Chess Games Collection [2 ed.]

Table of contents :
Table of Contents
Introduction
Book 1 - King Pawn 1.e4 e5:
Book 1: Chapter 1 – Early Deviations
Book 1: Chapter 2 – Vienna Game
Book 1: Chapter 3 – King’s Gambit
Book 1: Chapter 4 – Various 2.Nf3 Lines
Book 1: Chapter 5 – Latvian Gambit
Book 1: Chapter 6 – Philidor Defence
Book 1: Chapter 7 – Petroff Defence
Book 1: Chapter 8 – Romantic 2.Nf3 Nc6
Book 1: Chapter 9 – Ruy Lopez
Book 1: Index of Names to Games
Book 2 - Sicilian Defence 1.e4 c5
Book 2: Chapter 1 – Various Lines
Book 2: Chapter 2 – 2.Nf3 without 2…d6
Book 2: Chapter 3 – 2.Nf3 d6
Book 2: Chapter 4 – Najdorf
Book 2: Index of Names to Games
Book 3: French Defence 1.e4 e6
Book 3: Chapter 1 – Early Deviations
Book 3: Chapter 2 – Alapin-Diemer
Book 3: Chapter 3 – Advance Variation
Book 3: Chapter 4 – Tarrasch Variation
Book 3: Chapter 5 – Classical Variation
Book 3: Chapter 6 – Winawer Variation
Book 3: Index of Names to Games
Book 4: Caro-Kann 1.e4 c6
Book 4: Chapter 1 – Rare Lines
Book 4: Chapter 2 – Advance Variation
Book 4: Chapter 3 – Exchange & Panov
Book 4: Chapter 4 – Main Line
Book 4: Chapter 5 – Classical 4.Nxe4 Bf5
Book 4: Index of Names to Games
Book 5: Alekhine & Pirc 1.e4
Book 5: Chapter 1 – Semi Opens
Book 5: Chapter 2 – Alekhine Defence
Book 5: Chapter 3 – Modern Defence
Book 5: Chapter 4 – Pirc Defence
Book 5: Index of Names to Games
Book 6 – Queen Pawn 1.d4 d5:
Book 6: Chapter 1 – Queen Pawn Games
Book 6: Chapter 2 – Queens Gambits
Book 6: Chapter 3 – Albin Counter Gambit
Book 6: Chapter 4 – Slav Defence
Book 6: Chapter 5 – Queen’s Gambit Declined
Book 6: Index of Names to Games
Book 7 - Indian Defences 1.d4 Nf6
Book 7: Chapter 1 – Lines without 2.c4
Book 7: Chapter 2 – Budapest Gambit
Book 7: Chapter 3 – Benoni & Benko
Book 7: Chapter 4 – 2.c4 e6 Indians
Chapter 5 – Nimzo-Indian
Book 7: Chapter 6 – King’s Indian
Book 7: Chapter 7 – Gruenfeld Defence
Book 7: Index of Names to Games
Book 8: Rare First Moves:
Book 8: Chapter 1 – Rare White Moves
Book 8: Chapter 2 – Rare Black Moves
Book 8: Chapter 3 – Reti Opening
Book 8: Chapter 4 – English Opening
Book 8: Bonus Chapter
Book 8: Index of Names to Games
Book 9 - Queens Knight 1.Nc3 & 1...Nc6
Book 9: Chapter 1 – 1.Nc3 Attack
Book 9: Chapter 2 – 1.Nc3 c5
Book 9: Chapter 3 – 1.Nc3 e5
Book 9: Chapter 4 – 1.Nc3 d5
Book 9: Chapter 5 – 1…Nc6 Defence
Book 9: Chapter 6 – 1.e4 Nc6
Book 9: Chapter 7 – 1.e4 Nc6 2.d4 e5
Book 9: Chapter 8 – 1.e4 Nc6 2.d4 d5
Book 9: Index of Names to Games
Book 10 - Bird & Dutch 1.f4 & 1…f5:
Book 10: Chapter 1 – 1.f4 without d5
Book 10: Chapter 2 – 1.f4 d5
Book 10: Chapter 3 – Bird Classical 3.e3
Book 10: Chapter 4 – Dutch without 1.d4
Book 10: Chapter 5 – Dutch Rare Moves
Book 10: Chapter 6 – Staunton Gambit
Book 10: Chapter 7 – Main Line 2.c4
Book 10: Index of Names to Games
Before you go

Citation preview

Chess Games Collection Second Edition Tim Sawyer

Chess Games Collection: Second Edition Copyright © 2020 by Sawyer Publications All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form without permission in writing from the author. Reviewers may quote brief passages in reviews.

Disclaimer and FTC Notice No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, mechanical or electronic, including photocopying or recording, or by any information storage and retrieval system, or transmitted by email without permission in writing from the publisher. While all attempts have been made to verify the information provided in this publication, neither the author nor the publisher assumes any responsibility for errors, omissions, or contrary interpretations of the subject matter herein. This book is for entertainment purposes only. The views expressed are those of the author alone, and should not be taken as expert instruction or commands. The reader is responsible for his or her own actions. Adherence to all applicable laws and regulations, including international, federal, state, and local governing professional licensing, business practices, advertising, and all other aspects of doing business in the US, Canada, or any other jurisdiction is the sole responsibility of the purchaser or reader. Neither the author nor the publisher assumes any responsibility or liability whatsoever on the behalf of the purchaser or reader of these materials. Any perceived slight of any individual or organization is purely unintentional.

Table of Contents Table of Contents Introduction Book 1 - King Pawn 1.e4 e5: Book 1: Chapter 1 – Early Deviations Book 1: Chapter 2 – Vienna Game Book 1: Chapter 3 – King’s Gambit Book 1: Chapter 4 – Various 2.Nf3 Lines Book 1: Chapter 5 – Latvian Gambit Book 1: Chapter 6 – Philidor Defence Book 1: Chapter 7 – Petroff Defence Book 1: Chapter 8 – Romantic 2.Nf3 Nc6 Book 1: Chapter 9 – Ruy Lopez Book 1: Index of Names to Games Book 2 - Sicilian Defence 1.e4 c5 Book 2: Chapter 1 – Various Lines Book 2: Chapter 2 – 2.Nf3 without 2…d6 Book 2: Chapter 3 – 2.Nf3 d6 Book 2: Chapter 4 – Najdorf Book 2: Index of Names to Games Book 3: French Defence 1.e4 e6

Book 3: Chapter 1 – Early Deviations Book 3: Chapter 2 – Alapin-Diemer Book 3: Chapter 3 – Advance Variation Book 3: Chapter 4 – Tarrasch Variation Book 3: Chapter 5 – Classical Variation Book 3: Chapter 6 – Winawer Variation Book 3: Index of Names to Games Book 4: Caro-Kann 1.e4 c6 Book 4: Chapter 1 – Rare Lines Book 4: Chapter 2 – Advance Variation Book 4: Chapter 3 – Exchange & Panov Book 4: Chapter 4 – Main Line Book 4: Chapter 5 – Classical 4.Nxe4 Bf5 Book 4: Index of Names to Games Book 5: Alekhine & Pirc 1.e4 Book 5: Chapter 1 – Semi Opens Book 5: Chapter 2 – Alekhine Defence Book 5: Chapter 3 – Modern Defence Book 5: Chapter 4 – Pirc Defence Book 5: Index of Names to Games Book 6 – Queen Pawn 1.d4 d5: Book 6: Chapter 1 – Queen Pawn Games Book 6: Chapter 2 – Queens Gambits

Book 6: Chapter 3 – Albin Counter Gambit Book 6: Chapter 4 – Slav Defence Book 6: Chapter 5 – Queen’s Gambit Declined Book 6: Index of Names to Games Book 7 - Indian Defences 1.d4 Nf6 Book 7: Chapter 1 – Lines without 2.c4 Book 7: Chapter 2 – Budapest Gambit Book 7: Chapter 3 – Benoni & Benko Book 7: Chapter 4 – 2.c4 e6 Indians Chapter 5 – Nimzo-Indian Book 7: Chapter 6 – King’s Indian Book 7: Chapter 7 – Gruenfeld Defence Book 7: Index of Names to Games Book 8: Rare First Moves: Book 8: Chapter 1 – Rare White Moves Book 8: Chapter 2 – Rare Black Moves Book 8: Chapter 3 – Reti Opening Book 8: Chapter 4 – English Opening Book 8: Bonus Chapter Book 8: Index of Names to Games Book 9 - Queens Knight 1.Nc3 & 1...Nc6 Book 9: Chapter 1 – 1.Nc3 Attack Book 9: Chapter 2 – 1.Nc3 c5

Book 9: Chapter 3 – 1.Nc3 e5 Book 9: Chapter 4 – 1.Nc3 d5 Book 9: Chapter 5 – 1…Nc6 Defence Book 9: Chapter 6 – 1.e4 Nc6 Book 9: Chapter 7 – 1.e4 Nc6 2.d4 e5 Book 9: Chapter 8 – 1.e4 Nc6 2.d4 d5 Book 9: Index of Names to Games Book 10 - Bird & Dutch 1.f4 & 1…f5: Book 10: Chapter 1 – 1.f4 without d5 Book 10: Chapter 2 – 1.f4 d5 Book 10: Chapter 3 – Bird Classical 3.e3 Book 10: Chapter 4 – Dutch without 1.d4 Book 10: Chapter 5 – Dutch Rare Moves Book 10: Chapter 6 – Staunton Gambit Book 10: Chapter 7 – Main Line 2.c4 Book 10: Index of Names to Games Before you go

Introduction Chess Games Collection combines ten books written by Tim Sawyer with 1904 games and 1656 pages in an eBook format. The ten books are Second Editions of the following: Book 1 – King Pawn 1.e4 e5: Chess Opening Games Book 2 – Sicilian Defence 1.e4 c5: Chess Opening Games Book 3 – French Defence 1.e4 e6: Chess Opening Games Book 4 – Caro Kann 1.e4 c6: Chess Opening Games Book 5 – Alekhine & Pirc 1.e4: Chess Opening Games Book 6 – Queen Pawn 1.d4 d5: Chess Opening Games Book 7 – Indian Defences 1.d4 Nf6: Chess Opening Games Book 8 – Rare First Moves: Chess Opening Games Book 9 – Queens Knight 1.Nc3 & 1…Nc6: Chess Opening Games Book 10 – Bird & Dutch 1.f4 & 1…f5: Chess Opening Games I’ve played chess for 50 years now. I read a lot of books, met a lot of people, been a lot of places and thought a lot of things. I entertain my tribe of creative chess players. Some consider me a wise old man. Others just say, “Ok boomer.” I played many of these games. I chose others that I happen to like. And friends sent me their games. This book does not include my Blackmar-Diemer Gambit Collection which is available as a separate eBook. The notes include some theory, some stories, and some rambling commentary written over many years. An Index of player Names to

Games appears at the back of each book. All ten books are also available individually in print. Enjoy!

Book 1 - King Pawn 1.e4 e5: Second Edition Chess Opening Games Copyright © 2015, 2016, 2018 by Sawyer Publications All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form without permission in writing from the author. If you love 1.e4 e5 King Pawn chess openings then enjoy this book. This 2018 Second Edition has 285 games. I share my analysis and adventures in these openings. I tell personal stories, describe chess history and explain the strategy and tactics that I’ve seen from my play vs masters, experts and club players. I provide you with opening insights from main lines to offbeat wild gambits. This 2018 Second Edition has updated commentary and an index of player names to the games. I love the 1.e4 e5 King Pawn defenses as enjoyed by players of all skill levels. This book covers Open Games like Vienna Game, King’s Gambit, Elephant Gambit, Latvian Gambit, the Philidor, Petroff Defence, Scotch Game, Italian Game, and Ruy Lopez. You can find checkmate themes in all these openings. To help you, related games are grouped together. You will find games full of interesting ideas from years of the author’s own writing. They provide creative ideas and ways to improve. Consider new strategies and tactics and your interest will soar! When I tried new variations many years ago, it turned my own career around and led to higher ratings. You are going to win games that you want to show your friends. Stay excited. Have fun playing chess. Try this book!

Book 1: Chapter 1 – Early Deviations 1.e4 e5 This chapter considers very rare second moves for White.

1 – Poole 2.Bb5 f5 3.Nc3 Gary Poole played with originality and aggression. Alas, White lost one knight to a counting error and another to a double attack. His king got mated on his original square. I had a USCF Postal Master rating of 2211 during the time of this game. Poole (1658) - Sawyer (2211), corr USCF 89N260, 25.06.1990 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Bb5 f5 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.d3 c6 5.Bc4 Bb4 6.h4 d5 7.exd5 cxd5 8.a3? [This 8.a3? is a counting error. Black stands better anyway, but losing two pieces for one makes White's game virtually hopeless. 8.Bb3 d4 9.a3 Ba5 10.Ba4+ Bd7 11.Bxd7+ Nbxd7 12.b4 dxc3 13.bxa5 Qxa5-/+ and White would only be down a pawn.] 8...Bxc3+ 9.bxc3 dxc4 10.Bg5 0-0 11.h5 Nc6 12.h6 g6 13.Nf3 [If 13.Ne2 Qd6-+] 13...Qa5 [Or 13...e4 14.dxe4 Qxd1+ 15.Rxd1 Nxe4-+ and Black is up a knight.] 14.Nxe5? [After 14.0-0 Qxc3 15.Qb1 Nd4 16.Nxd4 Qxd4 17.Bxf6 Rxf6-+ White is only down a bishop and a pawn.] 14...Qxc3+ 15.Bd2 Qxe5+ 16.Be3 f4 17.Qf3 Qxa1+ 18.Qd1 Qxd1+ 19.Kxd1 fxe3 20.fxe3 c3 21.Rh4 Ng4 22.Rxg4 Bxg4+ 23.Ke1 Nd4 24.exd4 Rae8# 0-1

2 – Four Move Mate 2.Qh5 Fool’s Mate requires your opponent to make two foolish moves early in the game such as 1.g4 e5 2.f3 Qh4 mate. Fool's Mate has to be given to you, but you can try for a four move Scholar's Mate, though Black can defend with good moves. Scholar’s Mate requires just one huge mistake by your opponent on move three. White – Black, begins 1.e4 e5 2.Qh5 [Other Scholar's Mates include 2.Qf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5? (3...Nf6 is good.) 4.Qxf7 mate. Or 2.Bc4 Bc5 3.Qh5 d6 (3...Qe7 covers f7 and protects e5.) 4.Qxf7 mate.] 2...Nc6 [Good. Black

protects e5. Bad is 2...g6? 3.Qxe5+ Qe7 4.Qxh8 and White has won a rook.] 3.Bc4 Nf6? [3...g6 4.Qf3 Nf6 defends.] 4.Qxf7 mate. 1-0

3 – Heim 2.f3 Bc5 3.Ne2 What can we say about the Open Game variation beginning 1.e4 e5 2.f3? I’ve faced it a few times. This move 2.f3 shows White can get away with almost any early move. When I saw this move in my postal chess games, I wondered if it was a transcription error. Maybe White simply forgot to include the “N” when writing 2.Nf3. When Black plays 1.e4 e5 with the corresponding early move 2...f6, it is very risky. Of course there is always the fantasy idea of transposing to a Blackmar Gambit with 2...d5 3.d4 dxe4, but that is highly unlikely from this move order. Even more unlikely with be a BDG Lemberger 4.f3 after 2...d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.d4. Back to reality. David Heim is one of many club players who have played that as White vs me. Here is a game from the USCF 1989 Golden Knights Postal Tournament section 89N214. Heim (1485) - Sawyer (2187), corr USCF 89N214 29.11.1989 begins 1.e4 e5 2.f3 Bc5 [2...Nc6 is a good alternative.] 3.Ne2 Nc6 4.f4?! [Consistent but risky. 4.c3 Bb6=/+] 4...d6 5.fxe5 dxe5 6.d3 Bg4!? [6...Nf6-+] 7.Nbc3? [7.h3] 7...Qf6 [7...Qh4+! 8.g3 Qf6-+] 8.d4 Bxd4 9.Kd2 0-0-0 10.Nd5 Qf2 11.Qe1 Nf6 12.Qxf2 Nxe4+ 13.Ke1 [This allows a mate, but after 13.Kd1 Nxf2+ 14.Ke1 Nxh1-+ White is also lost.] 13...Bxf2+ 14.Kd1 Rxd5+ 15.Bd2 Rxd2+ 16.Kc1 Nb4 17.Kb1 Rd1+ 18.Nc1 Nd2# 0-1

4 – DeLa'O 2.f3 Bc5 3.Bc4 Michael De La'O lived in Texas. Maybe he played postal chess so as not to interfere with his work schedule. Nowadays we all play online anytime. USCF lists Michael DeLa'O of Texas with a correspondence rating of 1996. He has not been active in recent years. Our game below was probably one of his earlier efforts. De La'O (1758) - Sawyer (2107), corr USCF 89N275 10.08.1990 begins 1.e4 e5 2.f3 Bc5 3.Bc4 Bxg1!? [3...Nf6=/+ favors Black.] 4.Rxg1 Qh4+ 5.g3? [5.Kf1! Qxh2 6.Nc3 Qh4?! 7.d4+/=] 5...Qxh2 6.Rf1 [6.Kf1? d5 7.Bxd5 Bh3+ and Black wins material.] 6...Qxg3+ 7.Rf2 d6 8.Qe2 Nc6 9.c3 Bh3 10.Na3? [This move leaves White down the Exchange and two

pawns. Somewhat better is 10.d3 Nge7-+] 10...Qg1+ 11.Rf1 Bxf1 12.Qxf1 Qxf1+ 13.Bxf1 f5 14.Nb5 Kd8 15.Bh3 a6 16.Na3 f4 17.d4 Nf6 18.dxe5 dxe5 19.Bd2 Ke7 20.0-0-0 g5 21.Rg1 Rag8 22.Bf5 h5 23.Nc2 g4 24.fxg4 Nxg4 25.c4 f3 26.Rf1 Nh2 0-1

2.d4 The Center Game sees White immediately challenge the center, however this opening gives Black good play as well.

5 – Hartelt 2...d5 3.Nc3 Rob Hartelt won a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit Avoided that became an Open Game. I'm sure some King Pawn players might reach this Center Game position after 1.e4 e5 2.d4 d5. Black leaves too much to chance with such bold counterplay. White found a quick mate against Plogdin. Hartelt - Plogdin (1021), Live Chess Chess.com, 13.04.2018 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e4 e5 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3 dxe4 5.d5 exf3 6.Nxf3 Bd6 7.Bc4 [7.Bg5 00=/+] 7...Bd7 [7...e4-/+] 8.0-0 0-0 9.Bd3 Re8 [9...h6-/+] 10.Ne4 [10.Ng5 e4 11.Ncxe4 Rxe4=] 10...Nxe4 11.Bxe4 c6 [11...f5-/+] 12.Bxh7+ [12.Ng5+-] 12...Kxh7 13.Ng5+ Qxg5 [13...Kg6=] 14.Bxg5 Kg8 15.Qf3 cxd5 [15...f5 16.Rad1+-] 16.Qxf7+ Kh8 17.Rf6 Rf8 18.Rh6+ gxh6 19.Bf6# 1-0

6 – Meserve 2...d5 3.dxe5 Large tournaments have players of all levels. William Meserve was my postal opponent in a USCF Golden Knights section. He was rated in the lower half of players in this tournament. The USCF formula considered that the 1425 rating of Mr. Meserve was too low for me to get any rating points at all for beating him. Sawyer - Meserve , corr USCF 88N300, 26.06.1989 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e4 e5? [White is ready for a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit.] 3.dxe5! [3.Nf3 transposes to the Elephant Gambit line 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 d5 3.d4!?] 3...Be6?! [Black admits that he is going to be a pawn down, so he at least develops a piece.] 4.exd5 Qxd5 [Black could keep the queens on the board when down material. 4...Bxd5 5.Nc3+/-] 5.Qxd5 Bxd5 6.Nc3 Bb4 7.Bd2 Bxc3 8.Bxc3 Nc6 9.0-0-0 0-0-0 10.Nh3 Nge7 11.Nf4 Bxa2? [Whoops. Black goes pawn snatching and gets his bishop trapped. 11...g5!? 12.Nxd5 Nxd5 13.Bd2+/-] 12.Rxd8+ [Since I will be up material, I might as well head for an endgame.] 12...Rxd8 13.b3 g5 14.Nd3 Nd5 15.Bd2 Re8 16.Kb2 Nxe5

17.Kxa2 Nc6 18.Bxg5 Ncb4+ 19.Nxb4 Nxb4+ 20.Kb2 [There is no good defense to make up for the extra bishop. Black throws in the towel.] 1-0

7 – Winter 2…d5 3.dxe5 A friend asked, "How does one return to chess when he does not feel like playing?" We all have times of discouragement. Others life forces us to take a break. Twice I pretty much quit playing chess 1975-76 (for school) and 1986-87 (after the death of my son and a job change). I played only two games in 1987. When I came back to playing, I did not play well at first. But a few of those games were the most enjoyable I ever played in my life! All the chess books that I wrote and my highest ratings came after the hard times. In 1987, I worked for an insurance company in a large office building. That year I added a second job as a church pastor on nights and weekends. The next year I left the business world to pursue ministry fulltime. Chess moved from the back seat of my life to the garage. I stopped playing almost completely. The games that I played vs Brad Winter were in the office during lunch. Our game transposes to the Center Game. Sawyer (1981) - Winter, Horsham PA 1987 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e4 e5 3.dxe5 dxe4 4.Qxd8+ Kxd8 5.Nc3 e3 [5...Nc6 6.Bf4+/-] 6.Bxe3 Ne7 7.0-0-0+ Bd7 8.Bc4 f6 [This move drops a piece and things go downhill for Black, but he was already in trouble. 8...Nf5 9.Bf4+-] 9.e6 Kc8 10.exd7+ Nxd7 11.Be6 Kb8 12.Bxd7 a5 13.Nf3 Ra6 14.Bb5 Rd6 15.Bc5 Rxd1+ 16.Rxd1 b6 17.Rd8+ Nc8 18.Rxf8 Rxf8 19.Bxf8 1-0

8 – Tobias 2…exd4 3.Qxd4 Eric Tobias was one of my favorite opponents at the Chaturanga Chess Club in Hatboro, Pennsylvania. Both of us were on the way up and about to see our ratings top 2000. Here I attack. Tobias (1915) - Sawyer (1981), Hatboro PA, 22.12.1988 begins 1.e4 e5 2.d4 exd4 3.Qxd4 Nc6 4.Qd1 Nf6 5.Bd3 Bc5 [5...d5 6.exd5 Nxd5=] 6.Nf3 d6 7.0-0 Bg4 8.h3 Bh5 9.Nbd2 Ne5 10.Be2 Bxf3 11.Nxf3 Nxe4 12.Nxe5 dxe5 13.Be3? [13.Bd3=] 13...Bxe3 14.fxe3 Ng3 15.Rf2 Nxe2+ [15...Qxd1+ 16.Rxd1 Nxe2+ 17.Rxe2 Ke7-/+] 16.Qxe2 0-0 17.Rd1 Qe7 18.Rdf1 c6 19.a4 Rad8 20.Qc4 Rd6 21.Rf5 Re6 22.Rh5 [22.Qb3 Rd6-/+] 22...g6

23.Rh6 f5 [23...e4-+] 24.Qe2? [24.Qh4 Qxh4 25.Rxh4 Rd6-/+] 24...Qg5 25.Qc4 Rfe8 26.g4 Qxh6 27.gxf5 gxf5 28.Rxf5 Qxe3+ 29.Kg2 Kg7 30.Qb4 Qe2+ 31.Rf2 Rg6+ 0-1

9 – BeSomeone 2…exd4 3.Nf3 My Internet Chess Club opponent "BeSomeone" tried to play the Englund Gambit 1.d4 e5 against me a few times. This time, I chose to play a delayed Danish Gambit with 2.e4 exd4 3.Nf3 c5 4.c3! The position opened up very wide and very quickly when I decided to regain my pawn with a lead in development. Both sides swapped off c-pawns and castle to an open queenside. One missed tactic led to a quick checkmate. Sawyer - BeSomeone, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 24.05.2012 begins 1.d4 e5 2.e4 [Overall 2.dxe5+/= scores better in my database.] 2...exd4 3.Nf3 [The full Danish Gambit is 3.c3 dxc3 4.Bc4 cxb2 5.Bxb2] 3...c5 [3...Nc6 4.Nxd4 Scotch Game] 4.c3! d5! 5.exd5 Qxd5 6.cxd4 cxd4 7.Qxd4 Qxd4 8.Nxd4 Nf6 9.Nb5 Na6 10.N1c3 Bb4 [10...Bc5!] 11.Bf4 Bd7 12.0-00 Bxc3 13.Nxc3 [13.Nd6+!+-] 13...0-0-0 14.Bc4 Be6? 15.Nb5! Bxc4 16.Nxa7# Black checkmated 1-0

10 – Sawyer 3.c3 dxc3 4.Nxc3 The Danish and Goring Gambits are cousins. My move 10.Bg5 was a tactical move in my Chessimo training exercises. Black played very fast, using only 65 seconds total for his 30 moves. I used a little more time at 75 seconds for my 31 moves. Sawyer - BeSomeone, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 21.11.2012 begins 1.d4 e5 2.e4 exd4 3.c3 dxc3 [The Danish Declined goes 3...d5 4.exd5 Qxd5 5.cxd4 Nc6 6.Nf3 Bg4 7.Be2 Bb4+ 8.Nc3 Bxf3 9.Bxf3 Qc4=] 4.Nxc3 Bb4 [4...Bc5 5.Bc4 Qf6 6.Nf3 h5? 7.Nd5! Qd6 8.Bf4 Qe6? 9.Nxc7+ Ke7 10.Nxe6 1-0. Sawyer-NN, simul 1996] 5.Nf3 Bxc3+ [Goring Gambit goes 5...Nc6 6.Bc4 d6 7.0-0 Bxc3 8.bxc3 Nf6 9.e5 Nxe5 10.Nxe5 dxe5 11.Qb3 Qe7 12.Ba3 c5 and Black must choose a response to some likely check along the a4-e8 diagonal.] 6.bxc3 Nf6 7.Bc4 0-0 8.e5 Re8 9.0-0 Ng4? [9...d5 10.Bb3+/=] 10.Bg5 [Amazingly strong is 10.Bxf7+!] 10...Re7 11.Bxe7 Qxe7 12.Qd4 d5 13.Bxd5 Nc6 14.Bxc6 bxc6 15.h3 Nh6 16.Rad1 Ba6 17.Rfe1 Nf5 18.Qd7 Qxd7 19.Rxd7 Rc8 20.Red1 Kf8 21.Nd4 Nxd4 22.R7xd4 c5 23.Rd8+ Ke7 24.Rxc8 Bxc8 25.Rd5 c4 26.Rc5 Ba6?

27.Rxc7+ Ke6 28.Rxa7? [I missed 28.Rc6+!+- at first, but not at second.] 28...Bc8 29.Rc7 Ba6? 30.Rc6+ Kxe5 31.Rxa6 Black resigns 1-0

2.Bc4 The Bishop’s Opening was one of my favorite openings in the late 1970s and early 1980s. This chapter covers games where White does not play Nc3 to transpose into a Vienna Game.

11 – Strockyj 2…f5 3.Bxg8 One of the most risky opening variations I played in my drive to be a USCF Postal Chess Master was the Calabrese Counter-Gambit in the Bishop's Opening 2.Bc4 f5?! I really doubt its complete theoretical soundness, but in practical terms I did well. Naturally in blitz it can be a promising gambit. I played it in postal chess vs Roman Strockyj in the Golden Knights tournament. In my database the Calabrese had scored 53% for Black. The performance rating was not great, because usually White was rated much lower. That same was true in my own games. This game vs Strockyj was not decided in the opening, nor in the middlegame. We reached a drawish rook ending, and somehow I pulled off a win. Postal players got into a lot of endgames since they were allowed to use books to help play the openings well. Strockyj (1685) - Sawyer (2085), corr USCF 89N215 15.08.1989 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 f5 3.Bxg8 Rxg8 4.Nc3 d6 [4...Nc6] 5.h3 [5.d4] 5...g6 [5...fxe4! 6.Nxe4 Nc6 7.Qh5+ g6 8.Qxh7 Rg7 9.Qh8 d5-+ with initiative for the gambit pawn.] 6.d4 exd4 7.Qxd4 Bg7 8.Qd5 Rf8 9.exf5 c6 10.Qe4+ Kd7 11.Nge2 Rxf5 12.g4 Rf7 13.Be3 Qe7 14.0-0-0 d5 15.Qg2 Na6 16.a3 Nc7 17.Rhe1 b6 18.Nxd5 [18.Bd4+/-] 18...cxd5 19.Rxd5+ Ke8 20.Bg5 Bf6 21.Bxf6 Rxf6 22.Rd4 Re6 23.f4 Ba6 24.Kd1 [24.f5 Qg5+ 25.Kb1 gxf5=/+] 24...Bxe2+ [Taking the knight is okay, but stronger is 24...Rd8!-+] 25.Rxe2 Rxe2 26.Qxe2 Qxe2+ 27.Kxe2 Rd8 28.Rc4 Rd7 29.f5 gxf5 30.gxf5 Rf7 31.Ra4 a5 32.Rf4 Nd5 33.Rh4 Kf8 34.c4 Nf6 35.Kd3 Re7 36.Rf4 Kg7 37.b4 axb4 38.axb4 Ra7 39.Kd4 Ra3 40.h4 h5 [40...Rb3 41.b5 Kf7-/+] 41.c5 bxc5+ 42.Kxc5 Rb3 43.b5 Nd7+ 44.Kd6 Rxb5 45.Kxd7 Kf6 46.Rd4 Kxf5 47.Kc6 Rb8 48.Rd5+ Kg4 49.Rd4+ Kg3 50.Ra4 Rd8 51.Kc5 Rd1 52.Re4 Rh1 53.Re5 Kxh4 54.Re4+ Kg3

55.Re3+ Kf4 56.Rd3 h4 57.Kc4 [57.Rd4+ Ke3] 57...h3 58.Rd4+ Ke3 [58...Kf5!] 59.Rd3+ Ke2 60.Ra3 [60.Rc3!] 60...Kf2 61.Ra2+ Kg3 62.Ra3+ Kg4 63.Kb5 Rb1+ 64.Ka6 h2 0-1

12 – Kruger 2…Nf6 3.d3 c6 I played 1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Nf6 and 3.Nc3 (Vienna Game) or 3.d3. GM Konstantin Sakaev in "The Petroff: an Expert Repertoire for Black" wrote: "However, if Black replies with 3...c6 the game is quite different from the usual developments in the Italian Game. Our analysis shows convincingly that there is not a single variation in which White can obtain even a minimal edge and Black has an excellent position in all lines." Expert Paul Kruger played Bishop's Opening 3.d3 against me. I equalized as Black, but an equal opening did not prevent me from being outplayed. Paul Kruger played very strong moves. Kruger (2089) - Sawyer (2192), corr USCF 89N261, 20.07.1990 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Nf6 3.d3 c6 4.Bb3 Bc5 [4...d5 5.Nf3 Bd6=] 5.Nf3 d6 6.0-0 Be6 7.Bxe6 fxe6 8.Nc3 Nbd7 9.Na4 Bb4 [9...Bb6=] 10.c3 Ba5 11.Qb3 b5 12.Qxe6+ Qe7 13.Qxe7+ Kxe7 14.b4 Bxb4 15.cxb4 bxa4 16.Nh4 g6 17.Bd2 a5 [17...Rab8=] 18.bxa5 Nc5 19.Rad1 Nxd3 20.Bg5 Nc5 21.Bxf6+ Kxf6 22.Rxd6+ Ke7 23.Rxc6 Rxa5 24.f3 Rd8 25.Rc1 Nd3 26.Rc7+ Ke8 27.Rb1 Rc5 28.Rxh7 a3 [28...Rdc8 29.Rf1 Rc2 30.Nxg6+/-] 29.Rh8+ [29.Nxg6!+-] 29...Kd7 30.Rxd8+ Kxd8 31.Nxg6 Rc2 32.Rd1 1-0 [if 32...Rc1 33.Rxc1 Nxc1 34.Nxe5 Nxa2 35.Nc4 +-]

13 – Mitchell 4.Nf3 d5 5.Bb3 Bg4 This postal chess game in the Bishops Opening saw me play the solid 3.d3. White plans to gradually attack and maintain control of the position. My opponent Stacy Mitchell got his king caught in the middle while his queen was trapped on the side. Sawyer (2000) - Mitchell (1955), corr APCT 1979 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Nf6 3.d3 c6 4.Nf3 d5 5.Bb3 Bg4 6.Bg5 [6.h3 Bxf3 7.Qxf3+/=] 6...Be7 [6...dxe4 7.Bxf6 gxf6 8.dxe4 Qxd1+ 9.Kxd1 Rg8=/+] 7.Nc3 [7.h3=] 7...d4 8.Ne2 [8.Nb1=] 8...Qc7 9.Ng3 Na6 10.h3 Bd7 11.a3 h6 12.Bd2 Nc5 13.Ba2 Be6 14.Bxe6 Nxe6 15.0-0 g5 [15...0-0-0 16.c3=] 16.Nf5 Bf8 17.Ne1 [17.c3+/=] 17...Ng7 18.Nxg7+ Bxg7 19.g3 Qd7 20.Kh2 Nh7

21.Ng2 f5 22.Qh5+ Kd8 23.exf5 Qxf5 24.f4 Nf6 25.Qe2 gxf4 26.gxf4 e4 27.dxe4 Nxe4 28.Nh4 Qf6? [28...Qd5 29.Rae1=] 29.Qxe4 Qxh4 [29...Re8 30.Qh7+-] 30.Ba5+ 1-0 [If 30...Kd7 31.Qf5+ Kd6 32.Bb4+ Kc7 33.Qf7+ Kb6 34.Be7! wins the Black queen.]

14 – Hayward 4.Nf3 d5 5.Bb3 Bd6 Keith Hayward and I never met, but we grew up in New England at the same time. We moved to states further west and south. I lived in Tennessee during this APCT postal chess game. I knew Keith as a creative attacker who enjoyed less popular openings, such as Bird’s Opening, Dutch Defence, and the Latvian Gambit. Our Bishops Opening contest was decided when Black either set the board up wrong or wrote the wrong move 27 on his postcard, a very rare mistake for the future FIDE Master Keith Hayward. Sawyer (2000) - Hayward (2150), corr APCT 1979 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Nf6 3.d3 c6 4.Nf3 d5 5.Bb3 Bd6 6.Nc3 [6.exd5 Nxd5 7.0-0 0-0= Sakaev] 6...Be6 [6...0-0 7.0-0 dxe4 8.Nxe4 Nxe4 9.dxe4=] 7.Bg5 [7.0-0 Nbd7 8.Bg5+/=] 7...Qa5 [7...d4 8.Bxe6 dxc3 9.Bh3 cxb2 10.Rb1=] 8.0-0 Nbd7 9.Re1 0-0-0 10.exd5 cxd5 11.Qd2 Bb4 12.a3 Bxc3 13.Qxc3+ [13.bxc3+/-] 13...Qxc3 14.bxc3 h6 15.Bd2 e4 16.Nd4 Nc5 17.Nxe6 fxe6 18.d4 [18.Be3=] 18...Nxb3 19.cxb3 Rhf8 20.Be3 Kd7 21.c4 Rc8 22.Rac1 Rc6 23.Rc2 Rfc8 24.Rec1 Rb6 25.Rc3 Ra6 26.a4 dxc4 27.Rxc4 Nd5? [Black thought he had already swapped rooks 27...Rxc4 28.Rxc4 Nd5=, but he had not.] 28.Rxc8 1-0

15 – Caruana 5.Bb3 Bb4+ The 2.Bc4 Bishop’s Opening may head for a Giuoco Pianissimo if Black plays an early …Nc6. Unique to the Bishop’s Opening is 2...Nf6 3.d3 c6. Black’s 5...Bb4+ was one I had not seen before. The bishop simply checked to provoke 6.Bd2 and then retreated to 6...Bd6. Masters like openings that keep pieces on the board to maximize opportunities. Here the rising star Fabiano Caruana works up a sudden attack against Varuzhan Akobian. Caruana (2817) - Akobian (2645), PRO League KO Stage 2017 chess.com INT (4.3), 25.03.2017 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Nf6 3.d3 c6 4.Nf3 d5 5.Bb3 Bb4+ 6.Bd2 Bd6 [6...Bxd2+ 7.Nbxd2] 7.Nc3 dxe4 8.Ng5 0-0 9.Ncxe4 Be7 10.h4!? Nbd7 11.Qf3 Qe8 12.0-0-0 a5 13.a3 Nd5 14.Rde1 h6 15.Ng3 [15.Qg3!?+/-] 15...Ra6 [15...N7f6 16.Nf5+/=] 16.Nf5 f6

[16...Nc5 17.Ba2+/-] 17.Ne6 Nc5 18.Nexg7 Nxb3+ 19.cxb3 Qg6 20.Rh3 Bxf5 [20...Kh8 21.Rg3 Qh7 22.Nxe7 Nxe7 23.Rxe5!+-] 21.Nxf5 Kh7 22.Rg3 Qf7 23.Nxh6 1-0

Book 1: Chapter 2 – Vienna Game 2.Nc3 Vienna Game 2.Nc3 is where White controls d5 and delays Nf3.

16 – Baffo 2…f5 3.Bc4 Nf6 Jeffrey Baffo appears to have a great time playing 1.Nc3. He has a good feel for the opening which he has played for many years. Baffo (1719) - xory (1601), Live Chess Chess.com, 01.06.2018 begins 1.Nc3 e5 2.e4 [2.Nf3= Napoleon] 2...f5 3.Bc4 [3.exf5! +/- King's Gambit with an extra move.] 3...Nf6 4.exf5!? [4.d3+/=] 4...d5 [4...Nc6 5.d4 Nxd4 6.Nf3 Nxf3+ 7.Qxf3 c6 8.Bg5 d5 9.0-0-0=] 5.Bxd5!? [Or 5.Nxd5! Nxd5 (5...Nc6 6.Ne3 Bc5 7.d3 Bxe3 8.Bxe3 Bxf5 9.Nf3+/-) 6.Qh5+ Ke7 7.d4 Qd6 8.Bg5+ Nf6 9.Nf3+/-] 5...Nxd5 6.Qh5+ Ke7 7.d4 Nf6 [7...exd4 8.Bg5+ Nf6 9.0-0-0+-] 8.Bg5 Qxd4 [8...e4 9.Bxf6+ gxf6 10.Nge2+/=] 9.Nf3 Qd6 10.Rd1 Qa6 11.Nd5+ [Or 11.Nxe5! g6 12.Nd5+! +- wins] 1-0

17 – Sawyer 2…Be7 3.Bc4 Nf6 The Vienna Game 2.Nc3 allows White to control d5. My threats kept Black tied down until I could mount an unstoppable attack. On move nine Black went for a combination that lost a pawn. With 27.Bh6, White had potential back rank mate threats. This could only be met by losing material. Black could hardly move. Sawyer (2084) - Guest, ICC 5 0 u Internet Chess Club, 05.05.2015 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nc3 Be7 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.d3 0-0 5.Nf3 [5.f4 d6 6.Nf3= is a good King's Gambit Declined where Black is solid but somewhat passive.] 5...d6 6.h3 Nc6 7.a3 Nd4 8.0-0 Be6 9.Nxd4 Bxc4? [This drops a pawn. Correct is 9...exd4 10.Bxe6 fxe6 11.Ne2 c5=] 10.dxc4 exd4 11.Qxd4 Re8 12.Be3 Nd7 13.f3 Bf6 14.Qd2 Ne5 15.b3 c5? [This gives White a target on d6. 15...Ng6 16.Rad1+/-] 16.Rad1 Qa5 17.Nd5 [17.Nb5!+- is stronger.] 17...Qxd2 18.Nxf6+ gxf6 19.Rxd2 Re6 20.Rfd1 b5 21.cxb5 a6 22.bxa6 [Or 22.b6+-] 22...Rxa6 23.a4 c4 24.f4 c3 25.Rd5 Nd7 26.f5 Rxe4 27.Bh6 Re5 [If 27...Re8 28.Rxd6 Rxd6 29.Rxd6+- Black is still down two

connected passed pawns and helpless.] 28.Rxd6 Rxd6 29.Rxd6 Re7 30.a5 Black resigns 1-0

18 – Piehl 2…Nc6 3.g3 Nf6 Mike Piehl and I transposed to a Vienna Game 3.g3. Piehl was about to jump his rating 100 points. We played side by side at a later tournament. I lost to a master while he drew an expert. Mike told me that my chess style was as exciting as his was boring!? Piehl (1827) – Sawyer (2006), Florida Class Championship (2), 07.01.2006 begins 1.e4 Nc6 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.g3 e5 [Black could play 3...d5!? which transposes to a sort of Alekhine 4.exd5 Nxd5 5.Bg2 Nxc3 6.bxc3 e5=] 4.Bg2 [4.Nf3 Bc5 5.Bg2 d6 6.d3 a6 7.0-0=] 4...Bc5 5.d3 d6 6.Na4 0-0 [6...Bb6=] 7.Nxc5 dxc5 8.f4 c4! [I sacrifice a pawn for activity.] 9.Nf3 [White does not accept my pawn. 9.fxe5 Ng4 10.Nf3 cxd3 11.Qxd3=] 9...cxd3 10.cxd3 Bg4 11.0-0 Qd6 12.Qb3 b6? [12...Bxf3! 13.Bxf3 Rad8 14.Qxb7 Qc5+ 15.Kh1 Rxd3-/+] 13.Qc3 [13.fxe5! Qc5+ 14.Kh1 Nd7 15.Bf4+/=] 13...Bxf3 14.Bxf3 Nd4 15.fxe5 Qxe5 16.Bf4 Nxf3+ 17.Rxf3 Qxc3 [17...Qh5!?] 18.bxc3 c5 19.a4 Rfe8 20.c4!? Nd7 21.a5 f6?! 22.Rf2 Ne5 23.Bxe5 fxe5 24.Rb2 Rab8 25.axb6 axb6 26.Ra7 Re6 27.Rf2 Rf8 28.Rxf8+ Kxf8 29.Kf2 Re7 30.Rxe7 Kxe7 31.Ke3 Kd6 32.Kd2 Kc6 33.Kc3 1/2-1/2

19 – Lamford 3.g3 d5 4.exd5 Those of us who were correspondence or postal chess masters in the years before databases had to write down detailed notes on opening theory. Many of us published out findings as chess books. Paul Adrian Lamford wrote a book on the Albin Counter Gambit. I used his final postcard to me as the bookmark for that book for many years. Paul Lamford played the Vienna Game 3.g3, and we agreed to a draw after only a few moves. Lamford - Sawyer, corr ICCF 1985 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.g3 d5 4.exd5 Nxd5 5.Bg2 Nxc3 6.bxc3 Bd6 7.Nf3 0-0 [7...Nc6 8.0-0 0-0 9.Rb1 Bg4 10.h3 Bh5 11.g4 Bg6 12.d4 exd4=] 8.0-0 Nd7 9.d3 [9.d4 c6 10.Re1 exd4 11.cxd4 Nf6 12.c4 Bf5 13.Nh4 Be6 14.d5 cxd5 15.cxd5 Bg4=] 9...Rb8 10.a4 b6 11.a5 1/2-1/2

20 – Sadilek 2…Nf6 3.g3 Bb4 This positional 3.g3 Vienna Game exploded with fireworks when White sacrifice a piece for 2 pawns by 13.Nxd5!? White regained the material with interest in Maximilian Sadilek vs Daniel Koffler. Sadilek (2227) - Koffler (2173), TCh-AUT 2nd Ost 2015-16 Austria AUT (11.4), 10.04.2016 begins 1.Nc3 e5 2.e4 Nf6 3.g3 Bb4 4.Bg2 0-0 5.Nge2 c6 6.0-0 d5 [6...Re8 7.d4=] 7.exd5 Nxd5 8.Nxd5 cxd5 9.d4 e4 10.Nf4 Nc6 [10...g5 11.Nh3 Be7 12.Qh5=] 11.c3 Ba5 12.f3 g5 13.Nxd5 [13.Nh5+-] 13...Qxd5 14.fxe4 Qd8 [14...Qd6 15.Bxg5+/=] 15.Qh5 f6 16.e5 Nxd4 [16...Qe8 17.Qxe8 Rxe8 18.exf6+/-] 17.exf6 Rxf6 18.Bxg5 Ne2+ [18...Nf5 19.Bxf6 Qxf6 20.Bd5+ Kg7 21.Rae1+-] 19.Kh1 1-0

21 – blik 2…Nf6 3.f4 d5 Chess openings to not always lead directly to immediate victory. If winning tactics do not develop quickly, the best strategy for a win might be to head to the endgame. The tactical skill of the King as a fighting piece comes into play in the ending. blik - Sawyer, ICC 5 0 Internet Chess Club, 29.01.2012 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.Nc3 e5 3.f4 [The Vienna Gambit. Other options are 3.Nf3 Nc6 Four Knights Game; or 3.Bc4 Nxe4 4.Qh5 Nd6] 3...d5! 4.fxe5 Nxe4 5.Nf3 Bc5!? [It’s a dynamic variation favored by Larry Kaufman. The point is to tempt White to push d4 and then pin the knight with ...Bb4 as in the game. 5...Be7 is the main line.] 6.d4 Bb4 7.Bd2 c5 8.Bb5+ Nc6 9.0-0 0-0 10.Qe1 [Larry Kaufman recommends 10.a3 Bxc3 11.Bxc3 Qb6 with possibly a slight Black edge.] 10...Nxd2 11.Qxd2 Qb6 12.Bxc6 bxc6 13.a3 Bxc3 [I missed 13...cxd4 14.axb4 dxc3+ 15.Qd4 Qxd4+ 16.Nxd4 cxb2=/+ and Black will remain a pawn ahead.] 14.bxc3 cxd4 15.cxd4 c5 16.Rab1 Qc6 17.c3 Be6 18.Ng5 h6 19.Nxe6 fxe6 20.Qe2 cxd4 21.cxd4 Rxf1+ 22.Rxf1 Rf8 23.Rxf8+ Kxf8 24.Qb2 Qb6 [I decided to try my luck in a pawn ending. I was immediately rewarded.] 25.Qxb6 axb6 26.g4? [Big mistake. The g-pawn is going nowhere. The kings must hurry toward the queenside. The best try is 26.Kf2 Ke7 27.Ke3 Kd7 28.Kd3 Kc6 29.a4 b5 30.Kc3 with a

drawn position.] 26...Ke7 27.Kf2 Kd7 28.Ke1 [If 28.g5 Kc6 29.gxh6 gxh6 30.Kf3 Kb5 31.Kg4 Kc4! wins] 28...Kc6 29.a4 b5 30.a5 b4 31.a6 Kb6 32.a7 Kxa7 33.Kd1 Kb6 34.Kc2 Kb5 35.Kb2 Kc4 36.h4 g5 0-1 White resigns 0-1

22 – Andreikin 3.f4 d5 4.fxe5 The Vienna Game begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nc3. This is an old variation of the Open Game that has been covered in many books from the 1800s to the present. Both sides have several good options. Dmitry Andreikin reached the top 20 in the world in June of 2016. Andreikin had won the World Junior Championship back in 2010. That same year he played Vladimir Kramnik in blitz. These two players weaved their way through opening theory. The game when from 1.Nc3 Nf6 (Queens Knight Attack) to 2.e4 (Alekhine Defence) to 2...e5 (Vienna Game) to 3.f4 (Vienna Gambit). Andreikin (2683) - Kramnik (2791), VI World Blitz Moscow RUS (37), 18.11.2010 begins 1.Nc3 Nf6 2.e4 e5 3.f4 [Vienna Gambit. Other options are 3.Nf3 Nc6 Four Knights Game; or 3.Bc4 Nxe4 4.Qh5 Nd6] 3...d5 4.fxe5 Nxe4 5.Nf3 Bc5!? [This more dynamic variation is favored by Larry Kaufman. The point is to tempt White to push d4 and then pin the knight with ...Bb4 as in the game. 5...Be7 is the main line.] 6.d4 [6.Qe2 Bf5 7.d4 Bb4 8.a3 Nxc3 9.Qe3 Na2+ 10.Bd2 Bxd2+ 11.Qxd2 Be4=] 6...Bb4 7.Bd2 c5 8.Nxe4 [8.Bd3 Nxd2 9.Qxd2 cxd4 10.Nxd4 Nc6=/+. And after 8.Bb5+ Nc6 9.0-0 0-0 10.Qe1 Larry Kaufman recommends 10.a3 Bxc3 11.Bxc3 Qb6 with possibly a slight Black edge.] 8...dxe4 9.Bxb4 cxb4 10.Ng1 0-0 11.Bc4 Nc6 12.c3 bxc3 13.bxc3 Qg5 [13...Qc7! 14.Ne2 Nxe5 15.dxe5 Qxc4 16.Qd4 Be6-+] 14.Qe2 Bf5 15.Nh3 Bxh3 16.gxh3 e3 17.0-0-0 Rac8 18.Bb3 Na5 19.Kb2 Nxb3 20.axb3 f6 21.e6 Qd5 22.Qxe3 Rfe8 23.Rhe1 Rc6 24.c4 Rcxe6 25.Qxe6+ Qxe6 26.Rxe6 Rxe6 27.d5 Re2+ 28.Kc3 Kf7 29.c5 Ke8 30.Ra1 a6 31.c6 bxc6 32.dxc6 Kd8 33.Rxa6 Kc7 34.b4 Re5 35.Kc4 Re4+ 36.Kc5 Re5+ 37.Kc4 Re4+ 38.Kb5 Re5+ 39.Ka4 Re1 40.Kb3 Rb1+ 41.Kc4 f5 [41...Rc1+ 42.Kb5 Kd6 43.h4 h5=] 42.b5 [42.Kb5+-] 42...f4 [42...Rc1+ 43.Kd5 Rd1+ 44.Ke5+-] 43.Ra7+ Kd6 44.Rd7+ Ke6 45.Rd2 f3 46.Rf2 Rc1+ 47.Kb4 Rb1+ 48.Kc5 Rc1+ 49.Kb6 Rc3 50.Kb7 Kd6 51.Rf1 g5 52.b6 h5 53.c7 Kd7 54.Rxf3 1-0

2.Nc3 Nf6 3.Bc4 I reached the Vienna Game lines through the Bishop’s Opening many times as Nc3 and Bc4 can be played in either move order.

23 – Straszacker 2…Nf6 3.Bc4 Bb4 Dr. R.L. Straszacker holds the Guinness Book of World Records for the longest match in postal chess. He played one opponent continuous games from 1946 to 1999, a total of 112 games over 50 years. During that time, I also played Dr. Straszacker two games as part of the APCT-SACCA match. Reinhardt Ludwig Straszacker was a very friendly opponent. He was a significant business leader in South Africa at that time. Non-correspondence players think that postal chess would never have simple tactical mistakes. Wrong. Postal players were not always quietly focused on the game at home. Life happens. Maybe you set up your board while listening to a ball game or watching a movie. Your kids run into the room while you ponder your move. It's time for supper. The dog hides your rook. (We had a cat that took pawns from my chess set and hid them while I was away at work. That evil cat did not last long in my house!) For my openings at the time, I was heavily influenced by Tim Harding's book on the Bishop's Opening and a little book by Tony Santasiere on the Vienna Game published by Ken Smith. Sawyer - Straszacker, corr APCT-SACCA 1978 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Nf6 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.f4!? [4.Nf3 is more solid.] 4...Bxc3?! [4...Qe7; 4...Nc6] 5.dxc3 Nc6 6.Nf3 Qe7 7.Qe2 d6 8.0-0 Bd7?! [8...exf4! 9.Bxf4 Be6=] 9.f5 h6 10.b4 a6 11.a4 Rb8?! [The rook does not do much here. This is simply a waste of time.] 12.Bd2 Na7 13.h3 0-0 14.Nh4 c6? [Black missed my forking threat. He had to move his king.] 15.Ng6! [A fun move to play.] 15...Qd8 16.Nxf8 Qxf8 17.g4 d5 18.exd5 [18.Bd3+-] 18...cxd5 19.Bb3 Qd6 20.Rae1 Ne4? [Black dreams of a fork on g3. If 20...Re8 21.Be3+/-]

21.Qd3 Bc6? [21...Nxd2+- and White would still have to convert the advantage of the Exchange.] 22.Rxe4 1-0

24 – Alberston 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.d3 d6 It was my privilege to play the National Master Bruce Alberston and chess author in the third round of a tournament in Levittown, Pennsylvania in 1982. I knew him as a longtime chess teacher from the Allentown area which is 60 miles north of Philadelphia. My Bishops Opening / Vienna Game 3.Bc4 gave me reasonable attacking chances. Alberston prevented me from transposing into a King’s Gambit Declined with his move 5...Be6. Then I was on my own. I missed good chances and got outplayed by a master. Sawyer (1900) - Alberston (2309), Levittown, PA (3), 15.05.1982 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Nf6 3.Nc3 Bc5 4.d3 d6 5.f4 Be6 [5...Ng4 6.f5 h5=] 6.Nf3 [6.Bxe6 fxe6 7.Nf3 exf4 8.d4 Bb6=] 6...Bxc4 7.dxc4 Nc6 [7...exf4 8.Bxf4 0-0=/+] 8.Qe2 [8.fxe5 dxe5=] 8...0-0 9.Be3? [9.fxe5 Nxe5 10.Nxe5 dxe5 11.Bg5=] 9...Bb4 [9...Nd4-/+] 10.Bd2 exf4 11.0-0-0 Re8 12.e5 [12.Nd5 Bc5-/+] 12...Nxe5 13.Nxe5 Rxe5 14.Qf3 Qc8 15.Bxf4 Bxc3 16.bxc3 [16.Qxc3 Re2-/+] 16...Rf5 17.g4 Rc5 18.g5 Qg4 19.Qxb7 [19.Qxg4 Nxg4-/+] 19...Qxf4+ 20.Kb2 Qe4 21.Rd5 [21.Qxe4 Nxe4-+] 21...Re8 22.gxf6 Qxh1 23.fxg7 Rxd5 0-1

25 – Turcotte 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.f4 d6 5.d3 Bxg1 Mike Turcotte played in the same club as Bruce Alberston. They were friends and might have travelled to this event together. In my game vs Turcotte, I won a pawn. Black was the higher rated player, and he wanted to avoid a loss being down material. We agreed to a draw although Black had only a little compensation. But White should play on and try to win from the final position on the board. My draw in this round allowed me to be paired against Alberston in the next round, but a win here would have been better for me. The result was based on a mutual fear of losing.

Sawyer (1900) - Turcotte (2019), Levittown, PA (2), 15.05.1982 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Nf6 3.Nc3 Bc5 4.f4 d6 5.d3 Bxg1 [5...Ng4] 6.Rxg1 Bg4 [6...Nc6=] 7.Qd2 Be6 8.Bxe6 fxe6 9.fxe5 dxe5 10.Qg5 Qe7?! [10...Nc6=] 11.Qxe5 Nc6 12.Qb5 0-0-0 [12...0-0=] 13.Be3 a6 14.Qc5 Qe8 15.Qg5 Rd7 16.0-0-0 h6 17.Qg3 Rf8 18.Qe1 [18.Rdf1+/-] 18...Rdf7 19.Qe2 e5 20.Rgf1 Nd7 21.Qh5 Qe6 22.Rxf7 Rxf7 [If 22...Rxf7 23.Nd5+/-] 1/2-1/2

26 - Puckett 5.f4 Ng4 6.f5 Nf2 I travelled with my wife to Crossville in July 1977. The counties in Tennessee could have served as inspiration for the famous TV show "Dukes of Hazzard" which became popular in 1979-1985. It was obvious the little towns in the Tennessee hills and valleys were known more for football than chess. It seemed like every county had some kid who had grown up to be an NFL player. Crossville, Tennessee was on the Central Time Zone west side of a mountain range on the southern end of the Appalachians; the valley on the east side was in the Eastern Time Zone. It was there in Crossville that Harry Sabine ran chess tournaments. Later the USCF would move its headquarters to this same town. I won my first round as Black in an Albin-Counter Gambit. Forty years ago I was afraid to sacrifice material. I remember how scared I was during this game. My low rated opponent blundered and I won after some heart pounding moments. I did not dare play the King's Gambit. I preferred what I called the "Chicken King's Gambit". It starts: 1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Nf6 3.Nc3 Bc5 4.de d6 5.f4 Nc6 6.Nf3. In the second round, I faced Randy Puckett who was rated about 450 points below me. Black chose the risky Dangling Knight Variation 5...Ng4. This tournament game as White lasted only 10 moves. I won this tournament outright 4-0. The players rated above me all lost to players rated below me. All my opponents were rated hundreds of points below me. I cruised to an easy victory. My wife was impressed with the awesome skills of her new husband. Alas, it was a rare occurrence for me to win enough money at a tournament to pay for the cost of our motel and meals. Sawyer - Puckett, Crossville, TN (2), 16.07.1977 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Bc5 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.d3 d6 5.f4 Ng4 [5...Nc6 6.Nf3 is a King's Gambit Declined] 6.f5 Nf2 7.Qh5 0-0 [Usually 7...g6 8.Qh6 is played.] 8.Bg5 Qe8

9.Nd5! [White is winning.] 9...g6 [If 9...Nxh1 10.Nf6+ gxf6 11.Bxf6+- and the best Black can do is to sacrifice a couple bishops before getting checkmated.] 10.Nf6+ 1-0

27 – Sims 6.f5 Nf2 7.Qh5 Qd7 I gave a simultaneous exhibition in February 1980 at a school in Red Bank, Tennessee. I found that most club players did not know the Bishop’s Opening. All my moves come naturally. Black intended 6...Nf2 forking Qd1 and Rh1. White’s queen and four minor pieces focus on Black’s king and queen. The undeveloped Black queenside is of little help. White's attack is powerful! Sawyer - Sims, Red Bank, TN simul 07.02.1980 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Nf6 3.Nc3 Bc5 4.f4 d6 5.d3 Ng4 [5...Nc6 6.Nf3 is a King's Gambit Declined.] 6.f5! Nf2? [The Nf2 fork looks good at first, but it is bad. Maybe 6...h5! 7.Nh3 Qh4+ 8.Kf1 and White might has either 8...Nc6 (or 8...c6 9.Qe2) 9.Nd5] 7.Qh5 [Threatens mate on f7.] 7...Qd7? [7...g6 8.Qh6 Nxh1 9.Bg5!+-] 8.Nf3 [Obvious and good. This is easy to play in a simul. Even better is winning a piece with 8.Be6! Qe7 9.Nd5 Qf8 10.Bxc8+-] 8...Nxh1 9.Ng5 Rf8 10.Nxh7 [Again 10.Be6! Qd8 11.Nxf7 also wins.] 10...c6 [If 10...d5 11.Nxd5 with the threat of Ndf6+ forking king and queen.] 11.Nxf8 Kxf8 [White regained the rook. Black is still ahead in material, but his position is a disaster.] 12.Qh8+ Ke7 13.Bg5+ [13.Bh6! d5 14.f6+!] 13...f6 14.Be6 [14.Qxg7+! Kd8 15.Bxf6+ Kc7 16.Qf8 Na6 17.Be6+-] 14...Qxe6 [The Black queen is lost. If 14...fxg5 15.Bxd7 Nxd7 16.Qxg7+ Kd8 17.f6+and Black will lose more material.] 15.fxe6 fxg5 [Of course 15...Nd7 16.exd7 Bxd7 17.Qxa8+-] 16.Qxc8 Na6 17.Qd7+ White has Qf7 mate next move. 1-0

28 – McMahon 4.d3 d6 5.f4 Ng4 The curse of postal chess was setting up a position incorrectly. In this game I picked up a bishop for two f-pawns. Probably I was winning, but then suddenly Black just resigned. My opponent C. Stanley McMahon later wrote to me that he had set the board up wrong, omitting his e5 pawn, so he resigned. So I got lucky. Sawyer - McMahon, corr APCT 77R-11 (2), 08.1977 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Nf6 3.Nc3 Bc5 4.d3 d6 5.f4 Ng4 6.f5 Nf2 7.Qh5 g6 8.Qh6 c6 9.Qg7? [I

missed the strong 9.Bg5! Qc7 10.Bb5!! and White is winning.] 9...Rf8 10.Bh6 Kd7? [10...Nd7! 11.Qxh7 Nf6 12.Qg7 d5 13.Bg5 dxc4-/+] 11.Qxf8 Qxf8 12.Bxf8 Nxh1 13.Nh3 Ke8 14.Bg7 gxf5 15.Ke2 f4 16.Rxh1 Bg4+ 17.Ke1 Bxh3 18.gxh3 Nd7 19.Ne2 Be3 20.d4 Ke7 21.Bh6 1-0

29 – Talkeres 3.Bc4 Nc6 4.d3 Bb4 5.Nge2 The Vienna Game / Bishops opening was a favorite of mine as White in the 1970s. Throughout my career as Black, I’ve chosen three different approaches to 2.Nc3: 2...Nf6; 2...Nc6; or 2...f5!? My opponent's ICC handle "Talkeres" honored the great chess players Tal and Keres. During our three minute blitz game he had good attacking chances. I knew he wanted to play Bxf7 to win material or play for checkmate. I figured out a way to let him play. This gave me an attack vs his king. "Talkeres" yielded to temptation and got checkmated himself a few moves later. Talkeres - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 10.11.2012 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nc3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.d3 Bb4 5.Nge2 d5 6.exd5 Nxd5 7.0-0 Nxc3 [7...Be6 8.Bxd5 Bxd5 9.f4 0-0=] 8.bxc3 Bd6 9.f4 0-0 10.f5 Kh8 11.f6 gxf6 12.Ng3 Be6 13.Bb3 Rg8 14.Qh5 Rg6 15.Nf5 Bxf5 16.Rxf5 Qd7 17.Be3 Rag8 18.g3 e4 19.Bf4? [White has a good game after 19.dxe4+/=] 19...Bxf4 20.Rxf4 exd3 21.cxd3 Qxd3 22.Bxf7? [White yields to the temptation to win the Exchange but Black plans to sack a rook for a mating attack. 22.Kh1 Qxc3 23.Rd1 Ne5 24.Rh4 Qf3+!=/+] 22...Rxg3+ 23.hxg3? Qxg3+ 24.Kf1 Qxf4+ 25.Ke2 Rg2+ 26.Kd3 Rd2# 0-1

30 – Button 3.Bc4 Nc6 4.f4 exf4 5.Nf3 Howard Button seemed to enjoy postal chess. He entered many APCT events. This was the only time we played each other. Half the time, I played in class events where I faced mostly experts and masters. But here I encountered Howard Button in an open event. His fifth move was excellent, better than what most people play. After that nice start for Black, things went from good to bad to worse in what followed. Soon his position was busted. Sawyer (2000) - Button (1374), corr APCT 1979 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Nf6 3.Nc3 Nc6 4.f4!? exf4 [4...Nxe4!=/+] 5.Nf3 Na5! 6.Be2 Bc5? [6...d5=] 7.e5 Ng4 8.d4 Qe7? [8...Bb6 9.Bxf4+/-] 9.Nd5! Qd8 10.dxc5 c6 11.Nxf4

0-0 12.b4 b6 13.bxa5 b5 14.Qd4 Rb8 15.0-0 Ba6 16.Nh5 Qxa5 17.Qxg4 1-0

31 – Gilbert 3.Bc4 Nc6 4.f4 Nxe4 5.Nf3 I played a wild game vs John Gilbert where I sacrificed a bishop for an attack. The combination won the Black queen and chases the king from Ke8 to Kg6 to Kc6. This line of play was influenced by Tony Santasiere and Tim Harding, with additional pushes from Weaver Adams and Ken Smith. Their books on the Bishops Opening and Vienna Game were a great help, encouraging me to play more aggressively than my normal Caro-Kann ways. My tactical skill was quite limited in those days. Twice in this game I grab big material instead of finding a forced checkmate. This was my first APCT event. It shows I had a lot to learn about postal chess. After 100 such games, I was a lot stronger, reaching the Expert level. Eventually I would play 1000 correspondence games, win an ICCF Master section and become a USCF postal master. I reached my peak after about 12 years of postal play. Sawyer - Gilbert, corr APCT 77R-11 (4), 08.1977 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Nf6 3.Nc3 Nc6 4.f4 Nxe4 5.Nf3 Nxc3 6.dxc3 exf4 [Drops a pawn. Correct is 6...Qe7=] 7.Bxf4 Bc5 8.Bxf7+! Kxf7 9.Qd5+ Kf6? 10.Bg5+ Kg6 11.Bxd8 [I missed 11.Nh4+! Kh5 12.Bxd8+ Ne5 13.Qxe5+ Kg4 14.h3 mate] 11...Re8+ 12.Kd1 Rxd8 13.Qxc5 [I missed 13.Qe4+! Kf6 14.Qf4+ Ke7 15.Re1+ Ne5 16.Rxe5+ Kd6 17.Qd2+ Kc6 18.Qd5+ Kb6 19.Qxc5+ Ka6 20.Qa5 mate] 13...d6 14.Nh4+ Kf7 15.Qd5+ Be6 16.Rf1+ Ke7 17.Qg5+ Kd7 18.Qxg7+ Ne7 19.Nf5 Bxf5 20.Rxf5 Rg8 21.Qxh7 Rh8 22.Qf7 Rag8 23.Rf2 Rxh2 24.Kd2 [24.Re2!+-] 24...Rgxg2 25.Raf1 Kc6 26.Qf3+ 1-0

32 – Steinberg 3.Bc4 Nc6 4.f4 exf4 5.Nf3 Arnold Steinberg and I began a Vienna 3.Bc4 with aggressive back and forth tactics. I got a slight advantage as Black, but sharp positions turn on a dime. I blundered and lost. Steinberg (1949) - Sawyer (2000), corr APCT 1985 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nc3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.f4 Nxe4! 5.Nf3 Nxc3 6.dxc3 Qe7 7.Qd5 [7.Qe2 exf4 8.Bxf4 Qxe2+ 9.Bxe2 d6 10.0-0-0 Be7=/+] 7...exf4+ 8.Kd1 d6 [8...Qf6!

9.Qe4+ Be7 10.Bxf4 d5! 11.Bxd5 Bf5=/+] 9.Bb5 Be6 10.Bxc6+ Kd8 11.Qb5 bxc6 12.Qxc6 Rb8 13.Bxf4 Rxb2 14.Qa8+ Bc8 [14...Kd7 15.Nd4 Qf6=] 15.Re1 Qd7 16.Qxa7 c5? [Black opens up his king to disaster. Better is 16...h6 17.Kc1 Rb7=/+] 17.Qa5+ Qc7 18.Re8+ 1-0

2.Nc3 Nf6 3.Bc4 Nxe4 Black moves the game into a more tactical Vienna with 3.Bc4 Nxe4.

33 – Sawyer 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 In his excellent book on the Petroff repertoire Grandmaster Konstantin Sakaev writes: "It is weaker for Black to play 4.Bxf7 Kxf7 5.Nxe4 d5=+; Black occupies the centre and later he can castle artificially, since he has more than sufficient time for this." In trying to castle by hand, I miss the power of Qf3+ attacking d5 which would have given White equality at a couple points. alain - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 02.06.2012 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Nf6 3.Nc3 Nxe4 4.Bxf7+?! Kxf7 5.Nxe4 d5=/+ [Sakaev] 6.Ng3 Bd6? [6...Nc6=/+] 7.b3? [7.Qf3+!=] 7...Nc6 8.Bb2 Rf8? [8...Qf6-/+] 9.Nf3? [9.Qf3+!=] 9...Bg4 10.Qe2? Kg8 [10...e4!-+] 11.0-0-0? e4 [White loses a piece and eventually the game.] 12.h3 exf3 13.Qb5 fxg2 14.hxg4 gxh1Q 15.Rxh1 Bxg3 16.fxg3 Qd6 [Now White is a rook down.] 17.Qd3 Qg6 18.Qxd5+ Qf7 19.Qg2 Qf3 20.Qh3 h6 21.Kb1 Rae8 22.g5 h5 23.g6 Qg4 24.Qh2 Re2 25.Qg1 Rff2 26.Bc3 Nd4 27.Rh4 Nf3 28.Rxg4 hxg4 29.Qc1 Re1 30.Kb2 Rxc1 31.Kxc1 Rg2 32.d4 Rxg3 33.d5 Rg1+ 34.Kb2 Rd1 35.Ba5 b6 0-1

34 – Regan 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 James Regan and I played some fun extra postal chess games. Here we played a Vienna Game 3.Bc4 Nxe4. White goes in for 4.Bxf7!? This continuation is in the style of the Jerome Gambit. The line leads simply to positions with equal chances. However in this unrated game James Regan outplays me. Regan - Sawyer, corr 1989 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.Bc4 Nxe4 4.Bxf7+!? [4.Qh5 Nd6 5.Bb3 is the main line.] 4...Kxf7 5.Nxe4 d5 6.Qf3+?! [6.Nc3=] 6...Kg8 7.Ng3? c6 8.Qe2 Bd6 9.d3 Nd7 10.Nf3 Qe7? [This allows a nasty knight fork. Better is to keep going with 10...Qf6=] 11.Bd2 [But 11.Nf5!+/-] 11...Nf6 12.0-0-0 Bg4 13.h3 Bxf3 14.gxf3 g6? [14...Qd7=] 15.Rde1 Kf7 16.h4 h5 17.Qf1 Qc7 18.Qg2 Rae8 19.Rh3

[19.Rhg1+/-] 19...Rhg8 20.Kb1 a5 21.Ne2 b5 22.Rg1 Re6?! 23.d4 [23.Rg3+/-] 23...b4 [23...exd4!=] 24.Rg3 Nd7 25.Rg5 1-0

35 – Fancy 2…Nf6 3.Bc4 Nxe4 White tried the speculative 4.Bxf7+ in the Vienna Game. Black had a good game in a wild position with a queen vs two rooks. Eventually, White found a win in Stuart Fancy vs Harry Press. Fancy (2049) - Press (1889), Oceania Zonal 2015 Cammeray AUS, 05.07.2015 begins 1.Nc3 e5 2.e4 Nf6 3.Bc4 Nxe4 4.Bxf7+ [The sharp Frankenstein-Dracula variation 4.Qh5 Nd6 5.Bb3 Nc6 6.Nb5 g6 7.Qf3 f5 8.Qd5 Qe7 9.Nxc7+ Kd8 10.Nxa8 b6 gives compensation for the Exchange. I played it several times as White in the 1970s.] 4...Kxf7 5.Nxe4 d5 6.Nc3 [In my game Regan - Sawyer, corr 1989 White played 6.Qf3+?! Kg8 7.Ng3? c6 8.Qe2 Bd6 9.d3 Nd7 10.Nf3. Black missed 10...Qf6= and later lost the game.] 6...c6 7.Qh5+ g6 8.Qe2 Bd6 9.d3 Re8 10.h4 e4 [10...Nd7=] 11.dxe4 Bf5 12.Bg5 Qa5 13.0-0-0 Bb4 14.exf5 [14.Be3+/-] 14...Rxe2 15.fxg6+ hxg6 [15...Kxg6=] 16.Ngxe2 Nd7 17.Rd4 [17.a3=] 17...Re8 18.h5 Bxc3 19.Nxc3 gxh5 20.Rdh4 [20.Rxh5=] 20...Qc5 [20...d4-+] 21.Be3 Rxe3 22.fxe3 Qxe3+ 23.Kd1 [23.Kb1 Nf6=/+] 23...Ne5 [23...Nf6-/+] 24.R4h3 Qd4+ 25.Kc1 Qf4+ 26.Kb1 d4 27.Nd1 Ke7 28.Rxh5 Nc4 29.b3 Ne3 [29...Na3+ 30.Kb2+/=] 30.Nb2 [30.R5h4+/=] 30...Qf2 31.Rc1 Qxg2 32.Rh7+ Kf6 33.Rxb7 Nd5 34.Rxa7 Nc3+ 35.Ka1 Qd2 [35...Ne2 36.Re1=] 36.Nd3 Ne4 [36...Nd5 37.Kb2+/-] 37.Kb2 Qc3+ 38.Ka3 Nd2 [38...Nc5 39.Rf1+ Ke6 40.Nb4+/-] 39.Ra4 [39.Ka4+-] 39...c5 [39...Ke7 40.Nb2+/=] 40.Ra6+ Ke7 [40...Kg7 41.Ka4+-] 41.Rh1 Nc4+ 42.Ka4 Nd6 43.Rh7+ Ke6 44.Rh6+ Kf5 45.Raxd6 Qxc2 46.Rd5+ [If 46...Ke4 47.Re5+] 1-0

36 - Grattan 4.Qh5 Nd6 5.Qxe5+ I went to great lengths to avoid the draw in a Vienna Game vs Robert Grattan, only to find myself losing. Somehow I struggled back. I won this game that lasted from late 1984 to late 1985. Grattan (1851) - Sawyer, corr APCT 84R-20 1984 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.Bc4 Nxe4 4.Qh5 Nd6 5.Qxe5+ [Queens come off.] 5...Qe7 6.Qxe7+ Bxe7 7.Bb3 Nf5 8.Nf3 c6 9.0-0 d5 10.Re1 [Or 10.d4 0-0 11.Re1 Bf6=] 10...Na6!? 11.d4 Nc7 12.Ne2 Ne6 13.c3 Bd7 [13...f6!] 14.Ne5 Nd6 15.Nxd7 Kxd7 16.Bc2 g6 17.b3 Rae8 18.Nf4 Ng7 [18...Bf6=] 19.Bb2 f5?! [19...Ngf5!?] 20.Nd3 Nf7 21.c4! Bf6? 22.Ne5+? [22.cxd5!+-] 22...Bxe5 23.dxe5 Ne6 24.cxd5 cxd5 25.Rad1 Kc6 26.b4 Re7 27.a4 Rd8 28.Bb3 Red7 [I am losing.] 29.Ra1 [29.f4! h5 30.g3+-] 29...Kc7 30.Rad1 b6 31.b5 Nfg5 32.f3? [32.Rc1+!+/-] 32...Nc5 33.Bc2 Nge6 34.Bd4 Kb7 35.g3 Rc7 36.Re2 Nxd4 37.Rxd4 Ne6 38.Rd1 Rc3 39.f4 d4 40.Rd3 Rdc8 41.Rdd2 R8c4 42.Kf1 Nc5? [42...Kc7!-/+] 43.e6! Nxe6 44.Rxe6? [44.Bd3!+/=] 44...Rxc2 45.Rxc2? [45.Re7+ Rc7=] 45...Rxc2 46.Re7+ Rc7 47.Re2 d3 48.Rd2 Rc3 49.Kf2 Kc7 50.Ke3 Kd6?! [50...Ra3!-/+] 51.Rxd3+ Rxd3+ 52.Kxd3 Kd5 53.Kc3? [53.h3!=] 53...Ke4 54.Kc4 h5 55.h4 Kf3 56.Kd5 Kxg3 57.Kc6 Kxh4 58.Kb7 g5!? [58...Kg4-/+] 59.fxg5 Kxg5 60.Kxa7 h4 61.a5 bxa5 62.b6 h3 63.b7 h2 64.b8Q h1Q 65.Qg3+ Kh5 66.Qf2? Qe4 67.Qh2+ Kg6 68.Qg3+ Kf7 69.Qb3+ Qe6 70.Qa4 Qe7+ 71.Ka6 Qd6+ 72.Kxa5? [Black swaps queens. The f-pawn wins easily.] 72...Qd8+! 0-1

37 – Warren 5.Bb3 Be7 6.Qxe5 I defeated James Warren, husband of APCT tournament director Helen. Jim Warren played notable games vs Bobby Fischer. Jim also helped implement the rating system created by Arpad Elo. Sawyer (2000) - Warren (2072), corr APCT 1979 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Nf6 3.Nc3 Nxe4 4.Qh5 Nd6 5.Bb3 Be7 6.Qxe5 [6.Nf3 Nc6 7.Nxe5 g6 8.Nxc6 dxc6=] 6...0-0 7.d4 Nc6 8.Qf4 b5 9.Nf3 Bb7 [9...Na5=] 10.Be3 Na5 11.Bd5 Bxd5 12.Nxd5 c6 [Better is 12...Nac4=] 13.Nxe7+ Qxe7 14.00 Ndc4 15.Bc1 [15.Rfe1+/-] 15...Rfe8 16.b3 Nb6 17.Bb2 Nd5 18.Qd2 b4

19.a3 Nb7 20.Rfe1 Qd6 21.Rxe8+ Rxe8 22.axb4 Qxb4 23.Qxb4 Nxb4 24.Rxa7 Nd8 25.Ra8 [25.Kf1 Ne6 26.Ne1+-] 25...Nxc2 [25...Nd5 26.Ra7+/-] 26.Bc3 Kf8 [26...f6 27.Ba5+-] 27.Ra2 1-0

5.Bb3 Nc6 to 10…b6 In some circles this is called the Frankenstein-Dracula Variation.

38 – Poscher 11.d3 Nd4 12.Nh3 Edmund Poscher of Austria was the friendliest opponent I played in my first ICCF tournament. Edmund communicated well in English. I seem to recall he liked the Beatles and Bobby Fischer. Both pretty much ceased to perform after 1972. ICCF ratings show Edmund Poscher rated 2120 and inactive since 1995. He mounted a very impressive attack for the Exchange. When I blundered, Edmund Poscher polished me off in good form. Sawyer - Poscher, corr ICCF 1978 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Nf6 3.Nc3 Nxe4 4.Qh5 Nd6 5.Bb3 Nc6 6.Nb5 g6 7.Qf3 f5 8.Qd5 Qe7 9.Nxc7+ Kd8 10.Nxa8 b6 11.d3 Nd4 12.Nh3 [Junior 12 suggests 12.Nxb6 axb6 13.Qa8+/=] 12...f4 13.Nxb6 axb6 14.Qa8 Kc7 15.Bd5 Nxc2+ 16.Ke2 Nb5 [Chances are equal after 16...Bb7 17.Bxb7 Nd4+ 18.Kf1 Nxb7 19.Bd2=] 17.Be3?? [I threw the game away. Black gets a direct attack. White's king is toast. Correct is 17.Bd2 Nbd4+ 18.Kd1 Nxa1 19.Qa7+ Kd8 20.Qxb6+ Ke8 21.Qb8!? Qc5 22.Qxe5+ Ne6 23.Nxf4+/= and though both kings are in danger, White seems better off.] 17...fxe3 18.fxe3 Qc5 19.d4 Nbxd4+ 20.exd4 Nxd4+ 0-1

39 – Davis 11.d3 Bb7 12.h4 f4 I liked this Vienna Game line as White. Black can equalize, but finding best moves is not easy. I faced the veteran Bob Davis when I was a young man, and my rating was headed up, up, up. Sawyer - Davis (1600), corr RPCC (1), 23.06.1977 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Nf6 3.Nc3 Nxe4 4.Qh5 Nd6 5.Bb3 Nc6 [5...Be7! 6.Qxe5 0-0=] 6.Nb5 g6 7.Qf3 f5 8.Qd5 Qe7 9.Nxc7+ Kd8 10.Nxa8 b6 11.d3 Bb7 [11...Nd4! when there could follow 12.Nxb6 axb6 13.Qa8 Kc7 14.Qa4 Bb7=] 12.h4 f4 13.Qf3 Nd4 14.Qg4 Bh6 15.Nh3 [15.c3+/- Stockfish, Komodo, Houdini] 15...N6f5 16.Ng5 Bxg5 17.hxg5 f3 18.g3 e4 19.Be3 Bd5? [19...Ne2 20.Nxb6 axb6 21.Bxb6+ Kc8 22.dxe4+/-] 20.Qf4 d6 21.Bxd5 Nxc2+ 22.Kd2 Ncxe3 [If 22...exd3 23.Kxd3 Nfxe3 24.fxe3 Nxa1 25.Rc1 Rf8

26.Be6!+- with mate in a few moves.] 23.fxe3 Rf8 24.Qxe4 Qxe4 25.Bxe4 f2 26.Bxf5 1-0

40 – Klein12.h4 f4 13.Qf3 Nd4 Eugene Klein of Bridgeport, Connecticut described himself as a “little wood pusher.” Gene and I played three very long games in three different openings via APCT postal chess. Typically, our games lasted a full year or more at a move about every six days. I had White in all three. The others began 1.e4 b6 and 1.e4 e6. I loved gambits when I had the extra material. Here I grabbed the Exchange in this Bishops Opening Vienna Game. I gave it back and lost a pawn by the time of the early middlegame. Then I got first one pawn back and then another. Despite my inaccuracies, I converted the rook and pawn ending for the victory. Sawyer (2000) - Klein (1923), corr APCT 1979 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Nf6 3.Nc3 Nxe4 4.Qh5 Nd6 5.Bb3 Nc6 6.Nb5 g6 7.Qf3 f5 8.Qd5 Qe7 9.Nxc7+ Kd8 10.Nxa8 b6 11.d3 Bb7 12.h4 f4 13.Qf3 Nd4 14.Qg4 Bh6 [14...h5 15.Qxg6 Rh7 16.c3+/=] 15.Nh3 [15.c3+/-] 15...N6f5 [15...Bxa8 16.Bd2+/=] 16.Ng5 Bxg5 17.hxg5 f3 18.g3 e4 19.Be3 exd3 20.Qf4 d6 21.Kd2 Ne2 22.Qc4? [22.Qa4+-] 22...Bxa8 23.Qxd3 [23.Qe6=] 23...Be4 24.Qb5 Nxe3 25.fxe3 Nxg3 26.Rh3 Nf5 27.Rf1 Qxg5 28.Rhxf3 Bxf3 29.Rxf3 Qg2+ 30.Qe2 Qxe2+ 31.Kxe2 [This endgame pits White's R+B and 4 pawns vs Black's R+N and 5 pawns.] 31...Ke7 32.Rf4 Kf6 33.Kf3 Kg5 34.Be6 Rf8 35.c3 Rf6 36.Bd7 h5 37.b4 d5 38.a4 Rf7 39.Be6 Re7 [Black allows the minor pieces to be exchanged. Better would have been 39...Nh4+!-+] 40.Bxf5 gxf5 41.Rd4 Re5 42.Rd1 h4 43.Rg1+ Kf6 44.Rg8 Kf7 45.Ra8 Re7 46.Rh8 Re4 47.Rd8 Re5 48.Rd7+ Kg6 49.Rxa7 [White regains a pawn. Now a R+4Ps each.] 49...Re8 50.a5 h3 [Black loses a pawn. 50...bxa5 51.Rxa5=] 51.axb6 Rh8 52.Ra1 h2 53.Rh1 Kg5 54.b7 Rb8 55.Rxh2 Rxb7 56.Rg2+ [56.Rb2!+-] 56...Kf6 57.Ke2 Rb8 58.Kd3 Ke5 59.Rb2 Rb7 60.c4? [60.b5!+-] 60...dxc4+ 61.Kxc4 Kd6? [61...Ke4!=] 62.b5 Rc7+ 63.Kd4 Re7 64.b6 Rb7 65.Rb5 Kc6 66.Kc4 Rf7 67.b7 Rxb7 68.Rxb7 Kxb7 69.Kd5 Kc7 70.Ke6 Kc6 71.Kxf5 Kd5 72.e4+ 1-0

41 – Spanik 12.h4 h6 13.Qf3 Walter Muir convinced me to try some international chess play in 1978. I made my first very tentative attempt at competition in the International Correspondence Chess Federation (ICCF). I was the only player in my section from the USA. The transmission time between moves was very slow. This was my shortest game. This opponent was Ing. Jozef Spanik whom I think was from Czechoslovakia, what is today the Czech Republic and Slovakia. I wore out my copy of Tim Harding’s book on Bishop's Opening. My opponent failed to reply to my 14th move. In ICCF, if you did not receive a move from your opponent within say 2-3 weeks, then you were to send a repeat of your last move via registered mail and notify the tournament director. If your opponent did not reply to your repeat move, then eventually you were awarded a forfeit win. In most countries, the cost of registered mail was a slight increase to normal mail prices. In the USA registered mail was about 10 times the cost of a normal postcard. I struggled to earn enough money in the late 1970s. Those were my early poverty years where chess took money from my family. For my game vs Ing. Jozef Spanik, I was awarded a win. The process annoyed me. I decided to spend more of my money on my family. That worked. I am still married to the same wife! I quit my 1978 ICCF section. In future years I would return to the ICCF and sometimes I played very well. The US economy was terrible back in 1978-1980, leading President Jimmy Carter to be voted out of office by a landslide. Almost every state voted for Ronald Reagan and the economy soon turned around. Like most people, I voted for Jimmy Carter the first time, but I would not make that mistake the second time. I voted for Reagan in 1980 and 1984. Sawyer - Spanik, corr ICCF corr ICCF, 1978 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Nf6 3.Nc3 Nxe4 [After 3...Nc6 I played what I called the "Chicken King's Gambit". I backed into that opening via 4.d3 Bc5 5.f4 d6 6.Nf3 King's Gambit Declined. That avoids an actual pawn sacrifice.] 4.Qh5 Nd6 5.Bb3 [5.Qxe5+ Qe7 6.Qxe7+ Bxe7 7.Bb3=] 5...Nc6 [5...Be7 6.Nf3 Nc6 7.Nxe5=] 6.Nb5 g6 7.Qf3 f5 8.Qd5 Qe7 9.Nxc7+ Kd8 10.Nxa8 b6 11.d3 [Another way to play this is 11.Nxb6 axb6 12.Qf3 Bb7 13.d3 Nd4 14.Qh3] 11...Bb7

12.h4 h6 [The more popular way to stop the threat of 13.Bg5 winning the Black queen is by 12...f4 13.Qf3 Bh6 14.Bd2 Nd4=] 13.Qf3 Nd4 14.Qg3+/= Black stopped playing. 1-0

Book 1: Chapter 3 – King’s Gambit 2.f4 The Kings Gambit is a famous method to attack as White.

42 – Sawyer 2…Bd6 3.Nf3 I see my game vs "realityczech" needs a reality check. I didn’t notice 5.e5! wins a piece. I missed other improvements but won. Sawyer - realityczech, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 19.12.2012 1.f4 e5 2.e4 Bd6 3.Nf3 Nf6? [3...f6 4.d4 exf4 5.e5+/-] 4.Nc3?! [4.fxe5!+-] 4...exf4 5.d4? [5.e5! Qe7 6.Qe2+-] 5...Be7 6.Bxf4 d5 7.e5 Ne4 8.Bd3 Nxc3 9.bxc3 Bg4 [9...c5=] 10.0-0 0-0 11.h3 Bxf3 [11...Be6 12.Rb1+/=] 12.Qxf3 Bg5? [12...Qd7 13.Qh5+-] 13.Bxg5 Qxg5 14.Qxd5 c6 15.Qe4 g6 16.Rf2 [16.Rab1+-] 16...Nd7 17.Raf1 Rae8 18.h4 [18.Bc4+-] 18...Qh6 19.Qg4 [19.Bc4+-] 19...Re7 20.h5 Qxh5 21.Qxh5 gxh5 22.Rf5 h6 23.Rxh5 [23.R1f3+-] 23...Kg7 24.Rf3 f5 25.Rhxf5 Rxf5 26.Rxf5 Nb6 27.c4 Rf7 28.Rxf7+ Kxf7 29.Kf2 Ke6 30.Ke3 Nd7 31.Ke4 Nf8 32.d5+ cxd5+ 33.cxd5+ Ke7 34.c4 Ng6 35.g3 Nh8 36.Kf5 Nf7 37.d6+ Kd7 38.c5 Nd8 39.Bb5+ Black resigns 1-0

43 – Sawyer 2...Nc6 3.Nf3 f5 I need a backup to my King's Gambit 2...exf4 lines. My sharpest and most successful try is the Tony Miles idea 2...Nc6 3.Nf3 f5!? challanger100 - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 29.12.2012 begins 1.e4 Nc6 2.f4 e5 3.Nf3 f5!? 4.exf5 exf4 5.d4 d5 6.Bxf4 Bxf5 [6...Bd6 7.Bxd6 Qxd6 8.Bd3 Nge7 9.Nc3 Bxf5 10.Bxf5 Nxf5 11.Qe2+ Qe7 12.Qxe7+ Nfxe7=.] 7.Bd3 Bxd3 8.Qxd3 Nf6 9.0-0 Be7 10.c3 [10.Ng5! Qd7 11.Nc3 0-0 12.Rae1+/-] 10...0-0 11.Ne5 Ne4 12.Nd2 Nxd2 13.Qxd2 Nxe5 14.Bxe5 Qd7 15.Qd3 Bd6 16.Qg3 Bxe5 17.Qxe5 Rxf1+ 18.Rxf1 Rf8 19.Rxf8+ Kxf8 20.h3 a6 21.b3 c6 22.Kh2 Qe7 23.Qb8+ Kf7 24.Qf4+ Qf6 25.Qc7+ Qe7 26.Qxe7+ Kxe7 27.g4 Kf6 28.Kg3 g5 29.Kf3 Ke6 30.Ke3 Kd6 31.Kd3 b5 32.a4 Kc7 33.axb5 axb5 34.c4 Kb6 35.Kc3 Ka5

36.Kb2? [36.c5!=] 36...Kb4 37.cxd5 cxd5 38.Ka2 Kc3 39.Ka3 b4+ 40.Ka4 h6 41.Kb5 Kxb3 42.Kc5 Kc3 43.Kxd5 b3 White resigns 0-1

44 – Zilbermints 4.exf4 e4 Lev Zilbermints wins in what is called the Kings Gambit Miles Defence. When Tony Miles wanted a break from his beloved Sicilian Dragon he used to play 1.e4 Nc6. He could reach this line via 2.f4 e5. Lev Zilbermints turns a defence into an attack. He castles queenside and assaults the kingside to mate the king. makrane (2061) - Zilbermints (2269), Rated Blitz game lichess, 26.07.2018 begins 1.e4 e5 2.f4 Nc6 3.Nf3 f5 4.exf5 e4 5.Ng5 [My Kings Gambit Playbook recommends 5.Ne5 Nxe5 6.fxe5 Qe7 7.d4 exd3 8.Qxd3 Qxe5+ 9.Be2+/=] 5...Nf6 6.Bc4? [6.Be2 Bc5 7.d3=] 6...d5 7.Bb3 Bxf5 [Black regained the gambit pawn and now has a great position.] 8.Nc3 h6 [8...Bg4 9.Ne2 Nd4-+] 9.Nxd5 hxg5 10.Nxf6+ Qxf6 11.Qe2 0-0-0 12.0-0 Nd4 [12...Bc5+! 13.Kh1 Rxh2+! 14.Kxh2 Qh6+ 15.Kg3 Qh4# mate] 13.Qc4 Be6 14.Qa4 [14.Qxd4 Qxd4+ 15.Kh1 Bxb3 16.axb3 gxf4-+] 14...Bc5 15.Bxe6+ Nxe6+ [Or 15...Qxe6 16.Kh1 Rxh2+ 17.Kxh2 Qh6+ 18.Kg1 Ne2# mate] 16.Kh1 Rxh2+! 17.Kxh2 Qh6+ 18.Kg3 Qh4# Black wins by checkmate. 0-1

45 – Zilbermints 5.Ne5 Nf6 Lev Zilbermints wrote to me: "I crushed GM Evgeni Vasiukov on the Internet Chess Club with the Adelaide Counter-Gambit in 25 moves. He tried the King's Gambit, but was in for a surprise." Black’s entire army mounted a coordinated assault on the White king. The grandmaster opened up the kingside for attack, but was unable to talk his queenside pieces into joining the fray. The 6.g4 move is not mentioned by John Shaw in his classic book. Vasiukov (2215) - Zilbermints (2184), ICC 5 0 Internet Chess Club, 14.01.2015 begins 1.e4 e5 2.f4 Nc6 3.Nf3 f5 4.exf5 e4 5.Ne5 Nf6 6.g4 [The main line seems to be 6.Nc3 Qe7 (6...Bd6!?) 7.Ng4 Nxg4 8.Qxg4 Qf7=] 6...Bc5!? [6...Nd5!=] 7.g5 0-0 8.gxf6 [8.Nc3+/=] 8...Qxf6 9.Bc4+ Kh8 [9...d5 10.Bxd5+ Kh8 11.Qh5 Nxe5 12.fxe5 Qxe5 13.Bf7 Bxf5-/+] 10.Qg4

[10.Qh5!+/=] 10...d5 11.Ng6+? [11.Nxc6 Bxf5=] 11...Qxg6 12.Qxg6 hxg6 13.Bxd5 Nd4 14.Bb3 Nf3+ [Or 14...Bxf5-+] 15.Ke2 Bxf5 16.Nc3 Rae8 [Or 16...Bg4 17.h3 Nd4+ 18.Ke1 Bf3-+] 17.Nd5 Nd4+ 18.Ke1 Nf3+ 19.Ke2 Bg4 20.Ne3 Nd4+ 21.Ke1 Bf3 22.Rg1 Bh5 23.Rf1 Nf3+ 24.Kf2 Rxf4 25.Kg3 Ref8 White resigns 0-1

46 – Corter 2…d6 3.Nf3 Bg4 James H. Corter was an active member of the Williamsport chess club that met on Tuesday nights at Lycoming College. I played James and his son Travis Corter about 30 games each. At that time, James was a typical club player rated in the 1500s-1600s. Travis was learning. They were friendly guys and a joy to play. I happened to score 59-0 against them. Yes, I was our only club player rated over 2000. So I was "supposed" to win, but one does not always win every single game, even if favored to do so. John Shaw writes of 2...d6: "This is a bit passive, unless Black captures on f4 shortly." Corter's move here of 3...Bg4 reminded me of the Paul Morphy game vs the Duke of Brunswick. Sawyer (2010) - Corter (1603), Williamsport, PA 22.06.1999 begins 1.e4 e5 2.f4 d6 3.Nf3 Bg4 4.Bc4 Bxf3 5.Qxf3 Nf6 6.0-0 [6.fxe5! dxe5 7.Qb3+/-] 6...Be7 7.d3 0-0 8.f5?! [8.Nc3+/=] 8...h5 9.Qg3 Kh7 10.Nc3 c6 11.Bg5?! [11.Bb3+/=] 11...Ng4 [11...Qb6+! 12.Kh1 Qxb2=] 12.Bd2 Bg5 13.Rad1?! [13.Bxg5 Qxg5 14.h3 Qe3+ 15.Qxe3 Nxe3 16.Rf2 Nxc4 17.dxc4+/=] 13...Bxd2 14.Rxd2 Qg5 [14...Qb6+ 15.Kh1 Qxb2 16.Ne2 Nd7=] 15.Re2 h4 16.Qf3 Nd7 17.Nd1 g6? 18.Bxf7! 1-0

47 – Ter-Saakian 2…Nf6 3.fxe5 Black can defend against the King's Gambit by either grabbing or refusing the f4 pawn. It never gets easy. White uses the f4 pawn to attack if Black declines the gambit. I usually take with 2...exf4 and dare White to beat me, but Black has other playable options. The higher rated player below chose a defense that reminds me of an Alekhine Defence. White got pawns to d5 and e5 after 2.f4 Nf6 in the game Grigorii Ter-Saakian vs Gennady Pranizin. Ter-Saakian (2080) - Pranizin (2220), 14th Moscow Open A 2018 RUS, 04.02.2018 begins 1.e4 e5 2.f4 Nf6 3.fxe5 Nxe4 4.Nf3 d5 [4...Be7=] 5.d3 Nc5 6.d4 Ne6 7.c4 c5 [7...Bb4+ 8.Kf2+/=] 8.cxd5 Nxd4 9.Nc3 Bg4 10.Be2 Bxf3 11.Bxf3 Nd7 12.Bf4 [12.e6!+-] 12...g5 13.Bg3 Bg7 14.e6 0-0

[14...Nf6 15.exf7+ Kxf7 16.0-0+-] 15.exd7 Qe7+ 16.Be2 Nf5 [Or 16...f5 17.0-0+-] 17.Bf2 g4 [17...Nd4 18.0-0 Nxe2+ 19.Qxe2 Qxe2 20.Nxe2+-] 18.Qd3 Qg5 [18...Nd4 19.h3+-] 19.Bxc5 Be5 20.Qe4 h5 21.Qxe5 1-0

48 – duckbreath 2…Nf6 3.fxe5 Bobby Fischer played a famous King's Gambit vs Robert Wade in the 2.f4 Nf6 variation. John Shaw gives it as Game 71 in his book on "The King's Gambit", a Quality Chess masterpiece. Shaw writes: "Incidentally, choosing Fischer - Wade to illustrate the 3.fxe5 line is like choosing vanilla as your favourite flavour of ice cream. No apologies though, as there is no better example of how to handle the white side of this line. Besides, any chess book is improved by the addition of a Fischer game." Below vs "duckbreath" (rated 2520) I had White in this line and played a textbook draw. You may know the Philidor Opening. The Philidor Endgame allows you to draw a pawn down in a rook ending. Starting at move 44, this game demonstrates the proper procedure to draw the Philidor Endgame, a specific rook and pawn ending with your king is directly in front of the enemy pawn and your rook is on the pawn's 6th rank. Once the pawn is advanced to that 6th rank, slide your rook back and check the enemy king from behind. There is no way to avoid the draw. Sawyer (2226) - duckbreath (2520), ICC 15 0 u Internet Chess Club, 07.07.2001 begins 1.e4 e5 2.f4 Nf6 3.fxe5 ["3.Nf3 aims for a more complex struggle" - Shaw] 3...Nxe4 4.Nf3 d5 [4...Ng5 5.d4 Nxf3+ 6.Qxf3 Qh4+ 7.Qf2 Qxf2+ 8.Kxf2 and 1-0 in 38. Fischer-Wade, Vinkovci 1968] 5.d3 Nc5 6.d4 Ne6 7.c4 Nc6 8.Be3 [8.cxd5 Qxd5 9.Nc3 Bb4 10.Bd2 Bxc3 11.bxc3+/=] 8...Bb4+ 9.Nc3 Ne7 10.a3 Bxc3+ 11.bxc3 0-0 12.Bd3 dxc4 13.Bxc4 Nd5 14.Qd2 Qd7 15.0-0 b6 16.Ng5 Bb7 17.Nxe6 fxe6 18.Bd3 Rxf1+ 19.Rxf1 h6 20.Bxh6 Nxc3 21.Bg6 Qxd4+ 22.Qxd4 Ne2+ 23.Kh1 Nxd4 24.Be3 Rd8 25.Bxd4 Rxd4 26.Bf7+ Kh8 27.Bg6 Bxg2+ 28.Kxg2 Rg4+ 29.Kh3 Rxg6 30.Rf7 c5 31.Rxa7 Rg5 32.Ra6 Rxe5 33.Rxb6 Re3+ 34.Kg2 Rxa3 35.Rxe6 c4 36.Rc6 Rc3 37.Kf2 Kg8 38.Ke2 Rc2+ 39.Kd1 Rxh2 40.Rxc4 Kh7 41.Ke1 g6 42.Kf1 Kh6 43.Kg1 Rd2 44.Rc3 [This is the Philidor Endgame position to draw a rook and pawn ending.] 44...Kh5 45.Ra3 g5 46.Rb3 g4 47.Ra3 Kh4 48.Rb3 g3 49.Rb8 Rc2 50.Rh8+ Kg4 51.Rg8+ Kf3 52.Rf8+ Ke2 53.Re8+ Kf3 54.Rf8+ Ke2 55.Re8+ Kd1

56.Rd8+ Ke1 57.Re8+ Kd2 58.Rd8+ Ke3 59.Re8+ Kd2 60.Kg2 Kc1+ 61.Kxg3 Ra2 62.Re1+ Kb2 63.Re2+ Ka1 64.Rxa2+ Kxa2 [Game drawn because neither player has mating material] 1/2-1/2

2.f4 Bc5 The classical King’s Gambit Declined is a solid well recommended choice.

49 – Bender 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.fxe5 My opponent was Sam Bender. I faced both of the APCT players named Bender. Here I played this King's Gambit vs Sam Bender who was rated about 100 points below me. After making move 25 Sam wrote on his postcard, "Looks like you got me." Friendly chit-chat or banter was common on weekly postcards during games. A week or two later I got a nice card from his wife informing me that Sam had died. It is rare in the USA to win a chess game because your opponent dies, but it is more likely in a yearlong postal game than during an over-the-board game that might take hours. I heard an old tale of a postal player in Connecticut who died without informing his opponents. The tournament director I.A. Horowitz secretly took over the games and won the tournament! Sam Bender played the classical 2...Bc5 King's Gambit Declined recommended by opening theoreticians. After 3.Nf3, Mr. Bender avoided the solid 3...d6! for the risky 3...Nf6!? This allowed White to develop all his pieces in an aggressive attacking formation aimed at the Black monarch. Bender’s position was lost. The game was adjudicated a rated win for White. Sawyer (1900) - Bender (1822), corr APCT 78CC-A-3 (4), 05.1978 begins 1.e4 e5 2.f4 Bc5 3.Nf3 Nf6 [Better is 3...d6 when White has either 4.Nc3 or 4.c3] 4.fxe5 Nxe4 5.d4 Be7 6.Be3 [6.Bd3!+/=] 6...d5 7.exd6 cxd6 8.Nbd2 Nxd2 [8...d5=] 9.Qxd2 0-0 10.Bd3 Nd7 11.0-0 d5 12.Rae1 Nf6 13.Bg5 Be6 14.Qf4 h6? 15.Qh4 [Nowadays with my BDG experience I would play 15.Bxh6!+- in a heartbeat. But back in 1978 I was afraid to sacrifice anything!] 15...Re8 16.Bxf6 [White has 16.Rxe6! fxe6 17.Bxh6 Ne4 18.Qg4 Bf6 19.c3+/-] 16...Bxf6 17.Qf4 Be7 18.Ne5 Rf8 19.Ng4 [19.c3+/=] 19...Bg5 20.Qf3? [20.Qg3! Bh4? 21.Nxh6+!+-] 20...Qb6 21.c3 Rad8 [Black missed his chance with 21...Qxb2! 22.Re2 Bxg4=/+] 22.Re2 Bxg4

23.Qxg4 Qc6 [Better is 23...Rd6 24.h4+/-] 24.h4 f5 25.Bxf5 Bf6 26.Qg6 10

50 – Cooper 3.Nf3 d6 4.Bc4 I was working my way up through the bottom ranks of chess in 1972. My best opponent was the future master Graham Cooper. We played hundreds of blitz games in his dorm room. Graham taught me to play fast. He was much better than I was. Though Graham played a lot of speculative sacrifices, he rarely lost our games on the board. I won about one fourth of them, most of them when his time ran out just before he could checkmate me. Cooper taught me to love chess books. He was a great student of openings. He loved to attack. In addition to the King's Gambit, he played all the sharpest main lines of the 1.e4 openings. As Black he liked the Ruy Lopez Marshall Attack and the King's Indian Defence. He loved to sacrifice something in every game. We played about once a week. Constantly I prepared new lines from my own growing library to surprise him in our blitz games. I learned three things from Graham Cooper about chess books. 1. Read chess books written beyond just those found in English. 2. Think for yourself. Be willing to disagree with the theoreticians. 3. Look for the most interesting moves. Cooper pointed out that in opening manuals like MCO, best moves are indicated by "!" Graham said that the good players often knew the best moves. He liked to try all the interesting moves with "!?" Those moves surprise opponents. I call it the "Cooper Principle". Experiment. Try those moves with “!?” That concept changed my chess life! This King's Gambit Declined comes from the 1972 University of Maine Championship. I learned that defending open games requires exact opening knowledge. Good defensive possibilities are often overlooked. Gambit players are rewarded for boldness. Graham Cooper became a USCF Life Master.

Cooper (1900) - Sawyer (1450), UMO ch Orono, Maine (2), 09.12.1972 begins 1.e4 e5 2.f4 Bc5 3.Nf3 d6 4.Bc4 Nf6 5.d3 Nc6 6.Nc3 Bg4 7.h3 Bxf3 8.Qxf3 Nd4 9.Qg3 0-0 10.f5 Nxc2+ 11.Kd1 Nxa1 12.Bh6 g6? [12...Nh5! 13.Qg4 c6 -+] 13.fxg6 hxg6 [Or 13...Nh5 14.Qg4 d5 15.gxf7+ Kh8 16.Qxh5 Qd6 17.Bxd5 +-] 14.Qxg6+ 1-0

2.f4 d5 The famous Falkbeer Counter Gambit dates back to the 1800s when the 2.f4 Gambit was truly King.

51 – Fry 3.Nc3 d4 4.Nce2 Nc6 Luther Fry's f-pawn follows a fabulous flight from f2 to f7 in a Falkbeer from moves 2 to 9. Fry varied from the normal 3.exd5. I assume that Luther Fry was comfortable heading into a Vienna Gambit, but he certainly handled the Van Geet type option well enough to outplay me when my king got caught in the center. Fry chose 5.d3 and kept the bishop home for the time being. Fry (2072) - Sawyer (2030), corr USCF 89SS104, 18.02.1992 begins 1.e4 e5 2.f4 d5 3.Nc3 [3.exd5] 3...d4!? [3...Nf6 4.fxe5 Nxe4 5.Nf3 Be7=] 4.Nce2 Nc6 5.d3 Bd6 [5...Bg4 or 5...exf4] 6.f5!? [6.fxe5 Bxe5 7.Nf3=] 6...g6 7.g4 h5 [7...Bb4+! 8.c3 Qh4+ 9.Kd2 Ba5-/+] 8.fxg6 Bxg4 9.gxf7+ Kxf7 10.Qd2 Nf6?! [10...Bf8!] 11.h3 Be6 [11...Bb4!?] 12.Nf3 Ke7 13.Ng5 Bg8 [13...Qd7=] 14.h4 Qf8 [14...Bb4 15.c3+/=] 15.Ng3 [15.a3+/-] 15...Re8 [15...Bb4 16.c3+/=] 16.Bh3 Kd8 17.a3 Nh7? [17...Ne7 18.Rf1+/-] 18.Rf1 Qg7 19.Nxh5 Qe7 20.Qg2 Nf8 21.Qg4 1-0

52 – Callahan 3…exd5 c6 4.Nc3 The name "Callahan" (common in Florida), reminded me of the character Peggy Callahan (played by Jennifer Darling) from the 1970s both in the TV series "The Six Million Dollar Man" and later "The Bionic Woman". Darling went on to become the voice of many animated characters in movies and television shows. Daniel Callahan and I played the King’s Gambit. At first I thought about a Falkbeer Counter Gambit. Then I opted for the 3...c6 gambit approach. White delayed d2-d4, and I got a good game. Callahan (1868) - Sawyer (1969), corr APCT EMN-A-1, 28.12.1996 begins 1.e4 e5 2.f4 d5 3.exd5 c6 4.Nc3 exf4 5.Nf3 Bd6 6.Bc4 [6.d4] 6...Ne7 7.dxc6 [7.d4] 7...Nbxc6 8.d4 0-0 9.0-0 Bg4 10.Ne4 Rc8 [10...Bc7

11.c3] 11.Bb3 Bb8 12.c3 Ng6 13.Bc2 Nh4 14.Ned2 f5 15.Qe1 Bxf3 16.Nxf3 Nxf3+ 17.Rxf3 Nxd4 18.Rd3 Nxc2 19.Qe6+ Kh8 20.Rxd8 Rcxd8 21.Rb1 Rfe8 22.Qc4 [22.Qf7 a6-/+] 22...Rd1+ 0-1

53 – Stobbe 3.exd5 e4 4.Nc3 The names of chess openings can rapidly change from one to another with each new move. Arthur J. Stobbe (1916-2008) was a librarian who conferred on me the honorary title of "Doctor" after I got my BlackmarDiemer Gambit Keybook published in 1992. Arthur thought that anyone who got a book published ought to be given an honorary PhD. As I recall, we had an enjoyable year of conversation on our weekly postcards. Arthur Stobbe was a veteran postal chess player who preferred gambits or offbeat openings. Here Arthur started with a Bird's Opening. After I offered the From Gambit, Mr. Stobbe settled on the King's Gambit. I countered with the Falkbeer Counter Gambit. Thus in the matter of two moves, we flipped openings four times. The opening and middlegame were roughly equal in our contest, but I had the better chances in the endgame. Eventually, White blundered on move 42 and ran out of steam by move 50. Stobbe - Sawyer, corr USCF 1992 begins 1.f4 e5 2.e4 d5 3.exd5 e4 4.Nc3 [The main line of the Falkbeer is 4.d3 Nf6 5.dxe4 Nxe4 6.Nf3 Bc5 7.Qe2 Bf5 8.Nc3 Qe7 9.Be3+/=] 4...Nf6 5.d3 Bb4 6.Bd2 e3 7.Bxe3 0-0 8.Be2 Bxc3+ 9.bxc3 Nxd5 10.Bd2 Qf6 11.c4 Nxf4 12.Bxf4 Qxf4 13.Nf3 Re8 14.Qd2 Qxd2+ [Black may wish to keep the queens on the board with 14...Qd6.] 15.Kxd2 Nc6 16.Rab1 b6 17.d4 Ba6 18.Bd3 g6 19.Rhe1 Kf8 20.d5 Na5 21.c5 Bxd3 22.cxd3 Nb7 23.c6 Nd6 24.Ne5 f6 25.Ng4 Kg7 26.Ne3 Kf7 27.Nc2 Rxe1 28.Rxe1 Re8 29.a4 [29.Rxe8 Nxe8 30.Kc3=] 29...Rxe1 30.Kxe1 Ke7 31.Ke2 Ne8 [31...Nc8 32.Ne3 Kd6 33.Ng4 f5 34.Nf6 Ne7 35.Nxh7 Kxd5-/+] 32.Ke3 f5 33.Kd4 Kd6 34.Na3 a6 35.h4 h6 36.Nc4+ Ke7 37.g3 Nf6 38.d6+ cxd6 39.Nxb6 Kd8 40.Na8 Kc8 41.Nb6+ Kc7 42.Nd5+? [Better to keep the knights on with 42.Nc4 Kxc6-/+] 42...Nxd5 43.Kxd5 g5 44.a5 gxh4 45.gxh4 f4 46.Ke4 Kxc6 47.Kxf4 Kb5 48.Ke3 Kxa5 49.Kd2 Kb4 50.Kc2 a5 0-1

54 – Yakimenko 3…e4 4.Nc3 The King’s Gambit is well suited for players who like to attack. I've played it over 700 times from one side or the other. In 1972-74, Ray Haines and Graham Cooper played it against me all the time. By 1980, I also played the Kings Gambit from time to time. Alex Yakimenko defeated R. Kutschenko at the Basel Masters in early 2017 with a Kings Gambit Falkbeer Counter Gambit. Yakimenko (2242) - Kutschenko (2101), Basel Masters 2017 Basel SUI (3.48), 03.01.2017 begins 1.e4 e5 2.f4 d5 3.exd5 e4 4.Nc3 [The main line is 4.d3 Nf6 5.dxe4 Nxe4 6.Nf3 Bc5 7.Qe2+/=] 4...Nf6 5.Bc4 Bc5 6.d4 [6.d3!?] 6...Bb4 [After 6...exd3 White can choose between 7.Qxd3 and 7.cxd3.] 7.Nge2 Nxd5 [Maybe better is 7...Bg4!?] 8.0-0! Nf6 9.f5! b6 [9...Nbd7 10.Bg5+/=] 10.Bg5 Bb7 11.Ng3 [11.Bxf6 Qxf6 12.Nd5 Bxd5 13.Bxd5 c6 14.Bxe4+/-] 11...Bxc3 12.bxc3 Qd6 [12...0-0 13.Bxf6 Qxf6 14.Qg4+/-] 13.Nh5 Nxh5? [Now Black's game completely falls apart. 13...Rg8!?] 14.Bxf7+ Kxf7 15.Qxh5+ Kf8 16.f6 g6 17.Qh6+ Kf7 18.Qg7+ Ke6 19.Qxh8 Nd7 20.Qxh7 Nf8 21.Qg7 Kd5 22.Qf7+ Kc6 23.Bf4 1-0

55 – Watt 3…e4 4.Bb5+ c6 This romantic Kings Gambit ends in a mate! The USCF lists my opponent James Watt with the rating of 1833 by 1991 with no further tournament games played. This game played three years earlier. His aggressive style shows that he was a player who was rapidly improving at the time. White temporarily leaves the knight at home in the King’s Gambit. With the Falkbeer move 3...e4, the move Nf3 is taken away, so White needs a different plan. John Shaw recommends 4.d3. Here White chose 4.Bb5+!? By move 9, I had developed all four minor pieces and castled. White had moved one bishop, one knight and left his king in the center. Two moves later, White lost his lady friend.

Watt (1584) - Sawyer (1981), Hatboro, PA 1988 begins 1.e4 e5 2.f4 d5 3.exd5 e4 4.Bb5+ c6 5.dxc6 Nxc6 6.Qe2 [6.Ne2; 6.Nc3] 6...Nf6 7.Nc3 Bc5 8.d3 0-0 9.Bxc6 Bg4 10.Qd2 e3 11.Bxb7 exd2+ 12.Bxd2 Qe7+ 13.Be4 Nxe4 14.dxe4 Bxg1 15.Rxg1 Qh4+ 16.Kf1 Rad8 [Or 16...Rab8-+] 17.Be1 Qxh2 18.Nd5 Rxd5 19.exd5 Re8 20.Bc3 Qxf4 mate 0-1

56 – Sawyer 4.d3 Qxd5 5.Qe2 What do you learn from the way a strong chess engine treats a gambit? When I played a King's Gambit against SharpShooter (rated 2929) it did not take on f4. Instead the computer played a Falkbeer Counter Gambit with 2...d5 3.exd5 e4 4.d3 Qxd5. White obtains a slightly better game, but tactics will decide the game. I was a pretty good blitz player in my 40s, but I was no match for the tactical skills of this silicon monster. I missed a good chance for an edge on move 17. Later I blundered the game away. Sawyer (2368) - SharpShooter (2929), ICC 3 2 u Internet Chess Club, 15.01.2000 begins 1.e4 e5 2.f4 d5 3.exd5 e4 4.d3 Qxd5 5.Qe2 Nf6 [Another game vs the same opponent continued 5...f5 6.Nc3 Bb4 7.Bd2 Bxc3 8.Bxc3 Nf6 9.dxe4+/- although 0-1 on move 32. Sawyer SharpShooter, ICC 2000] 6.Nd2 Bf5 7.dxe4 Bxe4 8.g4 Bb4 9.c3 Be7 10.Nxe4 Qxe4 11.Qxe4 Nxe4 12.Nf3 Nd7 13.Bd3 Ndc5 14.Bc2 0-0-0 15.0-0 Rhe8 16.Be3 Bf8 17.Bf2 [17.Rad1! Rxd1 18.Rxd1 f5 19.Ne5+/=] 17...Nxf2 18.Kxf2 Bd6 19.f5 Ne4+ 20.Kg2 Nf6 21.h3 Nd5 22.Kh1 Re2 23.Bb3 Nf4 24.h4 Rxb2 25.Bxf7 Ne2 [25...Rf8! 26.Bb3 h5-+] 26.Rfb1? Ng3+ 27.Kg1 Bc5+ 28.Nd4 Rxd4 29.Rxb2 Rd2# White checkmated 0-1

57 – Sawyer 4.d3 Nf6 5.dxe4 Is it better to sacrifice or grab a pawn? The King's Gambit player chooses to gambit a pawn. You need an advantage of some kind to win a chess game. My guest opponent in 2002 offers a pawn on move two and grabs a pawn on move 12. My subsequent attacks on his bishop gave me the advantage of his weak f5 pawn. The moral of the story is that a gambit sacrifice is fine early in the game. However, the time and space you gain must allow you a good chance to end up with an advantage. Sawyer - Guest, ICC 2 12 u Internet Chess Club, 06.05.2002 begins 1.e4 e5 2.f4 d5 3.exd5 e4 4.d3 Nf6 5.dxe4 Nxe4 6.Nf3 Bc5 7.Qe2 Bf5 8.Nc3 Qe7 9.Be3 Bxe3 10.Qxe3 Nxc3 11.Qxe7+ Kxe7 12.bxc3 Bxc2 [If 12...Be4 13.Ng5] 13.Kd2 Bf5 [Or 13...Bg6 14.Re1+ Kd6 15.Nd4] 14.Re1+ Kd7 15.Nd4 g6 16.Nxf5 gxf5 17.Bd3 Kd6 18.Bxf5 Kxd5 19.Be4+ Kd6

20.Bxb7 Nc6 21.Bxa8 Rxa8 22.Kc2 Ne7 [22...Na5 23.Re4+-] 23.Rd1+ Kc5 24.Rhe1 Black resigns 1-0

2.f4 exf4 In this section we look at less common continuations after accepting the gambit pawn.

58 – Ivanchuk 3.Bc4 Qh4+ When grandmasters Vassily Ivanchuk and Sergey Karjakin play the Kings Gambit, they may test popular theory. Ivanchuk wants to win against the best players in the world. He continues to play sharp theoretical lines and finds good lines vs grandmasters. Ivanchuk (2731) - Karjakin (2757), Vladimir Petrov Mem 2015 Jurmala LAT, 08.03.2015 begins 1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Bc4 Qh4+ 4.Kf1 d6 5.Nc3!? [If 5.Nf3 Qf6 6.d4 Ne7 7.h4!? Be6=] 5...Be6 6.Bb3!? [Or 6.Qe2 Nd7 7.Bxe6 fxe6 8.Qc4 0-0-0 9.Qxe6 when 9...g5!=/+ looks like a good idea.] 6...Nd7 [6...Nf6 7.Nf3 Qh6=/+] 7.d4 g5 [7...Ngf6 8.Nf3 Qh6=/+] 8.Nf3 Qh5 9.h4 h6 [9...Ngf6 10.Nxg5 Bxb3 11.axb3 Qxd1+ 12.Nxd1 Bg7=] 10.Kg1 g4 11.Ne1 Bxb3 12.axb3 Ngf6 13.Nd3 g3 14.Qf3 Qxf3 15.gxf3 Nb8 16.Ne2 Nc6 17.c3 Rg8 18.Kg2 d5 19.e5 Nh5 20.Nexf4 Nxf4+ 21.Nxf4 0-0-0 22.Nh5 b6 23.Nf6 Rh8 24.h5 Kb7 25.Kxg3 Na5 [25...Ne7 26.Rg1 Nf5+ 27.Kf4+/-] 26.b4 Nb3 27.Rb1 a5 28.bxa5 bxa5 29.Be3 Kc6 [or 29...Bg7 30.Ng4+-] 30.Kf2 a4 31.Ke2 Na5 32.Ra1 Nc4 33.Rxa4 Nxb2 34.Ra6+ Kb7 35.Rha1 Nc4 36.Kd3 Nb6 37.Bf4 Rc8 38.Ng4 Bg7 39.Ne3 Bf8 40.Ra7+ Kc6 41.R1a6 Kb5 42.Nxd5 Rg8 43.c4+ Nxc4 44.Nc3+ 1-0

59 – Morozevich 3.Bc4 Nf6 I've had loads of fun playing and studying the King's Gambit off and on since the 1970s. In Alexander Morozevich vs Arkadi Vul, White wins with a wide-open aggressive Kings Gambit Accepted 3.Bc4 line which is sometimes called the Bishop's Gambit. Morozevich (2665) - Vul (2225), RUS Rapid GP Serpukhov, 23.02.2018 begins 1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Nc3 Bb4 5.Nf3 [5.e5=] 5...0-0 6.0-0 Bxc3 7.dxc3 Nxe4 8.Bxf4 c6 [8...d6 9.Qd4 Bf5=] 9.Bd6 Nxd6 10.Qxd6 b5 11.Bd3 g6 12.Ne5 Qb6+ 13.Kh1 c5 14.Nxf7 Qxd6 15.Nxd6 Nc6 [15...Ba6 16.Kg1+/-] 16.Bxb5 Nd8 [16...Rb8 17.Bc4+ Kg7 18.b3+-] 17.Rxf8+ Kxf8

[Next White threatens to win a piece.] 18.Re1 Nb7 [18...Ne6 19.Nxc8 Rxc8 20.Bxd7+-] 19.Re8+ Kg7 20.Nxc8 1-0

60 – McShane 3.Bc4 d6 4.Nc3 Kings Gambit leads to sharp positions that turn on a dime. In this game, White obtained a good opening only to be outplayed but a grandmaster. Black finds a fast checkmate when White's king becomes dangerously vulnerable in the center. This game between Leonardo Aira and Luke McShane shows the danger of having an uncastled king when the position opens up. Aira (1942) - McShane (2640), European Blitz 2017 Katowice POL (2.5), 15.12.2017 begins 1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Bc4 d6 4.Nc3 h6 5.d4 Qh4+ 6.Kf1 Be6 7.Bb3 Nd7 8.Nf3 [8.Qf3=] 8...Qh5 [8...Qf6!?] 9.Bxf4 Be7 10.e5 [10.h3!?] 10...g5 11.Bg3 g4 12.Ne1? [12.d5! Bf5 13.exd6 Bxd6 14.Bxd6 cxd6 15.Qe2+ Ne7 16.Nd4=] 12...dxe5 13.dxe5 Qf5+ [13...0-0-0=/+] 14.Kg1 [14.Ke2 0-0-0 15.Rf1=] 14...Bc5+ 0-1

61 – Kozganbayev 3.Bc4 d5 White wins this Kings Gambit opening with an endgame sacrifice. Erkin Kozganbayev maintained his early advantage as White. But then, Muhammad Khusenkhojaev fought back. Black obtained passed a4 and e6 pawns vs White's tripled c-pawns. When White sacrificed his queen for a rook, Black's game fell apart by one tempo. Kozganbayev (2342) - Khusenkhojaev (2466), Almaty Open 2017 Almaty KAZ (7.6), 09.10.2017 begins 1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Bc4 d5 4.Bxd5 Nf6 5.Nc3 Bb4 6.Nf3 0-0 7.0-0 c6 [7...Re8 8.Bb3=] 8.Bb3 a5 9.a4 Be6 10.Bxe6 fxe6 11.Qe2 Nbd7 12.d4 Nh5 13.e5 Nb6 14.Ne4 g6 15.c3 Be7 16.Nfd2 [16.g4 Ng7 17.g5+/-] 16...Qd5 17.b3 Qd8 18.Nc4 Nxc4 19.bxc4 c5 20.Bb2 [20.Ba3+/-] 20...Qc7 21.Ba3 b6 22.Rab1 Rfd8 [22...Rad8 23.Rf3+/=] 23.Qg4 [23.Nf6+ Bxf6 24.exf6 Kf7 25.dxc5 bxc5 26.Rb5 Nxf6 27.Bxc5+/-] 23...Qc6 24.Nd6 Ng7 25.Qxf4 Rf8 26.Qc1 Rxf1+ 27.Qxf1 Bxd6 28.exd6 Qxa4 [28...Nf5 29.Qe2+/=] 29.Bc1 Rf8 30.Qd3 Qc6 [30...cxd4 31.Bh6 Qd7 32.Rxb6+/-] 31.dxc5 Nf5 32.cxb6 Nxd6 [32...Qc5+ 33.Kh1 Nxd6 34.Be3+-] 33.Ba3 Rd8 34.Bxd6 Rxd6 35.Qxd6! 1-0 [White queens the b-pawn or c-pawn with check!]

2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3 In this section we look at less common continuations after accepting the gambit pawn.

62 – Penullar 3…Nc6 4.Bc4 The King's Gambit often and easily wins against Black's natural development moves. There are at least 20 reasonable methods to defend the Kings Gambit, although admittedly some are just barely playable. Three Black defenses are proven to be good: The traditional main line of the King's Gambit Accepted 2...exf4 3.Nf3 g5 allows Black to hold on to the pawn at least temporarily. Play is tactical, but Black's chances are just as good as White's. Larry Kaufman recommends reaching the Modern Defence by the 2...d5 move order 1.e4 e5 2.f4 d5 3.exd5 exf4 4.Nf3 Nf6. Mihail Marin recommends the Classical King's Gambit Declined 2...Bc5. There follows 3.Nf3 d6 4.Nc3 Nf6 5.Bc4 Nc6 6.d3 which can be reached from a Bishop's Opening or Vienna Game. Here White wins in a crushing attack. Black played what would normally be good in other openings but not the Kings Gambit. tgralex - Penullar, world players vs Kasparov's Chess Chess.com, 25.02.2012 begins 1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3 Nc6 4.Bc4 d6 5.0-0 [5.d4!+/= grabs the center, threatens Bxf4 and in some cases like ...Be6 the pawn fork d4-d5.] 5...Nf6 6.Nc3 Ne5 7.Bb3 Be6!? 8.d4 Nxf3+ 9.Qxf3 Bxb3 10.axb3 Be7 11.Bxf4 0-0 [White has a very promising kingside attack.] 12.e5! dxe5 13.dxe5 Nd7 14.Rad1 [White is for choice. There is plenty of time to grab the pawn with 14.Qxb7+/- and return to Qf3 with advantage on both sides of the board.] 14...Qc8 15.Qg4 [15.Nd5!+/- hits e7, c7, f6 with the possibility of redeployment to f5 or g4 via e3.] 15...f5 16.Qg3 [Or 16.exf6 Nxf6 17.Qe2 when all White's pieces are well placed.] 16...g6 [16...Nc5 17.Nd5+/-] 17.Bh6 Re8 18.Rxf5 [The gambit player has won a pawn with a great position. Black is lost.] 18...Nc5 19.Rdf1 Ne6 20.Rf7 Bf8 21.Qh4

[21.Ne4!+- adds even more tactical threats.] 21...Ng7 22.Nd5 [Or 22.Ne4!+-] 22...Bc5+ 23.Kh1 Nf5 24.R1xf5 gxf5 25.Qf6 Qe6 26.Qg7# 1-0

63 – Sawyer 3…Nf6 4.e5 During my Williamsport simultaneous exhibition in 1996 at Penn College, I played the Kings Gambit vs 1.e4 e5. A publisher once offered me $500 to write a book on the King's Gambit before we had the internet or databases. It would have been hard work. I was flattered but turned him down. I already had a full-time job! Sawyer - NN, simul Williamsport PA 1996 begins 1.e4 e5 2.f4 King's Gambit 2...exf4 [2...f6? 3.fxe5 fxe5? 4.Qh5+ g6 5.Qxe5+ Ne7 6.Qxh8 d6 7.d4 c6 8.Bh6 Nd7 9.Nc3 d5 10.exd5 Nxd5 11.Bxf8 Nxf8 12.Nxd5 1-0 Sawyer-NN, Williamsport PA 1996] 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.e5 Ne4 5.d3 Nc5 6.d4 Ne4 7.Bxf4 [White has regained the gambit pawn with a better position.] 7...d5 8.Bd3 Bf5 9.Nbd2 Bb4 10.0-0 Qe7 [10...Nxd2 11.Bxd2 Bxd3 12.Bg5 Be7 13.Bxe7 Qxe7 14.Qxd3+/- White is more active but the material is still even.] 11.c3 Nxc3 12.Qb3 [12.bxc3! Bxd3 13.cxb4 Bxf1 14.Nxf1+- White has two pieces for a rook.] 12...g6? [12...Bxd3 13.bxc3 Bxf1 14.Rxf1+-] 13.Bg5 Qf8 14.Bxf5 gxf5 15.bxc3 1-0

64 – Wallace 3…Nf6 4.e5 International Master John Paul Wallace mounts a strong King's Gambit attack against an uncastled king. Threats aimed at the vulnerable Black king allowed White to win the queen in the game John Paul Wallace of Australia vs Tore Kolas of Norway. White may improve with 8.g4!? Wallace (2399) - Kolas (2159), TV2 Fagernes GM Open NOR, 27.03.2018 begins 1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.e5 Nh5 5.d4 d6 6.Qe2 d5 7.Nc3 g5 [7...Nc6=] 8.g3 [Or 8.g4!? Bxg4!? 9.Rg1 Qd7 10.e6!+=] 8...g4 9.Bd2 gxf3 [9...Nc6!-/+] 10.Qxf3 Ng7 11.Nxd5 Be7 12.0-0-0 c6 13.Nxe7 Qxe7 14.gxf4 Be6 15.c4 Nd7 [15...Na6=] 16.Rg1 Nf5 [16...Qf8 17.Qb3+/-] 17.Bc3 Nh4 [17...Nb6 18.d5+/-] 18.Qh5 Rc8 [18...0-0-0 19.d5+/-] 19.Rg5 Ng6 [19...h6 20.Qxh4+-] 20.f5 Nf4 21.Qh6 Nh3 [21...Qf8 22.Qh4+-] 22.Bxh3 Bxc4 23.e6 Nf6 24.d5 [24.Re1+-] 24...Ne4 [24...cxd5 25.exf7+ Kd7 26.Qxf6 Qxf6 27.Bxf6+-] 25.f6! Qc5 [25...Qf8 26.exf7+ Kd8

27.Rg8+-] 26.exf7+ Kd8 27.dxc6+ Kc7 28.Rxc5 [White picks off the queen.] 1-0

65 – Rohricht 3…Qe7 4.Nc3 In the December 1983 issue of Tom Purser's "BDG World" magazine, Gerard Welling wrote on the Liege Open 1983 where Emil J. Diemer played. Welling wrote: "To my surprise, Mr. Diemer played in Liege. But he is old, and with his intensive style it costs him all his energy within a few rounds..." Welling added: "Diemer showed some games with 1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3 Qe7, and other strange openings... Some of these openings surely are dubious, but they show a very personal approach to the game!" Tom Purser had a profound impact on my life. I had no Diemer games on this line, so I did my own analysis. My game vs Wayne Rohricht was in the Diemer Variation of the King’s Gambit. Rohricht - Sawyer (1950), corr APCT 1986 begins 1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3 Qe7 [Diemer Variation] 4.Nc3 [4.d3 g5 5.Nc3 c6=; 4.d4 d5 5.e5 g5=] 4...d5! 5.e5 [5.Nxd5 Qxe4+ 6.Qe2 Qxe2+ 7.Bxe2 Bd6 8.d4 Ne7! 9.Nxf4 Bf5 10.c3 Nd7 11.0-0 0-0=] 5...c6 [5...d4 6.Nd5 Qd8 7.Nxf4 g5 8.Nh5 g4 9.Bc4 Nc6 10.0-0 Be6=] 6.d4 g5 7.h4 f6? [7...g4!] 8.Be2 fxe5 9.0-0 e4 10.Nxg5 Nf6 11.Bh5+ Nxh5 12.Qxh5+ Kd7 13.Rxf4 Qe8 14.Rf7+ Kd8 15.Ngxe4 Be6 16.Bg5+ Black resigns 1-0

66 – Bacon 3…Qe7 4.Nc3 Against the King's Gambit vs Joe Bacon, I chose the Diemer line 3.Nf3 Qe7!? Joe Bacon and I played four other postal games 10 years later, two drawn London Systems (I was White) and two BDG thematic event games where we both won as Black. Bacon defended my attack on e4 with 5.d3. White managed an edge throughout the game. At the end Black will lose the g-pawn and White stands better. I lost as my APCT membership expired. Bacon (2132) - Sawyer (1950), corr APCT 1986 begins 1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3 Qe7 [Diemer Variation] 4.Nc3 [4.d3 g5 5.Nc3 c6=; 4.d4 d5 5.e5 g5=] 4...d5! 5.d3 c6 [5...Nf6!=] 6.Bxf4 Bg4 7.Qd2 Nf6 8.0-0-0 d4 9.Ne2 c5 10.h3 Be6 11.Kb1 Nc6 12.g4 Qd7 13.Bg2 0-0-0 14.Ng5!? Bd6! 15.Nxe6

Qxe6 [15...fxe6 16.g5 Ne8 17.Rdf1+/=] 16.Bxd6 [16.g5+/=] 16...Qxd6 17.Rdf1 Ne5 18.Nf4 g5? 19.Nd5 Nxd5 20.exd5 f6 21.h4 Nxg4 22.Bh3 h5 23.hxg5 fxg5 24.Qxg5 Kb8 25.Bxg4 hxg4 26.Rxh8 Rxh8 27.a3 Rd8 28.Rf5 g3 29.Re5 g2 30.Rf5 +=. Black resigns 1-0

67 – Funk 3...Be7 4.Bc4 Bh4+ I was scared to death to play a gambit. What if I just gave up a pawn and lost the endgame? Well, one day I finally decided to give the Kings Gambit a try in a game against Donald Funk. My tactical skills were relatively low back then, so I had little reason to have confidence. It turned out that this little game showed me the value of a gambit. It can present problems for the defense. Tom Purser first published his BDG WORLD magazine one year later in 1983. The world of gambits opened up to me big time. In this Cunningham Gambit, I warded off his check and began my own successful attack. Many gambit games are just easy wins. Sawyer (1900) - Funk (1707), Lansdale, PA 21.05.1982 begins 1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3 Be7 4.Bc4 Bh4+ [This tempting check may not be the best move. 4...Nf6 5.e5 Ng4 6.Nc3 Bh4+ 7.Kf1 0-0 8.d4 Ne3+ 9.Bxe3 fxe3=] 5.Kf1 d6 [5...Be7 6.d4 Nf6=] 6.d4 f5 [6...Bg4 7.Bxf4 Ne7=] 7.e5 Nc6 [7...d5 8.Bb3+/=] 8.exd6 [8.Bxf4+/=] 8...cxd6 9.Nc3 [9.Qe2+ Be7 10.Bxg8 Rxg8 11.h4=] 9...Bf6? [9...Be7 10.Bxf4] 10.Bxf4 a6 11.Nd5 [11.Qe2+ Kf8 12.Re1 g6 13.Nd5+/-] 11...Be6? [11...Nge7 12.Qe2+-] 12.Qe2 Kf7 13.Nxf6 Bxc4 14.Qxc4+ Kxf6 15.Bg5+ 1-0

68 – Bekker 3…Be7 4.d4 Aim at the biggest target when you are in the midst of chaos. Kings face danger. Queens are attacked. White finds a killer move that forces the end. This King's Gambit features a rare 6.Bg2!? against the Cunningham Variation 3.Nf3 Be7 in the game Stefan Bekker vs Bogdan Lalic. Bekker (2273) - Lalic (2397), 11th OGD Prinsenstad 2018 Delft NED (6.5), 01.04.2018 begins 1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3 Be7 4.d4!? [4.Bc4; 4.Nc3] 4...Bh4+ 5.g3 fxg3 6.Bg2!? gxh2+ 7.Kf1 Be7 8.Nc3 d6 9.Be3 Nf6 10.Nxh2 g6 11.Qf3 Nh5 12.e5 Nc6 13.Rd1 Bh4 14.exd6 [14.Bf2 Bxf2 15.Qxf2 dxe5-+] 14...0-0 [14...Ng3+ 15.Kg1 cxd6 16.Bh6 Nxh1-+] 15.dxc7 Qxc7 16.Nd5 [16.Kg1 Re8=/+] 16...Qd6 17.Kg1 Ng3? [17...Ne7! 18.Nxe7+ Qxe7-/+] 18.Bf4 Nxd4 [18...Qxd5 19.Qxd5+-] 19.Rxd4 Qc5 20.Be3 Nf5 [20...Re8 21.Rxh4 Rxe3 22.Qxe3 Qxe3+ 23.Nxe3+-] 21.Rxh4

Nxh4 [Now the killer move...] 22.Qf6! 1-0 [White threatens of 23.Ne7+ and 23.Bxc5. Black is lost.]

69 – Gauche 3…Be7 4.Bc4 The author W. John Lutes did extensive research on the King's Gambit. In his book on the Cunningham Gambit (3...Be7), Lutes found that "the Three Pawns Gambit is not theoretically correct for White, but the major lines lead to extremely difficult positions for the second player to defend in actual practice." Black has a wide variety of choices on moves 6-8. White is equal or better in most of those lines. The game between C Gauche and Thauane Ferreira Medeiros illustrates that point. Gauche (2234) - Medeiros (1972), 1st AXPG Brazil Open 2017 Ponta Grossa BRA (7.14), 29.10.2017 begins 1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3 Be7 4.Bc4 Bh4+ 5.g3 [5.Kf1=] 5...fxg3 6.0-0 gxh2+ 7.Kh1 Nh6 [7...d5 8.Bxd5 Nf6=/+] 8.d4 0-0 [8...d5 9.Bxd5 c6 10.Bb3 Ng4=] 9.Bxh6 gxh6 10.Ne5 [Black has tripled pawns. White attacks.] 10...d5 11.Nxf7 Rxf7 [11...Qe7 12.Bxd5+/-] 12.Bxd5 Kh8 13.Rxf7 Nc6 14.Qf3 Bd7 15.Bxc6 [15.Nd2 Ne7 16.Bxb7+-] 15...bxc6 16.d5 Kg8 [16...Qg5 17.Nd2 Bg4 18.Rf8+ Rxf8 19.Qxf8+ Qg8 20.Qxg8+ Kxg8 21.Kxh2 cxd5 22.exd5+-] 17.Nc3 Be8 18.Rf8+ Kg7 19.Rf1 Rb8 [19...Qe7 20.dxc6+-] 20.Rg8+ 1-0

70 – Burovic 3…d5 4.exd5 Nf6 White wins this King's Gambit Falkbeer 1.e4 e5 2.f4 d5 that transposes into a KG Modern Defence. The game begins 1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3 d5. White sacrificed the Exchange by allowing 12...Bxa1 and received great compensation in Ismet Burovic vs Amir Hadzovic. Burovic (2321) - Hadzovic (2276), ch-Sarajevo BIH, 24.03.2018 begins 1.e4 e5 2.f4 d5 3.exd5 exf4 4.Nf3 Nf6 5.c4 c6 6.Nc3 cxd5 7.d4 Bb4 8.Be2 Ne4 9.Qb3 Qa5 10.0-0 Nxc3 11.bxc3 Bxc3 12.Ba3! [12.Rb1=] 12...Bxa1 [12...b5 13.Rac1+/-] 13.Rxa1 Be6 14.Ne5? [14.cxd5! Qxd5 15.Bc4 Qxc4 16.Qxb7+-] 14...Qb6 15.Qa4+ Nc6 16.cxd5 [16.Bc5 Qc7 17.cxd5 Bxd5 18.Nxc6 Bxc6-/+] 16...Bxd5 17.Bg4 Be6 [17...Kd8 18.Bf3 Nxe5 19.Bxd5 Rc8-+] 18.Nxc6 bxc6 [18...Qxc6 19.Qb4 Qd7 20.Bf3 0-0-0 21.d5 Bxd5 22.Rd1 Qc6 23.Bxd5 Rxd5 24.Rc1 Qxc1+ 25.Bxc1 Rd1+ 26.Kf2 Rxc1=/+] 19.Bf3 Rc8 20.Bc5 Qc7? [20...Qb2=] 21.d5! Qe5 22.Rc1 Bd7 [22...Qb2

23.Ba3+-] 23.Qa5 cxd5 24.Re1 Qxe1+ 25.Qxe1+ Be6 26.Ba3 Kd7 27.Qb4 Rc7 28.Be2 1-0

71 – Van Foreest 3…d5 4.exd5 In 2016 GM Jorden Van Foreest was listed as the fourth highest rated active player Under 18 in the world. The Van Foreest family has had several current players and other notable former players for generations going back 100 years. GM Jorden Van Foreest won a King’s Gambit in the Modern Variation. This prompted me to do a thorough study of that line. Alik Tikranian as Black began with the Falkbeer Counter Gambit after 1.e4 e5 2.f4 d5 3.exd5. He avoided 3…e4 by 3...exf4 4.Nf3 Nf6. Van Foreest (2578) - Tikranian (2120), 43rd OKU 2016 Utrecht NED, 05.06.2016 begins 1.e4 e5 2.f4 d5 3.exd5 exf4 4.Nf3 Nf6 5.Bb5+ [5.c4=] 5...c6 6.dxc6 bxc6 [6...Nxc6=] 7.Bc4 Bd6 [7...Qe7+!? or 7...Nd5] 8.0-0 [8.Qe2+!?] 8...0-0 9.Nc3 Bg4 10.d4 Nbd7 11.Kh1!? [11.Qd3=] 11...Nb6 [11...Qc7=] 12.Bb3 h6 [12...a5=] 13.Qd3 Re8 [13...Qc7=] 14.Ne5 Bxe5 15.dxe5 Qxd3 16.cxd3 Rxe5 17.Bxf4 Rh5 [17...Rae8 18.Bxh6+/=] 18.Kg1 Nbd5 19.h3 Be6 20.Ne2 Re8 21.Bd2 Re5 [21...Ne3=] 22.Nd4 Bd7 23.Rac1 Ne3 24.Rf2 [24.Rf3 Nxg2 25.Kxg2+/-] 24...Nf5 [24...c5 25.Nf3+/-] 25.Nxf5 Rxf5 26.Rxf5 Bxf5 27.Rxc6 Bxd3 28.Rc7 Re2 29.Rxf7 Rxd2 30.Rxf6+ Kh7 31.Rd6 g6 32.Kh2 1-0

72 – Penullar 3…d6 4.d4 Nf6 Peter Mcgerald Penullar shows that the King's Gambit wins vs passive defense, just as it has for 200 years. Black accepts the gambit with 2...exf4, but he fails to hold the pawn with 4...g5. Oil_beef_hooked - Penullar, Kings and Queens - Chess.com, 22.02.2012 begins1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3 d6 4.d4 Nf6?! [Correct is 4...g5!=] 5.Nc3 Be7 6.Bxf4 0-0 7.Bd3 Nc6 8.0-0 [+/= White has a wonderful position with an open f-file.] 8...Nh5 9.Be3 Nf6 10.h3 Bd7 11.Bg5 [11.e5+/- looks very promising.] 11...h6 12.Bh4 Ne8 13.Bxe7 Qxe7 14.Qd2 Nb4 15.Bc4 a6 16.a3 Nc6 17.Rae1 Kh7 18.e5! [The thematic breakthrough.] 18...dxe5 19.Nxe5 Nxe5 20.Rxe5 Be6 21.Qe3 Nd6 22.Bd3+ g6 23.Rh5! [A great tactic! Black is busted.] 23...f5 24.Qxh6+ Kg8 25.Qh8+ Kf7 26.Rh7+ Ke8 27.Rxe7+ Kxe7 28.Qg7+ Bf7 29.Nd5+ Kd7 30.Nf6+ Kc6 31.d5+ Kb6

32.Nd7+ Ka7 33.Nxf8 Re8 34.Ne6 Rg8 35.Qd4+ Kb8 36.Re1 Re8 37.Kf2 Nb5 38.Bxb5 axb5 39.Qg7 Bxe6 40.dxe6 c6 41.Qd7 Rh8 42.e7 Ka7 43.e8Q Rxe8 44.Rxe8 g5 45.Re7 Kb6 46.b4 g4 47.Qxb7# 1-0

73 – Cooper 3…d6 4.Bc4 h6 When I first picked up the King’s Gambit book by John Shaw I thought, "Wow! 680 pages!" Years ago I was offered a contract to write a book on the King's Gambit (like I did on the BDG), but I knew I was not the man for the job. John Shaw has done what I wish I could have done. There are a lot of games, a lot of analysis, a lot of variations and a lot of diagrams. John Shaw carried on years of computer analysis to prove the viability (or not) of every line. Grandmaster Shaw gives many options for both sides and expresses his preferences. The multitude of variations can be confusing. Playing a gambit is sometimes scary, but the more you play it, the less overwhelming it becomes. The best way to learn a gambit is to play it all the time. Then look up your opening after each game. Even the theoretically equal lines in your hands will be a dangerous threat to your opponents. Now for a few specifics. Of the 21 chapters, 14 of them cover 2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3. The two most popular lines for Black are 3...g5 (my personal favorite) and 3...d5. Against 3.Nf3 g5, Shaw devotes 80 pages of dense analysis. He likes both 4.h4 g4 5.Ne5 Nf6 6.Bc4 and 4.Nc3. After 3.Nf3 d5 4.exd5 Nf6 5.Bb5+ the author suggests a "new direction". John Shaw considers 3.Bc4 to be no longer playable since 3...Nc6! favors Black in all lines. In the KG Declined I mention recommendations by John Shaw vs two major options: First in the Classical 2.f4 Bc5 3.Nf3 d6 4.Nc3 Nf6 5.Bc4 Nc6 6.d3 Bg4 7.Na4 or 6...a6 7.Nd5. Second against the Falkbeer 2.f4 d5 3.exd5 e4 4.d3 Nf6 5.dxe4 Nxe4 6.Nf3 Bc5 7.Qe2. Over 150 pages are dedicated to 2...Bc5 or 2...d5, and then he covers more!

Shaw mentions almost every played branch of this opening and does well editing out the worst. He does not waste space with deep analysis of rarely played choices. Consider two of my pet off-beat lines. First, vs 3.Nf3 Qe7 (Diemer) Shaw recommends 4.Nc3 but does not cover my 4...d5. And second, vs 2.f4 Nc6 3.Nf3 f5, Shaw gives 4.exf5 but not my 4...exf4. Of course my lines might be much weaker than what he presents. The King's Gambit had an amazing impact on the early years of my life. Ray Haines and Graham Cooper chased me enough that by 1974 I fled the Open Game for the Caro-Kann Defence. But I kept coming back to the King's Gambit from both sides of the board. I purchased about every book on the KG written in the past 45 years. Tim Bishop recently sent me a Kings Gambit game by two masters, both of whom I played when I lived in Maine. The game is between Stanley Elowitch and Graham Cooper from the Maine State Championship in April 1980. I played in this event in 1977. Against Fischer's 3...d6, Shaw recommends 4.d4 in Quaade style aiming for a Nc3 / g2-g3 set-up. Cooper gets the best out of the opening, but Elowitch manages to hold his own in the final 20 moves of flying pieces and complications. Elowitch - Cooper, Maine State Championship, 04.1980 begins 1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3 d6 4.Bc4 h6 5.d4 [5.h4!? Shaw] 5...g5 6.c3 [6.0-0 Bg7 7.c3 Nc6 8.Qa4 Bd7 9.Qb3=] 6...Bg7 7.Qb3 Qe7 8.0-0 Nc6 9.g3 [If 9.h4 Nf6 10.hxg5 hxg5 11.Nxg5 Nxd4-+] 9...fxg3 10.hxg3 Nf6 11.e5 dxe5 12.dxe5 Ng4 13.Nxg5 hxg5 14.Bxf7+ Kd8 15.Qd5+ Qd7?! [This throws away the advantage in a complicated position. Houdini 3 gives 15...Bd7! 16.e6 Nce5+ and Black remains up a piece.] 16.Bxg5+ Ne7 17.Bxe7+ Kxe7 18.Qc5+ Kd8 19.e6 Qd3 20.Qg5+ Bf6 21.Qxg4 Rh1+ 22.Kxh1 Qxf1+ 23.Kh2 Qf2+ 24.Kh3 Ke7 25.Na3 Bd7 26.exd7 Kxf7 27.Qh5+ Kg7 28.Qg4+ Kf7 1/2-1/2

2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3 g5 This is the main line of the King’s Gambit. Black immediately defends the gambit pawn.

74 – Regan 4.d3 Nc6 I played eight postal chess games against James Regan in a wide variety of openings. Both of us played dozens of other games against many correspondence opponents simultaneously. Since James and I were already writing to each other about once a week for rated games, it seemed like a good idea to play a few fun games on the side. All the games were short, under 30 moves. This game was the shortest. James Regan took me out of the book with the quiet 4.d3, but it did not work well here. Regan - Sawyer, corr 1989 begins 1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3 g5 4.d3?! [The aggressive choices are 4.h4 g4 5.Ne5 Nf6 6.d4 or 4.Bc4 g4 5.0-0 gxf3 6.Qxf3 Qf6 7.e5] 4...Nc6 5.h3 h6 [Also good is 5...d5=/+] 6.Nc3 Bg7 7.Be2 Nge7 8.h4 Ng6 9.Qd2 g4 10.Ng5? hxg5 0-1

75 – Haines 4.Bc4 d6 5.0-0 Ray Haines played the Kings Gambit against me when he was young and on the way up. He read books and learned specific variations. Nowadays Haines prefers openings based on general principles rather than having to remember exact lines. He enjoys easy wins vs club players and seems happy with his approach. Ray Haines returned to his Kings Gambit roots for this game. Haines (1475) - Neboska (1547), Live Chess.com, 18.07.2018 begins 1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3 g5 4.Bc4 d6 5.0-0?! [5.h4! g4?! 6.Ng5 Nh6 7.d4 f6? 8.Bxf4 fxg5 9.Bxg5 Qd7 10.0-0+/-] 5...g4 [5...h6 6.d4 Bg7=/+] 6.d3?! [6.Ne1!+/=] 6...gxf3 7.Qxf3 Qf6!? 8.Nc3 c6 [8...Ne7!?=/+] 9.Bxf4 Bh6? [9...Be7=/+] 10.Qh5?! [10.Qg3!+- wins] 10...Bxf4 11.Rxf4 Qxf4 12.Rf1 Bg4 [12...Qh6 13.Qxf7+ Kd8-+] 13.Bxf7+ Ke7 [13...Kd7!-+] 14.Qh4+ Qf6 15.Qg3? [15.Rxf6 Nxf6 16.h3=] 15...Qd4+ 16.Kh1 Nf6 17.Bb3 Nbd7 18.h3 Be6 [18...h5!-+] 19.Qg7+ Kd8 20.Qxh8+ Kc7 21.Qxa8 Bxb3 22.axb3 Nb8 23.Ra1 [23.Ne2!+-] 23...a6 24.Ra4 Qf2 25.Rc4? Nh5

[25...Qe1+! 26.Kh2 Ng4+! 27.hxg4 Qh4+ 28.Kg1 Qe1+ draws] 26.Nd5+ Kd7? 27.Qxb7+ mate in two. 1-0

76 – BBranko 4.Bc4 Bg7 5.0-0 In my King's Gambit 3.Nf3 g5 line vs "BBranko" I left my h6-g5-f4 pawn chain intact. I should have pushed ...g4! on moves 7-9. BBranko (1712) - Sawyer, 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 22.09.2012 begins 1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3 g5 4.Bc4 [4.h4] 4...Bg7 5.0-0 d6 6.d4 h6 7.Re1? [This takes away a retreat square for the Nf3.] 7...Nc6 [7...g4!=/+] 8.a3 Nge7 [Now 8...g4!-/+ is even stronger.] 9.Nc3 0-0 [9...g4!] 10.d5 Ne5 11.Nxe5 Bxe5 12.Ne2 Ng6 13.c3 f5 14.Nd4 fxe4 15.Rxe4 Bxd4+ 16.Qxd4 Bf5 17.Re1 Qf6 18.Qxf6 Rxf6 19.Bd2 Rff8 20.Re2 Rae8 [20...Ne5 21.Bb3 Rae8-+ was a little better.] 21.Rae1 Rxe2 22.Rxe2 Kf7 23.Kf2 Re8 24.Rxe8 Kxe8 25.Bb5+ Ke7 26.c4 Ne5 27.Bc3 a6 28.Bxe5 dxe5 29.Ba4 e4 30.c5 b6 [30...e3+!-+] 31.b4 a5 [31...bxc5 32.bxc5 e3+!-+] 32.Bb3 axb4 33.axb4 bxc5 34.bxc5 Kf6 35.h3 Ke5 36.g4 e3+ 37.Ke2 Be4 38.Bc4 Bxd5 39.Bd3 Kd4 0-1

77 – Sawyer 4.Bc4 Bg7 5.d4 In his book "Chess Advantage in Black and White", author Larry Kaufman writes: "The King's Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.f4) is among the most interesting and exciting of chess openings." I won a King's Gambit 3.Nf3 g5 vs "Voiarnalung" who challenged my f4g5-h6 pawn chain with 8.g3. My win came in the endgame. Voiarnalung (1820) - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 26.09.2012 begins 1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3 g5 4.Bc4 Bg7 5.d4 d6 6.c3 h6 7.0-0 Nc6 8.g3 [8.h4 Qe7] 8...Bh3 9.gxf4 Bxf1 [9...Qd7 10.Rf2 Nf6-/+] 10.Qxf1 gxf4 [10...g4-/+] 11.Bxf4 Nf6 [11...Qf6! 12.Bg3 0-0-0=/+] 12.Nbd2 [12.e5!=] 12...0-0 13.Kh1 Qe7? 14.Bd3 [14.Nh4!+/=] 14...Kh8 15.Qh3 Qe6 16.Qh4 Qg4 17.Rg1 Qxh4 18.Nxh4 Ne7 19.e5 Nh5 [19...Ne8=/+] 20.Be3? [20.exd6=] 20...d5? [20...Nd5-+] 21.Nf1 f6 22.Be2 fxe5 23.Bxh5 exd4 24.Bxd4 Bxd4 25.cxd4 Rg8? [25...Rf4] 26.Ng6+ Nxg6 27.Bxg6 Raf8 28.Ne3 c6 29.Rg3 Rf6 30.Bf5 Rxg3 31.hxg3 Kg7 32.Kg2 Rf8 33.Kf3 Kf6 34.Kf4 Re8 35.Ng4+ Kg7 36.Ne5 a6 37.g4 Rf8 38.Nd7 Rf7 39.Ke5 Re7+ 40.Kd6 Re2 41.b4 Rxa2 42.Kc5 Rf2 43.Be6 Rb2 44.Ne5 b6+

[44...Rc2+!=] 45.Kxc6? [45.Kxb6!+/=] 45...Rxb4 46.Kxd5 a5 47.Nd3 Rb1 48.Ke5 a4 49.d5 Rd1 50.Bf5 a3 51.d6? [51.Nb4 Re1+ 52.Kd4 Re2=/+] 51...Rxd3 [51...a2!-+] 52.Bxd3 a2 53.d7 a1Q+ 54.Kd6 Qd4+ 55.Kc7 Qxd3 56.d8Q Qxd8+ 57.Kxd8 b5 0-1

78 – Sawyer 4.h4 g4 5.Ng5 h6 My opponent "lordbluff" (1877) played the Allgaier variation of the King's Gambit. After4.h4 g4 5.Ng5?! h6 George Walker wrote in "A New Treatise on Chess" (1833), "I consider this to be the best move for Black, although you certainly get a fine attack in exchange for the knight." White sacrifices the knight to open up Black’s king by 6.Nxf7 Kxf7. In his book "The Petroff: an Expert Repertoire for Black", GM Konstantin Sakaev gives "7.Bc4 d5 8.Bxd5 Ke8 -/+ and his compensation for the piece is insufficient." My opponent played 7.Qxg4. Bill Wall listed this opening after 7.Qxg4 Nf6! 8.Qxf4 as called the "Horny Defence" of the King's Gambit Accepted. Who is "Horny"? I found on page 63 where George Walker wrote after 8.Qxf4: "This move is given as best by Horny." He gave a footnote indicating it came from "Anweisung das Schachspiel" (1824) by Johann Horny. Since Horny gave the line for White, I would have called it the Horny Gambit rather than Defence. In any case, I avoided the whole Horny line when I played 7...Qf6. lordbluff - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 27.09.2012 begins 1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3 g5 4.h4 g4 5.Ng5?! h6 6.Nxf7 Kxf7 7.Qxg4 [The normal continuation is 7.d4 d5 8.Bxf4] 7...Qf6 [7...Nf6! 8.Qxf4 Bd6-+] 8.Bc4+ [Allgaier preferred 8.d4] 8...Ke7 9.0-0 h5 [9...Qd4+! 10.Kh1 Qxc4 11.Qxf4 Bg7-+] 10.Qe2 Qxh4 11.d3 Bh6 12.Nc3 c6 [12...Nf6! 13.Nd5+ Nxd5 14.exd5+ Kd8-+] 13.e5 b5 14.Bb3 Na6 15.Ne4 Qg4 16.Rf3 Nc7 17.Nd6 Ne6 18.Bxe6 dxe6 19.Bd2 Nf6 20.Bb4 [White missed 20.Nxc8+! Rhxc8 21.exf6+] 20...Nd5 21.Bc5 Kd7 22.c4 Nb6 23.cxb5 cxb5 24.Qe4 Ba6 [24...Rg8-/+] 25.Nf7? [25.Bxb6!=] 25...Rhg8 26.Rf2 Bf8 27.Bxf8 Raxf8 28.Qd4+ Kc7 29.Qd6+ Kb7 30.Rc1 Rc8 31.Qe7+ Ka8 32.Rxc8+ Rxc8 33.Rf1 f3 [33...Rc2! 34.Rf2 Rc1+ 35.Rf1 f3-+] 34.Rxf3 Rc1+ 35.Rf1 Rxf1+ [35...Qd4+!-+ wins a rook.] 36.Kxf1 Bb7 37.Qd8+ Nc8 38.Nd6 Qxg2+ 39.Ke1 Qh1+ 40.Kd2 Qg2+? 41.Kc3? Qc6+ 42.Kb3 Kb8 43.Nxc8 Bxc8 44.Qg5 Qd5+ 45.Kc3 Qc5+ 46.Kd2 Qf2+ 47.Kc3 Qc5+? 48.Kd2 Qf2+? [48...Qd4-+] 49.Kc3 Qf5 50.Qd8 Qxe5+ 51.d4 Qc7+ 52.Qxc7+

Kxc7 53.Kd3 a5 54.Ke3 Kd6 55.Kf4 Bb7 56.Kg5 Kd5 57.Kxh5 Kxd4 58.Kg5 e5 59.Kg4 e4 60.Kg3 e3 White is in a losing position when his flag fell. 0-1

79 – Sawyer 6.Nxf7 Kxf7 7.d4 One simple way to win a chess game is to get your opponent to make a big sacrifice. If he cannot obtain enough compensation, then you have a great chance to win. In the King's Gambit 5.Ng5 variation, White hopes to invest a knight in order for long term attacking chances. If it takes too long, Black will consolidate and begin his own attack. My opponent playing White ("neuhaus44") chose the Allgaier Gambit. Frankly, I do not remember the proper lines for Black. I just learn a little more every time I play a blitz game. At first White got great attacking chances against me. Now I realize I should have followed 5.Ng5 h6 6.Nxf7 Kxf7 7.d4 with 7...d5 8.Bxf4 Nf6. neuhaus44 - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 04.11.2012 begins 1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3 g5 4.h4 g4 5.Ng5 h6 6.Nxf7 Kxf7 7.d4 d6 [More popular is 7...d5 8.Bxf4 Nf6-/+] 8.Bxf4 [8.Bc4+!?] 8...Bg7 9.Bc4+ Be6? 10.0-0 [10.Bxe6+! Kxe6 11.Qxg4+ picking up a second pawn and continuing the attack.] 10...Nf6 11.Qe2 Ke7? [11...Re8] 12.Nc3 Bxc4 13.Qxc4 c6 14.d5? [14.e5!+-] 14...Nfd7 15.e5 Nxe5 16.Rae1 Nbd7 17.dxc6 bxc6? [17...Qb6+ 18.Kh1 Qxc6-/+] 18.Kh1? [18.Bxe5! wins outright. 18...dxe5 19.Rf7+ Kd6 20.Nb5+ cxb5 21.Rd1#] 18...Qb6 [18...Qc8=/+] 19.Bxe5 Bxe5 20.Qxg4? [20.Rf7+ Kd8 21.Qe6 Qc7 22.Rxe5 dxe5=] 20...Rag8? [20...Raf8-+] 21.Qh5? [The final losing move. White has a likely perpetual check with 21.Rf7+! Kxf7 22.Qxd7+ Kg6 23.Qe6+ Kh7 24.Qf7+ Rg7 25.Qf5+ Kg8 26.Qc8+ Kh7=] 21...Kd8 22.Rf7 Qxb2 [22...Rf8!-+] 23.Ne4 Qb4 24.Rxd7+ Kxd7 25.Qf5+ Kc7 26.Rd1 Rf8 27.Qe6 Qxe4 28.Qe7+ Kb8 29.Rb1+ Kc8 30.Qe6+ Kd8 31.Rb8+ Kc7 32.Rb7+ Kxb7 33.Qd7+ Kb8 White resigns 0-1

4.h4 g4 5.Ne5 The main line of the Kieseritzky is the basis of this chapter.

80 – Rogers 5…h5 6.Bc4 Nh6 Rev. Herschel Rogers was the pastor of a Baptist Church in Presque Isle, Maine. He was a friendly older man with white hair who invited players to a hall in the church on Saturday mornings to play chess. I kept this game score played vs Herschel Rogers. In a show of unusual boldness, I began with the King's Gambit. Sawyer - Rogers, Presque Isle, Maine 22.02.1974 begins 1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3 g5 4.h4 g4 5.Ne5 h5 6.Bc4 Nh6 [Interesting is 6...Rh7 7.d4 d6 8.Nd3 f3 9.gxf3 Be7 10.Be3 Bxh4+ 11.Kd2 Bg5 12.f4 Be7! A fascinating struggle awaits.] 7.d4 f6? [The hole on g6 invites my pieces. The Nh6 keeps the rook from protecting h5.] 8.Ng6 Rh7 9.Bxf4 [White regained the gambit pawn with a big uncontested center.] 9...Nc6 10.Nc3 Bb4 11.0-0 Bxc3 12.bxc3 d6 13.e5 [I missed the subtle tactical shot 13.Bg5!+-.] 13...f5? 14.Bg5 [14.exd6!+-] 14...Qd7 15.exd6 Nf7 16.Re1+ Nce5 17.dxe5 [17.Nxe5! Nxe5 18.Rxe5+ Kf8 19.Be7+ Kg7 20.Qd2 and the Black king is in mating net that even his queen cannot prevent.] 17...Nxg5 18.hxg5 Rg7?! [Hastens the end.] 19.e6 Qc6 20.d7+ Bxd7 21.exd7+ Kd8 22.Re8# 1-0

81 – Edberg 5…h5 6.Bc4 Nh6 I tried the Kings Gambit in this slow postal chess tournament, albeit the preliminary round of the US championship. I figured I could look up the opening lines in my books. My opponent Robert Edberg became a very strong correspondence master. Sawyer (2000) - Edberg (2300), corr USCCC 1981 begins 1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3 g5 4.h4 g4 5.Ne5 h5 6.Bc4 [6.d4 d6 7.Nd3=] 6...Nh6 [6...Rh7 7.d4=] 7.d4 d6 8.Nd3 f3! [This makes the kingside very dangerous for White.] 9.gxf3 Be7 10.Bg5 [10.Be3 Bxh4+ 11.Kd2=] 10...Bxg5 11.hxg5 Qxg5 12.f4? [12.Qd2=] 12...Qg6?! [12...Qg7!-/+] 13.f5 [13.Nc3=] 13...Nxf5?! [13...Qf6 14.Nf4 h4 15.Nc3 h3=/+] 14.exf5 Bxf5 15.Nc3

[15.Qe2+! Kd7 16.0-0 Nc6 17.Qf2+/=] 15...Nc6 16.Ne2 0-0-0 17.Qd2 Be4 18.Ndf4 [18.Rf1 Bf3 19.0-0-0 d5 20.Bb5=] 18...Qg5 19.Nxh5? [White blunders. Better was 19.Rg1 d5-/+] 19...Rxh5 0-1

82 – Sawyer 5…d6 6.Ng4 Nf6 New In Chess announced the book "Amateur to IM" by Jonathan Hawkins published by Mongoose Press. Jonathan describes himself as a "relatively weak" university age player who had spent years studying openings. His early progress leveled off. My victory illustrates in this Kings Gambit something that I often say. Players rated in the 1700s frequently lose pawn endings. shalilsnv (1757) - Sawyer (2032), ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 07.11.2012 begins 1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3 g5 4.h4 g4 5.Ne5 d6 6.Nxg4 Nf6 7.Nxf6+ Qxf6 8.Qf3? [8.Nc3 Nc6 9.Nd5 Qg6!= Sakaev] 8...Nc6 9.Bb5 h5? [9...Bd7=/+] 10.d3 Bd7 11.Qxf4 Qxf4 12.Bxf4 Nd4 13.Bxd7+ Kxd7 14.Kd2 [14.Na3!+/=] 14...Rg8 15.g3 Be7? [Ouch. I’m down a pawn, but ahead on the clock. Better is 15...Ne6=] 16.Nc3 f5 17.Raf1 fxe4 18.Nxe4 Raf8 19.Bg5 Nf3+ 20.Ke3 Nxg5 21.Rxf8 Rxf8 22.hxg5 d5 23.Nf6+ Bxf6 24.gxf6 Rxf6 25.Rxh5 c6?! 26.g4 [26.Rh7+!+-] 26...Rf7 27.g5 Ke6 28.Rh1 Rg7 29.Rg1 Kf5 30.Kd4 b6 31.b4 Rg6 32.Rf1+ Ke6 33.Rf6+ Rxf6 34.gxf6 Kxf6 35.a4? [I hoped he’d miss 35.b5!+-] 35...Ke6 36.c4 dxc4 37.dxc4 Kd6 38.c5+? [Throwing away the pawn endgame. White had only 21 seconds left on the clock. Correct is 38.b5 c5+ 39.Ke4 Ke6=] 38...bxc5+ 39.bxc5+ Ke6 40.Ke4 [Or 40.a5 Kf5 41.a6 Kf4-+] 40...a5 41.Kd4 Kf5 42.Kd3 Ke5 43.Kc4 Ke4 44.Kc3 Kd5 45.Kd3 Kxc5 46.Kc3 Kd5 47.Kd3 c5 48.Kc3 c4 49.Kc2 Kd4 White forfeits on time 0-1

83 – Haines 5…Nf6 6.Bc4 d5 Ray Haines loved the King's Gambit. He studied the monograph by Trevor Hay. Ray followed the Hay way to play day by day. We tested and debated those lines. Dan Heisman has recommended that when you are learning chess you should play tricky or trappy openings. They teach you tactics you need to learn to improve. Haines - Sawyer, Ft Fairfield, ME 02.11.1973 begins 1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3 g5 4.h4 g4 5.Ne5 Nf6 6.Bc4 [6.d4 d6 7.Nd3 Nxe4 8.Bxf4] 6...d5 7.exd5 Bg7 [7...Nxd5!?] 8.d4 Nh5 9.Nc3 0-0 10.Ne2 c5 11.Bxf4 [11.Nxf4]

11...Nxf4 12.Nxf4 b5 [12...cxd4!] 13.Be2 [Not 13.Bxb5? Qa5+ picking off the bishop.] 13...f5 14.g3 [14.c3+/=] 14...cxd4 15.Ned3 Na6 16.0-0 Bb7 17.Bxg4 fxg4 18.Qxg4 Nc7? 19.Nh5 Qe7 20.d6! Qe3+ 21.Rf2 Qh6 22.dxc7 Rxf2 23.Nxf2+- Ray White is winning. 1/2-1/2

84 – Whittle 5…Nf6 6.Nxg4 Nxe4 My postal chess game with Scott Whittle was published in USCF Chess Life, January 1990 issue in the column by Alex Dunne. It is a nice short tactical King's Gambit variation. We played a critical variation of the Kieseritzky Gambit. Our knights headed to opposite corners. White walked into trouble, getting one knight stuck on a8 and the other one undefended on h2. Had the game continued, Black could play 16.Ke1 Ng4+ and take on h2. Whittle (1900) – Sawyer (2124), corr USCF 88NS3, 26.06.1989 begins 1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3 g5 4.h4 g4 5.Ne5 Nf6 6.Nxg4!? [6.d4 d6 7.Nd3 Nxe4 8.Bxf4 or 6.Bc4 d5 7.exd5 Bd6 8.d4 Nh5] 6...Nxe4 7.Qe2?! [An interesting alternative is 7.d3 Ng3 8.Bxf4 Nxh1 9.Qe2+ Qe7 10.Nf6+ Kd8 11.Bxc7+ Kxc7 12.Nd5++/=] 7...Qe7 8.Nc3 Ng3 9.Qxe7+ Bxe7 10.Nd5? [10.Rh2 Rg8 11.Nf2 Nc6-/+] 10...Nxh1 11.Nxc7+ Kd8 12.Nxa8 Bxh4+ 13.Kd1 Re8 14.Be2 d6 15.Nh2 Nf2+ Black will win both knights. 0-1

85 – Chaney 6.d4 d6 7.Nd3 Nxe4 King's Gambit leads to romantic swashbuckling attacks or to ugly losses. Black holds a pawn but feels real pressure. I enjoyed my games vs Ron Chaney. I also cited my game vs Tom Beechey. Chaney (1948) - Sawyer (2000), corr APCT 1985 begins 1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3 g5 4.h4 g4 5.Ne5 Nf6 6.d4 d6 7.Nd3 Nxe4 8.Bxf4 Qe7 [8...Bg7 9.c3 0-0 10.Nd2 Re8 11.Nxe4 Rxe4+ when Black has an extra pawn.] 9.Qe2 Bg7 [9...Nc6 10.c3 Bf5 11.Nd2 0-0-0=] 10.c3 h5 11.Nd2 Nxd2 12.Kxd2 Qxe2+ 13.Bxe2 Nc6 14.Rae1 [14.Bd1 Ne7 15.Ba4+ Bd7 16.Bxd7+ Kxd7 17.Rae1 Bh6 18.g3 f5 19.Bxh6 Rxh6= 1/2-1/2 in 33. Beechey – Sawyer, corr USCF 89N285 1990] 14...Be6 [14...Ne7=] 15.Bxg4 [15.Bg5 f6 16.d5 fxg5 17.hxg5 Bxd5 18.Bf3+ Be6 19.Rxe6+ Kd7 20.Bd5 Ne7=] 15...hxg4 16.d5 Kd7 17.dxe6+ fxe6 18.Re4 Rag8 19.Nf2 [19.g3 e5 20.Be3 Bh6 21.Nf2 Bxe3+ 22.Kxe3 Ke6 23.Rxg4 Rxg4 24.Nxg4=] 19...d5 20.Ra4 e5 21.Bg5 Bh6 22.Rxg4 Bxg5+ 23.hxg5 Rxh1 24.Nxh1 Ke6 25.Ng3 e4 26.c4 Ne5 27.cxd5+ Kxd5 28.Rf4 Rxg5 29.Nxe4 Rxg2+ 30.Kc3 [30.Rf2 Rxf2+

31.Nxf2 Kd4-/+ Black is a pawn up in a knight endgame.] 30...Rxb2 31.Nf6+ Ke6 32.Ra4 Rb6 33.Ne4 a6 34.Ra5 Rc6+ 35.Kd4 [35.Kb3 Rc1 36.Nc5+ Kf6-+] 35...Rc4+ 36.Ke3 Rc3+ 37.Ke2 Re3+ [If 38.Kxe3 Nc4+ 39.Kd4 Nxa5-+] 0-1

86 – Custer 12.Qxe7+ Kxe7 My opponent here is Larry Custer (rated 1712). After this win my rating went to 2178. At one point in my USCF postal play, I won 26 games in a row. This might have been one of those wins. The game lasted about nine months. It is quite possible during this game that I made one of several visits to the town of Gettysburg, Pennsylvania, the site of the famous Civil War battle. My wife and I went there on our honeymoon long ago. East of the town, George Armstrong Custer was a hero for the Union Army. The bold Custer became a famous general. In 2018 I visited the Little Bighorn Battlefield in Montana, the site of his final loss: Custer's Last Stand. I do not know if Larry Custer was related to General Custer, but Larry surely came charging right at me! Our opening was a King's Gambit Kieseritzky 4.h4. White gambited the f-pawn to get a grip on the center and open lines against my kingside. I managed to hold him off and get into an endgame still up the pawn. While he was picking off most of my other pawns, I worked to advance my passed g-pawn for a forced win. Custer - Sawyer, corr USCF 88N300, 19.09.1989 begins 1.e4 e5 2.f4 [King's Gambit] 2...exf4 3.Nf3 g5 4.h4 g4 5.Ne5 Nf6 6.d4 d6 7.Nd3 Nxe4 8.Bxf4 Qe7 9.Qe2 Bg7 10.c3 h5 [10...Bf5!?] 11.Nd2 Nxd2 12.Qxe7+ Kxe7 13.Kxd2 Be6 [White has some compensation, but I prefer the endgame with the extra pawn.] 14.Re1 [14.Bg5+! f6 15.Be3=. Or 14.g3 c6 15.Bg2 Na6 16.Rae1 Kd7 17.b3 Nc7 18.Bg5 Rae8 19.Rhf1 f5 20.Rf2 Bh6 21.Bxh6 Rxh6 22.Nf4 Bf7 23.Bf1 Rxe1 24.Kxe1 Ne6 25.Bd3 Rf6 26.Kd2 Ng7= 0-1 White withdrew in Sawyer - Coplin, corr USCCC 1981] 14...Kd7 15.b3 Nc6 16.Nb2 Rae8 [-/+. Black position has really improved in the last few moves. He is fully developed.] 17.Bc4 Bxc4 18.bxc4 Rxe1 19.Rxe1 Bh6?! [19...Re8=/+] 20.Bxh6?! [20.Rf1! Bxf4+ 21.Rxf4 keeps White more active.] 20...Rxh6 21.g3 Rf6 22.Nd3 Ne7 23.Nf4 Rf5 24.Kd3 Ng6 25.Ke4 Ra5?! [25...Rf6!-/+] 26.Re2? [26.Nd5!] 26...c6 27.Rb2 Nxf4 28.Kxf4 Ke6 29.Ke4 Rf5 30.Rxb7 d5+! 31.cxd5+ cxd5+ 32.Ke3 Rf3+ 33.Kd2 Rxg3 [Black's passed g-pawn is now a BIG threat.] 34.Rxa7 Rf3 35.Ra6+ [White's best hope is to send his a-pawn on a mad dash from a2-a8: 35.a4 Rh3 36.a5 Rxh4 37.a6 g3 38.Ra8 g2 39.Re8+ Kf5 40.a7 g1Q 41.a8Q but

41...Kf4!-+ and White is busted.] 35...Kf5 36.Rh6 g3 37.Rxh5+ Kg4 38.Rxd5 g2 39.Rg5+ Kh3 40.h5 Rg3 0-1

Book 1: Chapter 4 – Various 2.Nf3 Lines 2.Nf3 f6 Damiano Defence is not necessarily intended to be a gambit. If White sacrifices his knight on e5, Black cannot recapture without getting crushed.

87 – Eddy-Booth 3.Nxe5 fxe5 Fast Eddy-Booth was rated around 1800. He played blitz chess as fast as bullet chess. Against me he sometimes won because of his speed. EddyBooth chose the "rope-a-dope" approach in a variety of closed openings. He could move his king and other pieces around behind the wall of pawns which allowed him to ignore his opponent's moves as much as possible. Dispatching the Damiano Defence requires White to play exact moves in sharp tactics. Eddy-Booth took only 9 seconds total to play the first 10 moves, which included a draw offer around move 7. I used 32 seconds for my first 10 moves. I tried to remember 3.Nxe5, 8.h4, 9.Bxb7 and 10.Qa5. When the dust clears, usually Black has sacrificed four pawns for little compensation. Suddenly I had played 9.h5+, not a blunder but it took me out of my plans. Next thing I know, I threw away the entire advantage with 11.Qd5?? EddyBooth was rewarded with an advantage on the board and the clock. Fortunately for me, he hung a piece 10 moves later on a move where he took 20 of his 51 total seconds. Sawyer - Eddy-Booth, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 11.01.2013 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f6 3.Nxe5! fxe5? [As Black I always play 3...Qe7! This sets a trap hoping for 4.Qh5+? g6 5.Nxg6 Qxe4+ winning the White knight on g6. White does get a good game after 4.Nf3+/-] 4.Qh5+ Ke7 5.Qxe5+ Kf7 6.Bc4+ d5 [Or 6...Kg6 7.Qf5+ Kh6 8.h4! winning] 7.Bxd5+ Kg6 8.h4! h6 9.h5+ [The most accurate is 9.Bxb7! Bd6 10.Qa5!+-] 9...Kh7 10.Bxb7 Bd6 11.Qd5?? [Whoops. I make a big blunder! Ugh?! Correct is 11.Qa5!+-] 11...Ne7 12.Qd3 Bxb7 13.e5+ Kg8 14.exd6 Qxd6 15.Qxd6 cxd6 16.0-0 Kh7 17.d4 Rf8 18.c4 Be4 19.Be3 Nbc6 [I expected 19...Bd3 20.Rc1 but

Black is better after 20...Nf5-/+] 20.Nd2 Nf5? [20...Bf5=/+] 21.Nxe4 Black resigns 1-0

88 – JackBach 3.Nxe5 fxe5 Longtime popular radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh has a saying that in war, sports and politics, "Nobody ever won anything by defending." Rush went on to explain that if all you do is defend, it does not bring victory. He said that to win, "At some point you have to attack your opponent." That general principle is true in chess. Let me compare politics and chess. To win, a good politician needs to get the attention of the voters by demonstrating these three qualities: 1. Look good. 2. Sound smart. 3. Make sense. Chess openings get the attention of players in the same way that politicians get voters’ attention. They look good, sound smart and make sense. A successful chess opening must: 1. Develop rapidly. 2. Control the center. 3. Make threats. You can win with the Damiano Defence?! Now, that would be a highly dubious promise. Black hopes to win by defending the e5 pawn with 2...f6. It fails when White makes a promising knight sacrifice, but he must be able to demonstrate its value to win. Both sides have promise, but only one side in this line has good substance. Here I demonstrate how this defense falls short in a blitz game win against the weak computer program JackBach. Sawyer - JackBach, ICC 3 3 Internet Chess Club, 17.07.2009 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f6?! 3.Nxe5 fxe5? [The correct way to play this is 3...Qe7 Black attacks the knight and sets a trap. 4.Nf3! (4.Qh5+? Falling for the trap. 4...g6 5.Nxg6 Qxe4+ winning the knight on g6.) 4...Qxe4+ 5.Be2 White has a lead in development and the tactical threat of Re1 to potentially attack both the queen and king.] 4.Qh5+ Ke7 [4...g6 5.Qxe5+ Qe7 6.Qxh8 Qxe4+ 7.Kd1 and Black has lost at least a rook for a knight.] 5.Qxe5+ Kf7 6.Bc4+ Kg6 [6...d5 7.Bxd5+ Kg6 8.h4! h6 9.Bxb7+- and if the bishop is captured, White mates on f5.] 7.Qf5+ Kh6 8.h4! [I had won with 8.d4+ g5 9.h4

before I found that 8.h4! forces a faster mate.] 8...Bb4 [Only temporarily preventing d4.] 9.c3 g6 10.d4+ g5 11.hxg5+ Kg7 12.Qf7# Black is checkmated. 1-0

2.Nf3 d5 This is the Elephant Gambit. It begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 d5.

89 – Purser 3.d4 dxe4 4.Nxe5 Bd6 Once upon a time our hero Tom Purser talked to his private investigator buddy Peter Atzerpay about the opening 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 d5. Peter asked if the opening was called either “Queen's Pawn Counter Gambit” or “Mittelgambit im Nachzug”. But Tom Purser called it, “An Elephant.” Tom Purser played in an Atlanta tournament. He won this Elephant Gambit vs “A. Sheehan”. The USCF lists an Andrew Sheehan from Georgia. I am guessing that he may have been Tom Purser’s opponent here. Sheehan - Purser, Atlanta 1983 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 d5 3.d4 dxe4 [3...Nf6 4.Nxe5 Nxe4 5.Bd3 Nd7 6.Nxd7 Bxd7=] 4.Nxe5 Bd6 5.Bf4 Nf6 6.Nc3 0-0 7.f3 Bb4 8.Bc4 Nd5 9.Bxd5 Qxd5 10.0-0 Bxc3 11.bxc3 f5 12.c4 Qd8 13.Qd2 [13.Rb1+/-] 13...Nd7 14.Bg5 Qe8 15.Nxd7 Bxd7 16.fxe4 fxe4 [16...Qxe4=] 17.Rxf8+ Qxf8 18.Rf1 Qe8 19.Qf4 Qg6 [19...c6=] 20.Be7 h6 21.g3? [21.Qxc7+/=] 21...Re8 22.Bb4 e3 [22...Bh3-+] 23.Qxc7 Bh3 24.Qxb7 Bxf1 25.Kxf1 Qxc2 26.Qd5+ Kh8 27.Ke1 Qf2+ 0-1

90 – Alexis 3.exd5 Bd6 4.d4 e4 Ray Alexis takes on Tom V. Purser in the Elephant Gambit 2.Nf3 d5 in postal chess. I never took this gambit seriously until Purser published wins by Emil J. Diemer as Black. Purser plays 3...Bd6 against an experienced postal player. The evaluation has Black close to equality the entire game against this strong player. Alexis - Purser, corr, 1979 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 d5 3.exd5 Bd6 [The most common line is 3...e4 4.Qe2 Nf6 5.d3 Bb4+ 6.c3 0-0 7.dxe4 Bc5 8.Bg5+/-] 4.d4 e4 5.Ne5 [5.Nfd2!?] 5...Ne7 [5...Nf6 6.Bb5+ Bd7 7.Nxd7 Nbxd7 8.Bg5+/=] 6.Bb5+ Kf8 7.Qh5 Bxe5 8.Qxe5 Qxd5 9.Bf4 Qxe5 10.Bxe5 c6 11.Bc4 Nd7 12.Bd6 Nb6 13.Bb3 Ke8 14.c3 [14.Nd2 Bf5 15.0-0+/-] 14...Ned5 [14...Kd7 15.Bg3+/=] 15.Nd2 [15.c4+/-] 15...Bf5 16.0-0 Kd7 17.Bg3 h5 18.h3 Rae8 19.Bc2 Bh7 20.Bb3 Re7 21.Rfe1 Rhe8 22.Nf1 g5 23.a4 a5 24.h4 g4 25.Ne3 f5 26.Bxd5 Nxd5 27.Nxd5 cxd5 28.Bf4 Rc8

29.Ra3 Rc6 30.Rb3 Ke6 31.Ra1 Ra6 32.Rc1 Bg6 [32...Rd7 33.Rb5+/=] 33.c4 dxc4 34.Rxc4 1-0

91 – Purser 3.exd5 Bd6 4.d4 e4 The Elephant Gambit 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 d5 is very rare. When I first started playing chess around 1970, absolutely nobody played the Elephant Gambit at all. No one had ever heard of it. Or if they did, it had the unwieldy name Queen Pawn Counter Gambit. When a grandmaster did play one, it came from a simul or it felt like a game played at odds. Despite a rare spectacular win in the olden days, it looked like Black was losing a pawn for nothing. Published games in this opening were almost unheard of. Those few brave souls who did play it included E.J. Diemer, Walter Muir, G. Halasz, and sometimes Roald Berthelsen. But in the late 1980s, the Elephant Gambit caught on in more circles. Now and then a tactical master would play it frequently. Postal experts would play it, since their opponents could not find much in theory about it in books and no one had strong chess engines or databases to show the way. Tom Purser had long been a proponent of the Elephant Gambit. In 1988 the group Rasmus Pape, Niels Jensen and Tom Purser published the 1st edition of their Elephant Gambit book. After that, many Blackmar-Diemer Gambiteers played the Elephant. I tried it in 1988 and won 3 of my first 4 games with it, beating two players rated over 2000. In 1994 the Jonathan Rogers monograph appeared. Below was the first time I had White in the Elephant Gambit. In addition to Tom's choice of 3...Bd6, the immediate pawn push 3...e4 is often played by Black. Sawyer - Purser, corr IECG 1995 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 d5 3.exd5 Bd6 4.d4 e4 5.Ne5 Nf6 6.Nc3 [6.Bb5+! Bd7 7.Nxd7 Nbxd7 8.Bg5+/=] 6...Nbd7 7.Bb5 [Or 7.Nxd7 Bxd7 8.Bc4 0-0] 7...0-0 8.Nxd7 Bxd7 9.Be2 a6 10.Bg5 Bf5 11.0-0 h6 12.Be3 Qd7 13.Qd2 Rad8 14.Bf4 Bh7 15.Rac1 Rfe8 16.a3

Re7 [16...b5!?] 17.Be3 [17.Bc4 Rde8 18.Rce1= is a reasonable way to keep fighting.] 17...Qf5 18.f3 [18.h3!?=] 18...Rde8 1/2-1/2

92 – Casey 3.exd5 e4 4.Ne5 Elephant Gambit 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 d5!? is one of those lines where Black sacrifices a valuable center pawn. White stands better, but there are things about the Elephant Gambit that favor Black. 1. The Elephant Gambit is not very well known by most players. 2. Normal White development can lead to a good Black game. 3. Black's pieces have open lines for active development. 4. Black frequently gets a pawn on e4 to disrupt White's plans. 5. Often Black regains the gambit pawn anyway. Daren Casey chose 3.exd5 e4 4.Ne5. Black's pieces became more active. White's choice to swap queens was fatal. Casey (1570) - Sawyer (2006), corr USCF 89SS104, 06.01.1992 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 d5 3.exd5 e4 4.Ne5 [4.Qe2+/=] 4...Qxd5 5.d4 exd3 6.Nxd3 Bd6 7.Nc3 Qf5 8.Be2 Nf6 9.0-0 Nc6 10.Re1 0-0 11.Bf3 Nd4 12.Be4 [12.Be3 Nxf3+ 13.Qxf3 Qxf3 14.gxf3 Bf5=] 12...Qg4 13.Qxg4? [The losing move. 13.Bf4 Qxd1 14.Raxd1 Nxc2 15.Bxd6 Nxe1 16.Bxf8 Nxd3=] 13...Bxg4 14.Nf4 [If White just sacrifices the Exchange with 14.Bg5 Nxc2 15.Bxf6 Nxa1-+ White does not have much compensation.] 14...Nxe4 15.Rxe4 Nxc2 16.Rb1 Bf5 17.Re2 [17.Rc4 Rfd8-+] 17...Nd4 18.Re1 Bxb1 19.Nxb1 Bxf4 20.Bxf4 Rfe8 0-1

93 – Puzey 3.exd5 e4 4.Qe2 In my Glenn Puzey game from the 1989 USCF Golden Squires Tournament, White played most of the main line. He deviated with 5.Nc3. His play seems critical and very good. Check it out! Puzey (1913) - Sawyer (2001), corr USCF 89SS104, 1992 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 d5 3.exd5 e4 4.Qe2 Nf6 5.Nc3 Be7 6.Nxe4 0-0 [6...Nxd5 7.d3 0-0 8.Qd1 f5 9.Ng3!+/=] 7.Nxf6+ [Or 7.d3 Nxd5 8.Qd1 f5 9.Ng3!+/=] 7...Bxf6 8.d4 Bg4 [8...Qxd5 9.Be3 Bg4 transposing to the game or 8...Bf5 9.c3+/=] 9.Be3 [9.Qe4 Re8 10.Ne5+/-] 9...Qxd5 10.c3 Nc6 [10...Nd7 seems better.] 11.h3 Bh5 12.Qd1 Rfe8 [12...Na5 13.Be2 Nc4 14.Bxc4 Qxc4 15.Ne5 Bxd1

16.Nxc4+/= Black's compensation for the gambit pawn is two bishops.] 13.Be2 g5!? 14.0-0 g4? 15.Nd2 gxh3 16.gxh3 Kh8 [16...Bxe2! 17.Qxe2 Re6 18.Qf3 Ne7+/-] 17.Bxh5 Rg8+ 18.Bg4 h5 19.f3 hxg4 20.hxg4 [20.fxg4!+-] 20...Bh4 21.Bf2 Bg5 22.Ne4 Rae8 23.Kg2 1-0

94 – Kostanski 4.Qe2 Nf6 5.d3 Vs Robert Kostanski I played the Elephant Gambit 3.exd5 e4 variation. Black was winning near the end. I let my advantage slip and the game appears to have ended in a perpetual check for a draw, but I’m not sure. Kostanski (2032) - Sawyer (2077), corr USCF 89SS40, 1990 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 d5 3.exd5 e4 [3...Bd6] 4.Qe2 Nf6 5.d3 [5.Nc3 Be7 6.Nxe4 0-0 7.d3 Nxd5 8.Qd1 f5+/=] 5...Be7 6.dxe4 0-0 7.Nc3 Re8 8.Bd2 b5 [8...Bb4 9.0-0-0 Bxc3 10.Bxc3 Nxe4 11.Be5+/=] 9.Qxb5 Nbd7 10.Qa4 Nc5 11.Qc4 Ba6 12.Qd4 Nfxe4 13.Nxe4 Nxe4 14.Ne5 Bf6 15.f4 Bxf1 [15...Nxd2 16.Bxa6 Qd6 17.Kxd2 Bxe5 18.fxe5 Qxa6 19.c4+/-] 16.Qxe4 Bxe5 17.fxe5 f5 18.Qf3 Bc4 19.Bc3 [19.0-0-0+/-] 19...Bxd5 20.Qf2 Qg5 21.0-0 Re6 22.Rad1 Be4 23.Rd7 Rg6 24.g3 h5 25.Rxc7 [25.Qf4+/-] 25...h4 26.Qf4 [26.Qd2=] 26...Qh5 27.Be1 Rg4 [27...hxg3 28.Bxg3 Qh3-/+] 28.Qe3 [28.Qd2=] 28...hxg3 29.Bxg3 Qh3 30.Rf2 [30.Kf2 f4 31.Bxf4 Rxf4+ 32.Qxf4 Rf8-+] 30...Rd8 31.Rd2 Rxg3+ [An indication of how poorly I was playing at times was the fact that I missed the win that would follow 31...Rxd2 32.Qxd2 f4-+] 32.hxg3 Rxd2 33.Qxd2 Qxg3+ 34.Kf1 Qf3+ 35.Ke1 Qh1+ 36.Kf2 Qf3+ 1/2-1/2

95 – Sawyer 4.Qe2 Nf6 5.d3 My attitude toward gambits is to accept it and make them pay for the material that they sacrifice. This Elephant stomped on me pretty hard. At first I played well. Then I blundered and lost. Sawyer - jethro369, Internet Chess Club 2012 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 d5 3.exd5 e4 [3...Bd6 4.d4 e4 5.Ne5+/=] 4.Qe2 Nf6 5.d3 Bd6 6.dxe4 0-0 7.Bg5 [7.Nc3 Re8 8.Bg5+/-] 7...Nbd7 8.Nc3 a5 9.0-0-0 a4 10.a3 Qe7 11.Qd2 Bxa3 12.bxa3 Qxa3+ 13.Kb1 Qb4+ 14.Ka1 a3 15.Na4? [In one move I go from winning with 15.Rb1!+- to losing.] 15...Qxa4 16.Qc3 Nxe4 17.Qb3 Qa5 18.Bd3 Ndc5 19.Qc4 Nxd3 20.Rxd3 Nxf2 21.Rb3 Nxh1 22.Bd2 Qa6 23.Qd4 Qf1+ 24.Ka2 Qxg2 25.Ne5 Nf2 26.Rg3 [Things get sloppy.] 26...Qf1? [26...Qe4-+] 27.Rxg7+? [27.Bh6!+-] 27...Kxg7 28.Ng4+? [28.Nxf7+ Kxf7=] 28...f6 29.Bh6+ Kg6 30.Nxf2 Kxh6 31.Qh4+

Kg6 32.Qg3+ Kf7 33.Qxc7+ Kg8 34.Qg3+ Kh8 35.Qh4 Bf5 36.Nd3 Bxd3 37.cxd3 Qe2+ 38.Kb3 Qxd3+ 39.Kb4 Qxd5 40.Qc4 Qxc4+ 41.Kxc4 a2 White resigns 0-1

96– Sawyer 4.Qe2 Nf6 d3 Once in a while when I play the White pieces, I am surprised by an Elephant Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 d5). In my opinion the main line is 3.exd5 e4 4.Qe2 and White stands better. I found the gambit to be very tricky in a 3 minute blitz game. This is especially true if I do not remember the exact moves. Elephants can stomp pretty hard. In this game, I was crushed in the opening, but I managed to survive and win. I forgot how I had played it correctly on Thanksgiving 2011 (see next game). Sawyer - chelsee, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 23.06.2012 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 d5 3.exd5 e4 [3...Bd6 4.d4 e4 5.Ne5+/=] 4.Qe2 Nf6 5.d3 Bb4+ [5...Bd6 was played vs me by jethro369 in the previous game.] 6.Bd2 0-0 7.Bxb4 [7.dxe4! Re8 8.e5!+/=] 7...exf3 8.Qxf3 Re8+ 9.Be2 Bg4 10.Qg3 Bxe2 11.Kd2 Bh5 12.Na3 Nxd5 13.Bc3 Nxc3 14.bxc3 Qf6 15.Nc4 Qh6+ [15...Re2+! 16.Kc1 Qxc3-+ and Black would be mated in a few moves.] 16.f4 Re2+ 17.Kc1 Qg6 18.Qxg6 Bxg6 19.g4 h5 20.Ne5 hxg4 21.Nxg6 fxg6 22.Rg1 Rxh2 23.Rxg4 Rh1+ 24.Kb2 Rxa1 25.Kxa1 Nc6 26.Rxg6 Re8 27.c4 Kf7 28.Rg2 Re1+ 29.Kb2 Nd4 30.Kc3 Nf3 31.Rf2 Ng1 32.Kd2 Ra1 33.a4 Nh3 34.Rf3 Ng1? [This allows White back into the game. 34...Rh1-+] 35.Rf2 Kf6 36.Ke3 Rxa4 37.Rg2 Ra1 38.Rg3 Re1+ 39.Kf2 Rc1 40.Rxg1 Rxc2+ 41.Ke3 g6 42.Rh1 b5 43.cxb5 Rb2 44.Rh7 Rxb5 45.Rxc7 a5 46.Ra7 Kf5 47.Rf7+ Ke6 48.Ra7 Kf5 49.Rf7+ Kg4 50.Ke4 Rb4+ 51.d4 a4 52.Ra7 Kg3 53.Ke5 Kf3 54.d5 Rxf4? [Now White is winning.] 55.d6 Rf5+ 56.Ke6 Rf4 57.d7 Re4+ 58.Kf7 Rd4 59.Kxg6 a3 60.Rxa3+ Kf4 61.Ra7 Kg4 62.Kf7 Rf4+ 63.Ke7 Re4+ 64.Kd8 Kf5 65.Ra1 Ke6 66.Rd1 Rh4 67.Kc8 Rc4+ 68.Kb7 Rb4+ 69.Kc6 Rc4+ 70.Kb5 Rc1 71.d8Q Rxd1 72.Qxd1 Ke5 73.Qf3 Kd4 74.Qe2 Kd5 75.Qe3 Kd6 76.Qe4 Kd7 77.Qe5 Kc8 78.Qe7 Kb8 79.Kb6 Ka8 80.Qd8# Black is checkmated 1-0

97 – blik 4.Qe2 Nf6 5.d3 How do you eat an elephant? One bite at a time. After I left the 2011 Thanksgiving table stuffed with turkey, I watched the Dallas Cowboys win over the Miami Dolphins by one point. Then I sat down to a feast at the chess table. This time it was on the Internet Chess Club. I played my old favorite "blik". My game began as an Alekhine with 1.e4 Nf6 2.d3 e5. White surprised me with 3.d4!? This is an Elephant Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 d5!?) with COLORS REVERSED. This gambit was a favorite of the famous BDG player Diemer, so I have some knowledge of the opening. My general opinion is that White (in my game Black) does best to play 3.exd5 e4 4.Qe2 (which is 4…Qe7 here) and the fight is on. blik (2410) – Sawyer (2100), Internet Chess Club, 24.11.2011 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.d3 e5 [I play 2...d5 to immediately challenge e4. I recommended this in my Alekhine Defense Playbook.] 3.d4 exd4! [This is the best chance of keeping an edge vs the Elephant Gambit. 3...Nxe4 is also playable.] 4.e5 Qe7 5.Nf3 [5.Qe2 Nd5=/+] 5...d6 6.Bb5+ c6 7.0-0 dxe5 8.Bc4 Be6!? [8...Bg4! 9.Nbd2 Nbd7-/+] 9.Nxe5 Nbd7 10.Bxe6 Qxe6 11.Nf3 0-0-0 12.Nxd4 Qg4! [I like my chances of drawing or winning endgames against this opponent.] 13.Qxg4 Nxg4 14.Nf5 g6 15.Ng3 Bg7 16.Nc3 f5 17.h3 Ngf6 18.Be3 Nb6 19.Bxb6 axb6 20.Rad1 Rxd1 21.Rxd1 Rd8 22.Rxd8+ Kxd8 23.Na4 Kc7 24.Nc3 Nd7 25.Nge2 b5 26.g3 Nc5 27.f3 Na4 28.Nxa4 bxa4 29.c3 [29.b3 axb3 30.axb3 Kd6=/+] 29...Be5 30.f4? [30.Kf2! Kd6 31.Ke3 Kd5 32.Kd3 b5=/+] 30...Bf6 31.g4?! fxg4 [Decision time. My clock dropped below two minutes while I thought.] 32.hxg4 Kd6 33.Kg2 b5 34.Kf3 h6 35.Ng3 [35.Ke4 Ke6=/+ still leaves White with the inherent weakness of the outside passed pawn.] 35...Kd5 36.Ne4 Be7 37.Ke3 Bc5+ [As I pondered this move, my clock dropped below one minute.] 38.Nxc5 Kxc5 39.f5 gxf5 40.gxf5 Kd5 41.Kf4 c5 42.b3 axb3 43.axb3 b4 44.c4+ [44.cxb4 cxb4 45.Kf3 Ke5 46.Kg4 Kf6 47.Kf4 h5-+] 44...Kd6 45.Ke4 Ke7 46.Kd3 Kf6 47.Ke4 h5 48.Kf4 h4 [At this point I had 38 seconds left.] 49.Kg4 h3 50.Kxh3 Kxf5 51.Kg3 Ke4 52.Kf2 Kd3 53.Kf3 Kc3 54.Ke2 Kxb3 55.Kd3 Ka2 56.Kd2 b3 57.Ke3 b2 58.Kf4 b1Q 59.Kg5 Qd3 60.Kf6 Qxc4 61.Ke5 Qd4+ 62.Kf5 c4 63.Ke6 c3 64.Ke7 c2 65.Kf7 c1Q 66.Kg6

Qce3 67.Kf7 Qdf4+ 68.Kg6 Qeg3+ 69.Kh5 Qfh4# White is checkmated; Black had 27 seconds left on his clock. 0-1

Book 1: Chapter 5 – Latvian Gambit 2.Nf3 f5 Here we cover rare White third moves against the bold Latvian Gambit.

98 – Winter 3.d3 Nf6 4.Nc3 I played two recorded games in 1987, both against my co-worker Brad Winter. We worked in Horsham, Pennsylvania and played every once in a while during lunch. My activity picked up to 78 games in 1988. Brad Winter met my Latvian Gambit with the solid but quiet 3.d3 line. White's lack of aggression allowed Black to work up his own attack, but I was rusty. White starts a series of chopping off pieces, but Black picks off more than White. Winter - Sawyer (1981), Horsham PA 1988 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f5 3.d3 Nc6 4.Nc3 Nf6 5.Be3 Bb4 6.Qd2 [6.exf5 d5 7.d4 0-0=] 6...fxe4 [6...f4!-+] 7.dxe4 Nxe4 8.Qd3 Nxc3? [8...d5!-/+] 9.bxc3 Ba5? [9...Be7=] 10.Bg5 Ne7 11.Nxe5 d6? [Bad. 11...d5! 12.0-0-0 c6 13.Qf3+/=] 12.Qb5+ [12.0-0-0!+wins because the d-pawn is pinned.] 12...c6 13.Bxe7 [13.Qb3 dxe5-+] 13...Bxc3+ 14.Ke2 Qxe7 15.Qd3 Qxe5+ 16.Qe3 Qxe3+ 17.fxe3 Bxa1 0-1

99 – Uballe 3.d4 fxe4 4.Bg5 Sharp play characterized my play in 1989. Luis Uballe met my Latvian Gambit with 3.d4. Black got the advantage. White's king was chased to the kingside. A knight mate ends the nightmare. Uballe (1536) - Sawyer (2108), corr USCF 89N261, 10.09.1990 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f5 3.d4 fxe4 4.Bg5 [4.Nxe5 Nf6 5.Bg5 d6 6.Nc4 Be7=] 4...Be7 5.Bxe7 Qxe7 [Or 5...Nxe7 6.Nxe5 d6 7.Ng4 0-0 8.Ne3 Nbc6 9.Nc3 d5=] 6.Nxe5 Nf6 7.Nc3 d6 8.Nc4 d5 9.Ne5 [9.Ne3 0-0 10.Be2 c6=] 9...Nbd7=/+ 10.Bb5 c6 11.Nxc6 bxc6 12.Bxc6 Rb8 13.b3 [13.Nxd5 Nxd5 14.Bxd5 Ba6-/+] 13...Qd6 14.Ba4 Ba6 15.Qd2 0-0 16.0-0-0 Qa3+ 17.Kb1 Nb6 18.Bb5 Nc4 19.Qc1 Bxb5 20.Qxa3 Nxa3+ 21.Kc1 Bd7 [21...Ng4!-+] 22.Rhe1 Rfc8 23.Kd2 Nb5 24.Nxb5 Bxb5 25.a4 Bd7 26.f4 exf3 27.gxf3

Bf5 28.Rc1 Rc7 29.Ke3 Re8+ 30.Kf2 Rxe1 31.Rxe1 Rxc2+ 32.Kg3 g5 33.Re5 Nh5# 0-1

100 – Thompson 3.d4 fxe4 4.Nxe5 Latvian Gambit is a risky opening which has the practical value of giving open lines in less known positions. Enterprising players can get great positions when White is put on his own at move 3. Mark Thompson responded 3.d4 along a road less travelled. The game led to quite a fight. Black had the advantage most of the way, but White held his own with good defensive moves. I have the result listed as a draw, but Black is up a pawn at the end. Possibly White resigned and I mislabeled it. Nowadays I would fight on and not offer a draw as Black nor resign as White! Thompson (1727) - Sawyer (2013), corr USCF 89SS66, 01.04.1992 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f5 3.d4 fxe4 4.Nxe5 Nf6 5.Be2 [5.Bg5 d6 6.Nc4 Be7 7.Be2 0-0 8.0-0 d5=] 5...d6 6.Ng4 Nbd7!? [6...Be7=] 7.Bg5!? Be7 8.Nc3 d5 9.Ne5 0-0 10.0-0 c6 11.Nxd7 [11.f4=] 11...Bxd7 12.Rb1?! [12.f3=] 12...Qe8 13.Bf4 Qg6 14.Bg3 Bg4 15.h3 Bh5 16.Qd2 Rae8 17.b4 [17.Bd1 Bb4=/+] 17...a6 [17...Bxe2 18.Nxe2 Nd7-/+] 18.Qe3 Bxe2 19.Nxe2 Nh5 20.Nf4 Nxf4 21.Bxf4 Bd6 22.Bxd6 Qxd6 23.a4 Qg6 24.Kh2 Re6 25.Rb3 Ref6 26.Qg3 Qh6 27.b5 axb5 28.axb5 Qd2 29.bxc6 bxc6 30.Kg1 [30.Qc3 Qe2=/+] 30...Qxd4 31.Rb7 Rg6 32.Qe3 Qe5 33.Kh1 [33.f4 Qd6 34.c4 Rgf6-/+] 33...Qf4 [33...h6!-+] 34.Qxf4 Rxf4 35.Kg1 Rgf6 36.Rb3 h6 37.Rc3 [37.Re3 g5-/+] 37...d4 38.Rc4 d3 39.cxd3 exd3 40.Rc3 Rd6 1/21/2

101 – Shaw 3.d4 fxe4 4.Nxe5 Jack Shaw chose the Latvian Gambit 3.d4. I had won against this variation as Black before vs Uballe a year earlier. I missed several good moves vs Jack Shaw. I tried to hold the position with solid play, but my pieces were too loose. My king was too exposed. Jack Shaw played a combinative tactical trick and won material. Very nice. Live by the sword; die by the sword. Shaw (2021) - Sawyer (2107), corr USCF 89N286, 26.09.1990 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f5 3.d4 fxe4 4.Nxe5 Nf6 5.Be2 d6 6.Ng4 Bxg4 [6...Be7=] 7.Bxg4 d5 8.0-0 Nbd7 [8...Bd6=] 9.Bg5 Be7 10.Bh5+ g6 11.Be2 0-0 12.c4 c6

13.c5 Kg7 [13...b6=/+] 14.Qd2 Rf7 [14...Ng8=] 15.Nc3 Ng8 16.Be3 Nf8 17.f3 exf3 18.Bxf3 Qd7 19.b4 a6 [19...Ne6=] 20.a4 Re8 21.b5 axb5 22.axb5 h5 23.Ra7 Qc8 24.Bf4 Ne6 25.Be5+ Bf6 26.Bxf6+ Nxf6 27.bxc6 bxc6? [27...Qxc6+/=] 28.Rxf7+ Kxf7 29.Bxd5 1-0

102 – Koks 3.Nc3 fxe4 4.Nxe4 In the late 1980s and early 1990s, I played the Latvian Gambit vs men and women alike. My highest rated female opponent was Irene Aronoff. From the same event I played Barbara Koks. She responded 3.Nc3, as in the Ruy Lopez Schliemann. If Barbara Koks had captured my hanging e5 pawn with either 4.Nxe5! or 5.Nxe5, I’d have been in trouble. Her natural moves 4.Nxe4 d5 5.Ng3 e4 shifted the game to my favor. We exchanged into an ending. There Black had the better bishop, better pawn structure, better king position, and ultimately, the better result. Koks (1818) - Sawyer (2083), corr USCCC 10P05, 21.06.1990 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f5 3.Nc3 fxe4 4.Nxe4 [4.Nxe5!+/-] 4...d5! 5.Ng3 [5.Nxe5 Qe7 6.d4 dxe4 7.Qh5+ g6 8.Nxg6 hxg6 9.Qxh8 Be6 10.Qe5 Bg7 11.Qxe4 Nf6=] 5...e4 6.Nd4 Nf6 7.Be2 Nc6 [7...c5!?=/+] 8.Nxc6 bxc6 9.0-0 Bd6 10.d3 exd3 11.Bxd3 0-0 12.Bg5 Qd7 13.Qd2 Qf7 14.h3 [14.f3=] 14...c5 15.c3 Bd7 16.Rad1 Rae8 17.Rfe1 h6 18.Bxf6 Qxf6 19.Rxe8 Rxe8 20.Re1 Bxg3 21.Rxe8+ Bxe8 22.fxg3 d4 23.Qe2 Bc6 24.c4 Kf8 25.Qf2 Qxf2+ 26.Kxf2 Ke7 27.g4 g5 28.g3 Kf6 29.Bf1 Ke5 30.Ke2 Be4 31.Kd2 Bb1 32.a3 Be4 33.Kc1 Bh1 34.h4? [34.Kd2 Ke4-/+] 34...Ke4 35.hxg5 hxg5 36.Be2 d3 37.Bd1 Bf3 0-1

103 – Leite 3.Nc3 fxe4 4.Nxe5 Winners play winners in the 1989 USCF Golden Knights Semi-Finals. Here I was taught a lesson in the Latvian Gambit by the master George Leite who was rated 2351. George Leite chose the rare 3.Nc3 variation. While this line is not has popular as 3.Nxe5, 3.Bc4 or 3.exf5, White develops a piece and still gets a good position. Possible improvements for Black are 3...Nf6, 4...Nf6 or 5...Nc6. In any case, White maintains the better position. Master Leite shows that Black is not the only player who can attack early with the f-pawn. His 5.f4 move led to a line where I captured his pawn en passant. White’s attack resembled a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit or a Dutch Defence Staunton Gambit after his 6.Nxf3. Black was crushed under the pressure!

Leite (2351) - Sawyer (2075), corr USCF 89NS14, 04.10.1990 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f5 3.Nc3 fxe4 4.Nxe5 Qf6 5.f4! [Very strong continuation!] 5...exf3 6.Nxf3 c6 7.Be2 d5 8.0-0 Bd6 9.d4 Bg4? [9...Ne7+/=] 10.Ne5 Bxe2 11.Qxe2 1-0

3.exf5 The variation 3.exf5 treats the Latvian like a King’s Gambit reversed.

104 – Chandler 3.exf5 Nf6 4.Bc4 Chess pieces hate to be "Loose". What do we know about loose pieces? Nobody loves them. Nobody pays attention to them. No other pieces on the chess board protect them. Dana MacKenzie described this in a video for February 10, 2009 as follows: "Undefended pieces are often a red flag for combinations, even if they are not currently being attacked. They are the ones most likely to be victimized by pins, forks, etc. John Nunn has a saying: LPDO (loose pieces drop off). I invented a new acronym: LPCRF (loose pieces cause red faces)." Bill Chandler noticed that his opponent's queen is loose. The red flag for a combination was waving. Bill grabbed the loose Lady. Earth - Chandler, ICC 5 0 Internet Chess Club, 02.01.2012 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f5 3.exf5 [White captures one of the two loose pawns. The main line Latvian Gambit is to capture 3.Nxe5] 3...Nf6 4.Bc4 [If White grabs the second loose pawn 4.Nxe5 Qe7 5.Qe2 d6 Black has faster development as partial compensation for the gambit.] 4...d5 5.Bb3 Bxf5 6.0-0 [6.Nxe5+/= intending 7.d4 protecting the knight that can no longer be driven away from e5 by a pawn.] 6...Nc6 7.Re1 Bd6 8.Nc3 [White deserves a lot of credit for rapidly developing his pieces. So far so good.] 8...0-0 [Black is developing just as fast, even while giving up a pawn.] 9.Nxd5 Nxd5 10.Bxd5+ Kh8 11.Bxc6!? [Most strong players would keep this active bishop on the board.] 11...bxc6 12.d3?! [Once again the e-pawn is loose and could be snatched with advantage. 12.Nxe5! Bxe5 13.Rxe5+/= and White is ahead two pawns.] 12...e4? [Best is 12...Bg4! pinning the knight with a double attack on f3.] 13.dxe4 [White has the in-between-move 13.Bg5! which attacks the Black queen and adds protection from Ra1 to the White queen.] 13...Bxe4 14.Rxe4? [A fatal mistake. The knight can leap into action with 14.Ng5 Bg6 15.Ne6+/= causing Black some concerns.] 14...Bxh2+! [As Dana MacKenzie noted, loose pieces lead to combinations. Chandler sees the combination at blitz speed and is rewarded.] 15.Nxh2 [Black picks up the Lady.] 15...Qxd1+ White resigns 0-1

105 – Heckman 3…e4 4.Nd4 During the 1989 USCF Golden Knights Postal Tournament I met a wide variety of people. The event was open to players of all levels. Wayne Heckman was rated a little lower than most of my opponents. He chose the Latvian Gambit Accepted 3.exf5 line. This may not be the strongest line, but it’s not bad. It is certainly good for White when handled accurately. White followed 3.exf5 e4 up with the reasonable looking 4.Nd4!? (instead of 4.Ne5!). This allowed me to launch what became the Four Pawns Attack against the Latvian Gambit. Black threatened to regain the gambit pawn and dominate the center, but White still had plenty of play left. At this point White forfeited on time. I do not know why he stopped playing. We all have our own reasons for playing or not. In postal chess, you played several games at once. You paid for postage for every move. After six moves vs six opponents, he might have realized that he was unlikely to win this event. Some people just stop playing. Forfeits are part of the competition. I played to win events or raise my rating. This was one of those quickie wins one gets in correspondence chess. Those games never bothered me. It was another win in the event and gave me free time for a new game. Heckman (1453) - Sawyer (2193), corr USCF 89N285, 12.04.1990 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f5 3.exf5 e4 4.Nd4 [For better or worse the main line is 4.Ne5! Nf6 5.Be2 d6 6.Bh5+ Ke7 7.Nf7 Qe8 8.Nc3+/-] 4...Nf6 5.Nc3 c5!? [Probably better is 5...Nc6 6.Nxc6 dxc6 7.g4 h5 8.g5 Nd5 9.Nxe4 Bxf5 10.Qe2=] 6.Nde2 d5 [White forfeited on time. He has a good game after 7.Ng3+=] 0-1

106 – Moore 4.Ne5 Nf6 5.d4 My first Latvian Gambit was against Jeffrey Moore, a star scholastic player from the "Bad Bishops" team in Philadelphia. He had come up through the famous Vaux team that had won seven consecutive National Junior High School championships (1977-1983).The Chess Drum website had a 30 year old team picture that includes a younger Jeffrey Moore. Mr. Moore would sometimes visit the Chaturanga Chess Club to play simultaneous exhibitions. I played him a couple times in simuls when he was about 16-17 years old. He was already a rated expert. Moore was a good tactical player who seemed to know the main line openings fairly well. I surprised him with a rare Latvian Gambit. All I used to study this opening was the monograph by Ken Smith from Chess Digest. I played a few Latvian Gambits vs the weak computers Atari and Sargon in 1984. This was the first time I played it in a live game. This game began 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f5 3.exf5 e4. A key difference between the Latvian Gambit and the King's Gambit is that this e-pawn push attacks a knight in the Latvian but the move 3.e5?! is pointless after the King’s Gambit 1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4. We continued 4.Ne5 Nf6 5.d4. White fought for the center in a natural continuation. Critical is 5.Be2! d6 6.Bh5+ Ke7 7.Nf7 Qe8 when White stands a little better after either 8.Nc3 or 8.Nxh8. Probably Jeffrey Moore did not know this line. It was a simul so I had much more time than he did to think. Soon Black activated his bishops. White lost to my queenside mating attack. Moore - Sawyer, Hatboro, PA simul Hatboro, 07.06.1984 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f5 3.exf5 e4 4.Ne5 Nf6 5.d4 [5.Be2! d6 6.Bh5+ Ke7 7.Nf7 Qe8 8.Nc3 (8.Nxh8 Qxh5 9.Qxh5 Nxh5 10.g4 Nf6) 8...Nxh5 9.Nd5+ Kxf7 10.Qxh5+ g6 11.fxg6+ Kg7] 5...d6 6.Ng4 Bxf5 7.Nxf6+ Qxf6 8.Nc3 c6 9.d5 c5!? [9...Nd7=] 10.Nb5 [10.g4! Bg6 11.Bg2] 10...Qe7 11.Bf4 Qd8

12.c4 a6 13.Qa4 Kf7 14.Nc3 g5 15.Be3 Bg7 16.Qb3 Nd7 17.Be2 h5 18.00-0 Qe7 19.h3 Ne5 20.f4? [20.Rhe1=] 20...exf3 21.gxf3 Nxc4 22.Bxc4 Qxe3+ 23.Rd2 Bxc3 24.bxc3? [24.Qxc3 Qxc3+ 25.bxc3 Rae8-+] 24...b5 25.Be2 c4 26.Qb2 b4 27.Bxc4 bxc3 28.Qb7+? Kf6 29.Rhd1 Rhb8 White resigns 0-1

107 – Coriell 4.Ne5 Nf6 5.Be2 Tricky openings are a double-edged sword. For about 10 years from the mid-1980s to the early 1990s, I played many sharp gambits to trick or swindle people. Usually it worked like a charm. My rating generally went up as I won more than I lost. When playing White, my choice of the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit was particularly effective. I defeated many class A players, and experts and some masters. However as Black, playing risky chess can lead to the occasional ugly loss, especially if one does not play it accurately. The secret is to learn lessons from losses that become wins later in life. In the Latvian Gambit Black usually has the option of playing ...f5xe4 fairly soon. That was prevented by John G. Coriell when he chose 3.exf5 in our game from the 10th US Correspondence Chess Championship in 1990. Unfortunately for me, I foolishly experimented with the line 5...d5? Back then it seemed like just another playable option. Nowadays we know that it is not good. Black must play 5...Be7 or the standard 5...d6. This was another example of me losing a game in a Latvian Gambit due to my poor play. There were better moves for Black that I missed. Also, John Coriell played some pretty good moves of this own! Coriell (1910) - Sawyer (2065), corr USCCC 10P05, 27.11.1990 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f5 3.exf5 e4 4.Ne5 Nf6 5.Be2 d5? [The main line is 5...d6 6.Bh5+ Ke7 7.Nf7 Qe8+/-; but Black might do better with 5...Be7 6.Bh5+ Kf8+/=] 6.Bh5+ Ke7 7.Nf7 [7.d3!+-] 7...Qe8 8.Nc3 c6 [8...g6 9.Nxh8 gxh5 10.d3+-] 9.Nxh8 [9.d3!+-] 9...Qxh5 10.Qxh5 Nxh5 11.g4 Nf6 12.Rg1 Nbd7 13.f4 exf3? 14.d4 Ne4? 15.Nxe4 dxe4 16.Kf2 Kf6 17.Bf4?! [Correct is 17.Re1!+-] 17...c5? [Black might wiggle out with 17...g6! 18.Rae1 Kg7

19.fxg6 hxg6 20.Rxe4 Kxh8 21.Kxf3+/= and Black has a bishop and a knight for a rook and two pawns.] 18.Rae1 Nb6? 19.Be5+ 1-0

3.Bc4 This 3.Bc4 move places the bishop on an active diagonal and leaves both epawns hanging.

108 – Penullar 3…d6 4.d3 Be7 Peter Mcgerald Penullar plays a Latvian Gambit that transposes into a Philidor Defence after 3.Bc4. The best approach for White is to develop quickly. It works almost all the time, whether facing the Latvian Gambit or the Philidor Defence. Then White can control the center and attack Black weaknesses. Typically Black has trouble activating all his pieces quickly in these defenses. White plays a few rather quiet moves like 4.d3, 5.h3 and 9.a3. From there Peter castles queenside and he mounts a kingside attack that leads to checkmate. This is a good example of how to defeat passive White play. lakhote - penullar, TPOC vs. IM - Board 4 Chess.com, 22.02.2012 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f5 3.Bc4 [This is a good move. The best continuation vs the Latvian Gambit is 3.Nxe5] 3...d6 [Black transposes to a Philidor Defence. Sharper play follows 3...fxe4 4.Nxe5 d5 or 4...Qg5] 4.d3 [If 4.d4! fxe4 White has powerful piece sacrifice 5.Nxe5! dxe5 6.Qh5+ Kd7 7.Qf5+ Kc6 8.Qxe5 a6 9.d5+ Kb6 10.Be3+ Bc5 11.Bxc5+ Kxc5 12.b4+ Kxb4 13.Nd2 Qf6 14.Rb1+ Kc5 15.Qxc7+ Nc6 16.Qb6+ Kd6 17.Nxe4+ Black's king has barely avoided checkmate, but the queen is lost and mate may follow soon after anyway.] 4...Be7 5.h3?! Nf6 6.Bg5 [6.Nc3+/-] 6...c6 7.Bxf6?! [White gives up his good bishop and activates Black's bad bishop.] 7...Bxf6 8.0-0 Qe7 9.a3 f4 10.c3 Be6 11.Qb3 Bxc4 12.Qxc4 Nd7 13.b4 Nb6 14.Qb3 h5 15.Nbd2 [White develops this knight about 10 moves too late.] 15...g5 16.Nh2 0-0-0 17.Ndf3 [If White defends the kingside with 17.f3 Black can break open the center 17...d5=/+] 17...g4 18.hxg4 hxg4 19.Nxg4 Rdg8 20.Nfh2 Rxg4 21.Nxg4 f3! 22.gxf3 [Everyone is invited over to White's house for a party!] 22...Qh7 23.Qe6+ Kc7 24.Kg2 Qh3+ 25.Kg1 Qh1# 0-1

109 – Curtis 3…b5 4.Nxe5 bxc4 In the series "Line of Duty" DCI Anthony Gates tells DS Steve Arnott of Anti-Corruption, “You take a shot at the king, make sure you kill him, son.” Gates had been honored as the "Officer of the Year". Chief Gates refers to himself as king of the cops. Arnott suspects Gates of corruption. He tries to prove Gates is dirty. In real life, to shoot at the king is a terrible thing. Do not do it! However the game of chess has violent ideas. The ultimate goal in chess is the death of your opponent's king. Checkmate! To win in chess, you must go after the king. It is worth the risk of sacrifice, but how much should you risk? If you can get the king, it is worth any sacrifice. But make sure you are likely to get the king before you plan to throw away too many valuable pieces. If you sacrifice too much and fail, you are doomed to lose. In a Latvian Gambit my opponent Warren Curtis decided to go after my king. His timing was off. White's Bc4 was under attack. White did not take my b-pawn, nor did he back off with the move 4.Bb3. He boldly played 4.Nxe5 threatening my king along the h5-e8 diagonal. He did not win enough material to compensate for the loss of his bishop after my move 4...bxc4. If White wants the Qh5+ threat, he should play 3.Nxe5, or retreat with 4.Bb3. Curtis (1632) - Sawyer (2016), corr USCF 89N278, 04.03.1991 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f5 3.Bc4 b5 4.Nxe5?! [The most popular response is 4.Bb3 but White chooses to sacrifice a bishop to attack the Black king.] 4...bxc4 5.Qh5+ g6 6.Nxg6 Nf6 7.Qh4 [Not 7.Qxf5? d6-+] 7...Rg8 8.Nxf8 Rxf8 9.d3 fxe4 [9...cxd3 10.cxd3 Nc6=/+] 10.dxe4 d6 11.Nc3 Bb7 [11...Be6!?] 12.Bg5 Nbd7 13.Qf4 Qe7 14.0-0 0-0-0 15.Rfe1 [15.Qd2 Rg8-/+] 15...Rde8 [Even stronger is 15...Rg8! 16.Bxf6 Nxf6-/+] 16.f3 Qe6 17.Qe3 Kb8 18.Bxf6 Rxf6 19.a4 Rg8 20.Re2 Rh6 21.f4 [Or 21.g3 a6-+] 21...Rh3 22.g3 Qg4 [22...Nf6!-+] 23.Rg2 h5?! [This leaves Black vulnerable to a knight f2 fork. 23...Nf6!-+] 24.Rf1 [Black can swap into an ending with an extra

bishop. White could defend better with 24.Nd1 Qg7 25.Nf2 Rh4=/+] 24...h4 25.f5 hxg3 26.Rxg3 Rxg3+ 27.Qxg3 Qxg3+ 28.hxg3 Rxg3+ 29.Kf2 Rg4 30.Ke3 Ne5 31.f6 Rg3+ 32.Kd2 Rg2+ 33.Ke3 Rg3+ 34.Kd2 Rf3 35.Rxf3 Nxf3+ 36.Ke3 Ne5 37.Kd4 Kc8 38.f7 Nxf7 39.Kxc4 Kd7 40.b4 Ke6 41.Nb5 Ba6 42.Kd4 Bxb5 0-1

110 – Smith 3…b5 4.Bxg8 Rxg8 This Latvian 3.Bc4 b5 led to a hard fight. Daryn Smith refused my b-pawn sacrifice. We maneuvered around a mass of closed central pawns. I failed to break through on the kingside. White succeeded in breaking through on the queenside. The timing of my resignation was due to White's temporarily high rating. Such a loss might not cost me many or any rating points. Smith (2514) - Sawyer (2112), corr USCF 89N278, 07.08.1990 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f5 3.Bc4 b5 4.Bxg8 Rxg8 5.d4 fxe4 6.Nxe5 d6 7.Ng4 d5 8.Ne3 g6 9.Nc3 c6 10.a4 b4 11.Ne2 Bd6 [11...Nd7=] 12.c3 [12.c4] 12...Be6 13.Qc2 [13.cxb4] 13...Qb6 [13...Kf7 14.0-0 Kg7=] 14.Bd2 Na6 15.0-0 Qc7 16.g3 g5 [16...Bh3 17.Rfc1 Rf8=] 17.Ng2 [17.f3! exf3 18.Rxf3 0-0-0 19.Nf5+/=] 17...Bh3 18.f4 bxc3 19.bxc3 g4?! 20.Rf2 Bxg2 21.Rxg2 [21.Kxg2+/=] 21...Qf7 22.Rb1 Rb8 [22...Kd7=] 23.Rxb8+ Nxb8 24.c4 Nd7 25.c5 Bb8 26.Qb3 Rg6 27.Nc1 Rf6 28.Qb7 Qe7 29.Ba5 Kf7 30.Rb2 h5 31.Bc7 1-0

111 – Brooks 3…b5 4.Bb3 fxe4 The 2010 action movie "Three Kingdoms" tells about fighting factions in China in 228 A.D. (based on "Romance of the Three Kingdoms" by Luo Guangzhong). One wise man advises his troops: "A battle is like chess. Instead of standing pat, playing defensively... you must sacrifice a rook to take a king." I am not sure how a chess rook in China compares to medieval castles of Europe 1000 years later. But the quote works for me. After I sacrifice one rook vs Richard Wade Brooks, my opponent sacrifices two rooks. One can give up too much material. Brooks (1909) - Sawyer (2030), corr USCF 89NS20, 04.03.1991 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f5 3.Bc4 b5 4.Bb3 fxe4 5.Nxe5 Qg5 6.Nf7 [is 6.d4! Qxg2 7.Qh5+ g6 8.Bf7+ Kd8 9.Qg5+ Qxg5 10.Bxg5+ Be7 when White could try 11.h4+/=] 6...Qxg2 7.Rf1 d5 8.Nxh8 Nf6? [8...Bg4!-+ wins] 9.Bxd5? [Giving Black another option. 9.d4 Bg4 10.Qd2=] 9...Bh3! 10.Bf7+ Ke7

11.Qe2 Nc6 12.Qxb5 Rb8 13.Qc4 Rb4 14.Qe2 Nd4 15.Qa6 [White is running out of ways to defend. 15.Bc4 Nxe2 16.Bxe2 Qxh2 17.Nc3 Bxf1 18.Bxf1 Ng4-+] 15...Nxc2+ [15...Qf3!-+] 16.Kd1 Nxa1 17.b3 Qxf1+ [17...Bg4+!-+] 18.Qxf1 Bxf1 0-1

112 – Zilbermints 5.Nxe5 Qg5 Lev Zilbermints won this Latvian Gambit vs diegotristan in the Mayet Attack, Strautins Gambit. I played this same line in postal chess 30 years ago. Back then, chess engines were weak and databases were rare. The better attacker tended to win. Black chases the White king to the queenside for mate. diegotristan (1957) - Zilbermints (2248), Rated Blitz game lichess, 26.07.2018 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f5 3.Bc4 b5!? 4.Bb3 fxe4 5.Nxe5!? [Safer is 5.d3+/-] 5...Qg5 6.d4 Qxg2 7.Rf1 [Correct is 7.Qh5+! g6 8.Bf7+ Kd8 9.Qg5+ Qxg5 10.Bxg5+ Be7 11.h4+/=] 7...d6 [7...Nf6! 8.Bf7+ Ke7 9.Nc3 d6 10.Nd5+ Nxd5 11.Bxd5 dxe5 12.Bxa8 Bh3= This line reminds me of my Sawyer Gambit in the Ruy Lopez after 3...d5!?] 8.Qh5+ g6 9.Bf7+ Kd8 10.Bxg6? [White missed 10.Nxg6! Nc6 11.Nxh8 Nxd4 12.Qg5+!+-] 10...hxg6? [10...dxe5!-/+] 11.Qxh8? [White should first play 11.Bg5+! Be7 12.Qxh8+-] 11...Bh3 12.Qxg8? [12.Nd2=] 12...Qxf1+ 13.Kd2 Qxf2+ 14.Kc3 dxe5 15.Qd5+ Kc8 16.Qxa8 [16.b4 Qxd4+ 17.Qxd4 exd4+ 18.Kb2 a5-+] 16...Qxd4+ 17.Kb3 Be6+ [White resigns. 17...Qb4 mate also works.] 0-1

113 – Regan 6.d4 Qxg2 7.Qh5+ The sharpest attacking line against the Latvian Gambit is the variation 3.Bc4. White plays for an immediate kingside attack. After the normal 3...fxe4 4.Nxe5 d5 5.Qh5+ g6 6.Nxg6 hxg6, White has the choice of 7.Qxh8 or 7.Qxg6+. However, Black has other options. James Regan and I played many postal games. In one game, I tried the Latvian Gambit 3.Bc4 b5 variation. The notes below show how this extra 3...b5 tempo move can make a real difference. Black turns the tables and attacks the White king! Regan - Sawyer, corr USCF, 1989 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f5 3.Bc4 b5 [3...fxe4 4.Nxe5 Qg5 5.d4 Qxg2 6.Qh5+ g6 7.Bf7+ Kd8 8.Bxg6= is playable. The Black king needs to escape, but the Bc8 cannot immediately move out of

the way.] 4.Bb3 fxe4 5.Nxe5 Qg5 6.d4 Qxg2 7.Qh5+ g6 8.Bf7+ Kd8 9.Bxg6? [This is a mistake that allows Black to benefit handsomely from 3...b5!? Correct is to force a queen swap with 9.Qg5+! Qxg5 10.Bxg5+ Be7 11.h4+/=] 9...Qxh1+ 10.Ke2 Ba6 11.Nd2 b4+ 0-1

114 – Santiago 3…fxe4 4.Nxe5 d5 My Latvian Gambit 3.Bc4 fxe4 against Harbey Santiago saw me get open lines for my pieces in exchange for some pawns. When I failed to play 10...c6!? or 11...Kc6!, things got ugly for me. Thus I sacrificed all six of my remaining pawns. When you play risky openings, you have to learn to live with some bad positions. What do you do when way behind in material? Since I was rated over 500 points above my opponent, I kept on playing for months and months and hoping. Our moves in my Golden Knights Postal Tournament were played at a pace of about one move each per week. White had multiple passed pawns. That can be confusing. When his king stayed in the middle, it gave me hope. Gradually I got more and more compensation. It was a miracle that I lasted long enough to find a nice checkmate. This game finished at my peak USCF Postal rating of 2211. I won about six games at that point for which I received zero rating points due to their goofy rating system at the time. Rest assured that as soon as I failed to win games, I definitely lost rating points. It was still fun playing postal chess back before everyone had access to strong chess engine analysis. We were all just on our own. Santiago (1614) - Sawyer (2211), corr USCF 89N189 corr USCF, 18.06.1990 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f5 3.Bc4 [3.Nxe5] 3...fxe4 4.Nxe5 d5 5.Qh5+ g6 6.Nxg6 hxg6 7.Qxg6+ [Black gets active play for the Exchange after 7.Qxh8 Kf7 8.Qd4 Be6 9.Be2 Nc6 10.Qe3 Bh6] 7...Kd7 8.Bxd5 Nf6 9.Nc3 Nxd5 10.Nxd5 Rh6 [10...c6!?=] 11.Qf7+ Kd6? [Now Black is in trouble. It is important to play 11...Kc6 so there is no check from f8. 12.Nxc7 Qxc7 13.Qxf8 Re6=] 12.Nxc7 Nd7?! [This is just ugly. White goes up a rook and four pawns. Somewhat better is 12...Be6 13.Qf4+ Kd7 14.Nxa8+-] 13.Nxa8 Rf6 14.Qc4 b6 15.d3 Ba6 16.Qd4+ Ke7 17.Nxb6!? [This leaves me with a bishop and knight vs six pawns and a rook. Instead, 17.Bg5+- wins] 17...Rxb6 18.dxe4 Qc7 19.c3 [19.Bg5+ Kf7 20.0-0-0+-] 19...Ke8 20.b4 Rd6 21.Bf4 Rxd4 22.Bxc7 Rxe4+ 23.Kd1 Bg7 24.Rc1 Kf7 25.Re1 Rc4 26.Bd8 Bb5 27.Re7+ Kf8 28.Rxg7 Kxg7 29.Kd2 Ne5 30.h3

Re4 31.Bg5? [White finally loses it and allows me win. To avoid collapse he could play 31.Bc7=] 31...Re2+ 32.Kd1 Rxf2 33.Be3 Ba4+ 34.Rc2 Bxc2+ 35.Kc1 Nd3# A pretty checkmate! 0-1

115 – Myers 5.Qh5+ g6 6.Nxg6 hxg6 David Myers played well as White against my Latvian Gambit. You get some correspondence wins when you just keep playing. Myers (1787) - Sawyer (2100), corr APCT 1985 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f5 3.Bc4 fxe4 4.Nxe5 d5 5.Qh5+ g6 6.Nxg6 hxg6 7.Qxg6+ Kd7 8.Bxd5 Nf6 [8...Qf6!? 9.Bxe4 Nc6=] 9.Nc3 Qe7 [9...Nxd5 10.Nxd5 c6 11.Nf6+ Kc7 12.d3 b6 13.Bf4+ Kb7 14.0-0-0 e3 15.fxe3 Be7=] 10.b3!? [10.d3! Qg7 11.Bxe4 Qxg6 12.Bxg6+/=] 10...Rh6 11.Qf7 Qxf7 12.Bxf7 Nc6 13.Bb2 Ke7 [13...Bd6! 14.0-0-0 Ne5 15.Bd5 Nxd5 16.Nxd5 b6-/+] 14.Bc4 Bf5 [14...Be6=/+] 15.0-0-0 Ne5 [15...Rg6=] 16.Be2 Neg4 [16...c6=] 17.Bxg4 Nxg4 18.Rde1 Re6 [18...Rxh2 19.Rxh2 Nxh2 20.Rh1 Ng4=] 19.Nb5= [I forfeited when my membership expired.] 1-0

116 – Blood 5.Qh5+ g6 6.Nxg6 hxg6 I came so close to a great victory in this exciting contest vs John Blood Sr. I boldly played Black in the Latvian Gambit. I chose the 3.Bc4 fxe4 line where I sacrificed the Exchange. When the dust cleared after move 18, the White queen had given up her precious life after capturing both rooks on h8. For the lost queen and knight, White had two rooks and a pawn. In this unbalanced position Black was winning. The game had to be played correctly to win. My unexplainable move 27 blunder threw away the win. Blood (1988) - Sawyer (2032), corr USCF 89NS14, 11.02.1991 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f5 3.Bc4 fxe4 4.Nxe5 d5 5.Qh5+ g6 6.Nxg6 hxg6 7.Qxh8 Kf7 8.Qh7+ [Or 8.Qd4 Be6 9.Be2 Nc6 10.Qe3+/= White's material can be worth more than the tempo or two Black will gain by attacking the White queen.] 8...Bg7 9.Bb3 Be6 10.f3 e3! 11.Ba4 [If 11.dxe3 Nd7 White can get his queen out by sacrificing a piece. 12.Bxd5 Bxd5 13.Qh3=] 11...Nc6? [Houdini likes 11...Nh6!-/+] 12.dxe3 Qg5 13.g3? [13.0-0! Nf6 14.f4 Qg4 15.Qh3+/-] 13...Nh6 14.f4 Qh5 15.f5 gxf5 16.Bb5 Rh8 17.Be2 Qg5 18.Qxh8 Bxh8 19.Na3 Ng4 20.h4 Qe7 21.0-0 Kg6 22.c3 Be5 23.Kg2 d4 24.cxd4 Nxd4 25.exd4 Bd5+ 26.Kh3 Bxg3 27.h5+ Kxh5?? [After 27...Kh7! 28.Kxg3 Qxe2 29.Rxf5 Qg2+ the White king will be mated in a

dozen moves or so.] 28.Rxf5+ Kg6 29.Rg5+ Kf6 30.Bxg4 Qe1 [Better is 30...Qe4 31.Rf5+ Kg7 32.Rxd5 Qxd5 33.Kxg3 Qxd4 34.Bf3+/- when Black has some perpetual check possibilities.] 31.Rxd5 1-0

117 – Smith 7.Qxh8 Kf7 8.Be2 In a tournament I found myself paired vs a guy named "Smith". I didn't think much about it. But this Smith turned out to be one of the best analysts I ever played in 20 years of postal competition. Ten years ago the book "Modern Chess Analysis" by Robin Smith was published by Gambit. It shows "techniques that have revolutionized chess analysis." By then, author Robin Smith was a correspondence chess grandmaster and twice US Correspondence Champion. His ICCF reached 2642. This book covers in great detail how to get the most out of computer analysis. In ICCF play, everyone can turn to their favorite chess engine. So how does Robin Smith keep finishing at the top? He demonstrates various methods of analysis, the proper use of multiple chess engines, how to benefit from database use, what statistics to believe and what to doubt. Smith covers openings, middlegames and endgames. In conclusion Robin Smith wrote in 2004: "Regardless of how many advances are made in the next decade or so, and what program weaknesses are or are not solved, I believe that it is clear that the human-computer partnership will continue to be far more powerful for analysis then either could ever be alone. The techniques outlined in this book will continue to play a role for the chess analyst for the foreseeable future." When I played Robin Smith in a Latvian Gambit game, I did not know what I was up against. It turned out that he became a far stronger player than I had imagined, to his credit. We played in the 10th United States Correspondence Chess Championship. It did not take a computer to win this game. I chose a risky line that worked vs weaker folks. Robin Smith was a good player who remained wide awake to my mistake on move 17. Smith - Sawyer, corr USCCC 10P05, 1990 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f5 3.Bc4 fxe4 [Many times I played 3...b5!?] 4.Nxe5 d5 5.Qh5+ g6 6.Nxg6 hxg6 [Or 6...Nf6 7.Qe5+ Be7 8.Bb5+ c6 9.Nxe7 Qxe7 10.Qxe7+ Kxe7 11.Be2]

7.Qxh8 [Or 7.Qxg6+ Kd7 8.Bxd5 Nf6 9.Nc3 Qe7] 7...Kf7 8.Be2 [8.Qd4] 8...Bg7 9.Qh7 Nc6 10.0-0 Nd4 11.Bd1 Be6 12.d3 Nf6 13.Qh4 Nf5 14.Qh3 Nd4 15.Qe3 Nf5 16.Qe1 Qd6 17.dxe4 Rh8? [17...Nxe4 18.Nd2+/-] 18.e5 1-0

3.Nxe5 The knight takes the pawn and opens up the threat of 4.Qh5+ which Black must defend.

118 – hawkstorm 3…Nc6 4.Nxc6 I do not know what a "hawkstorm" is, but I remember driving across Kansas toward Colorado. A huge line of ominous dark clouds creeping toward us from 40 miles away. It was a hawkeye storm of great proportions. I expected to see Dorothy from the “Wizard of Oz” to go sailing by at any moment. After 15 minutes or so, the worst of it had passed. The next day was beautiful. Months later we kept finding small pieces of Kansas wheat or chaff in various places throughout our car. Below is a blitz game where I lost as White very quickly vs "hawkstorm". I was higher rated and overconfident; I just grabbed every pawn he offered. The next thing I knew, the winds were blowing hard in my face and his army was raining down upon me. Nice game. Sawyer - hawkstorm, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 24.06.2012 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f5 3.Nxe5 Nc6 4.Nxc6 dxc6 5.exf5 [5.Nc3!+/-] 5...Bxf5 6.Bc4 [6.Nc3 Nf6 7.d3+=] 6...Nf6 7.Qe2+ Be7 8.0-0 Nd5 9.d3 0-0 10.Bxd5+ cxd5 11.Nd2 Bd6 12.h3 Qd7 13.Nf3? Bxh3 14.gxh3 Qxh3 15.Ng5 Qh2 mate 0-1

119 – Livingston 3…Qf6 4.exf5 Sheldon Livingston was rated 1000 points below me. My win was to be expected. Mr. Livingston captured both my Latvian pawns, but he dropped a knight. The game lasted only 10 more moves. On November 10, 1871 the journalist and explorer Henry Morton Stanley found in Africa the famous missionary and explorer David Livingstone. Stanley is reported to have said, "Doctor Livingstone, I presume." Both lived different and very fascinating lives. They can be admired most for what they accomplished. I thought of their meeting when I played Sheldon Livingston. Livingston (1123) - Sawyer (2183), corr USCF 89N214 21.03.1990 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f5 3.Nxe5 Qf6 4.exf5? [White drops a knight for the pawn.

Better is 4.Nc4 or 4.d4.] 4...Qxe5+ 5.Qe2 Qxe2+ 6.Bxe2 d5 7.0-0 Bxf5 8.Re1 Be7 9.Nc3 c6 10.a4 Nd7 11.a5 Ngf6 12.Ra4 Bxc2 13.Rd4 0-0 14.Bd3 Bc5 0-1

120 – Alden 3…Qf6 4.Nf3 fxe4 Here is a game from a tournament played March 31, 1990 on the campus of Penn State University in State College, Pennsylvania. It was spring in a beautiful setting. They were about done getting snow. The grass is beginning to grow. In my spare time I wrote my first book on the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit which I played as White. As Black I played the Dutch Defence vs anything other than 1.e4 and the Latvian Gambit in the Open Game after 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f5. The Latvian Gambit served me pretty well throughout the 1980s and 1990s. I won about 30 games out of 50 attempts plus maybe three draws. The wins were wild and crazy. The losses tended to be short and catastrophic as more analysis got published on this opening. I was mostly a postal chess player, but this game was played at a live tournament. Correspondence players called face to face chess by the term “OTB”. That stands for Over The Board, (not Off Track Betting which is another popular use for OTB). My opponent in this game was Rich Alden. I’ve wondered if he is related to the famous John Alden from the pilgrim Mayflower ship in 1620. This chess game was the only time Rich Alden and I played. The time controls were fast enough to play all four rounds easily in about eight hours. Fast play in a sharp style leads to blunders on both sides that can be quite entertaining. Alden (1730) - Sawyer, State College, PA 1990 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f5 [Latvian Gambit] 3.Nxe5 Qf6 4.Nf3?! [This move implied that White had reached a position that he did not know. Correct moves are 4.d4 or 4.Nc4 both favoring White according to theory in 2011.] 4...fxe4 5.Qe2 d5? [5...Qe7=] 6.d3 Bf5 7.dxe4 dxe4 8.Nfd2!? Qe6 [8...Nc6=] 9.Nc4? [9.Qb5+ Nc6=] 9...Nc6 10.Be3 0-0-0 11.Nbd2 Nf6 12.h3 Bb4 13.g4 Nxg4?? [Instantly going from better to worse. Simply 13...Bg6 is good. 14.0-0-0 h5-/+] 14.c3?? [Instantly going from better to worse. Boldly accepting the sacrifice nets White an extra piece after 14.hxg4! Bxg4 15.Qxg4 Qxg4

16.Bh3!+- pinning and winning the queen.] 14...Nxe3 15.Qxe3 Be7 16.Bg2 Rhe8 17.0-0-0 Kb8?! [17...Rd3!-+] 18.Kb1 h6 19.Qe2? e3+ 20.Ka1 exd2 21.Qxe6 Bxe6 22.Bxc6 bxc6 23.Na5? Bd5 24.Rhg1 Bf3 25.Rxg7? Bxd1 26.Nxc6+ Kb7 27.Nxe7? Bc2 White resigns 0-1

3.Nxe5 Qf6 4.Nc4 White immediately saves his knight with the retreat 4.Nc4.

121 – Sawyer 4…b5 5.Ne3 The Latvian Gambit slightly favors White. The gambit player is standing at the bottom of a hill in a fight. I had fun playing weaker players, but I did not do well with it vs rated higher opponents. I drew a couple notable players, and won a few games, but I lost many games with this gambit. Here is an example of me playing for a winning endgame with the extra material as White. Sawyer (2078) - challanger100 (1932), ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 10.11.2012 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f5 3.Nxe5 Qf6 4.Nc4 b5 [4...fxe4 5.Nc3+/-] 5.Ne3 fxe4 6.Nc3 c6 7.Nxe4 Qe7 8.Ng3 d5 9.Qe2 [9.d4+-] 9...Nf6 10.Nef5 Bxf5 11.Nxf5 Qxe2+ 12.Bxe2 g6 13.Ne3 Bd6 14.0-0 0-0 15.Ng4 Nbd7 16.Nxf6+ Nxf6 17.d3 Rae8 18.Bf3 Nd7 19.Bh6 Rf7 20.Rfe1 Rfe7 21.Kf1 Ne5 22.Bg5 Re6 23.Be2 d4 24.Bh4 Kg7 25.Bg3 Nf7 26.Bxd6 Nxd6 27.Bg4 Rxe1+ 28.Rxe1 Rxe1+ 29.Kxe1 c5 30.f4 Kf6 31.Kf2 c4 32.g3 a5 33.Be2 c3 34.bxc3 dxc3 35.Ke3 Nf5+ 36.Ke4 Ke6? [36...b4 37.g4 Nd6+ 38.Kd5+-] 37.Bg4 b4 38.Bxf5+ gxf5+ 39.Kd4 Kd6 40.h3 h6? 41.g4 fxg4 42.hxg4 Ke6? 43.Kc4 Kd6 44.Kb5 Kd5 45.Kxa5 Kd4? 46.Kxb4 Black resigns 1-0

122 – Zilbermints 4…fxe4 5.Ne3 Lev Zilbermints wrote: "I decided to play a gambit that he could not refuse -- the Greco Counter Gambit, a.k.a. Latvian Gambit!!" After 4.Nc4, White gave Black time to execute a successful king hunt and mate. I wrote the notes to Lev's game below. FirstAndrexo (2069) - Zilbermints (2165), Rated Blitz lichess, 14.07.2018 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f5 3.Nxe5 Qf6 4.Nc4 fxe4 5.Ne3 [5.Nc3] 5...c6 6.c4!? [6.d3+/=] 6...Qf7 7.Nc3 Nf6 8.Qc2 d5!? [8...Be7] 9.cxd5 cxd5?! 10.Nb5? [10.Ncxd5!+-] 10...Nc6 11.d3 a6 12.Qa4 Rb8 13.Na3 Bb4+ 14.Bd2 Bxd2+ 15.Kxd2 0-0 [15...d4!-+] 16.Be2 [16.Re1 d4 17.Nd1 b5-+] 16...exd3 17.Bf3 Ne4+ 18.Bxe4? [18.Kc1 b5 19.Qd1 Nxf2-+] 18...Qxf2+

19.Kxd3 [19.Kd1 Qe2+ 20.Kc1 Qxe3+ 21.Kb1 Qxe4-+] 19...dxe4+ 20.Qxe4 Rd8+ 21.Kc3 Qd2+ 22.Kb3 Rd3+ 23.Ka4 b5+ 24.Nxb5 axb5 mate Black wins by checkmate. 0-1

123 – Mirabile 5.Nc3 Qf7 The year 1993 was my 5th straight year of playing frisky and risky gambits. As I won more postal chess games, I kept getting paired with other winners. I faced ever increasing competition. As White I played some of the most beautiful chess games in my life. As Black, it was sweet and sour sauce. Tim Mirabile was a very good player in his own right. My Latvian Gambit got only the sour flavor. In the "heads I win, tails I lose", there were too many tales from the dark side. If this had been on Halloween, the Tim with Black got tricked and the Tim with White got treated. Mirabile - Sawyer, corr USCF 1993 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f5 3.Nxe5 Qf6 4.Nc4 fxe4 5.Nc3 Qf7 6.d4 Bb4 [6...Nf6 7.Bg5 Bb4 8.Ne5 Qe7 9.Be2+/=] 7.Bd2!? [7.Ne5!+/-] 7...Nf6? [This is the most popular move, but better is 7...Bxc3 8.Bxc3 Nf6 9.Be2 0-0 10.0-0+/=] 8.Nb5! Bxd2+ 9.Qxd2 Kd8 10.Be2 a6? [Black has to play 10...d6 first, and then 11.Ne3 a6 12.Nc3 Re8 although White stands much better after 13.0-0+/-] 11.Nxc7 1-0

124 – Borbash 6.d4 Bb4 7.Be2 Gambit players must play the openings accurately, especially with Black. In my 1989 USCF Golden Knights Postal Semi-Finals game against Steve Borbash I tried a line in the Latvian Gambit variation that gave White too many chances. Back in 1991 I had a hard time evaluating this gambit. Modern chess engines make it easier to see that 6...Nf6! allows White only a slight edge, but White was just better after my 6...Bb4. Mr. Borbash caught my tactical slip on move 16 and punished me immediately. Postal games involved commitment for a year. Some opponents withdrew. Sometimes I did. In the notes Gerald Sojka withdrew. Borbash (1936) - Sawyer (2043), corr USCF 89NS20, 1991 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f5 3.Nxe5 Qf6 4.Nc4 fxe4 5.Nc3 Qf7 6.d4 Bb4 [6...Nf6!] 7.Be2 [7.Ne5! Qf5 8.Bc4 Ne7 9.0-0+-] 7...Nf6 [After 7...Nf6 another game ended 0-1 by forfeit in Sojka (1777) - Sawyer (2038), corr USCF 89NS48, 1990] 8.0-0 d5 9.Ne5 Qe7 10.Bg5 c6 [Another idea is 10...Bxc3 11.bxc3 0-0+/=

material is even, but White's pieces have a little more scope.] 11.f3 exf3 12.Bxf3 0-0 13.Qd3 Be6 14.Rae1 Nbd7 15.Re2 Rae8 16.Rfe1 Qd8? [16...Bxc3 17.bxc3 Qd6 18.Bf4+/=] 17.Nxc6 1-0

125 – Marfia 6.d4 Bb4 7.Ne5 A Latvian Gambit fills the heart of chess players with excitement and anticipation, or fear and dread. In November 1985 a book was released entitled “The Latvian Gambit: Encyclopedic Games Collection” by Kon Grivainis, a noted chess master. There was snow on the ground when I ordered a copy of this book. I entered a postal chess section for that winter. Boldly I sent off to Jim Marfia my second move 2...f5!? He was a long time 1.e4 player, so I planned to surprise him with this gambit! Then I got the beautiful book I’d ordered. Published by Thinkers' Press. Edited by Robert B. Long. Translated by Jim Marfia! What? Are you kidding me? My opponent had translated the book that I was using. Ugh! I was the one who got surprised! We played a sharp variation. Both threatened to win, but we missed our best shots. Then we repeated moves. Later James Marfia told me that all he had translated were the words at the beginning of the book, like the Forward. All the moves were in algebraic notation and needed no translation. Jim Marfia may be most famous for his Dover translation of the David Bronstein classic book on the Zurich 1953 tournament. Marfia - Sawyer, corr APCT 1986 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f5 3.Nxe5 Qf6 4.Nc4 fxe4 5.Nc3 Qf7 6.d4 Bb4 [6...Nf6 7.Be2+/=] 7.Ne5 Qe6 8.Bd2 [8.Qh5+ g6 9.Nxg6 Nf6 10.Qh4 Rg8 11.Nf4+/-] 8...Bxc3 [8...Nf6 9.Nb5 Bxd2+ 10.Qxd2 Na6=] 9.bxc3 Nf6 10.Bc4 d5 11.Bb3 Nc6 12.Bf4 0-0 13.00 Kh8 [13...Na5=] 14.c4 Ne7 [14...Nxe5 15.dxe5 dxc4 16.exf6 Qxf6 17.Bxc7 cxb3 18.axb3+/=] 15.cxd5 Nexd5 16.Bg5 [16.f3 exf3 17.Qxf3+/-] 16...Qf5 17.Bxf6 [17.Qd2+/-] 17...gxf6 18.Bxd5 fxe5 19.Qe2 exd4 20.Bxe4 Qf6 21.Bd3 [21.Qd3+/=] 21...h6 [21...Bf5=] 22.Rab1 Rb8 23.f4 b6 24.Rf3 [24.Rbe1+/=] 24...c5 [24...Bg4=] 25.f5 Bb7 26.Rbf1? [26.Rg3 Rg8=] 26...Bxf3 [Black is winning after 26...Rbe8! 27.Qd1 Bxf3 28.Rxf3 Re3-+. Kevin Sheldrick noted that I had earlier listed the moves as

26...Be4? 27.Qxe4. That has been corrected. Here the game is accurate.] 27.Qxf3 Rbe8 28.Qf4 Qg5 29.Qd6 Qf6 30.Qf4 Qg5 31.Qd6 1/2-1/2

3.Nxe5 Qf6 4.d4 White protects his advanced knight with 4.d4.

126 – Dowd 4…d6 5.Nc4 fxe4 In the olden days of postal chess, games did not last minutes or hours but rather months and years. This means one could start an event only to find later that life gets in the way. When this occurred, a good player would officially withdraw from the event. Withdrawals were usually done without rating penalty, pending adjudications of any lost positions the player who withdrew had. A bad player would simply disappear. The rest of the opponents had to send repeat postcards and then win on time. I withdrew from an ICCF thematic Blackmar-Diemer Gambit tournament (preliminary group 6). It began November 15, 2006. Soon after I received my pairing assignments, I realized that I had too much going on in my life right then in 2006. I may have made one or two moves in games, but I withdrew quickly. Thus I scored 0 out of 10 games. Some people were surprised to see that I scored zero in a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit event. Yup. In my Latvian Gambit game below, I get outplayed by Mr. Dowd. I stand worse by move 15 due to my weak d5 pawn and lack of queenside development. Steven Dowd officially withdrew from the tournament like a good player should do when necessary. I got a tournament game win, probably without gaining rating points. I do not remember details. Dowd (2091) - Sawyer (2129), corr USCF 88NS3 24.07.1989 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f5 3.Nxe5 Qf6 4.d4 d6 5.Nc4 fxe4 6.Be2 d5 [Better is 6...Qd8 7.0-0 Nf6 Black has chances after 8.Bg5 Be7 9.Ne3 0-0 10.Nc3 Nbd7 11.Bc4+ Kh8 12.f3 exf3 13.Qxf3 c5!=] 7.Ne3 c6 8.c4! [White aims at Black's pawn center, which will be difficult to hold together.] 8...Bb4+ 9.Nc3 Ne7 10.0-0 Bxc3 [Black is in trouble. Also not good enough is

10...0-0 11.Qb3 Bxc3 12.bxc3+-] 11.bxc3 0-0 12.f3 Qe6 13.fxe4 Qxe4 14.Bf3 Qe6 15.cxd5 cxd5 [+/-. My opponent withdrew.] 0-1

127 – Nigen 6.Ne3 Nc6 7.Bb5 It’s great when a gambit wins outright in the opening. Sometimes you have to work out the win in the middlegame. When all your middlegame effort fails to win, you still may get enough pressure to gain an advantage in the endgame. That happened here. My Latvian Gambit game was played in the 1989 USCF Golden Knights Postal Chess Tournament. My opponent was Lee Nigen. We castled opposite sides. We moved back and forth like a chess game. Slow and steady, I turned the balance of the game to Black's favor. Eventually I won the endgame. Nigen (1617) - Sawyer (2019), corr USCF 89N286, 28.12.1990 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f5 3.Nxe5 Qf6 4.d4 d6 5.Nc4 fxe4 6.Ne3 [One powerful way to play as White is 6.Nc3 Qg6 7.f3 exf3 8.Qxf3 Nc6 9.Bd3 Qg4 10.Qe3+ Be7 11.0-0 Nf6 12.d5 Nb4 13.Rf4 Qd7 14.Bf5+/-] 6...Nc6 7.Bb5 Bd7 8.c3 Qg6 9.0-0 Nf6 10.Nd2 d5 11.Qb3 [11.f3!?] 11...a6 12.Bxc6 Bxc6 13.c4 0-0-0 14.f3 exf3 15.Nxf3 Bd6 16.cxd5 Nxd5 17.Nxd5 Bxd5 18.Qe3 Rdf8 [Even better is 18...Rde8!-+] 19.Qg5 Bxf3 20.Qxg6 hxg6 21.Rxf3 Rxf3 22.gxf3 Rxh2 23.b3 Rc2 24.Kf1 Bb4 25.Bf4 Bc3 26.Rd1 Rxa2 27.Be5 Ra1 28.Rxa1 Bxa1 29.Bxg7 c5 30.Ke2 Bxd4 31.Bxd4 [White could last longer with 31.Bh6 Kd7 32.Kd3 Kc6-+] 31...cxd4 32.Kd3 Kd7 33.Kxd4 Kd6 34.b4 b6 0-1

128 – Probasco 6.Ne3 Nc6 7.d5 I wasn’t the only one throwing punches in my chess games. My opponents hit back. A few of their punches landed square on my nose. Here Robert Probasco started pushing his f-pawn. That pesky pawn poised problems for my position. It looked like I would lose maybe two pawns when he played 16.f6! I knew I had several wins coming in other games. Against Probasco, it wasn’t looking good. A loss now would give me more rating points when I won others. Thus I did not drag out this game. He played well.

Probasco (2135) - Sawyer (2042), corr USCF 89N214 1990 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f5 3.Nxe5 Qf6 4.d4 d6 5.Nc4 fxe4 6.Ne3 Nc6 7.d5 Ne5 8.Be2 Qf7 9.Nd2 Nf6 10.0-0 Be7 11.f3 Nxd5 12.Nxe4 Nxe3 [12...Nf4=] 13.Bxe3 h6? [Better is 13...Bf5 14.Ng3 Bd7 15.f4 Nc6 16.c3 0-0-0=] 14.f4 Nc6 [14...Nc4 15.Bd4+/-] 15.f5 0-0 16.f6! 1-0

129 – Sawyer 6.Nc3 Qg6 7.f3 Below I faced a rare Latvian Gambit. “Chess Openings Essentials notes”: "This is sometimes called the Greco Counter-Gambit, after the Calabrian Gioacchino Greco, who analyzed a variety of lines in the early part of the 17th century. It was later revived by the Latvian Karl Behting, who studied it at the beginning of the 20th century." Most Latvian Gambits in my chess career were with me playing Black. Now and then I find myself on the White side. I prefer the main line 3.Ne5. After the normal 3...Qf6, it was decision time: 4.d4 or 4.Nc4. Previously, I have chosen 4.Nc4! This day I chose the move 4.d4. I got the normal White advantage. In the speed of a three minute game, I missed a few good shots. Eventually, I came up with a good time to play the winning move Nf5. Sawyer - kwiz, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 09.06.2012 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f5 3.Nxe5 Qf6 4.d4 [Previously I played 4.Nc4 fxe4 5.Nc3 Qf7 6.Ne3+/-] 4...d6 5.Nc4 fxe4 6.Nc3 Qg6 7.f3 Nf6 [Usually Black plays 7...exf3 8.Qxf3 Nc6 9.Bd3 Qg4 10.Qe3+!+/-] 8.Ne3 c6 [8...Be7 9.Bc4] 9.d5 [9.fxe4!+/-] 9...Be7 10.Be2 0-0 11.0-0 Bf5 12.fxe4 Bxe4 13.Nxe4 Nxe4 14.Bd3 [14.Rxf8+!+/-] 14...Rxf1+ [14...Nd7!=] 15.Qxf1 Nd7 16.Qf3 [16.Nf5!+-] 16...Ndf6 17.b3?! [Again 17.Nf5+-] 17...Ng5?! 18.Qe2?! Qe8? 19.dxc6 bxc6 20.Nf5 [Finally I play the move! Black resigns] 1-0

130 – Heap 6.Nc3 Qg6 7.f3 exf3 David Heap met my Latvian Gambit with bold aggression. White grabbed the initiative. I fought back and got a good game. But I made one slip and David Heap came crashing through to win. Heap (2237) - Sawyer (1950), corr APCT 1986 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f5 3.Nxe5 Qf6 4.d4 d6 5.Nc4 fxe4 6.Nc3 Qg6 7.f3 exf3 8.Qxf3 Nc6 9.Bd3 Qg4 10.Qe3+ Be7 11.d5!? [11.0-0 Nf6 12.d5 Nb4 13.Rf4+/-] 11...Nb4 12.0-0 Nxd3 13.Qxd3 [13.cxd3+/-] 13...Bd7 14.Bd2 0-0-0 15.Rf4 Qh5 [15...Qg6=] 16.Qd4 b6 17.a4 Bf6 18.Qd3 Ne7 19.a5 Bf5? [19...b5!

20.Nb6+ axb6 21.axb6 cxb6 22.Nxb5 Bxb5 23.Qxb5 Qxd5 24.Rc4+ Kb8 25.Qxb6+ Qb7 26.Ra6 Rd7 27.Qa5 Bd4+ 28.Rxd4 Nc6 29.Rxc6 Qxc6=] 20.Nxb6+! 1-0

131 – Fischer 6.Nc3 Qg6 7.Ne3 Bobby Fischer lost a tournament game to the Latvian Gambit. That amazed me, but there is more to the story. The game was played at the 1955 U.S. Junior Championship in Lincoln, Nebraska. Viktors Pupols was 20 and Fischer was 12. This was before Fischer won eight US Championships. Bobby's time was devoted to long hours of detailed opening study. The day Fischer was to play Pupols in the evening, they were all together in the home of Aleks Liepnieks. The older guys played poker. When Pupols dropped out of a poker game, he played blitz vs Fischer, beating Bobby repeatedly with the Latvian. Viktors told him that he would play the Latvian that night vs Bobby in their tournament game. Fischer did not believe him and continued to study the Ruy Lopez and Giuoco Piano all day long. In the Larry Parr book Viktors Pupols: American Master, we read that Viktors Pupols said, "Bobby lost more Latvian Gambits that afternoon than in all the rest of his life!" Fischer - Pupols, USA-chJ, 1955 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f5 3.Nxe5 Qf6 4.d4 d6 5.Nc4 fxe4 6.Nc3 Qg6 7.Ne3 Nf6 8.Bc4 [A critical line is 8.Be2 c6 9.00 Be7 10.f3+/-] 8...c6 9.d5 Be7 10.a4 Nbd7 11.a5 Ne5 12.Be2 0-0 13.0-0 Bd7 14.Kh1 Kh8 15.Nc4 Nfg4 16.Qe1 [16.Nxe5=] 16...Rf7? [Fischer missed the winning line 16...Nf3!-+] 17.h3 Nf6 18.Nxe5 dxe5 19.Bc4 Rff8 20.Be3? [20.dxc6 Bxc6 21.Be3= Stockfish, Rybka, Fritz] 20...Nh5 [20...cxd5!-+] 21.Kh2 Bd6 22.Bb3 Nf4 23.Bxf4? [23.Rg1=] 23...exf4 24.Qxe4? [24.f3 Rae8-/+] 24...f3+ 25.g3 Bf5? [25...Qh5!-+] 26.Qh4 Rae8 27.Rae1 Be5 28.Qb4 Qh6 29.h4 g5 [At various points Black had a mating attack with 29...Bxg3+! 30.fxg3 Qd2+ 31.Ne2 Rxe2+ 32.Kg1 Rg2+ 33.Kh1 Rh2+ 34.Kg1 Qg2#] 30.Rh1 gxh4 31.Kg1 h3 32.dxc6 bxc6 33.Qc5 Qg7 [Again 33...Bxg3!-+] 34.Kh2 Qf6 [34...Bd4!-+] 35.Qxa7 Bd4 36.Qc7 Bxf2 37.Rxe8 Rxe8 38.Rf1 Bd4 39.Rxf3? [39.Qf4!=] 39...Bxc3 [39...Bg1+!-+]

40.bxc3 Re2+ 41.Kh1 Be4 42.Qc8+ Kg7 43.Qg4+ Qg6 44.Qd7+? [The only way to avoid immediate loss is 44.Qf4! but as Lev Zilbermints pointed out, Black is still better after 44…Bxf3-/+. White may survive a bishop and pawn vs rook ending.] 44...Kh6-+ White lost on time. 0-1

132 – Koval 6.Nc3 Qg6 7.Ne3 How do you avoid one move blunders? You must consider how your intended move will change the position. Keith Koval played a very good game against my Latvian Gambit despite the fact that he had a lower rating. From move 8 onward, White was probably on his own. For the next eight moves Keith continued to play well. But White dropped the Exchange with 17.Nf1? He resigned soon after. White missed that his move changed the position significantly by leaving g4 unguarded. Koval (1437) - Sawyer (2107), corr USCF 89N278, 13.08.1990 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f5 3.Nxe5 Qf6 4.d4 d6 5.Nc4 fxe4 6.Nc3 Qg6 7.Ne3 Nf6 8.Ned5 [8.Be2!?] 8...Nxd5 9.Nxd5 Qf7 10.Bc4 c6 11.Ne3 [11.Nb6!? d5 12.Nxa8 dxc4=] 11...d5 12.Bb3!? [Up to here White has played well. Probably best is 12.Be2=] 12...Bd6 13.0-0 Nd7? [I should have castled 13...0-0=] 14.f3 [14.c4!+/=] 14...exf3 15.Rxf3 Nf6 16.Qe2 [16.c4+/=] 16...0-0 17.Nf1? [The brilliant move 17.Nc4!= attacking the bishop on d6 works because the knight cannot be captured without Black suffering along the a2-g8 diagonal.] 17...Bg4 18.Rxf6 [Or 18.Bd2 Bxf3 19.Qxf3 Rae8-+] 18...Qxf6 19.Qe1 Qxd4+ 20.Kh1 Rae8 0-1

133 – Mrofka 6.Nc3 Qg6 7.Ne3 At the time this game was played I had a USCF Postal Master rating of 2211. My opponent Ray Mrofka was an average level player rated 1572. We met in the 1989 USCF Golden Knight Postal Tournament. This was an open event where players were routinely paired off in groups of seven to form a section. Players were assigned 3 Whites and 3 Blacks vs their six opponents. Mrofka did not make any mistakes in the opening. We castled on move 13 and started pushing pawns and pieces. Unfortunately for White he got his bishops loose and dropped one of them. Mrofka (1572) - Sawyer (2211), corr USCF 89N215 16.07.1990 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f5 3.Nxe5 Qf6 4.d4 d6 5.Nc4 fxe4 6.Nc3 Qg6 7.Ne3 Nf6 8.Ned5 [8.Be2+/=] 8...Nxd5 9.Nxd5 Qf7 10.Bc4 c6 11.Ne3 d5 12.Bb3 Bd6 13.0-0 0-0 14.c4 Be6 15.f3 Qh5 16.f4? [16.h3=] 16...Qxd1 17.Nxd1 [Or

17.Rxd1 Bxf4=/+] 17...dxc4 18.Bc2 Nd7 19.Bxe4 Nf6 20.Bc2 Nd5 21.f5 Bd7 22.Nc3 Rae8 23.Nxd5 cxd5 24.Bd2 Re2 25.Bc3? [White throws away a bishop and the game. 25.Rad1 h6-/+] 25...Rxc2 0-1

134 – Aronoff 6.Nc3 Qg6 7.Bf4 In 2011 the east coast of the USA was hit by a big rain storm called Hurricane Irene. It reminded me of another Irene from 20 years ago. In 1990 I got paired to compete against Irene Aronoff. She was one of the stronger female masters in America. We met in the United States Correspondence Chess Championship which was a postal tournament. Thus we were playing at a pace of about one move per week. Irene was no wimpy little girl who would easily lose to most men. In fact Irene Aronoff was one of the best correspondence players in the USA, man or woman, at the peak of her playing skill. In 1985 she had won the USCF Golden Squires Tournament. Aronoff was the best female opponent I faced in correspondence play. My record vs females is about the same as vs males; it is just that I played a lot more guys. As always, I win a lot vs weaker players and not so much vs stronger ones. Irene Aronoff also played in over-the-board tournaments. When she stopped playing over 20 years ago, she was rated 2255. Irene Aronoff is a USCF Master; she also earned a Women's FIDE Master Title. From 1984-1991 I played the Latvian Gambit several times per year with mixed results. I had some good wins and draws, and several disgusting losses. A few losses made their way into Tony Kosten books on the Latvian Gambit. This game stayed level throughout. At one point I had a chance to open the position up and dare her to attack me. I decided to play it safe and draw. Aronoff - Sawyer, corr USCCC 10P05 corr USCCC, 30.08.1990 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f5 3.Nxe5 Qf6 4.d4 d6 5.Nc4 fxe4 6.Nc3 Qg6 7.Bf4 [Some like 7.f3 or 7.Ne3] 7…Nf6 8.Ne3 Be7 9.Bc4 c6 10.d5 Nh5 11.Bg3 Nxg3 12.hxg3 Nd7 13.Qd4 Nf6 14.0-0-0 c5! 15.Bb5+ Kf7 16.Qd2 a6 17.Be2 b5 18.Rdf1 [18.Rh4!?] 18...Rf8 19.f3 Qxg3 20.Ng4 [20.fxe4 Kg8=] 20...Kg8 [Playing it safe. 20...Bxg4! 21.fxg4 Kg8 22.Rh3 Qxg2 23.Rfh1 Nxg4 24.Nxe4 Qxe4 25.Bd3 Qe5 26.Bxh7+ Kf7-+] 21.Nxf6+ Bxf6 22.Nxe4 Qe5 23.Nxf6+ Qxf6 24.Bd3 Bf5 25.Re1 Qd4 26.Be4 Qxd2+ 27.Kxd2 Bxe4 28.fxe4 Rf2+ 29.Re2 Raf8 30.Ke3 Rxe2+ 31.Kxe2 h6 32.Ke3 Rf6 33.Rd1 Kf7 34.a4 Rg6 1/2-1/2

135 – Pipitone 6.Nc3 Qg6 7.Bf4 One of me early Latvian Gambit attempts came in postal chess against the ICCF player Antonio Pipitone from Italy. We took turns gaining the advantage before we agreed to a draw. Pipitone - Sawyer, corr ICCF 1985 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f5 3.Nxe5 Qf6 4.d4 d6 5.Nc4 fxe4 6.Nc3 Qg6 7.Bf4 Nf6 8.Ne3 Be7 9.Qd2 [9.Be2 0-0 10.0-0+/=] 9...c6 10.Be2 [10.d5 Nh5 11.Bg3+/=] 10...d5 11.0-0 0-0 12.f3 exf3 [12...Be6 13.fxe4 Nxe4 14.Nxe4 dxe4 15.d5+/=] 13.Bxf3 Ng4 14.Be2 Nxe3 15.Qxe3 Bd6 16.Bxd6 [16.Bh5! Bxf4 17.Rxf4+-] 16...Qxd6 17.Rxf8+ Qxf8 18.Rf1 Qd8 19.Ne4 [19.Bh5 Na6 20.Bf7+ Kh8 21.Qe5+-] 19...dxe4 20.Bc4+ Kh8 21.Qg5 [21.Rf7+/=] 21...Qxd4+ 22.Kh1 Bf5 23.Qxf5 Nd7 24.Qe6 Nf6 [24...Nc5=/+] 25.c3 Qd8 26.g4 h6 27.Rf4 [27.a4=] 27...Qd1+ [27...Qc7 28.Rf1 Re8-/+] 28.Rf1 Qd8 1/2-1/2

136 – Todd 6.Nc3 Qg6 7.Bf4 The main line Latvian Gambit leads to a position where White pieces stand very well, but Black regains the gambit pawn. Furthermore, the slightest White inaccuracy allows Black an aggressive unbalanced position where chances are roughly equal. Below is my game vs TE Todd played in the 1989 USCF Golden Knights Postal Chess Tournament. I got a great position as Black. I held the advantage for about 10 moves. Houdini says I stood much better. Then I carelessly blundered a piece to a combination on move 33. Ugh! My opponent TE Todd jumped at the chance to punish my tactical error. Nice shot. Todd (2330) - Sawyer (2053), corr USCF 89N280, 09.11.1989 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f5 3.Nxe5 Qf6 4.d4 d6 5.Nc4 fxe4 6.Nc3 Qg6 7.Bf4 Nf6 8.Ne3 Be7 9.Bc4 c6 10.d5 Nh5 11.Bg3 Nxg3 12.hxg3 Nd7 13.Be2 0-0 14.dxc6 bxc6 15.Bc4+ Kh8 16.Ne2 Nb6 17.Nf4 Qe8 18.Be2 Kg8 19.Bc4+ [19.a4 g5=] 19...Nxc4 20.Nxc4 d5 21.Ne3 Qf7 22.Qh5 [22.0-0 Bc5-/+] 22...Qxh5 23.Rxh5 Rb8 24.0-0-0 g5 25.Ne2 Rxf2 26.Nd4 Bf6 27.b3 [27.Nxc6 Bxb2+ 28.Kb1 Rb7 29.Na5 Bd4+ 30.Nxb7 Bxe3 31.Rdh1 Bf5-+] 27...Bd7 [27...c5!-+] 28.g4 c5 29.Ndf5 d4 30.Nd5 Bxf5 31.gxf5 Kg7 32.g4 Rg2

[32...Rh8 33.Nc7 h6-/+] 33.Rd2 Rxg4? [33...Rg1+ 34.Rd1 Rxd1+ 35.Kxd1 Bd8-/+] 34.Rxh7+ 1-0

Book 1: Chapter 6 – Philidor Defence 2.Nf3 d6 This natural defence of e5 is known as the Philidor Defence.

137 – Zintgraff 3.Bc4 h6 4.d4 My Philidor Playbook for White covers 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 against the Philidor Defence 2...d6, Elephant Gambit 2...d5, Latvian Gambit 2...f5, Damiano Defence 2...f6, Gunderam 2...Qe7, and Busch-Gass Gambit 2...Bc5. I must admit an occasional weakness for the Elephant Gambit and Latvian Gambit as Black, but in my saner moments, I prefer White. The Philidor 2.Nf3 Playbook gives a step by step guide to the 200 most important positions when Black does not play 2...Nf6 or 2...Nc6. Gary Zintgraff played a Bishop's Opening that turned into a Philidor Defense. He wrote: "Here is a blitz game on ICC where my opponent had been bragging that he could beat anyone with his Philidor Defense and was ready to give lessons. I had to wait through several of his games to challenge him. I like to play the Morphy attack usually but started off with the Bishop's Opening in hopes of getting a weak move from him and then transposing into a Morphy attack. That's sort of what happened!" Zintgraff - NN, Internet Chess Club, 2017 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 d6 3.Nf3 [Now a Philidor] 3...h6 [Too soon for this move. It comes in one variation after White has played Bg5 in the main line.] 4.d4 Nd7 [Mistake? Played too soon.] 5.dxe5 dxe5 [Now his game falls apart.] 6.Bxf7+ Kxf7 7.Nxe5+ Ke6 8.Qd5+ [Resigns after some evaluation time. His King has only two squares to retreat to. One leads to mate in 3. The other is mate in 5. He typed in some BS then about my play and, although I never respond to comments, I typed in, "Thanks for the Philidor lesson."] 1-0 [Notes by Zintgraff]

138 – Devereaux 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Nc3 You can win by picking apart your opponent's vulnerable points. White can meet the Philidor Defence by castling queenside and attacking kingside. White finds points of double attack at f6, c7, and e6 in the game between Maxim Devereaux and Jonathan Pein. Devereaux (2370) - Pein (2153), Gibraltar Masters 2018 Caleta ENG, 01.02.2018 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 d6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Nc3 h6!? [4...Be7] 5.d4 exd4 6.Nxd4 g6 [6...Nc6] 7.f3 Bg7 8.Be3 Nc6 9.Qd2 0-0 10.0-0-0 Nxd4 [10...Ne5 11.Be2+/-] 11.Bxd4 a6 12.g4 b5 13.Bd5 Nxd5? [13...Rb8 14.Bc6+/=] 14.Nxd5 Be6 [14...c5 15.Bxg7 Kxg7 16.Qc3+ f6 17.Nf4+/-] 15.Bxg7 Kxg7 16.Qc3+ f6 17.Nxc7 1-0

139 – Sawyer 3.d4 Nd7 4.Nc3 Players rated 500 points below me sometimes forget important principles. Develop all your pieces and castle in the opening. Otherwise you will probably get into trouble. My opponent in the game below moved his kingside knight and bishop three times each in the first 10 moves. I began with a Queens Knight Attack and transposed into a Philidor Defence. When he left his king in the center, trouble was brewing. I was able to play checkmate to the king on e7 with 18.Bc5 mate! This is a well-known mating theme in the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit variation 5.Qxf3. This line is called the Ryder Gambit. My Internet Chess Club opponent had the handle "scubadoo". That reminds me of Scooby Doo, where are you? and of Scuba Do and of Ski-Doo. Sawyer (1924) - scubadoo (1367), ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 19.04.2014 begins 1.Nc3 e5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 Nd7 4.e4 c6 5.Be3 [Briefly I thought about 5.Bc4 or first 5.a4 but instead I just decided to develop a piece and make Black think.] 5...Be7 6.Qd2 Bf6 [White has developed three minor pieces and my queen. Black has developed two minor pieces.] 7.0-0-0 Ne7 8.h3 Ng6 9.g4 Nh4 10.Nxh4 Bxh4 11.f4 Nb6 [Since White's Bf1 prevents ...Nc4, Black would do better to castle 11...0-0] 12.dxe5 d5 13.exd5 Nxd5 14.Nxd5 cxd5 15.Qxd5 Qxd5 16.Rxd5 Be6 17.Bb5+ Ke7

[17...Kf8 18.Rd2+- leaves White up two pawns with a better position.] 18.Bc5 mate! Black is checkmated 1-0

140 – Sawyer 3.d4 Nc6 4.d5 It was May 1980. This was another Presidential election year. The American economy was terrible: high unemployment, high inflation. I had been laid off from one company after another. It was hard to make ends meet. This would be the third time I could vote for US President. In 1972 I voted for the Democratic candidate George McGovern because I did not want to go to the Vietnam War. The military had already given me my physical and pronounced me fit to go in January 1973. In November 1972, Richard Nixon won almost every state in the Election. Nixon promptly cancelled the draft so I did not join the military after all. But Richard Nixon had lied about Watergate and was forced to resign in 1974. Oh for the days when lying was just about the worst thing a President might do! Gerald Ford had been a "do-nothing" politician. They made him VicePresident hoping he would do no harm. Ford replaced Nixon in 1974. By 1976 I was hoping for somebody who would do good things. I voted for the Democrat Jimmy Carter. Carter won, and I had high hopes. By 1980 it was obvious to all of America that Jimmy Carter's policies had hurt almost everyone. In the summer I moved to Pennsylvania for school and work. When I registered to vote, this time the Democrat Jimmy Carter convinced me to become a Republican. Not that I always vote for the GOP. I do not. And I have a lot of government or union worker friends. Since 1980 the Republicans have had my attention more than they used to. Carter did win Georgia in the 1980 election and five other states. Ronald Reagan won 44 states, including California, New York and Illinois. When those three heavily Democrat states vote for the Republican, that says a lot about that Democratic candidate. After that election, by the summer of 1981, my financial life made significant and immediate improvements. Years later I had the privilege of visiting Plains, Georgia, the home town of

Jimmy Carter. I respect anyone who gets elected President, but one Jimmy Carter term was more than enough for me. Back to May 1980. I went to Dalton, Georgia, known as the carpet capital of the world! I played a Saturday simultaneous exhibition. None of the games were that impressive and I do not know who I played. I do remember that those northern Georgia folks were very kind to me. This is a very typical simul game. The weaker opponent loses material in the opening and gets mated in the early middlegame by the stronger player. Nice checkmate at the end. When the name of a player is unknown, it is often recorded as "NN" = "No Name". Sawyer - NN, Dalton, GA simul 10.05.1980 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 [Philidor Defence.] 2...d6 3.d4 Nc6 [This position could have been reached via the Scotch Game after 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 d6 instead of the normal 3...exd4.] 4.d5 Nd4? [Black makes a counting error. White has two pieces attacking d4 while Black has only one defender.] 5.Nxd4 exd4 6.Qxd4 Nf6 7.c4?! [Playing a more closed game when up material is a little slow. White could swap off his bad bishop with 7.Bb5+] 7...Be7 8.Nc3 0-0 9.Qd1?! [Maybe I thinking about Bd3.] 9...c6 10.Be2 Qa5 11.0-0 cxd5 12.cxd5 h5? [Another counting error. The h5-pawn faces two attackers with only one defender.] 13.Bxh5 b5 14.Bf3 Rb8 15.Bf4 b4 16.Ne2 Bg4 17.Bxg4 Nxg4 18.Nd4 Rbc8? [Black misses that 18.Nd4 uncovers a White queen attack on the Ng4.] 19.Qxg4 Rc4 20.Nc6 [20.Nf5! wins more material after 20...Bf6 21.Nxg7! as 21...Bxg7 22.Bh6 leads to mate next move.] 20...Qc7 21.b3 Rxe4 22.Rfe1 Bf6 [22...f5 23.Qg6+-] 23.Rxe4 Bxa1 24.Ne7+ Kh8 [Black must lose the king or the queen. 24...Qxe7 25.Rxe7+-] 25.Qh4# 1-0

141 – Lau 3.d4 Nc6 4.dxe5 The Philidor Defence has a crossover line after three moves that can transpose to a Ruy Lopez, Italian Game or Four Knights Game. This Philidor Defence begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4. With Black's next move 3...Nc6 we arrive at a position that could be reached in a Scotch Game after 2...Nc6 3.d4 d6. This line is never recommended but club players try this logical continuation all the time. In theory two responses give White a slight edge: 4.dxe5 and 4.d5 leaving Black with a difficult position. I play both moves. Here as White I chose to capture with 4.dxe5 vs a young David Lau. He played a bold but risky sacrifice against me in this club game. David's active and creative play led to equal chances until he dropped the Exchange on move 23. In the end I offered the rook back so I could queen my g-pawn. Sawyer (2011) - Lau (1414), Williamsport, PA 1994 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 Nc6 4.dxe5 Qe7 5.Bg5 f6 6.exf6 Qxe4+ 7.Be2 gxf6 8.Bc1 [8.Nc3! Qg6 9.Be3+/-] 8...Bf5 9.c3 Bh6 10.0-0 0-0-0 11.Nbd2 Bxd2 12.Bxd2 Nge7 13.Re1 Qd5 14.Bh6 Qxd1 15.Raxd1 Rhg8 16.Nd4 Nxd4 17.Rxd4 Nc6 18.Rd2 [18.Rf4+/-] 18...Rg6 19.Bf4 Re8 20.Kf1 Reg8 21.Bc4 R8g7 22.Be6+?! [22.Bg3+/=] 22...Bxe6 23.Rxe6 Rxg2? [23...Kd7! 24.Re1=] 24.Bg3 R2xg3 25.hxg3 Rg6 26.Re8+ Kd7 27.Rh8 Rg7 28.Kg2 Ne5 29.Rd4 c5 [29...Rf7 30.Ra8+-] 30.Rh4 h5 31.R4xh5 Nd3 32.R5h7 Rxh7 33.Rxh7+ Kc6 34.Rf7 Nxb2 35.Rxf6 Na4 36.g4 Nxc3 37.g5 Ne4 38.Rf5 Kd7 39.g6 Ke6 40.g7 1-0

2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 f5 Andre Philidor seems to have chosen 2…d6 with the intention of playing 3…f5 which is a very aggressive continuation.

142 – Bratanov 4.dxe5 fxe4 5.Ng5 Andre Philidor planned to attack (1...e5), defend (2...d6) and counter attack (3...f5) with pawns. Against IM Zsivko Bratanov our friend Lev Zilbermints found a nice mate in 28 moves. Philidor wrote "the pawns are the soul of chess." Lev Zilbermints begins this game with five consecutive pawn moves, but they set up an ensuing attack with pieces. Central pawn chains in the opening are pointers for strategy. They point like an arrow in the direction where one's attack is most likely to be successful. The Black pawns at c7-d6-e5 point toward g3. There we find the White king in the crosshairs on move 24. Checkmate follows a few moves later. Pretty finish. Bratanov (2624) - Zilbermints (2223), ICC 3 0 u Internet Chess Club, 27.02.2011 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 f5 4.dxe5 fxe4 5.Ng5 d5 6.c4 [Komodo and Houdini prefer 6.e6+/- while Fritz prefers 6.c4+/=] 6...Bb4+ 7.Bd2 [The critical line for the IM here is 7.Nc3! d4 8.a3 Bxc3+ 9.bxc3 Nc6 10.Nxe4 Bf5 11.Bg5 Nge7 12.Ng3+/=] 7...Qxg5 8.Bxb4 Nc6 [8...d4 9.Qxd4 Nc6 10.Qd2 e3 11.fxe3 Nxb4 12.Qxb4 Qxe3+ 13.Be2 Bg4=] 9.Bc3? [9.Bd2=] 9...d4 10.Bxd4 Nxd4 11.Qxd4 Qc1+ 12.Ke2 Bg4+ 13.f3 Rd8 14.Qc3 Qd1+ 15.Kf2 Bf5 [15...Ne7-+] 16.g4 Bg6 [Black has the brilliant shot 16...Rd3!-+] 17.Bg2 Qd7 18.Na3 exf3 [18...Qe7=] 19.Bxf3 Nh6 20.Rad1 Qe7 21.Rxd8+ Qxd8 22.Rd1? [22.h3+/=] 22...Qe7? [22...Qh4+!-+] 23.Bd5? [23.Kg1+/=] 23...c6 24.Kg3 cxd5 25.cxd5 0-0 26.Nc4 Qg5 27.h3 Qf4+ 28.Kh4 Nf5# White checkmated 0-1

143 – Tatai 4.dxe5 fxe4 5.Ng5 Zilbermints wrote to me: "I crushed Tatai with the PCG on ICC". This gambit pressures White in an unbalanced tactical position. Lev Zilbermints ends up on top in this short tactical clash. IM Stefano Tatai won the Italian Chess Championship 12 times. He specialized in opening theory. Tatai played this blitz game late in his life. Tatai passed away in 2017 at the age of 79. Tatai (1885) - Zilbermints (2055), ICC 5 0 Internet Chess Club, 26.04.2015 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 f5 4.dxe5 [Alternatives are 4.Nc3+/= and 4.exf5+/-] 4...fxe4 5.Ng5 d5 6.Nc3 Bb4 7.e6 [Or 7.Be2 Nc6 8.0-0+/= Stockfish] 7...Nh6 [7...Qf6! 8.Nf7 Bxe6 9.Nxh8 Nc6 gives Black compensation.] 8.Qh5+ Kf8 9.Nf7 [9.Bd2; 9.Be3; or 9.f3] 9...Qe8 10.Bxh6 [10.Qxd5! Nxf7 11.exf7 Qxf7 12.Qd8+ Qe8 13.Qxc7+-] 10...Bxe6 11.Qe5? [11.Qg5! gxh6 12.Qf6 Qxf7 13.Qxh8+ Qg8 14.Qf6+ Qf7 15.Qxh6+ Qg7 16.Qxg7+ Kxg7 17.0-0-0+/-] 11...Qxf7 12.Bxg7+? Qxg7 13.Qxe6 Bxc3+ 14.Ke2 Nc6 [14...Bxb2-+] 15.bxc3 Qxc3 16.Rd1 [A knight fork is coming, so White resigns 0-1

144 – Lawson 4.dxe5 fxe4 5.Ng5 International Master Eric Lawson of Canada takes on our gambit hero Lev Zilbermints in a Philidor Defense Counter Gambit. In slower play IM Lawson with his FIDE rating of 2371 should have an advantage in depth of calculation and accuracy of evaluation. Lev Zilbermints excels in blitz with his fast attacks and defense. Lawson (2148) - Zilbermints (2132), ICC 4 0 Internet Chess Club, 02.06.2015 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 f5 4.dxe5 fxe4 5.Ng5 d5 6.e6 Nh6 [Another idea is 6...Bc5 7.Nxe4 Bb4+ 8.c3 dxe4 (8...Be7 9.Qg4 g6 10.Ng5+/-) 9.Qxd8+ Kxd8 10.cxb4 Bxe6 11.Nc3 Nf6 12.Bg5 Nbd7 13.Nxe4+/-] 7.c4 [7.g3 c6 8.Bh3 Na6 (8...Qf6 9.e7+/-) 9.0-0 g6 10.c4 Be7 11.Nxe4 dxe4 12.Qxd8+ Bxd8 13.Bxh6+/-] 7...Bb4+ [7...d4! 8.Nxe4 Bxe6=] 8.Nc3 d4 9.Qa4+? [9.a3! e3 (9...dxc3 10.Qxd8+ Kxd8 11.axb4+/-) 10.axb4 exf2+ 11.Kxf2 0-0+ 12.Kg1 dxc3 13.Qxd8 Rxd8 14.bxc3+/-]

9...Nc6 10.a3 e3!? [10...dxc3! 11.axb4 cxb2 12.Bxb2 Qxg5-+] 11.Nf7 [11.axb4 Qxg5-+] 11...Qf6 12.axb4 Qxf2+ 13.Kd1 Bxe6 14.Nxh8 dxc3 15.Be2 0-0-0+ 16.Kc2 Qxe2+ 17.Kb3 Qxc4+ 18.Ka3 cxb2 19.Kxb2 Qd4+ 20.Kb1 Bf5+ 21.Ka2 Nxb4+ 22.Kb3 Be6+ 23.Ka3 Qc3+ White resigns 01

2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 exd4 Black exchanges pawns to relieve the immediate pressure on this center.

145 – Haines 4.Nxd4 h6 5.Bc4 Ray Haines defeated a Philidor Defence by virtually ignoring the queenside. His focus on checkmate was rewarded on move 36. This reminded me of driving with the kids squabbling in the back. My focus is on the main task of looking ahead and driving safely. Haines - pecadj (1560), Live Chess Chess.com, 20.08.2017 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 exd4 4.Nxd4 h6 5.Bc4 Nf6 6.Nc3 Be7 7.0-0 0-0 8.h3 a6 [8...c6 9.Bf4+/=] 9.a4 Bd7 10.Qd3 c6 [10...Nc6=] 11.Qg3 Kh8 12.Be3 [12.Rd1+/-] 12...b5 13.Ba2?! [13.axb5!+-] 13...b4 14.Nce2 c5 [14...Nxe4=/+] 15.Nf5 Bxf5 16.exf5 Qd7 17.Rad1 Qxf5 18.Nf4 [18.Bb1=] 18...Qxc2 19.Qf3 [19.Nd5 Nxd5 20.Bxd5 Ra7=] 19...Nbd7 [19...Ra7-/+] 20.Nd5 Qxb2 [20...Ne5-/+] 21.Nxe7 [21.Rd2 Qe5 22.Bf4=] 21...Qxa2 22.Nf5 [22.Rxd6 Qb2=/+] 22...Qxa4 [22...d5!-+] 23.Qg3 [23.Rxd6 Rg8 24.Nxh6=] 23...Rg8 24.Nxd6 Rgf8 [24...Qb3-+] 25.Nf5 Nh5 26.Qg4 [26.Qh4=] 26...Ndf6 27.Qf3 Rad8 28.Rxd8 Rxd8 29.g4 Nxg4 [29...b3-/+] 30.hxg4 Nf6 31.g5 hxg5 32.Bxg5 c4 33.Bxf6 gxf6 34.Qh5+ Kg8 35.Qh6 Rd1 36.Qg7 mate 1-0

146 – Beerdsen 4.Nxd4 g6 5.Nc3 Weak players keel over in simple positions, but you must fight to win against strong players. In this battle between International Masters, Thomas Beerdsen wins as White in a Philidor Defence vs Manuel Bosboom. White finds a good move in complications. Beerdsen (2445) - Bosboom (2403), Batavia GM Amsterdam NED, 03.03.2018 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 exd4 4.Nxd4 g6 5.Nc3 Bg7 6.g3 Nc6 7.Be3 Nf6 8.h3 0-0 9.Bg2 Re8 10.0-0 Rb8 [10...Bd7=] 11.f4 Bd7 [11...Nxd4 12.Bxd4 b6=] 12.Re1 a6 13.g4 h6 14.Bf2 Na5!? 15.Qd3 b5 16.Bh4 Nc4 17.b3 Nb2 18.Qg3 g5 [18...b4=/+] 19.fxg5 Nh7 20.Qe3 hxg5 21.Bg3 b4 22.Nce2 Nf6 23.Rf1 Qe7 24.e5 dxe5 25.Nf5 Bxf5 26.Rxf5 e4 [26...Rbd8 27.Raf1+/=] 27.Raf1 Rb5 28.Nd4 Nd5 [28...Rc5 29.Rxg5 Rxg5 30.Qxg5+-] 29.Qxg5! Qxg5 30.Rxg5 Ne3 [30...f6 31.Rgf5+-] 31.Nxb5

Nxf1 [31...axb5 32.Re1+-] 32.Nxc7 Rd8 [32...Nxg3 33.Nxe8+-] 33.Bxf1 [Or 33.Be5+-] 1-0

147 – Haines 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 g6 Ray Haines won against a Philidor Defence using my favorite Pirc Defence line. My approach involves Be3, f3, 0-0-0, and a kingside attack. Here White's move 6.Bg5 allowed a tactical possibility if Black chose 6...c6. The moment passed but Ray Haines obtained a good position. He won by attacking the center and kingside simultaneously. Haines (1609) - MoralArcOfTheUnivers (1482), Live Chess 25.11.2017 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 exd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 g6 [5...Be7] 6.Bg5 c6 [White wins material.] 7.f3 [The Nf6 is in some danger. 7.e5! dxe5 8.Nxc6 Qxd1+ 9.Rxd1 Nxc6 10.Bxf6+- wins] 7...Bg7 8.Qd2 0-0 9.g4?! [9.0-0-0+/-] 9...b6 [9...d5!=] 10.h4 Qc7 11.0-0-0 Nbd7 12.Bh6 [12.h5+-] 12...Ne5 13.h5 c5 14.Bxg7 Kxg7 15.hxg6 fxg6 16.Qh6+ [White should try 16.Ndb5!+-] 16...Kf7? [16...Kg8 17.Ndb5 Qg7 18.Qxg7+ Kxg7 19.Be2+/=] 17.Ndb5 Qc6 18.Rxd6 1-0

148 – Spence 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 In a Philidor Defence my chess club friend Lorenzo Skip Spence attacked my weakest point f2. That is a logical strategy. How should I handle Black’s threat against f2? First, be aware of the danger. Second, rapidly develop my own pieces. And third, castle to keep that square from being vulnerable. Skip Spence probably did not study openings. Still, all players begin their game somehow. The natural approach of pushing center pawns and moving minor pieces works well most of the time at the club level. In other games against me, Skip Spence played the Benoni Defence 3...Na6 as Black and the Sicilian Defence with 2.Bc4 as White. Sawyer - Spence, Williamsport, PA 1996 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 exd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 c6 [More common is 5...Be7 6.Be2+/=] 6.Bd3 Qb6 7.Nb3 Ng4 8.0-0 Be6 9.h3 Ne5 10.Be3 Qc7 11.f4 Nxd3 12.cxd3 g6 13.f5 gxf5 [13...Bxb3 14.Qxb3+/-] 14.exf5 Bxb3 15.Qxb3 Nd7 16.Rae1 Kd8 [Better is 16...0-0-0 17.Qxf7+- when White is up a pawn in a good

position.] 17.Qxf7 Ne5 18.Bg5+ Kc8 19.Qe6+ [A faster win was 19.Qe8+ Qd8 20.Qxd8#] 19...Kb8 20.Bf6 Bg7 21.Rxe5 Rc8 22.Bxg7 Qxg7 23.Qxd6+ Qc7 24.Qxc7+ Kxc7 25.Re7+ Kb6 26.Rxh7 1-0

149 – Yip 5.Nc3 Be7 6.Bc4 0-0 July 2013 news articles described how nine year old Carissa Yip became a chess expert with a rating of over 2000. Some reports prematurely called her a master. Carissa Yip is very talented and her future is very promising. She had played in about one tournament per week. First her rating rose to 2007. She slipped back to 1951 in a later tournament. Her rating started to go back up in the Harlow B. Daly Memorial event from July 24, 2013. I actually met Harlow B. Daly, who was born in 1883, that's back when Paul Morphy was still alive! That’s a long time ago. Harlow B. Daly was still finishing in first and second place in the Maine championship when I was in high school. Below is a game from earlier this year where Carissa Yip plays vs the Philidor Defence of William B. Ruegner from the US Amateur Team East in 2013. Her style is active and open but not reckless. Here Carissa finds the winning tactical shot of 16.Nf5! Yip (1835) - Ruegner (1689), US Amateur Team East 2013 Parsippany USA (1), 16.02.2013 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 exd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 Be7 6.Bc4 0-0 7.0-0 Nxe4 8.Nxe4 d5 9.Bd3 dxe4 10.Bxe4 Bd6!? [More normal would be 10...Nd7 11.Re1+/=] 11.Qh5 g6 12.Qf3 c6 13.Rd1 Re8 14.Bf4 Bg4? [Black makes a tactical mistake missing White's 16th. 14...Bxf4 15.Qxf4 Qe7=] 15.Qxg4 Rxe4 16.Nf5! Rxf4 17.Qxf4 gxf5 18.Rxd6 Qe7 19.Rad1 Na6 20.Rd7 Qe6 21.R7d6 [Or 21.Rd8+! Rxd8 22.Qg5+ with an easy win.] 21...Qe7 22.Qxf5 Re8 23.h3 Nb4 24.Qg4+ 1-0

150 – CraftyWiz 5.Nc3 Be7 6.Be2 Francois Andre Danican Philidor was a French music performer and composer. Philidor also played chess at the Cafe de la Regence in Paris, where Paul Morphy would play 100 years later. There at that café, Philidor played the visiting American, Dr. Benjamin Franklin. Both men wrote books on chess. Philidor published "l'Analyse du jeu des Echecs" in 1749. The most famous Philidor quote is translated into English on Wikipedia: Philidor: "play the pawns well; they are the soul of chess: it is they

which uniquely determine the attack and the defence, and on their good or bad arrangement depends entirely the winning or losing of the game." Benjamin Franklin wrote an essay "The Morals of Chess" where he compares chess to life. Ben Franklin was inducted into the US Chess Hall of Fame in 1999. Franklin, Philidor and George Washington were contemporaries, who were born and died in that order. All were alive during the American Revolution and the French Revolution. Philidor died in London on August 31, 1795. That was two years after Franklin died and four years before Washington died. Below I draw a chess game in the Philidor Defence vs a high rated opponent. We repeat moves in a mostly blocked position. Sawyer (2411) - CraftyWiz (3108), ICC 5 0 Internet Chess Club, 17.06.2004 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 exd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 Be7 6.Be2 0-0 7.0-0 c5 8.Nf3 Nc6 9.h3 a6 10.Re1 Ne5 11.Nxe5!? dxe5 12.Be3 Be6 13.Qxd8 Rfxd8 14.Rad1 b5 15.b3 b4 [15...c4=] 16.Na4 Nd7 [16...Nxe4 17.Bf3+/=] 17.Rd2 Kf8 18.Red1 Ke8 19.Kf1 g6 20.Nb2 Nf6

21.Rxd8+ Rxd8 22.Rxd8+ Kxd8 23.f3 Bc8 24.Bc4 Ke8 25.Nd3 Nd7 26.g4 h5 27.Ke2 hxg4 28.hxg4 Bb7 29.Kf2 Bd6 30.Ke2 [30.g5+/=] 30...f6 [30...Be7=] 31.Bf2 Ke7 32.Be3 Ke8 33.Bf2 [33.g5!?+/=] 33...Ke7 34.Be3 Ke8 1/2-1/2

Book 1: Chapter 7 – Petroff Defence 2.Nf3 Nf6 The opening moves 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 are commonly called the Petroff Defence or the Russian Defence.

151 – Norman 3.d3 Ng4 4.h3 Rick Torning sent me this hilarious game with his comments: "John Norman is a chess administrator with the New South Wales Junior Chess League (Australia). He enjoys attacking f2 when Black. This is his trademark opening system. In this game, he manages a nice king hunt with a 0–0# to finish off the marching parade!" jrc22osu (1487) - Norman (1532), 5 min blitz Chess.com, 22.11.2017 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.d3 Ng4 4.h3 Nxf2 5.Kxf2 Bc5+ 6.Be3 Bxe3+ 7.Kxe3 c6!? [Normally one would expect 0–0 or Nc6 to protect the pawn. Black lured the Knight to e5 with pawn bait.] 8.Nxe5? Qg5+! 9.Kd4? [walking into danger by trying to protect the material advantage.] 9...c5+ 10.Kd5 ['Twas better to retreat to c3 rather than thinking the N could be saved.] 10...b6 [10...b5! was crushing] 11.Qg4 [White probably thought they were getting out of trouble with a queen trade!] 11...Bb7+ [A king check trumps an unprotected queen 'check'! Perhaps better is 11...Qe7 12.d4 0–0] 12.Kd6 [still thinking the N could be saved. Black has a won game.] 12...Qe7+! 13.Kc7 d6+ 14.Nd7 Nxd7 15.Kxb7 Ne5+ [Discovered check and wins the queen.] 16.Kxa8 [White could also lose other ways. 16.Ka6 Rb8 17.Kb5 Qb7 18.Ka4 Qa6+ 19.Kb3 Qb5+ 20.Kc3 Qb4#] 16...Nxg4 17.hxg4 0–0# mate! [John was running out of pieces to sac! The White king is like the naughty boy forced to sit in the corner for bad behavior. Castling for a checkmate is beautiful and rare.] 0-1 [Notes by Rick Torning]

152 – blik 3.Bc4 Nxe4 4.Qe2 I have out-lived age-wise, many great players of the past who did not die young. These include Morphy, Nimzowitsch, Capablanca, Alekhine, Tal and Petrosian. All died younger than I am. I picture them as old men, but I feel like I am a younger man. I had many wonderful birthday greetings in 2011 on Facebook. Michael Niefünd who wrote: "Happiness, Peace and Joy on your Birthday, Tim! “And may there always be a pawn left for queening that you wisely haven't sacrificed in the opening. ;D" Here my opponent played what looked like a good middlegame move in the advance of the e-pawn. It turned out to be a flawed strategy for the endgame. This game was played vs "blik". blik (2307)- Sawyer, Internet Chess Club 2011 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Bc4 Nxe4 4.Qe2 [This caught me by surprise. I am on my own.] 4...Nd6!? [This reminded me of a Vienna Game without the Nc3. The official correct move 4...d5! Black is at least equal and maybe slightly better.] 5.Nxe5 Qe7 [5...Be7] 6.Bb3 Nc6 7.Nxc6 dxc6 8.Nc3 Bf5 9.d4 Qxe2+ 10.Kxe2 Be7 11.Re1 0-0 12.Kf1 Rfe8 13.Bf4 Bf8 14.Re5 Bd7 15.Rae1 Kh8 16.f3 f6 17.Rxe8 Rxe8 18.Rxe8 Bxe8 19.Ne4 Nxe4 20.fxe4 Bd6 21.e5 fxe5 22.dxe5 Be7 23.e6?! [This looks like a good move initially, but I was happy to see it. The pawn is eventually corralled and captured.] 23...Bd6 24.g3 Bxf4 25.gxf4 g6 26.c3 Kg7 27.Kf2 Kf6 28.a4 g5 29.fxg5+ Kxg5 30.Bc2 h6 31.Bd1 Kf6 32.Bg4 Bg6 33.a5 b6 34.axb6 cxb6 35.Kg3 Be4 36.Kh4 Bd5 37.Kh5 Bxe6 38.Bf3 Bd5 39.Bxd5 cxd5 40.Kxh6? [The game becomes a race for rook pawns. Both have a problem. White's h-pawn has both kings in the way. Black's a-pawn has a3 and the b4 lever square covered. If 40.Kg4 a5-+] 40...a5 41.h4 b5 42.Kh5 a4 43.Kg4 d4 44.cxd4 b4 45.Kg3 a3 46.b3 a2 White resigns 0-1

153 – Muir 3.Nc3 d5 4.Nxe5 Bob Muir and I changed chess opening names four times in one game. We began in the Alekhine Defence and then changed to a Vienna Game, then a Three Knights Game. Finally we arrived at a line in the Elephant Gambit that can also be reached from the Petroff Defence. White stood well with a better game. Alas he only played 4 more moves due to a tactical error. Suddenly White was down a piece. Muir (1800) - Sawyer (2011), Williamsport, PA 1994 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.Nc3 e5 3.Nf3 d5 4.Nxe5 [4.exd5 Bd6 5.Bb5+ c6 6.dxc6 Nxc6 7.Bxc6+ bxc6 8.0-0 0-0 9.d3 Nd5 10.Ne4+/=] 4...Bd6 5.d4 dxe4 6.Bg5 0-0 7.Nd5? [7.Be2 Bf5=] 7...Bxe5 8.dxe5 [Or 8.Bc4 c6 9.dxe5 cxd5-+] 8...Qxd5 0-1

154 – Over-Rated 3.Nc3 Bb4 Several chess openings can be called the Three Knights Game. They all make three early knight moves by move three. Consider the Four Knights Game minus one with 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Nc3 when Black plays something like 3...Bc5 or 3...Bb4. The Petroff Defence with 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Nc3 Bb4 (not 3...Nc6) is also a Three Knights Game. The line 1.e4 e5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.Bc4 Nc6 is a Vienna Game. What about 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6? That is the Two Knights Defence variation of the Italian Game. The line 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 Nf6 is a Ruy Lopez Berlin Defence. Petroff Defence Three Knights Game follows standard moves 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Nc3 Bb4 with equal chances. I transpose to one vs Over-Rated. I held my own for about 20 moves in a blitz game. Then I let my pieces get tangled and got crushed. Sawyer (2408) - Over-Rated (3547), ICC 2 12 u Internet Chess Club, 06.08.2004 begins 1.Nc3 Nf6 2.e4 e5 3.Nf3 Bb4 4.Nxe5 0-0 5.Be2 Re8 6.Nd3 Bxc3 7.dxc3 Nxe4 8.0-0 d5 9.Nf4 c6 10.c4 d4 11.Bf3 [11.Re1!+/= Komodo] 11...Ng5 12.Bg4 Na6 13.Nd3 Ne4 14.Bxc8 Qxc8 15.f3 Nd6 16.b3 Nf5 17.Re1 Ne3 18.Bxe3 dxe3 19.a4 [19.Re2=] 19...Qe6 20.Nf4

[20.Re2=] 20...Qf6 21.Ne2? [Things are beginning to slip away. 21.g3 Nb4-/+] 21...Rad8 22.Qc1 Nb4 23.Rb1 [Or 23.Ng3 Re6-+] 23...Rd2 24.Kf1? Rxc2 25.Qd1 Rd2 26.Qc1 Qh4 White resigns 0-1

3.d4 exd4 This Petroff Defence variation with 3.d4 exd4 can transpose to some other lines or be unique.

155 – Moran 3.d4 exd4 4.Bg5 The opening moves 1.e4 e5 2.d4 exd4 is one of the easiest ways to begin a chess game. Chess expert Moran demonstrated that White had many transpositional possibilities. Ray Haines writes: "I keep looking at my games, so I can remember what I did wrong. Maybe that is why my games show more clicks. My games are far from perfect. I played more back in the 1980"s in Bangor. They had a new college Prof. who taught computers A.I. His name was Danny Kopec and he was an IM chess master. He played in the tournaments which I played in at that time. I did not get to play him before he moved out of the area. The thing that surprised me was that he spoke to me between rounds once and said he had been looking at my games. He thought I had a very interesting style of play. This was a surprise for me coming from him." I replied, "Yes, Danny Kopec is a well-known chess teacher." Ray Haines played well in this 1982 game against a much higher rated opponent. The position was equal or slightly in Ray's favor. Then came the blunder of 33...Kc6? It threw the game away. Moran (2130) - Haines, World Open (2), 1982 begins 1.e4 e5 2.d4 exd4 3.Nf3 Nf6 [The Petroff. Others include: 3...Bc5 Houdini; 3...Bb4+ Deep Rybka; 3...Nc6 Scotch Game] 4.Bg5 [4.e5 Ne4 5.Qxd4 d5 6.exd6 Nxd6=] 4...h6 [4...Bb4+! Stockfish] 5.Bxf6 Qxf6 6.Qxd4 Qxd4 7.Nxd4 Bc5 8.Nb3 Bb6 9.a4 Nc6 10.a5 Bd4 11.c3 [11.Nxd4 Nxd4 12.Bd3=] 11...Bf6 12.Na3 d6 13.Nb5 Kd8 14.0-0-0 [14.N5d4=] 14...Be6 15.c4 [If 15.N5d4 Bxd4 16.Nxd4 Nxa5=/+] 15...a6 16.Nc3 Bxc3 17.bxc3 Ne5 18.Rd4 g5!? [18...Ke7=/+] 19.Kb2 Ke7 20.c5 Rhd8 21.cxd6+ Rxd6 22.Be2 Bxb3 23.Rxd6 Kxd6 24.Kxb3 b5 25.axb6 cxb6 26.Rd1+ Kc7 27.g3 g4 28.h3 h5 29.hxg4 hxg4 30.Rh1 a5 31.Rh5 Re8 32.Rf5 Kd6 33.Ka4 [33.Rg5=]

33...Kc6? [An accidental gift. After 33...Nd7=/+ there is plenty of play left. Black would have equal or better chances.] 34.Bb5+ 1-0

156 – Ward 3.d4 exd4 4.Bc4 Sandwiched in between playing two weaker opponents I faced a master by the name of Tom Ward. I did not write it down, but I am guessing it was Thomas M. Ward of Michigan. He has a correspondence rating of 2395. The position after four moves can be reached via the Bishop's Opening or the Petroff Defence. This is one of those few games I played where the chess engine Blunder Check function turned up no mistakes for either side. In other words, it was a practically perfect game! After move 32 we reached an unbalanced ending where both sides had one knight and four pawns to start. Both sides had connected passed pawn majorities that we advanced on opposite sides of the board. Once it became clear that the final pawn was about to disappear, we agreed to a draw. Ward (2320) - Sawyer (2035), corr USCF 89N275, 24.05.1989 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Nf6 3.d4 exd4 4.Nf3 Nxe4 [4...Nc6 transposes to the Two Knights Defence.] 5.Qxd4 Nf6 6.Bg5 Be7 7.Nc3 c6 8.0-0-0 d5 9.Rhe1 0-0 [The main line is 9...Be6 10.Qh4 Nbd7 11.Bd3 Nc5 12.Nd4 with compensation for the pawn.] 10.Qh4 Nbd7!? [Or 10...Bf5 11.g4 Bg6 12.Ne5 Qd6=] 11.Bd3 g6 12.Nd4 Re8 13.Re3 Ne4!? 14.Bxe7 Qxe7 15.Qxe7 Rxe7 16.Rde1!? [Maybe White should have tried 16.Bxe4 dxe4 17.Rxe4 Rxe4 18.Nxe4+/= when at least for the moment White's pieces are better placed in a symmetrical pawn structure.] 16...Ndc5 17.f3 Ne6 18.fxe4 Nxd4 19.exd5 Rxe3 20.Rxe3 Kf8 21.dxc6 bxc6 22.Ne4 Bf5 23.c3 Nb5 24.a4 Nc7 25.Nf6 Bxd3 26.Rxd3 Ne6 27.Rd7 h5 28.Kc2 Nc5 29.Rc7 Nxa4 30.Rxc6 Nb6 31.c4 Rc8 32.Rxc8+ Nxc8 33.Kd3 Ke7 34.Nd5+ Ke6 35.Kd4 Nd6 36.Kc5 g5 37.b4 f5 38.Kd4 f4 39.Nc3 Nf5+ 40.Kd3 Nh4 41.Nb5 Nxg2 42.Nxa7 f3 43.Nc6 Nf4+ 44.Ke3 g4 45.Nd4+ Kd7 46.Nf5 Ne2 47.b5 Kc7 48.Ng7 h4 49.Nf5 g3 50.hxg3 hxg3 51.Kxf3 Nc3 52.Kxg3 Kb6 53.Nd4 Ne4+ 54.Kf4 Nd6 55.Ke5 Nxc4+ 56.Kd5 Na3 1/2-1/2

3.d4 Nxe4 Black follows through with his threat to take the e4 pawn.

157 – Muir 4.dxe5 d5 5.exd6 I studied all known Bobby Fischer games. He gave no Petroffs in "My 60 Memorable Games". Fischer must have faced 2...Nf6 in hundreds of games, but my database lists only seven Fischer Petroffs. It was not a popular opening in his day among masters. In a club game vs Bob Muir I chose 3.d4 as White. We both get a little tipsy on move 15. Then I sober up and win material. Sawyer (2011) - Muir (1800), Williamsport PA 1995 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.d4 Nxe4 4.dxe5 d5 5.exd6 [Or 5.Bd3 Be7 6.0-0 0-0=] 5...Nxd6 [5...Bxd6!=] 6.Bd3 Be7 7.0-0 0-0 8.Re1 Bg4 [8...Nc6=] 9.h3 Bf5 10.Bf4 Bxd3 11.Qxd3 Nd7 12.Nc3 Nf6 13.Rad1 Re8 14.Nd5 [14.Nb5+/-] 14...Bf8 15.Nxc7? [15.Rxe8 Ndxe8 16.Qb3 Nxd5 17.Rxd5 Nd6 18.c4+/=] 15...Rxe1+? [15...Qxc7 16.Bxd6 Bxd6 17.Qxd6 Qxc2=] 16.Nxe1 Rc8? [16...Qxc7 17.Bxd6+/-] 17.Bxd6 Bxd6?! 18.Qxd6 1-0

158 – BethO 4.Bd3 d5 5.Nxe5 The Petroff helps Black develop his pieces quickly and keep the king safe. The problem is that it can be difficult to develop an attack vs White. Or Cohen in “A Vigorous Chess Opening Repertoire for Black” refers to the old main line with 11.Qxd5 "as a 'poisoned pawn' because capturing it hands over the initiative." My 45 45 game vs BethO was equal until I got a kingside attack. I kept the pressure on. Then I found a checkmate on move 33. BethO (1848) - Sawyer (2277), ICC 45 45 Internet Chess Club, 23.09.2008 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.d4 Nxe4 4.Bd3 d5 5.Nxe5 Nd7 6.Nxd7 Bxd7 7.0-0 Bd6 8.c4 c6 9.cxd5 cxd5 10.Qh5 0-0 11.Qxd5 Bc6 12.Qf5 [12.Qh5 g6=] 12...g6 13.Qg4 [13.Qh3 Ng5=] 13...f5 [13...h5=+ Cohen] 14.Bc4+ Kh8 15.Qd1 Qh4 16.g3? [16.f4!=] 16...Qh3 [16...Nxf2!-+] 17.d5 Bd7 18.Qd4+ Nf6 19.Bg5 Kg7 20.Rc1 h6 [20...f4=] 21.Bf4 [21.Bxf6+ +/-] 21...Bxf4 22.Qxf4? [22.gxf4=] 22...Ng4 23.Qd4+ Kh7 24.Nc3 Rae8

[24...Qxh2+! 25.Kf1 Rfe8 26.Ne4 Rxe4 27.f4 Qh1+ -+] 25.Qxg4 Qxg4 26.Nb5 Bxb5 27.Bxb5 Rc8 28.f4 a6 29.Bf1 Qf3 30.Rxc8 Rxc8 31.Bg2 Qe3+ 32.Kf1 Rc2 33.Re1 Qf2# 0-1

159 – Linux 5…Nd7 6.Nxd7 Exact endgame knowledge allows you to play faster and more accurately. It helps you convert your excellent middlegame play into a full point. And it helps you draw positions in even games. Here is how you can draw the rook ending when your opponent has pushed a rook pawn all the way to the 7th rank and his rook is in front of it on the 8th rank. Often you can hold the position and draw the game when you are down a pawn. That is what happens in this blitz game vs the computer engine LinuxKnight. The game begins as a Petroff Defence, however this endgame can be reached from any opening. LinuxKnight (3077) - Sawyer begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.d4 [3.Nxe5] 3...Nxe4 4.Bd3 d5 5.Nxe5 Nd7 6.Nxd7 Bxd7 7.0-0 Bd6 8.c4 c6 9.cxd5 cxd5 10.Nc3 Nxc3 11.bxc3 0-0 12.Qh5 g6 13.Qxd5 Qc7 [In the previous game I forgot the move order and played 13...Bc6 14.Qg5+/= It did not turn out well.] 14.Bh6 Rfd8 15.Qg5 Qxc3 16.Rfd1 Bf8 17.Bxf8 Rxf8 18.Rac1 Qb2 19.Be4 Bc6? [19...Ba4 20.Rb1 Qxa2 21.Bd5 Qa3=] 20.Rc2 Qb5?! 21.Qxb5 Bxb5 22.Bxb7 Rab8 23.Rc7 Rfd8 24.g3 Rd7 25.Rxd7 Bxd7 26.Bd5 Be6 27.Bxe6 fxe6 28.Rc1 Rb7 29.Kg2 Kf7 30.Kf3 Kf6 31.Rc6 Rb4 32.d5 Ra4 33.Rxe6+ Kf7 34.Re2 Rd4 35.Rc2 [35.Re5!+- appears to be winning.] 35...Rxd5 36.Rc7+ Kf6 37.Rxa7 h5 38.a4 Rd1 39.a5 Ra1 40.a6 Ra5 41.Ra8 Kg7 42.h4 Ra4 43.a7 Ra5 [I have reached the standard blockading position with enemy pieces Ra8/Pa7. All Black has to do to draw is to keep his king on g7 {h7 is a weaker alternative} and my rook on the a-file. If the White king advances toward a7, I check him from behind until he come back towards the first rank.] 44.Ke4 Ra1 45.Kd5 Rd1+ 46.Kc6 Rc1+ 47.Kb6 Rb1+ 48.Kc7 Rc1+ 49.Kd6 Rd1+ 50.Kc5 Rc1+ 51.Kd4 Rd1+ 52.Kc4 Rc1+ 53.Kb5 Rb1+ 54.Ka4 Ra1+ 55.Kb4 Rb1+ 56.Kc3 Ra1 57.Kb3 Ra6 58.Kc4 Ra1 59.f3 Rc1+ 60.Kd5 Rd1+ 61.Kc5 Rc1+ 62.Kb6 Rb1+ 63.Ka6 Ra1+ 64.Kb7 Rb1+ 65.Kc6 Rc1+ 66.Kd6 Rd1+ 67.Ke5 Re1+ 68.Kf4 Ra1 69.Ke3 Ra3+ 70.Kd4 Ra4+ 71.Kc5 Ra1 72.f4 Rc1+ 73.Kb5 Rb1+ 74.Ka6 Ra1+ 75.Kb6 Rb1+ 76.Kc7 Rc1+

77.Kd6 Rd1+ 78.Ke6 Re1+ 79.Kd5 Rd1+ 80.Kc6 Rc1+ 81.Kb7 Rb1+ 82.Kc8 Rc1+ 83.Kd7 Rd1+ 84.Kc6 Rc1+ 85.Kd7 Rd1+ 86.Ke7 Re1+ 87.Kd8 Rd1+ 88.Ke8 Re1+ 89.Kd7 Rd1+ 1/2-1/2 Game drawn by repetition 1/2-1/2

3.Nxe5 d6 In this section White immediately captures the undefended e5 pawn.

160 – Cochrane 4.Nxf7 Kxf7 I did not realize it until later, but this was exactly my 3000th recorded game in which I played 1.e4 e5 with the Black pieces and exactly my 500th recorded game with the Petroff Defence. However, it is only the sixth time I faced the Cochrane Gambit 4.Nxf7. With this game I am 4 wins vs 2 losses as Black with a plus performance rating. The funny thing about this game was that I kept refusing to play ...Re8-Rf8 (to the open f-file) until it was too late. I had the advantage until my mistake on move 19. Then my position became more difficult. I think my opponent "foxsden" got into time trouble, because on move 28 he returned the favor. After that I was winning. foxsden (1645) - Sawyer (2015), ICC 3 1 u Internet Chess Club, 07.06.2013 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Nxe5 d6 4.Nxf7 Kxf7 5.Nc3 [The most common continuation is 5.d4 c5 6.dxc5 Nc6 7.Bc4+ Be6 8.Bxe6+ Kxe6=] 5...Be7 6.d4 Re8 7.Bc4+ Be6 8.Bxe6+ Kxe6 [It seems risky to bring the king out this far, but there is plenty of time to retreat. Why? Because White has only one developed piece, while Black has a knight, bishop and rook already in play.] 9.0-0 Kf7 10.f4 Kg8 11.e5 dxe5 12.fxe5 Nd5 13.Ne4 Nc6 14.c3 Qd7 15.Qh5 Kh8!? [15...Rf8!=/+] 16.Bg5 Qe6 [Again, 16...Rf8!=/+] 17.Rf3 [17.Bxe7 Ncxe7 18.Qxh7+ Kxh7 19.Ng5+ Kg6 20.Nxe6 Nf5=] 17...Qg6 18.Qh4 Bxg5 19.Nxg5 h6? [The only move to keep the advantage was 19...Rf8=/+] 20.Nf7+! Kg8 21.Raf1 Rf8 22.Rg3 Qxf7 23.Rxf7 Rxf7 24.Qxh6 [24.e6!+-] 24...Raf8 [24...Nf4 25.Rxg7+ Rxg7 26.Qxf4+/-] 25.h3 Nde7 26.e6 [26.Rg4!+-] 26...Rf1+ 27.Kh2 Nf5 28.e7? [28.Qg5 Nxg3 29.Qxg3=] 28...Nxh6 29.exf8Q+ Kxf8 White resigns 0-1

161 – blik 4.Nf3 Nxe4 5.c4 I played a game where 5.c4 in one book for White intersected the 5.c4 line given in a book for Black. The two authors had differing views of how to handle the Petroff Defence Kaufmann Attack developed over 100 years ago by Dr. Arthur Kaufmann. Larry Kaufman in "The Chess Advantage in Black and White" calls the Petroff by name the Russian Defense. Larry Kaufman follows 5.c4 idea of the Kaufmann with the extra "n" by giving 10 pages of games and analysis for White including this quote: "Some of the lines are a bit drawish, but I'm afraid that is unavoidable when dealing with the Petroff. All we can ask for is a position where most of the winning chances are on the White side, and I believe the Kaufmann Attack fits that description." In addition to Kaufman, I chose the 2011 book "The Petroff: an Expert Repertoire for Black" by Konstantin Sakaev. His comment on 5.c4 is: "This is an original move, but that's about the most positive thing that can be said about it." After 5...Nc6 6.Nc3 Nxc3 7.dxc3 both writers mention the typical 7...Be7. These authors suggest the development of the Black's light squared bishop with 7...Bf5 (Sakaev) or 7...Bg4 (Kaufman). Larry Kaufman recommends the dynamic approach of castling opposite sides as a good idea to play for a win: 0-0-0 vs 0-0. I tried Konstantin Sakaev's improvement is 7...g6. My opponent “blik” played the logical 8.d4 and 9.Bd3. I drew as Black. blik (2374) - Sawyer (2109), ICC 5 0 Internet Chess Club, 17.09.2013 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Nxe5 d6 4.Nf3 Nxe4 5.c4 Nc6 [5...Be7 6.d4 0-0 7.Bd3+/=] 6.Nc3 Nxc3 7.bxc3 g6 [7...Qf6!?] 8.d4 Bg7 9.Bd3 Qe7+ [9...0-0 10.0-0 Qd7 11.Re1 b6 12.Bg5 Bb7=] 10.Be3 0-0 11.0-0 Bg4 12.Rb1 [12.h3+/=] 12...b6 13.h3 Bxf3 14.Qxf3 Na5 15.Rfe1 Qf6 16.Qxf6 Bxf6 17.Bh6 Rfe8 18.Bf4 Bg7 19.a3 Kf8 20.Kf1 Rxe1+ 21.Rxe1 Re8 22.Rxe8+ Kxe8 23.a4 Ke7 24.Bg5+ Bf6 25.h4 Bxg5 26.hxg5 c5 27.Ke2 Nc6 28.Be4

Nd8 29.Ke3 Ne6 30.f4 Ng7 31.g4 Ne6 32.Bd5 Nc7 33.dxc5 bxc5 [33...Nxd5+ 34.cxd5 bxc5=] 34.Bc6 Ne6 [34...a5=] 35.a5 Nc7 36.f5 Na6 37.Bf3 Nb8 38.Bd5 Nd7 39.f6+ Kf8 40.Kf4 Ne5 41.Kg3 Ke8 42.Kh4 Kf8 43.Kg3 Ke8 44.Kh4 Kf8 Game was drawn by mutual agreement 1/2-1/2

162 – Piorun 4.Nf3 Nxe4 5.Bd3 White won a Petroff Defence with the unusual move 5.Bd3!? This must be a temporary stop for the bishop since it blocks d2. Kacper Piorun defeated Wojciech Przybylski. Possibly White intended to take Black out of his pregame preparation and make him think while the clock is running. Later, the grandmaster playing White sacrificed the other bishop to force a quick win. Piorun (2651) - Przybylski (2320), ch-POL Rapid 2017 Zgierz POL (8.6), 08.01.2017 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Nxe5 d6 4.Nf3 Nxe4 5.Bd3!? [Normal are either 5.d4 or 5.Nc3.] 5...Nc5 [5...Nf6 6.0-0 Be7 7.h3 0-0 8.c3 h6!?=] 6.Be2 d5 7.0-0 [7.d4 Ne4 8.0-0+/=] 7...Bd6 [7...d4!?=] 8.d4 Ne4 9.c4 c6 10.Nc3 Nxc3 [10...0-0 11.Qc2 Nxc3 12.bxc3+/=] 11.bxc3 0-0 12.Re1 Nd7 13.Qb3 dxc4 [13...Nf6 14.Bg5+/=] 14.Bxc4 h6 15.Qc2 Qf6 [15...Nb6 16.Bd3 Qc7 17.c4+/=] 16.Qe4 Qd8 [16...Rd8! 17.Ne5 Re8 18.Bf4+/=] 17.Bxh6 b5 [17...Qe7 18.Qc2 Bxh2+ 19.Nxh2 Qh4 20.Bc1+-] 18.Ng5 Nf6 19.Qg6! Bxh2+ 20.Kh1 1-0

163 – blik 4.Nf3 Nxe4 5.Qe2 I’ve played the Petroff for decades with mixed success. I bought Konstantin Sakaev's book: "The Petroff: an Expert Repertoire for Black." It covers everything after 1.e4 e5. One Petroff Defence line after 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Nxe5 d6 4.Nf3 Nxe4 is the symmetrical 5.Qe2. Things start out even. White was slightly better in the middlegame. My chess engine opponent lost in the endgame. blik (2200) - Sawyer (1969), Internet Chess Club 2011 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Nxe5 d6 4.Nf3 Nxe4 5.Qe2 Qe7 6.d3 Nf6 7.Bg5 Nbd7 8.Nc3 Qxe2+ [I use a little phrase to remind myself in this line: "Take on eight."] 9.Bxe2 h6 10.Bd2 c6 11.0-0-0 Be7 [11...d5=] 12.d4 d5 13.Bd3 0-0 14.Rde1 Bd6 15.Kb1 Re8 [Black offers to swap rooks to free up f8 for a king or knight.] 16.Rxe8+ Nxe8 17.Re1 Kf8 18.Be3 Ndf6 19.Ne5 Ng4 20.Nxg4 Bxg4 21.h3 Bh5 22.Ne2 Bg6 23.Bxg6 fxg6 24.Bf4 g5 25.Be5 Rd8 26.f4 gxf4 27.Nxf4 Nc7 28.h4 [28.Nd3 Bxe5 29.Nxe5=] 28...Bxe5

29.dxe5 Re8 30.Rf1 Kg8 31.Ng6 Ne6 32.g4? Nf8 33.Nxf8 Rxf8 34.Rf5? g6 35.Rf6 Rxf6 36.exf6 g5 [I cannot allow White to play g4-g5.] 37.h5 Kf7 38.Kc1 Kxf6 39.Kd2 Ke5 40.Ke3 c5 41.Kf3 Kd4 42.a3 a5 43.a4 b6 44.Kf2 Ke4 45.Ke2 Kf4 46.Kd2 Kxg4 47.c3 Kf3 48.Kc2 g4 White resigns 0-1

164 – Czempiel 5.Nc3 Nxc3 6.dxc3 Black's bold Petroff Defence counterattack led to success when he outplayed his higher rated opponent. White chose 5.Nc3 to assault the center. Black opened up the a-file to force a sudden Qa1 mate in the game Jan Kokoszczynski vs Henryk Czempiel. Kokoszczynski (2115) - Czempiel (1883), 11th Gora Sw. Anny Open Gora Swietej Anny POL, 17.01.2018 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Nxe5 d6 4.Nf3 Nxe4 5.Nc3 Nxc3 6.dxc3 Be7 7.Bf4 Nc6 8.Qd2 Be6 9.0-0-0 Bxa2 10.b3 a5 11.Kb2 a4 12.Kxa2 axb3+ 13.Kxb3 Ra5 14.Kb2 Qa8 15.Bc4 d5 16.Bxc7 0-0 17.Bxa5 [17.Ra1 Rxa1 18.Rxa1 Qc8 19.Bb3 Qxc7 20.Qxd5=] 17...Nxa5 18.Ne5 Ba3+ 19.Kb1 Nxc4 [19...dxc4 20.Qe3 Qa6 21.Rd5 Nc6 22.Nd7 Bb2 23.Kxb2 Ra8 24.Kc1 Qa1+ 25.Kd2 Qxh1=] 20.Qxd5? [20.Nxc4 dxc4 21.Qd7 b5=] 20...Bb2 [Qa1 mate] 0-1

165 – Grant 6.dxc3 Be7 7.Bf4 In the book “Chess Openings for White, Explained”, the GM authors Alburt, Dzindzichashvili and Perelshteyn note of 5.Nc3: "The knight move leads to dynamic and interesting play." My ICC opponent "UlyssesSGrant" was a frequent winner, but I managed to hold him off this time. That handle is based on the Union General in the American Civil War who fought to win when other generals were incompetent or afraid. Grant climbed the ranks by winning in battle. General Robert E. Lee surrendered to Grant at Appomattox Courthouse in Virginia, a place I’ve visited. Later, Ulysses S. Grant became President of the United States. Sawyer (2203) - UlyssesSGrant (2512), ICC 0 6 u Internet Chess Club, 24.04.2009 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Nxe5 d6 4.Nf3 Nxe4 5.Nc3 Nxc3 6.dxc3 Be7 7.Bf4 [7.Be3 0-0 8.Qd2 Nd7 9.0-0-0 Nf6=] 7...Nd7 [7...0-0 8.Qd2 Nd7=] 8.Qd2 0-0 9.0-0-0 Nc5 10.Bc4 Be6 [10...Bf5=] 11.Bxe6 Nxe6 [11...fxe6 12.Be3=] 12.Be3 Qd7 13.Ng5 [13.Kb1=] 13...Nxg5 [13...Bxg5 14.Bxg5 Qa4=/+] 14.Bxg5 Bxg5 15.Qxg5 Rae8 16.Rhe1 h6 17.Qd5 b6 18.f3 Rxe1 19.Rxe1 Re8 20.Rxe8+ Qxe8 21.Qd2 Qe6 22.b3 Qe5 23.g3 a5

24.Kd1 Kf8 25.Qe1 [Or 25.f4=] 25...Ke7 26.f4 Qxe1+ 27.Kxe1 Ke6 28.Kf2 Kd5 29.Ke3 f5 30.h4 h5 31.c4+ Kc5 32.c3 d5 33.cxd5 Kxd5 34.Kd3 b5 35.c4+ bxc4+ 36.bxc4+ Kc5 37.a3 Kc6 38.Kd4 Kd6 39.c5+ Ke6 40.a4 c6 41.Kc4 Ke7 42.Kd4 Kf6 43.Kc4 Ke6 44.Kd4 Kf6 1/2-1/2

3.Nxe5 d6 4.Nf3 Nxe4 5.d4 d5 The most natural continuation is for both players to advance their d-pawns on move five.

166 – Rideout 6.Bd3 Bd6 7.0-0 Opinions of the Petroff Defence has changed a lot. Around 1900, Harry Pillsbury played it during his short but brilliant career. Then Frank Marshall played the Petroff regularly for thirty years. Sure, thousands of other players used 2...Nf6, but generally they were not the leading players who had the kind of frequently published Black wins that everyone hopes to copy. For the next thirty years Petroff players included Boris Kostic, David Bronstein and C.H.O'D. Alexander, which brings us through World War II. The top frequently published Petroff players from 40 years ago were Smyslov, Dvoretsky, Benko, Kholmov, Morgado, and Bisguier. Indeed, GM Arthur Bisguier lost some famous Petroffs in the US Championships: Bisguier lost Petroffs to Larry Evans in 1958 (a beautiful game!), to Robert Fischer in 1959 and to Walter Browne in 1974. The Browne game was often quoted; I am sure it kept a lot of players from jumping to this defence. I am an example of a player who improved later as an adult, not as a scholastic player. Here is my game vs Kirk Rideout from my early days. Nice mate. I unknowingly follow through my 13th move the game BurnMarshall, Karlsbad 1911. Yes, exactly 100 years ago. I missed some moves in this game, something I still do. I hope you like the checkmate combination at the end. Sawyer - Rideout, Ft Fairfield, Maine 02.04.1974 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Nxe5 [This is my favorite, but I've also played the moves 3.Nc3, 3.d4 and 3.Bc4.] 3…d6 [When my opponents fell for the famous trap is 3...Nxe4? 4.Qe2!, I scored 25-0.] 4.Nf3 Nxe4 5.d4 d5 6.Bd3 Bd6 [Two other options are recommended for Black: 6...Be7 and 6...Nc6.] 7.0-0 0-0 8.Re1 Re8 9.c4 c6 10.Nc3 Nxc3 11.Rxe8+ Qxe8 12.bxc3 Bg4 13.Bd2 g6 14.h3 Bd7 15.Qb3 b6 16.Re1 [16.cxd5+-] 16...Qd8 17.cxd5 cxd5 18.Bg5 Qc7 19.Ne5 [19.Qxd5+-] 19...Be6 20.f4 Kg7 21.f5 gxf5 22.g4? [22.Bxf5!

Bxf5 23.Qxd5+-] 22...fxg4 23.Nxg4 Bxg4 24.hxg4 h6? [24...Be7=] 25.Qxd5! Nc6 26.Bxh6+! Kxh6 27.Qh5+ Kg7 28.Qh7+ Kf6 29.Qh6# 1-0

167 – Fuchs 6.Bd3 Bd6 7.0-0 The Petroff Defence leads to wide open positions where one move can make all the difference. Black wins in this game with a sneaky bishop retreat. White grabbed a poisoned pawn on b7 and soon became trapped in Simon Heinrici vs FM Georg Fuchs. Heinrici (2099) - Fuchs (2156), TCh-AUT 2nd West 2017-18 Austria AUT (6.4), 12.01.2018 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Nxe5 d6 4.Nf3 Nxe4 5.d4 d5 6.Bd3 Bd6 7.0-0 0-0 8.Re1 [8.c4+/=] 8...f5 9.c4 c6 10.cxd5 cxd5 11.Nc3 Nc6 12.Qb3 [12.g3=] 12...Kh8 13.Kf1 [13.Ne2=] 13...Be6 14.Qxb7? [14.Be3 Rc8=/+] 14...Nb4! 15.Bb1 [15.Bxe4 dxe4-+] 15...Bc8! [If 15...Bc8 16.Qxa8 Ba6+ 17.Kg1 Qxa8-+] 0-1

168 – Heyn 6.Bd3 Bg4 7.h3 Clive Heyn liked to play five minute games. Clive was very fast, but a little loose with the pieces. At the time of this game, I was rated 2011 in USCF tournament play. Heyn was rated 1751. I expected to win. Once in a while Clive would make me pay for a blitz blunder. And I did blunder in this game. But then I got away. This game is an example of how bishops of opposite color can give attacking chances to the side with the initiative. Sawyer - Heyn, Williamsport, PA begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 [The Petroff Defence, also called the Russian Defence.] 3.Nxe5 d6 4.Nf3 Nxe4 5.d4 d5 6.Bd3 Bg4 [6...Nc6 is the main line. Play usually continues 7.0-0 Be7 8.c4 or 8.Re1] 7.h3 Bh5 8.Qe2 Qf6 9.g4 Bg6 10.Ne5 Be7 11.Nc3 [11.Bxe4! Bxe4 12.f3+/-] 11...Nxc3 12.bxc3 0-0 [12...Bxd3=] 13.Nxg6 fxg6 14.Be3 Ba3 [14...c5!=] 15.Rb1 b6 16.c4 Nc6 17.cxd5?? [17.c3+/=] 17...Nxd4 18.Bxd4 Qxd4 19.0-0 Rae8 20.Qd2 Qxd5 21.Qc3 Qc5 22.Bc4+ Kh8 23.Rb3 Re4 24.Bd3 Qxc3 25.Rxc3 Bb4 [25...Ra4=/+] 26.Rxc7 Ref4 27.Kg2 Bc5 28.f3 h5? [28...Ra4=] 29.Bxg6 hxg4 30.hxg4 Ra4 31.Rh1+ Kg8 32.Rh7 [More accurate is 32.Bh7+ Kh8 33.Be4+! Kg8 34.Bd5+ Rf7

35.Bxf7+ Kf8 36.Rh8#] 32...Bd4 33.Rh5 Rxa2 34.Bh7+ Kh8 35.Bd3+ Kg8 36.Bc4+ Rf7 37.Bxf7+ Kf8 38.Rh8 mate 1-0

169 – Boruchovsky 6.Bd3 Be7 Petroff Defence players may blitz the opening moves 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Nxe5 d6 4.Nf3 Nxe4 5.d5 d5 6.Bd3 Be7 7.0-0. Black avoided 7...Nc6 with known equality in Avital Boruchovsky vs Yuriy Kuzubov. Black made a tactical slip in a difficult position. Boruchovsky (2542) - Kuzubov (2689), 19th ch-EUR Indiv 2018 Batumi GEO (6.36), 22.03.2018 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Nxe5 d6 4.Nf3 Nxe4 5.d4 d5 6.Bd3 Be7 7.0-0 Bf5 [7...Nc6=] 8.Re1 0-0 9.Nc3 Nxc3 10.bxc3 Bxd3 11.cxd3!? [11.Qxd3+/=] 11...Nc6 12.Rb1 b6 13.Qa4 Na5 [13...Qd6 14.Rb2+/=] 14.Bd2 c5 15.Ne5 Qe8 16.Nd7 cxd4 17.cxd4 Rd8 18.Rxe7 Qxe7 19.Nxf8 Qxf8 20.Bxa5 bxa5 21.Qxa5 Rd7 22.Qb5 Qd8? [A blunder. If 22...Rd8 23.Qc5+/- Instead, White wins with...] 23.Qxd7! 1-0 [If Black recaptures, White checks forcing mate.]

170 – Shafkat 6.Bd3 Nc6 7.Bg5 There is an old saying: I have forgotten more than I know. This can be true of opening variations that I used to know, but that I have not played for a while. I sometimes miss opportunities to punish inaccurate play, especially in blitz games. In this Petroff Defence we rattled off the opening moves and I expected 7.0-0 Be7. My opponent blundered with 7.Bg5? This bishop was protected by his knight, and he attacked my queen. In a blitz game it is most effective to play safely and quickly. This I did. Alas I forgot that my knight could back up. I should have just picked off his bishop for free! Fortunately I still won. Shafkat - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 20.10.2012 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Nxe5 d6 4.Nf3 Nxe4 5.d4 d5 6.Bd3 Nc6 7.Bg5? [The main line is 7.0-0 Be7] 7...Be7?! [So intent was I on playing developing my Black bishop that I missed 7...Nxg5!-+ winning White's bishop.] 8.Bxe7 Qxe7 9.0-0 0-0 10.Re1 Bg4 11.h3 Bh5 [11...Bxf3! 12.Qxf3 Nxd4=/+] 12.c3 f5 13.Na3 a6 14.Nc2 Qf6 15.Ne3 g5? 16.Nxd5 Qd6 17.Bc4 Kg7 18.Rc1 Rae8 19.Re3 [19.Qc2+/=] 19...g4 20.hxg4 Bxg4 [20...fxg4!-/+] 21.Qe1 b5 22.Bb3 Re6? [22...Na5=] 23.Nxc7 [23.Nh2+-] 23...Rh6 24.Rxe4?

[24.Ne6+ Rxe6 25.Bxe6 Qxe6 26.Nh2+/-] 24...Bxf3? [24...fxe4 25.Qxe4 Bxf3-+] 25.Re7+? [25.Ne6+ Kh8 26.Rf4 Rxe6 27.Bxe6 Qxf4 28.gxf3 Re8=] 25...Nxe7 26.Ne6+ Kh8 27.Nxf8? Qh2+ 28.Kf1 Qh1 mate 0-1

171 – Munoz 7.0-0 Bg4 8.Re1 Bobby Fischer was my guide when I first learned openings. What did I learn from Fischer on how to play vs the Petroff? Not much. That was because in Bobby's day the Petroff was not played by many grandmasters. When Fischer took the White pieces after 3.Nxe5 d6 4.Nf3 Nxe4, I find only three Fischer games. In one he played 5.Qe2 and won in 60 moves. The other two saw Bobby play 5.d4 reaching an even position after 5...Nf6 6.Bd3 Be7 7.h3. Fast forward to my APCT email game with Lazaro Munoz. He chose the Petroff Defence with the line 5.d4 d5 6.Bd3 Nc6 7.0-0 Bg4 following a Kasparov-Karpov match game from 1986 which ended in a draw. Or Cohen writes in his book “A Vigorous Chess Opening Repertoire for Black” that 7...Bg4 is an "incorrect" move order. However, Cohen notes that sometimes he likes to play it as Black anyway. White should play 8.c4 to strive for an advantage. I chose the popular 8.Re1. There I did not find much of an advantage. Sawyer (1944) - Munoz (1817), corr APCT EMQ-3, 08.01.1997 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Nxe5 d6 4.Nf3 Nxe4 5.d4 d5 6.Bd3 Nc6 7.0-0 Bg4 [7...Be7=] 8.Re1 [8.c4 Nf6 9.Nc3+/=] 8...Be7 9.c4 Nf6 10.cxd5 Nxd5 11.Nc3 0-0 12.h3 Be6 13.a3 Bf6 14.Na4 [14.Be4+/=] 14...Nxd4 15.Nxd4 Bxd4 16.Bxh7+ Kxh7 17.Qxd4 b6 18.Nc3 c5 [18...Kg8=] 19.Qd3+ Kg8 20.Nxd5 [A good way to play on would be 20.Qg3+/=] 1/2-1/2

172 – HOTBIT 7.0-0 Be7 8.Re1 In 1974 Anatoly Karpov and Viktor Korchnoi played a match to see who would play Bobby Fischer for the World Championship in 1975. When Karpov won, Fischer would not play at all. Bobby had stopped playing everybody after his 1972 match. He only returned briefly in 1992 to play a rematch with Spassky. The Karpov-Korchnoi battles in 1974 frequently centered on games where Korchnoi was Black in the French Defence 3.Nd2 c5 Tarrasch Variation. One Petroff game was a flashback to a famous Capablanca-Kostic line in the Petroff Defence. In that 1919 game Capablanca answered 11…Kh8 with 12.Nf1. In 2011 I tested the line vs the 3098 rated computer HOTBIT which almost always beat me. When it did, I searched for an improvement and went back for another game. HOTBIT - Sawyer, Internet Chess Club 2011 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Nxe5 d6 4.Nf3 Nxe4 5.d4 d5 6.Bd3 Nc6 [The old move order was 6...Be7 7.0-0 Nc6] 7.0-0 Be7 8.Re1 Bg4 9.c3 f5 10.Qb3 0-0 11.Nbd2 Na5 [I have tried to follow Korchnoi with mixed results after 11...Kh8!? 12.h3 (12.Nf1!? Capablanca. 12.Qxb7 Rf6 13.Qb3 Rg6 14.Bb5+/=) 12...Bh5 13.Qxb7 Rf6 14.Qb3 Rg6? (14...g5!? 15.Ne5 Nxe5 16.dxe5 Rb6) 15.Be2! Bh4 16.Rf1 Bxf3 17.Nxf3 Bxf2+ 18.Rxf2 Nxf2 19.Kxf2 Qd6 20.Ng5! Rf8 21.Qa3 Qd8 22.Bf4 h6 23.Nf3 Re8 24.Bd3 Re4 25.g3 Rf6 26.Qc5 g5 27.Nxg5 hxg5 28.Bxg5 Ree6 29.Re1 Qg8 30.h4 Rg6 31.Rxe6 1-0 KarpovKorchnoi, Moscow 1974] 12.Qc2 [HOTBIT is out for blood. Earlier I played this variation against the more peace loving "blik" computer: 12.Qa4 Nc6 13.Qb3 Na5 14.Qa4 Nc6 15.Qb3 Na5 Game drawn by repetition 1/21/2. blik-Sawyer, Internet Chess Club 2011] 12...Nc6 13.b4 a6 14.a4 Bd6 [14...h6! 15.h3 Bh5=] 15.Rb1 Kh8 16.b5 axb5 17.axb5 Na5 18.Ne5 Bxe5 19.dxe5 Bh5 [19...Qh4 20.Nf1!+/=] 20.c4 Nxc4 21.Nxc4 dxc4 22.Bxc4 Bf7?! 23.e6 Bg6 24.Rd1 Qf6 25.Rd7 Rac8? 26.Bb2 Black resigns 1-0

173 – CraftyWiz 7.0-0 Be7 8.c4 How can you score well against high rated chess engines? The simplest is to outplay the grandmaster computer program and defeat it. Too hard, you say? I agree. A second more feasible option is to get a draw. Still not easy but a draw is actually possible. Here are 5 ways to draw: 1. Get the better position and repeat moves. 2. Completely close off the position. 3. Reach a safe simplified position. 4. Head for a drawn endgame. 5. Get a time advantage in blitz and force the computer to play faster and weaker. None of these work all the time, but if you draw 1 in 10 games, your rating will likely go up. From 1998 to 2004 I was usually rated around 2400 in ICC blitz. I defeated some engines that played the same openings repeatedly. During that time period, I learned my lines well. My occasional win or draw every ten games or so kept my rating up there. Below I drew vs a 3124 rated computer chess engine in the Petroff Defence. As White I was probably short on time and took a draw from a better position. I played my best and tool a rest. Sawyer (2395) - CraftyWiz (3124), ICC 5 0 Internet Chess Club, 16.06.2004 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Nxe5 d6 4.Nf3 Nxe4 5.d4 d5 6.Bd3 Nc6 7.0-0 Be7 8.c4 Nf6 [Popular is 8...Nb4 9.Be2=] 9.cxd5 [9.Nc3+/=] 9...Nxd5 10.Nc3 Be6 11.Re1 0-0 12.a3 Bf6 13.Be3 Re8 14.Bc2 Bg4 15.h3 Nxe3 16.fxe3 Bd7 [16...Bh5=] 17.Qd3 g6 18.Rad1 Bg7 19.e4 h6 20.e5 Ne7 21.Bb3 Bf5 22.Qe2 Nc6 23.Qf2 Na5 24.Ba2 g5 [Or 24...Qc8 25.Nh4+-] 25.Nh4 [White has good chances after 25.b4 Nc6 26.Nh4!+-] 25...Be6 26.Nf5 Bxa2 27.Nxg7 Kxg7 28.Nxa2 Qe7 29.Nc3 Rad8 30.Ne4 Nc4 31.Nf6 Rh8 32.Nh5+ [White stands better after 32.Rf1!+-] 32...Kg8 33.Nf6+ Kg7 34.Nh5+ Kg8 35.Nf6+ Kg7 Game drawn by repetition 1/21/2

174 – Browne 8.c4 Nb4 9.cxd5 Grandmaster Walter S. Browne passed away in his sleep. The Vegas Chess Festival posted this comment on Walter Browne. Mike Anderson says: On the way to Reno 2014 he told me: “If you lose you learn, then you win and earn.” – GM Walter Browne Browne was a six time US chess champion. He was a leading player from my generation. I was one of his many Facebook friends and followed his career since the early 1970s. Walter Browne wrote “The Stress of Chess: My Life, Career and 101 Best Games”. In memory of Walter Browne, I decided to post one of his games. His Petroff Defence win from 1974 was mentioned by me in 2011. Walter Browne found the move 14.Bh6! vs the longtime Petroff Defence expert Arthur Bisguier. This Browne game made a big impression on me and many of my contemporaries. For years I thought that the Petroff Defence was not sound. In reality Black just missed the way to equalize. Browne (2575) - Bisguier (2435), USA-ch Chicago (9), 1974 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Nxe5 d6 4.Nf3 Nxe4 5.d4 d5 6.Bd3 Be7 7.0-0 Nc6 8.c4 Nb4 9.cxd5 [9.Be2 0-0 10.Nc3=] 9...Nxd3 10.Qxd3 Qxd5 11.Re1 Bf5 12.Nc3 [12.g4!? Bg6 13.Nc3 Nxc3 14.Qxc3=] 12...Nxc3 13.Qxc3 c6? [Black should play 13...Be6!=] 14.Bh6! Rg8 [14...gxh6 15.Re5+/=] 15.Re5 Qd7 16.Rae1 Be6 17.Ng5 0-0-0 18.Nxf7 Bxf7 19.Rxe7 Qxd4 20.Rxf7 [20.Qh3+!?+/-] 20...Qxc3 21.bxc3 gxh6 22.Rb1 Rg5 23.h4 Rb5 24.Rxb5 cxb5 25.Rxh7 Rd1+ 26.Kh2 Rd2 27.Rxh6 Rxa2 28.h5 Rxf2 [Or 28...Kd7 29.Rh7+ Ke6 30.Rxb7+-] 29.Rh8+ Kc7 30.h6 Kb6 31.Kh3 a5 32.g4 b4 33.cxb4 axb4 34.Re8 Rf1 35.Kg2 Rf7 36.g5 Rf5 37.h7 Rxg5+ 38.Kf3 Rh5 39.h8Q Rxh8 40.Rxh8 1-0

Book 1: Chapter 8 – Romantic 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.c3 This covers many third move option in the old double King Pawn openings.

175 – Ivy 3.c3 d5 4.Qc2 dxe4 “Chess Opening Essentials” (from Italy) has a great introduction to the Ponziani Opening: "Domenico Lorenzo Ponziani, from the Italian town of Modena, analyzed various important lines in the 18th century. He was also a member of the Pope's inner circle. The c2-c3 push is logical in that it supports d2-d4. But it has two drawbacks: it leaves the e4-pawn undefended and it prevents the development of the queen's knight to c3. Black's two best responses are 3...Nf6 and 3...d5, both of which highlight these drawbacks." In my own games I have played both 3...Nf6 and 3...d5 pretty much interchangeably. This blitz game vs "Ivy" will serve as an introductory game to this opening. Black can basically equalize after 1.e4 e5 anyway. Thus it is not a bad thing to play a rarer line that might lead to equality in positions you know better than your opponent. However, if you really do not know the opening well, then the Ponziani just gives Black an easy to play game. Ivy (1643) - Sawyer (2013), ICC 3 0 u Internet Chess Club, 31.05.2013 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.c3 d5 4.Qc2?! [4.Qa4] 4...dxe4 5.Qxe4 Nf6 6.Qh4 Be7 7.Qa4 0-0 8.d3 Re8 [8...Bf5-/+] 9.Bg5 h6 10.Bxf6 Bxf6 11.Nbd2 Bf5 12.Ne4 Be7 13.Rd1 a6 14.Be2 Qd7 15.0-0? [This drops a piece. Better is 15.Qc2 Rad8=/+] 15...Nd4 16.Qxd7 Nxe2+ 17.Kh1 Bxd7 18.Rfe1 Nf4 19.Nxe5 Bf5 20.g3 Nh3 21.Kg2 Ng5 22.f4 Nxe4 23.dxe4 Be6 24.a3 f6 25.Nf3 Rad8 26.Nd4 Bg4 27.Rc1 c5 28.Nb3 b6 29.h3 Be6 30.Na1 Rd2+ White resigns 0-1

176 – Shipley 3.c3 d5 4.Bb5 Vs Shipley it's short, sharp, and shweet... Okay... "sweet", but it was hard for my tangled tongue there to say "sweet". I played Black vs William Shipley in a Ponziani Opening. I like 3...Nf6, but this time I chose 3...d5 which worked in this game. Shipley (1481) - Sawyer (2083), corr USCF 89SS66, 19.07.1991 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.c3 d5 4.Bb5 [4.Qa4 f6 5.Bb5 Nge7 6.exd5 Qxd5=/+] 4...dxe4 5.Nxe5 Qg5 [Or 5...Qd5 6.Qa4 Nge7 7.f4 exf3 8.Nxf3 a6 9.Be2=] 6.d4 [6.Qa4 Qxg2 7.Bxc6+ bxc6 8.Qxc6+ Kd8=/+] 6...Qxg2 7.Rf1 a6 [7...Bd6!-/+] 8.Qa4? Nge7 9.Bf4 g5?! [9...f6!-/+] 10.Bg3 Bh6 11.Nxc6 Bd7 12.c4? [White accidentally traps his Bb5. An unbalanced equality follows 12.Nd2 bxc6 13.Bc4 Nd5 14.0-0-0=] 12...bxc6 0-1

177 – snowowl 3.Nc3 Bc5 4.Nxe5 A snowy owl is a white bird natural to various northern snowy climates. An Icelandic snowy owl played a significant part in the 1994 comedy movie "Dumb and Dumber". The snowy owl is the official bird of Quebec, Canada. It preys on little rodents and swallows them whole. I like to think of my opponent "snowowl" as a mid-level club player who crushes the lower rated players but loses to the higher rated. When I blundered with 12.Bb2??, I turned my advantage into a losing position. However, for three moves we both were focused on the center of the board and missed Black's tactic Qd8-Qb6+ followed by Qxb2. Then I played 15.Bxf6 to regain my edge. Sawyer - snowowl, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 22.09.2012 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Nc3 Bc5 4.Nxe5! [More popular is 4.Bc4 Nf6 5.d3 d6 6.Bg5 h6 7.Bxf6 Qxf6 8.Nd5 Qd8 9.c3] 4...Nxe5 5.d4 Bd6 6.dxe5 Bxe5 7.f4!? Bxc3+ 8.bxc3 d6 9.c4 Nf6 10.Bd3 0-0 11.0-0 c6 12.Bb2?? [12.Qf3+/=] 12...Re8? [12...Qb6+!-+ wins my Bb2.] 13.Qf3? d5 [13...Qb6+!-+] 14.cxd5? [14.Bxf6+/=] 14...cxd5 [14...Qb6+!-/+] 15.Bxf6 Qxf6 16.exd5 Rd8 17.c4 b5 18.cxb5 Bb7 19.Qe4 g6 20.Bc4 Rac8 21.Rad1 Re8

[21...Rc5 22.Qd4+/-] 22.Qd4 Qd6 23.f5 Red8 24.fxg6 hxg6 25.Qxa7 Ba8 26.Qd4 [More accurate is 26.Qxf7+! Kh8 27.Rd3+-] 26...Rd7 27.a4 Rcd8 28.a5 Qb4 29.d6 Qxa5 30.Qf6 Qb6+ 31.Kh1 Rxd6 32.Rxd6 Rxd6 33.Qxf7+ Black resigns 1-0

3.Nc3 Nf6 Here we consider the Three Knights and Four Knights Game in their various forms.

178 – Sawyer 4.d3 Bb4 5.Be2 I love short chess games that end in a beautiful checkmate! If I can win such a game as Black, so much the better. In this Four Knights Game, my opponent "GetBetterAtChes" adopted a rather solid slow approach. Thus I started to play more aggressively to see how much I could get away with. I took everything he gave me. I gave nothing back. I worked a lot on the "Chessimo" program (formerly Personal Chess Trainer) by GM Gilberto Milos. This involves doing daily Tactics, Endgame and Strategy exercises. The strategy positions come with an explanation of why the move he recommends is best. I often did hundreds of these positions. When I played 15...f4 in the game below, I could imagine the grandmaster telling me "so as to attack the White king and open the diagonal for the Black bishop." GetBetterAtChes - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 17.11.2012 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.Nf3 Nc6 4.d3 Bb4 [This is a Reversed Ruy Lopez Steinitz with Black being down a tempo.] 5.Be2 0-0 6.Bd2 d5 7.exd5 Nxd5 8.Nxd5 [8.0-0=] 8...Bxd2+ 9.Nxd2 Qxd5 10.0-0 f5 11.Bf3 Qf7 12.g3 Bd7 [The immediate 12...f4 is also playable.] 13.c4 Rab8 14.a3 Nd4 15.Bg2 [15.Bd5 Be6-/+] 15...f4 16.Be4 f3 17.Nb3? [This is a dream come true as I envisioned a possible mating net. 17.Re1 Qh5 18.Re3 Bh3=/+ and White is pretty much forced to sacrifice the Exchange for a pawn.] 17...Ne2+ 18.Kh1 Bh3 19.Nd2? [Allows mate in one, but the alternative 19.Rg1 Bg2+ 20.Rxg2 fxg2+ 21.Bxg2 Qxf2-+ leaving White down the Exchange is no fun.] 19...Bg2# 0-1

179 – Zigo 4.d4 Bb4 5.d5 Nb8 This Four Knights Game allowed White to sacrifice for an attack. In Viktor Zigo vs Patrik Schoupal, White grabbed the e5 pawn to apply pressure. Black missed the perfect defense. White pieces swarmed around the Black king trapped in the corner. Zigo (2264) - Schoupal (2049), TCh-CZE 1 Liga Vychod Czech Republic CZE (8.2), 18.02.2018 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.Nc3 e5 3.Nf3 Nc6 4.d4 Bb4 5.d5 Nb8 6.Nxe5?! [6.Bd3!=] 6...Qe7 7.f4 0-0 8.Bd3 d6 9.Nf3 Nxe4 10.0-0 Bc5+ 11.Kh1 Nf2+ 12.Rxf2 Bxf2 13.Bd2 Na6 [13...Nd7-/+] 14.Ne4 Bh4 15.Bc3 Nc5 [15...f5 16.Neg5 Bxg5 17.Nxg5 h6 18.Qh5 Qe8-/+] 16.Neg5 Bxg5 17.Nxg5 h6 18.Bh7+ Kh8 19.Qh5 Re8? [19...f6 20.Bg6 Bg4 21.Qh4 Qd7=] 20.Bg6 [20.Qxh6! f6 21.Qh5 Bg4 22.Qh4 fxg5 23.fxg5+-] 20...Bg4 [20...f6 21.Bxe8+-] 21.Qxh6+ 1-0

180 – mscp 4.Nxe5 Nxe5 5.d4 Nc6 The Halloween Gambit is a fun fanciful variation. I am skeptical of a full piece sacrifice in the opening. It works sometimes in practice. In the Four Knights Game 4.Nxe5 Halloween Gambit, three conditions improve the odds that White may win: 1. White has very strong tactical skills. 2. Black has very weak tactical skills. 3. Black is under blitz speed time pressure. That said, the sacrifice is more interesting than first supposed. White has a central pawn for the piece and will likely pick up one more tempo after 4.Nxe5 Nxe5 5.d4. I tried it in a blitz game vs the computer engine "mscp". At the end it worked out okay. Sawyer - mscp, Internet Chess Club, 2011 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Nxe5?! [The Halloween Gambit. It has to be unsound to give up a piece for a pawn and tempo, but in a blitz game almost anything is playable.] 4...Nxe5 5.d4 Nc6 6.e5 [An important alternative is 6.d5.] 6...Ng8 7.Bc4 Qh4 8.Be3 Nxe5 [8...d6=/+] 9.g3 Qg4 10.Be2 Qe6 11.dxe5

Qxe5 12.0-0 d6 13.Re1 c6 14.Bf4 Qf6 15.Bg4+ Kd8 16.h4 [16.Bxc8] 16...Bxg4 17.Qxg4 h5 18.Qe2 Ne7? 19.Rad1 d5 20.Bg5 [20.Nxd5] 20...Qd6 21.Bf4? [21.Ne4] 21...Qb4 [21...Qf6=] 22.Qe5 [22.Nxd5] 22...Qxb2 23.Qc7+ Ke8 24.Bd6 Qxc3 25.Rxe7+ Bxe7 26.Qxe7# Black checkmated 1-0

181 – Baffo 4.Nxe5 Nxe5 5.d4 Ng6 Four Knights Game 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Nc3 Nf6 is reached in many variations after 1.Nc3 or 1...Nc6. The knight moves can be played in almost any order. The Halloween Gambit 4.Nxe5 is fun for blitz games. Jeffrey Baffo must have smiled after this beautiful finish. Baffo (1741) - biteme2 (1796), Live Chess Chess.com, 20.06.2018 begins 1.Nc3 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.e4 Nf6 4.Nxe5?! Nxe5 5.d4 Ng6 6.e5 Ng8 7.Bc4 d6 8.Qf3 Qd7 [8...f5-/+] 9.exd6 [9.0-0!?] 9...Bxd6 10.0-0 Nf6 11.Re1+ [11.Bg5 0-0 12.Bxf6 gxf6 13.Ne4 Qf5-+] 11...Kf8 [11...Be7-+] 12.Bg5 Ng4 [12...Qf5 13.Qxf5 Bxf5-+] 13.Be7+! 1-0

182 – Sadilek 4.d4 exd4 5.Nd5 Four Knights Game Belgrade Gambit 4.d4 exd4 5.Nd5!? avoids the routine 4.d4 exd4 5.Nxd4 lines that lead to equality. Bruce Monson wrote a book in 1997 that I enjoyed reading entitled “The Complete Guide to the Belgrade Gambit.” Below White wins with the help of a double attack in the game Maximilian Sadilek vs Marko Rubil. Sadilek (2251) - Rubil (2278), TCh-AUT 2nd Ost 2017-18 Austria AUT (2.4), 22.10.2017 begins 1.Nc3 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.e4 Nf6 4.d4 exd4 5.Nd5!? [5.Nxd4 Bb4 6.Nxc6 bxc6=] 5...Be7 [5...Nxe4 6.Bd3 Nc5 7.0-0=] 6.Bc4 [6.Bf4 d6 7.Nxd4 0-0 8.Nb5 Nxd5 9.exd5 Ne5 10.Be2 Ng6=] 6...0-0 7.0-0 d6 [7...Nxe4 8.Re1 Nf6 9.Nxe7+ Nxe7 10.Qxd4=] 8.Nxd4 Ne5 9.Bb3 c5 [9...Nxd5=] 10.Nf5 Bxf5 11.exf5 c4 12.Ba4 Nxd5 [12...a6 13.c3 Nd3=] 13.Qxd5 Qc8 14.Re1 Bf6 15.f4 Nd7 16.Bxd7 Qxd7 17.Be3 Bxb2 18.Rab1 Bc3 19.Rxb7 Qa4 [19...Qxb7 20.Qxb7=] 20.Rxf7 Rxf7 21.Qxa8+ Rf8 22.Qd5+ Kh8 23.Qxd6 Qe8 24.Bd2! 1-0

183 – Jerome 4.Bc4 Nxe4 5.Bxf7+ What is a Jerome Gambit? Our chess friend Rick Kennedy had a great site on the various forms of the Jerome Gambit. Rick Kennedy listed five Jerome Gambit options and wrote about them passionately: 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Jerome Gambit 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Nc3 Bc5 5.Bxf7+ Italian Four Knights Jerome Gambit 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 h6 4.0-0 Bc5 5.Bxf7+ Semi-Italian Jerome Gambit 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 h6 4.0-0 Nf6 5.Nc3 Bc5 6.Bxf7+ Semi-Italian Four Knights Jerome Gambit 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nd4 4.Bxf7+ Blackburne Shilling Jerome Gambit I humbly present a sixth option: 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Nc3 Nxe4 5.Bxf7+ Open Italian Four Knights Jerome Gambit. My ICC opponent "jeromed" chose a form of the Jerome Gambit. White gets the piece back. In that way it is more Queen's Gambit than King's Gambit, but it has an aggressive feel. Bill Wall listed it as a "Noa Gambit, Four Knights", but it is so Jerome-ish. jeromed - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 24.05.2012 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Nc3 Nxe4 5.Bxf7+ [The Jerome Gambit idea. Normal is 5.Nxe4 d5 6.Bd3 dxe4 (6...Nb4!= Kaufman) 7.Bxe4 Bd6= (7...Ne7!?)] 5...Kxf7 6.Nxe4 d5 7.Ng3!? [Common is 7.Neg5+ Kg8-/+ Material is even. Theory favors Black with his two pawns and two bishops.] 7...Bd6 [7...e4! 8.0-0 (or 8.Ng1 h5-/+) 8...exf3 9.Qxf3+ Qf6 10.Qxd5+ Be6 11.Qb5 Nd4 12.Qxb7 Bd6 Black is well developed and aggressively poised, but White has three pawns for the sacrificed bishop.] 8.d3 Rf8 9.Bg5 [White can quickly castle kingside: 9.0-0 Kg8 10.h3 h6 11.c4 Fighting for e4 for the Ng3. 11...Be6 12.cxd5 Bxd5 13.Ne4 Nd4 14.Nxd4 exd4 15.Qg4 with a playable game for White, although it seems Black a little stands better.] 9...Qe8 10.Qd2 Kg8 [10...h6 forces White to give up his bishop, but

I wanted a safer king.] 11.0-0-0 Bg4 12.h3 Bxf3 13.gxf3 Rxf3 14.Rhg1 Qf7 15.Nh1 Kh8 [Unpinning the pawn.] 16.c3 d4 17.c4 Rf8 [I missed 17...Nb4!-+] 18.Bh4? [White missed the diagonal threat.] 18...e4 19.dxe4? Bf4 White resigns as the queen is lost. 0-1

184 – Hoskavich 5.Nxe4 d5 Jeff Hoskavich and I played a few times at the Williamsport chess club in the mid-1990s. As they used to say in the newspaper business, “A good time was had by all.” We played 8 games. I was the higher rated player and won most of them. This was an offhand game, and my hand was way off. Jeff Hoskavich caught me in this one game for an instructive win. Maybe I should say an instructive loss. I probably learned more than he did. Now I am more sensitive about protecting my king. Jeff may have completely forgotten about this game. We began as an Alekhine Defence with 1.e4 Nf6. Jeff Hoskavich avoided 2.e5. He played 2.Nc3. I often play 2…d5. I have scored well as Black in that line of the Scandinavian Defence 1.e4 d5. I transposed into a Vienna Game with 2…e5. After 3.Nf3 I often play 3...Bb4. This Three Knights Game amounts to a Ruy Lopez reversed. Instead we entered the Four Knights Game. Hoskavich played the Italian pawn fork line with 4.Bc4 Nxe4 5.Nxe4 d5. All was fine until move 18. Then I went from having the advantage to a completely lost position in one move. That is never good. On move 20, Jeff Hoskavich had two ways to win. He chose to move his king which won my queen. He could have moved his queen which won my king. Put a fork in me. I was all done. Hoskavich (1750) - Sawyer (2010), Williamsport, PA 1994 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.Nc3 e5 3.Nf3 Nc6 4.Bc4 Nxe4 5.Nxe4 d5 6.Bxd5 [A good way to play this position is 6.Bd3 dxe4 7.Bxe4 Bd6 8.0-0 0-0 9.c3=] 6...Qxd5 7.Nc3 Qd8 8.0-0 Be6 9.Re1 Bd6 [9...Bc5! 10.d3 0-0=/+] 10.d3 [10.d4 exd4 11.Nb5=] 10...0-0 11.Nb5 a6 [11...Bc5=/+] 12.Nxd6 cxd6 13.Ng5 Bf5 14.g4?! [14.Be3 h6 15.Ne4 d5 16.Ng3 Bg6=] 14...Bg6 [Or 14...Bc8-/+ ] 15.h4 h6 16.h5 hxg5 [16...Bxh5! 17.gxh5 hxg5 18.c3 f5-/+] 17.hxg6 f6?! [More powerful is 17...Qf6!-/+] 18.Qf3 Qe8?? [Black was still fine after 18...Ne7! 19.Qxb7 d5=/+] 19.Qd5+ Kh8 20.Kg2 [There is a mate in two with 20.Qh1+ Kg8 21.Qh7#] 1-0

185 – Fedoseev 6.Bd3 dxe4 Young players find treasure in old lines. Dr. Savielly Tartakower played the Italian Four Knights Game as White 20 times in my database and lost only three times. He defeated Nimzowitsch, Reti, and Bogoljubow. He drew Spielmann, Rubinstein, and Keres. All were among the best in the world. Vladimir Fedoseev won against Ivan Babikov in the line 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bc4 after the fork idea of 4...Nxe4 5.Nxe4 d5. Black regains the piece but White may gain the advantage. I often reached this opening when I began 1.Nc3 as White or 1.e4 Nc6 as Black. Fedoseev (2731) - Babikov (2276), ch-RUS Blitz 2017 Sochi, 02.10.2017 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bc4 Nxe4 5.Nxe4 d5 6.Bd3 dxe4 7.Bxe4 Bd6 8.0-0 0-0 9.Re1 Ne7 [9...Nb4 10.d4 f5 11.Bd3 e4 12.Bc4+ Kh8 13.Ng5=] 10.Bd3 [10.c3+=] 10...Ng6 11.Bxg6 fxg6 12.Qe2 Qf6 13.d4 exd4 14.Qc4+ Kh8 [14... Qf7 15.Qxf7+ Rxf7 16.Nxd4=] 15.Bg5 Qf5 16.Be7 Bxe7 17.Rxe7 Bd7?! [17...c5=] 18.Qxd4 Rf7 19.Rxf7 [White wins material with 19.Nh4! Rxe7 20.Nxf5 Bxf5 21.f3+/-] 19...Qxf7 20.Ne5+/= 1-0 [If 20...Qf6! 21. Re1 Be6 22. Qe4 Rf8 23. f3+= White stands better.]

186 – Grover 4.Bb5 Bd6 5.d3 Grandmaster Sahaj Grover finds an attacking line in the Spanish Four Knights Game vs David Silva. White had a target after the first six moves. Black had played 5...h6 and 6...0-0. White retreated his light-squared bishop along the a2-g8 diagonal and he prepared for a kingside assault. It didn't take long as GM Grover won on move 22. Grover (2484) - Silva (2279), Boardwalk Pearson IM Port Elizabeth RSA, 14.03.2018 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bb5 Bd6 5.d3 h6 6.a3 0-0 7.Bc4 [7.0-0 a6=] 7...a6 [7...Bc5=] 8.g4 Bc5 9.h3 [9.g5+/=] 9...b5 10.Ba2 b4 11.axb4 Nxb4 12.g5 Nxa2 13.Rxa2 hxg5 14.Bxg5 Be7 15.Rg1 d6 16.Bh6 Ne8 17.Nd5 f5 [17...c6 18.Nxe7+ Qxe7 19.Be3=] 18.Ng5 c6 [18...Qd7 19.Qh5 Bxg5 20.Bxg7 Nxg7 21.Qxg5+/=] 19.Qh5 cxd5

[19...Bxg5 20.Bxg5 Qxg5 21.Qxg5 cxd5 22.exd5+-] 20.Bxg7 Bxg5 21.Qh8+ Kf7 22.Qxf8+ 1-0

187 – Lingsell 4.Bb5 Bc5 5.0-0 In his excellent book “The Kaufman Repertoire for Black & White”, Larry Kaufman recommended the line 4.Bb5 Bc5! for the Black player in the Four Knights Game. Kaufman’s first book was a classic. This newer book is even more accurate. Kaufman wrote this in his note to 4...Bc5!: "This obvious move has rarely been seen due to the coming 'fork trick', but since this game and notes show that it is not promising for White I expect 4...Bc5 to become the main line of the Four Knights, and 4.Bb5 to lose popularity." In the game below vs Pelle Lingsell, White won a pawn in the Four Knights Game with a knight fork. This led to a winning endgame which required some technical play. Sawyer - Lingsell, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 02.06.2012 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bb5 Bc5 5.0-0 d6 [Larry Kaufman's critical line is 5...0-0 6.Nxe5 Nxe5 7.d4 Bd6 8.f4 Neg4 9.e5 Be7 10.Be2 d6=] 6.d4 Bxd4 7.Nxd4 exd4 8.Qxd4 0-0 9.Bxc6 bxc6 10.Bg5 c5 11.Bxf6 cxd4 12.Bxd8 Rxd8 13.Nd5 c6? [Black blunders a pawn to a fork. There is still plenty of play after 13...Bd7 14.f3 c6 15.Nf4=] 14.Ne7+ Kf8 15.Nxc6 Re8 16.Nxd4 Rxe4 17.c3 Ba6 18.Rfe1 Rae8 19.Rxe4 Rxe4 20.f3 Re5 21.Kf2 Rc5 22.Re1 g6 23.Re3 h5 24.Nc2?! [24.a4+-] 24...Ra5 25.a3 Bc4 26.b4 Rd5? [Now White can activate his pieces and wins with the extra pawn. 26...Ra4 27.g4+/=] 27.Nd4 a5 28.f4 axb4 29.axb4 Bb5 30.Nxb5 Rxb5 31.Ke2 Rf5 32.g3 Rb5 33.Kd3 Rb8 34.Kd4 Rb5 35.Kc4 Rf5? 36.b5 Rc5+ 37.Kb4 1-0

188 – Sawyer 4.Bb5 Bb4 5.0-0 The Queen's Knight Attack first move 1.Nc3 found its way into almost every game I played during 2003. From there I took whatever path I felt like at the moment. Here we passed from a Vienna Game to a Spanish Four Knights Game after 4.Bb5 Bb4, I benefited from Black's move 7...a6. This proved to be too slow. Later I mounted a strong attack and checkmated her on move 19. By opponent's handle was "lynch_valeria", which happens to be the artist stage name for an Argentine singer. That actress was about my age. Whoever she was, a 1701 Yahoo rating was pretty good since they started everyone at 1200. Yahoo chess ratings over 2000 were rare when I played there, except for maybe computers rated 3000. Sawyer (1900) - lynch_valeria (1701), Yahoo 2 12, 13.08.2003 begins 1.Nc3 Nf6 2.e4 e5 3.Nf3 Nc6 4.Bb5 Bb4 5.0-0 Bxc3 6.bxc3 0-0 7.Re1 a6? 8.Bxc6 dxc6 9.Nxe5 Re8 10.d4 c5 11.Bg5 [11.Bf4!?+/-] 11...cxd4 12.cxd4 h6 13.Bxf6 Qxf6 14.Qf3 Qb6? [14...Qxf3 15.Nxf3+/=] 15.Qxf7+ Kh7 16.Qxe8 Qxd4 17.Rad1 Qb2 18.Qg6+ Kg8 19.Rd8# 1-0

189 – Kobalia 5.0-0 0-0 6.d3 Four Knights Game allows Black to copy White, but it cannot go on forever. Imagine the scenario where Black copies everything until White plays checkmate and then Black plays checkmate too late. Game over. White wins. Mikhail Kobalia as White played 7.Bxc6. After Ilya Chekletsov recaptured with 7...bxc6, White moved the knight away with 8.Ne2 to avoid 8...Bxc3. Later Grandmaster Kobalia sacrificed a bishop on h6, a tactic familiar to Blackmar-Diemer Gambit players. Kobalia (2596) - Chekletsov (2372), ch-RUS Blitz 2017 Sochi RUS (2.24), 02.10.2017 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Nc3 Nc6 4.Bb5 Bb4 5.0-0 00 6.d3 d6 7.Bxc6 bxc6 8.Ne2 h6 9.Ng3 Bg4 10.h3 Be6 11.Kh2 Nh7 12.Be3 Ba5 13.d4 exd4 14.Nxd4 Qd7 [14...Qe8 15.Ndf5=] 15.Ndf5 [15.Ngf5+/=] 15...Bb6? 16.Bxh6! gxh6 [16...g6 17.Bxf8+-] 17.Qg4+ Ng5

18.Nxh6+ Kh7 [18...Kh8 19.Qxg5+-] 19.Qxg5 Bd4 [19...f5 20.exf5+-] 20.Qh5 Kg7 [20...Bg7 21.Ngf5+-] 21.Ngf5+ Kf6 [21...Bxf5 22.Nxf5+ Kg8 23.Nxd4+-] 22.Ng4 mate 1-0

2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 The move 3.d4 leads to the Goring Gambit, Scotch Gambit and Scotch Game.

190 – Fondeo 3…Bb4+ 4.c3 Bd6 When I play 1...Nc6, sometimes I face the Scotch Game. I chose 3...Bb4 against Fondeo. White had 24 seconds left after move 27 to make all his moves. We played the remaining moves quickly. Fondeo - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 13.10.2012 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 Bb4+?! [3...exd4] 4.c3 Bd6 5.Bg5 f6 6.Bh4 g5 7.Bg3 h5 8.h4 [8.dxe5+/-] 8...g4 9.Nfd2 Qe7 10.d5 Nd8 11.Nc4 Nf7 12.Nbd2 c6 13.Ne3 Ngh6 14.Qb3 0-0 15.a4 Kg7 16.Ndc4 Bc5 17.Be2 Bxe3 18.Nxe3 d6 19.f3 c5 [Clocks: 0:58-1:53] 20.fxg4 Bxg4 21.Nxg4 Nxg4 22.Bxg4 hxg4 23.0-0-0 Nh6 24.Rdf1 f5 25.exf5 Rxf5 26.Qc4 Raf8 27.Rxf5 Nxf5 [Clocks: 0:24-1:35] 28.Qxg4+ Kh7 29.Qh5+ Nh6 30.Be1 Qf7 31.Qg5 Qf4+? [A mistake. My opponent had 11 seconds left. I just needed to avoid mate to win. 31...Rg8 32.Qd2+/=] 32.Bd2 Qxg5?+- [32...Qf6 33.g4! but there was no time to win a longer endgame.] 33.hxg5 Kg6 34.Rxh6+ Kf5 35.Rh7 Ke4 36.Rxb7 Kxd5 37.g6 Rg8 38.g7 e4 39.Bf4 Kc6 40.Rf7 d5 0-1

191 – Wilbur 3…exd4 4.c3 d6 I played more chess games against Glen Wilbur than anyone in 1971-72. We barely knew the rules and had no one to teach us. We played for fun at school, at home, and on the same chess team. Ronald Robinson played our board one; he won the Maine High School championship on tied-breaks in 1973. Glen played board two, and I played board 3. Glen and Ronald were rated higher than I in the early days, but later I would pass them both. I had studied the pamphlet by David Levy on the Goring Gambit. Sawyer - Wilbur, Glen Cove, Maine 2.11.1976 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 exd4 4.c3 d6 [The Goring Gambit goes 4...dxc3 5.Bc4 or 5.Nxc3] 5.cxd4 Bg4 6.Nc3 Nf6 7.Bc4 Bxf3 8.gxf3 Qd7 9.0-0 0-0-0 10.Bf4 Nh5 11.Bg3?! [11.Be3] 11...f5 [Wrong Pawn. 11...g5! 12.Nd5 Nf4 13.Bxf4 gxf4 14.Kh1 Bg7 15.Bb5+/=] 12.d5 [12.Bb5+/-] 12...Nxg3? [12...Ne5 13.Bb5

Qf7 14.f4+/=] 13.dxc6 bxc6 [13...Qxc6 14.Bd5+-] 14.Ba6+ Kb8 15.Qb3+ 1-0

192 – Miles 4.c3 d3 5.Bxd3 In the early 1970s, I got a very small pamphlet by David Levy on the Goring Gambit. I tried it on several occasions throughout the years 197277, mostly in blitz and offhand games. The Goring Gambit 4.c3 is a lefthanded Blackmar-Diemer Gambit 4.f3. In the Queens Knight Defence 1.e4 Nc6, Tony Miles tried many ideas against 3.Nf3 to reach lesser known positions. In this game Miles declined the Goring Gambit with 4…d3. Playing the White pieces was FIDE Master Dirk Troltenier from Germany. Troltenier (2300) - Miles (2580), Bundesliga 1990 begins 1.e4 Nc6 2.d4 e5 3.Nf3 exd4 4.c3 [The main lines are 4.Nxd4 Nf6 (or 4...Bc5 5.Be3 Qf6 6.c3 Nge7 7.Bc4 0-0 8.0-0 d6=) 5.Nxc6 bxc6 6.e5 Qe7 7.Qe2 Nd5 8.c4 Ba6 9.b3 g6=] 4...d3!? [There is a lot of good theory for both the gambit accepted 4...dxc3 5.Nxc3 Bc5 6.Bc4 d6 7.0-0 Nge7=; and the gambit declined 4...d5 5.exd5 Qxd5 6.cxd4 Bg4 7.Be2 Bxf3 8.Bxf3 Bb4+ 9.Nc3 Qc4=] 5.Bxd3 d6 6.h3 Nf6 [or 6...g6 7.Be3 Bg7 8.0-0 Nf6 9.Nbd2 0-0=] 7.0-0 Be7 8.c4 [8.Be3 Ne5 9.Nxe5 dxe5 10.Qc2 0-0 11.Nd2 Be6 12.Rad1 c6 13.Nf3 Qc7=] 8...Ne5 [Or 8...Nd7 9.Nc3 0-0 10.Nd5 Bf6=] 9.Nc3 0-0 10.Be2 Re8 11.Nd4 c6 12.f4 [12.Be3+/=] 12...Ng6 13.Kh1 Bf8 14.Bd3 Qc7 15.Qf3 a6 16.a4 b6 17.Bd2 Bb7 18.Rae1 Rad8 19.Bc1 Nd7 20.Bc2 Be7 21.Nf5 Bf6 22.Qg3 Nc5 23.b4 Ne6 24.h4 Nd4 [24...h5!?] 25.Nxd4 Bxd4 26.h5 Nf8 27.Rd1 [27.Ne2 Bf6=] 27...Bf6 28.Bb2 [28.e5!+-] 28...Qe7 29.e5 dxe5 30.Rxd8 [30.Ne4=] 30...Qxd8 31.Rd1 Qe7 32.f5 e4 33.c5 [33.Ba1 c5-/+] 33...bxc5 [33...e3-+] 34.bxc5 Be5 [34...e3-+] 35.Qg4 Nd7 36.Qxe4 [36.Nxe4 Bxb2-+] 36...Nxc5 [36...Bc8-+] 37.f6 Nxe4 38.fxe7 Nf2+ 39.Kg1 Nxd1 0-1

193 – Sawyer 4.c3 dxc3 5.Nxc3 Nc6 6.Bc4 I reached a Danish Gambit by transposition 1.d4 e5 2.e4. One wrong move led to a forced tactical win like a short order cook. Sawyer - vt, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 29.06.2012 begins 1.d4 e5 2.e4 [2.dxe5] 2...exd4 3.c3 dxc3 [3...d5 4.exd5 Qxd5=] 4.Nxc3 [4.Bc4 cxb2 5.Bxb2 d5 6.Bxd5 with some compensation.] 4...Bb4 5.Bc4 Nc6 6.Nf3 d6 7.Qb3 [7.0-0 Bxc3 8.bxc3 Nf6 9.e5 Nxe5 10.Nxe5 dxe5 11.Qb3 Qe7 12.Ba3 c5=] 7...Bxc3+ 8.bxc3 Ne5? [Black should transposes to 7.0-0 after 8...Qe7 9.0-0 Nf6 10.e5 Nxe5 11.Nxe5 dxe5] 9.Nxe5 dxe5 10.Bxf7+ Kf8 [10...Ke7 11.Ba3+ Kf6 12.Rd1 Bd7 13.f4+- cannot be appealing for Black.] 11.Bxg8 Rxg8 12.Ba3+ Ke8 13.Qxg8+ Black resigns 1-0

194 – Moore 4.c3 dxc3 5.Nxc3 Bb4 Scotch Game gives White options of 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.c3!? Robert C. Moore from North Carolina played the Goring Gambit vs me in an APCT postal chess contest. White built up an attack on the squares e6 and b7 which I defended with 10...Qc8!? We reached an even rook and pawn ending. I had read Fine's “Basic Chess Endings” cover to cover. I wrote out pages of analysis following principles from my endgame texts. I thought I worked everything out for a draw, but I miscalculated and lost the game. Moore (1882) - Sawyer (1950), corr APCT 78CC-A-3, 11.1978 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 exd4 4.c3 dxc3 5.Nxc3 Bb4 6.Bc4 d6 [6...Nf6=] 7.0-0 Bxc3 8.bxc3 Be6!? [8...Nf6!=] 9.Bxe6 fxe6 10.Qb3 Qc8 [10...Qd7! 11.Qxb7 Rb8 12.Qa6 Nf6 13.e5=] 11.Ng5 [11.Rb1=] 11...Nd8 12.f4 [12.c4!?] 12...h6 13.Nf3 Ne7 14.f5 [14.Ba3=] 14...0-0 [14...exf5!?] 15.Nd4 Rf6 16.g4 c5 17.Nf3?! c4 18.Qa4 Qc5+ [18...Nf7=/+] 19.Nd4 e5 20.Ba3 b5? [20...Qc7=] 21.Qa6 Qb6 22.Qxb6 axb6 23.Nxb5 Nb7 24.Bb4 Nc5 25.Bxc5 bxc5 26.Rfd1 Nc8 27.Rd2 Kf8 28.Rb1 Rf7 29.Nxd6 Rd7 30.Nxc4 Rxd2 31.Nxd2 Rxa2 32.Rb8 Rxd2 33.Rxc8+ Ke7 34.Rxc5 Kf6 35.Rc6+ [35.h4+/-] 35...Kg5 36.Rg6+ Kf4 37.Kf1 Kf3 38.Ke1 Kxe4? [38...Rxh2 39.Rxg7 Kxe4=] 39.Rxg7? [39.Kxd2 Kd5 40.Rxg7+-] 39...Rxh2 40.Kd1 Kd3 41.Rd7+ Kxc3 42.Ke1 Rg2 43.Rg7 Kd4 44.Kf1

Ra2 45.Rg6 Ke3 46.Kg1 e4 47.f6 Rf2 48.Rxh6 Rf4 49.Rh3+ Kd4 50.g5 e3 51.Rh8 Kd3 52.Kg2 e2 53.Rd8+ Kc3 54.Re8 Rg4+? [54...Kd2=] 55.Kf3 Rxg5 56.Kxe2 Rf5 57.Rf8 1-0

195 – Quinones 4.Bc4 Bc5 5.0-0 Jorge Quinones sent me a Scotch Gambit which began 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 exd4 4.Bc4. Why do players choose to play the Scotch Gambit as White? 1. It is tricky and requires accurate play by Black. 2. It is less well known occurring 2% of Open Games. 3. It has dozens instead of hundreds of lines to learn. 4. It has easy to learn frequently repeatable lines. 5. It has unbalanced equal positions to play for a win. 6. It is promoted by GM Roman Dzindzichashvili. 7. It is played in thematic events like this one. ruben72d (2057) - Quinones, 4rd Scotch Gambiteers Official Tournament Chess.com (3), 12.04.2016 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 exd4 4.Bc4 [This is the starting position.] 4...Bc5 5.0-0 [Most prefer 5.c3!] 5...d6 6.c3 Bg4 7.Qb3 Bxf3 8.Bxf7+ Kf8 9.Bxg8? [Tempting. Correct is 9.gxf3 dxc3 10.Bxg8 Rxg8 11.Nxc3 g5 12.Be3=] 9...Rxg8 10.gxf3 g5 11.Qe6?! [White should try to bring out a piece. 11.Nd2 Bb6-/+] 11...Rg6 12.Qh3 Kg7 [12...Ne5 13.Qg3 Qf6-+] 13.b4 Bb6 14.a4 a5 15.b5 [15.bxa5 Rxa5-/+] 15...Ne5 16.cxd4 Bxd4 17.Ra3 Qf6 18.Qg2 Rf8 19.Nd2 g4 20.f4 Qxf4 [21.Nb3 Nf3+ 22.Kh1 Qxe4 23.Nxd4 Qxd4 24.Be3 Qb4-+ Black is two pawns up.] 0-1

196 – Chandler 4.Bc4 Bb4+ 5.c3 Bill Chandler attacked f7 prematurely, but then he demonstrated what happens when Black fails to protect f7 in a blitz game. The opening went from the Scotch Game to the Scotch Gambit. Chandler - Archilleus, ICC 5 0 Internet Chess Club, 15.02.2012 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 exd4 4.Bc4 [Scotch Gambit] 4...Bb4+ 5.c3 dxc3 6.0-0 [6.bxc3 Dzindzichashvili; 6.Nxc3 is a Goring Gambit] 6...Nge7 [The full Danish Gambit 6...cxb2 7.Bxb2 Nf6 8.Ng5 0-0 9.e5 d5 10.exf6 dxc4 11.Qh5 has a promising attack for White.] 7.bxc3 Bc5 8.Bxf7+?! [Better is

8.Ng5! Ne5 9.Nxf7 Nxf7 10.Bxf7+ Kxf7 11.Qh5+ regained the piece on c5.] 8...Kxf7 9.Ng5+ Kg8 10.Qb3+ Kf8?? [Black forgets about f7. 10...d5!-+ Saves the game.] 11.Qf7# Black is checkmated 1-0

197 – Sawyer 4.Bc4 Nf6 5.e5 The word "Roman" has many meanings. In history, Roman is the Empire during the life of Jesus Christ. In building, Roman refers to an architectural style. In math, Roman is a set of numerals. In language, Roman is an alphabet. In religion, Roman is the Catholic Church. A frisky man with a girl has Roman hands and Russian fingers. In chess, Roman means Grandmaster Roman Dzindzichashvili. Roman Dzindzichashvili is famous for his opening repertoire which he presents in many videos available on Chess4Less.com and in the two books: “Chess Openings for White Explained” and “Chess Openings for Black Explained”. These books Roman prepared and wrote with GM Lev Alburt, GM Eugene Perelshteyn and Al Lawrence. They all put in a lot of work on these books. They cover Roman's basic repertoire. One of Dzindzi's favorite openings is the Scotch Gambit. This opening is maybe not the strongest, but it is playable and tricky. In some ways this is like the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit, but in the Scotch Gambit, White usually gets his pawn back fairly soon. Below is my game vs "sequitamorena" which ended in a quick mate when Black missed a tactic. Sawyer - sequitamorena, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 12.01.2013 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 exd4 4.Bc4 Nf6 5.e5 Ne4 6.0-0 [Other ideas are 6.Qe2 Nc5 7.c3 or 6.Bd5 Nc5 7.0-0] 6...Be7 7.Re1 Nc5 [7...d5 8.exd6 Nxd6 9.Bd5=] 8.Nxd4 Nxd4 [8...0-0 9.Nc3+/=] 9.Qxd4 Ne6 10.Qg4 0-0 11.Bh6 f5? [Fortunately for me in this blitz game I realized in time that Black just pinned his Ne6. 11...d5! 12.exd6 Bf6 13.c3 Qxd6 14.Be3=] 12.Qxg7#! Black is checkmated 1-0

198 – Mutesi 4.Bc4 Nf6 5.e5 A lady at church told me she thought of me when she read the Readers Digest article by Tim Crothers (8 pages - great reading!) about Phiona Mutesi, the young girl from Katwe, Uganda, Africa. Phiona learned chess at Agape Church from Coach Robert Katende. Phiona Mutesi qualified for two chess Olympiads by 2012. Here are three quotes from the article: "When I first saw chess, I thought, ‘What could make all these kids so silent?’" Phiona recalls. "Then I watched them play and get happy and excited, and I wanted a chance to be that happy." "Chess is a lot like my life," Phiona says through an interpreter. "If you make smart moves, you can stay away from danger, but you know any bad decision could be your last." "When I first met Phiona, I took it for granted that girls are always weak, but I came to realize that she could play as well as a boy," Ivan [Mutesasira] says. "She likes to attack, and when you play against her, it feels like she's pushing you backward until you have nowhere to move." Here is a game from the 40th Olympiad in Istanbul, Turkey between Yeonhee Cho of South Korea in the Scotch Gambit. As Black, Phiona Mutesi plays aggressively, opens the f-file with 14...f6, and finishes with a mating combination. Cho (1542) - Mutesi, 40th Olympiad Women Istanbul TUR (9.55), 06.09.2012 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 exd4 4.Bc4 Nf6 5.e5 d5 6.Bb5 Ne4 7.Nxd4 Bc5 [Or 7...Bd7 8.Bxc6 bxc6 9.0-0 Bc5=] 8.Nxc6!? [8.Be3] 8...Bxf2+ 9.Kf1 Qh4 [9...bxc6 10.Bxc6+ Kf8=] 10.Be2? [White gets confused. Better is to deal with the hanging Nc6 issue by 10.Nxa7+! c6 11.Nxc8 Rxc8 and only then play 12.Be2=] 10...bxc6 11.Nc3 Nxc3 12.bxc3 Bd4? [Black returns the favor. I thought this might be a typo, but the next move proves it was not. After 12...Bb6 and Black is winning.] 13.cxd4 0-0 14.Be3 f6 15.exf6 Rxf6+ 16.Kg1 Bf5 17.Qd2 Be4 18.h3?! [This leaves a hole for the black queen on g3. More challenging is 18.Qe1!+- ] 18...Qg3

[Black plays for mate.] 19.Bf1 Raf8 20.Re1 [White should try 20.h4!+/- to threat Rh3.] 20...Bxc2 21.Rc1 Be4 22.Qe2? [22.h4] 22...Rf3! 23.Re1 Rxe3 24.Qxe3 Rxf1+ 25.Kxf1 Qxg2# 0-1

199 – Karpatchev 4.Nxd4 Qh4 The Scotch Game 4.Nxd4 Qh4 was played by Staunton in the 1840s. Steinitz and others played it a lot from 1860 until 1905. Then the Scotch and the Steinitz 4…Qh4 took a 60 year break when hardly anyone played it. GM Lev Gutman and Sid Pickard specialized in this 4...Qh4 line and wrote books on it. It is not a well-known line. If you are new to the Scotch Game, the Steinitz 4…Qh4 quickly poses a serious challenge for you. The first thing to notice after 4…Qh4 is both the White pawn on e4 and knight on d4 are under attack. None of the moves White might first think of are playable, such as 5.f3, 5.Bd3, or 5.Nf3. The most common choices are 5.Nc3 or the gambit 5.Nb5. My initial assessment of this line was that White could easily lose a pawn. To hold onto the extra pawn, the Black king may have to slide over to Kd8 (to protect c7) and lose castling privileges. There is real risk for both sides, and real reward in the form of victories. The prepared player profits most. Roland Schmaltz is a German grandmaster and 1-minute bullet chess champion. That requires a quick mind for fast play. Here the Russian Grandmaster Aleksandr Karpatchev won quickly. Schmaltz (2390) - Karpatchev (2505), Cappelle op (5), 1993 begins 1.e4 Nc6 2.Nf3 e5 3.d4 exd4 4.Nxd4 Qh4 [The main lines are 4.Nxd4 Nf6 (or 4...Bc5 5.Be3 Qf6 6.c3 Nge7 7.Bc4 0-0 8.0-0 d6=) 5.Nxc6 bxc6 6.e5 Qe7 7.Qe2 Nd5 8.c4 Ba6 9.b3 g6=] 5.Nc3 [5.Nb5 Bb4+ 6.Bd2 Bc5 7.Qf3 Bb6 8.Be3 Ba5+ 9.c3 a6 10.Nd4 Ne5 11.Qg3 Qxg3 12.hxg3 d6 13.Nd2 Bb6=] 5...Bb4 6.Ndb5 [6.Be2 Qxe4 7.Ndb5 Bxc3+ 8.bxc3 Kd8 9.0-0 Nf6 10.Nd4 Nxd4 11.cxd4 d6 12.Bg5 Qf5 13.Bh4 Bd7 14.Qd2+/=] 6...Ba5 7.Bd3 [7.Be2 a6 8.Nd4 Qxe4 9.Nxc6 dxc6 10.0-0 Qe7 11.Bc4 Nf6 12.Re1 Be6 13.Bg5 0-0 14.Qf3 h6=] 7...a6 8.Na3 b5 9.Bd2? [9.Nab1 Ne5 10.0-0 Nf6 11.Nd2 0-0=] 9...Nf6 10.g3 Qh3 11.Nd5 Nxd5 12.exd5 0-0 13.dxc6 [13.Bxa5 Re8+ 14.Be2 Qg2 15.dxc6 Qxh1+ 16.Kd2 Qxh2-/+] 13...Re8+ 14.Be2 dxc6 15.Rf1 [15.c3 Qg2 16.Rf1 Bh3 17.Be3 Qxh2 18.Bf3 Rxe3+

19.fxe3 Qxb2 20.Nc2 Qxc3+ 21.Kf2 Bxf1 22.Kxf1 Qf6-/+] 15...Bg4 16.f3 [16.Bxa5 Bxe2 17.Qxe2 Rxe2+ 18.Kxe2 b4-+] 16...Qxh2 17.Bxa5 Rad8 18.Bd2 Qxg3+ 19.Rf2 Bh3 0-1

200 – Miles 4.Nxd4 Bb4+ 5.c3 When Tony Miles transposed from the Queens Knight Defence 1...Nc6 into a King Pawn Open Game with 2...e5, White had the opportunity to choose a romantic opening. Here Miles plays his special 4...Bb4+ against the Scotch Game. This avoids opening theory in the more popular 4...Bc5. I like the Black bishop maneuver with 13...Be6, 15...Bd5, and 16...Bc6. Anthony J Miles picked up three pawns and a knight after a multitude of checks in a game with Andrei-Nestor Cioara. Cioara (2353) - Miles (2579), 5th HIT Open Nova Gorica SLO (2), 02.02.2000 begins 1.e4 Nc6 2.Nf3 e5 3.d4 exd4 4.Nxd4 Bb4+ 5.c3 Bc5 6.Be3 Bb6 7.Bc4 [7.Nf5] 7...Ne5 [7...Nf6 8.Nxc6 bxc6=] 8.Be2 Nf6 9.f4 Nc6 [9...Ng6 10.Nd2 d5=] 10.Nd2 Nxd4 [10...d5=] 11.Bxd4 0-0 [11...d5=] 12.0-0 d6 13.Bf3 Be6 14.Qe2 Re8 15.h3 Bd5 16.Qd3 Bc6 17.Rfe1 Nd7 18.Qe3 f5 19.Qd3 Qh4 20.e5 [20.Rf1 fxe4 21.Bxe4 d5=] 20...Qxf4 21.Bxc6 bxc6 22.exd6 cxd6 [22...Ne5-/+] 23.Qc4+ [23.Nc4 Nc5=] 23...d5 24.Rxe8+ Rxe8 25.Qxc6 Bxd4+ 26.cxd4 Qxd4+ 27.Kh1 Nf6 28.Nf3 [28.Qc2 Ne4-/+] 28...Qxb2 29.Rd1 [29.Re1 Rxe1+ 30.Nxe1 Qxa2-/+] 29...Qxa2 30.Nd4 [30.Qb7 Qa3-+] 30...Qf2 31.Qb7 [31.Kh2 h6-+] 31...Re1+ 32.Rxe1 Qxe1+ 33.Kh2 Qe5+ 0-1

201 – Gerace 4.Nxd4 Bc5 5.Nb3 Scotch Game opening chess theory was new to me in 1978. My normal defense to 1.e4 was the Caro-Kann 1...c6. I defended the Open Game 1.e4 e5 in this APCT Class A championship game. It game taught me several memorable lessons. My short game against James Gerace is marked by his excellent move 10.Ra4! This challenged my bishop. I failed to handle it correctly and was completely busted tactically. By move 12, half my army faced immediate annihilation. My knight, bishop, queen and king were all in grave danger. I could save some, but the final result was not in doubt in this APCT game. The USCF lists James Gerace of California with a final correspondence rating of 1780. Postal games were rated in order of finish. My quick resignation of a lost game meant my rating would go up higher in the wins that soon followed. I quickly reached the 2000 expert level by winning my other games, despite this crushing loss. Gerace (1821) - Sawyer (1900), corr APCT 78CC-A-3, 05.1978 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 exd4 4.Nxd4 Bc5 5.Nb3 [5.Be3] 5...Bb6 6.a4 [6.Nc3] 6...Qh4!? [6...a5 7.Nc3 Nf6=] 7.Qe2 Nf6? [7...a6=] 8.a5 Nd4 9.Nxd4 Bxd4 10.Ra4! Bc5? [10...c5 11.c3 Be5 12.g3+/-] 11.Rc4 d6 12.e5 1-0

202 – Schultz 4.Nxd4 Bc5 5.Nxc6 Scotch Game allows players both quick development and sharp attacks. Black played 4.Nxd4 Bc5 below and continued 6...Qh4 to threaten mate in one. Black finished with a knight attack on the queen to defend h7 and uncover the pin to win the bishop on e3 in the game Kai Gylling Nielsen vs Jesper Schultz Pedersen. Nielsen (1897) - Schultz Pedersen (2235), Politiken Cup 2014 Helsingor DEN (10.91), 29.07.2014 begins 1.e4 Nc6 2.Nf3 e5 3.d4 exd4 4.Nxd4 Bc5 5.Nxc6 bxc6 6.Bc4 [6.Bd3 d6 7.0-0 Nf6=] 6...Qh4 7.Qf3 Nf6 [7...d5=/+] 8.Nd2 [8.Bf4 0-0 9.0-0 d5 10.exd5 cxd5=] 8...0-0 9.g3 Qh3 10.Bf1 Qe6

11.Bd3 d5 12.0-0 Re8 13.exd5 cxd5 14.Nb3 Bb6 15.Bd2 Ne4 16.Rae1 Bb7 [16...c5 17.c4 Bb7 18.Bxe4 dxe4-/+] 17.Qh5 [17.Be3 Qd7=/+] 17...Qf6 18.Be3 Re5 [18...Qxb2-/+] 19.Qh3 [19.Qd1 Rae8=/+] 19...Rae8 [19...Ng5 20.Bxg5 Bxf2+ 21.Kg2 d4+ 22.Re4 Qxg5-+] 20.f3 [20.Nd4 Bc8-/+] 20...Ng5 0-1

203 – Miranda 4.Nxd4 Bc5 5.Be3 White plays the Scotch Game line 4.Nxd4 Bc5 5.Be3 to defend the knight on d4. Normal play followed until the move 9.Bf3. After the players castled, Black mounted a kingside attack by opening lines with 16...f5. The White pieces were pushed back until Black found a beautiful mate in Miranda Gonzalez vs Russell Granat. Miranda Gonzalez (2027) - Granat (2213), 4NCL 2011-12 Hinkley Island ENG (4.88), 15.01.2012 begins 1.e4 Nc6 2.d4 e5 3.Nf3 exd4 4.Nxd4 Bc5 5.Be3 Qf6 6.c3 Nge7 7.Bc4 Ne5 8.Be2 Qg6 9.Bf3 [9.0-0 d6 10.f3 0-0 11.Nd2 d5 12.Kh1 dxe4 13.fxe4 Bg4 14.Bf4 Bxe2 15.Qxe2 Bd6=] 9...a6 10.Nd2 Nxf3+ 11.Qxf3 d6 12.h3 Bd7 13.0-0 0-0 14.Kh1 Rae8 15.b4? [15.Rac1 Bb6=/+] 15...Bxd4 16.cxd4? f5 17.exf5 Rxf5 18.Qe2 Bb5 19.Qd1 Nd5 20.Rg1 [20.Qb3 Bxf1 21.Nxf1 Qf7-+] 20...Nxe3 21.fxe3 Rxe3 22.Nf3 [22.Qg4 Bc6-+] 22...Bc6 23.Qd2 [23.Rf1 Qg3-+] 23...Qh6 24.Rae1 [24.Rge1 Rfxf3 25.Rxe3 Rxh3+ 26.Rxh3 Qxd2-+] 24...Rfxf3 25.gxf3 Qxh3+ 26.Qh2 Bxf3+ [If 27.Rg2 Rxe1 mate!] 0-1

204 – Markovic 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nxc6 This Queens Knight Defence 1...Nc6 provides just a taste of the popular Scotch Game 4.Nxd4 Nf6 line. White handles the position quite well for 20 moves. Then Black wins a bishop with an x-ray tactic in the game Maja Milanovic vs Marko Markovic. Milanovic (1851) - Markovic (2285), 19th Skopje Open Skopje MKD (3), 26.10.2011 begins 1.e4 Nc6 2.d4 e5 3.Nf3 exd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nxc6 bxc6 6.e5 [6.Bd3 d5=] 6...Ne4 [6...Qe7 7.Qe2 Nd5 8.c4 Nb6=] 7.Be2 [7.Nd2 Nxd2 8.Bxd2 g6=] 7...Bc5 8.0-0 0-0 9.Nd2 [9.Qd3 d5=] 9...Qh4 10.Nxe4 Qxe4 11.Bd3 Qxe5 12.Re1 Qd5 [12...Qf6=] 13.c4 Qd6 14.Qf3 Bd4 15.Bf4 Qf6 16.Qe4 g6 17.Rab1 d6 18.Qxc6 [18.Be3 Bf5=] 18...Qxf4 19.Qxa8 Bxf2+ 20.Kh1 Bxe1 21.Rxe1 Qd2 22.Qe4 Bf5! Black wins the Bd3 by a skewer through the queen. 0-1

205 – Nepomniachtchi 4.Nxd4 Nf6 When I was 12 years old, my father and some friends took me to Baxter State Park in Maine. We climbed Mount Katahdin which rises one mile above sea level. We stopped by a stream. I took off my shoes and waded into the water as it gently flowed down the mountain over the rocks. Suddenly I started slipping and sliding deeper into the water up to my neck. I could not stop myself. The water current pushed me along. The footing was slick. The guys formed a human chain that reached me and pulled me out. Whew. I experienced the slippery slope first hand. How can a strong grandmaster slip into a lost opening position? White won this short Scotch Game in only 23 moves without a sudden blunder by Black. He just slipped into a worse position Ian Nepomniachtchi is a Russian grandmaster rated near the top in the world. GM Nepomniachtchi is a universal openings player, but mostly as White he chooses 1.e4. It is no surprise to me that he might win a short game. GM Evgeny Tomashevsky played 12…d6 stepping onto the slippery slope, and White found 13.Nc3. Black did not fall off the cliff with some big blunder. He just went slip sliding away. Nepomniachtchi (2740) - Tomashevsky (2731), 10th Tal Mem 2016 Moscow RUS (1.4), 26.09.2016 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 exd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nxc6 bxc6 6.e5 Qe7 7.Qe2 Nd5 8.c4 Ba6 9.b3 g6 10.f4 [10.g3=] 10...Bg7 11.Qf2 Nf6 [11...Nb6!?] 12.Ba3 [12.Be2=] 12...d6 [12...Ng4=] 13.Nc3 0-0 [13...Qe6 14.Be2+/=] 14.0-0-0 Ne8 15.g3 Bb7 16.Bg2 f6 17.exd6 Nxd6 18.c5 Nf5 19.Rhe1 Qf7 20.Bf1 Rfd8 21.Rxd8+ Rxd8 22.Bc4 Rd5 23.Qe2 1-0

2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 The move 3.Bc4 leads to various forms of the Italian Game.

206 – Haines 3…h6 4.0-0 Nf6 Can you play chess openings using common sense? Yes, but exact knowledge of basic theory will boost your success. The move 3...h6 in the Italian Game is surprisingly common for players rated 1500-1600. How do masters respond to 3...h6? Attack minded masters such as Morphy, Steinitz, and Svidler played 4.d4 to open up the center quickly. Others such as Koltanowski and Gipslis first played 4.0-0. Alekhine opted for 4.Nc3 in a simul when he was the world champion. The Italian Game begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4. How do you handle the move 3...h6 vs the Italian Game? I've always played 4.0-0 or 4.d4. Our move 3...h6 is played fully 1% of the time. The beginner logic of 3...h6 goes like this. Black wants to play 3...Nf6. He notices White can play 4.Ng5. If Black does not know the theoretical move 4...d5 nor enjoy the gambit 4...Bc5, then preventing 4.Ng5 by 3...h6 seems reasonable, almost forced! In the game Ray Haines vs David Hunter, we find another example of the move 3...h6. White continues with 5.d3 against his less experienced opponent. Ray Haines demonstrates that solid but rapid development leads to a playable middlegame. Haines - D. Hunter, Presque Isle, ME 05.01.2016 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 h6 [3...Bc5; 3...Nf6] 4.0-0 Nf6 5.d3 [5.d4+/= makes use of open lines.] 5...Bc5 6.Nc3 d6 7.Be3 Bxe3 8.fxe3 Bg4 [8...Na5=] 9.Qe1 Bxf3? [Black is too slow to complete his development. Now White's attack will pick up speed. Better is 9...0-0 10.Qg3 Na5=] 10.Rxf3 a6 11.Qg3 Qd7? [This loses faster than 11...0-0 12.Raf1+-] 12.Qxg7 0-0-0 13.Qxf6 Nb4 14.Bxf7 Rhf8 15.Be6 Rxf6 16.Bxd7+ Rxd7 17.Rxf6 Nxc2 18.Rf8+ Rd8 19.Rxd8+ Kxd8 20.Rf1 Nxe3 21.Rf7 Kc8 22.Nd5 Nxd5 23.exd5 c6 24.dxc6 bxc6 25.g4 d5 26.h4 Kd8 27.g5 Ke8 28.g6 c5 29.Rc7 e4 30.g7 exd3 31.g8Q# 1-0

207 – Hayward 3…f5 4.d4 fxe4 Keith Hayward left a comment on my Mike Kaplan game: "I played Keith Kaplan too. He was a very aggressive player." They played an Italian Game (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4). One does not see the Rousseau Gambit (3...f5) played or analyzed very often. Clearly it is a critical response in that Black threatens 4...fxe4. Also Black gets a good game after 4.exf5 e4! Tim McGrew (he wrote the Forward to Blackmar-Diemer Gambit Keybook II) wrote written three articles for ChessCafe.com on the Rousseau Gambit. The first covered 4.d3 and all the other alternatives to the main line. The second covered 4.d4. The third covered a critical line sent to McGrew by Dennis Monokroussos. Keith Hayward is a FIDE Master and an ICCF-IM known for his expertise in chess openings. Christoph Scheerer wrote in "The Blackmar-Diemer Gambit" (page 290) on a game which "gave White got good play in K. Hayward - T. Sawyer, correspondence 2007". Keith Hayward plays Keith Kaplan (he’s a National Master from Massachusetts or Rhode Island). On to their exciting game! Hayward - Kaplan, Jaffrey NH, 29.10.1978 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 f5 4.d4! [4.d3 Nf6 5.Nc3 Bb4 6.0-0 Bxc3 7.bxc3 d6 8.Ng5 Qe7 9.Bf7++/= White's advantage is not great.] 4...fxe4 [4...Qe7!? 5.0-0 fxe4 6.Nxe5 Nxe5 7.dxe5 Qxe5 8.Nc3 Nf6 9.Nd5 Nxd5 10.Bxd5 c6 11.Bxe4+/Material is even, but the Black king and queen on the open e-file is likely to cause big problems.] 5.Nxe5 Nxe5 [Tim McGrew recommends 5...d5 6.Bb5! (6.Nxc6 bxc6 7.Qh5+ Ke7!=/+; 6.Qh5+ g6 7.Nxg6 Nf6 8.Qh4 Nxd4-/+) 6...Qd6 analysis by Monokroussos after 7.0-0+/- shows White is better.] 6.dxe5 g6 [6...Qe7 7.0-0 Qxe5 see note to Black's fourth move.] 7.Qd5 Qe7 8.Bg5 Qe6 9.Qxe4 d5 10.Qxd5 [10.Bxd5 Qf5 11.Qxf5 Bxf5 12.Nc3+-] 10...Qxd5 11.Bxd5 [Black is down two pawns and two tempi in development. There is no defence.] 11...Be7 12.Bxe7 Nxe7 13.Nc3 c6 14.Bc4 Bf5 15.0-0-0 b5 16.Bd3 Be6 17.Ne4 0-0 18.Nf6+ Kg7 19.f3 a5

20.Kb1 a4 21.Be4 b4 22.Rd6 Bxa2+?! [Unsound, but this is a practical try for a miracle mating trap. If 22...Bf5 23.Bxf5 Nxf5 24.Rxc6 White is up three pawns.] 23.Kxa2 b3+ 24.cxb3 axb3+ 25.Kxb3 Rfb8+ 26.Kc2 Ra5 27.Nd7 Rb4 28.Rd2 c5 29.Rc1 Raa4 30.Nxc5 Rc4+ 31.Kd1 1-0

208 – Purser 3…d6 4.0-0 a6 When Tom Purser has passed away my wife said, "You and Tom were friends for a long time." "Yes, 33 years." Tom Purser was well known in the public chess community as an author and publisher, but he enjoyed his private life with family and friends. Tom fell in love with the BDG. He met with Diemer in Germany. Purser convinced me to try the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit. Then Tom got me to join the Internet Chess Club. I contributed to his BDG World Magazine (1983-1997). Tom Purser provided a BDG Concepts article for my Blackmar-Diemer Gambit Keybook II. Tom Purser found out I graduated from Bryan College in Dayton, Tennessee. Then he told me Dayton was his home town. In fact, both of us worked for the Dayton Herald Newspaper about 15 years apart (in the 1960s and 1970s). It's a small world after all. To honor his military service I present an early Tom Purser game played in Vietnam against Paul Radke, Tom Purser played 1.e4 early in his career. He loved the Italian Game lines after 3.Bc4. Purser - Radke, Nha Trang, Vietnam 1969 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 d6 4.0-0 a6 [4...Be7=] 5.a4 [5.d4+/=] 5...Bd7 6.Nc3 Qe7 7.Nd5! Qd8 8.d4 [8.Ng5!?+/-] 8...exd4 9.Nxd4 g6 [9...Ne5 10.Ba2 c6 11.Nc3 Nf6 12.f4+/-] 10.Qf3 [10.Nxc6!+-] 10...Nxd4 [10...Ne5 11.Qb3+/-] 11.Nxc7+ Qxc7 12.Qxf7+ Kd8 13.Qxf8+ Be8 14.Bg5+ Ne7 15.Bxe7+ Qxe7 16.Qxh8 Nxc2 17.Rac1 Qxe4 18.Qf6+ Kc7 19.Rfd1 Bc6 20.Qxd6+ Kb6 21.a5+ Ka7 22.Qc5+ 1-0

209 – Sawyer 3…Nd4 4.Nxe5 Italian Game 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 moves on more specific variations such as Giuoco Piano, Evans Gambit, Two Knights Defence, Four Knights Game, Max Lange, Scotch Gambit or Philidor Defence. The trappy line 3.Bc4 Nd4 is a Shilling Gambit or Kostic Gambit. There is a good way (4.Nxd4!), a bad way (4.Nxe5?!), and an ugly way (5.Nxf7?) for White to play. I played a game early on Christmas morning while the stockings still hung by the chimney with care. Okay, our stockings were by the tree. The highlight for our Christmas is to think about Jesus and enjoy our friends and family. Later on Christmas day another family member "skyped" us while we were sitting around our square table. He said that it would be easier to see us if we all sat on the same side like in the famous painting "The Last Supper" by Leonardo da Vinci. That painting has Jesus and his disciples. They all look like Italians around the year 1495. This painting was done about the time the current version of chess was invented to give more power to the queen and bishops. That rule change made the game of chess faster and more exciting. andrei - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 25.12.2012 begins 1.e4 Nc6 2.Nf3 e5 3.Bc4 Nd4?! 4.Nxe5?! [4.Nxd4! exd4 5.0-0 Nf6 6.Re1 d6 7.c3 Ng4 8.Qe2!+/-] 4...Qg5 5.Nxf7? [5.Bxf7+ Kd8 6.0-0 Qxe5 7.c3 Ne6 8.d3 Ne7=/+ when Fritz and Houdini favor Black's extra knight over White's two extra pawns.] 5...Qxg2 6.Rf1 Qxe4+ 7.Be2 Nf3# White is checkmated 0-1

210 – Fitzsimons 3...Be7 4.d4 Italian Game Hungarian Defence 3.Bc4 Be7 is less popular than 3...Bc5 or 3...Nf6. In David Fitzsimons against Jonathan Rogers, Black had an interesting possibility after 4.d4 exd4 5.c3!? Instead of 5...Na5, Black played 5...Nf6 and got kicked by 6.e5! Fitzsimons (2337) - Rogers (2340), 4NCL 2017-18 England, 10.02.2018 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Be7 4.d4 exd4 5.c3!? [5.Nxd4+/=] 5...Nf6 [5...Na5! 6.Be2 dxc3 7.Nxc3 d6=] 6.e5! Ne4 7.Bd5 Nc5 [7...f5 8.0-0+/=]

8.cxd4 Ne6 [8...Na6 9.Nc3+/-] 9.Nc3 0-0 [9...Nb4 10.Bb3+/-] 10.Be4 f5 11.exf6 Bxf6 12.d5 Nc5 13.dxc6 Bxc3+ 14.bxc3 Qe7 15.Qd5+ Kh8 16.Ba3 d6 17.Bxc5 Rf5 [17...Bf5 18.cxb7 Bxe4 19.Qg5+-] 18.Qd3 1-0

211 – Spiegel 4.Ng5 Bc5 5.Bxf7+ I chose to play the game below like a maniac. Michael Spiegel was a notable USA chess player. His old FIDE rating was 2155. When we played, Spiegel was at his peak ICCF rating of 2281. I had seen his published games and was very impressed. Michael Spiegel was a correspondence opening expert. I was stuck playing the Black pieces. What would I do? I answered Michael Spiegel's Italian Game with the Two Knights Defence. When he played the aggressive 4.Ng5, for only the second time in my life I played 4...Bc5!? The year before I drew a club game as Black vs David Parsons. That was it for my prior experience in this famous gambit, but of course I knew about it. In the 1800s the Czech player Karel Traxler played the gambit in a handful of published games. Decades later, Kenneth Williams and John Menovsky analyzed the line in great detail, so much so that they named it the WilkesBarre Variation after their club. What inspired me to play this was that the city of Wilkes-Barre was between where Michael and I lived at the start of the game. Tim Harding wrote in his excellent “Counter-Gambits” book that WilkesBarre was in New England, but that is not quite true. New England is the six states east of New York. Wilkes-Barre is in Pennsylvania, west of New York. It is about 140 miles from New England. That is about the same distance from Dublin, Ireland to Liverpool, England. In the grand scheme of world geography, they are very close, but not quite the same if you actually live there. It was a minor inaccuracy in a book by a great author. Since Michael Spiegel played the Italian Game, it seemed fitting to battle over a Wilkes-Barre (pronounced "Wilks Barry"). During the game Michael moved to Asia which made this a long game.

After the tournament finished, ICCF published that two of my opponents had tied for first place with very fine 4.0-2.0 records. I wrote to the tournament director and asked what place I finished with my 4.5-1.5 record. They changed the result and put me first. ICCF never sent me the Master certificate (a postcard, not a title) that noted the achievement of winning such a section. What I got was a full year of satisfaction playing a lot of very good chess. Spiegel (2281) - Sawyer (2157), corr ICCF 1995 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf64.Ng5 Bc5 [4...d5 5.exd5 Na5] 5.Bxf7+ [5.Nxf7 Bxf2+ 6.Kf1 Qe7 7.Nxh8 d5 8.exd5 Nd4 9.d6 Qxd6 (9...cxd6 10.Kxf2 Bg4 11.Qf1+-) 10.Nf7 Qc5 11.d3 Bh4 12.b4 Qe7 13.Nd2+/-] 5...Ke7 6.Bd5 [6.Bb3] 6...Rf8 7.0-0 d6 8.h3 [8.c3 Bg4 9.Nf3] 8...Qe8 [8...h6 9.Nf3] 9.c3 Qg6 10.d4 Bb6 11.f4 [11.a4] 11...exf4 12.Bxf4 h6 13.Nf3 Nxd5 14.exd5 Rxf4 15.dxc6 bxc6 16.Qe2+ Be6 [16...Kf8=] 17.Nbd2 Kd7 18.Kh2 [18.a4=] 18...Re8 19.Qf2 Qc2 20.Nc4 Qxf2 21.Nxb6+ cxb6 22.Rxf2 Bd5 23.Kg3 Ref8 [23...Rf6=/+] 24.Raf1 g5 25.b3 [25.Nh2 h5 26.Rxf4 gxf4+ 27.Kf2=] 25...h5 26.h4 gxh4+ 27.Nxh4 Rg4+ 28.Kh3 Rxf2 29.Rxf2 Be6 30.Nf3 Rxd4+ 31.Kh2 Rd3 32.c4 Re3 33.Kg3 Re4 34.Rd2 d5 35.cxd5 Bxd5 36.Kf2 a5 37.Nd4 a4 38.bxa4 Kd6 39.g3 [White could try to draw a rook ending down a pawn: 39.Ne2 Rxa4 40.Nc3 Ra5 41.a4 Kc7 42.Nxd5+ Rxd5-/+] 39...Kc5 40.Ne2 Rxa4 41.Nc3 Rd4 42.Rb2 Bf7 43.Ke3 Bg6 44.Ne2 Rd3+ 45.Kf4 b5 46.Kg5 Bf7 47.Rc2+ [Black is better after 47.g4 hxg4 48.Kxg4 Ra3 49.Nc1 b4-+] 47...Kb6 48.g4 hxg4 49.Kxg4 b4 50.Kf4 c5 51.Nc1 Rd1 52.Ke3 c4 53.Ke2 Bh5+ 54.Ke3 Kc5 55.Nb3+ Kd5 56.Na5 Rd3+ 57.Kf2 c3 58.Nb3 Bd1 59.Rc1 Bxb3 [Black can force a win by 59...c2 60.Na1 Rc3 61.Nb3 Rxb3-+] 60.axb3 Rd2+ 61.Ke3 Rb2 62.Rd1+ Kc5 63.Rd8 Rxb3 64.Rc8+ Kb5 65.Rb8+ Ka6 66.Ra8+ Kb7 67.Ra5 Rb2 68.Kd3 c2 0-1

212 – Yu Yangyi 4.Ng5 d5 5.exd5 Yu Yangyi rated 2723 demonstrated a good way to play the Two Knights Defence. White challenged Black with aggressive 4.Ng5. Normally Black plays some type of a gambit in this line. Here Black continued 4...d5 5.exd5 Na5. White remained up a pawn after the normal moves 6.Bb5+ c6 7.dxc6. Black must keep up the opening and middlegame pressure with threats. In response White usually does not move anything on the queenside for the first ten moves. Then Liu Qingnan played 11.d4. As Black, Yu Yangyi threatened h2, f2, e2, c2 and others squares. Chess engines evaluate the position as having equal chances. The game did not necessarily have to end in a draw. However, these strong players from China did repeat moves and draw. Liu Qingnan (2523) - Yu Yangyi (2723), ch-CHN 2015 Xinghua CHN (4.2), 21.05.2015 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Ng5 d5 5.exd5 Na5 6.Bb5+ c6 7.dxc6 bxc6 8.Be2 h6 9.Nf3 e4 10.Ne5 Bd6 [Or 10...Bc5 11.0-0 Qd4 12.Ng4 Bxg4 13.Bxg4 Nc4=] 11.d4 exd3 12.Nxd3 0-0 13.0-0 Qc7 14.h3 [14.g3 Bf5 15.Nd2 Rfe8 16.Bf3 Rad8=] 14...c5 [14...Re8 15.Re1=] 15.b3 c4 16.bxc4 Nxc4 17.Nd2 Nxd2 18.Bxd2 Bf5 19.Ne1 Ne4 20.Bd3 Rac8 21.Nf3 Bc5 22.Be3 Rfd8 23.Qc1 Nc3 24.Qd2 Ne4 25.Qc1 Nc3 26.Qd2 [26.Re1 Bxe3 27.Qxe3 Nd5 28.Qd2 Nf4 29.Ne5=] 26...Ne4 27.Qc1 Nc3 1/2-1/2

2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 Here we cover the Evans Gambit and Giuoco Piano.

213 – Haines 4.b4 d5 5.exd5 At the end of 1973, I experimented with the Evans Gambit. I had a copy of the little Chess Digest monograph by the late GM Larry Evans. The Evans Gambit is named after the Welsh sea Captain William Davies Evans who played it in 1827. Paul Morphy made it seem like a forced win for White except when he played Black. Our town library had a copy of the black and white paperback “Chess Openings: Theory and Practice” by I.A. Horowitz (1964). Ray Haines and I studied every detail of it in our learning years. Even when I tried a gambit, Ray insisted on turning the tables. He attacked me! Our game continued 4.b4!? d5!? Eric Schiller called this variation the Hein Counter Gambit. This line is not as strong as accepting the Evans Gambit by 4...Bxb4, but the move hides some tricks. I fell for one on move 7. I never recovered. Ray Haines had a tactical approach in his early years. It was a beautiful game. I just wish I had been on the winning side! Sawyer - Haines, Ft Fairfield, ME 02.12.1973 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.b4 d5!? [Hein Counter Gambit. Evans Accepted is 4...Bxb4 5.c3 Ba5 6.d4 exd4 (or 6...d6 7.Qb3 Qd7 8.dxe5) 7.0-0 where Black has tried several set-ups. The Evans Declined continues 4...Bb6 5.a4 a6=] 5.exd5 Nxb4 6.Nxe5!? [I am on my own. White most often plays 6.0-0 Nf6 7.Nxe5 Nbxd5 8.d4+/= with a slight edge.] 6...Nf6 [Junior suggests 6...Bd4! 7.c3 Bxe5 8.d4 and Black has some interesting options with his Be5; 6...Qe7 7.0-0!+/-] 7.d4? [White misses a tactic. Correct is 7.0-0 Nbxd5 (7...Bd4 8.Ba3!+/=) 8.d4+/=] 7...Bxd4! 8.c3 [8.Qxd4?? falls to the knight fork 8...Nxc2+ winning the queen.] 8...Bxe5 9.Qa4+ Nc6 [9...c6!-+] 10.dxc6 0-0 11.Ba3 Re8 12.0-0 bxc6 13.Rd1 Bxh2+! [The classic bishop sacrifice!] 14.Kf1 [After 14.Kxh2 Ng4+ 15.Kg1 Qh4 16.Bxf7+ Kxf7 17.Qf4+ Kg8-+ when Black a much better game.] 14...Nd5 15.Bxd5 cxd5

16.Nd2 a5 17.c4 Bd7 18.Qc2 Qh4 19.Nf3 Qh5 20.Rxd5?! [Desperation.] 20...Qxd5! [The fitting end to a beautiful game. After 21.cxd5 Bb5+ wins the queen and knight.] 0-1

214 – Ullrich 4.b4 Bxb4 5.c3 Ba5 The Evans Gambit presents both players with some significant challenges. White needs to develop his pieces quickly, attack the center, make constant threats, and keep Black’s weak points weak. Black needs to fight back to keep from getting completely run over. The placement of his center pawns and queen are critical. Usually White is ready, willing, and able to sacrifice a second pawn after 4.b4 Bxb4 5.c3 Ba5 6.d4 exd4. Black may take the second pawn and then return it as I did vs “blik” in the notes. I played a postal chess game against Juergen Ullrich in the Evans Gambit. I do not remember which part of Germany he lived in. DDR was East Germany, and BRD was West Germany. I faced many postal opponents from each side of the Berlin wall. The International Correspondence Chess Federation (ICCF) lists Jürgen Ullrich of Germany with a rating of 2159 in 308 games. His peak rating was 2220 in 1994. My ICCF rating is 2157 based on 65 games. I have been inactive there for 20 years. I don’t think I played badly in this game at first, but I chose a line that is too passive for my own good. Later, I was outplayed. Ullrich - Sawyer, corr ICCF 1985 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.b4 Bxb4 5.c3 Ba5 6.d4 [Another line is 6.0-0 Nf6 7.d4 exd4 8.Ba3 d6 9.cxd4 Nxe4 10.d5 Ne7=] 6...d6 [6...exd4! 7.0-0 Nge7 8.cxd4 d5 9.exd5 Nxd5 and 1/2-1/2 in 152 moves. blik - Sawyer, Internet Chess Club 2009] 7.Qb3 Qd7 8.dxe5 dxe5 [8...Bb6!=] 9.0-0 [9.Ba3!?] 9...Bb6 10.Rd1 Qe7 11.a4 [11.Rd5!?] 11...a6 12.Bd5 Nf6 13.Ba3 Bc5 14.Bxc5 Qxc5 15.Bxf7+ Ke7 16.Bd5 Nxd5? [16...Rd8 17.Nbd2+/-] 17.Rxd5 [17.exd5! Na5 18.Qc2 Bg4 19.Nbd2 Qxd5 20.h3 Bxf3 21.Nxf3 Qe6 22.Nxe5+-] 17...Qb6? [17...Be6 18.Rxc5 Bxb3 19.Nbd2+/-] 18.Qxb6?! [White is winning after 18.Qa3+! Ke8 19.a5 Qa7 20.Nxe5+-] 18...cxb6 19.Nxe5 Be6 20.Nxc6+ bxc6 21.Rd2 Rhd8 22.Kf1 Bc4+ 23.Ke1 Bd3 24.f3 Rd6 25.Na3 Rad8 26.Rad1 b5 27.axb5 axb5 28.Kf2 b4? [Blunder. Black is still in the game after 28...c5 29.Rb2+/=] 29.cxb4 1-0

215 – Haines 4.0-0 Nf6 5.d4 Bxd4 My girlfriend lived far away on Valentine's Day in 1974. Instead of visiting her, I played chess. I read pamphlets by Chess Digest and by George Koltanowski on the Giuoco Piano and the Max Lange Attack. I studied Paul Morphy games and loved his 3.Bc4 wins. Ray Haines and I were able to prepare fairly well. The first 10-15 moves follow what I remembered of Koltanowski’s plan against 5...Bxd4. I got full compensation for my sacrificed pawn and more. The two move checkmate at the end is instructive. Sawyer - Haines, Ft Fairfield, ME 14.02.1974 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.0-0 [Sometimes I played 4.c3] 4...Nf6 5.d4 Bxd4 6.Nxd4 Nxd4 7.f4 d6 8.c3! [8.fxe5 dxe5 9.Bg5 Be6=] 8...Nc6 9.f5! [This f-pawn keeps one bishop out of e6 and allows another bishop to get to g5.] 9...Na5?! 10.Bd3 d5 11.Bg5!? Nc6 12.Qf3 dxe4 [12...d4 13.Na3] 13.Bxe4 Bd7 14.Nd2 Qe7 15.b4 [Played to discourage queenside castling, to threaten b4-b5, and to take control of c5.] 15...0-0 16.Bd5 [Clearing out e4.] 16...a5 17.Ne4 Kh8?! [17...axb4! 18.Qh3!+/] 18.Bxf6 gxf6 19.Qh5 [19.a3!+-] 19...Rg8?! 20.Rf3?! [20.a3+-] 20...axb4 21.Rh3 Rg7 22.Qh6?? Rag8 [22...Bxf5!-+] 23.Nxf6 Rxg2+ [23...Bxf5=/+] 24.Kh1 R2g7 25.Qxh7+ Rxh7 26.Rxh7# 1-0

216 – Haines 4.0-0 Nf6 5.d4 exd4 George Koltanowski developed opening repertoires for White. Kolty played Colle System or Max Lange Attack in simultaneous exhibitions. Max Lange was a leading German player who wrote a classic book "The Chess Genius of Paul Morphy" published in 1860 and translated into English by Ernest Falkbeer. Each move in Max Lange Attack has a tactical purpose. I only knew the first 14 moves against Ray Haines. Then things got crazy until I won. Sawyer - Haines, Ft Fairfield, ME 15.02.1974 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.0-0 Nf6 5.d4 exd4 6.e5 d5 7.exf6 dxc4 8.Re1+ Be6 9.Ng5 Qd5 10.Nc3 Qf5 11.Nce4 0-0-0 12.g4 Qe5 13.Nxe6 fxe6 14.fxg7 Rhg8

15.Nxc5? [I’m out of book. 15.Bh6 d3 16.c3=] 15...Qxc5 16.Bh6 d3 17.c3 [17.cxd3 cxd3=/+] 17...d2 [17...Ne5-/+] 18.Rxe6 Rd3? [18...Qd5=] 19.Re2? [19.Qe2!+-] 19...Ne5 20.Re3 Rxg7 [20...Rxe3! 21.Bxe3 Qd5-+] 21.Rxd3? [21.Bxg7 Rxe3 22.fxe3 Qxe3+ 23.Kf1=] 21...Nxg4? [21...Nxd3+] 22.Qe2 Qh5? [22...Ne3+ 23.Kh1 Qc6+!=] 23.Qe6+ 1-0

217 - Morphy 4.0-0 Nf6 5.d3 I took a book to read in the doctor's office: "The Chess Players" by Frances Parkinson Keyes published in 1960. This novel was based on the life of Paul Morphy. This American was the world's best player in the 1850s. In Chapter 2 there is a fictitious chess game supposedly played by Paul Morphy's real grandfathers Don Diego Morphy and Joseph Le Carpentier. The game is to have been played during a discussion of arrangements for the wedding of their children, Paul Morphy's parents: Alonzo Morphy and Louise Therese Felicite Thelcide Le Carpentier. According to "Old Families of Louisiana" edited by Stanley Clisby Arthur (pages 54-58), Don Diego Morphy Sr. was born in Madrid. His Irish name was "Murphy", but Diego changed it to "Morphy" to make it easier for the Spaniards to pronounce. From the first Don Diego Morphy Sr. marriage came two sons: Diego Jr born on the island of San Domingo and Ernest born in Charleston, South Carolina. After his first wife died, Diego Sr. married again and had a third son, Judge Alonzo Morphy. Alonzo had two sons and two daughters. The boys were first Edward and second Paul born three years later. Diego Morphy Sr. arrived in New Orleans in 1803 and died in 1814. Paul Morphy was born June 27, 1837. Those were facts. Now to fiction. "The Chess Players" theoretical game between Diego Morphy Sr. and Joseph Le Carpentier was played about 1827 (it makes for nice fiction). No sense letting the fact Morphy Sr. had died earlier stand in the way of a good story! As I played through the game in my mind in the waiting room, it sounded real enough. In fact, the opening is an Italian Game trap that has been repeated many times. The earliest game with this line in my database was Dubois - Steinitz, London 1862. Dom Diego Morphy Sr. - Le Carpentier, New Orleans, LA 1827 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.0-0 Nf6 5.d3 d6 6.Bg5 h6 7.Bh4 g5 8.Bg3 h5 [8...Na5=] 9.Nxg5 [Maybe 9.h4 Nh7 10.c3=] 9...h4 10.Nxf7 hxg3 [Or 10...Qe7 11.Nxh8 hxg3 12.Bf7+ Kd8 13.hxg3=] 11.Nxd8 Bg4 12.Qd2 Nd4 [Here Diego Morphy is distracted by the beautiful and provocative Thelcide

who came to stand behind her father.] 13.Nc3? [White has to return the queen with 13.h3 Ne2+ 14.Qxe2 Bxe2 15.Ne6=] 13...Nf3+ 14.gxf3 Bxf3 01 [Diego Morphy said: "I see it is useless to continue this struggle, my friend... Shall we ask Alonzo to join us?"]

218 – Steinitz 4.0-0 d6 5.d3 Previously I cited the opening trap game between Paul Morphy's grandfathers: Don Diego Morphy Sr. and Joseph Le Carpentier. In that mythical Morphy Sr. - Le Carpentier game, Black played the brilliant move 8...h5!! This move was played as Black by Wilhelm Steinitz in 1862. Dubois played 9.h4 (see game below). In the fictional game Don Diego Morphy continued 9.Nxg5. He accepted Black's sacrifice in a manner that has been repeated many times. Don Diego Morphy passed away before his famous grandson Paul was born, but the other grandfather Joseph Le Carpentier lived a long life. He often played his grandson Paul Morphy. In fact, Paul Morphy's real parents Alonzo Morphy and Thelcide Le Carpentier probably met each other and fell in love through some chess connection. There were likely many games between her father Joseph and her future husband Alonzo. These notable players probably played many games in her father’s home. In his book "Modern Chess Analysis", Robin Smith writes about 8...h5!! He says that "Steinitz's move was probably the result of home preparation." He also states that Dubois declined the sacrifice, indicating that White did not play 9.Nxg5. After a little digging, I found the Dubois - Steinitz game from the British Chess Association Tournament 1862 with notes by Henry Bird. These two opponents played each other several times, but my guess is that only once did Dubois allow Steinitz to play 8...h5!! Dubois - Steinitz, London 1862 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.0-0 d6 5.d3 Nf6 6.Bg5 h6 7.Bh4 g5 8.Bg3 h5 9.h4 Bg4 10.c3 Qd7 11.d4 exd4 12.e5 dxe5 13.Bxe5 Nxe5 14.Nxe5 Qf5 15.Nxg4 hxg4 16.Bd3 Qd5 17.b4 0-0-0 [The commencement of a marvelous combination.] 18.c4 Qc6 19.bxc5 Rxh4 20.f3 Rdh8 21.fxg4 Qe8 22.Qe1 [22.Bf5+ Kb8 and then 23.Qxd4 would have relieved White from his difficulties.] 22...Qe3+

23.Qxe3 dxe3 24.g3 Rh1+ 25.Kg2 R8h2+ 26.Kf3 Rxf1+ 27.Bxf1 Rf2+ 28.Kxe3 Rxf1 29.a4 Kd7 30.Kd3 Nxg4 31.Kc3 Ne3 32.Ra2 Rxb1 33.Rd2+ Kc6 34.Re2 Rc1+ 35.Kd2 Rc2+ 36.Kxe3 Rxe2+ 37.Kxe2 f5 38.Ke3 Kxc5 39.Kd3 f4 0-1 [Notes by Henry Bird]

219 – Hoolt 4.d3 Nf6 5.c3 a6 Knights like to occupy outposts in enemy territory. Good strategy finds a hole where a knight cannot be driven away by a pawn. Winning strategy supports winning tactics or it fails. In the game between Sarah Hoolt and Jonathan Carlstedt, the players had mirror outposts on move 14. White had the prettier outpost, but Black had the better tactics. Hoolt (2423) - Carlstedt (2413), Bundesliga 2017-18 Norderstedt GER, 03.02.2018 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.d3 Nf6 5.c3 a6 6.a4 d6 7.0-0 Ba7 8.Na3 0-0 9.h3 Ne7 10.Bg5 Ng6 11.Nh4 Kh8 12.Qb3 [12.Nxg6+ fxg6=] 12...Qe8 13.Bxf6 gxf6 14.Nf5? [14.Nxg6+ fxg6=] 14...Nf4 15.g3 [15.Ng3 f5-/+] 15...Bxf5 16.exf5 Qc6 0-1

220 – Jandourek 4.d3 Nf6 5.0-0 Surprise moves trick your opponent if you find a hidden tactical gem. Black's 15...Nh3+ seems fine. White's queen cannot take the knight and live, except that Black's own queen faces danger in this Italian Game between Lukas Jandourek and Jaroslav Vorisek. Jandourek (2254) - Vorisek (2219), TCh-CZE 1 Liga Zapad Czech Republic CZE (5.4), 07.01.2018 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Nc6 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.d3 Bc5 5.0-0 d6 6.c3 a6 7.Bb3 0-0 8.h3 Ba7 9.Re1 Ne7 10.d4 Ng6 11.Nbd2 Nh5? [11...b5 12.Nf1=] 12.Nxe5! dxe5 [12...Ngf4 13.Ng4+/-] 13.Qxh5 Nf4 14.Qf3 Qg5? [14...Ng6 15.Qg3+/=] 15.Nc4 Nxh3+ [15...Qh5 16.Qxh5 Nxh5 17.Nxe5+-] 16.Qxh3! [White is up a piece.] 1-0

221 – trubble 4.c3 Nf6 5.d3 The strength of the quiet Italian Game Giuoco Pianissimo is that Black can drift into a passive position. White may build up a gradual advance following d3 / c3. Here White expanded on the queenside. My opponent "trubble" got in trouble. My bishop, knight, queen and rook combined to attack the White king. trubble - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 09.11.2012 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.c3 Nf6 5.d3 a6 6.a4 [6.Bb3 or 6.0-0] 6...d6 7.b4 Ba7 8.Bg5 h6 9.Bh4 g5 10.Nxg5?! [10.Bg3=] 10...hxg5 11.Bxg5 Qe7 12.b5 axb5 13.Bxb5 Bd7 14.0-0 Nd8 15.Bc4 Be6? [15...Ne6-+] 16.Qb3? [16.Qf3! Bg4 17.Qxf6 Qxf6 18.Bxf6+/-] 16...Rb8 17.Nd2 Bxc4 18.Nxc4 Ne6 19.Bd2 Ng4 20.h3 Qh4 21.Na5? [21.d4 exd4-+] 21...Nxf2 [Black mates in six after 21...Bxf2+!] 22.d4? [If 22.Rxf2 Qxf2+ 23.Kh1 Rg8-+] 22...Nxh3+ 23.gxh3 Qg3+ White resigns 0-1

222 – lupus53 4.c3 Nf6 d4 exd4 Grandmasters Lev Alburt, Roman Dzindzichasvili and Eugene Perelshteyn recommend playing the Giuoco Piano via the Scotch Gambit (as in this game) with the move 7.Bd2. They wrote about 7.Nc3!? in “Chess Openings for White Explained” (2nd edition): "Players seeking active play have generally been advised to select the heavily analyzed pawn sacrifice 7.Nc3, which leads to a sharp game after 7...Nxe4 8.0-0." My opponent "lupus53" chose the sacrifice line 7.Nc3!? I went into an ending after 8.Qb3 and 11.Qa4?! This left me up a pawn with a good knight posted on Nc4 vs a bad bishop. lupus53 - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 15.12.2012 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 exd4 4.Bc4 Bc5 5.c3 Nf6 6.cxd4 Bb4+ 7.Nc3 Nxe4 8.Qb3 [8.0-0 Bxc3 9.d5 (9.bxc3 d5=) 9...Bf6 10.Re1 Ne7 11.Rxe4 d6=] 8...Bxc3+ 9.bxc3 0-0 10.0-0 Na5 11.Qa4?! [11.Bxf7+ Rxf7 12.Qd5 Nxc3 13.Qxa5 Ne2+ 14.Kh1 d6=/+] 11...Nxc4 12.Qxc4 d5 13.Qd3 Bf5 14.Qe3 Re8 15.Qf4 Bg6 16.Bb2 Qd6 17.Qxd6 Nxd6 18.Ne5 f6 19.Nxg6 hxg6 20.Rfe1

Kf7 [20...Nc4!-+] 21.Rac1 Rxe1+ [21...Nc4!-+] 22.Rxe1 Re8 23.Kf1 Rxe1+ 24.Kxe1 Nc4 25.Bc1 b6 26.Ke2 c5 27.dxc5 bxc5 28.Kd3 Ke6 29.f4 f5 30.g3 Kd6 31.h3 Kc6 32.g4 Kb5 33.Be3?! Nxe3 34.Kxe3 Kc4 35.Kd2 d4 36.cxd4 cxd4 37.gxf5 gxf5 38.h4 g6 39.a4 d3 40.a5 Kd4 41.a6 Ke4 White resigns 0-1

223 – Haines 4.c3 Nf6 5.d4 exd4 During the winter of 1973-1974, I lived in the same town of Fort Fairfield as my friend Ray Haines in northern Maine. I could see Canada out my bedroom window. It was cold and snowy. The scene was like the Russian farm house where Rocky trained in the movie Rocky IV (which was filmed in Wyoming). There was not much to do in a place like that long before cable TV and the Internet. Ray Haines and I played chess at his farm house. When players are young and learning, they advance faster if they play openings that are sharp and tactical. This we did. Ray Haines and I spent a lot of our time talking about chess openings. We may have spent more time going over lines in books rather than simply playing against each other. One week in February we tested out several variations of the Italian Game. In the main line with 9.d5, Ray played 11...0-0 of which Wikipedia notes: "is considered to lead to a draw with best play, although Black has many opportunities to go wrong." I played the standard knight sacrifice 14.Nxh7 to threaten mate in one on move 16. There are chances for both sides, but I managed to pull off a mate by move 24. Sawyer - Haines, Ft Fairfield, ME 17.02.1974 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.c3 Nf6 5.d4 exd4 6.cxd4 Bb4+ 7.Nc3 Nxe4 8.0-0 Bxc3 9.d5 Bf6 10.Re1 Ne7 11.Rxe4 0-0 [11...d6 12.Bg5 Bxg5 13.Nxg5 h6 14.Qe2 hxg5 15.Re1 Be6 16.dxe6 f6 17.Re3 c6 18.Rh3 Rxh3 19.gxh3 g6=] 12.Bg5 [12.d6 cxd6 13.Bg5 (13.Qxd6 Nf5 14.Qd5 Ne7= repeating moves.) 13...d5 14.Bxd5 Nxd5 15.Qxd5 d6 16.Bxf6 Qxf6 with dynamic equality.] 12...Bxg5 13.Nxg5 d6 14.Nxh7 Kxh7 15.Qh5+ Kg8 16.Rh4 [With a threat of mate in one.] 16...f5 17.Re1 [17.Be2 Ng6 18.Qh7+ Kf7 19.Rh6 Nf4 20.Bh5+ Nxh5 21.Qg6+ Kg8 22.Qxh5 gxh6 23.Qg6+ Kh8 24.Qxh6+ Kg8

with a draw by repetition.] 17...Qe8? [17...Ng6! 18.Rh3 (Not 18.Qh7+? Kf7 19.Rh6 Qg5!-+) 18...Rf6-/+] 18.Qh7+ Kf7 19.Bd3 Qd8 [19...Bd7! 20.Qh5+ Kf6 21.Qf3 Qg6 22.Bb5 c6 23.dxc6 bxc6 24.Bc4 d5-/+] 20.Rh6 Rg8 21.g4 [21.Be2+/=] 21...Bd7 22.g5? [22.Ree6+/=] 22...Rh8 [22...Kf8-/+] 23.Rf6+ Ke8 24.Qxh8# 1-0

Book 1: Chapter 9 – Ruy Lopez 3.Bb5 The Ruy Lopez chapter begins with a look at lesser player lines.

224 – Hayward 3…d5 4.exd5 In 1974 I bought the Tim Harding “Counter Gambits” book. On page 81 he discussed 3.Bb5 d5 4.Nxe5 Qg5 5.Nxc6 Qxg2 6.Rf1 a6 7.Ba4 Bh3 8.Qe2 Qxf1+ 9.Qxf1 Bxf1 10.Kxf1 dxe4 “with a rough material balance (discovered checks are met by …b5). However, White’s position is surely preferable?” I played my 3…d5!? vs Keith Hayward and others in non-rated games. Thomas Morris suggested I share them. Anders Tejler wrote me, “This is your chance to get a namesake if you do some analysis of the line and present a number of illustrations.” I wrote my 1979 article entitled “Original Analysis” for the APCT News Bulletin. My improvement over the Harding line above was to play 6.Rf1 Bh3. Sometimes this is called the Sawyer Gambit. Later I discovered a different line is best here with 6.Rf1 Qxe4+! Hayward (2100) - Sawyer (2000), corr 1979 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 d5 4.exd5 [4.Nxe5 Qg5 (4...Nge7 5.Nc3 dxe4 6.0-0+/-) and now: 5.d4 a) 5.Nxc6 Qxg2 6.Qf3 (6.Rf1 Qxe4+! 7.Qe2 Qxe2+ 8.Kxe2 a6 9.Nc3 Bd7=/+) 6...Qxf3 7.Ne5+ c6 8.Nxf3 cxb5 9.exd5 Nf6 10.0-0 1/2-1/2 Curt Jones - Sawyer, corr 1978; b) 5.Nf3! Qe7 (5...Qxg2? 6.Rg1 Qh3 7.exd5 a6 8.Bf1 Qd7 9.dxc6+-) 6.e5+/-; c) 5.d4 Qxg2 6.Qf3 (6.Rf1 a6 7.Bxc6+ bxc6=) 6...Qxf3 7.Nxf3 dxe4 8.Ne5 1-0 in 39, Ed Sawyer - Tim Sawyer, corr 1976, when Black should have played 8...Nge7!=/+] 4...Qxd5 5.Nc3 Qd6! [5...Qc5 6.d4 exd4 7.Nxd4 Bd7 8.Be3 Qb4 9.a3 Qd6 10.Qe2 0-0-0 11.0-0-0 Nxd4 12.Rxd4 Qe7 13.Rhd1 Nf6 14.Nd5 Nxd5 15.Rxd5 c6 16.Bxc6 1-0 Curt Jones - Sawyer, corr 1978] 6.d4 [Thomas Morris beat me with the move 6.Qe2!?+/-; The best move seems to be 6.0-0!+/-] 6...exd4 7.Nxd4 Bd7 8.Be3 a6 9.Bxc6 Bxc6 10.Nxc6 [10.Qe2 0-0-0 11.0-0-0+/=]

10...Qxc6 11.Qd5 Qxd5 12.Nxd5 0-0-0 13.0-0-0 Ne7 14.Nxe7+ Bxe7 15.Bd4 Bg5+ 16.Kb1 Bh6 17.g4 f5 18.g5 Bxg5 19.Bxg7 Rxd1+ 20.Rxd1 Rg8 21.Be5 1/2-1/2

225 – Fejzic 3…d5 4.Nxe5 dxe4 Kevin Begley wrote: "Hi Tim, Saw your chess page... Wondering if you're the Sawyer whose name is connected with the Sawyer Gambit in the Ruy Lopez. If not, perhaps you might know who is the inventor. Kind Regards, Kevin Begley" I replied, "Hi Kevin, Sawyer Gambit. There's a blast from the past. I assume you mean 3...d5. Tim Harding mentioned it in 1974 giving a line or two, but I don't think he gave any games. So I played it against four masters. Anders Tejler of BDG fame said I should write about it. With all the boldness of youth, I named it after myself in an APCT article in 1979.” I added that “Tim Harding deserves credit.” This Ruy Lopez 3...d5 appeared in the 2018 game Danis Fejzic vs Ismir Beslija. Fejzic (1460) - Beslija (1696), 48th Bosna Open 2018 Sarajevo BIH (6.60), 08.05.2018 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 d5 4.Nxe5 [4.c3 transposes to the Ponziani Opening begins 3.c3 d5 4.Bb5.] 4...dxe4 [The main idea behind 3...d5 is 4...Qg5 5.Nxc6 Qxg2 6.Rf1 Qxe4+ 7.Qe2 Qxe2+ 8.Kxe2 a6=/+] 5.Nxc6 Qd5 [5...bxc6 6.Bxc6+ Bd7 7.Bxa8+-] 6.Nc3 Qc5 [6...Qg5 7.g3+-] 7.b4 Qb6 [7...Qg5!?] 8.Nd5! Qxc6 9.Bxc6+ bxc6 10.Nxc7+ 1-0

226 – Fricke 3…d5 4.Nxe5 Qg5 This follows up on my Ruy Lopez Sawyer Gambit 3...d5!? that Tim Harding mentioned in 1974. Kevin Begley wrote: "Harding is credited with a variation (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 d5 4.Nxe5 Qg5 5.Nxc6). Also, somebody named Fricke (any idea who this is) has been credited with a variation (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 d5 4.Nxe5 Qg5 5.0-0)." My database has G. Fricke vs Lothar Frenzel in an East German postal game. Maybe it was Gunter Fricke, a player from that time period. Black missed the best fifth move response. Fricke - Frenzel, DDR corr 1988 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 d5 4.Nxe5 Qg5 5.0-0 Bd7? [5...Qxe5! 6.d4 Qd6 7.exd5 a6 8.Re1+ Be7 9.Nc3 Nf6 10.Ba4 b5 11.Bxb5 axb5 12.Nxb5 Qd7 13.dxc6 Qxc6=] 6.Nxd7 Kxd7 7.d4 Qe7 8.exd5 h5 9.dxc6+ bxc6 10.Bxc6+ Kxc6 11.Qf3+ Kb6 12.Qxa8

Nf6 13.Nc3 Qd7 14.Bf4 c6 15.Qb8+ Ka6 16.Na4 [16.b4+-] 16...Rg8 17.Qxf8 Rxf8 18.Nc5+ Kb6 19.Nxd7+ Nxd7 20.Rfe1 Nf6 21.c4 Rd8 22.Re7 c5 [22...Ra8 23.Rxf7+-] 23.Bc7+ Kc6 24.Bxd8 1-0

227 – Sawyer 3…Nd4 4.Nxd4 Henry Bird developed a defense to the Ruy Lopez with 3…Nd4. White has three considerations: 1. Castle kingside and play d3. 2. Note that the Bb5 hinders the movement of Black’s d-pawn. 3. When necessary retreat the bishop to either Ba4 or Bc4. 4. Play f4 or Qh5 early to attack the kingside. Against “sashagel71” when I pushed my pawn to f5, Black chose not to play 9...d5. I outplayed my opponent and won a rook. Sawyer (1937) - sashagel71 (1929), Yahoo 3 4, 17.02.2001 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 Nd4 4.Nxd4 exd4 5.0-0 Qf6 [A critical variation is 5...Bc5 6.Bc4 d6 7.d3 c6 when White has 8.a4 or 8.Qh5] 6.d3 Bc5 7.f4 [7.Qh5 Bb6 8.e5+/=] 7...Ne7 [7...c6 8.Bc4+/=] 8.Nd2 0-0 9.Nf3 [9.Bc4+/=] 9...d6 [Sharper is 9...d5!= ] 10.f5 h6 11.g4 g5 [11...d5=] 12.Kg2 [Best is 12.h4!+/-] 12...Kh7 [12...d5 13.e5+/=] 13.h4 gxh4 14.Rh1 Rh8 15.Rxh4 Kg8 16.Qh1 d5 17.e5 Qg7 18.f6 Qg6 19.fxe7 Bxg4 [19...Bxe7 20.Rxh6 Rxh6 21.Qxh6 Qxh6 22.Bxh6+-] 20.e8Q+ Rxe8 21.Bxe8 Bd7+ 22.Kf2 Bxe8 23.Qg2 [23.Bxh6! Be7 24.Rg1+-] 23...Qxg2+ 24.Kxg2 h5 25.Kf2 Bd7 26.Bg5 Bg4 27.Bf6 Rh6 28.Rg1 Rg6 29.Nh2 Bf5 30.Rxg6+ [30.Rxh5!+- forces mate in two.] 30...Bxg6 31.Nf1 Kf8 32.Ng3 Ke8 33.Nxh5 Kd7 34.Nf4 Bf8 35.Nxg6 fxg6 36.Rh8 Bc5 37.Rg8 Ke6 38.Rxg6 Kf5 39.Rg7 Bb6 40.Kf3 a5 41.Rg5+ Ke6 42.Kf4 Bc5 43.Rg6 1-0

228 – Lau 3…Nge7 4.d4 f6 The Ruy Lopez 3…Nge7 is a logical line. Against Dick Zdun I chose 4.0-0 and 5.d4. When the young David Lau met my Ruy Lopez with 3…Nge7, I challenged the center with 4.d4. Sawyer (2011) - Lau (1414), Williamsport, PA 1994 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 Nge7 4.d4 [4.0-0 g6 5.d4 Bg7 6.dxe5 Nxe5 7.Nxe5 Bxe5 8.f4 Bg7 9.f5 c5? 10.f6 1-0 Sawyer - Zdun, Williamsport PA 1994] 4...f6?! [4...Nxd4 5.Nxd4 exd4 6.Qxd4=] 5.0-0 [5.d5!+/-] 5...a6 6.Bxc6 Nxc6 7.d5 Ne7 8.Nh4 g6 9.f4 d6 10.f5 [10.fxe5!+/=] 10...Bd7 [10...c6=] 11.fxg6 hxg6 12.Qf3 Bg7 13.g3?! [13.Qf2=] 13...g5 14.Nf5 Nxf5 15.exf5 Qe7 16.Nd2 0-

0-0 17.c4 Rh3 18.a4 Rdh8 19.Rf2 Qf8 20.Ne4 Qe8 21.b3 Qg8 22.Be3 Qh7 23.Raa2 Kd8 [23...g4 24.Qxg4=] 24.Rac2 Ke7? [24...Qh5 25.Qxh5+/-] 25.c5 Be8 [25...Qh5 26.Qxh5+-] 26.cxd6+ cxd6 27.Nxg5 fxg5 28.f6+ Kd8 29.Bb6+ Kd7 30.Qg4+ 1-0

229 – Haines 3…Nge7 4.0-0 g6 Ruy Lopez employs strategy based upon tactics. Ray Haines showed that active open play leads to surprising opportunities. If this was an American football game, White flushed the Black king out of the pocket and tackled him for mate. After 11.Qxd4, Black had two other options. One was from William Lombardy, a contemporary of Bobby Fischer. Lombardy was a grandmaster who became a priest. I am a chess player who spent 26 years in the clergy, so we had that in common. We were Facebook friends, but I never met Bill personally. R.I.P. Lombardy. Haines (1494) - herbert22 (1445), Live Chess Chess.com, 14.10.2017 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 Nge7 4.0-0 g6 5.d4 [5.c3] 5...exd4 6.Nxd4 Bg7 7.Be3 0-0 8.Nc3 d6 [8...d5! 9.exd5 Nb4!=] 9.Qd2 Nxd4 10.Bxd4 Bxd4 11.Qxd4 c6 [11...a6 12.Be2 b5 13.Rad1 Rb8 14.a3 b4 15.axb4 Nc6 16.Qd2 Nxb4 17.f4+/= and 1-0 in 41. Diez del Corral - Lombardy, Orense 1975; 11...Be6 12.Rad1 a6 13.Be2 Nc6 14.Qd2 f6 15.f4+/= and 1-0 in 56. Larsen - Sabuk, Fano ITA 2017] 12.Bc4 d5?! [12...Be6 13.Rad1+/=] 13.exd5 cxd5 14.Bxd5 [14.Nxd5 Nxd5 15.Bxd5 Be6 16.c4+/-] 14...Nxd5 [14...Be6 15.Rad1+/=] 15.Nxd5 Be6 16.Nf6+ Kg7? [16...Kh8 17.Qe5 Qb8 18.Qg5 Kg7 19.Nh5+ Kg8 20.Rfe1+/-] 17.Ne8+ Kh6 18.Qg7+ Kg5 [Or 18...Kh5 19.Qxh7+ Kg4 20.Qh3+ Kf4 21.Qe3+ Kf5 22.g4+ Kxg4 23.Ng7 Qh4 24.f3+ Kh3 25.f4+ Kg4 26.Qf3#] 19.f4+ Kg4 20.Nf6+ Kf5 21.g4# 1-0

230 – Haines 3…d6 4.d4 a6 Ray Haines won when his opponent made a tactical counting error. It seemed Black had everything under control, but Haines saw the one move that trumps all others in a combination. That trump move is a check. The Ruy Lopez began 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 d6 4.d4! White threatened e5 twice. Black ignored the threat, played 4...a6, and lost material. White one easily. Haines (1486) - pilsiedeluxe (1459), Live Chess, 11.12.2017 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 d6 4.d4 a6 [Now the trump move.] 5.Bxc6+! bxc6 6.dxe5 [White wins a pawn.] 6...d5 7.exd5 Qxd5 8.Qxd5 cxd5 9.Nc3 c6

10.0-0 Bc5 11.Na4 Be7 12.Be3 Nh6 13.Bc5 Nf5 14.Bxe7 Nxe7 15.Nc5 0-0 16.Nd4 Ng6 17.f4 Rb8 18.b3 Bg4 [18...Ne7 19.f5+-] 19.h3 Bc8 20.Nxc6 Rb6 21.Nd4 Be6 22.f5 Nxe5 23.fxe6 fxe6 24.Rxf8+ Kxf8 25.Re1 1-0

231 – Zdun 3…d6 4.d4 Bd7 Richard Zdun was one of the oldest players at the Williamsport chess club during my years there. Coincidently Dick Zdun chose the old Steinitz Variation 3…d6 to defend against my Ruy Lopez. William Steinitz was born May 17, 1836 in Prague. That city was part of the Austrian Empire known as the Kingdom of Bohemia. Prague became the capitol of the Czech Republic. Steinitz began in the attacking style common to the 1800s. He won the 1862 London tournament. At that time Paul Morphy was involved in the American Civil War. Morphy retired from chess. In 1866 Steinitz defeated Anderssen in a match. In 1873 Steinitz added positional skills and developed a new style of defense. William Steinitz was a prolific chess journalist and theoretician. Steinitz became world champion by defeating Zukertort. He held the title from 1886 to 1894. Then he lost to Emmanuel Lasker. The Steinitz Variation 3…d6 is a solid but passive defence to the Ruy Lopez. This Black pawn protects e5, but it blocks the dark squared bishop. It also loosens control of c6. The key move in our game was 7…c5?! With that pawn thrust, Dick Zdun was saddled with a backward d6 pawn. White blockaded and attacked the d6 pawn. The tactics around d6 allowed White to win a piece. If Black had recaptured at the end, then a discovered knight check would pick off a Black rook. Sawyer (2010) - Zdun (1635), Williamsport, PA 1996 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 d6 4.d4 Bd7 5.Nc3 Nxd4 [5...Nf6 6.0-0 exd4 7.Nxd4 Be7 8.Nxc6 bxc6 9.Bd3 0-0 10.f4+/=] 6.Nxd4 exd4 7.Qxd4 [7.Bxd7+ Qxd7 8.Qxd4 Ne7 9.0-0+/=] 7...c5?! [7...Bxb5 8.Nxb5 a6 9.Nc3 Nf6 10.Be3+/=] 8.Qd3 Nf6 9.0-0 Bxb5 10.Qxb5+ Qd7 11.Qxd7+ Nxd7 [11...Kxd7 12.Bg5+/=] 12.Nd5 [12.Nb5+/-] 12...Kd8 13.Bf4 Ne5 14.Rad1 Kd7? [14...Ng6 15.Bg3+/-] 15.Bxe5 1-0

232 – Neverov 3…Bc5 4.0-0 Nd4 Ruy Lopez allows for large-scale tactics and strategy since both armies remain involved in the action. White plays for an attack in Mikhail Antipov vs Valeriy Neverov. Now Black turns the tables and forces mate. Black's 18...h5 reminds me of the fishing pole. Antipov (2616) - Neverov (2480), 19th ch-EUR Indiv 2018 Batumi GEO, 25.03.2018 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 Bc5 4.0-0 Nd4 5.Nxd4 Bxd4 6.c3 Bb6 7.d4 c6 8.Bc4 [8.Ba4=] 8...d6 9.Kh1?! [9.dxe5 dxe5 10.Qxd8+ Bxd8 11.Be3=] 9...Nf6 10.f4? exd4 11.e5 Ng4! 12.Qf3 Qh4 [Here, crushing is 12...d5! 13.Be2 Nxh2 14.Kxh2 Qh4+ 15.Kg1 Bg4!-+] 13.h3 d5 14.Bb3 Bf5 15.cxd4 Bxd4 16.Nc3 Nf2+ 17.Kh2 Ng4+ 18.Kh1 h5!? [18...Rd8-+] 19.Nxd5 [19.Bd2 Nf2+ 20.Kh2 Bg4-/+] 19...cxd5 20.Qxd5 [If 20.Bxd5 Nf2+ 21.Kh2 Rc8-+. Now find the winning move.] 20...Qg3! 0-1

233 – Ross 3…Bc5 4.0-0 Nf6 In the Classical Ruy Lopez 3.Bb5 Bc5, first I made sure to castle on the kingside. I knew I wanted to do that. My further play would depend on Black’s defensive choices. A natural continuation is 4.0-0 d6 5.c3 Bd7 6.d4 when White has good chances. Instead our game continued 4.0-0 Nf6. I played for the central pawn fork with 5.Nxe5 Nxe5 6.d4. Black went wrong with 6...Bd6? Then White would be winning after the best reply is 7.dxe5! Here I tried the tricky move 7.f4?! It worked this time. Black’s knight was trapped when he took with 7…Nxe4? After 8.fxe5 Be7 9.Qf3, White won a piece due to a mate threat on f7. Hank Ross played on until checkmate, since he had to write to me for a while anyway to play our other game. Sawyer (1980) - Ross (1700), corr APCT P-388, 1978 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 Bc5 4.0-0 Nf6 5.Nxe5 Nxe5 6.d4 Bd6? [6...a6 7.Be2+/=] 7.f4?! [7.dxe5! Bxe5 8.f4 Bd6 9.e5 Bc5+ 10.Kh1 Ng8 11.Nc3+-] 7...Nxe4? [7...Nc6 8.e5 0-0 9.exf6 Qxf6 10.c3 b6=] 8.fxe5 Be7 9.Qf3 Ng5 10.Bxg5 00 11.Bxe7 Qxe7 12.Bd3 Qb4 [12...d6 13.Nc3+-] 13.Qe4 g6 14.Nc3 c6

15.a3 Qe7 [15...d5 16.axb4 dxe4 17.Nxe4+-] 16.Qf4 d6 17.exd6 Qe6 18.Rae1 Qg4 19.Qf6 Be6 20.Rf4 Qh5 21.Rh4 Qa5 22.Rxh7 [Or 22.Rxe6!+-] 22...Kxh7 23.Re5 Qd8 24.Rh5+ Kg8 25.Rh8# 1-0

3.Bb5 f5 Here Black meets the Ruy Lopez with the Schliemann Gambit. This leads to very sharp play.

234 – Sawyer 4.exf5 e4 5.Qe2 In all my years of chess, I have played the Open Game 1.e4 e5 thousands of times. I have been Black in the Ruy Lopez Schliemann Gambit hundreds of times. Amazingly White has accepted 3...f5 gambit with 4.exf5 only seven times. I won six and lost one. Here is one of those wins. I had a vague recollection that there is a line where the players might repeat moves (see note to my 5th move) and that Black can avoid it with 7...Nf6 or 7...Nh6 or something. I did not really remember the line while we were playing. It is common knowledge that the weakest point in White's position at the beginning of the game is f2. If White castles kingside then it becomes h2 or g2. However if Black attacks with overwhelming material, then any point anywhere near the White king is potentially vulnerable. My 3-minute blitz game attack is topped off with a queen sacrifice and checkmate. hbandersen - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 27.01.2013 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 f5 4.exf5 e4 5.Qe2 d5? [Played on the spur of the moment, and not good. Black should play 5...Qe7! 6.Bxc6 dxc6 7.Nd4 Nh6 (7...Qe5 8.Nf3 Qe7= repeats moves) 8.0-0 Nxf5 9.Nb3 a5= is recommended by GM Sabino Brunello] 6.d3 [6.Ne5!+- with dual threats on c6 and h5.] 6...Bxf5 7.dxe4 dxe4 8.Bxc6+ bxc6 9.0-0 Bd6 10.Nd4?! [10.Nc3+/-] 10...Qd7?! [10...Bxh2+! 11.Kxh2 Qxd4=] 11.Nxf5 Qxf5 12.Nc3 Nf6 13.Re1?! [White should not allow Black to castle kingside. 13.Qc4+/-] 13...0-0 14.Qc4+ Kh8 15.Qxc6 [Now White's king is in serious danger. Critical here is 15.h3 Ng4 16.Nxe4 Nxf2 17.Nxd6 Nxh3+ 18.Kh2 cxd6

19.Qe6 Nf2 20.Qxf5 Rxf5=/+] 15...Ng4 16.Nxe4 Bxh2+ 17.Kf1 Qxf2+ 18.Nxf2 Rxf2# White checkmated 0-1

235 – ButchCroft 4.d3 fxe4 Ruy Lopez Schliemann 4.d3 gives Black the opportunity to play for an attack. I studied the Schliemann. I worked up the theory on it. However, I rarely had that opening theory memorized. The Psalmist said to God, "Your word have I hid in my heart." Years ago an old teacher said in his class we could paraphrase that Bible verse to mean "Your word have I hid in my notebook." Why? Because we wrote down lots of helpful information, but it did not make it from our pen to our brain. We were like the chess players who buy lots of opening books that go mostly unread. Against "ButchCroft" I missed good moves early in the game. Soon I found myself in trouble. I had expected White to punish me with the move 14.Bh6. White returned the favor with the weaker retreat move 14.Bh4. This gave me a promising attack on the f-file which ended in checkmate. ButchCroft - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 15.12.2012 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 f5 4.d3 fxe4 5.dxe4 Nf6 6.Nc3 Bc5 7.0-0 d6 8.h3 [The main line for 4.d3 is 8.Bg5 0-0 9.Nd5 Kh8] 8...Bd7?! [8...Be6!=] 9.Bg5 0-0 10.Bc4+ Kh8 11.a4 [11.Nd5+/=] 11...a6? [11...h6=] 12.Nd5 Ne7 13.Nxf6 gxf6 14.Bh4?! [14.Bh6+/-] 14...Ng6 15.Bg3 f5 16.Bd5?! c6 17.exf5 Bxf5 18.Bb3 Qf6 19.Re1 [19.Kh2 e4-/+] 19...Bxh3 20.gxh3 Qxf3 21.Qxf3 Rxf3 22.Rad1? [Hanging a piece. White should play 22.Kg2 Raf8-+] 22...Rxg3+ 23.Kh2 Rf3 24.c3 Rxf2+ 25.Kg3 [Or 25.Kh1 Nf4-+] 25...Raf8 26.Rd3 h5 27.Bd1 h4+ 28.Kg4 Kg7 29.Re4 Kh6 30.Rf3 R2xf3 31.Bxf3 d5 32.Re1 Rf4# White checkmated 0-1

236 – blik 4.Nc3 Nd4 5.Nxe5 Momir Radovic posted a chess lesson on the Four Principles of Warfare that apply to Chess Strategy. Good stuff! The third principle is Deception and Surprise. "All war is deception, advised Sun Tzu. The concentration of forces must be carried out in such a way that you manipulate the enemy’s perceptions so they think they fight on favorable terms. You entice them with lures of (in chess, usually material) profit, while you wait for them in strength at a decisive point where your assault ratio overpowers their defenses." Here my opponent was the chess engine "blik" on the Internet Chess Club. Black’s choice of the Ruy Lopez Schliemann was a mild surprise. The line 4.Nc3 Nd4!? was a big surprise. Leonid Shamkovich and Eric Schiller wrote on this opening years ago, but nobody plays this line anymore. I played the frisky 5.Nxe5!? Larry Kaufman in his repertoire book "The Chess Advantage in Black and White" suggested 4.d3 giving an analyzed game for White. “This now appears to be a simple route to advantage.” Sawyer - blik (2398), ICC 5 0 Internet Chess Club, 21.01.2012 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 f5 4.Nc3 Nd4!? [Oh no. I never play this as Black. I prefer the main line 4...fxe4 5.Nxe4 Nf6 (The old main line is still playable after 5...d5 6.Nxe5 dxe4 7.Nxc6 Qg5 8.Qe2 Nf6 9.f4 Qxf4 10.Ne5+ c6 11.d4 Qh4+ 12.g3 Qh3 13.Bc4 Be6) White has to make a choice between 6.Nxf6+ (or 6.Qe2 d5 7.Nxf6+ gxf6 8.d4 Bg7 9.dxe5 0-0) 6...Qxf6 7.Qe2 Be7 8.Bxc6 dxc6 9.Nxe5 Bf5 10.d3 0-0 11.0-0 Rae8] 5.Nxe5! [5.Ba4 Nf6 6.0-0 Bc5 7.Nxe5+/=; 5.Bc4 c6 6.0-0 d6 7.Re1+/=] 5...Qg5 [5...Nf6 6.exf5; 5...Nxb5 6.Nxb5] 6.0-0 fxe4 7.f4!? [Junior 12 likes 7.Re1!+- and White is winning.] 7...Qh4 8.g3 [8.d3!?+/-] 8...Qh3 9.d3 Bc5 10.Kh1 Nxc2 [10...c6 11.Be3+/=] 11.Qxc2?? [I thought quickly, I took only one second of thought. Had I taken 3-5 seconds I might have felt the potential looseness of the Rf1. Of course as soon as I mistakenly grabbed the knight, there was instant mate! 11.Nxe4! Nxa1 12.Ng5+- and one of the White knights might

play Nf7xRh8.] 11...Qxf1# White checkmated. Black’s surprise opening gambit paid off! 0-1

237 – Sawyer 4.Nc3 fxe4 5.Nxe4 This was the final of three consecutive blitz games that I played vs "GetBetterAtChes". Black won all three games, and I was fortunate to have Black twice. In the second game I made an unsound sacrifice that did not work out well. This game begins as a Three Knights Game. Since I had done well with the risky 3...f5, I decided to try it again in blitz. I would not play this Three Knights 3...f5 in a tournament game. We transposed into a Ruy Lopez Schliemann 3...f5. That gambit from the Ruy Lopez move order I might actually play in a tournament, if I felt like it was my best approach in the given situation. White got into trouble early and stayed in trouble throughout. In the endgame I was threatening to queen both rook pawns. GetBetterAtChes - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 17.11.2012 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nc3 [The normal Ruy Lopez move order is 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 f5 4.Nc3 which transposes to the game below.] 2...Nc6 3.Nf3 f5 4.Bb5 fxe4 5.Nxe4 Nf6 6.Bxc6 [Almost everyone plays either 6.Qe2 or 6.Nxf6+] 6...dxc6 7.Nc3 [Sabino Brunello gives a line that begins with 7.Qe2 Bg4=] 7...e4 8.Ng1 Bc5 9.Nge2 0-0 10.0-0 Bg4 [Wrong piece! I might have had a quick win after 10...Ng4!-+] 11.h3 Bh5 12.Qe1 Qd6 13.d3 exd3 14.cxd3 Qxd3 15.Nf4 Qd6 16.Nxh5 Nxh5 17.Be3 Bxe3 18.Qxe3 Rae8 19.Qg5 Nf6 20.Rad1 Qe5 21.Qg3 Qxg3 22.fxg3 Rd8 23.g4 Rxd1 24.Rxd1 Re8 25.g5 Ne4 26.Re1 Nd6 27.Rxe8+ Nxe8 28.Kf2 Kf7 29.Ke3 Ke6 30.g4 Nd6 31.b3 b5 32.Ne2 c5 33.Nf4+ Ke5 34.Nh5 c4 35.Nxg7 cxb3 36.axb3 a5 37.h4 a4 38.Kd3 a3 39.Kc3 b4+ 40.Kc2 Kf4 41.Ne6+ Kxg4 42.Nc5? [42.Nf8 Kxh4-+] 42...Kxh4 43.Na6-+ Kxg5 44.Nxb4 h5 45.Kd3 h4 46.Ke3 Kg4 47.Kf2 Kf4 [Faster would be 47...h3!+] 48.Nd3+ Ke4 49.Nc5+ Kd4 50.Ne6+ Kc3 51.Kg2 a2 White resigns 0-1

238 – blik 4.Nc3 fxe4 5.Nxe4 Nf6 Ruy Lopez or Spanish Opening is one of the oldest on record. Ruy Lopez was a Spanish priest around 1500. He is supposed to have suggested the strategy of placing your opponent so the sun is in his eyes. I wonder if that works on the computer “blik”. Here we played the Schliemann Variation or Jaenisch Gambit. Once in a while blik played a perpetual check variation after 10.e6 Ne5 11.Bf4 Qd6 12.0-0 Qxe6 13.Rfe1 Qb6 14.Nxe5 fxe5 15.Bxe5 Bxe5 16.Qxe5 Qxb5. Black was ahead a bishop for a pawn, so White chose to perpetual check on g5 or g3 and then again on e5. Black could not avoid the draw without losing. After the game continuation of 10.Bxc6 Black had some chances to play for a win. My basic idea in this game was to head for a "bishops of opposite color" ending. All I had to do after move 38 was to protect a6 & c6 with my bishop and keep his king away from f7. Many computer programs do not quickly see the drawish nature of these bishop endings even if ahead a pawn or two. blik - Sawyer, ICC 5 0 Internet Chess Club, 01.09.2011 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 f5 4.Nc3 fxe4 5.Nxe4 Nf6 6.Nxf6+ gxf6 7.d4 d5 8.Qe2 Bg7 9.dxe5 0-0 10.Bxc6 [10.e6 Ne5 11.Bf4 Qd6 12.0-0 Qxe6 13.Rfe1 Qb6 14.Nxe5 fxe5 15.Bxe5 Bxe5 16.Qxe5 Qxb5 17.Qg3+ Kh8 18.Qe5+ Kg8 1/2-1/2 blik-Sawyer, Internet Chess Club 2008] 10...bxc6 11.e6 Re8 12.0-0 Bxe6 13.Nd4 Qd6 14.Qf3 Bd7 15.Nf5 Qe6 16.Nxg7 Kxg7 17.Qg3+ Kh8 18.Qxc7 Rec8 19.Qf4 Qf5 20.Qd6 Qe6 21.Bf4 Qxd6 22.Bxd6 Kg7 23.c3 Kf7 24.Rfe1 Re8 25.Bc5 a6 26.b4 Rxe1+ 27.Rxe1 Re8 28.Rxe8 Bxe8 29.g4 Ke6 30.f4 f5 31.h3 fxg4 32.hxg4 h5 33.f5+ Kf6 34.Bd4+ Kg5 35.gxh5 Bxh5 36.f6 Kg6 37.a4 Bd1 38.a5 Kf7 39.Kg2 Ba4 40.Kf3 Bb5 41.Be5 Bc4 42.Kf4 Bb5 43.Bd4 Bc4 44.Ke5 Bb5 45.Be3 Bc4 46.Bd4 Bb5 47.Kd6 Ba4 48.Kc5 Bb5 49.Kd6 Ba4 50.Kc7 Bb5 51.Be5 Ke6 52.Kd8 Kf7 53.Bd4 Ba4 54.Be5 Bb5 55.Bd4 Ba4 56.Kc7 Bb5 57.Kb7 Ke6 58.Be5 Kf7 59.Bd4 Ke6 60.Kb6 Kf7 61.Kc7 Ke6 62.Be5 Kf7 63.Kb7 Ke6 64.Kb8 Kf7 65.Kc8 Ke6 66.Bd4 Kf7 67.Be5 Ke6 68.Bd4 Kf7

69.Kc7 Ke6 70.Kd8 Kf7 71.Be5 Bc4 72.Kd7 Bb5 73.Kd8 Bc4 74.Kc8 Bb5 75.Bd4 Bc4 76.Kd7 Bb5 77.Be5 Ba4 78.Kc8 Bb5 79.Kc7 Ba4 80.Kb8 Bb5 81.Ka7 Ke6 82.Bd4 Kf7 83.Be5 Ke6 84.Kb6 Kf7 85.Kb7 Ke6 86.Ka7 Kf7 87.Kb8 Ke6 88.Bd4 Ba4 Game drawn by 50 move rule 1/2-1/2

239 – Rookie 4.Nc3 fxe4 5.Nxe4 Nf6 Most of the time when I beat a computer program, it was in the endgame. Once in a while I pulled off a middlegame mating attack that went beyond the chess engine's horizon. I might not have seen to the end either. However, by intuition born out of experience I could feel the likelihood of there being moves available to complete a successful attack. Here is one of many games I played vs the computer program "Rookie". I have also played its older cousin "blik" quite a bit. They played the same lines a lot, until Rookie got stronger. It did not seem to matter whether the opening lines were sound or not. If these chess engines were winning, then every few games they would repeat those same opening lines. There were a probably 50 lines that I got to know pretty well by playing these computers. Lots of losses taught me lessons. Then I found improvements. Some were in the Ruy Lopez or Spanish Opening which begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 f5, Schliemann (also called Jaenisch) Gambit. Grandmasters Radjabov, Aronian, Zvyagintsev and Sokolov have played the Schliemann. This has increased its popularity. Rookie - Sawyer, ICC 5 0 Internet Chess Club, 02.02.2008 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 f5 4.Nc3 [The main line Schliemann. Also good is 4.d3. Less promising are 4.d4, 4.exf5 or 4.Bxc6.] 4…fxe4 [4...Nd4 was popular about 20-30 years ago] 5.Nxe4 Nf6 [The old main line continued 5...d5 6.Nxe5 dxe4 7.Nxc6 Qg5.] 6.Nxf6+ [Equally as popular is 6.Qe2 d5 7.Nxf6+ gxf6 8.d4 Bg7 9.dxe5 0-0 which I have played many times.] 6...Qxf6 7.Qe2 Be7 8.Bxc6 [Black can recapture with either pawn.] 8… bxc6 [I think I got this line from the Nigel Davies book Gambiteer II. Here I mounted a mating in a few moves.] 9.Nxe5 c5 10.0-0 Bb7 11.Re1 0-0-0 [I got my king out of the center and progressed with an attack that won fairly quickly. It was the only time Rookie allowed me to do this, but it was fun!] 12.d3 Rhf8 13.Ng4 [13.Bd2] 13...Qg6 14.f3 Bh4 15.Rf1 Rde8 16.Ne3 d5 17.Qd1 d4 18.Ng4 h5 19.h3 hxg4 20.hxg4 Bg3 0-1

240 – blik 4.Nc3 fxe4 5.Nxe4 Nf6 I decided to play one blitz game vs the chess engine “blik”. We played at 5 0 speed. This Ruy Lopez Schliemann chosen led me to try to draw a bishops of opposite color ending. I was forced to play very fast to get the draw. At the end I had only two seconds left on my clock. “blik” had four pawns left and I had two. blik - Sawyer, ICC 5 0 Internet Chess Club, 25.02.2012 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Nc3 f5 [I knew blik transposed.] 4.Bb5 fxe4 5.Nxe4 Nf6 6.Nxf6+ Qxf6 7.Qe2 Be7 8.Bxc6 dxc6 9.Nxe5 Bf5 10.d3 0-0 [10...0-0-0 was a valid alternative.] 11.0-0 Bd6 [Black sacrificed a pawn for rapid development.] 12.Nc4 a6 13.Be3 Rae8 14.Rae1 b5 15.Nxd6 cxd6 16.b3 Bd7 17.Qd2 Qg6 18.Kh1 Qf6 19.Qa5 Bc8 20.c3 Qd8 21.Qxd8 Rxd8 22.Bg5 Rde8!? 23.Be7 Rf5 24.Bxd6 Rxe1 25.Rxe1 Bd7 26.Bg3 Rf6 27.a4 Re6 28.Be5! g6 29.axb5 axb5 30.d4 Kf7 31.c4 bxc4 32.bxc4 Re8 33.d5 cxd5 34.cxd5 [Black needed to cover f5 and d7 to hold the position. Clocks: 2:11-2:07.] 34...h5 35.d6 Bf5 36.f4 Rd8 37.Ra1 Rd7 38.Kg1 Rb7 39.Ra8 Rd7 40.Kf2 Ke6 41.Ra6 Bd3 42.Rb6 Be4 43.h3 Rb7 44.Ra6 Rd7 45.h4 Bf5 46.g3 [Now we started counting to 50 moves. Clocks: 1:291:28.] 46...Rb7 47.Rc6 Rd7 48.Rb6 Kd5 49.Ra6 Ke6 50.Ke1 Kd5 51.Kd2 Rb7 52.Ke3 Rb3+ 53.Kf2 Rb7 54.Ra4 Rd7 55.Ra6 Rb7 56.Ra3 Rd7 57.Ra5+ Ke6 58.Ra6 Kd5 59.Ke3 Rb7 60.Kf2 Rd7 61.Ke2 Rb7 62.Ra3 Rd7 63.Ra5+ Ke6 64.Ra6 Rb7 65.Rc6 Rd7 66.Rb6 Ra7 67.Kf2 Rd7 68.Ke2 Ra7 69.Rb3 Rd7 70.Rb5 Ra7 71.Rb8 Rd7 72.Rf8 Kd5 73.Kf2 Ke6 74.Re8+ Kd5 75.Ra8 Ke6 76.Rf8 Kd5 77.Rb8 Ke6 78.Rb5 Ra7 79.Rb8 Rd7 80.Rb4 Ra7 81.Rb2 Rd7 82.Rb6 Ra7 83.Rc6 Rd7 84.Kf1 Ra7 85.Rc7 [I exchanged rooks and did another 50 moves. Clocks: 1:140.19.] 85...Rxc7 86.dxc7 Kd7 87.Ke1 Kc8 88.Ke2 Bg4+ 89.Kd3 Bf5+ 90.Ke2 Bg4+ 91.Kd3 Bf5+ 92.Kc4 Bg4 93.Kc3 Bf5 94.Kb4 Bg4 95.Kc4 Bf5 96.Kc5 Bg4 97.Kc6 Bf5 98.Kb6 Bg4 99.Ka6 Bf5 100.Ka7 Bg4 101.Kb6 Bf5 102.Ka7 Bg4 103.Kb6 Bf5 104.Kc6 Bg4 105.Bd6 Bf5 106.Bc5 Bg4 107.Bd6 Bf5 108.Be5 Bg4 109.Kc5 Bf5 110.Kb6 Bg4 111.Bd6 Bf5 112.Be7 Bg4 113.Bf6 Bf5 114.Bd8 Bg4 115.Be7 Bf5 116.Ba3 Bg4 117.Bf8 Bf5 118.Bd6 Bg4 119.Be7 Bf5 120.Bd8 Bg4 121.Bf6 Bf5 122.Bc3 Bg4 123.Bb4 Bf5 124.Bf8 Bg4 125.Ba3 Bf5 126.Bf8 Bg4

127.Bd6 Bf5 128.Bb4 Bg4 129.Ba3 Bf5 130.Bc1 Bg4 131.Bb2 Bf5 132.Bc1 Bg4 133.Bd2 Bf5 134.Ba5 Bg4 135.Ka7 Bf5 136.Kb6 Bg4 Draw by 50 move rule. Clocks: 1:08-0.02. 1/2-1/2

241 – BigSerge 4.Nc3 fxe4 5.Nxe4 Nf6 I played four blitz games against the gambit player BigSerge while my wife was cooking supper. On that day, his rating was above mine. Here is a summary of our four games. Game 1: King's Gambit Accepted 3.Nf3 g5 4.h4 g4 5.Ng5!? h6. As Black I blundered my queen and resigned on move 19. Game 2: Pirc Defence 4.Be2 Bg7 5.g4!? (E. J. Diemer's idea). BigSerge ripped apart my center and won after 24 moves. Game 3: King's Gambit Accepted 3.Nf3 d5. I held off his many threats. He blundered a queen on move 24 and resigned. Game 4: Ruy Lopez Schliemann 3...f5 4.Nc3. BigSerge was down in time. He played for a win and lost in the endgame here. Sawyer - BigSerge, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 19.11.2012 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 f5 4.Nc3 fxe4 5.Nxe4 Nf6 6.Nxf6+ Qxf6 7.Qe2 Be7 8.Bxc6 dxc6 9.Qxe5 [Headed for an endgame with an extra pawn. Most players play 9.Nxe5 Bf5 10.d3 0-0 11.0-0+/= Black has compensation for White extra pawn in two bishops, open lines and probable pressure against the king.] 9...Bg4 10.Qxf6 Bxf6 [Clocks: 2:40-2:11] 11.c3?! [11.d3] 11...Bxf3 12.gxf3 c5 13.d3 0-0-0 14.Be3 [14.Ke2] 14...Rxd3 15.Ke2 Rd5 16.Rad1 Rxd1 17.Rxd1 b6 18.Rd2 Rd8 19.Rxd8+ Kxd8 20.Kd3 Kd7 [Clocks: 1:57-1:46] 21.b3 [I want to place my queenside pawns on the light squares so my 3 pawns could hold off Black's 4 pawns with no entry points for his king. 21.Ke4 was another good idea.] 21...Ke6 22.c4 [22.Kc4!?] 22...Kf5 23.Bd2 Be5 24.h3 g6 25.Be3 Bf4 26.Ke2 Be5 27.Kd3 Bb2 28.Bd2 Bd4 29.Be3 Ke5 30.Ke2 a6 [Clocks: 1:18-1:10] 31.Kd3 Bb2 32.a4 Kf5 33.Ke2 Be5 34.Kd3 Bf4 35.Ke2 Kg5 [Clocks: 1:10-0:48] 36.Kd3 Bxe3 37.fxe3 Kh4?! [37...Kf5=] 38.e4 Kg5 39.Ke3 Kf6 40.h4 h6 41.f4 c6 [Clocks: 0:55-0:38] 42.Kf3 Ke6? [The losing move. 42...h5= gives Black good drawing chances.] 43.Kg4 Kf6? 44.h5 g5 45.fxg5+ hxg5 46.h6 [46.e5+! Kxe5 47.Kxg5+- wins more easily.] 46...Kg6 47.h7 Kxh7

48.Kxg5 Kg7 49.Kf5 Kf7 50.e5 Ke7 51.e6 Kf8 52.Kf6 Ke8 53.e7 b5 54.Ke6 bxa4 55.bxa4 a5 56.Kd6 Kf7 [Clocks: 0:30-0:12] 57.Kd7 Black resigns 1-0

242 – blik 4.Nc3 fxe4 5.Nxe4 Nf6 Some Ruy Lopez Schliemann (3.Bb5 f5) lines lead to bishops of opposite color endgames. White may have an extra pawn or two. How do you draw as Black in bishops of opposite color endings? Here are some suggestions based on hundreds of my games: 1. Leave only the kings, bishops and pawns on the board. 2. Blockade the opponent’s pawns with anything you can. 3. Exchange pawns so you will not have too much to defend. 4. Have your bishop protect your pawns where necessary. 5. Use your king to keep your opponent's king from invading. 6. Give yourself squares to use so that you can repeat moves. 7. Play fast enough so that you do not lose on time. blik (2346)- Sawyer (2212), ICC 5 0 Internet Chess Club, 2012 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 f5 4.Nc3 fxe4 5.Nxe4 Nf6 [The main line.] 6.Nxf6+ Qxf6 7.Qe2 Be7 8.Bxc6 dxc6 9.Qxe5 Qxe5+ 10.Nxe5 Bd6 11.d4 Bxe5 12.dxe5 Bf5 [Opposite colored bishops.] 13.c3 c5 14.Be3 c4 15.0-0 0-0-0 16.Rad1 Rxd1 17.Rxd1 Rd8 18.Rd4 Rxd4 19.cxd4 c6 [Black will put his pawns on the light squares.] 20.Bd2 b5 21.f3 h5 22.Bb4 Kd7 23.Kf2 Ke6 24.Kg3 g6 25.Kf4 Kd5 26.Bc5 a5 27.g4 hxg4 28.fxg4 Bd3 29.h4 Ke6 30.h5 gxh5 31.gxh5 b4 32.Ke3 Bh7 33.Bb6 a4 34.Kd2 Bg8 35.Bc5 b3 36.axb3 axb3 [White must guard c3/b2 area against c4-c4, b2xc3, b3-b2b1=Q.] 37.Ba3 Kf5 38.h6 Kg6 39.Bf8 Bd5 40.Kd1 Be6 41.Bg7 Bd5 42.Kc1 Be6 43.Kd1 Bd5 44.Bf8 Be6 45.Kd2 Bd5 46.Bg7 Be6 47.Kc3 Bd5 48.Bf8 Be6 49.Kb4 Bd5 50.Kc3 Be6 51.Kb4 Bd5 52.Bg7 Be6 53.Kc3 Bd5 54.Kd2 Be6 55.Kc1 Bd5 56.Bf8 Be6 57.Be7 Bd5 58.Bf8 Be6 59.Kd1 Bd5 60.Ke1 Be6 61.Bb4 Kxh6 [Now it is just a matter of playing 50 more moves.] 62.Bd2+ Kg6 63.Kf1 Kf5 64.Bc3 Ke4 65.Ke2 Bd5 66.Ke1 Be6 67.Kf2 Bd5 68.Ke2 Be6 69.Kf1 Bd5 70.Ke2 Be6 71.Kf1 Bd5 72.Kf2 Be6 73.Kg2 Bd5 74.Kg3 Be6 75.Kg2 Bd5 76.Kg3 Kf5 77.Kf2 Be6 78.Ke1 Bd5 79.Kf2 Be6 80.Bb4 Bd5 81.Ba5 Be6 82.Bc3 Bd5 83.Kg3 Be6 84.Kg2 Bd5+ 85.Kg3 Be6 86.Kg2 Bd5+ 87.Kh3 Be6 88.Kg3 Bd5 89.Kh4 Be6 90.Kh5 Bd5 91.Kh6 Ke6 92.Bb4 Be4 93.Kg5 Bd5 94.Ba3 Be4 95.Kf4 Bd5 96.Kg5 Be4 97.Kf4 Bd5 98.Bb4 Bg2 99.Kg3 Bd5 100.Kf4 Bg2

101.Bc3 Bd5 102.Kg5 Be4 103.Kf4 Bd5 104.Ke3 Bg2 105.Ke2 Bh1 106.Bb4 Bg2 107.Kf2 Bd5 108.Kg3 Be4 109.Kh4 Bd5 110.Kh5 Be4 111.Kg5 [I had 10 seconds left.] 111...Bd5 Drawn by the 50 move rule 1/21/2

3.Bb5 Nf6 243 – Krysa 4.d3 Bc5 5.0-0 Nd4 Ruy Lopez Berlin 3.Bb5 Nf6 lines with 4.d3 remain popular due to the defensive skills by masters against the open 4.0-0 Nxe4 5.d4. Attempts to avoid 4.0-0 may also fail. The gradual build-up 4.d3 strategy can be thwarted when Black counter attacks such as in Pascal Charbonneau vs Leandro Krysa. Charbonneau (2505) - Krysa (2548), PRO League Group Stage chess.com INT (5), 07.02.2018 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 Nf6 4.d3 Bc5 5.0-0 Nd4 6.Nxd4 Bxd4 7.c3 Bb6 8.Bg5 c6 [8...h6 9.Bh4=] 9.Ba4 [9.Bc4=] 9...h6 10.Bh4 [10.Bxf6 Qxf6=] 10...d6 [10...g5 11.Bg3 d6 12.Qd2 Rg8 13.Kh1 h5 14.f3=] 11.Nd2? [11.Bxf6 Qxf6 12.Nd2=] 11...g5! 12.Bg3 h5! 13.h4 Rg8 [13...Bg4!-/+] 14.Nc4? [14.hxg5 Rxg5 15.Bh4 Rg6=] 14...Ng4 15.Nxb6 axb6 16.hxg5 Qxg5 17.Bb3 h4 18.f4 [18.Qf3 Rg7-/+] 18...Qg7 19.Bxh4 [19.fxe5 Nxe5 20.d4 Qxg3-+] 19...Ne3 20.Qf3 Nxg2 0-1

244 – Najer 4.d3 Bc5 5.c3 0-0 White attacks a knight in the Ruy Lopez after 1.e4 e4 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5. Below Black ignored the attack on Nc6 with the Classical Berlin line after 3...Nf6 and 4...Bc5. Then on move 7 the Black knight runs away from c6 to e7. Later, the Ruy Lopez bishop on b5 gets attacked in Evgeniy Najer vs Jergus Pechac. The action in this game started slow but it turned wild by move 17. Najer (2683) - Pechac (2440), 19th ch-EUR Indiv 2018 Batumi GEO, 17.03.2018 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 Nf6 4.d3 Bc5 5.c3 0-0 6.0-0 d6 7.Nbd2 Ne7 8.d4 exd4 9.cxd4 Bb6 10.Re1 Ng6 [10...Bg4=] 11.Nc4 c6 12.Nxb6 Qxb6 13.Bd3 Bg4 14.Be3 Nh4 15.d5 [15.Be2 Bxf3 16.gxf3=] 15...Qxb2 16.Re2 Bxf3 17.Rxb2 Bxd1 18.dxc6 Ba4? [Black gets greedy. Better was 18...bxc6 19.Rxd1=] 19.cxb7 Rad8 20.Bxa7 Nd7 21.Rb4 Bc6 22.Rc1! [After 22...Bxb7 (or 22...Nc5 23.b8Q+-) 23.Rxb7+-] 1-0

245 – Pichot 4.d3 Bc5 5.c3 d5 Tension mounts. Both sides attack a piece. Both sides threaten a check. Who wins? The one who forced a combination. Weaker players wait for weaker opponents to blunder. Stronger players force the tactical action. White began quietly in this Ruy Lopez Berlin with 4.d3, but soon the fireworks came raining down. In the game Alan Pichot vs David Martinez Martin, White won a pawn to drive the Black king out into the open. Pichot (2552) - Martinez Martin (2399), Gibraltar Masters 2018 Caleta ENG 25.1.2018 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 Nf6 4.d3 Bc5 5.c3 d5 6.exd5 Qxd5 7.Bc4 Qd6 8.b4 Bb6 9.a4 a5 [9...e4=] 10.b5 e4 11.dxe4 Qc5 [11...Qxd1+ 12.Kxd1 Nd8 13.Rf1+/=] 12.Bxf7+! Kxf7 13.Be3 Qe7 14.bxc6 Bxe3 15.fxe3 Rd8 [Or 15...bxc6 16.Qb3+ Ke8 17.0-0+/-] 16.Qb3+ Kg6 [16...Kf8 17.e5+-] 17.e5 bxc6 18.Qc2+ Kh6 19.0-0 [19.exf6 Qxe3+ 20.Qe2+-] 19...Ng4 [19...Nd7 20.Qe4+/-] 20.Qe4 Re8 [20...Rd5 21.c4+-] 21.Qxc6+ Be6 22.Qe4 Bd7 23.e6 Bxe6 24.h3 Qc5 [24...Bd7 25.Qxe7 Rxe7 26.hxg4 Bxg4 27.Kf2+-] 25.hxg4 Bc4? [25...g6 26.Qd4+-] 26.Qf4+ g5 [27.Qf6 mates] 1-0

246 – catz 4.Nc3 d6 5.d4 exd4 After 1.Nc3 e5, for this game I chose the more conventional 2.e4. Therefore we transposed from a Queens Knight Attack to a Vienna Game to a Four Knights Game to a Ruy Lopez. A common Ruy Lopez move order is 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 Nf6 4.0-0 d6 5.d4 Bd7 6.Nc3 exd4 7.Nxd4 Be7. We reached this position in my ICC blitz game vs “catz”. He was rated 1585. I won a piece for a pawn. Gradually I strengthened my position until he ran out of time. Sawyer - catz, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 08.02.2013 begins 1.Nc3 e5 2.e4 Nf6 3.Nf3 Nc6 4.Bb5 d6 5.d4 exd4 6.Nxd4 Bd7 7.0-0 Be7 8.Bf4 Nxd4 9.Qxd4 0-0 10.Bxd7 Qxd7 11.Rad1 Rad8 12.f3 [Going fishing with 12.Qxa7+/= never entered my head.] 12...Nh5 13.Be3 Bf6 14.Qd3 Bxc3 15.Qxc3 a6 16.e5! Qe7? [16...f5! saves the knight but 17.Qb3+ Kh8 18.Qxb7+/- wins a pawn.] 17.g4 dxe5 18.gxh5 Rd6 19.Rxd6 cxd6 20.Qc4

Kh8 21.Qg4 f5 22.Qg5 Qe6 23.b3 f4 24.Bf2 h6 25.Qg2 Rf6 26.Qg4 Qf7 27.Bh4 Rf5 28.Qg6 Qf8 29.c4 Black is down a bishop and forfeits on time 1-0

247 – Muir 4.Nc3 d6 5.d4 Bd7 “Combo” is a combination of things. In a restaurant a “combo” is a meal with a drink. It chess, “combo” has other meanings. In tactics it is a series of moves that accomplish some goal. In openings, it is a transposition that unites more than one opening. My game with Bob Muir was a Philidor to Scotch to Ruy Lopez Steinitz to Berlin combo. Either of us could have varied at any point from moves two to five and reached a different position. We began with a Philidor Defence after 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4. Black responded with 3...Nc6. This can be reached via a Scotch after 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 d6. Instead of playing 4.dxe5 or 4.d5, I chose 4.Bb5. This is a Ruy Lopez. A common Steinitz continuation is either 4…exd4 or 5…exd4. After Black played 4…Bd7 5.Nc3 Nf6 6.0-0 and we have a line in the Ruy Lopez Berlin Variation. The normal continuation to reach that line would be 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb4 Nf6 4.0-0 d6 5.d4 Bd7 6.Nc3. I don’t like my idea to treat this like a King’s Indian Defence after 7.Bg5 h6 8.Bxf6 Bxf6 9.d5. Black got a strong attack here. Other seventh moves (7.dxe5 or 7.Re1) in the notes look better. Sawyer (2010) - Muir (1800), Williamsport, PA 14.11.2000 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 Nc6 4.Bb5 Bd7 5.Nc3 Nf6 6.0-0 Be7 [6...exd4 is more normal here] 7.Bg5!? [7.dxe5 Nxe5 8.Bxd7+ Qxd7 9.Nd4 0-0 10.Nf5+/=; 7.Re1 exd4 8.Nxd4 0-0 9.Bxc6 bxc6 10.Bg5 h6 11.Bh4!?= and 1/2-1/2 in 18. Sawyer - Riesenbeck, corr CCLA 1980] 7...h6 8.Bxf6 Bxf6 9.d5 Ne7 10.Qd3 Ng6 11.Ne2 0-0 12.Bxd7 Qxd7 13.c4 Rab8 14.b4 a6 15.a4 Rfe8 16.Rfc1 Qe7 17.a5 Nf4 18.Qc2 g5 19.Ng3 Kh7 20.Nf5 Qf8 21.Ne1 g4 22.Nd3 Qg8 23.Ra2 [23.Nxf4! exf4 24.e5+-] 23...Qg5 24.Rd1 h5 25.c5 h4 26.Rb2 Nxd5 27.cxd6 cxd6 [27...c6 28.Nc5+-] 28.Nxd6 Red8? [Hastens the end.] 29.Nxf7 Qg6 30.Nxd8 Qxe4 31.Ne6 h3 32.Ne1 [32.Ndc5!+- is the strongest move here.] 32...Qxc2 33.Nxc2 Nc3 34.Rd7+ Kg6 35.Ne3 Nb5 36.Rbd2 Nd4 37.Nxd4 exd4 38.Nxg4 Re8 39.f4 Bh4 40.g3 Be7 41.Re2 1-0

248 – Chess Bull 4.Qe2 Bc5 “Chess Bull”" sent me three Ruy Lopez blitz games where Black won using the Fishing Pole variation. This game turned out well. Black's dark squared bishop, active kingside knight, open h-file for the rook, advanced g-pawn and powerful queen, force an impressive checkmate threat. In the end, there was no defence to this “Chess Bull” Fishing Pole Attack. NN - Chess Bull, Fishing Poles Games, 2014 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 Nf6 4.Qe2 Bc5 5.c3 Ng4?! [Better is 5...0-0 6.0-0 when Black has three playable lines: 6...d6, 6...Re8 or 6...Qe7] 6.0-0 d6 7.d3 [7.d4!+-] 7...a6 8.Bxc6+ bxc6 9.h3 h5 10.Nbd2 Qe7 11.Nc4 Be6 12.Ne3 Nf6 13.Bd2 Qd7 14.Ng5 Bg4 15.hxg4 hxg4 16.f3 [Again 16.d4+-] 16...g3 17.Qe1 Nh5 18.b4 Ba7 19.Qe2? [Last chance for 19.d4+/-] 19...Nf4 20.Qe1 Qe7 21.Nh3 [If 21.Qxg3 White loses the queen to a fork check after 21...Ne2+ 22.Kf2 Nxg3-+] 21...Rxh3 22.gxh3 Qh4 0-1

249 – RockyTop 4.0-0 Ng4 5.h3 h5 I ate a bowl of Chocolate Lucky Charms for supper, while chatting with my wife about things that happened during the day. Finally, I finished my cereal. She got hungry and went to cook something for herself. Then I logged on to the Internet Chess Club for a quick game or two before getting into the evening's later activities. My opponent "RockyTop" and I sat down to a nice game of blitz chess online. With a handle like that, I assume he likes the famous 1967 country bluegrass song about Tennessee. We spent some wonderful years in that beautiful state. I even won a chess tournament in Crossville. I like the words from the song "Rocky Top”. In chess, life can be simple. Just play for fun! My opponent and I started with the normal looking moves of the Ruy Lopez when I tossed out an old country fishing pole with a Black Knight for bait in a Ruy Lopez. White's first five moves were very good. But when he nibbled at the bait and got hooked, I reeled in a nice catch. It worked like a lucky charm. RockyTop (1400) - Sawyer (2021), ICC 3 2 u Internet Chess Club, 18.07.2013 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 Nf6 4.0-0 Ng4 5.h3 h5

6.hxg4? [Better are either 6.c3 a6 7.Ba4 Bc5 8.d4 Ba7; or 6.d3 Bc5 7.c3 a6] 6...hxg4 7.Bxc6 dxc6 8.d4 gxf3 9.Qxf3 Qh4 White resigns 0-1

250 – mscp 4.0-0 Ng4 5.h3 h5 Brian Wall, the master from Colorado, is famous for many of his variations that he has given creative names. One of Brian Wall's most well-known openings it the Fishing Pole in the Ruy Lopez. The Fishing Pole includes the idea of Nf6-g4 as Black. If the knight is attacked by h2-h3, then Black continues h7-h5. This includes a trap as presented below. There is more to the variation than just the trap. Taking the knight is very risky. Take a look at the Fishing Pole in the style of Brian Wall. Here are the most common continuations: A. 6.d4 exd4 7.Nxd4 Bc5 B. 6.c3 a6 7.Ba4 Bc5 C. 6.d3 Bc5 7.c3 a6 I am not saying the variation is super strong or even completely sound. But it sure is tricky. I won a short and sweet blitz game vs the computer chess engine program "mscp". mscp - Sawyer, ICC 5 0 Internet Chess Club, 29.10.2011 begins 1.Nf3 Nc6 2.e4 e5 [Transposing to the Open Game.] 3.Bb5 Nf6 4.0-0 Ng4 [This looks like the bait.] 5.h3 h5 [This is the pole.] 6.Bxc6 dxc6 7.hxg4 hxg4 8.Nxe5 [Taking the bait.] 8...Qh4 [White cannot avoid checkmate.] 9.f3 g3 10.d4 Qh1# White is checkmated 0-1

251 – bjewe 4.0-0 Nxe4 5.d4 Be7 The Ruy Lopez Berlin Variation has been very popular in recent years. After 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 Nf6 4.0-0 Ne4 5.d4 there is a fork in the road. Almost everyone follows the path 5…Nd6 6.Bxc6 dxc6 7.dxe5 Nf5 8.Qxd8+ Kxd8. The road not taken is 5…Be7. This bishop move appears only about 15% of the time. What is Black’s idea with the 5…Be7 move? 1. It develops a new piece. 2. It protects the king against an open e-file. 3. It prepares Black to castle kingside. 4. It keeps the queens on the board. The disadvantage after 6.Qe2 Nd6 7.Bxc6 bxc6 8.dxe5 Nb7 is that Black’s knight has been temporarily fianchettoed to b7. It takes more time to get rearranged and untangled. After 9.Nc3 0-0 10.Re1 Nc5 11.Be3 Ne6, theory favors White slightly. 12.Rad1 is close to equal. It looks like either 12.Nd4 or 12.Qc4 are better. In my Ruy Lopez game against “bjewe”, I focused on the e-file. Gradually White picked off all of Black’s kingside pawns for an endgame win. Sawyer (2226) - bjewe (1631), ICC 20 20 u Internet Chess Club, 31.10.1999 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 Nf6 4.0-0 Nxe4 5.d4 Be7 [More popular is 5…Nd6 6.Bxc6 dxc6 7.dxe5 Nf5 8.Qxd8+ Kxd8=] 6.Qe2 Nd6 7.Bxc6 bxc6 8.dxe5 Nb7 [8...Nf5 9.Qe4 g6 10.b3+/=] 9.Nc3 0-0 10.Re1 [10.Nd4 Bc5 11.Qd3=] 10...Nc5 11.Be3 Ba6 [11...Ne6 12.Rad1=] 12.Qd2 Rb8 13.b3 f6 [13...Ne6 14.Nd4+/=] 14.exf6 Rxf6 15.Bg5 Re6 16.Rxe6 Nxe6 17.Bxe7 Qxe7 18.Re1 Rb4 19.Ne5 Bc8 20.Ne4 Rd4 21.Qe3 c5 22.Nf3 Rb4 23.Nxc5 Qxc5 24.Qxc5 Nxc5 25.Re8+ Kf7 26.Rxc8 Rb7 27.Ne5+ Ke7 28.Nd3 [28.g3+/-] 28...Nxd3 29.cxd3 d5 30.Kf1 Kf6 31.Ke2 Ke5 32.Ke3 Kd6 33.Rd8+ Kc5? [33...Ke6 34.Rh8+/-]

34.Rd7 Kc6 35.Rxg7 Kc5 36.Rxh7 d4+ 37.Kd2 [37.Ke4+-] 37...Kb6 38.Re7 c5 39.Rxb7+ Kxb7 40.h4 Kb6 41.h5 Kb5 42.h6 Kb4 43.h7 Black resigns 1-0

3.Bb5 a6 This is the Morphy Variation.

252 – Sawyer 4.Bxc6 dxc6 5.d4 This is my first recorded game vs my friend Edward G. Sawyer. Ed and I are not related, but we were good friends for several years. We both lived at opposite ends of Washington County in the southeast corner of Maine. Fifty years ago it was one of the poorest counties in America. Washington County was a nice place to grow up, but a difficult place to make a living. I had met Ed Sawyer previously. While I was a student at the University of Maine (just a few years behind author Stephen King), I assisted George Cunningham who travelled to direct a scholastic event in Washington County. Ed Sawyer won that scholastic event. In those days I remember he studied chess a lot. Ed Sawyer later became a USCF master. This game was played in a four round Saturday tournament held at the University of Maine in Orono. We lived 100 miles or more from UMO in different directions. This final round game was a Ruy Lopez Exchange 5.d4 from the famous game Lasker-Capablanca, St Petersburg 1914. White heads into an endgame with a favorable pawn structure. I won two pieces for a rook and guided my passed c-pawn to queen. Edward Sawyer - Tim Sawyer, Orono, Maine (Round 4), 13.10.1973 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Bxc6 dxc6 5.d4 [Lasker. 5.0-0 Fischer] 5...exd4 6.Qxd4 Qxd4 7.Nxd4 Bd7 8.0-0 [8.Be3 0-0-0=] 8...0-0-0 9.Nc3 Bc5 10.Nb3 Bd6 11.Be3 Ne7 12.a3 f5 [Black plays to open the position up where his two bishops might be of more importance.] 13.Rad1 Be5 14.Bg5 Rhe8 15.exf5 Bxf5 16.Rxd8+ Kxd8 17.Rd1+ Kc8 18.Re1 Bf6 [18...Ng6!=/+] 19.Bxf6 gxf6 20.Nd4 Bg6 21.Ne4? [A tactical error. 21.g4=] 21...Nd5 22.f3 f5 [White’s knight sacrifice nets my rook.] 23.Nxf5 Bxf5 24.Nd6+ cxd6 25.Rxe8+ Kc7 26.Re2 Nf4? [26...Kd7 covering e7.] 27.Rd2? [27.Re7+ Kb6 28.Rf7 Ne2+ 29.Kf2 Bg6 30.Rf6+/-] 27...d5 28.Kf2 Kd6 29.g4 [29.g3! and the game could go either way.] 29...Bg6 30.Kg3 Ne6 31.f4 Nc5 32.Re2 Ne4+ 33.Kh4 a5 34.f5 Bf7 35.c4? [35.b4 a4 36.g5 Ke5 37.Kg4 b6=/+] 35...Ke5 36.cxd5 cxd5 37.Rc2 d4 38.Rc7 Bd5

39.Re7+ Kd6 40.Rxh7 d3 41.Rh8 d2 42.Rd8+ Ke5 43.Re8+ Kf4 44.Rxe4+ Bxe4 45.f6 d1Q 46.h3 Bg6! 47.f7 Qe1# 0-1

253 – Socko 5.Nc3 Bd6 6.d4 White won in a Ruy Lopez Exchange Variation 4.Bxc6 dxc6 5.Nc3 with tactical alertness. Black routinely castled on move 9 which left her queen potentially vulnerable. White's pin of the Bd6 won Black's extra doubled cpawn in Monika Socko vs Nino Batsiashvili. Socko (2468) - Batsiashvili (2528), European ACP w Blitz Tbilisi GEO, 01.04.2018 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Bxc6 dxc6 5.Nc3 Bd6 6.d4 exd4 7.Qxd4 f6 8.0-0 Ne7 9.Rd1 0-0?! [9...Bg4=] 10.Bf4! Bg4 11.Bxd6 cxd6 12.Qxd6 Qe8 13.Qg3 Qh5 14.h3 Be6 15.Rd6 Qf7 16.Rad1 Ng6 [16...Rae8 17.Na4+-] 17.h4 h5 [17...Rae8 18.h5+/-] 18.Rxe6 Qxe6 19.Qxg6 Rad8 [19...Qf7 20.Qxf7+ Rxf7 21.Ne1+-] 20.Ng5 1-0

254 – Sawyer 5.0-0 f6 6.d4 exd4 I like both 1.e4 and 1.d4. Each game I just pick one. I played this Ruy Lopez 3...a6 4.Bxc6 dxc6 5.0-0 which was made popular by Bobby Fischer in my early chess years. I play 4.Ba4. I did not know 4.Bxc6 Spanish Exchange theory deeply. I varied from the recommended 7.Nxd4 to play my 7.Qxd4. I swapped queens and headed to an ending where I had an extra kingside pawn. That seemed promising to me. On second thought, 7.Nxd4 looks better. That’s what I hope to play if I get into this position again. Sawyer - joe1314, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 14.09.2012 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Bxc6 dxc6 5.0-0 f6 6.d4 exd4 [Or 6...Bg4] 7.Qxd4 [Play usually continues 7.Nxd4 c5 8.Nb3 Qxd1 9.Rxd1] 7...Qxd4 [7...Bd6!? 8.Be3 Ne7 9.Nbd2 Be6 10.Rfd1] 8.Nxd4 Bc5 [8...Bd7! followed by castling queenside gives Black a good game.] 9.Be3 Ne7 10.c3 Kf7 11.Nd2 Bg4 12.f3 Be6 13.Kf2 Rad8 14.Nxe6?? [I felt like I should play 14.Rad1 but I did not see the tactic in this 3 minute blitz game.] 14...Bxe3+? [Black also misses 14...Rxd2+! winning at least a piece.] 15.Kxe3 Kxe6 16.Rad1 Ng6 17.Nb3 b6 18.Nd4+ Kd6 19.Nf5+ Kc5 20.Nxg7 Ne5? 21.b3 [It would have been nicer to see 21.Ne6+ Kc4 22.Nxd8+-] 21...Rdg8 22.Ne6+ Kb5 23.Nxc7+ Ka5 24.g3 h5 25.Ne6 h4 26.g4 Ng6 27.Nf4 Ne5 28.Nd3 Ng6 29.a3 h3 30.Nb2 c5 31.b4+ [Missed a

mate in 3 with 31.Nc4+! Kb5 32.Rd6! Rb8 33.a4#] 31...Kb5 32.Rd6 cxb4 33.cxb4 Nh4 34.Rfd1 Ng2+ 35.Kf2 Rc8 36.R1d5+ 1-0

255 – Protej 5.0-0 f6 6.d4 Bg4 I drew vs the 2401 rated Protej after I won a pawn. Ruy Lopez Exchange lines are roughly equal in theory, but players are not. My choice in this three minute blitz game was to quickly develop the Black kingside with 7.c3 Bd6 8.Nbd2 Nh6!? 9.Nc4 Nf7. The fact that it worked in this game is no guarantee of future success. The big advantage for me in this game was that White blundered a pawn. Sure, I was around to accept it, but I cannot take credit for causing White’s mistake. Its pawn on e6 was too vulnerable. In a slow game vs a human, I would have played to win with a move like 24…g6! In time pressure vs a chess engine I headed toward a drawn position. I only had a few seconds left at the end. Protej (2401) - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 u Internet Chess Club, 09.06.2016 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Bxc6 dxc6 5.0-0 f6 6.d4 Bg4 7.c3 Bd6 8.Nbd2 Nh6!? [8...Qe7=] 9.Nc4 Nf7 10.Ne3 [10.h3 Bh5!?=] 10...Be6 11.Qe2 Qd7 12.d5 cxd5 13.exd5 Bf5 [13...Bg4 14.Nxg4 Qxg4=] 14.Nxf5 Qxf5 15.Nd4 Qd7 16.Ne6!? [Frisky and risky. Much safer is 16.c4 0-0 17.Ne6 Rfe8=] 16...Nd8 17.Qg4 [17.Nxd8 Rxd8 18.c4 0-0=] 17...Nxe6 18.dxe6 Qe7 19.Qc4 [19.f4=] 19...0-0 [19...0-0-0=/+] 20.Rd1? [20.f4=] 20...Rfe8 21.Qe4 b6 22.g4 Qxe6 23.a4 a5 24.Be3 Qe7 [24...g6!-/+] 25.Rd5 Kh8 26.Rad1 Rad8 27.c4 Bb4 28.b3 h6 29.f3 Rxd5 30.Rxd5 Rd8 31.Kg2 Rxd5 32.Qxd5 Qd6 33.Qxd6 Bxd6 34.Kf1 g5 35.Ke2 Kg7 [35...Bc5=/+] 36.Kd3 Kf7 37.Ke4 [37.c5!=] 37...Ke6 38.Bc1 Bc5 39.Bb2 c6 40.Ba1 Bf2 41.h3 Bc5 42.Bc3 Bd6 43.Bb2 Bc5 44.Bc3 Bd6 45.Bb2 Bc5 46.Bc3 Bd6 Game drawn by repetition 1/2-1/2

256 – Goldt 4.Ba4 f5 5.d4 exd4 In 1984 I played Dr. Rainer Goldt of Germany in an International Correspondence Chess Federation game. We battled via postal chess for a full year. Rainer Goldt had an ICCF rating of 2349 based on 55 games when he stopped playing in 2003. We were probably both rated around 2100 when we played in 1984. Our Ruy Lopez game was in the exciting gambit line 4.Ba4 f5!? This Schliemann Defence Deferred appeared in a famous game between Anatoly Karpov and Viktor Korchnoi. I usually play the side of Karpov in his openings against Korchnoi. I’m impressed with the attacking skills of Viktor Korchnoi, but Anatoly Karpov’s style to control the board with strong pieces makes sense to me. Of course we knew the Karpov vs Korchnoi game. I followed the main line recommendation 5.d4 exd4 6.e5. I kept a slightly better position throughout the game, however I offered a draw in a double bishops ending. I remember that 1985 was a big year of personal and family transition, moving and changing jobs. Sawyer - Goldt, corr ICCF 1984 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 f5 5.d4! exd4 6.e5 Bc5 7.0-0 Nge7 8.Bb3 [8.c3 dxc3 9.Nxc3 0-0 10.Nd5+/-] 8...d5 9.exd6 Qxd6 10.Re1 h6 [10...Bd7 11.Nbd2+/=] 11.Nbd2 b5 12.a4 Bb7 [12...Rb8 13.c3+/=] 13.axb5 axb5 14.Rxa8+ Bxa8 15.Nf1 Kd8 16.Qd3 Re8 17.Qxb5 Ng6 18.Bf7 Rxe1 19.Nxe1 Nge7 20.Nd3 Ba7 21.Bf4 [21.Qa6 Nc8 22.Nf4+/-] 21...Qf6 22.Bb3 Ng6 [22...g5 23.Bd2+/=] 23.Ng3 [23.Qa6 Nxf4 24.Nxf4+/-] 23...Nh4 [23...Nxf4 24.Nxf4 Qe5 25.Qxe5 Nxe5 26.Nxf5+/-] 24.Qd5+ Kc8 25.Qe6+ [25.Be5 Nxe5 26.Qxa8+ Bb8 27.Nh5+-] 25...Qxe6 26.Bxe6+ Kd8 27.Nxf5 Nxf5 28.Bxf5 Ne7 29.Be6 Ng6 30.Bg3 Bb6 31.Bc4 Ke7 32.Ne5 [32.h4+/-] 32...Nxe5 33.Bxe5 g6 34.Bd3 Kf7 35.Kf1 Bd5 36.f3 Be6 37.Ke2 Bd7 38.b3 h5 39.Bc4+ Ke7 40.Bd5 Bb5+ 41.c4 dxc3+ 42.Bc4 Bd7 43.Bxc3 Bc8 44.Bd2 Kf6 45.Be3 Ba5 46.Bd4+ Kg5 47.Bc5 Bc3 48.Be7+ Kh6 49.f4 Kg7 50.b4 Bf5 51.Ke3 Bb2 52.Bd8 c6 53.Bc7 Kf6 54.Bd3 Bc1+ 55.Kd4 Bb2+

56.Kc4 Be6+ [56...Bxd3+ 57.Kxd3+/=] 57.Kc5 Ba3 58.Be5+ Kf7 59.Bc3 Bd5 60.g3 Bf3 [60...h4 61.Kd6+-] 61.Kd6 Bc1 62.Bd4 1/2-1/2

257 – Penullar 4.Ba4 d6 5.d4 Peter Mcgerald Penullar played in a Ruy Lopez thematic match. The starting position was predetermined through eight moves. The Modern Steinitz has first 3…a6 4.Ba4 and then 4…d6. This line contains one of the classic Noah's Ark traps. Black can trap and win the White Bb3 with the a6 / b5 / c4 pawns. A minor piece is always worth more than two pawns in the opening. Black chose not to win the bishop, but he won the game anyway. petemaric - Penullar, CHRISTIAN CHESS WORLD, 2012, Match #65 Chess.com, 13.02.2012 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 d6 5.d4 b5 6.Bb3 Nxd4 7.Nxd4 exd4 8.Qxd4 c5 [This was the thematic starting position.] 9.Qd5 Ra7? [9...Be6 10.Qc6+ Bd7 11.Qd5 c4 12.Bxc4 bxc4 13.Qxc4 Nf6 14.Nc3 Be7 15.0-0 0-0-+] 10.0-0 [10.c4!=] 10...Be6 11.Qc6+ Qd7? [11...Bd7! 12.Qd5 c4-/+] 12.Qxd7+ Kxd7 13.Bxe6+ fxe6 14.Be3 Rc7 15.Nd2 Nf6 16.a4 b4 17.b3 Be7 [Equal.] 18.Rad1 Rd8 19.Bf4 Kc6 20.f3 Nh5 21.Be3 d5 22.exd5+ [22.g4 Nf6=] 22...exd5 23.Rc1? [23.g4 Nf6 24.Bf4 Bd6 25.Bxd6 Rxd6=] 23...Nf6 [23...Bf6! 24.g4 Re7-/+] 24.Bg5 h6 25.Bxf6 [25.Bf4 Bd6 26.Bxd6 Rxd6=/+] 25...Bxf6 26.Nb1 Re7 27.Rce1 Rde8 28.Rxe7 Rxe7 [Black pushes his pawn majority] 29.g3 Re2 30.Rc1 Bb2 [30...Bd4+! 31.Kf1 Rxh2-+] 31.Rd1 Rxc2 32.Nd2 Rc1 33.Rxc1 Bxc1 34.Nf1 c4 35.bxc4 dxc4 36.Kf2 b3 37.Ke2 b2 0-1

258 – Saric 5.0-0 Bd7 6.c4 Masters love the Ruy Lopez because of its complex strategical and tactical play. Most of the pieces remain active in battle deep into the middlegame. You can always play for a win. Pattern recognition, calculation ability, and accurate evaluation all play a major role in the final result. Ivan Saric won against WGM Nino Batsiashvili after she delayed her bishop development. Saric (2664) - Batsiashvili (2504), Gibraltar Masters Caleta ENG, 28.01.2018 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 d6 5.0-0 Bd7 6.c4 Nf6 7.Nc3 Bg4 8.h3 Bxf3 9.Qxf3 Nd7 10.Qg3 Nd4 11.f4 c6 12.d3 Qb6 13.Be3 0-0-0 [13...Qxb2 14.Bxd4 exd4 15.Nd5=] 14.Rab1 Nc5 15.b4 Nxd3 16.fxe5 dxe5 17.Rxf7 h5 [17...Bxb4 18.a3+-] 18.Kh1 Bxb4 19.a3!

[Or 19.Bc2!+-] 19...a5 [19...Rhf8 20.Rxf8+-] 20.axb4 axb4 [20...Rhf8 21.Rxf8+-] 21.Bc2 Nf4 [21...Rdf8 22.Rxf8+ Rxf8 23.Bxd3+-] 22.Ra1 1-0

259 – Workman 4.Ba4 b5 5.Bb3 Bb7 The Ray Haines Ruy Lopez vs Bradley Workman in the 2016 Maine State Championship raises possibilities to offer coaching advice. Ray was interested in what I thought about his game. I think that either 1.e4 or 1.d4 are good choices. He plays well in active positions. Ruy Lopez is a good choice if you do not want to memorize a lot. Sure, it has theory, but many of the moves are based on logical principles as long as one doesn’t fall for a trap. Black played the gambit 11...d5 that jump started his game. When White missed 12.Nd2, things shifted in Black’s favor. Ray’s opponent was apparently an improving player who had the better position for most of the game. Black missed several chances for advantage. Workman made Ray Haines work for 70 moves. When White was short of time, they agreed to a draw. Haines - Workman (1638), Maine State Championship (3), 09.04.2016 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 b5 5.Bb3 Bb7 6.0-0 Nf6 7.d4 [Many players prefer 7.d3= or to prepare d4 with 7.Re1 Bc5 8.c3 d6 9.d4=] 7...Nxd4 8.Nxd4 exd4 9.e5 Ne4 10.c3 d3 [Maybe 10...Nc5=; Interesting but risky is 10...dxc3 11.Qf3 Nd6!=] 11.Qxd3 d5?! [11...Nc5!=] 12.exd6?! [12.Nd2+/=] 12...Bxd6 13.Qe2 0-0 14.Nd2 Nc5 [14...Qh4!-/+] 15.Qg4 Nd3 16.Nf3 Ne5? [16...Qf6=/+] 17.Nxe5 Bxe5 18.Bg5 Qd3 19.Rad1 Qg6 20.Qh4? [20.f4! Qb6+ 21.Rf2+/=] 20...h6 21.f4 hxg5 22.fxg5 Qh7? [Black returns the favor. 22...Bd6-+] 23.Bxf7+! Rxf7 24.Qxh7+ Kxh7 25.Rxf7 Re8 26.h4 [26.Rdd7 Kg6 27.Rfe7 Rxe7 28.Rxe7 Bd6=/+] 26...Kg6 27.Rfd7 [27.Rdd7 Rh8-/+] 27...Bc6 [27...Bg3!-+] 28.R7d3 Re6 [28...Kh5-/+] 29.Kf1 Rd6 30.b3 Rxd3 [30...Kh5 31.Rxd6 cxd6-/+] 31.Rxd3 Kf5 32.Kf2 Be4 33.Rd7 Ke6 34.Rd8 Bxc3 35.Re8+ Kf5 36.h5 Bd4+ 37.Ke2 Bxg2 [Black has a better endgame after 37...Bc6 38.Re7 Kxg5 39.Rxc7 Bxg2-/+] 38.h6 gxh6 [Much stronger is 38...Kg6!= ] 39.gxh6 Be4 40.h7 Bb1 41.h8Q [41.a3+/-] 41...Bxh8 42.Rxh8 Bxa2 43.Rh3 Ke5 44.Kd2 Bb1 45.Rc3 Kd6 46.Rh3 Kc5 47.Kc3 b4+ 48.Kb2 Bg6 49.Rh6 Bd3 50.Rh4 Kb6 [50...c6=] 51.Rh5 [White could pick off a

pawn here, and maybe he did during the next 20 moves. 51.Rxb4+ Bb5 52.Rh4+/=] 1/2-1/2

260 – Weinstein 4.Ba4 d6 5.0-0 Bd7 Ray Haines and I played IM Norman Weinstein when he came to Maine for a simultaneous exhibition. This event was held in Waterville on the Friday night before a weekend tournament. Five of us travelled together from northern Maine. We split a motel room together for the weekend. I believe the young man Ray slept on the floor. Last I knew, Haines still had his original scoresheet for this game. Ray wrote: “Here is a game you asked me for earlier. I had trouble finding it. It is a game score which I did not wish to lose. I was unrated at that time. I had played less than 16 rated games at that time. This is the game with Norman Weinstein. The computer says he made a mistake on move 19. He should have play QRXP and would have had the better game.” This game is a Ruy Lopez. Ray Haines played the Modern Steinitz (4...d6) which he was fond of in those days. Black sometimes wins material with the Noah's Ark Trap. Weinstein - Haines, Waterville, ME simul, Board 7, 1974 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 d6 5.0-0 [5.d4 b5 6.Bb3 Nxd4 7.Nxd4 exd4 8.Bd5 (Not 8.Qxd4? c5 9.Qd5 Be6 10.Qc6+ Bd7 11.Qd5 c4-+ Noah's Ark Trap) 8...Rb8 9.Qxd4=; More common is 5.c3] 5...Bd7 6.d4 b5 7.Bb3 Nxd4 8.Nxd4 exd4 9.c3 Nf6 [After 9...dxc3 10.Nxc3 Nf6 11.f4+/= the tactical skills of an international master are likely to shine.] 10.cxd4 c5 11.dxc5 dxc5 12.e5 c4 13.exf6 cxb3 14.Qe2+ Be6 15.Nc3 Qxf6 16.axb3 Be7 17.Nxb5 0-0 18.Nc7 Rab8 19.Nxe6 [It is natural to head for an endgame with an extra pawn, especially in a simul. However White had better chances in the middlegame after 19.Rxa6! Bc5 20.Nxe6 fxe6 21.Rxe6 Qf7 22.Re5 Bd4 23.Re4 Bf6 24.b4+-] 19...Qxe6 20.Qxe6 fxe6 21.Rxa6 Rxb3 22.Rxe6 [White could probably win a bishop ending and certainly a pawn ending, but with rooks on the board, the game is very drawish.] 22...Bf6 23.Rd1 [23.Re2!?] 23...Bxb2 24.Be3 Bf6 25.g3 Rfb8 26.Rd7 R3b4 27.Ra6 Rc8 28.Raa7 Rb5 29.Bd4 Bxd4 30.Rxd4 Rg5

31.Rdd7 h6 32.h4 Rg6 33.Kh2 h5 34.f4= [34.Ra5! Rf6 35.f4 g6 36.Raa7+/= White might swap off a set of rooks, but the game is still drawn as long as Black keeps one of his rooks on the board.] 34...Rc3 35.Rd5 Rcxg3 36.Rxh5 Rg2+ 1/2-1/2

261 – Haines 4.Ba4 d6 5.c3 Bd7 Ray Haines is younger than me, but he is one of my oldest friends. We first met in the state high school chess championship in 1972 held at the University of Maine. My record in that event was +3 =1 -1; Ray was one of the three players I beat. When my family moved near his family, Ray Haines looked me up. There were hardly any chess players around, so Ray Haines and I got together several times to play and talk chess. We played a lot. Later I moved away, but Ray Haines and I kept in touch. Since I was a couple years older, I had moments of arrogance that sometimes comes with youth. There is no way I should lose to a younger player. But darn it, Ray was about as good as I was. Also, he was more aggressive than I. Here is one of our early games. Good play led to a draw. I avoided that and lost. Sawyer - Haines, Ft Fairfield, ME 02.10.1973 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 d6 5.c3 Bd7 6.0-0 Nge7 7.d4 Ng6 8.Be3 Be7 9.Qe2!?N [9.Nbd2 0-0 10.Re1 Bf6 11.d5 Nce7] 9...h6 10.Rd1 Bg5 11.Nbd2 Bxe3 12.Qxe3 0-0 [Black has equalized.] 13.Nf1 Qe7 [Black has 13...Nxd4! 14.cxd4 Bxa4 15.b3 Bc6 At first glance e5 is weak, but 16.dxe5 Re8!=/+] 14.Ng3 Rad8 [14...Nxd4=/+] 15.Bc2 Qf6 16.Nh5 Qe7 17.d5 [Finally.] 17...Nb8 18.b4 b6 [18...f5!?] 19.h3 [19.Ng3+/=] 19...f5! 20.exf5 Bxf5 21.Bxf5 Rxf5 22.g4? [22.Ng3!+/=] 22...Rf7 [The half-open f-file is a big advantage for Black.] 23.Nd2 Nf4 24.Nxf4 Rxf4 25.Re1 Rdf8 26.f3 Qh4 27.Kg2 Nd7 28.Qf2 Qxf2+ 29.Kxf2 Nf6 30.c4 Nd7? [30...b5!-+] 31.Re4 g5 32.Kg3? [32.Rc1=] 32...Nf6?! [32...b5!=/+] 33.Rxf4 exf4+ 34.Kf2 Re8 35.Re1? [35.a4=] 35...Rxe1 36.Kxe1 Kf7? [36...b5!=/+] 37.Ke2 Nd7 38.Ne4 Nf6 39.Kd3 Ke7 40.Nxf6 Kxf6 [Reaching a drawn position.] 41.Ke4 b5 42.Kd3 Ke7 43.Kc3 Kf6 44.Kd4 Ke7 45.c5 Kf6 46.a3 Kg6 47.Kc3 Kf6 48.Kd4 Kg6 49.cxd6 cxd6 50.Ke4 Kf6 51.Kd4 Kg6 52.Kd3 Kf6 53.Ke4 Kg6 54.h4?? [Frustrated with the draw, I miscalculate and throw the game away. Ugh!! 54.Kd4=] 54...gxh4 55.Kxf4 h5! 56.Ke3 [If 56.g5 h3 57.Kg3 Kxg5 58.Kxh3 Kf4-+ and the outside passed pawn wins.]

56...hxg4 57.fxg4 Kg5 58.Kf3 h3 59.Kg3 h2 60.Kxh2 Kxg4 61.Kg2 Kf4 62.Kf2 Ke4 63.Ke2 Kxd5 64.Kd3 Ke5 65.Ke3 d5 66.Kd3 d4 67.Kd2 Ke4 68.Ke2 d3+ 69.Kd2 Kd4 70.Kd1 Kc3 71.Kc1 Kb3 0-1

3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 This leads to common lines in the Ruy Lopez.

262 – DrMenghy 5.d3 b5 6.Bb3 d6 In the Ruy Lopez, the 5.d3 line is suggested as one possibility in the Everyman book “The Ruy Lopez: Move by Move” by Neil McDonald. While the book covers all the major Ruy Lopez ideas (also called the Spanish Opening), Neil McDonald notes that 5.d3 as "A plan to get you started with the Ruy Lopez". My game below reminds me of the rich ideas in this popular opening. It combines strategy with tactics. The game is a three minute blitz game with both of us being rated over 2000. Most of the moves were good, but I made two poor moves. First I missed the winning line 27...Kh8! and then in time trouble I missed the drawing line 41...Qa7+. But all in all I was happy with my play, despite the loss. My opponent played good moves too. DrMenghy - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 14.10.2012 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.d3 [This move 5.d3 is trendy, but much more common is 5.0-0] 5...b5 [Another approach is 5...d6 6.c3 g6 7.0-0 Bg7] 6.Bb3 d6 7.c3 Be7 8.0-0 Na5 [The main line is 8...0-0 9.Re1 Na5 10.Bc2 c5 11.Nbd2] 9.Bc2 c5 10.a4 Bd7 11.Re1 0-0 12.Nbd2 Re8 13.Nf1 g6 14.h3 Qc7 15.Ne3 Bf8 16.axb5 axb5 17.d4 exd4 18.cxd4 Bc6 19.d5 Bd7 20.Nd2 b4 21.Qf3 Bg7 22.Nec4 Nxc4 23.Rxa8 Rxa8 24.Nxc4 Bb5 25.Ne3 [This helps Black. Better is 25.e5 Re8=] 25...Nd7 26.Ng4 Ne5 27.Nf6+ Bxf6? [Here I missed the subtle winning line 27...Kh8! 28.Qf4 Qe7 29.Ng4 b3 30.Bb1 Ra1 31.Bd2 Nxg4 32.Qxg4 Bxb2-+] 28.Qxf6 Qd8 29.Qf4? [29.Qxd8+ Rxd8 30.Bg5+/=] 29...c4 [There is one last chance to make use of the knight fork on d3: 29...b3! 30.Bb1 Ra1 31.Bd2 Bd3 32.Bxd3 Nxd3 33.Rxa1 Nxf4-/+] 30.Qg3 b3 31.Bb1 Ra1 32.Bd2 Nd3 33.Bxd3 Rxe1+ 34.Bxe1 cxd3 35.Bc3 f6 [35...Qc7=] 36.Qe3 Qe7 37.f4 Kf7 38.Qd4 h5 39.Kf2 h4 40.Ke3 Ba6 41.Qb4 [White can pick off a pawn with 41.Kf3 Bb5 42.Qb4 Qd7 43.Qxb3+/=] 41...Qb7? [The fatal blunder.

Black could draw with 41...Qa7+ 42.Bd4 Qc7= due to the threat of ...Qc1+!] 42.Qxd6 Qa7+ 43.Kf3 d2 44.Qxf6+ Ke8 45.Bxd2 1-0

263 – Vujakovic 5.d4 exd4 6.0-0 Surprise! Surprise! Surprise! That always makes for a fun chess move. Black tried to chase away the White queen and was in for a shock! The Ruy Lopez opening was basically equal. White got a slight edge by move 14. Black retreated a bishop to kick the White queen on move 16. Then came the surprise response in the game Branko Vujakovic vs Mladen Trbojevic. Vujakovic (2340) - Trbojevic (2353), 27th TCh-CRO Div 1b 2018 Biograd na Moru CRO (1.15), 15.09.2018 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.d4 exd4 6.0-0 Be7 7.e5 Ne4 8.Nxd4 0-0 9.Re1 [9.Nf5 d5 10.Nxe7+ Nxe7 11.c3=] 9...Nxd4 10.Qxd4 Nc5 11.Nc3 Nxa4 [11...d6 12.Bb3 Nxb3 13.axb3 Be6 14.exd6=] 12.Qxa4 d5 13.exd6 Bxd6 [13...Qxd6 14.Bf4 Qb4 15.Bxc7 Be6 16.Qxb4 Bxb4 17.Be5=] 14.Bf4 Bf5 [14...Bd7 15.Qd4 Bc6 16.Rad1+/=] 15.Bxd6 Qxd6 16.Rad1 Bd7? [16...Qc6 17.Qxc6 bxc6 18.Rd2+/=] 17.Qxd7! 1-0

264 – Quesada 5.d4 exd4 6.0-0 Ruy Lopez theory extends deep into the game. Not everything is tried or even known. New ideas crop up as computers examine positions by the millions. In the game Yasser Quesada Perez vs Yusnel Bacallao Alonso, White found a sudden win. Quesada Perez (2552) - Bacallao Alonso (2605), 55th ch-CUB Absoluto 2018 Havana CUB (6.1), 07.02.2018 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.d4 exd4 6.0-0 Be7 7.Re1 0-0 [7...b5=] 8.e5 Ne8 9.c3 dxc3 10.Nxc3 d6 11.exd6 Nxd6 12.Nd5 b5 [The bishop on e7 is vulnerable. Black would be wise to protect it immediately. 12...Re8=] 13.Bc2!? [13.Nd4+/=] 13...h6 [13...Re8=] 14.Nd4! [White wins at least a piece by attacking Nc6 and Be7. Last century theory went 14.Bf4 Be6 15.Nxe7+ Nxe7 16.Nd4+/= with a slight edge.] 1-0 [If 14...Nxd4 15.Nxe7+!+-]

265 – Pigeon 5.0-0 Bc5 6.Nc3 I won a Ruy Lopez against Pigeon based on the pawn structure. Both sides missed the best move eight. Later, after a piece exchange, White was left with an extra doubled pawn on the queenside vs Black's winning 3 to 2 pawn edge on the kingside. Pigeon (2007) - Sawyer, ICC 2 6 Internet Chess Club, 18.04.2018 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.0-0 Bc5 6.Nc3 [6.c3 0-0 7.d4 Ba7 8.Bg5+/=] 6...b5 [6...0-0 7.Bxc6 dxc6=] 7.Bb3 d6 8.Ng5 [8.Nd5+/=] 8...0-0 [8...Bg4-/+] 9.Bd5 Nxd5 10.Nxd5 Ne7 11.d3 Nxd5 12.exd5 h6 13.Ne4 Bb6 14.Be3 Bxe3 15.fxe3 Bd7 16.a3 Qe7 17.Qh5 f5 18.Nc3 Qf7 19.Qh4 Qf6 20.Qxf6 Rxf6 21.b4 Raf8 22.d4? [A positional mistake. Better would be 22.a4 bxa4 23.Nxa4=] 22...exd4 23.exd4 Re8 24.Rae1 Rxe1 25.Rxe1 Rf8 26.Kf2 Re8 27.Rxe8+ Bxe8 [Black has the better endgame pawn structure.] 28.Ke3 Kf7 29.g3 Bd7 [29...Kf6=/+] 30.Kf4 Kf6 31.Kf3 g5 [31...Be8-/+] 32.h4 [32.Ne2 Be8=/+] 32...Be8 33.Ke3 Kg6 34.hxg5 hxg5 35.Kf3 Kf6 36.Ne2 Bh5+ 37.Ke3 Bxe2 [37...Bf7-/+] 38.Kxe2 Ke7 39.Kd3 Kd7 40.c4 [40.Ke3 c6-/+] 40...Kc8 41.c5 Kd7 42.Ke3 Ke7 43.Kd3 Kf6 44.Ke2 Kg6 45.Kf3 Kh6 46.Kg2 Kh5 47.Kf3 Kg6 48.g4 [48.Ke3 g4-+] 48...fxg4+ 49.Kxg4 Kf6 50.c6 [50.Kg3 Kf5-+] 50...Kg6 51.Kg3 Kf5 52.Kf3 g4+ 53.Kg3 Kg5 54.Kg2 Kf4 55.Kf2 g3+ 56.Ke2 Ke4 57.Ke1 Kf3 58.Kd2 g2 59.Kc3 g1Q 60.Kc2 Qxd4 61.a4 Qxb4 62.axb5 axb5 63.Kd3 Qc5 64.Kd2 Ke4 65.Ke2 Qc2+ 66.Kf1 Kf3 67.Kg1 Qg2 mate White checkmated 0-1

266 – Papp 5.0-0 b5 6.Bb3 Bc5 Ruy Lopez combines the chess richness of full piece play, attack and defense, strategy and tactics. In the game Petra Papp vs Vesna Misanovic, White's queen angled for an attack on f7. When Black threatened mate in one, she was in for a shock. Papp (2326) - Misanovic (2280), Frauenbundesliga 2017-18 Germany, 01.10.2017 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.0-0 b5 6.Bb3 Bc5 7.a4 Bb7 8.Re1 Nd4 9.Nxd4 Bxd4 10.d3 0-0 11.Nd2 d5 12.exd5

Nxd5 13.Nf3 [13.axb5 axb5 14.Rxa8 Qxa8 15.c3 Ba7 16.Rxe5+/=] 13...Nf4 14.Bxf4 exf4 15.Nxd4 Qxd4 16.Qg4 Qf6 [16...Qd6 17.Qf5=] 17.axb5 axb5 18.Rxa8 Bxa8 19.Qd7 Qg5 [19...Qg6 20.g3+/-. Black threatens mate on g2.] 20.Qxf7+! 1-0 [White mates next move.]

267 – Elliott 5.0-0 b5 6.Bb3 Bb7 Arkhangelsk Variation of the Ruy Lopez begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.0-0 b5 6.Bb3 Bb7. This variation is named after a city in Russia near the White Sea that is about 1200 kilometers north of Moscow and east of Finland. The strategy in this line is for White to develop his kingside first. He only starts on the queenside later. In contrast, Black develops the queenside. Black delays castling until White shows his plan. The variation had been played in a few notable games in chess history, but White usually won. Schlechter beat Chigorin in 1897. Capablanca beat Dale in 1919. Kotov beat Keres in 1950. In the 1960s the line finally became popular. Malich, Vasiukov, and Bagirov all played the Arkhangelsk several times as Black. One of those early proponents was the energetic attacker Rashid Nezhmetdinov. He played the line against many famous players in the early 1960s, defeating opening theoretician Alexey Suetin. I played Tom Elliott in a Ruy Lopez. He always seemed to have my number. White started well enough, but the idea of playing the bishop to Bg3 instead of Be3 did not work well. The losing move was the lemon 21.f3? You might want to call that a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit delayed way too long. I was outplayed. Tom Elliott deserved the victory that he earned. Sawyer (1969) - Elliott (2144), corr APCT EMN-A-1, 05.12.1995 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.0-0 b5 6.Bb3 Bb7 7.Re1 [This is most popular. Also good are 7.d3 and 7.c3] 7...Bc5 8.c3 d6 9.d4 Bb6 10.Bg5 [Best seems to be 10.Be3 0-0 11.d5=] 10...h6 11.Bh4 g5 12.Bg3 0-0 13.Qd3!? [13.a4 exd4 14.cxd4 Re8=] 13...Nh5 14.Bd5 Nxg3 15.hxg3 Qf6 16.Nbd2 [16.g4!?=] 16...Rae8 17.Nb3 exd4 18.Bxc6 Bxc6 19.cxd4 Re7

20.Nfd2 Rfe8 21.f3? [21.Rac1 Bb7-/+] 21...d5 [21...a5!-+ makes d4 hard to defend.] 22.Kh2 [22.Rad1 dxe4 23.Nxe4 Qg6-/+] 22...Qg6 23.g4 [23.Nc5 dxe4 24.fxe4 Bxc5 25.dxc5 Rd7-+] 23...dxe4 24.fxe4 Bxe4 25.Nxe4 Rxe4 26.Rxe4 Rxe4 27.Qd1 [27.Rf1 Rxg4 28.Qxg6+ fxg6-+] 27...Qd6+ 28.Kh1 Bxd4 [Or 28...h5-+] 29.Nxd4 Qxd4 30.Qxd4 Rxd4 31.Rc1 Rc4 0-1

268 – Berryman 5.0-0 Nxe4 6.Re1 Do you know the famous opening trap I call the "Hastings h-file Mate"? This pattern can be reached from many openings. Memory work gives you a great practical edge when you can choose in advance how you wish to play vs the most popular early moves. Years ago I memorized all 14 moves of this game. The mate is illustrated in the Ruy Lopez line played at Hastings in 1919. A generation earlier, the line was played in Maroczy Marco, but Black played more solidly, not allowing the mate. A.D. Clark correctly pointed out that this trap is Anastasia’s Mate. It is an Anastasia Mate on the h-file, my "Hastings h-file Mate". This checkmate theme is a variation of the back rank rook mate. Here the mate is done on the h-file with the help of a knight and queen sacrifice, prior to the rook mate. Here's what to look for: Black has castled kingside with a normal Rf8, Kg8 and pawns on f7, g7 and h7; however the typical Nf6 has moved away and does not cover h7. Ready for the combination? White begins with 1.Ne7+. It drives the Black king from g8 to h8. Then 2.Qxh7+ forces Black to capture Kxh7. Finally White slides over to the hfile for mate: 3.Rh5#. Black's king has no moves since he has a pawn on g7 and the Ne7 covers g8 and g6. Berryman - Straat, Hastings 1919 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.0-0 Nxe4 6.Re1 [The Open Ruy Lopez is almost always played 6.d4 b5 7.Bb3 d5 8.dxe5 Be6] 6...Nc5 7.Nc3 [7.Bxc6 dxc6 8.Nxe5 leaves White with a better pawn structure while Black as two bishops.] 7...Nxa4 8.Nxe5 Nxe5? [8...Be7 9.Nd5 0-0 10.Nxc6 dxc6 11.Nxe7+ Kh8 12.Qh5 Be6 13.Rxe6 fxe6 14.Ng6+ Kg8 15.Nxf8 Qxf8 16.Qg4 Nb6 17.Qxe6+ Kh8 18.b3 Re8 19.Ba3 Qxf2+ 20.Kxf2 Rxe6 21.Re1 Rxe1 22.Kxe1 1/2-1/2. Maroczy-Marco, Budapest 1896] 9.Rxe5+ Be7 10.Nd5 00 11.Nxe7+ Kh8 12.Qh5 d6 [This allows the thematic mate, but there is no playable defense. 12...g6 13.Qh4 and White is going to win a lot of

material. 12...h6 13.d3 and White threatens to rip open Black's kingside with 14.Bxh6 winning.] 13.Qxh7+ Kxh7 14.Rh5# 1-0

269 – Maier 5.0-0 Nxe4 6.d4 exd4 The Open Ruy Lopez Riga Variation is tricky for club players. White sacrifices his e4 pawn and d4 pawn for an attack. White threatens to win a piece. Black has a counter attack. My only prior game against the Riga was in 1979. My opponent played 8…Bd7. I got his knight and won the game in 45 moves. This variation gets its name from a correspondence match between the city of Berlin in Germany and the city of Riga in Latvia. Black won an ending where White had an extra knight while Black had three extra kingside pawns. I played in several an ICCF Master Class events in the 1980s. These were events that you played in to become a master or to compete in the World Championship cycle. That cycle used to take about 10 years of continuous winning. Some grandmaster would win, but we all had our own hopes. One of my opponents was Albert Maier from Austria. In 1994 Maier reached his peak ICCF rating of 2152. Our 1984 ICCF game was an Open Ruy Lopez Riga Variation. Because it was postal chess, we had access to chess books. We followed the original Berlin vs Riga game for 17 moves. That game continued 18.g5 Rag8 19.Bd4 h6 20.Bf6+ Kf7 21.Bxh8 Rxh8 21.Rd1 hxg5+ 22.Kg2 Kf6. Instead, I varied with 18.Kg3. In our game I managed to get a good position. I increased my advantage and outplayed him. I won as White in 25 moves. Sawyer - Maier, corr ICCF 1984 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.0-0 Nxe4 6.d4 exd4!? [The main line is 6...b5 7.Bb3 d5 8.dxe5 Be6=] 7.Re1 d5 8.Nxd4 Bd6 9.Nxc6 Bxh2+ 10.Kh1 Qh4 11.Rxe4+ dxe4 12.Qd8+ Qxd8 13.Nxd8+ Kxd8 14.Kxh2 Be6 15.Be3 f5 16.Nc3 [16.c3+/= Houdini; 16.Nd2+/= Komodo] 16...Ke7 17.g4 g6 18.Kg3 b5 19.Bb3 h5 20.Nd5+ Bxd5 21.Bxd5 h4+ [21...c6 22.Bc5+ Kd7 23.Bf7+/-] 22.Kh3 Rae8 23.Rd1 fxg4+ 24.Kxg4 h3 [24...Rh5 25.Bxe4+-] 25.Bc5+ 1-0

270 – Piorun 6.d4 b5 7.Bb3 d5 You may vary from main lines to play something you know better than your opponent. The Open Ruy Lopez 8.Nxe5 favored by Johannes Minckwitz was played by Winawer, Goring, Mieses, and Bird as White. Kacper Piorun outplayed Semen Lomasov. Piorun (2653) - Lomasov (2551), 19th ch-EUR Indiv 2018 Batumi GEO, 26.03.2018 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.0-0 Nxe4 6.d4 b5 7.Bb3 d5 8.Nxe5!? [8.dxe5 Be6=] 8...Nxe5 9.dxe5 Be6 [9...c6=] 10.Be3 Be7 11.c3 0-0 12.f3 Nc5 13.Bc2 Nd7 14.f4 f5 15.Nd2 c5 16.Nf3 Nb6 17.Bf2 Rb8 18.b4 cxb4 19.Nd4 Qd7 20.g4 g6?! [20...bxc3 21.gxf5 Rxf5=] 21.gxf5 gxf5 [21...Bxf5 22.Bxf5 gxf5 23.cxb4+/-] 22.Kh1 Kh8 23.Qh5 Bf7 24.Qh3 Bg6 [24...Be6 25.Qh6+-] 25.Rg1 Qe8 26.Rxg6 Qxg6 27.Rg1 Qf7 [27...Rg8 28.Rxg6 Rxg6 29.Bxf5+-] 28.e6 Qe8 29.Bxf5 1-0

271 – Vehre 8.dxe5 Be6 9.c3 John Vehre, Jr. is a USCF National Master from Ohio. We met in three short postal chess games. One was in CCLA and the other two were in APCT. This was my only game as White. We played an Open Ruy Lopez after 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.0-0 Nxe4. It was played many times in the world championship at Baguio City in the Philippines. Anatoly Karpov had the White pieces and Victor Korchnoi played Black. Vehre and I followed the main line 6.d4 b5 7.Bb3 d5 8.dxe5 Be6. John Vehre played the line 11…f5!? Many players sacrifice a knight with 11…Nxf2 known as the Dilworth Variation. It contains many traps, but we did not go there. A critical Dilworth line is given in the notes. John Vehre and I agreed to a draw. In the final position, critical lines lead Black to give a perpetual check or repeat moves. Sawyer (2050) - Vehre (2150), corr APCT 1980 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.0-0 Nxe4 6.d4 b5 7.Bb3 d5 8.dxe5 Be6 9.c3 Bc5 10.Nbd2 0-0 11.Bc2 f5!? [The Dilworth variation goes 11...Nxf2 12.Rxf2 f6 13.exf6 Bxf2+ 14.Kxf2 Qxf6 15.Nf1 Ne5 16.Be3 Rae8 17.Bc5 Nxf3 18.gxf3 Rf7 19.Kg2 = 1/2-1/2 in 47. Sofia Polgar - Jan Votava, Singapore

1990.] 12.Nb3 Bb6 13.Nfd4 Nxd4 14.Nxd4 Bxd4 15.Qxd4 [15.cxd4 +/=] 15...c5 16.Qd1 f4 17.f3 Ng5 18.a4 b4 19.h4 [19.cxb4 +/-] 19...Nh3+ 20.gxh3 Qxh4 21.Rf2 1/2-1/2

3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.0-0 Be7 This is the main line Closed Ruy Lopez.

272 – Haines 6.Nc3 h6 7.d3 g5 Ray Haines mated Black’s queen in a Ruy Lopez. He wrote, "I do not get the chance to checkmate a queen very often." Yes, a rare and humorous sight which led to an immediate resignation. Haines (1478) - skrai26 (1556), Live Chess Chess.com, 23.12.2017 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 Nf6 4.0-0 a6 5.Ba4 Be7 6.Nc3 h6 7.d3 g5 [7...d6 8.Bd2 0-0 9.h3=] 8.Nd5 [8.Bxc6! dxc6 9.Nxe5+/-] 8...g4 [8...d6+/=] 9.Ne1!? h5 10.f4 Bc5+ 11.Kh1 Nd4? [11...b5!? 12.fxe5 Nxd5 13.exd5+/=] 12.c3 Ne6 [12...Nxd5 13.cxd4+-] 13.fxe5 Nxd5 14.exd5 Nf8 15.d4 Bb6 [15...b5 16.dxc5 bxa4 17.Qxa4+-] 16.Nd3 [16.Qd3+-] 16...g3 17.h3 c6 [17...Qe7 18.Qf3+-] 18.d6 Ne6 19.Qf3 Rf8 [19...0-0 20.Qxg3+ Kh8 21.Rf6+-] 20.Bh6 Ng5 21.Qf5 Ne6 22.Bxf8 Ng5 23.Be7!? [Mate to the queen! Mate to the king is 23.Bb3! Kxf8 24.Qg6 Qe7 25.dxe7+ Kxe7 26.Qxg5+ Ke8 27.Qg8+ Ke7 28.Rxf7#] 1-0

273 – Bishop 6.d4 b5 7.Bb3 Ray Haines thought Tim Bishop was a master. Later Tim Bishop wrote me to thank me and note that he never quite made it to master yet. Timothy G Bishop had not been active recently. His last tournament was the Maine Closed Championship that Ralph Townsend won. In September 1972 Townsend played a bunch of us beginners in a simultaneous exhibition at the University of Maine. It was the first time I saw a King’s Gambit. I got crushed. Below White sacrificed a pawn for open lines. This in turn led to tactical threats with pins and forks. Then Black hung a queen. Haines - Bishop, Univ. of Maine at Orono, 20.05.1983 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.0-0 Be7 6.d4 [Ray likes the open tactics of 6.d4.] 6...b5?! [6...exd4 7.Re1 b5 8.Bb3 d6 9.Bd5 Nxd5 10.exd5 Ne5 11.Nxd4 0-0=] 7.Bb3 d6 8.c3 Bg4 9.h3 Bxf3 10.Qxf3 exd4 11.Qd1 [11.Qg3!? 0-0 12.Bh6 Ne8 13.Bd5 Bh4 14.Qf4+/=] 11...dxc3 12.Nxc3 0-0 13.f4 Qd7?! [13...Na5 14.Bc2 c6=] 14.Be3 b4? [14...Rfe8] 15.Nd5! Nxe4?

[Black has a problem with Nc6. 15...Na5 16.Ba4+/=] 16.Rc1 Ng3 17.Rf3 Bh4 18.Ba4 Nd4? 19.Bxd7 Nde2+ 20.Kh2 1-0

274 – Huber 6.Qe2 b5 7.Bb3 d6 I experimented with the 6.Qe2 vs the Closed Ruy Lopez. It took me a long time to beat Ernest Huber. Later, I returned to 6.Re1. Sawyer (2050) - Huber (1800), corr APCT 1980 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.0-0 Be7 6.Qe2 b5 7.Bb3 d6 8.a4 Na7 9.c3 c5 10.d4 Qc7 11.h3 0-0 12.Nbd2 Bd7 13.axb5 axb5 14.d5 Rab8 15.Kh2 Nc8 16.g4 g6 17.Rg1 Qd8 18.Nf1 Ne8 [18...Nb6=] 19.Ng3 Bf6 20.Be3 Ng7 21.Bc2 Nb6 22.b3 Rc8 23.Ra7 Rb8 24.Bd3 Nc8 25.Ra6 Ne8 26.Rga1 Nc7 27.R6a2 b4 28.c4 Ne8 29.Rg1 Ng7 30.Raa1 [30.Qd2+/-] 30...Nb6 31.Raf1 Ra8 32.Bb1 Ra3 33.Qd3 Na8 34.Bc1 Ra6 35.Ne1 Bg5 36.Bb2 Nc7 37.Ne2 Bf6 38.Bc1 Ra8 39.f4 exf4 40.Nxf4 Be5 41.Kh1 Nce8 42.Nf3 Bf6 43.g5 [43.Qe3 Ra1 44.Bc2+/=] 43...Bc3 44.h4 [44.Qe2+/=] 44...Nc7 [44...f5 45.Qe3 Ra1=/+] 45.h5 Be5 [45...Qc8 46.h6=] 46.h6 Nge8 47.Qe3 [47.Nxe5 dxe5 48.Ng2+-] 47...Bh8 [47...Bc3 48.Ne2+/=] 48.Nd3 [48.e5 Bc8 49.Re1+/-] 48...Qe7 [48...Ra1 49.Bd2=] 49.e5 Na6 50.Bb2 Bf5 51.Qf4 Rd8 52.Re1 Bxd3 [52...Qd7 53.Nf2+-] 53.Bxd3 Nac7 [53...Nb8 54.Bf1+/-] 54.Rgf1 Rd7 55.Nh2 [55.exd6 Qxd6 56.Ne5+-] 55...dxe5 56.Bxe5 Bxe5 57.Rxe5 Qd6 58.Ng4 1-0

275 – Pascute 6.Qe2 b5 7.Bb3 0-0 E. Bruce Pascute chose a bold Marshall Attack approach vs my 6.Qe2 line. Black got a good game with a slight edge. I fought back until his advantage slipped away. It’s back to 6.Re1 for me. Sawyer (2050) - Pascute (1623), corr APCT 1980 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.0-0 Be7 6.Qe2 b5 7.Bb3 0-0 8.c3 d5 9.d3 [9.exd5 Nxd5 10.Nxe5 Nxe5 11.Qxe5=] 9...Re8 10.Rd1 Bb7 11.Bg5 Na5 12.Bc2 Nd7 [12...h6 13.Bh4=] 13.Bd2 [13.Bxe7 Qxe7 14.b4 dxe4 15.Ne1=] 13...dxe4 14.dxe4 c5 15.b3 Qb6 16.c4 b4 17.Bxb4 Rad8 [17...cxb4 18.Rxd7=] 18.Bc3 Nc6 19.Ne1 Nd4 20.Qe3 Nxc2 [20...Bh4=/+] 21.Nxc2 Qg6 22.f3 Bg5 23.Qf2 Qe6 [23...Nf6 24.Rxd8 Rxd8 25.Nd2+/=] 24.Nd2 [24.Ba5 Rc8 25.Ne3+-] 24...Rc8 [24...Nb8 25.Nf1+/-] 25.Nf1 Nf8 [25...Nb8 26.Rab1+/-] 26.Nfe3 f6 [26...Red8 27.Rxd8 Rxd8 28.Nd5+-]

27.Nd5 [27.Nf5+-] 27...Nd7 28.Rd3 [28.Bd2 Bxd2 29.Rxd2+-] 28...f5 29.Rad1 fxe4 30.fxe4 Rf8 [30...Nf6 31.Qe2+/-] 31.Qe2 Rf7 32.Nce3 Nf6 33.Nxf6+ Bxf6 34.Rd6 Qe7 [34...Qe8 35.Nf5+-] 35.Qg4 g6 [35...Qf8 36.Nf5+-] 36.Rd7 1-0

276 – Nygren 6.Re1 0-0 7.Bxc6 Ruy Lopez has many moves that we take for granted. Each one has a tactical or strategical reason behind it. Chester Nygren and I played a Closed Ruy Lopez. Black developed both knights, one bishop, and castled by move 6. Not by move 7 or 8? Indeed. How does 6…0-0 affect the position? The normal move is 6…b5 7.Bb3 0-0. Why does Black chase away the White bishop? Because White has a threat. Since White has castled and protected his e4 pawn, he can capture Black’s e5 pawn. White wins a pawn. Play continued 7.Bxc6 dxc6 8.Nxe5 Bc5 9.Nf3 Re8 10.d4 Ba7!? The placement of this bishop is active but risky. Soon Black’s dark squared bishop is buried alive. Sawyer (2000) - Nygren (1500), corr APCT 1979 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.0-0 Be7 6.Re1 0-0?! [Black sacrifices the e5 pawn. Correct is 6...b5] 7.Bxc6 dxc6 [7...bxc6 8.Nxe5 Bb7 9.d4+/=] 8.Nxe5 Bc5 [8...Re8 9.d3+/=] 9.Nf3 Re8 [9...Bg4 10.h3+/=] 10.d4 Ba7!? 11.e5 [11.Qd3!?+/=] 11...Nd5 12.c4 Ne7 13.c5 b6 14.b4 a5 15.a3 bxc5 16.bxc5 Bxc5 [Black was desperate to get something for his trapped bishop. White was also winning after 16...Bg4 17.Nbd2 Rb8 18.h3 Be6 19.Rb1+-] 17.dxc5 Qd5 18.Be3 Ng6 19.Nc3 Qxd1 20.Rexd1 Bg4 21.Bd4 Bxf3 22.gxf3 Nxe5 23.Bxe5 Rxe5 24.Rd7 Rxc5 25.Rad1 Rxc3 26.Rd8+ Rxd8 27.Rxd8# 1-0

277 – Muir 6.Re1 b5 7.Bb3 d6 Bob Muir was a frequent 1.e4 player. He played it over half the time as White. Our club did not have many 1.e4 e5 players. Here we head down an old main line of the Ruy Lopez. I was familiar with the popular 8.c3 0-0 9.h3 lines. Bob Muir surprised me with 8.d4. My 8...exd4 was good. Better would have been 8...Nxd4! with a chance to play a possible Noah's Ark Trap. White’s 9.e5? was too much of a good thing. Black won material. Muir (1800) - Sawyer (2010), Williamsport, PA 10.1998 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.0-0 Be7 6.Re1 b5 7.Bb3 d6 8.d4 [White usually prefers 8.c3] 8...exd4 [8...Nxd4! 9.Nxd4 exd4 10.c3 (Not 10.Qxd4?

Noah's Ark Trap 10...c5-+ and Black's a material.) 10...dxc3 11.Nxc3 00=/+] 9.e5? [9.Bd5 Nxd5 10.exd5 Ne5 11.Nxd4 0-0=] 9...dxe5 10.Nxe5 Nxe5 11.Rxe5 0-0 12.Bf4?! [Or 12.Bg5 c5-+] 12...Bd6 13.Qf3 Bg4 0-1

278 – Shannon 8.c3 d5 9.exd5 e4 Surprise your opponent. Play the Ruy Lopez Marshall Attack. You have a choice. You could rattle off 12-15 main line moves quickly. Or you could try 9...e4. Paul Shannon played this idea against me in 1980. This was back before computer chess engine software programs played at master levels. ChessBase had not been invented. We were on our own. Fortunately for me this was a postal chess game. We took about one week between each move. We both had other chess games going at the same time. I was not rushed in making my moves. During 1980 I was busy raising a family, moving far away to another state, and changing jobs. Still there was time for chess! The time tested main line is 9...Nxd5. Another possible variation is 9...e4!? That is probably not quite as strong. Otherwise many grandmasters would play it to avoid the beaten pathways. Unbalanced variations carry the possibility that you can outplay your opponent in sharp tactics. This time the complications of the position settled in my favor. Sawyer (2050) - Shannon (2050), corr APCT 1980 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.0-0 Be7 6.Re1 b5 7.Bb3 0-0 8.c3 d5 9.exd5 e4!? [The main line 9...Nxd5 10.Nxe5 Nxe5 11.Rxe5 c6= is the time tested way to play.] 10.dxc6 exf3 11.d4 fxg2 12.Qf3 Be6 [12...a5!?] 13.Bxe6 fxe6 14.Rxe6 Nd5 15.Qxg2 Bh4 16.Re5 [16.f3+/-] 16...Bxf2+ [16...Ne7!?] 17.Kh1 Ne7? [17...Nf4 18.Bxf4 Rxf4 19.Nd2+/-] 18.Bg5 Rf7 19.Nd2 Bxd4 20.Rxe7 1-0

279 – Fischer 9.exd5 Nxd5 10.Nxe5 Nxe5 My game on the Wade Defence 1.d4 d6 2.Nf3 Bg4 led me to wonder. What other interesting game did International Master Robert G. Wade play that I might like to look at? I found one against Bobby Fischer in the Ruy Lopez Marshall Attack. In 1965 Fischer accepted an invitation to play in Havana at the Capablanca Memorial Tournament. The US State Department would not allow him to travel to Cuba. A compromise was found. Bobby Fischer played from a little room in the Marshall Chess Club. The games were played by teletype with Fischer in New York. His opponents responded from Cuba. This arrangement made for very long games. Bob Wade co-authored a book on the Ruy Lopez Marshall Attack. He was a great source of chess information. When Bobby Fischer prepared for Boris Spassky, Frank Brady tells us in his book "Endgame" that Bob Wade sent Fischer two loose leaf notebooks. They had analysis on Spassky's openings, one book with each color Spassky played. Fischer - Wade, Havana, Cuba 1965 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.0-0 Be7 6.Re1 b5 7.Bb3 0-0 8.c3 d5 9.exd5 Nxd5 10.Nxe5 Nxe5 11.Rxe5 c6 12.d4 Bd6 13.Re1 Qh4 14.g3 Qh3 15.Be3 h5 [A more popular approach is 15...Bg4 16.Qd3 Rae8 17.Nd2+/=] 16.Qf3 h4 17.Bxd5 cxd5 18.Nd2 Be6 19.Bf4 Bg4 20.Qg2 [20.Qxd5!? Bxf4 21.gxf4+/-] 20...Qxg2+ 21.Kxg2 h3+ 22.Kg1 Bxf4 23.gxf4 Rfd8 24.f3 Be6 25.Nb3 Rab8 26.a3 Rb6 27.Kf2 g6 28.Re5 Kg7 29.Rae1 Kf6 30.Na5 [30.Nc5!+/-] 30...Rh8 31.b4 Rc8 32.R5e3 Rg8 33.Nb3 Ra8 34.Ra1 g5 35.fxg5+ Kxg5 36.Rg1+ Kf6 37.Ree1 Rc6 38.Rc1 Bf5 39.Rge1 [Now the game is equal. Maybe White should try 39.Rg3+/=] 39...Rg8 40.Rg1 Ra8 41.Nc5 a5 42.Ra1 Rcc8 43.Ra2 Rg8 44.Rg3 axb4 45.cxb4 Rh8 46.Rg1 Rhg8 47.Rxg8 Rxg8 48.Ke3 Re8+ 49.Kf4 Rg8 50.Ke3 Re8+ 51.Kf4 Rg8

52.Re2 Rg2 53.Ke3 Rg1 54.a4 bxa4 55.Nxa4 Rd1 56.Rb2 Rd3+ 57.Kf2 Rxd4 58.Nc3 Rd3 59.Ne2 d4 60.b5 Bc8 61.Nc1 Rd1 62.Nb3 Rh1 63.Kg3 Rg1+ 64.Kf4 Rg2 65.Rd2 Bb7 66.b6 Ba8 67.Rxd4 Rxh2 68.Rd6+ Ke7 69.Rh6 Rb2 70.Nd4 h2 71.Kg3 1/2-1/2

280 – Matan 11.Rxe5 c6 12.d4 Bd6 Matan Prilleltensky mounts a Marshall Attack in the famous Ruy Lopez opening. Andy Soltis is proved right! In this gambit after move 19, I was at the end of my book knowledge. I played slowly for a known variation. I used 27 minutes for the first 19 moves. My opponent used 16 minutes. I took seven minutes to talk myself into what was a blunder on move 20. In his book "Attacking the Spanish", Sabino Brunello wrote: “20.Bd1?? was played in Hellers - I. Sokolov, Haninge 1989, as well as quite a few other games. Amazingly, so far no-one seems to have noticed that Black can win by force after 20...Nxe3!N 21.fxe3 (21.Re3 Bxd1 wins a piece for nothing.) 21...Bxg3! 22.hxg3 Rh6 with a mating attack.” My opponent found the win others missed. Matan Prilleltensky became a USCF Life Master. Despite this game, my rating went up 5 points for this tournament. Sharper play suits me. After this game I read the "Grandmaster Secrets: Openings" book by Andy Soltis. His alter-ego GM Noah Tall says: "If you don't know the book at move 20 in a Lopez, it won't kill you - unless it's a sharp line like the Marshall Attack. The main Lopez variations are relatively quiet so the risk is only that you'll make a second-best move, a minor sin." I confirm that not knowing move 20 in a Marshall can kill you. My move lost by force, a major sin. Sawyer (1960) - Prilleltensky (2129), Florida Championship (3), 02.09.2007 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.0-0 Be7 6.Re1 b5 7.Bb3 0-0 8.c3 d5 9.exd5 Nxd5 10.Nxe5 Nxe5 11.Rxe5 c6 12.d4 [Fischer drew Spassky with 12.g3 (Santa Monica 1966), but I did not know it beyond 12.g3] 12...Bd6 13.Re1 Qh4 14.g3 Qh3 15.Be3 Bg4 16.Qd3 Rae8 17.Nd2 Re6 18.a4 Qh5 19.axb5 axb5 20.Bd1? [White prefers 20.Nf1 or 20.Qf1, but I did not know theory at this point.] 20...Nxe3! [20...Bxd1? 21.Raxd1 f5 22.Nf1 f4 23.Bc1 Ref6 24.Qe4 Kh8 25.Qd3 h6

26.b3 b4 27.cxb4 fxg3 28.fxg3 Bxb4 29.Nd2 Rf2 30.h4 Nc3 0-1 Hellers Sokolov, Haninge 1989] 21.fxe3 Bxg3! 22.hxg3 [22.Re2 Bf4-+] 22...Rh6 23.Nf1 Qh1+ 24.Kf2 Rh2+ 25.Nxh2 Qxh2+ 26.Kf1 Bh3# [My opponent played really well! Congratulations.] 0-1

281 – Muir 7.Bb3 d6 8.c3 0-0 Bob Muir liked to play the Ruy Lopez Yates Variation with 9.d4 as White. The Englishman Frederick Yates played it well against grandmasters. Yates drew both Alekhine and Capablanca with 9.d4. Yates won against Efim Bogoljubow after 9.d4 exd4 at London 1922. When they met in New York 1924, Bogoljubow won as Black after 9.d4 Bg4 which became the Bogoljubow variation, even though he played both ninth moves repeatedly. Emanuel Lasker and Euwe played 9.d4 was White. Edward Lasker and Rubinstein played it as Black. Capablanca and Thomas played it from both sides. Spielmann played 9.d4 vs Marshall in 1911. As for my adventures, when I had Black against Muir and his Yates line 9.d4, I chose the Bogoljubow variation 9…Bg4 to pin the f3 knight and add pressure on d4. Muir (1800) - Sawyer (2011), Williamsport, PA 1995 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.0-0 Be7 6.Re1 b5 7.Bb3 d6 8.c3 0-0 9.d4 Bg4 10.d5 [10.Be3 exd4 11.cxd4=] 10...Na5 11.Nbd2 Nxb3 12.axb3 Ne8 [12...c6 13.dxc6 Qc7=] 13.c4 bxc4 [13...Bd7 14.Nf1 f5=] 14.Nxc4 [14.bxc4+/=] 14...f5 15.Ne3? [15.exf5 Rxf5=] 15...Bxf3?! [15...fxe4 16.Nxg4 exf3 17.gxf3 Bg5-/+] 16.Qxf3 fxe4 17.Qg4 Nf6 18.Qe6+ Rf7 19.Nf5 Bf8 20.Bg5 Qe8 21.Qxe8?! [21.b4=] 21...Nxe8 22.Ng3 h6 23.Be3? [23.Bd2 Rb8=/+] 23...Nf6 24.Rad1 Rb8 25.Rc1 Rxb3 0-1

282 – Sawyer 9.h3 Na5 10.Bc2 c5 The Ruy Lopez allows players to fight with many pieces creating more tactical and strategical possibilities, and more mistakes. In this game from our early years, future chess master Ed Sawyer had all his pieces protected. Then Black apparently intended to redeploy his dark squared bishop to the queenside via d8. Black nudged his queen ahead to d7 to free up d8, but d7 was the only retreat square for his knight. White pushed to a5 and won. Sawyer, Tim - Sawyer, Edward, correspondence 1978 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.0-0 Be7 6.Re1 b5 7.Bb3 d6 8.c3 0-0 9.h3 Na5 10.Bc2 c5 11.d4 Nd7 12.dxc5 dxc5 13.Nbd2 f6 14.Nh4 Nb6 [14...g6=] 15.Nf5 Kh8 16.g4!? [16.b3+/=] 16...Nac4 [16...Qc7=] 17.Nxc4

Nxc4 18.Qe2 [18.Qxd8 Bxd8 19.b3+/=] 18...Rf7 19.b3 Nb6 20.a4 Qd7? [Black overlooks one detail. 20...bxa4 21.bxa4 a5 22.Rd1+/=] 21.a5 1-0

283 – Becerra 10.Bc2 d5 11.exd5 Grzegorz Gajewski introduced his Gajewski Gambit in 2007. The Ruy Lopez move 10...d5 is a type of delayed Marshall Attack for the Black pieces. GM Julio Becerra Rivero shows he knows how to marshal his army to victory in a game against Max Perez. I’ve enjoying watching Grandmaster Becerra play many games. Perez (2399) - Becerra Rivero (2531), PRO League Group Stage chess.com INT (6), 14.02.2018 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.0-0 Be7 6.Re1 b5 7.Bb3 d6 8.c3 0-0 9.h3 Na5 10.Bc2 d5 11.exd5 e4 12.Ng5 [Another critical line seems to be 12.Bxe4 Nxe4 13.Rxe4 Bb7 14.d4 Re8 15.Bf4 Nc4 16.b3 Nb6 17.c4 bxc4 18.bxc4 Nxc4 19.Nc3 Nb6 20.Qb3 Rb8=] 12...Nxd5 13.Nxe4 f5 14.c4? [14.Ng3=] 14...bxc4 15.Nec3 [15.Ng3 Nb4-/+] 15...Nb4 16.Na3 [16.d4 cxd3 17.Ba4 Bd7-/+] 16...Bc5 17.b3 Qh4! 18.Rf1 Bb7 19.Ne2 [19.Nxc4 Rf6-+] 19...Nd3 20.Nxc4 [20.Bxd3 cxd3 21.Nc2 Qe4-+] 20...Nxf2! 0-1

284 – Gusev 10.Bc2 c5 11.d4 Qc7 Blocked pawns in the center make rapid attacks seem far away. If all pieces remain on the board, a creative master can devise an effective sudden assault. This Ruy Lopez Chigorin Variation sees Alek Gusev surprise Viktor Ponomarenko on move 20. Gusev (2368) - Ponomarenko (2183), Tula GM RUS (3), 10.04.2018 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.0-0 Be7 6.Re1 b5 7.Bb3 0-0 8.h3 d6 9.c3 Na5 10.Bc2 c5 11.d4 Qc7 12.Nbd2 Bb7 13.d5 Rac8 [13...Rfb8!? 14.b3 Bc8=] 14.b3 b4 [14...h6 15.Nf1+/=] 15.c4 Rb8 16.Nf1 Bc8 17.Ng3 Nb7 18.Nh2 Nd7 [18...Re8!?] 19.Nf5 Bd8 20.Bh6! Bf6 21.Bxg7 Bxg7 [21...Qd8 22.Qg4+-] 22.Qg4 [and mate next move] 1-0

285 – Shredder 10.Bc2 c5 11.d4 Why is the Ruy Lopez so reliable? Chess masters trust this opening from both sides of the board. They have for 150 years. My first tournament Ruy Lopez was played when Boris Spassky was world champion. Bobby Fischer won a Ruy Lopez in the 1972 match when the title changed hands. Much of the world calls this the Spanish Opening after 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5. Consider nine reasons masters love Ruy Lopez. 1. It is completely sound but not a forced draw. 2. There are very few early piece exchanges. 3. Any piece might become useful and active. 4. There are lines to please any style of player. 5. Both sides have options for pawn structures. 6. Middlegames strategy influences the result. 7. Tactics are the reason for strategical moves. 8. Club players like to copy master openings. 9. Masters understand what to do and why. One way I test openings is to play vs chess engines. I copy what computers play vs me in multiple blitz games, changing colors after every game. Typically against a strong engine in the same opening I lose as White, then lose as Black, lose as White, etc. But not always. Sometimes I win or draw. Shredder chose the Ruy Lopez Chigorin 9...Na5. I obtained a good position but let it slip on move 32. After my blunder, I offered a draw. Fortunately it was accepted. Sawyer (2002) - Shredder (3322), Florida, 14.02.2006 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.0-0 Be7 6.Re1 b5 7.Bb3 d6 8.c3 0-0 9.h3 Na5 10.Bc2 c5 11.d4 Qc7 12.Nbd2 cxd4 13.cxd4 Nc6 14.Nb3 a5 15.Be3 a4 16.Nbd2 Bd7 17.Rc1 Qb7 18.Qe2 Rfe8 19.Bd3 Rab8 20.dxe5 dxe5 [20...Nxe5 21.Nxe5 dxe5 22.Bc5=] 21.Bc5 Nh5 22.g3 Nb4 23.Nxe5 Nf6 24.Nxd7 Qxd7 25.Bb1 Qxh3 26.e5 Ng4 27.Nf1 g6 28.Bxe7 Rxe7 29.Rc5

Re6 30.Rxb5 Rxb5 31.Qxb5 Nc6 32.Qxa4? [32.f4! Nd4 (or 32...Nh2 33.Re3+/-) 33.Qd3 Nf5 34.Qd8+ Kg7 35.Bxf5 gxf5 36.Qg5+ Kf8 37.Qxf5 Rh6 38.Qe4+-. Now Black could be up the Exchange for a pawn after my 32.Qxa4? Ncxe5 33.Rxe5 Rxe5 34.Be4 Nf6 35.Bg2 Qg4-/+] 1/2-1/2

Book 1: Index of Names to Games Aira – 60 Akobian – 15 alain – 33 Alberston – 24 Alden – 120 Alexis – 90 andrei – 209 Andreikin – 22 Antipov – 232 Archilleus – 196 Aronoff – 134 Babikov – 185 Bacallao Alonso – 264 Bacon – 66 Baffo – 16, 181 Batsiashvili – 253, 258 BBranko – 76 Becerra Rivero – 283 Beerdsen – 146 Bekker – 68 Bender – 49 Berryman – 268 Beslija – 225 BeSomeone – 9, 10 BethO – 158 BigSerge – 241 Bisguier – 174 Bishop – 273 biteme2 – 181 bjewe – 251 Black – 2 blik – 21, 97, 152, 161, 163, 236, 238, 240, 242

Blood – 116 Borbash – 124 Boruchovsky – 169 Bosboom – 146 Bratanov – 142 Brooks – 111 Browne – 174 Burovic – 70 ButchCroft – 235 Button – 30 Callahan – 52 Carlstedt – 219 Caruana – 15 Casey – 92 catz – 246 challanger100 – 43, 121 Chandler – 104, 196 Chaney – 85 Charbonneau – 243 Chekletsov – 189 chelsee – 96 Chess Bull – 248 Cho – 198 Cioara – 200 Cooper – 50, 73 Coriell – 107 Corter – 46 CraftyWiz – 150, 173 Curtis – 109 Custer – 86 Czempiel – 164 Davis – 39 De La'O – 4 Devereaux – 138 Diegotristan – 112 Dowd – 126

DrMenghy – 262 Dubois – 218 duckbreath – 48 Earth – 104 Edberg – 81 Eddy-Booth – 87 Elliott – 267 Elowitch – 73 Fancy – 35 Fedoseev – 185 Fejzic – 225 FirstAndrexo – 122 Fischer – 131, 279 Fitzsimons – 210 Fondeo – 190 foxsden – 160 Frenzel – 226 Fricke – 226 Fry – 51 Fuchs – 167 Funk – 67 Gauche – 69 Gerace – 201 GetBetterAtChes – 178, 237 Gilbert – 31 Goldt – 256 Granat – 203 Grattan – 36 Grover – 186 Guest – 17, 57 Gusev – 284 Hadzovic – 70 Haines – 75, 83, 145, 147, 155, 206, 213, 215, 216, 223, 229, 230, 259-261, 272, 273 Hartelt – 5 hawkstorm – 118

Hayward – 14, 207, 224 hbandersen – 234 Heap – 130 Heckman – 105 Heim – 3 Heinrici – 167 herbert22 – 229 Heyn – 168 Hoolt – 219 Hoskavich – 184 HOTBIT – 172 Huber – 274 Hunter – 206 Ivanchuk – 58 Ivy – 175 JackBach – 88 Jandourek – 220 jeromed – 183 jethro369 – 95 joe1314 – 254 jrc22osu – 151 Kaplan – 207 Karjakin – 58 Karpatchev – 199 Khusenkhojaev – 61 Klein – 40 Kobalia – 189 Koffler – 20 Kokoszczynski – 164 Koks – 102 Kolas – 64 Kostanski – 94 Koval – 132 Kozganbayev – 61 Kramnik – 22 Kruger – 12

Krysa – 243 Kutschenko – 54 Kuzubov – 169 kwiz – 129 lakhote – 108 Lalic – 68 Lamford – 19 Lau – 141, 228 Lawson – 144 Le Carpentier – 217 Leite – 103 Lingsell – 187 LinuxKnight – 159 Liu Qingnan – 212 Livingston – 119 Lomasov – 270 lordbluff – 78 lupus53 – 222 lynch_valeria – 188 Maier – 269 makrane – 44 Marfia – 125 Markovic – 204 Martinez Martin – 245 McMahon – 28 McShane – 60 Medeiros – 69 Meserve – 6 Milanovic – 204 Miles – 192, 200 Mirabile – 123 Miranda Gonzalez – 203 Misanovic – 266 Mitchell – 13 Moore, J – 106 Moore, R – 194

MoralArcOfTheUnivers – 147 Moran – 155 Morozevich – 59 Morphy Sr. – 217 Mrofka – 133 mscp – 180, 250 Muir – 153, 157, 247, 277, 281 Munoz – 171 Mutesi – 198 Najer – 244 Neboska – 75 Nepomniachtchi – 205 neuhaus44 – 79 Neverov – 232 Nielsen – 202 Nigen – 127 NN – 63, 137, 140, 248 Norman – 151 Nygren – 276 Oil_beef_hooked – 72 Over-Rated – 154 Papp – 266 Pascute – 275 pecadj – 145 Pechac – 244 Pein – 138 Penullar – 62, 72, 108, 257 Perez – 283 petemaric – 257 Pichot – 245 Piehl – 18 Pigeon – 265 pilsiedeluxe – 230 Piorun – 162, 270 Pipitone – 135 Plogdin – 5

Ponomarenko – 284 Poole – 1 Poscher – 38 Pranizin – 47 Press – 35 Prilleltensky – 280 Probasco – 128 Protej – 255 Przybylski – 162 Puckett – 27 Pupols – 131 Purser – 89-91, 208 Puzey – 93 Quesada Perez – 264 Quinones – 195 Radke – 208 realityczech – 42 Regan – 34, 74, 113 Rideout – 166 RockyTop – 249 Rogers, H – 80 Rogers, J – 210 Rohricht – 65 Rookie – 239 Ross – 233 ruben72d – 195 Rubil – 182 Ruegner – 149 Sadilek – 20, 182 Santiago – 114 Saric – 258 sashagel71 – 227 Sawyer, E – 252, 282 Sawyer, T – 1, 3, 4, 6-14, 17-19, 21, 23-34, 36-43, 46, 48-53, 55-57, 63, 65-67, 74, 76-88, 91-103, 105-107, 109-111, 113-121, 123-130, 132-136, 139-141, 148, 150, 152-154, 156-161, 163, 165, 166, 168, 170-173, 175-

178, 180, 183, 184, 187, 188, 190, 191, 193, 194, 197, 201, 209, 211, 213216, 221-224, 227, 228, 231, 233-242, 246, 247, 249-252, 254-256, 261, 262, 265, 267, 269, 271, 274-278, 280-282, 285 Schmaltz – 199 Schoupal – 179 Schultz Pedersen – 202 scubadoo – 139 sequitamorena – 197 Shafkat – 170 shalilsnv – 82 Shannon – 278 SharpShooter – 56 Shaw – 101 Sheehan – 89 Shipley – 176 Shredder – 285 Silva – 186 Sims – 27 Smith, D – 110 Smith, R – 117 snowowl – 177 Socko – 253 Spanik – 41 Spence – 148 Spiegel – 211 Steinberg – 32 Steinitz – 218 Stobbe – 53 Straat – 268 Straszacker – 23 Strockyj – 11 Talkeres – 29 Tatai – 143 Ter-Saakian – 47 tgralex – 62 Thompson – 100

Tikranian – 71 Tobias – 8 Todd – 136 Tomashevsky – 205 Trbojevic – 263 Troltenier – 192 trubble – 221 Turcotte – 25 Uballe – 99 Ullrich – 214 UlyssesSGrant – 165 Van Foreest – 71 Vasiukov – 45 Vehre – 271 Voiarnalung – 77 Vorisek – 220 vt – 193 Vujakovic – 263 Vul – 59 Wade – 279 Wallace – 64 Ward – 156 Warren – 37 Watt – 55 Weinstein – 260 White – 2 Whittle – 84 Wilbur – 191 Winter – 7, 98 Workman – 259 xory – 16 Yakimenko – 54 Yip – 149 Yu Yangyi – 212 Zdun – 231 Zigo – 179

Zilbermints – 44, 45, 112, 122, 142-144 Zintgraff – 137

Book 2 - Sicilian Defence 1.e4 c5 Second Edition – Chess Opening Games Copyright © 2015, 2016, 2018 by Sawyer Publications All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form without permission in writing from the author. Welcome to the Sicilian Defence 1.e4 c5. Chess author Tim Sawyer analyzes 184 games. This expanded version has updated commentary, and an Index of Names to Games. The 2018 Second Edition covers the Sicilian Defence, especially the Najdorf, Dragon, and Sveshnikov Variation, 2.c3 Alapin, 2.d4 Smith-Morra Gambit, 2.Nc3 Closed, and the 2.b4 Wing Gambit. About half the games in this book were played by the author. Many were against masters, experts and club players over 45 years of play. The author discusses typical examples of chess and tactics in the Sicilian Defence chess opening. Of special note is the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit Declined Sicilian Defence. The very same position occurs in both openings after 1.d4 d5 2.e4 c5 (BDG) or 1.e4 c5 2.d4 d5 (Sicilian Defense). Most of the games are by experts or masters. You benefit from the author’s lifetime study of grandmasters who play the Sicilian Defense. They include Paulsen, Lasker, Capablanca, Alekhine, Nimzowitsch, Kotov, Botvinnik, Polugaevsky, Korchnoi, Tal, Petrosian, Spassky, Fischer, Larsen, Karpov, and Kasparov of old. Modern players include Anand, Leko, Gelfand, Ivanchuk, Nunn, Shirov, Svidler, Topalov, Caruana and Magnus Carlsen. Follow ideas to surprise your opponent and win. Have fun playing chess. Enjoy this book!

Book 2: Chapter 1 – Various Lines 1.e4 c5 We begin with White’s second move alternatives that avoid the popular lines. These include 2.Ne2, 2.d3, 2.b3, 2.Bc4, and 2.f4.

1 – Huber 2.Ne2 Nc6 3.g3 d5 Kingside fianchetto moves in the Sicilian Defence are common for Black with Bg7 Dragon variations, but not so much for White. Below my opponent played for an early Bg2 without first tossing in 2.Nc3. I reacted quickly with ...d5 and instant equality. Ernest Huber competed actively in APCT postal chess in the late 1970s and early 1980s. We met four times when I was always slightly higher rated. Here White's creative set-up fell apart due to the 10th move. White turned his attention to the queenside where Black had castled. Alas for him, the main action was on the kingside where White had castled. Huber (1850) - Sawyer (2050), corr APCT 1980 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Ne2 Nc6 3.g3 d5 4.Bg2 dxe4 [4...d4 5.d3 e5 6.f4=] 5.Bxe4 Nf6 6.Bg2 [6.Bxc6+ bxc6 7.d3 g6=/+] 6...Bg4 [6...e5 7.0-0=] 7.0-0 Qd7 8.d3 0-0-0 [8...e5 9.Nd2=] 9.Nbc3 h5 10.b3? [10.Bg5=] 10...h4 11.Qe1 [11.f3 Bf5-/+] 11...hxg3 12.Nxg3 [12.fxg3 Nb4-/+] 12...Bh3 13.Bxh3 Qxh3 0-1

2 – Amin 2.d3 e6 3.g3 d5 King’s Indian players often choose a strategy to attack kingside. White followed that approach in this Sicilian Defence with a rapid h-pawn advance in Bassem Amin vs Aman Hambleton. Amin (2693) - Hambleton (2501), PRO League Group Stage chess.com INT (3), 31.01.2018 begins 1.e4 c5 2.d3 e6 3.g3 d5 4.Nd2 Nc6 5.Bg2 Nge7 6.Ngf3 g6 7.0-0 Bg7 8.Re1 0-0 9.h4 dxe4 10.Nxe4 b6 [White pushed his hpawn in this King's Indian Attack.] 11.h5 Bb7 [11...h6 12.hxg6 fxg6 13.a4+/=] 12.hxg6 hxg6 13.Nfg5 Nf5 14.Qg4 Re8 [Or 14...Ncd4 15.Qh3

Nh6 16.Nf3+/-] 15.Qh3 Nd6 16.Qh7+ Kf8 17.Nxd6 Qxd6 18.Ne4 Qd4 19.c3 Qd8 [19...Qd7 20.Bh6+-] 20.Bg5 1-0

3 – Bond 2.b3 Nc6 3.Bb2 d6 Jocelyn Bond sent me a Sicilian Defence vs Normand Corneau in the Championnat club d'échecs de Jonquiere in Canada. In the 1970s, the Snyder Sicilian (1.e4 c5 2.b3) was the favorite line of Master Robert M. Snyder on which he wrote a book. The line is fine, but apparently Snyder was not fine. Snyder is a convicted sex offender. I do not know the circumstances. America's Most Wanted had done an episode on him scheduled for October 24, 2009. That episode was pre-empted by the baseball playoffs and apparently never aired. Robert Snyder fled the United States. He was captured in Belize. The USCF had a note about his capture. The line 1.e4 c5 2.b3 is a fully playable Anti-Sicilian that could be reached from a Larsen’s Opening after 1.b3 c5 2.e4. If you play it all the time, you may score well. Jocelyn Bond provided notes. Corneau - Bond, Championnat club d'échecs de Jonquiere (4), 04.07.2012 begins 1.e4 c5 2.b3 Nc6 3.Bb2 d6 4.Bc4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.a4 e6 7.Nf3 d5N 8.exd5 [8.Bd3!?=] 8...exd5=/+ 9.Qe2+ Be7-/+ 10.Nxd5? [Better is 10.Bd3-/+] 10...Nxd5-+ 11.Bxg7 Rg8 12.Bf6 Rg6 [12...Nxf6 13.0-0 Bh3-+ Oops. I dream of the gain of the White queen and didn't see that the bishop is in the air.] 13.Bh4?? [13.Bxe7 Ncxe7 14.Ne5-+] 13...Re6 won the queen. 0-1 [Notes by Bond/Deep Fritz]

4 – Kohler 2.Bc4 Nc6 3.a3 e6 White’s move 2.Bc4 vs a Sicilian Defence gives Black an easier time than normal. Here’s my postal game against Dennis Kohler. Kohler (1352) - Sawyer (1973), corr APCT, 1994 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Bc4 Nc6 3.a3 e6 4.Nc3 Nf6 5.Nf3 d6 [5...Nxe4 6.Nxe4 d5=/+] 6.d3 Be7 7.h3 00 8.0-0 a6 9.a4 Qc7 10.Re1 Nd4 11.Bf4 e5 12.Bd2 Be6 13.Nd5 Bxd5 14.exd5 b5 15.axb5 axb5 16.Nxd4 bxc4 17.Nf5 [Better is 17.Rxa8 Rxa8 18.Nb5+/=] 17...cxd3 18.Nxe7+ Qxe7 19.cxd3 [19.Rxa8 Rxa8=/+] 19...Nxd5 [19...Qb7 20.Rxa8 Rxa8-/+] 20.f4 [20.Qb3 Rxa1 21.Rxa1 Qe6=/+] 20...f6 21.Rxa8 Rxa8 22.g3 [22.fxe5 fxe5-/+] 22...Qb7 23.Qc1

Qb3 [23...Ra2!-+] 24.fxe5 fxe5 [24...Qxd3! 25.Kh2 fxe5-+] 25.Bc3 Nxc3 26.Qxc3 Qxc3 27.bxc3 Ra3 28.Rc1 Ra2 29.Rd1 Rc2 30.d4 Rxc3 [30...exd4 31.cxd4 c4-+] 31.dxe5 dxe5 32.Kf2 Kf7 Black is up two pawns in a rook ending. 0-1

5 – Eilmes 2.f4 Nc6 3.Nf3 g6 The Sicilian Defence can be met by the famous Grand Prix Attack. This variation typically begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nc3 Nc6 3.f4 g6 4.Nf3 Bg7. And now it is decision time for White. Where will White develop the light squared bishop? Usually it is played 5.Bc4 or 5.Bb5. Don Eilmes played a quick 2.f4 and the shorter bishop move 5.Be2 vs me in the 1970s. Both sides must analyze original positions at the postal speed of three days per move. Donald P. Eilmes had a USCF correspondence rating of 2232 with a tournament rating in the 1900s. Eilmes played a total of 820 ICCF games. He was frequently rated over 2300. He was a very thorough analyst in the years before there were strong chess engines. In 1979 Don Eilmes and I were working our way up through the ranks of postal players in America. As I recall when we played our APCT game Don lived in Escondido, California. Eilmes outplayed me. What stood out was that I got mated and never saw it coming! Bravo! The USCF notes Donald Eilmes passed away at age 82. Eilmes (1948) - Sawyer (2000), corr APCT 1979 begins 1.e4 c5 2.f4 Nc6 3.Nf3 g6 4.Nc3 Bg7 5.Be2!? d6 6.0-0 a6 7.d3 b5 [7...Nf6=] 8.Qe1 e6 9.Nd1 Nge7 10.c3 Qc7 11.Be3 0-0 12.g4 f5! 13.Qh4 fxg4 14.Qxg4 e5 [14...Rb8 15.Ng5 Nd8 16.Qh4 h6 17.Nf3 b4=] 15.Qh4 exf4 16.Bxf4 Ne5 17.Ne3 Ra7 [17...Nxf3+ 18.Bxf3+/=] 18.Bxe5 [18.Nxe5! dxe5 19.Bg5+/-] 18...dxe5 19.Ng4 Rf4? [Now Black is losing. Instead he should play 19...h5! 20.Ne3 Bh6=/+] 20.Nh6+ Kh8? 21.Nxe5 Bxe5 22.Rxf4 Bxf4? 23.Qf6# [Really? I set my board up to see what I missed. Wow. Yup. I missed a checkmate. That’s a first in postal.] 1-0

6 – Parsons 2.f4 d5 3.Nc3 d4 David Parsons was one of my favorite players. David came to my home and invited me to join the Williamsport Chess Club. I played there every Tuesday night for about eight years. Usually Parsons liked offbeat trappy openings, such as the Wing Gambit in the Sicilian Defence. Here David played 2.f4. In the Sicilian Defence game below, David made the mistake of never moving his d-pawn. I’m sure he would tell you that you should move your center pawns early in the game. It is one thing to play early moves like f4 / Nc3, moves I might play myself. Things start out a little sloppy in this skittles game. We were probably playing rather fast in a college lounge with TV playing in front of us and music behind us. Then White got his pawns locked on d2, c3, and b4. Trapped! His dark squared bishop on c1 had no opportunity to come out and play with all the other pieces. I won at my leisure. Parsons - Sawyer, Williamsport, PA, 28.11.2000 begins 1.e4 c5 2.f4 d5 3.Nc3 [The other two common continuations are: 3.exd5 Nf6 4.Bb5+ Bd7 5.Bxd7+ Qxd7 6.c4 e6 or 3.e5 Nc6 4.Nf3 Bg4] 3...d4 4.Na4?! [4.Nce2 or first 4.Bb5+ would lead to equal chances.] 4...e6 [4...e5! 5.fxe5? Qh4+! winning.] 5.Nf3 Nf6 6.Bb5+?! [White position feels very loose with several unprotected men. 6.Bd3] 6...Bd7 7.Qe2 a6?! [7...Bxb5 8.Qxb5+ Qd7 9.Qxd7+ Nbxd7 10.b3 Nxe4-/+ and Black has won a pawn.] 8.Bxd7+ Qxd7? 9.b3? [9.Nb6!+-] 9...b5? 10.Nb2 [10.Nb6!+-] 10...Nc6 11.c3 Be7 12.0-0 Rd8 13.Nd1 d3 14.Qe1 c4 15.b4? [White traps in his bishop forever. 15.bxc4 bxc4=/+] 15...0-0 16.e5 Qa7+ [16...Nd5-/+] 17.Ne3 Nd5 18.Ng5 Bxg5 19.fxg5 Nxe5 20.Qg3 Ng6 21.h4 e5 [21...Nxe3 22.Qxe3 Qxe3+ 23.dxe3 d2-+] 22.Kh1 Ngf4 23.Nxd5 Rxd5 24.Bb2 Ne2 25.Qf3 e4 26.Qf2 Qxf2 [26...e3-+] 27.Rxf2 f5 28.gxf6 Rxf6 29.Rxf6 gxf6 30.a4 Rh5

31.g3 Nxg3+ 32.Kg2 Ne2 33.axb5 axb5 34.Kh3 Kg7 35.Ra7+ Kg6 36.Rc7 Rf5 37.Rc5 h5 38.Ba3 Re5 [38...e3!-+] 39.Bb2 e3 0-1

2.b4 cxb4 The Sicilian Defence Wing Gambit makes life easier for both sides. White can avoid the complex theory of the main lines. Black can advance in the center and may have an extra pawn.

7 – Torning 3.Bb2 Nc6 4.d4 This game features the “Abrahams” Variation. I won the prize in a tournament around 1973 of a book. I chose the Dover book by Gerald Abrahams entitled “Technique in chess.” Most writers simply said about a won position that, “it’s a matter of technique.” Mr. Abrahams attempted to explain how you win a won game. Rick Torning writes, "Greetings Tim, I have provided some bullet games that may (or may not) be of interest to your blog readers! In this Sicilian Wing Gambit - I dine out of this variation (cheap eats). It is a tricky little line but worth knowing. Regards, Rick Torning" Torning - NN, Casual Bullet, 03.03.2018 begins 1.e4 c5 2.b4 cxb4 3.Bb2 [Sicilian Wing Gambit, Abrahams Variation] 3...Nc6 4.d4 d5 5.exd5 Qxd5 6.c4! bxc3 7.Nxc3 Qxd4 8.Nd5 Qxd1+ [8...Qxb2 9.Nc7#] 9.Rxd1 e6?? [9...Kd7 10.Nb6+ Kc7 11.Nxa8+ Kb8 12.Bb5 and if 12...Kxa8?? 13.Bxc6 bxc6 14.Rd8! wins] 10.Nc7+ Ke7 11.Nxa8 Nf6?? 12.Ba3+ Black resigns. [12.Ba3+ Nb4 13.Bxb4+ Ke8 14.Nc7#; 12.Ba3+ Ke8 13.Nc7#] 1-0 [Game notes by Torning]

8 – Parsons 3.a3 Nc6 This is the first of four Sicilian Defence Wing Gambit games that I played against David Parsons. This time it appears I wasted a little time to play 3...Nc6 4.axb4 Nxb4 5.Ba3 Nc6. Black kept the extra pawn, but after that White dropped a piece as well. White should play 12.Bxf8 or 13.Nxa3 to remain only down a pawn. Parsons (1682) - Sawyer (2011), Williamsport, PA 1994 begins 1.e4 c5 2.b4 cxb4 3.a3 Nc6 4.axb4 Nxb4 5.Ba3 Nc6 6.d4 d5 7.e5 Bf5 8.c3 e6

9.Qa4 Qa5 10.Qxa5 Nxa5 11.Bb5+ Nc6 12.Nf3 Bxa3 13.Rxa3? [13.Nxa3 f6=/+] 13...Bxb1 14.0-0 Be4 15.Nd2 Nge7 16.Rfa1 [Or 16.Nxe4 dxe4-+] 16...0-0 0-1

9 – Faydi 3.a3 e6 4.axb4 Bxb4 Jonathan Faydi of the Netherlands drew a nice attacking game vs Fritz 13. He sent me this Sicilian Defence Wing Gambit. Jonathan wrote: “Hello, Here is a game I played recently that could be interesting to you and your readers… I've been experimenting for some time with the Wing Gambit against the Sicilian and in this game I managed to draw against Fritz 13 (4 minutes + 2 seconds per move for the computer Vs 14 minutes + 2 seconds per move for me). Kind regards, Jonathan” Jonathan Faydi wrote a blog “From Patzer to Master” where he analyzed this game. I present the same game with my analysis. Jonathan Faydi (FIDE rated 2138) presented a reasonable goal and approach for chess improvement. The Sicilian Defence Wing Gambit begins after 1.e4 c5 2.b4!? White deflected Black's c-pawn so he can set up a pawn center. This gambit was played at least a handful of times by many great masters of old: Capablanca, Alekhine, Spielmann, Koltanowski, Bronstein and most often by the US champion Frank Marshall. Modern masters who often employ the Wing Gambit repeatedly include Bonafede, Dimitrov, Shivananda and Shirazi. Faydi (2138) - Fritz 13, Netherlands 14m+2s, 13.06.2014 begins 1.e4 c5 2.b4 cxb4 3.a3 e6 [About half the time Black plays 3...d5!= forcing White to commit his e-pawn.] 4.axb4 Bxb4 5.c3 Be7 6.d4 d6 7.Bd3 Qc7 [7...Nf6=] 8.Ne2 Bd7 9.0-0 Nf6 10.Na3 0-0 11.Bg5 [11.Nc2] 11...a6 12.f4 h6 13.Bh4 Nc6 14.e5 Nd5 15.Bxe7 Ndxe7 16.Nc2 b5 17.Ne3 [17.Ng3!? gives different attacking chances.] 17...d5 [17...b4!? would try to hurry things up on the queenside before White picks up speed on the kingside.] 18.Bc2 Rfb8 19.Qd3 Nf5 20.Rf3 Kf8 21.g4 Nxe3 22.Rxe3 Qd8 23.Qh7 [23.f5!+/= looks very promising.] 23...b4 24.Rf1 b3 25.Qh8+ [After 25.f5 Qg5 26.Nf4 Ke7 27.Bd3 Rh8= the position is close to equal, but maybe not quickly drawn. In such a position, a computer might outplay a human with either color.] 25...Ke7 26.Qxg7 bxc2 [Maybe Fritz thought all roads led to a

draw, such as 26...Qg8 27.Qf6+ Ke8 28.Bd3 Ne7 29.f5 Nxf5 30.Bxf5 exf5 31.e6 fxe6 32.Nf4 Qg5 33.Rxe6+ Bxe6 34.Qxe6+ Kf8 35.Nxd5 Kg7 36.Qe5+ Kg6 37.Qe6+ Kg7=] 27.Qf6+ Kf8 28.Qh8+ Ke7 29.Qf6+ Kf8 30.Qh8+ Ke7 31.Qf6+ Kf8 1/2-1/2

10 – Parsons 3.a3 e6 4.axb4 My second Sicilian Wing Gambit game against David Parsons features me playing 3.a3 e6 as Fritz 13 did in the previous game. Dave played 7.Nf3 instead of 7.Bd3 and 8.Ne2 played by Faydi. White blundered on move 12 and Black soon won a bishop. Parsons (1682) - Sawyer (2011), Williamsport, PA 1994 begins 1.e4 c5 2.b4 cxb4 3.a3 e6 4.axb4 Bxb4 5.c3 Be7 6.d4 d6 7.Nf3 Nf6 8.Bd3 Nc6 9.Bf4 Qc7 10.Nbd2 e5 11.dxe5 dxe5 12.Nxe5 [12.Be3] 12...Nxe5 13.Qa4+ Bd7 14.Bb5 Nd3+! 15.Bxd3 Qxf4 16.Qd4 0-0 17.Rxa7 [17.e5 Qxd4 18.cxd4 Nd5-+] 17...Rxa7 [17...Qg5-+] 18.Qxa7 Bc6 19.f3 [19.Qe3 Qxe3+ 20.fxe3 Ra8-+] 19...Nd7 [19...Rd8-+] 20.Ke2 [20.g3 Qh6-+] 20...Bc5 21.Qa1 Qe3+ 22.Kd1 Qxd3 0-1

11 – Parsons 3.a3 d5 4.exd5 Sicilian Defence Wing Gambit allows Black to advance a center pawn quickly in most lines. After 3.a3, Black can play 3...e5. I preferred 3...d5. David Parsons stood worse and resigned early. Parsons (1682) - Sawyer (2011), Williamsport, PA 1994 begins 1.e4 c5 2.b4 cxb4 3.a3 d5 [3...e5=] 4.exd5 Qxd5 5.Bb2 [5.Nf3 e5=] 5...bxa3 6.Nxa3 Nc6 7.Nf3 Bg4 8.c4 Qe4+ 9.Be2 Bxf3 10.gxf3 Qf4 11.Qa4 e6 12.d4 Bb4+ [12...Nf6 13.Nc2 Be7-/+] 13.Kf1 Nf6 14.Rd1 0-0 -/+ 0-1

12 – Parsons 3.a3 d5 4.axb4 In my final game against David Parsons in the Sicilian Defence Wing Gambit I once again played 3.a3 d5. Parsons tried 4.axb4 dxe4. Black dominated the center. Then I castled queenside with check to break the pin of my knight and to win the White queen. Parsons (1682) - Sawyer (2011), Williamsport, PA 1994 begins 1.e4 c5 2.b4 cxb4 3.a3 d5 4.axb4 dxe4 5.Nc3 Nf6 6.Bc4 Qd4 7.Qe2 Bg4 8.f3 exf3 9.gxf3 Bd7 10.Bb2 Qh4+ 11.Kd1 e6 12.Nb5 Bxb5 13.Bxb5+ Nc6 14.Bc3 [14.Bxc6+ bxc6=] 14...Bxb4 [14...Be7-/+] 15.Ra4 Nd5 16.Qe5? [White

throws away a good position. 16.Bxb4 Ndxb4 17.c3+/=] 16...Nxc3+ [16...Bxc3-+] 17.dxc3 [17.Qxc3 0-0-0-+] 17...0-0-0+ 18.Ke2 Nxe5 19.Rxb4 Qg5 Black has won a queen. 0-1

2.d4 d5 This Sicilian line is also a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit Avoided. The first two moves could be 1.e4 c5 2.d4 d5 or 1.d4 d5 2.e4 c5. One continuation is 3.Nc3. That could arise by 1.Nc3 d5 2.d4 c5 3.e4. I treat it as a Sicilian Defence since Black need not play ...dxe4.

13 – Jorgensen 2.d4 d5 3.dxc5 This Blackmar-Diemer Gambit Avoided variation resembled an offbeat Albin-Counter Gambit Reversed. I have played 3.exd5 and 3.Nc3 interchangeably and scored very well with each. Also good is 3.dxc5 which may favor White. It led to a long endgame with equal chances in Mik Jorgensen against Arunn Ananthan. Jorgensen - Ananthan, Bronshoj Lang Weekend 2012 Copenhagen DEN (6), 13.02.2012 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e4 c5 3.dxc5 d4 [3...Nf6 4.exd5 Qxd5 5.Qxd5 Nxd5 6.Bd2+=] 4.Nf3 Nc6 5.Bd3 [5.c3!+/- dxc3? 6.Qxd8+ Kxd8 7.Nxc3+-] 5...e5 6.0-0 Nf6 7.Nbd2 Bxc5 8.a3 0-0 9.b4 Bd6 10.Nc4 Re8 11.Bg5 h6 12.Bd2 a6 13.Re1 Bg4 [Both sides have completed their development with equal chances.] 14.Nxd6 Qxd6 15.h3 Bh5 16.g4 Nxg4 [Black decides to unbalance the game. Otherwise, 16...Bg6=] 17.hxg4 Bxg4 18.Bf1 Qf6 19.Bg2 d3?! 20.cxd3 [20.c3!+/- takes away d4.] 20...Nd4 21.Re3 Rac8 22.Rc1 Rxc1 23.Bxc1 Rc8 24.Bb2 Nc2 25.Qd2 [White has a bishop and knight for a rook and pawn. 25.Bc1 Nxe3 26.Bxe3 Rc6 27.Bc5 Rc7 28.Be3=] 25...Nxe3 26.Qxe3 Bxf3 27.Bxf3 Rc2 28.Bc1 Qg5+ [Or 28...Rxc1+ 29.Qxc1 Qxf3 30.Qc8+ Kh7=/+ when Black is a pawn up in a hard to win queen ending.] 29.Qxg5 hxg5 30.Bxg5 Rc3 31.Be7 Rxd3 32.Be2 Rxa3 33.Bc4 Ra1+ 34.Kg2 a5 35.bxa5 Rxa5 36.Bd5 b5 37.Bd6 b4 38.Bxb4 [Now with all the pawns on the kingside, the two bishops vs the rook and extra pawn is a draw.] 38...Ra6 39.Bc3 Rg6+ 40.Kf3 Rg5 41.Bd2 Rg6 42.Bc3 Rg5 43.Bd2 Rh5 44.Kg2 Kf8 45.Bb4+ Ke8 46.Bc6+ Kd8 47.Bd5 f6 48.Bd2 g5 49.Be6 Ke7 50.Bf5 Rh8 51.Bb4+ Kf7 52.Bc5 Ra8 53.Be3 Ra6 54.Kg3 Kg7 55.Bc5 Ra1 56.f3 Kh6 57.Bf8+ Kh5 58.Bg4+ Kg6 59.Bf5+ Kf7 60.Bc5 Rc1 61.Bf2 Ke7 62.Be3 Rc2 63.Bf2 Kd6 64.Be3 Kc6 65.Be6 Kd6 66.Bf5 Ke7 67.Bf2 Kf7 68.Bb6 Kg7 69.Bd8

Rc1 70.Kg2 Rd1 71.Be7 Ra1 72.Bc5 Rc1 73.Be7 Kf7 74.Bb4 Rc4 75.Bd6 Ra4 76.Bc5 Ra8 77.Kg3 Kg7 78.Be7 Rh8 79.Bc5 Rh1 80.Kg2 1/2-1/2

14 – Bourne 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 Adolf Anderssen played 1.e4 c5 2.d4 long before Pierre Morra or Ken Smith were born. Smith and Morra analyzed 2…cxd4 3.c3!? At Amsterdam in 1861 Adolf Anderssen vs Van't Kruys began 1.e4 c5 2.d4 d5. Is this Sicilian Defence a Smith-Morra Gambit Avoided? Or is it a BlackmarDiemer Gambit Avoided (1d4 d5 2.e4 c5)? Or is it an Albin Counter Gambit (1.d4 d5 2.c4 e5) Reversed with an extra move for White? Before Jason Bourne was famous, there was Alfred Bourne. The name "Alfred Bourne" is famous in golf, soccer and finances. However, more specifically, my USCF postal chess opponent was Alfred Scott Bourne. He was probably nowhere near as famous as some others. But I don’t know for sure. Our game began 1.d4 d5 2.e4 c5. Anderssen continued 3.exd5 Qxd5 4.dxc5 and White chased around Black's queen. I chose to play 4.Nc3 instead. After the queens came off the board, White got a slight lead in development in the hope to reach a winning endgame. We both had pawn majorities: White on the queenside and Black on the kingside. Bourne pushed me around until finally he was about to drop a pawn in the endgame. Sawyer (2153) - Bourne (1635), corr USCF 89N215, 07.08.1990 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e4 c5 3.exd5 [The previous game saw 3.dxc5. White has several other playable options. 3.e5 cxd4 4.Qxd4 Nc6 5.Bb5 Bd7 (5...e6=; or 5...Qa5+ 6.Nc3 Qxb5 7.Nxb5 Nxd4 8.Nxd4=) 6.Qxd5 e6 7.Qd3 Nxe5 8.Bxd7+ Qxd7 9.Qxd7+ Nxd7=; 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.d5 Nf6(4...e6? 5.Bb5+ Bd7 6.dxe6 fxe6! 7.Qh5+ g6 8.Qe5+/-) 5.f3 (5.Be3=) 5...exf3 6.Nxf3= Blackmar-Diemer Gambit.] 3...Qxd5 [Another idea is 3...cxd4 4.Qxd4 Nc6 5.Qd1 Ne5 6.Nc3+/-] 4.Nc3 [The Anderssen vs Van't Kruys game continued 4.dxc5 Qxc5 5.Be3 Qe5 6.Nc3 and 1-0 in 19.] 4…Qxd4 5.Qxd4 cxd4 6.Nb5 Na6 7.Nxd4 [7.Nf3+/=] 7...e5! 8.Bxa6 [8.Bb5+ Bd7=] 8...bxa6 9.Nb3 Nf6 10.Nf3 e4 11.Nfd4 Bd6 12.h3 0-0 13.Bd2 [13.Bg5] 13...Bb7 14.Na5 Be5 15.Nxb7 Bxd4 16.c3 Bb6 17.Nd6 [17.Bf4] 17...Rad8 18.Nc4 h6 19.Be3 Nd5 20.Nxb6 Nxe3 21.fxe3 axb6 22.Ke2 Rd7 23.Rad1 Rfd8

24.Rd4 Rxd4 25.exd4 f5 26.Rf1 g6 27.g4 fxg4? [27...Rf8 28.Ke3+/=] 28.hxg4 Kg7 29.Ke3 Re8 30.Rf4 1-0

15 – Lord-Heckubiss 3.Nc3 Qa5 Rick Torning asked me about the Blackmar-Diemer Avoided line 1.d4 d5 2.e4 c5 3.Nc3 citing a junior he was coaching. The student asked Rick "what if..." This led Torning to analyze the rare line 3...Qa5. Before I deal with that, let me explain the line. I covered the variation 1.e4 c5 2.d4 d5 in my Sicilian Defence book instead of the BDG because Black does not play ...dxe4. White could take either pawn and stand better after 3.dxc5! or 3.exd5! The enterprising move 3.Nc3= is popular among masters but only from the move order 1.d4 d5 2.Nc3 c5 3.e4, a sort of Albin Counter Gambit Reversed. After 3...dxe4, White has 4.d5 among others. My ICC game vs Lord-Heckubiss was the only time I saw 3...Qa5? White's best move is 4.exd5! with a solid plus. Rick Torning experimented with 4.Bd2!? to win a recent game. Sawyer - Lord-Heckubiss, ICC r 5 12 Internet Chess Club, 02.05.1998 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e4 c5 3.Nc3!? [3.exd5!+= or 3.dxc5!+=] 3...Qa5? [3...dxe4=] 4.exd5! [4.Bd2!? Qd8 (4...dxe4 5.Bb5+ Bd7 6.Nd5 Qd8 7.Bf4 Bxb5 8.Nc7+ Kd7 9.Nxa8 Qa5+ 10.Bd2+/-; 4...cxd4? 5.Nxd5+-) 5.Bf4 Nf6 6.dxc5 e6 7.exd5 Nxd5 8.Nxd5 exd5 9.Bxb8+/=] 4...cxd4 [4...Nf6 5.dxc5 e6 6.Bb5+ Bd7 7.Bxd7+ Nbxd7 8.dxe6 fxe6 9.Qe2+/-] 5.Qxd4 Nf6 6.Bd2 [Or 6.Nf3+- ] 6...Qd8 [6...a6 7.Ne4 Qc7 8.Nxf6+ gxf6 9.Ne2 Nd7 10.0-00+-] 7.0-0-0 [7.Nf3+-] 7...e6 8.Bb5+ Bd7 9.dxe6 fxe6 10.Bg5 [10.Bxd7+ Qxd7 11.Nf3+-] 10...Nc6 11.Bxc6 Bxc6 12.Qxd8+ [12.Qe5+-] 12...Rxd8 13.Rxd8+ Kxd8 14.f3 Bc5 15.Nge2 Kc7 16.Rd1 Nd5 17.Nxd5+ exd5 18.Nf4 Re8 19.Nxd5+ Bxd5 20.Rxd5 Re1+ [20...Kc6 21.c4+/-] 21.Kd2 Bf2 22.Rd3 h6 [22...Rg1 23.Bf4+ Kc8 24.g4+/-] 23.Be3 Rf1 [23...Rxe3 24.Rxe3 Bxe3+ 25.Kxe3+-] 24.Ke2 Bxe3 25.Kxf1 Bb6 26.b4 a5 27.a3 Kc6 28.c4 axb4 29.axb4 Bc7 30.h3 g5 31.Rd5 Bd6 32.Rxd6+ Kxd6 33.Ke2 Kc6 34.f4 b5 [34...Kd6 35.fxg5 hxg5 36.Kf3+-] 35.c5 Kd5 36.f5 Kc4 37.c6 Kxb4 38.c7 Kc3 39.c8Q+ Kd4 40.f6 b4 41.f7 b3 42.f8Q b2 43.Qf6+ Kd5 44.Qcc6# 1-0

16 – Kluge 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.d5 In 2016 I wrote a series of newer books on the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit. My starting position began 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4. If Black does not play 2… dxe4, the line transposes into another opening. The BDG line 1.d4 d5 2.e4 c5 transposes to the Sicilian Defence SmithMorra Gambit Avoided line 1.e4 c5 2.d4 d5. Furthermore play can continue with 3.Nc3 dxe4 as a reversed Albin Counter Gambit. This line is a type of Blackmar-Diemer Gambit Declined. Computers played weak chess before I became a USCF Postal Master and before e-mail was common. Correspondence players were on their own, except for opening books in their favorite lines. Some of my games were very long and others very short. 1980s databases were limited. Only a few books covered the BDG. Almost all of them were not in English, so I decided to write one myself. Bob Long from Thinkers' Press / Chessco of Davenport, Iowa offered me a contract to write my first book. I wrote the original "Blackmar-Diemer Gambit Keybook" over a three year period of time, late 1988 to late 1991. I received my first copy in print late February 1992. I do not remember how many copies were printed, but they all sold out. While I was writing the book, I tested the opening as White every chance I got. Mark D. Kluge initially captured my e-pawn after 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4, but we transposed back to what could be a Sicilian Defence with 3.Nc3 c5. This Albin-Counter Gambit Reversed comes with an extra tempo for the gambit player. My opponent slipped up with 4.d5 e6? In 1973 I made the same Albin Counter Gambit blunder as White with my 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e5 3.dxe5 d4 4.e3? Nowadays I more often play the Black side of the AlbinCounter Gambit.

Sawyer (2182) - Kluge (1726), corr USCF 89N189, 02.10.1989 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 c5 4.d5 e6? 5.Bb5+! Bd7 6.dxe6 fxe6 7.Qh5+ ["I don't feel like playing with an exposed king. Good game!" - Kluge. Houdini 3 gives 7.Qh5+ g6 8.Qe5 Nf6 (or 8...Qf6 9.Qxe4 Nc6 10.Nd5+/-) 9.Bg5 Be7 10.0-0-0 0-0 11.Bxd7 Nbxd7 12.Qxe6+ Rf7 13.Bxf6 Bxf6 14.Nxe4+/-] 1-0

17 – Yang Hainan 4.d5 Nf6 In the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit players battle for the center in many ways. Usually it involves pawns: the d-pawn and e-pawn, as well as the f-pawn and c-pawn. One line is like a reversed Albin-Counter Gambit after 1.d4 d5 2.e4 c5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.d5. This position can arise from other move orders such as the Sicilian Defence 1.e4 c5 2.d4 d5. The contest between Yang Hainan and Chan Peng Kong came to this position by heading in the direction of a Veresov Opening. That opening is 1.d4 d5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.Bg5. These players varied with 2.Nc3 c5 3.e4 which again is a Sicilian Defence. After the moves 3…dxe4 4.d5 the best continuation is 4...Nf6 5.Bg5. This game from the Hong Kong Open in China is the critical line. Both sides played well. White obtained an edge which gradually grew. In BDG nomenclature, this 3...c5 line is the Dries Variation. Yang Hainan (2137) - Chan Peng Kong (2264), Hong Kong Open 2014 (7.15), 04.10.2014 begins1.d4 d5 2.Nc3 c5 3.e4 dxe4 4.d5 Nf6 5.Bg5 Qb6 6.Qd2 Nbd7 7.0-0-0 a6 8.Re1 h6 9.Bh4 g6 10.f3 exf3 11.Nxf3 Bg7 12.Bc4 Qb4 13.Bd3 0-0 14.a3 Qa5 15.Rxe7 c4 [Correct is 15...b5! 16.d6 c4 17.Be4 Nxe4 18.Nxe4 Qxd2+ 19.Nexd2=] 16.Bxc4 Qc5 17.Qe2 Nb6 18.Bf2 Qxc4 19.Bxb6 Qxe2 20.Rxe2 Bg4 21.Re7 Nd7 22.Bc7 Bf6 23.Ree1 Bxc3 24.bxc3 Bxf3 25.gxf3 Rfe8 26.Kd2 Rec8 27.d6 Nc5 28.Re7 Kf8 29.Rhe1 Ne6 30.R1xe6 fxe6 31.Rxe6 Rxc7 32.dxc7 Kf7 [32...Rc8 33.Rxg6 h5 34.Rh6 Rxc7 35.Rxh5+/-] 33.Rb6 Rc8 34.Rxb7 g5 35.Ke3 Ke6 36.Ra7 Kd5 37.Kd3 Kc5 38.Rxa6 Rxc7 39.Rxh6 Rf7 40.Ke4 Re7+ 41.Kd3 Rf7 42.Ke3 Re7+ 43.Kf2 Ra7 44.Rg6 Rxa3 45.Rxg5+ Kd6 46.Rg2 [46.c4! Rc3 47.c5+ Kc6 48.h4 Rxc2+ 49.Kg3+-] 46...Rxc3 47.Kg3 Ke5 48.Kg4 Rc8 49.Re2+ Kf6 50.h4 Rg8+ 51.Kf4 Rh8 52.Rh2 Rg8 53.h5 Kg7 54.h6+ [Getting rid of the rooks with 54.Rg2+! Kf8 55.Rxg8+ Kxg8 56.Ke5+- wins far more easily.] 54...Kh7 55.Ke3 Re8+ 56.Kd2 Rd8+ 57.Kc1 Rf8 58.Rh3 Rc8 59.f4 Rc4 60.Rh4 Rc8 61.Kd2 Rd8+

62.Ke3 Re8+ 63.Kf3 Rc8 64.Rh2 Rc4 65.Kg4 Rc5 66.f5 Rc3 67.Kg5 [67.f6!+-] 67...Rg3+ 68.Kf6 Kg8 69.c4 Rc3 70.Rh4 Rc1 71.Ke6 Re1+ 72.Kd6 Rd1+ 73.Kc6 Rf1 74.Rh5 Kh7 75.c5 Rc1 76.Kd6 Rd1+ 77.Kc7 Rc1 78.c6 Rc2 79.Kd7 Rd2+ 80.Kc8 Rc2 81.c7 Rc1 82.f6 1-0

18 – Khlichkova 5.Bg5 Qb6 It is nice to see so many girls playing chess in the twenty-first century. When I was a young player in the previous century, women rarely appeared at tournaments. Most females only came to tournaments because their husband or boyfriend played. Now girls are everywhere. And just like the boys, the girls play at every level of strength and experience. We are all better off for it. The lines 1.d4 d5 2.Nc3 c5 3.e4 transposes to the BDG and to the Sicilian Defence after 1.e4 c5 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3. These players followed the natural path with 3…dxe4 4.d5. WFM Tatiana Khlichkova defeated vs IM Elena Zaiatz with the standard 5.Bg5. The continuation 5.Nge2 also looks good. The BDG approach with 5.f3 is more risky, as is the counterpart 5...f6 in the Albin Counter Gambit. This is a contest between high rated Russian women. On this occasion, youth triumphs over experience. Black keeps her king in the center and attacks on the flanks. The game demonstrates how the bishops of opposite color middlegame favors the attacker. Here White worked up a checkmate. Khlichkova (2249) - Zaiatz (2408), 64th ch-RUS HL w 2014 Vladivostok RUS (3.6), 06.06.2014 begins 1.d4 d5 2.Nc3 c5 3.e4 dxe4 [3...e6 4.exd5 exd5 5.dxc5+/-] 4.d5 [4.Bb5+!?; 4.Nge2!?] 4...Nf6 5.Bg5 [5.f3 exf3 6.Nxf3 g6 7.Bf4 Bg7 8.Qd2 0-0 9.0-0-0 BDG Long Bogo] 5...Qb6 6.b3 [6.Bb5+!?] 6...Nbd7 7.Nge2 g6 8.Qd2 h6 9.Be3 Bg7 10.Rd1 a6 11.Ng3 Qb4 12.Be2 [12.d6!?] 12...h5 [12...Ng4=/+] 13.0-0 h4 14.a3 Qxa3 15.Ra1 Qb4 16.Ra4 Qb6 [16...hxg3 17.Rxb4 gxh2+ 18.Kh1 cxb4 19.Na4=] 17.Ngxe4 Nxe4 18.Nxe4 f5 19.Ng5 Qd6 20.Ne6 Be5 21.f4 Bf6 22.Bb5 b6 23.Bc6 Rb8 24.c4 Kf7 25.Ra2 Nf8 26.Ng5+ Kg7 27.Nf3 Nh7 28.Qf2 Nf8 29.Bc1 e6 [29...Ne6=] 30.Re1 exd5 [30...Bb7 31.Bb2+/=] 31.Bxd5 Ne6 32.Bxe6 Bxe6 33.Rd2 Qc6 34.Ne5 Bxe5 35.Rxe5 Rbd8 36.Bb2 Kf7 37.Re1 [37.Re3 Rxd2 38.Qxd2+/-] 37...Rxd2 38.Qxd2 Rg8 39.Qc3 Bd7 40.Re5

Bc8 41.Rd5 Qe6 42.Qd2 Qe4 43.Rd6 Be6 [43...h3 44.gxh3+/=] 44.Qc3 Ke7 45.Rd1 Rf8 46.Qg7+ Rf7 47.Bf6+ 1-0

2.d4 cxd4 The Smith-Morra Gambit is the mirror image of the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit. Its popularity wavers up and down. In the 1900s two famed players played 1.e4 c5 2.d4 intending 2…cxd4 3.c3!? Pierre Morra was a postal player from France. He was active from the 1920s to the 1950s. He wrote a pamphlet about this gambit, but I have never seen any games where Morra played it. Ken Smith was a poker player from Texas and a USCF Master. Smith played this gambit against masters and grandmasters. He won and lost many games. Smith analyzed and promoted this opening for decades in his books on the Smith-Morra Gambit.

19 – De Bouver 3.Nf3 g6 4.c3 Congratulations to Guido De Bouver for his blog on Blackmar-Diemer Gambit! I know how much work it is to write so much. De Bouver demonstrated an eagerness to prove the soundness of the BDG. He analyzed many of the most critical lines. Here is a creative effort De Bouver played in a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit Avoided. The players transposed into a Sicilian Defence. Guido's gambit play is efficient and effective in this short mating attack. His opponent is Jan Staes. Since Guido De Bouver is from Belgium, I assume that is where this game was played. De Bouver - Staes, Belgium, 2012 begins 1.d4 c5 [Blackmar-Diemer Gambit Avoided] 2.e4 [Sicilian Defence] 2...cxd4 3.Nf3 g6 [Black hopes to play a Sicilian Dragon, but it would be more prudent to first play 3...Nc6 or 3...d6 to see what White plans to do.] 4.c3!? dxc3 [Correct is 4...Bg7 5.cxd4 d5=] 5.Nxc3 Bg7 [Another idea is 5...Nc6 6.Bc4 Bg7 7.0-0 (7.e5!?) 7...d6 8.Qe2 Nf6] 6.Bc4 e6? [6...Nc6 see previous note] 7.Nb5! d5 8.exd5 Nf6 9.Bf4 Na6 10.Nd6+ Ke7 11.Ng5! [Black is losing because his king is caught in the center surrounded by White's pieces.] 11...Rf8 [11...Qa5+ 12.Kf1 Nxd5 13.Ndxf7+- does help much.] 12.0-0 h6 13.Re1! hxg5

14.dxe6 Bxe6 15.Bxe6 fxe6 16.Rxe6+ Kxe6 17.Qe2+ Kd5 [17...Kd7 18.Qb5+ Ke6 19.Re1+ Ne4 20.Rxe4+ leads to mate: 20...Be5 21.Qxe5+ Kd7 22.Qb5+ Kc7 23.Qxb7#] 18.Qc4# 1-0

20 – Sawyer 3.c3 dxc3 4.Nxc3 When I was a kid in the 1950s, every Saturday morning there were westerns on American television. The classics were Gene Autry, the Lone Ranger, Roy Rogers and Dale Evans. By the 1960s they added Maverick, Cisco Kid, Rin Tin Tin, Sky King, the Rifleman and others. Wagon Train, Bonanza, and Gunsmoke ran on various nights. Then there was the chess knight on Paladin's calling card that read: Have Gun Will Travel. They were harmless fun. Good guys wore white hats. Bad guys wore black hats. People got shot, but no one got seriously hurt unless they were really bad guys. If the heroes were shot, they were just grazed. The heroes were fine for the next new episode. Playing a gambit in chess is harmless fun. For most of us chess is a game, a hobby, albeit also a passion. You might get shot on the board. If your king gets checkmated, you learn something and your king is fine for the next new game. I experimented with the Smith Morra Gambit in a postal game vs the future master Edward Sawyer in 1974 when we both lived in Maine. The dark squared bishop play on the a3-f8 is a key factor this time. While I never personally met Ken Smith, we talked on the phone quite a bit. Ken Smith loved the Sicilian Defence Gambit 1.e4 c5 2.d4 cxd4 3.c3 or Smith Morra Gambit. Once in a while I essay a Smith Morra Gambit. It is fully playable. I prefer the Open Sicilian 3.d4. The extra pawn comes in handy for White in the main lines. Tim Sawyer – Edward Sawyer, corr (2), 21.05.1974 begins 1.e4 c5 2.d4 cxd4 3.c3 dxc3 4.Nxc3 e6 [The most common defensive set-up is 4...Nc6 5.Nf3 d6 6.Bc4 e6 7.0-0] 5.Nf3 [The Chicago Defence is 5.Bc4 a6 6.Nf3 b5 7.Bb3 d6 8.0-0] 5...Bb4!? 6.Qd4 Bxc3+ [6...Bf8 7.Be2+/=] 7.bxc3 [7.Qxc3 Nf6 8.Bd3+/=] 7...Nf6 8.Ba3 [White aims to take control of the dark squares on the very diagonal Black recently used. More dynamically White could have played 8.Bd3 d5 9.e5+/=] 8...Nc6 9.Qa4 Qa5 [9...d5 10.Nd4=] 10.Qxa5 Nxa5 11.e5 Ng8 [11...Nd5 12.Nd4+/=] 12.Be2 [12.Nd4+/=]

12...Ne7 13.0-0!? Nac6 14.Bb5?! a6 15.Bxc6 Nxc6 16.Bd6 f6 17.Rfe1 b5 18.a4 Bb7 19.axb5 axb5 20.Rxa8+ Bxa8 21.Rb1 1/2-1/2

21 – Perov 4.Nxc3 e6 5.Nf3 a6 As I revised this Sicilian Defence book for the Second Edition, I wanted to see who had been successful with the Smith-Morra Gambit in recent games. German Perov won several games with the gambit in 2018. I analyzed four and added them to my book. Black played 4...e6 (instead of the natural 4...Nc6) in this first game. White built up a big attack along the f-file with moves like 10.Nxf7, 12.f4, 17.f5, 19.f6, and 28.Rf1+ in Perov vs Jiri Jezbera. Perov (2256) - Jezbera (2136), 29th Czech Open A 2018 Pardubice CZE (5.107), 24.07.2018 begins 1.e4 c5 2.d4 cxd4 3.c3 dxc3 4.Nxc3 e6 5.Nf3 a6 6.Bc4 b5 7.Bb3 Bb7 8.0-0 d6 9.Ng5 Be7 10.Nxf7 [10.f4 Bxg5 11.fxg5 Ne7 12.Bf4=] 10...Kxf7 11.Qg4 Qd7 12.f4 Nf6 13.Qh3 b4 14.Na4 d5 15.Be3 Nxe4 16.Nb6 Qb5 17.f5 e5 18.Qh5+ [18.Ba4 Qd3 19.Qh5+ Kf6 20.Rae1+-] 18...Kf8 19.f6 Nxf6 20.Ba4 Bc5 [20...Qxa4 21.Nxa4+-] 21.Rxf6+ [21.Qxe5 Bxe3+ 22.Qxe3 Qxa4 23.Nxa4+-] 21...gxf6 22.Qh6+ Kf7 23.Bxb5 Bxb6 24.Bxb6 axb5 25.Rc1 Bc6 26.Bc7 Bd7 [26...Ra6 27.Bxe5+-] 27.Bxe5 fxe5 28.Rf1+ Ke8 29.Qg7 1-0

22 – Perov 4.Nxc3 Nc6 5.Nf3 e6 Black chose the continuation of 7...Nge7 8.Bg5 f6 White offered the thematic knight sacrifice by 11.Nd5 with a Black pawn on e6. That knight was declined and the Black king stepped off the e-file via 12...Kf7. White sacrificed a second knight with 15.Ng5+ for a winning attack in the game German Perov vs Sergey Sergienko. Perov (2159) - Sergienko (2315), 22nd Voronezh Master Open Voronezh RUS, 19.06.2018 begins 1.e4 c5 2.d4 cxd4 3.c3 dxc3 4.Nxc3 Nc6 5.Nf3 e6 6.Bc4 a6 7.0-0 Nge7 8.Bg5 f6 9.Be3 Ng6 10.Bb3 b5 11.Nd5 Rb8 [11...exd5 12.exd5 Nce5 13.d6 Bb7 14.Nxe5 fxe5 15.f4 exf4 16.Re1 fxe3 17.Rxe3+ Be7 18.Qd4=] 12.Rc1 Kf7 [12...a5 13.Nf4 a4 14.Nxg6 hxg6 15.Bxe6 dxe6 16.Rxc6 Qxd1 17.Rxd1=] 13.Re1 Nce7 14.Nc7 Bb7

15.Ng5+ fxg5 16.Qf3+ Nf4 17.Bxf4 Nf5 18.Be5 Ke7 19.Qg4 Nh6 20.Qxg5+ Kf7 21.Qf4+ [After 21...Kg8 22.Nxe6+-] 1-0

23 – Perov 5.Nf3 e6 6.Bc4 a6 Black’s play in this Sicilian Defence Smith-Morra Gambit appears tries to improvement on the line 6...a6 7.0-0 Nge7 8.Bg5 f6 with another pawn move 8...h6 to kick the Bg5. White continues the strategy of offering a knight sacrifice with 11.Nd5. White wins with a knight fork in German Perov vs Vladislav Cherepanov. Perov (2069) - Cherepanov (2355), 14th Moscow Open A 2018 Moscow RUS, 27.01.2018 begins 1.e4 c5 2.d4 cxd4 3.c3 dxc3 4.Nxc3 Nc6 5.Nf3 e6 6.Bc4 a6 7.0-0 Nge7 8.Bg5 h6 9.Be3 b5 10.Bb3 Ng6 11.Nd5 Rb8 12.Rc1 h5 [12...a5 13.Nf4 Nxf4 14.Bxf4+/=] 13.Re1 f6 14.a3 Kf7 15.Nf4 Qc7 16.Nxg6 Kxg6 17.e5 Kf7 18.Qd3 Bb7 [18...Be7 19.Bf4+-] 19.Red1 [19.exf6 gxf6 20.Nh4+-] 19...Rd8 [19...Be7 20.Nh4 Nxe5 21.Rxc7 Nxd3 22.Rxd3+-] 20.Nh4 Qxe5 [20...d5 21.exd6+-] 21.Ng6 1-0

24 – Llaneza 5.Nf3 d6 6.Bc4 When Bobby Fischer competed against the Russians, he made much of the ideology of the Soviet Union. China shared a similar ideology, but it lacked world class masters. Recently, chess skill in China has mushroomed. Now, China has many grandmasters. This Smith-Morra worked against the somewhat unusual 6...Bd7 as played between Marcos Llaneza Vega and Junwen Chen. Llaneza Vega (2403) - Chen, 1st Shenzhen Open 2018 Shenzhen CHN, 26.07.2018 begins 1.e4 c5 2.d4 cxd4 3.c3 dxc3 4.Nxc3 Nc6 5.Nf3 d6 6.Bc4 Bd7 7.0-0 Nf6 8.Bf4 e5 [8...Rc8 9.Qb3=] 9.Bg5 [9.Ng5+/=] 9...h6 10.Bh4 Be7 11.Bxf6 gxf6 12.Nh4 Nd4 13.Qh5 Be6 14.Bxe6 Nxe6 15.Nd5 Nc7 16.Rac1 [16.Ne3!+-] 16...Nxd5 17.exd5 Qd7 18.Nf5 Bf8 19.f4 a6 [19...Rc8 20.Rxc8+ Qxc8 21.fxe5 dxe5 22.Qg4+/=] 20.Ng3 [20.fxe5 fxe5 21.Nd4+-] 20...Rh7 [20...Be7 21.Ne4+/-] 21.Ne4 [21.Rc3+-] 21...Bg7 [21...Be7 22.fxe5 fxe5 23.Rc3+/-] 22.fxe5 dxe5 [22...Qe7 23.exf6+-] 23.Rxf6 Qxd5 [23...Kf8 24.Rcf1+-] 24.Rxf7 Rd8 25.Nd6+ Rxd6 26.Rc8+ Rd8 27.Rfc7+ 1-0

25 – Taylor 6.Bc4 Nf6 7.0-0 e6 Years ago Randy Pals asked the following question about the Smith-Morra Gambit in a forum: “And how can a postal master like David Taylor successfully use the SM in international correspondence chess?” “You would think that if it was really unsound, high level correspondence games would tell the tale...” The answer might be that David C. Taylor researched the Smith-Morra Gambit in the Sicilian Defence for decades. A sharp mind devoted to tactical play for a long time produces great results. With the death of James E. Warren, I did some research to see what mutual opponents Jim and I had. I found a game played between two experienced tournament and postal chess players. Jim Warren and David Taylor both lived in the greater Chicago area. Quite possibly they played each other several times over the years of their careers. They contested this Sicilian Defence. David Taylor was the 7th US Correspondence Chess Champion. Dave often played the Goring Gambit and Smith-Morra Gambit. Taylor was rated 2382 in postal play and 2188 over-the-board. David Taylor began his Smith-Morra Gambit assault as White right out of the opening. Jim Warren fought back as Black. Then Warren mounted a sudden successful counter attack. Taylor - Warren, Illinois open 1965 begins 1.e4 c5 2.d4 cxd4 3.c3 dxc3 4.Nxc3 Nc6 5.Nf3 d6 6.Bc4 Nf6 7.0-0 e6 8.Qe2 Be7 9.Rd1 e5 10.Be3 0-0 11.Rd2 [11.Rac1=] 11...Bg4 12.h3 Bh5 13.Rad1 Qc8 14.Bd5 Rd8 15.a3 h6 16.b4? [16.Rc2 Qd7 17.Ba2=] 16...Nd4 17.Bxd4 exd4 18.Nb5 Nxd5 19.exd5 Bf6 20.Nbxd4 Re8 21.Qb5 [21.Qf1 a6-/+] 21...Bxd4 22.Rxd4

Bxf3 23.gxf3 Qxh3 24.Qxb7 [24.Qd3 Rac8-/+] 24...Qxf3 25.R4d3 Qg4+ 26.Kf1 Rac8 27.Qxa7 Rc2 28.Qd4 Re4 29.Qa1 Qe2+ 0-1

26 – Sildmets 6.Bc4 e6 7.0-0 Be7 I played this Smith-Morra Gambit against one of the strongest postal players in America. I planned to surprise Anton Sildmets with secret tricks from my Smith-Morra book collection. We got to a variation. I looked it up. The book cited Anton Sildmets! Ugh! I had chances, but I got outplayed. It was a privilege to play him. The USCF gives an Anton Sildmets obituary which reads in part: "Member: Faith Lutheran Church; Golden Knights Chess U.S. Champion, 1964; State Chess Champion, 1962; four time city chess champion; postal expert; Master chess rating. Retired Goodyear Tire and Rubber after 30 plus years." Sawyer (2100) - Sildmets (2356), corr APCT 1982 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.c3 dxc3 5.Nxc3 d6 6.Bc4 e6 7.0-0 Be7 8.Qe2 Nf6 9.Rd1 e5 10.h3 [10.Be3 0-0 11.Rac1 (11.h3 to the game) 11...Be6 12.b4 Nxb4 13.Bxe6 fxe6 14.Nxe5=] 10...0-0 11.Be3 a6 [11...Be6 12.Ng5 Bxc4 (12...Bd7 13.a3=) 13.Qxc4 Rc8 14.Qe2=] 12.Rac1 Bd7 13.a3 Rc8 14.b4 h6 [14...b5 15.Bb3=; 14...Qe8 15.Qd3=] 15.Nd5 [15.Bb3 b5 16.Nd5 Nxd5 17.Bxd5=] 15...Be6? [15...Nxd5 16.Bxd5 Qe8=] 16.Bc5? [I had 16.Nb6! Bxc4 17.Qxc4 Rb8 18.Qd3+/=] 16...Bxd5 17.exd5 Nb8 18.Nxe5 [18.Be3 Qd7=/+] 18...Nh7 [18...b5!-/+] 19.Nf3 [I missed 19.Nc6! bxc6 20.dxc6 Rxc6 21.Bd5 Rc8 22.Bb7 Rc7 23.Bb6 Rxc1 24.Bxd8 Rxd1+ 25.Qxd1=] 19...dxc5 20.d6 Bg5 0-1

27 – Perov 7.0-0 Nf6 8.Bf4 e5 Black plays his pawn to 8...e5 in one move in this Smith-Morra Gambit Sicilian Defence. Then White takes aim at f7 with 6.Bc4 and 9.Ng5 intending 9...exf4 10.Nxf7 and 11.Nxh8 in the wild and complex game of German Perov vs Alexander Demianjuk. Perov (2069) - Demianjuk (2333), 14th Moscow Open A 2018 Moscow RUS (5.62), 31.01.2018 begins 1.e4 c5 2.d4 cxd4 3.c3 dxc3 4.Nxc3 Nc6 5.Nf3 d6 6.Bc4 a6 7.0-0 Nf6 8.Bf4 e5 9.Ng5 exf4 10.Nxf7 Qe7 [10...Qd7

11.Nxh8=] 11.Nxh8 Ne5 12.Bb3 Be6 13.Bxe6 Qxe6 14.Nd5 Nxd5 15.Qh5+ g6 16.exd5 Qd7 17.Qh4 f3 18.Rfe1 Qg7 19.gxf3 Be7 20.Qh3 [20.Qg3 Qxh8 21.f4+/=] 20...Qf6 [20...g5 21.Rac1+/=] 21.Re3 g5 22.Qxh7 0-0-0 23.Nf7 [23.Ng6 Nxg6 24.Re6+-] 23...Nxf7 24.Re6 Rh8 [24...Qxf3 25.Rxe7+-] 25.Qc2+ 1-0

28 – Haines 7.0-0 Nf6 8.Bg5 Ray Haines and Edward Sawyer lived 150 miles apart in Maine near Canada. I had the privilege of visiting both their homes. In this sharp Sicilian Defence Smith-Morra Gambit, Ray Haines notched an impressive win. I added new notes in 2015 using more powerful computer chess engines. My first two rated games were losses against the two newspaper columnists George Cunningham and Gerry Dullea in a five round weekly tournament in 1972. I won my last three rounds to finish 3-2. That result gave me a portion of the unrated prize money. Three years later in their 1975 Bangor Daily News weekly chess column George Cunningham and Gerry Dullea wrote this: “In a postal game against inter-county rival Ed Sawyer, 1974 champion of Washington County, Ray makes victory look easy again as he employs one of his favorite attacks, the Smith-Morra line of the Sicilian.” “Tim Sawyer to whom we are indebted for these games and his comments on them, says Ray has demonstrated several beautiful forced wins from the key position after White's 11th move. He also notes Black's slow development.” “Ed sees that his queen is no protection for the knight after all because taking the rook leaves him on the painful end of a king-queen fork by the White knight.” “Our thanks go to Ray for creating these brief beauties and to Tim for being thoughtful enough to share them.” Haines - Edward Sawyer, corr Maine, 1974 begins 1.e4 c5 2.d4 cxd4 3.c3 dxc3 4.Nxc3 Nc6 5.Nf3 d6 6.Bc4 a6 7.0-0 Nf6 [7...e6 8.Qe2=] 8.Bg5!? [8.Bf4= Komodo, Stockfish] 8...e6 9.Qe2 h6! [40 years ago I thought this

was a mistake, but since then it has become the top move. 9...Be7 10.Rfd1 Qc7 11.Rac1 0-0 12.Bb3=] 10.Bf4! e5 [10...g5!=/+ Stockfish] 11.Rfd1!? exf4 [11...Bd7 12.Be3=] 12.e5 Nxe5? [12...Qe7 13.exf6 Qxe2 14.Bxe2 gxf6= Black has an extra pawn among his ugly islands.] 13.Nxe5 Qe7 14.Bxf7+ Kd8 15.Rxd6+!? Kc7? 16.Rxf6! 1-0

2.c3 The Sicilian Defence Alapin Variation 2.c3 is a completely sound system of development. The 2.c3 Alapin Sicilian may be met by the classical 2...d5 or the Alekhine Defence type move 2…Nf6. The Alapin may transpose to other opening variations.

29 – Morris 2…e6 3.Nf3 Nc6 Thomas Morris was the chess champion of the state of Georgia. One of our postal games saw me try the Sicilian Defence 2.c3. The Alapin variation was a rare choice for me as White, since I like the normal Open Sicilian 2.Nf3/3.d4 lines. The year 1981 was one of my most active years, and 1982 was a very successful year. Then I developed a reputation among the experts and masters in APCT. My promising career crashed with my life tragedy in 1983. Happily, sunny days do follow storms. By the late 1980s I found new chess pleasure and success in the BlackmarDiemer Gambit. Here is a game from my blissful early days. At first we held back our dpawns. Then by move 7, we both had isolated d-pawns in the center of the board at d4 and d5. I remember studying this type of position in books on chess strategy by Grandmaster Ludek Pachman. I owned the entire three book series with complete games. I also enjoyed the edited summary edition "Modern Chess Strategy" published by Dover. In our game after some maneuvering, we agreed to a draw in a symmetrical position. There were no tactical flashes or deep theory. Just solid play with possibilities passed.

Sawyer (2100) - Morris (2250), corr APCT 1982 begins 1.e4 c5 2.c3 e6 3.Nf3 Nc6 4.Be2 d5 5.exd5 exd5 6.d4 cxd4 7.cxd4 Nf6 8.0-0 h6 9.Nc3 Bd6 10.Re1 0-0 11.h3 Be6 12.a3 Rc8 13.Be3 [13.Bd3=] 13...Bb8 14.Rc1 Ne4 15.Nd2 Qd6 16.f4 f5 [16...Nxc3 17.bxc3 Qxa3=/+] 17.Nf3 a6 18.Ne5 Ba7 19.Bf3 Rfd8 20.Ne2 Na5 21.b4 Nc4 22.Qb3 Nxe3 [22...Qe7 23.Kh1 Rc7-/+] 23.Qxe3 Bd7 24.Kh2 Nf6 1/2-1/2

30 – Chandler 2…Nc6 3.Nf3 g6 Bill Chandler played the attacking Sicilian Defence Alapin (2.c3). Playing as White, Bill did several important things correctly. 1. He took control of the center of the chess board. 2. He developed most of his pieces quickly. 3. He made tactical threats against enemy pieces. 4. He moved his army toward his opponent's king. 5. He successfully pushed the attack to checkmate. If Black had not resigned, Bill had mate in one. Tactics is about safety. Strategy is about doing the right thing. Not all the moves were perfect, but White did what he was supposed to be doing. Perfect games rarely happen, because none of us are perfect. That's why we need God. If you get too upset with the lack of perfection in yourself and others, you will have a real bummer of a life. Lighten up. It's a game. Have fun! Chandler - TommyRuff, ICC 5 0 Internet Chess Club, 16.02.2012 begins 1.e4 c5 2.c3 [Sicilian Alapin] 2...Nc6 3.Nf3 g6 [Dragon idea.] 4.d4 cxd4 5.cxd4 Bg7 6.Bb5 a5?! [This move makes no sense. Maybe Black was trying for 6...a6 and missed the square with the mouse.] 7.Nc3 Nf6 8.Bg5 [It is good to develop the bishop, but gaining space and time with 8.e5!+- is even better. White will play this a few moves later.] 8...0-0 9.Qd2 Qb6 [9...d5!= In this game Black suffers for never moving the d-pawn.] 10.e5 Ne8 11.a4 f6 12.Nd5 [The knight attacks the queen and moves closer to the Black king.] 12...Qd8 13.Bh6 fxe5 14.Bxg7 Kxg7 15.Nxe5 Nxe5 16.dxe5 e6 17.Nf4 Nc7 18.Bd3 [18.Be2+/- is a better square, but at least White shows the value of aiming several pieces at the opponent's king. It pays off!] 18...b6 19.h4 Bb7 20.h5? [This h-pawn push is premature because it is not safe. The rook lift 20.Rh3!+/= looks pretty good.] 20...Nd5? [It is logical to want to swap off attacking pieces, but here Black misses the tactical shot 20...Qg5! 21.Ne2 (to save the knight) 21...Qxd2+ 22.Kxd2 Rxf2=/+ and Black's pieces come to life around White's uncastled king.]

21.Nxd5 Bxd5 22.hxg6 hxg6? [Black's last chance to pull up before crashing is 22...h5 23.Rxh5+- and White has a much better game.] 23.Qh6+ Kf7 24.Qxg6+ Ke7 25.Rh7+ 1-0

31 – Roman Lopez 2…d5 3.exd5 Rapid opening development allows tactical threats to confuse or trick your opponent. In this Sicilian Defence Alapin 2.c3, Jesus Roman Lopez of Spain threatened the Nc7 fork. Paulo Pinho of Portugal found counterplay against d4 so he was ready for 14.Nc7. White found another surprise knight move to win with 14.Nd6! Roman Lopez (2008) - Pinho (2186), Gibraltar Masters Caleta ENG, 29.1.2018 begins 1.e4 c5 2.c3 d5 3.exd5 Qxd5 4.d4 Nf6 5.Nf3 g6!? [5...e6; 5...Bg4; or 5...Nc6] 6.Na3 Bg7 7.Bc4 Qe4+ 8.Be3 0-0 9.0-0 Ng4 [9...cxd4 10.Nxd4 Qe5 11.Qd2+/=] 10.Bg5 cxd4 11.Re1 Qf5 12.Bxe7 Re8? [12...dxc3 13.bxc3 Bxc3 14.Nb5 Bxe1 15.Qxe1+/-] 13.Nb5 Be6 14.Nd6! [Not 14.Nc7 Rxe7 15.Nxa8 Nc6=. After 14.Nd6 Black is lost. If 14...Qc5 15.Rxe6 fxe6 16.Bxe6+ Kh8 17.Nf7+ Kg8 18.N7g5+ Kh8 19.Bxc5 wins.] 1-0

32 – Sawyer 2…d5 3.exd5 In the Sicilian Defence main lines Black has an extra center pawn after 2.Nf3 and 3.d4 cxd4 and White has an extra queenside pawn. The Alapin Variation 2.c3 ensures White can have another pawn in the center against the Sicilian Defence. The question is will White have three pawns at e4, d4 and c3? Or will it be two pawns? Or just one pawn? Black's choices are 2...Nf6 3.e5 Nd5 like an Alekhine and 2...d5 3.exd5 Qxd5 like a Scandinavian. My move 2...d5 allowed the game to be wide open. White castled quickly but Black's king stayed in the center vs "messchess". As late as move 15 I still had a chance for 15...0-0 with equality. I waited too long and got into a big mess. messchess (2626) - Sawyer (2391), ICC 3 1 u Internet Chess Club, 27.11.2002 begins 1.e4 c5 2.c3 d5 3.exd5 Qxd5 4.d4 cxd4 [4...Nf6 5.Nf3 e6 6.Be2=] 5.cxd4 Nc6 6.Nf3 Bg4 7.Be2 e6 8.Nc3 Qa5 9.0-0 Nf6 10.h3 Bxf3 11.Bxf3 Rc8 12.d5 exd5 13.Re1+ Be7 14.Nxd5 Nxd5 15.Bxd5 Qd8

[15...0-0 16.Bxc6 Rcd8 17.Qe2 Bb4 18.Rd1=] 16.Bg5 f6 [16...0-0 17.Bxe7 Nxe7 18.Bxb7+/-] 17.Be3 [Or 17.Bxf6+-] 17...Qd6 18.Qg4 Rd8 19.Bxc6+ bxc6 20.Qxg7 Kd7 21.Rad1 Black resigns 1-0

33 – Savic 2…d5 3.exd5 Qxd5 White won against this Sicilian Defence when Black castled queenside. In Miodrag Savic vs Josip Stocko, Black naturally pushes queenside pawns. The game clearly illustrated that Black suffered when he failed to push the pawns that restrict his kingside. Savic (2505) - Stocko (2308), Third Saturday 65 IM 2018 Novi Sad SRB (7.2), 15.02.2018 begins 1.e4 c5 2.c3 d5 3.exd5 Qxd5 4.Nf3 Bf5 5.d4 Nc6 6.Be3 Nf6 7.Na3 cxd4 8.Nxd4 0-0-0?! [8...Nxd4 9.Qxd4=] 9.Qa4 Nxd4 10.cxd4 a6 11.Rc1+ Kb8 12.Rc5 Qd7 13.Bb5 Qe6 14.Bc4 Qd7 15.Bb5 Qe6 16.0-0 Bg6 [16...g5 17.Qa5+-] 17.Bf4+ Ka8 [17...Rd6 18.Bxa6+-] 18.Rc6!? [18.Bxa6+-] 1-0

34 – Michenka 2…Nf6 3.e5 Nd5 Sicilian Defence Alapin 1.e4 c5 2.c3 Nf6 shares characteristics with Alekhine Defence. Attacks work when players execute the tactics with the proper timing. White had the right strategy to capture on g6 but played it too late in Alexey Kislinsky vs Jozef Michenka. Kislinsky (2509) - Michenka (2328), 1st Bohumin Open 2018 Bohumin CZE (8.1), 27.05.2018 begins 1.e4 c5 2.c3 Nf6 3.e5 Nd5 4.d4 cxd4 5.cxd4 d6 6.Bc4 Nb6 7.Bb5+ Bd7 8.e6 [8.Qe2=] 8...fxe6 9.Bd3 g6 10.h4 Qc7 11.h5 Rg8 12.hxg6 hxg6 13.Nc3 Nd5 14.Nxd5 [Timing is everything. 14.Bxg6+! Kd8 15.Nxd5=] 14...exd5 15.Bxg6+? [Too late. Better is 15.Be3=] 15...Rxg6 16.Qh5 Qc2 17.Ne2 Bg4 0-1 [White will lose the king or queen.]

35 – Rookie 4.Nf3 Nc6 5.d4 cxd4 White rarely plays Kf1 in the Sicilian Defence. Against the 2.c3 Alapin Variation, as Black I played 2...Nf6 3.e5 Nd5 4.Nf3 Nc6 5.d4 cxd4 which transposes to a Smith-Morra Gambit Declined which begins 2.d4 cxd4 3.c3 Nf6 etc. When Ken Smith was promoting the Morra in the 1970s, 2.d4 seemed more popular than 2.c3. Here White got an opening advantage. Then Rookie played 13.Kf1? This was a blunder. It looks like a fingerfehler (German slip of the finger) or a mouse slip. How can a computer make such a mistake? Touch move errors are common by humans in blitz. For example, once I meant to play 1.d4 d5 2.e4 but actually I played 2.e3. Trying to correct my mistake, I pushed my e-pawn further ahead, only to realize that it wasn’t my move! Now I had accidentally premoved 3.e4? Thus after 2...Nf6 3.e4 Nxe4, I was down a tempo and a pawn vs a higher rated player. That mistake did not turn out well. In the game below for some strange reason Rookie played 13.Kf1? I had defeated Rookie three other times in a Ruy Lopez, in a Slav Defence, and in an Alekhine Defence. I also drew a Queen's Knight Attack 1.Nc3. This time I did not make the best of my chances, but I did draw my higher rated opponent. Rookie (2486) - Sawyer (2241), ICC 5 0 Internet Chess Club, 05.09.2009 begins 1.e4 c5 2.c3 Nf6 3.e5 Nd5 4.Nf3 Nc6 5.d4 cxd4 6.cxd4 d6 7.Bc4 Nb6 8.Bb5 dxe5 9.Nxe5 Bd7 10.Nc3 Nxe5 11.dxe5 a6 12.Bd3 [12.Bxd7+! Qxd7 13.Qe2+/=] 12...Bc6 13.Kf1? [13.e6 f5 14.Qc2+/=] 13...e6 14.Qe2 Be7 15.h3 0-0 16.Be3 Nd5 17.Rd1 Qc7 18.Nxd5 Bxd5 19.Qc2 [19.f4 Bxa2=/+] 19...Qxc2 [Better is 19...Qxe5! 20.Bxh7+ Kh8 21.Bd4 Qf4-/+] 20.Bxc2 Rac8 21.Bb1 Bc4+ [Black have an advantage with 21...Bc5! 22.Ke2 Bxe3 23.Kxe3 Bxg2 24.Rhg1 Bd5=/+] 22.Kg1 Rfd8 23.Kh2 Rxd1 24.Rxd1 Rd8 25.Rxd8+ Bxd8 26.b3 Bd5 27.Kg1 Be7 28.Bc2 h6 29.Bd3 Kf8 30.Be2 Ke8 31.Bd4 g6 32.g3 h5 33.h4 Kd7 34.f3 Kc6 35.Kf1 Bd8 36.Kg2 Be7 37.Kf2 Bd8 38.Bf1 Be7 39.Be2 Bd8 40.Bf1 Be7 1/2-1/2

36 – Baffo 4.d4 cxd4 5.cxd4 d6 This Alekhine Defence game transposed eventually into an Alapin Sicilian 2.c3. As Black I managed to hold correspondence master Jeffrey Baffo to a draw. He began 1.e4. I defended with the Alekhine Defence 1...Nf6, one of my most successful defenses. In our 12 match games, Jeff Baffo and I chose a wide variety of openings. Here Baffo chose the Two Pawns Attack with 2.e5 and 4.c5 favored by many attacking players who prefer White in the Sicilian Defence Alapin. That variation begins 1.e4 c5 2.c3 Nf6 3.e5 Nd5. Those lines transpose to the Alekhine Two Pawns, although either side can avoid the transpositions. Two Pawns is called the Alekhine Chase Variation. Sicilian Defence transpositions come by challenging advanced White pawns with 6...d6, while 6...b6 stays strictly in the Alekhine. The confusing and tricky part following the maze of Sicilians is that they reach the same position one move quicker than they do in the Alekhine. So the numbers are off. For example, 1.e4 c5 2.c3 Nf6 3.e5 Nd5 4.d4 cxd4 5.cxd4 d6 6.Nf3 e6 7.Nc3 Nxc3 8.bxc3 Qc7 reaches the 9...Qc7 position of our Alekhine game. GM Evgeny Sveshnikov (famous for a Black Sicilian line) plays this position as White against both opening move orders. Sveshnikov prefers the move 9.Bd2 (via Sicilian) or 10.Bd2 (via Alekhine). However in 2012, the grandmaster did play Baffo's move 10.Qb3!? There he followed the line 12.Bxe5 Nxe5 13.Nxe5 Bd6 14.Bb5+ and 1-0 in 37 moves (Sveshnikov - Degraeve, 28th Cappelle Open, 2012). In our USCF correspondence game below, we exchanged into a roughly equal bishop ending where Baffo and I agreed to a draw. Baffo (2273) - Sawyer (1960), corr USCF 95P135, 18.03.1996 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.c4 Nb6 4.c5 Nd5 5.Nc3 [5.Bc4 e6=] 5...e6 6.d4 d6 7.cxd6 cxd6 8.Nf3 Nxc3 9.bxc3 Qc7 10.Qb3!? [10.Bd2= is the normal book move.] 10...Nd7 11.Bf4 dxe5 12.Nxe5 [12.Bxe5 Sveshnikov] 12...Bd6 13.Bg3 Nxe5 14.dxe5 Be7 15.Bb5+ Bd7 16.Bxd7+ Qxd7 17.0-0 0-0 18.Rab1 b6 19.Rfd1 Qc7 20.Rd3 Rfd8 21.Rbd1 Rxd3 22.Rxd3 Rd8 23.Qd1 Kf8 [If I wanted to try for more, Houdini suggests 23...Rxd3

24.Qxd3 g5=/+ but I had no energy for that in 1996.] 24.Rd4 Rxd4 25.Qxd4 Qd826.Qxd8+ Bxd8 27.Kf1= 1/2-1/2

37 – Sharp 5.Qxd4 e6 6.Nf3 When I played the Sicilian Defence in postal chess, we were allowed to use books during the game. I had a large chess library when I played Mike Sharp. He tried the 2.c3 Alapin which was quite rare back in 1980. Mike Sharp and I were rated Experts in the American Postal Chess Tournaments club. This was our only meeting. The books gave analysis to moves 13-15. Then we were on our own. I have two APCT rating lists from about 35 years ago. The first list has M. Sharp of California and later of Missouri. I found one game Mike Sharp played in 1978. I also found a draw Sharp played vs the prolific postal master Michael Brent in 1981. My records indicate that I never played Michael Brent. However my database has about 30 games that he played vs opponents whom I also played during my correspondence career. Except for a few geeks, home computers were not available until 1982. By 1984 I used computers in business. At home I got a Commodore 64. It was popular but had a very limited function. Chess databases did not exist until about 1985-1988. And while some chess engines did exist, they were slow and very weak. So Michael Sharp and I did the best we could. Here I won a pawn and outplayed him in a rook ending. Sharp (2050) - Sawyer (2050), corr APCT 1980 begins 1.e4 c5 2.c3 Nf6 3.e5 Nd5 4.d4 cxd4 5.Qxd4 e6 6.Nf3 Nc6 7.Qe4 d6 8.Nbd2 dxe5 9.Nxe5 Nxe5 10.Qxe5 Qd6 11.Bb5+ Bd7 12.Bxd7+ Qxd7 13.0-0 Qd6!? [13...Qc7=] 14.Qxd6 Bxd6 15.Ne4 Bc7 16.c4 Nf4 17.Rd1 Ne2+ 18.Kf1 Nxc1 19.Raxc1 Ke7 20.c5 Rhd8 21.Nd6? [Clearly White miscalculated, since this line loses a pawn. 21.g3 Rxd1+ 22.Rxd1 f5=] 21...Bxd6 22.cxd6+ Rxd6 23.Rc7+ Kd8! 24.Rxd6+ Kxc7 25.Rd3 Rd8 26.Rc3+ Kd7 27.Ra3 a6 28.Rb3 Kc7 29.Rc3+ Kb8 30.Rg3 g6 31.Ke2 Rd7 [With this well placed rook, Black can make real progress.] 32.Rf3 Kc7 33.Ke3 Kd6 34.Ke4 f5+ 35.Kf4 e5+ 36.Kg3 e4 37.Rb3 Ke5 38.f3 [If 38.f4+ Ke6-/+] 38...f4+! 39.Kg4? [This hastens the end. 39.Kf2 e3+ 40.Ke1 b5-+] 39...e3! 40.Rb4 Re7! 0-1

38 – Taylor 6.Nf3 Nc6 7.Qe4 Chandler Bolt noted that you often learn the most from someone who is just two rungs above you on the ladder of success. Many beginners and young kids have very helpful coaches and teachers who themselves are rateds in the 1800 to 2000 range. Those who are rated much higher may be helpful, if they have good teaching skills. But masters deal with different issues. For example a 2600 rated grandmaster may be trying to avoid a draw vs a 2400 rated international master. Most players rated around 1400 would love to get a draw against a 2400 master. Do that many times and a 1400 would be a 1600. The key for lower rated players is piece safety. Most cannot go 20 moves against a master without losing material. When I learned how to play solid openings and keep my pieces safe, then I raised my rating way up. David Taylor was an experienced master and higher rated than I, but our postal ratings were often within 200 points of each other. Our Sicilian Defence Smith Morra Gambit Declined became an Alapin Sicilian. Our line 2.d4 cxd4 3.c3 Nf6 4.e5 Nd5 transposed to the same position as 2.c3 Nf6 3.e5 Nd5 4.d4 cxd4. Fortunately I turned a solid equal opening into a draw. Taylor (2200) - Sawyer (2050), corr APCT 1980 begins 1.e4 c5 2.d4 cxd4 3.c3 Nf6 4.e5 Nd5 5.Qxd4 e6 6.Nf3 Nc6 7.Qe4 d6 [7...f5 8.Qe2 b5=] 8.Nbd2 dxe5 9.Nxe5 Nxe5 [9...Be7!?=] 10.Qxe5 Qd6 [10...Bd7 11.Be2 f6 12.Qh5+ g6 13.Qf3 Bc6=] 11.Bb5+ Bd7 12.Bxd7+ Qxd7 13.Nf3 [The alternative is 13.0-0 Qc7 14.Qxc7 Nxc7 15.Ne4 Be7 16.Rd1 0-0=] 13...Qc7 [Black could sacrifice a pawn by 13...Be7!? 14.Qxg7 Bf6 15.Qh6 Qb5=] 14.Bf4 [14.Qxc7 Nxc7 15.c4=] 14...Qxe5+ 15.Bxe5 f6 16.Bg3 e5 [16...Be7 17.Nd4 Kf7=] 17.0-0-0 0-0-0 18.c4 Nb6 19.Rxd8+ Kxd8 20.Rd1+ Kc8 21.b3 Bc5 22.Nd2 h5 23.f3 1/2-1/2

2.Nc3 This leads move 2.Nc3 to the Closed Sicilian and Grand Prix variations. Many 1.Nc3 players transpose to the Sicilian lines after 1...c5 2.e4. I’m just giving a taste of games in this line that avoids the popular 3.g3 variation.

39 – Ruiz 2…d6 3.g3 Nf6 USCF Master Glenn James Ruiz had white in our 1982 APCT postal chess game. I chose the Sicilian Defence. His 2.Nc3 Closed System was known to me from Karpov's chess games. But, I was not sure which way to approach it as Black. This game reminds me of some small forest animals that I hit with my car. They start to run across the road. Then they see my car coming. Instead of continuing on to safety, they turn around and run right back in front of my vehicle. Thud. Squish. Ugh! In this game I started across the board with c5, d6, e6, Nc6, Nf6, Be7, etc. I should castle kingside to safety with a good position. Instead I went back to the center and played 7...d5 while my king still is in the middle of the road. I never did castle. My king hindered the coordination of my own pieces and the protection of my little pawns. When I tried 17...f5, all I ended up doing was daring him to hit one of my loose pawns. My position got run over by White walled tires with his rolling rooks in the center and the queenside. He hit my pawn and it was gone. Ruiz (2083) - Sawyer (2100), corr APCT 1982 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nc3 d6 3.g3 Nf6 4.Bg2 e6 5.d3 Be7 6.f4 Nc6 7.Nf3 d5!? [The main line here is 7...0-0 8.0-0 a6 9.h3 Qc7=] 8.0-0 [8.e5 Ng4=] 8...a6 [Better was grabbing space and time with 8...d4 9.Nb1 0-0=] 9.a4 [9.Ne5!?+/=] 9...dxe4 10.dxe4 Qxd1 11.Rxd1 Nb4 12.Ne1 Rb8 [12...e5 13.fxe5 Ng4 14.Nd5!+/=] 13.e5 Nd7 [13...Nfd5 14.Ne4+/=] 14.Ne4 b6 15.Be3 Bb7 16.Rd2 Nd5 17.Bf2 f5? [17...c4 18.Rd4+/=] 18.exf6 gxf6 19.Rad1 f5 [19...c4 20.Re2+/-] 20.Ng5

Bxg5 21.fxg5 b5 [21...c4 22.Nf3+/-] 22.Nd3! c4 23.Nf4 Nxf4 24.gxf4 Bxg2 25.Kxg2 Rb7 26.Rd6 Ke7 27.Rxa6 1-0

40 – Zlatanovic 2…a6 3.f4 b5 Black began play on the queenside for six moves in this Sicilian Defence. White responded with a strategy of a full kingside pawn assault. The pawns opened lines of attack for a bishop and queen to invade in the game Boroljub Zlatanovic vs Sasa T Jovanovic. Zlatanovic (2382) - Jovanovic (2222), ch-Central Serbia 2015 Kragujevac SRB, 13.03.2015 begins 1.Nc3 c5 2.e4 a6 3.f4 b5 4.Qe2 [4.d4 cxd4 5.Qxd4=] 4...Bb7 5.Nf3 Nc6 6.d3 Nd4 [6...e6 7.Be3=] 7.Qf2 Nxf3+ 8.Qxf3 g6 [8...e6 9.Be2=] 9.g4 Bg7 10.f5 e6 11.h4 gxf5 12.gxf5 Qa5 13.Bd2 Bh6 [13...b4 14.Nd1+/=] 14.Bxh6 Nxh6 15.fxe6 fxe6 16.Qf6 Nf7 17.Be2 Qd8 18.Qg7 1-0

41 – Sadilek 2.Nc3 Nc6 3.Bb5 White’s light squared bishop embarks on an exciting adventure in this Sicilian Defence. The bishop went to Bb5, Bc4, Ba2, Bb1 followed by Bxh7+ in Maximilian Sadilek vs Klaus Neumeier. Soon White had a winning attack. Sadilek (2258) - Neumeier (2286), TCh-AUT 2nd Ost 2016-17 Austria AUT (4.3), 13.11.2016 begins 1.Nc3 c5 2.e4 Nc6 3.Bb5 Nd4 4.Bc4 a6 5.d3 e6 6.a4 Qc7 [6...Nf6=] 7.Nge2 Nf6 8.0-0 Be7 9.f4 d6 10.Ba2 [10.Be3=] 10...0-0 11.Kh1 Bd7 12.Be3 Nxe2 13.Qxe2 b5 14.g4 [14.Nd1=] 14...b4 15.Nd1 Bc6 16.Kg1 d5 17.g5 Nd7 18.Nf2 Rfe8 19.h4 c4 20.e5 Nxe5 [20...Bb7-/+] 21.fxe5 Qxe5 22.Qf3 Qc7 23.Ng4 Bd6 24.d4 Bxa4 [24...Rf8 25.h5+/-] 25.Bb1 Bc6 26.c3 a5 [26...bxc3 27.bxc3+/-] 27.Bxh7+ Kh8 [27...Kf8 28.Ne5+-] 28.Nf6 g6 29.h5 e5 [29...Bh2+ 30.Kg2 Qg3+ 31.Qxg3 Bxg3 32.Kxg3+-] 30.hxg6 fxg6 31.Bxg6 Kg7 32.Nh5+ Kxg6 33.Qf5+ Kxh5 34.Rf3 1-0

42 – Suba 3.Nge2 Nf6 4.g3 g6 One can attack the Sicilian Defence either fast in the Open 3.d4 lines or opt for slower play in other lines. White fianchettoed his kingside bishop and castled. Then he pushed pawns and opened lines for attack. I loved the move 27.Be4 which uncovers the Rg1 in the game Mihai Suba vs James Steedman. Suba (2416) - Steedman (2130), 14th ch-Euro Seniors over 65 2014 Porto POR (6.8), 14.03.2014 begins 1.Nc3 c5 2.e4 Nc6 3.Nge2 Nf6 4.g3 g6 5.Bg2 Bg7 6.d3 d6 7.h3 Rb8 8.f4 e6 9.0-0 0-0 10.Be3 a6 11.Qd2 Qc7 12.g4 [12.e5=] 12...b5 13.g5?! [13.f5=] 13...Ne8 14.a3 Nd4 15.Rf2 f5 16.gxf6 Bxf6 17.Kh1 Bg7 [17...Ng7-/+] 18.Rg1 Bb7 19.Nd1 d5 20.Bxd4 Bxd4 21.Nxd4 cxd4 22.exd5 exd5 [22...Ng7 23.dxe6=] 23.f5 Nd6 [23...Ng7 24.fxg6 hxg6 25.Bf1 Rxf2 26.Nxf2+/=] 24.fxg6 hxg6 [24...Nf5 25.Bf3 Ng3+ 26.Kg2+/=] 25.Qg5 [25.Be4+-] 25...Kh7 26.Qh4+ [26.Be4! Nf5 27.Qxg6+ Kh8 28.Rxf5+- mates in three moves.] 26...Kg8 [26...Kg7 27.Bf3+-] 27.Be4! Qh7 [27...Rxf2 28.Rxg6+ Kf8 29.Qh8+ Ke7 30.Qe5+ Kf8 31.Nxf2+-] 28.Rxg6+ 1-0

43 – Caruana 5.Bg2 Bg7 6.d3 The Closed Sicilian Defence with 3.Nge2 and 4.g3 supports both the Nc3 and the later pawn push to f4. White played for an early queenside expansion. Black started well, but then things when from bad to worse. Soon, several pawns came raining down on the Black center with 15.exd5, 19.f4, 21.dxe4, 22.f5, 23.e5, 24.f6 and 26.e6. Black had to give up a rook to avoid checkmate in this game between Fabiano Caruana and Alexander Grischuk. Caruana (2799) - Grischuk (2782), Champions Showdown G5 Saint Louis USA (3.2), 12.11.2017 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nc3 d6 3.Nge2 Nf6 4.g3 g6 5.Bg2 Bg7 6.d3 Nc6 7.0-0 Rb8 8.a3 0-0 9.Rb1 Ne8 [9...b5=] 10.b4 Nc7 11.Be3 Nd4 12.Qd2 e5 13.bxc5 dxc5 14.Nd5 Nxd5 15.exd5 Bg4 16.Nxd4 cxd4 17.Bg5 [17.Bh6=] 17...Bf6 [17...f6 18.Bh6 Bxh6 19.Qxh6 b6=]

18.Bxf6 Qxf6 19.f4 Rfc8 [19...Rfe8 20.Rbe1+/-] 20.Rbe1 e4 21.dxe4 Rc3 22.f5 Rbc8 23.e5 Qb6 24.f6 [24.fxg6+-] 24...Kh8 [24...Re3 25.e6+-] 25.Qh6 Rg8 26.e6 [If 26...fxe6 27.f7 wins a rook.] 1-0

44 – Lu Shanglei 3.Nf3 g6 4.Bc4 White transposed to a Sicilian Defence in this battle of Chinese grandmasters. The opening resembled French Defence after 14...d5 and 16.e5. White’s bishop on b1 appeared to be trapped with no safe moves, but ultimately it assisted in the attack on g6 in Lu Shanglei vs Wei Yi. What happened to Black’s queen? Lu Shanglei (2606) - Wei Yi (2718), ch-CHN 2015 Xinghua, 29.05.2015 begins 1.Nc3 c5 2.e4 Nc6 3.Nf3 g6 4.Bc4 Bg7 5.d3 d6 6.a3 e6 7.h4 [7.00=] 7...Nf6 8.Ba2 a6 9.Ne2 b5 10.Ng3 h6 11.c3 Bb7 12.d4 Qb6 13.0-0 [13.h5=] 13...0-0-0 [13...h5=] 14.a4 d5 15.axb5 axb5 16.e5 [16.exd5 Nxd5 17.dxc5 Qxc5 18.Qe2+/-] 16...Ne4 [16...Ng4 17.Bb1+/-] 17.Be3 Nxg3 [17...cxd4 18.cxd4 +/-] 18.fxg3 c4 19.Qd2 Kc7 20.Nh2 Rd7 21.Rae1 b4 22.Bb1 Kc8 [22...h5 23.g4+/=] 23.Rf3 b3 24.Ref1 Nd8 25.R3f2 Bc6 26.Ng4 h5 27.Bh6 Bxh6 28.Nxh6 Rh7 [28...Qc7 29.Qg5+/=] 29.Qg5 Ra7 30.g4 hxg4 31.h5 g3 32.Rf6 Be8 [32...Rh8 33.hxg6 fxg6 34.Bxg6+/-] 33.hxg6 fxg6 34.Rf8 Qc6 [34...Bf7 35.Ng4+-] 35.Ng8 [35.Bxg6 Rhg7 36.Bxe8 Rxg5 37.Bxc6+-] 35...Rhg7 36.Nf6 Rae7 [36...Rge7 37.Qxg3+-] 37.Qh6 1-0

45 – RichyRich 3.d3 g6 4.Be2 I let my opponent have an extended central pawn. I surrounded and devoured the pawn. Experience has taught me that I face two principal dangers in chess. One is aggressive play by my opponent that threatens to win material or checkmate me. Two is unsafe play by me that leaves my pieces unprotected or my king vulnerable. White’s passive play eliminated danger number one. RichyRich - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 11.12.2012 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nc3 Nc6 3.d3 [3.g3] 3...g6 4.Be2 Bg7 5.f4 e6 6.Nf3 Nge7 7.0-0 [7.e5 d5=] 7...d5 8.e5 0-0 9.Nb5 a6!? 10.Nd6 Nf5 [10...f6 11.Nxc8 Rxc8 12.exf6 Bxf6=] 11.Nxf5 exf5 12.b3 f6 13.Bb2 fxe5!? [13...d4=/+, but the pawn structure is drawish.] 14.Nxe5 Nxe5 15.Bxe5 Bxe5 16.fxe5 d4 17.Bf3 Qc7 18.Bd5+ Kg7 [18...Kh8] 19.Qe2 [19.Qf3] 19...Re8 20.Rfe1 Be6 21.Bf3

Re7 22.g3? [22.Rac1 Rae8 23.c3 dxc3 24.Rxc3 Qa5=/+] 22...Rae8 23.Qg2 Bc8! 24.c3 Rxe5 25.Rec1 dxc3 26.Rxc3 [26.Qc2 Re3-+] 26...Re1+ 27.Rxe1 Rxe1+ 28.Kf2 Qe5 29.Rc2 [White could avoid immediate mate by giving up material after 29.d4 cxd4 30.Rd3 Ra1-+] 29...Qe3# White checkmated 0-1

46 – So 3.f4 g6 4.Nf3 Bg7 5.Bc4 The Sicilian Defence Grand Prix Attack 5.Bc4 pressured the Grandmaster Wesley So to defend accurately. See how he turned the tables and won quickly. How do great players make good players look terrible? They keep their opponents so busy dealing with current little issues that they miss their long term big issues. White didn’t move his dark squared bishop or d-pawn for the entire game. That didn’t work well against one of the strongest players in the world. Remy Degraeve could have won material at the end, only to be checkmated. Degraeve (2019) - So (2808), PRO League Group Stage chess.com INT (5), 11.02.2017 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nc3 Nc6 3.f4 g6 4.Nf3 Bg7 5.Bc4 e6 [5...d6 6.0-0=] 6.f5 [6.e5] 6...gxf5 [More common is 6...Nge7 7.fxe6 fxe6 8.d3=] 7.exf5 d5 8.Bb5 [8.Bb3!?] 8...e5 9.0-0 Nge7 10.Nh4 [10.Bxc6+ bxc6=/+] 10...Bf6 11.Qh5 a6 12.Bxc6+ Nxc6 13.Nf3 e4 14.Ne1 Rg8 [14...b5=/+] 15.Ne2 [White has to play 15.d3!=] 15...Rg5 16.Qxh7 Nd4!? [It looks like Black had a better choice with 16...Ne7! 17.d3 Bxf5 18.Rxf5 Rxf5-/+] 17.Nxd4 [White might have a better chance after 17.Ng3! Ke7 18.d3 Rxg3 19.hxg3 Ne2+ 20.Kf2 Nxc1 21.Rxc1 Bd7=/+] 17...Bxd4+ 18.Kh1 Qf6 19.c3 [19.d3 Rxf5 20.Rxf5 Qxf5 21.Qxf5 Bxf5-/+] 19...Rxf5 20.Rxf5 [20.Qxf5 Bxf5 21.cxd4 cxd4 22.g4 Qh4 23.gxf5 0-0-0-+] 20...Bxf5 21.Qg8+ [21.cxd4 Bxh7-+] 21...Ke7 22.Qxa8 Bd7 [Black can force checkmate in a few moves: 22...Bd7 23.Nf3 exf3 24.cxd4 f2 25.Qe8+ Bxe8 26.h3 f1Q+ 27.Kh2 Q6f4+ 28.g3 Q4f2#] 0-1

47 – Ekebjaerg 3.f4 g6 4.Nf3 Two top International Correspondence Grandmasters clashed in this Queens Knight Attack that transposed into the Grand Prix Sicilian Defence. Black was Michel Lecroq. Ove Ekebjaerg of Denmark was one of the leading 1.Nc3 players in the world during the 40 year period of 1963 to 2002. Take note. The Sicilian Defence is a popular chess opening because it allows Black to counter any of White’s attempts to win. One excellent approach is the Grand Prix Attack with 2.Nc3 and 3.f4. GM Roman Dzindzichashvili promoted this method. Roman is persuasive. Sometimes I play the Grand Prix as White. I recommend the book “Chess Openings for White, Explained” by Lev Alburt, Dzindzichashvili, Perelshteyn and Al Lawrence. They wrote this in Chapter 14 on Meeting the Sicilian Defence: "A practical White player needs something that reduces Black's options and that offers a straightforward way to play for the advantage. "In the 1970s, British masters put together such an approach, using the pawn-push f4, for their weekend circuit of tournaments - the Grand Prix. Their approach caught the attention of chess players around the world." Ekebjaerg (2590) - Lecroq (2570), W-ch14 corr9499, 1994 begins 1.Nc3 c5 2.f4 Nc6 3.Nf3 g6 4.e4 Bg7 5.Bb5 Nd4 6.a4 [6.0-0 Nxb5 7.Nxb5=; 6.Bc4!?] 6...b6 [6...Nh6 7.Bc4 e6 8.0-0 0-0 9.d3=; 6...Nf6 7.0-0 0-0 8.d3 d6 9.Nxd4 cxd4 10.Nd5 Nxd5 11.exd5=] 7.Bc4 [7.0-0 Bb7 8.Be2!?=] 7...Bb7 8.Bd5 Bxd5 9.Nxd5 e6 10.Ne3 d6 [10...Ne7 11.0-0 d5 12.d3 0-0 13.e5=] 11.c3 Nxf3+ 12.Qxf3 Nf6 [12...Ne7 13.f5 Nc6 14.0-0 0-0=] 13.0-0 0-0 14.d3 d5 15.c4 dxe4 16.dxe4 Qc7 17.e5 Nd7 18.a5 Rae8 19.Rd1 bxa5 20.Rd6 Rb8 21.Ra6 g5 22.g3 gxf4 23.gxf4 Qb7 24.Qxb7 Rxb7 25.R1xa5 Ra8 26.Ra2 Bf8 27.R6a3 Be7 28.Ng4 h5 29.Nf2 f6 30.exf6 Bxf6 31.Ne4 Bd4+ 32.Kg2 Nb6 [32...Nf6 33.Ng5 e5 34.f5+/=] 33.b3 Nd7 34.Bb2 Bxb2 35.Rxb2 Rab8 36.Rd2 Kf8 37.Rd3 Ke7 38.Rg3 Rh8 [38...Kf8 39.Ng5 Ke7 40.Re3+/-] 39.Ra6 Rh7 40.Rg6 Nf8 41.Rg8 Kf7 42.Rg5 Rc7 43.Nxc5 Re7 [43...Rg7 44.Rxg7+ Kxg7 45.Ne4+-] 44.Ne4 1-0

48 - Taormina 3.f4 e6 4.d3 g6 Daniel J. Taormina was an enthusiastic club player at Lycoming College in Williamsport, Pennsylvania. Daniel and I played many times in 1995 and then again in 2001. His attack on the kingside was a good strategy, but he made too many tactical mistakes. Taormina (1241) - Sawyer (2010), Williamsport, PA 15.05.2001 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nc3 Nc6 3.f4 e6 4.d3?! [This traps in a bishop. Better is 4.Nf3, allowing 5.Bc4 or 5.Bb5] 4...g6 5.Nf3 Bg7 6.Bd2 Nge7 7.Be2 0-0 8.0-0 Nd4 9.g4?! [This leaves White's kingside vulnerable. Better is 9.Nxd4 cxd4 10.Nb5 d5=] 9...d5 10.h4 Nec6 11.a3 [11.h5!?] 11...Nxf3+ [11...Nxe2+! 12.Qxe2 Nd4-/+] 12.Rxf3? [12.Bxf3 Qxh4-/+] 12...Qxh4 13.Rf2? Bd4 14.Qf1 Qg3+ 15.Qg2 Bxf2+ 16.Kf1 Qxg2+ 17.Kxg2 Bd4 0-1

49 – Wolff 3.g3 g6 4.Bg2 Bg7 Stephen D. Wolff of Texas was a master in the Correspondence Chess League of America (CCLA). In 1995 Wolff won games vs two opponents that I had previously played: John Vehre and Herbert Hickman. I played the Sicilian Defence against Wolff in 1980. I had the advantage that postal players were allowed to use books. As wonderful as opening books are, they do not play the game for you. Once you leave the published theory, you need good strategy and accurate tactics. I got a good position as Black out of the opening. I imagine that my books helped. Back then, I played through Chess Informant in openings I might play to see where grandmasters placed their pieces. That helps with strategical ideas, but it does not train you in tactical skills. Wolff completely outplayed me. I resigned when Wolff began a combination vs g6 and d5. I wish I had played one or two more moves to allow him to demonstrate exactly how he planned to win. His threats include 24.e6, 24.Bxd5, and Rxg6 and Qg2. Wolff (2200) - Sawyer (2000), corr CCLA 1980 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nc3 Nc6 3.g3 g6 4.Bg2 Bg7 5.d3 d6 6.f4 e5 [Maybe 6...Nf6=, 6...Rb8=, or 6...e6=] 7.Nf3 Nge7 8.0-0 0-0 9.Be3 Nd4 10.Qd2 [10.fxe5 dxe5 11.Nd5=] 10...exf4 [10...Bg4=] 11.gxf4 [11.Bxf4=] 11...b5 [11...Bg4!=/+] 12.Nd1 Nxf3+

13.Rxf3 Bg4 14.Rg3 Bxd1 [14...Bh5=] 15.Rxd1 f5 16.c3 Rb8 17.b4 Qc7 18.bxc5 dxc5 19.e5 Rfd8 20.d4 Nd5 21.h4 Kf7 [21...cxd4 22.Bxd5+ Rxd5 23.cxd4+/-] 22.h5 a5 [22...Nxe3 23.Rxe3+/-] 23.hxg6+ 1-0

Book 2: Chapter 2 – 2.Nf3 without 2…d6 2.Nf3 Various Normally Black answers 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 with moves like 2…d6, 2…e6, or 2…Nc6. These flexible moves can transpose into each other, especially when Black plays all three of those by move six. This section covers second moves other than 2...d6 by Black.

50 – Feng 2…b6 3.d4 d6 White played for an Open Sicilian Defence. When Black would not open the center with 3...cxd4, White opened it with 4.dxc5. Soon Black found himself in deep trouble. I won material and pursued a checkmate in this offhand club game vs Feng. Sawyer - Feng, Williamsport, PA 1994 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 b6 3.d4 d6? [3...cxd4 4.Nxd4 Bb7 5.Nc3+/=] 4.dxc5 bxc5? [This loses a rook. Black would only lose the Exchange with 4...dxc5 5.Bb5+ Bd7 6.Qd5 Bxb5 7.Qxa8+-] 5.Qd5! Nf6 6.Qxa8 Ba6 7.Bxa6 Nxa6 8.Qc6+ Qd7 9.Qxa6 Nxe4 10.Nc3 Nxc3 [10...Nf6 11.0-0+-] 11.bxc3 Qe6+ 12.Be3 Qd7 13.Rb1 e5 [13...f6 14.Rb7+-] 14.Rb8+ Ke7 15.Nxe5 dxe5 16.Bxc5+ Qd6 17.Qxd6# 1-0

51 – Sawyer 2…g6 3.d4 cxd4 The Sicilian Defence Alapin 2.c3 g6 variation attempts to avoid the more popular 2.c3 d5 and 2.c3 Nf6 lines. The 2.c3 g6 lines are recommended by Grandmaster Roman Dzindzichashvili. Players at all levels enjoy playing his Accelerated Sicilian Dragon repertoire. I have faced the Dragon Sicilian many times from the White side throughout my chess career. I have won and lost some very exciting games. I played the Black side in this short little blitz game. I captured on d4 but not the gambit pawn on c3. sr2015 - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 13.12.2012 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 g6 3.d4 cxd4 4.c3 Bg7 5.Bc4 e6 6.0-0 Ne7 7.e5 d5 8.exd6 Qxd6 9.cxd4 0-0 10.Nc3 a6?! [10...Nbc6 11.Ne4 Qc7=] 11.Ne4 Qb6 12.Bg5

Nbc6 13.Nf6+ Bxf6 [13...Kh8=] 14.Bxf6 Nd5?! 15.Qd2? Nxf6 White resigns 0-1

52 – Haines 2…e6 3.c3 d5 Ray Haines sent me a Sicilian Defence game vs Steve Morgan: “Hi Tim, I have a club game for you to see. The game ended in a draw. I ran it through my computer and it found the game as being even after I lost the pawn. This is not one of my best games, but it shows how important it is to not give up... Ray" Steve Morgan was rated 2047. Ray Haines proved that being up one pawn is not always enough to win. Never give up too soon. It reminds me of British Prime Minister Winston Churchill. He stood against Adolf Hitler of Germany. In a speech before the House of Commons, June 4, 1940, Winston Churchill said: "Even though large tracts of Europe and many old and famous States have fallen or may fall into the grip of the Gestapo and all the odious apparatus of Nazi rule, we shall not flag or fail. We shall go on to the end, we shall fight in France, we shall fight on the seas and oceans, we shall fight with growing confidence and growing strength in the air, we shall defend our Island, whatever the cost may be, we shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender..." Morgan (2047) - Haines, Club Game, Maine, 10.04.2014 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 e6 3.c3 [White avoids the 3.d4 Open Sicilian] 3...d5 4.Bb5+ Nc6 5.exd5 exd5 6.Qe2+ Be7 [6...Qe7=] 7.Ne5 [7.0-0=] 7...Bd7 8.Nxd7 Qxd7 9.d4 0-0-0!? 10.0-0 Nf6 11.Bxc6 bxc6 12.Be3 Rhe8 13.Qa6+ [13.dxc5+/=] 13...Kb8? [13...Qb7 14.Qxb7+ Kxb7 15.dxc5 Nd7 16.b4 Bf6=] 14.dxc5 Ne4 15.b4 Bf6 16.Bd4 Qb7 17.Qxb7+ [White's queen is the more dangerous and therefore their exchange helps Black. 17.Qa4+/-] 17...Kxb7 18.Rd1 Rd7 19.f3 Bxd4+ 20.cxd4 Ng5 21.Nc3 Re3 22.Rac1 f6 23.h4 Nf7 24.Kf2 Rde7 25.b5 Nd8 26.bxc6+ Kxc6 27.Re1 Rxe1 28.Rxe1 Rxe1 29.Kxe1 Ne6 30.Ne2 g6 31.Kd2 h5 [Black is stuck on the queenside, so he chose active kingside play. If 31...Ng7 32.g4+/-] 32.g3 [Unnecessarily slow. After 32.g4! f5 33.gxh5 gxh5 34.Ke3+- Black will likely have to give up a second

pawn.] 32...Ng7 33.g4 g5 34.hxg5 fxg5 35.Kd3 hxg4 36.fxg4 Ne8 37.Ng3 Nf6 38.Kc3? [White gives back a pawn and now it is a draw. He could have probed longer with 38.Nf5+/-] 38...Nxg4 39.Nf5 Nf6 1/2-1/2

53 – Stany 2…Nf6 3.Nc3 d5 The Sicilian Defence 2...Nf6 line leads to original positions. Surprise tactics may turn in any direction to trick masters. White responded 3.Nc3 giving Black opportunity to return to popular lines with 3...d6 4.d4. Instead, Black countered with 3...d5. International Master G.A. Stany of India found a sudden tactic against Grandmaster Nils Grandelius of Sweden. Black's Dragon bishop fianchetto left a natural vulnerability to a pawn push f4-f5, but the pawn is not the only piece to attack the f5 square. Stany (2502) - Grandelius (2647), London CC Superblitz KO, 10.12.2017 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Nc3 d5 4.e5 Nfd7 5.Nxd5 Nxe5 6.Bb5+ Nbc6 7.Ne3 Bd7 8.Be2 g6 9.Nxe5 Nxe5 10.d4 cxd4 11.Qxd4 Bg7 12.Qb4 Bc6 13.0-0 0-0 14.Rd1 Qc7 15.Qh4 [15.Bd2=] 15...Rad8 16.Bd2 Rd4 17.Qg3 [17.Qh3 h5=/+] 17...Rfd8 [17...f5=/+] 18.Bc3 Rxd1+ 19.Bxd1 Qd6? [19...Be4=/+ or 19...f5=/+] 20.f4 Nd7? [Somewhat better was 20...Nc4 21.Nxc4 Qc5+ 22.Ne3+/=. Now White wins at least a full piece.] 21.Bxg7! Kxg7 [21...Nf6 22.Bxf6 Qxf6 23.c3+-] 22.Nf5+! 1-0

54 – Amin 2…Nf6 3.e5 Nd5 The Sicilian Defence Nimzowitsch line 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nf6 leads to slightly offbeat positions that allow for wild tactics. Black picked off a poisoned pawn with 7...Qb6 and 8...Qxb2 which reminds one of the Najdorf in the game Bassem Amin vs Dmitry Gordievsky. White countered with sharp tactics and outplayed his grandmaster opponent. Amin (2693) - Gordievsky (2622), 80th Tata Steel GpB Wijk aan Zee NED (5.5), 17.01.2018 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.e5 Nd5 4.Nc3 Nxc3 5.dxc3 Nc6 6.Bc4 e6 7.Bf4 Qb6 8.Nd2 Qxb2 9.Ne4 Qb6 10.Qg4 Na5 [White has better bishops. 10...Qa5 11.0-0+/=] 11.Be2 [Even stronger is 11.Nd6+! Bxd6 12.Qxg7 Bxe5 13.Bxe5+/-] 11...Qb2 12.0-0 [12.Kd2!+-] 12...Qxc2 13.Qf3 [13.Bf3+/=] 13...Qa4 14.Rab1 a6 15.Rfd1 h6 16.Bg3 Nc6 17.Qf4 b5 18.Bh5 Nd8 [18...Kd8 19.f3+-] 19.Bh4 Bb7 20.Bxd8 Kxd8 21.Qxf7

Bc6 [21...b4 22.Bf3+-] 22.Bf3 Kc7 [22...Bd5 23.Nf6+-] 23.Ng5 Kb6 24.Bxc6 Ra7 [24...dxc6 25.Nxe6+-] 25.Rxd7 Qxa2 26.Rb7+ Rxb7 27.Qxb7+ 1-0

2.Nf3 Nc6 This section covers games that begin with 2.Nf3 Nc6 but without the most popular continuation 3.d4.

55 – Muir 3.d3 e6 4.g3 d5 Bob Muir often played closed variations from 1.e4. I tried many different openings against him. These included the Alekhine Defence or the Caro-Kann Defence. Sometimes I chose the 1.e4 e5 Open Game as Black playing either the Elephant Gambit or the Ruy Lopez. This time I ventured the sharper Sicilian Defence. Generally players who prefer the Open Sicilian continue the opening with the moves 2.Nf3 / 3.d4. In this game Bob Muir played 2.d3 / 3.Nf3. Then we transposed to the King's Indian Attack. Early in his career Bobby Fischer sometimes adopted this King’s Indian Attack set-up, especially against 2…e6. Our position was closed. Black expanded and grabbed space by advancing all his pawns on the queenside. Black applied pressure and White dropped a pawn. When Black was about to win more material, White resigned. Muir (1800) - Sawyer (2011), Williamsport, PA 1995 begins 1.e4 c5 2.d3 Nc6 3.Nf3 e6 4.g3 d5 5.Nbd2 Nf6 6.Bg2 Be7 7.0-0 b5 8.b3 a5 9.c4 dxc4 10.dxc4 b4 11.Bb2 0-0 12.Qe2 Qc7 13.e5 Nd7 14.Rfe1 Bb7 15.Bh3 [15.Ne4=] 15...a4 16.bxa4 Nb6 17.Rac1 Rxa4 18.Ra1 Rfa8 19.a3 bxa3 20.Bc3 Nb4 21.Ne4 Bxe4 22.Qxe4 N4d5 0-1

56 – LinuxKnight 3.c4 g6 4.d3 From time to time I played high rated computers like LinuxKnight on the Internet Chess Club. Usually I got crushed quickly if the monster chess engine was rated over 3000. Here is a Sicilian Defence that I managed a draw in a three minute game. Previously I drew this opponent in the Caro-Kann / BDG and in the Petroff Defence. Human grandmasters put their pants on one leg at a time (except for when they wear a dress!). Human, grandmasters could blunder at any time in ways that computers cannot. Mistakes by high rated players are rare, which is how they get to be high rated. These chess engines possess a high level of tactical skill, pattern recognition, calculation ability and exact knowledge of thousands of opening and endgame positions. In the game below LinuxKnight, I headed for an Accelerated Dragon Sicilian in the same vein as recommended by GM Roman Dzindzichashvili. White instead chose a hybrid of the English Opening after 1.e4, 2.Nf3 and 3.c4. It could be an Accelerated Maroczy Bind, except White plays 4.d3. After 17 moves, the White knight attacked the Black queen back and forth for a draw. Curious. I wish this game had been rated! LinuxKnight (3375) - Sawyer (1951), ICC 3 0 u Internet Chess Club, 09.06.2008 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 g6 3.c4 Nc6 4.d3 [4.d4 cxd4 5.Nxd4 is a Maroczy Bind Accelerated Dragon.] 4...Bg7 5.Be2 Nf6 6.Nc3 d6 7.0-0 0-0 8.Bg5 Bg4 9.h3 Bxf3 10.Bxf3 Nd4 11.Nb5 Nxf3+ 12.Qxf3 a6 13.Nc3 Nd7 [13...Re8=] 14.Qd1 [14.Nd5 Re8 15.Qe2=] 14...Ne5 15.Qd2 Nc6 [15...b5! 16.cxb5 axb5 17.Nxb5 Qa5!=] 16.Rad1 Rb8 17.Nd5 Qd7 [17...f6 18.Be3 f5=] 18.Nb6 Qc7 [18...Qe8=] 19.Nd5 Qd7 20.Nb6 Qc7 21.Nd5 Qd7 1/21/2

57 – Haines 3.Nf3 d6 4.Bc4 "What will I play against the Sicilian Defence?" Back in 1973 one would choose the popular Open Sicilian with 2.Nf3/3.d4; Closed Sicilian with 2.Nc3/3.g3; or Smith-Morra Gambit with 2.d4/3.c3. It matters little which line you choose as long as you actually make a decision! Your commitment gives you confidence to play well. This game looks to be my worst game from 1973, but life is not all about success. I can learn lessons from losses. My opponent was my friend Ray Haines who was in the process of adding the Sicilian Defence to his repertoire. It was a friendly game but I fought on to the bitter end. Ray played better than I did. Sawyer - Haines, Ft Fairfield, ME 20.12.1973 begins 1.e4 c5 [A surprise. Ray had been playing 1...e5] 2.Nc3 [I have a moment of indecision. Usually I had played the Open Sicilian with 2.Nf3 and 3.d4 but what has Haines prepared for me?] 2...Nc6 3.Nf3 [Once again I change my mind. I did not play a Closed Sicilian.] 3...d6 4.Bc4 [I am still unsure what to do. Ray probably did not know much book, but chess players like to worry.] 4...e6 5.0-0 Nf6 6.d4 [Finally I head back toward the normal Open Sicilian.] 6...cxd4 7.Nxd4 Be7 8.Be3 Bd7 [Here Ray leaves the book continuation 8...0-0 9.Bb3 a6 10.f4 reaching a position typical of Bobby Fischer's games.] 9.Qf3?! [This move invites an obvious knight fork to swap off a bishop. Better is 9.Bb3 with a typical position.] 9...Ne5 10.Qe2 Nxc4 11.Qxc4 0-0 12.Nf3 [White has no plan.] 12...Rc8 13.Qe2 Qa5 14.Rad1 Bc6 15.Bd2 Qb6 16.b3 Rfd8 17.Bg5 Qb4 18.Qe3? Ng4 19.Qd4 Qxd4 20.Rxd4 Bf6? [Both 20...f6-/+ and 20...Nf6-/+ leave Black with a much better position.] 21.e5? [21.Bxf6 Nxf6 22.Rfd1 gives White pressure on d6.] 21...Bxf3 22.exf6 gxf6? [Black lets things slip. 22...Rxc3! 23.fxg7 Rdc8 24.gxf3 Ne5 wins due to the threat of ...Nxf3+ forking king, rook, and bishop.] 23.gxf3? [After this Black has a commanding advantage. The only hope for White was 23.Bd2 Ne5=/+ but Black still is up a pawn.] 23...fxg5 24.Rxg4 Rxc3 25.Rxg5+ Kf8 26.Rc1 Rdc8 27.Ra5 a6 28.Kg2 d5 29.Ra4 Rxc2 30.Rxc2 Rxc2 31.a3 Rc3 32.Rb4 b5 33.a4 Rc5 34.axb5 Rxb5 35.Rxb5 [35.Rh4 at least would try to get a passed pawn. Swapping rooks

just leads to a simple pawn ending. I stubbornly play on.] 35...axb5 36.b4 e5 37.f4 e4 38.Kf1 Ke7 39.Ke2 d4 40.Kd2 Kf6 41.Ke2 Kf5 42.Ke1 Kxf4 43.Ke2 d3+ 0-1

58 – Spence 3.Bc4 e6 4.Nc3 When you play the Sicilian Defence at a club, you see a variety of responses. Popular moves 2.Nf3, 2.Nc3, and 2.c3 appear blend with the likes of 2.d4, 2.f4 and 2.b4. Lorenzo Skip Spence chose 2.Bc4. The problem with developing a bishop early is that Black adjusts the pawn structure to make Bc4 ineffective. Here 2...e6 3.Nf3 Nc6 transposed to 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 e6. Our position remained equal for 25 moves until I gained the edge. Spence - Sawyer, Williamsport, PA 1996 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Bc4 e6 3.Nf3 Nc6 4.Nc3 a6 [4...Nf6=] 5.a3 b5 6.Ba2 Qc7 7.d4 cxd4 8.Nxd4 Nf6 9.Nde2 b4 10.axb4 Bxb4 11.Bd2 0-0 12.0-0 Bb7 13.Ng3 Ne5 14.Nb5 Qc5 15.Bxb4 Qxb4 16.Nd6 Bc6 17.Bb3 Bb5 [17...Rfb8 18.Ra3 Ne8 19.Nxe8 Rxe8 20.f4 Ng6=] 18.Nxb5 [18.c3] 18...axb5 19.Rxa8 Rxa8 20.c3 Qc5 21.Qd4 Qxd4 22.cxd4 Nd3 23.Rb1 d5 24.exd5 Nxd5 25.Bd1 [25.Bxd5 exd5 26.Nf5=] 25...Ra2 26.Be2 N5f4 27.Bxd3 Nxd3 28.Ne4 Rxb2 29.Rxb2 Nxb2 30.Kf1 Nc4 31.Ke2 Kf8 32.Kd3 Ke7 33.Nc3 Nd6 34.f4 Kf6 35.g4 b4 36.Na2 b3 37.Nc3 g5 38.fxg5+ Kxg5 39.h3 Kh4 40.Nb1 Kxh3 41.g5 Kg4 42.Kc3 [Or 42.Nd2 b2 43.Kc2 Kxg5 44.Kxb2 Kf4 45.Kc2 h5-+] 42...Nb5+ 43.Kc4 Nxd4 44.Kxd4 Kxg5 45.Nd2 b2 46.Nb1 h5 47.Ke3 h4 48.Kf2 [Or 48.Nc3 Kg4 49.Kd2 h3 50.Kc2 h2 51.Nd1 Kg3-+] 48...Kg4 49.Nd2 e5 50.Nb1 f5 51.Nd2 e4 52.Nb1 f4 53.Ke2 h3 54.Nd2 h2 55.Nb1 h1Q 56.Nd2 b1Q 57.Nxb1 Qxb1 58.Kd2 e3+ 59.Kc3 e2 60.Kd4 e1Q 61.Kd5 Qb5+ 62.Kd4 Qee5# 0-1

59 – Zakhartsov 3.Bb5 e6 The highlight of this Sicilian Defence blitz game is the creative tactics of White’s queenside knight. The move 12.Nb5 made use of the pin on c6. The capture 18.Qxb5 worked due to a fork with check on c7 in the game Vladimir Zakhartsov against Igor Glek. Zakhartsov (2486) - Glek (2444), 72nd Moscow Blitz Moscow RUS (13.10), 08.09.2018 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 e6 4.Bxc6 bxc6 5.0-0 Ne7 6.e5 [6.d3 Ng6 7.Ng5 h6 8.Nh3 d6=] 6...Ng6 7.Nc3 [7.b3 f6 8.Bb2

Be7=] 7...f6 8.d4 cxd4 9.Qxd4 d6 [9...fxe5 10.Nxe5 Qb6=] 10.exd6 Qxd6 11.Qe4 [11.Qa4+/=] 11...Qc7 12.Nb5 Qb6 [12...Qb7=] 13.Nbd4 e5 14.Be3 Bb7 15.Ne6 c5 16.Qa4+ [16.Qc4+/-] 16...Bc6 17.Qc4 Bb5 [17...Bd7 18.Nxf8 Nxf8 19.Bxc5+/-] 18.Qxb5+ 1-0

60 – Lovenstein 3.Bb5 g6 What is a good way to play the Sicilian Defence against the Rossolimo Variation? The line begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5, also known as the Nimzovich-Rossolimo Attack. White avoids the Open Sicilian 3.d4 and with 3.Bb5 threatens to double Black's pawns. However 4.Bxc6 would involve giving up the two bishops, so Black often plays 3...g6. As Black vs Robert Lovenstein I followed this set-up with 5...e5, 6...Nge7 and 7...d6. By the time Bob took my knight on c6, I recaptured with my other knight. The queens came off the board and by move 15 White had to give up a piece for my kingside pawns. He resigned when Black's c-pawn was going to promote to a queen. Robert H. Lovenstein was an active member of the Chaturanga Chess Club. We played three games that I have recorded from my days in that club after I moved back to Pennsylvania from Texas. In 1984 I was in my 30s and Bob was a generation older. Lovenstein (1503) - Sawyer, Hatboro, PA 26.07.1984 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 g6 4.0-0 Bg7 5.c3 [5.Nc3=] 5...e5 [5...Nf6=] 6.a3 Nge7 7.b4 d6 8.d4?! [8.d3+/=] 8...a6? [8...exd4! 9.cxd4 0-0!=/+] 9.Bxc6+ Nxc6 10.dxc5?! [10.d5+/-] 10...dxc5 11.Qxd8+ Nxd8 12.Bg5 f6 13.Bh4 [13.Be3=] 13...h5 14.Rd1 g5 15.Nxg5 fxg5 16.Bxg5 Ne6 17.Bh4 c4 18.Nd2 b5 19.Nf3 [19.a4 Bb7-/+] 19...Bb7 20.Rd6 Nf4 21.Kf1 [21.Rad1 0-0-+] 21...Bxe4 22.Re1 Bd3+ 23.Kg1 Ne2+ 24.Kh1 0-0 25.h3 Nxc3 26.Nxe5 Bxe5 [26...Ne4!-+] 27.Rxe5 Ne4 28.Rg6+ Kh7 29.Rge6 c3 30.Rxh5+ Kg7 31.Re7+ Rf7 32.Rh7+ Kxh7 33.Rxf7+ Kg6 34.Rc7 c2 35.Rc6+ Kh7 36.Rc7+ Kh8 37.Kh2 Bc4 0-1

2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 Here we begin to consider the lines where White chooses the Open Sicilian with 3.d4.

61 – Murray 4.Nxd4 a6 5.c4 Every St. Patrick's Day, my mind harkens back to my Irish chess friend from Williamsport by the name of John Patrick Murray. Ireland has a great chess connection with America. A couple centuries ago the Murphy family left Ireland and went to Spain. They changed the family name to Morphy because it was easier to pronounce for Spanish speaking people. The Morphy family travelled from Spain to Cuba and also to the Carolinas. Eventually they settled in New Orleans. A generation later came the great chess champion Paul Morphy. His style of romantic attacks and brilliant combinations dazzled the world. Paul Morphy dominated the chess world in 1850s. His world was turned upside down with the American Civil War in the 1860s. It seems Morphy spent much of the war years in Cuba and Paris. Another New Orleans chess player, Armand Blackmar (a gambit player), wrote songs in support of the Confederacy in the South. Here’s a game that I played against Pat Murray. His pet lines in the Sicilian Defence involved an early ...a6. His lines were a cross between the Taimanov, Najdorf and Sveshnikov variations. Murray opened the position up prematurely leading to sharp play and a short game. Neither of us took time to castle. In the fire fight that followed, Black's king got caught in the center. Sawyer - Murray, Williamsport, PA 1994 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 a6 5.c4 [5.Nc3+/=] 5...e6 6.Nc2 Nf6 7.Nc3 d5? [7...Bc5=]

8.cxd5 exd5 9.exd5 Ne5 10.Qe2 Qe7 11.Ne3 g6 12.f4 Neg4 13.h3 Nxe3 14.Qxe3 [14.Bxe3!+/-] 14...Qxe3+ 15.Bxe3 Bb4 16.Bd4 Ke7 17.d6+?! [It is even stronger to castle first with 17.0-0-0! Re8 18.d6+ Bxd6 19.Bxf6+ Kxf6 20.Rxd6+ Kg7 21.Bc4+-] 17...Bxd6 18.Nd5+?! Ke6 [18...Nxd5 19.Bxh8 f6=/+] 19.Nxf6 Bxf4 20.Bc4+ 1-0

62 – Zdun 4.Nxd4 d6 5.Nc3 In my early chess years I studied the main line Dragon Sicilian Defence (5...g6) more than the Accelerated Dragon (4...g6). David Levy wrote a pamphlet on the Hyper-Accelerated Dragon (2...g6). In my youth I thought that 2...g6 was too risky, but now I know that almost anything is playable. Most opponents do not study much opening theory beyond a pet line here or there. Richard Zdun was a regular at the chess club in Williamsport. I think he was in his 60s for most of the nine years we played. Dick played a wide variety of openings. I am pretty sure that Zdun was originally from Europe somewhere. He possessed some general knowledge and a certain amount of practical experience. The main issue was that Black delayed the move …Nf6. In this Sicilian Defence Accelerated Dragon Variation the players castled opposite sides. Black traded off his bishop on g7 by 12...Bxd4. A few moves later White was able to move a pawn to g7 with a winning position. Sawyer (2010) - Zdun (1634), Williamsport, PA 11.02.1998 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 d6 5.Nc3 Bd7 6.Be3 g6 7.Bc4 Bg7 8.Qd2 Ne5 9.Bb3 [9.Be2!?] 9...Nc6 [9...Rc8=] 10.a3 a6 11.f3 Nxd4 [11...Nf6=] 12.Bxd4 Bxd4 13.Qxd4 Nf6 14.0-0-0 0-0 15.g4 Bc6 16.h4 Qc7 [16...Qa5 17.h5 g5 18.Nd5+/-] 17.h5 Rad8 [17...Qa5 18.hxg6 Qg5+ 19.Kb1 hxg6 20.Rh3+-] 18.hxg6 e5 19.Qd2 Be8 20.g7 1-0

63 – Heyn 4.Nxd4 d5 5.Nc3 Clive Heyn loved to play very fast blitz chess in our games. He could make many moves in one second each. His speed meant Clive Heyn was always a threat to win games on time. The down side to his instant moves was that Clive seemed to play the first thing that came into his mind. Below Heyn chose the Sicilian 4...d5!? The critical line is 5.exd5 Qxd5 which has similarities to the Scandinavian Queens Knight Defence with 1.e4 Nc6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 Qxd5. The line Clive Heyn chose gave White a slight advantage with accurate play. Perfect opening play in blitz is rare. How players follow it up makes all the difference. Clive obtained an equal position. Heyn took away my castling privileges and castled queenside himself as Black in this Sicilian Defence. Both kings were exposed to danger. I set a trap that Black missed. Suddenly we had an instant checkmate on move 13! Sawyer (2011) - Heyn (1751), Williamsport, PA 1994 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 d5 5.Nc3 [5.exd5 Qxd5 6.Be3 e6 7.Nc3 Bb4 8.Qd2 Qa5 9.Nb3 Qe5 10.f4 Bxc3 11.bxc3+/=] 5...dxe4 6.Nxc6 Qxd1+ 7.Kxd1 bxc6 8.Nxe4 Bf5 9.Bd3 0-0-0 [9...e6 10.Ke2 0-0-0 11.Be3 Kb7 12.Rhd1 Be7 13.c3 Nf6=] 10.Ke2 e6 11.Bf4 [11.Rd1] 11...h6? [11...Kb7 12.Rad1 Be7 13.Be5 Nf6 14.Nxf6 Bxd3+ 15.Rxd3 Rxd3 16.cxd3 gxf6 17.Bc3 Rd8=] 12.Rhd1 Nf6? [Logical and fatal. 12...Rd7 13.Ba6+ Kd8 14.Rxd7+ Kxd7 15.Rd1+ Ke7 16.Bd6+ Ke8 17.Bxf8 Kxf8 18.Nc5+/-] 13.Ba6# 1-0

64 – Hofford 4.Nxd4 e5 5.Nb3 Frank Hofford fired a Kalashnikov Sicilian Defence at me in the days before I knew what one was. I met his aggressive 4...e5 with the rather tame 5.Nb3. Stronger would have been 5.Nb5. My plan was to castle opposite sides and play for mate in the English Attack style years before it was popular! My set-up was Qd2, 0-0-0, f3, g4, h4, with g5 driving away the defender knight from f6 and forcing mate. It worked marvelously and the game lasted just 16 moves. This APCT Semi-Class tournament came during my early days of postal chess as I was rapidly moving my rating up over 2000. This win was a stepping stone in that process. I never saw another game played by Frank Hofford, but I note that he was pretty good at chess problems. Every month Newman Guttman published The Problem Solver in the APCT News Bulletin. Contestants sent in solutions, usually a mate in two or three moves. The first move was almost never a check nor a capture. When I topped the APCT Problem Solver Ladder in 1979, Frank Hofford was then listed as 7th out of 48 participants. Some guy whom I had never heard of named Tom Purser was 26th. And my own brother was listed as 33rd. Sawyer - Hofford (1694), corr APCT 77SC-11 (1), 11.1977 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 e5 5.Nb3 [5.Nb5 is the most popular move.] 5...Bb4+ 6.Bd2 Bxd2+ 7.Qxd2 Nf6 [7...a5=] 8.Nc3 a6 9.0-0-0 0-0 10.f3 b5 11.g4 h6? [This creates a target. Better is 11...b4 12.Na4=] 12.h4 Ne8 13.g5 hxg5 [Black can try to keep the position closed with 13...h5 but White's army is on the march. 14.f4 exf4 15.Be2 g6 16.Rhf1 d6 17.Qxf4+/-]

14.hxg5 d6 15.Kb1 [Or 15.f4+- which also keep g5 from being taken with check.] 15...Be6 16.Qh2 1-0

4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 e5 The two sides tangle in the Sveshnikov Sicilian Defence.

65 – Chess Challenger 6.Nf5 The self-contained chess board computer Chess Challenger was released in 1978 with upgrades a few years later. The average player could face a computer opponent over a sensory board. Bamberger’s sold the Chess Challenger. A few years later in 1986 this store was converted over to its parent company Macy’s. The store still operated in the same mall as of 2018. One day at lunch time I stopped by to play a quick game against the store model. My moves I played almost instantly. Then I’d wait for a minute. Eventually Chess Challenger would move. I finished this little game because it fell for a mate. I played a Sicilian Defence Sveshnikov Variation against Chess Challenger. I estimated its rating at 1400. There were wild claims that its strength was everything from 1100 to 1900, though 1500 seemed to be common. I depended on what levels you set it. The higher levels of play allowed Chess Challenger to think a lot longer and evaluate to deeper ply levels, but I could only stand at the counter and play the store sample for so long before I had to move along. Fortunately, it fell for a mate on move 18. Chess Challenger (1400) - Sawyer, Montgomeryville, PA 1980 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 e5 6.Nf5 [6.Ndb5] 6...d5 7.Bd3? [White lost a piece when it could not see to the end of the combination. 7.exd5 Bxf5 8.dxc6 Qxd1+ 9.Nxd1 bxc6 10.Ne3 Be6=] 7...dxe4 8.Bxe4 [8.Nxg7+ Bxg7 9.Nxe4 Nxe4 10.Bxe4 Qxd1+ 11.Kxd1 Be6-+] 8...Qxd1+ 9.Kxd1 Nxe4 10.Nxg7+ Bxg7 11.Nxe4 0-0 [11...Be6-+] 12.Bd2 f5 13.Nd6 Be6 14.Nxb7 e4 15.Bc3 Bh6 16.Re1 Rad8+ 17.Nxd8

Rxd8+ 18.Ke2 [18.Bd2 Rxd2+ 19.Kc1 Rxf2+ 20.Kb1 Rxg2-+] 18...Bc4# 0-1

66 – O'Neal 6.Ndb5 d6 7.Nd5 I discovered the Sicilian Defence Sveshnikov Variation late at night while playing over the games in Chess Informant. I worked evenings at the La-ZBoy chair factory in the Tennessee home town of Tom Purser. He was away in Germany meeting Diemer. I didn’t know about Diemer or Purser in those days. I got home from work after midnight and played through Chess Informant games on the kitchen table while everyone else was asleep. The morning mail brought a stack of postcards with chess moves from my postal tournament opponents. I’d set up the board, play through my games, look at my opponent’s new move, and select my next move. I mailed my postal replies on the way to work. I gave the Sveshnikov a try in 1979. William O'Neal took me out of the book with 7.Nd5. Okay, that move was in the book, but it had much less analysis than the main lines. For some reason in the middlegame I kept avoiding the pawn capture ...e5xf4. I hoped for White to blunder. O’Neal didn’t play perfectly, but he played better than I did. I won most of my games in those days, but this one didn’t turn out in my favor. O'Neal (1700) - Sawyer (2000), corr APCT 1979 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 e5 6.Ndb5 d6 7.Nd5 Nxd5 8.exd5 Ne7 [8...Nb8!?] 9.c4 Nf5 [9...Ng6 10.Qa4 Bd7 11.Qb4 Bf5=] 10.b4 [10.Bd3 Be7 11.0-0 0-0 12.f4+/=] 10...g6 [10...Be7 11.Bd3 a6 12.Nc3 0-0 13.0-0 Nd4=] 11.Bb2 a6 12.Nc3 Nh6 13.Be2 f5 14.Na4 Nf7 15.f4 Bg7 16.c5 0-0 17.Nb6 Rb8 18.0-0 Bd7 19.Rc1 Be8 20.Nc4 [20.a4+/=] 20...Bb5 21.a4 [21.Nxd6 Nxd6 22.cxd6 Qb6+ 23.Rf2 Qxd6 24.Bxb5 axb5 25.Bxe5 Bxe5 26.fxe5 Qxe5 27.d6+/=] 21...Bxc4 22.Bxc4 Rc8 23.Ba2 Bh6 24.g3 [24.Rb1 Bg7 25.fxe5 Bxe5 26.Bxe5 Nxe5=] 24...b6 [24...exf4 25.Rxf4 Qe8=/+] 25.Ba3 [25.Qd2+/=] 25...bxc5 [25...exf4 26.Rc3 Bg7 27.Rd3 fxg3 28.hxg3 Ne5-/+] 26.bxc5 dxc5 [26...exf4 27.cxd6 Rxc1 28.Bxc1 fxg3 29.hxg3 Bxc1

30.Qxc1 Nxd6-/+] 27.d6 Qb6 [27...exf4 28.Qd2 Kh8 29.Bxf7 Rxf7 30.Rxc5+/=] 28.Rb1 Qa7 29.Bc4 e4 [29...exf4 30.Qd5+-] 30.Qd5 Bg7 31.Rb7 Bd4+ 32.Kg2 Qa8 33.Rxf7 Qxd5 34.Rxf8+ Kxf8 35.Bxd5 1-0

67 – Marfia 7…Nxd5 8.exd5 Nb8 You know how it goes. When we win a game, we think, "Wow. That's a great opening!" When we lose, that variation was to blame. Our result oriented approach influences our evaluations of chess openings. Some openings fit better with our current skill set, while other openings will actually sharpen our skills. I liked the unbalanced 5...e5 Sveshnikov Variation. I played two games from each side. White won all four games. That streak ended in 1980. That year I played six Sveshnikov games: two draws and four Black wins! After 6.Nbd5 d6, White chooses 7.Bg5 most of the time. In 1979 I faced 7.Nd5. William O'Neal outplayed me and I lost as Black. Thus I decided to try 7.Nd5 one time as White. My chance came when James Marfia played a Sicilian Defence Sveshnikov Variation. Jim chose the more popular 8...Nb8, while I had opted for 8...Ne7 vs O'Neal. Both lines are okay, but Black has to find good moves to avoid trouble in either case. Jim Marfia and I were rated about the same in APCT. I got a passed pawn on d6, but he pinned my king to an uncomfortable position on h1. With bishops of opposite colors in a rook endgame, we agreed to a draw. Later I changed my preference to the main line 7.Bg5. Sawyer (2050) - Marfia (2050), corr APCT 1980 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 e5 6.Ndb5 d6 7.Nd5 [7.Bg5 a6 8.Na3 b5=] 7...Nxd5 8.exd5 Nb8 [8...Ne7=] 9.c4 Be7 10.Bd3 0-0 11.0-0 f5 [11...a6=] 12.c5 a6 13.cxd6 Bxd6 14.Nxd6 Qxd6 15.Qc2 e4 [15...Kh8=] 16.Be2 Nd7 17.f3 [17.Rd1+/=] 17...exf3 18.Bxf3 Ne5 19.Qb3 Nxf3+ 20.Rxf3 f4 21.Bd2 Bg4 22.Rf2 Rf7 23.Raf1 f3 24.gxf3 Bh3 25.Re1 Rd8 26.Bb4 [26.f4+/=] 26...Qg6+ [26...Qb6!=] 27.Kh1 Rf5 28.d6+ Kh8 29.Qe6?! [The position is equal. White still could have kept some advantage with 29.Qe3!+/-] 29...Qxe6 30.Rxe6 Rb5 1/2-1/2

68 – Bielefeld 7.Bg5 Be6 Dr. Martin Bielefeld frequently competed in the United States Correspondence Championship. I played in that same event twice but I never made it to the final round. Our game below came from a postal event run by the Correspondence Chess League of America (CCLA). The Sicilian Defence Sveshnikov 5...e5 had recently caught fire in 1980. I’d played it sometimes as Black. Marty Bielefeld wanted to try out a less popular line with 7...Be6 when I had White. There were no databases or chess engines available. I had a few books and several issues of Chess Informant, but I’m sure I found myself on my own pretty quickly. I started well until my dubious novelty recapture of 12.exd5?! That relieved the pressure his backward d6 pawn. Then Black had a good version of King’s Indian Defence type position. He attacked with both his doubled fpawns and outplayed me. Sawyer (2000) - Bielefeld (2100), corr CCLA 1980 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 e5 6.Ndb5 d6 7.Bg5 Be6 8.Nd5 [8.Bxf6 gxf6 9.Nd5 Rc8 10.c3 a6 11.Na3+/-] 8...Rc8 [8...Bxd5 9.exd5 Ne7 10.Nc3+/=] 9.Bxf6 [9.c3 a6 10.Bxf6 gxf6 11.Na3+/-] 9...gxf6 10.c3 a6 11.Na3 Bxd5 12.exd5?! [12.Qxd5 b5 13.Nc2+/-] 12...Ne7 13.Qa4+ Qd7 14.Qxd7+ Kxd7 15.Nc4 Kc7 16.0-0-0 Bh6+ 17.Kb1 b5 18.Ne3 f5 19.g3 f4 20.Ng4 Bg7 21.gxf4 exf4 22.h4 f5 [22...Kb6=] 23.Nh2 Kb6 24.Nf3 Rc5 25.Ng5 Rxd5 26.Bg2 [26.Rxd5 Nxd5 27.Bh3+/=] 26...Rxd1+ 27.Rxd1 Be5 28.Nf7 Rg8 29.Bf3 Kc7 30.Re1 Nc6 31.Bxc6 Kxc6 32.Nxe5+ dxe5 33.Rxe5 Rg2 34.Rxf5 Rxf2 35.b4 f3 36.a4 [36.h5 h6=/+] 36...bxa4 37.c4 [37.h5 a3 38.Ka1 h6-+] 37...a3 38.Ka1 Kd6 39.b5 [39.h5 Ke6 40.Rf8 Ke5+] 39...axb5 40.cxb5 Rf1+ 41.Ka2 f2 42.Rf7 Kc5 0-1

69 – Fuerte2004 7.Bg5 a6 8.Na3 Be6 A draw can be the better part of wisdom, especially in a fast 3 minute blitz game vs a good player. My opponent Fuerte2004 and I contested the popular Sicilian Defence Sveshnikov Variation. Black usually plays 8...b5 attempting to pawn fork the White knights on Nc3 and Na3. Black played a side line 8...Be6. We reached an endgame where I was winning on the board but losing on the clock. At move 44, Houdini found a mate in 25 more moves. I didn't have time for that! I managed two moves to just barely draw before my clock expired, eliminating his last pawn. In the final position I was up a single bishop with kings on the board and nothing else. That’s right. No pawns left to queen. Thus, it was drawn due to no material to mate. Sawyer (2280) - Fuerte2004 (2250), ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 19.04.2009 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 e5 6.Ndb5 d6 7.Bg5 a6 8.Na3 Be6 9.Nd5!? [9.Nc4! Rc8 10.Bxf6 gxf6 11.Ne3+/=] 9...Bxd5 10.exd5 Qa5+ 11.Bd2 [11.c3! Qxd5 12.Bxf6 Qe4+ 13.Be2 gxf6 14.0-0=] 11...Qxd5 12.c4 Qe4+ 13.Be2 Nd4 14.f3 Qxe2+ 15.Qxe2 Nxe2 16.Kxe2 d5 17.Rac1 Bxa3 18.bxa3 0-0 19.cxd5 Nxd5 20.Rhd1 Rfe8 21.Bb4 Nf4+ 22.Kf2 Rad8 23.Rxd8 Rxd8 24.Rc7 b5 25.Ra7 Nd3+ 26.Ke3 Nc1 [26...Nb2 27.Rxa6 h6 28.Ke2 Rd1 29.Rb6 Rc1 30.Kf2 Rc2+ 31.Kg3 Nd3 32.Rxb5 Rxa2 33.Rb8+ Kh7 34.Rd8 Nxb4 35.axb4 Rb2=] 27.Rxa6 [27.Rc7+/-] 27...Nxa2 28.Rb6 f5 29.Rxb5 Re8 30.Rb7 [30.Bd2+/-] 30...e4 31.Re7 Rxe7 32.Bxe7 exf3 33.Kxf3 Nc3 34.Bb4 Na4 35.Kf4 g6 36.Ke5 Kf7 37.h4 h6 38.g3 Nb6 39.Kd6 Nc4+?! [Black does better to keep pushing kingside pawns with 39...g5] 40.Kc5 Nxa3 41.Bxa3 g5 42.hxg5 hxg5 43.Bc1 f4 44.gxf4 [Houdini found a mate in 25: 44.g4 Kg8 45.Bb2 Kf7 46.Kd5 f3 47.Bd4 Ke7 48.Be3 f2 49.Bxf2 Kd7 50.Bd4 Kc7 51.Be3 Kd7 52.Bxg5 Kc7 53.Be3 Kd8 54.Ke4 Ke8

55.Bd4 Kf7 56.g5 Kg6 57.Kf4 Kf7 58.Kf5 Ke7 59.g6 Kf8 60.g7+ Kf7 61.Kf4 Kg8 62.Ke4 Kh7 63.Kf5 Kg8 64.Kf6 Kh7 65.Kf7 Kh6 66.Be3+ Kh5 67.g8Q Kh4 68.Bf2+ Kh3 69.Qg3#] 44...gxf4 45.Bxf4 1/2-1/2

70 – Harabor 8.Na3 b6 9.Nd5 The Correspondence Chess League of America (CCLA) was an old and well respected postal chess club. I met Mihai Harabor in 1980. He was destined for a rapid rise in his correspondence career. Although I won two of our three games, Mihai Harabor would become a much higher rated correspondence master. Here I played Black in a Sicilian Defence Sveshnikov Variation. My favorite book on that opening was: "Sicilian: Lasker-Pelikan", by R. Wade, J. Speelman, N. Povah, L. Blackstock. I felt like I was exploring original moves in uncharted territory! Also, I got the Chess Informant issues to study the latest games. The World Champion Emmanuel Lasker played 5...e5 a couple times in 1910. Pelikan played it quite a bit in the 1950s. In the mid-1960s Gennadi Timoshchenko and Evgeny Sveshnikov both played it in big tournaments. They continued through the 1970s. Eventually the name "Sveshnikov Variation" stuck. He proved in game after game that Black's position has a lot of compensation. Black often enjoys two bishops. This leads to attacks all over the board and at the White king. Analysis goes 15-20 moves deep. I gave up the two bishops. That left us bishops of opposite color. In the endgame that could be drawish. In the middlegame with other pieces on the board, bishops of opposite color can lead to attacks that cannot easily be defended. I enticed his king forward to the point where I sacrificed a rook and checkmated him. Harabor (2100) - Sawyer (2000), corr CCLA 1980 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 e5 [This leaves a hole on d5 for a White piece, like a knight. Black cannot drive it away from d5 with a pawn. In the olden days, this was thought to be too serious a weakness.] 6.Ndb5 d6 7.Bg5 a6 8.Na3 b5 9.Nd5 [White must decide whether to play 9.Nd5 immediately or to play 9.Bxf6 gxf6 10.Nd5.] 9…Be7 10.Bxf6 Bxf6 11.c3

0-0 12.Nc2 Rb8 13.Be2 Bg5 14.0-0 Be6 15.Ncb4 Nxb4 16.Nxb4 Qb6 17.Nd5 Qb7 18.b3 Bxd5 19.Qxd5 Qxd5 20.exd5 Bd2 21.c4 bxc4 22.Bxc4 a5 23.Rad1 Bb4 24.f3 f5 25.g3 g5 26.f4 Bc5+ 27.Kg2 gxf4 28.gxf4 e4 29.h4 Rf6 30.h5 Kf7 31.Kh3 Rg8 32.Be2 Ke7 33.Kh4 Rf7 34.h6 Rf6 35.Kh5 Rg2 36.Bc4 Rfg6 37.Rh1 Kf6 38.Rdf1 Bf2 39.Be2 R2g5+ 40.fxg5+ Rxg5# 0-1

71 – SharpShooter 9.Nd5 Be7 Every complex chess opening may potentially reach a simple endgame once enough material comes off the board. That’s what happened in this Sicilian Defence Sveshnikov Variation game against the highly rated computer SharpShooter. White won a pawn. We had constant exchanges from moves 17 to 29 whereupon we reached a rook and pawn ending. Probably there were too many pawns on the board for the chess engine to use its endgame tablebase. This rook endgame is one I’ve drawn many times. My opponent had a queenside rook in front of the lone extra passed pawn. My king must stay on h7 or g7 to avoid a loss to the move Rh8. My rook must stay behind the passed pawn unless I am giving check if his king approaches the passed pawn. I cannot allow his king to help on the queenside or invade on the kingside. Draw. SharpShooter (3078) - Sawyer (2418), ICC 3 2 u Internet Chess Club, 13.12.1999 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 e5 6.Ndb5 d6 7.Bg5 a6 8.Na3 b5 9.Nd5 Be7 10.Bxf6 Bxf6 11.c3 0-0 12.Nc2 Rb8 [12...Bg5 13.a4 bxa4 14.Rxa4 a5 15.Bc4 Rb8=] 13.Be2 [13.h4 Be7 14.Nce3 Be6 15.Qf3 Qd7=] 13...Bg5 14.0-0 a5 [14...Be6 15.Qd3 a5 transposes.] 15.Qd3 Be6 16.Rfd1 b4 17.b3 bxc3 18.Nxc3 Be7 19.Nb5 Nb4 20.Nxb4 axb4 21.Nxd6 Bxd6 [21...Qb6 22.Nf5 Bxf5 23.exf5 Bc5=] 22.Qxd6 Qxd6 23.Rxd6 Rfd8 24.Rxd8+ Rxd8 25.f3 f6 26.Bc4 [26.Rd1+/=] 26...Kf7 27.Bxe6+ Kxe6 28.a3 bxa3 29.Rxa3 Rd1+ 30.Kf2 Rb1 31.Ra6+ Kf7 32.Ra7+ Kg6 33.Rb7 Rb2+ 34.Kg3 h6 35.b4 h5 36.b5 Kh6 37.b6 Rb3 38.Rb8 g5 [38...Kg5 39.h4+ Kg6 40.b7 Rb2 41.Kh3 Kh7 42.g3 g6 43.Rf8 Rxb7 44.Rxf6 Kg7 45.Rd6+/=] 39.b7 Kh7 40.Kf2 Kg7 41.h3 h4 42.g4 Kh7 43.Ke2 Kg7 44.Kd2 Kh7 45.Kc2 Rb6 46.Kd3 [46.Kc3 Kg7 47.Kc4 Rb2=] 46...Rb1 47.Kc4 Kg7 48.Kd5 Rd1+ 49.Kc6 [49.Ke6 Rb1 50.Kd6 Rd1+ 51.Ke7 Rb1=] 49...Rc1+ 50.Kd6 Rd1+ 51.Kc7 Rc1+ 52.Kd8 Rd1+ 53.Kc8 Rc1+ 54.Kd7 Rd1+ 55.Ke7 Rb1 56.Ke8 Rb2

57.Kd8 Rd2+ 58.Kc7 Rc2+ 59.Kd6 Rd2+ 60.Ke7 Rb2 61.Kd7 Rd2+ Game drawn by mutual agreement 1/2-1/2

72 – EggSalad 9.Bxf6 gxf6 10.Nd5 f5 Beating the chess engine EggSalad was difficult. I had a great chance in a Sicilian Defence Sveshnikov. We weaved through the mine field of this unbalanced popular opening. Rather than play for a middle game advantage vs a computer program whose tactical skills far exceeded mine, I went for the endgame with 16.Qc1. After multiple exchanges, we reached a pawn ending. The old chess engines were notoriously weaker in endings, but I blundered first. On move 33 I allowed Black a win. Fortunately for me EggSalad missed it. We were dynamically equal again. On move 39 the machine blundered and gave me a forced win. Sadly, I let it slip on move 45. The game ended in a draw. If I had the time to calculate the race to queen the pawns, I could have won. Typical play led to mate on move 62. Back then when I was in my 40s, I was still a pretty good blitz player. Alas we all have our limitations when the clock is ticking in speed chess. Sawyer (2382) - EggSalad (3146), ICC 5 0 u Internet Chess Club, 28.01.2000 begins with 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 e5 6.Ndb5 d6 7.Bg5 a6 8.Na3 b5 9.Bxf6 [9.Nd5 Be7 10.Bxf6 Bxf6 11.c3=] 9...gxf6 10.Nd5 f5 11.Bd3 Be6 12.0-0 Bg7 [12...Bxd5 13.exd5 Ne7 14.c3 or 14.Nxb5=] 13.c3 0-0 14.Nc2 Rc8 15.f3 [White has natural play vs the queenside with 15.a4+/=] 15...Qg5 [15...Bxd5 16.exd5 Ne7=] 16.Qc1 [16.a4+/=] 16...Qxc1 17.Raxc1 fxe4 18.fxe4 Bxd5 19.exd5 Ne7 20.Ne3 [20.Nb4=] 20...Bh6 21.Rce1 Bxe3+ 22.Rxe3 f5 23.Rh3 [23.Rg3+ Kh8 24.Rgf3 Rc5 25.Be4 Kg7 26.Rg3+ Kh8 27.Rgf3=] 23...Rc5 24.Rh5 Rxd5 25.Bxf5 Nxf5 26.Rhxf5 Rxf5 27.Rxf5 Rd1+ 28.Rf1 Rxf1+ 29.Kxf1 Kf7 30.b3 Ke6 31.Ke2 a5 32.Ke3 d5 33.g4? [33.a3=] 33...a4? [33...b4!-+] 34.bxa4 bxa4 35.a3 Kd6 36.h4 Kd7 37.Kd3 Ke6 38.Ke3 Kd6 39.Kd3 e4+? [39...Kc5=] 40.Kd4 h6 41.c4 dxc4 42.Kxe4 c3 43.Kd3 Ke5 44.Kxc3 Kf4 45.g5? [This allows Black to draw. If I had the time to calculate in this blitz game, then I could have won with 45.Kb4 Kxg4 46.Kxa4 Kxh4 47.Kb5 h5 48.a4 Kg3 49.a5 h4 50.a6 h3 51.a7 Kh2 52.a8Q Kg1 53.Qg8+ Kf2 54.Qh7 Kg2 55.Qe4+ Kg1 56.Qg4+ Kh2 57.Kc4 Kh1 58.Qxh3+ Kg1 59.Kd3 Kf2 60.Qg4 Kf1 61.Ke3 Ke1 62.Qg1#] 45...hxg5 46.hxg5 Kxg5

47.Kb4 Kf5 48.Kxa4 Ke6 49.Kb5 Kd7 50.Kb6 Kc8 51.Ka7 Kc7 52.a4 Kc6 53.a5 Kc7 54.Ka8 Kc6 55.Ka7 Kc7 56.Ka8 Kc6 57.a6 Kb6 58.a7 Kc7 White is stalemated 1/2-1/2

73 – Morris 11.Bd3 Be6 12.Qh5 We had a little Southern postal chess battle with Sicilian Defence Sveshnikov Variation. I lived in the state of Tennessee. Thomas Morris won the championship of the state of Georgia about this same time. The Sveshnikov was relatively new in my repertoire. At this time I was also playing William O’Neil. I played the opening pretty well until move 19. I tried to hold my own in the middlegame. I survived, but only because we drifted into a rook endgame where I stood worse. I tried some tricks but nothing worked. White kept on winning. Thomas Morris deserved his victory. He wrote chess articles that encouraged me in my own future chess writing. Morris (2000) - Sawyer (2000), corr APCT 1979 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 e5 6.Ndb5 d6 7.Bg5 a6 8.Na3 b5 9.Bxf6 gxf6 10.Nd5 f5 11.Bd3 Be6 12.Qh5 Bg7 13.c3 0-0 14.exf5 Bxd5 15.f6 e4 16.fxg7 Re8 17.Be2 Re5 18.Qh6 Rg5 19.0-0 Qe7 [19...Ne5 20.Rad1 Nd3 21.g3 Nf4 22.Rfe1 Qd7 23.Nc2 Nh3+ 24.Kg2=] 20.Rad1 e3 21.f3 [21.g3 exf2+ 22.Rxf2 Qe3 23.Qf6+/=] 21...Qe5 [21...Re8!=] 22.Bd3 Rxg7 23.Rde1 Re8 24.Nc2 Qg5 25.Bxh7+ Kh8 26.Qxg5 Rxg5 27.Bd3 Ne5 28.Be4 [28.Rxe3+/-] 28...Bc4 [28...e2 29.Rxe2 Bc4=] 29.f4 Bxf1 30.fxg5 e2 31.Ne3 Nd3 32.Bxd3 Rxe3 33.Bf5 Re5 34.Bg4 Rxg5 35.Bf3 Kg7 36.g3 f5 37.Bxe2 Bh3 38.Bf1 Bxf1 39.Kxf1 f4 40.gxf4 Rh5 41.Re2 Kf6 42.Rf2 Kf5 43.Kg2 Rh6 44.h3 Re6 45.Kf3 Re1 46.h4 Rh1 47.Kg3 Rg1+ 48.Rg2 Rd1 49.h5 Rh1 [49...Rd3+ 50.Kh4+-] 50.Rh2 Rg1+ 51.Kf2 Rb1 [51...Rg7 52.h6 Rh7 53.Kf3+-] 52.Ke3 Re1+ 53.Kd3 Kxf4 54.h6 Re8 55.h7 Rh8 56.Kd4 a5 57.Kd5 Ke3 [57...Kf5 58.Kxd6+-] 58.Kxd6 b4 59.cxb4 axb4 60.Kc5 b3 61.a4 Rc8+ 62.Kb4 1-0

4.Nxd4 g6 This 4…g6 variation is known as the Accelerated Dragon which follows 2…Nc6. It may transpose from the Hyper-Accelerated Dragon 2…g6 or it may transpose to the main line 2…d6 Dragon Sicilian with 4.Nf6 5.Nc3 g6.

74 – Blacula 5.Nxc6 bxc6 6.Nc3 I began this game with the Hyper-Accelerated Dragon Sicilian Defence 2...g6. My fourth move 4…Nc6 transposed back into the Accelerated Dragon that normally has 2…Nc6 and 4…g6. White can choose to avoid the main lines of 5.Nc3 or 5.c4. In my ICC game vs Blacula, White captured my knight by 5.Nxc6. Black recaptured toward the center with 5...bxc6. This pawn structure supported the future advance 9…d5. My strong pawn center made it difficult for White to mount long lasting threats. Blacula - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 12.12.2012 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 g6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nc6 5.Nxc6 bxc6 6.Nc3 [6.Qd4 Nf6 7.e5 Nd5 8.e6 f6=] 6...Bg7 7.Bd3 [7.Bc4 Qc7=] 7...Nf6 8.0-0 0-0 9.Kh1 d5 10.e5 Nd7 11.f4 Nc5 12.Be2 f6 [12...d4!?] 13.Be3 Ne6 14.exf6 exf6 [14...Rxf6!?] 15.f5 gxf5 16.Bg1 Ng5 17.Qe1 Ne4 18.Bd3 Qd6 19.Rd1 Qe5 20.Bxe4? [20.Ne2 Qxb2=] 20...fxe4 21.Bd4 Qh5 22.Qg3 Kh8? [22...Qg6-/+] 23.Rf4 Be6 24.Rh4 Qg5 25.Qxg5? [Swapping pieces ends the attack. Better was 25.Qf2 Rab8=/+] 25...fxg5 26.Bxg7+ Kxg7 27.Rh3 Bxh3 28.gxh3 Rf2 29.Rc1 Raf8 30.Nd1 Rf1+ 31.Kg2 Re1 White resigns 0-1

75 – Zdun 5.Nc3 Nf6 6.Bc4 In the Sicilian Defence or the Pirc Defence, I sometimes pull off the hidden queen trick. This game began as a Dragon Variation against Dick Zdun. The hidden queen trick happens when White places his queen on Qd2 and castles queenside. Black plays his queen to Qa5 and castles kingside. At the key point White moves his king to b1 followed by his knight to d5. Then the White Qd2 and Black Qa5 are staring at each other. If Black swaps queens, White first inserts a check with the knight before recapturing the queen. In this game Black could have defended with 14...Rfd8. Instead Black played the move 14...Nd5. This allowed White to pick up a piece when moving to d5. The 16.Ne7+ move that followed attacked the bishop on c8. When Black has a knight on f6, White may choose to use the hidden queen trick to swap into a favorable endgame. When you consider this tactical shot, make sure the Black Qa5 does not cover d5, because Qa5xd5 could be embarrassing for White. In blitz the embarrassment can go the other way. Black may miss that his queen is hanging after Nd5 and lose to Qd2xa5. I like to win games that are short and sweet. Tactics win. Sawyer (2010) - Zdun (1634), Williamsport, PA 28.03.2000 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 g6 6.Bc4 Bg7 7.Be3 Qa5 [7...0-0 8.Bb3=] 8.f3 0-0 9.Qd2 a6 [9...d6 10.0-0-0 Nxd4 11.Bxd4=] 10.0-0-0 [10.Bb3+/=] 10...b5 11.Bb3 Bb7 [11...Ne5 12.Bh6+/=] 12.Kb1 e6 13.Nxc6 dxc6 14.e5 [14.Qf2+/=] 14...Nd5? [14...Rfd8!=] 15.Nxd5 Qxd2 16.Ne7+ Kh8 17.Rxd2 Bxe5 18.Rd7 Rab8 19.Ba7 Bc8 20.Bxb8 1-0

76 – Magarinos 5.Nc3 Bg7 6.Be3 GM Roman Dzindzichasvili recommended the Sicilian Defence. His videos and DVDs have been all the rage among tournament players of all ages. Roman is passionate about the lines he plays and explains them thoroughly. His book "Chess Openings for Black, Explained: A Complete Repertoire" was co-authored by former US champ GM Lev Alburt, Roman's student GM Eugene Perelshteyn and Al Lawrence who has written a lot on chess. One of Dzindzi's favorites for Black is the Accelerated Dragon Sicilian. I faced this opening against Juan Magarinos in a game we played at Borders bookstore in Orlando, Florida. Juan was a tournament player. His USCF rating had peaked at 1798 four years before this game. During that time period, I frequently played 1.Nc3. This game started as a Queens Knight Defence. But after 1...c5, White chose to head for an Open Sicilian Defence with an eventual e2-e4. I missed several chances to get an advantage. We finished play in an even endgame. When the store closed we had to quit. Sawyer - Magarinos, Orlando, FL, 04.12.2003 begins 1.Nc3 c5 2.Nf3 [2.e4 is the Closed Sicilian] 2...g6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Bg7 5.e4 [Transposing to the Open Sicilian Defence.] 5...Nc6 6.Be3 a6? [This leaves weaknesses on the dark squares and does not help in the center. Correct is 6...Nf6 7.Bc4 0-0 8.Bb3 a5 reaching the main line of book Dzindzichashvili book.] 7.Bc4 [Good but not the best. Very powerful is 7.Nd5!+/= e6 8.Nxc6 bxc6 (8...dxc6 9.Bb6 Qd7 10.Nc7+ Kf8 11.Bc5+ Ne7 12.Qxd7 Bxd7 13.Nxa8+-) 9.Bb6 Qh4 10.Nc7+ Kf8 11.Qd6+ Ne7 12.Nxa8+-] 7...e6 8.0-0 [8.Nxc6 bxc6 9.Qd6+/=] 8...Nge7 9.Qd2 b5 10.Bb3 Bb7 11.f3 Rc8 12.Rad1 0-0 13.Nde2 [13.Nxc6 Bxc6 14.Qd6+/=] 13...Ne5 14.h3 [14.f4!? Ng4 15.Bd4 Bxd4+ 16.Nxd4 b4 17.Nce2 Bxe4 18.h3 Nf6 19.Qxb4+/=] 14...b4 15.Na4 d5 16.exd5 [16.Qxb4!+-] 16...Nxd5 17.Bxd5 Bxd5 18.Nb6 Nc4 19.Nxc4 Rxc4 [19...Bxc4 20.Qxb4 Qc7=] 20.b3 Rc8 21.Qxb4 Rxc2 22.Rd2 Qc8 23.Rxc2 [23.Nf4 Ba8 24.Rxc2 Qxc2=/+] 23...Qxc2 24.Qd2 Qxd2 25.Bxd2 Rc8 26.Rc1 Rxc1+ 27.Bxc1 Kf8 28.Kf2 Ke7 29.Ba3+ Kd7 30.Nf4 Bb7 31.Nd3 Bd4+ 32.Ke2 Kc7 33.Nc5 [The position is equal. The game was

discontinued at this point (most likely because the store was closing), thus I list it as a draw for database purposes.] 1/2-1/2

77 – Price 5.Nc3 Bg7 6.Be3 d6 Blackmar-Diemer Gambit players routinely begin 1.d4 with the hope to reached the main line after 1...d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3. The move 1...Nf6 may also transpose to a BDG. When Black avoids the gambit with some other first move, White is on his own to play whatever. Tyrin Price (as White) sent me this example with his notes to the game. Price (1523) - ColdNorth (1417), ICC 5 0, 22.10.2016 begins 1.d4 g6 [Avoided the BDG by a Modern Defense.] 2.e4 Bg7 3.Nc3 c5 4.Nf3 cxd4 5.Nxd4 [Now it is an Accelerated Dragon! I have often played the Dragon and its Accelerated cousin.] 5...Nc6 6.Be3 d6 [One benefit of the Accelerated Dragon over the main line Dragon is that Black can get in ...d5 all at once rather than in two moves in the normal Dragon where White chooses 10.0-0-0 over 10.Bc4 (Yugoslav). Playing ...d6 is out of keeping with the spirit of the line. I think ...Nf6 is better.] 7.Qd2 a6 [This move is also not common in most Dragon lines. Usually the Black Queen will go to a5 and then ...b5 needs no other preparatory pawn anchors like ...a6.] 8.h4 [Thematic idea against k-side fianchettoes. Open up the h-file. Still may be a bit early. More usual is simply 0-0-0.] 8...h5 9.f3 [I am not sure about this move but I'd like to get g4 in eventually.] 9...Nf6 10.0-0-0 Nxd4 11.Bxd4 b5 12.Kb1 Bb7 [Uncharacteristic. My opponent may be out of his book.] 13.Nd5 Bxd5 14.exd5 Rc8 15.g4 [Getting in g4 while the Knight is pinned. My opponent did a long think using about 40 seconds which is a long time in a 5-minute game.] 15...hxg4 16.fxg4 [I had pre-moved this so it was instant for me and my opponent hunkered down into another long think which put him under time pressure. He falls apart soon.] 16...Kf8 17.g5 Nh5 18.Qf2 Bxd4 19.Rxd4 Ng7 20.Bh3 [Fritz told me in post-mortem that 20.Bd3 is even stronger. My idea is to pile quickly onto f7.] 20...Rc7 21.Rf1 e6 22.dxe6 Black forfeits on time 1-0 [Notes by Price; edited for space]

78 – Sawyer 5.Nc3 Bg7 6.Be3 Jose Raul Capablanca was my hero forty five years ago. I had the joy of transcribing four of his books into ChessBase format for ChessCentral. Here is an unrated fun blitz game I played vs a chess friend on ICC who uses Capablanca's name for his handle. The funny thing is that J.R. Capablanca did not normally play the Sicilian Defence as Black. Sawyer - capablanca1 Internet Chess Club 2011 begins 1.e4 c5 [The Sicilian Defence.] 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 g6 [The Accelerated variation of the Dragon Sicilian. A key to this line is that Black holds back his d-pawn from the normal ...d7-d6 to play for a ...d7-d5 in one move] 5.Nc3 [Another good idea is to play 5.c4 the Maroczy Bind, which prevents ...d7-d5. My friend was rated below me. It seemed I had good chances of a win tactically if the pieces were flying around.] 5...Bg7 6.Be3 Nf6 7.f3 [The critical continuation here is 7.Bc4 0-0 (7...Qa5 8.0-0+=) 8.Bb3 Qa5 9.f3 d5.] 7...Qa5!? [7...0-0! (Dzindzichashvili) 8.Qd2 d5=] 8.Qd2 0-0 9.Nb3!? [Kicking the queen away. The alternative is 9.Bc4.] 9...Qd8 10.0-0-0 a5 11.Nd4 [Junior 12 likes 11.Na4+=.] 11...d5 [Sacrificing a pawn which can be temporary or permanent. Black can transpose into a normal Sicilian Dragon formation with 11...d6 with a playable game.] 12.Nxc6 bxc6 13.exd5 cxd5 14.Nxd5 Be6? [Here Black falters. Correct is 14...Nxd5 15.Qxd5 Qxd5 16.Rxd5 Be6= when Black can probably take on a2 soon.] 15.Nxf6+ [Capablanca often exchanged off the heavy pieces after he won a pawn. Junior 12 notes 15.Nb6! is also very promising for White, but it is more human to exchange into a winning ending.] 15...Bxf6 16.Qxd8 Rfxd8 17.Rxd8+ Rxd8 18.a3 Rb8 19.c3 a4 20.Bd3 Bb3 21.Bc2 Bxc2 22.Kxc2 e5 23.Rd1 Black resigns 1-0

79 – Dyson 6.Be3 Nf6 7.Bc4 It had been 25 years (1982) since I regularly played 1.e4 over the board. My opponent here was Peter Dyson. He helped write the book “G.M.Ram: Essential Grand Master Chess Knowledge” by IM Rashid Ziyatdinov with NM Peter Dyson. He chose the Sicilian Defence. The Accelerated Dragon is very popular. It appeared to me that Dyson played the repertoire recommended in "Chess Openings for Black Explained." I figured Peter Dyson was very familiar with 8.Bb3. Therefore I chose something less well-known. With my move 8.Nxc6!? I was trying to leave the known book paths. It is actually one of the best choices, but there are many playable continuations. Sawyer (1966) - Dyson (2141), 14th Space Coast Open (1), 27.04.2007 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 g6 5.Nc3 Bg7 6.Be3 Nf6 7.Bc4 0-0 8.Nxc6!? [I was tempted to play 8.f3!? but I did not feel comfortable sacrificing a pawn. The Fritz move was 8.0-0! After the game, Dyson said it was a good move that nobody played. 8...Nxe4 9.Nxe4 d5 10.Nxc6 bxc6 11.Bd3 dxe4 12.Bxe4=] 8...bxc6 [8...dxc6 9.Qxd8 Rxd8=] 9.f3 Qa5 10.0-0 Rb8 11.Rb1 d5 12.exd5 Rd8 13.Qd2 cxd5 14.Bb3 Qc7 15.Qf2 e5 16.Bxa7 Rb7 17.Bc5 d4 18.Na4 [18.Ne4? Nxe4 19.fxe4 Qxc5 20.Bxf7+ Kh8-/+ and Black should easily defend.] 18...Bh6 19.Qh4 Nh5 20.Kh1 Be3 21.Rbd1 [21.c3!+/=] 21...Re8 22.c3 Ng7 23.cxd4 exd4 24.Rfe1 Nf5 25.Qf6 Rxb3?! 26.axb3 Re6 27.Rxe3?! [Here I missed the tactical shot 27.Bb6! Qxb6 28.Nxb6 Rxf6 29.Nxc8+=] 27...Nxe3 [Forced. 27...Rxf6?? allows a mate theme common in my tactical exercises. 28.Re8+ Kg7 29.Bf8+ Kg8 30.Bh6#] 28.Qxd4 Nxd1 29.Qxd1 Ba6 30.b4 [Black had five minutes left on the clock.] 30...Qc8 [Black forgot about his clock. He happened to look at it when he had only 08 seconds left. Flustered made this move with 04 seconds to spare.] 31.Nc3 Qe8 32.Bg1!? [32.Bf2! looks better, but Fritz seems to show that both are equally playable.] 32...Re1 33.Qd4 [Here I begin to lose my way and get outplayed by a former master. 33.Qd2! f5 34.Qd5+ Kg7 35.Qd4+ Kf7 36.h3 Bb7 37.Qh4=] 33...Bb7

34.h3 [34.b5 Rf1=+] 34...h5 [or 34...Rf1 35.Qd3 Ra1=+] 35.Kh2 Qb8+ 36.Kh1 Qc7 37.Qd2 Qe5 38.Qf2 Ra1 39.Qd2 g5 40.Ne4 Bxe4 41.fxe4 Rb1 42.Qd5 Qf4 43.Qd4 g4 44.h4 g3 45.Qd8+ Kh7 46.Qg5 Rxg1+ [with mate in two.] 0-1

80 – Daly 6.Be3 Nf6 7.Bc4 0-0 I first played USCF Life Master Troy Daly in a Sicilian Defence at the 2007 Florida State Championship. The Accelerated Dragon 8.0-0 was suggested to me by Peter Dyson. He said this was a little known line that was better than its reputation. I figured my 16-year old opponent knew the main line which goes 8.Bb3 a5. Troy told me that the main line favors White very slightly, but Troy added that he had been playing it "since I was born" and that he usually won as Black anyway. Troy is not the first chess Daly that I have known. I met Harlow B. Daly at the Downeast Open chess tournament in 1973 when I travelled to Portland, Maine. Harlow Daly (1883-1979) played Frank Marshall and Samuel Reshevsky. Also, Harlow B. Daly defeated World Champion Alexander Alekhine in a 1929 Boston simul. I do not know of any relationship to the New England Daly family, but the Florida Daly family carried on a fine chess tradition. Sawyer (1959) - Daly (2111), Florida State Championship (2), 01.09.2007 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 g6 5.Be3 Bg7 6.Nc3 Nf6 7.Bc4 0-0 8.0-0 Nxe4 9.Nxe4 d5 10.Nxc6 bxc6 11.Bd3 dxe4 12.Bxe4 Qc7 [A possible improvement was 12...Ba6! 13.Qxd8 Rfxd8 14.Rfd1 Bxb2=] 13.Rb1 Rb8 14.b3 e5 15.Qe2 Kh8 16.Rfd1 [16.Bc5! Rd8 17.Rfd1+=] 16...f5 17.Bd3 c5 18.f3 Bb7 19.a4 Rbd8 20.Bc4 e4 21.Rxd8 Rxd8 22.fxe4 Bxe4 23.Rd1 Rxd1+ 24.Qxd1 Be5 25.h3 Qe7 26.Qd2 Bf6 27.Qf2 Bxc2 28.Bxc5 Qe4 29.Bxa7 Bxb3 [After 29...Bxb3 the logical continuation is 30.Bxb3 Qb1+ 31.Kh2 with a draw, however 31.Qf1! Qxb3 32.a5+=] 1/21/2

81 – ATtheGreat 7.Bc4 Ng4 The Sicilian Defence Accelerated Dragon Variation that I played against my chess friend ATtheGreat is not my typical crushing victory. Instead this is an escape. This game began as a Queen's Knight Attack 1.Nc3 g6. After 2.e4 c5 3.Nf3 Bg7 4.d4 cxd4 5.Nxd4 we were in an Accelerated Dragon Sicilian. Pieces started flying. The queens came off the board. White was winning, but then I missed 11.Rxd1 with an advantage. White picked off three pawns in exchange for a piece. But Black stood better, so that idea didn't work well. How do I escape? We got into a bishop and pawn endgame. ATtheGreat had the bishop and pawns. I had only pawns but three more of them. I saw the drawn rook pawn ending. Black had a useless wrong color bishop that did not cover the queening square of his rook pawn. A draw was not my goal in the opening. When I reached an endgame with no pieces, a draw seemed wonderful. Sawyer (2377) - ATtheGreat (1550), ICC 2 12 u Internet Chess Club, 14.02.2004 begins 1.Nc3 g6 2.e4 c5 3.Nf3 Bg7 4.d4 cxd4 5.Nxd4 Nc6 6.Be3 Nf6 7.Bc4 Ng4 8.Nxc6 Nxe3 9.Bxf7+ Kf8 10.Nxd8 [10.Qf3 suggested by ATtheGreat. 10...Nxc2+ 11.Kd2 bxc6 12.Bb3+ Bf6 13.Kxc2 d6=/+] 10...Nxd1 11.Nxd1 [11.Rxd1!+-] 11...e6 12.0-0 [12.h4 Bf6 13.h5 g5 14.h6 Bxd8 15.Bh5+/-] 12...Ke7 13.Nxe6 dxe6 14.Bxe6 Bxe6 15.c3 Bc4 16.Re1 Rhf8 17.Ne3 Be6 18.Nd5+ Bxd5 19.exd5+ Kd7 20.Re2 Rae8 21.Rae1 Rxe2 22.Rxe2 Re8 23.Rxe8 Kxe8 24.Kf1 Kd7 25.Ke2 Kd6 26.Kd3 Kxd5 27.f4 b5 28.b3 a5 29.g4 Bf8 30.h3 Bd6 31.Ke3 Ba3 32.Kd3 Bc1 33.f5 gxf5 34.gxf5 Ke5 35.c4 bxc4+ 36.Kxc4 Bd2 [Better is 36...Kxf5! 37.b4 axb4 38.Kxb4 Kf4 39.a4 Kg3 40.Kc3 Kxh3 41.Kd3 Kg3! 42.Ke2 h5 43.a5 Ba3 44.a6 Bc5-+] 37.a3 Kxf5 38.Kd3 Be1 39.Ke2 Bg3 40.b4 axb4 41.axb4 Bd6 42.b5 Kg5 43.Kf3 Kh4 44.Kg2 h5 45.b6 Be5

46.b7 Bd6 47.Kh1 Kxh3 48.b8Q Bxb8 49.Kg1 Kg3 50.Kh1 Kf3 51.Kg1 Game drawn by mutual agreement 1/2-1/2

82 – Sevian 5.c4 Bg7 6.Be3 d6 White places a pawn on c4 (instead of a bishop) in the Sicilian Defence Maroczy Bind. The slower 5.c4 move cuts down Black’s counter play options. The Maroczy Bind leads to more strategy than tactics in the middlegame in most cases. This game is an exception. Black chased a poisoned pawn on b2. Of course, as Bobby Fischer pointed out, if one could grab such a pawn and get away safely, Black has a won game. White should not offer the b2 pawn unless the gambit promises a likely reward. If the Black queen gets trapped, the calculation is easy. The deeper challenge comes when the queen escapes. It seemed to me that Black was going to survive when I saw the game Samuel Sevian vs Vladislav Chizhikov after 16.Nc7 Ne8. But then came constant threats to the queen with 17.f4, 18.Nd5, and 19.f5. Black tried to defend until the crushing check 23.Rf8! Sevian (2603) - Chizhikov (2262), 46th Rilton Cup 2016-17 Stockholm SWE (8.23), 04.01.2017 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 g6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Bg7 5.c4 Nc6 6.Be3 d6 [6...Nf6 7.Nc3] 7.Nc3 Qb6 [7...Nf6 8.Be2 0-0 9.0-0 Bd7 10.Qd2 Nxd4 11.Bxd4 Bc6 12.f3+/=] 8.Ndb5 [8.Nb3 Bxc3+ 9.bxc3 Qc7 10.f3=] 8...Bxc3+ [8...Qa5 9.Be2 Nf6 10.0-0 a6 11.Nd4+/=] 9.Nxc3 Qxb2 10.Nb5 [10.Nd5 Nb4 11.Rc1 Nxd5 12.exd5 Nf6 13.Bd4 Qb4+ 14.Bc3=] 10...Kf8 11.Be2 Nf6 12.0-0 Kg7 13.Rb1 Qe5 [13...Qxa2 14.Nc7 Rb8 15.Nd5=] 14.f3 h5 15.Qd2 Rb8 16.Nc7 Ne8 17.f4 Qf6 [17...Qa5 18.Qxa5 Nxa5 19.Bxa7+/-] 18.Nd5 Qe6 19.f5 Qd7 20.Bxa7 e6 [20...Qd8 21.Qc3+ Nf6 22.Bb6+-] 21.Qc3+ Kg8 [21...f6 22.Bxb8+-] 22.fxg6 fxg6 [22...f5 23.Nb6+-] 23.Rf8+ [After 23.Rf8+ Kxf8 24.Qxh8+ Kf7 25.Rf1+ Nf6 26.Rxf6#] 1-0

83 – Greiner 5.c4 Nf6 6.Nc3 Nxd4 Ted talks with his opening in this Sicilian Defence Accelerated Dragon. I ventured 5.c4 against Theodore J. Greiner. This Maroczy Bind is rare for me. I prefer straight forward piece development like 5.Nc3. I always think that I might want the c4 square available for my bishop. Ted Greiner was a postal player with an ICCF rating as high as 2355. When we played, we were both on the rise. Greiner wrote many articles on chess. I enjoyed playing in CCLA for a year or two where we played this game. I got to meet several experts and masters. In 1982 Ted and I played another short draw in APCT with a Sicilian Defence. That time I had the Black pieces. This time I am White. In the notes below I provide an earlier 1978 game vs my friend Hardon McFarland. In 1980 I moved to Pennsylvania. We played in the same club. He was a generation older than me. Hardon McFarland and I rarely got paired against each other in live events, but we had several long talks about chess and life. I appreciated his life experience and wisdom. These games were played in the days before the Accelerated Dragon was popular. I rarely faced it as White, except in my blitz games against Greg Nolan. Sawyer (2000) - Greiner (2000), corr CCLA 1980 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 g6 5.c4 Nf6 6.Nc3 Nxd4 7.Qxd4 d6 8.Be2 Bg7 9.Bg5 [9.0-0 0-0 10.Qe3 Be6 11.Bd2 Nd7 12.f4 Qb6 13.Qxb6 Nxb6 14.b3 a5 15.a4 f5 16.Rae1 Nd7 17.exf5 Bxf5 18.Nd5 Bd4+ 19.Kh1 e5 20.fxe5 dxe5 21.Nc7 Rac8 22.Nd5 Ra8 1/2-1/2 McFarland-Sawyer, corr APCT 1978] 9...0-0 10.Qd2 Be6 11.Rc1 Qa5 12.f3 Rfc8 13.b3 a6 14.Na4 Qxd2+ 15.Kxd2 Nd7 16.g4 Kf8!? [16...Re8 17.Be3=] 17.h4 Bd4 18.h5 f6

19.Bh6+ Kf7 20.hxg6+ hxg6 21.Kd3 Ba7 22.Bd2?! [22.Be3=] 22...Rh8 [22...b5=/+] 23.Nc3 Ne5+ 24.Kc2 Nc6 25.Nd5 Rac8 26.Rcf1 [26.g5=] 26...Kg7 [26...g5!?] 27.Bd1 Rxh1 28.Rxh1 Rh8 1/2-1/2

84 – Taylor 6.Nc3 Bg7 7.Be2 The Sicilian Defence Accelerated Dragon has a variation that is a curious transposition. It arises from an English Opening or from what might be called a Benoni Declined. I knew that Allen Taylor played reliable openings. We met from time to time at the Williamsport chess club at Lycoming College. As Black my friend played either the Sicilian Defence or the King’s Indian Defence. This time he tried a Benoni Defence. The possibility of a transposition exists since the Sicilian begins 1.e4 c5 and the Benoni begins with 1…c5 or more commonly 2…c5. This game began 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 c5. The standard Benoni move is 3.d5. Then Black might choose the Modern Benoni with 3…e6 or the Benko Gambit with 3…b5. Apparently I was not in the mood for a Benoni. I played 3.Nf3. This transposes into an English Opening. The normal move order for this Symmetrical English is 1.c4 c5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.d4. Now it was Taylor’s turn to transpose. After 3…g6 4.Nc3 d6 5.e4 cxd4 6.Nxd4 we are in a Sicilian. This Maroczy Bind type line could arise with the moves 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 g6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 d6 5.c4 Nf6 6.Nc3. The actual Maroczy Bind follows 2…Nc6. Black attacked on the kingside. In the process White picked off pawn after pawn. When the attack stalled, the game was lost. Sawyer - Taylor, Williamsport, PA 1995 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 c5 3.Nf3 g6 4.Nc3 d6 5.e4 cxd4 6.Nxd4 Bg7 7.Be2 0-0 8.0-0 a6 [8...Nc6 9.Be3=] 9.Be3 Nc6 10.Qd2 Ng4 11.Bxg4 Bxg4 12.f3 [12.Nd5!?] 12...Bd7 [12...Be6!?] 13.Nd5 Nxd4 [13...Ne5!=] 14.Bxd4 Bxd4+ 15.Qxd4 e5 16.Qd2 Be6 17.Kh1 a5 18.b3 Kg7 [18...Bxd5 19.Qxd5+/=] 19.Rfd1 [19.Nc3+/-] 19...f5

[19...Bxd5 20.Qxd5+/=] 20.Nc3 f4 21.Qxd6 Qf6 22.Nd5 Bxd5 23.Qxf6+ [Or 23.Qxd5+-] 23...Rxf6 24.Rxd5 Re6 [24...Rb6 25.h4+/-] 25.Rd7+ Kf6 26.Rad1 Raa6 27.h3 [27.Rxb7+-] 27...Rab6 28.R1d5 h5 29.Rxa5 Kg5 30.Rb5 Rbd6 31.Rxe5+ Rxe5 32.Rxd6 Kh4 33.Rxg6 Re7 34.Kh2 1-0

2.Nf3 e6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nc6 The 2.Nf3 e6 lines are solid but not as popular as some others. This can transpose to other lines were Black later plays …e6.

85 – Sawyer 4…Nf6 5.Nc3 Bb4 Black treated this Sicilian Defence somewhat like a Nimzo-Indian Defence with the moves 2...e6, 4...Nf6, and 5...Bb4. Blunders on moves 7 and 8 allowed White to win a bishop. I finished off the game with a BlackmarDiemer type checkmate against arconia. Sawyer (2226) - arconia (1228), ICC 25 10 u Internet Chess Club, 28.11.1999 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 e6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 Bb4 6.e5 Nd5 7.Bd2 a6? 8.Nxd5 Bc5? [8...Bxd2+ 9.Qxd2 exd5 10.Nf5+/-] 9.Nb3 b6 10.Nxc5 exd5 11.Nb3 0-0 12.Bd3 Nc6 13.f4 a5 14.Be3 d6 15.0-0 dxe5 16.fxe5 Nxe5 17.Bxh7+ Kh8 18.Qh5 g6? [18...Bg4 19.Qxe5 Kxh7 20.Qg3+-] 19.Bxg6+ Kg7 20.Qh7# Black checkmated 1-0

86 – Duda 4…a6 5.Nc3 d6 Duda won with a unique strategy and an aggressive queenside attack. White adopted a standard plan of development against the Sicilian Defence with 6.Be3, 7.Qd2 and 8.0-0-0. Black played the Kan Variation with 2...e6 and 4...a6. Then the kingside knight joined in the battle with 6...Ne7, 7...Nec6, and 13...Nxd4. Even though White got in moves like 10.g4, 11.h4 and g5, the Black queenside attack arrived with amazing speed. GM Duda finished with a beautiful queen sacrifice 25...Qxb3+! in the game between Alexander Grischuk vs Jan-Krzysztof Duda. Grischuk (2766) - Duda (2737), chess.com Speed 1m+1spm 2018 chess.com INT (2.25), 18.09.2018 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 e6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 a6 5.Nc3 d6 6.Be3 Ne7 7.Qd2 Nec6 8.0-0-0 Be7 9.Kb1 0-0 10.g4 b5 11.h4 Bb7 12.g5 b4 13.Na4 [13.Nce2=] 13...Nxd4 [13...Qa5 14.b3=] 14.Qxd4 a5 15.f3 Nd7 16.b3 [16.Bb5=] 16...Bc6 17.Nb2 a4 18.h5

[18.Qxb4 d5=] 18...axb3 19.cxb3 [19.axb3 Qa5=/+] 19...Bxg5 [19...Qa5-/+] 20.Rg1 Bf6 21.Qxd6 [21.Qxb4 d5=/+] 21...Qa5 22.Na4 [22.Bd4 Ne5-+] 22...Bxa4 23.bxa4 Qxa4 24.Bc4 [24.Rg2 Rfd8-+] 24...Rfc8 25.Bb3 [25.Qxd7 Qa3-+] 25...Qxb3+! 0-1

87 – Jwnycc 4…a6 5.Bd3 Nc6 The Sicilian Defence Kan Variation with 2...e6 and 4...a6 leave a potential weakness if Black waits too long to move the d-pawn. Such was the case in my Internet Chess Club game vs Jwnycc. Black was in trouble by move 10 and down a pawn by move 11. But then the fun began. White had a steamroller with his c-pawn and b-pawn which chase around the Black knight. Consider the moves 21, c5, 23.b5, 25, c6, 27.b6, and 28.c7. White could only be prevented from getting a new queen by Black’s resignation. Sawyer (2226) - Jwnycc (1463), ICC 40 0 u Internet Chess Club, 01.11.1999 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 e6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 a6 5.Bd3 Nc6 6.Nxc6 bxc6 [6...dxc6 7.0-0 e5 8.Nd2+/=] 7.0-0 Nf6 [7...d5 8.Bf4+/=] 8.e5 Nd5 9.c4 Nb6 [9...Ne7 10.Nc3+/-] 10.Be3 d5 11.exd6 c5 12.Bxc5 [12.Be4+-] 12...Bxd6 13.Bxd6 Qxd6 14.Be4 Qxd1 15.Rxd1 Ra7 16.Bc6+ Bd7 17.Bxd7+ Nxd7 18.b3 0-0 19.Nc3 Nc5 20.b4 Nb7 [20...Nd7 21.c5+-] 21.c5 [21.Rd7+-] 21...Nd8 22.a4 [22.Rd6+-] 22...a5 [22...Rc7 23.Rac1+-] 23.b5 Nb7 [23...Rc7 24.c6+-] 24.Rd7 Rfa8 [24...Rb8 25.c6+-] 25.c6 Nc5 26.Rxa7 Rxa7 27.b6 Re7 [27...Ra8 28.b7+-] 28.c7 Re8 29.Ne4 Nb7 [29...Nxe4 30.b7+-] 30.Rd1 Rc8 31.Nd6 Nxd6 32.Rxd6 g6 33.Rd8+ Black resigns 1-0

88 – Moiseenko 5.Nc3 Qc7 6.Bd3 White sacrificed a knight on move 15 to capture three pawns by move 18 in a Sicilian Defence Kan Variation. White had a great attack and won in Vadim Moiseenko vs Hovik Hayrapetyan. Moiseenko (2554) - Hayrapetyan (2483), Andranik Margaryan Mem Yerevan ARM (6.1), 14.01.2018 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 e6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 a6 5.Nc3 Qc7 6.Bd3 Nc6 7.Nxc6 bxc6 [7...dxc6 8.0-0 Nf6=] 8.0-0 d5 [8...Nf6 9.Qe2 d5 10.Bg5 Bb7=] 9.Re1 Bb7 10.Qf3 Bd6 11.h4!? [11.Qg4+/=] 11...Nf6 12.h5 h6 13.b3 Bb4 [13...Be5!?] 14.Bd2 Qa5 [14...dxe4 15.Nxe4 Bxd2 16.Nxd2 0-0=] 15.exd5 Bxc3? [15...Nxd5=]

16.Bxc3 Qxc3 17.dxe6 0-0-0 [17...fxe6? 18.Bg6+ Kd7 19.Qxc3+-] 18.exf7 Qc5 [18...Qa5 19.Rad1+/-] 19.Bg6 [19.Rad1+-] 19...Qd5 [19...Qg5 20.Qh3+ Kb8 21.Rad1+/-] 20.Qf4 Rhf8 [20...Qd6 21.Qxd6 Rxd6 22.Re8+ Rxe8 23.fxe8Q+ Nxe8 24.Bxe8+- and White is up two pawns.] 21.Rad1 Qxd1 22.Bf5+ Qd7 23.Re7 c5 24.Qd6 1-0

89 – Aronian 5.Nc3 Qc7 6.g3 Levon Aronian defeats Fabiano Caruana in a Sicilian Defence at blitz speed. White played the fianchetto system against the Kan Variation. Black doubled his opponent’s pawns on c3, but that gave White the opportunity to play 10.Ba3 and 16.Rb1 with good effect. Black sacrificed the Exchange. White got the better of the tactics that followed and in the end won at least one rook. Aronian (2764) - Caruana (2816), GCT Blitz YourNextMove Leuven BEL (9.2), 15.06.2018 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nc3 e6 3.Nf3 a6 4.d4 cxd4 5.Nxd4 Qc7 6.g3 Nf6 7.Bg2 Bb4 [7...Nc6 8.0-0 Be7 9.Re1 0-0 10.Nxc6 dxc6 11.e5=] 8.0-0 Bxc3 [8...0-0=] 9.bxc3 d6 [9...0-0 10.Ba3 Re8 11.Re1+/=] 10.Ba3 0-0 11.e5 dxe5 12.Bxf8 Kxf8 13.Nb3 [13.Nf3 Nbd7 14.Qe2 Qxc3 15.Rfe1+/=] 13...Bd7 14.Na5 Ra7 15.Nxb7 Ke7 16.Rb1 Bb5 17.Re1 [17.Qc1+-] 17...Nbd7 [17...e4 18.c4+-] 18.Qc1 Nd5 [18...Rxb7 19.Bxb7 Qxc3 20.Rb3+-] 19.Qa3+ Kf6 20.Bxd5! exd5 21.Rxb5! [Now if 21...axb5 22.Qxa7+-; or 21...Rxb7 22.Qxa6+ wins the rook.] 1-0

90 – Murray 4…Nc6 5.Nc3 a6 The Sicilian Defence Taimanov allows Black to consider an early pawn advance ...d5. I played the fianchetto line 6.g3 to attack the d5 square from a distance in my game against Pat Murray. Black chose to push 6...d5 without the help of 8...Nf6. This left Black with an isolated weak pawn. I built up pressure to the point where I won and kept the extra pawn by move 15. Black’s move 19...Rd8 fell prey to a combination where I won a knight. Sawyer (2010) - Murray (1585), Williamsport, PA 1994 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 a6 5.Nc3 e6 6.g3 d5 [6...d6 7.Bg2 Bd7 8.0-0 Be7=] 7.exd5 [7.Bg2 Nf6 8.0-0+/=] 7...exd5 8.Bg2 Nf6 9.0-0 Be7 10.Nde2 Be6 [10...d4 11.Bxc6+ bxc6 12.Nxd4+/=] 11.Nf4 0-0 12.Ncxd5 Nxd5 13.Nxd5 Bc5 14.Be3 Bxe3 15.Nxe3 [White has won a pawn.] 15...Qa5 16.Qe1 [16.c3+/-] 16...Qb5 17.b3 Rad8 18.Rd1 Rxd1 19.Qxd1 Rd8?

[19...Qc5 20.c4+/-] 20.Bxc6! Rxd1 21.Bxb5 and White has won a knight. 1-0

91 – Hector 6.Nxc6 bxc6 7.Bd3 The Sicilian Defence gives players opportunities to develop almost endless creative tactical possibilities. Black chose the Taimanov Variation 4...Nc6 with a pawn on e6. This defense covered d5 until Black played 11...e5. White posted bishops on c4 and a3. One slight slip and Grandmaster Jonny Hector struck immediately in this game against Matts Unander. Hector (2502) - Unander (2057), Kvibergspelen 2018 Gothenburg SWE, 20.04.2018 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 e6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nc6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Nxc6 bxc6 7.Bd3 d5 8.Qe2 Nf6 9.0-0 Be7 10.b3 d4 [10...0-0=] 11.Na4 e5 12.c3 0-0? [12...c5=] 13.cxd4 Qxd4 [13...exd4 14.e5+/-] 14.Bb2 Qd6 15.f4 Nd7 16.Bc4 Bf6 17.Rad1 Qc7 18.Ba3 18...Re8? [Black tries to avoid losing the Exchange. If 18...exf4 19.Bxf8+/=] 19.Bxf7+! [White wins a rook after 19...Kh8 20.Bxe8 or if 19...Kxf7 20.Qh5+ mates in five.] 1-0

92 – Huschenbeth 7.Bd3 d5 This Sicilian Defence Taimanov Variation features an early 7...d5 with equal chances. White targeted the center with 12.e5! Then Black’s king got stuck in the center which made it difficult to defend the kingside. White provoked strategic weaknesses and won with sharp tactics in Niclas Huschenbeth vs Klaus Bischoff. Huschenbeth (2596) - Bischoff (2510), Bundesliga 2017-18 Berlin GER (15.4), 01.05.2018 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 e6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nc6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Nxc6 bxc6 7.Bd3 d5 8.0-0 Qc7 [8...Nf6 9.Qf3 Be7=] 9.Re1 [9.f4 Be7 10.b3 Nf6=] 9...Bb7 10.Qf3 [10.exd5 cxd5 11.Qh5+/=] 10...Nf6 [10...Bd6 11.Qg4 h5 12.Qxg7 Bxh2+ 13.Kf1 Be5 14.Qg5+/=] 11.Bg5 [11.Bf4+/=] 11...Be7 12.e5! Nd7 13.Bxe7 Kxe7 14.Qg3 c5 15.b3 h6 16.Na4 Bc6 17.c4 dxc4 [17...d4 18.Nb2=] 18.Bxc4 Bxa4 19.bxa4 g5 20.Rad1 Nb6? [20...Rhb8 21.a3+/=] 21.Qf3 [After 21.Qf3 Rhg8 22.Bxe6 fxe6 23.Qf6+ Ke8 24.Qxe6+ Kf8 25.Re3+-] 1-0

93 – Sevian 5.Nc3 Qc7 6.Be3 White can choose the Classical Variation vs a Sicilian Defence in any line with the moves Be2, Be3, 0-0 and f4 in almost any order. White is ready for anything Black will try. Black began this game as a Taimanov Variation. After several moves the position resembled a standard defence. Chances were equal. The position was even. The players were just playing chess. Then Black overlooked a queen shot on move 22 in the game between Samuel Sevian and Temur Kuybokarov. Sevian (2614) - Kuybokarov (2472), PRO League Group Stage chess.com INT (8), 28.02.2018 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 e6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nc6 5.Nc3 Qc7 6.Be3 a6 7.Be2 Nf6 8.0-0 Be7 9.f4 d6 10.Qe1 0-0 11.Kh1 Nxd4 12.Bxd4 b5 13.a3 Nd7 14.Qg3 Bf6 15.Bxf6 [15.Rad1 Bb7 16.Bxf6 Nxf6=] 15...Nxf6 16.Bd3 [16.Rad1 Bb7=] 16...Bb7 17.Rae1 Nd7 18.Re3 e5 [18...Rae8 19.Qh4 Nc5=] 19.Nd5 Bxd5 20.exd5 h6 [20...Rae8=] 21.Qh3 Rae8 22.Rg3 exf4? [22...Kh8 23.Qf5 g6 24.Qh3 Kh7 25.f5 e4 26.Be2 Re5=] 23.Qxh6! 1-0

94 – Svetushkin 6…7.Qd2 White employed the English Attack against the Sicilian Defence Taimanov Variation 4...Nc6 with 6.Be3, 7.Qd2, 8.0-0-0 and 9.f3. Black pinned the Nc3. Once White dealt with that issue, he was free to attack kingside in the game between Dmitry Svetushkin and Igor Miladinovic. Soon Black was defenseless. Svetushkin (2580) - Miladinovic (2545), TCh-SRB Premier 2018 Valjevo SRB (5.3), 04.09.2018 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Qc7 5.Nc3 e6 6.Be3 a6 7.Qd2 Nf6 8.0-0-0 Bb4 [8...Be7 9.f3 b5=] 9.f3 Ne7 [9...Ne5 10.Nb3 b5 11.Qe1+/=] 10.Nde2 d5 11.Bg5 dxe4 12.Bxf6 gxf6 13.Qd4 exf3 14.Qxb4 fxe2 15.Bxe2 Nc6 [15...f5=] 16.Qh4 f5 17.Qf6 0-0

18.Rd3 [18.g4!+/-] 18...Ne7 19.Rhd1 b5 [19...Ng6 20.Rd8 b5=] 20.Bh5 Ng6 [20...Bb7 21.Rd7+-] 21.Bxg6! [After 21.Bxg6 fxg6 22.Rd8+-] 1-0

Book 2: Chapter 3 – 2.Nf3 d6 Without 3.d4 This Open Sicilian 3.d4 cxd4 is the most popular 2.Nf3 d6 line.

95 – Zintgraff 3.c4 Nf6 4.Nc3 Gary Zintgraff sent this Sicilian Defence he play from a simul against Walter Browne. The line resembles a Maroczy Bind. "Dear Tim: In 1975 GM Walter Browne toured 50 cities in the USA playing simultaneous exhibitions. I was playing in the Eli Lilly Chess Club against Mr. William Radspinner who was such a fine old gentleman that we made him a member even though he wasn't an Eli Lilly employee. He won our club championship quite frequently. He let our club know about the simul tour and we got on GM Walter Browne's tour schedule. He had very few losses by the time he made it to Indianapolis in November 1975. He had already won 6 of his 11 National Open Championships, and eventually won the American Open 7 times, the World Open 3 times and the U.S. Open Chess Championship twice (1971 and 1972). He alternated White and Black in the games against 31 of us after giving a short lecture on chess and the famous players he had faced. I was lucky enough to get the white pieces. There were 31 players with him scoring 29 wins, 1 draw, and 1 loss." Zintgraff - Browne, Eli Lilly Chess Club simul, 06.11.1975 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.c4 Nf6 4.Nc3 Nc6 5.d4 Bg4 6.d5 Nd4 7.Be2 Bxf3 8.Bxf3 g6 9.Be3 Nxf3+ 10.Qxf3 Bg7 11.Rc1 0-0 12.0-0 Nd7 13.Qe2 a6 14.b3 Qa5 15.Na4 Rfb8 16.Bd2 Qd8 17.Bc3 b5 18.Nb2 Bxc3 19.Rxc3 Qa5 20.Nd1 bxc4 21.Rxc4 Nb6 22.Rc3 Qb5 23.Qd2 a5 24.Rh3 Nd7 25.Qh6 Nf8?! 26.Ne3 Qd3? [I believe he intended to play 26...Qe2 27.f4 Qb2 28.f5 Qg7 29.fxg6 fxg6 30.Qxg7+ Kxg7 31.Rhf3 Kg8+/-. Now White has a winning shot:] 27.Nf5! Qxf1+ 28.Kxf1 gxf5 29.exf5 f6 30.Rg3+ Kf7 31.Qh5+ [After 31.Qh5+ Ng6 32.fxg6+ Ke8 33.gxh7+ Kd7 34.Qe2 will mate.] 1-0

96 – Marcello 6.g4 a6 7.g5 Michael Marcello was a generous man who spend most of his time on more important pursuits than chess. He showed up at our club one Halloween night. As my friend only occasionally played chess, the Sicilian Defence tactics quickly turned in my favor for an easy Black victory. Marcello - Sawyer (2010), Williamsport, PA 31.10.2000 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d3 Nc6 4.b3 Bg4 5.h3 Bxf3 6.gxf3 e6 7.Bf4? [7.Bb2=] 7...Qf6! 8.c4 Qxa1 9.a4 Nd4 10.b4 cxb4 11.Qb3? [A blunder in a lost position.] 11...Nxb3 12.e5 Qxb1+ 13.Ke2 Qc2+ 14.Bd2 Qxd2# 0-1

97 – Haines 3.c3 e6 4.d4 d5 Mr. H., Ray Haines, won with his runaway h-pawn in a Sicilian Defence. White's third move 3.c3 may be a surprise weapon. Black had an excellent follow-up 3...Nf6! Mr. Haines preferred the French Defence a move behind with 3...e6 4.d4 d5 5.e5. The closed nature of the position could give equal chances, but gradually White's position became somewhat better. When Black blundered on move 21, White's chances improved. However White threw the game away on move 36. Black's runaway h-pawn decided the game. matejamijuskovic - Haines, chess24, 22.04.2017 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.c3 e6 [3...Nf6!] 4.d4 d5 [4...cxd4 5.cxd4 Nf6 6.Bd3 Be7 7.Nc3 Nc6 8.0-0 0-0 9.a3+/=] 5.e5 [5.exd5 Qxd5 6.Bd3+/=] 5...Qb6 [5...Nc6=] 6.Bd3 Ne7 7.b3 [7.0-0+/=] 7...Nd7 8.Be3 Nc6 9.Bc2 Be7 [9...cxd4 10.cxd4 Bb4+ 11.Nbd2 Qa6=] 10.0-0 f5 11.g3 0-0 12.Qd3 cxd4 13.cxd4 Nb4 14.Qd2 Nxc2 15.Qxc2 Nb8 16.Nc3 Nc6 17.Rac1 Bd7 18.Na4 Qa5 19.Bd2 Qd8 20.Nc5 Bxc5 21.Qxc5 Qe7? [21...h6=] 22.Qxe7 Nxe7 23.Bb4 [23.Rc7!+-] 23...Rfe8 24.Rc7 Bb5? [24...Nc6 25.Rxd7+/-] 25.Rfc1 [25.Bxe7 Bxf1 26.Kxf1+-] 25...Nc6 26.Bd6 Be2 27.Nd2 Nxd4 28.Bc5 Nf3+ 29.Nxf3 Bxf3 30.Rxb7 a6 31.Rc3 Rec8 32.Re7 Be4 33.Rxe6 d4 34.Bxd4 Rxc3 35.Bxc3 Rc8 36.Rxa6? [36.Bd2+/-] 36...Rxc3 37.f4 Rc2 38.b4 Rg2+ 39.Kf1 Rxh2 40.Ke1 Rb2 41.a3 Rb3 42.Kf2 Rf3+ 43.Ke2 Rxg3 44.Kd2 Rb3 45.e6 Kf8

46.Kc1 h5 47.Kd2 h4 48.Ke2 h3 [48...Bd3+! 49.Ke3 Bxa6+ 50.Kd4 h3-+] 49.Kf2 h2 0-1

98 – Yanofsky 3.c3 Nf6 4.Na3 Kevin Begley wrote to me about a trap in the Sicilian Defence 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.c3 line. Begley wrote (which I edit): "I invented a coffeehouse trap. I caught several IMs with it in blitz -- most of them were checkmated on move 11 or 12. LOL. I showed some friends. We band of small fish went whale hunting like Captain Ahab with that harpoon. :)" Thanks, Kevin. I've played 3.c3 a few times, but never your Begley's PreMove/Touch-Move Coffeehouse Defense beginning with 5.Bb5!? and his 9. d4! (the pre-move!). My closest was to follow the game Phil Haley vs Daniel Abe Yanofsky where I've dabbled with the line 6.Nxd4! Haley - Yanofsky, Canada ch 1945 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.c3 Nf6! 4.Na3 [4.Be2!? e5 (4...Nxe4? 5.Qa4+ Nc6 6.Qxe4+-) 5.0-0 Be7 6.d4 exd4 7.cxd4 Nxe4 8.dxc5 Nxc5 9.Nc3 Nc6 10.Nd5 Bf6 11.Nxf6+ Qxf6 12.Be3 0-0 13.Nd4=] 4...Nc6 [4...Nxe4? 5.Qa4+ Bd7 6.Qxe4+- Bindrich - Mueller, Oberhof 1999] 5.d4 [Begley's Pre-Move/Touch-Move Coffeehouse Defense 5.Bb5!? Nxe4 6.Qa4 Nf6 7.0-0 Bd7 8.Re1 a6 9.d4! (pre-move!) 9...axb5? (9...e6!-/+) 10.Nxb5! Rxa4 11.Nxd6#] 5...cxd4 6.cxd4 [6.Nxd4! Nxe4 7.Nxc6 bxc6 8.Qa4=] 6...d5 [6...Nxe4!? 7.d5 Qa5+ 8.Nd2 Qxd5 9.Nb5 Kd8 10.Bc4 Qc5-/+] 7.e5 Ne4 8.Nc2 Qa5+ 9.Nd2 Bf5 10.Be2 Qb6 11.Nf3 Qa5+ 12.Nd2 Rc8 13.0-0 Nxd2 14.Bxd2 Qb6 15.Bc3 e6 16.a4? [16.Ne3!+/=] 16...Be7 [16...Bxc2! 17.Qxc2 Nxd4-/+] 17.Ne3 Be4 18.f3 Bg6 19.f4 Be4 20.a5 Qc7 21.Bf3 Bxf3 22.Rxf3 f5 23.g3 Bb4 24.Bxb4 Nxb4 25.Qa4+ Nc6 26.Rc1 a6 27.b4? [27.Ng2=] 27...0-0 28.Nf1 Qb8 29.Rd3 Nxd4 30.Rxc8 Rxc8 31.Qd7 Rd8 32.Qe7 Re8 33.Qc5 Nb5 34.Rd1 Qa7 35.Rc1 Qxc5+ 36.Rxc5 Kf7 37.Kf2 Ke7 38.Ne3 Kd7 39.Rc2 Rc8 40.Rd2 [40.Rxc8 Kxc8-/+] 40...Rc3 41.Nc2 Rc4 42.Ke3 Na7 43.Ke2 Nc6 44.b5 axb5 45.Na3 Rc5 46.Rb2 b4 47.Nc2 Rxc2+ 48.Rxc2 Nd4+ 49.Kd3 Nxc2 50.Kxc2 Kc6 0-1

99 – Stretch 3.b4 cxb4 4.d4 Do you have a favorite gambit in the Sicilian Defence from either side of the board? Bill Stretch played a Delayed Wing Gambit after the initial moves of 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.b4!? White obtained good play for the gambit pawn. As Black I moved my queen to the kingside and was fortunate to escape. William Stretch and I became experts with ratings over 2000. In this 1982 tournament at Levittown, Pennsylvania we were out of the running for first. I rarely played gambits, but here I found myself defending to survive. Then White stood better after my mistake on move 7. White pushed a passed pawn to d6. I blockaded it with a knight. Once I demonstrated Black had a good defense while up material, White resigned. Stretch - Sawyer, Levittown, PA (5), 16.05.1982 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.b4 cxb4 4.d4 d5 [4...Nf6=] 5.exd5 Qxd5 6.c4 bxc3 7.Nxc3 Qh5? [7...Qa5 8.Bd2 Nf6 9.Bb5+ Bd7 10.Qe2 e6 11.Nd5 Qd8 12.Nxf6+ gxf6=] 8.Rb1 [8.Qa4+!+-] 8...a6 9.Bc4 [9.Qa4+!+-] 9...e6 10.0-0 Nf6 11.d5 b5 12.Bb3 [12.dxe6 fxe6 13.Bxe6 Bxe6 14.Re1+-] 12...Be7 [12...e5 13.Re1+/-] 13.d6 [13.Re1+-] 13...Bd8 14.Ba3 Nbd7 15.Ne2 Bb7 16.Nf4 [16.Ng3 Qg4=/+] 16...Qg4 17.Nxe6 [17.Bc1 Rc8-/+] 17...fxe6 18.Bxe6 Bxf3 [18...Qxe6! 19.Re1 Ne4-+] 19.Qxf3 [19.Bxg4 Bxd1-+] 19...Qxf3 20.gxf3 Bb6 21.Rbc1 Kd8 22.Rc6 Rc8 23.Rfc1 Rxc6 24.Rxc6 Re8 25.Bf5 Re2 26.Bb4 g6 [Or 26...Nd5-+] 27.Bh3 Ke8 28.Bc3 Rc2 29.Be6 b4 30.Rc8+ Bd8 0-1

100 – Haines 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bc4 In the Sicilian Defence 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 you choose which recapture you prefer. 4.Qxd4 was popular in the 1980s. 4.Nxd4 looks better, since Black can attack 4.Qxd4 by Nc6. When White delayed 3.d4, the added time to develop improved Black's chances. After 5.d4 cxd4 White chose the unusual move 6.Qxd4. This supported the tactical thrust 7.e5, but the resulting position only led to equality. White did develop a good position. When White missed his chance on move 16, Black took over. Black won the Exchange and attacked. The players had bishops of opposite color. Haines demonstrated his attack on the dark squares could not be stopped by White's light squared bishop. Hro61 - Haines, chess24, 17.02.2016 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bc4 e6 5.d4 cxd4 6.Qxd4!? [6.Nxd4=] 6...Be7 [6...a6=] 7.e5 Nc6 [7...dxe5 8.Qxd8+ Bxd8 9.Nxe5 Nbd7=] 8.Bb5 dxe5 9.Qxd8+ Bxd8 10.Nxe5 Bd7 11.Nxd7 Nxd7 12.Be3 0-0 [12...Bb6=] 13.0-0-0 Nde5 14.f4 Ng4 15.Bc5 Be7 16.Bxc6? [16.Bxe7! Nxe7 17.Rd7+/=] 16...Bxc5 17.Bxb7 Rab8 18.Bf3 Nf2 19.Ne4 [19.Rhe1 Nxd1 20.Nxd1 Rfd8-/+] 19...Be3+ 20.Kb1 Nxh1 21.Rxh1 Bxf4 22.g3 Be5 23.c3 Rfc8 [23...f5 24.Nc5 Bxc3+] 24.Rd1 f5 25.Ng5 Bxc3 26.b3 e5 27.Bd5+ Kf8 28.Nxh7+ Ke8 [28...Ke7 29.Ng5 e4-+] 29.Be6 Rd8 30.Rxd8+ Rxd8 31.Bxf5 Rd2 32.Bc2 Rxh2 33.a4 Rh1+ 34.Ka2 Ra1# 0-1

101 – Mamedov 3.Bb5+ Bd7 White won this Sicilian Defence game with one of my favorite tactics. The key vulnerable Black queen unprotected on d7. White has a queen on g4 and hiding behind a knight on f5. The knight moves for check and the queen falls in Rauf Mamedov vs Asyl Abdyjapar. Mamedov (2709) - Abdyjapar (2382), World Rapid 2017 Riyadh KSA (1.37), 26.12.2017 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.Bb5+ Bd7 4.Bxd7+ Qxd7

5.0-0 Nc6 6.Qe2 [6.c3 Nf6=] 6...Nf6 7.Rd1 g6 8.c3 Bg7 9.d4 cxd4 10.cxd4 0-0 11.Nc3 Rac8 [11...d5=] 12.h3 h6?! 13.Bf4 g5 14.Bh2 g4 15.Nh4 gxh3 16.Nf5 d5 [16...hxg2 17.Kxg2+/=] 17.Nxd5 Nxe4 [17...Qe6 18.Nc3+-] 18.Qg4 Ng5 19.Nxh6+ Bxh6 20.Qxd7 1-0

102 – chesspurr 3.Bb5+ Bd7 The Moscow Variation 3.Bb5+ of the Sicilian Defence was once recommended for White by GM Larry Kaufman in his excellent 2004 book "The Chess Advantage in Black and White" with the subtitle "Openings Moves of the Grandmasters". The bishop check avoided the popular Open Sicilian 3.d4 lines with all their exciting and complicated opening theory. Of course White could just push the d-pawn to d4 later if he chose. The cat loving handle "chesspurr" put my opponent in good company. The former world champion Alexander Alekhine used to bring his cat named "chess" to the board in the 1930s. In a famous picture the cat looks like a Siamese to me. This reminds me of a woman who rented a room to me in her trailer. I was working in her area for the summer. It was just me, that woman and her Siamese cat. I found out that the cat was "literally" toilet trained or should I say "litter free" toilet trained. chesspurrr - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 20.09.2014 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.Bb5+ Bd7 4.Bxd7+ Qxd7 5.0-0 Nc6 6.d4 [The most common line is 6.c3 Nf6 7.Re1 e6 8.d4 cxd4 9.cxd4 d5 10.e5 Ne4 11.Nbd2 Nxd2 12.Bxd2 Be7 13.Rc1=] 6...cxd4 7.Nxd4 Nf6 8.Nxc6 bxc6 9.Qe2 g6 10.e5 dxe5 11.Qxe5 Bg7 12.Nc3 0-0 13.h3 Nd5 14.Qg3 Nxc3 15.bxc3 Qd6 16.Bf4 Qc5 17.Rfe1 [17.Rad1=] 17...Qxc3 [17...Bxc3-+] 18.Be5 Bxe5 19.Qxe5 Qxe5 20.Rxe5 e6 21.Rc5 Rfc8 22.Rb1 Rc7 23.Rb4 Rd8 24.Rbc4 Rd1+ 25.Kh2 Rd6 26.f4 Kf8 27.Kg3 Ke7 28.Kf3 Kd7 29.Ke4 Rd5 30.c3? [30.Rc3 Kd6=/+] 30...Rxc5 [30...Kd6-+] 31.Rxc5 Kd6 32.Rc4 c5 33.Ra4 f6 34.g4 f5+ 35.Ke3 Kc6 36.Ra6+ Kd5 37.c4+ Kxc4 38.Rxe6 a5 39.gxf5 gxf5 40.Re5 Kb4 41.Rxf5 Ka3 42.Rf8 Kxa2 43.Kd3 c4+ 44.Kc3 a4 45.f5 a3 46.f6 Kb1 [46...Rc6=] 47.Rb8+ [47.Re8+-] 47...Kc1 48.Rg8 [48.Ra8=] 48...Kd1 49.Rg7 Rc6 50.Rg1+ Ke2 51.Rg2+ Kf1 52.Ra2 Rxf6 53.Kxc4 Rf3 54.h4 h6 55.Kd5 h5 56.Ke4 Rh3 57.Kf4 Rxh4+ 58.Kg5 [58.Kg3 Ra4=/+] 58...Rh3 59.Kf5 Ke1 60.Kf4 Kd1 61.Rg2 Kc1 62.Ra2

Kb1 63.Rg2 a2 64.Rg1+ Kb2 65.Rg2+ Ka3 66.Rg1 Rb3 67.Kg5 Rb1 68.Rg3+ Ka4 69.Kxh5 a1Q 70.Rg4+ Rb4 71.Rg5 Qh1+ White forfeits on time 0-1

103 – Sandford 3.Bb5+ Bd7 The flexibility of the Sicilian Defence can be a curse. Players have wide latitude in how to arrange the pieces. One slight inaccuracy can decide the entire direction of the game. Tom Sandford played White in this Sicilian Defence. Ray Haines wrote (edited for space): "This first round game between Tom Sandford and me was played in Houlton, Maine on 6-3-17. The time control was game/65. This is a bit fast for me. I made the mistake of putting my queen on the wrong square. I had more time to work with but I had a lost game..." [After] "I stopped writing down the moves I was able to win the white pawns on the queenside, but he won all of my pawns on the king side. The pieces all got traded off, which left him with three passed pawns. He had less time than I did with only about 48 seconds remaining to play. I had one or two minutes. I resigned." Sandford - Haines, Houlton, ME (1), 03.06.2017 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.Bb5+ Bd7 4.Bxd7+ Qxd7 [4...Nxd7] 5.0-0 [5.c4] 5...Nc6 6.d4 [6.c3!?] 6...cxd4 7.Nxd4 Nf6 8.Re1 [8.Nc3=] 8...e6 [8...g6!?] 9.Bg5 Be7 10.c4 a6 11.Nc3 0-0 12.Qd2 [12.Nxc6 Qxc6 13.Rc1=] 12...Rfd8 13.Rad1 Nxd4 14.Qxd4 b5?! [14...Qc6=] 15.cxb5 axb5 16.e5 Ne8 17.Bxe7 Qxe7 18.Qb4 Qb7 19.exd6 Qc6? [19...Qb8 20.Ne4+/-] 20.Re3 [20.Nxb5!+-] 20...Nf6 [20...Rxd6 21.Rxd6+/=] 21.Red3 [21.Re5+-] 21...Ra7 22.a3 Rad7 [22...Rb7 23.h3+/-] 23.Qxb5 Qxb5 24.Nxb5 Rb8 25.a4 Nd5 26.b3 Nb4 27.Rc3 Nd5 28.Rc4 Kf8 29.Rdc1 Rbd8 30.g3 [Or 30.a5+-] 30...f6 31.Rc8 Ke8 32.Kg2 Nb6 33.R8c6 Nd5 34.R6c5 Nb4 35.R5c4 Nd5 36.Rh4!? h6 37.Rg4 g5 38.h4 1-0

3.d4 cxd4 This Open Sicilian 3.d4 cxd4 is the most popular 2.Nf3 d6 line.

104 – Hunter 5.Bc4 e6 6.0-0 Ray Haines sacrifices a bishop on e6. Caleb Hunter chose a Sicilian Defence with 1.e4 c5. Hunter had good opening strategy. He developed both knights, a bishop and a queen, but Black was a little too slow to castle. Black missed tactics which we all do when facing a stronger player. Haines chose his favorite 5.Bc4 line in the Sicilian Defence. After 7.Nc3 they transposed to normal lines. Ray Haines wrote in part: "I played against twin brothers. Lance Beloungie and I have been working with them. Lance has done more than I have, and they are both getting better. They still have to learn to do more book work, but they are the strongest players in high school in the Aroostook area at this time. I played an opening line which I played a lot in high school and won many games with it." Haines - C. Hunter, Presque Isle, ME 05.01.2016 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 a6 5.Bc4 e6 6.0-0 Nf6 7.Nc3 Qc7 8.Bb3 Nbd7 [8...Be7 9.Be3=] 9.Kh1 Be7?! [9...Nc5! 10.f3=] 10.Bxe6! fxe6 11.Nxe6 Qc4 12.Nxg7+ Kd8 [12...Kf7 13.Nf5+/-] 13.Nf5 [13.Nd5!+-] 13...Nxe4? [13...Bf8 14.f3+/-] 14.Nxe7 Kxe7 15.Nxe4 Kd8 16.Nxd6 Rf8 17.Nxc4 b5 18.Bg5+ Kc7 19.Qd6+ Kb7 20.Na5+ Ka7 21.Be3+ Nb6 22.Bxb6# 1-0

105 - Haines 5.Bc4 Nxe4 6.0-0 Ray Haines won against the Sicilian Defence with his own Haines Gambit 5.Bc4!? If Black accepted the gambit with 5...Nxe4, White would gain time for a quick attack with his extra two tempi for the pawn. In the game below after move 7, White had developed Bc4, castled and played a rook to the half-open e-file. Black had only one piece developed with Nf6 (played twice). I won a few games with this gambit myself. My personal favorite was a postal chess game in APCT played back in 1978 vs Ron Chaney (see next game). Ray Haines played at Chess24 online and wins a quick game even though time control was a standard Game 30. His opponent with the Black pieces was Mohamed Moufeed from Egypt. Haines offered his analysis by Rybka to show how Black could have equalized. Black did not choose that line. So, the game is over in 14 moves. Haines - MOHAMED MOUFEED, Chess24 - Game 30, 28.01.2016 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Bc4 Nxe4 6.0-0 e6 7.Re1 Nf6 8.Qf3 Qa5 9.Bd2 Qc5 10.Bxe6 Bxe6 11.Nxe6 fxe6 12.Qxb7 Qc6?? [Rybka 4 w32: 12...Qd5 13.Rxe6+ Qxe6 14.Qxa8 0.05/16 Qc8 15.Nc3=] 13.Rxe6+ Kd8 14.Ba5+ 1-0

106 – Chaney 5.Bc4 a6 6.0-0 During 1978-79 my American Postal Chess Tournaments rating jumped from about 1800 to about 2000. Each event followed the old postal chess rules. We could use books but we could not ask for analytical help from other players. Computers in 1978 were about 1500 strength, so they weren’t much help at all. The APCT Queen event was a one round 13-player section that had a higher entry fee and higher prize money. I think I tied for first place in this event, scoring something like 9-3. It gave me confidence by showing me that I made progress in my skill. All the games would be played at the same time, at a pace of about one move each per week, so the shorter games would have more likely finished first. Time control was three days per move, but almost everyone replied in one day. It often took two more days for the postcard to arrive at the new location. I faced Ron Chaney 17 times over a 20 year period. We were about the same age, about the same strength, played in the same events and sometimes played the same openings. In our first six games, I had a slight edge. The next six we broke even, but in the final five games, Chaney won four of them. This short game features a rare gambit that my longtime chess friend Ray Haines showed to me. I don't know where Ray got it from. Things went from bad to worse until Black has had enough. Sawyer - Chaney, corr APCT Q-36, 1978 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Bc4 [Standard is 5.Nc3] 5...a6?! [5...Nxe4 6.Bxf7+ Kxf7 7.Qh5+ g6 8.Qd5+ e6 9.Qxe4. Chaney was ready for a transposition to the Najdorf Sicilian after 6.Nc3.] 6.0-0 Nxe4 [Black accepts the hanging e-pawn.] 7.Qh5 e6? [Black can hit back at center and equalize no matter which way White takes on d5 after 7...d5=] 8.Bxe6 [Regaining the gambit pawn. Also looks good is 8.Nxe6] 8...Bxe6 9.Nxe6 Qc8 [9...Nf6 10.Qxf7+

Kxf7 11.Nxd8++/-] 10.Nxf8 Kxf8 11.Re1 Qxc2 [Black's king is stuck in the center.] 12.Qh4!+- Nf6? [A natural retreat, but it misses a tactical threat.] 13.Qxf6! [Gotta love that move! Black has just lost a piece since 13...gxf6 14.Bh6+ Kg8 15.Re8 is checkmate!] 13…Qc7 14.Bf4 Qd7 15.Qxd6+ Kg8 16.Nc3 f6 17.Re7 Qxd6 18.Bxd6 Nc6 19.Rxb7 Rd8 20.Re1 1-0

107 – Morin 5.Bc4 a6 6.0-0 e5 Roger Morin defeated Ray Haines in the Sicilian Defence. The variation chosen was the gambit 5.Bc4!? Ray Haines has played this gambit successfully for decades. He defeated Roger Morin last year with 5.Bc4!? I used it myself to beat Ron Chaney in a pretty little postal chess game. See previous game. Obviously 5.Bc4 can transpose into the 6.Bc4 Sozin Sicilian that Mike Porter played vs Ray Haines. In this tournament each of Ray's games featured a knight retreat to the second rank as a key aspect of the final result. This third round game sees him play 21.Nh2!? This knight sortie removed coverage on g5 which allowed Roger Morin to play for a tactical combination. Almost every game is decided by tactics. At the lower levels, players leave unprotected pawns or play pieces to squares where they can be captured. At the mid-levels, players make counting errors in exchanges or make unsound sacrifices. At the higher levels, players lose material to double attacks or they fail to look deep enough at the final position in a series of forced moves. Your skills at chess tactics determine your strength. Haines - Morin (2002), Houlton, Maine (3), 15.11.2014 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 a6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Bc4 [This is Ray Haines gambit line in the Sicilian Defence, which works well from time to time. 5.Nc3] 5...d6 6.0-0!? [At 23 ply, Fritz actually prefers this over the normal move 6.Nc3] 6...e5 [Black chooses the Najdorf approach, as opposed to the Scheveningen set-up with 6...e6] 7.Nf3 Be7 8.Nc3 0-0 9.Bg5 [9.Be3 would transpose to a popular variation, where White's advantage is very small.] 9...Nbd7 10.Qd2 [10.a4 h6=] 10...b5 11.Bb3 Bb7 12.Rfe1 b4 13.Nd5 Bxd5 14.Bxf6 Nxf6 15.Bxd5 [15.exd5= is a more dynamic approach.] 15...Rb8 16.Rad1 Qc7 17.Rc1 [17.Bb3=] 17...Rfc8 [Or 17...Nxd5 18.Qxd5 Rb5=] 18.c4 a5 19.Red1 Qa7 20.h3 h6 21.Nh2!? [21.b3] 21...Rc5 [The

point of this move is to prevent White from recapturing on d5 with the queen.] 22.Qe3? [22.Qc2=] 22...Nxd5 23.Rxd5 Bg5! 0-1

108 – Haines 5.Bc4 e6 6.0-0 a6 During a high school chess tournament in Presque Isle, Maine the younger generation of players duked it out in longer and slower games. While this was going on, the veteran players Ray Haines and Roger Morin played a lively 10 minute game for fun. Ray Haines discusses his choice of one of his favorite gambit lines - which I learned from him: Sicilian Defence 5.Bc4. “I have been playing this line in the Sicilian defense against the computer and most of the lines are equal or better for white. “I came up with the line a long time ago and showed you it then. You won a postal game with it. “I am planning to use it in tournaments, because it will get people out of the lines which they know, quickly. “I think it is worth using. I would never have thought of using it without the computer to help me.” Here his creativity is rewarded for a pretty win. Haines - Morin (2029), Presque Isle, Maine, April 2013 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Bc4 e6 6.0-0 a6 7.Qe2 Nc6 8.Nxc6 bxc6 9.e5 Nd5 10.Nc3 Nxc3 11.bxc3 d5 12.Bd3 c5 [Ray provided a couple lines of analysis by Fritz 11: 12...Rb8 13.Be3 Qc7 14.Qg4 g6 15.Qa4 Bg7 16.f4 f6 17.exf6 Bxf6 18.Rfb1 Rxb1+ 19.Rxb1 Bxc3 20.Bb6 Qd6 21.Bd4 Bxd4++/=; 12...Qc7 13.Rb1 Be7 14.Bf4 0-0 15.h4 Rb8 16.h5 Rxb1 17.Rxb1 Qa5 18.h6 Qxa2 19.Rb3 g6 20.Qg4 Bc5+/=] 13.c4 Bb7 14.Rb1 Bc6 15.cxd5 exd5 16.e6 f6 17.Qh5+ Ke7 18.Qf7+ Kd6 19.Bf4# 1-0

109 – Haines 5.Nc3 e6 6.g4 a6 This postal game highlights one of my lovable flaws. I love speculative sacrifices. I’m not always in the mood for one, but I play them whenever they strike my fancy. I played a Sicilian Keres Attack 6.g4 against the Scheveningen Variation of Ray Haines. The 6.g4 Keres Attack is a quick White pawn push. It threatens 7.g5 driving the knight away from f6. White dreams of a big space advantage and lots of tactics. Black counters by 6…h6 or by redeploying the knight after 7.g5 Nfd7. Black’s pawns on d6 and e6 prepare play a counter attack with either d5 or e5. Many move orders reach this position. Our chances were about even for the first dozen moves. Then I sacrificed a piece with 13.Ne6?! I had what might be considered two pawns compensation. Haines stood better as Black, at least until he missed 16… Ke7! Then it was equal again, at least until he missed 22…Bc5! The advantage switched to White in a complicated middlegame. Just like in a Dragon Sicilian, White’s extra pawns were on the queenside. Black’s extra pawns were on the kingside. When we reached the ending, both sides tried to queen passed pawns on opposite sides of the board. When the pawns queened White was up the Exchange and a pawn. Black resigned. Sawyer - Haines, corr 1980 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 e6 6.g4 a6 [6...h6 7.h4=] 7.g5 Nfd7 8.Be3 b5 9.a3 Nb6 10.Rg1 [10.h4 N8d7 11.h5 Ne5=] 10...N8d7 11.f4 Bb7 12.f5 [12.Qh5 g6 13.Qh3=] 12...e5 13.Ne6?! [13.Nb3=] 13...fxe6 14.Qh5+ Ke7 15.fxe6 Kxe6 16.0-0-0 g6 [16...Ke7! 17.g6 Nf6-/+] 17.Bh3+ Ke7 18.Qg4 Qe8 19.Qe6+ Kd8 20.Bxb6+ Nxb6 21.Rxd6+ Kc7 22.Rxb6 Qxe6 [22...Bc5!=] 23.Rxe6 Bc8 24.Re8 Bb7 25.Rxa8 Bxa8 26.Rf1 Be7 27.Rf7 Kd6 28.Kd1 Bxg5 29.Ra7 Kc5 30.Rxa6 Kd4? 31.Nxb5+ [31.Ke2+/-] 31...Ke3 32.Nd6 Rd8 33.Kc1!? Bxe4 34.Kb1 Bf4 35.Nxe4 Rd1+ 36.Ka2 Kxe4 37.Bg2+ [37.a4=] 37...Ke3 38.Rc6 Rd2 39.Bh3 e4 40.Bf1 Kf2 41.Bb5 Rd5 42.c4 Rxb5? [42...Rf5 43.c5 e3=/+] 43.cxb5 g5 44.b6 e3 45.Rf6 e2 46.b7 e1Q 47.b8Q 1-0

110 – Porter 5.Nc3 e6 6.Bc4 Here is a game from the Maine Potato Blossom Festival by Ray Haines from the third round. Ray has played the Sicilian as Black for decades. Ray Haines met Mike Porter. They contested a Sicilian Defence Sozin 6.Bc4. Ray Haines wrote: “This was round 3. I was playing Mike Porter for the first time. He and his son have just move here. “They are both very welcomed here as new players in the area. I look forward to playing both of them again. “We both got into time trouble. I made a mistake on move 37 and lost a piece. “I should have played my bishop to queen 8, not my rook.” This was a nice win by Mr. Porter. He stayed alive long enough to catch a tactical mistake by Mr. Haines. M. Porter - Haines, Potato Blossom Festival Ft Fairfield, Maine (3), 13.07.2013 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 e6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 d6 6.Bc4 Be7 7.h3 [This seem slow. More popular is 7.Be3 Nc6 when White needs to decide on which side to castle.] 7...Na6!? 8.f3 [White loves his pawn moves. Worth considering is 8.Bxa6 bxa6 9.Nc6 Qd7 10.Nxe7 Qxe7 11.Bf4+=] 8...Nc5 9.a3!? a6 10.0-0 Qc7 11.Ba2 Bd7 12.Bd2 b5 13.Nce2 00 14.Rc1 Qb6 [14...e5!?] 15.Kh1 e5 16.Nb3 Be6 17.Nxc5 Bxa2 18.Nd3 Be6 19.Qe1 Nd7 20.Qg3 Kh8 21.Nc3 Qd8 22.Nb4 Nb6 23.b3 [I like going after the bishop with 23.Nc6 Qc7 24.Nxe7 Qxe7 and then 25.b3=] 23...d5? [This drops the e5-pawn. Black was better after 23...Bh4!=+] 24.Nc6 Qc7 25.Nxe7 Qxe7 26.Qxe5 [26.Nxd5 Nxd5 27.exd5 Bxd5 28.Bb4!+-] 26...Rad8 27.exd5 [27.Be3+-] 27...Nxd5 28.Nxd5 Rxd5 29.Qf4 Qd7 30.Bc3 f6 31.Bb4 Rd8 32.Qe3? [32.Rfe1+= maintains White's advantage.] 32...Bxh3! [White's 7th move is "punished" 25 moves later.] 33.f4 Bg4

34.c4 Rd3 35.Qb6 Be2 36.Rfe1 Qg4 37.Rc2 Rd1? [Big mistake. 37...Bd1!=+] 38.Rcxe2 1-0

4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 g6 111 – Rhudy 6.f4 Nc6 7.Nxc6 On Patriot's Day in Boston, Massachusetts they run the Boston Marathon Race and the Boston Red Sox play their only morning home game on their annual schedule. In 2013 a bombing led to “Boston Strong”, a theme used by the Red Sox to win the 2013 Major League Baseball World Series. I read the children's book “Rush Revere and the First Patriots” by Rush Limbaugh. In that book the adventures of Tommy and Freedom continue. But unlike in the book Rush Revere and the Brave Pilgrims, there is no chess in the First Patriots book. My wife and I descend from the Pilgrims and had Patriots in our families. We grew up in New England. We also descend from another guy who was born before the Mayflower sailed. By 1979 I had moved to Tom Purser’s area of Tennessee. I was actively playing APCT postal chess. One of my opponent's was Curtis Rhudy of Pennsylvania, a state I would later call home for a wonderful 20 years. My game vs Rhudy was in the Sicilian Defence. The famous Dragon Variation has been popular at the club level all my chess life. In this game, I avoided the main line 6.Be3 lines with 6.f4. This f-pawn supports and early 8.e5 push that allows White an early attack with some tricky ideas. Black has good moves available to equalize, but not everyone finds them all the time. Sawyer (2000) - Rhudy (1662), corr APCT 1979 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 g6 6.f4 [6.Be3 is about 20 times more popular than what I chose here.] 6...Nc6 7.Nxc6 bxc6 8.e5 Nd7 [8...dxe5 9.Qxd8+ Kxd8 10.fxe5 Ng4 (10...Nd7! 11.Bf4=) 11.Bf4 Bg7 12.0-0-0+ Bd7 (Not 12...Ke8? 13.Nb5!+-) 13.Re1+/=] 9.Qf3 Bb7 10.Be3 dxe5 11.0-0-0 exf4 [11...Qc7=] 12.Bd4!? e5? [12...f6=] 13.Bxe5 f6? [13...Nxe5 14.Rxd8+

Rxd8 15.Qxf4+/-] 14.Bxf4 Bg7 15.Bc4 Qb6 16.Rhe1+ Kd8 17.Rxd7+ Kc8 18.Be6 with a mate in four. 1-0

112 – Blitshteyn 6.Be3 Bd7 7.f3 You know it happens. Your opponent takes you out of the book. Now what? "Just play chess," they say. But how? Try this approach. 1. Remember the main ideas of your opening. 2. Pick an idea that looks good now. 3. Play it. The Sicilian Defence Dragon Variation is an aggressive opening you can play without much knowledge of theory. Really? Sure. Picture the Sicilian Dragon as a tree. The main line is fairly skinny up to moves 9 or 10. Then branches go all over the place. Trying to know all the lines is like trying to know all the names in an old phone book. It's impossible and unnecessary. Just follow the plan. White castles queenside. Black castles kingside. As White you play g4, h4, Bh6, Kb1, and h5 if possible in some order. You open up the kingside and threaten the king. As Black you aim your pawns and pieces to open queenside files and diagonals. Eliminate the defenses and threaten the king. Adjust your plan based on the tactical needs of the moment. I recall Mark Blitshteyn as a friendly young man, with maybe a Russian accent. During the Cold War, the Russian chess players I knew of were masters. Mark was just a club player rated 1747. He came to America and enjoyed playing chess. Wonderful! Our game was from an event at the North Penn Chess Club near Philadelphia. Black sacrificed to keep attacking, but his position was in pieces when he ran out of pieces. Sawyer - Blitshteyn (1747), Lansdale, PA 22.05.1982 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 g6 6.Be3 Bd7 7.f3 Bg7 8.Qd2 0-0 9.0-0-0 Nc6 10.Bc4 a6 11.h4 b5 12.Bb3 Na5 13.Bh6 Nxb3+ [13...Bxh6 14.Qxh6

e5=] 14.Nxb3 Be6 15.g4 Bxb3 16.axb3 Qa5 [16...Bxh6 17.Qxh6+/=] 17.Kb1 b4 [17...Bxh6 18.Qxh6+/-] 18.Nd5 Nxd5 19.exd5 Rac8 [19...f6 20.Bxg7 Kxg7 21.h5+-] 20.h5 Bxb2 [20...Bxh6 21.Qxh6+-] 21.Kxb2 Qa3+ 22.Kb1 Rc5 23.Bxf8 Ra5 24.Qd4 Qa2+ 25.Kc1 f6 26.Bxe7 Rc5 27.Qb2 Qa5 28.Qxf6 Qa3+ 29.Qb2 Qa5 30.hxg6 Rxc2+ 31.Kxc2 1-0

113 – Brandt 6.Be3 Bg7 7.f3 I came out of my semi-retirement in 1996. I played in a three round event at Carlisle, Pennsylvania. We had a small club up in Williamsport where we played unrated skittles games. I was the only player in that club rated over 2000. Four players travelled with me to Carlisle. They played in the Reserve section. As White in round one I trotted down a familiar path in a sharp Sicilian Defence Dragon 9.Bc4. The idea is castle opposite sides and mutually attack the opponent's king. I was not in a mood to play. I figured I had a much better chance outplaying an 1800 player in an endgame. I do not recommend choosing a sharp opening to reach an endgame, but it worked here. Sawyer (2011) – Brandt (1800), 4th Saturday Carlisle Open (1), 25.05.1996 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 g6 6.Be3 Bg7 7.f3 Nc6 8.Qd2 0-0 9.Bc4 [9.0-0-0] 9...Bd7 10.0-0-0 Qa5 [10...Rc8] 11.Kb1 Ne5 12.Bb3 Rfc8 13.Nd5!? [White decides to outplay his opponent in an endgame. Better is 13.h4] 13...Qxd2 14.Rxd2 [Or 14.Bxd2 Nxd5 15.Bxd5 Nc4=] 14...Kf8 [14...Nxd5 15.Bxd5 Nc4 16.Bxc4 Rxc4 and Black has a slight advantage of the two bishops.] 15.Bg5 Nxd5 16.Bxd5 Nc6 [Again, White chooses to exchange material and head toward an ending.] 17.Nxc6 Bxc6 18.Bxc6 Rxc6 19.Be3 a6 20.Bd4 Rac8 21.Bxg7+ Kxg7 22.c3 Rc5 23.Rhd1 Kf6 24.Rd5 Rxd5 25.Rxd5 Rc5 26.Rd4 g5 [I reached a rook endgame. Black would stand better after 26...Rh5! 27.h3 Ke5=/+] 27.Kc2 h5 28.Kd3 Ke5 29.b4+/= [White now has a slight advantage.] 29...Rc6 30.Rd5+ Kf6 31.h4 e5 32.g3 gxh4 33.gxh4 Ke6 34.b5?! [34.c4! f5 35.a4 fxe4+ 36.fxe4 Rc8 37.c5+/-] 34...axb5 35.Rxb5 Ra6 36.Rb2 f5 37.Rg2 fxe4+ 38.fxe4 Kf6 39.Rf2+ Ke6 40.Rg2 Kf6 41.Rb2 b6 42.Rf2+ Ke6 43.Rb2 Kf6 44.Rf2+ Ke6 45.Rg2 Kf6 46.Kc4 Ra5 47.Kb4 Kf7? [Now Black is losing. He had to play immediately 47...d5! 48.exd5 Rxd5 49.Rg5 Rd2 50.Rxh5 e4= with a likely draw.] 48.a4 d5 [Too late.] 49.exd5 Rxd5 50.Rg5 Kf6 51.Rxh5 Kg6 52.Rg5+ Kh6 53.Rf5 Kg6 54.Rg5+ Kh6 55.c4 Rd4 56.Rxe5 Rxh4 57.Re6+ Kg5 58.Rxb6 Rh1 59.Re6 Rb1+ 60.Kc5 Ra1 61.Kb6 [This is a known Rook and Pawn ending. I only need

the c-pawn to win, since Black's king is cut off from the queenside.] 61...Rxa4 62.c5 Kf5 63.Re1 Rb4+ 64.Kc7 Rc4 65.c6 Kf6 66.Kd7 Rd4+ 67.Kc8 Rc4 68.c7 Kf7 69.Rb1 Ke7 70.Kb8 Kd7 71.Rd1+ Ke7 72.c8Q Rxc8+ 73.Kxc8 1-0

114 – Zdun 7.f3 0-0 8.Qd2 a6 It is fun to attack as White in the Sicilian Defence. Against a Dragon Variation, we know by move 4...g6 or 5...g6 that Black will fianchetto a bishop on g7. When Dick Zdun played the Dragon Sicilian against me in a Williamsport club game, I discovered he was going to fianchetto both bishops. Because Black castled kingside, his queenside expanse could be more than just ...b6. Zdun played 8...a6 and 9...b5 before 10...Bb7. I continued with the typical kingside attacking moves like 12.h4, 13.g4, and 14,h5. But then I got sacrifice happy with 15.Rxh5?! That looked reasonable, but it failed. I missed a winning line with 16.fxg4! So then, I had to win the game all over again. I hate when that happens. Black's plan with his placement of ...Bb7 was a surprise to me. That move would be common in a Najdorf, but not so much in a Dragon. Still, in practice it worked here. Black could have equalized with 13...Na5. When I play Black, I prefer to develop ...Be6 in the Dragon so as to aim at the White castled queenside. Sawyer (2010) - Zdun (1634), Williamsport, PA 04.04.2000 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 g6 5.Nc3 Nf6 6.Be3 Bg7 7.f3 0-0 8.Qd2 a6 9.Bc4 b5 10.Bb3 Bb7 11.0-0-0 Nc6 12.h4 h5 13.g4 hxg4? [13...Na5=] 14.h5 Nxh5 15.Nxc6 Bxc6 16.Rxh5? [16.fxg4!+-] 16...gxh5 17.Bh6 e6 18.fxg4 Qf6 [18...h4!-+] 19.Bxg7 Kxg7 20.Qxd6 Qg5+ 21.Kb1 Bxe4 22.Nxe4 Qxg4 23.Qd4+ Kh6 24.Rg1 [24.Qe3+!+-] 24...e5 25.Qe3+ [25.Qb6+!+-] 25...Qf4 26.Qb6+ f6 27.Qb7 Rg8 28.Bxg8 Rxg8 29.Rd1 Rg7 30.Qc6 Rg6 31.Qa8 Rg7 32.Qh8+ Rh7 33.Qf8+ Kg6 34.Rg1+ Kf5 35.Nd6+ Ke6 36.Qg8+ Kxd6 37.Rd1+ Kc6 38.Qxh7 e4 39.Qd7+ Kc5 40.Rd5+ Kb6 41.Rd6+ Kc5 42.Qc7+ Kb4 43.Rd4# 1-0

115 – Deepan 8.Qd2 0-0 9.g4 Future chess master Edward Sawyer invited me to give a simul against his club in Pembroke, Maine, 45 years ago. I studied the Sicilian Dragon for a few days starting at move 10. As luck would have it, one of my simul opponents played those exact first 10 moves. I checkmated him 10 moves later. He only knew those 10 moves! But players don’t always play those same first 10 moves. The game Chakkravarthy Deepan vs Timur Gareev followed 9.g4 which is a nice break from my choice 9.Bc4 or 9.0-0-0. I’ve not paid much attention to 9.g4, but based on this game, it sure seems interesting. Deepan (2475) - Gareev (2605), 10th Chennai Open IND, 21.01.2018 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 g6 6.Be3 Bg7 7.f3 Nc6 8.Qd2 0-0 9.g4 e6!? 10.0-0-0 d5 11.h4 h5 [11...Nxd4 12.Bxd4+/=] 12.Nxc6 bxc6 13.e5 Nd7 14.gxh5 Nxe5 15.hxg6 [15.h6+/-] 15...fxg6 16.h5 Nxf3 17.Qg2 Nh4 18.Qg4 Nf5 19.Bd2 Rb8 20.hxg6 Rf6 [20...Qb6 21.b3+/-] 21.Bd3 Ba6 [21...Kf8 22.Bg5+/-] 22.Bxa6 Qb6 23.b3 Qxa6 24.Rh7 Ne7 [24...Qa3+ 25.Kb1 Qb4 26.Qh5+-] 25.Bh6 Qa3+ 26.Kb1 Bxh6 27.Rxh6 Nf5 28.Rh7 Qb4 29.Qh5 Kf8 [29...Qh4 30.Rh8+ Kg7 31.Qxh4 Nxh4 32.Rxb8+-] 30.Qg5 1-0

116 – Protej 8.Qd2 Nc6 9.0-0-0 I challenged Protej and the battle was on. I was ready. We’re off! It was a Dragon Sicilian Defence. My pieces arrived aggressively placed. Black fought back. What could I do? Aha! The hidden queen trick. That will work. The opening was complex but equal. Then I screwed up on move 29 and dropped a pawn. Black was a high rated chess engine. What kind of ending could I draw? I would have been happy with a bishop ending, but Black kept one set of rooks on the board. Black should have swapped down to a pawn ending when the extra pawn won easily. Instead Black kept the rooks on the board. Where could I find an advantage? My queenside pawn majority. If only I could gain a passed pawn that kept the Black rook so busy he could not win the game. Black should have won, because I only had 8 seconds left on my clock. The computer still had a minute. A smart human would know that I did not have time to run down from behind two connected and protected pawns, pick them off and mate the king in eight seconds. White would have lost on time, but instead, once I got my passed pawn pushed to the seventh rank, my silicon buddy took a draw on the board by repetition. Very nice. Sawyer (2038) - Protej (2401), ICC 3 0 u Internet Chess Club, 30.01.2016 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 g6 6.Be3 Bg7 7.f3 00 8.Qd2 Nc6 9.0-0-0 Nxd4 [9...d5 10.exd5 Nxd5 11.Nxc6 bxc6 12.Bd4 e5 13.Bc5=] 10.Bxd4 Be6 11.Kb1 Qc7 12.g4 [12.h4!+/= might be slightly better.] 12...Rfc8 13.h4 Qa5 14.Nd5!? [14.a3+/=] 14...Qxd2 15.Nxf6+ [15.Rxd2 Bxd5 16.exd5=] 15...Bxf6 16.Rxd2 Bxd4 17.Rxd4 h6 18.g5 hxg5 19.hxg5 Kg7 20.Rd2 Rh8 21.Rdh2 Rxh2 22.Rxh2 Rc8 23.a3 Rc5 24.f4 Bd7 25.Bd3 Rc7 26.Kc1 Rc5 27.Kd2 a6 28.Bf1 e5 29.Bd3? [White is fine after 29.Ke3! exf4+ 30.Kxf4 f6 31.gxf6+ Kxf6 32.Rh7 Bc6 33.Bd3=] 29...exf4 30.Rf2 Rxg5 31.Rxf4 d5 32.exd5 Rxd5 33.c4 Rd6 34.c5 Rd5 35.b4 Bb5 36.Rf3 Rd7 [Black easily wins the pawn endgame after 36...Bxd3 37.Rxd3 Rxd3+ 38.Kxd3 Kf6-+] 37.Kc3 Bxd3 38.Rxd3 Re7? [Black lets me off the hook. Correct is 38...Rxd3+ 39.Kxd3 Kf6-+] 39.a4 Kf6 40.b5 axb5 41.axb5 Kg5 42.Kc4 f5 43.c6 Kf6 44.Kc5 bxc6

45.bxc6 Kf7 46.Kb6 Re6 47.Kb7 Re2 48.c7 Rb2+ 49.Kc8 Ke8 50.Re3+ Kf7 51.Kd8 Rd2+ 52.Kc8 Rb2 53.Kd8 Rd2+ 54.Kc8 Rb2 55.Kd8 Game drawn by repetition 1/2-1/2

117 – Dieffenbach 8.Qd2 Nc6 9.Bc4 The sharp Sicilian Defence Dragon Variation gives stronger players a big advantage. Better players take advantage of tactical mistakes by their opponents. Tactics rule in chess play. Good chess moves must be safe and active. Higher rated players excel in combinations and checkmates when compared to their lower rated counterparts. Dave Dieffenbach boldly played sharp openings, but this gave him many opportunities to go wrong. In 1996, David was rated 1252. I was rated 2010 at that time. Black chose moves that were active but not safe. His 12...Ba6?! and 13...b5? allowed White the strong post 15.Nd5 with serious threats. White quickly reached an endgame where he was up a rook and two pawns for Black's light squared bishop. Sawyer - Dieffenbach, Williamsport, PA 1996 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 g6 6.Be3 Bg7 7.f3 Nc6 8.Qd2 0-0 9.Bc4 Qc7 10.Bb3 Nxd4 11.Bxd4 b6 [11...Be6=] 12.h4 Ba6?! [12...Be6 13.0-0-0+/=] 13.0-0-0 b5? 14.Bxf6 Bxf6 15.Nd5 Qc6 [This loses the Exchange, but Black's game also falls apart after 15...Qd8 16.Nxf6+ exf6 17.Qf4+-] 16.Nxf6+ exf6 17.Bd5 Qc5 18.Bxa8 Rxa8 19.Qxd6 Qxd6 20.Rxd6 Bb7 21.Rhd1 Kg7 22.Rd8 Rxd8 23.Rxd8 a5 24.Kd2 b4 25.c4 a4 [Or 25...bxc3+ 26.Kxc3+-] 26.Rb8 Ba6 27.Rxb4 1-0

118 – Halwick 8.Qd2 Nc6 9.Bc4 Some who know my Blackmar-Diemer Gambit may wonder why I played 1.e4 and a Sicilian in an ICCF Master Class Tournament. One of my favorite desserts is a Banana Split with three scoops of different ice cream flavors on a sliced banana. I like variety. Floyd J Halwick had an initial rating of 2386. Later it dropped into the 2200s for a while, but after 181 games Halwick ended with a current ICCF rating of 2358. Floyd Halwick was from New York and had a USCF correspondence rating of 2255. To be that high rated for that long, Floyd Halwick must be good with databases and chess engines, since his ICCF opponents do the same. Twenty years ago those computer tools were almost useless, but today they are essential for correspondence play. The Sicilian Defence Dragon is unbalanced and fun to play from either side of the board. Halwick sacrificed a pawn for attack. He fell prey to a long forced combination. All of my pieces seemed to be on the right squares whenever I needed them there. This victory helped me to win this master class tournament 4.5 - 1.5. Sawyer (2157) - Halwick (2386), corr ICCF 1995 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 g6 6.Be3 Bg7 7.f3 0-0 8.Qd2 Nc6 9.Bc4 [9.00-0 later became more popular.] 9...Bd7 10.0-0-0 Qa5 [The recommended line is Soltis Variation goes 10...Rc8 11.Bb3 Ne5 12.h4 h5 13.Bg5 Rc5=] 11.Bb3 Rfc8 12.Kb1 Ne5 13.h4 b5!? [13...Nc4 14.Bxc4 Rxc4 15.Nb3 Qc7 14.Bd4 Be6 15.h5+=] 14.Ncxb5 Qxd2 15.Bxd2 Nc4 [15...Rab8 16.Nc3+=] 16.Bxc4 [16.Nc3! Nxd2+ Rxd2+=] 16...Rxc4 17.Be3 [17.b3+=] 17...Rb8 18.b3 Rcc8 19.Nxa7 [19.Na3+=] 19...Rc7 [19...Rc3 20.Bf2 Rb7] 20.c4 Rxa7 21.Nc6 Bxc6 22.Bxa7 Ra8 23.Bd4 Nh5 24.Bxg7 Kxg7 25.Rhe1 Nf4 26.g3 [26.Rd2+=] 26...Nh5 27.g4 Nf4 28.a4 Rb8 29.Ka2 Kf6 30.Ka3 Ke5 31.b4 Ng2 32.Rh1 f5 33.exf5 [33.gxf5 gxf5 34.b5+/-] 33...gxf5 34.Rd3 [34.gxf5 Bxf3 35.Rd2+=] 34...fxg4 [34...f4=] 35.fxg4 Be4 36.Rc3 Kd4 37.Kb3 Ne3 38.Rh2 Nxg4 39.Rd2+ Ke5 40.a5 Ra8 41.c5 Nf6 42.c6 Nd5

43.Rc1 [43.Rxd5+ Bxd5+ 44.Ka4+/-] 43...Nc7 44.Ka4 Rb8 45.Rb2 Bd3 46.Re1+ Kf6 [46...Kd4=] 47.Rf2+ Bf5 48.Rxf5+ Kxf5 49.Rxe7 Rxb4+ 50.Kxb4 Nd5+ 51.Kb5 Nxe7 52.Kb6 d5 53.a6 d4 54.a7 Nc8+ 55.Kb7 Nxa7 56.Kxa7 d3 57.c7 d2 58.c8Q+ Kf4 59.Qc2 1-0

119 – Sah 9.Bc4 Bd7 10.0-0-0 The Sicilian Defence is known for its wild tactics. My APCT game vs Robert Sah had four thematic rook sacrifices in the 9.Bc4 Yugoslav Dragon variation. The first rook sacrifice was a positional Exchange sacrifice that both humans and chess engines routinely play on c3. Here it was 19...Rxc3 to open up a queenside attack on the king. Often the battle leads to pawn assaults when the players castle opposite sides. Black sacrifices a piece to pick off some White pawns. With 21...Bxf3 the Black bishop forks both rooks. White wiggled. White played the second rook sacrifice with 27.Rxg2. The endgame became a pawn race. Black advanced a pawn to f2. White sacrificed the third rook for the pawn with 42.Rxf2+. The final position still had a rook on the board. White had two pawns and Black had a rook. When White played 45.Kb5 and 46.a7, it became clear that Black was forced to sacrifice his rook for the a-pawn (otherwise White queens that pawn). After the fourth rook sacrifice, Black would devour the last pawn. There would be no rooks to sacrifice. Just two lonely kings for a draw. Sawyer (2000) - Sah (1950), corr APCT 1979 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 g6 6.Be3 Bg7 7.f3 0-0 8.Qd2 Nc6 9.Bc4 Bd7 10.0-0-0 Qa5 11.Bb3 Rfc8 12.h4 Ne5 13.Kb1 Nc4 14.Bxc4 Rxc4 15.Nb3 Qd8 [15...Qc7 16.g4+/=] 16.Bh6 [16.e5 Ne8 17.exd6 Nxd6 18.Bd4+/-] 16...Qf8 [16...Bxh6 17.Qxh6+/=] 17.Bxg7 Qxg7 18.g4 Rac8 19.h5 [19.e5!?+/-] 19...Rxc3 20.bxc3 Bxg4 21.hxg6 Bxf3 22.gxh7+ [White eliminates the outside passed pawn, but he might have done better with 22.gxf7+ Qxf7 23.Rhg1+ Kh8 24.Rdf1=] 22...Kh8 23.Rdg1 Nxe4 24.Qd3? [This should not have worked well. Better is 24.Rxg7 Nxd2+ 25.Nxd2 Bxh1 26.Rxf7=] 24...Nxc3+ 25.Ka1 Bg2 26.Nd4 Ne2 27.Rxg2 Qxg2 28.Re1 Nxd4!? 29.Qxd4+ Qg7 [This leads to an unbalanced but drawn

rook and pawn ending. Houdini gives 29...e5! 30.Qxd6 Re8-/+] 30.Qxg7+ Kxg7 31.Rxe7 Rf8 32.Rxb7 Kxh7 33.Rxa7 Kg6 34.Rd7 f5 35.Rxd6+ Kg5 36.Kb2 f4 37.a4 f3 38.Rd1 f2 39.Rf1 Kg4 40.a5 Kg3 41.Kb3 Kg2 42.Rxf2+ Kxf2 43.Kb4 Ke3 44.a6 Kd4 45.Kb5 Kd5 46.a7 Kd6 1/2-1/2

120 – Gecko 10.0-0-0 Qa5 11.Bb3 Just do it. Go for it! That’s the attitude when a blitz player gets an idea. Give it a try. Why not? When you try something in blitz chess, it could work. If not, it’s only a fun game. Maybe you will learn something new. It will be done in five minutes. I could try something else next time. That’s the sense I get from this Sicilian Dragon vs Gecko. At the time I was near my blitz chess peak. Both players got frisky on move 16. White attacked kingside with 16.Bh6?! Better would have been to strengthen the center with 16.Nb3 and 17.Bd4. Black could have punished White and defended the kingside with 16...Nxe4 and 17...Bxh6. Instead Black sacrificed the Exchange with 16...Rxc3?! White held on to the material after 17.Bxg7 Kxg7 18.Qxc3. Pieces were flying around as they do in the Dragon. Both sides missed a few things. White’s extra material and better king position made the difference. Sawyer (2418) - Gecko (1625), ICC 5 0 u Internet Chess Club, 28.11.1999 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 g6 6.Be3 Bg7 7.f3 Nc6 8.Qd2 0-0 9.Bc4 Bd7 10.0-0-0 Qa5 11.Bb3 Rfc8 12.h4 Ne5 13.h5 Nc4 14.Bxc4 Rxc4 15.hxg6 fxg6 16.Bh6?! [16.Nb3! Qe5 17.Bd4+/-] 16...Rxc3? [16...Nxe4 17.Qe3 Bxh6 18.Qxh6 Qg5+ 19.Qxg5 Nxg5=] 17.Bxg7 Kxg7 18.Qxc3 Qxa2 19.Qa3 Qc4 [19...Qxa3 20.bxa3+/=] 20.Qb3 [20.e5!+-] 20...Qc7 21.Ne6+ Bxe6 22.Qxe6 Rc8 23.Rd2+/- Qa5? 24.c3 [24.Qxe7+!+-] 24...Rc7 25.Kb1 Qb5 26.g4 Rxc3? 27.Qxe7+ Kg8 28.Qxf6 Rc7 29.Qd8+ Black resigns 1-0

121 – Daly 9.Bc4 Bd7 10.Bb3 I love books by Cyrus Lakdawala. In his "A Ferocious Opening Repertoire" book on the Veresov, Lakdawala wrote of himself on page 125: "Unlike my opponent, I just don't have the open game gene. I tend to over-finesse and try to control some weak square when I should be going after the opponent with a meat axe! I remember one exasperated ICC kibitzer offering me this piece of constructive criticism after I had blotched a similar game: "It's called the initiative. You ought to try it sometime! Idiot!!"" I can relate to Cyrus Lakdawala. I began my career with the Caro-Kann, Capablanca, and Fine's "Basic Chess Endings". At the most inopportune moments I may head for the endgame. This Sicilian Defence is a good example. Troy Daly was soon to become a master and head off to college. We ran into the middle of a sharp main line. International Master Javad Maharramzade was watching our game. After we finished very late at night, this IM reminded us that in this variation, White has to focus on attack, to push pawns and throw everything at the kingside. I may win or I may not, but it is the only good way to play this line. Sawyer (1964) - Daly (2161), Space Coast Open (1), 08.05.2009 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 g6 5.Nc3 Bg7 6.Be3 Nf6 7.Bc4 0-0 8.Bb3 d6 9.f3 Bd7 10.Qd2 Qa5 11.0-0-0 Rfc8 12.h4 h5 13.Kb1 Ne5 14.Nd5?! [At this point I thought I might do better in an endgame vs a young opponent who is rated 200 points above me. More promising is 14.Bg5+/=] 14...Qxd2 15.Rxd2 Nxd5 16.Bxd5 Nc4 17.Bxc4 Rxc4 18.Rhd1 Rac8 19.c3 Bf6 20.g3 Be5 21.Ne2 [21.Bf4= Houdini 3] 21...a6 22.Bd4 Bxd4 23.Nxd4 b5 24.a3 Kg7 25.Re1 f6 26.f4 e5 27.fxe5?! [Probably better is 27.Nb3 Rxe4 28.Rxe4 Bf5 29.Kc1 Bxe4 30.Rxd6=] 27...dxe5 28.Nf3 Bc6 29.Rde2 Bb7 30.Kc2 Kf7 31.Nd2 R4c7 32.Re3 Rd8 33.Rd3 Rxd3 34.Kxd3 Ke6 35.Re3 f5 36.exf5+ gxf5 37.c4 e4+ 38.Kd4 bxc4 39.Nxc4 Bd5 40.Rc3? [This counting error allows Black to use tactics to exchange into a winning pawn ending. 40.Nb6 Rc2 41.b3 Rb2 42.Nxd5 Rd2+ 43.Kc3 Rxd5=/+] 40...Rxc4+ 41.Rxc4 Bxc4 42.Kxc4 Ke5 43.Kc3 f4

44.gxf4+ Kxf4 45.Kd2 Kf3 46.Ke1 Ke3 47.b4 Kd3 48.a4 Kc4 49.b5 axb5 50.axb5 [Or 50.a5 Kc5-+] 50...Kxb5 51.Kf2 Kc4 52.Ke2 Kd4 53.Kd2 Ke5 54.Ke2 Kf4 55.Kf2 Kg4 56.Ke3 Kxh4 57.Kxe4 Kg3 0-1

122 – Mack 9.Bc4 Bd7 10.h4 Kingside attacks with mate threats make it fun to play the White side of the Sicilian Dragon. I learned the general principles from Bobby Fischer. Black has chances too in this Sicilian Defence. If not, the Dragon Variation would go puff and we'd never see it again. I attacked eagerly. I paid little attention to defense. The first dozen moves are easy to play. Until then, both sides have many good options. There is little need to memorize more than one key variation. Your opponent will leave the book. Then you deal with the details. My moves 15 and 16 were not the best against my club opponent John Mack. Black returned the favor on move 17. White won the Exchange twice. White gave one Exchange back in order to queen a pawn. Sawyer - Mack (1595), Lansdale, PA 04.02.1981 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 g6 6.Be3 Bg7 7.f3 0-0 8.Qd2 Nc6 9.Bc4 Bd7 10.h4 Rc8 11.Bb3 Ne5 12.0-0-0 Qa5 13.g4 [13.Kb1+/=] 13...Nc4 [13...b5!?=] 14.Bxc4 Rxc4 15.Nde2? [This is the wrong spot for the knight. Correct is 15.Nb3+/=] 15...Rfc8 [15...b5! 16.g5 Nxe4 17.Nxe4 Qxa2 18.c3 Bf5-+] 16.Bh6? [16.Kb1=] 16...Rxc3!? [16...b5!-/+] 17.Nxc3 Rxc3? [A tactical mistake going from a win to a loss. 17...Nxe4! 18.fxe4 Bxc3 19.bxc3 Qa3+ 20.Kb1 Rc6=/+] 18.Qxc3 [Or 18.Bxg7+-] 18...Qxc3 19.bxc3 Bxh6+ 20.g5 Nxe4 21.fxe4 Bg7 22.Kd2 Be5 23.Kd3 a6 24.Rb1 Bc6 25.Rb6 Kg7 [or 25...f5 26.gxf6 Bxf6 27.a4+-] 26.Rhb1 f6 27.Rxb7 Bxb7 28.Rxb7 Kf7 29.Ra7 Bg3 30.Rxa6 Bxh4 31.gxf6 Bxf6 32.a4 h5 33.Rb6 h4 34.a5 h3 35.a6 g5 36.a7 g4 37.a8Q h2 38.Qd5+ Kg7 39.Qh5 g3 40.Rb8 1-0

123 – Vehvilainen 9.Bc4 Bd7 10.h4 One of my stronger international correspondence opponents was Pertti Vehvilainen of Finland. His Sicilian Defence Dragon Variation was in a very critical line. After about a dozen common moves, the position became sharp and extremely complex. The players castled on opposite sides. Then they attacked the kings with all they had, defending only when they must. My position was strong at first in our game. Then it was equal for a while. Then I messed up my attack. I had the right ideas at the wrong time. I pushed my h-pawn when I should have played my bishop. Then I played my bishop when I should have pushed my h-pawn. Finally I missed a chance to draw with 27.Kxc2! when I played 27.Kc1. He did not play perfect, but it was better than I played. Pertti Vehvilainen finished in second place in our 15 player round robin ICCF Master Class tournament. This event started in 1984. His score was 10.5 out of 14. I had four wins, four draws and six losses. My score was 6 out of 14. His ICCF rating is 2359. Sawyer - Vehvilainen, corr ICCF 1986 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 g6 6.Be3 Bg7 7.f3 0-0 8.Qd2 Nc6 9.Bc4 Bd7 10.h4 Rc8 11.Bb3 Ne5 12.0-0-0 h5 13.Kb1 [13.Bh6 Bxh6 14.Qxh6 Rxc3 15.bxc3 Qa5 16.Kb1 Rc8 17.g4 Qxc3 18.gxh5 Nc4 19.Bxc4 Rxc4 20.Rd3 Qb4+ 21.Rb3!+/=] 13...Nc4 14.Bxc4 Rxc4 15.Nb3 Qc7 [15...Qb8 16.Bd4=] 16.Bd4 Bc6 17.g4!? [17.a3!?; 17.Qe2!?] 17...e5 18.Be3 hxg4 19.h5? [19.Bg5!=] 19...Rc8 [19...gxf3! 20.h6 Nxe4 21.Nxe4 Bxe4 22.hxg7 Rxc2 23.gxf8Q+ Kxf8 24.Qxd6+ Qxd6 25.Rxd6 f2-/+] 20.Bh6?! [20.h6!=] 20...Rxc3 21.bxc3 gxf3 22.Bxg7 Kxg7 23.hxg6 fxg6 24.Qh6+ Kf7 25.Nd2 Ba4 26.Nxf3 Bxc2+ 27.Kc1 [White draws with 27.Kxc2! Qxc3+ 28.Kb1

Qb4+ 29.Ka1=] 27...Bxd1 [Black is winning with 27...Qxc3! 28.Ng5+ Ke8 29.Qh8+ Kd7-+] 28.Ng5+ Ke8 29.Qh8+ [29.Qxg6+! Kd7 30.Qf5+ Kc6 31.Qxf6 Bg4=/+] 29...Kd7 30.Qg7+ Kc6 31.Qxf6 Bh5 32.Kd2 b5 33.Nf7 Kb6 34.Rh3 Rf8 35.Qxd6+ Qxd6+ 36.Nxd6 Rf2+ 37.Kd3 Kc5 0-1

124 – Hartman 10.0-0-0 Rc8 11.Bb3 Long ago I learned about attacking when players castle on opposite sides. One little book had a big impact on me. I think the book was "The Art of the Middlegame" by Paul Keres and Alexander Kotov, but my memory fails me sometimes. I do remember that it was a great book. When players castle opposite sides, the plan is to push pawns at your opponent's king. In this Sicilian Defence Dragon Variation, both sides get to test out the theory. Darryl Hartman and I played a popular line in opening theory. White ripped open the kingside and sacrificed in a bold manner. Black picked up extra pawns, but White had counter play. After move 21, Black could not safely avoid the draw by perpetual check. Hartman and I played one other very short draw that year. In that game, I tried 4.Qxd4. Both of us chose to invest more effort on other postal games that we were playing at that time. Sawyer (2100) - Hartman (2100), corr APCT 1982 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 [4.Qxd4 Bd7 5.c4 1/2-1/2. corr APCT 1982] 4...Nf6 5.Nc3 g6 6.Be3 Bg7 7.f3 Nc6 8.Bc4 0-0 9.Qd2 Bd7 10.0-0-0 Rc8 11.Bb3 Ne5 12.h4 h5 13.Bg5 Rc5 14.g4!? [14.Kb1=] 14...hxg4 15.h5? [15.f4=] 15...Nxh5! 16.Nd5 Rxd5 [16...Re8-/+] 17.Bxd5 Qb6 18.c3 e6 19.Bb3?! [19.fxg4!=] 19...gxf3 20.Kc2? [20.Bh6 Qd8-/+] 20...Rc8 [20...a5!-+] 21.Bh6 [21.Be3 Ng4-+] 21...Nc4 [This leads to a drawn position. Black is still better after 21...Bxh6 22.Qxh6 f2-/+] 22.Bxc4 Rxc4 23.Bxg7 Kxg7 24.Rxh5 gxh5 25.Rg1+ Kf8 26.Qh6+ Ke7 27.Qg5+ Kf8 28.Qg8+ Ke7 29.Qg5+ 1/2-1/2

125 – Horwitz 10.0-0-0 Rc8 11.Bb3 I discovered a new move in the Sicilian Defence Dragon Variation. I found that a few months later World Champion Anatoly Karpov played the same move about the same time! It was a novelty for me. Karpov maybe already knew 14.Rhe1!? The Sicilian Dragon naturally allows White to attack kingside or in the center. Black attacks queenside or in the center. Thus 14.Rhe1 (center) and 14...b5 (queenside) look logical. Probably the champion planned this idea in advance, since Sosonko was likely to repeat a line in which he had previously won. The game Zuidema Sosonko, 1976 continued 15.f4 Nc4 16.Bxc4 bxc4 17.e5 and Black won. Later, Anatoly Karpov took the knight before pushing the e-pawn with 17.Bxf6 Bxf6 18.e5 and White won in 30 moves. My opponent Daniel M. Horwitz became a strong postal chess player. Danny is frequently rated over 2300 by ICCF and by USCF. Daniel Horwitz has maintained an active and successful correspondence career. The Dragon provokes mistakes. Sharp players hope their opponents will make more and bigger mistakes. My central strategy in this game paid off. Sawyer (2000) - Horwitz, corr APCT 1979 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 g6 6.Be3 Bg7 7.f3 0-0 8.Qd2 Nc6 9.Bc4 Bd7 10.0-0-0 Rc8 11.Bb3 Ne5 12.h4 h5 13.Bg5 Rc5 14.Rhe1 [14.Kb1 b5 15.Rhe1 a5 16.f4=] 14...b5 15.Nd5?! [15.f4 Nc4 16.Bxc4 bxc4 17.Bxf6 Bxf6 18.e5= Karpov] 15...Nxd5 16.exd5 a5 [16...Re8=/+] 17.f4 f6? [Attacking the wrong bishop. Better is 17...a4! 18.fxe5 Bxe5 19.Rxe5 dxe5 20.d6 Qa8!=] 18.fxe5 fxg5 19.exd6 exd6 20.Ne6 Bxe6 [20...Qf6 21.c3+/=] 21.dxe6 Qe7 22.Qxd6 Re8 23.Qxe7 Rxe7 24.Rd7 Bf8 25.Rd8 Rf5 26.c4 bxc4 27.Bxc4 gxh4 28.Red1 Rc5 29.b3 Rxe6? [29...Kg7 30.R1d7+/-] 30.Kb2 [30.Rf1+-] 30...Rxc4 31.bxc4 Rf6 32.R1d7 Rf5 33.Kb3 Rg5

34.Rd2 Kg7 35.R8d5 Rg3+ 36.R5d3 Rg5 37.Rc2 Rc5 38.Rd5 Kf6 39.Rf2+ Kg7 40.Rd7+ 1-0

126 – bjerky 10.0-0-0 Ne5 11.Bb3 I love beef jerky. Strips of lean meat with the fat missing. What can be wrong with that? It tastes great to me, but my wife cannot stand the smell. Apparently it gives me Dragon breath. After a day of playing 1.d4 and a couple hours working on BDGs, I decided to go online and play a blitz game before bedtime. This time I ventured 1.e4! My opponent for this three minute blitz game was "bjerky". Fortunately we cannot smell or tell anything about Dragon breath online. We rattled off the first 14 moves very quickly in a Sicilian Defence variation. By transposition we got into a well-known rich and wild position. For the next 20 moves pieces were flying all over the place. In the end I caught the his Black king before he caught mine. Sawyer - bjerky, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 18.11.2012 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Bc4!? [I keep playing this line because I keep winning with it. When I stop winning, I will go back to 5.Nc3] 5...Nc6 6.Nc3 g6 7.Be3 Bg7 8.f3 0-0 9.Qd2 Bd7 10.0-0-0 Ne5 11.Bb3 Rc8 12.h4 h5 13.Bg5 Rc5 14.g4 [This Soltis Variation has been reached thousands of times. I used to play it 30 years ago. Equally popular is 14.Kb1 b5 15.g4 with complications.] 14...hxg4 15.Bh6? [I play and new move, and it stinks?! About 1000 games in my database went 15.f4 Nc4 16.Qe2 with an unclear position.] 15...Nc4? [Black lets me off the hook. I would have been in trouble after 15...gxf3!-+] 16.Bxc4 Rxc4 17.Bxg7 Kxg7 18.h5 Rh8 19.fxg4 Bxg4 20.Rdg1? [Correct was 20.hxg6! because if 20...Bxd1? White has 21.Nf5+ Kf8 22.Rxh8+ Ng8 23.Rxg8+ Kxg8 24.Qh6+- and mate next move.] 20...Bxh5 [20...Qb6!-/+] 21.Nf5+ Kf8 22.Nd5 Nxe4 23.Qg2? [23.Qd3=] 23...e6 24.Nfe3 Ra4 25.Nf4 Ra5? [25...Qb6!-+] 26.Rxh5? [26.Qxe4+- turns the tables.] 26...Raxh5? [26...Rhxh5-+] 27.Nxe6+? fxe6 28.Qxe4 Qb6 [28...Qe7-/+] 29.Qxe6 Re5? [Black has a drawing line:

29...Rh1! 30.Qc8+ Kg7 31.Qd7+ Kf8= repeating moves.] 30.Rf1+ Kg7 31.Qf6+ Kh6 32.Qxh8+ Kg5 33.Qf6+ Kh6 34.Ng4+ 1-0

127 – Sedlock 10.0-0-0 Ne5 11.Bb3 Ervin F. Sedlock was one of many APCT players from Illinois, the home of Jim and Helen Warren. It appears that Erv Sedlock retired to Florida. I did the same thing. Sedlock was a USCF National Tournament Director. Erv Sedlock played chess for over 60 years. I have a dozen of his games in my database. He was in his 40s when we played this game. We contested a popular Sicilian Defence Dragon Variation. This game saw the battle of two rooks. Black doubled his rooks on the c-file. They were ready for attack. Meanwhile the White pawns were racing toward the Black king. Soon the White queen invaded. White doubled his rooks on the first rank. Then the kingside pawns disappeared. The White rooks on g1 and h1 proved to be very powerful on those open lines. Black had the advantage of the two bishops against two knights. However, White had the initiative. His knights were side by side hitting many strategic squares. The Black king was flushed out of the pocket to the open field. In a tactical combination black lost one of his bishops. Down a piece in the endgame, Black resigned. This is one of the better Dragon Sicilians that I played. Sawyer (2150) - Sedlock (2000), corr APCT 1982 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 g6 6.Be3 Bg7 7.f3 Nc6 8.Bc4 0-0 9.Qd2 Bd7 10.0-0-0 Ne5 11.Bb3 Qa5 12.h4 Rfc8 13.Kb1 Nc4 14.Bxc4 Rxc4 15.Nb3 Qd8 [15...Qc7 16.g4+/=] 16.Bh6 [16.e5!+/-] 16...Bh8 [16...Bxh6 17.Qxh6+/=] 17.h5 Rac8 18.hxg6 hxg6 19.g4?! [19.e5!+/-] 19...b5 [19...Bxg4!=] 20.Qh2 b4 21.Bf8 [Wrong direction. Correct is 21.Bf4! Bg7 22.Nd5 Nxd5 23.Qh7+ Kf8 24.Bh6+-] 21...Nh5 22.gxh5 Qxf8 [22...g5

23.Bxe7 Qxe7 24.Nd5+/-] 23.hxg6 Qg7 24.gxf7+ Kxf7 25.Qh5+ Qg6 26.Qxg6+ Kxg6 27.Rdg1+ Kf7 28.Rh7+ Ke6 29.Nd5 Bf6 30.Rg6 Re8 31.Rxe7+ Rxe7 32.Rxf6+ Ke5 33.f4+ Kxe4 34.Nxe7 1-0

4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 Nc6 This Classical Sicilian often becomes a Richter-Rauzer 6.Bg5.

128 – Haines 6.Bb5 Bd7 7.Nxc6 Do you like the move 6.Bb5 for White? In the classical open Sicilian Defence White plays 3.d4. Black plays 2...d6 and 5...Nc6 in either one order or the other. After 6.Bb5 Bd7 7.Nxc6 bxc6, Black prepared for the counter thrust ...d6-d5. This worked well with pawns on e6 and c6. Then, Ray Haines boldly played 12...e5. This fought for d4 and f4 but weakened d5. The big idea of this game is a Black pawn sacrifice with 17...d5?! In theory the pawn advance to d5 is a logical strategy, but here Black was just a pawn down. The logical move 6.Bb5 used to be rare. Strong chess engines consider it to be as good as anything else. It looks like a waste of time. The move 6.Bb5 forces Black to improve his position and defend c6. If the bishop is chased away, White has lost a tempo. After he gave up a pawn, Ray Haines did well to survive. He worked the position into a drawn rook and pawn endgame. Guest - Haines, chess24, 17.02.2016 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 Nc6 6.Bb5 Bd7 7.Nxc6 bxc6 8.Bd3 [8.Bc4 is more common.] 8...e6 9.0-0 Rb8 10.b3 Be7 11.Bb2 0-0 12.f3 e5 13.Ne2 Be6 14.c4 Qb6+ 15.Kh1 Rfd8 16.Nc3 Bf8 [Black could activate his kingside pieces with 16...Nh5=] 17.Qe1 d5?! [This is a risky sacrifice. 17...Nh5=] 18.cxd5 [18.Na4! seems to win a pawn, or more in the case of 18...Qc7? 19.exd5 cxd5 20.Bxe5 Bd6 21.Bxf6 gxf6 22.cxd5 Bxd5 23.Qh4+-] 18...cxd5 19.Nxd5 [19.Na4 Qd6 20.exd5 Qxd5 21.Bc4 Qd7 22.Bxe6 Qxe6 23.Qxe5+/=] 19...Nxd5 20.exd5 Bxd5 21.Bxe5 Re8? [21...Rbc8 22.Rd1+/=] 22.f4?! [22.Qh4! g6 23.Bxb8+-] 22...Rbd8 23.Qf2 Qxf2 24.Rxf2 Bxg2+ 25.Rxg2 Rxd3 26.Bb2 Re4 27.f5 Rde3 28.Rgg1 Re2 29.Bc3 [29.Bxg7=] 29...Rc2 [29...Rf4=/+] 30.Bxg7 Bxg7 31.f6 Ree2?!

[31...Rh4=] 32.Rxg7+ Kf8 33.Rxh7 Kg8 [33...Ke8 34.Rd1+/=] 34.Rg7+ [34.Rh5+/-] 34...Kh8 35.Rd1 Rxh2+ 36.Kg1 Rhd2 37.Re1 Re2 38.Rd1 Red2 39.Re1 Re2 40.Rd1?! [This leads to a draw. Better is 40.Rxe2 Rxe2 41.a4+/-] 40...Red2 1/2-1/2

129 – Rodriguez 6.Be3 Ng4 Doubled pawns are a double-edged sword. They cut in both directions. Jeremy Silman points this out when he writes about imbalances. Everything that makes your position different than your opponent’s position is an imbalance. Just about every imbalance has both positive and negative aspects. The negative aspects of doubled pawns are the limitations they have in advancing or breaking up your opponent’s pawns. The positive aspects are an extra open file and better defense. White played 6.Be3 in this Classical Sicilian Variation between Andres Rodriguez Vila and Jair Osipi. Both sides had blocked and doubled epawns. White had a knight and a c-pawn. Black had a bishop and an fpawn. White combined an attack on both the f-file and d-file to catch Black’s vulnerable king in the center. Rodriguez Vila (2477) - Osipi (2200), Brazil Foz do Iguacu Open Foz do Iguacu BRA (7.8), 19.05.2018 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 d6 6.Be3 Ng4 7.Bb5 Bd7 [7...Nxe3 8.fxe3 Bd7 9.0-0 transposes to the game] 8.0-0 Nxe3 9.fxe3 Ne5?! [9...e6 10.Bxc6 bxc6=] 10.Nf3 Bxb5 11.Nxb5 e6? [11...f6 12.Qd5+/=] 12.Nxe5 dxe5 13.Qh5! Qe7 14.Nd6+ [After 14...Kd7 15.Rxf7+-] 1-0

130 – Muzychuk 6.Bg5 Bd7 The Sicilian Defence Richter Rauzer Variation 6.Bg5 Bd7 7.Qd2 Rc8 plays for a quick queenside attack. Black allows his f-pawns to be doubled to gain the two bishops. White finished with a nice combination in Mariya Muzychuk vs Alexander Bagrationi. Muzychuk (2521) - Bagrationi (2539), 4th Gideon Japhet Mem Op Jerusalem ISR (7.4), 06.07.2018 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 Nc6 6.Bg5 Bd7 7.Qd2 Rc8 8.0-0-0 Nxd4 9.Qxd4 Qa5 10.f4 h6 11.Bxf6 gxf6 12.Kb1 Qc5 [12...Bg7 13.f5+/=] 13.Qd2 f5 14.e5 [14.exf5 Bxf5 15.Bb5+ Kd8 16.Bd3=] 14...e6? [14...Bg7=] 15.g4! Bc6 16.Bg2 Bxg2 17.Qxg2 Rg8 18.Qxb7 Rc7 19.Qa6 Rxg4? [19...Rc6 20.Qa4+/=] 20.exd6

Rc6 21.d7+ Kd8 22.Qb7 Bd6 23.Nb5! Rb6 [If Black checks the king White wins the game after 23...Qxc2+ 24.Ka1 Rb6 25.Qc8+ Qxc8 26.dxc8Q+ Kxc8 27.Nxd6+ Kc7 28.Nxf7+-] 24.Nxd6! [After 24.Nxd6 Rxd6 25.Rxd6 Qxd6 26.Qc8+ Ke7 27.Qe8+!+- and White gains a second queen.] 1-0

131 – Zdun 6.Bg5 a6 7.Qd2 Qb6 Dick Zdun was a practical player with decades of experience. He did not play openings with the intention of winning immediately. Although if you blundered, he would happily win. Sharp players choose openings based on exact knowledge. Other players are more philosophical. They play the opening following general principles. There are players who play the same openings repeatedly. Dick was not that type of player. I never knew what he would play. Mr. Zdun made his selections based on a wide variety of reliable openings. He had a basic knowledge of many popular lines. I won a game vs Dick Zdun in the Sicilian Defence Rauzer. Black plays 2… d6 or 5…Nc6 (or in reverse order as here). White in the Rauzer plays 6.Bg5 with a threat to leave Black with doubled pawns. The normal reply is 6… e6. In this game Zdun treated the position like a Najdorf with the moves 6…a6, 7…Qb6 and 8…Be6. But he left his e-pawn on e7. Then Black attacked kingside and queenside. When Black tried to activate his dark squared with 16…Bh6 and 17…Bg5, the bishop became basically a super pawn hemmed in by pawn f4 and f6. White invaded through light squared holes in Black’s defense. Then White sacrificed a knight on d8 and rook on e7 to force checkmate with a queen and rook. Sawyer (2010) - Zdun (1634), Williamsport, PA 06.02.2001 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 d6 6.Bg5 a6 7.Qd2 Qb6 8.Nb3 Be6 9.Be2 Ng4 10.0-0 f6 11.Nd5 Bxd5 12.exd5 Nce5 13.Bf4 g5 14.h3 gxf4 15.Bxg4 Nxg4 16.hxg4 Bh6 17.Nd4 [17.Qd3+/=] 17...Bg5 [17...f3! 18.Qc3+/=] 18.Ne6 [18.Nf5+/- looks good] 18...h6 19.Qd3 Kf7 20.b3 Rac8 21.c4 Qa5 22.a4 Qb4 23.Rfe1 b5 24.axb5 axb5 25.Qf5 Rce8 [25...bxc4? 26.Nxg5+ hxg5 27.Rxe7+ Kxe7 28.Ra7+ mates] 26.cxb5 Qxb3

27.Nd8+! Rxd8 [On 27...Kf8 I intended 28.Qg6 (28.Ra8! Kg7 29.Ra7+-) 28...Qxd5 29.Ne6+ Qxe6 30.Rxe6+-] 28.Rxe7+ Kxe7 29.Ra7+ Kf8 30.Qg6 1-0

132 – Anand 6.Bg5 e6 7.Qd2 a6 Former World Champion Vishy Anand found success in this Sicilian Defence. His attack in rapid play led to a short win. I enjoy the style of Viswanathan Anand. His approach is bold but not unduly risky. GM Anand is a great player to model. Alexander Khalifman wrote a series of many books entitled “An Opening for White according to Anand” based on his repertoire. Li Chao2 of China is sometimes called “Li Chao b” since there is another player named “Li Chao”. Years ago China was not very strong in chess. Now their country is number 3 in the world. In a Sicilian Rauzer 6.Bg5 White chooses between 9.f4 or 9.f3. This game was decided by the powerful play of Anand’s g-pawn. Anand (2779) - Li Chao2 (2720), World Rapid 2016 Doha QAT (7.5), 27.12.2016 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 Nc6 6.Bg5 e6 7.Qd2 a6 8.0-0-0 Bd7 9.f4 b5 10.Bxf6 [10.Nxc6 Bxc6 11.Bd3 Be7 12.e5 dxe5 13.fxe5 Nd7 14.Bxe7 Qxe7 15.Be4=] 10...gxf6 [10...Qxf6 11.e5 dxe5 12.Ndxb5 Qd8 13.Nd6+ Bxd6 14.Qxd6 exf4 15.Ne4+/-] 11.Kb1 [11.Nxc6 Bxc6 12.Kb1+/=] 11...b4 [11...Qb6 12.Nf3 Be7 13.f5 0-0-0 14.g3 Kb8 15.fxe6 fxe6 16.Bh3+/=] 12.Nce2 Qb6 13.g3 [13.Nxc6 Bxc6 14.f5 e5 15.Ng3+/=] 13...Rc8 14.Bg2 [14.Qd3!?] 14...h5!? [More often players push the other rook pawn 14...a5 15.Rhe1 Nxd4 16.Nxd4 Bg7 17.Re3 0-0 18.Rd3=] 15.Bf3 [15.Nxc6 Qxc6 16.Nd4+/=] 15...Na5 16.b3 Bg7 [16...Nb7=] 17.g4!? [17.Rhe1=] 17...h4? 18.g5 fxg5 19.Rhg1 Rc5 20.fxg5 20...0-0 21.Nf4 Nc6 22.Nxc6 Bxc6? 23.g6! f5 24.Nxe6 fxe4 25.Nxg7 Kxg7 26.Qxd6 Re8 27.Bxe4 Rxe4 28.Rgf1 1-0

133 – Sawyer 6.Bg5 e6 7.Qd2 In the Sicilian Defence Richter-Rauzer Variation the players normally castle on opposite sides. The strategy follows in which both sides plan an attack against the enemy king. My opponent "cassiopea" in the game below went for a quick build up on the c-file. I should have crossed up Black's move order with 11.Nbd5, but I backed off with 11.Nb3. Chances were pretty much even, but in the endgame I had a fortunate fork that won. This was one of those times were I chose my opening line based on which had given me the highest performance rating. Note that my move order was chosen because at the time my performance with 2.Nc3 was one rating point higher than 2.Nf3. Later the two moves scored equally well. Other times I choose my openings based on winning percentage. After all, once the pieces are developed it is just me playing. My results tend to be about the same in any opening. Sawyer - cassiopea, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 08.11.2012 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nc3 d6 3.Nf3 Nc6 4.d4 cxd4 5.Nxd4 Nf6 6.Bg5 e6 7.Qd2 Be7 8.f3 [8.0-0-0 0-0 9.f3 transposes] 8...0-0 9.0-0-0 Bd7 [Black usually plays 9...a6 or 9...Nxd4] 10.Kb1 Rc8 11.Nb3 [11.Ndb5+/=] 11...a6 12.g4 Ne5 13.Be2 Nc4 14.Bxc4 Rxc4 15.h4 b5 16.h5 Qc7 17.Be3 Rc8 18.Rc1 b4 19.Ne2 a5 20.g5 Ne8 21.g6 Bf6 22.gxf7+ Kxf7 23.Bd4? [23.Qd3 a4 24.Nd2=] 23...a4 24.Bxf6 Nxf6 25.Nbd4 e5 26.Nf5 Bxf5 27.exf5 d5?! [27...Qd7=/+] 28.h6 b3 29.cxb3 Rxc1+ 30.Rxc1 Qd7 31.Rxc8 Qxc8 32.hxg7 axb3 33.axb3 Qxf5+ 34.Qc2 Qxf3 35.Qc7+ Kg8 36.Qxe5 Kxg7 37.Nd4 [37.Ka2=] 37...Qe4+ 38.Qxe4 Nxe4 [38...dxe4-/+] 39.b4 h6 40.b5 h5? [40...Kf6 41.b6 Nd6 42.Kc2=] 41.b6 Nd6 42.Nf5+ Nxf5 43.b7 [Black forfeits on time just before White gets a new queen.] 1-0

134 – Taylor 7.Qd2 Be7 8.0-0-0 Why do players sacrifice material? A chess sacrifice increases the drama in a game. It adds to the beauty. It provides comedy. Yes, a chess sacrifice is a wonderful move. I still love to sacrifice and I am past 60 years old! Emanuel Lasker famously said, “The delight in gambits is a sign of chess youth... we with maturing experience leave off gambit playing…” My wife asked me when I was going to write my book, “Maturity and How I Attained It”. She said it would be a work of fiction. She is only half joking. We met in 1976, and she knows me very well. Immaturity in chess makes me want to sacrifice when I should be serious and hold on to more material. I don’t want to throw my material away for no reason. I just want to have fun when I win. I find sacrifices even when I do not play gambits. To complicate matters, a lot of my games were played in online blitz games or in unrated club games. I could and did play boldly. The risks in such contests were minor. I won this game in the Rauzer Sicilian Defence vs Allen Taylor in Williamsport. I focused my play on the center with rooks on d1 and e1. Then on move 15, I sacrificed a knight. On move 17, White can regain the piece. Instead I got too cute. I sacrificed the Exchange. I took a bishop with the rook. I should just grab the other bishop with a pawn. Waiting a move to play 18.dxc6 gave Black a chance for a better defense. In this club game Black missed it. I was able to pull off a pretty finish. When Black resigned, he was up the Exchange. But we were headed to a pawn endgame where only I would have a bishop. Sawyer - Taylor, Williamsport PA 1995 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 Nc6 6.Bg5 e6 7.Qd2 Be7 8.0-0-0 a6 9.f3 [9.Bxf6=] 9...Rb8 10.Be2 Bd7 11.Rhe1 b5 12.Nxc6 Bxc6 13.Bf1!? [13.Bxf6!=] 13...b4 [13...0-0 14.Bf4=] 14.Bxf6 Bxf6 15.Nd5 exd5 [15...Bxd5 16.exd5 e5=] 16.exd5+ Be7 17.Rxe7+!? [Better is 17.dxc6+-] 17...Kxe7 18.dxc6

Re8 [18...Qc7 19.Bc4+/=] 19.Bxa6 Kf8 20.Qxd6+ Qxd6 21.Rxd6 Re6 22.Rxe6 fxe6 23.c7 1-0

4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 e6 This is the Classical Scheveningen Sicilian Defence with Black pawns on d6 and e6.

135 – Raja Harshit 6.Be3 a6 7.g4 Fifty years ago when the Chess Informant people in Yugoslavia were developing codes for opening systems the move 6.Be3 vs the Sicilian Defence Scheveningen was considered to be a mere transpositional device. White would probably play 6.Be2 or 6.Bc4 with a later Be3. The same position could also be reached via 6.Be3 first. Other lines with 6.Be3 were likely to be rare and less important. They published the Encyclopedia of Chess Openings [ECO] over the next decade. The released about one volume per year for five years in the later 1970s. As I recall, they first published volume C, then B, then D, then E, and last of all ECO A. The Sicilian Defence is covered in ECO B from B20 to B99 with the popular and critical lines being at the end of each variation. The Scheveningen is B80-B89. The move 6.Be3 is B80 because it had not yet developed into the major system that it is today. The Sicilian Defence English Attack 6.Be3 leads to wonderful attacks where White castles queenside and pushes pawns to f3, g4 and h4. Raja Harshit took a different approach vs Gabriela Antova. He avoided 7.f3 and played 7.g4, 8.Bg2, and 10.h4. Raja Harshit (2427) - Antova (2260), Gibraltar Masters Caleta ENG, 28.01.2018 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Be3 e6 7.g4 b5 [7...e5=] 8.Bg2 [8.g5!? Nfd7 9.a3+/=] 8...Bb7 9.a3 [9.g5 Nfd7 10.f4=] 9...Nfd7 10.h4 Nb6 11.g5 d5 [11...N8d7=] 12.h5 [12.0-0+-] 12...e5 [12...Nc4 13.Qe2+/-] 13.h6! gxh6 [13...g6 14.exd5+-] 14.exd5 Nxd5 15.Nc6 Nxc6 16.Bxd5 [16.Nxd5 Bg7 17.Bb6 Qxg5 18.Nc7+ Kf8 19.Bxc6

Bxc6 20.Qd6+ Kg8 21.Qxc6+-] 16...hxg5? [16...Qd7 17.Qf3 0-0-0 18.Bb6+-] 17.Qf3 Qc7 18.Qf6 b4 [18...Nd4 19.Bxd4 exd4 20.0-0-0+-] 19.Bb6 Qd7 20.0-0-0 1-0

136 – Hardison 6.Be3 Nc6 7.f3 The Sicilian Defence English Attack 6.Be3 is a race. Players castle opposite sides and rush to push pawns and to attack targets. It makes for exciting chess. Ray Haines sent me a Sicilian Defence game from the Houlton Open. Ray writes, “I was black against Roger Hardison. I won the game, He traded Queens early, but I still had a lot of play. He made two big mistakes losing a piece each time.” Thanks Ray. That sums it up. The players followed for ten moves what they had played earlier in the year. Attackers prefer 11.g5 or 11.h4 as Roger Hardison played last time. White chose the slower 11.Rg1. This was not a blunder. It seemed like a waste of time because the rook might be better on h1 than g1. When White played 13.Qb6, his intention to swap queens made it clear that he no longer intended to attack kingside. There are easier paths to an even endgame than the Open Sicilian. The game was still up for grabs until White’s game fell apart. Hardison - Haines, Houlton ME (2), 05.08.2017 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 d6 6.Be3 e6 7.f3 Be7 8.Qd2 a6 9.g4 Qc7 10.0-0-0 0-0 11.Rg1 Nxd4 12.Qxd4 b5 13.Qb6 [13.g5 Nd7 14.f4 Bb7 15.Kb1=] 13...Qxb6 14.Bxb6 Bb7 15.Be3 Rac8 16.a3 Rfd8 17.Bb6 Re8 18.Bd3 [18.g5=] 18...Nd7 19.Be3 Bf6 20.Ne2 Ne5 21.Rgf1 Nxd3+ 22.Rxd3 d5 23.g5 Be7 [Or 23...dxe4-/+] 24.e5 b4 25.axb4 Bxb4 26.Kb1 a5 27.c3 Ba6 28.Rd2 Be7 29.Nd4 Bxf1 30.f4 Bc5 31.Rd1 Bh3 32.Rd2 Bxd4 33.Bxd4 Bf5+ 34.Ka1 Rb8 35.Ka2 a4 36.Bc5 Rec8 37.Bb4 Rc4 38.Rd4 Rxd4 0-1

137 – Hardison 6.Be3 Nc6 7.f3 English Attack is a logical approach to the Sicilian. Ray Haines wrote this which I edit here: "My game with Roger Hardison was a wide open game with both kings being open to attack. He played 18.gxh7 with check. I did not like to take that pawn with my king because he could move his bishop to d3. This would result in him having a discovered check. I was happy with my game here, but it was not a simple game with this fast time control." Haines finished second in this tournament won by Leonardo Cui of Canada. White started well with an attack on the kingside. Black moved the action to the queenside. Play went back and forth with a slight edge in each direction. When White blundered on move 25, Black’s attack gained great momentum. Hardison - Haines, Houlton Open (3), 07.01.2017 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 Nc6 6.Be3 e6 7.f3 Be7 8.Qd2 a6 9.0-0-0 Qc7 [9...0-0 10.g4 Nxd4 11.Bxd4 b5 12.h4 b4 13.Na4 Rb8=] 10.g4 0-0 11.h4 [11.g5 Nd7 12.h4 b5 13.g6!? with a sharp position.] 11...b5 12.a3 [12.g5+/=] 12...Rb8 [12...Nxd4 13.Bxd4 Nd7=] 13.h5 b4 14.axb4 [14.Nxc6! Qxc6 15.axb4 Rxb4 16.g5 Ne8 17.Nd5+/-] 14...Nxb4 [14...Nxd4 15.Bxd4 Qb7 16.g5 Qxb4 and Black has good practical chances.] 15.Nb3 [15.g5+/=] 15...Qb7 16.g5 [16.Bc4=] 16...Nd7 17.g6 Nxc2 18.gxh7+ Kh8 [18...Kxh7 19.Qxc2 Qxb3 20.Qg2 Bf6=/+] 19.Qxc2 Qxb3 20.Qg2 Kxh7 [20...Bf6=/+] 21.Bd3 Ne5 22.Rhg1 Bf6 23.f4 Nxd3+ 24.Rxd3 Qc4 [24...Rg8!? -/+] 25.Qd2? [25.Qc2!=] 25...Bb7 26.e5 dxe5 27.fxe5 Bxe5 28.Bd4 Qc7 29.Qg5 Bf4+ 0-1

138 – Hardison 6.Be3 Nc6 7.f3 Roger Hardison met the Sicilian Defence with the bold English Attack. White's pieces focused on the d5 square. Hardison had a powerful shot 13.Nd5! but he missed it. Ray Haines had Black. He tended to play best in sharp positions. The bottom line was Ray Haines played better overall. He wrote: "My game with Roger Hardison ... I made some mistakes in that game which he did not take advantage of. I was looking at different attacking lines and chose one which had a rook sac. This was the wrong line of play. It would have been better to trade his bishop for my knight. I would then have a pawn fixed on his b3 square and could have pushed the rook pawn to open the rook file." In a couple phases, as Ray noted above, White "did not take advantage" of his chances. We all miss stuff. Most of this game favored Black, and Ray Haines won in the end. Hardison - Haines, Houlton Open (1), 05.03.2016 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 Nc6 6.Be3 e6 7.f3 Be7 8.Qd2 a6 9.Bc4 Qc7 10.0-0-0 0-0 11.Bb3 b5 12.g4 Nd7? [Both sides had played well so far, but this move gives White a strong attack. If Black wants to redeploy his knight from f6, first he should trade off his other knight on d4 with 12...Nxd4 13.Qxd4 Nd7=] 13.Qf2?! [Because of the position of the Black knights, the d5 square is weak. White has the powerful response in 13.Nd5! exd5 14.Nxc6 Ne5 (14...Qxc6? 15.Bxd5+-) 15.exd5+/=] 13...b4? 14.Nce2?! [14.Nd5!+/- still works.] 14...Nxd4 15.Nxd4 Nc5 16.Ne2? a5 [This is good. Even better is 16...Nxb3+! 17.axb3 a5-+] 17.Bxc5 dxc5 18.Bc4 a4 19.Kb1 b3 20.cxb3 axb3 21.a3 Ba6 22.Rc1 Bf6 23.f4? [23.Bxa6 Qd6=/+] 23...Bxc4 [23...Bxb2! 24.Kxb2 Bxc4 25.Rxc4 Qa5-+] 24.Rxc4 Rxa3? [This was the last chance for 24...Bxb2!-+] 25.bxa3 Qa5 26.Nc1 [White is winning, as he was a dozen moves earlier. The best winning continuation may be 26.Nc3!+-] 26...Bd4 27.Qe2?! [27.Rxd4! cxd4 28.Rd1 Qxa3 29.Qb2+-] 27...Qxa3 28.Rxd4 cxd4 29.Qb2 Qa8 30.Re1 Rc8 31.Re2

[31.Qxd4+/=] 31...Qa6 32.Qxb3 Qc6 [32...Qa8=] 33.Qc2 [33.Nd3+/-] 33...Rb8+ 34.Nb3?! [34.Ka1=] 34...Qb5 35.Kb2? [35.Rd2 Qxb3+ 36.Qxb3 Rxb3+ 37.Kc2 Rc3+ 38.Kd1 h5-/+] 35...d3 0-1

139 – Haines 6.g4 a6 7.g5 This postal game highlights one of my lovable flaws. I love speculative sacrifices. I’m not always in the mood for one, but I play them whenever they strike my fancy. Long ago I played a Sicilian Keres Attack 6.g4 against the Scheveningen Variation of Ray Haines. The 6.g4 Keres Attack is a quick White pawn push. White threatens 7.g5 driving the knight away from f6. With this comes the dream of a big space advantage and lots of tactics. Our chances were even for the first dozen moves. Then my flaw took over. I sacrificed a piece with 13.Ne6?! I had what might be considered two pawns compensation. Haines stood better until he missed 16…Ke7! Then it was equal, until he missed 22…Bc5! The advantage switched to White in a complicated middlegame. Like in a Dragon Sicilian, White’s extra pawns were on the queenside and Black’s extras were on the kingside. Sawyer - Haines, corr 1980 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 e6 6.g4 a6 [6...h6 7.h4=] 7.g5 Nfd7 8.Be3 b5 9.a3 Nb6 10.Rg1 [10.h4 N8d7 11.h5 Ne5=] 10...N8d7 11.f4 Bb7 12.f5 [12.Qh5 g6 13.Qh3=] 12...e5 13.Ne6?! [13.Nb3=] 13...fxe6 14.Qh5+ Ke7 15.fxe6 Kxe6 16.0-0-0 g6 [16...Ke7! 17.g6 Nf6-/+] 17.Bh3+ Ke7 18.Qg4 Qe8 19.Qe6+ Kd8 20.Bxb6+ Nxb6 21.Rxd6+ Kc7 22.Rxb6 Qxe6 [22...Bc5!=] 23.Rxe6 Bc8 24.Re8 Bb7 25.Rxa8 Bxa8 26.Rf1 Be7 27.Rf7 Kd6 28.Kd1 Bxg5 29.Ra7 Kc5 30.Rxa6 Kd4? 31.Nxb5+ [31.Ke2+/-] 31...Ke3 32.Nd6 Rd8 33.Kc1!? Bxe4 34.Kb1 Bf4 35.Nxe4 Rd1+ 36.Ka2 Kxe4 37.Bg2+ [37.a4=] 37...Ke3 38.Rc6 Rd2 39.Bh3 e4 40.Bf1 Kf2 41.Bb5 Rd5 42.c4 Rxb5? [42...Rf5=/+] 43.cxb5 g5 44.b6 e3 45.Rf6 e2 46.b7 e1Q 47.b8Q 1-0

140 – Antipov 6.g4 h6 7.g5 Grabbing a little pawn is dangerous if your chess opponent has developed everything and you have not. This Sicilian Keres Attack gave Black an open h-file after 7...hxg5. Grandmaster Mikhail Antipov boldly answered 13...Rxh2 with the move 14.Nd5!? Ylon Schwartz tried not to open up the center. Even so, White came crashing through with 16.Nxe6! Antipov (2588) - Schwartz (2267), Gibraltar Masters 2018 Caleta ENG (1.38), 23.01.2018 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 e6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 d6 6.g4 h6 7.g5 hxg5 8.Bxg5 a6 9.f4 Qc7 10.Qd2 Nbd7 11.0-0-0 b5 12.Bg2 Bb7 13.Rhe1 Rxh2 14.Nd5!? [14.a3=] 14...Qc4 [14...exd5! 15.exd5+ Kd8 16.Nc6+ Kc8-/+] 15.Re3 Nxe4 [15...Nxd5! 16.exd5 Nf6=/+] 16.Nxe6! fxe6? [16...Ndf6 17.Nec7+ Kd7 18.Nb6+ Kd8 19.Bxf6+ gxf6 20.Rxe4+-] 17.Bxe4 1-0

141 – Baramidze 6.g4 h6 7.h4 It appears the point of the Keres Attack in the Sicilian Defence after 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 e6 6.g4 is to push the g-pawn immediately with 7.g5. What if White really wants a pawn on g5 and Black has defended with 6...h6? In that case, White’s g-pawn would be swapped. What if White wants to constantly threaten to push the pawn g5 but prefers to maintain the tension for as long as feasible? The answer to these questions is for White to play 7.h4 and 8.Rg1. When Black played 8...d5, White turned his attention to the center and the queenside. White punished Black’s greedy a2 capture and then won in David Baramidze vs Lubomir Ftacnik. Baramidze (2610) - Ftacnik (2546), Bundesliga 2017-18 Hockenheim GER (9.5), 24.02.2018 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 e6 6.g4 h6 7.h4 Nc6 8.Rg1 d5 9.exd5 Nxd5 10.Nxd5 exd5 11.Be3 Qxh4 12.Nb5 Qe7 13.Qxd5 a6 [13...Be6 14.Qe4 0-0-0 15.Nxa7+ Nxa7

16.Bxa7 Qc7=] 14.Nc3 Nb4 [14...Be6 15.Qe4 Rd8 16.Bxa6 h5 17.Bb5 Bxg4=] 15.Qd2 Be6 16.0-0-0 Rd8 17.Qe1 Rxd1+ 18.Qxd1 Nxa2+ [18...Qd6 19.Be2 Nd5=] 19.Nxa2 Bxa2 20.c4 Qb4 [20...Qd7 21.Qxd7+ Kxd7 22.Kc2+/-] 21.Bd2 Qb3 [21...Qd6 22.Qa4+ Qd7 23.Qxa2+-] 22.Qe1+ Be7 23.Rg3 Qa4 24.Ra3 1-0

142 – Baffo 6.Be2 Be7 7.0-0 0-0 Jeffrey Baffo and I enjoyed many correspondence games in 1996. I think Jeff enjoyed them more than I did, if the results were any indication. He played the Sicilian Defence vs my Classical Scheveningen approach. This game was our only straight Sicilian but we did transpose to a Sicilian Alapin 2.c3 from the Alekhine Defence. The Sicilian Defence is flexible for Black. Sometimes moves 2, 4, 5, and 6 can be played in any order to reach the same position. Baffo held back the queenside moves …Nc6 and …a6 until moves 8 and 9. By then I knew that we were not playing the Sveshnikov, nor the Dragon, nor the Najdorf. As White I prefer the Open Sicilian 3.d4 lines. Usually I avoid closed or gambit lines but not always. The flexible 6.Be2 has been less common for me as White. More often I play Keres Attack 6.g4 vs the Scheveningen. When Black plays ...Nc6 and ...a6, I like the English Attack set-up after 6.Be3, which resembles the 150 Attack vs the Pirc Defence. Here White mounted a kingside attack, but Black broke through with his own counter attack. It is a good example of how well a queen and knight co-ordinate together effectively. Sawyer (1986) - Baffo (2248), corr USCF 95P139, 08.04.1996 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 e6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 d6 6.Be2 [6.g4!? or 6.Be3] 6… Be7 7.0-0 0-0 8.f4 Nc6 9.Be3 a6 10.a4 Qc7 11.Kh1 Re8 12.Bd3 Bd7 13.Qe1 e5 14.fxe5 dxe5 15.Nf5 Bxf5 16.Rxf5 Bb4 17.Qg3 Bxc3 18.bxc3 Kh8 19.Qh4 Ng8 20.Raf1 f6 21.g4 Rf8 22.g5 Nce7 23.R5f3 Ng6 24.Qh5 fxg5 25.Bxg5 Rxf3 26.Rxf3 Qxc3 27.Rh3 Nh6 28.Bxh6? [28.Rf3 Ng8=/+] 28...gxh6 29.Qxh6 Qe1+ 30.Kg2 Nf4+ 31.Kf3 Qd1+ 32.Ke3 Qg1+ 33.Kd2 Qg2+ 0-1

143 – Haines 6.Be2 Nc6 7.Bg5 Ray Haines and I played the Open Game from each side against each other. Later we incorporated many additional openings into our repertoires. Ray Haines would sometimes switched to the Sicilian Defence. I had played through enough games by the world champions that I knew some basic ideas. However, I did not have any real concrete well-prepared opening variations. In this game I chose a combination of the Richter/Rauzer (6.Bg5) and Classical (6.Be2) variations. Shortly after the opening, Ray sacrificed (or lost) material in an effort to attack my king. Very quickly things fell apart and he dropped a couple pieces. This is a reminder that in almost every game at almost every level the result is decided by the loss of material or mate. What does that teach us? We need to train on tactical skills. The ability to recognize combinations and checkmates is far more important that ideas and strategy. Sawyer - Haines, Ft Fairfield, ME 19.02.1974 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 e6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nc6 5.Nc3 d6 6.Be2 [A popular choice is to transpose into a Sozin Variation with 6.Be3 Nf6 7.Bc4 Be7 8.Qe2] 6...Nf6 7.Bg5 Be7 8.f4!? [8.Qd2 a6] 8...a6 9.Nb3 0-0 10.0-0 b5 11.Bf3 [White could play 11.a3!? to hinder ...b4.] 11...Qb6+ 12.Kh1 b4 [12...Bb7 13.a3] 13.e5! dxe5 14.fxe5 Nxe5 15.Bxa8 Nfg4? [With Be7 undefended, this is knight move is a major blunder. Black's game almost immediately falls apart. Junior 12 likes 15...bxc3 16.bxc3 Bd7 17.Qd4 Qb8 18.Bf4 Qxa8 19.Bxe5 Bc6=] 16.Bxe7 Nf2+ 17.Rxf2 Qxf2 White is way ahead in material. Black resigns. 1-0

144 – Haines 6.Be2 a6 7.Be3 The battle in the Sicilian Defence takes place on any of the four squares in the middle of the board. Roger Morin took on Ray Haines in a battle over the center. Ray Haines wrote: “I played Roger Morin from Houlton Maine. He has a 2020 rating and is in the top five players in Maine. He played a King pawn opening and I replied with a Sicilian defense. He played a little passive. He played bishop to king two (6.Be2) which is a good move if you are planning to play it to king bishop three (Bf3), but he also played his king bishop pawn to King bishop three (10.f3). This setup does not work well together. The bishop cannot go to bishop three (f3) now. He later moved his bishop to queen three (17.Bd3) to help in his king side attack. This was a small mistake. I had play on the queenside with my pawns and rooks. I also had play with my bishops in the center. This is normal in the Sicilian.” Morin (2033) - Haines, Houlton, ME (2), 17.09.2016 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Be2 e6 [6...e5] 7.Be3 Be7 8.0-0 b5!? [8...0-0=] 9.a3 [9.Bf3! b4 10.e5 dxe5 11.Nde2+/-] 9...Bb7 10.f3 0-0 11.Qe1 Nc6 12.Nxc6 Bxc6 13.Rd1 Qc7 14.Qf2 Rac8 15.g4 Qb7 16.Rd2 a5 17.Bd3 b4 18.axb4 axb4 19.Ne2 d5 20.g5 Nd7 21.Nd4 Ne5 22.f4 Ng4 23.Qe2 Nxe3 24.Qxe3 Bc5 25.c3 [25.e5 g6-/+] 25...bxc3 [25...dxe4! 26.Bc2 Ra8-+] 26.bxc3 dxe4 27.Bc2 Qb6?! [27...Rfe8!-+] 28.Bxe4 Bxe4 29.Qxe4 Rfd8 30.Kg2 Bxd4 31.cxd4 Qc6 32.Kf3 Qxe4+ 33.Kxe4 Rd5 34.Ra1 [34.f5 Rd6= Haines] 34...g6 35.Ra4 Rcd8 36.h4 Kg7 37.Rc2 R8d7 38.Rc8 Rd8 39.Rxd8 Rxd8 40.Ra5 h6 41.d5 exd5+ 42.Rxd5 Ra8 43.Rd7 hxg5 44.hxg5 Ra6 45.Rd5 Re6+ 1/2-1/2

145 – Mockler 6.Be2 a6 7.Be3 Ray Haines sometimes plays the Sicilian Defence Scheveningen line in fashion similar to what Aleksander Nikitin wrote about with the moves 2...d6, 5...e6, 6...a6 in some order. I think Ray had one of Nikitin's books from the 1970s. Nikitin coached a kid named Garry Kasparov. Using the same line, that young man became world champion. In the third round of the World Open in 1982, Ray outplayed Mockler (2059) to win. The Open Sicilian Defence 3.d4 allows White to play in the center, the queenside or the kingside. Mockler chose a thematic sacrifice of a piece on b5 for pawns and open lines, similar to what Mikhail Tal might have played. This particular tactic did not work well. Ray Haines defended well and countered with a nice mating attack against the White king. Mockler (2059) - Haines, World Open (3), 1982 begins 1.e4 c5 2.d4 cxd4 3.Nf3 d6 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 e6 6.Be2 a6 7.Be3 b5 8.a3 [This is one of those variations that is equal in theory but tends to favor Black in practice. White seems to do better with either 8.Bf3 or 8.0-0!?] 8...Bb7 9.f3 Nbd7 10.0-0 Be7 11.Qd2 Qc7 12.Rfd1 0-0 13.Bxb5?! [13.Qe1=] 13...axb5 14.Ndxb5 Qb8 15.Nxd6 Rd8 16.Ncb5 Ba6 17.c4 Ne5 18.Qd4 Nxf3+ 19.gxf3 Bxb5 20.Nxb5 [White sacrifices a queen. The alternative is 20.cxb5 Bxd6 21.Qb6 Bxh2+ 22.Kh1 Qxb6 23.Bxb6 Rdb8 24.Kxh2 Rxb6 25.a4 Kf8-/+] 20...Rxd4 21.Bxd4 Qf4 22.Kg2 Nxe4 23.fxe4 Qxe4+ 24.Kg1 Qg4+ 25.Kf1 Qf3+ 26.Kg1 e5 27.Bf2 Ra6 28.b4 Rg6+ 29.Bg3 f5 30.Nc7 f4 31.Nd5 Bh4 [Black is clearly winning with this move. A little faster would be 31...fxg3! 32.Nxe7+ Kf7 33.Rf1 gxh2+ 34.Kxh2 Rh6+ 35.Kg1 Rh1#] 32.Rf1 Rxg3+ 33.hxg3 Qxg3+ 34.Kh1 Qh3+ 35.Kg1 Qg4+ 36.Kh1 f3 37.Ne3 Qh3+ 38.Kg1 Qg3+ 39.Kh1 f2 40.Rxf2 Qxf2 41.Ng2 Bg3 42.Rd1 Qe2 [Ray Haines provides the following analysis from Fritz 11: 43.Rb1 Qf3 44.b5 Bf2 45.Rb3 Qxb3 46.Ne3 Qxe3 47.Kg2 Bh4 48.Kh2 g5 49.Kg2 Qf2+ 50.Kh1 Bg3 51.a4 Qh2#] 0-1

146 – Commons 6.f4 a6 7.Bd3 How do you beat a strong player in chess? Make double threats. When you threaten to do two things at once, even a famous grandmaster will be challenged. In this example, Kim Commons wins a very nice Sicilian Defence against Pal Benko. It was played at the US championship which was held that year in Oberlin, Ohio. White began 1.e4 c5 2.Nc3. Commons varies from his normal choice of 2.Nf3. Maybe Kim expected Benko to play 2...Nc6 and was prepared with either 3.g3 Closed Sicilian or 3.f4 Grand Prix. Once Black played the moves, 2...d6 and 3...a6, White headed for the Open Sicilian lines with 4.d4 cxd4 5.Nxd4 e6. Black moved only pawns for five moves. The principle is this: When your opponent gives you the center, take it! White employed the set-up with 6.f4 and 7.Bd3. By move 23 the position resembled a King's Gambit. White attacked in the center and on the kingside. Once his e-pawn took off for promotion, there was no stopping him. Why? Because the only way to guard against 37.e8=Q was to allow the final move of the game: 37.Qf8 checkmate. Commons (2415) - Benko (2515), USA-ch Oberlin (8), 1975 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nc3 d6 3.Nf3 a6 4.d4 cxd4 5.Nxd4 e6 6.f4 Nf6 7.Bd3 Nc6 [7...Qc7=] 8.Nxc6 bxc6 9.0-0 Be7 10.Qe2 e5 11.fxe5 dxe5 12.Bc4 0-0 13.h3 Ne8 14.Be3 Nd6 [14...Rb8 15.Rad1+/=] 15.Rad1 Qc7 16.Bd3 Nb5 17.Na4 Nd4 18.Qf2 Be6 19.Qg3 [19.c3+/-] 19...Bd6 [19...Rfd8 20.b3+/=] 20.c3 f5 21.cxd4 f4 22.Bxf4 exf4 23.Qh4 [23.Qf3+/-] 23...Be7 24.Qh5 Bxa2 [24...Bf7 25.Qe2+/=] 25.e5 g6 26.Qe2 [26.Bxg6!?] 26...Bd5 27.Nc3 Qb6 28.Bc4 Bxc4 29.Qxc4+ Kh8 30.Kh1 Rad8 31.Qe6 Qxb2? [31...Qb7

32.Rf3+/=] 32.Qxe7 Qxc3 33.Rxf4 Rxf4 [Or 33...Kg8 34.Qe6+ Kg7 35.Rf6+-] 34.Qxd8+ Kg7 35.e6 Qe3 36.e7 Re4 37.Qf8# 1-0

147 – Davies 6.Bc4 Nc6 7.a3 St. Louis has become one of the leading locations in the United States for chess activity. The Chess Club and Scholastic Center of Saint Louis is a driving force for the game. Across the street from the club is the World Chess Hall of Fame. Ten years ago it was in Miami in a building that was shaped like a rook. I visited it when we were in Miami on business. As I recall APCT player and columnist James Davies lived in the St. Louis area. I chose the Sicilian Defence in our 1980 game. In postal chess, you mailed your moves to their home address. Davies played the Sozin Variation 6.Bc4 against my classical Sicilian 5...Nc6. He took me out of the book with his move 7.a3. It was new to me, but maybe James Davies had played it before. Jim's plan was to retreat the bishop to a2 to assist long range like a sniper in his kingside attack aiming at e6 and f7 and g8. White sacrificed a rook for an attack. Black survived, but in the end White still had a perpetual check to draw. Davies (2170) - Sawyer (2050), corr APCT 1980 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 d6 6.Bc4 e6 7.a3!? [This may look slow, but White has long term attack plans in mind. 7.Be3 Be7 8.Qe2 a6 9.0-0-0 Qc7 10.Bb3 0-0=] 7...Be7 8.0-0 0-0 9.Ba2 Nxd4 10.Qxd4 b6 11.Qd3 Bb7 12.f4 [12.Bf4=] 12...d5 [12...Qc8!=/+] 13.e5 Ng4 14.Qg3 Bc5+ 15.Kh1 Ba6 16.Rf3 Nh6 [16...h5 17.f5 exf5 18.Rxf5 Qd7= when Black threatens the rook on f5 and a check on f2.] 17.f5 Nxf5 [17...Kh8 18.Bg5+-] 18.Rxf5 exf5 19.Bh6 g6 20.Nxd5 Be7 21.Rd1 [The winning move is 21.e6! fxe6 22.Nc7 Rf6 23.Nxa6+- and White is up a piece.] 21...Kh8 22.Ne3 [22.Qe1 Re8 23.e6+/-] 22...Qc7 [22...Qc8=] 23.Bd5 [Another good chance is the complicated line after 23.Re1! Rfe8 24.Nxf5 Bf6 25.Nd6 Bxe5 26.Nxf7+ Qxf7 27.Bxf7 Bxg3 28.Rxe8+ Rxe8 29.Bxe8 Be5 30.c3+/- and White is up

a pawn in a four bishop endgame.] 23...Rad8 24.Qf4 Rfe8 25.b4 Bf8 26.Bg5 Rd7 27.Bf6+ Bg7 [Black could return material in an effort to win, but that might favor the higher rated player. 27...Kg8 28.h4 Re6 29.Bxe6 Rxd1+ 30.Nxd1 fxe6=/+] 28.Bxg7+ Kxg7 29.Nxf5+ gxf5 1/2-1/2

148 – Sogin 6.Bc4 a6 7.Bb3 e5 Who was Sozin? Veniamin Innokentevich Sozin was a Russian master, author of articles and books, and opening theoretician. He was born in 1896 and died in 1956. Sozin is best known for the Open Sicilian Defence variation 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 d6 6.Bc4 e6 7.0-0 Be7 8.Be3 a6 9.f4. These moves can be played in a different order. The name “Sozin Sicilian” often means almost any classical line with 6.Bc4. Black may have pawns at d6, e6, and or a6. Black’s knights may be at Nf6 and at Nc6 or at Nbd7. Master Sozin developed the idea of castling kingside with the f4-f5 attack on e6. Bobby Fischer played 6.Bc4 with great success. One thematic tactical combination is …Nf6xe4, Nc3xe4, …d6-d5 with a pawn fork on the Ne4 and Bc4. Because of this, Fischer and others sometimes play Bc4-b3 on move 7 or soon after. Lou Sogin was an active postal chess player from the 1960s to the 1990s. I have a dozen of his games in my database. More often than not, Sogin was on the losing side in those games. I played the Sozin against Lou Sogin in APCT. Note that I played 7.Bb3 to avoid the pawn fork. On move 13 he dropped a piece. Sawyer (1973) - Sogin (1683), corr APCT 94R-29, 1994 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 e6 6.Bc4 a6 7.Bb3 e5 [The most popular continuation is 7...b5 8.0-0 Be7=] 8.Nf3 [Stronger players go for the tactically unbalanced 8.Nf5! Bxf5 9.exf5+/=] 8...Be7 9.h3!? [If I played 9.0-0 0-0 10.Be3 Black may put a bishop or knight on g4. I decided to avoid that.] 9...0-0 10.Be3 Nc6 11.Qd3 Be6 12.0-0 Qa5 [Black has played well so far. A reasonable idea would be to play the rook to the half open cfile with 12...Rc8=] 13.Nd5 [13.a3+/=] 13...Nxd5? [This drops a piece. Black must play 13...Bxd5! 14.exd5 (14.Bxd5 Nb4 15.Qd2 Bd8 16.Bxb7

Rb8 17.a3 Rxb7 18.axb4 Qxb4=) 14...e4 15.Qd2 exf3 16.dxc6 Qxd2 17.Bxd2 bxc6 18.Rfe1 Rfe8 19.gxf3=] 14.exd5 Nb4 15.Qd2 Bxh3?! [Black sacrifices another piece out of desperation, but there was not escape. 15...Bxd5 16.Bxd5 Qxd5 17.Qxb4+-] 16.gxh3 1-0

149 – Fawbush 6.Bc4 Nc6 7.Bb3 The classical Sicilian Defence with 6.Bc4 is known as the Sozin variation. Bobby Fischer specialized in that line 50 years ago. The Sozin still works well, but as in most Sicilian lines, Black equalizes with good play. In some ways it is like the Italian Game or the Scotch Gambit. The bishop at c4 aims at the key squares d5, e6, f7 and g8. Here is the game Kevin L. Bachler vs George E. Fawbush in the Sozin. I knew these both as strong postal chess players 30 years ago. I played them both. Bachler beat me in our only game. Like me, Fawbush was a very active postal player. Fawbush and I met many times in correspondence play. George Fawbush crushed me a bunch, but a couple of the wins I had over Fawbush came at major moments in my chess career. In the game below, "G.E.F." (as his moves were signed) won out during a long battle. Fawbush was an APCT Life Master. Bachler - Fawbush, corr 1982 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 e6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 d6 6.Bc4 Nc6 7.Bb3 Be7 8.f4 Qa5 [8...0-0 9.Be3=] 9.Qd3 [9.00 d5 10.Nxc6 bxc6 11.e5=] 9...0-0 10.0-0 [10.Bd2=] 10...Nxd4 11.Qxd4 d5 12.Be3 dxe4 13.Nxe4 Rd8 [13...b6=/+] 14.Qc3 Qxc3 15.Nxc3 Ng4 16.Bf2 Nxf2 17.Kxf2 Bc5+ 18.Kg3 Bd7 19.Ne4 Bd4 20.c3 Bc6 [20...Bb6=/+] 21.Ng5 Bf6 22.Nf3 a5 23.Rad1 a4 24.Bc4 a3 25.bxa3 Bxc3 26.Bb3 Kf8 27.Rxd8+ Rxd8 28.Rd1 Ra8 29.f5?! [29.a4 Bf6=/+] 29...e5 30.Ng5 e4 [30...Ke7-/+] 31.Kf4 Re8 32.Nxh7+ Kg8 [32...Ke7=] 33.Ng5 e3 34.Bxf7+ Kf8 35.Bc4 [35.Bxe8!+/-] 35...Bd2 36.Be2 Ra8 37.Nf3 Ra4+ 38.Kg3 Ba5 [38...Rxa3=] 39.Rd3 [39.Nd4+/=] 39...Bc7+ 40.Kh3 Be4 41.Rd4 Bxf3 42.Rxa4 Bxe2 43.Re4 Bb6 44.Re6 Bd3 [44...Bc5-+] 45.g4 Bf1+ 46.Kg3 e2 47.h4 Ba5 48.Kf2 e1Q+ 49.Rxe1 Bxe1+ 50.Kxe1 Bh3 51.g5 Bxf5 52.h5 Be6 53.Kd2 Bxa2 54.Kc3 Bf7 55.h6 gxh6 56.gxh6 Be8 57.Kc4 [Or 57.Kb4 Bh5-+] 57...Ba4 58.Kd5 b5 59.Ke6 Kg8 60.Kf6 Kh7 61.Kg5 Bd1

62.Kf5 Kxh6 63.Kf6 Bc2 64.Ke5 Kg5 65.Kd5 Kf4 66.Kd4 Ba4 67.Kd3 Kf3 68.Kd4 Ke2 0-1

150 – Warren 6.Bc4 Nc6 7.Bb3 Chess expert Jim Warren outplayed Bobby Fischer twice in the Sicilian Defence. This same James E. Warren developed the computer program for Elo chess ratings. On Friday, December 12, 2014, Tim Just posted the following:

"Helen Warren informed me this AM that her husband Jim Warren died. His heart gave out. I have few details. The death notice and funeral details will be in the Chicago Tribune a week from Saturday, according to Helen. “Jim worked with Elo in developing the ratings formula. Along with Helen he ran APCT for years. They sponsored many Master chess events over the years, including the U.S. Masters.” When Professor Arpad Elo produced the FIDE Rating List in 1969 he wrote: "Grateful acknowledgement is made to Mr. James Warren of Western Springs, Illinois, who wrote the computer program for the method of successive approximations and performed the computation for the 200 selected players." Arpad E. Elo, Member, FIDE Qualification Committee, USCF Ratings Chairman Jim Brotsos, Co-founder of the Chicago Industrial Chess League wrote in part: "Jim Warren has already received mention as one of the pillars of the League. In addition, he has had leadership roles in the Illinois Chess Association and the APCT. In 1997 he received the U.S.C.F. Meritorious

Service Award for helping to establish the FIDE rating system. He and his wife have sponsored major regional tournaments and the U.S. Masters, often acting as financial patrons... They are, no doubt, the most influential couple in the history of Midwestern American chess. Jim has a significant collection of chessmen and one of the largest collections of chess books/magazines in the Midwest." Robert James Fischer was born March 9, 1943 in Chicago, Illinois, but Fischer grew up in New York. He returned to Chicago on March 23, 1964 for his simultaneous exhibition tour and scored +49 =4 -1. Just two months later in another simul Bobby Fischer scored +44 =5 -1 in Cicero, Illinois on May 20, 1964. In both simuls, Bobby Fischer played the same first 18 moves vs Jim Warren in the sharp 6.Bc4 Sozin line of the Sicilian Defence. Note that Fischer employed the Sozin pawn push with 15.f5!? Jim Warren won a pawn in each game. Bobby Fischer had to fight hard just to draw Jim Warren. Fischer - Warren, Cicero simul 20.05.1964 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 d6 6.Bc4 e6 7.Bb3 Be7 8.Be3 0-0 9.0-0 Bd7 [9...a6=] 10.f4 Nxd4 11.Bxd4 Bc6 12.Qe2 b5 13.Nxb5 Bxb5 14.Qxb5 Nxe4 15.f5!? Bf6 [15...e5 16.Be3 Bg5 17.Bxg5 Qxg5=] 16.Qd3 Bxd4+ [16...d5!=] 17.Qxd4 d5 18.c4 [White should play 18.fxe6! fxe6 19.c4+/=] 18...dxc4 19.Qxe4! [An improvement over their earlier meeting in the Chicago simul where Fischer played the weaker 19.Qxd8?! Rfxd8 20.Bxc4 Nd2 21.Rfc1 Nxc4 22.Rxc4 exf5=/+. Warren was up two f-pawns in a rook ending. But late in a simul when other games are done, the grandmaster returns faster and play speeds up. Mistakes on moves 56 and 64 allowed White to escape with a draw on move 67.] 19...cxb3 20.fxe6 Qb6+ 21.Kh1 fxe6 22.axb3 Qxb3 23.h3 Qxb2 24.Qxe6+ Kh8 25.Qe7 Rxf1+ 26.Rxf1 h6 27.Rf8+ Rxf8 28.Qxf8+ Kh7 29.Qf5+ Kg8 30.Qc8+ Kh7 31.Qf5+ g6 32.Qa5 Qb6 33.Qa2 Qb7 34.Qa1 Qc7 1/2-1/2 [Black cannot make progress with his extra a-pawn.]

Book 2: Chapter 4 – Najdorf 5.Nc3 a6 Here are games with some of the less popular sixth moves for White in the Najdorf Variation.

151 – Chigaev 6.h4 Nc6 7.h5 Grandmasters love the Sicilian Defence. It allows for a wide variety of possibilities, both tactical and strategical. After 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 (Najdorf), White has played 32 different moves in my database. Most of them are bad for White or at best dubious. The move 6.h4 as played in the game between Maksim Chigaev and Evgeny A. Levin is a rare choice. There are 14 more popular choices for White in my database. Objectively, the best thing I can say about 6.h4 in this game is that any position played by someone rated 2593 could work well. The moves 6.h4 and 7.h5 played a key part in White’s win. Black had a fine position out of the opening. In hindsight, playing 11...Bg4 to take on h5 cost Black some much needed tempi. What really decided the game was the creative tactical play starting with 15.Rxh5! White’s rook, bishop and knight worked together beautifully. What a crazy game! Chigaev (2593) - Levin (2516), 40th Nezhmetdinov Rapid Kazan RUS (3.2), 11.09.2018 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 Nf6 4.Nc3 cxd4 5.Nxd4 a6 6.h4 Nc6 [6...e5 7.Nb3=] 7.h5 h6 8.Nxc6 [8.Be3 e5 9.Nxc6 bxc6 10.Bc4=] 8...bxc6 9.e5 dxe5 10.Qxd8+ Kxd8 11.Na4 [11.Bd2=] 11...Bg4? [11...Bf5 12.Nb6 Rb8 13.Nc4 Nd7 14.Ne3=] 12.Be3 [12.Nb6 Rb8 13.Nc4+/=] 12...e6

13.f3 Bxh5 14.0-0-0+ Kc7? [14...Ke8!?=] 15.Rxh5! Nxh5 16.Bb6+ Kb7 17.Rd7+ Kc8 18.Rc7+ Kb8 19.Rxf7 Bd6 [19...Bb4 20.Bc7+ Kc8 21.Nb6+ Kb7 22.Nxa8+-] 20.Rd7 Bb4 21.Bc7+ Kc8 22.Nb6+ Kb7 23.Nxa8 Nf6 24.Rxg7 1-0

152 – Grischuk 6.Nb3 Nc6 7.Be3 Alexander Grischuk won the 2015 World Blitz Championship. Top blitz players have a vast supply of practical ideas. They need these ideas at a moment’s notice. Opening play by blitz players may be well thought out in advance if they are following their repertoire. This is more likely to be the case if the game is played at a slower pace or in a tournament. Grandmaster Grischuk reached a peak rating of 2810 in 2014. It is hard to keep a rating up that high without continual victories against the top players in the world. These games require deep preparation. Grischuk met Dmitry Kokarev in the 69th Russian Championship. Earlier, Oparin vs Kokarev continued 6.Nb3 Nc6 7.Be3 Ng4 8.Bd2 Nf6 9.Bd3. Grischuk probably knew Kokarev liked 9…g6 so he attacked with 9.h4!? White won in a sharp tactical battle. Grischuk (2752) - Kokarev (2636), 69th ch-RUS 2016 Novosibirsk RUS (11.2), 27.10.2016 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Nb3!? Nc6 [6...e6 or 6...e5] 7.Be3 Ng4 8.Bd2 [Common is 8.Bc1 g6 (8...Nf6 9.Be3 repeats) 9.f3 Nf6 10.Be3 Bg7 11.Qd2 0-0 12.0-0-0=] 8...Nf6 9.h4 g6 [9...e5 10.Be2 Be7 11.Be3 0-0=] 10.Bg5 Bg7 11.Qd2 h6 [11...Be6 12.0-0-0 a5=] 12.Bf4 [12.Bxf6 Bxf6 13.0-0-0=] 12...Be6 13.0-0-0 h5 14.Kb1 0-0 15.f3 Rc8 16.Bh6 Bxh6 17.Qxh6 Qb6 18.g4 [18.Be2! Ne5 19.Rhf1 Rxc3 20.bxc3 Bc4 21.Bxc4=] 18...Ne5 19.gxh5 Nxh5 20.Be2 Rxc3 21.bxc3 Qf2? [21...Rc8 22.Rhg1 Bxb3 23.axb3 Rxc3=] 22.Nd4 Ng3 23.h5 g5 24.Qxg5+ Kh7 25.Rdf1 Nxf1 26.Rxf1 Nxf3 [Or 26...f6 27.Rxf2 Bxa2+ 28.Kxa2 fxg5 29.Rg2+-] 27.Qc1 [27.Qxe7!+-] 1-0

153 – Smith 6.Bc4 e6 7.0-0 b5 I played a Sicilian Defence against Eric Smith in a Najdorf Sozin. This opening was very sharp. Alas the players were not sharp. One of the thematic tactical treats in the Najdorf Sozin is for Black to push his b-pawn to drive away the protection of e4. Black cannot normally win the pawn without facing a very strong attack. As Black I tried it. I got in big trouble. I escaped and won. Smith - Sawyer, Williamsport, PA 1994 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Bc4 e6 7.0-0 b5 8.Bb3 Bb7 [Safer and more common is 8...Be7=] 9.Re1 [Those who like the murky waters of a speculative sacrifice might be happy to try 9.Bxe6!? fxe6 10.Nxe6 Qc8 11.Nd5=] 9...b4?! [Now it is Black who goes in the risky play. He dares White to sacrifice. A more sound approach would be 9...Nbd7=] 10.Na4 [10.Nd5! Nbd7 11.Bg5+/- gives White a strong attack.] 10...Nxe4? [10...Nc6 11.c3 bxc3 12.Nxc3+/=] 11.f3! Nc5 12.Be3?! [This leads only to equality. White can win by 12.Nxc5! dxc5 13.Ba4+ Nc6 (13...Nd7 14.Nxe6 fxe6 15.Bg5 Be7 16.Rxe6 0-0 17.Bxe7+- and Black is busted.; and moving the king loses to a pretty mate after 13...Ke7 14.Nf5+ Kf6 15.Qxd8+ Be7 16.Qxe7+ Kxf5 17.Qg5#) 14.Nxc6 Qd7 15.Qxd7+ Kxd7 16.Ne5+ Ke7 17.Be3+- White is up a knight with a great position.] 12...Nxb3 13.Nxb3?! [13.axb3=] 13...Nd7 14.c3 bxc3 15.Nxc3 [Black has an extra passed dpawn. White's attack has stalled. If Black has time to complete his development and to consolidate his position, he will gain a big advantage.] 15...Be7 16.Qd3 0-0 17.Rad1 d5 18.f4 Qc7 19.Ne2 [19.Rc1 Qd6 20.Na4 Bc6 21.Nac5 Bb5-/+] 19...Rac8 20.Rc1 Qb8 21.Kh1 Rxc1 22.Rxc1 Rc8 23.Rxc8+ Qxc8 24.Ng3 Nc5 25.Qe2 [Or 25.Bxc5 Bxc5 26.Ne2 Bb6-+ when Black has the two bishops and an extra pawn.] 25...Nxb3 26.axb3 Bc5 27.Bxc5 Qxc5 0-1

154 – Chaney 6.Bc4 e6 7.Bb3 Ronald Chaney of Burlington, Iowa was an experienced Najdorf player. Five times he had Black vs me in the Sicilian Defence. I won. He won. Then drew. I won. He won. Score +2 -2 =1. I was impressed with his understanding of the Najdorf Variation. Chaney was active in APCT postal. In the game below Kevin L. Bachler employed the 6.Bc4 Fischer Attack. Kevin Bachler as a master is usually on the winning side. Ron Chaney boldly played pawn moves for six of his first seven moves. This was required to defeat such a strong master. By move 10 all Black's minor pieces were developed, but his king was still in the center. White sacrificed a bishop for three pawns and the attack to keep Black from castling. Both sides had chances in a sharp tactical position. The fight resembled a hand to hand martial arts movie with about 15 moves of punches and counter punches. When the dust cleared, Ron Chaney had mate in one and won. Bachler - Chaney, APCT corr 1992 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Bc4 e6 7.Bb3 b5 8.f4 [8.0-0=] 8...Bb7 9.Be3 Nbd7 10.0-0 Be7!? 11.Bxe6 fxe6 12.Nxe6 Qc8 13.Nxg7+ Kf7 14.Nf5 Bf8 [14...b4=] 15.e5 [15.Bd4! Rg8 16.Ne3+/=] 15...Rg8 16.Rf2 Qc6 17.Ng3 Ng4 18.Re2 Nxe3 [18...dxe5!-+] 19.Qd3 dxe5 20.fxe5 Nxg2 21.Qxh7+ Rg7 22.Rf1+ Ke8 [22...Nf6!-+] 23.Rxf8+ Nxf8 24.Qxg7 Nf4 25.Rd2 Nh3+ 26.Kf1 Qf3+ 27.Ke1 Qe3+ 28.Kd1? [28.Nce2 Qf2+ 29.Kd1 Bf3=/+] 28...Qg1+ 0-1

155 – Garcia Palermo 6.g3 e5 We enjoy when a little amateur rises up to smite a giant master. Francesco Cavicchi won a Sicilian Najdorf vs GM Carlos Garcia Palermo. Cavicchi wrote: "Hi Tim, I send you another "Amateur-David vs GM-Goliath" 3min.online match. No strange stuff this time, but the good, old (and very well known) Sicilian Najdorf, now part of my main repertoire against 1e4. And the "victim" is... GM Carlos Garcia Palermo (2398)" 3000 years ago, the little boy David was destined to be a famous king in Israel. The giant Goliath was a Philistine from Gath in between Jerusalem and the Gaza strip. People have fought over that area ever since. I care what happens; I have friends on both sides. But I cannot solve their problems, so I just play chess. Little David amateur chess players may be future masters. The giant GM Carlos Garcia Palermo is my age with a FIDE rating of 2449. He meets a Sicilian Defence 5...a6 with 6.g3. A key difference in this line is that after the standard Najdorf 6...e5, White retreats 7.Nde2. This knight supports f4, covers d4, protects c3 and is not in the way of 8.Bg2. I wonder if Grandmaster Garcia Palermo is related to founders of the famous city Palermo, Sicily, Italy. Who knows? It makes me think of George C. Scott in the 1970 movie "Patton". Here sharp tactics make White’s king vulnerable to a nice mating attack! Garcia Palermo (2398) - Cavicchi (1855), Fsi Arena online, 23.07.2014 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.g3 e5 7.Nde2 Be7 8.Bg2 Be6 9.0-0 Qd7 [Another approach is 9...0-0 10.h3 Nbd7=] 10.f4 Bh3 11.f5 Bxg2 12.Kxg2 h5!? [12...Qc6=] 13.Bg5 Nc6 14.Bxf6 Bxf6 15.Nd5 Bd8 16.h4 Rc8 17.c3 Ne7 18.f6 Nxd5 19.Qxd5 [19.fxg7 Ne3+ 20.Kf3 Rg8 21.Kxe3 Bb6+ 22.Kd2=] 19...Bxf6 20.Rad1 Qg4 21.Rf3 [21.Ng1 0-0=/+] 21...0-0 22.Kf2 Rfd8 23.Qxb7 [23.Rd2 Rd7-/+] 23...Rb8 24.Qd5 [Multiple exchanges 24.Qxa6 Rxb2 25.Rxd6 Rxd6 26.Qxd6 Qxe4 27.Qd3 Qc6 28.Re3 Rxa2-+ still leave Black up a pawn.] 24...Rxb2 25.a4

Rxe2+ [25...Rc8!-+] 26.Kxe2 Rb8 27.Rd2 Rb1 28.Qxd6? [28.Qc4=] 28...Qxe4+ 29.Kf2 Qe1+ 30.Kg2 Qh1+ [White resigns due to 31.Kf2 Rf1+ 32.Kf3 Qf3 checkmate] 0-1

156 – Mercier 6.h3 b5 7.a3 When Boris Spassky was World Champion, I was a scholastic player. I did not keep many score sheets. I couldn't imagine that years later I’d like to see them. Not that my games were brilliant, but my losses taught me good lessons that helped me improve. We had a travelling high school chess team. We got permission from our school to be at the other school when their classes ended. We played two game matches on each board at their club. With the speed of young players, most games were over in half an hour. I don't recall we even used clocks! Ah, the old days. My high school score was 9-1-1. My loss was a back rank mate in some Open Game where I was Black. My draw as White was in a Slav Defence. I only played one game that time because our game lasted so long. I forgot all nine of my early wins. Our high school also competed in the state high school chess tournament in early 1972. I went 3-1-1. My loss was as Black vs David Rowe in an Italian Game. I drew someone when I did not know how to win a queen vs pawn endgame. One of my wins was vs Ray Haines. Later, I lived for a year in Ray’s home town. He and I became lifelong chess friends. I played in the University of Maine Championship in December of 1972. It was an eight player round robin tournament. I lost my first three games to Mercier, Cooper and Greenlaw. I won my next four games. My first round was a Najdorf Sicilian Defence. Sawyer - Mercier, University of Maine 1972 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.h3 [Weaver Adams reasoned since Black has time for a6, White has time for h3.] 6...b5 7.a3 [After this game I found Fischer's suggestion of 7.Nd5! See next game vs Salisbury.] 7...Bb7 8.f3 Nbd7 9.Be3 e6 10.Qd2 Be7 11.0-0-0 0-0 12.g4 Nb6 13.h4 d5 14.e5 Nfd7 15.f4 Nc4 16.Bxc4 dxc4 17.Rh3 b4 18.axb4 Bxb4 19.Nxe6 Bxc3 20.Nxd8 Bxd2+ 21.Bxd2 Rfxd8 22.Ba5 Bc6 23.Bxd8 Rxd8 24.Rh2 Re8 25.Rd6

Bb5 26.Rhd2 Nc5 27.Rd8 Kf8 28.Kd1 Ne6 29.Rxe8+ Kxe8 30.f5 Nc5 31.Ke1 Nd7 32.Rd5 Bc6 33.Rd4 Nxe5 34.Kf2 Ke7 35.g5 f6 36.g6 h5 37.Kg3 Bd7 38.Kf4 Ba4 39.b3 cxb3 40.cxb3 Bxb3 41.Kg3 a5 42.Kh3 Nc6 43.Re4+ Ne5 44.Re1 Bc2 45.Kg3 Bxf5 46.Kf4 Bxg6 0-1 White resigns.

157 – Salisbury 6.h3 b5 7.Nd5 Material sacrifice in chess is difficult unless you have confidence based on knowledge and skill. When I first started playing chess, my knowledge and skill were minimal; to sacrifice was scary. I spent a year playing blitz chess with Graham Cooper, a future Master. Cooper loved to sacrifice. He kept throwing pawns and pieces at me. But he taught me the value of research in chess openings, something I have used almost daily ever since. When I lost a Sicilian to Mercier, I looked up how to play it in Bobby Fischer's book. He suggested the sacrifice 7.Nd5!? That night I prepared to face Darrell Salisbury and his Sicilian. I won the Exchange. Then I returned the Exchange to queen a pawn. Sawyer - Salisbury UMO Championship 1972 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 [Salisbury and I were tied at 3-3 in the final round. I tried to prepare this line. I did not play it perfectly, but it worked!] 6.h3 b5 7.Nd5!? Nxe4! [7...Bb7? 8.Nxf6+ gxf6 9.c4 bxc4 10.Bxc4 Bxe4 11.0-0 d5 12.Re1 e5 13.Qa4+ Nd7 14.Rxe4 dxe4 15.Nf5 Bc5 16.Ng7+ Ke7 17.Nf5+ Ke8 18.Be3 Bxe3 19.fxe3 Qb6 20.Rd1 Ra7 21.Rd6 Qd8 22.Qb3 Qc7 23.Bxf7+ Kd8 24.Be6 1-0 Fischer - Najdorf, Varna 1962] 8.Qf3 Nc5 9.Nf6+? [Fischer gives: 9.b4! e6 10.bxc5 exd5 11.Qxd5 Ra7=] 9...exf6? [9...gxf6! 10.Qxa8 Bb7 11.Qa7 e5-/+ Fischer] 10.Qxa8 Bb7 11.Qa7 Be4 12.b4 Na4 13.Nxb5 Be7 14.Nc7+ Kf8 15.Nxa6 Nc6 16.Qc7 Qxc7 17.Nxc7 Nxb4 18.Rb1 Nxc2+ 19.Kd2 Bd8 20.Rb8 Ke7 21.Nd5+ Bxd5 22.Kxc2 Be4+ 23.Bd3 Bxd3+ 24.Kxd3 Nc5+ 25.Kc2 Re8 26.Re1+ Ne6 27.Bd2 Kd7 28.a4 Kc7 29.Rb2 Kc6 30.Rc1 Nc5 31.Kd1 Bc7 32.Bb4 Re4 33.Bxc5 dxc5 34.Rbc2 Bb6 35.Rc4 Re7 36.a5 Rd7+ 37.Ke2 Bxa5 38.Rxc5+ Kb6 39.Rc6+ Kb7 40.R6c2 Bc7 41.g3 Kc8 42.Ra1 Re7+ 43.Kf3 Kb7 44.Rb1+ Kc8 45.Rd1 g6 46.Kg2 f5 47.f4 h5 48.Kf3 Kb7 49.Re2 Rxe2 50.Kxe2 Bb6 51.Rd7+ Kc6 52.Rxf7 Bd4 53.Rf8 Kd6 54.Rg8 Bf6 55.Rxg6 Ke7 56.Rh6 h4 [This was given in the Bangor Daily News chess column on a Saturday around Christmas 1972. George Cunningham and Gerry Dullea diagrammed it and congratulated me on giving back the Exchange to win the ending. They were tournament directors and professors at the University of Maine. They wrote the weekly

newspaper column.] 57.Rxh4! Bxh4 58.gxh4 Kf6 59.Ke3 Kg6 60.Kd4 Kh5 61.Ke5 Kxh4 62.Kxf5 Kh5 63.Ke6 Kg6 64.f5+ Kg7 65.Ke7 Kg8 66.f6 Black resigns 1-0

158 – Johns 6.h3 e5 7.Nb3 Be7 In the early 1970s there was a left-handed major league baseball pitcher named Tommy John. His major league career stretched from 1963-1989. Tommy John played for the Cleveland Indians, Chicago White Sox, Los Angeles Dodgers, New York Yankees, California Angels, Oakland Athletics and he finished back with the Yanks. Tommy John retired when his dentist's son got two hits off him, a future superstar named Mark McGwire. In 1974 John had 13 wins and only 3 losses. All of a sudden he permanently damaged ligaments in his arm. When it appeared that Tommy John's career was over, Dr. Frank Jobe performed surgery on his arm. After taking off the entire 1975 season, Tommy John was able to return and pitch very well for many years. I am a lifelong baseball fan. I knew this pitcher long before the famous "Tommy John surgery" was named after him. Back in 1973 I was a young whipper snapper. I had only climbed a few rungs of the ladder of chess success. My opponent in this game was Thomas Johns. We played this game in a tournament held at the UMO chess club. Johns played the Najdorf Variation of the Sicilian Defence as Black, following Bobby Fischer who had won the World Championship six months earlier. I played 6.h3, a line Fischer won with as White when he faced GM Miguel Najdorf. In a moment of boldness I sacked a rook with 22.Rxg7+! Sawyer - Johns, University of Maine, Orono, Maine 07.03.1973 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.h3 e5 [This is the standard Najdorf Sicilian move. The backward pawn on d6 cannot be easily attack by Ne4 or Nb5, and we are a long way from a possible Nc4.] 7.Nb3 [7.Nf3!? Be7 8.Bc4 0-0 9.Be3 Nc6 10.0-0 b5 11.Bd5+=; Theory usually recommends 7.Nde2=] 7...Be7 [7...Be6 8.Bg5 Be7 9.Qf3 Nc6 10.Be2 and any White edge seems small.] 8.Be3 0-0 9.Be2 Nbd7 10.Qd2 b5 11.a3 Bb7 12.f3 [I set up what would be known as the English Attack vs the Sicilian Defence.] 12...Nh5 13.0-0-0 Ng3 14.Rhg1 Nxe2+ [Black takes my bad bishop.] 15.Qxe2 Nf6 16.g4 Qc7 17.h4 h6 18.g5 hxg5 19.Bxg5 Nh5 20.f4 Nxf4 21.Bxf4 exf4 22.Rxg7+! Kxg7 23.Qg4+ Kh6 24.Qxf4+ [Or 24.Rg1!+-] 24...Bg5? [Black had to try 24...Kh7 when 25.Nd4 Rg8

26.Qf5+ is very strong. Now if 26...Kg7 27.Rg1+ Kf8 28.Ne6+ Ke8 29.Rxg8+ and mate in a few moves.] 25.Qxg5+ Kh7 26.Rg1 1-0

159 – Elowitch 6.h3 e5 7.Nde2 Stanley Elowitch won or tied for the Maine State Championship at least 10 times. After Harlow B. Daly was well past his prime, Elowitch reigned as the number one rated player in the state. Our chess ratings in Maine were deflated. It was like we played in a closed pool of players. We were all improving, but we only ever played each other. At that time Stanley Elowitch was rated only as an Expert. Then several of us started playing out of state. Our ratings went up. Then Stanley Elowitch became a National Master. It was a privilege to play him. He encouraged me. In this event, I had planned to play Bird's Opening (1.f4) as White and Dutch Defence and Caro-Kann Defence as Black. However, vs Elowitch I decided to play another first move that I heard was pretty good: 1.e4! Elowitch often played 1...e5, but he wanted a more complex opening vs me so he could win. Stan chose 1...c5, the Sicilian Najdorf. I played the Weaver Adams 6.h3 variation. I tried an unsound attack and was outplayed. Elowitch played this game well; my play was ridiculous. Stanley took time after our game to review it with me. Elowitch told me he usually played 1.e4 e5. I showed him that I was prepared to play the Goring Gambit. We went over some lines. When he wandered into some inferior variations, Stanley Elowitch said he was glad that he had played the Sicilian Defence vs me. Duane Mercier and Gary L. White tied for 1st place in that 1977 Maine Championship. I had played that 6.h3 line vs Mercier in 1972. Sawyer - Elowitch, Maine Champ (4), 17.04.1977 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.h3 [Weaver Adams Variation, which Fischer played.] 6...e5 [6...e6 7.g4] 7.Nde2 Be7 8.Ng3 [Not knowing the line well, I failed to play the key move 8.g4 when play could continue 8...Be6 9.Bg2 Nc6 10.Be3 0-0 11.0-0 b5 12.Ng3] 8...Be6 9.Be2 0-0 10.0-0 Qc7 11.Bg5!? Nbd7 12.Rc1? [12.a4] 12...Nb6 13.Bxf6 Bxf6 14.Nd5 Bxd5 15.exd5 Bg5 [Black takes over the initiative.] 16.Rb1 f5 17.b3 Rae8 18.c4 Nd7 [White is in deep trouble so I try to sac a piece for complications.] 19.Nxf5? Rxf5

20.Bd3? [The last chance it keep it messy is 20.Bg4 Rf6 21.Be6+ but Black still has a much better game.] 20...e4 21.Qg4 Rfe5 22.f4 Nf6 23.Qg3? Nh5 24.Qg4 Bxf4 25.Rxf4 Nxf4 26.Qxf4 exd3 27.Rf1 Re1 0-1

160 – Rhudy 6.Be2 e5 7.Nb3 Be7 There is a saying, "Don't look a gift horse in the mouth!" The condition of a horse's teeth indicates its value. The point of the saying is this: If someone gives you a gift, you should politely accept it without immediately looking too closely to check on its value. It may have some flaws but it is a gift. In chess, however, when offered a knight, you should look that gift horse in the mouth. Check it out! Taking a piece is usually a winning advantage. But make sure that you do not get bitten by the free knight. Remember that the Trojan horse allowed the enemy Greeks to invade the city of Troy. In my 1977 APCT Rook-11 section, I got paired with Curtis Rhudy, a friendly opponent from Pennsylvania. Our opening was a Sicilian Defence. In an equal position on move 11, Rhudy provided me with a gift horse by 11...Ng4. The knight was defended only once and attacked twice by my Be2 and x-ray by the Qd1. By taking the knight, I awakened Black's aggressive intentions. After another dozen moves of sharp tactics and material being chopped off, I reached a winning endgame. Sawyer - Rhudy, corr APCT 77R-11 (3), 08.1977 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Be2 e5 [Black must decide between this Najdorf move and the Scheveningen option 6...e6] 7.Nb3 Be7 8.0-0 0-0 9.Be3 Nc6!? [Usually the knight goes to d7 in the Najdorf with the pawn on e5. For example 9...Be6 10.Qd2 Nbd7=] 10.f4 [10.f3!? Be6 11.Nd5+/=] 10...exf4 11.Bxf4 [11.Rxf4 Be6=] 11...Ng4? [Black hangs a knight. Probably he was angling for e5, but the move failed tactically. 11...Be6= or 11...Ne5= would have been fine.] 12.Bxg4 f5 [12...Re8 13.Bxc8 Rxc8 14.Nd5+-] 13.exf5 Bxf5? [13...Kh8 14.Nd5+-] 14.Qd5+ Kh8 15.Bxf5 Nb4 16.Qe6 Rf6 17.Qd7 Qxd7 18.Bxd7 Nxc2 19.Rac1 Nb4 20.Ne4 Rff8 21.Bxd6 Bxd6 22.Nxd6 Nxa2 23.Rxf8+ Rxf8 24.Rc8 1-0

161 – Palkendo 6.Be2 e5 7.Nb3 Back around 1971, I had a great aunt who retired after 50 years of teaching school. She knew I showed an interest in learning chess so she bought me the book "My 60 Memorable Games" by Bobby Fischer. I devoured all of those 60 Fischer games. I played Russell Palkendo at Carlisle, Pennsylvania. He was a friend of one of my students, the late Victor Rislow. Russ played 1.e4. I chose the Sicilian Defence. Palkendo played the Classical 6.Be2. This gave me a chance to transpose into a Scheveningen with 6...e6, but I stayed with the Najdorf idea of 6...e5. I equalized as Black. Then from moves 21-24 I got outplayed. It culminated in the sacrifice 25.Ne6! This netted my queen in the end. Once we got to the endgame, White had trouble putting me away. His clock kept counting down. How did I survive a losing endgame? I determined exactly how my opponent could win. In this game, I was stuck in a passive position. It became critical that my rook, knight, b-pawn and g-pawn were always protected. I had to make it difficult for White's king to invade my position. Palkendo - Sawyer, 4th Saturday Carlisle Open (2), 25.05.1996 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Be2 e5 7.Nb3 Be7 8.00 0-0 9.Be3 Be6 10.f4 [The main line is 10.Qd2 Nbd7 11.a4 Rc8 12.a5 Qc7 which has played over a thousand times.] 10...exf4 11.Rxf4 Nc6 12.Nd5 Bxd5 13.exd5 Ne5 [Black has completely equalized.] 14.Kh1 Nfd7 15.Qd2 Bg5 16.Rf5 Bxe3 17.Qxe3 Rc8 18.c3 Nc4?! [18...Re8=] 19.Bxc4 Rxc4 20.Raf1 Ne5 21.Nd2 Rc7? [Now White gains the advantage. 21...Ra4!=] 22.Qg3 Kh8 23.Ne4 Re7 24.Ng5 Kg8? [Black loses the queen to a pretty tactical move. I do get some compensation, so the game keeps going.] 25.Ne6! fxe6 26.Rxf8+ Qxf8 27.Rxf8+ Kxf8 28.dxe6 Rxe6 29.h3 h6 30.Qf4+ Ke8 31.Qb4 Re7 32.Qxd6 [White has a queen and pawn for Black's rook and knight.] 32...Nc6 33.b4 Rd7 34.Qg6+ Kd8 35.a4 Kc8 36.b5 axb5 37.axb5 Nd8 38.c4 Rf7 [All Black's pieces are protected.] 39.c5 Kd7 40.Qd6+ Kc8 41.b6 Rd7 42.Qe5 Rf7 43.Qa1 Nc6? [Probably both sides were in time trouble. Black should try 43...Kd7 44.Qa8 Ke8

45.c6 bxc6 46.Kh2+- which favors White.] 44.Qe1? [44.Qa8+ Nb8 45.Qa2+-] 44...Nd8 45.Qg3 Rd7 46.Qg4 Nc6 47.Qf5 Nd8 A draw was agreed. White was probably in serious time trouble. 1/2-1/2

5.Nc3 a6 6.f4 The move 6.f4 may team up with Bd3 or transpose elsewhere.

162 – Moore 6.f4 e6 7.Bd3 b5 This Sicilian Defence Najdorf was my second simultaneous exhibition win against Jeffrey Moore. He was rated about 100 points above me. The previous game was a Latvian Gambit. For some reason I practiced new lines when I played in simuls. In the 1980s, Jeffrey Moore was a talented young Philadelphia Expert tournament player. He sometimes visited the Chaturanga Chess Club to play simuls. Jeff Moore was well-known as a member of one of the top scholastic chess teams in the country. Moore - Sawyer, Hatboro, PA simul 1985 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.f4 [There are four bishop moves more popular than 6.f4: 6.Bg5, 6.Be3, 6.Be2 and 6.Bc4.] 6...e6 [The Najdorf question in many lines is whether Black should push his e-pawn one or two squares. If 6...e5 the main line is 7.Nf3 Nbd7 8.a4 Be7 9.Bd3 0-0 10.0-0] 7.Bd3 [The bishop protects e4, but leaves the Nd4 unprotected. White often tries the set-up 7.Be2 Be7 8.0-0 0-0 9.Be3 Nc6 10.a4 Qc7 11.Kh1 Re8 12.Bf3] 7...b5 8.0-0 Bb7 9.Qe1 [9.Kh1 would have been a good precaution.] 9...Qb6! [Black focuses on the weak diagonal a7-g1 by pinning the knight.] 10.Be3 Ng4 11.Kh1 Nxe3 12.Qxe3 Nd7 13.Rae1 0-0-0! [Castling opposite sides sharpens the situation.] 14.Nb3? [14.a4=] 14...Qxe3 15.Rxe3 Nc5 16.Na5!? [16.Nxc5 dxc5 17.e5 c4 18.Be4 Bc5=/+ and Black has a slight edge with the two bishops.] 16...Ba8 17.Rd1 Be7 18.a4 Nxd3 19.cxd3 b4 [Black drives the knight away from d5, but there is no need to wait. If 19...d5 20.exd5 b4 21.Ne4 Rxd5=/+ and Black appears better.] 20.Na2? [20.Ne2!] 20...d5 21.Rc1+ Kd7 22.exd5 [Trying to block in the Ba8 with 22.e5 fails to 22...d4!] 22...Bxd5 23.Nc4 Bxc4?! [23...Rb8 24.Ne5+ Ke8 25.Nc6 Rc8-+] 24.dxc4? [This allows the Black king an active safe role on c6. Better is 24.Rxc4 when the position is still a little messy.] 24...Kc6 25.c5 a5 26.Re5 [White is trying to hold c5, but the real threats are with

rooks on the first and second ranks.] 26...Rd2 27.Rb1 Rhd8 28.Rf1 [Not a help.] 28...Rxb2 29.Nc1 Rdd2 30.Rh5 Rb1 31.Rh3 Rc2 0-1

163 – Vestergaard 6.f4 e6 7.Be3 The novel “1984” was written by George Orwell just a few years before I was born. It imagined surveillance cameras 35 years in the future with the reminder, “Big Brother is Watching You.” Steen Skovmose Vestergaard of Denmark had an ICCF rating of 2091 based on 582 correspondence games. His peak rating appears to have been 2349 in 2005. I have over 50 of his games in my database. We played in 1984 back before the International Correspondence Chess Federation posted individual ratings. Our game in 1984 was a Sicilian Defence. During the 1980s I played the Najdorf Variation, especially in the first half of that decade. The latter half of the 1980s I played the Latvian Gambit. I played this game very well until I made a big blunder on move 23. White noticed my mistake and punished me with 24.Rxf6! Vestergaard - Sawyer, corr ICCF 1984 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.f4 e6 [Another popular Najdorf approach is 6...e5 7.Nf3 Nbd7 8.a4 Be7 9.Bd3 0-0 10.0-0=] 7.Be3 [7.Be2 Be7 8.0-0 0-0 9.Be3 would be a typical Scheveningen line.] 7...b5 8.a3 [The question after 8.Bd3 b4 9.Na4!? is to the position of this knight. Is the Na4 strong or weak? The line 8.Qf3 Bb7 9.Bd3 Nbd7 10.g4 leads to a sharp position.] 8...Bb7 9.Bd3 Nbd7 10.Nf3 [White retreats the knight to f3. Another idea is for the queen to occupy that same square. 10.Qf3 Rc8 11.0-0 Be7 12.Rad1=] 10...Qc7 11.Qe2 Be7 12.h3 0-0 13.0-0 Nc5 14.Nd2 Rac8 15.f5 d5! 16.exd5 exd5 17.Bd4 Rfe8 18.Qf3 Nce4 19.Bxe4 dxe4 20.Qe3 Nd5 [Black may wish to sacrifice the Exchange with 20...Red8 21.Bb6 Qe5 22.Nf3 (22.Bxd8? Bc5!-+ wins the White queen.) 22...Qd6 23.Bxd8 Bxd8 24.Rad1 Bb6 25.Nd4 Rc4 26.Nce2 Rxc2=/+] 21.Nxd5 Bxd5 22.b4 [White should grab f6 while he can with 22.f6! Bc5 23.Bxc5 Qxc5 24.Qxc5 Rxc5 25.Rf5=] 22...Qxc2 [Now it is Black's turn to occupy f6 with a pawn. 22...f6! 23.c3 Qd7 24.Rae1 Bd6-/+ Black has a slightly better position due to the two bishops and advanced e-pawn.] 23.f6 Bxf6? [Big blunder. Black

throws away a fine position due to White's tactical response. Better was 23...Bf8 24.fxg7 Be7=/+] 24.Rxf6! gxf6 [24...Qd3 25.Rxa6+- leaves Black down a knight.] 25.Qg3+ Kf8 26.Qd6+ Re7 27.Bxf6 Qxd2 28.Bxe7+ Ke8 29.Bh4 1-0

164 – Lingsell 6.f4 e5 7.fxe5 Pelle Lingsell of Sweden was a good blitz player and 30 years younger than me. Lingsell obtained a peak Internet Chess Club blitz rating on 2307 on 15-Feb-2013. We played five games in a wide variety of openings during the year 2012. I scored 4-1. In the Sicilian Defence I answered his Najdorf Variation with 6.f4. Usually as White I develop a bishop on move 6 but not always. Now Black must choose between the Scheveningen approach with 6…e6 or the Najdorf with 6…e5. The main difference lies in which pawn push fits well. The move 6…e6 which supports d5. The move 5…a6 kept White from attacking a backward d6 with a move like Nb5. Pelle Lingsell chose the Najdorf idea 6…e5. White is supposed to solidify his position with Nd4-Nf3. Then White can play Bd3 and hope to enjoy his space advantage. But then I went off half-cocked with my move 7.fxe5. It allowed Black to swap queens and keep my king in the center. Black attacked me. I was on the defensive and struggling. At a key moment in this fast paced game Black missed a winning combination on move 22. That turned the tables and I won. Sawyer (2007) - Lingsell (2093), ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 04.11.2012 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.f4 e5 7.fxe5? [The normal line is 7.Nf3 Nbd7 8.a4 Be7 9.Bd3 0-0 10.0-0=] 7...dxe5 8.Nf3 Qxd1+ 9.Kxd1 Nc6 10.Bd3 Bb4 11.Bd2 0-0 12.a3 Bc5 13.Ke2 b5 14.Nd5 Nxd5 15.exd5 Nd8?! [15...Nd4+ 16.Nxd4 Bxd4=] 16.b4 Bd6 17.c4 bxc4 [Black has a chance to cross me up with 17...e4!=/+] 18.Bxc4 f5 19.Bg5 Nf7 20.Be3 Bb7 21.Bc5?! [21.g3=] 21...Rac8 22.Rhc1 e4? [The winning combination is 22...Bxc5 23.bxc5 Rxc5 24.d6 Bd5 25.Bxa6 Ra5 26.Bc4 Bxc4+ 27.Rxc4 Nxd6-+] 23.Nd4 Bxc5 24.bxc5 Ne5? [24...Rxc5 25.Rab1+/-] 25.c6 Nxc4 26.Rxc4 Ba8 [During the game I expected 26...a5 but I see White is still winning after 27.Ke3+-] 27.Rac1 Rfd8? 28.Nxf5

Kf7 29.d6 g6 30.d7 Rc7 31.Nd6+ Ke6 32.Nxe4 Kd5 33.Nf6+ [I missed 33.Rc5+! Kxe4? 34.R1c4#] 33...Ke6 34.Ne8 Rcxd7 35.cxd7 Rxd7 36.Nc7+ Kf5 37.Nxa8 1-0

5.Nc3 a6 6.Be3 The move 6.Be3 is the English Attack played by Robert Byrne.

165 – Morrison 6…e5 7.Nf3 Be7 My best ICCF effort came in 1994-1995. Then I won a 7-player Master Class event. It is great to win a chess tournament! The success of a first place finish gives a sense of accomplishment for hard work. Every game was important to the final result. The ICCF Master Class tournaments were for candidate masters (experts) and masters who wanted to compete for the world correspondence championship. If you won two 7-player events or won one 15-player event, you moved on to the preliminary round of the world championship. If you won one of those events, maybe a 15-player round robin event, you went to the semi-finals, and then on to the finals. If you kept defeating postal tournament winners, then in about 10 years, you could become the world champion. This Sicilian Defence Najdorf against Jackson E. Morrison of California ended in a draw. I won the tournament by half a point. Morrison chose the 6.Be3. I was fortunate that Morrison was in a peaceful mood. The rest of my games were hard fought. Although 6.Be3 was played by many masters in the 1950s and 1960s, Grandmaster Robert Byrne became famous in the early 1970s for winning with 6.Be3 vs Browne and vs Najdorf himself, as well as losing with it vs Korchnoi and Fischer. Morrison (2208) - Sawyer (2157), corr ICCF 1994 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Be3 e5 7.Nf3 [7.Nb3= is more popular] 7...Be7 8.Bc4 0-0 9.0-0 Qc7 10.Qd3 [10.Bb3 Be6=] 10...Nc6 [10...b5 11.Bd5=] 11.a3 Bg4 12.Nd2 b5 13.Ba2 b4!? [13...Rac8=] 14.Nd5 Qb7 15.f3 Be6 16.Nxf6+ gxf6 17.Bd5 bxa3 18.bxa3 Rab8 19.Rab1 Qc8

20.Nc4 Qc7 21.f4 [21.Bb6!+- and White is winning.] 21...Rxb1 22.Rxb1 Rb8 23.Bb6 [White would have stood better after 23.Rb6! Rxb6 24.Bxb6 Qb7 25.f5 Bxd5 26.Qxd5+/-] 23...Qc8 24.f5 Bxd5 25.exd5 Nd4 26.Rf1 Nb5 [In a position that slightly favors White, I offer a draw.] 1/2-1/2

166 – Golubka 6.Be3 e5 7.Nf3 An early b5 pawn push left Black's a8 rook vulnerable to attack in this Sicilian Defence Najdorf Variation English Attack 6.Be3 e5. Black appears to have White queen trapped, but White had an escape plan in the game Petro Golubka vs Martyna Wikar. Golubka (2484) - Wikar (1955), Krakow Rapid Championship Krakow POL, 16.06.2018 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Be3 e5 7.Nf3 Be7 8.Bc4 0-0 9.Bb3 b5? [9...Be6 10.0-0=] 10.Bd5! Nxd5 11.Qxd5 b4 [11...Qd7 12.Qxa8 Bb7 13.Qa7 Nc6 14.Qb6 Bd8 15.Nxe5+/=] 12.Qxa8 Be6 13.Nd5 Qd7 14.0-0-0 Nc6 15.Qxc6! [If 15...Qxc6 16.Nxe7+ wins.] 1-0

167 – Obando 6…e5 7.Nb3 Be6 My third round Space Coast Open game was the most fun I had in a tournament for a long time! Harold Obando arrived to play in the third round. I played White in a Sicilian. It had been 25 years since I faced a Najdorf Variation as White over the board. Then I played 6.Bg5, but I was concerned with my current ability to handle the Poisoned Pawn Variation after 6...e6 7.f4 Qb6. I tried 6.Be3 known as the English Attack. In recent years it has been the most popular move. I had played several training blitz games in this line from each side vs computers. After this Saturday night game, since I slept poorly the previous two nights, I went back to my hotel room, and I fell into a deep sleep. Somehow my wristwatch alarm went off at 1:00 AM?? I'm was asleep and totally out of it in a dark strange hotel room. I tried to turn off the alarm on a new watch. Five minutes later it went off again! By the time I got it fixed, I was unable to sleep. My wife got up early and we went to breakfast Sunday morning. Along the way, I saw my 4th round pairing was vs an ex-master Expert who had lost

while sitting next to me during my Najdorf game. I wanted to play him. I expected his Scandinavian and wondered if I would choose a BlackmarDiemer or follow the main lines. After breakfast my wife left and went home. I showed up for my fourth round. I played 1.e4 and started my clock. After about half an hour, the TD informed me that my opponent was not coming. The forfeit win gave me 1-3 vs all Experts. That left me with nothing to do for five and a half hours, when I would almost certainly have to play Black vs a Class A player at my most exhausted point. I decided to withdraw from the final round. I went home and fell asleep. Sawyer (1966) - Obando (2046), 14th Space Coast Open (3), 28.04.2007 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 [Najdorf Sicilian. Here I thought for a long time.] 6.Be3 e5 7.Nb3 [7.Nf3 is the positional line, but I wanted a scalp.] 7...Be6 8.f3 Nbd7 [Black played the opening quickly.] 9.Qd2 Be7 10.0-0-0 b5 11.g4 0-0 12.g5 Nh5 [A good alternative to 12...b4. After the game my opponent said he forgot to play ...b4 at the right moment after which he eventually felt that he must have been lost at some point.] 13.Rg1!? [13.Nd5 Nxd5 14.exd5= Stockfish, Komodo] 13...Rc8 14.Kb1 Qc7 15.Rc1 Nb6 16.Qf2?! [16.Na5=] 16...Rb8 [My king is in trouble than his. He has the hole in d5 well covered. There seems to be a slight static advantage to Black. With this in mind, I thought of Dorfman's principle in "The Method in Chess": "If for one of the players that static balance is negative, he must without hesitation employ dynamic means, and be ready to go in for extreme measures." Consequently I need to open lines toward the Black king immediately. Therefore, my move:] 17.f4! Nxf4 18.Bxf4 exf4 19.Qxf4 Nc4!? 20.Nd5! Bxd5 21.exd5 Ne5 22.Nd4 g6? [A common move in this line, but here it gives me a target. Black has better options like 22...Qc5=] 23.h4 Qb7 24.Bg2 Rfd8 25.h5!? [White should cash in on both the queenside and kingside. 25.Nc6! Nxc6 26.dxc6 Qa7 27.Bd5 Rf8 28.h5!+-] 25...Bf8 26.hxg6 hxg6 27.Rh1 Bg7 28.Rcf1 Re8 29.Qh4 [29.Qh2! wins] 29...Kf8 30.Nc6?! [The last move of time control. I thought this led to a forced mate in five. Other moves looked promising but were unclear to me in the short time I had to decide. I thought seriously about playing the promising 30.Ne6+!? but it does not work. Before I thought I saw a mate in five, I thought I might play 30.Qh7!] 30...Rbc8

[This was a surprise!] 31.Qh7 [At this point I saw my intended mate in five with 31.Qh8+? fails. My original plan did not envision his king on g7. My time trouble did not help.] 31...Rxc6 32.dxc6 Qb6 33.Bd5 Qd4 34.Bxf7? [White still has a good game with 34.Bb3!+-] 34...Nxf7 35.Rxf7+? Kxf7 36.Rf1+ Ke7 37.Re1+ Kd8 38.Rxe8+ Kxe8 [There is no attack for White nor any defence against Black's attack!] 0-1

168 – Tinker 6…e5 7.Nb3 Be6 I beat a master level chess engine in the Main Line of the Sicilian Najdorf 6.Be3. Winning is about seeing threats in both directions. If I'm good at tactics then I'm good at chess. I train every day. My puzzles rating on lichess is 2206. My current chess.com tactics rating is 2134, but it sometimes tops 2200. I've done Chessimo tactics for 10 years in all openings. My tactical skills avoided Tinker trouble. I had nothing in the center or on the kingside. My only hope was to queen a queenside pawn. The computer thought it was winning, and maybe it was, until it devoured my h-pawn. Then it was too late. Sawyer - Tinker (2263), ICC 5 3 Internet Chess Club, 17.09.2017 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Be3 e5 7.Nb3 Be6 8.f3 Nbd7 9.Qd2 b5 10.0-0-0 Nb6 11.Qf2 Nc4 12.Bxc4 Bxc4 13.Na5 Be6 14.Nc6 Qc8 15.Nb4 Be7 16.Nbd5 Qc6 [16...Bxd5 17.Nxd5 Nxd5 18.Rxd5=] 17.Nxe7 Kxe7 18.Qd2 b4 19.Nd5+ Bxd5 20.exd5 Qc4 21.Kb1 a5 22.Qd3 [22.Rhe1+/=] 22...Qxd3 23.Rxd3 Rhb8 24.Bg5 h6 25.Bxf6+ Kxf6 26.Kc1 Rb5 27.Rhd1 a4 28.Kd2 Rc8 29.Kc1 Ke7 30.c3 a3 31.b3 bxc3 32.Kc2 f5 33.Re3 Kf6 34.Rxc3 Rxc3+ [34...Rbc5!-/+] 35.Kxc3 Rc5+ 36.Kb4 Rc2 37.Kxa3 Rxg2 38.b4 Rxh2? [38...Rf2 39.b5=] 39.b5 Rc2 40.b6 Rc8 41.Kb4 Ke7 42.a4 Rc2 [42...Kd7 43.a5+-] 43.Kb5 Rb2+ [43...Rc5+ 44.Ka6+-] 44.Ka6 g5 [44...e4 45.fxe4 fxe4 46.Rd4+-] 45.b7 e4 46.fxe4 f4 47.Ka7 g4 48.b8Q [Black resigns. If 48...Rxb8 49.Kxb8 f3 50.Rf1+-] 1-0

5.Nc3 a6 6.Bg5 This sharp continuation with 6.Bg5 is the traditional main line.

169 – Taylor 6…Nbd7 7.Bc4 e6 In my early years I played through 530 games by Anatoly Karpov in the RHM David Levy collection up through 1974. At his peak, Karpov could control the entire board with his pieces. He took away almost any square that his opponent wanted to use. A few years after the game below, Anatoly Karpov wrote a book on Queen Pawn Openings without 2.c4 (only in Russian). There Karpov mentioned me in his section on the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit. As I recall, Karpov called me a Baptist minister. I won nice games in Karpov style vs lower rated players but I found myself just waiting for mistakes. Higher rated players did not make many mistakes. In fact, they enjoyed my mistakes. To beat higher rated players, I had to sharpen my approach to openings. I needed to increase the risk to get the reward. I chose some wild gambits and some sharp main lines. This led to ugly losses and glorious victories. But my rating and skill improved. Sometimes I played the BDG with 1.d4. When I played the 1.e4 openings as White I continued my aggressive ways. I looked for complicated lines where my opponent could go wrong. I won in the Sicilian Defence Najdorf 6.Bg5. I did not know all the lines, but neither did my opponents. Vs Allen Taylor the result could have gone either way. Black lost due to loose pieces. In the final position I had a double threat of Nxe6xf8 and gxf6. Sawyer - Taylor, Williamsport, PA 19.09.2000 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Bg5 Nbd7 7.Bc4 e6 8.f4 [8.0-0 h6

9.Be3+/=] 8...Be7 9.Qf3 [9.Bxe6! fxe6 10.Nxe6 Qb6 11.Nxg7+ Kf7 12.Nf5 Qxb2 13.Nd5 Bf8 14.0-0+/-] 9...h6 10.Bh4 Qc7 11.Bb3 Nc5 12.0-0!? Bd7 [12...Nfxe4! 13.Bxe7 Nxc3 14.Bxd6 Qxd6 15.Qxc3 0-0 16.Rad1 Qb6=] 13.Rad1 Nxb3 14.axb3 Rc8 15.g4 b5 16.Rfe1 0-0 [16...b4!=/+] 17.g5 Ne8 18.Qh5 Qc5 19.Bf2 Nf6 20.Qf3 1-0

170 – Jones 6…Nbd7 7.Bc4 Qa5 In 1977 I got paired against a teenage player named Curt Jones. He was an expert whose rating was rapidly rising. While I was in college; I think Curt was in high school. Curt Jones became a USCF Life Master. His current rating is in the 2400s. Curt's father was one of the better Tennessee players in the 1970s. Many chess parents would love to see their children become chess masters. In general, how does the child of a chess playing parent become good? Here are some observations: 1. Curt was polite and friendly during our five games. This speaks to excellent parenting. 2. Curt regularly played in chess events. He was given opportunity (time and money). 3. Curt's father had an extensive chess library. Knowledge and training were available. 4. Curt said he studied books from his father's library. It showed his passion to improve. 5. Curt went on to be quite active for 20 years. This implies Curt probably loved playing. Curt Jones and I first met in a Tennessee Chess Association postal event. In my initial Sawyer-Jones game, I was White in a Sicilian Defence Najdorf. I played 6.Be2. Curt Jones outplayed me and won. After our first game, Curt and I agreed to play a two game rated postal match in 1978. During our games, Curt Jones won the Tennessee State Championship. In our match we both won as White. He won a King's Indian Attack. I won here below. Sawyer - Jones, corr TCA 1978 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Bg5 Nbd7 [Jones told me he had never lost in this line. Normal is 6...e6.] 7.Bc4 Qa5 8.Qd2 e6 9.0-0 Be7 10.Rad1 h6 11.Bh4 Ne5 12.Bb3!? [The book move was 12.Be2; I wanted to stay lined up on e6/f7.] 12…g5 13.Bg3 Nh5 14.f4! [Black's king is in the center. The way to victory is straight ahead!] 14…Nxg3 15.hxg3 Ng4 16.f5 [Attacking e6 with both the f-pawn, the Nd4 and the Bb3.] 16…e5 17.f6! [Keep going! The threat of

fxe7 is that Bxf7+ can follow. Thus Black dares not capture on d4.] 17...Bf8 [17...Bd8] 18.Nf5 Qc5+ 19.Kh1 Bxf5 20.Rxf5 Ne3? [20...h5 21.Qxg5+/=] 21.Rxe5+ Qxe5 22.Qxe3 Qxf6 23.Nd5 Qg6 24.Rd3 Bg7 25.Nc7+ Ke7 26.Nxa8 Rxa8 27.Qb6 Rd8 28.Ba4 Be5? [28...Qh5+ 29.Kg1+-] 29.Qc7+ 1-0

171 – Gabasjelisjvili 6…Nbd7 In the early 1980s I played in a selection of master level postal chess tournaments in the International Correspondence Chess Federation (ICCF). I played postal chess against people from 30 different countries. This gave me the opportunity to “meet” a lot of good players. Numerical notation was used to combat the language barrier. Every square is a two digit number. Every move was a four digit number. The algebraic “a1” square is “11” in numerical notation. The first move 1.Nf3 in algebraic is 1.7163 in numeric. Numbers are one thing. Names are another. The spellings of my opponent’s names would change depending the alphabet used. Here I played G. Gabasjelisjvili in the Sicilian Defence. There are players with similar spelled names to this player, but I am not sure exactly who he was. ICCF was not online until years later. By the spelling I am guessing this player was from Russia. At any rate, we played the same sharp Najdorf Variation in which I defeated Curt Jones in the previous game. The key moves were 6.Bg5 Nbd7 7.Bc4 Qa5 8.Qd2 e6. Against Curt Jones I castled kingside. Here I castled queenside and turned up the heat. I had a great game until I got burned. Sawyer - Gabasjelisjvili, corr ICCF 1984 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Bg5 Nbd7 7.Bc4 Qa5 [7...Qb6 8.Bb3 e6=] 8.Qd2 e6 9.0-0-0 [Another idea is to play 9.f3 b5 (9...h6 10.Be3 Ne5 11.Bb3=) 10.Bb3 Bb7 11.0-0 Be7 12.a3=] 9...b5 10.Bb3 Bb7 11.Rhe1 0-00 [11...Be7 12.Kb1 Nc5 13.Bxf6 Bxf6 14.Nf5 0-0 15.Nxd6 Be5 16.Nxb7 Nxb7=] 12.f3 Kb8 13.Be3 [13.Kb1+/=] 13...Rc8 14.Kb1 Ne5 15.Qf2 [15.Bg1+/=] 15...Nfd7 16.Rd2 [16.Nde2+/=] 16...Be7 17.h3 g5 18.Rc1 Ka8 [Now Black can sacrifice the Exchange with good compensation after 18...Rxc3 19.bxc3 Qxc3 20.Ne2 Qc7 21.Rcd1 Rc8=] 19.g3?! [19.Nde2 b4

20.Na4+/=] 19...Rxc3 [19...b4!?=] 20.bxc3 Nc4 21.Bxc4 bxc4=/+ [Apparently White could not find a good defense. Black is better, but there seems to be a possibility of survival after 22.Ne2 Bxe4 =+] 0-1

172 – Chavez 6…e6 7.f4 Qc7 The thematic White knight sacrifice Nd5!? in the Sicilian Defence opens up lines to attack the Black king. Such a gambit may work well in the hands of a strong player. The danger to both sides is real. An open e-file aimed at the Black king can leads to all kinds of tactics from a direct mate to checks that double attack other pieces. On the other hand, White sacrifices a piece. A whole piece in some cases. That’s a lot. If you invest a piece, you had better expect a pretty valuable return for the material. If not, you lose. Both sides threaten mate in this sharp contest between Ricardo Ernesto Chavez and Santosh Gujrathi Vidit. White had to keep up the attack. Each player appeared to have a mate in two. Black had a simple check and mate, but White was on the hunt. Right when White seemed to have 24.Nc6+ and 25.Qa7 mate, it became clear that Black’s far away queen on f2 covered a7. Only Black could checkmate. White resigned. Chavez (2244) - Vidit (2711), 43rd Olympiad 2018 Batumi GEO (1.4), 24.09.2018 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Bg5 e6 7.f4 Qc7 8.Qf3 b5 9.0-0-0 b4 10.Nd5 exd5 11.Bxf6 [11.exd5 Be7 12.Bd3 h6-/+] 11...gxf6 12.exd5 Kd8 13.Bd3 Qc5 14.Nb3 [14.Bf5 Bxf5 15.Nxf5 h5=/+] 14...Qb6 15.Rhe1 [15.Qh5 Ra7 16.Rhe1] 15...Ra7 16.Qh5 Qf2 [16...Re7 17.Rxe7 Bxe7 18.Qxf7 Qe3+ 19.Kb1 Qxf4-/+] 17.Re4 Re7 18.Rxb4 Nd7 19.Na5 Re1 20.Nc6+ [20.Rxe1 Qxe1+ 21.Qd1 Qxd1+ 22.Kxd1 Nc5=/+] 20...Kc7 21.Rc4 Nb6 22.Ne5+ Nxc4 23.Qxf7+ Kb8 0-1

173 – Price 7…b5 8.a3 Bb7 A week after Art Price beat me with his bold Budapest Gambit we played again. This time I had Black and held my own. Price played 1.e4. I responded with the Sicilian Defence that I had been studying at the time. Like Fischer I chose the Najdorf Variation. However, I was not following Bobby Fischer this time. Lev Polugaevsky had written several books on how to study the opening. As his example Polugaevsky chose his own line of the Najdorf which is 6.Bg5 e6 7.f4 b5. Polugaevsky was in the mix of the World Championship Candidates playoff events for a couple decades. He found it too difficult to beat Viktor Korchnoi. Most grandmasters never even made it to Korchnoi. I studied the Polugaevsky books on the Sicilian Defence. He had developed his 7…b5 Variation through home analysis and over the board competition. When his ideas were refuted Lev just kept searching deeper for new ideas. I thought of Lev Polugaevsky’s passion when working on my BlackmarDiemer Gambit Keybook. Arthur Price played the sharp 6.Bg5 which Spassky used to beat Fischer 10 years earlier. Price avoided the sharpest 8.e5 lines. Price (2054) - Sawyer (1900), Lansdale, PA 22.05.1982 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Bg5 e6 7.f4 b5 8.a3 [White avoids the sharpest theory. In those days I was studying the Polugaevsky books on the Sicilian. I was familiar with this variation. I was ready for the sharp lines after 8.e5 dxe5 9.fxe5 Qc7 and now: 10.exf6 (10.Qe2 Nfd7 11.0-0-0 Bb7=) 10...Qe5+ 11.Be2 Qxg5+/=] 8...Bb7 9.Be2 Nbd7 10.0-0 [White can hold onto the e-pawn with 10.Bf3=] 10...Qb6 11.Bxf6 Nxf6 12.Kh1 Nxe4 13.Nxe4 Bxe4 14.Bf3 Bxf3 15.Qxf3 Rc8 [15...d5=/+] 16.c3 g6? [I was way too concerned about White's possible f5 attack. I should have played 16...Be7 17.f5 e5=] 17.Rae1?! [I did not prevent f5. White has a strong attack with the sacrifice 17.f5! gxf5 18.Qh5 Rg8 19.Nxe6+-]

17...Be7? [17...Bg7 18.f5 0-0=] 18.Qe4 [18.f5! exf5 19.g4+/-] 18...d5 19.Qe2 Rc7 20.Rf3 [20.f5 exf5=/+] 20...Kd8 [20...0-0-/+] 21.Re3 Re8 22.Rd3 Bh4 23.g3 Bf6 24.Nf3 Ree7 25.g4 Qc5 26.g5 Bg7 27.Kg2 h5 [Black stood better after 27...Qc4=/+] 1/2-1/2

174 – Chaney 7…Qb6 8.Qd2 Bobby Fischer had a philosophy that if he could grab a pawn in the opening, even a risky pawn, and if he could get away, then he would have a won endgame. Fischer was a great defender. Fischer played the Sicilian Defence Poisoned Pawn Variation as Black in the Najdorf maybe a dozen times. He won six, lost once to Spassky in the World Championship and drew the rest. Ronald Chaney played the Sicilian Najdorf in three of our games. Most of the time Bobby Fischer played 6.Bg5 e6 7.f4 Be7. Ron Chaney did too, but there was this one time he played 7…Qb6. It is one thing to watch grandmaster play this wild line. It is quite another to try and attack a slippery king. This time I tried 10.Be2!? The Poisoned Pawn sometimes feels to me like the position is full of holes for both sides. My position went from Swiss chess to Limburger cheese. My game stunk. Sawyer (1944) - Chaney (1972), corr APCT EMN-A-4 1997 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Bg5 e6 7.f4 Qb6 8.Qd2 Qxb2 9.Rb1 Qa3 10.Be2!? [Usually I play 10.f5 Nc6 11.fxe6 fxe6 12.Nxc6 bxc6 13.Be2 Be7 14.0-0 0-0 15.Rb3 Qc5+ 16.Be3 Qe5 with a draw by repetition after either 17.Bd4 (17.Bf4 Qc5+ 18.Be3=) 17...Qa5 18.Bb6 Qe5 19.Bd4=] 10...Nbd7 11.0-0 Qc5 12.Kh1 Be7 13.Rf3?! [13.f5 e5 when White can choose between 14.Ne6!? (14.Nb3 Qc7=/+) 14...fxe6 15.fxe6 Nb6 16.Rxf6 Bxf6 17.Bxf6 gxf6 18.Bh5+ Kd8 19.e7+ Kxe7 20.Rxb6=] 13...b5 14.Re3 [Another attempt to complicate the position would be 14.Rd3!? Bb7 15.Bf3 Rd8 16.e5 dxe5 17.Nxe6 fxe6 18.Bxb7 exf4=/+] 14...h6 15.Bxf6 Nxf6 [15...Bxf6!=/+] 16.Bf3? [I missed my chance for 16.e5! dxe5 17.fxe5 Nd5 18.Nxd5 exd5 19.Rc3=] 16...Rb8? [16...Bb7 17.e5 dxe5 18.fxe5 Rd8=/+] 17.Nce2? [17.e5! dxe5 18.fxe5 Nd5 19.Nxd5 exd5 20.e6+/=] 17...Bb7 18.Nb3 [My position was getting worse, but there was still a chance for complications. 18.a4 bxa4 19.e5 Nd5 20.Bxd5 Qxd5

21.Nc3 Qxg2+ 22.Qxg2 Bxg2+ 23.Kxg2 Rxb1 24.Nxb1 Kd7 25.exd6 Bxd6 26.Rd3 Rc8=/+ when White has two knights for a bishop and three pawns.] 18...Qb6 19.Na5 Ba8 20.c4 Bd8 21.cxb5 Qxa5 22.Qxd6 Qb6 0-1

175 - Raudenbush 8…Qxb2 In December 1980 I returned to active play with some sharp chess. I played five games that month at the North Penn Chess Club in Lansdale, Pennsylvania. Here are two of them. William Raudenbush at that time was a USCF Expert and a very strong postal player. Raudenbush had a well-defined, prepared and thought out opening repertoire that he played all the time with confidence. As White, Bill played 1.d4 / 2.c4. As Black, he played the King's Indian (Nbd7 lines) and the Sicilian Defence. Bill was twenty years older than I and he had a positive influence on my chess. I was quite familiar with main line theory. This made our games very entertaining. One of my favorite books back then was the Sicilian Najdorf by Michael Stean. The Poisoned Pawn Variation of the Najdorf Sicilian Defence is a very tactical line. Black is in danger of being mated while trying to walk off with a winning amount of material. Sawyer - Raudenbush, Lansdale, PA 03.12.1980 begins 1.e4 c5 [Sicilian Defence] 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Bg5 e6 7.f4 Qb6 8.Qd2 Qxb2 9.Rb1 [This rook move is the main line. Boris Spassky played 9.Nb3 against Bobby Fischer in 1972.] 9...Qa3 10.f5 [The other main line is 10.e5 dxe5 11.fxe5 Nfd7 12.Ne4 h6 13.Bh4 Qxa2 14.Rd1 Qd5 15.Qe3 Qxe5 16.Be2 Bc5 17.Bg3 Bxd4 18.Rxd4 Qa5+ 19.Rd2 0-0 20.Bd6 Rd8 21.Qg3 Qf5 22.Be5. This line scores very well for White.] 10...Nc6 11.fxe6 fxe6 12.Nxc6 bxc6 13.e5 dxe5 14.Bxf6 gxf6 15.Ne4 Be7 [Black usually chooses this over 15...Qxa2 16.Nxf6+ (16.Rd1) 16...Ke7? (16...Kf7) 17.Rd1 Kxf6 18.Be2 (18.Bd3!+-) 18...Bc5? 19.Qh6+ Kf7 20.Rf1+ (20.Bh5+! mates one move faster.) 20...Ke8 21.Bh5+ 1-0 Sawyer – Raudenbush, Lansdale 1980] 16.Be2 0-0 [Nowadays we know 16...h5 to be correct. 17.Rb3 Qa4 18.Nxf6+ (18.c4!?) 18...Bxf6 19.c4 Bh4+ 20.g3 Be7 21.0-0 h4 22.Bd3 Rg8 23.Qf2 Kd7 24.Qd2 Bc5+ 25.Kg2 Bd4 26.c5 is a critical line.] 17.Rb3 Qa4 18.0-0? [Castling is a risky piece sacrifice. Better is 18.c4+/=] 18...Qxe4

19.Rg3+ Kh8 20.Qh6 Rf7?! [20...Rg8!-+] 21.Bh5 Bc5+ 22.Kh1 Qc4? [22...Raa7! 23.Bxf7 Rxf7=] 23.Rg8+?? [White has mate in six starting with 23.Rd1!+-] 23...Kxg8 24.Bxf7+ Kxf7 25.Rxf6+ Ke7?? [25...Ke8!-+] 26.Qf8+ Kd7 27.Rf7+ Be7 28.Qxe7# 1-0

176 – Viveiros 7…Be7 8.Qf3 0-0 Florida has constant construction. People from all over the world want to enjoy 350 mornings of sunshine per year. It rains every afternoon in the summer, but people still want to come to Florida. Roads change with the construction. Streets are relocated. You don’t always end up where you think you were headed. William Viveiros from South Florida played two interesting postal games against me. I played Black in our Gruenfeld Defence. We started down the main highway of the Sicilian Defence. We turned onto the expressway of the Najdorf Variation 6.Bg5. Then Black took an exit into another line. He mixed his defensive systems with ...Nc6. I got the advantage, but I let him slip away. Sawyer (2050) - Viveiros (1800), corr APCT 1980 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Bg5 e6 7.f4 Be7 8.Qf3 0-0 [The normal continuation is 8...Qc7 9.0-0-0 Nbd7=] 9.0-0-0 Nc6?! [9...Qc7=] 10.Bxf6 [10.e5 Nd5 11.Nxd5 exd5 12.Bxe7 Nxe7 13.exd6+/=] 10...gxf6 11.Qh5 [11.Nxc6 bxc6 12.Rd3 Kh8 13.Qh5 Rg8 14.Qxf7+/=] 11...Kh8 12.Rd3 Rg8 13.Qxf7 Rg7 [13...Nxd4 14.Rxd4 Rg7 15.Qh5+/=] 14.Qh5 [14.Nxc6 bxc6 15.Qh5 Bd7 16.Rg3+/-] 14...Bd7 [14...Nxd4 15.Rxd4 e5 16.Rd5!?+/=] 15.Nf3 Qg8 16.Kb1 Rc8 17.Nd2 e5 18.Nd5 Qf8 [18...exf4 19.Nxe7 Rxe7 20.Rxd6+/-] 19.f5 [19.g3+-] 19...Bd8 20.g4!? [20.Qh6!+-] 20...Qg8 [20...Ne7 21.Ne3+/-] 21.Qh6 Qf7 [21...Qf8 22.Rg1+-] 22.Nc4 Qf8 23.Rd1 b5 24.Nce3 [24.Ncb6 Bxb6 25.Nxb6+-] 24...Nd4 25.c3 Nc6 26.Be2 b4 27.Nxb4 [27.cxb4!+-] 27...Nxb4 28.cxb4 Rb8 29.a3 Ba4 30.Rc1 [30.Bxa6+-] 30...a5 31.b5 Bxb5 32.Bxb5 Rxb5 33.Nd5?! [33.Rc2+-] 33...Rxb2+ 34.Ka1 Rb8?! [Black has an amazing draw sequence with 34...Rb3! 35.Ka2 Rb2+ 36.Ka1 Rb3= because if the White king takes the rook, Black wins the White queen by discovered check.] 35.Rc6 [35.Rb1+/-] 35...Qf7 36.h3 Qb7 37.Qc1 Rd7 [37...Qa7!=] 38.Qc2 Qa7 39.Qd2 [39.Rb1+/-] 39...Rb3 40.Rc3 Rdb7 [40...Rxc3! 41.Qxc3 Rb7=] 41.Rhc1?! [My last chance for victory was 41.Qh6! Rxa3+ 42.Rxa3 Qd4+

43.Nc3 Kg8 44.Rb1 Rb4 45.Rd1 Qc5 46.Qd2 Rd4 47.Qa2+ Kg7 48.Rxd4 Qxd4 49.Qd5 Qg1+ 50.Qd1+- and White remains up a rook.] 41...Qb8 42.Qd3 a4 43.Rxb3 Rxb3 44.Rc3 Rb2 45.Rc8 Rb1+ 46.Qxb1 1/2-1/2

177 – LaVallee 7…Be7 8.Qf3 Qc7 Ray Haines met Daniel LaVallee in the Maine State Closed Championship held at Waterville in 2016: "I played an old friend, who use to live in northern Maine a number of years ago. He is a school teacher. He works with his students to help them learn how to play chess as one of his interests. He played one of his best games against me in this round. He made a few small mistakes, which added up against him to give me the better game." Daniel LaVallee appears well-prepared for a Sicilian Defence Najdorf Variation. Black played the questionable move 9...Nc6. White could get the advantage by chopping off the knight with 10.Nxc6 and pushing the e-pawn. But here, White missed the opportunity. Black went on to outplay him and win. LaVallee (1354) - Haines, Maine Championship (1), 09.04.2016 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Bg5 e6 7.f4 Be7 8.Qf3 Qc7 9.0-0-0 Nc6 [9...Nbd7=] 10.Nb3 [10.Nxc6!+/=] 10...b5 11.g4?! Bb7 [11...b4!?=] 12.Bxf6 gxf6 13.Rg1 b4 14.Ne2 a5 15.g5 [15.Nbd4=] 15...a4 [15...fxg5=/+] 16.Nbd4 b3 17.a3 bxc2 18.Nxc2 fxg5 19.fxg5 Ne5 20.Qe3 Rc8 [20...h6-/+] 21.Nc3 d5 22.Nd4 Bc5 23.Rg3 [23.exd5=] 23...Qb6 [23...dxe4-+] 24.Bb5+ [24.exd5+-] 24...Qxb5 25.Ndxb5 Bxe3+ 26.Rxe3 Nc4 27.Re2 dxe4 28.Rd4 Ba6 29.Rxc4 Rxc4 30.Nd6+ Ke7 31.Nxc4 Bxc4 32.Rxe4 Rc8 33.Rd4 e5 34.Rd2 Bb3 35.Kb1 Ke6 36.Ne4 [36.Rf2=] 36...Rc6 37.Rf2 Rc4 38.Nc3 Rf4 39.Rxf4 exf4 40.Ne2 Ke5 41.Kc1 Bc4 42.Ng1 Ke4 43.Kd2 Bf1 44.Kc3 Bb5 [44...Ke3!-+] 45.Kd2 f3 46.Nh3 Kd4 47.Nf2 Bc6 48.Nh3 Ke5 49.Ke3 Kf5 50.Ng1 Kxg5 51.Nxf3+ Bxf3 52.Kxf3 Kf5 53.h4 h5 54.Kg3 Ke4 55.Kh3 f5 56.Kg3 f4+ 57.Kf2 f3 58.Kf1 Ke3 59.Ke1 f2+ 0-1

178 – Swazey 7…Be7 8.Qf3 Qc7 When I give a simultaneous exhibition, I play different openings on alternate boards. If I play 1.e4 on one board, then I will play 1.d4 on the next board. I don’t want my opponents to simply be able to copy what the person next to them has played. Tactics decide almost every game. Weak players suck at tactics so I play for them. In simuls I aim for fast direct piece contact. Typically I have a big advantage in tactical skills. I train daily. For a simul, I like open games but I avoid most gambits. I want tactical positions, but I avoid most wild and crazy gambit lines. My exception is the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit because I know it. My goal is to find good moves in five seconds and keep moving. Most of my opponents will blunder on their own accord. The level of competition varies widely in a simul. Some opponents are near beginners. Others are seasoned tournament competitors. I gave a simul at Penn College in Williamsport, Pennsylvania back in 1996. There were about six boards with rotating players. Roy Swazey had a USCF rating of 1657. We had played at the local club, so I knew him. We played several games in this simul. Swazey chose the Sicilian Defence Najdorf Variation. That is not a beginner’s opening. Roy wanted to win, but he forgot the ninth move. Then I blundered. He thought he was losing and gave up. Sawyer - Swazey, simul Williamsport, PA 1996 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Bg5 e6 7.f4 Be7 8.Qf3 Qc7 9.0-0-0 b5? [9...Nbd7 10.g4=] 10.e5 Bb7 11.Qg3 Nh5 [11...dxe5 12.fxe5 Nbd7 13.exf6 Qxg3 14.hxg3 Nxf6 15.Nb3+-] 12.Qg4 g6 [Or 12...0-0 13.Bxe7 Qxe7 14.Qxh5 Nd7 15.exd6 Qxd6 16.Qg5+-] 13.Rg1?! [Here I threw away my advantage. Correct was 13.Nxe6! Qd7 14.exd6 Bxg5 15.Nc7+ Kf8 16.Qxg5+-] 13...dxe5 14.fxe5 Bxg5+ 15.Qxg5 0-0 16.Bxb5 [16.g4 Ng7

17.Bg2 Bxg2 18.Rxg2+/=] 16...Nd7? [Black returns the favor. 16...axb5 17.Ndxb5=] 17.Bxd7 Qxd7 18.Nf5 Qe8 19.Ne4?? [This changes the evaluation from a win to a loss. 19.Nh6+! Kh8 20.g4+-] 19...exf5 [Also strong is 19...Bxe4!-+] 20.Nf6+ [Black saw that he was forked and resigned. Actually he had a win after 20...Nxf6 21.exf6 Qe6 22.Rd4 Be4-+] 1-0

179 – Swazey 9.0-0-0 Nbd7 I played another game against Roy Swazey from my 1996 Penn College simul. This simultaneous exhibition saw Sawyer play 30 games in two hours, but never more than seven boards at once. Roy Swazey played a few back to back games. When he gave up in the previous game, we just set up the pieces and played another. I played White in a sharp Sicilian Defence. We chose the Najdorf Variation after 6.Bg5 e6 7.f4 Be7 8.Qf3 Qc7 9.0-0-0. In the previous game, Roy Swazey played the premature 9…b5? This time he improves by first inserting 9…Nbd7. Our play led to a complex position that was rich in possibilities. Here I was beating player after player after player. The attitude in the room was that most of my moves were brilliant. That was not true of all moves, but it impacted the mind set of my opponents. Once again I blundered with a powerful looking but tactically unsound move. Fortunately for me, Black resigned. Sawyer - Swazey, simul Williamsport, PA 1996 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Bg5 e6 7.f4 Be7 8.Qf3 Qc7 9.0-0-0 Nbd7 10.g4 b5 11.Bxf6 Nxf6 12.g5 Nd7 13.f5 Bxg5+ [Other possibilities include: 13...0-0! 14.Rg1 b4 15.Nce2=; 13...Ne5 14.Qg3 0-0 15.Kb1+/=; 13...Nc5 14.f6 gxf6 15.gxf6+/=] 14.Kb1 Ne5 [14...0-0 15.fxe6 Nb6 16.Nd5 Nxd5 17.exd5=] 15.Qh5 Bf6!? [Normally Black plays either 15...Qd8 16.h4 Bf6 17.fxe6 0-0 18.Bh3+/-; or 15...Qe7 16.Nxe6 Bxe6 17.fxe6 g6 18.exf7+ Kxf7 19.Qh3 Kg7 20.Nd5+/-] 16.fxe6 [Maybe better is 16.Nxe6 Bxe6 17.fxe6+/-] 16...g6 17.exf7+?! [17.Nd5! Qd8 18.Qh3!?+/=] 17...Kxf7 [17...Qxf7! 18.Qh6 Bg7 19.Qg5 0-0=] 18.Qh6 Ng4 19.Qf4 Kg7 20.h3 [I missed the correct move 20.Nd5!+/- when White stands better.] 20...Be5 21.Qf3?! [21.Qd2!=] 21...Rf8 22.Qe2 [Now was the time to play 22.Nf5+! Bxf5 23.exf5 Nh6 24.f6+ Bxf6 25.Nd5 when Black would have to find the

move 25...Qa7! 26.Nxf6 Rxf6=/+ and White has only a little compensation for the pawn minus.] 22...Nf2 23.Nd5 Qf7 24.Bg2 Nxd1 25.Rxd1 Qf2 26.Nf5+?? [Black resigned, but he could have won with 26...Rxf5!-+] 1-0

180 – Chaney 10.g4 b5 11.Bxf6 Ron Chaney and I often outplayed each other in opening theory. This game turned out to be in his favor. Ron Chaney played well. He crushed me and deserved the win. I learned an important lesson. The game was a Sicilian Defence which he played against me five times. We both scored two wins and a draw. There is a fork in the road of the main line Najdorf Variation after 6.Bg5 e6 7.f4 Be7 8.Qf3 Qc7 9.0-0-0 Nbd7. The most popular choices for White are 10.g4 and 10.Bd3. Both lines are equally playable in theory. Both sides have chances. Sawyer (2000) - Chaney (1900), corr APCT 1979 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Bg5 e6 7.f4 Be7 8.Qf3 Qc7 9.0-0-0 Nbd7 10.g4 [The alternative is 10.Bd3=] 10...b5 11.Bxf6 Nxf6 12.g5 Nd7 13.a3!? [The most reliable attack follows 13.f5! 0-0 (13...Nc5 14.f6 gxf6 15.gxf6 Bf8 16.Kb1+/=) 14.Rg1 b4 15.Nce2 e5 16.f6 exd4 17.fxe7 Re8 18.Nxd4=] 13...Rb8 14.h4 b4 15.axb4 Rxb4 16.Bh3 Qc5 [Or 16...Qb6 17.Nf5 Bf8 18.Qd3 Rxb2 19.Nxd6+ Bxd6 20.Qxd6 Rb4=] 17.Nb3 Qb6 18.h5? [This move was popular at the time. However games like this one and subsequent analysis by modern chess engines show that theory tends to favor Black. 18.Na2! Ra4 19.Nc3 Rb4 when the players might repeat moves, or White could try 20.Rhf1 0-0 21.f5=] 18...Nc5 19.Nxc5 dxc5 20.g6 fxg6 [Because White's king is the more vulnerable, Black has the happy choice of several sharp attacking possibilities. 20...0-0 21.gxh7+ Kxh7 22.Rdg1 Rd8 23.h6 g6 24.f5 exf5 25.exf5 Bf6-/+; or 20...Rxb2 21.gxf7+ Kxf7 22.Rdg1 c4-/+] 21.hxg6 h6 22.Nd5 exd5 23.Bxc8 0-0 24.e5? [This loses badly. It's going to be ugly. But even if White mounts a better attack with 24.Qg4 Rxe4 25.Rde1 Rfxf4 26.Qd7 Qd8-/+ Black can return to defend everything with two extra pawns.] 24...Rxb2 25.Rh3? Rb1+ 26.Kd2 Qb4+ 27.Ke2 [27.c3 Rxd1+ 28.Kxd1 Qb1+ 29.Ke2 Qa2+ 30.Kf1 Rxc8-+] 27...Rxd1 28.Be6+ Kh8 29.Kxd1 Rxf4 30.Qh1 Bg5 [If this was an American football play, one could describe the situation like this. The quarterback goes back to pass. The receivers are covered downfield. The two largest defenders have invaded the backfield. The

White king is about to be sacked. This will be a painful loss. Black has many ways to win. He can force mate a little quicker with 30...Rd4+!-+] 31.Rb3 Rf1+ 32.Ke2 Qe1+ 33.Kd3 Qd2# 0-1

181 – Aykent 11.Bxf6 Nxf6 12.g5 I trotted down the main line of the Najdorf Sicilian Defence in my postal chess game against the higher rated Serdar Aykent. Sharp tactics came into play on every move, but we were in known territory. Other masters had been here before. The use of chess engines was forbidden, but such personal computer chess options were weak anyway in the early 1990s. This was postal chess. We were not allowed to use computers but we were allowed to use books. I had books. All I had to do was to follow the book. The problem was that the book did not go on forever. Eventually the trail ended and I stood there in a complex sea of possibilities. My idea of 23...Bh6+ 24.Kb1 Bf4 was original, but better would have been 23...Rc8! With the rook move, I might have had a little advantage. Alas, my game quickly fell apart. White’s attack came crashing through and my king was in trouble. Aykent (2138) - Sawyer (1973), corr APCT 94R-29, 12.1994 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Bg5 e6 7.f4 Be7 8.Qf3 Qc7 9.0-0-0 Nbd7 10.g4 b5 11.Bxf6 Nxf6 12.g5 Nd7 13.f5 Nc5 14.f6 gxf6 15.gxf6 Bf8 16.Bh3 b4 17.Nd5 exd5 18.exd5 Bxh3 19.Qxh3 Qd7 20.Rhe1+ [20.Qh4 Kd8 21.Nc6+ Kc7 22.Qxb4 a5=] 20...Kd8 21.Ne6+ fxe6 22.dxe6 Nxe6 23.Rxe6 Bh6+ [23...Rc8! 24.Rde1 Rc5=/+] 24.Kb1 Bf4 [24...Bf8 25.Rde1 Kc7 26.Qg4+/-] 25.Qf3 Qxe6 26.Qxa8+ Qc8 27.Qe4 Qg4 28.Rxd6+ Kc7 [28...Bxd6 29.Qxg4+-] 29.Qc6+ Kb8 30.Qb6+ 1-0

182 – Chaney 10.Bd3 h6 11.h4 Grandmasters seem to win with almost any chess opening. But not me. I frequently win with some, but then I lose with others. I know the Sicilian Defence as well as anything. I have played it more than 1000 times from each side of the board. Many famous grandmaster games were with the Sicilian. The tactical training I use has multiple positions from this opening. Nowadays there are databases and chess engines that provide detailed information on every position. None of that existed when this game was played. I tried to learn from Fischer’s games. Again I faced Ronald L. Chaney. Later he would become a much stronger player and beat me repeatedly. But not here. In this Sicilian Defence we trotted down the familiar trail of the Najdorf 6.Bg5 main line. Earlier I chose 10.g4. Smyslov, Mednis, and Gligoric all had played it vs Bobby Fischer. I got crushed. The lesson I learned was that I cannot just follow the master games. I looked further. I found that Boris Spassky had played 10.Bd3. Furthermore Velimirovic and others had played the fascinating sacrifice 11.h4 in response to 10…h6. That looked like fun! This proved to be a creative and ambitious approach. My win against Curt Jones and this against vs Chaney stand out as my personal favorites when I had White in the Najdorf Sicilian. Sawyer (2050) - Chaney (1900), corr APCT 1980 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Bg5 e6 7.f4 Be7 8.Qf3 Qc7 9.0-0-0 Nbd7 10.Bd3 h6 11.h4!? [11.Qh3; 11.Bh4] 11...hxg5?! [11...Nc5 12.Bxf6 Bxf6=] 12.hxg5 Nh7 [12...Rxh1 13.Rxh1+/=] 13.g6 Ndf6 [13...Ndf8 14.gxh7 Rxh7 15.Rhe1+/-] 14.gxh7 Rxh7 15.Rhe1 [15.Kb1+/-] 15...e5 16.Nf5 Bxf5 17.exf5 0-0-0 18.g4 Rh4 19.g5 Rxf4 20.Qe2 Ng4? [20...Ng8 21.f6+/-] 21.Nd5 Bxg5 22.Kb1 Qc5 23.Nxf4 Nf2 24.Rd2 [24.Nh3! Nxh3 25.Qg4+-] 24...Bxf4 25.Qxf2 Bxd2 26.Qxd2 f6 27.Qg2 Rd7 28.c4 Kb8

29.Rc1 Qd4 [29...d5 30.cxd5 Qxd5 31.Qxd5 Rxd5 32.Kc2+-] 30.Qd5 Qxd5 31.cxd5 Re7 32.Rc2 Rd7 33.Kc1 Re7 34.Kd1 Re8 35.Rh2 Kc7 36.Be4 Kd7 37.Rh7 Rg8 38.Ke2 Ke7 39.Bf3 Kf7 40.Bh5+ Kf8 41.Bg6 Ke7 42.Kd3 b6 43.Kd2 Kf8 44.Kc3 Ke7 45.Kb4 Kf8 46.a4 Ke7 47.Bh5 1-0

183 – Taylor 10.Bd3 h6 11.h4 In 1996 I played a simultaneous exhibition at Penn College in Williamsport, Pennsylvania. There were about 30 games and I played 6-8 games at a time over a two hour period with rotating players. When one game finished, another player would take the board. Some opponents played several games. Most of my opponents were casual players unknown to me. Two of them were club players: Allen Taylor and Roy Swazey. As I recall, Allen Taylor helped organize and publicize the simul from the Penn College end. Allen and I were chess friends and frequent opponents. According to my records, we played 37 games. My score vs Taylor was +35 =1 -1. This Sicilian Defence, Najdorf Variation was my only loss to Allen Taylor and also my only loss in the Penn College simul. In the notes I include part of another game from that simul against Roy Swazey that I won (same variation, same opening). Sawyer - Taylor, Williamsport PA simul 1996 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Bg5 e6 7.f4 Be7 [The main line of the Poisoned Pawn Variation 7...Qb6 goes: 8.Qd2 Qxb2 9.Rb1 Qa3 when White usually chooses between 10.f5 or 10.e5] 8.Qf3 Qc7 9.0-0-0 Nbd7 [9...b5 10.e5 (Or first 10.Bxf6!) 10...Bb7 11.Qg3+/- White eventually won after some sloppy play. Sawyer-Swazey, Williamsport PA 1996] 10.Bd3 h6 11.h4!? [Offering one of the thematic Najdorf bishop sacrifices.] 11...b5 12.Bxf6 Nxf6 13.g4 Bb7 14.g5 Nd7 15.Rhe1 Nb6 16.Qg3 [16.f5! hxg5 17.fxe6!+/- looks promising.] 16...b4 17.Nce2 Rc8 18.gxh6 [18.g6! attacks f7 to remove the guard of e6.] 18...g6 19.f5 [19.Nxe6! fxe6 20.Qxg6+ Kd7 21.Nd4+- with a great attack.] 19...Rxh6 20.e5? [20.Qe3! sidesteps the threat of ...Bxh4.] 20...Bxh4 21.Qe3 Rh5 22.Rg1? [I had played not great, but at least good until this 22nd move. Now is the last chance to bust open lines the Black king and queen; there is no need to worry about the rook just yet. 22.Nxe6! fxe6 23.exd6!+-] 22...Nd5 23.Qd2 gxf5 24.Nf3 Be7 25.Rg8+ Kd7 26.Rxc8 Qxc8 [26...Kxc8!-+ and Black is winning.] 27.Ng3 Rh3 28.Nxf5 Rxf3 29.Nxe7 Nxe7 30.exd6 Nd5 31.Be4 Rh3 [Black is up a

knight.] 32.Qg2 Ne3 33.Bxb7 Nxg2 34.Bxc8+ Kxc8 35.d7+ Kd8 36.c4 bxc3 37.b4 Rh2 38.a4 Ne3 39.Re1 Rc2+ 40.Kb1 Rb2+ 41.Kc1 Nd5 42.b5 axb5 43.axb5 Kxd7 0-1

184 – Browne 10.Bd3 h6 11.Qh3 In memory of the late Walter Shawn Browne we look at a win the grandmaster had in his beloved Sicilian Defence. Walter Browne played every line in the Najdorf Sicilian with great success for over 40 years. Many of us followed and played the same openings as the World Champion Bobby Fischer, but Walter Browne was one of the most successful. GM Browne was a very successful poker player who excelled in competitive battles. He excelled in playing the time scrambles in tournament games. Here Walter Browne took on one of his contemporaries, Dutch grandmaster Jan H. Timman. The game involved a very sharp line where Black castled on the queenside. Browne outplayed Timman in the center and won on the kingside. Timman (2540) - Browne (2575), Wijk aan Zee (6), 1974 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Bg5 e6 7.f4 Be7 8.Qf3 Qc7 9.0-0-0 Nbd7 10.Bd3 h6 [Or 10...b5 11.Rhe1 Bb7 12.Qg3=] 11.Qh3!? [More common is 11.Bh4 g5 12.fxg5 Ne5 13.Qe2 Nfg4=] 11...Nb6 12.Rhe1 e5!? [12...Rg8=] 13.Nf5 Bxf5 14.exf5 0-0-0 15.Bh4 exf4 16.Bf2 Rhe8 [16...Rd7=] 17.Bxb6 [17.Bd4=] 17...Qxb6 18.Bc4 d5 19.Nxd5 Nxd5 20.Bxd5 Bf6 21.Qb3 Qxb3 22.Bxb3 Rxe1 23.Rxe1 Bg5 24.Kb1 Rd2 25.Rg1 f3 26.gxf3 Rxh2 27.Bxf7 h5 28.f6?! [28.c3 Bf6=/+] 28...Bxf6 29.Rd1 Kc7 30.a3 Rh3 31.Bg6 h4 32.Bh5 Rg3 33.Bg4 Be5 34.Ka2 Kc6 35.Rh1 g5 36.Rd1 [36.b4 Rg2=/+] 36...h3 37.Rh1 Rxg4 38.fxg4 h2 39.b4? [39.c4 Kc5-/+] 39...Kd5 40.Kb3 Ke4 0-1

Book 2: Index of Names to Games Abdyjapar – 101 Amin – 2, 54 Anand – 132 Ananthan – 13 Antipov – 140 Antova – 135 arconia – 85 Aronian – 89 ATtheGreat – 81 Aykent – 181 Bachler – 149, 154 Baffo – 36, 142 Bagrationi – 130 Baramidze – 139 Benko – 146 Bielefeld – 68 Bischoff – 92 bjerky – 126 Blacula – 74 Blitshteyn – 112 Bond – 3 Bourne – 14 Brandt – 113 Browne – 184 Browne – 95 capablanca1 – 78 Caruana – 43, 89 cassiopea – 133 Cavicchi – 155 Chan Peng Kong – 17 Chandler – 30 Chaney – 106, 154, 180, 182 Chavez – 172

Chen – 24 Cherepanov – 23 Chess Challenger – 65 chesspurrr – 102 Chigaev – 151 Chizhikov – 82 ColdNorth – 77 Commons – 146 Corneau – 3 Daly – 80, 121 Davies – 147 De Bouver – 19 Deepan – 115 Degraeve – 46 Demianjuk – 27 Dieffenbach – 117 Duda – 86 Dyson – 79 EggSalad – 72 Eilmes – 5 Ekebjaerg – 47 Elowitch – 159 Fawbush – 149 Faydi – 9 Feng – 50 Fischer – 150 Fritz13 – 9 Ftacnik – 139 Fuerte2004 – 69 Gabasjelisjvili – 171 Garcia Palermo – 155 Gareev – 115 Gecko – 120 Glek – 59 Golubka – 166 Gordievsky – 54 Grandelius – 53

Greiner – 83 Grischuk – 43, 86, 152 Guest – 128 Haines – 28, 52, 57, 97, 100, 103-105, 107-110, 128, 136-139, 143-145, 177 Haley – 98 Halwick – 118 Hambleton – 2 Harabor – 70 Hardison 136-138 Hartman – 124 Hayrapetyan – 88 Hector – 91 Heyn – 63 Hofford – 64 Horwitz – 125 Hro61 – 100 Huber – 1 Hunter – 104 Huschenbeth – 92 Jezbera – 21 Johns – 158 Jones – 170 Jorgensen – 13 Jovanovic – 40 Jwnycc – 87 Khlichkova – Kislinsky – 34 Kluge – 16 Kohler – 4 Kuybokarov – 93 LaVallee – 177 Lecroq – 47 Levin – 151 Li Chao2 – 132 Lingsell – 164 LinuxKnight – 56

Llaneza Vega – 24 Lord-Heckubiss – 15 Lovenstein – 60 Lu Shanglei – 44 Mack – 122 Magarinos – 76 Mamedov – 101 Marcello – 96 Marfia – 67 matejamijuskovic – 97 Mercier – 156 messchess – 32 Michenka – 34 Miladinovic – 94 Mockler – 145 MOHAMED MOUFEED – 105 Moiseenko – 88 Moore – 162 Morgan – 52 Morin – 107, 108, 144 Morris – 29, 73 Morrison – 165 Muir – 55 Murray – 61, 90 Muzychuk – 130 Neumeier – 41 NN – 7 Obando – Obando – 167 O'Neal – 66 Osipi – 129 Palkendo – 161 Parsons – 8, 10-12 Perov – 21-23, 27 Pinho – 31 Porter – 110 Price, A – 173

Price, T – 77 Protej – 116 Raja Harshit – 135 Raudenbush – 175 Rhudy – 111, 160 RichyRich – 45 Rodriguez Vila – 129 Roman Lopez – 31 Rookie – 35 Ruiz – 39 Sadilek – 41 Sah – 119 Salisbury – 157 Sandford – 103 Savic – 33 Sawyer, E – 20, 28 Sawyer, T – 1, 4-6, 8, 10-12, 14-16, 20, 29, 32, 35-39, 45, 48-51, 55-58, 60-76, 78-85, 87, 90, 96, 99, 102, 106, 109, 111-114, 116-127, 131, 133, 134, 139, 142, 143, 147-148, 153, 156-165, 167-171, 173-176, 178-183 Schwartz – 140 Sedlock – 127 Sergienko – 22 Sevian – 82, 93 Sharp – 37 Sildmets – 26 Smith – 153 So – 46 Sogin – 148 Spence – 58 sr2015 – 51 Staes – 19 Stany – 53 Steedman – 42 Stocko – 33 Stretch – 99 Suba – 42 Svetushkin – 94

Swazey – 178, 179 Taormina – 48 Taylor, A – 84, 134, 169, 183 Taylor, D – 25, 38 Timman – 184 Tinker – 168 TommyRuff – 30 Torning – 7 Unander – 91 Vehvilainen – 123 Vestergaard – 163 Vidit – 172 Viveiros – 176 Warren – 25, Wei Yi – 44 Wikar – 166 Wolff – 49 Yang Hainan – 17 Yanofsky – 98 Zaiatz – 18 Zakhartsov – 59 Zdun – 62, 75, 114, 131 Zintgraff – 95 Zlatanovic – 40

Book 3: French Defence 1.e4 e6 Second Edition - Chess Opening Games Copyright © 2015, 2016, 2018 by Sawyer Publications All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form without permission in writing from the author. Welcome to the French Defence chess opening after 1.e4 e6. Author Tim Sawyer analyzes 182 games. This 2018 Second Edition has updated commentary, and an Index of Names to Games. The author tells stories and explains opening strategy. Spice up your play with the Alapin Diemer Gambit. Discover the ideas of the Advance Variation, the Classical, the MacCutcheon or the kingside attacks in the French Winawer. Focus on active piece play with the Tarrasch Variation. Or boldly try to transpose to the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit in answer to the Burn Variation. Most of the games see White playing 3.Be3, 3.Nd2 or 3.Nc3. Many were played by the author against masters, experts and club players over 45 years of play. The author shows you typical examples in this proven defence. Follow ideas to surprise your opponent and win. The games tell stories about fascinating chess players. Examine a variety of openings from main lines to gambits. Find creative ideas and ways to improve. Have fun playing. Enjoy this book!

Book 3: Chapter 1 – Early Deviations 1.e4 e6 This section covers lines that do not continue 2.d4 d5.

1 – Bryan 2.Nf3 d5 3.e5 In round 3 of the Maine State Closed Championship, Lance Beloungie got paired against FIDE master Jarod Bryan. There was a three-way tie for first place at 4 out of 5, but in the final standings Bryan is listed first. Many years ago Jarod Bryan also played my friend Ray Haines. FM Bryan played the French Defence Wing Gambit. Beloungie declined the gambit with 4...c4. He defended White’s constant attacks quite well until Lance blundered on move 41. As Mr. Beloungie noted: "The third game against FM Bryan is my favorite. I played him to a standstill until about 11:00 P.M. when, short of time and physically and mentally drained, I succumbed. Still, for near 70 years old, I thought I did well on the first day." Bryan - Beloungie, Maine State Closed (3), 23.04.2012 begins 1.e4 e6 2.Nf3 d5 3.e5 c5 4.b4 c4 [Accepting the gambit with 4...cxb4 5.a3 Nc6 6.axb4 Bxb4 7.c3 Be7 8.d4 Bd7 9.Bd3 gives White some compensation.] 5.a3 Ne7 6.d3 cxd3 7.Bxd3 Ng6 8.Bb2 Qc7 9.0-0 Be7 10.Re1 0-0 11.h4 Nc6 12.b5 Na5 13.Nbd2 b6 14.Ng5 h6 15.Nxf7 Nf4 16.Nd6 Nb7 17.Bf1 Nxd6 18.exd6 Bxd6 19.Nf3 Qf7 20.Be5 Bc5 21.g3? [21.Bd4=] 21...Ng6 22.Bg2 Nxe5 23.Rxe5 Bd7!? 24.a4 Rae8!? 25.Qe2 Bd6 26.Re3 Qf6 [Junior 12 likes the complicated line 26...e5 27.Nxe5 Bxe5 28.Rxe5 Bg4 29.Rxe8 Bxe2 30.Rxe2= where White has a rook, bishop and f-pawn for his sacrificed queen.] 27.Re1 Bc5 28.Re5 Rf7 29.c3 Rfe7 30.Nh2 Bd6 31.Re3 Rf8 32.Ng4 Qf5 33.Rf3 Qh5 34.Re3 [Before protecting the Ng4, White could attack with 34.c4!+/-] 34...Qf5 35.Rf3 [35.Ne5+/=] 35...Qh5 36.Rf6 Qe8 37.Rxf8+ Qxf8 38.Ne5 Bxe5 39.Qxe5 Rf7 40.Re2 Rf5 41.Qc7 Qc8? [After 40 good moves, Black finally slips up. The game might have ended

with a repetition of moves after 41...Rf7 42.Qe5 Rf5 43.Qc7!? Rf7=] 42.Qxa7 1-0

2 – Aikins 2.d3 d5 3.Be2 Throughout my career people would find out that I played chess. I have many interests. I try not to annoy my non-chess playing friends by talking too much about chess, but I like to talk about it. Sometimes people ask if they can play me a game. Other times I happen upon a chess game in progress and play the winner. I do not remember the exact occasion of this game played in 1997. Probably I was at some church related conference in Pennsylvania. We met friendly people and have some spare time during breaks or after the meetings. Sometimes we played golf. I’m terrible at it. If I play a good golfer then I lose 18 holes in a row! Some are close but all are lost. I met Mark Aikins in chess. Clearly he knew how to play, but he was not a competitive tournament player. It was just nice to play. Here I am winning in 18 moves instead of losing in 18 holes. For some strange reason I played the French Defence 1.e4 e6 as Black. Two years before this game I had written a book on the Alapin French. That book covered the line after 2.d4 d5 3.Be3!? Our game below sees White also play a pawn and bishop but to the more conservative squares of 2.d3 d5 3.Be2. At this point I realized my opponent knew how to play but he was still at the beginner stage of opening theory. My strategy was to go after him tactically with a constant stream of threats. The result was brutal and predictable, like my golf game in reverse. Aikins - Sawyer, Mt Bethel 1997 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d3 d5 3.Be2 [A more tricky move would be 3.Qe2 Be7 4.Nf3 Nf6=] 3...Nf6 4.Nf3? [This loses the first pawn. 4.e5 Nfd7 5.f4 Be7=] 4...dxe4 5.dxe4 Qxd1+ 6.Kxd1 Nxe4 7.Re1? [This loses the second pawn. 7.Be3 Nc6-/+] 7...Nxf2+ 8.Kd2 Ne4+ 9.Ke3 Nf6 10.Kf2 Bc5+ 11.Be3? [This drops a piece to a knight fork. Otherwise White is just down two pawns. 11.Kf1 Nc6-+] 11...Ng4+ 12.Kg3

Nxe3 13.Bb5+ Bd7 14.Nc3? [White could defend the c2 pawn and the rooks with 14.Na3 Nc6-+] 14...Nxc2 15.Bxd7+ Nxd7 16.Red1 Nxa1 17.Rxa1 0-0-0 18.Ne5? [After 18.Re1 Be7-+ Black would only be up a rook and three pawns.] 18...Nxe5 0-1

3 – Squash 2.d3 d5 3.Nd2 I worked as a flag man on a road construction crew. We paved one lane wide ten miles a day. The powerful paving equipment did not move fast, but it flattened everything in its path. The move 2.d3 in the French Defence makes slow progress. The key is the power behind the move. Can White be stopped? If one normally plays the King’s Indian Defence as Black then the King's Indian Attack 2.d3 makes sense as White against the French Defence. Bobby Fischer would play it sometimes. The theory is that when someone plays White against the King’s Indian Defence, they push for an early 4.e4. If you turn the board around, Black has played only …e6 and is also a tempo down just because they move second to begin the game. In ICC I was squished by Squash. The 3054 rated player using that Internet Chess Club handle back in 2011 was probably a computer. Humans were rarely rated that high. If they were, they would not likely play someone like me rated only 2101 that day. I played this game well for 25 moves, but that was not enough. Squash (3054) - Sawyer (2101), ICC 5 0 Internet Chess Club, 24.11.2011 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d3 d5 3.Nd2 c5 4.Ngf3 Nc6 5.g3 Nf6 6.Bg2 Be7 7.0-0 0-0 8.c3 [The most popular line is 8.Re1 b5 (8...h6!?=) 9.e5 (9.exd5=) 9...Nd7 10.Nf1 a5 11.h4 b4=/+] 8...Qc7 9.exd5!? [More common is 9.Re1 dxe4 10.dxe4 e5=] 9...exd5 10.Re1 h6 [Or 10...Bd6=] 11.d4 cxd4 12.Nxd4 Nxd4 13.cxd4 Be6 14.Nf1 Rac8 15.Ne3 Bb4 [15...Rfd8=] 16.Bd2 Bxd2 17.Qxd2 Qd7 18.Rac1 Rxc1 19.Rxc1 Rc8 20.Rxc8+ Qxc8 21.f3 Ne8 22.Bf1 Nd6 23.Bd3 b5 24.b3 Qc7 25.Ng2 Bf5 [25...Nf5 26.Bxf5 Bxf5=] 26.Be2 Qc2?! [Black could defend better with the queens on the board. 26...a6=] 27.Qxc2 Bxc2 28.Ne3 Bb1 29.a3 a5 30.Kf2 b4 [This drops a pawn. Black might have still been able to survive. Here is a possible continuation: 30...Ba2 31.Bd1 Nc8 32.Ke2 Ne7 33.Kd2 Bb1 34.Kc3 Bf5 35.f4 Bd7=] 31.axb4 axb4 32.Nxd5 Nf5 33.Nxb4 Nxd4 34.Bc4 Nc2 [White is also better after

34...Kf8 35.g4 Ke7 36.Ke3 Ne6 37.Nd5+ Kd6 38.f4+/-] 35.Nxc2 Bxc2 36.b4 Bf5 [36...Kf8 37.Ke3 Ke7 38.Kd4 f6 39.Kc5+-] 37.b5 Bd7 38.b6 Bc6 39.Bd3 Kf8 40.Be4 Black resigns 1-0

4 – Bond 2.d4 Nc6 3.Nf3 Jocelyn Bond sent me another game from north of the border: "Hi Tim, 4th of 7 weeks 30 minutes for mate. This week I'd like to present to you a game I've played last Wednesday in my Jonquiere chess championship against Elwan Certon. "This young man was born in Brazil but lived young in France and now lives in Canada. An aggressive player but opening knowledge is low. Tell me? What's the name to give to this opening? Really a French? After the game, my opponent told me that in Internet blitz it pays for him 1.e4 e6 2.d4 Nc6! Ok....but tonight man we play serious chess!! "Actually, I lead the championship with 8 points in 8 games followed by Michael Dufour 5.5 in 6 games. Thanks for the publication and continue your very good work!!!" Bill Wall called the opening after 2...Nc6 the "French Connection, Nimzovich Defense". I like Certon's 2...Nc6!? but one must play more accurately with 3...d5. The inclusion of 3.Nf3 prevented an early Qg4 or f4 line for White. This gave Black helpful tempos. Bond (1957) - Certon (1350), Jonquiere chess championship (8), 18.07.2012 begins 1.d4 e6 2.e4 Nc6 [seems to me risky] 3.Nf3 b6 [provoking] 4.d5 [4.c4!?] 4...Nce7 [I waited 4...exd5 5.exd5 Nce7 6.Bc4 or even 6.d6!? could be fun] 5.dxe6N [5.c4!?] 5...fxe6 [5...dxe6? 6.Qxd8+ and 7.Ne5 comes] 6.Bg5 [pin and perturbs black activation] 6...Bb7? 7.Nc3 [Stronger was 7.Ne5!? (Deep fritz) d6 (7...g6 8.Qf3 or 8.Bb5 was strong) 8.Qh5+ g6 9.Nxg6 hxg6 10.Qxh8 Bxe4 11.Nc3+-] 7...h6?! +/-(bad) 8.Bh4 g5? 9.Ne5! Nf6 10.Be2! [My opponent did not see this move before to play 8...g5] 10...gxh4? [Leads to more trouble. 10...Bg7 11.Bh5+ Kf8+/- would have just been uncomfortable] 11.Bh5++- Ng6 12.Bxg6+ [12.Nxg6? Rh7 13.Ne5+ Ke7+-] 12...Ke7 13.Nf7 Rg8 [13...Qc8 saved nothing 14.Nxh8 Bg7 15.Nf7+-] 14.Nxd8 Rxd8 15.e5 Rxg6 16.exf6+ Rxf6 17.0–0 [17.Qg4 was more solid 17...h3 18.Qxh3 Rg6+-] 17...Rg6 18.f3 18...Ke8 [18...h3 19.g3] 19.Qd3 Rg8 20.Ne4 h3? [20...Bg7+-] 21.Nf6+ Kf7 22.Nxg8 Bc5+ 23.Kh1 hxg2+ 24.Kxg2 Rxg8+ 25.Kh1 Ke8 26.Rad1 d5? [26...Bc6]

27.Qh7 Kf8 28.Qxh6+ Ke8 29.Qxe6+ Kf8 30.Rde1 Kg7 31.Rg1+! Bxg1 32.Rxg1+ Kh8 33.Qxg8# 1–0 [Notes by Jocelyn Bond and Deep Fritz]

5 – Haines 2.d4 c6 3.Nf3 How do you beat a Hippopotamus chess opening? You outrun it! Let me explain. First things first. What is it? The Hippopotamus is when Black begins by moving many pawns just one square to the third rank very early in the game. In the example of Ray Haines vs “rafa47”, we have a Hippo that began 1.d4 e6 2.e4. This looks like a French Defence, but Black avoids 2...d5. His first four moves were only with pawns. Black's next four moves had one with a knight and three with pawns. The strategy of this defense is the opposite of Hungry Hippos. In this Hippo, Black has little interest in eating. He just hides behind his third rank pawns. Only the strongest Hippo players venture out, and then only when they are good and ready. You outrun a Hippo using the “fast and blast” method. Develop your pieces fast and blast open the center with pawns. Put your central pawns on the fourth rank. Bring out your pieces to support the advance of one of those pawns. Then push a pawn and force pawn exchanges. Crack Black's wall of pawns. You need open lines to favor your active army. Don't take too long! Black's problem is temporary. Given time, he will catch up. Open up the position before move 10 if possible. This is a good illustration of a Hippo. Ray Haines handled it well. My main suggestions for him would be to add an early f4 or c4, and avoid playing the slow flank move 7.a4. Haines - rafa47, chess24, 17.02.2016 begins 1.d4 e6 2.e4 c6 3.Nf3 h6 4.Bd3 d6 5.0-0 Ne7 6.Nc3 b5 7.a4 [Better would be 7.Be3!+/-] 7...b4 8.Ne2 a5 9.Ng3 Ba6 10.Qe2 Qb6 11.Be3 Bxd3 12.Qxd3 Qa6 13.Qd2 [13.c4+/-] 13...d5?! [13...Nd7 14.c3+/=] 14.e5 Nd7 15.h4 Nb6 16.b3 0-00? [16...Rc8 17.Rac1 Nd7 18.Rfd1+/=] 17.Rac1 Kb7 18.c3 Ng8 19.Ne1

Rc8 20.Nd3 Be7 21.h5 f6 [21...bxc3 22.Qxc3 Nd7 23.Bd2+-] 22.exf6 Nxf6 23.cxb4 Bxb4 24.Nxb4 axb4 25.Qxb4 Ka8 26.Qd6 [26.Rc5!+-] 26...Rhe8 27.a5 Nbd7 28.Bf4 Qb7 29.Qa3 Qa6 30.Rc2 Qd3 31.Rfc1 Qxd4 32.Be3 Qe5 33.Rxc6 Rxc6 34.Rxc6 Qb8 35.Ra6+ Kb7 36.Ra7+ Kc8 37.Bb6 Qe5 38.Qc1+ 1-0

6 – Delpire 2.d4 d5 3.c4 dxe4 Jason Delpire sent me this win in the Diemer-Duhm Gambit. White played this gambit against the French after 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.c4. When Black accepted the gambit by 3...dxe4 4.Nc3 f5 5.f3 exf3 6.Nxf3, the game took on the character of a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit Poehlmann Variation 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 f5 4.f3 exf3 5.Nxf3 which is also a Dutch Defence. The Diemer-Duhm difference is the gambit move 3.c4!? It helps control the center with pawns, but it delays piece development. White usually prefers to bring out a piece against the French Defence by 3.Nc3, 3.Nd2, 3.Bd3, or even 3.Be3. Diemer-Duhm is an excellent choice for the enterprising player in blitz chess. Black lands in unfamiliar territory where threats can easily be missed due to the quick pace of play. Delpire (1506) - shubik (1551), Rated Blitz game lichess, 03.09.2017 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.c4 [Diemer-Duhm] 3...dxe4 4.Nc3 f5 [4...Nf6 5.f3 exf3 6.Nxf3] 5.f3 exf3 6.Nxf3 Bb4 [6...Nf6] 7.Bd3 Nf6 8.Qe2 0-0 9.0-0 [White controls e5.] 9...Bxc3 [9...c5] 10.bxc3 Nc6 11.Bg5 h6 12.Be3 Re8 13.Bf4 b6 14.Ne5 Nxe5 15.Bxe5 Ng4 16.Rae1 Nxe5 17.Qxe5 Bb7 18.Re3 Qg5 [18...Qd7 19.Bc2 Rad8 20.Rfe1 c5=/+; 18...Qd6 19.Rfe1 Qxe5 20.Rxe5 Kf7=/+] 19.Rg3 Qe7 20.Re1 Qd6? [20...Qf7 21.a4=] 21.Qxg7# 10

2.d4 d5 3.Bd3 The 3.Bd3 variation is a favorite of my friend Ray Haines.

7 - Haines 3…Nf6 4.Nd2 c5 Be aware of transpositions to other opening variations. In the final round of the Maine Potato Blossom Festival, Ray Haines played his longtime friend Lance Beloungie. The opening was a French Defence with 3.Bd3. This game had the flavor of a delayed Tarrasch Variation after 4.Nd2. White got a nice attack. In the middlegame Haines included the pretty bishop sacrifice 23.Bxh7+! "This was round four. I was playing Lance Beloungie. I saw that I could win material and stopped looking for more at that point. I did not check to see if I was missing a mating possibility. I did not wish to use a lot of time on my clock in this game the way I did the other games. I cut my planning short for this reason." Haines - Beloungie, Potato Blossom Festival Ft Fairfield, Maine (4), 13.07.2013 begins 1.d4 e6 2.e4 d5 3.Bd3!? Nf6 4.Nd2 c5 5.c3 [5.e5 Nfd7 6.c3 leads to a very popular line.] 5...Nc6 6.Ngf3 a5!? [Playable, but I am not sure how this contributes to Black's two strategic issues: (1) Activate his bishops and castle; and (2) Choose his best pawn structure for the squares d4, e4, e5, d5, c5, c4.] 7.0-0 Be7 8.Re1 cxd4 9.cxd4 Bb4 10.exd5 Nxd5 11.Bc4 0-0 [11...a4!?=] 12.a3 Bd6 13.Ne4 Nb6 14.Bd3 Be7 15.Be3 a416.Nc5 Bd7? [Black was in a difficult position.] 17.Nxb7 Qc7 18.Nc5 Na5 19.Nxd7Qxd7 20.Ne5 Qd5 21.Rc1 Nb3 22.Rc3 Rfc8? 23.Bxh7+! Kf8 [23...Kh8 24.Qh5 16.83 24.Qg4 Bf6 25.Be4 Qa5 26.Qh5+ Kg8 27.Rxc8+ Rxc8 28.Bh7+ Kf8 29.Qxf7# Haines] 24.Qg4 [Even better is 24.Qh5! g6 25.Bxg6!+-] 24...Bf6 25.Be4 Qa5 26.Bxa8 Rxc3 27.bxc3 Qxc3 28.Rf1 Bxe5 29.dxe5 Nxa8 30.Qb4+ [The "mating possibility" Ray mentioned may have been after 30.Rd1! Nb6 31.Qh4+- with an attack that forces Black to give up more material.] 30...Qxb4 31.axb4 Nc7 32.Bc5+ Nxc5?! 33.bxc5 a3 34.Ra1 Nb5 35.h4 Ke7 36.g4 f6 37.f4 fxe5 38.fxe5

Kf7 39.Kg2 Kg6 40.Kg3 Kh6 41.c6 g5 42.h5 Nc7 43.Rxa3 Nd5 44.Rf3 Kg7 45.Rf6 Nc7 46.Rg6+ Kh7 47.Rxg5 Kh6 48.Rg6+ Kh7 49.g5 1-0

8 – Haines 3…Nf6 4.Nd2 c5 Ray Haines pressured Lance Beloungie with another classic Bxh7+ sacrifice. This game began with the 3.Bd3 move. The players reached a thematic French Defence. Haines wrote: “He left his king undefended. I looked at the kingside and wanted to sacrifice the king bishop for the attack. I could not see mate in every line, but I could see a lot of attacking chances.” “The best move for him would have been to play his king to king knight three on move 14 (14...Kg6). I thought that it might even win for him at first, but the computer seems to show I had a lot of play in this line. I think that the attack was worth the piece.” Ray Haines sealed his first place victory in the Potato Blossom Festival by winning this game. The move 3.Bd3 allowed Black to equalize with 3...dxe4 4.Bxe4. but Black played 3...Nf6 4.Nd2 c5. Haines - Beloungie, Potato Blossom Festival (3), 12.07.2014 begins 1.d4 e6 2.e4 d5 3.Bd3 Nf6 4.Nd2 c5 5.c3 [5.e5 Nfd7 6.c3 Nc6 7.Ne2 is standard.] 5...Nc6 6.Ngf3 dxe4 7.Nxe4 Nxe4 8.Bxe4 cxd4 9.cxd4 Bd6 10.0-0 0-0 11.Be3 Qc7 12.Rc1 Rd8 13.Bxh7+!? [13.Bb1+/=] 13...Kxh7 14.Ng5+ Kg8 [Correct defense is the bold 14...Kg6! 15.Qg4 f5! 16.Qh4 Bd7 17.Qh7+ Kf6=] 15.Qh5 Bxh2+ 16.Kh1 Bf4 [Black should last longer after 16...Rd5! 17.Qh7+ Kf8 18.Qh8+ Ke7 19.Qxg7+-] 17.Qh7+ Kf8 18.Qh8+ Ke7 19.Qxg7 Rf8 20.Nh7 Rd8 21.Qf6+ Ke8 22.Bxf4 Qe7 23.Qh8+ Kd7 24.Nf6+ 1-0

9 – Ernst 3…dxe4 4.Bxe4 c5 3.Bd3 gave equal chances until Black grabbed a poisoned pawn. Then White obtained winning chances in this French Defence game between Spike Ernst and M Chakravarthi Reddy. Ernst (2546) - Chakravarthi Reddy (2415), 5th Fischer Mem GM 2018 Anogia GRE (2.4), 12.09.2018 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Bd3 dxe4 4.Bxe4 c5 5.Ne2 Nf6 6.Bf3 Nc6 [6...Be7 7.Nbc3 0-0 8.0-0 Nc6 9.Be3=] 7.Be3 Qb6 [7...cxd4 8.Nxd4 Ne5 9.Nc3 a6 10.Qe2 Nxf3+ 11.Qxf3=] 8.Nbc3 Qxb2?!

[8...Bd7 9.0-0=] 9.Rb1 Qa3 10.0-0 Be7 [10...Qa5 11.dxc5 Be7 12.Nd4+/=] 11.Nb5 Qa5 12.Bf4 0-0 13.Nc7 cxd4 14.Nxa8 e5 15.Bd2 [15.Bg5+/-] 15...Qc5 16.Ng3 Bd6? [16...h6 17.Qe2 Qd6 18.Ne4 Nxe4 19.Qxe4+/-] 17.Bg5! Qa5 [17...e4 18.Bxf6 exf3 19.Ne4+-] 18.Bxf6 gxf6 19.Be4 1-0

10 – Haines 3…dxe4 4.Bxe4 Nf6 French Defence has always been very popular. French theory appears in books and videos. If you study the opening in great detail, understand the concepts and memorize your main lines your effort should yield a good return in wins. It is not the only way to win. If you have limited time or little interest in deep opening theory there are good moves you can play to put your opponents on their own early in the game. Ray Haines sent me this game played against a veteran club player. "Here is the game I played this week at the club. I think I got it right. Ray Haines vs Lance Beloungie on 9-19-2013. This was a club game played at the Univ. of Maine at Presque Isle without a time clock. Lance resigned the game. I do not play many gambits, but I am still an attacking style player." "I do not like playing the new main lines because they need a lot of work to learn the lines. The older ideas are good even now to use, and I do not need to remember a lot of lines. I guess a lot of other people have the same idea." Ray Haines is in good company. The position after White's 5.Bf3 was played 100 years ago by the best players in the world, such as Lasker, Schlechter and Capablanca. No matter what opening you choose, you still have to outplay your opponent to win. Haines - Beloungie, Presque Isle Maine, 19.09.2013 begins 1.d4 e6 2.e4 d5 3.Bd3 dxe4 4.Bxe4 Nf6 5.Bf3 c6 6.Ne2 Bd6 7.0-0 0-0 8.Nbc3 Nbd7 9.Bg5 Qc7 10.g3 b6 11.Ne4 Be7 12.Bf4 Qb7 13.Be5 Nxe4 14.Bxe4 Nxe5 15.dxe5 Bd7 16.Nf4 Qc7 17.Qe2 Rfd8 18.Rfe1 Rac8 19.Qh5 g6? [This natural move turns out to be the wrong pawn, creating a fatal weakness on the dark squares. 19...h6!= keeps Black in the game.] 20.Nxg6 hxg6 21.Bxg6 fxg6 22.Qxg6+ Kf8 23.Re3 [Also very strong is 23.Qh6+! Kg8 24.Re4+-] 23...Be8 24.Rf3+ Bf6 25.Rxf6+ [Or 25.Qxf6+!+-] 25...Bf7 26.Qh6+ Ke7 27.Qg7 Rf8 28.Rd1 Rcd8 29.Re1 [Ray wrote: 29.Rxe6+! 29...Qd7 0.69 29...Kxe6 30.Qf6# "I missed this mate, because I was looking

at moving the queen rook to f3."] 29...c5 30.Re3 Rd4 31.Ref3 Rd1+ 32.Kg2 Qc6 33.Rxf7+ Rxf7 34.Qxf7+ Kd8 35.Kh3 1-0

2.d4 d5 3.exd5 The Exchange Variation 3.exd5 is chosen by those who want open lines and wish to avoid the more popular theory.

11 – Crompton 3…exd5 4.h3 John Crompton played this cute quickie in the French Defence Exchange Variation with a symmetrical pawn structure. Players the attack with the pieces. Paul Morphy played 3.exd5. He won almost all the time. White’s one tempo lead disappeared after 4.h3. Black’s tenth move caught my attention with 10...Qg3!? prodonvito (1568) - Crompton (1605), Live Chess Chess.com, 17.02.2017 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 exd5 4.h3 [White was apparently afraid of having his knight pinned after 4.Nf3 but he should have been afraid of falling behind in development.] 4...c5 [Black is ready for action, even at the risk of an isolated pawn. 4...Nf6=] 5.dxc5 [5.Bb5+ Nc6 6.Nf3=] 5...Bxc5 6.Nf3 Nc6 7.Bd3 [7.Nc3 Be6 8.Bd3=] 7...Nf6 8.0-0 0-0 9.Re1 [9.Nc3=] 9...Qd6 [9...Qb6=/+] 10.Nc3? [White misses that his f2 pawn is pinned. He should break the pin by 10.Be3=] 10...Qg3!? [This fun move is why the game caught my attention. Stronger is first 10...Bxh3! 11.gxh3 Qg3+ 12.Kh1 Bxf2 13.Bf1 Nd4-+ and White is crushed.] 11.Rf1? [Black is rewarded for his boldness. White would play 11.Be3 Bxe3 12.Rxe3 Qc7=] 11...Bxh3! 12.Bxh7+ Nxh7 13.Qxd5 Qxg2# 0-1

12 – Kamsky 4.Nf3 Bf5 5.Bd3 This battle of grandmasters began with the Exchange Variation of the French Defence. White sacrificed the Exchange to force a winning position in the game Gata Kamsky vs Mikhail Antipov. Kamsky (2677) - Antipov,M2 (2598), Aeroflot Open A 2018 Moscow RUS (8.11), 27.02.2018 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 exd5 4.Nf3 Bf5 5.Bd3 Bxd3 6.Qxd3 Nc6 [6...c6 7.Qe2+ Qe7 8.Be3+/=] 7.0-0 Qd7 8.Re1+ Nge7 9.Bd2 f6 10.b4 a6 11.a4 g5 [11...Kf7 12.c4+/=] 12.Na3 g4 13.Nh4 Kf7 14.b5 axb5 15.Nxb5 Ng6 16.Qf5 [16.Nf5+/=] 16...Rd8 [16...Qxf5

17.Nxf5+/=] 17.Qh5 Nce7 18.Bf4 Kg7 [18...Kg8 19.Bxc7+-] 19.Bxc7 Rc8 20.Rxe7+ Bxe7 21.Nf5+ Kf7 [21...Kg8 22.Bf4+-] 22.Bd6 Bf8 [22...Rce8 23.Bxe7+-] 23.Bxf8 Kxf8 24.Re1 [threatens Qh6+] 1-0

13 – LeviRook 3…exd5 4.Nf3 Bd6 French Defence Exchange Variation 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 exd5 has a reputation for being drawish. That is not necessarily accurate. The better player usually wins no matter what. I had reached the French Exchange position a total of 85 times from either side at the time of this game. White outscored Black 39 wins to 33 wins; only 13 of those games were drawn. Here I chose 4.Nf3, which has been favored by USCF master James R. West. I wrote about winning a symmetrical pawn structure position from a Petroff Defence. I transposed to this French Exchange after 1.e3, a first move that I rarely play. This is my 15th game vs LeviRook on the Internet Chess Club. He beat me two of those games, both as White. In 2012 I won two games as White vs this same opponent, with a BlackmarDiemer Gambit and with a Queens Gambit Accepted. Below features a game with a lengthy knight and pawn ending. Sawyer (1971) - LeviRook (1384), ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 02.05.2014 begins 1.e3 e5 2.d4 exd4 3.exd4 d5 [French Defence, Exchange Variation] 4.Nf3 [A sharper line is 4.c4 Nf6 5.Nc3=] 4...Bd6 5.Bd3 c6 [A very popular line 5...Nf6 6.Ne5 0-0 7.0-0 c5 8.c3 Re8=/+ favors Black.] 6.h3 Qe7+ 7.Qe2 Qxe2+ 8.Bxe2 f6 9.Bd3 b6 10.0-0 Kf7 11.b3 Ba6 12.Bxa6 Nxa6 13.c3 Nc7 14.Re1 Ne7 15.Ba3 Bxa3 16.Nxa3 Rae8 17.Nc2 Nf5 18.Kf1 Rxe1+ 19.Rxe1 Re8 20.Rxe8 Nxe8 21.Nb4 Ne7 22.Nd3 Nd6 23.g4 [23.Ng1=] 23...Ne4 24.c4 dxc4 25.bxc4 g6 [25...b5!=/+] 26.a3 Ke6 27.Ke2 Nd6 28.Nb2 Nec8 29.Kd3 h6 30.Nd2 f5 31.f3 g5 32.Na4 Ne7 33.Nc3 Ng6 34.Ne2 a6 35.a4 Nb7 36.Ng3 fxg4 37.hxg4 Nf4+ 38.Ke3 Ng2+ 39.Kf2 Nf4 40.Nf5 h5 [40...Nd6! 41.Nxh6 c5!=] 41.Ng7+ Kf6 [41...Kf7 42.Nxh5+/=] 42.Nxh5+ Nxh5 43.gxh5 Kf5 [43...Kg7 44.Kg3+/-] 44.Ke3 [44.Ne4!+-] 44...Nd6 45.c5 bxc5 46.dxc5 Ke5 47.cxd6 Black resigns 1-0

14 – Oriero 4.Nf3 Bd6 5.Nc3 North Penn Chess Club had events directed by E. Olin Mastin. I was paired with a young girl named Jaquelline Sussane Oriero. She arrived in the United States from Bulgaria, a country known for its chess players. As I recall she was given an initial rating of 1900, but she did not perform consistently at that level. She was good but not quite that strong. Years later she was no longer listed as an active USCF player. I hope she's had a good life. Our French Defence game reached the Exchange Variation 3.exd5 exd5 with me as Black. After about 40 moves, our game was adjourned by the tournament director so as to begin the next round. For pairing purposes, this game was considered a win for White due to the fact that she had an extra pawn. This annoyed me greatly. I wanted to face higher rated players. I entered the next round with a bad attitude and I suffered for it. After my next round game, Miss Oriero and I finished our game which ended as a win for Black, after she missed a drawing opportunity. Oriero (1549) - Sawyer (1981), Lansdale PA (2), 1985 begins 1.e4 e6 2.Nf3 d5 3.exd5 exd5 4.d4 Bd6 5.Nc3 [The main line is 5.Bd3 Nf6 6.0-0 (6.Ne5?! 0-0 7.0-0 c5=/+) 6...0-0 7.Re1=] 5...Ne7 6.Bd3 [6.Nb5=] 6...c6 7.Be3 Bf5 8.Ne2 Qc7 9.Qd2 Bxd3 10.Qxd3 Nd7 11.Qd2 [11.0-0 0-0 12.Ng3=] 11...Nf6 12.Bf4 Ne4 13.Bxd6 Qxd6 14.Qc1 [Preferring to avoid 14.Qd3 Qb4+ 15.Nd2 Nxd2 16.Qxd2 Qxb2 17.0-0 Qb6=/+] 14...0-0-0 15.c3 f6 16.Qf4 Qe6 17.Nd2 g5 18.Qf3 f5 [18...Nf5!-/+] 19.Nxe4 dxe4 20.Qe3 [White could do better with 20.Qh3 Qg6=/+] 20...f4 21.Qd2 h5 [Black position is very strong after 21...Nf5!-+ ] 22.0-0-0 Qxa2 23.Qc2 Qe6 24.Rde1 Nf5 25.Ng1 e3 26.Nh3 Rhg8 27.Qe2 h4 [Gives Black a crushing position. 27...c5! 28.fxe3 Nxe3 29.Qd3 cxd4 30.cxd4 Qb6-+] 28.Qg4 Nxd4 29.Qxe6+ Nxe6 30.fxe3 Nc5 31.Kc2 fxe3 32.Rxe3 Rge8 33.Rhe1 Rxe3 34.Rxe3 Rd5 35.Re8+? [35.b4=] 35...Kd7 36.Rg8 Ne4 37.Rg7+ Kd6 [37...Ke6!-+] 38.Kc1 b5 39.Rxa7 Rd2? [Black is still winning after 39...g4! 40.Nf4 Rf5-/+] 40.Nxg5 Re2 41.Nxe4+ Rxe4 42.Rg7 Re2 43.h3 c5 44.Rg4 Kd5 45.b3 c4 46.bxc4+ bxc4 47.Kd1 Re4 48.Kd2 Rxg4 49.hxg4 Ke4 50.g5 Kf5 51.Ke3 Kxg5 52.Kf3 Kf5 53.Ke3 Kg4

54.Kf2 Kf4 55.g3+ [White can draw with 55.Ke2! Kg4 56.Kf2 Kf4=] 55...hxg3+ 56.Kg2 Ke3 57.Kxg3 Kd3 58.Kf2 Kxc3 59.Ke2 Kb2 0-1

Book 3: Chapter 2 – Alapin-Diemer 3.Be3 with rare lines The Alapin French offers the e4 pawn as a gambit. Black can take the pawn with 3…dxe4 or attack the pawn with 3…Nf6 4.e5. Other options are covered in this section.

15 – Chandler 3…c5 4.exd5 exd5 Bill Chandler sent me a BDG game. While looking for that game I stumbled upon this nice Alapin French game that he also won. The object in chess it to get the opponent's king. Your own focus must be on aggression toward the enemy army. But it is easy to forget to protect your own king. In the midst of battle, when bullets start flying, it is vital that your king be kept safe. You only get one king. Protect him! Unless you can immediately finish the attack on your opponent's king, the good general rule is protect your king first and attack his second. Black was slow to protect his king. William Chandler kept up the attack through the middlegame and reached a winning endgame. Bill's play was sharp, tactical, logical and effective. Chandler - Gelgolan, Main Playing Hall, 21.09.2013 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Be3 c5 4.exd5 [4.dxc5+/= is more common.] 4...exd5 5.dxc5 Nf6 6.Nc3 Nbd7 7.Nxd5 Bxc5 8.Bxc5 Nxc5 9.Qe2+ Be6 10.Nxf6+ gxf6 [10...Qxf6!? 11.Qb5+ Nd7 12.Nf3 (Not 12.Qxb7? Rb8 13.Qc7 Qxb2-+) 12...0-0 13.Bd3 Rac8 14.0-0+/=] 11.Qb5+ Nd7 12.0-0-0 Qc7 13.Nf3 Rc8 [13...0-0-0 14.Be2+/=] 14.Bd3 0-0 15.Qh5 Rfe8 [15...Qf4+ 16.Kb1 h6 17.Nd4+-] 16.Qxh7+ Kf8 17.Rhe1 Ne5 18.Nxe5 fxe5 19.Qh8+ [Or 19.f4! since 19...exf4 20.Qh6+ Ke7 21.Rxe6+ fxe6 22.Qg7+ Kd6 23.Be2+ Kc5 24.Qc3+ Kb6 25.Qb4+ Kc6 26.Qb5#] 19...Ke7 20.Qxe5 Qxe5 21.Rxe5 f6 22.Re3 Kf7 23.Bb5 Re7 24.Rde1 Rc5 25.a4 a6 26.Bd7 Re5 27.Bxe6+ R7xe6 28.Rxe5 Rxe5 [It is better for the defender to keep the rooks on the board, but three extra pawns wins for White. 28...fxe5 29.h4+-] 29.Rxe5 fxe5 30.Kd2 b5 31.axb5 axb5 32.Ke3 Ke6 33.Ke4 Kd6 34.h4 1-0

16 – Szasz 3…b6 4.e5 Bb7 Charles Szasz played a significant role in the spread of the BlackmarDiemer Gambit in America over the past 50 years. Here he played 3.Be3 vs the French. Black's most immediate threat is simply 3... dxe4. Playing against the French is like banging your head against a cement block; you get a headache. The cement block will rarely attack, but how do you break it? Black will hardly be surprised by anything, but White can try a potentially powerful karate chop. The move 3.Be3 was developed and played by Semyon Alapin in the 1890's! The game usually remains wide open. White gets quick slashing attacks and often wins in about 20 moves. Psychologically, Black faces a dilemma. He prefers a closed game. This may explain why about one third of the time, he declines the tempting gift pawn hanging there on e4. Shocked, Black wonders, "Are you sure you meant to play that?!" Szasz - Sheppards, US Intercollegiate, 1976 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e4 e6 3.Be3!? b6 [This allows the B/c8 to have a useful function at either b7 or a6. In this line all Black's minor pieces can be developed easily. A lunch time chess friend once ventured 3...Bb4+? 4.c3 Ba5 (Now 4...Bf8!? appears to be a waste of time.) 5.Nd2 Ne7 6.Qg4 e5? 7.Qxg7 Rg8 8.Qxh7 dxe4? 9.Nxe4 exd4 10.Nf6+ Kf8 11.Bh6+ Rg7 12.Bxg7# (Fast food!) 1-0 Sawyer - Black, Horsham PA 1988; Another inferior alternative is 3...e5? 4.dxe5 dxe4 5.Qxd8+ Kxd8 6.Nc3 Bf5 7.0-0-0++/-] 4.e5 [White closes the center, so that the B/c8 will have very limited scope if it is fianchettoed on the normal b7. If 4.Nd2 dxe4 5.Nxe4 Bb7= with equal chances or 4.Bd3!?=. The critical and best line is 4.exd5! exd5 5.Nf3+/=] 4...Bb7 [Black could equalize with either 4...c5= or 4...Ba6!?=] 5.f4 Nd7 [Charles Szasz wrote an article on the Alapin Gambit found in BDG World (Issue 4, April 1983] 6.Nf3 c5 7.c3 cxd4 8.cxd4 Rc8 9.a3 Ne7 10.Bd3 Nc6 [10...g6 11.0-0 a6 12.Nc3+/=] 11.0-0 Ncb8 [11...Be7 12.Qe2 g6 13.Nc3 0-0 14.Rac1+/-] 12.Nc3 [Or 12.f5! exf5 13.Bxf5 g6 14.Bh3+-] 12...Ba6 13.Nb5 Bxb5 14.Bxb5 a6 15.Bd3 Be7 16.Bd2 [16.f5+-] 16...0-0 17.Bb4 Bxb4 18.axb4

[18.Bxh7+! Kxh7 19.Ng5+ Kg6 20.axb4+-] 18...a5 19.Bxh7+ Kh8 20.Ng5 g6 21.Qg4 f5 22.Qh4 Kg7 23.Nxe6+ 1-0

17 – Diemer 3…Nf6 4.f3 Be7 Emil Josef Diemer (1908-1990) was a master famous for his bold gambit play. Diemer his incredible career in Germany spanned both World Wars. Diemer is most well-known for Blackmar-Diemer Gambit (BDG): 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3. In 1956, E.J. Diemer wrote his BDG book covering early deviations and 4... exf3 5.Qxf3 entitled (in German) "From the First Move until Mate!" Diemer intended to write a second volume covering the more popular 5.Nxf3 line; alas, he never did. My Alapin French book cites 35 Diemer games. Many players call the moves 1.d4 d5 2.e4 e6 3.Be3 the "Alapin-Diemer Gambit". As Black, Diemer played both the Elephant Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 d5) and the Soller Gambit (1.d4 e5 2.dxe5 f6!?). In 1992, I wrote a book covering everything that Diemer played after 1.d4 entitled the "Blackmar-Diemer Gambit Keybook." For ten years I enjoyed playing Diemer's repertoire from both sides. E.J. Diemer's games taught me how to play a mating attack. This Alapin Diemer vs Stefan Martin was played late in Diemer’s life. Diemer - Martin, Viernheim 1984 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e4 e6 3.Be3 Nf6 4.f3 Be7 5.Bd3 [A possibility is 5.Nd2 0-0 6.e5 Nfd7 7.Bd3 f6 8.f4 f5 9.g4 Bh4+ 10.Kf1 fxg4? 11.Qxg4+/- and 1-0 in 22. Sawyer - Huth, Skittles game, Hatboro PA 1989] 5...b6 [Black could try 5...dxe4 6.fxe4 e5 7.dxe5 Ng4 8.Qe2 Nxe3 9.Qxe3=] 6.c3 c5 [Again, 6...Ba6? 7.Bxa6 Nxa6 8.Qa4+ winning the N/a6] 7.e5 Nfd7 8.Nd2 Ba6 [Beware of 8...cxd4 9.cxd4 Ba6=] 9.Bc2 Nc6 10.a3 Rc8 11.f4 0-0 12.Ngf3 f6 13.h4!? [Diemer weakens his kingside to attack. A safer choice was 13.Qb1= but that was not the Diemer way.] 13...f5 [13...h6 14.Qb1 f5=/+] 14.Ng5! Bxg5 15.hxg5 g6 16.Rc1 cxd4 17.cxd4 Na5 18.g4 Qe7 19.gxf5 exf5 20.Qf3 Qe6 21.Kf2 Rfd8 22.b3 [22.Bb1! Nf8 23.Ba2+/=] 22...Nf8 23.a4 Nc6 24.Qd1 Nb4 25.Nf3 Rc6 [25...Na2=/+] 26.Bb1 Rdc8 27.Qd2 Qe7 28.Rxc6 Rxc6 29.Rc1 Rxc1 30.Qxc1 Bd3 31.Ne1 Bxb1 32.Qxb1 Qc7 33.Bd2 Nc6 34.Qc1 Ne6 35.Nf3 Qd7 36.Ke3 Kf7 37.Qh1 Ke8 38.b4 Kd8? [38...a6=] 39.b5! Nb8 40.Bb4

Kc8 41.Bd6 Kb7 42.Nd2 a6 43.Qxd5+ Kc8 44.Nc4 Qf7 45.Nxb6+ Kd8 46.Bxb8+ Ke8 47.bxa6 1-0

18 – Kaletsky 3…Nf6 4.f3 Be7 White should answer the French Alapin Gambit Declined with 3.Be3 Nf6 with 4.e5! It took me years to learn this. In my early Blackmar-Diemer Gambit days I preferred 4.f3. I got the same position by transposition after 1.d4 Nf6 2.f3 d5 3.e4 e6 4.Nc3. My game against Allan Kaletsky was played in the 1989 USCF Golden Knights Postal Tournament. At that pace we both made about one move per week. The position became closed when I played 7.e5. Then Black played 9...c4. This move locked in our bad bishops. That is a bigger problem for Black. White has more space and can rearrange his army as needed. After many months of maneuvering, I finally achieved a winning rook ending. Sawyer (2011) - Kaletsky (1523), corr USCF 89N214, 26.12.1990 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e4 e6 3.Be3 Nf6 4.f3 Be7 5.Nd2 b6 6.c3 c5 7.e5 [The game becomes a positional struggle typical of the French Defense. Another approach is 7.Bd3 0-0 8.Rc1 Nc6 9.e5 Nd7 10.f4 f5 11.g4!? Daring. (11.Ndf3+/=) 11...Bh4+ 12.Kf1 cxd4 13.cxd4 Nb4 14.Bb1 Ba6+ 15.Kg2 Nd3 16.Bxd3 Bxd3 17.g5 Bxg5+/= and 0-1 in 37. Webster - Schroeder, Elo Open 1988] 7...Nfd7 8.f4 Ba6! 9.Ngf3 c4?! [This positional error traps in Black's bad bishop. Better is to trade off the light squared bishops with 9...Bxf1 10.Nxf1=] 10.Be2 Qc7 11.0-0 Nc6 12.a4 [12.Qc2+/=] 12...Bb7 13.Kh1 h6 14.Qc2 a6 15.Rfc1 [15.f5+/=] 15...Nf8 16.Qb1 b5 17.b4 g5 18.axb5 axb5 19.Rxa8+ Bxa8 20.Qa2 Bb7 21.g3 f6 22.exf6 Bxf6 23.Kg1 g4 24.Ne5 h5 25.Qc2 Qg7 26.Nf1 Bxe5 27.fxe5 Ne7 28.Bf2 Nh7 29.Be3 Ng5 30.Bxg5 Qxg5 31.Qd2 Qxd2 32.Nxd2 Nf5 33.Ra1 0-0 34.Nf1 Rf7 35.h3 Nh6 36.Ne3 Nf5 37.Nxf5 exf5 38.Kf2 Re7 [38...Bc8 39.Ke3 gxh3 40.Kf4 h2 41.Bf3 Be6 42.Rh1+/-] 39.Ke3 Bc8 40.Ra8 Rc7 41.Rb8 Kf7

42.Rxb5 Ra7 43.Rxd5 [43.hxg4! fxg4 44.Rxd5+-] 43...Ra3 44.Rc5 Rxc3+ 45.Kf4 Rc2 46.Rxc8 [46.Bxc4+!+-] 46...Rxe2 47.hxg4 1-0

19 – Allensworth 3…Nf6 4.f3 Bb4+ In the 1989 USCF Golden Knights Postal Tournament against John Allensworth I tried the 1.d4 Nf6 2.f3 e6 3.e4 d5 4.Be3. This French could also begin 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Be3 Nf6 4.f3. I prefer 4.e5 with that move order. Black captured my e-pawn 6...Nxe4 in exchange for a knight. Maybe he thought my written pawn move 2.f3 was 2.Nf3. After this, it was just a matter of time, probably six months at a move per week, before Black chose to resign. Sawyer (2107) - Allensworth (1265), corr USCF 89N260, 22.08.1990 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.f3 e6 3.e4 d5 4.Be3 Bb4+ 5.c3 Be7 6.Nd2 Nxe4? [Black sacrifices or loses a piece. 6...dxe4 7.fxe4 c5=] 7.fxe4 e5 8.Ngf3 exd4 9.Bxd4 0-0 10.exd5 Qxd5 11.Bc4 Qh5 12.Qc2 [The most powerful move is 12.0-0! Nc6 13.Ne5+-] 12...Nc6 13.0-0-0 Bf5 14.Bd3 Nxd4 15.Nxd4 Bxd3 16.Qxd3 Rad8 17.Qf5 Qh4 18.g3 Qh6 19.Qg4 Bg5 20.h4 Be3 21.N4f3 c5 22.Ng5 [22.Rhe1 b5 23.Qf5 b4 24.Ng5 Bxg5 25.Qxg5 Qxg5 26.hxg5 bxc3 27.bxc3+-] 22...Qd6 [22...Qg6 23.Qc4 h6 24.Ngf3+/=] 23.Rh2 b5? [23...Qg6 24.Qf3+/-] 24.Qe4 Bxg5 25.hxg5 Qg6 26.Qxg6 fxg6 27.Rdh1 h6 28.gxh6 gxh6 29.Rxh6 Kg7 30.Rh7+ Kg8 31.Rh8+ Kg7 32.R1h7+ 1-0

20 – Avalos 3…Nf6 4.f3 c5 I played 1000 correspondence chess games over 20 years vs opponents from 30 countries and all 50 states in the USA. Rarely did I meet my opponents face to face. In 1989 I had White vs Carlos Avalos Sarravia. It may have been his first USCF Postal rated game. Avalos got my rating plus 400 points which put him temporarily at 2576. Last I looked, his correspondence rating had settled down to 2178. His tournament rating was 2062, and he was still active. About 15 years later at a chess tournament in Florida, a nice man came up to me and introduced himself to me as Carlos Avalos. He said we had played many years before. I remembered him. Carlos Avalos showed the value of 4…c5! I felt the pain. I learned my lesson. I should have played 4.e5 or 5.e5.

Sawyer (2176) - Avalos (2576), corr USCF 89N280, 18.01.1990 begins 1.d4 e6 2.e4 d5 3.Be3 Nf6 4.f3?! c5! [Enterprising.] 5.dxc5?! [5.e5 Nfd7=] 5...Qc7! 6.c3 [6.Nc3] 6...Bxc5 7.Bxc5 Qxc5 8.e5 Nfd7 9.f4? [The last try is 9.Qd4=/+] 9...Qe3+ 10.Ne2 Nc5 [10...Nc5 Embarrassing. 11.Qd4 Nd3+ 12.Kd1 Nf2+-+] 0-1

21 – Haines 3…Nf6 4.f3 b6 Ray Haines sent me his three games from the Presque Isle March Event, Open Section which was played in Maine on March 31, 2012. Ray was in a three way tie for first place. The event was played at the University of Maine at Presque Isle (U.M.P.I.). This is about 150 miles north of the main campus of the University of Maine at Orono, where I attended years ago. In the first round Ray Haines faces the French Defence and chose the Alapin-Diemer Gambit (3.Be3) vs his longtime friend Lance Beloungie. Black declined the gambit and missed a thematic French Check & Capture tactic that allowed White to win a piece. This same tactic also comes up in the Tarrasch Variation after 3.Nd2 and the Advance Variation 3.e5. Three things must be available for this combination: (1) White plays c2-c3; (2) Black swaps a piece with Ba6, Bxa6, with an undefended Nxa6; and (3) the move Qa4 is check. Sometimes Black defends against this threat with an earlier ...a7-a5 or ...Qd7 prior to ...Ba6. We all drop a piece from time to time. The game continued until an ending was reached with White up a knight. Ray did not make any big blunders when up a piece. He won fairly easily. Haines - Beloungie, UMPI Open, Round 1, 31.03.2012 begins 1.d4 e6 2.e4 d5 3.Be3 Nf6 [Alapin-Diemer Gambit Declined] 4.f3!? [The proven best move by results and analysis is 4.e5! Nfd7 (since 4...Ne4? blunders a piece to 5.f3 Qh4+ 6.g3 Nxg3 7.Bf2+-) when both 5.Nf3 and 5.f4 are good.] 4...b6 5.Nd2 Ba6!? [Black wants to exchange his bad French bishop.] 6.Bxa6 Nxa6 7.c3 c5? [Black misses the tactical threat and drops a piece. Better is 7...c6 8.e5+/=] 8.Qa4+ Qd7 9.Qxa6 dxe4 10.fxe4 cxd4 11.Bxd4 Be7 12.Ngf3 0-0 13.0-0 Ng4 14.Qe2 [White has nicely consolidated with his extra knight. The rest is just a matter of working toward and endgame. Black is lost.] 14...f6 15.e5 Rad8 16.h3 Nh6 17.exf6 Bxf6 18.Ne4 Bxd4+ 19.Nxd4 e5 20.Rxf8+ Rxf8 21.Nf3 Qd5 22.Neg5 Re8 23.Qc2 g6 24.Qb3

Qxb3 25.axb3 e4 26.Nd4 e3 27.Kf1 a5 28.Ke2 Nf5 29.Nxf5 gxf5 30.Rf1 h6 31.Nf3 f4 32.Ne1 Rd8 33.Nd3 Kg7 34.Rxf4 Re8 35.Rf3 1-0

22 – Tobias 3…Nf6 4.f3 b6 When I lived near Philadelphia, I played dozens of enjoyable games vs Expert Eric Tobias at the Chaturanga Club. For some reason, it seems that we played a lot of 10 minute games, but I do not remember the time limit of this particular game. We transposed to the French Defence Alapin Gambit Declined with 3.Be3 Nf6. The point of 1.d4 Nf6 2.f3 is to transpose into a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit (after 2...d5 3.e4 dxe4 4.Nc3) without having to face the Huebsch Gambit after 2.Nc3 d5 3.e4 Nxe4. The problem with 2.f3 in the French Defence is that White wastes a tempo if Black does not take on e4. This allows Black to equalize easily, but at least White gets out of the book with Be3. The same French Defence position could be reached via 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Be3 Nf6 4.f3, but in that case better would be 4.e5! Eric Tobias and I were rated almost exactly the same for a time. Tobias played me tough. Usually Eric Tobias did not let me get away with as much as I did in this game. Both sides could have improved, but at least I was the one who got to enjoy the victory this time. Sawyer - Tobias, Hatboro, PA 1989 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.f3 d5 3.e4 e6 4.Be3 b6 5.c3 [Hoping for the cheapo. 5.e5 is clearly playable 5...Nfd7 6.f4= leaves White with a wasted tempo but a playable game.] 5...Bb7 [5...Ba6? 6.Bxa6 Nxa6 7.Qa4+ wins a piece.] 6.Nd2 c5 7.Bd3 g6 8.e5 Nfd7 9.f4 Bg7 10.Ngf3 0-0 11.0-0 Nc6 12.Qe1 c4 13.Bc2 b5 14.g4 a5 [Black equalize with 14...f6= ] 15.Qg3 [15.f5!+/-] 15...b4 [15...f6 16.f5+/=] 16.Rf2 [16.f5+/-] 16...a4 17.Raf1 b3 18.axb3 axb3 19.Bb1 Nb6 [19...f5 20.exf6 Nxf6 21.f5+/=] 20.f5 Na4 21.f6 Bh8 22.Bh6 Re8 23.Ng5 Nxb2 24.Qh4 Nd3 25.Nxh7 Kxh7? [Black can try 25...Nxf2 26.Rxf2 Nxe5 27.dxe5+- to avoid immediate mate.] 26.Bg7+ 1-0

3.Be3 Nf6 4.e5 This line combines the characteristics of the Alapin and other 3…Nf6 4.e5 French lines. Continuations without 4.e5 (such as 4.f3) were covered in the previous section.

23 – Sawyer 4…Nb8 5.Nf3 b6 I won an Alapin-Diemer Gambit 3.Be3!? Black was in shock and didn't take the free pawn on e4. Ok. That's great! I shoved it to e5. White got space. Black's king clogged up the center. I got a great position simply by attacking Black's weak queenside. Black resigned as I pondered which rook to grab after move 23. Sawyer - Guest (1409), Playchess, 03.04.2018 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e4 e6 3.Be3 Nc6 4.e5 Nb8 [4...Nge7 5.Nf3=] 5.Nf3 b6 6.Bd3 c5 7.c3 a5 [7...Bd7 8.0-0+/=] 8.0-0 Nc6 9.Nbd2 Ba6 10.Bxa6 Rxa6 11.Qe2 Ra8 12.h3 [12.c4+/-] 12...Be7 13.Rfc1 Rb8 14.Qb5 Qc8 15.a4 [15.c4+/-] 15...c4 16.b3 [16.Nxc4! dxc4 17.d5 exd5 18.Nd4+-] 16...cxb3 17.Qxb3 Bd8 18.c4 dxc4? [18...Qd7 19.cxd5+/-] 19.Nxc4 Qd7 20.Nd6+ Ke7 21.Ng5 b5 [21...Nh6 22.Nge4+-] 22.Ngxf7 Nxd4 23.Bxd4 Rc8 [White can win either rook.] 1-0

24 – Donohue 4…Ne4 5.f3 The French Defence Alapin Gambit Declined 4.e5 contains a deadly trap on move 4. Various players fall for the trap from time to time. When playing Black in the French Defence Classical Steinitz 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.e5, it is reasonable, although not recommended, to attempt 4...Ne4?! However against the French Defence Alapin, this maneuver fails terribly after 3.Be3 Nf6 4.e5 Ne4? In my 1989 USCF Golden Knights Postal Chess Tournament game vs Gerald Donohue, Black illustrated the trap perfectly. White wins a piece. This opponent was my first win with this trap, but I won the same way four more times with 7.Bf2! Each of those players chose a different seventh move, but there are no available good moves for Black.

Sawyer (2183) - Donohue (1355), corr USCF 89N275, 09.03.1990 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e4 e6 3.Be3 Nf6 4.e5 Ne4? [Black falls for the trap. 4...Nfd7 5.f4 or 5.Nf3] 5.f3! Qh4+ [If 5...Ng5 6.h4!+- still wins the knight.] 6.g3 Nxg3 7.Bf2! Qh6 8.Bxg3 1-0

25 – Woodland 4…Nfd7 5.Bd3 Before the Polgar sisters were world famous, I played Donna Marie Woodland. Postal chess was pretty much a man's world. I am guessing I played about a dozen women in my 1000 correspondence games. One of the most notable women I remember playing was my game vs Irene Aronoff. I also met Rachel Crotto during the 1974 US Junior Open at Franklin & Marshall College in Lancaster, Pennsylvania. We only played blitz and skittles. My game vs Donna Marie Woodland (rated 1806) was in the 1989 USCF Golden Knights Postal Tournament. During that event I achieved a USCF Postal Master rating. This lady met me at the time I was playing the best chess of my life. Our opening was a French Defence Alapin 3.Be3 Nf6 4.e5. Usually I follow up 3.Be3 Nf6 4.e5 Nfd7 with 5.f4 but here I tried 5.Bd3 and 6.Qg4. When she tried to connect her rooks 11...Ke7, she stepped into two tactical ideas at once after 12.Bg5. The White bishop had a skewer on the Black king which could not be captured due to the pin on the Black queen. The royal family had fallen and with it, the game. Sawyer (2208) - Woodland (1806), corr USCF 89N286, 10.05.1990 begins 1.d4 e6 2.e4 d5 3.Be3 Nf6 4.e5 Nfd7 5.Bd3 [The main line of the AlapinDiemer Declined is 5.f4 c5 6.c3 Nc6 7.Nf3+/=] 5...Be7 [A natural continuation would be 5...c5 6.c3 Qb6=] 6.Qg4 c5? [This is too risky. Black has to cover the 6...g6 spot.] 7.Qxg7 Rf8 8.c3 c4 [If Black goes for queenside counter play with 8...Qb6 after 9.b3+/- White still has a good position.] 9.Bxh7 Bf6? [Hanging a piece. Better is either 9...b5 or 9...Qb6] 10.exf6 Qxf6 11.Bh6 Ke7? [Black is in for a royal skewing.] 12.Bg5! Nc6 13.Nf3 b6 14.Ne5 Ke8 [14...Ncxe5 15.Bxf6+ Nxf6 16.dxe5+- White is up a

queen for a rook.] 15.Bxf6 Ncxe5 16.Bxe5 Bb7 17.Bd6 Kd8 18.Bxf8 Kc7 19.Be7 Bc6 20.Qxf7 e5 21.dxe5 Nxe5 22.Qf4 1-0

26 - Alapin 4…Nfd7 5.c3 c5 Semyon (Simon) Alapin was a creative tactical player. He faced strong players from Blackburne to Nimzowitsch. Alapin once mated the American Frank Marshall in 16 moves! Semyon Alapin is most remembered for his unusual early opening moves. One of his openings is in the Open Game with 1.e4 e5 2.Ne2!? Another has become a popular Sicilian Defence 1.e4 c5 2.c3!? How did Alapin play against the French Defence his 3.Be3!? Here are several examples. The stem game is against A. Zinkl. Alapin - Zinkl, Vienna 1899 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Be3 Nf6 [3...dxe4 4.Nd2 Nf6 (4...f5 5.f3 exf3 6.Ngxf3 Nf6 7.Bc4 Nd5 8.Qe2 Be7 9.0-0-0 0-0 10.Rhg1 c6 11.g4 b5 12.Bb3 a5 13.c4 a4 14.Bc2 bxc4 15.Nxc4 Ba6 16.Bd2 Bxc4 17.Qxc4 a3 18.b3 g6 19.gxf5 exf5 20.Bh6 Rf6 1/2-1/2 Alapin - Noa, Dresden 1892) 5.c3 (Alapin's idea was to attack e4 with Qc2 and Ng3. Diemer played 5.f3 known as the Alapin-Diemer Gambit.) 5...Bd7! (5...Nbd7 6.Qc2 Be7 7.Ne2 0-0 8.Ng3 Nd5 9.Qxe4 N7f6 10.Qd3 c5 11.Be2 cxd4 12.cxd4 Bd7 13.0-0 Rc8 14.Rac1 Bc6 15.Nc4 Nb4 16.Qb1 Bd5 17.a3 Nc6 and 1/2-1/2 in 50. Alapin - Burn, Berlin 1897 18.Qd3=) 6.Qc2 Bc6 7.Ne2 Be7 8.c4 0-0 9.0-0-0 Na6 10.Nc3 Nb4-/+ and 0-1 in 29. Alapin Showalter, Vienna 1898] 4.e5 [This reliable line provides a positional advantage for White. The whole line improves on the Tarrasch 3.Nd2 Nf6 4.e5.] 4...Nfd7 [In blitz games, and occasionally in serious games, one sees the piece blunder 4...Ne4? 5.f3! Qh4+ 6.g3 Nxg3 7.Bf2+-] 5.c3 [Normal is 5.f4 c5 6.c3 Nc6 7.Nf3 Be7 8.Bd3 (8.Be2!?+/=) 8...cxd4 9.cxd4 Qb6 10.Qd2 Nb4 11.Be2 0-0 12.Nc3 f6 13.0-0 Nc6 14.Bd3 Nb4 15.Be2 Nc6 16.Rac1 f5 17.Kh1 Qd8 and 1/2-1/2 in 28. Alapin - Von Gottschall, Dresden 1892 18.Na4+/-] 5...c5 6.a3 [Solid and cautious. More common is 6.f4 which could transpose to 5.f4 c5 6.c3.] 6...c4?! [6...Nc6= is better.] 7.b4 a5 8.Nd2 a4 9.Qg4 f5 [9...Nc6 10.Be2+/=] 10.Qg3 b5 11.Be2 Qe7 12.Nh3 [12.h4!?+/-] 12...Qf7 [12...Nc6 13.Nf3 g6 14.0-0+/-] 13.Ng5 [13.Nf4!?+/-] 13...Qg8 14.h4 Be7 15.h5 h6 16.Nh3 Nf8 17.Nf4 Bg5 18.Nf3 Bxf4 19.Bxf4 Ra7 20.Nh4 Re7 21.Qh2 Kd7 22.g4 fxg4 23.Bxg4 g5 24.hxg6

Nxg6 25.Bh5 Nxf4 26.Qxf4 Rg7 27.0-0-0 Qf8 [27...Kc7 28.Qh2+/-] 28.Qf6 Rhg8 29.Rh3 [Or 29.Ng6!+-] 29...Qe7 30.Rf3 Nc6 31.Bf7! 1-0

27 – Catania 4…Nfd7 5.f4 g6 When facing the Alapin Gambit Declined 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Be3 Nf6 what is the best 4th move for White? It must be 4.e5. After 4...Nfd7 White continues 5.f4, strengthening the central pawn wedge. White expects a space advantage on the kingside. After completing development, the plan is a pawn storm with an eventual g2-g4 and f4-f5. In the 1989 USCF Golden Knights Semi-Finals my opponent Duane Catania countered my obvious plan with 5...g6. This left Black with gaping holes on the dark squares. The g6 pawn will eventually become a target for pawn exchange and the opening of the kingside for pieces. White obtained a big positional advantage. Temporarily I gave Black a chance to save the game on move 33. A few moves later it was all over. Sawyer (2078) - Catania (1795), corr USCF 89NS20, 09.10.1991 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e4 e6 3.Be3 Nf6 4.e5 Nfd7 5.f4 g6?! [This keeps White from quickly pushing a pawn to f5. Black has no intention of the fianchetto 6... Bg7, since the Bishop is more useful on e7. Another rare try is 5...b6 6.Nf3 (A bold approach is 6.Qg4!?+/=) 6...c5 7.c4+/= Cody] 6.Nf3 c5 [After 6...Be7 7.c3 b6 8.Bd3 Ba6 9.0-0 Bxd3 10.Qxd3, Black has a slightly better Bishop, while White has more space.] 7.c3 Nc6 8.Qd2 a6 9.Bd3 b5 10.0-0 Bb7 11.Qf2 c4 [With the center closed, Black expands on the queenside, moves his pieces to the queenside, and has his best play on the queenside. Then for some unknown reason, Black closes off the position on the queenside!] 12.Bc2 Rc8 [Here a positional struggle ensued:] 13.a3 Be7 14.Nbd2 a5 15.g4 Nf8 16.f5 Qd7 [16...gxf5 17.gxf5 exf5 18.Bxf5+/-] 17.Ng5 [17.f6! Bd8 18.Bh6+- should eventually lead to the win of the h7 pawn.] 17...Bxg5 18.Bxg5 gxf5 19.gxf5 Rg8 20.Qh4 exf5? [20...Ne7+/=] 21.Bxf5 Qe7 22.Nf3 Ne6 23.Bxe6 [23.Kh1!+- wins] 23...Qxe6 24.Qxh7 Kd7 25.Kh1 Rh8 26.Qg7?! [26.Qc2+-] 26...Rcg8 27.Qf6 Ne7 28.Qxe7+ Qxe7 29.Bxe7 Kxe7 30.Rg1 Bc8 31.Rxg8 Rxg8 32.Rg1 Rh8 33.Rg7 [33.Kg2!+/=] 33...Kf8 [Black can equalize with 33...Bf5!=] 34.Rg3 Bf5

35.Ng5 Rh5 36.Kg2 b4 37.axb4 axb4 38.Nh3 Be4+ 39.Kg1 bxc3 40.bxc3 Rh6 41.Nf2 Bf5 42.Ng4 Ra6? [42...Bxg4 43.Rxg4+/=] 43.Nf6 1-0

28 – Veigar 4…Nfd7 5.f4 c5 It's ridiculous! But it's true. I had scored better as White against the French Defence with the Alapin 3.Be3!? (57%) than I had with 3.Nc3 (55%) against the exact same level of competition. When we were playing a postal game in 1978 Dr. Ted Bullockus first told me about the move 3.Be3!? I dismissed it as foolish. I looked the move up in the excellent thick book on the French Defence by Gligoric, Karpov, etc. and published by RHM around 1975. To my shock, the move 3.Be3!? was not mentioned at all! At the time I preferred Karpov's 3.Nd2 French Tarrasch. I was not a gambit player, but Bullockus sparked my interest in 3.Be3!? Here is a French Defence Alapin vs "Veigar" in a 3 0 blitz game from the Internet Chess Club. At such speed, I cannot really calculate anything. I just play rapid "hope chess" for fun. I use pattern recognition, intuition and experience... an adrenalin rush. Maybe someday I might slow down to 5 minute games. Sawyer - Veigar, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 21.01.2013 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Be3 Nf6 4.e5 Nfd7 5.f4 c5 6.c3 Nc6 7.Nf3 f6 8.Nbd2 [8.Bd3!+/= is more accurate.] 8...Be7 9.Bd3 0-0 10.0-0 cxd4 11.cxd4 Nb6 12.b3 [Houdini also likes 12.exf6+/=] 12...Bd7 13.a3 Be8 14.Qc2 f5 15.g4!? [15.Qb2+/=] 15...Bg6 16.g5 Rc8 17.Qb2 Qd7 18.Rfc1 Na5 19.Kg2 Rc7 20.Rxc7 Qxc7 21.Rc1 Qd7 22.a4 Rc8 23.Rxc8+ Qxc8 24.Qc2 Be8 25.Qxc8 Nxc8 26.h4 Nb6 27.Ne1 Nc6 28.Nc2 Nb4 29.Nxb4 Bxb4 30.Kf2 Bh5 31.Nb1 Kf8 32.Bd2 Be7 33.Bc1 Ke8 34.Ba3 Bxa3 35.Nxa3 a6 36.Ke3 Kd7 37.a5 Nc8 38.Nc2? [This move leaves the White pawns on a5, d4, f4, and h4 as potential targets for the Black knight. 38.b4= holds the position.] 38...Bd1 39.Kd2 Bxc2 40.Kxc2 Ne7 41.b4 Nc6 [Black misses his chance with 41...Ng6!-/+] 42.Kc3 g6 [42...Na7=] 43.b5 Nxa5 44.bxa6 bxa6 45.Bxa6 Kc6? [45...Nc6=] 46.Kb4? [46.Bc8! Nc4 47.Bxe6+- wins quickly.] 46...Kb6 47.Bc8 Nc6+ 48.Kc3 Nd8 49.Bd7 Ka5 50.Be8 Kb6 51.Kb4 Kc7 52.Kb5 Nb7? [52...Kb7=] 53.Bc6 [53.Bf7!+-] 53...Nd8

54.Be8 Nb7? [Black is desperately down on time. In hopes to draw by repeating moves he repeats the blunder. 54...Kb7=] 55.Bf7 Kd7 56.Bg8 Nd8 57.Bxh7?! [Black forfeits on time. Correct is 57.Kb6 Nc6 58.Bxe6+ wins] 1-0

29 – Mason 6.c3 Nc6 7.Nf3 White won an Alapin Diemer Gambit when Black declined the pawn. The game began as a French Defence after 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Be3 Nf6 4.e5 Nfd7 5.f4. Here Donald Mason won against Thivyaa Rahulan. White obtained a dominating position to the point where the result was never in doubt. My French 3.Be3 Playbook is a step by step guide to the Alapin Diemer Gambit. Mason (2125) - Rahulan (1737), 16th 4NCL Congress 2017 Coventry ENG, 04.11.2017 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Be3 Nf6 4.e5 Nfd7 5.f4 c5 6.c3 Nc6 7.Nf3 a6 [7...Be7 8.Be2 0-0 9.0-0=] 8.Bd3 b5 9.0-0 Bb7? [9...c4 10.Bc2 g6+=] 10.f5! [White breaks through for a powerful attack.] 10...Be7 11.fxe6 fxe6 12.Ng5 Nf8 13.Nf7 Qc7 14.Nxh8 0-0-0 15.Nf7 Re8 16.Qh5 g6 17.Qh6 c4 18.Be2 a5 19.Nd2 Kb8 20.Bg5 Bxg5 21.Nxg5 Qc8 [21...Nd7 22.Qxh7+-] 22.Rf7 Ba6 [22...Ne7 23.g4+-] 23.Raf1 Nd7 24.Rxh7 Nb6 [24...Nf8 25.Rxf8 Rxf8 26.Nxe6+-] 25.Nf7 Rg8 26.Nd6 Qd8 27.Rhf7 Nd7 28.Qh7 Nb6 [28...Ndxe5 29.Rb7+ Ka8 30.dxe5+-] 29.Rb7+ Ka8 30.Rxb6 Bc8 [30...Qxb6 31.Qxg8+ Nb8 32.Qxe6+-] 31.Nxc8 Qxc8 32.Rxc6 1-0

30 – Sawyer 6.c3 Nc6 7.Nf3 I played an unrated blitz French Defence Alapin-Diemer Gambit Declined 3.Be3 Nf6. The path was familiar to me, although I had not played 3.Be3 as often in recent years. I had discovered an improvement on move eight, but when I got there, I forgot to play the move. I blitzed the standard 8.Qd2 instead of 8.Qc1! Sawyer (2000) - Guest, ICC 2 12 u Internet Chess Club, 25.07.2018 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Be3 Nf6 4.e5 Nfd7 5.f4 c5 6.c3 Nc6 7.Nf3 Qb6 8.Qd2 [Again I forgot about 8.Qc1!+/=] 8...Be7 9.Be2 0-0 10.0-0 f6 [10...a6=] 11.Na3 fxe5 12.fxe5 cxd4 13.cxd4 Bb4 14.Qd3 Qa5? [14...Be7! 15.Nc2+/=] 15.Ng5 g6 [Black resigns while I was thinking. After 15...g6 White must play 16.Bg4! (I rejected 16.Nxe6?! Ndxe5!=/+) 16...Nd8 17.Nb5+-] 1-0

31 – Dyba 6.c3 Nc6 7.Nf3 My French Defence Alapin Gambit Declined game vs Paul Dyba was one of the 52 annotated games [Game 19] in my 1995 Alapin French book published by Bob Long and Thinkers' Press. In the book I followed a specific move order of 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 (and later 7.Nf3 Be7 8.h4 Qb6 9.Qd2 cxd4 10.cxd4 f6) from the game Diemer-Busca given in the notes below. That Diemer game transposed to my game with Paul Dyba. Here is the actual move order of our 1989 USCF Golden Squires Postal Chess Tournament game. In the book I analyzed the variation using a consistent move order between games 18-20. This helps the reader to compare subtle differences. There are many paths to the same positions. Moves 12-16 against Dyba imply a willingness for both players to draw the game. We were both probably out of contention for any prizes three years after the tournament started. We had finished about 10 games each, so we had a pretty good idea of where we stood in the standings. The notes below are revised with the help of chess engine analysis that was not available back in 1991. Sawyer (2006) - Dyba (2019), corr USCF 89SS60, 31.12.1991 begins 1.d4 e6 2.e4 d5 3.Be3 Nf6 4.e5 Nfd7 5.f4 c5 6.c3 Nc6 7.Nf3 Qb6 8.Qd2 f6 9.h4!? [This move is quite an enterprising attempt to weaken the kingside by provoking a pawn advance. After Black castles there might be a possible Ng5!? sacrifice to open the h-file. 9.Be2+/=] 9...cxd4 10.cxd4 Be7 11.Nc3 0-0 [This is more sensible than opening lines by 11...fxe5 12.fxe5 0-0 13.00-0 Bb4 14.Ng5 Ne7 15.Bd3 Nf5 16.g4 h6 17.gxf5 hxg5 18.fxe6 Nxe5 19.dxe5 Qxe6 20.hxg5 Qxe5 21.Bd4 Bxc3 22.Bxc3 1-0. Diemer - Busca, simul Genf 1956] 12.Bd3 f5 13.0-0 Nd8 14.Na4 Qb4 15.Qxb4 Bxb4 16.Bd2 [16.Rfc1+/-] 16...Bxd2 17.Nxd2 Nc6 18.Nf3 Re8 19.Nc3 a6 20.a3 Nf8 [20...Nb6=] 21.g3 [21.Na4+/=] 21...h6 22.Kf2 Bd7 23.Ke3 Na5 [23...Re7=] 24.Nd2 b5 25.b3 Rec8 26.Rfc1 Kf7 27.b4 Nc4+ 28.Ke2 Nxd2 [28...Rcb8=] 29.Kxd2 Ke7 30.Na2 [A draw was agreed, but White appears

to had the better chances due to the better light-squared bishop after 30.a4+/- ] 1/2-1/2

32 – Rowe 6.c3 Nc6 7.Nf3 Milton S. Hershey was a man who did great things for people. In the late 1800s Hershey worked in Pennsylvania making candy and ice cream. He got many creative ideas from other people to improve his craft. In 1900 Mr. Hershey decided to build a factory town. His employees would make chocolate. I first visited there in 1974. You could smell the chocolate in the air. I loved it. At Halloween each year, millions of pieces of Hershey candy are purchased by Americans and given away. I do not like to wait for Halloween myself. I eat Hershey chocolate year round. In addition to the chocolate factory in Hershey, Pennsylvania, there is also many things to make it a community in which his employees would enjoy living. There are attractive wide streets well decorated, a major teaching hospital and good schools. Wikipedia notes: It is popularly called "Chocolatetown, USA." Hershey is also referred to as "The Sweetest Place on Earth." Mr. Hershey also built an amusement park for his employees to enjoy. It is now known as Hershey Park. At the park there is a hockey arena and football stadium. Back in 1991 the chess club in Hershey held an Action Chess tournament with 30-minute games. As I recall it was held on the south east side of town either at or near a golf country club or a retirement center. I played some really good tournaments and some really bad tournaments in those days. This was a good one, so it is easy to write about. I seem to recall that my son came with me to Hershey. I don't recall if Travis played in that tournament. He was the only one of my kids who actually played rated tournament chess. My own opponent in the first round was Philip Rowe. His name reminded me of the first tournament game I ever lost about 30 years before this. That

was to a David Rowe in Maine when we were in high school. Anyway, my first round game in Hershey was an Alapin-Diemer Gambit of the French Defence on which I wrote a book published by Thinkers' Press in 1995. Like all my early books it sold out, but used copies are still floating around. Sawyer - Rowe, Hershey, PA 1991 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e4 e6 3.Be3 Nf6 4.e5! Nfd7 [4...Ne4? loses the knight to 5.f3 Qh4+ 6.g3 Nxg3 7.Bf2!+-] 5.f4!? [5.Nf3 c5 6.c3 Nc6 7.Bd3 Qb6 8.Qc1+/=] 5...c5 6.c3 Nc6 7.Nf3 Qb6 8.Qd2 [White covers both the P/d4 and the P/b2. Unfortunately, the Queen sometimes gets in the way on d2. How should White develop his N/b1?] 8...Be7 [8...a6 is practically a waste of time. 9.Bd3 cxd4 10.cxd4 Be7 11.Nc3 0-0 12.h4 f6 13.Qc2 g6 14.Bxg6 hxg6 15.Qxg6+ Kh8 16.Ng5! 1-0. Diemer - Klauser, Le Locle 1958; Attacking the front of the pawn chain can lead to 8...f6 9.h4 h5 10.Bd3 f5 11.Ng5 Ne7 12.Na3 c4 13.Bxc4! dxc4 14.Nxc4 Qc6 15.Nd6+ Kd8 16.Nxe6# 1-0. Diemer - NN, simul Waldsee 1953] 9.Be2 0-0 [Black can try 9...cxd4 10.cxd4+/=] 10.0-0 f6 11.a3? [Ugly. White leaves a huge hole at b3 under Black's control. 11.Na3!?] 11...a5 [Correct is 11...Na5!=/+] 12.a4 Qa7 13.Na3+/= b6 14.Nb5 Qb8 15.Kh1 Ba6 16.Rfe1 c4 17.Na3 Bxa3 18.bxa3 b5 19.axb5 Bxb5 20.Reb1 a4 21.Bd1 Ra5 22.Ra2 Qc7 23.Rab2 Rb8 24.Bc2 Rb7 25.Qd1 Qb8 26.h3 Ra6 27.Nd2 Rab6 [White suddenly shifts sides and attacks kingside.] 28.Qh5 f5 29.Nf3 Na5 30.g4 g6 31.Qh6 Nf8 32.gxf5 exf5 33.Rg1 Bd7 34.Rxb6 Rxb6 35.Bc1 Nb3 36.Be3 Na5 37.Bc1 Nb3 38.Be3 Na5 39.Nh4 Rb2 40.Bxf5 Bxf5 41.Nxf5 Qb7 42.Nd6 Qb3 43.Ne8 Ne6 44.Nf6+ Kf7 45.Qxh7+ Ng7 46.Qxg6+ 1-0

3.Be3 dxe4 Black initially accepts the gambit pawn.

33 – Schott 4.f3 exf3 5.Nxf3 Nf6 The French Defence Alapin-Diemer Gambit 3.Be3 resembles the BlackmarDiemer Gambit. It scores well against humans due to the surprise factor. The 3.Be3 gambit wins more than it should in theory. Reimund Schott defeated Manfred Lachnit in a game from Germany. One wasted tempo gave White great chances. Schott (1965) - Lachnit (1775), 9th Rheinland-Pfalz Open 2017 Lambsheim GER (4.34), 16.06.2017 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Be3 dxe4 4.f3 exf3 5.Nxf3 Nf6 6.Bc4 Nd5 [6...Bd6 7.0-0 0-0 8.Nbd2 Nc6 9.Bg5=] 7.Qe2 Nxe3 8.Qxe3 Be7 9.Nbd2 Nc6 10.0-0-0 [10.c3=] 10...Na5 11.Bd3 b6 12.h4 h5 13.Ng5 Bxg5 [13...Bb7 14.Ndf3 Bxf3 15.Nxf3=] 14.hxg5 g6 [14...Qe7 15.g6+/=] 15.Ne4 0-0 [15...Qe7 16.Nf6+ Kd8 17.Rhe1+-] 16.Nf6+ Kg7 17.Qe5 [Another way to win is 17.Nxh5+-] 1-0

34 – Doty 4.f3 exf3 5.Nxf3 Nc6 Elmo Doty sent me a nice game. He demonstrated the value of attacking play at the middle levels of chess. You do not have to play gambits, but you do have to attack to win in chess against good players. The more you attack, the better you get at it. Elmo chose the French Defence Alapin Gambit 3.Be3 dxe4. Doty sacrificed material on e4, f3 and h6 leading to a nice checkmate. Here is what Doty wrote: “Hi Tim, I played my first tournament in ages last weekend at the Marshall, and owe you (and your book) some credit for this victory in round 3 against the French Defense… So, thanks for exposing players to the Alapin Gambit. I'll keep at it until it fails me. Warm Regards, Chris ('Elmo') Doty” This game has a classic gambit bishop sacrifice of Bxh6 typical of the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit and the Alapin-Diemer Gambit. Doty - Serota, Marshall Chess Club Under 1800 (3), 06.10.2012 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Be3 dxe4 4.f3 exf3 5.Nxf3 Nc6 6.Bd3 Nf6 7.0-0 Be7

8.c3 Bd7 9.Qe1 0-0 10.Qg3 Bd6 11.Qh4 Be7 12.Ne5 h6 ["needed 12...g6 instead" - Doty] 13.Bxh6 gxh6 14.Qxh6 Nxe5 15.dxe5 Bc5+ 16.Kh1 Bc6 17.Qg5+ Kh8 18.exf6 Qxd3 19.Qg7# 1-0

35 – Keres 4.Nd2 f5 5.f3 exf3 I always liked Paul Keres. In his early years Keres lived in the country of Estonia far from strong tournaments. To improve in chess he collected any game he could find in the newspaper. He wrote them down in books. Paul Keres turned to correspondence chess to improve his skills. Keres said that in his youth he always chose the sharpest opening variations he could find. The unknown young Keres played this Alapin Diemer Gambit against the French Defence with 3.Be3. Black weakened his pawn structure to hold the pawn with 4...f5. The idea may look bad, but it is fairly popular. The ending of this game has been presented in several different ways and with several different move orders. I chose the one that makes the most sense to me and looks to be the most reasonable finish. Keres - Verbac, corr 1932 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Be3 dxe4 4.Nd2 f5 5.f3 exf3 [This helps lines White. One line Diemer faced as White repeatedly was 5...Nf6 6.fxe4 fxe4 7.Nh3 Bd6 8.Bc4 Qe7 9.0-0 0-0 10.Ng5 Kh8 11.Ndxe4+/-] 6.Ngxf3 Nf6 7.Bd3 [Here Alapin tried 7.Bc4 Nd5 8.Qe2 Be7 9.0-0-0 0-0 10.Rhg1 c6 11.g4 b5 12.Bb3 a5 13.c4-/+ Alapin - Noa, Dresden 1892] 7...c5 [If 7...Be7 8.Ne5 0-0 9.0-0 Nbd7 10.Ndf3 c6 11.c3 Qc7 12.Qe2 Bd6 13.Nc4= and 1-0 in 26. Szulmistrat-Munster, Corres. 1982] 8.0-0 cxd4 9.Nxd4 f4? [9...Nc6 10.Nxc6 bxc6 11.Qf3=] 10.Rxf4 e5 11.Bb5+ [Even better is 11.Rxf6! gxf6 12.Qh5+ Ke7 13.Rf1+-] 11...Kf7 [11...Bd7 12.Ne6 exf4 13.Nxd8+/-] 12.Qh5+ g6 13.Bc4+ Kg7 14.Qh6+! [Brilliant! White wins.] 14...Kxh6 15.Rh4+ Kg7 16.Bh6# 1-0

36 – Cotter 4.Nd2 f5 5.f3 Nc6 From 1975-1979 there was a classic television show called "Welcome Back, Kotter". The sitcom was the story of a teacher who returned to his high school to teach low-performing students like Kotter was himself when he was a student 10 years prior. Imagine someone who was a lower rated high school chess player. Ten years later he returns as a chess expert or master. Such teachers can be very effective, because they can relate to the situations those teenage students are facing. My French Defence Alapin 3.Be3 dxe4 4.Nd2 game vs Norman Cotter reminded me of that TV show. Note that the name of my opponent is spelled differently than the fictional TV character. The French Defence Alapin-Diemer Gambit has four popular variations after 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Be3: A. 3...Nf6 4.e5 Nfd7 5.f4 B. 3...dxe4 4.Nd2 f5 5.f3 C. 3...dxe4 4.Nd2 Nf6 5.f3 Nd5 6.Qe2 D. 3...dxe4 4.Nd2 Nf6 5.f3 exf3 6.Ngxf3 Why did I play the French Alapin? Because I liked playing lines that Black did not know. Because I liked winning some quick games. Because I had a better performance rating with 3.Be3 than any other third move. Cotter played an excellent game. Sawyer (2112) - Cotter (1876), corr USCF 89N215, 10.08.1990 begins 1.d4 e6 2.e4 d5 3.Be3 dxe4 4.Nd2 f5 5.f3 Nc6 6.fxe4 Nxd4 7.Ngf3 Bc5 8.Bc4!? [White has three alternatives worthy of consideration: 8.exf5, 8.c3 and 8.Bxd4] 8...Nxc2+ 9.Qxc2 Bxe3 10.exf5 exf5 11.0-0-0 Qf6 12.Rhe1 [12.Qb3 f4 13.Bxg8 Qc6+ 14.Bc4+/-] 12...f4 13.g3 Ne7 14.gxf4 Bxf4 15.Kb1 Bg4 16.Ne4 Qg6 17.Qd3 Bd6? [White's advantage would be smaller after 17...a6 18.h3 Bxf3 19.Qxf3 Rf8 20.Qd3+/-] 18.Nxd6+ [I missed a win with 18.Bb5+! Kd8 19.Ne5 Qf5 20.Nxd6 Qxd3+ 21.Rxd3+-]

18...cxd6 19.Qxg6+ hxg6 20.Rxd6 Bxf3 21.Rde6 0-0-0 22.Rxe7 Rxh2 23.Rxg7 Be4+ 24.Ka1 Bf5 25.a4 Rd7 26.Rg8+ Kc7 27.Be6 Re7 28.Rc1+ Kd6 29.Bxf5 gxf5 30.Rg6+ Kd5 31.Rd1+ Kc4 32.Rf1 Rf7 33.Rg5 Kb3 34.Rf3+ Kxa4 35.Rfxf5 Rxf5 36.Rxf5 b5 37.Rf4+ b4 38.Ka2 1/2-1/2

37 – Diebert 4.Nd2 f5 5.f3 Nc6 Charles M. Diebert won a game in the French Defence Alapin-Diemer Gambit with 3.Be3. At the time this game was played, Diebert was the most successful BDG player in the USA. He defeated several masters with the Blackmar-Diemer. The National Master Charles Diebert of Columbus, Ohio wrote the book, "The Blackmar-Diebert Gambit" published in 1991. I ordered a copy directly from Chuck Diebert when it was new. He wrote me a nice note when I bought the book from him. Diebert started college the same year I did. Charles began his chess career with 22 straight rated losses. Shortly after that, he discovered the BlackmarDiemer Gambit. After the book was written, Charles Diebert went on to play other openings. In his prime Diebert was rated about 2400 both with and without the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit. Diebert played this Alapin French Defence against Terence W. Niehoff. Diebert (2396) - Niehoff (2300), US Amateur Team Midwest 1987 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e4 e6 3.Be3 dxe4 4.Nd2 f5 5.f3 Nc6 6.c3 exf3 [Interesting is the Pachman idea of 6...e5 7.dxe5 Nxe5 8.fxe4 Nd3+ 9.Bxd3 Qxd3 but White can play 10.Qh5+! g6 11.Qe2 Qxe2+ 12.Nxe2=; 6...Nf6 7.fxe4 fxe4 8.Bg5 e3 9.Bxe3 e5 10.Ngf3 and 1-0 in 23. Chance - Armstead, USCF Corres. 1992/93] 7.Ngxf3 Nf6 [Or 7...Bd6 8.Nc4= with compensation for a pawn.] 8.Bc4 [If 8.Bd3?! e5!=/+] 8...Nd5 9.Qe2 Be7 10.0-0 0-0 11.Rae1 [The creative attacking master Janowski ventured 11.a3 Bf6 12.Rad1 a6 13.Ba2 b5 14.Nb3= and 1-0 in 40. Janowski - Corzo, Habana 1913] 11...Bf6 12.g3 [Diebert liked this idea. The alternative is 12.Bf2= ] 12...Kh8 13.Bf4 Nce7 [13...Nxf4 14.gxf4 Qd6=/+] 14.Ng5 Nxf4 15.gxf4 Bxg5 16.fxg5 Nd5 17.Qh5 h6 [17...b5 18.Bb3=] 18.Nf3 Nf4 19.Qh4 Ng6 20.Qg3 Re8 21.Kh1 Qd6 22.Re5 [22.Qh3!+/-] 22...Nf8 [22...Re7 23.gxh6+/=] 23.Qh4 [23.gxh6! g6 24.h4+-] 23...Bd7 [23...Qd8 24.Qg3+/-] 24.gxh6 Bc6

25.hxg7+ Kxg7 26.Rg1+ Ng6 27.Qh5 Bxf3+ 28.Qxf3 Kf6 29.Qg3 Qc6+ 30.Bd5 1-0

38 - Chandler 4.Nd2 b6 5.f3 Bill Chandler won a classic mating attack with the French Defence AlapinDiemer Gambit (3.Be3). Here was Chandler's step by step plan of attack: Step 1: Develop his own pieces rapidly. Step 2: Aim at targets near the opponent's king. Step 3: Rip open the defense in front of opponent's king. Step 4: Make continual mate threats. Step 5: Checkmate opponent's king. White's play was not perfect; the move 9.Ne5 seems premature. Because of this, Black had some chances that he missed. But Bill Chandler's boldness was richly rewarded. Andy Soltis pointed out that a master always looks for targets. It is only one aspect about being a chess master, but it is a very important one! Here Bill Chandler shows a touch of master. Chandler - MaMi98, ICC 5 0 Internet Chess Club, 07.04.2012 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Be3 dxe4 4.Nd2 b6 5.f3 [Of course there is nothing wrong with 5.Nxe4 but White plans a BDG-style attack with an open f-file.] 5...exf3 6.Ngxf3 Bb7 7.Bd3 Nf6 8.0-0 Be7 9.Ne5!? [Often White prefers to protect d4 with 9.c3 before launching the attack. The alternative is 9.Qe1 00 when White can choose between 10.Qh4 or 10.Bg5] 9...0-0 10.Rxf6 Bxf6 11.Qh5 h6 [11...g6-+] 12.Bxh6 gxh6? [12...Qxd4+ 13.Kh1 Qxe5-+] 13.Qxh6 Qxd4+ 14.Kh1 Be4 [The only good move for Black is 14...Qh4 but White still has a promising attack after 15.Bh7+ Kh8 16.Qxf8+ Kxh7 17.Qxf7+ Bg7 18.Qg6+ Kh8 19.Ndf3 Bxf3 20.Qe8+ Kh7 21.Nxf3 Qf4 22.Re1 e5 23.Qh5+ Kg8 24.Ng5 Qf6 25.Qe8+ Bf8 26.h4+-] 15.Bxe4 Qxe4 16.Nxe4 Bxe5 17.Ng5 Bf4 18.Qh7# Black checkmated 1-0

39 – Whitaker 4.Nd2 Nf6 5.c3 Norman Whitaker won a French Defence in much the same way that Semyon Alapin himself played 3.Be3. He chose 5.c3. At the Downeast Open in Portland, Maine during the summer of 1973 Norman Whitaker was the first International Master that I met personally. Whitaker played on the upper boards of that event. I played on the lower boards. It was one of my worst tournaments, but I learned some very important lessons. I kept no recorded games from that event. Still, I remember that I made a rare opening blunder. Ouch. The Black pieces in this French Defence were played by the notable master Wolfgang Heidenfeld. Back in 1959 Heidenfeld had played White in a Huebsch Gambit against Kirby. Here Whitaker played a persistent attack and won in the end. Whitaker (2300) - Heidenfeld (2400), Lugano 1968 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Be3 dxe4 4.Nd2 Nf6 5.c3 Nbd7 [Black sets a trap with 5...Be7 6.Qc2 Nd5! 7.Nxe4 (Not 7.Qxe4? f5 8.Qf3 f4 9.Bxf4 0-0 10.g3 g5-/+ and 0-1 in 29. Kemna - Geveke, Germany 1986) 7...f5 8.Nc5 Bxc5 9.dxc5 Nxe3 10.fxe3=] 6.Qc2 b6 [Interesting is 6...Nd5 7.Nxe4 (7.Qxe4=) 7...Nxe3 8.fxe3 Qh4+ 9.g3 Qh6 10.0-0-0!? Qxe3+ 11.Kb1=; 6...c5 suggested by Keres and Minev can be met simply by 7.Nxe4=] 7.Nxe4 [If 7.g3 Be7 8.Bg2 Nd5=] 7...Bb7 8.Bd3 [Another idea is 8.Nxf6+ Nxf6 9.Bb5+!?= and 1-0 in 33. Arnold - Gatzke, Germany 1981] 8...Be7 9.Nf3 Nxe4 10.Bxe4 Bxe4 11.Qxe4 0-0 12.h4 Nf6 13.Qc2 Qd5 14.Ng5?! [14.0-0=] 14...h6 [It looks risky, but it appears the position can be defended after 14...Qxg2! 15.0-0-0 Qd5 16.Rdg1 c5-/+ and Black is up a pawn.] 15.f3 b5 16.Ne4 e5 17.dxe5 Qxe5 18.Bd4 Qe6 19.Bxf6 Bxf6 20.0-0-0 Rfd8 21.Qb3 Rxd1+ 22.Rxd1 Bxh4 23.Qxe6 fxe6 24.Rd7 Re8 [24...Rc8 25.Kc2+/=] 25.g3 [25.Rxc7+/-] 25...Bd8 26.Kd2 Kh7 27.g4 Kg6 28.Ke2 Rg8 29.Nc5 c6 30.f4 h5 [30...Bb6 31.Nxe6 Kf6 32.Nd4+/=] 31.gxh5+ Kxh5 32.Nxe6 Bb6 33.Kf3 Kg6 34.Rd6 Kf7 35.Rxc6 Ke7 36.Nd4 Kd7 37.Rg6 b4 38.f5 bxc3

39.bxc3 Ke7 [39...Bc5 40.Ne6+-] 40.f6+ Kf7 41.Rxg7+ Rxg7 42.fxg7 Kxg7 43.Ke4 Kf7 44.Kd5 Ke7 45.Kc6 Kd8 46.Kb7 Kd7 47.Nb5 Bc7 48.Nxa7 1-0

40 – blik 4.Nd2 Nf6 5.c3 Nc6 Marcel van Kervinck was the programmer for two popular chess engines on the Internet Chess Club. The first slightly weaker one used Rookie 2.0 with the player handle “blik.” It was usually rated in the 2300s to 2400s. “blik” was not updated. It played the same few opening variations repeatedly. We played this Alapin French. Sawyer (2312) - blik (2468), ICC 5 0 Internet Chess Club, 12.01.2008 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e4 e6 3.Be3 dxe4 4.Nd2 Nf6 5.c3 Nc6 6.Bg5 [6.Qc2 Nd5 7.Nxe4 f5 8.Bg5 Qd7 9.Ng3=] 6...h6 7.Bxf6 Qxf6 8.Nxe4 Qg6 9.Ng3 e5 10.d5 Ne7 11.Nf3 c6 12.dxc6 Nxc6 13.Bd3 Qe6 14.0-0 g6 15.Bc2 Bg7 16.Re1 0-0 17.Qe2 Rd8 18.Bb3 Qe7 19.Rad1 Be6 20.Rxd8+ Rxd8 21.Rd1 [21.h4=] 21...Bxb3 22.axb3 Rxd1+ 23.Qxd1 f5 24.Ne2 Qd8 25.Qxd8+ Nxd8 26.Nd2 Nf7 27.Nc4 a6 28.Nb6 Nd6 29.Nc4 Nxc4 30.bxc4 a5 31.Kf1 a4 32.Nc1 e4 33.Ne2 Be5 34.Nd4 Bxh2 [34...Kf7=/+] 35.g3 f4 [35...Kf7 36.Kg2+/=] 36.Kg2 Bxg3 37.fxg3 f3+ 38.Kf2 b6 [38...Kf7 39.c5+-] 39.b4? [39.Nb5!+-] 39...a3? [39...Kf7-/+] 40.Nc2 a2 [40...Kf7 41.Nxa3+-] 41.c5 bxc5 42.b5 e3+ 43.Kxe3 a1Q 44.Nxa1 1-0

41 – Rookie 5.c3 Nc6 6.Bg5 The chess engine “Rookie” used the program Rookie 3.x. I found it played the same variations as “blik”, but Rookie played more and better opening lines. Its rating tended to be in the 2400s to 2500s. “Rookie” was much harder to beat than “blik”. Both have now been removed from ICC. I played this Alapin-French the day before the “blik” game above. Rookie played the move 11...Qb6. Sawyer (2240) - Rookie (2486), ICC 5 0 Internet Chess Club, 11.01.2008 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e4 e6 3.Be3 dxe4 4.Nd2 Nf6 5.c3 Nc6 6.Bg5 h6 7.Bxf6 Qxf6 8.Nxe4 Qg6 9.Ng3 e5 10.d5 Ne7 11.Nf3 Qb6 12.Nxe5 Qxb2 13.Ne4 Nxd5 14.Rb1 Nxc3 15.Rxb2 Nxd1 16.Kxd1 Bf5 17.Bd3 0-0-0 [17...f6 18.Ng3+/-] 18.Ke2 [18.Kc2!+-] 18...Re8 19.Nxf7 Ba3 20.Rb3 Bxe4 21.Bxe4 Rxe4+ 22.Kf3 Rhe8 23.Rxa3 R4e7 24.Nxh6 gxh6 25.Re3 Rxe3+ 26.fxe3 c5 27.g4 c4 28.h4 Rf8+ 29.Ke2 Rg8 30.Rg1 b5 31.g5 Rg6

[31...hxg5 32.hxg5 Kd7=] 32.h5 Re6 33.g6 Re8 34.Rf1 Kb7 [34...Kd7 35.Rf7+ Ke6 36.Rxa7+/-] 35.Rf7+ Ka6 [35...Kc6 36.Rh7+-] 36.Rh7 c3 [36...Rg8 37.Rxh6+-] 37.Rxh6 Ka5 38.g7 Rc8 39.Kd1 Rg8 40.Rg6 Rd8+ 41.Kc1 b4 42.g8Q 1-0

42 – Bond 5.f3 Nc6 6.c3 exf3 Jocelyn Bond sent this on a French Diemer-Alapin game: “Now is a more serious BDG game!!! “Hello Tim, I just began this summer event, the Jonquiere club championship in Quebec province in Canada. “In the second of twelve rounds (2 games a week against the same player) each 6 Wednesday night game in June and July months) I won as White with a big attack in an Alapin Diemer French in just 21 moves. It's an interesting game. “I surprised my opponent {Serge Tremblay} who laughed at me when I played the first moves of the game, but less some moves later (he he). “The control time is 30 minutes to do mate in this event. Actually I lead in the event 2 wins in a row! Thanks for the publication!” I enjoy publishing good games from my readers. Jocelyn Bond of Canada sent me many games. Bond (1957) - Tremblay (1500), Jonquiere club championship (2), 27.06.2012 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e4 e6 3.Be3 dxe4 4.f3 [4.Nd2 is the alternative 4...Nf6 5.f3 etc.] 4...Nf6 5.Nd2 Nc6 [5...c5!? 6.dxc5 Qc7 is possible ] 6.c3 exf3 7.Ngxf3 Bd6 [7...Nd5!? Or 7...Be7] 8.Bd3 h6 (?!) 9.0–0 a6?! 10.Qe2 0–0 11.Ne4 [11.Nc4] 11...Re8?? [Hum, not that; 11...Nd5!? Deep Fritz.] 12.Nxf6+! (wins) 12…Qxf6? [12...gxf6 is unappetizing] 13.Ne5 Qh4 [or 13...Bxe5 14.Rxf6 Bxf6+-] 14.Rf4 Qd8 [14...Qg5 15.Nxf7] 15.Nxf7 Qd7 [15...Bxf4 16.Nxd8 +-] 16.Nxd6 [a difficult choice to do: 16.Nxh6 was a big temptation but 16..gh 17.Qg4 and now I saw 17...Qg7 so I played the risk zero move 16.Nxd6] 16...cxd6 17.Qh5 e5? 18.Bc4+ d5 19.Bxd5+! [Deviation: e8] 19...Qxd5? [19...Re6 20.Bxe6+ Qxe6+ covering e8 square] 20.Qxe8+ Kh7 21.Rf8! [the mate will come] 1–0. [Notes by Jocelyn Bond and Deep Fritz (30 minutes to do mate)]

43 – Heisman 5.f3 c5 6.c3 It is always a nice trophy win to take a game from a master, even if it is only in blitz or in a simultaneous exhibition. Here I beat the renowned chess teacher Daniel Heisman. In his teaching, Dan mentions the value of playing tricky openings. Heisman cites the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit as a good option for the White pieces. My original BDG Keybook Introduction (from 1992) began with: “Welcome to the exciting and entertaining world of the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit! This is an opening system where White wins. He wins often and he wins quickly. USCF Master Dan Heisman once told me of a statistical analysis of chess openings that gave the BDG the top scoring percentage 85% for White.” Dan Heisman referenced the 1950s Blue Book of chess. Years later I purchased a copy. In the 1950s a large number of known BDGs were the best games of Diemer. Those stats of published games were one sided. Still it is fun to be number one on the list. This blitz game shows how defending an Alapin-Diemer attack can easily get out of hand. Tricky openings are dangerous for the defender. White attacked the king. Black dropped the queen! Sawyer (1981) - Heisman (2250), Hatboro, PA 1989 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.f3 d5 3.e4 e6 [Dan chooses to go into a French. 3...dxe4 4.Nc3 =BDG] 4.Be3!? [4.e5= is objectively the strongest move.] 4...dxe4 [We now have an Alapin French, also known as the Alapin-Diemer.] 5.Nd2 [The main line to this position is 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Be3 dxe4 4.Nd2 Nf6 5.f3.] 5...c5 6.c3 cxd4 7.cxd4 Nc6 8.Bb5 [White has to develop the kingside pieces and Bd3 does not work at the moment.] 8...exf3 9.Ngxf3 Be7 10.Bg5 0-0 11.0-0 a6 12.Bd3 [Objectively Black must be better here. White wasted two tempi to get his bishops at the great squares Bg5 and Bd3. Possibly the d4 pawn can be safely taken, but this is a blitz game. Black can chose to avoid undo risk a few seconds ago on move 3.] 12...Qc7?! 13.Rc1 [White is fully developed.] 13...Nd5?! 14.Qe1!? [Down a pawn, White tries to make

something happen by heading toward h4.] 14...Bd7?? [14...f6!? 15.Qe4 f5 16.Qh4 unclear] 15.Qh4+- Nf6? 16.Ne5!? h6 17.Bxf6 Bxf6 18.Rxf6 Qd6 19.Ndf3!? Ne7? 20.Rxh6 gxh6 21.Qxh6 Nf5 22.Bxf5 exf5 23.Qxd6 [Whoops.] 1-0

44 – Sawyer 5.f3 b6 6.fxe4 In 1995 I wrote a book on the Alapin Diemer Gambit which was called the “Alapin French: Tactics for White”. It is a fun gambit for those who take chess as a game and are not too serious. The French Defence is an opening with well-known time tested methods of development. After 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 (in whatever move order), White has good knight moves such as 3.Nc3 and 3.Nd2. There are reasonable pawn moves like 3.e5 and 3.exd5. The bishop moves receive little comment in theory. My friend Ray Haines likes the solid 3.Bd3 and Alapin played the gambit line 3.Be3!? Later Emil J. Diemer revived the idea of 3.Be3!? There is no big difference for me. My own personal performance rating is about the same, no matter which third move I choose. Alapin French is basically a slower Blackmar-Diemer Gambit. If your opponent does not counter sharply, then White is blessed with a great game. In this game Tiger of Chess as Black ultimately declines the gambit by 5...b6. So I did a dangerous thing. I grabbed a tiger by the tail. This time I survived and won. In 2014 I intentionally goofed off all year playing a lot of fast blitz games in speculative lines vs lower rated players. Often I won. Then at the end of the year my life changed with the death of my co-worker friend Ronnie Taylor. In 2015 there was little time for chess. Pressure at work became serious. My health deteriorated. Finally I chose to retire. By 2016 my chess life was fun again! Sawyer - TIGEROFCHESS (1682), ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 14.09.2014 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e4 e6 3.Be3 dxe4 4.Nd2 Nf6 5.f3 b6?! [A critical line is 5...Nd5 6.Qe2 Nc6 7.c3 exf3 8.Ngxf3 Be7=/+] 6.fxe4 Bb7 7.Bd3 Be7 8.Ngf3 Nbd7 9.0-0 c5 10.e5 Ng8? [10...Nd5=] 11.c3 a6 12.Qe2 b5 13.Be4 Qc7 14.Bxb7 Qxb7 15.Ng5 Nh6 [15...cxd4 16.Nxf7 dxe3

17.Nb3+/-] 16.Nge4 [The best way to continue is 16.Qh5!+-] 16...c4? [Black missed the good move 16...Nf5! 17.Bg5!+/= when White is only a little better.] 17.Bxh6 gxh6 18.Qf3 0-0-0 19.Qxf7 Bg5? 20.Nd6+ Black resigns 1-0

45 – Rookmagier 5.f3 b6 6.fxe4 The Alapin-Diemer French Defence is both exciting and stupid, both rewarding and ugly. Boldness is required from both sides. White sacrifices a pawn in what resembles the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit down a tempo. But with the slightest slip in unfamiliar territory, White has a good or great game. The best way for Black to get an advantage is to accept the gambit on move three and counter-attack quickly. Naturally aggressive players prefer the Sicilian or Open Game, a small point in White's favor with the Alapin. In a blitz game, there is little time for perfect play, especially in gambits. Here in a three minute game vs "Rookmagier", we see a French Defence Alapin 5.f3 where Black allows White to regain his gambit pawn. In the brief rough and tumble, the evaluations moved back and forth between equality and an advantage for Black. Both of us missed chances on the board, but to his credit "Rookmagier" played faster than I did. He was ahead on the clock when we agreed to a draw by repetition after move 40. Sawyer (2021) - Rookmagier (1837), ICC 3 0 u Internet Chess Club, 21.07.2013 begins 1.d4 e6 2.e4 d5 3.Be3 dxe4 4.Nd2 Nf6 5.f3 b6 [The main line is 5...exf3 6.Ngxf3 Be7 7.Bd3 0-0 8.0-0 =] 6.fxe4 Bb7 7.Bd3 Be7 8.Ngf3 0-0 9.0-0 Nbd7 10.Bg5 [10.Qe2=] 10...c5 11.e5? [11.Qe1=] 11...Nd5 [11...Ng4!=/+] 12.Bxe7 Qxe7 13.Qe2 cxd4 [13...Nf4=/+] 14.Ne4 [14.Qe4] 14...Nc5 [14...Nf4-/+] 15.Nxc5? [Chances are equal after 15.Nxd4! Rad8 16.c3 Nxd3 17.Qxd3=] 15...bxc5 16.Qe4 g6 17.h4 Nb4 [I expected 17...Ne3-+] 18.Qg4? [18.Qf4 Bxf3 19.Rxf3 Nd5-/+] 18...Nxd3 [18...c4!-+] 19.cxd3 Bxf3 20.Rxf3 f5 21.exf6 Rxf6 22.Rh3 Raf8 23.Re1 [After I moved I noticed I was in trouble on the clock: 1:36-2:11] 23...Qd6 24.h5 e5 25.hxg6 Rxg6 26.Qh5 Qe7 27.Qxe5 Qf7 28.Kh2 Qf2 29.Qd5+ Rf7 30.Re8+ Kg7 31.Re6 Qf4+ 32.Kg1 Qf2+ 33.Kh2 Rxe6 34.Qxe6 Qf4+ 35.Rg3+ Kh8 36.Qc8+ Rf8 37.Qxc5 [37.Qe6=] 37...Qh4+ [37...Rg8!-+ picks off the rook.] 38.Rh3 [If 38.Kg1!+/- White stands better on the board but behind on the clock.] 38...Qf4+ 39.Rg3 [Another drawing line is

39.Kg1 Qf1+ 40.Kh2=] 39...Qh4+?! 40.Rh3?! Qf4+ [Clocks: 0:23-0.37. Game drawn by mutual agreement] 1/2-1/2

46 – Debaets 5.f3 Nd5 6.Qe2 Thinkers' Press published my book in 1995 on the Alapin French 3.Be3!? This is also called the Alapin-Diemer Gambit. Usually I played 3.Nc3, but I had a lot of success with 3.Be3. This was especially true in the pre-Fritz chess engine computer days. After 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Be3!? dxe4, Black has accepted a gambit pawn. White has four typical methods of play: 4.c3; 4.f3; 4.Nc3/5.f3 and main line 4.Nd2/5.f3 (see our game below). The full acceptance is 4.Nd2 Nf6 5.f3 exf3 6.Ngf3 and now Be7/Be7/Nbd7 7.Bd3/8.0-0 or 8.Bg5 intending a possible 0-0-0. For those who do not wish to accept the gambit, 3.Be3 Nf6 4.e5 Nfd7 with typical French Defence play. I made it to the mountain top with a master 2200 rating following 26 postal chess wins in a row. The USCF sent me a certificate as a USCF Postal Master. Then I descended. My game against Andy Debaets (rated 1844) raised my postal rating back up to 2195. I was able to climb the mountain again and reach 2200. It might be easy for some, but it was hard for me to get there. Sawyer - Debaets, corr USCF 88N300, 16.04.1990 begins 1.d4 e6 2.e4 d5 3.Be3 dxe4 4.Nd2 Nf6 5.f3 Nd5 6.Qe2 c5 7.dxc5 Qa5 [Black might consider 7...exf3 8.Ngxf3 Nd7 9.Ne4! Qc7 10.Bd4+=; The Bishop could be captured immediately 7...Nxe3 8.Qxe3 Qa5 9.0-0-0!?] 8.c3 Nxe3 9.Qxe3 Bxc5 10.Qxe4 Qc7 [Weaker is 10...Bxg1? 11.Rxg1 Qb6 12.0-0-0 Nd7 13.Be2 Nf6 14.Qh4 Qa5 15.Nc4 Qxa2 16.Nd6+ Kf8 17.Qb4 a5 18.Qc5 Nd7 19.Nxc8+ Nxc5 20.Rd8# 1-0. Diebert - Bath, Columbus 1983] 11.0-0-0 Nc6 [After a long struggle White obtained a winning advantage for the endgame:] 12.Bd3 f5 13.Qh4 0-0 14.Ne2 Ne5 15.Bc2 b5 16.Kb1 Ng6 17.Qe1 e5 18.Nb3 Be7 19.g3 a5 20.f4 Bb7 21.Rf1 a4 22.Nbc1 Be4 [22...a3!-/+] 23.fxe5 Bxc2+ 24.Kxc2 a3 25.b3 Bc5 26.Nd3 Nxe5 27.Nxc5 Qxc5 28.Nf4 Ng4 29.Ne6 Ne3+ 30.Kc1 Qb6 31.Nxf8 Rxf8 32.Qf2 Qh6 33.Qd2 Nxf1 [33...Qb6=] 34.Qxh6 gxh6 35.Rxf1 Re8 36.Rf2 [36.Kd2!+/-] 36...Kg7 37.b4 Kg6 38.Kc2 Kg5 39.Kb3 Re3 40.Rc2 [40.Rd2+/-] 40...h5 41.Kxa3 h4 42.Kb3 hxg3 43.hxg3 Rxg3? [43...Rg4=] 44.a4 bxa4+

45.Kxa4 f4 46.b5 f3 47.b6 Kh4 48.b7 Rg8 49.Ka5 Kg3 50.c4 f2 51.Rxf2 Kxf2 52.c5 h5 53.c6 h4 54.c7 h3 55.b8Q Rxb8 56.cxb8Q Kg2 57.Qb2+ 10

47 – Sawyer 5.f3 Nd5 6.Qe2 Be7 King safety is the top priority in chess since losing the king loses the game. You must keep your own king safe and make your opponent’s king as unsafe as possible. Castling is wise because it removes the king from the center where armies congregate. In my long game vs Todd Van Valkenburg from the 1989 USCF Golden Knights Postal Chess Tournament, we transposed into a French Defence. After 3.Be3 dxe4 4.Nd2 Nf6 5.f3, we were in the Alapin-Diemer Gambit where Black has two principle options: take on f3 with 5...exf3 or first, as was played below, attack the hanging Be3 with 5...Nd5. Van Valkenburg chose 6...Be7!? This allowed me to regain my gambit pawn with 7.fxe4. When he did not castle a few moves later, Black's position became very difficult to play. Black dropped a piece which disappeared on move 22 and his king was checkmated 22 moves later. Sawyer - Van Valkenburg, corr USCF 1991 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e4 e6 3.Be3 dxe4 4.Nd2 Nf6 5.f3 Nd5 [The Alapin-Diemer Gambit Accepted usually continues 5...exf3 6.Ngxf3 Be7 7.Bd3 0-0 8.0-0] 6.Qe2 Be7!? [6...Nxe3 7.Qxe3 exf3 8.Ngxf3=] 7.fxe4 Nxe3 8.Qxe3 Bg5 9.Qd3 Bxd2+ 10.Kxd2 Nc6 [Castling here with 10...0-0= would have prevented some of the troubles that hounded Black later.] 11.Nf3 Nb4?! 12.Qb5+ Nc6 13.c3 a6 14.Qh5 g6 [14...0-0 15.Bd3+/=] 15.Qh6 e5 16.Qg7 Ke7? [Black has to try 16...Rf8 17.Nxe5 Qg5+ 18.Kc2 Nxe5 19.Qxe5+ Qxe5 20.dxe5 Ke7= when White's extra double e-pawn is not all that helpful.] 17.Nxe5 Nxe5 18.Qxe5+ Be6 [This drops a full piece in a very difficult position. After this everything is downhill for Black. 18...Kd7 19.Kc2 Rf8 20.Bd3+-] 19.d5 Rg8 20.Kc2 Qd6 21.Qxd6+ cxd6 22.dxe6 fxe6 23.Be2 b5 24.Rad1 Rad8 25.Rhf1 h5 26.Rf2 Rgf8 27.Rxf8 Rxf8 28.Rf1 Rxf1 29.Bxf1 h4 30.a4 bxa4 31.Bxa6 g5 32.Bb5 d5 33.exd5 exd5 34.Bxa4 Kf6 35.b4 g4 36.b5

Kf5 37.b6 Kf4 38.b7 Ke3 39.b8Q Kf2 40.Bd7 Kxg2 41.Bxg4 h3 42.Qg3+ Kf1 43.Bf5 d4 44.Bd3# 1-0

48 – Muir 5.f3 Nd5 6.Qe2 exf3 Ted Bullockus played the Alapin-Diemer variation of the French Defence (1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Be3!?). My own book on the Alapin French was published in 1995 by Thinkers' Press (Bob Long & his Chessco Company). Unfortunately for Ted Bullockus, my book was published just before Ken Smith of Chess Digest was planning to publish a Bullockus book on the same gambit. When my book came out, Ken Smith decided there was not enough market for two books on this gambit. Smith pulled the plug on the Bullockus project. Very sad. I am sure Ted's book would have been excellent. Fortunately this is no longer a problem. The old book stores had limited shelf space. Most books were available for one to three months. If they did not sell, they pulled them from the shelves. They did not return them. Today online space is unlimited. Books can sell forever, even if only one copy at a time. In this game Bob Muir avoids the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit with the French Defence. In this case I responded with the Alapin-Diemer Gambit 3.Be3 dxe4 4.Nd2 Nf6 5.f3. My old buddy Bob Muir went after my unprotected Be3 with 5...Nd5. This is a good alternative to the main line 5...exf3. We castled opposite sides. Normally the proper strategy in such situations is to push pawns toward the opponent's king. This worked wonders for me. I was given a present, a marvelous gift: the checkmate of his king by my pawn. Sawyer (2010) - Muir (1800), Williamsport, PA 01.1998 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e4 e6 3.Be3 dxe4 4.Nd2 Nf6 5.f3 [Alapin used to play 5.c3!?] 5...Nd5 [This is a good alternative to the main line, which runs 5...exf3 6.Ngxf3 Be7 7.Bd3 0-0 8.0-0] 6.Qe2 exf3 7.Ngxf3 Bd6 8.Ne4 0-0 9.0-0-0 Qe7 10.c4 Nf4 11.Qf2 Ng6 12.c5 Bf4 13.h4 c6 14.h5 Bxe3+ 15.Qxe3 Nh8

16.Bd3 Nd7 [16...f6 17.Nd6+/-] 17.g4 e5 18.Neg5 Nf6 19.Qxe5 Qd7 20.Qxf6 gxf6 [Trying to get the knight out of the corner also loses. 20...Ng6 21.Nxh7 gxf6 22.Nxf6+ Kg7 23.Nxd7 Bxd7 24.hxg6 fxg6 25.Ne5+-] 21.Bxh7+ Kg7 22.h6# 1-0

49 – Webster 5.f3 Nd5 6.Qe2 Nxe3 Peter Webster won a French Defence in the 3.Be3 Alapin Diemer Gambit. In the 1970s and 1980s Peter was one of Wisconsin's strongest masters. Webster is a long time Blackmar-Diemer Gambit player. Peter also played the Alapin Gambit, as well as the BDG, in a slightly different way than many gambiteers, i.e. he often castled on the queenside. Although his variations appear less popular, remember Peter Webster played many games before there was any book knowledge available. And, there is the wisdom of more than twenty years in Webster's selections. Because of Peter Webster's geographical location in small town Wisconsin, he doubtless had played the same lines against the same players year after year. Therefore, he can rarely benefit from the "surprise" factor of his gambits. Thus, Peter Webster played at a disadvantage which may have kept his master rating somewhat lower than it could otherwise have been. Here Webster’s opponent was T. Moore. The players castled on opposite sides. Then they commenced the race to attack their opponent's King. White won in fine fashion. Webster - Moore, Janesville, WI 1979 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e4 e6 3.Be3 dxe4 4.Nd2 Nf6 5.f3 Nd5 6.Qe2 Nxe3 7.Qxe3 exf3 8.Ngxf3 Be7 9.Bd3 Nd7 10.0-0-0 Nf6 11.Ne5 0-0 [Another try is 11...Nd5 12.Qf3 0-0 13.Rhf1 f5 with chances for both sides in Bullockus - Velasco, American Open 1976] 12.Rhf1 c5 13.dxc5 Qd5 [Black is still in the game with 13...Qa5=] 14.Nb3 Qxg2 15.Rg1 Nd5 16.Qd4 [White has many ways to win. Another is 16.Bxh7+! Kh8 17.Rxd5+-] 16...Qh3?! [16...Qxh2 17.Rxg7+!+-] 17.Rxg7+ Kxg7 18.Rg1+ Kh6 19.Ng4+ Kh5 20.Qg7 Bg5+ 21.Kb1 h6 22.Qxf8 [22.Nxh6!+- leads to mate in a few moves.] 22...f5 23.Nxh6 Qe3 24.Rxg5+ [Or 24.Be2+ Qxe2 25.Nf7+-] 24...Qxg5 25.Be2+ Kg6 26.Nf7 Qe7 [If

26...Qg1+ 27.Nc1 Qxh2 28.Qg8+ Kf6 29.Nd6+-] 27.Qg8+ Kf6 28.Qh8+ 10

3.Be3 dxe4 4.Nd2 Nf6 5.f3 exf3 In this section Black fully accepts the Alapin-Diemer Gambit. Play resembles a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit.

50 – Finiseur 6.Ngxf3 b6 7.Bd3 Good gambits have typical combinations. Such moves flow from repeatable and recognizable patterns. This one is from a French Defence in the AlapinDiemer Gambit. The same idea I used many times in the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit, Euwe Variation. The Alapin line costs White one tempo for the Bc1-e3-g5 moves. However, if Black does not hit back hard and fast, the tempo does not matter much. My opponent was rated below me and this was a 3 0 blitz game. Thus everything was played very quickly. The whole game was probably completed in one minute. Black’s moves 6...b6 and 7...Bb7 were fine logical developing moves. However the only impact these moves had on this game was to cost Black two tempi in the defense of the kingside. The move ...h6 made an easy target. Once stripped naked of his defenses, the Black king had nowhere to escape. He tried to hide behind the White bishop, but checkmate followed. Sawyer - Finiseur, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 01.05.2012 begins 1.d4 e6 2.e4 d5 3.Be3!? dxe4 4.Nd2 Nf6 5.f3 exf3 6.Ngxf3 b6 [There are many playable 6th move options. The only line at this point where Black has a winning record is 6...Nbd7 7.Bd3 c5 and even here White has some compensation.] 7.Bd3 Bb7 8.0-0 Be7 9.Bg5 Nbd7 10.Qe1 0-0 11.Qh4 [When I reach this position in a blitz game, I feel my chances of success are very high.] 11...h6 [11...Re8 is forced. 12.Ne5 Nxe5 13.dxe5 Qd5 14.Nf3 Bc5+ 15.Kh1 Ne4 16.Bh6! gxh6 17.Rae1 Qd8 18.Qg4+ Kh8 19.Bxe4 Rg8

20.Qf4=] 12.Bxh6 gxh6 13.Qxh6 Re8 [13...Nc5 14.dxc5 Qd5 15.Nb3 Rad8 16.Rae1+/-] 14.Ng5 Bf8 15.Bh7+ Kh8 16.Nxf7# Black is checkmated 1-0

51 – Katz 6.Ngxf3 Be7 7.Bd3 Jeremy Katz of Brooklyn, New York was rated 2256 in USCF postal at the time of this game. Suffice it to say that Katz was a very good postal chess player. I myself was often listed among the top APCT players years ago. I played Board 4 for US team in the 10th World Correspondence Chess Olympiad 1982-84, was a USCF Postal Master off and on in 1990, and won an ICCF Master Class section 1995-97. I tend to play chess more by instinct and pattern recognition than by analysis. Of course, often in my correspondence play, like in the game below, I had to make very specific calculations. Against the French Defence, White can choose from several good third moves. Below is a beautiful little game played in BDG style. Some come to the BDG after years of playing against the French after 1.e4 and feel comfortable with whatever they have been playing. I played all four common responses, 3.Nc3, 3.Nd2, 3.e5 and 3.exd5, as well as the offbeat and risky 3.Be3!? Alapin French. My performance with 3.Be3 had been slightly higher. Sawyer (1993) - Katz (2256), corr USCF 89NS61, 28.07.1991 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e4 e6 [We reached a very normal and popular French Defence.] 3.Be3 dxe4 [Consider the psychology at work. Most French Defense players did not capture 3...dxe4 in other lines. They provoked the pawn to advance to e5. This e-pawn is just hanging there on e4. If Black wants to refute this gambit, he must make the capture now. Anything else gives White at least equality, and usually the better position with equal material.] 4.Nd2 Nf6 5.f3 exf3 6.Ngxf3 Be7 7.Bd3 b6 8.0-0 Bb7 9.Bg5 [No longer needed on e3, the Bishop redeploys to g5 where it threatens to capture on f6 leaving h7 less defended.] 9...0-0 10.Qe1 [This prepares Qh4 with combinations on h7 and f6.] 10...c5 11.Qh4 [White has compensation for the pawn and practical chances.] 11...h6 [Black challenges White to attack or slink away.] 12.Bxh6 [When Black combines kingside castling with a pawn on h6, I capture that pawn and rip open the protection of Black's king.] 12...gxh6 13.Qxh6 Qd5 14.g4! [Black missed this winning pawn advance which takes h5 away from

the Black Queen and threatens to dislodge the Knight on f6.] 14...cxd4 15.g5 Nbd7 16.gxf6 Nxf6 17.Kh1 Qh5 18.Rg1+ 1-0

52 – Sawyer 6.Ngxf3 b6 7.Bd3 In this French Defence Alapin-Diemer 5.f3 exf3 my White pieces reach their ideal squares for a powerful kingside mating attack. Such positions have been determined from hundreds of games in the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit Euwe. After move 14 here are my pieces: My queen is Qh4 attacking h7 and f6. My bishops are on Bd3 attacking h7 and Bg5 attacking f6. My knights are on Nd2 covering e4 and f3 while my knight on Nf3 eyes g5 or e5. My rooks are on Rf1 aiming at f6 and Rd1 adds extra protection for my knight, bishop and d-pawn. Often in the French Alapin, reaching these hoped for squares is difficult because White is one or two tempi behind the BDG. Here Black was too slow to fight back. I threatened to win the Exchange with 16.Bxh7+. Black decided to redeploy his d7-knight, forgetting its important need to protect f6. The Nf6 falls and that's all she wrote. Sawyer - xsf, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 18.03.2013 begins 1.d4 e6 2.e4 d5 3.Be3 dxe4 4.Nd2 Nf6 5.f3 [The f3 gambit was Diemer's approach, while 5.c3 with the idea of Qc2 was Alapin's idea.] 5...exf3 [5...Nd5 6.Qe2 Nc6=/+] 6.Ngxf3 b6 7.Bd3 Bb7 8.0-0 Be7 9.Qe1 Nbd7 10.c3 c5 11.Rd1 Qc7 [My pieces lean toward the kingside. When Black sets up to castle queenside, I throw in my next move to make him think I can easily attack him if he castles long. Probably he should just go after my dark squared bishop.] 12.a4 0-0 [12...Ng4-/+] 13.Bg5 Rad8 14.Qh4 cxd4 15.cxd4 Nb8? [Retreating the knight drops a piece. The threat was 16.Bxh7+ Nxh7 17.Bxe7 winning the Exchange. In interesting try would be 15...h5 when White might try 16.Nc4 or 16.Ne4] 16.Bxf6 Black resigns 1-0

53 – Sawyer 6.Ngxf3 Bd6 7.Bd3 Alapin-Diemer may not be sound, but it can be very dangerous for Black. Bill Wall's 500 French Miniatures book gave 16 games (and others that would transpose); White scored 16-0. In 1995 my book on the variation called the "Alapin French, Tactics for White" was published. In the introduction to that book I wrote: "Welcome to the King's Gambit of the French Defense! White gets quick slashing attacks that often win in 20 moves. John Watson cited my book in "Play the French" (1996 edition). Watson gave about half of a page to the Alapin with variations that go beyond move eight in only a few cases. Eric Schiller recommended the Alapin as the gambit to play vs the French Defense in his book "Gambit Opening Repertoire For White". Here I faced a French Defence and chose the Alapin-Diemer Gambit. Years ago I played it all the time. I still wheel it out once in a while since my performance rating with 3.Be3!? had been higher than any other variation after the position reached by 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5. I refer to anything after 3.Be3 as the Alapin French. When White follows 3.Be3 with f3 on moves 4 or 5, it is an Alapin Diemer Gambit. Emil Jozef Diemer played 3.Be3 vs the French Defence many times with some impressive wins. The gambit can be declined with 3...Nf6, but White gets a good game after 4.e5! Critical is 3...dxe4. White can play 4.f3 or 4.Nc3, but the main line is 4.Nd2 Nf6 5.f3. Alapin's original idea was 5.c3 and 6.Qc2. With Diemer's continuation of 5.f3, the pawn on e4 is double attacked. More often than not, Black plays 5...exf3 6.Ngxf3. Sawyer - superdave99, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 07.07.2012 begins 1.d4 e6 2.e4 d5 3.Be3 dxe4 4.Nd2 Nf6 5.f3 exf3 6.Ngxf3 Bd6 7.Bd3 0-0 8.0-0 Nbd7 9.Bg5 c5 10.Qe1 cxd4 11.Qh4 h6 12.Bxh6 gxh6 13.Qxh6 Qa5

14.Ng5 [14.Nc4 Qh5 15.Qxh5 Nxh5 16.Nxd6+-] 14...Qe5 15.Ndf3 [15.g3+-] 15...Qe3+ 16.Kh1 Bf4 17.Rae1 Bxg5 18.Nxg5 Qxg5 19.Qxg5+ Kh8 20.Qh6+ Kg8 [At this point that clocks read 2:00 - 0:55. Here I slowed way down to consider which checkmate is the fastest. Seeing that I was now thinking, Black resigned.] 1-0

54 – Chandler 6.Ngxf3 Be7 7.c3 How do you beat an expert in a chess tournament? What can you do if you are rated below 2000 while your opponent is rated above 2000? Higher rateds win 10 to 1. Four scenario options threaten the expert. Let’s each one in turn. First, you develop safely and try to stay alive until you sneak in and checkmate the expert. Unlikely. Second, you develop safely and outplay the expert tactically. You win material or an endgame. Possible. Third, you develop aggressively and threaten the king. You force checkmate or die. You are dangerous. Fourth, you develop aggressively and attack several weak points with full energy. Your threats succeed. This fourth option works best if you are wellprepared. William Chandler played Justin Alter in the Colorado Open 2016 with a sharp Alapin-Diemer Gambit 3.Be3. Chandler (1689) - Alter (2027), Colorado Open (1), 03.09.2016 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Be3!? dxe4 4.Nd2 Nf6 5.f3 exf3 6.Ngxf3 Be7 7.Bd3 Nd5 [White dreams of 7...0-0 8.0-0 Nbd7 9.Qe1 b6 10.Qh4 Bb7 11.Bg5 h6 12.Bxh6 gxh6 13.Qxh6 Re8 14.Ng5 Nf8 15.Rxf6 Qxd4+ 16.Kh1 Bxf6 17.Bh7+ Kh8 18.Nxf7#] 8.Qe2 Nxe3 9.Qxe3 Nd7 10.c3 [10.0-0.] 10...c5 11.0-0 cxd4 12.Nxd4 [12.cxd4 0-0 13.Nc4 Nf6 14.Nce5 Nd5 15.Qe4 forces Black to deal with the threat of mate in one.] 12...e5!? 13.Qf3 [13.Nc4!=] 13...Nf6 14.Bb5+? [Chandler suggested 14.Nf5!?] 14...Kf8! 15.g4 exd4 16.g5 dxc3 17.gxf6 Bxf6 18.Ne4 Qb6+ 19.Kh1 Qxb5 20.Nxf6 gxf6 21.Qxc3 Qc6+ 22.Qxc6 bxc6 23.Rxf6 Be6 24.Re1 Ke7 25.Rf4 Rhg8 26.h4 Rg7 27.Rg1 Rxg1+ 28.Kxg1 Bxa2 [Chandler noted that "resignation came a few moves later."] 0-1

55 – Renders 6.Ngxf3 Be7 7.c3 Mart Renders sent me an e-mail with the following game: "Dear Mr. Sawyer, "As I am a novice in the Alapin French and you are an expert, I would like to ask you where in this game I could have improved. I do not seem to get a winning attack launched and I am wondering if I should have employed a different set up. Kind regards, Mart Renders" Time control was 45 45. Dan Heisman advises players to use the time and think. White started with 45 minutes and ended with 46, so he could have spent twice as much thinking time as he did. The opening was very well played in the French Defence Alapin 5.f3 exf3 variation. Black chose the solid line 6.Ngxf3 Be7 after which I begin my comments. The natural move 10...Nc6 gave White the time for a promising attack. Renders (1761) - NimzoMal (1673), ICC 45 45 Internet Chess Club, 21.02.2013 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Be3 dxe4 4.Nd2 Nf6 5.f3 exf3 6.Ngxf3 Be7 7.c3 [Do not defend d4 until it is under more pressure. White must activate his pieces quickly. Therefore, most common here is 7.Bd3 0-0 8.0-0 with a slight lead in development and some open lines toward the Black king.] 7...0-0 8.Bd3 Bd7 9.0-0 h6 10.Qe1 [An alternative set-up is to play 10.Qe2 with ideas of Rae1 and Ndc4-e5.] 10...Nc6 11.Qg3 [This queen sortie leads to somewhat forcing play and possible draws by repetition. It is not bad, but I like 11.Nc4 which brings another piece to bear on e5 and giving the Be3 a retreat square on d2 if needed, such as after 11...Nd5 12.Bd2= when White has good attacking chances for the pawn.] 11...Bd6 12.Ne5 Bxe5 13.dxe5 Nh5 14.Qh3 Nxe5 15.Bc2 Nf6 16.Bxh6 gxh6 17.Qxh6 Ng6 18.Rad1? [Developing the rook here is logical but tactically dangerous. Better is 18.Nf3 Nh7 (or 18...Ng4 19.Qh5 Nf6 20.Qh6 repeating moves) 19.h4 Qf6 20.h5 Qf4 21.Qxf4 Nxf4 22.Ne5=] 18...Qe7 [Black could have made things difficult for White with 18...Ng4! 19.Qh5 Qh4 20.Bxg6 Qxh5 21.Bxh5 Ne3-+ winning the Exchange.] 19.Nf3 Rfd8 20.Ng5 Be8 21.Rde1 Qf8 [After this the game is even. Black could have

played for some advantage with 21...Rd5!-/+] 22.Qxf8+ Nxf8 23.Rxf6 Rd2 24.Rf2 [Clocks: 46:15-35:37 Game drawn by mutual agreement] 1/2-1/2

56 – Sawyer 6.Ngxf3 Be7 7.Bd3 I won against the French Defence with the Alapin-Diemer Gambit 3.Be3 by defeating a player rated 2049 in a blitz game. Black had a fine position for the first dozen moves, but things drifted in my favor as we simultaneously attacked the kingside, albeit imperfectly. Sawyer - Guest (2049), Playchess, 03.04.2018 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e4 e6 3.Be3 dxe4 4.Nd2 Nf6 5.f3 exf3 6.Ngxf3 Be7 7.Bd3 b6 8.0-0 Bb7 9.Qe2 Nbd7 10.Rae1 c5 11.c3 [11.dxc5!? Bxc5=/+] 11...0-0 12.Ng5 h6 13.Nge4 [13.Ngf3 cxd4 14.Bxd4 Bc5-/+] 13...Nxe4 [13...Nd5-/+] 14.Nxe4 Qc7 [14...Rc8=/+] 15.Rd1? [15.Bxh6! gxh6 16.Qg4+ Kh8 17.Qh5+/-] 15...Nf6 [15...c4=/+] 16.Nxf6+ Bxf6 17.dxc5 [17.Rxf6!+-] 17...bxc5 [17...Be5!-/+] 18.Bc2 [18.Rxf6!+-] 18...Rad8 [18...Be5-/+] 19.Qg4 [19.Rxf6!+-] 19...Rxd1 20.Rxd1 Bg5 [20...Be5-/+] 21.Bxg5 hxg5 22.Qxg5 g6 [22...c4=] 23.h4 Kg7 [23...Bd5 24.h5+/=] 24.h5 Rh8 [24...Rg8+/-] 25.hxg6 [25.Bxg6!+-] 25...Qh2+ 26.Kf2 Qh4+ [26...Rh5!?=] 27.Qxh4 Rxh4 28.gxf7 [28.Rd7+-] 28...Bd5 29.a3 Rf4+ 30.Kg1 Rxf7 31.Rf1 Rb7 32.b4 cxb4 33.cxb4 Rc7 34.Rf2 Rc3 35.a4 Bb3 36.Bxb3 Rxb3 37.b5 Rb4 38.Ra2 e5 39.Kf2 Kf6 40.Ke3 Kf5 41.Kd3 Kg4 42.Kc3 Rf4 [42...Rb1 43.Kc4+-] 43.a5 Rf7 44.b6 axb6 45.axb6 Rb7 46.Rb2 e4 47.Kc4 [Black resigns with only a few seconds left.] 1-0

57 - Guezennec 6.Ngxf3 Nbd7 7.Bd3 Here is a classic example of the Alapin-Diemer Gambit in the French Defence played in France. Frankly it makes sense to me. The Alapin-Diemer Gambit in the French has the feel and look of a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit. The game began 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Be3 dxe4 4.Nd2 Nf6 5.f3 exf3 6.Ngxf3. Black’s defensive set up is identical to a BDG Euwe Variation. In the BDG, White would have Nc3 instead of Nd2, and likely Bg5 instead of Be3. White is Franck Guezennec. At the time he was rated 2193. His rating later rose to 2232. Black was played by Lucas Bajoni. His rating later rose to 2016. Both sides played good logical moves. Black was up the gambit pawn. He used several tempi to successfully force the minor exchange of his knights for the White bishops. Undeterred, White aimed at the Black king with his knights and queen. To avoid mate, Black returned the two bishop advantage. The White knights chopped off the Black bishops on f6 and e6. Both sides threatened checkmate, on g7 and g2 respectively. Then tricky play ensued with the rooks and queens. In the end, Black fell to a combination that would cost him a rook. Guezennec (2193) - Bajoni (1930), 7th d'Ille et Vilaine Open 2014 Rennes FRA (8.7), 10.07.2014 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Be3 dxe4 4.Nd2 Nf6 5.f3 exf3 6.Ngxf3 Nbd7 7.Bd3 Nd5 8.Qe2 c5 9.0-0 [9.0-0-0 can work well too.] 9...Nxe3 10.Qxe3 Be7 11.Kh1 [Another idea is to play 11.c3 to keep a pawn on d4.] 11...0-0 12.Rae1 cxd4 13.Nxd4 Nc5 14.Bc4 Bg5 15.Qf2 Bf6 16.c3 e5 17.N4f3 Nd3 18.Bxd3 Qxd3 19.Ne4 Qa6 20.Qg3 [Or 20.Nxf6+ Qxf6 21.Rxe5=] 20...Kh8 21.Nfd2 [21.Nxf6! gxf6 22.Qh4 Rg8 23.Nd2 Rg6 24.Ne4=] 21...Rd8? [21...Be7 22.Qxe5 Be6=/+] 22.Nxf6 Rxd2 23.Ne4 [23.Qg5+/-] 23...Re2 24.Ng5 Be6 25.Nxe6 fxe6 26.Rd1 Qc6? [26...Rd2=]

27.Rf7 Rg8 28.Rxg7 Re1+ 29.Qxe1 Kxg7 30.Qxe5+ [Even more powerful is 30.Qg3+! Kf7 31.Rf1+ Ke7 32.Qxg8+-] 30...Kf7? 31.Rf1+ Ke8 32.Qb8+ 1-0

58 – Sawyer 6.Ngxf3 Nbd7 7.Bd3 The Alapin-Diemer Gambit in the French Defence is a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit Euwe with White being a move behind (Be3-g5 instead of Bg5). Still there is the thematic mating attack if Black does not defend forcefully and intentionally to stop the attack. In this game my Internet Chess Club 3 minute blitz opponent was "anxat" rated 1900. He failed to stop my mate this time. On the weekend this game was played, my own rating was bouncing back and forth over and under and over 2000. It ended at 2001. As White I was playing well those days, and when not, I was got breaks to obtain draws or even wins. As Black however I was having lots of trouble. Thus the rating fluctuation. I wondered if I needed to play something different as Black. But sometimes that was not the problem. What I may have needed was to better learn the lines that I already played as Black. Sawyer - anxat, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 11.08.2012 begins 1.d4 e6 2.e4 d5 3.Be3 dxe4 4.Nd2 Nf6 5.f3 exf3 6.Ngxf3 Nbd7 [Black seems somewhat better after 6...Be7 7.Bd3 0-0 8.0-0 Nbd7 9.Qe1 c5 10.c3 Ng4=/+] 7.Bd3 c5 8.c3 cxd4 9.cxd4 Bb4 10.0-0 0-0 11.Qe1 Nd5 12.Bg5 Be7 13.Qh4 N7f6 14.Bxf6 [White can get the advantage by 14.Ne5! g6 15.Rac1 Nh5 16.Bxe7 Nxe7 17.Ne4+/=] 14...Nxf6 15.Ne5 Bd7? [Both 15...g6=/+ and 15...h6=/+ give Black good defensive chances.] 16.Rxf6 Black resigns 1-0

59 – Jones 6.Ngxf3 Nbd7 7.Bd3 Craig Jones is one of the few players that I played in postal chess and overthe-board in a USCF tournament. At the time of this game, Craig was one of Pennsylvania's better masters. Master Craig Jones is not to be confused with contemporary Master Curt Jones of Tennessee, whom I also played. Here Craig Jones handled my French Defence Alapin Gambit 5.f3 exf3 by defending better than I attacked. Most of the time Black develops a bishop on move six such as 6…Be7 or 6…Bd6. These moves are fine. Craig Jones instead played for a quick central counter attack with 6...Nbd7 and 7...c5. I began with a standard attack formation as White. I developed all my pieces and my queen and castled by move 10. However, I was too slow. I acted like Black was just going to sit there and let me pound away at his defenses. On the contrary, Black hit back quickly. This variation has to be considered a critical line for the 3.Be3 Alapin-Diemer French. Sawyer (2070) - Jones (2061), corr USCF 89NS20, 02.11.1990 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e4 e6 3.Be3 dxe4 4.Nd2 Nf6 5.f3 exf3 6.Ngxf3 Nbd7 [More common is a bishop move, such as 6...Be7.] 7.Bd3 c5 8.c3 [In light of what follows, this seems to close. Maybe 8.0-0 or 8.Qe2.] 8...Be7 9.Qe2 0-0 10.0-0 b6 11.Bg5 Bb7 12.Qe1?! [This is too slow. 12.Rad1 cxd4 13.Nxd4 Nc5 14.Bc2 Nd5 15.Bxe7 Qxe7=/+] 12...cxd4 13.cxd4 h6 14.Qh4 Re8 15.Rae1? [White could try 15.Bf4 Nd5 16.Qg3 Nxf4 17.Qxf4 Rc8-/+] 15...hxg5 16.Nxg5 Nf8 17.Rxf6? [Or 17.Ndf3 Bxf3 18.Rxf3 Ne4 19.Rh3 Qxd4+ 20.Ree3 Qxe3+ 21.Rxe3 Nxg5-+ and for the sacrificed queen Black has two knights, a rook and a pawn.] 17...Bxf6 0-1

Book 3: Chapter 3 – Advance Variation 3.e5 White pushes the e-pawn to gain a kingside space advantage.

60 – Sawyer 3…c5 4.c3 Nc6 A natural method in the French Defence to attack White's e5 pawn is to push Black's f-pawn. This leaves the first player with a decision to make. Should I play exf6 or not? If White takes on f6, he gets a half-open e-file from which to attack the e6 pawn and the e5 square. Black gets an open f-file, as enjoyed by BlackmarDiemer Gambit players. If White does not take the pawn, the position may become closed, giving Black time to complete his development with less risk, albeit in a cramped area. In my Advance Variation game vs "NightKnight" (rated 2238), I faced the rare 5...f5!? in the French Defence. This time I chose to take on f6 en passant. The position quickly opened up but I got into trouble. Black got a slight edge. I felt like a person who was arm wrestling, and my hand was being pushed downward. I flexed my own muscle being rated 2287 at the time. I equalized and pushed for an advantage. After I made the wrong capture on move 31, Black got a perpetual check for a draw. Sawyer (2287) - NightKnight (2238), ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 18.04.2009 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 c5 4.c3 Nc6 5.Nf3 f5 6.exf6 [6.Be2!?+/=] 6...Nxf6 7.Bg5 cxd4 8.cxd4 Qa5+ 9.Bd2 Qd8 10.Bg5 Bd6 [10...Qb6=/+] 11.Nc3 a6 12.Bd3 Bc7 13.Bh4 0-0 14.0-0 Qd6 [14...Bd7=] 15.Bg3 Qd7 16.Bxc7 Qxc7 17.Re1 Bd7 18.Ne2 [18.h3+/=] 18...Ng4 19.h3 Rxf3 20.hxg4 Rf7 21.f3 Raf8 [21...Qb6=] 22.Rc1 Qd6 23.Bb1 e5 24.dxe5 Nxe5 25.Nd4 Ng6 [25...Rf4=] 26.Qd3 Bb5 27.Nxb5 axb5 28.a3 Qg3

29.Re2 [29.Rf1+/=] 29...Rxf3 30.Qxd5+ Kh8 31.Bxg6 [31.Qxf3 Rxf3 32.Rc3 Qxg4 33.Rxf3+/=] 31...hxg6 32.Re8 Qf2+ 33.Kh2 Qg3+ 34.Kg1 Qf2+ 35.Kh2 Qg3+ 36.Kg1 1/2-1/2

61 – Beloungie 5.Nf3 Nge7 Chess friend Lance Beloungie competed in the Maine State Closed Championship. Lance is a retired man who played many of the top players in the state, including the master who finished in first. In the first round Beloungie got paired down vs the lower rated player Frank Collemer in a straightforward French Defence Advance Variation. Lance Beloungie noted, "It's nice when they gift a piece to the old man." [I agree completely.] White was a relative newcomer to USCF tournament play. He still had a provisional rating. Since this game was played, Frank Collemer has gained far more experience. He has raised his rating at least 100 points. Collemer - Beloungie, Maine State Closed (1), 23.04.2012 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 c5 4.c3 Nc6 5.Nf3 Nge7 [5...Qb6 is 10 times more popular, but it does not score any better than what Black plays here.] 6.Bb5 Bd7 [Black sets a trap to win a pawn.] 7.0-0? Nxe5 8.Bxd7+ Nxd7 [The trap worked.] 9.dxc5 Nxc5 10.Be3 Nf5 11.Bd4 Nxd4 12.Qxd4 f6 13.Re1 Qd6 14.Nbd2 Be7 15.Qg4 h5 [Black can make a new square of his knight on e6 after 15...e5=/+] 16.Qxg7 0-0-0 17.b4 Nd7? [17...Nd3=/+] 18.Nd4 Ne5 19.Nb5? [Both his Nb5 and Qg7 become too loose. 19.f4+/-] 19...Qd7 20.Rxe5 fxe5 21.Qxe5 Qxb5 [White has a few pawns for a rook, but that is not enough. Black wraps things up in a few more moves.] 22.Qxe6+ Qd7 23.Qe3 Kb8 24.Nb3 Rdg8 25.Nd4 Bg5 26.Qe5+ Ka8 27.Qe2 Qg4 0-1

62 – Lagarde 5.Nf3 Qb6 6.a3 This French Defence Advance Variation illustrates two common themes. White plays 6.a3 and 7.b4 to strengthen the queenside where his opponent is strategically stronger. Black plays 6...Nh6 daring White to chop off the knight with his dark squared bishop. It would leave b2 weak. White kept his bishop. It later came in handy (19.Bxe7) in the game Maxime Lagarde vs Gary Giroyan. Lagarde (2615) - Giroyan (2407), 5th ch-Francophonie Blitz Cannes FRA (4.1), 13.07.2018 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 c5 4.c3 Nc6 5.Nf3 Qb6 6.a3 Nh6 7.b4 cxd4 8.cxd4 Nf5 9.Be3 [9.Bb2 Bd7 10.g4=] 9...Bd7 [9...Nxe3 10.fxe3=] 10.Bd3 g6 11.Nc3 [11.Bxf5!? gxf5 12.Nc3+/=] 11...Be7?! [11...Nxe3 12.fxe3 Nxb4 13.axb4 Bxb4 14.0-0 Bxc3 15.Rb1 Qd8 16.h4=] 12.Na4 Qd8 13.Rc1 0-0 14.h4 h5 15.Nc5 a5 16.b5 Na7 17.a4 Rb8 18.Bg5 [18.Bxf5 exf5 19.0-0+-] 18...Nc8 19.Bxe7 Qxe7 [19...Ncxe7 20.0-0+/-] 20.Qd2 Be8 [20...Rd8 21.Qf4+-] 21.Bb1 [21.Bxf5 exf5 22.Qh6+-] 21...Nb6 [21...Kg7 22.Ng5+-] 22.Qf4 [22.Bxf5 exf5 23.Qh6+-] 22...Nc4 [22...Nxa4 23.Nxa4+/-] 23.g4 Nh6 [23...hxg4 24.h5 gxf3 25.hxg6 fxg6 26.Qh2+-] 24.Qxh6 f6 [24...b6 25.Ng5+-] 25.gxh5 1-0

63 – Rookie 5.Nf3 Bd7 6.Be2 The French Defence is a proven chess opening that can be handled in various ways by either side. After 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5, White can play 3.Nc3, 3.Nd2, 3.e5, 3.exd5 or 3.Be3. I play them all depending on my mood. In this Advance Variation 3.e5 after 5.Nf3 Bd7 6.Be2, "Rookie" played Ng8-Nge7-Ng6-Nf4. Then I promptly chopped the knight off with 13.Bxf4. I kept my play solid. This computer chess engine rated 2583 repeated moves for a draw on move 28. Sawyer (2173) - Rookie (2583), ICC 5 0 Internet Chess Club, 19.08.2007 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e4 e6 3.e5 c5 4.c3 Nc6 5.Nf3 Bd7 6.Be2 [6.a3] 6...Nge7 7.0-0 Ng6 8.Be3 cxd4 9.cxd4 f6 10.exf6 gxf6 11.Nc3 Qb8 12.Rc1 Nf4 13.Bxf4 Qxf4 14.Re1 Bh6 15.Rb1 a6 16.a3 a5 17.Bf1 Ne7 18.Ne2 Qb8

19.Ng3 b5 20.b3 Ng6 21.Rb2 Bf8 22.Ra2 Nf4 23.Qd2 h6 24.Ne2 Ng6 25.Ng3 Nf4 26.Ne2 Ng6 27.Ng3 Nf4 28.Ne2 1/2-1/2

64 – Baffo 5.Nf3 Bd7 6.Be2 This game follows a French Defence where Jeff Baffo chose the Advance Variation. After 3.e5 c5 4.c3 Nc6 5.Nf3, we experiment with a logical but less popular line 5...Bd7 6.Be2 Nge7. By the ninth move, I had completely equalized. Nine moves more and I stood better as Black. However then I got into trouble as he moved his army toward my king. Our match games in the spring of 1996 followed this pattern: I would start well, maybe even get an opening advantage. We moved into the middlegame and disaster would strike me almost every time, usually a selfinflicted wound. My notable opponent picked at my weak points which was in keeping with Jeff Baffo’s ability as a postal chess master. The French Defence with me as Black is comparatively rare. Once in a while I play this fine and well respected opening, but my personal results as Black have not been pretty. In both winning percentage and performance rating as Black over the past 45 years, I have scored much better after 1.e4 with 1...e5, 1...Nf6 and 1...Nc6. Even 1...c6 and1...c5 have been good for me. All of those I have played at least 1000 times. The French I have played less than 500 times as Black, Maybe the thousands of times I have been on the White side colors my perception. You have to find what works well for you. Baffo (2256) - Sawyer (1975), corr USCF 95P139, 08.04.1996 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 c5 4.c3 Nc6 5.Nf3 Bd7 [Avoiding the usual move 5...Qb6] 6.Be2 Nge7 7.0-0 Ng6 8.g3 Be7 9.h4 [At 40 ply Stockfish evaluates this position as completely equal: 0.00] 9...cxd4 10.cxd4 0-0 11.h5 Nh8 12.h6 g6 13.Nbd2 f6 14.exf6 Bxf6 15.Nb3 Nf7 [15...b6= would prevent 16.Nc5.] 16.Nh2 [16.Nc5] 16...Nd6 17.Bg4?! [17.Ng4=] 17...Rc8 18.Nf3 Ne4 [18...b6=/+] 19.Be3 Rf7?! [19...Ne7=] 20.Rc1 b6 21.Re1 Ne7? [21...Rf8=]

22.Rxc8 [22.Nbd2!+/=] 22...Qxc8 [22...Bxc8=] 23.Nbd2 Nxd2? [23...Nf5 24.Bf4+/=] 24.Qxd2 Nf5 25.Bxf5 exf5 26.Bf4 Re7 27.Be5 Bxe5 28.dxe5 Be6 29.Nd4 Rc7? [Hastens the end, but after 29...Qe8 30.Nxe6 Rxe6 31.Qxd5 Kf8 32.f4+- White is up a solid protected passed pawn.] 30.Qg5 10

65 – Bachler 6.Be2 cxd4 7.cxd4 In the early 1980s, FM Kevin Bachler was one of the stronger American postal chess players. Bachler went on to become not only a FIDE Master rated 2350 but also a FIDE Trainer and a USCF Professional Coach for 30 years. Kevin Bachler is an experienced instructor and a successful player who has helped many others improve their chess skills. I recommend you check out his sites. We met once in postal chess as young men with me playing White in a French Defence. Instead of my pet Alapin French or even the Tarrasch French, I chose something else. This time I went with the Advance Variation. This was very rare for me. Our game continued 3.e5 c5 4.c3. I avoided the Milner-Barry Gambit 6.Bd3 and played the more solid 6.Be2. I was fine for the first 20 moves, but his greater understanding and skill led Black to a winning position. It was our only game vs each other, but I have examined a handful of other Kevin Bachler games that he played vs our mutual opponents. Sawyer (2000) - Bachler (2129), corr APCT, 1985 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 c5 4.c3 Nc6 5.Nf3 Qb6 6.Be2 cxd4 7.cxd4 Nh6 8.Nc3 Nf5 9.Na4 Bb4+ [9...Qa5+ 10.Nc3=] 10.Bd2 [10.Kf1!=] 10...Qa5 11.Bc3 b5 [11...Bxc3+ 12.Nxc3 Qb6 13.Bb5 Bd7 14.Bxc6 Bxc6=] 12.a3 Bxc3+ 13.Nxc3 b4 14.axb4 Qxb4 15.Bb5 [15.Qa4=] 15...Bd7 16.Bxc6 Bxc6 17.Qd2 0-0 18.0-0 Rfb8 19.Rfb1 Qe7 20.Nd1 Rb3 21.Qc2 [21.Rc1=] 21...Qb7 22.Ra3 Rxf3 23.gxf3 Nxd4 24.Qc5 Ne2+ 25.Kf1 Bb5 26.Ke1 [26.Kg2 a6=/+] 26...Nf4 [Stronger is 26...Ng1!-+] 27.Kd2 a6 28.Nc3? [28.Rc1 Ng6=/+] 28...Bd3 [Or 28...Rc8!-+] 0-1

66 – Delpire 6.Bd3 Bd7 7.0-0 Jason Delpire crushed this French Defence with an alternative transposition into the 3.e5 Milner Barry Gambit. Black can reach the same positon with either 6...exd4 or 7...cxd4. Black has the choice between taking one pawn or two. Black gobbled up both gambit pawns below which proves to be risky. Jason wrote about his game: "Played in the last round of Lichess 4545 League. My opponent had no idea this was a real gambit, he thought I just blundered. Took my time, trying to continually find active moves so as to not let my advantage slip away. It was an enjoyable game!" I bet. Such a victory looks like a lot of fun. Delpire (1637) - JohnJPershing (1662), Rated Classical lichess, 08.04.2018 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 c5 4.c3 Nc6 5.Nf3 Bd7 6.Bd3 Qb6 7.0-0 [White continues in gambit style. Stronger in theory is 7.dxc5 Bxc5 8.0-0+/=] 7...cxd4 8.cxd4 Nxd4 9.Nxd4 Qxd4 10.Nc3 Qxe5 [Black should be happy with just one extra pawn and play 10...a6! 11.Qe2!? although White still has some attacking chances.] 11.Re1 Qc7 12.Nxd5 Qc6? [White has a big attack. 12...Qa5 13.Rxe6+ fxe6 14.Qh5+ Kd8 15.Bg5+ Nf6 16.Nxf6+/=] 13.Be4 [13.Bb5! Qxb5 14.Nc7+ wins queen.] 13...Qd6? [With this blunder, White has a big advantage. 13...Rc8 14.Ne7+-] 14.Bf4 e5 15.Bxe5 Qxe5 16.Bf3 [White the queen.] 16...Bd6 17.Rxe5+ Bxe5 18.Qe2 f6 19.Nc7+ Kf7 20.Qc4+ Kf8 21.Nxa8 1-0

67 – Mastin 6.Bd3 cxd4 7.cxd4 Before I took up the BDG, I played the BDF. I played the Bird, Dutch, and French. E. Olin Mastin Jr. chose the Milner-Barry Gambit 6.Bd3!? This gambit was invented by a notable player. Philip Stuart Milner-Barry (1906-1995) was an original contributor to many openings. As White, Milner-Barry beat Pal Benko with the 2.c3 Sicilian. He drew Jose Capablanca in a Sicilian Dragon, and he defeated Jacques Mieses in a Queens Knight Defence with 5.f3 in the BDG style. As Black, he drew Samuel Reshevsky in 4.Qc2 Nc6 Nimzo-Indian Defence and Vera Menchik in the Bogo-Indian. Milner-Barry played hundreds of games vs masters for over 50 years. It is no shame that he also lost to the likes of Capablanca, Alekhine, Euwe and Botvinnik, all world champions. He was also famous for the Caro-Kann Milner-Barry variation. After my inaccurate play on move 11 and my blunder on move 21, Olin Mastin stood well until move 23. Fortunately I won. Mastin (1767) - Sawyer (1981), Lansdale PA (1), 1985 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 c5 4.c3 Nc6 5.Nf3 Qb6 6.Bd3 [This is a gambit. More popular are 6.a3= or 6.Be2=] 6...cxd4 7.cxd4 Bd7 8.0-0 Nxd4 9.Nxd4 Qxd4 10.Nc3 a6! [I considered 10...Qxe5 but White has a promising attack for the two pawns after 11.Re1 Qd6 (or 11...Qb8 12.Nxd5 Bd6 13.Qg4=) 12.Nb5 Qb6 13.Be3=] 11.Qe2 Bb4!? [The main line is 11...Ne7 12.Kh1 Nc6 13.f4 Nb4 14.Rd1 Nxd3 15.Rxd3 Qb6 16.Be3 Bc5 17.Bxc5 Qxc5=/+; Maybe better is 11...Rc8! 12.Rd1 Bc5 13.Bc2 Qh4-/+] 12.Bd2 [12.Rd1=] 12...Ne7 13.a3 Ba5 14.Kh1 Bc7 15.f4 Qa7 16.Qg4 g6 17.Rf3 0-0-0 18.Rc1 Nc6 19.Ne2 Kb8 20.Qg3 Rc8 21.b4 Nd4? [21...h5 22.a4 h4=/+] 22.Nxd4 Qxd4 23.Bc3? [23.Be3! Qb2 24.Qe1+/=] 23...Qa7 24.Be1 Bb6 25.Rxc8+ Rxc8 26.h4 h5 27.Kh2 [If 27.Bd2 Bb5 28.Bxb5 axb5-/+] 27...Bd4 [27...Rc1!-+] 28.Qg5 [28.f5!? gxf5 29.Rxf5 Be8-/+] 28...Qb6 29.Qe7 Be8 30.a4 Qc7 31.Qxc7+ Rxc7 32.b5 axb5 33.axb5 Bc3 34.Bxc3 Rxc3 35.Be2 Rxf3 36.Bxf3 Bxb5 37.Kg1 Kc7 38.Kf2 Kc6 39.Ke3 Kc5 40.Kd2 [Or 40.g4 hxg4 41.Bxg4 Be8 42.Kd3 b5 43.Bd1 b4-+] 40...Kd4 41.g3 Bd3 42.Bd1 b5 43.Bb3 b4 44.Ba4 Kc4 45.Bd1 b3 46.Bxb3+ Kxb3 47.Kxd3 Kb4 48.Kd4

Kb5 49.Kd3 Kc5 50.Kc3 d4+ 51.Kd3 Kd5 52.Kd2 Ke4 53.Ke2 d3+ 54.Kd2 Kd4 55.Kd1 Ke3 56.Ke1 d2+ 57.Kd1 Kd3 0-1

Book 3: Chapter 4 – Tarrasch Variation 3.Nd2 In this and the next few sections we examine the Tarrasch with 3.Nd2. This variation allows White classical piece development.

68 – Payne 3…Nd7 4.Ngxf3 c5 Let's say you are prepared. You know the book theory in your opening. All of a sudden your high rated opponent takes you out of the book. Ugh! What a pain! Even if his move is just okay, you have questions. Is it a trap? Is it sound? Does he know it well? Fred R. Payne of Texas played a lot of master level postal chess. Payne was near his peak when I played him more than 30 years ago. His ICCF rating later dropped to 2278 later in his career. He was rated 2312 during our USCCC game. In our French Defence Tarrasch game Payne played 3...Nd7!? Ralph Marconi wrote a nice article dedicated to Dr. Payne. There Marconi notes that in 1951 Fred Payne became the youngest chess champion of Kentucky in state history. Sawyer (2000) - Payne (2312), corr USCCC 1981 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nd2 Nd7!? 4.Ngf3 c5 5.exd5 exd5 6.c3 [6.dxc5 Bxc5 7.Nb3=] 6...Ngf6 7.Bb5 a6 8.Qe2+ [8.Bd3=] 8...Be7 9.Ba4?! [9.Bd3] 9...0-0 10.Nf1!? [10.00 Re8=/+] 10...cxd4 11.Nxd4 Nc5 12.Bc2 Bg4 13.f3 Bd7 14.Ne3 Ne6 15.Nxe6 fxe6 16.0-0 Bc5 17.Kh1 Qe7 18.f4 Rae8 19.Bb3 [19.a4 Rf7=/+] 19...Kh8 [19...Bb5-/+] 20.Bd2 Ne4 21.Ng4? [21.Bc2 Bb5-/+] 21...Qh4 0-1

69 – Rawlings 3…Nc6 4.Ngf3 e5 “The Man From U.N.C.L.E.” movie had a scene where a girl tried to distract a guy from playing chess. The secret agents were American, Russian, German, and British with action in Berlin and Rome. Those are places where people read my blog. Thank you! In addition to the United States, Russia, Germany, United Kingdom and Italy, I have readers from Canada. The theater in which I saw that movie had a pre-movie quiz about the meaning of the word “Canada”. Wrong answers were “Nothing Here” or “Evening Star”. Correct was “Big Village”. I played a Canadian correspondence player William Rawlings in an APCT postal game that began as a French Defence. Black met my Tarrasch Variation 3.Nd2 Nc6 4.Ngf3 e5 and a sharp battle followed. The name Rawlings is well known in competition for its sports equipment. My opponent was active in the USCF prior to 1991. One William Rawlings played in the 1930s in Canada. He might be the same guy who played in the 1970s or 1980s. That is a big spread of 45 years, but I have played that long myself! It is just that now I am the old man. Back in 1978 I was the young man. You will note that I had excellent classical development in the center of the board and found a tactical win. Sawyer (1900) - Rawlings (1946), corr APCT 78CC-A-3, 05.1978 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nd2 Nc6 4.Ngf3 e5?! [The main line here is 4...Nf6 5.e5 Nd7 6.Nb3 when White has space in an otherwise equal position.] 5.Bb5 exd4 6.0-0 Bd7? [6...Bb4 7.Nxd4+/-] 7.exd5 Nb4 8.Qe2+ Be7 9.d6 [9.Ne5+- is also strong.] 9...cxd6 10.Nxd4 a6 [or 10...Nc6 11.N2f3+-] 11.Bxd7+ Qxd7 12.Re1 Kf8 13.N2f3 Bf6 14.Bf4 Nd5 15.Bg3 g6 16.Rad1

Rd8 17.Nb5 [17.Nb3+-] 17...axb5 18.Rxd5 Bxb2 19.Bxd6+ Qxd6 20.Rxd6 Rxd6 21.Qxb5 Bc3 22.Qc5 1-0

70 – Shannon 3…Nc6 4.Ngf3 g6 Here I attempted to play a Tarrasch French Defence in Karpov style. When I play positional chess, I am good but not great. When I play in a tactical style, I am good, great, or ugly. There is a tendency to only publish the great. My ugly games are painful. Another approach is to play main lines and look for tactical surprises along the way. Alas, that takes a lot of energy! My opponent was Paul Shannon. Paul has been a mainstay in USCF tournaments on the west coast of the USA for decades. He was one of my favorite opponents. Shannon and I played five times over a 20 year period. Over time our ratings gradually went up. Amazingly both our ratings were almost exactly the same each time we played. This was our first game. During this game, Paul found out that I like baseball. Shannon generously sent me a scorebook for the Los Angeles Dodgers. I loved it! Paul Shannon played a wide variety of openings as do I. That is easier in correspondence chess, since one can consult opening books and learn the opening as the game progresses. In our other games, I won as White in a Ruy Lopez Marshall Attack. We had a short draw with me as White in a Bird’s Opening, From Gambit. He won as White in a Reti/Polish/Dutch after 1.Nf3 f5 2.b4. Years later we played one blitz game where Shannon as White won again in a Benko Gambit. Here in our first game we played a French Defence as noted. Sawyer - Shannon, corr APCT Q-36 corr APCT, 1978 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nd2 Nc6 4.Ngf3 g6 5.c3 Bg7 6.Bb5 Nge7 7.0-0 f5 8.exf5 exf5 [I don't know if Shannon had been in this position before, but he certainly succeeded in getting me on my own.] 9.Re1 [Grabbing the open file. 9.Nb3+/- seems to give White an edge.] 9...0-0 10.Nf1 a6 11.Bd3!? [11.Bxc6 Nxc6 12.Bf4+/=] 11...Qd6 [Black has 11...f4!=] 12.g3 h6 13.Bf4 Qd8 14.Be5 [This led to several exchanges and a fairly level position throughout. I could be winning if I had played 14.h4!+-] 14...Nxe5 15.Nxe5 Bxe5 16.Rxe5 Nc6 17.Re1 Qd6 18.f4 Bd7 19.Qf3 Rae8 20.Nd2 Nb8 21.Bf1 Bc8 22.Bg2 c6 23.a4 Nd7 24.b4 [24.Qd3+/=] 24...Nf6 25.Qd3 Ne4

26.Nf3 Rf7 27.Ne5 Rg7 28.a5 g5 29.Ra2 Be6 30.Kf1 Kf8 31.Bf3 Ke7= 32.Ke2!? Reg8 33.Kd1 Kd8 34.Qe3 gxf4 35.gxf4 Qe7 36.Rc2 Qh4 37.Kc1 Kc7 1/2-1/2

71 – Martin 3…Nc6 4.Ngf3 Nh6 After I began playing the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit, I reached the French Defence most often after 1.d4. My stats showed I had played the French over 2000 times as White. Those games began 1.d4 (50% of the time), 1.e4 (40%), and 1.Nc3 (10%). A typical fact of American Postal Chess Tournaments (APCT) events was that a section began before it was filled. This was done in the reasonable faith that more players would pay to play. They did. If too many entered, they spilled over to a new section. The first round of the Rook events had seven players each, three games with each color. When a new player was added, they already knew what colors they had vs each opponent. The newly arriving player notified their opponents and began play. In this game from APCT 84 Rook-20, I was White in a French Defence Tarrasch. My opponent John Martin played 3...Nc6. It is highly possible that when I first got the assignments, I was gung ho on the BDG. Then by the time I was assigned to John Martin (rated 1809), my worry of the two BDGs that were already in progress might have led me to play 1.e4. Or maybe Martin had been assigned earlier and then I got excited about the BDG later. As White in this game I tried to improve my position from move to move. Black did not make major blunders. He drifted toward a weaker and weaker position until he lost significant material. Sawyer - Martin, corr APCT 84R-20 corr APCT, 1984 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nd2 Nc6 4.Ngf3 Nh6 [Far more popular is 4...Nf6 5.e5 Nd7 6.Nb3 or 6.Be2] 5.c3 f6 [Black fights for e5 instead of the more normal fight for e4 with 5...f5] 6.Bd3 Nf7 7.0-0 Be7 8.Re1 0-0 9.Nf1 Bd6 10.Ng3 dxe4 11.Nxe4 [White has a comfortable space advantage.] 11...Be7 12.Bf4 [12.b4+/- attempts to set up a positional bind.] 12...Re8 13.Qc2 f5 14.Ng3 Bd6 15.Bxd6 Nxd6 16.Rad1 Qf6 17.Ne5 Ne7 18.f4 Nd5 19.Qf2 Qh6

20.Ne2 Nf6 21.h3 g5 22.Qg3 g4 23.hxg4 fxg4 24.Nxg4 Nxg4 25.Qxg4+ Kh8 26.Ng3 Rf8 27.Qh5 Qg7 [White does well with the queen exchange also: 27...Qxh5 28.Nxh5 Bd7 29.Kh2 Be8 30.Re5+-] 28.Qe5 Bd7 29.Nh5 Qxe5 30.dxe5 and White wins more material. 1-0

72 – Gill 3...Nc6 4.Ngf3 Nf6 In the 1970s I was a big fan of World Champion Anatoly Karpov who dominated the chess world for 10 years, 1974-1984. His style of play was basically to control the board with active pieces rather than with sharp pawn attacks. Years later Anatoly Karpov would kindly write about me in his book on the Queen Pawn Games (only in Russian) where he covered all 1.d4 openings without 2.c4, including my beloved Blackmar-Diemer Gambit. In the fourth and final round of my tournament in Crossville, Tennessee I got to play a little like Karpov in a French Defence 3.Nd2 Nc6 Variation. Harrison Gill found himself very cramped on the queenside. Gill was rated over 200 points below me. Since those rated above me all got knocked off before I was able to play them. I breezed through this event and won every game. The money I got for 1st place covered my motel, food and travel costs. My wife was with me which made it a nice day all the way around in beautiful central Tennessee. And here’s a real shocker. Years later the USCF relocated their headquarters from New York state to this affordable southern small town. Crossville is in the Central Time Zone and just over the mountain from the Eastern Time Zone. It’s a pretty area. Sawyer - Gill, Crossville, TN (4), 16.07.1977 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nd2 Nc6 4.Ngf3 Nf6 5.e5 Nd7 6.Nb3 Be7 [Some players insert 6...a5 7.a4] 7.Bb5 a6 8.Bxc6 bxc6 9.0-0 c5 10.Na5 Nb8 11.c4 c6 12.Qa4 Bd7 13.dxc5 Bxc5 14.b4 Be7 15.c5 [The point is to leave Black cramped on the queenside.] 15...Qc7 16.Bf4 0-0 17.Rfe1 f6+- [17...h6 18.Nd4+/-] 18.Qb3 [Even stronger may be 18.exf6 Qxf4 19.fxe7 Re8 20.Ne5 Rxe7 21.g3 Qf6 22.Nb3+-] 18...Qc8 19.exf6 Bxf6 [19...gxf6 20.Bh6+/-] 20.Be5 Bxe5 21.Nxe5 Qc7 22.Rac1 Rf5 23.Qe3 Be8 24.Rc3 Ra7 [Or 24...Nd7

25.Nexc6+-] 25.Nexc6 Bxc6 26.Qxe6+ Rf7 27.Rf3 Qd7 [If 27...h6 28.Rxf7 Qxf7 29.Nxc6 Nxc6 30.Qxc6+- Black is up two pawns.] 28.Nxc6 Qxe6 29.Rxe6 Rxf3 30.gxf3 Nxc6 31.Rxc6 a5 32.b5 1-0

3.Nd2 Nf6 Black continues with classical development to provoke 4.e5.

73 – Haines 4.Bd3 c5 5.exd5 To French or not to French. White must choose. Black invites a French Defence after 1.d4 e6 with 2.e4. Blackmar-Diemer Gambit players face this issue. Queens Gambit players will attack the fifth rank with the c-pawn. Since Black here is a Dutch Defence player, he would probably answer a move like 2.c4 with 2...f5. Chess players who are comfortable with either 1.e4 or 1.d4 will play 1.d4 e6 2.e4. Ray Haines won a French Defence Tarrasch Variation against Lance Beloungie in the second round of a tournament played in Maine. Black got his pieces tangled up. White attacked and picked off two knights. Black resigned since he could only regain one piece. Haines - Beloungie, Houlton, ME (2), 03.06.2017 begins 1.d4 e6 2.e4 d5 3.Nd2 Nf6 4.Bd3 [4.e5] 4...c5 5.exd5 Nxd5 [5...Qxd5! 6.Ngf3 cxd4=] 6.Ngf3 Nc6 7.dxc5 Bxc5 8.Ne4 Bb6 [8...Be7 9.0-0 f5!?=] 9.0-0 Bd7? [9...f5!?] 10.a3 [10.c4 Nf6 11.Nd6+ Kf8 12.b3+-] 10...Qc7? [10...Bc7 11.c4 Nf6 12.Bg5 Ne5 13.Re1 Bc6 14.Nxf6+ gxf6 15.Nxe5 Bxe5 16.Rxe5 fxg5 17.Qe2+/=] 11.c4! Nde7 [11...f5 12.cxd5 fxe4 13.Bxe4 exd5 14.Bxd5 0-0-0 15.Bg5+-] 12.c5 Bxc5 13.Nxc5 Ne5? [13...Rd8 14.Qc2+-] 14.Nxe5 1-0

74 - Surak 5.f4 c5 6.c3 Nc6 Why do people quit chess? I will put on my pop psychology hat and suggest four possibilities, each beginning with the letter “D”. 1. Distracted. They are so busy making money, making good grades, or making love that there is no time for chess in their life. 2. Disappointed. They lost a game or two. Chess is not fun. It takes work. They decide to go look for something easier to do. 3. Discouraged. They have lost a lot of games. They make more blunders than they think they should. Chess is hard. Too hard. 4. Depressed. They lose all the time. They will never win again. Their life is full of troubles. They cannot bear to play anymore. In the 1980s I went down this road myself. I experienced major losses in my family and my job. I needed to make changes. In my chess career, I had progressed to the point where I played a steady stream of experts and masters. I lost a lot of games. My ratings yo-yoed from 2100 to 1900 up and down, up and down. For a while during that time period I played the French Defence as Black. Here in a Tarrasch, I played APCT Expert Steve Surak. He chose 5.f4. When I had to renew my membership, I withdrew. My chess life was not over. After I became established in a new job, I returned to chess. Then I switched to the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit. I won a lot of games in 1989. Chess was fun again! Surak (2172) - Sawyer (1950), corr APCT 1986 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nd2 Nf6 4.e5 Nfd7 5.f4 c5 6.c3 Nc6 7.Ndf3 cxd4 8.cxd4 Qb6 9.g3 Bb4+ [9...Be7=] 10.Kf2 f5!? [10...g5 11.fxg5 Ndxe5 12.Nxe5 Nxe5 13.Kg2=] 11.Ne2 g6? [11...0-0=] 12.Be3 Ndb8 13.h3 [13.Kg2+/-] 13...h5 14.Bg2 [14.Rc1+/-] 14...Qc7 15.g4 hxg4? [15...Na5 16.Ng5+/=] 16.hxg4 Rxh1 17.Qxh1 Qg7 18.gxf5 gxf5 19.Rg1 Bf8 20.Bf1 Qe7 21.Rg8 Na6 22.Ng5 Bd7 23.Qh5+ Kd8 24.Nf7+?! [24.Qh8+-] 24...Kc7 25.Nd6 Rd8 26.Ke1?! [26.Nc3+/-] 26...Be8 27.Qh2 Kb8 28.Bf2 Bf7 29.Rh8 Qd7 30.Nxf7 Qxf7

31.Rh7 Qe8 32.Nc1 Nc7 [32...Na5=] 33.Nb3 Rd7 34.Rh8 Rd8 35.Kd1 b6 36.Be1 a5 37.Bf2 Nb4 38.a3 Qa4 39.Qg3 Nba6 40.Be1 Nb5= Black withdrew. 1-0

75 – Hathaway 5.Bd3 c5 6.c3 Timid Timmy. That was me. I was deathly afraid of gambits. If I offered a pawn to my opponent, you could bet that it was a trap. I had to know for sure how I was getting my material back. Later I learned about the great benefits of getting compensation for sacrifices. After that, I added gambit play to my repertoire. John Hathaway played the French Defence. I liked the active Tarrasch Variation. In this short game Black fell for a trap. Then he lost his queen. Hathaway got some compensation for his troubles, but it was not nearly enough. The placement of 3.Nd2 temporarily blocked White's control of the g5 square. My chess friend John jumped at the chance to threaten my g2 pawn with 7...Qg5. The queen trap came from the always hard to see backwards bishop move. In this case it was 10.Bf1 Qxh1 11.Nxh1. Sawyer saw your Hathaway plan. Black hath my rook but away with your queen. White castled with check and mate next move. Sawyer - Hathaway, Lansdale, PA 04.03.1981 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nd2 Nf6 4.e5 Nfd7 5.Bd3 c5 6.c3 Nc6 7.Ne2 Qg5 [7...cxd4 8.cxd4 f6 9.exf6 Nxf6 10.Nf3 Bd6 11.0-0=] 8.Nf3 Qxg2? [8...Qd8 9.0-0+/=] 9.Ng3 cxd4 10.Bf1 Qxh1 11.Nxh1 dxc3 12.bxc3 Ndxe5 13.Nxe5 Nxe5 14.Bf4 Ng6 15.Bg3 h5 16.h4 Bd7 17.Qb3 b6 18.Bb5 Bxb5 [18...Rd8 19.Qa4+-] 19.Qxb5+ Kd8 20.c4 Be7 [20...Bc5 21.cxd5+-] 21.cxd5 Nxh4 [21...e5 22.Rc1+-] 22.dxe6 fxe6 23.0-0-0+ Kc8 24.Qc6# 1-0

76 - Hathaway 7.Ne2 Qb6 8.Nf3 John Hathaway was one of those guys who beat the players who beat me. Yet in our club, I won more of our games against him. In this French Tarrasch Variation John Hathaway improved upon his mistake in the previous game. There, Hathaway had played 7…Qg5 8.Nf3 Qxg2. Black lost his queen when it got trapped. The strategy for Black in the 3.Nd2 Nf6 4.e5 Nfd7 5.Bd3 line is to play along either the b6-d4-f2 diagonal or the c7-e5-h2 diagonal. Those ideas are illustrated in the lines 7…Qb6 8.Nf3 cxd4 and 7…cxd4 8.cxd4 f6. John avoided both options. In this game Black kept the position closed. That was reasonable, but Black had to make sure he stayed active. Passive play tends to prove fatal in chess long term. Hathaway played 7… Qb6 8.Nf3 Be7. This was one of those games were my creativity and boldness led to an advantage. I offered a knight sacrifice with 14.Ng5!? Black should have accepted the sacrifice and tried to outplay me in complications. White went on to win the Exchange. Technical difficulties remained, but White was able to exchange material. This led to an endgame where my material finally won. Sawyer - Hathaway, Lansdale, PA 04.03.1981 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nd2 Nf6 4.e5 Nfd7 5.Bd3 c5 6.c3 Nc6 7.Ne2 Qb6 8.Nf3 Be7 9.0-0 0-0 10.Nf4 [10.a3+/=] 10...cxd4 [10...Re8=] 11.cxd4 Nb4 12.Bb1 f6 13.a3 Na6 14.Ng5!? f5? [14...fxg5 15.Qh5 h6 16.Qg6 Rxf4 17.Qh7+ Kf8 18.Bxf4 gxf4 19.Bg6+/-] 15.Nfxe6 Bxg5 16.Nxf8 Bxc1 17.Nxd7 Qxb2 [17...Bxd7 18.Qxc1] 18.Qd3 [18.Bxf5! Bxd7 19.Rb1+-] 18...Bxd7 19.Ra2 Qb6 20.Rxc1 Rf8 21.f4 Bb5 22.Qc3 Bc4 23.Rb2 Qc6 24.Ba2 b5 25.Bxc4 [25.a4 b4 26.Qxc4 dxc4 27.Rxc4+-] 25...bxc4 26.Qa5 Nc7 27.Qxa7 Ra8 28.Rb8+ Rxb8 29.Qxb8+ Ne8 30.Rb1 c3 31.Qb3 Nc7 32.Rc1 Nb5 33.Qb4 Qb6 34.Rxc3 Qxd4+ 35.Qxd4 Nxd4 36.Rc8+ Kf7 37.Kf2 1-0

77 – Bies 8.Nf3 cxd4 9.cxd4 King pawn and Blackmar-Diemer players encounter the French Defence frequently. Some players as Black think they are taking White out of their plans, but BDGers face the French about as much as anything. Years ago I chose the 3.Nd2 Tarrasch Variation. Later I switched to 3.Nc3 and 3.Be3, but I always kept a fondness for 3.Nd2. The Tarrasch Variation leads to active piece play with tactical wins by combination. The dark squared bishop even ends up on Be3 a lot in the Tarrasch. Fred Bies is not a name commonly thrown about in chess circles. I think he was from Illinois (home of APCT). I found a book on basketball rules authored by a Fred Bies in 1999. I have no idea if it is the same one. Maybe not. Below after my opponent Fred Bies played move 20, the Black queen is facing a two on one fast break, to borrow a basketball metaphor. My capture of his rook on c8 left the Black queen overworked. When she recaptured my rook, I picked up a three pointer with her knight on move 22. Sawyer (1950) - Bies (1925), corr APCT 78SC-5, 11.1978 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nd2 Nf6 4.e5 Nfd7 5.Bd3 c5 6.c3 Nc6 7.Ne2 Qb6 8.Nf3 cxd4 9.cxd4 f6 10.exf6 Nxf6 11.0-0 Bd6 12.Nc3 0-0 13.Be3 Bd7 [13...Qxb2 14.Nb5+/-] 14.a3 Be8 15.Ne5 [15.Ng5 Nd8! 16.Qc2=] 15...Qc7? [15...Bxe5! 16.dxe5 Qxb2 17.exf6 Qxc3 18.fxg7 Qxg7 19.Qd2=] 16.f4 [16.Nb5+/-] 16...Rc8 17.Rc1 Bh5 18.Qe1 Qb6 19.Na4 Qd8 20.h3 Na5? [20...Be8 21.Nc5+/=] 21.Rxc8 Qxc8 22.Qxa5 Qb8 23.Qe1 b6 24.Nc3 Be8 25.g4 b5 [25...Qc7 26.Qe2+-] 26.g5 Nd7 27.Qh4 g6 28.Qg4 Nxe5 29.fxe5 Bf7 30.exd6 1-0

78 – Klein 8.Nf3 cxd4 9.cxd4 Eugene Klein and I played three long games in the space of a few years. I had White in three different openings. In our French Defence game Black solved his bad light squared bishop problem with the maneuver 15...Be8, then 16...Bh5, and 21...Bxf3. White obtained an extra pawn on both the queenside and kingside while Black had an extra center pawn. Eventually we exchanged into a rook endgame. Gene Klein just kept playing on almost until checkmate. It did not cost him more because he had to send me a move in another game anyway. It took about a week for each of us to receive new postal chess moves. I might hear from him the same day every week and he from me on a different day. The game below was middle of three games and the longest. We would play more than one game on a postcard from APCT tournaments in that began in 1978-1979. Sawyer (1950) - Klein (1923), corr APCT 78SC-5, 11.1978 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nd2 Nf6 4.e5 Nfd7 5.Bd3 c5 6.c3 Nc6 7.Ne2 Qb6 8.Nf3 cxd4 9.cxd4 f6 10.exf6 Nxf6 11.0-0 Bd6 12.Nc3 0-0 13.Be3 Bd7 14.a3 a6 15.b4 Be8 [15...Qc7=] 16.Re1 Bh5 17.Na4 Qc7 18.h3 e5 [18...Ne4-/+] 19.dxe5 Nxe5 20.Be2 Nxf3+ 21.Bxf3 Bxf3 22.Qxf3 Qf7 [22...Rae8=] 23.Nc5 Bb8 24.Bd4 Ba7 25.Ne6 Bxd4 26.Nxd4 Rac8 27.Ne6 Rfe8 28.Nc5 Red8 29.Rad1 Rc6 30.Qe3 Re8 31.Qf3 Rd8 32.Re3 Rdc8 33.Qf5 g6 34.Qe5 Re8 35.Qd4 Rd8 [35...Re7 36.Rde1+/-] 36.Rde1 Re8 37.Rxe8+ Nxe8 38.Nxb7 Qd7 39.Nc5 Qf7 40.Qe5 [40.Re5!+-] 40...Nc7 41.Qe7 Qxe7 42.Rxe7 h6 43.Kf1 a5 44.Ke2 Nb5 45.Re3 Kf7 46.Nd7 Rd6 47.Ne5+ Kg7 48.bxa5 Ra6 49.Rg3 g5 50.h4 Nd4+ 51.Kd2 Nf5 52.Rd3 Rxa5 53.hxg5 hxg5 54.Nc6 Rc5 55.Nd4 Nxd4 56.Rxd4 Kf6 57.a4 Kf5 58.Rd3 Ra5 59.Ra3 d4 [59...Ke4 60.Kc3+/=] 60.Kd3 Ke5 61.Kc4 [61.f3+/-] 61...Ke4 [61...g4 62.f3+/=] 62.f3+ Ke5 63.Kb4 [63.Kd3+/-] 63...Ra8 [63...Rd5!?] 64.a5 Kd5 65.Kb3 Ra6 66.Kc2 Ke6 67.Kd3 Kd5 68.Ra2 Rc6 [68...Kc5 69.Ra4 Kb5 70.Rxd4+-] 69.a6 Rc3+ 70.Kd2 Rc8 71.a7 Ra8 72.Kd3 Ke5 73.Ra5+ Kf4 74.Kxd4 g4 75.fxg4 Kxg4 76.Kd5 Kg3 77.Kc6 Kxg2 78.Kb7 Rf8 79.a8Q Rxa8 80.Rxa8 Kf3 81.Re8 Kf4 82.Kc6 Kf5 83.Kd5

Kf4 84.Re5 Kf3 85.Re4 Kg3 86.Ke5 Kf3 87.Kf5 Kg3 88.Re3+ Kf2 89.Kf4 Kg2 90.Re2+ 1-0

79 – Harabor 9.cxd4 f6 10.exf6 How often do you face the French Defence in your games? For me it has always been lot. As White I like the King Pawn 1.e4 openings and also the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit 1.d4 d5 2.e4. The French Defence can be attacked with pawns or pieces. The Tarrasch Variation 3.Nd2 allows White more open piece play. In the 3...Nf6 4.e5 Nfd7 line Black seeks counter play with the moves 5...c5 and 9...f6 to open both bishop files. Here I review one of my games against Mihai Harabor. Our French Defence and Sicilian Defence games were played when we were up and coming postal chess players in 1980. Years later we were both much more experienced. By then Mihai Harabor had become a much stronger correspondence player. But this was a game from the early days. Our French Defence Tarrasch saw us play a popular 3.Nd2 Nf6 line. White attacked the e-file and e6 in particular. Black hoped his piece activity would compensate for this weakness. Black got too aggressive. His thematic ...e5 counter attack in the center did not work well on this occasion. White ended up with an extra bishop after some tactics. That was enough to decide the game. Sawyer (2000) - Harabor (2100), corr CCLA 1980 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nd2 Nf6 4.e5 Nfd7 5.Bd3 c5 6.c3 Nc6 7.Ne2 Qb6 8.Nf3 cxd4 9.cxd4 f6 10.exf6 Nxf6 11.0-0 Bd6 12.Nf4 0-0 13.Re1 Bd7 14.Be3 [14.Nxe6 Rfe8 15.Bf5=] 14...Qc7 [14...Rae8 15.g3=] 15.g3 e5? [15...Rac8 16.Ng5+/-] 16.dxe5 Nxe5 [16...Bxe5 17.Ng5+/-] 17.Nxe5 Bxe5 18.Rc1 Bc6 [18...Qd8

19.Nxd5+-] 19.Ne6 Qf7 20.Nxf8 Rxf8 21.Rc2 Qd7 22.Bc5 Re8 23.Rce2 Bd6 [23...Qc7 24.Bxa7+-] 24.Rxe8+ Nxe8 25.Rxe8+ Qxe8 26.Bxd6 Qe6 27.Bf4 d4 28.Qe2 1-0

80 – Burke 9…Bb4+ 10.Kf1 f6 The French Defence Tarrasch Variation gave me several games with tactical piece combinations. There were a lot of good ones, but my game with Bob Burke has to be my favorite. Black played the opening well. On move nine Black decided to go for the aggressive 9…Bb4+ 10.Kf1 f6. Maybe he did not think I would play 10.Kf1!? I did not want to forfeit castling, but the move was recommended as a possibility in books. Spielmann played it, but he might have played anything wild and tactical. I was a positional player. However, the continuation 11.Nf4 fxe5 12.Nxe6 looked very inviting. I decided to try it. Black’s 13…Kf7 appears to be a novelty. A couple games in the 1960s continued 13…Kf8 14.Bh6 Kg8 15.Qc1 +-.and White won both of them. The winning combination took calculation. That is the good thing about correspondence play. I had three days to figure out each move. I could move the pieces around and write out my analysis. This is what I routinely did when I carried out a tactical attacks. Black's army was somewhat poised to attack the White king. The problem leading the attack was the Black king, right out in front. I'm sure that wasn't his original plan. At the time I was an active postal chess player in both APCT and CCLA. I believe that this game was played in CCLA. Bill Wall published it in his first book “500 French Defence Miniatures”. I do not remember but this Bob Burke might be Robert W. Burke. I played him about the same time. Pretty quickly after this game, Robert W. Burke raised his rating above mine and beat me with him as White in a King’s Indian Attack. Robert W. Burke has been a good correspondence player for a long time.

Sawyer (2000) - Burke, corr 1980 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nd2 Nf6 4.e5 Nfd7 5.Bd3 c5 6.c3 Nc6 7.Ne2 Qb6 8.Nf3 cxd4 9.cxd4 Bb4+ 10.Kf1 f6 11.Nf4 fxe5 12.Nxe6 Nf6 [12...g6 13.dxe5=] 13.Nxg7+ Kf7 14.Nh5 e4 [14...Nxh5 15.Ng5+ Ke7 16.Qxh5 Qxd4 17.Be2+/-] 15.Ng5+ Ke7 16.Nxf6 Kxf6 [16...Qxd4 17.Ngxe4 dxe4 18.Nxe4+-] 17.Qh5 Be6 [17...Rf8 18.Nxh7+ Kg7 19.Nxf8+-] 18.Qh6+ 1-0

81 – Etienne 10.Kf1 f6 11.Nf4 My French Defence Tarrasch game vs Julio Etienne led to a quick sharp Mexico Mate! Normally I played for kingside castling as White. Theory in one line recommended that I answer 9...Bb4+ with 10.Kf1. The theory was that White got an attack, but it made me nervous. What if my attack failed? Usually I won big. Here is an example. Some people go to Mexico on vacation. They mail postcards from Mexico to friends and family back home. But here I did the reverse. I mailed my postcards to Mexico with my chess moves. In my mind, I picture a comedy scene. I pretend that I mailed my moves to Texas. Then the cartoon character Speedy Gonzalez ran my postcard south of the border down to Julio in Tampico. I enjoy meeting a new opponent from a new country. Players in American Postal Chess Tournaments (APCT) rarely came from Mexico. Every state in the USA was represented in APCT. Many players from Canada also competed in the events that I entered. But Julio Etienne was my only APCT opponent from Mexico. That's a fairly popular name, and that's all I remember about him. Spielmann – Stoltz 1930 continued 13…exf3 14.Bc7 +/-. White stood better but he lost in the end. Sawyer (2050) - Etienne (1900), corr APCT 1980 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nd2 Nf6 4.e5 Nfd7 5.Bd3 c5 6.c3 Nc6 7.Ne2 Qb6 8.Nf3 cxd4 9.cxd4 Bb4+ 10.Kf1 [10.Bd2 f6 11.exf6 Nxf6 12.0-0 0-0 13.Bc3 Bd7 14.Qb3+/=] 10...f6 11.Nf4 fxe5 12.Nxe6 e4 [12...g6 13.dxe5=] 13.Bf4 exd3 14.Nc7+ Kf7 15.Nxa8 Qd8 16.Nc7 [16.a3+-] 16...Nf6 17.Nb5 Bf5 18.a3 Ba5 [18...Be7 19.Ne5+ Kg8 20.Nxd3+/-] 19.Nd6+ Ke7 20.Nxf5+ Kd7 21.Qxd3 Rf8 22.Ne5+ Nxe5 23.dxe5 Ng4 24.Qxd5+ Ke8 25.Qe6+ Qe7 26.Qxe7# 1-0

82 – Pfeiffer 9…f6 10.exf6 Nxf6 Can you believe it? Both bishops were sacrificed for the h-pawns with check. Both kings declined the bishops. My friendships with French people in America and with players from France go back many years. I studied the French language for four years in school. Here the French Defence wins! As White I chose the Tarrasch Variation 3.Nd2 in the French Defence. My opening was strong, White's position was good for the first 18 moves. The Tarrasch can lead to wide open tactics. In this game I was outgunned in complications by a good player. My opponent J. Scott Pfeiffer has a USCF rating in the 2100s. We were both up and coming players back at that time. Like many players of my generation, Pfeiffer has not played much in the last 25 years. As I recall the conversations on our weekly chess postcards in 1980, Scott chose his life priorities carefully and chose them well. I do not know how his plans turned out, but at least in 1980 Scott Pfeiffer seemed to be headed in a good direction. Sawyer (2050) - Pfeiffer (2050), corr APCT 1980 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nd2 Nf6 4.e5 Nfd7 5.Bd3 c5 6.c3 Nc6 7.Ne2 Qb6 8.Nf3 cxd4 9.cxd4 f6 [9...Bb4+ 10.Bd2+/=] 10.exf6 Nxf6 11.0-0 Bd6 12.Nf4 [12.Bf4 Bxf4 13.Nxf4+/=] 12...0-0 13.Re1 Re8 14.Ng5 [14.a3 Bd7 15.Be3 Qxb2 16.Rb1 Qxa3 17.Rxb7=] 14...Qxd4 15.Nfxe6 Bxe6 16.Nxe6 Bxh2+ 17.Kf1 Rxe6 18.Rxe6 Qh4 [18...Rf8 19.Be3=] 19.Re3? [19.Rxf6 gxf6 20.Qf3=] 19...Ng4 20.Bxh7+ [20.Qf3 Nce5=/+] 20...Kh8 21.Rf3 Bd6 22.Ke2? [Or 22.Be3 Nh2+ 23.Ke2 Nxf3 24.gxf3 Qxh7 25.Qxd5 Be5-+] 22...Nxf2 23.Rxf2 Re8+ 24.Be3 Rxe3+ 25.Kxe3 Bc5+ 26.Kd2 Qxf2+ 27.Qe2 Qxe2+ 28.Kxe2 Kxh7 29.Rh1+ Kg6 30.Rh8 b6 31.Rc8 Ne5 32.Rd8 d4 33.a3 a5 34.Kd1 d3 35.Rb8 Kf5 36.b4 axb4 37.axb4 Be3 0-1

83 – Ousley 8.cxd4 Nb6 9.0-0 What is your favorite French variation? After 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5, you can choose the popular 3.Nc3, the solid 3.Nd2, the positional 3.e5, the simple 3.exd5 or the gambit 3.Be3!? Note that 3.Nd2 Nf6 4.e5 resembles 3.Be3 Nf6 4.e5 in pawn structure and piece placement. World champion Mikhail Tal favored the Tarrasch 3.Nd2 with success in the 1970s. White got a good pawn structure and open lines for attack. In Tal-Hecht, Nice Olympiad 1974, White kept Black's knights at bay on Nc6 and Nb6 at bay with pawns a3 and b3. I copied Tal's idea when Larry Ousley played a French Defence vs me in 1977. We met in a Tennessee Chess Association postal tournament. The USCF had Larry Ousley rated in the 1800s until a few years ago. We were young men during this game. My strategy included playing 15.a3 and 16.b3 in line with the Tal game mentioned above. Also I played Ne3 instead of Be3. As the game continued, Black missed some tactics on a4. White doubled his queen and rook on the 7th rank to win. Sawyer - Ousley, corr TCA 1977 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nd2 Nf6 4.e5 Nfd7 5.Bd3 c5 6.c3 Nc6 7.Ne2 cxd4 8.cxd4 Nb6 9.0-0 Bd7 10.f4 [10.a3 a5 11.Nf3+/=] 10...g6 11.Nf3 h5 [11...Nb4!?] 12.Bd2 Nb4 13.Bxb4 Bxb4 14.Qb1 Rg8 15.a3 Be7 16.b3 Rc8 17.Ne1 [17.Qe1+/=] 17...Kf8 18.Nc2 Kg7 19.Ne3 Qe8 20.a4 a6 21.Qe1 Rc7 22.g4 [22.Qg3+/=] 22...hxg4 23.Nxg4 Bxa4? [23...Rh8=/+] 24.bxa4 Nxa4? [24...Rh8 25.Qg3+-] 25.Qa5 Rc8 26.Qxa4 Qd8 27.Qa5 b6 28.Qxa6 f5 29.exf6+ Bxf6 30.Qb7+ Be7 31.Ra7 1-0

84 – Hagerty 8…f6 9.exf6 Nxf6 The name “Bernie” was popular in 2016 when Bernie Sanders ran for President. Bernie was a senator from Vermont. I lived in Vermont during the summers of 1975 and 1976. While it is a very small state, I found it to be unique and quite interesting. This Green Mountain state of Vermont borders the French speaking Quebec province south of Montreal in Canada. French was one of my favorite subjects in school, but I forgot a lot of it. Bernie Hagerty played the White pieces against my rare French. I was playing Steve Surak in another French at the same time. Hagerty chose the same Tarrasch Variation that I also played as White. We followed the main line for the first eleven moves. Black defends in the French Defence, but Black can also attack. I played along the c7-h2 diagonal after 10.0-0 Bd6 11.Nf3 Qc7. It looked funny to me to see White develop the knight to f3 after he castles. That is because the White knights crisscross with 3.Nd2 to 11.Nf3 and 7.Ne2 to 13.Nc3. I played the opening well. However the more we entered the middlegame, the worse I did. I struggled to find good moves. White had a clear advantage in this French Defence. Because of my bad light squared bishop, I suffered a weak end at Bernie's. Bernie Hagerty was a postal expert. My APCT games were lost when I failed to renew my membership. I hope I resigned this one. Previously Hagerty and I drew a King’s Indian Defence. Hagerty (2003) - Sawyer (1950), corr APCT 1986 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nd2 Nf6 4.e5 Nfd7 5.Bd3 c5 6.c3 Nc6 7.Ne2 cxd4 8.cxd4 f6 9.exf6 Nxf6

10.0-0 Bd6 11.Nf3 Qc7 [11...0-0 12.Bf4 Bxf4 13.Nxf4 Ng4=] 12.h3 0-0 13.Nc3 a6 14.Re1 Bd7 15.Be3 Rae8?! [15...Be8 16.Rc1 Bh5=] 16.Rc1 Kh8 17.Ne5 Bc8? 18.f4 g6 19.Qe2 Bxe5 20.fxe5 Ng8? 21.Qg4 [21.b4+/-] 21...Qg7 22.Qh4 Nce7 23.g4 [23.Na4+/-] 23...h6 24.Bg5 Nf5 25.gxf5 gxf5 26.Kf2 Qxg5 27.Qxg5 hxg5 28.Rg1 g4 1-0

85 – Baffo 8…f6 9.exf6 Nxf6 Anatoly Karpov chose variations where his pieces dominated the most important squares on the board. Karpov became champion mostly through piece control rather than pawn advances or rapid attacks. In his early 1.e4 days Karpov played the Tarrasch Variation 3.Nd2 vs the French Defence to win the title. I won some nice games with 3.Nd2, but then I switched to gambits. When I lose an Alapin-Diemer 3.Be3 or a Winawer Variation 3.Nc3 Bb4, I think about returning to the simple open piece development of the Tarrasch 3.Nd2. Jeff Baffo and I played two six-game correspondence matches 18 years ago. Jeff won most of the games and this one is no exception. I have a foggy memory of that year. It seems the games were played maybe during February, March and April. I know I was in Atlanta, Georgia for a Promise Keepers clergy conference during the week of Valentine's Day 1996. Later that summer the Olympics came to Atlanta. For some reason in this game vs Jeffrey Baffo, I resigned in an equal position! Maybe I was seeing ghosts. I cannot blame the opening, a good active and logical variation. One key point of the 3.Nd2 Nf6 line is that White's kingside knight plays to 7.Ne2 (after 5.Bd3) to protect d4 and c3, leaving f3 open for the queenside knight 10.Nf3. As Anatoly Karpov demonstrated, it can be good for White to trade bad dark squared bishops. I did everything well - except to keep playing! Sawyer (1950) - Baffo (2273), corr USCF 95P135, 11.03.1996 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nd2 Nf6 4.e5 Nfd7 5.Bd3 c5 6.c3 Nc6 7.Ne2 cxd4 8.cxd4 f6 9.exf6 Nxf6 10.Nf3 Bd6 11.0-0 Qc7 12.Bg5 0-0 13.Bh4 Bd7 14.Bg3 a6 15.Rc1 Bxg3 16.Nxg3 Qf4 17.Ne2 Qd6 18.Nc3 Be8 19.Re1 Bh5 20.Be2 Qb4= [White resigned in an equal position. Maybe I thought White would lose a pawn due to the threats on b2 and d4, however 21.Ne5! Nxe5 22.dxe5 Bxe2 23.Nxe2 (or 23.Rxe2) 23...Nd7 24.Qd4= holds everything.] 0-1

86 – Kasa 8…f6 9.exf6 Nxf6 Richard Kasa passed away in July 2015. Kasa was a long time chess master and an energetic scholastic chess teacher. From what I saw online, I am sure Rich is missed by the people who knew him well. Kasa and I played only this one time. Our encounter came in the International Correspondence Chess Federation (ICCF) Master Class section WT/M/GT/156. We were the only two USA players out of the 15 in this round robin event. I finished in eleventh with 6 out of 14. Kasa was next with 5.5. My chess game with Richard Kasa began as a French Defence 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5. I chose the Tarrasch 3.Nd2 Nf6 4.e5 Nfd7. When GM Seirawan played this against Kasa in 1992, Yasser as White played 5.c3 c5 6.f4. They drew in 36 moves. That is C05. I preferred C06 in ECO with 5.Bd3 and White knights on d2 and e2. I relocated my knights to their natural squares 10.Nf3 and 12.Nc3. This kept the White bishops active. I followed the White strategy of exchanging the dark squared bishops via Bg5-Bh4-Bg3. Anatoly Karpov used this strategy against Victor Korchnoi in their world championship matches. Our game was a sharp contest with constant attacks and counter attacks. We both played well for about a year (the slow speed of postal chess). White had a better move 20. Black had a better move 34. The position remained basically equal until my blunder on move 40. Sawyer - Kasa, corr ICCF 1984 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nd2 Nf6 4.e5 Nfd7 5.Bd3 c5 6.c3 Nc6 7.Ne2 cxd4 8.cxd4 f6 9.exf6 Nxf6 10.Nf3 Bd6 11.0-0 Qc7 12.Nc3 [12.g3=] 12...a6 13.Bg5 0-0 14.Bh4 [14.Rc1=] 14...g6 15.Bg3 Bxg3 16.hxg3 Qg7 17.Qd2 Ng4 18.Be2 Bd7 19.Rad1 Rae8 20.Nh2 [20.Na4+/=] 20...Nh6 21.g4 Kh8 22.Bf3 Re7 23.Ne2 Ref7 24.g5

Nf5 25.g3 Nd6 26.Bg2 Nc4 27.Qc3 Rc8 28.b3 Nd6 29.Qb2 Ne4 30.f4 Nb4 31.Bxe4 dxe4 32.Rc1 Rxc1 33.Nxc1 Bb5 34.Re1 Bd3 [34...Rc7!=/+] 35.Ng4 Rc7 36.Nf6 Rc2 37.Qa3 Qe7 38.Qa5 Nc6 39.Qb6 Qb4 40.Qxb4 Nxb4 41.Nxe4? [41.a3 Nd5=] 41...Bxe4 42.Rxe4 Rxc1+ 0-1

3.Nd2 c5 Black immediately and directly challenges the White center since the White Nd2 does not attack d5.

87 – Haines 4.c3 Nc6 5.Bd3 Ray Haines won with a sudden sacrifice. The French Defence Tarrasch line 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nd2 c5 4.exd5! gives White the easier side of an equal position. Below, Ray Haines reached this line by transposition. Instead of taking Black's d-pawn with 4.exd5, White chose 4.c3 Nc6 5.Bd3 which dropped his own d-pawn, if his opponent played accurately. Black stood better until a blunder on move 14 when White turned the tables and won. Haines (1544) - hoppeclump (1500), Live Chess Chess.com, 05.06.2018 begins 1.d4 e6 2.e4 d5 3.Nd2 c5 4.c3!? [4.exd5!= gives White a much easier game.] 4...Nc6 [4...dxe4 5.Nxe4 cxd4=] 5.Bd3?! [Dubious sacrifice of d4. Better is 5.Ngf3=] 5...cxd4 6.exd5? [6.cxd4 Nxd4=/+] 6...dxc3 7.bxc3 exd5!? [7...Qxd5!-/+ develops the kingside and remains up a pawn.] 8.Ngf3 Nf6 9.0-0 Be7 10.Qc2 Be6 11.Nb3 0-0 12.Bg5 [12.Rb1 Qc7=/+] 12...g6 [12...Rc8-/+] 13.Nbd4 Nd7 [13...Ng4=/+] 14.Bh6 Re8? [14...Nxd4 15.Nxd4 Bf6 16.Bxf8 Qxf8 17.Nxe6 fxe6 18.Rae1 Nc5= compensation for the Exchange] 15.Nxe6! fxe6 16.Bxg6 [White wins the Exchange or mates.]1-0

88 – Muir 4.exd5 cxd4 5.Bb5+ This Bob Muir game reminded me of the von Hennig Schara Gambit 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 c5 4.cxd5 cxd4. Black plays the same exact first four moves. Here Black lost his stranded pawn on d4, but he had compensation. Black castled queenside. White castled kingside. Black kicked a White knight, expecting it to retreat. Instead the knight leaped over the pawns for checkmate! Sawyer (2010) - Muir (1800), Williamsport, PA 03.1998 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e4 e6 3.Nd2 c5 4.exd5 cxd4 5.Bb5+ Bd7 6.Bxd7+ Qxd7 7.dxe6 Qxe6+ 8.Qe2!? [8.Ne2!+/-] 8...Qxe2+ 9.Nxe2 Nc6 10.Nb3 0-0-0 11.0-0 Bb4

[11...Nge7 12.Bf4=] 12.Rd1 Nf6 13.Nexd4 Ne5 [13...Nxd4 14.Rxd4 Rxd4 15.Nxd4+/=] 14.c3 Be7 15.Bf4 Nc4 16.Nb5 [16.Nf5+/-] 16...Rxd1+ 17.Rxd1 a6? [17...b6 18.Re1+/-] 18.Na7# 1-0

89 – Huber 4…Qxd5 5.Ngf3 Here are four tips for you to win chess games quickly. 1. Develop all your minor pieces before your opponent does. 2. Grab big open lines. 3. Aim for weak points. 4. Look for combinations. Watch what happens in my French Defence vs Ernest Huber. In the 1970s World Champion Anatoly Karpov controlled the board with piece play in all his openings. Karpov's skill and expertise with pieces allowed him to dominate the best masters in the world for a decade after Bobby Fischer quit playing. Fischer was awesome when he played! But he quit after 1972. From 19721982 Karpov sharpened his skills playing 50 master tournament games per year. Fischer did not. If Fischer wanted to play Karpov we can imagine the games would have been great! I copied Karpov's openings in my own games. In the French Defence Tarrasch Variation 3.Nd2 game vs Ernest Huber, my army was at full strength. Black got into big trouble after a dozen moves. He had weak points at f7, e6, d7, and c7. I had many combinations because of my advantage in development and found one that won a piece. Sawyer (1980) - Huber (1874), P-388 corr APCT (1.2), 12.1978 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nd2 c5 4.exd5 Qxd5 5.Ngf3 cxd4 6.Bc4 Qd6 7.0-0 Nf6 8.Nb3 Bd7 9.Nbxd4 Be7 10.Qe2 a6 [10...Nc6 11.Rd1+/=] 11.Rd1 Qc7 12.Ne5 0-0 [12...b5 13.Bb3+-] 13.Bf4 [13.Nxf7!+-] 13...Qc8 [13...Qb6 14.c3+/-] 14.c3 [14.Nxd7! Nbxd7 15.Nxe6 fxe6 16.Bxe6+ Rf7 17.Rxd7 Nxd7 18.Rd1+-] 14...Nc6? [14...Kh8 15.Bb3+/-] 15.Nxd7 Nxd4 16.Nxf6+ Bxf6 17.cxd4 Re8 18.Rac1 Qd7 19.Be5 1-0

90 – Urgena 4…Qxd5 5.Ngf3 Helen Warren attracted many players to APCT from her home state of Illinois. One postal player from Illinois was Chris Urgena. He and I played the same French Defence line two times in 1979. I like the Tarrasch Variation 3.Nd2 due to the open nature of the position. Black chose the line 3…c5 4.exd5 Qxd5. This keeps Black from having an isolated pawn on d5. Normally White drives the queen back with 5.Ngf3 Nc6 6.Bc4 Qd8. Temporarily Black may have an extra pawn after 7.Nb3 cxd4. The risk to White is minor since there is no good way for Black to keep the pawn. Here I regained the pawn with 11.Nbxd4. In our other game I reached the same position as below after 8.0-0. There Urgena played 8…g6. I should have responded with 9.Nbxd4 Nxd4 10.Nxd4 a6 11.Qd3 Bg7 12.Rd1 Bd7 13.Bf4+=. Then White would have had an advantage due to the better bishops. Instead I played 9.Bg5 and we drew a long game. This shorter game below features a tactical skirmish. White has a lead in development and better placed pieces. My strategy led to a positional advantage for White. My pieces had better scope, especially the bishops. One knight move that jumps out at me in this game is 16.Nd7. This move headed toward complications. White had multiple possibilities. Black chose the wrong defensive arrangement and apparently miscalculated. Sawyer (2000) - Urgena (1840), corr APCT 1979 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nd2 c5 4.exd5 Qxd5 5.Ngf3 Nc6 6.Bc4 Qd8 7.Nb3 cxd4 8.0-0 Be7 [8...Nf6 9.Nbxd4 Nxd4 10.Nxd4=] 9.Qe2 Nf6 10.Rd1 0-0 11.Nbxd4 Qc7 12.Nxc6 [12.Bg5+/=] 12...bxc6 13.Bg5 Bb7 14.Qe5 [14.Ne5!?] 14...Qxe5 15.Nxe5 Rfd8 16.Nd7 Nd5 17.Bxe7 Nxe7? [17...Rxd7 18.Bc5+/=] 18.Nc5 Rxd1+ 19.Rxd1 Rb8 20.Nxb7 Nd5 21.Na5 g6 22.Nxc6 Rb7 23.Bb3 1-0

91 – Parsons 4…Qxd5 5.Ngf3 We may not like politics in chess, but politics and chess can mix and survive. We have our personal opinions, but remember, we come together to play chess. Just keep moving. If we kicked out everyone who disagreed with us, we could play only solitaire chess. As I recall David Parsons loved conservative American politics. He probably liked every Republican President from Abraham Lincoln to George W. Bush. Another vocal player in the club was a liberal Democrat. This made for some good natured banter. Love covers a multitude of sins. At our chess club we all liked each other well enough that we did not let political differences get in the way. Just keep moving. Beyond being able to vote, what the heck can we do about the government anyway? In our French Defence Tarrasch, Dave chose 4...Qxd5. Black avoids the isolated pawn at the cost of a few tempi. I tried to focus on the center. Parsons pushed play to his right. Most of his moves were from the e-file to the a-file. My queen got distracted from the center on move 23. That gave him good play. Just keep moving. Pieces kept flying with each tactical threat and counter. In the ending White was up a pawn, so Black resigned. Sawyer (2011) - Parsons (1682), Williamsport, PA 1994 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nd2 c5 4.exd5 Qxd5 5.Ngf3 cxd4 6.Bc4 Qd8 7.Nb3 Bb4+ 8.Bd2 Qb6 9.Nfxd4 Nf6 10.0-0 0-0 11.Bxb4 Qxb4 12.Bd3 [12.Qe2=] 12...Rd8 13.c3 Qe7 14.Qf3 e5 15.Nf5 [15.Rfe1+/=] 15...Bxf5 16.Bxf5 Nc6 17.Rad1 e4 18.Qe3 Qe5 19.Qc5 Rd5 [19...g6=] 20.Rxd5 Nxd5 21.Bd7 Nce7 22.c4 [22.Re1=] 22...b6 23.Qb5? [23.Qd4=] 23...a6 24.Qa4 Nf6 25.Bc6 Ng4 [Black threatens mate in one.] 26.g3 Rd8 27.c5 bxc5 [27...Nxc6! 28.Qxc6 e3-+] 28.Qxe4 [28.Bxe4=] 28...f5 [28...c4=/+] 29.Qxe5 Nxe5 30.Bb7 c4 31.Na5 Rd2 32.Bxa6?! [32.f4+/-] 32...c3? [32...Rxb2 33.Nxc4=] 33.Nc4 Nxc4 34.Bxc4+ Kf8 35.bxc3 Rc2 36.Rb1 Nc6 37.Rb6 1-0

92 – Benner 4…exd5 5.Bb5+ In a French Defence game I grabbed a pawn and tried to keep it. This greedy approach was too risky. I got away with it, but I do not play this way anymore. Here I examine a Tarrasch Variation 3.Nd2 game that I played by postal chess in 1978. As I recall, my opponent Steve Benner was an Iowa farmer. Some years later, I visited Iowa while on vacation. One of my favorite places was the Field of Dreams baseball field. My choice was to take 7.dxc5 and try to defend with 8.b4? This resembles a Queens Gambit reversed. I would have been in trouble if Black found the correct 10th move. APCT Semi-Class tournaments listed players in order of rating. They divided all the entrants into groups of seven. At that point, you would play the other six in your group with three games as White and three as Black. At the beginning of the event, everyone had ratings that were close to each other. The games were played at a pace of about one move each per week, so games tended to last for several months. By the end of the event, player ratings were often far apart. The final results were rated based on each players ratings at the time the game ended. My postal rating was on a rapid rise in 1978. Helen Warren directed APCT tournaments. Jim Warren ran the ratings for APCT. According to Professor Arpad Elo, Jim Warren wrote the computer program FIDE used for its Elo rating system. APCT set ratings 1000 points below the Elo rating scale. USCF postal did not. I changed all my APCT ratings to the Elo scale. Sawyer (1950) - Benner (1722), corr APCT 78SC-5, 11.1978 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nd2 c5 4.exd5 exd5 5.Bb5+ Bd7 6.Qe2+ Be7 7.dxc5 Nf6

8.b4? [White is being greedy. Better is 8.Ngf3 0-0 9.Nb3 Re8 10.Be3=] 8...0-0 9.Nb3 Re8 10.Be3 Ng4 [10...a5!-/+] 11.Bxd7 Qxd7 12.Nf3 Bf6 13.Nbd4 Nc6 14.c3 Re4 [14...Nxe3 15.fxe3 Rxe3 16.Qxe3 Re8=/+] 15.0-0 Rae8 16.Qd2 [16.Rae1=] 16...Nxe3 17.fxe3 Rxe3 18.Rae1 Rxe1 19.Rxe1 Rxe1+ 20.Qxe1 Kf8 1/2-1/2

93 – Johnson 4…exd5 5.Bb5+ Shortly after I played Michael Johnson of California, a fascinating article appeared in the APCT News Bulletin. It was entitled: “A Chess Vacation: Russia and Michael Johnson”. The article was well written. It was published around May. 1979. I only have page 135 of the article because one of my other wins from our same event was on the back (page 136). Michael Johnson took a chess group vacation to Russia. His observations made an interesting travel log for the Western chess player during the cold war period. In part he wrote: “In Russia it is not enough merely to play well; one must be able to pass along his knowledge and skills... Geller is on the staff.” “...at Moscow University... Botvinnik told us that it's his opinion that computers will soon play better than people, but that this should not influence human chess in any way.” “We were met by Maya Chiburdanidze, the Women's World Champion. She is a very pleasant 17 year old girl with a very pleasant killer-instinct at the board. Her full-time trainer is Gufeld” “In the states, when someone finds out that you play tournament chess, their first question is likely to be, "How many moves ahead can you think?"... In Russia, when they learn that you play the game, their first question is, "What openings do you play?” This Sawyer vs Johnson game was a Tarrasch French Defence. The basic theme of this 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nd2 c5 line is for White to play against the isolated Black pawn on d5. Our game was level until Johnson missed a simple tactic. It happens to us all. He lost a piece and the game. Some wins do come easy. Sawyer - Johnson, corr APCT Q-36 corr APCT, 1978 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nd2 c5 4.exd5 exd5 5.Bb5+ Bd7 6.Qe2+ Be7 7.dxc5 Nf6 8.Nb3 0-0

9.Be3 Re8 10.Nf3 a6 11.Bxd7 Nbxd7 12.0-0 Bxc5 13.Nxc5 Nxc5 14.Rfe1 Ne6 15.Qd3 Qc7 16.h3 Rac8 17.c3 Qc4 18.Ne5 Qxd3 19.Nxd3 Red8 20.Rac1 h6 21.Nb4 d4 22.cxd4 Nxd4 [22...Rxc1 23.Rxc1 Nxd4=] 23.Rxc8 Nf3+ 24.gxf3 1-0

94 – Corter 4…exd5 5.Ngf3 James Corter played the French Defence against me several times. His son Travis also played it against me some. This time against Jim Corter I countered with the Tarrasch Variation 3.Nd2. Corter opted for the classical open move 3...c5. I proceeded to exchange off the e-pawns at d5. Years earlier I would follow up with 5.Bb5+. Even though I had good results, I did not like those positions out of the opening. Knights before bishops. That’s almost always a better idea. So I developed my kingside knight with 5.Ngf3. Normally Black stops a bishop check on move six with 5…Nc6 on move five. James Corter developed 5...Nf6. This looks playable enough, but White was able to mix things up for a few moves with 6.Bb5+ and 7.Qe2+. None of this amounted to much. Black was still fine. We kept maneuvering. Eventually White got a slight edge. Black opened up his kingside and pushed to attack. This allowed me to threaten the pin of his queen to his king. Corter dodged that, but then he fell prey to the pin of his h-pawn to his queen. This is one of those unusual games were a player resigned without getting checkmated nor losing material. However Black was just about to lose a pawn when White would have a big advantage. Sawyer (2010) - Corter (1603), Williamsport, PA 20.03.2001 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nd2 c5 4.exd5 exd5 5.Ngf3 Nf6 6.Bb5+ Bd7 7.Qe2+ Be7 8.dxc5 0-0 9.0-0 [9.Nb3 Re8 10.Be3 a6 11.Bd3 Ba4 12.Nfd4=] 9...Bxc5 10.Nb3 Re8 11.Qd3 Bxb5 [11...Bb6=] 12.Qxb5 Bb6 13.Bg5 Qd7 14.Nbd4 Bxd4 15.Nxd4 a6 16.Qd3 Ne4 17.Bf4 Nc6 18.c3 Nc5 19.Qd1 Ne6 20.Nxe6 fxe6 21.Qg4 Qf7 22.Bg5 Qg6 23.Qf4 Rf8 24.Qd2 Ne5 25.f4 Nc4 26.Qe2 h5 [26...Rae8 27.Bh4=] 27.b3 Nb6 28.Be7 Rfe8 29.Bc5 Nd7

30.Bd4 Nf6 31.Bxf6 [31.Qe5+/=] 31...gxf6 32.Rf3 Kf7 33.Re1 h4 [33...Rac8 34.a4+/=] 34.Rh3 [34.Qf2+/-] 34...Qh6 35.g3 1-0

95 – Werner 4…exd5 5.Ngf3 RxN, Resigns! My game vs Edmund Werner was decided on a rook sacrifice. Our APCT game was a French Defence in the Tarrasch Variation 3.Nd2 c5. White ripped open the queenside with 14.a4 and won a pawn. I had to defend the 15...Bb8 mate threat. Werner was active in many postal organizations from the 1950s until his death. Old-timers will remember Ed Werner. The Daytona Beach Morning Journal listed Ed Werner’s obituary on June 6, 1981. Apparently Werner had worked in his younger days as an entry clerk for Master Eagle Photo Engraving Corp. in New York. Then Edmund Werner retired to Florida where he played postal chess for many years. The paper lists Werner as age 68 at the time of death. The article says that Werner was a member of the International Correspondence Chess Federation. Sawyer (1900) - Werner (1747), corr APCT 77RF 1978 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nd2 c5 4.exd5 exd5 5.Ngf3 a6 [5...Nc6=] 6.dxc5 Bxc5 7.Nb3 Ba7 8.Be2 Ne7 9.0-0 Qc7 10.c3 0-0 11.Nfd4 Nbc6 12.Be3 Nxd4 13.Nxd4 b5? [13...Nc6 14.Re1+/=] 14.a4 bxa4 15.Qxa4 Bb8 16.g3 Bb7 17.Bf4 Qc8 18.Bxb8 Qxb8 19.Qd7 Re8 20.Ra5 [20.Rfe1+/-] 20...Qc8 21.Qxc8 Rexc8 22.Rfa1 Rab8 23.R1a2 g6 [23...Nc6 24.Nxc6 Rxc6 25.Bxa6 Bxa6 26.Rxa6 +/=] 24.Bxa6 Rc7 25.Rb5 Ra8 26.Rba5 Rb8 27.Bd3 Bc8 28.Ra7 Rxa7 29.Rxa7 Kf8 30.Rxe7 1-0

96 – Cooley 5…Nc6 6.Bb5 Nf6 This French Defence game vs Tom Cooley shows my opponent played some good chess. I started well, but Black fought back. He turned my advantage into equality. Then he gained the edge. Cooley outplayed me and won in fine fashion. Congratulations. Sawyer (2000) - Cooley (1850), corr APCT 1979 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nd2 c5 4.exd5 exd5 5.Ngf3 Nc6 6.Bb5 Nf6 7.0-0 Be6 8.dxc5 [8.Re1! Bd6 9.Nb3 c4 10.Nc5+/=] 8...Bxc5 9.Nb3 Qb6 [9...Bb6 10.Nbd4=]

10.Nxc5 Qxc5 11.Nd4 [11.Bd3+/=] 11...0-0 12.Nxe6 fxe6 13.Be2 Ne4 14.Bf3 Nd6 15.c3 Nf5 16.g3 Rad8 17.Bg2 e5 18.Bg5 Rd7 19.Qd3 e4 20.Qc2? [20.Be3=] 20...h6 21.Bf4 g5 22.Bd2 Ne5 23.Rad1 Nd4 24.Qa4? [24.Be3 Ndf3+ 25.Kh1 Qd6=/+] 24...Ne2+ 25.Kh1 Rxf2 26.b4 Qb6 27.c4 Rxf1+ [27...Ng4-+] 28.Rxf1 Qd4 29.Bf4 gxf4 30.gxf4 Nc3 0-1

97 – blik 6.Bb5 Bd6 7.0-0 Do computer chess engines fear the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit? Can’t Black just take the pawn and win easily? Only sometimes. In my game vs “blik” Black refused to take the gambit pawn. I did a quick count vs this opponent from 2008 - 2013. As White in the BDG I won 98 games and lost 101 games with 34 draws. Fear is not part of the computer algorithm for opening selection. Such choices are based on its approved book lines, its winning percentage with specific moves and some “random” selection. Instead of entering the BDG this computer transposed into the French Defence with 1.d4 d5 2.e4 e6. I chose the Tarrasch 3.Nd2 which leads to very solid and equal positions. This game continued 7.0-0 cxd4 instead of 7.dxc5 Bxc5 8.0-0. After multiple exchanges we reached a bishop and pawn ending where neither king had any entry points to his opponent’s pawns. From 34.g5 we drew this game on move 84 by the 50 move rule. Sawyer (1984) - blik (2422), ICC 5 0 Internet Chess Club, 20.06.2008 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e4 e6 3.Nd2 c5 4.Ngf3 Nc6 5.exd5 exd5 6.Bb5 Bd6 7.0-0 [7.dxc5 Bxc5 8.0-0 Nge7 9.Nb3 Bd6=] 7...cxd4 8.Nb3 Nge7 9.Nbxd4 0-0 10.c3 Bg4 [10...Re8 11.Re1=] 11.h3 Nxd4 12.cxd4 Bxf3 13.Qxf3 Qb6 14.Qd3 Nc6 15.Bxc6 bxc6 16.b3 Qb5 17.Qxb5 cxb5 18.Bd2 Rfe8 19.Rfe1 Rxe1+ 20.Rxe1 Rc8 21.Rc1 Rxc1+ 22.Bxc1 f6 23.f3 Kf7 24.g4 g6 25.Kf2 h5 26.Be3 Ke8 27.Ke2 a6 28.Kd3 a5 29.a4 hxg4 30.hxg4 bxa4 31.bxa4 Kd8 32.Bd2 Bc7 33.f4 f5 34.g5 [34.gxf5 gxf5=] 34...Ke7 35.Be3 Kf7 36.Bd2 Kf8 37.Be3 Ke7 38.Bd2 Ke6 39.Be3 Kd6 40.Bd2 Ke6 41.Be3 Ke7 42.Bd2 Bb6 43.Ke3 Ke6 44.Kd3 Bd8 45.Be1 Ke7 46.Bd2 Bb6 47.Ke3 Bd8 48.Kd3 Kd7 49.Ke3 Kc8 50.Kd3 Bb6 51.Ke3 Kc7 52.Kd3 Kc6 53.Ke3 Kb7 54.Kd3 Kc7 55.Ke3 Kd8 56.Kd3 Kd7 57.Ke3 Kd8 58.Kd3 Kc8 59.Ke3 Kd7 60.Kd3 Ke8 61.Ke3 Ke7 62.Kd3 Bc7 63.Ke3 Bb6 64.Kd3 Kd8 65.Ke3 Kc8 66.Kd3 Kd7 67.Ke3 Bc7 68.Kd3 Bd6

69.Kc2 Ke8 70.Kd3 Bc7 71.Ke3 Kd7 72.Kd3 Ke8 73.Ke3 Bd8 74.Kd3 Bb6 75.Ke3 Kf8 76.Kd3 Kg8 77.Ke3 Kf7 78.Kd3 Kg8 79.Ke3 Kf8 80.Kd3 Kf7 81.Ke3 Kg8 82.Kd3 Kf8 83.Ke3 Kg8 84.Kd3 1/2-1/2

98 – Ballard 6…Bd6 7.dxc5 Bxc5 DLP Ballard from Oklahoma is a Life member of the USCF who earned the National Master title. He and I played postal games almost every year from 1978 to 1982. DLP won the first game with 1.g3 in what was basically a Reversed Pirc Defence. Duncan Suttles was famous at that time for playing 1.g3. Grandmaster Suttles was very active. Usually Suttles played 1.e4, but if not he chose 1.g3, 1.c4 or 1.Nc3. My early loss vs DLP Ballard occurred when I was very much in the learning phase of my chess skills and experience. All the rest of my games vs DLP Ballard were drawn. When I wrote to someone weekly for months, we had ongoing conversations on the postcards. DLP Ballard was a friendly guy. Sometimes we would chat. I was curious and asked him one time what the “DLP” stood for. As I recall he said, “D La Pierre Ballard”. He said his first name was just the letter “D”. I think he signed his postcards “D”. Nice. Since he was rated over 2200 in tournament play, I am guessing that he was stronger face to face than via correspondence. Still he was a pretty good postal chess player for several years. This was the only game where I had White. We reached a critical variation of the French Defence Tarrasch after 3.Nd2 c5. I traded off both my bishops for both of his knights. Then we mixed things up. After multiple exchanges I had a queen and a pawn for his two rooks. We agreed to a draw when we could have repeated moves. Sawyer (2100) - Ballard (2050), corr APCT 1980 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nd2 c5 4.exd5 exd5 5.Ngf3 Nc6 6.Bb5 Bd6 7.dxc5 Bxc5 8.0-0 Nge7 9.Nb3 Bd6 10.Bg5 0-0 11.Re1 a6 12.Bxc6 [12.Bd3!?] 12...bxc6 13.Bxe7 Bxe7 14.Nbd4 Bd7 15.Ne5 Bf6 16.Ndxc6 Bxc6 17.Nxc6 Qd6 18.Nd4 Qb4

19.Nc6 Qxb2 20.Qxd5 Qxa1 [20...Qb5 21.Rad1=] 21.Rxa1 Bxa1 22.g3 Bc3 23.Qc5 Bf6 24.a4 g6 25.Ne7+ [25.Qb6+/=] 25...Bxe7 26.Qxe7 Rfe8 27.Qb7 Reb8 28.Qc7 Rc8 1/2-1/2

99 – Spigel 6…Bd6 7.dxc5 Bxc5 The Greek philosopher Socrates gave us the famous maxim “Know Thyself.” The point was that we are not gods. We have limitations. Know them. During my chess career, I learned things about myself that I did not expect. Outwardly I am a peaceful person. Inwardly I can become rather wild and frisky. I am comfortable with solid chess, but when a game gets wild, I somehow naturally crank up my play to a higher level. When the pieces are flying around, I tend to find more good moves than my opponent does. It is not that I see everything; I don't, and I do hate that. But I have more success when combinations abound. David Spigel and I played four times. I won this French Defence and drew a London System as White. I lost a Bird's Opening as White and I lost a Latvian Gambit as Black. This game followed some Karpov-Korchnoi 1974 match games through move 12. After my 14.h3, 14...Nxd4 15.Nxd4 would have led to equality. Instead Black decided to mix things up. When pieces start flying, I got the better chances. At a critical moment I missed the powerful move 20.Bh7+! Missing moves happens, but the point is I got to a position where White was winning. Often I was not so successful with positional chess. Things swung back to equal as we approached the ending. All of a sudden Black hung a piece. Maybe Spigel meant to play other moves first and forgot that he had not played them yet. Maybe he set the board up wrong. For whatever reason, I got a gift win. Sawyer - Spigel, corr APCT Q-36 corr APCT, 1978 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nd2 c5 4.exd5 exd5 5.Ngf3 Nc6 6.Bb5 Bd6 7.dxc5 Bxc5 8.0-0 Nge7 9.Nb3 Bd6 10.Nbd4 0-0 11.c3 Bg4 12.Qa4 Bh5 13.Bg5 Qc7 14.h3 f6?! [14...Nxd4 15.Nxd4=] 15.Ne6 Qc8 16.Nxf8 fxg5 17.Nxh7 Bxf3 18.Nxg5 Bh5 19.Bd3 Ne5 20.Qh4 [I missed the move 20.Bh7+!] 20...Nxd3 21.Qxh5 Qf5 22.g4? [22.Rad1] 22...Nf4 23.gxf5 Nxh5 24.Rad1 Rf8

25.Ne4 Bb8 26.Nc5 Rxf5 27.Rfe1 Kf7 28.Nxb7 Nf4 29.Nd8+ Kf6 30.Rxe7 Nxh3+ 31.Kg2 Nf4+ 32.Kf1 Kxe7 33.Nc6+ Kd6 34.Nxb8 Nd3 [34...Rh5 35.Ke1 Rh1+ 36.Kd2 Rxd1+ 37.Kxd1 Nd3=/+] 35.Rxd3 1-0

Book 3: Chapter 5 – Classical Variation White develops his knight to protect e4 and attack d5.

3.Nc3 100 – Sawyer 3…c6 4.Be3 Be7 Dan Heisman recommended playing a million blitz games to improve your opening play. I love blitz chess. I learned many openings that way, but I am a long way from a million games! Over my career I have tried to play opponents of every level. Club players will often play lines never seen at the master level. Common non-master lines rarely make it into opening books. This curious line combines a Caro-Kann and a French Defence. We began 1.d4 d5 2.e4 e6 3.Nc3 c6. How should White play? Good moves are 4.Nf3, 4.e5 or 4.Bd3. More speculative are 4.f3, 4.Be3 and 4.a3. I have played all of them; it is a matter of taste. Here I chose 4.Be3 Be7 5.e5 (5.Bd3!?) 5...c5 when 6.Qg4! looks better than my choice of 6.f4. I made errors on moves 24, 25, 32 and 33. My opponent played well, but I was still in the game. Up until this point, he played slightly faster than I did. I had to step it up and make him think. I tried to pry open the kingside; he began to use more time. At the end I had a 0:400:33 edge on the clock when he made a tactical blunder dropping his rook. He resigned. Sawyer (1991) - ZEPFAN4EVER (1583), ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 04.08.2011 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e4 e6 3.Nc3 c6?! 4.Be3 [4.Nf3+/=; 4.e5+/=] 4...Be7 5.e5 c5 6.f4 [6.Qg4+/=] 6...cxd4 7.Bxd4 Nc6 8.Nf3 b6 9.Bb5 Bd7 10.0-0 a6 11.Bxc6 Bxc6 12.Bf2 Rc8 13.Ne2 Bc5 14.Ned4 Qd7 15.c3 Ne7 16.Qd2 0-0 17.Rad1 Qb7 18.Kh1 b5 19.Nxc6 Qxc6 20.Nd4 Bxd4 21.Bxd4 Nf5 22.g4 Nxd4 23.Qxd4 Qc4 24.a3? [24.f5] 24...Rc7 25.Kg2 [25.f5] 25...Qb3 26.Rd2 Rc4 27.Qf2 Rfc8 28.Re1 Qa4 29.Kg3 Re4 30.Re3 Rcc4 31.Rde2? [31.Rxe4=] 31...h6? [31...Rxf4?] 32.Qf3 [32.Rxe4=] 32...Rxe3 [32...Rxf4-+] 33.Rxe3 Qb3 34.Re2 a5 35.h3 b4

36.axb4 axb4 37.cxb4 Qxb4 38.f5 d4 39.Qa8+ Kh7 40.f6 Qb3+ 41.Kf2 gxf6 42.exf6 [42.Qf8=] 42...Rc2? [42...d3-+] 43.Qe4+ Black resigns 1-0

101 – Zerg 3…c6 4.Be3 Nf6 I heard from the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit player Howard Zerg. "Hello Tim, My name's Howard, and I'm a huge fan of your BDG book. Way to go!" "I can't imagine writing down so much notation..." "This is my favorite game that I have played recently." Thanks Howard! I have always found the Caro-French a little perplexing for the BDGer. White plays 1.d4 / 2.e4 / 3.Nc3 (in any order) and Black plays 1...e6 / 2...d5 / 3...c6 (in any order). At this point, White has many playable moves. In my experience the odds are very small of reaching a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit from this position. I have tried 4.Be3!? as did Howard. My best results were from 4.Nf3 and 4.e5. I have also stubbornly played 4.f3. Howard Zerg treated it with a Huebsch Gambit flavor. That worked well for him here. Zerg (2030) - niccion (2047), Blitz 3 min, 28.03.2013 begins 1.d4 e6 2.Nc3 d5 3.e4 c6 [3...Nf6= French Defence] 4.Be3!? Nf6 5.Qd2 Nxe4 6.Nxe4 dxe4 7.f3 exf3 8.Nxf3 Be7 9.0-0-0 0-0 10.Bd3 Nd7 11.h4 f5 [The natural move is 11...Nf6 when White has compensation for the gambit pawn after a move like 12.h5!?=] 12.h5 h6 13.Rdg1 Bd6 14.g4 f4 [If 14...fxg4 15.Rxg4 Rxf3 16.Bxh6 Rf7 17.Rhg1 Bf8 18.Bxg7 Rxg7 19.Rxg7+ Bxg7 20.h6+/=] 15.Bf2 Be7 16.Bh4 [16.g5+-] 16...Bg5 17.Bxg5 hxg5 18.h6 Rf7 19.Rh5 gxh6 20.Rgh1 Rg7 21.Rxh6 Qe7? [This move invites disaster, but White is still better after 21...Kf7 22.Rh8+-] 22.Qh2 e5 23.Rh8+ Kf7 24.Qh5+ [24.Bc4+! could lead to the pretty and quick finish after 24...Kf6 25.Rh6+ Rg6 26.Rxg6+ Kxg6 27.Qh6#] 24...Ke6 25.Re8 Kd5 26.Rxe7 Rxe7 27.Nxe5 Nxe5 28.dxe5 [Or 28.Qxg5!+-] 28...Rxe5 29.Rd1 Kc5 30.b4+ Kb6 31.a4 [31.Qh8!+- wins more material.] 31...a6 32.Qh8 Re7 33.Qd4+ Kc7 34.a5 Be6 35.Qb6+ Kd7 36.Bf5+ Ke8 37.Bxe6 Rxe6

38.Qxb7 Re7 39.Qxa8+ Kf7 40.Qxc6 Re6 41.Qc7+ Re7 42.Qd6 Re6 43.Qd7+ Re7 44.Qd5+ Re6 45.Re1 Kg6 46.Qxe6+ Kg7 47.Qe7+ Kg8 48.Re6 1-0

102 – Torning 3…c5 4.exd5 Rick Torning sent me this French Defence game with this note: "A typical bullet game against schlosser (2409), who managed to help me win with a little king hunt in a 12 move brevity, had a certain charm reinforcing the value of pins, open lines and the problem of f7-f6! This is a pretty game for me. Hope you are well my friend! Regards, Richard Torning" Torning (1801) - schlosser (2409), Casual Bullet game lichess, 20.10.2017 begins 1.d4 d5 2.Nc3 e6 3.e4 c5 4.exd5 cxd4 [4...exd5 5.dxc5 d4 6.Bb5+ Nc6 7.Qe2+ Be6 8.Ne4+/-] 5.Qxd4 [5.Bb5+ Bd7 6.Qxd4 exd5 7.Bxd7+ Qxd7 8.Qxd5+/-] 5...exd5 [5...Nc6 6.Bb5 exd5 7.Qxd5+/-] 6.Qe5+ [6.Qxd5!+/-] 6...Ne7 [6...Be6!=] 7.Bb5+ [7.Nb5 Nbc6 8.Qd6+/=] 7...Nd7? [7...Nbc6=] 8.Nxd5 f6 9.Nc7+ Kf7 [White has two mates in four.] 10.Bc4+ [Or 10.Qe6+] 10...Kg6 [If 10...Nd5 11.Bxd5+] 11.Qg3+ Kh5 12.Be2# 1-0

103 – Parsons 3…c5 4.exd5 US Champion Frank Marshall had a creative gambit or offbeat line for everything. David Parsons played the Marshall Gambit of the French Defence against me which began 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 c5. Years ago Rick Kennedy and Riley Sheffield wrote a detailed analysis in "The Marshall Gambit: in the French and Sicilian Defenses". White gets the better position, but this line presents less common issues for White. The big question is “Can White win a pawn and keep it?” White can capture on both d5 and c5 which leaves the new d5 pawn in jeopardy. When the position opened up White got even more and better play. Sawyer (2011) - Parsons (1682), Williamsport, PA 1994 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 c5 4.exd5 exd5 5.dxc5 Nf6 [5...d4 6.Ne4!? Qd5 7.Qe2 Be6 8.c4!? Qf5 9.Nf3 Bxc5? 10.Nxd4 Bxd4 11.Nd6+ Kd7 12.Nxf5 Bxf5 13.Qf3 1-0 Sawyer - Parsons, Williamsport PA 1994] 6.Bg5?! [6.Be3+/=] 6...d4 [6...Bxc5=] 7.Bxf6 Qxf6 8.Nd5!? Qe5+? [8...Qe6+ 9.Qe2+/=] 9.Qe2 Qxe2+ 10.Bxe2 [10.Nxe2!+-] 10...Kd7 [10...Kd8 11.0-0-0+/-] 11.b4 Nc6 12.Rd1 Be7 [12...Ne7 13.Nc3+-] 13.Bg4+ [13.Nf3+-] 13...Kd8 14.Bxc8

Rxc8 15.Nf3 a5 16.b5 [16.a3+-] 16...Bxc5 [16...Nb4 17.Nxb4+/-] 17.bxc6 Re8+ 18.Ne3 Rxc6 19.Nxd4 Rd6 20.Nb5 Rxd1+ 21.Kxd1 Bxe3 22.fxe3 Rxe3 23.Re1 1-0

104 – Sawyer 3…c5 4.exd5 What do you do when you win a lot of material early in a blitz game and there is no immediate mate? You are likely to win eventually, but things can go bad when moves are made rapidly. I follow these five rules of thumb to win such games. 1. I play fast enough to avoid losing on time. 2. I watch my King and major pieces. Don’t lose anything big! 3. I look for strong threats to make my opponent think longer. 4. I swap off the major pieces when practical. 5. I look for little ways to get a quick easy win. Here my opponent avoided the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit. Black opted for 1.d4 d5 2.e4 c5. Adolf Anderssen reached the same position against Van’t Kruys in Amsterdam 1861 via Sicilian Defence after 1.e4 c5 2.d4 d5. That game continued: 3.exd5 Qxd5 4.dxc5. Many players choose 4.Nc3 Qxd4 5.Qxd4 cxd4 6.Nb5 and White stands better. I usually play that. One other option is the Alapin Sicilian 4.c3. I chose a different third move in 3.Nc3. Then Black headed for the French Defence with 3…e6. An alternative is 3...dxe4 4.d5 which is a Reversed Albin-Counter Gambit. By move 10 I had won material. I followed my five rules listed above. I did miss a very strong threat with 25.R8d6+! Eventually Black walked into a mate. Sawyer - samo66, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 06.08.2011 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e4 c5 3.Nc3 e6 4.exd5 exd5 5.dxc5 Bxc5 [5...d4 6.Bb5+ Nc6 7.Qe2+ Be6 8.Ne4+/=] 6.Qxd5 [6.Bb5+!? Bd7 7.Qxd5 Qe7+ 8.Qe4+/=] 6...Qxd5 [Black's game goes from bad to worse. 6...Qe7+! 7.Qe4 Bf5 8.Qxe7+ Nxe7 9.Be3 Bxe3 10.fxe3 Bxc2 11.Rc1 Bf5 12.Nb5+/- with advantage.] 7.Nxd5 Bb6 8.Be3 Kd7? 9.Bxb6 axb6 10.Nxb6+ [wins the Exchange] 10…Kc6 11.Nxa8 Bf5 12.Bd3 Ne7 13.Bxf5 Nxf5 14.0-0-0 Nd7 15.Nf3 Rxa8 16.a3

Nc5 17.Nd4+ Nxd4 18.Rxd4 Ne6 19.Rd2 Nf4 20.g3 Nh3 21.f4 Re8 22.Rhd1 g5 23.fxg5 Nxg5 24.Rd8 Re2 25.R8d2 [25.R8d6+!] 25...Re6 26.b4 Nf3 27.Rd3 Ne5 28.Re3 f6 29.Rde1 Rd6 30.Rd1 Re6 31.h3 Re8 32.Rc3+ Kb5 33.Rd5+ Kb6 34.Rd6+ Kb5? 35.Rc5+ Ka4 36.Ra5# 1-0

105 – Martinez 3.d4 Nc6 4.Nf3 How do you handle it when your opponent copies your moves? At the Borders bookstore in Orlando, Florida one Marty Martinez copied my first couple moves. Then Marty went his own way. Sawyer - Martinez, Orlando, FL, 08.01.2004 begins 1.Nc3 Nc6 [Being a copycat has some value. You have to watch out for tactics. Any winning combination or checkmate will favor White.] 2.d4 d5 3.e4 e6 [French and Nimzowitsch Defence meet here.] 4.Nf3 dxe4 [4...Nf6 5.e5 Ne4 6.Bd3 f5 is recommended in the 2007 repertoire book “Play 1...Nc6!” by Christoph Wisnewski (now Scheerer)] 5.Nxe4 Bb4+ 6.c3 Ba5 7.a4 Nge7 8.b4 Bb6 9.a5 Bxd4 10.Nxd4 Nxd4 11.Qxd4 Qxd4 12.cxd4 [Black has only one pawn for his lost bishop.] 12...0-0 13.Be3 Nf5 14.Ng3 Nxe3 15.fxe3 e5 16.Bc4 exd4 17.exd4 Bg4 18.0-0 Rad8 19.d5 Rde8 20.Rae1 Rxe1 21.Rxe1 Bd7 22.Ne4 [22.Re7!+-] 22...c6 23.dxc6 Bxc6 24.Nd6 h6 25.Nxf7 a6 26.Ne5+ Kh7 27.Nxc6 Rc8 28.Bd3+ g6 29.Ne7 Re8 30.Bxg6+ 1-0

106 – Mastrovasilis 4.Nf3 Nf6 This French Defence is a variation that the Queens Knight player might play from either side: after 1.Nc3 as White or after 1...Nc6 as Black. White avoided a natural bishop swap with the retreat 9.Bf4. Complication ensued where Black sacrificed his queen and three pawns for rook, bishop, and knight when the dust cleared on move 24. White was outplayed by his higher rated opponent in the game Nenad Ristic vs Athanasios Mastrovasilis. Ristic (2372) - Mastrovasilis (2501), 1st Pelion Open 2018 Agios Ioannis GRE (9.3), 23.06.2018 begins 1.e4 Nc6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 e6 4.Nf3 Nf6 5.e5 Nd7 6.Bg5 [6.Ne2 f6 7.Nf4 Qe7 8.exf6+/=] 6...Be7 7.h4 a6 [7...0-0 8.Qd2 f6=] 8.Qd2 h6 9.Bf4 b5 10.Ne2 Nb6 11.b3 Bb7 12.Ng3 Qd7 [12...0-0 13.Nh5+/=] 13.Nh5 Rg8 14.Rh3 0-0-0 15.Rg3 f6 16.Nxg7 fxe5 17.Nxe5 Nxe5 18.Bxe5 Bxh4 19.Rc3 Rxg7 20.Rxc7+ [20.g3 Bg5 21.f4 Be7 22.Bxg7+/-] 20...Qxc7 21.Bxc7 Rxc7 22.Qxh6 Be7 23.Qxe6+ Kb8 24.0-00 Ba3+ 25.Kb1 Rd6 26.Qe8+ Nc8 27.Bd3 Re7 28.Qf8 [28.Qh5+/-]

28...Rde6 29.Qf4+ Nd6 30.c3 Ka7 31.Qd2 [31.b4=] 31...Ne4 32.Qc2 b4 33.Bxe4 Rxe4 34.cxb4 Bxb4 35.Qd3 [35.a3 Bxa3=/+] 35...Bc8 36.Ka1 [36.f3 Bf5-+] 36...Bf5 37.a3 [37.g4 Bh7-+] 37...Re1 0-1

107 – Panko 4.Nf3 Nf6 5.e5 Black will be down a rook in the ending of the game Radoslav Panko vs Slavomir Furman in a French Defence transposition. Panko (2049) - Furman (1768), V4 Stiavnica Open 2018 SVK, 12.07.2018 begins 1.Nc3 d5 2.e4 e6 3.d4 Nc6 4.Nf3 Nf6 5.e5 Ne4 6.Bd3 Bb4 7.Bd2 Nxd2 8.Qxd2 Be7 9.a3 Bd7 10.b4 a5 11.b5 Nb8 12.0-0 c5 13.Rfb1 c4 14.Bf1 a4 15.g3 Qb6 16.Ra2 Ra5 17.h4 0-0 18.Nh2 Bxb5 [18...Be8 19.Ng4=] 19.Rab2 Bxa3 20.Rxb5 Rxb5 21.Rxb5 [21.Nxb5+/-] 21...Qa6 22.Rb1 Qa5 [22...Nc6 23.Na2+/=] 23.Rb5 [23.Qe3+/-] 23...Qa6 24.Rb1 Qa5 25.Qe3 Bb4 26.Na2 Bd2 [26...Nc6 27.c3+/-] 27.Qe2 [27.Qa3+-] 27...b5 [27...Nc6 28.Nf3+/=] 28.Nf3 Bh6 29.g4 [29.c3+/-] 29...g6 30.g5 Bg7 31.c3 Nc6 32.Nh2 Rb8 33.Ng4 b4 34.Nxb4 Nxb4 35.cxb4 Rxb4 36.Qd2 Bf8 [36...Rb5 37.Qxa5+/=] 37.Nh6+ Bxh6 38.Qxb4 [38.gxh6 Rxb1 39.Qxa5+-] 1-0

108 – Douglas 3.d4 Nc6 4.e5 I played Mark Douglas at Borders bookstore in Orlando, Florida. Once I got a winning advantage, Fritz 8 gave variety of ways to describe the hopelessness of Black's plight which I quote below. Sawyer - Douglas, Orlando, FL, 10.02.2005 begins 1.Nc3 Nc6 2.d4 d5 3.e4 e6 4.e5 Bb4 [4...Nge7 5.Nf3+/=] 5.Qg4 f5?? [Better is 5...Bf8+/=] 6.Qxg7+- Nxd4 7.Qxh8 Nxc2+ 8.Kd1 Nxa1 9.Qxg8+ Kd7 10.Qxd8+ Kxd8 11.Bg5+ Ke8 12.Kc1 Nb3+ [12...Bc5 a fruitless try+-] 13.axb3 Bc5 14.Nh3 Bd7 15.Bb5 c6 [15...Bxb5 does not save the day+-] 16.Bd3 Bd4 [16...Kf7 is not the saving move] 17.f4 c5 [17...Kf7 cannot change destiny+-] 18.Bb5 Be3+ [18...a6 doesn't change the outcome] 19.Kc2 d4 [19...a6 doesn't get the cat off the tree] 20.Bxd7+ Kxd7 21.Nd1 Rg8 22.Nxe3 dxe3 23.g3 Rg6 [23...h6 does not help much] 24.Re1 h6 25.Bf6 Ke8 [25...Kc7 cannot change what is in store] 26.Rxe3 Rg4 [26...Kd7 is not much help 27.Rd3+ Kc7 28.b4+-] 27.Nf2 Rg6 28.Rd3 h5 [28...Rg8 doesn't change anything anymore] 29.Rd6 Kf8 [29...h4 doesn't improve anything] 30.Nd3 Rg8 31.Rd8+ Kf7 32.Rxg8 Kxg8 33.Nxc5 b6 34.Nxe6 a5 35.Nd4

Kf7 36.Nxf5 Ke6 37.Ne3 b5 38.f5+ Kf7 39.Bd8 Ke8 40.Bxa5 Kd7 41.e6+ Ke7 42.Bb4+ Kf6 43.Nd5+ Kxf5 44.e7 Ke6 45.e8Q+ Kxd5 [45...Kf5 does not improve anything 46.Qf7+ Kg4 47.Ne3+ Kh3 48.Qxh5 mate] 46.Kd3 h4 47.Qe4 mate 1-0

3.Nc3 dxe4 This is the French Defence Rubinstein Variation.

109 – Haines 4.f3 exf3 5.Nxf3 Ray Haines appeared to be headed for the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit. Then Black veered into a French Defence Rubinstein which may begin by 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 or 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 dxe4. White normally captures 4.Nxe4. Haines chose the adventurous 4.f3 exf3 5.Nxf3. His opponent played the rare 5...Ne7 and never used his other minor pieces. After 13.Ne5, Black was very weak on the light squares. Haines (1522) - gaessyangma2way (1369), Live Chess Chess.com, 11.07.2018 begins 1.d4 d5 2.Nc3 e6 3.e4 dxe4 4.f3 exf3 5.Nxf3 Ne7 [5...Nf6 is a BDG Euwe] 6.Bg5 [6.Bd3] 6...h6 7.Bh4 g5 8.Bg3 Nf5 9.Be5 f6 10.Bg3 Nxg3 11.hxg3 Qe7 [11...Bd6] 12.Bd3 f5? [12...Nc6=] 13.Ne5 Qf6 14.Qh5+ Ke7 15.Ng6+ Kd8 16.Nxh8 Qxh8 [White has won the Exchange.] 17.0-0-0 [Or 17.Qxg5+!+-] 1-0

110 – Hartelt 4.f3 exf3 5.Nxf3 Rob Hartelt wins the French Defence Rubinstein that resembles a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit. After 1.d4 d5 2.Nc3 e6 3.e4 dxe4, White usually recaptures 4.Nxe4. Bolder players can opt for a gambit with 4.f3. Practical odds favor White since only 17% of opponents find the strong reply 4...Bb4! Most choose 4...Nf6 or as here 4...exf3. Hartelt (1605) - chriswhelan (1788), ChessCube Game lichess, 10.03.2018 begins 1.d4 d5 2.Nc3 e6 3.e4 dxe4 4.f3 exf3 [4...Bb4! 5.fxe4 Bxc3+ 6.bxc3 Qh4+ 7.Ke2 Qxe4+ -+] 5.Nxf3 Nc6 6.Bb5 Bd7 7.0-0 a6 8.Bd3 Qf6 [8...Nf6=] 9.Bg5 Qxd4+ [9...0-0-0 10.Bxf6 gxf6 11.Qe2+-] 10.Nxd4 Nxd4 11.Be4 Nc6 [11...c5 12.Qh5+-] 12.Qf3 [12.Rxf7!+-] 12...f6 [12...f5 13.Bxf5 exf5 14.Rae1+ Nge7 15.Nd5+-] 13.Qh5+ Ke7 14.Nd5+ [14.Be3!+-] 14...exd5 15.Bxd5 g6 [15...Re8 16.Bxc6 bxc6 17.Rad1+-]

16.Qe2+ Kd8 17.Rxf6! Bg7 [17...Bc5+ 18.Kh1 Kc8 19.Bxg8 Rxg8 20.Qc4+-] 18.Rf8# 1-0

111 – Abedov 4.Nxe4 Nc6 5.Nf3 White aimed for a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit but Black didn't cooperate. When Black played 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 dxe4 the players transposed into a French Defence Rubinstein. The IM Abdul Hameed El Arousy continued 4.Nxe4 and attacked. Abedov - DrunkenStuper (1625), ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 22.01.2018 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 e6 4.Nxe4 [French Defence Rubinstein] 4...Nc6 5.Nf3 Be7 6.Bd3 [6.c3+/-] 6...Nf6 7.Nxf6+ Bxf6 8.c3 0-0 9.Bf4 Ne7 10.0-0 Ng6 11.Bg3 c6 [11...b6 12.Be4+/=] 12.Qe2 Qb6 13.h4 Bd7 14.h5 Ne7 15.Qe4 g6 16.hxg6 fxg6 17.Ne5 Bxe5 18.Bxe5 Qxb2 [18...Rf7 19.b4+/-] 19.Rab1 Qxa2 [19...Qa3 20.Rxb7+-] 20.Rxb7 Rad8 21.Qh4 Nf5 22.Qg5 Bc8 [22...Qa5 23.Bc7+-] 23.Bxf5 exf5 24.Rg7+ Black resigns since 25.Rxg6+ wins. 1-0

112 – Taylor 4.Nxe4 Be7 5.Bd3 My chess friend Allen Taylor backed into the French Defence Rubinstein Variation in our game played in 1995. White must be able to handle such transpositions. French Defence Rubinstein begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4. I chose 4.Nxe4. Black’s problem in the Rubinstein French is that White has almost complete freedom in the center. The advantage for Black is that lines are relatively predictable, repeatable, and simple. Here he weakened e6 with the move 9…f5. In an effort to protect e6, Black lost two pawns and exchanged into a lost endgame. Sawyer - Taylor, Williamsport PA 1995 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 e6 4.Nxe4 [4.f3?! Bb4!=/+] 4...Be7 [4...Nd7 5.Nf3 Ngf6 6.Nxf6+ Nxf6 7.Bd3=] 5.Bd3 Nf6 6.Nf3 Nc6 [6...Nbd7 is a more solid move when White has many interesting options.] 7.c3 [If 7.0-0 Black must not play 7...Nxd4? 8.Nxd4 Qxd4? 9.Bb5+!+- and White wins the Black queen.] 7...Nxe4 8.Bxe4 0-0 9.0-0 f5 10.Bc2 Bf6 11.Re1 Ne7 12.Bg5 Ng6 13.Bxf6 Qxf6 14.Bb3 Kh8 15.Ne5 Nf4 16.Qf3 Nd5 [16...Ng6 17.Re2+/-] 17.Bxd5 exd5 18.Qxd5 c6 19.Qb3 b6 20.Qc4 f4 [20...Bb7 21.Nd7 Qf7 22.Qe6 Qxe6 23.Rxe6 Rf7 24.Rae1 g6 25.Nf6+-] 21.Qxc6 Qxc6 22.Nxc6 Bb7 23.Ne5

Rf5 24.Re2 [24.c4+-] 24...Rf6 [Black is still busted after 24...f3 25.Nxf3 Bxf3 26.gxf3 Rxf3 27.d5 Rd3 28.c4+-] 25.Rae1 Kg8 26.f3 Bd5 27.c4 Bf7 28.Nxf7 Rxf7 29.Re8+ Rxe8 30.Rxe8+ Rf8 31.Rxf8+ Kxf8 32.Kf2 1-0

3.Nc3 Nf6 In this line both sides develop knights classically on move three.

113 – Penullar 4.f3 Bb4 5.a3 We reach the Classical Variation of the French Defence after 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Nf6. All these moves can be played in any order except 1.e4 Nf6 2.d4? in view of 2...Nxe4. White has two good moves, two okay moves and two gambit moves. The good moves score the highest, but the other moves score reasonably well, depending on the level of competition. Let's look at White's 4th move options in order of popularity: Good: 4.Bg5 Classical Variation Good: 4.e5 Steinitz Variation Okay: 4.exd5 Exchange Variation Okay: 4.Bd3 Solid development Gambit: 4.Be3 Rasa-Studier, cousin to 3.Be3!? Alapin-Diemer Gambit: 4.f3 Often reached via transposition after 1.d4 Nf6 2.f3 In November 2011, Peter Mcgerald Penullar changed the French Defence into something akin to the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit. Penullar - wttyoung913, PF ALAY SA DIYOS AT SA BAYAN 18 - Board Chess.com, 15.11.2011 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 e6 3.e4 d5 4.f3 Bb4 5.a3 Bxc3+ 6.bxc3 0-0 [6...dxe4 transposes to the Winckelmann-Reimer Gambit.] 7.Bd3 [White is ready to solidify e4.] 7...dxe4 8.fxe4 b6 [If 8...Nxe4 9.Nf3 Nxc3 10.Bxh7+ Kxh7 11.Qd3+ f5 and White is better after either 12.Qxc3 or 12.Ng5+] 9.Nf3 Bb7 10.e5 [Or 10.Qe2+/=] 10...Nd5 [10...Ne4 11.0-0 Nxc3 12.Qe1 Bxf3 13.Rxf3 Qxd4+ 14.Kh1 Nd5 15.c3!+/= and White takes over the initiative.] 11.Bd2 [This is a good move, but even

more immediately powerful is 11.Bxh7+! Kxh7 12.Ng5+ Kg6 13.h4+-] 11...Nd7 12.0-0 c5 13.Qe1 [13.Bxh7+!+- wins] 13...cxd4? [13...f5 14.exf6 N7xf6 15.Qxe6+ Kh8 16.Ne5+-] 14.Bxh7+! Kxh7 15.Ng5+ Kg6 16.Qe4+ with mate in a few moves. 1-0

114 – EricEsoteric 4.Be3 Bb4 5.a3 I tried a Rasa-Studier Gambit in the French Defence in this unrated blitz game against EricEsoteric. In 1997 I was writing my Blackmar-Diemer Gambit Keybook II. I aimed for the BDG type positions as often as possible. The 4.Be3 line tends to be risky, but it worked well enough for a quick checkmate this time. Sawyer - EricEsoteric, ICC u 4 4 Internet Chess Club, 1997 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 e6 3.e4 d5 4.Be3 Bb4 [4...dxe4! 5.f3 Bb4=/+] 5.a3?! [5.e5! Ne4 6.Qg4=] 5...Bxc3+ 6.bxc3 dxe4 7.f3 exf3? [7...Nbd7-/+] 8.Nxf3 0-0 9.Bd3 Nbd7 [9...b6 10.0-0 Bb7=] 10.0-0 Re8 11.Bg5 h6 12.Bf4 Nd5 13.Qd2 Nxf4 14.Qxf4 c5 15.Ne5 Qf6? [15...f5=] 16.Qe4 Qxf1+ [16...Qf5 17.Rxf5 exf5 18.Qxf5+-] 17.Rxf1 Nf6 [17...f5 18.Rxf5+-] 18.Rxf6 gxf6 19.Qh7+ Kf8 20.Qxf7# 1-0

115 – Zilbermints 4.Be3 dxe4 5.f3 Lev Zilbermints won this French Defence as White with the bold RasaStudier Gambit. The opening resembles both the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit and Alapin Diemer Gambit. Neither player castled early. Black's king suffered as White attacked with pawns, bishops, and rooks. Zilbermints (2039) - ThomasIndigo (1893), ICC 5 0 Internet Chess Club, 14.05.2018 begins 1.d4 e6 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.e4 d5 4.Be3 dxe4 5.f3 exf3 [5...Bb4!=/+] 6.Nxf3 c5 7.dxc5 Qxd1+?! [7...Nbd7=] 8.Rxd1 Nbd7 9.Nb5 Kd8 10.c4 a6 11.Nd6 Bxd6 12.cxd6 Ne4 13.b4 a5 14.b5 Ndc5 [14...f6 15.Bd3+/-] 15.Ng5 Nxg5 16.Bxc5 Ne4 17.Bb6+ Kd7 18.c5 f6 19.Bd3 [19.Rd3+-] 19...Ng5 [19...Nc3 20.Rd2+/-] 20.0-0 [20.Bc7!+-] 20...e5 21.Bf5+ Ne6 22.Rc1 g6 23.Bh3 f5 24.Rfd1 Nd4 25.c6+?! [25.Re1+-] 25...bxc6 26.Bxd4 exd4 27.Rxd4 Bb7 [27...cxb5=] 28.g3 Rab8 [28...Rac8=] 29.Bg2 c5 30.Rxc5 Bxg2 31.Rc7+ Kd8 [31...Ke6 32.Kxg2 Rxb5=] 32.Kxg2 Rxb5 33.Rdc4 Rb8 34.Rg7 Rb2+ 35.Kh3 Rd2 36.Ra7 Rxd6 37.Ra8+ Black resigns 1-0

116 – Slive 4.Bd3 dxe4 5.Nxe4 Veteran player Alex Slive traveled up north to play in the Houlton Open. He was a long time French Defence player who earned a National Master Certificate. Slive and Ray Haines finished in a five way tie for first place with Roger Morin, Cynthia Cui, and Nathan Gates. Ray Haines writes, “I won this game. I lost a pawn and should have lost the game but he made some mistakes which gave me a lot of chances. 26 Qd3 was a bad move. I spent a lot of time looking to see what he was playing and thought I needed to keep him from doubling my pawns by trading bishops.” Haines - Slive (2000), Houlton, ME (3), 17.09.2016 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 [2.d3 d5 3.Nd2 Nf6 4.Ngf3 c5 5.g3 Nc6 6.Bg2 Be7 7.0-0 0-0 in Chase Slive, Boylston 1994] 2...d5 3.Nc3 [3.exd5 exd5 4.Bd3 Bd6 5.Nc3 c6 6.h3 Ne7 in Schmitt - Slive, Boston 1999] 3...Nf6 [3...Bb4 4.e5 Qd7 5.Bd3 b6 6.Nge2 Bb7 7.a3 Bf8 in Clark - Slive, Boston 1999] 4.Bd3 [4.e5 Nfd7 5.f4 c5 6.Nf3 Nc6 7.Be3 Qb6 in Schmitt - Slive, Boylston 1994] 4...dxe4 [4...c5!] 5.Nxe4 Be7 6.Nf3 Nbd7 7.Ng3!? [7.Qe2, 7.0-0 or 7.Nxf6+.] 7...00 8.Be3 b6 9.0-0 Bb7 10.c3 c5 11.Qe2 cxd4 12.cxd4 Nd5 [12...Rc8=] 13.Rac1 N7f6 14.Ne5 Rc8 15.a3 Qd6 [15...Nxe3=/+] 16.Ba6!? Qb8 17.Bxb7 Qxb7 18.Rfd1 Rxc1 19.Rxc1 Rc8 20.Qd2 Rc7 21.Ne2 Qc8 22.Nf4 Nxf4 23.Bxf4 Nd5 24.Rxc7 Qxc7 25.Bg3 Bd6 26.Qd3? [26.Nd3 Bxg3 27.hxg3=] 26...Bxe5 27.Bxe5 Qc1+ 28.Qf1 Qxb2 29.h4 f6?! [29...Qxa3!-+] 30.Bb8 [30.Bd6] 30...Qxd4?! [30...Qxa3! 31.Qc4 a5-+] 31.Qb5! Kf7 [31...Qd1+ =/+] 32.Qd7+ Kg6 33.Qxe6 a5 34.g4 Qd3? [Black slips. 34...h6 =] 35.Qe8+ 1-0

117 – Haines 4.Bd3 Bb4 5.e5 In January 2015 Ray Haines finished in first place in a chess tournament held in Houlton, Maine. There I-95 meets New Brunswick, Canada. In the first round vs Lance Beloungie the two played a French Defence 3.Bd3. This continuation is a "rare" choice for most, but not for Ray Haines. His friend Lance Beloungie had doubtless faced it many times in their multiple French Defence games. I often play 3.Be3, but I like 3.Bd3 too. To debate theory in lines Black knows well, we may play 3.Nc3, 3.Nd2, 3.e5 or 3.exd5. Haines avoided 4.e5. That would give White a solid positional advantage. But Black would also be in familiar territory after a move like 4.e5. It would lead to a common French structure. Ray got frisky with his knights. He mixed things up which made the game more tactical. The danger was that these tactics would favor Black. Beloungie could and did dominate the center. Black was clearly winning by move 18. Unfortunately for Lance, his 25th move did not turn out well. White opened the center, turned the tables and won quickly. Haines - Beloungie, Houlton, Maine (1), 24.01.2015 begins 1.d4 e6 2.e4 d5 3.Bd3 Nf6 [3...dxe4 4.Bxe4 Nf6 5.Bd3= or 5.Bf3=] 4.Nc3!? [4.e5+/=] 4...Bb4 [4...c5!=] 5.e5! Nfd7 6.Nge2?! [A risky approach that allows Black a lot of control in the center. 6.Qg4!+/-] 6...c5 7.dxc5 Nc6 [7...Bxc5!=/+] 8.0-0 Ndxe5 [8...Bxc5] 9.a3 [9.Na4=] 9...Bxc5 10.b4 Nxd3!? [10...Bd6-/+] 11.Qxd3 Bd6 12.Bb2 a6 13.Rad1 0-0 14.f4 Qc7 15.Na4 f6 16.Rc1 [16.c4 b5=/+] 16...Bd7 17.Qb3 b5 18.Nc5 Qb6 [18...Bxc5+! 19.bxc5 Na5 20.Qd3 Nc4 21.Bd4 e5-+] 19.Qc3 e5 20.fxe5 fxe5 21.Kh1 Bxc5 22.bxc5 Qa7 23.Rcd1 d4 [Black has a promising continuation that could leave him up two extra center pawns: 23...Bg4 24.Rfe1 d4-+] 24.Qb3+ Kh8 25.Qd5 Ne7? [This hangs the e-pawn. Better is 25...Qc7-/+] 26.Qxe5 Nc6 27.Qd6 Rfe8 28.Nxd4 [Another good idea is 28.Rf7+-] 28...Nxd4 29.Qxd4!? Bc6

30.Qd6 Qb7 31.Rfe1 Bxg2+ 32.Kg1 Bc6 33.Re6 Rxe6 34.Qxe6 Bh1 35.Qg4 Bf3 [35...Bc6! 36.Rd6+/=] 36.Qd7 Qxd7 37.Rxd7 1-0

118 – Crompton 4.e5 Ne4 5.Nxe4 John Crompton offered a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit but Black hid with the French Defense. White chose the Steinitz Variation after 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.e5. Black’s knight boldly jumped to 4...Ne4. This is an easy line for Black to reach, so maybe he knew it in advance. If so, then Black could be familiar with the continuation 5.Nxe4 dxe4 with either 6.Be3 or 6.Bc4. Maybe 6.f3!? was a surprise. Crompton (1609) - benztoyzII (1581), Live Chess Chess.com, 01.06.2017 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e4 e6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.e5 Ne4 [4...Nfd7] 5.Nxe4 [5.Nce2 Nc6? 6.f3 Ng5 7.h4+-] 5...dxe4 6.f3!? [6.Be3 c5 7.dxc5 Nd7 8.Qg4 Nxc5 9.Bb5+ Nd7 10.Ne2 Qa5+ 11.Nc3 a6 12.Bxd7+ Bxd7 13.Bd4 Bc6 14.0-00=; 6.Bc4 a6 7.a4 b6 8.Ne2 Bb7 9.Nf4 Nc6 10.Be3+/=] 6...exf3 [6...c5 7.Be3 Qb6 8.fxe4 Qxb2 9.Nf3 cxd4 10.Bxd4 Bb4+ 11.Kf2=] 7.Nxf3 Be7 [7...c5] 8.Bd3 0-0 9.0-0 Nd7 10.Qe1 c5 [10...f5 11.exf6 Nxf6 12.Qh4+-] 11.c3 cxd4 12.cxd4 f6 13.exf6 Nxf6 14.Bg5 [14.Qh4+/-] 14...a6 [14...Bd7 15.Qh4 h6 16.Bxf6 Bxf6 17.Qe4 Bc6 18.Qh7+ Kf7 19.Ne5+ Ke8 20.Kh1+/-] 15.Qh4 b5 16.Bxf6 Bxf6 17.Qxh7+ Kf7 18.Ne5+ Ke8 19.Qg6+ Ke7 20.Nc6+ 1-0

119 – Gizmoorient 4.e5 Ne4 5.Nxe4 The French Defence Steinitz 4.e5 Ne4 5.Nxe4 dxe4 gives me a hope that as White I can win Black’s extended weak pawn on e4. Here it worked by the double attack move 8.Qg4 hitting g7 and e4. My opponent dropped a piece due to a pin and resigned. Sawyer (2410) - Gizmoorient (1406), ICC 3 0 u Internet Chess Club, 22.12.1999 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d5 3.e4 e6 4.e5 Ne4 5.Nxe4 dxe4 6.Be3 Nc6 [6...c5 7.dxc5 Nd7 8.Qg4 Nxc5 9.Bxc5 Bxc5 10.Qxg7=] 7.c3 [7.Ne2 b6 8.Nc3+/-] 7...Be7 [7...Ne7 8.Ne2+/=] 8.Qg4 Rg8 [8...Bf8 9.Qxe4+/-] 9.Qxe4 Bg5 10.Bxg5 Qxg5 11.Nf3 Qg6 12.Qxg6 [12.Bd3+/-] 12...hxg6 13.Bd3 f5 [13...Bd7 14.0-0 Ne7 15.Ng5+/-] 14.exf6 [14.0-0-0+/-] 14...gxf6 15.0-0-0 f5 16.Rhe1 b6? [16...Kf7 17.h4+-] 17.Bb5 Bb7? [17...Bd7

18.Bxc6 Bxc6 19.Rxe6+ Kd7 20.d5+-] 18.Ne5 [Or 18.Rxe6+ Kd8 19.Bxc6 Bxc6 20.Rxc6+-] Black resigns 1-0

120 – Lopez 4.e5 Nfd7 5.Nf3 I played Aldo Lopez in the 2005 Florida State Championship. Six years later I drew Aldo Lopez in the 2011 State Championship. After 1.Nc3 d5 2.e4 e6, we had reached the French Defence. I chose to hold back d2-d4 for several moves to avoid known theory. This limits the amount of material White needs to know after 1.Nc3, but it also limits White’s options. I played what Harald Keilhack called "a somewhat clumsy line" of the Steinitz French with 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.e5 Nfd7 5.d4 c5. Aldo Lopez outplayed me and deserved the win. After our game Aldo Lopez suggested I spend more time playing slower standard games on ICC. He was probably right. Instead I spent more time playing blitz chess. Sawyer (2011) - Lopez (2109), FL State Championship (3), 04.09.2005 begins 1.Nc3 d5 2.e4 e6 3.Nf3!? [3.d4] 3...Nf6 4.e5 Nfd7 5.d4 c5 6.dxc5 Nc6 7.Bf4 Nxc5!? [7...Bxc5 8.Bd3=] 8.Bd3 [8.a3!? or 8.Bb5!?] 8...Be7 [Black can be left with the 2 bishops after 8...Nxd3+ 9.Qxd3 although his light squared bishop is not necessarily stronger that my extra knight in a French formation.] 9.0-0 0-0 [Again 9...Nxd3 10.Qxd3 when a computer idea for an immediate kingside attack is 10...g5!? 11.Bg3 h5 but Black's king in not well placed to support this action.] 10.Re1 f6 11.exf6 Bxf6 [During the game Black thought that White was better in this variation.] 12.Ne5?! [White does not have any major threats, but the game is about equal after 12.Qd2=] 12...Bd7 [12...Nxe5! 13.Bxe5 Bxe5 14.Rxe5 Qb6-/+] 13.Bg3 a6 [13...Bxe5! 14.Bxe5 Nxe5 15.Rxe5 Qb6-/+] 14.Rb1 Rc8 15.Qd2 Be8 16.Nxc6 Rxc6 17.Be5 Nxd3 18.cxd3 Bg6 19.f4? [19.Rbc1 d4 20.Bxf6 Qxf6 21.Na4=/+] 19...Bxe5 20.Rxe5 Qb6+ 21.Kh1 Qd4 [Material is even, but White's position is too loose. Sometimes will fall. Even stronger for Black would be 21...Qb4-+] 22.g3 Qxd3 23.Qxd3 Bxd3 24.Rd1 Bf5 25.Rd2 Bh3 26.Kg1 Rfc8 27.Kf2 b5 28.a3 g6 29.Re1 Kf7 30.Ke3 Bf5 31.Ne2 Rc2 32.Nd4 Rxd2 33.Kxd2 Be4 34.Ke3 Ke7 35.Re2

Rc1 36.Rd2 Kd6 [White tries to blockade the position, but Black forces it open and wins.] 37.Kf2 e5 38.fxe5+ Kxe5 39.Nf3+ Bxf3 40.Kxf3 Re1 41.Kf2 Re4 42.Rc2 Kd4 43.Rd2+ Kc4 44.Kf1 a5 45.Kf2 a4 46.Kf1 Re5 47.Kf2 d4 48.Kf1 d3 49.Kf2 Re2+ 50.Rxe2 dxe2 51.Kxe2 Kb3 0-1

121 – Levi 4.e5 Nfd7 5.Nf3 c5 This French Defence reached by transposition saw Black play on the flanks with moves like 5...c5 and 9...f6 as well as 7...Qa5 and 12...Nh5. Black’s king remained in the center. White followed a strategy to complete his development by move 12. Then he opened lines of attack toward the Black king. White won a pawn and Black’s monarch was practically defenseless in this game between Eddy Levi and Kris Chan. Levi (2152) - Chan (2183), Australasian Masters IM Melbourne AUS, 15.12.2016 begins 1.Nc3 d5 2.e4 e6 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.e5 Nfd7 5.d4 c5 6.dxc5 Nc6 7.Bf4 Qa5!? [7...Bxc5 8.Bd3 a6=] 8.a3 Qxc5 9.Bd3 f6 10.exf6 Nxf6 11.Nb5 Kd8 12.0-0 Nh5 13.b4 Qe7 14.Bg5 Nf6 15.c4 a6 16.cxd5 exd5 17.Nc3 [White might win the queen with 17.Re1 axb5 18.Rxe7 Bxe7 19.Bxb5+-] 17...Be6 18.Bc4 Qd6 [18...Kc8 19.Bxd5 Bxd5 20.Nxd5 Qd8 21.Nxf6 gxf6 22.Qxd8+ Nxd8 23.Bxf6+-] 19.Bxd5 Kc7 20.Bxe6 Qxe6 21.Re1 Qf5 22.Qb3 Rd8 23.b5 axb5 [23...Na5 24.Qa4+-] 24.Nxb5+ Kc8 25.Qa4 Bc5 26.Bf4 1-0

122 – Akobian 5.Nce2 c5 6.c3 Varuzhan Akobian won a short French Defence Steinitz Variation against the four time US Champion Alexander Shabalov. Black probed the queenside with the advance of his a-pawn all the way to a3. Then combined with a timely 11...Ne4 and exchanges the game ended when the Black queen invaded with 18...Qf2. White could not swap queens without losing to a knight fork. Shabalov (2568) - Akobian (2640), PRO League KO Stage 2018 chess.com INT (1), 13.03.2018 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.e5 Nfd7 5.Nce2 c5 6.c3 Nc6 7.f4 a5 8.Nf3 a4 [8...Be7 9.dxc5=] 9.dxc5 [9.Be3 Be7 10.g3 0-0 11.Bg2 b6 12.0-0=] 9...Nxc5 10.Ned4 [10.Ng3 Qb6=] 10...a3 [10...Ne4=/+] 11.b3 [11.b4 Ne4 12.Qd3=] 11...Ne4 12.Qd3 Nxd4 13.Nxd4 Bd7 14.Be3 [14.Be2 Rc8-/+] 14...Rc8 15.Rc1 Qh4+ 16.Kd1 Bc5

17.Nf3 [17.Be2 0-0-/+] 17...Bxe3 18.Qxe3 [18.Nxh4 Nf2+ 19.Kc2 Nxd3 20.Bxd3 Bxf4-+] 18...Qf2 0-1

123 – BethO 5.f4 c5 6.Nf3 Nc6 7.Be3 a6 I did not completely ignore the advice of Aldo Lopez mentioned in a previous game. Here is a slower game played at the speed of 45 45 on the Internet Chess Club. My standard ICC rating has been over 2200 for many years. That is mostly due to inactivity at the slower speeds. I won a French Defence in the Steinitz Variation after 4.e5. My opponent was BethO. The theme of this game is good bishops and bad bishops. The point of the 7.Be3 line is for White to exchange off dark squared bishops. The dark squared bishops were good for Black if they stayed on the board. Many exchanges followed until we reached an ending with only pawns and light squared bishops. These bishops favored White. Soon White won a pawn and swapped bishops for an easy win. Sawyer (2272) - BethO (1809), ICC 45 45 Internet Chess Club, 22.09.2008 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.e5 Nfd7 5.f4 c5 6.Nf3 Nc6 7.Be3 a6 [Equally popular is 7...cxd4 8.Nxd4 Bc5 9.Qd2=] 8.Qd2 b5 9.dxc5 Bxc5 10.Bxc5 Nxc5 11.Qf2 Qb6 12.Bd3 Bb7 [More common is 12...b4 13.Ne2 a5 14.0-0 Ba6=] 13.0-0 b4 14.Ne2 Qa5 [14...a5 15.f5!?] 15.Ned4 [15.Nc1+/=] 15...Ne4 16.Nxc6 Bxc6 17.Qe3 Qa4? [17...0-0 18.a3=] 18.Nd2 [I did not want to exchange my good bishop for his knight, but White could pick up a pawn with 18.Nd4 Bd7 19.Bxe4 dxe4 20.Qxe4+/-] 18...Nxd2 19.Qxd2 Qa5 [19...Bb5 20.f5 Bxd3 21.cxd3 exf5 22.Rxf5 a5=] 20.a3 [20.f5 Qc5+ 21.Kh1 exf5 22.Rxf5+/=] 20...Qb6+ 21.Qf2 Qxf2+ 22.Kxf2 a5 23.axb4 axb4 24.Rxa8+ Bxa8 25.Ra1 0-0 26.Ra5 Rb8 27.Rb5 [27.Ke3 d4+ 28.Kxd4 Bxg2 29.Rb5+/-] 27...Rxb5 28.Bxb5 Kf8 [Black should play 28...d4! 29.g3 Be4=] 29.g3 Kg8 [29...d4=] 30.Ke3 Bb7 31.Kd4 Kf8 32.Ba4 h5 33.Kc5 Ke7 34.Kxb4 Ba8 [34...f6 35.exf6+ gxf6 36.Kc5 e5 37.fxe5 fxe5 38.c3+-] 35.Kc5 f6 [35...Bb7 36.b4 Kd8 37.b5 Kc8 38.b6 Kd8 39.Bb5+-] 36.Bc6 Bxc6 37.Kxc6 fxe5 [37...g5 38.exf6+ Kxf6 39.b4+-] 38.fxe5 Ke8 39.Kd6 Kf7 40.b4 h4 41.b5 d4 42.b6 hxg3 43.hxg3 Kg6 44.b7 Kf5 45.b8Q Kg5 46.Kxe6 Kg6 47.Qb5 Kh6 48.Qd3 Kg5 49.Qxd4 Kg6 50.Qg4+ Kh7 51.Kf7 Kh8 52.Qh4# 1-0

124 – Kosteniuk 7.Be3 a6 8.Qd2 The former Women’s World Champion Alexandra Kosteniuk played an impressive attack in this French Defence. White took aim at e6 and f7 to assault the Black king. Kosteniuk sacrificed her queen with the creative move 25.Nh6! I really enjoyed this win against Aleksandra Goryachkina. Kosteniuk (2559) - Goryachkina (2535), 68th ch-RUS w 2018 Satka RUS (6.2), 30.08.2018 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.e5 Nfd7 5.f4 c5 6.Nf3 Nc6 7.Be3 a6 8.Qd2 b5 9.Qf2 Qb6 10.Bd3 cxd4 11.Nxd4 Bc5 12.Nce2 b4 13.0-0 a5 14.c4 dxc4 15.Bxc4 Nxd4 [15...Bb7=] 16.Nxd4 0-0 17.Rfe1 Ba6 18.Bb3 Rfd8 19.Rac1 Rac8 [19...Kh8 20.f5+/=] 20.f5 Kh8 [20...Rf8 21.f6+/-] 21.fxe6 Nxe5 [21...fxe6 22.Rxc5 Nxc5 23.Nxe6 Qxe6 24.Bxe6+-] 22.Rxc5 Qxc5 23.Nf5 [23.exf7 Qd6 24.Ne6+-] 23...Qb5 [23...Qc6 24.exf7+-] 24.e7 Nd3 [24...f6 25.Qg3+-] 25.Nh6! Nxf2 26.Nxf7+ [White wins after 26...Kg8 27.exd8=Q+ Rxd8 28.Nxd8+ Kf8 29.Bc5+! Qxc5 30.Ne6+] 1-0

125 – Djukic 6.Nf3 Nc6 7.Be3 Qb6 White won this French Defence Steinitz when his opponent opened too many lines without protecting his own king. Black trotted a dozen moves down a very risky line. Of course, trying to beat a grandmaster rated 500 points above you sounds pretty risky too! White found a crushing finish in the game between Nikola Djukic and Mahir Salkic. Djukic (2556) - Salkic (2033), 48th Bosna Open Sarajevo BIH, 05.05.2018 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.e5 Nfd7 5.f4 c5 6.Nf3 Nc6 7.Be3 Qb6 8.Na4 Qa5+ 9.c3 cxd4 10.b4 Qc7 11.Nxd4 Nxd4 12.Bxd4 f6? [12...b6 13.Bd3+/=] 13.Bd3 [13.Bb5 f5 14.0-0+-] 13...fxe5 14.fxe5 Nxe5 15.Qh5+! Nf7 [15...g6 16.Bxe5+-] 16.0-0 g6 17.Qf3 Ne5 18.Bb5+ 1-0

126 – Hyde 6.Nf3 Nc6 7.Be3 Qb6 Here I won a French Defence in the Steinitz Variation 4.e5 line. It seems to me that this 7.Be3 Qb6 line is one of the most common continuations. My opponent used a handle “Hyde” which later became inactive. I do not know if this was the correspondence player Kevin Hyde or someone else completely different. I know “Hyde” drew our other game with his Torre Attack against my Gruenfeld Defence. The key feature of this game is that both kings got into trouble in the opening. Neither king could castle. Black grabbed the poisoned pawn on b2. The natural follow up was the sacrifice of the rook on a8. Black attacked. The wide open White king looked to be in trouble, however there were adequate defenses. White slipped on move 21, but Black missed his chance to draw. Then the tables turned. White attacked. This time the Black king was under assault. He could hardly run at all and he did not hide. Sawyer - Hyde, ICC r 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 26.11.1997 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 e6 3.e4 d5 4.e5 Nfd7 5.f4 c5 6.Nf3 Nc6 7.Be3 Qb6 8.dxc5 [White often plays 8.Na4 Qa5+ 9.c3 cxd4 10.b4 Nxb4 11.cxb4 Bxb4+ 12.Bd2 Bxd2+ 13.Nxd2= when Black has three pawns for his sacrificed knight.] 8...Qxb2 [8...Bxc5 9.Bxc5=] 9.Nb5 Qb4+ 10.Bd2 Qxc5 11.Nc7+ Kd8 12.Nxa8 Nb4 [12...h6 13.a4+/-] 13.Bxb4 [13.c3! Nc6 14.Qa4 a6 15.c4 dxc4 16.Qxc4 Qxc4 17.Bxc4 b5 18.Bb3 h6 19.Be3+-] 13...Qxb4+ 14.Qd2? [14.Kf2+/-] 14...Qe4+ [14...Qb2 15.Qc1 Qc3+ 16.Kf2 Ba3 17.Qe1 Qxc2+ 18.Kg3+/=] 15.Be2 Bc5 16.Kf1 [16.Ng5 Qxg2 17.Nxf7+ Ke7 18.Rf1 Rf8 19.Ng5+-] 16...f6 17.exf6 gxf6 18.Bd3 Qa4 19.Ke2 [19.g3 b6 20.Kg2 Bb7 21.Rhe1+-] 19...e5 [19...Rg8 20.Ke1+/=] 20.fxe5 fxe5 21.Nxe5? [21.Qg5+!+-] 21...Nxe5 [Black could save the game with 21...Re8! 22.Qg5+ Re7 23.Qg8+ Re8= when White must repeat moves or accept an

inferior position.] 22.Qg5+ Be7 23.Qxe5 Bg4+ [Or 23...Qg4+ 24.Kd2 Qg5+ 25.Qxg5 Bxg5+ 26.Kd1 Bg4+ 27.Be2+-] 24.Kd2 Qb4+ 25.c3 Qb2+ 26.Bc2 Rf8 27.Qxd5+ Ke8 28.Nc7# 1-0

3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5 The bishop move is the most natural method of development.

127 – Terrigood 4…dxe4 f3 Nc6 When I feel like playing the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit, half the time Black avoids it. The most common avoidance set-ups are the Dutch, the Pirc, the Benoni, the Caro-Kann and the French. With the Caro-Kann Defence 1.e4 c6 2.d4 and French Defence 1.e4 e6 2.d4, the normal continuation is 2...d5. There is a real possibility Black will capture d5xe4 allowing a BDG-type gambit of f2-f3 attacking the resulting e4 Black pawn. The bridge from the French Defence to the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit is very easy to cross. For example 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 is either the Rubinstein Variation (3...dxe4 4.f3 exf3 5.Nxf3 Nf6 6.Bg5 - BDG Euwe) or the Burn Variation (3...Nf6 4.Bg5 dxe4 5.f3 exf3 6.Nxf3). Both of these lines reach the same position as 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3 exf3 5.Nxf3 e6 6.Bg5. In my game vs Terrigood, White attempted to reach a BDG via a French Burn Variation. Black burned that bridge with 5…Nc6! He got a very good game. He played well and deserved to win. Sawyer – Terrigood, ICC r 3 3 Internet Chess Club, 8.10.2011 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 e6 3.e4 d5 4.Bg5 dxe4 5.f3!? [Often I recapture 5.Nxe4, but my 3289 blitz rated computer opponent would doubtless outplay me is such a line. Maybe I could catch it in a BDG. It's been known to happen to computers before!] 5...Nc6! [Burned by the Burn Variation. I had only faced 5...Nc6 move seven times in 40 years, but it sure seems good.] 6.Bb5 [I hate to play this move. I want this bishop at Bd3.] 6...exf3 7.Nxf3 Be7 8.0-0 [8.Bxf6 Bxf6 (8...gxf6 9.d5 a6 10.Ba4 b5 11.Nxb5 axb5 12.Bxb5) 9.Ne4 Bd7 10.c3!? with 90% compensation for the gambit pawn in both cases, but using a tempo to exchange off a piece in a gambit is usually incorrect.]

8...0-0 9.Qd2 Rb8 10.a3 h6 11.Be3 [I was dreaming of a Bxh6 sacrifice for a mating attack or perpetual check if I can get an extra move or two.] 11...Ng4 12.Bf4 e5 13.Bxc6 exf4 14.Be4 Ne3 15.Rfe1 Bg4 16.Nd1 f5 17.Bd3 Bxf3 18.gxf3 Qxd4 19.Kh1 Bg5 20.c3 Qc5 21.Nf2 Rbd8 22.Qe2 Bh4 23.Rg1 Bxf2 White resigns 0-1

128 – Chess-Dream 4…dxe4 5.f3 Dr. John Anderson had a wealth of experience from his Kentucky roots. Doc taught the ancient Greek language at Bryan College in Dayton, Tennessee. I cite three of his colorful sayings. "Scarce as hen's teeth": Doc's phrase for something very rare you might never see. This is like playing 5.f3 vs a Burn French. "Riding a Greek horse too far": Dr. Anderson taught us usage determines meaning in language. Trying to stubbornly focus too much on the ancient origin of a word can lead one to miss the obvious truth. Below I try too hard to make a French into a BDG. "Missed by a frog hair": Doc used this quip when we almost got an answer correct but just barely missed it. Going from a French Burn to a BDG almost worked until "Chess-Dream" found 5...c5! I was in a rural Florida town on business. When I opened my car door to go to work in the morning, a little frog quickly jump in and disappeared up under the pedals. Off to work we went. The frog stayed hidden when we went out to lunch. After work I drove to town to get some food. While waiting at a traffic light, out hopped the little green guy (about one inch long) onto the floor of the passenger's side. I grabbed an extra napkin and snared the little fella sending him on his way to frog heaven. Sawyer - Chess-Dream, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 23.05.2012 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d5 3.e4 e6 4.Bg5 dxe4 5.f3!? [5.Nxe4 is correct.] 5...c5 6.dxc5 Qxd1+ 7.Rxd1 exf3 8.Nxf3 Bxc5 9.Bxf6 [9.Nb5! Na6 (9...Bb6 10.Ne5 0-0 11.Nc4=) 10.a3 h6 11.Bh4 0-0 12.b4 Bb6 13.Bxf6 gxf6 14.Nd6 Nc7 15.c4 a5 16.c5 Ba7 17.Bc4 with queenside threats to offset Black's extra kingside pawns.] 9...gxf6 10.Ne4 Be7 11.Nd6+ Bxd6 12.Rxd6 Ke7 13.Rd2 Nc6 14.c3 b6 15.g3 Bb7 16.Bg2 Rad8 [At this point Black has the better game.] 17.0-0 Rxd2 18.Nxd2 Na5 19.Bxb7 Nxb7 20.Ne4 f5 21.Ng5

h6 22.Nf3 Rd8 23.Rf2 Nc5 24.Rd2 Rxd2 25.Nxd2 Na4 [The endgame clearly favors Black.] 26.Kf2 Nxb2 27.Ke3 Na4 28.Kd4 Nc5 29.Nc4 f6 30.Na3 a6 31.Nc4 Nd7 32.a4 h5 33.h4 e5+ 34.Kd5 f4 35.gxf4 exf4 36.Nd2 Ne5 37.Ne4 f3 38.c4 Ng4 39.Kc6 f5 40.Ng3 f4 41.Nf1 Ne3 42.Kxb6 Nxf1 43.Kxa6 Ne3 44.c5 f2 45.c6 f1Q+ 0-1

129 – Rookie 4…dxe4 5.Nxe4 My Internet Chess Club rating fluctuated radically during my 20 years of blitz play. In my younger days my ICC blitz rating was often over 2400. On the day this book was published, my ICC rating was 2003. Sometimes it dipped lower. I won this French Defence vs the silicon monster Rookie. There’s no gambit variation here. I just played good chess strategy until I reached a winning endgame. Sawyer (1946) - Rookie (2423), ICC 5 0 Internet Chess Club, 08.06.2008 begins 1.Nc3 Nf6 2.d4 d5 3.e4 e6 4.Bg5 dxe4 5.Nxe4 Be7 6.Nxf6+ Bxf6 7.Bxf6 Qxf6 8.Nf3 0-0 9.Bd3 c5 10.c3 cxd4 11.Nxd4 Bd7 12.0-0 Nc6 13.Nxc6 [13.Nf3+/=] 13...Bxc6 14.Qe2 Rfd8 15.Rad1 Qg5 16.Be4 Bxe4 17.Qxe4 Rxd1 18.Rxd1 Rd8 19.Rxd8+ Qxd8 20.Qd4 [20.h3=] 20...Qxd4 21.cxd4 g5 22.f3 [22.f4!?=] 22...b5 23.Kf2 f6 24.Ke3 Kf7 25.Kd3 [25.Ke4!?] 25...h5? [25...f5=] 26.h3?! [26.Kc3! a5 27.Kb3 Ke7 28.a4 b4 29.Kc4+-] 26...h4 [26...f5=] 27.Kc3 a5? [27...Ke7! 28.Kb4 Kd6 29.Kxb5 Kd5 30.Ka6 Kxd4 31.b4+/-] 28.a4 bxa4 [28...Ke8 29.axb5+-] 29.Kc4 Kg7 [29...f5 30.Kb5+-] 30.Kb5 Kg6 31.Kxa4 e5 32.dxe5 Kf5 33.exf6 Kxf6 34.Kxa5 Ke7 35.b4 1-0

130 – Devereaux 4.dxe4 5.Nxe4 Black got burned in this French Defence Burn Variation by the power of a check. Masters use common sense in the opening to develop faster and castle before their opponents. In the game Maxim Devereaux vs Kimiya Sajjadi, Black could not hide from attack. White sacrificed a knight for winning tactics in the center. Devereaux (2370) - Sajjadi (1911), Gibraltar Masters Caleta ENG, 28.01.2018 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5 dxe4 5.Nxe4 Be7 6.Bxf6 gxf6 7.Qd3!? [Or 7.Nf3 f5 8.Nc3=] 7...f5 8.Nc3 a6 9.0-0-0 b5 10.Qf3 Ra7 [10...c6 11.h3=] 11.d5 [11.Qe3] 11...e5 12.Nh3 Qd6 13.Qe3

Rb7 14.f4 e4 [14...Nd7 15.fxe5=] 15.Nf2 [15.g4!+/=] 15...Qc5 16.Rd4 b4 [16...0-0 17.g4=] 17.Ncxe4 fxe4 18.Nxe4 Qb6 [18...Qa5 19.d6+-] 19.d6 cxd6 20.Nxd6+ Kf8 21.Nxc8 1-0

131 - Brummer 4…Bb4 5.exd5 How do you evaluate the Big Mac in chess? The French Defence MacCutcheon comes right back at you. If White can pin a knight with a bishop with 4.Bg5, then can’t Black do it too with 4…Bb4!? In 1962 Bobby Fischer took on Tigran Petrosian. Their contest started as a flashy Fischer against a passive Petrosian. But Black was a tiger after 5.e5 h6. With cat like moves he dodged Bobby's bishop and clawed his way back into the fight. Fischer's five bishop moves in a row 6.Bd2, 7.Bxc3, 8.Ba5, 9.Bd3 and 10.Bc3 ended when Tigran Petrosian chopped one off by 10...Nxc3. Petrosian defeated Fischer in this game. It is found in the book “How to Beat Bobby Fischer” by Edmar Mednis. This 1962 candidate's tournament determined the challenger to the World Champion Mikhail Botvinnik. Spoiler alert: Petrosian became the next world champion! Bobby Fischer's time was not in 1962 but in 1972 vs the man who eventually beat Petrosian. That was Boris Spassky. Big MacCutcheon was more easily handled by David Brummer vs Viktors Pupols. In 1975 Brummer chose the French Defence MacCutcheon Exchange with 5.exd5. In recent years this theoretical idea has been recommended in books by Dzindzichashvili and Lakdawala. Below a natural knight move (16...Nd5) fails to a bold rook sacrifice (17.Rxb7+)! Brummer - Pupols, Arizona 1975 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5 Bb4 5.exd5 [5.e5 h6=] 5...Qxd5 6.Bxf6 [6.Nf3 Houdini] 6...gxf6 [6...Bxc3+ 7.bxc3 gxf6 8.Qd2 Nc6 9.Qf4= Stockfish] 7.Nge2 Nc6 8.Qd2 Qa5 [8...Bxc3!? 9.Nxc3 Qxd4 10.Qxd4 Nxd4 11.0-0-0 c5 12.Ne4=] 9.g3

Bd7 10.Bg2 0-0-0 11.0-0 Qg5 [11...h5=] 12.Qd3 Qg6 13.Qc4 Be7 14.b4 Kb8 15.Ne4 Nxb4 16.Rfb1 Nd5? [16...Bc6 17.N2c3 Bd5=] 17.Rxb7+ Kxb7 18.Rb1+?! [18.Nf4! Nxf4 19.Nd6+ and mate in two.] 18...Ka8 19.Nf4 Nxf4? 20.Qxc7 Rb8 21.Nd6+ Nxg2 22.Rb7 1-0

132 – Searles 4…Bb4 5.e5 h6 6.Be3 This was the first time in any tournament that I had a chance to reach a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit as Black. Up until 1978 no one had ever tried to play the BDG against me. Richard Searles as White began 1.d4. I played 1…Nf6 to prevent 2.e4. After 2.Nc3 d5 I figured my d5 pawn kept White from playing 3.e4. Searles played 3.e4 anyway! He must be crazy! Or a dangerous attacker. I looked it up in Modern Chess Openings. I could try 3...dxe4 4.f3 exf3 (Blackmar-Diemer Gambit). Richard Searles must know it pretty well. Yikes! I know what I’ll do. I will transpose into the French Defence (though I’d never played it). What a fool I was! Searles (1900) - Sawyer (1900), corr TCA 1978 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d5 3.e4 e6 4.Bg5 Bb4 5.e5 h6 6.Be3!? [Later I would play 6.Be3 myself. The main line is 6.Bd2 Bxc3 7.bxc3 Ne4 8.Qg4=] 6...Ne4 7.Qg4 g6 8.a3 Bxc3+ 9.bxc3 c5 10.Bd3 h5 11.Qf3 Qa5!? [11...Nxc3 12.dxc5=] 12.Ne2 cxd4 13.Bxd4 Nc6 14.0-0 Nc5?! [14...0-0 15.Bxe4 dxe4 16.Qxe4+/=] 15.Qf6 Rg8 16.Be3?! [16.Rfd1+/=] 16...Nd7 17.Qg5 Ndxe5 18.Qh6 Bd7 [18...Ng4 19.Qh7 Nf6 20.Qh6 Ng4= repeats moves] 19.Rfb1 [19.h3=] 19...0-0-0 20.Rb5?! [20.h3] 20...Qa4 [20...Ng4 21.Rxa5 Nxh6=/+] 21.Rab1 b6 [21...Ng4=/+] 22.R1b3 [22.Bxb6 axb6 23.Qe3 Nxd3 24.cxd3 Kc7 25.Qxb6+ Kd6 26.Qc5+ Ke5-/+ when the Black king will hide around his kingside pawns.] 22...Nxd3 23.cxd3 Nd4 24.R5b4 Nxe2+ 25.Kf1 Qa6 [25...Qc6-/+] 26.Kxe2 Ba4 27.Rb2 b5? [I missed my chances. White's attack springs to life. Better was 27...e5 28.Bxb6 e4=/+] 28.Qf4 Rd7 29.c4! dxc4 30.Rxc4+ Kd8 31.Rxa4 Qxa4 32.Qxa4 bxa4 33.Rb8+ 1-0

133 – Faroni 4…Bb4 5.e5 h6 6.Be3 Ne4 My opponent Faroni seemed bound and determined to capture my knight and double my pawns in this French Defence. Sawyer - Faroni, ICC r 2 12 Internet Chess Club, 29.12.1998 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e4 e6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5 Bb4 5.e5 Bxc3+ [White does not need to play a3!] 6.bxc3 h6 7.Be3 Ne4 8.Qg4 g5 [8...g6 9.Bd3=] 9.h4 [9.Bd3+/-] 9...f5? [9...c5 10.Bd3+/=] 10.Qh5+ Kf8 11.hxg5 [Or 11.Ne2+- ] 11...Nd7

[11...Nxc3 12.gxh6+-] 12.gxh6 [Or 12.Ne2+- ] 12...c5 [12...Qe7 13.Ne2 c5 14.f3+-] 13.h7 cxd4 14.Bh6+ Ke7 15.Bg5+ Nxg5 16.Qxg5+ Ke8 [16...Kf7 17.Qxd8 Rxd8 18.h8Q Rxh8 19.Rxh8+-] 17.Qg7 1-0

134 – Paetzold 4…Bb4 5.e5 h6 6.Bd2 I once had a friend from Germany named Ortwin. During the year that we were together, his wife gave birth to a baby boy. They named him “Tim”. Both of us moved on with our lives and relocated our families. Still, we kept in touch for several years. About that time I met another Ortwin in an email tournament. My new opponent was Ortwin Paetzold of Germany. We played our game in IECG (International Email Chess Group). Ortwin Paetzold was one of the IECG founders. IECG transferred its activities into the Lechenicher SchachServer (LSS). Ortwin Paetzold managed LSS after that change over. I was interested in playing a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit. Black could have challenged me to do so with 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d5. Instead he settled for a French Defence after 2...e6 3.e4 d5. Ortwin Paetzold chose the sharp unbalanced MacCutcheon Variation 4.Bg5 Bb4. In 1996 I stuck with the main line after 5.e5 g6 6.Bd2. We attacked and defended threats from the opponent. Email was new. My eyes were bigger than my stomach. I put too many games on my plate. I chose to ease my pain with draws. My Paetzold game was unbalanced. It was also about even. One chess engine evaluated the final position as very equal at 0.00. Sawyer - Paetzold, IECG 05.01.1996 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 e6 3.e4 d5 4.Bg5 Bb4 5.e5 h6 6.Bd2 [6.Be3 Ne4 (6...Bxc3+ 7.bxc3 Ne4 and 1/2-1/2 in 59 moves. Sawyer - Mogno, Internet Chess Club 1998. I should have played 8.Ne2+/=) 7.Qg4 g6 8.a3 Bxc3+ 9.bxc3 c5 10.Bd3=] 6...Bxc3 7.bxc3 [7.Bxc3 Ne4 8.Bb4 c5 9.Bxc5 Nxc5 10.dxc5 Qc7 11.Nf3=] 7...Ne4 8.Qg4 [8.Bd3 Nxd2 9.Qxd2 c5 10.Nf3 c4 11.Be2=] 8...g6 [8...Kf8 9.Qf4 c5 10.Nf3=] 9.Bd3 [9.Bc1 c5 10.Bd3 Nxc3 11.dxc5=] 9...Nxd2 10.Kxd2 c5

11.h4 [11.f4 Qa5 12.Nf3 Nc6 13.h4 cxd4-/+ and 0-1 in 24 moves. Sawyer blik, Internet Chess Club 2012] 11...Nc6 12.Rh3 [12.Nf3 Bd7 and 0-1 in 29 moves. Sawyer - Rookie, Internet Chess Club 2008 13.Qf4=] 12...cxd4 13.cxd4 Qb6 14.Nf3 Bd7 15.Rhh1 Qc7 16.Ke3 Rc8 17.Rab1 b6 18.Ba6 1/2-1/2

135 – Fawbush 4…Be7 5.e5 Ng8 The famed postal chess master George E. Fawbush looked for ways to take his opponents out of the opening book. In a French Defence, G.E.F. chose 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5 Be7 5.e5 Ng8. Why does Black play such a move? Usually he plays 5…Nfd7. It would appear the plan is to relocate to e7 instead of d7. Flexibility is a great strategy in chess. After 5.e5 the d7 square is a key pass through point for half the Black army. Think about it. Black could play either knight, a bishop, a queen or a king to d7. Whatever goes there will clog up the lines for everyone else. The problem with the undeveloping knight move is that it is a long gallop to the center from g8. This became popular for a few years. This move can only be playable in a closed position. Sawyer (2000) - Fawbush (2200), corr APCT 1985 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e4 e6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5 Be7 5.e5 Ng8!? [This takes White out of familiar territory. Black accepts a slightly inferior game with the intention of slowly rearranging his pieces. Normal is 5...Nfd7] 6.Be3 b6 7.h4!?[7.Qg4 g6 8.Nf3+/-] 7...h5 8.Be2 g6 9.Nf3 Ba6 10.Qd2 Bxe2 11.Nxe2 Nc6 12.0-0 Qd7 13.a3 [13.c3 Bf8 14.Rac1 Nge7 15.Bg5+/-] 13...Na5 14.b3 Kf8 15.Bg5 Kg7 16.Be3 [16.Qf4!?+/=] 16...Qd8 17.Bg5 c5 18.Bxe7 [This seems to ease Black's game. White could simply play 18.Rfd1+/=] 18...Nxe7 19.Qd3?! [19.Qf4] 19...c4 20.Qc3 cxb3 21.cxb3 Rc8 22.Qd3 Nf5 23.g3 Qc7 24.Rfc1 Qe7 25.b4?! [25.Ng5 Rhe8 26.Rc2 Rxc2 27.Qxc2 Qd7 28.Kg2 Rc8 29.Qd3 Qe7=] 25...Nc4 26.Nd2 b5 27.Nb3? g5 28.hxg5 Qxg5 29.f4? [This leaves a fatal weakness on g3. White should try 29.Qf3 Rh6=/+ and hope to survive.] 29...Qg4 30.Rc3 Rcg8?! [It is amazing how often this happens. One side is winning easily. Then in one move for a brief moment they give the other side a chance. The losing side misses the moment and goes on to lose like they never had a chance. Here Black would continue to win easily after 30...Nce3! 31.Qxe3 Nxe3 32.Rxe3 Rc2+] 31.Rf1 [White can keep the material equality for a while with 31.Qf3! a6-/+ Black is better, but he is not crushing, at least not yet.] 31...Kf8

[Better is 31...Nce3! 32.Qxe3 Nxe3 33.Rxe3 h4-+ when Black has a queen for two knights.] 32.Rf3? [32.Qf3 h4 33.Qxg4 Rxg4 34.Rff3 hxg3 35.Nxg3 Nxa3-+] 32...Qh3 [32...h4!-+] 33.Kf2 h4 0-1

136 – Haines 5…Nfd7 6.h4 Bxg5 Ray Haines sacrificed a pawn in the French Defence Alekhine-Chatard Attack. After Black grabbed the pawn after 6.h4 Bxg5 7.hxg5 Qxg5 8.Nh3 Qe7, White could gain time with 9.Qg4 to aim at g7. Instead, Ray Haines developed a bishop. Black failed to defend accurately, and White won with a strong finish. Haines (1529) - jfk03 (1556), Live Chess Chess.com, 01.02.2018 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5 Be7 5.e5 Nfd7 6.h4 Bxg5 [Taking the gambit pawn is risky. 6...h6=] 7.hxg5 Qxg5 8.Nh3 Qe7 [White has compensation for the pawn. 8...Qh4!?] 9.Bd3!? [9.Qg4+/=] 9...h6 10.Qg4 Qf8 [10...Kf8 11.0-0-0 c5 12.Nb5=] 11.0-0-0 a6 12.Nf4 Nb6 [12...g5 13.Ncxd5 exd5 14.Nxd5+/=] 13.Nh5 Nc6 [13...g6 14.Nf6+ Kd8 15.Qh4+/-] 14.Nxg7+ Kd8 15.Nh5 Bd7 16.Nf6 Ne7 17.Rh5 Bc6 18.Rdh1 Ng8 [18...Kc8 19.Qf4+-] 19.Qh4 [19.Nh7 Qe8 20.Qg7+-] 19...Nxf6 20.Qxf6+ Kc8 [20...Kd7 21.Rxh6 Rxh6 22.Rxh6+-] 21.Rxh6 Rxh6 22.Rxh6 Kd7 23.Rh7 1-0

137 – Sawyer 5…Nfd7 6.h4 c5 I had Chess.com do a computer analysis of one of my wins in the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit. In a certain position, the computer chess engine spit out the following comment: "BLUNDER - Lucky you! Your opponent blundered! The best move was..." I screwed up in another opening in a French Defence Classical 6.h4 Alekhine Gambit. It appears I got lucky and won at the end! I’m sure that Chess.com computer would tell me "Lucky you!" Sawyer (2034) - gdesportes (1835), Live Chess Chess.com, 26.08.2012 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 e6 3.e4 d5 4.Bg5 Be7 5.e5 Nfd7 6.h4 c5 7.dxc5?! [Best is 7.Bxe7! Kxe7 (or 7...Qxe7 8.Nb5 0-0 9.Nc7+/=) 8.Qg4 Kf8 9.Nf3+/=] 7...Nc6 8.Qg4 Ndxe5 9.Qg3? [9.Bxe7!=] 9...Bxg5 [9...f6!=/+] 10.hxg5 Ng6 [10...Qa5] 11.Nf3 [11.Nb5!+/=] 11...Bd7 12.0-0-0 [12.Nb5!+/- was not registering with me.] 12...Qa5 13.Kb1 0-0-0 14.Bd3

[14.Nb5!+- threatens to check on d6 and fork on f7 with discovered check.] 14...Qxc5 15.Bxg6 hxg6 16.Rxh8 Rxh8 17.a3 Rh5 18.Ne5 Nxe5 19.Qxe5 Qxf2 20.Qxg7 Rxg5 21.Qf8+ Kc7 22.Qc5+? [I had 22.Ne4! Qe2 23.Qd6+ Kc8 24.Qf8+ Kc7=] 22...Bc6? [22...Qxc5!-+ I thought about 23.Nb5! but then I found the simple...] 23.Qxf2 1-0

138 – OpenFile 5…Nfd7 6.h4 h6 Any BDG player and practically any 1.e4 player has to deal with the venerable French Defence. I have tried just about everything against it. Generally I score very well vs the French, but there are always those annoying losses from time to time. As I recall Mednis wrote that Bobby Fischer did not handle French Defense positions as well as he did other openings. Wasn't the game Mednis beat Fischer a French Defense? I lost to Mednis myself but that was as Black in my Alekhine Defence. Since White usually sets up in the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit with 1.d4, 2.e4 and 3.Nc3, it makes sense to play these variations vs the French. And there are the transpositions to the French via 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 e6 and 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 e6 3.e4 d5. This last line leads to the French Classical where White has two good variations of approximately equal value: 4.e5 and 4.Bg5, both of which I have played many times. When I am in the BDG-mode, I prefer 4.Bg5 when for example 4...dxe4 5.f3!? exf3 6.Nxf3 transposes to the Euwe variation. Normal play is 4.Bg5 Be7 5.e5 Nfd7 6.Bxe7 giving White a good position. However it is so common that those who play Black usually know it well. Even lower rated players blitz these moves out and with confidence. This brings me to the Chatard-Alekhine variation 6.h4!? This line is in contrary to the more popular 6.Bxe7. White offers a pawn for open lines, rapid development and a kingside attack. Here is a bullet game (2 minute game) from the past where the position was all closed up on the kingside. Eventually I managed to breakthrough just in time. Sawyer (2100) - OpenFile (1700), ICC r 2 0 Internet Chess Club, 1997 begins 1.d4 d5 2.Nc3 e6 3.e4 Nf6 4.Bg5 Be7 5.e5 Nfd7 6.h4 h6 7.Bxe7 [7.Be3!] 7...Qxe7 8.Qd2 b6 9.f4 c6 10.g4 Bb7 11.Nf3 0-0 12.g5 h5 13.Bd3 g6 14.0-0-0 Rc8 15.Kb1 Ba6 16.Bxa6 Nxa6 17.Nh2 c5 18.Ne2 c4 19.c3 Nc7 20.Ng3 Rcb8 21.Qe2 a5? [21...b5 22.Nxh5 b4] 22.Nxh5 gxh5

23.Qxh5 Qf8 24.Ng4 b5 25.Nf6+ Nxf6 26.gxf6 b4 27.Rdg1+ Qg7 28.Rxg7+ Kf8 29.Qh8# 1-0

139 – Irvin 6.Bxe7 Qxe7 7.Nb5 The French Defence Classical Variation is a well-worn beaten path 4.Bg5 Be7 5.e5 Nfd7 6.Bxe7 Qxe7. Everyone plays 7.f4. Okay, not everyone all the time. Usually I play 7.f4. Here I tried to find something new in the knight sortie 7.Nb5!? Both sides lost a little time. The knight could relocate via Na3-Nc2-Ne3. Black swapped off queens to keep White from castling. White wanted to have the better bishop for an endgame. But Black chose a tactical middlegame that led to a different endgame. In the 1990s Jimmy E. Irvin was an active correspondence chess player. Many of his games were played by email. ICCF listed Jimmy Irvin with a rating of 2324 after a total of 54 games. Jimmy Irvin and I played twice in APCT email sections. This game was a French Defence. In our other game Irvin played White in an English Opening. This game featured an Exchange sacrifice by Black beginning with 24… Rxf3+. There followed a long series of captures to 31…cxb3. The resulting position left Black with two connected passed pawns and a bishop for the White rook. A draw was agreed in an equal but unbalanced endgame. Sawyer (1960) - Irvin (2200), corr APCT EMQ-2, 30.07.1996 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d5 3.e4 e6 4.Bg5 Be7 5.e5 Nfd7 6.Bxe7 Qxe7 7.Nb5!? [7.f4] 7...Qd8 [7...Nb6 8.c3 a6 9.Na3 c5 10.f4=] 8.c3 [8.c4 dxc4 9.Bxc4 a6 10.Nc3 c5 11.dxc5 0-0 12.Nf3 Nxc5 13.0-0=] 8...a6 9.Na3 c5 10.f4 cxd4 [10...Nc6 11.Nf3 Qb6 12.Qd2 0-0 13.b3=] 11.cxd4 Qa5+ 12.Qd2 Qxd2+ 13.Kxd2 Nc6 14.Nf3 0-0 15.Nc2 Nb6 16.b3 Bd7 17.Bd3 a5 18.a4 Rac8 19.Rac1 f6 20.Ke3 Be8 21.g4 fxe5 22.fxe5 h6 23.h4 Rf7 24.Na3 Rxf3+ 25.Kxf3 Nxd4+ 26.Ke3 Rxc1 27.Rxc1 Nxb3 28.Rb1 Bxa4 29.Bc2 Nc4+ 30.Nxc4 dxc4 31.Bxb3 [Despite the fireworks the position has remained equal for a long time. White could try 31.h5=] 31...cxb3 [Or 31...Bxb3=]

32.Kd4 b6 33.Kc3 Kh7 34.Rd1 b2 35.Rb1 Kg6 36.Rxb2 b5 37.Rf2 Bd1 38.Rf4 Be2 39.Kd2 Bc4 40.Kc3 Bd5 41.Kc2 Bc6 1/2-1/2

140 – Stefansson 6.Bxe7 Qxe7 7.Qd2 The players back into a Classical French Defence 4.Bg5 Be7 below. White repositioned the queen’s knight with 8.Nd1 and 10.Ne3. The dream is for 21.Ng4 and beyond, as in 23.Nh6+. White got the better kingside attack in this game between Vignir Vatnar Stefansson and Konstantinos Emmanouilidis. Stefansson (2277) - Emmanouilidis (1982), 11th Paleochora Open 2018 GRE, 22.07.2018 begins 1.Nc3 d5 2.e4 e6 3.d4 Nf6 4.Bg5 Be7 5.e5 Nfd7 6.Bxe7 Qxe7 7.Qd2 a6 8.Nd1 [Or 8.f4 c5 9.Nf3 Nc6=] 8...f5 [8...c5 9.c3 f6 10.f4 g5!?=] 9.exf6 gxf6?! [9...Nxf6 10.Bd3=] 10.Ne3 c5 11.c3 b5 12.Ne2 Nc6 13.g3 Nb6 14.Bg2 Bb7 15.0-0 0-0 16.Nf4 c4 [16...cxd4 17.cxd4+/-] 17.Rfe1 Qd6 [17...Nd8 18.Nexd5 Nxd5 19.Nxd5+-] 18.Qe2 [18.Nxe6!? Qxe6 19.Nxd5 Qxd5 20.Bxd5+ Nxd5 21.Qe2+-] 18...Bc8 19.Qg4+ Kh8 20.Qh4 Rf7 [20...Ne7 21.Ng4+-] 21.Ng4 [21.Nexd5 Nxd5 22.Bxd5 exd5 23.Re8+!+-] 21...e5 [21...Qd8 22.Nxe6 Bxe6 23.Rxe6+-] 22.Ng6+ Kg8 [22...Kg7 23.dxe5 Nxe5 24.Qh6+ Kg8 25.N6xe5+-] 23.Nh6+ Kg7 24.Nxf7 Kxf7 25.Qxh7+ Ke8 26.dxe5 fxe5 27.Nxe5 Nxe5 28.Qh5+ Kd8 29.Rxe5 Bd7 [29...Ra7 30.Bxd5 Kc7 31.Bg2+-] 30.Bxd5 Nxd5 [30...Rc8 31.Be6+-] 31.Rxd5 Qc6 [31...Qe6 32.Rad1+-] 32.Rad1 Ra7 33.Qh8+ Kc7 34.Rxd7+ White wins a rook. 1-0

141 – Kutikoff 7.f4 a6 8.Nf3 I tried to play a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit in a tournament game. I was White and paired against Adam Kutikoff, a young man who was probably in his late teens. He had been rated over 2000. Adam was listed in the tournament ratings as an expert. Many younger players get very nervous having to defend unfamiliar gambits. Also after the game Kutikoff revealed that Aldo Lopez warned him not to get into an endgame with me. Our contest began 1.d4 d5 2.e4!? Now my opponent went into a very long think. Later Adam told me that he had never seen 2.e4 before. Kutikoff had played in 239 USCF rated events! After the game we were in the skittles room doing post-mortem. At one point I said something about the French noting, "When I was young..." An old-timer at a neighboring table interrupted me and said, "When you were young, the French was the Gaul!" I chose 6.Bxe7 Qxe7 7.f4. An opportunity presented itself to play a big sacrifice on e4: 13.Ne4!?? I loved playing this move! I felt that the sacrifice gave me good winning chances at that moment. Jeffrey Haskel was the master who won this tournament. Haskel suggested Black could play for a win by gradually unravelling his pieces and slowly pushing White back. I thought so too. Sawyer - Kutikoff, FL State Championship Naples FL (3), 04.09.2011 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e4 e6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5 Be7 5.e5 Nfd7 6.Bxe7 [6.h4 h6 7.Be3+/=] 6...Qxe7 7.f4 a6 8.Nf3 c5 9.Qd2 Nc6 10.dxc5 Qxc5 11.0-0-0 b5 [This move leaves the Nc6 less protected.] 12.Nd4 Bb7 [This leaves the Nd7 less protected.] 13.Ne4!? [This was my most creative move of the entire tournament. 13.Nxc6 Qxc6 14.Ne2 0-0 15.Nd4=] 13...dxe4? [13...Qxd4! 14.Nd6+ Ke7 15.Qxd4 Nxd4-/+] 14.Nxe6 Qe7 15.Nc7+ [15.Nxg7+! Kd8 (15...Kf8 16.Nf5 Qe6 17.Qxd7 Qxd7 18.Rxd7+-) 16.Nf5 Qe6 17.Nd6 Rb8 18.c4+/-] 15...Kd8 16.Nxa8 [16.Nd5 Qe6 17.Nb6 In the post-mortem Kutikoff and I both thought this won for White, now I see that

Black can reply with moving the king. 17...Kc7 18.f5 Qxa2 19.Nxa8+ Kb8=/+] 16...Bxa8 17.g3 Kc7 18.Bh3 Rd8 19.Qe3 Nc5 20.Rxd8 Nxd8 21.Rd1 Bc6 22.Qd4 Ndb7 1/2-1/2

142 – Young 7.f4 a6 8.Nf3 c5 At the 2009 Space Coast Open, most of my opponents were up and coming masters. One player was from my own generation. Clinton Young is a few years younger than me, but he is close enough to my age that I can easily relate to him. In fact we have quite a bit in common. I really enjoyed playing Mr. Young. That night I made a new friend. After our French Defence game, we retired to the skittles room. We talked for a long time. Clinton Young had some great stories. We played a handful of blitz games. Later I remembered the first 20 moves in four offhand blitz games where I scored 3.5-0.5. In our tournament game, my idea in the Classical Variation with 11.cxd3 (instead of the dynamic 11.Qxd3) was to saddle Black with a bad light squared bishop. As an old timer, I had a lot of experience playing endgames. I felt like I could win the knight vs bishop ending that night vs that opponent. And in the end, I managed to do just that. Sawyer (1964) - Young (1815), Space Coast Open (3), 09.05.2009 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5 Be7 5.e5 Nfd7 6.Bxe7 Qxe7 7.f4 a6 8.Nf3 c5 9.dxc5 Nxc5 10.Bd3 Nxd3+ [More common is 10...Nc6 11.Qd2 b5=] 11.cxd3 Nc6 12.d4 Bd7 13.0-0 0-0 14.Qd2 Na7 15.Rfc1 [White could press for an immediate attack with 15.f5! since 15...exf5? 16.Nxd5+/-] 15...Nb5 16.Nxb5 Bxb5 17.Rc2 Rfc8 18.Rac1 Bc6 19.Ne1 Qd8 20.g3 [20.Nd3+/=] 20...Bd7 21.Rxc8 Rxc8 22.Rxc8 Qxc8 23.Qc2 Qc4 24.Qxc4 dxc4 25.Kf2 Bc6 26.Nc2 Kf8 27.Ne3 b5 28.Ke2 Ke7 29.Kd2 Kd7 30.Kc3 a5? [This loses a pawn, and eventually, the game. If 30...Kc7! Houdini gives the critical line as 31.a4 Kb6 32.axb5 axb5 33.Kb4 Bf3 34.Nc2 Bc6 35.Na3 Be8 36.Nb1 Bc6 37.Nc3+/=] 31.a4 b4+ 32.Kxc4 Bxa4 33.b3 Bc6 34.Kc5 Kc7 35.Nc4 a4 36.Kxb4 [More accurate is 36.bxa4 Bxa4 37.Kxb4 Bc6 38.Kc5+-] 36...axb3 37.Kxb3 Bd5 38.Kb4 Be4 39.Nd6 Bg6 40.Kc5 Kd7 41.Kb6 [Houdini likes 41.g4! Bd3 42.Nxf7+-] 41...f6 42.Nb7 fxe5

43.fxe5 h5 44.Nc5+ Ke7 45.Kc7 Bb1 46.Nb7 Be4 47.Nd8 Bd5 48.Nc6+ Ke8 49.Kd6 Ba2 50.Nb4 Bc4 51.d5 exd5 52.Nxd5 Be2 53.e6 1-0

143 – MoonBeam 7.f4 0-0 8.Nf3 I ventured the classical French Defence bishop sacrifice in my game against MoonBeam. I had chances, but I got outplayed. Sawyer (2380) - MoonBeam (3007), ICC 5 0 Internet Chess Club, 24.11.2003 begins 1.Nc3 e6 2.e4 d5 3.d4 Nf6 4.Bg5 Be7 5.e5 Nfd7 6.Bxe7 Qxe7 7.f4 0-0 8.Nf3 c5 9.Bd3 cxd4 10.Bxh7+ Kxh7 11.Ng5+ Qxg5 [11...Kg8 12.Qh5 Qxg5 13.fxg5 (13.Qxg5!?) 13...dxc3 14.0-0 transposes back to the game.] 12.fxg5 dxc3 13.Qh5+ Kg8 14.0-0 g6 15.Qh4? [15.Qh6! cxb2 16.Rab1 Nxe5 17.Rf4 f6 18.gxf6 Rxf6 19.Rxf6 Nbd7 20.Rxe6+-] 15...Nxe5 16.Rae1 Nc4 17.b3 [17.Rf3+-] 17...Nd2 18.Rf2 [18.Rf4!+-] 18...e5 19.Re3 d4 20.Rd3 e4 21.Rdxd2? [21.Rxd4=] 21...cxd2 22.Rxd2 Bf5 23.g4 e3 24.Rxd4 Bxc2 25.Rc4 Nc6 26.Rxc2 Nd4 27.Qg3 Nxc2 28.h4 e2 29.h5 e1Q+ 30.Kg2 Ne3+ 31.Kh3 Qf1+ 32.Kh2 Rac8 White resigns 0-1

144 – Tregidga 7.f4 0-0 8.Nf3 Email was new. In those days I used AOL (America Online). With every chess move I heard its notification “You’ve got mail!” John Tregidga and I contested the French Defence. We exchanged off minor pieces. White controlled the c-file and had more space. Black controlled the d-file. Eventually we agreed to draw. I added a French Defence game vs Jeff Andersen about that same time. Sawyer (1969) - Tregidga (1940), corr APCT EMQ-1, 11.1995 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5 Be7 5.e5 Nfd7 6.Bxe7 Qxe7 7.f4 0-0 8.Nf3 c5 [8...a6 9.Qd2 (9.Bd3=) 9...c5 10.dxc5 Qxc5 (10...Nxc5=) 11.Bd3 b5 12.Qf2 Qxf2+ 13.Kxf2 Nc6 14.Rhc1 Bb7 15.Ne2 f6 16.exf6 gxf6 17.c3 Nc5 18.Bc2 Ne4+ 19.Bxe4 dxe4 20.Nfd4 Nxd4 1/2-1/2 Sawyer - Andersen, corr USCF 1995] 9.Qd2 [9.dxc5] 9...Nc6 10.0-0-0 [10.dxc5] 10...Nb6 [10...a6=] 11.Qe3 [11.dxc5] 11...cxd4 12.Nxd4 Nxd4 13.Qxd4 [13.Rxd4 Bd7 14.h4=] 13...Bd7 14.Nb5?! [14.Kb1 Rfc8=] 14...Bxb5 15.Bxb5 Rfc8 16.Bd3 Nc4 17.b3?! [17.Kb1] 17...Na5 18.Kb2 Nc6 19.Qe3 Nb4 [19...a5=/+] 20.c3 Nxd3+ 21.Qxd3 [21.Rxd3=] 21...Rc7 [21...Rc5 22.Rc1 Rac8 23.Rhf1

b5=/+] 22.Rc1 Rac8 23.Rc2 [23.Rhf1!?] 23...f5 [23...Rc5=/+] 24.Rhc1 Rc5 25.c4 Rd8 26.cxd5 Rcxd5 27.Qc3 b6 28.g3 Rd3 29.Qc7 R3d7 30.Qc3 Qf8 31.Rg2 Kh8 32.Rcc2 Rd3 33.Qc4 Qe7 34.Rc3 R3d4 35.Qc7 R4d7 36.Qc6 Kg8 37.Qc4 1/2-1/2

Book 3: Chapter 6 – Winawer Variation 3.Nc3 Bb4 Black pins the knight that protects e4. How will White respond?

145 – Sawyer 4.Be3 dxe4 5.f3 I am a pattern player. I worked on chess patterns every day. My favorite method is “Chessimo” by Grandmaster Gilberto Milos. He provides six modules of 720 tactics positions; three modules of 480 endgames; and three modules of 240 strategy positions. That's 6480 chess patterns taken from grandmaster games. These exercises help me learn tactics from all openings. The process builds on recognizable patterns. Early exercises show the final two moves, three moves, five moves, seven moves, etc. I recognize the patterns. At one point I finished five tactical modules, one endgame module and all three strategy modules. That's 4800 positions Chessimo had me do 7 to 10 times each! The French Defence Rasa-Studier Gambit is 4.Be3!? I offered a pawn vs "PatternPlayer". I forgot 8.fxe4 Nxe4 9.Qg4 and got into big trouble. In blitz I kept playing, avoided checkmate and hoped. When Black got into time trouble, I found a mating pattern. Sawyer (2065) - PatternPlayer (2087), ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 10.11.2012 begins 1.e4 e6 2.Nc3 d5 3.d4 Bb4 4.Be3 dxe4 5.f3 Nf6 6.a3 Bxc3+ 7.bxc3 c5 8.Qd2 [Correct is 8.fxe4 Nxe4 9.Qg4= Instead I drift into a lost position.] 8...cxd4 9.cxd4 Nc6 10.c3 Qa5 11.Bc4 exf3 12.Nxf3 Ne4 13.Qd3 Qxc3+ 14.Qxc3 Nxc3 15.0-0 0-0 16.Bd3 Nd5 17.Bg5 f6 18.Bd2 Bd7 19.Rab1 b6 20.Rfe1 g6 21.Bh6 Rfe8 22.Bd2 Kf7 23.h3 Nce7 24.g4 h6 25.Kf2 g5 26.Kg3 Ng6 27.h4 Ngf4 28.Be4 Rac8 29.hxg5 hxg5 30.Rh1 Rh8 31.Rxh8 Rxh8 32.Bxd5 Nxd5 33.Bb4 Nxb4 34.axb4 a5 35.bxa5 bxa5 36.Rb7 Ke7 37.Ra7 a4 38.d5? e5? [38...exd5-+] 39.Nd2 Rb8 40.Ne4 Rb3+ 41.Kf2 Kd8= [This throws away the advantage. Black is still winning after 41...Rb5 42.d6+ Ke6 43.Nxf6 Kxf6 44.Rxd7 Rb4-/+] 42.Nxf6

Bb5 43.d6 Rc3 44.Rb7 [44.Rg7=] 44...Bc6? [44...Rf3+ 45.Kg2 Rxf6 46.Rxb5=] 45.Rb8# Black is checkmated. 1-0

146 – Penullar 4.Be3 dxe4 5.f3 Our friend Peter Mcgerald Penullar figured out another method to attack the French Defence. Penullar used ideas that he borrowed from the BlackmarDiemer Gambit. Usually the French is reached after 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5. Here both the players reverse their first two moves. We all know that the French Defence is a good and solid opening. However, like with its cousin, the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit Euwe Variation 5.Nxf3 e6, the French defender can easily slip into passive and losing play. Penullar - kucukturank, OMER TCP v ASIA & - Boa Chess.com, 15.01.2012 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e4 e6 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.Be3!? dxe4 5.f3 Nf6 6.Bc4!? [The ideal square of Bd3 is not available. So White develops quickly intending to play Bd3 later if Black castles kingside.] 6...Bxc3+ [There is no need to capture on c3 until White plays a3. Instead Junior 12 slightly prefers Black after 6...0-0=/+] 7.bxc3 Nbd7 8.fxe4 0-0 [8...Nxe4 might transpose.] 9.Bd3 Nxe4 10.Nf3 Nxc3 11.Bxh7+ Kxh7 12.Qd3+ Kg8 13.Ng5!? [It is hard to resist making a mate threat.] 13...Nf6 14.Qxc3 b6 [14...Qd5!? 15.Qxc7 Bd7 16.0-0 Rac8=/+] 15.0-0 Bb7 16.Qd3 [White threatens mate in two but eliminating the Nf6 and playing Qh7 mate.] 16...Re8?+- [A logical and losing blunder. Proper defence is the counterattack of 16...Qd5! threatening mate in one. Now 17.Rf2 allows the fork 17...Ne4 exchanging toward the endgame with Black up a pawn.] 17.Rxf6 Qxf6 18.Qh7+ Kf8 19.Rf1 Qxf1+ 20.Kxf1 Bd5 21.Qh8+ Ke7 22.Qxg7 Kd8 23.Nxf7+ 1-0

147 – Muir 4.a3 Ba5 5.b4 Bb6 The closed nature of the French Defence tends to favor knights over bishops. That can even be true if the bishops stay on the board for a few extra moves. In the first 16 moves of my offhand club game against Bob Muir, Black moved his knights only once each. Then in the next 17 moves he moved them 11 times. There were checks and forks threatened all over the place. In this Winawer variation Black had the opportunity to capture the e-pawn. The critical line is 4.a3 Bxc3+ 5.bxc3 dxe4. At that point White could choose between 6.Qg4 and 6.f3!? My friend Bob chose the bishop retreat with 4.a3 Ba5 5.b4 Bb6. White had a clamp on the position after 6.e5. Black countered with the thematic but risky 6…c5? It lost a pawn, but I took it the wrong way. White’s extra doubled c-pawn was a big advantage, but I missed several knockout punches. Black fought back and could have equalized. Eventually he ran out of steam. Sawyer (2010) - Muir (1800), Williamsport, PA 04.05.1999 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e4 e6 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.a3 Ba5 5.b4 Bb6 6.e5 c5? [This drops a pawn. Better is 6...Ne7 7.Nf3 0-0 8.Bd3+/=] 7.bxc5 [7.dxc5! Bc7 8.f4+/-] 7...Bc7 [7...Ba5 8.Bd2+/-] 8.Nb5 Nc6 9.Qg4 [9.Nd6+! Bxd6 10.cxd6+-] 9...Kf8 10.Bd3!? [10.Bd2+-] 10...Nge7?! [10...Ba5+ 11.Bd2+/-] 11.Bg5 [11.Ne2+/-] 11...h6 12.Bxe7+ Qxe7 13.f4?! [13.Ne2+/-] 13...a6? [Black should keep his bishop with a check after 13...Ba5+ 14.Kf2 a6=/+] 14.Nxc7 Qxc7 15.Nf3 [15.Ne2+/-] 15...Qa5+ 16.Kf2 Qc3 17.Ke3 [17.Qh4+/-] 17...Na5 18.Rhf1 Nc4+ 19.Ke2 Nxa3 20.Rfc1 Nb5? [20...Bd7 21.f5+/=] 21.Ke3? [21.Bxb5!+- wins the knight.] 21...Na3 22.Qg3? [22.Kf2+/=] 22...Nc4+ [22...Nxc2+! 23.Ke2 Nxd4+ 24.Nxd4 Qxd4-/+] 23.Ke2 Bd7 24.Qe1 Qxe1+ 25.Kxe1 Ne3? [25...Bc6=] 26.Kf2 Ng4+ 27.Ke2 h5 28.h3 Nh6 29.Rcb1 Bc6 [29...Ra7 30.c4+/-] 30.Rb6 a5 31.Bb5 Nf5? [31...Ke7 32.Bxc6 bxc6 33.Rxc6+/-] 32.Bxc6 bxc6 33.Rxc6 Ng3+ 34.Kd3 g6 35.Rc7 Ke8 36.Ng5 Rf8 37.Rb7 f5 38.Nxe6 1-0

148 – Lopez 4.a3 Ba5 5.b4 Bb6 Tactics. No question about it that tactics are king. Tactics are the key to chess success. This game reminded me that I needed to work more diligently on my own tactical skills. If I was a grandmaster in my prime, playing an expert would be like a day off. Instead I was a former expert hoping to regain my former status. After losing the first round to an expert rated 2140, I got some relief by facing an expert rated "only" 2115. In 2005 I played Aldo Lopez the first time in the 2005 Florida State Championship where I was 3-3. Lopez won a pawn in his French Defence and outplayed me all the way into an endgame where he won. The other two games I lost were to kids who were on their way to becoming grandmasters. Our 2011 game began 1.d4 e6 2.e4 d5. Lopez said everyone thinks experts know all their openings deeply but they don't. I agree with him. We were both on our own after only 4 moves. We reached an ending where Black had a bishop and an extra pawn vs my knight on d4. I handled it well, won back the pawn and force a draw in a K+P ending where his king had more of the center. After the game Lopez was showing a friend how powerful my knight was vs the bishop in an open endgame position. Sawyer - Lopez, FL State Championship Naples FL (2), 03.09.2011 begins 1.d4 e6 2.e4 d5 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.a3 Ba5 [4...Bxc3+ 5.bxc3 dxe4 6.f3] 5.b4 Bb6 6.e5 [6.Nf3] 6...Ne7 7.Nf3 a5 8.Be3 axb4 9.axb4 Rxa1 10.Qxa1 0-0 11.Na4 Nd7 12.Nc5 [12.Bd3+/=] 12...Bxc5 13.dxc5 Nf5 14.Bd3 Nxe3 15.fxe3 f6 16.0-0 fxe5 17.Nxe5 Rxf1+ 18.Bxf1 Qg5 [18...Qf6 19.Qa8 Qxe5 20.Qxc8+ Nf8=/+] 19.Nf3 Qxe3+ 20.Kh1 Qf4 21.Bd3 e5 22.Qa8 Qf8 23.Bf5 e4? [23...Nb6 24.cxb6 Qxf5 25.bxc7 Lopez did not want to allow a pawn on c7. 25...e4=/+] 24.Nd4? [I messed up the move order tactically. 24.Be6+! Kh8 25.Bxd7 Lopez 25...exf3 26.Kg1+-] 24...g6 25.Be6+ Kg7

26.Kg1 e3 27.Nf3 Qf6 28.Bxd7 Bxd7 29.Qa3 Qf4 30.Qc3+ Kg8 [30...Kh6 Aldo Lopez wondered about this move.] 31.Qd4 Qxd4 32.Nxd4 Kf7 33.Kf1 Bg4 34.h3 Bd1 35.Ke1 e2 36.c3 c6 37.Nxe2 Bxe2 38.Kxe2 Ke6 39.h4 Ke5 40.Ke3 h6 41.g4 Ke6 42.Ke2 Kf6 43.Kf2 Ke6 44.Ke2 1/2-1/2

149 – Duggan 5.bxc3 dxe4 6.f3 In the Southern Open 2012 I played John Edward Duggan who was a USCF rated 2331. When John told me he was from England, I pointed out he was missing the London Olympics. Duggan noted he was missing the traffic! I thanked him for coming to Florida on vacation. Orlando is an awesome place! Our game began 1.d4 e6. Rather than play my London System or 2.c4 inviting a Classical Dutch, I boldly pushed 2.e4 into a French. After 2...d5 3.Nc3. This time it was not an Alapin 3.Be3!? Duggan stepped into the Winawer with 3...Bb4. I figured Duggan would play critical lines. It seemed like a fine afternoon for adventure! We continued 4.a3 Bxc3+ 5.bxc3 dxe4. Now I chose 6.f3!? This is the Winckelmann-Reimer Gambit which author Tim Harding called the "IM-Killer". Bobby Fischer played 6.Qg4 a handful of times. White usually scores better with 6.f3!? I play both moves but I was in the gambit mood. It seemed like my best shot at a 2300. After his 6...Bd7 I was on my own. Duggan thought I might win because in many variations I was just one tempo from finding checkmate. I did not find it, but it sure was fun trying to win. This was an enjoyable tournament game with a nice post-mortem to follow. The game gave me another rated contest against a foreign FIDE opponent. Sawyer - Duggan, Southern Open Orlando FL (2), 28.07.2012 begins 1.d4 e6 2.e4 d5 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.a3 Bxc3+ 5.bxc3 dxe4 6.f3 Bd7 7.Bf4 [The main line is 7.Nh3 Bc6 8.fxe4 Bxe4 9.Ng5 with good compensation for the pawn.] 7...Bc6 [If 7...exf3 both 8.Qxf3 and 8.Nxf3 are good for White.] 8.fxe4 Bxe4 9.Nf3 Nf6 10.Bd3 Nbd7 11.0-0 0-0 12.Qe1 [A common BDG continuation.] 12...Bxd3 13.cxd3 Re8 14.Bg5!? c5 15.Qh4 [Junior likes 15.Ne5!+/=] 15...Qc7 16.Ne5 [Interesting is 16.Bxf6 Nxf6 17.Ng5 h6 18.Rxf6 gxf6 19.Ne4 f5 20.Nf6+ Kg7 21.Rf1=] 16...Nxe5 17.dxe5 Nd5 18.Rae1 Ne7 19.Bf6? [Better is 19.Qg4! intending to push h4. Duggan

suggested 19.Rf3!?] 19...Ng6 20.Qg5 gxf6 21.exf6 [Taking with the pawn comes close but does not work. Duggan thought I would do better with 21.Rxf6 when Ref1 would pressure f7.] 21...Kh8 22.Re4 Rg8 23.Rf3 Nf8 24.Qh5 Rd8 25.Rh4 Rd5 26.Qh6 Qe5 27.Kf2 Qg5 28.g3 Qxh6 0-1

150 – Torning 6.f3 Nc6 7.fxe4 Rick Torning won a French Winkelmann-Reimer Gambit which is a cousin to the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit which can be reached via a French Winawer after 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Bb4. Mr. Torning wrote: "The Winkelmann-Riemer Gambit often allows a classic bishop sacrifice! Another short game in 16 moves." Torning - NN, Casual Bullet lichess, 04.03.2018 begins 1.d4 d5 2.Nc3 e6 3.e4 Bb4 [French Defence Winawer] 4.a3 Bxc3+ 5.bxc3 dxe4 6.f3 [Winckelmann-Riemer Gambit] 6...Nc6 7.fxe4 Bd7 [7...Qh4+] 8.Nf3 Nf6 9.e5 Nd5 10.Bd2 0-0 11.Bd3 b6? 12.Bxh7+! Kxh7 13.Ng5+ Kg6! 14.h4 Nf6 15.h5+ Kf5 16.Qf3# White wins by checkmate. 1-0 [Game notes by Torning]

151 – Zintgraff 6.f3 Nf6 7.Bg5 Gary Zintgraff backed into a French Defence Winawer that transposed to a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit Euwe line 5.Nxf3 e6 6.Bg5 Bb4 7.a3 Bxc3+ 8.bxc3. Zintgraff wrote: "Dear Tim: Here is a 5 0 Blitz game played on 2/1999 at the San Antonio Chess Club tournament where I defeated a solid expert, John Hyltin. It shows a transposition from two other openings to get to a typical BDG attack. He has been an "over the board" tournament expert for over 25 years. I was rated about 1780 at the time. He has been very strong with the French Defense and the Nimzo-Indian, but still, I was very happy to get to play the Winckelmann-Reimer Gambit (deferred) against him after he avoided my Paleface Attack (deferred). My opening strategy was trying to get some form or "cousin" of the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit against him to have a fighting chance. His 7...exf3?! gave me that chance! Sincerely, Gary Zintgraff" Zintgraff - Hyltin, San Antonio CC, 02.1999 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d5 3.f3 e6 4.e4 Bb4 5.a3 Bxc3+ 6.bxc3 dxe4 7.Bg5?! exf3?! 8.Nxf3 [Now I had a BDG.] 8...0-0 9.Bd3 h6 10.h4 Nbd7 11.Qd2 Re8 12.Bxh6 gxh6? 13.Qxh6 Nf8 14.Ng5 Qe7?! 15.0-0 Ng6?? 16.Rxf6? [Much better for

White would have been: 16.Bxg6! Qf8 17.Bxf7+ Qxf7 18.Nxf7 and mates] 16...Qxf6 17.Qh7+ Kf8 18.Rf1 [Resigns. With more time he might have tried 18...Nf4 19.Qe4 Qh6 20.Qxf4 f5 21.Qxc7 Qg7 22.Qd6+ while 18...Qxf1+?? or Ke7?? both lead to mate or an overwhelming White position.] 1-0 [Edited Notes by Zintgraff]

152 – Penullar 6.f3 exf3 7.Nxf3 The French Defence is a good opening that has survived the test of time. It maintains a certain popularity. Many new books and videos have hit the market by famous titled players. White seems to be able to play anything vs the French, but nothing wins by force. Black always finds a playable line. Peter Mcgerald Penullar played the French Defence Winawer 4.a3 gambit line. With 6.f3 Penullar went into the Winckelmann-Reimer Gambit. This had the look and feel of the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit. The WRG has been the subject of some debate over the years. Sometimes it is faster to win with a Winckelmann-Reimer Gambit than say the name. There are lines completely losing for Black while other lines might favor Black. One thing is known: taking the gambit pawn immediately with 6.f3 exf3 is bad for Black. I had over 400 games in my collection where Black captured with 6...exf3. White won 88%! Of course White still has to play well. Below is an example where Penullar does just that. Nice win! Penullar - jaruta, Live Chess Chess.com, 24.07.2012 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e4 e6 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.a3 Bxc3+ 5.bxc3 dxe4 6.f3 exf3 [The most popular move is 6...c5. After that move White has tried 15 different replies. I do not know which one is the best. Of those that have been played at least 50 times, the two that score the best are 7.Rb1 and 7.Bf4.] 7.Nxf3 Nf6 8.Bd3 h6 9.0-0 b6 10.Be3 [A new move. White has done well with 10.Qe1!+/- a few times before.] 10...Bb7 11.Qe1 0-0 12.Qh4! [Or 12.Qg3!? Nh5 13.Qh3 Nf6 14.Bxh6 gxh6 15.Qxh6+- with a winning attack.] 12...Nd5 13.Bg5! hxg5 14.Nxg5 [Faster is 14.Qh7#!] 14...Re8 15.Qh7+ Kf8 16.Rxf7# 1-0

153 – Sawyer 7.Nxf3 Nf6 8.Bd3 This game transposed from a Scandinavian Defence 1.e4 d5 into the French Defence Winckelmann-Reimer Gambit after 4.a3 with a later 6.f3!? This exact position can be reached by many move orders. The main French Defence move order is 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.a3 Bxc3+ 5.bxc3 dxe4 6.f3 when an interesting line is 6...Nf6 7.fxe4. This same BDG position can be reached via 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3 e6 5.fxe4 Bb4 6.a3 Bxc3+ 7.bxc3. Then play can continue 7...Nxe4 8.Qg4! In the blitz game below I missed an unusual chance to trap the queen. Fortunately for me, Black could not handle the pressure against his king. Sawyer - promesa, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 02.01.2013 begins 1.e4 d5 2.d4 dxe4 3.Nc3 e6 4.f3 Bb4 5.a3 Bxc3+ 6.bxc3 exf3 7.Nxf3 Nf6 8.Bd3 0-0 9.0-0 c6 [9...b6 10.Bg5 Bb7 11.Ne5 Qd5 12.Qd2+/-] 10.Bg5 Nbd7 11.Qe1 Qa5 12.Qh4 Qxc3 13.Rad1 [I missed an unusual but effective tactic of trapping the queen here. 13.Bd2! Qb2 14.Rfb1+-] 13...Qa5 14.Ne5 b5? 15.Nxd7 Nxd7? 16.Qxh7# Black checkmated 1-0

154 – Bernal 7.Nxf3 Nf6 8.Bd3 Winckelmann-Reimer Gambit can transpose to a BDG Euwe. My opponent was Manny Bernal. This is one of 40 skittles games I played at Borders bookstore in Orlando, Florida from 2003-2005. In the Queens Knight Attack I almost always follow up with e4 or d4, depending on what I feel like playing. My opponent played 1...e6 signaling that we would head toward a French Defence. Sawyer - Bernal, Orlando, FL, 06.11.2003 begins 1.Nc3 e6 2.d4 Bb4 3.e4 [3.Nf3 is an option for 1.Nc3 players who wish to avoid the well-known lines.] 3...d5 [Transposing to the French Defence Winawer] 4.a3 Bxc3+ 5.bxc3 dxe4 6.f3!? [This is an interesting approach. Another idea is 6.Qg4 Nf6 7.Qxg7 Rg8 8.Qh6=] 6...exf3 7.Nxf3 [7.Qxf3!? Nf6 8.Bd3 0-0 9.Ne2=] 7...Nf6 8.Bd3 0-0 [8...c5! 9.0-0 0-0 10.Qe1! Nbd7 (10...Qd5 11.Qg3 Nbd7 12.Ne5 Nxe5 13.dxe5+/-) 11.Qh4 b5 12.Ng5 h6 13.Ne4+/=] 9.0-0 [White has excellent attacking prospects on the kingside.] 9...Qd6 [9...Qd5 10.c4

Qd8 11.Qe1 Nc6 12.Qh4+/-; 9...b6 10.Bg5 Bb7 11.Ne5 Qd5 12.Qd2+/-] 10.Qe1 c5 11.Qh4 cxd4 12.Bg5 e5? [Hastens the end.] 13.Bxf6 Qxf6 14.Qxh7# 1-0

3.Nc3 Bb4 4.e5 c5 White advances the pawn to protect it and cramp Black.

155 – Corter 4…Bxc3+ 5.bxc3 A little knowledge is a dangerous thing. So they say. However we all start with no knowledge. You make progress when you gain a little knowledge. Then you move on from there. At the chess club in Williamsport, Pennsylvania I sometimes played a young Travis Corter. I like the name “Travis”. It was popular in Texas and popular among baseball players. Travis was learning. We headed toward the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit with 1.d5 d5 2.e4. He avoided the gambit move 2…dxe4. Later Travis would allow me to play the BDG a few times. This time Corter played the French Defence with 2…e6. Earlier that same year I won a couple Alapin-Diemer French Gambits against his father James Corter after 3.Be3. Here we entered the famous Winawer Variation after 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.e5. Travis probably knew this a little bit from watching his dad. Black prematurely exchanged off his bishop on c3. He usually plays 4…c5 and waits for White to waste a tempo with 5.a3 Bxc3+. Our game continued 4…Bxc3+ 5.bxc3. Then Black pushed the pawn to 5…f6. That is a good strategy for attacking the pawn center. The alternative is …c5. His 5…f6 move was tactically dangerous for Black. You do not want to open the center when you have less space and fewer pieces in action. I forced sharp play until White won two pawns.

Sawyer (2010) - Corter (1400), Williamsport, PA, 22.06.1999 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e4 e6 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.e5 Bxc3+ 5.bxc3 f6?! [5...Ne7 6.Qg4 0-0 7.Nf3+/=] 6.Bd3 fxe5? [6...Qd7 7.Nf3+/-] 7.Qh5+ Kf8 8.Qxe5 Nc6 9.Qf4+ Qf6 [9...Nf6 10.Nf3+-] 10.Qxc7 e5 11.dxe5 [11.Ba3+! Nge7 12.Bb5+-] 11...Nxe5 12.Ne2 Nxd3+ 13.cxd3 Qg6 14.Nf4 [14.Ba3+ Ke8 15.0-0+-] 14...Qe8+ 15.Kd2 b6 16.Ba3+ Ne7 17.Rhe1 g5 18.Bxe7+ Qxe7 19.Qxe7+ 1-0

156 – BIGBURAT 4…Nc6 5.a3 My French Defence game vs BIGBURAT in the Winawer 3...Bb4 saw Black play 4...Nc6, which was not just a waiting move. The knight blocked the thematic 4...c5. A reasonable strategy is to attack e5 with a timely ...f6. The players opened up the e-file. Black’s most important pieces lined up on that file. That strategy did not work well. White won with a check when Black’s king stood in the front of the line. Sawyer - BIGBURAT, ICC r 15 0 Internet Chess Club, 16.04.1998 begins 1.d4 e6 2.e4 d5 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.e5 Nc6 5.a3 Bxc3+ 6.bxc3 Nge7 7.Bd3 h6 8.h4 [8.Qg4+/-] 8...Bd7 9.g4 [9.Qg4+/-] 9...f6 [9...Na5=] 10.exf6 gxf6 11.Qf3 f5 12.gxf5 Nxf5 13.Qh5+ Kf8 [13...Ke7 14.Bxf5 exf5 15.Bxh6+/-] 14.Bxf5 exf5 [14...Qf6 15.Bd3+-] 15.Bxh6+ Rxh6 16.Qxh6+ Ke7 17.Qg5+ [17.0-0-0+-] 17...Kd6 [17...Kf7 18.Ne2+-] 18.Qf4+ Ke6 [18...Ke7 19.Nf3+-] 19.Nf3 Qe7 [19...Kf7 20.0-0-0+-] 20.Kd2 Re8 [20...Qd6 21.Qh6+ Ke7 22.Rae1+ Be6 23.Qg7+ Kd8 24.Qh8+ Kd7 25.Qxa8+-] 21.Rae1+ 1-0

157 – Rookie 4…Ne7 5.Bd2 c5 Here I tried the Winawer French Defence line with 5.Bd2 that Roman Dzindzichashvili recommended. Rookie inverted the moves 4...Ne7 and 5...c5 which made little difference. I chose 6.Nb5 from where my knight could recapture on d4 or jump into Nd6 for attack. White got a good kingside attack. My guess is that I was low on time when I took the draw because I missed a winning continuation. Sawyer (1970) - Rookie (2480), ICC 5 0 Internet Chess Club, 17.06.2008 begins 1.e4 e6 2.Nc3 d5 3.d4 Bb4 4.e5 Ne7 5.Bd2 c5 6.Nb5 Bxd2+ 7.Qxd2 0-0 8.f4 f6 9.Nf3 fxe5 10.fxe5 a6 11.Nd6 cxd4 12.Bd3 Nbc6 13.00 h6 [13...Rxf3 14.Rxf3 Nxe5 15.Qf4 Nxf3+ 16.gxf3 Nf5 17.Bxf5 exf5 18.Re1=] 14.a3 Nxe5 15.Nxe5 Rxf1+ 16.Rxf1 Qxd6 17.Nf7 Qd7 [17...Qc7 18.Qe2 Nf5 19.Bxf5 exf5 20.Qe8+ Kh7 21.Re1 Be6 22.Qxe6+-] 18.Nxh6+

gxh6 19.Qxh6!? [I saw the draw and took it. I missed the win. 19.Rf6! Nf5 20.Bxf5 exf5 21.Qxh6 Qe7 22.Qg5+ Qg7 23.Rg6+-] 19...Nf5 20.Qg6+ Qg7 21.Bxf5 exf5 22.Qe8+ 1/2-1/2

158 – Priasmoro 5.Bd2 Ne7 This French Defence Winawer followed the same continuation to 8.f4 as my previous game vs Rookie. Here Black played 8...a6. When Black pushed her f-pawn, she advanced to 11...f5. Better is 11...f6 which threatens the e5 pawn which protects the Nd6. White opened the g-file with 12.g4 and 13.gxf5. A strong attack with a sacrifice and a check followed in the game between the players Novendra Priasmoro and Medina Warda Aulia. Priasmoro (2449) - Aulia (2380), Japfa IGM 2018 Surakarta INA, 27.04.2018 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.e5 c5 5.Bd2 Ne7 6.Nb5 Bxd2+ 7.Qxd2 0-0 8.f4 a6 9.Nd6 cxd4 10.Nf3 Nec6 11.Bd3 f5? [11...f6=] 12.g4 Nd7 [12...fxg4 13.Ng5+/=] 13.gxf5 [13.0-0-0+/=] 13...Ndxe5 [13...exf5 14.0-0-0+/=] 14.fxe5 Nxe5 15.Nxe5 Qxd6 16.Qf4 Qb4+ 17.Kf2 exf5 18.Rhg1 Re8 [18...Rf6 19.Rae1+-] 19.Rxg7+ Kxg7 20.Qg5+ 1-0

159 – Anurag 5.Bd2 cxd4 The French Defence Winawer Variation 5.Bd2 has been trendy for the past decade. White has good practical chances without the need to delve into the depths of 5.a3. However, Black has fully adequate defensive options. Here the moves 5...cxd4 6.Nb5 Bc5 7.Qg4 Kf8 allowed Black to keep his good bishop. That proved very handy for capturing the Nd6 in the game between Sergio Diaz Castro and Mhamal Anurag. Diaz Castro (2263) - Anurag (2472), 43rd Seville Open 2018 Seville ESP (8.10), 19.01.2018 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.e5 c5 5.Bd2 cxd4 6.Nb5 Bc5 7.Qg4 Kf8 8.Nf3 [8.b4!?] 8...Nc6 9.0-0-0 [9.Nbxd4 Qb6 10.Bc3=] 9...Qb6 10.Qf4 Bd7 [10...a6 11.Nd6 Bxd6 12.exd6=] 11.Ng5 [11.Bd3 a6=] 11...Nh6 12.Bd3 [12.Nf3 a6-/+] 12...Rc8 13.h4 a6 14.Nd6 Bxd6 15.exd6 e5 16.Qg3 Nf5 17.Bxf5 Bxf5 18.Qb3 [18.Qf3 Nb4 19.Qxf5 Rxc2+ 20.Kb1 Rxb2+ 21.Kxb2 Nd3+ 22.Kc2 Qc5+ 23.Kb1 Qb5+

24.Kc2=] 18...Qxb3 19.axb3 f6 [19...Na5-+] 20.Nh3 [20.Nf3 Na5-+] 20...Kf7 [20...Na5-+] 21.f3 [21.Rdf1 Rhd8-+] 21...Na5 22.Bxa5 [22.Bc3 dxc3-+] 22...Rxc2+ 23.Kb1 Rc5+ 0-1

160 – Muir 4…c5 5.Nge2 cxd4 When I was a child, sometimes we ate red flannel hash. It is an acquired taste. Not everyone likes it, but sometimes I do. We took a family trip to Seattle, Washington. At one restaurant I ordered red flannel hash for breakfast. No one else in my family did. They all laughed and looked at me strangely. Most of my chess career I reached the French Defence from the White side of the board. Once in a while I have a taste for the Black side of the board. It’s rare and strange, but it happens. Here I found myself on the Black side of a French Defence vs Robert Muir. I chose the Winawer Variation. When I had Black after 4.e5 c5, almost everyone had played 5.a3 against me. A few brave souls ventured 5.Bd2 or 5.Qg4. Bob Muir did not take long to get me out of the book. His choice of 4.e5 c5 5.Nge2 marked the only time I ever faced this. If you are looking for something new, this move 5.Nge2 is really not all that bad. It is equal and different. White misplayed the complications. His mistake on move eight dropped a pawn. The middlegame left Black with a bad light squared bishop, but the extra pawn allotted me freedom to expand in the center. More exchanges led to a rook endgame. I was happy to return the extra pawn in exchange for a checkmate. Muir (1800) - Sawyer (2010), Williamsport, PA 1997 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.e5 c5 5.Nge2!? [5.a3 in the main line] 5...cxd4 [5...Ne7!? =] 6.Qxd4 [6.Nxd4 Qc7=] 6...Nc6 7.Qg4 Nge7 [7...Bf8=] 8.Bg5?! [8.Qxg7 Ng6=] 8...Bxc3+ [8...Qc7=/+] 9.Nxc3 Nxe5 10.Bxe7 Nxg4 11.Bxd8 Kxd8 12.Be2 Nf6 13.f3 Bd7 14.g4 Bc6 15.Kf2 Rc8 16.Rhd1 Ke7 17.Kg3 Rhd8

18.g5 [18.Bd3 g5-/+] 18...Ne8 19.Bd3 g6 20.Ne2 e5 21.c3 f5 22.Re1 e4 23.Nd4 Kf7 24.Bc2 Nd6 25.h4 Nb5 26.Nxb5 Bxb5 27.fxe4 dxe4 28.Bb3+ Bc4 29.Rad1 Bxb3 30.axb3 Ke7 31.Kf4 [31.b4 Rxd1 32.Rxd1 Rd8-+] 31...Rxd1 32.Rxd1 Rd8 33.Ra1 Ke6 34.Rxa7 Rd3 0-1

161 – ChiliPepper 5.a3 Ba5 I played a wild and complex queen endgame from the French Defence Winawer against a high rated opponent ChiliPepper. Sawyer (2403) - ChiliPepper (2808), ICC 5 0 Internet Chess Club, 06.11.1998 begins 1.d4 e6 2.e4 d5 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.e5 c5 5.a3 Ba5 6.b4 cxb4 7.Qg4 bxa3 8.Bd2 g6 9.Rxa3 Qb6 10.Rb3 Qc7 11.Nb5 Bxd2+ 12.Kxd2 Qa5+ 13.Ke3 Nh6 14.Nd6+ Kf8 15.Qh4 Qe1+ 16.Ne2 [16.Kf3+-] 16...Nf5+ 17.Nxf5 exf5 18.Qd8+ Kg7 19.Qf6+ Kf8 [Black avoids a draw after 19...Kg8 20.Qd8+ Kg7=] 20.Qxh8+ Ke7 21.Qxc8 f4+ 22.Kxf4 Qxf2+ 23.Kg4 h5+ 24.Kh3 g5 25.Rxb7+ Nd7 26.Qxd7+ Kf8 27.Qd6+ Kg8 28.Rb8+ [White wins after 28.Ng3!+-] 28...Rxb8 29.Qxb8+ Kg7 30.g4 hxg4+ [Black mates in two: 30...Qf3+ 31.Ng3 hxg4#] 31.Kxg4 Qh4+ 32.Kf3 Qe4+ 33.Kf2 Qxh1 34.Ng3 Qxh2+ 35.Bg2 Qh4 36.Qxa7 Qf4+ 37.Bf3 g4 38.Qb6? [White mates in seven: 38.Nh5+ Kg8 39.Nxf4 g3+ 40.Kxg3 Kg7 41.Bxd5 Kh8 42.e6 fxe6 43.Ng6+ Kg8 44.Bxe6#] 38...Qxf3+ 39.Ke1 Qxg3+ 40.Kd2 Qf4+ 41.Ke2 Qe4+ 42.Kd2 g3?! [42...Qf5-+] 43.Qf6+ Kg8 44.Qg5+ Kf8 45.Qd8+ Kg7 46.Qg5+ [White can draw by 46.Qf6+ Kf8 47.Qd8+ Kg7=] 46...Qg6 47.Qxg6+ [47.Qe3 g2-+] 47...Kxg6 48.Ke3 Kg5 49.Kf3 Kh4 50.Kg2 Kg4 51.c3 Kf4 52.c4 dxc4 53.d5 Kxe5 54.d6 Kxd6 White resigns 0-1

162 – Fedoseev 5.a3 Ba5 6.b4 This Winawer retreat 5...Ba5 in the game Vladimir Fedoseev vs Shakhriyar Mamedyarov reminded me of a Fischer-Tal contest. Fedoseev (2724) - Mamedyarov (2809), 11th Tal Mem Blitz Moscow RUS, 05.03.2018 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.e5 c5 5.a3 Ba5 6.b4 cxd4 7.Qg4 Kf8 [7…Ne7 Tal] 8.Nb5 Bc7 [8...Bb6 9.Nf3 Ne7 10.Nbxd4 Nd7=] 9.Qg3 [9.Qxd4 Nc6 10.Qc5+ Nge7 11.Nxc7 Qxc7 12.Nf3+/=] 9...Nc6 10.f4 a6 11.Nxc7 Qxc7 12.Bb2 Nge7 13.Bd3 Nf5 14.Qf2 [14.Bxf5 exf5 15.Qd3+/=] 14...Bd7 15.Nf3 Nce7 16.g4 Ne3 17.Bxd4 Nxg4 18.Qh4 Nh6 19.Bc5 Nhg8? [19...Bb5 20.Bxb5 axb5 21.Nd4 b6=] 20.a4 [Or 20.0-00+/-] 20...a5 21.Ke2?! [21.f5+/-] 21...axb4 [21...Ke8 22.Bd6+/=] 22.Bxb4

Rxa4 [22...Ke8 23.Rhg1+/=] 23.Rxa4 Bxa4 24.Ra1 b5 25.Ra3 Ke8 [25...Qb6 26.f5+/-] 26.Nd4 Qb6 27.Qf2 Qb7 28.Kd2 [28.f5 exf5 29.Nxf5 Nxf5 30.Bxf5+-] 28...Nh6 [28...g6 29.Nxb5 Bxb5 30.Ra7+-] 29.Nxb5 1-0

163 – Bourget 5…cxd4 6.axb4 dxc3 The chess club in Camden met at a seaside restaurant along the coast of Maine in the final days of Bobby Fischer’s reign. The harbor in Camden is beautiful in the daylight, but these chess players met after dark. I think they only played skittles games. The Fischer Boom which started in 1972 led players like myself to take a passing interest in chess and change it into a passion. Many of us began playing tournament chess in 1972 through 1975. When Fischer refused to defend his title and quit playing, the USA boom went bust. Half the players dropped out. The chess group in Camden had only a few players who met on a weeknight when the restaurant was relatively quiet. I visited there once or twice with a friend. I believe my opponent in this French Defence vs Gerry Bourget. We battled in the wild Winawer Variation where Black answers 4.e5 c5 5.a3 with 5...cxd4 (instead of the natural 5...Bxc3+). After 6.axb4 dxc3 7.Qg4, Black chose to defend g7 with 7...Kf8. We must have both been out of the book and on our own at that point. Eventually the advantage fell to Black. After he missed some of the best moves, I dug myself out of a hole. Our moves 18 and 19 were weak for both sides. Then the game swung in my favor. I threatened mate in one after 22.h6. Black tried and failed for a perpetual check. I won a few moves later. Sawyer - Bourget (1500), Camden, ME 30.03.1975 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.e5 c5 5.a3 cxd4 6.axb4 dxc3 7.Qg4 Kf8 8.Bd3 Qc7 9.f4 Nh6 10.Qh5 Nf5 11.g4 g6 12.Qg5 cxb2 13.Bxb2 Ne3 14.Bd4 Nxc2+ 15.Bxc2 Qxc2 16.Bc5+ Kg7 17.Ne2 [17.Qf6+ Kg8 18.Bf8 Kxf8 19.Qxh8+ Ke7 20.Nf3=] 17...Nc6 [17...Nd7-/+] 18.h4 [18.Qf6+ Kg8 19.Bf8 Kxf8 20.Qxh8+ Ke7 21.Qf6+ Ke8 22.Rc1=] 18...b6? [18...h5!=/+] 19.h5?

[19.Qf6+ Kg8 20.Bf8 Kxf8 21.Qxh8+ Ke7 22.Rc1 Qxe2+ 23.Kxe2 Ba6+ 24.Ke3 Rxh8 25.Rxc6+-] 19...Ba6? [19...bxc5 20.Qf6+ Kg8 21.h6 Kf8 22.Qxh8+ Ke7 23.bxc5=] 20.Qf6+ [20.h6+ Kg8 21.Rh2 bxc5 22.Qf6 Kf8 23.Qxh8+ Ke7 24.Qxa8+-] 20...Kg8 21.Rh2 Bxe2 [21...h6 22.Rxa6+-] 22.h6 [Mate threat] 22...Qc3+ 23.Kxe2 Qb2+ 24.Kf3 Qc3+ 25.Kg2 Qc2+ 26.Kh1 Qe4+ 27.Rg2 1-0

164 – Waldrep 5…cxd4 6.axb4 dxc3 Carl Waldrep played the French Defence Winawer Variation against me in 1994. This game was in the first round of an open Rook event which served as the APCT championship. If memory serves me correctly I think this was one of the final postal chess events that I played in. Shortly after this I switched from playing by postcard to playing by email for 1995 and 1996. By 1997 I had pretty much given up correspondence chess for the thrill of blitz. I joined the Internet Chess Club at that time. Carl E. Waldrep Jr of Jacksonville, Florida passed away in 2012. He was a retired bank executive. His chess playing was primarily by correspondence. Carl Waldrep played 97 games in ICCF with a peak rating of 2344 in 1996. Waldrep was a creative player. Carl Jr. sought complications in the French in those days before strong computer chess engines. I trotted down the main line of the Winawer Variation with 4.e4 c5 5.a3. All of a sudden Waldrep sidetracked me with 5…cxd4!? This line tempts White to go pawn chasing on the kingside. If that happens, Black will go pawn chasing on the queenside. In theory White has adequate defenses. In practice without a computer database or chess engine, the position is tricky. White must find the best way to sacrifice his queenside rook. I failed. Sawyer (1973) - Waldrep (2241), corr APCT 94R-28, 1994 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.e5 c5 5.a3 cxd4 6.axb4 dxc3 7.Qg4 cxb2 8.Bxb2 Qe7 9.Ba3!? [9.Nf3!+/=] 9...Qc7 10.Qxg7 Qc3+ 11.Ke2? [Better is 11.Kd1 Qxa1+ 12.Bc1 Nc6 13.Qxh8+/=] 11...Qxc2+ [11...Qxa1 12.Qxh8 Kf8-+] 12.Ke3 Qc3+ 13.Bd3 Qxa1 14.Nf3 [14.Qxh8 Kf8-/+] 14...Qxh1 15.b5 [15.Qxh8 Qxg2-+] 15...Nd7 16.Bxh7 [16.Qxh8 Qxg2-+] 16...Qa1 17.Bd6

Qc1+ 18.Ke2 Qb2+ [18...Ne7-+] 19.Ke1 Ne7 20.Qxh8+ Nf8 21.Qg7 Qc3+ 22.Kd1 Qb3+ 23.Ke1 Bd7 24.Ng5 Qc3+ 25.Kd1 Qa1+ 26.Kd2 Qd4+ 27.Ke1 Qf4 28.Bg8 Qc1+ 29.Ke2 Bxb5+ 30.Kf3 Qd1+ 0-1

165 – Parsons 6…Nc6 7.Be3 David Parsons was the ultimate club player. Dave knew his pet lines by experience rather than by memorized exact knowledge. Familiar second rate moves may score better than the unfamiliar best moves. Club players perform best in comfortable positions. Parsons played a French Defence Winawer Variation. I avoided the main line 4.e5 with 4.a3 Bxc3+ 5.bxc3. Dave did not accept the gambit with 5… dxe4. Instead Parsons played the 4.a3 line as if it were 4.e5. David chose the thematic 5...c5. We transposed back to 4.e5 after my move 6.e5. The most common move order is 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.e5 c5 5.a3 Bxc3+ 6.bxc3. At this point most players continue 6…Ne7. Some choose 6…Qc7 or 6… Qa5. Dave chose 6…Nc6. Statistically this choice has scored a little less, but 6…Nc6 was still a thematic and reasonable move. My games with Dave almost always reached a phase where pieces were flying all over the place. This was no exception. He swapped queens to draw my king out with 10.Kxd2. Then we build up for a major tactical assault. Parsons opened the center with 16…e5. Suddenly 10 of my next 11 moves were captures. Most of his were too. The difference was that I picked off a few extra pawns. When the dust cleared after move 27, we were both in a knight endgame. Black had no pawns at all. White had three untouched kingside pawns. Sawyer (2011) - Parsons (1682), Williamsport, PA 1994 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.a3 Bxc3+ 5.bxc3 c5 6.e5 Nc6 7.Be3 [7.Qg4+/=] 7...cxd4 8.cxd4 Qa5+ 9.Qd2 Qxd2+ 10.Kxd2 f6 11.Nf3 Bd7 12.Bd3 Rc8 13.Rab1 Rc7 [13...b6=] 14.Rhc1 [14.exf6 Nxf6 15.Bf4+/-] 14...Nge7 [14...f5=] 15.exf6 gxf6 16.c4 [16.Bf4+-] 16...e5 [16...dxc4 17.Bxc4=] 17.cxd5 Nxd5 18.dxe5 fxe5 19.Bxa7 Nxa7 [19...Be6 20.Ng5+/-] 20.Rxc7 Nxc7 21.Rxb7 Nab5 [21...e4 22.Bxe4+-] 22.Rb8+ Ke7 23.Rxh8 Nxa3

24.Rxh7+ Kd6 25.Nxe5 Bb5 26.Rxc7 Kxc7 27.Bxb5 Nxb5 28.Ke3 Kd6 29.Nd3 Ke6 30.g4 Nd6 31.f4 1-0

166 – Fitter 6…Qc7 7.Qg4 f5 When I was in my blitz chess prime, I won and drew games vs lots of high rated opponents. I got a great attacking opening in this French Defence Winawer against a high rated chess engine, but I accidently trapped my own queen in a game against Fitter. Sawyer (2406) - Fitter (3079), ICC 5 0 Internet Chess Club, 05.12.1998 begins 1.d4 e6 2.e4 d5 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.e5 c5 5.a3 Bxc3+ 6.bxc3 Qc7 7.Qg4 f5 8.Qg3 Ne7 9.Qxg7 Rg8 10.Qxh7 cxd4 11.Kd1 Bd7 12.Qh5+ Ng6 [12...Kd8 13.cxd4 Qc3 14.Rb1 Qxd4+ 15.Bd3+/=] 13.Ne2 [13.Rb1!?] 13...d3 [13...dxc3 14.Nf4 Kf7 15.Rb1+/=] 14.cxd3 Ba4+ 15.Ke1 Qxe5 [15...Bb5 16.Bd2+/-] 16.Bg5 [16.d4 Qc7 17.h4+/-] 16...Nc6 17.d4 Qc7 18.h4 e5 19.Rh3 Qf7 20.f4 [20.dxe5! Ncxe5 21.Nd4+/-] 20...e4 21.g3? [Whoops. I was doing pretty well until then. 21.Ng3+/=] 21...Rh8! White resigns 0-1

167 – Iljiushenok 6…Qc7 7.Qg4 f6 Two grandmasters avoided that sharpest lines in this Winawer Variation of the French Defence with 6...Qc7 instead of the more popular 6...Qa5 or 6...Ne7. But chess is chess. White worked up a winning attack in the game Ilia Iljiushenok vs Pavel Ponkratov. Iljiushenok (2530) - Ponkratov (2622), 22nd Voronezh Master Open Voronezh RUS (9.6), 21.06.2018 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.e5 c5 5.a3 Bxc3+ 6.bxc3 Qc7 7.Qg4 f6 8.Nf3 [8.Bb5+ Kf8 9.Qh5+/=] 8...c4 9.Be2 Qf7 [9...Nc6 10.Qg3 Qf7 11.0-0 Nge7] 10.0-0 [10.a4 Ne7 11.0-0+/=] 10...Nc6 11.Qg3 Bd7 [11...Nge7 12.Nh4 fxe5 13.dxe5 0-0 14.f4+/=] 12.exf6 gxf6 13.Qc7 Bc8 14.Qd6 Qe7 15.Qg3 Bd7 [15...Qf7 16.Nh4 Nge7 17.Rb1+/=] 16.Ne5 fxe5 [16...0-0-0 17.Nxc6 Bxc6 18.Bg4+/-] 17.Bh5+ Kf8 [17...Kd8 18.Bg5 Nf6 19.dxe5+-] 18.Bg5 [After 18.Bg5 Nf6 19.Bh6+ Qg7 20.Qxg7#] 1-0

168 – Damey 6…Qa5 7.Bd2 In the 2007 Central Florida Class Championship my opponents were all rated 2000 or higher. This was the only game were I actually had White. In the third round I had gotten a forfeit win as White due to the luck of pairings. I had already arranged to have a 5th round 1/2-point bye due to my work schedule. Since I had lost my two games as Black, I wanted at least a draw here. I had prepared to play White in the Sicilian Defence, though my preparation was not in depth. Suddenly I had a "Who cares" moment: "1.d4 Charge!" Against Michael Damey, I began 1.d4. Damey ducked the BDG, and we played a French Defence. Afterwards we had a nice time talking and going over games. Sawyer - Damey, Central Florida Class Ch (4), 07.01.2007 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e4 e6 [Keith Hayward said that one faced a lot of French Defences when playing this way.] 3.Nc3 [The last time I had this position in a tournament was 1991. I played the Alapin French 3.Be3 and won.] 3...Bb4 4.e5 c5 5.a3 [I toyed with 5.Bd2 on which GM Eugene Perelshteyn had done two videos for ICC. Since I only watching them once and did not really know the lines, I chose 5.a3. Damey told me he plays 5.Bd2!] 5...Bxc3+ 6.bxc3 Qa5!? [This was the first time I faced this in a recorded game. My opponent played his first 10 moves at blitz speed.] 7.Bd2 Qa4 [This reminded me of a continuation given in Fine's Practical Chess Openings. Botvinnik used this idea after the moves Ne7 / Nf3.] 8.Qb1!? [The best continuation, used by Fischer and recommended by Khalifman, is to play 8.Qg4! and after 8...g6 or 8...Kf8 to retreat with 9.Qd1!+/=. I considered the Qg4 advance, but not the retreat. I did not want to sacrifice c2 at this time.] 8...c4 9.f4 [9.Nf3 seemed more dynamic, but I wanted a solid position.] 9...Ne7 10.Nf3 Nbc6 11.Be2 h6 12.0-0 b6 13.Ra2 [The Rook frees up my Queen. This possibility did not occur to me when I first played Qb1.] 13...Bd7 14.Qe1 0-0-0 15.g3 [I was marking time and pondering bringing the Knight to b2 via h4-g2-e3.] 15...Rdg8 16.h4 Kc7 17.Kg2 [The queenside did not look to promising for attack by either player. My plan was to use my kingside space advantage. If he gives me weak points to target, I will be all

over them.] 17...g6 [I figured he was open to a draw. If he was determined to play for a win, I would expect 17...f6.] 18.Rh1 h5 19.Ng5 Be8 20.Kh2 Nf5 21.Nf3 1/2-1/2

169 – Caruana 6…Qa5 7.Bd2 French Defence leads to unbalanced play in material, strategy, and tactics. Aleksandr Lenderman as Black sent his queen on a journey to a5, a4, e4, and g6 in 15 moves. Fabiano Caruana as White lined up two bishops and crashed through with a winning attack. Black's well-traveled queen was lost. Caruana performed well, finished second, and raised his rating. Samuel Shankland played great and won the US Championship. Caruana (2804) - Lenderman (2599), ch-USA 2018 Saint Louis USA (2.3), 19.04.2018 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.e5 c5 5.a3 Bxc3+ 6.bxc3 Qa5 7.Bd2 Qa4 8.Qg4 Kf8 9.h4!? [9.Qd1 b6 10.dxc5 bxc5 11.c4=] 9...Nc6 [9...Nd7] 10.h5 h6 11.Qd1 cxd4 12.Nf3 dxc3 [12...Nge7 13.Rh4=] 13.Bxc3 g5 14.hxg6 Qe4+ 15.Be2 Qxg6 16.Qd2 Nge7 17.Bd3 [White offers a pawn for a promising attack.] 17...Qxg2 [17...Qg7 18.0-0-0+/-] 18.Ke2 Qg4 19.Rh4 Qg7 20.Rg1 Ng6 21.Rf4 Nce7 [21...Ke7 22.Rf6 Kd8 23.Nd4 Ncxe5 24.Nxe6+ Bxe6 25.Bxe5+-] 22.Bb4 a5 [22...Ke8 23.Bxe7 Kxe7 24.Qb4+ Kd8 25.Qd6+ Bd7 26.Bb5 f5 27.Rxg6+-] 23.Rxg6 [If 23...Qh7 24.Bxe7+ Kxe7 25.Rg1 f5 26.exf6+ and 27.Bxh7 wins Black's queen.] 1-0

170 – Caruana 6…Qa5 7.Bd2 This French Defence Winawer Variation contained a little seen White tactic of playing a knight to Nh7 for check. This prompted Black to give up the Exchange in the game Fabiano Caruana vs Daniel Naroditsky. White soon increased his advantage to win. Caruana (2817) - Naroditsky (2646), ch-USA 2017 Saint Louis USA (8.3), 06.04.2017 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.e5 c5 5.a3 Bxc3+ 6.bxc3 Qa5 7.Bd2 Qa4 8.Qg4 Kf8 9.Nf3 b6 [9...Ne7 10.Bd3 c4 11.Be2 Qxc2 12.0-0=] 10.c4 Ne7 11.Bd3 [11.cxd5 exd5 12.Qf4+/=] 11...dxc4 12.dxc5 bxc5 13.Ng5 h6 14.Nh7+ Rxh7 15.Bxh7 Bb7 16.0-0 Nbc6 [16...Bd5 17.Qf4+/=] 17.Rab1 Ba6 18.Be3 Qa5 [18...Nxe5 19.Qe4 N5c6 20.Bxc5+-] 19.Rfd1 Nxe5 20.Qg3 f6 21.Rd6 Bc8 22.Rbd1 Nd5 [22...Bb7 23.Bd2+-] 23.Bf4 Rb8 [23...Nxf4 24.Rd8+!+-] 24.Bxe5 fxe5 25.Qxe5 Qd2

[25...Qc7 26.R6xd5+-] 26.Rd8+ Kf7 27.Bg8+ [27.Qh5+! forces mate in 7 more moves.] 27...Kg6 28.Qe4+ Kf6 29.Qf3+ [If 29...Qf4 30.Rf8+ wins the queen.] 1-0

5.a3 Bxc3+ 6.bxc3 Ne7 Black develops the final kingside minor piece while pondering the possible sacrifice of the g7 and h7 pawns.

171 – Akobian 7.h4 Qc7 White proves the kingside in this French Defence Winawer with the moves 7.h4 and 8.h5. Such an advance proved useless in the game between Ruslan Ponomariov and Varuzhan Akobian. Ponomariov (2694) - Akobian (2647), World Rapid 2017 Riyadh KSA, 27.12.2017 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.e5 c5 5.a3 Bxc3+ 6.bxc3 Ne7 7.h4 Qc7 8.h5 h6 9.Bd3 [9.Nf3 b6 10.Bb5+ Bd7 11.Bd3 Ba4=] 9...b6 10.Qg4 cxd4 11.Ne2 Qxe5 12.cxd4 Qf6 13.Bf4 Nbc6 14.Qg3 [14.c3 0-0 15.Qg3 Re8=] 14...Nf5 15.Bxf5 exf5 16.Nc3 0-0 17.Nxd5 [17.0-0-0 Be6=/+] 17...Qe6+ 18.Ne3 [18.Be5 f6 19.Nc7 Qe7 20.Nxa8 Nxd4 21.Qd3 fxe5-+] 18...Nxd4 19.Be5 Nxc2+ 20.Nxc2 f6 21.0-0 fxe5 22.Rfe1 f4 [22...e4 23.Nd4 Qf6-+] 23.Qc3 [23.Qf3 Bd7-/+] 23...e4 24.Nd4 Qd5 25.Nc6 Qxh5 [25...Re8 26.Rad1 Qxh5-+] 26.Rxe4 f3 27.Ne7+ Kh7 28.Re5 [28.Qd3 fxg2 29.Rh4+ Bf5-+] 28...Qg4 29.Qd3+ Rf5 30.Kf1 [30.g3 Qh3+] 30...Ba6 0-1

172 – Gadimbayli 7.a4 Nbc6 It seems that seventh moves like 7.a4 or 7.Nf3 do not give White as many winning chances in the Winawer. Black defended well to stop White’s attack in Mihaela Sandu vs Abdulla Gadimbayli. Sandu (2289) - Gadimbayli (2416), 19th ch-EUR Indiv 2018 Batumi GEO, 28.03.2018 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.e5 c5 5.a3 Bxc3+ 6.bxc3 Ne7 7.a4 Nbc6 8.Nf3 Qa5 9.Bd2 Bd7 10.Bb5 [10.Be2 f6 11.exf6 gxf6 12.c4 Qc7 13.dxc5=] 10...a6 11.Bxc6 [11.Be2 c4 12.0-0=] 11...Bxc6 12.0-0 0-0 13.Re1 [13.Qb1!?=] 13...Rfc8 14.Ng5 h6 15.Nh3 Be8 16.Nf4 Qc7 17.Nh5 cxd4 18.Nf6+? [18.Qf3 dxc3 19.Bxh6 gxh6 20.Qf6 Nf5 21.g4 Qd8 22.gxf5 Qxf6 23.Nxf6+ Kf8 24.Nxe8 Rxe8=/+] 18...gxf6 19.exf6 Ng6 20.Qf3 dxc3 21.Qh5 [21.Bxh6 d4-+] 21...Qd8 22.Bxh6 Qxf6 23.Bg5 Qh8

24.Qf3 Rc4 25.Rad1 [25.a5 Nh4-+] 25...Bxa4 26.Bf6 Qh6 27.Bxc3 Qf4 28.Qd3 Rac8 29.Rxe6 [29.Bd2 Bxc2 30.Bxf4 Bxd3-+] 29...Qg4 [The queen attacks Re6, defends Ng6, and leaves Black up a piece.] 0-1

173 – Rimlinger 7.a4 Nbc6 Peter Rimlinger was a postal chess master in APCT in 1985. We met in a French Defence Winawer. I played the Black pieces. Our game lasted about a year. In the olden days, the point of 7.a4 was to allow Ba3. White aimed into the heart of the enemy camp on the dark diagonal. We reached a drawn ending if we had kept playing. Drawing a master was a moral victory, but that was not the whole story. At the time I struggled with personal issues. During the week I worked in a big busy corporate insurance office. They paid well. Outside of work I went to church, raised my kids, loved my wife, and tried to recover from the loss of a child. By 1986 I did not want to spend more money on chess. This was in fact the only game that I wished I could have continued. I was correctly forfeited when I did not renew my APCT membership. As I had done before, I quit playing chess for a while. I returned to fun and serious chess play in 1988 after I had changed jobs. Rimlinger (2233) - Sawyer (2000), corr APCT 1985 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.e5 c5 5.a3 Bxc3+ 6.bxc3 Ne7 7.a4 Nbc6 8.Nf3 Qa5 9.Qd2 Bd7 10.Be2 f6 [10...Rc8=] 11.exf6 gxf6 12.dxc5 0-0-0 [12...e5 13.00 0-0-0 14.c4 Qxd2 15.Nxd2 Rhg8=] 13.0-0 [13.Nd4+/=] 13...e5 14.Ba3 h5 15.Rfb1 Be6 16.Bb4 Qc7 17.a5 a6 18.Ne1 Ng6 19.Qd1 [19.Ra4=] 19...Rdg8 20.Ra3? Nf4 21.Qd2 Nxg2 22.Nxg2 Rxg2+ 23.Kxg2 Rg8+ 24.Kh1 Qg7 25.Bf3 e4 26.Qe1 Bh3 27.Qg1 exf3 [27...Qh7-+] 28.Qxg7 Rxg7 29.Rab3 [29.Rd1 Rg2=] 29...Ne5 [29...Rg2=/+] 30.Ba3 [30.c6 Nxc6=] 30...Ng4 31.Kg1 Ne3+ [31...f5-+] 32.Kh1 Rg2 33.fxe3 Rg5 34.Rg1 [34.Rxb7=] 34...f2 35.Rbb1 Rxg1+ 36.Rxg1 Kd7 37.Rd1 Ke6 38.e4 [38.c6 bxc6=/+] 38...dxe4 39.Bc1 f5 40.Be3 f1Q+ 41.Rxf1 Bxf1 42.Kg1 Bb5 43.Kf2 Ba4 44.Kg3 Bxc2 45.c6 bxc6 46.Kf4 Kd5 47.Kxf5 Kc4 48.Kf4 Kxc3 49.h4 Kc4 50.Kg3 Kb5 51.Bd2 e3 [51...c5-/+] 52.Bxe3

Kxa5 53.Kf2 Kb4 54.Bd2+ Kb3 55.Ba5 c5 56.Ke2 Ka4 57.Bc3 a5 58.Kd2 Bf5 59.Kc1 Kb5 60.Kb2 a4 61.Be5 Kc4 62.Ka3 Bd7 63.Bf6 Kd3 64.Be5 Kc2 65.Bd6 c4 66.Kb4 Bb5 [66...c3=/+] 67.Kxb5 Kb3 68.Bb4 c3 [=] 1-0 [Forfeit]

174 – Lobanov 7.Qg4 cxd4 Black hit the center with a quick 7...cxd4 in the Winawer. White won on the kingside in Sergei Lobanov vs Ilya Duzhakov. Lobanov (2482) - Duzhakov (2421), 91st ch-St Petersburg St Petersburg RUS (11.2), 13.04.2018 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.e5 Ne7 5.a3 Bxc3+ 6.bxc3 c5 7.Qg4 cxd4 8.Bd3 [8.Qxg7 Rg8 9.Qxh7=] 8...Qa5 9.Ne2 0-0 10.Bg5 Ng6 11.Qg3 Nc6 12.f4 dxc3 13.h4 h5 14.Bf6 Bd7 15.Rb1 Qxa3 16.0-0 b6 17.Qg5 Qc5+ [17...Rfb8 18.Bxg6 fxg6 19.Qxg6 Qf8 20.Qg5 Qf7 21.Rf3=] 18.Kh2 Nb4 [18...d4 19.Qxh5 Nce7 20.Bxe7 Qxe7 21.Bxg6 fxg6 22.Qxg6 Qxh4+ 23.Kg1 Qh7 24.Qxh7+ Kxh7 25.Nxd4 Rac8=/+] 19.Ng3 [19.Rxb4! Qxb4 20.Ng3 Bb5 21.Bxb5 gxf6 22.Qh6+-] 19...Nxd3 20.Nxh5 Nf2 21.Nxg7 Qe3 [21...Rfc8 22.h5 Ne4 23.Qg4+/-] 22.Nh5 Kh7 23.Bg7 Kg8 [23...f6 24.Qh6+ Kg8 25.Rxf2 Nxe5 26.fxe5 Qxh6 27.Bxh6 fxe5 28.Bxf8+-] 24.Rbe1 Qd2 25.Kg1 [25.Bh6+-] 25...Bb5 [25...Ng4 26.Qxg4 Qxc2 27.Bh6+-] 26.Qh6 Ng4 27.Nf6+ Nxf6 28.Bxf6 10

175 – Buxon 7.Qg4 Qc7 Lance Beloungie played a French Defence vs Jon C Buxon in the Maine State Closed tournament in 2012. On the tenth move, White varied from the main line with 10.Rb1. This led to an equal and unbalanced game. Black started to handle it well, but then he lost his grip. White’s mistakes were less important, and thus he went on to win. One curious fact about this game was that both players were listed with exactly the same rating. Buxon - Beloungie, Maine State Closed (5), 24.04.2012 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.e5 Ne7 5.a3 Bxc3+ 6.bxc3 c5 7.Qg4 Qc7 8.Qxg7 Rg8 9.Qxh7 cxd4 10.Rb1!? [The standard book continuation is 10.Ne2 Nbc6 11.f4 Bd7 12.Qd3 dxc3] 10...Qxe5+ 11.Be2 [11.Ne2 dxc3 leads to an unbalanced position with equal chances. One possibility is 12.Bf4 Qf6 13.h4 Nbc6!? 14.Bg5 Qe5 15.Bf4!? Qf6 with a draw by repetition] 11...dxc3 12.Nf3 Qc7? [Black would do better to stay on the kingside with 12...Qf5 13.Qxf5 Nxf5; or 12...Qf6] 13.Ng5 Nbc6 [13...Rf8] 14.Qxf7+

Kd8 15.Bf4?! [White gives Black another chance. Best is 15.Qf6!+-] 15...e5 16.Bc1 Bd7 [16...Nd4!=] 17.Qf6 Kc8 18.Nf7 Rg6 19.Qh8+ Rg8 20.Qh6 Rg6? [20...Nf5!] 21.Qf8+ Nd8 22.Qxe7 Ne6? 23.Nd6+ 1-0

176 – Rydstrom 7.Qg4 Qc7 This Winawer French Defence began with the 1.Nc3 move order. Black sacrificed the g7 pawn in what has become one of critical lines. Black enjoys unbalanced winning chances in sharp play but White won in the game Tom Rydstrom vs Petter Stigar. Rydstrom (2313) - Stigar (2235), FSIM April 2017 Budapest HUN, 11.04.2017 begins 1.Nc3 d5 2.e4 e6 3.d4 Bb4 4.e5 Ne7 5.a3 Bxc3+ 6.bxc3 c5 7.Qg4 Qc7 8.Qxg7 Rg8 9.Qxh7 cxd4 10.Ne2 Nbc6 11.f4 dxc3 [11...Bd7 12.Qd3+/=] 12.h4 Bd7 13.h5 0-0-0 14.Qd3 Nf5 15.Rb1 d4 16.Rh3 [16.Rg1+/=] 16...f6 17.exf6 e5 18.f7!? [18.fxe5 Nxe5 19.Qe4 Nc4=] 18...Rgf8 19.g4 Nd6 [19...Nh6!?] 20.Bg2 [20.f5 Rxf7 21.Bg2 Nxf5=/+] 20...e4?! [20...Bxg4!-+] 21.Qg3 Qa5 22.Kf1 [22.Nxd4 Nxd4 23.Qxc3+ Qxc3+ 24.Rxc3+ Bc6=] 22...Qd5 [22...Qa4!-+] 23.f5 Bxf5 24.gxf5 Qa2 25.Rb4 Nxb4 26.axb4 Qxc2 27.Qe1 Nxf5? [27...Nb5=] 28.Nxd4 Rxd4 29.Rxc3+ Rc4 30.Rxc2 Rxc2 31.Bxe4 Ng3+ 32.Qxg3 Rxc1+ 33.Ke2 [White's queen and bishop win against Black's two rooks.] 1-0

177 – Batchuluun 7.Qg4 Qc7 This French Defence Winawer Variation saw Black sacrifice the g7 and h7 pawns. White grabbed the material and returned to defend the center with 12.Qd3 and 13.Qxc3. A few moves later White got the advantage in the game Tsegmed Batchuluun vs Xiangyi Liu. Batchuluun (2561) - Liu (2449), Prof. Lim Kok Ann GM Inv Singapore SIN (3.5), 08.06.2018 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.e5 c5 5.a3 Bxc3+ 6.bxc3 Ne7 7.Qg4 Qc7 8.Qxg7 Rg8 9.Qxh7 cxd4 10.Ne2 Nbc6 11.f4 dxc3 12.Qd3 Bd7 13.Qxc3 Nf5 [13...0-0-0 14.Rb1 Nf5 15.Rg1 d4 16.Qd3 Na5 17.g4 Ba4=] 14.Ng3 d4 [14...Nxg3 15.hxg3 Rc8 16.Ra2 d4 17.Qb2 Ne7=] 15.Qc4 Nxg3 16.hxg3 0-0-0 [16...Rc8 17.Bd2 Qb6 18.Qb3 Qxb3 19.cxb3 Rxg3 20.Rh8+ Ke7 21.Rxc8 Bxc8 22.Rb1+/=] 17.Kf2 f6 18.exf6 Rg6 19.Rh7 Rxf6 20.Bd3 e5 21.Kg1 [21.Bd2+/-] 21...Qa5 [21...Re8 22.fxe5 Nxe5 23.Qxc7+ Kxc7 24.Bg5+/-] 22.fxe5 Qe1+ 23.Kh2

Be6 [23...Re6 24.Rb1 Rg8 25.Qd5 Qxg3+ 26.Kg1 Rg7 27.Bf4!] 24.Qxc6+ bxc6 25.Ba6+ Kb8 26.Rb1+ Ka8 27.Bb7+ Kb8 28.exf6 1-0

178 – Owens 7.Qg4 0-0 8.h4 When Johnny Owens and I were kids, there was a cartoon on TV called “Quick Draw McGraw”. It ran from 1959-1962. This lovable character appeared in other Hanna-Barbera cartoons as well. Quick Draw McGraw was a horse who walked on two legs. He worked as a sheriff in the Old West. His trusty sidekick deputy was the Mexican burro Baba Looey. Baba Looey was the smarter of the two. But when Baba Looey offered a suggestion, Quick Draw McGraw always would remind him, “I’ll do the thin’in around here! And don’t you for-git it!” Johnny Owens played the French Defence Winawer Variation against me in a postal game. What line should we try? I’ll let him do the thinking around here. I reckoned that once Owens picked a line, then I would figure it out. We didn’t play the most popular line. Black sent his queen on an adventure. She went from d8 to a5 to b6 to b2 all in the first 10 moves. Either of us could have avoided the line we chose. Apparently he was going to let me do the thinking around here. I couldn’t just let his queen break into my house and get away. But I couldn’t catch her either. We needed help from a sheriff like Quick Draw McGraw. Since he wasn’t around, we ducked into a quick draw by repetition. Sawyer (1973) - Owens (2000), corr APCT 94R-29, 1994 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.e5 c5 5.a3 Bxc3+ 6.bxc3 Ne7 7.Qg4 0-0 8.h4!? [8.Bd3 is the most common move.] 8...Qa5!? [8...Qc7!=/+] 9.Bd2 Qb6!? 10.dxc5 [10.Nf3 Qb2 11.Rc1 Nbc6 12.Bd3 Nf5 13.0-0=] 10...Qb2 11.Qd1 Nd7 12.f4 [12.Nf3=] 12...Nxc5 [If Black wants to play on, he can try 12...Nf5=/+ ] 13.Rb1 Qxa3 14.Ra1 Qb2 15.Rb1 1/2-1/2

179 – Gilmour 7.Qg4 0-0 8.Bd3 c4 I seem to recall that George Cunningham played the Black side of a French Defence Winawer Variation in a club game I watched many years ago. I knew the gambit line 7.Qg4 Qc7 8.Qxg7. Black headed in that gambit direction. All of sudden he played 7.0-0. Later I asked him about it, because it seemed to my eyes that Black had castled into serious trouble. George assured me that 7...0-0 was recognized as a playable line. Experience proved that the line was sound if Black defended accurately. And also, my suspicion of real danger for Black has been illustrated in games such as my blitz contest vs Gilmour. Sawyer - Gilmour, ICC u 2 12 Internet Chess Club, 05.04.1998 begins 1.d4 e6 2.e4 d5 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.e5 Ne7 5.a3 Bxc3+ 6.bxc3 c5 7.Qg4 0-0 8.Bd3 c4 9.Bh6 Ng6 10.Bxg6 hxg6 [10...fxg6 11.Be3 Nc6 12.h4+/=] 11.Be3 Nc6 12.h4 Qe8 [12...Ne7 13.h5+/-] 13.h5 f5 [13...gxh5 14.Qxh5 f5 15.Qh7+ Kf7 16.Bg5+-] 14.exf6 gxf6 [14...Rxf6 15.h6 e5 16.Qh4+/-] 15.hxg6 e5 16.Qh5 and mate next move. 1-0

180 – Ruiz 8.Bd3 Nbc6 9.Qh5 My analysis in this French Defence Winawer Variation game shows a critical line for Black in the notes to move 17. Black chose a different path and soon became vulnerable to attack. White handled the assault with success to win in this game between Joshua Daniel Ruiz Castillo and Miguel Mosquera. Ruiz Castillo (2378) - Mosquera (2388), COL Olympiad Selection El Bagre COL, 22.06.2018 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.e5 c5 5.a3 Bxc3+ 6.bxc3 Ne7 7.Qg4 0-0 8.Bd3 Nbc6 9.Qh5 Ng6 10.Nf3 Qc7 11.Be3 c4 12.Bxg6 fxg6 13.Qg4 Bd7 14.h4 Rf5 15.h5 Rxh5 [15...gxh5 16.Rxh5 Rxh5 17.Qxh5 transposes to the game.] 16.Rxh5 gxh5 17.Qxh5 Rf8 [17...Be8! 18.Qh3 Nd8 19.Kd2 Bg6 20.Nh4 Qf7=] 18.Kd2 Bc8 19.Rh1 h6

20.Qg6 Ne7 21.Qg4 Qa5? [21...Nf5 22.Bxh6+/-] 22.Bxh6 Rf7 23.Bg5 Qxa3 [23...Rxf3 24.Qxf3 Nf5 25.Qh5+-] 24.Qh4 [If 24.Qh4 Kf8 25.Bxe7+ Rxe7 26.Qh8+ Kf7 27.Ng5+ Kg6 28.Qh7+ Kxg5 29.Qh5+ Kf4 30.Rh4#] 10

181 – Yoo 9.Bg5 Qa5 10.Ne2 Ng6 French Defence Winawer Variation after 7.Qg4 0-0 8.Bd3 Nbc6 reaches a position where White usually played 9.Qh5 or 9.Nf3. I discovered in my analysis to these games that another promising idea is 9.Bg5. Positions can easily drift into a situation with great attacking chances. White sacrificed a knight to win with 21.Nxg6! in the game Christopher Woojin Yoo vs Conrad Holt. Yoo (2378) - Holt (2592), Berkeley Summer GM Norm Berkeley USA (9.2), 21.08.2018 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.e5 c5 5.a3 Bxc3+ 6.bxc3 Ne7 7.Qg4 0-0 8.Bd3 Nbc6 9.Bg5 Qa5 10.Ne2 Ng6 [10...cxd4 11.f4 dxc3 12.0-0 Ng6 13.Qh5 Bd7 14.Rf3+-] 11.0-0 Qa4 12.f4 c4 13.Bxg6 fxg6 14.f5 gxf5 15.Qg3 b5 16.h4 a5 17.h5 Qxc2 18.Nf4 Ra7 19.h6 Rff7 [19...g6=] 20.Bf6 g6? [20...b4!? 21.axb4 axb4 22.Rxa7 Rxa7 23.cxb4=] 21.Nxg6! hxg6 22.Qxg6+ Kf8 23.Rf3 Qb2 [23...Ne7 24.Bxe7+ Raxe7 25.Rg3+-] 24.Rd1 Ne7 [24...Qe2 25.Rdf1+-] 25.Bxe7+ Raxe7 26.Rg3 Ke8 [26...Re8 27.h7+-] 27.h7 Kd7 28.h8Q 1-0

182 – Heimann 8.Bd3 Nbc6 9.Bg5 Black causes havoc to the queenside in many a French Defence Winawer Variation. This game is no exception. The problem for Black is that both sides castled kingside. The game did not last long enough for the queenside to matter. White broke through with his bishops to force a quick checkmate in Andreas Heimann vs Harutyun Barseghyan. Heimann (2589) - Barsegyan (2471), TCh-FRA Top 12 2018 Brest FRA (8.4), 02.06.2018 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.e5 Ne7 5.a3 Bxc3+ 6.bxc3 c5 7.Qg4 0-0 8.Bd3 Nbc6 9.Bg5 [9.Nf3 f5 10.Qg3 Qa5 11.Bd2+/=] 9...Qa5 10.Ne2 cxd4 11.f4 [11.Bxe7 Nxe7 12.Qxd4 Nc6 13.Qe3 b6=] 11...dxc3 12.0-0 Qa4 [12...Ng6 13.Qh5 Bd7 14.Rf3+-] 13.Qh5 Ng6 [13...Nf5 14.g4+-] 14.Rf3 Nd4 15.Rh3 Nxe2+ 16.Kh1 h6 17.Bxh6 Ngxf4 18.Bh7+! Kh8 19.Bxg7+! [After 19...Kxg7 20.Qg5+ Ng6 21.Qf6#] 1-0

Book 3: Index of Names to Games Abedov – 111 Aikins – 2 Akobian – 122, 171 Alapin – 26 Allensworth – 19 Alter – 54 Antipov – 12 Anurag – 159 anxat – 58 Aulia – 158 Avalos – 20 Bachler – 65 Baffo – 64, 85 Bajoni – 57 Ballard – 98 Barsegyan – 182 Batchuluun – 177 Beloungie – 1, 7, 8, 10, 21, 61, 73, 117, 175 Benner – 92 benztoyzII – 118 Bernal – 154 BethO – 123 Bies – 77 BIGBURAT – 156 blik – 40, 97 Bond – 4, 42 Bourget – 163 Brummer – 131 Bryan – 1 Burke – 80 Buxon – 175 Caruana – 169, 170 Catania – 27 Certon – 4

Chakravarthi Reddy – 9 Chan – 121 Chandler – 15, 38, 54 Chess-Dream – 128 ChiliPepper – 161 chriswhelan – 110 Collemer – 61 Cooley – 96 Corter, J – 94 Corter, T – 155 Cotter – 36 Crompton – 11, 118 Damey – 168 Debaets – 46 Delpire – 6, 66 Devereaux – 130 Diaz Castro – 159 Diebert – 37 Diemer – 17 Djukic – 125 Donohue – 24 Doty – 34 Douglas – 108 DrunkenStuper – 111 Duggan – 149 Duzhakov – 174 Dyba – 31 Emmanouilidis – 140 EricEsoteric – 114 Ernst – 9 Etienne – 81 Faroni – 133 Fawbush – 135 Fedoseev – 162 Finiseur – 50 Fitter – 166 Furman – 107

Gadimbayli – 172 gaessyangma2way – 109 gdesportes – 137 Gelgolan – 15 Gill – 72 Gilmour – 179 Giroyan – 62 Gizmoorient – 119 Goryachkina – 124 Guest – 23, 30, 56 Guezennec – 57 Hagerty – 84 Haines – 5, 7, 8, 10, 21, 73, 109, 116, 117, 136 Harabor – 79 Hartelt – 110 Hathaway – 75, 76 Heidenfeld – 39 Heimann – 182 Heisman – 43 Holt – 181 Huber – 89 Hyde – 126 Hyltin – 151 Iljiushenok – 167 Irvin – 139 jaruta – 152 jfk03 – 136 JohnJPershing – 66 Johnson – 93 Jones – 59 Kaletsky – 18 Kamsky – 12 Kasa – 86 Katz – 51 Keres – 35 Klein – 78 Kosteniuk – 124

kucukturank – 146 Kutikoff – 141 Lachnit – 33 Lagarde – 62 Lenderman – 169 Levi – 121 LeviRook – 13 Liu – 177 Lobanov – 174 Lopez – 120, 148 Mamedyarov – 162 MaMi98 – 38 Martin, J – 71 Martin, S – 17 Martinez – 105 Mason – 29 Mastin – 67 Mastrovasilis – 106 MoonBeam – 143 Moore – 49 Muir – 48, 88, 147, 160 Naroditsky – 170 niccion – 101 Niehoff – 37 NightKnight – 60 NimzoMal – 55 NN – 150 OpenFile – 138 Oriero – 14 Ousley – 83 Owens – 178 Paetzold – 134 Panko – 107 Parsons – 91, 103, 165 PatternPlayer – 145 Payne – 68 Penullar – 113, 146, 152

Pfeiffer – 82 Ponkratov – 167 Ponomariov – 171 Priasmoro – 158 prodonvito – 11 promesa – 153 Pupols – 131 rafa47 – 5 Rahulan – 29 Rawlings – 69 Renders – 55 Rimlinger – 173 Ristic – 106 Rookie – 41, 63, 129, 157 Rookmagier – 45 Rowe – 32 Ruiz Castillo – 180 Mosquera – 180 Rydstrom – 176 Sajjadi – 130 Salkic – 125 samo66 – 104 Sandu – 172 Sawyer – 2, 3, 13, 14, 18-20, 22-25, 27, 28, 30-32, 36, 40, 41, 43-48, 5053, 56, 58-60, 63-65, 67-72, 74-86, 88-100, 103-105, 108, 112, 114, 119, 120, 123, 126-129, 132-135, 137-139, 141-145, 147-149, 153-157, 160161, 163-166, 168, 173, 178-179 Schlosser – 102 Schott – 33 Searles – 132 Serota – 34 Shabalov – 122 Shannon – 70 Sheppards – 16 Shubik – 6 Slive – 116 Spigel – 99 Squash – 3

Stefansson – 140 Stigar – 176 superdave99 – 53 Surak – 74 Szasz – 16 Taylor – 112 Terrigood – 127 ThomasIndigo – 115 TIGEROFCHESS – 44 Tobias – 22 Torning – 102, 150 Tregidga – 144 Tremblay – 42 Urgena – 90 Van Valkenburg – 47 Veigar – 28 Verbac – 35 Waldrep – 164 Webster – 49 Werner – 95 Whitaker – 39 Woodland – 25 wttyoung913 – 113 xsf – 52 Yoo – 181 Young – 142 ZEPFAN4EVER – 100 Zerg – 101 Zilbermints – 115 Zinkl – 26 Zintgraff – 151

Book 4: Caro-Kann 1.e4 c6 Second Edition – Chess Opening Games Copyright © 2015, 2016, 2018 by Sawyer Publications All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form without permission in writing from the author. Welcome to the Caro-Kann Defence chess opening. Win after 1.e4 c6. Author Tim Sawyer examines 170 games. This 2018 Second Edition includes experiences, opinions, commentary, and analysis, plus an Index of Names to Games. The author tells stories and explains the chess opening strategy and tactics. Win in the Caro-Kann Defence. Be active! Punish your opponent. Play an opening used by every world champion for the past 100 years from one side or the other. Grandmasters who played this as Black include Capablanca, Botvinnik, Smyslov, Bronstein, Petrosian, Karpov, Kasparov, Anand, Carlsen and Caruana. Most of the games in this book were played by the author. Many were against masters, experts and club players. Tim Sawyer shows typical examples of play in this proven defence. This book covers all the main variations after 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5. That includes the 3.Nc3 Classical, 3.exd5 Exchange and Panov, 3.e5 Advance and the 3.f3 Fantasy Variation. Also included is the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit O’Kelly variation. The Caro-Kann fits well with the Slav Defence and London 2.Bf4 chess openings. Have fun playing chess. Enjoy this book!

Book 4: Chapter 1 – Rare Lines 1.e4 c6 Instead of the obvious second move 2.d4, White can also try lesser known variations such as 2.Ne2 or 2.Nc3.

1 – Haines 2.f4 d5 3.e5 c5 You push center pawns, develop pieces and castle. Nothing else needs to matter as long as your position is safe in the Caro-Kann Defence. White's move 2.f4 weakened the kingside. Black began his assault with 9...h5. When White missed winning tactics, Ray Haines finished the game with a sudden creative checkmate. Ellington48 (1518) - Haines (1632), Live Chess Chess.com, 01.08.2017 begins 1.e4 c6 2.f4 d5 3.e5 c5 4.Nf3 Nc6 5.Nc3 e6 6.Be2 Bd7 7.0-0 Qb6 8.Kh1 0-0-0!? [8...Nh6=] 9.a4 h5 10.a5 Nxa5 11.d4 Nh6 [11...cxd4=] 12.dxc5? [12.Bd2!+/-] 12...Qxc5 [12...Bxc5=] 13.Bd2 [13.Nb5!?+/=] 13...Nf5?! 14.b4 Qxb4 15.Nxd5 Qc5 16.Rxa5! h4 [16...Qc6 17.Ne3 Bc5 18.Nxf5 exf5 19.Ng5+-] 17.Rxc5+ Bxc5 18.Nc3? [18.Ng5! Bc6 19.Nxf7+-] 18...Ng3+ 19.hxg3 hxg3+ 20.Nh4 Rxh4# 0-1

2 – Lobanov 2.c4 d5 3.cxd5 White attacked d5 with two pawns in this Caro-Kann Defence 2.c4 line. Black developed to prepare for a counterattack. Lines opened up. Eventually White’s knight on e3 was overworked. Black chopped it off in Nikolai Looshnikov vs Sergei Lobanov. Looshnikov (2435) - Lobanov (2515), TCh-RUS Premier 2018 Sochi RUS, 02.05.2018 begins 1.e4 c6 2.c4 d5 3.cxd5 cxd5 4.exd5 Nf6 5.Bb5+ Nbd7 [5...Bd7 6.Bc4 b5 7.Bb3 a5=] 6.Nc3 a6 7.Bxd7+ [7.Be2=] 7...Qxd7 8.Nf3 Nxd5 9.0-0 f6 10.Re1 e6 11.Qb3 Be7 [11...Kf7=] 12.d4 [12.d3 Kf7 13.Nd4 Nxc3 14.bxc3 Qd5=] 12...b5 13.Ne4 [13.Nxd5 Qxd5=] 13...Bb7 14.Nc5 Bxc5 15.dxc5 0-0 16.a4 [16.Be3] 16...b4 17.Nd4?! [17.Bd2=] 17...e5 18.Nc2 a5 19.f4? [19.Rd1 Rac8=/+] 19...Kh8 20.fxe5 [20.Qd3 Qc6+] 20...fxe5 21.Rxe5 Qc7 22.Re1 Qxc5+ [22...Ra6 23.Nd4 Qxc5-+] 23.Be3

Nxe3 24.Nxe3 Rae8 25.Rac1 Qg5 26.Rc2 [26.Re2 Bf3-+] 26...Bd5 27.Rc5 [27.Qd3 Be4-+] 27...Rxe3 0-1

3 – Sawyer 2.Ne2 d5 3.e5 Bf5 The book "The Caro-Kann: Move by Move" by Cyrus Lakdawala is excellent! When I glanced at the chapter "King's Indian Attack and 2 Ne2", I saw this 2.Ne2? Cyrus implied it was dangerous. Someday I’d check it out, but not right then. I search of my own games showed that I had faced 2.Ne2 only four times. I won all of them against weaker players. Then I played an ICC game vs "OutsideTheGate" rated 2212; I was rated four points lower at 2208. What to my wondering eyes would appear but 2.Ne2!? Turns out I followed the line I was "most likely to encounter" for 11 moves, before my opponent deviated from the book that I did not know. There is no time to refer to a book during a 3 0 game. OutsideTheGate (2212) - Sawyer (2208), 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 07.03.2012 begins 1.e4 c6 2.Ne2 d5 3.e5 ["This tricky line is very popular on the Internet Chess Club." Schandorff] 3...Bf5 4.Ng3 Bg6 5.h4 h6 6.h5 Bh7 7.e6 [Like the Alekhine Defence.] 7...fxe6 [7...Qd6 8.exf7+ Kxf7 9.d4 e5 10.Bd3 e4 feels like a Latvian Gambit.] 8.d4 e5! ["A key move to remember. We deny White his brilliant blockade sac by returning the pawn to seal e5 with a cork." Lakdawala. Interesting is 8...c5!? 9.dxc5 e5] 9.dxe5 e6 [9...Nd7!? 10.f4 Qb6 11.Bd3 Bxd3 12.Qxd3 0-0-0=] 10.Bd3 Bxd3 11.Qxd3 Qd7 12.Nd2!? [Lakdawala gives 12.0-0 Bc5 13.Be3 Na6 where he shows that Black gets good compensation for a pawn he sacrifices.] 12...Bc5 13.Nf3 [13.Nb3! Bb6 14.Be3 Na6 15.0-0-0 0-0-0 16.Qc3+/= and White has a somewhat better position.] 13...Na6 14.c3 Ne7 15.Be3 Bxe3 16.Qxe3 0-0= [Why not castle kingside?] 17.Rh4 Nf5 18.Nxf5 Rxf5 19.00-0 Qe7 [Simple tactics: threat ...Rxf3/...Qxh4.] 20.Rh3 Qc5?+/- [Missing the response. I should have played 20...Qf7!] 21.Nd4! [Threatening f5/e6.] 21...Rf7 22.Rg3 Kh8 23.Nxe6 Qxe3+ 24.fxe3 Re8 25.Nf4 Nc5 26.Rf1 [26.Rf3!+/-] 26...Ne4? [26...Kh7!=/+ and Black has a good game.] 27.Ng6+ Kg8 28.Rxf7 [28.Rgf3!+/-] 28...Kxf7 29.Rf3+ Kg8 [29...Ke6!?] 30.e6= [30.g4! gives White good winning chances.] 30...Ng5 [White's e6-pawn falls. The endgame is equal. I am ahead in time. White forces the draw.] 31.Rf5 Nxe6 32.Re5 Nc7 33.Rxe8+ Nxe8 34.Kd2 Kf7 35.Nf4 Nf6 36.Kd3 b6 37.b4 Nd7 38.Kd4 Kf6 39.e4 dxe4 40.Kxe4 Nf8 41.g4 Ne6 42.a4 Nxf4 43.Kxf4 b5 44.a5 a6 45.Kf3 Kf7 46.Ke4 Ke6 47.Kd4 Kd6 48.c4 bxc4

49.Kxc4 Kd7 50.Kc5 Kc7 51.Kd4 Kd6 52.Ke4 Ke6 53.Kf4 Kf6 54.Ke4 Ke6 55.Kd4 Kd6 56.Ke4 Ke6 Drawn by repetition 1/2-1/2

4 – Dreev 2.d3 d5 3.Nd2 g6 Alexey Dreev has won with the Caro-Kann Defence consistently for 30 years. White has tried every conceivable way to search for an advantage. Yang-Fan Zhou played in the Kings Indian Attack style with 2.d3 combined with Bg2. Black attacked fast before his opponent castled. Then White’s queen ran out of safe squares. Zhou (2449) - Dreev (2653), PRO League Group Stage chess.com INT, 24.02.2018 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d3 d5 3.Nd2 g6 4.f4 Bg7 5.g3 Nh6 6.Bg2 Ng4 7.Qe2 Qb6 8.Nb3 dxe4 9.dxe4 Be6 [9...0-0 10.Bf3=] 10.Nf3? [10.h3+/=. Now Black has a strong deflecting bishop sac.] 10...Bc4! 11.Qd2 [11.Qxc4 Qf2+ 12.Kd1 0-0 13.Qe2 Rd8+ 14.Bd2 Ne3+!-+ wins queen] 11...Na6 12.h3 [12.e5 Nb4-+] 12...Rd8 13.hxg4 [13.Nbd4 Bxd4 14.Nxd4 Rxd4 15.Qc3 Rxe4+ 16.Be3 Rxe3+ 17.Kd2 Rxc3-+] 13...Rxd2 14.Bxd2 Nb4 [14...Bxb2-+] 15.Bxb4 [15.0-0-0 Nxa2+ 16.Kb1 Bxb3 17.cxb3 Qxb3-+] 15...Qe3+ 16.Kd1 Be2+ 0-1

5 – Godena 3.Nd2 Qc7 4.g3 Black chose the central pawn duo with 2...d5 and 5...e5 against the CaroKann 2.d3 line. White challenged the center with 9.d4. Both sides had equal chances. Instead of the natural recapture 11...cxd5, Black mixed things up with 11...c5. When the Black queen went fishing for a poisoned pawn on b2, White won the pawn on b7. The combination that followed netted White an extra piece in the game Michele Godena vs Maksim Schekachikhin. Godena (2505) - Schekachikhin (2406), 19th ch-EUR Indiv 2018 Batumi GEO (7.83), 24.03.2018 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d3 d5 3.Nd2 Qc7 4.g3 Nf6 5.Bg2 e5 6.Ngf3 Bd6 7.0-0 0-0 8.Re1 Re8 9.d4 exd4 10.exd5 Rxe1+ 11.Qxe1 c5 [11...cxd5 12.Nxd4 a6 13.N2b3=] 12.Nc4 Bf5 13.Nxd6 Qxd6 14.Bf4 Qb6? [14...Qf8 15.Ne5+/=] 15.Bxb8 Qxb2 [15...Rxb8 16.Qe5 Rf8 17.Qxf5+-] 16.Rb1 Qxc2 [16...Qxa2 17.Rxb7+-] 17.Rxb7 Be4 18.Ng5 [White is up a bishop.] 1-0

6 – Brunello 3.Nd2 e5 4.Ngf3 The Caro-Kann strategy for Black is to eliminate White's pawn on e4 (after 3.e5, 3.exd5, or 3.Nc3 dxe4). That frees f5 for the Black bishop. The slower 2.d3 d5 3.Nd2 maintains an e4 pawn. Black has the option of 3...g6 or the more open central focus of 3...e5 as in Daniele Genocchio vs Sabino Brunello. Genocchio (2410) - Brunello (2556), 77th ch-ITA 2017 Cosenza, 05.12.2017 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d3 d5 3.Nd2 e5 4.Ngf3 Bd6 5.d4 exd4 6.Bd3 c5 7.0-0 Ne7 8.exd5 0-0 9.c4 dxc3 10.Ne4 Nxd5 11.Bc4 Be6 12.Nfg5 Be7 13.Qh5 Bxg5 14.Bxg5 Nf4 15.Bxf4 [15.Qf3=] 15...Bxc4 16.Rfd1 [16.bxc3 Bxf1 17.Rxf1 Qe7-/+] 16...cxb2 17.Rab1 Nd7 [17...Bd3!-+] 18.Be5 [18.Nd6 Be6=/+] 18...Re8 19.Rxd7? [19.f4 f6-+] 19...Qxd7 20.Nf6+ [20.Qg5 Rxe5-+] 20...gxf6 21.Bxf6 [What do Black do now?] 21...Qd3! [The queen attacks b1 and defends with ...Qg6.] 0-1

7 – Sawyer 2.Nc3 d5 3.f3 I played to hold the center in this Caro-Kann game. When White did not move forward, I jumped into the void. The pawn structure indicated White had have chances on the kingside and Black the queenside. At a key point I moved from queenside expansion to a direct kingside mating attack. This would have been impossible had White focused more on attacking my kingside. vicnice01 - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 09.04.2013 begins 1.e4 c6 2.Nc3 d5 3.f3 [A very rare move. More common are 3.Nf3 or 3.d4] 3...Nf6 4.Nge2 d4 5.Nb1 e5 6.Ng3 c5 7.Bc4 g6 [7...Nc6] 8.d3 Bg7 9.Bd2 0-0 10.Qc1 Qe7 11.Bh6 Be6 12.Bxg7 Kxg7 13.Bb3 b5 14.Nd2 Nbd7 15.00 Nb6 16.a3? [I expected 16.Bxe6=] 16...c4 17.Ba2 a5 18.h3 Rfc8 19.Qd1 b4 20.f4 c3 21.bxc3 bxc3? [21...Bxa2 22.Rxa2 dxc3=/+] 22.Nb1? [White has the in-between move 22.fxe5!+/-] 22...Bxa2 23.Rxa2 Na4 24.Qc1 Nb2 [24...Rab8!-+] 25.Ra1 Rab8 26.a4 Rb4 27.fxe5 Qxe5 [27...Nd7-/+] 28.Rf3 [28.Nf5+!=] 28...Rc6 [28...Ne8-+] 29.Na3 [White misses the bold 29.Nf5+ gxf5 30.Qg5+ Kh8 31.Rg3=] 29...Rxa4 30.Nc4? Nxc4 [Black switches

direction and aims at a kingside mating attack. Strong is 30...Rxa1! 31.Qxa1 Nxc4 32.dxc4 Rxc4-/+] 31.Rxa4 Nd2 32.Rxf6 Rxf6 33.Kh2 h5 34.h4 Nf1+ 35.Kg1 Qxg3 36.Qxf1 Qe3+ White resigns 0-1

8 – Chess Challenger 3.Qf3 In 1993 I played a game vs the computer Chess Challenger in a rare variation of the Caro-Kann Defence. I do not remember the occasion of this game, but I have always enjoyed playing the odd game vs weaker computers and chess engines to see that curious mix of awesome and awful. I am guessing it was set to play at about a 1400 level at some rather faster speed, moving every few seconds. Most of the moves in our game were reasonable, but my opponent made one big blunder in the game (14.Ng3?). I was rated in the 1400s in 1972. I was new to tournament chess. I learned a lot from the famous World Championship match when Fischer beat Spassky in 1972. I was young and energetic. Soon my rating shot up. Daily study and regular play led to my constant improvement. We all make mistakes. Many of my opponents have blundered in similar fashion to this game ever since. Warren H. Goldman wrote a book published in 1976 on the line 1.e4 c6 2.Nc3 d5 3.Qf3 line called “New Ideas in Old Settings: 3 Q-B3 against the Caro-Kann etc.” Here is a game in that line. Chess Challenger (1400) - Sawyer (2011), Bellefonte, PA 1993 begins 1.e4 c6 2.Nc3 d5 3.Qf3 [More common is 3.Nf3] 3...dxe4 [3...d4] 4.Qxe4 [Warren Goldman only recommended lines with 4.Nxe4.] 4…Nf6 5.Qd3?! [This blocks harmonious development. Better would be a move like 5.Qf4=] 5...Qxd3 6.Bxd3 Nbd7 7.Nge2 [7.Nf3=] 7...Ne5 [7...Nc5! 8.Bc4 b5=/+] 8.0-0?! [8.Be4 Nxe4 9.Nxe4= and Black has the two bishops.] 8...Nxd3 9.cxd3 e5 [9...Bf5!-/+] 10.f4 [10.d4=] 10...Bc5+ 11.Kh1 exf4

12.Rxf4 [12.Nxf4 0-0-/+] 12...Be6 13.b4 Bd6 14.Ng3? [14.Rf1 0-0-/+] 14...Bxf4 15.Nge2 Bd6 16.Ba3?! a5 17.Rb1 0-0 18.Nd4 Nd5 19.Nxd5 Bxd5 20.Nf5 Bxb4 21.Bxb4 axb4 22.Rxb4 Rxa2 23.Ne7+ Kh8 24.Rxb7? Ra1+ 25.Rb1 Rxb1 mate 0-1

9 – Tauriainen 3.Qf3 dxe4 This Queens Knight 1.Nc3 transposed to the Caro-Kann Defence 3.Qf3 Variation. White takes aim at Black kingside. The bishop joins in at c4. White sacrificed a pawn for open lines with 6.d4 in the game Marko Tauriainen vs Adam Lubos Polansky. Tauriainen (2103) - Polansky (1977), 28th Czech Open B 2017 Pardubice CZE (3.25), 23.07.2017 begins 1.Nc3 d5 2.e4 c6 3.Qf3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Nf6 5.Bc4 [Or 5.c3 e5 6.Bc4=] 5...Nbd7 6.d4 [6.Bb3] 6...Nb6 7.Bd3 Qxd4 8.Ne2 Qd8 [8...Qe5 9.0-0 Nxe4 10.Bxe4 Qf6=] 9.N2c3 [9.Bf4=] 9...Nbd5 10.Bg5 [10.Nxd5=] 10...Qa5 11.0-0 Nxc3 12.Bd2 Nfxe4 [12...Qc7 13.Bxc3=] 13.Bxe4 Qc7 14.Bxc3 e5 15.Bxe5 [15.Rad1+/=] 15...Qxe5 16.Bxc6+ Kd8 17.Bxb7 Bxb7 [17...Bd6 18.g3=] 18.Qxb7 Rc8 19.Rfe1 Qc7 20.Rad1+ Bd6 21.Qd5 [21.Qa6+-] 21...Kd7 [21...Re8 22.Qxd6+ Qxd6 23.Rxd6+ Kc7 24.Red1+/-] 22.Qxf7+ Kc6 23.Qd5+ Kd7 24.Re6 1-0

10 – Riff 2.Nc3 d5 3.Nf3 Nf6 Black posted a knight in the center in the Caro-Kann Defence. It seems risky to answer e5 with ...Ne4 early in 1.e4 openings. We see it in some French Defence lines. Black’s 5...h6 protected g5 for a possible ...Ne4-Ng5Ne6 retreat, but it left Black’s kingside weak. White broke through in the center with a sharp attack by moves like 8.dxc3 and 10.c4 (instead of the routine 8.bxc3 and a later d4) and the pawn sacrifice 12.e6. White trapped the Black king in the game between Jean-Noel Riff and Martin Lokander. Riff (2503) - Lokander (2379), GRENKE Chess Open 2018 Karlsruhe GER, 01.04.2018 begins 1.e4 c6 2.Nc3 d5 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.e5 Ne4 5.Be2 [5.Ne2 Qb6 6.d4 e6 7.Ng3=] 5...h6 [5...Nxc3 6.bxc3 c5 7.0-0 Nc6 8.c4!?=] 6.0-0 c5 [6...e6 7.d4 Nxc3 8.bxc3+/=] 7.Re1 [7.Bb5+ Nc6 8.Na4+/=] 7...Nxc3 8.dxc3 Nc6 9.Bb5 Qb6 10.c4 d4? [10...e6 11.c3 dxc4=] 11.c3 [11.e6! Bxe6 12.Rxe6 fxe6 13.Ne5 0-0-0 14.Bxc6 bxc6 15.Nf7+-] 11...dxc3 [11...Bg4 12.cxd4+/-] 12.e6 Bxe6 13.Rxe6 Rd8 14.Bxc6+ bxc6 15.Qc2 fxe6 16.Ne5 cxb2 [16...Rd6 17.bxc3+-] 17.Qg6# 1-0

11 – McShane 3.Nf3 a6 4.d4 Luke McShane outplayed Hugh W. Murphy in an offbeat (3...a6) CaroKann Two Knights. Black could not avoid losing a piece. McShane (2669) - Murphy (2119), 6th Kings Place Open 2017 London ENG, 07.07.2018 begins 1.e4 c6 2.Nf3 d5 3.Nc3 a6 4.d4 Bg4 5.h3 Bh5 6.exd5 cxd5 7.g4 Bg6 8.h4 h6 9.Ne5 Bh7 10.Qf3 [10.g5+/=] 10...Nf6? [10...f6 11.Nd3=] 11.g5 hxg5 [11...Bxc2 12.gxf6 gxf6 13.Bd3 Bxd3 14.Nxd3+- Up a knight.] 12.hxg5 Be4 13.Nxe4 Rxh1 14.gxf6 Rxf1+ [Or 14...exf6 15.Qxh1 fxe5 16.Ng5+- Up a bishop.] 15.Kxf1 dxe4 16.Qb3 [After 16.Qb3 e6 17.Qxb7 Nd7 18.Nxd7+- Up a knight.] 1-0

12 – Stoleriu 3…Bg4 4.h3 Bh5 The Caro-Kann Two Knights Retreat 4.h3 Bh5 rewards accurate play. Black was better in Marc Morgunov vs George Stoleriu. Morgunov (2362) - Stoleriu (2347), European Youth U18 Teams Bad Blankenburg GER (5.3), 16.07.2018 begins 1.e4 c6 2.Nc3 d5 3.Nf3 Bg4 4.h3 Bh5 5.exd5 cxd5 6.Bb5+ Nc6 7.g4 Bg6 8.Ne5 Rc8 9.d4 e6 10.h4 [Another line is 10.Qe2 Bb4 11.h4 Nge7 12.h5 Be4 13.f3 0-0 14.Nxc6 Nxc6 15.Be3 Qf6 16.fxe4+/=] 10...f6 11.h5 [11.Nxg6 hxg6 12.Qd3 Kf7 13.Bxc6 Rxc6 14.Bd2 Bb4 15.0-0-0=] 11...Bxc2 12.Qxc2?! [12.Bxc6+ bxc6 13.Qxc2 fxe5 14.dxe5 Bb4=] 12...fxe5 13.dxe5? [13.Be3 Nf6-/+] 13...Bb4 [13...d4!-+] 14.a3 Bxc3+ 15.Qxc3 [15.bxc3 a6=/+] 15...Nh6 16.f3 0-0 17.0-0? Qb6+ [Black wins a piece.] 0-1

13 – Eljanov 4.h3 Bxf3 5.Qxf3 Nf6 In this Caro-Kann between Pierre Bailet vs Pavel Eljanov, Black will win a pawn with a great position by 21...Nxf2 and 22...Rfxd8. Bailet (2501) - Eljanov (2702), TCh-FRA Top 12 2018 Brest, 05.06.2018 begins 1.e4 c6 2.Nf3 d5 3.Nc3 Bg4 4.h3 Bxf3 5.Qxf3 Nf6 6.Be2 [6.d3=] 6...e6 7.0-0 Bc5 [7...d4 8.Nb1 Nbd7 9.d3 Bd6=] 8.Rd1 [8.Qg3!?+/=] 8...Bd4 9.exd5 cxd5 10.Nb5 [10.Bb5+ Nc6 11.Ne2 Bb6 12.d4=] 10...Bb6

11.c4 a6 12.Nc3 [12.Qa3 Ne4=/+] 12...Nc6 13.cxd5 Nd4 14.Qg3 [14.Qd3 Nxd5 15.Nxd5 Qxd5=/+] 14...0-0 15.d3 Nxd5 16.Bf3 Bc7 17.Qg4 Nf6 18.Bg5 Nxg4 19.Bxd8 Nxf3+ 20.gxf3 Bh2+ 0-1

14 – Mamedyarov 5.Qxf3 e6 6.d3 One of the best theoretical lines in the Caro-Kann Defence Two Knights Variation is 3...Bg4 4.h3 Bxf3 5.Qxf3 e6 6.d3. Black has a strong position with pawns on the light squares and pieces of the dark square. White has kingside attacking possibilities, but it was Black who got the faster and stronger attack in the game between Awonder Liang and Shakhriyar Mamedyarov. Liang (2572) - Mamedyarov (2804), PRO League Group Stage chess.com INT (4), 03.02.2018 begins 1.e4 c6 2.Nf3 d5 3.Nc3 Bg4 4.h3 Bxf3 5.Qxf3 e6 6.d3 Nd7 7.Bd2 Qb6 8.0-0-0 Bd6 9.h4 [9.g4 Ne7 10.h4=] 9...Ne7 [9...d4=] 10.h5 Be5 11.h6 g6 12.Na4 Qc7 [12...Qa6 13.b3 b5=] 13.Nc3 Rc8 14.Ne2 c5 15.exd5 Nxd5 16.Qe4 0-0 17.f4 Bh8 18.g4 N7f6 19.Qf3 b5 20.Nc3 [20.c4=] 20...b4 21.Nxd5 [21.Ne4 Qa5=/+] 21...Nxd5 22.f5 Qa5 23.Kb1 Nc3+ [Stronger is 23...Bxb2!-+ and Black is winning.] 24.Bxc3 bxc3 25.fxg6 Rb8 [Better is 25...fxg6! 26.Qe4 Rfe8-/+; White may survive after 25...Rb8 26.gxh7+! Kxh7 27.Qe4+ f5 28.Qxe6 Rxb2+ 29.Ka1 Bf6 30.d4 Qb6=/+] 0-1

15 – Fernandez 5.Qxf3 e6 6.a3 Black determined to play the Caro-Kann Defence against 1.Nc3 with the move 1…c6. White could avoid it by holding back e4, but that would give Black an easier game. White headed into a key variation of the Two Knights Variation with 6.a3. Black can equalize. White refused to trade off pieces into a draw. Tensions heated up. White found the winning killer move 24.Qe7! in this game Daniel Fernandez vs Daniel Gormally. Fernandez (2500) - Gormally (2474), 4NCL 2017-18 England ENG (6.61), 11.02.2018 begins 1.Nc3 c6 2.Nf3 d5 3.e4 Bg4 4.h3 Bxf3 5.Qxf3 e6 6.a3 [6.d4 dxe4 7.Qxe4 Nf6 8.Qd3=] 6...Nf6 7.d4 dxe4 8.Qe3 Nbd7 9.Nxe4 Nxe4 10.Qxe4 Be7 11.Be2 Qa5+ 12.c3 Bg5 13.f4 [13.b4 Qd8 14.Qg4+/=] 13...Bh4+ 14.Kf1 0-0 15.g3 Be7 16.Kg2 Qc7 17.Bf3 Nf6 18.Qe5 Bd6 19.Qe2 Rac8 20.b4 b6 21.Rd1 c5 22.dxc5 bxc5 23.b5 Rfe8 24.Bc6 Red8 25.Be3 e5 [25...Qb6 26.Bf2+/-] 26.fxe5 Bxe5 27.Bxc5 Bxg3

[27...Re8 28.Qf3+/-] 28.Qe7! [After 28.Qe7 Qxe7 29.Bxe7 Rxd1 30.Rxd1+-] 1-0

16 – Kampars 5.Qxf3 e6 6.d4 Peter Webster sent me this story of Nikolajs Kampars. It tells his journey from Latvia to Wisconsin to the editor of BDG Magazine. "This information comes from two visits to Nikolajs Kampars at his home and one with his family after his death. When I met Mr. Kampars, he was living with his wife and sister in the lower portion of a Victorian-era home in Milwaukee. A brother lived nearby; I do not know if there were other living relatives. He had heart trouble and had retired from his work in a bakery. "In Latvia he had been a member of the judicial system. I was not able to work out which position in the United States would have been most comparable to the one he held. His father had been a police chief in Russia during the Czarist regime. One of the few things which the family had brought with them when they escaped from Latvia was an oil painting of their father in dress uniform; this was hanging on the dining room wall. He told me that once he and his brother entered the police station and found the entire staff asleep. It was the custom in those days to have waxed mustaches with the ends curling upwards, and the two boys were unable to resist the temptation to clip the ends off those mustaches! "When Soviet troops entered the Baltic States, thousands of people fled. For the Kampars family this was a life-or-death decision; the Soviets were under orders to eliminate anyone who might be antagonistic to the Communist regime (I have read an estimate that eleven thousand Latvians were murdered and thousands more deported to Siberia), and as the family of a Czarist police official they would have been on this list even though their father had died between the World Wars. Some Estonians were able to enter Finland, with which there was then a common border, but Lithuanians and Latvians had nowhere to go but German-controlled territory. The family was fortunate to reach a camp in Austria, which was not overrun by the Soviet armies. "All I learned of his chess life in Latvia is that he and his brother were given lessons by Aaron Nimzovich and that at one point he was the librarian for the national organization. The book Alekhine in Europe and Asia (Donaldson, Minev, and Seirawan) includes a simul loss by Alekhine in Riga, Latvia, against "Kampar" (see p. 98); no initial, and the final "s" is

missing, but this may well have been Nick. Games from a tournament held in the Austrian DP camp indicate that he was a conservative player with a classical style and opening repertoire; the gambit ideas for which he became known when he published Opening Adventures were not typical of his cross board play. He became one of the best in Wisconsin using this classical style; before I began to play tournament chess he drew against a very young Bobby Fischer as Black in a Caro-Kann, (he also lost one to Fischer) and my records show that in the 1958 North Central Open in Milwaukee (Pal Benko headed a field of 88) he was the top Wisconsin player (4-1,2) and repeated this in the 1959 Western Open (4-1,3) (Benko again, 112 players) and 1959 North Central Open (4-0,3) (master Curt Brasket of Minnesota won ahead of future world correspondence champion Hans Berliner, 90 players, Kampars 5th). I don't know whether he ever competed outside Milwaukee. His USCF rating was Expert. "I do not know how Mr. Kampars became aware of the German master Emil J. Diemer. The family participated in European chess life to some extent. His sister told me that GM Savielly Tartakower wrote a poem for her! He would occasionally send the aging Diemer a little money when he could spare it; he showed me a strange letter which seemed to indicate that Mr. Diemer had some sort of mental glitch, although he noted that other letters gave no indication of problems. "Although I did not see a pet in the home, copies of the bulletin of the Milwaukee Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals were on the sideboard. Appropriate reading material for a gentle man and gentleman. "Peter Webster" Thank you for that wonderful piece! USCF Master Peter Webster is a long time BDG player. I mentioned him in the Introduction to my BDG books. Kampars drew Bobby Fischer in a Caro-Kann. Robert J Fischer - Nikolajs Kampars, Milwaukee WI 1957 begins 1.e4 c6 2.Nc3 d5 3.Nf3 Bg4 4.h3 Bxf3 [4...Bh5!?] 5.Qxf3 e6 6.d4 [6.d3 d4=] 6...Nd7 7.Bd3 dxe4 8.Nxe4 Ngf6 9.0-0 Nxe4 10.Qxe4 Nf6 11.Qe3 Nd5 [11...Bd6!?] 12.Qf3 Qf6 13.Qxf6 Nxf6 14.Rd1 0-0-0 15.Be3 Nd5 16.Bg5 Be7 17.Bxe7 Nxe7 18.Be4 Nd5 19.g3 Nf6 20.Bf3 Kc7 21.Kf1 Rhe8 22.Be2 e5 23.dxe5 Rxe5 24.Bc4 Rxd1+ 25.Rxd1 Re7 26.Bb3 Ne4 27.Rd4 Nd6 28.c3 f6 29.Bc2 h6 30.Bd3 Nf7 31.f4 Rd7 32.Rxd7+ Kxd7 33.Kf2

Nd6! 34.Kf3 f5 35.Ke3 c5 [White's king is denied entry points.] 36.Be2 Ke6 37.Bd3 1/2-1/2

17 – Duhm 2.d4 d5 3.c4 dxe4 What do you do when you go through a stretch where you are scoring lower than usual? After playing dozens of practice blitz games on the same day, I was doing rather poorly. I decided to see what lines had my best lifetime performance ratings and play those for a bit. Thus I won my last eight games of the day. This Caro-Kann game was not just any old variation. It’s a cousin of the Diemer-Duhm Gambit which normally is reached by 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.c4 dxe4 4.Nc3 intending 5.f3 with play similar to a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit. Earlier that same day my 1500 rated opponent had played a BDG Teichmann as White. Our Caro-Kann Defence game, OracleMcSnacker - Sawyer, began 1.e4 c6. Now White thought for 11 seconds, but White played the next five moves using a total of five seconds. After move 11 I thought to myself, “Wow! This 1506 rated opponent is playing aggressive and fast!?” Then I played some inaccuracies on moves 12 and 13. This led to more trouble. I played for exchanges with the hope that it would relief some pressure with my move 13…Nd5!? White responded with 14.Bxe7. Finally, my strategy had worked. I was fortunate that White missed the better choices of 14.Ne4 or 14.Rh3! when he could have had a small advantage. The game continued 14...Qxe7 15.Qh6 Nxc3 16.bxc3 f5. Black fought back. Eventually I won a piece and the game. OracleMcSnacker (1506) - Sawyer, ICC 5 0 Internet Chess Club, 23.09.2011 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.c4 dxe4 4.Nc3 Nf6 5.f3 exf3 6.Nxf3 Bg4 7.Be3 e6 8.Bd3 Nbd7 9.0-0 Be7 10.Qe1 0-0 11.Qh4 Bxf3 12.Rxf3 g6? [12...e5!? or 12...c5!=] 13.Bg5 Nd5!? 14.Bxe7= [14.Rh3! h5 15.Bxe7

Nxe7 16.g4 Kg7 17.gxh5 Nf5 18.Qf2 Rg8 19.Bxf5 gxf5 20.Qf4 Qf6+/=] 14...Qxe7 15.Qh6 Nxc3 16.bxc3 f5 17.Re1 e5 18.dxe5-/+ [18.c5 Qg7 19.Qh4 e4=/+] 18...Nxe5 19.Rfe3?-+ [19.Kh1 Qf6 20.Rh3 Rf7-/+] 19...Qc5 20.Kh1-+ Ng4 21.Qg5?-+ [If 21.Qf4 Nxe3 22.Rxe3 Rfe8-+] 21...Nf2+ 22.Kg1 Nxd3 White resigns 0-1

2.d4 d5 3.f3 Alexey Bezgodov has made 3.f3 more popular with his book published in 2014.

18 – Sawyer 3.f3 Nf6 4.Nc3 e6 From the movie "The Avengers": Steve Rogers: "Stark, we need a plan of attack!" Tony Stark: "I have a plan: attack!" In the three minute chess blitz game below, my original plan of attack was to transpose into a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit after 3.e4 dxe4 4.Nc3. However after 3.e4 c6 4.Nc3 e6, that was not going to happen. After I complete my development, I needed a plan of attack. After move 15 I decided to just attack! I combined my pawns and pieces to open up the defenses around Black's king. My attack was not deeply thought out, nor was it played accurately. However an attack by itself threatens stuff. An attack puts pressure on the opponent. By the end, I had an easy win as White in a BDG Avoided Caro-Kann opening. Sawyer - idledim, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 16.05.2012 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.f3 d5 3.e4 c6 4.Nc3 e6 [4...dxe4 5.Bc4 exf3 6.Nxf3] 5.Bg5 [White can play a standard Steinitz Variation of the Classical French Defence with 5.e5 Nfd7 6.f4 c5 7.Nf3 Nc6 8.Be3 where both sides have lost one tempo.] 5...Be7 6.Bd3?! [Better is 6.e5 Nfd7 7.Bxe7 Qxe7 8.f4 c5 9.Nb5+/=] 6...h6?! [6...dxe4! 7.fxe4 Qxd4=/+] 7.Be3 Nbd7 8.Qd2 [8.e5!+/=] 8...g5 9.e5 Nh5 10.Nge2 c5 11.g4 Ng7 12.dxc5 Nxc5 [12...Nxe5!=] 13.Bb5+ Bd7 14.Nd4 0-0 15.Bxd7 Qxd7 16.h4! Rac8 17.hxg5 hxg5 18.Bxg5 Rfd8? 19.Bf6! Bxf6 20.exf6 e5 21.Qg5 [Winning, but sloppy. Fastest is 21.Rh8+!

Kxh8 22.Qh6+ Kg8 23.Qxg7#] 21...Nce6 22.Nxe6 Black resigns [22.Qh6!+-] 1-0

19 - Hou Yifan 3.f3 Qb6 4.Nc3 Hou Yifan is a female chess prodigy from China. At 20 years old, she was the Women's World Chess Champion. Hou Yifan was rated 2673, two points below Judit Polgar at 2675, another "lady grandmaster" who plays the Caro-Kann Defence 3.f3. We cannot say "fellow GM" because these ladies are girls and not guys. I recall the styles of female opponents that I played such as Rachel Crotto, Irene Aronoff, Simone Sobel - twice, Sanja Petronic, Barbara Koks, Jaquelline Oriero and Donna Marie Woodland. Also, I have written about Vera Menchik, Martha Fierro Baquero, Eva Maria Zickelbein, Tatiana Khlichkova, Maya Chiburdanidze, Fiona Mutesi, and Carissa Yip. When one of the best players in the world repeats an opening, you know it is a good line. The World Champion Vassily Smyslov played 3.f3 on select occasions. Hou Yifan liked the Caro-Kann Defence 3.f3 Fantasy variation. She played it often. Here she defeated Hungarian GM Robert Ruck (2577) in France. Ruck chose the rare queen move 3...Qb6. She continued 4.Nc3. Both sides had chances in sharp play, but Hou Yifan won in the end. Hou Yifan (2673) - Ruck (2568), Corsican Circuit Final 2014 Bastia FRA (3.4), 20.10.2014 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.f3 Qb6 4.Nc3 dxe4 5.fxe4 e5 6.Nf3 [6.dxe5 Be6 7.Nf3 Nd7 8.Ng5=] 6...exd4 7.Nxd4 [7.Qxd4 Qxd4 8.Nxd4=] 7...Nd7 [7...Nf6 8.e5 Ng4 9.e6 Bxe6 10.Bc4 Bxc4 11.Qxg4=] 8.Be2 [8.Ndb5!? cxb5 9.Nd5 Qa5+ 10.Bd2 Qa4 11.Nc7+ Kd8 12.Nxa8+/=] 8...Ne5 [8...Ngf6=] 9.Bf4 Ng6 10.Be3 Qxb2 11.Na4 [11.Ndb5! Bb4 12.0-0 Bxc3 (12...Nf6 13.Rb1+-) 13.Nc7+ Ke7 14.Bc5#] 11...Qb4+ 12.c3 Qa5 13.0-0 Nf6 14.Rb1 Be7 15.Nf5 0-0 16.Nxe7+ Nxe7 17.Bc5 Qc7 [17...Re8-/+] 18.Bd6 Qd8 19.Nc5 [19.e5+/=] 19...b6 20.e5 Nfd5 21.Ne4 Ne3 22.Qd3 Nxf1 23.Rxf1 Ng6 24.Qg3 Be6 25.Ng5 Bd5 [25...Bxa2-/+] 26.c4 h6 27.cxd5 Qxg5 28.dxc6 Qxg3 29.hxg3 Rfe8 30.Ba6 [30.c7+/-] 30...Nxe5 31.c7 f6 32.Rd1 Nf7 [32...Kf7!=] 33.Bf4 [33.Bb4+/=] 33...Ne5 [33...g5! 34.Bc1 Kg7=] 34.Bb7 Re7 35.Bxa8 Rxc7 36.Bd5+ Kf8 37.Bb3 Rc5 38.Rd8+ Ke7 39.Rd1 [39.Rg8+-] 39...a5 40.Be3 Rc6 41.Ba4 Rc4

42.Bb3 Rc6 43.Rd5 Rc3 44.Bxb6 Ng4 45.Rd1 Rxg3 46.Bc7 Rc3 47.Bxa5 Rc6 48.Bb4+ Ke8 49.Ba4 Ne5 50.Bxc6+ Nxc6 51.Bc3 1-0

20 – Bendix 3.f3 e6 4.c3 dxe4 In a club game Juergen Bendix surprised me with a Caro-Kann Defence 3.f3 variation. It was not unheard of, but I rarely faced it with the Black pieces. His last published rating was 1370 from 1990, though probably Juergen Bendix had been a stronger player in his younger years. He died in 1996 at age 79. I played the higher rated players at the club, but sometimes they were busy or absent. Then I took the opportunity to play whoever was available. Here was my only recorded game vs Mr. Bendix. Juergen Bendix was 63 years old for our North Penn Chess Club game in Lansdale, Pennsylvania. He had moved to the United States from somewhere in Europe. About that time my USCF tournament rating reached the 1900s. My postal chess rating at that time was already well over 2000 and over 2100 by the next year. I played postal chess every day, but I played in live chess tournaments only a few times a year. My initial choice vs the Caro-Kann 3.f3 was to select the solid 3...e6 which threatens to win a pawn. As it turned out, White was very eager to sacrifice a pawn although 4.Nc3 would have been a better continuation in the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit style. We ended up with a BDG Ryder Gambit type position after his 6.Qxf3. We both castled queenside and I outplayed him. We swapped queens and later I won a bishop in a combination. Bendix (1370) - Sawyer, Lansdale, PA 05.06.1981 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.f3 e6 4.c3 [If 4.Nc3 Bb4 White can choose between 5.Bf4, 5.Nge2 or 5.Bd2] 4...dxe4 5.Nh3 exf3 6.Qxf3 Qd5 7.Be2 Qxf3 8.Bxf3 Bd6 9.Bf4 Bxf4 10.Nxf4 Nf6 11.Nd2 Nd5 12.Nxd5 exd5 13.h3 Nd7 14.0-0-0 Nf6

15.Rde1+ Be6 16.b3 0-0-0 17.g4 h6 18.Kb2 Rhe8 19.a4 Bd7 20.Re5 Kc7 21.g5 Rxe5 22.dxe5 Ng8 23.h4 Re8 24.Re1 Ne7 25.c4 dxc4 26.Nxc4 Ng6 27.gxh6 gxh6 28.Bh5 [28.h5 Nf4-/+] 28...Nf4 29.Be2 b5 30.axb5 cxb5 31.Nd6 [31.Nd2 Rxe5-+] 31...Rxe5 32.Nxf7 Rxe2+ 33.Rxe2 Nxe2 34.Nxh6 Be6 35.b4 Kd6 36.Kc2 Kd5 37.Kd2 Nf4 0-1

21 – Smyslov 3.f3 e6 4.Be3 dxe4 GM Smyslov lived 89 years as a deeply religious man. He was a musician who believed God could be seen in chess. He said: "Chess as an art has a divine origin, while chess as a sport (when victory counts at all costs sacrificing the beauty of the game), springs from [the] Devil." "If every action was faultless, it would be of no interest to others. First of all, chess players are human beings dependent on their emotions. They are not insured against mistakes, they even must make them. Chess reflects the essence of human nature, including human ideas, creativity and illusions. The emotional side plays a considerable role. When we read: “If it had not been for… I would have…”, this is impossible because there are no “if’s”! It is not so easy to become a World Champion." GM Alexey Bezgodov wrote: "The 22-year old Vassily Vasilievich Smyslov already had a highly-developed technique and a rare degree of positional understanding. However, this did not stop him from sacrificing a pawn in the opening, if in return he could obtain the initiative, or even hopes of it!" Smyslov - Kan, Sverdlovsk (11), 1943 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.f3 e6 4.Be3 dxe4 5.Nd2 exf3 6.Ngxf3 Nf6 7.Nc4 [An alternative is 7.Bd3 Nd5 8.Qe2=, but Bezgodov writes: "An important maneuver. Whilst heading for e5, the knight also gives the bishop on e3 greater freedom of movement."] 7...Nbd7 8.Bd3 Nd5 9.Bg5 Qc7 10.0-0 h6 11.Bd2 Be7 12.Nce5 N5f6 13.Qe1 Nxe5 14.Nxe5 Bd7 15.Qg3 g5 16.Qh3 Rf8 17.Nxf7 [Bezgodov: "Understanding that the extra exchange will win the game, Smyslov does not bother looking for other moves. A player with a sharper style might have preferred 17.Qxh6 Qd6 18.c3 Ng8 19.Qg7+-"] 17...Rxf7 18.Bg6 Qd6 19.Kh1 0-0-0 20.Bxf7 e5 21.Qxh6 Ne4 22.Qxd6 Bxd6 23.Be1 exd4 24.Bg6 Nc5 25.Bg3 Bxg3 26.hxg3 Rh8+ 27.Kg1 Na4 28.b4 Nc3 29.a3 b6 30.Rae1 Kc7 31.Re5 g4 32.Bd3 Kd6 33.Rg5 Be6 34.Re1 Nd5 [If 34...Rh6 35.Be2+/-] 35.Re4 c5 36.Bc4 Nc7 37.bxc5+ bxc5 38.Rg6 Re8 39.Rexg4

Re7 40.Re4 Kd7 41.Bxe6+ Rxe6 [Or 41...Nxe6 42.g4+-] 42.Rgxe6 Nxe6 43.Rxe6 Kxe6 44.Kf2 Kf5 45.Kf3 c4 46.g4+ Kg5 47.Ke4 1-0

22 – Le Corre 3.f3 e5 4.dxe5 When I mentioned the Alexey Bezgodov book on Caro-Kann 3.f3, our friend Francesco Cavicchi wrote: "but there's that fearsome 3...e5." Bezgodov called 3...e5 "The Abordage Variation", with this description: "There will be a battle without rules, not any less intense than in the classical King's Gambit in the far off 19th century!" In response here I present a clash in the Caro-Kann Defence 3.f3 between two masters played in France. FIDE Master Benjamin Le Corre had the White pieces vs young Vianney Domenech. This time experience won out over youth. GM Bezgodov writes that after "many sleepless nights" his conclusion about the 3...e5 line is this: "White's game is easier and, not surprisingly, more pleasant." The Bezgodov considers the 9.Qd4! line in this game to be the most reliable for White. Le Corre (2266) - Domenech (2238), ch-FRA Accession 2014 Nimes FRA (4.15), 20.08.2014 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.f3 e5 4.dxe5 Bc5 [4...Qc7 5.Bf4 Qb6 6.b3 dxe4 7.fxe4 Bc5 8.Qf3 Bxg1 9.Bc4 Be6 10.Bxe6 fxe6 11.Nd2= but 1-0 in 27 in Scandinavian-Sawyer, Internet Chess Club 1998] 5.Nc3 Qb6 [5...Ne7 6.Qd2 0-0 7.f4=] 6.Na4 Qa5+ 7.c3 Bxg1 8.Rxg1 dxe4 9.Qd4! [9.Bf4!?; 9.f4!?] 9...Ne7 10.Bg5 Ng6 [10...Nd7 11.Bxe7 Kxe7 12.f4+/=] 11.b4 [11.Nc5 0-0 12.Nxe4+/-] 11...Qc7 12.0-0-0 0-0 13.Qd6 Qd7 [13...Qxd6 14.exd6 exf3 15.gxf3+/=] 14.Nc5 Qf5? [14...Qe8 15.Nxe4+/-] 15.f4 h5 [Everything goes downhill for Black. 15...Qg4 16.Qd2 Nd7 17.h3+-] 16.h3 h4 17.Be2 b6 18.Bg4 bxc5 19.Bxf5 Bxf5 20.g4 hxg3 21.Rxg3 cxb4 22.h4 Re8 23.h5 Nf8 24.Bh6 g6 25.Qf6 Ne6 26.hxg6 Bxg6 27.Rxg6+ fxg6 28.Qxg6+ Kh8 29.Rh1 1-0

3.f3 dxe4 Black captures the central pawn and plans to follow-up with 4…e5.

23 – blik 4.fxe4 e5 5.Nf3 Bg4 I like the GM Alexey Bezgodov book entitled "The Extreme Caro-Kann: Attacking Black with 3.f3". The back cover reads: "This strange looking move was already played by former greats Gena Maroczy and World Champion Vassily Smyslov, but the idea has come to fruition in the hands of modern world-class players like Vassily Ivanchuk, Alexander Morozevich and Judit Polgar." This Fantasy Variation hinders the use of Black's light squared bishop. I got into trouble combining 5...Bg4 with 6...Nf6. White obtained a quick tactical strike with a bishop sacrifice. blik (2441) - Sawyer (2155), ICC 5 0 Internet Chess Club, 23.03.2012 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.f3 dxe4 4.fxe4 e5 5.Nf3 Bg4 6.Bc4 [If 6.c3 Nd7 White has 7.Bd3 by Hou Yifan or 7.Be2 by Houdini] 6...Nf6? [6...Nd7=] 7.Bxf7+! Kxf7 8.Nxe5+ Kg8 9.Nxg4 Nxg4 10.Qxg4 Qd7 11.Qxd7 Nxd7 12.e5 Be7 13.0-0 Rf8 14.Rxf8+ Nxf8 15.Be3 Ne6 16.Nc3 a6 17.Ne4 Kf7 18.Rf1+ Ke8 19.c4 Rf8 20.Rxf8+ Kxf8 21.d5 Black resigns 1-0

24 – Timofeev 5.Nf3 exd4 6.Bc4 Nf6 Artyom Timofeev of Russia sacrificed his queen in the middle of the board which demonstrated his boldness, imagination and clever eye for a pretty combination. He defeated FIDE Master Pavel Bublei. Black deviated from 5...Bg4 with his 5...exd4 which gave White a slight White advantage and equal chances. Then came the winning shot 21.Qxd5! The GM outplayed the FM. Timofeev (2598) - Bublei (2339), Chigorin Memorial 2014 St Petersburg RUS, 24.10.2014 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.f3 dxe4 4.fxe4 e5 5.Nf3 exd4 6.Bc4 Nf6 7.0-0 Nbd7 8.e5 [Houdini likes 8.Qe1!? Nb6 9.Bb3 Bc5 10.Ng5 0-0 11.Bxf7+ Rxf7 12.Nxf7+/=] 8...Nd5 9.Bxd5 cxd5 10.Nbd2 [10.Kh1!?]

10...Be7 11.Nb3 0-0 12.Nbxd4 [12.Qxd4=] 12...Nc5 13.Be3 Bg4 14.h3 Bd7 15.Nb3 Nxb3 16.axb3 Bb5 [16...Be6=] 17.Rf2 a6 18.Nd4 Bd7 19.Qd3 [19.Qf3+/=] 19...Qc7 20.Nf5 Qxe5? [20...Bxf5=] 21.Qxd5! 1-0

25 – Pythagoras 5.Nf3 exd4 6.Bc4 Nd7 This Caro-Kann Defence game in the 3.f3 Fantasy variation is a sharp and critical line from a three minute Internet Chess Club game. I played the Black pieces. We attempted simultaneous king hunts. At a likely two seconds per move we missed some tactical shots on both attack and defense. I won in 16 moves. Improvements for both sides are suggested in the notes. My opponent in today's game is "Pythagoras" whose handle likely comes from the famous Greek mathematician from the 500s BC known for his opinions on music, science, philosophy and religion, as well as notable thoughts about women and food. Like me, "Pythagoras" is often rated around 2000 in blitz (he had peaked at 2256). When this game was play, we were both going through phases where our ratings had dipped. A few weeks later we had both raised our ratings over 100 points. Because of the high volume and speed of games played, ICC ratings rise sharply and fall dramatically. You have to take many rating snapshots to get an accurate picture of a player’s strength. Pythagoras - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 05.10.2014 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.f3 dxe4 4.fxe4 e5 5.Nf3 exd4 6.Bc4 Nd7 [Komodo likes this move, while Houdini prefers 6...Nf6=] 7.Ng5?! [Black is borrowing an idea from a Two Knights Defence. Normal here is 7.0-0 Ngf6= when White has tried many options.] 7...Ne5 8.Bxf7+? [8.0-0 Nh6-/+] 8...Nxf7 9.Nxf7 Kxf7 [9...Qh4+! would have been a great shot.] 10.0-0+ Ke8? [10...Nf6 11.e5 Qd5 12.exf6 gxf6=/+] 11.Qf3? [11.Qh5+! Kd7 12.Qf5+ Kc7 13.Qxf8+- and White's creativity would have been rewarded.] 11...Qf6 12.Qg3 Qg6 13.Qe5+ Be7 14.Qxd4 Nf6 15.e5 Ne4 16.Nc3 Bc5! White resigns 0-1

Book 4: Chapter 2 – Advance Variation 3.e5 Bf5 White grabs space with 3.e5 and denies Black the move …Nf6. I usually play 3...Bf5. That’s all I cover, though I’ve played 3...c5.

26 – barano 4.c3 e6 5.Ne2 The move 3.e5 line is one of the sharpest methods against the Caro-Kann Defence 1.e4 c6. This Advance Variation is about as popular as the traditional 3.Nc3 main lines. In an effort to re-learn my SuperSolid set of openings, I tried to play at least one blitz game per day. After each game, I looked up the opening. Against my opponent "barano" I had a good start. Then I missed a couple things. White developed an attack against my uncastled king. My opponent sacrificed a piece for two advanced passed pawns. That was all she wrote. It was a nice attack, even though I was on the wrong side of it. barano (2005) - Sawyer (2239), ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 14.03.2012 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 Bf5 4.c3 e6 5.Ne2!? Nd7 [Or 5...c5!] 6.Nf4 Ne7 7.g4 Be4 8.f3 Bg6 9.h4 h6 [Almost always in these Advance Caro lines, 9...h5!= is the correct move.] 10.Nxg6 Nxg6 11.h5 Ne7 [11...Nh4!?] 12.Bd3 c5 13.Be3 cxd4 [13...Nc6 Development is better than breaking open the position.] 14.cxd4 Nc6 15.Bc2?! Qa5+ [15...Qb6!=/+] 16.Nc3 Nb4?+/[I missed the tactic 16...Ndxe5! 17.dxe5 d4 18.Bxd4 0-0-0-/+ winning back the bishop with advantage.] 17.Ba4 Rc8 18.0-0 a6 [Now I am in trouble. White's good moves are very easy to see.] 19.Bxd7+ Kxd7 20.f4 Be7 21.f5 Nc6 22.fxe6+ fxe6 23.Rf7 Rhg8 24.a3 [24.Na4!+/-] 24...Rcf8 25.Qf3?! Qd8 [25...Nd8= is a good idea.] 26.Na4 Rxf7? [Necessary is 26...Qe8 27.Rxf8 Rxf8=] 27.Qxf7 Qe8 28.Nc5+ Kc7 [There is no good defense. The rest of the game is ridiculous.] 29.Nxe6+ Kb8 30.Qxe8+ Rxe8 31.Nxg7 Rg8 32.Bxh6 Bf8 33.g5 Bxg7 34.Bxg7 Rxg7 35.g6 [There is no stopping these pawns. White played well and deserved the win.] 35...Nxd4 36.Rf1 Ne2+ 37.Kh2 d4 38.Rf7 Rg8 39.g7 Ka7 40.h6 d3 41.h7 Rxg7 42.Rxg7 d2

43.Rd7 Ng1 44.h8Q Nf3+ 45.Kg3 Nxe5 46.Qxe5 d1Q 47.Rxd1 a5 48.Qxa5+ 1-0

27 – Fedoseev 4.Nd2 e6 5.Nb3 White’s play 5.Nb3 hits against Black’s normal strategy to push a pawn to c5 in this Caro-Kann Defence. Black changes tactics and swapped off a set of knights at h4. From there Black’s queen slid into the risky central square Qe4. Black would have been fine after 12.Qc2. Instead he had to sacrifice a piece. That didn’t work well. White used the extra material to build a winning attack in the game between Vladimir Fedoseev and Andrew Ledger. Fedoseev (2713) - Ledger (2353), 34th ECC Open 2018 Porto Carras GRE (1.4), 12.10.2018 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 Bf5 4.Nd2 e6 5.Nb3 Nd7 6.Nf3 Ne7 7.c3 [7.Be2 h6 8.0-0 g5=] 7...Ng6 [7...a5=] 8.Be3 Nh4 9.Nxh4 Qxh4 10.Be2 Qe4 11.h4 h6 12.h5 Be7? [12...Qc2!=] 13.Rc1 Nxe5 14.dxe5 Qxe5 15.Qd4 Qxd4 16.cxd4 Bb4+ [Or 16...0-0 17.0-0+- and White is up a knight.] 17.Bd2 Bd6 18.g4 Bh7 19.Rh3 Kd7 [19...0-0-0 20.a4+-] 20.Na5 Rab8 21.Rb3 Kc7 [21...Bc7 22.Rxb7 Rxb7 23.Nxb7 Bb6 24.Nc5+ Ke7 25.Bf4+-] 22.Ba6 bxa6 23.Rxc6+ Kd7 24.Rxd6+! [After 24.Rxd6+ Kxd6 25.Bf4+ e5 26.Bxe5+ Ke6 27.Bxb8+-] 1-0

28 – Fressinet 4.h4 h5 5.Bd3 White tried early attacking ideas with 4.h4 and 7.Bg5 in this 3.e5 CaroKann Defence Advance Variation. Black in turn focused his attention on the queenside with 7...Qb6 and 8...Qa6. The players castled opposite sides. White kept angling to attack e6 and other weak points in Black’s position, but every threat was met by an adequate defense. White tried to chase away a troublesome knight with 24.f3, but Black closed in for the kill to win material in the game Robert Ris vs Laurent Fressinet. Ris (2431) - Fressinet (2649), 5th Purtichju Open 2018 Porticcio FRA (5.5), 03.07.2018 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 Bf5 4.h4 h5 5.Bd3 Bxd3 6.Qxd3 e6 7.Bg5 Qb6 8.Nd2 Qa6 9.c4 Ne7 10.b3 Nd7 11.Ne2 f6 12.exf6 [12.Nf4+/=] 12...gxf6 13.Bf4 0-0-0 14.Qh3 [14.0-0=] 14...Ng6 15.Bh2 Bb4 16.Qg3 Nge5 17.dxe5 Nxe5 18.Rd1 [18.Nc3 dxc4 19.0-0=] 18...dxc4 19.00 Bxd2 20.Qh3 [20.Rxd2 Rxd2-+] 20...Ng4 21.Nf4 Bxf4 22.Bxf4 Rxd1

23.Rxd1 Qxa2 24.f3 [White hopes to drive away the knight.] 24...Qf2+ 25.Kh1 Qe2! 0-1

29 – doc7099 4.Nf3 e6 5.c3 Have you hugged your child tonight? In chess, keeping your material safe is a lot like protecting your children. As a parent you might not be looking at each kid every moment, but often a good parent can sense when a child might be in trouble. A good chess player can often sense when any piece might be in trouble. My friend Dan Heisman developed the Seeds of Tactical Destruction to help a player sense trouble. In this Caro-Kann Defence game, Black has weak points at c6 (pawn) and f5 (bishop and pawn). White has weak points at e5 (pawn) and e1 (king). Play was pretty even in this three minute ICC blitz game vs "doc7099" until White tried to force the issue with 21.c4!? His continuation was 22.bxc4? This dropped his e5-pawn. The game was still alive because Black’s extra pawn was a doubled f-pawn. Moments later, however, White forgot about the weakness on e1. In the face of checkmate in one, White disconnected and forfeited the game. It was an understandable reaction. doc7099 - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 18.03.2013 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 Bf5 4.Nf3 e6 5.c3 c5 [5...Nd7=] 6.Bb5+ Nc6 7.Bxc6+ bxc6 8.0-0 cxd4 [8...c4!?=] 9.Nxd4 Ne7 10.Bg5 Qc7 11.Bxe7 Bxe7 12.Nxf5 exf5 13.Re1 0-0 14.Nd2 Rab8 15.b3 g6 16.Nf3 Rfe8 17.Rb1 Bf8 18.Qd4 Qb6 19.Qh4 Bg7 20.Qf4 Qc7 21.c4!? dxc4 22.bxc4? [This drops a pawn. White should play 22.Qxc4 Bxe5 23.Nxe5 Rxe5 24.Rxe5 Qxe5 25.Qxc6 Qe2=] 22...Rxb1 23.Rxb1 Bxe5 24.Nxe5 Qxe5 25.Qf3? [White misses the mate threat. Better is 25.Qxe5 Rxe5 26.Kf1 Kg7=/+] 25...Qe1+ White disconnected and forfeits 0-1

30 – Haines 4.Nf3 e6 5.Be2 Qb6 Ray Haines convinced me to try the Caro-Kann Defence in 1974. Soon I started winning with it. Ray won this one against Nathan Gates. Haines wrote: “I played Nathan Gates three times before. I played a Sicilian Defense as black in two of those games. I decided to play the Caro-Kann. I have always liked this opening. It was the first opening which I studied back when I started to study how to play. I know that many very strong players have played this opening in the past; like Botvinnik, Smyslov, Korchnoi, and Tim Sawyer.” [Very funny. Haines links me with these greats! Ray continues...] “The opening is a lot like the French only with the queen bishop out. I treated it like a French Defense in this game. The problem was that White used 8.c4 to open the game. I got the better game half way into the game and won on time.” Gates - Haines, Houlton Open (3), 03.06.2017 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 Bf5 4.Nf3 e6 5.Be2 Qb6 [5...Nd7 6.0-0 Ne7=] 6.Nbd2 Nd7 7.0-0 Ne7 8.c4 c5 [8...Ng6!?] 9.dxc5 Nxc5 [9...Qxc5!?] 10.cxd5 Nxd5 11.Nc4 Qd8 12.Nd4 a6 [12...Bg6 13.Nb5 Ne4 14.Qa4 Qd7 15.Ne3+-] 13.Nxf5 exf5 14.Re1 [14.Qc2 Qc8 15.Bf3 Nb4 16.Qe2+-] 14...Ne6 15.Bf3 Nb4 16.Bxb7 Rb8 17.Qa4+ Qd7 18.Qxd7+ Kxd7 19.Rd1+ Kc7 20.Bf3 Nc2 21.Rb1 Bc5 22.Ne3 [22.Bd2!] 22...Ncd4 23.Bd5 Rhd8 [23...Ne2+ =/+] 24.Bb3 [24.Bd2+/-] 24...Nxb3 25.axb3 Rxd1+ 26.Nxd1 Rxb3 27.Nc3 Bd4 28.Bd2 Bxe5 29.Rc1 Kb7 30.g3 Rxb2 31.Be3 Bd4 32.Bxd4 Nxd4 33.Rd1 Nf3+ 34.Kg2 Ne5 35.Rd5 f6 36.Na4 Rb5 37.Rd8 Kc6 38.Rg8 Rb7 39.Nc3 Ra7 40.h4 a5 41.f4 Ng4 42.Rc8+ Kd7 43.Rc5 a4 44.Ne2 a3 45.Rc1 a2 46.Ra1 Ne3+ 47.Kf3 Nc2 48.Rd1+ [Black will queen his a-pawn and win.] 0-1

31 – SlowBo 4.Nf3 e6 5.Be2 Ne7 At every skill level the Caro-Kann Defence might be met by the Advance Variation with3.e5. My favorite response as Black is to play 3...Bf5, getting the light squared bishop outside my pawn chain. My 3…Bf5 is followed by 4...e6 and eventually c6-c5, attacking White's d4 pawn. Here White played the solid 4.Nf3 line along with a sharp counter attack of 7.c4 hitting my d5 pawn. Mostly I play online blitz games. Once in a while I have a slow go with an opponent like "SlowBo". For this game the time control was a 25 minute game with 10 second increments. For a blitz player like me, the game seemed to last an eternity. I outplayed this computer chess engine in a good rook endgame. SlowBo (1905) - Sawyer (2181), ICC 25 10 Internet Chess Club, 07.07.2007 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 Bf5 4.Nf3 e6 5.Be2 Ne7 6.0-0 c5 7.c4 Nbc6 8.dxc5 d4 9.Qa4 Ng6 10.Qb5? [10.Rd1=] 10...Qd7 11.Rd1 Ngxe5 12.Nxe5 Nxe5 13.Qxd7+ Nxd7 14.c6 bxc6 15.Rxd4 Bc5 16.Rd1 00-0 17.g4 Bg6 [17...Bc2=/+] 18.Bg5 f6 19.Bh4 Ne5 20.Nc3 Rxd1+!? 21.Nxd1 [21.Rxd1 Rd8=/+] 21...Rd8 22.Kf1 Bd3 23.g5 Be7 24.gxf6 Bxf6 25.Bxf6 gxf6 26.Bxd3 Rxd3 27.b3 Ng4 28.Kg2 f5 29.b4 Rd2 30.a4 a6 31.b5 cxb5 32.axb5 axb5 33.cxb5 Kb7 34.h3 Nf6 35.Kf3 Nd5 36.h4 Rd3+ 37.Ne3 Nxe3 38.fxe3 Rb3 39.Rg1 Rxb5 40.Rg7+ Kc6 41.Rxh7 Rb4 42.h5 Rh4 43.Rh8 Kd5 44.h6 Ke5 45.h7 Rh6 46.Ke2 Ke4 47.Kf2 e5 48.Rc8 [Correct is 48.Kg3! Kxe3 49.Re8 f4+ 50.Kg4 Rxh7 51.Rxe5+ Kd4 52.Kxf4 Rf7+ 53.Rf5 Rxf5+ 54.Kxf5 with only two naked kings left on the board.] 48...Rxh7 49.Rc4+ Kd5 50.Rb4 Rh2+ 51.Kg3 Rc2 52.Ra4 Rc4 53.Ra3 [53.Ra2 Ke4=/+] 53...Ke4 54.Kf2 Rc2+ 55.Ke1 Rb2 [55...Kf3!-+] 56.Rc3? [56.Ra5! Rc2=/+] 56...Kf3 57.Kd1 e4 58.Ra3 Re2 59.Ra5 Kxe3 60.Rxf5 Rf2?! [60...Rd2+! 61.Ke1 Ra2-+] 61.Rb5? [Now the win is easy. White could make things more difficult with 61.Re5 Rf1+ 62.Kc2 Rg1=/+] 61...Rf1+ 62.Kc2 Ke2 63.Kc3 Rf8 64.Re5 e3 65.Kc2 Rc8+ 66.Kb2 Kf2 67.Rh5 e2 68.Rf5+ Ke1 69.Rf7 Rc5 70.Rd7 Kf2 71.Rf7+ Ke3 72.Re7+

Kd3 73.Re6 Rc4 74.Rxe2 Kxe2 75.Ka2 Kd3 76.Kb3 Rd4 77.Kb2 Rb4+ 78.Ka2 Kc2 79.Ka3 Rc4 80.Ka2 Ra4# 0-1

32 – Bosiocic 4.Nf3 e6 5.Be2 c5 White appeared to have the initiative in this Caro-Kann 3.e5 with 10.Bb5+, 11.g4, 12.f4, and 13.Qa4. Everything looked fine until Black fought back with 13...f5, 14...h6, 19...Rg6+, 20...Rxc3, and soon White was under a serious assault. Black’s move 27...Qxb2 sealed the deal with the threat of 28...Qxa1+ or 28...Qg2 mate in the game between Marin Bosiocic and Arik Braun. Bosiocic (2600) - Braun (2581), 27th TCh-CRO Div 1a 2018 Biograd na Moru CRO, 09.09.2018 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 Bf5 4.Nf3 e6 5.Be2 c5 6.0-0 Nc6 7.Be3 [7.c3=] 7...cxd4 8.Nxd4 Nxd4 9.Qxd4 Ne7 10.Bb5+ Nc6 11.g4!? [11.Nd2=] 11...Bg6 12.f4 [12.c4 a6=/+] 12...Qd7 13.Qa4 f5 [13...Rc8=/+] 14.g5 [14.exf6 gxf6 15.f5 exf5 16.Nc3=] 14...h6 15.gxh6 Rxh6 16.Nd2 Rc8 17.Bxc6 Rxc6 18.Qxa7 Bh5 19.c3 Rg6+ 20.Kh1 [20.Kf2 Rg4=/+] 20...Rxc3 21.Bd4 [21.Qd4 Rc2-+] 21...Rd3 22.Nb3 Qb5 23.Bc5 [23.Qb8+ Kf7 24.Qc7+ Kg8-+] 23...Bf3+ 24.Rxf3 Rxf3 25.Nd2 [25.Bf2 Qe2 26.Rg1 Rxf2 27.Qxf2 Qxf2 28.Rxg6 Qf1+ 29.Rg1 Qxf4-+] 25...Bxc5 26.Qb8+ Kd7 27.Nxf3 Qxb2 0-1

33 – Lingsell 4.Bd3 Bg6 5.f4 I played this Caro-Kann Defence game against Pelle Lingsell of Sweden. I chose the Advance Variation with 3.e5 Bf5 4.Bd3. 94% of the time Black captures on move four with 4...Bxd3 to exchange his bad bishop for White's good one. Black's choice to retreat to 4...Bg6 may have been an attempt to complicate matters or to take White out of the book. Whatever the reason, it worked in this game when I missed a tactic. In 2012 I defeated Pelle Lingsell in the Four Knights Game and in a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit Bogoljubow variation. It seems fair that I show this game where he won to balanced things out. Sawyer (1962) - Lingsell (2053), ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 17.11.2012 begins 1.d4 c6 2.e4 d5 3.e5 Bf5 4.Bd3 Bg6 5.f4 [5.e6!+/-] 5...e6 6.Nf3 Ne7 7.Nh4!? [7.0-0=] 7...c5 8.c3 Nbc6 9.Be3?! [9.dxc5=] 9...Qb6 10.Nxg6

hxg6 11.b3 Nf5 12.Bxf5 gxf5 13.Qd2? [13.0-0 Rc8=/+] 13...cxd4 14.Bxd4 Nxd4 15.Qxd4 Bc5 16.Qd2? Be3! 17.Qd3 Bxf4 18.g3 Bxe5 19.Nd2 Rc8 20.Rc1 Qa6 21.Qxa6 bxa6 22.c4 dxc4 [For one move Black misses 22...Bxg3+!-+] 23.Nxc4 Bxg3+ White resigns 0-1

3.e5 Bf5 4.Bd3 Bxd3 It is natural for Black to swap off his “bad” bishop, but he is also exchanging his only developed piece by 4…Bxd3.

34 – Amort 5.Qxd3 e6 6.b3 J.R. Capablanca taught me a deep respect for endgames. Thus I preferred openings like the Caro-Kann Defence where I could build up positional advantages. This game is in the 3.e5 Advance Variation where White chose the simple 4.Bd3, a move popular at the club level. Generally it implies a lack of ambition to push for an opening advantage. More theoretically challenging approaches involve developing either knight on move four. By 1981 my chess activity and rating were on a rapid rise. In October that year I played in a match for the Chaturanga Chess Club vs a team visiting from another club. Team events can be a lot of fun. You gather your friends to take on a team with someone else's friends. My opponent was Anthony Amort. Both our ratings were headed higher, and mine was about to pass his. Safety is job one. Weaker players lose material to tactics. Tony Amort and I were careful players. Activity is job two. My strategy gave me a more active bishop, rooks and king. White exchanged into the wrong endgame, so this contest became an easy win. Amort (1909) - Sawyer, Hatboro, PA team match, 27.10.1981 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 Bf5 4.Bd3 [Stronger players prefer 4.Nf3; 4.Nc3 or 4.h4] 4...Bxd3 5.Qxd3 e6 6.b3 c5 7.c3 cxd4 8.cxd4 Qa5+ 9.Bd2 Qa6 10.Qxa6 Nxa6 11.a3 Ne7 12.Nc3 Nc6 13.Nge2 Nc7 14.0-0 Be7 15.b4 a6 16.Na4 b5 17.Rfc1 bxa4 18.Rxc6 Nb5 19.Be3 Kd7 20.Rc2 Rhc8 21.Rca2 Rc4 22.Kf1 Rac8 23.Ke1 Nc3 24.Nxc3 Rxc3 25.Kd2 R3c4 26.Kd1 Kc6 27.Rc2 Kb5 28.Rxc4 Rxc4 29.Kd2 a5 30.bxa5 Kxa5 31.Kd3 Ka6 32.Bc1 f6 33.f4 Bd8 34.Bd2 f5 35.h3 h5 36.Rb1 Be7 37.Bb4? [Wrong endgame. White needs to swap rooks and keep his "bad" bishop on the board. 37.Rc1

Rxc1 38.Bxc1=] 37...Bxb4 38.Rxb4 [Headed for a pawn ending, but a rook ending is also lost for White. 38.axb4 Kb5 39.Ra1 Rxb4 40.Rc1 a3-+] 38...Rxb4 39.axb4 Kb5 40.Kc3 h4! 41.Kb2 Kxb4 42.Kc2 0-1

35 - Alexis 6.f4 Qa5+ 7.c3 The joy of playing correspondence chess in the days before the internet was meeting players from all over the world. Here it is Ray Alexis in APCT. One of my Jeffrey Baffo post detailed my correspondence career of 1085 games. Ray Alexis has a master ICCF rating of 2275 and a USCF correspondence rating of 2216. Ray Alexis was reported to be a friend of Anatoly Karpov and the editor of CHESS'N Stuff and of a periodical on chess stamps. American Postal Chess Tournaments run by Helen Warren and Jim Warren named most of their events after chess pieces. Each type of event was different. My game with Ray Alexis in 1993 was in Knight 328. This was a one round tournament where nine players faced the other eight simultaneously, four as White and four as Black. Our opening was a Caro-Kann Defence. In 1989-90, I won a lot of Latvian Gambit games. By 1991-1992, I was facing stronger opposition and losing with the Latvian. So I decided to return to the Caro-Kann Defence in the Advance Variation. Ray chose 3.e5 Bf5 4.Bd3 which seem tame. But calculation and pattern recognition skills far out trump opening theory when it comes to results. I chose the queen swapping maneuver 7...Qa6 from Atkins - Capablanca, London 1922. Alas, later I made a tactical blunder. Alexis (2133) - Sawyer (2003), N-328 corr APCT, 06.1993 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 Bf5 4.Bd3 Bxd3 5.Qxd3 e6 6.f4 Qa5+ [6...c5=] 7.c3 Qa6 8.Qh3 Ne7 9.Nd2 Nd7 10.Ne2 0-0-0 11.b4 h5 12.Nf3 Qd3?! [12...Nf5=] 13.Ng5! Qg6 14.0-0 Nb6 15.a4 Kd7? [15...Rd7 16.g4+/=] 16.g4!? [16.f5!+- breaks open the position in White favor.] 16...f5 17.exf6 Qxf6? [A

fatal blunder. Black had to play 17...gxf6 18.Nxe6 Re8 19.g5 Qf5= when the position appears defensible.] 18.Ng3 g6 19.Re1 1-0

36 – Muir 6.Nf3 Qa5+ 7.Qd2 The Caro-Kann Defence proves to be a solid defense vs typical White opening attacks, but Black plays for much more than stopping an onslaught. A key strategy for winning chess is to minimize White's pluses and maximize Black's pluses. In this game after a queen swap on move seven, White had exchanged two of his best attacking pieces. Black's knights and good dark squared bishop were left with excellent posts for operation. Good tactics are required for victory. Your chances improve with a good positional play such as a favorable pawn structure and effective squares for your pieces. Chess club players may choose normal developing moves that take you out of your prepared book. Beware of transpositions. In a Caro-Kann Defence my late friend Bob Muir answered 1.e4 c6 with 2.Nf3. However after 2...d5 3.e5 Bf5 4.d4 e6 5.Bd3 we reached the 3.e5 Bf5 4.Bd3 line by transposition. Bob Muir was a mainstay of the club at Lycoming College during the years I lived in Williamsport, Pennsylvania. There we just played games for fun. He and I played many times. Black exchanged White's active pieces: a queen, a rook, a bishop and a knight. The game ended with a bishop fork check that picks up a knight. Muir (1800) - Sawyer (2010), Williamsport PA 1997 begins 1.e4 c6 2.Nf3 d5 3.e5 Bf5 4.d4 e6 5.Bd3 Bxd3 6.Qxd3 Qa5+ 7.Qd2!? [7.Bd2 Qa6=] 7...Qxd2+ 8.Nbxd2 c5 9.c3 Nc6 10.0-0 cxd4 11.cxd4 Nge7 12.Nb3 Ng6 13.Bd2 Be7 14.Ne1 0-0 15.f4 Nh4 16.Nf3 Nxf3+ 17.Rxf3 g6 18.g4 Rfc8 19.a3 a5 20.Rc1? [20.a4=] 20...a4 21.Nc5? b6?! [Missing 21...Nxd4

22.Rfc3 Ne2+! with a winning fork.] 22.Nd7 Nxd4 23.Rf2 [23.Rxc8+ Rxc8-/+] 23...Nb3 24.Rxc8+ Rxc8 25.Bc3 Nc5 [25...d4! 26.Nxb6 Rc6 27.Bxd4 Nxd4-+] 26.Nxb6 [26.Bb4! Nxd7 27.Bxe7 Rc4-/+] 26...Rc6 27.Ba5 Ne4 28.Re2 Bc5+ 0-1

37 – Foesig 6.Nf3 Nd7 7.Bg5 In April of 1981, I played Harry Foesig in a train of three Caro-Kann Defence games at the North Penn Chess Club. There were two men named Harry Foesig in that area at that time. I believe they were father and son, Senior (1897-2003) and Junior (1925-2001). One of them wrote books about railroads and trolleys in the Philadelphia area. My guess is that Foesig, Sr. was the author and that Foesig, Jr. was my chess opponent. At that time I worked for Bamberger’s at the Montgomeryville Mall in the nearby North Wales area. I sold candy with pictures of four different stores, one on each side of the box. One side had Bamberger’s, and one had Macy's, which was our parent company. I do not remember the other two stores. Five years later Macy's rebranded its stores, eliminating all the other names. Macy's owned Bloomingdale's and all together Macy's became the largest U.S. department store at the time. Tracking my games I played Harry Foesig four times. I was White in a Slav Defence. The others were Caro-Kann Defence games with 3.Nc3. Here I deal with the issue of an early c2-c4 move in the Advance Variation. I did not allow White to take on d5. Instead I played 8.c4 dxc4. Black castled queenside, a rare idea after 3.e5, but I liked to castle on opposite sides. Both sides attacked the king but White dropped his queen to a tactical combination. Foesig (1600) - Sawyer (1887), Lansdale, PA 29.04.1981 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 Bf5 4.Bd3 Bxd3 5.Qxd3 e6 6.Nf3 Nd7 [6...c5!?] 7.Bg5 Qc7 8.c4 dxc4 9.Qxc4 h6 10.Bf4 Nb6 11.Qe2 0-0-0 12.0-0 g5 13.Be3 Ne7 14.g4?! [Opening lines to the wrong king! 14.a4=] 14...Ng6 15.Rc1?! [15.Nc3 Kb8=/+] 15...Be7 16.a4 Nd5 17.Nc3 Ndf4 18.Bxf4 Nxf4 19.Qf1? [Centralizing the queen might better deal with the coming attack. 19.Qe4 h5-/+] 19...h5 20.Nb5 Qd7 21.Nxa7+ Kb8 22.Qe1 [If 22.Nxc6+ bxc6 23.Qa6 Qb7-+] 22...hxg4 23.Nxc6+ bxc6 24.Nxg5 Bxg5 25.Qb4+ Qb7

26.Qc5 [Or 26.Rc4 Qxb4 27.Rxb4+ Kc7-+] 26...Rxd4 27.a5 Rd5 28.Qxc6 Rd1+ 29.Rxd1 Qxc6 0-1

38 – Keiser 6.Nf3 Nd7 7.0-0 Flashback to 1982: I played Art Keiser of Pennsylvania four APCT postal games on the same postcards. Two were Bird's Openings and two CaroKann Defences. Below is an Advance 4.Bd3 Variation which allows Black to swap off his bad bishop. I believe this was the same Arthur W. Keiser who died at the age of 92. The Bucks County Courier Times described him as being born on a farm and raised with a deep Christian faith and love of the earth. Art Keiser was devoted to church and family, who "remember him for his love of gardening, photography, chess, tennis, racquetball, model airplanes, and Spanish." In his final tournament at age 71 in 1993, Art Keiser ended up 41st out of 50 players in Hatboro. Art Keiser finished behind my friends Greg Nolan, Alan Lindy, Eric Tobias, Victor Snapstys and ahead of Robert Lovenstein. All were players that I faced myself. In this game White had the right idea, but, at the wrong time. White fell for a tactic that left White down the Exchange and a pawn. I was fortunate enough to win all my games vs Keiser. Keiser (1856) - Sawyer (2100), corr APCT 1982 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 Bf5 4.Bd3 Bxd3 5.Qxd3 e6 6.Nf3 Nd7 7.0-0 Qc7 [7...Ne7=] 8.a3 Ne7 9.b4 a5 10.Bd2 a4 11.b5 c5 12.c4 cxd4 13.cxd5 Nxe5 [13...Nxd5!=/+] 14.Nxe5 Qxe5 15.dxe6 fxe6 16.Re1 Qd5 17.f4? [Correct is 17.Re4 e5 18.f4=] 17...g6?! [17...Rc8!-/+] 18.Re5? [White should play 18.Bb4= now!] 18...Qd7 19.Bb4 Bg7 20.Re4 [20.Nd2 Nd5-/+] 20...Nd5 21.Bc5? Rd8 [More accurate is 21...Rc8! 22.Bb4 Rc1+ 23.Kf2 Ne3-+] 22.Nd2 b6 23.Bxd4? [23.Bb4 Nxb4 24.axb4 0-0 25.Rxa4 Rc8-/+] 23...Nxf4 24.Rxf4 Bxd4+ 25.Rxd4 Qxd4+ 26.Qxd4 Rxd4 27.Nf3 Rd3 28.Kf2 Rb3 29.Nd4 0-0+ 30.Kg1 Rb2 31.h4 Rff2 32.Nxe6 Rxg2+ 33.Kh1 Rh2+ 0-1

3.e5 Bf5 4.Nc3 e6 With the move 4.Nc3, White signals that he has no intention of a slow build up with c2-c3. For better or worse, the knight on c3 is ready for action.

39 – Barnes 5.Nf3 Qb6 6.Be3 Starting on 7/7/77 I received my first APCT event pairings. Helen Warren of Illinois did a great as the tournament director of the American Postal Chess Tournaments organization. I played hundreds of games with APCT over a 20 year period. This game was from my first APCT section. The Rook was the annual club championship. The Rook was an Open event for players of all levels. The first round was played in seven player sections. Each player had three games as White and three as Black in a round robin. Winners advanced to the next round and played other winners. Some first round games led to easy wins by the higher players. Typically the games with the fewer moves finished earlier. They were usually vs the weaker opponents. All six games were in progress at the same time. Against Tim Barnes I played the Caro-Kann Defence which was my standard defence at the time. White first played 2.Nc3 but then transposed into the Advance Variation 3.e5. There is not much to say beyond the fact that my fifth move may have been a little risky. By the 10th move, I had won a pawn and a knight. Barnes - Sawyer, corr APCT 77R-11 (1), 08.1977 begins 1.e4 c6 2.Nc3 d5 3.e5 Bf5 4.d4 e6 5.Nf3 Qb6 6.Be3 [6.Nh4+=] 6...Qxb2 7.Qb1 Ba3 8.Na4

Qxb1+ 9.Rxb1 Bxc2 10.Rxb7 Bxa4 11.Bd3 a6 12.0-0 Bb5 13.Rb1 Nd7 14.Rb3 Be7 15.Bxb5 axb5 16.Rb2 Bd8 17.h3 Nb6 18.Ng5 Ne7 19.g4 Nc4 0-1

40 – Trull 5.Nf3 e6 6.Be2 Qc7 I don't know who was the oldest chess player I faced. Certainly my opponent in this game had to be near that upper end. Edgar V. Trull was a long time postal chess player competing from at least the 1940s to the 1980s. Trull was a former US Army Sergeant who lived the latter part of his life in Texas. I think his military background helped his chess play. Edgar Valentine Trull was born in upper New York State on September 3, 1896. My guess is that he was the son of a medical doctor with the exact same name who was born around 1854 and who himself lived in Bennington, Vermont (near upper New York state). The chess playing Edgar V. Trull passed away on December 6, 1990 at the age of 94. He was buried at the Fort Sam Houston National Cemetery, San Antonio, Texas. From the games in my database Edgar Trull was a consistent 1.e4 e5 player from either side of the board. We only played once, when he was 82-83 years old. He was rated around 1788. My game with Trull began as a Caro-Kann Defence. White chose the Advance Variation. Although this can be a positional line, it is known for the sharp tactics possible when Black counter-attacks with pawns to f6 and / or to c5. It is most common for Black to develop his light squared bishop immediately with 3…Bf5. Trull (1788) - Sawyer, corr APCT Q-36, 1978 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 Bf5 4.Nf3 e6 5.Nc3 Nd7 6.Be2 Qc7 [Now White's knight leaves the protection of his e5/d4 pawns and goes after my bishop.] 7.Nh4 Bg6 8.0-0 a6 [The point of this move is to play c5 without allowing Nb5 attacking the Qc7.] 9.b3 c5 10.Nxg6 [Maybe better is 10.Bb2=] 10...hxg6 11.Bf4 cxd4 12.Qxd4 Bc5 13.Qd3 Nxe5 [Black has won a pawn. Black's center pawns advance on White. I win the skirmish.]14.Qg3 Bd6-+ 15.h3 Nf6 16.Na4 Ne4 17.Qe3 b5 18.Nb2 Bc5 19.Bxe5? Qxe5 20.Nd3 Bxe3 21.Nxe5 Bd4 22.Nf3 Bxa1 23.Rxa1 0-0 24.Nd4 e5 25.Nf3 Nc3 26.Bf1 f6 27.Nh4 g5 28.Nf5 g6 29.Ne3 f5 30.Nd1 Nxd1 31.Rxd1 Rfd8 32.g3 Kf7 33.Bg2 Ke6 34.f4 e4 35.fxg5 Rac8 36.Rd2 Rc3 37.g4 Rdc8 38.gxf5+ gxf5 39.a4 bxa4

40.bxa4 Rxc2 41.Rxc2 Rxc2 42.Bf1? d4 43.Bxa6 d3 44.Kf1 Rc1+ 45.Kf2 f4 46.h4 d2 0-1

41 – ATtheGreat 5.g4 Bg6 6.Nge2 In 2006 I played a blitz game vs my chess friend “ATtheGreat” on the Internet Chess Club. He pushed my Caro-Kann Defence with the aggressive 3.e5 Bf5 4.Nc3 e6 5.g4 attack. His bold play in this variation threatened to overrun my kingside. When facing such tactics, you must not allow your opponent to walk all over your position. Don’t become a punching bag. Fight back! Black must aim directly at the White pawns, such as those on g4, e5, d4 or c2. This game is an example of the Black pieces getting around and through the pawn to destroy the White position. An opening like the Caro-Kann Defence normally leads to a slower beginning with a methodical approach. There was no time for a slow set-up here. If Black attacked slowly White would catch up in development and crush Black. This time the tables were turned on White's early assault. Black won this short quick contest. ATtheGreat (1500) - Sawyer (2407), ICC 2 12 u Internet Chess Club, 01.09.2006 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 Bf5 4.Nc3 e6 5.g4 Bg6 6.Nge2 Ne7 [6...c5 7.h4 h5=] 7.f4 h5 8.Ng3? [8.f5 exf5 9.g5=] 8...hxg4 9.Qxg4 Nf5!? [9...Bxc2!-+] 10.Bg2 [10.Nxf5 Bxf5-+] 10...Nxg3?! [10...Nxd4-+] 11.Qxg3 [11.hxg3 Rxh1+ 12.Bxh1 Bxc2-/+] 11...Bxc2 12.Bd2 Qh4 [12...Qb6!-+] 13.0-0 Qxg3 [13...Qh7!-+] 14.hxg3 g6 15.Rac1 Bd3 16.Rf2 Nd7 17.Nd1 c5 18.Bc3 Rc8 19.Ne3 cxd4 0-1

42 – Niemi 6.Nge2 c5 7.h4 Greg Niemi demonstrated how to beat the Caro-Kann Defence with the aggressive Advance Variation. His approach included several key pawn pushes on odd numbered moves such as 3.e5, 5.f4, 7.h4, 9.f4, and 11.f5. I failed to stop the pawns or to fight back accurately. While 3.e5 leads to a temporary closed center, White opened up the position and caught my king in the middle. It was a nice crushing win for Greg Niemi. He was an active USCF rated Expert from Las Vegas, Nevada. This was our only game. In my correspondence games from the late 1990s, I thought I could play email chess as I had played postal chess for 20 years. That was a serious flaw that cost me hundreds of rating points. They were both correspondence, but there was a big difference. In postal chess, an active player would have 30-50 games in progress at one time. That translates to 6-8 tournament moves per day. If you spent 15-30 minutes per move, which included writing out the postcards that was a couple hours per day. With email, transmission time was instant. I was presented with 30-50 moves per day. At the speed in which I had played postal that could take me all day to analyze those games. To squeeze them all into just a couple hours of available chess time around work and family time. Therefore, I spent much less time on email games than I had on postal play where I had been a master. Most of my opponents knew better than to foolishly overcommit like I had. It was like I was playing a simul and they were playing tournament speed. I lost a lot of games to good players in 1996 and 1997. They played very well vs me. Here is an example. Niemi (2000) - Sawyer (1897), EMQ-4 corr APCT, 15.04.1997 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 Bf5 4.Nc3 e6 5.g4 Bg6 6.Nge2 c5 7.h4 cxd4!? [7...h5!=]

8.Nxd4 h5 9.f4 hxg4 10.Bb5+ Nd7 11.f5 Rxh4 12.Rf1 Rh5 [It appears White has the advantage after 12...exf5 13.e6 fxe6 14.Qe2 Qe7 15.Bg5+/-] 13.fxg6 Qh4+ 14.Ke2 Rxe5+ 15.Be3 f5? [15...0-0-0 16.Qd2+/=] 16.Nxe6! Rxe6 [Or 16...g3 17.Nxd5 Qh2+ 18.Kf3 Qh5+ 19.Kxg3+-] 17.Bxd7+ Kxd7 18.Qxd5+ Bd6 19.Qxb7+ 1-0

43 – Byrnes 6.Nge2 c5 7.h4 Joseph J. Byrnes challenged my Caro-Kann Defence. White played the critical line 3.e5 Bf5 4.Nc3. This was played in 1996 when email was first becoming popular. My game vs Byrnes is typical of the 4.Nc3 e6 5.g4 line in the Caro-Kann Advance. Being from email, it was a fast approach to the slow process of correspondence play. This ended up being an unbalanced wild and crazy game. We both were winning at various points in the game. Finally we agreed to a draw. Byrnes (1900) - Sawyer (1960), EMQ-2 corr APCT, 05.12.1996 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 Bf5 4.Nc3 e6 5.g4 Bg6 6.Nge2 c5 7.h4 h5 8.Nf4 Nc6 [8...Bh7=] 9.Nxg6 fxg6 10.Ne2 Nge7!? [10...Qc7=] 11.c3!? cxd4 12.cxd4? [12.Nxd4=] 12...hxg4 13.Nf4 Kd7 [13...Qb6!=/+] 14.Qxg4 Nxd4 15.Be3 [15.Bb5+!?] 15...Nc2+ 16.Kd2 Nxa1 17.Bb5+ Nc6? [17...Kc8 18.Qxe6+ Kb8=] 18.Nxe6 Qa5+ [18...Bb4+ 19.Ke2+-] 19.Kd1 Kc8 20.Nc5+?! [White should grab the free bishop with 20.Nxf8+! Kb8 21.Bc5+-] 20...Kb8 21.e6? [This gives Black a chance. Correct is 21.Qd7+-] 21...a6? [21...Bd6-+ and Black is winning.] 22.Nd7+ [Even better is 22.Qg3+! Kc8 23.Bxc6 bxc6 24.e7!+- with a crushing attack.] 22...Kc7 23.Bb6+ Qxb6 24.Nxb6 Kxb6 25.Bxc6 bxc6 26.Qxg6 Rh6 27.Qf7 [27.Qg4+/-] 27...Rf6 28.Qd7 Ra7 29.Qd8+ Kc5 [29...Rc7 30.Re1+/=] 30.Qa5+ Kd6 31.Re1 Re7 32.Qxa6 [Best is 32.b4! Rfxe6 33.Qd8+ Rd7 34.Qxf8+!+- winning the bishop.] 32...Rexe6 33.Rxe6+ Rxe6 34.Qa3+ c5 1/2-1/2

Book 4: Chapter 3 – Exchange & Panov 3.exd5 cxd5 White often takes the pawn on d5 at the first opportunity.

44 – Moyer 4.Nf3 Bf5 5.Be2 Club players answer the Caro-Kann Defence with the natural play 3.exd5 known as the Exchange Variation. In this game White played 1.e4 c6 2.Nf3. It is a line that transposes easily. Black played 2...d5. Now after 3.exd5 cxd5 4.d4 we reached a position that could arise after 2.d4, 3.exd5 and 4.Nf3. Central square battles followed. Black had better chances on the queenside and White on the kingside, but tactics trump strategy. As I recall Phil Moyer was a regular at the North Penn Chess Club at that time. Here Moyer attacked my Black army. I stopped his plans to win material or checkmate me. After the attack ended and Black had won two pawns, White resigned. The club met in Lansdale, Pennsylvania, a few miles northwest of Philadelphia. This is my only recorded game with Moyer. At that time I was playing a lot of postal chess. I worked full time and took classes toward a master’s degree (not in chess). Moyer - Sawyer, Lansdale, PA 15.04.1981 begins 1.e4 c6 2.Nf3 d5 3.exd5 cxd5 4.d4 Bf5!? [4...Nc6=] 5.Be2 Nf6 6.0-0 e6 7.Bg5 Be7 8.Bb5+ Nc6 9.Ne5 [9.Bd3=] 9...Qc7 10.Nc3 0-0 11.Bxf6 Bxf6 12.f4 a6 13.Be2? [13.Bxc6 bxc6=] 13...Bxe5 [13...Qb6!-+] 14.fxe5 Qb6 15.Nxd5 Qxb2 16.c3 [16.Rxf5 exf5-/+] 16...exd5 17.Rxf5 Qxc3 18.Rf4 Qe3+ 19.Rf2 Nxd4 20.Bg4 Qxe5 21.Qf1 Ne6 22.Re1 Qd6 23.Rf5 f6 [23...g6!-+] 24.Rxd5 Qb6+ 25.Kh1 Ng5 26.Rd7 Rad8 27.Qc4+ Kh8 28.Bf5 [28.Rde7

Qf2-/+] 28...Rxd7 29.Bxd7 Qd6 30.Bc8 b5 31.Qg4 Rd8 32.h4 Nf7 33.Qd7 Qxd7 [33...Qf8!-+] 34.Bxd7 Ne5 35.Bh3 h5 36.Kg1 Ng4 0-1

45 – hapster 4.Nf3 Nc6 5.Be2 Winning is not always hard. In fact, winning can be easy. This is illustrated in a three minute game I played. White chose to play the Caro-Kann Defence Exchange Variation with an early Nf3. My approach was to use General Principles. Consider these: 1. Play faster than your opponent in blitz chess. That was a challenge in this game because my opponent did play very fast. 2. Develop faster than your opponent. After 12 moves I had played all my pieces except my Ra8, which was already on a good square since advancing my a-pawn was a likely scenario. 3. Swap off your weakest pieces. 13...Bxf3 was a good example. 4. Grab open files (Rfc8), diagonals (Bd6) and outposts (Nc4/Ne4) for active play. 5. Attack your opponent's weak points: a4, c3. 6. Keep your king safe: 9...0-0; 22...h6. 7. Threaten undefended material and look for a tactical finish. As it usually happens, this game was decided by a tactical blunder. hapster - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 29.03.2012 begins 1.e4 c6 2.Nf3 [Many of blitz players intend to answer both 1.e4 e5 and 1.e4 c5 with 2.Nf3. After they play 1.e4, the mouse has already clicked on 2.Nf3 when they see my move. It is not a blunder, but it limits White's choices.] 2...d5 3.exd5 cxd5 4.d4 Nc6 [4...Nf6 is more popular.] 5.Be2 Bg4 [Black gets to swap off his bad bishop.] 6.Nbd2 e6 7.c3 Nf6= [Black has equalized.] 8.Qc2 Bd6 9.a3 0-0 10.b4 Qc7 [Black has just about completed his development. White has three weak points: A. Ke1; B. Bc1; C. Pc3.] 11.b5 Na5 12.Rb1 Rfc8 13.Bb2 Bxf3 14.Nxf3 Nc4 15.Bxc4 Qxc4 16.a4 a6 17.Qe2 [White decides he wants to castle, but my queen hits f1. So he offers a queen swap.] 17...Ne4 [Black brings in more reinforcements, but he can just pick off the pawn now: 17...Qxa4-+] 18.Qxc4 Rxc4 19.bxa6 bxa6 20.0-0 Rxa4 [Black wins a pawn almost without effort.] 21.Rfc1 Rc4 22.Ba1 h6 [White is not going anywhere. Black takes a moment to eliminate the possibility of a back rank mate.] 23.h3 Bf4 24.Rc2 Rac8

25.Rb3 a5 26.Ra3 a4 27.g3 Bd6 [Retreat and attack at the same time. White only sees the retreat.] 28.Kg2? [White was forced to play 28.Raa2 Nxc3-+ and Black has won another pawn.] 28...Bxa3 0-1

46 – Dest 4.Nf3 Nc6 5.Nc3 If you play the Caro-Kann Defence at the club level, there are natural lines that you will see very often. One is 1.e4 c6 2.Nf3. This can easily transpose to the Exchange Variation after 2...d5 3.exd5 cxd5 4.d4. What is the difference between this move order and the normal move order 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 cxd5 4.Nf3? They reach the same position, but White had better options instead of 4.Nf3 in the second line. White could attack the d5 pawn with 4.c4. White could also hinder the development of the Black bishop with 4.Bd3. Via the move order 2.Nf3, the move 4.Nf3 does neither. Black is left to attack d4 with 4...Nc6 and pin the Nf3 with 5...Bg4. At the Williamsport chess club at Lycoming College Mike Dest and I played an unrated offhand game. I do not remember if we used a clock or not. Probably it was not a blitz game. Most of our games were slow enough so that I could write down the moves. That would be Game 30 or without a clock at all. Black was allowed to freely attack in this variation. He picked off one White pawn after another as pieces were exchanged. The players entered a double rook and pawn endgame. The White king was flushed out of the pocket like a quarterback. Within a few moves the king was sacked in the center of the board and checkmated on e5 by a pawn. Dest - Sawyer, Williamsport, PA 1997 begins 1.e4 c6 2.Nf3 d5 3.exd5 cxd5 4.d4 Nc6 [or 4...Nf6] 5.Nc3 Bg4 6.Be2 e6 7.Bg5 [7.h3=] 7...Qb6 [7...Be7=] 8.b3 [8.0-0=] 8...Bxf3 [8...Bb4!-+] 9.Bxf3 Qxd4 10.Qxd4 Nxd4 11.0-0 Nxf3+ 12.gxf3 a6 [12...Rc8!-+] 13.Rfe1 Be7 14.Bf4 [14.Bxe7 Nxe7-/+] 14...Rc8 15.Na4 Rxc2 [15...b5!-+] 16.Be5? Bf6 17.Bxf6 Nxf6

18.Nb6 Nd7 [18...Rc6!-+] 19.Nxd7 Kxd7 20.Re5 Rhc8 21.Ree1 Rb2 22.Kg2 Rcc2 23.a4 Rxf2+ 24.Kg3 Rg2+ 25.Kf4 Rxb3 26.Rg1 g5+ 27.Ke5 Ke7 28.Rab1 Re2+ 29.Kd4 Rd2+ 30.Ke5 f6# 0-1

47 – Taormina 4.Nf3 Nc6 5.Bb5 The Caro-Kann Exchange Variation is played by people of all skill levels and experience. Some grandmasters love it. Players at the club level sometimes just stubble into it. After the opening moves 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5, the pawn on e4 is under attack. What does White do when in danger of dropping a pawn? White captures a pawn. Take that! Or on second thought, I’ll take that! One night at the Williamsport chess club, I found myself playing Daniel Taormina. I don’t remember much about him. I imagine that work or family kept him busy, but he seemed to enjoy playing chess when he could make it to the club. Daniel exchanged pawns on move three. He avoided the normal 4.Bd3. Instead he played an early 2.Nf3. After 4.d4 came 5.Bb5. Our game here proceeded normally until the White pieces got a little loose. Instead of protecting his pieces, White started attacking the Black pieces. Then White committed a counting error when pieces were being exchanged. Black picked up a two for one and won a piece. Many Caro-Kann Defense games last a long time. This had to be one of my shorter Black wins with this defence. Taormina - Sawyer, Williamsport, PA 1995 begins 1.e4 c6 2.Nf3 d5 3.exd5 cxd5 4.d4 Nc6 5.Bb5 Bg4 6.Bxc6+ bxc6 7.h3 Bf5 [7...Bxf3 8.Qxf3 e6=] 8.0-0 e6 9.Bf4 Bd6 10.Ne5 [10.Bxd6 Qxd6 11.Nbd2=] 10...Qc7 11.Nd2? [11.Qd2=] 11...f6 12.g4 fxe5 [12...Be4!-+] 13.Bxe5 [13.dxe5 Bxe5 14.Bxe5 Qxe5=/+] 13...Bxe5 14.dxe5 Bg6 0-1

48 – Fuchs 4.Nc3 Bf5 5.Nf3 How did players with different languages from many countries conduct postal chess games? If they did not speak the same language, how then could they communicate their chess moves? The International Correspondence Chess Federation (ICCF) play was conducted on written postcards or in letters. Sometimes I used air grams. These I bought at the post office. They were one sheet of paper cut to fold into an envelope with prepaid postage. The moves were written by me on the inside. ICCF used numerical notation made up of four digit codes. It was similar to long algebraic notation. The numerical board is a grid with a1 being 11, a8 being 18, and h8 being 88. Thus e2-e4 is 5254; Ngf6 is 7866, etc. One opponent in my first attempt at an ICCF event was Rainer Fuchs. I think he was from West Germany. Back then the country of Germany was split into East and West. This nation was literally separated by a wall. Postal chess was very popular on both sides of Germany. Those two Germanys were ranked #1 and #2 in total number of postal players. I think the USSR and USA were ranked #3 and #4. Our game transposed to an unorthodox Caro-Kann Defence 3.exd5 line where White played an early Nc3. Neither side got a serious advantage out of the opening. At the time I withdrew from the event, our position was equal.

Fuchs - Sawyer, corr ICCF 1978 begins 1.e4 c6 2.Nc3 d5 3.exd5 cxd5 4.d4 Bf5 5.Nf3 e6 6.Bb5+ Nc6 7.0-0 [7.Ne5] 7...a6 [7...Bd6] 8.Ba4 Be7 9.Re1 Nf6 10.Ne5 Rc8 11.Qe2 Qb6 12.Bxc6+ bxc6 13.Na4 Qb5 14.b3 Qxe2 15.Rxe2 c5 16.c3 cxd4 17.cxd4= 1-0 [Black withdrew]

49 – Bryan 4.Bd3 g6 5.c3 Nf6 My wife asked me, "Do you remember when the Patriots were terrible?" Oh yes, I do. They were in Boston at that time. Later they moved to Foxboro. They became the New England Patriots and became a dynasty. "New England" is the region of six states in the northeast corner of the USA, all east of New York State. Jarod Bryan is a FIDE master from Maine. Playing Black was my longtime friend Ray Haines. He did well in this contest. Bryan (2215) - Haines (1953), Orono ME (3), 17.10.1987 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 cxd5 4.Bd3 [The solid Exchange Variation. More aggressive is 4.c4 the Panov Variation.] 4...g6 [The most common line is 4...Nc6 5.c3 Nf6 (5...Qc7 GM Schandorff) 6.Bf4 Bg4 7.Qb3 Qc8 (7...e5!? is a rare trick play that might work well.) 8.Nd2 e6 9.Ngf3 Be7 10.0-0 00=] 5.c3 Nf6 6.Nf3 Bg7 7.0-0 0-0 8.h3 Nc6 9.Re1 Qc7 10.Bg5 a6 11.a4 b6 12.Qe2 Ra7 13.Nbd2 [13.Qe3 with the idea to exchange of dark squared bishops.] 13...Nh5 14.Qe3 f6 15.Bh4?! [Fourth down and White punts the ball away. He could have plunged ahead with 15.Bh6 or even gone for it big time with 15.g4!? fxg5 16.gxh5 with chances for both sides.] 15...e5 16.dxe5 [16.c4!] 16...fxe5 17.Bf1 e4 18.Nd4 Nxd4 19.cxd4 Qc2?! [Black needs to move the queen so his Ra7 can add to the pressure on White's position. A good move is 19...Qd6-/+] 20.Qc3? [This is a mistake that gives Black the lead for the rest of the game. A master does not want to draw with an A player, but he could have a draw with 20.Rec1 Qxb2 21.Nb3= because the Black queen is trapped on b2; White can force a repetition by attacking it with rooks. Another try to keep the game alive is 20.a5!?=] 20...Qxc3 21.bxc3 Rc7 [21...Bh6!-+ attacking the undefended knight and could prove inconvenient for White.] 22.Nb1 h6 23.g4 Nf4 24.Ra2 g5 25.Bg3 Rc6 26.Re3 [26.f3!?] 26...h5 27.gxh5 Nxh3+ 28.Kh2 Nf4 29.Be2 Rh6 30.Rb2 Nxe2 31.Rexe2 Bg4 32.Re3 Rxh5+ [Black has won a pawn, but even more important is his strong attack on the vulnerable White king.] 33.Kg1 Bf3 34.Bh2 Rf6 35.Nd2 g4 36.Nf1 Bh6 37.Re1 Bf4! [The bishop clears h6 for a rook and attacks the poor Bh2.] 38.Ng3 Rh3 39.Reb1 Bc7 40.c4 Rfh6 41.Rxb6 [White throws a "Hail Mary" pass.] 41...Bxb6 [Intercepted.]

42.Rxb6 Rxb6 [White resigns. 42...Rxg3+ Black could run it back for a touchdown with 43.fxg3 Rxb6 44.Kf2 Rb3 45.cxd5 e3+ 46.Ke1 Rb1# mate] 0-1

50 – Ellison 4.Bd3 g6 5.Bf4 Bg7 Ray Haines showed that it is not the piece placement nor pawn structure that mattered most. What matters most is how you use what you have in order to play aggressive chess. In this game Ray attacks as Black in the Caro-Kann Defence 3.exd5 Exchange Variation. His opponent with the White pieces was Bill Ellison. Ellison - Haines, Orono 1986 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 cxd5 4.Bd3 g6 5.Bf4 Bg7 [Two other ...g6 ideas employ ...Nh6 as seen in Chess Openings for White, Explained combining the Lev Alburt name and fame with the Roman Dzindzichasvili the opening repertoire: 5...Nc6 6.c3 Nh6 7.Nf3 Bg7 (or 7...Bf5) 8.0-0 0-0 9.Re1 f6] 6.c3 Nf6 7.Nf3 Nc6 8.0-0 0-0 9.Nbd2 a6 [9...Nh5!?] 10.a4 b6 11.Re1 Nh5 12.Be3 Rb8 13.Nf1 f6 14.h3 e5 15.dxe5 fxe5 [Black is on the attack.] 16.Bg5 Qc7 17.Be2 Qf7 18.Be3 h6 19.Qd2 Kh7 20.g4 Nf4 21.Bxf4 exf4 22.Bd3 Qf6 23.Qe2 d4 24.c4 Bb7 25.h4 Nb4 26.g5 Qd6 27.h5?! [27.gxh6 Bf6=/+] 27...Nxd3 28.Qxd3 Rf5=/+ [First chopping off the knight makes the rook lift stronger. 28...Bxf3! 29.Qxf3 Rf5!-/+] 29.N1h2 Qc6?+/- [29...hxg5=/+] 30.Re7 Kh8 31.gxh6 Bf6 32.hxg6?-+ [32.Rxb7 Rxb7 33.hxg6 Rh5 34.Re1=] 32...Rg5+ 33.Kf1 Bxe7 34.Ne5? [Hanging a piece and exposing the White king.] 34...Qh1+ 35.Ke2 Rxe5+ 36.Kd2 Bb4+?-+ [36...Qxa1-+ leads to a faster win.] 37.Kc2 Qxh2 [37...Qxa1-+] 38.Qxd4 Be4+ 39.Kb3 Qh3+ 40.Ka2 Qe6 41.Rd1 Bxg6 42.Rg1 Re8 43.Qxf4? Re4 44.Qc7 Re7 [44...Bf7!-+ Turns the mate threats in the opposite direction.] 45.Qb8+ Kh7 46.Qg3 Qxc4+ 47.Qb3 Qxb3+ 48.Kxb3 a5 49.Rd1 Bf7+ 50.Kc2 Re2+ 51.Kd3 White resigns in the face of mate in three. 0-1

3.exd5 cxd5 4.Bd3 Nc6 5.c3 This is the main line of the Caro-Kann Exchange variation.

51 – Tretter 5…Qc7 6.Ne2 Bg4 Knight takes bishop on g6. That's normal in a Caro-Kann Defence. White gets the bishop pair. Black swaps off his bad bishop. Everybody is happy. What could go wrong? When the internet was young, I defended a Caro-Kann against Terry Tretter. This reminded me of a girls’ softball game with my queen as the star player. White played the Exchange Variation 3.exd5 cxd5 4.Bd3 Nc6 5.c3. I countered with 5...Qc7 (Play ball! The girl gets in the batter's box). Black is a tempo down from where White is in a Queens Gambit Declined Exchange Variation. Terry Tretter played reasonably well, but after 14.Nxg6 hxg6, I was able to castle queenside. Since I had recaptured with the h-pawn, I had an open hfile. In this game the Black queen "ran the bases" tactically. Black scored an inside the park (the board) home run starting with: 11...Qxd6 (first base), 19...Qb6+ (second base), 20...Qxb2 (third base), and 21...Qxh2# checkmate (home plate). Black has scored the winning run. Tretter - Sawyer, corr Internet 1995 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 cxd5 4.Bd3 Nc6 5.c3 Qc7 [5...Nf6 6.Bf4=] 6.Ne2 [6.Nf3=] 6...Bg4 [6...e6=] 7.f3 [7.0-0=] 7...Bh5 [7...Bd7 8.Bf4 e5! Lakdawala] 8.Bf4 Qd7 9.Nd2 e6 10.0-0 Bd6 11.Bxd6 Qxd6 12.g3 Nge7 13.Nf4 Bg6 14.Nxg6 hxg6 15.f4 Nf5 16.Bxf5 [16.Qe2=] 16...gxf5 17.Nf3 0-0-0 18.Ne5 [18.Qe2=] 18...Nxe5 19.dxe5? [19.fxe5 Qa6=/+] 19...Qb6+ 20.Qd4 Qxb2 21.Qxa7 Qxh2# 0-1

52 – Ortiz Suarez 5...Qc7 6.Ne2 Bg4 The Exchange Variation of the Caro-Kann Defence resembles a Queens Gambit Exchange in reverse. White plays Qc2 in QGD. In CKD Black may play 5...Qc7 to hinder 6.Bf4. White prepared 9.Bf4 with 6.Ne2 combined with 8.Qb3. White’s queenside queen invasion was answered by Black queenside rook invasion. Then a mistake on move 18 led to a big White advantage in the game between Isan Reynaldo Ortiz Suarez vs Yusnel Bacallao Alonso. Ortiz Suarez (2543) - Bacallao Alonso (2605), 55th ch-CUB Absoluto 2018 Havana CUB (3.4), 04.02.2018 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 cxd5 4.Bd3 Nc6 5.c3 Qc7 6.Ne2 Bg4 7.0-0 [7.f3 Bd7=] 7...Bh5 [7...Nf6 8.Qe1 e6 9.f3 Bh5 10.Qh4 h6 11.Qh3 Bd6=] 8.Qb3 e6 9.Bf4 Bd6 10.Bxd6 Qxd6 11.Qxb7 Rb8 12.Qa6 Rxb2 13.Na3? [13.Nf4=] 13...Bxe2 14.Bxe2 Rxe2 15.Nb5 Qd7 16.Nxa7 Qxa7 [16...Nxa7 17.Rfb1 Ne7 18.Rb8+ Nac8 19.Qxe2 0-0=] 17.Qxc6+ Qd7 18.Qa6 Rb2? [18...Rc2 19.Rfb1 Rxc3=] 19.Rfb1 Rxb1+ 20.Rxb1 Qd8 [20...f6 21.Rb7+-] 21.Qa7 Ne7 22.Rb8 Nc8 23.Qc5 Kd7 24.Rb7+ Ke8 25.Qc6+ Kf8 26.Rd7 Qe8 27.Qc7 1-0

53 – Aronian 5…Nf6 6.h3 g6 Fabiano Caruana won a bishop for a knight and got an open file in a CaroKann Defence Exchange Variation. But Levon Aronian turned the table. That happens in blitz games at any level. Black had two bishops vs two knights, but exchanges on moves 22 and 23 left both the Black bishops en prise. Only one could be saved. After Aronian won a bishop, Caruana resigned. Aronian (2767) - Caruana (2822), chess.com Speed 1m+1spm 2017 chess.com INT (22), 24.07.2018 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 cxd5 4.c3 Nc6 5.Bd3 Nf6 6.h3 g6 [6...e5 7.dxe5 Nxe5 8.Nf3 Nxd3+ 9.Qxd3 Bd6=] 7.Qc2 [7.Nf3 Qc7 8.Qc2 Nh5 9.0-0 Nf4=] 7...e5 8.dxe5 Nxe5 9.Nd2 [9.Be3=] 9...Nxd3+ 10.Qxd3 Bd6 [10...Bg7 11.Qe2+ Be6 12.Nb3 0-0=/+] 11.Ngf3 0-0 [11...Qe7+ 12.Qe2 Qxe2+ 13.Kxe2 0-0=/+] 12.0-0 Bf5 13.Qd4 Re8 14.Rd1 Rc8 15.Nb3 Be4 16.Bg5 Re6 [16...Bxf3 17.Re1 Be4

18.Bxf6=] 17.Nfd2 Qe7 18.Re1 Kg7 19.Rad1 [19.Qxa7+/=] 19...Bc2 20.Rxe6 fxe6 [20...Qxe6 21.Rc1 Bxb3 22.Nxb3 Re8=] 21.Re1 b6 [21...Bxb3 22.Nxb3+/-] 22.Bxf6+ Qxf6 23.Rxe6 Qxd4 24.Nxd4 Bc5 [24...Bf4 25.Re7+ Kf6 26.Rxa7+-] 25.Nxc2 1-0

54 – Rosenthal 5…Nf6 6.Nf3 Bg4 I drew Nicholas Rosenthal at the Florida State Championship in Naples, Florida. Below was our rematch in Cocoa Beach. This was his 20th USCF event since then. His rating was up about 100 points since we last met. This game was the closest I came to a FIDE rated win in a long time. I was an old man playing against the higher rated talented kid. I asked if he was in high school and he said he was. I must have been at least 40 years older than my opponent. White attacked kingside. I surprised Rosenthal with 19...Nxe5! He chose to sacrifice the Exchange and play for a win. Nicholas managed to draw. This was both wonderful and annoying for me. Rosenthal - Sawyer, Space Coast Open Cocoa Beach FL (2), 28.04.2012 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 [Nicholas usually plays 2.Nf3, maybe for 2...d5 3.exd5 cxd5 4.Ne5] 2...d5 3.exd5 cxd5 4.Bd3 Nc6 5.c3 Nf6 6.Nf3 [I trained to play was 6.Bf4 Bg4 7.Qb3 Qc8 8.Nd2 e6 9.Ngf3 Be7 10.0-0 0-0 11.Ne5 Bh5=] 6...Bg4 7.Bf4 e6 8.Nbd2 Bd6 9.Bg3 [I prepared 9.Bxd6 Qxd6 10.0-0 0-0=] 9...0-0 10.0-0 Rb8 [Black plays a Queens Gambit Exchange Variation Reversed. The rook supports a minority attack.] 11.Qe1 [White intends to play for a kingside attack.] 11...Bxg3 [I wanted to play 11...b5 but 12.Ne5+/= forces me to part with either one of my bishops for the Ne5.] 12.hxg3 b5 13.Ne5 Nxe5 14.dxe5 Nd7 15.Qe3 [White activates his queen.] 15...Bh5 [Black has an equal game with either 15...b4 or 15...Qb6. Now White threatens a strong attack.] 16.Nb3 Qb6 17.Nd4 a6 [I did not like 17...b4 18.cxb4 Qxb4 19.Nc6+/-] 18.g4!? Bg6 [Rosenthal had done a lot of analysis on 18...Bxg4 19.Qg5 h5 but I thought it was too risky.] 19.Rae1 [19.Bxg6 hxg6 20.Rae1+/=] 19...Nxe5! [or 19...Bxd3 20.Qxd3 Rfc8=] 20.Be2?! [White was pretty much forced to play 20.Bxg6 Nxg6 21.f4 Rfe8 22.f5 Nf8 23.f6 with compensation for the sacrificed pawn.] 20...Nc4 [Black is better on the board. I offered a draw here.] 21.Qh3 [If 21.Bxc4 bxc4-/+] 21...Nd2 [Also strong is 21...Nxb2-+ but I wanted to win the Exchange and get one of his rooks off the board.] 22.f4 Nxf1 23.Rxf1 Be4 24.Kf2 f6 25.Ke1 e5 26.Nf5 Bxf5 27.gxf5 Qd6 28.Rh1 h6 29.Qg4 Kh8

30.Qg6 exf4? [This blunder throws the win away. White now offers a draw since it is forced. Correct was 30...Qe7! 31.fxe5 fxe5-+ and Black is winning.] 1/2-1/2

55 – Folkman 6.Bf4 Bg4 7.Qb3 Na5 Why did I play for a draw in a game against a lower rated player when I should be playing for a win? Frankly, I don’t know. It is too simplistic to say that the Caro-Kann Defence is drawish. Each opening and each variation stands on its own. As long as there are imbalances, dynamic play is possible. The Exchange Variation after 1.e4 c6 2.d5 d5 3.exd5 cxd5 avoids a symmetrical pawn structure. It gives Black the better knight squares and White the better bishop squares. Frank Folkman was rated a couple hundred points below me. The California Chess Journal shows he won the San Francisco Class B Championship 4-0 in 1987. After that the USCF listed that Frank Folkman was rated 1839 at some point. Folkman did not make any mistakes in our game below. My question is, “Why did I play to swap queens with my moves 7…Na5 and 11…Qb3 if I wanted to win as Black? Although the rook ending was equal in the final position, White had the better king position. If I tried to avoid a draw, White would have the better chances to win. I had already lost to Ray Alexis in this same APCT postal chess event. Perhaps that led to my lack of energy. The year 1993 was busy for me outside of chess. I had several health, family and employment issues. In November 1993 we moved when I found a more exciting and better paying job. Folkman (1767) - Sawyer (2003), corr APCT N-328, 06.1993 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 cxd5 4.Bd3 Nc6 5.c3 Nf6 6.Bf4 Bg4 7.Qb3 Na5 8.Qa4+ [8.Qc2 e6 9.Nd2 Bd6 10.Bxd6 Qxd6 11.Ngf3=] 8...Bd7 9.Qc2 Qb6 [9...Nh5 10.Be3=] 10.Nf3 e6 11.a4 [11.Qe2!?] 11...Qb3 [11...Rc8=] 12.0-0 [12.Qe2+/=] 12...Qxc2 13.Bxc2 Rc8 14.Ne5 Nc4 15.Nxc4 dxc4 16.Nd2

Be7 17.Bd1 a6 18.Be2 b5 19.axb5 axb5 20.Ra2 Bc6 21.Bf3 Bxf3 22.Nxf3 Nd5 23.Bd2 0-0 24.Rfa1 Bf6 25.g3 h6 26.Ra5 Rb8 27.Ne5 Bxe5 28.dxe5 Rfc8 29.Kf1 b4 30.cxb4 Nxb4 31.Bxb4 Rxb4 32.Ra8 Rxa8 1/2-1/2

56 – Tempske 7.Qb3 Na5 8.Qa4+ Castle early, castle often. Sure thing. I’ll get right to it. Except that sometimes I delayed it too long. I played the Caro-Kann to avoid wild tactics. That was foolish. Openings do not play the complicated tactics. Players do! Anthony Tempske was a master at correspondence. His APCT rating was 2200. His ICCF rating is 2231. When a master chose the Exchange Variation, I should have known that he planned to attack. That is what masters do. The proper plan was to play a solid opening, develop quickly and castle safely. It started well for me. I decided to waste two moves to offer a queen swap. Instead of taking my queen, White lined up his queen on my king. We traded off a couple minor pieces, but I wasn’t any safer after 15 moves. Since I had not castled, he attacked e6 with 16.d5. There was no time to duck and cover. I missed my chances and picked off a couple queenside pawns. He moved in on my king. I was ahead two pawns but hopelessly lost when he played his final move 24.Ne4. White threatened to win my king, my queen, both my rooks, my bishop and all my pawns. I could save any one of them temporarily, but eventually they would all fall. I resigned. Tempske (2200) - Sawyer (2003), corr APCT Q-139, 07.1993 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 cxd5 4.Bd3 Nc6 5.c3 Nf6 6.Bf4 Bg4 7.Qb3 Na5 8.Qa4+ [8.Qc2 e6 9.Nd2 Bd6 10.Bxd6 Qxd6=] 8...Bd7 9.Qc2 Qb6 [9...Nh5 10.Be3=] 10.a4 [10.Nf3+/=] 10...Qb3 [10...Rc8=] 11.Qe2 [11.Nd2=] 11...e6

[11...a6 12.Ra3 Qb6 13.Nf3=] 12.Nf3 Rc8 [12...Nc4 13.Bc1+/=] 13.Ne5 Nc4 14.Bxc4 dxc4 15.Nxd7 [15.0-0+/=] 15...Nxd7 16.d5 Nc5 17.0-0 Nd3 18.Be3 Qxb2 [18...Bc5=] 19.Nd2 Qxc3 [19...Bc5 20.dxe6 0-0 21.exf7+ Rxf7 22.Qg4=] 20.dxe6 fxe6 21.Qh5+ g6 22.Qb5+ Kf7? [22...Kd8 23.Qxb7+/-] 23.Qd7+ Be7 24.Ne4 1-0

57 – Mann 7.Qb3 Qc8 8.Nd2 FIDE lists Richard Mann with a rating of 2205. He earned a FIDE Candidate Master title. USCF lists Richard J. Mann as having earned a National Master Title with a rating of 2200 from back in the year 1990. I played Richard Mann in a 1985 APCT postal chess section. Many times over the board masters had lower postal chess ratings. Those two types of play have slightly different skill sets, as do both blitz and tournament play. The Caro-Kann Defence in the Exchange Variation is a good way for White to play for a win at minimal risk. A player at the level of Richard Mann was not likely to make any big mistakes. The question was, “Would Black make any notable mistakes that White could exploit?” As Black I chose 7…Qc8 instead of the 7…Na5 that I previously played. This line seemed to lead to total equality in theory. Both players focused on the center. White opened the c-file for his rooks. Black had the fortunate knight fork move 20…Nd6. That forced the exchange of White’s remaining bishop. White had a weak isolated queen pawn on d4. Black blockaded it. As the endgame approached, the d4 pawn could potentially cost White the game. Optically it did not look like White had much, although a6 and f7 could have become weak for Black. My guess is that Mann offered me a draw since the final move was 26.Qc6. Not all Caro-Kann draws were bad for me. Mann (2150) - Sawyer (2000), corr APCT 1985 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 cxd5 4.Bd3 Nc6 5.c3 Nf6 6.Bf4 Bg4 7.Qb3 Qc8 [7...e5!?=] 8.Nd2 e6 9.h3 Bh5 10.Ngf3 Be7 11.0-0 0-0 12.Rfe1 Bg6 13.Bxg6 hxg6 14.Rac1 Na5 [14...a6=] 15.Qb5 b6 [15...Nc6 16.Qd3+/=] 16.Ne5 Nb7 17.Nc6 Qd7 18.Nxe7+ Qxe7 19.c4 dxc4 20.Rxc4 [20.Nxc4 Rac8=] 20...Nd6 21.Bxd6

Qxd6 22.Nf3 Rfc8 23.Rec1 Qd8 24.Ne5 Rxc4 25.Qxc4 Qd5 26.Qc6 1/21/2

58 – Harimau 7.Qb3 Qc8 8.Nd2 e6 The Caro-Kann Defence Exchange Variation 4.Bd3 can be reached via other openings. One such Caro-Kann Defence line that I sometimes played was in the London System. Usually in the London I play White. In the Caro-Kann I usually play Black. It is in fact the exact same position. Therefore it is helpful to know both sides of the board. After 1.d4 d5 2.Bf4 c5 3.e3 Nc6 4.c3 cxd4 5.exd4 Nf6 6.Bd3, we reached the position after 6.Bf4 in the game below. The thing about this game is that more often in the Caro-Kann Defence I played the Black pieces. Here I am on the White side. My high rated computer opponent played the same 7…Qc8 that I had played in the previous game. After 8.Nd2 e6, I played 9.Ngf3 directly instead of the move 9.h3 that Mann had played. As White I played okay, but I messed up with my 20th move. Things went downhill from there. Sawyer - Harimau, ICC 5 0 Internet Chess Club, 30.12.2012 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 cxd5 4.Bd3 Nc6 5.c3 Nf6 6.Bf4 Bg4 7.Qb3 Qc8 8.Nd2 e6 9.Ngf3 Be7 10.0-0 0-0 11.Ne5 Bh5 12.Rae1 Bd6 13.Bg3 [13.h3!?; 13.Nxc6 Qxc6 14.Bxd6 Qxd6 15.Re3] 13...Qc7 14.f4 Bg6 15.f5 Bxf5 16.Bxf5 exf5 17.Rxf5 Rae8 18.Ndf3 Re6 19.Ng5 Re7 20.Rff1? [20.Ngf3] 20...Nxe5 21.dxe5 Bxe5 22.Bxe5 Rxe5 23.Rxe5 Qxe5 24.Nf3 Qe3+ 25.Kh1 Rb8 26.Re1 Qc5 27.Nd4 a6 28.Qd1 Ne4 29.Qe2 Re8 30.Kg1 g6 31.Qe3 Qa5 32.a3 Nd6 33.Qf2 Rxe1+ 34.Qxe1 Qd8 35.h3 Nc4 36.Qc1 Qe7 37.a4 Qe4 38.b3 Nd6 39.Qc2 [39.Qd2 Kg7 40.Nc2 Nf5-/+] 39...Qe1+ 40.Kh2 Ne4 41.c4 Qg3+ 42.Kg1 Qe3 0-1

59 – Frumkin 7.Qb3 Qc8 8.Nd2 e6 Ed Frumkin was the strongest of six opponents in my first APCT postal chess tournament. That section started for me on 7/7/77. Tim Barnes was another of these six players. In both games I was Black in a Caro-Kann Defence. Frumkin won all his six games in that 1977 event. Edward Frumkin became an APCT master and later a USCF National Master. Back in 1977 Frumkin played 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3. My game with him in that section was my only loss. I finished 5-1. In 1985 Frumkin tried a different variation. While Frumkin was beating me in this APCT contest, I was drawing Richard Mann in the same Caro-Kann Defence Exchange Variation. Again we follow the 7.Qb3 Qc8 line. The game continued 8.Nd2 e6 9.Ngf3 Be7 10.0-0 0-0 11.Ne5 Nxe5. Years later Harimau would play 11…Bh5 against me. See previous game. After 11…Nxe5 12.fxe5 White signals his intention to attack my king. This game illustrates well how to attack a loose opponent’s king. Frumkin mounted a strong attack in the center. I failed to find the correct defense on moves 13, 16 and 17. My last good choice would have been 17…Kh8. I doubt I gave this move much consideration. I tried to hold my central pawns, but White ripped open the position for a beautiful tactical finish. Frumkin (2274) - Sawyer (2000), corr APCT 1985 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 cxd5 4.Bd3 Nc6 5.c3 Nf6 6.Bf4 Bg4 7.Qb3 Qc8 [7...Na5 8.Qa4+ Bd7 9.Qc2=] 8.Nd2 [8.h3+/=] 8...e6 9.Ngf3 Be7 [9...Nh5=] 10.0-0 0-0 11.Ne5 Nxe5 12.dxe5 [12.Bxe5=] 12...Nd7 13.Qc2 g6 [13...h6=] 14.h3 Bf5 15.Bxf5 gxf5 16.Bh6 Re8 [16...Rd8=] 17.Nf3 f6?! [17...Kh8=] 18.Qe2

fxe5 19.Nxe5 Nxe5? [19...Bf6 20.Nd3+/=] 20.Qxe5 Bf8 21.Bxf8 Rxf8 22.Rae1 Kf7 23.Re3 Qd7 24.g4 Rg8 25.Kh2 fxg4 26.hxg4 Rae8 [26...Rg6 27.f4 Rd8 28.f5 exf5 29.Rxf5+ Kg8 30.Qd4+/-] 27.f4 Rg6 28.f5 Rf6 [28...Rh6+ 29.Kg2+/-] 29.Qxf6+ 1-0

3.exd5 cxd5 4.c4 The continuation 4.c4 is the Panov-Botvinnik Attack.

60 – Haines 4…Bf5 5.Nf3 Nc6 White won a Caro-Kann Panov Attack after 1.d4 c5 2.e3 cxd4 3.exd4 d5 4.c4. This opening may be reached from many move orders by transposition. The standard move order is 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 cxd5 4.c4. Black responded with 4...Bf5 (instead of 4...Nf6). Ray Haines found a mating attack when Black’s king stayed in the middle. Haines (1600) - muvenda (1517), Live Chess Chess.com, 20.02.2018 begins 1.d4 c5 2.e3 cxd4 3.exd4 d5 4.c4 Bf5 5.Nf3 Nc6 6.Nc3 [6.cxd5! Qxd5 7.Nc3 Qa5 8.d5+-] 6...e6 7.Be2 Bb4 8.0-0 Bxc3 9.bxc3 Nf6 10.Ba3 Bg4 11.cxd5 Qxd5 12.c4 Qh5 13.d5 [13.Qb3! 0-0-0 14.Rab1+-] 13...exd5 14.cxd5 Ne5 [14...Qxd5 15.Qc1+/=] 15.Bb5+ Ned7 [15...Kd8 16.Qe1+-] 16.Re1+ Kd8 17.Be7+ Kc8 [Now White mates by force.] 18.Rc1+ Kb8 19.Bd6# 1-0

61 – Haines 5…Nc6 6.Nf3 dxc4 This wild Caro-Kann Defence ended up in favor of Ray Haines who played Black. This delayed Panov became some type of Queens Gambit Accepted. Moves 18 to 21 were full of blunders on both sides. The most important rule is, "Don't make the last blunder!" mohamed395 (1647) - Haines (1684), Live Chess Chess.com, 03.04.2018 begins 1.e4 c6 2.Nf3 d5 3.exd5 cxd5 4.d4 Nc6 5.c4 Nf6 6.Nc3 dxc4 7.Bxc4 Bg4 8.Be3 e6 9.h3 Bh5 10.Be2 Be7 11.Qb3 0-0 12.Qxb7 Nb4 13.0-0 Nc2 14.Rad1 Nxe3 15.fxe3 Rb8 16.Qxa7 Rxb2 17.g4 [17.Rb1=] 17...Bg6 18.Ne5? [18.Bd3 Bb4=/+] 18...Bd6? [18...Bb4-+] 19.h4? [19.Nxg6=] 19...Be4? [19...Ne4!-+] 20.Nxe4 [20.g5!=] 20...Nxe4 [20...Rxe2=/+] 21.Nxf7? [21.Rxf7!+-] 21...Rxe2 22.Rf2 Rxf2 23.Nxd8 [Black has a mate in two.] 23...Bh2+ 24.Kh1 Ng3# 0-1

62 – Parsons 4...Nf6 5.Nf3 Nc6 David Parsons attacked. He played aggressively. Dave brought his pieces out quickly. He opened up the position with the Panov Attack 4.c4 against my Caro-Kann Defence. All this sounds nice. Maybe he thought he was safe with queens gone off the board. A game plan involves two sides. As Black I also opened up the position. There was no quiet 5...e6 line for me. Instead I chose the sharp 5...Nc6 line. By move eight I had developed both my knights and a bishop. By move 13 there were no center pawns left for either side on the c, d or e-files. What was the main difference in the position? Black had castled. White had not. I'm sure David Parsons intended to castle soon, but he was busy doing important things. Why castle early? Because if you don't, when the middlegame tactics start flying, your king is a target for double attacks or checkmate. By then, there is no time to stop in the middle of a combination and castle. Dave Parsons loved to talk chess and teach chess. He would be the first to tell you that you need to castle early. It costs him in this short game. Parsons (1682) - Sawyer (2011), Williamsport, PA 1994 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 cxd5 4.c4 Nf6 5.Nf3 Nc6 6.Qa4!? [The normal continuation is 6.Nc3 Bg4=] 6...Qa5+!? 7.Nc3 Qxa4 8.Nxa4 Bg4 9.cxd5 Bxf3 10.dxc6 Bxc6 11.Nc5 [11.Nc3=] 11...e5 12.Be3 [12.dxe5 Bxc5 13.exf6 0-0=/+] 12...exd4 13.Bxd4 0-0-0 14.Nb3 [14.Bxf6 gxf6-/+] 14...Bb4+ 15.Bc3 [15.Ke2 Rhe8+ 16.Be3 Nd5-+] 15...Rhe8+ 16.Be2 Nd5 [16...Bxc3+! 17.bxc3 Bb5-+] 17.Bxb4 Nxb4 18.Rc1 Nd3+ 0-1

63 – Hauber 5.Nc3 dxc4 6.Bxc4 Chess is a social game that attracts all kinds of people: male and female, young and old, good and bad. When I was young, I went to a tournament with my friend. My friend ended up in prison a year later. While at that tournament, we met the infamous IM Norman T. Whitaker. Later I heard Whitaker had been in prison. I spent many years working in prison. My job was to interview inmates. Most go to prison because of bad morals. They had the choice of right or wrong. They chose to do wrong and got caught. Some prisoners play chess every day. They don't much training nor books. The first move might be 1.a4 or 1.Nh3. I remember one prison where their star player rated in the 1700s asked if I was the Rev. Tim Sawyer who wrote a book for sale in his USCF chess catalog. Yup, that’s me. When postal chess was at its height, most clubs allowed inmates to compete in correspondence events. Mail was stamped noting that the letter or postcard came from prison. APCT's Helen Warren did a lot to help inmates play in postal tournaments. My opponent here was Marv Hauber. He was in a California prison during our game. Hauber told me that he was a member of MENSA, which means he had a high IQ. I believed him. A high IQ means that mentally he can go a long way. Bad morals means he can go in the wrong direction. Maybe my opponent went a long way in the wrong direction and ended up in prison. His postal chess rating was about 1720. That’s not bad. Our game went from a Scandinavian to a Caro-Kann Panov and then a Queen's Gambit. I did some breaking and entering of my own as I broke the position open with 14.d5! Then White won a pawn. The rest of the game is the process of advancing that extra pawn. It ends with a nice tactical combination. Sawyer - Hauber, corr APCT, 1978 begins 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Nf6 3.c4 c6 4.d4 cxd5 5.Nc3 dxc4 6.Bxc4 e6 7.Nf3 Be7 8.0-0 0-0 9.Qe2 a6 10.Rd1 b5 11.Bb3 Bb7 12.Bg5 Qc7? [12...Re8=] 13.Rac1 Qd6 14.d5 e5 15.Qxe5 Nbd7 16.Qd4 Nc5 17.Bf4 Nxb3 18.Bxd6 [18.axb3+-] 18...Nxd4 19.Bxe7 Nxf3+ [19...Nxd5 20.Bxf8 Nxc3 21.Nxd4 Nxd1 22.Ba3+/=] 20.gxf3 Rfc8 21.Bxf6 gxf6 22.Ne4 [22.d6+/-] 22...Kf8? [22...Rxc1 23.Rxc1+/=]

23.Rxc8+ [23.Nc5!+-] 23...Bxc8 [23...Rxc8 24.Nd6+/-] 24.Nc5 Bh3 25.d6 Kg7 26.d7 Rd8 27.Rd4 Kg6 [27...Kf8 28.b4 Ke7 29.Re4+ Kf8 30.Re8+ Rxe8 31.dxe8Q+ Kxe8 32.Nxa6+/=] 28.Re4 Be6? 29.Rxe6 fxe6 30.Nxe6 Rxd7 31.Nf8+ 1-0

64 – malulo 5…Nc6 6.Nf3 Bg4 My opponent "malulo" was rated about 2257. We got a Caro-Kann Defence Panov Attack. I chose the 5...Nc6 line. White tried to punish me for inexact play but ended up losing material. I took on the mantle of Capablanca by swapping into a won endgame. The win jumped my ICC rating up to 2231. malulo - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 10.03.2012 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 cxd5 4.c4 Nf6 5.Nc3 Nc6 6.Nf3 Bg4 7.Be2 e6 8.0-0 dxc4 [I spent a lot of time playing the Queen's Gambit Accepted in practice blitz games in the past year. White has already played Be2, so it costs another tempo to take on c4. 8...Be7 is the alternative that also leads to equality.] 9.Qa4 Be7 10.Ne5 Bxe2 11.Nxc6 [Or 11.Nxe2 Rc8 12.Rd1 0-0 13.Nxc4 Nb4=/+] 11...bxc6? [I played the natural recapture, but Black has a nice tactical shot 11...Qd7!-/+] 12.Qxc6+ Nd7 13.Nxe2 Rc8 14.Qa4 Qc7 15.Bf4 Qb7 16.Rac1 0-0 17.Rxc4? [White walks right into a fork. I am fortunate that my bishop covers b4.] 17...Nb6 18.Rb4 Bxb4 19.Qxb4 Qe4 20.Qd2 Nc4 21.Qd1 Nxb2 22.Qd2 Nc4 23.Qd1 Nb6 24.Be3 Qc2 [I want to swap off queen, rook and a minor piece to get to an easily won ending where I am up the Exchange.] 25.Qa1 Nd5?! [I was so intent on forcing exchanges that I missed the free knight 25...Qxe2-+] 26.Ng3 Nxe3 27.fxe3 Qc3 28.Qe1 Qxe1 29.Rxe1 Rc2 30.Ra1 Rfc8 31.Ne4 Rc1+ 32.Rxc1 Rxc1+ [Targeted endgame acquired.] 33.Kf2 Rc2+ 34.Kf3 Rxa2 35.Nc5 a5 36.h4 a4 37.g4 a3 38.Nb3 Rb2 39.Nc1 a2 [Black can queen with exact rook moves: 39...Rc2! 40.Nb3 Rc3 41.Na1 a2 42.Ke4 Rc1 43.Nb3 Rb1-+] 40.Nxa2 Rxa2 41.e4 Ra3+ 42.Kf4 f6 43.d5 e5+ 44.Kf5 Kf7 45.g5 Rf3+ [There was a creative subtle mate in 4 that I missed here at blitz speed. 45...Rg3 46.gxf6 gxf6 47.d6 h5 48.d7 Rf3#] 46.Kg4 Rf4+ 47.Kg3 Rxe4 48.gxf6 gxf6 49.d6 Rd4 50.d7 Rxd7 51.h5 Rd4 52.h6 f5 53.Kf3 Rd3+ 54.Ke2 Ra3 55.Kd2 Kg6 56.Ke2 Kxh6 [Generally taking this pawn would be a waste of one tempo. However, in a blitz game, eliminating all your opponent's material eliminates his possible win on time. I was ahead on the clock, but it seemed worth one second to do so.] 57.Kf2 Kg5 58.Ke2 Kf4

59.Kd2 Ra2+ 60.Kc3 e4 61.Kd4 Rd2+ 62.Kc3 Rd8 63.Kc4 e3 64.Kc5 e2 65.Kc6 e1Q 66.Kc7 Rd2 67.Kb7 Qc1 68.Kb6 Rb2+ 69.Ka5 Qa1# 0-1

65 – Marshall 5...Nc6 6.cxd5 Nxd5 To pull off a swindle in a slow tournament game is rare, but that is what I did in 2007 at the Southern Open. Mario Marshall had moved to South Florida from Jamaica. I wish I could describe the look on my opponent's face, but I did not dare look at him for fear that I would burst out laughing. That would be rude and very bad form. In a previous tournament, I myself was swindled in a winning position by an Expert. It was not very funny for me. This opening was a Caro-Kann Defence which I played since 1974, but this was only my third tournament game with it in 15 years, always getting a bad game and then always getting lucky with two wins and a draw! Mario Marshall told me after the game that he did not know the theory here. He said he just wanted to attack. That was obvious! I got into deep trouble in this opening. Then I was lost in the middlegame. A few days after this game, I asked Dan Heisman for tips on swindling when you are losing. He said the basic idea was to complicate. This is exactly what I did! Despite poor opening theory and middlegame strategy, once again a tactical idea decided the game. I did not play any FIDE rated games until I was well past my prime and over 50 years old, so this was a memorable win for me. Marshall was very kind to me after the game. We had a good time going over it and I think we joked about the Jamaican Olympic Bobsled team. Marshall (2038) - Sawyer (1946), Southern Open (2), 28.07.2007 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 cxd5 4.c4 Nf6 5.Nc3 Nc6 [In the 1970s I played 5...g6 in Gruenfeld style.] 6.cxd5 [The main line is 6.Nf3 Bg4=] 6...Nxd5 7.Bc4 Nb6 [Attacking the isolated pawn on d4 and the bishop on c4, but 7...Be6 is better.] 8.Bb5 a6 9.Bxc6+ bxc6 10.Nf3 Bg4 11.h3 Bxf3 12.Qxf3 Nd5 [The knight feels good on d5, but my opponent told me after the game that every move I did not develop my kingside, he was happy.] 13.Bg5 Qd6 [intending to answer Ne4 with ...Qb4 attacking b2 and d4.] 14.0-0 e6 [Consolidates d5.] 15.Rac1 Be7 16.Ne4 Qb4 17.Bxe7 Kxe7 [17...Qxe7!? 18.Rxc6 0-0+/-] 18.Ng5 Nf6 [Plan B. My original intention was 18...f6 but

here I saw that White was easily winning after 19.Nxe6!+- Ugh!] 19.Rxc6 Rhc8 20.Rfc1 Rxc6 21.Qxc6 [Even more powerful was 21.Rxc6!+-] 21...Ra7 22.Qc5+ Qxc5 23.dxc5 Nd5 24.Kf1 [24.Nxh7?! f6=] 24...Rc7 [We both had about an hour left. Clocks were: White 0:56; Black 1:22.] 25.a3 [Several people were now watching our game figuring that it would be over soon.] 25...a5 [Indeed, the game would end in less than one minute. Current times on the clock were: White 0:49; Black 1:19.] 26.Rc4 [Played after about a half minute's thought. Since he had not thought much, it felt like a good time to spring a cheapo. I had seen this combination earlier, but now with the rook on c4, it had a better chance.] 26...Nb6?! [Almost immediately I played for a swindle.] 27.cxb6?? [White lets the win slip away. He took about 15 seconds thought choosing to sacrifice his rook to get a queen, "thinking" I had blundered. White should try 27.Rf4+-] 27...Rxc4=/+ [I captured his rook while slightly faking disgust. My heart was beating very rapidly all of a sudden!] 28.b7?? [Instantly he advanced the pawn to glory, expecting that this move would be the coup de grace. But just as quickly I make my own crushing move.] 28...Rc1+!-+ [Everyone was shocked! What a rush!! Now he saw he was lost and resigned. Final clock times: White 0:48; Black 1:18. If 29.Ke2 Rc2+ 30.Ke3 Rxb2-+ and as soon as his new queen appears, she disappears.] 0-1

66 – Wittmann 5…Nc6 6.cxd5 Nxd5 7.Nf3 You are bound to meet famous opponents in a long career. Who have you played? Local champs? Titled Players? Dr. Walter Wittmann of Austria is a FIDE International Master. Wittmann played hundreds of well-known players in a 40 year career. He liked a wide variety of interesting openings. Wittmann was named in countless opening books that I have read. Dr. Wittmann played 2282 ICCF games with a peak rating of 2293 in 1993. We met 10 years earlier in a postal game. Wittmann attacked my Caro-Kann Defence with the 4.c4 Panov Variation. We reached the 5...Nc6 main line by transposition. Grandmaster Lars Schandorff calls this "The Endgame Line" in the 15th chapter of his Quality Chess book "The Caro-Kann". That book was published in 2010. Of course that particular book was not available to us back in 1983. I "left the book" with 18...Rc8+!? Schandorff recommended the move 18...Bb4. Lengthy accurate endgame play leads to draws. Postal play between Austria and the United States was slow and expensive. We reached an equal position at a point in time where we could see that we were not going to win the tournament. Then we agreed to a draw. Wittmann - Sawyer, corr ICCF 1983 begins 1.e4 c6 2.c4 d5 3.exd5 cxd5 4.cxd5 Nf6 5.Nc3 Nxd5 6.Nf3 [6.Bb5+ Bd7=] 6...Nc6 7.d4 [This transposes to a main line of the Panov Attack. 7.Bb5=] 7...Bg4 8.Qb3 Bxf3 9.gxf3 e6 10.Qxb7 Nxd4 11.Bb5+ Nxb5 12.Qc6+ Ke7 13.Qxb5 Qd7 14.Nxd5+ Qxd5 15.Bg5+ [15.Qxd5 exd5 16.0-0=] 15...f6 16.Qxd5 exd5 17.Be3 Ke6 18.0-0-0 Rc8+ [18...Rd8 19.Rhe1 Kf7=] 19.Kb1 Bc5 20.Rhe1

Kd6 21.Rd3 [21.Bf4+ Kc6 22.Re6+ Kd7 23.Re2 g5=] 21...Rhd8 22.Red1 Ke6 23.Rc1 Bxe3 1/2-1/2

67 – McDonald 5…e6 6.Nf3 In 2012 I got back in the tournament saddle. Then I fell off the horse. After that, I got run over. This game is a sharp tactical affair with a beautiful finish. Alas I am on the wrong side of the board! My fourth round opponent was Kenneth E. Mc Donald rated 2169. He and a friend were visiting from Baltimore. His friend mentioned how strong the players were here. Yes indeed. We were in Cocoa Beach, a small town of 12,000 people, Right then there were 30 players rated over 2000, some in the 2600s. Kenneth McDonald ("Mc Donald" in USCF) earned a National Master Certificate in 1993 and a Candidate Master norm. He used to be rated in the 2300s. Ken told me that he does not study openings. He just plays a lot of blitz chess, which he said hurts his tournament play. Thus he is rated in the 2100s. Maybe I should have his problem and play a lot of blitz. I shall ponder. My Caro-Kann preparations included 5...e6 lines with 6.Bg5 and with 6.Nf3 Bb4 7.cxd5 and 7.Bd3. With 7.Bg5, I was totally on my own. After the game Ken said bluntly, “You made a big mistake!” “It happens,” I replied. Ken said, “Tell me about it.” Then he added, “It happened to me in my last game.” McDonald - Sawyer, Space Coast Open Cocoa Beach FL (4), 29.04.2012 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 cxd5 4.c4 Nf6 5.Nc3 e6 6.Nf3 Bb4 7.Bg5 00 8.Bd3 dxc4 9.Bxc4 Nbd7 10.0-0 Nb6?! [Too slow. Correct is 10...h6 11.Bh4 Qa5 12.Rc1 Bxc3 13.Rxc3 b5 14.Bb3 and now 14...Bb7 or 14...b4] 11.Bb3 Be7?! 12.Rc1 Nbd5? [Maybe Black should try 12...Bd7 13.Ne5 Bc6 14.Qd3+/=] 13.Re1 Nxc3 14.bxc3 Nd5? [Black is losing. If 14...h6 15.Bxf6 Bxf6 16.Ne5 Qc7 17.Bc2 Rd8 18.Qd3 g6 19.Qf3+/=] 15.Bxe7 Nxe7 16.c4 b6 17.d5 exd5 18.cxd5 Nf5 19.Ne5+/- [Also good is 19.Nd4!+/-] 19...Nd6 20.Qc2?! [White could play 20.Qf3 Bb7 21.Nc6 and if 21...Bxc6? 22.dxc6+-] 20...Bf5 21.Qc7 Qxc7 [21...Re8! 22.Qxd8 Raxd8 23.Nc6 Rxe1+ 24.Rxe1 Ra8 and Black has some hope.] 22.Rxc7 Rfc8? [22...Rfe8 23.Re3+/=] 23.Rxc8+ [In my dreams 23.Rec1? Rxc7 24.Rxc7 Rc8 25.Rxc8+ Bxc8 and Black has endgame chances.] 23...Rxc8 24.g4!

Bc2? [I thought about 24...Be4! 25.f3 but I missed the saving move 25...Re8!=] 25.Nc6! [Beautiful. I completely missed this too. Not my finest hour.] 25...Bxb3 26.Ne7+ Kf8 27.Nxc8 1-0

68 – McCullough 6.Nf3 Bb4 I could not have guessed the opening in this game. We started with 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 as a Scandinavian Defence. After 2...Nf6, I threatened to hold the pawn with 3.c4. Richard McCullough offered a gambit with 3...c6. I wanted to take the pawn, but it seemed that Black could get a lot of play after 4.dxc6 Nc6. I didn't want that. I transposed to a Panov-Botvinnik Attack with 4.c4 cxd5. The game continuation 5.Nc3 e6 6.Nf3 Bb4 7.Bd3 dxc4 8.Bxc4 led to a Nimzo-Indian Defence position. No, I would not have guessed that my 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 would have led to a Nimzo-Indian. The Caro-Kann order takes one more move by each side to reach this Nimzo-Indian position. White busted open the position with 11.d5. The game became very sharp and tactical. White won a pawn. The pieces continued to make threat after threat. In the end Black allowed his knight to be trapped. After that, it was soon over. Sawyer - McCullough (1719), corr APCT P-388, 1978 begins 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Nf6 3.c4 c6 4.d4 cxd5 5.Nc3 e6 6.Nf3 Bb4 7.Bd3 dxc4 8.Bxc4 0-0 9.0-0 Nbd7 10.Qe2 b6 11.d5 Bxc3 12.dxe6 fxe6 [12...Bb4 13.exd7 Qxd7 14.Bg5+/=] 13.Qxe6+ Kh8 14.bxc3 Nc5 15.Qe2 Re8 [15...Bg4 16.h3+/=] 16.Ng5 Qe7 17.Qc2 [17.Qxe7 Rxe7 18.Be3 Bb7 19.Rfe1+/-] 17...g6? [17...Ba6 18.Bxa6 Nxa6 19.Be3+/-] 18.Nf7+ Kg8 19.Nd6+ Be6 20.Bxe6+ Qxe6 21.Nxe8 Rxe8 22.Be3 Nce4 23.Qb3 Nd5 24.Bd4?! [24.Rfe1!+-]24...Nd2 25.Rae1 Nxb3 26.Rxe6 Rxe6 27.axb3 Re2 28.Rc1 Kf7 29.Kf1 Rb2 30.c4 Rd2 31.Be5 Nb4 32.Bc3 Rxf2+ 33.Kxf2 Nd3+

34.Ke3 Nxc1 35.b4 Nb3 36.Kd3 Nc1+ 37.Ke4 Na2? [37...Ke6 38.Bd2+/=] 38.Bd2 Ke6 39.Kd4 Kd6 40.c5+ bxc5+ 41.bxc5+ 1-0

69 – Kuperman 6…Be7 7.c5 When you play the Caro-Kann Defence 4.c4 Panov Variation, tension results. The White c4 and Black d5 pawns constantly threaten to capture each other. Usually cxd5 or dxc4 occurs quickly to relieve the tension. White has the option of pushing the c-pawn to c5 giving each player a pawn majority, White's on the queenside is immediately further advanced. The pawn push can happen on move 5 or any time after that. Each moment with pawn possibilities has its own issues. Dr. Baruch Kuperman is the only opponent I recall playing in postal chess who lived in Israel at the time we played. White gave me chances, but I got in trouble. After my 10th and 11th moves my position collapsed. In 2001 Dr. Kuperman earned the Senior International Correspondence Chess Master title from the ICCF. His peak rating was 2407. My ICCF rating is 2157. Kuperman - Sawyer, corr ICCF 1982 begins 1.e4 c6 2.c4 d5 3.exd5 cxd5 4.d4 Nf6 5.Nc3 e6 6.Nf3 Be7 7.c5 [7.cxd5] 7...0-0 8.Bd3 b6 9.b4 [9.cxb6 Qxb6 10.Na4 Qc6 11.0-0=] 9...a5 10.Na4 Nfd7?! [10...Nbd7=] 11.h4 [11.b5 bxc5 12.Nxc5+/=] 11...f5? [11...h6!=/+] 12.Ng5 Qe8 13.Bb5 Ba6 14.Bxa6 Nxa6 15.b5 Nc7 16.c6 [16.Qe2+/=] 16...Nf6 17.Qe2 Rb8? [17...Bd6 18.Nf3+/=] 18.Bf4 Bd8 19.Nxe6 Nxe6 20.Bxb8 1-0

70 – Sawyer 7.cxd5 Nxd5 Simple is not easy. In this postal game Tim Sawyer vs Edward Sawyer we reached a Queens Gambit from Caro-Kann Defence. Ed and I were friends. We are not related, at least not closely. In my early years I tried out many different variations. As White I chose the Panov Variation 1.e4 c6 2.d4 3.exd5 cxd5 4.c4. This line leads to wide open positions. They can become sharp and tactical. Black simplified our position after 7…Nxd5 in a way that would make Capablanca happy. It may be simple, but finding the right plan and the best squares for pieces is hard. This same position after seven moves can be reached via the Queen's Gambit Declined Semi-Tarrasch after 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Nf3 c5 5.cxd5 Nxd5 6.e3 cxd4 7.exd4 Be7. One thing that surprised me in this game was Black’s 13...Be8. It never occurred to me that Black might back up his bishop. My experience was geared to moving pieces ahead aggressively and rapidly. I had planned to take his bishop. I figured that could wait one more move. It disappeared! I took his knight instead. I found myself caught by indecision. Should I attack his king? My pieces were not set up for attack. He had no weak points. Black was able to coordinate his pieces against me queenside. My attempts on the kingside produced nothing. When my last queenside pawn fell, I resigned. Sawyer, Timothy E - Sawyer, Edward G, corr 1976 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 cxd5 4.c4 Nf6 5.Nc3 e6 6.Nf3 Be7 7.cxd5 Nxd5 8.Bb5+ [8.Bd3 Nc6 9.0-0 0-0 10.Re1 Nf6 11.Bg5 h6 12.Bh4 b6 13.a3 Bb7=] 8...Nc6 [8...Bd7 9.Bc4 Nxc3 10.bxc3 Qc7 11.Qd3 0-0 12.Bb3 Bc6 13.0-0 Nd7=] 9.Ne5!? [The main continuation of this line is 9.0-0 0-0 10.Re1=] 9...Bd7

10.Bxc6 bxc6 [10...Bxc6=] 11.Qf3 [11.Qg4!+/=] 11...0-0 12.0-0 Nxc3 [12...f6 13.Nxd7 Qxd7=] 13.Qxc3 [13.bxc3=] 13...Be8 14.Nxc6 Bxc6 15.Qxc6 Qxd4 16.Rb1 Rfc8 17.Qf3 Rab8 18.Be3?! [18.b3=] 18...Qa4 19.a3 Bf6 20.h3? [20.Qd1 Qxd1 21.Rfxd1 Rxb2 22.Bxa7 Ra2 23.Rb3=] 20...Bxb2 21.Bc1 Bf6 22.Bh6 Bb2 [22...Be5-/+] 23.Qg3? Qxa3 0-1

71 - Schoppmeyer 8.Bd3 Nc6 Herbert Schoppmeyer of Germany had an ICCF rating of 2137. His name appeared in many gambit opening chess books. I was familiar with his name. Schoppmeyer played postal chess for 40 years. I have almost 100 of his games in my database. Schoppmeyer played a wide variety of openings. It appears that he tried everything from main lines to unorthodox variations. In the 1950s he lost two games as Black to the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit. Back then I still didn’t know anything about the BDG. Many of his games seem to be thematic events. Herbert played the King’s Gambit Falkbeer Counter Gambit and Latvian Gambit. Herbert Schoppmeyer is listed as having been born in 1940, but I don’t know if that is accurate. The earliest Schoppmeyer games in my database are from 1955. His peak years of tournament success were 1959 to 1973. He stopped playing around 1992. We played a Caro-Kann Defence Panov Attack. It transposed to Queens Gambit Semi-Tarrasch from that Caro-Kann move order. The Queen's Gambit Declined Semi-Tarrasch move order would be 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Nf3 c5 5.cxd5 Nxd5 6.e3 cxd4 7.exd4 Be7. The Schoppmeyer move 8.Bd3 was better than my choice of 8.Bb5 against Edward Sawyer (see previous game). Schoppmeyer - Sawyer, corr ICCF 1982 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 cxd5 4.c4 Nf6 5.Nc3 e6 6.Nf3 Be7 7.cxd5 Nxd5 8.Bd3 [8.Bc4 Nc6 9.0-0 0-0 10.Re1 Bf6 11.Ne4 b6=] 8...Nc6 9.0-0 0-0 10.Re1 Bf6 11.Be4 Qd6 [11...Nce7 12.Ne5 Bd7 13.Qh5 g6 14.Qf3 Bg7=] 12.Bxd5!? [12.Bc2 Qb4 13.a3+/=] 12...exd5 13.Nb5 Qd8 14.Bf4 Bg4 15.Bd6?! [15.h3 Bxf3 16.Qxf3 a6 17.Nc7 Rc8 18.Qxd5=] 15...Bxf3 16.Qxf3 Nxd4? [The only move is 16...a6! 17.Bxf8 axb5 18.Bc5 b6=/+] 17.Qd3 Nxb5 18.Bxf8 Bxb2

19.Rab1 Bc3 20.Re3 Qxf8 21.Rxb5 d4 22.Rh3 g6 23.Rxb7 Re8 24.g4 Re1+ 25.Kg2 a5 26.Rf3 Re7 27.Rb6 [27.Qb5+/-] 27...Kg7 28.Qc4 Qa8 29.Rc6 Ra7? [29...Qb8 30.Qd5+/=] 30.Qd5 Qe8 31.Rd6 Re7 32.g5 [Or 32.Rd8!+-] 32...Rc7 [Black is completely busted. 33.Rd8 wins.] 1-0

72 – Lindberg 9.0-0 0-0 This Caro-Kann Defence game led to a popular variation of the SemiTarrasch Defence. White had an isolated d4 pawn along with open lines for attack. Black had good endgame prospects as long as he survived the opening. White won the Exchange by move 16 in the game Bengt Lindberg vs Kjell-Ake Andersson. Lindberg (2406) - Andersson (1940), Vasteras Open 2018 Vasteras SWE, 28.09.2018 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 cxd5 4.c4 Nf6 5.Nc3 e6 6.Nf3 Be7 7.cxd5 Nxd5 8.Bd3 Nc6 9.0-0 0-0 10.Re1 Bf6 11.Be4 Nce7 12.Ne5 b6?! [12...Bd7 13.Qd3 h6=] 13.Ng4 Bb7 [13...Bh4 14.g3 f5 15.Bg2 fxg4 16.gxh4 h6 17.Qxg4+/=] 14.Nxf6+ gxf6 [14...Nxf6 15.Bxb7+-] 15.Bh6 [15.Bxd5! Nxd5 16.Bh6+-] 15...f5 [15...Re8 16.Qf3 f5 17.Bxd5 Bxd5 18.Qg3+ Ng6 19.Nb5+/-] 16.Bxf8 Qxf8 17.Bf3 Rc8 18.Rc1 Nxc3 19.Rxc3 Nd5 20.Rxc8 Qxc8 21.Qd2 Qd8 22.Qh6 1-0

73 – Danin 10.Re1 Bf6 White has two strong options in the Caro-Kann Defence when the opening becomes a Semi-Tarrasch Defence. One idea is 12.Ne5 as played in the previous game. The other is 12.Qd3. Both give White attacking chances. Once again White won the Exchange, but this time the Nf3-Ne5-Ng4 knight maneuver led to 17.Nxh6 to bust open Black’s kingside in the game between Alexandre Danin and Elizaveta Solozhenkina. Danin (2540) - Solozhenkina (2202), Kolomna Rapid 2018 Moscow RUS, 16.02.2018 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 cxd5 4.c4 Nf6 5.Nc3 e6 6.Nf3 Be7 [6...Bb4=] 7.cxd5 Nxd5 8.Bd3 0-0 9.0-0 Nc6 10.Re1 Bf6 11.Be4 Nce7 12.Qd3 [12.Ne5=] 12...h6 13.Ne5 Bd7 14.Ng4 Bc6 15.Qg3 Kh8 16.Qh3 Ng8 [16...Ng6 17.Nxd5 Bxd5 18.Bxd5 exd5 19.Nxh6 gxh6 20.Bxh6 Kg8 21.Bxf8+/=] 17.Nxh6 gxh6 [17...Nxh6 18.Bxh6 Bh4 19.Bd2 Nxc3 20.Bxc6 bxc6 21.Re5 Ne2+ 22.Kf1 f5 23.Rxe2+-] 18.Bxh6 Bh4 19.Bxf8 Nf4 20.Qf3 Bxe4 21.Rxe4 Qxf8 22.Rxf4 Bg5 23.Rxf7 Qh6 24.Nb5 1-0

3.exd5 cxd5 4.c4 Nf6 5.Nc3 g6 The Panov-Botvinnik Attack 5…g6 line resembles a Gruenfeld.

74 – Lucas 6.Bd3 Bg7 7.Be3 The eight rounds for the 1974 US Junior Open tournament in Lancaster, Pennsylvania were played Monday night, afternoons and evenings Tuesday through Thursday, and Friday morning. This gave us mornings free. A kind family from Clio, Michigan befriended me and Rachel Crotto. They took us on morning trips. I remember one day visiting the Amish country. This was an area that I would years later visit many times with my wife. The Caro-Kann Panov Attack 4.c4 is a sharp way to play against this solid opening. After the standard 4.c4 Nf6 5.Nc3, Black has three good defensive set-ups. a. 5...e6 - intending a strategical Nimzo-Indian type defence with 6...Bb4. b. 5...Nc6 - with sharper central play, one line being a long forced ending. c. 5...g6 - a Gruenfeld type gambit line where Black sacrifices the d5 pawn. I played all three. In my early days, I was particularly favorable to the gambit 5...g6. It was interesting to note that when things got wide open and tactical, I tended to perform better. I did not put down my opponent's first name. I just listed him as "J. Lucas". Lucas - Sawyer, US Junior Open US (2), 06.08.1974 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 cxd5 4.c4 Nf6 5.Bd3 g6 6.Nc3 Bg7 7.Be3 0-0 8.Qd2 Nbd7 9.c5 [White is hoping to avoid tactics with this move, but instead he walks right into a combination.] 9...Nxc5! 10.dxc5 d4 11.Nge2 dxe3 12.Qxe3 Nd5 13.Qd2 Nxc3 14.Nxc3 Qd4 15.c6 bxc6 16.0-0? [Relatively best is 16.Be4

Qc4-+] 16...Bf5 17.Rad1 Rad8 18.Ne2? Qxd3 19.Qxd3 Bxd3 20.Rd2 Bxe2 21.Rxe2 e6 22.b3 Rd6 0-1

75 – Kiick 6.cxd5 Bg7 7.Nf3 The Caro-Kann Defence leads to solid play. White can open up the position by 3.exd5 with a Panov Attack 4.c4 where tactical skill is rewarded. Chess is fun as a hobby. Some find glory while others achieve more notable accomplishments beyond chess. White below is Dennis Kiick whom USCF lists as living in Tennessee. I assume he is Dr. Dennis Kiick, the learned professor at Lincoln Memorial University who is an expert in health and history. We played two APCT postal games simultaneously. As White I won a Queen's Gambit Declined, but in both games he played logical moves throughout. Here I chose my favorite 5…g6 against the Panov Attack. Kiick (1700) - Sawyer (2100), corr APCT 1981 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 cxd5 4.c4 Nf6 5.Nc3 g6 6.cxd5 Bg7 7.Nf3 [7.Qb3 0-0 8.Be2=] 7...0-0 [7...Nxd5 8.Qb3=] 8.Bc4 Nbd7 9.0-0 Nb6 10.Bb3 Nfxd5 11.Nxd5 [11.a4=] 11...Nxd5 12.Bd2 Qd6 13.Bxd5?! [13.Re1=] 13...Qxd5 14.Bc3 Bg4 15.Qd3?! e5 16.Qe3 Bxf3 17.Qxf3 Qxf3 18.gxf3 exd4 19.Bb4 Rfe8 20.Rad1 Re2 21.Rd2 Rxd2 22.Bxd2 Rc8 23.Re1 h5 24.Bb4 Rc2 25.Ba3 [25.Re8+ Kh7 26.Re7 Rxb2-+] 25...d3 26.Re8+ Kh7 27.Re7 d2 28.Rd7 Rc1+ 29.Kg2 d1Q 30.Rxd1 Rxd1 31.Kg3 Bd4 0-1

76 – Fawbush 6.cxd5 Nxd5 George Fawbush was known for his sharp uncompromising play. His choice of opening variation always held some surprise for his opponents. Fawbush demonstrated the value of original attacks in standard chess openings. By 1979 I had made significant progress in my game. However, I still played too passive to play solid chess. Throughout most of the 1970s I chose the Caro-Kann Defence. When Fawbush played the 4.c4 Panov, I responded with 5…g6. This was my attempt to mix it up with the master. The idea is that if White attacks d5, Black will defend and later attack d4. Fawbush preferred wide open play. Clearly George analyzed more deeply that I did in our postal games. These were the days before we had chess engines. His play was not always accurate. George Fawbush played at a master level, not a grandmaster level. Fawbush was always aggressive. It seemed to me he was far more tactical than strategical. And he would take risks to avoid any drawish position. He played to win. Another quirk about Fawbush was his propensity to send long strings of “IF” moves that were five or more moves long. This made the game move very fast. The cost of a stamped postcard was 10 cents. As I recall, “GEF” won this 19 move game and spent a total of about one US dollar in postage for all the moves combined. In this game Fawbush outplayed me quickly. A few years later, I outplayed Fawbush to win two games at the same time. But this game below was an earlier when George was clearly better. Fawbush (2200) - Sawyer (2000), corr APCT 1979 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 cxd5 4.c4 Nf6 5.Nc3 g6 6.cxd5 Nxd5 7.Qb3 Nb6 [7...e6=] 8.Bb5+ Bd7 9.Nf3 Bg7 10.Bxd7+ N8xd7?! [10...Qxd7!=] 11.a4 Qb8? [11...a5

12.0-0 0-0 13.Re1+/=] 12.a5 Nc8 13.0-0 0-0 14.g3 [14.Nd5!+-] 14...Nf6 15.Bf4 Nd6 16.Nb5 a6 17.Nxd6 exd6 18.Rfe1 [18.Rac1+/=] 18...Rd8? [18...Qc7! 19.Ra4 Rfe8=] 19.Re7 1-0

77 – Snyder 6.Nf3 Bg7 7.Bf4 Ray Haines outplayed Todd Snyder in a Caro-Kann Defence during the second round of the Potato Blossom Festival in Fort Fairfield, Maine. This town is on the Canadian border in the northeast corner of the US. After the moves 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5, White played the Exchange Variation 3.exd5 cxd5 4.c4 known as the Panov-Botvinnik Attack. Ray Haines chose the fianchetto defence with 4...Nf6 5.Nc3 g6. While the fight was still going on, White lost the game on time. When I visited the New England Eatery and Pub in Melbourne Beach, Florida, I could enjoy food that I could have eaten when I was a child. I had whole belly fried clams (most places just have clam strips), Boston baked beans and of course a baked potato (which reminded me of Fort Fairfield, back in the day). To give European readers an idea, the distance and difference between Melbourne Beach and Fort Fairfield is about the same as Rome, Italy to Stockholm, Sweden. Chess is usually played indoors, but on a beautiful day in July, you can play outdoors up in Maine. Snyder (1974) - Haines (1803), Potato Blossom Festival Ft Fairfield ME (2), 12.07.2014 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 cxd5 4.c4 Nf6 5.Nf3 g6 6.Nc3 Bg7 7.Bf4 a6!? [This risks falling behind in development. 7...0-0 8.Be2 Nc6 9.0-0 Bg4=] 8.Be2 [Other ideas are 8.c5 or 8.Qb3] 8...0-0 9.Qd2 dxc4 10.Bxc4 b5 11.Bb3 [11.Be2=] 11...Bb7 12.Qe2 Nc6 13.Rd1 Nb4 [13...Na5=/+] 14.0-0 Nbd5 15.Bd2 e6 16.Rfe1 Qb6 17.h3 Rad8 18.Be3 [18.Nxd5=] 18...Nxe3 19.fxe3 Ne4 20.Nd2 Ng3 21.Qf2 Nf5 22.Nf3 Bxf3 23.Qxf3 Nxe3 24.Rxe3 Bxd4 25.Rde1 [White could have two minor pieces for a rook and two pawns with 25.Rxd4 Qxd4=/+] 25...Bxe3+ 26.Qxe3

Qxe3+ 27.Rxe3 Rd2 28.Ne4 Rxb2 29.a4 bxa4 30.Bxa4 [White forfeits on time] 0-1

78 – Hansen 6.Nf3 Bg7 7.Qb3 This is a battle of future Blackmar-Diemer Gambit players before either of us were famous for the BDG! In the third round of the 1977 Maine State Championship I was paired as Black vs Johan Skip Hansen. Ten years later in 1987, Skip Hansen won this same Maine state championship. Skip was a friendly middle-aged man who worked in the shipyard. Hansen had moved to Maine as a USCF Expert. As I recall, Skip mentioned how hard it was to keep his rating up. Players in Maine were pretty much a closed group in those days. Most of us started as weak players. We studied and gradually made significant improvements. But since we just kept playing each other, we just swapped rating points back and forth. When we did play people from other states, we gained a lot of rating points. Few of us were masters, but many of us became experts. In this game Skip played 1.e4 and we got an open Caro-Kann 4.c4 Panov Botvinnik. There are three popular Black choices after 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 cxd5 4.c4 Nf6 5.Nc3: 5...g6 Gruenfeld where Black gambits the d5 pawn. 5...e6 Nimzo-Indian as recommended by Lakdawala 5...Nc6 Sharp line as recommended by Schandorff I chose the first line as given in Tim Harding's book on Counter Gambits. We got a middlegame where Hansen had two bishops vs my two knights. That did not yield him enough, so he went into a double rook ending where I had some winning chances. Skip kept trying to avoid the draw. Hansen was the higher rated player. I was some little known young Tim Sawyer. After a long fight, the game was drawn.

Hansen - Sawyer, Maine Champ Maine (3), 16.04.1977 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 [I imagine that Skip later tried to reach a BDG via 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.f3 or 4.Bc4] 3...cxd5 4.c4 Nf6 5.Nc3 g6 [Panov-Botvinnik Variation. This Gruenfeld-like 5...g6 was a favorite of mine. Alternatives are 5...e6 or 5...Nc6] 6.Nf3 Bg7 7.Qb3 [The most popular continuation is 7.cxd5 Nxd5 8.Bc4 Nb6 9.Bb3 0-0 10.0-0 Nc6 11.d5 Na5 12.Re1 Bg4 13.h3 and now a lot of material gets chopped off. 13...Bxf3 14.Qxf3 Nxb3 15.axb3 Re8 16.Be3 Bxc3 17.Bxb6 Qxb6 18.bxc3 Qxb3=] 7...0-0 8.cxd5 Nbd7 9.Be2 [9.Bg5 is also critical.] 9...Nb6 10.0-0 Nfxd5 11.Ne4 Bg4 [11...Be6=/+] 12.a4 Bxf3?! 13.Bxf3 e6 [13...a5=] 14.Bg5 Ne7 15.Nf6+ [15.Nc5!+/- winning the b7 pawn.] 15...Bxf6 16.Bxf6 Qd7 [The middlegame proceeds with White's two bishops vs Black's two knights.] 17.Rfe1 Nbd5 18.Bg5 Rac8 19.Rad1 Rc7 20.Be4 [White could immediately give back the bishops, but it does not lead to an advantage. 20.Bxe7 Nxe7 21.d5 Nxd5 22.Bxd5 exd5 23.Rxd5 Re8!=] 20...Rfc8 21.Bd3 Qd6 22.g3 Qb4 [One can see that I loved endgames.] 23.Qxb4 Nxb4 24.Bxe7 Nxd3 25.Rxd3 Rxe7 26.d5 Rd7 27.d6 [Is the pawn on d6 strong or weak?] 27...Rcd8 28.Red1 e5 29.a5?! [One way to keep the d6pawn is to challenge the e5-pawn. 29.f4 exf4 30.gxf4 Kg7=] 29...f6 30.Kf1? Kf7 31.Ke2 Ke6 32.Rb3 Rc8! 33.f4 e4?! [33...Rc2+! wins a pawn.] 34.Ke3 f5 35.Rb5 Rxd6 36.Rxd6+ Kxd6 37.Rxb7 Rc7 38.Rb3 Kc6 [Or 38...Rc2 39.Rb7 Rxh2 40.Rxa7 Rxb2 41.Rxh7 Rb3+ 42.Kd4 Rd3+ 43.Kc4 Rxg3 44.a6=] 39.a6 Rd7 40.h3 h5 41.h4?! [41.Ke2!] 41...Kc7 42.Ke2 Kc6 [42...Kc8! 43.Rb5 Rd6 44.Rb7 Rxa6 45.Rg7 Kd8=/+] 43.Rb8 Kc7 44.Rb4 Kc6 45.Rb8 Kc7 46.Rb4 Kc6 47.b3 [47.Rb8= Drawn by repetition.] 47...Rd3! 48.Rb7 Rxg3 49.b4 Rh3? [49...Rg2+! 50.Ke3 Ra2 51.Rg7 Kb5 52.Rxg6 Ra3+ 53.Kd4 Kxb4 54.Rg2 Kb3!-+] 50.b5+ Kc5 51.Rxa7 Kxb5 52.Rg7 Kxa6 [After this it is a draw in all lines. Black's last try for a win is 52...Rxh4 53.Rxg6 Rh2+ 54.Ke3 Rh3+ 55.Kd4 Rd3+ 56.Ke5 e3 57.Rg2 Kxa6 58.Re2 Rd8 59.Kxf5 Re8 60.Kg5 Kb5 61.Kxh5 Kc4 62.Kg5 Kd3 63.Re1 e2 64.f5 Kd2 65.Rxe2+ Kxe2 66.f6 but Black will be forced to give up his rook for the final pawn leaving only the two kings on the board.] 53.Rxg6+ Kb7 54.Rg5 Rxh4 55.Rxf5 Kc6 56.Ke3 Kd6 57.Kxe4 Rh1 58.Rf6+ Ke7 59.Kf5 h4 60.Rh6 h3 61.Rh7+ Kd6 62.Kg4 Ke6 63.Rh6+ Kd5 64.Rxh3 Rxh3 65.Kxh3 Ke6 66.Kg4 Kf6 67.f5 Kf7 68.Kg5 Kg7 1/2-1/2

79 – Allman 6.Nf3 Bg7 7.Qb3 In 1992 I mostly played just correspondence chess. One day I got up on Saturday and drove to Altoona to play in a one day four round event at the Station Mall. Altoona is a mountain railroad community located in the middle of rural Pennsylvania. My first round opponent was John Allman, Jr. At 1821, John had one of the lower ratings in the Open Section. Unfortunately, John was not in his best form that day. Mr. Allman finished last scoring four straight losses. But against me, he could have done better. Allman began with 1.e4. I returned to my Caro-Kann Defence. I equalized easily but missed moves that would have given me an advantage. At the end we reached a very drawish position. He could have mishandled the kingside pawns if he tried too hard to win with 41.g5, but it seemed unlikely that he would lose. After move 40 my opponent left the room. Eventually his flag fell. I claimed a win on time. John returned and objected saying that they always play a 40 move time control. Tournament Director David Axinn confirmed that time control was at move 45. It was clearly posted in writing. Thus the game was a forfeit win for me. Allman - Sawyer, Altoona, PA (1), 02.05.1992 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 cxd5 4.c4 Nf6 5.Nc3 g6 6.Qb3 Bg7 7.Nf3 [The main line is 7.cxd5 0-0 8.Be2 Nbd7 9.Bf3 Nb6= with equal chances.] 7...0-0 8.Be2 dxc4 9.Bxc4 Nbd7 [9...Nc6!=/+] 10.Na4 e6 11.0-0 Nb6 12.Nxb6 Qxb6 13.Qxb6 axb6 14.Bd2 Bd7 15.a3 Rfc8 16.Ne5 Be8 [I missed the sharp continuation 16...Ne4!-/+ 17.Nxd7?! Nxd2 18.Nxb6 Rxc4 19.Nxa8 Nxf1 20.Kxf1 Bxd4+] 17.Rac1 Nd7?! [17...Nd5=] 18.f4 Nf6 19.Rfe1 Bf8?! 20.g3 Kg7 21.Rc2 Rc7 22.Rec1 Rac8 23.Bd3 Rxc2 24.Rxc2 Rxc2 25.Bxc2 Bd6 26.Kf2 Nd5 27.Be4 Bb5 28.Nd3 Kf6 29.Nb4 Nxb4 30.axb4 Bc6 31.Ke3 Ke7 32.Bc3? [Equality can be maintained with 32.Bd3 b5=] 32...Kd7 [Black is given opportunities to swap into a superior endgame with a much better bishop. Black's king could dominate the board at d5. White would be under

pressure. Correct is 32...Bxe4! 33.Kxe4 f5+ 34.Kd3 b5-/+] 33.b5 [33.Bd3!=] 33...Bd5 [33...Bxb5 34.Bxb7 Bc6 35.Bxc6+ Kxc6-/+ with a better ending.] 34.Be1 Ke7 35.g4 Bc7 36.Bh4+ Kd7 37.h3 Bd6 38.Bf6 Be7 39.Bxe7 Kxe7 40.Bxd5 exd5 White forfeits on Time 0-1

80 - Kohut 6.Qb3 Bg7 7.cxd5 Timothy D. Harding wrote a classic book in 1973 entitled "Counter Gambits: Black to Play and Win". This book had a profound and long lasting impact on my view of chess. One gambit came from the Caro-Kann Defence variation after the moves 3.exd5 cxd5 4.c4 Nf6 5.Nc3 g6. About the only theoretical books on the Caro-Kann Defence I had back then were a monograph by Ken Smith, "Practical Chess Openings" by Fine, and the classic tome "Chess Openings: Theory and Practice" by I.A. Horowitz. Beyond that, I had popular game collections by Capablanca, Alekhine, Fischer, Botvinnik, Lasker, Keres and Morphy. In postal chess everyone could use books for research, so all those books were very important! One of the books, I think Ken Smith's monograph, had a line where Black could trap the White queen. Somehow we reached that position or a similar one in my APCT 77 Rook 11 game vs Gregory Kohut. He and I enjoyed playing so much, that we soon added another four game rated postal match. All the games could be played on the same postcard, one move in each game per week. This 5...g6 line gambits the d5 pawn. Play gets very tactical. Kohut - Sawyer, corr APCT 77R-11, 08.1977 begins 1.e4 c6 2.c4 d5 3.exd5 cxd5 4.d4 Nf6 5.Nc3 g6 6.Qb3 Bg7 7.cxd5 0-0 8.Nge2 [The main line is 8.Be2 Nbd7 9.Bf3 Nb6 10.Nge2=] 8...Re8 [8...Nbd7=] 9.g3 e6 10.dxe6 Bxe6 11.Qxb7 Nbd7 12.Bg2 Rb8 13.Qxa7 Bc4 14.Bf3 Nd5 15.Nxd5? [15.0-0 Ra8 16.Qb7 Rb8=] 15...Rxe2+ 16.Bxe2 Bxd5 17.0-0

Ra8 [The queen is trapped.] 18.Qxa8 Qxa8 19.Be3 Qe8 20.Bd3 Nf6 21.b4 Qe6 22.Rfc1 h5 23.a4 h4 24.Re1 hxg3 25.fxg3 Ng4 26.Bf2 Qf6 27.Rf1 Qf3 0-1

81 - Fawbush 6.Qb3 Bg7 7.cxd5 A fighting spirit gives you a higher rating. Your opponent’s do not all resign quickly just because you show up. You need to make good moves. Just let the result happen. Don't cut it short. Before my rating surged past 2000 I was timid when playing stronger players. Once I learned to not offer draws, my rating went up. George E. Fawbush had a fighting spirit and almost never agreed to draws. GEF won frequently. Fawbush lost sometimes, but he always fought hard. In my Caro-Kann Defence in the 4.c4 Panov Variation vs George Fawbush I got a good position with the 5...g6 Gruenfeld type line. White chose the sharp 6.Qb3 idea but he went wrong ten moves later. Probably I offered the draw. I imagine Fawbush agreed because he stood worse. The other issue was that this came from a Tennessee Chess Association event where he may have determined that he was not going to win. Five years later I beat George Fawbush in a game selected and analyzed by Arthur Bisguier, but this game below was played in my early years of postal chess. Fawbush (2200) - Sawyer, corr TCA 1977 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 cxd5 4.c4 Nf6 5.Nc3 g6 6.Qb3 Bg7 7.cxd5 0-0 8.Be2 Nbd7 9.Bf3 Nb6 10.Bg5 a5 11.Bxf6 [11.Nge2 a4 12.Qb5 Bd7=] 11...exf6 12.Nge2 Bf5 13.Qb5 Re8 14.0-0 Qd6 15.g4 Bd7 16.Qd3? [16.Qc5 Nc8 17.Ne4 Qb8=] 16...f5 17.h3 fxg4 18.hxg4 f5 [18...Rac8=/+] 19.Kg2 [19.Nb5 Bxb5 20.Qxb5 fxg4 21.Bxg4 Nxd5=/+] 19...fxg4 20.Bxg4 [20.Be4 Rac8-/+]

20...Bxg4 21.Qb5 Qf6 [Black stood better when a draw was agreed.] 1/21/2

82 – Noonan 6.Qb3 Bg7 7.cxd5 Dr. Thomas R. Noonan upset my Caro-Kann Defence research. My favorite 5…g6 gambit line against the 4.c4 Panov Variation had served me well. Chess opening books were not widely available in 1977. Authors recommended the same few lines of theory. Postal players like myself who did research could repeat the same few main lines. There is a back story to this game. Dr. Thomas Noonan played the same line against me in the same event at the same time as did George Fawbush. They copied each other for 10 moves. There must have been a slight difference in transmission time. Fawbush moved quickly but he lived near St. Louis, Missouri. Dr. Noonan lived only 50 miles from me in Oak Ridge, Tennessee. The city of Oak Ridge is located just west of Knoxville along I-40. It is famous for scientific research. Oak Ridge is known as the birthplace of the atomic bomb. Noonan demonstrated that I had a serious danger on the d-file. My target was his d5 pawn sitting in front of his d4 pawn. The problem was I had not yet blockaded the pawn with a piece on d6. Noonan’s move 13.d6 exploded onto the board like an atomic bomb. My position blew up. It left me shook up. I played my 5…g6 line intending to regain the gambit pawn on d5. All of a sudden I had to remain down a pawn and was losing. Noonan - Sawyer, corr TCA 1977 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 cxd5 4.c4 Nf6 5.Nc3 g6 6.Qb3 Bg7 7.cxd5 0-0 8.Be2 Nbd7 9.Bf3 Nb6 10.Bg5 [10.Nge2 Bg4 11.Bxg4 Nxg4 12.a4=] 10...a5 [10...Re8! 11.Nge2 Bg4=] 11.Nge2 Bf5?! 12.0-0 Bd3 13.d6! Qxd6 14.Bxb7 Ra7 15.Bf3 e6? [15...Bc4 16.Qc2+/=] 16.Qd1 Bxe2 [16...Ba6 17.Rc1+/=] 17.Qxe2 Rd7

18.Nb5 Qb4 19.Bc6 Rxd4 20.Nxd4 Qxd4 21.Be3 Qe5 22.Qb5 Nbd5 23.Bxd5 Ng4 24.g3 Nxe3 25.fxe3 Rb8 [25...exd5 26.Rae1+/-] 26.Qd7 exd5 27.Qxf7+ Kh8 28.Qf4 Rxb2 29.Rab1 Qc3 30.Rbc1 1-0

Book 4: Chapter 4 – Main Line 3.Nc3 We begin with games where Black does not capture the e-pawn on move three.

83 – Sawyer 3…b5 4.exd5 cxd5 Once I encountered a man from Moscow, Russia. He now lives in the United States. At one point the subject of chess came up. He asked me if I was a good chess player. I answered, "Yes." Here is what he told me he liked to do. The man said sometimes when he sees people enjoying a game of chess, they ask the normal question, "Do you play chess?" He replies, "I know how to move the pieces." (This implies that he is barely a beginner and easy to beat.) When they invite him to play a game, he surprises them by winning. Then he told me, "I have been playing since age 4." I myself have played in many simultaneous exhibitions. I might be the opponent playing against a grandmaster, master or expert, called a Candidate Master. Sometimes I give the simul myself. There I play against lower club players and novices. In 1996 I gave a simultaneous chess exhibition at Penn College in Williamsport, Pennsylvania. I played 30 games in a couple hours. That sounds like more than it really was. I played 6-8 boards at a time with rotating players. When one player would finish, another took his place. Two of my opponents were club players. Most opponents just knew how to move the pieces. They played chess for fun now and then. This is a very short game against a novice player that I call “NN” (No Name available). It came from that simul event.

Sawyer - NN, simul Williamsport PA 1996 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e4 c6 3.Nc3 b5 4.exd5 cxd5? [If Black is going to play this line, it seem best to continue 4…b4 5.Ne4 cxd5 6.Nc5+=] 5.Bxb5+ 1-0

84 – Crompton 3.Nc3 e6 4.e5 John Crompton won this game against both the Caro-Kann and French Defence. This defense can be passive but here it turned wild. Danger surrounded both sides. Each avoided a possible draw. Black had two queens when White found a mate in four. Crompton (1635) - Darrien88 (1638), Live Chess Chess.com, 09.07.2018 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e4 c6 3.Nc3 e6 4.e5 [4.Bd3+/=] 4...c5 5.Bd3 c4 6.Be2 Bb4 7.f4 Nc6 8.Nf3 Nge7 9.Bd2 [9.0-0=] 9...Nf5 10.a3 Bxc3? 11.bxc3 0-0 12.0-0 a5 [12...Bd7=] 13.Qe1 b5 14.g4 Nfe7 15.Qg3 Bd7 16.Nh4 Qc8 17.Rf2 Rb8 18.f5 exf5 19.gxf5 Nxf5 20.Nxf5 Bxf5 21.Bh6 [21.Rg2=] 21...Bg6 22.Bg4 Qb7 23.Bd2 Bxc2 24.Bf5 Bxf5 25.Rxf5 Ne7 26.Rf6 Ng6 27.Raf1? Rbc8 [27...gxf6-+] 28.h4 gxf6 29.Rxf6 Kh8 30.Bg5 Rg8 31.Kh2 b4 32.h5 b3 33.hxg6 b2 [33...Rxg6-+] 34.Qh4 [34.Rxf7! b1Q 35.Bf6+ Rg7 36.Bxg7+ Kg8 37.Rxb7 Qxb7 38.gxh7+ Kxh7 39.Bf6=] 34...Rg7 [34...Rxg6!-+] 35.gxf7 b1Q [35...Rf8!-+] 36.f8Q+ Rxf8? [Black draws after 36...Rg8 37.Rf7 Q7b2+ 38.Rf2 Rcxf8 39.Bf6+ Rxf6 40.Qxf6+ Rg7= with a perpetual check.] 37.Rxf8+ Rg8 38.Bf6+ Qg7 39.Bxg7+ Kxg7 40.Qf6# 1-0

85 – Nutter 3…Nf6 4.e5 Nfd7 This Caro-Kann position after 3.Nc3 Nf6 had been reached 400 times in my database with some games by World Champions. Play continues 4.e5 Nfd7 (on 4...Ne4 5.Bd3 Tal-Strelkov, Latvia 1950, 1-0 in 19) 5.e6!? fxe6 6.Bd3 (6.f4 c5 7.dxc5 Nf6 Krause - Emanuel Lasker, Naestved 1919, 0-1 in 22; 6.Nf3 Nf6 7.Bf4 Nbd7 Eikstroem - Alekhine, Riga 0-1 in 24) 6...Nf6 7.Nf3 g6 8.h4 in the famous game Tal Campomanes, Leipzig 1960, 1-0 in 27. My score against "Nutter" of 5-1 pretty much reflected our rating difference. I missed a mate in one when I saw a mate in four?! Sawyer - Nutter, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 30.12.2012 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 c6 3.e4 d5 4.e5 Nfd7 5.Bd3 e6 6.f4 Na6 [More common is 6...c5 7.Nf3] 7.f5? [7.Nf3] 7...Be7? [7...Qh4+! 8.g3 Qxd4=/+ and Black has won

a pawn with a solid position.] 8.fxe6 fxe6 9.Qh5+ Kf8 10.Bxh7!? [10.Nh3!+- is even better.] 10...Rxh7 [10...Qe8] 11.Qxh7 Bg5 12.Nh3 Bxc1 13.Rxc1 Nb4 14.0-0+ Ke7 15.Qxg7+ Ke8 16.Qg6+ [16.Qf7#] 16...Ke7 17.Rf7+ Ke8 18.Qg8+ Nf8 19.Qxf8# Black checkmated 1-0

86 – Sarosy 3…g6 4.h3 Bg7 So close I came to beating Zoltan Sarosy, one of the strongest masters I ever played in my life. Sarosy dodged. He weaved. He wiggled. He jiggled. He made me work hard. In the end I missed the best move 48. Zoltan the magnificent pulled off a draw. Darn. At the time International Correspondence Chess Master Zoltan Sarosy of Canada was near his peak rating of 2435 (in 1992) when more than 80 years old! How old is too old for chess? In 1987, under Hans-Werner von Massow the ICCF added the Elo rating system. Before that they used only class titles. By then Sarosy was already in his 80s; he might have had a much higher rating in his younger days. He won a Master Class tournament in Hungary in 1943. According to his biography in the Canadian Chess Hall of Fame, Zoltan Sarosy "Reached age 100 in 2006 while still playing chess by e-mail; in 2007, became longest lived Canadian chess player ever". The opening was a crossover between the Caro-Kann Defence (1.e4 c6 with d5) and the Modern Defence (1.e4 g6 with Bg7) which can be reached by either move order. White usually plays 1.e4, 2.d4, 3.Nc3 and then either 4.h3 and 5.Nf3 as I did, or 4.e5 and 5.f4. Black plans a slow build up in an unbalanced position. Sarosy liked to play original little known positions that made his opponents think on their own. It is dangerous for weaker players to try a slow build up, because they have not yet developed the tactical, strategical and analytical skills to make it work effectively. They get crushed without improving. Weaker players need to play openings that lead to quick contact development so they can learn quickly. They do not have to play main lines, just anything that brings all the pieces out for action. When the armies clash, they will learn what works and what to avoid in the future. Sarosy already knew what works. He was a proven dangerous player waiting to pounce and crush experts and masters due to his deep analysis.

Because I developed rapidly with control of the center, I was able to prevent disaster and even obtain a winning position. Picking off his pawn with 48.Nxg6 seemed like a good idea. Alas, it failed to his brilliant defense. This draw got me to 2.5 points in the event. I won this Master Class tournament with 4.5 out of 6. Sawyer (2157) - Sarosy (2401), corr ICCF 1995 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 g6 4.h3 Bg7 5.Nf3 Nh6 6.Bf4 0-0 7.Qd2 dxe4 8.Nxe4 Nf5 9.c3 Nd7 10.Bc4 Nb6 11.Bb3 Nd6 12.Nc5 Nd5 13.Be5 b6 14.Nd3 f6 15.Bh2 Be6 16.0-0 Qd7 17.Qe2 Bf7 18.Rfe1 Rfe8 19.Nde5 fxe5 20.dxe5 Nc7 21.e6 Nxe6 22.Bxe6 Qxe6 23.Qxe6 Bxe6 24.Rxe6 Rad8 25.Rae1 Kf8 26.Bf4 c5 27.Ne5 Nf7 28.Nc6 Rd7 29.a4 Bf6 30.a5 Ng5 [30...Rc8 31.Kh2 b5 32.a6=] 31.Bxg5 Bxg5 32.Ne5 Rd6 33.Rxd6 exd6 34.Nd7+ Kf7 35.Rxe8 Kxe8 36.axb6 axb6 37.Nxb6 Kf7 38.Nd5 Bc1 39.b3 Ke6 40.c4 Ke5 41.g3 Kd4 [Maybe better is 41...Ke4 42.Kg2 Kd3 43.Kf1 g5 44.Nf6 h6 45.Nd5 Bb2 46.f4 Ke4 47.Kf2 Bd4+ 48.Kg2 Ba1 49.fxg5 hxg5 50.h4 gxh4 51.gxh4+=] 42.f4 Kd3 [Or 42...Bb2 43.Kf2 Ke4 44.Ke2 Bg7 45.Nc7 Bf8 46.Nb5+/-] 43.Kf2 Kc2 [If 43...Bd2 44.Kf3 Ba5 45.g4+-] 44.Ke2 Kxb3 45.Kd3 h5 46.Ne7 [Winning is 46.g4! hxg4 47.hxg4 Ka3 48.f5 gxf5 49.gxf5 Bh6 50.f6+-] 46...h4 47.gxh4 Bxf4 48.Nxg6? [White is winning after 48.Ke4 g5 49.h5 Kxc4 50.h6 Bc1 51.Nd5 Bb2 52.Ne3+ Kb4 53.Kd5+-] 48...Bg3 49.Ke2 [49.Ke4 Kxc4 50.h5 d5+ 51.Kf3 Be1 52.h6 Bc3 53.Kg4 Kb5 54.h7 c4 with a likely draw] 49...d5 50.cxd5 c4 51.Ne7 Bxh4 1/2-1/2

3.Nc3 dxe4 Gambit players avoid the recapture and continue with either 4.Bc4, 4.f3 or both.

87 – Delpire 4.Bc4 Bf5 5.f3 Jason Delpire posted a Caro-Kann Defence and commented: "Kind of a "helpmate game". This is the first game with time controls of 5/0 in well over a year for me (meaning: my rating is not a reliable gauge of my playing strength). Tim Sawyer, is 4.Bc4 correct, or should I play 4.f3 first?" I answered, "Theory seems to slightly favor 4.f3 over 4.Bc4, although if you play both in the same game, positions often transpose. Black may play Nf6, e5 or b5 on moves four or five, and each brings its own issues. I note Black here avoided Nf6. Maybe I will use this game for my blog this coming week." Jason Delpire replied, "That would be great if you used my game! I usually play 4.Bc4, and have yet [to have] someone try anything other than protecting e4. I know I was happy when I saw 7...Nd7, as it blocks the Q from attacking the d-pawn which can be quite weak and distracting, especially with the hole on f2. The questionable sac 9.Nxe6 was fun, and it's a shame I missed a Queen sac for mate." Key in Jason's choices is that Black did not play ...Nf6. Delpire (1864) - gonchar (1219), FICS, 08.04.2015 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Bc4!? Bf5 5.f3 exf3 6.Nxf3 e6 7.0-0 Nd7 8.Ng5 Nh6 9.Nxe6!? [This could be fun in a blitz game. White could play 9.a4 if he does not want to back up to sacrifice on e6.] 9...fxe6 10.Bxh6 gxh6 11.Rxf5 [11.Bxe6 Bg6 12.Qg4 h5 13.Rae1 Be7 (13...hxg4? 14.Bf7!#) 14.Qh3 Nf6-/+] 11...Bg7? [Another critical line is 11...exf5 12.Qh5+ Ke7 13.Ne4 Qa5-/+] 12.Qh5+ Ke7 13.Rf7+ Kd6 14.Rxg7 Qb6 15.Ne4+ [Jason Delpire writes: "Grr, missed mate in two." 15.Qe5+! Nxe5 16.Ne4#! Yes, that is

pretty. Your move also leads to mate, just not quite as quickly.] 15...Kc7 16.Qe5+ Kd8 17.Rxd7+ Kxd7 18.Nf6+ Ke7 19.Qxe6+ Kd8 20.Qd7# 1-0

88 – Curtis 4.Bc4 Nd7 5.f3 There are three very common Blackmar-Diemer Gambit type set-ups that White can impose vs the solid Caro-Kann Defence after 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5: (I) Fantasy Variation with 3.f3. (II) Milner-Barry with 3.Nc3 dxd4 4.f3. (III) Von Hennig with 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Bc4 as played in one of three of my postal games vs Warren Curtis. We transposed into the Caro-Kann Defence main line normally reached by 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4. After 4.Bc4 Nd7, I headed toward a BlackmarDiemer Gambit type position with 5.f3 exf3 6.Nxf3 Ngf6. This became a BDG Ziegler where Black played 6...Nbd7 which blocks Black's light squared bishop from playing 6...Bf5. After 7.0-0 e6 the game took on the flavor of a BDG Euwe variation. We continued with the typical moves 8.Bg5 Be7 9.Qe1 0-0 10.Bd3 h6 11.Qh4 when White had major threats against the Black king. There were lots of options discussed in the notes. White broke through in the center for a winning position. Then play ceased in all our postal games. Sawyer (2016) - Curtis (1632), corr, 1991 begins 1.d4 c6 2.e4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Bc4 Nd7 [More common is 4...Nf6 5.f3 BDG O'Kelly 4...c6 5.Bc4, or even 5...exf3 6.Nxf3 BDG Ziegler] 5.f3 [5.Nxe4 is a well-known CaroKann Defence.] 5...exf3 [5...e5 6.dxe5 Nxe5 7.Qxd8+ Kxd8 8.Bb3 exf3 9.Nxf3 Nxf3+ 10.gxf3 Be6 11.Bg5+ Nf6 12.0-0-0+ and White has some compensation for the pawn.] 6.Nxf3 Ngf6 7.0-0 e6 8.Bg5 [8.Bf4!?= Houdini 4] 8...Be7 9.Qe1 0-0 10.Bd3 h6 [10...c5 11.Qh4 transposes to a popular BDG Euwe line where both sides have used one more move than normal.] 11.Qh4 Nd5 [If Black grabs the bishop, White gets a very strong attack. 11...hxg5 12.Nxg5 Qb6 13.Rxf6 Nxf6 14.Bh7+ Kh8 15.Bg6+ Kg8 16.Nce4 Qxd4+ 17.Kh1+- and Black has to give up the queen to avoid immediate mate. Correct is 11...Re8! 12.Ne4 Nxe4 13.Bxe7 Qxe7 14.Qxe4 f5 15.Qe3 Nf6 16.Ne5=] 12.Qe4? [12.Nxd5! Bxg5 13.Nxg5 Qxg5 14.Qxg5 hxg5 15.Ne7+ Kh8 16.Rae1 g6 17.Bxg6 fxg6 18.Nxg6+ Kg7 19.Nxf8 Nxf8= and White has a rook and h-pawn for Black's bishop and knight.]

12...f5? [I was fortunate Black missed 12...N7f6!-/+] 13.Qxe6+ Kh8 14.Bxe7 Nxe7 15.Rae1 Re8 16.Qf7!? 1-0

89 – Konnen 4.Bc4 Nf6 5.Bg5 This attempt at a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit led to the Caro-Kann Defence by transposition after 3...c6. Black returned the gambit pawn with 6...e3 and attempted to win by pin on c3. White’s king was forced to flee to safety on the kingside. Then Black’s king was in danger in the game Timo Konnen against Jim Robertson. Konnen (1875) - Robertson (1604), 15th South Wales Int 2018 Cardiff WLS (2.27), 07.07.2018 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 c6 4.Bc4 Nf6 5.Bg5 [5.f3!?] 5...Nbd7 6.f3 e3 7.Bxe3 [7.Nge2=] 7...e6 8.f4 Nb6 9.Bd3 Nbd5 10.Qe2 Bb4 11.Bd2 Qa5 12.Nf3 [12.Nxd5=] 12...Nxf4? [12...Nxc3 13.bxc3 Bxc3=/+] 13.Bxf4 Bxc3+ 14.bxc3 Qxc3+ 15.Kf2 Ng4+ 16.Kg3 h5 17.h4 f6 [17...Bd7 18.Rab1+-] 18.Qe4 f5 19.Qe1 Qa3 20.Bxf5 Kf7 [20...00 21.Bxe6+ Kh8 22.Bxc8+-] 21.Bd3 Bd7 22.Qe4 1-0

90 – Fizz44 4.f3 e3 5.Bxe3 Bf5 The Caro-Kann Defence was the first defence I studied. I played 1.e4 c6 as Black regularly in the 1970s when I was in my 20s. That seems like a long time ago. In this game I played White. My opponent “Fizz44” returned the gambit pawn with 4…e3. The return of the pawn resulted in allowing White to develop three pieces, castle and gain a space advantage by move 10. Black's position was solid, but he remained down several tempi. When I play Black in the Caro-Kann, my winning plan is to grab a pawn and win the endgame. If White is attacking and does not need to sacrifice material, then Black may be in deep trouble! Sawyer - Fizz44 (1741), ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 20.11.2016 begins 1.d4 c6 2.e4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.f3 e3 [Black returns the pawn. 4...exf3 5.Nxf3 Nf6 is the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit Ziegler] 5.Bxe3 Bf5 [5...Nf6 6.Bd3+/=] 6.g4! Bg6 7.Nge2 h6 [7...e6 8.h4+/=] 8.Nf4 Bh7 9.Qd2 e6 10.00-0 Bb4 11.a3 Ba5 [11...Bxc3 12.Qxc3 Nf6 13.h4+/=] 12.Bd3 [12.Nh5! Kf8 13.d5!+-] 12...Bxd3 13.Qxd3 Nf6 14.h4 Nbd7 [14...Bxc3 15.Qxc3 Nd5 16.Qd2+/=] 15.b4 [15.g5! Nd5 16.Ncxd5 cxd5 17.Nh5+/-] 15...Bb6 [15...Bc7 16.g5+/=] 16.Ne4?! [16.g5+/=] 16...Bc7 17.g5 Nd5 18.Nxd5

cxd5 19.Nc3?! [19.Nc5=] 19...Qe7 [19...Nb6!=/+] 20.Nb5 [20.gxh6=] 20...0-0-0 [20...Bb8=] 21.Nxc7 [21.Qc3+/=] 21...Kxc7 22.Bf4+ Kc8? [22...Kb6=] 23.Qc3+ Nc5 24.Qxc5+ Black resigns 1-0

91 – Torning 4.f3 exf3 5.Nxf3 Rick Torning wrote about the BDG Caro-Kann version of the Rasa-Studier Gambit: "The Rasa-Studier Gambit game has a nice trap that baits Black's queen to win a pawn with check and then a bishop - which if accepted leads to a forced checkmate! The e6 pawn shields, nay interferes with, Black's queen from defending the weak f7 square. A nice brevity. I have not found this trap in any of my books on traps or database files (including ChessBase Mega Database 2018). Do you know if it has been played before?" Yes, Rick. It was played in Vandenbroucke-gron, ICS 1995 (BDGKII Game 85 page 345), a game that was repeated via a different move order in Sawyer-guest, ICC 1997. Torning - NN, Casual Bullet lichess, 01.03.2018 begins 1.d4 c6 2.e4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.f3 [Caro-Kann Rasa-Studier Gambit] 4...exf3 5.Nxf3 Bg4 6.Bc4 Bxf3 7.Qxf3 Nf6 8.Ne4 e6 9.Nxf6+ Qxf6 10.0-0! [baiting the queen to capture the bishop.] 10...Qxd4+ 11.Kh1 Qxc4?? 12.Qxf7+ [White has a forced mate 12.Qxf7+ Kd8 13.Bg5+ Be7 14.Qxe7+ Kc8 15.Rf8+ Rxf8 16.Qxf8+ Kc7 17.Qd8#] 12...Kd8 13.Bg5+ Kc8 14.Qe8+ [White wins on time before...] 14...Kc7 15.Qd8# 1-0 [Game notes by Torning]

92 – Zilbermints 5.Nxf3 Nf6 6.Bd3 Lev Zilbermints wins vs a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit that could have come from a Caro-Kann Defence. Black chose the Ziegler 5.Nf3 c6. White played 6.Bd3 (instead of the popular 6.Bc4). White must continue 6...Bg4 7.Be3! (see my Blackmar-Diemer Theory 3 for more analysis on this line). Cassius43 (2135) - Zilbermints (1916), Blackmar-Diemer Gambit Chess.com (3), 12.06.2018 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3 exf3 5.Nxf3 c6 6.Bd3 Bg4 7.h3?! [7.Be3! e6 8.h3= or 8.Qe2=] 7...Bxf3 8.Qxf3 Qxd4 9.Be3 Qh4+ 10.g3 Qb4 11.0-0-0 Nbd7 12.Be2 [Maybe 12.g4 e6 13.g5 and for 13...Nd5= (but 13...Ne5!=/+)] 12...e6 13.Kb1 Be7 14.g4 Nd5

15.Nxd5 cxd5 16.c3 Qa4 17.Rd4 Qa5 18.g5 Bc5 19.Rf1 0-0 20.Rh4 Bxe3 21.Qxe3 Qb6 22.Qf3 g6 23.Rf4 e5 24.Rb4 Qc6 0-1

93 – Torning 6.Bc4 Bg4 7.Ne5 I’ve seen several Caro-Kann Defence games which contain the same tricky trap from different move orders. I received this from Rick Torning. The opening transposes into the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit. Rick Torning commented on his games as White: "Against OhNooo (1760) the Caro Kann turned into a Ziegler Defence to my BDG. Black chose to castle long and after 15 moves had the choice of being checkmated on b8 or losing the queen for a bishop. Lastly, Igrethu (1988) ended up in an 8 move checkmate via the Caro Kann transposing into the BDG Ziegler Defence! Should never take that 'jail-bait' little queen on d1!" Torning (1801) - OhNooo (1760), Casual Bullet game lichess, 22.10.2017 begins 1.d4 d5 2.Nc3 c6 3.e4 dxe4 4.f3!? [4.Nxe4] 4...exf3 5.Nxf3 Nf6 [With this move the opening has transposed into a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit.] 6.Bc4 Bg4? [6...Bf5] 7.Ne5!? [White regains the gambit pawn with attack after 7.Bxf7+! Kxf7 8.Ne5+ Kg8 9.Nxg4+/-] 7...Be6! [The classic blunder was seen in 7...Bxd1? 8.Bxf7# 1-0 Torning - lgrethu, lichess 2017] 8.Bxe6 fxe6 9.0-0 Nbd7 10.Bf4 Nxe5 [10...g6 11.Qd3 Bg7 12.Qh3 Rf8 13.Rad1+/-] 11.Bxe5 Qd7 [11...g6 12.Ne4+/-] 12.Ne2 [12.Qf3!+-] 12...0-0-0 [12...g6 13.Qd3 Bg7 14.Rae1 0-0=] 13.c3 Nd5 [13...g5 14.Nc1+/-] 14.Qa4 Nb6? 15.Qxa7 1-0

94 – Crompton 6.Bc4 Bg4 7.Bxf7+ John Crompton sent me these Blackmar-Diemer Gambit gems that could also be reached via the Caro-Kann Defence. Black should play 6...Bf5. But alas, the temptation to pin the White knight by 6...Bg4 is too strong for many players to ignore. The punishment is swift and often brutal. White mates quickly here. Crompton (1634) - aldrenalin (1627), Chess.com, 13.11.2017 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d5 3.e4 dxe4 4.f3 exf3 5.Nxf3 c6 6.Bc4 Bg4 [6...Bf5] 7.Bxf7+ Kxf7 8.Ne5+ Kg8 9.Nxg4 Nbd7 [9...Nxg4 10.Qxg4 Nd7 11.Qe6# 1-0

Crompton - MiguelOrozco, Chess.com 2017] 10.0-0 Nxg4 11.Qxg4 Nf6 12.Qe6# 1-0

95 – Gareyev 6.Bc4 Bf5 7.Ne5 Grandmaster Timur Gareyev turned a Caro-Kann Defence into a BlackmarDiemer Gambit in January 2017. In December 2016 Timur Gareyev set an impressive world record in blindfold play. GM Gareyev avoided the 4.Nxe4 main line Caro-Kann variations. The BDG is an exciting choice, but here White walked into a bad line. Better would be 7.0-0, or earlier 6.Bd3, or even 3.f3!? White cannot afford to leave his uncastled king in the center. Guillermo Vazquez defended aggressively. Rather than 8…Bg6 he countered with 8…Nfd7. Black threatens Nxe5 and …Qh4+. This thematic idea comes from both the Slav and BDG. Nigel Short transposed to a related line (see 7.Qe2 below) in a blitz game. Short won as White in 43 moves from a Caro-Kann Defence. The BDG fits in well with the King’s Gambit which Nigel often played on the Internet Chess Club about fifteen years ago. Blackmar-Diemer Gambit sets up a battle of White momentum vs Black material. Gareyev (or Gareev) plays a wide variety of entertaining sharp openings! Gareyev (2617) - Vazquez (2437), PRO League Pacific 2017 chess.com INT (1), 11.01.2017 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.f3 exf3 5.Nxf3 Nf6 6.Bc4 Bf5 7.Ne5 [7.Qe2 e6 8.0-0 Be7 9.Bf4 Nbd7 10.Rae1 0-0=/+ Short (3314) - Diana (2924), ICC 2004] 7...e6 8.g4 Nfd7 9.Bf4?! [If 9.gxf5 Qh4+ 10.Kf1 Nxe5 11.Be2 Qh3+ 12.Ke1 Ned7=/+] 9...Nxe5 10.Bxe5 Qh4+ 11.Bg3 Qxg4 12.Be2 [12.Qd2 Be7 13.Be2 Qg5 14.Bf4 Qh4+ 15.Bg3 Qh6 16.Qxh6 gxh6 17.0-0-0 Na6 18.a3 0-0-0-/+ when Black's f-pawn is a long term advantage.] 12...Qg5 13.Rf1 Nd7 14.Bf3 Bb4 15.Qe2 Nf6 16.Qe3?! Qxe3+ 0-1

96 – Crompton 7.0-0 e6 John Crompton won this Caro-Kann Defence that transposed to a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit. In this BDG Ziegler Variation 5.Nxf3 c6 6.Bc4 Bf5 White has tactical threats of 9.Nxf7 and 9.Rxf5 if Black misses 8...Bg6. John Crompton mounted a mating attack. Crompton (1550) - flubovci (1526), Live Chess Chess.com, 22.03.2018 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e4 c6 [Normal BDG move order is 2...dxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3 exf3 5.Nxf3 c6 6.Bc4 Bf5 see the game position after move 6.] 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Bc4 Bf5 5.f3 exf3 6.Nxf3 Nf6 [BDG] 7.0-0 e6 8.Ne5 Bd6? [8...Bg6] 9.Nxf7 [Or 9.Rxf5!+-] 9...Kxf7 10.Rxf5 Re8 [10...Nbd7 11.Ne4+-] 11.Ne4 [Or 11.Bg5 Be7 12.Re5+-] 11...Kg8 12.Nxf6+ gxf6 13.Qg4+ Kh8 14.Rh5 f5 [14...Qe7 15.Qg6 Rg8 16.Qe4+-] 15.Qh3 [15.Rxh7+! Kxh7 16.Qh5+ Kg8 17.Qg6+ Kh8 18.Bg5+-] 15...Re7 16.Bg5 Qe8 [16...Nd7 17.Re1+-] 17.Re1 [17.Bf6+! Kg8 18.Rg5+!+-] 17...Rg7 18.Rxe6 Qf8 [18...Nd7 19.Rxe8+ Rxe8 20.Qxf5+-] 19.Bf6 Nd7 20.Rxh7+ Kg8 21.Rxd6+ Rf7 22.Rh8# 1-0

97 – Zilbermints 8.Ng5 Bg6 Lev Zilbermints transposed to the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit from the CaroKann Defence. White played the favored move 8.Ng5 and built an attack. Black's extra gambit pawn was doubled on the g-file and of minimal help. Lev employed his entire army vs Herzeleid. Black's failure to complete queenside development became a key factor in White's win. Zilbermints (1872) - Herzeleid (2001), ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 09.05.2018 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Bc4 Bf5 5.f3 exf3 6.Nxf3 e6 7.0-0 Nf6 8.Ng5 Bg6 9.Ne2 Bd6 10.Bf4 [10.Nf4 Bxf4 11.Bxf4 0-0=/+] 10...0-0 11.Bxd6 Qxd6 12.Nf4 Nd5 13.Nxg6 hxg6 14.Bxd5 Qxd5 15.Qg4 Rd8 [15...f6 16.Nxe6+-] 16.Rad1 f6 17.Nxe6 Qd7 18.Rde1 [18.Rxf6!+-] 18...Qf7 [18...Na6 19.Qxg6+-] 19.Nxd8 Qf8 20.Qxg6 [20.Qe6+ Kh7 21.Re3 Qc5 22.dxc5 g5 23.Rh3+ Kg6 24.Qf5#] 20...Na6 21.Re8 Black resigns 1-0

98 – Zintgraff 8.Ne5 Bxc2 Gary Zintgraff sent me a short Caro-Kann Defence that became a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit. I edited his notes for space. Mr. Zintgraff wrote: "Here is my BDG [Caro-Kann to Gunderam} vs Al Fulton. It has not yet been published. Al had researched and found some German analysis [which I had not seen] that showed my 9.Nxf7 to be invalid so long as he played the correct move 11...Kd7! instead of 11...Be7? which he transposed to one move too soon. Whew! I like this game because it demonstrates how sensitive Black's defensive moves are to White's initiative and how a move which looks just fine (11....Be7?) can lead to disaster. Enjoy, Gary Zintgraff" Thanks, Gary. White should play earlier 10.Qxc2! with the advantage as shown in my Blackmar-Diemer Theory 3 book. Zintgraff (1839) - Fulton (1784), San Antonio Chess Club, 19.06.1999 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e4 c6 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Bc4 Nf6 5.f3 exf3 6.Nxf3 Bf5 7.0-0 e6 8.Ne5 Bxc2 9.Nxf7 Kxf7 10.Bxe6+ Kxe6 11.Qxc2 Be7? [My opponent told me a week after this game that he had planned to play 11...Kd7! which was recommended in the German analysis. It appears to win for Black in all lines. I found a Tim McGrew game vs Moonshot, ICC which went: 12.Bg5 Be7 13.d5 cxd5? (Instead 13...Kc8 would have maintained Black's advantage for Moonshot, e.g. 14.Rad1 Nbd7 15.dxc6 Qb6+ 16.Kh1 Qxc6-/+) 14.Nxd5 Nxd5 15.Rad1 Qb6+ 16.Kh1 Qc6 17.Qf5+ Kc7 18.Rxd5 Bxg5 19.Qxg5 McGrew-Moonshot, ICC 1998] 12.Qb3+ Nd5? [12...Kd7! would have been much better but 13.Qxb7+ Ke8 14.Qxa8+-] 13.Nxd5 Qxd5 [13...cxd5? 14.Qh3+ Kd6 15.Bf4+ Kc6 16.Rfc1+ Kb6 17.Bc7+ Qxc7 18.Qb3+ Ka5 19.Rxc7 and mates soon.] 14.Qh3+ [If he had not resigned when he did, I had planned to oscillate my Queen along the 3rd rank two more times. Now if 14.Qh3+ Kd6 15.Bf4+ Qe5 16.Bxe5+ Kd5 17.Qb3+ Ke4 18.Qf3#] 1-0 [Notes by Zintgraff]

99 – Martin 4.f3 e5 5.dxe5 I imagine our chess friend Andrew Martin surfing the internet. He finds a beautiful beach on which sits a lantern. Andrew picks up the lantern and dusts it off. Out pops a chess genie ready to grant him three gambit wishes. The genie says, "All three gambits will be in the same game, and you as Black can only choose one way to play in this game." IM Andrew Martin played Black against "SugarMagnolia" in an ICC five minute blitz game. Martin chose Black in a Caro-Kann Defence after 1.d4 d5 2.Nc3 c6 3.e4 dxe4. The main line would have been 4.Nxe4. With this 4.f3 move, International Master Andrew Martin was given three gambit wishes by the chess genie. How might Martin respond? #1 Gambit Wish: 4.f3 exf3 5.Nxf3 Nf6 transposes to the BDG Accepted Ziegler. #2 Gambit Wish: 4.f3 Nf6 transposes to the BDG Declined O'Kelly variation. #3 Gambit Wish: 4.f3 e5 chooses the recommended reply to the Milner-Barry Gambit. Martin chose #3. This is the Sir Stuart Milner-Barry Gambit. Our BDG hero "SugarMagnolia" kept up the pressure but alas missed a few chances. IM Andrew Martin, being the fighter he is, picked off the e5-pawn and won in the endgame. At any rate, the clash of styles led to entertaining chess! SugarMagnolia (2219) – AndrewMartinIM (2302), ICC 5 0 Internet Chess Club, 17.08.2012 begins 1.d4 d5 2.Nc3 c6 3.e4 dxe4 4.f3 e5 5.dxe5 [5.Be3!?] 5...Qxd1+ 6.Nxd1 [The position is harder for White to play after 6.Kxd1?!] 6...exf3 [6...Nd7! is the most critical line. White has 7.fxe4 (or 7.f4!? f6 8.Nf2=) 7...Nxe5 8.Nf3=] 7.Nxf3 Bc5 8.Be3 Nd7 9.Bc4 Ne7 10.Bxc5 [I like 10.0-0!+/= aiming at f7 and e6.] 10...Nxc5 11.Nc3 Be6 12.Bxe6 Nxe6 13.Ne4 0-0 14.0-0-0 Rfd8 15.Nd6 Rd7 16.Nd4 [16.g3!?] 16...Nxd4 17.Rxd4 Ng6 18.Rhd1 h6 19.Nc4 Rxd4 20.Rxd4 Re8 21.Nd6 Rd8 22.Re4 [22.Ra4] 22...b6 23.a4 Rd7 24.b4 Kf8 25.Nc4 Ke7 26.c3 Ke6 [At this point it seems the e-pawn is lost, and with it, the game.] 27.Kc2 Rd5 28.a5 b5 29.Nb2 Rxe5 30.Kd3 f5 31.Rxe5+ Kxe5 32.c4 [Black is winning with the extra pawn, even after 32.g3 Ne7-+] 32...Nf4+ 33.Kc3 Nxg2 34.Nd3+ Ke4 35.Nc5+ Ke3 36.Ne6 f4 37.Nxg7 f3 38.Nf5+ Kf4 39.Ng3 f2 40.cxb5 cxb5 41.Kd4 h5 42.Nxh5+ Kf3 43.Ng3 Ne3 44.Kc5 [A funny sideline is 44.Ne4 Nc2+ 45.Ke5 Nxb4 46.Nxf2 Kxf2 47.h4 Nc6+

48.Kd6 b4 49.h5 b3 50.h6 b2 51.h7 Ne5 52.Kxe5 b1Q 53.h8Q Qb2+ wins the queen] 44...Nf5 45.Nxf5 f1Q 46.Nd4+ Ke4 47.Nxb5 Qf5+ 48.Kc6 Qd5+ 49.Kc7 Qxb5 0-1

100 – Tbricker1 4.f3 e5 5.Be3 There are five closely related gambits in the Caro-Kann Defence using the f3 and / or Bc4 idea. It is easy to confuse them. They can transpose. Using a blitz game where I mated my opponent on the 14th move with the CaroKann 4.f3 Milner-Barry Gambit, here I break down the subtle differences of these lines. The Caro-Kann Defence is a good solid opening played on both sides by chess world champions and by me. The main line is 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 when Black can play 4.Nxe4 Bf5 (Schandorff), 4.Nxe4 Nd7 (Lakdawala) or 4.Nxe4 Nf6 (Silman). Here is a breakdown of the five related gambit lines: A. 3.f3 – The Fantasy Variation which can transpose below if 3...dxe4 4.Nc3 exf3, although White often plays 4.fxe4 e5. The most common reply is 3...e6 which is really a threat to win a pawn, say after 4.Be3, with 4...dxe4 5.fxe4 Qh4+ and 6...Qxe4. B. 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Bc4 - Von Hennig Gambit. Play might continue 4...Nf6 (or 4...Bf5) 5.f3 Bf5 where Black plays to hold e4. Or 5...exf3 6.Nxf3 it transposes to the Ziegler. C. 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.f3 - Milner-Barry Gambit. This has two key options: 4...e5 where 5.dxe5 does not attack an Nf6; or simply 4...exf3 without an Nf6. If 4...Nf6, see O'Kelly. D. 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.f3 Nf6 - O'Kelly Variation. This is also a BlackmarDiemer Gambit Declined after 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3 c6. Two typical continuations are 5.fxe4 e5 or 5.Bc4 b5 or 5...Bf5. 5.Nxe4 and 5.Be3 are also favorites. E. 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.f3 exf3 5.Nxf3 Nf6 - Ziegler Variation. This is a BlackmarDiemer Gambit Accepted after 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3 exf3 5.Nxf3 c6. Some prefer 6.Bd3, but 6.Bc4 Bf5 is the BDG Ziegler. White has the choice between 7.Bg5 e6 8.0-0, 7.Ne5 e6 8.g4 or 7.0-0 e6 and then 8.Ne5 or 8.Ng5. I hope that breakdown helps you keep these clear in your own mind. All of them can reach the BDG Ziegler. In my blitz game vs TBricker1, the

alternative to my 5.Be3 was 5.dxe5. Sawyer - TBricker1, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 23.06.2012 begins 1.d4 c6 2.e4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.f3 e5 5.Be3 Bf5 6.Nxe4 Bxe4 7.fxe4 Nd7 8.Nf3 f6 9.Bc4 Bb4+ 10.c3 Ba5 11.Qb3 b5 12.Bxg8 Ke7 13.Qe6+ Kf8 14.Qf7# Black checkmated 1-0

101 – Berthelsen 4.f3 e5 5.Be3 In September 2013 I was very happy to receive a game from long time BDGer Roald Berthelsen: “Hi Tim! “The following game was played in a Swedish open club tournament 2008. “The game [Roald Berthelsen – Leif Anderberg] has never been publish before. “Best regards, Roald Berthelsen” This Caro-Kann Defence 4.f3 e5, Milner-Barry Gambit, Black's 6...Be6 (without Nf6) was new to me. It was not in my database. The basic question in the main line is whether White's isolated e4 pawn is strong or weak. Black played to win the two bishops with Nb8-d7-c5xd3. However this allowed White to recapture 11.cxd3 leaving him with a central pawn duo. Berthelsen advanced these pawns with great effect. A key tactic was 17.e6! This attacked the queen. Black's f7 pawn could not take on e6 without dropping the Ng6. White's moves 16-22 were very accurately executed. Nice game. Berthelsen - Anderberg, Swedish club open 2008 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.f3 e5 5.Be3 exd4 6.Bxd4 Be6!? [6...Nf6 7.fxe4 Bb4 8.a3 Bxc3+ 9.Bxc3=] 7.fxe4 [Or 7.Nxe4=] 7...Nd7 8.Nf3 h6 9.Bd3 [9.Qd2!?] 9...Nc5 10.0-0 Nxd3 11.cxd3 Bg4? [Here was Black's last chance to get an equal game with 11...Nf6=] 12.Bf2 [Or 12.Ne2+/-] 12...Qd7 13.d4 [If 13.Ne5 Bxd1 14.Nxd7 Kxd7 15.Raxd1+/- White's pieces are better placed, but the position is less complicated.] 13...Ne7 14.Qd3 Ng6 15.Rfe1 Bd6 16.e5 Bc7? [16...Be7=] 17.e6! Qc8? [17...Bxe6 18.Rxe6+ fxe6 19.Qxg6+ Qf7 20.Qxf7+ Kxf7 21.Ne4+/=] 18.d5 [Or 18.exf7+ Kxf7 19.Bg3+-] 18...Nf4 19.Qd4 0-0 20.d6! Bxf3? [It is difficult to defend this position.

20...fxe6 21.dxc7 Bxf3 22.gxf3 Qxc7 23.Bg3+/-] 21.d7! Nxe6 22.dxc8Q 10

3.Nc3 dxe4 4.f3 Nf6 This is the O’Kelly Variation of the Caro-Kann Defence.

102 – InaOm 5.Bc4 Nd5 6.fxe4 I spent a disappointing day of blitz chess. I constantly lost by rescuing defeat from the jaws of victory. Or I won games in such an ugly fashion that I could not bear to look at them again. Then finally I pulled off this nice win. The opening backed into a CaroKann Defence with 1.d4 d5 2.e4 c6. I thought about playing 3.e5. It was one of my most successful choices as far as performance rating at that time. My opponent was a Class B player. My rule of thumb is that these players rated in the 1600s and 1700s are the easiest to beat with the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit. I went with 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.f3 Nf6. We have the BDG Declined O'Kelly variation normally reached after 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3 c6. Many 5th moves are playable; I went with the common line 5.Bc4. Black replied with 5…Nd5? This cannot be good. Black returned the material and gave White a central pawn duo. So, Black spent three of the first six moves to swap off its only developed piece. I built up a kingside attack. I missed a couple moves that would have given me a larger advantage, but I was still winning. At the end I decided to exchange pieces into an ending where I obtained an overwhelming material advantage. Sawyer - InaOm, ICC 5 0 Internet Chess Club, 23.09.2011 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e4 c6 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.f3 Nf6 5.Bc4 Nd5? 6.fxe4 Nxc3 7.bxc3 Qa5 8.Bd2 [Or 8.Qf3+/-] 8…h5 9.Nf3 Bg4 10.0-0 e6 11.Qe1!? [11.h3! Bxf3

12.Qxf3+-] 11...Bxf3 12.Rxf3 Be7 13.e5 [13.Qg3!+-] 13...Nd7 14.Qf2 0-0 15.Bd3 Qd8 [15...c5 16.Rf1+/-] 16.Rf1 f5 17.exf6 [17.Bc4!+-] 17...Bxf6 18.Qe2 Qe7 19.Qe4 g5 20.Qg6+ Qg7 21.Qxh5 e5 22.Bc4+ Rf7 23.Qxf7+ [23.Bxg5!+-] 23...Qxf7 24.Bxf7+ Kxf7 25.Bxg5 Rg8 26.Bxf6 Nxf6 27.Rxf6+ Black resigns 1-0

103 – Simons 5.Bc4 e3 6.Bxe3 When I posted a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit, Neil Graham wrote: “Good Morning “I see that you have included the Martin Simons - Richard Pert game today. All except one of Martin's White games in the British Championship started with some variant of the BDGs - all the games are on the British Championship website...” Great! Martin Simons is a good player who handled the BDG well. The game vs Pert was his only BDG loss. Adrian Elwin played a Caro-Kann Defence with 1.e4 c6 2.Nc3 d5 3.d4 dxe4. Rather than play the routine and good recapture 4.Nxe4, Martin Simons transposed into a BDG O'Kelly with 4.Bc4 Nf6 5.f3. The game featured Black returning the gambit pawn with 5...e3. Such positions in the opening favor White or are even. Later this middlegame clearly favored White up to move 18, but it drifted toward equality. Black missed a win when both players messed up move 43. In the end they had a hard fought draw. Simons (2087) - Elwin (1974), 101st ch-GBR 2014 Aberystwyth WLS (3.29), 21.07.2014 begins 1.e4 c6 2.Nc3 d5 3.d4 dxe4 4.Bc4 Nf6 5.f3 e3 [Another idea is 5...Bf5 6.g4 Bg6 7.g5] 6.Bxe3 e6 7.Nge2 Bd6 8.Qd2 Nbd7 9.0-0 Qc7 10.Bf4 Nb6 11.Bb3 Nbd5 12.Bxd6 Qxd6 13.Ne4 Qe7 14.c4 Nb6 15.Qg5!? [Or 15.Nxf6+ Qxf6 16.Ng3 0-0 17.Ne4+/-] 15...Nxe4 16.Qxe7+ Kxe7 17.fxe4 Rd8 18.c5 [18.e5+/=; 18.Rf3+/=] 18...Nd7 19.Rf3 b6! 20.cxb6 axb6 21.Raf1 Rf8 22.Nc3 Ra5 23.Bc4 Ba6 24.Bxa6 Rxa6 25.b4 f6 26.Rc1 Ra7 27.Rf2 Rfa8 28.Rfc2 Ra3 29.Rb1 e5 30.d5 cxd5 [30...c5!?] 31.Nxd5+ Kd8 32.Rd1 Rxa2 33.Rxa2 Rxa2 34.Nxb6 Ra7 35.Kf2 Rb7 36.Rxd7+ Rxd7 37.Nxd7 Kxd7 38.Ke3 h5 39.h3? [39.Kd3 Kd6 40.Kc4 g6 41.g3 f5 42.exf5 gxf5 43.b5 e4 44.Kd4 Kc7 45.h3 Kb6 46.g4 fxg4 47.hxg4 hxg4 48.Kxe4 Kxb5 49.Kf4 Kc4 50.Kxg4= and only the two kings are left.] 39...h4 [39...Kc6 40.Kd3 Kb5 41.Kc3 h4-+] 40.Kf3 Kc6 41.Kg4 Kb5 42.Kxh4 Kxb4 43.Kh5? [43.Kg4 g6 44.h4 Kc5 45.Kf3 Kd6 46.g4 Ke7 47.h5 Kf7 48.Ke3 Kg7 49.hxg6 Kxg6 50.Kf3 Kg5

51.Kg3=] 43...Kc4 [Here 43...f5! 44.exf5 e4-+ wins for Black.] 44.Kg6 Kd4 45.Kxg7 Kxe4 46.h4 Kf4 47.h5 e4 48.h6 e3 49.h7 e2 50.h8Q e1Q 51.Qh6+ Kg3 52.Qh3+ Kf4 53.Qf3+ Kg5 54.Qxf6+ Kg4 55.Qf3+ Kg5 56.Qd5+ Kg4 57.Qf3+ 1/2-1/2

104 – Cullen 5.Bc4 e5 6.dxe5 World Champion Mikhail Botvinnik once reached a Blackmar-Diemer Declined position in a simul in Stockholm. Playing the Black pieces, Botvinnik defended with 4...c6, the Caro-Kann Defence BDG O'Kelly Variation. The gambit player Th. Dahlen continued with the standard 5.Bc4. Botvinnik chose 5...e5 to keep White from castling, instead of the normal 5...Bf5. After some exchanges, a double rook ending was reached. The players agreed to a draw on move 23. In this line White seemed to have the better chances. My opponent Peter Cullen followed Botvinnik's line in the O'Kelly variation during our 1990 postal chess game in the 10th US Correspondence Chess Championship. Like T. Dahlen, I failed to find the strongest line. Just as the position got more difficult for me, so did Peter's life. Cullen informed me that he was short of time with a new baby. We had raised our children, so I knew that life became busier with a new baby. Agreeing to a draw against me allowed Peter Cullen to focus his more limited free time on other chess games where he did well. Sawyer (2059) - Cullen (2104), corr USCCC 10P05, 04.10.1990 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.f3 d5 3.e4 dxe4 4.Nc3 c6 5.Bc4 e5 6.dxe5 Qxd1+ 7.Kxd1 exf3 8.Nxf3 Ng4 9.Ke2 Nd7 10.Bf4 Nc5 [10...Nb6 11.Bb3 Be6 12.Bxe6 fxe6 13.Ng5 Nd5 Dahlen-Botvinnik 14.Kf3!+/- Christoph Scheerer points out this would have won a pawn for White.] 11.h3 Be6 12.Bxe6 Nxe6 13.Bd2 Nh6 14.g4 0-0-0= 15.Rad1 Be7 16.Ne4 Rhe8 17.Be3 Kc7 18.Kf2 [18.Rxd8 Rxd8 19.Rd1 Rxd1 20.Kxd1+/=] 18...Ng8 19.Neg5 [19.Rhf1] 19...Nxg5 20.Nxg5 Rxd1 21.Rxd1 [Cullen wrote: 21.Rxd1 "I think I might

be slightly better after 21...Bxg5 22.Bxg5 Ne7 23.Bxe7 Rxe7 24.Re1 but only minimal plus. With a new baby I'm short of time."] 1/2-1/2

105 – Felber 5.Bc4 b5 6.Bb3 exf3 I reviewed Eric Jego's book on the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit. One of my games in that book was against Robert J Felber. There are two players named “Felber” who played in the BDG thematic correspondence tournaments in the 1990s. I played them a total of 10 games. From 1995-1997 I played Josef M. Felber three times. Black won every game. The first game I was White in an Alekhine Defence. Yes, I usually played Black. But since I’ve played 1.e4 thousands of times as White, there were many games where I have faced my beloved Alekhine as White. The last two games were BDGs. We both won as Black. Against Robert J. Felber, I played seven BDGs during the same time period, 1996-1997. I was White twice and Black five times. I won one as Black and all the other games were drawn. This game was the longest of the batch. Black kept his king in the center while my bishops were actively placed on Bc4 and Bg5. When Black pushed his queenside pawns, I broke up his kingside pawns. The notes in this game vs Robert Felber are mine. Sawyer - Felber, corr Internet 1996 beginsv1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3 c6 [O'Kelly is often reached via the Caro-Kann Defence.] 5.Bc4 [This bishop development is standard and can easily transpose as noted. Other lines are also playable such as: 5.Nxe4; 5.fxe4; 5.Be3] 5...b5 6.Bb3 exf3 [If Black does not want to accept the f-pawn, he can play 6...e6] 7.Nxf3 [We have reached a line in the BDG Ziegler Variation (5.Nxf3 c6)] 7...Nbd7 8.00 e6 9.Bg5 a5 10.Qe2 Nb6 [10...Be7!=/+] 11.Bxf6 gxf6 12.a3 f5 13.Qe3 Rg8 [White grabs the open g-file for attack.] 14.Ne5 Qg5?! 15.Qf3 Bb7 16.Nxb5 Rc8 17.Nc3 Nd5 18.Rf2 Bg7 19.Rd1 Bxe5 20.dxe5 Rc7 21.Bxd5 exd5 22.Qxf5 Qxf5 23.Rxf5 Bc8 24.Rf6 Be6 25.Rh6 Bf5 26.Rd2 Rg5 27.h4 Rg4 28.Ne2 Bg6 29.Nd4 [29.h5 Rh4 30.Nd4 Rxh5 31.Rxh5 Bxh5=] 29...Kf8 30.h5 Kg7 31.hxg6 Kxh6 32.gxf7 Rxf7 33.Nxc6 Rb7 34.b3 Rb5 35.e6 Re4 36.Nd4 Rb6 37.Kf2 Kg6 38.Re2 [38.Rd3+/=] 38...Rxe2+ 39.Kxe2 Kf6 40.Ke3 Rb7 41.Kf4 Rc7 42.g4 h6 43.Ke3 Rc3+ 44.Kf4 a4

45.e7 Kxe7 46.Ke5 Kf7 47.Kxd5 Rxc2 48.bxa4 Rc3 49.Nb5 Rg3 50.Nd6+ Kf8 1/2-1/2

106 – Glickman 5.Bc4 Bf5 6.g4 Bg6 This game first transposed into a Caro-Kann. Then with our fourth moves 4.f3 Nf6 we transposed into a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit Declined O'Kelly Defence. My 1989 USCF Golden Squires Postal Chess Tournament game vs Stuart Glickman continued 5.Bc4 Bf5 6.g4 Bg6 7.g5. Black responded to my advancing g-pawn with the knight retreat 7...Ng8. This was not covered by Christoph Scheerer in his BDG book. To me this line feels like the BDG Vienna 4.f3 Bf5 5.g4 Bg6 6.g5 variation. The difference is the placement of Black’s knight. White would stand better in our game if I had continued correctly. But I did not. I missed the key move 10.Bd3. That would have allowed me to keep the advantage. Then I missed another chance to equalize on move 16. From there, things went downhill for me. Stuart Glickman played well. He just kept coming after me until my army could no longer survive. Sawyer (2002) - Glickman (1971), corr USCF 89SS90, 09.10.1991 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e4 c6 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Bc4 Nf6 5.f3 Bf5 6.g4 Bg6 7.g5 Ng8 [7...Nd5 8.Nxe4 (8.fxe4 Scheerer) 8...e6 9.Ne2 Be7=] 8.fxe4 e6 9.h4 Bb4 10.e5?! [10.Bd3!+/- The threat 11.h5 gives White time to develop a knight and protect d4 with a big space advantage.] 10...Be4 11.Rh3 [White's in trouble, but better is 11.Rh2 Bxc3+ 12.bxc3 Ne7=/+] 11...Nd7 [11...Bxc2! 12.Qxc2 Qxd4-/+] 12.Bd2 Bf5 13.Rg3 Qc7 [13...Nb6-/+] 14.Nf3 0-0-0 15.Bb3 Ne7 16.Kf2? [16.Qe2!=] 16...Bxc3 17.bxc3 Rhg8 18.c4 f6 19.Bf4 [19.exf6 gxf6-/+] 19...Ng6 20.Be3 fxe5 21.h5 Nf4 22.Bxf4 exf4 23.Rg1

Rge8 24.Nh4 [24.Re1 Nc5-+] 24...Ne5 25.Qd2 Ng4+ 26.Ke1 f3 27.Nxf3 e5 28.d5 e4 29.Nd4 e3 30.Qe2 Qa5+ 31.Kf1 Rf8 32.Kg2 Bd7 [32...Qc7!-+ is crushing.] 33.Rgf1 Qc7 34.Kg1 Rf2 0-1

107 – Tom 5.Bc4 Bf5 6.g4 Bg6 What do you do if Black does not accept your Blackmar-Diemer Gambit? One option is to play the main line of whatever opening Black is headed toward. Another option is to search for some distinctly BDG type position. This is often possible in the BDG Declined variations. The first rounds of the 1989 Golden Knights began of course in 1989. The better players qualified for more rounds later. By 1992 I was facing many strong players simultaneously. This game is against a USCF postal master from the Semi-Finals. My opponent in this game was David Tom. He lived at the same address as Joe Tom. I played them both about the same time. We reached a standard Caro-Kann Defence. The only difference was that we played our first two moves in reverse order to the normal 1.e4 c6. The main line continues with the good move 4.Nxe4. I chose the speculative moves 4.Bc4 and 5.f3. This line transposed to the BlackmarDiemer Gambit Declined O'Kelly. It could have arisen after 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3 c6 5.Bc4. I played a risky 8th move in 8.fxe4!? It had the feel of the BDG Vienna 4.f3 Bf5 5.g4 Bg6 6.g5 Nd5 7.fxe4 called the Kampars Gambit. I got a good position. Then I missed the correct move 20.Rh1 which could have given me a slight advantage. Sawyer (1988) - Tom (2215), corr USCF 89NS53, 10.04.1992 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e4 c6 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Bc4 [4.Nxe4] 4...Nf6 5.f3 Bf5 6.g4 Bg6 7.g5 Nd5 8.fxe4 [Houdini, Fritz and Stockfish all prefer 8.Nxe4!=] 8...Nxc3 9.bxc3 Bxe4 10.Nf3 e6 11.0-0 Bg6 12.Ne5 [12.Qe2 looks like a playable alternative.] 12...Bd6 13.Nxg6 hxg6 14.Qf3 Bxh2+ 15.Kg2 Qc7 16.Ba3 b5

17.Bd3 a5 18.Rae1 b4 19.Bc1 Bd6 20.Bxg6? [I missed 20.Rh1 Rxh1 21.Rxh1 Nd7 22.c4+=] 20...fxg6 21.Rxe6+ Kd8 22.Qe4 Qd7 23.Qxg6 Bc7 24.Bf4Qd5+ 25.Kg3 Bxf4+ 26.Rxf4 Qh1 27.Rd6+ Kc8 28.Qxg7 Rh3+ 29.Kg4 Rh4+ 0-1

108 – Van Oirschot 5.Nxe4 Bf5 Years ago I tried to back into a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit in a postal chess game. I was new to the BDG. Usually I only played against opponents from the United States. The postage costs were less expensive. This game was played in the International Correspondence Chess Federation. My opponent was Kees Van Oirschot from the Netherlands. Kees van Oirschot was a few years older than me. He must have been good at research and writing. In 1986 Kees wrote an article for New In Chess magazine on the Ruy Lopez Marshall Attack RL 17. I think he’s the same player listed as Cornelis van Oirschot. His last ICCF rating was 2349 from the year 1998. We ended up with a BDG / Caro-Kann Defence hybrid called the O'Kelly Variation. White usually chose sharp lines such as 5.Bc4 or 5.fxe4. I wanted to avoid common continuations. My 5th move 5.Nxe4 was fully sound, albeit rather boring. After our 6th moves, White's awkward f3 pawn is compensated for by Black's doubled f-pawns. The position was very equal throughout. After 13 moves in an even position, we agreed to a draw. The alternative was to play out this game at the rather slow and expensive snail mail pace of international post at the time. Sawyer - Van Oirschot, corr ICCF 1985 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.f3 d5 3.e4 dxe4 4.Nc3 c6 5.Nxe4 Bf5 6.Nxf6+ gxf6 [6...exf6 7.Bd3=] 7.c3 e6 8.Bf4

[8.Ne2!?=] 8...Bd6 9.Bxd6 Qxd6 10.Bd3 Bg6 11.Ne2 Nd7 12.Qd2 0-0-0 13.0-0-0 Rhg8 1/2-1/2

109 – Elliott 5.Nxe4 Bf5 6.Nxf6+ The O'Kelly Variation is a good defense to decline the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit after 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3 c6. The line appears in the Caro-Kann Defence as well after 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d4 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.f3 Nf6. Many other move orders also work, including the one in the game below. White has two sharp choices 5.Bc4 and 5.fxe4, and one solid choice 5.Nxe4. The sharper choices are more enterprising, but if you are uncomfortable with them, then taking with the knight is completely sound. Years ago I had an account on America On Line. AOL used the phrase "You've got mail!" when you logged into your e-mail. Tom Hanks and Meg Ryan appeared in a movie with that name. It pitted two bookstore owners against each other. Meg Ryan's character owed a little family store like the one where I bought my first chess books around 1971. Tom Hanks' character owned a superstore similar to the ones that sold the chess books I later wrote. Online chatting led the two movie characters to love and romance, living happily ever after. Two years before that movie, I faced a strong correspondence player in Tom Elliott from APCT. Tom Elliott gradually and consistently outplayed me. Eleven years earlier Kees van Oirschot had recaptured with 6...gxf6. Tom Elliott chose the sharper 6...exf6, which caused me trouble finding safety for my king. Eventually I played 18.Kf2, but it was ten moves too late. Sawyer (1969) - Elliott (2144), corr APCT EMQ-1, 30.01.1996 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d5 3.e4 dxe4 4.f3 c6 5.Nxe4 Bf5 6.Nxf6+ exf6 7.Bc4 Qe7+ [7...Bd6=] 8.Be2? [8.Kf2!=] 8...Nd7 [8...Na6 9.c3 Nc7=/+] 9.c3 Qe6 [9...Nb6=/+] 10.Bf4 [10.h4] 10...Bd6 11.Bxd6 Qxd6 12.Bd3 Bxd3 13.Qxd3 0-0 14.Ne2 [14.0-0-0 Rae8=/+] 14...Rfe8 15.Rd1 Rad8 16.b3 Qa3 17.Qd2 Qe7 18.Kf2 Qd6 19.g3 Nf8 20.Rhe1 c5 21.d5 b5 22.c4 bxc4 23.bxc4 Qa6 24.Qc2 Nd7 25.Nc1 Nb6 26.Nb3 Nxc4 27.Nxc5 Qb5 28.Rd4? [28.Nd7 Rxe1 29.Rxe1 Rc8-/+] 28...Rxe1 29.Kxe1 Ne5 0-1

110 – Lykke 5.Nxe4 Nxe4 6.fxe4 e5 ICCF play in the modern era has the advantage that players use computer chess engine programs to assist in move selection. Years ago when I played most of my ICCF games, computers were weak. Robin Smith wrote about how the combination of human and machine produces the best possible results. In this critical game Hans Chr. Lykke (Denmark) plays a BDG vs Heinz Offenborn (Germany). Black chose the BDG O'Kelly 4.f3 c6 which could also be reached via a Caro-Kann Defence. White's main options included 5.Bc4, 5.fxe4 and 5.Nxe4. Taking with the knight 5.Nxe4 is solid and dependable from a theoretical standpoint, although not in keeping with the typical BDG style. Computers do not care about style, just good moves. Correspondence players may start out to play a sharp line, but stronger players adjust as needed to the realities of the position. They produce the best result. That may feature a mating attack, tactical combination, positional strategy, or endgame technique. Lykke vs Offenborn was a high level test of the 5.Nxe4 Nxe4 line. Chances were even until Black misplayed the ending on move 38. The subtle difference between Black's rook move options (38...Rc8? or first 38...Rc2! and then 39...Rc8) was not easy to pick up by the typical chess engine at that time. Lykke (2465) - Offenborn (2374), WC26-SF10 ICCF Email, 01.09.2002 begins 1.d4 d5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.e4 dxe4 4.f3 c6 5.Nxe4 Nxe4 6.fxe4 e5 7.Nf3 exd4 8.Qxd4 Qxd4 9.Nxd4 Nd7 [9...Bc5 10.Be3 0-0 11.Be2!? Nd7 12.0-00 Re8 13.Bf3 Ne5=] 10.Bf4 Nc5 [10...Bc5!? 11.Nf5 0-0 12.0-0-0 Re8=] 11.Bc4 Be7 12.e5 0-0 13.Rf1 Bh4+ 14.Kd2 b5 15.Bd3 Bd7 16.Bf5 Rad8 17.Ke2 Rfe8 18.Rad1 Ne6 19.Be3 Nxd4+ 20.Rxd4 Bxf5 21.Rxf5 Rxd4 22.Bxd4 Be7 23.Kf3 Rd8 24.Ke4 c5 25.Be3 Rd1 26.b3 Re1 27.g3 g6 28.Rf3 Ra1 29.Kd5 Rxa2 30.Rf2 a5 31.Bxc5 Bxc5 32.Kxc5 a4 33.b4 a3

34.Kxb5 Rb2 35.Rf1 a2 36.Ra1 Rxc2 37.Ka6 Rc4 38.Ka5 Rc8? [Black's best chance for a draw is with the subtle 38...Rc2! 39.b5 and then 39...Rc8=] 39.Ka4 Rc2 40.Kb3 Re2 41.Rxa2 Rxe5 42.Kc4 Kf8 43.b5 Ke7 44.Rd2 Re1 45.b6 Rb1 46.Kc5 f5 47.Kc6 Rc1+ 48.Kb7 g5 49.Ra2 1-0

111 – Hauser 5.Nxe4 Nxe4 6.fxe4 e5 The Blackberry name game: Chuck Berry, Dave Barry and Ratislav Bury all sound similar in English. This game features a short chess opening win for White in a critical BDG line. In this 2006 ICCF correspondence chess game, Jack Hauser beats or buries Ratislav Bury who played Black in the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit. Bury was buried after he declined the BDG 4.f3 gambit with 4...c6. These opening moves transposed into a Caro-Kann Defence. The same variation could have also been reached after 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.f3 Nf6. Earlier I wrote about a successful critical game in the O'Kelly 4.f3 c6 5.Nxe4 Nxe4 line. In that game after 6.fxe4 e5 7.Nf3 exd4 White played the natural recapture 8.Qxd4. Here Jack Hauser played 8.Bc4. White went all out for an attack. Note that Ratislav Bury had played 30 games in ICCF. I listed the most current rating I could find, but Bury was no longer active in ICCF play at the time I analyzed this game. Hauser (2100) - Bury (1858), WS/H/063 ICCF, 07.10.2006 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3 c6 5.Nxe4 Nxe4 6.fxe4 e5 7.Nf3 exd4 8.Bc4 Qa5+ 9.Bd2 Qc5 10.Qe2 Nd7 [10...Bg4 11.b4 Qh5 12.0-0 Nd7 13.h3 Bxf3 14.Rxf3 f6 15.Qf2=; 10...a5 11.e5 Be7 12.0-0-0 b5 13.Bd3 Be6 14.Qe4 Qd5 15.Qxd5 Bxd5 16.Nxd4=] 11.b4 Qb6 12.Qf2 f6 13.0-0 Bxb4 14.e5 Bxd2 15.Qxd2 fxe5 [Better is 15...Qc5 16.exf6 Nxf6 17.Rae1+ Kd8 18.Nxd4+/= although White has a more active position.] 16.Nxe5 Nxe5 17.Rae1 1-0

112 – Liddy 5.fxe4 Nbd7 6.Nf3 e6 When learning the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit, I tried it out in club games. I played at the Chaturanga Chess Club that met in Hatboro, Pennsylvania. There was a U.S. Naval Air Base where they tested military items in nearby Willow Grove. I did my testing on the chess board, but some of my opponents worked on the base. First I played at the Chaturanga in 1981-82. Later I played there again from 1985-1989 after I returned to Pennsylvania from Houston, Texas. Below is the only recorded game I have vs Darryl Liddy. We transposed into the Caro-Kann Defence. This variation is also known as the BDG O'Kelly4.f3 c6. Besides the move 5.fxe4 that I chose, White had two other options. I could have tried 5.Bc4 (offering again to gambit a pawn) or 5.Nxe4 (regaining the gambit pawn). In this short contest I lined up my pieces in BDG Euwe style Nf3, Bd3, 0-0, Bg5, and Qe1-Qh4. My goal was to checkmate the Black king by direct assault. Sawyer - Liddy, Hatboro, PA 1988 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e4 c6 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.f3 Nf6 5.fxe4 Nbd7 [5...e5=] 6.Nf3 e6 7.Bg5 [7.e5 Nd5 8.Nxd5+/-] 7...h6 8.Be3 Bb4 9.Bd3 0-0 10.0-0 Bxc3 [10...Ng4=] 11.bxc3 b6 12.Qe1 Bb7 13.Qh4 Re8 14.e5 Nd5 15.Bg5 hxg5 [15...Qc7 16.Bxh6 gxh6 17.Qxh6+-] 16.Nxg5 c5 17.Qh7+ Kf8 18.Rxf7# 1-0

113 – Torning 5.fxe4 e6 6.Nf3 Rick Torning wins a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit which is a Caro-Kann Defence O'Kelly. Torning writes: "BDG O'Kelly Defense game - One mistake by Black on move allowed Bh7+ with a forced win. White has the queen, 2 rooks and 2 bishops attacking on the king-side and Black had no defenders because of the pawn chain and cramped pieces." Torning - NN, Casual Bullet lichess, 03.03.2018 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e4 c6 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.f3 Nf6 [Blackmar-Diemer Gambit Declined O'Kelly] 5.fxe4 e6 6.Nf3 Be7 7.Bd3 Nbd7 8.0-0 Nb6 9.Bf4 Bd7 10.Qd2 0-0 11.Ne5 Rc8 12.Rf3 Be8 13.Rh3 Bd6 14.Rf1 Nbd7? 15.Nxd7 Qxd7 [15...Bxf4 16.Nxf6+ Qxf6 17.Rxf4 Qxd4+ 18.Kh1 wins] 16.e5 Nd5 17.Bxh7+! [Black

resigns. 17.Bxh7+ Kh8 18.Qd3 Nxf4 19.Rxf4 g6 20.Bxg6+ Kg7 21.Rh7+ Kg8 22.Qh3 fxg6 23.Rh8+ Kg7 24.Qh7#] 1-0 [Game notes by Torning]

114 – Shredder 5.fxe4 e5 6.dxe5 When testing Blackmar-Diemer Gambit variations and other openings in blitz games, often I placed myself on the Black side. Often I would have some strong computer chess engine play the White pieces. Against Shredder, I played the Alekhine Defence. After 1.e4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d5 (2…e5 is a Vienna Game), White transposed into the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit with 3.d4 dxe4. After 4.f3, here I opted for the Caro-Kann Defence line 4…c6. This is known as the BDG Declined O'Kelly variation. This game continued with the typical 5.fxe4 e5! Black counter attacked d4 and threatened to leave White with an isolated e-pawn. Often White defended the d-pawn with 6.Nf3, but my chess engine opponent simply chopped off my e-pawn. This allowed Black to exchange queens. Chances were equal, but our ratings and skill levels were not. White's active bishop and well posted knight kept Black from a coordinated defense. I resigned after I lost material. Shredder (3362) - Sawyer (2000), Florida, 24.03.2006 1.e4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d5 3.d4 dxe4 4.f3 c6 5.fxe4 e5 6.dxe5 Qxd1+ 7.Nxd1 [Also playable is 7.Kxd1 Ng4 8.Ke1 Nxe5 9.Nf3 Nbd7 10.Be3=] 7...Nxe4 8.Nf3 Bb4+ [Deep Rybka and Deep Fritz indicate 8...Be6 9.Bd3 Nc5 10.Be2 Nbd7 11.Nc3 Be7 12.Bf4=] 9.c3 Bc5 [9...Be7 10.Bd3=] 10.Be3 [Or 10.Bd3 f5 11.exf6 Nxf6 12.Be3=] 10...0-0?! [10...Bb6 11.Bd3 Nc5 12.Bc2=] 11.Bd3 Bxe3 12.Nxe3 Nc5 13.Bc2 Be6 14.Ng5 h6 15.Nxe6 Nxe6 16.0-0-0 Rd8 17.Rxd8+ Nxd8 18.Rd1 Ne6 19.Nc4 Na6 20.Nd6 b6 21.Be4 Rd8 22.Bxc6 1-0

115 – McGrew 5.fxe4 e5 6.Nf3 exd4 Every once in a while God brings someone into your life at just the right time. In the late 1990's I met Tim McGrew. McGrew and I played and chatted a lot on ICC in those days. Tim was a great help in getting me to write an updated edition to my keybook. In February 1999 Tim McGrew wrote the Forward to my Blackmar-Diemer Gambit Keybook II. His creative work on the BDG has appeared online at various sites. Three BDG writers all have similar first names. Each one has a six letter last name: Tim McGrew, Tim Sawyer and Tom Purser. In this game, the two named “Tim” are playing in a BDG thematic correspondence event. I do not remember if it was by e-mail or by postcard. We transposed into a Caro-Kann Defence with his 4...c6. This line is called the BDG O'Kelly variation. It is an excellent way to decline the gambit. Volker Hergert wrote "Die O'Kelly-Verteidigung im Blackmar-DiemerGambit" in 1993, a 65 page book published by Mandfred Madler in German. Hergert provided deep analysis from thematic correspondence games covering about 70 games in detail. Theoretical chances are equal. At one point I noted that I had faced the BDG O'Kelly 95 times and scored 56%. But prior to 1996 when Tim McGrew played it against me, I had faced it only three times: Van Oirschot in 1985, Liddy in 1988 and Cullen in 1990. Frankly, I had no clue as to which line was best for White. Sawyer - McGrew, corr BDG thematic, 1996 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3 c6 5.fxe4 e5 6.Nf3 [6.dxe5=] 6...exd4 7.Nxd4 [7.Qxd4 Qxd4 8.Nxd4=] 7...Bb4 8.Bc4 Bg4 [8...0-0 9.0-0 Bc5 10.Nce2 Nbd7-/+] 9.Qd3 0-0 10.h3 Nbd7 11.Bf4 Nc5 12.Qe3 Ncxe4 13.hxg4 Re8 14.0-0 Nxc3 15.Qd3 Ncd5 16.Bg5 Qb6 17.c3 Ne4 18.Bf4 Bc5 19.Rae1 Qxb2 20.Rxe4 Rxe4 21.Qxe4 Qxc3 22.Bxd5 Qxd4+ 23.Qxd4 Bxd4+ 0-1

116 - BlackDragon 5.fxe4 e5 6.Nf3 exd4 Much of the time when I played the Black Dragon chess engine on ICC we reached lines in the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit Gunderam. As I recall, many of the BlackDragon games were at 2 0 minute bullet speed. I don’t play that fast anymore, but I did back in the 1990s. Below we have an interesting BDG O'Kelly variation that I played in the line 5.fxe4 e5! The critical line as presented in the notes seemed to follow 10.a3! Once I missed that I was in trouble. If you don't like the opening after 5.fxe4, then you might wish to examine the alternatives 5.Nxe4 or 5.Bc4. In theory, all of them are playable. Your fifth move choice is more a matter of taste. And finally, the last part of this game was a good example of a strong computer outplaying a human at about two seconds per move. Sawyer - BlackDragon, Internet Chess Club 17.03.1998 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.f3 d5 3.e4 dxe4 4.Nc3 c6 5.fxe4 e5 6.Nf3 exd4 7.Qxd4 Qxd4 8.Nxd4 Bb4 9.e5 [This may be better than the more popular 9.Bd3 0-0=/+ which seems to give a very slight edge to Black.] 9...Ne4 10.Bd2? [10.a3! Bxc3+ 11.bxc3 Nxc3 12.Bd3 Nd7 13.e6=] 10...Nxd2 11.Kxd2 0-0 12.a3 Rd8 13.axb4 Rxd4+ 14.Bd3 Rxb4 15.g3 [15.Ne4 Bf5=/+] 15...Nd7 16.Rhe1 Rxb2 17.Na4 Rb4 18.Kc3 a5 19.h4 [19.e6 fxe6 20.Rxe6 Nf6-/+] 19...Rg4 [19...b5 20.Nb2 Rg4-+] 20.Re3 b5 21.Nb2 Nc5 22.Be2 Rxg3 23.Rxg3 Ne4+ 24.Kd4 Nxg3 25.Bf3 Nf5+ 26.Kc5 Bd7 27.h5 a4 28.Nd3 Ne3 29.c3 Rc8 30.Rg1 Nc4 31.h6 g6 32.Nf4 Nxe5 33.Nh5 Nxf3 34.Rg3 Nd2 35.Nf6+ Kh8 36.Rd3 Nb3+ 37.Kb4 Be6 38.Rd6 g5 39.Rd3 c5+ 40.Kxb5 a3 41.Rg3 a2 42.Rxg5 a1Q 43.Rg7 Qa5# 0-1

3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Nf6 White makes the natural recapture 4.Nxe4. Black in turn plays to attack the knight. In this section we consider 4…Nf6.

117 – Rodrigues 5.Qd3 Nxe4 What do you do when your opponent plays a move new to you? First, if that move gives you an advantage, try to find the best move and punish him for his weaker theoretical choice. Second, if your opponent's move leaves the position basically even, you could just play a safe move, even if it only maintains equality. Instead of trying to outplay him using opening theory, you can use your tactics, strategy and calculation ability. Consider the Caro-Kann line 4.Nxe4 Nf6 in the game Reti-Tartakower, Vienna 1910. In those days many took 5.Nxf6+; others backed off with 5.Ng3 to which the standard move was 5...e5 (now 5...h5 or 5...g6). Reti played the simple new move 5.Qd3!? This "is to say the least of doubtful value, but not so bad that it can be thus summarily refuted" [Watts & Hereford]. Black tried to refute the idea with 5...e5 and got outplayed famously. In 1981 I faced 5.Qd3 twice. In ICCF World Cup V against M. Costa Rodrigues, I chose 5...Nxe4 6.Qxe4 Qd5!? We agreed to a draw in a materially even rook and pawn ending. Later against the lower rated Archer, I played 5...Qc7 and I was able to win. Rodrigues - Sawyer, corr ICCF 1981 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Nf6 5.Qd3 Nxe4 [5...e5 6.dxe5 Qa5+ 7.Bd2 Qxe5 8.0-0-0 Nxe4?? "Homer nods! or was he only obstinate in carrying through his (faulty) idea, based on his 5th move? White mates in 3 moves." (Watts & Hereford) 9.Qd8+ Kxd8 10.Bg5+ Kc7 (10...Ke8 11.Rd8#) 11.Bd8# 1-0 Reti Tartakower, Vienna 1910] 6.Qxe4 Qd5 [6...Nd7= headed for Nf6 makes sense.] 7.Qe3 Bf5 8.c4 Qe4 9.Nf3 Na6 10.a3 g6 11.Be2 Bg7 12.0-0 0-0 13.Rd1 Rfd8 14.Bd3 Bxd4 15.Bxe4 [Maybe 15.Qxe4 Bxe4 16.Bxe4 Bxf2+ 17.Kxf2 Rxd1 18.Bc2+/= White would have two active bishops vs Black's

extra rook and two pawns.] 15...Bxe3 16.Bxe3 Bxe4 17.Rxd8+ Rxd8 18.Bxa7 Bxf3 19.gxf3 Rd2 20.Rb1 Nc7 21.Bb8 Ne6 22.Be5 Nd4 23.Bxd4 Rxd4 24.Rc1 Draw agreed. 1/2-1/2

118 – Tamang 5.Nxf6+ exf6 6.c3 Black accepts doubled pawns in a Scandinavian Defence to Queens Knight Defence to Caro-Kann Defence. I prefer White's 4-3 queenside pawn structure to Black’s open lines. White increased his piece activity until Black missed a tactic in Dipankar Sengupta vs Thendup Tamang. Sengupta (2579) - Tamang (1953), Kathmandu Open 2018 Kathmandu NEP (2.3), 13.04.2018 begins 1.e4 d5 2.Nc3 dxe4 3.Nxe4 Nf6 4.Nxf6+ exf6 5.d4 c6 [This move 5...c6 transposes to the Caro-Kann Defence. An alternative is 5...Bd6=] 6.c3 Bd6 7.Bd3 0-0 8.Qc2 h6 9.Ne2 Qc7 10.Be3 Nd7 11.0-0-0 Re8 12.Ng3 Nf8 13.Kb1 Be6 14.c4 b5 15.cxb5 Qa5 16.Bc4 cxb5 [16...Bxc4 17.Qxc4 cxb5=] 17.Bxe6 fxe6 18.d5 Rac8 19.Qb3 Rc4 20.dxe6 Rxe6 [20...Be5 21.e7 Rxe7 22.f4+/=] 21.Rd5 a6? [21...Qa4 22.Rxb5 Qxb3 23.Rxb3+/-] 22.Qxc4 1-0

119 – Berkes 5.Nxf6+ exf6 6.c3 White castled queenside in this Caro-Kann Defence 5...exf6 variation. The opening gave equal chances, but soon White seemed to get into trouble with a tenuous pawn structure. His king became vulnerable to an impressive Black attack in the game between Arturs Bernotas and Ferenc Berkes. Bernotas (2436) - Berkes (2671), 19th ch-EUR Indiv 2018 Batumi GEO (1.19), 17.03.2018 begins 1.e4 c6 2.Nc3 d5 3.d4 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Nf6 5.Nxf6+ exf6 6.c3 Bd6 7.Bd3 0-0 8.Qc2 [8.Ne2 Re8 9.Qc2 g6 10.h4 Nd7 11.h5 Nf8 12.Bh6 Be6 13.0-0-0 Qa5 14.a3+/=] 8...Re8+ 9.Ne2 h5 [9...g6 10.h4+/=] 10.Be3 [Or 10.0-0 h4 11.h3 Nd7 12.Bd2 Nf8 13.Nf4=] 10...Nd7 11.Ng3 [11.0-0=] 11...Nb6 12.0-0-0 [12.0-0 Nd5=] 12...Nd5 13.Rde1 [13.Bd2 Nf4 14.Bxf4 Bxf4+ 15.Kb1 Qd5=] 13...Be6 14.Kb1 Qa5 15.a3 Rad8 16.Ne4 Nxe3 17.fxe3 c5 18.c4 cxd4 19.Nxd6? [Although 19.exd4 Bxa3 20.bxa3 Rxd4 21.Re3 b5=/+ and Black has compensation for the sacrificed knight.] 19...Rxd6 20.e4 [20.Rhf1 dxe3 21.Rxe3 Red8-+] 20...Rc8 21.Qe2 Rb6 22.Ka1 [22.Ka2 Rbc6 23.Rc1 b5-+] 22...Rb3 23.Qc2 [23.Rc1 b5 24.c5 b4+] 23...Rxa3+ 24.bxa3 Qxa3+ 25.Kb1 [25.Qa2 Qxd3-+] 25...Rc6 26.c5 Rxc5 0-1

120 – Champion 5.Nxf6+ exf6 6.Bc4 To be a champion you have to beat a champion. In my ICCF Master Class tournament I defeated William R. Champion in the 5...exf6 Caro-Kann Defence. Viktor Korchnoi only played it a handful of times. It is named after him because he drew with it vs the world champion Karpov. I tried to beat a Champion too! The variation begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Nf6 encouraging White to capture 5.Nxf6+. In other games Champion chose 5...gxf6 or 4...Nd7. The point after 5...exf6 is Black has open lines in the center and an extra pawn to attack kingside. The pawn structure is a very predictable problem for Black in the endgame. White's three kingside pawns can block Black's four pawns, but on the queenside White can establish a passed pawn. The extra pawn may be blockaded, but in reality White often wins directly with it or trades that pawn for a win elsewhere on the board. William Champion was an active player whose rating was near 2200. It dipped lower at the end of his career. This win helped me to win this Master Class tournament. Sawyer (2157) - Champion (2100), corr ICCF 1994 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Nf6 5.Nxf6+ exf6 [I often played 5...gxf6 myself.] 6.Bc4 [The alternative 6.c3 has a higher winning percentage, but both have about the same performance rating.] 6...Qe7+ 7.Qe2 Be6 8.Bxe6 Qxe6 9.Bf4 Qxe2+ 10.Nxe2 Na6 [I was amazed Black allowed me to enter an ending with a 4-3 pawn advantage on the queenside.] 11.c3 0-0-0 12.0-0-0 Bd6 13.Bxd6 Rxd6 14.Rhe1 Re8 15.Nf4 Rxe1 16.Rxe1 g6 17.Re7 Rd7 18.Rxd7 Kxd7 19.Kd2 Nc7 20.c4 Ne6 21.Ke3 b6 22.d5 Nxf4 23.Kxf4 cxd5 24.cxd5 Kd6 25.Ke4 f5+ 26.Kd4 g5 27.Kc4 a6 28.a4 f4 [28...Kc7 29.Kd4+=] 29.Kd4 f5 [29...h6 30.f3 b5 31.axb5 axb5 32.Ke4+/-] 30.f3 h5

31.h4 gxh4 32.Kc4 [Another way to win is 32.a5! bxa5 33.b3 h3 34.gxh3 h4 35.Kc4 Ke7 36.Kc5 Kd7 37.d6 a4 38.bxa4 a5 39.Kd5 Kd8 40.Ke6 Ke8 41.Kxf5+-] 32...b5+ [Or 32...Kd7 33.a5 bxa5 34.Kc5 a4 35.d6+-] 33.axb5 axb5+ 34.Kd4 1-0

121 – Johnson 5.Nxf6+ exf6 6.Nf3 USCF National Master Joel Johnson posted this beautiful win online in a Caro-Kann Defence. What caught my eye was the strategy and timing that Joel Johnson employed to open up the pawns in front of the Black king. Once the position was full of holes, White’s army came in for the kill. The player “BarneyPlum” as Black was from Germany. Johnson (2050) - BarneyPlum (2127), Live Chess Chess.com, 13.10.2018 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Nf6 5.Nxf6+ exf6 6.Nf3 Bd6 7.Be2 0-0 8.Be3 Bg4 9.h3!? [9.0-0=] 9...Bh5 10.g4!? [10.c4=] 10...Bg6 11.Qd2 Nd7 12.h4 h6 [12...Be4 13.0-0-0 Nb6=/+] 13.g5! fxg5 [13...h5!=] 14.hxg5 h5 15.0-0-0 Qc7 16.Nh4 b5? 17.f4 [17.Nxg6! fxg6 18.Bd3! Nb6 19.Bxg6+-] 17...Rae8 18.f5 Rxe3 19.fxg6 Bf4 20.Kb1 Nb6 [20...Rg3 21.gxf7+ Rxf7=] 21.Nf5 [21.Ng2!+-] 21...Rb3 [21...Ree8 22.gxf7+ Qxf7 23.Qxf4 Rxe2=] 22.Qxf4 Rxb2+ 23.Kxb2 Na4+ [23...Rc8 24.Qxc7 Rxc7 25.Bxh5+-] 24.Ka1 Qxf4 25.Ne7+ Kh8 26.Rxh5# 1-0

122 – Korchnoi 5.Nxf6+ exf6 6.Nf3 Viktor L. Korchnoi was a grandmaster for 60 years from 1956 until his death in 2016 at age 85. GM Korchnoi was one of the strongest players in history to not become the world champion. He played for the championship three times in 1974, 1978 and 1981. Each time Korchnoi lost to Karpov by a small margin. Korchnoi was famous as a counter attacker. I studied hundreds of his games. He was more dangerous as Black than White. One of the openings that Korchnoi and I both played as Black was the Caro-Kann Defence. My database has over 100 of his Caro-Kann games. He played all the variations, 80% of the time as Black. He preferred the classical main line 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Bf5. Korchnoi also played 4...Nd7 and 4...Nf6 many times. What I remember from the 1970s was his play with 4…Nf6 5.Nxf6+ exf6. True, Korchnoi played 5…gxf6 as well, but what amazed me was that he played 5…exf6 at all! In my thinking, the line gives Black a likely lost endgame. In fact, I have won many of these endgames as White myself. Korchnoi accomplished his own successful middlegame attacks as Black with 5…exf6. This made 5…exf6 more playable in his hands. Here is his win vs Eugenio Torre in the Caro-Kann Defence 5.Nxf6+ exf6 line. Torre (2490) - Korchnoi (2665), Buenos Aires olm 1978 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Nf6 5.Nxf6+ exf6 6.Nf3 Bd6 7.Be2 [Or 7.Bd3 0-0 8.0-0 Bg4=] 7...Na6 8.0-0 Nc7 9.c4 0-0 10.Be3 Re8 11.Qd2 [11.Qc2 g6 12.Rfe1 Bf5=] 11...Bf5 12.Rad1 Be4 13.Qc1 h6 14.Nd2 Bh7 15.Bf3 f5 16.Nb3 g5 17.Na5 g4 18.Be2 Bb4 19.Nxb7 Qc8 20.Nc5 f4 21.Bxg4 [White could get three pawns for a piece with 21.Nd3! Bxd3 22.Bxd3 fxe3 23.fxe3 Be7 24.Bf5 Qd8 25.Bxg4=] 21...Qxg4 22.Bxf4 Ne6 23.Be3 Rad8 24.Nd3

[24.Nxe6 Rxe6 25.Bxh6 Rxd4=/+] 24...Bd6 25.Ne5 Bxe5 26.dxe5 Bd3 27.f3 Qxc4 28.Qxc4 Bxc4 29.Rxd8 Nxd8 30.Rd1 Bxa2 31.Bxa7 [31.Rd6 f6 32.Rxf6 Rxe5-/+] 31...Bd5 32.f4 Ne6 33.Be3 h5 [33...Rb8!-+] 34.h3 Rb8 35.Rd2 Rb3 36.Kf2 h4 37.Rc2 Bxg2 0-1

123 – Baffo 5.Nxf6+ gxf6 6.c3 Jeffrey Baffo ignored theory in a Caro-Kann Defence which tells us not to bring out the queen too early. How early is too early? Jeff Baffo played a Bronstein-Larsen line. It began 4.Nxe4 Nf6 5.Nxf6+ gxf6. Black intended to use the open g-file for tactics. Black started with doubled f-pawns in the opening and ended with two passed f-pawns in the endgame. Black played an early 6...Qd5!? His queen was such an imposing presence that that I sent my own girl out to meet her with 7.Qb3. This led to my own doubled b-pawns. Black's aggressive a-pawn tried its version of "walk on by". In the exchanges of moves 17-19, White dropped a pawn in hope of trapping Black's Rg2. White gave up too much to get the rook. By the end White had a rook and three pawns vs Black's two bishops and four pawns. The bottom line: Jeffrey Baffo creatively outplayed me...again. Sawyer (1999) - Baffo (2239), corr USCF 95P135, 03.04.1996 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Nf6 5.Nxf6+ gxf6 6.c3 Qd5!? [Black is looking for less popular choices. Otherwise, 6...Bf5 7.Nf3+/=] 7.Qb3 [7.Be3+/=] 7...Qxb3 8.axb3 Be6 9.b4 [9.Bc4!?+/=] 9...Nd7 10.Nf3 a6 11.Bf4 Rg8 12.Be2 Bd5 13.Rg1 Nb6 14.0-0-0 [Rather than castle, since the queens are off the board, White might do better with 14.Kd2= and leave the rooks where they are.] 14...a5 15.b5 a4 16.Kd2 a3 17.bxa3 Rxa3 18.Ra1 Rxa1 19.Rxa1 Rxg2 20.Bg3 Bh6+ 21.Kc2 Bg5 22.bxc6 bxc6 23.Rb1 [23.Nxg5!? fxg5 24.Ra6=] 23...Be4+ 24.Bd3 Bxf3 25.Rxb6 Kf8 26.Bxh7 Be3 27.Bf5?! [A better way to play this endgame seems to be 27.Kd3! Bxf2 28.Bxf2 Rxf2 29.Ke3 Rxh2 30.Kxf3 Rxh7 31.Rxc6=] 27...Bxf2 28.Bh3? [Here I just lose it. 28.Bxf2 Rxf2+ 29.Kd3 Bh5 30.Be4 f5 31.Bxc6 f4=/+ would at least give me a passed c-pawn, although I would have to deal with

Black's two passed f-pawns soon.] 28...Be4+ 29.Kd2? Bxg3+ 30.Bxg2 Bf4+ 0-1

124 – von Wurttemberg 6.Be2 When I see the Olympics, I remember that I played in the chess correspondence Olympics many years ago in 1982-84. Many of my international opponents were very strong. Some opponents were not master level strength. This international game was not from the Olympics. It was from in an Open tournament with players of all skill levels. As I recall it was the ICCF World Cup V. There were 9 players (8 games) in the first round. The winner advanced to the next round. My score was 4 wins, 3 draws, 1 loss (5.5 of 8). I did not win the event and I did not advance. This game was a Caro-Kann Defence game where my opponent Adolf von Wurttemberg made a few major blunders. Probably two of them were due to setting the board up wrong. In the end I was way ahead in material with a kingside mating attack that targeted exchanges on g3. von Wurttemberg - Sawyer, corr ICCF, 1981 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Nf6 5.Nxf6+ gxf6 6.Be2 [The main line is 6.c3 Bf5 7.Nf3 and now in addition to the obvious moves (Qc7/Nd7/e6), Black has the interesting 7...Qd5!?=] 6...Bf5 7.Nf3 Qc7 8.Bd3 Bg6 9.0-0 Nd7 10.Be3 e6 11.Bf5? [Apparently White thought my bishop was still on f5 instead of g6.] 11...exf5 12.Qd3 f4 13.Qe4+? [Once again White misses that Black has a bishop on g6.] 13...Bxe4 14.Bd2 0-0-0 15.Ne1 f3 16.g3 Bd6 17.b4 Rhg8 18.a3 h5 19.Rd1 h4 0-1

125 – Davis 6.Bc4 Bf5 7.Bf4 e6 Bruce Davis was already an active member of the Allentown, Pennsylvania chess scene when we met in round 3 of a tournament. By 1981 I was an expert in postal chess, but I only played live at the Lansdale chess club near Philadelphia. Davis and I were about the same age. He was more experienced in tournament play. Since he had White and the higher rating, Davis had every reason to fight for a win. I hung around long enough to win the ending. I had studied lots of endgame books. In 1978, I got a chess cassette tape by Raymond Keene on the aggressive Bronstein-Larsen 4...Nf6 and 5...gxf6. In 1978 I lost a postal game as White. By 1979, I had taken it up as Black. I won one and drew two. In 1981 I won all six games I played with 5...gxf6, five postal games and this Bruce Davis game. By 1982, I played it vs stronger postal competition and started losing with it. That was no fun. By 1983, I had quit playing it until a lost to John Blood Sr. as Black in 1992. I lost with it again as White in 1994 vs Jeffrey Baffo. I still play it once in a while. Davis (1970) - Sawyer, Allentown, PA (3), 13.06.1981 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Nf6 5.Nxf6+ gxf6 6.Bc4 [The main line is 6.c3 Bf5 7.Nf3+/=] 6...Bf5 7.Bf4 [More often White plays 7.Nf3 or 7.Ne2] 7...e6 8.Qd2 Nd7 9.Nf3 Nb6 10.Bb3 Bd6 11.0-0-0 Be4 12.Qe3 Bd5 13.Bxd6 Qxd6 14.g3 Bxb3 15.Qxb3 Qd5 16.Qxd5 cxd5 17.Rhe1 [17.Ne1 Nc4 18.Nd3 Nd6=] 17...Rc8 18.Nh4 Kf8 19.f4 f5 20.Nf3 Nd7 21.Kb1 Ke7 22.Rc1 Rc6 23.c3 b5 24.Re2 Rhc8 25.Rec2 h6 26.Ne1 R8c7 27.Nd3 Rc8 28.b3 R6c7 29.b4 Nb6 30.Nc5 Rc6 31.Re2 Rg8 32.Kc2 Rgc8 33.Kb3 R8c7 34.Rg1 h5 35.h3 Rc8 36.g4 hxg4 37.hxg4 fxg4 38.Rxg4 Kf6 39.Rg5 Rh8 40.Reg2 [40.Rge5=. I do not remember if either of us offered a draw in this game. Clearly White wanted to win. This led him to take risks that led to his loss.] 40...Rcc8 41.R2g3 Rh4 42.Nd3 Na4 43.Nc5 Rxf4 44.Nxa4 bxa4+ 45.Kxa4 Rxc3 46.Rxc3 Kxg5 47.Rd3 [White is lost after this. He

might have better defensive chances after 47.Rc7 f5 48.Rxa7 Rxd4 49.Kb3 f4=/+] 47...f5 48.Kb5 Rh4 49.Kc5 f4 50.Kd6 Kf5 51.Rd1 f3 52.a4 Ke4 53.a5 f2 54.b5 Kf3 55.Rf1 Rxd4 56.Kxe6 Rb4 0-1

126 – Paichadze 6.Qd3 Qc7 7.g3 Black starts the Caro-Kann Defence with a modest pawn move 1...c6. In chess it’s not how you start but how you finish that matters most. Black played the sharp 5...gxf6 variation. White grabbed one of the doubled pawns with 12.Qxf7, but Black sent his center pawns on a long journey deep in White’s territory to win the game between Alua Nurmanova and Luka Paichadze. Nurmanova (1825) - Paichadze (2564), ACF Botvinnik Mem Cup Moscow RUS, 11.08.2018 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nd2 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Nf6 5.Nxf6+ gxf6 6.Qd3 Qc7 [6...Na6 7.a3 Bg4 8.Bf4 Qd7=] 7.g3 h5 8.Nf3 Bg4 9.Bg2 Nd7 10.Bd2 0-0-0 11.Qb3 [Or 11.h3 Bxf3 12.Qxf3 Nb6=] 11...e5 12.Qxf7 exd4 13.0-0-0 Qd6 [13...Ne5 14.Qxc7+ Kxc7=] 14.Bf4 [14.Rhe1 Ne5 15.Nxe5 fxe5 16.f3 Bd7 17.f4=] 14...Ne5 15.Bxe5? [15.Qb3=] 15...fxe5 16.h3 [16.Qb3 Qf6-/+] 16...Bh6+ 17.Kb1 Rhf8 18.Qb3 Be6 19.Qa4 [19.c4 Qc5-+] 19...Bd5 20.Ne1 Bxg2 21.Nxg2 Rxf2 22.Ne1 [22.Rhg1 Kb8-+] 22...e4 23.c3 [23.Qxa7 Qf6-+] 23...Bd2 [23...Rxb2+ 24.Ka1 Rd2-+] 24.Qxa7 [24.cxd4 Qxd4 25.Qxd4 Rxd4-+] 24...e3 25.Qa8+ [25.Rg1 dxc3 26.Nc2 cxb2-+] 25...Kc7 26.Qa5+ Kb8 27.Qb4 Qg6+ 28.Ka1 [28.Nc2 Qxc2+ 29.Kxc2 Bxc3+ 30.Kd3 Bxb4-+] 28...dxc3 29.Rg1 c2 0-1

127 – Matnadze 6.Nf3 Qc7 7.c4 The Caro-Kann Defence 5...gxf6 variation allows Black a direct attack against White’s kingside. Here the Black rooks do damage in the game Benjamin Abel Garcia Romero vs Ana Matnadze. Garcia Romero (2230) - Matnadze (2378), ch-ESP Rapid 2018 Linares ESP (9.11), 19.08.2018 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nd2 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Nf6 5.Nxf6+ gxf6 6.Nf3 Qc7 7.c4 Bg4 8.Be2 Nd7 9.0-0 e6 10.Nh4 Bxe2 11.Qxe2 0-0-0 12.Be3 [12.Qh5!?+/=] 12...h5 13.g3 f5 14.b4 [14.Bg5 f6 15.Bf4 Bd6 16.Bxd6 Qxd6 17.Rad1+/-] 14...Rg8 15.Qf3 [15.b5=] 15...Bxb4 16.c5 Nf6 17.Rab1 Nd5 18.Ng2 Ba5 19.Rb3 h4 20.Rfb1 [20.Nxh4 f4=/+] 20...hxg3 21.fxg3 Rg4 [21...b5 22.a4 bxa4 23.Ra3 Bb4

24.Rxa4 a5-/+] 22.Nf4 Nxe3 23.Qxe3 [23.Rxb7 Qxb7 24.Rxb7 Kxb7=] 23...b6 24.Ra3 Qd7 [24...b5 25.h3 Rgg8-/+] 25.Ne2 [25.d5 Rxf4 26.dxe6=] 25...Qd5 26.Kf2 [26.Qd3 Kd7-/+] 26...Rh8 [26...Re4-+] 27.h4 Rhxh4 28.Qf3 Rh2+ 29.Ke3 [Or 29.Kf1 Re4 30.Nf4 Rxf4 31.gxf4 Qxf3+ 32.Rxf3 Rh1+ 33.Ke2 Rxb1-+] 29...Re4+ 0-1

128 – Haines 6.Nf3 Qc7 7.Bc4 Ray Haines played in a four round chess tournament in Houlton, Maine in 2012 at Game/75. In the third round Ray played Black in a Caro-Kann Defence 4.Nxe4 Nf6 defense vs Roger Peterson. He knew this opponent well. Ray Haines wrote: "This is the first time that I have been able to play this line in it though as most people seem to wish to play the exchange lines. I played a bishop move because it looked good, but he missed a knight move [9.Ng5] which would have made things harder for me. We both missed chances for better play early. I like to sac pawns for play, and he knows this, so he did not try to take my krp [h-pawn]. He has gotten into trouble doing take before when playing me. He thought that he would have the better endgame but that did not work out for him. I have learned from this game and will not make the same mistakes." Ray Haines and I played a lot in 1974 when I began playing the Caro-Kann myself. It was one of my five top defenses vs 1.e4 over my career. It is quite likely that Ray influenced my choice of 1...c6. I played it almost exclusively until about 1980. By then I was ready for sharper openings in my repertoire. I did well with them too, but I have a soft spot in my heart for the Caro-Kann. Peterson - Haines, Houlton, ME (3), 26.05.2012 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Nf6 5.Nxf6+ gxf6 6.Nf3 [The most common set-up is 6.c3 Bf5 7.Nf3 e6 8.g3] 6...Qc7 [6...Bg4 7.Be2 Qc7 8.0-0 Nd7 and in some scenarios, usually after ...0-0-0, Black could play ...e5 in one move.] 7.Bc4 Rg8!?N [Usually Black develops a bishop with 7...Bf5 or 7...Bg4] 8.0-0 Bh3?! 9.Nh4 [9.Ng5! fxg5 10.Qh5 Rg7 11.Qxh3+/=] 9...Bg4 10.Be2 [10.Qd3! Rh8 11.Qb3+/-] 10...Be6 11.c4 [11.Qd3+/-] 11...Na6 12.Qd3 0-00 13.Be3 Qd7 14.a3 Bg4 15.Bxg4 Qxg4 16.Qf5+ [White might be able to pick off the h-pawn with 16.Qxh7 e6 17.h3+/-] 16...Qxf5 17.Nxf5 e6 18.Ng3 f5 19.b4 Bd6 [19...f4! 20.Bxf4 Rxd4=/+] 20.f4 Nc7 21.Rac1 Rg4 22.Rc3 Rdg8 23.Rf2 Be7 24.d5 Bf6 25.Rcc2 exd5 26.Bxa7 [26.Nxf5+/=] 26...Bh4 27.Rfd2 dxc4 [Black misses 27...Bxg3! 28.hxg3 dxc4 29.Rxc4

Rxg3=/+] 28.Nxf5 Nb5 29.Bb6 [29.Be3!+/=] 29...Nxa3 30.Nd6+? [30.Rc1=] 30...Kb8 31.Ra2 c3 32.Rd1? c2 33.Rxc2 Nxc2 34.Rd2 Nxb4 35.Rb2 Nd3 36.Ra2 Ne1 37.g3 Bxg3 38.Ra7 Bxf4+ 39.Kf2 Bxd6 40.Kxe1 Rg2 0-1

129 – Schmid 6.Nf3 Bf5 7.Bd3 Bg6 The Caro-Kann Defence 4.Nxe4 Nf6 is noted as a sharp line of play, especially after 5.Nxf6 gxf6. Back in the 1970s this was a favorite line of Bent Larsen. At the time I only played 4...Bf5 or 4...Nd7 as Black. My game vs Walter Schmid made me take the 5...gxf6 line more seriously. I played 5...gxf6 myself frequently as Black during the years 1979-1983. Korchnoi at the time liked to play 4...Nf6 5.Nxf6+ exf6. He tried used the open lines for attack with his bishops. I distrust the 5...exf6 line; in my own practice I have several times won as White with the 4-3 queenside pawn advantage. Walter Schmid had a peak ICCF rating of 2350 from 1995-1996. In recent years his rating has fallen to 2189. I was unrated at the time of the game below. Eventually I would be rated over 2000. These days I am not active in ICCF; my last rating was 2157. In the game below, I ended up losing on time. Time control was 30 days for every 10 moves. I do not remember why I exceeded the time limit. Sawyer - Schmid, corr ICCF 1978 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 [One thing I liked about playing 4...Nf6 is that it can also be played vs the Two Knights Variation move order after 2.Nc3 d5 3.Nf3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Nf6 5.Nxf6+ gxf6 6.d4] 2...d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Nf6 5.Nxf6+ gxf6 6.Nf3 Bf5 [6...Bg4 7.Be2 Qc7 or 7...e6] 7.Bd3 [The main line is 7.c3 e6 8.g3] 7...Bg6 8.0-0 Nd7 [More popular is 8...e6 but playing Nd7 threatens a possible ...e5 in one move.] 9.Bf4 Qa5 [9...e6] 10.c4 0-0-0 11.Qe2 e6 [11...e5! 12.dxe5 fxe5=] 12.a3 Bg7 13.Rfd1 Rhe8 14.Bd2 Qc7 15.Bc3 e5 16.Bxg6 [Here I did not dare go for 16.dxe5!+/=] 16...exd4 17.Qc2 fxg6 18.Bxd4 Nb6?! [18...Bh6=] 19.a4 White lost on time. 0-1

130 – Blood 6.Nf3 Bf5 7.Be2 After missing a chance to defeat John Blood Sr. with my Latvian Gambit, a year later I chose to defend against his 1.e4 with the Caro-Kann Defence. Normally after 4.Nxe4, I played the classical 4...Bf5. Sometimes I preferred the sharper and riskier 4...Nf6 line, intending 5.Nxf6+ gxf6. Jeremy Silman wrote a book on this line called "The Dynamic Caro-Kann: The Bronstein Larsen and the Original Caro Systems" a couple years before this game was played. To be aggressive, I tried a throwback to those thrilling days of yesteryear. The bishop still went to Bf5, but Black also had use of the open g-file. Black's normal idea is to castle queenside. I was too slow to castle. That caused me trouble. I prematurely attacked along the g-file as a base of operations. This was my original plan, but this time the execution failed badly. White found more effective play on the b-file than Black did on the g-file. John Blood won which reversed my earlier success against him. Blood - Sawyer, corr USCF 1992 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Nf6 5.Nxf6+ gxf6 6.Nf3 Bf5 7.Be2 e6 8.0-0 Qc7 9.c4 Nd7 10.d5 Rg8 [10...0-0-0! 11.Nd4 Be4=] 11.Nh4 Bg6 [11...Be4=] 12.Nxg6 hxg6 13.dxc6 Qxc6 14.Bf4 Ne5 15.Qc2 0-0-0 16.Rad1 Be7 17.Qc3 [17.a3+/-] 17...Nd7!? [17...Rxd1 18.Rxd1 Qe4=] 18.Bf3 Qc5? 19.b4 Qf5 20.Bxb7+ Kxb7 21.Qf3+ Kb6 22.c5+ Nxc5 23.bxc5+ Bxc5 24.Rb1+ 1-0

131 – Rabeler 6.Nf3 Bf5 7.Bc4 Following the opening adventures of Bent Larsen, the great Danish grandmaster, I found myself frequently drawn to his unique theoretical inventions. One such idea comes from the Caro-Kann Defence 4.Nxe4 Nf6 5.Nxf6+ gxf6 variation. This variation was played by both Aron Nimzowitsch (100 years ago) and Bent Larsen (40 years ago). A problem occurs for Black when White plays Bf4 early. Black usually plays Nbd7 and Bd6, however the knight interferes with the queen's protection of the Bd6. Larsen had an idea to answer an early Bf4 with 8...Na6!? The knight is headed toward an eventual Nd5. This rare move was played in Tal-Larsen, Riga Interzonal 1979. Probably I saw it in a Chess Informant in 1980 and was happy to give it a try. In the 1981 ICCF World Cup V postal chess event, I decided to follow Larsen's idea. My opponent was E. Rabeler. I continued my pressure on the kingside, even though White castled queenside. I switched focus to the king, won material and White resigned. Rabeler - Sawyer, corr ICCF 1981 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Nf6 5.Nxf6+ gxf6 6.Nf3 Bf5 7.Bc4 e6 8.Bf4 Na6!? 9.Bb3 Rg8 10.Qe2 Bd6 11.Bg3 Bg4 12.c3 Nc7 13.0-0-0 Qe7 14.Qe3 0-0-0 15.Rde1 Nd5 16.Bxd5 cxd5 17.Nd2 Bf5 18.f4? [White's position seems very defensible after 18.Nf3=] 18...Qc7 19.Nb3 [19.Rhf1 Qa5 20.a3 Qa4 threatening mate in 1] 19...a5 20.Nc5 b6 21.Nd3 Qc4 22.Kd2 Qxa2 23.Ra1 Qc4 24.Rhc1 Kd7 0-1

3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Nd7 Black prepares Nf6 so that one knight can be recaptured if necessary by a knight.

132 – Vaughan 5.Qe2 e6 6.g3 On Thursday night August 8, 1974, President Richard Nixon came on national television to say that effective the next day, he would resign the presidency of the United States. Many of us wanted to watch that announcement, but we were playing in a chess tournament. It was the seventh round of the 1974 US Junior Open at Franklin & Marshall College in Lancaster, Pennsylvania. In the 5th round on the night before I had been playing Frank Teuton on a board next to Meeks Vaughan, Jr. who watched me win a nice game in the same Caro-Kann Defence variation. In this tournament I scored 3.5 out of 4 as Black in the Caro-Kann picking up a lot of rating points. Meeks Vaughan Jr became a USCF Expert and Correspondence Master. I thought I saw Vaughan visit a tournament in Maine in the early 1970s, but I would not swear to it. Vaughan has not been active in over-the-board tournaments since 1991. Vaughan was rated at least a hundred points above me, but neither of us felt like playing in this round. Meeks set up an opening trap. When I did not fall for it, a draw was offered. Vaughan - Sawyer, US Junior Open (7), 08.08.1974 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Nd7 5.Qe2 [This is a trap by Max Euwe and others. Black has two good moves and one lemon.] 5...e6 [Black plays this good move 40% of the time, including against Euwe. The most recommended move is 5...Ndf6 allowing a possible 6...Bf5. It is played 50% of the time. The real lemon is 5...Ngf6?? It has been played 18 times in my database.

Only 14 of those times did White respond with the immediate 6.Nd6 mate! Paul Keres won one of those quick games as White.] 6.g3 1/2-1/2

133 - PII233Crafty 5.Bc4 Ngf6 6.Ng5 Some variations naturally lead to multiple exchanges so that an ending is reached shortly after the opening finishes. That is not to say the game is drawish. If both sides head down the same path, one or both is probably hoping for victory. PII233Crafty and I played 29 games with the Caro-Kann Defence 4…Nd7 variation. I drew 5, won this game, and lost the rest. I learned a lot about 4…Nd7. It was called the Karpov Variation or Smyslov Variation, depending on which generation you were from. This game can and did lead to so many exchanges that by move 30 we were in a level King and Pawn endgame. On move 34, Black made a seemingly simple pawn exchange that changed the structure and gave White an easy win. Black's blunder allowed the White king to invade via the h-file while the Black king was tied down to holding White's c-pawn. Sawyer (2405) - PII233Crafty (2853), Internet Chess Club 1998 began 1.d4 d5 2.e4 c6 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 [When I am in a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit mood, I play 4...f3.] 4...Nd7 5.Bc4 Ngf6 6.Ng5 e6 7.Qe2 Nb6 8.Bd3 [If 8.Bb3 h6 9.N5f3 a5 is the theoretically correct.] 8...h6 9.N5f3 c5 10.dxc5 Bxc5 [This variation has some visual similarities to the Queen's Gambit Accepted.] 11.Ne5 Nbd7 12.Ngf3 0-0 [Black usually plays 12...Qc7 or 12...Nxe5] 13.0-0 b6 14.Nxd7 Bxd7 15.Ne5 Bd6 16.Nxd7 Qxd7 17.c3 Rad8 18.Bc2 Qc7 19.h3 Bh2+ 20.Kh1 Bf4 21.Bxf4 Qxf4 22.Rad1 Rfe8 23.Rxd8 Rxd8 24.Rd1 Rxd1+ 25.Qxd1 Ne4 26.Bxe4 Qxe4 27.Kg1 Kh7 28.a3 Kg6 29.Qg4+ Qxg4 30.hxg4 f5 31.gxf5+ exf5 32.c4 Kf6 33.f4 g5 34.g3 gxf4? [Normal play might follow 34...a5 35.b4 Ke6 36.Kf2 Kd6 37.Ke3= when the two kings are tied to the center or the opponent's pawn majority side.] 35.gxf4 a5 36.b4 Ke6 37.Kg2 b5 38.c5 Kd5 39.Kg3 Kc6

40.Kh4 Kd5 41.Kh5 Kc6 42.Kxh6 axb4 43.axb4 Kd5 44.Kg5 Ke6 45.Kg6 Kd7 46.Kxf5 Ke7 47.Ke5 Kd7 48.f5 Kc6 49.f6 Kd7 50.c6+ Kd8 51.Ke6 Kc7 52.f7 Kxc6 53.f8Q Kc7 54.Qc5+ Kb7 55.Qd6 Ka7 56.Qc6 Kb8 1-0

134 – Gruenfeld 5.Bd3 Ngf6 6.Ng5 What was supposed to be a solid and positional variation of the Caro-Kann Defence in 4...Nd7 turns extremely wild. Black wins a knight with 15...gxf3. White breaks through with 16.Rxe6+. Black checks with 17...Rxg2+. A couple moves later and it’s all over in the game between Yehuda Gruenfeld and Andrew Kayonde. Note that 5.Bd3 Ngf6 6.Ng5 transposes to 5.Ng5 Ngf6 6.Bd3. Gruenfeld (2418) - Kayonde (2393), 43rd Olympiad 2018 Batumi GEO (3.61), 26.09.2018 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Nd7 5.Bd3 Ngf6 6.Ng5 e6 7.N1f3 Bd6 8.Qe2 h6 9.Ne4 Nxe4 10.Qxe4 Qc7 [Or 10...Nf6 11.Qe2 Qc7 12.Bd2 b6 13.0-0-0 Bb7=] 11.0-0 [Another idea is 11.Qg4 Kf8 12.0-0 b6 13.b3 Bb7 14.Bb2=] 11...b6 12.Qg4 g5 [12...Kf8 13.b3 Bb7 14.Bb2 Nf6 15.Qh4+/=] 13.Qh3 Rg8 14.Re1 g4 15.Qxh6 gxf3 16.Rxe6+ Be7 17.Bf4 [17.Rxe7+ Kxe7 18.Bf4+-] 17...Rxg2+ [17...Nf6 18.Rxf6 Qd7 19.Rxc6+-] 18.Kh1 Qb7 [18...Nf8 19.Bxc7 Bxe6 20.Bg3+-] 19.Rxe7+ Kxe7 20.Bd6+ [After 20...Kd8 21.Qh8+ Rg8 22.Qxg8+ Nf8 23.Qxf8+ Kd7 24.Bf5#] 1-0

135 – Barbosa 5.Nf3 Ngf6 6.Neg5 This Caro-Kann Defence exhibited solid development with both sides castling queenside. It appeared as if the players were in for a long struggle. White had a fine game until for some reason he chose 19.Ne5. This move dropped a pawn and walked into a devastating pin in the game Mario Villanueva vs Oliver Barbosa. Villanueva (2466) - Barbosa (2545), PRO League Group Stage chess.com INT (6), 14.02.2018 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Nd7 5.Nf3 Ngf6 6.Neg5 e6 [6...h6 7.Nh3 g5 8.Nhg1 Bg7 9.Bd3 c5 10.c3 cxd4 11.cxd4 0-0 12.Ne2 e5 13.Nxe5 Nxe5 14.dxe5 Ng4 15.0-0 Nxe5=/+] 7.Bd3 Bd6 8.Qe2 h6 9.Ne4 Nxe4 10.Bxe4 [10.Qxe4=] 10...Qc7 [10...0-0 11.Bd2 e5 12.dxe5 Nxe5 13.0-0-0=] 11.Bd2 [11.0-0 0-0 12.c4 b6 13.b3=] 11...b6 [11...0-0 12.0-0-0=] 12.0-0-0 Bb7 13.Kb1 0-0-0 [13...0-0=] 14.c4 Rhe8 15.Rhe1 Kb8 16.Bc3 a5 [16...g5 17.Bc2+/=] 17.g3 Bb4 18.Bxb4 axb4

19.Ne5? [19.Bc2+/=] 19...Nxe5 20.dxe5 Qxe5 21.Qe3 c5 22.Rxd8+ Rxd8 23.Qf3 [23.Bxb7 Qxe3 24.Rxe3 Kxb7-/+] 23...f5 0-1

136 – Kohut 5.Nf3 Ngf6 6.Ng3 Gregory Kohut and I played several postal chess games in 1977. The first one was a Caro-Kann Defence Panov Botvinnik Attack. That game was played in APCT. According to my records, all the other games were played in Ron’s Postal Chess Club (RPCC). Greg Kohut and I had five interesting games with no draws. Here I chose the Caro-Kann Defence 4…Nd7 variation. That was relatively rare for me since I usually played 4…Bf5. I set up a solid defense. All my pieces were developed by move 12. My intention was to attack queenside and in the center. Then Gregory Kohut boldly made a daring but unnecessary knight sacrifice with 19.Nxe6?! This gave Black good winning chances if he defended correctly. Ten moves later White resigned. Kohut (1700) - Sawyer, corr RPCC 1977 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Nd7 5.Nf3 Ngf6 6.Ng3 e6 7.Bc4 [7.Bd3] 7...Nb6 8.Bb3 [8.Bd3] 8...c5 9.c3 Qc7 [9...cxd4 10.Nxd4 Be7=] 10.dxc5 [White could gain a tempo is he delayed the capture of c5 for a move and played 10.0-0 Be7 11.dxc5+/=] 10...Bxc5 11.0-0 0-0 12.Qe2 Bd7 13.Bg5 Be7 14.Rad1 Ba4 15.Bxa4 Nxa4 16.Nd4 a6 17.Rfe1 Rad8?! [17...b5 18.Bxf6 Bxf6=] 18.Bc1 [White has a nice shot with 18.Ndf5! exf5 19.Nxf5 Rxd1 20.Nxe7+ Kh8 21.Qxd1 Nxb2 22.Qd4+/-] 18...b5 19.Nxe6?! [This is an unnecessary sacrifice. Chances were equal after 19.Bg5=] 19...fxe6 20.Qxe6+ Kh8 21.Qxa6 [21.Rxd8 Bxd8 22.Qxa6 Qd7-/+ when Black has a knight for two pawns.] 21...Bc5 [Better was 21...Rb8-+] 22.Qxb5 [22.Rxd8! Qxd8 23.Qxb5 Ng4 24.Be3 Bxe3 25.fxe3 Qh4 26.Qh5 Qxh5 27.Nxh5 Nxb2-/+ when White has three isolated pawns against Black's extra knight.] 22...Bxf2+ 23.Kh1 Bxe1 24.Rxe1 Nc5 25.Qe2 Nd3 26.Rf1 Ng4 27.Bg5 Rxf1+ 28.Nxf1 Rf8 29.g3 Ndf2+ 0-1

137 – Teuton 5.Nf3 Ngf6 6.Ng3 L. Frank Teuton was rated higher at 1910 than most of the 201 players at the US Junior Open in 1974. It was held in Lancaster, Pennsylvania. In those days, there were few scholastic events. Most players were rated between 1100 and 2000. Now you find scholastic players rated well over 2000 or well below 1000. In 1974 Teuton lived in Maryland. This was near Lancaster. Some years ago I enjoyed chatting with him on the Internet Chess Club. As I recall, at that time he used the ICC handle "FightNFrank". As a young man Teuton moved to Canada. In New Hampshire in the 1990s Frank played in a couple tournaments where he posted a USCF master rating. Teuton was the highest rated player I defeated in the 1970s. Of course, I only played a few rated tournaments in 1972, 1973, 1974 and 1977. Our Caro-Kann Defence game was one of the best games I played in my early days. At the end I announced mate in four. Announced checkmates were common in the old chess books I read. However, I did not realize that in an actual tournament, that is considered bad form. I was young and excited. Nowadays I would just let my moves speak for me. Teuton (1910) - Sawyer, US Junior Open (5), 07.08.1974 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Nd7 5.Nf3 [The other two lines are 5.Bc4 and 5.Ng5] 5...Ngf6 6.Ng3 e6 7.Bd3 c5 8.c3 b6 9.0-0 Be7 10.Ne5 Bb7 11.Bb5 0-0 [Black has equalized.] 12.Nc6 Bxc6 13.Bxc6 Rc8 14.Bb5 [14.Bb7 Rc7=] 14...cxd4 15.cxd4 Nd5 16.Re1 Qc7 [Black is better developed. White decides to attack kingside.] 17.Nh5 N7f6 18.a3 g6 19.Ng3?! [19.Nxf6+ Bxf6=] 19...Rfd8 20.Bg5 Qc2 21.Qf3!? [The position favored Black. White made a calculated choice to attack rather than head to an inferior ending. Alas for White, Black defended and counterattacked well for the rest of the game.] 21...Qxb2 22.Ba6 Rc3 23.Be3 Nxe3 24.fxe3 Rxa3 25.Rab1 Qc3 26.Qb7 Rd7 27.Qb8+ Kg7 28.Rbc1 Qb4 29.Bc8 Rd8 30.Qb7 Rc3 31.Bxe6 Rxc1 32.Rxc1 fxe6 33.Rc7 Kf8 34.h3 Nd5 35.Rc6 Qe1+ 36.Nf1 Nxe3 37.Rxe6 Qxf1+ 38.Kh2 [I repeat moves while I work out the checkmate details.] 38...Qf4+ 39.Kh1 Qf1+ 40.Kh2 Qf4+ 41.Kh1

Bd6 42.g3 [Here I announced a mate in four.] 42...Qf1+ 43.Kh2 Qf2+ 44.Kh1 Qe1+ 45.Kh2 Bxg3# 0-1

138 – Chaney 5.Ng5 Ngf6 6.Bd3 Ron Chaney and I played a lot of games over a 20 year period in American Postal Chess Tournaments (APCT). I won more of the early games played by postcard. Chaney won more of the later games played by email. Two of our games were in the Caro-Kann Defence. In this game Ronald Chaney had the Black pieces. In the first of those games I had Black. There I played 4…Bf5. That first game was played in 1978. It is covered near the end of this book. The second Caro-Kann game is given below. Ron Chaney had Black and chose the solid 4…Nd7. This was one of those rare games where neither one of us made any serious mistakes. White attacked with the 5.Ng5 line. Black found a lesser known line with 7…Be7 that equalized. Black had the advantage of the two bishops. This changed to a bishop for a knight in the middlegame. White had a pawn majority on the queenside. Black had one on the kingside. The rooks were set to possibly come off the board very soon when a draw was agreed. Sawyer (1944) - Chaney (1972), EMQ-3 corr APCT, 08.01.1997 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Nd7 5.Ng5 Ngf6 6.Bd3 e6 7.N1f3 Be7 [The main line is 7...Bd6=] 8.Qe2 h6 9.Ne4 Nxe4 10.Qxe4 c5 11.0-0 cxd4 12.Qxd4 Bf6 [12...0-0=] 13.Qd6 [13.Qa4 a6 14.c3+/=] 13...Qe7 14.Qxe7+ [White could probe the position further with 14.Qg3!? Nc5 15.Bf4 Nxd3 16.cxd3 Bd7= but not 16...Bxb2? 17.Bd6 Qd8 18.Rab1 Bf6 19.Nd2+/=] 14...Kxe7 15.c3 Nc5 16.Bc2 b6 17.Be3 Ba6 18.Rfe1 Nd3 19.Bxd3 Bxd3 20.Bd4 [20.Rad1=] 20...Bxd4 [20...Rhd8=] 21.Nxd4 Rac8 [21...Ba6!?=] 22.Re3 [22.Rad1=] 22...Ba6 23.Nf5+ Kf6 24.Nd6 Rc7 25.Rd1 g6 [25...Rd8=] 26.Ne4+ [26.Rf3+ Kg7 27.c4 Ra8=] 26...Ke7 27.f3 f5 28.Nf2 Kf6 [28...Rc6=] 29.Ree1 Rhh7 1/2-1/2

139 – BethO 5.Ng5 Ngf6 6.Bd3 I love online chess. I have played on the Internet Chess Club for 20 years. Most games were set to the faster blitz time controls. Every once in a while I play a slow game. My Caro-Kann Defence game vs Beth0 was played at the slow time control of 45 45. This is far less popular than the 3 0 speed. We played the main line 4…Nd7 variation that continued 5.Ng5 Ngf6 6.Bd3 e6 7.N1f3 Bd6 8.Qe2 h6 9.Ne4 Nxe4 10.Qxe4. White had more central control. Black would be okay as long as he completed his development and castled. Here Black played for an attack while the king still sat in the middle. That was not likely to work out well. Fleeing to the open file proved to be fatal. Sawyer (2197) - BethO (1786), ICC 45 45 Internet Chess Club, 17.09.2007 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Nd7 5.Ng5 Ngf6 6.Bd3 e6 7.N1f3 Bd6 8.Qe2 h6 9.Ne4 Nxe4 10.Qxe4 c5?! [10...Nf6=] 11.0-0 Qf6?! [11...Nf6 12.Qh4+/=] 12.Re1 [12.Be3+/-] 12...cxd4 13.Nxd4 Bc5? [13...Nc5 14.Bb5+ Kf8 15.Qe3+/=] 14.c3 [14.Be3+/-] 14...Bb6 15.Be3 Nc5 16.Bb5+ Kd8? [Fleeing to the open file is fatal. 16...Kf8 17.Qc2+/-] 17.Qc2 [Or 17.Nxe6+! fxe6 18.Rad1+ Ke7 19.Qc4+-] 17...e5 18.Nb3 [18.Rad1+-] 18...Bd7 19.Rad1 Kc7 20.Bxd7 [20.Bxc5 Bxb5 21.Bd6+ Kc8 22.Bxe5+-] 20...Nxd7 21.Qe4 Rad8 22.h3 Bxe3 23.Qxe3 Kb8 24.Nc5 [24.Rd5+/-] 24...Nxc5 25.Qxc5 Rxd1 26.Rxd1 Rc8 27.Qd5 Rc7 [27...a6 28.a4 g5 29.c4+/=] 28.Re1 Qf5 [28...Qg5 29.h4 Qxh4 30.Qxe5+/-] 29.Rxe5 Qb1+? [With this check Black loses a rook. He would only be a pawn down if he played 29...Qd7 30.Qe4+/-] 30.Kh2 a6 31.Qd6 [White had a mate in 10 beginning with 31.Re8+ Rc8 32.Qe5+ Ka7 33.Rxc8 Qg6 34.Qb8+ Kb6 35.Qc7+ Ka7 36.Qd8 Qd6+ 37.Qxd6 a5 38.Qc7 Ka6 39.Ra8+ Kb5 40.Rxa5#] 31...Qxb2 32.Re8+ Ka7 33.Qxc7 Qxf2 34.Re7 [White had a mate in eleven beginning with 34.Qb8+ Kb6 35.Re7 Qc5 36.Rxb7+ Kc6 37.Rc7+ Kd5 38.Qa8+ Kd6 39.Qd8+ Ke6 40.Rxc5 f5 41.Rc6+ Kf7 42.Qc8 g6 43.Qb7+ Kg8 44.Rc8#] 34...Qb6 35.Qxb6+ Kxb6 36.Rxf7 g5 37.Rf6+ Ka5 38.Rxh6 Kb5 39.Rh5 Kc4 40.Rxg5 Kxc3 41.h4

b5 42.h5 Kb2 43.h6 Kxa2 44.h7 Kb3 45.h8Q Kc4 46.Rg3 a5 47.Qh4+ Kd5 48.Rg5+ Kc6 49.Qh6+ Kd7 50.Rg7+ Ke8 51.Qh8# 1-0

140 – Baffo 5.Ng5 Ngf6 6.Bd3 My correspondence adventures with Jeffrey Baffo included this game from the solid Caro-Kann Defence 4...Nd7 variation. Typically all the pieces remain on the board while both sides complete their development. This allows the better players flexibility in combining tactics and strategy to choose where to attack, what pawns to push, which pieces to exchange and whether or not to play for a middlegame or endgame win. The line has been called the Flohr Variation, Smyslov Variation or Petrosian Variation. Each of those grandmasters played it as Black about 20 times in known games. Anatoly Karpov played it at least 120 times adding new ideas, making it the Karpov Variation. In his “The Caro-Kann, Move by Move” book, Cyrus Lakdawala recommends this variation. In the 1974 US Junior Open, I won a nice game with 4...Nd7 where I announced mate in four as Black vs Frank Teuton. The next night just after I finished yet another game in this same line, Richard Nixon announced his resignation, but the President was not playing chess. Nowadays I spend more time looking for attacking lines against the CaroKann Defence as White. In my early years I preferred Black. In this game, Jeff tried the trendy 5.Ng5 which had been well known for about a decade at that time. We both castled queenside and reached an even pawn ending when we agreed to a draw. Baffo (2263) - Sawyer (1972), corr USCF 95P135, 18.03.1996 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Nd7 5.Ng5 [Other popular lines include 5.Bc4 Ngf6 6.Ng5 e6 7.Qe2 Nb6= and 5.Nf3 Ngf6 6.Nxf6+ Nxf6 7.Bc4 Bf5=] 5...Ngf6 6.Bd3 [6.Bc4 e6 7.Qe2 Nb6=] 6...e6 7.N1f3 Bd6 8.Qe2 h6 9.Ne4 Nxe4 10.Qxe4 Nf6 11.Qe2 Qc7 12.Bd2 b6 13.0-0-0 Bb7 14.Rhe1 [14.Ne5 c5 15.Bb5+ Ke7=] 14...0-0-0 [14...0-0= is also good.] 15.Ba6 b5 16.Bxb7+ Kxb7 17.Kb1 Ka8 18.Ne5 [White usually plays 18.Rc1 or 18.Bc1] 18...Bxe5 19.dxe5 Nd7 [19...Nd5] 20.f4 Nb6 21.Ba5 Rxd1+

22.Rxd1 Rd8 23.Rd3 Rxd3 24.Qxd3 Qd7 25.Bxb6 Qxd3 26.cxd3 axb6 27.Kc2 Kb7 28.Kc3= 1/2-1/2

Book 4: Chapter 5 – Classical 4.Nxe4 Bf5 Various Alternatives Black develops the bishop and attacks the central knight.

141 – Carlsen Kasparov 5.Qf3 Pro-Biz chess events have grandmasters play half the moves alternating with their partners. The current World Champion Magnus Carlsen and Chris Flowers teamed up against former World Champion Garry Kasparov and FM Terry Chapman. The grandmasters played the odd numbered moves. The chess businessmen played the even numbered moves. All went well until Mr. Flowers blundered on move 28. World Champion Magnus Carlsen avoided book lines when he played the rare 5.Qf3 against the Caro-Kann Defence. I have won all four times I faced this move as Black. Carlsen & Flowers - Kasparov & Chapman, 5th Pro-Biz Cup 2017 London ENG (2.3), 30.11.2017 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nd2 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Bf5 5.Qf3 e6 [5...Bg6 6.Ne2 Nd7= 0-1 in 37. Socket - Sawyer, Internet Chess Club 2002] 6.c3 [6.Be3 Nf6 7.Nxf6+ Qxf6 8.Qe2 Nd7 9.0-0-0 Bd6= 0-1 in 25. Cosby - Sawyer, Williamsport PA 1997] 6...Nd7 7.Bf4 Qb6 8.Bd3 Bxe4 9.Bxe4 Ngf6 10.Ne2 Nxe4 11.Qxe4 Be7 12.0-0 0-0 13.Qc2 Rfe8 14.Rfe1 c5 15.Rad1 Rad8 16.d5 [16.h3=] 16...exd5 17.Rxd5 Qe6 18.Red1 Nf6 19.Rxd8 Bxd8 20.Ng3 [20.c4=] 20...Qxa2 21.Nf5 Qe6 22.h3 Ne4 23.Qa4 Bb6 24.Qd7 c4 25.Be3 Nc5 26.Qxe6 fxe6 27.Bxc5 Bxc5 28.Nd6? [28.Ng3 b5 29.Rd7 Re7=/+] 28...Rd8 0-1

142 – Eggert 5.Bd3 Nd7 6.Nf3 In August of 1974 the US Junior Open was held at Franklin & Marshall College in Lancaster, Pennsylvania. The night before I finished a tournament in Harrisburg scoring about 2-3. I think that was the only time I had a losing record in my early days. Monday morning I walked to the bus station in Harrisburg, only to find that there was also a passenger train going from Harrisburg to Lancaster. This was new to me. In Maine where I grew up, trains were for freight, not people. But the cost of the train was much cheaper than the bus, so... all aboard! Once in Lancaster, I walked to Franklin & Marshall College. There I stayed in a dorm room. It was Spartan, but we were young and it was cheap. The US Junior Open was a Swiss event with only one section of 201 players. I was paired down in the first round and expected to win vs Paul Eggert. Later I moved to Pennsylvania. I think I met Paul in the early 1980s at a chess event, although we did not face each other. I played a classical Caro-Kann Defence 4.Nxe4 Bf5. Then I castled opposite sides and attacked. It worked nicely. Eggert - Sawyer, US Junior Open (1), 05.08.1974 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Bf5 5.Bd3 Nd7!? [Black can take the d-pawn 5...Qxd4! and White does not have enough.] 6.Nf3 Ngf6 7.Nxf6+ Nxf6 8.Bxf5 Qa5+ 9.Bd2 Qxf5 10.0-0 e6 11.c3 Bd6 [I decided to attack the kingside.] 12.h3 Nd5 13.b3 h5 14.c4 Nf4 15.Bxf4 Bxf4 16.Qe2 g5 17.g3 Bc7 [Today I would play 17...Qxh3 18.gxf4 gxf4-+] 18.Kg2 g4 19.Ng1 [Better is 19.hxg4 hxg4 20.Ne5 Bxe5 21.dxe5 0-0-0=/+] 19...0-0-0 20.Rad1 gxh3+ 21.Nxh3 Rdg8 22.Qf3 Qc2 23.Kg1 Rg7!? [Black attack continues with 23...Qg6! 24.Kg2 h4-+] 24.a4? [Now Black is lost. White could try to make something happen with 24.d5 exd5 25.cxd5] 24...Rhg8 25.Rc1 Qb2 26.Rc3 h4 27.Kh2? hxg3+ 28.Qxg3 Bxg3+ 29.Rxg3 Rxg3 0-1

143 – PII233Crafty 5.Nc5 b6 Bobby Fischer wrote that he played 5.Nc5 several times in simuls in the 1960s. Sometimes I try that line myself. White gets no advantage, except it might be a surprise weapon vs humans. I faced the Caro-Kann Defence from PII233Crafty in 1998. Then I was rated in the 2400s in blitz on the Internet Chess Club. Here is a sample of some of my draws vs the high rated PII233Crafty chess engine. Later I also drew duckbreath in the same line. Sawyer (2412) - PII233Crafty (2726), ICC 5 0 Internet Chess Club, 13.11.1998 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e4 c6 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Bf5 5.Nc5 b6 [The main alternative was played vs me by Jack Clauser. After 5...e5 6.Nxb7 Qe7 (This was the old move. Nowadays almost everyone plays 6...Qb6=) 7.Na5 exd4+ 8.Be2 Qb4+ 9.Bd2 Qxb2 10.Bd3 (10.Rc1+/=) 10...Bxd3 11.cxd3+/= 1-0 in 22. Sawyer - Clauser, corr 1994] 6.Nb3 Nf6 [Another good line for Black is 6...e6 7.Nf3 Nd7 (7...Bd6=) 8.Be3 Qc7 9.Bd3 Bxd3 10.Qxd3 Ngf6 11.0-0 c5 12.dxc5 Nxc5 13.Nxc5 Bxc5 14.Bxc5 Qxc5 15.Rad1 0-0=. The game position was equal, but I was outplayed. I blundered on move 33. Then I dragged the game out until mate. I am not proud of the way I handled it. 1-0 in 69. Pekelder - Sawyer, corr APCT 1978] 7.Nf3 e6 8.Bd3 Bb4+ 9.c3 Bxd3 [I drew three other games that continued 9...Bd6 10.Bxf5 exf5 11.0-0 0-0 12.Bg5 h6 13.Bxf6 Qxf6 14.Re1+/= White has a better pawn structure, but Black has kingside attack chances. Game drawn by repetition 1/2-1/2 in 91. Sawyer - PII233Crafty, Internet Chess Club 1998] 10.Qxd3 Bd6 11.0-0 [11.Bg5 Nbd7 12.Nbd2 Qc7 13.0-0 0-0 14.Rad1=] 11...0-0 12.Re1 Nbd7 13.Bg5 Qc7 14.Bh4 Rae8 15.Bg3 [15.Nbd2 e5 16.Bxf6 Nxf6 17.dxe5 Bxe5 18.Nc4=] 15...Bxg3 16.hxg3 e5 17.dxe5 Nxe5 18.Nxe5 Rxe5 19.Rxe5 Qxe5 20.Rd1 Re8 21.Nd4 Qd5 22.c4 Qd6 23.Nf3 Qxd3 24.Rxd3 Kf8 25.Kf1 c5 26.b3 g6 27.Nd2 Re6 28.f3 Ke7 29.Kf2 h5 30.Re3 Nd7 31.Rxe6+ Kxe6 32.Ke3 Nb8 33.Ne4 Nc6 34.Nc3 Ke5 35.Nd5 Nd4 36.Ne7 Nf5+ 37.Nxf5 Kxf5 38.Kf2!? a6 [This is a wasted tempo when you may be trying to achieve zugzwang. 38...Ke5 39.Ke3 g5-/+] 39.a3 [This costs a tempo. White should try 39.Ke3 g5 40.Kd3 Ke5 41.Ke3=] 39...Ke6 40.Ke3 Ke5 41.Kd3 f6 [41...g5-/+] 42.Ke3 Kf5 43.Kf2

Ke6 44.Ke3 Ke5 45.Kd3 a5 46.Ke3 Kf5 47.Ke2 Ke5 48.Ke3 Kf5 49.Ke2 Ke5 50.Ke3 Game drawn by repetition 1/2-1/2

144 – Davis 5.Ng3 Bg6 6.Nh3 I played a Caro-Kann Defence against Bob Davis in our four game postal chess match in Ron's Postal Chess Club. As I recall, Bob Davis lived somewhere in New England. I lived in Dayton, Tennessee, the home town of Tom Purser of BDG fame. Purser had joined the military and had been sent off to Germany. Back in the 1970s, I had never heard of Tom Purser, and I had never faced a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit. The game below was officially the second game of the match. After I won two games, we agreed to draws in the other games to save postage, all games being simultaneously played on the same postcard. After several exchanges, this Classical Caro-Kann game was pretty drawish anyway with its bishops of opposite color. Our other games consisted of a Vienna Game, a Benko Gambit, and an Albin Counter Gambit. That last one was published by Anders Tejler in his Gambiteer column of the monthly APCT News Bulletin. Back then I was just beginning to get a taste for gambits, but mostly I was too chicken to sacrifice anything. Davis (1600) - Sawyer, corr RPCC (2), 24.06.1977 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Bf5 5.Ng3 Bg6 6.Nh3 e6 7.Nf4 Bd6 [7...Qc7=] 8.Nxg6 [8.Ngh5!?] 8...hxg6 9.Be3 Qc7 10.Qf3 Nf6 11.0-0-0 Nbd7 12.Ne4 Nxe4 13.Qxe4 Nf6 14.Qf3 Nd5 15.Bc4 Nxe3 16.fxe3 Rxh2 [16...0-0-0=] 17.e4 [17.Rxh2! Bxh2 18.Rf1 Bd6 19.e4+/=] 17...Bf4+ 18.Kb1 Rxh1 19.Rxh1 Bh6 [19...0-0-0 20.c3 Bh6=/+] 20.Rf1 Qe7 21.Qg3 [21.d5! 0-0-0 22.dxc6 bxc6 23.Qb3 Kc7=] 21...0-0-0 22.Qc3 Qg5 [22...Kb8=/+] 23.g3 [23.d5!=] 23...Qe3 24.Qxe3 Bxe3 25.Rxf7 Rxd4 26.Bxe6+ Kd8 27.a3 Rxe4 28.Bh3 Re7 29.Rf8+ Re8 30.Rf7 1/2-1/2

145 – Riazantsev 6.Nh3 Nd7 7.Nf4 White played to take the bishop on g6 with a knight to double the Black gpawns. Players castled opposite sides in this Caro-Kann Defence. Suddenly the front doubled g-pawn attacked White in the game Maxim Lugovskoy against Alexander Riazantsev. Lugovskoy (2416) - Riazantsev (2649), Kurnosov Mem Rapid 2018 Chelyabinsk RUS (6.4), 08.09.2018 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Bf5 5.Ng3 Bg6 6.Nh3 Nd7 7.Nf4 Qc7 8.Bc4 e6 [8...Ngf6 9.Qe2 Nb6 10.Bb3 e6 11.h4 Bd6=] 9.c3 [9.Bxe6!? fxe6 10.Nxe6 Qd6 11.Qe2 Nb6 12.Nc7+ Kd7 13.Nxa8 Nxa8 14.f4=] 9...Ngf6 10.0-0 [10.h4 e5 11.dxe5 Qxe5+ 12.Qe2 Bc5=] 10...Bd6 11.Qf3 Nb6 12.Bb3 Nbd5 13.Nxg6 hxg6 14.Bg5 [14.c4 Ne7 15.c5 Bxg3 16.fxg3 Qd7 17.Rd1 Nf5=] 14...Bf4 15.Bxf4 Nxf4 16.Rfe1 0-0-0 17.Re5 Rh4 18.h3 Rdh8 19.c4?! [19.Rae1 Kb8=] 19...Nd7 20.Ree1 g5 21.d5? [21.Ne2 Nxe2+ 22.Rxe2 Nf6=/+] 21...g4 22.hxg4 [22.Qe3 gxh3-+] 22...Ne2+ [If 23.Kf1 Nd4 with threats against the White queen and king.] 0-1

146 – Savchenko 6.Nf3 e6 7.h4 White typically plays an early h4 against the Caro-Kann Defence Classical 4...Bf5 line with the intention to play h5. White left the pawn on h4 and went after the pawn on g7. This led to a winning attack in the game Boris Savchenko vs Alexandr Triapishko. Savchenko (2550) - Trjapishko (2530), Kolomna Rapid 2018 Moscow RUS (3.2), 16.02.2018 begins 1.e4 c6 2.Nc3 d5 3.d4 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Bf5 5.Ng3 Bg6 6.Nf3 e6 7.h4 h6 8.Ne5 Bh7 9.Bd3 Bxd3 10.Qxd3 Nd7 [10...Nf6 11.Bf4 Qa5+ 12.Bd2 Bb4 13.Bxb4 Qxb4+ 14.c3 Qxb2 15.Rb1 Qxa2 16.Rxb7+/=] 11.f4 Be7 12.Bd2 [12.Nh5 Bf8 13.Be3 Ngf6 14.Nxf6+ gxf6 15.Nxd7 Qxd7 16.f5 0-0-0=] 12...Nxe5 13.fxe5 Bxh4 14.0-0-0 Bxg3 15.Qxg3 Ne7 16.Qxg7 Rg8 17.Qxh6 [17.Qh7 Rxg2 18.Kb1 Nf5 19.Bxh6 Ke7=] 17...Qd5 18.Bg5 Qxa2 19.c3 Nd5? [19...Kd7 20.Bxe7 Rg6 21.Qh3 Kxe7 22.Qh4+ Kd7=] 20.Rhf1 Qa1+ 21.Kc2 Qa4+ 22.Kd2 Qb5 [22...Qb3 23.Rb1 Nb4 24.cxb4 Rd8 25.Qh4 Qxb4+ 26.Ke3 Qb3+ 27.Kf2+/-] 23.Kc1

Rc8 [23...Qa4 24.Qh7 Rxg5 25.Qxf7+ Kd8 26.Qxb7 Qa1+ 27.Kd2 Qxb2+ 28.Qxb2 Rxg2+ 29.Kd3 Rxb2 30.Rf8+ Kc7 31.Rxa8+-] 24.Qh7 Rxg5 25.Qxf7+ Kd8 26.Rh1 Ne7 27.Rh7 Rc7 [27...Kc7 28.Qxe7+ Kb8 29.Qxg5+-] 28.Qf8+ 1-0

147 – Pirtle 5.Ng3 Bg6 6.Nf3 Nd7 Many years ago I played a Caro-Kann Defence in postal chess vs Ralph Booney Pirtle (1924-2003) of Cordova, Alaska. Pirtle spent most of his life in that small town far away, but as long as there was mail, there was correspondence chess. The USCF listed an obituary of Ralph Pirtle. They noted that he grew up in Arizona and California. Ralph joined the US Navy at age 17 and fought in the Philippines in World War II. Ralph Pirtle earned a degree in Montana. He worked for the Idaho Fish and Game Department. In 1959 Pirtle took a job with the Alaska Department of Fish and Game as a biologist. I played the Caro-Kann Defence to attack kingside against him. Often White castled kingside, so that meant I castled queenside. Generally it was much safer for Black to castle kingside. Ralph Pirtle was a very friendly opponent. He was getting ready to retire in 1980. Maybe that influenced his willingness to draw. Pirtle (1962) - Sawyer (2000), corr APCT 1979 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Bf5 5.Ng3 Bg6 6.Nf3 Nd7 7.Bg5!? h6 8.Bf4 e6 [Or 8...Qa5+ 9.c3 Ngf6 10.Bd3 Bxd3 11.Qxd3 e6 12.0-0 Be7=] 9.Bd3 Bxd3 10.Qxd3 Ngf6 11.0-0 Nd5!? [This fit in with my strategy to play Qc7 and 0-0-0 as Black. Certainly playable was 11...Be7=] 12.Bd2 Qc7 13.Rfe1 Be7 14.c4 N5f6 15.Qe3 [15.Qc2 Rc8=] 15...0-0-0 [It would be much safer for Black to play 15...0-0 16.Rad1=] 16.b4 g5?! 17.d5 [17.Qe2 Kb8 18.Bc3+/=] 17...g4?! [At least Black is consistent. White also stands better after 17...cxd5 18.cxd5 Nxd5 19.Qxa7 Bxb4 20.Rac1 Bc5 21.Qa8+ Qb8 22.Qa4+/-] 18.dxe6 gxf3 19.exd7+ Rxd7 20.gxf3 [White misses his best shot. 20.Bc3 Rhd8 21.Be5 Qb6 22.Qxf3+-] 20...Rhd8 21.Bc3 Ng8?! [Now White will be up two pawns. Black might have been wiser to mix things up with 21...Rd3 22.Qxe7 Qxe7 23.Rxe7 Rxc3 24.Rxf7 Nd7 25.f4 Rxc4 26.a3+/=] 22.Qxa7 Rd3 23.Be5 Bd6 24.Bxd6 Qxd6 25.Ne4 Qb8 26.Qc5

[Or 26.Qa4+-] 26...Qc7 27.Qf5+ [The attack would be very difficult to defend after 27.b5 cxb5 28.Qxb5 Rxf3 29.Rad1 Rfd3 30.Rxd3 Rxd3 31.c5 Rd5 32.Nd6+ Qxd6 33.Re8+ Qd8 34.Rxd8+ Rxd8 35.c6+-] 27...Qd7+Draw agreed. 1/2-1/2

148 – Wall 6.Nf3 Nd7 7.Bf4 e6 Throughout the 1970s, I played the Caro-Kann Defence almost exclusively vs 1.e4. It was Round 3 of a chess tournament at Crossville, Tennessee on July 16, 1977. I played the Classical Caro-Kann Defence variation vs French Wall who was rated about 300 points below me. In fact there were only two players in this event who were rated above me. Both got knocked off by lower rated players in the first 3 rounds. So, after this game I was 3-0 and all alone in first place. This was the first time my wife had attended a chess tournament. She pointed out that I acted nervous. She said I fidgeted during the games. Well, in my younger years, I was nervous! Nowadays, I am calmer when I play. I do not have the energy to wiggle at all. I win less frequently in my old age, but that is also because now my opponents are much stronger. Wall - Sawyer, Crossville, TN (3), 16.07.1977 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Bf5 5.Ng3 Bg6 6.Nf3 Nd7 7.Bf4 [The main line is 7.h4 h6 8.h5 Bh7 9.Bd3 Bxd3 10.Qxd3] 7...e6 8.Bd3 Ngf6 9.0-0 Be7 10.Re1 0-0 11.Bxg6 hxg6 12.Qd2 [12.c4 is more aggressive.] 12...Qb6 13.c3 Rfd8 14.Qc2 c5 15.Rad1 cxd4 16.Nxd4 [16.Rxd4=] 16...Nd5 17.Be3?! Nxe3 18.Rxe3 Nf6 19.Nge2 Rac8 20.Nf3? [White goes from a little trouble after 20.h3 Bc5=/+ to a lot of trouble.] 20...Ng4 21.Rxd8+ Rxd8 22.Rd3 Rxd3 23.Qxd3 Qxf2+ 24.Kh1 Qf1+ 0-1

149 – Nelson 6.Nf3 Nd7 7.Bd3 In the winter of 1973-74, I found the Caro-Kann Defence. I read the books by I.A. Horowitz and Chess Digest. The whole opening made sense to me. I could bypass the 1.e4 e5 fireworks and go to the endgame which I loved. In those days, chess players smoked cigarettes at tournaments. Most did not want to play in a smoke-filled room. Tournaments were either "NS" (No Smoking) or "LS" (Limited smoking). This tournament was played in Lewiston or Waterville, Maine. The tournament playing area had too rooms. The crowded room was No Smoking. Neither I nor my opponent smoked. We chose to play in the Smoking room to enjoy the quiet atmosphere. Hardly anyone in there smoked anyway. My opponent was a Mr. D. Nelson. He was in his 30s or 40s. His first name was probably either Dennis, Donald or David, but I don’t remember for sure. His rating was about 1650. Here I got my first Caro-Kann win. Nelson - Sawyer, Lewiston, ME (4), 10.02.1974 begins 1.e4 c6 [CaroKann Defence.] 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 [Main Line.] 3...dxe4 4.Nxe4 Bf5 [Later in the year 1974, I would add to my repertoire 4...Nd7 which is the old Smyslov Variation.] 5.Ng3 Bg6 6.Nf3 [This normal development move has always been popular. The sharper main line is 6.h4 h6 7.Nf3 Nd7 8.h5 Bh7 9.Bd3 Bxd3 10.Qxd3 but that was not so well known by club players back in 1974.] 6...Nd7 7.Bd3 Bxd3 8.Qxd3 Qc7 9.0-0 e6 10.Re1 0-0-0 11.Ne4 Nc5 12.Qc4?! [A possible improvement is 12.Nxc5 Bxc5 13.Bd2 Nf6 14.b4 Be7 15.c4+/=] 12...Nxe4 13.Rxe4 Nf6 14.Bf4 [White uses the temporary location of the Re4 to activate his bishop.] 14...Bd6 15.Bxd6 Rxd6 16.Re2 h6 17.Ne5 g5 [The outpost Ne5 is very good against the Caro-Kann. Black cannot exchange knights with 17...Nd7? due to 18.Nxf7 forking the rooks. Therefore, since we castled opposite sides, I started pushing my kingside pawns.] 18.c3 h5 19.a4 Ng4 20.b4 Nxe5 21.Rxe5 Rd5 [Protecting g5 via x-ray.] 22.Rae1 Rhd8 23.g3 a5 24.Rxd5 cxd5 [24...Rxd5=] 25.Qxc7+ [White hopes to outplay me in an equal endgame. If he wanted to play for more, he could try 25.Qb3+/=] 25...Kxc7 26.b5? [26.bxa5 Rd6=] 26...Kd6 27.Ra1 Rc8 28.Kg2? [White forgot that he left c3

en prise. If 28.Ra3 e5-/+] 28...Rxc3 29.Kf1 Rc4 30.Ke2 Rxd4 31.Ke3 e5 32.f3 f5 33.h3 b6 34.Ra2 Kc5 35.Ra3 Kb4 36.Ra1 Kb3 0-1

150 – Roys 6.Nf3 Nd7 7.Bd3 e6 Confidence is a tricky thing. Andrew Carnegie commissioned Napoleon Hill to interview the most successful people in the world to develop a philosophy of success. Hill proved this truth: “The way you think will greatly determine your success in life.” That truth applies to chess on two levels. On the lower level your thought process will determine whether you find good moves or miss them. On the higher level your belief in your ability to win will influence how hard you work to make your efforts succeed. Your attitude determines your altitude. Players who give up on an opening, or give up playing for a win, or give up studying the game, or give up playing at all will not be winners in chess and maybe not in life either. I believed in the Caro-Kann Defence. Why? I believed I could win games by castling opposite sides and assaulting my opponent’s king. I believed this to be true, no matter how solid the opening. I demonstrated this against a young Harvey C. Roys. Later Roys became a strong correspondence master, but we were young. White chose a good and solid approach to castle kingside. Thus my belief in opposite side castling led me to go queenside and attack. Against Harvey Roys, Black obtained a winning attack that somewhat resembled a successful Albin-Counter Gambit. Later I learned that there were easier ways to attack than 1…c6. Roys - Sawyer, corr APCT 77SC-11, 11.1977 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Bf5 5.Ng3 Bg6 6.Nf3 Nd7 7.Bd3 e6 8.0-0 [8.Bf4 Qa5+ 9.c3 Ngf6=] 8...Ngf6 9.Re1 [9.Bxg6 hxg6 10.c4=] 9...Bd6 10.Bg5 [10.Nf5 Bxf5 11.Bxf5 0-0 12.Bd3 c5 13.c3=] 10...Qc7 [10...0-0= is a good and solid approach.] 11.Nf1 0-0-0 12.h3 Bxd3 13.Qxd3 h6 14.Be3 g5 15.g3

[15.N1d2 Rhg8 16.Nc4 g4 17.hxg4 Nxg4 18.Nxd6+ Qxd6=] 15...g4 16.hxg4 Nxg4 17.N3h2 [17.Bd2!=] 17...Nxh2!? [17...Nxe3=/+] 18.Nxh2? Rhg8!? [More logical is 18...Rdg8!-/+] 19.Nf1 [19.Kh1 Nc5-/+] 19...h5! 01

151 – Acor 6.Nf3 Nd7 7.Bc4 e6 I met Corey Acor in the final round of the 2009 Southern Open. Corey Acor is a master who twice beat my London System with his King’s Indian Defence. This time Acor defeated my Caro-Kann Defence after I missed a good shot. White delayed the h4 pawn push for a few moves to line up on e6 with Bc4 and Qe2. Corey was outplaying me when all of a sudden there appeared the opportunity for me to play a brilliant sacrificial attack. The problem was that I lost the confidence that I once had 30 years ago when I had played Harvey Roys. I glanced at the sacrifice and told myself, “That won’t work.” I did not look deep enough at the combination against Acor. I was discouraged about the trend of the game. I was physically tired in this final round game, even though I had a half point bye and a forfeit win. During my working years I was mentally tired. Pretty much I gave up on my chances. I stopped trying. My attitude cost me a chance at brilliance with 20…Nxc2! The lesson is one must stay focused to achieve the best results. Acor (2350) - Sawyer (1943), Southern Open (5), 02.08.2009 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nd2 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Bf5 5.Ng3 Bg6 6.Nf3 Nd7 7.Bc4 e6 8.h4 h6 9.Qe2 Ngf6 [9...Bd6=] 10.Ne5 Nxe5 11.dxe5 Nd5 12.a3 Be7 13.h5 Bh7 14.Qg4 Rg8 15.Bb3 Qc7 16.f4 0-0-0 17.Bd2 Qb6 18.Qf3 Bc5 19.0-0-0 Ne3 20.Rde1 Nf5 [20...Nxc2! 21.Bxc2 Bxc2 22.Kxc2 Rxd2+ 23.Kxd2 Qxb2+ 24.Kd3 Rd8+ 25.Kc4 (25.Qd5 Rxd5+ 26.Kc4 b5#) 25...Rd4+ 26.Kxc5 Qb6#] 21.Nxf5 Bxf5 22.g4 Bh7 23.f5 Rge8 24.Rh2 Kb8 25.f6 g5 26.hxg6 Bxg6 27.Rxh6 Rd4 28.Rxg6 Rxd2 [28...fxg6 29.f7+-] 29.Kxd2 fxg6 30.f7 Rd8+ 31.Kc1 Bf2 32.f8Q Bxe1 33.Q8f4 Qg1 34.Qf1 1-0

5.Ng3 Bg6 6.h4 The point of 6.h4 is to limit the expansion of the Black kingside pawn majority.

152 - Andreu 6…h6 7.Nh3 Nf6 The main line Caro-Kann Defence typically continues 4.Nxe4 Bf5 5.Ng3 Bg6 6.h4 h6. Usually White plays h4-h5 on move 7 or 8. The resulting pawn structure limits Black’s endgame possibilities. The problem is h5 can also be difficult for White to defend. Half a century ago Bobby Fischer tried 6.h4 without pushing to h5 in his US Championship game vs Steinmeyer. If White plays 6.h4 h6 7.Nh3 (or 7.Ne2), then he gains time with 8.Nf4 due to the threat of 9.Nxg6. Black would not want to play 9…fxg6 so he retreats with 8…Bh7. Mikhail Tal developed a sacrificial idea of Nf4, Bc4 and Nxe6. Javier Andreu followed Tal - Botvinnik in our APCT postal game. I found an innovation over Botvinnik with 12…Bxg3. I may have found this idea in a book somewhere. Black captured the bishop with 17…Nxe4. If White recaptures, Black has a perpetual check. Andreu (2100) - Sawyer (2003), corr APCT Q-171 08.1993 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Bf5 5.Ng3 Bg6 6.h4 h6 7.Nh3 [7.Nf3 Nd7 8.Bd3 Bxd3 9.Qxd3 e6 10.Bd2 Ngf6 11.c4 Qc7 12.0-0-0 0-0-0 13.Bc3 Qf4+ 14.Kb1 Nc5 15.Qc2 Nce4 16.Ne5 Nxf2 17.Rdf1 1-0 Fischer Steinmeyer, US Championship 1963] 7...Nf6 [7...e6 8.Nf4 Bh7 9.Bc4 Nf6 transposes] 8.Nf4 Bh7 9.Bc4 e6 10.0-0 [An early example of this line was 10.Qe2 Bd6 11.0-0 0-0 12.c3 1/2-1/2 in 31. Tartakower - Flohr, Folkestone ol 1933] 10...Bd6 11.Nxe6 [Tal played this sacrifice in the 1960 World Championship match.] 11...fxe6 12.Bxe6 Bxg3 [12...Qc7 13.Nh5 (13.Re1 Nbd7 14.Bg8+ Kf8 15.Bxh7 Rxh7 16.Nf5 g6 17.Bxh6+ Kg8 18.Nxd6 Qxd6 19.Bg5= Tal - Botvinnik, World Championship 1960. Botvinnik as

Black won this game, but Tal won the match.) 13...Rf8 14.c4 Bg6 15.Ng3 Nbd7 16.c5 Bxg3 17.fxg3 Nd5 18.Re1 0-0-0 19.Qg4 1/2-1/2 in 56. Tal Vukic, Bugojno 1978] 13.fxg3 Qe7 14.Re1 Be4 15.Bf5 0-0 16.g4 Qf7 17.Bxe4 Nxe4 1/2-1/2

153 – Pikula 7.h5 Bh7 8.Nf3 Nf6 A superficial glance at the Caro-Kann Defence may lead one to assume Black hopes to win by gaining a positional edge in the middlegame that bears fruit in the endgame. But strong players attack. The play for combinations. They often win with tactics as in the game Ed Schreiber vs Dejan Pikula. Schreiber (1887) - Pikula (2460), 1st Zurich Easter Op SUI, 30.03.2018 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Bf5 5.Ng3 Bg6 6.h4 h6 7.h5 Bh7 8.Nf3 Nf6 9.Bd3 Bxd3 10.Qxd3 e6 11.Ne5 Nbd7 12.f4 c5 13.Be3 [13.f5 Nxe5 14.dxe5 Qxd3 15.cxd3 Nd7=] 13...Nxe5 [Or 13...Qa5+ 14.Bd2 Qa4=] 14.fxe5 Nd5 15.Bd2 cxd4 16.Qxd4 Qc7 17.c3 [17.Qa4+ Qc6 18.Qxc6+ bxc6 19.0-0-0=] 17...Bc5 18.Qe4 0-0-0 19.Ne2 Rd7 20.0-0-0 Rhd8 21.Bf4 Qc6 22.Rd3 [22.Nd4 Qb6=/+] 22...Nxf4! 23.Qxc6+ bxc6 24.Rxd7 [Or 24.Nxf4 Rxd3 25.Nxd3 Rxd3 26.Rf1 Be3+ 27.Kb1 Rd7-+] 24...Nxe2+ 25.Kd1 Rxd7+ 26.Kxe2 Rd5 0-1

154 – Baffo 7.Nf3 Nf6 8.h5 Bh7 In 1996 Jeffrey Baffo played my favorite Caro-Kann variation against me. How do you meet your own opening when it is played against you? I chose to follow the Boris Spassky 6.h4 attack with the strategy of restricting Black's kingside by 8.h5. The old set-up for Black is to castle queenside. Jeffrey Baffo played the more dynamic castling opposite sides favored by Bent Larsen and others. As Black I have played them both many times, but often chose the old school 10...Qc7 with ...0-0-0 because it was more comfortable for me. Sawyer (1981) - Baffo (2256), corr USCF 95P139, 08.04.1996 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Bf5 5.Ng3 Bg6 6.h4 [6.Nf3] 6...h6 7.Nf3 Nf6 8.h5 Bh7 9.Bd3 Bxd3 10.Qxd3 e6 11.Bd2 Be7 12.0-0-0 0-0 13.Kb1 Nbd7 14.Ne4 Nxe4 15.Qxe4 Nf6 16.Qe2 Qd5 17.Qe5 Rfd8 18.Be3 Bd6 19.Qxd5 Nxd5 20.Bc1 Nf6 21.Ng1 [Another option is 21.Ne5 Bxe5 22.dxe5 Ng4=] 21...c5 [Maybe 21...Bc7] 22.f3 [22.Ne2! cxd4 23.Rxd4

Rac8 24.f3 e5=] 22...cxd4 [22...Be5=+] 23.Rxd4 e5 24.Rd3 Bc5 25.Ne2 Rxd3 26.cxd3 Rd8 27.Kc2 Nd5 28.a3 Be3 29.g4 Bf2 30.Nc3 a6 [Or 30...Rc8=] 31.Nxd5 Rxd5 32.Bd2 f6 33.Bc3 Kf7 34.Rf1 Be3 35.Re1 Bc5 36.Re4 g5 37.b4 Bd4 1/2-1/2

155 – Heung 7…Nd7 8.h5 Bh7 My opponent was 11 year old Christopher Heung. His rating at the time of this game was 1864. A few weeks later Christopher raised his rating another 150 points to an Expert. He made very consistent progress. Soon Heung became a USCF rated master. Christopher Heung was a solid player who had many draws vs higher rated players. Once Christopher told me that he would be the top player in the state of Florida for his age if it were not for Ray Robson (who was the World Under-12 champion at age 10). Later Heung won the National 6th Grade Championship. Robson had won the 5th Grade Championship the previous year, but Ray Robson chose to not play in the 6th grade event. Our final position looked drawn to me. I was tired. This was the fourth round in the first event I had played in eight months. I will need to have more energy to compete with all these kids. My age was the same as all four of my opponents put together! Heung - Sawyer, FL State Championship (4), 03.09.2006 begins 1.e4 c6 [In 1974, I won my first tournament Caro-Kann Defence beating several players rated above me, usually in an endgame. When I began playing it, my rated jumped quickly from about 1620 to 1820.] 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Bf5 [I had wins with this Classical Variation and with both 4...Nd7 and 4...Nf6 in tournament play from the old days.] 5.Ng3 Bg6 6.h4 h6 7.Nf3 Nd7 8.h5 Bh7 9.Bd3 Bxd3 10.Qxd3 e6 [10...Qc7 has always been my choice in tournament play in the past. Chris' mother spoke to me about this line after the game, saying that she thought 10...Qc7 was more solid and 10...e6 more dynamic. She is right of course. Now there is a chess mother.] 11.Bf4 Ngf6 12.0-0-0 Be7 [So far so book.] 13.c4 0-0 [13...b5! The recommended line is to gambit this pawn.] 14.Ne4 Nxe4 15.Qxe4 Nf6 16.Qe2 Re8 17.Ne5 Rc8 [17...Qa5!?] 18.Kb1 c5 19.dxc5 Qa5 20.g4 Qxc5 21.g5 hxg5 22.Bxg5 Ng4!? [I love to find tactical solutions this days. Why in the world am I playing the Caro-Kann? Force of habit, I guess.] 23.Bxe7

Qxe5 24.Qxg4 Rxe7 25.Rd4 [Christopher thought about 25.h6!? but said he could not find any concrete advantage.] 25...Qf5+ 26.Qxf5 exf5 27.Rhd1 Kh7 28.Rf4 Kh6 29.Rxf5 Rxc4 1/2-1/2

156 – Buckingham 9.Bd3 Bxd3 10.Qxd3 William A. Buckingham of Pennsylvania played correspondence chess for over 30 years. As I recall he lived in a small town area in north central Pennsylvania. Bill played the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit in the early 1960s. I played Bill Buckingham in postal and email chess. He was a very friendly player. Here we seemed to be too eager to exchange queens and rush toward an endgame. I appeared to be tired. I should have tried harder to win as White. Sawyer (1960) - Buckingham (1900), EMQ-2 corr APCT 13.08.1996 begins 1.d4 c6 2.e4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Bf5 5.Ng3 Bg6 6.h4 h6 7.Nf3 Nd7 8.h5 Bh7 9.Bd3 Bxd3 10.Qxd3 e6 11.Bf4 Ngf6 12.0-0-0 Be7 13.Ne5 [13.Kb1 0-0=] 13...Nxe5 [13...0-0 14.Kb1 Nxe5=] 14.Bxe5 [14.dxe5 Qxd3 15.Rxd3 Nd5 16.Bd2 0-0-0=] 14...Qd5 15.Qb3 [15.Kb1 0-0=, but not 15...Qxg2? 16.f3!+-] 15...Qxb3 16.axb3 0-0 17.Bxf6 Bxf6 18.Ne4 Be7 19.c3 Rfd8 20.f3 Rd5 21.g4 Rad8 22.Nf2 c5 23.dxc5 Rxd1+ 24.Rxd1 Rxd1+ 25.Kxd1 Bxc5 26.Nd3 Bd6 27.c4 Kf8 28.b4 Ke8 29.b5 b6 30.b4 Ke7 31.Kd2 Kf6 32.Ke3 g6 33.hxg6 fxg6 34.c5 bxc5 [Another possible draw is to sit tight for a moment and then push pawns with 34...Bc7 35.f4 h5 36.Kf3 bxc5 37.bxc5 e5=] 35.bxc5 Bc7 36.Nb4 Bh2 37.Nd3 [37.Ke4 Bg1 38.Nd3+/=] 37...Bc7 38.Nb4 1/2-1/2

157 – Harmon 10.Qxd3 e6 11.Bd2 In this Caro-Kann Defence Black sacrifices pawns on b7 and a7 to attack the king. Black wins the White queen with a little pawn check in the game Melikset Khachiyan vs Luke Harmon-Vellotti. Khachiyan (2522) - Harmon-Vellotti (2468), PRO League Group Stage chess.com INT, 07.03.2018 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Bf5 5.Ng3 Bg6 6.h4 h6 7.Nf3 Nd7 8.h5 Bh7 9.Bd3 Bxd3 10.Qxd3 e6 11.Bd2 Ngf6 12.0-0-0 Be7 13.Kb1 0-0 14.Ne4 c5 15.Be3 [15.g4 Nxg4 16.Qe2 Qb6 17.Ne5 Ndxe5 18.dxe5 f5 19.exf6 Nxf6 20.Rdg1 Nxe4 21.Qxe4 Bf6=] 15...Nxe4 [15...Qc7 16.dxc5 Rfd8 17.Nxf6+ Nxf6=] 16.Qxe4 Nf6 17.Qxb7 Rb8 18.Qa6 Nd5 [18...Qc7 19.dxc5 Bxc5 20.Qc4 Qb7 21.Bd4 Bxd4

22.Qxd4 Rfc8=] 19.Bd2 Qc7 20.Ba5 Qd7 21.c4 Qa4 22.cxd5 Rb5 23.Qxa7 [23.dxe6 Rfb8 24.exf7+ Kf8 25.Qxb5 Qxb5 26.Bc3=] 23...Rxa5 24.Qxe7 Rb8 25.Kc1 [25.a3 Qb3-+] 25...Qb4 26.Kc2 [26.Rd2 Rxa2-+] 26...Rxa2 27.Kd3 c4+ 0-1

158 – Pultinevicius 10…e6 11.Bd2 White drove a bayonet into Black’s Caro-Kann Defence with the g-pawn. He gave up a queen and two pawns for a bishop, knight and rook playing 16.g4, 17.g5, 18.gxf6, 19.fxe7, and 20.exf8Q+. But then White overlooked a combination that won the knight for Black in the game Toms Kantans against Paulius Pultinevicius. Kantans (2529) - Pultinevicius (2422), Baltic zt III Stage 2018 Liepaja LAT, 14.07.2018 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Bf5 5.Ng3 Bg6 6.h4 h6 7.Nf3 Nd7 8.h5 Bh7 9.Bd3 Bxd3 10.Qxd3 e6 11.Bd2 Ngf6 12.0-0-0 Be7 13.Ne4 Qb6 [13...0-0 14.Kb1 c5=; 13...Nxe4 14.Qxe4 Nf6=] 14.Nxf6+ Nxf6 15.Ne5 0-0 16.g4 Rad8 17.g5 [17.c3=] 17...Rxd4 18.gxf6 Rxd3 19.fxe7 Rd5 20.exf8Q+ Kxf8 21.f4 [21.Nd3=] 21...Kg8 [21...f6 22.Ng6+ Kf7=] 22.Rh2 f6 23.Nd3 Qb5 24.Rg1? [24.Re2 Rd6=] 24...Rxd3! 25.Bc3 [25.cxd3 Qc5+ wins a rook. -+] 25...Rf3 0-1

159 – Zelcic 10…e6 11.Bd2 Ngf6 Players castled opposite sides in this Caro-Kann Defence. Black attacked g2 but decided not to take the pawn. White pushed the pawn until he could swap it off. White dominated the open g-file to force the victory in the game Robert Zelcic vs Darko Doric. Zelcic (2509) - Doric (2465), 8th Split Open 2018 Split CRO (6.1), 16.08.2018 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Bf5 5.Ng3 Bg6 6.h4 h6 7.Nf3 Nd7 8.h5 Bh7 9.Bd3 Bxd3 10.Qxd3 e6 11.Bd2 Ngf6 12.0-0-0 Bd6 [12...Be7=] 13.Ne4 Nxe4 14.Qxe4 Nf6 [14...Bc7 15.Kb1 Nf6 16.Qd3=] 15.Qe2 Bc7 16.Rde1 b5 17.Ne5 Qd5 18.Kb1 Rd8 19.Bc1 0-0 20.g4 Nh7 21.f4 f5 [21...f6 22.Nd3+/=] 22.g5 Bxe5 [22...hxg5 23.fxg5+-] 23.dxe5 Rfe8 24.gxh6 gxh6 25.Rhg1+ Kh8 26.Rg6 a5 27.Reg1 a4 [27...Rg8 28.Qe1+-] 28.Qf2 c5 [28...Rg8 29.Qg3 Rxg6 30.hxg6 Ng5 31.Qh4 Kg7 32.Rxg5+-] 29.Qg3 1-0

160 – Riazantsev 10.Qxd3 e6 The game Timur Taysayev vs Alexander Riazantsev was a short Black win with two significant twists. First, Black came the 10.Qxd3 e6 11.Bd2 Bd6. This subtle move steers the game from the hectic heavy traffic of a busy highway off onto a quiet country road where players think for themselves. It allows Bc7 instead of the normal Qc7. Second, after Black missed 21…c5! White mounted a kingside attack. Riazantsev pursued active counter play. Black aimed at c2. Glancing at the game score I thought this was a smothered mate. It was deeper than that since White’s Qe2 guards c2. Instead Black has a knight fork on the White rooks. Taysayev (2241) - Riazantsev (2651), ch-RUS Blitz 2016 Sochi RUS (1.4), 04.10.2016 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Bf5 5.Ng3 Bg6 6.Nf3 Nd7 7.h4 h6 8.h5 Bh7 9.Bd3 Bxd3 10.Qxd3 e6 [10...Qc7] 11.Bd2 Bd6!? [Almost everybody plays 11...Ngf6 or just transposes to 10...Qc7 lines with 11...Qc7] 12.Ne4 Bc7 13.0-0-0 Ngf6 14.g3 Nxe4 15.Qxe4 Nf6 16.Qe2 Qd5 17.c4 Qe4 18.Be3 [18.Qxe4 Nxe4 19.Be3 0-0-0 20.Ne5 Rhf8 21.Rh4 Nd6 22.g4 f6 23.Ng6 Rfe8 24.c5 Ne4 and Black won a knight ending after 20 more moves. 0-1 in 44 Jehad - Zahedifar, Abu Dhabi UAE 2016] 18...0-0 19.Rh4 Qh7 20.Ne5 Rfd8 21.g4 [21.Qc2 Qxc2+ 22.Kxc2=] 21...Bxe5 [21...c5!=/+.] 22.dxe5 Nd7!? [22...Ne8 23.f3+/- is not likely to work.] 23.g5 Nxe5 24.Rg1 [24.g6 fxg6 25.Re4+/-] 24...Nd3+!? [24...Qf5! 25.Qc2 Nf3!-+] 25.Kb1 Nb4+?! [25...Nf4+ 26.g6 fxg6 27.hxg6 Nxg6=/+] 26.Ka1 [26.g6!+- stops the Black attack cold.] 26...Nc2+ [Black is winning after 26...hxg5 27.Bxg5 Nc2+ 28.Kb1 Nd4+ 29.Qe4 Nf3!-+] 0-1

161 – Shafkat 10…Qc7 11.c3 "Shafkat" is a rare name in the USA. Probably the best known is the aerospace engineer Shafkat Chowdhury who worked on software projects for the American space industry. I had the privilege of touring two major NASA facilities: the Johnson Space Center in Houston, Texas and the Kennedy Space Center in Cape Canaveral, Florida. My ICC opponent "Shafkat" below probably had no connection to the space industry. Who knows? White played the main line of Caro-Kann Defence 10.Qxd3 Qc7. Today 10.Qxd3 e6 is very common. I play that too. However, I’ve played 10.Qxd3 Qc7 since 1974. I am more comfortable with it. The point of 10...Qc7 is to prevent 11.Bf4 and prepare ...0-0-0. Simple classical development gives Black equality. White has to do most of the creative thinking. In a 3 0 blitz game, White can go quickly down in time or overplay the position. Here White blundered the Exchange with 19.g3? Then Black just swapped into a won ending. Shafkat - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 19.03.2013 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nd2 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Bf5 5.Ng3 Bg6 6.Nf3 Nd7 7.h4 h6 8.h5 Bh7 9.Bd3 Bxd3 10.Qxd3 Qc7 11.c3!? [11.Bd2] 11...e6 12.Bd2 Ngf6 13.0-0-0 Bd6 14.Ne4 Nxe4 15.Qxe4 0-0-0 16.Rhe1 c5 17.dxc5 Nxc5 18.Qc2 Be7 [18...Bf4=] 19.g3? [19.Be3 Bf6=] 19...Nd3+ 20.Kb1 Nxe1 21.Rxe1 Bf6 22.Bf4 Qd7 23.Ne5 Bxe5 24.Bxe5 f6 25.Bd4 e5 26.Bxa7 Qd3 27.Qxd3 Rxd3 28.Be3 Rhd8 29.a4 [29.Kc2 R3d6=/+] 29...Rd1+ 30.Rxd1 Rxd1+ 31.Kc2 Rh1 32.g4 Rg1 33.f3 Rg3 34.Bc5 Rxf3 35.Bf8 Rf4 36.Bxg7 Rxg4 37.Bxf6 e4 38.Kd2 Rg2+ [38...Kd7-+] 39.Ke3 Rxb2 40.Kxe4 [40.Bg7 Rh2 41.Bxh6 Rxh5-/+] 40...Rh2 41.c4 Rxh5 42.a5 Rxa5 43.Kd4 Kd7 44.c5 h5

45.Be5 Kc6 46.Bd6 b5 47.Kc3 h4 48.Kb4 Ra4+ 49.Kb3 h3 50.Kc3 Ra2 51.Kb4 h2 52.Bxh2 Rxh2 White resigns 0-1

162 – Muchamedschanow 11.Rh4 For the first 35+ years of my life, the United States and USSR (Union of Soviet Socialist Republics) were involved in a Cold War: Capitalism vs Communism. Americans just wanted to live their life in peace. I suspect that was the wish of Russians too. From the American viewpoint, we believed that socialism robbed people of freedom. In the 1970s we would not elect an openly socialist president of the United States to give the government a strong control over people's lives. We understood the dangers. We knew many who fled such countries and came to America. My first USSR opponent was W. Ch. Muchamedschanow. We did not chat much on our postcards. We just sent the moves. I imagine we were on some watch list since numerical chess notation could look to the suspicious like secret codes. This was six years after Fischer-Spassky 1972. I did not find anybody with my opponent's exact name in the rating list. ICCF does have a Flur Sabitovich Mukhamechanov (rated 2157 - the same as me). The opening I studied most in 1978 was the Classical Caro-Kann Defence. I looked at many games in this line. The line was too dull for me. I only beat weaker players. Usually I fell asleep mentally and missed opportunities when they arrived. Muchamedschanow played the sharp 11.Rh4 variation. I made a blunder on move 23 and lost. We did not have databases then. Now I find the game Bellon - Pomar which had the same blunder in 1976. GM Pomar played on for a while before giving up. Muchamedschanow - Sawyer, corr ICCF 1978 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Bf5 5.Ng3 Bg6 6.h4 h6 7.Nf3 Nd7 8.h5 Bh7 9.Bd3 Bxd3 10.Qxd3 Qc7 [The Black queen takes control of the h2-b8 diagonal. 10...e6 is more popular nowadays.] 11.Rh4 [I did not handle this tricky line well. This was my first experience with it. The famous Geller lines goes 11.Bd2 e6 12.0-0-0 Ngf6 13.Ne4 0-0-0 14.g3=] 11...e6 12.Bf4 Bd6

[12...Qa5+!?] 13.Bxd6 Qxd6 14.Ne4 Qe7 15.Qa3 Qxa3 16.bxa3 Ke7 17.Rb1 Rb8 18.Nc5 Nxc5 19.dxc5 a5 [Maybe better is 19...Nf6 20.Rhb4 b5 21.Ne5 Rhc8] 20.Ne5 Nf6 21.Rd4 Rhc8 22.g4 Rc7 23.f3 Rd8 [23...Nd7 24.Nd3+/-] 24.Rxb7! 1-0

163 – Cook 11.Bd2 e6 12.c4 Ngf6 Being from New England in the Northern USA, it took me a little time for my ears to understand the Southern language. In 1977 I was driving through Knoxville, Tennessee when I had a car problem. I pulled into Midas Muffler. Out walked a friendly guy who asked, "Can I hape ya?" I wasn't sure I wanted to be "haped" but he did fix my old car. I love the South! I lived 40 years in the North plus more than 20 years lived in the South in three different states. I noticed right off that life in the South was more relaxed. They move more slowly. Apparently that slow speed could sometimes apply to chess too. Here is a game played in northern Alabama, in Huntsville, which is home to a large NASA space operation. In the Caro-Kann Defence 4.Nxe4 Bf5 variation, my opponent Trevor Cook was just down one pawn. Admittedly his position was difficult. At that point he let his clock run out. This gave me a forfeit win on time. Maybe he thought that his position was hopeless. Cook - Sawyer, Huntsville, AL (2), 20.08.1977 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Bf5 5.Ng3 Bg6 6.Nf3 Nd7 7.h4 h6 8.h5 Bh7 9.Bd3 Bxd3 10.Qxd3 Qc7 11.Bd2 Ngf6 [Usually I play 11...e6] 12.c4 e6 13.Bc3 [13.0-0-0=] 13...0-0-0 14.0-0-0 Bd6 15.Nf1 Nc5 16.Qc2 Nce4 17.Ne3 Bf4 18.Rde1 c5 [18...Ng4!=/+] 19.g3 Bxe3+ 20.Rxe3 Nxc3 21.Qxc3 cxd4 22.Nxd4 a6 23.Rh4 Rd7 24.Nf3 Rhd8 25.Rd4? [White makes a big blunder, but Black misses the point. Better would have been 25.Ne5=] 25...Nxh5?! [Black big material with 25...Rxd4! 26.Nxd4 Qd6!-+ and Black wins the knight.] 26.Rxd7 Qxd7 27.Re1 f6 28.Qe3 e5 29.Nd2 Qc6 0-1

164 – Charette 12.0-0-0 Ngf6 I played in a match between Glen Cove Bible College and the University of Maine "B Team". I played Board 1 for Glen Cove against Jim Charette. I ended up with White. What did Charette play? My own Caro-Kann! APCT columnist Jim Davies wrote: “APCTer Tim Sawyer turns in an instructive performance.” Sawyer - Charette, Orono, ME 27.04.1976 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Bf5 5.Ng3 Bg6 6.Nf3 Nd7 7.h4 h6 8.h5 Bh7 9.Bd3 Bxd3 10.Qxd3 Ngf6 11.Bd2 e6 12.0-0-0 Qc7 13.c4 0-0-0 14.Ne4 Ng4 15.Qe2 f5 16.Nc3 Bb4 17.a3 Bxc3 18.Bxc3 Rhe8 19.Ne5 Ndf6 20.f3 Nxe5 21.dxe5 Nd7 22.Rd6 Nc5 23.Rhd1 Na4 24.Kc2 Nxc3 25.Kxc3 Qb6 26.Qd3 a5 [In this position, White has an obvious advantage, with an outpost on d6 and more space in general. But winning major piece endings depends on possession of open lines, and the only open file is well contested. Given enough time, Black may show aggressive intentions with ...a4, threatening ...Qb3+. Yet White can force an easily won K & P ending.] 27.Rxd8+! Rxd8 28.Qxd8+ Qxd8 29.Rxd8+ Kxd8 30.c5! [The following features of the position make it winnable: 1) The presence of the White pawns on the fifth rank give White more space to maneuver. Since the Black king cannot maneuver to b6, d6, f6, or g6, he has limited squares from which to defend his e-pawn and c-pawn. 2) Black has no counter play on the K-side which can produce a passed pawn. 3) The Black king cannot reach his exposed apawn. So when he is eventually forced to play ...b6, the resulting pawn trade will leave his pawns split, allowing White to create an outside passed pawn.] 30...Kc7 31.f4! [This is an important tempo to drive the Black king back. After 31.Kb3? Black draws with 31...b5 32.cxb6+ Kxb6 and the White king is in the way; 33.Ka4 c5 and White cannot penetrate.] 31...Kd7 [After the text, a try by Black such as 31...b5 32.cxb6+ Kxb6 33.b4 either transposes to the game, or wins after 33...a4 34.Kc4 Kb7 35.Kc5 Kc7 36.b5 and White picks up the a-pawn.] 32.Kb3 Kc7 33.Ka4 b6 34.cxb6+ Kxb6 35.b4 axb4 36.Kxb4 [An outside passed pawn is the key to winning such endings. When the Q-side pawns are traded, White's king will be closer to the K-side. The conclusion would be: 36.Kxb4 c5+ 37.Kc4 Kc6 38.a4 Kb6

39.a5+ Kc6 40.a6 Kb6 41.a7 Kxa7 42.Kxc5 and White can win all the Black pawns if he wishes.] 1-0 [Game Notes by Jim Davies]

165 – Shredder 13.Ne4 0-0-0 14.g3 Grandmaster Efim Geller employed an idea in the main line of the CaroKann Defence based on the move 14.g3 to control f4. Some move orders reach the same position with 15.g3. This move delay often occurs with a queen and bishop stutter step. Instead of 11.Bd2 Qc7 we see 11.Bf4 Qa5+ 12.Bd2 Qc7. Geller played the line 10 times as White in my database against the likes of Foguelman, Petrosian, Vukic, Kasparov, Campora (twice), Saidy and others. Geller scored 5.5 - 4.5. I chose this same line when I played a Caro-Kann Defence vs Shredder in a test blitz game. I think I was playing the same variation repeatedly from both sides of the board against this strong chess engine. I’m sure I lost a lot of games. This game was a miracle. Somehow its wires got crossed. The computer walked into a lost pawn endgame. I am guessing that the program would need to look 25 ply ahead to see the possible win for White. Probably at blitz speed it was running low on time and did not calculate deep enough. In any case, it was nice to get a rare win vs the computer. The rating is what it gave itself. Sawyer - Shredder (3314), Florida 17.03.2006 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Bf5 5.Ng3 Bg6 6.h4 h6 7.Nf3 Nd7 8.h5 Bh7 9.Bd3 Bxd3 10.Qxd3 Ngf6 11.Bd2 Qc7 12.0-0-0 e6 13.Ne4 0-0-0 14.g3 Nxe4 15.Qxe4 Nf6 16.Qe2 Bd6 17.Kb1 Rhe8 18.c4 c5 19.dxc5 [19.Bc3 cxd4 20.Nxd4 a6 21.b4+/=] 19...Qxc5 20.Be3 Qf5+ 21.Ka1 Bc5 [21...a6=] 22.Bxc5 Qxc5 23.Ne5 Qe7 24.Rxd8+ Rxd8 25.Rd1 Nd7 26.Nxd7 Rxd7 27.Kb1 Rxd1+ 28.Qxd1 Qf6 29.Qe2 Kd7 30.Kc2 Qf5+ 31.Qd3+ Ke7 [31...Qxd3+ 32.Kxd3 Kd6=] 32.Qxf5 exf5 33.Kd3 f4 [33...Ke6 34.Kd4 b6 35.b4+/-] 34.g4 Kf6 [34...Kd6 35.Kd4+/-] 35.Ke4 Kg5 [Another idea that fails is 35...f3 36.b4 Ke6 37.Kxf3] 36.f3 [36.b4!+- looks simpler] 36...a6 [36...a5! 37.c5! f5+ 38.gxf5 Kxh5 39.a4! (39.Kxf4 Kh4 40.b3 h5 41.a3 Kh3

42.b4 axb4 43.axb4 h4 44.b5 Kg2 45.c6 bxc6 46.bxc6 h3 47.c7 h2 48.c8Q h1Q= when both sides queen.) 39...Kh4 40.c6 bxc6 41.b4 axb4 42.a5+-] 37.b4 Kf6 38.Kxf4 Ke6 39.Ke4 Kd6 40.a4 Ke6 [40...Kc6 41.Ke5+-] 41.c5 Ke7 42.Ke5 g6 43.b5 1-0

166 – Weinstein 13.Qe2 0-0-0 Notable author and historian Bill Wall wrote about famous players named "Weinstein" in chess. First is Garrik Weinstein. He took his mother's name and became World Champion Garry Kasparov, one of the greatest chess players of all-time. Second there is Raymond Allen Weinstein. Raymond was two grades ahead of Bobby Fischer at Erasmus Hall High School. They played four times in the US Championship from 1958-63. Bobby Fischer played 1.e4 every time. Weinstein drew with a Caro-Kann, but lost a Sicilian, a French, and a Ruy Lopez. Later apparently Raymond Weinstein went crazy. He killed someone, and spent the rest of his life in an insane asylum. The third chess Weinstein is Norman Weinstein. I played him in this game. Bill Wall compiled this biographical information: "Norman Stephen Weinstein was born on October 4, 1950 in New York. In 1968 he won the U.S. Junior Open in New York. Norman attended Brandeis University and got a Master’s degree in mathematics. In 1972 Norman won the Atlantic Open. In 1972, Norman Weinstein's rating was 2416, number 20 in the U.S. In 1973 he won the U.S. Open in Chicago. In 1974 Norman took 9th place at the U.S. Championship in Chicago. He defeated Reshevsky in this event. In 1975 he took 3rd place at Lone Pine and did well enough in the 1975 Cleveland International to gain the International Master norm (playing at Grandmaster pace). In 1975 he took 2nd place at an international tournament in Portimaio, Portugal. Larry Evans took 1st place. This was the first time Americans took 1st and 2nd place at an international tournament. In 1976 he won the Quebec Open. In 1978 he wrote a book on the Reti Opening (1.Nf3 d5 2.c4).In 1978 Norman tied for 5th-7th in the U.S. Championship in Pasadena, California. He scored 1 win (against Kim Commons) and 13 draws, with no losses, the only player not to lose a game. Norman Weinstein has the highest percentage of draws (77.1 percent) of any player participating in a U.S. Championship. He was

recruited by Bankers Trust, who was looking for chess masters, and Norman became a very successful and wealthy currency trader. He has been mentioned in Forbes magazine." During the second weekend of February 1974 four chess friends and I travelled from northern Maine 200 miles south to a college in central Maine. I thought it was Bates College in Lewiston. Ray Haines listed this as being located at Colby College in Waterville, Maine. I rode there in the back seat. I was literally in the dark. Norman Weinstein played a 53-board simultaneous exhibition on Friday night before a weekend tournament. Weinstein won the 1973 US Open. Rows of tables were arranged in a rectangle. We waited with anticipation for Weinstein to arrive. He was coming up from Boston. The guy to my right talked about how exciting it was to play a master. There were no masters in Maine. IM Norman Weinstein was 23 years old with shoulder length dark hair. Most of us had long hair back in the early 1970s. Weinstein was friendly and greeted us all as he began each game with 1.e4. I trotted out my very first Caro-Kann Defence with 1...c6. The guy sitting next to me played the Center Counter Defence, what we now call the Scandinavian Defence. His game went 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Qxd5 3.Nc3 Qc6? 4.Bb5 and Black resigns. Norman Weinstein beat almost all of us. We were impressed! My friend Ray Haines drew him as Black defending the Ruy Lopez. Weinstein - Sawyer, Lewiston, Maine (simul) 08.02.1974 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Bf5 5.Ng3 Bg6 6.Nf3 Nd7 7.h4 h6 8.h5 Bh7 9.Bd3 Bxd3 10.Qxd3 Qc7 [This is the old main line. Black's ideas are to castle queenside while taking the f4-c7 diagonal away from White. Later 10...e6 would become popular with kingside castling.] 11.Bd2 Ngf6 12.0-00 0-0-0 13.Qe2 [The queen move is Spassky's idea. The Geller line is 13.Ne4 e6 14.g3 Nxe4 15.Qxe4] 13...e6 14.Ne5 Nxe5 [Years later 14...Nb6 15.Ba5 Rd5= would become popular.] 15.dxe5 Nd7 [15...Nd5 was the alternative.] 16.f4 Be7 17.Ne4 Nc5 18.Nc3 b6?! [Foolishly I create a

weakness in front of my king. Correct is 18...f6! 19.exf6 Bxf6= SpasskyPetrosian, World Championship 1966.] 19.Be3 g5? [This will cost Black a pawn.] 20.hxg6 fxg6 21.Qg4 Kb7 22.Kb1 g5 23.Bxc5 Bxc5 24.fxg5 Rxd1+ 25.Nxd1 Qxe5 26.gxh6 Rh7 27.Qg6 Qf5 28.Qg8 Be7 29.Ne3 Qe4 30.Rd1 Bf6? [White was willing to part with his passed h-pawn 30...Rxh6 to potentially trap my king with 31.a4!+-] 31.Nc4! Qxc4 32.Qxh7+ Ka6 33.Qd3 1-0

167 – Warren 14.Ne5 Nxe5 Playing openings popular at the grandmaster level was a simple process in postal chess 35 years ago. There were no big databases or strong chess engines to deal with. We had chess books. That was it. Some used Modern Chess Openings or the Encyclopedia of Chess Openings. Other correspondence players added specialized monographs on their favorite openings. A few of us collected large libraries with many thousands of chess books. That’s what I did. It was because of this that many of the best researched books on chess openings were written by correspondence players. Many of my opponents wrote books. That motivated me to write! Since Jim Warren sold chess products for APCT, I knew that he had access to just about every opening book. In fact I bought some from him myself! What surprised me was that Jim played my own pet line against me! He chose the Caro-Kann Defence in the old Classical Variation where we both castled queenside. Black equalized in a typical fashion and we gradually worked toward an endgame. Fortunately for me, Jim Warren blundered like I blundered vs Norman Weinstein and Vincent Nardacci. Sawyer (2050) - Warren (2100), corr APCT 1980 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Bf5 5.Ng3 Bg6 6.h4 h6 7.Nf3 Nd7 8.h5 Bh7 9.Bd3 Bxd3 10.Qxd3 Qc7 [10...e6 11.Bf4 Qa5+ 12.Bd2 Bb4=] 11.Bd2 e6 12.Qe2!? [12.0-0-0] 12...Ngf6 13.0-0-0 0-0-0 14.Ne5 Nxe5 [14...Nb6] 15.dxe5 Nd7 [15...Nd5 16.f4 or 16.c4] 16.f4 Be7 17.Ne4 Nc5 18.Nc3 f6 19.exf6 [19.Rhe1] 19...Bxf6 20.Qc4 Qb6 21.b4 Na6 22.Ne4 Nc7 23.Nxf6 gxf6 24.Bc3 Qe3+ 25.Kb2 Rxd1 26.Rxd1 Nd5 27.Re1 Qxf4 28.Qxf4 Nxf4 29.Bxf6 Rg8 30.g4 Nd5 31.Bc3 Kd7 32.Re4 Ke7 33.Bd4 b6 34.Kb3

Nf6 35.Bxf6+ Kxf6 36.Rd4 Rg5 37.c4 a5 38.Rd6 axb4 [38...Rxg4=] 39.Rxc6 Rc5 [39...Rxg4 40.Rxb6+/=] 40.Rxb6 Rxc4? [40...Ra5 41.Rxb4+-] 41.Kxc4 1-0

168 - Frumkin 14…Nb6 15.Rh4 For 10 years I studied the latest issues of Chess Informant faithfully, playing through all the games and looking for new ideas and opening novelties in popular variations. I fell in love with the 14...Nb6 line of the Classical Caro-Kann Defence. Earlier I had played 14...Nxe5 against the International Master Norman Weinstein in 1974. Edward Frumkin earned a National Master Certificate in 1992. Frumkin wrote an ongoing column in the APCT News Bulletin entitled "Knight on the Rim." Ed was usually an over-the-board Expert who became a master in postal chess back before computers were any good. When Ed stopped playing, some of his games were rated as losses. Do not let his final correspondence rating fool you. Frumkin was regularly rated at least 2200 in postal chess. Below I got a good position with the solid Caro-Kann Defence. Ed Frumkin benefits from my penchant to launch an unsound attack where no immediate attack was needed. It was an honor to play Frumkin. He scored 6-0 in this 77 Rook 11. I went 5-1. Frumkin - Sawyer, corr APCT 77R-11 (6), 08.1977 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Bf5 5.Ng3 Bg6 6.Nf3 Nd7 7.h4 h6 8.h5 Bh7 9.Bd3 Bxd3 10.Qxd3 Qc7 [10...e6 has completely surpassed 10...Qc7 in the past twenty years.] 11.Bd2 e6 12.Qe2 Ngf6 13.0-0-0 0-0-0 14.Ne5 Nb6 [14...Nxe5 was played in 1966 by Petrosian, Botvinnik and Pachman.] 15.Rh4 [The main line is 15.Ba5 Rd5 16.Bxb6 axb6 17.c4 Ra5 which I reached in other games.] 15...c5 16.Ba5 Kb8!N [I invent a good move. It became popular 20 years later.] 17.Kb1 Bd6 18.dxc5 Bxc5 19.Nd3 Be7 20.Rc1 Rd5 [The position is equal.] 21.Bb4 Rhd8 22.Nf1 Bxb4 23.Nxb4 Rd4 24.Rxd4 Rxd4 25.Nd3 Nbd5 [25...Nc4=/+] 26.Ng3 Qc4 27.Qe5+ Ka8? [The losing move. I was trying to move my knight forward for an attack when backward for defense was appropriate. The position was equal

after 27...Nc7=] 28.b3 Nc3+ 29.Kb2 Na4+ 30.bxa4 Nd5 31.Ne2 Re4 32.Qxg7 [The back rank checkmate threat prevents Black from regaining the piece.] 32...a5 33.Ng3 Rd4 34.Qf8+ Ka7 35.Qc5+ 1-0

169 – Chaney 15.Ba5 Rd5 Future world champion Gary Kasparov played the Caro-Kann Defence until he got his rating over 2500. During 1977 and 1978 Kasparov won about 10 games with it and drew many others. In 1976 chess coach Aleksander Shakarov became the coach of Gary Kasparov. They worked together until 2005. They wrote a book on the Classical Caro-Kann around 1984. GM Gary Kasparov switched to the more complicated Sicilian Defence as his rating approached 2700. The Caro-Kann taught him how to study and win in the opening against masters. One of my own favorite wins as Black in the Caro-Kann was against Ronald L Chaney. Later we would play many times. This game was in the 4…Bf5 main variation in the 14…Nb6 line. Like me, Chaney did a lot of research. He played openings well. For this game I found the idea of 23…g5! The game was equal until White blundered on move 31. The next game saw Nardacci play this line more accurately. Chaney - Sawyer, corr APCT 78R-2, 01.1978 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Bf5 5.Ng3 Bg6 6.Nf3 Nd7 7.h4 h6 8.h5 Bh7 9.Bd3 Bxd3 10.Qxd3 Qc7 11.Bd2 e6 12.Qe2 Ngf6 13.0-0-0 0-0-0 14.Ne5 Nb6 15.Ba5 [15.c4 Rxd4 16.Be3 Rxd1+ 17.Rxd1 Rg8=] 15...Rd5 [15...c5!?] 16.Bxb6 axb6 17.c4 Rd8 [17...Ra5 18.Kb1 Bd6 19.f4 Kb8=] 18.Ne4 Nxe4 19.Qxe4 Bd6 20.f4 f5?! [20...c5! 21.dxc5 bxc5 22.b3 f5=] 21.Qe3 Bxe5 22.Qxe5 Qxe5 23.dxe5 g5! [I think I found this move in Chess Informant analysis notes to this Martin - Pomar game. 23...Rhg8 24.Rxd8+ Kxd8 25.Rd1+ Kc7 26.Rd6 g5 27.g3 gxf4 28.gxf4 1-0 in 46. Martin Gonzalez Pomar Salamanca, Las Palmas 1977] 24.fxg5 [24.hxg6 Rdg8 25.g3 Rxg6 26.Rh3=] 24...hxg5 25.Rxd8+ Kxd8 26.Kd2 Ke7 27.Ke3 Kf7 28.Kf3 Rd8 29.Ke3 f4+ 30.Ke2 Rd4 31.Rd1? [This is a losing mistake. Black picks off

the h5 in a pawn endgame. White can reach a drawn rook and pawn ending with 31.h6! Kg8 32.Kf3 Kh7 33.Kg4 f3+ 34.Kxf3 Rf4+ 35.Ke3 Rxc4 36.Rf1 Kxh6 37.Rf6+ Kg7 38.Rxe6 Kf7=] 31...Rxd1 32.Kxd1 Kg7 0-1

170 – Nardacci 16.Bxb6 axb6 Snow storms in New England remind me of a postal game I played when the big blizzard hit Rhode Island. Vincent Nardacci and I played a CaroKann Defence. We began November 1977 at a pace of one move per week. By February 1978 we were into the middlegame. All of a sudden I stopped hearing from him. I lived in beautiful Tennessee. He lived in Rhode Island. In February 1978 his area was hit with 27.6 inches (70 cm) of snow that killed about 100 people. The mail was not delivered for several days. I know the old saying, "the mail must go through", but there are times when it cannot. His obituary notes Vincent Nardacci was instrumental in running chess tournaments at Rhode Island College. He is not listed in the USCF, but this was APCT. I take time to remember him with our lone contest which he won. After I began postal chess in 1977, I faced players from all 50 states in the USA and 30 countries around the world. In this early game, we were relatively young with lower ratings but with a higher anticipation of success. Four years later my rating had gone up 300 points and his up 100 points. I sacrificed a pawn expecting Nardacci to blunder, which was foolish of me. Instead, Vincent buried me in an avalanche of snow White pawns. Nardacci (1720) - Sawyer (1850), corr APCT 77SC-11 (5), 11.1977 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Bf5 5.Ng3 Bg6 6.h4 h6 7.Nf3 Nd7 8.h5 Bh7 9.Bd3 Bxd3 10.Qxd3 Qc7 [10...e6] 11.Bd2 e6 12.Qe2 Ngf6 13.0-0-0 0-0-0 14.Ne5 Nb6 15.Ba5 Rd5 [15...c5!=] 16.Bxb6 axb6 17.c4 Rd8 18.Ne4 Nxe4 19.Qxe4 Bd6 20.f4 f5 21.Qe2 Bxe5 22.Qxe5 Qxe5 23.dxe5 g5 24.hxg6 Rdg8 25.Rd3 Rxg6 26.g3 Rhg8 27.Rh3 c5 28.Kd2 Kc7 29.a3 b5 30.cxb5 Kb6 31.a4 Ka5 [The correct path to equality is 31...c4 32.Rc3 (or 32.Rd6+ Ka5 33.Kc3 Kxa4 34.Kxc4 Rc8+ 35.Kd3 Kxb5=) 32...Ka5 33.Rxc4 Rxg3 34.Rxg3 Rxg3=] 32.b3 [32.Kc3+/-] 32...Kb4 33.Kc2 Rc8 34.Kb2 Rc7 [34...b6 35.Rd6+/=] 35.Rc3 [35.Rh1+/-] 35...c4 [35...b6 36.Rd3+/=] 36.Rh1 Rgg7 37.Rhc1 h5 [37...Ka5

38.bxc4+/-] 38.Rxc4+ Rxc4 39.Rxc4+ Ka5 40.Rc3 Rh7 41.Ka3 h4 42.gxh4 Rxh4 43.Rc4 Rh7 44.Rd4 Kb6 45.Kb4 Kc7 46.a5 Rh3 47.b6+ 10

Book 4: Index of Names to Games Acor – 151 Aldrenalin – 94 Alexis – 35 Allman – 79 Amort – 34 Anderberg – 101 Andersson – 72 Andreu – 152 Aronian – 53 ATtheGreat – 41 Bacallao Alonso – 52 Baffo – 123, 140, 154 Bailet – 13 barano – 26 Barbosa – 135 Barnes – 39 BarneyPlum – 121 Bendix – 20 Berkes – 119 Bernotas – 119 Berthelsen – 101 BethO – 139 BlackDragon – 116 blik – 23 Blood – 130 Bosiocic – 32 Braun – 32 Brunello – 6 Bryan – 49 Bublei – 24 Buckingham – 156 Bury – 111 Byrnes – 43 Carlsen – 141

Caruana – 53 Cassius43 – 92 Champion – 120 Chaney – 138, 139 Chapman – 141 Charette – 164 Chess Challenger – 8 Cook – 163 Crompton – 84, 94, 96 Cullen – 104 Curtis – 88 Danin – 73 Darrien88 – 84 Davis, Bob – 144 Davis, Bruce – 125 Delpire – 87 Dest – 46 doc7099 – 29 Domenech – 22 Doric – 159 Dreev – 4 Eggert – 142 Eljanov – 13 Ellington48 – 1 Elliott – 109 Ellison – 50 Elwin – 103 Fawbush – 76, 81 Fedoseev – 27 Felber – 105 Fernandez – 15 Fischer – 16 Fizz44 – 90 Flowers – 141 flubovci – 96 Foesig – 37 Folkman – 55

Fressinet – 28 Frumkin – 59, 168 Fuchs – 48 Fulton – 98 Garcia Romero – 127 Gareyev – 95 Gates – 30 Genocchio – 6 Glickman – 106 Godena – 5 gonchar – 87 Gormally – 15 Gruenfeld – 134 Haines – 1, 30, 49, 50, 60, 61, 77, 128 Hansen – 78 hapster – 45 Harimau – 58 Harmon-Vellotti – 157 Hauber – 63 Hauser – 111 Herzeleid – 97 Heung – 155 Hou Yifan – 19 idledim – 18 InaOm – 102 Johnson – 121 Kampars – 16 Kan – 21 Kantans – 158 Kasparov – 141 Kayonde – 134 Keiser – 38 Khachiyan – 157 Kiick – 75 Kohut – 80, 136 Konnen – 89 Korchnoi – 122

Kuperman – 69 Le Corre – 22 Ledger – 27 Liang – 14 Liddy – 112 Lindberg – 72 Lingsell – 33 Lobanov – 2 Lokander – 10 Looshnikov – 2 Lucas – 74 Lugovskoy – 145 Lykke – 110 malulo – 64 Mamedyarov – 14 Mann – 57 Marshall – 65 Martin – 99 Matnadze – 127 McCullough – 67 McDonald – 67 McGrew – 115 McShane – 11 mohamed395 – 61 Morgunov – 12 Moyer – 44 Muchamedschanow – 162 Muir – 36 Murphy – 11 muvenda – 60 Nardacci – 170 Nelson – 149 Niemi – 42 NN – 83, 91, 113 Noonan 82 Nurmanova – 126 Nutter – 85

Offenborn – 110 OhNooo – 93 OracleMcSnacker – 17 Ortiz Suarez – 52 OutsideTheGate – 3 Paichadze – 126 Parsons – 62 Peterson – 128 PII233Crafty – 133, 143 Pikula – 153 Pirtle – 147 Polansky – 9 Pultinevicius – 158 Pythagoras – 25 Rabeler – 131 Riazantsev – 145, 160 Riff – 10 Ris – 28 Robertson – 89 Rodrigues – 117 Rosenthal – 54 Roys – 150 Ruck – 19 Sarosy – 86 Savchenko – 146 Sawyer, E – 70 Sawyer, T – 3, 7, 8, 17, 18, 20, 23, 25, 26, 29, 31, 33-48, 51, 54-59, 62-71, 74-76, 78-83, 85, 86, 88, 90, 100, 102, 104-109, 112, 114-117, 120, 123125, 129-133, 136-140, 141-144, 147-152, 154-156, 161-170 Schekachikhin – 5 Schmid – 129 Schoppmeyer – 71 Schreiber – 153 Sengupta – 118 Shafkat – 161 Shredder – 114, 165 Simons – 103

SlowBo – 31 Smyslov – 21 Snyder – 77 Solozhenkina – 73 Stoleriu – 12 SugarMagnolia – 99 Tamang – 118 Taormina – 47 Tauriainen – 9 Taysayev – 160 TBricker1 – 100 Tempske – 56 Teuton – 137 Timofeev – 24 Tom – 107 Torning – 91, 93, 113 Torre – 122 Tretter – 51 Trjapishko – 146 Trull – 40 Van Oirschot – 108 Vaughan – 132 Vazquez – 95 vicnice01 – 7 Villanueva – 135 von Wurttemberg – 124 Wall – 148 Warren – 167 Weinstein – 166 Wittmann – 66 Zelcic – 159 Zhou – 4 Zilbermints – 92, 97 Zintgraff – 98

Book 5: Alekhine & Pirc 1.e4 Second Edition – Chess Opening Games Copyright © 2015, 2016, 2018 by Sawyer Publications All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form without permission in writing from the author. Welcome to Alekhine & Pirc 1.e4. Author Tim Sawyer examines 173 SemiOpen 1.e4 games. This 2018 Second Edition includes experiences, opinions, commentary, and analysis, plus an Index of Names to Games. The author tells stories and explains the chess opening strategy and tactics. Half the book is devoted to the Alekhine Defence 1.e4 Nf6. The Modern Defence 1.e4 g6 and Pirc Defence 1.e4 d6 have 50 games. Other covered openings include the Scandinavian Defence and rare lines after 1.e4 in the Semi-Open openings. Most of the games in this book were played by the author. Many were against masters, experts and club players. Tim Sawyer shows typical examples of play in this proven defence. Tim played games vs authors Edmar Mednis, Andrew Martin and Macon Shibut. He played these openings from both sides of the board. The author played the Alekhine Defense for many years. The Alekhine Defence founded by world champion Alexander Alekhine has long been a favorite of the author. Many players like the Pirc Defense, Ufimtsev, Yugoslav, or Modern Defence. The Center Counter Defence or Scandinavian challenges White immediately. Nimzowitsch played the Queens Knight Defence 1.e4 Nc6. Discover creative ideas in strategy and tactics. Try it!

Book 5: Chapter 1 – Semi Opens 1.e4 To begin this chapter, we consider rare Black moves after 1.e4.

1 – Zilbermints 1…f5 2.exf5 Can you play a Dutch Defence against the King Pawn opening? Well, yes and no. You can play 1.e4 f5 as Black, but it won't be a Dutch. That is, not unless White plays Staunton Gambit by 2.d4. Enterprising players play this opening for fun in blitz or against very weak opponents. Or weak players might play it themselves. In the notes below, I cite two early games from 100 years ago. The Czech master Oldrich Duras played it several times against strong competition in Prague in the 1930s. The opening is called the Duras Gambit. Lev Zilbermints won with “the Fred” as this is also called. After 1.e4 f5, here are the main possibilities: 2.d4 is a Dutch Defence Staunton Gambit 1.d4 f5 2.e4. 2.Nf3 is a Lisitzin Gambit usually reached by 1.Nf3 f5 2.e4. 2.exf5 is the Duras Gambit. Black usually plays 2…Nf6 or 2…Kf7. Other common moves are 2…d5 and 2…e5. Zilbermints plays them all. In this game Lev chose 2…Nh6. His opponent “duarni” is listed as a Women’s International Master. duarni (1957) - Zilbermints (2041), 5 0 Internet Chess Club, 10.06.2016 begins 1.e4 f5 2.exf5 Nh6 [2...Kf7 3.d4 d5 4.Qh5+ g6 5.fxg6+ Kg7 6.Bd3 Nf6 7.Bh6+ Kg8 8.gxh7+ Nxh7 9.Qg6+ Bg7 10.Qxg7# 1-0 Pillsbury Magana, Germany 1902; 2...Nf6 3.d4 (3.g4!+/-) 3...d5 4.Bd3 c5 5.dxc5 e5 6.Bb5+ Nc6 7.Nf3 Bxc5 8.Nxe5 0-0 9.Bxc6 bxc6 10.0-0 Bxf5 11.Nxc6 Qd6 12.Nd4 Ng4 13.Nf3 Bxc2 14.Qxc2 Rxf3 15.g3 Rxg3+ 16.Kh1 Rg1+ 17.Kxg1 Qxh2# 0-1 Schwartze - Hartlaub, Hamburg 1905] 3.g4!? [White played this like a King's Gambit reversed. 3.Qh5+! Nf7 4.Nf3 e6 5.Ne5+/-] 3...e6 4.fxe6 d5 5.d4 Qh4 6.Nf3 [6.Nc3+/-] 6...Qxg4 7.Rg1 [7.Ng5+/=] 7...Qxe6+ 8.Be2 Nf5 9.Nc3 Nc6 10.Bf4 Bd6 [10...Bb4=] 11.Bxd6

[11.Ng5!+/=] 11...Qxd6 12.Qd2 0-0 13.0-0-0 a6 14.Rg5 Bd7 15.Rdg1 Rae8 16.Bd3 Re7 17.h4 Kh8 18.h5 Ncxd4 19.Nxd4 Nxd4 20.Bxh7? [Chances were equal after 20.Rxd5 Qh2 21.Re1 Nf3 22.Rxe7 Nxd2 23.Rdxd7 Qf4=] 20...Nf3 21.Qxd5 Qf4+ 22.Kb1 Nxg5 White resigns 0-1

2 – Muir 1…g5 2.d4 h6 Odd flank openings like the Grob Attack (1.g4) and the Macho Grob, also called the Borg, (1.e4 g5 or first 1.d4 h6) feel like they should be swiftly and tactically crushed. Grob players combine bishop control of the long diagonal with a kingside pawn attack. A good idea is to challenge the g-pawn with your own h-pawn, as Bob Muir did. But then he sacrificed a bishop 8.Bxf7+? which failed tactically. I ended up fianchettoing my king on g7 where it is open but safer than White's king. Even after White castled, Black was able to threaten checkmate. David Alan Zimbeck asked, “Are you sure Kg7 was played? White has Qh5 with mate.” Yes, at least that is what is in my notation. It looks like I got away with one. I saw the mate on g6, but not on f7. Nice catch. This may have been a blitz game that I tried to record from memory. Often Bob Muir and I played 30 minute games when I wrote down the moves during play. Muir (1800) - Sawyer (2010), Williamsport, PA 1996 begins 1.d4 h6 2.e4 g5 3.h4 gxh4 4.Nf3 Nf6 5.Nc3 d5 6.exd5 Nxd5 7.Bc4 Nxc3 8.Bxf7+? [This is too much. Simply 8.bxc3+/- leaves White with good kingside targets.] 8...Kxf7 9.Ne5+ Kg7 [? The correct move is 9...Kg8!-+. I do not remember what I played, but according to my records I played Kg7.] 10.Qd3 Qd6 11.Qxc3 Nc6 12.Nf3 Qb4 13.Bd2 Qxc3 [Very powerful is 13...e5!-+] 14.Bxc3 e5 15.dxe5 [15.d5 Nb4-/+] 15...Bb4 16.Bxb4 Nxb4 17.0-0-0 Bg4 [The a2-pawn is pretty much free: 17...Nxa2+! 18.Kb1 Nb4+] 18.Rxh4 h5 19.a3 Nc6 20.Rd3 Rad8 21.Re3 Rhe8 22.Nh2? [If 22.Rh1 Bxf3 23.Rxf3 Rxe5-+] 22...Rd1# 0-1

3 – pothead 1…b6 2.d4 e6 Rev. John Owen played a universal defense twice against Paul Morphy in 1858. Sometimes it is known as Owen's Defence after 1.e4 b6 2.d4 Bb7 3.Bd3 e6. Morphy won the first game and Owen won the second. Sergeant presents two additional blindfold games where Morphy reached the same position. One was a draw in Paris vs the sculptor Eugene Lequesne in 1858 and the other a Morphy win in Philadelphia vs Samuel Lewis in 1859. Each time Paul Morphy played 4.Nh3. Against the Queens Fianchetto in an Internet Chess Club blitz game below vs "pothead", I chose a Semi-Morphy idea. Often I play 3.Bd3, but this time I went with 3.Nc3. After 4.f3 I played 5.Nh3. With the Black bishop on b7, there is no danger of ...Bc8xh3. However, Black went for 6...Qh4+ when I chose to cover up with 7.Nf2. Black kept his king in the center which gave me more targets. In the end his king was chased to the h-file and mated. Sawyer - pothead, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 20.02.2013 begins 1.d4 e6 2.e4 b6 3.Nc3 Bb7 4.f3 Bb4 5.Nh3 Bxc3+ 6.bxc3 Qh4+ 7.Nf2 Ba6 8.Bxa6 Nxa6 9.g3 Qh5 10.Be3 c5 11.Qe2 Nc7 12.0-0 [12.dxc5 bxc5 13.0-0+would give White an open b-file to invade, but I was planning to rip open the center where Black has left his king.] 12...a6 13.Rae1 b5 14.Bf4 Rc8 15.g4 Qg6 16.Bg3 c4 17.Nh3 f6 18.Nf4 Qf7 19.d5 g5 20.dxe6 Nxe6 21.Nxe6 Qxe6 22.e5 f5 23.gxf5 Qxf5 24.Qe4?! [White lets his advantage slip. 24.e6!+- is correct.] 24...Ne7 [24...Qxe4 25.Rxe4 Ne7=] 25.f4 g4 26.Qb7 Kf7 [Black's last chance for survival is 26...0-0 27.Rd1+/-] 27.Bh4 [More accurate is 27.e6+! Kf8 28.Bh4 Qc5+ 29.Rf2+-] 27...Rb8 28.e6+ Kg6 29.Qxd7 Qc5+ 30.Bf2 Qd5 31.Qxe7 Rbe8 32.Qf7+ Kh6 33.f5 Qxf5 34.Be3+ Qf4 35.Bxf4# Black is checkmated 1-0

4 – vladdfallavenna 1…b6 Once in a while you face a player who begins with the Queens Fianchetto (1...b6). This was originally named after Rev. John Owen who played it against Paul Morphy over 150 years ago. I’ve tried many different things against 1...b6. It can resemble a type of French Defence. Here is a three minute blitz game I played on the Internet Chess Club. This time I got mixed up in my ideas and got nothing special out of the opening. I had a couple shots at an advantage but missed them both. In the ending, I blundered and was losing for a moment. My opponent returned the favor. Both sides would have split pawns but had to decide which pawns they would go with. Both sides made many mistakes. In the end, Black had b & d pawns. White had a & g pawns. The race was on, but Black wasted one tempo in time pressure and lost. Sawyer - vladdfallavenna, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 23.05.2012 begins 1.d4 b6 2.e4 Bb7 3.Nc3 e6 4.Bd3 Bb4 5.Nf3 [White could try 5.Nge2 Nf6 6.0-0+/-] 5...Nf6 6.e5 [6.Qe2 d5=] 6...Ne4 7.Bd2 [7.Bxe4] 7...Nxc3 8.bxc3 Be7 9.0-0 0-0 10.Qe2 d5 11.Qe3 c5 12.Ng5 Bxg5 13.Qxg5 Qxg5 14.Bxg5 Ba6 15.Bxa6 [15.dxc5=] 15...Nxa6 16.Rab1 f6 17.exf6 gxf6 18.Bf4 c4?! [Black is better with 18...cxd4 19.cxd4 Rfc8=/+] 19.Rfe1 Rfe8 20.Re2 Kf7 21.Rbe1 Rac8 22.Bd6 [I am playing quickly, but I am not playing good moves. 22.f3+/=] 22...Nc7 23.Bxc7?! Rxc7 24.f4 b5 25.a3 Rce7 26.Kf2 e5 27.dxe5 fxe5 28.fxe5 Kg6 [28...Ke6=] 29.e6?! [29.Kg3+/=] 29...Kf6 30.g3 Rxe6 31.Rxe6+ Rxe6 32.Rxe6+ Kxe6 33.Ke3 Ke5 34.Kf3? [34.g4!=] 34...a5? [34...d4!-+ wins for Black.] 35.Ke3 h6? [35...h5!=] 36.h3? [36.g4!+- wins] 36...h5 37.g4 hxg4? [37...h4!=] 38.hxg4 b4 39.cxb4 axb4 40.a4? [Too cute. The win is easy after 40.axb4+-] 40...d4+ 41.Kd2 b3 42.cxb3 cxb3 43.a5 b2 44.Kc2 Ke4 45.Kxb2 Ke3 46.a6 Ke2? [By now I realized that the game was a draw on the board, though I believe I was ahead on time. I was surprised to see him waste the tempo allowing me to win. 46...d3!=] 47.a7 d3 48.a8Q d2 49.Qe4+ 1-0

1.e4 Nc6 Black plays the Nimzowitsch Defence. I have a Queens Knight book on 1.Nc3 as White and 1...Nc6 as Black. Here’s just a little.

5 – Bentrup 2.Nc3 e6 3.Nge2 I read that at one point, Vladimir Kramnik, Gata Kamsky and Gary Kasparov all planned to retire shortly after age 40 or 41. Why? It is hard to perform at a level that brings enjoyment. Chess players improve in our younger years, then level off for years, and finally gradually decline in our later years. When I was age 39, I retired from tournament chess. I had hit my peak and was too busy with work and life and family to compete seriously. Well into my 50s, I came out of retirement a few times to play in the Florida State Championships. In 2011 it was held in Naples. My first opponent was Ben Bentrup, a law student who seemed to be in his chess prime. Ben had a very good tournament. After beating me, he then defeated the highest rated master in the event. He beat another master in round three and drew against another master later. Bentrup tied for 7th. White lost a tempo in our opening. Bentrup realized this and told me he decided to treat it as if he was playing Black. Bentrup told me he thought I should have attacked queenside. That certainly was a valid option. This 150 Attack with colors reversed is played with an idea to attack kingside or in the center. He outplayed me and won with ease. Ben Bentrup told me that I won the opening. Then everything went downhill for me after that. Bentrup - Sawyer, FL State Championship Naples FL (1), 03.09.2011 begins 1.e4 Nc6 [I prepared to play 1...Nc6.] 2.Nc3 e6 [Wisnewski suggested the French here. Often I transpose to the Vienna Game with 2...e5. Bentrup expected that.] 3.Nge2 d5 4.d3 [Whoa! White is daring Black to take over the center. Okay.] 4…d4 5.Nb1 e5 6.g3 Bg4 7.Nd2 Qd7 8.f3 [8.f4? exf4 9.gxf4 Be7! with advantage to Black according to Bentrup] 8...Be6 9.f4 f6 10.Nf3 Bd6 [10...0-0-0 11.Bg2 Nh6=/+] 11.Bg2 0-0-0 12.0-0

h6 [12...Nge7=/+] 13.a3 g5 14.Qe1 Nge7 15.f5 Bf7 16.b4 Rdg8 [16...a6=] 17.c4 dxc3 18.Qxc3 Kb8 19.Be3 Nc8 [19...a6=] 20.b5 N6e7 21.a4 h5 22.d4 g4 23.Nxe5 fxe5 24.dxe5 Bxe5 25.Qxe5 Qd3 26.Bf4 Nd6 27.Qxe7 Qxe2 28.Bxd6 1-0

6 – Markovic 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Nc3 Goran Markovic is an incredible blitz player. His skill is obvious to anyone who has seen him play. And indeed if you have seen him play, you cannot miss his blitz skill. Every time Markovic enters a blitz tournament, he finishes at or near the top. I asked him if he was still playing on ICC and he said he was. I do not remember what handle he was using. He told me his ICC rating was 2700. I said I never got above the 2400s. Markovic plays tournament games as if they were 15 minute games. Goran plays sharp main line complicated aggressive openings instantly. Goran will do his thinking on your time. Before my game with Markovic, someone suggested that I play slowly to try to bother him in some way. I said, "But I am a blitz player. I am him. It would bother me as much as him!" Of course I am 30 years older than Goran, so I am slower with age. He tried to break through tactically in the endgame, but I made sure I had the better bishop (my pawns on the light squares) and rook control of the open file. I blitzed many moves and took only about half an hour more than Goran did. Our potential four hour game plus post-mortem was over in two hours. I loved that! Markovic - Sawyer, FL State Championship Naples FL (4), 04.09.2011 begins 1.e4 Nc6 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Nc3 [3.e5 is more challenging but Markovic just wants rapid development.] 3...d5 4.exd5 Nxd5 [We have now arrived at a variation I know well as a long time Alekhine Defence player.] 5.Bb5 Nxc3 6.bxc3 Qd5 7.Qe2 Bg4 8.d4 e6 9.0-0 Bd6 [Goran told me later he had not seen this move. All of a sudden he realizes that I have possible kingside attack.] 10.h3 Bxf3 11.Bxc6+ Qxc6 12.Qxf3 Qxf3 13.gxf3 Kd7 [My king needs to stay near vulnerable points.] 14.Rb1 b6 15.Rd1 Rhc8 16.Kf1 Ke7 17.c4 c6 18.Ke2 Rab8 19.Be3 a6 20.Rb3 b5 21.c5 Bc7 22.Kd3 Rd8 23.Rdb1 Ra8 24.c4 bxc4+ 25.Kxc4 Rdb8 26.Rb7 Kd8 27.a4

Kc8 28.R7b3 [Not 28.Rxc7+ Kxc7 29.Bf4+ Kc8 30.Bxb8 Rxb8 31.Rb6 Rxb6 32.cxb6 a5 33.Kc5 Kb7 34.Kd6 Kxb6 35.Ke7 c5-+] 28...Rxb3 29.Rxb3 Rb8 30.Rc3 Ba5 31.Rc1 Bc7 32.Ra1 Kd7 33.Bd2 Ke7 34.Bc3 Kd7 35.Re1 g6 36.Bb4 Rb7 37.Bc3 Rb8 38.Bb4 Rb7 39.Rh1 Rb8 40.Bc3 Rb7 1/2-1/2

7 – Ludwig 2…d6 3.Bb5 Bd7 In round one of my first Florida tournament, I was paired against Daniel Ludwig, the highest rated master in the event. He was on his way to grandmaster. Ludwig was rated 2324; I was rated 2010. Daniel Ludwig appeared very polite to me. Ludwig did not do well in this event; as I recall he was suffering from a cold. After I moved to Florida I expected most of my chess opponents to be old retired men close to my age. Instead I found Florida was flooded with many talented young kids rated over 2000! Ludwig was 15 years old rated over 2300. I asked Daniel Ludwig if he was the Florida high school champion. He answered, "Yes." Shortly after this he won the US Masters in Nashville, TN. In 2006 he became the 11th Grade National Champion. Ludwig - Sawyer, FL State Championship (1), 03.09.2005 begins 1.e4 Nc6 [For three years I had been trying to learn the Nimzowitsch Defence 1… Nc6 as Black.] 2.Nf3 d6 [I declined the invitation to return to Open Game lines with 2...e5 although I do play that sometimes from this move order.] 3.Bb5!? [Ludwig has a tremendous memory. He must know the Ruy Lopez Steinitz variation well. Most of my practice games I had played in this line continued 3.d4.] 3...Bd7?! [I had a hard time concentrating. My first response to a non-book move is dubious. Better was 3...Nf6. Daniel thought I might play 3...e5 transposing to what he called "old stuff."] 4.d4 Ne5?? [Stupid play. Alternatives include: 4...Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Be2 e6 7.0-0+/=; 4...e5 transposes to the Old Steinitz Defence.] 5.Nxe5! [I lost a pawn due to my very weak analysis. I missed his piece sacrifice only two moves deep.] 5...Bxb5? [Better is 5...dxe5 6.Bxd7+ Qxd7 7.dxe5 Qxd1+ 8.Kxd1 e6 when at least his extra pawn is doubled.] 6.Nxf7!+- [Darn! At this point, I know that I am lost. That didn't take long!] 6...Kxf7 7.Qh5+ g6 8.Qxb5 Qc8 [Okay, so I'm busted. I chose to just play on past move 30. That way I could get some practice just making moves and punching the manual clock. Even so, there were a few times where I forgot to push my clock and had to be reminded.] 9.Nc3 c6 10.Qe2 e6 11.0-0 Bg7 12.Qf3+ Ke8 13.Qg3 Kd7 14.d5 [Ludwig's play is aggressive and impressive.] 14...cxd5 15.exd5 Bxc3 16.dxe6+ Kxe6 17.bxc3 Qc6 18.Re1+ Kd7 19.Qg4+ Kc7 20.Qd4

Nf6 21.Qxf6 Raf8 22.Qd4 Kb8 23.Be3 b6 24.a4 Qc5 25.Qd3 Qf5 26.Qxd6+ Kb7 27.a5 Rf7 28.axb6 a6 29.Bd4 Rd7 30.Qa3 Rf8 31.Qxa6+ Kc6 32.b7+ mate in 2. 1-0

8 – Robson 2…d6 3.Bb5 a6 Here’s my first game vs Ray Robson. “So kid, how old are you?” “10”. Ray was a cute kid from a nice family. He became an FIDE Master in 2005 winning the Pan-American Youth Championship. I liked Ray Robson immediately. During our game, he wore a 2004 Boston Red Sox world championship baseball cap. Grandmaster Ray Robson was born on my birthday. Robson was rated 100 points above me, but I outweighed him by 100 pounds. Since then both his rating and my weight have gone up! Robson said I played that first game so terribly that he figured he would just copy Daniel Ludwig. So Ray Robson played 3.Bb5. I improved on the Ludwig game with 3...a6 to clarify the position. My friend Vic Rislow had been after me for many years to return to tournament play. The set and clock I used for this event were gifts from him. Sadly, Vic passed away from cancer three months after this tournament. The good news is that I won some prize money in this event, tying for 3rd and 4th among non-masters. Robson - Sawyer, FL State Championship (6), 05.09.2005 begins 1.e4 Nc6 2.Nf3 d6 [A favorite move of GM Tony Miles.] 3.Bb5 a6 [This time I do much better. 3...Nf6 is also playable.] 4.Bxc6+ bxc6 5.d4 Bg4 6.0-0 Nf6 7.Nc3 e6 8.h3 Bh5 9.Qe2 Be7 10.Bf4 0-0 11.Rad1 Re8 [I don't like this move. Generally, Black plays on the b-file or for a d6-d5 French position.] 12.Rfe1 [I did not know Robson at all prior to this game, but he was a young Karpov in style. One difference is that the young Karpov played fast. Ray played very slowly, taking a lot of time for most of his early moves in a game, even if he knows the position very well.] 12...d5 [This is a thematic move, but I am getting a little loose on h5 and c6. I almost played 12...Bg6! After the game Robson told me he had intended to play 13.Nh4 but that move probably needs more preparation. 13...Bxe4! 14.Nxe4 Nxe4 15.Qxe4 d5 16.Qe5 Bxh4 17.Qxc7 Qxc7 18.Bxc7 Be7=] 13.g4 Bg6 14.Ne5 Nxe4!? 15.Nxg6 hxg6 16.Nxe4 dxe4 17.Qxe4 Qd5?! [Robson suggested

afterwards that I play 17...Bd6+/=] 18.Bxc7 Qxa2?! [Fishing for trouble.] 19.b3 c5? [I was worn out and I finished up with two serious tactical errors. A couple older masters watching us rightly criticized me for not playing better.] 20.dxc5 Bxc5? 21.Ra1 Qb2 22.Be5 f5 23.Qd3 1-0

9 – Sheldrick 3.d4 Nf6 4.Nc3 Kevin Sheldrick sent me a game that he played on Guy Fawkes Day. After his quote below are the notes to the game that Kevin provided. “Hi Tim, I just played a game that I think is rather topical for your latest blogs. Enjoy, haha! The idea for my 22nd and 23rd moves came directly from seeing the final moves in the game Van Geet - Timman, the Hague, 1968 - which I believe I saw for the first time about a week ago, somewhere. I may also have been inspired by Guy Fawkes to try to play in explosive fashion today. I assume in USA you are aware that Guy Fawkes Day is today, where people set off fireworks in remembrance of the Catholic Guy Fawkes, who attempted to blow up parliament on November 5, 1605, in order to kill King James 1 (who officiated the King James Bible) because he thought that Protestants were a bunch of patzers - which we Baptists don't agree with. Bye, Kevin Sheldrick” Sheldrick (1903) - NN (2237), FICS, 05.11.2016 begins 1.e4 Nc6 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 Nf6 4.Nc3 Bg4 5.Be3 g6?! [5...e6+/= looks more normal to me] 6.h3 Bxf3 7.Qxf3 Bg7 8.Bb5 0-0 9.0-0-0 Nd7?! [9...Qc8 or 9...a6 are better] 10.h4 [10.e5!+-] 10...e5 11.d5? [11.Bxc6+/= is much better] 11...Nd4 12.Bxd4? [12.Qh3+/=] 12...exd4 13.Ne2 Ne5 14.Qh3 h5 15.Nxd4 c6? [15...Ng4-+] 16.dxc6 bxc6 17.Nxc6? [17.f4!=] 17...Nxc6 18.Bxc6 Qb6? [18...Rb8!=/+] 19.Bxa8 Bxb2+ 20.Kd2 Qxf2+ 21.Kd3 Rxa8 22.Qe3!? Qxg2?? [22...Qf6=] 23.Rdg1 Qxh1 24.Rxh1 Rc8 25.c4 Be5 26.Rb1 Rc7 27.Qg5 Kg7 28.Rb8 f6 29.Qd2 Rf7 30.Qa5 d5! 31.exd5? Bxb8 [Whoops! Still ++- though...] 32.Qc5 Rd7 33.Qc6 Rc7 34.Qe6 Rb7 35.d6 g5 36.hxg5 fxg5 37.d7 Bc7 38.Qc6 Black resigns 1-0 [Notes by Kevin Sheldrick]

10 – blik 3.d4 Nf6 4.Nc3 Bg4 One of the leading players in England during the mid-1800s in the Howard Staunton era was Elijah Williams. Opening theory was not well developed and many players went their own way. Almost everyone played 1.e4 e5. Williams was known to play strategically sound openings that we might call offbeat. Long before Aron Nimzowitsch played 1.e4 Nc6, Williams tried it in the earliest recorded game of the Nimzowitsch Defence in 1845. His handling of it was amazingly modern. Masters often play 2.Nf3 willing to allow Black to play an Open Game by 2...e5. The Williams idea is to play ...Bg4 combined with Nf6, e6 and Be7. Black's central pawns will likely advance to d5 and / or e5 depending on later developments. It's not super aggressive, but it takes away White's fun. Other players who added this to their repertoire included Rainer Knaak, Hugh Myers and Tony Miles. This game reached a common position after 1.e4 Nc6 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 Nf6 4.Nc3 Bg4. White had the choice of many fifth moves. Four options are popular: 5.Be3, 5.Be2, 5.d5 and my opponent's choice in this game 5.Bb5. It led to an interesting struggle with the computer chess engine “blik”. blik - Sawyer, ICC 5 0 Internet Chess Club, 28.06.2010 begins 1.e4 Nc6 2.Nf3 d6 [The Williams Variation, played by Elijah Williams in 1845. His idea, which has been followed by many others, is to develop the Bg4. This is normally combined with Nf6, e6 and Be7 keeping the center pawns back at first.] 3.d4 Nf6 4.Nc3 Bg4 5.Bb5 [Threatening d5 win by pin the knight.] 5...a6 6.Bxc6+ bxc6 7.h3 Bh5 [Usually Black retreats.] 8.Qd3 e6 9.Bg5 Be7 10.0-0-0 0-0 11.g4 Bg6 12.Bxf6 Bxf6 13.h4 d5 14.Kb1 dxe4 15.Nxe4 Bxe4 16.Qxe4 Qd5 17.Qd3 c5 [Swapping off the doubled pawn.] 18.Ng5 [Threatening mate.] 18...g6 19.dxc5 Qxc5 20.Ne4 Qe5 [Threatening mate.] 21.Nxf6+ Qxf6 22.Qd4 Qxd4 23.Rxd4 Rfd8 24.Rhd1 Rxd4 25.Rxd4 Kf8 26.Kc1 Ke7 27.Rc4 Kd6 28.g5 Rb8 29.b4 Rb5 30.a4 Rd5 31.f4 c5 32.c3 cxb4 33.cxb4 e5 34.Kc2 exf4 35.Rxf4 Rf5 36.Rxf5 gxf5 37.Kd3 Kd5

38.Kc3 f4 39.Kd3 f3 40.Ke3 Kc4 41.Kxf3 Kxb4 42.Kg4 Kxa4 43.Kh5 Kb5 44.Kh6 a5 45.Kxh7 a4 46.h5 a3 47.g6 fxg6 48.hxg6 a2 49.g7 a1Q 50.g8Q Qh1+ Game drawn by mutual agreement 1/2-1/2

1.e4 Nc6 2.d4 White’s first two moves can be played in either order. He sets up a big pawn center.

11 – Wood 2…e5 3.d5 Nce7 Most major tournaments in Florida had an Under-2000 or Under-2100 section. You could only play up one section, so the Open section often had no one below 1800 or 1900. The State Championship was different. Everyone had a chance to play for the title. My opponent Daryn Wood boldly decided to play for the championship which was played in 2005 in Altamonte Springs, a few miles north of Orlando, Florida. Daryn was rated 1764. He was the lowest rated player I faced in any Florida tournament. I chose the Queen's Knight Defence 1.e4 Nc6 (Nimzowitsch Defence). After 2.d4 e5 (Mikenas), White turned down the chance to play a Scotch Game with 3.Nf3 and played 3.d5. The game featured a blockade in the nature of that set forth in the famous book "My System" by Aron Nimzowitsch. I made two piece sacrifices, each of which netted me a pawn. Wood - Sawyer, FL State Championship (4), 04.09.2005 begins 1.e4 Nc6 2.d4 e5 [I play both and 2…d5 interchangeably.] 3.d5 [3.Nf3 Scotch Game] 3...Nce7 4.Nf3 Ng6 [Van Geet Advanced Variation Reversed.] 5.c4 Bb4+ 6.Nc3 Bxc3+ [Exchanging off the bad bishop.] 7.bxc3 d6 8.Be2 Nf6 9.Qc2 0-0 10.0-0 b6 [My idea is to hinder c4-c5 and allow my bishop to move away from c8 without leaving the b-pawn hanging on b7. More dynamic is to play for ...c7-c6 (instead of ...b7-b6), but here I decided to play for a kingside attack and ignore the queenside. Alternatives are 10...Qe7!? or 10...Nf4!?] 11.h3 Nd7 12.a4 a5 [12...Nc5=] 13.Be3 Nh4!? 14.Nd2 Ng6 15.Nf3 Nc5! 16.Ne1 f5 17.f3 fxe4 [17...Qh4!-/+] 18.fxe4 Rxf1+ 19.Bxf1 Qh4 20.Bxc5 dxc5 [20...bxc5! 21.Nf3 Qh5-/+] 21.Nf3 Qf6 22.Bd3? Bxh3! 23.Rf1 Bd7 24.Qd1 [White could play 24.Nd4 when Black has 24...Qg5-+] 24...Rf8 25.Bc2 Ne7 [25...Nf4!-+] 26.Rf2 Nc8 27.Qf1 Qe7 28.Qe2 Nd6 [I

learned to blockade the pawn with the knight from Nimzowitsch when I was young. White is tied down to defending e4/c4.] 29.Kf1 Bg4 30.Ke1 Bxf3 31.gxf3 Qg5 32.Kd1 g6 33.Bd3 Kg7 34.Kc2 h5! 35.Qf1 Qe3! 36.Be2? Nxe4! 37.Bd3 Qxf2+ 0-1

12 – Bacrot 2…d5 3.exd5 Qxd5 Do grandmasters play your favorite openings? Peter Leko and Etienne Bacrot are super grandmasters whose ratings often exceeded 2700. I was pleased to discover their Queen's Knight game from 2014. After 1.Nf3 Nc6 transposed to the Queen's Knight after 2.e4 d5 3.exd5 Qxd5 4.d4 e5. Slightly more popular is 4...Bg4, but both moves completely equalize this Scandinavian Defence offshoot. In his “Play 1...Nc6!” book author Christoph Wisnewski calls 4...e5 "the more solid option" but he likes 4...Bg4 when playing for a win. Bacrot won the Exchange with a combination. For a long time Leko defended well and made it difficult for Black to win. But in the end Black's h-pawn could not be stopped without the loss of a bishop. Leko (2723) - Bacrot (2718), SportAccord Blitz 2014 Beijing CHN (18.2), 13.12.2014 begins 1.Nf3 Nc6 2.e4 d5 3.exd5 Qxd5 4.d4 e5 [4...Bg4=] 5.Nc3 Bb4 6.a3 Bxc3+ 7.bxc3 e4 8.Nd2 Nf6 9.Nc4 Bg4 10.Qd2 Bh5 [10...Be6=] 11.Qg5 [11.Rb1+/=] 11...Qxg5 12.Bxg5 Nd5 13.Bd2 0-0-0 14.Ne3 Nb6 15.Rb1 Rhe8 16.g4 Bg6 17.h4 f6 18.g5 Bf7 19.gxf6 gxf6 20.Rb5 Ne7 21.Rg1 a6 22.Ra5 Rg8 23.Rxg8 Rxg8 24.Bh3+ [24.Nf5 Rg1 25.Nxe7+ Kd7 26.Nf5 Nc4=/+] 24...Kd8 25.Rc5 Na4 [25...Rg1+ 26.Ke2 Ng6-/+] 26.Ra5 Nb2 27.d5 Rg1+ 28.Bf1 b6 29.Rxa6 Nxd5 30.Ra8+ Kd7 31.Rf8 [31.Bc1 Nxe3 32.fxe3 Bc4-/+] 31...Nxe3 32.Rxf7+ Ke8 33.Bxe3 Kxf7 34.Ke2 Nc4 35.Bf4 c6 36.a4 Nb2 37.Bh3 Nxa4 38.Bd2 Nb2 [38...Nc5-+] 39.Bf5 Nc4 40.Bf4 h5 41.Bxe4 Rg4 42.Kf3 Rxh4 43.Kg3 Rg4+ 44.Kf3 Ne5+ 45.Ke3 h4 46.Bf5 Rg1 47.Ke2 c5 48.Bh2 Rh1 49.Bf4 h3 50.Be4 [50.Bg3 c4-+] 50...Rg1 51.Bh2 Rc1 52.Kd2 Rb1 53.Bg3 Ng4 54.Bd5+ Kg7 0-1

13 – Okhotnik 2…d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.d5 How often do you undevelop a knight and return it to its original square? The Closed Ruy Lopez Breyer Variation sees Black play 9...Nb8 to shift the knight from c6 to d7. In the Queen's Knight Defence line 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.d5 Nb8! is best. Bogoljubow, Deppe, Van Geet and Larsen all played this move 4…Nb8 in the early years of this opening. Note this variation can arise from the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit after 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 Nc6 4.d5 Nb8. Most of the time players choose 4...Ne5 or the weaker 4...Nb4. In the game FM Viacheslav Malyi against GM Vladimir Okhotnik players castled opposite sides. Black obtained constant pressure along the long dark diagonal. The grandmaster returned material to reach a won pawn ending. Malyi (2316) - Okhotnik (2391), Mukachevo UKR (8.3), 05.05.2013 begins 1.e4 Nc6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.d5 Nb8 5.Bf4 Nf6 6.Bc4 a6 7.Qe2 [7.Bb3=] 7...g6 [7...Bf5=/+] 8.Nxe4 Nxe4 9.Qxe4 Bg7 10.0-0-0 Bf5 11.Qe3 0-0 12.f3 b5 13.Bd3? [13.Bb3+/=] 13...Qxd5 14.Bxf5 Qxf5 15.Ne2 Nc6 16.Qe4 Qf6 17.c3 e5 18.Be3 Rfd8 19.h4 Qe6 20.Kb1 f5 21.Qc2 b4 22.cxb4 Nxb4 23.Qa4 Nd5 24.Bc5 Rab8 25.b3 [25.Qc2 a5-/+] 25...e4 26.fxe4 Qe5 [26...Rb5-+] 27.Rd4 [27.Qd4 fxe4-/+] 27...fxe4 28.Qxa6 Nc3+ 29.Nxc3 Rxd4 30.Bxd4 Qxd4 31.Rc1 e3 32.Qe6+ Kh8 33.Qd5 Qxh4 34.Qe4 Qf2 35.Nd1 Qf6 36.Nc3 c5 37.Qxe3 c4 38.Qf3 Qxf3 39.gxf3 cxb3 40.a3 [40.Ne4 bxa2+ 41.Kxa2 h5-/+] 40...Rf8 [40...b2-+] 41.Kb2 Rxf3 42.Kxb3 h5 43.a4 Rxc3+ 0-1

14 – Rosenthal 3.e5 f6 4.f4 The Florida Championship is a six round tournament played on Labor Day weekend each year. In 2011 I arranged to take a half point bye in the sixth round, so I knew that the fifth round was my last of this event. My final opponent was Nicholas Rosenthal. He was a 15 year old who won the 2011 Florida Super State, the K-12 Open section run by the Florida Scholastic Chess League. Nicholas already had a FIDE rating of 2019. He had been rated slightly higher. Sid Pickard who published my 3rd and 4th books was an expert in 1...Nc6 as Black. I made a comment once to Sid that I don't like to block my cpawn with the knight. Pickard pointed out that the knight does not have to stay on c6! Rosenthal answered 1.e4 Nc6 with 2.f4!? I asked him why he did not play 2.Nf3. He said it was because he does not play those 2...e5 lines. He plays the Bishop's Opening after 1.e4 e5 2.Bc4. After my opportunities faded, Rosenthal offered a draw. Rosenthal - Sawyer, FL State Championship Naples FL (5), 05.09.2011 begins 1.e4 Nc6 2.f4 d5 3.e5 f6 [3...d4! 4.Nf3 Qd5! Wisnewski] 4.d4 Nh6 5.Nf3 Bf5 6.c3 Qd7 [Wisnewski gives 6...e6, 7...Be4, 8...f5 and 9...Qd7. I played all these moves in a slightly different order.] 7.h3 [Not in the book.] 7...Be4 8.Nbd2 f5 [8...Nf5!? to make use of the hole on g3.] 9.Nb3 [The Nc5 threat is always an issue in the Nimzovich, just as ...Nc4 is in the 150 Pirc or the Dragon Sicilian.] 9...e6 10.Be3 g6 [A waiting move. Where are the two kings going? More consistent is 10...Nf7.] 11.Rc1 [White plan to rip open the c-file and I am potentially in trouble.] 11...Kf7 12.c4 Nd8 13.cxd5 exd5 14.Ng5+ Kg7 15.Rg1 c6 16.g4 Bb4+ 17.Kf2 Ne6 18.Nxe4 dxe4 19.g5 [Nicholas thought I would play 19...Ng8, but then my knight is trapped. If a later ...Ne7, my Bb4 has no retreat from a2-a3. Instead of 19.g5, Junior 12 see good attacking chances for White with 19.d5+/-.] 19...Nf7 20.Bc4 Rhd8 21.Qc2 Nc7 22.Rgd1 Nd5 23.a3 Be7 24.Nc5 Bxc5 25.dxc5 Qe6 26.Qb3 Rd7 27.Rd2=/+ [27.h4+/-] 27...a6?+/- [27...Nxg5!

28.Bxd5 cxd5 29.fxg5 f4 30.Bd4 e3+-/+] 28.Bxd5 cxd5 29.Qb6 Nd8 30.Rcd1 Kf7 31.Qb3-/+ [31.Qb4=] 31...d4 32.Qxe6+ Nxe6 33.Bxd4 Rad8?!= [33...Nxf4-+] 34.Ke3 Rd5 35.b4 R8d7 36.a4 Ke8 37.h4 1/2-1/2

15 - Petrekanovic 3.e5 Bf5 4.a3 Miroslav Petrekanovic of Serbia appeared headed for a BDG, but he got sidetracked by 2...Nc6. Petar Poleksic usually plays 1.d4 and 2.c4 as White. Earlier in 2016 he had played 1.e4 Nc6 2.Nc3 e5 as Black against Smolovic. He avoided the BDG. Petrekanovic (2153) - Poleksic (1968), XXX Belgrade Trophy SRB, 28.11.2016 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e4 Nc6 3.e5 Bf5 4.a3 [4.c3 f6 5.Nf3 e6 6.Bb5 Nge7 7.exf6 gxf6 8.Nh4 Bg6 9.0-0=] 4...e6 5.Nf3 Qd7 [5...f6 6.b4=; or 5...Nge7 6.Bd3=] 6.Nbd2 Be7 7.Nb3 h5 8.Be2 Bg4 9.h3 Bxf3 10.Bxf3 g6 11.Be3 a5 12.a4 f5 13.g4 fxg4 14.hxg4 h4 15.Qd3 Kf7 16.g5 [16.c3+-] 16...b6 17.Rh3 Bd8 18.Bg4 Nge7 19.Qb5 Nf5 20.Bxf5 exf5 21.f4 Be7 22.0-0-0 Rh7 23.Bf2 Nb8 24.Qxd7 Nxd7 25.Rdh1 Nf8 26.Rxh4 Rxh4 27.Rxh4 Kg7 28.Kd2 Ne6 29.Kd3 c6 30.Nd2 Rb8 31.Be3 Rb7 32.b3 Rb8 33.c3 Rc8 34.Nf1 Rb8 35.Ng3 Rf8 36.Rh6 [36.Bd2+/-] 36...Nxg5 37.fxg5 f4 38.Rh4 fxe3 39.Rg4 Rf2 40.Ne2 Rf1 41.Kxe3 Rb1 42.Kd3 Rxb3 43.Rg1 Rb2 44.e6 b5 45.axb5 cxb5 [45...Rxb5!=] 46.Nf4 a4 [46...Rf2 47.Nxd5+-] 47.Nxd5 Kf8 [47...Bd8 48.e7+-] 48.Rf1+ Ke8 49.Nxe7 Kxe7 50.d5 a3 51.Rf7+ Kd6 52.Rd7+ Kc5 53.e7 a2 54.e8Q 1-0

16 - Maksimovic 3.e5 Bf5 4.Ne2 In this game between young rapidly improving Catalin-Lucian Patrascu against WGM Suzana Maksimovic, Black castled kingside and attacked kingside. This works in part because White's e5 pawn blocks some of his own attacking prospects. Maksimovic found a nice checkmate to finish the game. Patrascu (2069) - Maksimovic (2238), 25th Seacoast Trophy Eforie Nord ROU, 30.06.2015 begins 1.e4 Nc6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 Bf5 4.Ne2 e6 5.Ng3 Bg6 6.h4 f6!? [6...h5 7.Be2 Nb4 8.Na3 c5 9.c3 Nc6=/+] 7.Bb5 Qd7 8.0-0 a6 9.Ba4 fxe5 10.dxe5 b5 11.Bb3 Bc5 12.h5 Bf7 13.Bf4 Nge7 [13...g6!?] 14.c3 Nf5 15.Nxf5 exf5 16.Re1 Be6 17.Nd2 0-0 18.h6 Rad8 19.Nf3 g6 20.Nd4 Be7 21.Qd2 Na5 22.Bg5 c5 [22...Bxg5 23.Qxg5+/=] 23.Nf3 [23.Nxe6 Qxe6 24.Bxe7+-] 23...Nc4 24.Bxc4 bxc4 25.Bxe7 Qxe7 26.b4 d4

27.bxc5 dxc3 28.Qxc3 Rd3 29.Qa5 Bd5 30.Qxa6 Rxf3 31.gxf3 [31.Qd6!=] 31...Qg5+ 32.Kf1 Bxf3 [32...Qh5-/+] 33.Qxc4+ Kh8 34.Red1 [34.Re3!+-] 34...Qxh6 35.Ke1 Qh1+ 36.Kd2 [36.Qf1!=] 36...Rd8+ 37.Ke3 Bxd1 38.Qf4 Qe1# 0-1

1.e4 d5 2.exd5 This is the Scandinavian Defence or Center Counter Defence.

17 – Abdilkhair 2.Nc3 d4 Masters possess a wealth of strategical and tactical patterns in their memory banks. Amateurs enjoy skills but can run afoul of a move that instantly wins big for the master. White retreated a bishop to win in Abilmansur Abdilkhair vs Andrey Stroganov. Abdilkhair (2235) - Stroganov (1826), Minsk BLR, 28.06.2018 begins 1.e4 d5 2.Nc3 d4 3.Nce2 e5 4.f4 Nc6 5.Nf3 f6 6.d3 Be6 [6...Bg4=] 7.c3 Qd7 8.Bd2 [8.fxe5 fxe5 9.cxd4 exd4 10.Nf4=] 8...Nh6 9.Qa4 0-0-0 10.cxd4 exd4 11.b4 Kb8? [11...Nxb4 12.Qxd7+ Rxd7 13.Nexd4 Bf7 14.a3=] 12.b5 Ne7 13.Nexd4 c5 14.Nxe6 Qxe6 15.Be2 Nc8 16.0-0 [16.Rd1+-] 16...Nf5 [16...c4 17.d4+/-] 17.Ba5 [17.Qd1 Nd4 18.Nxd4 Rxd4 19.Be3+-] 17...b6 [17...Nb6 18.Bxb6 axb6 19.exf5 Qxe2 20.Rfe1+/-] 18.exf5 Qxe2 [18...Qe3+ 19.Rf2+/-] 19.Rfe1 Qb2 20.Rab1 Rd4 [20...Qxb1 21.Rxb1 bxa5 22.Qxa5+-] 21.Qxd4 [21.Nxd4!+-] 21...Qxd4+ 22.Nxd4 cxd4 [22...Kb7 23.Nc6+-] 23.Re8 Kb7 24.Bb4 1-0

18 – Pridorozhni 3.Nce2 e5 Opening wins are fun. Middlegame wins are nice. Endgame wins can be easy. The knight rushed to 4.Ng3. Black’s reply of 4...g6 kept the knight at bay and prepared 7...h5. But White simplified into a winning ending in Aleksei Pridorozhni vs Pavel Potapov. Pridorozhni (2565) - Potapov (2479), ch-RUS Blitz 2017 Sochi RUS (3.5), 02.10.2017 begins 1.e4 d5 2.Nc3 d4 3.Nce2 e5 4.Ng3 g6 5.Bc4 Bg7 6.d3 Nc6 7.f4 h5 8.h3 h4 9.N3e2 Nf6 10.Nf3 exf4 11.Nxf4 Qe7 12.0-0 Bd7 13.e5 Nh5 14.e6 Bxe6 15.Nxe6 fxe6 16.Ng5 0-0-0 [16...Ne5 17.Nxe6+/=] 17.Rf7 [17.Nf7+/-] 17...Qd6 18.Nxe6 Rd7 19.Nxg7 Rxf7 [19...Nxg7 20.Bf4+/-] 20.Bxf7 Nxg7 21.Qg4+ Kb8 22.Qxg6 Qe5 23.Bd2 Nf5 24.Qg5 Ng3 [24...Rf8 25.Bb3+/-] 25.Qxe5 [25.Re1+-] 25...Nxe5 26.Bd5 Rf8 [26...Rh5 27.Re1+/-] 27.Re1 c6 [27...a6 28.Bb4+-] 28.Be4 Kc7

[28...Re8 29.Bf4+-] 29.Bg5 Nxe4 30.Rxe4 Ng6 31.Bxh4 c5 32.Be7 Re8 [32...Nxe7 33.Rxe7+ Kd6 34.Rxb7+-] 33.Bd6+ After the rooks come off White will have two extra passed pawns in a minor piece endgame. 1-0

19 – Sengupta 2…dxe4 3.Nxe4 Nf6 Black accepts doubled pawns in a Scandinavian Queens Knight Caro-Kann Defence. I prefer the 4-3 queenside pawn majority to Black’s open lines in view of the likely endgame. Some games never get that far. White increased his piece activity until Black missed a tactic in Dipankar Sengupta vs Thendup Tamang. Sengupta (2579) - Tamang (1953), Kathmandu Open 2018 Kathmandu NEP (2.3), 13.04.2018 begins 1.e4 d5 2.Nc3 dxe4 3.Nxe4 Nf6 4.Nxf6+ exf6 5.d4 c6 [This move 5...c6 transposes to the Caro-Kann Defence. An alternative is 5...Bd6=] 6.c3 Bd6 7.Bd3 0-0 8.Qc2 h6 9.Ne2 Qc7 10.Be3 Nd7 11.0-0-0 Re8 12.Ng3 Nf8 13.Kb1 Be6 14.c4 b5 15.cxb5 Qa5 16.Bc4 cxb5 [16...Bxc4 17.Qxc4 cxb5=] 17.Bxe6 fxe6 18.d5 Rac8 19.Qb3 Rc4 20.dxe6 Rxe6 [20...Be5 21.e7 Rxe7 22.f4+/=] 21.Rd5 a6? [21...Qa4 22.Rxb5 Qxb3 23.Rxb3+/-] 22.Qxc4 1-0

20 – Grigoriev 2…dxe4 3.Nxe4 Bf5 White developed pieces and connected rooks by move 16 in this Scandinavian Queens Knight 2.Nc3. Chances on the board were equal. White probed for weaknesses on each side. Then Black overlooked a tactical skewer combination from the center of the board to the corner in this game between A. Grigoriev and Muhammed Bulut. Grigoriev (2145) - Bulut (1759), Mersin Open 2017 TUR, 26.10.2017 begins 1.e4 d5 2.Nc3 dxe4 3.Nxe4 Bf5 4.Ng3 Bg6 5.d4 e6 6.c3 Qd5 [6...Nf6 7.Nf3 Nbd7 8.Bd3=] 7.Nf3 Nf6 8.Qb3 Qxb3 9.axb3 Bd6 10.Be2 0-0 11.Ne5 Bxe5 12.dxe5 Ne4 [12...Nd5 13.f4=] 13.Be3 Nxg3 14.hxg3 Nc6 15.f4 Be4 16.Kf2 Rfd8 17.b4 b6 [17...a6 18.Rhd1=] 18.b5 [18.Ra4+/-] 18...Ne7 19.Ra3 Nf5 20.Bc1 g6 [20...Ne7 21.Rd1+/=] 21.g4 Ne7 22.c4 g5 [22...c5 23.Re3+/-] 23.Re3 [23.f5+/-] 23...Rd4? [23...Bg6 24.Ra3+/-] 24.Rxe4! If 24...Rxe4 25.Bf3 regains one rook or the other. White remains up a piece. 1-0

21 - Cavicchi 2.exd5 e5 3.Bc4 Francesco Cavicchi asked what to play as Black against 1.e4. "But Tim, please, what to play blitz against 1e4? Here's the punctum dolens for black. Scandinavian Qd6 is my main defense to 1e4 but I don't recommend it for blitz games. Because of its solid, but not immediate nature it's quite difficult to find rapidly a plan at blitz with the Qd6 variation. I've tried the Latvian gambit (Fraser variation with Nc6, I don't like the main line with Qf6) with good results when I was young, but nowadays my memory tends to betray me, so no more Latvian. Elephant gambit looks to me simply unsound. Regarding the Alekhine defense. mmmh, there is that unpleasant 2.Nc3." Cavicchi's question is specific about blitz openings. The Latvian and Elephant are best in blitz if you play them all the time vs players who rarely see them. If you play the same opponent dozens of games in the same line, the surprise value diminishes. I enjoy facing 2.Nc3 in the Alekhine Defence when I play Black. Tactical tricky gambits will catch a lot of fish. It helps if you know lines by heart. Francesco plays the Scandinavian 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Qxd5 3.Nc3 Qd6 as his "main defense". That is sound. He took a break from it with the counter gambit 2...e5. Cavicchi played with energy and creativity. This was an impressive and fun game! NN - Cavicchi, Italy blitz, 2014 begins 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 e5 3.Bc4 [3.dxe6 Bxe6 4.d4+/= seems good for White; 3.Nf3 is an Elephant Gambit; 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bc4] 3...c6 [The choice of Deep Fritz here.] 4.dxc6 Bc5 [More normal would be 4...Nxc6 5.d3+/=] 5.cxb7 [5.Bxf7+! turns the tables after 5...Kxf7 6.Qf3+ Qf6 7.Qd5+ Be6 8.Qxc5 Nxc6 9.Nf3+/- and White is up two pawns.] 5...Bxb7 6.Bb5+ [Another wild line is 6.Qh5 Bxf2+ 7.Kf1 Qf6 8.Qxf7+ Qxf7 9.Bxf7+ Kxf7 10.Kxf2+/- when Black has compensation for a pawn but is down two pawns.] 6...Nc6 7.Nf3 Nge7 8.Nxe5?! [8.0-0+/- is correct.] 8...0-0 9.Nxc6 Nxc6 10.0-0 Nd4 11.Bc4 [11.Qh5 Nxb5 12.Qxc5 Nd4=/+] 11...Nf3+! [Or 11...Qg5!-+] 12.gxf3 Qg5+ 13.Kh1 Qf4 0-1

22 – Crompton 3.Nc3 e6 4.dxe6 John Crompton won a Scandinavian Alekhine Defence. His 3.Nc3 e6 idea is a cousin to the Icelandic 3.c4 e6. While I prefer the Alekhine 3.Nc3 Nxd5, Crompton was rewarded for his boldness in blitz play. You don't have to play perfectly. Here White blundered and John won instantly! indobeginnerchess (1613) - Crompton (1571), Live Chess Chess.com, 16.04.2018 begins 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Nf6 3.Nc3 e6 4.dxe6 Bxe6 5.d4 [5.Nf3+/=] 5...Bb4 6.Nf3 Ne4 [6...0-0 7.Bd3 c5 8.0-0+/=] 7.Bd2 Nxd2 8.Qxd2 Qe7 9.0-0-0 0-0 10.Bd3 Bxa2 11.b3? [White stands better after 11.Bxh7+! Kxh7 12.Qd3+ Kg8 13.Nxa2+/-] 11...Ba3# 0-1

23 – Crompton 2…Nf6 3.c4 e6 John Crompton won this Scandinavian Icelandic Gambit in 15 moves. Play begins 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Nf6 3.c4 e6 4.dxe6 Bxe6. Black had two pieces developed and open center files. White faced serious pressure. Black quickly regained the gambit pawn with the attack. After 15...Qf3, Black mates in a few moves. kevinstar (1549) - Crompton (1600), Live Chess Chess.com, 12.11.2017 begins 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Nf6 3.c4 e6 4.dxe6 Bxe6 5.Nc3 Bb4 6.g3?! [This weakens the kingside. Better was 6.Be2 Qe7 7.d3 Nc6 8.Nf3 0-0-0=] 6...Qe7 [Or 6...0-0 7.d3 Re8=/+] 7.Bg2 Bxc4+ 8.Nge2 Nc6 9.Bxc6+ bxc6 [The diagram illustrates the e-file pin.] 10.a3? [10.0-0 0-0-0 11.d3 Bxd3 12.Re1 Bc4-/+] 10...Bxc3 11.bxc3 0-0 12.Bb2 [12.d3 Rad8 13.0-0 Rxd3 14.Qc2 Qe4-+] 12...Rfe8 13.0-0 Qxe2 14.Qa4 [14.Qxe2 Rxe2 15.Bc1 Ne4+] 14...Bd5 [Or 14...Rab8 15.Rae1 Qxe1 16.Rxe1 Rxe1+ 17.Kg2 Bf1+ 18.Kf3 Rxb2-+ when Black would have 2 rooks and 2 minor pieces for his

queen.] 15.Rae1 [15.c4 Qxc4-+ prevents mate, but White is still a piece down.] 15...Qf3 0-1

24 – Zdun 3.c4 e6 4.Nc3 exd5 I played a Scandinavian Defence 2...Nf6 line with the intention to play a gambit. When White protected d5 with 3.c4, I challenged his forward pawn with 3...e6!? Dick Zdun figured that taking my offered pawn on e6 looked dangerous, so he just developed with 4.Nc3. That was fine, but his 5.Nxd5 gave Black a strong center. Soon White got into deep trouble. At first, he lost the Exchange by move 15. Then he fell for a mate when I sacrificed my queen. Zdun (1634) - Sawyer (2010), Williamsport, PA 1998 begins 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Nf6 3.c4 e6 4.Nc3 [4.dxe6 Bxe6 5.Nf3=] 4...exd5 5.Nxd5? [5.cxd5 Nxd5 6.Nf3 Nc6=] 5...Nxd5 6.cxd5 Qxd5 7.Nf3 Nc6 8.Be2 Bg4 [8...Bc5=/+] 9.h3 Bf5 10.0-0 0-0-0 11.b3 Nd4 12.Bb2 Nxe2+ 13.Qxe2 Bd3 14.Qe5 [14.Qd1 Bxf1 15.Qxf1 Qd3-+] 14...Bxf1 15.Rxf1 f6 [15...Qxe5 16.Bxe5 f6-+] 16.Qe3 Bc5 17.d4 Bd6 18.Re1 [18.Qd3 Kb8-+] 18...Qf7 [18...Rde8-+] 19.Qd2 Rhe8 20.Kf1 Rxe1+ 21.Nxe1 Re8 22.Nf3 Qe7 23.Bc3 b6 24.a4 a5 25.Qd3 g6 26.d5 [26.Qa6+ Kd7 27.Qb5+ c6-+] 26...Bb4 27.Nd4 Qe1+! [Mate is forced.] 0-1

25 – Chilson 3.Bb5+ Bd7 4.Bc4 I tried the Scandinavian Defence 2.exd5 Nf6 hoping to reach the Portuguese Variation 3.d4 Bg4. Instead, we stutter stepped our way with 3.Bb5+ Bd7 4.Bc4 Bg4. White outplayed me, pure and simple. I messed up my bishops and deserved the loss that I got. My opponent Steven Chilson is one of those players with a low over the board rating but a high correspondence chess rating. His tournament rating at the time of our game was 1507 but his USCF correspondence rating is 2146. We played in APCT email. Chilson - Sawyer (1800), corr APCT EMN-A-9, 02.1998 begins 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Nf6 3.Bb5+ Bd7 4.Bc4 Bg4 5.f3 Bf5 6.Nc3 [6.g4+/=] 6...Nbd7 7.g4 [7.d4 Nb6 8.Bb3=] 7...Nb6 8.Bb3 Bc8 9.d4 h5 10.g5 Nfxd5 11.Nxd5 Nxd5

12.h4 Bf5 [12...g6=/+] 13.Ne2 e6 14.Ng3 Bg6 15.Bd2 c6 16.f4 Qc7 17.Qf3 0-0-0 18.f5 Bxf5?! [I mishandled my bishop play on the kingside. 18...exf5 19.0-0-0 f4=] 19.Nxf5 exf5 20.Qxf5+ Qd7 21.0-0 Bd6 22.Rad1 Bg3 23.Kg2 Bxh4? [23...Bb8 24.Rde1+/-] 24.Qxd7+ Rxd7 25.Rh1 Bxg5 26.Bxg5 f6 27.Bc1 g5 28.c4 Ne7 29.Rhf1 1-0

26 – Kaplan 2…Nf6 3.d4 Nxd5 Back in 1974 I was already in my 20s with a goal to reach a 1700 rating. I ended up rated 1687 when I first quit chess to focus on college. When I returned to chess, my rating surged past 2000. A 1700 rating is about the middle of players at a big tournament. The average rating of all players is well below 1700. But higher rated players show up more often to tournaments. This tournament was played in Waterville or Lewiston, Maine. In the first round as Black I beat Evelyn Cunningham with 1.e4 e5. The 2nd round game was a Scandinavian Defence against Mike Kaplan rated 1700. He doubled some scary rooks on the 7th rank. We both had chances but the game ended in a draw. Sawyer - Kaplan, Lewiston, ME (2), 09.02.1974 begins 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 [Years later I would boldly play 2.d4 and head toward a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit.] 2...Nf6 3.d4 Nxd5 4.c3 [A rather timid move. The typical continuation is 4.c4 Nb6 5.Nf3 g6 6.Nc3 Bg7 7.h3 0-0 8.Be3 Nc6 9.Qd2 e5 10.d5+/= and White has a more active position.] 4...Bf5 5.Nf3 f6?! [Black shows aggressive intentions. One would expect 5...e6] 6.Qb3 Nb6 7.a4 Nc6 8.Bf4?! [More consistent is 8.a5 Qd5 9.Nbd2 Qxb3 10.Nxb3 Nd5 11.Nc5+/-] 8...Qd5 9.Nbd2 Qxb3 10.Nxb3 Nd5 11.Bg3 0-0-0 12.Bc4 a6 13.0-0 Nb6 14.Bf7 g5 [14...e5 15.dxe5+/-] 15.Nc5=/+ [The best line is 15.a5! Nd5 16.c4 Nf4 17.Bxf4 gxf4 18.d5 Nb4 19.Nfd4+/-] 15...h5+/= [Black is attacking the kingside with the hope to win material. 15...e5 16.Be6+ Bxe6 17.Nxe6 Re8=] 16.h4= [16.a5! Na8 17.Be6+ Bxe6 18.Nxe6+/=] 16...g4 17.Nd2 e5 18.Be6+ Bxe6 19.Nxe6 Re8 20.Nxf8 Rhxf8 21.dxe5 Nxe5 22.Bxe5 Rxe5 23.a5 Rd8 24.axb6 Rxd2 25.b4 Ree2= [25...cxb6 26.Rad1 Rc2 27.Rd6 Rf5-+] 26.Rad1?-+ [Out of fear I played to exchange a set of rooks when more aggressive action was required. I should have looked more closely at the h-pawns and played 26.Ra5! g3 27.Rxh5 gxf2+ 28.Kh2 Re1 29.Rh8+ Kd7 30.Rh7+ Kc8=] 26...cxb6 27.g3 Rxf2 28.Rxd2 Rxd2 29.Rf5 Rd3 30.Kg2 Rxc3 31.Rxh5 Rc2+ 32.Kg1 Rc4 33.Rf5 Rxb4 34.h5 Re4 35.Rxf6 Re8 36.h6 Rh8

37.Rxb6 a5 38.Rg6 b5 39.Rb6 b4 40.Ra6 b3= [Premature. Black should first play 40...Kb7! 41.Rxa5 Rxh6-/+ and it would be difficult for White to save the game.] 41.Rxa5 Rxh6 42.Rb5 Re6 43.Rxb3 Re4 44.Kf2 Kd7 45.Re3 Re6 46.Rxe6 Kxe6 47.Ke2 Kd6 1/2-1/2

27 – RockyTop 2…Nf6 3.d4 Bg4 RockyTop found an interesting endgame win in an Internet Chess Club blitz game against Gambit-Lover. I watched the game live. White started the pawn ending a pawn down. He managed to win through a better king position. The opening was a Scandinavian Defence Portuguese Variation with 2.exd5 Nf6 3.d4 Bg4. White can choose 4.f3, 4.Nf3 or even 4.Bb5+!? Here "RockyTop" played the natural 4.Be2. Eventually Gambit-Lover got the better position, but his opponent RockyTop fought back and won. I enjoyed the battle of ideas in this endgame. RockyTop (1400) - Gambit-Lover (1541), ICC 0 8 u Internet Chess Club, 25.07.2013 begins 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Nf6 3.d4 Bg4 4.Be2 [A trap can be set with 4.Bb5+ c6 5.dxc6 Bxd1? (5...Nxc6 6.Nf3+/=) 6.c7+ Nc6 7.cxd8Q+ Rxd8 8.Kxd1+- and White has won a piece.] 4...Bxe2 5.Qxe2 Qxd5 6.Nf3 Nc6 7.c4 Qe4 8.Nc3 Qxe2+ 9.Kxe2 e6 10.h3 0-0-0 11.Be3 Bb4 12.Rac1 Bxc3 13.Rxc3 h6 14.Ra3 a6 15.Rc1 g5 16.Rcc3 [White could try 16.b4!? Nxb4 17.Ne5 Rhf8 18.Ra4 Nc6 19.Nxc6 bxc6 20.Rxa6=] 16...g4 17.hxg4 Nxg4 18.Rcb3 Nxe3 19.fxe3 Rhg8 20.Kf2 f6 21.Rd3 Rg4 22.Nh2 Re4 23.d5 [23.g4=] 23...Ne5 24.Rdc3 Rxc4 [24...Nxc4 25.Ra4 exd5-+] 25.dxe6 Rxc3 26.Rxc3 Re8 27.Nf3 Rxe6 28.Nxe5 Rxe5 29.Rc4 Kd7 30.Rh4 h5 31.Kf3 c6 32.Rb4 Rb5 33.Rxb5 axb5 34.Kg3 Ke6 [Black gets sidetracked by White's kingside activity and drifts that way. Black has five chances in a row to play the winning 34...b4-+] 35.Kh4 Kf5 36.Kxh5 c5 37.g4+ Ke5 38.Kg6? [38.a3!= draws] 38...c4 [This is Black's last chance to win with 38...b4 39.b3 b5 40.Kf7 c4-+ queening the c-pawn.] 39.a3 b6? [The losing move. There is a draw with 39...Ke6 40.Kg7 Ke7 when Black holds the opposition.] 40.Kf7 b4 41.axb4 b5 42.Kg6 [White has more than one way to win: 42.Ke7 f5 43.gxf5 Kxf5 44.Kd6 Ke4 45.Kc5 Kxe3 46.Kxb5+-] 42...Ke6 43.Kg7 Ke5 44.Kf7 f5 45.g5 Ke4 46.g6 Kxe3 47.g7 f4 48.g8Q f3 49.Qg3 Ke2 50.Qe5+ [Another winning idea is 50.Qg4 Ke3 51.Ke6 f2 52.Qd1+-] 50...Kf1 51.Qe3 [Since White's win requires pushing the b-

pawn, more efficient is 51.Qxb5!+- quickly winning all three pawns.] 51...f2 52.Ke6 c3 53.bxc3 Kg1 54.Kd5 Kh1 55.Qf3+ Kg1 56.Qxf2+ Kxf2 57.c4 bxc4 58.Kxc4 Ke3 59.b5 Black resigns 1-0

1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Qxd5 This is the main line of the Scandinavian Defence (called the Center Counter Defence in many old chess books).

28 – Niven 3.Nf3 Bg4 4.Nc3 The Scandinavian Defence used to be called the Center Counter Defence after 1.e4 d5. Years ago it was considered weak. Only a few masters, such as Fred Reinfeld, would play it. Over the past 40 years it has gradually become more and more popular at the grandmaster level. If White wants a theoretical advantage 2.exd5 is preferred. But alas I have had a fondness for my other passions with 2.Nc3 (Queen's Knight Attack) and 2.e4!? (Blackmar-Diemer Gambit). After 2.exd5, Black has two ways to recapture. The most popular variations are: (A) 2...Qxd5 3.Nc3 Qa5; (B) 2...Qxd5 3.Nc3 Qd6; or (C) 2...Nf6 3.d4 Bg4. Once in a while (about 6% of the time), I play this opening as Black. In the 1989 USCF Golden Squires Finals, I chose the Scandinavian Defence vs John Niven. We avoided the critical lines, even though in postal chess we could use books. Play was inaccurate before the game was simplified with all queens and center pawns exchanged. It turned out to be a final round short draw. Our ratings were only 2 points apart - so, no rating change. Niven (1959) - Sawyer (1961), corr USCF 89SF10, 28.07.1992 begins 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Qxd5 3.Nf3 [3.Nc3] 3...Bg4 4.Nc3 Qa5 5.Be2 [5.h3+/=] 5...Nc6

6.d4 e5 [6...0-0-0!=] 7.Bd2 0-0-0 [Black should try the wild line 7...Bxf3 8.Bxf3 Nxd4 9.Bxb7 Rb8=] 8.dxe5 [Now the tension fizzles out. White should win a pawn with 8.Nxe5 Nxe5 9.Bxg4+ Nxg4 10.Qxg4+ with little compensation for Black.] 8...Nxe5 9.Nxe5 Qxe5 10.h3 Bxe2 11.Qxe2 Qxe2+ 12.Nxe2 Bc5 1/2-1/2

29 – Torning 3.Nc3 Qe5+ Richard Torning sent me this interesting Scandinavian Defence. I edited his comments and notes for space. Rick Torning wrote: "The Scandinavian Patzer variation is playable below master strength. This game demonstrates what can happen if White plays too passively and loses a tempo by being over cautious. There is opposite sides castling and a rare yet pretty mating pattern. It is a reasonably crisp game at a bullet time control." NN - Torning, Casual Bullet game, 03.08.2018 begins 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Qxd5 3.Nc3 Qe5+ 4.Be2 c6 5.Nf3 Qc7 6.0-0 Bf5 So far all obvious moves. Black relies on the PATZER SYSTEM. 7.Bc4 This bishop has moved twice, the first time to block the check the second to attack the weak f7 square. 7...e6 Black blocks the attack and opens a line for the dark-squared bishop to develop. 8.Re1 to put a rook on a semi-open file shadowing the enemy king. 8...Nf6 to control d5. 9.d3 Not as good as d4. 9...Bd6 To give Black the option of kingside castling. The queen and bishop target h2-pawn. Nbd7 was also playable. 10.Bb3 Loses a tempo. Better were Ne4, h3 or Bd2. 10...Nbd7 I could castle kingside. 11.d4 It took two moves for this pawn to get to d4. 11...0-0-0 12.Bg5 pinning the Nf6. I like h3 or Qe2 better. 12...Nb6 I kept the center files closed. I wanted to trade knights on d5. 13.Bxf6 Why give up a bishop that was not threatened? 13...gxf6! Black has a semi-open g-file to attack the White king. 14.Ne4 attacking the f6 pawn and Bd6. I kept my bishop for the attack. 14...Bf4!? I sacrificed a pawn for development. Allowing White to win the pawn on f6 gets rid of a kingside defender. also possible was 14...Bxe4 15.Rxe4 is pretty balanced] 15.Nxf6 Nd5!? 16.Nxd5 [if 16.Ne4! h5 17.g3 Rdg8+/= and Black has an attack] 16...cxd5! 17.c3 To trade of the light-squared bishops. 17.g3 makes sense. White would have to prepare for Black's h-pawn to break up the king's protection. 17...Rhg8 develop the piece doing the least. 18.Bc2 Consistent. White expects Black to trade on c2, retreat to g6 or pin the N to the Q on g4. 18...Bh3! Unexpected. The pawn cannot capture because the rook has it in an absolute pin 19.g3 still pinned by the rook but attacking the bishop 19...Bxg3! A nice forcing move. The only move for White is fxg3. 20.Qe2?? Blunder. 20.Ne5 Bxe5+ 21.Kh1 Bg2+ 22.Kg1 Bxh2#; 20.Re2.

20...Bxh2+! discovered check by the rook on the g-file. The bishop is protected by the queen on c7. 21.Kh1 the only move. 21...Bg2# Black wins by checkmate. 0-1 [Notes by Torning]

30 – Fressinet 3.Nc3 Qd8 4.d4 This Scandinavian Defence resembles a strategy that I’ve used in the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit Gunderam Variation with moves like Ne5, g4 (attacking Bf5), and Qf3 (attacking f7). Black's poor queen ran all the way back home when trouble arrived on move three. White broke through with a sacrifice on d5 in Laurent Fressinet vs Philippe Hauseux. Fressinet (2651) - Hauseux (1853), ch-FRA Rapid Orsay, 10.05.2018 begins 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Qxd5 3.Nc3 Qd8 4.d4 Nf6 5.Nf3 c6 6.Bc4 Bf5 7.Ne5 e6 8.g4 Be4 9.Nxe4 Nxe4 10.Qf3 [10.Qe2+/-] 10...Nd6 11.Bb3 Be7 12.Be3 Nd7 13.0-0-0 Rf8 [13...a5 14.a4+/-] 14.c4 Qa5 [14...Bf6 15.Kb1+/-] 15.Nxd7 Kxd7 16.c5 Nb5 [16...Rad8 17.cxd6+-] 17.d5 cxd5 [17...exd5 18.Bxd5+-] 18.Bxd5 exd5 [18...Nd6 19.Bxb7+-] 19.Qxd5+ Nd6 20.c6+ [White wins the hanging queen on a5.] 1-0

31 – Vlassov 3.Nc3 Qa5 4.Nf3 Nc6 This game follows a non-standard move order that begins 1.e4 Nc6 2.Nf3 d5. Other ways to reach this line are 1.e4 Nc6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 Qxd5 4.Nc3 Qa5 5.Nf3 or 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Qxd5 3.Nc3 Qa5 4.Nf3 Nc6 5.d4. The best way to play the Scandinavian Defence is to play aggressive tactics. Black does an amazing job at this in the game between Peter Polanyi and Nikolai Vlassov. Polanyi (1990) - Vlassov (2415), World Senior 50+ 2016 Marianske Lazne CZE, 19.11.2016 begins 1.e4 Nc6 2.Nf3 d5 3.exd5 Qxd5 4.Nc3 Qa5 5.d4 [5.Bb5 Bd7 6.0-0 0-0-0 7.d4 Nf6 8.Qe2 a6 9.Bxc6 Bxc6 10.Ne5 Be8=] 5...Bg4 6.Be2 0-0-0 7.Be3 Nf6 8.h3 Bxf3 9.Bxf3 e5 [9...Nxd4 10.Bxd4 Qb4=/+] 10.d5 [10.Bxc6 bxc6 11.Qd3 exd4 12.Bxd4 Re8+ 13.Be3 Nd5=] 10...e4 11.Bg4+ Kb8 12.0-0 Nxd5 13.Nxd5 Rxd5 14.Qc1 Bc5 15.c4 Rdd8 16.a3 Bd4 [16...Bxe3 17.fxe3 h5-/+] 17.Rb1 f5 18.b4 Qe5 19.b5 Ne7 20.Bf4 Qe6 21.Be2 h6 22.c5 [22.a4 Ng6-/+] 22...g5 [22...Nd5-/+] 23.Be3

f4 24.Bxd4 Rxd4 25.c6 [25.b6 axb6 26.cxb6 c6-/+] 25...f3 26.gxf3 [26.Rd1 Nf5-+] 26...Qxh3 27.Qe3 27.Rd1 exf3 28.Bxf3 Rf4-+] 27...Nf5 0-1

32 – Wolff 3.Nc3 Qa5 4.Bc4 White must decide whether or not to play d2-d4 on moves 2-6 in the Scandinavian Defence. After this natural push the pawn may become a target on d4, therefore some players prefer to play only to d3. In many other openings White advances this pawn slowly. Take for example the Bishops Opening 2.Bc4 Nf6 3.d3, or the Ruy Lopez 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.d3, or the Giuoco Pianissimo 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.d3. In all these openings White develops is light squared bishop classically with Bc4 or Bb5. The Scandinavian Defence, also known as the Center Counter Defence, allows for the same type of set-up after 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Qxd5 3.Nc3 Qa5. Here is a game between two masters. Stephen Wolff took on Herbert W. Hickman. These were former opponents of mine. White played the more conservative continuation 4.Bc4 Nf6 5.d3 and still mounts a strong attack. The game ends in checkmate on move 28. I ponder playing the Scandinavian Defence. I give it a try from time to time. Daniel Quinones provided me with a lot of his detailed research on the Scandinavian. Often I avoided 2.exd5 with 2.d4 for a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit. At any rate, the game below is a pretty example of a successful kingside assault. Wolff - Hickman, CCLA North Am ch corr, 1995 begins 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Qxd5 3.Nc3 Qa5 4.Bc4 Nf6 5.d3 [The main line is 5.d4] 5...c6 [5...e6] 6.Nge2 [6.Bd2+/=] 6...e5 7.0-0 Bg4 [7...Be7 8.Ng3+/=] 8.f3 Bh5 9.Ng3 Bc5+ 10.Kh1 0-0 11.Nxh5 Nxh5 12.f4 Nxf4 13.Bxf4 exf4 14.Rxf4 Nd7 15.Rf5!? [15.Qh5+/-] 15...Qc7 16.Ne4 Be7 17.Qf3 Kh8 18.Rxf7 Rxf7 19.Qxf7 Qe5 20.Be6 Qxb2 [20...Nf6 21.Qxe7+/-] 21.Re1 Bb4 22.c3 Bxc3 [22...Rf8 23.Qxd7+-] 23.Ng5 Ne5 24.Qf5 Ng6 25.Nf7+ Kg8 26.Ne5+ Kh8 27.Nxg6+ hxg6 28.Qh3# 1-0

33 – Parsons 3.Nc3 Qa5 4.d4 David Parsons invited me to join the chess club in Williamsport, Pennsylvania in 1994. Dave was fun to play. He was fond of all attacks and counter attacks. Parsons played his pet lines that led to his familiar attacks. His openings worked against club players. In a Scandinavian Defence, I chose the main line 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 rather than 2.d4 which heads toward a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit. In the game below I castled kingside and David attacked. Taking aim at h2 through my g3, he hit me directly with Bd6, Qc7, Ng4 and h5-h4. Black's prospects looked reasonable until he overdid it. The one mistake that actually cost Black the game was his bold sacrifice of a whole piece. If his king had been reasonably safe, his attack might have worked. Unfortunately for Black, his king was undefended and it still sat on his original square. White opened the center. Suddenly Black was helpless. Sawyer (2011) - Parsons (1682), Williamsport, PA 1994 begins 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Qxd5 3.Nc3 Qa5 4.d4 c6 5.Nf3 Bg4 [5...Nf6] 6.Be2 Bxf3 7.Bxf3 Nf6 8.0-0 e6 9.a3 [9.Bf4+/=] 9...Nbd7 10.Be3 Bd6 11.b4 Qc7 12.g3 h5 13.Ne4 Nxe4 14.Bxe4 Nf6 15.Bg2 Ng4 16.Qe2 f5 [Black can equalize with 16...Nxe3 17.Qxe3 h4=] 17.c4 h4 18.c5 [18.Bg5+/=] 18...Nxh2? [Bold but reckless. Better is 18...Be7 19.Bf4 Qd7 20.Rad1+/=] 19.cxd6 Qxd6 20.Bf4 Qxd4 21.Qxe6+ 1-0

34 – Caglioti 3.Nc3 Qa5 4.d4 e5 W. John Lutes wrote a book on the Scandinavian Defence with an early 4...e5. It looked like a lot of fun. I wasn’t sure about the soundness of the idea. Michael Caglioti outplayed me this time. Caglioti (2145) - Sawyer (2189), corr USCF 88P103, 29.06.1989 begins 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Qxd5 3.Nc3 Qa5 4.d4 e5?! [4...Nf6] 5.Nf3 [5.dxe5 Qxe5+ 6.Qe2 Qxe2+ 7.Ngxe2 Nf6 8.Bf4+/=] 5...Bg4 [5...Bb4 6.Bd2 exd4 7.Nxd4+/=] 6.h3 [6.dxe5+/=] 6...Bxf3 7.Qxf3 Bb4 8.Bc4 Nf6 9.0-0 Nc6

10.Nd5 0-0-0 [10...Nxd5 11.Bxd5 0-0 12.Bxc6 bxc6 13.c3 Bd6 14.Qxc6 exd4 15.cxd4+/=] 11.Nxf6 gxf6 12.c3 Be7 13.d5 Nb8 14.Be3 b6? [14...Qa4 15.Bb3+/-] 15.a4 Nd7 16.b4 Bxb4 17.cxb4 Qxb4 18.Ba6+ Kb8 19.d6 e4 20.dxc7+ Kxc7 21.Qf4+ 1-0

35 – Muir 4.d4 Nf6 5.a3 c6 I played the Center Counter Scandinavian Defence against Bob Muir. I won a pawn and the Exchange. There were technical problems forcing an endgame, but I had middlegame tactical possibilities. I probed for weak points and sacrifice my queen. If Bob took my queen, I’d mate his king. If he ran, I'd be up a rook. This left White up a creek without a paddle. He decided it was time to turn the board around and play a new game. Muir (1800) - Sawyer (2010), Williamsport, PA 11.1998 begins 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Qxd5 3.Nc3 Qa5 4.d4 Nf6 5.a3!? [This seems like a waste of time. Most popular is 5.Nf3] 5...c6 6.Nf3 Bf5 7.Bd3 Bxd3 8.Qxd3 e6 9.0-0 Nbd7 10.Bf4 Be7 11.b4 Qd8 12.Rad1 0-0 13.Na4 Nd5 14.Bg3 b5 15.Nb2 [Running away is not the solution. Better is 15.Nc5+/=] 15...a5 16.c4 bxc4 17.Nxc4 axb4 18.axb4 Nxb4 19.Qe4 Nd5 20.Nfe5 Nc3 21.Qxc6 [Better is to be down just a pawn with 21.Qc2 Nxe5 22.Qxc3 Nxc4 23.Qxc4 Qd5-/+] 21...Nxe5 22.Bxe5 Rc8 23.Qa6 Nxd1 24.Rxd1 Bf6 25.Nb6 [25.Nd6 Rc2-/+] 25...Rc6 26.Bxf6 gxf6 27.Rb1 Qxd4 28.Qb7 Qb2! 0-1

36 – Conlon 4…Nf6 5.Nf3 Bf5 The Scandinavian Defence always has had its supporters as it is easy to play and very logical. In this APCT email Queen Section, I took a break from my Blackmar-Diemer Gambit (2.d4). I played the standard 2.exd5. My game vs Greg Conlon saw him defend quite well. We reached a drawish double rook endgame where it was difficult for either side to make any progress. Sawyer (1969) - Conlon (1709), corr APCT EMQ-1, 11.1995 begins 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Qxd5 3.Nc3 Qa5 4.d4 Nf6 5.Nf3 Bf5 6.Bc4 e6 7.0-0 c6 8.Re1 Bb4 [8...Nbd7] 9.Bd2 0-0 10.a3 Bxc3 11.Bxc3 Qc7 12.h3 [12.Ne5 Nbd7=] 12...Nbd7 13.Bd3 Bxd3 14.Qxd3 Rfd8 15.Qe2 c5 16.dxc5 Qxc5 17.Bb4 [White could try 17.Rad1 or 17.Bd4] 17...Qc6 18.Rec1 a5 19.Bd2 Nc5 [19...h6=] 20.Ne5 Qe4 21.Qxe4 Nfxe4 22.Be3 Nd7 23.Nxd7 Rxd7 24.Kf1 b5 [24...Nd2+ 25.Bxd2 Rxd2 26.Ke1=] 25.c4 [With 25.Rd1+/= White might have a slight advantage with a bishop vs knight and pawns on both

sides of the board.] 25...bxc4 26.Rxc4 Nd2+ 27.Bxd2 Rxd2 28.b4 axb4 29.Rxb4 Kf8 30.Re4 Rc8 31.Re2 Rd5 32.a4 Ra5 33.Rea2 [Or 33.f3=] 33...Rc4 34.Ra3 1/2-1/2

Book 5: Chapter 2 – Alekhine Defence 1.e4 Nf6 The Alekhine Defence has been one of my favorite openings from either side of the board. I begin with the games where White does not play 2.e5 or 2.Nc3.

37 – Guest 2.d4 Nxe4 3.Bd3 The risky Omega Gambit sees White sacrifice the e4 pawn for open lines after 1.d4 Nf6 2.e4 Nxe4 or 1.e4 Nf6 2.d4 Nxe4. This gambit can be successful, but it cannot be recommended. The risk does not match the reward. Francesco Cavicchi wrote that he was "not particularly happy" with this gambit. I totally agree. Guest - Sawyer (2000), ICC 0 1 u, Internet Chess Club, 1999.03.24 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.d4 Nxe4 3.Bd3 [3.Nc3 Nxc3 4.bxc3 d5-/+] 3...Nf6 4.Nf3 d5 5.O-O Bg4 6.h3 Bxf3 7.Qxf3 c6 8.c4 Nbd7 9.Nc3 e6 10.Bg5 [10.c5 e5!=] 10...Be7 [10...dxc4=+] 11.Rfe1 dxc4 12.Bxc4 O-O 13.Rac1 Qa5 [13...Nb6!-/+] 14.Bb3? [14.Bd2 Qb6 =+] 14...Qxg5 [Unregistered player White disconnected and forfeits] 0-1

38 – Foust 2.Bc4 Nxe4 3.Bxf7+ I played Michael Foust in this 1989 USCF Golden Knights Postal Tournament. We played twice before in APCT. This USCF postal game was in an Alekhine Defence 2.Bc4 Nxe4 3.Bxf7+ variation. Foust (1900) - Sawyer (2041), corr USCF 89NS48, 24.05.1991 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.Bc4 Nxe4 3.Bxf7+ Kxf7 4.Qh5+ Kg8 5.Qd5+ e6 6.Qxe4 d5 7.Qe2 Nc6 8.Nf3 Qf6!? [White forfeited the game at this point. Jeff Caveney posted the following comment on April 7, 2005: "Back in the mid-1990s on one of the Usenet chess groups Max Burkett shared an amazing line for Black discovered by Fritz in this variation: 8...e5 and if 9.Nxe5 Nd4! 10.Qd3 (10.Qd1 Qg5-+; 10.Qh5 g6 11.Nxg6 hxg6 12.Qxg6+ Bg7 and the piece should crush the three pawns here.) 10...Bc5 11.0-0 (11.Qc3 Qg5!-+; 11.Na3 Qg5-+) 11...Bf5-+." All very interesting. Looks good. A possible

continuation after my 8...Qf6!? is 9.0-0 e5 10.Nc3 e4 11.Nxd5 Qf7 12.Qxe4 Bf5 13.Qc4 Be6-+] 0-1

39 – Schirber 2.d3 d5 3.e5 We reach the 8th round of the US Junior Open. Leo Schirber was a friend of Spencer Lucas, the only USCF rated master as I recall in the 1974 event. Both players had travelled to Lancaster, Pennsylvania from the southwestern part of the USA. Leo Schirber has not been active in tournament play recently for many years, but his last USCF published rating was 2265. He was about 1900 and rapidly rising when I played him in 1974. I responded to his Alekhine Defence with 1.e4 Nf6 2.d3 intending a King's Indian Attack. On move three I changed my mind. Forget the KIA. Attack! It was my final chance in the final round vs a higher rated player. The move 2.d3 is fine, although rather passive. As Black I have faced 2.d3 110 times and I scored 76%, a great percentage for Black. Anyway, after wasting a move 2.d3 only to play 5.d4. Yep, that didn't work well. Attack or don't, but do not just attack half-heartedly. I have this same view of military action. Either fight to win, or stay home. In chess, like in military action, just hanging around the battlefield without going all out just gets your own guys killed. That does not accomplish anything positive. My hesitation lost the battle. Schirber defended well. My troops were mortally wounded. My KIA went from as the Kings Indian Attack to KIA as Killed In Action. Sawyer - Schirber, US Junior Open (8), 09.08.1974 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.d3 d5 3.e5?! Nfd7 4.e6?! fxe6 5.d4 e5 [5...c5!?] 6.dxe5 Nxe5 7.Qh5+?! Nf7 [It is ridiculous to play move that count on your opponent's poor play, especially if your opponent is a good player. I was hoping for 7...Ng6? 8.Bd3] 8.Bd3 g6 9.Qh4 e5 10.Qa4+ Nc6 11.Nc3 Be6 12.Bd2 Bg7 [Black controls the center, is well developed and up a pawn. White is lost.] 13.f3

a6 14.b4 Qh4+ 15.g3 Qxb4 16.Qxb4 Nxb4 17.Rb1 Nxd3+ 18.cxd3 0-0-0 19.Na4 b6 20.Ne2 Bf5 21.Rb3 e4 [Good moves for Black are obvious and powerful. He never makes a mistake. Well played.] 22.fxe4 dxe4 23.dxe4 Bxe4 24.Rf1 Ne5 25.Nf4 0-1

40 – Flear 2.d3 d5 3.Nd2 Nc6 Black immediately attacks White's developed pawn on move 1. If White defends the pawn, Black's army continues to move ahead. Most players can make the quick mental adjustment and push the pawn with 2.e5, switching from defense to attack. Why does Black play 1... Nf6 if he knows the knight can be attacked immediately? I prefer a paradigm shift. "Why does White play 1.e4 if he knows the Pawn can be attacked immediately?" My knight can move all over the board while his pawn is stuck on the e-file. Check out the game Srdjan Marangunic vs Glenn Flear. Marangunic - Flear, Bern 1991 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.d3 [This 2.d3 move might be played by a wimp or an imp. If White is a wimp, he immediately thinks passive defense in the face of danger. Black will open lines for his pieces to take the best squares. Just play good moves. Wait for White to fall apart. If White is an imp, he may be an expert in the Philidor or Pirc Defense and wants to play with colors reversed and an extra move. This is unlikely, unless he's a master, but it is certainly possible. If you do not know how strong your opponent is, beware of 2.d3 until he proves himself.] 2...d5 [Black attacks the e-pawn until the pawn moves or is captured.] 3.Nd2 [White plans a King's Indian Attack.] 3...Nc6 [Rapid development is Black's best friend.] 4.Ngf3 [4.Be2 e5 5.exd5 Nxd5 6.Ngf3 Be7 Black has the better open lines for future play. 7.0-0 0-0=] 4...e5 [We have one of those rare lines in the Alekhine Defense where Black occupies the center with pawns as much if not more than White does. This happened because White refused to challenge Black's knight on f6. Such reserve play gives Black an objectively easier game. But it also leads to lines the Black will face less often, so he may not be as well prepared as against the main lines.] 5.c3 [This flexible move keeps a Black piece out of d4 or b4 while preparing a possible future pawn advance to those same squares. It also allows White to move along the d1-a4 diagonal.] 5...Be7 [At first glance, this move looks boring, but it allows Black to castle quickly and that brings more of his army into the future battle. The more actively looking move to c5 makes the bishop a target for the queenside pawns or for the knight on d2.] 6.Be2 [White's bishops do not have a lot of options.] 6...0-0 [The position resembles a Reversed Philidor.] 7.0-0 [7.Qc2 Be6 8.0-0 h6 9.Re1

Re8 10.exd5 Nxd5= with equal chances although Black looks more ready for action.] 7...a5 [This flank move cuts down White's options on the queenside. Black has superior chances everywhere.] 8.a4 [Hold on there, buddy. White does not let Black expand on the queenside either.] 8...Re8 [The e-file is the best place for the rook, and now f8 is available for the bishop, until needed later.] 9.h3 [White takes g4 away from the Black bishop and knight, but this makes g3 weak later in the game.] 9...Bf8 10.Re1 h6 [Black wants to place a bishop on e6 without be hassled by a knight on g5.] 11.Bf1 Be6 12.Qc2 Nd7 [This step backwards is like pulling back the hammer on a gun; the f-pawn will shoot out like a bullet.] 13.Nb3 f5 14.exd5 Bxd5 15.Nfd2 Qf6 16.Be2 Rad8 [Black's pieces are ready to attack White's weak points.] 17.Bf3 Qf7 18.Bxd5 Qxd5 19.Nf1 f4 20.d4 [White has to fight back or he will get squished like a bug.] 20...exd4 21.Rxe8 Rxe8 22.Bxf4 d3! [Black pushes to get a passed d-pawn.] 23.Qd1 Nc5 24.Nxc5 Bxc5 25.Ne3 Bxe3 26.Bxe3 Ne7 [The knight is needed to help advance the d-pawn.] 27.c4 [Tricky! If Black takes this pawn, White will activate his rook on the c-file with an equal game.] 27...Qe4 28.Qh5 Nf5 29.Bd2 Re5 [Black moves in for the kill; he would love to play his knight to e3 right now. White must do something.] 30.Qg4 Qxg4 31.hxg4 Nd6 [With the queens off the board the d-pawn is becoming more powerful. Black combines a threatened invasion with an attack on the c-pawn. The dpawn itself may not actually queen in such positions, but the threat for it to queen ties White and down and causes weakness.] 32.b3 Re2 33.Rd1 Ne4 34.Be3 d2 [Finally the pawn has advanced!] 35.Kf1 [The Black rook is trapped.] 35...Ng3+! [It would appear that Black has miscalculated when all of a sudden he is hit with a lightning bolt!] 36.fxg3 Rxe3 37.Rxd2 [It looks like both sides will lose pawns. However, since the Black rook has already invaded and is attacking undefended pawns, the White pawns will fall faster.] 37...Rxb3 38.Rd7 c5 39.g5 hxg5 [Black wants to keep a pawn on g7 so that his king can get around it and so that he will be trying to queen a g-pawn in the ending, which is much easier than trying to queen an hpawn.] 40.Rd5 b6 41.Rxg5 Kh7 42.Kf2 Rb4 43.Rh5+ Kg8 44.Rd5 Rxa4 45.Rd6 Rb4 46.Ke3 a4 [White has been tied down to the railroad tracks and he sees the train coming!] 47.Kd3 a3 48.Rd8+ Kh7 [To stop the apawn from queening, White must give up his g-pawns to the rook. The winning procedure involves tying White down to the a-pawn and then

winning with the g-pawn. Of course, if the rooks are ever swapped at this point, Black easily wins.] 0-1

2.Nc3 d5 3.exd5 This line is both a Scandinavian Defence and Alekhine Defence as it can be reached from either chess opening.

41 – Chandler 4.Nxd5 Qxd5 This game features Bill Chandler playing a nice attack in the Scandinavian Defence. The variation 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Nf6 3.Nc3 transposes into the Alekhine Defence. That Alekhine move order would be 1.e4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d5 3.exd5. Chandler has won a game in a line that I had seen before. His opponent with the White pieces used the handle Bekychess. White swapped knights on move four which brought the Black queen out to the center of the board as a commanding presence. Bekychess - Chandler, Internet Chess Club, 2012 begins 1.e4 d5 [Scandinavian Defence.] 2.exd5 Nf6 3.Nc3 [Transposing to the Alekhine Defence.] 3...Nxd5 4.Nxd5 Qxd5 5.Nf3 Bg4 6.Be2 Nc6 7.0-0 e6 8.c4 [White might do better to play 8.d4 0-0-0 9.c3 Bd6 10.h3+/=] 8...Qf5 9.d4 0-0-0 10.Be3 h5 [An amazingly good move is 10...Bc5!=/+] 11.h3 Be7 12.a3 Bxh3 13.gxh3 Qxh3 14.Bf4? [14.Qd3 Qg4+ 15.Kh1 Nxd4 16.Nxd4 Qh3+ 17.Kg1 Bd6 18.f4 Qg3+ 19.Kh1 with a draw.] 14...Rh6! 15.Bxh6 gxh6 16.Ng5 Bxg5 [The best line seems to be 16...Rg8! 17.f4 Bxg5-+] 17.Qd3 Be3 18.Qh7? [Somewhat better is 18.Qxe3 Rg8+ 19.Qg3 Rxg3+ 20.fxg3 Qxg3+ 21.Kh1 Nxd4-+] 18...Nxd4 19.Bd1 Qg3+? [Missing a mate in three: 19...Bf4 20.Re1 Qh2+ 21.Kf1 Qh1#] 20.Kh1 Qh4+? [20...Bxf2 21.Rxf2 Qxf2-+ and Black has a dominating position.] 21.Kg2 Qg5+ 22.Kh3? Rg8?-+ 23.Qxg8+ Qxg8 24.fxe3 Nf5 25.Kh2?-+ Qg3+ 26.Kh1 Qh3+ 27.Kg1 Nxe3?-+ 28.Rf2? Qg3+ 29.Kh1 Qxf2 0-1

42 – Alston 4.Nxd5 Qxd5 5.d4 I employed the provocative Alekhine Defence as Black to dare opponents to attack me. I played an early Alekhine tournament game vs Al Alston in 1981 at a Hatboro event near Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Years later an Al Alston was a notable community organizer in Philly. It might be the same guy. Two million people live in the greater Philadelphia area, so there might be more than one person with this same name. The only other "Alston" I ever heard of was Walter Alston. He was the major league baseball manager for the old Brooklyn and Los Angeles Dodgers for 23 years. I doubt that Walter and Al were related. This Scandinavian Variation of the Alekhine Defence was discussed in my review of the book by Lakdawala. The most challenging way to attack the Alekhine Defence is by 2.e5! Some avoid critical theory and play 2.Nc3. Black can avoid the Alekhine by 2...e5 which is a Vienna or by 2...d6 which becomes a Pirc. There is no need for Black to learn these other openings. After 2...d5 White chose the simple swap 3.exd5 instead of the space gaining 3.e5, or 3.d4!? Blackmar-Diemer Gambit. I took too many risks below, but I managed to outplay White in the end. Alston (1708) - Sawyer, Hatboro, PA (3), 18.07.1981 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d5 3.exd5 Nxd5 4.Nxd5 [4.Bc4 is sharper.] 4...Qxd5 5.d4 Bf5 6.Nf3 Qe4+ [6...Nc6=] 7.Be3 Qxc2 8.Qxc2 Bxc2 9.Rc1 Be4 10.Rxc7 Bc6? [10...f6!=. Black gets carried away.] 11.Bf4 [11.Ne5!+- would have punished me.] 11...Nd7 12.Bc4 [12.d5! Bxd5 13.Bb5 Bc6 14.Bxc6 bxc6 15.Rxc6+/=] 12...e6 13.Ne5? [Too late. White could play 13.Ke2=] 13...Bd6 14.Nxc6 Bxc7 15.Bxc7 Rc8 16.Bf4 Rxc6 17.Bd3 Ke7 18.0-0 Nf6 19.Bg5 [19.Bd2 Rhc8-/+] 19...Rd8 20.Be4 Rb6 21.Bxf6+ [Or 21.Bc2 Rxb2 22.Bb3 Re2-+] 21...Kxf6 22.b3 Rxd4 23.Bf3 Rd2 24.Ra1 Rb2 25.Bd1 Rd6 26.Bf3 b6 27.Be4 Rxa2 28.Re1 Rb2 29.h3 Rxb3 30.Kh2 Rd2 31.f4 Rbb2 32.Rc1 Rb4 33.Re1 a5 34.Bc6 a4 35.Ra1 b5 36.Ra3 Rb3 37.Ra1 a3 38.Bxb5 Rxb5 39.Rxa3 Rbb2 40.Rg3 Rxg2+ [Black gives up a rook to

reach a winning pawn ending, but of course 40...g6-+ and White is lost.] 41.Rxg2 Rxg2+ 42.Kxg2 Kf5 43.Kf3 f6 44.h4 h5 45.Kg3 g5 46.fxg5 fxg5 47.hxg5 Kxg5 48.Kh3 Kf4 49.Kh4 e5 50.Kxh5 e4 51.Kh4 e3 52.Kh3 e2 53.Kg2 e1Q 54.Kh2 Kf3 0-1

43 – Chandler 5.d4 Nc6 6.Nf3 Once again Bill Chandler wins a short blitz game played on the Internet Chess Club. It illustrates a variation that is never played by masters but very popular at the club level. The game begins as a Scandinavian Defence and as an Alekhine Defence. Both openings have a logical move order that meet in this common variation. The same position could also be reached via the less popular Queen's Knight Attack. Here is how: Scandinavian Defence: 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Nf6 3.Nc3 Alekhine Defence: 1.e4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d5 3.exd5 Queen’s Knight: 1.Nc3 d5 (1...Nf6 2.e4 d5) 2.e4 Nf6 3.exd5 I spent one full chapter (of 10 chapters) in my Alekhine Defense Playbook (published by Pickard & Son, 2000) covering 3.exd5 which reaches the game position. Many times I’d faced 4.Nxd5?! My average opponent was rated 1727. Bill Chandler is playing Black. I do not know his opponent "Marlborito." Marlborito - Chandler, ICC 5 0, 05.02.2012 begins 1.e4 d5 [Scandinavian Defence.] 2.exd5 Nf6 [Or 2...Qxd5 which Bauer recommended in "Play the Scandinavian" After 3.Nc3 Black plays 3...Qa5 or 3...Qd6] 3.Nc3 [We have reached the Alekhine Defence. Bill Chandler asked about 3.d4 Nxd5 4.c4 Nb4 but White is simply better after 5.a3! with a nice space advantage.] 3...Nxd5 4.Nxd5?! [This knight exchange is common.] 4...Qxd5 5.d4 [White boldly occupies the center.] 5...Nc6 [Black applies pressure to d4.] 6.Nf3 Bg4 7.c4 [7.Be2 0-0-0 8.c3 e5 and we have reached a standard position in this popular sub-variation. This line has led to a lot of short Black wins.] 7...Qf5 [7...Qd6!?] 8.Be2 0-0-0 9.d5? [Junior 12 prefers 9.Be3 Bxf3 10.Bxf3 Nxd4 11.Bg4 Nc2+ 12.Qxc2 Qxg4 13.0-0 e6 although White has insufficient compensation for the pawn.] 9...e6 10.Nd4? [10.0-0 exd5 11.cxd5 Rxd5=/+ and Black has won a pawn.] 10...Nxd4 [Or 10...Bb4+! 11.Kf1 Bxe2+ and White is in deep trouble.] 11.Qxd4 [If 11.Bxg4 Qe4+ 12.Kf1 h5 Black has a strong attack.] 11...Bxe2 12.Kxe2 exd5 13.cxd5

Rxd5 14.Qxa7 [White wins back his pawn and gets promptly mated.] 14...Qd3+ 15.Ke1 Qd1# White is checkmated 0-1

44 – Dunadan 5.d4 Nc6 6.Nf3 The Alekhine Defence: move by move book by Cyrus Lakdawala is an excellent and unique presentation on this opening. I’ve read 40 books on the Alekhine Defence. I even wrote one myself that sold out. No book covers this aggressive attacking defense the way that Cyrus Lakdawala does. He is informative, humorous and articulate, which makes him fun to read. It has 57 deeply annotated games in 464 pages with questions posed that typical chess students ask their teachers. The exercises help students to make a critical decision or to search for a combination. Cyrus Lakdawala has two pet lines that are out of the ordinary for this opening. First is 3.d4 Nb6 though he also covers the Main Line 3...d6 4.Nf3 dxe5. Second is 5.f4 g6 in the Four Pawns Attack (rather than 5...dxe5). Against the Exchange Variation he plays both the solid 5...exd6 and the sharp 5...cxd6, depending on how badly he needs a win in that game. I enjoy Lakdawala as an author. His opinions do not bother me. I like religion, politics and chess openings. If your preferences or passions in any of those three differ from mine, that is fine with me. I know why I am passionate about what I believe. I am happy and content with my life and my viewpoints. Sometimes I agree with Lakdawala, but always I like him. Below is the game Sawyer vs Dunadan. I added two Lakdawala quotes from his Game 51 vs Barquin to my game. My personal score as Black vs 4.Nxd5 was 78% in 145 games. Dunadan (1800) - Sawyer (2003), ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 24.05.2014 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d5 3.exd5 Nxd5 4.Nxd5?! [Lakdawala: "I have had this passive move played against me by lower rated players who hope to swap their way to a draw."] 4...Qxd5 [Lakdawala: "Black gets a dream Scandinavian and I already prefer my position."] 5.d4 Nc6 6.Nf3 Bg4 7.Be2 e5 [7...0-0-0 8.0-0 Nxd4 9.Nxd4 Bxe2 10.Qxe2 Qxd4 11.Bg5=] 8.0-0 [8.dxe5 Bxf3 9.Bxf3 Qxe5+ 10.Qe2 Qxe2+ 11.Bxe2 Bc5=] 8...0-0-0 [Cautious when 8...e4!=/+ is better for Black.] 9.c3 [Cautious. 9.c4!+/= is better.] 9...exd4 10.Nxd4 [10.cxd4=] 10...Bxe2 11.Qxe2 Nxd4 12.cxd4

Qxd4 [12...Bd6=/+] 13.Be3 [13.Bg5!+/-] 13...Qe4 14.Rac1 Bd6 15.Rc4 Qd5 16.Rd1? [Black falls for my trap. 16.Bxa7=] 16...Bxh2+ 17.Kxh2 Qxd1 [White resigns] 0-1

45 – Felber 3…Nxd5 4.Bc4 e6 Josef M Felber fell for an Alekhine Defence trap only to come out smelling like a rose. Turns out it is a boomerang trap where Tim the Trapper gets caught! I reached into the rose bush and grabbed the thorns. What began as a Scandinavian Defence quickly transposed to an Alekhine as our moves 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Nf6 3.Nc3 reached the same position as 1.e4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d5 3.exd5. Usually I play the Black pieces in this position and continue 3...Nxd5 4.Bc4 Nb6. Josef Felber chose 4...e6. In unfamiliar territory as White I thought that I saw a way to win a pawn. My creativity was a bad idea. Valentin Bogdanov wrote, "White can try to grab a pawn by 5.Bxd5?! exd5 6.Qe2+, but this is a highly dubious venture." This game proved Bogdanov right. Twenty years later, I know better than to play that line. I do not think Jozef Felber meant to set a trap, but it worked like a charm. Sawyer (2100) - Felber (2025), CM.1995.0.00005 IECG, 1995 begins 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Nf6 3.Nc3 Nxd5 4.Bc4!? e6 5.Bxd5 [Played with the idea of winning a pawn, but this is too risky. Better would be 5.Nf3= with a small lead in development.] 5...exd5 6.Qe2+?! [6.d4 is a French Defence Exchange Variation.] 6...Be6 7.Qb5+?! [7.d4] 7...Nc6 8.Qxb7 Nb4 9.Qb5+ Qd7 [A good idea is 9...c6! 10.Qa4 Bd7 (Bogdanov) 11.a3 c5 12.Nb5 Nxc2+ 13.Qxc2 Bxb5-/+] 10.Qxd7+ Kxd7 11.Kd1 d4 12.a3 Nc6 13.Ne4?! [White has 13.Nce2! d3 14.Nf4 dxc2+ 15.Kxc2 Bf5+ 16.d3 Nd4+ 17.Kc3 c5 18.Be3=] 13...d3 [More accurate would be 13...Bd5! 14.f3 d3-/+] 14.cxd3? [A fatal mistake. White may survive with 14.Nf3 Re8=/+] 14...Nd4! 15.Rb1 Bb3+ 16.Ke1 Bc2 17.Nc3 Re8+ 18.Kf1 Bxd3+ 19.Nge2 Nxe2 20.Nxe2 Rxe2 0-1

46 – Van Geet 4.Bc4 Nb6 This world championship tournament correspondence game between Dirk Daniel Van Geet and Stefan Briem transposed into the Alekhine Defence after 1.Nc3. Compare 1.Nc3 d5 2.e4 Nf6 and 1.Nc3 Nf6 2.e4 d5 and 1.e4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d5. Each line reaches the same position. This exchange 3.exd5 is a variation of the Scandinavian Defence after 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Nf6 3.Nc3. Stefan Briem of Iceland was born in 1938 according to FIDE. He was blessed with a long career. At the Reykjavik Open in 1988 generations and genders clashed. The veteran Stefan Briem had Black vs Judit Polgar who was born in 1976. There a guy about 50 years old drew a girl about 12 years old. Of course, she was not just any 12 year old. Judit Polgar became the greatest woman player of all time. Van Geet is famous for his opening with 1.Nc3. Here he played 3.exd5 against Briem. Van Geet - Briem, WchT U26 fin-B 05th Varna (3), 1958 begins 1.Nc3 d5 2.e4 Nf6 3.exd5 Nxd5 [3...Bg4 4.Bb5+ c6 5.dxc6 Nxc6 6.Nf3+/=; 3...c6 4.dxc6 Nxc6 5.Nf3 e5 6.Bb5+/=] 4.Bc4 [4.Nxd5 Qxd5 5.d4 e5=] 4...Nb6 [4...c6 5.Nf3 Bg4 6.Ne4 e6 7.0-0 Be7 8.d4 0-0 9.Bb3=; 4...e6 5.Nf3 Be7 6.0-0 0-0 7.Re1=; 4...Nxc3 5.Qf3 e6 6.dxc3 Bd6 7.Bf4=] 5.Bb3 Nc6 [5...c5 6.d3 Nc6 7.Qh5 e6 8.Nf3 Be7 9.Ne4=] 6.Nf3 [6.Qf3 e6 7.Nge2 Be7 8.d3 00 9.0-0 Ne5=] 6...Bf5 7.a4 [7.0-0 e6 8.d3 Be7 9.Re1 0-0 10.h3 h6 11.Qe2 Qd7=] 7...a5 8.Nh4 Bg6 9.d3 e6 10.Nxg6 hxg6 11.Nb5 Bd6 12.Qg4 [12.c3+/=] 12...Qf6 [12...Bb4+ 13.Ke2=] 13.c3 Rxh2 14.Nxd6+ cxd6 15.Rxh2 Qe5+ 16.Be3 Qxh2 17.0-0-0 Nc8 18.d4 Qh5 19.Qf4 Nd8 [19...d5 20.Re1+/=] 20.g4 Qh4 21.Qf3 [21.d5 e5 22.Qf3 f5 23.gxf5+/-] 21...Qf6 22.Qe4 Ne7 23.d5 e5? [23...Qe5 24.Qxe5 dxe5 25.d6+/=] 24.Rh1 Kf8 [24...Nc8 25.Bc4 Ke7 26.Bb5+-] 25.Rh8+ Ng8 26.Qh1 1-0

47 – Brameld 5.Bb3 Nc6 The solid piece developing move 2.Nc3 works well for those who like the Vienna Game as White (1.e4 e5 2.Nc3 Nf6). Computers may chose this line when they value rapid piece development. Black's best winning chance is to increase the pressure on e4 by 2...d5 which is now under double attack. Remember that we are playing to get White to move his pawn off e4 so as to make it easier to attack and free up f5 and others squares for Black's light squared bishop. White is forced to make a major commitment on move three. If you does not move his e-pawn, White can either passively apply additional defense to the e-pawn, or gambit the pawn such as 3.d4!? and possibly transpose to the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit. The more popular choices involve moving the e-pawn by either capturing on d5 or pushing to e5. The exchange with 3.exd5 is twice as popular as 3.e5 in the next section. I examine 3.exd5 using the game between Poul Rasmussen vs Arthur F. Brameld. Rasmussen - Brameld, Copenhagen, 1999 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d5 3.exd5 [We reach a popular line in the Scandinavian after: 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Nf6 3.Nc3.] 3...Nxd5 [Black does best to play this recapture. The gambit alternatives are not as strong.] 4.Bc4 [White develops a piece and directly attacks the knight. Of course there are several other options.] 4...Nb6 [Black forces White to make a commitment with his bishop. In blitz games White may miss the fact that the bishop on c4 is under attack.] 5.Bb3 [This is the only logical move. White keeps his eye on f7.] 5...Nc6 [Black whips out his knight which can move again to d4 to control the center or a5 to chop off the bishop. Also, with the knight on c6, the b7-pawn does not become a target as it could if Black brought out his light squared bishop first.] 6.Nf3 [White prepares to castle.] 6...Bf5 [This is Black's best choice for his light squared bishop. He might consider going to g4, but then White picks up a pawn with the combination of a bishop check on f7, a knight check on g5, and a the queen taking on g4.] 7.d4 [White makes the most

logical development. He prepares to bring out his dark squared bishop and take control of e5.] 7...e6 [This strengthens d5, prepares the development of the dark squared bishop and protects both f5 and f7.] 8.Qe2 [Here White gambits his d-pawn in an effort to get counterplay in the center. He does this while Black's king is still in the center and likely to stay there for the time being. The funny thing is that White's king is also in the center. I chose this game because very often in this line Black picks off the d-pawn anyway. Black must use some technique and here is a good game where Black handled it well.] 8...Nxd4 9.Nxd4 Qxd4 10.Be3 [White gains more time attacking the queen.] 10...Qd7 11.Rd1 [Again the attack comes. Black must be careful not to fall too behind in development.] 11...Bd6 12.Nb5 Qc6 [It is time to get the queen out of the way and to avoid any serious pawn weaknesses.] 13.Bxb6 Qxb6 14.Nxd6+ cxd6 15.Ba4+ [So there we have it. The Black king cannot castle and is stuck in the center. Will be able to combine checks on the Black king with attacks on the Black pawns?] 15...Ke7 [Black wants to connect his rooks and free the h-rook.] 16.0-0 Rhd8 17.Bb3 Rac8 18.Rfe1 Rc5 [Black is activating his rook.] 19.Rd5 [Being down a pawn and seeing that Black has not made any mistakes, White is getting desperate. He decides to mix it up and hope. The next problem is that b2 will fall.] 19...Rxd5 20.Bxd5 [It might be sound for Black to grab the b-pawn now, but it is very dangerous. White would play g4 to drive away the light squared bishop off e6 and then come crashing through on e6 with his own bishop placing Black in a difficult position.] 20...Rc8 [Black adds another target on c2.] 21.Be4 Bxe4 22.Qxe4 Qxb2 [Black's next aim is to eliminate White's queenside pawns with as little cost to his own kingside as possible.] 23.Qh4+ Qf6 24.Qxh7 g6 [Both sides would like to draw the other queen away from the queenside. Black has done the best at it because White must try to avoid exchanging the rooks or queens. Any pawn ending here is likely to be a forced win for Black.] 25.Qh6 Rxc2 [With the attack on f2, this is getting very serious for White.] 26.Rf1 g5 [Black offers another queen swap.] 27.Qh7 Rxa2 28.Qd3 [Finally White's queen has returned to her home file, only to discover that all of her queenside relatives have died off and a new group of people have moved in.] 28...Ra1 [With the exchange of rooks Black is left with three extra and passed pawns in a queen ending. White's position is hopeless.] 29.Rd1 Rxd1+ 30.Qxd1 [Black has a solid advantage with three passed

pawns. He can probably begin by pushing his b-pawn immediately. White throws in the towel.] 0-1

2.Nc3 d5 3.e5 White plays the challenging 3.e5 to kick the Black knight.

48 – Baffo 3…d4 4.Nce2 Nfd7 Jeffrey Baffo has included the Queens Knights Attack 1.Nc3 in his repertoire for many years. This game transposed into the Alekhine Defence that resembles a Scandinavian 2.Nc3 d4 line. Black's dark-squared bad bishop became completely useless. White attacked on the light squares and won a queen. Baffo - temujin1206 (1310), Live Chess Chess.com, 15.07.2018 begins 1.Nc3 Nf6 2.e4 d5 3.e5 d4 4.Nce2 [4.exf6 dxc3=] 4...Nfd7 5.f4 [5.e6!?] 5...e6 6.Ng3 f6 7.Nf3 Nc6 8.Bb5 Bc5 9.d3 a6 10.Bxc6 bxc6 11.0-0 0-0 12.Bd2 Bb7 13.a4 [13.f5! exf5 14.e6 Ne5 15.Nxf5+/=] 13...Ba7 14.a5 c5 15.b3 Bxf3 [15...f5 16.Ng5 Qe8=] 16.Qxf3 fxe5 17.f5 exf5 18.Nxf5 Qf6? [18...Kh8 19.Qg4+/=] 19.Qd5+ Qf7 20.Ne7+ Kh8 [Black’s queen falls.] 10

49 – CraftyWiz 3…d4 4.exf6 Against the high rated CraftyWiz, I chose 3.e5 in an Alekhine Defence. It felt weird. Why? Because I usually play as Black. The variation I chose saddled Black with three pawn islands. These can be difficult to defend. To offset this, Black has active piece play in the middlegame. The specifics of any potential future ending are far from clear. The better player usually wins. This Crafty is a Whiz. When it was done with me, I became a Was. Sawyer (2380) - CraftyWiz (3101), ICC 5 0 Internet Chess Club, 16.06.2004 begins 1.Nc3 Nf6 2.e4 d5 3.e5 d4 4.exf6 dxc3 5.fxg7 cxd2+ 6.Qxd2 [6.Bxd2 Bxg7 7.c3 Nc6=] 6...Qxd2+ 7.Bxd2 Bxg7 8.0-0-0 Nc6 9.Bb5 [9.Bc4 Ne5=; 9.Nf3 Be6] 9...Bd7 [9...Bg4!?=] 10.Nf3 e6 [10...0-0-0 11.Rhe1] 11.Rhe1 [11.Kb1=] 11...a6 12.Bd3 h6 13.c3 0-0-0 14.Be3 f5 15.Bc4 Na5 16.Bf1 e5 17.Bc5 Be6 18.Kb1 Rxd1+ 19.Rxd1 Rd8 20.Rxd8+ Kxd8 21.g3 Kd7 22.Nd2 b5 23.Bg2 c6 24.b3 Nb7 25.Be3 Kd6 26.Kc2 Nc5 27.Nf3 Nd7 28.Ne1 c5 29.Bb7 a5 30.Nd3 [30.Ba6! b4 31.c4

e4 32.Ng2=] 30...c4 31.Nc1 Nc5 32.Bxc5+? [32.Bg2! cxb3+ 33.Nxb3 Nxb3 34.axb3 e4 35.Bf1 Kc6 36.Kb2=] 32...Kxc5 33.Bf3 cxb3+ 34.axb3 a4 35.b4+ Kb6 36.Be2 a3 37.Na2? [37.Bh5 Bd5 38.Bg6 f4-/+] 37...Bxa2 White resigns 0-1

50 – Matthews 3…Nfd7 4.d4 The Alekhine Defence always brings a certain amount of risk to each side. The active Black pieces are a danger to White. The White kingside space advantage is a danger to Black. Against Dawud Matthews, I got so excited achieving a strategic, positional, tactical and material victory on the queenside that I ignored my kingside. I fell to a mating attack. I avoided checkmate on move 32 by resigning on move 31. I had won 10 Williamsport club games vs Dawud Matthews. This crushing assault was his lone win. We began with an Alekhine Defence 2.Nc3 d5 3.e5 Nfd7 variation. I normally prefer 3...Ne4 but sometimes play 3...d4. Here I chose 3...Nfd7 in French Defence style. I avoided closing in my bishop with 4...e6. Instead I swung my knight out of the way to 4...Nb6!? to develop 5...Bf5. My pieces and pawns swarmed the queenside to obtain a big advantage. Then came the counterattack. His pawns started slowly with 3.e5 and 6.g4. Then came a big finish with 18.h4, 23.f4, 25.h5, and 27.hxg6. Combine that with checks like 29.Qxe6+and the rook sacrifice 31.Rh8+ and it was over. Nice finish by Dawud Matthews. Matthews - Sawyer (2010), Williamsport PA 1996 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d5 3.e5 Nfd7 4.d4 Nb6!? [4...e6 French Defence; 4...Nc6 Queens Knight Defence] 5.b3?! [5.f4 Nc6 6.Nf3 Bg4=] 5...Bf5 6.g4 Bg6 7.Bd3 Bxd3 8.Qxd3 e6 9.Nf3 a6 10.a3 c5 11.b4 cxb4 12.axb4 Bxb4 13.Rb1 Nc6 14.Bg5 [14.0-0 Bxc3 15.Qxc3 Rb8=/+] 14...Qc7 15.0-0 Nc4 16.Rb3 [16.Nd1 h6!?-/+] 16...b5 17.Ra1 0-0 [17...Bxc3 18.Qxc3 Qb6-+] 18.h4 Be7 [18...Bxc3 19.Qxc3 b4-+] 19.Kg2 Rfc8 20.Ne2 N6a5 [20...Nb4!-+] 21.Bxe7 Qxe7 22.Ng5 g6 23.f4 Nxb3 24.cxb3 Nb6 25.h5 Nd7 [Correct is 25...f6! 26.exf6 Qxf6 27.Rh1 Nd7-/+] 26.Rh1 h6 [26...Nf8 27.hxg6 fxg6 28.Rxh7 Qxg5! 29.fxg5 Kxh7=] 27.hxg6 fxg6 [If 27...f5 28.Rxh6 Qg7

29.Rh7 Qxg6 30.Rxd7+-] 28.Qxg6+ Qg7 29.Qxe6+ Kf8 30.Rxh6 Re8 31.Rh8+ 1-0

51 – Torning 3…Ne4 4.d4 c5 Richard Torning shared a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit that is also an Alekhine Defence and Scandinavian. In the Alekhine when I am Black, I avoid 1.e4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d5 3.e5 Ne4 4.d4 c5 with the capture 4...Nxc3. The position after 6.d5 has been reached in 23 games in my database. "Greetings Tim, This game is a very rare variation indeed. Who says chess is exhausted! I note that you have played and won with this opening on two occasions according to your BDG Mega Database. I hope you enjoy this brevity. A natural looking bishop move to attack my queen was the only major mistake. Regards, Rick Torning" Torning - NN, Casual Bullet game lichess, 12.02.2018 begins 1.d4 d5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.e4 [Blackmar-Diemer Gambit. Perhaps Black was aiming for a Brombacher-Counter Gambit or Kaulich Defence?] 3...c5 4.e5 Ne4 5.Nxe4 dxe4 6.d5 [We can reach this position via Alekhine's Defence. I have found only six other games, two of which are Tim Sawyer's so I am in good company!] 6...e6 [6...g6 7.f4 exf3 8.Nxf3 Bg4 9.h3 Bxf3 10.Qxf3 Nd7? 11.e6 1-0. Sejkora - Novotny, Cesky Brod 1968; 6...Qc7 7.Bf4 g5 8.Bg3 Bg7 9.Qh5 Bxe5 10.0-0-0 Bf4+ 11.Kb1 Nd7 1/2-1/2 in 31. Portisch Csiszar Zalaegerszeg 1992] 7.d6 f5?! [7...Nc6=] 8.exf6 Qxf6 9.Bb5+ Bd7 10.a4 [10.Qh5+ g6 11.Qxc5+/-] 10...a6 [10...Bxb5 11.axb5+/=] 11.Bc4 e5 12.Qd5 Qxd6 [12...Nc6=] 13.Qxb7 Bc6?? [The fatal error. 13...Qc6! 14.Bd5 Qxb7 15.Bxb7 Ra7 16.Bxe4 Bc6 17.Bxc6+ Nxc6 18.Be3 Nd4 19.00-0+/-] 14.Qc8+ Ke7 [14...Qd8 15.Bf7+ Kxf7 (15...Ke7 16.Qe6#) 16.Qxd8+- White wins the queen] 15.Bg5+ Qf6 16.Bxf6+ Kxf6 17.Qe6+ Kg5 18.h4+ Kf4 19.g3# [White wins by checkmate.] 1-0 [Notes by Torning]

52 – duckbreath 3…Ne4 4.d4 In 1998 my Internet Chess Club ratings for standard, blitz and bullet were all over 2200. I played the Alekhine Defence as Black and the BlackmarDiemer Gambit as White over and over again. For me to excel at my age, the healthiest approach is to play a limited opening repertoire. Often I do not make healthy choices. When I play many different openings, my rating suffers severely. A broad approach was fine for postal chess, because I could just look up the theory in books. Nowadays I cannot remember at blitz speed, which richly rewards repeated pattern recognition. I play whatever I feel like and my rating goes wherever it goes. One high rated computer that I faced in 1998 was "duckbreath". That leads me to wonder about why it had that handle. It may be connected to a comedy troupe "Duck's Breath Mystery Theatre" on National Public Radio, or to Daffy Duck or Donald Duck. In our Alekhine Defence 2.Nc3 d5 3.e5 Ne4 game, I hung around until we reached a pawn ending that was won for me. Computers were notoriously poor at endgames. The process of queening a pawn might take 20 moves or more and 40 ply was beyond their horizon at blitz speed. I was able to defeat many high rated opponents from time to time, because I was a good endgame player. I could tell which endgames are winnable. This 15-minute game was unrated. duckbreath - Sawyer, ICC u 15 0 Internet Chess Club, 29.12.1998 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d5 3.e5 Ne4 4.d4 Nxc3 5.bxc3 c5 6.f4 [6.Nf3 Nc6=] 6...Nc6 7.Nf3 Bg4 8.Be2 e6 9.0-0 Be7 10.Rb1 [10.Be3 Qa5=] 10...Rb8 11.Bb5 0-0 12.Bxc6 bxc6 13.Rxb8 Qxb8 14.Ba3 Qb6 15.h3 Bxf3 16.Rxf3 Qa5 17.Qc1 Rb8 18.Kh2 Bf8 19.Rg3 cxd4 [19...g6-/+] 20.cxd4 [20.Bxf8! Kxf8 21.cxd4 c5 22.f5 exf5 23.Qg5 g6 24.e6=] 20...Bxa3 21.Qxa3 Qxa3 22.Rxa3 Rb7 23.Rb3 Rxb3 24.axb3 Kf8 25.Kg3 Ke7 26.Kf3 Kd7 27.g4 Kc7 28.Ke3 Kb6 29.f5 Kb5 30.h4 Kb4 31.Kd2 a5 32.Kd3? [32.h5! a4

33.bxa4 g6=] 32...a4 33.bxa4 Kxa4 34.c4 [Black also wins after 34.Kc3 g6!-+] 34...Kb3 35.c5 [Or 35.cxd5 cxd5 36.h5 g6-+] 35...Kb4 36.f6 g6 37.g5 Kb3 38.Kd2 Kc4 39.Ke3 Kc3 40.Kf3 Kxd4 41.Ke2 0-1

53 – Muir 4.d4 Nxc3 5.bxc3 Bob Muir loved Advance Variations in most semi-open positions. Below, all the heavy pieces were swapped off except the rooks. Black was able to double his rooks to force the win of material. There was no advantage playing it out. Once it became clear Black would be up an extra passed pawn or two, White resigned. Muir (1800) - Sawyer (2011), Williamsport, PA 1995 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d5 3.e5 Ne4 4.d4 Nxc3 5.bxc3 c5 6.Nf3 Bg4 7.Bb5+ Nc6 8.Qd3 Bxf3 9.Qxf3 cxd4 10.Bxc6+ bxc6 11.cxd4 e6 12.0-0 Be7 13.c4 0-0 14.cxd5 cxd5 15.Qg3 Re8 16.Bh6 Bf8 17.a3 g6 [17...Qb6=/+] 18.Bd2 Qb6 19.Qd3 Rec8 20.Rfb1 Qc6 21.Bb4 Qc4 22.Qxc4 [22.Qe3=] 22...Rxc4 23.Bxf8 Kxf8 24.Rd1 Rb8 25.Kf1 Rb3 26.a4 a5 27.Ra2 Rbb4 0-1

54 – fluxion 4.Nxe4 dxe4 5.Bc4 Before the BDG, I played BAD: Bird, Alekhine, and Dutch. These openings give your opponent first crack at the center and they slightly weaken your own kingside. Why did I ever play the BAD openings? Because I often won with them. Here a player rated in the 1700s turned an equal middlegame into a lost endgame. fluxion (1747) - Sawyer, Rated Blitz game lichess, 25.10.2017 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d5 3.e5 Ne4 [3...d4 may be best, but 3...Ne4 works well for me in blitz.] 4.Nxe4 dxe4 5.Bc4 Qd4 6.Qe2 Qxe5 7.d3 Nc6 [I almost played 7...Bf5=] 8.Qxe4 Qxe4+ 9.dxe4 e5 [9...Nd4 10.Bd3 e5=] 10.c3 [10.Ne2 Bc5 led to the drawn blitz game Akhenaten - jimmy-schlumpf, ICC 2004.] 10...Bc5 11.Nf3 f6 12.a4 Bg4 13.b4 Be7 14.h3 Bh5 15.g4 Bf7 16.Bd5 Nd8 17.b5 Bxd5 [Here 17...c6 18.bxc6 bxc6 19.Bxf7+ Kxf7 20.Be3 Ne6= is too easy for White.] 18.exd5 Bc5 19.Be3 Bxe3 20.fxe3 Nf7 21.Ke2 Nd6 22.Nd2 Ke7 23.c4 b6 24.a5 Nb7 25.Nb3 Rhd8 26.axb6 axb6 27.Kd3 Kd6 28.Ke4 Nc5+ 29.Nxc5 Kxc5 30.Kd3 Ra5 31.Rxa5 bxa5 32.Kc3 a4 33.Ra1 Ra8 34.Ra2 g6 [Black threatens ...f5.] 35.h4 [35.e4= holds. The Black king is stuck on c5.] 35...f5 36.g5 [36.gxf5 gxf5 37.d6 Kxd6 38.Rd2+ Ke6 39.c5 f4 40.exf4 exf4 41.b6 cxb6 42.cxb6 a3 43.b7 Rb8-/+] 36...a3

37.Kb3 f4 38.exf4 exf4 39.Kc3 f3 40.Kd3 [40.Kb3 Ra5-+] 40...f2 41.Ke2 Kxc4 42.Kxf2 [42.Ra1 a2 43.d6 cxd6 44.Kxf2 Kxb5-+] 42...Kxd5 43.Kf3 Kc4 44.Rc2+ Kxb5 45.Rxc7 a2 46.Rb7+ Kc6 47.Rxh7 White resigns. 0-1

55 – Taylor 4.Nxe4 dxe4 5.Qe2 FM Chris Dunworth first caught my attention with his 1988 annotation of 100 games in his booklet entitled "Developments in the Alekhine Defence 1985-1987". In the olden days, databases were rare. Thus thematic opening monographs were helpful. They were generally more focused and a lot cheaper than buying every copy of Chess Informant. Later Chris Dunworth did one of the Foxy Videos on the Alekhine Defence. All of us who write books on the Alekhine Defense have our own approach. The Dunworth approach is very good. On page 51 of his Developments booklet, Dunworth wrote of 1.e4 Nf6 2.Nc3 in part: "With 2...e5 Black may transpose into the Vienna Game, but 2...d5 is more in keeping with the spirit of the Alekhine... After 3.e5 Black... can play 3...Ne4 entering less well-trodden paths, with greater scope for innovative play." In an Alekhine Defence Foxy video, Christopher Dunworth recommended Black to play 2.Nc3 d5 3.e5 Ne4. This had long been my favorite. Allen V. Taylor Jr tried a unique idea 4.Nxe4 dxe4 5.Qe2!? This threatened both e4 and a check on b5. The queens came off quickly. I mounted pressure on his center. A tactical shot ended the contest. Taylor (1514) - Sawyer (2011), Williamsport PA 1995 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d5 3.e5 Ne4 4.Nxe4 dxe4 5.Qe2!? Qd5 6.Qb5+ c6 7.Qxd5 cxd5 8.d3 Bf5 9.Be2 Nc6 10.g4 Bg6 11.Bf4 exd3 12.cxd3 Nb4 13.Rc1 Bxd3 14.Kd2 Bxe2 15.Nxe2 Nc6 16.a3 [16.h4 e6=/+] 16...e6 17.Bg3 Be7 18.h4 Kd7 19.f4 Rhc8 20.h5 Na5 21.Rxc8 Rxc8 22.b4 [If 22.Kd3 Nc4-+] 22...Nc4+ 23.Kc3 Nxa3+ 24.Kb3 Nb5 25.Rc1 Nd4+! 0-1

56 – Phillips 4.Nxe4 dxe4 5.d4 After years with the Latvian Gambit in the late 1980s, I decided to try something else in the early 1990s. I returned to the Alekhine Defence in my later rounds of the 1989 USCF Golden Knights Postal Tournament. My game with Martin Phillips was a good example of how to avoid 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 as White. White chooses 2.Nc3 often at the club level if he wishes to avoid the theory of known positions after the immediate 2.e5. Black increased the pressure on e4 with 1…Nf6 and 2…d5. White could not stand it any longer. He pushed the pawn with 3.e5 in the game below. By the way, White also has two additional transpositional options on move three. First, White could angle for the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit with 3.d4!? dxe4 4.f3. Second, he could opt for the Scandinavian Defence with 3.exd5. That second option would reach the same position as 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Nf6 3.Nc3. White missed a good line on move 8 and soon got into trouble. Phillips - Sawyer, corr USCF 1991 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d5 3.e5 Ne4 [Another popular line is 3...d4 4.exf6 dxc3 5.fxg7 cxd2+] 4.Nxe4 dxe4 5.d4 exd3 6.Bxd3 Nc6 7.Bf4 Qd4! [Attacking Bf4 and pawns on b2 and e5] 8.Bg3 [8.Ne2! Qc5= (risky is 8...Qxb2 9.0-0+/= when White has a huge lead in development for the pawn.)] 8...Qxb2 9.Nf3 [9.Ne2] 9...Qc3+ 10.Nd2 Nxe5 11.Rb1 Nxd3+ 12.cxd3 Qxd3 13.Rb3 Qa6 [Or 13...Qd5-+] 14.Bxc7 Be6 15.Rb2 Bxa2 16.Qf3 Qe6+ 17.Kd1 Bd5 18.Qg3 f6 19.Re1 Qd7 20.Re3 e6 21.Rd3 b6 22.Nb1 Rc8 23.Bf4 Qa4+ 0-1

57 – YucoII 5.d4 exd3 5.Qxd3 When I was writing my Alekhine Defense Playbook published by Pickard & Son in 2000, I took every opportunity to play the Alekhine Defence. Here in the 2.Nc3 d5 3.e5 Ne4 line, we quickly swapped queens and set of knights. Another pair of minor pieces disappeared on move 10 and yet another pair on move 13. Thus we rushed to an endgame. Back then, computers were not quite so good in openings and endings due to their limited horizons. Often I was able to draw higher rated silicon opponents by getting past the middlegame as quickly as possible. This allowed my rating to get very close to 2500 a few times. As I recall, I stayed over 2200 in ICC blitz for about five years. YucoII was a Crafty chess engine computer program that was steadily improving when I played it on the Internet Chess Club in 1988. As noted below, it was rated 2716 at that time. When it last disconnected Monday, October 19, 1998, it had a blitz rating of 2821, had peaked at 3021, and its bullet rating peaked at 3003. Such computers were not easy to beat, but I had a chance. Alas I missed my chance on move 49. Probably I was short of time. YucoII (2716) - Sawyer (2316), ICC 4 0 Internet Chess Club, 01.04.1998 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d5 3.e5 Ne4 4.Nxe4 dxe4 5.d4 exd3 6.Qxd3 Qxd3 7.Bxd3 Nc6 8.Bf4 [8.f4 g6=] 8...Bg4 [8...g5!? 9.Bxg5 Nxe5=] 9.Be4 0-0-0 10.Bxc6 bxc6 11.Ne2 e6 12.Ng3 Bf5 13.Nxf5 exf5 14.0-0 Bc5 15.Rae1 Rhe8 16.c3 Rd3 17.h4 g6 [17...h6!?=] 18.g3 Bf8 19.Rd1 Red8 20.Rxd3 Rxd3 21.Re1 Kd7 22.Kf1 Ke6 23.Be3 c5 24.c4 Bg7 25.b3 Bf8 26.Ke2 Rd7 27.Bf4 c6 28.Ke3 Bg7 29.Kf3 Rd3+ 30.Ke2 Rd7 31.Kf1 Bf8 32.Kg1 Bg7 33.Kg2 Bf8 34.h5 Rd8 35.h6 Rd7 36.Bg5 Rd3 37.Kf1 Rd4 38.f3 Rd3 39.Kf2 Rd4 40.Ke2 Rd7 41.Ke3 Rd4 42.f4 Rd7 43.Re2 Rd4 44.Rd2 Rxd2 45.Kxd2 Be7 46.Bxe7 Kxe7 47.Ke3 [47.Kc3=] 47...f6 48.exf6+ Kxf6 49.Kf2 [White can draw with 49.a3 a5 50.Kd3 g5 51.Ke3 Kg6 52.Kf2 Kxh6 53.Kg2 Kh5 54.Kh3 h6 55.a4 Kg6 56.Kg2= and Black has no way to

penetrate.] 49...Ke6 [Here I missed a win with 49...g5! 50.Ke3 Kg6-+] 50.Kg2 Kf6 51.Kf2 Ke6 [51...g5!-+] 52.Kf3 Kf6 53.Kf2 [Drawn by repetition] 1/2-1/2

58 – Grifter 4.Nce2 d4 5.c3 Here is a critical opening variation where I got a draw vs a 2896 rated opponent. Usually I am on the Black side of the Alekhine Defence, but here is a game that transposed into this opening from a Queens Knight Attack. After 1.Nc3 d5 2.e4, Black played 2...Nf6 (instead of a Van Geet Variation with 2...d4). The same position after two moves can be reached from a Scandinavian Defence after 1.e4 d5 2.Nc3 Nf6. More common is the Alekhine move order 1.e4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d5, which allows for a possible transposition to the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit after 3.d4!? dxe4 4.f3. I chose the Alekhine move 3.e5. The idea behind 4.Nce2 was to play 5.d4 and trap the e4 knight with 6.f3. I played good chess in 2003. My opponent was "Grifter". This handle is no longer active on ICC. I do not remember if it was a chess engine or a human player. That handle made me think of the 1990 movie "The Grifters", staring Anjelica Huston, John Cusack and Annette Bening. The term "Grifter" refers to someone who is tricky and pulls off swindles. Somehow Black swindled himself and walked into an inferior line. To escape feared danger, my opponent chose to take a quick draw by repetition. Sawyer (2401) - Grifter (2896), ICC 3 0 u Internet Chess Club, 22.07.2003 begins 1.Nc3 d5 2.e4 Nf6 3.e5 Ne4 4.Nce2 d4 [4...f6=] 5.c3 Nc6 6.cxd4 [6.Nxd4+/-] 6...Ng5 7.f4 Ne6 8.Nf3 g6 9.d3 [9.d5! Qxd5 10.d4+/-] 9...Ncxd4 10.Nexd4 Nxd4 11.Nxd4 [11.Qa4+ Nc6 12.Be3=] 11...Qxd4 12.Qe2 Qb4+ 13.Qd2 Qb6 14.Qf2 Qb4+ 15.Qd2 Qb6 16.Qf2 Qb4+ 17.Qd2 Game drawn by repetition 1/2-1/2

59 – blik 5.c3 dxc3 6.Nxc3 Each Thanksgiving I am thankful for family and friends that bring me joy each year. In chess I am thankful for the openings like the BlackmarDiemer Gambit and the Alekhine Defence. My four original published chess opening books sold out all the printed copies. For that I say "Thank you" to my readers of the past 26 years. Your encouragement keeps me writing. Now I self-publish and readers still buy my books. Thank you! I am not sure why the Alekhine Defence scored well for me. My performance rating as Black after 1.e4 Nf6 rivals my good results with 1.e4 e5. Both openings brought me more wins than I could expect with anything else, even though other lines are just as good in theory. Here is the 2.Nc3 d5 3.e5 Ne4 variation that I played vs my old blitz friend "blik". In the 4.Nce2 line White tries to trap Black's centrally located knight. Usually I chose 4...d4, but FM Chris Dunworth recommends 4...f6 as a better choice for Black. "blik" and its cousin "Rookie" were strong chess engines that usually made me look like a turkey with the stuffing knocked out of it. Here I outplayed "blik" and won in the bishop ending. blik (2484) - Sawyer (2025), ICC 5 0 Internet Chess Club, 11.07.2008 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d5 3.e5 Ne4 4.Nce2 d4 5.c3 dxc3 [5...Nc6 6.Nxd4 Nxd4 7.Qa4+ c6 8.Qxd4 Qxd4 9.cxd4 Ng5 10.Bc4+/=] 6.Nxc3 Nxc3 7.bxc3 e6 8.Nf3 c5 9.Bc4 Be7 10.0-0 0-0 11.Bb2 b6 12.Qe2 Bb7 13.d4 cxd4 14.Rad1 Nc6 15.cxd4 Nb4 16.a3 Nd5 17.Qe4 Qd7 18.Rc1 Rac8 19.Bd3 g6 20.Rxc8 Rxc8 21.Rc1 [21.h3 Nb4 22.Qe3 Nxd3 23.Qxd3 a5-/+] 21...Rxc1+ 22.Bxc1 Qc6 23.Bb2 [23.Qe1 Qa4-/+] 23...Nb4 [23...Qa4 24.Bc2 Qb5 25.Bc1 Ba6-+] 24.Qxc6 Nxc6 25.Nd2 Kf8 26.Ne4 h5 27.Nd6 [27.f3 Ke8 28.Kf2=] 27...Bxd6 28.exd6 Ke8 29.Bc1 Kd7 30.Bf4 Nd8 31.Bb5+ Bc6 32.Ba6 f5 33.Kf1 Nf7 34.Kg1 Nxd6 35.Bd3 Be4 36.Ba6

Kc6 37.a4 [37.f3 Bd5=/+] 37...Kd5 [37...Bc2-+] 38.f3 Bc2 39.a5 bxa5 40.Be5 Ba4 [40...a4-+] 41.f4 Nc4 [41...Bc2 42.Kf2 a4-+] 42.h4 Nxe5 43.dxe5 Bb3 44.Bd3 a4 45.Kh1 a3 46.Bb1 a2 47.Bxa2 Bxa2 48.Kg1 Ke4 49.Kf2 Kxf4 50.Ke2 Kxe5 51.g3 Bc4+ 52.Kf3 a5 0-1

60 – Ubezio 5.c3 dxc3 6.Qa4+ Black's knight dives into the center with 3...Ne4. White chose the knight retreat in the game Andjelko Dragojlovic vs Marco Ubezio. Weaker players are not likely to even think of 4.Nce2. It attempts to leave the knight on e4 stranded and possibly trap it with pawn moves. This deep strategy that will usually be played only by those who have found this move in pregame preparation or in a book. Black hinders White's development with this pesky pawn. Dragojlovic - Ubezio, Porto San Giorgio ITA Porto San Giorgio ITA, 1999 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d5 3.e5 Ne4 4.Nce2 d4 5.c3 [White threatens to win material. Other lines cause no problem.] 5...dxc3 [I prefer to take the pawns, even though most Alekhine Defence books warn against it.] 6.Qa4+ ["Check!" I picture White clapping his hands with glee saying, "You fell for my trap and lost a piece!" White could just capture on c3.] 6...Nd7 [White might think that Black has chosen poorly because he blocks in his light squared bishop. But the knight is not stuck on d7 after the queen moves. Now it may be obvious that Nd7-c5-d3 is uncomfortable to White, if not disastrous.] 7.d4 [White can capture on either c3 or e4.] 7...cxb2 8.Bxb2 [White hopes he is playing the Danish Gambit.] 8...c6 [Black breaks the d7 pin.] 9.Nf3 [If 9.Qc2 Qa5+ 10.Nc3 Nxc3 11.Bxc3 Qd5 12.Nf3 Nb6-/+ Black is up a pawn.] 9...Ndc5 [The knights spring to life.] 10.Qc2 Qa5+ 11.Nc3 Nxc3 12.Bxc3 Qa4 [Black is eager to swap queens.] 13.Qxa4 Nxa4 14.Bd2 Bf5 15.Nh4 Be6 16.f4 Bd5 [What a great location for the bishop!] 17.Nf5 e6 18.Ne3 Be4 19.Bc4 Nb2 20.Kf2 0-0-0 [Black's pieces are better placed even though White's pieces are centralized.] 21.Bc3 Na4 [Black attacks the bishop that holds d4.] 22.Ba5 Rxd4 [Black adds a second pawn.] 23.Bb3 Bc5 [Black lines up at the White king.] 24.Rac1 b6 25.Rcd1 Rxd1 26.Bxd1 Nb2 [Normally Black's knight would take one of the bishops in trade, but he waits for the right moment and uses the knight to wreak havoc.] 27.Bd2 Rd8 28.Ke2 Bd3+ 29.Kf3 Bb5 30.Bc1 [Black is ready to exchange toward an ending.] 30...Nxd1 31.Rxd1 Rxd1 32.Nxd1 Bc4 33.a3 Bd5+ 34.Kg3 Bd4 [White can hardly move. Black keeps his two bishops to support the advance of the pawns.] 35.Ne3 [There is no way Black wants to take the knight and go into an ending with bishops of

opposite colors which would give some drawing chances.] 35...a5 36.Nc2 Bc3 37.Be3 c5 [The queenside pawns cannot be stopped without giving up the bishop or knight or both.] 0-1

2.e5 Nd5 The line 2.e5 Nd5 begins the normal Alekhine Defence.

61 – Martin 3.Na3 d6 4.Nf3 Our chess friend Andrew Martin loves offbeat lines that place unexpected challenges to his opponents. White almost always takes the Alekhine Defence into new territory. In the 1990s when I was doing research for my Alekhine Defense Playbook. Here I enjoyed this quick three minute game vs International Master Andrew Martin, notable author and teacher. Martin went his own way rather quickly with 3.Na3. That’s a rare line. It’s not a line you see very often. The opening was equal, but he demonstrated superior skill to win this game. Martin - Sawyer, ICC r 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 20.04.1998 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.Na3 d6 4.Nf3 g6 [4...dxe5! 5.Nxe5 g6=] 5.Nc4 Bg7 6.d4 00 7.h4 Nb6 8.h5 Nxc4?! [This only helps White. Better is 8...Nc6 9.e6 Nxc4 10.exf7+ Rxf7 11.Bxc4 d5 12.Bb3 Bg4= with a sharp playable position.] 9.Bxc4 d5 10.Be2 Bg4? [10...c5 11.dxc5 Nc6 12.c3+/=] 11.hxg6 hxg6 12.Ng5! Bxe2 13.Qxe2 e6 [Or 13...Qd7 14.Qf3+/-] 14.Qg4 f5 15.Qh3 Re8 16.Qh7+ Kf8 17.Qxg6 Qd7 18.Nh7+ Ke7 19.Bg5+ 1-0

62 – Zdun 3.Bc4 Nb6 4.Bb3 I had Black vs Dick Zdun 75 times. I lost only 2, drew 7, and won the rest. White usually plays d4 on move one, two or three. Here Zdun delayed to 17.d4. We both hung a bishop. It illustrates the Grandmaster Dr. John Nunn saying, “Loose Pieces Drop Off”. Zdun (1634) - Sawyer (2010), Williamsport PA, 01.1998 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.Bc4 Nb6 4.Bb3 d6 5.Nf3 Bg4? [5...Nc6=] 6.Bxf7+! Kd7 7.h3 Bxf3 8.Qxf3 [Or 8.e6+ Kc8 9.Qxf3+-] 8...c6 9.Qf5+ Kc7 10.0-0 g6 11.Qf4 N8d7 12.exd6+ [12.d4!+-] 12...exd6 13.Bb3 Bg7 14.Nc3 Rf8 15.Qg4 Ne5 16.Qd1 [16.Qg3+/-] 16...d5 17.d4 Ned7 18.Bf4+? [Hanging a bishop. 18.Qg4+/-] 18...Rxf4 19.Ne2 Rf7 20.c3 Qh4 21.Qd3 Raf8 22.f3 Bh6 23.c4

[Or 23.Rad1 Re7-+] 23...dxc4 24.Bxc4 Nxc4 25.Qxc4 Nb6 26.Qd3 Re7 27.b4 Rfe8 28.Rae1 Re3 29.Qc2 Nd5 30.b5 Nf4 31.bxc6 Nd3 32.cxb7+ Kb8 0-1

63 – silverwolf 4.Bb3 c5 5.c3 There once was a poor Black c-pawn that dreamed of glory far away. The little c-pawn loved many chess openings: the Benoni Defence, the CaroKann Defence and especially the Sicilian Defence. One day the c-pawn was part of a new chess game. White began 1.e4. The little c-pawn, expected soon to begin the Black charge. He called out "Play me! Play me!" But the player of the Black pieces began 1...Nf6, the Alekhine Defence. This blitz game rapidly continued 2.e4 Nd5 3.Bc4 Nb6 4.Bb3. At just the right moment when the c-pawn expected his d-pawn brother to be nudged ahead one or two squares, the c-pawn was ordered: "It’s your turn. Go! Go!" So with glee 4...c5 was played. Without awaiting further instructions, after the normal 5.c3, the Black c-pawn surged ahead with 5...c4. Over the next several moves, the two armies fought over the e5 and f3 squares. When White played 14.d4 in an attempt to bring up queenside reinforcements, the little c-pawn captured en passant 14...c4xd3. Now it had becoming the d-pawn. All White's attempts to wiggle free came to a screeching halt when the pawn played 18...d2, winning a piece or more. White lost on time while staring at our little hero on d2. silverwolf - Sawyer, ICC 1 3 Internet Chess Club, 18.05.2012 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.Bc4 Nb6 4.Bb3 c5 5.c3 [5.d3 Nc6] 5...c4 6.Bc2 Nc6 7.f4?! [More common is 7.Nf3 Qc7 8.Qe2 g5=] 7...d6 8.Nf3 Bg4 9.0-0 dxe5 10.fxe5 Nxe5 11.Be4 Nxf3+ 12.Bxf3 Bxf3 13.Qxf3 Qd5 14.d4? cxd3 15.Be3 Qxf3 16.Rxf3 Nc4 17.Bc1 Rd8 18.b3 d2-+ White forfeits on time 0-1

64 – Ross 3.Nf3 d6 4.Bc4 e6 A chess opening is like paint on a house. If a building has a firm foundation with solid construction in a good location, then it is a good building. Period. Paint just makes it look nicer. If your chess ability has a firm strategical foundation with solid tactical training, then you are a good player. If not, all the pretty paint in the world will not hide your flaws in any opening. If skills are lacking, you need to repair your game. Study tactics. After I visited the Grand Canyon, I drove from Flagstaff through Winslow, Arizona. This small town was such a fine place to be with a girl and a flatbed Ford. I came to the Painted Desert near Petrified Forest National Park. I travelled Route 66 (I-40) through Albuquerque, New Mexico, home town of veteran postal chess club player Hank Ross. When you write to the same address on postcards once a week for years, you remember that city. One of my early Alekhine Defence games was vs Hank Ross. We played eight APCT games during the period 1978-81, and I won them all in 30 moves or less. A feature of this game is that White delayed d2-d4 until move five. Ross (1709) - Sawyer (2100), corr APCT 1981 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.Nf3 d6 4.Bc4 e6 [4...Nb6 5.Bb3 Nc6=] 5.d4 Nc6?! [5...Be7 6.0-0 0-0=] 6.0-0 Nb6 7.Bb5 Bd7 8.Nc3 Be7 9.exd6 [9.a3+/=] 9...cxd6 10.Bf4 0-0 11.Qd3 a6 12.Bxc6 Bxc6 13.Ne4? [13.Rfe1 Rc8=] 13...Bb5 14.Bg5? Bxd3 15.cxd3 f5 16.Ned2 [16.Bxe7 Qxe7 17.Nc3 Qf6-+] 16...Bxg5 17.Nc4 Nd5 18.Rfe1 b5 19.Nxd6 Qxd6 20.Nxg5 h6 21.Nxe6 Rfe8 0-1

65 – Nichter 4…Nb6 5.Bxf7+ Temptation is strong to sacrifice a bishop for material, checks, and mate threats. Ralph Nichter made such a sacrifice in an Alekhine Defence. After Nf3 and Bc4, he had Bxf7+ followed by Ng5+ and bringing out the queen to Qh5, Qg4 or Qf3, depending on what Black did. White nabbed a rook for a second piece, but in that process Black castled by hand. White had a lot of fun for the first 10 moves. Then the enjoyment gradually switched sides. Nichter (1753) - Sawyer (2003), corr USCF 89SS90, 27.12.1991 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.Nf3 d6 4.Bc4 Nb6 5.Bxf7+?! [5.Bb3 Nc6=] 5...Kxf7 6.Ng5+ Kg8 7.Qf3 Qe8 8.e6 g6 9.Nf7 Bxe6 10.Nxh8 Kxh8 11.Nc3 [11.Qxb7? Bd5!-+ and White's queen is lost.] 11...Bg7 12.d3 Nc6 13.Be3 Qd7 14.Qe2 Rf8 15.0-0 Ne5 [15...Nd5!-+ swaps another piece.] 16.f3 c5 17.Kh1 Nc6 18.Nd1 Nd5 19.Bg1 [19.c4 Nxe3 20.Nxe3 Nd4-+] 19...Nf4 20.Qe1 Nb4 21.Rf2 Nbxd3 [Black heads for an ending up two pawns, but he still has a good middlegame with 21...Bd5!-+] 22.cxd3 Nxd3 23.Qe2 Nxf2+ 24.Nxf2 Bd5 25.a3 b5 26.Rd1 Qb7 27.Ne4 Bxe4 28.fxe4 Be5 29.Qc2 Rf4 30.Re1 Bd4 31.Qc1 [This drops a third pawn. 31.Qe2 e5-+] 31...Rxe4 32.Bxd4+ cxd4 33.Rf1 Kg7 [Or 33...Re2!-+] 34.Rf3 Qc6 35.Qf1 Qc4 0-1

66 – Muir 4.Bc4 Nb6 5.Bb3 Bob Muir held back d2-d4 until move 7 vs my Alekhine Defence. Black had two big strategic decisions: where to develop the dark squared bishop and where to place the d-pawn. My Bg7 and d5 led to equal play. White let his kingside knight get trapped. Muir (1800) - Sawyer (2010), Williamsport PA, 03.1998 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.Nf3 d6 4.Bc4 Nb6 5.Bb3 g6 [5...Nc6!] 6.Ng5 [6.a4+/=] 6...e6 7.d4 d5?! [This releases the tension and gives White an easy space advantage. Better is 7...Bg7=] 8.0-0 c5 9.Qf3 Qc7 10.Qf6 Rg8 11.c3 c4 12.Bc2 Rg7 13.Nh3 Qe7 14.Bh6? [14.Qf3 Rg8 15.Bg5+-] 14...Qxf6 15.exf6 Rg8 16.Bxf8 Rxf8 17.g4 e5 18.dxe5 Bxg4 19.Ng5 [19.Kg2 Nc6 20.f4 d4 21.Be4 0-0-0=] 19...h6 20.f3 Bc8 21.Nh7 Rh8 22.Na3 a6 23.b3

Rxh7 [23...cxb3! 24.axb3 Rxh7-+] 24.bxc4 Nxc4 25.Nxc4 dxc4 26.Be4 [If 26.Rfd1 Rh8-+] 26...Nc6 27.f4 Be6 28.Rab1 0-0-0 29.Rb6 Bd5 30.Bh1 Bxh1 31.Kxh1 Rhh8 32.Rfb1 Rd7 33.Kg2 Rhd8 34.Kg3 Rd2 35.h4 R8d3+ 36.Kg4 Rg2# 0-1

2.e5 Nd5 3.Nc3 With the move 3.Nc3 the knights attack each other. White is willing to allow doubled pawns in exchange for open lines.

67 – Ryder 3…e6 4.Nxd5 exd5 In "Adventures of a Freelancer: The Literary Exploits and Autobiography of Stanton Arthur Coblentz", the author recounts with confidence meeting Dr. Ryder in a chess match. This Wikipedia quote tells of the renowned chess playing Berkeley professor Dr. Arthur William Ryder: "I found myself seated opposite a quiet-looking, middle-aged man with a clear-cut virile face, who seemed placidly unaware of his impending doom. But something, alas, went wrong at the game's very start. After a mere halfdozen moves, I was hopelessly ensnarled and, after another two or three moves, I was entirely stunned by that most disheartening word, "Checkmate!" How had it happened? In my humiliation, I could not explain. But the flush on my cheeks was somewhat relieved when I learned that my opponent was ranked as one of the two best chess players on the Pacific Coast." Years before Diemer was born, Dr. Ryder played his gambit. The line begins 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3 exf3 5.Qxf3. The German master E.J. Diemer turned this opening into a playable system in all variations. Diemer played both 5.Qxf3 and 5.Nxf3. The Blackmar-Diemer Gambit may be reached from an Alekhine Defence after 1.e4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d5 3.e4 dxe4 4.f3 exf3. Here in the game below Dr. Ryder plays Dr. W.T. Scott of Los Angeles. Scott - Ryder, San Francisco-Los Angeles Telegraph Match 1923 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.Nc3 e6!? 4.Nxd5 exd5 5.d4 d6 6.Nf3 Bg4 [6...dxe5 7.Nxe5 Bd6=] 7.Be2 Be7 8.c3 c6 9.Bf4 0-0 10.h3 Bxf3 11.Bxf3 Re8 12.0-0 dxe5 13.Bxe5 Bd6 14.Bxd6 Qxd6 15.Qb3 Qc7 16.Rfe1 Nd7 17.Qa3 Nb6 18.b3 g6 19.Qc5 Rad8 20.a4 Nc8 [20...a6!=] 21.Rxe8+ Rxe8 22.Bxd5 Qf4 23.Bf3 Qd2 24.d5 cxd5 25.Bxd5 b6 26.Qc6 Rd8 27.c4 Kg7 28.Qc7 Rf8

29.Qe5+ Kg8 30.Re1 Nd6 31.Re3 Nf5 32.Rf3 Qd4 33.Qc7 a5 34.g4 Nh6 35.Qd6 Qc5 36.Qf4 Kg7 37.Qf6+ Kg8 38.g5 Nf5 39.Rxf5 gxf5 40.h4 Qc7 41.h5 Qf4 42.Kf1 Qg4 43.g6 Qd1+ 44.Kg2 Qg4+ 45.Kf1 Qd1+ 1/2-1/2

68 – Morin 3…e6 4.Bc4 Nb6 When Ray Haines played 1.e4, Roger Morin surprised him with 1...Nf6, Alekhine Defence instead of the Sicilian Defence. Ray opted for the Paul Keres favorite 3.Nc3. These players finished in a tie for first place in this Houlton tournament. Haines - Morin (2035), Houlton Open (2), 05.03.2016 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.Nc3 e6 4.Bc4 Nb6 [4...Nxc3=] 5.Bb3 d5 6.exd6 cxd6 7.Nf3 Be7 8.0-0 0-0 9.d4 Nc6 10.Ne2 [10.d5!?] 10...Bd7 [10...e5!?] 11.c3 Rc8 12.Qd3 Bf6 13.Bf4 e5 14.d5 [14.Be3=] 14...Na5 15.Be3 Nxb3 [White blocked the diagonal of his light square bishop, but Black could try 15...Be7 16.Nd2 f5=/+] 16.axb3 a6 17.c4 Be7 18.Rac1 f5 19.Qd1 f4 20.Bxb6 Qxb6 21.Nd2 [21.Nc3 Bf5 22.Re1=] 21...f3 [Black chooses to open lines, but he might drum up an attack probing bishop moves like 21...Bg4 22.Kh1 Bh4=/+] 22.Nxf3 Bg4 23.Ne1 Rf6 [Or 23...Bh4! 24.g3 Bg5 25.Rc3 Bh3 26.Ng2 Rf7=/+] 24.h3 Bh5 25.Qc2 Rcf8 26.Nd3 [26.Ng3 Bg6=] 26...e4 27.Ndf4 Bxe2 [After 27...Rxf4 28.Nxf4 Rxf4-+ the two Black bishops seem stronger than the White rook.] 28.Nxe2 Rxf2 29.c5 [29.Rxf2 Qxf2+ 30.Kh1 e3-/+] 29...Rxf1+ 30.Rxf1 Qxc5+ 31.Qxc5 Rxf1+?! [The ending is drawn. Black might win after 31...dxc5! 32.Rxf8+ Kxf8 33.Nc3 Bf6 34.Nxe4 Bxb2-/+] 32.Kxf1 dxc5 33.Nc3 b6 34.Nxe4 Kf7 35.Ke2 Bf6 36.Nc3 Ke7 37.Na4 Kd6 38.Nxb6 Bd8 39.Nc4+ Kxd5 40.Kd3 Bf6 41.Ne3+ Kc6 42.Nc4 Kb5 43.Kc2 a5 44.Nd6+ Kb4 45.Ne4 Bd4 46.Nd6 a4 47.bxa4 Kxa4 48.b3+ Kb4 49.Nc4 Bf6 50.Ne3 Kb5 51.Nc4 Kc6 52.Ne3 Kd6 53.Kd3 h5 54.g4 hxg4 55.hxg4 Ke5 56.Ng2 Bg5 57.Kc4 Ke4 58.Kxc5 Kf3 59.Ne1+ Kxg4 60.Kd5 Bd2 61.Nd3 g5 62.Nf2+ Kf3 63.Ne4 1/2-1/2

69 – Parsons 3…Nxc3 4.bxc3 David Parsons had a passion for playing attacking chess using offbeat lines. As far as I know, he was not related to Parson Brown from the song "Winter Wonderland"; I still remember how nervous I was when I had to sing that song at Christmas in 1967. David had a slight resemblance to the famous NASCAR driver Benny Parsons, but again no known relation. Speaking of racing, when we reached an ending and our kings became involved in a race, David got off track. He missed the "Wrong Way" sign and drove the long way around on the kingside. This momentary lapse in judgment gave me a win from a short cut on the queenside. In hindsight, David should have settled for a draw. Our game was an Alekhine Defence 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5. The normal continuation is 3.d4, but David Parsons chose 3.Nc3. This immediately challenged Black's lone developed piece. Once the knights were exchanged by 3...Nxc3, White had a space advantage with pawns. David opted for 4.bxc3 to set up the solid pawn chain protecting e5 with 5.Nf3 and 6.d4. Chances were very even until the endgame where he was outplayed. Parsons (1721) - Sawyer (2011), Williamsport, PA, 14.09.1999 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.Nc3 Nxc3 4.bxc3 [4.dxc3] 4...d5 [More dynamic is 4...d6 5.f4 g6 6.d4 Bg7 7.Nf3 0-0=] 5.Nf3 c5 6.d4 Bg4 [6...Qa5=] 7.Be3 e6 8.Be2 cxd4 9.cxd4 Bxf3 10.Bxf3 Qa5+ [10...Bb4+] 11.Bd2 Bb4 12.Bxb4 Qxb4+ 13.Qd2 Qxd2+ 14.Kxd2 Nc6 15.c3 Kd7 16.Rhb1 Na5 17.Be2 Rhc8 18.Rb5 b6 19.Rab1 Rc7 20.f4 Rac8 21.Rc1 Nc4+ 22.Bxc4 Rxc4 23.Rb4 Rxb4 24.cxb4 a5 25.Rxc8 Kxc8 26.bxa5 bxa5 27.Kc3 [27.a4 completely cuts the queenside off for the kings and makes a draw very likely unless someone blunders horribly on the kingside.] 27...Kc7 28.g4 Kc6 29.h4 Kb5 30.f5? [White is racing on the kingside, but the prize is on the queenside. 30.Kb3= blocks off a4-c4 and leads to a drawish position.] 30...Ka4 31.h5 Ka3 32.g5 g6 33.hxg6 hxg6 34.fxg6 fxg6 35.Kc2 Kxa2 36.Kc1 Kb3 37.Kb1 Kc3 38.Ka2 Kxd4 39.Ka3 Kxe5 0-1

70 – WetDog 4…d5 5.d4 c5 I continue my Alekhine Defence presentations after 2.e5 Nd5. Here is another example of 3.Nc3 Nxc3 4.bxc3. I treated this position as similar to an Advance Variation of the Caro-Kann Defence by playing a Bf5. I put my pawns on d5, c5 and e6. Blocked pawns in the center give each side what is called a Pawn Arrow. This line points in the direction where success is most likely to occur if you take action there. White's arrow went from c3-d4-e5 pointing toward an attack on the Black king. The Black arrow went from f7-e6-d5-c4 pointing to queenside action. Against my ICC opponent WetDog, I carried out my strategy. I kept White so busy that he never threatened the Black king. WetDog (1704) - Sawyer (2412), ICC 5 7 u Internet Chess Club, 20.12.1999 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.Nc3 Nxc3 4.bxc3 [4.dxc3] 4...d5 [4...d6] 5.d4 c5 6.Nf3 Nc6 7.h3 [7.Be2=] 7...Bf5 8.Bd3 Bxd3 9.Qxd3 [Or 9.cxd3 cxd4 10.Nxd4 Nxe5=] 9...e6 10.0-0 c4 11.Qe2 Be7 12.a4 Qa5 13.Qd2 b5 14.Ba3 Bxa3 15.Rxa3 b4 16.cxb4 Qxb4 17.Qxb4 Nxb4 18.c3 [18.Rb1=] 18...Nc6 19.a5?! [19.Rb1 0-0=] 19...Ke7 20.Rb1 Rhb8 21.Rxb8 [If 21.Rc1 Rb2 22.Kf1 Rab8-/+] 21...Rxb8 22.Kf1 Rb3 23.Rxb3 cxb3 24.Nd2 Nxa5 25.Ke1 b2 26.Kd1 Nc4 27.Nb1 [White resigns as Black can simply push his a-pawn to force a win.] 0-1

71 – Fedorov 4…d6 5.f4 c5 White played for a pawn wedge against this Alekhine Defence with pawns on f4, e5, d4, and c3 (after 3...Nxc3). Black fought back by exchanging pawns on e5 and e4. Then White made a counting error due to a check which gained a move and won a piece for Black in the game Jiri Fiser vs Evgueny Fedorov. Fiser (1914) - Fedorov (2239), Vera Menchik Mem Rapid Prague CZE, 10.06.2018 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.Nc3 Nxc3 4.bxc3 d6 [4...g6!?=] 5.f4 c5 6.d4 dxe5 7.fxe5 Nc6 8.Be3 Bf5 9.Nf3 e6 10.Bd3 cxd4 11.cxd4 Bb4+ 12.Kf2 Bg6 13.Rb1 Qc7 14.Bxg6 hxg6 15.Qd3 Rd8 16.c3 Be7

17.Rb5 [17.Rhc1=] 17...a6 18.Rb2 b5 19.Rhb1? [19.a4 Nxe5=] 19...Nxe5 20.Nxe5 Qxe5 21.Qxg6? [21.a4 bxa4-/+] 21...Qxe3+! [After 21...Qxe3+ 22.Kxe3 fxg6-+ Black is up a bishop.] 0-1

72 – PII233Crafty 4.dxc3 d5 I loved the Paul Keres collection of game he annotated about his career. He sometimes played 3.Nc3 vs the Alekhine Defence. Vs PII233Crafty in the Alekhine I scored +0, =8, -61. I had 120...Rb8 doubling rooks on the a-file to pick off his a6 pawn after Kb6, but I had only 36 seconds left. We drew when I had just 20 seconds. It was tempting to try to win on time, but these computers picked up speed at the very end and played many moves per second. PII233Crafty (2688) - Sawyer (2442), ICC 5 0 Internet Chess Club, 25.09.1998 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.Nc3 Nxc3 4.dxc3 d5 [4...d6] 5.Bd3 c5 6.Bb5+ Bd7 7.Bxd7+ Qxd7 8.Bf4 Nc6 9.Qf3 e6 10.0-0-0 c4 11.Qg4 Qc7 12.Nf3 0-0-0 13.Kb1 g6 14.Bg5 Be7 15.Bf6 Bxf6 16.exf6 Ne5 17.Qf4 Nxf3 18.Qxf3 Qc6 19.h4 h5 20.Rhe1 Qc5 21.Qf4 Qc7 22.Qd4 b6 23.Rd2 Qc5 24.Qxc5+ bxc5 25.Kc1 Kc7 26.b3 cxb3 27.cxb3 Kc6 28.Kc2 Rd7 29.Red1 Rhd8 30.Re2 a5 31.Re5 Rd6 32.g3 R6d7 33.Rd2 Rd6 34.Rd3 R6d7 35.Rd1 Rd6 36.Rd2 R6d7 37.Kb1 Rd6 38.Rd1 R6d7 39.Rg5 Rd6 40.Kc2 R6d7 41.Rd2 [41.Re5=] 41...Rd6 [41...a4 42.Rd1 axb3+ 43.axb3 Ra7=+] 42.Re2 R6d7 43.Kd3 Rh8 44.Rge5 Rhd8 45.Rc2 Rb8 46.Rg5 Rh8 47.Re2 Rdd8 48.Ke3 Rd7 49.Rd2 Rdd8 50.Kf4 Rd7 51.Re5 Rhd8 52.Rd3 Rh8 53.Re1 Rhd8 54.Ke5 Rd6 55.Red1 R6d7 56.R1d2 Rd6 57.f4 R6d7 58.Rd1 Rd6 59.R3d2 R6d7 60.Rc2 Rd6 61.b4 axb4 62.cxb4 c4 63.a4 R6d7 64.Kd4 Ra8 65.a5 Rb7 66.Kc3 Rb5 67.Rcd2 Ra6 68.Rd4 Ra8 69.Ra1 Ra6 70.Ra2 Kd6 71.Re2 Kc6 72.Red2 Ra8 73.Rb2 Ra6 74.Re2 Ra8 75.Rdd2 Ra6 76.Re1 Ra8 77.Rb2 Ra6 78.Rbe2 Ra8 79.Rd1 Ra6 80.Re3 Ra8 81.Rd2 Ra6 82.Re5 Ra8 83.Rb2 Ra6 84.Rc2 Ra8 85.Re3 Ra6 86.Rce2 Ra8 87.Ra2 Ra6 88.Rc2 Ra8 89.Re1 Ra6 90.Rh2 Ra7 91.Rd1 Ra6 92.Re2 Ra8 93.Rf2 Ra7 94.Rg2 Ra6 95.Rd4 Ra7 96.Rc2 Ra8 97.Rdd2 Ra7 98.Rc1 Ra8 99.Rb2 Ra7 100.Re2 Ra8 101.Rce1 Ra7? [101...Rab8=] 102.Rg1? [102.Rxe6+! +-] 102...Ra8 103.Rc1 Ra7 104.Ree1 Ra8 105.Rb1 Ra7 106.Red1 Ra8 107.Ra1 Ra7 108.Rac1 Ra8 109.Rb1 Ra7 110.Rdc1 Ra8 111.Ra1 Ra7 112.Ra4 Ra8 113.a6 Ra7 114.Kd4 Kb6 115.Rca1 Kc6 116.R1a2 Kb6 117.Kc3 Kc6 118.R4a3 Kb6 119.Ra1 Kc6 120.R3a2 Kb6 [120...Rb8=+] 121.Ra4 Kc6 122.Rc1 Kb6 123.Rca1 Kc6 124.R1a3 Kb6 125.Kd4 Kc6 126.Ra2 Kb6

127.Ke3 Kc6 128.Ra1 Kb6 129.R1a3 Kc6 130.Kd4 Kb6 131.Ke5 Kc6 132.Ra1 Rb6 133.Rb1 Rb5 134.Rb2 Kd7 135.Rba2 Kc6 136.Kd4 [Drawn. Clocks: 0:20-0:23] 1/2-1/2

73 – Shibut 4.dxc3 d5 5.Nf3 In 1997 I had the privilege of playing Macon Shibut for nine blitz games on the Internet Chess Club. Mr. Shibut was a tournament master rated in the 2300s according to the USCF. My ICC blitz rating was above 2300 for many years. Shibut was clearly the better player, but I won five of these nine games. Apparently I got hot at the right moment. Macon Shibut published the highly recommended book "Paul Morphy and the Evolution of Chess Theory" in 1993, one year after I published my first "Blackmar-Diemer Gambit Keybook". I love books about Paul Morphy. The Alekhine Defence was my defense of choice for this game. Twice Shibut chose the Keres line 3.Nc3 vs me. Below both of us were attacking. Fortunately for me, when we made it to the endgame, he made the last mistake. Shibut - Sawyer, ICC u 3 0, 26.11.1997 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.Nc3 Nxc3 [In another game vs Shibut, I tried 3...Nb6 here and won on move 60.] 4.dxc3 d5 5.Nf3 Bg4 6.h3 Bxf3 7.Qxf3 e6 8.Bd3 c5 9.Bb5+ Nc6 10.Bxc6+ bxc6 11.Bf4 Qb6 12.b3 g6 13.g4 Bg7 14.0-0 Qc7 15.Rae1 0-0 16.h4 a5 17.a4 c4 18.bxc4 dxc4 19.h5 h6 20.Qe3 g5 21.Bxg5!? [The sacrifice is a reasonable idea in blitz chess, but better is 21.Bg3 Rab8 22.f4+/=] 21...hxg5 22.Qxg5 f6 23.exf6 Rxf6 24.Rd1 [24.Re4 Raf8 25.Kg2 Rf4 26.Rxf4 Qxf4 27.Qxf4 Rxf4 28.Kg3 Be5-/+] 24...Raf8 25.Rd4 Kh7 [Even better is 25...Qg3+!-+] 26.Rxc4 Bh6 [I had a forced mate with 26...Qg3+! 27.Kh1 Rxf2 28.Rxf2 Rxf2 29.Qg6+ Kh8 30.Qe8+ Bf8 31.Qxf8+ Rxf8 32.Rf4 Rxf4 33.h6 Rf1#] 27.Qc5 Rf3 28.Qxc6 Rg3+ 29.fxg3 Qxg3+ 30.Qg2 Be3+ 31.Rf2 Bxf2+ 32.Kh1 Qxg2+ 33.Kxg2 Be1 34.g5 Rf2+ 35.Kh3 Rf3+ 36.Kg4 Rxc3 37.Re4 Bd2 38.Rxe6 Rxc2 39.Re7+ Kg8 40.h6 Rc3 41.g6 [White had a good chance of surviving after 41.h7+ Kh8 42.g6=] 41...Rc4+ 42.Kh5 Rc5+ 43.Kg4 Bxh6 44.Re8+ Bf8

45.Ra8 Kg7 46.Ra6 Be7? [46...Rd5-+] 47.Kf3 [47.Ra7!=] 47...Bf6 48.Ke4 Kxg6 49.Kd3 Rh5 50.Kc2 Rh2+ 51.Kb3 Rh3+ 0-1

74 – Brummer 4…d6 5.Nf3 Bg4 David Brummer met my Alekhine Defence with a 3.Nc3 Keres variation. As a young master, David Brummer had played in the famous Lone Pine 1976 tournament against such players as Walter Browne, James Sherwin and Leonid Shamkovich. Now David Brummer was a veteran player. We had never met but he knew who I was. Florida State Championships were held Labor Day weekend each September. There were two scheduled games each day for three days Saturday, Sunday and Monday. This 2007 tournament played at Daytona Beach was won by GM Julio Becerra. Tied for second place were Blas Lugo, Ray Robson, Andrew Boekhoff, and Troy Daly. David Brummer is a former Florida State Champion. We met in the first round, neither of us were worn out yet, except by the trip to the event. Alekhine Defence presented each side with key choices on move four that determined the pawn structure. After that, there was not much theory. We just played chess. We fought to a draw. Brummer (2157) - Sawyer (1959), Florida State Championship (1), 01.09.2007 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.Nc3 Nxc3 4.dxc3 [Also common is the other recapture with 4.bxc3 when again Black has 4...g6=; 4...d5; or 4...d6!?=] 4...d6 [4...g6=; or 4...d5!?] 5.Nf3 Bg4 [5...Nc6=] 6.Bf4 d5 7.h3 Bxf3 8.Qxf3 e6 9.c4 c6 10.cxd5 Qxd5 11.Be2 Qxf3 12.Bxf3 Nd7 [With queens of the board, it will be difficult for my opponent to win.] 13.0-0-0 Be7 14.Bh2 0-0-0 15.Be2 Nb6 16.Bd3 Nd5 17.Kb1 Nb4 18.Be4 Rxd1+ 19.Rxd1 Rd8 20.Rf1 [White's original intention was 20.Rxd8+ Kxd8 21.Bxh7 but the bishop gets trapped. 21...g6 22.Bf4 Ke8=] 20...g6 21.Bf4 Nd5 22.Bh6 Bf8 23.Bc1 Be7 24.c4 Nb4 25.Be3 Kb8 26.f4 Na6 27.b3 Bc5 28.Bc1 Bd4 29.g4 Kc7 30.a3 c5 31.f5 Bxe5 32.fxg6 fxg6 33.Rf7+ Rd7 34.Rxd7+ Kxd7 35.Bxb7 Nb8 36.Be4 Nc6 37.h4 Ne7 [My goal with this move is to eliminate all White's kingside pawns.] 38.Bh6 Bg3 39.Bg5 h5

40.gxh5 gxh5 41.Bf3 Nf5 42.Bxh5 Nxh4 43.Bxh4 [Bishops of opposite colors is a draw here.] 1/2-1/2

75 – Bondar 4…d6 5.Nf3 Bg4 My ICCF Master Class postal chess game vs V.N. Bondar was in the Alekhine Defence. White rapidly developed his queenside knight with 3.Nc3. Black held his corresponding knight back until move 10 and suffered for it. The Black knight must enter the fray much earlier to stem the tide of White's attack. At that time I was still learning the Alekhine Defence which I had only been playing for a few years. Years later I wrote books on it. For a long time I did not know the exact identity of my opponent. Then ICCF put some of the old tournament cross tables online. At the time Bondar played for the USSR. After the fall of the Soviet Union, Bondar was listed as playing from Ukraine. My opponent was IM Vladimir Bondar. He won this 15 player round robin event WT/M/GT/141 scoring 11.5. I scored only 4.5 with 1 win, 7 draws, and 6 losses. This was an ICCF Master Class tournament. Suffice it to say Bondar was a good player. That year of 1983 I played at times 100 postal games at once. There were some gems, but more often, my games featured wins by my higher rated opponents or draws vs lower rateds. Bondar - Sawyer, corr ICCF, 1983 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.Nc3 Nxc3 4.dxc3 d6 5.Nf3 Bg4 [5...Nc6=] 6.h3 Bxf3? [6...Bh5 7.exd6 Qxd6 8.Bd3+/= Stockfish] 7.Qxf3 c6 [7...Nc6 8.Be3+/-] 8.exd6 Qxd6 9.Bc4 e6 [9...Qf6 10.Qg3+/-] 10.Be3 Nd7 11.Rd1 Qc7 12.Bf4 Qb6 13.Rxd7 Kxd7 14.Be3 c5? [14...Qd8 15.Qxf7+ Qe7 16.Bxe6+ Kc7 17.Qf4+ Qd6 18.Qf5+/-] 15.Qxf7+ 1-0

3.c4 Nb6 4.c5 Nd5 This Two Pawns Attack is also known as the Chase Variation.

76 – Baffo 5.Nc3 e6 6.d4 d6 In the game below Jeffrey Baffo began with 1.e4. I defended with the Alekhine Defence, one of my most successful defenses. Baffo chose the Two Pawns Attack with 2.e5 and 4.c5. It is favored by many attacking players who prefer White in the Sicilian Defence Alapin variation that begins 1.e4 c5 2.c3 Nf6 3.e5 Nd5. Some Sicilian lines transpose to some of the Alekhine Two Pawns, although either side can avoid the transpositions. Two Pawns is also called the Chase Variation. Transpositions to Sicilians come from challenging advanced White pawns with 6...d6. The move 6...b6 stays strictly in the Alekhine Defence. This tricky maze of Sicilians can reach the same position as the Alekhine one move quicker. The numbers are off. For example, after 1.e4 c5 2.c3 Nf6 3.e5 Nd5 4.d4 cxd4 5.cxd4 d6 6.Nf3 e6 7.Nc3 Nxc3 8.bxc3 Qc7 we reach the 9...Qc7 position in our game. Evgeny Sveshnikov (famous for a Black Sicilian line) played this position as White against both opening move orders. Sveshnikov prefers the move 9.Bd2 (via Sicilian) or 10.Bd2 (via Alekhine). In 2012, this grandmaster played Baffo's 10.Qb3!? He followed 12.Bxe5 Nxe5 13.Nxe5 Bd6 14.Bb5+ and 1-0 in 37 moves (Sveshnikov - Degraeve, 28th Cappelle Open, 2012). In our own USCF correspondence game, we exchanged into a roughly equal bishop ending. Baffo and I agreed to a draw. Baffo (2273) - Sawyer (1960), corr USCF 95P135, 18.03.1996 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.c4 Nb6 4.c5 Nd5 5.Nc3 [5.Bc4 e6=] 5...e6 6.d4 d6 7.cxd6 cxd6 8.Nf3 Nxc3 9.bxc3 Qc7 10.Qb3!? [10.Bd2= is the normal book move.] 10...Nd7 11.Bf4 dxe5 12.Nxe5 [12.Bxe5 Sveshnikov] 12...Bd6

13.Bg3 Nxe5 14.dxe5 Be7 15.Bb5+ Bd7 16.Bxd7+ Qxd7 17.0-0 0-0 18.Rab1 b6 19.Rfd1 Qc7 20.Rd3 Rfd8 21.Rbd1 Rxd3 22.Rxd3 Rd8 23.Qd1 Kf8 [If I wanted to try for more, Houdini suggests 23...Rxd3 24.Qxd3 g5=/+ but I had no energy for that in 1996.] 24.Rd4 Rxd4 25.Qxd4 Qd826.Qxd8+ Bxd8 27.Kf1= 1/2-1/2

77 – chapaev 5.Nc3 e6 6.d4 d6 White repeatedly attacks the Black knight in the Two Pawns. The move 4.c5 leaves a hole on d5 for the Black knight to return free from future pawn harassment. My game vs chapaev was typical. White attacked the knight by 5.Nc3. Black can protect the knight with 5...e6 or 5...c6 and challenge c5 with 6...d6 or 6...b6. While the Bc8 cannot be develop to Bf5 or Bg4 with pawns at d7 and e6, after 6...b6, Bb7 and Ba6 are available. If 7.cxb6 axb6, Black has a half-open a-file for his rook or rooks. That happened here. chapaev (2030) - Sawyer (2424), ICC 2 12 Internet Chess Club, 25.02.1999 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.c4 Nb6 4.c5 Nd5 5.Nc3 e6 6.d4 b6 [Black can walk into an Alapin Sicilian with 6...d6 7.cxd6 cxd6 8.Nf3=] 7.cxb6 [A critical line is 7.Nxd5 exd5 8.Be3 bxc5 9.dxc5 c6 10.b4 Na6 11.a3 Nc7 12.Nf3 a5=] 7...axb6 8.Bd3 Ba6 9.Nf3 Bb4 10.Qc2 h6 11.a3 Nxc3 12.bxc3 Be7 13.0-0 Nc6 14.Qe2 Bxd3 15.Qxd3 d5 16.c4?! [16.exd6=] 16...dxc4 17.Qxc4 Na5 18.Qb5+ Qd7 19.Qxd7+ [Or 19.a4 Qxb5 20.axb5 Kd7=/+] 19...Kxd7 20.Nd2 Ra7 21.f4 Rha8 22.f5 Nc6 23.fxe6+ fxe6 24.Rf7 Nxd4 25.Rxg7 Ne2+ 26.Kh1 Nxc1 27.Rxc1 Rxa3 28.Ne4 Ra1 29.Rg1 Ke8 30.Rg8+ [30.Nf6+ Bxf6 31.exf6 c5=/+] 30...Bf8 31.h3 Rxg1+ 32.Kxg1 Kf7 33.Rg3 c5 34.Rf3+ Ke8 35.Rf6 Kd7 36.Rf7+ Kc6 37.Rf6 Kd5 0-1

78 – Lau 5.Bc4 e6 6.d4 d6 David Lau was the youngest member of our chess club about 20 years ago. His USCF rating the last time David S. Lau played was 1738 from the year 2003. Many players drift toward passive play. Such an approach rarely leads to a high rating gain. But David had the right attitude. This was evident from the Chase Variation. He attacked! Win or lose, David attacked. Lau (1564) - Sawyer (2011), Williamsport PA 1995 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.c4 Nb6 4.c5 Nd5 5.Bc4 e6 6.d4 d6 [6...b6!=] 7.Bxd5 exd5 8.Be3?! [8.cxd6 cxd6 9.Nf3=] 8...Nc6?! [8...dxe5! 9.dxe5 Na6=/+] 9.Nc3 dxe5 10.dxe5? [This drops a piece. Better is 10.Nge2 exd4=/+] 10...d4 11.Nb5

dxe3 12.Qxd8+ Kxd8 13.fxe3 Bxc5 14.Rd1+ Bd7 15.Nf3 Bxe3 16.Rd3 Bf4 17.0-0 Re8 18.Rfd1 Re7 19.g3 Bxe5 20.Ng5 h6 21.Nh7 [Of course if 21.Nf3 Bxb2-+ Black is completely busted as well.] 21...Ke8 22.Rd5 Rc8 23.a4 Bf5 24.b4 Bxh7 0-1

79 – Zelcic 6.Nc3 Nf4 7.Qf3 Tactical skills can offset slightly inferior openings. The higher rated Robert Zelcic left the book in this Alekhine Defence against Zdenko Padjen. The players had to develop their own plans. Robert Zelcic gradually turned the game in Black's favor. Padjen (2006) - Zelcic (2493), 2nd Krunoslav Hulak Mem Zagreb CRO, 30.11.2017 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.c4 Nb6 4.c5 Nd5 5.Bc4 e6 6.Nc3 Nf4!? [6...Nxc3=] 7.Qf3 [7.g3+/=] 7...Ng6 8.d4 Nc6 9.Be3 d6 10.exd6 cxd6 11.0-0-0 d5 12.Bd3 Be7 13.Qg3 [13.h4!?] 13...Bd7 [13...b6=/+] 14.Nf3 Qb8 15.Kb1 0-0 16.Bxg6 fxg6 17.Rhe1 b6 18.Qxb8 Raxb8 19.cxb6 axb6 20.Bc1 b5 21.b3 h6 22.Re2 g5 23.h3 Bd6 24.Ne5 Nxe5 25.dxe5 Bc5 26.f3 b4 27.Nxd5 [27.Na4 Ba7=/+] 27...exd5 28.Rxd5 [28.e6 Bb5-+] 28...Bf5+ 29.Kb2 Rbc8 30.e6 Be7 0-1

80 – Micah 6.Nc3 Nxc3 7.bxc3 In the Alekhine Defence Chase Variation, Black might not quickly push both center pawns. The cramped nature of the position can make communication between Rh8 and Ra8 difficult. This ICC game vs Micah started well. Then a tactical mistake on move 23 gave White a winning position. Beware of Black’s weak points on the kingside. The pawns were not easy to defend. Moving the pawns leaves holes where White could invade as in the game below. Fortunately for me in a two minute bullet game my opponent Micah also overlooked some good moves. Micah - Sawyer, ICC r 2 0 Internet Chess Club 1997 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.c4 Nb6 4.c5 Nd5 5.Bc4 e6 6.Nc3 Nxc3 7.bxc3 [7.dxc3 Nc6=] 7...Bxc5 8.d4 Be7 [Deep Rybka 4 likes 8...d5!? 9.Qg4 Bf8 10.Bd3=] 9.Qg4 g6 10.Bh6 c5 [Or 10...d5=] 11.Nf3 cxd4 12.Qxd4 Nc6 13.Qf4 d5 14.Bd3 Qa5 15.0-0 Bd7 16.Ng5 Bxg5 17.Bxg5 Qxc3 18.Bf6 Rf8 19.Rfd1 Qd4!? [19...h5] 20.Qg3 Qb6 21.Rab1 Qc7 22.Qh4 h5 23.Qg5 Nxe5? [This blunders a piece and should lose. Black is still in the game after 23...a6+/=] 24.Bxe5 Qd8 25.Bf6 Qc7 26.Rdc1 Qd6? 27.Rb3 [27.Rxb7+-] 27...Bc6 28.Bxg6 fxg6 29.Qxg6+ Kd7 30.Qg7+ Ke8 31.Qg6+ [White has a mate in

15 moves starting with 31.Rxc6! +-] 31...Kd7 32.Qxh5? [32.Qh7+! Ke8 33.Rxc6 bxc6 34.Qg6+ Rf7 35.Rb7+- wins for White!] 32...Rxf6 33.Rg3 Qe7 34.Qh4 Raf8 35.f3 Rf4 0-1

81 – Data 6.Nc3 Nxc3 7.dxc3 Against the computer chess engine "Data" rated 2849 I played the old critical line in the Alekhine Defence Chase Variation with the book move 9...g5! Today the theoretical evaluation of this variation is better understood than it was twenty years ago. The basic opening theory of the Alekhine Defence in the 1990s came from Vladimir Bagirov, Lev Alburt and Graham Burgess. In my The Alekhine Defense Playbook published by Pickard & Son in 2000 of the move 12...Nxe5 I wrote: "The knight sacrifice is too much for the fpawn to handle. He will have to drop something." See next game where White deviated from the game below with 14.Qh5 and there Black won. My game vs Data was played about two months after I hit my peak Internet Chess Club blitz rating of 2492 on October 1, 1998. We reached a position after 23 moves where I had the choice between an even middlegame and a drawish ending. I went for the draw vs an opponent rated 400+ points above me. The computer was unlikely to lose on time. Data (2849) - Sawyer (2436), ICC 5 0, 26.11.1998 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.c4 Nb6 4.c5 Nd5 5.Bc4 e6 6.Nc3 Nxc3 7.dxc3 Nc6 8.Bf4 [If 8.Qh5 Bxc5 9.Nf3 g6=] 8...Bxc5 9.Qg4 g5! 10.Bxg5 Rg8 11.Nh3 [11.Bxd8 Rxg4 12.Be2 Rxg2 13.Bxc7 Rxf2=] 11...Be7 12.f4 Nxe5 [The old move, and good enough for equality. Now however we know that Black seems a little better with simply 12...Bxg5! 13.fxg5 Nxe5 14.Qe2 Nxc4 15.Qxc4 h6!? 16.gxh6 Qf6=/+ Houdini] 13.fxe5 Bxg5 14.Qe4 Rg7 15.Rf1 d5 16.exd6 cxd6 17.Bb5+ Kf8 18.Rf2 Bh6 19.Nf4 Bxf4 20.Qxf4 d5 21.Bd3 [White may do better with 21.Qd4 f5 22.g4!? Qb6 23.Qxb6 axb6 24.gxf5 Rg1+ 25.Rf1 Rxf1+ 26.Bxf1 exf5=] 21...Bd7 22.Qb4+ Kg8 23.Qxb7 Qc8 [Black could play for more with 23...a5 24.Bb5 Bxb5 25.Qxb5 Qc7= but getting the queens off the board made victory more difficult for my computer opponent.] 24.Qxc8+ Rxc8 25.Kd2 Rb8 26.Ke3 Bb5 27.Bxb5 Rxb5 28.Kd3 Kf8 29.Rg1 Ke7 30.Rgf1 f5 31.Re2 Kd6 32.Rf4 Rg4 33.g3 Rxf4 34.gxf4 Rb7 35.Ke3 Rg7 36.b3 Kc5 37.Kd3 Kd6 38.Ke3 Kc5 39.Kd3 Kd6 40.Ke3 [Game drawn by repetition] 1/2-1/2

82 – Bertola 7…Nc6 8.Bf4 Bxc5 White is in the habit of chasing the knight. Some habits are hard to break. White will just keep chasing the knight with pawns until he cannot do it anymore. I like to call this variation is called the Two Pawns Attack. Others prefer to call it the Chase Variation. Yippee! After the fourth move the knight returns to this powerful post from which he can no longer be harassed by a White pawn. Now the pawn on c5 becomes a major liability. As a result, White may gambit the c5 pawn in the hopes to profit from the fact that Black has not moved anything except one knight and might have trouble completing his development. Unfortunately for White, gambits in this line tend to be unsound. Black has not developed any pawns. White has not developed any pieces! Consider some possibilities from a correspondence game between L. Lepre and Georges Bertola. L Lepre - Georges Bertola, corr, 1988 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 2...Nd5 3.c4 Nb6 4.c5 Nd5 5.Bc4 [Black’s knight can hardly move, but it can be safely protected until a better option comes along.] 5...e6 [Not only does this protect d5 but it also uncovers an attack on c5.] 6.Nc3 [This usually leads to the gambit of the c5-pawn in exchange for a kingside attack or an attack on center.] 6...Nxc3 [Black again doubles White's c-pawns, and then he usually can win the one on c5.] 7.dxc3 [Taking with the d-pawn is much better for White as he wants to get his dark squared bishop out quickly.] 7...Nc6 [Black attacks the e-pawn, which is something we do in the Alekhine.] 8.Bf4 This fits logically with White's 7th move.] 8...Bxc5 [Black picks up the gambit pawn and is ready to withstand White's assault.] 9.Qg4 [White understandably takes aim at the lowly g-pawn.] 9...g5! [The revenge of the g-pawn! What it this? Yes, the lowly g-pawn rises up to attack the White bishop. Charge! This is one of the funniest moves in all the Alekhine Defense. To those who know this opening, it is a well-known move. But for those who see it for the first time, it's a real shocker! The concept of playing g5 comes up from time to time when either a bishop or pawn is on f4. The usual point is to deflect the protection off e5. Here it is unique because

White is already trying to figure some way to provoke a pawn weakness on the kingside. Suddenly White is blessed and cursed with ... g5!] 10.Bxg5 [This is the strongest way to devout the g-pawn since it attacks the Black queen. The move 10.Qxg5 is weaker because the bishop on c4 is hanging. Material is even but Black can go in for a wild line that gives him great chances after 11.Bxg5 Nxe5!] 10...Rg8 [Another shocker! Black leaves his queen hanging to the bishop. Of course, that bishop is now pinned due to the boldness of the dearly departed g-pawn.] 11.Nh3 [This is a popular move] 11...Be7 [With White's extra pieces developed, Black now covers up his own queen and increases the pressure on g5.] 12.f4 [White plays an obvious solid move that protects e5 and g5.] 12...Nxe5 [The knight sacrifice is too much for the f-pawn to handle. He will have to drop something.] 13.fxe5 [White takes the knight and drops the bishop. Black picked up a pawn in the process.] 13...Bxg5 [Black not only regains his piece but also threatens to check on d2 and then chop off the queen.] 14.Qh5 [Her majesty sidesteps the terrors of the g-file.] 14...Rg7 [This is the simplest way to defend h7.] 15.0-0 [White wants a rook on the f-file. The natural thing is to bring his king to relative safety at the same time.] 15...Qe7 [Black could be preparing to castle queenside someday. More to the point, he has in mind to check on c5 and pick up the bishop on c4 someday soon!] 16.Bd3 [A sharpeyed White moves the bishop and attacks the h-pawn.] 16...b6 [Finally we are ready to bring out the light squared bishop.] 17.Be4 [Both light squared bishops can use that long diagonal.] 17...c6 [If the rook would move to b8, then Black will not be able to castle queenside.] 18.Rf3 [White has the option of doubling rooks on the f-file or sliding one along the 3rd rank.] 18...Ba6 [This is clearly the best diagonal for Black's light squared bishop in view of the fact that White's bishop has shifted over to e4.] 19.Rg3 [The pin on the dark squared bishop brings with it some threats but Black can meet them all.] 19...h6 20.Nf2 0-0-0 21.h4 f5 [Black cannot immediately move his pinned bishop.] 22.hxg5 fxe4 23.Nxe4 hxg5 24.Nd6+ Kb8 25.c4 Bxc4 26.Qg4 Bb5 27.a4 Ba6 28.b4 Rh8 29.b5 [White hopes to open up the queenside for attack. 29...Rgh7 [Aha! The rook on a1 is hanging, ready to be picked off after a check on h1.] 30.Raa3 Rh1+ 31.Kf2 Qh7 [Black can invade behind the lines with his queen. There is no defense.] 32.Rae3 Qb1 0-1

3.d4 d6 This section covers less common fourth moves for White. Such moves may transpose to the main lines. Here we look at some moves that do not.

83 – MaryDawson 4.exd6 exd6 The Exchange Variation in the Alekhine Defence typically follows the moves 4.c4 Nb6 and then 5.exd6. White could reverse the order and play 4.exd6 and 5.c4, but in that case, the knight can return to Nf6 instead of Nb6. Below, White chose 5.Nf3 and then 6.c3 instead of 6.c4. My game against MaryDawson saw White sacrifice a bishop in an attempt to queen kingside pawns. Fortunately for me, my lone piece, a knight, proved stronger than White’s advanced pawns. MaryDawson (2118) - Sawyer (2141), ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 04.09.2010 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.d4 d6 4.exd6 exd6 5.Nf3 Be7 6.c3 [6.c4 Nb6 7.Nc3 0-0 8.h3=] 6...0-0 7.Bc4 Nb6 8.Bd3 Bf6 9.Be3 Re8 10.0-0 Nc6 [10...Be6=] 11.Nbd2 d5 12.a3 Bg4 13.Qc2 g6 14.h3 Bxf3 15.Nxf3 Qd7 16.Rae1 Bg7 17.Bf4 Rxe1 18.Rxe1 Bf6 [18...Nd8 19.Ne5+/=] 19.Ne5 [19.Qe2+/-] 19...Nxe5 20.dxe5 Bg7 21.h4 c6 22.h5 Re8 23.hxg6 hxg6 24.Bxg6?! [White's bishop sacrifice is not completely sound. 24.Qd2=] 24...fxg6 25.Qxg6 Qe6 26.Qg3 Nd7 27.Re3 Nc5 [27...Nf8-+] 28.b4 [28.Qh4 Ne4-/+] 28...Ne4 29.Qh3 [29.Qh4 Qg6-+] 29...Qxh3 30.gxh3 Bxe5 31.Bxe5 Rxe5 32.f3 Nd2 33.Rd3 Nc4 34.a4 [34.Kf2 Nxa3-+] 34...Re3 35.Rxe3 Nxe3 36.Kf2 Nd1+ 37.Ke2 Nxc3+ 38.Kd3 Nxa4 39.Kd4 b6 40.h4 [40.Kd3 Nb2+ 41.Kc3 Nc4-+] 40...a5 41.bxa5 [41.b5 cxb5 42.Kxd5 b4-+] 41...bxa5 42.h5 Kg7 43.Ke5 Nc5 44.f4 Nd7+ 45.Ke6 Nf6 46.h6+ Kg6 [46...Kxh6 47.Kxf6 a4-+] 47.f5+ Kg5 48.Ke5 a4 White resigns 0-1

84 – Jansson 4.exd6 cxd6 The recapture 4.exd6 cxd6 in the Alekhine Defence Exchange Variation breaks the symmetry. It’s more dynamic than taking with the e-pawn. After Black plays ...g6, the structure resembles the pawns in the Sicilian Defense Dragon Variation. However, in the Alekhine Defence, White’s pawn is on d4 instead of e4. I fought for the center with 13...e5 in my game against Jansson. The game became a skirmish of rooks and knights until White forgot that my centralized knight on d5 covered c7. Thus, White dropped a knight on move 27 and then the Exchange on move 33. Since this was a two minute bullet game, White was probably running short of time when things fell apart. Jansson - Sawyer, ICC r 2 0 Internet Chess Club, 1997 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.d4 d6 4.exd6 cxd6 5.Bd3 g6 6.Ne2 Bg7 7.0-0 0-0 8.c3 Nc6 9.Nd2 Bg4 10.h3 Bxe2 11.Qxe2 Nf4 12.Qf3 Nxd3 13.Qxd3 e5 14.d5 Ne7 15.Ne4 Rc8 16.Bd2 a6 [16...h6 17.c4 f5=] 17.Rac1 b5 18.f4 [18.Be3=] 18...Qb6+ [18...f5!-/+] 19.Kh1 [19.Be3+/=] 19...f5 20.Ng5 e4 21.Qe3 [21.Qe2 Nxd5-/+] 21...Qxe3 22.Bxe3 Nxd5 23.Bd4 [23.Bg1 Nc7-+] 23...Bxd4 24.cxd4 Ne3 [24...h6-+] 25.Rfe1 Nd5 26.Ne6 Rfe8 [26...Rxc1 27.Rxc1 Re8-+] 27.Nc7? Rxc7 28.Rxc7 Nxc7 29.Rc1 Nd5 30.g3 Re7 31.Kg2 Rc7 32.Rd1 Rc2+ 33.Kf1 Ne3+ 0-1

85 – Guest 4.f4 dxe5 5.dxe5 Alekhine Defence leads to minor piece tactics against White's center pawns. As often happens, I picked off a pawn by move 10 with a combination in this Internet Chess Club blitz game. Short and sweet. White managed only six more moves before his time ran out. Guest - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 u Internet Chess Club, 24.03.2018 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.d4 d6 4.f4 dxe5 5.dxe5 Bf5 6.Nf3 [6.Bd3=] 6...Nc6 7.Bd3 Bxd3 8.cxd3? [8.Qxd3 e6=] 8...e6 [8...Ndb4!] 9.Nc3 Ndb4 10.d4 [Now

Black wins a pawn.] 10...Nxd4! 11.Nxd4 Qxd4 12.Qxd4 Nc2+ 13.Kd2 [13.Kf2 Nxd4 14.Be3 Nc2 15.Rac1 Nxe3 16.Kxe3 0-0-0=/+] 13...Nxd4 14.Kd3 Nc6 [14...0-0-0!-/+] 15.Be3 0-0-0+ 16.Ke2 a6-/+ Black has an extra pawn. White forfeits on time. 0-1

86 – Karolyi 4.Bc4 Nb6 5.Bb3 A rule of thumb in chess openings is that if your opponent keeps his pawns back from the center of the board, you should play both your e-pawn and dpawn to the center immediately. This gives you maximum scope for classical development. Most 1.e4 players will follow with d4 as soon as reasonably possible. Black tried to move White’s pawn off the e4 square with move 1. Now that the pawn advanced, Black shifts to attack e5. When White plays to keep a pawn on e5, that pawn often becomes a liability. I have seen games where Black wins the pawn on e5 in the next dozen moves or so. In addition, Black is ready to develop his light squared bishop as in the game between Pierre Alain Bex vs Tibor Karolyi Jr. Bex - Karolyi, Geneve YM 1989 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.d4 d6 4.Bc4 [This is a very natural move that can usually be played at any moment from moves two to six. In each case we have a slightly different situation.] 4...Nb6 [Attack the bishop that attacks the knight. The tempo White gained by attacking the knight will be lost when he has to save his bishop. I have won blitz games where Black doesn’t realize that my knight was attacking c4.] 5.Bb3 [White usually retreats back to this square from where he can take aim at f7.] 5...Bf5 [If Black wants to get this bishop out before advancing his e-pawn, he should do so now. If he waits and first captures on e5, White will probably move his queen to h5. Then Black does best to push e6 to defend f7 but trapping in the bishop on c8.] 6.Qf3 Qc8 [Black covers both f5 and b7.] 7.exd6 [White hopes to benefit from the open e-file. Of course, many things are playable here.] 7...cxd6 [Taking with the c-pawn is significantly better than taking with the e-pawn. Although Black can probably survive with the e-pawn, it does potentially allow White more pressure on f5, f7, d5 and b7.] 8.Nc3 [White can play a sham sacrifice with 8.Bxf7+ Kxf7 9.g4 Nc6! I like this move. Since Black cannot avoid giving back the bishop, he simply gets on with development.] 8...e6 [Black protects the f5 bishop by a pawn which frees up the Black queen. Also, f7 is no longer a serious problem from the White bishop.] 9.Nge2 [When the

queen occupies f3, the kingside knight comes here from which there are several options. These options are not usually as strong as those from f3, but they can be quite good.] 9...d5 [Black stops White from pushing his dpawn.] 10.Bf4 [Grabbing this diagonal for this bishop, White also denies Black the same diagonal for his bishop.] 10...a6 [It is wise to keep White’s knight out of b5.] 11.0-0 Be7 12.Rfe1 Nc6 13.Qg3 [White hopes to attack.] 13...0-0 14.Bc7 Nd7 15.a4 b6 [The central pawns point the direction in which Black's attack is naturally strong. Picture an arrow from f7-e6-d5 pointing at c4. Black will be naturally strong on the queenside. White is fooling around over there, when he should be place his hopes on some kingside attack. Admittedly, Black has no serious weaknesses on the kingside, but that merely points to the fact that this whole line favors Black.] 16.Nd1 Ra7 [Decision time for White.] 17.Bd6 Bxd6 18.Qxd6 Nf6 19.f3 [Keeping Black pieces out of e4.] 19...Rd8 [Scram.] 20.Qf4 Rc7 [Black has power on the c-file. White must defend against invasion.] 21.Ne3 Bg6 [Black not only wants to keep his bishop, but more importantly, he wants to keep d5 solid until he is ready for more action. If the e-pawn had to recapture on f5, White would have play vs d5.] 22.c3 b5 23.axb5 axb5 24.Ra2 b4 [Black is cranking open the queenside.] 25.c4 dxc4 26.Nxc4 Bd3 [Both White's queenside pawns and his knights are open to possible combinations.] 27.Ne5 Bxe2 28.Nxc6 Rxc6 29.Rxe2 Rcd6 [Those exchanges did not help White's d-pawn!] 30.Rc2 Qb7 31.Rc4 Qb6 [Black is piling up on d4 and incidentally aiming at the White king.] 32.Kf1 h6 [Before action can be taken, Black must give his king air in view of a possible future check on a8, b8 or c8.] 33.Ra4 [It looks like the weakness of b4 compensates for the one on d4. However, Black could handle b4 with his knight if he wanted to, but White can never handle d4 with his bishop!] 33...Rxd4 [The battle has started; the fur will fly; Black is smiling; White will fry.] 34.Raxb4 Rd1+ 35.Bxd1 [35.Ke2 Trying to run away does not work either. 35...Qg1 36.Bxd1 Rxd1 37.Qg3 To cover the mate on e1. 37...Qf1+ 38.Ke3 Nd5+ 39.Ke4 Qe2#] 35...Rxd1+ 36.Ke2 Qg1 [White must give up his queen on d2 to avoid being checkmated within a few moves.] 0-1

3.d4 d6 4.c4 Nb6 This is the main approach to the Exchange Variation.

87 – Wharry 5.exd6 cxd6 6.Nf3 Correspondence chess allows players to test out critical opening lines that the big boys play without having to remember moves. The use of chess books was allowed. Nowadays we have chess engines and databases, but there was not much of that over 20 years ago. Postal chess masters collected a lot of written theoretical analysis in notebooks. That is why many correspondence masters, myself included, wrote books on chess openings. Stephen Wharry and I contested an Alekhine Defence in the Lev Alburt variation (4.Nf3 g6). Alburt had won the US championship playing this opening. White will likely choose between 5.c4 and 5.Bc4. The 5.c4 line with 6.exd6 cxd6 is a cousin to the Exchange Variation 4.c4 Nb6 5.exd6 cxd6. However, in the Alburt line White has already committed to Nf3. We followed the main line for 15 moves. Then we were on our own. Both of us missed winning chances and agreed to a draw when I stood better. Wharry (2014) - Sawyer (1978), corr USCF 89SS90, 09.10.1991 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.d4 d6 4.Nf3 g6 5.c4 Nb6 6.exd6 cxd6 7.Be2 Bg7 8.00 0-0 9.h3 Nc6 10.Nc3 Bf5 11.Be3 d5 12.c5 Nc4 13.Bxc4 dxc4 14.Qa4 e5 15.d5 Nd4 16.Nd2 [16.Qxc4 Nxf3+ 17.gxf3 Bxh3 18.Rfd1=] 16...Bd3 17.Rfc1 b5!? 18.Nxb5 Ne2+ [18...Nxb5=/+] 19.Kh1 a6? 20.Nd6 [20.Nc3 Nxc1 21.Rxc1+/=] 20...Nxc1 21.Rxc1 f5 22.N2xc4 f4 23.Bd2 Qh4 24.f3 e4 [24...Qf2! 25.Be1 Qxc5 26.Qd7+/=] 25.Qd7 [25.Qd1+/-] 25...exf3 [Black should first play 25...Bxc4 26.Nxc4 exf3=] 26.Qe6+ Kh8 27.Ne5 fxg2+ 28.Kg1 h6 29.Nxd3?? [White is winning after 29.Be1!+] 29...Bd4+

30.Kxg2 Qg3+ 31.Kh1 Qf3+ [31...Rf5!-+ threatens ...Qxh3 mate!] 32.Kh2 Qg3+ 33.Kh1 Qf3+ [33...Rf5!-+] 34.Kh2 Qg3+ 35.Kh1 [-+] 1/2-1/2

88 – Harimau 6.Nc3 g6 7.Be3 Leading up to New Year’s Day 2013, I decided to play a short training match against the computer program Harimau. It was rated 3002 for this game and slightly lower for the other two games. At that high rating level, I am not expecting to defeat it. The tactics of a 3000 rated computer are nearly flawless. The reason I played it was because I wanted to see how it handled various lines I might played. The Alekhine Defense is one of my favorite openings from either side. I have played it thousands of times trying every variation. In the Alekhine Defence game below, Harimau followed the lines given for White by GM Roman Dzindzichasvili until the computer found an improvement with 15...b6! This led to equal play. Only the queens were off the board. There were many open lines and possibilities for all the rest of the pieces. That is a perfect scenario for most grandmasters. Using Houdini I found some improvements for White over my play which I noted below. Sawyer - Harimau, ICC 5 0 Internet Chess Club, 29.12.2012 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 Nb6 5.exd6 cxd6 6.Nc3 g6 7.Be3 Bg7 8.Rc1 00 9.b3 e5 [Not 8...N8d7 because of 9.c5!+- winning.] 10.dxe5 dxe5 11.Qxd8 Rxd8 12.c5 N6d7 13.Bc4 Nc6 14.Nf3 Na5 15.Be2 b6! 16.cxb6 [16.0-0 bxc5 17.Ne4 Bb7 18.Nxc5 Nxc5 19.Rxc5 Nc6 20.Bc4=; 16.Na4 Nxc5 17.Nxc5 bxc5 18.Rxc5 Bf8 19.Rxe5 Nc6 20.Re4 Nb4 21.0-0 Bb7 22.Rd4 Nxa2=] 16...Nxb6 17.0-0 Bb7 18.Rfd1 Rxd1+ 19.Bxd1 [19.Rxd1 Rc8! (19...h6 20.Bf1 Bc6 21.Nd2+/=) 20.Nb5 Nd5 21.Bxa7 Rc2 22.Bf1 Rxa2 23.b4=] 19...Rc8 20.Ne2 Nc6 21.Nc3 Nb4 22.a3 Nd3 23.Rc2 e4 24.Nd4 Rd8 25.Nde2 f5 26.g3 Ba6 27.Nc1 [27.Rd2 Kf7+/=] 27...Nxc1 28.Rxc1 Bxc3 29.Rxc3 Rxd1+ 30.Kg2 Bf1+ 31.Kg1 Bh3# White checkmated 0-1

89 – Eldridge 6.Nc3 g6 7.Be3 In sporting news, the city of Lewiston, Maine was famous for a quick knockout from what was called the "Phantom Punch." It was the rematch between Sonny Liston and Cassius Clay (who had just changed his name to Mohammed Ali). The fight was the only heavyweight boxing championship ever held in Maine. Nine years later, I played in a weekend chess tournament in that area where I had a fight of my own. For years I thought it was in Lewiston, but the chess might have been played in Waterville. My opponent for the third round on Saturday night was Michael Eldridge, the state high champion. Mike was rated about 1800 at that time. It might have been an Under-1800 section. Mike was younger than I was, better than I was, and on his way up. Our opening was an aggressive Alekhine Defence (1.e4 Nf6). Later in my career I would add it to my own repertoire as Black. At the time I was just trying to avoid complications. I played the Exchange Variation. Michael Eldridge kept his king in the center too long and I managed to land a knockout punch of my own: checkmate on move 20. Sawyer - Eldridge, Lewiston, ME (3), 09.02.1974 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.c4 [The main line is 3.d4 d6 4.Nf3] 3...Nb6 4.d4 d6 5.exd6 [The Exchange Variation. Sharper is 5.f4 the Four Pawns Attack.] 5...cxd6 [Very common is 5...exd6 leading to more sound positions.] 6.Nc3 g6 7.Be3 Bg7 8.Nf3 [The main line these days is 8.Rc1 0-0 9.b3 with a positional edge to White.] 8...Bg4 [Safer and sounder is to get the king out of the center by 8...0-0 9.h3 Nc6 with equal chances.] 9.Rc1 Nc6 10.Be2 [Both sides have developed all their minor pieces quickly. White has added Rc1 which will prove to be very important.] 10...Bxf3 [10...d5!?] 11.Bxf3 Nxc4 12.Bxc6+ bxc6 13.Qa4 Nxb2 14.Qxc6+ Kf8 [Black wins a pawn at the risk of a bad king position. The threat is ...Nd3+.] 15.0-0 Rc8 [The critical line is

15...Nd3 16.Rb1 Rc8 17.Qa6 Rxc3 18.Bd2+/=] 16.Qa6 Qd7 17.Nd5! [Maybe even better is 17.Na4!] 17...Rb8 18.Rc7 Qb5? [The final error, but Black is in trouble anyway. 18...Qa4 19.Rc8+ Rxc8 20.Qxc8+ Qe8 21.Qb7+-] 19.Qxb5 Rxb5 20.Rc8# 1-0

90 – Luch 6.Nc3 g6 7.a4 Bg7 Black wins an Alekhine Defence with a surprisingly sharp tactic in reverse that ends the game immediately. Black found a difficult tactical maneuver to foresee. The 2018 game Cristian Silva Lucena vs International Master Michal Luch of Poland was played in Spain. Bishop retreats are hard for many players to see coming. It worked wonders here. Silva Lucena (2301) - Luch (2398), 29th Roquetas de Mar Open Roquetas de Mar ESP (6.15), 05.01.2018 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 Nb6 5.exd6 cxd6 6.Nc3 g6 7.a4 Bg7 8.a5 N6d7 9.Nf3 0-0 10.d5 [10.Be3 Nc6=] 10...Nf6 11.Be2 e6 12.0-0 exd5 13.cxd5 Na6 14.Nd4 Re8 15.Bb5 Bd7 16.Bxa6 bxa6 17.Qd3 Qc8 18.Bf4 Qc5 19.Be3 Qb4 20.Qxa6 [20.h3 Rac8=] 20...Ng4 21.Nc6 [21.Ncb5 Nxe3 22.fxe3 Rxe3-/+] 21...Qxb2 22.Ne2 Nxe3 23.fxe3 Qb3 24.Rad1 Bg4 25.Rde1 [25.Kh1 Bc8-+] 25...Bc8 [Black wins a piece. Also strong is 25...Qxe3+! 26.Kh1 Bxe2-+] 0-1

91 – Teixeira 4.c4 Nb6 5.exd6 Black plays a five move combination that won three pawns for a knight starting on move 15 of this Alekhine Defence. That could benefit either player, but immediately White dropped the extra piece due to the power of the pin. Thus, Black remained up three pawns in the game between Alexey Fernandez Cardoso and Ricardo da Silva Teixeira. Fernandez Cardoso (2429) - Teixeira (2235), 13th American Continental Montevideo URU, 10.06.2018 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 Nb6 5.exd6 exd6 6.Nc3 Nc6 7.d5 Ne5 8.Be2 [8.f4+/=] 8...Qe7 9.b3 g6 10.Be3 Bg7 11.Qd2 0-0 12.Nf3 Bg4 13.Nd4 Bxe2 14.Ndxe2 Rfe8 15.0-0 Nbxc4 16.bxc4 Nxc4 17.Qd3 Nxe3 18.fxe3 Qxe3+ 19.Qxe3 Rxe3 20.Rf3? [20.Rac1=] 20...Rxe2! [Black remains up three pawns.] 0-1

92 – pawnstar3 5.exd6 exd6 Active pieces is the goal for Black in the Alekhine Defence. Tactical combinations crop up all over the place, even in the symmetrical Exchange Variation 5.exd6 exd6. I have played this opening thousands of times as Black. So far I have scored slightly better with 5...cxd6 than 5...exd6, but I play both with equal frequency. Each time I just pick one. I used to play this Exchange line as White to avoid tactics. But then I got tactically outplayed by a high rated correspondence player. Then I realized that any opening with very active pieces is going to allow for tactical complications. Here is a three minute blitz game where Black's knights go to the queenside Nb6/Nc6 and his bishops go to the kingside Bf6/Bg4 (although Bf6/Bf5 is more common). I note that the famous GM Roman Dzindzichashvili recommends in his repertoire that White play the moves 6.Nc3 Be7 7.Bd3. When my opponent played 6.Nf3, I thought maybe ...Bg4 would be better than ...Bf5. In such a fast time control, the pieces started flying. In the end, I picked off a queen. pawnstar3 - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 21.05.2012 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.c4 Nb6 4.d4 d6 5.exd6 exd6 6.Nf3 Be7 7.Nc3 0-0 8.b3 [The main line from here goes: 8.h3 Bf5 9.Be2 Nc6 10.0-0 Bf6 11.Be3 Re8 12.b3 h6=] 8...Bf6 9.Bb2 Bg4 [9...Nc6=] 10.Be2 Nc6 11.0-0 Re8 [11...d5 12.c5 Nc8=] 12.Re1 [12.d5 Rxe2! 13.Qxe2 Nd4 14.Qe3 Bxf3 15.gxf3 Nc2=] 12...Qd7? 13.d5 Nb4 [13...Ne5? 14.Nxe5 Rxe5 15.Qd2+/=] 14.a3 Na6 15.Nd4 Bxe2 16.Ndxe2 Nc5 17.b4? Ne4 [17...Nxc4-/+] 18.Rb1 Nxc4 [18...Nxc3! 19.Bxc3 Rxe2 20.Rxe2 Bxc3-/+] 19.Qd3? [19.Nxe4 Rxe4 20.Bxf6 gxf6=] 19...Nxb2 20.Nxe4? [White drops the queen, but at any rate he has lost a piece with 20.Rxb2 Nxc3-+] 20...Nxd3 21.Nxf6+ gxf6 0-1

93 – Duppel 6.Nc3 Be7 7.Nf3 This is the Exchange Variation. It’s always been popular at the club level. The advantage is that e5 is no longer a weakness, but it is also no longer a strength. Black can recapture with either pawn. Let’s examine the game M. Schmidt vs Matthias Duppel. Schmidt - Duppel, Schopfenheim 1997 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 Nb6 5.exd6 exd6 [Black is ready to move his bishop to e7, castle, and move a rook to e8. White can develop just about any way he wishes. In practice, Black develops faster and often pressures the advanced pawns. White may get his pieces crossed up. I’m amazed at how many short games I have won in this line.] 6.Nc3 Be7 [Black does best to play the bishop and castle quickly.] 7.Nf3 [This natural move temporarily allows a pin on g4.] 7...0-0 [Black almost always castles kingside, so the sooner the better. A rook appearing soon on e8 can be useful. It is not clear just where Black wants to develop his queen's knight and queen's bishop. Black might know where he prefers to place them, but why let White know yet. Better to castle first and keep White guessing.] 8.Be2 [The bishop covers f3 and c4 without cutting off the connection between d4 and the queen.] 8...Nc6 [Black keeps White guessing as to whether his bishop will go to f5 or g4.] 9.0-0 [White completes his kingside development and awaits Black's intentions before deciding on the position of his dark-squared bishop.] 9...Bg4 10.d5 [This is most effective before Black plays his bishop to f6.] 10...Bxf3 [This bishop covers c6 should White capture there immediately.] 11.Bxf3 Ne5 [Black attacks c4 and f3. However, since the bishop on f3 is somewhat limited by his pawns on the light squares, the Black knight is even stronger for the moment.] 12.b3 Bf6 [What fun this bishop could have on this long diagonal!] 13.Bb2 [The knight on c3 needs to be protected.] 13...Re8 14.Be4 g6 15.Qc2 Bg7 16.Rae1 f5 [Get back, bishy!] 17.Bd3 Nbd7 18.Nd1 Qh4 [Hmmm. I wonder what we could do over here. A direct attack on the king seems to be in order.] 19.f4? [It appears White has overlooked the loss of the Exchange. 19...Nf3+ 20.Rxf3 Rxe1+ 21.Bf1 [Black sees the opportunity to give up his rook for two pieces and enter an ending with an extra piece.] 21...Rxd1 22.Bxg7 Rxf1+ 23.Kxf1 Kxg7 24.Qe2 Nc5 [What a powerful extra piece that knight will be on e4!] 25.g4

[White desperately tries to protection of e4.] 25...Ne4 26.gxf5 gxf5 27.Qg2+ Qg4 28.Qb2+ Kf7 [White's position collapses.] 0-1

4.c4 Nb6 5.f4 dxe5 6.fxe5 This is the Four Pawns Attack, the classic clash of style.

94 – Szklarczyk 6...c5 7.d5 e6 This game from the ICCF World Cup V was an international open postal chess tournament with 9 players in our section. About that time I began to play the Alekhine Defence as Black. My early attempts were inconsistent but helpful to my learning. The Alekhine Defence Four Pawns Attack with 5.f4 is a key thematic variation. It is not very popular in actual practice. The Four Pawns was easier to play in postal chess because these lines can be complicated and tactical. In correspondence chess players could look up opening theory in books. In blitz or tournament play, White almost always leaves the book early in the Alekhine Defence. Play usually continues 5.f4 dxe4 6.fxe5 Nc6. I experimented with a topical line 6...c5!? This was seen in the famous game Bronstein-Ljubojevic, Petropolis Interzonal 1973. In that game, White won in 44 moves. My opponent for this game was Janusz Szklarczyk. When ICCF started publishing ratings later (in 1991) he was rated 2295. Szklarczyk - Sawyer, ICCF, 1981 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 Nb6 5.f4 dxe5 6.fxe5 c5 [The main line of the Four Pawns Attack is 6...Nc6 7.Be3 Bf5 8.Nc3 e6 9.Nf3 when Black has several options.] 7.d5 e6 8.Nc3 exd5 9.cxd5 c4 10.Nf3 [If White thinks he can take 10.Bxc4? to regain the piece with a Qa4+ and capture, he will be crossed up with Black's own check and capture after 10...Qh4+!-+] 10...Bg4 [10...Bb4!?] 11.Qd4 Bxf3 12.gxf3 Bb4 13.Bxc4 0-0 14.Rg1 g6 15.Bg5 Qc7 16.Bb3 [16.Rg4! Nxc4 17.Qxc4 Qxe5+] 16...Bc5 17.Qf4 Bxg1 18.d6 Qc5 19.0-0-0 [19.Ne4=]

19...Be3+?! [19...Nc6!-+] 20.Qxe3 Qxe3+ 21.Bxe3 N8d7 22.e6 [22.f4+/-] 22...fxe6 23.Bxe6+ Kg7 24.Bd4+ Kh6 25.Be3+ Kg7 26.Bd4+ 1/2-1/2

95 – Times 6…c5 7.d5 g6 Tim Bishop sent me games that brought back memories: “Hi Tim, I trust you’re doing well. I thought these chess games might interest you. A local master plays his own variation of the Alekhine’s Defense where, in the four-pawn attack, he plays an early c5 for black. I had winning chances in both games, but couldn’t convert. Have you ever seen this variation before? I can’t find much of anything on it. On a happier note, I had a recent game I’ll treasure for many years to come. And I was surprised to see it published in the Saturday Boston Globe...” Thanks Tim. Masters such as Lawyer Times specialize in their openings to be familiar with tactics. Bishop boldly played two sharp attacking games. He pushed the fight to Black. The notes and annotations are by Bishop except as noted by Sawyer. Bishop (2048) - Times (2273), Groundhog Day Swiss Metrowest Chess Club, Natick, (3), 25.02.2014 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.c4 Nb6 4.d4 d6 5.f4 dxe5 6.fxe5 c5 7.d5 g6 8.Nc3 Bg7 9.Bf4 0-0 10.Bd3 [Note by Sawyer: Popular chess engines prefer White after 10.Qd2 e6 11.0-0-0 exd5 12.cxd5+/= Komodo, Deep Rybka, Deep Fritz, Houdini, Critter.] 10...e6 11.d6 Nc6 12.Nf3 f6 [Note by Sawyer: Black improved in the second game with 12...Nd7! 13.Qe2 Nd4 14.Nxd4 (Another interesting try is 14.Qe3!? Nxf3+ 15.gxf3 Qh4+ 16.Kd2 with chances for both sides.) 14...cxd4 15.Nb5 Qa5+ with equal chances although 0-1 in 37. Bishop-Times, Metrowest CC Natick Mass 2014] 13.Ne4N [Note by Sawyer: Houdini likes the line 13.exf6! Bxf6 14.Ne4 Bxb2 15.Bg5+/=] 13...Nd7 14.exf6 Nxf6 15.Bg5 Qa5+ 16.Bd2 Qb6 17.Nxf6+ Bxf6 18.0-0 Nd4 19.Bh6 Bg7? 20.Bxg7 Kxg7 21.Ng5 [21.Nxd4! cxd4 22.Rxf8 Kxf8 23.Qf3+ Ke8 24.Qf4 Kd7 25.c5 Qxc5 26.Rc1 Qxd6 27.Qf7+ Kd8 28.Qg8+ Kd7 29.Qxh7+ Kd8 30.Qg8+ Kd7 31.Qf7+ Kd8 32.Bxg6 and mate or significant loss of material to follow.] 21...Qxd6 22.Rxf8 [22.Qg4! offers some good attacking chances] 22...Qxf8 23.Nxh7?? [23.Qg4 instead, threatening Nxh7] 23...Qf4 24.Qa4 [time pressure; game is over; perhaps 24.Qf1 followed by exchange of queens and Rf8 tying up bishop and rook; even

though down a piece, it is difficult for him to develop because of Be4.] 24...b5 25.Qa5 Bd7 26.cxb5 [26.Rf1 may be better try] 26...Qe3+ 27.Kh1 Qxd3 28.Qc7 Nxb5 29.Qb7 Qd5 White loses on time. 0-1

96 – MarshKnight 6…Nc6 7.Nf3 In 2013 tragedy struck with the bombing at the Boston Marathon by two boys who were from southern Russia. Law enforcement found these young men and thus lessen the immediate danger to America. Almost everyone who lives in United States wish for the pursuit of happiness. This follows when we love our family, worship God, work our jobs and play our games (like chess!). I have had many friends from Russia. Thankfully, most of us do not want to hurt other people. We just want to enjoy our lives and have fun. Those who read my blog come from many countries. Here are the Top 10: 1. United States (America the Beautiful - home of Blackmar) 2. Germany (Home of Diemer and correspondence players) 3. United Kingdom (We share a similar language: English) 4. Russia (We share a love of chess. Thank you!) 5. France (Home of Gedult and our friend Eric Jego) 6. Belgium (Home of BDG theoretician Guido De Bouver) 7. Norway (Can you say Grandmaster Magnus Carlsen?) 8. Philippines (Hello to Peter Mcgerald Penullar) 9. Canada (Bonjour Mr. Jocelyn Bond of Ryder Gambit fame) 10. Netherlands (Home of tall people and the Dutch Defence!) Alexander Alekhine was a great tactical world chess champion who came from Russia. He has always been one of my favorites. I played an Alekhine Defence vs "MarshKnight". Here the White queen went to the unfortunate square d3. In blitz, White missed the tactical danger aimed at her majesty. MarshKnight (1836) - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 19.04.2013 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 Nb6 5.f4 dxe5 6.fxe5 Nc6 7.Nf3

Bg4 8.Be3 Bxf3 [8...e6 9.Nc3 Qd7= might be better.] 9.gxf3 [9.Qxf3 Nxd4 10.Qe4 c5=] 9...e6 10.Nc3 Qh4+ 11.Bf2 Qf4 12.Qd3? [12.c5 Nd7=] 12...00-0 13.Nb5? Nxe5 14.Bg3? Nxd3+ White resigns 0-1

97 – creditordebit 7.Nf3 Bg4 The most principled variation in the Alekhine Defence is the Four Pawns Attack (5.f4). White plays as many central pawns as possible to grab space. When I wrote my “Alekhine Defense Playbook” (2000), I called this variation the “Four Targets Attack”. Why? Because Black has many ways to attack these central pawns. Here is a short example of how things can go bad for White. My ICC blitz opponent was "creditordebit". The winning idea included a cross pin, a tactic used by Alekhine himself in other openings. creditordebit - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 09.05.2012 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.c4 Nb6 4.d4 d6 5.f4 [Four Pawns Attack.] 5...dxe5 6.fxe5 Nc6 7.Nf3 [The main line is 7.Be3 Bf5 8.Nc3 e6 9.Nf3 when Black usually chooses 9...Be7, 9...Bg4 or 9...Qd7] 7...Bg4 8.Be3 e6 9.Nc3 Be7 10.h3 [White has to play. 10.Be2] 10...Bxf3 11.gxf3 [I have been here before. In Bruha - Sawyer, ICC 1997 White played 11.Qxf3 Nxd4 12.Bxd4 Qxd4 Black had won a pawn and went on to win the game.] 11...Bh4+ 12.Bf2 Qxd4 [I love this cross pin idea, but even stronger is 12...Bxf2+! 13.Kxf2 Qh4+ 14.Kg2 0-0-0 and White will likely be three pawns down in the middlegame.] 13.Qxd4 Nxd4 14.Bxh4 Nxf3+ 15.Kf2 Nxh4 [White resigns since he has lost two pawns for nothing and traded into a lost endgame.] 0-1

98 – Costigan 7.Nc3 Bf5 8.Be3 e6 Okay, "Revenge" is too strong. There was no animosity between us. Costigan was friendly, encouraging and a good sport. It was just that Thomas Costigan beat me in the 1974 US Junior Open. I simply wanted to return the favor. Thomas Costigan had a twin brother Richard. They both rapidly increased their ratings in the 1970s. Around 1981 or so I seem to remember they were twin masters rated 2308 and 2309. This game was played eight years after our first encounter. Thomas was rated 2359. He visited the Chaturanga Chess Club to play a simultaneous exhibition. I was one of 15 opponents or so. Unlike many simuls, Costigan allowed us to choose our color. Naturally I chose to play the White pieces. Nice guy! Once again we played the Alekhine Defence with 1.e4 Nf6. In our early game I played the timid King's Indian Attack. After 2.d3 d6 3.Nf3 c5 4.g3 g6 5.Bg2 Bg7 6.0-0 0-0 7.Nbd2 Nc6 8.c3 Rb8. Black expanded on the queenside. He broke through and won material before I did anything serious on the kingside. In this game I play aggressively. After move 25 I was winning. I missed a quicker win with 34.c7! At the end I was up two rooks when he gave up trying to get a perpetual check. In this simul game I learned that I play better in open positions with active piece play. Also, I play better when I try to push my opponent around. Tim should not play Timidly. Sawyer - Costigan, Hatboro, PA simul 08.07.1982 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 Nb6 5.f4 dxe5 6.fxe5 Bf5 7.Nc3 e6 8.Be3 Nc6 9.Nf3 Bb4 [I play 9...Be7 as Black.] 10.Be2 [10.a3!? Bxc3+ 11.bxc3 Qd7 12.Be2] 10...0-0 11.0-0 Na5 12.Nd2 Bg6 13.Rc1 c5 14.dxc5 Bxc3 15.Rxc3 Nd7 16.Nf3 Nc6 17.a3 a5 18.Bg5 Qc7 19.Qd6 Rfc8 20.Bf4 a4 21.Rd1 Nf8 22.h3 Qa5 23.Bg5 [23.Nd4! Nxd4 24.Qxd4] 23...h6 [23...Rd8!] 24.Bh4 Bf5+/= [24...Rd8!] 25.Nd4 Nxd4 26.Qxd4 Rxc5 27.g4 Rxe5 28.Bf3 Bh7

29.c5 f6 30.Bg3 Ng6 31.Bxe5 Nxe5 32.Bxb7 Rb8 33.c6 Bc2 34.Rd2 [34.c7!] 34...Qc7 35.Rdxc2 Rd8 36.Qxd8+ Qxd8 37.c7 Qd4+ 38.Kg2 Ng6 39.c8Q+ Kh7 40.Qc4 Nh4+ 41.Kg3 Qg1+ 42.Bg2 Qe1+ 43.Kh2 Qe5+ 44.Rg3 1-0

99 – Barthel 9.Nf3 Bb4 10.c5 The Four Pawns Attack leads to tactical fun for both players. White plays to push his opponent off the board. Black steps around the pawns with pieces and gains a lead in development. In Miguel Sanjuan Garcia vs Ansgar Barthel, the Four Pawns became targets. By move 14, three of those pawns were gone and the fourth pawn was hanging. Chalk this one up for Black. Sanjuan Garcia (2019) - Barthel (2187), Gibraltar Masters 2018 Caleta ENG 29.1.2018 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 Nb6 5.f4 dxe5 6.fxe5 Nc6 7.Be3 Bf5 8.Nc3 e6 9.Nf3 Bb4 10.c5 [10.Be2 Na5 11.0-0 Qd7=] 10...Nd5 11.Bd2? [11.Qd2 0-0=/+] 11...Nxd4 12.Nxd4 [12.Nxd5 Qxd5 13.Bxb4 Qe4+ 14.Kf2 Nxf3 15.Bc3 Nxe5-+] 12...Qh4+! 13.g3 Qxd4 14.Nxd5 Qxe5+ [14...Qxd5 15.Bxb4 Qxh1-+] 15.Be2 Qxd5 16.Bf3 [Or 16.Rf1 Bxc5-+] 16...Bxd2+ 17.Qxd2 Qxf3 0-1

100 – Bramante 9.Nf3 Be7 10.Be2 Attacking the Alekhine Defence with a bold Four Pawns Attack is a two edged sword. Pete Bramante threw his pawns and pieces at me in a very aggressive manner. My army fought back and a sharp battle involving queen moves ensued. I go food shopping with my organized wife. My job is to push the grocery cart. She starts down the aisle in one direction. Then she turns around to pick up what she forgot and turns around again. Her loss of time does not matter when buying food, especially if I throw something yummy in the cart when she's not looking. Loss of time on the chess board can be fatal for the female. In this game Pete Bramante had trouble with beautiful queen. First she moves 17.Qd3. Then she turned around and went back with 21.Qd1. This allowed Black to get a powerful mating attack. Bramante (1700) - Sawyer (2100), corr APCT 1981 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 Nb6 5.f4 dxe5 6.fxe5 Nc6 7.Be3 Bf5 8.Nc3 e6 9.Nf3 Be7 10.Be2 0-0 11.0-0 f6 12.Nh4 [The main line is 12.exf6 Bxf6=] 12...fxe5 13.Nxf5 exf5 [Also very good is 13...Rxf5=] 14.d5 [14.dxe5 Qxd1

15.Raxd1 Nxe5=] 14...Nd4 15.Bxd4 exd4 16.Qxd4 Nd7 17.Qd3 [17.Kh1 Bc5=] 17...Bc5+ 18.Kh1 Qg5 [18...Qf6=/+] 19.Nb5 Rae8 20.Nxc7 Re3 21.Qd1 [21.Ne6! Qh6=/+] 21...Bd6 [Even better was 21...Qh4! 22.d6 Rf6+] 22.Ne6 [22.Nb5! Be5=/+] 22...Qh4 0-1

101 – insight 10.Be2 0-0 11.0-0 The Four Pawns Attack is recommended for White by attacking players. Indeed, I have often played it myself as White. If Black is careless or passive, White can win quickly. Fortunately for Black, the wins go both ways! If Black can win a pawn, he will probably win the game. Now where do you suppose Black might find some lowly pawn to target for destruction? Aha! Here we have four targets sitting all alone in the middle of the board. Picture each of these White pawns with a bulls-eye painted on its nose. Black only has to hit and destroy one target for a probable victory! We could call this variation the "Four Targets Attack." White has two approaches to the main line, one positional and one wild (see the next few games). Here I examine the positional line where White tries to control the board. For the main game I’ve chosen the Internet Chess Club game “alejo2” and “insight.” These masters play under handles. "insight" plays anonymously, while "alejo2" gives his name and where he is from in Argentina. It was a blitz game, but these players are far from weak. I do not have the ratings for this particular game. However, on the same day that this game was played, they played each other another game in which alejo2 was rated 2360 and insight 2529. Both players have been higher than that from time to time. They probably had the opening memorized and played the first dozen moves in a matter of a few seconds. They have no doubt studied this line and knew exactly how they wanted to play it. The player with White has also played the Alekhine as Black. Both are very experienced in blitz play. And, as in almost any speed of chess, the game was ultimately decided by a blunder. alejo2 (2360) - insight (2529), Internet Chess Club, 08.02.1999 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 Nb6 5.f4 dxe5 6.fxe5 [Taking with the d-pawn

would allow Black to swap queens and keep White from castling. After the f-pawn recapture note that White's pawns (targets) are each defended only once. When the Black pieces step around these pawns, the White king does not have much to hide behind.] 6...Nc6 [Immediately Black gangs up on the d4 pawn. If White pushes to d5, the e-pawn falls.] 7.Be3 [This is the most accurate move, but players who do not study theory will play a weaker move.] 7...Bf5 [Rapid development is essential for Black. This bishop has to get out quickly, so that Black's e-pawn can be pushed to e6. That holds back White center and allows his dark squared bishop to emerge out of f8. Since there is no knight to pin on f3, the choice of f5 for the bishop is obvious.] 8.Nc3 [It makes little difference which White knight comes out first. As long as they both come out soon, Black continues to play the same way and the same positions will be reached. There are some good alternatives for Black, but White has adequate continuations in any case. Black will benefit more from knowing a few lines well than from learning additional lines.] 8...e6 [Protecting the bishop on the f5 and releasing the bishop from f8, Black also eyes a queen check on h4.] 9.Nf3 [White prepares to castle and covers a possible check from h4 as well.] 9...Be7 [This basic developing move plans for rapid castling followed by ...f6 and the opening of the f-file. Black's dark-squared bishop has more prospects for usefulness on f6, g5 or even h4 than on b4. There are five good moves here for Black (Bg4; Bb4; Nb4; Qd7; and what I cover, Be7). They are all playable though theory fluctuates on them slightly. The old standard line with Be7 that I recommend fits well with other lines. Therefore, this should be relatively easier to understand and remember.] 10.Be2 [White chooses the positional line. He puts pieces in play, holds his center and awaits further developments. This is one of White's best lines against the Alekhine, from a theoretical standpoint. Fireworks can begin at any moment with little warning. But then again, amazingly most of these pieces can be exchanged rapidly, and we can instantly find ourselves in a rather wide open endgame. Usually both sides spend several moves staying active and avoiding weaknesses, moving back and forth "like a chess game" until suddenly, someone strikes. It may be that they strike an effective blow; on the other hand, they may just leave themselves open for a powerful counterstrike. At any rate, it makes for interesting chess.] 10...0-0 [Black has completed his development first and is now ready to strike back at the White pawns.] 11.00 f6 [Black opens up the position and obtains equal play. Anyone who plays

the French Defense as Black or the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit as White could be familiar with this concept of attacking an e-pawn from the front with an f-pawn.] 12.exf6 [It is easier for White to exchange here rather than to defend e5.] 12...Bxf6 [Just as with many lines in the Exchange Variation, here Black's bishops slash parallel diagonals through the center from the kingside while his knights hit the center from the queenside. Black's only real concern is the isolated e-pawn, which could become weak. However, this pawn can be exchanged when White pushes to d5, or the pawn can also be advanced to e5 and even e4 in an attack. The advantage of that pawn is the support that it lends to d5 and f5.] 13.Qd2 [What shall do with his rooks? Lifting the queen up, he plans to move a rook to d1.] 13...Qe7 [The queen steps up to make way for a rook on d8 and to support the advance of the e-pawn.] 14.Rad1 Rad8 [Black brings in the final rook and hits at d4 which is pinned do to the queen on the d-file. Now both sides are completely developed.] 15.Qc1 [Side-stepping the pin.] 15...h6 [Experience has proven this to be an excellent move. Black is ready for action and simply waiting for White to commit himself. But this pawn move also provides a possible retreat of the bishop from f5 to h7, and prepares the advance of Black's pawn to g5 to assist in a kingside attack.] 16.Kh1 [With this White accomplishes to things. He moves his king out of the way diagonal checks, and he makes a hiding place for his bishop on g1.] 16...Bh7 [Black avoids potential combinations against f5.] 17.Bg1 [White gets his bishop out off the e-file before trying to open up the position.] 17...Rfe8 [There are a lot of ways that Black can play here. I chose this blitz game as the main game for this line, not because it is perfect, but because it demonstrates the typical type of play you are likely to see in your games. In fact, White plays quite well in this game and yet Black still has the advantage near the end.] 18.d5 exd5 19.cxd5 Nb4 [Black gangs up on d5.] 20.Bb5 Rf8 21.Rfe1 Qf7 [How can White reduce the pressure on d5?] 22.Bxb6 axb6 23.Bc4 [All of a sudden we see the White on the diagonal with Black king and queen. It is time to get out of the way.] 23...Kh8 24.a3 Bxc3 [Attacking the rook, Black gets time to capture on d5.] 25.Qxc3 Nxd5 26.Bxd5 Rxd5 27.Rxd5 Qxd5 28.Qxc7 Be4 [After a normal exchange of pieces Black has a good position.] 29.Qe7 [How can Black save both his rook and his bishop?] 29...Rxf3?! [Black would stand better if he just played the rook to f4. Instead, he tries an unsound sacrifice and is rewarded for his boldness.] 30.gxf3 Bxf3+ 31.Kg1 Qd4+ 32.Qe3? [White loses a

game that he probably could win with good technique and perfect play after either 32.Re3 or 32.Kf1. Instead of that, Black wins.] 32...Qg4+ [with a mate in one.] 0-1

102 – Rookie 10.d5 exd5 The Alekhine Defence caught my interest in the 1972 Spassky - Fischer match. Bobby played it twice. Overall my database has 15 games were Bobby Fischer played the Alekhine Defence: 8 as White and 7 as Black. My oldest recorded game playing the Alekhine in a tournament was against Mike Eldridge from 1974. It was a memorable win for me as White, because Mike was higher rated than me. Here I played Black against the computer Rookie in a wild Four Pawns Attack blitz game. Black has four targets to aim at in the center, so in my 2000 book the “Alekhine Defense Playbook” I wrote: “We could call this variation the Four Targets Attack.” Rookie chose the aggressive 10.d5 line where White sacrificed a rook on h1 to get a pawn to e7. Black made threats against the White king and the advanced e-pawn. All the while Black offered to exchange material leading to a winning endgame. Rookie - Sawyer, Internet Chess Club 5 0, 2007 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 Nb6 5.f4 dxe5 6.fxe5 Nc6 7.Be3 Bf5 [Rapid development is essential for Black.] 8.Nc3 e6 9.Nf3 Be7 [The traditional main line, but there are several alternatives. 9...Bg4; 9...Bb4; 9...Nb4; 9...Qd7] 10.d5 [10.Be2 0-0 11.0-0 f6 12.exf6 Bxf6 is the alternative line.] 10...exd5 11.cxd5 Nb4 12.Nd4 Bd7 13.e6 fxe6 14.dxe6 Bc6 15.Qg4 Bh4+ 16.g3 Bxh1 17.gxh4 0-0 18.Qg5? [The losing move. Black cannot let White carry out the threatened 19.e7. Undoubling the h-pawns is not a good enough reason to swap queens. Correct is 18.0-0-0 Qf6.] 18...Qxg5 19.hxg5 c5 20.0-0-0 cxd4 21.Bxd4 N4d5 22.e7 Rfe8 23.Bxb6? Nxb6 24.g6 hxg6 25.Bh3 Bc6 26.Be6+ Kh7 27.Re1 Bd7 [27...Rxe7 28.Bg8+ Kxg8 29.Rxe7 Nd5 30.Nxd5 Bxd5-+ Black is up a piece.] 28.Bxd7 Nxd7 29.Ne4 Rec8+ 30.Kb1 Nf6 31.Nd6 Rcb8 32.Re3 Ne8 33.Ne4 Nf6 34.Nd6 Ne8 35.Nf7 Kg8 36.Ne5 Nf6 37.Nxg6 Kf7 38.Ne5+ Kxe7 39.Nc6+ Kd6 40.Nxb8 Rxb8 41.Ra3 a6 42.Rg3 Rg8 43.a4 g5 44.Rb3 Kc7 45.Rg3 g4 46.Rc3+ Kb8 47.Rc4 g3 48.hxg3 Rxg3 49.Ka2 Nd5 50.Rd4 Ne7 51.Re4 Nc6 52.b4

Rd3 53.b5 axb5 54.axb5 Rd4 55.Re8+ Rd8 56.Re4 Nd4 57.b6 Kc8 58.Re3 Kd7 59.Rc3 Kd6 60.Kb1 Kd5 61.Rc7 Rb8 62.Rc1 Nc6 63.Rc2 Re8 64.Kb2 Re4 65.Ka3 Rb4 66.Rxc6? [Desperation.] 66...Kxc6 0-1

103 – Evans 11.cxd5 Nb4 The Alekhine Defence tempts White to advance pawns and kick the Black knight around the board from the king's knight file (Ng8) to the queen's knight file (Nb6). In theory White gets a strong pawn center and Black gets active pieces. The Four Pawns Attack is the sharpest line White can choose. The first nine moves are the basic set-up for both sides. Black has several options. My favorite has been 9...Be7. At move 10, White must decide whether to develop with 10.Be2 or whether to pounce immediately with 10.d5 before Black has castled. This 10.d5 line is like grabbing a tiger by the tail. You may grab far more than you bargained for. White often gives up the Exchange and Black is forced to endure a strong attack. There is a lot to remember, but in postal chess both sides use books. Thus choosing good lines became more important than memory. I played Ron Evans in the 1989 USCF Golden Knights. I ventured the Alekhine Defence. It became one of my favorites. This game is a good example of me getting a good opening position, and then being outplayed in the ensuing middlegame. Every opening has a learning curve. This was one of my lessons. My opening was good, but Ron Evans played better. Evans - Sawyer, corr USCF 1991 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 Nb6 5.f4 dxe5 6.fxe5 Nc6 7.Be3 Bf5 8.Nc3 e6 9.Nf3 Be7 10.d5 exd5 11.cxd5 Nb4 12.Nd4 Bd7 13.e6 fxe6 14.dxe6 Bc6 15.Qg4 Bh4+ 16.g3 Bxh1 17.0-0-0 Qf6 18.gxh4 0-0 19.Be2 Bd5 20.Bg5 Qe5 21.Rg1 [The natural 21.e7 is usually met by 21...Rf2-/+] 21...Nxa2+ [Another good idea is 21...h5! 22.Qxh5 Qxd4 23.Rg4 Nxa2+ 24.Nxa2 Qe5-+] 22.Nxa2 Bxa2 23.Bh6 g6 24.Bd3 Rf6 25.h5 Bxe6 26.Nxe6 Qxe6 27.Qg5 Re8 28.hxg6 Qc6+ 29.Kb1 hxg6 30.h4 [Black maintains a pawn advantage after 30.Bxg6 Rxg6 31.Qxg6+ Qxg6+ 32.Rxg6+ Kh7 33.Rf6 Nd5 34.Rf5 Kxh6

35.Rxd5 Re7=/+] 30...Qd6 [30...Ree6-+] 31.Bc2 [31.Bxg6 Rxg6 32.Qxg6+ Qxg6+ 33.Rxg6+ Kh7=/+] 31...Qe5?! [31...Re5-/+] 32.Qg2 Qh5 33.Bb3+ Kh7 34.Bg5 Re2? [Black's last chance was 34...Rf3 35.Bd1 Ref8=/+] 35.Qxb7 Qf3 36.Qxc7+ Kh8 37.Bxf6+ Qxf6 38.Qc1 1-0

104 – France 12.Nd4 Bd7 13.e6 Alekhine Defence players like to face the Four Pawns Attack as Black. The tactics in the sharpest line are difficult for either side to handle flawlessly. Since Black typically plays the Alekhine Defence more often than White does, Black tends to be more familiar with the lines. Those who regularly play Black usually score well. However everyone has to start somewhere. In my 1989 USCF Golden Knights Postal Tournament game vs Michael France, I was still fairly new to this opening. As Black I managed to get an advantage. Then I blundered on move 29. Five moves later it was over. Michael France outplayed me and deserved the win because of it. A few years after this game, I started playing this opening much more often. In 2000, Sid Pickard and Son published my book on it entitled “The Alekhine Defense Playbook”. The book sold out. On page 127 after the move 19.Be2, I recommended the improvement 19...Qe5! to counterattack the undefended Be3. This idea follows the postal chess game Antin - Van Beurden, correspondence 1992. There White resigned after move 27. France - Sawyer, corr USCF 1991 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 Nb6 5.f4 dxe5 6.fxe5 Nc6 7.Be3 Bf5 8.Nc3 e6 9.Nf3 Be7 10.d5 [The alternative is 10.Be2 0-0 11.0-0 f6 12.exf6 Bxf6=] 10...exd5 11.cxd5 Nb4 12.Nd4 Bd7 13.e6 fxe6 14.dxe6 Bc6 15.Qg4 Bh4+ 16.g3 Bxh1 17.0-0-0 Qf6 18.gxh4 0-0 19.Be2 Bd5 [19...Qe5!-/+] 20.Bg5 Qe5 21.a3 [21.e7 Rf2-/+] 21...Na2+ [21...Nc6 22.Nxd5 Nxd5=/+] 22.Nxa2 Bxa2 23.e7 Rfe8 24.Bd3 Nd5 25.Nf3 Qd6 26.Qe4 g6 27.Bc2 Nf6 28.Qxb7 Qxe7 29.h5? [29.Qa6=] 29...Qf7? [29...Rab8!-/+] 30.hxg6 hxg6 31.Ne5 Qe6 [31...Rxe5 32.Qxa8+ Ne8 33.Bd2+/-] 32.Nxg6 Ne4? 33.Ne7+ Rxe7 34.Qxa8+ 1-0

105 – Blijlevens 13…fxe6 14.dxe6 White blasts ahead attempting to open lines for attack. However as I hope to demonstrate, White's king and pieces are just as vulnerable as Black's are. In the game van Willigen vs Blijlevens. van Willigen - Blijlevens, corr Netherlands 1982 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 Nb6 5.f4 dxe5 6.fxe5 Nc6 7.Be3 Bf5 8.Nc3 e6 9.Nf3 Be7 10.d5 exd5 [I prefer to simplify the central situation. No longer does Black have to concern himself with defending a pawn on e6.] 11.cxd5 [The exchange 11.Bxb6 axb6 lessens the pressure on d5.] 11...Nb4 12.Nd4 [If 12.Bb5+ c6 and Black gains time attacking the bishop.] 12...Bd7 [The bishop is ready to cover e6 and prepare the advance of the c-pawn. In addition, he is ready to occupy c6 if and when it becomes available.] 13.e6 [Charge! White is ripping open Black's position. All the open lines toward the kingside would be just wonderful except for the fact than White's king is still in the center with no center pawns to hide behind.] 13...fxe6 14.dxe6 Bc6 [A great diagonal for this bishop! Black's minor pieces are as active as White's are.] 15.Qg4 [White targets g7 and prepares to castle queenside.] 15...Bh4+ 16.g3 [White sacrifices the Exchange so he can castle queenside, complete his development, and throw everything at the Black king. Black expects to survive the attack and thrive with extra material!] 16...Bxh1 [It is best to take the rook immediately.] 17.0-0-0 [17.gxh4 0-0 18.0-0-0 transposes back to the game] 17...0-0 18.gxh4 [If 18.Nf5, the immediate threat of mate must be dealt with. Black defends g7 and attacks f5 with 18...Qf6.] 18...Qf6 [What a wild position! Any player could blunder. Certain factors favor Black. First, Black's position is completely sound. Second, White's king is more exposed. And third, Black will likely know this position better and have a deeper understanding of the resulting positions. Many hard fought games end by a sudden White oversight.] 19.Bg5 [White forces the Black queen to declare her intentions.] 19...Qxf1 Black trades the queen for two rooks. 20.Rxf1 Rxf1+ 21.Nd1 c5 [This either drives a piece from d4 or protects a pieces on b4, or both!] 22.Bh6 [With a threat of mate in 1.] 22...g6 23.e7 Re8 [The pawn on e7 must be stopped.] 24.a3 Rxe7 25.axb4 cxd4 26.Qg3 Bf3 [This move combines an attack on d1 with protection of the rook on f1.] 27.Qb8+ Kf7 28.Qf8+ Ke6

[The value of Black's 26th move is now obvious.] 29.Qg8+ Kd7 30.Kc2 d3+ 31.Kxd3 Rxd1+ 32.Kc3 Na4+ [and the White queen will fall.] 0-1

4.Nf3 This old reliable move 4.Nf3 is called the Modern Variation.

106 – Marfia 4…g6 5.Bc4 Nb6 USCF National Master James Marfia performed best at face to face tournaments, but he enjoyed playing correspondence chess. Many of his games were published, so I knew what opening lines Jim played. For a few years I played the Alekhine Defence almost constantly. The Marf played the recommended main line 4.Nf3. This time I chose 4...g6 popularized by Lev Alburt. We reached a wild line after 9.Bxf7+!? There, Black sacrifices the Exchange to obtain a strong pawn on e5. That’s funny! Usually it is White with the strong pawn on e5. Jim Marfia had an edge, but after move 28 it was equal. White had an extra rook and f-pawn. Black had an extra bishop and knight. Draw agreed. Marfia (2027) - Sawyer, corr APCT EMN-A-9, 12.01.1998 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.d4 d6 4.Nf3 g6 5.Bc4 [5.c4 is an alternative.] 5...Nb6 6.Bb3 Bg7 7.a4 [7.Ng5 d5=] 7...dxe5 8.a5 N6d7 9.Bxf7+ Kxf7 10.Ng5+ Kg8 11.Ne6 Qe8 12.Nxc7 Qd8 13.Nxa8 [White could repeat moves with 13.Ne6 Qe8 14.Nc7=] 13...exd4 14.c3 Nc5 [14...h6!? 15.0-0 Kh7=] 15.cxd4 Bxd4 [Or 15...Qxd4=] 16.0-0 e5 [16...Nc6!=] 17.Nc3 Nc6 18.Nb5 Bf5 19.Nxd4 Nxd4 20.Be3 Ncb3 [A better try was 20...Qxa8 21.Bxd4 exd4 22.Qxd4 Ne6 23.Qd5+/=] 21.Bxd4 Nxd4 22.Re1 Qxa8 [22...Kf7 23.Rc1 Nc2 24.Qxd8 Rxd8 25.Rxe5 Kf6 26.f4 Rxa8 27.g4+/=] 23.Rxe5 Qd8 24.Ra4 Nc6 25.Rd5 [25.Qxd8+! Nxd8 26.Re8+ Kg7 27.Rxh8 Kxh8 28.a6+/-] 25...Qe8 26.g4 Bc8 27.f3 [27.a6!+/-] 27...Kg7 28.Qd2 [Now the position is equal. 28.Re4 Qf7 29.a6+/-] 28...Rf8 29.Re4 Qf7 30.Rd3 a6 31.Qc3+ 1/2-1/2

107 – Gorton 4…g6 5.Bc4 c6 In the 1980s I gave simultaneous exhibitions against several players at once. Mostly I played postal chess. I lived in a small town without a chess club. I contacted a chess club in Red Bank, just north of Chattanooga, Tennessee and arranged to play a simultaneous exhibition against their club. I think it was in a school. I was rated about 1900. The game was an Alekhine Defence against a scholastic player by the name of Gorton. He is probably no relation to the seafood people. I played actively but almost too carefully in this game, waiting for a mistake from Black. Playing a simul, I did not want to spend much time in deep calculation or planning. Eventually Black dropped a pawn, but the game continued. Later he trapped a bishop outside his wall of pawns and the game was over. Sawyer - Gorton, Red Bank, TN simul 07.02.1980 begins 1.e4 Nf6 [About this time I had added the Alekhine Defence as Black to my own repertoire.] 2.e5 Nd5 3.d4 d6 4.Nf3 [I was under the influence of the World Champion Anatoly Karpov who in 1980 was playing 4.Nf3. At other times I have played the four pawns attack with 4.c4 Nb6 5.f4 with a wide open sharp game.] 4...g6 [Alburt Variation] 5.Bc4 [More common is 5.c4 Nb6 6.exd6] 5...c6 6.0-0 Bg7 7.h3 [7.exd6+/=] 7...0-0 8.Qe2 Nb6 9.Bb3 d5 10.c3 [Just a solid waiting move. Remember I am playing several games at once. I did not want to spend time thinking. Play safe and step to the next board.] 10...Na6 11.Rd1 c5 12.Be3 cxd4 13.cxd4 Bf5 14.Nbd2 [14.Nc3 makes more sense to me today.] 14...Rc8 15.Rac1 Nb4 16.Rxc8 Qxc8 17.Nf1 a5 18.a3 Nc6 [18...a4 19.Rc1+/=] 19.Qb5 Qd8 20.Bg5 [Now is the time for 20.Ng3+/=] 20...h6 21.Bd2 a4 22.Bxa4 Nxa4 [Here Black has a tactical resource that he misses. Probably at this point some of the other games were done and I was coming back to this board more quickly. 22...Bd7! 23.Bc2 Nxd4 24.Qd3 Nxf3+ 25.Qxf3=] 23.Qxa4 Qb6 [23...Be4!=] 24.Bc3 Rc8 25.Ne3 Be4 [25...Be6 26.Ne1 h5 27.Nd3+/-] 26.Ne1 [Much better is

26.Nd2!+/-] 26...e6? [26...h5 27.f3 Bh6 28.fxe4+/=] 27.f3 [The Be4 is trapped.] 27...Bf5 28.g4 1-0

108 – Fischer 4…g6 5.Be2 Bg7 Walter Browne faced Bobby Fischer in a tournament. Browne almost won as White. Fischer played the Alekhine Defence as Black Leading to his world championship run. Bobby Fischer games in the Alekhine from the period 1968-1971 were not well known. Several commentators on the 1972 World Championship match were surprised Fischer played the Alekhine Defence. I doubt Spassky was surprised. Fischer stood better in the opening against Browne until Fischer’s f-pawn plan bombed. Browne - Fischer, Rovinj / Zagreb (15), 03.05.1970 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.d4 d6 4.Nf3 g6 5.Be2 Bg7 6.c4 Nb6 7.exd6 cxd6 8.Nc3 [8.0-0 0-0 9.Nc3 transposes.] 8...0-0 9.0-0 [9.h3= would prevent the pin.] 9...Nc6 10.Be3 Bg4 11.b3 d5! 12.c5 [12.Nxd5 Nxd5 13.cxd5 Qxd5= saddles White with an isolated d-pawn.] 12...Nc8 13.h3 Bxf3 14.Bxf3 e6 15.Qd2 [15.b4 a6 16.Ne2=] 15...N8e7 16.Nb5?! Nf5 17.Bg4 a6 18.Bxf5 axb5 19.Bc2 Ra3 20.b4 [20.Qd3 Qh4-/+] 20...f5 [20...Qh4!?] 21.Bb3 Qf6 22.Qd3 f4 [22...Ra7 23.Rad1 f4=/+] 23.Bc1 Ra6 24.Bb2 f3 25.g3 Qf5 26.Qxf5 gxf5 27.Rad1 Nxb4 28.Rfe1 f4?! [This bold attack should lose. Correct is 28...Kf7!= when Black is fine.] 29.a3 Nc6 30.Rxe6 fxg3 31.Bxd5 gxf2+ 32.Kxf2 Kh8 33.Re3 b4 34.axb4 Nxb4 35.Bxf3 Ra2 36.Rb3 Nc6 37.Kg3 Rg8 38.Kf4 Rf8+ [38...Na5!?] 39.Ke4 Rf7 40.Bg4 Re7+ 41.Kd3 [Houdini and Stockfish prefer 41.Kd5+-] 41...Ra4 42.Ra1 Rxd4+ 43.Bxd4 Bxd4 44.Ra8+ Kg7 45.Rb5 Bf2 46.Bf5 Ne5+ 47.Kc3 Be1+ 48.Kd4 Nc6+ 49.Kc4 Bh4 50.Bc8 Nd8 51.Ra2 Rc7 52.Bg4 Be7 53.Kd5 Nc6 54.Rab2 Nd8 55.Rb1 Bf8 56.R1b2 [56.Rg1+-] 56...Be7 57.Rg2 Kh8 58.Ra2 Kg7 59.Ra8 Bh4 60.Rb8 Rf7 61.Rb2 Kh6 62.Rb6+ Kg7 63.Rb3 h5 64.Bc8 Be7 65.Rb5 [65.Rg3+ Kh7 66.Rg2+-] 65...Rf3 66.Bxb7 Rxh3 67.c6 Rc3 68.Ra8 h4 69.Ra4 h3 70.Rc4 h2 71.Rb1 Rxc4 72.Kxc4 Bd6 73.Kd5 Bg3 74.Bc8 Kf7 75.Bh3 Ke7 76.Rc1 Kf6 77.Ra1 Ke7 78.Rf1 Nf7 79.Bg2 Ng5 80.Kc5 Ne6+ 81.Kb6 Bc7+ 82.Kb7 Bd6 83.Bd5 Nc5+ 84.Kb6 Na4+ 85.Ka5 Nc5 86.Kb5 Kd8 87.Rf7 Kc8 88.c7 [Now Black is able to reach a drawn ending. At this critical point 88.Rh7!+- seems to give White winning chances since the Black bishop is overworked covering c5, c7, and h2.]

88...Nd7 89.Kc6 h1Q 90.Bxh1 Ne5+ 91.Kb6 Bc5+ 92.Kxc5 Nxf7 93.Kb6 Nd6 94.Bd5 Kd7 95.Bc6+ Kc8 96.Bd5 Kd7 97.Bb3 Nc8+ 98.Kb7 Ne7 1/2-1/2

109 – blik 4…dxe5 5.Nxe5 Nd7 It was a Saturday in January. We had some outdoor plans. The Florida weather was beautiful. Alas someone got sick and we were unable to go. I watched a few movies, went out to eat at a restaurant, wrote some additional blog posts and played through dozens of BDG games by chess friend Peter Mcgerald Penullar. Eventually I just felt like playing a few blitz games. I got on the Internet Chess Club and played my old computer buddy "blik" for eight games. My goal was to relax and to sharpen my tactics. “blik” was rated between 2383 and 2419. My rating was between 2111 and 2156. My record for the eight games was +1 =3 -4. We alternated colors. I had White in the first game. This was Game 4 of our match in the 1.e4 Nf6 Alekhine Defence. blik - Sawyer, ICC 5 0 Internet Chess Club, 21.01.2012 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.d4 d6 4.Nf3 dxe5 5.Nxe5 Nd7 6.Nf3 [White backs off from the wild and pretty much forced line of 6.Nxf7!? Kxf7 7.Qh5+ Ke6 8.c4 N5f6 9.d5+ Kd6 10.Qf7 Ne5 11.Bf4 c5 12.Nc3 a6 when most computers like Black and most humans like White.] 6...c6 7.Be2 N7f6 8.0-0 Bg4 9.c4 Nb6 10.Nbd2 e6 11.Qb3 Qc7 12.h3 Bh5 13.a4 Be7 14.a5 Nbd7 15.a6 b6 16.Re1 0-0 [I have castled with a solid position.] 17.Bd3 Rfe8 18.g4 Bg6 19.Bxg6 hxg6 20.Ne4 Nxe4 21.Rxe4 c5 22.Bf4 Bd6 23.Bxd6 Qxd6 24.g5 Rac8 25.Rd1 Qc7 26.Qb5 cxd4 27.Rexd4 Nf8 28.Ne5 [I have drifted into a position where White's queenside pawn majority is a problem for me. 28.Qe5!+/-] 28...Red8 29.f4 Rxd4 30.Rxd4 Rd8 31.Qc6! [White is much better here. I decided to try my luck in an endgame.] 31...Qxc6 32.Nxc6 Rxd4 33.Nxd4 Nd7 34.b4 Nb8 35.b5 Kf8 36.c5 bxc5 37.b6 Nxa6 38.bxa7 Nc7 39.Nb5 Na8 [Better my knight on a8 than his pawn!] 40.Nd6 Ke7 41.Nb7 c4 42.Kf2 Kd7 43.Na5 c3 44.Ke3 Kc7 45.Nc4 Kb7 [My king has rescued my knight.] 46.Nd6+ Kxa7 47.h4? [Losing. Correct is 47.Kd3! Nc7 48.Kxc3 Nd5+ 49.Kd4 Nxf4 50.Nxf7 Nxh3 Drawn when all remaining pawns will be captured. But not 47.Nxf7? Nc7 48.Kd3 Nd5 49.Nd8 Nxf4+ 50.Kxc3 Kb6 and Black might have some chances as his king gets closer.]

47...Nb6 48.Nb5+ Kb7 49.Nxc3 Kc6 50.Kf3 Nd5 51.Ne4 Ne7 52.Kg2 Nf5 53.Kh3 Kd5 54.Nf2 Kd4 55.Ng4 Ke4 56.Ne5 Nd6?!= 57.Kg3 Kd5 Game drawn by mutual agreement in an equal position. 1/2-1/2

110 – jubajeba 5.Nxe5 c6 6.Be2 The Alekhine Defence leads to sharp positions where Black takes on some risk in an effort to make things difficult for White. Here is the 3 minute blitz game jubajeba - Sawyer where White plays the strongest move 4.Nf3. Black has many good fourth move ideas. Nowadays most recommend 4...dxe5, such as Tim Taylor does in his book. For some reason for several years I did better with 4...g6, 4...Nc6 and 4...Bg4 than I did with 4...dxe5. My early results had little to do with the value of the move. In this case a player rated below me came up to bite me. It was a wild game with a nice checkmate at the end. jubajeba - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 04.09.2012 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.d4 d6 4.Nf3 dxe5 [Usually I play 4...Bg4 which I gave in my Alekhine Defense Playbook.] 5.Nxe5 c6 6.Be2 Bf5 7.0-0 e6 8.c4 Nf6 9.Nc3 Nbd7 10.Bg5 Be7 [10...Nxe5! 11.dxe5 Qxd1 12.Raxd1 Nd7=] 11.Nxd7 Qxd7 12.d5 cxd5 13.cxd5 Nxd5? [13...0-0 14.dxe6 Qxe6=] 14.Bxe7 [14.Bb5!+-] 14...Kxe7 [14...Nxc3!-/+] 15.Qb3 Nxc3 16.bxc3 a6? [Black should be able to defend with 16...Kf6 17.Rad1 Qc7 18.g4 Bg6 19.Qb4 Qe5 20.h4 h6=] 17.Rfd1 Qc7 18.Qb4+ Kf6 19.g4 Bg6? [19...Qe5 20.gxf5+/-] 20.Rd4? [White has a forced mate in 6: 20.g5+ Kxg5 21.Qg4+ Kf6 22.Qh4+ Ke5 23.f4+ Ke4 24.Rd4+ Kf5 25.Bd3#] 20...e5? [Here is Black's last good chance. 20...a5!=] 21.Rd6+ Kg5 22.h4+ Kxh4 23.g5+ Kxg5 24.Qg4+ Kh6 25.Qh4# Black is checkmated 1-0

4.Nf3 Bg4 This is the Modern Defence Traditional Main Line.

111 – Miller 5.exd6 exd6 6.Be2 Adam R. Miller was my fourth round opponent in the 2009 Space Coast Open. Miller's rating was on a rapid rise until he reached 2083 a few months after this game. As of the 2012 National K-12 Championship, Adam Miller was rated 2058. In our game I chose the Alekhine Defence on which I had written a book. I had not played it much since about 2000. Adam Miller mixed his variations somewhat with 4.Nf3 and 5.exd6 which allows Black easy equality. My response to his Exchange Variation was 5...exd6. My position was solid but too passive requiring much patience and care. As pointed out, I missed several better defensive choices, including some that could have led to my advantage. Unfortunately I gave White the chance to mess up my kingside pawn structure. Two more inaccuracies and I was toast. Adam Miller simply outplayed me. Miller (1998) - Sawyer (1964), Space Coast Open (4), 10.05.2009 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.d4 d6 4.Nf3 Bg4 5.exd6 exd6 6.Be2 Be7 7.0-0 0-0 8.c4 Nb6 9.Be3 Bf6 10.Nbd2 Re8 11.Rc1 Nc6 12.b3 d5 [12...a5=] 13.c5 Nd7 14.a3 Ne7 [14...Nf8] 15.h3 Bxf3 16.Nxf3 c6 [16...Nf5!=] 17.Bd3 Ng6 18.Nh2 Bg5 19.Qf3 Qf6 20.Qh5 [20.Qxf6 Bxf6 21.g3+/=] 20...Bxe3 [Houdini recommends that I sacrifice the Exchange here with 20...Rxe3! 21.fxe3 Bxe3+ 22.Kh1 Qxd4 23.Rce1 Qxd3 24.Qf3 f6 25.Rxe3 Qc2 26.b4 Nde5-/+] 21.fxe3 Qe7 22.Ng4 Nf6? [22...Ndf8=] 23.Rxf6 gxf6 24.Rf1 Kg7 25.Kh1 f5 26.Qh6+ Kg8? [Wrong square. After this the game is lost. Better was 26...Kh8 27.Rxf5 Qf8 28.Qh5 Qg7 29.Nh6 Rf8 30.Rf1+/- and although White is better, he still has to find a final breakthrough that works.] 27.Rxf5 f6 28.Nxf6+ Kh8 29.Rh5 Nf8 30.Re5 [30.Rg5!+- mates faster.] 30...Qf7 31.Nxe8 Rxe8 32.Rxe8 Qxe8 33.Bf5 Qf7 34.g4 Ng6 35.Kg2 1-0

112 – ATtheGreat 5.Be2 e6 6.h3 My chess friend “ATtheGreat” sent me a message on ICC: “I played a brilliancy against an FM in the Alekhine's Defense in a 45 30 simul. I know you wrote a book on the Alekhine's Defense and figured you may want to add this game to further additions to your book.” His opponent was FM Diego Mussanti. His finger notes read in part: “Hi! My name is Diego Mussanti, FIDE Master. I have been amongst the most active ICC vendors for many years.” I looked at this Alekhine Defence 4.Nf3 Bg4 game. It really was pretty good. In the Alekhine Defence, it is White that usually gets a big pawns center. However by move 21 here, it was Black who had the big pawn center. Nice turnaround for ATtheGreat! Games in this opening involve a lot of heavy piece play with tactics always lurking. Alekhine games tend to end suddenly. This was the case here. Black seized the momentary opportunity for a knight fork. Mussanti (2375) - ATtheGreat (1994), ICC 45 30 u Internet Chess Club (1), 22.08.2012 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.d4 d6 4.Nf3 Bg4 5.Be2 e6 [This 5...e6 is the most popular move. In my Alekhine Defense Playbook, I recommend 5...c6. Both moves are about equal in theory. 5...c6] 6.h3 [The main line is 6.0-0 Be7 7.c4 Nb6 8.Nc3 0-0 9.Be3 which has been played thousands of times in my database. A critical continuation is 9...Nc6 10.exd6 cxd6 11.d5 exd5 12.Nxd5 Nxd5 13.Qxd5 Bf6 with play for both sides.] 6...Bxf3 7.Bxf3 Nc6 8.0-0 Be7 9.c4 Nb6 10.exd6 cxd6 11.b3 d5 12.c5 Nc8 13.a3 Bf6 14.Bb2 N8e7 15.b4 Nf5 16.Nd2 Bxd4 17.Qb3 Bxb2 18.Qxb2 0-0 19.b5 Ncd4 20.Bd1 e5 21.Re1 f6 22.Nb3 Nxb3 23.Bxb3 Kh8 24.Qa2 d4 25.c6? [White is understandably eager to push the c-pawn, but this is premature. Better would be 25.Be6 Ne7=] 25...bxc6 26.bxc6 Ne7 27.Rac1 Rc8 28.Ba4 Qa5 29.Qe6 d3 30.Red1 Nd5 31.Rxd3? [If 31.Rc4 Nc3 32.Rxd3 Nxa4 and Black is up a piece.] 31...Nf4 White resigns 0-1

113 – Maks 6.0-0 Be7 7.c4 Nb6 In 1985 I played in team competition for the Chaturanga Chess Club in the Philadelphia area. They used me for the road team when others did not travel. Here we played at home in Hatboro. My opponent was this night was Gary Maks. Like many young men our age, we hoped to improve. You can only really do that by playing. So we did. By his comments I judged Gary to be a man who valued faith and family. His rating was on the rise. Later Gary Maks and I became USCF experts rated over 2000. I find the Alekhine Defence to be a wonderfully restless opening. I have to be busy. If I sit around to do nothing, I lose. I began playing the Alekhine Defence as Black in 1980. Throughout the next decade I studied books by Vladimir Bagirov and Lev Alburt. They both played the Alekhine hundreds of games each. I did not play much in 1985. That night Maks played the Alekhine Defence against me. How great is that? We chose 4.Nf3 Bg4 5.Be2 e6. I call this the Bagirov line. Also Lev Alburt played it many times when he took a break from his own 4.Nf3 g6 line. My approach was to control the center, keep my pieces active, maintain the tension, and probe for a weakness. I found it in his undefended Nb6 after move 23. White won a piece for several pawns. I checkmated Black's king in the middle of the board. Sawyer (1981) - Maks (1720), Hatboro, PA 21.03.1985 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.d4 d6 4.Nf3 [I have 4.c4 more often than 4.Nf3 as White.] 4...Bg4 5.Be2 e6 6.0-0 Be7 7.c4 Nb6 8.Nc3 N8d7!? [8...0-0 9.Be3+/=] 9.exd6 cxd6 10.b3 0-0 11.h3 Bh5 12.Ba3 Nf6 13.Qc2 Rc8 14.Rac1 a6 15.g4?! [15.Rfe1+/=] 15...Bg6 16.Bd3 Qd7?! [16...Bxd3 17.Qxd3=] 17.Bxg6 hxg6 18.Qe2 Nh7 19.Rce1?! [19.Rfe1+/=] 19...Ng5 20.Bc1 Nxf3+ 21.Qxf3 Rc7 22.Qe3 Bf6 23.Ne4 Qd8? [Black maintains a solid defense with 23...Be7=] 24.Nxf6+!? [Stronger was 24.d5!+-] 24...Qxf6 [24...gxf6 25.d5+/=] 25.d5 Nxd5 [25...Nc8 26.dxe6+/-] 26.cxd5 Rc3 27.Qf4 Qh4 28.Re3 Rxe3 29.Qxe3 exd5 30.Kg2 Rc8 31.Bb2 Rc2 32.Qd4 Qf6 33.Qxf6 gxf6 34.Bxf6 Rxa2 35.Rc1 Kh7 36.Rc8 [White missed a mate in five beginning with 36.h4!+-] 36...g5 37.Bxg5 Kg7 38.Rb8 b5 39.Be3 f6 40.Rb7+ Kg6 41.h4 f5 42.h5+ Kf6 43.g5+ Ke5 44.Re7# 1-0

114 – Mednis 7.h3 Bh5 8.c4 One cold November Saturday, I went to Lansdale, Pennsylvania to play the notable author Edmar J. Mednis in a simul. I got him to autograph my copy of his book “How to Beat Bobby Fischer.” I apologized for only buying the paperback edition instead of the hardcover. Edmar Mednis said not to worry. The paperback edition was his best-selling book. As I recall, Mednis played about 20-30 of us. Edmar Mednis was rated 2484 at the time. Edmar Mednis turned his French Defence win against Fischer into great book ideas. His explanations of what was happening in grandmaster games increased my understanding. Mednis was awarded the title of Grandmaster in 1980. It was fun to play a famous author! What was it like to have Bobby Fischer resign? I always liked Mednis' explanation: “I have been asked innumerable times how it felt to receive Fischer's handshake. Well, it sure felt great to defeat Fischer, but I must admit that I didn't get Bobby's handshake nor, for that matter, any other direct communication from him. What happened was the following: Next time we were together was for Round 4, and before the games for that round started, Fischer went up to the referee, Hans Kmoch, and told him that he was resigning. Mr. Kmoch then came over to me and informed me, ‘Mr. Fischer has resigned.’” For our game, I decided to venture the Alekhine Defence with 1.e4 Nf6. I had dabbled in this opening from time to time. Fifteen years later it would become my number one defense to 1.e4 for the next 15 years. In the game below we follow for a while one of the Spassky-Fischer games from 1972. Eventually I got my pawns and pieces tangled up and got crushed by Grandmaster Mednis. Mednis - Sawyer, Lansdale, PA 07.11.1981 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.d4 d6 4.Nf3! [This "Modern Variation" is the strongest move in theory. Black has to work harder to equalize than with 4.c4 Nb6 5.exd6, the Exchange Variation; or 5.f4, Four Pawns Attack] 4...Bg4 [I have played this opening over 2000 times and analyzed many lines deeply with computers. Still it is not clear to me which is the best 4th move for Black. In this game I chose the historically most popular. I have played them all, including 4...g6 Lev Alburt; 4...dxe5 Most popular nowadays; and 4...Nc6 Less popular, but

playable.] 5.Be2 e6 [This is the traditional continuation after 4...Bg4. In my repertoire Playbook I chose the Flohr Variation with 5...c6] 6.0-0 Be7 7.h3 [To play h3 or not is an interesting question. Sometimes it matters and other times it does not. More common here is not to play h3 and just continue 7.c4 Nb6 8.Nc3 0-0 9.Be3] 7...Bh5 8.c4 Nb6 9.Nc3 0-0 10.Be3 d5 11.b3 [Now I am on my own. The main line goes 11.c5 Bxf3 12.gxf3 Nc8 13.f4 when Black choose between 13...Bh4 or 13...Nc6] 11...Nc6 [11...a5 Black could fight for more space with 12.c5 N6d7 13.a3+/=] 12.c5 Nc8 13.b4 b6? [A better arrangement is 13...a6 14.Qb3 f6+/=] 14.a3 f6? [14...Bxf3 15.Bxf3 bxc5 16.bxc5 Bg5 17.Rb1 Bxe3 18.fxe3 N8e7 19.Qd3+/=] 15.exf6 Bxf6 16.Re1 [Mednis plays active and safe. More committal is 16.g4 Bg6 17.g5 Be7 18.b5 Na5] 16...Qd7? [16...Bxf3 17.Bxf3 bxc5 18.bxc5 N8e7+/-] 17.Ne5!? [If White was not playing a couple dozen other players at once, he might have chosen 17.b5! (or first 17.g4) leading to a serious of exchanges that requires exact calculation to prove a winning advantage.] 17...Nxe5 18.Bxh5 Ng6? [Wrong way. Black could occupy a thematic Alekhine Defence square with 18...Nc4! 19.Bg4 Ne7 20.Bg5 Threat to win queen with Bxe6+ 20...Nf5 21.Bxf6 Rxf6+/= White is better, but Black might survive.] 19.Bg4 Rf7? [Black should protect d5 with 19...Nce7] 20.Nxd5! Nce7 [If 20...Qxd5 21.Bf3+- and White picks off the Ra8.] 21.Nxf6+ gxf6 22.Qb3 [The weak focal point is e6.] 22...f5 23.Bf3 Rc8 24.Rad1 Nd5 25.Bg5 b5 26.Rxe6! [Crashing through.] 26...Qxe6 27.Bxd5 Qe8 28.Bxf7+ Qxf7 29.d5 c6 30.Qf3 Black has lost two pawns and has no counter play. 1-0

115 – Lalith 8.c4 Nb6 9.exd6 Databases have millions of games. It's a blessing and a curse. Masters play so many different lines. It's hard to choose. I've spent more than 40 years developing repertoires. My Alekhine 1…Nf6 Playbook has deeper chess engine analysis than my old “The Alekhine Defense Playbook” published in 2000. I’ve played the Alekhine hundreds of times as White and thousands as Black. I wrote Alekhine Playbook as a repertoire for myself. Grandmaster Babu M.R. Lalith won this Alekhine Defence against Mohan Kushagra. Black defended queenside and pushed for a kingside mating attack. Kushagra (2159) - Lalith (2529), 55th ch-IND Challengers Ahmedabad IND (5.9), 16.08.2017 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.d4 d6 4.Nf3 Bg4 5.Be2 e6 6.0-0 Be7 7.h3 Bh5 8.c4 Nb6 9.exd6 cxd6 10.a4 a5 11.Qb3 0-0 12.Be3 Na6 [12...Nc6=] 13.Qb5 Bxf3 14.Bxf3 d5 15.c5 Nc4 16.Na3 [16.Bc1=] 16...Nxe3 17.fxe3 Nb4 18.Rac1 Bg5 19.Rfe1 [19.Rc3=] 19...Qc7 20.Nc2 Nc6 21.Rb1 f5 22.b4 axb4 23.Nxb4 Na5 24.Nc2 Bd8 25.Rb4 Qe7 26.Reb1 Bc7 27.Qd3 [27.Qe2 Rfb8=] 27...Qh4 28.Na3 [28.Qe2 g5-/+] 28...g5 29.Nb5 Bg3 30.Nd6 [30.Bd1 g4 31.R4b2 Nc4-+] 30...g4 31.Nxf5 Rxf5 32.Bxg4 Rf6 33.Rb6 [33.e4 Rg6 34.Qd1 dxe4-+] 33...Bf2+ 34.Kh1 Qxg4 0-1

116 – Stankovic 9.exd6 cxd6 10.Nc3 I love Alekhine Defence 1.e4 Nf6 with either color. I've played it hundreds of times as White and thousands as Black. Its wide open tactics lead to exciting chess with original positions. Here Milo Stankovic traps the knight of his opponent Daniel Gomez Anadon. Stankovic (2416) - Gomez Anadon (2189), 45th La Roda Open 2018 La Roda ESP, 30.03.2018 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.d4 d6 4.Nf3 Bg4 5.Be2 e6 6.0-0 Be7 7.h3 Bh5 8.c4 Nb6 9.exd6 cxd6 10.Nc3 0-0 11.Be3 Nc6 [11...d5 12.c5 Bxf3 13.Bxf3 Nc4=] 12.d5 exd5 13.Nxd5 Nxd5 14.Qxd5 Bg6 15.Rad1 Bf6 16.Qd2 Re8 17.b3 a5 18.Qxd6 Qxd6 19.Rxd6 a4 20.c5 Nb4 21.Bb5 axb3 22.axb3 Re7 [22...Rec8 23.Rc1+/=] 23.Rfd1 h6 24.Bd2

[24.Bxh6+/-] 24...Na2 [24...Ra3 25.Bc4+/-] 25.Bc4 Nc3 [25...Be4 26.Nd4+-] 26.Bxc3 [If 26...Bxc3 27.Rxg6 wins knight by pin.] 1-0

5.Be2 c6 This 5...c6 is the Flohr Variation to which I have been partial.

117 – Schroer 5.Be2 c6 6.c4 I played a simultaneous exhibition game vs Jonathan Schroer on the Internet Chess Club. Schroer earned an International Master FIDE title in 1984. He was a skilled attacking player. IM Schroer was a great blitz player who played many online simuls. This was played at a pace of 35 35 (that was 35 minutes plus 35 seconds increment added after each move is played. When this game was played, Jonathan Schroer had an ICC rating of 2708. My rating was 2232. I do not know how many other boards Schroer was playing at once. I chose the Alekhine Defence. Schroer - Sawyer, ICC 35 35 u Internet Chess Club, 26.11.2002 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.d4 d6 4.Nf3 Bg4 5.Be2 c6 6.c4 Nb6 7.Nbd2 dxe5 8.Nxe5 Bf5! [Up to this point Schroer was playing rapidly. White seemed to be surprised by my move. He used 30 minutes for his next two moves. Nigel Davies only considered 8...Bxe2 9.Qxe2 Qxd4 10.Ndf3 when White has a strong attack.] 9.c5N [My book had: 9.Nb3 e6 10.0-0 Be7 11.a4 N6d7 Usually it is in Black's interest to challenge any piece on e5 and swap it off if possible.] 9...Nd5 [I happily returned to the hole White created on d5. Since White spent so long on this 9th move, he must have been prepared for the obvious 9...Qxd4 10.Nxf7 Kxf7 11.cxb6 Qxb6 when White has compensation for the sacrificed pawn.] 10.Ndf3 Nd7 11.Nc4 e6!? [This is a risky continuation because it leaves a big hole on d6. I decided to risk it so as to complete my development. At least this way my bishop covers d6.] 12.0-0 Be7 13.Re1 0-0 14.Bd2 Qb8!? [14...b6! seems to be the most aggressive continuation. I considered it, but decided not to mix it up with an IM whose tactical skills exceed mine. I decided that I would force White to come up with a plan and a combination while his clock was ticking. 14...Qc7 is the most natural move.] 15.Rc1 Bg4 16.h3 Bxf3 17.Bxf3 Re8 18.Qb3 Qc7 19.Red1 [White waits for Black to force the issue and create a

weakness that he can attack without deep thought. We both decide to wait for a mistake and repeat the position three times.] 19...Rac8 20.Re1 Ra8 21.Rcd1 Rac8 22.Rc1 Ra8 Game drawn by repetition 1/2-1/2

118 – Mertanen 4.Nf3 Bg4 White develops his king side knight to its most natural square in the Modern Variation 4.Nf3. The knight protects the two center pawns. He gives up any rash attempt to trap the Black knight and waits further developments. The name "Modern Variation" seems rather funny nowadays since it is the main line among grandmasters and anything but modern. Still, there is no need to change the name. What has happened is that the deeper variations (based on Black's 4th or 5th moves) have received their own names. Black plans to play e7-e6 but does not want to immediately block in his light-squared bishop. He pins the knight and threatens ...dxe5 when White cannot recapture with the knight. Classical bishop development to g4 or f5 is possible in most Alekhine lines. The Flohr Variation (5.Be2 c6) is named after the grandmaster who played it (Botvinnik - Flohr, Nottingham 1936). For many years I played other variations vs 4.Nf3 such as 5...e6, 4...dxe5, or 4...g6. Each of these lines is fully playable, however the Flohr Variation (5.Be2 c6) was more in keeping with my style. I did not really pay close attention to this line until Burgess wrote his second book on the Alekhine in 1996. I had won a game as White vs the Flohr Variation to beat long time Alekhine Defense expert Dr. Ted Bullockus in an APCT postal game back in 1978. That game made me dismiss 5...c6 unfairly. Eventually I found a way to combat my own line vs the Flohr that gave Black at least equality. Let’s examine the game Ari Tonteri vs Janne Mertanen. Ari Tonteri - Janne Mertanen, Lahti 1997 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.d4 d6 4.Nf3 Bg4 5.Be2 c6 6.Ng5 [This is a very tricky and can lead to wild tactical complications.] 6...Bf5 [It is much better for Black to avoid swapping bishops which gives White a strong attack.] 7.e6!? [White gambits a pawn with the hope of exploiting Black's weaknesses.] 7...fxe6

[Taking with the bishop was too greedy and would give White great counterplay.] 8.g4 [This forces the Black bishop away from e6 for that White can regain his gambit pawn.] 8...Bg6 9.Nxe6 [White does best to take the pawn immediately.] 9...Qd7 [Black saves his queen and chases away the White knight.] 10.Nf4 [Threatening to take either minor piece.] 10...Nxf4 11.Bxf4 e6 12.Nc3 Be7 [Amazingly Black has excellent chances. Both sides played very well in the following game and if fits with a typical scenario in this variation. I am sure that some improvements can be found for either side, but I chose this game because I like it (and because the concepts used by these players can be used by you over and over again).] 13.Qd2 Na6 14.0-0-0 Nb4 15.a3 Nd5 [Black grabs a great central outpost for his knight. White decides to swap knights.] 16.Nxd5 cxd5 [Naturally Black chooses to open a line toward White's king rather than toward his own!] 17.h4 Rc8 [With the threat of taking on c2.] 18.Bd3 Bxd3 19.Qxd3 0-0 [Black rushes his king to a somewhat safer location and incidentally attacks the bishop.] 20.Be3 b5 [We now have a middlegame where the players have castled on opposite sides. It becomes a race to see who can pry open the opponents king first. Exciting chess!] 21.g5 b4 22.axb4 Qa4 [Black is threatening to capture either b-pawn.] 23.c3 Qxb4 [Making use of the pin on the c-file. 24.g6 h6 [This is a very important move because Black wants to keep the kingside closed and blocked up.] 25.Qd2 Qa4 26.Bxh6 [White is trying to blast open the kingside and play for checkmate.] 26...Rb8 [Of course Black dare not take the bishop, and anyway, he must continue his attack to slow down White attack. Here Black is threatening a queen check on a1 followed by a capture on b2 with either the rook or queen.] 27.Kb1 [White breaks off the attack to defend for a moment.] 27...Rb3 [What else can Black bring to his attack? Make way for a second rook!] 28.Qe2 [Aiming at e6.] 28...e5 29.Qh5 [29.dxe5 allows 29...Ra3!] 29...Rfb8 [Black doubles up on the pinned b-pawn.] 30.Bc1 [Sneaky. White is hoping that Black will either capture the pawn on c3 or play his rook to a3 threatening mate next move on a1.] 30...Bf6 [White was threatening to check on h7 and mate on h8! This move gives an escape catch to Black's king on e7 and protects g7.] 31.Qf5 [White tries to swing around and check from the other side since checks on the h-file are ineffective.] 31...Ra3 Back to the mate threat on a1.] 32.Qe6+ Kh8 [White's attack is stalled and there is no time to advance the h-pawn in view of the threats to his own

king.] 33.b4 [Defending the mate in one, White allows a mate in two.] 33...Ra1+ [and the queen mates next move on a2.] 0-1

119 – Kafel 5.Be2 c6 6.0-0 Bxf3 A popular version of the wedding vows contains the phrase: “To have and to hold from this day forward.” Your intended spouse gives themselves for you to have. You pledge to keep them. When I performed weddings I used that phrase. I pronounced them married at the end of the service. Later, some held on to their spouses. Some spouses left. Others stayed. In the Alekhine Defence, Black voluntarily gives White the e5 square. White has a pawn on e5, but it is his responsibility to hold onto it. The difference between the French and the Alekhine is that the French Black pawn is on d5 while the Alekhine pawn is on d7. The Alekhine player can challenge the e-pawn with …d6. This puts e5 in danger and under some pressure. My game against Kafel illustrates White’s problem. Kafel (2030) - Sawyer (2424), ICC 4 0 Internet Chess Club, 10.03.1999 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.d4 d6 4.Nf3 Bg4 5.Be2 c6 6.0-0 Bxf3 7.Bxf3 dxe5 8.dxe5 e6 9.Qd3!? [9.Qe2 is normal.] 9...Nd7 10.Re1 Qc7 11.Nc3 Nxe5 12.Qe2? [White dropped the e5 pawn, a common occurrence in the Alekhine. White should regain the pawn by 12.Nxd5! Nxf3+ 13.Qxf3 cxd5 14.Qxd5=] 12...Nxc3 [Or 12...Nxf3+! 13.Qxf3 Bd6 14.Nxd5 cxd5 15.Qxd5 Bxh2+ 16.Kf1 0-0 17.Qe4 Bd6=/+] 13.bxc3 [13.Qxe5 Qxe5 14.Rxe5 Nd5=/+] 13...Nxf3+ 14.Qxf3 Bd6 15.h3 0-0 16.Qg4 Be5 17.Bb2 Bf6 18.h4 Qe7 19.h5 Rfd8 20.h6 g6 21.Re3 Bg5 22.Rf3 Bxh6 [White has lost a second pawn.] 23.c4 Bg7 24.Bxg7 Kxg7 25.Re1 h5 26.Qe4 Rd2 27.g4 hxg4 28.Qxg4 Rh8 29.Qe4 Qh4 30.Rf4 Qh2+ 31.Kf1 Qh1+ 32.Qxh1 Rxh1+ White resigns 0-1

120 – Goldthrope 7.Bxf3 dxe5 After a rare good night’s rest at a hotel, I returned for the fourth round of the 5th Turkey Bowl Open. My opponent Christopher Goldthrope had the lowest rated at 1800 that was allowed in the top section. Chris Goldthrope was a notable coach of scholastic players in South Florida. We were playing in Boca Raton, Florida. Christopher Heung's mom told me Goldthrope is an excellent coach for beginners. About half the time in tournament play in the old days, I played the CaroKann Defence. Many times I played the Sicilian Defence or the Open Game. Later I added 1...Nc6. Thirty five years ago I added the Alekhine Defense which I have played thousands of times as Black. I wanted a win here. As of 2006, I had always won with the Alekhine Defence in tournaments. This game is remembered by me for White's move 47.Na1. I found this position quite humorous. I am sure Christopher Goldthrope teaches his students that knights belong in the center, not in a corner. Grandmaster Julio Becerra, who won this tournament, stopped by for a moment, notice the trapped knight, glanced at me and moved on. So I finally win a game.

The fifth round game was a half point bye arranged before the tournament so as to travel back home for work the next day. My final score 2.5-2.5 in the Open Section. This was one of my better results after I passed age 50. Goldthrope - Sawyer, 5th Turkey Bowl Boca Raton, FL (4), 19.11.2006 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.d4 d6 4.Nf3 Bg4 [The main line which I play about half the time.] 5.Be2 c6 6.0-0 Bxf3 7.Bxf3 dxe5 8.dxe5 [My had opponent blitzed all his moves up to this point very quickly. Most tournaments have a five second delay per move. Higher rated opponents normally play known opening positions in 10-15 seconds per move. This guy was playing in 1-2 seconds per move, so his clock was not moving. Not yet. During the last half of the game, he used almost all his allotted two hours thinking time.] 8...e6 [Prevents intrusion on d5.] 9.c4!? [This line makes it difficult for White to defend e5. With the queens off the board, the Black King is in no trouble. Better are 9.Re1; 9.Qe2; or 9.Nd2 potentially heading for d6.] 9...Ne7 10.Qxd8+ Kxd8 11.Rd1+ [I played 11.Bd2 Nd7 12.Ba5+ b6 13.Bc3 and 1-0 in 30. Sawyer - Bullockus, corr APCT 1978] 11...Nd7 12.Nc3 [12.Bh5!? g6 13.Be2+/=] 12...Ng6 [=] 13.Be3 Ngxe5 14.Be2 Kc7 15.Ne4 f6 [Covers g5] 16.f4 Nf7 17.a3 [This looks slow. 17.Rd3 to double rooks makes more sense, although 17...Rd8=] 17...Nd6 18.Nc3 Nf5 19.Bf2 e5 20.Bg4 g6 [Secures f5+h5] 21.Bxf5 gxf5 22.Ne2 Bh6 23.b4 Rhe8 24.Ng3 Bxf4 25.Nxf5 e4 26.Bg3 [26.g3!? Rg8 27.Ra2=/+] 26...Bxg3 27.Nxg3 Re5 28.Rf1 [28.Rd4 f5-/+] 28...Rae8 [28...a5 29.Rae1 axb4 30.axb4-/+] 29.Rae1 Nb6 30.Rxf6 [30.Rc1 R5e6-/+] 30...Nxc4 31.Nf5 [I expected 31.Rf7+!? R8e7 32.Rxe7+ Rxe7 and now 33.Rxe4 Rxe4 34.Nxe4 Nxa3 35.g4 Nc2-/+ reaching the game continuation with an extra tempo for White if one ignores the position of the Black King in the initial pawn race.] 31...Nxa3-+ 32.Rf7+ Kb8 33.Nd6 R8e7 34.Rxe7 Rxe7 35.Rxe4 Rxe4 36.Nxe4 Nc2 37.g4 [37.b5-+] 37...Nxb4 38.g5 [38.Kf2 otherwise it's curtains at once 38...a5 39.Ke3-+] 38...a5 39.h4 Nd5 [39...a4!? seems even better 40.h5 a3 41.Nc5-+] 40.h5 Nf4 41.h6 [41.Kf2 Nxh5 42.Ke3 Kc7-+; 41.g6 Nxg6 42.hxg6 hxg6 and Black wins with four pawns vs the Knight.] 41...a4 42.Kf1 [42.Nc3 does not help much 42...b5 43.Kf2 Nh3+ 44.Ke3 Nxg5-+] 42...a3 43.Nc5 b5 44.Nb3 a2 45.Ke1

[45.Kf2 is the last straw 45...c5! a convincing end 46.Ke3-+] 45...c5! [A fitting end to a beautiful game] 46.Kd2 [46.Nxc5 Deflection from a1 46...a1Q+] 46...c4 47.Na1 b4 48.Kc2 b3+ 49.Kc3 Kc7 50.Kb2 Kd6 51.Kc3 Ke6 52.Kb2 Kf5 53.g6 Kxg6 54.Kc3 Kxh6 [I was in no hurry. White is going nowhere on the queenside. 54...Nd3 secures the win.] 55.Nxb3 [If 55.Kb2 I was considering winning with 55...Nd3+ 56.Ka3 Kg5 57.Ka4 b2-+] 55...cxb3 56.Kb2 Kg5 0-1

121 – Bullockus 8.dxe5 e6 9.c4 The International Correspondence Chess Federation (ICCF) awarded Ted Bullockus the title International Arbiter in 1982. His peak ICCF rating was around 2300. Dr. Ted Bullockus and I were USA 10th Olympiade Chess Team members in 1982-84. I was on Board 4 and Bullockus on Board 6. Alex Dunne of USCF Chess Life fame played Board 5. Bullockus told me he had hundreds of pages of notes on the Alekhine Defence based on his years of play and analysis. Our game began 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.d4 d6 4.Nf3. This was played in Anatoly Karpov style. He was world champion at the time we played this game. I did well following Karpov lines. After move eight we reached the basic starting point for this line. There are many White set-ups from this point. The key question: Is the pawn on e5 strong or weak? As White I swapped queens and play for better piece co-ordination. This game I think was annotated by the former Georgia State Chess Champion Thomas Morris for the APCT News Bulletin. Alas I no longer have a copy of that article. Sawyer - Dr. Bullockus, corr APCT Q-36, 1978 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.d4 d6 4.Nf3 [Two other common variations are the Exchange Variation 4.exd6 and the Four Pawns Attack with 4.c4 Nb6 5.f4.] 4…Bg4 [In the 1972 Spassky-Fischer match, Bobby played 4...Bg4 in one game and 4...g6 in another. Later 4...dxe4 became more common.] 5.Be2 c6 [Flohr Variation; Fischer played 5...e6.] 6.0-0 Bxf3 7.Bxf3 dxe5 8.dxe5 e6 9.c4 Ne7 10.Qxd8+ Kxd8 11.Bd2!? [This idea came from the Caro-Kann Defence where the bishop starts on d2 and goes to c3 or a5.] 11…Nd7 12.Ba5+ b6 [A weakness. In my Alekhine Defense Playbook I gave 12...Kc8 13.Bc3 g5!? 14.Nd2 Ng6 15.Rfe1 Bg7 with equal chances.]

13.Bc3 Kc7 14.b4?! Rd8 [14...g5!=/+] 15.a4 Ng6 16.Re1 Nh4 17.Be4 g5 18.Nd2 Bg7 19.Nf3 Nxf3+ 20.Bxf3 h5 21.a5 g4 22.axb6+ axb6 23.Ra7+ Kb8 24.Rea1 Nxe5 25.c5 bxc5 26.bxc5 Kc8 27.Ra8+ [27.Be2!+-] 27...Kd7 28.R1a7+ Ke8 29.Bxe5 gxf3 30.Bxg7 Black resigns 1-0

122 – Cherner 8.dxe5 e6 9.Qe2 Dr. Ted Bullockus (previous game) had a tremendous impact on my chess life. Shortly after our game I began also playing the Alekhine Defence as Black, including the Flohr Variation 5…c6. While I remained a universal openings player, the Alekhine was one of my most common choices. One of the best and worst qualities of this opening is that White usually leaves the known book fairly quickly. Black has to make a lot of decisions. Creativity and tactics matter! Lyle Cherner and I met 15 times in several different openings. Here he chose a very good line against my Alekhine Defence. I got into trouble as Black because my king was not safe. White was unable to put me away. We moved on to a long middlegame with frequent tactical threats on the queenside. At the end of this game I could have kept the queens on the board with 43...Qc3-+, but I was confident that I could win with two extra pawns in a bishops of opposite color endgame against this opponent. Apparently he thought so too. White resigned. Cherner (1750) - Sawyer (1960), corr APCT EMQ-2, 30.07.1996 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.d4 d6 4.Nf3 Bg4 5.Be2 c6 6.0-0 Bxf3 7.Bxf3 dxe5 8.dxe5 e6 9.Qe2 Nd7 10.Re1 Qc7 11.Nd2 Bc5 [11...Be7=] 12.Nb3 Bb6 13.Bg5 h6 14.Bd2 a5 15.c4 Nb4 [15...Ne7=] 16.Bc3 Na6 17.Rad1 a4 18.Nd2 Nac5 19.Ne4 Nxe4 20.Qxe4 Bc5 21.Qg4 Bf8?! [White has won the opening. Now on to the middlegame. Maybe Black could survive after 21...0-0 22.Be4+/-] 22.Rd2 Nb6 23.b3 [23.Red1!+-] 23...Qe7 [23...g6 24.Red1+/-] 24.Bd4 [A good move is 24.Red1!+- ] 24...Qb4 [24...h5 25.Qe4+/-] 25.Rdd1 [Still powerful is 25.Red1!+-] 25...axb3 26.axb3 g6 27.Bxb6? [This allows Black to equalize. White could continue the attack with 27.Re3+/-] 27...Qxb6 28.Qd4?! Bc5 29.Qd7+ [This drives the Black king to safety. 29.Qb2 0-0=/+] 29...Kf8 30.Qd2 Kg7 31.Qc2 Ra3 32.Rb1 Qb4 33.Red1 Rha8 34.Rd2 Ra1 35.Rf1 R8a3 36.Be2 Rxf1+!? [Or

36...R1a2 37.Qxa2 Rxa2 38.Rxa2 Qxb3-+] 37.Bxf1 Rxb3 38.h3 [38.g3 Rc3 39.Qb2 Qxb2 40.Rxb2 Bd4-/+] 38...Rb1 39.Re2 Bd4 40.Qd3 Bc5 [40...c5+] 41.Qc2 Re1 42.Rxe1 Qxe1 43.Qe2 Qxe2!? [Or 43...Qc3-+] 44.Bxe2 Bd4 0-1

123 – Burgess 9.Qe2 Nd7 10.c4 Graham Burgess made major contributions to the Alekhine Defence theory in the 1990s. He played B. Martin below. White made no mistakes and took no risks, but also he did not apply direct pressure. Black appears to be cramped, but each of Black's pieces have good effective squares for operation. And what of White's e-pawn so bravely pushed with 2.e5? It is stuck there all by its lonesome. Many White players gambit the pawn in an attempt to use the open e-file for an attack on Black's king or at least on his center. Martin - Burgess, English Counties Final Birmingham, 1995 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.d4 d6 4.Nf3 Bg4 5.Be2 c6 6.0-0 Bxf3 7.Bxf3 [White might play 7.gxf3 but the double f-pawns are a weakness, while the open g-file is not all that helpful. 7...e6 8.c4 Ne7 9.f4 Nf5=] 7...dxe5 [Black attacks e5 three ways in five moves.] 8.dxe5 [White has compensation for a pawn after 8.c4!? Nb6 9.dxe5 Qxd1 10.Bxd1 Nxc4=.] 8...e6 9.Qe2 Nd7 10.c4 [White drives the knight from center.] 10...Ne7 [This is unusual, but the point will soon be obvious. The knight is headed for g6 to gang up on e5.] 11.b3 Ng6 12.Bb2 Qc7 13.Bh5 [There is no way to hold the pawn on e5. White attacks g6, potentially pins f7, and gets out of the way of his own fpawn.] 13...Ndxe5 14.f4 Nd7 15.f5 0-0-0! ["When playing the tricks, one must beware of such counter-tricks." Burgess.] 16.fxe6 [Burgess notes 16.fxg6? hxg6-+] 16...fxe6 17.Bg4 Nf4 18.Qe4 Bd6 19.g3 Nc5 20.Qe3 Nfd3 21.Bd4 Be5 22.Bxe5 Qxe5 23.Qxe5 Nxe5 24.Bh3 Kc7 25.b4 Ncd3 26.a3 Nxc4 27.Bxe6 Ne3 28.Rf3 Ne1 29.Rf7+ Kd6 30.Bb3 Rhf8 31.Nd2 Rxf7 32.Bxf7 N1c2 33.Nc4+ Ke7 34.Nxe3 Nxa1 0-1

Book 5: Chapter 3 – Modern Defence 1.e4 g6 This is the Modern Defence with 1…g6.

124 – Haines 2.d4 b6 3.Nc3 Ray Haines won this Modern Defence double fianchetto. Black developed rapidly and castled, he abandoned the center. White occupied it and then forced open lines against the Black king. Haines (1559) - bhanu2358 (1526), Live Chess Chess.com, 16.11.2017 begins 1.d4 g6 2.e4 b6 3.Nc3 Bb7 4.Be3 Bg7 5.Qd2 Nf6 6.f3 Nc6 7.0-0-0 0-0 8.g4 [8.e5 Ne8 9.f4 e6 10.Nf3+/-] 8...a5 [8...e5 9.Nge2 Ne8 10.d5+/=] 9.Bh6 [Also good is 9.h4+/-] 9...Nb4 [If 9...Bxh6 10.Qxh6 e5 11.Nge2+/=] 10.a3 Nc6 11.h4 Ne8 12.Bxg7 Kxg7 [Black has still not moved a center pawn. 12...Nxg7 13.h5+-] 13.h5 d6 14.hxg6 fxg6 15.Qh6+ Kf6 16.Nd5+ [Or 16.Bc4!+-] 16...Ke6 17.Qxh7 [17.Qxf8+-] 17...Kd7 18.Qxg6 Nf6 19.g5 Nxd5 20.Bh3+ e6 21.Qxe6# 1-0

125 – Haines 2.d4 e6 3.Nc3 The Modern Defence makes sense as a coordinated system, but some players just seem to wander into it with 1...g6. Ray Haines missed a mate, hung a rook, and won! Sometimes that happens. Haines (1498) - Rrractl (1344), Live Chess Chess.com, 20.07.2018 begins 1.d4 g6 2.e4 e6 3.Nc3 d6 4.Be3 [4.h4+/=] 4...Bg7 5.Qd2 Ne7 6.0-0-0 d5 7.f3 c6 8.Nge2 b5 9.Bh6 0-0 10.h4 b4 11.Na4 Qa5 12.b3 dxe4 13.fxe4 e5 14.h5 exd4 15.hxg6 fxg6 16.Bxg7 Kxg7 17.Qh6+ Kf6 [Black drops a rook.] 18.Ng3 [White mates 18.Qxf8+! Ke6 19.Nxd4+ Kd6 20.Nf5+ Ke5 21.Qg7+ Kxe4 22.Nd6+ Kf4 23.Qd4+ Kg5 24.Qh4#] 18...Qg5+ 19.Qxg5+ Kxg5 20.Rxh7 Re8 [20...Ng8 21.Rxd4+-] 21.Rxd4 a5 22.Nc5 Ra7 23.Nd3 Nd7 24.Ne1 [24.e5!+-] 24...Ne5 25.Nf3+ Nxf3 26.gxf3 Kf4 27.Ne2+ Kxf3 28.Rh3+? [White hangs a rook. 28.Rf7+ Kg4 29.e5+ Kg5 30.Ng1+/-] 28...Kg4 [28...Bxh3!-+ wins for Black.] 29.e5+? [29.Rg3+ Kh5 30.Nf4+

Kh6 31.Rd2+/-] 29...Kg5 30.Rg3+ Kh6? [30...Kf5=] 31.Rh4+ Kg7 32.Nf4 Rf8 33.Nh5+ Kg8 34.Bc4+ Kh7 35.Nf6+ Kg7 36.Rh7# 1-0

126 – Cavicchi 2.d4 Bg7 3.c3 Francesco Cavicchi showed us his win vs a female master: "Hi Tim, as we all know, every BDG player has to deal -more often than we'd desire- with the (in)famous Pirc-Modern complex. My suggestion to unleash the fury against it in pure "keep the flame alive"-style is the Bronstein variation of the Austrian attack, combining f4 with h4 (see Bronstein-Palmiotto, Munich 1958; David's fireworks are definitely worth a look). In the following example the victim is, one more time, a top female player: WGM M. Fierro Baquero (Elo 2338). It's amazing to see how often they're totally unprepared to face sound, poisonous sidelines: the surprise effect fully works and after 20 moves it's all over." Martha Fierro Baquero of Ecuador holds titles as an International Master and a Woman Grandmaster. Cavicchi played an inspired game with a beautiful mating attack that made blitz a lot of fun! Cavicchi (1915) - Fierro Baquero (2367 fide blitz), Fsi Arena 5 min, 24.06.2014 begins 1.d4 g6 2.e4 Bg7 3.c3 [Bronstein played 3.Nc3, but I prefer c3, sustaining the centre against ...c5 in French Advance-style with Nf6 still to come, there's no immediate danger on e4.] 3...d6 4.f4 Nf6 5.e5 Nd5 6.Nf3 0-0 7.h4 Bg4 8.Be2 c5 9.Qb3 [double pressure on d5 and b7] 9...Nb6 10.Be3 cxd4 11.cxd4 Be6 12.Qd1 Nd5 13.Bd2 Nc6 14.Nc3 Nxc3 15.bxc3 dxe5 16.fxe5 Rc8 17.h5 Na5 18.hxg6 hxg6 19.Qc1 Nc4? [Stockfish recommends 19...Qc7; after 19...Nc4? White launches a classic, automatic-pilot attack against Black fianchetto. See how weak the dark squares are. White moves are so natural.] 20.Bh6 Bh8 [20...Bxh6 21.Qxh6 and White mates in 3] 21.Bxf8 Qxf8 22.Ng5 [pressure on e6 and h7] 22...Bf5 23.Qf4 f6 24.Rxh8+! Kxh8 [If 24...Kg7 25.Rxf8 fxg5 26.Qxf5 gxf5 27.Rxc8 wins] 25.Qh4+ [Black resigns. After 25...Qh6 26.Qh6 Kg8 27.Qh7 Kf8 28.Qf7 mate] 1-0 [Cavicchi]

127 – Dubov 3.Nf3 d6 4.Bc4 a6 This Modern Defence began 1.Nf3 g6 2.e4 Bg7 3.Nf3 d6. White won using an interesting queen triangulation Qd2-Qa5-Qa3 and then 19.Bc7 in the game Daniil Dubov against Valery Sviridov. Dubov (2703) - Sviridov (2551), ch-RUS Blitz 2018 Sochi RUS, 07.10.2018 begins 1.Nf3 g6 2.e4 Bg7 3.d4 d6 4.Bc4 a6 5.0-0 b5 [5...e6 6.Re1+/=] 6.Bb3 [6.Bd3 Bb7 7.a4 b4 8.c3+/=] 6...e6 7.Re1 [7.a4 b4 8.a5+/=] 7...Ne7 [7...Nf6 8.a4+/=] 8.c3 Bb7 9.Nbd2 Nd7 10.Nf1 0-0 11.h4 h6 12.Ng3 c5 13.Bf4 cxd4 14.cxd4 Nb6 [14...Nf6=] 15.Rc1 Qd7 16.Qd2 Kh7 17.Qa5 Qd8 18.Qa3 d5? [18...Nbc8 19.Bc2+/=] 19.Bc7 1-0

128 – Tarantoga 3.Nc3 Nf6 Some avoid my Blackmar-Diemer Gambit by a Modern Defence 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 g6 3.e4 Bg7. Black forges that ...d6 has not been played. Tarantoga rated 1908 proved it is not just weak players who do this. Now 4.e5! is the correct move, gaining both space and time. I discovered that 5.Nf3! is better than my usual 5.f4?! Sawyer - Tarantoga, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 09.12.2012 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 g6 3.e4 Bg7? 4.e5! Ng8 5.f4?! [Closing the position does not help White to use his development lead. Better is 5.Nf3! Nc6 6.Bf4+/-] 5...d5! 6.Nf3 e6 7.h4 Ne7 8.h5 Bd7 9.hxg6?! [9.g4! to maintain the tension will likely favor White more.] 9...hxg6 10.Rxh8+ Bxh8 11.Be3 Nf5 12.Bf2 Qe7 13.Qd2 c5!? 14.0-0-0 [14.dxc5!+- is good for White, but in a practical matter, it may help Black for me to loosen my center.] 14...c4 [14...Nxd4 15.Nxd4 cxd4 16.Nb5 Bxb5 17.Bxb5+ Nc6 18.Qxd4+/-] 15.g4 Ng7 16.Bh3 Nc6 17.Nh4 0-0-0 18.f5 gxf5 19.gxf5 Nxf5 20.Nxf5 exf5 21.Nxd5 Qe6 22.Ne3 Qh6 23.Nxc4 Qxd2+ 24.Rxd2 Nb4 25.Nd6+ Kb8 26.a3 Nd5 27.Bxf5 Bxf5 28.Nxf5 Nf4 29.Bh4 Rg8 30.b3 Rg1+ 31.Kb2 Rg4 32.Be7 Nd5 33.Bd6+ Kc8 34.Ne7+ [34.Rh2!+-] 34...Nxe7 35.Bxe7 Kd7 36.Bb4 f6 37.exf6 Bxf6 38.Bc3 Kc6? [The clocks read: 1:26-0:32. I expected to win on time in about 20 moves. I didn’t want to throw away the win. If 38...Kd6 39.Bb4+ Kd5 40.c4+ Kc6 41.Bc3+/-] 39.d5+ Kd7 40.Bxf6 b5 41.Rd4 Rg2

42.Be5 a6 43.a4 Re2 44.Bf4 Rf2 45.Be3 Re2 46.Bd2 bxa4 47.bxa4 Kd6 48.c4 Kd7 49.Kb3 Rh2 50.c5 Rh3+ 51.Kc4 Ra3 52.Kb4 Ra1 53.Ka5 Kc7 54.Bb4 Kb7 55.c6+ Black forfeits on time 1-0

129 – Petronic 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.e5 Blitz games are notorious for entertainment and blunders. Here is a little 3minute game I played on ICC against a Women's International Master (WIM) Sanja Petronic. For this game I chose to initially aim for the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit which could be reached after 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d5. My opponent avoided this with 2...Bg7. Maybe she expected 3.Bg5 for a Veresov. However, as a BDGer, I played 3.e4. The normal response is a Pirc Defence with 3...d6. Alas she played 3...Bg7. After 4.e5 the knight was embarrassed. We end up with an unusual Modern Defence. How does this happened? Black plays on autopilot without accounting for White's actual moves. Suddenly the position gets ugly and Black gets run over. Black resigned in the face of an unstoppable mate. In 3 minute blitz (both players having a total of three minutes each for the entire game), it was very easy to get washed away and drown in the wave of unforeseen initiative. Attacking moves become very obvious. The defender falls behind in precious time. That happens to all of us. This was part of eight games in a batch that I had played about the same time. I won 6 of the 8, but my two losses were just as ugly as the losses of any other players. Since her rating was just a little bit below mine, I am sure that she usually played a lot better than this. Sawyer - Petronic, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 01.05.2012 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 g6 3.e4 Bg7? [Black is playing on autopilot and flies into a problem. Normal is 3...d6 Pirc Defence.] 4.e5! Ng8 5.f4 d5 6.Nf3 h5 7.Be3

Nh6 8.Bd3 Nc6 9.Qd2 Nb4 10.Be2 Nf5 11.Bf2 c6 12.a3 Na6 13.h3 Nc7 14.0-0-0 e6 15.g4 hxg4 16.hxg4 Rxh1 17.Rxh1 Ne7 18.Bh4 b6 19.Bf6 Bxf6 20.exf6 Ng8 21.g5 Bb7 22.Ne5 [Another good way to play is 22.Rh8 Kd7 23.Ne5+ Kc8 24.Nxf7+- Instead, I played for a mating net.] 22...c5 23.Rh8 Kf8 24.Bb5 Nxb5 25.Qh2 1-0

130 – Sarosy 3.Nc3 c6 4.h3 d5 So close I came to beating Zoltan Sarosy, one of the strongest masters I ever played in my life. Sarosy dodged. He weaved. He wiggled. He jiggled. He made me work hard. In the end I missed the best move 48. Zoltan the magnificent pulled off a draw. Darn. At the time International Correspondence Chess Master Zoltan Sarosy of Canada was near his peak rating of 2435 (in 1992) when more than 80 years old! How old is too old for chess? In 1987, under Hans-Werner von Massow the ICCF added the Elo rating system. Before that they used only class titles. By then Sarosy was already in his 80s; he might have had a much higher rating in his younger days. He won a Master Class tournament in Hungary in 1943. According to his biography in the Canadian Chess Hall of Fame, Zoltan Sarosy "Reached age 100 in 2006 while still playing chess by e-mail; in 2007, became longest lived Canadian chess player ever". The opening was a crossover between the Caro-Kann Defence (1.e4 c6 with d5) and the Modern Defence (1.e4 g6 with Bg7) which can be reached via either move order. White usually plays 1.e4, 2.d4, 3.Nc3 and then either 4.h3 and 5.Nf3 as I did, or 4.e5 and 5.f4. Black plans a slow build up in an unbalanced position. Sarosy liked to play original little known positions that made his opponents think on their own. It is dangerous for weaker players to try a slow build up, because they have not yet developed the tactical, strategical and analytical skills to make it work effectively. They get crushed without improving. Weaker players need to play openings that lead to quick contact development so they can learn quickly. They do not have to play main lines, just anything that brings all pieces out for action. When the armies clash, they will learn what works and what to avoid in the future. Sarosy already knew what works. He was a proven dangerous player

waiting to pounce and crush experts and masters due to his deep analysis. Because I developed rapidly with control of the center, I was able to prevent disaster and even obtain a winning position. Picking off his pawn with 48.Nxg6 seemed like a good idea. Alas, it failed to his brilliant defense. This draw got me to 2.5 points in the event. I won this Master Class tournament with 4.5 out of 6. Note: The Modern Defence and Caro-Kann Defence is very often reached by the moves 1.e4 g6 2.d4 Bg7 3.Nc3 c6 4.Nf3 d5 5.h3. Sawyer (2157) - Sarosy (2401), corr ICCF 1995 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 g6 4.h3 Bg7 5.Nf3 Nh6 6.Bf4 0-0 7.Qd2 dxe4 8.Nxe4 Nf5 9.c3 Nd7 10.Bc4 Nb6 11.Bb3 Nd6 12.Nc5 Nd5 13.Be5 b6 14.Nd3 f6 15.Bh2 Be6 16.0-0 Qd7 17.Qe2 Bf7 18.Rfe1 Rfe8 19.Nde5 fxe5 20.dxe5 Nc7 21.e6 Nxe6 22.Bxe6 Qxe6 23.Qxe6 Bxe6 24.Rxe6 Rad8 25.Rae1 Kf8 26.Bf4 c5 27.Ne5 Nf7 28.Nc6 Rd7 29.a4 Bf6 30.a5 Ng5 [30...Rc8 31.Kh2 b5 32.a6=] 31.Bxg5 Bxg5 32.Ne5 Rd6 33.Rxd6 exd6 34.Nd7+ Kf7 35.Rxe8 Kxe8 36.axb6 axb6 37.Nxb6 Kf7 38.Nd5 Bc1 39.b3 Ke6 40.c4 Ke5 41.g3 Kd4 [Maybe better is 41...Ke4 42.Kg2 Kd3 43.Kf1 g5 44.Nf6 h6 45.Nd5 Bb2 46.f4 Ke4 47.Kf2 Bd4+ 48.Kg2 Ba1 49.fxg5 hxg5 50.h4 gxh4 51.gxh4+=] 42.f4 Kd3 [Or 42...Bb2 43.Kf2 Ke4 44.Ke2 Bg7 45.Nc7 Bf8 46.Nb5+/-] 43.Kf2 Kc2 [If 43...Bd2 44.Kf3 Ba5 45.g4+-] 44.Ke2 Kxb3 45.Kd3 h5 46.Ne7 [Winning is 46.g4! hxg4 47.hxg4 Ka3 48.f5 gxf5 49.gxf5 Bh6 50.f6+-] 46...h4 47.gxh4 Bxf4 48.Nxg6? [White is winning after 48.Ke4 g5 49.h5 Kxc4 50.h6 Bc1 51.Nd5 Bb2 52.Ne3+ Kb4 53.Kd5+-] 48...Bg3 49.Ke2 [49.Ke4 Kxc4 50.h5 d5+ 51.Kf3 Be1 52.h6 Bc3 53.Kg4 Kb5 54.h7 c4 with a likely draw] 49...d5 50.cxd5 c4 51.Ne7 Bxh4 1/2-1/2

131 – Ferranti 3.Be3 c6 4.Qd2 d5 Some days everything seems to go right. This was one of those days. I was playing in a four round Game 30 Action tournament. After a game with White and another with Black, it's time to be White again. Since I kept winning, I kept facing stronger players. This opponent John Ferranti was rated in the 1800s. He was very kind to me after the game. John greatly encouraged me in my Blackmar-Diemer Gambit efforts. I got carried away trying to force a BDG-type position from the well-known Caro-Kann Modern Defence hybrid sometimes credited as the Gurgenidze System. In a faster tournament rapid time limit, the psychological power of the threat was very real. Players did not have as much time to work out a good defence. Twenty years ago, hardly anything was published on the BDG in English. And if it was, very few people actually read it. This became Game 33 in my original Blackmar-Diemer Gambit Keybook published by Thinkers' Press in 1992. Sawyer - Ferranti, Hershey, PA 1990 begins 1.d4 g6 2.e4 Bg7 [Modern Defence] 3.Be3 c6 4.Qd2 d5 [Caro-Kann Defence] 5.Nc3 Nf6 6.f3 dxe4 7.Bc4!? [White tries to sacrifice a pawn for open lines and a couple of tempi. Certainly 7.fxe4 is playable, too.] 7...Nd5! 8.Bxd5! [Not 8.Bh6 e3! 9.Bxe3 Nxe3 wins the d-pawn.] 8...cxd5 9.fxe4 dxe4 10.Nxe4 0-0 11.Nf3 Bg4 12.0-0 Bxf3 13.Rxf3 Nd7 [More logical is 13...Nc6 intending 14...e5!? 14.Rd1=] 14.Bh6! Nf6? [This gives Black a lost ending.] 15.Nxf6+ exf6 16.c3?! [Good, but slow. [Better is 16.Rh3! f5 17.Bxg7 Kxg7 18.Qh6+-] 16...g5? [This gives Black a lost middlegame.] 17.Bxg7 Kxg7 18.Raf1 Qd6 [Black could try 18...Rc8 intending 19.Qf2 (White could of course play 19.Rxf6 Qxf6 20.Rxf6 Kxf6 21.h4+-) 19...Rc6 20.h4+/-] 19.Qf2 Rae8

20.Rxf6 Re6 21.Rxf7+ Rxf7 22.Qxf7+ Kh8 23.Rf5 [23.Qf8+ leads to a won ending, but I prefer to threaten mate. 23...Qxf8 24.Rxf8+ Kg7 25.Rd8+-] 23...Rh6? 24.Qe8+ [Mate in 4. After the game Black asked, "Is there a book on this opening?" There is now John, and you are in it!] 1-0

132 – Dbronstein06 3.Nc3 d6 4.Be3 h6 At the time of this game, I tried to play the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit as White and 1...Nc6 as Black. I reached the BDG in about half of my games with the White pieces. That meant that in the other half as White I met a lot of BDG Avoided opening variations. My ICC opponent “Dbronstein06” chose the 1…g6 Modern Defence by transposition. Chess Openings Essentials, Vol 1 says this about the Modern Defence: "Black almost ignores what White does and develops on his own account with a wide number of plans to choose from. This makes the Modern an ideal defence for those among you that don't want a system for which you need to learn a lot of established theory. .... usually Black does proceed with ...d6 (which can also be played on the first move) and ...Bg7." In 10 moves Black pushed six pawns ahead just one square in a hedgehog style. Then he played four minor pieces to only the second rank. If White played actively and opened the position up for attack, White was likely to find a "target rich environment". Black would be too loose to protect against sharp tactics. After 11.h4 White was ready for attack. Then Black dangerously opened up the position himself. Sure, there were some threats that the second player could make. He could try to trap the Bc4. But once that threat was met, things turned ugly for Black. Sawyer (1952) - Dbronstein06 (1604), ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 19.08.2011 begins 1.d4 d6 2.e4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.Be3 h6 5.Qd2 e6 6.Bc4!? [This bishop becomes a target in battle. Better is 6.0-0-0 letting Black further display his intentions.] 6...Ne7 [Consistent. But where is the knight going from here?] 7.f3 [With the idea to set up the d4-e4-f3-g4-h4 pawn formation. 7.f4 or 7.Nf3 are both excellent options for White.] 7…Nd7 8.Nge2 b6 9.0-0-0 Bb7 10.g4 a6 11.h4 b5 12.Bb3 c6 13.d5 exd5 14.exd5 c5 15.a4 c4 16.Ba2 b4 17.Ne4 c3 18.bxc3 [18.Nxd6+] 18...bxc3 19.N2xc3

[19.Nxd6+] 19...Ne5 20.Rhf1 [20.Qd4] 20...0-0 21.Bxh6 Rc8 22.Bxg7 Kxg7 23.Qd4 f5 24.Ng5 Qa5 25.Ne6+ Kf7 26.Nxf8 Kxf8 27.f4 Rxc3 28.fxe5 Ra3 29.Bb3 Qc7 30.Kb2 Rxb3+ 31.cxb3 Bxd5 32.exd6 Qb7 33.dxe7+ Kxe7 34.Qxd5 Qxd5 35.Rxd5 Ke6 36.gxf5+ Black resigns 1-0

133 – Crotto 3.Nc3 d6 4.Nf3 The 1974 United States Junior Chess Open played at Franklin & Marshall College in Lancaster, Pennsylvania was about my 12th chess tournament. I finished 4.5-3.5. After this, the only USCF rated tournaments I played prior to 1981 were events in Maine, Tennessee and Alabama in 1977. To improve faster, you should play often more than I did. I never played chess as a child. I had voted in the 1972 US Presidential Election and was still playing as a "Junior" in 1974! I was one of the oldest players in the 1974 US Junior Open. I just met the age requirement by a few weeks. I had the privilege of playing future masters and experts: Bob Bayus, Frank Teuton, Thomas Costigan, Meeks Vaughan Jr, and Leo Schirber. I played two other significant players: future grandmaster Michael A. Rohde and Rachel Crotto. Both were younger than I. I played Michael Rohde in the blitz championship. He met my Caro-Kann 4.Nxe4 Nd7 with 6.Ng3, keeping pieces on the board. When ready, Rohde mounted a successful kingside attack. Rachel Crotto and I played several blitz games for fun. We met on the first day and spent a lot of time together in between rounds. I was a country bumpkin and she was a city girl rated 300 points above me. Rachel Crotto went on to earn a USCF National Master Certificate and become a Women's International Master. Like most from our generation, she has long since retired from active play. Below is the only game I recorded that we played, a very rare (for me) Pirc Defence as Black. Crotto - Sawyer, Lancaster, PA 09.08.1974 begins 1.e4 d6 2.d4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.Nf3 Nd7 5.Bc4 Ngf6? [If you want to play an early ...Nd7, then it makes sense to bring out the other knight via e7: 5...e6 6.0-0 Ne7] 6.e5 dxe5 7.dxe5 Ng8 8.e6 [Even stronger is 8.Bxf7+! Kxf7 9.Ng5+ Ke8 10.Ne6 with smothered mate to the queen.] 8...fxe6 9.Ng5 Ne5 10.Qxd8+

Kxd8 11.Bxe6 h6 12.Bxc8 Kxc8 13.Ne6 Bf6 14.Nd5 c6 15.Ndc7 Rb8 16.Bf4 h5 17.0-0-0 Nd7 18.Rd3 [White has a mate in four: 18.Rxd7! Kxd7 19.Rd1+ Bd4 20.Rxd4+ Kc8 21.Rd8#] 18...g5 19.Rhd1 Nh6 20.Rxd7 Nf7 21.Na6 Be5 22.Bxe5 intending 23.Rc7 mate. A very nice game for White. 1-0

Book 5: Chapter 4 – Pirc Defence 1.e4 d6 2.d4 Nf6 This defensive set-up is known as the Pirc Defence.

134 – anon3 3.Nc3 e6 4.f4 Nc6 In 2014 I trapped another queen in a Pirc Defence winning in 11 moves. In 2015 I suddenly trapped a queen and won by move 13 in an irregular opening. The queen is a danger to both sides. The queen is a powerful piece. When she moves aggressively, everyone has to take her seriously. Note that White was able to attack her by developing all his minor pieces. What is this opening called? 1.e4 d6 2.d4 Nf6 3.Nc3 e6. Actually I began 1.d4, but we reach the same position. First it looks like a Pirc with a French twist, and later a delayed Philidor with 4...Nc6 thrown in. The Internet Chess Club allows visitors to play unrated games with the temporary guest handle such as guest123, etc. Paying members can play unrated games anonymously to try out various openings or to use computers with the handle "anon". My unknown (to me) opponent below swings his knight swings to Ne7 after having lost a tempo. That costs him a pawn and more. In 2014 I experimented with questionable lines that ran along the edge of soundness, or openings I did not know well. In 2015 and 2016 I worked on good moves rather than just fun moves. Sawyer (2052) - anon3, ICC 5 0 u Internet Chess Club, 07.02.2015 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d6 3.e4 e6 4.f4 Nc6 5.Nf3 h6 6.Bd3 e5? [It is a mistake for

Black to open the center too soon. 6...Be7 7.0-0+/=] 7.d5 Ne7? [7...Nb8 8.fxe5 dxe5 9.Nxe5+/-] 8.fxe5 dxe5 9.Nxe5 Qd6 10.Nc4 Qc5? [The queen is trapped, but Black was in trouble anyway. 10...Qd8 11.Qf3+-] 11.Be3 Qb4 12.a3 Bg4 13.Qc1! Black resigns 1-0

135 – Cui 3.Nc3 Nbd7 4.f4 e5 The Black Lion is an opening you play without looking at your opponent, at least not for four or five moves. Leonardo Cui of Canada played the basic first four moves in order with 1...d6, 2...Nf6, 3...Nbd7, and 4...e5. Ray Haines responded aggressively as White. Ray wrote: "This is my game with Leonardo Cui in the first round. I had the better game in the center with a lot of space to work with. The computer rated the game as a little better for black after I gave up the first pawn. I also like black a little better after I gave up the second pawn. I had good control of the dark squares, which gave me a lot of play against his king." Black dropped a piece in tactics. In the end, he would have to give up his queen to avoid mate. Haines - Cui, Houlton ME (1), 05.08.2017 begins 1.e4 d6 2.d4 Nf6 3.Nc3 Nbd7 [The normal Pirc continues with 3...g6.] 4.f4 e5 5.Nf3 exd4 6.Nxd4 [More popular is 6.Qxd4 c6 7.Be3 d5 8.exd5 Bc5 9.Qd3 Qe7 10.Nd4+/=] 6...g6 [6...Nc5=] 7.Bc4 Nb6 [7...Bg7=] 8.Bb3 Bg4 [8...c5 9.Nf3 c4=/+] 9.Qd3 Bg7 10.0-0 0-0 11.h3 Bc8 12.Be3 Nbd7 13.Rad1 [13.Nf3+- would leave White with a clear advantage in the center.] 13...Nc5 14.Qe2 [14.Qc4! Nfxe4 15.Nxe4 Nxe4 16.f5= with a better position than the game continuation. Also good here is 16.Nb5=.] 14...Nfxe4 15.Nxe4 Nxe4 16.Qf3 Nc5 17.f5 Nxb3 18.axb3 Bxd4 19.Bxd4 Bxf5 20.Qc3 b5 [Black should play 20...Qd7! 21.Bg7 Rfe8 22.Bh8 f6 23.Bxf6 Re6=/+ when Black remains up a pawn.] 21.Rxf5 Qh4 22.Bf6 b4 [22...Qh6 23.Rxb5+-] 23.Qd2 1-0

136 – Wight 4.Be3 Bg7 5.h3 David Wight sent me a Pirc Defence that he won. According to the normal strategy, White hunted down Black’s dark-squared bishop to exchange it. The theory is that with that bishop gone, Black’s king will lose some of its natural protection. Wight as White attacked the kingside and threatened mate. In fact, he missed a mate in two on move 31. He just kept going until he found a mate 10 moves later. As Bobby Fischer said when he missed a quick mate, the mate you see is better than the one you don’t. Wight (1628) - g1br4l0t (1629), Rated Blitz game lichess, 22.10.2018 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 g6 3.e4 d6 4.Be3 Bg7 5.h3 Nfd7 6.Qd2 0-0 7.Bh6 c5 8.Bxg7 Kxg7 9.d5 Qa5 10.h4 Nf6 11.Nf3 a6 [11...h6=] 12.Bd3 [12.h5 Nxh5 13.Be2+/=] 12...b5 [12...h5=] 13.0-0 [13.h5+/-] 13...c4 14.Be2 h5 15.Qg5 b4 16.Nd1 Nxe4 17.Qxe7 Bf5 [17...Qxd5=] 18.Bxc4 [18.Ne3+-] 18...Nd7 [18...Qc5 19.Bd3 Ra7-+] 19.Ne3 Rae8 [19...Ndc5=] 20.Nxf5+ gxf5 21.Qxd7 Kg6 22.Bd3 Rd8 23.Qb7 Rb8 24.Qa7 Qxd5 25.Qe3 Qc5 26.Bxe4 Qxe3 27.fxe3 fxe4 28.Nd4 a5 29.Rf5 Rfc8 [29...f6 30.Rxa5+-] 30.Raf1 b3 [30...Rb7 31.Rg5+ Kh7 32.Rf6 Rc5 33.Nf5+-] 31.axb3 [31.Rxf7! bxc2 32.R1f6#] 31...a4 [31...Rf8 32.Rg5+ Kh7 33.Rxh5+ Kg6 34.Rxa5+-] 32.Rf6+ Kg7 33.Rxf7+ Kg8 34.bxa4 Rxb2 35.Re7 [35.R1f6 Rcb8 36.Nf5+-] 35...Ra2 36.Ne6 Rxa4 37.Rff7 Ra1+ 38.Kh2 Rxc2 39.Rg7+ Kh8 40.Rh7+ Kg8 41.Reg7# White wins by checkmate. 1-0

137 – Blacula 3…g6 4.Bg5 h6 The Pirc Defence lends itself to being attacked by virtue of the pawn on g6. My White army weaved its way through and past the Black fortress. White's pieces and pawns carved a path like a hot knife through melted butter. Black's defensive set-up began with the pawn on g6, the bishop on g7 and the king on g8. But things went wrong. White got a pawn on g6 and advanced to g7 with an unstoppable threat of g8=Q. Black's original Pirc Defence plans fell far short. Often the choices White has will revolve around what he does with his own f-pawn. White could aggressively grab space with the advance 4.f4. That was how I had trapped a queen. White could play 4.f3 (or first 4.Be3) and the 150 Attack with g4 and h4 to storm the kingside. Finally, he could leave the pawn on f2, play 4.Nf3 and 0-0 focus on the center. Against Blacula I played 4.Bg5 and after 4...h6, I retreated with 5.Be3 and opted for a 150 Attack set-up. The pawn on h6 became a target. Once I played 10.g5, I forced open lines. His rook pawn advance to 15...a4 never amounted to much. My rook pawn advance to 19.h5 continued my assault on the Blacula king because of the target on g6. White won material and the game when my g-pawn made it to 26.g7 with 27.Rh8 forcing a new queen. Previously, I had defeated Blacula in a Sicilian Dragon as Black. Sawyer (1924) - Blacula (1515), ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 07.08.2014 begins 1.e4 d6 2.d4 Nf6 3.Nc3 g6 4.Bg5 h6 5.Be3 Bg7 6.f3 0-0 7.Qd2 Kh7 8.0-0-0 c6 9.g4 [White could also try 9.h4 h5 10.Kb1+/= and then attack.] 9...b5 10.g5 [10.h4+/=] 10...hxg5 11.Bxg5 Rh8 [11...Nbd7=] 12.h4 Nh5

[12...Nbd7=; 12...Kg8=] 13.Nce2 a5 14.Nh3 Bxh3 15.Bxh3 a4 16.Bg4! Kg8 17.Bxh5 Rxh5 18.Nf4 Rh7 19.h5 Qa5 20.Qxa5 Rxa5 21.hxg6 [21.Bxe7!+- may leave White up two pawns instead of one.] 21...Rxh1 22.Rxh1 f6 23.Bh6 e5 24.Ne6 [Or 24.Bxg7!+-] 24...Bxh6+ 25.Rxh6 Nd7 26.g7 Kf7 27.Rh8 Black resigns 1-0

138 – Botti 4.Bg5 h6 5.Be3 Will it be the same as the Saemisch? Can I poke the Pirc and provoke a weakness? Will I win with a wild pawn assault? Chess openings were fascinating in the 1970s. There were no personal computers, no databases, and no chess engines. To help us find opening moves, we relied on published games and philosophical B.S. (Bobby & Spassky). If Bobby Fischer or some other world champion played an opening variation, then it must be good. But what if we did not want to follow the crowd? In the late 1970s and 1980s Fred Botti played correspondence chess in the American Postal Chess Tournaments. This APCT club was run by Helen and Jim Warren of Illinois. When I played Fred Botti, he chose the Pirc Defence. Fischer had played the Pirc as Black in 1972. Boris Spassky continued 4.f4. That did not appeal to me. It could make life too easy on my lower rated opponent. I wanted him to think on his own. Previously in 1979 I had faced Pete Melissakis and Carl Dunn. At first I played it safe vs Melissakis with the Classical 4.Nf3. But vs Dunn I ventured the rare Byrne Variation with 4.Bg5. My Byrne Attack against the Botti Pirc provoked a pawn push that provided me pleasure. We castled opposite sides. I stripped away Black’s kingside pawns. His naked king was defenseless. Sawyer (2000) - Botti (1688), corr APCT 1979 begins 1.e4 d6 2.d4 g6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5 h6?! [4...Bg7] 5.Be3 Bg7 6.f3 0-0 7.Qd2 Kh7 [7...h5 8.Bc4 c6 9.Nge2 Nbd7 10.0-0 b5 11.Bb3+/=] 8.0-0-0 c6 9.g4 Nfd7 10.h4 e5 [10...Qa5 11.Kb1+/=] 11.Nge2 [11.dxe5 Nxe5 12.g5 h5 13.Bc5+/-] 11...b5 12.Ng3 exd4 13.Bxd4 Ne5 14.Be2 Be6 [14...Qa5 15.h5+/-] 15.f4 Nxg4?! [15...Qa5 16.h5 g5 17.fxg5 hxg5 18.Nf5+-] 16.f5 h5 [16...Ne5

17.fxe6 fxe6 18.Be3+-] 17.Bxg7 Kxg7 18.fxe6 Ne5 [If 18...b4 19.Bxg4 bxc3 20.Qxc3+ Qf6 21.Qxf6+ Kxf6 22.Bh3+- White remains up a bishop.] 19.Bxh5 [Even better seems to be 19.Nxh5+ Kh7 20.Nf4+-] 19...fxe6 20.Be2 d5 21.exd5 exd5 22.h5 Nbd7 23.hxg6 Kxg6 24.Qh6+ Kf7 25.Rhf1+ Ke8 26.Bh5+ 1-0

139 – Dunn 4.Bg5 Bg7 5.Qd2 Robert Byrne competed in the World Championship cycle in 1974. Eight players fought to see who would challenge Bobby Fischer in 1975. As it turned out, the challenger would be the champion because Fischer quit. You have to keep playing to keep winning championships. Quitters cannot be champs. Byrne and his brother Donald were among the top American players from in the 1950s and 1960s. Robert Byrne placed third in the Leningrad Interzonal in 1973. Grandmaster Byrne was a chess columnist for the New York Times from 1972 to 2006. Two years after losing his title Boris Spassky was still a force to be reckoned with. Robert Byrne was the US Champion. Spassky won their match with three wins and three draws. Anatoly Karpov beat Spassky 4-1 with six draws. Then Karpov won about every tournament and every match against everybody for ten years. Fischer and Karpov talked a few times, but Bobby did not play. Back to Byrne. He played many openings. He was famous for 6.Be3 in the Najdorf Sicilian and 5.f3 c6 6.Be3 a6 in the King’s Indian Defence. Against the Pirc, Byrne played 4.Bg5 Bg7 5.f4. When Carl Dunn played the Pirc Defence against me, I chose the Byrne 4.Bg5 to avoid the popular lines. Then I went my own way with 5.Qd2 c6 6.Nf3. Fischer played 5.Qd2 a few times in the 1950s. I might have known that information back in 1979. My speculative attack continued with 8.Bh6!? Later others also won with this bishop move. In the late 1970s I won a lot of postal games. By 1980 I was playing many more experts and masters. Sawyer (2000) - Dunn (1772), corr APCT 1979 begins 1.e4 d6 2.d4 Nf6 3.Nc3 g6 4.Bg5 Bg7 5.Qd2 c6 6.Nf3 b5 7.Bd3 Bg4 8.Bh6!? [8.Ng1+/=] 8...0-0 9.Bxg7 Kxg7 10.Qf4 Bxf3 11.Qxf3 Nbd7 12.0-0-0 [12.0-0=]

12...Qb6 13.g4 a5 [13...Qxd4 14.Bxb5 Qb6=/+] 14.g5 Ne8 [14...Nh5=] 15.h4 Qxd4 [15...h5 16.gxh6+ Kh8 17.Ne2+/-] 16.h5 [16.Qh3+-] 16...Ne5 [16...Qc5 17.Kb1+/=] 17.Qh3 Rh8 [17...gxh5 18.Bxb5 Qc5 19.Qxh5+-] 18.f4 Nc4 19.Bxc4 Qxc4 20.hxg6 fxg6 21.Qh6+ [21.f5+-] 21...Kf7? [Or 21...Kg8 22.f5+-] 22.f5 Ng7 23.Rdf1 gxf5 24.exf5 a4 25.g6+ Kg8 26.f6 10

140 – Bond 4.Bg5 Bg7 5.f4 Here is the final Jocelyn Bond game from the Jonquiere championship in Canada. Thank you Mr. Bond for graciously providing your games, comments and notes! "It's done. In obtaining 1½ in 2 games against Risto Heinoo, I won the title of Jonquiere chess championship. 12 games won, and 2 draws, but it was not easy. I recall the cadence, it was 30 minutes to do mate. In the past years Michael Dufour was the champion, but this year it is different. Last week I won 1½ to ½ our match and this is that game that made the difference." "In the second game [vs Risto Heinoo], I played 1.Nc3 may be I was inspired by Tim Sawyer game that I saw in this blog earlier this year. In reality the last time I played 1.Nc3 was some 3 years sooner when I lost in 30 moves facing Bator Sambuev, a Grand master of Montreal." Note by Sawyer: Queens Knight Attack 1.Nc3 Nf6 is flexible. 2.e4 e5 is a Vienna Game. 2.e4 d6 3.d4 g6 transposes to the Pirc Defence. 2.e4 d5 3.e5 is an Alekhine Defence. 2.e4 d5 3.exd5 is a Scandinavian Defence. 2.e4 d5 3.d4!? dxe4 4.f3 is the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit. 2.e4 d5 3.d4!? e6 is a French Defence. Bond (1957) - Heinoo (1500), Jonquiere chess ch (14), 09.08.2012 begins 1.Nc3 Nf6 2.d4 [2.e4 a Vienna game, not my choice today] 2...g6 3.e4 [Yes, that'll be a Pirc defense] 3...d6 4.Bg5 [Byrne variation - an underrated system] 4...Bg7 5.f4 [5.Qd2] 5...c6 6.Nf3 [I had to get 1/2 point to be champion. I decided to play zero risk] 6...Na6 7.Bxa6 bxa6 8.0-0! 0-0 9.e5 Nd5 10.Qd2 [Not sure. 10.Nxd5 making the Bc8 a bad bishop was interesting] 10...Be6! 11.Ne4 Qb6 12.c4 Nb4?? [Loses the game.] 13.a3 d5 [13...Bxc4] 14.Nc5 f6 15.Nxe6 fxg5 16.Qxb4 [16.Nxf8! is better but a won game is a won game] 16...Qxb4 17.axb4 Rf5 18.g4 Rf7 19.Nfxg5 dxc4 20.Rxa6 Bh6 21.Nxf7 Kxf7 22.Nc7 Rb8 23.g5 Bf8 24.Rxa7 [24.Ra4 was a safe move but it does not matter here] 24...Rxb4 25.f5! [The idea]

25...Rxb2 [25...gxf5 26.Rxf5+ Kg8 27.Ra8+-] 26.fxg6+ Kxg6 27.Rxf8 c3 28.Ra1 c2 29.Rff1 Kxg5 30.Rac1 1-0 [Notes by Bond/Fritz]

141 – MarkusP 4.Be2 Bg7 5.g4 There are many ways for White to attack the Pirc Defence. One of the least known is the Bayonet Attack preferred by Emil Josef Diemer, of Blackmar-Diemer Gambit fame. The standard Pirc Defence position is reached via 1.e4 d6 2.d4 Nf6 3.Nc3 g6. The German master Diemer would play the move order 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 g6 3.e4 d6. The Bayonet Attack idea with 4.Be2 Bg7 looked like quite an unassuming move. Black might have reasonably expected 5.Nf3 to reach a Classical Variation. Diemer's point was to play 5.g4! Now if 5...0-0 6.g5! White had the makings of a kingside attack. My early games in this line had been very successful. Here was an example from the Internet Chess Club. Sawyer - MarkusP, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 27.06.2012 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 g6 3.e4 d6 4.Be2 [Diemer's move.] 4...Bg7 5.g4 [This is the point of 4.Be2.] 5...0-0 6.g5 Nfd7 7.f4 [7.h4! has been the most popular choice here.] 7...e5 8.Nf3 exf4 9.Bxf4 f6 10.gxf6 [10.Qd2!+/-] 10...Nxf6 11.Qd2 Re8 12.0-0-0 Nxe4 13.Nxe4 Rxe4 14.Ng5 Re7 15.Bf3 Nc6 16.c3 [Preventing counter play vs d4. Another direct approach is 16.Bd5+ Kh8 17.h4+/-] 16...Bf5 17.h4 Bf6 18.h5 Rg7 19.hxg6 hxg6 20.Bd5+ Kf8 21.Nh7+ [Even stronger is 21.Rh8+! winning lots of material.] 21...Ke7 22.Nxf6 Black resigns, as taking the knight leads to mate in one. 1-0

142 – Dunadan 4.Be2 Bg7 5.g4 The King's Indian set-up is playable against any opening and any defence. Against the standard 1.e4 openings, that formation is the Pirc Defence or the Modern Defence. The Blackmar-Diemer Gambit move order that gives White the most options vs the Pirc is 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 g6 3.e4 d6. Usually Black continues 4...Bg7. The Modern omits an early Nf6 or d6. The famous lines vs the Pirc are the Austrian Attack 4.f4 Bg7 5.Nf3, the Classical 4.Nf3 Bg7 5.Be2 or the 150 Attack 4.Be3 Bg7 5.Qd2. My most common choice has been 4.f3 since that could be reached vs 1.d4 Nf6 2.f3!? Many other lines exist, including lines with 4.Bg5, 4.g3 or 4.Bc4. Since Black keeps playing the Pirc, obviously in theory Black either gets equality or comes close with perfect play. Diemer played a variety of lines vs the Pirc/Modern set-up. One idea he preferred was a sort of Bayonet Attack with 4.Be2 and an early 5.g4. I decided to give it a whirl. I got a great position out of the opening, but then on move 18 I blundered a full piece on g4. Being a 3 0 blitz game I played on... quickly! The kings had castled opposite sides. I missed a couple chances to reestablished equality. I went instead for a kingside attack. Being a piece down and missing things, Black's attack became more promising. Just as he was about to exert real pressure, Black saw my king was hiding behind a wall of three pawns. He sacrificed a queen to go for a back rank mate, only to later realize that one of the three pawns was a different color. I avoided mate by capturing that pawn and the game was over. Sawyer (1946) - Dunadan (1684), ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 17.07.2011 begins 1.d4 d6 2.e4 Nf6 3.Nc3 g6 4.Be2 Bg7 5.g4 0-0 6.g5 [6.Be3] 6...Ne8 7.f4 Nd7 8.h4 e5 9.dxe5 dxe5 10.f5 c6 11.f6 Bh8 12.Be3

b5 13.Bg4 Qc7 14.Qd2 Nd6 15.0-0-0 Nc4 16.Qe2 Nxe3 17.Qxe3 Nb6 18.Nf3 [18.Bxc8] 18...Bxg4 19.Rdg1 Bxf3 20.Qxf3 Rad8 21.h5 Nc4 22.Rh2 b4 23.Rgh1 bxc3 24.hxg6 [24.Qxc3] 24...cxb2+ 25.Kb1 fxg6 26.Qb3 h5 27.gxh6 Bxf6 28.h7+ Kh8 29.Qxc4 Qd6 30.Rh3 Qd1+?? [30...Qd4] 31.Rxd1 Rxd1+ 32.Kxb2 1-0

3.Nc3 g6 4.Nf3 This is the Classical Variation. The White focus is on simple development with moves like e4, d4, Nc3, Nf3, etc.

143 – Giri 4…c6 5.Be3 b5 6.e5 Anish Giri and Shakhriyar Mamedyarov played two blitz games in the Pirc Defence. In this first one Black held off playing Bg7. Instead he expanded on the queenside with 4...c6 and 5...b5. Black resigned in view of what looks like devious mate threats. Giri (2782) - Mamedyarov (2801), chess.com Speed 3m+1spm 2018 chess.com INT, 07.09.2018 begins 1.e4 d6 2.d4 Nf6 3.Nc3 g6 4.Nf3 c6 5.Be3 b5 [The standard continuation is 5...Bg7 6.h3 0-0 7.a4+/= when White has a slight space advantage.] 6.e5 Ng4 [6...b4 7.exf6 bxc3 8.fxe7 Qxe7 9.bxc3 Bg7 10.Be2+/-] 7.Bf4 dxe5 8.dxe5 Qb6 [Material is even and Black threatens mate in 1, but White stands much better. 8...Qxd1+ 9.Rxd1 Bh6 10.Bg3 Bg7 11.h3+/-] 9.Qd2 h5 10.h3 Nh6 11.0-0-0 a6 12.g4 Be6 13.Ng5 Bd7 14.e6 Bxe6 15.Nxe6 fxe6 16.Bd3 Kf7 [16...Nf7 17.Bxg6+-] 17.Be5 Rg8 18.Qf4+ [If 18...Ke8 19.Bc7!+-] 1-0

144 – Carlsen 4…Nc6 5.h3 Bg7 No opening and no position remains quiet when Magnus Carlsen is playing. This Queens Knight Defence 1.e4 Nc6 transposes into the Classical Pirc Defence with Nf3 and Nc3. Soon Black began to counter-attack with moves like 8...e5, 10...c6, and 12...d5. White had good chances in sharp play, but Black turned the tide in the game Sergei Movsesian vs Magnus Carlsen. Movsesian (2647) - Carlsen (2837), World Rapid 2017 Riyadh KSA, 27.12.2017 begins 1.e4 Nc6 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 Nf6 4.Nc3 g6 5.h3 Bg7 6.Be3 00 7.Qd2 a6 8.Bd3 e5 9.d5 Ne7 10.g4 c6 11.dxc6 bxc6 12.0-0-0 d5 [12...Qc7=] 13.Nxe5 Nxe4 14.Bxe4 Bxe5 15.Bg2 Rb8 16.Rhe1 Be6?! [Black could protect Be5 with 16...Qd6=] 17.Na4 [17.Bh6! Bh8 18.Bxf8+/-] 17...Qd6 [17...Nc8 18.Bh6+/=] 18.c3 Rb5 19.f4 [19.Bf1+/-] 19...Bg7 20.Bf1 [20.Qf2+/=] 20...Ra5 21.Qc2? c5 22.c4 [22.f5 gxf5-/+]

22...Rb8 23.Bd2 [23.b3 Rxa4-+] 23...Rxa4 24.Qxa4 Bxb2+ 25.Kc2 [25.Kb1 dxc4-+] 25...Bd7 26.Qb3 Rxb3 27.axb3 Bd4 Black is up a knight and pawn. 0-1

145 – bjerky 4…Bg7 5.Bg5 0-0 I am a classical guy. I like the classics. As a rule the classics are durable and dependable. When I go to a restaurant I order the classic turkey sandwich or classic hamburger. My old beater of a car has the word “Classic” on the back. True, the interior is beat up. It rattles, but it runs. I found that young girls are not impressed with my car. It’s not flashy nor romantic. But it’s paid for. When I come to a chess opening, I am immediately interested in anything that is classical. Early in my career I studied Jose R. Capablanca. I fell in love with his classical style of chess. I play a lot of romantic openings that the chess playing public enjoys. But when people aren’t looking I go classical. After players castled opposite sides, this Pirc Defence led to a classical back rank checkmate with a little twist: Black had a fianchettoed bishop sitting on g7 in front of his king. My opponent “bjerky” resigned in the face of mate in one. Sawyer - bjerky, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 30.11.2012 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 g6 3.e4 d6 4.Nf3 Bg7 5.Bg5 [5.Be2+/=] 5...0-0 6.Qd2 Re8 7.Bh6 Bh8 8.h3 c6 9.0-0-0 Nbd7 10.g4 b5 11.Bd3 Qa5 12.Kb1 b4 13.Ne2 c5 14.e5 Nd5 15.Be4 e6 16.Bxd5 exd5 17.exd6 c4 18.Nf4!? [18.Rhe1+/-] 18...Ba6 19.Rhe1 c3 20.Qc1 Bc4? [20...cxb2 21.Qxb2 Nb6=] 21.b3 Bb5 22.Nd3 [I missed 22.Nxd5+-] 22...Bxd3 23.Rxd3 Nb6 [23...Qa6 24.Rxe8+ Rxe8 25.Re3+/-] 24.Rde3 Rxe3 25.Qxe3 Bg7 [25...Qb5 26.Qe7+-] 26.Qe8+ Rxe8 [If 26...Bf8 27.Qxa8! Nxa8 28.Re8+- with mate to follow.] 27.Rxe8+ Black resigns 1-0

146 – Rookie 4…Bg7 5.Bc4 0-0 I played a flawless game against the Pirc Defence according to the blunder check function of my chess engine. I set the level at 0.29 or about one fourth of a pawn. I made no moves where the evaluation of my position dropped significantly in 40 moves! My opponent Rookie played 6...Nxe4 and 7...d5 vs my 5.Bc4 line. Sawyer (2035) - Rookie (2479), ICC 5 0 Internet Chess Club, 25.07.2008 begins 1.d4 d6 2.e4 g6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Nf3 Bg7 5.Bc4 0-0 6.h3 Nxe4 7.Nxe4 d5 8.Ned2 [8.Bd3 dxe4 9.Bxe4 c5 10.c3 cxd4 11.Nxd4 e5=] 8...dxc4 9.Nxc4 Nc6 [9...c5!=/+] 10.c3 b5 11.Nce5 Nxe5 12.Nxe5 Bb7 13.0-0 Qd5 14.Qf3 Qxf3 15.Nxf3 Bxf3 16.gxf3 [White's doubled f-pawns proved hard to attack.] 16...e5 17.dxe5 Bxe5 18.f4 Bd6 19.Be3 a6 20.Rad1 f5 21.Kg2 Rfe8 22.Kf3 Re4 23.Rd4 Rae8 24.Rfd1 Kf8 [Now all the rooks come off the board.] 25.Rxe4 Rxe4 26.Rd4 Rxd4 27.Bxd4 c5 28.Bh8 c4 29.Bd4 a5 30.a3 a4 31.Ke3 Ke8 32.Be5 Bf8 33.Kd4 Kd8 34.Kd5 Kd7 [The kings and bishops are denied entry points to any vulnerable pawns.] 35.f3 h6 36.Bd4 Bd6 37.Be5 Bf8 38.Bd4 Bd6 39.Be5 Be7 40.Bd4 1/2-1/2

147 – Mamedyarov 5.Be3 0-0 The second Pirc Defence game between super grandmasters Anish Giri and Shakhriyar Mamedyarov saw White play 7.Bh6 in conjunction with 4.Nf3. In this fast blitz game White played the moves Qg5+ and Nxe5 in the wrong order and lost material. Black’s final move 22...Qxh4! picked off a rook since 23.Bxg6 Qxf4+ 24.Kb1 fxg6 wins easily. Giri (2782) - Mamedyarov (2801), chess.com Speed 1m+1spm 2018 chess.com INT, 07.09.2018 begins 1.e4 d6 2.d4 Nf6 3.Nc3 g6 4.Nf3 Bg7 5.Be3 0-0 6.Qd2 c6 7.Bh6 b5 [7...Bg4=] 8.Bd3 Bg4 9.h4 Nbd7 10.h5 Bxh5 [10...Nxh5 11.Nh2=] 11.0-0-0 [11.Bxg7 Kxg7 12.e5 dxe5 13.dxe5 Ng4 14.Rxh5 gxh5 15.Qg5+ Kh8 16.Qxh5+-] 11...b4 [11...e5 12.Bxg7 Kxg7 13.Ne2 Re8=] 12.Ne2 e5 13.Ng3 Bxh6 14.Qxh6 Ng4 15.Qd2 Ndf6 [15...Ngf6 16.Nxh5 Nxh5 17.Qh6+/-] 16.Rh4 exd4 17.Nxh5 gxh5 18.e5 dxe5 19.Nxe5? [19.Qg5+! Kh8 20.Nxe5 Nxe5 21.Qxe5+/-] 19...Nxe5

20.Qg5+ [20.Rxd4 Qe7 21.Rxb4 Rad8-+] 20...Ng6 21.f4 Nd5 22.Qxh5 [22.Rh2 Qxg5 23.fxg5 c5-+] 22...Qxh4! 0-1

148 – Le Roux 5.Be2 0-0 6.0-0 c5 White sets up with a classical form of development against the Pirc Defence after 4.Nf3 Bg7 5.Be2 0-0 6.0-0. Black challenged the center with 6...c5. White advanced 7.d5 and got an isolated pawn on d5. Black played to gang up on that pawn with 12...Rd4 to pin the White bishop instead of playing the simple 12...Re8. Then White uncorked a zinger with 14.Qf3! The threat of Qxf7+ and Re8+ left Black scrambling. White saved everything and won material in JeanPierre Le Roux against Jure Skoberne. Le Roux (2554) - Skoberne (2553), PRO League Group Stage chess.com INT (9), 07.03.2018 begins 1.e4 d6 2.d4 Nf6 3.Nc3 g6 4.Nf3 Bg7 5.Be2 00 6.0-0 c5 [6...Nc6] 7.d5 e6 8.h3 [8.Bf4+/=] 8...exd5 9.exd5 Re8 10.Re1 Ne4 11.Nxe4 Rxe4 12.Ng5 [12.Bg5 Bf6 13.Bxf6 Qxf6 14.Nd2 Re5 15.Bd3+/=] 12...Rd4 [12...Re8=] 13.Bd3 c4 14.Qf3! Qf8 [14...f6 15.Ne6 Bxe6 16.dxe6 Nc6 17.Bf1+-] 15.Bf1 c3 16.bxc3 Ra4 17.Bb5 Bd7 18.Bxa4 Bxa4 19.Ba3 [Or 19.Rb1+- ] 19...Nd7 20.Qf4 Be5 [20...h6 21.Ne6 fxe6 22.Qxa4 Nb6 23.Qe4+-] 21.Qxa4 1-0

149 – padda5 5.Be2 0-0 6.0-0 Nc6 This Classical Pirc Defence began modestly with both players bringing out all their pieces. The pawn center closed with 10...e5 11.d5. The players fought for f5 with the sharp moves 12.g4 f5. White tried to keep Black from doubling rooks on the f-file, but Black did so anyway. I’m not sure if Black meant to sacrifice the Exchange or it just happened in this three minute game. Then Black dropped the queen to a pin in my game against padda5. Sawyer (1971) - padda5 (1912), ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 25.11.2012 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 g6 3.e4 Bg7 4.Nf3 d6 5.Be2 0-0 6.0-0 Nc6 7.Be3 Bg4 8.h3 Bxf3 9.Bxf3 Nd7 [9...e5 10.dxe5 dxe5 11.Ne2=] 10.Qd2 e5 11.d5 Ne7 12.g4 f5 13.gxf5 gxf5 14.Bg5 Qe8 15.Bxe7 Qxe7 16.exf5 Rxf5 17.Bg4 Rf4 18.Ne2 Raf8 [Maybe Black doubled rooks automatically in a blitz game without noticing that this sacrificed the Exchange.] 19.Nxf4

Rxf4 20.f3 Nf6 [20...h5 21.Be6+ Kh8 22.Qg2+/-] 21.Rae1 Qf7 [21...Bh6 22.Qd3+/-] 22.Be6 Black resigns 1-0

150 – Melissakis 6.0-0 Nc6 Pete Melissakis was my first. He was the first player to play the Pirc Defence against me in a recorded game. I’m sure that in my younger years I faced the Pirc. I remember that some kid in Washburn, Maine used to play the Pirc and Benko against me. Ray Haines might remember him from 1974. I forgot his name. “Game score” is a funny chess term. The general meaning and the technical meaning differ. The word score implies results. Did you win, lose or draw? How did you score in the tournament? Technically, “game score” means the recording of the moves played in the game. Often this was a hand written list of moves. Forty years ago I started keeping better records. Like many of us, my game scores from my early years were lost long ago. Against Melissakis I chose the safe Classical Variation. It was made popular by the then World Champion Anatoly Karpov. He played 4.Nf3 and 5.Be2 to beat Smejkal, Hort, Pfleger, Keene and Adorjan. Later Karpov would defeat Spassky, Nunn and others with it. But Timman and Korchnoi managed draws vs him. My approach in this line was safe solid development. I wanted to focus on the center and keep my pieces active. I dreamed of the Karpov approach. Take away all my opponent’s good options. Leave my opponent with only blunders to choose from. My king’s knight went on an adventure against Pete Melissakis. The horse started on g1 and galloped to 4.Nf3, 11.Nd4, 16.Nb3, 32.Na5, 35.Nc6 and finished the game with 36.Nxe7+ 1-0. Sawyer (2000) - Melissakis (1728), corr APCT 1979 begins 1.e4 d6 2.d4 Nf6 3.Nc3 g6 4.Nf3 Bg7 5.Be2 0-0 6.0-0 Nc6 7.d5 [7.h3 or 7.Be3] 7...Nb8 8.h3 [Karpov had won with 8.Re1] 8...c6 9.a4 cxd5 [9...Nbd7=] 10.exd5 b6 11.Nd4 Bb7 12.Bf3 Qd7 13.Re1 a6 14.Bf4 Ra7 15.Qd2 Rc8 16.Nb3 Ba8 17.Bg5 Rac7 18.Re3 h6 19.Bh4 Rc4 [19...Qd8=] 20.Bg3 Qa7 21.Rae1 Bf8 22.Be2 R4c7 23.f4 [23.Bf3+/=] 23...Nbd7 [23...Rxc3=] 24.Bf2 Bb7

[24...Rxc3 25.Rxc3=] 25.g4 [25.f5+/-] 25...Nh7 26.Bf3 Bg7 [26...Qa8 27.Nd4+/=] 27.Bg2 Bf6 28.h4 [28.Nd4+-] 28...Ndf8 [28...Qa8 29.Nd4+/=] 29.Rh3 Bg7 30.a5 Qb8 31.axb6 Rd7 32.Na5 Re8 33.g5 h5 [33...Ba8 34.gxh6 Bxh6 35.h5+-] 34.Rhe3 f6 35.Nc6 Qa8 36.Nxe7+ 1-0

3.Nc3 g6 4.f4 The sharp pawn move 4.f4 is the Pirc Yugoslav Variation.

151 – stin 4…Bg7 5.Nf3 Nbd7 In this game I played a Pirc Defence 4.f4 variation as White. It turned into chaos against a slightly higher rated opponent. After I won, my opponent “stin” was rated one point above me. Black chose a double fianchetto idea with 6...b6. I kept missing the pawn stab e4-e5! on moves 6, 7, and 8. Even so, I got his king caught in the middle before missing a mate in three in a three minute blitz game. I lost material. Then Black missed some chances at my king. I managed to get all the material back that I had “sacrificed”. Suddenly we were in an ending where my passed pawn could not be stopped. Sawyer - stin, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 02.11.2012 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d6 3.e4 g6 4.f4 Bg7 5.Nf3 Nbd7 6.Bd3 [6.e5+/=] 6...b6 7.0-0 [7.e5+/-] 7...Bb7 8.Qe2 [8.e5+/-] 8...Nh5 9.g4 Nhf6 10.f5 gxf5 11.exf5?! Nxg4 12.h3 Ngf6 13.Bg5 Rg8 14.Kh2 Bh8 15.Rae1 [15.Rg1=] 15...c5 [15...Bxf3!-+] 16.dxc5 bxc5 17.Bxf6 Bxf6 18.Bb5 [18.Rg1=] 18...Qb6 19.a4 a6 20.Bxd7+ Kxd7 21.Rf2 Rg7 22.Ne4 Bxb2? [22...Qxb2-+] 23.f6 Rg6 24.fxe7 [24.c4+/=] 24...Rag8? [24...Re6-/+] 25.c3? [25.Nf6+!+-] 25...Bxe4? 26.Qxe4 Bxc3? 27.Ree2? [I saw the too late 27.e8Q+ Rxe8 28.Qxe8+ Kc7 29.Re7 mate!] 27...Re6 28.Qxh7 Re8 29.Rxe6-+ fxe6 30.Ng5 Rxe7 31.Rf7? Qd8? [31...Qb2+ 32.Kg3 Be1+!-+] 32.h4 Be5+

33.Kh3 c4 [33...Bf6-+] 34.Qg6 Rxf7 35.Qxe6+ Kc6 36.Qxc4+ Kb7 37.Nxf7 Qd7+ 38.Kg2 Qc6+?+- [38...Bf6 39.Qd5+ Ka7 40.Nxd6= and a draw is likely.] 39.Qxc6+ Kxc6 40.Nxe5+ dxe5 41.h5 Kd6 42.h6 Black resigns 1-0

152 – Barr 5.Nf3 c5 Bb5+ Bd7 This Pirc Defence against Edwin Barr from what was probably my first email correspondence tournament. It was exciting to get moves within hours instead of within a week. Play was much faster than I was used to, but I had fun. Alas, I failed to analyze these games as much as I should have. I got a decent position in this sharp Yugoslav line. Black slipped up, but I missed my winning opportunity with 22.Re8+! The game drifted into a drawn endgame. We agreed to a draw. Sawyer (1969) - Barr (1800), corr APCT EMQ-1 corr APCT, 08.12.1995 begins 1.e4 d6 2.d4 Nf6 3.Nc3 g6 4.f4 Bg7 5.Nf3 c5 6.Bb5+ Bd7 7.e5 Ng4 8.Bxd7+ [8.e6!?] 8...Qxd7 9.d5 0-0 [9...dxe5 10.h3 e4 11.hxg4 exf3 12.Qxf3 Na6 13.Bd2=] 10.0-0 dxe5 11.h3 e4 12.Nxe4 Nf6 13.Nxf6+ Bxf6 14.c4 Rd8 [14...e6 15.Ne5 Qd6=] 15.Be3 Qd6 16.Qc2 b6 17.Rad1 e6 18.dxe6 Qxe6 19.Rxd8+ Bxd8 20.Re1 Qc8 21.Bd2 Nc6? [21...Bf6 22.Bc3=] 22.Bc3 [22.Re8+! I missed a winning approach. 22...Kg7 23.Bc3+ Nd4 24.Nxd4 cxd4 25.Bxd4+ f6 26.Bxf6+ Bxf6 27.Rxc8+-] 22...Bc7 23.Qe4 Qd7 24.Ne5 [24.g3+/=] 24...Bxe5 25.fxe5 Re8 26.Qd5 Qe6 27.Qxe6 fxe6 28.Rd1 Rd8 29.Rxd8+ Nxd8 30.b4 cxb4 31.Bxb4 Nf7 32.Bc3 Ng5 33.Bb4 Nf7 34.Bc3 1/2-1/2

153 – Vaisser 5.Nf3 c5 6.d5 0-0 It happens to us all. Even legends fall to blitz blunders. This Pirc Defence Yugoslav saw sharp play against Black’s light squares. The unfortunate locations of Black’s queen and knights gave White a quick win in the game Anatoli Vaisser vs Eugene Torre. Vaisser (2502) - Torre (2460), Platja d'Aro Legends Blitz ESP, 29.06.2018 begins 1.d4 d6 2.e4 Nf6 3.Nc3 g6 4.f4 Bg7 5.Nf3 c5 6.d5 0-0 7.Bd3 Na6!? [7...e6 8.dxe6 fxe6 9.0-0 Nc6=] 8.0-0 Nc7 [8...Bg4 9.h3 Bxf3 10.Rxf3 Nc7

11.a4 e6 12.dxe6+/=] 9.a4 Bg4 10.h3 Bxf3 [10...Bd7 11.Re1+/=] 11.Qxf3 e6 [11...Na6 12.Bxa6 bxa6 13.f5=] 12.f5 [12.dxe6 fxe6 13.Be3+/=] 12...gxf5 13.dxe6 [13.Bg5+/-] 13...Nxe6 14.Qxf5 Qb6? [14...Nd4 15.Qf2+/-] 15.a5 Qc6 16.Nd5 Nxd5 17.exd5 1-0

154 – iAttack 5.Nf3 c5 6.dxc5 I have known the Pirc Defence is a good opening since Bobby Fischer played it as Black against Boris Spassky in the 1972 World Championship. Below my opponent played the first eight moves accurately, but then he decided to attack and capture my undefended pawn. It seemed like a good idea, but he was falling into my trap. The b2 pawn was poisoned. Black's queen bit off more than she could chew. Then with one move 11.Nb5! Black realized it was over. The knight threatens 12.Nc7+ and 13.Nxa8 picking off the rook. This must be dealt with by something like 11...Kd8, but then 12.Rfb1 and the Black lady is without an escape route since the Nb5 covers both c3 and a3. White has many Pirc choices. I like the 150 Attack 4.f3, 5.Be3 and 6.Qd2 set-up after 1d4 Nf6 2.f3 in my games when I am headed toward a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit (if 2...d5 3.e4). Here I chose the Yugoslav 4.f4. Take note: I completed my development by move 10: both knights, both bishops, the queen, and castled, connecting the rooks for six developing moves. Black made only four in the first 10 moves; he never made it to move 11. We see a nice trap that could occur in many openings. My opponent "iAttack" was polite enough to resign at the right moment making this game a good illustration of the trap. Sawyer (1909) - iAttack (1488), ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 19.06.2014 begins 1.Nc3 d6 2.e4 Nf6 3.d4 g6 [The Pirc Defence] 4.f4 Bg7 5.Nf3 c5 6.dxc5 Qa5 7.Bd3 Qxc5 8.Qe2 Nc6 [Or 8...0-0 9.Be3 Qa5 10.0-0] 9.Be3 Qb4?! [This is a waste of time since b2 is poisoned. Better is 9...Qa5 10.00=] 10.0-0 Qxb2 [Black should play 10...0-0 11.a3 but not 11...Qxb2? which loses to 12.Na4+-] 11.Nb5! [Black resigns as he sees his queen is trapped.] 1-0

155 – Chatalbashev 5.Nf3 0-0 Sharp Pirc Defence lines lead to short wins or equality. White tried to blow Black off the board with 4.f4, 5.Nf3 and 6.e5!? White did well for a dozen moves. Black proved up to the task and fought back with tactics in Erland Mikalsen vs Boris Chatalbashev. Mikalsen (2287) - Chatalbashev (2550), OSS International 2018 Oslo NOR, 24.06.2018 begins 1.e4 g6 2.d4 Bg7 3.Nc3 d6 4.f4 Nf6 5.Nf3 0-0 6.e5 Nfd7 7.h4 [7.Bc4 Nb6=] 7...c5 8.h5 cxd4 9.hxg6!? [9.Qxd4 dxe5 10.Qf2 e4 11.Nxe4 Nf6=] 9...dxc3 [9...hxg6 10.Qxd4+/=] 10.gxf7+ Rxf7 11.Bc4 e6 12.Ng5 Nxe5 13.fxe5? [13.Qh5! h6 14.fxe5 hxg5 15.Qh7+ Kf8 16.Qh8+ Bxh8 17.Rxh8+ Kg7 18.Rxd8 Nc6=] 13...cxb2! 14.Qh5 [14.Nxf7 bxa1Q 15.Nxd8 Qxe5+ 16.Qe2 Qxe2+ 17.Kxe2 d5-+] 14...Qxg5! [After 14...Qxg5! 15.Qxf7+ (15.Bxb2 Qg3+ 16.Kd1 Nc6-+; 15.Qxh7+ Kf8 16.Bxb2 Bxe5-+; 15.Qxg5 bxa1Q-+) 15...Kxf7 16.0-0+ Bf6 17.Bxg5 bxa1Q-+] 0-1

156 – Rebel-3 6.Bd3 c5 7.dxc5 When Black plays the Pirc Defence against the 4.f4 Yugoslav, White can try to pick off pawns while Black pins and eliminates the knight on c3. I thought I had everything covered with 6...c5 and 7...Qa5. True, I don’t play this opening very often as Black, but I thought I was okay in the tactics. Nope. I wasn’t. My opponent found a final fork to force my resignation in this game against Rebel-3. I have never been as thoroughly forked as I was in this game. Rebel-3 (2711) - Sawyer (2391), ICC 5 0 u Internet Chess Club, 27.07.2001 begins 1.e4 d6 2.d4 Nf6 3.Nc3 g6 4.f4 Bg7 5.Nf3 0-0 6.Bd3 c5 [6...Nc6=] 7.dxc5 Qa5 8.cxd6 exd6 9.f5 Nxe4 10.Bxe4 Bxc3+ 11.bxc3

Qxc3+ [11...Re8 12.Ng5+/=] 12.Bd2 Qc5 13.fxg6 fxg6 14.Qe2 Nc6 15.Qd3 Bf5 16.Qb3+ Kg7 17.Qxb7+ Rf7 18.Qxc6 Bxe4 19.Qxe4 Raf8 [19...d5 20.Qd4+ Qxd4 21.Nxd4+-] 20.Ng5 Rc7 [20...Qf2+ 21.Kd1 Kg8 22.Nxf7 Qxf7 23.Re1+-] 21.Ne6+ Black resigns 1-0

157 – Laz 6.Bd3 c5 7.dxc5 dxc5 Black sacrificed the wrong knight in this Pirc Defence by taking my pawn with 19...Nxf6. Then I failed to grab what was offered me by simply 20.gxf6. Suddenly I was losing, but in bullet chess, things change in seconds. I regained the advantage and finished off the game with a checkmate against Laz. Sawyer - Laz, ICC r 2 1 Internet Chess Club, 1997 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d6 3.e4 g6 4.f4 Bg7 5.Nf3 0-0 6.Bd3 c5 7.dxc5 dxc5 8.0-0 Nc6 9.h3 a6 10.Be3 b6 11.Ne2 Bb7 12.c3 Qc7 13.Bc2 Rad8 14.Qe1 e5 15.f5 Nh5 16.g4 Nf6 17.g5 Nh5 18.f6 Bh8 19.h4 Nxf6? [Black sacrificed the wrong knight. 19...Nd4! 20.cxd4 cxd4 21.Rc1 dxe3=] 20.Rd1? [White failed to take the knight. I should have played 20.gxf6 Bxf6 21.Qg3+/-] 20...Bg7 [Black could have kept the knight with 20...Rxd1! 21.Qxd1 Nh5-+] 21.gxf6 Bxf6 22.Qg3 Qe7 23.Bg5 Kh8 [23...Bxg5 24.hxg5 Rxd1 25.Rxd1+/-] 24.Bxf6+ Qxf6 25.Ng5 [25.Rxd8 Qxd8 26.Nxe5+-] 25...Qe7 26.h5 f6 [26...Rxd1 27.Rxd1+/=] 27.Nf3 [27.Rxd8!+-] 27...Rg8 28.Kf2 gxh5 29.Qh4 c4 30.Qxh5 Qc5+ 31.Ke1 Rxd1+ 32.Kxd1 Qe3 [32...Bc8 33.Rh1+-] 33.Rh1 [33.Qf7 Qh6 34.Qxb7+-] 33...Rd8+ 34.Ke1 Rd7? 35.Qe8+ Kg7 36.Qxd7+ Kg6 37.Qxh7# 1-0

158 – Smeets 6.Bd3 c5 7.dxc5 The 4.f4 Yugoslav Attack against the Pirc Defence requires a sharp tactical eye for both sides. This battle extended from one end of the board to the other. Black's position was much harder to defend than it first appeared in the game Jan Smeets vs Alexander Graf. Smeets (2605) - Graf (2576), Bundesliga 2017-18 Berlin GER, 1.5.2018 begins 1.e4 g6 2.d4 Bg7 3.Nc3 d6 4.f4 Nf6 5.Nf3 0-0 6.Bd3 c5 7.dxc5 Nbd7 [7...dxc5 8.e5 Nd5 9.Nxd5 Qxd5 10.Qe2+/=] 8.cxd6 exd6 9.0-0 Re8 10.f5 Nc5 11.fxg6 hxg6 12.Ng5! Bg4 [12...d5 13.Bb5 Rxe4 14.Ncxe4 Nfxe4 15.Nxe4 Nxe4 16.Qf3+/=] 13.Qe1 d5 14.e5 [14.Qh4+/-] 14...d4 [14...Qb6 15.Kh1 Nxd3 16.cxd3+/-] 15.Bc4 Be6 [15...dxc3 16.Bxf7+ +-] 16.Nxe6 Nxe6 17.exf6 dxc3 18.fxg7 Qd4+ 19.Qf2 cxb2 [19...Qxf2+

20.Rxf2+-] 20.Qxd4 bxc1Q [20...Nxd4 21.Bxf7+ Kxg7 22.Bxb2+-] 21.Bxe6 1-0

3.Nc3 g6 4.f3 This Pirc 4.f3 is similar to the King’s Indian Defence Saemisch Variation. I often reach this via 1.d4 Nf6 2.f3 g6 3.e4 d6 4.Nc3.

159 – Regan 4…Bg7 5.Be3 Nc6 James Regan and I played in multiple sections of correspondence events in 1989-90. This may have just been a side game, but I think it was a USCF rated tournament game. Usually I recorded carefully in my records the exact section number, but sometimes I would just list it was "USCF corr". Here is a draw from one of those unknown postal sections. I used the opening designation Pirc Defence by transposition. Here Black played an early 5...Nc6. I experimented with what turned out to be a flawed strategy in playing my bishop to Bb5 and doubling Black's pawn with 8.Bxc6. The problem was by 8...bxc6 I gave Black an open file to attack me?! James Regan was up to the task. He attacked. Soon we agreed to a truce. Sawyer - Regan, corr USCF 1989 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.f3 d6 3.e4 g6 4.Be3 Bg7 5.Nc3 Nc6 6.Qd2 e5 7.Bb5?! [This move does not lose, but it is the wrong idea. Better are either 7.d5 or 7.Nge2] 7...0-0 8.Bxc6?! [Consistent but bad. White is going to castle queenside. Opening up the b-file gives Black good attacking chances. 8.Nge2] 8...bxc6 9.0-0-0 [9.dxe5 dxe5=] 9...Qe8 10.Nge2 Nd7 11.g4 [11.Bh6=] 11...exd4 12.Nxd4 Ne5 13.Rdf1? [13.Bh6] 13...Ba6 14.Rf2 c5 15.Nde2 Nc4 16.Qd3 Qc6 17.b3 Nxe3 18.Qxe3 Rfe8 19.Qd2?! [19.Rd1 Bxe2 20.Rxe2 Qa6=/+] 19...Rab8 [A

great way to continue the attack is 19...c4!-+] 20.Qd5?! 1/2-1/2 [Draw agreed]

160 – Xayavong 5.Be3 Nc6 Mistakes happen in chess. We rarely play perfectly. In the rough and tumble of an actual game, the advantage may swing back and forth. Stay focused on the game. Protect your vulnerable areas. Keep making threats, and you have a good chance to win. My opponent for today's game is Jerry Xayavong. We played a skittles games at the old Borders bookstore in Orlando, Florida. I was at the end of a long day of work playing chess against mostly younger guys. I was willing to face anyone available. My opponent opted for a Pirc Defence. Black sacrificed or lost a pawn, but then he played actively. We both missed his blunder on move 15 which hung a piece. After that Black played well. The fight was on. The queens came off the board quickly. We had castled opposite sides, so the game became imbalanced. In the middlegame, Black came after my undefended kingside. We reached an even position when I missed chances. I broke through on the queenside before he got through on the kingside. Sawyer - Xayavong, Orlando, FL, 13.11.2003 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 g6 [2...d5 3.e4 dxe4 4.f3 Blackmar-Diemer Gambit] 3.e4 d6 4.f3 Nc6 5.Be3 Bg7 6.Qd2 0-0 7.0-0-0 e5 8.d5 Ne7 9.Bh6!? [Seems premature. 9.h4!+/White can build up a kingside attack quicker than Black can do so on the queenside.] 9...c6!? [9...Bxh6 10.Qxh6 c6=] 10.Bxg7 Kxg7 11.dxc6 bxc6 [11...Nxc6 12.Qxd6 Qxd6 13.Rxd6 Be6 14.Rd1 Rfd8 15.Rxd8 Rxd8 16.Bb5 Nd4 17.Nge2] 12.Qxd6 Qxd6 13.Rxd6 [White has won a pawn.] 13...Ne8 14.Rd8 f5 15.Bc4 Bb7? 16.Rxa8? [Here I missed the tactical shot 16.Rd7!+-] 16...Bxa8 17.Nge2 Nd6 18.Bd3 c5 19.exf5 Nexf5 20.Bxf5 Nxf5 21.Rd1 Ne3 22.Rd7+? [Letting the advantage slip. 22.Rg1+/-] 22...Rf7 23.Rxf7+ Kxf7 24.Ng3? [24.Ne4=] 24...Nxg2 25.Nge4 h5? [25...Nh4! 26.Nxc5 Nxf3-/+] 26.Kd2 Kg7 27.Nxc5? [27.Nb5!+/=]

27...Bxf3 [27...Nh4!=/+] 28.b4 g5 29.b5 g4 30.N3e4 Nf4 [30...h4!=/+] 31.c4 h4 32.a4 Ne2 33.Ke3 Nd4 34.a5 Be2 35.Ne6+ Nxe6 36.Kxe2 Nd4+ 37.Kd3 Kg6 38.a6 Kf5 39.b6 axb6? [39...Nc6 40.bxa7 Nxa7 41.Ke3+/=] 40.a7 Nf3 41.Ng3+?! [41.a8Q+-] 41...hxg3 42.hxg3 e4+ 43.Ke3 1-0

161 – Lenchner 5.Be3 c6 In the final round of this one day Penn State tournament I got paired with USCF master Jonathan Lenchner. We both failed to win all our games. We just wanted to finish well. Earlier I won two quick games. Then I misplayed a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit. In this fourth round we began with the moves 1.d4 Nf6. This left me with many options. I chose 2.f3!? The continuation 2.f3 d5 3.e4 dxe4 4.Nc3 would transpose to the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit. Both 2...e6 and 2...c5 are the real theoretical issues. The Pirc Defence after 2.f3 g6 3.e4 d6 4.Nc3 is no problem for White. This transposes to lines in the 150 Attack. But I might play 4.c4 for a King’s Indian Saemisch. I played 4...Be3 to keep Black guessing for one more move. Lenchner delayed castling to push for an early attack. I also chose not to castle. Thus I avoided the sharpest positions. Neither side could coordinate pieces well with the kings stuck in the middle. We both missed good 23rd move options. By move 30 the position was my two knights vs his rook and pawn. By move 40 they had all disappeared. We arrived at a drawn rook ending with all the pawns on the kingside. Sawyer - Lenchner, State College PA 1990 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.f3 g6 3.e4 d6 4.Be3 Bg7 5.Nc3 [5.c4 is a Saemisch King's Indian Defence after 5...0-0 6.Nc3.] 5...c6 [Theory recommends that Black delay castling in this line and immediately start an attack vs the queenside. Weaker players will normally play 5...0-0 6.Qd2 with typical castling opposite sides play.] 6.Qd2 Qa5 7.Nge2 Nbd7 8.g4 h5 9.g5 Ng8 10.h4 b5 11.Ng3 b4 12.Nce2 c5 13.c3!? bxc3 14.bxc3 [14.Nxc3+/= is the way to play to win.] 14...Rb8 15.Bh3 cxd4 16.cxd4 Qxd2+ 17.Bxd2 e6?! [Black heads toward a fairly even pawn structure where White has the more active pieces. 17...e5! 18.Be3+/= when White's position is only slightly better, but a master might have outplayed me. It's been known to happen.] 18.Kf2 Ne7 19.Rab1 Nc6 20.d5 exd5 21.exd5 Rxb1 22.Bxd7+ Bxd7 23.dxc6? [23.Rxb1! Ne5 24.Ne4+/-] 23...Rb2 [23...Rxh1! 24.cxd7+ Kxd7 25.Nxh1 Rc8-/+] 24.cxd7+ Kxd7 25.Rd1 Rxa2 26.Bb4 Be5 27.Ne4 Rb8 28.Bxd6 Bxd6

29.Rxd6+ Ke7 30.Rd3 a5 31.N4c3 Rc2 32.Kg3 Kf8 33.Nf4 Rb3 34.Rd8+ Ke7 35.Ra8 Rcxc3 36.Nd5+ Ke6 37.Nxc3 Rxc3 38.Rxa5 Rc6 39.Rb5 Rc2 40.Ra5 Draw agreed. Neither side can make progress. 1/2-1/2

162 – Miller 5…c6 6.Qd2 b5 In high school I played four sports: baseball, basketball, ping pong and chess. I loved them all. The first two were team sports, so credit and blame for wins and losses were shared. I loved ping pong (table tennis) because I had good hand-eye co-ordination. My height was good for a 30 inch table. The ball bounced at the right level for me to have a good comfortable strong repeatable swing. Chess was more of a problem. We didn't know all the rules and we didn't have anyone strong to play against. There was just a half dozen beginners playing each other at lunch time. What I found was that one mistake in chess was very serious. In ping pong where the score goes to 21, I could make a dozen mistakes and still win the game easily. Not so with chess. In the my Pirc Defence game vs Randy Miller in the 1989 USCF Golden Squires Postal Chess Tournament, my good effort for many months of correspondence play was thrown away with one sudden careless blunder on move 35. I turned an endgame advantage into a losing position. It was disappointing here, but thus we find one of the greatest aspects of chess: Hope for a comeback during a chess game. Don't give up! You might win a losing battle! Sawyer (1981) - Miller (1894), corr USCF 89SS66, 28.04.1991 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.f3 g6 3.e4 Bg7 4.Nc3 d6 5.Be3 c6 6.Qd2 b5 7.Bh6!? Bxh6 8.Qxh6 Nbd7 9.Bd3 Qb6 10.Nce2 [10.Nge2= is more natural.] 10...e5 [10...c5=/+] 11.c3 d5 12.Nh3 exd4 13.Nxd4 [13.cxd4!+/=] 13...c5 14.Nc2 c4 15.Be2 Nc5 16.e5 Bxh3 17.Qxh3 Nfd7 18.f4 Ne4 19.Rf1 a5 20.Qe3 [20.Ne3=] 20...Qb7 [20...Ndc5-/+] 21.Bf3 [21.Qd4!=] 21...b4 22.Bxe4 dxe4 23.Qd4 0-0 24.cxb4 axb4 25.Qxc4? [25.Rd1 Nb6=/+] 25...Ra5?!

[25...Rfc8!-/+] 26.Nxb4 Rc8 27.Qd4 Rac5 28.a3 Rc4 29.Qe3 Nc5 30.Rf2 Rxb4 31.axb4 Nd3+ 32.Kf1 Nxf2 33.Qxf2 Qxb4 34.Re1 Qb3 35.Rxe4?? [I got greedy and missed the combination with the Black rook pinning my queen to my king. 35.Qe3 Qxb2 36.Qxe4+/=] 35...Qd3+! 0-1

163 – Ashby 6.Qd2 Nbd7 The most popular chess post on my blog “How to Win with the 150 Attack”. That game is found near the end of this book. This game against Stephen Ashby was in the same Pirc Defence 4.f3 variation. Back in 1990 this variation with 4.f3 and 5.Be3 was rare. Sometimes White reverses the move order with 4.Be3 and 5.f3. In theory it is more risky for Black to castle too early. Opening books often recommend that Black play 5...c6. This game is broken off early. I am not sure whether it had been a resignation or forfeit. In any case in 2011 my chess engine program Junior 10 evaluated the position as strongly favoring White. This victory over Stephen Ashby (1848) brought me to my peak USCF correspondence rating of 2211. After this game I won about five more games in a row. The USCF refused to give me any rating points for any of those wins. At least the USCF did send me a second USCF Postal Master certificate for reaching that level another time.

Sawyer (2211) - Ashby (1848), corr USCF 89N280, 14.05.1990 begins 1.d4 d6 2.e4 Nf6 3.Nc3 g6 4.f3 Bg7 5.Be3 c6 6.Qd2 Nbd7 7.0-0-0 b5 8.Bh6 0-0 9.h4 Qc7 10.h5 Bxh6 11.Qxh6 b4 12.Nce2 Qa5 13.hxg6 fxg6 14.Kb1 [This game brought me to my peak USCF correspondence rating of 2211.] 1-0

164 – claret 6.Qd2 Nbd7 7.g4 Against the Pirc Defence I have played just about every move order possible to reach the positions after 4.f3 / 5.Be3 / 6.Qd2. My ICC blitz opponent "Claret" was rated in the 2100s. I figured that Black would play the 5...c6 line once I displayed my set-up. As expected, the quality of the first 20 moves were good and the speed of play was fast. I chose to castle on the queenside for three reasons: 1. Castling kingside did not look reasonable. 2. The center did not look safe for my king. 3. Black had no open files on the queenside. A lot of time was spent trying to find a mate, but everything was covered. Black sacrificed a knight for some White pawns. My opponent spent a lot of time thinking from move 22 to the end. Black was in danger of losing on time. In the end White was up a knight when Black resigned. Sawyer - claret, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 13.10.2012 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 g6 3.e4 d6 4.Be3 Bg7 5.f3 c6 6.Qd2 Nbd7 7.g4 b5 8.h4 b4 9.Nce2 a5 10.Ng3 [10.h5!] 10...Ba6 11.Bxa6 Rxa6 12.Bh6 Bxh6 13.Qxh6 Qb6 14.0-0-0 a4 15.N1e2 [15.g5!? Nh5 16.Nxh5 gxh5 17.Ne2+/-] 15...b3 16.cxb3 a3 17.Qd2 axb2+ 18.Qxb2 c5 [18...0-0] 19.dxc5 Qxc5+ 20.Kb1 0-0 21.h5 [21.g5!+/-] 21...Rfa8 [Clocks: 2:05-2:02] 22.Nc1 Qe3 23.hxg6 fxg6 24.Qe2 Qf4 25.Nf1 Nc5 26.Ne3 Nfxe4? [26...e6 27.Nc2+/-] 27.fxe4 Qxe4+ 28.Nc2 Qxe2 29.Nxe2 Rxa2 30.Nc1 Ne4? [Clocks: 1:23-0:19] 31.Rd3?! [31.Nxa2+- might have prompted a faster resignation.] 31...Rxc2 32.Kxc2 Nf2 33.Rhh3 1-0

4.f3 Bg7 5.Be3 0-0 This is the most common line in the Argentine Variation.

165 – Regan 6.Qd2 Be6 Something I learned from the classic Hans Kmoch book "Pawn Power in Chess" 40 years ago was a tactical idea that often works against the Black fianchetto pawn structures such as the King's Indian, Benoni or Pirc. The idea is angle for an Nf5 sacrifice. From the f5 square the knight may attack the Bg7. If the knight is captured with gxf5, Black's king position becomes dangerously open. In this game vs James Regan, Black is headed toward a King's Indian Defence. My attempt to transpose to a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit led me to the Pirc Defence with 5.Nc3. The Pirc Defence 4.Be3 / 5.f3 variation is a major branch of this defence. These two moves can be played in reverse order. Play somewhat resembles an English Attack in the Sicilian Defence. When everything goes according to plan, White may play the kingside pawns to the squares e4-f3-g4-h4-h5. The alternative 4.Be3 is more flexible, as it could be combined with Nf3 and h3. The attacking plan in the Pirc Defence 6.Qd2 variation is for White to play moves like 7.0-0-0 and a later Bh6. In this postal game vs James Regan I got to play what Kmoch calls the Benoni Jump 14.Nf5!? This time it worked well. Sawyer (2043) - Regan (2229), corr USCF 89N286, 20.12.1990 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.f3 d6 3.e4 g6 4.Be3 Bg7 5.Nc3 0-0 6.Qd2 Be6 [6...c6 7.0-0-0; or 6...e5 7.Nge2] 7.0-0-0 c6 8.Bh6 Qa5 9.Nge2 [Better is 9.Bxg7 Kxg7 10.d5+/=] 9...Bc4 [9...Bxa2!=] 10.g4 Rd8 11.Kb1 Nbd7 12.Ng3 Ba6 [12...Nb6 13.Bd3+/=] 13.Rg1 Nf8 14.Nf5!? gxf5 15.gxf5 Ng6 16.fxg6 hxg6 17.Bxa6 Qxa6 18.Qg5 [Very strong is 18.Bxg7 Kxg7 19.f4!+-]

18...b6 19.h4 Qc8 20.Ne2 Nh7 21.Qf4 e5 22.Qe3 c5 23.dxc5 [23.Bxg7!+-] 23...dxc5 24.Rxd8+ Qxd8 25.Bxg7 Kxg7 26.h5 Qd6 27.Ng3 Kh8 1-0

166 – Schreiber 6.Qd2 c5 There is a famous gambit in the King's Indian Defence Saemisch Variation where Black plays after 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.e4 d6 5.f3 0-0 6.Be3 c5!? Possibly the earliest game played at the grandmaster level was Lev Polugaevsky - Roman Dzindzichashvili. Many other GMs have followed suit. In my database this line scored exactly 50%. In the closely related Pirc Defence Argentine Variation the move 6...c5?! is an unsound gambit. White has the pawn on c2 instead of c4. This makes his position more solid with an extra pawn. The 1989 USCF Golden Knights Semi-Final Postal Tournament was still in progress in 1991 as I had advanced to the next round. My opponent was William G. Schreiber. Black tried the gambit 6…c5?! Personally I have faced this gambit many times. I love playing White in this line. Black has some counter play, but I do not think it is near enough. Note that it is very easy for a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit player to reach the position after 6.Qd2. Sawyer (2017) - Schreiber (2034), corr USCF 89NS20, 15.04.1991 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.f3 g6 3.e4 d6 4.Be3 Bg7 5.Nc3 0-0 6.Qd2 c5?! 7.dxc5 dxc5 8.Qxd8 Rxd8 9.Bxc5 e6 10.Be3 a6 11.Rd1 Rxd1+ 12.Kxd1 [White need not fear a middle game attack with the queens and a set of rooks off the board. The king will guide the c-pawn on its journey toward c8.] 12...b5 13.Kc1 Bb7 14.Bd3 Nc6 15.Nge2 Ne5 16.Rd1 Rc8 17.Kb1 Nc6 [17...Nfd7 18.Nc1+/=] 18.Nd4 [18.Nc1+/-] 18...Ne5 [18...Ng4! 19.fxg4+/=] 19.Nb3 Ned7 [19...Nxd3 20.Rxd3+/- could at least leave Black with two bishops.] 20.a4 bxa4 21.Nxa4 Bf8 22.Nb6 [22.Na5!+- looks very promising.] 22...Rc7 23.Na5 Bc5 24.Nxd7 Nxd7 25.Bxc5 Nxc5 26.Nxb7 Nxd3 27.Rxd3 Rxb7 28.Rd6 Ra7 29.c4 Kf8 30.Kc2 Ke7 31.c5 Rc7 32.b4 Rb7

[If 32...a5 33.e5 axb4 34.c6 Ra7 35.Kb3+- and White is winning.] 33.Kc3 a5 34.bxa5 Rb5 35.Kc4 Rxa5 36.Rd2 h5 37.Kb4 [White could very well push the pawn immediately. 37.c6+-] 37...Ra8 38.Kb5 Rb8+ 39.Kc6 Rc8+ 40.Kb6 Rb8+ 41.Kc7 Rb5 42.c6 Rb1 43.Kc8 Rb6 44.c7 Rb4 45.Ra2 Rb1 46.Ra7 1-0

167 – gnice 6.Qd2 Re8 When players castle opposite sides in chess, there is a race to see who could strip away the defenses of the opponent the fastest. Typically this is done by pushing pawns to swap off the pawns that cover up the other king. Combine that with the invasion of one's bigger pieces, and the defence will be quickly overwhelmed. Checkmate follows. Here I had a clear plan that I carried out to mate. I brought in not only my bishops and knights but also my rooks and queen. My opponent tried to attack my king. It was too little too late. The opening was a Pirc Defence, 150 Attack. Black wanted to post a knight on d4, but it did not accomplish much. Better would have been to prepare a ...b7-b5 pawn push with 7...a6 or 7...c6. This game demonstrated an ideal set-up for White in the 150 Attack. Black was ready to check the White king, but he had been too deliberate in his development. I played the thematic Benoni Jump sacrifice 19.Nf5. Then Black's defenses crumbled. White's entire army suddenly came crashing in. White was winning easily in all lines. Mate followed quickly after a series of exchanges. Sawyer (1937) - gnice (1608), ICC 5 0 Internet Chess Club, 10.09.2011 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 g6 3.e4 d6 4.Be3 Bg7 5.Qd2 0-0 [Castling is very common here, but another good move is 5...c6.] 6.f3 Re8 7.0-0-0 Nc6 8.g4 Nd7 9.h4 e5 10.d5 Nd4 11.Bh6 Bh8 [Black is holding onto the darksquared bishop in case someday the long diagonal gets opened up. The position might stay closed with the blocked pawn on e5.] 12.h5 Nf8 [Now I want a knight on g3 to penetrate on f5 or h5.] 13.Nce2 a6 14.c3 Nxe2+ 15.Nxe2 Bd7 16.Ng3 b5 17.Bd3 Rc8 18.Rdg1 c6 19.Nf5 Bxf5 20.gxf5

cxd5 21.hxg6 fxg6 22.exd5 [22.fxg6 hxg6 23.Bxf8+-] 22...b4 23.fxg6 hxg6 24.Bxf8 bxc3 25.Rxg6+ Kxf8 26.Rxh8+ Kf7 27.Rh7+ Kf8 28.Qh6# 1-0

168 – Starosta 6.Qd2 c6 In May 1990 our family went to Washington D.C. for a week. I attended a conference held at the Washington Hilton Hotel. Nine years earlier this had been the site of an assassination attempt on President Ronald Reagan shortly after he took office in 1981. Reagan survived but some others did not. Since then the Hilton had made changes to prevent another such tragedy. Nobody should want to see a President killed. It is a terrible thing for the United States, no matter which political party one is in. If you love the President, you will miss him. If you do not, his death could make him a hero. Everybody loses. In 1990 there was an active chess club that met in the Arlington suburb for quad tournaments every Friday. Arlington, Virginia is directly across the Potomac River from Washington D.C. I played in a Quad Event with three rounds. My first round was against William Starosta. He declined my efforts at a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit by going into what became a Pirc Defence. Sawyer - Starosta, Arlington, VA (1), 25.05.1990 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.f3 d6 3.e4 g6 4.Be3 Bg7 5.Nc3 c6 [When White commits to the f3 set-up, it is common for Black to hold off on castling and focus on an immediate queenside attack. The choice between 5...c6 and 5...0-0 are about 50-50.] 6.Qd2 0-0 [Black switches strategies to the early castle option.] 7.0-0-0 Re8 8.Bh6 [White would like to also push g4 & h4 very fast, and maybe play Ng-e2-g3 and h5.] 8...Bh8 [Retreating this bishop is standard when Black has moved away the Rf8. It can work well when Black is prying open the long diagonal toward the White king.] 9.h4 Nbd7 10.h5! Nf8 [Taking the h-pawn would allow a glorious and quick finish. 10...Nxh5 11.Rxh5 gxh5 12.Qg5+ Bg7 13.Qxg7#] 11.hxg6 Nxg6 12.Nge2 [Or 12.g4!+-] 12...e5? [Dropping a pawn.] 13.dxe5 Rxe5 14.Qxd6 Qxd6 15.Rxd6 Be6? [Another tactical mistake. Now White f3 pawn is eager to fork two pieces

on f5.] 16.f4 [You will note that Black has done nothing to attack White's queenside. Now follows multiple exchanges.] 16...Nxf4 17.Nxf4 Nxe4 18.Nxe4 Rxe4 19.Nxe6 fxe6 20.Rd7 Rb4 21.c3 Ra4 22.Bd3 Rxa2 [Not much can be done. Another try is 22...Be5 23.Bxh7+ Kh8 24.Bf5 exf5 25.Bg7+ Kg8 26.Rh8#] 23.Bxh7# 1-0

169 – widowmaker 6.Qd2 e5 After 1.d4 Nf6 2.f3 g6 my chess games often continue 3.e4 Bg7 4.Nc3 d6 5.Be3 0-0 6.Qd2 which is a Pirc Defence. Black can play 5...c6 and delay castling. White can play 4.c4 d6 5.Nc3 which is a King's Indian Defence Saemisch Variation. In my 2014 game vs "widowmaker" I had the typical attacking advantage in this line. Black defended well enough to avoid immediate disaster, but I noticed that Black played slowly. This was a three minute game, which generally requires a pace of 20 moves per minute to avoid a loss on time. Black's slow defense was evident after 20 moves when I had a 40 second lead on the clock. At this point I focused on winning on time. By move 33 Black had only 13 seconds left. Then it was too late to speed up. Sawyer (1950) - widowmaker (1938), ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 20.09.2014 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.f3 g6 3.e4 Bg7 4.Nc3 d6 5.Be3 0-0 6.Qd2 e5 7.0-0-0 Nc6 8.d5 Ne7 9.g4 a6 10.Bh6 b5 11.h4 Bxg4? 12.fxg4 [Here I missed my opportunity to grab an immediate advantage with 12.Bxg7! Kxg7 13.fxg4 Nxg4 14.h5+-] 12...Nxg4 13.Bxg7 Kxg7 14.Bh3 [14.h5+-] 14...Nf6 15.h5!? [15.Qe3+-] 15...Nxh5 16.Nf3 Nf4 17.Ne2 Nxe2+ 18.Qxe2 Ng8 19.Kb1 h5 20.Rhg1 [20.Rdg1+-] 20...Nh6 [Black was playing slowly, so I just focused on winning on time. Clocks 2:01-1:20] 21.Ng5 Qe7 22.Rdf1 Rab8 23.Qf3 a5 24.b3 b4 25.Qf2 a4 26.Kb2 axb3 27.axb3 Ra8 28.Ra1 [If I was not just trying to run out the clock, I might have found

28.Qg2!+-] 28...Rxa1 29.Kxa1 Ra8+ 30.Kb2 Qf6 31.Qxf6+ Kxf6 32.Nf3 Kg7 33.Ne1 Ra6 [Clocks 1:37-0:13] 34.Nd3 c5 35.dxc6 Rxc6 36.Nxb4 Rb6 37.Nd5 Rb7 38.Ra1 Ng4 [38...g5 39.Bc8+/=] 39.Bxg4 hxg4 40.Rg1 f5 41.exf5 gxf5 42.c4 Kg6 43.Kc3 Kg5 44.Ne3 [Black forfeits on time. Clocks 1:18-0:00] 1-0

170 – Pythagoras 6.Qd2 e5 The Pirc Defence can be reached by transposition when Black avoids the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit after 1.d4 Nf6 2.f3 g6. Here 2...d5 3.e4 dxe4 4.Nc3 is a BDG. This Pirc Defence reached the 150 Attack set-up with moves like f3, Be3, Qd2 and 0-0-0. The strategy is to push pawns like g4, h4-h5 and open up the Black king for tactics or checkmate like in a Sicilian Dragon. In another game vs "Pythagoras" when I had Black. This time we focus on the center and then Black got queenside pawns going before I did kingside pawns. I built up a winning position, and then he lost on time. My rule of thumb for the clock in a three minute game is that you must play 70 moves to avoid frequent losses on time. If my opponent gets in deep time trouble with 10 seconds left, then I stop looking for winning moves on the board and start looking for safe fast moves and safe pre-moves. When possible I play forcing moves with a check or capture. I try not to allow my opponent to check me in any meaningful way. Here it worked. Sawyer - Pythagoras (1887), ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 05.10.2014 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.f3 g6 3.e4 d6 4.Nc3 Bg7 5.Be3 0-0 6.Qd2 e5 7.0-0-0 [Usually White chooses 7.Nge2 or 7.d5] 7...exd4 8.Bxd4 Nc6 9.Be3 a6 10.Bc4 b5 11.Bd5 Nxd5 12.Nxd5 Be6 13.Ne2 Bxd5 14.Qxd5 Na5 15.b3 Qe7 16.Bg5 Qe5 17.Qxe5 dxe5 18.Nc3 f6 19.Be3 Rfd8 20.Nd5 c6 21.Ne7+ [Better seems to be 21.Nc7! Rac8 22.Ne6 Rxd1+ 23.Rxd1 Bf8 24.Rd7+-] 21...Kf7 22.Rxd8 Rxd8 23.Bb6 Kxe7 24.Bxa5 Rd7 25.Bb4+ Ke6 26.Bd2 Bf8 27.c3 c5 28.Kc2 c4 29.bxc4 bxc4 30.Rb1 Bc5 31.Rb8 Rd6 32.Bc1 Rd3 33.Ra8 Be3 34.Rxa6+ Ke7 35.Bxe3 Rxe3 36.Ra7+ Ke6 37.Rxh7 Re2+ 38.Kb1 Rxg2 39.h4 Rf2 40.a4 Rxf3 41.Kb2 Rf2+ 42.Ka3 Rf1 43.Kb4 Re1 44.a5 Rxe4 45.a6 Re1 46.a7 Ra1 47.Kxc4 e4 48.h5 gxh5 49.Kd4 f5 [49...h4!=] 50.Rh6+ Kf7 51.Rxh5? [51.Rh8!+-] 51...Rxa7?

[51...Kg6!-/+] 52.Rh7+ Kg6 53.Rxa7 Kg5 54.Ke3 f4+ 55.Kf2 Kg4 56.Rg7+ Kf5 57.Rf7+ Ke5 58.Rh7 e3+ 59.Kf3 Black forfeits on time 1-0

171 – Caliguire 6.Qd2 Nbd7 I played in a tournament on May 2, 1992 at the Station Mall in Altoona, Pennsylvania. There I finished in second place in the Open Section. In my first round I won on time as Black in the Caro-Kann Panov. My second round was a loss to Master Rodion Rubenchik in the Albin-Counter Gambit. Here in round three my opponent was John C. Caliguire, Jr. Although we had never personally met before, I knew his name. My book Blackmar-Diemer Gambit Keybook had been published by Thinkers' Press in 1992 about nine weeks before this game. Caliguire played Game 500 in that book. Against me in Altoona, John Caliguire rated 1916 played a Pirc Defence. I had won a lot of games with the 4.f3 / 5.Be3 line when Black avoided the BDG. According to Junior 12, my play in this game was nearly perfect. That doesn’t happen very often. There is usually some better move that I could have played. Sawyer - Caliguire, Altoona, PA (3), 02.05.1992 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.f3 g6 [2...d5 3.e4 dxe4 4.Nc3 transposes to the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit.] 3.e4 d6 4.Nc3 [4.c4 Bg7 5.Nc3 KID Saemisch] 4...Bg7 5.Be3 0-0 [Some players prefer to play 5...c6 and begin queenside operations while the Black king is still in the center.] 6.Qd2 Nbd7 [6...c6 is more common. At this point, White must choose between six moves: 7.0-0-0, Bh6, h4, g4, Nge2, or Bc4. White would like to play all six moves at once, but of course must just pick one at a time.] 7.0-0-0 c6 8.Bh6 a5? [Too slow. 8...b5!= with roughly equal chances.] 9.h4 b5 10.h5 Nb6 [A big mistake would be 10...Nxh5?? 11.Rxh5 gxh5 12.Qg5 with mate next move.] 11.hxg6 fxg6 12.Bxg7 Kxg7 13.Qh6+ Kg8 14.e5 Nh5 15.g4 b4 16.gxh5 Bf5 17.hxg6 Bxg6 18.Bd3

bxc3 [Black was losing anyway. This just allows a forced checkmate.] 19.Bxg6 cxb2+ 20.Kb1 [White captures on h7 with queen or bishop next move, depending on what Black does.] 1-0

172 – Qbroot 6.Qd2 Nbd7 The Pirc Defence is fully playable, even if it is not as sharp as the Sicilian Dragon or King's Indian Defence. I prefer playing White in the Pirc Defence. White plays both 1.e4 and 2.d4 without immediate hassle. Black will strike back, but it takes a little time. Also White's Nc3 development is faster with the c-pawn on c2 instead of c4. The 150 Attack Line is 1.e4 d6 2.d4 Nf6 3.Nc3 g6 4.Be3 Bg7 5.f3, to which I transpose. Blackmar-Diemer Gambit players need to be able to meet both 1.d4 Nf6 and the Pirc Defence. I stumbled on to 2.f3 where play might continue 2...g6 3.e4 d6 4.Nc3 Bg7 5.Be3. This resembles the 150 Attack vs the Sicilian. Against a player using the handle Qbroot, I ended up with a good position and managed to win. Sawyer - Qbroot, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 18.09.2014 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.f3 g6 3.e4 Bg7 4.Be3 d6 5.Nc3 0-0 6.Qd2 Nbd7 7.0-0-0 e5 8.g4 a6 9.h4 b5 10.Kb1 Nb6 11.dxe5 Ne8 12.exd6 Nxd6 13.Bxb6 Bxc3 14.Qxc3 cxb6 15.Qd4 Be6 16.Qxd6 Qf6 17.Qd4 Qf4? [17...Rfd8 18.c3 Rxd4 19.cxd4+/-] 18.Qd2 Qc7 19.h5 Rac8 20.Bd3 b4 21.Qg5 f6 22.Qh6 g5 23.e5 fxe5 [Or 23...Qg7 24.Qxg7+ Kxg7 25.h6+ Kg8 26.exf6 Rxf6 27.Rh5+-] 24.Nh3 Qe7 25.Nxg5 Rf6 26.Qxh7+ Qxh7 27.Bxh7+ Kg7 28.Nxe6+ Kxh7 29.Ng5+ Kh6 30.Ne4 Rxf3 31.Rd6+ Kh7 32.Rxb6 [32.Ng5+! picks up a rook.] 32...a5 33.Rd1 Rf4 34.Re1 Rxg4 35.Nf6+ Kh6 36.Nxg4+ Kxh5 37.Nxe5 Kg5 38.Nd3 Black resigns 1-0

173 – lhj 6.Qd2 Nbd7 7.0-0-0 Every 1.e4 player and every Blackmar-Diemer Gambit player has to have a plan to win against the King's Indian Defence type set-up. This involves at least four moves by Black: 1...Nf6, 2...d6, 3...g6, 4...Bg7 played in almost any order. Unless interrupted, Black can pretty much ignore what White does until move 5. If White wants to face an actual King's Indian Defence, then he will play 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.e4 d6. The Pirc Defence follows 1.e4 d6 2.d4 Nf6 (Attacking e4) 3.Nc3 g6 followed by 4...Bg7. Because White has not used a tempo to play c2-c4, he reaches the crossroads on move four. The main choices are 4.f4 / 5.Nf3; 4.Nf3 / 5.Be2; 4.Bc4 / 5.Qe2; and 4.Be3 / 5.f3. This last option is the 150 Attack, named for the British rating level (about 1800 Elo) where that choice was particularly popular. Nowadays that move is played at every rating level. The move f2-f3 can be played at any point up to move 7. White's intentions are to follow with Qd2 / 0-0-0 / g4 / h4 /h5 / Bh6. Almost the exact same idea can be found in the Saemisch Variation of the King's Indian Defence, the English Attack of the Najdorf Sicilian Defence (though without the Bh6) and the Yugoslav Attack against the Dragon Sicilian Defence. For a second I forgot about the chronic hole on c4 which Black could now use for the first time. I blundered with 13.Nce2? I got away with it when Black failed to play 13...Nc4! After the exchanges that followed, White's attack was much faster. Sawyer - lhj, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 31.08.2011 begins 1.d4 g6 2.e4 Bg7 3.Nc3 d6 4.Be3 Nf6 [Pirc Defence] 5.f3 0-0 6.Qd2 Nbd7 7.0-0-0 a6 [Planning a queenside expansion.] 8.g4 b5 9.h4 Bb7 [The bishop is not effective here.] 10.Bh6 Rc8 11.h5 c5 12.d5 Ne5 13.Nce2 [13.Bxg7! is the correct way to reach the game continuation.] 13…a5 [Black also playing fast uses good strategy but bad tactics. 13...Nc4! attacks my queen while

she is protecting my Bh6.] 14.Bxg7 Kxg7 15.hxg6 fxg6 16.Qh6+ Kg8 17.Ng3 c4 18.g5 Nh5 19.Nxh5 gxh5 20.Rxh5 Rf7 21.Bh3 Rg7 22.Be6+ Kf8 23.Rh4 c3 24.Rf4+ Nf7 25.Rxf7+ Black resigns 1-0

Book 5: Index of Names to Games Abdilkhair – 17 alejo2 – 101 Alston – 42 anon3 – 134 Ashby – 163 ATtheGreat – 112 Bacrot – 12 Baffo – 48, 76 Barr – 152 Barthel – 99 Bekychess – 41 Bentrup – 5 Bertola – 82 Bex – 86 bhanu2358 – 124 Bishop – 95 bjerky – 145 Blacula – 137 Blijlevens – 105 blik – 10, 59, 109 Bond – 140 Bondar – 75 Botti – 138 Bramante – 100 Brameld – 47 Briem – 46 Browne – 108 Brummer – 74 Bullockus – 121 Bulut – 20 Burgess – 123 Caglioti – 34 Caliguire – 171 Carlsen – 144

Cavicchi – 21, 126 Chandler – 41, 43 chapaev – 77 Chatalbashev – 155 Cherner – 122 Chilson – 25 claret – 164 Conlon – 36 Conlon – 36 Costigan – 98 CraftyWiz – 49 creditordebit – 97 Crompton – 22, 23 Crotto – 133 Cui – 135 Data – 81 Dbronstein06 – 132 Dragojlovic – 60 duarni – 1 Dubov – 127 duckbreath – 52 Dunadan – 44, 142 Dunn – 139 Duppel – 93 Eldridge – 89 Evans – 103 Fedorov – 71 Felber – 45 Fernandez Cardoso – 91 Ferranti – 131 Fierro Baquero – 126 Fischer – 108 Fiser – 71 Flear – 40 fluxion – 54 Foust – 38 France – 104

Fressinet – 30 g1br4l0t – 136 Gambit-Lover – 27 Giri – 143, 147 gnice – 167 Goldthorpe – 120 Gomez Anadon – 116 Gorton – 107 Graf – 158 Grifter – 58 Grigoriev – 20 Guest – 37, 85 Haines – 68, 124, 125, 135 Harimau – 88 Hauseux – 30 Heinoo – 140 Hickman – 32 iAttack – 154 indobeginnerchess – 22 insight – 101 Jansson – 84 jubajeba – 110 Kafel – 119 Kaplan – 26 Karolyi – 86 kevinstar – 23 Kushagra – 115 Lalith – 115 Lau – 78 Laz – 157 Le Roux – 148 Leko – 12 Lenchner – 161 Lepre – 82 lhj – 173 Luch – 90 Ludwig – 7

Maks – 113 Maksimovic – 16 Malyi – 13 Mamedyarov – 143, 147 Marangunic – 40 Marfia – 106 Markovic – 6 MarkusP – 141 Marlborito – 43 MarshKnight – 96 Martin, A – 61 Martin, B – 123 MaryDawson – 83 Matthews – 50 Mednis – 114 Melissakis – 150 Mertanen – 118 Micah – 80 Mikalsen – 155 Miller, A – 111 Miller, R – 162 Morin – 68 Movsesian – 144 Muir – 2, 35, 53, 66 Mussanti – 112 Nichter – 65 Niven – 28 NN – 9, 21, 29, 51 Okhotnik – 13 Padjen – 79 Parsons – 33, 69 Patrascu – 16 pawnstar3 – 92 Petrekanovic – 15 Petronic – 129 Phillips – 56 PII233Crafty – 72

Polanyi – 31 Poleksic – 15 Potapov – 18 pothead – 3 Pridorozhni – 18 Pythagoras – 170 Qbroot – 172 Rasmussen – 47 Rebel-3 – 156 Regan – 159, 165 Robson – 8 RockyTop – 27 Rookie – 102, 146 Rosenthal – 14 Ross – 64 Rrractl – 125 Ryder – 67 SanjaP – Sanjuan Garcia – 99 Sarosy – 130 Sawyer – 2-8, 10-11, 14, 24-26, 28, 33-39, 42, 44, 45, 49, 50, 52-59, 61-66, 69, 70, 72-78, 80, 81, 83-85, 87, 88, 89, 92, 94, 96-98, 100, 102-104, 106, 107, 109-111, 113, 114, 117, 119-122, 128-134, 137-139, 141, 142, 145, 146, 149-154, 156, 157, 159-173 Schirber – 39 Schmidt – 93 Schreiber – 166 Schroer – 117 Scott – 67 Sengupta – 19 Sheldrick – 9 Shibut – 73 Silva Lucena – 90 silverwolf – 63 Skoberne – 148 Smeets – 158 Stankovic – 116

Starosta – 168 stin – 151 Stroganov – 17 Sviridov – 127 Szklarczyk – 94 Tamang – 19 Tarantoga – 128 Taylor – 55 Teixeira – 91 temujin1206 – 48 Times – 95 Tonteri – 118 Torning – 29, 51 Torre – 153 Ubezio – 60 Vaisser – 153 Van Geet – 46 van Willigen – 105 vladdfallavenna – 4 Vlassov – 31 WetDog – 70 Wharry – 87 widowmaker – 169 Wight – 136 Wolff – 32 Wood – 11 Xayavong – 160 YucoII – 57 Zdun – 24, 62 Zelcic – 79 Zilbermints – 1

Book 6 – Queen Pawn 1.d4 d5: Chess Opening Games – Second Edition Copyright © 2015, 2016, 2018 by Sawyer Publications All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form without permission in writing from the author. Play Queen Pawn openings via 1.d4 d5. Enjoy the 2.Bf4 London System and the 2.c4 Queen’s Gambit with its many defenses. In this 2018 Second Edition Tim Sawyer shares 180 games and stories from his 45 year career and other games that interest him from masters, experts and club players. This book covers Colle and London Systems, Queen’s Gambits, Albin Counter Gambit, Slav Defence, Queen’s Gambit Declined and others. Join the masters. Play Double Queen Pawn lines. This 2018 edition has updated commentary and an index of player names to the game numbers. This book covers all the openings that begin 1.d4 d5 except NOT the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit. Tim covers that gambit in great detail in his other books. You can find checkmate themes in all these openings. To help you, related games are grouped together. You will find games full of interesting ideas from years of the author’s own writing. They provide creative ideas and ways to improve. Learn to win the center. Improve your control of the chess board. This book is full of little known lines as well as a review of the main lines. Consider new strategy and tactics and your interest will soar! Stay excited. Play chess and have fun!

Book 6: Chapter 1 – Queen Pawn Games 1.d4 d5 The Closed Game 1.d4 d5 is one of the most popular ways to begin a chess game at all levels. This section considers rare second moves for White.

1 – Zurich Gambit 2.g4 Bxg4 Rob Hartelt asked me, "For the BDG, do you prefer to play as White or Black?" I replied using a baseball analogy, "I am happy on either side of the BDG. I prefer whichever side is winning at the moment! I love baseball. When I could play, I enjoyed batting and fielding. I just loved the game. Same with the BDG. Attacking is fun. An extra pawn is exciting. Yes!" Play ball! Once upon a time I ventured a rare Zurich Gambit 1.d4 d5 2.g4!? I borrowed an idea from Blackmar and followed Black's 2...Bxg4 with 3.f3!? Normal 3.Nc3. I lost quickly. I wanted to try another. I saw "TRENDAVID" was available for an unrated 3 0 game where he would play Black. It was a good opportunity to try a second Zurich Gambit. I was richly rewarded. Sawyer - TRENDAVID (1533), ICC 3 0 u Internet Chess Club, 02.03.2013 begins 1.d4 d5 2.g4 Bxg4 3.f3!? [This was my idea. I had not seen it played by anyone else. The most common move is 3.Nc3 when 3...e6 is -/+. That makes sense. Black has an extra pawn in his pocket.] 3...Bf5 4.Nc3 Nf6 [The critical line is 4...e5! 5.dxe5? (5.h4 Be7-/+) 5...Qh4+ 6.Kd2 Nc6 7.Nxd5 0-0-0 8.e4 Bxe4 9.fxe4 Qxe4-+ and White is getting crushed.] 5.Bg5 e6? [My gambit pays off. Better is 5...Nbd7 6.e4 dxe4 7.Qe2 exf3 8.Nxf3 c6 9.0-0-0 e6-/+] 6.e4 Bg6? [6...h6! 7.Bxf6 Qxf6 8.exf5 Qh4+ 9.Ke2 Nc6 10.Qd3 Nxd4+ 11.Kd1 0-0-0= and Black has compensation for

the piece.] 7.e5 h6 8.Bh4 c5 9.exf6 gxf6 10.dxc5 Bxc5 11.Bd3 Nc6 12.Qd2 Rg8 13.Nge2 Ke7 [13...Qb6 14.Na4 Qb4 15.Qxb4 Bxb4+ 16.Kf2+/-] 14.Qf4 Bf5 15.Bxf5 exf5 16.Qxf5 Black resigns 1-0

2 – Stonewall 2.f4 Nc6 3.Nf3 Yes, I finally got to retire. To celebrate I played a Stonewall Attack. I was moving from one stage of life to another. Our chess game move from one opening to another. We started as a Queen Pawn Game after 1.d4 d5 ended up as a Bird's Opening after White chose 2.f4. That surprise did take long. But I was in the mood for a quick three minute game, so everything was going to be fast. I had challenged a guest on the Internet Chess Club. Thus I do not know his rating. My focus was on speed. I hoped that my moves would be good enough. White began picking off my pawns. I looked for open lines. My major trump card was the advanced e-pawn. Slowly my pawn worked forward. Then faster. Finally I queened the pawn for checkmate! Guest - Sawyer (2001), ICC 3 0 u Internet Chess Club, 12.10.2015 begins 1.d4 d5 2.f4 Nc6 3.Nf3 Bf5 4.e3 e6 5.a3 a6 6.h3 Be4 7.Nbd2 Nf6 8.Be2 Be7 9.0-0 0-0 10.Ne5 Nd7 11.Nxe4 dxe4 12.c4 f5 [12...Ndxe5=] 13.b4 [13.Nxc6+/=] 13...Ncxe5 14.dxe5 Nb6 15.Bb2 c5 16.Qb3 Qe8 17.bxc5 Bxc5 18.Bd4 Qa4 [18...Na4=] 19.Rab1 Bxd4 20.exd4 Qxb3 21.Rxb3 Na4 22.Rxb7 [22.c5+/-] 22...Nc3 23.Bd1 [23.Re1+/=] 23...Rfb8 24.Re7 Rb1 25.Bc2 Rb2 26.Bd1 e3 [26...Rd2-/+] 27.Bf3 Rab8 28.Rxe6? [28.Kh2+/=] 28...e2! 29.Re1 Rb1 30.Rxb1 Rxb1+ 31.Kf2 e1Q# White checkmated 0-1

3 - Michaluk 2.e3 Bf5 4.Bd3 There were two chess sets on board our cruise ship to Alaska. Both were set up wrong. One time I walked past the library chess set. My wife suggested we sit and play. She asked me what she should play as Black. I recreated from memory the Paul Morphy White win vs the Duke of Brunswick in a Philidor Defence. Most cruisers did not want to play me. They were playing friends or family. After one couple finished playing, his wife suggested I play her husband. Steve Michaluk told me he wrote computer software including a chess playing program in the 1970s in FORTRAN. It looked ahead 3 ply. Steve said the program started cheating to win. In the days before PCs he gave up on the project. We sat down to play. With the ship rocking back and forth, the kings would take turns going up and down an inch. I agreed to take Black since Steve was already sitting on the White side. After 1.d4 d5 2.e3, I anticipated a Colle System type position with moves like Nf3 and Bd3 to follow. Thus I chose 2...Bf5 to combat this strategy. After we swapped light squared bishops, I planned to place my pawns on the light squares. When White dropped a pawn in the center, I switched to a dark squared pawn chain to protect my extra pawn. Then Steve Michaluk developed a good kingside attack. At the moment it seemed White needed to go forward with Bxg7, he retreated with Bd2. After that, I mounted my own successful kingside attack. Michaluk - Sawyer, Canada Pacific, 07.07.2014 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e3 Bf5 3.Bd3 Bxd3 4.cxd3 e6 5.e4 c5 6.Bf4 Nc6 7.Nf3 cxd4 8.Nbd2 Bc5 9.0-0 [9.Rc1] 9...Nf6 10.Rc1 Bb6 11.e5 [11.Bg5] 11...Nd7 12.Re1 0-0 13.Bg5 Qe8 14.Qe2 Rc8 15.Nh4 Ndxe5 16.Ndf3 Nxf3+ 17.Qxf3 f6 18.Bf4 e5?! [Black might try 18...Qd7 or 18...Ba5] 19.Nf5? [19.Qxd5+ Qf7] 19...Qd7 20.Qg4 Rcd8 21.Bh6!? [21.Bd2 saves a tempo.] 21...Rf7 22.Bd2 [I thought White's best idea was 22.Bxg7 Rxg7 23.Qxg7+ Qxg7 24.Nxg7 Kxg7-/+ but Black would have had the better chances.] 22...Kh8 23.Qf3 Ne7 24.Nh4

Ng6 25.Nxg6+ hxg6 26.g4 g5 27.Qh3+ Kg8 28.f3 g6 29.Qh6 Rg7 30.Qh3 Rh7 31.Qg3 Bc7 32.Kg2 Kf7 33.Rh1 Rdh8 34.Qf2 e4 35.Kg1 e3 36.Bxe3 dxe3 37.Qxe3 Rxh2 38.Rxh2 Rxh2 39.Kf1 Rh1+ 40.Kg2 Bf4 41.Qf2 Rxc1 42.Kh3 Kg8 43.Kg2 Qc7 44.Qe2 Rc2 0-1

4 – Haines 3.Bd3 c5 4.c4 c4 Ray Haines wins Queen Pawn Games with the Stonewall Attack that resembles Bird’s Opening. Players as Black often play ...c4 to virtually close the queenside in the Stonewall Attack or in the French Defence. Black dooms the Bc8 to a fenced in backyard. White seemed to hide in his castle behind a stone wall with 6.f4 until his forces were ready in the main game below. He could lower the drawbridge faster and attack with 6.e4. Anyway, by the time he played 15.e4, his stonewall had cracks in it that Black failed to find. Then White attacked and had two ways to mate. Haines (1622) - pavel135 (1634), Live Chess Chess.com, 23.04.2018 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e3 e6 [2...Nf6 3.Bd3 e6 4.f4 c5 5.c3 c4?! 6.Bc2 a6 7.Nf3 Nc6 8.0-0 Be7 9.Nbd2 0-0 10.a4 Bd7 11.Ne5 b5 12.b3 Na5 13.b4 Nc6 14.a5 Nxe5? 15.fxe5 Ne8 16.Qh5 f5 17.exf6 Nxf6 18.Rxf6! g6 19.Rxg6+ hxg6 20.Qxg6+ 1-0 Haines - cronocentauro, Chess.com, 22.05.2018] 3.Bd3 c5 4.c3 c4 [4...Qb6 5.f4 Nc6 6.Nf3 Nh6 7.0-0 c4? 8.Bc2 Ne7 9.Qe1 Nhf5 10.b3 Bd7 11.bxc4 dxc4 12.Nbd2 Bb5 13.e4 Nd6 14.Ba3 Ng6 15.Ne5 Nxe5 16.fxe5 Nxe4 17.Nxe4 (17.Bxf8!) 17...Bxa3 18.Qf2 0-0 19.Qh4 Bb2 20.Nf6+ gxf6 21.Qxh7# 1-0 Haines - mevludibardavelidze, Chess.com, 02.05.2018] 5.Bc2 Nc6 6.f4 [6.e4 is objectively stronger.] 6...f5 7.Nf3 Nf6 8.0-0 Be7 9.b3 b5 10.bxc4 dxc4 [10...bxc4 11.Ba4 Bd7=] 11.Nbd2 [11.Qe2!?=] 11...0-0 12.Ne5? [12.Qe1=] 12...Nxe5 13.fxe5 Nd5 14.Qf3?! Bb7 15.e4 fxe4 [Black could try 15...Nb4! 16.cxb4 Qxd4+ 17.Qf2 Qxa1-+] 16.Qxe4 Rxf1+ 17.Nxf1 g6 18.Bd2 Rb8 [18...Bg5=/+] 19.Qg4 Nc7 [19...Qd7=] 20.Ng3 Qf8 [20...Kh8 21.Rf1+/-] 21.Rf1 Qg7 22.h4 Rf8 23.Rxf8+ Bxf8 24.h5 Bc8 [24...gxh5 25.Qxh5+/-] 25.hxg6 hxg6 26.Bxg6 Bd7 27.Nh5 Qh8 28.Nf6+ Kg7 [White can choose between 29.Bh5 mate or 29.Be8 mate.] 1-0

5 – Mikhalevski 2.Bg5 f6 3.Bf4 The Trompowsky can lead to a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit Vienna reversed after 2.Bg5 f6 3.Bf4 Nc6. The BDG position could have occurred in the game Victor Mikhalevski vs Igor Berenboym, but here White avoided 4.Nf3 e5 5.dxe5 with 4.e3. Black got a good opening, but the grandmaster as White outplayed his opponent. Mikhalevski (2538) - Berenboym (2125), TCh-ISR 2018 Israel ISR (7.4), 16.02.2018 begins 1.d4 d5 2.Bg5 [2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3 Bf5 BDG Vienna] 2...f6 3.Bf4 Nc6 4.e3 [4.Nf3 e5 5.dxe5 is a BDG Vienna with colors reversed.] 4...e5 5.dxe5 fxe5 6.Bg3 Nf6 7.Bb5 Bd6 8.Nc3 a6 9.Ba4 b5 10.Bb3 Ne7 11.a4 bxa4 12.Rxa4 c6 13.Nf3 Bg4 [13...e4 14.Bxd6 exf3=] 14.e4 0-0 [14...d4 15.Ne2+/=] 15.exd5 Kh8 16.Rxg4 Nxg4 17.Ng5 Qd7 [17...Nf6 18.dxc6+/-] 18.Ne6 [18.dxc6!+-] 18...Nxd5 [18...Nf6 19.Nxf8 Rxf8 20.0-0+/-] 19.Nxf8 [19.Qxg4! Rae8 20.Nxd5 cxd5 21.Bxd5+-] 19...Rxf8 20.Nxd5 cxd5 21.Qxd5 Nf6 22.Qe6 Bb4+ 23.c3 Qd3 24.Qc4 Qb1+ 25.Bd1 Bd6 26.0-0 Qxb2 27.Qxa6 Bb8 28.Qc6 e4 29.Bh4 Be5 30.c4 Qd4 31.Bg5 h6? [31...Bxh2+! 32.Kxh2 Qe5+ 33.Kg1 Qxg5=] 32.Be3 Qd3 33.h3 [33.g3+/-] 33...Rd8 34.Qa4 Rc8 35.c5 Nd5? [35...Bh2+ 36.Kxh2 Qxf1 37.Bc2+/=] 36.Bc2 Nc3 37.Bxd3 Nxa4 38.Ba6 Rc7 39.c6 Nc3 40.Bb7 Nd5 41.Bc5 Rf7 42.Rd1 Nf6 43.Bc8 Rc7 44.Bd7 1-0

6 – Corter 2.Bg5 h6 3.Bh4 g5 It is good to practice new lines against weaker opposition. I gave 1.d4 d5 2.Bg5 a try vs Travis Corter. He kicked the bishop with 2…h6. His kingside pawns pushed the bishop back to his own wall of pawns. White chased the Black king out of his house when it became vulnerable to checks. At the end a king hunt could have led to a quick checkmate. Black’s move 12 grabbed another pawn, but he overlooked that his bishop would no longer be protected. When the bishop fell, Black resigned. Sawyer (2010) - Corter (1400), Williamsport, PA 08.01.2002 begins 1.d4 d5 2.Bg5 h6 3.Bh4 g5 4.Bg3 Bf5 5.h4 [5.c4] 5...f6 [5...Bg7 6.hxg5 hxg5

7.Rxh8 Bxh8=] 6.e3 Nc6 7.Qh5+ Kd7 8.Nf3 Bxc2 9.Na3 Nb4 10.Rc1 Bd3 11.Rxc7+ Ke6 12.hxg5 [12.Bxd3! Nxd3+ 13.Ke2 Nxb2 14.hxg5+-] 12...Nxa2? [12...Rh7 13.Bxd3 Nxd3+ 14.Kf1+-] 13.Bxd3 1-0

7 – GAF 2.Bg5 f6 3.Bh4 c6 I cannot know what went on in the mind of my opponent. What I do know was this Pseudo Trompowsky remained very balanced. Put another way, we both failed to make use of imbalances. Moves like 3…c6 4.c3 do not push for a win. Better approaches for Black are either 2…f6 3.Bh4 Nh6 or 2…h6 3.Bh4 c6 4.e3 Qb6 with a likely 5… Bf5. I have played many interesting games against the Internet Chess Club player “GAF”. This one seems very simple by comparison. It felt like both players were trying to draw. All the exchanges tended toward a more and more drawish position. White may have been content with a draw because I was the higher rated player. I may have been content to a draw because I was playing Black in an opening that I had rarely faced. First the queens came off the board by move seven. Then three sets of minor pieces were exchanged, including all the bishops. This left an open e-file. By move 26, all the rooks were swapped off. The remaining knights disappeared on move 29. We reached an endgame with pawns on both sides of the board. The kings raced to the center. Neither monarch could be allowed to penetrate to the other side, so the players repeated moves. GAF (1987) - Sawyer (2071), ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 06.04.2012 begins 1.d4 d5 2.Bg5 f6 3.Bh4 c6 4.c3 Bf5 5.Nd2 Qb6 6.Qb3 [6.e4!? dxe4 7.Nc4 Qc7 8.Bg3 Qd7 9.Ne2=] 6...Qxb3 7.axb3 a6 8.f3 [8.Bg3=] 8...Nd7 9.e4 Bg6 10.Bd3 e6 [10...e5!=] 11.f4 [11.Ne2=] 11...Bxe4 [11...Bd6=] 12.Nxe4 dxe4 13.Bxe4 Ne7 14.Nf3 Nd5 15.Bg3 Bd6 [15...f5 16.Bc2=] 16.Bxd5 exd5 17.b4 0-0 18.f5 Bxg3+ 19.hxg3 Nb6 20.Nd2 Nc8 21.g4 Nd6

22.Kf2 Rfe8 23.Rhe1 Kf7 24.Rxe8 Rxe8 25.Re1 Rxe1 26.Kxe1 g6 27.fxg6+ hxg6 28.Kf2 Nc4 29.Nxc4 dxc4 30.Kf3 Ke6 31.Ke4 Kd6 32.g3 Ke6 33.Kf4 Kd5 34.Ke3 b6 35.Kf3 c5 36.dxc5 bxc5 37.bxc5 Kxc5 38.g5 f5 39.Kf4 Kd5 40.Ke3 Ke5 41.Kf3 Kd5 42.Ke3 Ke5 43.Kf3 Game drawn by mutual agreement 1/2-1/2

8 – Guest 2.Bg5 f6 3.Bh4 Nc6 I tried a Pseudo Trompowsky vs a guest on the Internet Chess Club. One does not know how strong such opponents are unless they tell you. That has happened to me with some masters. Usually I do not know if a guest would be rated 1300 or 2300 until I play them. If they keep pushing me around, they’re good. This game turned out to be full of tactics. I discovered how much trouble one can both cause and get into in the same game. This line can resemble a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit Declined reversed. Yes, I could transpose exactly except that Black would be playing White in a BDG. “How?” you may ask. Here’s how. Consider these possibilities after 1.d4 d5. 2.Bg5 f6 3.Bf4 e5 4.dxe5 Nc6 5.exf6 Qxf6. 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 Bf5 4.f3 exf3 5.Qxf3 (same position). 2.Bg5 f6 3.Bf4 e5 4.dxe5 Nc6 5.Nf3. 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3 Bf5 (same position). The transpositions are not forced, but they are interesting. In our game I chose 3.Bh4 as White. It avoids the BDG transpositions. Sawyer (2000) - Guest, ICC 2 12 u Internet Chess Club, 10.08.2001 begins 1.d4 d5 2.Bg5 f6 3.Bh4 Nc6 4.e3 e5 5.Bb5 [5.dxe5 Nxe5 6.Nd2 Bd6 7.Ngf3 Ne7 8.Nxe5 Bxe5 9.c3 0-0=] 5...Bd7 [5...exd4 6.Qxd4 Bd6 7.Qd2 Nge7 8.Nc3 Be6=] 6.c3 [I missed that White could win a pawn after 6.dxe5! Nxe5 7.Qxd5 c6 8.Qxe5+ fxe5 9.Bxd8+/=] 6...a6 7.Ba4 exd4 [7...Nge7 8.Bg3 Nf5 9.dxe5 Nxg3 10.hxg3 Nxe5 11.Nf3=] 8.cxd4 Bb4+ 9.Nc3 Qe7 10.Qh5+!? [10.Nge2+/=] 10...g6 11.Qxd5 0-0-0 12.Qf3? [12.Nge2 h5=/+] 12...g5 [This allows White to bring his bishop to a somewhat safer position. Black missed the punishing reply 12...Nxd4! 13.Bxd7+ Rxd7 14.Qd1 Qe4-+] 13.Bg3 Nxd4 [13...h5!-+] 14.Qd1 Bxa4 15.Qxa4 h5 [15...Qe4! 16.0-0-0 Bxc3 17.exd4 Rxd4 18.Rxd4 Bxd4-/+]

16.h4? [16.0-0-0=] 16...g4 [16...Qe4-+] 17.0-0-0 Nc6 18.Nge2 f5? [18...Nh6 19.Nf4+/=] 19.Qc2 [19.Rxd8+!+/-] 19...Bxc3 20.Qxf5+ Kb8 21.Nxc3 Nf6 22.Bf4 Rhf8 23.Bg5?! [23.Kb1+/-] 23...Qg7 [23...Rxd1+ 24.Rxd1=] 24.Rxd8+ Nxd8 25.Rd1 Nc6 26.Qe6 Nh7 27.Bh6 Black resigns 1-0

2.Nc3 White develops a knight and threatens to immediately push a pawn to e4 if he so chooses. What will Black do about it?

9 – Saeed 2.Nc3 Bf5 3.e4 Bxe4 International Master Nasser A Saeed won a Queen Pawn Game after 1.d4 d5 2.Nc3 Bf5 3.e4 Bxe4. This resembles the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3 and Huebsch Gambit 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d5 3.e4 Nxe4 4.Nxe4 dxe4. Cyrus Lakdawala in “A Ferocious Opening Repertoire” mentioned 1.d4 d5 2.Nc3 Bf5 3.f3 e6 4.e4, but Saeed played a gambit with 3.e4!? The bishop is swapped off on e4. Saeed played the line repeatedly on the Internet Chess Club. FM Kaare Kristensen turned an equal line into a small advantage, but Saeed turned the tables by combining White’s kingside attack and his queenside defense. Saeed - Kristensen, ICC 5 0 Internet Chess Club, 06.10.2016 begins 1.d4 d5 2.Nc3 Bf5 3.e4!? [3.f3!? Nf6 4.g4 Bg6 5.g5 Nh5 6.f4 c5 7.e3=] 3...Bxe4 [This is rare. 3...dxe4 is a BDG Zeller] 4.Nxe4 dxe4 5.Bf4!? [Best seems to be 5.c3!] 5...e6 [Another try is 5...Nc6 6.d5 Nb4 (6...e5? 7.dxc6 and 1-0 in 54. Saeed - LazyPenguin1912, ICC 2016) 7.c4 e6 8.a3=] 6.Qd2 Nf6 7.0-0-0 Be7 8.f3 0-0 9.g4 Nbd7 [9...exf3 10.g5 Nd5 11.Nxf3 Nxf4 12.Qxf4 Qd6=/+] 10.g5 Nd5 11.h4 c5 12.fxe4 Nxf4 13.Qxf4 Qa5 14.Kb1 cxd4 15.Nf3 e5 16.Qg4?! [16.Qf5=; 16.Qh2=] 16...Nb6 17.h5 Rac8 [17...Na4! 18.Rd3 Nc3+!=/+] 18.g6 h6 19.gxf7+ Rxf7 20.Rg1 Qb4 [20...Ba3!-/+] 21.Nxe5 Na4? [21...Qc5=] 22.Qxc8+ Bf8 23.Nd3 Black resigns 1-0

10 – Bauer 2.Nc3 Bf5 3.f3 h6 GM Christian Bauer appeared to head for a Veresov Opening. His opponent Uwe Koch sidetracked him by delaying ...Nf6 to move seven. Uwe Koch played 2...Bf5. This fought for e4 without giving any purpose to 3.Bg5. Bauer chose to enforce e4 in Blackmar-Diemer Gambit style with 3.f3 and 4.e4. Black's slow response 3...h6 provided additional retreat space for his ...Bf5 as well as preventing a White Bg5. One idea of 2.Nc3 is that after here 7.Bf4, White can mount an attack vs c7 with 9.Nb5. In this game the Black king got caught in the center for too long. Grandmaster Bauer made Black pay. Bauer's sharp central attack led to a crushing quick victory. The Veresov Opening is a system of development where White begins by playing 1.d4, 2.Nc3 and 3.Bg5. Of course one cannot just blindly set-up this pattern without paying attention to what Black does. The basic strategy is the threat to occupy the center with pawns d4 and e4. After 1.d4, Black usually hinders 2.e4 with moves like 1...d5, 1...Nf6 or 1...f5. If 1.d4 d5 2.Nc3, White now threatens 3.e4. If Black responds 2...Nf6, hitting e4 with both his d5 pawn and Nf6, then 3.Bg5 is the Veresov. White threatens 4.Bxf6 to give Black doubled pawns and less influence over e4. Note 1.d4 d5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.Bg5 e6 4.e4 transposes to a French Defence. Bauer - Koch, Mehlingen PSB (ch) H, 1999 begins 1.d4 d5 2.Nc3 Bf5 [2...Nf6 3.Bg5 Veresov] 3.f3 h6 4.e4 dxe4 5.fxe4 Bg6 6.Nf3 e6 7.Bf4 Nf6 8.Bd3 Nbd7 9.Nb5 Bb4+ 10.c3 Ba5 11.Qe2 a6 12.Na3 c6 13.Nc4 Bc7 [13...0-0 14.Bd6+/-] 14.Bxc7 Qxc7 15.e5 Bxd3 16.Qxd3 Nd5 17.Nd6+ Ke7 18.0-0 Raf8 [If 18...Nf4 19.Qd2+-] 19.c4 [Or 19.Nh4+-] 19...N5b6 [If 19...Nf4 20.Qe3+-] 20.c5 Nc8 [20...Nd5 21.Nh4+-] 21.Nh4 b5 22.Rxf7+ Kd8 23.Ng6 Nxd6 24.exd6 Qa5 25.Nxh8 Rxh8 26.Qg6 Kc8 27.Rxd7 1-0

11 – Mitkov 2.Nc3 Bf5 3.f3 Bg6 Both chess players fight for control of e4 in the Queen Pawn Game 2.Nc3 Bf5. Below White enforced his will with 3.f3 Bg6 4.e4 dxe4 5.fxe4. No problem. Black just countered with 5...e5! White built up a queenside attack. He sacrificed a rook to threaten mate. A timely check gave Black a winning escape route for his king in Joshua Sheng vs Nikola Mitkov. Sheng (2392) - Mitkov (2461), PRO League Group Stage chess.com INT (4), 03.02.2018 begins 1.d4 d5 2.Nc3 Bf5 3.f3 Bg6 [3...Nf6 4.g4 Bg6 5.g5 Nh5 6.e4 dxe4 7.fxe4 e5!=] 4.e4 dxe4 5.fxe4 e5 6.dxe5 [6.Nf3 exd4 7.Qxd4 Qxd4 8.Nxd4 c6=] 6...Qxd1+ 7.Kxd1 Nd7 8.Bf4 0-0-0 9.Bd3 Nc5 10.Ke2 Ne6 11.Bg3 Nd4+ 12.Ke1 Bb4 [12...Ne7 13.Nf3 Nec6=] 13.Nf3 Ne7 14.a3 [14.Nxd4 Rxd4 15.e6! fxe6 16.Be5=] 14...Bxc3+ 15.bxc3 Ne6 [15...Nb3! 16.Rd1 Nc5=] 16.Ke2 Rhe8 17.Ke3 a6 18.Nh4 Nc6 19.Rhf1 Rd7 20.Nf5 Bxf5 21.Rxf5 g6 22.Rf6 Ned8 23.Rb1 Nxe5 24.Bxe5 [24.h3=] 24...Rxe5 25.Kf4 Rc5 26.Rxa6? [26.Rb3 Nc6-/+] 26...Ne6+! 0-1

12 – Short 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.Bf4 a6 Nigel Short wins Queen Pawn Game vs Michael Welsh of Ireland. The grandmaster attacks as White on both sides of the board simultaneously. I read a report in 2018 that GM Nigel Short wanted to be the President of FIDE. That could be very interesting. Short would certainly bring a different perspective than what FIDE appears to have had over the past many years. Time will tell. Short (2662) - Welsh (1985), 18th BCC Open 2018 Cha-Am THA (1.2), 13.04.2018 begins 1.Nc3 d5 2.d4 Nf6 3.Bf4 a6 4.e3 e6 5.g4 c5 6.g5 Nfd7 7.a3 Nc6 8.Nf3 b5 9.h4 Be7 10.Ne2 cxd4 11.Nexd4 Qb6 12.h5 Nxd4 13.exd4 f6 [13...b4=] 14.c3 [14.Qe2 0-0 15.0-0-0+/-] 14...Ra7 15.Bh3 [15.gxf6 Nxf6 16.Bd3+/=] 15...0-0 16.g6 e5 [16...h6 17.Qd2+/=] 17.gxh7+

Kh8 18.Be3 [18.Nh4+-] 18...exd4 19.Nxd4 Bc5 [Or 19...Ne5 20.Ne6+-] 20.b4 1-0

13 – Rinor 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.Bf4 g6 IM Jens Ove Fries Nielsen sent me this note about the Rinor! "Dear friend! "I saw your little article concerning the opening 1.d4 d5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.Bf4!? I would like to add some comments. "First I have played this System which I have given the name Rinor since 2011, long before Jobava, Rapport, etc. with a total of 150 games! "Second, I have nice wins against some strong GMs such as Grandelius, Hector, and Tukhaev, but have played it against a lot of other GMs. "It has nothing to do with Veresov in my opinion. I consider strongly to write a book over the Rinor. At last one of my most funny games with the Rinor. “Best wishes, “Jens Ove Fries Nielsen” Notes to his game vs Banerjee Bitan of India were provided by Fries Nielsen. Enjoy! Fries Nielsen (2381) - Bitan (2295), Lueneburg Open 2013 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d5 3.Bf4!? g6 4.Qd2 Bg7 5.Bh6 0-0 6.Bxg7 Kxg7 7.Nf3!? c6 8.h4!? h5 9.Ng5 Nbd7 10.f3 e5! 11.e3 exd4 12.exd4 Re8+ 13.Be2 b5!? 14.a3 Qc7 15.Kf2?! [15.0-0-0!] 15...Nb6 16.b3 a6 17.g3! Bb7 18.Qf4 Qxf4 19.gxf4 Nc8! 20.f5! Nd6 21.fxg6 fxg6 22.Bd3! Bc8 23.Rae1 Bd7?! 24.Re5 Bf5! 25.Bxf5 Nxf5 26.Ne2 Nd7 27.Rxf5! gxf5 28.Nf4 Rh8 29.Rg1 Kf6 30.Ke3 Rae8+ 31.Kd3 Re7? [31...Nf8] 32.Nge6! Rh6 33.Nd8! Nb8?? 34.Rg6+!! 1-0

14 – Fries Nielsen 3.Bf4 Bf5 Veresov Opening involves playing 1.d4, 2.Nc3, 3.Bg5 to begin a chess game. Note how the subtle difference of 3.Bf4 allows White to expand the kingside with pawn pushes that resemble the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit: 4.f3, 5.g4, 6.h4, 7.g5 and 8.e4. This is similar to the BDG Vienna Hara Kiri with 6.h4. White has the joy of attack without the danger of the gambit. Such a major pawn advance makes it difficult for Black to take aim at White's open king because of White's space behind the advanced pawns. Who plays like this? Try Stefanova, Jobava and Fries Nielsen. All have played 3.Bf4 several times. In 2005 I played it myself several times in blitz. In the game below players have mutual assaults as they castle opposite sides. Fries Nielsen calls this opening the Rinor. White obtains the best of it in this game as his bishops take aim at the Black monarch. I like the move 21.Qa5! The attack culminates in checkmate. Fries Nielsen (2384) - De Blecourt (2121), Copenhagen CC 2014 Ballerup DEN (2.12), 15.05.2014 begins 1.d4 d5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.Bf4 Bf5 4.f3 e6 5.g4 Bg6 6.h4 h5 7.g5 Nh7 8.e4 Bb4 9.exd5 Qxd5 10.Qd2 Bxc3 11.bxc3 Nc6 12.Be3 0-0-0 13.c4 Qd6 14.Ne2 Rhe8 15.Rb1 Nf8 [15...Qa3 16.Kf2 Qxa2 17.Rc1 Nf8 18.Nc3 Qa3=] 16.Bg2 [16.Kf2 Qa3 17.Nc3=] 16...e5 [16...Qa3 17.Kf2 Qxa2 18.Ra1 Qxc4=/+] 17.d5 Nd4 18.0-0 [18.Nxd4 exd4 19.Qxd4+/=] 18...Nxc2 [18...Nxe2+ 19.Qxe2=] 19.Bxa7 [19.Bf2+/=] 19...b6 20.Bh3+ Kb7 [20...Ne6=/+] 21.Qa5! Nd4 22.Bxb6 cxb6 23.c5 Bxb1 24.Rxb1 Nxe2+ 25.Kf2 Nc3 26.c6+ Kb8 27.Rxb6+ Kc7 28.Rb7# 10

15 – Tukhaev 3.Bf4 Bf5 4.f3 e6 Fries Nielsen wins vs a grandmaster with his Rinor Opening. After he kindly provided me with his game vs Bitan, he wrote: "Okay. Then I will give you my game against GM Adam Tukhaev (2548) from 8 round in Allsvenskan 2011-12." I covered two other games Jens Ove Fries Nielsen played with 2.Nc3 and 3.Bf4. The first was against De Blecourt in 2014. The second was against Drugge in 2015 (see next game). Fries Nielsen talked about possibly writing a book on this Rinor Opening. I hope he does! The game vs Adam Tukhaev began 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d5 3.Bf4!? Bf5!? Both sides started with obvious good moves. White's next plan was to expand his pawns on the kingside with the moves f3, g4, e3, h4, and g5 followed a few moves later by e4. This strategy is similar to several Blackmar-Diemer Gambit lines. Fries Nielsen - Tukhaev (2548), Allsvenskan (8), 2011-2012 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d5 3.Bf4!? Bf5!? 4.f3 e6 5.g4!? Bg6 6.e3 Be7 7.h4 h5 8.g5 Nfd7 9.Bd3!? Bxd3 10.cxd3 Na6!? 11.Nge2 c6 12.e4 g6 13.Be3 b5!? 14.Ng3!? Nc7 15.Nce2!? Rc8 16.Rc1 Na8 17.0-0 Nab6 18.b3!? a5 19.f4 f5 20.exd5!? exd5 [20...Nxd5!?] 21.Bd2! b4 22.Nxf5! gxf5 23.Ng3 Kf7 24.Nxf5 Bf8 25.Re1 Nf6! 26.Ng3! Qd7 27.f5 Re8 28.Qf3 Bd6 29.Re6 Ng4 30.Nxh5 Rxh5 31.Qxg4 Rhh8 32.Rce1 Rd8 33.g6+ Kg8 34.f6 Qc7 35.Re8+ 1-0

16 – Drugge 5.g4 Bg6 6.h4 h6 Fries Nielsen enjoys a variation which begins 1.d4 d5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.Bf4. What originally caught my eye was the BDG style pawn advances with 4.f3, 5.g4, 6.h4, along with a non-BDG like move 7.e3. This Fries Nielsen opening is not quite a Veresov. That begins 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.Bg5. Nor is it quite a London System which begins 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Bf4. Fries Nielsen calls this the Rinor Opening. The International Master Jens Ove Fries Nielsen of Denmark faced Patrik Drugge of Sweden in another game in this line. Here Black played 6...h6! This appears to be better than 6...h5. That continuation was covered in the previous game with Tukhaev. After 6…h6! 7.e3, popular chess engines offer many alternatives to 7...c5 in 7...a6 Stockfish, 7...Bd6 Houdini and 7...Be7 Komodo. All these lines lead to equal chances. Of course since all players are not equal, that also means the better players have the better chances. Fries Nielsen (2442) - Drugge (2175), Visma IMB 2015 Vaxjo SWE (8.2), 28.06.2015 begins 1.d4 d5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.Bf4 Bf5 4.f3 e6 5.g4 Bg6 6.h4 h6 7.e3 c5 [7...a6 8.h5 (8.Bd3 Bxd3 9.Qxd3 c5 10.Nge2=) 8...Bh7 9.Bd3 c5 10.Bxh7 Nxh7 11.Qd2=] 8.Nb5 Na6 9.c3 [9.a3=] 9...Be7 10.Bd3 Bxd3 11.Qxd3 Qb6 12.a4 Nd7 13.Ne2 c4 14.Qc2 e5 15.Bg3 0-0-0 16.b3 Nc7 17.bxc4 dxc4 18.Rb1 Na8 [18...h5 19.g5+/=] 19.Qa2 a6 20.Na3 Qc6 21.Nxc4 Qxf3 [21...f6 22.Na5+-] 22.Rf1 Qd5 23.Qb3 b5 24.axb5 axb5 25.Qxb5 Qxb5 26.Rxb5 Nc7 27.Ra5 exd4 28.exd4 Nf6 29.Bxc7 1-0

17 – Rateike 3.Bg5 Bf5 4.e3 Veresov Opening 1.d4 d5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.Bg5 is relatively rare. I played chess for 10 years before I faced one. That came in my game vs Richard Rateike whom I played in APCT. It is playable after either 1.d4 d5 or 1.d4 Nf6. After 3.Bg5, White threatens 4.Bxf6 doubling pawns. Now it is decision time. Black could defend the knight with 3...Nbd7, or offer to trade off his only developed piece with 3...Ne4 or ignore the threat with 3...Bf5. This game went back and forth. We both missed chances. Unfortunately I moved my bishop away from Bd6 before I realized my mistake. When the position was about even, we repeated moves for a draw. At that time on the same postcards we played another game. It was a Queens Gambit Accepted draw with our colors reversed from this game. Rateike (1869) - Sawyer (2100), corr APCT 1981 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d5 3.Bg5 Bf5 4.e3 [Sharper are 4.f3 or 4.Bxf6] 4...e6 5.g4 Bg6 6.Nge2 c5 7.Nf4 Nc6 8.Bb5 Qa5 9.Bxc6+ [9.Bxf6 gxf6 10.h4=] 9...bxc6 10.Nxg6 hxg6 11.a3 c4 12.h4 0-0-0 13.Bxf6 gxf6 14.Ke2 f5 [14...c5=/+] 15.g5 [15.h5!?=] 15...Be7 16.Na2 Rh5 17.b4 cxb3 18.cxb3 Bxa3 [18...Qxa3=/+] 19.Qc2 [19.Nc1!+/=] 19...Qb5+ 20.Kf3 Bd6 21.Nc3 Qb7 22.b4 Kd7 23.Na4 Qxb4!? 24.Rhb1 Qc4 25.Rb7+ [White could play to trap the Black queen with 25.Qd1 Rxh4 26.Rb7+ Ke8 27.Nb2 Qc3 28.Rb3 Rxd4 29.Rxc3 Rxd1 30.Rxd1+/- when White's extra rook looks stronger than Black's four extra pawns.] 25...Ke8 26.Qxc4 dxc4 27.Rxa7 Rxh4 28.Rb1 Bb8 [Inviting a draw, but with the bishop still at d6, Black could have played for more with 28...Rh3+ 29.Kg2 Rh2+ 30.Kf3 f4-/+] 29.Ra8 Bc7 30.Ra7 Bb8 31.Ra8 Bc7 32.Ra7 Bb8 33.Ra8 1/2-1/2

18 – Haines 3.Bg5 Nbd7 4.Nf3 How do you treat the Veresov Opening as Black or White? After 1.d4 d5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.Bg5, I like to avoid doubled pawns as Black. Therefore I favor 3...Nbd7. This allows one knight to protect the other. Ray Haines did the same in the game below. What does White do about my set-up? Veresov players with a fighting style choose 4.f3 or 4.Qd3. Both moves prepare e4. These moves directly and aggressively challenge Black. Here White opts for the simple 4.Nf3. After 4...e6, 5.e4 is possible due to the pin on the knight. Now we have what resembles a French Defence with the extra early moves Nf3 Nbd7. These additional moves give Black time for 5...h6 6.Bxf6 Nxf6. With the strong Bg5 gone, the cramped position is relieved by the exchange of a knight. Thus Black's game is easier than it might otherwise be. By move 11, schack55 playing White gets in trouble and loses a pawn. The rooks swap on move 38 leads to a bishops of opposite color ending where Black has two extra pawns. Ray Haines wins the endgame without much trouble. schack55 (1936) - Haines, chess24, 17.02.2016 begins 1.d4 d5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.Bg5 Nbd7 4.Nf3 e6 5.e4 h6 6.Bxf6 Nxf6 7.Bd3 [7.Qd3!=] 7...c5?! [7...Bb4=] 8.e5?! [8.exd5! Nxd5 9.Ne5+/=] 8...Nd7 9.0-0 Qb6 [9...cxd4=] 10.Na4 Qc7 11.c3? [White loses a pawn. Instead 11.c4+/= might make use of White's lead in development.] 11...c4! 12.Bc2 b5 13.Nc5 Nxc5 14.dxc5 Bxc5 15.a4 [15.a3 a5-/+] 15...b4 16.cxb4 Bxb4 17.Qd4 Bc5 18.Qg4 0-0 19.h4 Rb8 20.Rfb1 Rb4 21.Qg3 Bd7 22.b3 Rfb8 23.Nd2 Bd4 24.Ra2 Bxe5 25.Qf3 c3 26.Nf1 d4 27.Qd3 f5 28.h5 Bf6 29.g4 Qf4 30.gxf5 e5 31.Qg3 Qxg3+ 32.Nxg3 Bc6 33.Ne4 Bxe4 34.Bxe4 Kf8 35.Kf1 Rxb3 36.Rxb3 Rxb3 37.Bd5 Rb1+ 38.Ke2 Rb2+!? [38...Ke7-+] 39.Rxb2 cxb2 40.Be4 Bg5 41.Kd1 Ke7 42.Kc2 Bc1 43.Kb3 Kd6 44.Kc4 Bd2 45.Kb5 a5 46.Kc4 Ke7 47.Kd5 Kf6 48.Bd3 Bf4 49.Kc4 Kg5 50.Kd5 Kxh5 51.Ke4 Kg5 52.Kf3 h5 53.Kg2 Kg4 54.f3+ Kg5 55.Kh3 h4 56.Be4 Bg3 57.Kg2 Kf4 58.Bc2 Ke3 59.Be4 d3 60.Bxd3 Kxd3 61.Kh3 b1Q 62.Kg4 Qb4+

63.Kg5 Qf4+ 64.Kg6 Qxf3 65.f6 Qxf6+ 66.Kh7 g5 67.Kg8 Qe7 68.Kh8 e4 69.Kg8 Bd6 0-1

19 – Tartakower 3.Bg5 Nbd7 4.f3 Savielly G Tartakower was a favorite grandmaster of Tom Purser. This was partly because Tartakower played so many Blackmar-Diemer Gambits. Those of us who are partial to unorthodox openings enjoy the fact that Tartakower repeatedly played many less popular openings. Here against George Alan Thomas they contest a critical line in the Veresov Opening. In the Veresov Opening White develops his queenside pieces quickly so as to focus on the e4 square. Note that the 2.Nc3 aims at e4 and 3.Bg5 attacks the Nf6 to undermine Black's influence on e4. If Black plays 3...e6, the opening transposes to a Classical French Defence after 4.e4. If White wants to avoid the French, he might play 4.f3 or 4.Qd3 to threaten 5.e4. Tartakower - Thomas, Karlsbad (9), 1923 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d5 3.Bg5 Nbd7 4.f3 c6 5.e4 dxe4 6.fxe4 Qa5 [The main line is 6...e5! 7.dxe5 Qa5 8.Bxf6 gxf6 9.exf6 Ba3 10.Qc1 Nxf6=/+ according to Houdini 4, Deep Rybka and Deep Fritz] 7.Qd2 e5 8.Nf3 Be7 9.Bc4 exd4 10.Qxd4 Qb6 11.Qd2 Qc5 12.Bb3 Ne5 13.Be3 Nc4 14.Bxc5 Nxd2 15.Bxe7 Nxb3 16.axb3 Kxe7 17.e5 Ng4 18.0-0 Bf5 19.Nd4 Bg6 20.Rae1 Rhd8 21.Rf4 h5 22.h3 Nh6 23.g4 hxg4 24.hxg4 c5 25.Nf5+ Bxf5 26.gxf5 Rd2 27.f6+ Ke6? [27...gxf6 28.exf6+ Kd7=] 28.fxg7 Ke7 29.Ne4 [29.Rh4+-] 29...Rxc2 30.Rh4 Rg8 31.Rxh6 Rxg7+ 32.Kh1 Rxb2 33.Nd6 Rg6 [33...Rgg2 34.Rf1+-] 34.Rxg6 fxg6 35.e6 Rxb3 [35...Rd2 36.Nc8+ Ke8 37.e7 Rd4 38.Re6+-] 36.Nc8+ Ke8 37.e7 Rd3 38.Rf1 Rh3+ 39.Kg2 Rh8 40.Rd1 Kf7 41.Kf3 Rxc8 42.Rd8 Kxe7 43.Rxc8 Kd6 44.Ke4 b6 45.Rg8 Kc6 46.Rxg6+ Kb5 47.Kd3 Kb4 48.Rg1 b5 49.Ra1 c4+ 50.Kd4 Kb3 51.Rb1+ Ka4 52.Kc3 Ka5 53.Rh1 Kb6 [If 53...Ka6 54.Rh6+ Ka5 55.Rf6+-] 54.Rh6+ 1-0

2.Nf3 This section covers the Colle and other systems without an early 2.c4 or 2.Bf4. Some games transpose after 2.e3 and a quick Nf3.

20 – Sawyer 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bg5 Bg4 I won a Queen Pawn Chigorin when White captured the wrong way. I got a winning pawn structure though material was even. ChessNoobComp (1971) - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 03.04.2018 begins 1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bg5 Bg4 4.Nc3 a6 5.e3 Bf5 6.Bd3 Bxd3 7.Qxd3 f6 8.Bh4 Qd7 9.e4 e6 10.exd5 exd5 11.0-0-0 0-0-0 12.Na4 Nh6 13.Nc5 Bxc5 14.dxc5 Nf5 15.Bg3 Nxg3 16.fxg3 Ne5 [White could hold the ending despite doubled pawns.] 17.Nxe5?! [This gives Black a winning passed pawn on e5. Better is 17.Qc3=] 17...fxe5 18.Rhe1 e4 19.Qd4 c6 20.Qe5 Qc7 21.Qxc7+ Kxc7 22.Rf1 Rhf8 23.Rde1 Rde8 24.b4 Kd7 25.a4 Rxf1 26.Rxf1 Ke7 27.h4 Rf8 28.Rf4 [28.Rxf8 Kxf8=/+] 28...Rxf4 29.gxf4 h5 30.Kd2 Ke6 31.Ke3 Kf5 32.g3 Kg4 33.Kf2 d4 34.Kg2 d3 35.cxd3 exd3 36.Kf2 d2 37.Ke2 Kxg3 38.Kxd2 Kxf4 39.Kc3 g5 40.hxg5 Kxg5 41.b5 [41.Kd3 Kf4-+] 41...axb5 42.axb5 h4 43.Kb4 h3 44.Ka5 h2 45.Kb6 cxb5 46.Kxb7 h1Q+ 47.c6 b4 48.Kb6 Qxc6+ 49.Kxc6 b3 50.Kd5 b2 51.Ke5 b1Q 52.Kd4 Qb5 53.Ke4 Qc5 54.Kf3 Qe5 55.Kf2 Kg4 56.Kg1 Qe2 57.Kh1 Kg3 58.Kg1 Qe1# White checkmated 0-1

21 – Hasani 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.e3 Bg4 I transposed a Colle System into a risky BDG Euwe Reversed. White drifted into an inferior position and lost suddenly. Hasani - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 11.05.2012 begins 1.d4 Nc6 2.Nf3 d5 3.e3 Bg4 4.Nbd2 e5 5.dxe5 f6 [Sounder is 5...Nxe5 6.Be2 Nxf3+ 7.Nxf3 Nf6= but this is a blitz game.] 6.exf6 Nxf6 [6...Qxf6!? would be interesting since Qxd5 is not possible for White.] 7.Be2 Bd6 8.0-0 [8.c4!+/- must be correct.] 8...0-0 9.Nd4?! [Still 9.c4+/-] 9...Qd7 10.Bxg4 Nxg4 11.h3? [11.N2f3=] 11...Nxd4 [11...Bh2+! 12.Kh1 Nxf2+ 13.Rxf2 Rxf2 14.Kxh2 Qd6+ 15.Kh1 Nxd4 16.exd4 Re8-+] 12.exd4 Bh2+ 13.Kh1

Nxf2+ 14.Rxf2 Rxf2 15.Kxh2 Qd6+ 16.Kg1 Raf8 [16...Qg3 17.Qf3 Rxf3 18.Nxf3 Rf8-+] 17.Nf3 [17.Qg4 Qe7-/+] 17...Qg3 18.Nh2 Qxg2# White is checkmated 0-1

22 – Haines 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.g3 c5 Ray Haines won a crushing Queen Pawn Opening as Black. White swapped off a couple minor pieces to go pawn hunting. Black developed rapidly. Ray Haines had a fighting force that was practically unopposed. The White king never could castle. tobiE4 (1606) - Haines (1624), Live Chess, 25.11.2017 begins 1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.g3 c5 4.dxc5 Nc6 5.Bg5 e5 [5...Ne4=/+] 6.Bxf6 Qxf6 7.Qxd5 Be6 8.Qd3? [8.Qe4=] 8...Bxc5 [Stronger is the tactical 8...e4! when 9.Qxe4 Qxb2-+ wins a rook.] 9.Qb5 Qe7 10.Nxe5 [10.Nbd2] 10...0-0 [10...a6!-+] 11.Nxc6? [11.Nd3 Bb6 12.c3 Rad8=/+] 11...bxc6 12.Qxc6 Rac8 [12...Qf6!+] 13.Qa4 [13.Qf3 Bd5 14.Qxd5 Rfd8 15.Qf3 Qd6 16.Qd3 Qb6-+] 13...Qf6 14.Nc3 [14.e3 Qxb2-+] 14...Qxf2+ 15.Kd1 Rfd8+ Mate in 3. 0-1

23 – Zaja 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Bg5 e6 Queen Pawn Torre Attack 1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Bg5 e6 4.e3 line resembles the London System 2.Bf4, especially if the bishop retreats to Bg3. White angles his pieces to attack the kingside. Black often plays on the queenside. Here he chose to directly oppose White's assault with 12...Qg5 in the game Ivan Zaja vs Zvonko Babic. This time Black's defenses failed tactically. Zaja (2454) - Babic (2221), 23rd Bosnjaci Open Bosnjaci CRO (9.5), 09.01.2018 begins 1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Bg5 e6 4.e3 c5 5.Nbd2 Nc6 6.c3 h6 7.Bh4 Bd6 8.Bd3 0-0 9.Bg3 Re8 [9...Bxg3 10.hxg3 Qb6=] 10.Ne5 Bxe5 11.dxe5 Nd7 12.Qh5 Qg5!? [12...c4 13.Bc2 Qb6=] 13.Qxg5 hxg5 14.f4 d4?! [14...gxf4 15.exf4 b6=] 15.Ne4 gxf4 16.exf4 f6 17.Nd6 Re7 18.Bh4 dxc3 19.bxc3 Rb8 [19...Nb6 20.exf6 Rd7 21.Bh7+! Kxh7 22.f7 Rxf7 23.Nxf7+/-] 20.0-0-0 b6 21.Bb5! Ncxe5 [Or 21...Na5 22.Nxc8 Rxc8 23.Rxd7+-] 22.fxe5 Nxe5 23.Bg3 White remains a piece up. 1-0

24 – Holt 3.Bg5 Ne4 4.Bh4 Qd6 Black has a subtle tactical option in the solid Queen Pawn Torre Attack after 1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Bg5 Ne4 4.Bh4 Qd6!? The Black queen can slide over to ...Qh6 to attack the Bh4, prepare ...g5, or pin the h-pawn after Bg3 Nxg3. White must tread carefully. Black destroyed the White kingside to win this game between Anatoly Bykhovsky and Conrad Holt. Bykhovsky (2496) - Holt (2578), PRO League Group Stage chess.com INT (4), 03.02.2018 begins 1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Bg5 Ne4 4.Bh4 Qd6!? 5.Qc1 [5.Nbd2 Qh6! 6.Qc1 g5 7.Nxe4 dxe4 8.Bxg5 Qg7 9.Nh4 Qxd4=] 5...Nc6 6.e3 Bg4 [6...e5!=] 7.Nbd2 [7.h3 Bxf3 8.gxf3=] 7...Qh6! 8.Rg1 [8.Nb3 e5-/+] 8...Nxd2! 9.Bg5 Nxf3+ 10.gxf3 Qxg5 11.Rxg4 Qh6 [Black has won a knight.] 12.c4 e6 13.a3 Be7 14.b4 0-0 15.cxd5 exd5 16.b5 Nd8 17.Qxc7 Bd6 18.Qc2 [18.Qd7 Qe6-+] 18...Re8 19.Bd3 [19.h4 Qf6-+] 19...Ne6 20.Qb3 Rad8 21.Rg2 [21.Qd1 Qxh2-+] 21...Nxd4 0-1

25 – Pinto 3.Bg5 Ne4 4.Bh4 c5 White's bishop attacks a knight in the Queen Pawn Torre Attack 1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Bg5. Black turns the tables with 3...Ne4 when the knight attacks the bishop. A typical strategy for Black is to attack the unprotected b2 with ...Qb6. White's king stayed in the center and tactics favored Black in the game Frederico Matsuura vs Renato Quintiliano Pinto. Matsuura (2244) - Quintiliano Pinto (2436), Copel Telecom SESC Open Caioba BRA (3.8), 02.08.2018 begins 1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Bg5 Ne4 4.Bh4 c5 5.c3 [5.dxc5 Nc6 6.Nbd2 Nxc5 7.e3=] 5...Nc6 6.e3 Qb6 7.Qb3 c4 8.Qxb6 axb6 9.Nbd2 Nxd2 10.Nxd2 b5 11.e4 [11.Be2=] 11...e6 [11...dxe4 12.Nxe4=] 12.Be2 b4 13.exd5 [13.Bf3 bxc3 14.bxc3 Ra3 15.Nb1 Ra5 16.00=] 13...exd5 14.Bf3 Be6 15.Nxc4 [15.0-0 b5=/+] 15...bxc3 16.bxc3 dxc4 17.d5 Nd4 18.dxe6 Nc2+ 19.Kd2 Nxa1 20.exf7+ Kxf7 21.Bd5+? [21.Rxa1 Bd6 22.Bd5+ Kg6 23.Bxb7 Ra3=/+] 21...Kg6 22.Bxc4 Ra4 23.Bd3+ Kh5 24.Bg3 [If 24.Rxa1 Kxh4-+] 24...Rxa2+ 25.Ke3 Bc5+ Black is up a rook. 0-1

26 – Gates 3.e3 g6 4.Bd3 Bg7 Ray Haines obtained a flexible hanging pawn center vs Nathan Gates. This opening began as a Colle System vs a Gruenfeld set-up. Ray Haines explained what happened in this game: “This is the second time which I have played Nathan. I ended up with hanging pawns in the center He played the game with the plan of attacking my Queen Bishop Pawn. These pawns can be strong as they control the center. They are strong when setting on c4 and d4. They can advance and become strong attacking weapons as they move forward. The problem in this game is that too many pieces got traded off too fast. This resulted in a drawish end game. I put the whole game into my computer using Fritz11 and it rated the game as even all the way though. I did make a mistake on move 48. I had about 6 minutes to finish and my opponent had 2 minutes to finish. He made a mistake. He needed to play pawn takes pawn. This would have given him the better game.” Haines - Gates, Houlton Open (1), 25.07.2015 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.e3 d5 3.Bd3 g6 4.Nf3 Bg7 5.0-0 Bg4 6.Nbd2 [This knight move is certainly playable, but it would also be very reasonable for White to try 6.c4 when the attack on d5 can be bolstered by the sharper Nc3.] 6...0-0 7.h3 Bxf3 8.Nxf3 Re8 9.c4 e6 10.b3 [Another idea is 10.Qb3+/= aiming at both d5 and b7.] 10...c5 11.Bb2 cxd4 12.exd4 Nc6 13.a3 [13.Re1 Nb4 14.Bb1+/=] 13...dxc4 14.bxc4 Nd7 15.Re1 Nb6 16.Bf1 Rc8 17.Rb1 Qc7 18.d5!? [Maybe 18.Qd3] 18...Bxb2?! [18...exd5=] 19.Rxb2?! [19.d6!+/- looks promising] 19...exd5 20.cxd5 Rxe1 21.Nxe1 Rd8 22.Rd2 Ne5 23.Qb3 Qe7 24.Nc2 Qc5 25.Ne3 Nc6 [25...Ned7 26.g3=] 26.Rc2 [26.Ng4 Kf8 27.Nf6+/-] 26...Nd4 27.Rxc5 Nxb3 28.Rc7 Na5 29.Rc5 Nb3 30.Rb5 Nd4 31.Rb4 Nf5 32.g4 Ne7 33.Bg2 Rd7 34.a4 Nbxd5 35.Nxd5 Nxd5 36.Rd4 Nf6 37.Rxd7 Nxd7 38.Bxb7 Nc5 39.Bc6 Kf8 40.Kf1 Ke7 41.Ke2 Kd6 42.Be8 Ke7 43.Bb5 a6 44.Bc4 a5 45.Bb5 g5 46.Ke3 Ne6 47.Bd3 h6 48.h4? [The players can repeat moves by 48.Bc4 Nf4 49.Bf1 Ne6 50.Bc4=] 48...Nf4 [Black stands better with 48...gxh4!-/+] 49.hxg5 hxg5 50.Bf5 Kd6 51.Kd4 f6 52.f3 Kc6 53.Be4+ Kb6 54.Bd5 Ne2+ 55.Kc4 Nf4 56.Be4 Ne2 57.Kd5 Nc3+ 58.Ke6 Nxa4 59.Kxf6 Nc3 60.Bc2 a4 61.Bxa4 Nxa4

62.Kxg5 Nc5 63.f4 Kc7 64.Kf6 Ne4+ 65.Ke6 Kd8 66.g5 Ke8 67.g6 Kf8 68.f5 1/2-1/2

27 – Gates 3.e3 e6 4.Bd3 Bd6 How can travel help you improve your chess skill? Nathan Gates travelled hours to play Ray Haines and others up in the "county". When players travel to meet those in another area, it helps every one's chess experience. Ray Haines notes the following: "The last game was against a new player for me. Lance has played him before, but I have not. He is from down state. He is not a county person." Not a county person? Maine has 16 counties. The largest is Aroostook at the top of the state, called "the county". Maine averages 43 people per square mile, but Aroostook has a sparse 11 people per square mile. Their small towns have lots of wide open spaces between chess sets and boards. In this Colle System, White plays 1.d4 but then he delays pawn advances c4 or e4 until more pieces are developed. Nathan Gates played well. He could have equalized with a nice position by 9...e5! Black’s delay gave Ray a chance for 10.e4. The opening was basically even, but an inaccuracy on move 16 gave White the better game. Haines - Gates, Potato Blossom Festival (3), 11.07.2015 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e3 Nf6 3.Bd3 e6 4.Nf3 Bd6 5.0-0 0-0 6.b3 c6 [Black is playing a Colle vs a Colle, but probably sharper is 6...c5!=] 7.Bb2 Qc7 8.Nbd2 Nbd7 9.Rc1 [9.c4!] 9...b5 [The logical follow-up to Black's play is 9...e5! 10.dxe5 Nxe5 11.Nxe5 Bxe5 12.Bxe5 Qxe5=] 10.e4 dxe4 11.Nxe4 Nxe4 12.Bxe4 Nf6 [12...Bb7!=] 13.Bd3 Qa5 14.c4 [14.a3+/=] 14...Qxa2 15.Qc2 [15.Bc3 Qa6 16.Qd2+/=] 15...Qa5 [15...bxc4=] 16.cxb5 Bf4? [16...cxb5=] 17.Ra1 Qb6 18.bxc6 Nd5 19.Ba3 Re8 20.Bxh7+ Kh8 21.g3 Bc7 22.Ng5 f5 23.Qd1 Qxc6 24.Qh5 1-0

28 – Haines 3.e3 c6 4.Bd3 Bg4 I am from Maine. You find it in the northeast corner of the United States. Sometimes I listen to business marketing experts such as “Mike From Maine” and John Lee Dumas with his “EO Fire” podcast. We were from Maine even if we don't live there now. Gene Simmons, lead singer of KISS, contacted John Lee Dumas to be interviewed. Simmons told JLD how important it is in life to communicate clearly. Imagine you are applying for a job along with others. The man who has the power to hire you sets your resume aside and says, "So tell me about yourself." Gene Simmons said, "those first few words you open your mouth and say... will either move your chess piece forward and get you closer to getting that job, or you're going to go right back in line." Ray Haines moves his chess pieces forward vs Joachimelben of Germany. Ray kept fighting and was rewarded. Haines noted at his 30th move: "I missed the best line, but this is a fast time control and I played the first idea I had. The notes that follow would have been stronger." He added Rybka analysis below. Haines - Joachimelben, Chess24, 23.01.2016 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e3 c6 [It makes sense to play 2...Bf5 here.] 3.Bd3 Nf6 4.Nf3 Bg4 5.Nbd2 Nbd7 6.h3 Bh5 7.Qe2 Qc7 8.c4 [8.e4 looks good here with slightly better open lines for White.] 8...dxc4 [White stands better after this natural move. Black could play more aggressively with 8...e5!=] 9.Nxc4 b5 10.Ncd2 e5 11.g4 Bg6 12.dxe5 Nxe5 13.Nxe5 Qxe5 14.Nf3 [14.f4 Bxd3 15.fxe5 Bxe2 16.Kxe2 Nd7 17.Nf3=] 14...Qc7 [Backing off leaves White with a good game. Black is better after the subtle move 14...Qd5!=/+ due to White's weak points at d3, f3, and h3.] 15.0-0 Bd6 16.a4 b4 17.b3 0-0 18.Bb2 Nd5?! [18...Ne4=] 19.Rac1 Rfe8 20.Bxg6 hxg6 21.Qc4 Rac8 22.Rfd1 Qe7 23.Qd4 f6 24.Nh4 [Houdini found that combination 24.Rxc6! Rxc6 25.Qxd5+ Qe6 26.Qxe6+ Rxe6 27.Nd4+/-] 24...Be5 25.Nxg6 Qf7 26.Nxe5 fxe5 27.Qe4 Rf8 28.Rd2 Nf6 29.Qxe5 Qxb3 30.Qe7 [Rybka 4: 30.g5! Nh5 31.g6 Nf6 32.Qf5 Rcd8 33.Rxd8 Rxd8 34.Bxf6 gxf6 35.Rxc6 Qd1+ 36.Kh2 Qd7 37.Qxf6 b3 38.Ra6 Rf8 39.Qb2 Qc7+ 40.f4 Rb8 41.Re6 Qc2+

42.Qxc2 bxc2 43.Rc6+-] 30...Rf7 31.Rd8+ [31.Qe5!=] 31...Rxd8 [31...Kh7!-+] 32.Qxd8+ Rf8 33.Qd4 Qxa4 34.g5 Nh5 35.g6 Qb5 36.Rc5 Qe2 37.Qh4 Qxb2? [Black draws with 37...Qd1+ 38.Kh2 Qe2 39.Kg2 Qf3+ 40.Kg1=] 38.Qc4+ 1-0

29 – Hardison 3.e3 e6 4.Bd3 c5 Ray Haines won the Saturday Potato Blossom Festival in 2015. Ray wrote: “I won the event, but I was not happy with the way I played. I over looked good moves in each game. “The games were played at a fast time control of game/60. I did not wish to get into time trouble so I made the first move which looked good to me. I made second best moves as a result. “My game with Roger Hardison was the best game. I could have won a rook at the end and saw this. This would have let him keep his Queen and made it take longer, so I traded queens.” In this Colle System variation Roger Hardison started with an Indian set-up with 1...Nf6, 2...e6 and 3...c5. The position moved back into a classical formation with 4...d5. White opted for the 5.b3 line instead of the 5.c3 line. The key point in the game was when Ray Haines played 14.Nxe6! This led to an attack on the king. Haines - Hardison, Potato Blossom Festival (1), 11.07.2015 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.e3 e6 3.Bd3 c5 4.Nf3 d5 5.b3 [Or 5.c3=] 5...Be7 6.Bb2 0-0 7.0-0 b6 8.Qe2 Nbd7 9.Rd1 [9.c4!] 9...Qc7 10.Nc3 a6 11.e4?! [11.dxc5=] 11...dxe4 [11...cxd4! 12.Nxd4 Bb4 13.exd5 Bxc3 14.Bxc3 Qxc3 15.dxe6 Nc5!-/+] 12.Nxe4 Bb7 13.Neg5 h6? [13...cxd4 14.Bxd4=] 14.Nxe6! fxe6 [14...Bxf3 15.Nxc7 Bxe2 16.Bxe2+/-] 15.Qxe6+ Kh8? [15...Rf7 16.Bc4 Raf8 17.Qxe7 Bd5 18.Qe2+-] 16.Nh4 Rfe8 17.Ng6+ Kh7 18.Nxe7+ Kh8 19.Ng6+ Kh7 20.Ne5+ Be4 21.Bxe4+ Nxe4 22.Qf5+ Kg8 23.Qxe4 Nf6 24.Qg6 c4 25.Nxc4 Nd5 26.Nd6 Rf8 27.Qe6+ Kh8 28.Qxd5 Rad8 29.Ba3 Rf6 30.Re1 Qxc2 31.Nf7+ Kh7 32.Qe4+ 1-0

30 – Cui 3.e3 e6 4.Bd3 c5 5.c3 Imagine the situation. You want to win a Colle System. Your opponent is an unrated 12 year old. Cynthia Cui ends up with a better pawn structure and offers a draw. Ray Haines describes it: “This was an interesting game. We never have many women or young girls playing in our tournaments here in Houlton. Cynthia was just 12 years old and played very well for her age. “I got the better game in the beginning. I won a pawn on the kingside and had good play on the kingside I knew that I could not spend much time on my moves, because of the fast time control of game/75. “I made a quick plan based on my pawn advantage; I started trading down pieces with the idea of going to an endgame. The problem was that her rooks where on good squares and she got her pawns back. I would have been better off keeping the pieces on the board. “I could have traded my queen for both of her rooks at one point, but I did not do this. I did not spend enough time looking at this idea and decided not to trade for the rooks. I see now that it would have been better to trade my queen for the rooks. “She offered a draw and I agreed. I could have played on with the idea of winning on time. She had just 58 seconds remaining and I had 10 minutes. I just thought this would not be polite.” Haines - Cui, Houlton, ME (2), 19.09.2015 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.e3 d5 3.Bd3 e6 4.Nf3 c5 5.c3 Be7 6.0-0 0-0 7.Qe2 Nc6 8.Nbd2 Qb6 9.h3 a6 10.dxc5 Bxc5 11.e4 dxe4 12.Nxe4 Nd5 13.Nxc5 Qxc5 14.Qe4 Nf6 15.Qh4 Qh5 16.Qg3 h6 17.Re1 Re8? [17...Rd8 18.Bc2+/-] 18.Ne5 Bd7 19.Bf4 Ne7 [19...Kf8 20.Nc4+-] 20.Be2 Qf5 21.Bxh6 Qh7 22.Nxd7 [22.Bg5+-] 22...Qxh6 23.Nxf6+ Qxf6 24.Bf3 Nf5 25.Qc7 Rec8 26.Qxb7 Nh4 27.Qe4 [27.Qxa8 Rxa8 28.Bxa8+-] 27...Rab8 28.Rab1 Rc5 [28...Nxf3+ 29.Qxf3 Qxf3 30.gxf3+/=] 29.Qe2 [29.Bg4+-] 29...Rcb5 30.Rec1 [30.Be4+-]

30...Nxf3+ 31.Qxf3 Qxf3 32.gxf3 Rxb2 33.Rxb2 Rxb2 34.c4 Rxa2 35.c5 Rd2 36.c6 Rd8 37.Kf1 Rc8 38.Ke2 Kf8 39.Ke3 Ke7 40.c7 Kd7 41.Ra1 Rxc7 42.Rxa6 1/2-1/2

31 – Deluca 4.Bd3 c5 5.c3 Nc6 Ray Haines defended against the Colle System of Daniel C. Deluca in the first round of a tournament in Houlton, Maine. Ray was kind enough to send me all his games. We begin with a game where Ray Haines plays Black. As a rule the Colle System is a safe opening that affords both sides the opportunity to develop all their minor pieces easily. In this game Ray Haines plays 6...Be7 instead of the popular 6...Bd6, but almost everything leads to equal chances. It is how you follow it up that makes all the difference. Each of Ray's games in this event features a knight retreat to the second rank as a key aspect of the final result. Black's pawn arrow points from f7 to e6 to d5 and ahead to the queenside, indicating that is where his play is naturally stronger. Ray Haines retreats and saves his knight with 14...Nh7, instead of redeploying the horse to the queenside. Possibly Black intended to relocate the knight to Ng5, which he did. Dan Deluca is a chess teacher. One of his former students Matthew Fishbein earned a National Master Certificate earlier in 2014 with a rating over 2200. Deluca played a pretty good game. White just got himself in trouble on the queenside, lost material and resigned. Deluca - Haines, Houlton, Maine (1), 15.11.2014 begins 1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.e3 e6 4.Bd3 c5 5.c3 Nc6 6.Nbd2 Be7 [6...Bd6 is more popular.] 7.0-0 0-0 8.Re1 [Not bad, though more people prefer either 8.dxc5 or 8.Qe2] 8...Qc7 9.Qc2 h6 10.e4 cxd4 11.cxd4 [11.e5 Ne8 12.cxd4 Nb4=] 11...Qb6 12.e5 Nb4 13.Qb3 Nxd3 14.Qxd3 Nh7!? [A different knight retreat would be 14...Nd7 15.Nf1 Nb8=] 15.Nb3 Bd7 16.a4 [This loosens the queenside without threatening much. Maybe better is simply 16.Be3=] 16...Rfc8 17.Bd2 Rc4!? 18.Ba5? [18.Nc5 Bxc5 19.dxc5 Qxc5 20.b3 Re4=] 18...Qc6 19.Rac1? [19.Bd2 b6=/+] 19...b6 [Or 19...Qxa4-/+] 20.Bd2 Rc8 21.h3 a5

22.Bxa5 bxa5 23.Nfd2? [Now White is lost. There was a reasonable option: 23.Nxa5 Qxa4 24.Nxc4 dxc4-/+] 23...Rxc1 24.Rxc1 Qxa4 25.Rxc8+ Bxc8 26.Qc3 Qd7 27.Qxa5 Ng5 28.Qa8 Qb7 0-1

32 – Rubinsky 3.e3 e6 4.Bd3 c5 5.c3 Nc6 In 1974 I played in a five round Swiss tournament in Harrisburg, the capitol city of Pennsylvania. My parents went on business for a week to Wisconsin. They dropped me off on the way so I could play here and in the US Junior Open in Lancaster. This was the only game score that I kept from the Harrisburg tournament. Harrisburg had been flooded in 1972. It was my first rated event outside of Maine. I stayed across the Susquehanna River near a McDonald’s restaurant. There I ate my first Big Mac sandwich. In the final round I was paired vs David Rubinsky. He was rated 300 points above me. I was Black vs his Colle System. I mixed up my defensive systems and got into trouble early. We were the last game to finish. Only the tournament director remained. Rubinsky - Sawyer, Harrisburg, PA (5), 04.08.1974 begins 1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.e3 [Colle System] 3...e6 4.Bd3 c5 5.c3 [Classic Koltanowski Variation.] 5...Nc6 6.0-0 Bd6 7.Re1 [The main line is 7.Nbd2 0-0 8.dxc5 Bxc5 9.e4 Qc7 10.Qe2 h6=] 7...0-0 8.Nbd2 Qc7 9.e4 cxd4 10.cxd4 dxe4 11.Nxe4 Nxe4 12.Bxe4 f5 [I was following what I remembered of a line from Fred Reinfeld with f5 intending ...e5, but in his line Black had played Nbd7. Of course with the knight on c6, there was no tempo to play ...e5. It might not have been a strong continuation, but that was my plan.] 13.Bxc6 Qxc6 14.Ne5 Qd5 15.Qd3 b6 16.Qc4? [16.Bf4=] 16...Bb7 17.Qxd5 Bxd5 18.Bf4 Bxe5 [18...Rac8=/+] 19.Bxe5 Rac8 20.a4 a6 21.a5 b5 22.Bd6 Rfd8 23.Bc5 Kf7 24.Ra3 h6 25.Rae3 Re8 26.f3 h5 27.h4 g6 28.Kf2 Rg8 29.Re5 Rcd8 30.Ke3 Rge8 31.Kf4 Rh8 32.Rc1 Rc8 33.Re3 Rc6 34.Rec3 Rhc8 35.Ke5 Bc4 36.Rxc4!? [White sacrifices the Exchange to try to shake thing up. He could obtain some advantage with 36.Bb4+/- but that ending is potentially drawish.] 36...bxc4 37.Rxc4 R8c7 38.Rc3 Rc8 39.b4 R8c7 40.g4!? hxg4 41.fxg4 Rc8 42.d5 exd5 43.gxf5 gxf5 44.Kxd5 Rh6 45.Rf3 Rxh4 [My best chance to win was 45...Rd8+! 46.Ke5 Re6+ 47.Kf4 Kf6-/+] 46.Rxf5+ Ke8 47.Rf6 Rh5+ 48.Kc4 Rh4+ 49.Kb3 Rh3+ 50.Ka4 Rh4 51.Bf2 Rh2 52.Ba7 Rc3? [Playing for Ra2 mate, but that was a mistake.

The game is now lost. Correct was 52...Ra8=] 53.Rxa6 Kd7 54.Rg6 Kc8 55.a6 Ra2+ 56.Kb5 Rca3 57.Bc5 Rc2 58.Rg8+ Kc7 59.Bb6+ Kd7 60.Rb8 Rc8 61.a7 Ra1 62.Ba5 Rxa5+ 63.Kxa5 Rc1 64.a8Q Ra1+ 65.Kb6 Rxa8 66.Rxa8 1-0

2.Bf4 This is the most popular line of the London System.

33 – Haskel 2…Bf5 3.Nf3 e6 The 5th Turkey Bowl Chess Tournament in Boca Raton, Florida was a five round weekend event. I chose the two-day option. Jeffrey Haskel was another of the super-kids of Florida chess rated at that time 2121. He was re-entering in this Saturday morning short game. The night before Haskel had lost to young Christopher Heung. They both went on to become masters. We played a London System. Haskel played the early part of the game very quickly. He was way ahead in time until the endgame. The faster time limit benefited me in the first round, but ultimately I struggled to play three rounds in one day. Sawyer - Haskel, 5th Turkey Bowl Boca Raton, FL (1), 18.11.2006 begins 1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 Bf5 3.Bf4 e6 4.e3 Nd7 5.Bd3 Bxd3 6.Qxd3 c5 7.0-0 c4 [Black gets more space.] 8.Qe2 Ngf6 9.Nbd2 Be7 10.Ne5 0-0 11.c3 [Consolidates b4] 11...Nxe5 12.Bxe5 Nd7 13.Bg3 b5 14.e4 dxe4 15.Qxe4!? [Played to save time on the clock. My original intention had been 15.Nxe4 but all of a sudden I was worried about 15...f5!? missing that I have 16.Nd6! f4? 17.Qxe6+ Kh8 18.Nf7+ Rxf7 19.Qxf7 fxg3 20.fxg3+/=] 15...Nf6 16.Qe2 Nd5 [A valuable piece.] 17.Nf3 Bf6 18.Be5 Rc8 19.a3 a5 20.Bxf6 [20.a4 b4 21.Rfc1 Bxe5 22.Nxe5 Qe7=] 20...Qxf6=/+ 21.g3 [Prevents intrusion on f4.] 21...Rfd8 22.Ne5 Qe7 23.Rfc1 f6 24.Ng4! [Played to eliminate the knight on d5.] 24...Rc6 25.Ne3 Qd6 26.Nxd5 Qxd5 27.Re1 Qf5 28.Qe4 Qxe4 29.Rxe4 Kf7 30.f4 Rb8 31.Kf2 b4 32.axb4 axb4 33.f5!? [I liked this move because it practically forced a drawn ending vs a teenager who was rated over 100 points higher and was about 40 years younger than I. This seemed like a good start to the tournament. Probably stronger was 33.Ra7+! Kg6 34.g4 bxc3 35.bxc3 Rb2+ 36.Kf3+/=] 33...Rb7 34.fxe6+ Rxe6 35.Rxe6 Kxe6 36.Re1+ [36.Ke3 bxc3 37.bxc3 Rb3 38.Ra6+ Kf5 39.Ra5+ Kg4=] 36...Kd5=/+ 37.Re8 bxc3 38.bxc3 Rb3 39.Re3 g6 40.g4 Rb2+ 41.Re2 Rxe2+ 42.Kxe2 Ke4 [Fritz notes the ridiculous: "The black king gets dangerous"?! Of course this king

cannot go past the 4th rank without allowing the d-pawn to queen quickly. The position is a dead draw. If either player tried to win, he would lose.] 43.Kf2 Kf4 44.h3 h5 45.gxh5 gxh5 46.Kg2 h4 1/2-1/2

34 – DADASH 2…Nc6 3.Nf3 f6 There is a way to go from a London System to the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit Declined 4.f3 Bf5 5.g4 Vienna Hari-Kari variation when you have the Black pieces. The risk level is even higher than normal. That is because Black is a move behind where White would be. The Hari-Kari begins 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3 Bf5 5.g4. Play than usually follows: 5...Bg6 6.g5 Nd5 7.Nxe4 and now possible is 7...e6 with the gambit player to move. Reaching this same position as Black from the London System with colors reversed might happen after these moves: 1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bf4 f6!? 4.e4 e5?! 5.dxe5 g5 6.Bg3 g4 7.Nd4 Nxe5. The problem is that here in the London, it is the non-gambit players move! One could say it is like reaching a BDG Hari-Kari as White and giving your opponent two moves in a row. You do that as long as the first one is 7...e6. That is the most popular move anyway. How can I play that way? I could call it the BDG Hairy Care variation. It’s hairy, as in scary. I play it when I don’t care much. Sometimes in a fun 3 0 blitz game, I cannot resist the temptation to play a BDG, even a move down. I tend to get more serious vs stronger players and choose better continuations. Here the correct way to play this line would have been 4...g5! DADASH (1747) - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 25.05.2012 begins 1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bf4 f6!? [More normal would be 3...Bg4=] 4.e3 e5?! [4...g5! 5.Bg3 g4 6.Nh4 e5!= is the more accurate way to play.] 5.dxe5 g5 6.exf6? [White sacrifices a piece to open up the Black king. However that does not reap immediate rewards because White is not aggressively developed. 6.Bg3 g4 7.Nd4 Nxe5 This position has been reached five times in my database, and no one has played the good move 8.Nc3!+/=] 6...gxf4 7.f7+ Kxf7 8.exf4 Nf6 9.Bd3 Qe7+ 10.Be2 Qb4+

11.c3 Qxb2 12.Nbd2 Qxc3 13.0-0 Bg7 14.Ng5+ Kf8 15.Ndf3 h6 16.Nh3 Bf5 17.Rc1 Qb4 18.Rb1? Qxb1 0-1

35 – Cunanan 2..Nc6 3.Nf3 Bg4 As Olympic competition heated up in London, chess competition heated up in Florida at the Southern Open. It was one of those rare occasions. I had crawled out of my hole and personally showed up to play in a tournament. I had two goals. First was to make a USCF norm. Second was to play games that could give me a FIDE rating before I turned age 60. I determined to play much more sharply and aggressively than I usually do. In the first round I faced Andrew Cunanan. We began with his 1.Nf3 Nc6. White played 2.d4 which he told me after the game that he rarely plays. Cunanan opted for a London System. This was rather humorous to me. I had played London System as White in April at the Space Coast Open. Here I am on the Black side, but playing in Chigorin style fighting for e5. We continued with 3...Bg4 4.Nbd2 Nf6. I had the idea of 5...Nh5. We had an interesting struggle. I was eventually outplayed, but I felt good about my attacking play. Cunanan (2175) - Sawyer, Southern Open Orlando FL (1), 27.07.2012 begins 1.Nf3 Nc6 2.d4 d5 3.Bf4 Bg4 [3...f6!? could reach a BDG a tempo behind, but I thought the main line was stronger.] 4.Nbd2 Nf6 [4...e6 5.e3 Bd6 6.Bxd6 cxd6=] 5.e3 [5.h3!+/= avoids Black's reply.] 5...Nh5! [Going after the Bf4 yields immediate equality.] 6.h3 Bxf3 7.Qxf3 Nxf4 8.Qxf4 e6 9.Bb5 Bd6 10.Qg4 0-0 11.c4 dxc4 [We discussed 11...Nb4= after the game and concluded that Black's threats were not serious.] 12.Bxc6 bxc6 [I pondered 12...c3 to which Andrew planned simply 13.bxc3+/=] 13.Nxc4 c5 14.0-0-0 Qe7 15.d5 [I was concerned with the isolated c7 pawn after 15.dxc5 Bxc5=] 15...f5! 16.Qf3 e5 17.Na5 e4 18.Qe2 f4 19.Qg4 Rae8 20.Nc6 Qf6 21.Rd2 c4 22.Rc2 fxe3 23.fxe3 Ba3?! [23...Bc5=] 24.Nd4 c3? [I was trying to get lucky, and there was a possibility. However, better might have been 24...Bc5 25.Ne6 Bxe3+ 26.Kb1 Qf1+ 27.Qd1 Qd3 28.Nxf8 Rxf8 29.Qe2 Bb6 30.Rd1 Qxe2 31.Rxe2 e3 32.Kc2+/=] 25.Rxc3 c5 26.dxc6 Bb4 27.Rc4 Qf2 28.Qe2! [After the game White said he almost

played 28.Rxb4? allowing a draw with 28...Qxe3+ 29.Kb1 Qd3+ 30.Kc1 but not 30.Nc2? Rf1+ 31.Rxf1 Qxf1+ 32.Ne1 Qxe1+ 33.Kc2 Qxb4-+] 28...Qxe2 29.Nxe2 Rf2 30.Rxb4 Rxe2 31.c7 1-0

36 – Bacon 2…e6 3.Nf3 c5 4.c3 My master level opponent Joe Bacon chose a thematic 4.c3 Qb6 against my London System. Here's why that strategy is logical. When White plays Bf4 in the London, it leaves b2 undefended. Therefore after ...c6 or ...c5, the Black lady can slide up to Qb6 with eyes on the poisoned b-pawn. But is it really poisoned? That's a good question. The London System is a solid method of forward development. It resembles gravity continually pulling a glacier downhill toward the water, one slow inch per day. When a big chunk falls off, the progress is obvious. Most of the time it looks like nothing is happening. The moves d4 and Bf4 do not carry the speedy threats that their kingside counter parts e4 and Bc4 do. Usually Black can afford the time to chop off the London b2 pawn, if allowed. Here White opposed the Black queen with his own lovely lady, as I played 5.Qb3. The women stared at each other for a while. The advantage of letting your opponent make the first capture is that the recapture gives you an open file. See my 10.axb3. I had good chances near the end, but I was happy to draw my higher rated opponent. Sawyer (2003) - Bacon (2214), corr APCT Q-139 (3), 07.1993 begins 1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 e6 3.Bf4 c5 4.c3 Qb6 5.Qb3 Nf6 6.e3 Be7 7.Nbd2 Nbd7 [7...Nc6 8.Be2=] 8.h3 0-0 9.Be2 Qxb3 [9...Qc6=] 10.axb3 b6 11.Bb5 [11.dxc5+/=] 11...Bb7 12.0-0 a6 13.Bd3 Ne4 14.Rfd1 b5 [14...Rfc8=] 15.Ne5 Nxe5 16.Bxe5 Nxd2 17.Rxd2 Rfc8 [17...c4 18.bxc4 dxc4 19.Bf1=] 18.dxc5 Bxc5 19.b4 Be7 20.g4 f6 21.Bg3 g5 22.f3 Bd8 [22...Kf7!?] 23.e4!? [This leads to equality. White stands better with 23.h4!+/= ] 23...dxe4 24.Bxe4 Bxe4 25.fxe4 Rc4 1/2-1/2

37 – Artemiev 2…e6 3.e3 Bd6 The Russian prodigy Vladislav Artemiev played a sharp attack with the London System against Teimour Radjabov. White delayed castling in favor of 15.g4!? GM Radjabov is known for bold attacks as Black. He opened the b-file and invaded with 20...Rb2. But GM Artemiev sacrificed a knight to force mate on the kingside. Artemiev (2692) - Radjabov (2742), FIDE World Cup 2017 Tbilisi GEO (2.7), 08.09.2017 begins 1.d4 d5 2.Bf4 e6 3.e3 Bd6 4.Nf3 Nf6 5.Nbd2 0-0 6.c3 b6 7.Bd3 Bb7 8.a4 [8.0-0=] 8...c5 9.a5 Qc7 10.Bxd6 Qxd6 11.Ne5 c4 12.Bc2 b5 13.f4 Nbd7 14.Qf3 b4 15.g4!? [15.Ndxc4=] 15...Rab8 16.g5 Ne8 17.Qh3 g6 18.Ndf3 Bc8 19.Ba4 bxc3 20.bxc3 Rb2 21.Ng4 f5 22.Nge5 Nxe5 23.Nxe5 Nc7? [23...Qb8 24.Bxe8 Rxe8 25.0-0 Qb3=/+] 24.0-0 [24.Qh6+/-] 24...a6 [24...Ne8 25.Qh6=] 25.Qh6 Rd8 [25...Ne8 26.h4+/-] 26.Nxg6 hxg6 27.Qxg6+ Kh8 [Or 27...Kf8 28.Qf6+ Kg8 29.g6+-] 28.Rf3 1-0

38 – Bauer 2…c6 3.e3 g6 Gruenfeld Defence combines the pawn moves g6 and d5 to open paths for the bishops. Black's defenses can adequately meet anything White tries. Black's queen may venture forth as well, but care is required. Christian Bauer trapped Black's queen in his game vs Julien Boursier. Note that London System players may choose to the direct 4.c4 or the slower 4.c3 against the Gruenfeld Defence. Grandmaster Bauer chose the faster attack with 4.c4. Bauer (2644) - Boursier (2066), 5th ch-Francophonie Blitz Cannes FRA, 13.07.2018 begins 1.d4 d5 2.Bf4 c6 3.e3 g6 4.c4 Bg7 5.Nc3 Nf6 6.Nf3 0-0 7.h3 Nbd7 8.Be2 Re8?! [8...dxc4 9.Bxc4 c5 10.0-0=] 9.0-0 dxc4 10.Bxc4 Nh5 11.Bh2 Qa5 [11...Nb6 12.Bb3+/-] 12.a3 c5 13.Nd5 cxd4 14.b4! Qd8 15.Bc7 [The Black queen is lost.] 15...dxe3 16.Bxd8 Bxa1 17.Qxa1 Rxd8 18.Nxe7+ Kf8 19.Nd5 f6 20.Nc7 1-0

39 – Tovia 2…c6 3.e3 Nf6 Some openings naturally lead to endgames. Pieces meet each other in ways where exchanges are reasonable. The London System is one of those openings. Good bishop play makes the difference in many of those endgames. It matters which bishops stay on the board. Below is an endgame where Black had the good bishop on the dark squares. All his own pawns were on the light squares. The problem for Black was that White had an extra pawn. The White pawns limited the scope of the Black bishop. In the end, the White king invaded. That made all the difference. Black was lost. Sawyer - Tovia, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 18.05.2012 begins 1.d4 d5 2.Bf4 c6 3.e3 Nf6 4.c4 Be6 5.Nc3 dxc4 6.Nf3 Nbd7 7.Ng5 [7.e4!] 7...Bd5 8.e4 Be6? [Black takes on ugly doubled e-pawns which will cause the loss of a pawn. Better was 8...h6! 9.exd5 hxg5=/+] 9.Nxe6 fxe6 10.Bxc4 Nb6 11.Bxe6 g6 12.0-0 Bg7 13.e5 Nfd5 14.Nxd5 Nxd5 15.Bxd5 [15.Bg5!?] 15...Qxd5 16.Be3 0-0 17.Qb3 Rad8? [Black has defensive chances after 17...Qxb3 18.axb3 Kf7 heading to Ke6.] 18.Qxd5+ [White heads for the endgame, but the middlegame with 18.Qxb7!+- is very promising.] 18...Rxd5 19.Rab1 Rb5 20.b3 a5 21.a3 e6 22.b4 a4 23.Rbc1 Rd8 24.Rc5 Rd5 25.Rxb5 Rxb5 26.Rc1 Rd5 27.Rc5 Rxc5 28.bxc5 Kf7 [We reach a bishop ending where Black has the "good bishop" but that bishop has limited scope.] 29.Kf1 h6 30.Ke2 g5 31.Kd3 Kg6 32.g4 [Now Black has no way to invade the kingside.] 32...h5 33.h3 hxg4 34.hxg4 Bf8 35.Kc4 Be7 36.Kb4 Bd8 37.Kxa4 Bc7 38.Bd2 Bd8? 39.Ba5 Be7 40.Bc7 Kf7 41.Ka5 Ke8 42.Kb6 Kd7 43.Kxb7 Bf8 44.Bd6 Bg7 45.a4 Bh8 46.a5 Bg7 47.a6 1-0

40 – Pakleza 2…c5 3.e3 Nc6 White wins a London System after both sides make early sacrifices. FM Karol Rawicz goes fishing and hooks a rook, but his Black queen gets stuck on a1. GM Zbigniew Pakleza maintains control of the board and wards off Black's enterprising attack. Pakleza (2503) - Rawicz (2164), 6th POL-HUN Open 2018 Katowice POL, 05.05.2018 begins 1.d4 d5 2.Bf4 c5 3.e3 Nc6 4.c3 Qb6 5.Qb3 c4 6.Qc2 Bf5? [6...e5 7.dxe5 Bf5 8.Qc1=] 7.Qxf5 Qxb2 8.Qxd5 Qxa1 9.Qb5 0-0-0 10.Bxc4 [10.Qf5+ e6 11.Qc2+/-] 10...e5 11.Bg3 Bb4 12.Bd3 Bxc3+ 13.Ke2 Qb2+ 14.Qxb2 Bxb2 15.Nf3 f6 16.Nbd2 Nge7 17.Nc4 Bc3 [17...Bxd4 18.exd4 Nxd4+ 19.Nxd4 Rxd4 20.Rc1=] 18.Rc1 [18.dxe5+/=] 18...exd4 19.Nd6+ Kd7 20.Nxb7 Rc8 21.Nc5+ Ke8 22.Ba6 Rd8 23.Ne6 Rd5 [23...Rd7 24.Kf1+/=] 24.Nc7+ Kd7 25.Nxd5 Nxd5 26.Bb5 dxe3 [26...Rc8 27.Nxd4 Bxd4 28.exd4+/-] 27.fxe3 Re8 [27...a6 28.Ba4+-] 28.Rd1 Rxe3+ 29.Kf2 1-0

41 – Dubov 2…c5 3.e3 Nc6 The London System leads to a strong position where White is ready for any type of action. The grandmaster battle between Daniil Dubov and Denis Khismatullin saw Black react aggressively on the kingside with pawn moves 8...f6, 9...g5, 10...h5, and 11...g4. White fought for open lines for another dozen moves. Then White sacrificed a bishop on move 27 that could not be accepted. It left Black vulnerable to the loss of his knight on e7. Dubov (2677) - Khismatullin (2628), TCh-RUS Blitz 2017 Sochi RUS (8), 05.10.2017 begins 1.d4 d5 2.Bf4 c5 3.e3 Nc6 4.c3 Bf5 5.Nd2 cxd4 6.exd4 e6 7.Qb3 Qd7 8.Ngf3 f6 [Black prepares a kingside pawn assault. Another idea is 8...Nge7!? 9.Nh4 Ng6=] 9.Be2 g5 10.Bg3 h5 11.h4 g4 12.Nh2 Nh6 13.Nhf1 Bg6 14.Ne3 Nf5 15.Nxf5 Bxf5 16.0-0 Bh6 17.Qd1 Rc8 18.a4 [18.Nb3 0-0 19.f3 gxf3 20.Bxf3+/=] 18...Kf7 [18...Qh7=] 19.Nb3 b6 20.a5 Kg6 [20...Ne7!?] 21.Kh2 Ne7 22.f3 gxf3 23.Bxf3 Bg7 [23...Rcg8=]

24.axb6 axb6 25.Nc1 Qb5 [25...Bf8 26.Ra6+/-] 26.Ne2 [26.Ra7+-] 26...Bh6 27.Bxh5+! Kg7 [27...Kxh5 28.Nf4 mate!] 28.Ra7 Kf8 29.Bd6 1-0

42 – Hansen 2…c5.3.e3 e6 The solid London System allows you to drum up a strong attack if your opponent creates a weakness. Chris Hansen wins a nice game in the London 2.Bf4. I edit Chris Hansen's comments for space below. "Hi Tim! I thought I might share a game I played on the Fritz Server. I've become intrigued with this opening...based on its soundness, simplicity, and venomous potential for Kside attacks (oftentimes underestimated by Black). Also, I just bought your London System Book (200 positions)...an excellent way to study the opening (without a board)...to plug this stuff into our subconscious so to speak... "I'm so impressed with this opening... It is interesting that I did not 0-0 / 00-0 in this game...the pawn structure actually helped make this possible...the Kside attack just flowed so naturally... Best Regards, Chris" Thanks for the game Chris! You attacked well! Hansen - NN, 3 min, unrated Fritz Server Café 2017 begins 1.d4 d5 2.Bf4 c5 3.e3 e6 4.c3 Nd7 [4...Nc6 usually follows ...c5] 5.Bd3 c4 6.Bc2 Ngf6 7.Nf3 Be7 8.h3 h6 [Black creates a weakness. 8...0-0 9.0-0=] 9.Nbd2 Nh5?! [9...b5!?] 10.Bh2 g6?! 11.Qe2 0-0 12.e4 Ndf6 13.e5 Nh7 14.g4 Ng7 15.Nf1 g5 16.Ng3 b5 17.Qd2 a5 18.h4 gxh4 [18...b4 19.Ne2+/-] 19.Qxh6 f5 20.Nh5 [20.exf6!+-] 20...Nxh5 21.gxh5 [21.Qxh5!+-] 21...Rf7 22.Rg1+ Kh8 23.Rg6 Qf8 24.Qf4 Bd7 25.Ke2 b4 26.Rag1 bxc3 27.bxc3 Rb8 [27...Be8 28.Rxe6+-] 28.Nxh4 Bxh4 29.Qxh4 Qe7 30.Qg3 Rb2 31.Rg8# 1-0

43 – Hansen 2…c5 3.e3 e6 Chris Hansen won another interesting London 2.Bf4. I include some of his remarks which I edited for space. “Hi Tim! I just finished a rather quick London. I've noticed with the London...there are transpositions galore. This game was my first EVER (including postal, blitz and otb), opportunity to do a classic B sac on h7. I'm astounded how many attacking formations evolve with this opening...driven, in most part (as you mention) by a mistake (major or minor) by black.” “Another interesting point, [there is a] strong correlation to the Colle....a great source for White attacking formations....and defenses too... Still working on the Qside fianchetto... Capablanca's favorite formation vs the Colle...and I suspect this opening too (not sure if he ever faced the London). Best Regards, Chris” Jose Raul Capablanca played the London and Colle from both sides. The London System got its name when Alekhine, Rubinstein, and Capablanca all won with it against the Kings Indian Defence at the London tournament in August 1922. Hansen - NN, Friendly Game, 3m + 0s Café, 04.08.2017 begins 1.d4 d5 2.Bf4 e6 [2...c5 3.e3 Nc6 4.Nf3 Nf6 5.Nbd2 Bg4 6.c3 e6 7.h3 Bh5 8.Qb3 and 1-0 in 24. Capablanca - Tipal, London 1911] 3.e3 c5 4.c3 Nc6 5.Bd3 Nf6 6.h3 Bd6 7.Bxd6 Qxd6 8.Nf3 cxd4 9.exd4 0-0 10.Qe2 Re8 11.Ne5 Nd7 [11...Qe7 12.f4=] 12.Bxh7+! Kf8 [12...Kxh7 13.Qh5+ Kg8 14.Qxf7+ Kh7 15.Qh5+ Kg8 16.Qxe8+ picks off the rook.] 13.f4 f6 [13...g6 14.h4 Kg7 15.h5+/-] 14.Ng6+ Kf7 15.Qh5 [Black has no good moves.] 1-0

2.Bf4 Nf6 3.e3 This is the most popular line of the London System.

44 – AdamsX 3…c6 4.Nf3 g6 The London System is the set-up 1.d4, 2.Nf3, 3.Bf4 vs just about anything. White puts a clamp on e5 and attacks related squares such as d5 or f5. The key is to fight. Do not just sit passively to wait for life to happen to you. Push your advantages and minimize your weaknesses. And if you are playing all this in blitz chess, you must do it faster than your opponent. My opponent AdamsX played as well as I did. We played many times with pretty close to an even result. Sometimes I was rated higher. In this game he was rated slightly above me. In our London System, we both had an extra pawn, him on the queenside and me on the kingside. In the middlegame he outplayed me, but in the endgame I outplayed him. Sawyer (1966) - AdamsX (2019), ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 18.05.2014 begins 1.Nf3 d5 2.d4 Nf6 3.Bf4 c6 [3...Bf5=] 4.e3 g6 5.Be2 Bg7 6.0-0 0-0 7.h3 Bf5 8.c4 Nbd7 9.Nc3 Ne4 [9...dxc4 10.Bxc4+/=] 10.cxd5 Nxc3 11.bxc3 cxd5 12.c4 e6 13.Qb3 dxc4 14.Bxc4 Qb6 15.Rac1 Qxb3 16.Bxb3 Rfc8 17.Bd6 Bf8 18.Bxf8 Kxf8 19.Ne5 Nxe5 20.dxe5 a6 21.f3 Bd3 22.Rfd1 Bb5 23.f4 Ke7 24.Kf2 b6 25.e4 a5 26.f5 exf5 27.exf5 gxf5 28.Ke3 Rab8 29.Kf4 Bd7 30.Bc2 [White should play 30.Rxc8 Rxc8 31.Bxf7!=] 30...Be6 [30...Rc4+ 31.Kf3 Rbc8-+] 31.Bxf5 Rxc1 32.Rxc1 Bxa2 33.Rc7+ Kf8 34.Kg5 b5 35.Kf6 [35.Ra7 a4=/+] 35...Rb6+ 36.Kg5 Be6 37.Bxe6 Rxe6 38.Kf5 b4 39.Ra7 Rb6 40.Rxa5 b3 41.Ra1 b2 42.Rb1 Ke7 43.g4 Rb3 44.h4 Rb4 45.h5 h6 [45...Rb7-+] 46.g5 hxg5 47.h6 Kf8 48.Kxg5 Kg8 49.Kf6 Kh7 50.Kxf7 Kxh6 51.e6 Rf4+ 52.Ke7 Kg6 [52...Rf2 53.Kd8 Rd2+ 54.Ke8 Kg7 55.e7 Re2=] 53.Rxb2 Re4 54.Rg2+ Kf5 55.Rf2+ Ke5 56.Kf7 Kd6 57.Rd2+ Kc7 58.e7 Rf4+ 59.Ke8 Kc6

60.Kd8 Rh4 61.e8Q+ [Black forfeits on time. White has a mate in five.] 10

45 – Cruz 3…Bf5 4.Nf3 e6 5.c3 This was my third tournament game in the same day. I started energetically with a draw vs Jeffrey Haskel. After a short break, my second round was a fiasco. I lost to the Slav Geller Gambit by Simone Sobel. That loss emotionally tired me out. After a little break, I was not in a mood to play. I just wanted to go back to the hotel and see my wife and get some rest. My third round game was against my old buddy Humberto Cruz. Since I was a little higher rated, I figured Cruz would probably be happy with a quick draw. We played another London System. After 14 moves I offered a draw for which both players were playing. This is the old guys wanting to get to bed early so as to be ready for the next morning round. The extra rest gave me more energy. I won my 4th round game. I do not mind being older, but tournaments wear me out more than they did 30-40 years ago. Sawyer - Cruz, 5th Turkey Bowl Boca Raton, FL (3), 18.11.2006 begins 1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Bf4 Bf5 4.e3 e6 5.c3 Nbd7 6.Ne5 Bd6 7.Nxd7 Qxd7 8.Bxd6 Qxd6 9.Bd3 Bxd3 10.Qxd3 0-0 11.Nd2 e5 12.dxe5 Qxe5 13.Qd4 Qxd4 14.cxd4 1/2-1/2

46 – Alekseev 3…Bf5 4.c3 Bxb1 Evgeny Alekseev wins a London System when his opponent Denis Yevseev cannot avoid losing material in this battle of grandmasters. Black quickly takes the White knight on move four. White attacks queenside and Black also castles queenside. The White rooks pressure along the c-file and b-file. The game is decided by a logical tactical move. White attacks the rook on c8 and the knight on b6, but Black threats on f3 and c2 save everything until move 26. Alekseev (2614) - Yevseev (2514), St. Petersburg Rapid 2017 RUS (4.4), 26.08.2017 begins 1.d4 d5 2.Bf4 Nf6 3.e3 Bf5 4.c4 Bxb1 5.Rxb1 e6 6.Qb3 Nbd7 7.Nf3 [7.Qxb7+/-] 7...Bd6 8.Bg5 c5 9.Bxf6 Nxf6 10.cxd5 Qa5+ 11.Qc3 Qxc3+ 12.bxc3 Nxd5 13.Kd2 0-0-0 14.Bd3 Rhe8 15.Rhc1 h6 16.Ke2 e5 [16...Re7=] 17.Be4 Nb6 18.dxc5 Bxc5 19.Rb5 Ba3 20.Rc2 [20.Rcb1+/-] 20...Kb8 21.c4 g6 [21...Re7 22.c5+/=] 22.g4 [22.c5! f5 23.Bxf5 gxf5 24.cxb6 axb6 25.Nxe5+-] 22...Rc8 [22...Re7 23.c5+/-] 23.c5

f5 [23...Bxc5 24.Rcxc5+-] 24.gxf5 gxf5 25.Bxf5 e4 26.Nd4 [The knight is save. Rc2 is protected. Black loses material.] 1-0

47 – Aronian 3…e6 4.Nf3 Be7 An active army places its opponent in danger. The London System gives you the choice to run toward the tactics or away from the tactics. White ripped apart Black's defenses in the game Levon Aronian against Sharma (del) Hemant. White sacrificed a whole rook with a check. It could not be ignored and there was nowhere for Black to run. Aronian (2797) - Hemant (2348), Gibraltar Masters 2018 Caleta ENG, 24.01.2018 begins 1.d4 d5 2.Bf4 Nf6 3.e3 e6 4.Nf3 Be7 5.Bd3 b6 6.Nbd2 Bb7 7.Ne5 a6 8.0-0 Nbd7 9.c3 0-0 [9...Nxe5 10.Bxe5=] 10.Qf3 Ne8 11.Qh3 f5 12.Ndf3 Nxe5 13.Nxe5 Nd6 14.g4 c5 [14...Bg5 15.Rae1+/=] 15.Kh1 Bg5 16.Bxg5 Qxg5 17.gxf5 Nxf5 [17...Rf6 18.fxe6 Rh6 19.Qg3 Qxg3 20.fxg3+/-] 18.Rg1 Qe7 19.Rxg7+! Qxg7 20.Rg1 cxd4 [20...Qxg1+ 21.Kxg1 cxd4 22.Qg4+ Kh8 23.Bxf5 Rxf5 24.Qxd4+-] 21.Rxg7+ Kxg7 22.Qg4+ Kh8 23.Bxf5 dxe3 [23...exf5 24.Qxd4+-] 24.Qd4 Rxf5 25.Nf7+ Kg8 26.Nh6+ Kf8 27.Nxf5 exf5 28.fxe3 1-0

48 – Baron 3…c5 4.cxd5 Nc6 I love the London System. Tal Baron as White boldly sacrificed a pawn on move 12. Alan Tate accepted the g2 pawn with good chances in theory, but in practice, Black missed the best play in complications. It's amazing how quickly the tables turned and White won. Baron (2548) - Tate (2358), Gibraltar Masters 2018 Caleta ENG, 29.01.2018 begins 1.d4 d5 2.Bf4 Nf6 3.e3 c5 4.dxc5 Nc6 5.Bb5 e6 6.b4 a5 7.c3 axb4 8.cxb4 Nd7 9.Qb3 Qf6 10.Nc3 d4 11.Ne4 Qg6 12.Bd3?! [12.Ng3!=] 12...Qxg2 13.Ng3 Nf6 [13...Bxc5! 14.bxc5 Nxc5 15.Qb5 Nxd3+ 16.Qxd3 e5-+] 14.e4? [14.f3 e5 15.Bf1=] 14...Ng4 15.Qb2 Nxb4?! [15...e5!-+] 16.Bb5+ Bd7 [16...Nc6 17.Bf1 Qxf2+ 18.Qxf2 Nxf2 19.Kxf2 Bxc5=] 17.Bxd7+ Kxd7? [17...Kd8 18.Bb5+/-] 18.Qxb4 Qxf2+ 19.Kd1 Qxf4 [19...Kc8 20.Rb1+-] 20.Qxb7+ Qc7 21.c6+ 1-0

49 – Jacobsen 3…c5 4.c3 Nc6 Castle early and often has proven to be great chess opening advice. Kings caught in the middle may risk vulnerability in the middlegame. White made a powerful tactical shot in this London System between Mikkel Manosri Jacobsen and Marina Brunello. Jacobsen (2161) - Brunello (2367), Reykjavik Open ISL, 10.03.2018 begins 1.d4 d5 2.Bf4 Nf6 3.e3 c5 4.c3 Nc6 5.Nf3 Bg4 6.Qb3 Qc8 7.Ne5 c4 8.Qa4 a6 9.Nxc6 bxc6 10.b3 Nh5 11.Be5 Bd7 12.bxc4 f6 13.Bg3 Nxg3 14.hxg3 c5 15.Qc2 dxc4 [15...Bf5 16.Bd3+/=] 16.Bxc4 cxd4 17.cxd4 e5 [17...Bf5 18.e4+/-] 18.Nd2 Bb4 19.Rc1 Ba3 20.Rb1 g6 [Or 20...Rb8 21.dxe5 fxe5 22.Rxb8 Qxb8 23.Rxh7+-. Now find the move after 20…g6.] 21.Rxh7! [Black kingside crumbles.] 1-0

50 – Duda 3…c5 4.Nf3 Qb6 White won this short London System. The Polish grandmaster JanKrzysztof Duda surprised the Ukrainian Rustam Ponomariov and former FIDE World Champion. The game showed that tactics rule in all openings. White sacrificed a pawn or two to activate four minor pieces and castle by move 10. Then Black succumbed to a one move shot. Duda (2717) - Ponomariov (2694), European Blitz 2017 Katowice POL, 15.12.2017 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3 d5 3.Bf4 c5 4.e3 Qb6 5.dxc5 Qxb2 6.Nbd2 Qc3 7.Bb5+ Nc6 8.0-0 Qxc5 9.c4 dxc4 10.a4 Nd5? [10...c3 11.Nb3 Qd5=] 11.Ne4! 1-0 [Black drops the queen or a knight.]

51 – Lugo 3…c5 4.Nf3 Nc6 What am I doing on Board 2? I am sitting next to Grandmaster Julio Becerra and playing against International Master Blas Lugo in the second round of the Southern Open. I had entered the Open Section and was the lowest rated player at one point. An odd number of players in that section showed up, so they gave me an unrated first round bye win! I was paired with the winners in round 2 when I had never played round 1. The simple super solid London System has been a favorite of mine for over 20 years. The question is, “Is it solid or passive?” I should have played 13.e4 or played it on the next move to free White's position. On move 32 I missed a chance at equality and made a blunder in time pressure. Things slid downhill after that. My opponent IM Blas Lugo won this tournament. Sawyer (1944) - Lugo (2326), Southern Open (2), 01.08.2009 begins 1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Bf4 c5 4.e3 Nc6 5.c3 Bg4 6.Be2 e6 7.Nbd2 Qb6 8.Qb3 [8.0-0=] 8...c4 9.Qxb6 [9.Qc2 Bf5 10.Qc1 Nh5=/+] 9...axb6 10.Ne5! [I considered playing 10.0-0 but I didn't like leaving my Be2 unprotected. I expected Black might play 10...Ne4! 11.Bd1 Nxd2 12.Nxd2 Bxd1 13.Rfxd1 b5=+] 10...Nxe5 11.Bxe5 Bxe2 12.Kxe2 Nd7 13.Bg3!? [Better was 13.e4=] 13...b5 14.a3 Nb6 15.Rac1 Kd7 16.Rhd1 Be7 17.Nf3 f6 18.Kf1 g5 19.Nd2 Kc6 20.Kg1 h5 21.f4 h4 22.Bf2 Bd6 23.fxg5 fxg5 24.e4 Bf4 25.e5 g4 26.g3 hxg3 27.Bxg3 Be3+ 28.Kg2 b4 29.axb4 Ra2 30.Rc2 Na4 31.Nf1 Bg5 32.Bf2? [Correct was 32.Rb1!=] 32...Rxb2 33.Rxb2 Nxb2 34.Ra1 Nd3 35.Be3 Bxe3 36.Nxe3 Nf4+ 37.Kg3 Ne2+ 38.Kxg4 Nxc3 39.h4 Rg8+ 40.Kh3 [40.Kf3! Rf8+ 41.Kg4 Nb5-/+] 40...Ne2 41.Ng4 Nxd4 42.Nf6 Rh8 43.Kg4 Nb3 44.Ra3 d4 45.h5 d3 46.Kf3 Nd4+ 0-1

52 – Robson 3…c5 4.Nf3 Nc6 Ray Robson met in the Florida State Championship in 2006. Ray became the youngest master in US History at age 11. The crowd watched him. As his dad told me afterward, I played a very good game, only barely being outplayed in a Rook endgame. This is my third loss within in a year to the future grandmaster Robson. Charles Greene, a long time Blackmar-Diemer Gambit player, was also playing in this section. Chuck strolled over to see if I was playing a BDG. Then he smiled. Charles Greene was also playing a London for the first time in his life! Sawyer (1994) - Robson (2273), FL State Championship (1), 02.09.2006 begins 1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Bf4 [Later I listened to John Watson and Dan Heisman discuss the London. They said it was typical of players rated around 2000. My rating had fallen just below 2000. Watson said the problem with such an opening is that it limits one’s understanding of chess. They can play well up to a point. Then they hit a ceiling because they lack the chess understanding they would get from playing more main lines.] 3...c5 4.e3 Nc6 5.c3 Bf5 6.Bd3 [Kovacevic recommends 6.dxc5! e6 7.Nd4 Bxb1 8.Rxb1 Bxc5 9.Qa4+=] 6...Bxd3 7.Qxd3 e6 8.Nbd2 Be7 9.0-0 Nh5 10.Bg3 0-0 11.Ne5 Nxg3 12.Nxc6 bxc6 13.hxg3 Rb8 14.b3 cxd4 15.exd4 c5 16.dxc5 Bxc5 17.c4 dxc4 18.Qxd8 Rbxd8 19.Nxc4 Rd3 [I did not see this coming. Darn. At this point my g3 pawn was hanging.] 20.Rfd1! [I sacrificed the g3-pawn to get my rook on the seventh rank and his bishop off the board. After 20.Kh2?! Rfd8-/+ and it looks like White will be passive and tied down to his weak f2 and g3 pawns.] 20...Rxg3 21.b4 Rc3 22.bxc5 Rxc4 23.Rd7 Rxc5 24.Rxa7 Rfc8 25.a4 Rc1+ 26.Rxc1 Rxc1+ 27.Kh2 h5 28.a5 Ra1 29.a6 f6 30.Ra8+ Kh7 31.a7 e5 [The next day Ray suggested to me that I might have tried to run my king to the queenside to force Rxa7. I never gave it a serious thought at the time, because it seems like a long journey from h2 to b7. In the meantime, Black would make many pawn moves. At this point, I did not yet see the Black win.] 32.f3 Kg6 33.g3 Kg5 34.Kg2 e4 35.fxe4 Kg4 36.e5 Ra2+ 37.Kf1 fxe5 38.Re8 Rxa7 39.Rxe5 Ra2 40.Re3! [This was a cute move. If Black traded either

of his pawns, we would reach a well-known drawn Philidor ending. Alas, Robson knows better than to do that. Instead he plays accurately.] 40...g5 41.Kg1 Kh3 42.Kf1 g4 43.Rb3 Kh2 44.Rb5 h4 45.gxh4 g3 46.Rg5 g2+ 01

53 – Haines 3…e6 4.Nf3 Bb4+ Ray Haines defeats Lance Beloungie. In this London System you plant the seed and wait to harvest the fruit of your labor. Ray Haines wrote: “ This is potato harvest time in the county. They have had a lot of

good weather and have been able to get a lot of them out of the ground. I am looking for potatoes for myself. I just need russets potatoes for cooking. I should be able to find a field that has been harvested but still has some on the ground so I can pick a bag of them. ” Beloungie - Haines, Houlton, ME (2), 09.08.2014 begins 1.d4 d5 2.Bf4 Nf6 3.Nf3 e6 4.e3 Bb4+ 5.c3 Bd6 6.Bg3 [6.Ne5+/=] 6...Ne4 7.Bd3 f5 8.Bxe4?! [Giving up the good light squared bishop makes for an inferior middlegame. Better is 8.c4] 8...fxe4 9.Ne5 0-0 10.Nd2 Nd7 11.Qg4 Nxe5 12.dxe5 [12.Bxe5 Bxe5 13.dxe5 Rf5 14.f4 exf3 15.Nxf3=] 12...Be7 13.h4 c5 14.0-0-0 b5 15.h5? [15.Nxe4! Qa5 16.Nd6 Bxd6 17.exd6 Qxa2 18.Be5 Qa1+ 19.Kc2 Qa4+ 20.Qxa4 Rxf2+ 21.Rd2 Rxd2+ 22.Kxd2 bxa4=] 15...Qa5 16.Kb1 b4 [16...c4=/+] 17.Nb3 Qb5 18.h6 g6 19.Bh4 [White can save the game with 19.c4 dxc4 20.Bh4! Bxh4 21.Qxh4=] 19...Bxh4 [Black has great attacking chances after 19...bxc3! 20.Rc1 Bxh4 21.Qxh4 Rb8 22.Rxc3 c4-+] 20.Qxh4 bxc3 21.Qe7 Qd7 22.Qxd7 Bxd7 23.Nxc5 c2+ 24.Kxc2 Rac8 25.b4 Ba4+ 26.Kb2 Bxd1 27.Rxd1 Rxf2+ 28.Kb3 Kf7 29.Re1 a5 30.a3 axb4 31.axb4 Ra8 32.Na4 Rd2 33.Rc1 Rd3+ 34.Nc3 Rxe3 35.Kb2 Rc8 36.Rf1+ Ke7 37.Nb5 Re2+ 38.Kb3 Rcc2 39.Nd6 Rf2 40.Re1 Rc6 41.Nb5 Rd2 42.Ra1 e3 43.Ra7+ Kd8 44.Rxh7 Rxg2 [Black wins with 44...Rd3+! 45.Kb2 Rc4 46.Rh8+ Kd7 47.h7 Rxb4+ 48.Kc2 Rd2+ 49.Kc3 Rc4+ 50.Kb3 Rh4 51.Nc3 Rxg2 52.Ra8 Rgh2-+] 45.Rh8+ Kd7 46.Rh7+ Ke8 47.Nd6+ Rxd6 48.exd6 e2 49.Re7+ Kd8 50.Rxe6 Kd7 51.Re3? [51.h7! Rh2 52.Rxe2 Rxh7 draws] 51...Rh2 [Black wins with 51...Rg3! 52.Rxg3 e1Q-+] 52.h7 Kxd6 53.h8Q [53.Rxe2= is simpler.] 53...Rxh8 54.Rxe2 g5 55.Rg2 Rg8 56.Kc3 [White seems to have a good chance at a draw after 56.Rg4 Ke5 57.b5 Kf5 58.Rd4 Ke5 59.Rg4=] 56...g4

57.Kd4 g3 58.b5 Rg5 59.Ke3 Kc5 60.b6 Kxb6 61.Kf4 Rg8 62.Ke5 Kc5 63.Rc2+ Kb4 64.Rg2 Kc4 65.Kf4 Kd3 66.Kf3 d4 67.Kf4 Kc3 68.Ke4 d3 69.Ke3 Re8+ 70.Kf4 d2 71.Rxg3+ Kc2 72.Rg2 Kc1 73.Rg7 0-1

54 – jafar 3…e6 4.Nf3 Be7 The London System is a simple solid method of developing the White pieces that also has some attacking ideas. This opening can be played vs almost any defensive set-up posed by the Black pieces. The key White moves are 1.d4, 2.Nf3 and 3.Bf4. Sometimes it is wise to play 2.Bf4; other times throwing in an early pawn move c2-c3 is helpful. The classical set-up below continues with 4.e3, 5.Bd3, 6.0-0, 7.Nbd2, and 8.c3. In some ways it is like the Caro-Kann or the Slav Defence with an extra move. Grandmaster Andy Soltis wrote a book on the London System published by Ken Smith and Chess Digest, Inc. in 1993. On page 2, Tim Sawyer is listed as a research assistant for that book. Game 2 from that Soltis book is Pribyl vs Penrose from the Nice Olympiad in 1974. There White demonstrated the concept of Ne5, Qf3 and Qh3 to take aim at h7 and the Black king. Pribyl went on to win the game. At times White is tempted to play h3 allowing a retreat square at h2 for the Bf4. The London Classical Black pawn structure of d5, e6, c5, Be7 and Bb7 allows White to consider the Qd1-Qf3-Qh3 maneuver. I won using the Qh3 attack in a blitz game vs "jafar". Sawyer (1935) - jafar (1671), ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 20.05.2014 begins 1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 e6 3.Bf4 Nf6 4.e3 Be7 5.Bd3 Nbd7 6.0-0 0-0 7.Nbd2 c5 8.c3 b6 9.Ne5 [9.h3 here or earlier is more common. However I wanted to save h3 for my queen if Black let me.] 9...Bb7 10.Qf3! [White is playing for attack! The routine move 10.Ndf3 is okay, but a little dull.] 10...Rc8 11.Qh3 g6 12.Bh6 Re8 13.Ndf3 [13.f4!+/= would add to White's attacking options.] 13...Bf8? [This invites a powerful pin. Correct is 13...Nxe5!=] 14.Bg5 Bg7 [14...Be7 15.Bb5+/-] 15.Ng4 [15.Bb5!+/-] 15...h5 16.Nge5 Qe7 17.Qh4 Rcd8 18.Bb5 Qd6 [Better but still losing is 18...Qf8 19.a4 a6

20.Bxd7 Nxd7 21.Bxd8+-] 19.Nxd7 Rxd7 20.Bxf6 Bxf6 21.Qxf6 Rde7 22.Bxe8 Rxe8 23.Ne5 Qf8 24.f4 [Black forfeits on time.] 1-0

55 – Burke 3…e6 4.Nf3 c5 5.c3 The London System is a reliable opening that counts on basic safe development. White has solid control of d4 and looks for opportunities to play for c4 or e4 after all his pieces are out. In an APCT game Bernie Burke chose a classical set-up with the moves 1...d5, 2...Nf6, 3...c5 and 4...e6. He played in much the same way Black would handle a French Defence. Burke pushed his c-pawn on to c4. The point of this move is to prevent White from playing 6.Bd3. This logical strategy has some flaws. 1. White's d4 is no longer under threat of pawn capture. 2. White can attack the pawn chain with e3-e4 or b2-b3. 3. White's light squared bishop is more active than Black's. As the game unfolded White had a slightly better position. Black was forced to defend his lone a-pawn. Then as often happens, a tactical oversight leads to a quick finish. Sawyer (2003) - Burke (1500), corr APCT N-328, 06.1993 begins 1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Bf4 c5 4.c3 e6 5.e3 c4 [5...Nc6 6.Nbd2= is main line stuff.] 6.Nbd2 [6.b3+/= White can challenge c4 immediately or anytime up to move 11.] 6...Be7 7.Be2 0-0 8.h3 Nbd7 9.Qc2 b5 10.0-0 Bb7 11.b4 [11.b3=] 11...cxb3 [11...a5=] 12.axb3 [12.Qxb3+/-] 12...a6 13.c4 bxc4 14.bxc4 dxc4 15.Bxc4 [15.Nxc4+/-] 15...Bb4 [15...a5+/=] 16.Qb3 a5 17.Rfb1 Nb6 18.Bd3 Ba6 [18...Rc8=] 19.Bxa6 Rxa6 20.Nc4 [20.Qd3+/=] 20...Nxc4 21.Qxc4 Qc8? [21...Ra8=] 22.Qxc8 Rxc8 23.Rxb4 1-0

2.Bf4 Nf6 3.e3 e6 4.Nd2 This is the most popular line of the London System.

56 – Zakaryan 4…Be7 5.Ngf3 The London System may seem slow, but here White got doubled g-pawns in the game David Zakaryan vs Ulyana Bocharova. Two g-pawns meant twice the fun during the assault. Note: White could capture Black's f-pawn with either g-pawn on move 13. Zakaryan (2420) - Bocharova (1874), Vladimir Dvorkovich Rapid Taganrog RUS, 13.01.2018 begins 1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Bf4 e6 4.Nbd2 Be7 5.e3 0-0 6.Bd3 c5 7.c3 Nbd7 8.h4 b6 9.Qe2 Bb7 10.g4 Ne4 11.Ng5 Nxg5 [11...Nef6=] 12.hxg5 f5 13.gxf5 [Or 13.gxf6+-] 13...Bxg5 14.fxe6 h6 [Now 15.Bxg5 Qxg5 16.exd7 wins] 1-0

57 – Bachmann 4…Be7 5.Ngf3 Grandmaster Axel Bachmann won a London that felt like the BlackmarDiemer Gambit. White sacrificed a piece against his master level opponent Manuel Ocantos for a quick win. My London 2.Bf4 Playbook is a step by step opening guide as a simple safe super solid solution to your repertoire for White. Just play 2.Bf4 with e3 and Nf3. It makes your preparation easy. Chess Digest listed me as a Research Assistant in the 1993 book on the London System by Andrew Soltis. My copy has a note inside the front cover: “To Tim Sawyer, Thanks for helping make this book possible. Ken Smith.” Very cool. I miss Mr. Ken Smith, his black top hat, and his Smith-Morra Gambit passion. Bachmann (2646) - Ocantos (2248), 48th Mar Del Plata Open ARG, 09.04.2017 begins 1.d4 d5 2.Bf4 Nf6 3.e3 e6 4.Nf3 Be7 5.Nbd2 0-0 6.Bd3 c5 7.c3 Nc6 8.h3 c4 9.Bc2!? [Or 9.Be2 b5 10.b3=] 9...b5 10.a3 a5 11.e4 Bb7 [11...dxe4 12.Nxe4 Nd5 13.Bh2 f5 14.Ned2 Rf6=] 12.e5 [12.Qe2!?] 12...Ne8 [12...Nd7 13.h4!+/=] 13.h4 f6 [13...f5 14.Ng5+/=] 14.Ng5! [This is like a Fishing Pole line by Brian Wall.] 14...fxg5 [14...g6 loses to

15.Nxe6+-] 15.Bxh7+ Kxh7 16.hxg5+ Kg6 [16...Kg8 17.Rh8+ Kxh8 18.Qh5+ Kg8 19.g6 Nf6 20.exf6 Rf7 21.Qh7+ Kf8 22.Qh8# mate] 17.Qh5+ Kf5 18.Qh3+ Kg6 19.Qh7+ 1-0

58 – Sankalp 4…Bd6 5.Bg3 0-0 Tactics decide almost every chess game, for better or worse. If you want to win more, train on tactics. My London 2.Bf4 Tactics book gives 200 ways for White to win quickly from London System 2.Bf4 games. The book examines winning positions from moves 7 to 22. The tactics arrive somewhat later in this example between Gupta Sankalp and Kaan Kucuksari. Sankalp (2374) - Kucuksari (2251), Stockholm Chess Challenge SWE, 01.05.2018 begins 1.d4 d5 2.Bf4 Nf6 3.e3 e6 4.Nd2 Bd6 5.Bg3 0-0 6.Bd3 c5 7.c3 [7.dxc5=] 7...Qb6 8.Qc2 Nbd7 9.Ngf3 Qc7 10.0-0 Bxg3 11.hxg3 e5 12.dxe5 Nxe5 13.Nxe5 Qxe5 14.Rae1 [14.c4=] 14...Re8 15.c4 Be6 16.cxd5 Bxd5 17.f4?! [17.e4 c4 18.Bxc4=] 17...Qh5 [17...Qd6=/+] 18.e4 Bc6 19.e5 Ng4 20.Nf3 Rad8 21.Re2 Rd4 22.Rfe1 Red8 23.Bf5 R4d5 [23...Bxf3 24.gxf3 Ne3 25.Bxh7+ Kh8 26.Qb3=] 24.Be4 R5d7 25.Bxc6 bxc6 26.Qxc5 Nh6 [26...Rc7 27.Qc2+/-] 27.Qxc6 Nf5 [27...Ng4 28.e6+-] 28.e6 [Or 28.g4 Qg6 29.e6+-] 28...Re7 [28...fxe6 29.g4+-] 29.g4 Qxg4 30.exf7+ Rxf7 31.Re8+ Rf8 32.Qe6+ Kh8 33.Rxd8 Rxd8 34.Qe8+ and mate next move. 1-0

59 – Grachev 4…Bd6 5.Bg3 c5 A tactical aspect of the London System is the pin along the a4-e8 diagonal. Black is vulnerable to this after the natural pawn moves 1...d5 and ...b6. Boris Grachev noticed this pattern against Alexander Utnasunov. White responded to 7...b6 with 8.Bb5. He ganged up on the queenside and put Black under pressure. There followed 9.Qa4 and 11.Ne5. Soon White picked off some pawns which led to an early tactical victory. Grachev (2654) - Utnasunov (2446), ch-RUS Blitz 2017 Sochi RUS (3.14), 02.10.2017 begins 1.d4 d5 2.Bf4 Nf6 3.e3 e6 4.Nd2 Bd6 5.Bg3 c5 6.c3 Nc6 7.Ngf3 b6 8.Bb5 Bb7?! [8...Qc7 9.Bxd6 Qxd6 10.e4+/=] 9.Qa4 Qc7 10.Bxd6 Qxd6 11.Ne5 Rc8 12.Qxa7 Qc7 13.dxc5 bxc5 14.Nxc6 Bxc6 15.Qxc5 Bxb5 16.Qxb5+ Nd7 17.Nb3 [17.Qb3+/-] 17...0-0 18.0-0 Ne5 [18...Rb8 19.Qe2+/-] 19.Qe2 Nc4 20.h3 [20.Nd4+/-] 20...Ra8 21.Rfb1

Rfb8 22.Nd4 e5 23.Nf3 e4 24.Nd4 Ne5 25.a4 Nd3 [25...Rb6 26.b4+/-] 26.Qh5 [26.b4!+-] 26...Qc4 [26...Rd8 27.b4+-] 27.Nf5 Ra5 [27...Ra7 28.Qg5+/-] 28.b4 Ra7 29.Qg5 f6 30.Qg3 Rba8 [30...Ne5 31.b5+-] 31.b5 g6 [31...Rd7 32.a5+-] 32.b6 Rb7 33.Nd6 1-0

60 – Alekseev 4…c5 5.c3 Nc6 Double threats defeat talent. Weak opponents fall to a single threat. Strong opponents defend and fight back. You beat good players when you threaten two things at the same time. You could threaten to win a piece or checkmate in tactics. You could threaten to win on both sides of the board in strategy. In this London System, Evgeny Alekseev won the b-pawn against Alexander Kamnev. Then Grandmaster Alekseev threatened the kingside with 26.Rf4. When Black defended, White played a winning combination. Alekseev (2622) - Kamnev (2132), Chigorin Memorial 2017 St Petersburg RUS (1.5), 21.10.2017 begins 1.d4 d5 2.Bf4 Nf6 3.e3 e6 4.Nd2 c5 5.c3 Nc6 6.Ngf3 h6 7.Bd3 Bd6 8.Bg3 Bxg3 9.hxg3 Qd6 10.Qe2 Bd7 [More common would be 10...0-0 11.dxc5 Qxc5 12.e4=] 11.Rd1 0-0-0 12.e4 dxe4 13.Nxe4 Nxe4 14.Bxe4 cxd4 15.Nxd4 Qe5 16.0-0 [16.Nb5!?] 16...Kb8 17.Qf3 Nxd4 18.cxd4 Qf6 19.Bxb7 Qxf3 20.Bxf3 Bb5 21.Rfe1 Bc4 22.Re5 Rd6 23.b3 Ba6 24.d5 Rhd8 25.Rd4 Bb7 26.Rf4 f6 [26...Bxd5 27.Rxf7 R8d7 28.Rxd7 Rxd7 29.Kf1 Bxf3 30.gxf3+/-] 27.Rxe6 Bxd5 [27...Rxe6 28.dxe6 Bxf3 29.gxf3+/-] White to play and win the Exchange or the bishop. 28.Rxd6 1-0 [If 28...Rxd6 29.Rd4 pins the bishop and wins material.]

61 – Admiraal 6.Ngf3 exd4 White wins this London System 2.Bf4 with an unusual Bg2 instead of a classical choice such as Bd3. Miguoel Admiraal won the Exchange and a pawn vs Katerina Nemcova. Then White finished the game with a powerful tactic winning more material. Admiraal (2453) - Nemcova (2315), PRO League Group Stage chess.com INT (7), 24.02.2018 begins 1.d4 d5 2.Bf4 Nf6 3.e3 c5 4.Nf3 Nc6 5.Nbd2 e6 6.c3 cxd4 7.exd4 Nh5 8.Be3 Bd6 9.g3 g6 [9...0-0 10.Ne5=] 10.Bg2 0-0 11.0-0 f5? [11...Ng7 12.Bh3=] 12.Bh6 Re8 13.c4 dxc4 14.Nxc4 Be7 15.Nce5 Bd7 16.d5 Nb4 [16...Nxe5 17.Nxe5+/-] 17.Nxd7 Qxd7 18.dxe6 Qxe6 [18...Qxd1 19.Raxd1+-] 19.Re1 Qd5 20.Nd4 Qf7 21.a3 Na6 [21...Red8 22.axb4 Bxb4 23.Re5+-] 22.Bxb7 Nc5 [22...Bf6 23.Rxe8+ Rxe8

24.Bxa6+-] 23.Bxa8 Rxa8 [Now comes a crushing move that finishes Black.] 24.Nxf5! 1-0 [If 24...gxf5 25.Rxe7 Qxe7 26.Qd5+ Ne6 27.Qxa8+ winning.]

62 – Cruz 6.Ngf3 cxd4 7.exd4 Finally I played an older guy at a tournament in Florida. I judged Humberto Cruz to be about 10 years my senior. We had been beaten up by the kids who either were masters or were about to become masters. Cruz and I found ourselves well back in the pack with no chance to win the event. Humberto Cruz was a strong ICCF correspondence master. This was one of those times when life got in the way of my chess. I thought I might get an advantage with my London System, but I really wanted to be elsewhere. I decided to play for two hours of the four hour session. Then I would offer a draw unless I had a huge quick win. I did have a positional edge when we agreed to a draw. The Minnesota Twins were in St. Petersburg (site of this event) for a baseball game vs the Devil Rays. My wife had a baseball ticket to the game. I wanted to go with her, too. I used to be a chaplain for the Rays. One of my old friends was pitching for the Rays. Also, if I withdrew from this event early, we could drive back to Orlando before the Labor Day traffic got worse. We both had to work the next day. My wife and I enjoyed the baseball game. We were relaxing back at home long before the 6th and final round of the tournament was finished. It was sad and wonderful at the same time. Sawyer - Cruz, FL State Championship (5), 04.09.2006 begins 1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Bf4 e6 4.e3 c5 5.c3 Nc6 6.Nbd2 cxd4 7.exd4 Bd6 8.Bxd6 Qxd6 9.Bd3 0-0 10.0-0 Qf4 [10...e5!? 11.dxe5 Nxe5 12.Nxe5 Qxe5 13.Re1 would leave Black with an isolated queen pawn but a more active bishop.]

11.Re1 Re8 12.Qe2 Bd7 13.g3 Qh6 14.Ne5 Re7 15.f4 Nxe5 16.dxe5 Nh5 17.Nf3 f5 18.Qe3 b6 19.Kf2 g6 20.h4 Qf8 21.Nd4 Kh8 22.Rh1 Qf7 23.Be2 Rg8 24.Rh2 Qe8 25.Rah1 [+/=] 1/2-1/2

63 – ButchCroft 6…Bd6 7.Bg3 The London System ...e6 line is called "Common Ground" by Svere Johnsen and GM Vlatko Kovacevic in "Win with the London System". One idea for White is to answer ...Bd6 with Bg3. After ...Bxg3 hxg3, White uses the front g-pawn to attack the Black king. My opponent "ButchCroft" got a huge space advantage on the queenside with a closed center. Once I played 20.g5 my own advantage on the kingside quickly took shape. My game went from solid quiet play to aggressive tactics with the sudden arrival of the White queen from b1 to g6. My minor pieces played a major role in the finish. Sawyer - ButchCroft, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 15.12.2012 begins 1.d4 e6 2.Bf4 d5 3.e3 Nf6 4.Nf3 c5 5.c3 Nc6 6.Nbd2 Bd6 7.Bg3 Qc7 8.Bd3 Bxg3 9.hxg3 h6 10.Qc2 c4 11.Be2 b5 12.e4 a5 13.e5 Nd7 14.0-0 b4 15.g4 Qd8 16.a3 Bb7 17.axb4 axb4 18.Qb1 0-0 19.Rxa8 Qxa8 20.g5 hxg5? [This gives White a favorable attack with an immediate mate threat. Black is still in the game after 20...h5 21.g6 f6 22.exf6 Rxf6 23.Ng5 e5=] 21.Nxg5 g6 22.Nxe6 fxe6? [22...Rb8 23.Nf4+/-] 23.Qxg6+ Kh8 24.Qh6+ Kg8 25.Bh5 [25.Qxe6+!+-] 25...Ne7 26.Qg5+ Kh8 27.Qxe7 Qc8 [27...Qd8 28.Qxe6+-] 28.Bg6 Black resigns 1-0

64 – Garcia Fuentes 7.Bg3 0-0 White dreams of a kingside attack in the London System 1.d4 d5 2.Bf4 Nf6 3.e3 line. The queen can advance to Qf3 or Qh5 as in the game Sergio Miguel Garcia Fuentes vs Max Rocha. When Black eliminated the central knight, White's attack was unstoppable. Garcia Fuentes (2158) - Rocha (2185), Guillermo Garcia Master 1 Santa Clara CUB (2.5), 23.05.2018 begins 1.d4 d5 2.Bf4 Nf6 3.e3 e6 4.Nd2 c5 5.c3 Nc6 6.Ngf3 Bd6 7.Bg3 0-0 8.Bd3 Re8 9.Ne5 Qc7 10.f4 b6 11.0-0 Bb7 12.Qf3 h6 13.Bh4 Be7 14.Bxf6 Bxf6 15.Qh5 Qe7 [15...Nxe5 16.fxe5=] 16.Rf3 Qf8 [16...cxd4 17.exd4+/=] 17.Rg3 Nxe5? [17...Bxe5 18.Qxh6+/-] 18.fxe5 g6 19.exf6 1-0

65 – Caruana 7…0-0 8.Bd3 b6 The London System is an excellent blitz opening because White can play good moves rapidly. This saves clock time for complicated middlegame positions or long endgames. Le Quang Liem defeated the Fabiano Caruana in a super grandmaster blitz battle. Caruana played sharply with 11...e5 giving the possibility of multiple captures. White won the Exchange with 15.Bb5 but Black had good compensation. White stopped all three of Black's advanced passed pawns to win the endgame. Le Quang Liem (2739) - Caruana (2807), Saint Louis Blitz 2017 Saint Louis USA (1.2), 17.08.2017 begins 1.d4 d5 2.Bf4 Nf6 3.e3 e6 4.Nd2 c5 5.c3 Nc6 6.Ngf3 Bd6 7.Bg3 0-0 8.Bd3 b6 9.Qe2 Bb7 10.Rd1 Re8 11.e4 e5 [11...Bxg3 12.hxg3=] 12.dxe5 [12.dxc5 Bxc5 13.0-0+/=] 12...Nxe5 13.Nxe5 Bxe5 14.f4 dxe4 15.Bb5! Bc7 16.Nc4 Qe7 17.Bxe8 Rxe8 18.Ne3 Qe6 19.0-0 Qc6 20.f5 Bxg3 21.hxg3 h6 22.Rd2 Qc7 23.Qf2 Ba6 24.c4 b5 25.b3 bxc4 26.bxc4 h5 27.Qf4 Qxf4 28.Rxf4 Kh7 29.Rd6 Bb7 30.Kf2 Rc8 [30...Kh6 31.Ke2+/=] 31.Rh4 Kg8 32.Rh1 [32.g4 hxg4 33.Nxg4 e3+ 34.Kxe3+-] 32...Bc6 33.Rhd1 Rc7 34.Rd8+ Kh7 35.g4 Kh6 36.gxh5 Kxh5 37.Rb8 [37.Nd5+/-] 37...Kg5 38.Rdd8 Bd7 39.Nd5 Nxd5 40.cxd5 Bxf5 41.d6 Rc6 42.Rb7 Ra6 43.Rxf7 Rxa2+ 44.Kg3 g6 [44...Ra3+ 45.Kh2 Rd3 46.Rxg7+ Kf6 47.Rc7+/-] 45.d7 Ra3+ 46.Kh2 Rd3 [46...Bxd7 47.Rdxd7+-] 47.Rxf5+ gxf5 [47...Kxf5 48.Rf8+ Ke5 49.d8Q Rxd8 50.Rxd8+-] 48.Rg8+ Kf4 49.d8Q Rxd8 50.Rxd8 Ke3 51.Rc8 Kd4 52.Kg3 c4 53.Kf2 c3 54.Ke2 f4 [54...a5 55.g3 a4 56.Ra8+-] 55.Rf8 Ke5 56.Kd1 a5 57.Kc2 Kd4 58.Rxf4 a4 59.g4 a3 60.g5 a2 61.Rf1 1-0

66 – Van der Lende 8.Bd3 Re8 What does it take for a child to become a master in chess? My opponent Ilias Van der Lende was a 12-year old from Holland. His family was on vacation in the USA for four weeks. What better place to vacation than Orlando, Florida? A few years later I noticed Van der Lende had a FIDE rating of 2223. To succeed it takes passion, talent and hard work. But how much hard work? In his book "Outliers: The Story of Success" author Malcolm Gladwell provides this quote: “The emerging picture from such studies is that ten thousand hours of practice is required to achieve the level of mastery associated with being a world-class expert - in anything,” writes the neurologist Daniel Levitin. He includes chess players. A typical young child practices a few hours per week. If he feels he has talent, he develops passion. As he ages, the child wants to practice more. Once he feels passion, it takes about ten years to reach mastery. Of course, if he does not sense his talent nor feel the passion, he may be good, but there won't be mastery. Gladwell adds, "And what's ten years? Well, it's roughly how long it takes to put in ten thousand hours of hard practice. Ten thousand hours is the magic number of greatness." His parents gave Ilias Van der Lende opportunity. On move 27, Black pushed his b-pawn and then offered a draw. I was all too happy to accept. He was listed as rated higher (from Holland) than I was. Later I saw this was his very first USCF rated game. Sawyer (1946) - Van der Lende (2094), Southern Open Altamonte Springs, FL (1), 27.07.2007 begins 1.d4 e6 2.Nf3 d5 3.Bf4 c5 4.c3 Nc6 5.e3 Nf6 6.Nbd2 Bd6 7.Bg3 0-0 8.Bd3 Re8 9.0-0 [White should have played 9.Ne5! c4 10.Bc2 Qc7 11.Ndf3+=] 9...Bxg3 10.hxg3 e5 11.dxe5

Nxe5 12.Nxe5 Rxe5 13.Nf3 Bg4 14.Be2 Re7 15.Re1 Qe8 16.Kf1[16.Qd3 Qc8=/+] 16...Rd8 17.Rc1 Ne4 18.Nd2 Bxe2+ 19.Rxe2 [19.Qxe2 f5=/+] 19...c4 [19...Red7 20.Kg1-/+] 20.Nf3 Nc5 21.Rd2 [Attacking the backward pawn on d5] 21...Qc6 22.Rd4 Nd3 23.Rc2 b5 24.Ne1 Nc5 25.Qh5 g6 26.Qd1 a5 27.Kg1 b4 [White has a solid position, but could mix it up with 28.Rxc4=] 1/2-1/2

67 – Trjapishko 8.Bb5 a6 White works up a sharp full-scale assault using the London 2.Bf4 System. Alexandr Trjapishko won with a kingside attack against Artemiy Danchenko. White kept his king safe behind a closed center. Black doubled White's g-pawns, but this opened up the h1 rook's influence from its original square. White reached an ideal attacking position. Trjapishko (2531) - Danchenko (1836), Vladimir Dvorkovich Cup Taganrog RUS (1.10), 15.01.2018 begins 1.d4 d5 2.Bf4 Nf6 3.e3 c5 4.c3 e6 5.Nd2 Nc6 6.Ngf3 Bd6 7.Bg3 0-0 8.Bb5 a6 9.Bxc6 bxc6 10.Qa4 Bxg3 11.hxg3 Qb6 12.Qc2 h6 13.Ne5 a5 14.g4 Re8 15.Nb3 c4? [Black slams the door on his own prospects. White gets a dominate position. Chances on the board would have been equal after 15...cxd4= but White has better chances due to the rating difference.] 16.Nc5 Qc7 17.f4 Nd7 [17...Ne4 18.Nxe4 dxe4 19.g5+-] 18.Ncxd7 Bxd7 19.g5 hxg5 [This open the flood gates. Black will drown under the White attack. Somewhat better is 19...c5 20.gxh6 g6 21.dxc5 Rac8 22.Qd1+-] 20.fxg5 Rab8 21.Qh7+ Kf8 22.0-0 Ke7 23.Rxf7+ Kd8 24.Qxg7 1-0

68 – Carlsen 8.Bb5 Bxg3 Just because you lose a chess game doesn’t mean you have to stop playing that opening. Carlsen likes the London System. Yes, he lost the previous game, but Magnus came right back to it. The London 2.Bf4 is an easy chess opening to play at any level. The first dozen moves come naturally. White gets a good position. Final success depends on White's ability to outplay Black. It is one of my favorites when I am not in a gambit mood. Magnus Carlsen won with the London System. Earlier I mentioned an Italian 2.Bc4 that Fabiano Caruana won. Here White's counterattack in the London turned the tables with 24.e4. Carlsen pressed his advantage with a set of checks to win a piece and the game. Carlsen (2832) - Caruana (2808), GCT Blitz Paris 2017 Paris FRA (1.1), 24.06.2017 begins 1.d4 d5 2.Bf4 Nf6 3.e3 e6 4.Nf3 c5 5.c3 Nc6 6.Nbd2 Bd6 7.Bg3 0-0 8.Bb5 [8.Bd3 is more popular. Carlsen chose bishop to d3 to beat Kramnik in this event but there Black had played Nge7.] 8...Bxg3 9.hxg3 Qb6 10.a4 h6 11.0-0 Ne7 12.Qb3 Qc7 13.a5 Bd7 14.Be2 Ng6 15.Qa3 c4 16.b3 cxb3 17.Nxb3 [17.c4!?] 17...Ne4 18.Rfc1 Bc6 19.c4 dxc4 20.Rxc4 Qd8 [20...Rac8 21.Rac1=] 21.Nc5 Nd6 22.Rc2 Bd5 23.Bd3 b6 24.e4 bxc5 25.exd5 exd5 26.dxc5 Ne4 [If 26...Nc4 27.Bxc4 dxc4 28.Rxc4+/- White is up a pawn.] 27.c6 Qc7 28.Qb3 [28.Nd4+/-] 28...Rfd8 29.Qb7 Rac8 [29...Rdc8 30.Qxc7 Rxc7 31.Nd4+/-] 30.Rb1 Qxa5 31.c7 Rf8 32.Qb5 [32.Qa6+-] 32...Qa3 33.Qxd5 Nc3 34.Rxc3 Qxc3 35.Bxg6 Rxc7 36.Ne5 Qc5 37.Bxf7+ Rfxf7 38.Rb8+ 1-0

69 – Carlsen 8.Bb5 Ne7 Magnus Carlsen lost with the London System in the 2016 World Rapid Championship. Carlsen played the early part of this short game well. But like anyone could, Carlsen let his advantage slip. Grandmaster Anton Korobov won the European Blitz Championship in 2013. Korobov had a FIDE Rapid rating of 2750 as of December 2016. He was ahead on time in this game. On move 17 attacking a bishop was more tempting than taking a pawn. White had the idea of 18.Qh3 with a mate threat. But this White queen move gave Black surprisingly strong counterplay. Under time pressure Magnus Carlsen blundered with 18.Ng5? Carlsen (2840) - Korobov (2692), World Rapid 2016 Doha QAT (11.1), 28.12.2016 begins 1.d4 d5 2.Bf4 c5 3.e3 Nc6 4.c3 Nf6 5.Nd2 e6 [5...Bf5 6.Ngf3 e6=] 6.Ngf3 Bd6 7.Bg3 [7.dxc5 Bxc5 8.Be2=] 7...0-0 8.Bb5!? [8.Bd3 b6 9.Ne5 Bb7 10.f4 Ne7 11.Qf3=] 8...Ne7 [8...Be7 9.dxc5 Bxc5 10.Qc2=] 9.Bd3 b6 [9...c4 10.Bc2 b5 11.0-0=] 10.e4! Bxg3 [10...dxe4 11.Nxe4 Nxe4 12.Bxe4 Nd5 13.dxc5 Bxc5 14.Qc2=] 11.hxg3 dxe4 [11...Ng6 12.e5 Ng4 13.0-0=] 12.Nxe4 Ng6 [12...Ned5 13.dxc5 bxc5 14.Nxc5 Qb6 15.Nb3 h6 16.0-0+/=] 13.dxc5 [13.Ne5!? Bb7 14.Nxf6+ Qxf6 15.Nd7+/-] 13...Bb7 14.Nxf6+ Qxf6 15.cxb6 e5 16.Bxg6 hxg6 [16...Qxg6 17.0-0+/-] 17.Qd7!? [17.bxa7! Rxa7 18.0-0+/-] 17...Qxb6 18.Ng5? [This loses. 18.0-0-0= or 18.Qh3=] 18...Bxg2 19.0-0-0 Rab8 20.b3 Qxf2 21.Qg4 [Losing slowly is 21.Rh7 Qxg3-+] 21...Rfc8 22.Kb1 Rxc3 23.Qb4 Rcc8 0-1

Book 6: Chapter 2 – Queens Gambits 2.c4 This covers the rare lines such a 2...Bf5, 2...c5, and the Marshall line 2...Nf6. These can be a little tricky if Black is a strong player.

70 – El Debs 2…Bf5 3.cxd5 Bxb1 Queen's Gambit Baltic Defence is a London System reversed. Black plans to capture on b1. White delayed the recapture with 5.Qa4+ in Felipe de Cresce El Debs vs Joaquim de Deus Filho. El Debs (2545) - Deus Filho (1925), Brazil Foz do Iguacu Open Foz do Iguacu BRA (1.4), 16.05.2018 begins 1.d4 d5 2.c4 Bf5 3.cxd5 Bxb1 4.Qa4+ [4.Rxb1!? Qxd5 5.a3 Nc6 6.Nf3 0-0-0 7.Qc2 Nxd4 8.Nxd4 Qxd4 9.Be3+/=] 4...c6 5.Rxb1 Qxd5 6.Nf3 Nd7 7.e3 Qf5 [7...e6 8.Bd2 Ngf6 9.Qc2 Bd6! 10.Bd3+/=] 8.Ra1 e5 9.Be2 Nb6 10.Qb3 exd4 [10...e4 11.Nd2 Bd6 12.f3 Nf6 13.Qc2+/=] 11.Nxd4 Qd5 12.0-0 Qxb3 13.Nxb3 Nf6 14.Rd1 Be7 15.Na5 Rb8 16.e4 Nxe4 17.Bf4 Rd8 [17...0-0 18.Bxb8+/=] 18.Nxb7 Rxd1+ 19.Rxd1 Nd5 20.Be5 0-0 21.Na5 Bc5 22.Bd4 Nb4 23.a3 Nc2 [23...Nd5 24.Nxc6+-] 24.Bxc5 Nxc5 25.Nxc6 1-0

71 – Keinanen 2…c5 3.cxd5 Qxd5 Queens Gambit Copy Cat 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c5 opens the game for enterprising players. Black's the light squared bishop trapped the opposing king in the center. White launched a desperate but futile attack in Tapani Sammalvuo vs Toivo Keinanen. Sammalvuo (2435) - Keinanen (2341), ch-FIN 2018 Helsinki, 17.06.2018 begins 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c5 3.cxd5 Qxd5 4.Nf3 cxd4 5.Nc3 Qa5 6.Nxd4 Nf6 7.g3 [7.Nb3 Qc7 8.e4+/=] 7...e5 8.Nb3 Qc7 [8...Qa6!?] 9.Bg2 Bb4 10.Bd2 0-0 11.Rc1 [11.0-0 Nc6=] 11...Nc6 12.a3 Be7 13.Bg5 [13.Be3 Rd8=/+] 13...Rd8 14.Qc2 Be6 15.e3 Bc4 [15...Qb6=/+] 16.Bxf6 Bxf6 17.Ne4 Bd3 18.Nxf6+ gxf6 19.Qc3 Rac8 20.Nc5 Na5 21.Qb4 [21.Nxd3 Qxc3+ 22.Rxc3 Rxc3 23.bxc3 Rxd3=/+] 21...Ba6 22.Qg4+ [22.Bf1 Qc6=/+] 22...Kh8 23.b4 Nb3 24.Qf3 [24.Rc4 f5-+] 24...Nxc1 25.Qxf6+ Kg8

26.Qg5+ Kf8 27.Qh6+ Ke8 28.Qd6? [28.Bf1 Bxf1 29.Kxf1 Rd1+ 30.Kg2 Rxh1-+] 28...Qxd6 0-1

72 – Haines 2…Nf6 3.Nc3 Nc6 In the northeast corner of Maine, the farmers plant potatoes. The growing season is short. The crop is planted in May and June. It is harvested in September, or until the ground freezes. In the middle of the summer when the weather is nicer, after planting and before harvest, the people enjoy a celebration called the Maine Potato Blossom Festival in Fort Fairfield. A hearty group of chess players use the festive occasion to organize a one day event. Sometimes they play outside where the public can watch. Ray Haines sent me his four games. Here is a typical first round game in a Swiss pairing chess tournament. A stronger player faces a weaker one. The next three rounds saw Ray playing opponents who were closer to his own skill level. His first game is a Marshall / Chigorin Defence. Ray Haines wrote: “This game was played at the Maine Potato Blossom Festival in Fort Fairfield, Maine on 7-13-2013. This was the first round of the event. Kyle Porter’s rating was unknown to me. The time control was game/60. I won. The opening was a queen pawn opening.” Haines - K. Porter, Potato Blossom Festival Ft Fairfield, Maine (1), 13.07.2013 begins 1.d4 d5 2.c4 Nf6 3.Nc3 Nc6 4.Nf3 Bf5 [4...e6 is solid but passive.] 5.cxd5 Nb4? [Black drops a piece on move five. 5...Nxd5 6.Qb3+/=] 6.Qa4+ Bd7 7.Qxb4 e6 8.Qb3 exd5 9.Bg5 h6 10.Bxf6 Qxf6 11.Nxd5 Qc6?! 12.Ne5 Qd6 13.e3 Be6 14.Bc4 0-0-0 15.Nc3 Rg8 16.Bxe6+ fxe6 [Or 16...Qxe6 17.Nxf7+-] 17.Nf7 Qc6 18.Nxd8 Qxg2 19.Qxe6+ Kxd8 20.Qd5+ [Maybe even stronger is 20.Ke2+- but it is natural to want the queens off the board.] 20...Qxd5 21.Nxd5 Bd6 22.Ke2 Rf8 23.f4 Kd7 24.Rhg1 Ke6 25.Nc3 g5 26.Rgf1 g4 27.d5+ Kf5 28.e4+ Kg6 29.e5 Bc5 30.Na4 Be7 31.Rac1 Bd8 32.Nc5 Be7 33.Ne6 Re8

34.Nxc7 [Or 34.f5+!+-] 34...Rd8 35.f5+ Kg5 36.Ne6+ Kh4 37.Nxd8 Kh3 38.Rf2 h5 39.Rc3+ 1-0

73 – Baffo 3.cxd5 Qxd5 4.Nc3 In 1996 Jeffrey Baffo and I played two 6-game correspondence matches. I had been a USCF Postal Master a few years before. Jeff Baffo still was a USCF Correspondence Master. This was at the end of my 20 year correspondence career of 1000 games. During the mid-1990s even though I was rated over 2000 in tournament play, I played some of the worst correspondence chess of my life. I was in my 40's and my chess went through a mid-life crisis. E-mail chess was new. I thought, "Wow! Now I can play a lot of games at once!" I played 151 correspondence games in 1996. I played them like blitz chess, not giving the moves the attention they deserved. By 1997, I was playing blitz in the Internet Chess Club. I phased out the correspondence play I had begun in 1977. I very much enjoyed playing Baffo - just not the losing part! In our mismatch, Jeffrey won almost every game. He deserved the wins for his better play. Baffo and I both enjoy lesser known openings. Here is a Marshall Queens Gambit Declined. Here I am playing normal chess with 1.d4 d5 2.c4 as White. Jeff is playing weird stuff with 2...Nf6!? This has been condemned in opening theory, but really it only gives White a little more space. I obtained good chances until my blunder on move 29. There was no sense dragging it out. Baffo was not going to misplay this. Sawyer (1992) - Baffo (2244), corr USCF 95P135, 03.04.1996 begins 1.d4 d5 2.c4 Nf6 3.cxd5 Qxd5 4.Nc3 Qa5 5.Bd2 [Fritz, Houdini and Rybka all like this bishop move in theory, although in practice 5.Nf3 has scored a little better.] 5...Qb6 6.e3 [6.Nf3+/=] 6...Bf5 7.b3 [7.Na4+/=] 7...e6 8.Nf3 Nbd7 9.Be2 Be7 10.0-0 0-0 11.Nh4 Bg6 [11...Be4 12.Nxe4 Nxe4=] 12.Nxg6 hxg6 13.Na4 Qd6 14.Bc3 c6 15.Bb2 Rfd8 16.Qc2 Qd5 17.Nc3 Qf5 18.Qxf5 [18.e4!+/=] 18...gxf5 19.Rfd1 g6 20.Rac1 Nb6 21.g3 Kg7

22.Bf3 g5 23.Nb1 g4 24.Be2 Rh8 25.Kg2 Rh6 26.Ba3 Bxa3 27.Nxa3 Nbd5 28.Nc4 Ne4 29.Ne5? [This drops the a2 pawn. Better was 29.Rh1 Rd8 30.Bd3 Ng5=/+ when Black has pressure but he would have to find a way to break through if he was going to win.] 29...Ndc3 0-1

74 – Porter 3.cxd5 Nxd5 4.e4 Why don't your opponents play the main lines? Maybe they like offbeat or gambit lines. Maybe they know opening principles but not opening theory. What's the difference? Principles are strategic goals. Develop your pieces. Fight for the center. Keep your king safe. But opening theory includes exact tactics you know in advance. You know already where you will place your pawns and pieces in specific situations. Are you afraid your opponent knows more theory in a certain opening? He might. Most players have a very limited knowledge of opening theory. Ray Haines prefers 1.d4 as a first move. Ray Haines chose 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 against Mike Porter instead of the more modest 2.e3 or 2.Nf3. Marshall Defence to Queen's Gambit begins 1.d4 d5 2.c4 Nf6. Porter reversed the move order with 1...Nf6 and 2...d5. The key questions revolve around e5. Will White play 4.Nf3 to prevent ...e5? Will Black play it if allowed? The answer to both is No. White grabbed the center. Black let him have it. Chances were equal for another ten moves before Black's position got loose. Then Ray Haines attacked for the win. Haines - M. Porter, Houlton, ME (3), 22.08.2015 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 d5 3.cxd5 Nxd5 4.e4 Nf6 5.Nc3 e6 [5...e5!?] 6.Bc4 [6.Nf3!?] 6...Be7 [6...Bb4 7.Bg5=] 7.Nf3 [7.e5 Nd5 8.Qg4+/=] 7...0-0 [7...a6=] 8.Be3 b6 9.Qe2 Bb7 10.Bd3 Nbd7 11.0-0 c5 12.Rfd1 Ng4? [12...c4 13.Bxc4 Nxe4=] 13.dxc5 [13.Bb5+/=] 13...Nxe3 14.Qxe3 Bxc5 15.Qf4 Rc8 [15...Qb8=] 16.e5 f5? [16...Bxf3 17.Qxf3 Qc7 18.Bxh7+ Kxh7 19.Qd3+ Kg8 20.Qxd7=] 17.Bb5 Rf7? [17...Rc7 18.Bc4+/-] 18.Ng5 Re7 19.Bc4 [19.Nxe6!+-] 19...Rc6? [19...Qe8 20.Qxf5+/-] 20.Qh4 1-0

75 – Murray 3.cxd5 Nxd5 4.Nf3 I think of Pat Murray every year on St. Patrick's Day. We played every Tuesday night for eight years. Here is a Queens Gambit Declined where Murray played the Marshall Defence 2...Nf6. US chess champion of 100 years ago Frank Marshall played bold and risky lines that most players rarely studied. The one Ruy Lopez line that has stood the test of time, computer analysis and grandmaster play is the Marshall Gambit. Historically the most common Queens Gambit moves after 1.d4 d5 2.c4 are in order of popularity: 2...e6, 2...c6, 2...dxc4, 2...Nc6, 2...e5, 2...Nf6, 2...Bf5 and 2...c5. If you play the Queen's Gambit a lot, you will see them all. The Marshall Defence (2...Nf6) is most often seen in club play from players such as my friend here. I also played Pat Murray in the King's Indian Defence, the Englund Gambit, the Sicilian Defence and the Semi-Slav Defence. Below Pat Murray castles kingside. Then he opens up the g-file and h-file for my rooks which leads to a predictable checkmate. Sawyer (2010) - Murray (1585), Williamsport, PA 1996 begins 1.d4 d5 2.c4 Nf6 3.cxd5 Nxd5 4.Nf3 [4.e4!?] 4...Bg4 5.Ne5 Bh5 6.Qb3 Nb6 7.e3 [White can mess up Black's pawn structure with 7.Qh3! Bg6 8.Nxg6 fxg6 9.e3+/-] 7...e6 8.Nc3 Bd6 9.Nf3 Bxf3 10.gxf3 0-0 11.Bd3 Qg5 12.Bd2 Qg2 13.Ke2 Bxh2 14.Be4 Bg3 [If 14...Nc6 15.f4 Qg4+ 16.Bf3 Qh3 17.Rag1+White has a very strong attack.] 15.Bxh7+ Kh8 16.Be4+ Kg8 17.Rag1 [17.Raf1+- also works.] 17...Qxf2+ 18.Kd1 N8d7 [Or 18...Bh4 19.Be1+and White wins the bishop.] 19.Rf1 Qg2 20.f4 Qxf1+ 21.Rxf1 Nf6 22.Rh1 Nbd7 23.Rh3 Bf2 24.Be1 Bg1 25.Qc2 Ng4 26.Bh7+ Kh8 27.Bg8+ Kxg8 28.Qh7# 1-0

2.c4 Nc6 The Chigorin Defence could be reached via 1.c4 Nc6 2.d4 d5.

76 – Kohut 3.Bf4 dxc4 4.Nf3 In 1977 I played Gregory Kohut in Ron's Postal Chess Club (RPCC). In the late 1970s I often played standard 1.d4 and 2.c4 openings. Here my opponent Kohut surprised me with 2...Nc6, which is the Chigorin Defence. I decided to go my own way with the natural bishop development 3.Bf4!? White does better to bring out a knight. I headed toward original territory. The game took on the character of a Queen's Gambit Accepted after he played 3...dxc4. I did not recapture until 15.Bxc4. By that time I was up a bpawn. Even though my play was original, it was not very strong. Black missed better moves in the opening such as 6...f6 or 8...Nf6. I discovered Gregory Kohut had a brilliant middlegame defense available that we both missed in 18...Bb4! This would have given him much better chances. Instead he fianchettoed his queenside bishop. The poor bishop was naked with no pawns surrounding. When Black lost material, he threw in the towel. Sawyer - Kohut, corr RPCC 1977 begins 1.d4 d5 2.c4 Nc6 3.Bf4!? [Theory recommends 3.Nc3, 3.Nf3 or 3.cxd5] 3...dxc4 [3...Nf6=] 4.Nf3 Bg4 5.Ne5 [5.d5+/=] 5...Nxe5 6.Bxe5 Bd7 [6...f6 7.Bg3 e5 8.Qa4+ c6 9.dxe5 b5 10.Qc2 fxe5=/+] 7.a4 c6 8.d5? [8.e3+/=] 8...b5? [The correct way to keep an extra Black pawn is 8...Nf6 9.dxc6 Bxc6-/+] 9.dxc6 Bxc6 10.Qxd8+ Kxd8 11.axb5 Bxb5 12.Nc3 Bc6 13.e4 f6 14.Bd4 e6?! [14...e5 15.Be3+/=] 15.Bxc4 Ke7 16.Rxa7+?! [16.0-0! a5 17.Bc5+ Kf7 18.Bxf8 Kxf8 19.Bxe6+- and White has an extra pawn with a much better position.] 16...Rxa7 17.Bxa7 Kf7 18.Bb5 Bb7? [Amazingly Black can regain a piece with 18...Bb4! 19.Bxc6 Ne7 20.Bb7 Rd8 21.Ke2 Rd7 22.Ra1 Rxb7 although White still has one extra pawn. 23.Be3+/=] 19.Ke2 Bb4 20.Rd1

Ne7 21.Rd7 Bc8 22.Rd4 Bxc3 23.bxc3 Bb7? [This drops a piece. Better is 23...e5 24.Rc4 Ke6 25.Bc5 Bd7 26.Bxd7+ Kxd7 27.Bxe7 Kxe7 28.Rc7+ Ke6 29.Rxg7+/- when White is up two pawns in a rook ending.] 24.Rd7 Bxe4 25.Bc5 Bxg2 26.Rxe7+ Kg6 27.Rxe6 Rc8 1-0

77 – Fitter 3.cxd5 Qxd5 4.Nf3 Playing chess vs a high rated computer is a tall challenge. If you study openings after your games, you will discover teachable moments. Back in 1998 I was still playing strong blitz chess. I decided to experiment (for me) with the Chigorin Defence. This variation is part of the Queen's Gambit Declined where after 1.d4 d5 2.c4 Black does not take 2...dxc4. The Chigorin continues 2...Nc6. This hinders the push of Black's c-pawn, but it prepares the push of Black's e-pawn. Upon re-examination I found that I missed the move 7...e4! That would have made my position fully playable. Alas the 3014 rated "Fitter" was more fitter than I. In my adult years I have been more fatter than fitter. God has a sense of humor. I led a church small group. We were doing the Rick Warren series entitled "Transformed: How God Changes Us". The weekly topics cover spiritual health, physical health, mental health, emotional health, relational health, financial health and vocational health. I scheduled to write about this "Fitter" game long ago. When I got to it, I discovered that the topic of the week was Physical Health. So I set a goal in 2014. I gave myself 60 days to lose 10 pounds. How did I do? Did my chess exercises help? I did thousands of chess exercises. They helped my play but not my weight. So, I would have to do some physical exercise. Ugh!?! No way. Alas, I did not lose weight for over another year, not until after I retired. Fitter (3014) - Sawyer (2409), ICC 5 0 Internet Chess Club, 04.12.1998 begins 1.d4 d5 2.c4 Nc6 3.cxd5 Qxd5 4.Nf3 e5 5.Nc3 Bb4 6.Bd2 Bxc3 7.Bxc3 exd4?! [7...e4!=] 8.Nxd4 Nxd4 [8...Nf6 9.Nxc6 Qxc6 10.Rc1 Qe6+/=] 9.Qxd4 Qxd4 10.Bxd4 f6 11.e4 Be6 12.Bb5+ Bd7 13.Bc4 Ne7

14.e5 Nc6?! [14...f5 15.e6 Bc6 16.0-0-0+/-] 15.exf6 Nxd4? 16.fxg7 0-0-0 17.gxh8Q Rxh8 18.0-0-0 Nc6 19.Rhe1 Black resigns 1-0

78 – Sjugirov 3.cxd5 Qxd5 4.e3 Queens Gambit Chigorin Defence leads to unbalanced opening positions with the pawn structure and the minor pieces. Here White exchanged on d5 and later occupied that square with the pawn push 9.d5. Black's capture 14...Nxd5 turned out to be premature based on the tactics that followed in the game Sanan Sjugirov vs Vasilios Kotronias. Sjugirov (2652) - Kotronias (2529), Aeroflot Open A 2018 Moscow RUS (1.14), 20.02.2018 begins1.d4 d5 2.c4 Nc6 3.cxd5 Qxd5 4.e3 e5 5.Nc3 Bb4 6.a3 [6.Bd2 Bxc3 7.Bxc3 exd4 8.Ne2 Nf6 9.Nxd4+/=] 6...Bxc3+ 7.bxc3 Nf6 8.c4 Qd8 [8...Qd6 9.d5 Nb8 10.Ne2 0-0 11.Nc3+/=] 9.d5 Ne7 [9...Nb8 10.Ne2 0-0 11.Nc3 Nbd7 12.Bd3 Nc5 13.Bc2 c6=] 10.Bb2 c6 11.Bxe5 Ne4 12.Nf3 [12.Qb3+/=] 12...Qa5+ 13.Nd2 cxd5 14.cxd5 Nxd5? [Black must protect g7. 14...0-0!= ] 15.Bxg7 Rg8 16.Bd4 Bf5 [16...Bd7 17.f3+/-] 17.f3 Ndc3 [17...Nc5 18.Kf2+-] 18.Qc1 Rc8 [18...Nb5 19.fxe4 Nxd4 20.exd4 Bxe4 21.Qc5+-] 19.fxe4 Bxe4 [19...Nxe4 20.Qb2+-] 20.Qb2 Rxg2 [20...Ke7 21.Nc4 Rxc4 22.Bxc4 Nd5+ 23.Qd2+-] 21.Bxg2 Bxg2 22.Rg1 1-0

79 – Kveinys 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.cxd5 Nxd5 Black turned this Queens Gambit Chigorin Defence into an inferior Gruenfeld Defence variation after 5...g6. More accurate and promising was 5...e5! White built up a strong center and attacked kingside. Black tried to hold off the attack with 10...f5 and 13...h5. White got a winning attack in the game Aloyzas Kveinys vs Vaishali Rameshbabu. Kveinys (2519) - Vaishali (2310), 4th ad Gredine Open 2018 Ortisei ITA (3.8), 18.06.2018 begins 1.d4 d5 2.c4 Nc6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.cxd5 Nxd5 5.Nf3 [5.e4 Nxc3 6.bxc3 e5 7.d5 Na5=] 5...g6 [5...e5! 6.dxe5 Bb4 7.Bd2 Nxc3 8.bxc3 Ba5=] 6.e4 Nxc3 7.bxc3 Bg7 8.Be2 0-0 9.Bg5 [Or 9.0-0+/=] 9...Na5 10.Qd2 f5 11.e5 Be6 12.h4 Nc4 13.Qf4 h5 14.Bh6 Bd5 15.Rh3 Bf7 [15...Qe8 16.Rg3 a5 17.Bxg7 Kxg7 18.Kf1+/-] 16.Rg3 Qd5 17.Bxg7 Kxg7

18.Ng5 Rh8 19.e6 [After 19.e6 Bxe6 20.Bxc4 Qxc4 21.Qe5+ Kh6 22.Nxe6+-] 1-0

80 – ruval 3.Nc3 dxc4 4.e3 e5 White played 3.Nc3. After 3...dxc4, Larry Kaufman recommends 4.d5 in "The Kaufman Repertoire for Black and White". Another author GM Lar Schandorff recommends 4.Nf3 Nf6 5.Bg5 in his "Playing the Queen's Gambit". Both are sharp and forcing lines. White played 4.e3. Valery Bronzik calls this a "not very ambitious continuation" in his book "The Chigorin Defence". Then Bronzik gives a game with 4...e5 5.Nf3 exd4 6.exd4. Black in my game played 6...Nxd4. This allowed me to exchange knights and ponder a possible ending vs the isolated d-pawn. When White delayed castling, I found a combination. ruval - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 13.07.2012 begins 1.d4 Nc6 2.c4 d5 3.Nc3 dxc4 4.e3 e5 5.Nf3 exd4 6.Nxd4 Nxd4 7.exd4 Nf6 8.Bxc4 Bd6 9.Bg5 [9.0-0] 9...0-0 10.Qd2? [Preparing to castle queenside. Clearly White should have castled kingside immediately. 10.0-0 h6=] 10...Re8+ 11.Ne2? [11.Be3 Ng4 12.0-0-0 c6=/+ Black stands better, but it is still a game.] 11...a5 [Threat: 12...Bb4] 12.0-0? [Two moves too late. Castling queenside is not quite so bad after 12.0-0-0 a4-/+] 12...Ne4! [Take me!] 13.Bxd8 Nxd2 14.Bxc7 Nxc4 15.Bxd6 Nxd6 16.Rac1? Rxe2 White resigns down two pieces. 0-1

81 – Kharitonov 3.Nc3 dxc4 4.Nf3 Queens Gambit Chigorin Defence 1.d4 d5 2.c4 Nc6 3.Nc3 dxc4 resembles Queens Gambit Accepted. Black doubled the f-pawns with 4...Bg4 and 5...Bxf3. White opened the center when Black's king remained in the center. White forced mate after 22.Qxd5+ in the game between Alexandr Kharitonov and Maarten Post. Kharitonov (2566) - Post (1820), La Palma Island Open 2018 Santa Cruz de La Palma ESP (1.2), 10.08.2018 begins 1.d4 d5 2.c4 Nc6 3.Nc3 dxc4 4.Nf3 Bg4 [4...Nf6 5.e4 Bg4 6.Be3 e6 7.Bxc4 Bb4 8.Qc2 0-0=] 5.d5 Bxf3 [5...Nb8 6.Ne5+/-] 6.exf3 Ne5 7.Bf4 Nd3+ 8.Bxd3 cxd3 9.0-0 a6 10.Qb3 Rb8 11.Rad1 Nf6 12.Rxd3 Nd7 13.Re3 b5 14.Ne4 Rb6 15.Rc1 e5 16.dxe6 Rxe6 17.Bxc7 Qc8 [17...Nc5 18.Rxc5 Bxc5 19.Bxd8 Bxe3

20.fxe3+-] 18.Rec3 [18.Nd6+ Bxd6 19.Rxe6+ fxe6 20.Qxe6+ Be7 21.Re1+-] 18...Qb7 [18...Rxe4 19.fxe4+-] 19.Ba5 [19.Ng5 Be7 20.Nxe6 fxe6 21.Qxe6+-] 19...Nb6 20.Bxb6 Qxb6 21.Rc8+ Kd7 22.Qd5+ [If 22...Bd6 23.Nxd6 Rxd6 24.Qxf7 mate]1-0

2.c4 dxc4 Black accepts the Queen’s Gambit. White will regain the pawn.

82 – Rusev 3.e4 b5 4.a4 c6 White won an Exchange by 7.Nxb5 axb5 8.Rxa8. Black built up a strong attack in the game Dimitar Marholev vs Krasimir Rusev. Marholev (2145) - Rusev (2538), 82nd ch-BUL 2018 Kozloduy, 08.03.2018 begins 1.d4 d5 2.c4 dxc4 3.e4 b5?! [3...e5=] 4.a4 c6 5.axb5 cxb5 6.Nc3 a6 7.Nxb5 axb5 8.Rxa8 Bb7 9.Ra1 e6 10.f3 [10.Ne2! Bxe4 11.Nc3 Bc6 12.Be2 b4 13.Nb1 Bxg2 14.Rg1 Bd5 15.Nd2+/=] 10...f5! 11.exf5 Nc6 12.fxe6 Nge7 13.Bg5 Qd5 14.Bxe7 [14.Qd2 h6=] 14...Bxe7 15.Ne2 Qxe6 16.Kf2 Bg5! 17.f4 0-0 18.Ra3 [18.Qd2 Qe4=/+] 18...Bxf4 19.Nxf4 Rxf4+ 20.Rf3 Rxd4 21.Qe1 [21.Bxc4 Qxc4-/+] 21...Ne5 0-1

83 – Rideout 3.Nf3 c5 4.d5 I sent two Ray Haines games to George Cunningham and Gerry Dullea. I quote their Bangor Daily News chess column in 1975: “Two recent correspondents have sounded the praises of Ray Haines, a young man from Fort Fairfield, in Aroostook County. Apparently Ray is getting over the tournament jitters that have plagued him and is now able to orchestrate his very considerable theoretical knowledge into victories over the board.” “Players in the County consider Ray the best attacker player there, and that's saying quite a bit in view of the many fine players in northern Maine. In a game from the Good-Bye 1974, Ray shows a little of his prowess on the attack and he quickly demolishes Kirk Rideout, taking advantage of a few inaccuracies springing a cute trap and finally applying the clincher.” White played the interesting 4.d5!? in a Queens Gambit. When Black mishandled it, Ray Haines got an impressive attack.

Haines - Rideout, Good-Bye 1974 Maine, 1974 begins 1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 c5 3.c4 dxc4 4.d5!? [4.e3 leads to well-known lines.] 4...e6 5.e4 Nf6 6.Nc3 [6.Bxc4+/=] 6...exd5 7.e5 d4 8.Bxc4 Be6? [8...Ng4 9.h3 Nc6=] 9.Bxe6 fxe6 10.exf6 dxc3? 11.f7+ Ke7 12.Bg5+ Kxf7 13.Ne5+ Ke8 14.Qxd8# 1-0

84 – LeviRook 3.Nf3 e6 4.e3 b5 Good question. Let's assume that your primary goal is to win the game in blitz. Your secondary goal is to learn something: a new opening move, a tactic, a strategy, an attack, a combination, how to handle the clock, an endgame idea, about a mistake, etc. Now consider the popular three minute game with no increment, i.e. both sides get a total of 180 seconds for the entire game. If you always play at a pace of 3 seconds per move, you will have time to play only 60 moves. You want to play slow enough so as not to blunder in the opening, and play fast enough so as not to lose on time in the ending. Consider 100 three minute games I played on ICC during a two week period in 2012. 13 of the games lasted 60 moves of longer. I scored +6 =4 -3 in those games. If I had played slower than 3 seconds per move, I would have lost all 13 on time! When the game is going long, play more automatic moves in 1-2 seconds. My opponent in the Queen's Gambit Accepted game below is "LeviRook", a very fast blitz player. His consistent speed puts pressure on his opponents. My guess is that if he slowed down and just took one more second per move, his blitz rating would go up 200 points. But of course slowing down is not easy for any of us blitz players to do. We stick with what is comfortable. BDGers wonder why I played 1.c4. Well, I rarely do. As for those "100 three minute games", I played the Blackmar-Diemer 5.Nxf3 as White four times and won them all. Sawyer - LeviRook, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 06.12.2012 begins 1.c4 d5?! 2.d4 [2.cxd5!] 2...dxc4 3.Nf3 e6 [3...Nf6 4.e3] 4.e3 b5 [4...c5 5.Bxc4] 5.a4 c6 6.axb5 cxb5 7.b3 cxb3 8.Bxb5+ Bd7 9.Qxb3 Nf6 10.Ne5 [10.0-0] 10...Bxb5 11.Qxb5+ Nfd7? 12.0-0 [Better is 12.Qb7!+-] 12...f6 13.Nc6 [Again 13.Qb7+- ] 13...Nxc6 14.Qxc6 Rc8 15.Qa4?! [I just flat out missed 15.Qxe6+ Qe7 16.Qxe7+ Bxe7 17.Rxa7+- and White is up two solid pawns

for the endgame.] 15...Rc7 16.Bd2 Rb7 17.Nc3 Be7 [17...Kf7 18.Qa6+/-] 18.Rfb1 0-0? [Black played much faster than I did, using only 35 seconds total for all his moves. This blunder took only one second. If 18...Rxb1+ 19.Rxb1+- and White has a comfortable position.] 19.Rxb7 Black resigns 1-0

85 – Sawyer 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.Nc3 Queens Gambit leads to open play on the board. White offers a pawn on the queenside after 1.d4 d5 2.c4 dxc4. If Black keeps the pawn, he lags behind in development. White could win the gambit pawn back with 3.Qa4+, but other moves are better. What a deal! The White attack flows from left to right. It starts on the queenside. The focus shifts to the four squares in the middle of the board. If you don't fight for the center, you suffer in battle. Beware of combinations. Many pieces remain on the board with open lines. Tactics flow easily. If White controls the center, the attack aims toward the kingside. In this game White builds up a direct attack on the Black king. The assault was so fierce that the monarch fled to the queenside. Eventually White promoted a pawn. Then his two queens quickly mated Black. Sawyer - subamaya, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 04.12.2012 begins 1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 e6 3.c4 Nf6 4.Nc3 dxc4 5.e3 b6 6.Bxc4 Bb7 7.Be2 [There is no need to retreat the bishop. 7.0-0+/=] 7...Bb4 8.Bd2? [Missing 8.Qa4+! Nc6 9.Bb5 Bxc3+ 10.bxc3 Qd6 11.Ba3 Qd7 12.Ne5+-] 8...Bxc3 9.bxc3 Nbd7 10.0-0 0-0 11.Bd3 Re8 12.Re1 Rc8 13.e4 c5? [13...Nc5!=] 14.e5 Nd5 15.Qe2 [Now is a good time for 15.Bxh7+! Kxh7 16.Ng5+ Kg8 17.Qh5 Nf8 18.Qxf7+ Kh8 19.Re4+-] 15...Qc7 16.Qe4 g6 17.Qh4 c4 18.Bc2 Qd8 19.Bg5 f6? [19...Qc7 20.Qh6+/-] 20.exf6 N7xf6 21.Ne5 Qe7 22.Ng4 Rf8 23.Nxf6+ [23.Be4!+-] 23...Nxf6 24.Re3 Rf7 25.Rae1 Bd5 26.Re5 [26.Rh3!+-] 26...Qf8 27.R1e3 h5? [27...Nh5 28.f3+/=] 28.Bxg6 Rg7 29.Bh6 Rxg6 30.Bxf8 Rxf8 31.Rg5 Kg7 32.Ree5 Nd7 33.Rxg6+ Kxg6 34.Rg5+ Kf7 35.Qxh5+ Ke7 36.Qh7+ Kd6 37.Qg7 Rf6 38.h4 Rf8 39.h5 a5 40.h6 e5 41.dxe5+ Kc5 42.e6 Rxf2 43.Kxf2 Nf8 44.Qxf8+ Kc6 45.e7

b5 46.e8Q+ Kb6 47.Rxd5 b4 48.Qb5+ Kc7 49.Qe7+ Kc8 50.Qbb7# Black checkmated 1-0

86 – Bachmann 4.e3 b5 5.a4 b4 Black takes on some risk in the Queens Gambit Accepted when he tries to keep the extra pawn with an early ...b5. White almost always regains the pawn with an excellent position, but one has to play good moves. Here Black was rated about 500 points higher and managed to outplayed his opponent and win the game between Guilherme De Borba and Axel Bachmann. De Borba (2143) - Bachmann (2624), 4th Floripa Open 2018 Florianopolis BRA (6.11), 22.01.2018 begins 1.d4 d5 2.c4 dxc4 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.e3 b5 5.a4 b4 6.Bxc4 e6 7.0-0 Be7 8.b3 0-0 9.Bb2 Bb7 10.Nbd2 c5 11.Rc1 cxd4 12.Nxd4 Nbd7 13.N2f3 Nc5 14.Qe2 [14.Ne5=] 14...Rc8 15.Rfd1 Qa5 16.Nb5 Nfe4 17.Nd2 a6 18.Nxe4 Nxe4 19.Nd4 [19.Qg4=] 19...Nc3 20.Bxc3 bxc3 21.Nc2 [21.f4 Rcd8=/+] 21...Rfd8 22.Rxd8+ Rxd8 23.Rd1 Rd2 24.Rxd2 cxd2 25.Qd3 [25.Qd1 Bd6-/+] 25...Be4 Black queens or wins at least a piece. 0-1

87 – Rabiega 4.e3 Bg4 5.Bxc4 Three of the four knights get pinned and captured in this sharp battle. Black's queenside bishop went to 4...Bg4 and 8...Bxf3 in this Queens Gambit Accepted. White won a pawn after 10.Bxc6, but it resulted in the loss of tempi. Black counter attacked and won after 20...Bxc3+ in the game between Rasmus Svane and Robert Rabiega. Svane (2587) - Rabiega (2514), Lasker 150 Blitz Swiss Berlin GER (5.2), 28.04.2018 begins 1.Nf3 d5 2.d4 Nf6 3.c4 dxc4 4.e3 Bg4 5.Bxc4 e6 6.Nc3 Nc6 7.Bb5 Bd6 [7...Be7 8.h3 Bh5 9.Qa4 Bxf3 10.gxf3 0-0=] 8.Qa4 Bxf3 9.gxf3 0-0 10.Bxc6 bxc6 11.Qxc6 Rb8 12.Rg1 [12.f4 Nd5 13.Nxd5 exd5 14.0-0 Be7=] 12...g6 [12...Bxh2 13.Rg2=] 13.Qa4 c5 14.dxc5 Bxc5 15.Qc2 Nd5 16.Nxd5 Qxd5 17.Bd2 [17.Qe2 Bd6=/+] 17...Rfc8 18.Bc3 Bb4 19.Qe4 [19.Ke2 Qb5+ 20.Kd2 Rc5-/+] 19...Rxc3 20.bxc3 [20.Qxd5 Rd3+ 21.Ke2 Rxd5-+] 20...Bxc3+ 21.Kf1 Qxe4 22.fxe4 Bxa1 23.Rg5 e5 Black won a piece due to the pin on c3. 0-1

88 – Matlakov 4.e3 e6 5.Bxc4 Black's Queens Gambit Accepted provoked an attack. He got more than he bargained for when White sacrificed a piece for a mating attack. Bold play reminds me of Mikhail Tal played in his prime. Tactical training tools allow grandmasters Maxim Matlakov and Evgeniy Najer to play at high levels. Tal had to dream up combinations on his own. Matlakov (2730) - Najer (2699), 33rd ECC Open 2017 Antalya TUR (3.3), 10.10.2017 begins 1.Nf3 d5 2.d4 Nf6 3.c4 dxc4 4.e3 e6 5.Bxc4 c5 6.0-0 Nbd7 7.Nc3 a6 8.e4 b5 9.Bb3 cxd4 10.Nxd4 b4?! [This is provocative. Normal moves would be 10...Bb7= or 10...Bc5=] 11.Na4 Bb7 12.Bxe6!? [12.f3+/=] 12...fxe6 13.Nxe6 Qa5 14.Bf4 Rc8 15.Qb3 [15.Re1] 15...Nh5? [15...Bxe4!=/+] 16.Ng5 Nxf4 17.Qf7+ Kd8 18.Qxf4 Rg8 [18...Rc6 19.Nf7+ Ke8 20.Nxh8 Rf6 21.Qg4 Qxa4 22.e5+/=] 19.Rad1 Bc6 20.e5 h6? [20...Be7 21.Nc5 Bxc5 22.e6 Rc7 23.exd7 Bxd7 24.Ne6+ Kc8 25.Qf7+-] 21.Nf7+ Ke8 22.Qf5 [Also strong is 22.Qc4!+-] 22...Be7 [22...Bd5 23.e6 Nf6 24.b3 Qb5 25.Qg6 Ke7 26.Rfe1 Rc6 27.Ne5 Rd6 28.Qf7+ Kd8 29.Qa7+-] 23.Qg6 Qxa4 [23...Kf8 24.Nd6 Bxd6 25.Qxd6+ Ke8 26.Qe6+ Kd8 27.Qxg8+ Kc7 28.Qxg7+-. Instead of this, White has a mate in two.] 24.Ng5+! [followed by 25.Ne6 mate.]1-0

89 – Saulin 5…c5 6.0-0 a6 Queens Gambit Accepted leads to wide open positions. Quick assaults are always possible in such situations. Aggressive players race to be the first to push a winning attack. Black plans to develop quickly and counter-attack the center. In this game, White was too quick with 12.e4 and collapsed in the game Egor Gubsky vs Dmitri Saulin. Gubsky (2303) - Saulin (2376), TCh-RUS Major League 2018 Sochi, 08.05.2018 begins 1.d4 d5 2.c4 dxc4 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.e3 e6 5.Bxc4 c5 6.0-0 a6 7.Qe2 Nc6 8.Rd1 Qc7 9.a4 Be7 10.Nc3 0-0 11.dxc5 Bxc5 [Now White

weakens f2 and h2.] 12.e4? [12.b3=; 12.Bd3=] 12...Ng4! 13.Rf1? [13.Be3 Nxe3 14.fxe3 Bd7-/+] 13...Nd4! 0-1

90 – Over-Rated 6…a6 7.Bb3 Why did a computer rated 3025 play an opening that led to a draw by repetition? In my Queens Gambit Accepted blitz game vs Over-Rated, we followed the typical play where White's best choice is to repeat moves. Not that I complained. I gladly accepted the rating points. But this chess engine did not play like this all the time or it would not have been rated 3025. Was I just lucky it played this line? Yes. In recent years the Queen's Gambit Accepted has increased in popularity and in theoretical playability as near as I can tell. It is closely related to the Petroff Defence, and indeed some lines transpose exactly to each other. When I was young, neither of these openings were considered good. Grandmasters did not usually play them. Computers have proved both those openings fully playable at the highest level. The game below led to a classic Isolated Queen Pawn opening by move nine. White pushed for the tactical break of 12.d5. I expected to get crushed at any moment. With each move I just dealt with the issue. I defended what needed to be defended. Next thing I know, White is forcing perpetual check! Of course if Black wanted to play for a win, it was necessary to play 11...Na5. Then the game would go on. Over-Rated (3025) - Sawyer (1916), ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 03.05.2014 begins 1.d4 d5 2.c4 dxc4 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.e3 e6 5.Bxc4 c5 6.0-0 a6 [This is the basic position of the main line. White chooses one of 9 popular options listed in my database, which also has 10 other rarely played choices.] 7.Bb3 Nc6 8.Nc3 cxd4 9.exd4 Be7 10.Re1 0-0 11.a3 b5 [11...Na5 12.Bc2= is more common.] 12.d5 exd5 13.Nxd5 Nxd5 14.Bxd5 Bb7 15.Bf4 Bf6 16.Bd6 [Almost everyone plays 16.Rc1=; though the best move might be 16.Re2! protecting b2 and threatening to double up on a file.] 16...Re8 17.Bxf7+ Kxf7 18.Qb3+ Kg6 19.Qd3+ [White could try 19.Rxe8

Qxe8 20.Qd3+ Kf7 21.Re1= but the game would probably still end in a perpetual check.] 19...Kf7 20.Qb3+ Kg6 21.Qd3+ Kf7 22.Qb3+ [Game drawn by repetition] 1/2-1/2

Book 6: Chapter 3 – Albin Counter Gambit 2.c4 e5 Less Popular Lines Black boldly gambits a pawn to grab the initiative. We begin with games where White initially declines the e5 pawn.

91 – Crompton 3.Nc3 dxc4 John Crompton won an Albin Counter Gambit but check this out. Black had a fantastic faster win. You always want to look for two things when it's your move: every check and every capture. He could have played a check and then two captures with check. Black can win three pieces in a row by force on move nine. That doesn't happen every day! thuyhien2012 (1646) - Crompton (1631), Live Chess Chess.com, 03.01.2018 begins 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e5 3.Nc3 dxc4 4.dxe5 Qxd1+ 5.Nxd1 Nc6 6.Nf3 Bg4 7.Bf4 0-0-0 8.h3 Bf5!? [8...Bxf3 9.gxf3 Nge7=/+] 9.Ne3? [Now d2 is unprotected. Better was 9.a3=] 9...Be4 [Black could have won three pieces with a check: 9...Bb4+! 10.Nd2 Bxd2+ 11.Kd1 Bxe3+ 12.Ke1 Bxf4+] 10.Nxc4 Nb4 11.Rc1 Nxa2 12.Rd1 Rxd1+ 13.Kxd1 Nb4 14.e3 Bc5 15.Nfd2 [15.Ng5=] 15...Bc2+ 16.Kc1 Bg6 [16...Ne7=/+] 17.Be2 [17.Nb3=] 17...Nd3+ 18.Bxd3 Bxd3 19.Rd1 Ne7 20.f3 Ng6 21.g4 Nxf4 22.exf4 Rd8 23.b3 b5 [23...Bd4-/+] 24.Na5? [24.Nb2 Be3-/+] 24...Ba3# 0-1

92 – Santos 3.Nc3 exd4 4.Qxd4 Albin Counter Gambit won again! A king hunt leads to a quick checkmate. Jose Alves Santos defeats Jose Velho Guerreiro with the Albin Counter Gambit in early 2017. White is in trouble on move eight. He lasted only ten more moves before checkmate. Guerreiro tried 3.Nc3. Black sacrificed a pawn for a big lead in development. The White king was on the run by move nine. It's good to centralize the king in the endgame, but it's fatal to do so in the opening. Later, the rating of Jose Santos rose to 2208. Guerreiro - Santos (2193), Portugal Open Rapid 2017 Lisbon, 11.02.2017 begins 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e5 3.Nc3 exd4 4.Qxd4 Nc6 5.Qxd5 Be6 6.Qxd8+ [6.Bg5 Bxd5 7.Bxd8 Bxg2 8.Bxg2 Rxd8 9.Bxc6+ bxc6=] 6...Rxd8 7.e4 [7.Bf4 Bxc4 8.Bxc7 Rd7 9.Bf4 Nb4 10.Rc1 Nxa2=] 7...Nb4 8.a3 [8.Nd5 Nc2+ 9.Kd2 Nxa1 10.Bd3 Bd6-+] 8...Nc2+ 9.Ke2 Nxa1 [9...Bxc4+ 10.Kf3 Bxf1-+] 10.Kf3 [10.Nd5 Rc8 11.b4 c6-+] 10...Nb3 11.Bg5 Nd2+ 12.Bxd2 Rxd2 13.Nge2 [13.b4 c5-+] 13...Rd3+ 14.Kf4 Nf6 15.Ng3 g5+ 16.Kxg5 Rg8+ 17.Kxf6 Rg6+ 18.Ke5 Bd6# 0-1

93 – Blockader 3.Nc3 exd4 4.Qxd4 When you play power chess moves, you win more often. Many moves are playable but not powerful. What is a power chess move? It has these three qualities: 1. The power chess move threatens to win material or space. 2. The power chess move limits your opponent's options. 3. The power chess move is sound and does not lose by force. In my Albin-Counter Gambit game against "Blockader", White chooses a line that is playable in 3.Nc3. This is not so powerful as 3.dxe5. White's temporary pawn sacrifice on c4 became permanent. Eventually Black gets four connected passed pawns in a bishop ending that no blockader could stop. Blockader - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 20.11.2012 begins 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e5 3.Nc3 [Developing the knight is playable but not powerful. White had to know that 3.dxe5+/= is the correct move, but he chose to avoid it.] 3...exd4 4.Qxd4 dxc4 [4...Nc6 Black could play a gambit with 5.Qxd5 Be6 6.Qxd8+ Rxd8=] 5.Qxd8+ Kxd8 6.e4 Be6 7.Bf4 c6 [7...Nf6= looks playable, but I was trying to greedily hold onto the c4 pawn.] 8.0-00+ Ke8 9.Nf3 b5 10.Ne5?! [10.Nd4+/= threatening to regain the pawn with Bxb8/Nxc6, if a good opportunity presents itself.] 10...Nf6 11.a3 Nfd7 12.Be2 Nxe5 13.Bxe5 Nd7 14.Bg3 Bc5 15.f4 f6 16.Kc2 Rd8 17.Rd2 Ke7 18.Rhd1 Nb6 19.f5 Bf7 20.Bf3 Rxd2+ 21.Rxd2 Rd8 22.Bc7? [22.Rxd8 Kxd8-/+] 22...Rxd2+ 23.Kxd2 Nd7 24.g4 Be8 25.h4 Ne5 26.Bxe5 fxe5 27.h5 h6 28.Ne2 Kf6 29.Ng3 Kg5 30.Ke2? [Relatively best was 30.Ne2 Bd4 31.Kc2 c5-+] 30...a5 31.Nf1 Bd4 32.a4 Bxb2 33.axb5 cxb5 34.Nd2 Bf7 35.Kd1 Bd4 36.Kc2 Kf4 37.Bd1 b4 38.Kb1 b3 39.Nf3 a4 40.Nxd4 exd4 41.Kb2 c3+ 42.Kc1 Kxe4 43.Bc2+ d3 44.Bd1 a3 45.Bxb3 Bxb3 46.Kb1 d2 47.f6 d1Q# White is checkmated 0-1

94 – Sawyer 3.cxd5 Qxd5 4.Nc3 I played in the 2012 Space Coast Open. Then I returned home to annotate those games. But after my tournament experience of solid slow play, I felt like trying sharp openings in blitz games. In one such three minute game I played the Albin-Counter Gambit (1.d4 d5 2.c4 e5). I found it notable that during the recent tournament, no one played 1.d4 vs me. Usually White accepts the gambit with 3.dxe5. With that White tries to gain a strong initiative before Black regains the pawn. In this game, White just traded pawns with 3.cxd5. Black quickly got a good position. sawizard - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 03.05.2012 begins 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e5 3.cxd5 Qxd5 4.Nc3 [4.dxe5 Qxd1+ 5.Kxd1 Nc6 6.Nf3 Bg4 7.Bf4 Nge7 8.Nbd2 Ng6 9.Bg3 0-0-0 10.Kc2 Bb4 11.Rd1 Rhe8 12.a3 Bxd2 13.Rxd2 Rxd2+ 14.Kxd2=; or 4.Nf3 Nc6 Chigorin Defence] 4...Qxd4 5.Qxd4 exd4 6.Nb5 Bb4+ 7.Bd2 Bxd2+ 8.Kxd2 Na6 9.Nxd4 Bd7 [9...Nf6!=/+ appears to be the best move.] 10.Rd1? [10.e4=] 10...0-0-0 [10...c5!-/+] 11.Kc1 [11.e3] 11...Nf6 12.f3 c5 13.Nc2 Be6 14.b3 Rxd1+ 15.Kxd1 Nd5 16.Kd2 Rd8 17.Kc1 Nc3 18.Kb2? Nd1+ 19.Ka3? Nf2 [White has a strong mate threat with 19...Rd2!-+] 20.e4 Nxh1 21.Bxa6 bxa6 22.Ne2? Nf2? 23.Nc3 Nd3 24.Ne3 Nb4 25.f4 f6 26.f5 Bf7 27.Ka4? Rd3 28.Ncd1 Nc2 29.Nxc2 Rxd1 30.b4 Rd2 31.Ne3 cxb4?! [Better is 31...Rxa2# mate] 32.Kxb4 Bxa2 33.h3 Re2 34.Nd5 Bxd5 35.exd5 Rxg2 01

95 – Sawyer 3.dxe5 d4 4.Qa4+ The Albin-Counter Gambit is Black's most aggressive choice after 1.d4 d5 2.c4. Black has tried many second moves. According to my database, they all score 42% to 45% for Black. The one exception is 2...Nf6 which scores only 27%. Let’s review the options. 2...c6 Slav Defence (Very popular at all levels in recent years) 2...e6 Queen's Gambit Declined (Historically the most popular) 2...dxc4 Queen's Gambit Accepted (Less popular but sound) 2...e5!? Albin Counter Gambit (Our featured gambit here) 2...Nc6 Chigorin Defence (Dynamically balanced and good) 2...Bf5 Baltic Defence (Offbeat but still fairly playable) 2...Nf6 Marshall Defence (Chosen by weak players who lose) The Albin's counter attacking thrust is 2...e5!? This somewhat resembles a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit reversed. The Albin scores quite well in actual practice. If you play it frequently and know it well, you will win many games. The downside is that games which are not won will more often be lost than drawn. The overall winning percentage is the same as other lines. Here is a blitz game vs a weaker computer. Somehow my rooks got onto the "7th rank". I know when Black does it in algebraic notation it is technically the 2nd rank, but the concept is called “Rooks on the 7th rank”. From there White's demise was quick. mscp - Sawyer, Internet Chess Club 2011 begins 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e5 3.dxe5 d4 4.Qa4+?! [White does best with 4.Nf3 Nc6 with many 5th move options.] 4...Nc6 5.Nf3 Nge7 6.g3 Ng6 7.Bg2 Bb4+ 8.Bd2 Bxd2+ 9.Nfxd2?! [The natural 9.Nbxd2 must be better.] 9...Bd7 10.Qa3 Ngxe5

11.0-0 Qe7 12.Qxe7+ Kxe7 13.f4 Ng4 14.Nb3 Ne3 15.Bxc6 Bxc6 16.Rc1 Rad8 17.Na5 Rhe8 18.Nxc6+ bxc6 19.b4 Kf6 20.Nd2 d3 21.exd3 Rxd3 22.Nf3 Nf5 23.Ne5 Rd2 24.Nxc6? [24.Rd1 was correct.] 24...Ree2 25.Re1? Rg2+ 26.Kh1 Rxh2+ 27.Kg1 Rdg2+ 28.Kf1 Nxg3# White is checkmated 0-1

96 – Gilster 4.f4 Nc6 5.h3 f6 Once in a while I break forth with an Albin Counter Gambit. I knew a few lines pretty well and other lines not at all. In the three minute blitz game Gilster - Sawyer, my ICC opponent surprised me with 4.f4!? I usually play blitz at a pace of 2-3 seconds per move. As soon as I played 4...Nc6 5.h3? f6, I realized that I had missed the powerful reply 5...Qh4+! All was not lost of course. I still had a good position. The second time I was surprised by a blunder I did find the correct answer: a Smothered Mate of sorts. As I recall there is a similar mate in the Budapest Gambit. Open aggressive play is often rewarded with such beautiful quickies. Gilster - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 01.09.2012 begins 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e5 3.dxe5 d4 4.f4 Nc6 5.h3? f6 [Not a bad move, but I played too fast. One second later I thought of the winning move 5...Qh4+! Not as good would be 5...Bb4+?! That works only if White misses 6.Kf2!+/=] 6.Nf3 fxe5 7.fxe5 Nge7 [Better was 7...Nxe5! 8.Nxe5 Qh4+ 9.Kd2 Qf4+ 10.e3 dxe3+ 11.Kc2 Qxe5-/+] 8.Bf4 Ng6 9.Bg3 Bf5 10.h4 Qe7! 11.a3 Ngxe5 12.Nxe5 Nxe5 13.Nd2 [This shortens the game. Maybe 13.Qb3 0-0-0-+] 13...Nd3#! White is checkmated 0-1

97 – Crompton 4.a3 Bf5 5.Bf4 Albin Counter Gambit resembles a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit in reverse. John Crompton wins this sharp chess opening. Black keeps his opponent so busy dealing with tactical threats that White never moves the e2 pawn and never castles. A quick mate follows. syd77 (1688) - Crompton (1660), Live Chess Chess.com, 31.01.2018 begins 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e5 3.dxe5 d4 4.a3 Bf5 5.Bf4 [5.Nf3 Nc6 6.b4+/-] 5...Nc6 6.Nd2 f6 7.Ngf3 fxe5 [7...g5 8.Bg3 h5=] 8.Nxe5 Nxe5 [8...Nf6 9.Qa4+/=] 9.Bxe5 Nf6 [9...Qd7 10.Qb3+/-] 10.Nf3 [10.Qb3+/-] 10...c5 11.b4 Ng4 [11...cxb4 12.Bxd4 bxa3=] 12.bxc5 [12.Bf4+/=] 12...Nxe5 13.Nxe5 Qa5+ 14.Qd2 Qxc5 15.f4 [15.Nf3=] 15...Bd6 [15...Be4=/+] 16.Nf3 [16.Qb4 Qxb4+ 17.axb4 Bxb4+ 18.Kf2 Bd2=/+] 16...0-0-0 17.Qxd4 [17.Qb2 Qa5+ 18.Qd2 Qxd2+ 19.Nxd2 Bxf4-/+] 17...Qa5+ 18.Nd2

[18.Qd2 Qb6-+] 18...Bc5 19.Qe5 [19.Qb2 Rxd2 20.Qxd2 Bf2+!-+] 19...Qxd2# 0-1

98 – GiorgosY 4.a3 Nc6 5.f4 I did Chessimo exercises on Tactics, Endgames and Strategy. The morning before I played this game, I trained on Chessimo Endgame Module 1, Unit 51, and Exercises 381-390. Exercise number 390 has the exact ending (different squares but same idea) with which I won this game. The opening was an Albin-Counter Gambit where White put together two moves: 4.a3 and 5.f4 which got me into territory where I was more on my own. I knew I had to attack e5 or f4. I chose 5...g5?! This attacked f4. Junior 12 preferred the move 5...f6 to attack e5 in the style of a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit or Dutch Defence Staunton Gambit reversed. GiorgosY - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 23.11.2012 begins 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e5 3.dxe5 d4 4.a3 Nc6 5.f4 g5?! [The best move seems to be a sort of reversed BDG Poehlmann with 5...f6! 6.Nf3 fxe5 7.fxe5 Nge7 8.b4 Ng6=] 6.e3?! [6.fxg5! Bg7 7.Nf3+/=] 6...dxe3 7.Qxd8+ Nxd8? [7...Kxd8 8.fxg5 Nd4 9.Ra2 Bf5=] 8.Bxe3 [8.fxg5!+/-] 8...gxf4 9.Bxf4 Ne7 10.Nd2 Ng6 11.Bg3 Bg7 12.Ngf3 Nc6 13.0-0-0 Ncxe5? 14.Re1 [White wins a pawn by 14.Nxe5 Nxe5 15.Bxe5 Bxe5 16.Re1 f6 17.Nf3 0-0 18.Nxe5 fxe5 19.Rxe5+/-] 14...f6 15.Nxe5 Nxe5 16.Nf3 0-0? [I should have tried 16...Bf5! with the idea 17.Nxe5 Bh6+! 18.Kd1 0-0-0+!=] 17.Nxe5 fxe5 18.Bxe5 Bh6+ [118...Re8 19.Bc3 Rxe1+ 20.Bxe1 Bf5] 19.Kb1 Bf5+ 20.Ka2 c5 21.h3 Rfe8 22.g4 Be6 23.Bd3?! [23.Kb3+/-] 23...b5?! [23...Rad8=] 24.b3?! [Now the position is even for the next 45 moves. 24.Bf6+/-] 24...Rad8 25.Bf5 bxc4 26.Bxe6+ Rxe6 27.bxc4 Rde8 28.Bc3 Re2+ 29.Rxe2 Rxe2+ 30.Kb3 Re3 31.Kc2 Rf3 32.h4 Bf4 33.g5 Rf2+ 34.Kd3 Rf3+ 35.Ke4 Rxc3 36.Kxf4 Rxc4+ 37.Ke5 Rc3 38.Kd5 Rxa3 39.Kxc5 Ra4 40.Kb5 Rg4 41.Ka6 Ra4+ 42.Kb7 a5 43.Kb6 Ra2 44.Kb5 Kg7 45.h5 Rg2 46.Kxa5 Rxg5+ 47.Kb6 Kh6 48.Kc6 Rxh5 49.Rg1 Re5 50.Kd6 Re8 51.Kd7 Re2 52.Rh1+ Kg7 53.Rg1+ Kf7 54.Rh1 Rd2+ 55.Kc6 Kg6 56.Rg1+ Kf6 57.Rh1 Rc2+ 58.Kd5 Rc7 59.Ke4 Rg7 60.Kf4 Ke6 61.Rh6+ Kd5 62.Kf5 Kd4 63.Kf6 Ra7 64.Kg5 Ke3 65.Rf6 Ke4 66.Kh6 Ke5 67.Rf8 Ke6 68.Rh8 Kf6 [Clocks: 0:22-0:32] 69.Rxh7?

[White allows Black to play a winning combination. 69.Rf8+ leads to a draw on the board, but Black might win on time.] 69...Ra1 70.Kh5 Rh1+ 71.Kg4 Rxh7 White forfeits on time 0-1

99 – Haines 4.e3 Bb4+ 5.Bd2 dxe3 Ray Haines won an Albin Counter Gambit by a crisp attack and no mistakes. White defended with normal looking moves, typical for a player not familiar with established theory in this gambit. Haines carried out a successful direct assault in 23 moves. I included my Queen Pawn book in my Chess Games 1.d4 Series: 5 books in 1. This is a collection of five books in one. Those 5 books are Queen Pawn, Indian Defences, Rare First Moves, Queens Knight, and Bird & Dutch with 500 games. The books are much like this book. They discuss chess situations, players, game issues, styles, stories, opinions, passions, anecdotes, commentary, and theory. Chess Games 1.d4 Series is a companion volume to Chess Games 1.e4 Series. 1964Buick (1576) - Haines (1600), Live Chess Chess.com, 13.08.2017 begins 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e5 3.dxe5 d4 4.e3 [4.Nf3 is the standard move.] 4...Bb4+ 5.Bd2 dxe3 6.Qa4+ [White should play 6.fxe3 Qh4+ 7.g3 Qe4 8.Nf3=; 6.Bxb4 exf2+ 7.Ke2 fxg1N+! 8.Ke1 Qh4+ 9.Kd2 Nc6-+] 6...Nc6 7.Bxb4 exf2+ 8.Kxf2 Qh4+ 9.g3 Qd4+ 10.Ke1 [10.Kg2 Qxb2+ 11.Be2 Qxa1-/+] 10...Qe4+ 11.Ne2? [11.Kf2 Qxh1 12.Bg2 Qxh2 13.Nf3 Qh6-/+] 11...Qxh1 12.Nbc3 Bh3 13.Kf2 Qxh2+ 14.Ke1 Bxf1 15.Kxf1 0-0-0 16.Rd1 [If 16.Bc5 Qh1+ 17.Bg1 Nge7-+] 16...Nh6 17.Bc5 Ng4 18.Nd5 Qh1+ 19.Ng1 Nh2+ 20.Ke2 Qg2+ 21.Bf2 [21.Kd3 Rxd5+ 22.cxd5 Qxd5+ 23.Kc2 Qxc5+ 24.Kb1 Rd8-+] 21...Ng4 22.Ne7+ Nxe7 23.Qxa7 Nc6 0-1

100 – Sawyer 4.e3 Bb4+ 5.Bd2 The Albin-Counter Gambit 4.e3 line is known to be bad because of a famous classic trap. Does anyone ever fall for that trap? The first time I took the Albin Counter Gambit seriously was in the winter of 1972-73. I was in college when I came to visit some family who lived at that time in Fort Fairfield, Maine. My friend Ray Haines led the local high school chess club. We decided to have me play a 9-game simultaneous exhibition against the club. None of us were very good, but we were very enthusiastic! I had only played tournament chess for a few months. My rating was under 1500. This was my first simul. My head was dizzy playing. I never kept the game scores, but I have one special memory. In the simultaneous exhibition I scored +3 =3 -3. One kid tried the AlbinCounter Gambit. That game began 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e5 3.dxe5 d4. I wandered into the only trap my opponent knew with 4.e3? Bb4+ 5.Bd2 dxe3 6.Bxb4 exf2+ 7.Ke2 fxg1=Q? (Correct is a knight check with 7...fxg1=N+!) 8.Rxg1? (White matched Black blunder for blunder. 8.Qxd8+! escaped) 8...Bg4+ won the queen. After that debacle, I fell in love with the gambit myself. It took me years to dare to play it. When I do play it, I usually enjoy it. In my game vs “alain” White gave back the pawn after 4.e3 Bb4+ 5.Bd2 dxe3 6.fxe3 Qh4+. Then White dropped the Exchange. The game did not end instantly when I was ahead in material. Of course I still had to force the win. I did what I could. alain - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 02.06.2012 begins 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e5 3.dxe5 d4 4.e3 Bb4+ 5.Bd2 dxe3 6.fxe3 [The classic trap is 6.Bxb4? exf2+! 7.Ke2 fxg1N+! 8.Rxg1 Bg4+ wins the queen.] 6...Qh4+ 7.g3 Qe4 8.Qf3 Bxd2+ 9.Nxd2 Qxe5 10.Bd3 [10.0-0-0 Nc6=] 10...Nf6 11.Ne2?! Nc6 12.Nc3 0-0 [Stronger is 12...Bg4! 13.Qf4 0-0-0 14.Qxe5

Nxe5 15.Be2 Nd3+ 16.Bxd3 Rxd3-+] 13.0-0 Bh3 14.Rf2 Ng4 15.Qf5 g6 16.Qxe5 Ncxe5 17.Bf1 Nxf2 18.Kxf2 Bxf1 19.Kxf1 Rad8 [Black has won the Exchange.] 20.Nd5 c6 21.Ne7+? Kg7 22.Ne4 Nxc4 23.Nc5 Nxe3+ 24.Kf2 Nd5 [Most accurate is 24...Nc2!-+] 25.Nxd5 Rxd5 26.Nxb7 Rb8 27.Na5 Rxa5 0-1

3.dxe5 d4 4.Nf3 Nc6 We are finally off the dirt road and on to the paved highway of the Albin Counter Gambit. And yes, it is possible to defend d4 with 4…c5. However that continuation is considered too slow to be reliable. Black wants to develop a piece. First us consider some less common fifth moves for White.

101 – Willy809 5.Bf4 Nge7 6.e3 Albin Counter Gambit is one of my most successful defenses to 1.d4. This is especially true in blitz play. Both sides must employ attacking and defending tactics simultaneously. My Internet Chess Club opponent Willy809 and I had played 11 times. My score was +9 -2 in a variety of sharp openings. Willy809 came right after my king. This was a smart thing to do in blitz. His aggressive play was not always accurate, but in a three minute game he was potentially dangerous. White played the natural move 5.Bf4. Black ganged up on this bishop and the e5 pawn with 5...Nge7 and 6...Ng6. White had weak doubled pawns on e3 and e5. Black got free development and regained the gambit pawn with a good position. White continued to press against my king in the middlegame and I fought back. His checkmate did not work, but my mate did. Willy809 (1733) - Sawyer (1960), ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 28.06.2014 begins 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e5 3.dxe5 d4 4.Nf3 Nc6 5.Bf4 [More common are either 5.g3 or 5.a3] 5...Nge7 6.e3 Ng6 7.Bg3 Bb4+ 8.Nbd2 dxe3 9.fxe3 Bg4 [Even better may be 9...Qe7! 10.a3 Bc5=+] 10.Be2 Bxf3 11.Bxf3 Ncxe5 12.Qa4+ c6 13.0-0-0 [If 13.Qxb4? Nd3+ wins the White queen.] 13...Bxd2+ [13...0-0=] 14.Rxd2 Qe7 15.h4 [15.Rhd1=] 15...0-0 16.h5 Nxf3 17.gxf3 Ne5 18.Qc2 Nxf3 19.Re2 Rfe8 20.Qf5 [20.Qc3 Qe4-/+] 20...Nd4 21.exd4 Qxe2 22.Rf1 Qe3+ 23.Kc2 Qxg3! [I thought about swapping into

a winning ending with 23...Qe4+ 24.Qxe4 Rxe4-+ but then I saw he did not have a mate, I grabbed his bishop to be up a rook.] 24.Qxf7+ Kh8 25.h6 Qg6+ 26.Qxg6 hxg6 27.hxg7+ Kxg7 28.Rg1 Re2+ 29.Kd3 Rae8 30.d5 c5 31.Rg3 Kf6 32.b3 Kf5 33.a3 Kf4 34.Rxg6 R8e3# [White is checkmated] 0-1

102 – Schreck 5.Nbd2 Be6 6.b3 I won a short Albin Counter Gambit vs Eugene Schrecongost in a five minute blitz game at Lycoming College in Williamsport, Pennsylvania. I played 17 games live vs "Schreck". Here is one of 16 that I won. None lasted more than 28 moves; all short and sweet, including the one Schreck won. People ask what I play as Black vs 1.d4 and vs closed openings such as 1.c4 and 1.Nf3. My choices can be broken down pretty into six options. Each one I have played about 1000 times if you count tournament games, club games, correspondence games and blitz games. Here are my typical choices in no particular order: the Albin-Counter Gambit 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e5, the Slav Defence 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6, the King's Indian Defence 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 and ...d6, the Gruenfeld Defence 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 and ...d5, the Dutch Defence 1.d4 f5, and the Queens Knight Defence 1.d4 Nc6. In our game below, White chose the flexible 5.Nbd2. After this Luc Henris in his book "The Complete Albin Counter-Gambit" gives extensive coverage on two main lines 5...Nge7 and 5...Bg4 as well as many other lines such as 5...f6!? We continued here 5...Be6 6.b3 after which Henris gives "6...f6!? 7.exf6 Qxf6 - Alexander". In our game I opted for 6...Bb4. Then we were on our own in blitz. Schrecongost was rated from the 1500s to the 1700s. Schrecongost (1636) - Sawyer (2010), Game/5 Williamsport PA, 11.02.1998 begins 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e5 3.dxe5 d4 4.Nf3 Nc6 5.Nbd2 Be6 6.b3 Bb4 [6...f6!?=] 7.g3 [7.Bb2+/=] 7...Bc3 8.Rb1 [8.Ba3 Bxa1 9.Qxa1 Nge7] 8...Bf5 [8...Qe7=/+] 9.Ba3 Bxb1 10.Qxb1 Nge7 11.Bg2 Ng6 12.0-0 Bxd2 13.Nxd2 Ngxe5 14.Nf3 [14.f4!+-] 14...Nxf3+ 15.Bxf3 Qd7 16.Rd1 [Looks like White picks up a pawn with 16.Qe4+! Qe6 17.Qf4 h5 (17...0-0-0? 18.Bg4+-) 18.Qxc7+/=] 16...0-0-0 17.e3 d3 18.Kg2?! [18.Bb2!?] 18...Ne5 19.Bb2 Nxf3 20.Kxf3 Qf5+ [I missed the good king hunt shot 20...Qc6+

21.Kg4 h5+ 22.Kh3 h4-+] 21.Kg2 f6 22.Bd4 b6 23.Qxd3 Qxd3 24.Rxd3 c5 25.Kf3 cxd4 26.Ke2 dxe3 27.Rxe3 Rhe8 28.Rxe8 Rxe8+ 0-1

103 – Hatch 5.Nbd2 Bg4 6.h3 During the years I was studying for the ministry, I played very little chess. I studied at Glen Cove Bible College from 1974-76. Glen Wilbur, Ed Hatch and I already had USCF ratings when we showed up there. As I recall, they were rated in the 1500s. I was rated just under 1700 at 1687. I was inactive in tournament play. When I returned in 1977, my rating quickly jumped to the 1800s and kept going. Glen Cove Bible College was on beautiful oceanfront property located just north of Rockland, Maine. Years later the school sold the property. They moved to another location and changed the name of the school. After classes one day, we decided to break out a chess set and play a little. Ed Hatch was a fun-loving guy. I was an off the wall player. In our Albin-Counter Gambit 5.Nbd2 Bg4, Ed chose 6.h3 which I believe Tim Harding covered in his Counter Gambits book. In the end one might say that I got a little lucky. I was able to play 11...Nc2+. This looks like mate to the king. In reality it was winning the queen. Hatch - Sawyer, Glen Cove, ME 09.11.1976 begins 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e5 3.dxe5 d4 4.Nf3 Nc6 5.Nbd2 Bg4 [Alternatives are 5...Be6 and 5...Nge7] 6.h3 [More common are 6.a3 or 6.g3] 6...Bh5 [Usually Black plays 6...Bxf3 7.Nxf3 Bb4+ 8.Bd2 Qe7] 7.b3 [7.a3 prevents what followed.] 7...Bb4 8.g4 Bc3 [8...Bg6! is also a good move] 9.Rb1 Bg6 10.Bb2 [10.Ba3 Qd7=/+] 10...Nb4!? [10...Bxb1!-/+] 11.a3? [11.Bg2] 11...Nc2+ 0-1

104 – Davis 6.h3 Bxf3 7.Nxf3 In the 1970s Ron Daniel ran Ron’s Postal Chess Club. My guess is that he was USCF Life member Ronald B. Daniel from Ohio. Anyway, this Ron had some good ideas. As I recall his RPCC went out of business or was sold or taken over by another ancient postal club called "Z!" which stood for Zugzwang. When “Z!” ceased to exist, it folded into APCT run by Jim and Helen Warren. APCT was a much more stable club. The granddaddy of postal clubs was CCLA. It was run by elected officials. CCLA was the main liaison between the US players and the ICCF that ran the World Correspondence Championship. The USCF had postal chess, but they offered fewer events. They seemed to keep most of the entry fees. Other clubs offered prize money if you won a small one section event. Non-USCF clubs held a variety of events (rating class, regional, team, thematic, championships, etc.). Anyway, I played in all six of those clubs. I played a few RPCC events in the mid-1970s. Bob Davis was the father of someone who went to school with my wife. We got in contact with each other and decided to play a four game rated match through RPCC. I won two games and drew two games. In this Albin-Counter Gambit, Black regained the gambit pawn on e5. Chances were equal. White made a tactical error on move 19 allowing me to win material. After that I swapped off all the heavy pieces. This left me up a pawn in an easily won ending. Anders Tejler published it in his APCT column “The Gambiteer”. Andy Tejler took a break from writing on the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit to include a game by me, a future gambiteer myself!

Davis - Sawyer, corr RPCC (4), 26.06.1977 begins 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e5 3.dxe5 d4 4.Nf3 Nc6 5.Nbd2 [Popular are 5.g3 and 5.a3. 5…Bg4 6.h3 Bxf3 7.Nxf3 Bb4+ 8.Bd2 Qe7 9.a3 Bxd2+ 10.Qxd2 0-0-0 11.0-0-0 Nxe5 12.Nxe5 Qxe5 13.e3 c5 14.exd4 Rxd4 15.Bd3 Nf6 16.Rhe1 Qd6 17.Re3 Rd8 18.Kc2 Nd7 19.Qa5? [19.Re4=] 19...Ne5 20.Qd2?! Nxc4 21.Qe2 Nxe3+ 22.Qxe3 Rxd3! 23.Rxd3 Qxd3+ 24.Qxd3 Rxd3 25.Kxd3 Kd7 26.f4 f5 27.g4 g6 28.g5 Kc6 0-1

105 – andrei 5.a3 f6 6.Bf4 g5 In the Albin-Counter Gambit, there is usually the possibility of 5...f6!? This makes the opening in effect a Reversed Blackmar-Diemer Gambit Kaulich. But in the Albin-Counter the gambiteer is playing down a tempo compared to the BDG player. Here is an Albin-Counter Gambit played on Christmas Day 2012. I ventured 5...f6!? If White captures with 6.exf6 Black can choose between 6...Nxf6 or 6...Qxf6. After that White normally chooses between 7.g3 or 7.e3, depending on the exact situation. In our game White chose to play 6.Bf4, a reversed BDG Vienna. I opted for the Hara-Kiri set-up with 6...g5 7.Bg3 g4 and was rewarded with 8.Nh4. Later I remembered that advancing my Albin f-pawn (8...f5!) is usually better in the BDG Vienna (4...Bf5 5.g4 Bg6 6.g5 Nh5 7.f4!) than capturing the e-pawn (8...fxe5 in the Albin or 7.fxe4 in the BDG Vienna). This game was a nice Christmas present. I played early in the morning before anyone else was up, and before any presents were opened. In case you were wondering, I did get an actual Christmas present in 2012. It was the chess engine Houdini 3. andrei - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 25.12.2012 begins 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e5 3.dxe5 d4 4.Nf3 Nc6 5.a3 f6 [Another option is 5...Nge7 6.e3 Bg4 7.exd4 Bxf3 8.gxf3 Qxd4 9.Bd2 Qxe5+ 10. Be2 O-O-O 11.Qc2 Nd4 12.Qe4 Qxe4 13.fxe4 Nc2+ 0-1. vikram9999 - Crompton, chess.com, 23.05.2017] 6.Bf4 [Of course the critical line is 6.exf6 Nxf6 which is a Reversed BDG Kaulich, a move behind. A reasonable continuation might be 7.e3 Bg4 8.Be2 Bxf3 9.Bxf3 Qd7 10.0-0 0-0-0 11.exd4 Nxd4 12.Be3 Nxf3+ 13.Qxf3 Bd6+/= when Black has some compensation for the pawn.] 6...g5 7.Bg3 g4 8.Nh4 fxe5 [8...f5! with the threat of ...Be7 is very strong.] 9.b4 Bg7 [I considered 9...Be7! but rejected it because it fails to win a piece after 10.b5 Bxh4 11.bxc6 however the position is fine, because after 11...Bxg3 12.hxg3 bxc6-/+ Houdini 3 prefers Black.] 10.Nd2? [If White

saves the knight with 10.Qd3 Bf6 11.Nf5 Qd7 12.e4 h5=/+ Black still has a good position.] 10...Bf6 11.b5 Nb8 White resigns [11...Na5!-+] 0-1

106 – Haines 5.a3 Be6 6.e3 Ray Haines played in the Maine Potato Blossom Festival chess tournament. He won this Albin-Counter Gambit vs the long time expert and former state chess champion Roger Morin. "This game was very complex and both sides made mistakes. I could have lost this game, but I won in the end, because of his mistake on move 41. I had only 5 or 6 minutes left on my clock at that time, he had 20 minutes. It is easy to have the computer find mistakes which you had in a tournament game.” “You do not always find the right move because you are pacing your time, so that you do not spend too much time on one move. The time control in this event was game/60. The tournament which I played in in Bangor a few years ago had a time control of 30 moves in 90 minutes, and a second time control of game 30. This longer time control is used in bigger two day tournaments.” “The faster time control used in this tournament was used so we could finish the event in one day… You have to study the game for the best move and pace yourself by the clock. The result can be more than a normal number of mistakes.” Morin - Haines, Potato Blossom Festival Ft Fairfield, Maine (2), 13.07.2013 begins 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e5 3.dxe5 d4 4.Nf3 Nc6 5.a3 Be6 6.e3 dxe3 7.Qxd8+ Rxd8 8.Bxe3 Nge7 9.Bg5 [9.Nc3 Nf5=] 9...h6 10.Bxe7 Bxe7 [10...Kxe7!? 11.Nbd2 g5 12.h3 Bg7=/+] 11.Be2 Na5 12.Nbd2 c5 13.0-0 Nc6 14.Rfd1 0-0 15.Ne4 Bf5 16.Nc3 Bc2 17.Rd5 Nd418.Nxd4 cxd4 19.Nb5 d3 20.Bd1 Rxd5 21.cxd5 Bg5 [21...Bc5!] 22.g3 Bd2 23.d6 Rd8 24.Nd4 f6 25.Bxc2?! [25.Ne6! Rd7 26.Nc5 Rd8 27.Nxb7 Rd7 28.e6+-] 25...dxc2 26.Nxc2 fxe5 27.Rd1 Bg5 28.h4 Bf6 29.Ne3 Kf7 30.a4 Ke6 31.Nc4 Kd7 32.Kg2 Rc8 33.b3 Rc5 34.Kf3 b5 35.axb5 Rxb5 36.Rd3 a5 37.Nd2 Rb4 38.Ne4 a4 [38...Bd8!=] 39.bxa4 Bd8 40.Nc5+ [40.Rd5! Rxa4 41.Rxe5+- and White is up two pawns.] 40...Kc6 41.Ne6? [41.Na6! Rxa4 42.Nb8+ Kb7 43.Rb3+ Kc8 44.Nc6 Bf6 45.Rb6!+/- and White is up

one pawn.] 41...e4+ 42.Ke3 exd3 43.Nxd8+ Kxd6 44.Kxd3 [If 44.Nf7+ Kd5 45.Kxd3 Rb8-+] 44...Rb8 45.Nf7+ Ke6 46.Kc4 Kxf7 47.a5 Ke7 48.Kc5 Kd7 49.a6 Kc8 50.Kc6 Rb1 51.f4 Kb8 52.g4 Rg1 53.g5 Rg4 54.Kd5 Rxh4 55.gxh6 gxh6 56.Ke5 Rh1 0-1

107 – Penullar 5.a3 Bf5 6.b4 Peter Mcgerald Penullar played a nice Albin Counter Gambit 5.a3 line where he won a short game quickly as Black. White chose 4.a3 but transposed into one of the main lines: 4.Nf3 Nc6 5.a3. This line is recommended for White by many opening theoreticians. Penullar avoided the main lines 5...Nge7 and played 5...Bf5. White got good chances, but let them slip. In the end, Peter executed a checkmate against the fianchetto pawn structure similar to a Sicilian Dragon reversed. CaptainJimTKirk - penullar, PFCC U1750 Challenge - Board 3 Chess.com, 21.02.2012 begins 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e5 3.dxe5 d4 4.a3 Nc6 5.Nf3 Bf5 [The main line is 5...Nge7 6.b4 Ng6 7.Bb2 a5 8.b5 Ncxe5 when the position is close to equal.] 6.b4 Qd7 7.g3 [7.e3; 7.Nbd2] 7...0-0-0 8.Bg2 Bh3 [8...f6 9.exf6 Nxf6 10.0-0] 9.0-0 h5 10.Ng5?? [In one move the position goes from winning for White to an advantage for Black. 10.b5! Nb8 11.Qxd4!+-] 10...Bxg2 11.Kxg2 h4 [11...Nxe5!=/+] 12.Bf4 f6 13.exf6 [13.e6! Qe8 14.Nf7+/= would make things more difficult for Black.] 13...Nxf6? [13...gxf6! 14.Nf3 hxg3=/+] 14.Nf3? hxg3 15.hxg3 Qh3+ 16.Kg1 Qh1# 0-1

108 – Penullar 5.a3 Bg4 6.Bg5 An opening such as the Albin Counter Gambit leads to unbalanced positions. There it is sometimes difficult to determine if the gambiteer has enough compensation for the sacrificed material. Both sides make threats and counter-attacks until someone falls to a threat or makes a mistake. One must always be mindful of tactical combinations that can appear at a moment’s notice. In this game Peter Mcgerald Penullar continually battles his opponent. All of a sudden Peter sees a mating net and quickly snares the White king. Joferon2103 - penullar, Asian League 2012 Round 1: Team Indones Chess.com, 15.01.2012 begins 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e5 3.dxe5 d4 4.a3 Nc6 5.Nf3 Bg4 [This bishop move is the most popular, but the main line nowadays is 5...Nge7 6.b4 Ng6 7.Bb2 a5 8.b5 Ncxe5 where Black is close to equality. Material is even. There is disagreement as to which of the four possible captures, if any, produce an advantage. However, players rated over 2400 have scored well with the White pieces.] 6.Bg5 Be7 [Possibly better is the gambit 6...f6 7.exf6 Nxf6 with chances for both sides.] 7.Bxe7 [7.Bf4+/= holding on to e5 has to be a critical test.] 7...Ngxe7 8.h3 Bxf3 9.exf3 Ng6 [Simply 9...Nxe5] 10.Bd3 Ngxe5 11.0-0 Nxd3 12.Qxd3 0-0 13.Nd2 Ne5 14.Qe4 Nc6 15.b4 Re8 16.Qg4 Re2 [Black takes over the initiative.] 17.Ne4 d3 18.Rad1 Ne5 19.Qf4 Ng6 [19...Qe7 protect the Ne5 and threatens to bring over another rook.] 20.Qf5 Nh4?! 21.Qf4? [21.Qd5!+/=] 21...Ng6 22.Qf5 Ra2? 23.Nc3 [Both sides miss the tactic 23.Rxd3! Qxd3? 24.Nf6+ winning the queen.] 23...Rxa3 24.Rxd3 Qf8 25.b5 Ne7 26.Qe4 c6 27.Rfd1 Re8 28.Qd4 Nf5 29.Qd7 g6 30.Qxb7 cxb5 31.Nxb5?! [31.Qxb5+-] 31...Rxd3 32.Rxd3 Qb4 33.Qd5?? [33.Kh2 Qxc4 34.Qd7 Re1=] 33...Re1+ 34.Kh2 Qb1 [The only way White can bust out of the mating net is to give up the queen.] 35.Qxf5 gxf5 0-1

3.dxe5 d4 4.Nf3 Nc6 5.g3 Traditionally White’s main set-up is 5.g3 or 5.Nbd2 and 6.g3. These ideas normally transpose.

109 – Penullar 5.g3 Bf5 6.Nbd2 The Albin Counter Gambit initially looks a lot like a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit with an extra move c2-c4 for the non-gambit player. If Black plays ...f7-f6 hitting the White e5 pawn, then the position takes on even more of a BDG character. In the game below Peter Mcgerald Penullar plays the rare 5...Bf5 which has some similarities to the 6.Bf4 Long Bogo variation of the BDG Bogoljubow. This is especially true when Black follows it up with 8...f6 9.exf6 Nxf6. The game "layarrr" - "penullar" seesawed back and forth. Each side had chances to win or draw. Peter Penullar outplayed his opponent who resigned in the face of unstoppable threats. layarrr - penullar, Merry Christmas! - Board 8 Chess.com, 17.12.2011 begins 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e5 3.dxe5 d4 4.Nf3 Nc6 5.g3 [5.a3 Nge7 6.b4 Ng6 7.Bb2 a5 8.b5 Ncxe5; 5.Nbd2 Nge7 6.Nb3 Ng6 7.Nbxd4 Ngxe5 8.Nxe5 Nxe5] 5...Bf5!? [5...Nge7 6.Bg2 Ng6 7.Bg5 Qd7 8.0-0 h6] 6.Nbd2? [6.Bg2!+/=] 6...Qd7 [Black plans the thematic ...Qd7/...0-0-0/...Bh3. However with White's blunder, Black has 6...Nb4!-/+ and the White king and rook are very susceptible to a fork on c2.] 7.Nb3 0-0-0 8.Bg2 f6! [It is very reasonable for Black to speed up his development in this way.] 9.exf6 Nxf6 10.0-0 Bh3!? [Another idea is 10...h6 11.Bf4 Ne4 and Black has active piece play.] 11.Qc2 h5 12.Bg5 Be7 13.Rfd1 Nh7? [13...Bxg2 14.Kxg2+/-] 14.Bxe7 Nxe7 15.Nfxd4?! [15.Rxd4! Qf5 16.Rxd8+ Rxd8 17.Nfd4 Qg4 18.f3 Qd7 19.Bxh3 Qxh3 20.Qxh7+- and Black is down two pawns and a knight.] 15...Bxg2 16.Kxg2 h4 17.Qe4?? [The queen becomes a target here. Better is to target the Black queen with 17.Nc5!+-] 17...Ng5 18.Qe3 Qh3+? [18...hxg3=/+] 19.Kg1 hxg3 20.Qxg3 Qh5 21.Nb5 Ne6

22.Nxa7+ Kb8 23.Rxd8+ Nxd8? [23...Rxd8=] 24.Nb5 Ne6 25.Rd1?! [25.N3d4+/-] 25...Qxe2 26.Qd3? [Junior 12 gives the best line as 26.Nc3! Qxc4 27.Re1 Nf5 28.Qg6 Nh4 29.Qxe6 Nf3+ 30.Kg2 Nxe1+ 31.Qxe1 Qg4+ 32.Kh1 Qf3+ with a draw by perpetual check.] 26...Qg4+ 27.Kf1 Rxh2 0-1

110 – Cooper 5.g3 Be6 6.Nbd2 Back in 1989 I usually played the Dutch Defence as Black vs everything except 1.e4. In the following game I ventured the Albin-Counter Gambit line. We reached a common position after 8 moves. I chose 5...Be6. That move is reasonable. Other moves along the same diagonal such as 5...Bg4 or 5...Bf5 could reach the same position after 7...Bh3. My opponent was Harold Cooper. We both missed a few good opportunities. Eventually I ended up getting a good position. I obtained lots of compensation for my sacrificed pawn, and then he resigned. Cooper (1599) - Sawyer (2189), corr USCF 89N189 28.12.1989 begins 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e5 3.dxe5 d4 4.Nf3 Nc6 5.Nbd2 Be6 [5...Bg4 and 5...Nge7 are the major alternatives.] 6.g3 Qd7 7.Bg2 Bh3 8.0-0 h5!? [8...Bxg2 or 8...0-0-0 are played more often] 9.Nb3 [9.Bxh3 Qxh3 10.Ng5 Qd7 11.Ndf3+/- favors White, although care must still be given.] 9...h4 10.Bf4?! [10.e6! Bxe6 11.Nfxd4 Rd8 12.Nxe6 Qxe6 13.Qc2+/-] 10...hxg3 11.Bxg3 0-0-0 12.Qd2 f6 [12...Bxg2 13.Kxg2 Nge7=] 13.Rfd1 fxe5 14.Nxe5 Nxe5 15.Bxe5 Bxg2 16.Kxg2 Qh3+ 17.Kh1 Bd6 18.Qxd4 Ne7? [A blunder. Black was fine after 18...Qh5 19.Bg3 Nf6 20.Qxa7 Ne4=] 19.Bxd6? [Missing 19.Qxa7!+-] 19...Rxd6 20.Qf4 Rdh6=/+ 0-1

111 – Kirk 6.Nbd2 Qd7 7.Bg2 Richard Kirk played very well in our 89SS40 section of the 1989 USCF Golden Squires event. Most of the time I had played the Dutch Defence against the closed openings after 1.d4 f5. Sometimes I opted for a more enterprising gambit. In this game I chose the Albin-Counter Gambit. Our game led to sharp play where both kings can be under attack at the same time. It had the feel of a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit Long Bogoljubow 8.0-0-0 variation. I missed my best opportunity in 8...d3! There I would have had good attacking chances. Instead I failed to stop his attack. In our final position Kirk was winning a piece. Kirk (2004) - Sawyer (2033), corr USCF 89SS40, 10.04.1991 begins 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e5 3.dxe5 d4 4.Nf3 Nc6 5.g3 Be6 [5...Nge7 6.Bg2 Ng6 7.0-0 Ngxe5 is the main line today.] 6.Nbd2 Qd7 7.Bg2 0-0-0 8.Qa4 Kb8 [Best is 8...d3! 9.Ng5 Nd4 and now if 10.Qxa7 Nc2+ 11.Kd1 dxe2+ 12.Kxc2? Qd3# checkmate!] 9.Qb3 Nge7 10.Ng5 h6 [10...Na5 11.Qb5+/=] 11.Nxe6 Qxe6 12.f4 g5 [12...f6 13.exf6 gxf6 14.Ne4 Nc8] 13.Ne4 b6? [13...Ng6 14.0-0 gxf4 15.Bxf4+/=] 14.Nc5 Qf5 15.Be4 Qh3 16.Qb5 1-0

112 – Wilbur 5.g3 Bg4 6.Nbd2 A couple dozen Albin Counter Gambits are included in this book. Most were played by me. Here was one of my early efforts in this opening. I played Glen Wilbur in a 1977 postal chess game. Glen was a close childhood friend and my former college roommate. We played an Albin Counter Gambit. That same year Glen served as best man in my wedding. I shall always be grateful to him. As I recall, Glen Wilbur headed up our high school chess team. In my senior year Glen played the board ahead of me when we played against teams from other schools. Glen’s cousin Ronald Robinson won the state high school championship on tie breaks over the higher rated Mike Eldridge. Ronnie was fortunate that there was no provision made to hold playoffs that year. They were all better than me back then. I kept playing and eventually got the highest rating among my old teammates. Wilbur - Sawyer, corr, 22.06.1977 begins 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e5 3.dxe5 d4 4.Nf3 Nc6 5.Nbd2 Bg4 6.g3 Qd7 7.Bg2 0-0-0 8.0-0 Bh3 9.a3 Be7 [9...Bxg2! 10.Kxg2 Nge7 11.b4 Ng6 12.Qa4 Kb8 13.Bb2 Qg4 14.b5 Ncxe5 15.Nxe5 Nxe5 16.Rad1 Bc5=] 10.b4 Bxg2 11.Kxg2 Qf5 12.Bb2 h5 13.b5 [13.Qb1+-] 13...Nxe5 14.Nxd4 Qg6 15.Qa4 Kb8 16.N2b3 [16.N2f3+/-] 16...h4 17.c5 hxg3 18.fxg3? [Correct is 18.hxg3 Ng4 19.Rh1 N8f6 20.Rxh8 Rxh8 21.b6!=. Black meets White's attack with perpetual checks.] 18...Qe4+ [18...Ng4! 19.Nf3 Ne3+ 20.Kg1 Nxf1-/+] 19.Kg1? [19.Rf3 f5=/+] 19...Qe3+ 20.Rf2? [Black is also winning after 20.Kg2 Nf6 21.Bc1 Rxh2+ 22.Kxh2 Nfg4+ 23.Kg2 Qe4+ 24.Rf3 Qh7!-+] 20...Ng4 [Or 20...Rxh2!-+] 21.Raf1 Nxf2 22.Rxf2 Rxh2 23.Kxh2 Qxf2+ 24.Kh3 Qf1+ 25.Kh2 Nf6 26.Nc6+ bxc6 27.Bxf6 Bxf6 28.bxc6 Rh8+ 0-1

113 – Hughes 5.g3 Be6 6.Nbd2 I faced Robert Hughes with a daring Albin Counter Gambit. This game was from one of my last APCT email chess tournaments. How can the Albin Counter Gambit be playable? Because White does little to stop it with his second move 2.c4. What else could be done? White can usually stop the Albin with 2.Nf3. I have transposed to the Albin after 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.c4 e5 4.dxe5, but either side could deviate there. What is the advantage of 2.c4 over 2.Nf3? The move 2.c4 is sharper and gives White more threats in the Queens Gambit Accepted or Declined. Even in the Albin Counter Gambit the pawn on c4 may prove to be very helpful if White can get his strong queenside pawn mass in motion. Hughes and I castled opposite sides. I attacked the White king. As Black I sacrificed a pawn by 8...h5 and 9...h4 combined with 12...Bh3 leading to an eventual mating attack. What happened to the lonely c-pawn? It advanced all the way from c4 to b7 during moves 17-20, only to have White resign after one more move. I had lost to Robert Hughes the previous year in a King's Indian Defence. Then I was higher rated. In 1998 my correspondence rating dropped below 2000. At the same time my Internet Chess Club rating had risen past 2400. My focus, interests and efforts had changed to blitz play. This game turned out to have a pretty nice finish! Hughes (1800) - Sawyer, corr APCT EMN-A-9, 22.01.1998 begins 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e5 3.dxe5 d4 4.Nf3 Nc6 5.g3 Be6 6.Nbd2 Qd7 7.Bg2 0-0-0 8.0-0 h5 [8...Bh3!?] 9.b3 [More aggressive is 9.Qa4! Kb8 10.Ng5 Nxe5 11.Qb3! c6 12.Ndf3+/-] 9...h4 10.Nxh4 Nxe5 11.Ndf3 [11.Ne4!? Bh3 12.Bxh3

Qxh3 13.Ng5 Qd7=] 11...Nxf3+ 12.Nxf3 Bh3 13.Bxh3 Qxh3 14.Bf4? [14.Qc2 f6 15.b4 g5 16.Rd1 Ne7=] 14...f6 15.Qc2 g5 16.Bd2 Bd6 17.c5 Be5 18.c6 g4 19.Qf5+ Kb8 20.cxb7 Ne7 21.Qe6 Rd6 0-1

114 – Dunn 5.g3 Be6 6.Nbd2 I played the same few openings during most of the 1989 USCF Golden Knights Postal Chess Tournament. If you scored well, you got more games. Rounds stretched over the next four years. I played the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit as White and the Latvian Gambit as Black. At that time I defended vs 1.d4 with 1...f5, the Dutch Defence as Black. In one of the later rounds vs George Dunn I ventured an Albin Counter Gambit. By then I was likely out of the running for any prizes. The obvious danger in playing a gambit in correspondence chess in the days before databases and strong chess engines was that your opponent could pick up a book and look up the refutation. Now popular authors in recent books prefer 5.a3. Back in the early 1990s the recommended move was 5.g3, but there was minimal analysis available. Most players were on their own around moves eight to ten. We both had chances in my game against George Dunn. After a sharp fight, a drawish position was reached. Dunn - Sawyer, corr USCF 1992 begins 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e5 3.dxe5 d4 4.Nf3 Nc6 5.g3 Be6 6.Nbd2 Qd7 7.Bg2 0-0-0 [Or 7...Nge7 8.0-0 Ng6 9.Qa4+/=] 8.0-0 h5 9.Qb3 h4 10.Nxh4 Bh3 11.Ndf3 [11.Be4!?+/=] 11...Be7 12.Bg5 Bxg2 13.Nxg2 Bxg5 14.Nxg5 Nxe5 15.f4 f6 16.fxe5 fxg5 17.Qd3 [17.Ne1=] 17...Ne7 [17...Nh6=/+] 18.Rf2 Qe6 19.Ne1 Qxe5 20.Nc2 Nc6 21.Qf5+ Qxf5 22.Rxf5 d3 23.exd3 Rxd3 24.Raf1 Nd4? [24...g6=] 25.Nxd4 Rxd4 26.Rxg5 Rd2 27.Rxg7 [27.h4+/-] 27...Rdxh2 28.Rff7? [28.Rg8+ Rxg8 29.Kxh2+/-] 28...Rxb2 29.Rxc7+ Kb8 30.a4 Rd8 31.Rcd7 1/2-1/2

115 – Rubenchik 6.Nbd2 Qd7 I played in the Station Mall tournament at Altoona, Pennsylvania on May 2, 1992. I faced USCF Master Rodion Rubenchik in the second round. He was rated 2257. Rubenchik won the tournament. I finished in second place and still have the trophy to prove it. You would not know that success was coming my way by looking at the first two rounds! I had changed my openings as Black. Then I had Black twice in those early games. I played the Albin-Counter Gambit instead of the Dutch Defence which I had played for years with mixed results. This might be the only time I lost with the Albin in a tournament. Usually I only played it in blitz games. After his win, Master Rubenchik spent time showing me ideas that I could have tried. Rodion was an encouragement to me. Rather than act like my gambit was a poor choice, his attitude was that I could do better if I played it more accurately. He left a very positive impression. Rubenchik - Sawyer, Altoona, PA (2), 02.05.1992 begins 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e5 [Albin Counter Gambit] 3.dxe5 d4 4.Nf3 Nc6 5.g3 Be6 [The main line nowadays is 5...Nge7 6.Bg2 Ng6 7.0-0 Ngxe5 8.Nxe5 Nxe5 when Black has regained his gambit pawn. The position is close to equal.] 6.Nbd2 Qd7 7.Bg2 0-0-0 8.0-0 h5 9.Qa4 Bh3 [9...Kb8 10.Ng5 Nxe5 11.Qxd7 Nxd7 12.Nxe6 fxe6 13.Nf3 e5 14.Ng5+/-] 10.Bxh3 Qxh3 11.Ng5 Qf5 12.Ndf3 Nh6 13.Bf4 f6 [13...Be7 14.b4+/=] 14.Nh4 Qd7 15.exf6 gxf6 16.Ngf3 Qh3 17.Bxh6 Rxh6 18.Qb5 Ne7? [After this it is just a slippery slope to the end. 18...Ne5!=] 19.Rad1 c6 20.Qa5 b6 21.Qxa7 Ng6 22.Nxg6 Rxg6 23.Qxb6 h4 24.Qxc6+ Kb8 25.Rd3 hxg3 26.Rb3+ 1-0

116 – blik 5.g3 Nge7 6.Bg2 Ng6 The chess engine “blik” regularly scored a ratio of +8 =1 -1 vs me. It usually had an ICC blitz rating within 200 points of 2500. One of the charming traits “blik” had was that it repeated certain variations. It did not repeat all the time nor exactly the same way. But there was enough that I got to play the same line frequently. This allowed me to learn more about these particular variations. It was not a matter of memorizing from move one to mate. That rarely works. You have to be good enough to win a won game and to draw a drawn game. When blik played the White side of the Albin Counter Gambit, it might vary at moves 1, 2, 5, and anytime from move 15 onwards. The one presented here was its most popular Albin line. This meant I could play the first 14 moves of this one line rather quickly if I remember them and if “blik” did not vary with an early deviation. Since I had been in this line before, I had practiced attacking the White kingside. Sometimes I actually lost, but in this one variation, I won more often than not. In these two games “blik” played the same 17 moves each time. It usually did not enter such bad variations. For some reason it liked this one until it got there. Then it started to act desperate. I could plan on seeing one of these about every 20 games. It just happened on my Kick blik day (when I played “blik” many times) that I saw it twice! I hope you enjoy these quick attacks. blik (2500) - Sawyer, ICC 5 0 Internet Chess Club, 01.09.2011 begins 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e5 3.dxe5 d4 4.Nf3 Nc6 5.g3 Nge7 6.Bg2 Ng6 7.Bg5 Qd7 8.0-0 h6 9.Bf4 Nxf4 10.gxf4 g5 11.fxg5 [11.Nbd2!?] 11...hxg5 12.Nxg5 Nxe5 13.Nd2 f6 14.Nge4 Be7 15.Nb3 Qg4 16.Nxd4 Qh4 17.h3 Bxh3 18.Bxh3 [18.Nxf6+ Bxf6 19.Ne6 Bxe6 20.Qa4+ Kf7 21.Qd7+ Bxd7 22.Rfd1 Rag8

23.Rxd7+ Nxd7 24.f3 Qg3 25.Kf1 Rh1+ 26.Bxh1 Qg1# White is checkmated 0-1 blik-Sawyer, Internet Chess Club 2011] 18...Qxh3 19.Qa4+ b5 20.Qxb5+ c6 21.Nxf6+ Bxf6 22.Qxc6+ Nxc6 23.Rfc1 Qh1# White is checkmated 0-1

117 – AdamsX 7.0-0 Bg4 8.Bg5 Early Thanksgiving morning, long before I got stuffed with turkey, I played two chess games. My opponent was the experienced blitz player "AdamsX" on the Internet Chess Club. Our first game was an Albin Counter Gambit where we castled opposite sides. We both developed interesting attacks. I deviated from the main line and got the better position. My advantage grew but my opponent fought on. He put pressure on me by playing faster in the 3 minute blitz game than I played. At the end I realized that I was going to be unable to queen a pawn and force checkmate in four seconds, so I forced a draw. Then we turned the board around and tried a Blackmar-Diemer. AdamsX - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 22.11.2012 begins 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e5 3.dxe5 d4 4.Nf3 Nc6 5.g3 Nge7 6.Bg2 Ng6 7.0-0 Bg4 [The main line is 7...Ngxe5 8.Nxe5 Nxe5= when Black has regained the gambit pawn with better open lines but is a tempo behind in development.] 8.Bg5 [The critical line seems to be 8.Nbd2 Qd7 9.a3 0-0-0 10.Qa4 Kb8 11.b4 Ncxe5 12.Qxd7 Nxf3+!? 13.Nxf3 Rxd7 14.c5+/= and the d4 pawn might come under some pressure.] 8...Qd7 9.Nbd2 h6 10.Bf4 Nxf4 11.gxf4 g5 [11...0-0-0 Castling before the attack seems wise.] 12.Ne4 Be7 13.Nf6+ Bxf6 14.exf6 gxf4 15.e3 fxe3 16.fxe3 0-0-0 17.exd4 Rhg8 18.Kh1 Bxf3 19.Qxf3 Qxd4 20.Rad1 Qxc4 21.b3 Qc5 22.a4 Rxd1 23.Rxd1 Rd8 24.Rxd8+ Kxd8 25.Qd5+ Qxd5 26.Bxd5 Ne5 27.Bxb7 c6 28.Ba6 Kd7 29.Kg2 Ke6 30.Kg3 Kxf6 31.Kf4 Ke6 32.Ke4 Kd6 33.Kf5 h5 34.Kg5 Nf3+ 35.Kxh5 Nxh2 36.Kg5 Nf3+ 37.Kf6 Nd4 38.Bc4 Kc5 39.Kxf7 Kb4 40.Ke7 Nxb3 41.Bf1 Nc5? [Black has an easy win after 41...a5 42.Bg2 c5+ with two extra pawns. However, we were both under time pressure. Clocks: 0:32-0:23] 42.Kd6? [42.Bg2! Nxa4 43.Bxc6 with good drawing chances.] 42...Nxa4 43.Kxc6 a5 44.Bh3 Nc3 45.Be6 a4 46.Kb6 a3 47.Bf7 Na4+ 48.Ka6 Nb2 49.Ba2 Nc4 50.Ka7 Nd2 51.Ka6 Nb3 52.Kb6 Nc1 53.Be6 Kc3 [Clocks: 0:12-0:04. I cannot queen a pawn and checkmate

White in four seconds, thus it is time to force a draw.] 54.Ka5 Kb2? [Forcing a draw. The winning move is 54...Nb3+ when Black will queen.] 55.Ka4 Nb3 56.Bxb3 a2 57.Bxa2 [Clocks: 0:06.8-0.02.7 Game drawn because neither player has mating material] 1/2-1/2

118 – ambro1957 7.0-0 Be6 8.b3 Aggressive play with the Black pieces can leave White feeling uneasy and conflicted. White thinks he should do the attacking, but instead he finds himself on the defensive. Often to accomplish this Black may play a gambit. In this Albin Counter Gambit variation vs "ambro1957", both sides were on their own fairly quickly. Well, then I made a dumb dubious move. How did that happen? My fingers did not let my brain know what they were up to. My sudden questionable move was 7...Be6?! On the one hand it developed a piece instantly. That was the good point. The bad point was that I could have picked up the e5 immediately. My hasty mistake gave White the chance for a slight advantage. Fortunately that opportunity was missed in the speed of blitz. Then Black built up a strong kingside attack. In the end White could not avoid the loss of big material. ambro1957 - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 04.02.2013 begins 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e5 3.dxe5 d4 4.Nf3 Nc6 5.g3 Nge7 6.Bg2 Ng6 7.0-0 Be6?! [7...Ngxe5 8.Nxe5 Nxe5] 8.b3 Ngxe5 9.Bb2 [The natural consequence of Black's poor play would be 9.Nxe5 Nxe5 10.Bxb7+/=] 9...Nxf3+ 10.Bxf3 Bh3 11.Re1 Qd7 12.Bxc6? [12.e3=] 12...Qxc6 13.e4 0-0-0 [13...Bb4!-/+] 14.Qh5 Qe6 15.Nd2 Bb4 16.Qe2 h5 17.a3 Bc3 [17...Bg4!] 18.Bxc3 dxc3 19.Nf1? [19.Nb1 Bg4=] 19...h4 20.f4? [This allows Black to get an overwhelming position. White should try to defend with 20.Ra2 although Black keeps his attack going with 20...hxg3-/+] 20...Bxf1 21.Qxf1 hxg3 22.hxg3 Qh6 23.Qg2 Rd2 24.Re2 Rxe2 25.Qxe2 Qh1+ White resigns 0-1

119 – aditrix 8.b3 Bc5 9.Ba3 Qe7 I decided to play a couple Internet Chess Club blitz games. Here is game where I won using the Albin-Counter Gambit. This is a very aggressive attacking method to decline the Queens Gambit. It is similar to some Blackmar-Diemer Gambit lines. For example: 1.d4 d5 2.e4 c5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.d5 is an Albin (Counter Reversed) Gambit with an extra move! Often I just throw my pieces out there and look for tactical patterns. It worked again this time. aditrix (1808)- Sawyer (2116), ICC 5 0 Internet Chess Club, 07.01.2012 begins 1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 [The normal continuation for the Albin-Counter Gambit is 2.c4 e5 3.dxe5 d4 when 4.Nf3 Nc6 would transpose to the game.] 2...Nc6 3.c4 e5?! [I wanted to see if White, rated 1808, would transpose to an Albin. 3...Bg4 is the main line of the Chigorin Defence.] 4.dxe5 [4.Nxe5 Nxe5 5.dxe5 favors White, although I have worked very hard to make it playable.] 4...d4 [We have officially reached the main line of the AlbinCounter Gambit.] 5.g3 Nge7 [A favorite move over the past ten years. The old classic main line is 5...Bg4 6.Bg2 Qd7 7.0-0 0-0-0 when White chooses either 8.Nbd2 or 8.Qb3. Over the past 20 years, we have also seen 5...Be6 6.Nbd2 Qd7 7.Bg2 0-0-0 8.0-0 h5 9.h4 Nh6] 6.Bg2 Ng6 [Black is playing to regain the pawn.] 7.0-0 [If 7.Bg5 when Black should play 7...Qd7! covered in one of my other blog posts.] 7...Be6 [More common and consistent is 7...Ngxe5 8.Nxe5 Nxe5] 8.b3 [The best way to defend c4 is to also attack b7. 8.Qb3! Rb8 9.Rd1 Ngxe5 10.Nxe5 Nxe5 when the d-pawn is in trouble and Black's king is still in the center. White has several promising continuations. One option is 11.Bf4 Nc6 12.Na3+/-] 8...Bc5 9.Ba3!? [I felt pretty good when I saw this. 9.Nbd2+/=] 9...Qe7! 10.Bxc5 [Junior 12 gives the forcing line 10.b4 Bxb4 11.Nxd4 Nxd4 12.Bxb4 Nxe2+ 13.Qxe2 Qxb4 when Black has equal chances.] 10...Qxc5 11.Nbd2 0-0-0 [This looks promising.] 12.Ne4 [12.a3 Ngxe5 13.b4 Nxf3+ 14.Bxf3] 12...Qe7 13.a3 Ngxe5 14.Nxe5 Nxe5 15.Qc2 Kb8 [I want to play Bf5 pinning the knight without allowing any Nd6+/Qxf5+ possibilities.] 16.f4? [White leaves a gaping hole on e3 and forces my knight to angle for it.] 16...Ng4 17.Rfb1? [White should let the queen be forked with 17.Nf2 Ne3 because at least

there is a mate threat. 18.Qe4 c6-/+] 17...Ne3 18.Qd3 Nxg2 19.Kxg2 Bf5 20.Kf3 Rhe8 White resigns 0-1

Book 6: Chapter 4 – Slav Defence 2.c4 c6 Black sets up a solid pawn structure. He does not immediately block in his light squared bishop.

120 – Khenkin 3.e3 Nf6 4.Bd3 White must fight for the center against the Queens Gambit Slav Defence. Black took control after 3.e3 Nf6 4.Bd3 e5 5.Nc3 e4. The position resembled a French Defence Advance 3.e5 variation in reverse. White countered in Blackmar-Diemer Gambit style with 7.f3. Black aggressively broke open the kingside with 11...Nxh2, however White defended accurately in the game Igor Khenkin vs Parviz Gasimov. Khenkin (2557) - Gasimov (2329), Nakhchivan Open 2018 Nakhchivan AZE (1.10), 01.05.2018 begins 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.e3 Nf6 4.Bd3 e5 5.Nc3 e4 6.Bc2 Bd6 7.f3 0-0 8.fxe4 dxe4 9.Bxe4 Ng4 [9...c5 10.Bc2=] 10.Nf3 f5 11.Bd3 Nxh2?! 12.Nxh2 Qh4+ 13.Kd2 Bxh2 14.Ne2 c5 [14...Rf6 15.g3 Qh5 16.Qf1+-] 15.Qg1 cxd4 16.Qxh2 dxe3+ 17.Kxe3 Qe7+ [17...Qxh2 18.Rxh2+-] 18.Kf2 h6 19.Nf4 1-0

121 – Hechl 3.cxd5 cxd5 4.Bg5 Slav Defence Really Quick Exchange 3.cxd5 leads to sharp unorthodox play if players delay or avoid moves like Nf3 or Nf6. White chose the interesting move 4.Bg5. Black forgot for just one little move that his queen might need an escape route in the game Gerald Hechl vs Clemens Pallitsch. Hechl (2274) - Pallitsch (2190), TCh-AUT 2nd Ost 2017-18 Austria, 14.01.2018 begins 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.cxd5 cxd5 4.Bg5 Qb6 5.Nc3 e6 6.Qd2 Nc6 7.e3 Bd6 8.Bd3 Nge7 9.Nf3 f6 10.Bh4 e5 11.dxe5 Nxe5 12.Nxe5 Bxe5 13.0-0 Be6 14.Rac1 14...Rd8? [14...d4 15.exd4 Qxd4 16.Bg3 Bc4 17.Rfd1=] 15.Na4 [Wins queen] 1-0

122 – Mason 3.cxd5 cxd5 4.Nc3 Mike Mason and I battle it out late into the night during the fourth round of the Florida State Championship at Daytona Beach. The event was won by Julio Becerra just ahead of Blas Lugo, Ray Robson, Andrew Boekhoff and Troy Daly (whom I drew). This was the first time I had met former USCF Expert Mike Mason. He was very cordial. In a Slav Defence Exchange Variation White's plan is obvious: saddle Black with a bad bishop or a weakened pawn structure. The delay of White's Nf3 with a quick Nc3 and Bf4 allows him to threaten a sneaky Nb5. When I played 21...Rc8, I thought my king could get to d6. If it got there, he could not then win. Yes, he had the better bishop. But I had confidence because I had drawn such endings vs strong computers maybe a hundred times. At the time of this game, I was using Personal Chess Trainer. Later it became Chessimo. I practiced bishop endings several times per week using that program. After my 21st move, I went off to the bathroom. When I came back, I did not pay close attention to his actual move 22.Kg2! I should have adjusted my plans on move 23. Instead I walked into an inferior endgame. Because of this I forced myself to work very hard for the draw.

Mason (1986) - Sawyer (1959), Florida State Championship (4), 02.09.2007 begins 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.cxd5 cxd5 4.Nc3 Nf6 5.Bf4 a6?! [I was concerned with 5...Nc6! 6.Nb5? but 6...e5! leaves Black with a good game after 7.Bxe5 Qa5+ 8.Nc3 Ne4 9.Rc1 Nxc3 10.bxc3 Ba3-/+] 6.e3 Nc6 7.Bd3 g6!? 8.h3 Bg7 9.Nf3 0-0 10.0-0 e6 11.Rc1 Nh5 12.Bh2 f5 [With the threat of a potential f5-f4 push, I was able to exchange several of White's minor pieces and ease my defensive situation.] 13.g4 Nf6 14.Ne5 Nxe5 15.Bxe5 Ne4 16.Bxg7 Kxg7 17.Nxe4 fxe4 18.Be2 Bd7 19.f3 exf3 20.Rxf3 Rxf3 21.Bxf3 Rc8 22.Kg2! Rxc1 23.Qxc1 Qc8? [Correct was 23...Bc6!=] 24.Qxc8 Bxc8 25.g5! [White is now winning because Black's king cannot get to d6. However, I was determined to fight for a draw.] 25...Bd7 26.Kg3 Kf7 27.Kf4 Ke7 28.Ke5 b6 29.h4 Bc6 30.h5 a5 31.h6 Bb7 32.Be2 Bc6 33.Bd3 Be8 34.e4 dxe4 35.Bxe4 Bf7 36.d5 exd5 37.Bxd5 Be8 [37...Bxd5 38.Kxd5 Kd7 39.a4+- would lead to an easy White win.] 38.a3 Bb5 39.Be4 Be8 40.Kd5 Kd7 41.b4 axb4 42.axb4 Bf7+ 43.Ke5 Ke7 44.Bc6 Bc4 45.Bd5 Bb5 46.Be6 Bc6 47.Bg8 Ba4 48.Be6 [After the game, another player stopped me in the hallway. He told me that there was a point where White could take on h7 and win. I did not believe him, but when I looked into it later, sure enough. White has 48.Bxh7! which wins. If 48...Kf7 49.Kd6 Be8 50.Kc7 b5 51.Kd6+-] 48...Bc6 49.Bc8 Bf3 50.Be6? = [I finally wore him out, and just in time! Now 50...Bc6 would repeat the position a third time. I expected 50.Bf5!+- 1-0, but my opponent was convinced that White had nothing left anywhere.] 1/2-1/2

123 – jjcwn 3.cxd5 cxd5 4.Nc3 My opponent played a drawish line as White, but I wanted to win. Being somewhat under the influence of Cyrus Lakdawala, I decided to mix it up and play creatively with 5...Qb6!? Deep Rybka suggests 5...e5! Instead I ended up in Deep Doo-Doo. What I did was not what I wanted to do. So now what do I do? Here's what I did. Attack the King! From an English Opening I ended up in an Exchange Slav Defence. White played the same first five moves (in a different order) Saidy played in the Lakdawala book: “The Slav: Move by Move”. I was only somewhat under the influence of Lakdawala. Had I really been under the best influence of Lakdawala I would have played 4...Nf6 to protect d5. My 4...Nc6 is okay, but not in conjunction with 5...Qb6 because it loses a pawn. Fortunately for me it was a three minute blitz game. Both of us developed quickly. After we castled the only major imbalance (to use a Jeremy Silman concept) was that White had a pawn on e3 but Black was missing a pawn on e6. Imbalances usually provide something good for each side. My missing pawn meant an open diagonal for another bishop to attack. Quickly I was able to bring my queen, knight, two bishops and rook into the action. jjcwn - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 20.03.2013 begins 1.c4 c6 2.Nc3 d5 3.cxd5 cxd5 4.d4 Nc6 [4...Nf6 5.Bf4 Qb6= Saidy-Lakdawala, Los Angeles 1998] 5.Bf4 Qb6?! [5...e5! Deep Rybka] 6.Nxd5 Qa5+ 7.Nc3 e5 8.dxe5 Bb4 9.Bd2 Qxe5 10.Nf3 Qa5?! 11.e3 Nf6 12.Bd3 0-0 13.0-0 Bg4 14.Be2 Rad8 15.Qc2 Rfe8 [15...Bf5 16.Qc1 Qb6 17.Rd1+/=] 16.a3 Bf8 17.Rad1 Bd6!? 18.Rfe1?! [Now Black's army mobilizes to attack the White king. Correct would have been 18.Nb5! Qb6 19.Nxd6 Rxd6 20.Bc3+/- and White is up a solid extra pawn with a good position.] 18...Qh5! 19.h3 Bxh3 20.gxh3 Qxh3 21.Nb5 Ng4 [21...Re4!-+ is even faster.] 22.Nxd6 Rxd6 23.Qf5 Rh6?? [White resigns. I won with a blunder!? It looks good at first, but White can now sacrifice his queen with Qxf7!! and play Ng5+ picking up the Black queen on h3 while attacking the

Ng4 with his bishop. Fortunately White missed my inaccuracy. 23...Rg6!-+ would have won easily for Black.] 0-1

124 – Gates 3.Nc3 dxc4 4.e4 b5 You have to choose in the Slav Defence 3.Nc3 line. Do you take the "free" gambit pawn? Do you develop first? In this Queen Pawn 1.d4 d5 opening White met Slav Defence with the sharp 3.Nc3!? Black grabbed the c4 pawn and pushed ...b5. Now White had to deal with the ...b4 threat. Ray Haines sent this game vs Nathan Gates. Ray Haines wrote: “I got a good position in the opening, but made a mistake. I wanted to support my pawns on the queenside with my queen and push the queen side pawns. I did not wish to move the queen and leave the bishop pinned. I did not study the whole board the way I should have. I missed the fact that after he threatened my knight he could take my queen knight pawn with his knight. The game was still even, but it hindered my plans.” “He got some strong pawns on the queenside which he pushed forward and the computer gives him the better game. I do not know if I agree with this though, because I could get my king over to the queenside and stop the pawns.” Gates - Haines, Houlton, ME (1), 19.09.2015 begins 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.Nc3 dxc4 4.e4 b5 [4...e5!?] 5.a3 [5.a4 b4 6.Na2 Nf6 7.e5 Nd5 8.Bxc4 e6 9.Nf3=] 5...Nf6 6.g3 e6 [6...e5-/+] 7.Bg2 Bb7 8.Bg5 Be7 [8...h6=/+] 9.Nge2 [9.e5=] 9...0-0 [9...Nxe4! 10.Bxe7 Nxc3 11.Bxd8 Nxd1 12.Rxd1 Kxd8-/+] 10.Qc2 [10.e5 Nd5 11.Bxe7 Qxe7=/+] 10...h6 [10...c5!-/+] 11.Bxf6 Bxf6 12.e5 Be7 13.Nxb5 Qb6 [13...Nd7=/+] 14.Nbc3 Na6 15.0-0 Rad8 16.Qa4 c5 17.Bxb7 Qxb7 18.Qxc4 cxd4 19.Nxd4 Rc8 20.Qb5 Nc5 21.Qxb7 Nxb7 22.Rac1 Nc5 23.Rfd1 Rfd8 24.Rc2? [24.Ncb5!+/-] 24...Nd7 [24...Nb3-+] 25.Nf3 Nb6 26.Rdc1 g5 27.Kg2 [27.h3+/-] 27...g4 28.Ne1 Bg5 29.Rd1 Rxd1 30.Nxd1 Rxc2 31.Nxc2 Nc4 32.b4 Nxe5 33.b5 Kf8 34.Nce3 h5 35.a4 Ke8 36.Nc3 Bxe3 37.fxe3 Kd7 38.e4? [38.h4=] 38...Kc7 39.Na2 [39.h4 Kb6=/+] 39...Kb6 40.Nb4 Nc4 41.Nc6 Nd6 42.Nd8 Nxe4 43.Nxf7 Ka5 44.Kf1 Kxa4 45.b6 axb6 46.Ke2 b5 47.Ne5 b4

48.Kd3 Nd6 49.Kc2 b3+ [49...Ka3-+] 50.Kb2 Ne4 51.Nd3 Nd2 52.Nc5+ Kb4 53.Nxe6 Nc4+ 54.Kb1 Kc3 55.Nf4 Nd2+ 56.Kc1 b2+ 57.Kd1 b1Q+ 58.Ke2 Qf1+ 59.Ke3 Qf3# 0-1

125 – Haines 3.Nc3 dxc4 4.e3 b5 Ray Haines outplayed the longtime chess expert Roger Morin. This Slav Defence is a variation of the Queens Gambit Declined. This win vs the highest rated player in the event helped Ray Haines to finish in first place. Roger Morin has won a lot of games, but this day belonged to Ray Haines. Roger Morin provides a great service directing tournaments in Houlton, Maine. Players stay active and very gradually they raise their ratings. My calculation of the last three Houlton events shows that on average players' ratings have gone up two points. That is because in the USCF formula lower ratings go up faster than higher ratings go down. Now to the game. Black chose a quick expansion of the queenside pawns. He obtained a protected passed b-pawn which always had to be watched. The d5 square became an excellent base of operations for the Black army. Both sides attacked kingside for a while. Eventually pieces were exchanged as the players passed from the middlegame to the endgame. Then suddenly, Black's old friend the b-pawn decided the game. Morin (2010) - Haines, Houlton, Maine (2), 24.01.2015 begins 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.Nf3 dxc4 4.e3 b5 [4...Be6] 5.a4 e6 [If 5...Nf6 6.axb5! cxb5 7.b3+/=] 6.Be2 [6.axb5 cxb5 7.b3 Nf6 8.bxc4 bxc4 9.Bxc4+/=] 6...Nf6 7.00 Bb7 8.b3 a5 9.bxc4 b4 10.e4 Nxe4 11.c5 Be7 12.Re1 0-0 13.Bf4 Nf6 14.Nbd2 Ba6 15.Nc4 Bxc4 16.Bxc4 Nd5 17.Bxd5 Qxd5 18.Re5 Qd8 19.Rh5 Nd7 20.Qc2 Nf6 21.Rh3 Qd5 22.Rb1 [22.Re1 Qf5-/+] 22...Qe4 23.Qc1 [23.Qxe4 Nxe4-/+] 23...Nd5 24.Bd2 Bf6 25.Qb2 Nf4 26.Bxf4 Qxf4 27.Re1 Rad8 28.Qc2 g6 29.Re4 Qc7 [29...b3! 30.Qb1 Qf5-+] 30.g4 Rd5 31.Qd2 g5 [31...Bg7!-+] 32.Qd3 Kg7 33.Rxe6 Rh8 34.Re4 Qd7 35.Qe3 h6 36.Ne5 Bxe5 37.dxe5 Qe6 38.Rf3 Rhd8 39.Rf6 Qe7 40.Rxc6 Rd1+ 41.Kg2 Qb7 42.Rb6 Qd5 43.e6 [Ironically, White can rescue the game with 43.Qf3!+/=] 43...Rd3 44.Qe2? [44.Qe1 Rd4 45.e7 Rxe4=/+]

44...Rd4 45.Qf3 Qxe4 46.exf7 Qxf3+ 47.Kxf3 Rf8 48.Ra6 b3 49.Rb6 Rb4 0-1

126 – Rookie 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.e3 Bf5 Cyrus Lakdawala wrote the book “The Slav: Move by Move” from Everyman Chess. The publisher's blurb reads: “In this book, Cyrus Lakdawala examines the universally popular Slav Defence which has been his main choice against 1 d4 for many years. Here he shares his experience and knowledge of his favourite opening, presents a repertoire for Black and provides answers to all the key questions.” The author points out that 9 out of 10 of the world's top players have played the Slav Defence. Only Radjabov keeps playing the King's Indian Defence. On my high school chess team where we played other schools I had only one draw 45 years ago; that was as White in a Slav vs a higher rated player whom as I recall was named Daniel Sensenig. The Slav Defence begins 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 usually followed by 3.Nf3 Nf6. One of the great aspects of this set-up is that it can be used vs anything White does. If is the Slav it reaches a position that is likely to follow from those first two moves. Without c2-c4 it is a Caro-Kann Defence after 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5. I began playing the Caro-Kann as Black early in my career, but I did not start playing the Slav Defence as Black until 1978. A key aspect of the Slav Defence is that Black's light squared bishop can be played from c8 to f5 or g4, followed by ...e6 and then the development of the dark squared bishop to e7, d6, or b4. A related opening is the Semi-Slav Defence where Black keeps the bishop on c8 for the moment and plays 4...e6. The Semi-Slav Defence tends to be sharper and the Slav Defence more solid, but there are both types of positions in each one. There are four ways to win in the Slav Defence from either side. 1. Unbalance the game through tactics and outplay your opponent with combinations and superior calculation. 2. Unbalance the game through strategy and outplay your opponent with positional judgment and pattern recognition.

3. Unbalance the game through material sacrifice to increase your piece activity or attack your opponent's king. 4. Transition the game through the middlegame into a winning endgame with piece exchanges and technical skill. I have won and lost many games from each side using each method. Here is a game where I beat "Rookie" in an ICC blitz game with the Slav. I managed to employ option four above by swapping into an ending where I had the outside passed pawn. Even a computer rated over 2500 cannot hold that position. Rookie - Sawyer, ICC 5 0 Internet Chess Club, 01.08.2007 begins 1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.e3 c6 4.c4 Bf5 5.cxd5 cxd5 6.Qb3 Qc7 7.Bd2 e6 8.Bb5+ Nc6 9.Bb4 Bxb4+ 10.Qxb4 Qe7 11.Qxe7+ Kxe7 12.Bxc6 bxc6 13.Ne5 Rhc8 14.Nd2 Nd7 15.Nxd7 Kxd7 16.g4 Bg6 17.Nb3 f6 18.Nc5+ Kd6 19.h4 h6 20.Rc1 Be8 21.f4 a5 22.g5 hxg5 23.fxg5 fxg5 24.hxg5 Bg6 25.b3 Be4 26.Nxe4+ dxe4 27.Rh7 g6 28.Rc2 Rh8 29.Rh6 Rxh6 30.gxh6 Rh8 31.Rh2 e5 32.dxe5+ Kxe5 33.a3 Kf5 34.h7 Kf6 35.Rh4 Kg7 36.Rxe4 Rxh7 37.Re7+ Kh6 38.Rxh7+ Kxh7 39.Kf2 Kh6 40.e4 Kg5 41.Ke3 Kf6 42.Ke2 Ke5 43.a4 c5 44.Ke3 g5 45.Kf3 Kd4 46.Kg4 Kxe4 47.Kxg5 Kd3 0-1

127 – Bocharov 4.e3 Bf5 5.Nc3 a6 This unconventional Slav Defence uncovers a surprise at the end. In the game between Dmitriy Khegay and Ivan Bocharov, the players reached a common line via transposition. The seemingly inconsequential 19.b4 to expand the queenside turns out to be fatal. Khegay (2502) - Bocharov (2534), Kurnosov Mem Rapid 2017 Chelyabinsk RUS (8.4), 09.09.2017 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 c6 3.Nf3 d5 4.e3 Bf5 5.Nc3 a6 [5...e6=] 6.Ne5 Nbd7 7.cxd5!? [7.Qb3 Qc7=] 7...Nxe5 8.dxe5 Nxd5 9.Nxd5 [9.Bd2 e6=] 9...Qxd5 10.Qxd5 cxd5 11.Bd2 Rc8 12.Be2 e6 13.Bc3 Be7 14.Kd2 Kd7 15.Rhc1 Rc6 16.Ba5 Rhc8 17.Rxc6 Rxc6 18.Bc3 Rc8 19.b4? [19.Rc1 Bg6 20.g3 h6=] 19...d4! 20.exd4 [If 20.Bxd4 then Black wins a piece as follows: 20...Bxb4+ 21.Kd1 Bc2+ 22.Kc1 Ba4+ 23.Kb1 Ba3 24.Bb2 Bc2+ 25.Kc1 Be4+ 26.Kd2 Bxb2-+; 20.Bb2 Bxb4+ 21.Kd1 Bc2+ 22.Kc1 d3 23.Bf3 d2 mate!] 20...Bg5+! [Black wins the bishop on c3.] 0-1

128 – Vitiugov 4.e3 Bf5 5.Nc3 e6 Black wins this Slav Defence with a surprise tactic. Solid strategy marks this opening, but with heavy material remains the possibility of a sudden tactical shot for either side. Such was the final tale in the game Matthias Bluebaum vs Nikita Vitiugov. Bluebaum (2631) - Vitiugov (2735), GRENKE Chess Classic 2018 Karlsruhe / Baden Baden GER, 31.03.2018 begins 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.e3 Bf5 5.Nc3 e6 6.Nh4 Bg6 7.Bd2 Nbd7 8.Nxg6 hxg6 9.c5 e5 10.b4 Be7 11.b5 0-0 12.Qa4 [12.bxc6 bxc6 13.Be2=] 12...Re8 [12...exd4 13.exd4 Re8=/+] 13.bxc6 bxc6 14.Be2 exd4 15.exd4 Nxc5 16.dxc5 d4 17.0-0 dxc3 18.Bxc3 Bxc5 19.Bf3 Rc8 20.Bxc6 Re2 21.Bf3 Rxf2 22.Rxf2 Bxf2+ 23.Kxf2 Rxc3 24.Qxa7 [24.Rd1 Qc7=/+] 24...Ne4+ 25.Kg1 [25.Bxe4 Rc7 26.Qa8 Rc8 27.Qd5 Qf6+ 28.Bf3 Qxa1-+] 25...Ra3! [The threats of Rxa7 and Qd4+ with a forced mate win for Black.] 0-1

129 – Demuth 4.e3 Bf5 5.Nc3 e6 My Slav Defence Playbook for Black is a simple safe super solid solution to your chess opening repertoire after 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6. This is a reliable response to all Closed Games. Slav Defence makes your opening preparation easy. You do not need to memorize thousands of variations or play risky gambits. The Slav is a repeatable sound choice. The solid nature of the position gives Black an easier move selection which saves time. The Slav Defence fits well with Caro-Kann as Black and London 2.Bf4 as White. I played all three of these openings on the Internet Chess Club using “SuperSolid” about 10 years ago. Black won a sharp a Slav Defence. A strong attack on the White king in the game Roland Loetscher by GM Adrien Demuth was impressive. Nice game. Loetscher (2433) - Demuth (2558), 117th ch-SUI 2017 Graechen SUI (4.2), 16.07.2017 begins 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.e3 Bf5 5.Nc3 e6 6.Nh4 Be4 7.f3 Bg6 8.Qb3 Qc7 9.Bd2 Be7 10.0-0-0 dxc4 11.Bxc4 b5 12.Be2 a6 13.Nxg6 hxg6 14.g3 c5 [Black opens up lines of attack toward the White king.] 15.dxc5 Nbd7 16.Kb1 Nxc5 17.Qc2 Rc8 18.Rc1 0-0 19.Ka1? [19.a3 Qb6 20.Rhd1 e5=] 19...Qb7 20.Qd1 [20.a3 b4 21.axb4 Qxb4-/+] 20...Rfd8 21.Qe1 [21.e4 Bd6-/+] 21...b4 22.Nb1 a5 23.Rc4 Nfd7 [23...Nd5-+] 24.Qf2 Bf6 25.Rd1 Nb6 26.Rf4 Nca4 [26...Bxb2+! 27.Kxb2 Nba4+ 28.Ka1 b3 29.Na3 b2+ 30.Kb1 Rxd2 31.Rxd2 Nc3+ 32.Kc2 b1Q+ 33.Nxb1 Qxb1+ 34.Kxc3 Nd3+ 35.Rc4 Qb4+ 36.Kc2 Rxc4+ 37.Kxd3 Qc3#] 27.Rxf6 gxf6 28.Qf1 Qc7 29.Rc1 Qe5 0-1

130 – Haines 4.cxd5 cxd5 5.Nc3 When a lower rated player chooses a Slav Defence Exchange Variation, normally he is happy to draw as White. To get a stronger player to agree to a draw, you have to play active or aggressive. Your pieces need the better squares. You must make threats. There's an old saying about closing the barn door after the horses get out. In this game White closed the gate before his bishop got out. At a glance 6.Bf4 looks more effective than 6.e3 and 10.Bd2. White went from "likely to thrive" to "possible to survive". White's choice of 6.e3 is not a blunder. It's just not logical to me. It does not make sense coming from the lower rated player who chose an Exchange Slav. Compare 6.e3 to the theoretical evaluations after 6.Bf4. There the evaluations fluctuate from equal to a slight edge for White. Ray Haines and all his opponents raised their ratings in this tournament. Nathan Gates seemed to be improving. Gates outplayed Haines from time to time, but not this time. White's position went from equal to slowly sliding downhill to falling off the table. Gates - Haines, Houlton Open (3), 05.03.2016 begins 1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.c4 c6 4.cxd5 cxd5 5.Nc3 Nc6 6.e3 [The logical and good move is to play 6.Bf4=] 6...Bf5 7.Bb5 e6 8.Qa4 Qb6 9.Ne5 Rc8 10.Bd2 [10.b3 Nd7 11.Nxc6 bxc6 12.Ba6 Bb4 13.Bd2=] 10...a6 [10...Bd6=/+] 11.Bxc6+ bxc6 12.0-0 Bd6 13.Qb3 Qc7 14.Nd1 [14.f4 0-0-/+] 14...0-0 15.Rc1 Bxe5 16.dxe5 Qxe5 17.Bc3 Qd6 18.Bd4 [18.Bxf6!? gxf6 19.Qc3 e5=/+] 18...Nd7 19.Qc3 e5 20.Bc5 Nxc5 21.Qxc5 Qg6 22.f3 Rfd8 23.Qe7 Re8 24.Qh4 [24.Qc5 Bb1-/+] 24...d4 25.exd4 exd4 26.Nf2 d3 27.Qf4 Re2

[27...Qe6-+] 28.Rfd1 Rce8 [28...Qe6-+] 29.h3? [White has to defend g2. 29.g4 Be6 30.Rxc6 h5=/+] 29...Rxf2 30.Kxf2 Re2+ "mate next move" 0-1

131 – Richmond 5.Nc3 Bf5 6.Nf3 In the summer of 1977, I travelled to Huntsville, Alabama to play in a oneday four round tournament. Huntsville is home to many NASA projects, and I was flying high. This was just five weeks after I had won the tournament in Crossville, Tennessee. I think these two tournaments were the only OTB ones that I played in the Central Time Zone. By “OTB” I mean “over the board”. That is a common term used by correspondence players who played by postal or email. They did not meet their opponents face to face in correspondence. Now later years players have found another way to play without driving off to a tournament site. Now we play opponents online. As I recall, this event was held at a motel. The tournament director rented a couple adjoining rooms. My Round 1 game is vs Gordon Richmond in a Slav Defence Exchange Variation. As I remember, my opponent was very friendly. He seemed like someone who was just happy to play in a chess tournament. I was a much higher rated player and that won out in the end. Sawyer - Richmond, Huntsville, AL (1), 20.08.1977 begins 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.Nc3 Bf5 4.cxd5 cxd5 5.Bf4 e6 6.Nf3 Nf6 7.e3 a6!? [7...Nc6 is more common.] 8.Qa4+ Nc6 [8...Nbd7] 9.Ne5 Rc8? [Better is 9...Qc8, not the rook.] 10.Nxc6 Rxc6 11.Bxa6 Qb6? [11...Bc2 12.Qb5 Bd3 13.Qxd3 bxa6 14.0-0+/=] 12.Bb5 Be7 13.Bxc6+ bxc6 14.0-0 [14.Qa8+!+-] 14...0-0 15.a3 Qxb2 16.Qxc6 Bxa3? [16...Bd3 17.Rfd1+/-] 17.Na4 Qb3 18.Rxa3 Qxa3 19.Bd6 Qb3 20.Bxf8 Kxf8 21.Qd6+ Kg8? 22.Qd8+ Ne8 23.Qxe8# 1-0

132 – blik 5.Nc3 Nc6 6.Bf4 Bf5 November weather in Florida is beautiful. It is a great time to visit Disney World. The temperature outside is often the same as the temperature inside, say 70-78 F degrees for the daytime highs. During the Thanksgiving holiday in the United States people visit with family and friends, eat food and enjoy sports. I enjoyed this Slav Defence vs the computer "blik" rated 2410 at the time. A positive thing about the game below is that when I did a blunder check on the game, there were no blunders! If I could always play a 64 move game, or a 34 move game, without blunders, it would be awesome. Anyway, it raised my ICC blitz rating. Usually this opponent does not play this line, so when it did, I happily took advantage. blik - Sawyer, Internet Chess Club, 23.11.2011 begins 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.cxd5 cxd5 5.Nc3 Nc6 6.Bf4 Bf5 7.e3 e6 8.Bd3 [This is usually a sign that White is content with a draw, which fits well with the cxd5 idea. If he wants to try to take advantage of the extra move he tries one of the following: 8.Bb5; 8.Ne5; 8.Qb3] 8...Bxd3 9.Qxd3 Bd6 10.Bxd6 Qxd6 11.0-0 0-0 12.Rac1 Rac8 13.a3 a6 14.e4 [Breaking the symmetry.] 14...dxe4 15.Nxe4 Nxe4 16.Qxe4 Rfd8 17.Rc3 Qd5 18.Re1 Qxe4 19.Rxe4 Ne7 20.Ne5 Nd5 [Great post for the knight.] 21.Rc5 b6 22.Rxc8 Rxc8 23.Kf1 Rc1+ 24.Re1 Rc2 25.Re2 Rxe2 26.Kxe2 Kf8 [At this point Black has to make sure he does not drop a pawn to a White knight move.] 27.g3 Ke7 28.h4 f6 29.Nc4 a5 30.b3 Kd7 31.h5 h6 32.Kd3 Kc6 33.Kd2 Nc7 34.f3 Nb5 35.Kd3 Nd6 36.a4 Nf5 [36...Nxc4? 37.bxc4+/- may very well be winning.] 37.g4 Ne7 38.Kd2 Nd5 39.Kd3 Ne7 40.Ne3 Nd5 41.Nxd5 exd5 [After this White's only entry point is via f4-f5.] 42.f4 Kd6 43.f5 Kc6 44.Kc3 Kd6 45.b4 Kc6 46.Kb3 Kd6 47.Kb2 Kc6 48.Kb3 Kd6 49.b5 Kd7 [When the position is drawn and closed, when I am working my way toward the Fifty Move Rule at blitz speed, I often place my king on the same color as my opponent's king. That way I am more likely to get a repetition of moves earlier.] 50.Ka2 Kc8 51.Kb3 Kd7 52.Kc2 Ke8 53.Kd3

Kf7 54.Ke3 Ke7 55.Kf2 Kf8 56.Ke2 Ke8 57.Kf2 Kf8 58.Kg3 Ke7 59.Kg2 Ke8 60.Kf1 Kf7 61.Ke1 Ke7 62.Kd2 Kd8 63.Ke1 Ke7 64.Kf1 Kf7 Game drawn by mutual agreement 1/2-1/2

3.Nf3 Nf6 4.Nc3 dxc4 Black captured the gambit pawn and threatens to keep it.

133 – Krienke 5.e4 b5 6.Bg5 b4 In the final round of the 2009 Space Coast Open, I faced Makaio W. Krienke. Later he became a USCF master. Coming into this game I was physically and mentally exhausted. In this Slav Defence I had a chance to grab the advantage in a variation of the 5.e4 Geller Gambit. Instead I played the game like I was in a fog. I remember very distinctly that I could not focus on anything. I know I was physically overweight and out of shape. My opponent was almost 40 years younger than me. Here in the final round of long games, it caught up with me. White's 7.Bxf6? was a serious mistake, but I returned the favor with three blunders in 11 moves. Krienke did a good job finding tactical punishment for my poor play. I had a chance to possibly grab a win vs a talented future master, but I let it slip. That story was repeated over and over for about half the tournament games I played in my 50s. In those games I was beaten three different ways. What is the solution? Obviously I cannot get younger, and sometimes I am lazy. To get in TOP form, I can work on three areas: (T) tactical skill, (O) opening preparation, and (P) physical condition. It would take all three to get my rating back up over 2000 now that I am over 60 years old. If I add (L) for lazy, my rating will topple (TOPL). Krienke (2030) - Sawyer (1964), Space Coast Open (5), 10.05.2009 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.Nc3 dxc4 5.e4 b5 6.Bg5 b4 [Black's move 6...e6 leads to well-known positions Semi-Slav positions. 7.e5 h6 8.Bh4 g5 9.Nxg5 hxg5 10.Bxg5 Nbd7] 7.Bxf6? exf6? [Black should grab the knight

and gain the advantage in all lines with 7...bxc3 8.Be5 (8.Bxg7 Bxg7 9.bxc3 Qa5-+; 8.bxc3 exf6 9.Bxc4 Nd7-+) 8...cxb2 9.Rb1 Qa5+ 10.Qd2 c3 11.Qc2 f6 12.Bf4 Na6-+] 8.Na4 Be6 9.Rc1 c3 10.bxc3 bxc3 [10...Bxa2=] 11.Nxc3 Bb4 12.d5 Bxc3+? [12...Qa5 13.dxe6 Bxc3+ 14.Ke2 0-0=] 13.Rxc3 cxd5 14.exd5 Bg4? 15.Qa4+ Bd7 16.Re3+ Kf8 17.Qb4+ Kg8 18.Qb7 1-0

134 – Sobel 6.e5 Nd5 7.a4 b4 Simone Sobel had been one of the higher rated women players in Florida for years. Sobel was a thoughtful opening player with experience playing many South Florida experts and masters. I never learned the 5.e4 Geller Gambit well enough to hold off White’s attack. I often lost in this line. The Black king had no safe place. Simone Sobel beat me in the same line in our next game. Sobel - Sawyer, FL State Championship (2), 02.09.2006 begins 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.Nc3 dxc4 5.e4 b5 6.e5 Nd5 7.a4 b4?! [I mixed up the 5.e4 and 5.e3. After 7...e6 8.axb5 Burgess writes: "if Black is well-prepared he should not be worried by it..." White must "judge whether his (or her) opponents are more likely to fall into one of the myriad pitfalls the gambit presents than they are to know and play the lines flawlessly." 8...Nxc3 9.bxc3 cxb5 10.Ng5 Bb7 11.Qh5 g6=/+] 8.Ne4 e6 [8...c3 9.bxc3 bxc3 10.Bc4+/= Burgess] 9.Bxc4 a5 10.Bg5 Qc7 11.0-0 Ba6 12.Nfd2 Nb6! [White wanted to play Nc4. I prevented her idea. Now she thought for a long time.] 13.Rc1 N8d7 [Black is busted, but she yawned many times and used about half of her two hours. So I offered a draw. She thought for a long time and suggested we play on for a few moves.] 14.Bxa6 Rxa6 15.Qc2 Ra8 16.Qxc6 [White won both pawns.] 16...Qxc6 17.Rxc6 Be7 18.Rfc1 Bxg5 19.Nxg5 0-0 20.b3 Rfd8 21.Nge4 h6 22.Nd6 Nd5 23.N2e4 Kf8 24.Kf1 Ke7 [Now she was down to five minutes on her clock. She was still thinking a lot on each move. I decided to complicate matters and try to avoid immediate disaster.] 25.Rc8 f5 26.exf6+ gxf6 27.Rxa8 Rxa8 28.Nb5 f5 29.Nd2 e5 30.dxe5 Nxe5 31.Rc5 Rd8 32.Nc4 Nd3 33.Rc6 h5 34.Nxa5 Ne5 35.Rh6 Nf4 36.Rh7+ Kf6 37.f3 [White had only 10 seconds left on her clock with a 5 second delay. It was remarkable that she did not lose on time. I paused for a minute or two to examine what type of mate threats I could pose, after which I proceeded to blitz her in ICC style until the game ended.] 37...Rd1+ 38.Kf2 Rd2+ 39.Ke3 Rd3+ 40.Kxf4 h4 41.Rh6+ Ng6+ 42.Rxg6+ Kxg6 43.g3 h3 44.Nc7 Rd2 45.Ne6 Rxh2 46.Ng5 Rh1 47.g4 h2 48.Kg3 Kxg5 49.gxf5 Kxf5 50.Kg2 Rg1+ 51.Kxh2 Rg8 52.Nc6 Kf4 53.a5 Kxf3 54.Nd4+ Kf2 55.a6 Rh8# [Whew! White had 2 seconds left on her

clock. She was in tears, and devastated as anyone would be. If there was no mate then 55...Ra8 wins.] 0-1 White is checkmated.

135 – Sobel 6.e5 Nd5 7.a4 e6 Most of the time I played better than this. In Florida a handful of my tournament games were very ugly losses. My most ugly games were in the Slav Defence where I had Black. Two were Geller Gambits vs Simone Sobel. I won the first one when she got into time trouble (see previous game). Here she did not let that happen again. Sobel crushed me with her gambit attack. Simone Sobel played in a lot of tournaments with a rating near the 2000 expert level. After the game Simone told me that she has played this variation from both sides many times. She said she often lost as Black in much the same way I did. Here Simone Sobel played very well. My lack of understanding in this line was a major problem. She deserved the win. I deserved the loss. Sobel - Sawyer, 5th Turkey Bowl Boca Raton, FL (2), 18.11.2006 begins 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.Nc3 dxc4 [Later I played the trendy 4...a6 to avoid this line.] 5.e4 b5 6.e5 Nd5 7.a4 e6 [The last time we played, I blundered with 7...b4?] 8.axb5 Nxc3 9.bxc3 cxb5 10.Ng5 Bb7 11.Qh5 g6 [I got further in the book, but I am a passive position I do not handle well.] 12.Qg4 Be7 13.Be2 [13.Qf4 Bxg5 14.Qxg5 Qxg5 15.Bxg5 a5=/+] 13...Bd5 14.Ne4 Nc6 [14...h5 15.Qf4 Nc6=/+] 15.Bh6 [Traps the king in the center. I should have played h5 at some point in the past few moves.] 15...Bxe4 [15...b4!?=/+ should not be overlooked] 16.Qxe4 Qd7 17.Bf3 Rc8 18.0-0 a5 [18...b4 19.Qe3+/=] 19.Rfd1 Bf8 [19...Qc7!?+/-] 20.Bxf8+- Kxf8 21.d5 [21.Qf4 a4+-] 21...Ne7 22.dxe6 Qxe6 23.Rxa5 Rb8 24.Ra7 Nc8? [24...Re8 25.Rb7+-] 25.Rc7 [25.Bg4 Qe8 26.Bxc8 Rxc8 27.Rdd7+-] 25...Kg7?? [Shortens the misery for Black. 25...h5+-] 26.Bg4 Qa6 [26...Qe8 desperation 27.e6 h5 28.Qe5+ Kh7+-] 27.e6 Rf8 [27...Ne7 is no salvation 28.Qe5+ Kh6 29.Qf4+ g5 30.Qxf7 Qxe6 31.Qh5+ Kg7 32.Qxg5+ Qg6

33.Qxe7+ Kg8 34.Be6+ Qxe6 35.Qg7#] 28.Qe5+ Kh6 29.Rxf7 [29.Qf4+ Kg7 30.Rxf7+ Rxf7 31.Qxf7+ Kh6 32.Qf8+ Kg5 33.Rd5+ Kxg4 34.h3+ Kh4 35.Qf4#] 29...Rxf7+- 30.exf7 Nd6 31.Qxd6 1-0

136 – Muhle 5.a4 Bf5 6.Ne5 Nowadays many authors recommend the sharp Slav Defence 5.a4 Bf5 6.Ne5 variation. Back in 1978 neither the Slav Defence nor 6.Ne5 were popular. The line I chose would 20 years later be repaired and improved by Grandmaster Alexander Morozevich. However, at the time of this game Moro was only a one year old boy. In my first ICCF section, Peter Muhle played 1.d4. I offered to sidetrack him into my favorite Caro-Kann Defence after 1...c6 2.e4. Muhle stayed true with 2.c4. After 2...d5 we had arrived at a Slav Defence. We continued 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.Nc3 dxc4 5.a4 Bf5 6.Ne5. Play was not perfect, but White played better and won. Peter Muhle is not in the ICCF rating list which appeared many years later. Games in 1978 were not rated in ICCF. They used the title system. Players played in 7-person 6-game class events. If you won a section, then you moved up to the next class level for future tournaments. If you got high enough and won, then you could compete for the World Chess Correspondence Championship. Muhle - Sawyer, corr ICCF 1978 begins 1.d4 c6 2.c4 d5 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.Nc3 dxc4 5.a4 Bf5 6.Ne5 [The more solid and popular line is the Dutch Variation: 6.e3 e6 7.Bxc4 Bb4 8.0-0 where White scored 53.8% which is about average for all openings.] 6...Nbd7 [I avoided the long and rather forced line 6...e6 7.f3 Bb4 8.e4 Bxe4 9.fxe4 Nxe4 10.Bd2 Qxd4 11.Nxe4 Qxe4+ 12.Qe2 Bxd2+ 13.Kxd2 Qd5+ 14.Kc2 Na6 15.Nxc4 Black has three pawns for the bishop. The position is quite unclear, despite having been played 1000 times or more.] 7.Nxc4 Qc7 8.g3 e5 9.dxe5 Nxe5 10.Bf4 Rd8 [10...Nfd7 11.Bg2 g5!? is the famous Morozevich line.] 11.Qc1 Nfd7? [Given another chance I should have played 11...Bd6 12.Nxd6+ Qxd6 13.Bg2 0-0 14.0-0=] 12.Bg2 [12.Bxe5 Nxe5 13.Qe3 f6 14.f4] 12...f6 13.0-0 Be6 14.Ne4 Be7 [14...Bxc4 15.Qxc4 Nxc4 16.Bxc7 Rc8 17.Bf4+/= and the

two bishops are of some advantage.] 15.a5 a6! [15...Bxc4 16.Qxc4 f5=] 16.Qc3 Bxc4 17.Qxc4 Nxc4 18.Bxc7 Rc8 19.Bf4 g5 20.Bc1 Kf7 21.Rd1 Nc5 22.Nxc5 [Seeing that I will lose the b-pawn, I gave up rather than spend more international postage money.] 1-0

137 – Nolan 6.e3 e6 7.Bxc4 Bb4 Back around 1980 USCF postal chess had a funky rating system that was not exactly the Elo system. Eventually they switched over the numbers to the Arpad Elo scale. I did not play much in USCF postal back then. I preferred going with several other postal chess organizations. One of my early USCF postal chess opponents was my friend Gregory Nolan. Greg and I played together at the Chaturanga Club in Hatboro, Pennsylvania north of Philadelphia. We talked many times about chess books and chess in general. Nolan played 1.d4 main line openings as White. In our postal chess game below, I opted for the Slav Defence. Greg chose the most common line 6.e3. In the years since our game, there has been an increase in the sharper 6.Ne5!? That knight move was still fairly rare back then. In this game Greg pushed his d4-pawn far down the board. Jonathan Rowson in his book "Understanding the Gruenfeld" has a chapter on "Dealing with Delroy". Rowson names all the pawns with first letters that correspond to the file the pawn is on. "Delroy" is the d-pawn. In the Gruenfeld Defence, Delroy often gets to d6 and sometimes d7. Preferably for Black, he cannot make it to d8 safely! In my game vs Nolan, I mishandled Delroy. Nolan - Sawyer, corr USCF 1982 begins 1.d4 c6 2.c4 d5 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Nf3 dxc4 5.a4 Bf5 6.e3 e6 7.Bxc4 Bb4 8.0-0 0-0 9.Qe2 Nbd7 10.e4 Bg6 11.Bd3 Bh5 12.h3 [This is a less frequently played move. The main line is 12.e5 Nd5 13.Nxd5 cxd5 14.Qe3 Be7 15.Bd2 Nb8=] 12...Bxf3 13.Qxf3 e5

14.Be3 exd4 15.Bxd4 c5!? [15...Qe7=; 15...Bc5=] 16.Bxf6 Qxf6 17.Qxf6 Nxf6 18.Nd5 Nxd5 19.exd5 Bd2? [19...Rad8 20.Rfd1 Rfe8 21.Bc4 Kf8 22.d6 Re4 23.Rac1 Rd4=] 20.d6 Rfe8 21.Rfd1 Bg5 22.d7 Red8 23.Be4 Rab8 24.a5 [24.Rab1+/-] 24...a6? [24...Bf6 25.Rd5 Bxb2 26.Rb1 Bd4 27.Bd3+/=] 25.Rd5 Bf6 26.Rc1 Bxb2? 27.Rcxc5 b6 28.Rc8 [28.axb6!+-] 1-0

138 – Perrine 8.0-0 Nbd7 9.Qe2 When I played in the 2009 Space Coast Open, four of my five opponents were very highly rated kids. They were all too young to vote but very strong chess players. In round two I faced the future National Master Dalton Perrine in the main line of the Slav Defence. When I checked a few years later, Dalton Perrine was rated 2322. At the time we played, Dalton Perrine was clearly very rapidly on the way up. At that time Dalton was already a rated expert. We followed the main line for the first 12 moves. Then White chose 13.Bd2. In “The Slav: Move by Move” Cyrus Lakdawala recommends Black respond with 13...c5! Lakdawala notes, “Deciding if and when Black should play ...c5 is one of the toughest challenges of the Slav.” I did okay for most of the game, but on move 30 I blundered. I got too frisky and did not look deep enough into the position. I did not see that when I played 30...Qxb2? White would win back my queen with 35.Bf5+. Perrine (2070) - Sawyer (1964), Space Coast Open (2), 09.05.2009 begins 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Nf3 dxc4 5.a4 Bf5 6.e3 e6 7.Bxc4 Bb4 8.0-0 Nbd7 9.Qe2 0-0 10.e4 Bg6 11.Bd3 Bh5 12.e5 Nd5 13.Bd2 [This avoids the more popular lines 13.Nxd5 cxd5 14.Qe3 Be7=; or 13.Ne4 Be7 14.Ng3 Bg6=] 13...a5 14.Be4 f5 15.exf6 Qxf6 16.Qd3 h6 17.h3 Bxf3 18.Bxf3 Nf4 19.Bxf4 Qxf4 20.Bg4 Rae8 21.Rae1 Nf6? [There is no need to sacrifice the e-pawn. 21...Qd6 22.Re3 Nf6 23.Ne4 Nxe4 24.Qxe4 Rf6=] 22.Bxe6+ Kh8 23.Re2 Rd8 24.Ne4 Nxe4 25.Rxe4 Qf6 [Swapping queens would be better. 25...Qd2 26.Qxd2 Bxd2 27.Rd1+/=] 26.Qc4 [26.Bb3+/-] 26...b5 27.axb5 cxb5 28.Qd3 [White can pick off a pawn with 28.Qxb5! Rxd4 29.Re2+/=]

28...Bc5 29.d5 Bxf2+ 30.Kh1 Qxb2? [Here I throw the game away because I did not look far enough ahead and missed White's 35th move. 30...Qg6!=] 31.Re2! Qd4 32.Rexf2 Qxd3 33.Rxf8+ Rxf8 34.Rxf8+ Kh7 35.Bf5+ 1-0

139 – Rookie 8.0-0 0-0 9.Qe2 I managed to hold Rookie to a draw with the main line of the Slav Defence. We followed the line of the previous game. Rookie chose 13.Nxd5 which is a common continuation. Often in this line I try to relocate my knight from d7 to c6 via b8. Here I did not play accurately. My plan to play 14...Rc8 before I moved the knight could have been punished by 15.Ng5! By move 37 the game was easily drawn. Since my opponent was rated 400 points above me, a draw would net me rating points. If Black had been desperate to win, he might have been able to work up something with his knight by going to the kingside. He might be able to attack the White pawns and pick up something. Of course in a blitz game against a chess engine, a human like myself would likely get into time trouble. That would increase the odds that I would blunder or lose on time. I have noticed that a very strong computer would play for the win if the board was turned around. Many human players look at an equal position and assume a draw. Chess engines find winning chances beyond what most humans bother to try and imagine. Rookie (2560) - Sawyer (2133), ICC 5 0 Internet Chess Club, 27.07.2007 begins 1.Nf3 d5 2.d4 c6 3.c4 Nf6 4.Nc3 dxc4 5.a4 Bf5 6.e3 e6 7.Bxc4 Bb4 8.0-0 0-0 9.Qe2 Nbd7 10.e4 Bg6 11.Bd3 Bh5 12.e5 Nd5 13.Nxd5 cxd5 14.Qe3 Rc8?! [Better is 14...Re8=] 15.Bd2 [15.Ng5! h6 16.Nh7 Re8 17.Qg3+/=] 15...Qe7 16.Bxb4 Qxb4 17.Qd2 Qxd2 18.Nxd2 Bg6 19.Bxg6 hxg6 20.Rfc1 Nb8 21.Nb3 b6 22.a5 Rc6 23.Rxc6 Nxc6 24.axb6 axb6 25.Ra4 Rb8 26.h3 Kf8 27.f4 Ke7 28.g3 Kd7 29.Kf1 Kc7 30.Ke1 Kb7 31.Kf1 [31.Ra1 Rc8=] 31...Ra8 32.Rxa8 Kxa8 33.h4 Kb7 34.Ke2 Ka6 35.Kd3 Kb5 36.Kc3 [36.Nd2 Kb4 37.g4 b5 38.Ke3 Na5 39.Kd3 Nc4 40.Nxc4 bxc4+ 41.Kc2=] 36...Ka4 [Black could try 36...Ne7!? 37.g4

Ng8=/+] 37.Na1 Kb5 38.Nc2 Ka5 39.g4 b5 40.b3 b4+ 41.Kd2 Kb5 42.Kc1 Kb6 43.Kb1 Kb5 44.Ka1 Ka5 45.Kb1 Kb5 46.Kc1 Ka5 47.Kb2 Kb5 48.Kb1 Ka5 49.Kc1 Kb5 50.Kb1 Ka5 51.Ka2 Kb5 52.Ka1 Ka5 53.Ka2 Kb5 54.Kb2 Ka5 55.Kc1 Kb5 56.Kb2 Ka5 57.Kb1 Kb5 1/2-1/2

3.Nf3 Nf6 4.Nc3 e6 This Semi-Slav Defence continuation may be reached by either 2…c6 or 2…e6.

140 – Morin 5.cxd5 exd5 6.Qc2 In the final round of a 2014 tournament played in Houlton, Maine, Roger Morin once again met Ray Haines. The two have tangled many times. Often Ray Haines plays the Dutch Defence. Another game saw Roger play 1.d4 and allow an Albin-Counter Gambit. Here Roger Morin prevented most gambits with 1.Nf3. The two players transposed to a Queens Gambit Declined. On move five Roger Morin opted for the popular 5.cxd5 Exchange Variation. Black defended well and had a solid position. All the weak points were covered. Haines could have play the more flexible 19...Qd7 with a drawish equal game. That would have made it very tough for White to win. Roger Morin kept making threats. He was rewarded when on move 23 Black chose the wrong way to defend d5. This was a very unfortunate last round loss for Ray Haines. At least both players raised their ratings in this event. Morin (2001) - Haines, Houlton ME (3), 30.05.2014 begins 1.Nf3 d5 2.c4 c6 3.d4 e6 4.Nc3 Nf6 5.cxd5 exd5 6.Qc2 [White plays to take away f5 from Black's bishop. Another common line is 6.Bg5 h6 7.Bh4 Bf5 8.e3 Nbd7=] 6...Be7 [Black could also try 6...Bd6 7.Bg5 0-0 8.e3 Re8 9.Bd3 h6 10.Bh4 Be6=] 7.Bg5 Nbd7 8.e3 0-0 9.Bd3 h6 10.Bh4 Re8 11.0-0 Ne4 12.Bxe7 Qxe7 13.Bxe4 dxe4 14.Nd2 Nf6 15.Nc4 Bf5 [Or 15...Nd5= ] 16.f4 Nd5 17.Nxd5 cxd5 18.Na3 Rac8 19.Qb3 Qe6 [19...Qd7=] 20.Rac1 b6 [20...Rxc1 21.Rxc1 Rc8 22.Rxc8+ Qxc8=] 21.Nb5 Qd7 22.Rxc8 Rxc8 23.Nc3 Be6 [23...Rd8=] 24.f5 Bxf5 25.Qxd5 Qxd5? [This unfortunate

blunder loses a piece. Black could have played 25...Be6 26.Qxe4+/= and only been down a pawn.] 26.Nxd5 Be6 27.Ne7+ 1-0

141 – Mamedyarov 5.Bg5 h6 Veteran players rated over 2700 rarely lose quickly. These super grandmasters are especially difficult to beat in under 30 moves. Shakhriyar Mamedyarov of Azerbaijan gets the better of Boris Gelfand in this SemiSlav Moscow variation. After 5...h6 Black gets the bishop pair and a solid position. White obtains more active central play with extra space and a lead in development. Mamedyarov (2761) - Gelfand (2743), 10th Tal Mem 2016 Moscow RUS (3.5), 29.09.2016 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nf3 d5 4.Nc3 c6 5.Bg5 h6 [5...dxc4 6.e4 b5 7.e5 h6 8.Bh4 g5 9.Nxg5 hxg5 10.Bxg5 Nbd7 11.exf6 Bb7 12.g3 c5 13.d5 Qb6 14.Bg2 0-0-0 15.0-0+/=] 6.Bxf6 [6.Bh4 dxc4 7.e4 g5 8.Bg3 b5 9.Be2 Bb4 10.Qc2 Bb7 11.0-0 Nbd7 12.Rad1 Bxc3 13.bxc3 c5=] 6...Qxf6 [6...gxf6 7.e3 Nd7 8.cxd5 cxd5 9.Rc1+/=] 7.g3 [7.e3 Nd7 8.Bd3 dxc4 9.Bxc4 g6 10.0-0 Bg7=; 7.Qb3 dxc4 8.Qxc4 Nd7 9.Rd1 g6=; 7.Qc2 Nd7 8.e3 (8.e4 dxe4 9.Qxe4 g6 10.Bd3 Bg7=) 8...Qd8 9.Bd3 Be7 10.0-0 dxc4=] 7...Nd7 8.Bg2 dxc4 9.0-0 Be7 10.Ne4 Qf5 11.Ned2 e5 12.e4 Qh5 [12...Qe6 13.Rc1 b5 14.b3=] 13.Nxc4 exd4 14.Qxd4 [14.e5=] 14...Qc5 [14...0-0 15.e5 Bc5 16.Qc3=] 15.e5 0-0 16.Qe4 [16.Rad1 Qxd4 17.Nxd4=] 16...Nb6 17.Ne3 Qb4 18.Nd4 Rd8 [18...Bc5 19.Rfd1 Qxb2 20.a4 Bxd4 21.Rab1=] 19.Rad1 Qxb2 20.e6 Bxe6 [20...Bf6 21.Nxc6 Rxd1 22.exf7+ Kxf7 23.Rxd1 bxc6 24.Qxc6=] 21.Nxe6 fxe6 22.Bh3 Kh8 23.Bxe6 g5 [23...Rxd1 24.Rxd1+/=] 24.Ng4 Rxd1 25.Rxd1 Qg7 26.Ne5 Qf6 27.Bb3 Kg7 [27...Rf8 28.Ng6+ Kg7 29.Qxe7+ Qxe7 30.Nxe7+-] 28.Ng4 1-0

142 – Murray 5.e3 Be7 6.Bd3 0-0 Saint Patrick, the missionary of old to Ireland, used the three leaf clover to teach three Christian characteristics of faith, hope and love; and to teach about the Trinity: Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Once in a while, you might find a four-leaf clover. It might not be good theology, but I like to think of the fourth leaf as "luck". A good Irishman might well believe in faith, hope, love and luck. One of my Irish friends was John Patrick Murray of Williamsport. Pat and I played over 100 games. Pat beat me three times from each side. Here is one of his wins in a Queens Gambit Declined. Pat Murray played well and needed no luck. "It is not enough to be a good player... you must also play well" (Siegbert Tarrasch). Murray - Sawyer, Williamsport, PA, 09.01.2001 begins 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.Nc3 Be7 [Black has two normal pawn moves here: 4...c6 and 4...c5, both giving an equal game.] 5.e3 [About half the time here White plays 5.Bg5 leading to lines I know a little.] 5...0-0 6.Bd3 c6 [I thought about transposing into a Queen's Gambit Accepted. 6...dxc4 7.Bxc4 c5=] 7.Qc2 Na6 8.a3 dxc4 [If 8...c5 9.cxd5 exd5 10.Bxa6 bxa6 11.dxc5 Bxc5 12.0-0+/= Black would be on the other side of an IQP position with doubled pawns to boot.] 9.Bxc4 b5 10.Bd3 b4? [10...Qa5; or 10...h6 is better] 11.Ne4! [This is the winning move.] 11...Qa5 12.0-0 [12.Nxf6+ gxf6 13.Bxh7+ Kg7 14.Be4 bxa3+ 15.Bd2+-] 12...bxa3 13.bxa3 Bd7? [This is fatal. 13...Nxe4 14.Bxe4 Qh5 was better, even though the c-pawn still goes.] 14.Bd2! [There is no way to protect both the queen and the knight on a6.] 14...Qh5 15.Nxf6+ gxf6 16.Bxa6 e5 17.Bb4! [Another good move.] 17...Bxb4 18.axb4 Kh8 19.Be2 Bg4 20.Qxc6 Rg8 21.Qxf6+ Rg7 22.Rfc1 Kg8 [22...e4 is met by 23.Ne5! (23.Qc6 exf3 24.Qxa8+ Rg8 25.Qc6 fxe2 26.Qf6+ Rg7 27.Rxa7 h6 28.Ra8+ White is winning, but Black is still wiggling.) 23...Bxe2 24.Rxa7 Rf8 25.Nxf7+ Kg8 26.Nh6+ Qxh6 and now White would not settle for winning the queen when he can play 27.Qxf8+! Kxf8 28.Rc8#] 23.Rc7 e4 24.Qc6 Rf8 25.Qxe4 Rg6 [25...Bh3 26.g3 Bf5 27.Qe7+-] 26.Ra5! [My computer programs find several choices that win

for White.] 26...f5 27.Qd5+ Kh8 28.Qe5+ Kg8 [28...Rgf6 prolonged things only a little. 29.Raxa7 Qg6 30.Bc4! leading to a forced mate 30...Bxf3 31.Qxf6+ Rxf6 32.Rc8+ Rf8 33.Rxf8+ Qg8 34.Rxg8#] 29.Bc4+ with a mate in one 1-0

143 – Mandelkern 5.e3 Nbd7 I saw a license plate that read "Nxf7". That tag tells a lot about a player, but I do not remember if it was on a Florida vehicle. I was paired vs Jeremy Mandelkern in the second round of the 2007 Space Coast Open. Three months earlier I played Black in the Fianchetto line of the King's Indian Defense. I did not know that line well. Mandelkern outplayed me anyway. Later I found improvements, but I did not remember anything at this point. When I found myself meeting his 1.d4, I knew that I was once again unprepared. I don’t remember what I had intended to play. Whatever it was, it wasn’t good enough. I was not willing to contest the same King's Indian line. Many of my strongest opponents play 1.d4. I needed something sharp and strong to play against it. Jeremy would not allow an Albin-Counter Gambit. All is methodical and solid with him. I drifted into a Semi-Slav. It reminded me of my Richard Batten game (see next game). Mandelkern played 9.a3. Normally I play the straight Slav Defence with 4...Bf5 5.cxd5 cxd5 6.Qb3. I considered this position during the game. I had not been there recently and I remembered that Black had only a few options that gave him equality. My opponent would love that kind of position. Around our move 37 we were interrupted by the game to my left in a time scramble endgame. I don’t remember who the players were. One guy had with R + N + 2 hours of time on his clock vs the other guy with R + 28 seconds of time on his clock. They stopped writing down the moves around move 80. They were playing with a five second delay. The guy with two hours was blitzing and frustrated that the defender’s time was not going down. They played an amazing 100 additional moves.

The attacker looked Russian to me. He thought it was "sudden death", but this event had a five second delay. The defender was an old-timer who thought that he could not claim a draw due to insufficient losing chances. True, but he could claim a draw by the 50 move rule!! Finally the attacker offered a draw when his arm got tired. The defender still had about a dozen seconds left. Now back to our game. I decided to try my luck with 1.d4 d5. Mandelkern (2055) - Sawyer (1966), 14th Space Coast Open (2), 28.04.2007 begins 1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.e3 c6 4.c4 e6 [The Semi-Slav] 5.Nc3 Nbd7 6.cxd5 [Ah yes. Positional and methodical. Yikes! I was dreaming of 6.Bd3 dxc4 7.Bxc4 b5 8.Bd3 in an Anti-Meran Defense.] 6...exd5 [Keeping the symmetry here with 6...cxd5 7.Bd3+/= leaves White better since Black's knight is on d7 instead of c6.] 7.Bd3 Bd6 8.0-0 0-0 [I had been here before vs Batten.] 9.a3 Re8 10.Qc2 Qe7 [I am doing okay, but it had been many years since I played these type of lines.] 11.Nd2! [Stopping ...Ne4 which I had played vs Batten.] 11...g6?! [I think this is premature. It does not fit in with any plan. Maybe 11...c5 12.Be2 cxd4 13.exd4 Nb6 14.Nf3 Bg4=] 12.b4 [12.e4! now is strong, but I suspected that Mandelkern would not play it until he is completely ready, i.e. low risk.] 12...a6 [12...a5!= allows Black activity on the queenside.] 13.Bb2 [13.e4!+/=] 13...Nf8 14.Rfe1 Be6 [14...Bxh2+? 15.Kxh2 Ng4+ 16.Kg1 Qh4 17.Nf3+- still fails.] 15.e4 dxe4 16.Ncxe4 Bd5 [Black's bad bishop has become an active bishop.] 17.Nxd6 Qxd6 18.Nc4 Bxc4 19.Bxc4 Nd5 20.Qd2 Rxe1+ 21.Rxe1 Ne6 22.g3 Nec7 23.Re5 Rd8 24.Qh6 Qf8 25.Qh4 f6 26.Re2 Re8 27.Rxe8 Nxe8 28.Qe4 Qf7 29.Bb3 Nec7 30.Kf1 Kf8 31.h4 Qe6 32.Qf3 Kg7 33.Qd1 Qe4 34.Kg1 Ne8 35.Bc2 Qe6 36.h5 f5 37.hxg6 hxg6 [About here we were interrupted by the game to my left that was in a time wild scramble endgame. People were gathered around. Things get a little noisy when a crowd gathers. My opponent had plenty of time on his clock. He just waited for the other game to finish.] 38.Qd2 [Once the excitement of the other game died down, my own opponent finally made his move.] 38...Nef6 39.Bc1 Kf7 40.f3 Qe8 [Choosing passive defense here does not work out for me. I should have opted to push my own kingside pawns. 40...g5!?] 41.Kg2 Qe6 42.Bd3 Qe8 [42...f4!?] 43.Bc4 Qe6 44.Kf2 Qe8 45.Qd3 Kg7 46.Bd2 Qe7 47.Qf1 Qe8 48.Qc1 Qe6 49.Qh1 Qe8

[49...Nh5!?] 50.Bh6+ Kf7 51.Bf4 Kg8? [Things start slipping downhill. 51...Ke7 52.Be5+=] 52.Be5+/= Kg7? 53.g4+/- Kf7 54.gxf5 gxf5 55.Qh6 Qe6 56.Qh8 Ke7? [56...Nd7! 57.f4+/-] 57.Qg7+ Kd8 58.Qxb7 Nd7 59.Qa8+ Ke7 60.Qh8 [They announced 157 players in this event. This was the next to the last game to finish this round.] 1-0

144 – Ivanchuk 6.Qc2 b6 7.Bd3 The Semi-Slav is a solid, complex and flexible defense to the Queen Pawn 1.d4 d5 2.c4. Pieces remain on the board for a long time. The tactical and strategical complications favor stronger players. Each grandmaster had a passed pawn below, but it was Black who made it count in the game between Boris Gelfand and Vassily Ivanchuk. Gelfand (2703) - Ivanchuk (2710), 4th Gideon Japhet Mem Cup Jerusalem ISR (8.2), 05.07.2018 begins 1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.c4 c6 4.Nc3 e6 5.e3 Nbd7 6.Qc2 b6 7.Bd3 Bb7 8.0-0 Be7 9.b3 0-0 10.Bb2 h6 11.Rad1 Qc7 12.Qe2 Rad8 13.Rfe1 [13.Bb1 Rfe8 14.Ne5+/=] 13...Rfe8 [13...dxc4 14.bxc4 c5=] 14.Bb1 Bf8 15.Ne5 dxc4 16.Nxd7 [16.bxc4!?=] 16...Rxd7 17.bxc4 c5 18.d5 exd5 19.Nxd5 Nxd5 [19...Bxd5 20.cxd5 Nxd5=] 20.cxd5 Bd6 [20...g6 21.Qc4 Bg7 22.Bxg7 Kxg7 23.e4+/=] 21.g3 [21.Qd3! Bxh2+ 22.Kh1 Be5 23.d6! Bxg2+ 24.Kxg2 Qc6+ 25.Kg1+/=] 21...c4 22.Qc2 g6 23.Rd4 Rc8 24.Bc3 b5 25.Qb2? [25.Rg4 Bf8=/+] 25...b4 26.Bxb4 c3 [26...Qb6-/+] 27.Bxd6 cxb2 28.Bxc7 Rdxc7 29.Rb4 Rc1 [If 30.Kf1 Ba6+ 31.Kg2 Rxe1-+] 0-1

145 – Paravyan 6.Bd3 Bd6 7.0-0 White wins this Semi-Slav Defence. It reminds me of positions commonly found in the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit. The attack with 15.Bxh6! resembles a combination frequently seen in BDG games. White's queen, bishops, and kingside knight anticipate mate in the chess game David Paravyan vs Alexandra Alieva. Paravyan (2603) - Alieva (2100), 14th Moscow Open RUS, 27.01.2018 begins 1.Nf3 d5 2.d4 Nf6 3.c4 e6 4.Nc3 c6 5.e3 Nbd7 6.Bd3 Bd6 7.0-0 0-0 8.e4 dxe4 [8...dxc4 9.Bxc4 e5=] 9.Nxe4 Nxe4 10.Bxe4 Nf6 11.Bc2 c5 12.Bg5 cxd4 13.Qxd4 Be7 14.Qh4 h6 15.Bxh6! [15.Bd2=] 15...gxh6 16.Qxh6 Bd6 17.Rad1 [White wins with a threat like 18.Ng5.] 1-0

146 – Batten 6.Bd3 Bd6 7.0-0 APCT columnist Jim Davies analyzed my Richard Batten game in his "Strategic Themes for the learning player". This was one of my best attacking games from the 1970s. Davies published this column using my suggested title "Revising One's Plan" in an early 1980 NB. I quote Jim Davies' first two paragraphs: “A fundamental reason for studying chess openings is to develop an understanding of the strategic plans in each opening. Once you have a good plan, if you develop consistently with that plan, you should get a playable middle game. Beyond the opening, however, it is often necessary to revise your plan as conditions dictate. Provided that you do not drift aimlessly from move to move, changing plans so as to trade one type of advantage for another, is a strategy worth considering.” “In this game, Black develops with the intention of preventing White's e4. When White finally overcomes this problem, Black shifts his attention to the King. Once material is won, Black consistently reduces the position to a winning endgame.” Batten (2000) - Sawyer (1900), corr APCT Q-36, 1978 begins 1.d4 c6 2.Nf3 d5 3.e3 [Davies noted this move gives Black too much freedom. Better is 3.c4 transposing into a Slav Defence.] 3…Nf6 4.Bd3 e6 5.0-0 Nbd7 [Is White going to employ a Colle System? No.] 6.c4 Bd6 [“Black can now enter the Slav Accepted (6...dxc4) with a tempo on the Bishop.”] 7.Nc3 0-0 [We reached a Semi-Slav Defence.] 8.cxd5 exd5 9.b3 ["inconsistent with the previous move" – Davies] 9…Qe7 [Black wins the race for e4.] 10.Qc2 Re8 11.Re1 Ne4 12.Bb2 Ndf6 [Black is ready for action. White tries a radical approach to drive me out of e4.] 13.Nd2? [13.Ne5=] 13...Nxf2! [A classic piece sacrifice which leads to a king hunt.] 14.Kxf2 Ng4+ 15.Kf1 Nxh2+ 16.Kg1 Qh4 17.e4 Bg3 18.Rf1 Re6 19.Nf3 Nxf3+ 20.Rxf3 Rh6 21.Rxg3 Qxg3-+ 22.Nd1? dxe4 23.Bc4 b5 [23...Qh2+! 24.Kf2 Qf4+ 25.Kg1 e3-+] 24.Qxe4 Bd7 25.Qe5 Qxe5 26.Bxf7+ Kxf7 27.dxe5 Be6 28.Ne3 Rd8 29.Rf1+ Ke8 30.Ba3 Rh4 31.Bd6 Rxd6 32.exd6 Rd4 33.Nc2 Rxd6 34.Re1 Kd7 35.Re2 c5 36.Ne3

c4 37.bxc4 bxc4 38.Rc2 Rd4 39.Kf2 Kd6 40.Ke2 Kc5 41.Rb2 c3 42.Rb7 Rd7 43.Rxd7 Bxd7 44.Kd3 Be6 45.a3 c2 46.Kxc2 Kd4 47.Kd2 a5 48.g3 a4 49.Nd1 Kc4 50.Kc2 Bf5+ 51.Kb2 Kd3 52.Nc3 Bd7 53.Nd5 Ke4 54.Nf4 g6 55.Kc3 Kf3 56.Nd5 h5 57.Nf4 Be8 0-1

147 – Fernandez 6.Bd3 dxc4 I assume that my opponent is the Eduardo B. Fernandez listed in USCF with a tournament rating of 2079 from Florida. Apparently Eduardo Fernandez has not been active for 30 years. We played a Semi-Slav Meran Variation. The popularity of the Meran Variation goes back to the 1920s and 1930s. Rabinovich, Euwe, Pirc, Thomas, and Kashdan played it often as Black. In 2004 Larry Kaufman promoted the Semi-Slav and the Meran in his book “The Chess Advantage in Black and White”. The line he recommended was 8…Bd6. Probably I chose 8…b4 based on a game I found in Chess Informant. I know Sveshnikov played it. The Caro-Kann Defence was my favorite opening in the 1970s. Many times I played 1.d4 c6, but rarely did White take the bait and play 2.e4. If White wanted a Caro-Kann, he would play 1.e4. I am sure we both thought about castling early. But that just did not happen. This is the only time in my 50,000 games that both players castled on move 23. White agreed to a draw when he had an extra pawn. But it would be difficult to win this rook and pawn ending. Since each players had to pay for each move they played, most of us tended not to drag out the game. By now we probably knew that we were out of the running for the APCT championship. Fernandez (2016) - Sawyer (1900), corr APCT 77RF-6, 1978 begins 1.d4 c6 2.c4 d5 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.e3 e6 5.Nc3 Nbd7 6.Bd3 dxc4 7.Bxc4 b5 8.Bd3 b4!? [8...Bd6 9.0-0 0-0=] 9.Ne4 Nxe4 10.Bxe4 Bb7 11.Qa4!? [11.0-0 Bd6 12.a3 bxa3=] 11...Qb6 12.Nd2 Rc8 [12...a5 13.Nc4 Qc7 14.0-0 Be7=] 13.a3 bxa3 14.Nc4 Qa6 15.Qb3 Qb5 16.Qxb5 cxb5 17.Bxb7 Rxc4 18.bxa3 b4 [18...Ra4=] 19.axb4 Bxb4+ 20.Bd2 a5 21.Bxb4 Rxb4 22.Bf3

a4 23.0-0 0-0 24.Bc6 Nb6 25.Rfb1 Rb3 26.Rxb3 axb3 27.Rb1 Rc8 28.Bb5 g6 [28...Rc3 29.Kf1+/=] 29.Kf1 Nc4 30.Ke2 Na3 31.Rxb3 Nxb5 32.Rxb5 Rc2+ 33.Kf3 h5 34.h3 Rd2 35.g4 hxg4+ 36.hxg4 f6 37.Rb7 Kf8 38.g5 fxg5 39.Kg4 Rxf2 40.Kxg5 Rf5+ 41.Kxg6 Rf3 1/2-1/2

148 – Capablanca 7.Bxc4 b5 When waiting for my wife to do shopping, I sat in the car reading the book “Capablanca: Move by Move” by Cyrus Lakdawala. In his chapter “Capa on Attack” I found a position on page 79 where four key White pieces are on the same squares for an attack that is typical of a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit Euwe line. Black had castled kingside with a knight on f6 and the pawn structure of e6, f7, g7, h6. The key White pieces were Bd3, Ne5, Bg5 and queen on the hfile that aimed at h6/h7. Precisely when ...hxg5 was threatened Capablanca uncorked 20.Ng4! Cyrus Lakdawala in his picturesque language writes: “Only with this move does White pulls the strings that make the puppets dance.” I love that. When planning for mating combinations involving sacrifice, good tactics must be found. Otherwise the puppeteer looks like a dunce when there is no dance. Against Grigory Levenfish Jose Capablanca's brilliant move 22 intends Nxh6+! It is a beautiful game any way you play it. A big difference between the Semi-Slav Defence and the BDG is the presence of a pawn on f2. We can envision a BDG situation where White has castled kingside without an f2 pawn. Black has Ngf6 and Nbd7. If White sacrificed the Exchange by Rxf6 Nxf6 we would have the same situation as the Capablanca game. Capablanca - Levenfish, Moscow (19), 14.03.1935 begins 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.e3 e6 5.Nc3 Nbd7 6.Bd3 dxc4 7.Bxc4 b5 8.Bd3 a6 [Another approach is 8...Bb7 9.0-0 a6 10.e4 c5 11.d5 Qc7 12.dxe6 fxe6 13.Bc2=] 9.e4 c5 10.e5 cxd4 11.Nxb5 Nxe5 12.Nxe5 axb5 13.Qf3 [13.Bxb5+ Bd7 14.Nxd7 Qa5+ 15.Bd2 Qxb5 16.Nxf8=] 13...Ra5 14.0-0 b4 15.Bf4 Be7 16.Rfc1 0-0 17.Qh3 Rc5 18.Rxc5 Bxc5 19.Bg5 h6 20.Ng4 Be7 21.Bxf6 [Houdini reverses the order of Capablanca's planned captures to lead to a

faster checkmate with 21.Nxh6+! gxh6 22.Bxf6 Bxf6 23.Qxh6 Re8 24.Bh7+ Kh8 25.Bg6+ Kg8 26.Qh7+ Kf8 27.Qxf7# A common BDG mating pattern.] 21...gxf6 [21...Bxf6 22.Nxh6+ Kh8 23.Nxf7+ and White picks off the Black queen.] 22.Nxh6+ Kg7 23.Qg4+ Kh8 24.Qh5 Kg7 25.Nxf7 Rh8 26.Qg6+ 1-0

Book 6: Chapter 5 – Queen’s Gambit Declined 2.c4 e6 Black defends d5 with the classical move 2…e6.

149 – Haines 3.a3 Nf6 4.Nf3 Be7 Ray Haines won a nice kingside attack at a tournament in Houlton, Maine. The game began with 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6. Roger Hardison as Black transposed into a Queen's Gambit Declined after White played the anti-Nimzo-Indian move 3.a3. My database shows that after 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6, three moves have winning records for White: 3.Nc3, 3.Nf3 and 3.g3. Three moves have winning records for Black: 3.Bg5, 3.a3 and 3.e3. The curious aspect of this game is that White lost (or sacrificed) a rook on move 11. Twice Black refused to accept it. After this, the position slowly drifted toward White's favor. Later Black left his king insufficiently defended. Ray Haines ripped open the kingside with a classic Bxh7+ sacrifice. Haines - Hardison, Houlton, ME, 14.04.2012 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.a3!? d5 4.Nf3 Be7 5.Nc3 0-0 [Now we have reached a Queen's Gambit Declined type position where White's move a3 amounts to a wasted tempo.] 6.cxd5 Nxd5 7.e4 Nxc3 8.bxc3 c5 [This has the feel of a Semi-Tarrasch Variation where again White's a3 serves little purpose.] 9.Bc4 cxd4 10.cxd4 Qc7 11.Qe2? [Correct is 11.Bb3!=] 11...b5 12.Bd3 Qc3+ 13.Nd2 b4!? [It appears that Black could just grab the rook and run away: 13...Qxa1 14.0-0 Qxd4-+ At this point Black is trending up. Moves that improve his position from here are easy and obvious. White on the other hand, being a rook down, pretty much would have to pull off a checkmate.] 14.0-0 bxa3? [Black misses his last chance to pick off the rook. 14...Qxa1 15.Nf3 Qc3-+]

15.Bxa3 Bxa3 16.Nc4-+ [16.e5!?] 16...Qxd4? [16...Bb4! 17.Nb6 axb6 18.Rxa8 Nc6-+] 17.Rxa3 Nc6? [17...e5!=] 18.e5! Bd7? [Black should survive with 18...g6 19.Be4+/=] 19.Bxh7+ Kxh7 20.Qh5+ Kg8 21.Rh3 [Black is fried.] 21...f5 22.Nd6 1-0

150 – Torning 3.cxd5 exd5 4.e4 Rick Torning wins a Queens Gambit Declined with the sacrifice of a pawn via 4.e4 that must be unsound. However it’s a bullet game. Fast fun chess is the main requirement. Sound chess is practically unheard of. And it worked. White did have fun! Torning wrote: "The QGD Greek Gift game - I rarely play the QG as I prefer 2.Nc3. I wanted to see if I could get a BDG type game. Ended up with an Advanced French type setup which allowed a Greek gift sac." Torning - NN, Casual Bullet lichess, 02.03.2018 begins 1.d4 e6 2.c4 d5 3.cxd5 exd5 4.e4 Nf6 5.e5 Nfd7 6.Nc3 Nb6 7.Bd3 Bb4 8.Nf3 Bxc3+ 9.bxc3 0-0 10.Bxh7+! Greek Gift 10...Kxh7 11.Ng5+ Kg6 [11...Kg8! 12.Qh5 (12.Qd3 g6 and the Bc8 covers h3) 12...Bf5 and the bishop controls the b1-h7 light squared diagonal] 12.Qd3+! f5 [12...Kh5 13.Qh7+ Kg4 14.f3#; 12...Kh6 13.Qh7#; 12...Bf5 13.Qg3] 13.exf6+?? [13.Qg3] 13...Bf5!? [This was worth a try instead of Kf6] 14.Qg3 Kxf6?? [14...Qd7] 15.Qe5+ Kg6 16.h4 Bg4 17.h5+ Bxh5 18.Ne6 Qf6 19.Qxh5# White wins by checkmate. 1-0 [Game notes by Torning]

151 – Diaz 3.Nc3 e6 4.Nf3 dxc4 Your strongest tactical weapon is the double attack. If you want to play like a strong player, you will win by threatening two points simultaneously. You win when something when your opponent cannot defend against both threats in one move. An oddity in this game is that Black did not move either knight until moves 12 and 14. On move 17, Black threatened mate with a queen to win a rook in this Queen's Gambit Declined between Manuel Dario Ochoa de la Rosa vs Rider Diaz Murgada. Since the mate must be prevented, the rook would be lost. Ochoa de la Rosa (2437) - Diaz (2435), Guillermo Garcia Master 1 Santa Clara CUB, 29.05.2018 begins 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.Nc3 e6 4.Nf3 dxc4 5.e3

b5 6.a4 Bb4 7.Bd2 a5 8.axb5 Bxc3 9.Bxc3 cxb5 10.b3 Bb7 11.bxc4 b4 12.Bb2 Nf6 13.Bd3 0-0 14.0-0 Nbd7 15.Nd2 Qc7 [15...h6=] 16.f4 a4 17.Rxa4? [17.Rb1] 17...Qc6! 0-1

152 – Hartung 3.Nc3 c5 4.cxd5 One of my games was very short in the ICCF Cup V from 1981. My opponent L. Hartung played the Von Hennig Schara Gambit from the Queens Gambit Declined. Just as we were coming to the good stuff, while still in the book, Black stopped playing. We had only been playing two to three months. I will use this to show the main ideas of this gambit. Lars Schandorff in "Playing the Queen's Gambit - a Grandmaster Guide" writes: "The Von Hennig-Schara Gambit uses a similar move order to the Tarrasch, but these two lines have little else in common. In this case Black gives up a central pawn for quick development, but it is hard to believe it can be good." The Von Hennig Schara is a tricky and trappy gambit that scores well in practice. According to my database, Black's performance with 4...cxd4 is equal to his rating. The Hennig Schara scores 3% higher than the Tarrasch, but Tarrasch opponents are rated higher. If you like this gambit, and play it regularly, you will score as well with 4...cxd4 as with anything else. Using my shortened game as the tree, here are the key lines. Sawyer - Hartung, corr ICCF, 1981 begins 1.d4 e6 2.c4 [2.e4 French Defence] 2...d5 [2...f5 Dutch Defence] 3.Nc3 c5 4.cxd5 cxd4!? [This is the Von Hennig-Schara Gambit. Otherwise 4...exd5 Tarrasch Defence] 5.Qxd4 [5.Qa4+ Bd7 6.Qxd4 exd5 7.Qxd5 Nc6 transposes] 5...Nc6 6.Qd1 exd5 7.Qxd5 Bd7 [7...Be6 8.Qxd8+ Rxd8 9.e3 Nb4 10.Bb5+ Ke7 11.Kf1] 8.Nf3 [8.Nf3 Nf6 9.Qd1 (9.Qb3 Bc5 10.e3 0-0 11.Be2 Be6=) 9...Bc5 10.e3 Qe7 11.Be2 (11.a3 0-0-0 12.Qc2 Kb8 13.Be2 g5 14.b4 g4 15.Nd2+/-) 11...0-0-0 (11...0-0 12.0-0 Rfd8 13.a3 Bg4; 11...g5 12.0-0 g4 13.Nd4+/=) 12.0-0 g5

13.b4 Bxb4 14.Bb2 g4 15.Nd4 Kb8 16.Ncb5 Rhg8 (16...a6; 16...h5 17.Qa4+/=) 17.Qb3+/=] 1-0

153 – McCullough 4.Nf3 Nf6 Rich McCullough and I played a number of interesting opening lines, especially in my early years. This game began with McCullough playing the English Opening as White. I owned some English Opening Batsford books by John Watson. Watson showed how 1.c4 e6 might lead to the Queens Gambit Declined. When we got there I wanted to play something sharp. This is one of those rare times when I ventured forth with a Tarrasch Variation. I like classical play, so it would be a natural for me. However I am not a big fan of isolated center pawns. In the main line of the Tarrasch, I would rather be White than Black. Boris Spassky used the Tarrasch to win the World Championship against Tigran Petrosian in 1969. They reached the position after 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 c5 (Tarrasch) 4.cxd5 exd5 5.Nf3 Nc6 6.g3 Nf6 7.Bg2 Be7 8.0-0 0-0. Every time Petrosian played 9.Bg5. Richard did not take on d5 on move four. I gave him one more chances. So I took his pawn instead after 4.Nf3 Nf6 5.Bg5 cxd4. The position was wide open and tactical. White kept his king in the center, while Black castled queenside. I won in the end. McCullough (1719) - Sawyer (2000), corr APCT P-388, 1978 begins 1.c4 e6 2.Nc3 d5 3.d4 c5 4.Nf3 Nf6 5.Bg5!? [Usual is 5.cxd5=] 5...cxd4 6.Nxd4 [6.Qxd4 Be7 7.cxd5 exd5 8.e3 0-0 9.Be2 Nc6=] 6...e5 7.Nf3 [7.Bxf6 gxf6 8.Nb3 d4 9.Nd5 Bf5=] 7...d4 8.Bxf6 gxf6 9.Nd5 Bf5!? [9...Nc6 10.e4=] 10.Qb3 [10.g3!?=] 10...Qa5+ 11.Nd2 Nd7 12.a3 Bh6 [12...0-0-0!?=] 13.Qb4 Qxb4 [13...Qd8=] 14.Nxb4 [14.axb4!=] 14...Be6!? [14...Rc8-/+] 15.b3 Nc5 16.Rb1 0-0-0 17.Nd3 Nxd3+ 18.exd3 f5 19.g3 e4 20.f4 exf3 21.Nxf3 Rhe8 22.Kd1 f4 23.gxf4 Bg4 24.Be2 Bxf4 25.h3 Bh5 26.Ng1 Bg6 27.Kc2 Re3 28.Rf1 Bd6 29.b4 Rde8 30.Rf2 f5 31.Kd2 a5 32.Nf3? [32.bxa5 Bxa3 33.Nf3 Bb4+ 34.Kd1 Bc3-/+] 32...Bf4 33.Kd1 Bh5 34.Rhf1 Bg3 [Even better is 34...axb4 35.axb4 Bh6!-+] 35.Rg2 f4 36.Kd2 Rg8

37.Kc2 Rge8 38.Kd2 axb4 39.axb4 Bxf3 40.Rxf3 Kc7 41.c5 Kc6 42.Rxe3 Rxe3 43.Rg1? [43.Bh5 Kb5-/+] 43...f3! 44.Bf1 f2 45.Rg2 [45.Bg2+ Kb5 46.Rb1 Re1-+] 45...Re1 46.Rxg3 Rxf1 47.Ke2 Rg1 [The rooks will be exchanged. Black will be up a pawn on the queenside in the endgame.] 0-1

154 – Yace 4.cxd5 exd5 5.g3 When I finished updating this book, I noticed I had not included any games with the Queen's Gambit Declined Tarrasch Defence in the main line with g3 for White. So I did a search of my games. I had played it many times and from both sides. However never did I play it against a human in a game that I recorded. All my games in this variation of the Tarrasch Defence were played against computers at home or against chess engines online. I decided to add this one game before I went to print. As Black, Yace Paderborn played the Tarrasch Defence after 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6. A common move would be 3.Nc3. I chose 3.Nf3. My approach was to play it like a reversed Gruenfeld Defence or a variation of the Catalan Opening. We reached the standard Tarrasch position after eight moves. Instead of the popular 9.Bg5 c4, I played 9.dxc5 Bxc5 to isolate the Black d5 pawn. By move 17 I won that pawn. Gradually we arrived at an endgame that required some technique. Sawyer (1968) - Yace Paderborn (1904), Florida 14.07.2010 begins 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.Nf3 c5 4.cxd5 exd5 5.g3 Nc6 6.Bg2 Nf6 7.0-0 Be7 8.Nc3 0-0 9.dxc5 [9.Bg5 c4 10.Ne5 Be6=] 9...Bxc5 10.Na4 [10.Bg5 d4 11.Bxf6 Qxf6 12.Ne4 Qe7 13.Nxc5 Qxc5 14.Qd2=] 10...Be7 11.Be3 Re8 12.Bc5 [12.Rc1 Bg4=] 12...b5 [12...Bxc5 13.Nxc5 Qe7= 14.Rc1 Qxe2 15.Qb3 Ne5=] 13.Bxe7 Qxe7 14.Nc3 Bb7 [14...Be6 15.Nxb5+/=] 15.e3 [15.Nxb5+/=] 15...Qb4 [15...a6 16.a4+/=] 16.Nxd5 Nxd5 17.Qxd5 Qxb2 18.Rfb1 Qe2 [18...Qf6 19.Qxb5+/-] 19.Qxb5 [White can attack with 19.Ng5! Re7 20.Qf5 g6 21.Qf6 h6 22.Bd5 hxg5 23.Qxg6+ Kf8 24.Qh6+ Kg8 25.Bxc6 Bxc6 26.Qxc6+-] 19...Qxb5 20.Rxb5 Ba6 21.Rb2 Rad8 22.Rc1 h6 23.h4 Rd6 24.Bf1 Bxf1 25.Kxf1 Re7 26.Ke2 Nd4+ 27.Nxd4 Rxd4 28.Rd1 Rde4 29.Rbd2 f5 30.Rd7 Kf7 31.Rxe7+ Kxe7 32.Rd4 Re6 33.f3 Kf6 34.e4 g5 35.hxg5+ hxg5 36.Ke3 a5 37.a4 g4 [37...fxe4 38.f4 gxf4+ 39.gxf4+/=]

38.f4 [38.Rd5!+-] 38...Kf7 [38...fxe4 39.Rd5+/=] 39.e5 Kg6 40.Rd6 Kf7 [Or 40...Kh5 41.Kd4+-] 41.Rxe6 Kxe6 42.Kd4 Ke7 43.Kc5 Ke6 44.Kb5 Kd5 45.Kxa5 Kc5 46.Ka6 Kd5 47.Kb6 Ke6 48.a5 Kd5 49.a6 Ke4 50.a7 Kf3 51.a8Q+ 1-0

155 – Sawyer 4.Nc3 c5 5.cxd5 Simple is not easy. In this postal game Tim Sawyer vs Edward Sawyer we reached a Queens Gambit from Caro-Kann Defence. In my early years I tried out many different variations. As White I chose the Panov Variation 1.e4 c6 2.d4 3.exd5 cxd5 4.c4. This line leads to wide open positions. They can become sharp and tactical. Black simplified our position after 7…Nxd5 in a way that would make Capablanca happy. It may be simple, but finding the right plan and the best squares for pieces is hard. This same position after seven moves can be reached via the Queen's Gambit Declined Semi-Tarrasch after 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Nf3 c5 5.cxd5 Nxd5 6.e3 cxd4 7.exd4 Be7. One thing that surprised me in this game was Black’s 13...Be8. It never occurred to me that Black might back up his bishop. My experience was geared to moving pieces ahead aggressively and rapidly. I had planned to take his bishop. I figured that could wait one more move. It disappeared! I took his knight instead. I found myself caught by indecision. Should I attack his king? My pieces were not set up for attack. He had no weak points. Black was able to coordinate his pieces against me queenside. My attempts on the kingside produced nothing. When my last queenside pawn fell, I resigned. Sawyer, Timothy E - Sawyer, Edward G, corr 1976 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 cxd5 4.c4 Nf6 5.Nc3 e6 6.Nf3 Be7 7.cxd5 Nxd5 8.Bb5+ [8.Bd3 Nc6 9.0-0 0-0 10.Re1 Nf6 11.Bg5 h6 12.Bh4 b6 13.a3 Bb7=] 8...Nc6 [8...Bd7 9.Bc4 Nxc3 10.bxc3 Qc7 11.Qd3 0-0 12.Bb3 Bc6 13.0-0 Nd7=] 9.Ne5!? [The main continuation of this line is 9.0-0 0-0 10.Re1=] 9...Bd7

10.Bxc6 bxc6 [10...Bxc6=] 11.Qf3 [11.Qg4!+/=] 11...0-0 12.0-0 Nxc3 [12...f6 13.Nxd7 Qxd7=] 13.Qxc3 [13.bxc3=] 13...Be8 14.Nxc6 Bxc6 15.Qxc6 Qxd4 16.Rb1 Rfc8 17.Qf3 Rab8 18.Be3?! [18.b3=] 18...Qa4 19.a3 Bf6 20.h3? [20.Qd1 Qxd1 21.Rfxd1 Rxb2 22.Bxa7 Ra2 23.Rb3=] 20...Bxb2 21.Bc1 Bf6 22.Bh6 Bb2 [22...Be5-/+] 23.Qg3? Qxa3 0-1

156 - Schoppmeyer 5…Nxd5 Herbert Schoppmeyer of Germany had an ICCF rating of 2137. His name appeared in many gambit opening chess books. I was familiar with his name. Schoppmeyer played postal chess for 40 years. I have almost 100 of his games in my database. Schoppmeyer played a wide variety of openings. It appears that he tried everything from main lines to unorthodox variations. In the 1950s he lost two games as Black to the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit. Back then I still didn’t know anything about the BDG. Many of his games seem to be thematic events. Herbert played the King’s Gambit Falkbeer Counter Gambit and Latvian Gambit. Herbert Schoppmeyer is listed as having been born in 1940, but I don’t know if that is accurate. The earliest Schoppmeyer games in my database are from 1955. His peak years of tournament success were 1959 to 1973. He stopped playing around 1992. We played a Caro-Kann Defence Panov Attack. It transposed to Queens Gambit Semi-Tarrasch from that Caro-Kann move order. The Queen's Gambit Declined Semi-Tarrasch move order would be 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Nf3 c5 5.cxd5 Nxd5 6.e3 cxd4 7.exd4 Be7. The Schoppmeyer move 8.Bd3 was better than my choice of 8.Bb5 against Edward Sawyer (see previous game). Schoppmeyer - Sawyer, corr ICCF 1982 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 cxd5 4.c4 Nf6 5.Nc3 e6 6.Nf3 Be7 7.cxd5 Nxd5 8.Bd3 [8.Bc4 Nc6 9.0-0 0-0 10.Re1 Bf6 11.Ne4 b6=] 8...Nc6 9.0-0 0-0 10.Re1 Bf6 11.Be4 Qd6 [11...Nce7 12.Ne5 Bd7 13.Qh5 g6 14.Qf3 Bg7=] 12.Bxd5!? [12.Bc2 Qb4 13.a3+/=] 12...exd5 13.Nb5 Qd8 14.Bf4 Bg4 15.Bd6?! [15.h3 Bxf3 16.Qxf3 a6 17.Nc7 Rc8 18.Qxd5=] 15...Bxf3 16.Qxf3 Nxd4? [The only

move is 16...a6! 17.Bxf8 axb5 18.Bc5 b6=/+] 17.Qd3 Nxb5 18.Bxf8 Bxb2 19.Rab1 Bc3 20.Re3 Qxf8 21.Rxb5 d4 22.Rh3 g6 23.Rxb7 Re8 24.g4 Re1+ 25.Kg2 a5 26.Rf3 Re7 27.Rb6 [27.Qb5+/-] 27...Kg7 28.Qc4 Qa8 29.Rc6 Ra7? [29...Qb8 30.Qd5+/=] 30.Qd5 Qe8 31.Rd6 Re7 32.g5 [Or 32.Rd8!+-] 32...Rc7 [Black is completely busted. 33.Rd8 wins.] 1-0

3.Nc3 Nf6 This is the standard continuation in the Queen’s Gambit Declined.

157 – Rudenko 4.e3 Nbd7 The Google Doodle for July 27, 2018 highlighted Lyudmila Vladimirovna Rudenko. Who was Rudenko? She was born July 27, 1904, in Ukraine. She studied chess with Peter Romanovsky in 1929. Rudenko helped evacuate children from Leningrad in World War II. The first women's world champion Vera Menchik died in a 1944 bombing raid in England. Rudenko won the second women's world chess championship in 1950. She was awarded the FIDE IM and WGM titles. Rudenko lost her title to Elisaveta Bikova in 1953. Here's a prior game. Rudenko - Bikova, URS ch, 1948 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 d5 4.e3 [White selects this modest 4.e3 line played only 3% of the time. Far more popular are 4.Bg5; 4.cxd5; or 4.Nf3.] 4...Nbd7 5.Nf3 Be7 6.Qc2 0-0 7.b3 b6 8.cxd5 Nxd5 [8...exd5=] 9.Nxd5 exd5 10.Bd3 h6 11.0-0 Bb7 12.Bb2 Rc8 13.Rac1 c5 14.Qe2 [14.dxc5!?+/=] 14...Rc7 15.Bb1!? Re8 16.Qd3 Nf8 [16...g6=] 17.Ne5 Bf6 18.f4 Bxe5 [18...Be7=] 19.fxe5 c4 20.Qe2 b5 [20...Ne6 21.Ba3+/-] 21.Ba3 Ng6 [21...Ne6 22.Rf2+/-] 22.Bd6 Rd7 23.Rxf7?! [23.Qg4!+-] 23...Re6 [Black had a better defense with 23...Nxe5! 24.Rxd7 Nxd7 25.Rf1 Re6+/=] 24.Rxd7 Qxd7 25.Qf2 [25.Rf1+-] 25...Rxd6 26.exd6 Qxd6 27.Rf1 Bc6 [27...Qe6 28.Qg3+-] 28.Qf7+ Kh7 [White takes advantage of the pinned knight.] 29.Rf3 [Or 29.h4! h5 30.Rf5 Kh6 31.Rg5 Be8 32.Qxe8+-]1-0

158 – Anton 4.Nf3 dxc4 5.e4 Black finds a new Queens Gambit Declined move that challenges White. After 10.Qh5, Black always castled in my database. Here in Noa Omar vs David Anton Guijarro, Black played 10...g6!? Then the grandmaster uncorked a beautiful bishop tactic on move 15. Omar (2372) - Anton Guijarro (2653), 20th Dubai Open 2018 UAE, 07.04.2018 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nf3 d5 4.Nc3 dxc4 5.e4 Bb4 6.Bxc4 [6.Bg5 c5 7.Bxc4=] 6...Nxe4 7.0-0 Nxc3 8.bxc3 Bd6 9.Ng5 h6 10.Qh5 [10.Ne4=] 10...g6 [10...0-0 11.Ne4=] 11.Qh3 Kf8 12.Re1 Kg7 13.Nxf7?! [13.Ne4+/=] 13...Kxf7 14.Bxh6 Qf6 15.Re3 15...Bf4! 0-1 [If 16.Bxf4 Rxh3 17.Rxh3 Qxf4 18.Rf3 Qxf3 Black is up a knight.]

159 – Svane 4.Nf3 Bb4 5.Qa4+ Rasmus Svane defeated Ivan Cheparinov in this Ragozin Queens Gambit which began 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Nf3 Bb4. It’s both a Queens Gambit Declined and the Nimzo-Indian Defence. Svane applied pressure which Cheparinov equalized. Black missed White’s sudden kingside attack on move 23. Svane (2555) - Cheparinov (2689), World Rapid 2016 Doha QAT (1.26), 26.12.2016 begins 1.Nf3 d5 2.d4 Nf6 3.c4 e6 4.Nc3 Bb4 5.Qa4+ [5.Bg5 c5 6.cxd5 exd5 7.e3 0-0 8.Qc2 Be6 9.Bd3 h6 10.Bh4 c4 11.Be2 Nbd7 and 0-1 in 72. Cheparinov - Carlsen, Khanty Mansiysk RUS 2005] 5...Nc6 6.e3 [6.Bg5 dxc4 7.Bxf6 gxf6 8.a3 Bxc3+ 9.bxc3 Qd5 10.g3 b5 11.Qc2 Bb7 12.Bg2=] 6...0-0 7.Bd2 dxc4 8.Bxc4 Bd6 [8...a6 9.Qc2 Bd6 10.a3 (10.Ne4 Nxe4 11.Qxe4 Qf6 12.Rd1=) 10...e5 11.dxe5 Bxe5 12.Nxe5 Nxe5 13.Be2 and 1-0 in 47. Svane - Pert, London ENG 2016] 9.Qc2 [9.0-0 e5 10.d5 Ne7=] 9...e5 10.dxe5 Nxe5 11.Nxe5 Bxe5 12.f4 [12.0-0-0!? Qe7 13.Kb1=] 12...Bxc3 13.Bxc3 Qe7 [13...Ng4 14.Bd4 c5 15.Bxc5 Re8 16.0-0 b6 and 1/2-1/2 in 33. Giri - W. So, Paris FRA 2016] 14.0-0 Qxe3+ 15.Kh1 Qb6 16.Rf3 Re8 [16...Bd7=] 17.Raf1 [17.Rg3+/=] 17...Bd7 [17...Qc6=] 18.Rg3 a6 19.f5 Bb5 [19...Re3 20.Rxe3+/=] 20.Bxb5 [20.Qc1!+-] 20...Qxb5 21.Qc1 Kh8 22.Rff3 [22.a4!?+/-] 22...Rad8 [22...Qc6=/+] 23.h3 [23.Rxg7

Qe2 24.Rg8+ Kxg8 25.Rg3+ Kf8 26.Qh6+ Ke7 27.Re3+ Qxe3 28.Qxe3+ Kd7 29.Qh6=] 23...Qd5? [23...Qb6 24.Rxg7 Kxg7=] 24.Qg5! 1-0

160 – Anton 4.Nc3 Be7 5.Bf4 GM Dmitry Jakovenko won by sudden counter-attack in a Queens Gambit Declined as Black. GM David Anton Guijarro playing White complicated matters by allowing 10...Nxf4. Computer evaluations remained equal until move 21 when White may have been in time trouble. He made two blunders in a row. He got away with the first, but Black nailed him on the second. Anton Guijarro (2650) - Jakovenko (2704), World Rapid 2016 Doha QAT (6.28), 27.12.2016 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nf3 d5 4.Nc3 Be7 5.Bf4 0-0 6.e3 Nbd7 7.a3 dxc4 8.Bxc4 Nb6 9.Bd3 Nbd5 10.0-0 [10.Nxd5=] 10...Nxf4 11.exf4 b6 12.Qe2 Bb7 13.Rfe1 Bd6 14.Ne5 Nd5 15.Qg4 [15.Nxd5=] 15...c5 16.Nxd5 Bxd5 17.dxc5 bxc5 18.Rad1 Rb8 19.Re3 [19.Bc4 Bxe5 20.Rxe5 Rxb2 21.Bxd5 exd5 22.Rexd5=] 19...Bxe5 20.fxe5 f5 [20...Rxb2-/+] 21.Qa4? [21.Qe2=] 21...Rxb2 [Black could win a rook with 21...Bb3! 22.Qa6 Bxd1-+] 22.Bc4? [Or 22.Qxa7 Qh4-/+. Now find the winning move.] 22...Qh4! 0-1

161 – Protej 4.Nc3 Be7 5.Bf4 I drew a rated 2401 opponent in a symmetrical Queens Gambit. Our English Opening began 1.c4 d5 2.d4 e6. I was careful to develop rapidly and avoid any weaknesses that would let White invade. Knowing how to draw a drawn game is important as knowing how to win a won game. I had half a dozen draws against Protej in different openings. Here we swapped all the heavy material and then all the queenside pawns. We reached a drawn endgame where we both had four kingside pawns and a king. Protej (2401) - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 u Internet Chess Club, 04.06.2016 begins 1.c4 d5 2.d4 e6 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.Nc3 Be7 5.Bf4 0-0 6.e3 c5 7.dxc5 Bxc5 8.Be2 dxc4 9.Bxc4 Qxd1+ 10.Rxd1 Nc6 11.a3 [11.0-0 b6=] 11...a6 12.Bd3 Be7 13.Na4 b5 14.Nb6 Ra7 15.Ke2 Rb7 16.Rc1 Rxb6 17.Bc7 Rb7 18.Rxc6 Ra7 19.Rcc1 Bb7 20.Bb6 Raa8 21.Rhd1 Rac8 22.Bc7 [22.Bd4 Rfe8=] 22...Rfe8 23.b4 Nd5 [Or 23...Bd5=] 24.Be5 Bf6 25.Bxf6 Nxf6 26.h3 Rxc1 [26...Kf8=] 27.Rxc1 Rc8 28.Rxc8+ Bxc8 29.e4 Kf8 30.Ke3 Ke7 31.Kd4 Nd7 32.Bc2 [32.e5!?=] 32...Bb7 33.g4 h6 34.a4 Bc6 35.axb5 Bxb5 36.Bd3 Bxd3 37.Kxd3 Kd6 38.Ke3 Ne5 39.Nd4 [If 39.Nxe5 Kxe5 40.f4+ Kd6 41.h4 f6= and the kingside can be blocked off.] 39...Nc4+ 40.Kd3 Nb6 41.Nb3 Nd7 42.Na5 g6 43.Nc4+ Kc6 44.f3 f6 45.h4 Ne5+ 46.Nxe5+ fxe5 47.Kc3 Kb5 48.Kb3 g5 49.h5 a5 50.bxa5 Kxa5 51.Kc4 Kb6 52.Kd3 Kb5 53.Kc3 Kc5 54.Kd3 Kb5 55.Ke3 Kc4 56.Kd2 Kd4 57.Ke2 Kc4 58.Kd2 Kd4 59.Ke2 Kc4 60.Kd2 Kd4 Game drawn by repetition 1/2-1/2

162 – atlanta 4.cxd5 exd5 5.Qc2 c6 French Defence players can give their opponents the option to enter that opening after 1.d4 e6. If White plays 2.e4, then 2…d5 is a French. After 1.d4 e6 I play 2.e4 when in a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit mode. This time I was thinking more main line opening. Dutch Defence players who do not like the Staunton Gambit as Black after 1.d4 f5 2.e4 may also play 1.d4 e6. If White avoids the French with 2.c4, then Black can play the Dutch with 2…f5. Against my ICC blitz game vs "atlanta" I chose 2.c4. Black had the option of a Dutch Defence with 2...f5 or a Queen's Gambit Declined. The Queens Gambit was is the order of the day. We ended up with a Queen’s Gambit Declined 4.cxd5 Exchange Variation by transposition. Here White has the choice between the traditional Nf3 and the more dynamic Nge2 with a possible f3 and e4 pawn push. My approach was the traditional Nf3. We castled opposite sides. This should lead to a race for open lines against the opposing monarch. I developed an attack against Black's kingside before White really got going. I flushed the king out into the open. It travelled from its safety on g8 to its demise on g4. There my queen mated the Black king. Sawyer - atlanta, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 10.03.2013 begins 1.d4 e6 2.c4 d5 3.Nc3 c6 4.cxd5 exd5 5.Qc2 Nf6 6.Nf3 Bd6 7.Bg5 Bg4 8.e3 [8.Ne5!+/-] 8...h6 9.Bh4 Nbd7 10.Be2 Qc7 11.Bg3 Bxg3 12.hxg3 0-0 13.0-0-0 Rfe8 14.Kb1 Ne4 15.Nxe4 dxe4 16.Ng1 Bxe2 17.Nxe2 f5 [17...Nf6=] 18.Nf4 Rac8 [18...Nf6=] 19.Qb3+ Kh7 [19...Kh8 20.Rh5+-] 20.Ne6 [I missed the most forcing mate in 5 after 20.Rxh6+! Kxh6 21.Qf7 Qxf4 22.Rh1+ Qh4 23.Rxh4+ Kg5 24.Qxg7#] 20...Qd6 [20...Rxe6 21.Qxe6+-] 21.Ng5+ Kg6 22.Qf7+ Kxg5 23.Rh5+ Kg4 24.Qxf5# Black is checkmated 1-0

163 - Madison 4.cxd5 exd5 5.Bf4 H. O. Madison of Texas played postal chess from the 1970s to the 1990s. We met three times in APCT sections. In our younger years from the 1970s, I played most games hard for a win, I won both our games. Then I got old and tired and slow and busy with life. I suppose I could come up with more excuses too. During the 1990s, most of my correspondence play was awful. Whether it was APCT, USCF, or BDG thematic games, it was pretty bad. The lone exception was an ICCF Master Class section I entered. I worked very hard on all those games and won that event. This Queen's Gambit Declined started out as a Slav Defence with 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6. After 3.Nc3 e6 4.cxd5 exd5 we transposed to a QGD Exchange Variation that is like to a London System. Both sides play a drawish line when all the bishops disappear cleanly. It looks like we were just going through the motions. Harold O. Madison and I swapped pieces into a drawn endgame. I had a few slight chances, but there was no energy to seek any opportunity. Madison (1986) - Sawyer (2003), corr APCT N-328, 1993 begins 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.Nc3 e6 4.cxd5 exd5 5.Bf4 Nf6 6.e3 Bf5 7.Bd3 Bxd3 8.Qxd3 Bd6 9.Bg3 0-0 10.Nf3 [10.Nge2!?] 10...Re8 11.0-0 Ne4 [Now that White has castled, Black could play 11...Bxg3 12.hxg3=] 12.Bxd6 Qxd6 13.Nd2 Nxd2 14.Qxd2 Nd7 15.a3 Re6 16.b4 a6 [16...Nb6 17.Qd3 Nc4=] 17.a4 Rh6 18.g3 [18.h3=] 18...Re8 [18...Nf6 19.Rfb1 Ng4 20.h4 Re8-/+] 19.b5 axb5 [19...Qe6=] 20.axb5 Nf6 21.f3 Nh5 22.Qf2 Rg6 23.f4 f5 24.bxc6 bxc6 25.Qf3 Nf6 26.Rfe1 Ne4 [26...Qb4=/+] 27.Nxe4 dxe4 1/2-1/2

164 – Bourget 4.Bg5 Nbd7 5.cxd5 The first dozen moves of a chess game the armies clash. Your opponent places a road block in front of your plan for victory. To win, you must go around one way or the other. The right side of your brain provides you a path for planning, calculating and strategy. The left side leads you down the path of creativity, intuition and tactics. Masters try to use both sides and put them as close to each other as possible. Brilliant games occur when players walk on both paths at the same time. Creativity helps you to imagine unexpected moves that humans don’t see coming. They increase the chances your opponent will blunder. The big problem is that most creative moves are weak. The blessing of my creativity is that I do find unexpected moves in my games. The curse is that I have a hard time resisting them. When I spend so much energy to find such a move, I try to make it work even when I would be better off to just play a good move. This game was played in the beautiful seaside town of Camden, Maine. A small chess club met in a hotel bar on a quiet weekday evening. My opponent was Gerry Bourget. I had the Black pieces in a Queen's Gambit Declined. In my attempt to win, I stepped into the tall grass. Fortunately my opponent tripped before I did. I played a creative but not completely sound piece sacrifice. It netted me a few pawns. Both sides missed knight retreats that would have given him an even game. Near the end I missed two brilliant queen sacrifices leading to immediate mate. Bourget (1500) - Sawyer, Camden, Maine 1975 begins 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5 Nbd7 5.cxd5 exd5 6.e3 Be7 7.Bd3 c6 8.Qc2 0-0 9.h4 Re8 10.Nf3 Nf8 11.Ne5 Ng4 12.Bxe7 Qxe7 13.Nf3 Nxe3?! [13...Nf6 = is the expected approach.] 14.fxe3 Qxe3+ 15.Ne2 [15.Qe2! gives White the

better game.] 15...Bg4 16.Ng5 [16.Qd2 +/- and the White queen still comes to the rescue.] 16...Bxe2 17.Bxe2 Qxd4 18.Rd1? [Last chance for to equalize is 18.Nf3.] 18...Qf4 19.Rh3 Re7 20.Rd2 Rae8 21.Kd1 Qf2 [Missing 21...Qf1+!] 22.Nf3 Qxg2 23.Bd3 Qxf3+ [Missing 23...Qg1+!, but White gives up anyway.] 0-1 White resigns

165 – Morrill 4.Bg5 Nbd7 5.Nf3 In the final round of a tournament, we played a Queen's Gambit Declined Exchange. It transposes to a Queen's Indian Defence. I played Queen's Gambit Declined from both sides based on the games of champions like Capablanca, Alekhine and Botvinnik. I still play and win with 1.d4 d5 2.c4 despite my fondness for 2.e4. I was in my 20s. I was still stuck in Class C until this tournament. I kept working on my game. All of a sudden I achieved success. In about half a dozen events in the 1970s I moved from Class C through Class B to Class A. My rating went higher in the 1980s. My opponent was John Morrill, one of the top rated players in my section. I think this tournament was held at Lewiston, but it might have been Waterville. A year later in 1975 John J. Morrill won the Maine State Championship. My problem was that I was perfectly content with a score of 3.5 in the first four rounds. Sure, I hoped to win in the final round if my higher rated opponent would start blundering. But I did not want to win bad enough for me to work hard on the board. I was outplayed. But there were good moves that I missed which were within my ability to find. Frankly, I think I gave up too early. Here is the only game I lost in this event. Morrill - Sawyer, Lewiston, ME (5), 10.02.1974 begins 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5 [Exchange Variation is played 4.cxd5 exd5 5.Bg5 c6 6.Qc2 without an early Nf3.] 4...Nbd7 5.Nf3 c6 6.cxd5 [I liked the Cambridge Springs Variation with the trap 6.e3 Qa5 7.Bd3?! dxc4 8.Bxc4? Ne4] 6...exd5 7.e3 Be7 8.Bd3 0-0 9.0-0 b6 [The main line is 9...Re8 10.Qc2 Nf8=] 10.Rc1 Bb7 11.a3 c5 12.Re1 Rc8 [Maybe 12...Ne4!?] 13.Bf5 g6 14.Bb1 [14.Bh3+/=] 14...Re8 [Again 14...Ne4=] 15.Ba2 cxd4 16.exd4 Nf8 17.Bxf6 Bxf6 18.Rxe8 Qxe8 19.Bxd5? [19.Nxd5+/-]

19...Bxd5? [Junior 12 found that I could have actually saved the game with 19...Rxc3! 20.Bxb7 Rxc1 21.Qxc1 Bxd4 22.Nxd4 Qd7 and amazingly White wins his piece back.] 20.Nxd5 Nd7 21.Rxc8 Qxc8 22.g3 Qc4 23.Ne3 Qc7 24.Qa4 Qc1+ [24...Qb7 25.Ne1+/-] 25.Kg2 Qxb2 26.Qxd7 Qxa3 27.Nd5 1-0

166 – Chaney 4.cxd5 exd5 5.Bg5 Be7 In those thrilling days of yesteryear, Ron Chaney and I were working our way up through the ranks of postal chess. Chaney chose the Queens Gambit Declined Exchange Variation. This line became much more popular in the years that followed. The book entitled “How to Play the Queen’s Gambit Exchange Variation” by Kevin Wicker was published in 1976. I don’t know if Ron Chaney had a copy, but I did. I studied the variation and tried the opening from each side. It favors players who like to plan a detailed strategy. On the contrary, I prefer a general plan followed by a search for creative tactics. I am more of a fly by the seat of my pants guy. After a while I decided to play other openings that fit my style. My understanding of this line was insufficient. The key situation in our game was that I attacked when I should have defended. My losing attack consisted of 14...Bf5, 17...Qg5 and 18...Re6. These pieces were uncoordinated and undefended. A strong attacker prepares his pieces. He brings a huge army to the fight. My approach was flawed. I sent out one piece at a time. I hoped that eventually my whole army would surround my opponent’s king. My plan was ineffective. I lost a bishop. Chaney - Sawyer, corr APCT 78SC-5, 1978 begins 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.cxd5 exd5 5.Bg5 Be7 6.e3 0-0 7.Bd3 c6 [Or 7...h6 8.Bh4 c6=] 8.Qc2 Nbd7 [Black could relieve the pressure on his h-pawn with 8...h6 9.Bh4 Re8=] 9.Nf3 Re8 10.0-0 Nf8 11.Rab1 a5 [An alternative is 11...Ne4 12.Bxe7 Qxe7 13.Bxe4 dxe4 14.Nd2 f5=] 12.a3 Ne4 13.Bxe7 Qxe7 14.b4 [14.Bxe4 dxe4 15.Nd2 f5=] 14...Bf5 [14...axb4 15.axb4 Nxc3 16.Qxc3 Bg4=] 15.Bxe4 [15.b5!?] 15...dxe4 16.Ne5 [16.Nd2 axb4 17.axb4 Nd7=]

16...axb4 17.axb4 Qg5?! [I should protect the bishop with 17...Qe6=] 18.Ne2 Re6?! [Black impulsively attacks when he solidify his position with 18...Be6=] 19.Ng3 f6 [Black needs to save his bishop with 19...Bg6 20.Rfc1+/-] 20.h4 Qxh4 21.Nxf5 Qg5 22.f4 exf3 23.Nxf3 Qg4 24.Nh2 1-0

167 – Roberge 4.Bg5 Nbd7 5.Nf3 c6 In contrast to a Queen’s Gambit Exchange Variation which clarifies the pawn structure, I chose not to capture his pawn on d5. Instead I maintained and increase the tension with 6.e4!? This was my Anti-Queens Gambit Cambridge Springs line. It is an optimistic frisky line. Napier played it vs Teichmann in 1904. It caught my attention because I studied the games of Alexander Alekhine. In the 1920s and 1930s he frequently played 6.e4!? The line appears about once a year. The better players win more often. It’s not powerful or bad, just lesser known and different. That’s me. Lesser known and different. When I found myself headed toward a Cambridge Springs Variation with 6.e3 Qa5, I veered off with the interesting Alekhine move 6.e4!? Of course I was not prepared. This was postal chess. I played it to see what would happen. Maybe my opponent would blunder. Al Roberge was an above average postal chess player in APCT in the early 1980s. We played twice, one game with each color. This Alekhine line worked well. I got an advantage with good chances to win. But Black fought back. Then I could not figure out how to win. I gave up. We drew by repetition. Sawyer (2100) - Roberge (1983), corr APCT 1981 begins 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5 Nbd7 5.Nf3 c6 6.e4!? [6.e3 Qa5=] 6...dxe4 7.Nxe4 Bb4+ [7...h6 8.Nxf6+ Nxf6 9.Bf4=] 8.Nc3 Bxc3+ [8...h6=] 9.bxc3 Qa5 10.Bd2 [10.Qc2 c5 11.Bd2=] 10...Ne4 [10...e5!=] 11.Bd3 Nxd2 12.Qxd2 Nf6 13.00 0-0 14.Rfe1 Bd7 15.Re5 Qc7 16.Qf4 [16.Rg5! h6 17.Rg3+/-] 16...Rfe8 [16...b5 17.c5+/=] 17.Qh4 h6 18.Rae1 [18.g4!+/-] 18...Kf8 [18...b5 19.Nd2+/=] 19.g4 Ke7 20.g5 hxg5 21.Nxg5 Rh8 22.Qf4 Rac8 23.d5 Kf8

24.dxe6 Bxe6 25.Bf5 [25.Nxe6+ fxe6 26.Qg3+/-] 25...Bxf5 26.Qxf5 Rd8 27.Qf4 Qd7? [27...Rh6=] 28.Re7 Qxe7 29.Rxe7 Rd1+ 30.Kg2 Kxe7 31.Qe3+?! [I missed the power of 31.Qe5+ Kd7 (31...Kf8 32.Qc7!+-) 32.Qe2 Rd6 33.Nxf7+-] 31...Kf8 32.Qc5+ Ke8 [32...Kg8 33.Qxa7+/-] 33.Qe3+?! [33.Qe5+!+-] 33...Kf8 34.Qc5+ Ke8 35.Qe3+? 1/2-1/2

168 – Muir 4.Bg5 Nbd7 5.e3 c6 Bob Muir played in New York before he moved to Williamsport, Pennsylvania. Bob knew from personal experience where the pawns and pieces should go in his favorite openings. We drifted into a rook and pawn endgame. After 36.h5, Black's loose pawns are busted flat in Pennsylvania, waiting to be run over by a train. Sawyer (2011) - Muir (1800), Williamsport PA 1995 begins 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5 Nbd7 5.e3 c6 6.Nf3 Be7 [6...Qa5] 7.Qc2 h6 [7...0-0] 8.Bh4 0-0 9.Bd3 dxc4 10.Bxc4 Nd5 11.Bxe7 [11.Bg3!+/=] 11...Qxe7 12.a3?! Nxc3 13.bxc3 e5 [13...b6 14.0-0 Bb7 15.a4 c5=] 14.dxe5?! [14.00] 14...Nxe5 15.Nxe5 Qxe5 16.0-0 Rd8 [16...Bf5] 17.Rfd1 Rxd1+ 18.Rxd1 Bf5 19.Bd3 Bxd3 20.Qxd3 Qe7 21.c4 Re8 22.Qd7 Qxd7 23.Rxd7 Rb8 [Black would do better to keep his rook active with 23...Re4!=] 24.Kf1 Kf8 25.Ke2 Ke8 26.Rc7 a5 27.c5 b5 28.Rxc6 b4 29.axb4 [White should play 29.Rb6! Rxb6 30.cxb6 Kd7 31.axb4 axb4 32.Kd3 Kc6 33.Kc4 Kxb6 34.Kxb4+- with a winning pawn ending.] 29...Rxb4 30.Ra6 Rb5 31.c6 Rc5 32.c7 Rxc7 33.Rxa5 g6 34.h4 f5 [Generally in such positions, Black plays 34...h5! and makes White work hard to find a good pawn break. 35.Kf3+/=] 35.Ra6 Kf7 36.h5 1-0

169 – Djukanovic 4.Bg5 Nbd7 5.e3 c6 Opening traps impact many chess decisions. When I began to studied chess books on openings in 1972, I fell in love with the Queens Gambit Declined Cambridge Springs Variation 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5 Nbd7 5.e3 c6 6.Nf3 Qa5. White avoided all Black's traps and had a king hunt in the game between Sreten Djukanovic and Dragomir Vreljanski. Djukanovic (2254) - Vreljanski (2136), European Amateur U2300 Niksic MNE, 16.06.2018 begins 1.d4 e6 2.c4 Nf6 3.Nc3 d5 4.Bg5 Nbd7 5.e3 c6 6.Nf3 Qa5 7.Bxf6!? Nxf6 8.Qc2 Bb4 9.Bd3 c5 [9...dxc4 10.Bxc4 c5=] 10.cxd5 Nxd5 11.0-0 Bxc3 12.bxc3 Qxc3 13.Bb5+ Ke7 14.Qe4 Qb4 [14...Qa5 15.Rab1+/-] 15.Rab1 Qa5 16.Bc4 [16.Rfc1+-] 16...Nc3

17.Rxb7+ Bxb7 [17...Kf8 18.Rxf7+ Kxf7 19.Ne5+ Ke7 20.Qxa8+-] 18.Qxb7+ Kf6 19.Ne5 Rhf8 20.Qf3+ Ke7 21.Nc6+ 1-0

170 – Sawyer 4.Bg5 Nbd7 5.Nf3 c6 The Cambridge Springs Defence in the Queens Gambit Declined was one of the first tricky openings that I played. I learned it from studying Capablanca and Alekhine. Emmanuel Lasker played it in 1892. It got its name from the site of a chess tournament held in 1904. Then it was played mostly by the one-eyed Teichmann. Along Lake Erie, halfway between Cleveland, Ohio and Buffalo, New York is the city of Erie. That corner of Pennsylvania was famous 100-160 years ago for the discovery of oil in Titusville. It contributed to the success of John D. Rockefeller. Between Erie and Titusville is the small community of Cambridge Springs. I drove through Cambridge Springs, Pennsylvania to see if any place looked like where they might have played the tournament. It is a rural town of a couple thousand people. Later I found out that they played at the Rider Hotel which burned down in 1931. Ed Sawyer and I grew up in Maine, near the Canadian border to the east. Ed and I met at some chess tournaments and became friends. Curiously I won both our tournament contests before Ed became a master. Ed won more of our postal games. Here is an early Cambridge Springs Defence postal game where I won. Sawyer, Ed - Sawyer, Tim corr, 1974 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 d5 4.Bg5 Nbd7 5.Nf3 [The first trick is on the way to the Cambridge Springs: 5.cxd5 exd5 6.Nxd5? Nxd5 7.Bxd8 Bb4+! 8.Qd2 Bxd2+ 9.Kxd2 Kxd8-+ and Black is up a knight for a pawn.] 5...c6 6.e3 Qa5 7.Nd2 [There are many tricks in the Cambridge Springs where Black can win material. For example: 7.Bd3 dxc4 8.Bxc4 (8.Bxf6 Qb4=/+) 8...Ne4=/+; 7.Bxf6 Nxf6 8.a3 Ne4 9.Rc1 Nxc3 10.Rxc3? (10.Qd2!=) 10...Bxa3-+; 7.Qc2 Ne4 8.Bd3 Nxg5 9.Nxg5 dxc4-+; 7.cxd5 Nxd5 8.e4 Nxc3 9.bxc3 Qxc3+ 10.Bd2 Qa3=/+] 7...Bb4 8.Qc2 0-0 9.Bd3? [White loses a piece. He should have played 9.Be2=] 9...dxc4 10.Bxh7+!? Nxh7 11.h4 Nxg5 12.hxg5 g6 13.Qe4 Qxg5 14.g3 Nf6 15.Qg2 Rd8 16.Nf3 Qa5 17.Qh3 Bxc3+ 18.bxc3 Qxc3+

19.Kf1 Qxa1+ [Black will be up a bishop, two pawns and two rooks for his queen.] 20.Kg2 Qxh1+ 21.Qxh1 b5 22.Ne5 Kg7 23.f3 Bb7 24.Qe1 a5 25.a3 Rdc8 [There is no way to stop the Black queenside pawn expansion.] 26.e4 c5 27.dxc5 Rxc5 28.Qc3 b4 29.Qd4 Rxe5 30.Qxe5 Rc8 31.Qb5 bxa3 0-1

3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5 Be7 We examine the Orthodox Queen’s Gambit Declined.

171 – Shuler 5.e3 0-0 6.Rc1 In most 13 player APCT Queen Tournaments, almost all players were wellknown and active postal chess players. Many were masters. Rich Schuler was not, but he did play in APCT events for several years. Beyond that, I know nothing about him. We played four years later when I was a much higher rated player. In that game I played White in a Bird's Opening. In this game Schuler took me out of the book. I came up with a bad plan, and White was winning. He missed some great shots, and even gave me one chance for 31...Rdc8!=. I missed it. I was the higher rated player, but Rich was the better player in this game. Schuler offered a draw when he had a winning position. He gained rating points. I finished first or second in the event. Schuler - Sawyer, corr APCT Q-36 1978 begins 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 [2...c6 is a Slav] 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5 Be7 [White holds back on developing his kingside knight until move eight.] 5.e3 0-0 6.Rc1 Nbd7 7.Bd3 c6 8.Nf3 [We transposed to the main line.] 8...dxc4 9.Bxc4 Nd5 10.Bxe7 Qxe7 11.0-0 Nxc3 12.Rxc3 e5 13.Qb1 [White had to make a decision. An alternative is 13.dxe5 Nxe5 14.Nxe5 Qxe5 15.f4 Qe4=] 13...exd4 14.Nxd4!? [Taking us out of the book. Almost everyone plays 14.exd4.] 14...Nc5 [14...Nf6 is good.] 15.b4 Ne6? [My pieces are not coordinated. Correct was to occupy the center with 15...Ne4=. For the next 15 moves White is winning.] 16.Nf5 Qf6 17.Rfc1 Nf4 18.Ng3 Ng6 19.a4 Ne5 20.Be2 Bg4? 21.f3 [21.f4+-] 21...Be6? 22.b5 Qe7? 23.f4 Nd7 24.bxc6 bxc6 25.Rxc6 [25.f5!+-] 25...Qa3 26.Bd3 [26.R1c3!+-] 26...Nf6 27.e4?! Rfd8 28.R1c3 Qxa4 29.Bc2 Qd4+ 30.Kh1 Rab8 31.Qe1 Qd2 [31...Rdc8!=] 32.Qxd2 Rxd2 33.h3 Bd7 34.Rc7 Ne8 35.Rxa7 Rb2? 36.Bd3 Bxh3 37.gxh3 Rh2+ 38.Kg1 Rbg2+ 39.Kf1 Rxg3 40.Rc8 g5 41.Rxe8+ Kg7 42.Bc4 Rf3+

43.Ke1 Rxf4 44.Ree7 Rh1+ 45.Kd2 Rh2+ 46.Ke3 Rxh3+ 47.Kd4 Rhf3 48.Ke5 g4 49.Be6 Kg6 50.Bf5+ Rxf5+ 51.exf5+ Rxf5+ 52.Kd4 h5 53.Re5 g3? [53...Rf4+ 54.Re4 Rf1 55.Re8+/-] 54.Rxf5 g2 55.Ra1 Kxf5 56.Ke3 Kg4 57.Kf2 h4 58.Kxg2 f5 59.Ra8 h3+ 60.Kh2 f4 61.Rg8+ Kf3 1/2-1/2

172 – Seaside 5.Bg5 Nfd7 Yes, I know, I know. After 1.d4 d5 I am supposed to push my pawn on the right two squares to 2.e4. But there went my pawn on the left to 2.c4. I played 2.c4 to win pawns instead of to sacrifice pawns. That works too! I played the QGD hundreds of times. I played the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit with 2.e4 a thousand of times. Three times in this Queen's Gambit Declined 4. Bg5 game I win a pawn from a counting error. Here is how it happens. I exchange a piece. My opponent "Seaside" recaptures with a pawn. I capture that pawn for free. It is like a 2 for 1 BOGO deal: Buy One Get One. It get these at the grocery store Publix all the time. Instead of the old “blue light special”, this was a “light-square special” on c4, c6 and d5. After the three pawn lead, I played rook to the 7th rank winning two more pawns and a king with checkmate. Sawyer (2021) - Seaside (1419), ICC 2 2 u Internet Chess Club, 15.07.2013 begins 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Nf3 Be7 5.Bg5 Nfd7 [5...00 6.e3 Nbd7 is the Orthodox QGD, but Black chooses to swap off his good bishop for my bad bishop. Okay!] 6.Bxe7 Qxe7 7.e3 0-0 8.Rc1 Nf6 9.Bd3 c6 10.0-0 Nbd7 11.a3 Nb6 12.c5 Nc4? [Drops a pawn. Better is 12...Nbd7 13.e4+/-] 13.Qe2 [Another way to win the pawn is 13.Bxc4 dxc4 14.Qa4+/-] 13...Bd7 14.Bxc4 dxc4 15.Qxc4 b5 16.cxb6 axb6 17.Ne5 Be8? [Drops a second pawn. More logical is to defend c6 with 17...Rfc8 18.Rfd1+/-] 18.Nxc6 Bxc6 19.Qxc6 Nd5 [Drops a third pawn. A better way to defend b6 is by 19...Qd8 20.Nb5+-] 20.Nxd5 exd5 21.Qxd5 Rfd8 22.Qb3 Qb7 23.h3 h6 24.Rc3 b5 25.Rfc1 Ra4 26.Rc7 Qb8 27.Qxf7+ Kh8 28.Qxg7# Black checkmated 1-0

173 – Ross 5.Nf3 Ne4 6.Bxe7 I played Hank Ross in a Queens Gambit Declined. Ross chose 5…Ne4. This looks like a premature Lasker Variation. The point of this move for Black is to swap off one or two sets of minor pieces. Emmanuel Lasker was a great endgame player. Lasker would welcome almost any step closer to an ending. The normal Lasker Defense is 5…h6 6.Bh4 0-0 7.e3 Ne4. Lasker played this way a couple times in 1935. Guimard and Eliskases both played it very frequently after that. A few masters played this Hank Ross move in a single game now and then as Black with 5...Ne4!? They included players such as Pillsbury, Alapin, Thomas, and Spielmann. In my lifetime the only grandmaster to play this exact move order as Black was Anatoly Lein. He played it at least nine times vs top US grandmasters like Christiansen, Yermolinsky, and Ivkov. Club players choose 5...Ne4 in an attempt to swap off attacking pieces. They fear a White attack, especially from a higher rated player. I used to be such a player myself once upon a time. The ironic aspect of playing 5...Ne4 as Black is that such players routinely and unintentionally head for a losing endgame. They avoid the attack, but they give White an easy victory. I’ve won a thousand games like that vs players rated near 1700. Sawyer (2100) - Ross (1709), corr APCT 1981 begins 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5 Be7 5.Nf3 Ne4!? [Black usually plays either 5...0-0 or 5...h6] 6.Bxe7 Qxe7 7.cxd5!? [More promising are 7.Qc2+/= or 7.Rc1+/=] 7...Nxc3 8.bxc3 exd5 9.Qb3 c6 10.e3 0-0 [10...Bf5! 11.Be2 0-0 12.0-0 a5=] 11.Bd3 Nd7 12.0-0 Nf6 13.Rab1 b5?! [13...b6 14.c4 Be6 15.Rfc1=] 14.a4 Bg4?! [14...a6 15.Qb4+/=] 15.Ne5 Qe6 16.axb5 cxb5 17.Qxb5 Nd7? [This drops another pawn. Somewhat better is 17...Bf5 18.Bxf5 Qxf5 19.c4+-]

18.Nxg4 Qxg4 19.Qxd5 Nb6 20.Qe4 [Or 20.Qb5+-] 20...Qg6 [This loses more material, but swapping into an endgame when down two pawns is not likely to help after 20...Qxe4 21.Bxe4+-] 21.Qxa8! Qxd3 22.Qxa7 Nc8 23.Qc7 Qf5 24.Rb8 h5 25.h3 g5 26.Ra1 Qe6 27.Raa8 1-0

174 – alain 5.Nf3 0-0 6.e3 a6 Sometimes I simply play opening variations where I have the highest performance rating. As I have grown older, my skill and rating have diminished somewhat. Years ago I was rated higher, but that does not mean I cannot still enjoy chess. I am actually having fun with chess right now! One day as Black I won two Albin-Counter Gambits on time after very ugly moves on my part. I managed to play fast enough to keep the games going long enough to win on time. Playing four games per day keeps me in good three minute blitz shape. Below is another example of 1.d4 e6. I usually play 2.e4 going into a French Defence. My performance rating with 2.c4 is higher than 2.e4. I decided to play a few games with 2.c4. Then I won three games in a row with it. Of course sometimes I get a Dutch Defence. This is a main line Queen's Gambit Declined 4.Bg5 variation. My opponent "alain" dropped a pawn in the opening. This led to a winning endgame for me. Then Black lost on time. Sawyer - alain, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 08.10.2012 begins 1.d4 e6 2.c4 d5 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Nf3 Be7 5.Bg5 0-0 6.e3 a6 7.Rc1 Nbd7 8.a3 [8.cxd5 exd5 9.Bd3 c6] 8...c5?! [8...c6 9.Qc2 Re8 10.Bd3] 9.cxd5 Nxd5 10.Bxe7 Qxe7? [This drops a pawn. White would only have a small positional edge after 10...Nxe7 11.dxc5 Nxc5 12.Be2+/= with a lead in development.] 11.Nxd5 exd5 12.dxc5 Nxc5 13.Qxd5 Ne6 14.Be2 Bd7 15.0-0 Bc6 16.Qb3 h6 17.Rfd1 Rfe8 18.Qc3 [White should consider 18.Ne5!+/-] 18...Ng5 19.Qd4 Nxf3+ 20.Bxf3 Bxf3 21.gxf3 Rad8 22.Qf4 Rxd1+ 23.Rxd1 g5 24.Qf5 Qe6 25.Qxe6 Rxe6 26.Rd7 Rb6 27.b4 Kf8 28.Kg2 Ke8 29.Rd4 Ke7 30.Kg3 f5 31.f4 g4 32.f3 h5 33.fxg4 hxg4 34.h3+/= [Better is 34.e4!+/-] 34...Rg6 35.hxg4 Rxg4+ 36.Kf3 Rg1 37.e4 Rf1+ 38.Ke3 Re1+

39.Kd3 Ke6 40.exf5+= [Another good idea is 40.e5!+/-] 40...Kxf5 41.Kc4 Rc1+ 42.Kb3 Rc7 43.a4 b5 44.axb5 axb5 45.Rd5+ Kxf4 46.Rxb5 Ke4 47.Rc5 Rb7 48.Rc1 Kd5 49.Ka4 Black forfeits on time 1-0

175 – Blockader 6.e3 Ne4 How can I boost my performance in chess and still enjoy the game? Interesting question. This forced me to reassess my interest, my time, my health, and my age. Before I retired, I decided for a while to play whatever opening line has given me the best performance rating. Selecting these lines is quite simple. I keep two up-to-date collections of my own games using ChessBase Opening Book (.ctg file). One I call "TimWhite" and the other "TimBlack". Each has all the recorded games I have ever played with that color. Currently they both have over 25,000 games each. That means I have played more than 50,000 games in my lifetime. In my game vs “Blockader” I backed into a Queen's Gambit Declined after 1.d4 e6 2.c4. Of course 2.e4 is more common for a BDGer, but my best performance at that moment was 2.c4. After 2...Nf6 3.Nf3 Queen's Indian Defence is slightly better in my performance than 3.Nc3 or 3.g3. Black went into the QGD with 3...d5. I missed a winning trap but won anyway. Sawyer - Blockader, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 02.10.2012 begins 1.d4 e6 2.c4 Nf6 3.Nf3 d5 4.Nc3 Be7 5.Bg5 0-0 6.e3 Ne4 7.Bxe7 Nxc3? [7...Qxe7+/=] 8.bxc3 [Playing at the speed of two to three seconds per move is necessary in a three minute blitz game. Doing so, I missed the best move which I almost played: 8.Bxd8! Nxd1 9.Be7 Re8 10.Ba3+-] 8...Qxe7 9.Qc2 Nc6 10.Bd3 h6 11.0-0 b6 12.Rab1 Bb7 13.cxd5 exd5 14.Qa4 Na5 15.Nd2 [15.Ne5!+/=] 15...c5 16.dxc5 Qxc5 17.c4? [17.Nb3=] 17...d4 18.Nb3 Qg5 19.e4 Nc6 [19...Bc6!=/+] 20.Rbc1? [White has a playable game after 20.f4 Qe7 21.c5!=] 20...Rad8? [Black returns the favor. 20...Qf4-/+ ] 21.f4 Qh5 22.c5 g5? [22...Qg6 23.Rf2+/-] 23.cxb6 axb6 24.Rxc6 Bxc6 25.Qxc6 gxf4 26.Qxb6 Kg7 27.Nxd4 Qd1? [This allows a

forced mate, but White has a winning attack anyway. 27...Rb8 28.Qc7+-] 28.Nf5+ Kg8 29.Qxh6 Qg4 30.Ne7# 1-0 [Black is mated.]

176 – Deluca 6.e3 h6 7.Bh4 Turnovers occur in most sporting competitions and chess is no exception. You are on the offence when suddenly a mistake puts you on the defence. Here Roger Morin plays Daniel C. Deluca in a Queens Gambit Declined. The expert Roger Morin is often the higher rated player. His balanced style of both strategy and tactics allows Roger Morin to be more aggressive when he needs to win. Daniel Deluca demonstrates one of the best strategies in defending difficult and inferior positions. Keep your army alive and do not quit. Avoid getting mated and keep your eye on your opponent's king. You may survive enough to thrive. Try tactics for a turnover which may lead to a mating attack, checkmate, stalemate or perpetual check. The Orthodox Queen's Gambit Declined 4...Be7 is very solid. Black tells White, "You start punching. I will block and exchange pieces. When you stop punching, I will attack." If Black wants to punch sooner, he plays a different opening. Roger is cruising for victory, pounding away at Black's dwindling defenses with moves like 16.Ng6! But eventually, Dan recovers a turnover. Using the rook on the 7th rank 33...Rxa2 with the queen by 34...Qg5, Black's threats to the White king force a draw. Patience is rewarded! Morin (2001) - Deluca (1501), Aurora Equinox Maine, 27.09.2014 begins 1.Nf3 d5 2.c4 e6 3.d4 Nf6 4.Nc3 Be7 5.Bg5 0-0 6.e3 h6 7.Bh4 Ne4 [Another playable line is 7...b6=] 8.Bxe7 Qxe7 9.Bd3 [9.Rc1= is more popular.] 9...Nxc3 10.bxc3 Nd7 [10...dxc4 11.Bxc4 b6 12.0-0 Bb7=] 11.0-0 [Or 11.cxd5 exd5 12.0-0=] 11...dxc4 12.Bxc4 e5 [Again 12...b6=] 13.Bb3 exd4!? 14.cxd4 [14.exd4+/=] 14...Nf6 15.Ne5 c6? [Missing the threat. Better would be 15...Bf5 16.Rc1+/=] 16.Ng6! Qd8 17.Nxf8 Kxf8 18.Qc2 Bg4 19.f3 Bd7 20.e4 Rc8 21.e5 Nd5 22.Qc5+ Ne7 23.Qxa7 b5 24.Rad1 Nd5 [Or 24...Be6 25.Qc5 Kg8 26.Bxe6 fxe6 27.a4+-] 25.Qc5+ Ne7 26.Qd6 Ke8 27.Rfe1 Nf5 28.Bxf7+ Kxf7 29.e6+ Kg8 30.Qxd7 Nd6 31.Qa7 Ra8

32.Qc5 Qe7 33.Qxc6 [33.d5+-] 33...Rxa2 34.Qd7 Qg5 35.g3 Qh5 36.Qd8+ Kh7 37.Qh4 Qxf3 38.Qh3 Qf2+ 39.Kh1 Qf3+ 1/2-1/2

177 – Fischer 6.e3 h6 7.Bh4 b6 I enjoyed the "Pawn Sacrifice" movie about Bobby Fischer. I saw it at Disney Springs. The chess was accurate in its flavor and presented critical moves. Tobey Maguire as Bobby Fischer and Liev Schreiber as Boris Spassky fit great. Key characters are Regina Fischer (mother), Joan Fischer (sister), Carmine Nigro (teacher), Paul Marshall (lawyer), Father Bill Lombardy (grandmaster) and a girl ("Donna"). "Based on" movies are not documentaries. They slightly alter history to sell the best story. This movie built up Boris Spassky to make him a rival at Varna 1962 and world champion at the Piatagorsky in California a few years before he actually won the title. At Varna Fischer drew the world champion Botvinnik on board 1. Petrosian was on board 2. Boris Spassky on board 3 did not become world champion until 1969. In 1971 Fischer had to beat Petrosian to play Spassky. Nothing is said of Boris Spassky's famous crush of Fischer in 1960, nor the draws they played prior to 1972, nor Pal Benko stepping aside to give Fischer his cycle spot. They do not mention that Fischer was higher rated in 1972. Minor details. The movie has Fischer resign Game 1 dramatically after sacrificing his bishop. In reality Bobby played on for a long time and almost drew that game. Fischer took a lead in the match on Game 6 with 1.c4 which he only played a few times before. Boris Spassky applauded the win. Here is that real game. Fischer - Spassky, Ch World (match) Reykjavik (Iceland) (6), 1972 begins 1.c4 e6 2.Nf3 d5 3.d4 Nf6 4.Nc3 Be7 5.Bg5 0-0 6.e3 h6 7.Bh4 b6 8.cxd5!? [Both 8.Bd3 and 8.Be2 score better than Fischer's move.] 8...Nxd5 9.Bxe7 Qxe7 10.Nxd5 exd5 11.Rc1 Be6 12.Qa4 c5 13.Qa3 Rc8 14.Bb5!? [The natural move 14.Be2 is more popular and scores better for White.] 14...a6 [14...Qb7!=] 15.dxc5 bxc5 16.0-0 Ra7 [16...Qb7=] 17.Be2 Nd7 18.Nd4 Qf8 19.Nxe6 fxe6 20.e4! [Pawn Sacrifice] 20...d4 [20...dxe4] 21.f4! Qe7 22.e5 Rb8 23.Bc4 Kh8 24.Qh3 Nf8 25.b3 a5 26.f5 exf5 27.Rxf5 Nh7

28.Rcf1 [Fischer did not fall for Spassky's trap 28.Rf7? Ng5!-+ and Black turns the tables.] 28...Qd8 29.Qg3 Re7 30.h4 Rbb7 31.e6 Rbc7 32.Qe5 Qe8 33.a4 Qd8 34.R1f2 Qe8 35.R2f3 Qd8 36.Bd3 Qe8 37.Qe4 Nf6 38.Rxf6 gxf6 39.Rxf6 Kg8 40.Bc4 Kh8 41.Qf4! 1-0

178 – Shapiro 6.e3 Nbd7 7.Rc1 What makes a chess opening “orthodox?” The word means conventional, traditional, mainstream and established. In other words, an orthodox chess opening is reliable. It is one that fully playable. It has stood the test of time. If you lose a game in such an opening from either side of the board, whose fault is it? Take a wild guess. You cannot use the saying that you were a victim of the opening. The opening was fine. The player who lost was the problem. I played Meyer Shapiro of New York in a postal chess game with the Orthodox Queens Gambit Declined. We were pretty close to equal in the opening. He had chances, and I had chances. A key point of this game was White’s choice to push his c-pawn all the way to 9.c5. The recommended strategy for Black is to attack the backward pawn as soon as possible with 9…e5. For some reason I chose to delay that counter thrust. I treated the position like a Lasker Defence with the moves 9...h6 10.Bh4 Ne4 11.Bxe7 Qxe7 12.b4 Nxc3 13.Rxc3 e5. Apparently I wanted to reach an endgame. But be careful what you ask for. I missed some key moves and drifted into a lost position. Shapiro did well and found a nice win. Shapiro (1999) - Sawyer (2000), corr APCT 1985 begins 1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.c4 e6 4.Nc3 Be7 5.Bg5 0-0 6.e3 Nbd7 7.Rc1 c6 8.a3 [8.Bd3 dxc4 9.Bxc4=] 8...a6 9.c5 [9.Qc2] 9...h6 [9...e5! 10.Nxe5 Nxe5 11.dxe5 Nd7=] 10.Bh4 Ne4 [10...e5!=] 11.Bxe7 Qxe7 12.b4 [12.Nxe4! dxe4 13.Nd2 f5 14.Nc4+/=] 12...Nxc3 13.Rxc3 e5 14.dxe5 Nxe5 15.Be2 Bf5 [15...a5!=/+] 16.Nd4 Be4 17.f3 Bh7 18.0-0 Rae8?! 19.a4 f5?! [19...Ra8=] 20.Qb3

[20.f4+/=] 20...Nf7 [20...f4! 21.Rd1=] 21.b5 axb5 22.axb5 Nd8? [22...Qf6 23.bxc6 bxc6 24.Nxc6 Qxc6 25.Bb5 Qf6 26.Bxe8 Rxe8 27.Rd1+/=] 23.bxc6 bxc6 24.Nxc6 Nxc6 25.Qxd5+ Qe6 26.Bc4 1-0

179 – Latimer 6.e3 Nbd7 7.Rc1 My Queens Gambit Declined vs Edward Latimer travelled pretty far down the road of the Orthodox Variation. When Black did not take my knight on c3 that gave me new options. One good idea would be to take his knight with 12.Nxd5 exd5. White would have a comfortable position after 13.Bd3 Bb7. However the fact that Black controls e4 keeps White from developing a strong attack any time soon. What can I do about e4? Why not move my knight there? So I decided to try 12.Ne4!? The point of this move is to migrate the knight toward the kingside. White hopes to work up an attack. This is an interesting idea but not necessarily a promising plan. There is no objective expectation that such an attack would be successful as long as Black continues to pressure the center. The removal of White's knight from c3 lessens his influence on the center after 13.Ng3. It is Black who attacks kingside with White's knight as a potential target. The middlegame chances were equal until Black went wrong with his move 22…Nb2? The fork looked good, but it failed. White could escape with check and trap the knight in return. Sawyer (2000) - Latimer (1987), corr APCT 1985 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 d5 4.Bg5 Nbd7 5.Nf3 Be7 6.e3 0-0 7.Rc1 c6 8.Bd3 dxc4 9.Bxc4 Nd5 10.Bxe7 Qxe7 11.0-0 b6 [11...Nxc3 12.Rxc3 e5 13.Qc2+/=] 12.Ne4!? [Another approach might be 12.Nxd5 exd5 13.Bd3 Bb7=] 12...Bb7 13.Ng3 c5! 14.e4 Nf4 15.Bb5 Rfd8 16.Qa4 Nf8 [16...Nf6 17.Rfd1=] 17.dxc5 a6 18.Be2 bxc5 19.Rfd1 h5 20.Bf1 N8g6 21.Ne2 Nd3 22.Rc3 Nxb2? [Better was 22...Nge5 23.Nxe5 Nxe5 24.Rxd8+ Rxd8=] 23.Rxd8+ Rxd8 24.Qb3

Nd1 25.Rd3 Rxd3 26.Qxd3 Nb2 27.Qb3 Bxe4 28.Qxb2 [28.Nd2!+/-] 28...e5 [28...Bxf3! 29.Qb8+ Kh7 30.gxf3+/=] 29.Nd2 Bb7 [29...Bd3 30.Ng3 Bxf1 31.Ngxf1+-] 30.Nc4 f5 31.Na5 [Or 31.Ng3!+-] 31...Bd5 32.Nc3 Be6 33.Nc6 Qf6 34.Qb6 1-0

180 – O'Shea 6.e3 Nbd7 7.Rc1 We were hot. Burning hot in Hatboro, Pennsylvania. This day the air conditioning was not working at the tournament site. I was sweating like a pig while trying to play serious chess. How do you handle poor playing conditions? As a young man in 1981, I handled it very foolishly. The temperature reached 95 degrees Fahrenheit on this Sunday in Philadelphia. The front doors to the building were left wide open so that at least we would get some moving air from outside as we crowded around the chess tables inside. The air was still. Our opening an Orthodox Queens Gambit Declined which leads to longer games. My opponent for the fourth round was Stephen O'Shea. He had to be as uncomfortable as I and everyone else in the room was. I lived in the South 1977-1980, but by the summer of 1981, my body re-acclimated itself to Northern weather. Our bodies naturally thicken our blood in cold climates to conserve heat and thin our blood to release heat in hot climates. Now in Florida my body is used to 95 degree temperatures, but that was not the case in 1981 Philly. So what did I do? I decided to play my tournament game as if it was blitz chess. My opponent was rated 300 points below me, so in even conditions the odds of me winning were excellent. But my choice to play my moves without much thought was stupid. O'Shea wisely played at a normal pace. For the first dozen moves we played a well-known solid book line. Three months earlier I had won a club game vs John Mack with the move 13.Qb1, a favorite of Najdorf. In later years I preferred 13.dxe5 Nxe5 14.Nxe5 Qxe5 15.f4 and tried to outplay my opponents from an equal but unbalanced position. In the game below I am winning through move 27. Then I throw it all away in the heat of the moment with blunders on moves 28 and 29. Now fired up I stubbornly suffer on until move 65.

Stephen O'Shea holds his advantage and earns a well-deserved victory. USCF lists shows one Stephen O'Shea who obtained a rating in the 1700s and plays in tournaments down South in the Huntsville, Alabama. I wish him well. Sawyer - O'Shea (1583), Hatboro, PA (4), 19.07.1981 begins 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5 Be7 5.e3 0-0 6.Nf3 Nbd7 7.Rc1 c6 8.Bd3 dxc4 9.Bxc4 Nd5 10.Bxe7 Qxe7 11.0-0 Nxc3 12.Rxc3 e5 13.Qb1 [This is a rare line meant to support b4 and cover the b1-h7 diagonal. More common are either 13.dxe5 Nxe5 14.Nxe5 Qxe5 15.f4 Qe4=; or 13.Qc2 exd4 14.exd4 Nb6 15.Re1 Qd8 16.Bb3 Nd5 17.Bxd5 Qxd5=] 13...e4 14.Nd2 Nf6 15.Rfc1 [15.b4+/=] 15...Bf5 16.b4 Qd7 17.a4 Rac8 18.Be2 Rfe8 19.b5 Nd5 20.Rc5 Rc7 21.Bc4 Nb6 22.Bb3 Rcc8 23.a5 Nd5 24.Ba4 [24.a6!+-] 24...Re6 25.Bb3 [White is winning after 25.bxc6 bxc6 26.Rxd5 Qxd5 27.Rc5 Qd6 28.Rxf5+-] 25...Ree8 26.bxc6 [White wins material with 26.a6 Ne7 27.Nc4 Bg6 28.Ne5 Qc7 29.axb7 Qxb7 30.bxc6+-] 26...bxc6 27.Ba4 Re6 [27...Ne7 28.Nxe4+/-] 28.f3?! [Again 28.Rxd5! Qxd5 29.Rc5 Qd6 30.Rxf5+-] 28...Nxe3 29.Nxe4? [Throwing everything away in the heat of the moment. Chances are roughly equal after 29.Qb2=] 29...Bxe4 30.fxe4 Qxd4 31.Qa1 Qd2 32.Rg5 Rg6 33.Rcc5 h6 34.Qc3 Qxc3 [Fastest is to threaten checkmate with 34...Rf6! 35.h3 Qf2+ 36.Kh2 hxg5-+ leaves Black up a rook with a mating attack.] 35.Rxc3 Rxg5 36.Rxe3 Rxa5 37.Bb3 Re5 38.Kf2 c5 39.Bd5 Re7 40.Ke2 a5 41.Ra3 Ra7 42.Kd3 Kf8 43.Kc4 Ke7 44.e5 Rb8 45.Kxc5 Rc7+ 46.Kd4 Rb4+ 47.Ke3 Rc5 48.Bf3 Rxe5+ 49.Kd3 Rc5 50.Ke3 Rb6 51.Kd4 Kd6 52.h3 Rb4+ 53.Kd3 Kc7 54.Kd2 Kb6 55.Kd3 a4 56.Kd2 [If 56.Bd1 Kb5 57.Ra1 Rd5+ 58.Ke3 f5-+ Black is still winning easily.] 56...Ka5 57.Rd3 Rcb5 58.Rd6 a3 59.Be2 Rb2+ 60.Ke1 Re5 61.Ra6+ Kb4 62.Rb6+ Kc3 63.Rc6+ Kb3 64.Kf1 Rexe2 65.h4 Rec2 0-1

Book 6: Index of Names to Games 1964Buick – 99 AdamsX – 44, 117 aditrix – 119 Admiraal – 61 alain – 100, 174 Alekseev – 46, 60 Alieva – 145 ambro1957 – 118 andrei – 105 Anton Guijarro – 158, 160 Aronian – 47 Artemiev – 37 atlanta – 162 Babic – 23 Bachmann – 57, 86 Bacon – 36 Baffo – 73 Baron – 48 Batten – 146 Bauer – 10, 38 Beloungie – 53 Bikova – 157 Bitan – 13 blik – 116, 132 Blockader – 93, 175 Bluebaum – 128 Bocharov – 127 Bocharova – 56 Bourget – 164 Boursier – 38 Brunello – 49 Burke – 55 ButchCroft – 63 Bykhovsky – 24

Capablanca – 148 CaptainJimTKirk – 107 Carlsen – 68, 69 Caruana – 65, 68 Chaney – 166 Cheparinov – 159 ChessNoobComp – 20 Cooper – 110 Corter, T – 6 Crompton – 91, 97 Cruz – 45, 62 Cui, C – 30 Cunanan – 35 DADASH – 34 Danchenko – 67 Davis – 104 De Blecourt – 14 De Borba – 86 Deluca – 31, 176 Demuth – 129 Deus Filho – 70 Diaz – 151 Djukanovic – 169 Drugge – 16 Dubov – 41 Duda – 50 Dunn – 114 El Debs – 70 Fernandez – 147 Fischer – 177 Fitter – 77 Fries Nielsen – 13-16 Fuerte2004 – GAF – 7 Garcia Fuentes – 64 Gasimov – 120 Gates – 26, 27, 124, 130

Gelfand – 141, 144 Gilster – 96 GiorgosY – 98 Grachev – 59 Gubsky – 89 Guerreiro – 92 Guest – 2, 8 Haines – 4, 18, 22, 26-31, 53, 72, 74, 83, 99, 106, 124, 125, 130, 140, 149 Hansen – 42, 43 Hardison – 149, Hartung – 152 Hasani – 21 Haskel – 33 Hatch – 103 Hechl – 121 Hemant – 47 Holt – 24 Hughes – 113 Ivanchuk – 144 Jacobsen – 49 jafar – 54 Jakovenko – 160 jjcwn – 123 Joachimelben – 28 Joferon2103 – 108 Kamnev – 60 Keinanen – 71 Kharitonov – 81 Khegay – 127 Khenkin – 120 Khismatullin – 41 Kirk – 111 Koch – 10 Kohut – 76 Korobov – 69 Kotronias – 78 Krienke – 133

Kristensen – 9 Kucuksari – 58 Kveinys – 79 Latimer – 179 layarrr – 109 Le Quang Liem – 65 Levenfish – 148 LeviRook – 84 Loetscher – 129 Lugo – 51 Madison – 163 Mamedyarov – 141 Mandelkern – 143 Marholev – 82 Mason – 122 Matlakov – 88 Matsuura – 25 McCullough – 153 Michaluk – 3 Mikhalevski – 5 Berenboym – 5 Mitkov – 11 Morin – 106, 125, 140, 176 Morrill – 165 mscp – 95 Muhle – 136 Muir – 168 Murray – 75, 142 Najer – 88 Nemcova – 61 NN – 42, 43, 150 Nolan – 137 Ocantos – 57 Ochoa de la Rosa – 151 Omar – 158 O'Shea – 180 Over-Rated – 90 Pakleza – 40

Pallitsch – 121 Paravyan – 145 pavel135 – 4 Penullar – 107-109 Perrine – 138 Ponomariov – 50 Porter, K – 72 Porter, M – 74 Post – 81 Protej – 161 Quintiliano Pinto – 25 Rabiega – 87 Radjabov – 37 Rateike – 17 Rawicz – 40 Richmond – 131 Rideout – Riley – 83 Roberge – 167 Robson – 52 Rocha – 64 Rookie – 126, 139 Ross – 173 Rubenchik – 115 Rubinsky – 32 Rudenko – 157 Rusev – 82 ruval – 80 Saeed – 9 Sammalvuo – 71 Sankalp – 58 Santos – 92 Saulin – 89 sawizard – 94 Sawyer, E – 155, 170 Sawyer, T – 1-3, 6-8, 17, 20, 21, 32-36, 39, 44, 45, 51, 52, 54, 55, 62, 63, 66, 73, 75-77, 80, 84, 85, 90, 93-96, 98, 100-105, 110-119, 122, 123, 126,

131-139, 142, 143, 146, 147, 152-156, 161-168, 170-175, 178-180 schack55 – 18 Schoppmeyer – 156 Schrecongost – 102 Schuler – 171 Seaside – 172 Shapiro – 178 Sheng – 11 Short – 12 Sjugirov – 78 Sobel – 134, 135 Spassky – 177 subamaya – 85 Svane – 87, 159 syd77 – 97 Tartakower – 19 Tate – 48 Thomas – 19 thuyhien2012 – 91 tobiE4 – 22 Torning – 150 Tovia – 39 TRENDAVID – 1 Trjapishko – 67 Tukhaev – 15 Utnasunov – 59 Vaishali – 79 Van der Lende – 66 Vitiugov – 128 Vreljanski – 169 Welsh – 12 Wilbur – 112 Willy809 – 101 Yace Paderborn – 154 Yevseev – 46 Zaja – 23 Zakaryan – 56

Book 7 - Indian Defences 1.d4 Nf6 Chess Opening Games – Second Edition Copyright © 2015, 2016, 2018 by Sawyer Publications All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form without permission in writing from the author. Play Indian Defences with 1.d4 Nf6. Choose dynamic counter attacks. Enjoy grandmaster openings and win. This 2018 Second Edition has 202 games with commentary, analysis and opinions by Tim Sawyer and an index of player names to game numbers. This book covers King’s Indian and Gruenfeld Defences. Explore the Budapest Gambit, Benko Gambit or Benoni Defence. Study the solid Catalan, Nimzo-Indian or Queen’s Indian Defense. Or avoid 2.c4. Choose the Trompowsky, Colle or London System. Enjoy hypermodern openings. Fight for the center. Improve your control of the chess board. Tim Sawyer shares adventures and stories from 45 years playing masters, experts and club players. This book covers all the openings that begin 1.d4 Nf6 except for those with an immediate 2...d5. Not covered in Indian Defences are 2…d5 (see Queen Pawn 1.d4 d5) or Huebsch Gambit after 2.Nc3 d5 3.e4 Nxe4 (see Blackmar-Diemer Games 2 (Declined). You can find checkmate themes in all these openings. To help you, related games are grouped together. You will find games full of interesting ideas from years of the author’s own writing. They provide creative ideas and ways to improve. Consider new strategy and tactics and your interest will soar! You could win games that you may want to show your friends. Stay excited. Have fun playing chess!

Book 7: Chapter 1 – Lines without 2.c4 2.f3 & others This section can transpose to a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit after 1.d4 Nf6 2.f3 d5 3.e4 dxe4 4.Nc3. What if Black avoids the BDG immediately and does not play 2…d5?

1 – Gareyev 2.g4 Nxg4 3.e4 d6 Timur Gareyev won a Gibbins-Wiedenhagen Gambit while he was setting the record at the Blindfold King. This gambit begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.g4!? White's plan is to gain time at the cost of the g-pawn. Black is usually surprised and totally on his own at this point. The natural continuation is to accept the gambit followed by moving the d-pawn to protect his knight. Humphry Bogart played a famous game in this opening. Diemer, Bronstein, Gibbins, Krabbe and a host of Blackmar-Diemer Gambit players have ventured this gambit against Black's 1...Nf6 invitation to play the Indian Defences. I've played it a few times myself in blitz games just for something different. In this game, Gareyev faced James Stuart. Black played pretty well for the first dozen moves. Then the grandmaster's skill took over. Gareyev (2618) - Stuart, Gareyev Blindfold Simul Las Vegas USA (1.33), 03.12.2016 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.g4 Nxg4 3.e4 d6 [3...d5 4.Be2 Nf6 5.e5 Nfd7 6.Nf3 Nb6=/+] 4.f3 Nf6 5.Be3 e5 6.Nc3 c6 [6...Nc6=/+] 7.Qd2 Nbd7 8.00-0 Qc7 9.f4 Ng4 10.Bh3 [10.Nf3!?] 10...Nxe3 [10...Nb6=/+] 11.Qxe3 Be7 12.Nf3 h6 [12...exf4 13.Qxf4 g6=] 13.Rhg1 Rg8 [13...exf4 14.Qxf4 g5=] 14.dxe5 [14.fxe5 dxe5 15.Kb1+/-] 14...dxe5 15.Bxd7+ Bxd7 16.Nxe5 Rd8 [16...Be6! 17.Nf3+/=] 17.Qxa7 g5 18.Nxd7 Qxf4+ 19.Kb1 Rxd7 20.Rxd7 Kxd7 21.Qxb7+ Qc7 22.Rd1+ Bd6 23.Qb3 Ke7 24.Rf1 Rg7 [24...Kf8 25.Qe6+/-] 25.h3 Kf8 26.a4 Qc8 27.Ne2 Qa6 28.Qf3 Be7 29.Nd4 Qc8 30.Nf5 Rh7 31.Nxh6 Qe8 32.Ng4 Qd7 33.e5 Qc8 34.a5 Qa6 35.Qf5 Kg8 36.Nh6+ Kh8 37.Nxf7+ 1-0

2 – Kremer 2.f3 e6 3.e4 c6 Close to Martinsburg, West Virginia, just across the Potomac River, is one of the most sobering places I have ever visited. Outside of Sharpsburg, Maryland is the site of the Battle of Antietam from the year 1862 in the American Civil War. The Battle had three phases - each disastrous. Many soldiers were slaughtered in minutes. There was the Cornfield in the morning, Bloody Lane midday, and Burnside's Bridge in the afternoon. The Union General McClellan had the larger army but was so worried about losing that he did not dare to attack with all this soldiers. One third of his men never fired a shot at Antietam. The American Civil War could have ended in 1862 but dragged on to 1865. General McClellan was like a chess player who had more material, controlled the center but refused to force the win. This very poor strategy is exactly what I did in my game against William Kremer. Both sides moved their pieces ahead slowly. The opening is like a very Delayed French Defence. Sawyer - Kremer, Martinsburg, WV (3), 09.12.1989 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.f3 e6 [2...e6 makes 2.f3 look like a waste of time. Black can play aggressively with ...d5 / ...c5 etc.] 3.e4 c6 [Black is also plays slowly. Sharper is 3...c5 or 3...d5] 4.c3 [Grabbing space with 4.e5 is worth a try.] 4...Qb6 5.Qc2!? [5.e5+/=] 5...d6 [A slow French.] 6.Be3 Nbd7 7.Nd2 d5 8.Bg5?! [Both players insist on taking two moves to get to the same place you could go in one. 8.0-0-0+/=] 8...h6 9.Bxf6 [9.Be3!?] 9...Nxf6 10.e5 Nd7 11.f4 c5 12.Ngf3 cxd4 13.cxd4 Bb4 14.Bd3 Bxd2+?! [Black voluntarily gives up his good bishop.] 15.Qxd2 Nb8 16.0-0 Nc6 17.Kh1 Bd7 18.Be2 Rc8 19.Rac1 0-0 [White has let opportunities slip.] 20.g4 Qb4 21.Qxb4 Nxb4 22.a3 Nc2 23.h3 Ne3 24.Rfe1 Nc4 25.Rb1 Na5 26.b4 Nc4 27.Rb3 Ba4 28.Rc3 Nb2 [28...Rc6!] 29.Rec1 Bd7 30.Kg2 Rxc3 31.Rxc3 Rc8 32.Rxc8+ Bxc8 [A bishop ending looks winnable, but Black has that pesky knight.] 33.Nd2 Bd7 34.Kf2 a6 35.Ke3 b5 36.Nb1 Nc4+ 37.Kd3 f6 38.Kc3 Be8 39.Bd3 fxe5 [Black opens a path for the White king to invade. Maybe 39...g5!?] 40.dxe5 g6 41.Kd4 Kg7 42.Kc5 Kf7 43.Bxc4 bxc4 44.Kb6?? [Too far too fast. White is good after 44.Nc3!] 44...Bb5 [44...d4!-+ wins for Black.] 45.a4?? [White has to come back to survive.

45.Kc5=] 45...d4 46.axb5 axb5 47.Na3 c3 48.Nxb5 c2 49.Nxd4 c1Q [Black queens a pawn and I am busted. I treat it like a blitz game. Somehow I keep from losing.] 50.Nc6 Qxf4 51.b5-+ and drawn in 30 more moves. 1/2-1/2

3 – McNiece 2.f3 c5 3.d5 e5 The Blackmar-Diemer Gambit player has two ways to meet 1.d4 Nf6 on the second move. They are 2.Nc3 and 2.f3. Each one often transposes into the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit by move four. They are of equal value except when Black chooses not to head for the BDG. There are solutions to these problems. After 2.Nc3 d5 3.e4 White has to deal with the Huebsch Gambit 3...Nxe4. The alternative is 3...dxe4 4.f3 which is a BDG. The move 2.f3 is weaker for White in two situations. The first problem is when Black chooses either the solid French Defence approach with 2...e6. The second problem is when Black chooses a Benoni set-up with 2...c5. In my game against Peter McNiece from the 1989 USCF Golden Knights Postal Chess Tournament, we saw a Benoni Defence. I combined my 2.f3 with the Schmid idea of Nc3 without an early c2-c4. This left me weak on the light squares so I swapped off my king's bishop. Normally in the 2.Nc3 Benoni Schmid, White plays Nf3, with or without an early f4. But the move 2.f3 messes White up for these ideas in the Benoni Defence. It is not fatal, just not as strong. Probably the chances after 2.f3 are equal with correct play. White’s position was fine against Peter McNiece until my blunder with 23.Nc6? After that I decided to throw in the towel and focus more on my other postal games. Sawyer (2169) - McNiece (2068), corr USCF 89N285 corr USCF, 01.08.1990 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.f3 c5 3.d5 e5 4.e4 Qa5+ 5.Nc3 d6 6.Bb5+ Bd7 7.Bxd7+ Nbxd7 8.Nh3 [8.Nge2+/=] 8...Be7 9.0-0 c4 10.Be3

[10.Qe2+/=] 10...Bd8= 11.Qe2 Bb6 12.Nd1 Rc8 13.Nhf2 0-0 14.b3 cxb3 15.cxb3 Rc7 16.Bxb6 Qxb6 17.Ne3 Rfc8 18.Qd2 g6 19.Nc4 Qa6 20.Nd3 b5 21.Nb4 Qb7 22.Ne3 Qb6 23.Nc6? [23.Rac1=] 23...Nb8 24.Nxb8 Rc2-/+ 0-1

4 – Zilbermints 3.d5 d6 4.e4 g6 Is 1.d4 Nf6 2.f3 playable for White? What do other authors say? Tim Harding wrote in “Colle, London and Blackmar-Diemer Systems” (1979, p.101) about the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit Avoided line 1.d4 Nf6 2.f3 as follows: "If you hope to reach a Blackmar-Diemer after 1 d4 Nf6, you ... are most likely to get what you want via 2 f3!? d5 (2 ... c5 can now lead to a Saemisch King's Indian) 3 e4 de 4.Nc3. Good hunting!" Eric Schiller in his classic monograph “Blackmar Diemer Gambit” (1986, p.80) called the opening moves 1.d4 Nf6 2.f3 “The Paleface Attack”. Schiller went on to write: “When Black adopts an Indian set-up against 1 d4, one must adopt clever means to trick him into the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit... “2...c5 is possible, and then the game will probably transpose into a hybrid of the Benoni and King's Indian Defence: 3 d5 g6 4 e4 Bg7 5 c4 0-0 6 Nc3 d6 7 Bg5. That system, favored by British Grandmaster Raymond Keene, holds great attacking possibilities.” Below is an example of the line 1.d4 Nf6 2.f3 c5 3.d5 g6 4.e4. Lev Zilbermints played White. Both players were rated in the 2100s at the time in Internet Chess Club blitz. Sometimes they were rated much higher than that. Zilbermints - JureP, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 11.08.2004 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.f3 g6 [2...c5 can transposes after 3.d5. If White tries to deviate with 3.dxc5?! Qa5+ 4.Nc3 e6 5.e4 Bxc5=/+ Black has an improved Sicilian Defence type position. Of course 3.c3 looks playable, but it does not fight for the initiative.] 3.e4 c5 4.d5 d6 5.Be3 Bg7 6.Nc3 0-0 7.Qd2 a6 [Black prepares to expand on the queenside. 7...e6 8.dxe6 Bxe6 9.0-0-0+/=] 8.a4 Nbd7 9.Bh6?! [9.Nge2 Ne5 10.b3=] 9...Ne5?! [9...Bxh6! 10.Qxh6 Qb6=/+] 10.Bxg7 Kxg7 11.b3 [11.f4!+/=] 11...Qc7 12.h3 [Setting a trap by taking g4 away from the Ne5.] 12...Bd7? [Taking d7 away from the Ne5.] 13.f4! Neg4 14.hxg4 Bxg4 [White is a knight up.] 15.Nf3 Qd7 16.Be2 Nh5

17.Qe3 Ng3 18.Rh4 Nxe2 19.Nxe2 h5 20.Nh2 [Forcing the trade of Black's last minor piece.] 20...Bxe2 21.Qxe2 b5 22.g4 Black resigns 1-0

5 – Bovay 5.c4 Bg7 6.Nc3 0-0 James Bovay III played the Modern Benoni Defence against me in a fast two minute bullet chess game. Such contests fly by at a typical pace of 1-2 seconds per move. I gave him the option to transpose to a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit in the opening after 1.d4 Nf6 2.f3. However instead of that 2...d5 variation, Bovay played the Benoni Defence with 2...c5. There are four significant issues in this 2.f3 Benoni Defence game. White could have made different decisions. These four issues include: 1. White could avoid c2-c4 and play Nc3 one move earlier. 2. White could hinder Black's expansion with say 11.a4. 3. White missed Black's uncovered bishop attack 18.Nfd7. 4. White's game quickly collapsed leading to checkmate. Nice win by James Bovay whom I had played by postal in 1980. My ICC bullet record is +335, -319, =32 with a peak bullet rating of 2236 in 1999. Sawyer - Bovay III, ICC r 2 0 Internet Chess Club, 1997 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.f3 c5 3.d5 d6 4.e4 g6 5.c4 Bg7 6.Nc3 0-0 7.Bg5 h6 8.Be3 e6 9.Qd2 exd5 10.cxd5 a6 11.Bd3 b5 12.Nge2 Nbd7 13.0-0 Kh7 14.Ng3 Re8 15.Rfe1 Qc7 16.Bf1 Nb6 17.b3 b4 18.Nce2 Nfd7 19.Nf4 Bxa1 20.Rxa1 a5 21.Nd3 Ba6 22.Nb2 [22.Bxh6 a4=] 22...Bxf1 23.Kxf1 a4 24.Kg1 [24.Rb1 h5-+] 24...axb3 25.Nd3 Rxa2 26.Rxa2 bxa2 27.Qxa2 Ra8 28.Qb2 Nc4 29.Qe2 Nxe3 30.Qxe3 b3 31.h3 c4 32.Kh2 cxd3 33.Qxd3 Qc2 34.Qd4 Ra2 35.Nf5 Qxg2# 0-1

6 – Fitter 7.Bg5 h6 8.B3 e6 Want to develop a better chess opening repertoire? The word "fitter" describes either someone who puts together parts or someone who cuts off excess material or takes off weight. The Internet Chess Club had a computer chess engine playing with the handle "Fitter". It was rated around 2900. When I played test games against such a strong opponent, it helped me. I used the experience to put together my opening repertoire. This allowed me to more accurately evaluate the strength of what I play. Then I eliminated lines that were more like fat than muscle. In 1997 I aimed to reach a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit by 1.d4 Nf6 2.f3 d5 3.e4 dxe4 4.Nc3. Black sidetracked that goal with 2...c5. Thus my encounter with Fitter reached the Modern Benoni Defence variation with 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 e6 4.Nc3 exd5 5.cxd5 d6 6.e4 g6 7.f3 Bg7 8.Bg5 h6 9.Be3 0-0 10.Qd2 by transposition. The analysis of this game illustrated ideas that can work well plus playable options. My 16th move was a mistake that led to my eventual loss. That lesson was duly learned. Sawyer - Fitter, ICC u 5 0 Internet Chess Club, 1997 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.f3 c5 3.d5 d6 4.e4 g6 5.c4 Bg7 6.Nc3 0-0 7.Bg5 h6 8.Be3 e6 9.Qd2 exd5 10.cxd5 Re8 [10...h5 11.Nge2 Nbd7 12.Nf4 Ne5=] 11.Nge2 [11.Bb5!?=] 11...Nbd7 12.0-0-0?! [12.Bxh6 Nxe4 13.Nxe4 Qh4+ 14.g3 Qxh6 15.Qxh6 Bxh6 16.Nxd6 Rd8 17.Bh3 Nb6 18.Nxc8 Nxc8 19.Bxc8 Raxc8 20.Rd1=] 12...Kh7 13.h4 b5 14.Nxb5 Qb6 15.Nbc3 Ba6 16.g4? [16.Nf4 Bxf1 17.Rdxf1 Ne5 18.b3 Qa6=/+] 16...Ne5 17.Ng1 Bxf1 18.Rxf1 Rab8 19.b3 Qa6 20.Rf2 Nd3+ 21.Kb1 Nxf2 22.Bxf2 Qf1+ 23.Qe1 [Or 23.Be1 Nxe4 24.Nxe4 f5 25.gxf5 gxf5 26.Qe2 Qxe2 27.Nxe2 fxe4 28.fxe4 Rxe4-+] 23...Qd3+ 24.Ka1 Nxe4 25.Nge2 Nxc3 0-1

7 – Clauser 3.d5 e6 4.c4 b5 The Benko Gambit may be reached by Blackmar-Diemer Gambit players after the initial moves 1.d4 Nf6 2.f3 c5 3.d5 e6 4.c4 b5. Jack Clauser played this against me in a postal game in 1992. The natural Benko Gambit move order would be 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 b5 4.f3 e6. That transposes to the exact same position. Black's Benoni style approach answering 1.d5 Nf6 2.f3 with 2...c5! This is the sharpest reaction to White's hope to arrive at a BDG (reached by transposition via 2...d5 3.e4 dxe4 4.Nc3). Jack R. Clauser III worked closely with me during the years that I wrote my original Blackmar-Diemer Gambit Keybook published by Thinkers Press and Bob Long in 1992. We were already corresponding with each other on about a weekly basis playing our postal games, so working with Jack was convenient. I would write a chapter or section and send it to Jack Clauser. He read it and offered helpful suggestions. Jack Clauser was literally the proofreader of my draft copy of 700 annotated games. We lived about 95 miles apart. Sometimes I was in his area on business or at a chess tournament where we would meet. Once Jack came to my home and kindly took me to a Penn State Nittany Lions football game coached by Joe Paterno. Jack and I played 21 games over a ten year period. Although my rating was slightly higher than his, Clauser scored slightly better in our games, about half of which were drawn. I am not sure that we worked hard on these games, but we enjoyed playing each other. White had two other moves in the opening: 4.e4 and 7.f4. Sawyer (2000) - Clauser (1900), corr 1992 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.f3 c5 3.d5 e6 4.c4 [4.e4] 4...b5 5.e4 bxc4 6.Nc3 Ba6 [6...exd5 7.Nxd5=] 7.e5? [7.f4] 7...Nxd5 8.Nxd5 exd5 9.Qxd5 Nc6 10.Bxc4? [10.f4 Nb4 11.Qe4 Nd3+

12.Bxd3 cxd3 13.Nf3 c4-/+] 10...Bxc4? [We both missed 10...Qh4+! 11.g3 Qxc4-+] 11.Qxc4 Rb8 12.f4 Rb4 13.Qc3 Re4+ 14.Kf2 d5 15.exd6 Qxd6 16.Be3 [16.Nf3 Be7=/+] 16...Nb4 17.Ne2 [17.Nh3 Nd3+ 18.Ke2 c4-+] 17...Nd3+ 18.Kf3 Qd5 19.Qb3 Rc4+ [19...Rxf4+ 20.Kg3 Qg5+ 21.Kh3 Rh4#] 20.Kg3 Qe4 21.Qb8+ Kd7 22.Qb5+ Ke6 23.Qe8+ Be7 0-1

8 – Superpoil 3.d5 e6 4.e4 exd5 Jocelyn Bond asked if, after 1.d4 Nf6, White is stuck with 2.Nc3 or can he play 2.f3. His concern was the line 2.f3 c5 3.d5 e6. Both the moves 2.Nc3 and 2.f3 are approximately of equal value. With 2.Nc3 d5 3.e4, White has to deal with the Huebsch Gambit 3...Nxe4. That is good or bad depending on how well you play that variation compared to your opponent. With 2.f3 d5 3.e4, Black has 3...e6 or 3...c5 to avoid the 3...dxe4 4.Nc3 (BDG). After 1.d4 Nf6 2.f3. Black has four important options: 2...d5 3.e4 dxe4 4.Nc3 exf3 5.Nxf3 Blackmar-Diemer Gambit. 2...e6 3.e4 d5 and some sort of French Defence is likely. 2...g6 3.e4 Bg7 4.Nc3 d6 Pirc or 4.c4 d6 5.Nc3 King's Indian. 2...c5 3.dxc5 Qa5+ 4.Nc3 / 5.e4 like a Sicilian or 3.d5 Benoni. "Superpoil" is a long time BDG expert who appears and re-appears under many different handles. "Champbuster" is listed as Stefan Kristjannsson, an International Master from Iceland. Superpoil - Champbuster, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 10.08.2008 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.f3 c5 [Black adopts a Benoni Defence approach.] 3.d5 e6 4.e4 [If 4...d6 White can still avoid c2-c4 with 5.Nc3 getting an even position. For example 5...exd5 6.Nxd5!? Nxd5 7.Qxd5 Nc6 8.Be3 Be6 9.Qd2 d5=] 4...exd5 5.e5!? [5.exd5 Bd6 6.Qe2+ Qe7 7.Nc3= is an alternative.] 5...Qe7 [Pinning the pawn is a natural response, but Black does better to move the Nf6. 5...Ng8 6.Qxd5 Nc6 7.Nc3=; 5...Nh5!? (with a threat of 6...Qh4+) 6.Nh3!? d6 7.Qxd5 Bxh3 8.Qxb7 Nd7 9.gxh3 White has the two bishops in a messy unclear position.] 6.Qe2 Ng8 [6...Nh5?! Too late. 7.Nc3 Qh4+ 8.Qf2+/-] 7.Nc3 Qe6 [7...d4 8.Nb5+/= hitting c7/d6.] 8.Nh3! d4 [8...Nc6 9.Nf4 Qxe5 10.Nfxd5 Kd8 (10...Qxe2+ 11.Bxe2 Nd4 12.Nc7+ Kd8 13.Nxa8 Nxc2+ 14.Kd1 Nxa1 15.Bf4+/=) 11.Bf4 Qxe2+ 12.Bxe2 d6 13.Nb5 Kd7 14.0-0-0 a6 15.Nb6+ 1-0 deaf-Kirlian/Internet Chess Club 2009; 8...Qc6 9.Nf4 d4 10.Ne4+/=; 8...Na6 9.Nf4 Qc6 10.Nfxd5+/-] 9.Ng5 Qc6 [9...Qb6 10.Nd5 Qc6 11.Qc4+-; 9...Qg6 10.Nb5

Na6 11.c3+/-] 10.Nce4?! [Junior 12 likes 10.Nb5! a6 (10...Na6 11.Bf4 Nb4 12.a4+/-) 11.Nd6+ Bxd6 12.exd6+ Kf8 13.Bf4+/-] 10...Na6? [10...h6!=] 11.Nd6+ Bxd6 12.exd6+ Kf8 13.Bf4 Nb4 14.0-0-0 h6? [14...Nd5 15.Re1+/=] 15.Re1! [There is no defense to mate in a few moves.] 1-0

9 – Kuhn 3.d5 g6 4.e4 d6 Sadly Coach Joe Paterno was fired as the football coach of the Penn State Nittany Lions. Paterno had a tremendous career. He has my respect. When Joe Paterno was in his early years as a coach, grandmaster Donald Byrne was an English professor at Penn State University in State College. Byrne was famous for his Dragon Sicilian. Donald Byrne also played “The Game of the Century” vs Bobby Fischer in 1956. His brother grandmaster Robert Byrne wrote a chess column for the New York Times. State College is in “Happy Valley” between two hillside ranges. My play was very sad. In this first round tournament game, I threw away a draw, lost the game, and dropped out of the event. It was a Benoni Defence. “Benoni” means Son of Sorrow. My opponent Keith Kuhn played well and deserved the win. I had a headache during the game, and I rarely get headaches. In the endgame I had chances to save a draw, but I missed them all. Sawyer - Kuhn, State College, PA 1990 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.f3 [Those who hope to transpose into a BDG must choose between 2.f3 and 2.Nc3. I have played them interchangeably. Both head toward a BDG after 2...d5 3.e4. The problem with 2.f3 is that it does not fit well with 2...c5 or 2...e6.] 2...c5 3.d5 g6 4.e4 d6 5.Nc3 Bg7 6.Bb5+ [6.Be3=] 6...Nfd7 7.Nge2 0-0 8.Bxd7 Bxd7 9.Bg5 [9.a4=] 9...h6 10.Be3 Na6 11.Qd2 Kh7 12.0-0 Nc7 13.Kh1 b5 14.Nd1 b4 15.c4 bxc3 16.bxc3 Rb8 17.Nf2 Nb5 18.a4 Nc7 19.Qc2 Qc8 20.Ra2 Qa6 21.g4? [This turns out to be more of a weakness than a strength.] 21...Qc4 [21...e6!-/+] 22.Rfa1 Rb3 23.Nd1 Rfb8 24.Bf2 Nxd5 25.exd5 Qxd5 26.Qe4 Qxe4 27.fxe4 Bxg4 28.Ne3? Bf3+ 29.Kg1 Rb1+ 30.Rxb1 Rxb1+ 31.Nf1 Bxe4 32.Be3 Bd3 33.Kf2 Bxe2 34.Kxe2 Bxc3 35.Ng3 Be5 36.Ne4 Rb4 37.Nxc5 dxc5 38.Bxc5 Rh4 39.Bxa7 Rxh2+ 40.Bf2 f6 41.a5 Bd4 42.Kf1 g5 43.a6 Kg6? [43...Bxf2!-+] 44.Kg1 Rxf2 45.Rxf2 h5 46.Kg2 g4 47.Rd2 Bc5 48.Rd7?! [48.Rc2= White can draw by chasing the bishop forever. If Black moves the bishop off the g1-a7 diagonal, then queen the a-pawn. If a pawn protects the bishop is protect, take the bishop with the rook, and then queen the a-pawn.] 48...e5 49.a7

Bxa7 50.Rxa7 h4 51.Ra8 f5 52.Rg8+ Kf6 53.Rh8? [53.Kf2!] 53...Kg5 54.Rg8+ Kf4 55.Rh8 h3+ 56.Kf2 e4 57.Rg8 e3+ 58.Ke2 g3 59.Rh8 g2 0-1

10 – Schafer 3.d5 d6 4.e4 g6 White faces challenges in trying to transpose from 1.d4 Nf6 to a BlackmarDiemer Gambit. One of the more difficult issues to deal with is facing the Benoni Defence with 2…c5. I played Charles Schafer in my 1989 USCF Golden Knights Postal Tournament. Charles A. Schafer of Georgia had a final USCF correspondence rating that dropped down to 1956. The Augusta Chronicle lists the death of Charles A. Schafer in 2005 at age 89. I quote a portion from that obituary: “Mr. Schafer was a World War II veteran of the U.S. Navy. He owned numerous businesses in the Augusta area including the Gold Mine Jewelry Store, the Custom Recording Company, Baskin - Robbins, the Pink Dipper Ice Cream Shop, and Stereo Village. Mr. Schafer was an avid golfer who won numerous championships in his younger days, and was a master chess player. He taught bible classes at the Good Shepherd Episcopal Church and wrote the book ‘The Sanhedrin Papers’…” Our game began with an early 2.f3 c5. This led to a Benoni Defence. Both sides played some unusual set ups. Instead of a threat to rapidly expand on the queenside with 7...a6, Black chose the much slower 7...b6. When I saw Black’s slower play on the queenside, I castled on the queenside and push my kingside pawns. An alternative plan was to castle kingside and attack the center. We both missed some chances and a draw was agreed. Sawyer - Schafer, corr USCF 1989 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.f3 c5 3.d5 d6 4.e4 g6 5.Nc3 Bg7 6.Be3 0-0 7.Qd2 b6 [Slow. Better is 7...a6 8.a4=] 8.0-0-0!? Ba6 9.Bh6 Bxf1 10.Rxf1 Nbd7 11.h4 Bh8?! [11...Bxh6 12.Qxh6 Kh8!?] 12.Bxf8 Qxf8 13.Nge2 Rb8 14.g4 Ne5 [14...b5 15.h5+-] 15.h5 Nc4 16.Qf4 Bg7 [Or 16...b5 17.hxg6 hxg6 18.b3+-] 17.Ng3 [17.b3! Ne5 18.hxg6 hxg6 19.g5 Nh5 20.Qe3+-] 17...Nd7 18.hxg6 fxg6 19.Qg5 [19.Nge2+/-] 19...Bf6

20.Qf4 Be5 21.Qxf8+ Rxf8 22.Nge2 Ne3 23.f4? [Here White should play 23.Nb5 Nxf1 24.Rxf1=] 23...Nxf1 24.Rxf1 g5 25.f5 a6 [25...Nf6!-/+] 26.Nd1 1/2-1/2

2.Nc3 This section covers lines where Black does not play 2…d5 (see my BDG 2 Declined book) or transpose into another opening. It includes the NimzoIndian vs the Blackmar-Diemer with 2.Nc3 e6 3.e4 Bb4 and the Schmid Benoni 2.Nc3 c5 among other lines.

11 – Haines 2.Nc3 e6 3.e4 Bb4 Ray Haines plays a chess opening that resembles a Nimzo-Indian Defence 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Bb4 or a French Defence Winawer 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Bb4 as Black. The game position may also be reached when heading toward a BlackmarDiemer Gambit via 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d5 3.e4 dxe4 4.f3, but here Black does not play ...d5. Two good ideas work for White. Attack Nf6 with 4.e5! and then g7 with 5.Qg4! Or defend e4 with 4.Bd3. White hoped for a blunder and was rewarded with Black's seventh move. Haines - escacsjocrei, Live Chess, 2.3.2018 begins 1.d4 e6 2.e4 Nf6 3.Nc3 Bb4 [The players reach the BDG Nimzo by transposition.] 4.Bd3 [Most players prefer the aggressive continuation 4.e5!] 4...0-0 [4...c5 5.dxc5 Nc6 6.Nf3 Bxc5 7.0-0 d6 8.Na4+/=] 5.Bg5 [5.Nh3+/=] 5...h6 6.h4 hxg5 [6...Be7 7.e5+/-] 7.hxg5 Nh7? [7...g6 8.gxf6 Qxf6 9.e5 Qg7 10.Qd2+/=] 8.Qh5 f6 9.g6 Rf7 and White won. 1-0

12 – maniaq 4.e5 Nd5 5.Qg4 When my wife broke her right arm, it was put into a sling. After that, she could handle anything on her left side but nothing on her right side. What if a chess player acted that way? What if a player moved practically everything on the left side and nothing on the right? In short, the game would be short. Here's an example in the BDG Nimzo-Indian Variation. White plays the first three moves of a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit while Black plays the first three moves of a Nimzo-Indian Defence. Note that when playing Black, your kingside is your left side. So the game begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 e6 (2...d5 3.e4 dxe4 4.f3 would actually transpose into a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit) 3.e4 Bb4. Black pins the knight. In a dream scenario, Black would like to play ...Nxe4, Nxc3, Bxc3+ and Bxa1. What is White to do? Attack! Go after the center and vulnerable kingside. This marked the first time my Chess.com rating went over 2000. I had not played there much. Sawyer (2004) - maniaq (1849), Live Chess Chess.com, 20.08.2012 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 e6 3.e4 Bb4 4.e5 Nd5 5.Qg4 0-0 [Castling here is rare. Usually the game goes 5...Nxc3 6.Qxg7 Rf8 7.a3 Ba5 8.b4 when 9.Bg5 is a strong threat.] 6.Bh6 g6 7.Bxf8 [This is the logical follow-up. Both 7.Nge2+/- and 7.a3+/- are at least as good but not necessary.] 7...Kxf8 8.a3 [Again 8.Nge2 c5 9.0-0-0+/- also looks good for White, but in this line Black will eventually bring out the Queen and likely get some checks to the White king.] 8...Bxc3+ [8...Ba5 9.Nge2+/-] 9.bxc3 Nxc3 [9...c5 10.Bd3+/-] 10.Qh3 Kg7 [10...Nd5 11.Qxh7+-] 11.Qxc3 1-0 [Note that Black's queenside pieces, the right side, remains completely unmoved.]

13 – mscp 5.Qg4 Bxc3+ 6.bxc3 Black could follow the Nimzo-Indian Defence approach against the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit after 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 e6 3.e4 Bb4. Play could continue 4.e5! Nd5 5.Qg4! Nxc3 6.Qxg7 Rf8 7.a3! White is better in a sharp struggle. When I played the computer "mscp", it replied 5...Bxc3+ 6.bxc3 0-0 7.Bh6 (threatening mate) 7...g6 offering me the Exchange. This pesky 1700 rated computer started giving me some trouble in blitz games. At first I played like I always had with 8.Bxf8 Qxf8 9.Ne2, but my pieces were not well coordinated. Once I found an improvement for White, I won twelve in a row before moving on to other opponents, other variations and other openings. In the worst game I grabbed the Exchange 8.Bxf8 Qxf8 9.Qf3!? The first game Sawyer - mscp, ICC 10.23.2011 began 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 e6 3.e4 Bb4 4.e5 Nd5 5.Qg4 Bxc3+ 6.bxc3 0-0 7.Bh6 g6 8.Bxf8 Qxf8 9.Qf3!? [I played 9.Ne2+/= vs many opponents and won more than I lost. But I was not impressed with the games.] 9...Qa3 10.Kd2? Qb2 11.Qd1?? Qxc3+ 12.Ke2 Nf4# 0-1 White checkmated. This motivated me to search for an improvement. 0-1 The big improvement came when I tried 8.h4 Re8 9.h5!? The second game Sawyer - mscp, ICC 11.1.2011 began 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 e6 3.e4 Bb4 4.e5 Nd5 5.Qg4 Bxc3+ 6.bxc3 0-0 7.Bh6 g6 8.h4! [It seems White does better not to win the Exchange but to attack! I was rewarded with this game.] 8...Re8 9.h5 Nxc3 10.Bd3 d6 11.hxg6 hxg6 12.Bxg6 Qf6 13.exf6 Nd7 14.Bxf7+ Kxf7 15.Qg7# 1-0 Black checkmated 1-0 The best game came when I tried 8.h4 Re8 9.Bd3! The third game Sawyer - mscp, ICC 11.5.2011 began 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 e6 3.e4 Bb4 4.e5 Nd5 5.Qg4 Bxc3+ 6.bxc3 0-0 7.Bh6 g6 8.h4! Re8 9.Bd3!

[When I got tired of winning several games with 9.h5, I switched to 9.Bd3! Junior 12 likes them both.] 9...f5 10.exf6 Nxf6 11.Qe2 d5 12.h5 Nxh5 13.Rxh5 gxh5 14.Qxh5 Qd7 15.Nf3 Nc6 16.Kd2 Ne7 17.Bxh7+ Kxh7 18.Qf7+ Kxh6 19.Rh1# 1-0 Black checkmated 1-0

14 – Zintgraff 5…Nxc3 6.Qxg7 Many players with Black know very little of the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit. They just play their favorite defences without regard to specific opening theory. Such player might just avoid the BDG by accident. One set of common moves that is a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit Avoided variation that really should be avoided by Black. This is the Nimzo-Indian Variation vs the BDG moves. Let’s say Black plays the sound and solid Nimzo-Indian Defence 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Bb4. Now suppose White plays the BDG. Play might begin 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 e6 3.e4 Bb4. These are all the same moves for Black as in the Nimzo-Indian. White could protect the pawn with 4.Bd3 or pin the knight with 4.Bg5. But White has played aggressive e4 instead of the positional c4. That makes a big difference in the tactical threats. The move 4.e5 leads to very short fun games that illustrates the problem. I do not know if Black intentionally avoided the BDG or not. Black played very logically and followed analysis of what not to do as given in my own Blackmar-Diemer Gambit Keybook II published in 1999. There I provided a Tom Purser win. This time Gary Zintgraff shows how the sharp continuation 4.e5! can lead to a quick White victory. Zintgraff - BobSled, ICC 2000 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 e6 3.e4 Bb4 4.e5! Ne4 5.Qg4 Nxc3 6.Qxg7 Rf8 [6...Nd5+ 7.c3 Rf8 8.cxb4 Qe7 9.Bd2+/-] 7.a3 Ne4+ 8.axb4 Qh4 9.Nf3 Qxf2+ 10.Kd1 Nc6 11.Bh6 d5 12.Qxf8+ Kd7 13.Qxf7+ Ne7 [13...Kd8 14.Qg8+!+-] 14.Bf8 Qe3 [Black threatens 15...Nf2 mate, but White mates first!] 15.Qxe7+ [This works fine. Faster is 15.Bb5+! c6 16.Qxe7#] 15...Kc6 16.b5+ Kb6 17.Qc5+ Nxc5 18.Bxc5# 1-0

15 – lynoli 6.Qxg7 Rf8 7.a3 Ba5 Here is a game in the critical line of the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit against the Nimzo-Indian Defence. This time the variation spells complete and immediate disaster for Black. What do you do when you are up two queens by move 16? Stay out of trouble and look for checkmate. Here is how to play when you have a big material advantage: 1. Keep your king very safe. 2. Play fast enough not to lose on time. 3. Do not accidentally lose any of your biggest pieces. 4. Eliminate any way your opponent could threaten you. 5. Look for opportunities to force checkmate. I played fast moves that were obviously good. This is important so as to avoid time trouble. Naturally I missed things I would see if I spent more than two seconds per move. One opportunity was a faster mate starting on move 14 that involved a queen sacrifice. My goal is just to make sure that I win the game. Sawyer - lynoli, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 25.11.2012 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 e6 3.e4 Bb4 4.e5 Ne4 5.Qg4 Nxc3 6.Qxg7 Rf8 7.a3 Ba5 8.b4 Bb6 9.Bg5 f6 10.Bxf6 Rxf6 11.exf6 d5 12.f7+ [1-0. Sawyer - LoseOften, ICC 3 0, 19.06.2012] 12…Kd7 13.f8Q+ Kc6 14.b5+ [14.Qxd8 Bd7 15.Qge7! Nb5 16.Qdxd7+! Nxd7 17.Qxe6+ Nd6 18.b5#] 14...Nxb5 15.Bxb5+ Kxb5 16.Qxd8 Bd7 17.Qdf8 a5 18.a4+ Ka6 19.Qff7 Nc6 20.Qxd7 Bxd4 21.Qxc6+ bxc6 22.Qxd4 Rb8 23.Nf3 Rb4 24.Qd3+ Kb7 25.0-0 c5 26.c3 Re4 27.Qb5+ Kc8 28.Qe8+ Kb7 29.Rfb1+ Ka7 30.Qb8+ Ka6 31.Qa8# Black checkmated 1-0

16 – Torning 2.Nc3 c5 3.d5 e5 Richard Torning won an offbeat Schmid Benoni 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 c5 3.d5. I recommended 3.dxc5 Qa5 4.a3 Qxc5 5.e4+= in my 1992 Blackmar-Diemer Gambit Keybook. After 3.d5 e5, 4.e4+= was stronger than 4.dxe6=, but White won easily due to weak Black play. Torning - NN, Bullet game, 12.05.2018 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 c5 3.d5 e5 4.dxe6 fxe6 5.Bg5 d5 6.e3 h6 7.Bf4 Nc6 8.Nf3 g5 9.Bg3 Bg7 10.h4 g4 11.Ne5 Nh5? 12.Qxg4 Nxg3?? [12...Nxe5 13.Bxe5+-] 13.Qg6+ Ke7 14.Qf7+ [I played the longer checkmate instead of 14.Qxg7+ Kd6 15.Nb5#] 14...Kd6 15.Nb5+ Kxe5 16.Qf4# White wins by checkmate. 1-0 [Game notes by Torning]

17 – leventh 3.d5 e6 4.e4 exd5 BDG players may play 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 c5, the Benoni Defence Schmid variation. White plays an early Nc3 with the pawn on c2 rather than c4. This ICC three minute blitz game was against “leventh”. His rating at 2065 was a little higher than mine that day. I played fairly well in a rather common line. I gave up my queen for two rooks and made several mate threats. However, I missed a winning combination in the last few moves. At the end I still had 1:18 seconds left on the clock. I should have spent more time thinking. Unfortunately I missed the winning knight sacrifice Nxg5+! After a repetition of moves, my opponent claims a draw. At least I picked up a few rating points. Sawyer - leventh, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 04.09.2012 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 c5 3.d5 e6 4.e4 exd5 5.e5 Ng8 6.Nxd5 [6.Qxd5+/-] 6...Nc6 7.Nf3 d6 8.exd6 [8.Bg5 Qa5+ (or 8...Qd7 9.Bb5+/-) 9.Qd2+/-] 8...Bxd6 9.Be2 Nge7 10.Nxe7 Qxe7 11.0-0 0-0 12.Re1 Qc7 13.h3 Bf5 14.Bd3 Bg6 15.Be3 Rad8 16.Qe2 Rfe8 17.Bxg6 hxg6 18.c3 Bf4? [18...Ne5 19.Rad1=] 19.Bxf4 Qxf4 20.Qxe8+ Rxe8 21.Rxe8+ Kh7 22.Rae1 f6 23.R8e4 Qf5 24.Rh4+ Kg8 25.Re8+ Kf7 26.Rhh8 g5 27.h4! g4 28.h5 [Sadly I missed

the knight sacrifice 28.Ng5+!] 28...g5 29.Rhf8+ [29.hxg6+ Qxg6 (29...Kxg6 30.Nh4+ wins the queen)] 29...Kg7 30.Rg8+ Kf7 31.Rgf8+ [Again 31.Nxg5+!] 31...Kg7 32.Rg8+ Kf7 33.Rgf8+ [33.Nxg5+] 33...Kg7 Game drawn by repetition 1/2-1/2

18 – Zangetsu-Sims 2.Nc3 e6 The Benoni Defence with an early ...c5 and without ...d5 is a proven good way to meet Closed Openings. Usually White plays 1.d4 and 2.c4 in such main line games. Blackmar-Diemer Gambit players regularly play Nc3 in front of the c2pawn. If Black follows with 2.Nc3 c5, this leads to a variation known as the Schmid Benoni Defence. After 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3, Black is given the opportunity to transpose into a BDG with 2...d5 3.e4 dxe4 4.f3. This is the starting position of the BDG. Here also 3...Nxe4 is a Huebsch Gambit. In the game Tim Sawyer vs "Zangetsu-Sims", we have a short crushing victory. White makes good use of an early open e-file. Black's move 5...d4 reminds me of the 2.Nc3 d5 3.e5 d4 4.exf6 dxc3 line in the Alekhine Defence. Here after both knights are chopped off on move six, Black must give up a bishop on move seven. The queens come off the board and White is up a piece in the endgame. It does not get much better than that after the first nine moves in most chess games. Sawyer (1914) - Zangetsu-Sims (1771), ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 30.07.2014 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 e6 3.e4 c5 4.d5 exd5 5.e5 d4 [5...Qe7 6.Qe2 Ng8 7.Nxd5+-] 6.exf6 dxc3 7.Qe2+ Be7 8.Qxe7+ [8.fxe7 Qxe7 9.Qxe7+ Kxe7 10.bxc3+-] 8...Qxe7+ 9.fxe7 Kxe7 [9...cxb2 10.Bxb2 f6 11.Ne2 Kxe7 12.Nf4 Nc6 13.Nd5+ Kd8 14.Nxf6+-] 10.b3 [10.Ne2+-] 10...a6 11.Bf4 b5 12.Be5 b4 13.Bxg7 Rg8 14.Be5 d5 15.0-0-0 d4 16.Bc4 Nc6 17.Bg3 f6? 18.Nf3 [18.Bxg8+-] 18...Rg7 19.Rde1+ Kf8 20.Bd5 Bd7 21.Bd6+ Black resigns 1-0

19 – julssants 3.e4 c5 4.d5 d6 The Benoni Defence is more than just an opening. The Benoni is a hypermodern concept of fighting the move 1.d4 with ...c5. The d4 pawn is pushed to d5 where it attacks e6 and c6. This leaves the Black pawn on c5 in some control of d4. Benoni Defence move orders vary widely. For strategical purposes, consider the basic initial set-up of 1.d4 c5 2.d5. Black plans further action with up to four different approaches. 1. Fianchetto the Black bishop with ...g6 and ...Bg7. 2. Attack the d5-pawn with the e-pawn by ...e7-e6. 3. Occupy e5 with a knight after ...Nbd7 or ...Nfd7. 4. Expand the queenside pawns with a timely ...b5. White Blackmar-Diemer players have four questions to ask: 1. Do I want to advance to d5, capture on c5, or protect d4? 2. Since I will play Nc3, do I want my c-pawn on c4 or on c2? 3. Since I will play e4, do I want my f-pawn on f2, f3, or f4? 4. If I plan Nf3, where do I want to develop my bishops? Here is a Benoni blitz game where both players attack kingside. Sawyer - julssants, Live Chess Chess.com, 04.08.2012 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 e6 [If 2...d5 3.e4 dxe4 4.f3 is a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit] 3.e4 c5 4.d5 d6 5.f4!? [There is no super powerful move here. White has a slight space advantage. I decided to take a more aggressive stance than the solid main line: 5.Nf3 exd5 6.exd5 Be7 7.Be2 0-0 8.0-0+/=; Cyrus Lakdawala recommends 5.Bb5+ in his book on the Veresov. The idea is 5...Bd7 6.dxe6 fxe6 7.e5 dxe5 8.Nf3 but Black looks okay after 8...Nc6=. This line is worth further analysis.] 5...exd5 6.exd5 Be7 7.Nf3 0-0 8.Be2 Bg4?! [8...a6; 8...Na6] 9.0-0 Nbd7 10.h3! Bf5 [10...Bxf3 11.Bxf3+/=] 11.g4 Be4 12.Nxe4 [12.g5+/-] 12...Nxe4 13.Bd3 Ng3 [13...f5 14.Qe1+/-] 14.Re1 Bh4 [Black needs to create an escape square for the Ng3 with 14...c4 15.Bxc4+/-]

15.Kg2 h6 16.Nxh4 Qxh4 17.Re3 g5 [There are no good moves at this point. Black's position keeps getting worse and worse. 17...Nh5 18.gxh5 Nf6 19.Qf3+-] 18.Rxg3 gxf4 19.Bxf4 Nf6 20.c4 Rfe8 21.Qf3 Re7 22.g5 hxg5 23.Bxg5 1-0

20 – MickeyTJ 2.Nc3 c5 3.d5 Benoni Defence players (1.d4 c5 2.d5 Nf6) are familiar with pawn structures and piece developments that involve White playing an early pawn push c4. Blackmar-Diemer Gambit players can choose the Benoni Schmid (Nc3 without c4), often via 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 c5 3.d5. In the Benoni Defence that tactics can come quicker than Black is prepared for them. There is a drug called a "Mickey" that puts people to sleep. In chess it is best to stay awake! The pressure of very fast play can force anyone to miss tactics. In blitz we all fall into some trap from time to time. In my three minute game vs "MickeyTJ" (rated 1713), I catch Black asleep with my moves 5.f4 and 6.Bb5+. Black loses with the natural developing move 6...Nbd7 because White is immediately ready to play 7.e5. This attacks first one knight and then the other. Sawyer - MickeyTJ, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 02.02.2013 begins 1.d4 c5 2.d5 Nf6 3.Nc3 g6 4.e4 Bg7 5.f4 d6 6.Bb5+ Nbd7? [Wrong knight. This loses a piece. The correct move here is 6...Nfd7 when the main line is 7.a4 0-0 8.Nf3 Na6 9.0-0] 7.e5 dxe5 8.fxe5 Ng8 9.e6 Black resigns 1-0

21 – charlypapa 3…d6 4.e4 g6 In the August/September 2012 issue of “AARP The Magazine”, the actress Meryl Streep (at age 63) was asked, “But have you become more intent on approaching each moment as you've gotten older?” Her reply: “I don't think it's unusual for my friends and people my age [to feel the way I do]. I really don't. I only see bored 20 year olds. I don't see any bored 60year-olds. People may get crotchety, mean, but it's because they hold life to a high standard. I try to curb that instinct myself, but it’s there. You just want things to be better.” In the Benoni Defence game below, my Internet Chess Club blitz opponent is “charlypapa”. The term “papa” is usually reserved for fathers or grandfathers. Indeed, some call me “Papa.” For all I know, “charlypapa” might be an old guy like me. He does not settle for boring chess. Instead he goes with the unbalanced Benoni. I sharpen things with 5.f4 and 7.e5 but I completely miss the win of a piece by 8.exf6! At least I analyzed the game after I played it and wrote about it so I (and you) might remember it next time. Sawyer - charlypapa, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 26.08.2012 begins 1.d4 c5 2.d5 Nf6 3.Nc3 d6 4.e4 g6 5.f4 Bg7 6.Bb5+ Bd7 7.e5 Bxb5 8.Nxb5? [Here I completely missed the whole point of the line. White wins a piece with 8.exf6! Bxf6 9.Nxb5 Qa5+ 10.Nc3 Bxc3+ 11.bxc3 Qxc3+ 12.Bd2+-] 8...Ng8 9.e6?! [9.Nf3+/-] 9...f5 [9...fxe6 10.dxe6 Qa5+ 11.Nc3 Bxc3+ 12.bxc3 Qxc3+ 13.Bd2 Qf6=/+] 10.Nf3 Nf6 11.0-0 0-0 12.c4 a6 13.Nc3 Qa5 [13...b5!=] 14.Bd2 b5? 15.Nxb5 Qb6 16.Nc3 Qxb2 17.Rb1 Qa3 18.Rb3 [18.Rb7+-] 18...Qa5 19.Ne4 Qd8 20.Neg5 a5 21.a4 Na6 22.Nf7 Qc7 23.Bc3 Nb4 24.N3g5 Qc8 25.h4 [The best way to continue the attack is 25.Bxf6! exf6 (25...Bxf6 26.Rh3+-) 26.Nxd6+-] 25...Qe8 26.Bxf6

Bxf6 27.h5 Qxa4 28.hxg6 hxg6 29.Qf3 Bxg5? [Black's last chance is 29...Kg7!=/+] 30.fxg5 Rxf7 31.exf7+ Kxf7 32.Qe3 [32.g4!+-] 32...Nc2 33.Qe6+ Kf8 34.Qxg6 Qxb3 35.Rxf5# 1-0

22 - Tarentule-noire 5.f4 Bg7 All 1.d4 players must deal with the Benoni defenders choice of an early ...c5 pawn push. The Blackmar-Diemer Gambit player generally plays Nc3 without an early c2-c4 pawn advance. In a Benoni Defence the early Nc3 is the Schmid Variation. This sharp approach can lead to a quick attack. The Benoni Defence player must stay alert. My opponent's handle “Tarentule-noire” (Black Tarantula?). There is a mythical tale regarding a creature by that name. It hopes to lull its victims into a passive position and then weave a net around them. The cure against such a spider is supposed to be fast dancing. Here White out-dances the Black pieces. The blunder of a piece with 8...Ng4 is a tactic I first saw in Fischer's “My 60 Memorable Games” in his notes to some Sicilian Defence game. Sawyer - Tarentule-noire, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 31.12.2012 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 c5 3.d5 d6 4.e4 g6 5.f4 Bg7 6.Bb5+ Bd7 [6...Nfd7 7.a4 0-0 8.Nf3 Na6 9.0-0 Nc7 when every bishop retreat is good. 10.Bd3 is the most popular, followed closely by 10.Bc4, but Houdini seems to slightly prefer 10.Be2] 7.e5 dxe5 8.fxe5 Ng4 9.Qxg4 Bxb5 10.Nxb5 0-0 11.Nf3 a6 12.Nc3 b5 13.0-0 b4 14.Ne4 Qxd5 15.Neg5 Qxe5? [After this it is all downhill for Black. 15...h6 16.Qe4+-] 16.Nxe5 Bxe5 17.Bf4 [Or 17.Nxf7!+- ] 17...Bxb2 18.Rad1 Bd4+ 19.Rxd4 cxd4 20.Be5 f6 21.Bxd4 [There is a clever mate in six king hunt with 21.Qe6+! Kg7 22.Qxe7+ Kh6 23.Qxh7+ Kxg5 24.Bf4+ Kf5 25.Qh3+ Ke4 26.Qe6#!] 21...fxg5 22.Qe6+ Black resigns 1-0

23 – oli2 6.Bb5+ Nfd7 7.Nf3 I watched an old television episode of “Highway To Heaven”. In it, a grandfather had given up on competition figuring he was too old to try. Then he had the chance to run a 5K with his grandson. That gave the grandfather a new attitude. In 2011, I did two 5K's myself, although I did not run much. Old guys can still compete! About that time in blitz chess I had a little winning streak. My rating inched up higher than it had been in a while. It was not like the old days, but it was still fun! My opponent played the Old Benoni Defence 1.d4 c5. We could switch to a Sicilian Defence with 1.e4. A Blackmar-Diemer player must deal with the Benoni Defence anyway. He may be more familiar with 2.d5. This grabs space and gives more freedom. My choice to play 3.Nc3 is the Schmid Variation. (Lothar Schmid was the Arbiter of the Spassky-Fischer match.) Of this variation Jeremy Silman wrote in a review of the Benoni: “This is basically a normal Benoni where White hasn't played c2-c4. In general it's thought to be sound, but a bit better for the first player.” My opponent was rated about 100 points above me. He got the upper hand. He threw everything in the direction of my king. I ducked a few bullets and took aim at his king. He could have broken off his attack to offer a queen swap with 33...Qf5! That would have broken me. Instead I catch his king naked with my queen and rook, winning his queen and the game. Sawyer (1985) - oli2 (2077), ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 02.08.2011 begins 1.d4 c5 2.d5 Nf6 3.Nc3 g6 4.e4 d6 5.f4 [It is decision time. 5.Nf3 is more common.] 5...Bg7 6.Bb5+! [This move leads to a slight edge for White. The idea is to be able to play e4-e5 at a critical moment.] 6...Nfd7! 7.Nf3 [ECO gives 7.a4 or 7.Bd3] 7...0-0 8.0-0 Nf6 9.a4 [9.e5! seems stronger.] 9...e6 10.dxe6 fxe6 11.Bc4 Nc6 12.Ng5 Qe7 13.Re1 h6 14.Nf3 Kh8 15.Be3 [15.e5] 15...Ng4 16.Qd2 Nxe3 17.Qxe3 Nd4 18.Rac1 Bd7

19.g3 Bc6 20.Red1 Rad8 21.Ne2 [21.Nxd4] 21...Nxf3+ 22.Qxf3 d5 23.exd5 exd5 24.Bb5 Bxb2 25.Rb1 Bg7 26.Bxc6 bxc6 27.Re1 Rb8 28.Rxb8 Rxb8 29.Kf1 Rb2 30.Qd3 Qe6 31.Nc3 Qh3+ 32.Kg1 Bd4+ 33.Kh1 h5 [33...Qf5!] 34.Qxg6 Qd7 35.Re8+ Black resigns 1-0

2.Bg5 The Trompowsky is an interesting way to avoid the most popular Indian openings.

24 - Hardison 2.Bg5 Ne4 3.Bf4 Roger Hardison outplayed Ray Haines in a Trompowsky Attack 1.d4 Nf6 2.Bg5 during the first round of a tournament in Houlton. As usual, the player who castled first gained an advantage. These opponents have face each other many times. Ray Haines has played the Colle System 1.d4 Nf6 2.e3 e6 3.Bd3, 4.c3, and 5.Nf3. Here he takes a break with the Trompowsky Attack. In the first seven moves, White cleaned out his queenside in preparation for castling. As a solid player, Black had already castled. Thematically he challenged the White center with 7...c5! White’s response looked reasonable with 8.d5!? But he initiated exchanges on the d-file before he was ready for much action. White missed a good chance to castle on move 11. Black punished the move 14.Bxd6? with 14...Bb3!. Then the position permanently favored the second player. Ray Haines tried to fight back, but Roger Hardison maintained control with his stronger army until victory was assured. Haines - Hardison, Houlton ME (1), 09.08.2014 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.Bg5 Ne4 3.Bf4 e6 4.f3 Nf6 5.e4 Be7 [5...d5 6.Nc3=] 6.Nc3 0-0 7.Qd2 c5! 8.d5!? [Probably better is 8.Nb5!? or 8.dxc5 Bxc5 9.0-0-0 Nc6 10.e5 Ne8 11.Be3 Qb6 12.Bxc5 Qxc5 13.f4=] 8...exd5 9.Nxd5 Nxd5 10.Qxd5 Nc6 11.c3? [11.0-0-0!=] 11...d6 12.Rd1 Be6 13.Qd2 Bxa2 14.Bxd6? [14.Ne2 Bb3 15.Ra1 Qb6-/+] 14...Bb3! 15.Bxe7 Qxe7 16.Ra1 Rfd8 17.Qf2 a6 18.Nh3 f5 19.Be2 fxe4 20.fxe4 Rf8 21.Qe3 Rad8 [21...Ne5-/+] 22.Nf2 Ne5 23.0-0 Nc4 24.Bxc4+ Bxc4 25.Rfe1 Rfe8 26.Rad1 Rxd1 27.Rxd1 Qe5 28.Re1 Rd8 29.Ng4 Qh5 30.Qg3 Qg5 31.e5 h5 32.Ne3 Qxg3 33.hxg3 Be6 34.Re2 c4 35.Nc2 Rd3 36.Kf2? [36.Nd4 Kf7=/+] 36...Bg4 37.Nd4

Bxe2 38.Kxe2 Rxg3 39.Kf2 Rg5 40.Nf3 Rf5 41.Ke3 Kf7 42.Ke4 Rxf3 43.Kxf3 [Or 43.gxf3 g5 44.Kf5 h4-+] 43...g5 44.Ke4 Ke6 45.Kd4 b5 46.Ke4 a5 47.Kd4 g4 48.Ke4 h4 49.Kf4 h3 50.gxh3 gxh3 51.Kg3 h2 52.Kxh2 Kxe5 53.Kg2 Ke4 54.Kf2 Kd3 0-1

25 – Bauer 3.Bf4 c5 4.f3 Nf6 I like popular chess openings, but often I want to play lines that most people do not know. After 1.d4 Nf6 popular moves are 2.c4 and 2.Nf3. My database has 26 different second moves played by White. Most are weak, but six lesser known alternatives are reasonable. They are 2.Bg5, 2.Nc3, 2.f3, 2.e3, 2.g3 and 2.Bf4. I like popular movies, but I enjoy some that most people have not seen. One movie I watched was “Persecuted”. I went to see it at Disney Springs. This shopping and restaurant area is on Disney property in between various amusement parks. Parking was free, but the movie ticket, popcorn and Diet Coke were not free. Their AMC theatre was one of few locations where that movie could be found in the Central Florida area. Disney Springs used to be called Downtown Disney. Christian Bauer is a grandmaster who specializes in lesser played openings. Below is a Trompowsky Attack against Lev Gutman. With 2.Bg5 White threatens to take Black's knight and saddle his opponent with doubled pawns. Black in turn plays 2...Ne4 attacking White's bold bishop. One possible line after 3.Bf4 d5 mentioned in the note. It leads to a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit with Bf4 as an extra move for White. Lev Gutman avoids that with 3...c5. Grandmaster Bauer outplays his opponent with a BDG type expansion 4.f3 and later e4. Bauer (2625) - Gutman (2455), 10th Open Bad Zwesten GER (4), 04.01.2006 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.Bg5 Ne4 3.Bf4 c5 [3...d5 4.f3 Nf6 5.e4 dxe4 6.Nc3 exf3 7.Nxf3 is a BDG with an extra Bf4 move for White.] 4.f3 Nf6 5.dxc5 Qa5+ 6.Qd2 Qxc5 7.e4 e5 8.Be3 Qc7 9.Nc3 Bb4 10.Nge2 0-0 11.a3 Ba5 12.0-0-0 b5 13.b4 Bb6 14.Nxb5 Qc6 15.Nd6 Ba6 16.Nc3 Bxf1

17.Rhxf1 Bxe3 [17...Ne8 18.Nf5+-] 18.Qxe3 Qb6 19.Qxb6 axb6 20.Kb2 Nc6 21.Ncb5 Rfd8 22.Rd3 Rab8 23.c3 Nh5 24.g3 g6 25.a4 Kf8 26.Na3 Ke7 27.Nac4 f6 [If 27...Ng7 28.Rfd1+-] 28.f4 exf4 29.gxf4 Ng7 30.f5 Rf8 31.Rg1 g5 32.b5 Na5 33.Nxa5 bxa5 34.Rgd1 Rfd8 35.Nc4 Ra8 36.Nb6 Ra7 37.c4 1-0

26 – Purser 5.e4 dxe4 6.Nc3 In his postal chess prime, Tom Purser sometimes took a break from his beloved Blackmar-Diemer Gambit to experiment with the Trompowsky Attack. This IECG game was played with our Elephant Gambit. It was the final time that I actually played a correspondence game vs my friend Tom Purser. We reached one of Purser's favorite lines. Our Trompowsky transposes to a BDG with White having the extra move Bf4. If it is hard to choose which defence to play vs the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit, what should Black play when White has an extra move? I decided to play a Gunderam ...Bf5 type move and head toward what would be a solid Ziegler ...c6 set-up. This variation makes it more difficult for White to flash any tactics in spite of his rapid development. My IECG correspondence experience was very brief. I was only there a few months at most. After 20 years and 1000 games of correspondence play, I just wanted to be done with it. At this time Tom Purser got me to try blitz in the Internet Chess Club. He often played as a Guest. So I joined the Internet Chess Club in 1996. I have logged onto that site almost every day for 20 years. Purser - Sawyer, corr IECG Cat-X, 1996 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.Bg5 Ne4 3.Bf4 d5 4.f3 Nf6 5.e4 dxe4 6.Nc3 exf3 7.Nxf3 Bf5 8.Bc4 e6 9.Qe2 c6 10.0-0 Be7 11.Rad1 Nbd7 12.Kh1 Nb6 13.Bb3 0-0 14.Ne5 Nbd5 15.Bc1 Nd7 16.Bxd5 cxd5 17.Nxd5 Bg6 [17...Bd6 18.Nc4 Bb8 19.Ne7+ Qxe7 20.Rxf5 Bxh2!=] 18.Nxe7+ Qxe7 19.Nxg6 hxg6 20.Rd3 [Another plan would be to expand the queenside with 20.c4+/=] 20...Rad8 21.Bd2 Rfe8 22.c4 Nb6 [22...f5=] 23.Rdf3 f5 24.Bc3 Na4 [Probably better was 24...Nd7! 25.Re3 Nf6 26.Re1 Ne4= but I was confident that passive defence of e6 would hold

the draw.] 25.Re3 Nxc3 26.bxc3 b6 27.Re5 Qd7 28.h3 Rc8 29.Re1 Kf7 1/2-1/2

27 – Tressell 6…exf3 7.Nxf3 e6 There is a variation of the Trompowsky that transposes to the BlackmarDiemer Gambit with the extra move Bf4 for White. Sometimes I play the Trompowsky Attack as White but more often I seem to be on the Black side. When I entered that BDG variation, I felt like I was defending against my own opening. That happened in this three minute blitz game. My Internet Chess Club opponent was “Tressell” (rated 1709). When White has played this extra move Bf4, what is the best variation for Black? I knew that Bf4 was a normal idea in the BDG Bogoljubow (5.Nxf3 g6). If I chose that Black set-up, it could really help White. Then I thought about the BDG Euwe (5.Nxf3 e6). There White usually plays Bg5 or Bd3. Thus I headed for that with classical defensive development. The Trompowsky BDG with Bf4 adds the tactical threat of Nb5 attacking c7, which I could have prevented with 9...a6. As we continued, I exchanged off all the pieces and went into a winning rook ending. Tressell - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 05.02.2013 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.Bg5 Ne4 3.Bf4 d5 4.f3 Nf6 5.e4 dxe4 6.Nc3 exf3 7.Nxf3 [This Trompowsky is a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit with the extra move Bf4 for White.] 7...e6 8.Bd3 c5 9.0-0 cxd4 [9...a6=] 10.Nb5 Na6 11.Qe2 Be7 12.Ne5?! [12.a3=] 12...0-0 13.Rae1 Bd7 14.Nxd4 Nc5 15.Nxd7 Qxd7 16.Nf5 Nxd3 17.Nxe7+ Qxe7 18.Qxd3 Rad8 19.Qh3 Qc5+ 20.Kh1 Qh5 [20...Qxc2-/+ seems to work okay.] 21.Qb3 Qd5 22.Qh3 a6 23.Be5 Ne4 24.Qg4 [24.Bxg7 Kxg7 25.c4 Qxc4 26.Qg4+ Kh8 27.Qxe4 Qxe4 28.Rxe4 Rd2=/+ might have led to a more favorable rook ending than what occurred in the game.] 24...Qxe5 25.Rxe4 Qxb2 26.Re3 Qxc2 27.Rg3 g6 28.Qh4 Rd1 29.Qf4 Rxf1+ 30.Qxf1 Rc8 31.Rf3 Qc1 32.Rxf7 Qxf1+ 33.Rxf1 Rc2 34.Rb1 b5 35.h4 Rxa2 36.Re1 Kf7 37.Rf1+ Ke7 38.Rc1 Rd2 39.Rd1? [Time] 39...Rxd1+ White resigns 0-1

28 – Kasparov 7.Nxf3 Bg4 8.h3 I got this note from Gary Zintgraff and I include the game below. "Dear Tim: Kasparov transposes from a Trompowsky to a BlackmarDiemer Gambit Teichmann, a move up during a simul. in 2014. Sincerely, Gary Zintgraff" Eric Jego included this in his Blackmar-Diemer Gambit book. The extra White move in the Trompowsky Attack reaches a BDG with the wrong color to move. It does not match exactly, so I did not put it in my BDG books. As expected, the World Champion Gary Kasparov played well against Marco Paulo Carneiro. Kasparov (2817) - Carneiro, Simul Sao Paolo BRA, 21.08.2004 begins 1.d4 Nf6 [The Blackmar-Diemer Gambit 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3 exf3 5.Nxf3 Bg4 6.Bf4?! reaches the move 7 diagram below, but the Trompowsky works better since it's White's move, not Black's.] 2.Bg5 Ne4 3.Bf4 d5 4.f3 Nf6 5.e4 dxe4 6.Nc3 exf3 7.Nxf3 Bg4 8.h3 Bxf3 9.Qxf3 c6 10.0-0-0 e6 11.Bc4 Nbd7 [11...Be7=] 12.d5! cxd5 13.Nxd5 [Or 13.Bxd5+/] 13...Nxd5 14.Bxd5 a5 15.Bxb7 Ra7 16.Rxd7 Qf6 17.Rhd1 [17.Rc7+-] 17...Be7 [17...Bb4 18.Be3+-] 18.Rxe7+ Qxe7 19.Qc6+ Kf8 20.Bd6 [20.Qc8+ Qe8 21.Bd6+ Kg8 22.Qxe8 mate - Zintgraff] 20...g6 21.Bxe7+ Kxe7 22.Qc5+ Kf6 23.Qxa7 Rf8 24.Qd4+ e5 25.Qd6+ Kg7 26.Qxe5+ Kg8 27.Qf6 h5 28.Bd5 Kh7 29.Bxf7 1-0

2.Nf3 Here we examine solid Queen Pawn Indian Openings.

29 – Sredojevic 2.Nf3 e6 3.Bg5 You are supposed to castle to stay out of trouble. Here White castles into trouble. I call this opening the Torre Indian Attack. The basic plan is for White to play d4, Nf3, and Bg5. Below Black chose an Indian setup with 1...Nf6 but without ...d5. Four Black captures in the last five moves left White's kingside in shambles in the game Xu Ruoying vs Ivan Sredojevic. Xu Ruoying (1972) - Sredojevic (2351), Third Saturday Novi Sad SRB, 11.02.2018 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3 e6 3.Bg5 h6 4.Bh4 b6 5.e3 Bb7 6.Bd3 g5 7.Bg3 g4 8.Nh4!? Be7 9.0-0? [9.h3 h5 10.Nc3=] 9...Rg8 10.Qe1 [An alternative is 10.f3 Nh5 11.fxg4 Bxh4 12.gxh5 Bxg3 13.hxg3 Rxg3-/+. After 10.Qe1 Black continues the attack with...] 10...Nh5! 11.f3 Nxg3 12.hxg3 Bxh4 13.gxh4 g3 14.Qc3 Qxh4 15.Re1 Bxf3 [Black mates in two.] 0-1

30 – Haines 3.e3 b6 4.Bd3 Bb7 The opening moves 1.d4 and 2.e3 could lead to the Stonewall Attack. White follows up with the move Ne5 and f4 at some point. This structure has pawns on d4, e3, f4. Ray Haines played this to win his first round game at the Potato Blossom Festival. After the moves 7.b3 d5 Ray Haines noted: “I started playing the Colle System and turned it into a Stonewall Attack. He thought that he could play to trap my Queen, but this did not work.” Building a wall between armies limits your opponent’s ability to attack you. Haines was successful attacking with his queen and knight. Black needed to counter attack much earlier with …c5. Ray Haines concludes with this: “Roger and I have played many games since we met back in the 1980s. Here I am playing the Colle which worked out good for me. My Queen did a lot of damage in the end. I had to pick from a lot of good moves.” Haines - Hardison, Potato Blossom Festival, Ft Fairfield, ME, 09.07.2016 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.e3 e6 3.Bd3 b6 4.Nf3 Bb7 5.0-0 [Alternatives are 5.c4= Houdini or 5.b3= Komodo] 5...Be7 6.Nbd2 0-0 7.b3 d5 [Sharper is 7...c5] 8.Ne5 Nbd7 9.f4 Ne4 10.Qh5!? [10.Bb2] 10...f5 [Black chooses a double stonewall. 10...Ndf6! 11.Qh3 c5 and Black has some pressure on the White center.] 11.Ndf3 Rf6?! [Safer would be 11...Nxe5 12.Nxe5 a5=] 12.Ng5 Rh6? [12...Nxg5 13.fxg5 g6 14.Qh6=] 13.Qf7+ Kh8 14.Nxe6 Qg8 15.Qxe7 Nxe5 16.fxe5 Rxe6 [16...Qxe6 17.Qxe6 Rxe6 18.Rxf5+- and White has two extra e-pawns.] 17.Qxc7 Bc6 18.Ba3!? [18.Rxf5!+-] 18...Rc8 19.Qxa7 Ra8 20.Qxb6 Rxa3 21.Bxe4?! [21.Rxf5+-] 21...dxe4 22.Qc5 Ra6? 23.Rxf5 Re8 24.Raf1 1-0

31 – Haines 3.e3 c5 4.c3 Be7 Ray Haines transposes into the Colle System of development in a Presque Isle club game. What is it like to play the same few opponents over and over again? In Northern Maine, there are few clubs and fewer tournaments and only a handful of regular active players. Ray told me Roger Hardison is one of those he plays the most. The Colle System move order is 1.d4, 2.Nf3, 3.e3, 4.Bd3, and 5.c3. Ray delayed Nf3 with 2.e3, but transposed to the normal position. Roger Hardison held back his d-pawn and opted for the Queens Indian Defence set-up. He placed bishops at Be7 and Bb7. This plan was reasonable. Hardison would counterattack White's center with 3...c5, and then castle with 5...0-0. Black's future play was not aggressive enough to be dangerous. One must eventually attack to win. Black did not and he lost. Haines - Hardison, Presque Isle, Maine, 12.06.2014 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.e3 e6 3.Bd3 c5 4.c3 Be7 [4...b6 is the more common move order, but it can easily transpose to the game.] 5.Nf3 0-0 6.Nbd2 b6 7.0-0 Bb7 8.Qe2 cxd4 9.exd4 d6 10.Re1 Re8 11.Nc4 [Stockfish prefers 11.Ng5=] 11...Nbd7 12.Bf4 Nf8 13.Rad1 [13.h3=] 13...b5 [13...Ng6 14.Bg5 Qc7=] 14.Ne3 Nh5 15.Bg3 Nxg3 16.hxg3 a6 17.Nf1 Rc8 18.a4 Qb6 19.axb5 axb5 20.Bxb5 Red8 21.Bd3 Rb8 22.b4 Rdc8 23.Qd2 Ba6 24.Ra1 Bxd3 25.Qxd3 Ra8 26.N1d2 Nd7 27.Nb3 Qc7 28.Rec1 Nb6 29.Na5 [29.Rxa8 Nxa8 30.c4+/-] 29...Nd5 30.Nd2 Nf6 31.c4 Ng4 32.Nab3 Rxa1 33.Rxa1 d5 34.cxd5 [34.c5!+- with two connected passed pawns is good for White.] 34...Bxb4 35.Qf3 Bxd2 36.Qxg4 Bb4 37.dxe6 fxe6 38.Qxe6+ Kh8 39.Rc1 1-0

32 – Haines 4.Bd3 Be7 5.0-0 b6 Ray Haines played the Colle System against Roger Hardison. I give alternative ideas in the notes. Both players did well for the first nine moves. Ray Haines tends to avoid lines that masters play. Presumably this is to save time and cut down on his need to study. These players swerved back into a line played by Grandmaster Miguel Najdorf 75 years ago. This same Najdorf became famous for a popular Sicilian Defence variation. Haines attacked kingside according to the basic Colle plan. Ray Haines wrote: “I set a trap for him starting on move 14. He did not have to play into it, but he did and I won the Exchange.” Haines - Hardison, Houlton, ME, 17.09.2016 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.e3 e6 3.Bd3 c5 [3...d5] 4.Nf3 Be7 5.0-0 [5.c4] 5...b6 6.Qe2 [6.e4!? c4 7.Bxc4 Nxe4 8.Bf4=] 6...0-0 7.b3 [7.dxc5 Bxc5 8.e4=] 7...Bb7 8.Bb2 d5 9.Ne5 [9.Nbd2=] 9...Nbd7 10.f4 [10.Nd2 cxd4 11.Nxd7 Nxd7 12.exd4= and White outplayed his opponent and won 1-0 in 41 moves. Najdorf - Engels, Mar Del Plata 1941] 10...Ne4 [10...cxd4 11.exd4 Ne4 12.Nd2 f5=] 11.Nd2 f5 [11...Nxe5 12.fxe5 Bg5=] 12.Ndf3 h6?! [This creates a weakness on g6. 12...Bf6=] 13.Rad1 [13.Ng6 Re8 14.Rad1+/=] 13...Rc8 [13...Bd6 14.c4+/=] 14.Ng6 Rf7 [14...Re8 15.c4+/=] 15.Bb5 [15.c4+/=] 15...Bc6? [Wrong bishop move. Better is 15...Bd6=] 16.Bxc6 Rxc6 17.Nge5 Nxe5 18.Nxe5 Rc7 [18...Qe8 19.Nxc6 Qxc6 20.c4+/-] 19.Nxf7 Kxf7 20.c4 cxd4 [20...Bf6 21.dxc5+-] 21.cxd5 exd5 22.Bxd4 [Or 22.Qh5+ g6 23.Qxh6+-] 22...Bf6 23.Qd3 Bxd4 24.Qxd4 Rd7 [24...Nf6 25.Rc1+-] 25.Rc1 Qf6 26.Rc2 Qxd4 27.exd4 Ke7 28.Rfc1 Kf7 29.Rc7 1-0

33 – Haines 4.Bd3 b6 5.0-0 Bb7 Ray Haines shows the effectiveness of a Colle System attack. White's strategy is: 1. Quick development; 2. Play e3-e4; and 3. Search for tactics. Against Roger Hardison the White plan worked marvelously. It follow one rule of thumb I preach, because it is often true: “The first player to move all four minor pieces wins the game.” Black delays moving his queen's knight until move 18. This is usually way too late. White had so many chances for victory that he even missed a mate in three and found a quick win. Of his 20th move Ray Haines notes: “I could see that I could win a rook when He played rook to king one. I saw that first and did not see that I had a clear mate starting with 21 rook take rook check.” Haines - Hardison, Presque Isle May Open (1), 09.05.2015 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.e3 e6 3.Bd3 c5 4.Nf3 b6 5.0-0 Bb7 6.Nbd2 d5 7.c3 Bd6 [7...Be7= Komodo] 8.Re1 0-0 9.e4 dxe4 10.Nxe4 Nxe4 11.Bxe4 Bxe4 12.Rxe4 Qe7 [12...Nd7=] 13.Bg5! f6 14.Bh4 [Houdini gives the immediate 14.Qb3!+/- as even better.] 14...Rd8 [14...Na6 15.d5+/=] 15.Qb3 Kf8 16.Rxe6 Qc7 17.Qc2 cxd4 [If 17...Kg8 18.Qe4 Na6 19.Qg4 Kh8 20.Rxf6+-] 18.Qxh7 Nd7 19.Rae1 Re8 20.Qh8+ [20.Rxe8+! Rxe8 21.Qh8+ Kf7 22.Qxe8#] 20...Kf7 21.Qh5+ [Black resigned. Ray writes: "This is a possible ending as played out by Fritz 11 21...Kg8 22.Rxe8+ Rxe8 23.Qxe8+ Nf8 24.Nxd4 Qd7 25.Nb5 Qxe8 26.Rxe8 Be5 27.Bg3 Bxg3 28.hxg3 1-0"] 1-0

34 – Haines 4.c3 d5 5.Bd3 b6 Ray Haines wins a Colle System vs the Queen's Indian Defence: “Hi Tim, here are the games from the Potato Blossom Festival Chess Tournament. I won the tournament. We had a small turn out of just 4 players. The game vs Roger Hardison was becoming hard to win because of all of the pieces that were traded. I missed a win at one point which Fritz shows in the notes. He used a lot of time on his clock. I had 20 minutes more than he did. I won on time.” In the Maine farming community of Fort Fairfield, potato seed is planted from May to June and the crop is harvested from August to September. That leaves a week in July to party while the potatoes are growing the pretty green and white blossoms. Festivities include a street dance, parade, car show, yard sale, concerts, a beauty pageant and a chess event. In his 1979 book “Colle, London and Blackmar-Diemer Systems” T.D. Harding writes “Black can get good chances against the Colle system by fianchettoing his queen's bishop, delaying both castling and ... d5.” Roger Hardison did delay castling but played 4...d5 with 5...b6 and 6...Bb7. Haines kept the fight going until Black lost on time. Haines - Hardison, Potato Blossom Festival Ft Fairfield ME (1), 12.07.2014 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.e3 e6 3.Bd3 c5 4.c3 d5 5.Nf3 b6 [More popular is the alternative 5...Nc6 6.Nbd2 Bd6 7.0-0 0-0=] 6.Qe2 Bb7 7.Nbd2 Nbd7 8.0-0 Bd6 9.b3 [If 9.e4 dxe4 10.Nxe4 Nxe4 11.Bxe4 Bxe4 12.Qxe4 0-0=] 9...0-0 10.Bb2 e5 11.dxe5 Nxe5 12.Nxe5 Bxe5 13.Nf3 Bd6 14.Rfd1 Qc7 15.h3 Rfe8 16.Rac1 Re7 17.Nd2 Rd8 18.Re1 Bh2+ 19.Kh1 Bd6 20.Nf1 Qc8 21.Kg1 Qc7 22.Qc2 h6 23.c4 Be5 24.Rcd1 Bxb2 25.Qxb2 dxc4 26.Bxc4 Rxd1 27.Rxd1 Rd7 28.Qe2 Rxd1 29.Qxd1 Qd7 30.Qe2 Qc7 31.f3 Qe7 32.e4 Nd7 33.Ne3 Ne5 34.Bd5 Ng6 [Black seems to have equal chances after 34...Bxd5=] 35.Qc4 [Fritz 11 gives 35.Nf5! Qg5 36.Qb2 Nf4 37.h4 Nd3 38.hxg5 Nxb2 39.Bxb7+-] 35...Bxd5 36.Qxd5 Nf4 37.Qa8+ Kh7 38.Qb8 Ne6 39.Qe5 Qg5 40.Qc3 Nf4 41.Kh2 [41.Kf2=] 41...Qd8 [41...Ne2!-+ appears tricky and may favor Black.] 42.Nf5 Nh5

43.Qe5 Nf6 44.Nd6 Qd7 45.Nf5 Qb7 46.Ne7 Qd7 47.Qf5+ Qxf5 48.Nxf5 g6 49.Nd6 Kg7 50.Nc8 1-0 [Time]

35 – Haines 4.c3 b6 5.Bd3 Ba6 Ray Haines frequently played his chess friend Roger Hardison in club and tournament games. In the previously game in a Colle vs the Queen's Indian, Black played his queenside bishop to ...Bb7. In this game, Roger Hardison chose another popular Queen's Indian option. That is to play 5...Ba6 and exchange White's good bishop on d3. The Queen's Indian Defence set-up vs 1.d4 involves playing a combination of the moves like Nf6, e6, and b6. These pawns cover d5 and c5 while the actual placement of Black's d-pawn and c-pawn remain very flexible, as does the development of Black's bishops. Here however it is White's d-pawn and c-pawn that tell the story. The initial opening fight is over e4. It is logical for Black to trade bishops, but this game shows that White may advance his e-pawn quickly once these light squared bishops are gone. The move 9.e4 frees White's dark squared bishop to enter the fray. Ray Haines started with a slow queenside expansion of White pawns in 1.d4 and 4.c3. His prospects grew as these pawns advanced. Once White had his passed pawns on d6 and c5, Black was lost. Haines - Hardison, Presque Isle, Maine, 26.06.2014 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.e3 e6 3.Bd3 c5 4.c3 b6 5.Nf3 Ba6 6.0-0 Be7 7.Na3 Bxd3 8.Qxd3 0-0 9.e4 d6 [9...d5!=. With only his dark squared bishop left, Black should place his center pawns on light squares.] 10.Rd1 [10.d5+/=] 10...Nbd7 11.Be3 Rc8 12.e5 dxe5 13.dxe5 Nd5 14.c4 Nxe3 15.Qxe3 Qe8 16.Rd2 Nb8 17.Rad1 Nc6 18.Nb5 a6 19.Nd6 Bxd6 20.Rxd6 Rd8 21.Qe4 Nd4 [Black is going to lose a pawn one way or the other. If 21...Rxd6 22.Rxd6 Ne7 23.Rxb6+/-] 22.Nxd4 Rxd6 23.exd6 cxd4 24.Qxd4 Qc6 25.b3 Rd8 26.h4 Rd7 27.h5 h6 28.b4 Kf8 29.c5 b5 30.Rd3 Kg8 31.Rg3 f5 32.Qe5 Qd5 33.Qxd5 exd5 34.Rd3 [34.Rg6! Kf7 35.c6+- also wins quickly.] 34...a5 35.a3 axb4 36.axb4 1-0

36 - La Bonte 2.Nf3 g6 3.Bg5 The Torre Attack is a simple system of chess development for White in the opening. It is very popular at the club level because there is not much to learn. Usually the following moves are played 1.d4, 2.Nf3, 3.Bg5, 4.e3, 5.Nbd2, 6.c3, 7.Bd3 vs ...e6 or 7.Be2 vs ...g6, and 8.0-0, almost without regard to what Black is playing. If Black plays an early ...h6 or ...Ne4, then Bg5-Bh4 is common. Of course there are other options for both sides. Those who play the Torre tend to be careful not to blunder. They remain ready and able to capitalize on Black mistakes. My game vs Edward La Bonte Jr. from the 1989 USCF Golden Squires Postal Chess Tournament showed the White strategy of pushing queenside pawns with b4 and a4. Here in the game below, I chose a Gruenfeld set-up to play actively and make threats. White played to the kingside, pushed pawns on the queenside and then initiated some tactics on the center files where (fortunately for me), White made a rare (for him) miscalculation. La Bonte (2070) - Sawyer (2025), corr USCF 89SS90, 03.02.1992 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3 g6 3.Bg5 Bg7 4.Nbd2 d5 5.e3 Nbd7 [Or 5...0-0 6.c3 Nbd7 7.Be2 Re8 8.0-0 e5=] 6.b4 0-0 7.c3 c6 [7...Re8 is more aggressive, intending to push ...e5.] 8.a4 h6 9.Bf4 g5 10.Bg3 Ne4 [10...Nh5=] 11.Nxe4 dxe4 12.Nd2 f5 13.Bc4+ Kh8 14.0-0 [14.h4+/=] 14...e5 15.Bxe5 Nxe5 16.dxe5 Bxe5 17.Qc2 [17.Rc1=] 17...Qf6 18.Rac1 g4 19.g3 h5 20.Nb3 h4 21.Nd4 Kg7 22.Qb3 Rh8 23.Be6? [White miscalculates the combination he initiates. Better is 23.Rc2=] 23...Bxd4 24.Bxc8 [If 24.cxd4 Bxe6-+ and Black is up a piece.] 24...hxg3 25.Qe6 gxh2+ [This leaves Black up two pawns, but even better is 25...gxf2+! 26.Rxf2 Qxe6 27.Bxe6 Bxe3-+ and

Black wins the Exchange plus having two extra pawns.] 26.Kg2 Raxc8 27.Qd7+ Kg6 28.Qxd4 Rcd8 29.Qxf6+ Kxf6 30.Rc2 f4 0-1

37 – Funk 2.Nf3 g6 3.e3 Bg7 In the 1970s, George Koltanowski promoted his Colle opening pamphlet. It seemed like every tournament player in America had seen the 9th edition of his Colle System. In recent times creative books by David Rudel have renewed interest in the Colle System. It has gained some popularity. The opening moves are so easy for White that Class B and Class C players love it. Typically White plays 1.d4 / 2.Nf3 / 3.e3 / 4.Bd3 / 5.c3 or 5.b3. Black can play just about any standard system against the Colle, but White's position is very solid. The result is an even game where White usually has more experience in the lines. Masters want more than equality as White; most do not play the Colle. The Colle System tends to simply favor the stronger higher rated player and not the player that knows the most opening moves. Donald Funk was one of the mainstays of the North Penn Chess Club. Don was rated in the 1700s, give or take 100 points, most of the time. This was the first time Donald Funk and I played. Funk - Sawyer, Lansdale, PA 05.12.1980 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3 g6 3.e3 Bg7 4.Bd3 d5 [I adopt a Gruenfeld Defence set-up. The alternative was 4...d6 intending ...e5 or ...c5 to attack d4 when ready.] 5.0-0 0-0 6.Nbd2 b6 [6...c5 7.c3 Nbd7 8.Re1 b6 9.e4= is thematic.] 7.Re1 [White typically prepares the advance e3-e4.] 7...c5 8.c3 c4?! [8...Ba6=] 9.Bc2 Bf5?! 10.Bxf5 [10.e4! gives White a good game.] 10...gxf5 11.b3 cxb3 12.axb3 Nc6 13.Nh4 e6 14.g3 Qc7 15.Bb2 Rfc8 16.Kh1 b5=/+ [Black is much more prepared to advance pawns on the queenside than White is on the kingside. When things open up, Black's chances are promising.] 17.Rg1 a5 18.f3 Ne7 19.g4 Ng6 20.g5 Ne8 21.Ng2 Kh8 22.f4 Nd6 23.h4 b4 [The pawns have made contact. Tactical possibilities increase, and with them the chances that a player will miss something important.] 24.h5?! [White needs to play 24.cxb4! axb4 25.h5=] 24...Ne7 [24...bxc3! 25.Rc1 Nb5=/+]

25.Nh4? [Again 25.cxb4! axb4=] 25...bxc3 26.Rc1 Qb6?! [Black can open up some lines with 26...c2 27.Qe2 a4-/+] 27.Rxc3 Rcb8 28.Ba3 Nb5 29.Bc5 Nxc3 30.Bxb6? [30.Qc2 Qa6-/+] 30...Nxd1 [Black has the advantage of two rooks.] 31.Bc5 0-1

38 – Wallach 4.Bd3 d6 5.Nbd2 Ray Haines shares his Alex Wallach game. Haines writes: "I did not know his rating and this was the first time I had played him. I played a Colle and he played a King's Indian setup. My plan in the game was to attack his king pawn and control the queen file." Later in the middlegame, White got a winning attack as Ray Haines notes. "I let him place a knight on f4 with the idea I could under mind it by attacking e5. This would force him to move it. I did not think about him sacrificing a piece on e5 till he moved his queen to c8. The computer gives me the better game after he does it." Ray Haines got a strong attack, although the game was a draw. Congratulations to Wallach. Haines - Wallach (1513), Maine State Championship (5), 10.04.2016 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.e3 d6 3.Bd3!? g6! 4.Nf3 Bg7 5.Nbd2 0-0 6.0-0 c6 [6...c5!=] 7.Qe2 Re8 [7...c5=] 8.e4 e5 9.dxe5 dxe5 10.Nc4 Nh5 11.Bg5 Qc7 12.Rad1 h6 [12...b5 13.Ne3 h6=] 13.Be3 Bg4 14.h3 Bd7?! [14...Nf4!=] 15.Bc5! Bf8 16.Bxf8 [16.Qe3!+/-] 16...Kxf8 17.Qe3 Kg7 18.c3 [18.Be2+/-] 18...b5 19.Ncd2 Nf4 20.Nb3 Qc8?! 21.Nxe5 Nxh3+ 22.gxh3 Rxe5 23.f4 Rh5 24.f5 Na6? 25.Qf3 Rg5+ [25...Qc7 26.fxg6+/-] 26.Kh1 gxf5 27.h4 [27.exf5+-] 27...Rg4 28.Rg1 Rxg1+? 29.Rxg1+ Kh8 30.Nd4 Qd8 31.Qh5 Qf8 32.Nxf5 Bxf5 33.Qxf5 Qe7 34.Qf4 Qe6 35.Rg3?! [35.Qg3!+- wins] 35...Rg8 36.Rf3 Rg4 37.Qf6+ Qxf6 38.Rxf6 Rxh4+ 39.Kg2 Rg4+ 40.Kf3 Rg6 41.Rxf7 Nc5 42.Bc2 a5 43.Kf4 Rg2 44.Rf5 Rf2+ 45.Ke3 Rxf5 46.exf5 Kg7 47.b3 Kf6 48.Kf4 Nb7 49.Be4 Nd8 50.Bf3 c5 51.Be2 b4 52.c4 Nf7 53.Bf3 Ne5 54.Be2 Nc6 55.Bd3 Nd8? 56.Be2 1/2-1/2

39 – Morin 4.Bd3 0-0 5.0-0 d6 Black has two promising King's Indian Defence ideas to crack the solid Colle System. One strategy is to play an early ...c5 to attack d4 and hold back ...e5. The alternative is to play an early ...e5 along with ...f5 (after moving the Nf6 away) and hold back ...c5. Ray Haines played a Colle System vs the Kings Indian of Roger Morin in the first round of the Potato Blossom Festival. Haines and Morin meet several times each year. Black chose both 7...c5 and 10...e5. The d-file was opened by 12.dxe5 dxe5. Both sides missed chances for an advantage. They drew in 42 moves. Haines - Morin, Potato Blossom Festival, Fort Fairfield, Maine (1), 08.07.2017 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.e3 g6 3.Bd3 Bg7 4.Nf3 0-0 5.0-0 d6 6.Nbd2 Nbd7 7.Re1 c5 8.c3 b6 [8...e5 9.dxe5 Nxe5 10.Nxe5 dxe5 11.Qe2=] 9.e4 Bb7 10.Nf1 e5 [10...cxd4 11.cxd4 Rc8=] 11.Bg5 [11.d5+= cramps Black's position.] 11...Rc8 [11...cxd4!? 12.cxd4 exd4 13.Nxd4 Re8=/+] 12.dxe5 dxe5 13.Bb5 [13.Bc4=] 13...a6 [13...Qc7] 14.Bxd7 Qxd7 15.Qxd7 [15.Bxf6 Qxd1 16.Raxd1 Bxf6 17.Rd6=] 15...Nxd7 16.Rad1 Bc6 17.Ne3 f6 18.Bh4 Rfd8 19.Nd5 Kf7 20.c4 Rb8 [20...b5!?] 21.b3 [21.Nxf6 Bxf6 (if 21...Nxf6 22.Nxe5+ Ke8 23.Nxc6+/-) 22.Bxf6 Kxf6 23.Rd6+ Ke7 24.Rxc6+/-] 21...g5 22.Bg3 Nf8 23.Nc7 [23.h4 h6=] 23...Ne6 [23...Rxd1 24.Rxd1 Bxe4 25.Nxa6 Ra8 26.Nc7 Rxa2-/+] 24.Nxe6 [24.Nd5 b5=+] 24...Kxe6 25.Nd2 g4 [25...Rd4!=+] 26.f3 gxf3 27.gxf3 Rd3 28.Kf2 b5 [28...Rbd8 29.Ke2 f5-/+] 29.Ke2 Rbd8 30.Nb1 Rxd1 31.Rxd1 Rxd1 32.Kxd1 bxc4 33.bxc4 f5 34.Nc3 f4 35.Bf2 Bf8 36.Nd5 Bb7 37.Kd2 Bd6 38.Kd3 Bc6 39.Kc3 Be8 40.Kd3 Bh5 41.Ke2 Be8 42.Kd3 1/2-1/2

40 – Morin 6.Nbd2 Nc6 7.c3 I grew up in Maine. For many years Tom's of Maine has sold “Simply White” a clinically proven natural fluoride toothpaste. The fine print reads: "No artificial colors, preservatives, flavors, or sweeteners like saccharin. No animal testing or animal ingredients." It gets the job done without leaving a sweet yummy taste in my mouth. The day I wrote this, I brushed my teeth with Simply White. Clean mint. It’s good stuff, but l like the bad stuff! Ray Haines kindly provided me with many games. They remind me of different ways to play. His Simply White approach of 1.d4, 2.e3, 3.Bd3, 4.Nf3, and 5.0-0 gets the job done with good natural piece development, but without a yummy taste in my mouth. The Colle System lacks an aggressive animal ingredient. It fails to put Black in danger. The King's Indian played by Roger Morin puts White in danger. The KID has plenty of animal testing in the jungles of grandmaster tournaments. Many animal chess players have been harmed while playing the King's Indian Defence. In 2012 Yuri Markushin listed the Colle System as one of the 10 Worst Openings. I don’t know if it is that bad. Ray Haines might still have won had he found 28.Rad1! In such event, the king of Roger Morin could have become an animal trophy, or at least a chess trophy. I twist an old saying: Sometimes you eat the bear. Sometimes the Maine Black Bear eats your Simply White. Haines - Morin, Houlton, ME (3), 09.08.2014 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.e3 g6 3.Bd3 Bg7 4.Nf3 0-0 5.0-0 d6 6.Nbd2 Nc6 7.c3 e5 8.e4 Nh5 9.Nb3 Nf4 10.Bxf4 [Another approach is 10.d5 Nxd3 11.Qxd3 Ne7 12.Nbd2 f5=] 10...exf4 11.Qc2 Bg4 12.Nbd2 Re8 13.h3 Bd7 14.a4 Kh8 [14...Qe7] 15.b4 g5!? 16.Nh2 [16.e5 h6 17.Rfe1+/= Fritz 11] 16...Ne7 17.Qb3 Ng6 18.Qd1 c5 19.bxc5 dxc5 20.Nc4 cxd4 21.Nd6 Re7 22.Nf5 Bxf5 23.exf5 Ne5 24.Ng4 Nxg4 [24...dxc3!-+] 25.Qxg4 dxc3 26.f6 Qxd3? [26...Bxf6 27.Qf5 Kg7 28.Qxh7+ Kf8-+] 27.fxe7 c2 28.Qh5? [Haines: "I got in time trouble and missed the winning move on 28. It was queen rook to queen one.

28.Rad1! Qxd1 29.Rxd1 cxd1Q+ 30.Qxd1 Bf6 31.Qd7 Bxe7 32.Qxb7 Re8 33.Qd7+- Fritz 11"] 28...Bxa1 29.Rxa1 Qg6 30.Qe2 Re8 31.Rc1 Qe6 32.Qxc2 Rxe7 33.Qb2+ f6 34.Rc8+ Kg7 35.Qc2 f3 36.Rc3 fxg2 37.Re3 Qd7 38.Rd3 Qc6 39.Rc3 Re1+ 0-1

2.Nf3 and 3.Bf4 This is the traditional London System development.

41 – Riley 2.Nf3 e6 3.Bf4 b6 The London System is an easy opening for you to play. Your main idea is to play Bf4 on move two or three. By move six or seven, White has developed all four minor pieces. The solid pawn structure of d4, e3, and c3 is tough to crack. It resembles a Slav Defence reversed. How does White win? By targeting weaknesses. When all the pieces are actively poised, tactics for attack and combinations hide around every corner. My biggest problem has been when I thought nothing important was going on. I have slept through key moments. I was awake to my opportunity in the APCT postal game against Richard Riley. Riley created a weakness by playing ...b6 and ...Nc6 before he castled. The tactics due to this weakness allowed White to win a pawn. This loss of a pawn was followed by mass exchanges from moves 12 to 16. The opening mistake led to an endgame win. It is not sudden, but Black's loss can hardly be avoided. Sawyer (2003) - Riley (1405), corr APCT Q-139 (11), 07.1993 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3 e6 3.Bf4 b6 4.e3 Bb7 5.Nbd2 d5 6.c3 Bd6 7.Bd3 Bxf4 8.exf4 c5 9.Ne5 Nc6? [Because of the pin, White will win a pawn. Correct is 9...0-0 10.0-0=] 10.Bb5 Rc8 11.Qa4 Qc7 12.dxc5 0-0 13.Bxc6 Bxc6 14.Nxc6 Qxc6 15.Qxc6 Rxc6 16.cxb6 Rxb6 [After a series of exchanges White is up a pawn.] 17.b3 Rc8 18.c4 dxc4 19.Nxc4 Rbc6 20.0-0 Rd8 21.Rfd1 Rxd1+ 22.Rxd1 g6 23.Rd6 Rxd6 24.Nxd6 [Now we reach a knight and pawn endgame.] 24...Nd5 25.g3 Kf8 26.Kf1 Nc3 27.a4 a6 28.Ke1 Ke7 29.Kd2 Kxd6 [Black's best chance seems to be 29...Nxa4 30.Nxf7 Nc5 31.b4 Ne4+ 32.Ke3+/=] 30.Kxc3 a5 [All pawn endings are lost. For

example 30...Kc5 31.b4+ Kd5 32.g4+-] 31.b4 axb4+ 32.Kxb4 Kc6 33.Kc4 Kb6 34.Kd4 f6 35.g4 1-0

42 – Harabor 3.Bf4 c5 4.c3 b6 Mihai Harabor beat my London System using Queen's Indian set-up. Black put bishops on b7 and e7. Black completed his development in a very compact manner. I had a chance for a slight edge, but frankly, I was outplayed. After my early wins in the Sicilian and French vs Harabor, he went on to become a strong correspondence player. His current ICCF rating is 2285 based on 429 games. My ICCF rating is 2157 based on 65 games. I had moments of brilliance. I won 26 USCF postal games in a row and was rated well over 2200. After my first book was published in 1992, my play fell apart. I spent more time on writing than on keeping my skills sharp. I still love writing. Sawyer (2003) - Harabor (2217), corr APCT Q-171 (12), 08.1993 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3 e6 3.Bf4 c5 4.c3 b6 5.e3 Bb7 6.Nbd2 Be7 7.h3 0-0 8.Bd3 d6 [The alternative is 8...Nc6 9.0-0 when Black will need to make a decision about where to place his d-pawn.] 9.0-0 Nbd7 [9...Nc6 10.Qe2 is often played.] 10.Bh2 [10.Re1= Rybka, Stockfish & Komodo] 10...Re8 11.Nc4 Nf8 [11...Qc7=] 12.Qe2 [12.dxc5! dxc5 13.Nce5 Ng6 14.Bb5+/=] 12...b5 13.Ncd2 c4 14.Bc2 a6 [14...d5= closes in Black's light squared bishop, but it also fights for e4.] 15.e4! Ng6 16.Rad1 Qc7 17.Rfe1 [17.e5!?] 17...e5 18.dxe5?! [Not a good plan. Better is 18.Nf1 with play similar to a Ruy Lopez.] 18...dxe5 19.a3? Bc5 20.Nf1 Nf4 21.Qd2? [21.Bxf4 exf4=/+] 21...Rad8 22.Qc1 Rxd1 23.Qxd1 Rd8 [23...Qb6!-+] 24.Qc1 N6h5 25.Ng3 [25.Ne3 f6-/+] 25...Qb6 26.Nxh5 Bxf2+ 27.Kh1 Nxh5 28.Rd1 Rxd1+ 29.Qxd1 Ng3+ 30.Bxg3 Bxg3 31.Qd7 g6 32.Nxe5 Qf2! 0-1

43 – Mandelkern 2.Nf3 d6 3.Bf4 Back in the saddle. In April 2012 I returned to tournament chess. I played in the Space Coast Open held in beautiful Cocoa Beach, Florida. I took some time off work to be able to play. My wife and I made it a nice weekend at the beach. While I was playing, she went shopping, got in the pool, and walked along the beach. In between games, we went out to eat at local restaurants. A funny thing happened Friday afternoon before the first round. We tried to go to a Durango Steak House in Cocoa Beach. When we got there it was out of business. So we went next door to the Boston Beef & Seafood restaurant. It was wonderful. I was wearing my Boston Red Sox cap as usual. As soon as I entered the Boston Beef & Seafood restaurant, I saw that it was full of Boston sports memorabilia. Food was good too. I had some hot clam chowder (properly pronounced "chowda" in New England). Alas, the restaurant apparently went out of business sometime later. Guess there were not enough Red Sox fans visiting Cocoa Beach, Florida. This was the third time I played Jeremy Mandelkern. I have watched his progress since about 2005. Now Mandelkern is a Candidate Master who is very close to being a Master. He raised his rating in this event from 2150 to 2155. Jeremy is a positional player who excels in strategy, planning and endgames. When we were going over the game in the post-mortem, Larry Storch asked me jokingly if Jeremy ever brought his pieces out from beyond the third rank; he likes to attack from the back. Of course, since I did not choose an aggressive opening myself, any blame for a closed position falls on me. In our previous games, Mandelkern was White vs my King's Indian Defence and Slav Defence. This time I had prepared the London System which gives me a solid position. Jeremy told me his whole game was to play against my dark squared bishop. He did a great job!

Sawyer - Mandelkern, Space Coast Open Cocoa Beach FL (1), 27.04.2012 begins 1.d4 d6 [Very flexible and trendy move.] 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Bf4 Nbd7 4.e3 g6 5.Be2 Bg7 6.h3 c5 [Black chooses the Benoni set-up. If he wanted the King's Indian set-up, he would likely play 6...0-0 7.0-0 Qe8] 7.c3 0-0 8.0-0 a6 [More often play continues 8...b6 9.Nbd2 Bb7 10.a4 or 10.Bh2] 9.Nbd2 b6 10.Bh2 Bb7 11.a4 Rc8 12.Qb3 [Mandelkern suggested after the game that I might have tried 12.Re1 Qc7 13.Bf1 planning to push e4. That looks a lot better than my idea. Another interesting try is 12.Qb1!? which has scored well for White.] 12...Qc7 13.Qa3!? [Jeremy expected me to move a rook here. Maybe 13.Rfd1] 13...Qb8 14.b4 Nd5 15.e4 cxb4 16.cxb4 Nc3 17.Bd3 b5 18.axb5 Nxb5 19.Bxb5 [Maybe 19.Qa4 or 19.Qb2] 19...axb5 20.e5!? [Intuition indicates this is the thematic move. After 20.Qd3= is okay.] 20...dxe5 21.Rfe1 Bd5 22.Qa7? [22.dxe5 Qb7 23.Bf4 Ra8 24.Qe3 Rxa1 25.Rxa1 Ra8=/+] 22...Rc7 23.Qxb8 Rxb8 24.Nxe5 Nxe5 25.dxe5? [Mandelkern pointed out I should play 25.Bxe5 Bxe5 26.dxe5 e6 27.Ne4 Bxe4 28.Rxe4= which we analyzed after the game.] 25...e6 26.Ne4 Bxe4 27.Rxe4 Rc4 28.Rxc4 bxc4 29.Bf4 h6 [Not 29...Rxb4? 30.Ra8+ Bf8 31.Bh6 and Black would be checkmated.] 30.Rc1 Rxb4 [At this point I am lost. I wiggle around, but to no avail. Black plays the ending well.] 31.Bd2 Ra4 32.Bc3 g5 33.Ra1 Rxa1+ 34.Bxa1 Kf8 35.Kf1 Ke7 36.Ke2 Kd7 37.Ke3 Kc6 38.Ke4 Kb5 39.Bc3 Ka4 40.g3 Kb3 41.Kd4 Bxe5+ 0-1

44 – Fuerte2004 2.Nf3 c5 3.Bf4 Each spring in Florida birds can be seen flying north. Our clocks spring back an hour for daylight savings. The Red Sox play the Yankees in Spring Training baseball games. My play below reminded me of the Major League movie where Charlie Sheen played a pitcher nicknamed the "Wild Thing". Both that movie and my game can be described as a satire comedy. In a fast three minute blitz game I have White again and head for a London System. What follows is a comedy of errors. Sawyer (2242) - Fuerte2004 (2174), ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 13.03.2012 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3 c5 3.Bf4?! cxd4 4.Qxd4 [Many have fallen for 4.Nxd4? e5! 5.Bxe5 Qa5+ picking off the bishop which I did see.] 4...Nc6 5.Qa4 g6 6.c3 Bg7 7.e3 0-0 8.h3 b5+/= [8...d6=/+] 9.Qc2 b4 10.Be2 bxc3 11.Nxc3 d6 12.0-0 Bd7 13.Rac1 Rc8 14.Qd2 Nh5 15.Bh2 Be6 [Clocks: 2:27-2:16.] 16.a3 Bb3 17.Bd1 Na5 18.Nd4 Nc4 19.Qe2 Bxd1 20.Rfxd1 Qa5 21.Nd5?-/+ [Right idea. Wrong timing. 21.b4 Qd8 22.Nd5+/-] 21...Qxd5 [Clocks: 2:07-1:49. Now I took 29 seconds to think about resigning.] 22.e4 Qc5 23.Nb3? Qb5 24.Nd4 Bxd4 25.Rxd4 Qxb2 26.Qxb2 Nxb2 27.Rb1 Nc4 28.g4 Nf6 29.f3 Ne5 30.Bxe5 dxe5 31.Ra4 Rc7 32.Rb3 Rd8 33.Kg2? h5? [I am totally busted after 33...Rc2+ 34.Kg3 g5!-+] 34.Rab4? hxg4? 35.hxg4? Rd2+ 36.Kg3 Kg7? 37.a4? Rd4? [Still 37...Rcc2-+] 38.a5? Rxb4 39.Rxb4 Rc5 40.Rb7 Rxa5 [Clocks: 0:50-0:46] 41.Rxe7 Ra3? 42.Rxe5 a5 43.Re7 a4 44.Ra7 Nxe4+ 45.Kf4 Nc5 46.g5 Rc3 47.Ke5 a3? 48.Kd4 Rxf3? 49.Kxc5 Rf5+ 50.Kd4 Rxg5 51.Rxa3 Rg4+ 52.Ke5 f6+ 53.Ke6 Re4+ 54.Kd5 Re5+ 55.Kd4 g5 56.Ra7+ Kg6 57.Kd3 g4 58.Ra1 g3? [Simply 58...Kg5-+] 59.Rg1 Rg5 60.Ke4 Kh5 [Clocks: 0:22-0:18] 61.Kf4 Rg4+ 62.Kf3 f5= [62...g2-+] 63.Rh1+ Kg5 64.Ra1 g2 Clocks: 0:18-0:10. Ten seconds to avoid mate. 65.Kf2 g1Q+ 66.Rxg1 Rxg1 67.Kxg1 Kf4 68.Kf2 Ke4 69.Ke2 Kf4 70.Kf2 Kg4 71.Ke2? [A pre-move. I did not know he was going to g4, but he cannot mate in three seconds. 71.Kg2=] 71...f4?= [71...Kg3-+] 72.Kf2 Kh3 73.Kf3 Kh2 74.Kxf4 Clocks: 0:12-0:01.6. 1/2-1/2

45 – Fuerte2004 2.Nf3 c5 3.c3 I attempted a third London vs Fuerte2004 on the Internet Chess Club. At 2091, he was the highest rated human player found on the search list at the moment I wanted to play. All three times Fuerte2004 has chosen something different to play as Black: First: 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3 c5; Second: 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3 g6; and Third: 1.d4 c5. This last choice is the game here. My SuperSolid repertoire is to play 2.c3, intending an initial Nf3 / Bf4 / e3 set-up. Fuerte2004 transposed into a London with ...g6. Winning this game raised my ICC blitz rating up to 2237. Sawyer - Fuerte2004, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 16.03.2012 begins 1.d4 c5 2.c3 Nf6 3.Nf3 b6 4.Bf4 Bb7 5.e3 g6 6.Nbd2 Bg7 7.h3 0-0 8.Be2 [Generally after ...g6 this bishop goes to e2 for both offence and defence. It avoids a potential pawn fork tactic after e7-e5-e4, and it hits h5 in case of a later ...Nh5.] 8...d5 9.0-0 Nc6 10.Ne5 Nh5? [Black drops a pawn to our Be2 tactic. Normal looks like 10...Nxe5 11.Bxe5 Ne8 12.Bxg7= White has exchanged his bad bishop for Black good bishop. The middlegame is approaching equality, but an ending might someday favor White.] 11.Nxc6 Bxc6 12.Bxh5 gxh5 13.Qxh5 cxd4 14.exd4 f5 [Leaves holes on g5/e5.] 15.Nf3 Be8 16.Qh4 Bg6 17.Rfe1 Bf6 18.Bg5 Qd6 19.Bxf6 [I considered 19.Ne5 but Black can move to bishops of opposite color with 19...Bxe5 20.Rxe5 when White winning, but I did not want to go there in a 3 0 blitz game.] 19...exf6 20.Qg3 f4 21.Qg4 Rae8 22.Rxe8 Rxe8 23.Re1 Rxe1+ 24.Nxe1 Qe7 [Clocks: 2:01-1:05] 25.Kf1!? [Obviously a queenless endgame greatly favors White with the extra pawn. I decided to head there. Objectively stronger is 25.Nd3! Kg7 26.Nxf4 Qe1+ 27.Kh2 Qxf2 28.Nxd5+-] 25...Qe4 26.Qe2 f5 [26...Qb1! makes White work more.] 27.Qxe4 [Again 27.Nd3+-] 27...fxe4 28.g3 fxg3 29.fxg3 Be8 30.Nc2 Bb5+ 31.Kf2 Bd3?! [Better is 31...Kf7 32.Ne3+/-] 32.Nb4 Bc4 33.b3 a5 34.bxc4 axb4 35.cxb4 dxc4 36.Ke3 [36.a4!+-] 36...c3 37.a4 Kf7 38.a5 bxa5 39.bxa5 Ke6 40.a6 Kd5 41.a7 Kc4 42.a8Q Kb3 43.Qb7+ Kc2 44.Qxe4+ Black resigns. Clocks: 0:52-0:09. 1-0

46 – Fuerte2004 2.Nf3 g6 3.Bf4 The London System (d4 / Nf3 / Bf4 / e3) chess opening for White is flexible It can be played against any typical Black set-up. In this London System game “Fuerte2004” as Black attacked my e3 / d4 / c3 pawn center with ...c5. When he captured 6...cxd4, I had a choice between the solid symmetrical 7.cxd4 and the more dynamic 7.exd4. I chose the White play on the half-open e-file. Black delays committing his d-pawn until there is a clearly defined pawn structure. He chose the Gruenfeld Defence approach which combines Nf6 / g6 / Bg7 with ...d5. Sawyer (2227) - Fuerte2004 (2141), ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 15.03.2012 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3 g6 3.Bf4 Bg7 4.e3 0-0 5.h3 [The alternative is 5.Be2 d6 6.h3 with a King's Indian formation.] 5...c5 6.c3 cxd4 7.exd4 [This is the best way to play for a win. 7.cxd4 is also good when White has not played Nbd2.] 7...d5 [Gruenfeld formation.] 8.Nbd2 Nc6 9.Be2 [9.Bd3!?] 9...Re8 10.0-0 Ne4 11.Ne5 [11.Re1+/=] 11...Nxe5 12.Bxe5 f6 13.Bh2 Nxd2 14.Qxd2 e5 15.dxe5 fxe5 16.Rad1 Be6 17.Bb5 Re7 18.Ba4?! [18.Rfe1+/=] 18...a6 19.Bg3 Bf6 [19...Qb6!=] 20.Bb3 Rd7? [20...d4!=] 21.Rfe1 Qc7 22.Qd3 Rad8 23.Qf3 Kg7 24.Qe3 Bf5 25.f3 [25.Bxe5+/- wins a pawn.] 25...Qd6? 26.Qd2? [Correct is 26.Rxd5 Qxd5 27.Bxd5 Rxd5 28.c4+-] 26...Qe7 [26...d4!=] 27.Qe2 e4 28.fxe4 dxe4 29.Rxd7 Rxd7 30.Rd1?! [30.Bf2+/=] 30...Rxd1+ 31.Qxd1 Qc5+ 32.Kh2? [32.Kf1=] 32...Be5 33.Bxe5+ Qxe5+ 34.Kg1 Qf4= [34...e3=/+ looks more dangerous, but for who?] 35.Bc2 e3?! [This looks scary, but Black does better to avoid future checks with 35...Kh6=/+] 36.Bxf5 Qf2+ 37.Kh1 e2 38.Qd7+ Kh6 39.Qd2+ g5? [We have a likely draw with 39...Kg7 40.Qd7+ Kh6 repeating moves.] 40.Qd6+ Kh5 41.Bg4+ Kh4 42.Qh6+? [I missed a mate with 42.g3+! Qxg3 43.Qh6#] 42...Kg3 43.Qd6+ Qf4 44.Qd3+ Kf2 45.Qxe2+ Kg3 46.Qe1+ Qf2 47.Qxf2+ Kxf2 48.Kh2 [From here on we are is a time scramble. White is winning on the board. I chose to make many safe, fast, pre-moves to play at faster than 1 second per move. If I used time, I would play 48.Bc8+-] 48...Ke3 [Clocks: 0:17-0:12] 49.Bc8 b5

50.Bb7 a5 51.b4 axb4 52.cxb4 Kd4 53.Bc6 Kc4 54.Bxb5+ Kxb4 55.Kg3 Kxb5 56.Kg4 h6 57.Kh5 Ka4 58.Kxh6 Ka3 59.Kxg5 1-0 [Black's forfeits on time down three pawns. I had only 8.3 seconds left.]

47 – GreenPiece 3.Bf4 d5 4.e3 The London System is easy to play for old-timers like me. I have been playing it off and on for 20 years. One of the advantages in blitz games is that you do not have to do much. Just stay out of trouble and play fast simple logical chess. Another advantage of being an old-timer is that you have played thousands of endings throughout your career. This allows you to quickly assess which endgames are winning, drawing or losing. I played 1000 correspondence games in the B.C. days (Before Computers) were of much use. We had to learn the endgames by studying endgame manuals. Books printed on paper were permitted to use during the game. When played a pace of about one move per week, very few good players blundered in the opening. The books gave us all playable middlegames. These led to frequent endgames where games were won, lost or drawn. We were both rated in the 2190s when we started this game. My win here jumped my ICC blitz rating back up to 2213. Sawyer - GreenPiece, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 09.03.2012 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3 g6 3.Bf4 d5 4.e3 Bg7 5.h3 0-0 6.Be2 Nbd7 7.0-0 c5 8.c3 b6 9.Nbd2 Bb7 10.Re1 [10.Bd3 Ne4 11.Qe2=] 10...Ne4 11.Nxe4 dxe4 12.Nd2 [12.Ne5 Nxe5 13.dxe5 Qd5 14.Qxd5 Bxd5 15.Red1=] 12...e5! 13.dxe5 Nxe5 14.Nc4 Nxc4 [I expected 14...Nd3 15.Bxd3 when intuition told me I would be okay.] 15.Bxc4 Qxd1 16.Rexd1 Bc6 17.Kf1 [17.Rd6!+/= attacks the Bc6 which gains time allowing White to double rooks on the d-file.] 17...Rfd8 18.Ke2 [18.Bg5 Rxd1+ 19.Rxd1=] 18...Kf8 19.Rxd8+ Rxd8 20.Rd1 [20.a4] 20...Rxd1 21.Kxd1 b5 22.Be2 [I pondered 22.Bd6+!? for a few seconds.] 22...b4 23.cxb4 cxb4 24.Bd6+ Ke8 25.Bxb4 Bxb2 26.Bc4 f5 27.h4 [27.g3] 27...Bf6 28.g3 Be7 29.Bxe7 Kxe7 30.Kc2

Be8 31.Kc3 Kd6 32.Kd4 a5 33.a3 [33.g4!+/-] 33...h6 34.Bb3 g5 35.hxg5 hxg5 36.Bg8 g4 37.Bc4 Bd7 38.Bb3 Bb5 39.Bc4 Bxc4? [Black immediately swaps into a lost endgame. Correct was 39...Bd7= with equality on the board, but White was ahead on time.] 40.Kxc4 Kc6 41.a4 Black resigns 1-0

48 – Acor 3.Bf4 d6 4.e3 Nh5 In 2006 Corey Acor was the highest rated 17 year old master in the USA. A few months after our game, Acor would win the US Scholastic Blitz Championship. I really enjoy his style. This was the first of three USCF rated tournament games we have played. We also played some blitz chess for fun. Corey Acor has kept a very consistent USCF tournament rating in the 2200s for many years. This is the second game I lost to a master in the London System in this tournament. Ray Robson had faced it classically with 1.d4 d5 in the first round. Robson crushed me on his way to becoming a grandmaster later. Corey Acor chose an aggressive London System King's Indian set-up. I had chances, but Acor played with boldness. He got me in the end. Sawyer - Acor, FL State Championship (3), 03.09.2006 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3 d6 3.Bf4 g6 4.e3 Nh5 5.Bg5 h6 6.Bh4 g5 7.Nfd2 Ng7 8.Bg3 Nf5 9.Bd3 [This is as far as I knew in theory.] 9...Bg7 10.c3 [10.Qf3!= Kovacevic] 10...e5 [At this point I figure that my bad bishop on g3 could become my good bishop if I just change the color of square where my center pawns are located.] 11.Bxf5 Bxf5 12.e4 Bg6 13.d5 Nd7 14.c4 Nc5 15.Qc2 a5 16.Nc3 0-0 17.f3 f5 [We have a standard King's Indian type position, but Black has a bishop on g6.] 18.Bf2 Nd7 19.0-0-0 fxe4 20.Ndxe4 Nf6 21.Nxf6+ Qxf6 22.Ne4 Qf7 23.h3 a4 24.Be3 b5!? [Acor is an aggressive young master in Florida. He boldly proceeds with his attack, and it pays off.] 25.cxb5 Rfb8 26.Qe2 Ra5 27.Nc3 a3 28.b3 Qf5 29.Ne4 Rbxb5 30.Qc4 Bf7 31.Nc3? [I was happy with my game to this point, but once again I am outplayed by a master. I missed 31.Qxc7! Bf8 32.Qd8 Bxd5 33.Rxd5 Rxd5 34.h4+/-] 31...Rc5 32.Bxc5 Rxc5 [Now I am lost and nothing changes that.] 33.Qe4 Rxc3+ 34.Kd2 Qxe4 35.fxe4 Rg3 36.Rhg1 g4 37.hxg4 Bf6 38.Ke2 Bg6 39.Rc1 Rxg4 40.Rxc7 Rxe4+ 41.Kf3 Rf4+ 42.Kg3 Bh4+ 43.Kh2 Bf2 44.Rc8+ Kg7 45.Rgc1 Rh4# 0-1

49 – Acor 4.c3 Bg7 5.h3 b6 Corey Acor was a teenage USCF Master whom I played three times in tournaments. Our first meeting was a London System in the Florida State Championship the previous year. In both those games Corey Acor played the King's Indian Defence set-up. In all our games, I played well and then missed a key move in a critical position. Acor avoids drawish lines and plays for a win. Like many chess masters, he complicates the position but keeps it flexible enough to allow for many critical options. Acor prefers positions that make use of his tactical skills and his ability to play quickly. With a win and draw after two rounds in this event, I was tempted to play 2.f3 and head for a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit, but he is better at tactics than I am. In blitz play, I did get a draw with a BDG Euwe vs Acor in 2009. Normally Corey outplayed me in every blitz game. I figured at tournament speed that I had a better chance in an endgame, but Corey Acor keeps the middlegame going for a long time. Sawyer (1946) - Acor (2283), Southern Open (3), 28.07.2007 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3 d6! 3.c3 [Rather slow which shows the lack of confidence in my opening preparation for this event. The first time we played, I continued directly to the London with 3.Bf4!? which in hindsight would have been good to do again.] 3...g6 4.Bf4 Bg7 5.h3 [To retreat the bishop if necessary.] 5...b6 6.e3 Bb7 7.Be2 Nbd7 8.0-0 Nd5 9.Nbd2 [I tried to set-up and fortress that Black would have a hard time breaking through. This proves futile. It would be better to keep the bishop with 9.Bh2=] 9...Nxf4 10.exf4 e6 11.Re1 Qf6 12.g3 0-0 13.Bf1 Rfe8 14.Bg2 Rad8 15.Qa4 a5 16.Rad1 Ba8 17.a3 Qe7 18.Qc2 [Worth a try is 18.Nh2=] 18...Nf6 19.Qa4 h6 20.Qc2 Rb8 21.Qa4 Rec8 22.Rc1 c5 23.Qd1 Bc6 24.Qe2 Qb7 25.Nh4 cxd4 26.cxd4 Nd5 27.Nhf3? [Now things go bad. Very promising was 27.Nxg6! fxg6 28.Qxe6+ Kh7 29.Rxc6 Qxc6 30.Bxd5=] 27...Qd7 28.Qd3 Bb5 29.Qb1 f5 30.Rxc8+ Rxc8 31.Rc1 Kf7 32.h4 Bd3 33.Qa1 Rc6 34.Rxc6 Qxc6 35.Qd1 Qb5 36.Qa1?! [36.Qc1! Be2=/+] 36...Qc6 37.Qd1 Ba6 38.Bf1 Bxf1 39.Qxf1 b5 40.Kh2 Nf6 41.Qd3 Ne4 42.Kg2 Qd5

43.Qb3? [This loses, but White might be able to survive with 43.Qc2 or 43.Nf1] 43...Nxd2 44.Qxd5 exd5 45.Nxd2 Bxd4 46.b3 a4 0-1

50 – Schlagenhauf 4.c3 d6 The Space Coast Open Master/Expert section was won by IM Javad Maharramzade (2621) ahead of FM Eric Rodriguez and GM Lars Bo Hansen (2641). I began ranked about 34th out of 36 players, so I knew I would be playing near the bottom. In round three my opponent was Mark Schlagenhauf visiting Florida from Colorado. Mark Schlagenhauf had earned a National Master Certificate and a Candidate Master norm. His current rating for the Space Coast Open was 2041. Mark Schlagenhauf had lost both his first two rounds and we were both at the hotel for this event with our wives. We played from 7:00 PM to 8:00 PM (my normal bedtime) until my 15th move. By then I had clearly beaten back his attempt to trap my bishop; probably I stood slightly better. I felt like taking a breather, so I offered a draw. My opponent accepted. I talked with Mark about two players from Colorado, Brian Wall and Jeffrey Baffo. Both players Mark knew well. This was the only game I did not go over with my opponent. We figured looking for our wives was more beneficial. I watched the end of the Red Sox game, and the end of two movies I had seen before: Larry Crowe and The Blindside. It was very relaxing. Sawyer - Schlagenhauf, Space Coast Open Cocoa Beach FL (3), 28.04.2012 begins 1.d4 g6 2.Nf3 Bg7 3.c3 [The normal London System move is 3.Bf4 however I decided on the spot to vary from the lines I had prepared. The main line for the London King's Indian follows 3...Nf6 4.e3 d6 I had prepared to play 5.Be2 (5.h3 Soltis) 5...Nh5 6.Bg5 h6 7.Bh4 g5 8.Nfd2 gxh4 9.Bxh5 for better or worse.] 3...d6 [3...d5 4.Bf4 Nf6 leads to a Gruenfeld type position.] 4.Bf4 Nf6 5.e3 Nh5 [Black is clearly out of his prepared opening and decides to go after my bishop.] 6.Bg5 h6 7.Bh4 g5 8.Nfd2 [I played my last three moves rather quickly. Now he sees that taking my bishop will give me some targets.] 8...Nf6 9.Bg3 b6 [A fight

begins for e4.] 10.Bd3 Bb7 11.f3 [I must cover g2 and this gives me Bf2 if necessary.] 11...c5 12.Qe2 Nbd7 13.Ne4 a6 [Normal play might continue 13...0-0 14.Nxf6+ (or 14.h4!) 14...Nxf6 15.Nd2=] 14.Nbd2 cxd4 15.exd4+/= Draw agreed 1/2-1/2

51 – Spigel 3.Bf4 Bg7 4.e3 0-0 We think of the London System as 1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Bf4 or related lines under the same umbrella. These may include 1.d4 d5 2.Bf4 or even 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3 and 3.Bf4. David Spigel played a King's Indian Defence against my London System in 1993. The issues vs the KID center around moves five and six. Is White going to play 5.h3 or 5.Be2? Is White going to push his c-pawn to c3 with Nbd2 or c4 with Nc3? Is Black going to attack d4 with ...c5 or ...e5? Where will his queenside minor pieces be developed? Andrew Soltis recommends 5.h3 on page 100 of his "London System" book published in 1993. On page 2, I am named as a research assistant. Smith knew that I had cited the Tim Harding book "Colle, London and BlackmarDiemer Systems" in my BDG book in 1992. Smith asked to borrow my copy because it was sold out and hard to find. Here White played a lot of pawns to the dark squares. Black pushed his pawns to the light squares. We reached a rook endgame where we both had a weak backward pawn on an open file. We started to repeat moves and agreed to a draw. Sawyer (2003) - Spigel (1954), corr APCT Q-171 (8), 08.1993 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3 g6 3.Bf4 Bg7 4.e3 0-0 5.h3 b6 6.Nbd2 d6 7.Be2 c5 8.0-0 Ba6 9.c3 Bxe2 10.Qxe2 cxd4 11.exd4 Nc6 12.Ne4 [12.Rfe1+/=] 12...Nxe4 [12...Nh5=] 13.Qxe4 d5 14.Qe2 a6 15.Rfe1 b5 16.Ne5?! [16.Qe3+/=] 16...Nxe5 17.Bxe5 e6 18.Bxg7 Kxg7 19.Qe5+ Qf6 20.f4 Rfc8 21.g4?! [21.a3=] 21...Rab8 [21...b4!=/+] 22.a3 a5 23.g5 Qxe5 24.fxe5 Rc7 25.Re3 b4 26.axb4 axb4 27.Rf1 bxc3 28.bxc3 Rb2 29.Rf2 Rb1+ 1/2-1/2

52 – Johnson 4.e3 Nh5 5.Be5 I spent years writing the first Blackmar-Diemer Gambit Keybook. After it was published in 1992, I took a break from the BDG and played other openings. I had defeated Gardner Johnson with a BDG Gunderam in the 1990 US Correspondence Championship. However, I was not in the mood for a BDG this time. In 1993 I chose a London System against his King’s Indian Defence. Usually Black takes e5 away from the White pieces with an earlier …d6. Instead, Gardner Johnson decided to chase my dark squared bishop with 4…Nh5. How should White handle this threat? White could leave the bishop on f4 protected by the e3 pawn. Or the bishop could run around clockwise and get chopped off with Bg5, h6, Bh4, g5, Bg3, Nxg3. I chose to play 5.Be5!? This move attacked the Black rook. After his response 5…f6, I messed up. My interesting reply was 6.g4?! This was sort of kind of maybe playable, but in reality, Black stood better. Fortunately I was able to fight back. We drew by perpetual check. Sawyer (2003) - Johnson (2065), corr APCT Q-171 (6), 08.1993 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3 g6 3.Bf4 Bg7 4.e3 Nh5 [4...d6 prevents the game continuation.] 5.Be5 f6 6.g4?! [Correct is 6.Bg3! Nxg3 7.hxg3 c6=] 6...fxe5 7.dxe5 [7.gxh5 exd4 8.exd4 c5=/+] 7...Nf6 8.exf6 Bxf6 9.c3 [9.Nc3=] 9...d5 10.h3 e5 11.e4 dxe4 12.Qa4+ [If 12.Qxd8+ Bxd8 13.Nxe5 Bh4 14.Bg2 e3 15.Nd3 0-0=/+] 12...Nc6 [12...Bd7 13.Qxe4 Bc6=/+] 13.Qxe4 Be6 14.Bc4 Bxc4 15.Qxc4 Qe7 16.Nbd2 0-0-0 17.0-0-0 Kb8 18.Ne4 Bg7 19.Kb1 Rhf8 20.Nfg5 h6 21.Ne6 Na5 22.Qa4 Qxe6 23.Qxa5 Qc4 24.Qb4 Qxb4 25.cxb4 Rd4 26.Nc5 Rxf2 27.Ne6?! [White's best line is 27.Rxd4! exd4 28.Re1!=] 27...Rxd1+ 28.Rxd1 Bf6 29.Nc5 Kc8 30.Ne4 Rf4 31.Nxf6 Rxf6 32.Rd5 Re6 [Maybe Black could do something with the extra pawn in the rook and pawn ending. For example 32...Rf1+ 33.Kc2 Rf2+ 34.Kc3

Rh2 35.Rxe5 Rxh3+ 36.Kc2 Kd7-/+] 33.Kc2 e4 34.Rd2 g5 35.Re2 Rc6+ 36.Kd2 Rc4 37.a3 Kd7 38.Ke3 Ke6 39.Rf2 a6 40.Rf8 Rc2 41.Kxe4 Re2+ 42.Kf3 Rh2 43.Kg3 Rxb2 44.Rh8 Rb3+ 45.Kg2 Rxa3 46.Rxh6+ Ke5 47.Rg6 Ra2+ 48.Kg3 Ra3+ 49.Kg2 Ra2+ 50.Kg3 Ra3+ 51.Kg2 1/2-1/2

53 – Mar99Arg 4.e3 d6 5.h3 Bf5 I decided to play more blitz games on the Internet Chess Club. Like usual, I had mixed results. At first I had dropped my blitz rating to 2193. Then, I played the following game against "Mar99Arg" who was rated about 1833. We reached a London System and Kings Indian combination. I watched one of the videos from GM Ronen Har-Zvi on this line. Ronen pointed out the thematic c4-c5 break with the bishop on h2. The grandmaster emphasized that d6 would be weakened. All that happened in this game. I gained the advantage but missed the promising pawn break 20.d5! Then suddenly there on the board was a mating pattern that I have seen many times in various tactical exercises. The rest was instant and easy. Sawyer - Mar99Arg, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 08.03.2012 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3 g6 3.Bf4 Bg7 4.e3 d6 5.h3 Bf5 6.Bd3 [A more aggressive approach is 6.Nc3 0-0 7.g4+/=] 6...Bxd3 7.Qxd3 Nbd7 8.Bh2 [8.c4!?] 8...0-0 9.0-0 Re8 10.c4 c6 [The thematic weakening of d6.] 11.Nc3 Qb6 12.a3 a5 13.Rab1 Qa6 [13...e5!] 14.Rfd1 Rab8?! [Placing the rook on the h2-b8 diagonal cannot be good.] 15.b4 axb4 16.axb4 b5 17.c5 [Winning material do to the pinned d6-pawn.] 17...Ra8 18.cxd6 exd6 19.Bxd6 Qb7 20.Ne5 [Now is the time to beak in the center where White is stronger. 20.d5!+/-] 20...Ra3 21.Nxd7?! Nxd7 [21...Qxd7 22.Bh2 Nd5 23.Rbc1 (Not 23.Rdc1? Nxe3! 24.fxe3? Rxe3 25.Qxe3 Bxd4-/+) 23...Nxb4=] 22.Ra1 Rea8 23.Rxa3 Rxa3 24.Qc2 Nb6 25.Bc5 Nc4 26.Ne4 Qa6 27.Nd6 Ra2 28.Qe4 Qa4 [Aha! A mating pattern from some of my tactical exercises! 28...Qa8 29.Nxc4 bxc4 30.Rc1+/-] 29.Qe8+ Bf8 30.Qxf7+ Kh8 31.Qxf8# Black checkmated 1-0

54 – Bacon 5.h3 0-0 6.Bc4 The classic bishop move in the London System is Bf4 on move two or three. But what does White do with his other bishop? One offbeat option when Black chooses a King's Indian set up (here 4...d6) is for White to play Bc4. This supports an attack on f7. The two bishops are thus crisscrossing the center of the board. The move Bc4 is an old idea from the British Master Michael Franklin and pointed out by author Tim Harding. In my game against APCT Master Joseph Bacon, my bishop move prompted him to kick my 6.Bc4 bishop with 6...d5. But after 7.Bd3 my other bishop on f4 had a better diagonal. After the players completed development the focus was on the center of the board. The battle over e5 led to multiple exchanges leaving my queen in possession of that square. After some jockeying around in an even position, Joe Bacon and I agreed to a draw. Sawyer (2003) - Bacon (2214), corr APCT Q-171 (2), 08.1993 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3 g6 3.Bf4 Bg7 4.e3 d6 5.h3 0-0 6.Bc4 [6.Be2 b6 7.0-0 Bb7=] 6...d5 7.Bd3 c5 8.c3 c4 9.Bc2 Bd7 10.Nbd2 Qb6 11.Rb1 Qa5 12.a3 Nc6 [12...Bc6 13.0-0 Nbd7 14.Re1=] 13.0-0 Rad8 14.Qe2 Nh5 15.Bh2 b5 16.e4 e6 17.e5 [17.Bd6 Rfe8 18.Qe3+/=] 17...Bh6 18.g3 [18.h4+/=] 18...f5 19.exf6 Nxf6 20.g4 Ne8 21.g5 Bg7 22.Ne5 Nxe5 23.Bxe5 Bxe5 24.Qxe5 Ng7 25.f4 Nf5 26.Nf3 Ne7 27.Nh2 Nc6 28.Qe3 Qc7 29.Ng4 1/2-1/2

55 – blik 5.h3 0-0 6.Be2 c5 Andrew Soltis wrote a Chess Digest book on the London System where I am named as a Research Assistant. All I did was to loan Ken Smith my copy of the Tim Harding book, but it sounds nice. Below is a game where I draw “blik”. This is in a five minute ICC blitz game where I used the London System. Sawyer (2216) – blik (2389), Internet Chess Club, 05.02.2012 begins 1.d4 d6 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Bf4 g6 4.e3 [Some prefer the move order. 4.h3 Bg7 5.e3] 4...Bg7 5.h3 [The bishop can now retreat to h2.] 5...0-0 6.Be2 [6.Bd3 is generally frowned upon since g6 is not a weak target. Black might prepare the pawn threat e7-e5-e4 with a fork on Nf3 / Bd3.] 6...c5 7.c3 b6 8.0-0 Bb7 9.Nbd2 [White's pieces have reached their London set-up.] 9...Nbd7 10.Bh2 a6 11.Qc2 d5 [Black wins the fight for e4 by giving up e5.] 12.Ne5 h6 13.Ndf3 e6 14.Nxd7 Nxd7 15.Be5 [White offers exchanges, starting with the "bad" bishop and planning to place all his pawns on dark squares. This will make Black Bb7 a very bad bishop. 15.b4 is a reasonable alternative.] 15...Nxe5 16.Nxe5 Bxe5 17.dxe5 Qg5 18.f4 Qg3 19.Rf3 Qh4 20.Kh2 Qe7 [20...d4 21.Rff1 dxe3 22.Qd3 Rfd8 23.Qxe3 and White has a comfortable position.] 21.Rff1 Rfd8 22.g3 a5 23.h4 a4 24.a3 Ba6 [All the White pawns are on dark squares. This provokes an exchange of bishops putting me one step closer to an endgame draw. Black could mix things up with 24...d4! ] 25.Bxa6 Rxa6 26.Kg2 Qb7 27.Kf2 Qc6 28.Qe2 Ra7 29.Rfd1 [If White attacked with a pawn advance on the kingside then Black would blast open the center with ...d4!] 29...Rdd7 30.Rac1 b5 31.Qf3 Kf8 32.Qe2 h5 [This is the last pawn move before we start the count to 50.] 33.Qf3 [If White wanted to go for a win, now is a great time for 33.g4! ] 33...Kg8 34.Qe2 Kf8 35.Qf3 Ra8 36.Qe2 Re8 37.Qf3 Rc8 38.Qe2 Ra8 39.Qf3 Ra6 40.Qe2 Qb7 41.Qf3 Ke8 42.Qe2 Kf8 43.Qf3 Qa8 44.Qe2 Ra5 45.Qf3 Kg8 46.Qe2 Rc7 47.Qf3 Rd7 48.Qe2 Rd8 49.Qf3 Kf8 50.Qe2 Kg8 51.Qf3 Kf8 52.Qe2 Kg7 53.Qf3 Rh8 54.Qe2 Kf8 55.Qf3 Rh7 56.Qe2 Rh6 57.Qf3 Rh8 58.Qe2 Qb7 59.Qf3 Kg8 60.Qe2 Kf8 61.Qf3 Qa8 62.Qe2 Rh6 63.Qf3 Ra7 64.Qe2 Qc6 65.Qf3 Kg8 66.Qe2 Ra5 67.Qf3 Qb7 68.Qe2 Rh8 69.Qf3 Rh6 70.Qe2 Rh8 71.Qf3 Ra6

72.Qe2 Rh7 73.Qf3 Ra8 74.Qe2 Kf8 75.Qf3 Qc6 76.Qe2 Rc8 77.Qf3 Rh6 78.Qe2 Ra8 79.Qf3 Re8 80.Qe2 Rh7 81.Qf3 Qa8 82.Qe2 Rb8 83.Qf3 Game drawn by the 50 move rule 1/2-1/2

Book 7: Chapter 2 – Budapest Gambit 2.c4 e5 The Budapest Gambit begins with the moves 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e5!?

56 – Cavicchi 3.Nf3 e4 4.Nfd2 Grandmaster Alexei Dreev agrees to play at odds on the clock and drops a game to our Italian friend Francesco Cavicchi. This begins as an Englund Gambit 1.d4 e5 and transposes to the Budapest Gambit after 2.c4 Nf6. "Hi Tim, This is the Englund gambit declined I've played in a master challenge on FSI Arena chess site (5 minutes for me, just two minutes for the higher-rated master) against a very well known opponent: beware, for the Russians are coming! Top Russian GM Alexei Dreev (Elo 2701). More psychological than theoretical value, but we do not see GMs beaten by Englund gambits every day, so here we go: White: "igrok64" (Alexei Dreev, RUS, 2701) - Black: "mistercrowley" (Francesco Cavicchi, ITA, 1833) FSI Arena online, August 6, 2014" "This game reminds me of the charge of the Italian cavalry regiment at Isbuscenskij, august 1942. They shouted "Savoia!" and charged the soviet t34 tanks of the 812th Siberian regiment with their horses. Finally they won that battle. The last cavalry charge of History." I replied: Wow! I did not know about that. I knew about the Polish cavalry vs the German tanks about September 1, 1939. I did not know someone else tried it too. Very interesting. Reminds me of humans vs Fritz & company in chess. Francesco added: Yes, they did it because they took the sleeping Soviets by surprise. I read the Germans, watching this, were disgusted and at the same time admired, saying "we do not know how to do these things anymore". Yes, today we battle on the chess board instead of the horrors of flesh and blood in war. We are blessed to compete online from the comfort of home

in our own country. Enjoy! Dreev (2701) - Cavicchi (1833), FSI Arena online, 06.08.2014 begins 1.d4 e5 2.c4 Nf6 3.Nf3 e4 [from Englund to Budapest, from Budapest to reversed French advance. It’s curious to see how the gm refuses every pawns' offer in the opening] 4.Nfd2 c6 5.e3 d5 6.Nc3 Bd6 7.Be2 0-0 8.Qb3 Bc7 9.Qc2 Na6 10.a3 Bf5 11.h3 [I guess Dreev delays castling to confuse me. Well, I keep playing French theoretical moves and we'll see, I still feel safe.] 11...Qd7 12.b4 Rac8 13.Bb2 h6 14.g4 Be6 15.c5 Rfe8 16.0-0-0 [finally a target] 16...Nb8 [preparing pawn advance on the queenside] 17.Nb3 b6 18.Rdg1 a5 [the game becomes interesting, both sides attack now] 19.cxb6 Bxb6 20.Na4 Bd8 21.bxa5 Qa7 22.Bc3 Nfd7 [to avoid g5 forking f6 and h6] 23.h4 Na6 24.g5 h5? [First mistake, here I totally forgot the White bishop] 25.Bxh5 [maybe g6 was better] 25...c5 [trying to open the c-file and create a pin on his king. His queen is badly placed too] 26.dxc5 Ndxc5 27.Nb6 Bxb6 28.axb6 Qxb6 29.Nd4 Nd3+ [29...Bd7! was preferable] 30.Kd2 Nxf2 31.Be2 Nxh1 32.Rxh1 Nc5 33.g6 fxg6 34.h5 gxh5 35.Rxh5 Bf7 [White's already in zeitnot. I keep menacing to move very fast] 36.Rg5 Na4?? [Too fast! very bad mistake, but paradoxically the queen's deviation will be useful to my attack because her majesty no more defends the White king. I should have played Qh6 or Nd3] 37.Qxa4 Rxc3 38.Kxc3 Rc8+ 39.Kd2 Qb1 40.Nc2? [40.Nc6! was the correct move] 40...Be8 [Here white lost on time] 0-1 [Games notes by Cavicchi]

57 – Rahman 3.dxe5 Ne4 4.e3 How do I win against a FIDE Master in 3 minute blitz chess? 1. Stay 10-20 seconds ahead of my opponent on the clock. 2. Avoid getting mated before my opponent runs out of time. 3. Keep material on the board so his time forfeit is my victory. 4. Attack anything that would make my opponent think more. 5. Play openings that I know well or that I am trying to learn. I rarely play the Budapest Gambit. My ICC game "trsumon" was an exciting and wild affair. FIDE Masters are good chess players. They earn their titles in slower tournament play. His finger notes said: "HI. This is FM Md. Taibur Rahman." I saw FM Rahman was from Bangladesh. He had a FIDE rating of 2328. Rahman (2063) – Sawyer (2035), ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 29.08.2012 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e5 3.dxe5 Ne4 4.e3 Bb4+ [4...Nc6 5.Nf3+/=] 5.Bd2 Qe7 6.Bd3 Nxd2 7.Nxd2 Nc6 8.f4 f6 9.exf6? [9.Qh5+! Qf7 10.Qxf7+ Kxf7 11.a3+/-] 9...Qxe3+ 10.Qe2? Bxd2+ 11.Kd1 Qxe2+ 12.Nxe2 Be3 13.fxg7 Rg8 14.Bxh7 Rxg7 15.Be4 Nd4 [15...d6-+] 16.Re1 Kf8 17.g3 d6 18.Nc3? [18.Nxd4 Bxd4-+] 18...Bf2? [At this point a chess friend had sent me a text and I got sidetracked for one move. Stupid of me to check it out during the game. 18...Bg4+! 19.Re2 Re8-+] 19.Rf1 Bxg3 20.hxg3 Rxg3 21.Ne2? [21.Ke1=] 21...Nxe2? [21...Bg4! 22.Kd2 Bxe2 23.Rg1 Rxg1 24.Rxg1 Bxc4-+] 22.Kxe2 Bg4+ 23.Kf2 Rh3 24.Rg1 Be6 25.b3 c6 26.Rad1 Rd8 27.Rg6 Bf7 28.Rgxd6 Re8 29.Bf3 Rh2+ 30.Kg3 Rxa2 31.Rf6 Rb2 32.Rd7 Re7 33.Rd8+? [33.Rd3=] 33...Kg7 34.Rf5 Rxb3 35.Rg5+ Kf6 36.Kf2 Bxc4 37.Bg4 Rb2+ 38.Kf3 Be2+ 39.Kg3 Re3+ 40.Kh4 Bxg4 41.Kxg4 Rg2+ 42.Kh4 Rh2+ 43.Kg4 Rg2+ 44.Kh4 Rh2+ 45.Kg4 Rg2+ 46.Kh4 Rxg5 47.fxg5+ Ke7 48.Rb8 Rb3 49.Kh5 Rb1 50.Kg6 a5 51.Kg7 a4 52.g6 a3 53.Ra8 Rb3 54.Ra7 c5 55.Kh6? [55.Kh8=] 55...Rh3+? [Black gets a winning position with 55...Kf6! 56.Kh7 Rh3+ 57.Kg8 Kxg6-+] 56.Kg5 Rg3+ 57.Kf5 Rf3+ 58.Ke5 Rg3 59.Rxb7+ Kd8 60.Kf6 Kc8 61.Ra7 c4 62.g7 Rf3+?+- [62...a2 63.Rxa2 Kb7 with decent drawing chances for Black.] 63.Ke5 Rg3 64.Kd4? [This leads to a dead draw on the board, although White is down on time. Correct is 64.g8Q+!

Rxg8 65.Ra8+ Kd7 66.Rxg8 c3 67.Kd4 c2 68.Rg1 and White wins.] 64...Kb8 65.Rxa3 Rxg7 66.Kxc4 Rc7+ 67.Kd5 Rh7 68.Ke6 Rh6+ 69.Kf5 Rh5+ 70.Kg6 Rh1 White forfeits on time when Black has 8.6 seconds left. 0-1

58 – Canada 3.dxe5 Ne4 4.Nf3 Google says people from 155 countries clicked on my blog at one point. They rank countries different ways. The 10 most popular with thousands of page views each were: United States, Germany, Russia, Ukraine, United Kingdom, Italy, Netherlands, India, France, and Belgium. Sixteen other significant countries include: Norway, Canada, Philippines, Australia, Spain, Sweden, Portugal, Hungary, Brazil, Switzerland, Greece, Czech Republic, Ireland, Romania, Denmark, and Slovenia. Sometime I venture a Budapest Gambit. Here I play Black vs "canuck-eh". The two terms in this handle refer to people from Canada. "Canuck" is generally a positive term, depending on the intent of the user. For example see the National Hockey League team, the Vancouver Canucks. Canadians may end their sentences with the up-talk question word "eh?" which seems to be a substitute for the phrase, "Don't you agree?" I like Canada. I lived for a while on the Canadian border with the United States. I could see Canada out my bedroom window. My parents took me as a kid to three provinces. I returned to each of those provinces with my own kids and even more with my wife. In our game we have good ideas but poor execution. In the end, things go South for my Canadian opponent. "Go South, eh?" The map direction South is down. When you are losing, your fortunes go down, thus "go South." For me, going South in North America was awesome. I moved South three times and loved each state. Most people who move South love it. A few move back up North. That's okay with me. Who wants an unhappy neighbor? Bye. canuck-eh (1658) - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 04.01.2013 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e5 3.dxe5 Ne4 4.Nf3 Bc5?! [Critical is 4...Bb4+ 5.Bd2 Nxd2 6.Nbxd2 Nc6 7.a3+/=] 5.e3 Qe7 [5...Bb4+ 6.Bd2+/-] 6.a3 a5 7.Bd3 f5 8.exf6 Nxf6 9.0-0 0-0 10.Nc3 d6 11.Qc2 h6 12.h3 [White is winning with 12.Nh4!+-] 12...Nc6 13.Nd5 Nxd5 14.cxd5 Ne5 15.Nxe5 Qxe5 16.e4?! [White needs to play 16.f4! Qh5 17.Kh2+/-] 16...Qg3? [Right

idea but wrong time. Correct is 16...Bxh3! 17.Be3 (17.gxh3 Qg3+ 18.Kh1 Qxh3+ 19.Kg1 Rf3-+) 17...Bxe3 18.fxe3 Qg3 19.Kh1 Bg4 20.Qd2=] 17.b4? [17.Qxc5! Qxd3 18.Qe3+/- and White remains up a pawn.] 17...Bxh3 White resigns 0-1

2.c4 e5 3.dxe5 Ng4 With the continuation 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e5 3.dxe5 Ng4 Black intends to recapture the gambit pawn with his advanced knight.

59 – BlackDragon 4.f4 Bc5 Blitz chess mistakes are probable and understandable. Each side has 3-5 minutes for the whole game. Bullet chess is any speed faster than blitz. Mistakes will happen. Bullet chess is a lot of fun because you know that your opponent will make mistakes. In those games each side has only 1-2 minutes for the whole game. You just need to keep your own mistakes to a minimum to succeed. In some ways it is like gambling. I heard if you bet on National Football League games and beat the Las Vegas spread 60% of the time, you are very successful. That means you might lose money 40% of the time! I don’t bet. I played a lot of bullet chess in the 1990s. One of my favorite opponents was a computer named BlackDragon. Usually it kicked my butt, as it had me outrated around 2600 vs my 2300 at the time. As White vs BlackDragon I scored 2 wins and 4 draws in 69 games. As Black I was about the same getting 1 win and 6 draws in 70 games. In the Budapest Gambit I fall for a trap while playing White and quickly lose my queen in the middle of the board. Clearly 4.f4!? is a risky variation. That is a better square for 4.Bf4! Sawyer - BlackDragon, ICC u 2 1 Internet Chess Club, 21.08.1998 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e5 3.dxe5 Ng4 4.f4!? [4.Nf3; 4.Bf4!] 4...Bc5 5.Nh3 Nc6 6.a3

[6.e4 h5=/+] 6...0-0 7.e3 [If 7.b4 Bd4 8.Ra2 d6-/+ and White's king is caught in the center.] 7...Nxe3 8.Bxe3 Bxe3 9.Qf3? [White had to try 9.Qd3 but 9...Bb6 10.Ng5 g6 11.Nc3 d6 12.Nge4 Bd4 13.0-0-0 dxe5-/+ favors Black.] 9...Nd4 10.Qe4 d5! 11.cxd5 Bf5! [wins the queen in the middle of the board.] 0-1

60 – Roecker 4.e4 h5 5.Be2 During my 20 years of APCT correspondence play, I met many interesting opponents via our weekly postcards. One player that I liked right off was John Roecker. We qualified for the Finals due to success in the previous round. Though I never dared to play gambits in the 1970s, I liked to watch others go for it. John played the Budapest Gambit in a tricky manner. I chose an aggressive approach with the early moves e4 and f4. While the early opening was sharp, the change in evaluation was slow. I did not make any big blunders. I just gradually got outplayed month after month. I assume this game was vs John G. Roecker that the USCF lists as rated 1988 from Illinois, especially in view of the fact that the APCT owners James and Helen Warren were from the Chicago area, as were many APCTers. John Roecker is not to be confused with Al Roker, the famous NBC weatherman. The last names are spelled differently. Al Roker seemed like an easy guy to like. Sawyer (1900) - Roecker (1982), corr APCT 77RF-6, 06.1978 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e5 3.dxe5 Ng4 4.e4 h5!? [Far more popular is 4...Nxe5 5.f4 Nec6 6.Be3 Bb4+ 7.Nc3=] 5.Be2 Nc6 6.f4 [6.Nf3+/=] 6...Bc5 7.Bxg4 Qh4+ 8.g3 Qxg4 9.Qxg4 [Or 9.Nc3=] 9...hxg4 10.h4? [10.Ne2=] 10...gxh3 11.Rxh3 Rxh3 12.Nxh3 d6 13.Nf2 dxe5 14.Nd3 Bd4 15.Na3 [15.f5 Bd7=/+] 15...Bg4 16.Nb5 0-0-0 17.Bd2? [Although 17.Nxe5 Bxe5 18.fxe5 Nxe5-/+] 17...Rh8 18.Nf2 Rh2 19.Nxd4 Nxd4 20.Nxg4 Rh1+ [20...Nf3+! 21.Kd1 Rxd2+ 22.Kc1 Rg2-+] 21.Kf2 Rxa1 22.Nxe5 f6 23.Ng4 Rxa2 24.Bc3 Ne6 25.f5 Nc5 26.Ke3 Nd7 [26...Na4! 27.Bxf6 gxf6 28.b3 Ra3-+] 27.e5 fxe5 28.Nxe5 Nf6 29.g4 Ra6 30.g5 Ne8 31.Ng4 [31.c5! Ra1-/+] 31...Kd7 32.Bxg7? [Now it is over, but White plays on until the bitter end. 32.Ne5+ Ke7 33.c5 Ra1-/+] 32...Nxg7 33.f6 Ke8 34.Ne5 Nh5 35.f7+ Ke7 36.g6 Rf6

37.c5 c6 38.Kd4 Ng7 39.Ke4 Ne6 40.b4 Kf8 41.Nd7+ Kg7 42.Nxf6 Kxf6 43.g7 Kxf7 44.Ke5 Nxc5 45.bxc5 b6 46.Kd6 bxc5 47.Kxc5 a5 0-1

61 – Price 4.e4 d6 5.exd6 Bxd6 The Budapest Gambit is an enterprising opening that favors the bold and brave. Arthur H. Price was one of my favorite players in the North Penn Chess Club over 30 years ago. Art Price was a large presence in the club, a veteran player who played exciting chess with a calm demeanor. My guess is that he was middle-aged when I was a young man. Price earned a National Master Certificate and was an active USCF tournament competitor until about 10 years ago. Art Price played the Queens Indian Defence with 2.Nf3 e6. That changed when someone like myself let him play a Budapest Gambit with 2.c4 e5. This was a Friday night club game where we both missed some chances to win. I do not remember the time controls, but it was not a blitz game. It may have been Game in 60 moves. Sawyer - Price (2054), Lansdale, PA 15.05.1981 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e5 3.dxe5 Ng4 4.e4 d6 [4...Nxe5 5.f4 Nec6 6.Be3=] 5.exd6 Bxd6 6.Be2 Bb4+ 7.Bd2 [7.Nd2!+/=] 7...Bxd2+ [7...Bc5!=] 8.Qxd2 Qh4 9.g3 Qe7 10.Nc3 c6 11.h3 Nf6 12.0-0-0 0-0 13.Qd6 Qxd6 14.Rxd6 Na6 15.e5 Nd7 16.f4 Ndc5 17.Nf3 Bf5 18.g4 Be4 19.Nxe4 Nxe4 20.Rd4 Nac5 21.b4? [This is too loose. Better is 21.f5+/=] 21...Ng3?! [21...Nc3!=/+] 22.Re1 Nce4? [22...Ne6!=] 23.Bd3 Nf2 24.Re3 Rad8 25.Rxd8 Rxd8 26.Ne1 Nxd3+ 27.Rxd3 Rxd3 28.Nxd3 b6 29.Kd2 Kf8 30.Nf2 h5 31.Kd3 hxg4 32.hxg4 Ke7 33.Ne4 Nf1 34.Nd6 f6 35.exf6+ [35.Nc8+!+-] 35...gxf6 36.Nc8+ Kd7 37.g5 fxg5 38.fxg5 Ng3 39.g6 [39.Nxa7!+-] 39...Nh5 40.Nxa7 Nf4+ 41.Ke4 Nxg6 42.b5 cxb5 1/2-1/2

62 – Pharo 4.e4 Nxe5 5.f4 Ng6 The space shuttle Endeavour headed to Hollywood, California. In a September 10, 2012 article for the Huntsville Times, Lee Roop wrote: “Missing from the itinerary, however, is a fly-over of Huntsville, Alabama, home of the team that managed the shuttles' engines, solid rocket boosters and external tanks.” Thirty five years earlier I played in a Huntsville chess tournament vs Joe Pharo. He chose a Budapest Gambit. I attacked with 4.e4 and 5.f4 and obtained a winning position. Then I went the wrong way with my queen on move 16 and lost material. After I lost, I was tired and disgusted with myself. It was late in Central Time vs my Eastern Time inner clock. Rather than stay for the 4th and final round to win a little money, I drove home to Tennessee. Sawyer - Pharo, Huntsville, AL (3), 20.08.1977 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e5 3.dxe5 Ng4 4.e4 [More common are 4.Nf3 or 4.Bf4] 4...Nxe5 5.f4 Ng6 [The alternative is 5...Nec6 6.Be3 Bb4+] 6.Nf3 Bc5 [Black usually plays here 6...Bb4+ 7.Nc3+/=] 7.Nc3 a6?! 8.Bd3 [8.h4!+/=] 8...0-0 9.Qe2 d6 10.Be3 Bxe3 11.Qxe3 f5 12.0-0-0 fxe4 13.Qxe4 Qf6 14.g3 c6 15.Rhe1 Nd7 16.Qe6+? [Here I blundered in a great position. I lost the Exchange going forward when I should have backed off my queen. 16.Qe2 Nc5 17.Ng5 Nxd3+ 18.Qxd3+-] 16...Qxe6 17.Rxe6 Nde5 18.Rxd6 [I chose to be down a piece and get a pawn for it. The critical option is to be down the Exchange after 18.Rxe5 dxe5 19.Bxg6 hxg6 20.Nxe5 g5-/+] 18...Nxf3 19.Rh1 c5?! [19...Bh3!-+] 20.Ne4 Bf5 21.Nxc5 Bxd3 22.Rxd3 Rfc8? [22...Rac8 23.Nxb7 Rxc4+ 24.Kb1 Nd4=/+] 23.Nb3 Rxc4+ 24.Kb1 Nfh4 25.gxh4 Rxf4 26.Rd7 b5 27.h5 Ne5 28.Re7 Nc4 29.h6 g6 30.Rg7+ Kh8 31.h4 Rf2 32.Re1 Rxb2+ 33.Ka1? [I miss the drawing line 33.Kc1 Rf8 34.Rf7! Kg8 35.Rg7+ Kh8 36.Rf7 with a repetition of moves.] 33...Rf8? [33...Rh2! 34.Rge7 Rg8-/+] 34.Na5? [Again 34.Rf7 Rd8 35.Rd7 Rf8 36.Rf7=] 34...Rh2? [Black has a brilliant rook idea with 34...Re2!-+] 35.Nxc4 bxc4 36.Ra7 [And again 36.Rf7! Rb8 37.Rb7 Rd8 38.Rd7= I missed my last chance, and I slowly faded away.] 36...Rxh4 37.Rxa6 Rxh6 38.Rc6 Rh4 39.Kb2 Rh2+ 40.Kc3 Rxa2 41.Rxc4 Rf7 42.Re8+ Kg7

43.Rce4 h5 44.Kd3 Rf3+ 45.Kd4 Ra4+ 46.Kd5 Rxe4 47.Kxe4 Rf1 48.Ra8 h4 49.Ra7+ Kh6 50.Ra4 g5 51.Ke3 Kh5 52.Ke2 Rf8 53.Ra7 Kg4 54.Ra4+ Rf4 55.Rxf4+ Kxf4 56.Kf2 g4 57.Kg2 h3+ 58.Kg1 Kf3 59.Kh2 g3+ 60.Kh1 g2+ 61.Kg1 h2+ 62.Kxh2 Kf2 0-1

63 – Sawyer 5...Ng6 6.Nf3 Bb4+ Edward G. Sawyer and I met in a four round tournament at the University of Maine at Machias in March of 1974. We had played previously in October 1973. We were just learning the ropes. Later I would become a USCF Expert and a Correspondence Master. Ed Sawyer would become a USCF Master in Alaska. This time I played 1.d4 with the White pieces. Ed surprised me with a Budapest Gambit. I tried the aggressive line 4.e4 and 5.f4. Alekhine played this a few games. As our game progressed, I managed to win the Exchange. It took 30 more moves to convert the game into the win. This was the first USCF rated tournament that I ever won. Thankfully, I won more events in future years. Sawyer, Tim - Sawyer, Ed, Machias, Maine (4), 18.03.1974 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e5 3.dxe5 Ng4 [The alternative 3...Ne4 4.Nf3 Nc6 5.a3 d6 6.Qc2+/- favors White.] 4.e4 [The main line of the Budapest is 4.Bf4 Nc6 5.Nf3 Bb4+ 6.Nbd2 Qe7 7.e3 Ngxe5 8.Nxe5 Nxe5 9.Be2+/=] 4...Nxe5 5.f4 [I saw this line in a game by Alexander Alekhine. It looked good to me.] 5...Ng6 [5...Nec6 6.Be3 Bb4+ 7.Nc3+/=] 6.Nf3 Bb4+ 7.Nc3 0-0 8.Bd3 Nc6 9.0-0 Bxc3 10.bxc3 d6 11.Be3 Bd7 12.Ng5 h6 13.Nf3 f5 14.Nd4?! [14.exf5! Bxf5 15.Bxf5 Rxf5 16.g4!? looks aggressive.] 14...fxe4?! [14...Qe7!=] 15.Bxe4 Nxd4 16.cxd4?! [16.Qxd4!+/- protects the Be3 so that the Be4 is free to double attack the Ng6 and b7.] 16...Bf5? [Once again 16...Qe7! is Black's best try, hitting the Be3.] 17.Bxf5 [17.Bxb7! leaves White up a pawn.] 17...Rxf5 18.Qb1 [Double attack on f5/b7.] 18...Qc8 [Double defence.] 19.Kh1 [19.g4! Rf6 20.f5+- pushes the kingside attack.] 19...Ne7 20.Qe4 Kf7?! [The Rf5 should go to this square. It becomes vulnerable on f5.] 21.d5 Qd7 [21...h5!?] 22.g4 Re8 23.Qf3 [23.Qe6+ Qxe6 24.dxe6+ Kxe6 25.gxf5+ Nxf5 26.Rae1+- and White is up a rook.] 23...Rf6 24.Bd4 Rg6 25.f5 Rf6 26.Bxf6 gxf6 [White has won the Exchange. My technique for the rest of the game was good enough to win.] 27.Rae1 Ng8 28.Re6 Qa4 29.Qe4 Qd7 30.Rxe8 Qxe8 31.Qxe8+ Kxe8 32.Kg2 Kf7 33.Kg3 Ne7 34.Kh4 c6 35.Kh5 cxd5 36.cxd5 Kg7 37.Re1 Nxd5 38.Rd1 Nf4+ 39.Kh4 d5 40.Rd4 Ng2+ 41.Kg3 Ne3 42.Rd3 Nc4 43.Rxd5 Ne5

44.Kf4 a6 45.Rxe5 fxe5+ 46.Kxe5 Kf7 47.Kd6 a5 48.Kc7 Kf6 49.Kxb7 h5 50.h3 [Simply 50.gxh5 Kxf5 51.a4 wins easily.] 50...h4 51.Kb6 a4 52.Kb5 a3 53.Kb4 Kg5 54.Kxa3 Kf4 55.f6 1-0

64 – Rybka 4.Bf4 Nc6 5.Nf3 h5 In a test blitz game vs Rybka, I tried the Budapest Gambit. Sometimes it works well for me. To play a sharp opening gambit well, you have to study. You need to review the critical variations after each game you play. Then you have to use it frequently enough to remember how to play the correct lines in proper move order. I do not play the Budapest often enough for that. Memory has a big effect on chess skill. I had an idea of pushing my h-pawn like Roecker did vs me. Here I mixed up the variations. Rybka missed the strongest continuation of 8.e3. Instead the program played the speculative 8.Nd5!? Like many strong chess engines, this one can really push around an opponent. The initiative is an important influence on the chess board. After we both castled queenside, my loose losing pawn push (11...f6?) allowed multiple exchanges where he won material. The popular program's powerful piece play picked apart my army with threat after threat. From move 12 until the end, almost every White move was a check or capture. Rybka (3112) - Sawyer (1920), Florida, 07.07.2007 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e5 3.dxe5 Ng4 4.Bf4 Nc6 5.Nf3 h5? [Better is 5...Bb4+ 6.Nc3+/=] 6.h3 Nh6 7.Nc3 d6 8.Nd5!? [8.e3+-] 8...Be6 9.e3 Qd7 10.Qb3 0-0-0 11.0-0-0 f6? [11...Qe8 12.Qc3+-] 12.exf6 Bxd5 13.cxd5 Ne5 14.Bxe5 dxe5 15.Nxe5 Qf5 16.Nc6 Rd6 17.fxg7 Bxg7 18.Ne7+ 1-0

65 – Kitten 4.Nf3 Bc5 5.e3 Nc6 The evil chess engine Kitten was on the prowl with a Budapest Gambit. This was no cute little pussy cat. This chess engine Kitten was rated in the area of 2300 and sometimes above 2400. Its Internet Chess Club “finger” notes (with some editing) said: “Engine: Kitten 2.0 (1800 ELO). Owner & Author: Malacar. Hardware: AMD Athlon 64 processor 3000+, 1.81 GHz, 512 RAM. Moves instantly, perfect for people that like StrongBach(C) but want a slightly harder challenge. Kitten 1.0 (1600 ELO) was on ICC summer 2008 and reached 2250 bullet & 1750 blitz. Kitten is a very humanoid engine, it calculates 4 moves deep almost perfectly and is a lot better attacker than defender”. "Malacar" is no longer an active handle on the Internet Chess Club. Games in the ICC database by Malacar are from years 2008-2012. He was typically rated within 200 points of 2200 (swings typical of my own blitz rating history). It made sense for this bad kitty to play an aggressive Budapest Gambit. For this contest I chose one of the best lines as White, 4.Nf3. I obtained a slight advantage. I let it slip down to equality by move 15. It dropped to inferiority a half dozen moves later. Over the years we have owned many a frisky kitty that would hunt for prey and proudly bring home partially eaten birds, squirrels, rats and mice. These trophies were deposited by our cats on the door step or porch. They reminded us of their feline presence with presents that we did not want. In this game, Kitten claws me to death and devours my chess pieces - purrfectly. Sawyer (2061) - Kitten (2361), ICC 5 0 Internet Chess Club, 15.06.2010 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e5 3.dxe5 Ng4 4.Nf3 Bc5 5.e3 Nc6 6.Nc3 Ngxe5 7.Be2 d6 8.0-0 0-0 9.Nxe5 [9.b3 Re8 10.Bb2 Nxf3+ 11.Bxf3 Ne5=] 9...dxe5 10.a3 Bf5 11.b4 Be7 12.Bb2 a5 13.b5 Na7 14.a4 c6 15.Qxd8?!

[15.Qb3+/=] 15...Raxd8 16.Rfd1 Bc2 17.Rxd8 Rxd8 18.Bd1 [18.Rc1=] 18...Bf5 19.Ba3 Bb4 20.Bxb4 axb4 21.Ne2? [21.Na2 c5=/+] 21...Bd3 22.Ng3 Bxc4 23.Bf3 cxb5 24.axb5 b3 25.Bxb7 b2 26.Rb1 Nxb5 27.h3 Rb8 28.Ba6 Na3 29.Bxc4 Nxb1 White resigns 0-1

66 – Mingos 4.Nf3 Nc6 5.e3 What do Blackmar-Diemer Gambit players play as Black? BDGer John Mingos takes on Guido De Bouver in a Budapest Gambit. The postal master John Mingos had been a CCLA champion. That is the Correspondence Chess League of America. Mingos plays 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 instead of trying a BDG with 2.Nc3 or 2.f3. Clearly he knows both. Do gambit players have to play only gambits all the time? No. That is like thinking a guy who likes a redhead has no interest in a blond or brunette. Girls are girls and chess is chess. In either case, good tactics win; bad tactics lose. In the late 1990s two email organizations rose up to compete with the big boys. Mingos played just a few games in IECG, the International Email Chess Group, as did I. Shortly after that, I basically quit correspondence chess with very few exceptions. I liked the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit site by Guido De Bouver. He considered critical BDG theory in much of his writing with a good feel of the pulse of the BDG. I do not know the circumstances of his game with Mingos. John Mingos was often rated in the 2300s in more established postal play, so it is not surprising to see him play a very nice game against the Budapest Gambit. Mingos (2094) - De Bouver (2053), 90768 IECG Match, 1996 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e5 3.dxe5 Ng4 4.Nf3 Nc6 5.e3 [The main line is 5.Bf4 Bb4+ 6.Nbd2 Qe7 7.e3 Ngxe5 8.Nxe5 Nxe5 9.Be2+/= with only a slightly better position for White.] 5...Bb4+!? [5...Bc5 6.Be2 Ngxe5=] 6.Bd2 Bxd2+ 7.Qxd2 0-0 [7...Ngxe5 will likely transpose.] 8.Be2 Ncxe5 9.Nxe5 Nxe5 10.0-0 d6 11.Nc3 b6 [11...Re8 12.Rad1 Bg4 13.f3 Be6 14.b3=] 12.Rad1 [12.f4 Ng6 13.Bf3+/=] 12...Bb7 13.e4 f5? [13...Qh4!=] 14.f4 [14.exf5 Rxf5 15.f4 Nd7 16.Bg4+/-] 14...Ng6 15.exf5 Nh4 16.g3 Nxf5 17.Bg4 Qd7 18.Rfe1 Kh8 19.Nd5 Qc6 20.Qd3 Nh6 21.Bf3 Qc5+ 22.Kg2 Bxd5

23.Bxd5 Rae8 24.Qd2 a5 25.a3 a4 26.Rxe8 Rxe8 27.Re1 Rc8 28.Qe3 Qxe3 29.Rxe3 c6 30.Bf3 Nf5 31.Re6 b5 32.Bxc6 bxc4 33.Bxa4 Rb8 [This loses fairly quickly, but Black also struggles after 33...d5 34.Kf2 d4 35.Bd7+/-] 34.Re8+ Rxe8 35.Bxe8 d5 36.a4 d4 37.a5 c3 38.bxc3 dxc3 39.Ba4 1-0

Book 7: Chapter 3 – Benoni & Benko 2.c4 c5 3.d5 Black attacks the White pawn duo to separate and define targets against which to play.

67 – Spence 3...Na6 4.Nc3 e6 In a King's Indian Defence with ...e5, Black may play an early ...Na6. In a Benoni Defence after 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 c5 3.d5, Lorenzo "Skip" Spence played the rare move 3...Na6. Typically the idea is to threaten ...Nb4 as well as to play ...Nc7. From there the knight supports ...b5 which attacks White's important c4 pawn. Skip played this in a club game at Lycoming College. One key difference in the way he played it was that here Black did not fianchetto his kingside bishop. I came across this game when I was looking for a few offbeat examples of play in the Benoni Defence. We prepare for the main lines, but we need to handle play in the sidelines too. I also found some 3...e5 games like the ones vs Dave Kistler and Joe Veach that follow. The most popular third move lines are the 3...e6 Modern Benoni and the 3...b5 Benko Gambit. Sawyer - Spence, Williamsport PA 1996 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 Na6!? [This is very rare. There are five common moves: 3...b5; 3...e6; 3...e5; 3...g6 or 3...d6] 4.Nc3 e6 5.e4 d6 6.Nf3 e5 7.Be2 Bd7 8.0-0 h6 9.Be3 Qc7 10.a3 Rb8 11.Qc2 Qc8 12.Rfb1 b6 13.b4 Be7 14.b5 Nc7 15.a4 Ng4 16.Bd2 f5 17.exf5 Bxf5 18.Bd3 Bxd3 19.Qxd3 0-0 20.Qg6 Rf6 21.Qh5 Qf5 22.Qxf5 Rxf5 23.a5 Bf6 [23...Rf7 24.h3+/-] 24.axb6 axb6 25.Ne4 Be7 26.Ra7 Rc8 27.Rb7 Rff8 28.Rxb6 Ne8 29.Ra6 Ngf6 30.Nxf6+ Nxf6 31.Be3 Ne4 32.Nd2 Nf6 33.f3 Rb8 34.Ne4 Nxe4 35.fxe4 Ra8 36.Rba1 Rab8 37.Rf1 Rxf1+ 38.Kxf1 Kh7 39.Ke2 Kg6 40.Ra7

[Stronger is 40.Bxc5!+-] 40...Bf8 41.Bd2 Kf6 42.Ba5 Be7 43.Bc7 Re8 44.Ra6 Bd8 45.Rxd6+ Ke7 46.Rxd8 Rxd8 47.Bxd8+ Kxd8 48.b6 1-0

68 – Kistler 3…e5 4.Nc3 d6 In 1981 I travelled to Allentown, Pennsylvania with a group of chess club friends to play in a tournament. In round one I faced Dave Kistler who played a Benoni Defence. In the years that followed, it seems Dr. David Kistler became a prominent Expert chess player in upstate New York, winning many events. Dave met my standard 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 with 3...e5, known as the Czech Benoni or the Hromadka Benoni. This is a lesser known line where an Expert like Kistler could force a young A player (like I was 33 years ago) to think on my own. I came up with the idea of exchanging my light squared bishop for a knight in a closed position. I placed my key pawns on the light squares to attempt to benefit from having the better dark squared bishop. But alas, chess is more than bishop and pawn play. My strategy gave Black two bishops to work up a promising attack. I attempted to set up a defensive position rather than to look for offensive opportunities. Kistler used his time and experience to outplay me. He got in both thematic tactical pawn breaks with 16...b5 and 26...f5. Black gave me a brief break with his inaccuracy on move 27, but I fell into a losing position after I missed both 29.Nd1! and 33.Qd2. Though I lost this game, I learned an important lesson about the dangers of passive play. Sawyer - Kistler (2120), Allentown, PA (1), 13.06.1981 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 e5 4.Nc3 d6 5.e4 Be7 6.Be2 [Alternatives are 6.Bd3+/=; or 6.h3+/= with some space advantage.] 6...Nbd7 7.Bg4?! [7.Nf3+/=] 7...a6 [7...Nxg4 8.Qxg4 0-0=] 8.a4 0-0 9.Bxd7 Bxd7 10.Nge2 Qc7 11.0-0 b6 12.f3 Rab8 13.g4 Ne8 14.Ng3 g6 15.Bh6 Ng7 16.Kh1 b5 17.axb5 axb5 18.b3 bxc4 19.bxc4 Rb4 20.Qd3 Bh4 21.Rfb1 Rfb8 22.Bd2 Bd8 23.Kg2

Qc8 24.Rg1 Rb2 25.Rgb1 Bg5 26.Nf1 f5 27.gxf5 gxf5? [27...Nh5=] 28.Rxb2 Rxb2 29.Rb1? [Correct is 29.Nd1! fxe4 30.fxe4 Rxd2+ 31.Nxd2+/-] 29...Rxb1 30.Qxb1 Qd8 31.Qc1 f4 32.Be1 Bh4 33.Bxh4? [33.Qd2=] 33...Qxh4 34.Nd2 Bh3+ 35.Kh1 Qf2 36.Qg1 Qxd2 37.Nb5 Qe2 0-1

69 – Veach 5.e4 Be7 6.Bd3 FM Joseph Veach played the Benoni Defence with a 3...e5 Czech Benoni which was the second time that I had faced it in tournament play in 1981. This time I vary from my 6.Be2 0-0 7.Bg4 line against David Kistler to play the solid 6.Bd3. I determined that swapping off my bad bishop was not as important as tactics. Joe Veach was a master with a wide variety in chess opening repertoire which implies strong analytical ability at the board. Here Veach employs both positional and tactical ideas to crush me quickly. Vs Kistler my idea was to play 7.Bg4 and swap my light squared bishop for his knight. Veach had a similar idea vs me and played 8...Bg5 to swap off his bad bishop for my good bishop. As a young man back then, I was not going to just sit there and play a positional game with a bad bishop. I decided to “attack” with 9.g4!? but after his 9...Bh4+, my own king was on the run. Black's king was never in the slightest danger. Not that my concept was unsound; more like my ability was inept. I missed good moves at key points. I created clear targets for Black's army. I was completely outplayed by a FIDE chess master. This game from my early days was in a weekend tournament held each summer in Hatboro, near Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. I have no record of my first round game, which probably I won to get paired up vs Veach for the second round. Sawyer - Veach (2231), Hatboro, PA (2), 18.07.1981 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 e5 4.Nc3 d6 5.e4 Be7 6.Bd3 0-0 7.f3 [7.h3+/=] 7...Nh5 8.Nge2 Bg5 9.g4!? [9.0-0] 9...Bh4+ 10.Kd2 Nf4 11.Nxf4 exf4 12.Kc2 Qf6 13.Ne2 [13.e5!?=] 13...b5 14.Nxf4? [14.cxb5=] 14...Nd7 15.Nh5 Qe7 16.cxb5 a6

17.bxa6 Ne5 18.Bb5 Bxa6 19.Bxa6 Rxa6 20.Bd2 Rfa8 21.a3 Rb6 22.Qe2 Qe8 23.Rhb1 [23.a4 c4 24.Bc3 Rxa4 25.Qe3 Rba6=/+] 23...c4 24.Qe3 [24.Bc3 g6=/+] 24...Qa4+ 25.b3 cxb3+ 26.Rxb3 Rc8+ 27.Kb2 Nc4+ 0-1

70 – Malamute 6.f3 0-0 7.Be3 When I tried to play a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit, I was met with a Benoni Defence that was rather unusual. The game began 1.d4 Nf6 2.f3 c5 the Benoni. Malamute followed it up with a 3...e5 Czech Benoni Defence like my games vs David Kistler and Joseph Veach. The difference here is that I had already committed my kingside pawn structure with the early 2.f3. After 1.d4 Nf6, White has two good methods of reaching a BDG. One option is 2.Nc3 d5 3.e4 dxe4 4.f3. The other option is 2.f3 d5 3.e4 dxe4 4.Nc3. In each case the same position is reached as would occur after 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3. For tactics in two minute bullet chess, you make quick threats, small or big threats, whatever you notice. You react to immediate threats by your opponents. For strategy in two minute bullet chess, long term planning does not exist, except for setting up familiar opening patterns. In this game we rapidly shuffled pieces until Black was going to lose a pawn on the queenside. Quite likely I was ahead in time at the end. Maybe my opponent owned an Alaskan malamute puppy, the beautiful and noble sled dog. Sawyer (2150) - Malamute (2000), ICC r 2 0 Internet Chess Club, 1997 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.f3 c5 3.d5 e5 4.e4 d6 5.c4 Be7 6.Nc3 0-0 7.Be3 a6 [7...Nh5 8.Qd2] 8.Bd3 Bd7 9.a4 Be8 [9...a5 10.Nb5 Na6 11.Ne2 Nb4=] 10.Nge2 Nbd7 11.0-0 h6 12.Qd2 Nh7 13.Kh1 Bg5 14.a5 Bxe3 15.Qxe3 Qg5 16.Qxg5 Nxg5 17.Rfb1 Nh7 18.Rf1 [White has 18.Na4!+/- with play on the queenside.] 18...g6 19.Rab1 f5 20.b3 fxe4 [20...f4=] 21.Nxe4 Rf6 22.Nxf6+ Nhxf6 23.Nc3 b6 24.axb6 Nxb6 25.Ne4 Nxe4 26.fxe4 Kg7 27.Rf2 a5 28.Rbf1 Nd7 29.Ra1 1-0

2.c4 c5 3.d5 b5 Pal Benko worked out this system of counter attack against the White pawn center about 50 years ago. The gambit has great practical value at every level of play.

71 – Murray 4.cxb5 a6 5.Nc3 Happy Saint Pat Murray's Day! Often on St. Patrick's Day I honor my Irish friend. I write about a game by John Patrick Murray. Pat Murray and I played many times over a nine year period. Pat was a solid and dependable foe. Murray who 1.d4 as White and played the Sicilian Defence as Black. Here I was Black in the Benko Gambit. Pat captured one pawn but not the second pawn on a6. This allowed Black to pile on the pressure. In rapid succession White went from being up a pawn to equal to down a pawn. Both sides then shifted to attacking the king. After the minor pieces disappeared, Black won big material with a devastating check and the game was over. The lesson is if you are going to allow a Benko Gambit, take the pawn! Murray (1585) - Sawyer (2010), Williamsport PA 1996 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 b5 4.cxb5 a6 5.Nc3 d6 [5...axb5 6.Nxb5 Ba6 7.Nc3=] 6.Nf3 g6 7.g3 [7.e4 Bg7 8.h3 0-0 9.Bd2+/=] 7...Bg7 8.Bg2 axb5 9.Nxb5 Qa5+ 10.Nc3 Ne4 11.0-0 Nxc3 12.bxc3 Bxc3 13.Rb1 Qxa2 14.Bh6 Bf5 [14...Bf6=/+] 15.Rb7 Nd7 16.Ne1 Ne5 17.e4 Ng4 [17...Bc8 18.Rb3 Bd4-/+] 18.exf5 [18.Qd3 Nxh6 19.Qxc3+/-] 18...Nxh6 19.fxg6 fxg6 20.Bh3 0-0 21.Be6+ Kh8 22.f4 [22.Rxe7=] 22...Bd4+ 23.Kh1 Nf5 [23...Qa6!-+ wins one of the White rooks.] 24.Bxf5 Rxf5 25.Nf3 Rxd5 26.Nxd4 Rxd4 27.Qa1 Qd5+ 0-1

72 – Davis 5.b6 d6 6.Nc3 Nbd7 When I faced Bob Davis in our four game postal chess match, as White I decided to play one game each with 1.e4 and 1.d4. As Black against my 1.d4 he chose the Benko Gambit. White should accept the gambit by 4.cxb5 a6 5.bxa6, like I did vs Paul Norton, or continue development with 5.e3 like I did vs Jeffrey Baffo. It seems that I feared lines that I did not know. Against Davis I returned the gambit pawn with 5.b6. White was a pawn up after 4.cxb5. What did 5.b6 do? It wasted a tempo on a faraway flank pawn move to give back my material advantage. I am all for keeping a gambit pawn. And I approve of returning a gambit pawn if it gains a tempo and aids my own development. But 5.b6 does neither. At least since White was already playing a pawn ahead, my move 5.b6 should give me equality. The other four games in our match included an Albin Counter Gambit, a Vienna Game, and a Caro-Kann Defence. This match in Ron's Postal Chess Club was early in my postal career. In this game, we each enjoyed moments where we had a slight edge. In the end I was up a pawn in a bishops of opposite color endgame, a possible win, but a difficult one to be sure. Since the other games of the match had finished, I agreed to a draw. This concluded the match with my final winning score of +2 =2 -0. Sawyer - Davis, corr RPCC (3), 25.06.1977 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 b5 4.cxb5 a6 5.b6 d6 6.Nc3 Nbd7 [6...Qxb6 7.e4 g6 8.Nf3 Bg7 9.Be2=] 7.b7 Bxb7 8.e4 g6 9.Nf3 Bg7 10.Be2 0-0 11.0-0 Qc7 12.Qc2 [12.Bf4=] 12...Rfe8 [12...e6!=] 13.Bf4 Nb6 14.h3 e6 15.e5 [15.dxe6 Rxe6 16.Nd2=] 15...Nfxd5 16.exd6 Qd7 [16...Qc6=/+] 17.Bg3 e5 [17...f5=] 18.Nxd5

[18.Ne4=] 18...Nxd5 19.Qxc5 Rec8 [19...Rac8=/+] 20.Qa3 Nf4 21.Bxf4 exf4 22.Rac1 Bf8 23.Rxc8 Rxc8 24.Rd1 Bxf3? [24...Qc6 25.Qb3+/=] 25.Qxf3 [25.Bxf3+/-] 25...Rc6 26.Qxf4 Rxd6 27.Rxd6 Bxd6 28.Bg4 [28.Qe4+/=] 28...Qc7 29.Qd2 a5 30.Qc3 Qd8 31.Qc8 Bc7 32.Qxd8+ Bxd8 1/2-1/2

73 – Shannon 5.b6 Qxb6 6.Nc3 I played Paul Shannon several interesting games over a 20 year period. Most of them were postal chess contests in APCT, but here me meet in a blitz game. Over his long and active chess career Paul Shannon earned a USCF National Master Certificate. He played in hundreds of tournaments and directed hundreds of tournaments, mostly on the west coast of the United States. He must really love chess! Playing the Benko Gambit from either side is relatively rare for me. Paul Shannon chose the 5.b6 variation were White does not allow Black to place a bishop on a6. In the 1970s I played this idea myself as White vs Bob Davis. Against Paul Shannon, I make mistakes on f7 and get outplayed. Shannon - Sawyer, ICC u 5 0 Internet Chess Club, 1997 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 b5 4.cxb5 a6 5.b6 Qxb6 6.Nc3 d6 7.e4 g6 8.a4 Bg7 9.a5 Qb4 10.Ra4 Qb7 11.Bc4 Bd7 12.f4? [12.Ra3=] 12...Bxa4 13.Qxa4+ Qd7 14.Qc2 0-0 15.Nf3 Qc7 16.0-0 Qxa5 17.Bd2 Qc7 18.e5 Ng4 19.h3 Nh6 20.e6 fxe6 [20...Qb7=/+] 21.Ng5 Qb7 22.Nxe6 Rf7?! [Black should return the Exchange immediately with 22...Nf5 23.Nxf8 Kxf8=] 23.Nd8 Qc7 24.Nxf7 Kxf7? [Better is 24...Nxf7 25.f5+/=] 25.g4!? [Very powerful is 25.f5!+-] 25...Nd7 26.f5 gxf5 27.Bxh6 Bxh6 28.Qxf5+ Nf6 [28...Kg7 29.g5+-] 29.g5 [29.Qxh7+! Bg7 30.Ne4+-] 29...Bxg5 30.Ne4 Be3+ 31.Kh1 Rg8 32.Nxf6 exf6 33.Qe6+ Kg6 34.Bd3+ [White has a mate in three: 34.Qxf6+ Kh5 35.Be2+ Rg4 36.hxg4#] 34...Kh5 35.Qxe3 Qg7 36.Rf5+ Kg6 37.Rg5+ Kf7 38.Rxg7+ Rxg7 39.Qe6+ Kf8 40.Qxf6+ Rf7 41.Qxd6+ Ke8 42.Bxa6 Rf1+ 43.Kg2 1-0

74 – Baffo 5.e3 g6 6.Nc3 Bg7 In my two six game matches with Jeff Baffo in 1996, we played many openings. In one game Baffo boldly played the Benko Gambit. I chose the popular 5.e3 line, which was all the rage at the time. Everything was going well until I blundered on move 23. Americans owe the inventor of this gambit, Grandmaster Pal Benko, a lot of respect. Benko was born in France, raised in Hungary and immigrated to the United States. Pal Benko qualified for the world championship cycle 1970-72. Grandmaster Benko stepped aside to let Bobby Fischer take his place in the Interzonal. Without Benko's sacrifice, probably there would not have been a Fischer-Spassky match in Reykjavik. There is a chess saying: Patzer sees check. Patzer gives check. Patzer loses. That’s my check on move 23. And two moves later I creatively sacrificed a knight for pawns. To summarize: By move 15, I had two passed b-pawns; and 15 moves later, my b-pawns were gone and I was down a knight for a pawn. Once again, Jeffrey Baffo played with energy and accuracy. Sawyer (1980) - Baffo (2252), corr USCF 95P139, 08.04.1996 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 b5 4.cxb5 a6 5.e3 g6 6.Nc3 Bg7 7.Nf3 0-0 8.a4 Bb7 9.Rb1 e6 10.dxe6 fxe6 11.Be2 d5 12.0-0 axb5 13.axb5 Nbd7 14.b4 c4 15.Nd4 Qe8 16.e4 Nb6 17.Nc6 Bxc6 18.bxc6 Qxc6 19.exd5 exd5 20.Be3 Nfd7 21.Bd4 Ra3 22.Bxg7 Kxg7 23.Qd4+? [23.Qd2=] 23...Qf6 24.Qxf6+ Rxf6 25.Nxd5? [25.Nb5 Ra2=/+] 25...Nxd5 26.Bxc4 N7b6 27.Bxd5 Nxd5 28.b5 Nc3 29.Rb2 Rb6 30.h3 Rxb5 31.Rc2 Kf6 32.Rfc1 Nd5 33.Rd2 Rab3 0-1

75 – dyarbro 5.bxa6 Bxa6 Grandmaster Boris Avrukh developed a chess opening repertoire with the White pieces after 1.d4 and 2.c4. His approach involved the fianchetto setup of an early g3 against most Black defences. In recent years I have adopted this plan as my own. When Black played the Benko Gambit against me, I chose the 7.g3 line. This allowed White to complete his kingside development and castle. Here White obtained an advantage and maintained it throughout most of this game. Three minute ICC blitz chess puts both sides under some time pressure. My rule of thumb is that a good player must be able to get in 60 moves to do well in such games. If a player cannot play 60 moves, they are playing too slow for three minute blitz chess. If you lose on time in 50 moves, that is your fault. If you lose in 70 moves, give your opponent credit. Here "dyarbro" played 70 moves! That was good. I handled the pressure and enjoyed a better position. I played fast for the win. Sawyer (2210) - dyarbro (2164), ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 13.05.2010 begins 1.d4 c5 2.d5 d6 3.c4 b5 4.cxb5 a6 5.bxa6 Bxa6 6.Nc3 Nf6 7.g3 g6 8.Bg2 Bg7 9.Nf3 Nbd7 10.Rb1 0-0 11.0-0 Qa5 12.Bd2 Rfb8 13.Re1 [13.Qc2!+/=] 13...Bc8!? 14.Qc2 Nb6 15.e4 Na4 16.Nxa4 [16.e5!?] 16...Qxa4 17.Qxa4 Rxa4 18.a3? [18.e5=] 18...Rxe4 [18...Nxe4!-/+] 19.Ng5? [19.b4 Rxe1+ 20.Nxe1 Bf5=/+] 19...Rxe1+ 20.Bxe1 Bf5 21.Rc1 Rxb2 22.Bc3 Ra2 23.Ra1 Rxa1+ 24.Bxa1 Nd7 25.Bxg7 Kxg7 26.Be4 Bxe4 27.Nxe4 Nb6 28.Nc3 e6 29.a4 exd5 30.a5 Nc4 31.a6 Nb6 32.a7 d4 33.Nb5 d5? [33...Kf6=/+] 34.Nc7 c4 35.Kf1 d3 36.Nxd5 Na8 37.Ke1 f5 38.Kd2 Kf7 39.Ne3 Ke6 40.Nxc4 Kd5 41.Kxd3 g5 42.f4 gxf4 43.gxf4 h5 [White is winning in all lines. 43...Kc5 44.h4+-] 44.h4 Kc5 45.Ne3 Kb6 46.Nxf5 Kxa7 47.Ng7 Nc7 48.Nxh5 Nd5 49.Ke4 Ne7 50.f5 Kb6 51.f6

Ng6 52.Kf5 Nxh4+ 53.Ke6 Ng6 54.f7 Kc7 55.Kf6 Nf8 56.Ke7 Ng6+ 57.Ke8 Kd6 58.Nf4 Nxf4 59.f8Q+ Ke5 60.Qe7+ Kf5 61.Qc7 Ne6 62.Qa5+ Ke4 63.Qe1+ Kd5 64.Qd2+ Ke5 65.Qa2 Kf6 66.Qb2+ Kf5 67.Qc2+ Ke5 68.Qc4 Kf5 69.Ke7 Ke5 70.Qe2+ Kd4 71.Qd2+ Black forfeits on time 1-0

76 – Norton 6.Nc3 d6 7.g4!? Paul Norton played the Benko Gambit vs me at Allentown, Pennsylvania in 1981. Inspiration of the moment led me to a wild sacrifice that was a picture of my future gambit self. The Sawyer Gambit vs the Benko Gambit is the enterprising idea 7.g4!? I invented this move on the spot. The idea is to gain time by quickly attacking the center and Black's kingside before he could attack my queenside. The concept of deflecting Black's Nf6 away from e4 makes good sense on some level. Take for example the related idea in the Shirov-Shabalov Gambit in the Semi-Slav after 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.Nc3 e6 5.e3 Nbd7 6.Qc2 Bd6 7.g4!? In our Benko, my gambit worked in the sense that I took my opponent out of the book with 7.g4!? Since Norton played the Benko Gambit, he probably knew the theory better than I did. I got enough play to survive over the board in the final round while his clock was ticking. Yes, clocks did tick tock back then. My postal chess rating was already over 2000. At some point in the year 1981 my USCF tournament rating was 1887. I imagine that I gained rating points in this event. I was rapidly moving into the 1900s toward 2000. I like to play in the Open Section. All my opponents in this tournament were rated above me. I scored 2-3. Sawyer - Norton (1915), Allentown, PA (5), 14.06.1981 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 b5 4.cxb5 a6 5.bxa6 Bxa6 6.Nc3 d6 7.g4!? [7.e4 Bxf1 8.Kxf1+/=] 7...Nxg4 8.e4 Ne5 [8...Bxf1 9.Kxf1 Nf6=/+] 9.f4 Bxf1 [Or 9...Ned7=] 10.Kxf1 Ned7 11.Nf3 g6 12.h4 Bg7 13.h5 Qa5 14.hxg6 hxg6 15.Rxh8+ Bxh8 16.Bd2 Qa6+ 17.Qe2 Qxe2+ 18.Kxe2 Na6 19.a3 c4 20.Be3 Rb8 21.Bd4 Bxd4 22.Nxd4 Rxb2+ 23.Ke3 Rg2 24.Nde2 g5 25.Kf3 Rh2 26.fxg5 Ne5+ 27.Ke3 Nc5 28.a4 Ned3 29.Kf3 Ne5+ 30.Kg3

Rh5 31.a5 Rxg5+ [Probably Black offered a draw here. He has an extra pawn and seems to stand slightly better. However White has a passed pawn and his knights are in a solid position. Black cannot easily make progress and our ratings were close enough so that a draw will hardly move them. We were both out of the running for any prizes.] 1/2-1/2

77 – ChessBeta 6.Nc3 d6 7.e4 Back when I regularly had an ICC rating over 2200, I accepted a Benko Gambit played vs me by ChessBeta. It was rated 3266. In general when I consider 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4, I gradually move from the Budapest, Benko and Benoni to the Catalan, Queen's Indian and NimzoIndian Defence. After that, I turn to the final frontier with the King's Indian and Gruenfeld Defences. These last two are openings that I have played more often from each side. After the Benko Gambit is accepted by 4.cxb5 a6 5.bxa6 Ba6, White loses the right to castle in the most straightforward line. A common continuation would be 6.Nc3 d6 7.e4 Bxf1 8.Kxf1. What does White do with his king? That fastest way to castle by hand is with 9.g3 and 10.Kg2. Historically this is one of the main ideas of the Benko Gambit. This logical approach protects the king and connects the rooks. Often I fianchetto the bishop on g2 against the Benko Gambit. This is one of the few times that I played the king fianchetto line with 10.Kg2. In this game, I blundered in haste. My opponent ChessBeta punished me quickly. Sawyer (2391) - ChessBeta (3266), ICC 3 1 u Internet Chess Club, 15.03.2002 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 b5 4.cxb5 a6 5.bxa6 Bxa6 6.Nc3 d6 7.e4 Bxf1 8.Kxf1 g6 9.g3 Bg7 10.Kg2 0-0 11.Nge2 Na6 12.f3 e6 13.dxe6 fxe6 14.Bg5 h6 15.Bxf6 Qxf6 16.Qd2? [I was moving too quick and did not realize that he had taken with the queen until too late. 16.Rf1] 16...Qxf3+ 17.Kh3 g5 18.Rhf1 g4+ 19.Kh4 Qg2 20.Kxg4 h5+ 21.Kg5 Kh7 22.Rxf8 Rxf8 23.Qxd6 Bh6+ 24.Kxh5 Qh3# White checkmated 0-1

2.c4 c5 3.d5 e6 4.Nc3 exd5 This leads to the Modern Benoni Defence variation.

78 – Karthikeyan 5.cxd5 d6 White keeps e4 available for the knights in this Modern Benoni Defence after 4.Nc3, 6.Nf3, 8.Nd2 and 10.Nce4. Black got into trouble after she boldly grabbed a pawn with 10...Nxd5!? White won without ever moving any kingside pawns in the game between P2 Karthikeyan and Goyal Sanskriti. Karthikeyan (2456) - Sanskriti (1898), ch-Commonwealth 2018 New Delhi IND (1.12), 26.06.2018 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 e6 4.Nc3 exd5 5.cxd5 d6 6.Nf3 [White plans the e4 square for the knights.] 6...g6 7.Bf4 a6 8.Nd2 b5 9.a4 b4 10.Nce4 Nxd5!? [10...Nh5 11.Be3 f5=] 11.Bxd6 Bxd6 [11...Ne3!? 12.Qb3 Bxd6 13.Nxd6+ Qxd6 14.Qxe3+ Qe7=] 12.Nxd6+ Qxd6 13.Ne4 Qe7 [13...Qe5 14.Qxd5 Qxd5 15.Nf6+ Kf8 16.Nxd5=] 14.Qxd5 Ra7? [14...0-0 15.Qxa8 Bb7 16.Qa7 Qxe4 17.Qxc5+/-] 15.Nd6+ 1-0

79 – Kelires 6.Nf3 g6 7.Bf4 White does well to play e4 when it gives good tactical opening chances. Black obtains counter chances when e4 is delayed. In the Modern Benoni Defence, it often comes with 7.e4. Here White kept e4 available for his minor pieces. Black attacked at 13...f5 and 14...f4 in the game between Luka Lenic and Andreas Kelires. Lenic (2662) - Kelires (2523), 19th ch-EUR Indiv 2018 Batumi GEO (6.38), 22.03.2018 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nf3 c5 4.d5 d6 5.Nc3 exd5 6.cxd5 g6 7.Bf4 Bg7 8.Qa4+ Bd7 9.Qb3 Qc7 [9...b5 10.Bxd6 Qb6 11.Be5+/=] 10.Nd2 [10.e4 0-0 11.Nd2 Nh5 12.Be3 f5 13.exf5 Bxf5 14.h3+/=] 10...Nh5 11.Be3 [11.Bg5!?] 11...0-0 12.g3 Na6 13.Bg2 f5 14.Nf3? [14.Bf3=] 14...f4! 15.Bc1 c4 16.Qd1 Qb6 17.Ne4 Rae8 18.Nfg5 Nc5 19.Nxc5 Qxc5 20.Ne4 [20.Bf3 fxg3 21.hxg3 c3-+] 20...Rxe4 21.Bxe4 fxg3 22.0-0 Rxf2 23.e3 Rxf1+ 24.Qxf1 gxh2+ 25.Kxh2 Be5+ 26.Kg1 Ng3

27.Qf3 c3 28.b4 [28.Bd3 cxb2 29.Bxb2 Bxb2 30.Rb1 Bf5-+] 28...Qc4 29.Bc2 [29.Ba3 Nxe4-+] 29...Qh4 [Black forces mate. For example, after 29...Qh4 30.Ba3 Bg4 31.Qg2 Bh3 32.Qf2 Ne2+ 33.Qxe2 Qg3+ 34.Kh1 Bg4 35.Qg2 Bf3 36.Rg1 Qh2#] 0-1

80 – Pitkanen 6.Nf3 g6 7.g3 In the days before the Internet and email, postal chess allowed me to meet players from 30 countries. In 1982 I faced "J. Pitkanen" who was a correspondence expert or master. ICCF listed only Juhani Pitkanen from Finland born in 1946 currently ICCF rated 2214. That same person is also listed in FIDE, along with a Jorma Pitkanen born in 1941. I rarely play a Modern Benoni Defence as Black. This game was played 10 years after Bobby Fischer won a famous game with it in the world championship against Boris Spassky. Maybe that influenced me to give it a whirl. In our slow international postal game, White fianchettoed his bishop with 8.Bg2. My aggressive approach could have turned out badly with 16...f5? Pitkanen missed chances to play some key knight moves. These would have given White the advantage. After 26 moves, we agreed to a draw. Pitkanen - Sawyer, corr ICCF 1982 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 e6 4.Nc3 exd5 5.cxd5 d6 6.Nf3 g6 7.g3 Bg7 8.Bg2 0-0 9.0-0 Nbd7 [9...Re8=] 10.Nd2 a6 11.a4 Re8 12.h3 Rb8 13.Nc4 Ne5 14.Na3 Nh5 15.e4 Rf8 [15...Bd7=] 16.Kh2 [16.g4 Qh4 17.gxh5 Bxh3 18.h6 Bh8=] 16...f5? [Black is not so well prepared for the position to open up. 16...Bd7] 17.f4 b5 18.axb5 axb5 19.Naxb5 fxe4 20.Bxe4 [Or 20.Nxd6 Nxg3 21.Kxg3 Qxd6 22.Nxe4+/-] 20...Bd7 21.Qe2 c4? [21...Qb6 22.Na3+/-] 22.Na3 [22.Nxd6!+-] 22...Rc8 23.Qg2?[23.Nab5!+/-] 23...Nd3 24.Bxd3 cxd3 25.g4 [25.Rf3=] 25...Nxf4 26.Bxf4 Rxf4 1/2-1/2

81 – Vogel 6.e4 g6 7.Nf3 Bg7 Threats and counter threats mark exciting chess games. Frank Vogel and I played three rather sharp unbalanced chess openings. Each time Vogel opted a variety of creative lines. Our first two games were drawn in Dutch Defence type positions. In a popular Modern Benoni Defence book variation, once again I have chances for advantage. I missed good choices on moves 23, 25, 26 and 28. Then I lost my balance on move 30. I allowed my rook to become trapped and the game was over. This was played in 1996 when postal chess turned to e-mail chess. The new speed of play got me excited enough to enter several events that year, the same year I played Jeff Baffo. I found myself over committed. I burned out on correspondence chess after 20 years and 1000 games. About this time I turned to blitz chess in the Internet Chess Club. I am still there blitzing away for fun. Sawyer (1976) - Vogel (2150), corr APCT EMN-A-3, 21.11.1996 begins 1.d4 c5 2.d5 Nf6 3.c4 e6 4.Nc3 exd5 5.cxd5 d6 6.e4 g6 7.Nf3 Bg7 8.h3 0-0 9.Bd3 a6 10.a4 Re8 [Or 10...Nbd7 11.0-0 Re8 12.Bf4 Nh5 13.Bh2 Ne5 14.Nxe5+/=] 11.0-0 b6 12.Re1 Nbd7 13.Bf4 Qc7 14.Bc4 Bb7 15.Nd2 [15.Bh2+/=] 15...Nh5 16.Bh2 Be5 17.Be2 Bxh2+ 18.Kxh2 Ng7 19.g4 f5 20.gxf5 gxf5 21.exf5 Nf6 22.Nc4 Rab8 [22...Nxf5=] 23.Ne3 [23.Qd2+/-] 23...Ne4 24.Nxe4 Rxe4 25.Rg1 [25.Bd3!+-] 25...Qf7 26.Ng4 [26.Qc2!+/-] 26...Kf8 [26...Kh8 27.Bd3=] 27.f6 Ne8 28.Nh6? [28.Qc1!+-] 28...Qxf6 29.Rg8+ Ke7 30.Ng4? [30.Bf3 Re5 31.Ng4=] 30...Qf4+ 31.Kg1 [31...Kf7 32.Rh8 Kg7-+ and the White rook is lost.] 0-1

82 – Dobrotvorsky 7.Bg5 h6 I hate losing games, but losses can be great opportunities to learn. In this game I discovered the power of a kingside attack in the Modern Benoni Defence. Black chased my 9.Bh4 in a manner found in the King's Indian Defence. This concept had a profound impact on me. While I cannot easily pronounce this guy’s name, I think of this game every time someone chases my bishop back to Bg3. Black’s follow-up with Nh5 and f5 were very powerful. Back in 1981, most of my games involving the Benoni Defence were against players who were not so tactically strong. A better player can make opening development into a sharp weapon. In the ICCF World Cup V postal chess tournament, I lost this one game. My second opponent from Russia (then the Soviet Union) was Igor Mikhailovich Dobrotvorsky (rated 2124). There was no danger of me being the next Bobby Fischer. Here I mishandled the position from move 10 onwards. Black's powerful attack came very quickly. The game made such a favorable impression on me that I added the King's Indian Defence to my repertoire. The basic plan of pushing the f-pawn makes a lot of sense. I love my opponent’s ...f3 pawn sacrifice! Sounds familiar. Some years later I would play the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit 4.f3!? Sawyer - Dobrotvorsky, corr ICCF, 1981 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 c5 4.d5 exd5 5.cxd5 d6 6.e4 g6 7.Nf3 Bg7 8.Bg5 [More common is 8.h3 or 8.Be2] 8...h6 9.Bh4 a6 10.a4 [Correct is 10.Nd2! covering e4 and h5. 10...b5 11.Be2 0-0 and the game is about equal after 12.Qc2 or 12.0-0] 10...g5 11.Bg3 Nh5 12.Be2 Nxg3 13.hxg3 Nd7 14.Nd2 0-0 15.0-0 b6

16.Qc2 Ne5 17.Nc4 Nxc4 18.Bxc4 f5 19.Bd3 f4 20.gxf4 gxf4 21.Ne2 [If 21.e5 Bxe5-/+ Black is at least up a pawn.] 21...f3! 22.Ng3 Bd4 23.gxf3 Qh4 0-1

83 - McFly 7.f3 Bg7 8.Bd3 0-0 The Back to the Future movie series starting Michael J. Fox as Marty McFly began 30 years ago. The first move was released July 3, 1985. The original three movies involved time travel. There has been talk of a fourth movie in the works. In the first movie Marty McFly went back 30 years to 1955. In the second movie they go ahead thirty years to October 21, 2015. The movie had Miami playing the Chicago Cubs in the World Series. In 1985 this was a far-fetched idea. There was no Florida team and the Cubs never go to the baseball fall classic. In 2015 the Chicago Cubs really were good and could have gone to the World Series. They lost in the playoffs and just missed it. Also in 2015 there was a Miami baseball team. Since they were both in the National League, they could not play against each other in the World Series. In 2014 I played an Internet Chess Club three minute blitz game against one “Martinmcfly”. I played 2.c4, and we ended up in the Modern Benoni Defence. I adopted the set-up as White with 7.f3, 8.Bd3 and 9.Nge2. Chances were fairly even early on. I used more time to get a better position, but I repeated moves to avoid losing on the clock. Sawyer (1962) - Martinmcfly (1991), ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 16.05.2014 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 e6 4.Nc3 exd5 5.cxd5 d6 6.e4 g6 7.f3 Bg7 8.Bd3 0-0 9.Nge2 h5 [9...a6 10.a4 Nbd7 11.0-0 Ne5 12.Be3 Re8 13.b3=] 10.Bg5 a6 11.0-0 [11.a4=] 11...b5 12.Qd2 c4?! [12...Nbd7=] 13.Bc2 Nbd7 14.Bh6 [14.b4!? Qc7 15.a4+/=] 14...Ne5 [14...Bxh6 15.Qxh6 b4 16.Nd1 Ne5=] 15.Nd4 Bd7 16.a3 Qb6 17.Be3 Qc7 18.Kh1 Rab8 19.Na2 a5 20.Rad1 Qb7 21.Qxa5 Ra8 [Another try is 21...h4 22.Qb4 Qa6 23.Nc6 Bxc6 24.dxc6 Nxc6 25.Qxd6+/=] 22.Qd2 Rfe8 23.Nb4 Rac8

24.Ne2 Qc7 25.Na6?! [At this point I go for a draw by repetition of moves, possibly influenced by the clock. White is under attack, but does have an extra pawn. I could have continued 25.Qe1!+-] 25...Qb7 26.Nb4 Qc7 27.Na6?! Qb7 28.Nb4 Qc7 29.Na6?! Game drawn by repetition 1/2-1/2

84 – Harper 7.f3 Bg7 8.Bg5 h6 In 1991 I was in Columbus on business, home of Ohio State. I used to think Cleveland and Cincinnati were the largest cities in Ohio. The 2010 census indicated Columbus was the largest. I played six games vs Brian Harper from 1990-1992. Each was a BlackmarDiemer Gambit except this one game. We first met in BDG thematic postal tournaments, possibly run by Tom Purser for readers of his BlackmarDiemer Gambit World magazine. We agree to two draws. I won another game as White in 27 moves. Brian and I were sending chess moves by postcard about once a week for more than a year altogether. When I found out I was going to be in Columbus for a couple days with a free evening, we arranged to meet. Mostly we talked chess. As I recall, we did play a couple 5 minute games, both of us winning BDGs quickly as White when Black blundered away a queen. The Benoni Defence 2.f3 was a clash of styles. I gave Black the chance to transpose back into a BDG. In a 1989 USCF Golden Squires Postal Tournament we played a common position after 4.c4. We got into trouble on the board playing normal moves, such as 18.Bh6? and 21...Qh4? Our strategies were good, but our tactics were bad. As it turned out, he made the last mistake. Sawyer - Harper, corr USCF 89SS60, 08.04.1992 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.f3 c5 3.d5 e6 4.c4 exd5 5.cxd5 d6 6.e4 g6 7.Nc3 Bg7 8.Bg5 h6 [Another popular continuation is 8...0-0 9.Qd2 a6 10.a4 Re8 11.Nge2 Nbd7 12.Ng3=] 9.Be3 a6 [9...0-0 10.Qd2 Re8 11.Nge2 h5 12.Nc1] 10.a4 Qe7 11.Qd2 0-0 12.Nge2 Nbd7 13.Nc1 [Interesting would be 13.Bxh6!? Nxe4 14.Nxe4 Qh4+ 15.g3 Qxh6 16.Qxh6 Bxh6 17.Nxd6] 13...Ne5 [13...Nh5=] 14.Be2 h5 15.0-0 Nh7 16.Kh1 f5 17.Bd3 [17.Nb3 fxe4 18.Nxe4 Nf6 19.Nexc5 dxc5 20.Bxc5=] 17...Rb8 18.Bh6? [18.Re1=] 18...c4?! [18...Bxh6 19.Qxh6 f4! and the White queen is trapped. If for example 20.Be2 Rf6 21.Nd3 Nf7-+] 19.Bxg7 Kxg7 20.Be2 f4 [20...fxe4 21.Nxe4 Bf5=] 21.Qd4 Qh4? [21...h4 22.Bxc4=] 22.Bxc4 Nf6 23.Nd3 Nxd3 24.Bxd3 Kh6 25.e5 [25.Qb6!+-]

25...dxe5 26.Qxe5 Bd7 27.Ne4 Bf5 28.Nxf6 [28.Rac1+/-] 28...Bxd3 29.Rfd1 Bf5 30.Ne4 Rbe8 31.Qd4 Bxe4 32.fxe4 f3 33.Qe3+ Kh7? [33...Qg5 34.Qxg5+ Kxg5 35.gxf3 Rxf3 36.d6+/=] 34.gxf3 g5 35.Rac1 Rg8 36.Rc7+ Kh6 37.Rxb7 1-0

Book 7: Chapter 4 – 2.c4 e6 Indians 3.g3 This is a common line in the Catalan Opening.

85 – Rookie 3.g3 c5 4.Nf3 cxd4 I got completely outplayed in this opening, however, I didn’t lose in the opening I didn’t lose in the middlegame. I survived to the endgame and it was a rook ending that I knew. All I had to do was to play the correct 50 moves without losing on time and I could claim a draw. Indeed, that’s what happened. Sawyer (2319) - Rookie (2529), ICC 5 0 Internet Chess Club, 08.02.2009 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 c5 4.Nf3 cxd4 5.Nxd4 d5 6.Bg2 e5 7.Nc2 d4 8.0-0 Nc6 9.e3!? d3! 10.Nca3? Bb4 11.Bd2 a5 12.Nc3 Be6 13.Nab5 Bxc4 14.b3 Bxb5 15.Nxb5 e4 16.f3 exf3 17.Bxf3 0-0 18.Kg2 Re8 19.a3 Bxd2 20.Qxd2 Ne5 21.Nd4 Nxf3 22.Nxf3 Ng4 23.Rfe1 Qd5 [23...Rc8-+] 24.h3 Ne5 25.Qf2 Qxb3 [25...Rac8-+ and Black has a crushing position.] 26.Nxe5 Rxe5 27.Rab1 Qd5+ 28.Qf3 d2 29.Red1 Rae8 30.Qxd5 Rxd5 31.Rxb7 Rd3 32.Rb2 Rdxe3 33.Rbxd2 Rxa3 34.Rd8! Kf8 35.Rxe8+ Kxe8 36.Rd6 a4 37.Ra6 Ra2+ 38.Kg1 Ra1+ 39.Kg2 a3 40.Ra7 a2 41.h4 h5 42.Kh2 Kf8 43.Kg2 f6 44.Kh2 Kg8 45.Kg2 Kh7 46.Kh2 Kg8 47.Kg2 Kh7 48.Kh2 Kh6 49.Ra5 Kg6 50.Kg2 Kh6 51.Kh2 g5 52.hxg5+ fxg5 53.Ra6+ Kg7 54.Kg2 Kf7 [There is no way to avoid a draw] 55.Kh2 Ke7 56.Kg2 Kf7 57.Kh2 Kf8 58.Kg2 Kg7 59.Kh2 g4 [Now play 50 moves.] 60.Kg2 Kf8 61.Ra7 Ke8 62.Kh2 Kd8 63.Kg2 Kc8 64.Ra3 Kc7 65.Ra7+ Kb6 66.Ra3 Kc5 67.Ra8 Kb5 68.Ra7 Kc4 69.Ra8 Kb3 70.Rb8+ Kc4 71.Rc8+ Kd5 72.Rd8+ Kc4 73.Rc8+ Kb3 74.Rb8+ Kc3 75.Rc8+ Kb4 76.Rb8+ Kc5 77.Ra8 Kb4 78.Rb8+ Kc3 79.Rc8+ Kd4 80.Rd8+ Ke5 81.Re8+ Kf5 82.Rf8+ Ke6 83.Ra8 Kd5 84.Rd8+ Kc6 85.Ra8 Kc5 86.Rc8+ Kd6 87.Ra8 Kc5 88.Rc8+ Kd6 89.Rd8+ Kc7 90.Ra8 Kd6 91.Rd8+ Ke7 92.Ra8 Kd7 93.Kh2 Kc6 94.Kg2 Kb5 95.Rb8+ Ka5 96.Ra8+ Kb6 97.Ra3 Kb5 98.Ra8 Kc6 99.Ra3 Kd7 100.Ra8 Ke7 101.Ra7+ Kf6 102.Ra6+ Ke7 103.Ra7+ Kf6 104.Ra6+ Ke5 105.Ra5+

Kd4 106.Ra8 Kd3 107.Rd8+ Ke4 108.Re8+ Kd3 109.Rd8+ Ke4 110.Re8+ 1/2-1/2

86 – Koller 3.g3 d5 4.Nf3 dxc4 The Catalan Gambit is a temporary sacrifice that leads to lengthy maneuvers with heavy pieces. Tactics changed strategic plans quickly when Grandmaster Matej Sebenik won with a skewer (11...Bb5) and a pin (19.Nxb6 Rxb7) against Hans-Juergen Koller. Koller (2167) - Sebenik (2557), Graz Open A 2018 Graz AUT (1.4), 17.02.2018 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 d5 4.Nf3 dxc4 5.Bg2 a6 6.0-0 Nc6 7.e3 Bd7 8.Nfd2 [8.Qe2=] 8...Na5 9.Qc2 Rc8 10.Nxc4? [10.Nc3 b5=] 10...Nxc4 11.Qxc4 Bb5 12.Qb3 Bxf1 13.Kxf1 Rb8 14.Bxb7 [14.Bd2 Be7-/+] 14...Nd7 15.d5 e5 [15...Be7-+] 16.Nc3 h5 [16...Bd6-+] 17.h4? Rh6 18.Na4 Rb6 [If 19.Nxb6 Rxb7-+] 0-1

87 – Shepherd 5.Qa4+ Nbd7 John Shepherd was from Montreal, Canada. I had the privilege of playing him three times in APCT during 1978-1979. He was maybe 35 years older than I. Shepherd was probably too young to know the former Montreal champion Joseph Sawyer who played Alexander Alekhine and maybe also Frank Marshall. I remember John as a very friendly and encouraging opponent with his chats on our weekly postcards. Years later I would play kids who were 45 years younger than I, and I try to make myself available to talk with younger players about chess if they wish. They may have more chess skills than I, but I have more life experience. John Shepherd may be gone, but he is not forgotten. We played during the 1979 Major League Baseball World Series between the Baltimore Orioles and the Pittsburgh Pirates. I think he was a fan of Willie Stargell and the "We Are Family" Pirates. Snow delayed the first game in Baltimore on October 10, 1979. It was the earliest measurable snow in Baltimore history. I had Black in all three Shepherd-Sawyer games. Our first game was an English Opening that Shepherd won. This was second. Our third game was a Gruenfeld Defence which I won. Just as Black's position reached a dominating level, I chose to force a perpetual check. At the very end it was a forced draw which I must have offered. Why I didn't play 24...Rc2! winning material is beyond me. Maybe I was afraid or just content to pick up points vs a higher rated player. It looks wimpy to me now. Shepherd - Sawyer, corr APCT Q-36 corr APCT, 1978 begins 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.g3 [White moves to a Catalan Opening.] 4...dxc4 [The Open Catalan Variation which is a form of the Queen's Gambit Accepted] 5.Qa4+ [A set-up favored by GM Boris Avrukh is 5.Bg2 a6 6.0-0 b5 7.Ne5 with attack along the long diagonal.] 5...Nbd7 6.Bg2 a6 7.Qxc4 b5 8.Qc2

Bb7 9.0-0 c5 10.Rd1 Qb6 11.b3?! [Better was 11.Be3 with equal chances. White's 11.b3 was a weaker move that allows Black to gain the upper hand.] 11...cxd4 12.Nxd4 Rc8 13.Qd2 Bxg2 14.Kxg2 Bc5-/+ 15.e3 Ne5 16.f3 0-0 17.Bb2 Rfd8 18.b4 Be7 19.a3 Nxf3 20.Kxf3 Qb7+ 21.Ke2 Qg2+ 22.Kd3 Rxd4+ [22...Qf3-+] 23.Bxd4 Qe4+ 24.Ke2 Qg2+? [24...Rc2-+] 1/2-1/2

88 – Aegis 4.Nf3 Be7 5.Bg2 0-0 We love weapons that win chess games. Attacking systems aim at weaknesses. The ancient Greeks used "Aegis" which was a "shield" for protection. Often that shield was made of goat skins. Modern military warfare uses radar and missiles. My Internet Chess Club opponent Aegis played a Catalan Opening. I chose the basic Semi-Slav set-up with pawns on e6, d5, c6 and b5 which was sound and solid. The ultimate result comes down to who plays the best strategy and especially the best tactics. This Aegis radar locked on to my weakness. White fired missiles at d5 with Bg2, Nc3, c4 and cxd5, and e4 and exd5. When I chose 11...Bxd5, it was surprising how this natural capture was so bad. Black's lack of development and kingside vulnerability proved fatal. Aegis (3106) - Sawyer (2391), ICC 4 16 u Internet Chess Club, 27.10.2002 begins 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.g3 Be7 5.Bg2 0-0 6.Ne5 [6.0-0] 6...c6 [Best is 6...c5! 7.0-0 cxd4 8.Qxd4 Nc6 9.Nxc6 bxc6 10.Nc3 Ba6=] 7.cxd5 cxd5 [7...exd5=] 8.Nc3 a6 [8...Nc6= Black would do well to develop the queenside knight, which in the game is very slow to enter the fray.] 9.0-0 b5 10.e4! Bb7 11.exd5 Bxd5? [11...Nxd5= is a must.] 12.Nxd5 Nxd5 13.Qg4 Bf6 14.Re1 Qb6 15.Bd2 Ra7 16.Bxd5 exd5 17.Bb4 Re8 [17...Be7 18.Nd7 Nxd7 19.Bxe7+/-] 18.Nd7 Rxe1+ 19.Rxe1 Nxd7 20.Re8+ Nf8 21.Rxf8# Black checkmated 1-0

89 – Alkaline 4.Nf3 Be7 5.Bg2 A good player forces the game open. I put my Black pawns on the light squares. White mounted a special force invasion with his queen and minor pieces on the dark squares. I defended against a Catalan Opening. My opponent was rated 800 points above me. I went from closed to cramped until I could not defend. The Internet Chess Club lists this as a chess engine with Arasan 17.5. I don't know what that means beyond lots of rating points. This player has been inactive for more than a year. He came. He saw. He conquered. He left. The point of playing such a strong computer is to learn. I observed that White developed quickly. He fought for space in the center. He ripped the position open and invaded with energy. That's good advice for my next game! Alkaline (2875) - Sawyer (2028), ICC 3 1 Internet Chess Club, 05.01.2014 begins 1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 e6 3.g3 Nf6 4.Bg2 Be7 5.c4 c6 6.0-0 0-0 7.Nc3 a6!? 8.a3 b5? [This leaves Black's game very cramped. He should eliminate White's c-pawn while he still can with 8...dxc4 9.Ne5 Nbd7 10.Nxc4+/=] 9.c5 Nbd7 10.Bf4 Ng4 11.e4 f5 [11...e5 12.dxe5 d4 13.Nxd4 Ngxe5 14.b4+-] 12.e5 Nh6 13.Bxh6 gxh6 14.Qd2 Bg5 15.Qd3 Qe8 16.h4 Be7 17.Ne2 Kh8 18.Qd2 Qg6 19.Nf4 Qf7 20.Rfc1 Rg8 21.Nd3 Qg6 22.Rd1 Bb7 23.Nf4 Qf7 24.Ne2 Qg6 25.Ne1 Bf8 26.Qa5 Qe8 27.Nf4 Bg7 28.Qc7 Rb8 29.Bf3 Nf8 30.Bh5 Ng6 31.Ned3 Rf8 32.Qd6 Rd8 33.Qxe6 Black resigns 1-0

90 – Moryak 5.Bg2 0-0 6.0-0 You play a good opening. Your opponent equalizes. Now what? Make moves. You just keep making good moves. I played a Catalan that morphed into a Queen's Indian Defence vs Moryak. White's prized piece in the Catalan Opening is the light squared Bg2. Good moves keep my White light squared bishop more active with better open lines than Black's light squared bishop. This I learned from books by Boris Avrukh. Black defended well. After 31 moves we have a long bishop ending with time scramble mistakes. After 51 moves Black has two connected passed pawns but is losing. White wins the race to queen a pawn. In the end Black forfeits on time in a lost pawn ending. Sawyer (2199) - Moryak (2073), ICC 5 0 u Internet Chess Club, 22.05.2010 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 d5 4.Nf3 Be7 5.Bg2 0-0 6.0-0 b6 [6...dxc4 7.Qc2 a6 8.a4 Bd7 9.Qxc4 Bc6 10.Bg5 Bd5 11.Qd3=] 7.Nc3 [7.cxd5 exd5 8.Nc3 Bb7 9.Bf4+/=] 7...Bb7 8.Ne5 Nbd7 9.b3 c5 10.Bb2 cxd4 11.Qxd4 Nxe5 12.Qxe5 Nd7 13.Qh5 Bf6?! [13...Nf6=] 14.cxd5 exd5 15.Na4? [15.Rfd1+/-] 15...Bxb2 16.Nxb2 Nf6 17.Qf5 Rc8 18.Rac1 Qe7 19.e3 Qe6 20.Qxe6 fxe6 21.Rfd1 Rfd8 22.Nd3 Nd7 23.Nf4 Kf7 24.Bh3 Nf8 25.Nd3 Kf6 26.f4 Nd7 27.Kf2 Nc5 28.Nxc5 Rxc5 29.b4 Rxc1 30.Rxc1 Rc8 31.Rxc8 Bxc8 32.Ke2 Ba6+ 33.Kd2 Bc4 34.a3 e5 35.Bc8 d4 36.exd4 exd4 37.a4 h6 38.h4 Ke7 39.Bf5 Kf6 40.Bd3 Bb3 41.a5 Ke6 42.axb6 axb6 43.Bc2? [43.Bh7 Kf6 44.Kd3 g6 45.h5 gxh5 46.Kxd4 Be6 47.Be4+/=] 43...Bc4? [43...Bxc2 44.Kxc2 h5-+] 44.g4 Kd5 45.g5 hxg5 46.hxg5 [46.fxg5!+/-] 46...Ke6 47.Be4 Bb5 48.Bg6 Bc4 49.Bh7 b5? [49...Kd6=] 50.Bd3? [50.Bg8+!+- reaches the game continuation by force.] 50...Kf7? [50...Bxd3 51.Kxd3 Kf5 52.Kxd4 Kxf4 53.Kc5 Kxg5 54.Kxb5=] 51.Bxc4+ bxc4 52.f5! Ke7 53.b5 Kd6 54.f6 [time] 1-0

91 – Bok 6.0-0 dxc4 7.Qc2 a6 White's command of open lines made all the difference. This English transposed to an Open Catalan. In Benjamin Bok vs Lucas Van Foreest, Black captured the gambit pawn with 6...dxc4. White recaptured with his queen and soon returned to d1 only to have the queens swapped off. Black took six moves to trade light-squared bishops. Black did not develop his queenside knight until move 21, and then he resigned. Bok (2607) - Van Foreest (2481), 80th Tata Steel GpB Wijk aan Zee NED (8.4), 21.01.2018 begins 1.Nf3 Nf6 2.g3 d5 3.Bg2 e6 4.0-0 Be7 5.c4 0-0 6.d4 dxc4 7.Qc2 a6 8.a4 Bd7 9.Qxc4 Bc6 10.Bg5 Bd5 11.Qc2 Be4 12.Qd1 c5 13.dxc5 Qxd1? [13...h6=] 14.Rxd1 Bxc5 15.Nc3 Bc6 16.Ne5 Bxg2 17.Kxg2 h6 [17...Be7 18.Ne4+/=] 18.Bxf6 gxf6 19.Ne4 fxe5 20.Nxc5 b6 21.Ne4 Nc6 [21...Ra7 22.Rac1+/-] 22.Rac1 1-0

92 – Peterson 7.Qa4 a6 8.Qxc4 Eric Peterson played in classical style and accepted my gambit pawn with 6...dxc4. It’s a sham sacrifice. White regains the pawn in a few moves. I found a winning attack after a long battle. As I recall, Eric Peterson was a very active master who made himself available to play unrated games vs almost anyone. That made it great for those who wanted some action against a good player. Sawyer - Peterson, ICC u 4 0 Internet Chess Club, 1997 begins 1.d4 e6 2.g3 d5 3.Bg2 Nf6 4.Nf3 Be7 5.0-0 0-0 6.c4 dxc4 7.Qa4 a6 8.Qxc4 b5 9.Qc2 Bb7 10.Nc3 [10.Bd2 Be4 11.Qc1 Bb7 12.Bf4=] 10...Nc6 11.e3 Nb4 12.Qb1 c5 13.a3 Nc6 14.dxc5 Bxc5 15.b4 Be7 16.Rd1 Qb6 17.Bb2 Rac8 18.Qd3 Rfd8 19.Qe2 h6 20.Rac1 Kf8 21.Rxd8+ Rxd8 22.Rd1 Rxd1+ 23.Qxd1 Qd8 24.Qxd8+ Nxd8 25.Ne2 Bd5 26.Nf4 Bb7 27.Ne5 Bxg2 28.Kxg2 g5 29.Nfd3 Nd5 [29...Ke8=] 30.Nc5 Bxc5 31.Nd7+ Ke7 32.Nxc5 Nc7 33.Be5 Nd5 34.Nxa6 Nc6 35.Bg7 h5 36.e4 Nb6 37.Nc7 Nc4 [37...f6 38.Nxb5+/-] 38.Nxb5 e5 39.h4 gxh4 40.gxh4 f6 41.a4 [41.Kf3 Nb2 42.Ke2+-] 41...Nxb4 42.Bh6 Nc6 43.Be3 Ke6 44.Bc5 f5 [44...Nb2 45.Nc3+/-] 45.exf5+ Kxf5 46.Nd6+ Nxd6 47.Bxd6 Kg4 48.Bc7 Kxh4

49.a5 Kg4 50.a6 h4 [Or 50...e4 51.Bb6+-] 51.Bxe5 h3+ 52.Kh2 Kf3 53.Bd4 Nxd4 54.a7 Kxf2 55.a8Q Nf3+ 56.Kxh3 Ke3 57.Kg3 Nd4 58.Qa3+ Ke4 59.Qb4 Ke3 60.Qc5 Ke4 61.Qc4 1-0

3.Nf3 b6 This begins the Queen’s Indian Defence.

93 – Fedoseev 4.a3 Ba6 5.Qc2 This 4.a3 Variation game resembles a Modern Benoni Defence. The players castled opposite sides. White's attack was strong despite the fact that he could have been saddled with four f-pawns!? The most notable aspect of the game between Vladimir Fedoseev and Victor Bologan was the killer move 23.Nh4! Fedoseev (2706) - Bologan (2610), 19th Karpov Poikovsky RUS, 29.05.2018 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nf3 b6 4.a3 Ba6 [4...Bb7 5.Nc3 d5 6.cxd5 Nxd5 7.Qc2 Nxc3 8.bxc3 Be7 9.e4 0-0 10.Bd3 c5 11.0-0=] 5.Qc2 c5 [5...Bb7 6.Nc3=] 6.d5 exd5 7.cxd5 g6 [7...d6 8.Nc3 Nbd7 9.Nd2=] 8.Nc3 Bg7 9.Bf4 d6 10.h4 h6 [10...0-0 11.h5+/=] 11.g3 Qe7 12.Qa4+ [12.e4] 12...b5 13.Nxb5 0-0 14.Nxd6 Nxd5 15.0-0-0 [15.Rd1 Nxf4 16.gxf4 Bxb2=] 15...Nxf4 [15...Qe6 16.Qe4+/=] 16.gxf4 Bb7 17.h5 [17.Qb3+/-] 17...Qf6 18.Rd2 Bc6 19.Qc4 Nd7 20.hxg6 Nb6 21.gxf7+ Kh8 22.Qc2 [22.Qc3!?] 22...Qxf4 [22...Bxf3 23.exf3+/- White has a good position despite his quadruple pawns!] 23.Nh4! [White has a huge threat on g6 after 23...Be4 24.Nxe4 Qxf7 25.Ng5+-] 1-0

94 – Haines 4.e3 c5 5.Bd3 Be7 This game transposes into the Queens Indian Defence. White enjoys flexibility against the solid Indian Defence. Ray Haines and Roger Hardison begins the game quietly. Haines completed his development and then began his attack. After a battle in the center, White found the winning combination at the key moment. Haines - Hardison, Houlton ME (1), 26.05.2018 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3 e6 3.e3 c5 4.c4 Be7 5.Bd3 b6 6.Nc3 Bb7 7.0-0 0-0 8.Qe2 [8.d5!?] 8...d5 9.Rd1 [9.dxc5=] 9...cxd4 10.exd4 dxc4 11.Bxc4 Re8 [11...a6=] 12.Be3 [12.Ne5+/-] 12...Ne4 [12...a6=] 13.Rac1 Nxc3 14.Rxc3 Bf6 15.Bb5 Re7 16.Rdc1 [16.Bf4+/-] 16...a6 17.Bd3 Nd7 18.Ng5 [18.Bf4+/=] 18...Nf8

19.Ne4?! [19.Qh5=] 19...Bxe4 [19...Bxd4!=/+] 20.Bxe4 Rb8 21.Qxa6 Rd7 22.g3 Bxd4 23.Rc8 Rxc8 24.Rxc8 Qf6? [24...Qe7 25.Qa8+-] 25.Qa8! g5 [25...Qe7 26.Rxf8+ Qxf8 27.Bxh7+! Kxh7 28.Qxf8+- wins queen] 26.Rxf8+ Kg7 27.Rg8+ Kh6 28.Bxg5+ [28.Qf8+!+-] 1-0

95 – Zdun 4.Nc3 Bb7 5.Bg5 The Queen's Indian Defence allows Black to focus on the e4 square with his Black pieces. This makes sense since after 1d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 White has played 3.Nf3 instead of 3.Nc3. Initially Black aimed at the light squares with his knight on f6 and with the fianchettoed bishop on b7. Black may add pawn to d5. I played eight years in Williamsport in the chess club that met at Lycoming College. In that club Dick Zdun was one of the most experienced club players. Richard Zdun had probably already retired in those days. He enjoyed playing at the Tuesday night club. Dick usually chose basic classical development. In this game my Black pieces temporarily controlled e4 with 6...Ne4 and 7...Bxe4. Then I fought for the e4 square again with my moves 11...d5 and 14...f5. I built up an advantage but let it slip a bit. White had drawing chances at one point. But then Black got the better king position in a rook endgame. Zdun (1634) - Sawyer (2010), Williamsport, PA 01.04.1998 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3 b6 3.c4 e6 4.Nc3 Bb7 5.Bg5 Be7 6.h3 Ne4 7.Nxe4 Bxe4 8.Bxe7 Qxe7 9.Nd2 Bb7 10.e4 0-0 11.Be2 d5 12.0-0 dxe4 13.Re1 Nd7 14.Bf1 f5 15.Qb3 c5 16.d5 Rf6 17.Rad1 Kh8 18.f4 [Black does not need to capture en passant. More challenging would be 18.f3! exf3 19.Nxf3=] 18...Qd6 19.dxe6 Qxe6 20.Nf3 Re8 21.Qc3 Nb8 22.Ne5 Nc6 23.Nxc6 Bxc6 24.Re3 Rff8 25.b4 cxb4 26.Qxb4 Rd8 27.a4 Rxd1 [27...Qf6! 28.Rxd8 Rxd8-/+] 28.Qxf8+ Qg8 29.Qxg8+ [White would have good drawing chances after 29.Qxf5! h6 30.Rg3 Rc1 31.Qg6!=] 29...Kxg8 30.Ra3 a5 31.Kf2 Kf7 32.Be2 Rb1 33.g4 g6 34.gxf5 gxf5 35.h4 Rb4 36.c5 bxc5 37.Bb5? [37.Rc3 c4 38.Bxc4+ Ke7-/+] 37...Bxb5 38.axb5 Rxb5 39.Ke3 Kg6 40.Kf2 c4

41.Rg3+ Kf6 42.h5 Rb2+ 43.Kg1 Rb7 44.Ra3 Ra7 45.Kf2 Ke6 46.Rc3 Kd5 0-1

96 – Parsons 4.g3 Bb7 5.Bg2 Is your chess style consistent? How similar is your style as White compared to Black? My friend David Parsons loved to sacrifice and attack. He played White in the Italian Game Evans Gambit 4.b4!? If Black tried the Petroff Defence, Dave played the Cochrane Gambit 4.Nxf7!? Parsons played Black main lines such as the Nimzo-Indian and the Queen's Indian Defence. Against e4 openings Dave Parsons defended with the French Defence. Of course he surprised me on occasion with something different. One time he ventured a Ruy Lopez Schliemann Gambit. In every game he attacked! Here White wins a piece and then the Exchange leaving him up a rook. That should be an easy game, but an attacker is never completely out of the game. Dave Parsons kept his attention on my king. He broke open the kingside and made serious threats. I stopped the mate but I gave him a chance for a perpetual check. Fortunately for me, Black missed the key moment. Then my attack took over. Sawyer (2011) - Parsons (1721), Williamsport, PA 1995 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nf3 b6 4.g3 Bb7 5.Bg2 d5 [5...Be7 6.0-0 0-0 7.Nc3=] 6.Qc2 [6.cxd5 Bb4+ 7.Bd2 Bxd2+ 8.Qxd2 exd5 9.Nc3 0-0 10.0-0 Re8=] 6...dxc4 7.Qxc4 Bd5 8.Qc2 Ne4 [8...Nc6!=] 9.Nc3 Bb4 10.0-0 Nxc3 11.bxc3 Bd6 12.c4 Bb7 13.Rd1 Nd7 14.a4 0-0? [Black missed White's threatened double attack on h7 and b7. 14...Nf6 15.Bg5+/=] 15.Ng5! g6 16.Bxb7 Rb8 17.Bc6 Be7 18.Nf3 Nf6 19.Bh6 Qd6 20.Bxf8 Rxf8 21.Be4 Ng4 22.h3 Nh6 [If 22...Ne3 23.fxe3 Qxg3+ 24.Kf1 f5 25.Bc6 f4 26.exf4 Rxf4 27.e3 Rxf3+ 28.Bxf3 Qxf3+ 29.Qf2+-] 23.c5 Qd8 24.cxb6 axb6 25.d5 f5 26.dxe6 Bd6

27.Bc6 g5 28.Nd4 g4 29.h4 f4 30.Nb5 fxg3 31.Nxd6? [31.fxg3!+- and Black is busted.] 31...gxf2+ [Black can draw after 31...Qxh4! 32.fxg3 Qxg3+ 33.Bg2 Qf2+ 34.Kh1 Qh4+ 35.Kg1=] 32.Kg2 Qxh4 33.Rh1 Qg5 34.Nf7 1-0

97 – Adhiban 5…Be7 6.0-0 0-0 The Queens Indian Defence provides players strategic choices. One idea is to play safe and exchange off your weakest pieces for your opponent's strongest pieces with a plan to win the endgame. Another idea is to play actively. Force the action and look for tactical opportunities to win. White ganged up on f7 in the game between Baskaran Adhiban and Igor Kovalenko. Adhiban (2655) - Kovalenko (2635), PRO League Group Stage chess.com INT (8), 28.02.2018 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nf3 b6 4.g3 Bb7 5.Bg2 Be7 6.0-0 0-0 7.d5 [7.Nc3 Ne4 8.Nxe4 Bxe4 9.Ne5 Bxg2 10.Kxg2 d6 11.Nf3=] 7...exd5 8.Nh4 [8.Nd4 Bc6 9.Nxc6 dxc6 10.cxd5 cxd5 11.Nc3 c6 12.e4 dxe4 13.Nxe4=] 8...c6 9.cxd5 Nxd5 10.Nf5 Nc7 11.Nc3 d5 12.e4 Bf6 13.exd5 Nxd5 [13...cxd5 14.Bf4 Nba6 15.Re1=] 14.Nxd5 cxd5 15.Re1 [15.Ne3!?=] 15...Na6 16.Bf4 Bxb2 17.Rb1 Bf6 18.Nd6?! [18.Bd6 Re8 19.Qg4 g6 20.Nh6+ Kg7 21.Nf5+ Kh8=] 18...Bc6 19.Bxd5 Bxd5 20.Qxd5 Qd7 21.Rbd1 Rad8 22.h4 Nc5 23.Bg5 Bxg5 24.hxg5 [24.Qxg5 h6=/+] 24...Qa4 [24...Qc7-/+] 25.Re7 Rd7? [25...Qc2 26.Rd2=] 26.Rde1 Nb7 [26...Rxd6 27.Qxd6+-] 27.Qxf7+ [White has a forced mate after 27.Qxf7+ Rxf7 28.Re8+ Rf8 29.Rxf8+ Kxf8 30.Re8#] 1-0

98 – Grigoriants 6.0-0 0-0 7.Nc3 Your ability to attack on both sides of the board at the same time makes you a powerful and dangerous opponent. Black chose a modest center with pawns on e6 and d6 in the opening. White won in this Queen's Indian Defence by attacking the a8 rook and the h7 pawn in the middlegame between Sergey Grigoriants of Russia and Jens E. Ingebretsen of Norway. Grigoriants (2568) - Ingebretsen (2132), Reykjavik Open 2018 ISL, 07.03.2018 begins 1.Nf3 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 b6 4.Bg2 Bb7 5.0-0 Be7 6.d4 00 7.Nc3 Ne4 8.Bd2 Nxd2 9.Qxd2 d6 10.d5 a5 [10...e5 11.e4=] 11.dxe6 fxe6 12.Qe3 Rf6 [12...e5 13.Rad1+/=] 13.Ng5 Bxg2 14.Kxg2 Qd7?

[14...Nc6 15.Nxe6+/=] 15.Qe4 Qc6 16.Nd5! Bd8 17.Qxh7+ Kf8 18.Qh8# 1-0

3.Nc3 This is the Queen Pawn Indian that does not directly or immediately transpose to other lines.

99 – Jamison 3…g6 4.e4 d6 Larry Jamison seemed to head for the Queen's Indian Defence in the variation 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 usually intending ...b6. Suddenly he switched to the King's Indian Defence with 3.Nc3 g6. Apparently he planned to obtain a Hedgehog pawn. The position after move 14 is a great example. Black has all his pawns on the third rank except his h7 pawn. The Hedgehog plan is to support the pawns with pieces as they plod ahead. Here Black pushed his pawns without piece support. After move 14, Black had nothing else on the second rank except his Qg7. The rest of his pieces are on the first rank. My choice of the Saemisch Variation 5.f3 set-up made sense. White had the better game after Black played the time wasting move ...e6!? However, White must play correctly. Instead I made a tactical error by prematurely playing 8.Bh6? In what was essentially a ...g6 line, my mistake ironically allowed Black the tactical shot 8...Nxe4! We both missed it. After that Black stood worse and was in big trouble. By move 14, I had pawns on c5, d4, e4, f3, g4, and h4. We castled opposite sides and I mounted a successful kingside attack. Sawyer (2100) - Jamison (1700), corr APCT 1981 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 g6 4.e4 d6 5.f3 b6 [5...Bg7 6.Be3 0-0 7.Qd2 +/=] 6.Be3 Bg7 7.Qd2 0-0 8.Bh6? [8.0-0-0 +/=] 8...Ne8? [8...Nxe4! 9.fxe4 Qh4+ 10.Qf2 Qxf2+ 11.Kxf2 Bxh6 -/+] 9.h4 f6 10.g4 Qd7 11.Bd3 Bxh6 12.Qxh6 Qg7 13.Qe3

a6 14.Nge2 c6 15.0-0-0 Rf7 16.d5 c5 [16...b5 17.h5+/-] 17.dxe6 Bxe6 18.Nf4 Nc7 19.Ncd5 Bxd5 20.Nxd5? [20.exd5 Re7 21.Ne6 +-] 20...Nxd5 21.exd5 Nd7 22.f4 Re7 23.Qd2 Ra7 [23...b5 24.h5 +/=] 24.h5 g5 [24...b5 25.hxg6 hxg6 26.Qc2+/-] 25.h6 Qf8 26.fxg5 Re5 27.Bf5 Qe7 28.Rdf1 fxg5 [28...Kh8 29.Bxd7 Rxd7 30.gxf6 +-] 29.Be6+ Kh8 30.Rf7 Qe8 31.Qd3 Qg8 32.Rg7 1-0

100 – Stevens 3…c6 4.e4 d5 Gary Stevens plays an irregular Queen Pawn Indian vs me. We played at the North Penn Chess Club in Lansdale, Pennsylvania. This game demonstrated the need to fight for the middle of the board. Black allowed me to have too much control of the center with my first five moves of d4, c4, Nc3, e4 and e5. Black delayed his advance toward the center. Then he boldly jumped into battle with 4...d5 and 5...Ne4 and made a game of it. How do you use the extra space and better development? You keep your pieces safe and use as much of your army as possible to aim at targets of opportunity. In this case, Black's king never castled. Eventually I sacrificed a knight on c3 for his kingside pawns and caught his king in the center. Gary Stevens and I played just one other game. I had Black in a Caro-Kann Defence after 1.e4 c6 2.Bc4 d5 3.exd5 cxd5 4.Bb3 Nf6. I won a piece on move 16. We played on in that game until move 46. This was our much shorter contest. Sawyer - Stevens (1336), Lansdale, PA 27.05.1981 begins 1.d4 e6 2.c4 c6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.e4! d5 5.e5 Ne4 6.Nxe4!? [Also good are 6.Bd3 and 6.cxd5] 6...dxe4 7.Ne2 Bb4+ 8.Bd2 Qa5 [8...Bxd2+ 9.Qxd2+/=] 9.Nc3 e3? [Apparently Black hoped White would take on e3 with the bishop. White is better after 9...0-0 10.a3+/-] 10.fxe3 Qb6 11.a3 Be7 12.Bd3 Nd7 13.0-0 c5 14.b4!? [14.Qf3!+- is very strong.] 14...cxd4 15.c5 Qd8 16.Qg4 dxc3 17.Qxg7 Rf8 18.Bxc3 Nxe5 [18...a5 19.Qxh7+/-] 19.Bxh7 Nc6 20.Bg8 Qc7 21.Rxf7 Rxf7 22.Bxf7+ Kd7 23.Rd1+ 1-0

101 – Sytnik 3…b6 4.e4 Bb4 What's the point of the Nimzo-Indian Defence after 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Bb4? To prevent 4.e4. What if Black delays 3…Bb4? I played Edward Sytnik of New Jersey. Most of his career Sytnik has been rated in the 1700s and 1800s. Here we go way back to the year 1981. Both of us were learning openings that began with 1.d4 and 2.c4. Sytnik and I met in the first round of a tournament in Levittown, Pennsylvania. This Philadelphia suburb is near New Jersey. As a higher rater player, I was paired down in a big Swiss tournament. Black delayed the Nimzo-Indian move 3…Bb4 until 4…Bb4. This allowed White to obtain a small edge and play 4.e4! It had the impact that both of us were out of the book and on our own. I did okay for a few moves. Unfortunately for me, I missed a clear win on move seven. The lesson here is to really pay attention on the first few moves after you leave your opening book. Black did not sit still. He made several threats against my pieces. Good play like that would not keep his rating at 1558 for long. Sure I still won 20 moves later. That was nice, but more accurate play in the opening would have made it a better game for me. Sawyer - Sytnik (1558), Levittown, PA (1), 16.05.1981 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 b6 4.e4! Bb4 [4...Bb7 5.Qc2+/=] 5.Bd3 Bb7 6.Qc2 d6? 7.Nge2? [I missed 7.Qa4+! not realizing that 7...Nc6 8.d5 Bxc3+ 9.bxc3+wins a piece.] 7...Nbd7 8.a3 Bxc3+ 9.Nxc3 0-0 10.Bg5 h6 11.Bh4 e5 12.d5 g5 13.Bg3 c6 14.dxc6 Bxc6 15.0-0-0 Nc5 16.h4 [16.f3+/-] 16...Nh5 17.Bxe5 dxe5 18.Be2 Qf6 19.Bxh5 Qf4+ 20.Kb1 Nxe4 21.f3 Ng3 22.Ne2 Nxe2 23.Qxe2 Rac8 24.hxg5 hxg5 25.Rde1 f6 26.Qd3 Be8? [26...e4 27.fxe4+/-] 27.Bxe8 1-0

Chapter 5 – Nimzo-Indian 3.Nc3 Bb4 The Nimzo-Indian Defence pins the knight that would support e4.

102 – Zdun 4.Bd2 0-0 5.Nf3 When I was in high school, I played both ping pong (table tennis) and chess. I scored much better at ping pong because I had to make 21 mistakes to lose. You can win a lot of games by just safely returning the ball over the net consistently and letting your opponent try and fail to make the perfect kill shot. In chess it takes one mistake and you’re toast. You’re history. You’re done for. You’re kaput. And often you’re checkmated. Chess games are more lost than won. We can only win if our opponents make mistakes. Even if most of the moves are good, in chess it only takes one mistake. We all make a lot of mistakes, so we all win (and lose) chess games. My friend Richard Zdun was probably the oldest player in our club. Dick came to play almost every week. During my eight years there, I ended up playing Dick Zdun 145 times. We played many different openings. This Nimzo-Indian Defence was rare for me. Play started on the queenside and moved to the kingside. The outcome was decided by two tactical combinations where White dropped material. He lost a piece for a couple pawns on move 16. Then White lost a rook on move 28. Zdun (1635) - Sawyer (2011), Williamsport PA 1995 began 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.Bd2 0-0 5.Nf3 b6 6.Bg5 Bb7 7.e3 h6 8.Bh4 d6 9.Bd3 Nbd7 10.a3 Bxc3+ 11.bxc3 c5 [11...e5 gives Black a good game.] 12.0-0 Qc7 13.h3 Ne4 [13...Be4 activates the bishop before it is cut off after d5.] 14.Qc2 f5 15.Bg3 e5 [15...Nxg3 16.fxg3 Nf6=] 16.d5? [16.Nh4 Nxg3 17.fxg3 e4 18.Be2+/=] 16...Nxg3 17.fxg3 e4 18.Bxe4 fxe4 19.Qxe4 Rae8

20.Qd3 Qd8 21.Nh4 Ne5 22.Qe2 Qg5 23.Kh2 Bc8 24.e4 Bd7 25.a4 Rxf1 26.Qxf1 Qe3 27.Nf3 Qxe4 28.Re1? [Hanging a rook when down a piece.] 28...Nxf3+ 29.gxf3 Qxe1 0-1

103 – Parsons 4.Bg5 c6 5.e4 The Nimzo-Indian Defence is well known as a reliable defense to 1.d4. However, any opening can change suddenly from a solid position to a disaster. David Parsons played too slowly against the Spassky variation. The threat made by 4.Bg5 pinned the kingside knight. This allowed the move 5.e4 under certain conditions. Black defended with 4…c6. This does little to deter 5.e4. The point of the Parsons move 4…c6 was to follow with 5...Qa5. This unpinned his knight and doubled up on his own pin of my c3 knight. My play 6.Bd2 0-0 7.e5 left the White kingside less defended. Black tried to come back for support. The White attack proved to be strong. I wrapped up the game with a nice checkmate on move 22. I added another short game with Robert Sphar in the notes. I won that game in 15 moves, even though he played a more critical continuation with 4.Bg5 h6. Sawyer (2011) - Parsons (1682), Williamsport PA, 1994 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.Bg5 c6 [Many years before Robert Sphar had played 4...h6 5.Bh4 c5 6.d5 d6 7.e3 Bxc3+ 8.bxc3 e5 9.f3 Bf5 10.e4 Bh7 11.Bd3 Nbd7 12.Ne2 0-0 13.Qd2? Qc7 (13...Nxe4-/+) 14.g4 Ne8? (14...b5=) 15.Be7 1-0 in Sawyer (2100)-Sphar (1502) corr APCT 1981] 5.e4!? Qa5 [5...d6=] 6.Bd2 0-0 7.e5 Ne8 8.Bd3 d6 9.f4 Nd7 10.Nf3 f5 11.a3 Bxc3 12.Bxc3 Qd8 13.Ng5 Qe7 14.Qh5 h6 15.h4 Ndf6 [Or 15...dxe5 16.fxe5+-] 16.exf6 Nxf6 17.Qg6 hxg5 18.hxg5 Ng4 [18...Qe8 19.Qxe8 Nxe8 20.Kf2+/-] 19.Be2 Ne3 20.Kd2 [A faster mate was 20.Qh7+ Kf7 21.Bh5#] 20...Nxg2 21.Qh7+ Kf7 22.Bh5# 1-0

104 – Rind 4.Bg5 h6 5.Bh4 c5 One hot summer night in June 1981, I had the privilege of playing against IM Bruce Rind in a simul. Rind had earned his International Master title in 1979. At the time we played, he was rated about 2426. We are the same age. Like many old-timers, Bruce Rind stopped playing competitive tournament chess years ago. His last known event was in 1995. In the year 2000, Dan Heisman installed IM Bruce Rind as one of the 10 charter members of the Philadelphia Chess Hall of Fame. Heisman wrote: "Bruce Rind - IM Rind may be the strongest player ever to be born and stay in the Philadelphia area. A terror with the White pieces, Bruce gathered many GM scalps with his precise opening play and positional acumen. Bruce helped tutor one of the area's best junior players in the early 1990's, NM Danny Benjamin. It is no surprise he played a high board for the Philadelphia Quakers in the 1970's. Bruce was perhaps the most internationally visible player from Philadelphia during the last half of the 20th century. While other strong players like Charles Kalme and Tim Taylor moved away, Bruce stayed and played. Bruce is a psychology professor at Temple University." My career can be divided into three very different segments. Up to 1983 - My teens and 20s, I played main line openings and not the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit. 1983-2003 - My 30s and 40s, I played gambits and wrote four books. I was a USCF correspondence chess master. 2003-present - My 50s and beyond, I played tournaments in Florida and ICC blitz online. I resumed my writing. The Nimzo-Indian Defence is one of the most famous openings. Through my career, I played it over 100 times from each side. As White I played 4.e3, 4.Qc2 and often 4.f3.Boris Spassky used 4.Bg5 as a surprise weapon

about 30 times in tournaments since the year Rind and I were born. Against Bobby Fischer in 1972, Spassky played 4.Nf3. Rind was very kind for a simultaneous exhibition player. Bruce allowed us to choose our color. Most players giving a simul take White in all games. On the spur of the moment, I decided to try 4.Bg5 for the first time in my life against an IM. Bruce Rind later admitted he did not know that 4.Bg5 variation well. Rind said he remembered the recommended Black piece set-up and pawn formation but not the order or the timing of the moves. I did not know them either. Both our kings got stuck in the center. He felt his position may have been worse after the opening. Then I got my queen stuck on the h-file and I fell for a tactic. Bruce said I played well. He was a very polite winner and quite complimentary toward me after the game. Sawyer - Rind, Hatboro, PA simul 25.06.1981 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.Bg5 [Usually I play 4.e3 or 4.Qc2 here, but I had been looking at some Spassky games just prior to this simul. I figured that an IM would know the main lines much better than I did. This 4.Bg5 is sharp active chess.] 4...h6 5.Bh4 c5 6.d5 [My last chance to back off from the aggressive play is with 6.e3=] 6...b5 [More popular is 6...d6 7.e3 Bxc3+ 8.bxc3 where White chooses between 8...e5 9.f3, 9.Qc2 or 9.Bd3] 7.e4!? [Here I sacrifice a pawn for development. More often White heads down this line 7.dxe6 fxe6 8.cxb5 d5 9.e3 0-0 10.Bd3 d4 11.exd4 cxd4 12.a3 Ba5 13.b4 dxc3 14.bxa5 Bb7 with roughly even chances, but I did not know any of this.] 7...g5 8.Bg3 Nxe4 9.Be5 [9.Qf3] 9...Rg8 [9...0-0] 10.Bd3 [10.Qf3] 10...Nxc3 11.bxc3 d6 12.cxb4 dxe5 13.dxe6 [13.Be4!+/- looks promising.] 13...Bb7 [13...Bxe6] 14.exf7+ [14.cxb5 fxe6=] 14...Kxf7 15.Qh5+ Ke7 16.Rd1 Qf8 [16...Qd4 17.Qh3+/=] 17.Nf3 [17.Qe2!+/- bringing the queen back where it is more useful.] 17...Nd7 18.0-0? [White turns a better game into a worse game by logically castling because it loses material to a pawn

fork tactic. 18.Nd2 Bxg2 19.Rg1 Bb7 20.Be4 Bxe4 21.Nxe4+/-] 18...Nf6 19.Qh3 g4 20.Qg3 gxf3 21.Qxe5+ Kf7 22.Bh7? [This does not help.] 22...Rxg2+ 23.Kh1 Re8 24.Qf5 Be4 25.Rd7+ Re7 26.Rxe7+ Qxe7 0-1

105 – Belavitch 4.Bg5 c5 5.d5 I enjoyed sharp openings that World Champion Boris Spassky played. One variation was 4.Bg5 vs the Nimzo-Indian Defence. When Bob Belavitch played the Nimzo-Indian against me in a 1981 APCT postal game, I saw it as a great chance to test 4.Bg5. But I misplayed it. After 4.Bg5 c5 5.d5 h6, White has a good game with 6.Bh4. I thought this would also be good with the inclusion of the moves 5...b5!? 6.e4 h6 7.Bh4. However here Black is better after 7...exd5 8.cxd5 g5. In this case White does better to play 7.Bxf6 Qxf6 8.Qf3. My game was still playable until I blundered on move 21. I had to dodge his threats and fight back. Finally I found a rook sacrifice combination. This put me up one passed rook pawn in a bishops of opposite color endgame. When I won a second pawn, Black resigned. Sawyer (2100) - Belavitch (1500), corr APCT 1981 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.Bg5 c5 5.d5 b5!? [5...h6 6.Bh4=] 6.e4 h6 7.Bh4 [7.Bxf6! Qxf6 8.Qf3=] 7...d6 [7...exd5 8.cxd5 g5 9.Bg3 Nxe4 10.Qc2 0-0=/+] 8.f3 00 9.Rc1 bxc4 [9...Re8=] 10.Bxc4 g5 11.Bg3 Bxc3+ 12.Rxc3 exd5 13.Bxd5 Nxd5 14.Qxd5 Qb6 15.Bxd6 [15.Rb3+/-] 15...Qxb2 16.Ne2 Ba6 17.Qd2? [17.Re3+/=] 17...Qxd2+ 18.Kxd2 Rd8 19.e5 Nd7 20.Ke3 Re8 21.Kf2? [White has better drawing chances after 21.Ra3 Bxe2 22.Kxe2 Nxe5 23.Bxe5 Rxe5+ 24.Re3 Rxe3+ 25.Kxe3 Re8+ 26.Kd3 Re6=/+] 21...Nxe5 22.Nc1 Rad8 23.Bxc5 Nc6 [Black is winning after 23...Rd2+! 24.Kg3 f5-+] 24.Be3 Rd6 25.Re1 Re7 26.a3 f5 27.f4 gxf4 28.Bxf4 Rxe1 29.Kxe1 Rg6 30.Kf2 Kf7 31.Nd3 Bb5 32.Rxc6 Rxc6 33.Ne5+ Ke7 34.Nxc6+ Bxc6 35.Bxh6 Ke6 36.g3 Bb5 37.Ke3 Kf7 38.Kd4 Ke7 39.Ke5 Bd3 40.Kd4 Bb1 41.a4 Be4 42.Ke5 Bd3 43.h4 a6 44.Bd2 Kd8 [44...Kf7 45.h5+/=] 45.Kf6 Kd7 46.h5 Bb1 47.h6 f4 48.Bxf4 1-0

106 – Haines 4.a3 Bxc3+ 5.bxc3 Ray Haines faced the reliable Nimzo-Indian Defence from Roger Hardison in a UMPI Open in Maine. Hardison had a bad day as far as results in this quad event. Roger played the opening well, but then his chances slide downhill as the ending approached. After 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Bb4 the classic battle was between the bishops and knights. White’s often plays 4.e3. Also popular, is 4.Qc2. The hasty 4.a3 doubling pawns is more rigid. Ray chose to force the issue with the Saemisch Variation 4.a3 Bxc3+ 5.bxc3. We got a game where White had two bishops vs Black's two knights. The bishops did not really do anything, and with good knights Black got a slight advantage. In the end, Ray Haines was able to get a superior pawn structure with a protected passed pawn on d5, although Hardison blockaded it with Nd6 in fine Nimzowitsch style. But Black was saddled with several weaknesses that hurt as time ran short. Haines - Hardison, UMPI Open, Round 3, 31.03.2012 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.a3 Bxc3+ 5.bxc3 0-0 [5...c5!?] 6.Qc2 [The sharpest way to play this line is 6.f3 d5 7.cxd5 exd5 8.e3 c5 9.Bd3 b6 10.Ne2 Ba6 11.0-0 Re8 12.Ng3 Bxd3 13.Qxd3] 6...b6 7.e4 d6 8.Bd3 Nc6 9.Nf3 e5 10.0-0 Bg4 11.dxe5 dxe5 12.Be2 Bxf3 13.Bxf3 Na5 14.Be2 c5 [I like Black's position after 14...Qd6 15.Be3 Qc6=/+] 15.Rd1 Qc7 16.Bg5 Qc6 17.Bxf6 Qxf6 18.Rd5 Qe7 19.Rad1 Rad8 20.Qa4 Qf6 21.Qb5 Rxd5 22.cxd5 Qd6 23.Qd3 Re8 24.c4 g6 25.Rf1 Kg7 26.g3 Nb7 27.f4 f6 28.Qf3 Qe7 29.f5 Nd6 [Black's knight does an excellent job blockading the dpawn. White has a space advantage.] 30.fxg6 hxg6 31.g4 Rf8 32.Bd3 Qd7 33.Qg3 Qe7 34.h4 Rf7 35.Rf2 Rf8 36.Rh2 Rf7 37.g5 f5? [This move invites problems. We can presume the players were running short of time. Better was 37...fxg5 38.hxg5 Rf4 39.Rg2 Nxe4 40.Bxe4 Rxe4 41.Qh3=] 38.exf5!? [White can force open the position with 38.h5! f4 39.Qh4 Kf8 40.hxg6 Rg7 41.Qh6 Ke8 42.Be2+-] 38...Nxf5 39.Bxf5 Rxf5 40.Rf2!?

Qd6? [Maybe Black can hold out longer with 40...Qf7 41.Kg2+/=] 41.Rxf5 gxf5 42.h5 f4? [Now White can reach a simple won ending quickly.] 43.Qd3 Qd7? 44.Qg6+ Kf8 45.Qf6+ Qf7? 46.d6 Ke8 47.Qxf7+ Kxf7 48.h6 1-0

107 – Hertan 5.bxc3 c5 6.f3 d5 Ray Haines sent a game against FM Charles Hertan. Hertan wrote the book "Forcing Chess Moves". Ray Haines wrote: “This game was played in Portland, Maine on April 3, 1982. James Quirk was the director. I showed up and asked to play in the open section of the tournament. He tried to talk me into playing in the lower section. I know that my rating at that time was only 1718, but I was only interested in playing in the open. I was White in the second round and paired with a player named Charles Hertan. His rating was 2356. The time control was 50 moves in 90 minutes. This was the first time I ever played anyone rated this high. I remember talking to James Quirk before the round and it was clear the he did not think I would last very long. I did use a lot of time and got in to time trouble move 20, but so was he. I missed some good moves which I would not miss now. I give up a pawn on move 18 because it gave me an open file for my rook against his king. I failed to open the game up with pawn moves. We both had about 10 minutes to play on the time control by move 26. I could have played e6 on move 28 and he would have had problems. We both had about 2 minutes on the clock to go by move 28. I started making mistakes in an equal game and got into a lost game, but lost on time anyway. I have not looked at this game for a long time, but I guess I play will enough to be encouraged by the way I played.” Charles Hertan played the Nimzo-Indian Defence. Haines held his own for a long time, but then Hertan got a big advantage. Haines – Hertan (2356), Portland, ME (2), 03.04.1982 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.a3 Bxc3+ 5.bxc3 c5 6.f3 [White is fighting for e4. Another approach is 6.e3] 6...d5 7.cxd5 exd5 [7...Nxd5 8.dxc5 Qa5 9.e4 is more common.] 8.e3 Bf5 9.Bd3 Bxd3 10.Qxd3 0-0 11.Ne2 Nc6 12.0-0 Re8 13.Ng3 Rc8 14.Bb2 Qb6 15.Rab1 c4 16.Qd2 Na5 17.Rbe1 h5 18.h4 [White is ready now to play 18.e4 ] 18...Qd6 [18...Nb3!?] 19.Nf5 Qe6 20.Qc2 [Still good is 20.e4+/=] 20...g6 21.Ng3 Nd7 22.e4 Qe7 23.Kf2 [23.exd5] 23...Qxh4 24.Rh1? [24.Bc1 activates the bishop] 24...Qf6 25.e5 Qb6 26.f4 Kf8 27.Kf3 Ke7 28.f5 Kd8 29.Bc1 Qb3 30.Bg5+ Kc7 31.Qd2

Kb8 32.Rb1 Qa4 33.Bf4 Ka8 34.Rb4 Qc6=/+ 35.Rhb1? Nb3 36.Qb2 a5 37.Rxb3 cxb3 38.Bd2? [38.Qxb3 Qxc3+ 39.Be3 Qxb3-/+] 38...a4 39.Rc1+ Nb6 0-1

108 – Vitiugov 4.Nf3 b6 5.Qc2 Each opening has a different strategy, but which opening is this? After 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 we have: 3.Nc3 Bb4 is a Nimzo-Indian. What about 4.Nf3 b6? 3.Nf3 b6 is a Queens Indian. What about 4.Nc3 Bb4? 3.Nf3 Bb4+ is a Bogo Indian. What about 4.Nc3 b6? Every line reaches the same position after 4 moves. Whatever you want to call the line, White outplayed his opponent in this game from the 69th Russian championship held at Novosibirsk, Russia in 2016. GM Nikita Vitiugov wrote two opening books on the French Defence: GM Dmitry Bocharov as Black won the 2015 Russian Blitz Championship. Black played move 30 and resigned. Black may have realized that he did not have enough for his sacrificed piece. Vitiugov (2721) - Bocharov (2611), 69th ch-RUS 2016 Novosibirsk RUS (8.2), 24.10.2016 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.Nf3 b6 5.Qc2 Bb7 6.a3 [6.e3 0-0=] 6...Bxc3+ [6...Bxf3?! 7.axb4 Bb7 8.b5+/=] 7.Qxc3 0-0 8.Bg5 [8.g3 d6 9.Bg2 Nbd7 10.0-0 Qe7=] 8...d6 [In the Nimzo-Indian Defence Black challenges Bg5 with 8...h6 9.Bh4 d6=] 9.Nd2 [The alternatives are 9.e3 or 9.g3] 9...c5 [9...Nbd7 10.f3 h6=] 10.dxc5 bxc5 [10...dxc5 11.e3=] 11.e3 [11.Bxf6 Qxf6 12.Qxf6 gxf6 13.b4=] 11...Nbd7 12.Bd3 h6 13.Bh4 a5 [13...Bxg2! 14.Rg1 Bc6=] 14.0-0 Qb6 [14...Ne5=] 15.Rfe1 d5!? [15...g5 or 15...a4] 16.cxd5 exd5 17.Rac1 Rac8 18.Bf5 Rc7? [18...g6 19.Bxf6 gxf5 20.Bh4+/=] 19.e4 Re8 [19...g6 20.Bh3+/-] 20.Bg3 Rcc8 21.e5 d4 22.Qb3 Qc6 23.Nf3 c4 24.Qd1 Qc5 25.Bh3 Bxf3 26.gxf3 Rcd8 27.exf6 Rxe1+ 28.Qxe1 Nxf6 29.Qe5 Nd5 30.Bf5 [30.b4!+-] 30...c3 1-0

109 – Dvirnyy 4.Qc2 0-0 5.Nf3 Nimzo-Indian Defence gives Black flexible pawn structure options. White chose 4.Qc2 and castled kingside with classical development. All seemed fine until Black noticed that the g2 pawn was temporarily overworked. Tactics ensued that led to a quick victory in the game Guiseppe Tencati vs Grandmaster Danyyil Dvirnyy. Tencati (2111) - Dvirnyy (2513), 10th Capo d'Orso Open Porto Mannu Palau ITA (6.5), 06.06.2018 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.Qc2 0-0 5.Nf3 d5 6.cxd5 exd5 7.Bg5 [7.Bf4=] 7...h6 8.Bxf6 Qxf6 9.e3 c6 10.Bd3 Bd6 11.h3 Re8 12.0-0? [12.a3=] 12...Bxh3 13.Ne5 Bxg2 14.Kxg2 Qg5+ 15.Kf3 Qh5+ 16.Kg2 Bxe5 17.dxe5 [17.Rh1 Qg4+ 18.Kf1 Qf3-+] 17...Qg4+ [After 17...Qg4+ 18.Kh1 Rxe5 19.f4 Rh5+ wins the queen.] 0-1

110 – Akobian 4.Qc2 d5 5.a3 Black's strategy against 1.d4 is to hinder White from playing e4. NimzoIndian Defence 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.Qc2 d5 stops e4 temporarily. White keeps looking for an opportunity to move ahead. Here battle continues in the game Varuzhan Akobian vs Musunuri Lalith Babu. White won quickly after 13.e4 and 14.e5. Akobian (2647) - Lalith (2542), PRO League Group Stage chess.com INT, 24.02.2018 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.Qc2 d5 5.a3 Bxc3+ 6.Qxc3 0-0 7.Nf3 dxc4 8.Qxc4 b6 9.h4 Ba6 10.Qc2 Bb7 11.h5 h6 12.Rh4 [12.Bf4=] 12...Nbd7 13.e4 c5 14.e5 Nd5?! [14...Ne8! 15.Rg4 f5 16.Rg6 cxd4 17.Qc4 Nc5 18.Nxd4 Ba6 19.Nb5 Bxb5 20.Qxb5 Qh4=/+] 15.Bxh6 Ne7? [15...Ne3 16.Bxe3 Bxf3 17.Rh1+/-] 16.Rg4 Nf5 17.Bxg7! [After 17.Bxg7 Bxf3 18.gxf3 Nxg7 19.h6+-] 1-0

111 – Nakamura 5.cxd5 exd5 Grandmasters rated in the upper 2700s do not lose quickly in the opening. Except when they do! This amazingly short Nimzo-Indian Defence victory was between two of the strongest players in the world. The winner is the noted American grandmaster Hikaru Nakamura. Playing Black was Veselin Topalov who is a former FIDE World Champion. He lost his title to Vladimir Kramnik. In this Nimzo-Indian Defence, Black played a good strong line until move ten. Then for some reason Topalov chose 10…Bf5? Black wiggles around a bit but to no avail. After White’s 14.Qxd5 the game was hopelessly lost. Black's Bb4, Ne4 and Rh8 were all undefended in a wide open position with the Black king in the center. White had multiple targets for double attacks or check and captures. Nakamura (2779) - Topalov (2760), Champions Showdown 60m Saint Louis USA (3.2), 11.11.2016 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.Qc2 d5 5.cxd5 exd5 6.Bg5 h6 7.Bh4 [7.Bxf6 Qxf6 8.a3 Bxc3+ 9.Qxc3 Bf5 10.e3 (Not 10.Qxc7 0-0 11.Qxb7 Nc6-+) 10...0-0 11.Ne2 c6=] 7...c5 8.dxc5 g5 9.Bg3 Ne4 10.e3 Bf5? [10...Qa5 11.Rc1 Qxa2 12.Bb5+ Bd7 13.Bxd7+ Nxd7 14.Nge2 Nxc3 15.Nxc3 Qc4 16.Rd1 Nxc5 17.Rd4=] 11.Bxb8! [This is an improvement on 11.Bd3 Qa5 12.Nge2 Nc6 13.0-0 Bxc3 (13...Qxc5 14.Bxe4 Bxe4 15.Qd2+/-) 14.bxc3 Qxc5 15.Rab1 and 1-0 in 42. Biriukov Shaidullina, St Petersburg RUS 2010] 11...Nxc3 [11...Bxc3+ 12.bxc3 Rxb8 13.Bd3 (13.f3!+-) 13...Be6 14.Bxe4 dxe4 15.Qxe4 and 1/2-1/2 in 38. Roussel Roozmon - Landa, Nancy FRA 2008; 11...0-0 12.Be5 Bxc3+ 13.Bxc3+-] 12.Qxf5 Ne4+ 13.Ke2 Qxb8 14.Qxd5 [White wins a piece.] 10

3.Nc3 Bb4 4.e3 Traditionally this has been the most popular line of the Nimzo-Indian Defence. White protects d4 and prepares development.

112 – Hurst 4.e3 Nc6 5.Nf3 d5 Do tactics favor the player with two bishops? Only if you attack quickly and keep your king defended. Nimzo-Indian Defence leaves White with two bishops. Brian Hurst obtained the two bishops as Black! The opening was fully playable from either side. After 20 moves the position was equal but then Ray Haines launched a kingside assault. Ray wrote: “Brian played to trade his knights for my bishops. The bishops are stronger in open games. The problem here is that he did not have anything to protect his kingside. I used Fritz11 to study the game. It rated the game as equal after I played 22.Nf6+. I was using a little more time than my opponent so I did move quickly. I did choose the wrong line after move 23. I had planned on playing 24.Qh4 and then playing 25.Qh5. This looked strong as it attacked the weak square on f7 with both the knight and Queen. I put this into my computer and it came out as a wrong move. The right idea was to play 24.Rd3. This would let my rook into the game.” Black's 26 move trapped his king in the corner. Ray Haines found a checkmate. Note that both players lost only one game in this event and raised their ratings. Haines - Hurst, Houlton, ME (1), 22.08.2015 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.e3 e6 3.Nf3 Nc6 4.c4 Bb4+ 5.Nc3 [5.Bd2!?] 5...d5 6.Qc2 dxc4 7.Bxc4 Nd5 8.0-0 0-0 9.e4 [Or 9.Ne2+/= ] 9...Nb6 10.Qd3 Nxc4 11.Qxc4 Be7 12.Be3 Na5 13.Qa4 c6 14.Rfd1 b5 15.Qc2 Nc4 16.Qe2 [16.Bf4+/=] 16...Nxe3 17.Qxe3 Qb6 18.Rac1 Bb7 19.Qf4 Rad8 20.e5 c5! 21.Ne4 cxd4 22.Nf6+ Kh8 [The most accurate defense is 22...Bxf6 23.exf6 e5 24.Nxe5 Qxf6 25.Qxf6 gxf6=] 23.Ng5 h6 24.Qh4? [Haines points out that 24.Rd3!+- is the best way to play for an advantage.] 24...Bxf6 [Black wins a piece after 24...d3! 25.Qh5 Bxf6 26.exf6 Rd5 27.Nxf7+ Kh7 28.fxg7 Kxg7 29.Qxh6+ Kxf7-+

when White does not have enough compensation.] 25.exf6 Rd5 26.Ne4 Rg8? [26...Rf5!] 27.Rd3 e5 28.Rh3 Rdd8 29.Qxh6+ 1-0

113 – Hardison 4.e3 b6 5.Nge2 Roger Hardison with the lowest ranking and least score gained the most rating points with his bold victory over first place winner Ray Haines in the recent Houlton, Maine chess tournament. In a Nimzo-Indian Defence, the Black king marched his way up the board like Darth Vader in Star Wars. You can almost hear the king breathing through his helmet as he makes his final decisive move to 41...Kh3! and White resigns. Even though this was his only win Roger Hardison gained 22 rating points in the event. The flexible opening 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 allows both sides multiple options. White can pick from 3.Nc3, 3.Nf3 or 3.g3. Black can respond 3...Bb4, 3...b6 or 3...d5. All have been played for about 100 years. The NimzoIndian with 3.Nc3 Bb4 was popular for 50 years. Then the Queen's Indian 3.Nf3 b6 became popular for 25 years. The Catalan Opening with 3.g3 d5 gained in popularity. Nimzo-Indian Defence often leads to an Isolated Queen Pawn position where White has a d4 pawn but no remaining c-pawn or e-pawn. This position requires energetic attacking play by White and solid accurate defence by Black. Here Black got the initiative very early and White's attack never got off the ground. Haines - Hardison, Houlton, ME (3), 24.01.2015 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.e3 b6 [The main line revolves around d4 after 4...0-0 5.Bd3 d5 6.Nf3 c5 7.0-0 Nc6 8.a3 Bxc3 9.bxc3 dxc4 10.Bxc4 Qc7 11.Bd3 e5 12.Qc2 Re8=] 5.Nge2 [Stockfish likes this, but Houdini and Rybka prefer 5.Bd3 Bb7 6.Nf3=] 5...Ba6 6.a3 Bxc3+ 7.Nxc3 d5 8.b3 0-0 9.Bd3 [9.Be2! Nc6 10.a4 dxc4 11.bxc4 Na5 12.Ba3 Re8 13.Nb5=] 9...dxc4 10.bxc4 Nc6 11.Rb1 Na5 12.Qe2 c5 13.Bb2 [13.dxc5=] 13...cxd4 14.exd4 Rc8 15.0-0 [15.Nb5! Bxb5 16.cxb5 Nd5=/+] 15...Bxc4 16.Rfd1 Bxd3 17.Qxd3 Nc4 18.a4 Nxb2 19.Rxb2 Nd5 20.Ne4 h6 21.a5 Qc7 22.axb6 axb6 23.Rdb1 Rfd8 24.h3 Qc4 25.Qd2 f5 26.Ng3 Nc3 27.Re1 Rxd4 28.Qc1 Rc6 [28...f4! 29.Nh5 Ne2+ 30.Rbxe2 Qxc1-+ wins the Exchange.] 29.Qa1 Na4 30.Rbe2 b5 31.Re5 [White is down only one pawn after 31.Rxe6 Rxe6 32.Rxe6 Qxe6 33.Qxd4] 31...g6 32.Qa3 Qb4 33.Qa1 Kf7 34.Rb1 [White is down

only one pawn after 34.Rxb5 Qc3=/+] 34...Qd6 35.Rexb5 Nc3 36.Rb7+ Kf6 37.Qb2 Nxb1 38.Ne2 Rc1+ 39.Nxc1 Kg5 40.h4+ Kxh4 [40...Rxh4!+] 41.g3+ Kh3 [It's a beautiful thing to attack with the king.] 0-1

114 – Onischuk 4.e3 c5 5.Nge2 Anthony Saidy responded to one of my weekly Chess Training Repertoires. I edit his comments slightly: "Thank you. 5.Nge2 (I always so wrote it, the 5.Ne2 would suffice) was my specialty. If you have computer analysis of a game Onischuk-Browne, with c5 by White and ....e5 by Black, please send it. Of great theoretical importance, IMHO." - Saidy IM This game Alexander Onischuk and Walter Browne reminds me of the Caro-Kann Defence Panov line where play continues 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 cxd5 4.c4 Nf6 5.c5 e5. The Panov and Nimzo have various lines that transpose exactly but this one does not. Onischuk (2667) - Browne (2447), Continental Open Las Vegas USA (2), 27.07.2001 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.e3 c5 5.Nge2 cxd4 6.exd4 d5 7.c5 e5 8.dxe5 [8.a3 Bxc3+ 9.Nxc3 exd4 10.Qxd4 Nc6 11.Bb5 0-0 12.Bxc6 bxc6 13.0-0 Re8=] 8...Ng4 9.Nd4 [9.Nf4!? Bxc5 10.Nd3 Bd4 11.Bf4 f6 12.h3 Nxe5 13.Nxe5 fxe5 14.Bxe5 Bxc3+ 15.Bxc3 0-0 16.Qd4+/=] 9...0-0 10.e6 Nf6 11.exf7+ Rxf7 12.Be2 Ne4 13.0-0 Bxc3 14.bxc3 Nxc3 15.Qd2 Nxe2+ 16.Nxe2 Nc6 17.Bb2 b6 18.Rac1 Ba6 19.Rfe1 Bc4 20.Nd4 Nxd4 21.Bxd4 bxc5 22.Bxc5 Qd7 23.a3 Re8 24.Rxe8+ Qxe8 25.Re1 Qd7 26.Qb4 h6 27.Qb8+ Kh7 28.Re8 Qg4 29.Qb1+ Qf5 30.Qxf5+ Rxf5 31.Bxa7 d4 32.Bxd4 Rd5 33.Bc3 Rd3 34.Bb4 Rd1+ 35.Be1 Ra1 36.Re3 Bb3 37.h3 Rxa3 38.Kh2 Ra1 39.Bc3 Ra2 40.Re7 Kg8 41.Rxg7+ Kf8 42.Rg3 Bd5 43.Bd4 Ra6 44.Rd3 Kf7 45.g4 h5 46.Kg3 hxg4 47.hxg4 Kg6 48.f4 Be4 49.Re3 Re6 50.Be5 Bc2 51.Rc3 Be4 52.Rc7 Bb1 53.Kh4 Kh6 54.Bc3 [54.f5!+-] 54...Re2 55.f5 Rh2+ 56.Kg3 Ra2 57.Bf6 Ra3+ 58.Kh4 1-0

115 – Fawbush 4.e3 0-0 5.Nge2 During my 20 years of postal chess, I played opponents from 30 countries and from all 50 states in America. Half came from the same group of about 100 very active correspondence masters and experts. It was a small world. Often we played 20-40 games at a time. So we kept in touch with each other on about a weekly basis just by playing. Invariably we would get paired in a new game against some players we were already playing. That's what happened when I got paired vs George E. Fawbush of Missouri in 1982. Fawbush was the first player of three to be awarded a Life Master Certificate by APCT. Fawbush was a fascinating character who played a wide variety of openings. We played nine times from 1977-1993 breaking even in our results. This was our fourth game. The third game was a King's Indian Defense already in progress. I was Black in both. I chose the Nimzo-Indian Defence just for something different. I won both. Helen Warren held an APCT "Game of the Year Award" contest inviting players to submit their best game finished over a 12-month period. In 1983 the grandmaster selecting the winners was Arthur Bisguier. He would see the games without knowing who the players were. This game was chosen as the second best game of the year. My comment in the APCT News Bulletin read: “Winning against Fawbush is always something special. You know you're winning from one of the very best competitors.” Bisguier wrote, “Simple, accurate and elegant--greed punished, virtue rewarded. After 14...c5 Black already stood well and it is doubtful if White can hold after the avaricious 16.Nxd5 which was consistent with 15.dxc5 (15.bxc6 was preferable.) Though 20.Be4 doesn't work, there was no good defense to the KP. 20.Re1 is met by 20...Qh4+ and 20.f4 by 20...Qxf4+.” Fawbush (2200) - Sawyer (2182), corr APCT 81RT-3 1981 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.e3 0-0 5.Nge2 d5 6.a3 Be7 7.cxd5 Nxd5 8.Qc2 Nd7 9.b4 a5 10.Nxd5 exd5 11.b5 Bd6 12.Nc3 Nf6 13.Bd3 Bd7 14.f3 c5

15.dxc5 Bxc5 16.Nxd5 Rc8 17.Nxf6+ Qxf6 18.Qb1 Qg5 19.Kf2 Rfe8 20.Be4 f5 21.Qb3+ Kh8 22.Bb1 f4 23.Be4 fxe3+ 24.Bxe3 Rxe4 25.fxe4 Bxe3+ 26.Qxe3 Rc2+ 27.Qe2 Qc5+ 0-1

116 - Dempler 5.Bd3 c5 6.Nf3 William Dempler of Pittsburgh played the Nimzo-Indian Defence. He was my fourth round opponent in Allentown, Pennsylvania. Dempler was an expert at the moment we played. Sometimes he was rated over 2200 as a USCF master. The Nimzo-Indian after 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.e3 allows for flexibility in how Black chooses to place his central pawns. The classical approach is to play ...d5 with a central pawn structure of e6, d5, c5, which I had played as Black vs George Fawbush that same year. Here Black chose the hypermodern approach. He placed his pawns on the dark squares e5, d6, and c5. Black exchanged his dark squared bishop on c3 before it became a bad bishop. Then Black doubled my c-pawns and left me with a bad bishop on d3 that passively protected my blocked pawns on c4 and e4. Dempler worked up a kingside attack. Lesson: Attacking wins! This event included Sergey Kudrin and Dmitri Gurevich, two grandmasters who had just arrived from Russia. They would face each other many times over 20 years. As I recall Kudrin was slightly higher rated but I think Gurevich won this tournament. The experience of watching more skilled players improved my play. This helped me raise my rating. Sawyer - Dempler (2095), Allentown, PA (4), 14.06.1981 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.e3 0-0 5.Bd3 c5 6.Nf3 Nc6 7.0-0 Bxc3 8.bxc3 d6 9.e4 e5 10.d5 Ne7 11.Nh4 h6 12.f4 Bg4 [12...Ng6 13.Nxg6 fxg6 14.fxe5 dxe5] 13.Qe1 Ng6 14.Nxg6 fxg6 15.fxe5 dxe5 16.h3 Bd7 17.Qg3 Qe8 18.Bd2 g5 19.Kh2 [19.Rf2!?=] 19...Qe7 20.Qe3 b6 21.Be2 Qf7 22.Rf2 Qg6 23.Raf1 g4 24.h4? [White can hold everything with 24.Bd3=] 24...g3+ 25.Qxg3 Qxg3+ 26.Kxg3 Nxe4+ 0-1

117 – Paehtz 5.Bd3 d5 6.a3 Black wins a short Nimzo-Indian Defence which employs tactical threats to carry out strategical goals with endgame dreams. White got loose and dropped a piece in the opening of Elisabeth Paehtz vs Tan Zhongyi, the Women's World Champion. Paehtz (2464) - Tan Zhongyi (2517), 2nd IMSA Rapid w 2017 Huai'an CHN, 10.12.2017 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.e3 0-0 5.Bd3 d5 6.a3 Bxc3+ 7.bxc3 dxc4 8.Bxc4 c5 9.Nf3 Qc7 10.Bd3? [10.Be2=] 10...cxd4 11.cxd4? [It would be better to just sacrifice two pawns with 11.0-0 dxc3-/+] 11...Qc3+! 12.Qd2 [12.Bd2 Qxd3-+] 12...Qxa1 13.0-0 b6 14.Ne5 Ba6 15.Qc2 Rc8 0-1

118 – Warren 5.Nf3 d5 6.Bd3 c5 I love to find winning moves! What happens when I don't find them? Ugh!! How many times have I missed the winning move vs a higher rated player? When John G. Warren played a Nimzo-Indian Defence against me, I chose the popular 4.e3. White's position is solid and flexible. Alas, I missed a winning move 21 and a good move 22. After that, I was slowly and gradually outplayed. As I recall John Warren often had a master rating, but there was a brief time when our ratings were close. Sawyer (2100) - Warren (2101), corr APCT 1981 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.e3 0-0 5.Nf3 d5 6.Bd3 c5 7.0-0 Nc6 8.a3 Ba5 [8...Bxc3 9.bxc3=] 9.cxd5 exd5 10.dxc5 Bxc3 11.bxc3 Qa5!? [11...Bg4 12.c4 Ne5 13.cxd5 Bxf3 14.gxf3 Nxd5=] 12.Qc2 Qxc5 13.a4 Re8 14.Ba3 Qb6 15.c4 dxc4 16.Bxc4 Ne5 17.Nxe5 Rxe5 18.Rab1 Qc7 19.Rfd1 Bf5 20.Qb3 Re4? 21.Bd3?! [Up to this point, I have played well. But here I missed the winning move 21.Rbc1!+-] 21...Be6 22.Qc2?! [22.Qxb7+/-] 22...Qxc2 23.Bxc2 Rc4 24.Bb3 Rc3 25.Bxe6 Rxa3 26.Bb3 Kf8 27.Kf1 b6 28.Rdc1 Ne4 29.Ke1? [29.Bd5 Nd2+ 30.Ke2 Rd8 31.Rb5 a6 32.Rxb6 Rxd5 33.Rc8+ Ke7 34.Rc7+ Rd7 35.Rxd7+ Kxd7 36.Kxd2=] 29...Nc5 30.Bc2

Nxa4 31.Bxa4 Rxa4 32.Rb5 Rd8 33.Rc7 Ra1+ 34.Ke2 Ra2+ 35.Kf3? [35.Ke1 g6=/+] 35...Rdd2 36.Re5 Rxf2+ 37.Ke4 g6 38.Ree7 a5 39.Ra7 Rf6 40.Reb7 Rxg2 0-1

119 – O’Hearn 7.0-0 Nc6 8.a3 I played relatively few Nimzo-Indian Defence games. Partly it was because I played 1.e4 and moves other than 1.d4. Partly it was because I played 3.Nf3 and 3.g3. Partly it was because I played the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit after 1.d4 Nf6 with either 2.Nc3 or 2.f3. In an APCT postal game vs Jim O'Hearn, I played it straight with 1.d4, 2.c4, 3.Nc3. Jim stops my threatened 4.e4 with the Nimzo-Indian Defence 3...Bb4 pin. In 1978 I reexamined the games of the World Champion Anatoly Karpov. The Nimzo-Indian Defence games from his 1974 match with Polugaevsky had an impact on me. I tried to follow suit. In the notes is a short draw I had vs Leo Dobitsch in Levittown, PA. As I recall, this was a Saturday night game. I was tired and wanted to go home and get rest. When I arrived for the event the next day, Leo Dobitsch told me his coach Bruce Albertson had admonished him not to take short draws because he would not learn anything from those games. After that, I myself followed the chess master's advice in my tournament play for many years. In fact, I have heard other masters give the same advice many times. Keep playing! Below Jim O'Hearn boldly attacked my king. The game ended suddenly when my queen retreat trapped his knight. Sawyer - O'Hearn (1822), corr APCT 78CC-A-3, 05.1978 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.e3 0-0 5.Bd3 c5 6.Nf3 d5 7.0-0 Nc6 8.a3 Bxc3 9.bxc3 dxc4 10.Bxc4 Qc7 11.Bd3 [11.Qc2 1/2-1/2 Sawyer - Dobitsch, Levittown 1981] 11...e5 12.Qc2 Bg4 13.dxe5 Nxe5 14.Nxe5 Qxe5 15.f3

Bd7 16.a4 b6 17.Re1 Rfe8 18.e4 Nd5 19.Bd2 Nf4 20.g3 Nh3+ 21.Kg2 Qh5 22.Bb5 Re7 23.Qd3 Be6 24.Qd6 Kf8 25.g4 Qh4 26.Qg3 1-0

Book 7: Chapter 6 – King’s Indian 3.g3 and others We begin with consider unusual lines without an early Nc3.

120 – Goldbeck 3.f3 c5 4.d5 e6 Enterprising players aim for a full center as White with d4 and e4 pawns. Kings Indian or Benoni Defence players counter this strategy. Here White avoids Nb1-Nc3 in favor of Ng1-Ne2-Nec3. Lars Goldbeck played 1.d4 and forced e4 with 3.f3. Then Boris Chatalbashev attacked with 3...c5 and 10...f5 and outplayed White. Goldbeck (2247) - Chatalbashev (2561), 1st Bamberg Open GER, 12.05.2018 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.f3 c5 4.d5 e6 5.e4 exd5 6.cxd5 d6 7.Ne2 Bg7 8.Nec3 a6 9.a4 Nh5 10.Be3 f5 11.Nd2 0-0 12.Bd3 Nd7 13.exf5 [13.0-0=] 13...Re8 14.Kf2 [Or 14.Nde4 gxf5-+. Instead Black breaks through with the crushing move...] 14...Rxe3 15.Kxe3 Bd4+ 16.Ke2 Nf4+ 17.Kf1 Nxd3 0-1

121 – Murray 3.Nf3 Bg7 4.e3 0-0 Throughout most of the 1990s, I spent most Tuesday nights playing chess vs my Irish friend Pat Murray. We had a lot in common and spent a lot of time together. Pat Murray was his own thinker with his favorite set-ups for both White and Black. Here he places his dark squared bishop to 6.Bc3 vs my King's Indian Defence. With the center closed, players can play of the flanks. White makes some progress on the queenside, but I end up getting the better of a kingside attack. Murray - Sawyer, Williamsport, PA 1994 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nf3 Bg7 4.e3 0-0 5.Bd2!? [5.Nc3 d6=] 5...d6 6.Bc3 Ne4 7.Nbd2 Nxc3 8.bxc3 c5 9.Qc2 Nc6 10.Be2 e5 11.d5 Ne7 12.0-0 h6 13.Bd3 f5 14.e4 f4 15.Qb3 g5 16.g3 [16.h3!?] 16...Ng6 17.Rab1 Qf6 18.Qd1 [18.Kh1 h5=/+] 18...Bh3 19.Rxb7 g4 20.Qa4 [20.Ne1 Bxf1 21.Nxf1 fxg3 22.fxg3 Qf2+ 23.Kh1

Rab8 24.Rb3 h5-/+] 20...gxf3 21.Nxf3? fxg3 22.fxg3 Bxf1 23.Qd7 Bxd3 01

122 – Lampkin 4.Nc3 d6 5.Bf4 I visited New Orleans, Louisiana more than 100 years after Paul Morphy and Armand Blackmar roamed those streets. On a quiet weekday afternoon I played a five minute blitz game play vs Ted Lampkin at his Chess Connection store in a mall setting. Lampkin - Sawyer, New Orleans, Louisiana, 12.11.1999 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3 g6 3.c4 Bg7 4.Nc3 d6 5.Bf4 [This is an unusual move with White's pawn on c4. It does not pressure Black much, but it’s not bad.] 5...0-0 [5...Nh5! to eliminate the bishop was the move recommended by John Watson in “The Unconventional King's Indian.” I had bought that book, along with two others on the King's Indian, at Borders in Knoxville, Tennessee four days earlier on my trip to New Orleans. I had spent the four previous days writing on the Grob rather than learning the King's Indian.] 6.e3 Nbd7 7.Bd3 c6 [This leaves me weak on d6, but I wasn't thinking about that just yet.] 8.0-0 Qe8 [Black plans to push the king pawn to e5 and then e4.] 9.b3 e5 10.Bg3 e4?! [10...Nh5=] 11.Bxd6 [Whoops. I had not thought about this move. Oh well, I cannot stop him from taking my rook or my two pawns, so I will get two pieces for them.] 11...exd3 12.Bxf8 Qxf8 13.Qxd3 Qb4 [Gone fishing.] 14.Rac1 Nf8 15.Na4 Bf5 16.Qd1 Ne4 17.Ne5 [It is tempting to take on e5, but I could not develop my rook to the natural d-file.] 17...Rd8 [Pinning the d-pawn, I threaten to simply win the knight on e5.] 18.Nc5? [He offers me both knights!] 18...Nxc5 19.Qf3 Bxe5 20.dxe5 Ne4 [20...Rd2 would have been very strong.] 21.Qf4 Ne6 22.Qh6 Qf8 23.Qxf8+ Kxf8 [Recapturing with the knight was better.] 24.f3 N4c5 25.e4 Bxe4? [Better would have been to play a knight to either f4 or d4 to fork a rook leaving me up a knight, or to allow my bishop to escape, leaving me up three pieces for a rook.] 26.fxe4 Nxe4 [Ted got a phone call. We stopped the clock for several minutes. I looked at his books for sale.] 27.Rce1 N4c5 28.b4 Na6 [28...Nd3 threatens to win a pawn.] 29.a3 Rd2 30.Rf6 Ke7 31.Ref1 Nd8 32.e6! [Excellent choice! Now his rooks will have play.] 32...fxe6 33.Rf8 Nc7 34.Rh8 h5 35.Rff8 Rd1+ 36.Kf2 Rd2+ 37.Ke3 Rd1 38.Rfg8 e5 [38...Nf7! 39.Rh7 Kf6 40.Rf8 Rd7-+ and Black is winning.] 39.Rg7+ Kf6?? [I blunder in his time trouble. 39...Nf7! 40.Rxf7+ Kxf7 41.Rh7+ Ke6 42.Rxc7 Rd7-/+] 40.Rxc7 Ne6 41.Rxb7 Rg1 42.g3

Rg2 43.Rxa7 Rxh2 44.b5 cxb5 45.cxb5 Rg2 46.b6 Rxg3+ 47.Kf2 Rb3 48.Rb8 Rb2+ [49.b7 Rxf2 0-1. My rook took his king. Game over.] 0-1.

123 – Eldman 4.b3 0-0 5.Bb2 This taught me a lesson. As I grew older, I discovered passive play fails to improve tactics. Without tactical skills you can never be a strong chess player. King's Indian pawns e4/d5 vs e5/d6 give both sides pawn breaks to make progress. My passive played failed my pawns. They all ended up on dark squares when I had my bad dark squared bishop. White used to the hole on f5 to great success with his knight, queen and king. Black was busy trying to watch h6, f6, and d6. Eldman (2003) - Sawyer (2000), corr APCT 1979 begins 1.Nf3 Nf6 2.b3 g6 3.Bb2 Bg7 4.c4 0-0 5.g3 d6 6.d4 Nbd7 7.Nc3 c6 8.Bg2 e5 [8...Rb8!?=] 9.e4 a5 10.0-0 Re8 11.Re1 [11.dxe5 dxe5 12.Qe1=] 11...Qc7 12.d5 c5 13.Nb5 Qb6 14.h3 Nb8 15.a4 Na6 16.Kh2 Nc7 17.Bc1 Nxb5 18.axb5 Bd7 19.Ra2 Qc7 20.Ng1 Rf8 21.f4 Rae8 22.fxe5 dxe5 23.Rf2 Qd6 24.Bd2 b6 25.Qc1 Bc8 [25...Nh5 26.Ne2 f5=] 26.Ref1 Nd7 27.Ne2 f6 28.Kh1 Rf7 29.g4 Kf8 [29...Nf8 30.Ng3+/=] 30.Ng3 Ke7 31.g5 Kd8 32.h4 Kc7 33.Qd1 Bf8 34.Bh3 Be7 35.Be6 Rff8 36.gxf6 [36.Ne2+/-] 36...Rxf6 37.Rxf6 Nxf6 38.Bxc8 Rxc8 39.Bg5 Rf8 40.Kg2 Nd7 41.Rxf8 Bxf8 42.Qf3 h6 43.Bd2 Qf6 44.h5 g5 45.Nf5 Bd6 46.Kf2 Bf8 47.Ke2 Bd6 48.Qh3 Bf8 49.Ng3 Bd6 50.Qf5 Qxf5 51.Nxf5 Nf6 [51...Bf8 52.Bc3+/-] 52.Ng3 [52.Nxh6+-] 52...Kd7 53.Bc3 Ng8 54.Ke3 Ne7 55.Kf3 Ke8 56.Kg4 Ng8 57.Kf5 Kf7 58.Kg4 Nf6+ 59.Kf3 Nd7 60.Kg4 Nf6+ 61.Kf5 Ng8 62.Nf1 Ne7+ [62...Bb8 63.Ne3+/-] 63.Kg4 Ng8 64.Ne3 Nf6+ 65.Kf5 Nxh5 66.Bxe5 Bxe5 67.Kxe5 Nf6 68.Kf5 a4 69.bxa4 1-0

124 – bjerky 3.g3 Bg7 4.Bg2 0-0 We know that bishops love open diagonals. In this game both players fianchetto kingside on the long diagonal. Black’s dark squared bishop in the King's Indian Defence can get buried after pawns are played to squares such as d6, e5 and h6. In theory he will activate the bishop later, maybe along the d8-h4 diagonal. In practice he might remain closed in. I played the 3.g3 variation of the KID in an Internet Chess Club blitz game against “bjerky”. I got a position with a good knight vs a Black's bad bishop. It was a lengthy 78 moves for a three minute King's Indian Defence blitz game. Eventually Black got tangled up and lost material, probably when short of time. Sawyer - bjerky, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 30.11.2012 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.g3 Bg7 4.Bg2 0-0 5.Nf3 [Avrukh gives the move order 5.Nc3 d6 6.Nf3] 5...d6 6.0-0 h6 7.Nc3 Nc6 8.h3 [Or 8.Re1 but in any case, the position stays roughly even until the endgame.] 8...e5 9.d5 Ne7 10.e4 Nd7 11.Re1 f5 12.Be3 b6 13.Qd2 Kh7 14.Rad1 fxe4 15.Nxe4 Nf5 16.g4 Nxe3 17.fxe3 Nf6 18.Nxf6+ Qxf6 19.Rf1 Qe7 20.Qe2 a5 21.Nd2 Bd7 22.Be4 Rxf1+ 23.Rxf1 Rf8 24.Rxf8 Qxf8 25.Qf1 Qxf1+ 26.Kxf1 Be8 27.b3 Kg8 28.Kg2 Kf7 29.Kg3 Kf6 30.Nf3 g5 31.Bf5 Bg6 32.e4 Bxf5 33.gxf5 h5 34.Ne1 Bh6 35.Nc2 Bf8 36.Na3 Be7 37.Nb5 Bd8 38.Na7 Kf7 39.Nc6 Ke8 40.a3 Kd7 41.b4 axb4 42.axb4 Bf6 43.Nb8+ Kc8 44.Na6 Kb7 45.b5 Kc8 46.Nb4 Kd7 47.Nc6 Bg7 48.Nb8+ Kc8 49.Na6 Bh6 50.Nb4 Kd7 51.Nd3 Ke7 52.Kf3 Kf6 [White has a knight vs a bad bishop in a closed position. Better is 52...Bf8 53.Nb4+/= and Black should be able to defend a passive position.] 53.Nb4 [Here White has 53.c5! dxc5 54.Nxc5 bxc5? 55.d6+-] 53...Bf8? 54.Na6 Ke7 55.Nxc7 Kd7 56.Na8 Kc8 57.Nxb6+ Kc7 58.Na4 Kb7 59.Kg3 [During the game I never considered 59.f6!+-] 59...Be7 60.Kf3 Bf6 61.Ke3 [61.c5!+-] 61...g4 62.hxg4 hxg4 63.c5 dxc5 64.Nxc5+

Kc7 65.Ne6+ Kb6 66.d6 Kb7 67.d7 Kb6 68.d8Q+ Bxd8 69.Nxd8 Kxb5 70.Kf2 Kc5 71.Kg3 Kd4 72.Kxg4 Kxe4 73.f6 Kd5 74.f7 e4 75.f8Q e3 76.Qe7 Kd4 77.Kf3 e2 78.Qxe2 Black resigns 1-0

125 – Sawyer 5.Nc3 d6 6.Nf3 c5 The nature of the King's Indian Defence is to give White a huge space advantage. Then Black attacks White's d4 pawn with ...e5 or ...c5. In this game I simply tried to keep the edge of 4 files vs 3 files with White's 5th rank being pretty much unoccupied. Black missed some chances to equalize. I got my king to the center quickly in this blitz game. Black got into time trouble and then lost the endgame. Black resigned in the face of mate in one. Sawyer - MestreCapivara, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 11.10.2012 begins 1.d4 g6 2.c4 Bg7 3.Nc3 c5 4.Nf3 d6 5.g3 Nf6 6.Bg2 0-0 7.0-0 Na6 8.Bg5!? [8.d5 Nc7 9.a4 Rb8 10.e4+/=] 8...h6 9.Bf4? Nc7? [9...cxd4! 10.Nxd4 e5-/+] 10.Rc1 Ne6 [10...cxd4-/+] 11.Be3 cxd4 12.Nxd4 Nxd4 13.Bxd4 Rb8 14.Nd5 [I gave a glance to 14.Bxa7!+/- which wins a pawn.] 14...Nxd5 15.Bxd5 [15.cxd5+/=] 15...b6 16.Bxg7 Kxg7 17.f4 Bb7 18.Bxb7 Rxb7 19.Qd4+ Kh7 20.Rfd1 [20.f5+/=] 20...Qc7 21.e4 Qc5 22.b3 Qxd4+ 23.Rxd4 Kg7 24.Rcd1 Rc8 25.Kf2 Rbc7 [My idea was to get my king to the center to use my space advantage to win the endgame as my opponent begins to get into time trouble. However, here Black had a good counterattack with 25...b5!=] 26.Ke3 h5 27.h4 Kf6 28.Rd5 Rc5 29.Rxc5 Rxc5 30.Rd5 Rxd5 31.cxd5 e6 32.Kd4 Ke7 33.e5 Kd7 34.a4 a6 35.b4 Ke7 36.Ke4 Kd7 37.Kd4 Ke7 38.a5 b5 39.exd6+ Kxd6 40.dxe6 fxe6 41.Ke4 Kd7 42.Ke5 Ke7 43.Ke4 Kd6 44.Kd4 Ke7? [Repeating move in time trouble Black gets crossed up. Drawing would be 44...Kd7 45.Ke3 Kd6 46.Kd4= and we are back to the same position.] 45.Kc5 e5?! [This is just a faster way to lose. White also wins after 45...Kf6 46.Kb6+-] 46.fxe5 Ke6 47.Kd4 Kf5 48.Kd5 Kg4 49.e6 Kxg3 50.e7 Kxh4 51.e8Q g5 52.Qe1+ Kh3 53.Qh1+ Kg4 54.Qg2+ Kh4 55.Ke4 g4 56.Kf4 1-0

126 – Commons 6.Nf3 Nc6 7.0-0 a6 8.Qd3 All 1.d4 players have to find a line to play vs the King's Indian Defence. Back in the early 1970s Kim Commons played with success a favorite move 8.Qd3!? If memory serves me correct, he wrote an article on it for Chess Life & Review (later known as just Chess Life). My mind went back to that move when I read that Commons had passed away. The Panno Variation 6...Nc6 and 7...a6 is a popular continuation against the 3.g3 fianchetto variation. White connects the rooks, protects c4/d4 and prepares e4 with 8.Qd3!? The queen can be attacked on the d3 square by either ...Nb4 or ...Bf5. The downside is that each of those Black moves wastes a tempo. The move does not threaten to win material immediately nor checkmate quickly. What White gains is the significant flexibility provided by the move 8.Qd3!? Helmuth Weichert employed the King's Indian Defence. Kim Commons expanded in the center and on the queenside. Then White mounted a winning attack on the kingside. Commons - Weichert, Graz tt final (8), 1972 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.g3 Bg7 4.Bg2 d6 5.Nf3 0-0 6.0-0 Nc6 7.Nc3 a6 8.Qd3!? [Stockfish and Komodo both like this move.] 8...Bf5 [8...Bd7 9.d5 (9.e4) 9...Nb4 10.Qd1 a5 11.Nd4= and 1-0 in 48. Commons-Hay, Lone Pine 1972; 8...e5 9.d5 Ne7 (9...Nb4 10.Qd1=) 10.e4+/= but the game ended 0-1 in 43. CommonsSokolowski, Ventura 1971] 9.e4 Bg4 10.Be3 Nd7 11.Ne1 Nf6 [11...Nb4!?] 12.h3 Bd7 13.d5 [13.f4+/=] 13...Nb4?! [13...Ne5=] 14.Qd2 a5 15.a3 Na6 16.Nd3 e5 17.b4 Nh5 18.b5 Nb8 19.c5 dxc5 20.Bxc5 [Or 20.Nxc5+/-] 20...Re8 21.Rfd1 f5 [21...Nf6 22.Be3+/-] 22.a4 Qf6 [22...f4 23.g4+/-] 23.Rac1 f4 24.g4 f3 25.Bh1 Nf4 26.Nxf4 exf4 27.Bxf3 Qh4 28.Kg2 h5 29.Qxf4 Be5 [29...hxg4 30.Bxg4 Bxg4 31.Qxg4 Qxg4+ 32.hxg4+-] 30.Qh6

Qf6 31.Ne2 b6 32.Bd4 Rf8 33.Qe3 Bxd4 34.Nxd4 Qe5 35.Ne6 Bxe6 36.dxe6 Rf6 37.Qh6 1-0

127 – Koopmans 6.Bg2 Nbd7 Bruce Koopmans and I played a King's Indian Defence in an APCT postal game in 1981. White fought for control of d5. Chances were roughly equal in that game and we drew. I got a win later in a related line vs Arno Apel in a short ICCF postal chess game when my opponent stopped playing. Sawyer (2100) - Koopmans (2067), corr APCT 1981 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.g3 Bg7 4.Bg2 0-0 5.Nf3 d6 6.Nc3 Nbd7 [6...c5 7.0-0 Nc6 8.dxc5 dxc5 9.Bf4 Nh5 10.Be3 Nd4 11.Qd2 Bg4 12.Rfd1 Bxf3 13.Bxf3 Nxf3+ 14.exf3 Qxd2 15.Rxd2 Bxc3 16.bxc3 b6= 0-1 (forfeit) Apel - Sawyer, corr ICCF 1982] 7.0-0 e5 8.e4 exd4 [8...c6 9.h3=] 9.Nxd4 Nc5 10.f3 Be6 11.Nxe6 fxe6 12.Be3 [12.Bg5!?+/=] 12...Nfd7 13.Rc1 a5 14.b3 [14.Qd2 or 14.f4!?] 14...Qe7 [14...Ne5=] 15.Rc2 h6 16.Ne2 Kh7 17.Nf4 Qf7 18.Nd3 Nxd3 19.Qxd3 Ne5 20.Qd1 Nc6 21.a3 1/2-1/2

128 – Drclumsy 7.0-0 c6 8.h3 One of the blessings and curses of online chess is an adjourned game. This happens when one player leaves in the middle of the game. Depending on the setting that you give yourself online, you can have many or few adjourned games. My normal setting is to have the game forfeited by any player who disconnects during the game. A disconnect can happen to anybody. Usually a player with a losing position closes out ICC. When that happens, sometimes an administrator immediately adjudicates the game in favor of the winning side that did not disconnect. One can also lose internet connection in bad weather or when your wife decides to reboot the network. Some games are adjourned and picked up later for continuation. This is like correspondence chess, except with blitz games the pressure of the moment can lead a player to lose on time. Also, if the game is disconnected, a player could analyze the position more deeply, with or without a computer, before resuming play. In this blitz game I played vs "Drclumsy" who was rated a few hundred points below me. This day I was Black in a King's Indian Defence. White selected the g3 Fianchetto Variation. In response I played the traditional Nbd7 and e5 moves. The game was adjourned about move 23 and resumed later. Drclumsy - Sawyer, Internet Chess Club, 23.09.2012 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.Nf3 0-0 5.g3 d6 6.Bg2 Nbd7 7.0-0 c6 [This usually transposes to 7...e5] 8.h3 e5 9.e4 Re8 [I almost always play 9...Qb6] 10.Be3 [10.Re1] 10...a6 [10...exd4 11.Nxd4 Nc5 12.Qc2 a5 with a dynamically equal position.] 11.Qc2 Qc7 12.Rad1 b5 13.cxb5 cxb5 14.Rc1 Bb7 15.d5 Rec8 16.Qd2 Qd8 17.Ne2? Nb6? [17...Nxe4-/+] 18.Qd3 Nc4 19.b3 Nxe3 20.fxe3?! Rxc1 21.Rxc1 Rc8 22.Rxc8 Qxc8 23.Nh4 [Around here the game was adjourned and picked up many days later when we both were on ICC, available, and willing at the same time. I

had not looked at the adjourned position at all.] 23...Qc5 24.Qc3 Nd7 25.b4 Qxc3 26.Nxc3 Nb6 27.Bf1 Bc8 28.Kg2 f5 29.exf5 gxf5 30.Bd3? e4 31.Be2? Bxc3 0-1. White resigns 0-1

129 – Mandelkern 7.0-0 e5 The 2007 Central Florida Class Championship was the first Florida tournament where I did not play any of the super-kids. According to the notes I wrote at the time, my opponent Jeremy Mandelkern was a young man who had moved to Florida from New York. Jeremy made steady increases in his skill and rating. I was late to the board in this game, not feeling well. I made a few trips to the bathroom during this game. Old man problems. We played an interesting King's Indian Defence Fianchetto g3. Jeremy played very well. I was dealing with physical issues with little energy for this game. I missed a couple good chances. Mandelkern (2022) - Sawyer, Central Florida Class Ch (2), 06.01.2007 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3 g6 3.c4 Bg7 4.g3 0-0 5.Bg2 [Nunn's Chess Openings says, "This is one of White's most solid and respected lines against the King's Indian, popular amongst players who like to stifle their opponent's counter play before gradually revealing their own aggressive intentions."] 5...d6 [I decided to stay with the same sharp opening that I played in the first round. There is no better way to learn it than to play it. In my youth I headed to a Gruenfeld (sometimes called Neo-Gruenfeld) vs Bg2 lines via 5...c6 6.0-0 d5] 6.0-0 Nbd7 7.Nc3 e5 8.e4 c6 [This old main line does not give Black as much counter play as two others: 8...exd4! 9.Nxd4 Re8 or 8...a6!? is Gallagher's favorite.] 9.Re1 Re8 10.h3 Qb6 11.c5!? [This is a thematic move in the Fianchetto KID which I have seen several times in slightly different positions.] 11...dxc5 12.dxe5 Nxe5 13.Nxe5 Rxe5 14.Bf4 Re8 15.Na4 Qd8? [Correct is 15...Qa5!=+] 16.Nxc5 b6 17.Nd3 Be6 18.Qc2 Rc8 19.Rad1 Qe7 20.a3 c5 21.Be5 Nh5? [A very tired move. Black should play 21...c4!=+] 22.Bxg7 Nxg7 23.Nf4 Qc7 24.Rd2 Rcd8 25.Red1 Rxd2 26.Qxd2 Re7? [Dropping a pawn in a difficult position. From here on I play the rest of the game quite rapidly. White plays well.] 27.Qd8+ Qxd8 28.Rxd8+ Re8 29.Nxe6 fxe6 30.Rd7 e5 31.Bf1 Ne6 32.Bc4 Kh8 33.Bxe6 Rxe6 34.Rxa7 Rd6 35.Rb7 g5 36.Kg2 h5 37.Kf3 g4+ [A better try seemed to be 37...Rd3+ 38.Kg2 Rb3+=] 38.hxg4 Rf6+ 39.Ke2 hxg4 40.a4 Kg8 41.a5 bxa5 42.Rb5 Rf3 [My last chance was

42...a4! 43.Rxc5 Rb6 44.Rxe5 Rxb2+ 45.Ke3 a3 46.Ra5 a2 making White at least prove himself in an ending.] 43.Rxc5 Rb3 44.Rxa5 Rxb2+ 45.Kf1 1-0

3.Nc3 Bg7 Here we examine games where one of the players chooses a less popular line on moves 4 or 5.

130 – Johnston 4.e4 d6 5.Nge2 King's Indian Defence is one of the best developed strategical concepts for the Black pieces against 1.d4. This was my choice against the very active correspondence player Allan Johnston of New Zealand. Other New Zealanders about who I have written include William B. Petre and Robert A. Rasa. The highest ICCF rating that I have found for Allan Johnston was 2396. He preferred Closed Openings such as French Defence and Dutch Defence as Black, and 1.d4 as White. In a Master Class postal tournament that I won, Allan Johnston chose the rare 5th move idea of 5.Nge2 vs the King's Indian. Allan Johnston set-up a kingside attack with 6.Ng3, 8.Be2 and 9.h4. Deep Fritz, Houdini 4 and Stockfish prefer playing 9...h5. Instead I chose to fight back on the queenside with 9...c6. White has a slight advantage, but we fought all over the board for a long time. The game was equal when a draw was agreed. Johnston (2225) - Sawyer (2157), corr ICCF 1995 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.e4 d6 5.Nge2 [More common are 5.Nf3 or 5.f3] 5...0-0 6.Ng3 e5 7.d5 a5 8.Be2 Na6 9.h4 c6 [9...h5!=] 10.h5 cxd5 11.hxg6 fxg6 12.Nxd5 Be6 13.Bg5 Bxd5 14.cxd5 Qb6 15.Qd2 Qb4 16.Bxa6 Rxa6 17.0-0 Qxd2 18.Bxd2 Ng4 19.Rac1 Bh6 20.Bxh6 Nxh6 21.f3 Rb6 22.Rc2 Nf7 23.Rfc1 h5 24.Kf2 Ng5 25.Ke3 a4 [25...h4! 26.Ne2 Kg7 27.Rc7+ Kh6 28.Rh1 h3=] 26.Nh1 h4 27.Nf2 Kg7 [27...Nh7 28.Rd2 Nf6 29.Rc4+=] 28.Rh1 Rh8 29.f4 [29.Ke2! Nf7 30.Nd3+/-] 29...exf4+ 30.Kxf4 Nf7 31.Nd3 g5+ 32.Kf5 Rf8 33.Nf2 [33.Rh3 Kh6 34.Ke6 Kg6=] 33...Rb4 34.a3 Rd4 35.Ke6 Re8+ 36.Kd7 Kf8 37.Rh3 [37.Kc7 Re7+ 38.Kb6 Ne5=] 37...Re7+ 38.Kc8 b5

39.g3 hxg3 40.Rxg3 Kg7 41.Nh3 Kg6 42.Nf4+ Kf6 43.Nh5+ Ke5 44.Rg4 Rc4+ 45.Rxc4 bxc4 46.Ng7 Kf6 1/2-1/2

131 – Kachiani 5…0-0 6.Ng3 e5 Kings Indian Defence 5.Nge2 allows interesting tactics with Ng3 and h4. Many grandmasters play it. Tregubov and Bologan have used 5.Nge2 repeatedly as White, but even Anand and Carlsen have played it on occasion. 5.Nge2 is a way to avoid the well-worn 5.Nf3, 5.f3 or 3.g3 lines. White obtains the basic central pawn phalanx e4-d5-c4. To combat this Black has three options: (a) ...f5 attacking e4; (b) ...c6 attacking d5; or (c) ...b5 attacking c4. In the game Ketino Kachiani-Gersinska vs Kristin Mueller Ludwig, White sacrifices a knight which threatens material. If Black takes the knight, White pins a bishop and mates. Kachiani-Gersinska (2338) - Mueller Ludwig (2069), Frauenbundesliga 2017-18 GER, 28.01.2018 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.e4 d6 5.Nge2 0-0 6.Ng3 e5 7.d5 a5 8.Be2 Na6 9.h4 h5 10.Bg5 Qe8 11.Qd2 Ng4 [11...Bd7=] 12.Bxg4 Bxg4 13.Bh6 Nc5 14.f3 Bd7 [14...Bxh6 15.Qxh6 Bd7 16.0-0-0+/=] 15.Nxh5 [If 15...Bxh6 16.Nf6+ Kg7 17.Nxe8+ wins] 1-0

132 – PII233Crafty 5.Bd3 e5 Black’s natural kingside attack in the King’s Indian Defence takes time to set up. Black's army lines up at the door of White's king. I got a great attack but ran low on time. I repeated moves, avoided a loss and gained rating points. PII233Crafty (2677) - Sawyer (2370), ICC 5 0 Internet Chess Club, 24.09.1998 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.e4 d6 5.Bd3 e5 [5...0-0 6.Nge2 c5=] 6.d5 0-0 7.Nf3 a5 8.0-0 Na6 9.Be3 Ng4 10.Bg5 Bf6 [10...f6 11.Bd2 Nc5 12.Bc2 f5=] 11.Bxf6 Nxf6 12.Qd2 Ne8 13.Be2 f5 14.Rae1 f4 15.Qc2 g5 16.Nd2 Nf6 17.Nb3 b6 18.Nd2 Rf7 19.Nb3 [19.a3=] 19...Qf8 20.Rb1 Qg7 21.Qd2 h5 22.f3 g4 23.Bd3 h4 24.Kh1 Kh8 25.Qe1 Qg5 26.Be2 Rg7 27.Rg1 g3 [27...Nh5-+] 28.h3 Nh7 [28...Bxh3!-+] 29.Bd3 [White can hold the position with 29.Bf1!=] 29...Qh5 30.Qd1? [30.Bf1!=] 30...Ng5 31.Qf1 Bd7 32.Nb5 Qe8 [32...Nxh3!-+] 33.Re1 Qc8 34.Re2 [34.Rc1 Nxh3 35.gxh3 g2+ 36.Rxg2 Bxh3-+. Now it's time to sac on h3.] 34...Nxh3 [Or 34...Bxh3 35.gxh3 Nxh3-+] 35.gxh3 Bxh3 36.Qd1 Bd7 37.Nc3 [If 37.N3d4 exd4 38.Nxd4 Ba4-+] 37...h3 38.Nd2 Qd8 39.Qe1

Qh4 40.Nf1 Rag8 41.b3 Rg6 42.Nb5 R8g7 [Time trouble.] 43.Nc3 Kg8 44.Nb5 Kh8 45.Nc3 Kg8 46.Nb5 Kh8 Draw by repetition 1/2-1/2

133 – Hughes 5.Bd3 0-0 6.Nge2 White has a few related issues to deal with on the kingside when facing the King’s Indian Defence. These are the major questions: 1. Where will the light squared bishop be developed? 2. Where will the f-pawn go? It can stay on f2, or go to f3 or f4. 3. Where will the knight go? If the pawn goes to f3, then Nge2. In our King’s Indian Defence game Robert Hughes played 5.Bd3, 6.Nge2 and only later 11.f3. Black got a passed pawn on d4, but was unable to use it effectively. All of a sudden on move 27 I decided to "play for a win" from a very equal position and mixed things up. The only one who got mixed up was me, and I obtain a losing position. I must have been discouraged by the fact that I was down a pawn. White was winning. Again, I resigned when comparatively I stood only a little worse. Usually we play on when only down one pawn. The next year when we met in another APCT event. And again I had Black. I said forget this King’s Indian Defence stuff. I am going to play a gambit. That time I chose the Albin Counter Gambit and won. Hughes (1800) - Sawyer (1944), corr APCT EMQ-3, 08.01.1997 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.e4 d6 5.Bd3 0-0 6.Nge2 Nc6 [6...e5 7.d5=] 7.0-0 e5 8.d5 Nd4 9.Nxd4 exd4 10.Ne2 [10.Nb5 Re8 11.Re1 a6 12.Nxd4 Nxd5 13.cxd5 Bxd4=] 10...Re8 11.f3 c5 12.dxc6 [12.b4!?] 12...bxc6 13.Bg5 c5 14.Qd2 Qb6 15.Nf4 Be6 [15...Bb7 16.Nd5 Bxd5 17.cxd5 Nd7=] 16.b3 a5 17.Rab1 Qb4 18.Qf2 Nd7 19.Nxe6 fxe6 20.Bd2 Qb6 21.f4 Rf8 22.Qg3 Rae8 23.f5 Ne5 24.Bc2 Qb7 25.fxg6 hxg6 26.Bf4 Kh7 27.Rf2 d3? [Better would be 27...Rf7= when Black has adequate defensive resources.] 28.Bxd3 Nxd3 29.Qxd3 d5? [29...Bd4 30.Be3 Rxf2 31.Bxf2+/=] 30.exd5 [30.e5 Rf5 31.Rbf1+/-] 30...exd5 31.Rf3 Bd4+ 32.Kh1 1-0

134 – Beloungie 5.Be2 Nbd7 6.Nf3 0-0 In the fourth round of the Maine State Closed Championship, Lance Beloungie was paired against James Dubois. Both players were rated about the same. The French name Dubois is common in Maine and many places near Canada. I had a French teacher in high school named Miss Dubois with the French pronunciation "Doo-bwa". One of my favorite restaurant chains, "Hoss's Steak & Sea House", began in Dubois, Pennsylvania along Interstate 80, I have eaten at many of their locations, including the original one. That city generally gets the English pronunciation "Doo-boys". The game was a King's Indian Defence 5.Nf3. Instead of the standard KID e7-e5 break, Dubois played for the more Benoni type c7-c5 break. In the middlegame White picked off a pawn on the queenside. Eventually he won the rook ending. Beloungie - Dubois, Maine State Closed (4), 24.04.2012 begins 1.d4 d6 2.c4 Nf6 3.Nc3 g6 4.e4 Bg7 5.Be2 Nbd7 6.Nf3 0-0 7.0-0 c5 8.d5 a6 9.Rb1 Qc7 10.h3 Nh5 11.Be3 Qa5 12.Qd2 Qd8 13.b4 cxb4 14.Rxb4 Nhf6 15.Qc2 Ne8 16.Na4 f5 17.Nb6 Nxb6 18.Bxb6 Qd7 19.Nd4 Bxd4 20.Bxd4 fxe4 21.Bg4 Qd8 22.Bb6 Nc7 23.Qxe4 Bxg4 24.Qxg4 Qc8 25.Qe4 Rf7 26.Rfb1 Ne8 27.Bd4 Ng7 28.Bxg7 Kxg7 29.Rxb7 Qf8 30.f3 Rc8 31.Re1 Kg8 32.Rxe7 Rxe7 33.Qxe7 Rxc4 34.Qd7 Rc8 35.Qa4 Ra8 36.Qc6 a5 37.Re6 Rd8 38.Qa4 Rb8 39.Qxa5 Qf4 40.Re1 Qb4 41.Qa7? [White could swap queens and be up two pawns in a rook ending. 41.Qxb4 Rxb4 42.Re6 Ra4 43.Rxd6+-] 41...Qb5? [Both players are probably playing quickly and miss that the White rook is hanging. 41...Qxe1+ 42.Kh2 Qe5+ with serious mate threats.] 42.Re7 Qb6+ 43.Qxb6 Rxb6 44.Rd7 Ra6 45.Kh2 h6 46.Kg3 Kf8 47.Kh4 Kg8 48.g4 Kh8 49.Kg3 Kg8 50.a4 Kh8 51.a5 Kg8 52.h4 Kh8 53.g5 h5 54.f4 Kg8 55.f5 gxf5 56.Kf4 Rxa5 57.Rxd6 Ra4+ 58.Kxf5 Rxh4 59.Rh6 Rd4 60.Ke6 Re4+ 61.Kd6 Ra4 62.Re6 Rg4 63.Ke7 Rxg5 64.d6 Rg7+ 65.Ke8 Kh7 66.d7 [Black could pick off the dpawn, but White wins with the extra rook. If 66.Re7 Rxe7+ 67.Kxe7 Kg6

68.d7 Kf5 69.d8Q White wins with the extra queen.] 66...Rg8+ 67.Ke7 Rg7+ 68.Kd6 1-0

135 – Fawbush 5.Be2 0-0 6.Bg5 What is your most memorable game? Wins against stronger players stand out. My win vs George E. Fawbush in the King's Indian Defence ranks right up there. Fawbush was a great player who won a high percentage of his games and was near his peak. This game began before our Nimzo-Indian. GM Bisguier selected that game as a Runner-Up APCT Game of the Year. Fawbush as White resigned both to me at the same time. I loved that day! White chose the rare Averbach Variation 5.Be2 and 6.Bg5. He played the better opening. G.E.F. (as his moves were signed) aggressively attacked my king in the middlegame. Fawbush took risks in an effort to win, but I defended and won the endgame. Fawbush (2200) - Sawyer (2150), corr APCT 1980 begins 1.c4 g6 2.Nc3 Bg7 3.e4 d6 4.d4 Nf6 5.Be2 0-0 6.Bg5 h6 7.Be3 e5 8.d5 Nbd7 9.Qd2 Nc5 10.f3 a5 [A game between J. Scott Pfeiffer and myself as Black ended here in 1982 when White withdrew.] 11.0-0-0 h5 12.h4 Nh7 13.g3!? [13.Nh3+/=] 13...f5 14.Nh3 Nf6 15.Nf2 Bd7 16.Rdg1 b6 17.exf5 gxf5 18.g4 f4 19.Bxc5 bxc5 20.gxh5 [Grabbing a protected passed pawn looks strong, 20.g5!+- but White wants to attack my king, so open lines are desired.] 20...Nxh5 21.Nfe4 Qe7 22.Rg5 Be8 23.Rhg1 Kh8 24.Bd3 Bh6 25.R5g4 [25.R5g2+/-] 25...Ng7 26.Ng5 Bh5 27.R4g2 Nf5 28.Bxf5 Rxf5 29.Qd3 Rff8 30.Ne6 [30.Nce4+/-] 30...Rg8 31.Ng5 Rg7 32.Nce4 Rag8 33.Kd2 Rg6 34.Qf1 R6g7 35.Ke2 Rb8 36.b3 a4 37.Ne6? [White is taking risks in hopes to win. 37.Qd1=] 37...Rxg2+ 38.Qxg2 axb3 39.axb3 Bf7 [39...c6!-/+] 40.N6g5 Rxb3 41.Qg4 Rb2+ 42.Nd2? [This blunder turns the tide back again of the slight advantage from White to Black. Correct was 42.Kd3+/=] 42...Bxg5 43.hxg5 Bg6 44.Rh1+ Kg7 45.Qh4 Qf8 46.Qh6+ Kf7 47.Qxf8+ Kxf8 48.Ra1 Rb8 49.Ra7 Rc8 50.Nb3 Be8 51.Na5 Kg7 52.Nc6 Bxc6 53.dxc6 Kg6 54.Kd3 Kxg5 55.Ke4 Kf6 56.Rb7 Ke7 [56...Ke6!-+ seems to be winning for Black.] 57.Kd5 [57.Kf5!?] 57...Kf6 58.Ke4 [58.Ra7! White is down two pawns, but he might be able to defend by just moving his rook back and forth and hoping to play Ke6 at some

point.] 58...Ke6 59.Ra7 Rb8 60.Rb7 Ra8 61.Kd3 Ra3+ 62.Ke2 Re3+ 63.Kf2 d5 64.Rxc7 Kd6 65.Rd7+ Kxc6 66.Rxd5 Rc3 67.Rxe5 Rxc4 68.Re6+ Kd5 69.Re8 Rd4 70.Ke2 Kc4 71.Rc8 Kb4 72.Rb8+ Kc3 73.Rc8 c4 0-1

136 – BK-Chess 5.f4 Na6 6.Be2 Seasons change. Old ideas become new again. In the King's Indian Defence I tried 5...Na6. Playing a knight to a6 is relatively rare early in chess openings. You might play 100 games in a row without seeing it. The possible Bf1xa6 is minimized after 2.c4. This 5...Na6 idea is to aim at b4 or c5 with a possible relocation to c7. My opponent BK-Chess agreed to play an unrated game back in the days when I had been higher rated. In the end, I had two weak extra backward pawns as Black when White played a repeated checks to draw. BK-Chess (2943) - Sawyer (2391), ICC 3 0 u Internet Chess Club, 30.11.2002 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.e4 d6 5.f4 Na6 [5...0-0=] 6.Be2 [6.Nf3 0-0 7.Be2=] 6...c5 7.d5 Nc7 [7...0-0 8.Nf3 e6 9.0-0+/=] 8.Nf3 b5 9.cxb5 a6 10.bxa6 [10.b6! Nb5 11.Nxb5 axb5 12.e5+/-] 10...Bxa6 11.00 Bxe2 12.Qxe2 0-0 13.Ng5 [13.Rd1+/=] 13...Nd7 14.Be3 Qb8 15.f5 h6 16.Nf3 g5 17.Qc2 Ne5 18.Nxe5 Bxe5 19.a3 f6 20.Rfb1 Kg7 21.Qe2 Qe8 [21...Qb3 22.Re1 Rfb8=] 22.Rc1 Qf7 23.a4 Rfb8 24.a5 Qe8 25.Bf2 Nb5 26.Be3 Nxc3 27.bxc3 Rb3 28.Bd2 Qb5 29.Qh5 Qe8 30.Qxe8 Rxe8 31.Ra2 Ra8 32.Kf2 Kf7 33.h3 Ke8 34.Ke2 Kd7 35.Kd3 Kc7 36.Kc4 Rb7 37.Rca1 Rba7 38.g4 Ra6 39.Kb5 R6a7 40.a6 Rb8+ 41.Kc4 Rba8 42.Kd3 Kb6 43.Rb1+ Kc7 44.Rba1 Kb6 45.Rb1+ Kc7 46.Rab2 Kc8 47.Rb7 Rxa6 48.Rxe7 R6a7 49.Re8+ Kd7 50.Rxa8 Rxa8 51.Rb7+ Ke8 52.Rh7 Ra1 53.Rxh6 Rg1 54.Ke3 Rg3+ 55.Ke2 Rg2+ 56.Kd1 Rg3 57.Kc1 Rg1+ 58.Kc2 Rg3 59.c4 Rg1 60.Ba5 Rg3 61.Kd2 Ra3 62.Rh8+ Kd7 63.Bb6 Ra2+ 64.Ke3 Ra3+ 65.Kd2 Ra2+ 66.Kd3 Ra3+ 67.Kd2 [Game drawn by repetition] 1/2-1/2

137 – Arnold 5.f4 0-0 6.Nf3 Let's say you start out in a less popular opening. You don't have much theory to worry about. So you just play good moves. Then suddenly you find yourself wandering into a very popular opening. That happened to me vs G. Robert Arnold. When someone like Bob Arnold begins 1.f4 you might safely assume that he was a regular Bird's Opening player. Indeed he has been a long time Bird player. That means as White he avoids the big highways of opening theory. He prefers the side roads that go to the same destination of victory for White. Soon his flank pawns 1.f4 and 3.c4 are joined by his center pawns 5.e4 and 6.d4. Voila! We transposed to a King's Indian Defence. I didn't mind it, but I didn't expect it either. During the years that I played the King's Indian, I rarely faced the Four Pawns Attack. I chose a line that had been a common book variation. It turned out to be a bad one. I followed the crowd and drove right off the cliff. Bravo to Bob for finding this. He outplayed me and deserved the win. Arnold (2113) - Sawyer (1944), corr APCT EMN-A-4, 08.01.1997 begins 1.f4 Nf6 2.Nf3 g6 3.c4 Bg7 4.Nc3 0-0 5.e4 d6 6.d4 Na6 7.Be2 e5 8.fxe5 dxe5 9.Nxe5 [9.d5 Nc5 10.Bg5 h6=] 9...c5 10.Be3 cxd4 [10...Nb4!=] 11.Bxd4 Ng4? [This is most common, but it is a bad line for Black. Worth exploring is 11...Nb4 12.Bc5 Qa5 13.Bxf8 Bxf8 14.Nf3 Nxe4 15.a3 Nxc3 16.axb4 Nxd1 17.bxa5 Ne3=] 12.Nf3 Bxd4 13.Qxd4 Nb4 14.Qxd8 [14.00-0!+/-] 14...Rxd8 15.Rc1 Nd3+? [From bad to worse. Black should play 15...f5 16.Nd5+/-] 16.Bxd3 Rxd3 17.Nd5 Be6 18.Ke2 [Black's rook is trapped.] 1-0

138 – Mueller 6.Nf3 c5 7.d5 e6 When your opponent plays 1.c4 English Opening, how can you change the opening to a King's Indian Defence? When I studied Bobby Fischer's games I saw that a dozen times he played 1...g6. So I copied Fischer and it worked most of the time. Black developed in a normal KID way with Bg7, d6, Nf6 and 0-0. You just allow White to set up a big pawn center as you plan your counter attack with ...e5 or ...c5. The advantage of playing 1...g6 vs 1.c4 is that after White cannot transpose into a Modern Defence or Pirc Defence like he could after 1.d4 g6 2.e4 d6 3.Nc3 Nf6. Master Thomas Mueller chose the famous Four Pawns Attack vs my King's Indian. I hit back in a Modern Benoni Defence style with 6...c5 7.d5 e6 and a little Benko flavor of 9...b5. The position is very sharp, very tactical and very complicated. In such situations higher rated players usually outplay their lower rated opponents. Thomas Mueller had an ICCF rating of 2358 back in the days before there were strong computer chess engines. I actually put up a tough fight vs him until my natural rook recapture 28...Rxd8 which dropped the a-pawn. While there were still some drawing chances, Black could have improved and done very well with the two bishops after simply 28...Bxd8!=. Mueller (2200) - Sawyer (2000), corr CCLA 1980 begins 1.c4 g6 2.Nc3 Bg7 3.d4 Nf6 4.e4 d6 5.f4 0-0 6.Nf3 c5 7.d5 e6 8.Bd3 exd5 9.cxd5 b5 10.Bxb5 Nxe4 11.Nxe4 Qa5+ 12.Kf2 Qxb5 13.Nxd6 Qb6 14.Nc4 Qa6 15.Qe2 Nd7 16.Rd1 Bb7 17.Ne3!? [17.Nce5 Qxe2+ 18.Kxe2 Rfe8 19.Kf2 Nxe5 20.fxe5 Rad8=] 17...Qxe2+ 18.Kxe2 Nb6 [18...Rfe8 19.Kf2 Nf6=/+] 19.Kf2 Rfd8 20.d6 Bf8 21.b3 Bxd6 22.g3 [22.Ng4 Be7=] 22...c4 [22...f6 23.Bb2 Be7 24.Rac1 Kf7=] 23.Nxc4 Nxc4 24.bxc4 Ba6 25.Be3 Bxc4 26.Rd4 Bb5 27.Rad1 Bc7 28.Rxd8+ Rxd8?! [28...Bxd8!=] 29.Rxd8+ Bxd8 30.Bxa7 Bc4 31.a3 Be7 32.a4 Bd8 33.Nd4 Kf8 34.Ke3 h5 [34...Bd5!=] 35.Ke4 [35.Nc6+/=] 35...Bc7 36.Nb5 Bd8 37.Bc5+ I do not remember why I resigned at this specific point. Clearly White can play

follow up 37...Kg7 with 38.Bb4 and the extra pawn is well on its way to a queen. 1-0

3.Nc3 Bg7 4.e4 d6 5.f3 White chooses the 5.f3 Saemisch Variation.

139 – Roquentin 5.f3 c5 6.d5 After my earlier win, Roquentin naturally wanted another crack at me. We turned the board around and played again. I took a shot at a BlackmarDiemer Gambit with the Paleface Attack 1.d4 Nf6 2.f3!? Black played 2.c5. The position transposed from a Benoni into a King's Indian Saemisch. [Speaking of Benoni, here's a trivia question: What actress is from Benoni, South Africa?] This King's Indian Defence game differs from the normal 5.f3 line in that I played my dark squared bishop to Bg5 instead of the common Saemisch Be3. The reason is that once the moves ...c7-c5 and d4-d5 have been played, there is no pawn on d4 for White to defend. This line is solid with the pawn on f3 protecting e4. However it takes White longer to unfold his kingside pieces. The f3 move contributes to safety but not activity. You need both. The note beginning with 8.Qd2 below is a good suggested plan. Chances are equal as far as long term results are concerned. Those who play the line frequently will benefit from experience and score better. If you do not like this as White, then try 2.Nc3. [Answer to the Benoni trivia question above: Charlize Theron] Sawyer (2013) - Roquentin (2150), ICC 3 0 u Internet Chess Club, 31.05.2013 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.f3!? c5 3.d5 d6 4.e4 g6 5.c4 Bg7 6.Nc3 0-0 7.Bg5 e6 8.Bd3!? [8.Qd2 exd5 9.cxd5 a6 10.a4 Re8 11.Nge2 Nbd7 12.Ng3 Qa5 13.Be2 with some typical Benoni strategies.] 8...h6 9.Be3 exd5 10.cxd5 Re8 11.Qd2 Kh7 12.Nge2 a6 13.a4 Nbd7 14.0-0 Ne5 15.b3 Rb8 16.Rac1 Bd7 17.Rfd1 b5 18.axb5 axb5 19.Ra1? [19.Bf4 Qe7 20.Bxe5 Qxe5=/+] 19...c4 [Black is winning after 19...b4! 20.Na4 Nxd3 21.Qxd3 Bb5 22.Qd2 Nxd5-+ and White will lose big material.] 20.bxc4 bxc4 [20...b4 21.Nb5 Nxd5 22.exd5+/=] 21.Bc2 Rb2 22.Rab1 Rxc2 [22...Rxb1 23.Rxb1+/=] 23.Qxc2 Nd3 24.Nc1 Nc5 25.Bxc5 dxc5 26.Nb5 [26.N3e2

Nh5 27.Qxc4+-] 26...Nh5 27.Qxc4 [27.Nd6 Rf8 28.Nxc4+-] 27...Nf4 [27...Qh4! 28.d6+/-] 28.Ne2 [Or 28.Nd6! Re7 29.Nb7 Qb8 30.Qxc5+-] 28...Nxe2+ 29.Qxe2 Bxb5 30.Qxb5 Bd4+ 31.Kh1 Re5 32.Qb8 Qh4 33.Rxd4 Rh5 34.Rdd1 c4 35.Rbc1 Black resigns 1-0

140 – Benjamin 6.d5 Nbd7 I won a game vs future Life Master Dan Benjamin in the King's Indian Defence Saemisch. He was not yet a master. A few months later he made a huge jump in his rating. A key aspect of our game was my attempt to play a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit after 1.d4 Nf6 2.f3. My hope was 2...d5 3.e4 dxe4 4.Nc3 which is a BDG. After 2...c5 3.d5 White can play more original lines, but I was happy going from Benoni to King's Indian. Danny Benjamin took lessons from chess teacher Dan Heisman. Within a year Daniel Benjamin saw his rating go flying past me. His rating rose to 2400 when he got to high school and backed off only slightly. Benjamin played over 300 games at the master level as a teenager. Dr. Daniel J. Benjamin went to Harvard and Cornell. His expertise is in economics, psychology and research in things beyond what I understand. I wish him well. Sawyer - Benjamin, Hatboro, PA 26.01.1989 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.f3 c5 3.d5 d6 4.e4 Nbd7 5.c4 g6 6.Nc3 Bg7 7.Bg5 0-0 8.Qd2 Qa5 9.Bd3 a6 10.Nge2 Ne5 11.0-0 Bd7 [11...h6! 12.Bh4 (not 12.Bxh6? Bxh6 13.Qxh6 Nxd3-+) 12...Bd7=] 12.a4 Qb4 13.b3 Rab8? [13...Nxd3 14.Qxd3 Qa5=] 14.Rab1 b5 15.axb5 axb5 16.cxb5 Bxb5 17.Bxb5 Rxb5 18.Nxb5 Qxd2? [18...Qxb5 19.b4 Nc4 20.Qd3+-] 19.Bxd2 Rb8 20.Nbc3 Nd3 21.Nc1 Nb4 22.N3a2 Na6 [or 22...Nc2 23.Rb2+-] 23.Nd3 Nd7 24.Kh1 Bd4 25.Rfc1 Nb4 26.Ndxb4 cxb4 27.Nxb4 Be5 28.Bh6 Rxb4 29.Rc8+ Nf8 30.Rxf8# 10

141 – Markov 6.d5 e6 7.Bg5 In my game against Markov we changed the possible openings many times. First I began with 1.d4. Queen’s Gambit anyone? Then Black played 1…e6. A typical reply would be 2.c4. That could logically reach a Classical Dutch Defence after 2…f5. But no. White played 2.e4. I preferred a French Defence. Here I expected 2…d5. Then I would have to decide whether or not to venture the Alapin Diemer Gambit with 3.Be3!? But no. Black continued with 2…c5. Undoubtedly Markov was ready for 3.Nf3 cxd4. It could be a Taimanov Sicilian Defence. But no. White pushed the d-pawn ahead with 3.d5. Now we have a Benoni Defence. After 3…d6 4.c4 Nf6 5.Nc3, we could arrive at the Modern Benoni after 5…exd5 6.cxd5 g6. But no. Black just plays 5…g6. After 6.Bg5 Bg7 7.f3 0-0 8.Qd2 we have transposed into a Saemisch King's Indian Defence. The move Bg5 instead of the normal Be3 only slightly alters the position. It makes little difference if the bishop later goes to Bh6, as in fact it did with 15.Bh6!? We castled opposite sides. I opened up as many lines as I could on the kingside. I defended when necessary on the queenside. My attack ended in checkmate when I mated the Black king with my little White g-pawn. Sawyer - Markov, ICC u 5 0 Internet Chess Club, 20.02.1998 begins 1.d4 e6 2.e4 c5 3.d5 d6 4.c4 Nf6 5.Nc3 g6 6.Bg5!? Bg7 7.f3 0-0 8.Qd2 Re8 [8...exd5 9.Nxd5+/=] 9.0-0-0 e5 10.h4 Nbd7 11.g4 Qa5 12.Kb1 a6 13.h5 b5 14.hxg6 fxg6 15.Bh6!? [15.cxb5!? Rb8 16.Bxf6 Nxf6 17.bxa6 Bxa6

18.Bxa6 Qxa6 19.Nh3+/=] 15...Bh8 16.Nh3 bxc4 17.Bxc4 Nb6 18.Bd3 Rb8 19.Ne2 Qxd2 20.Rxd2 [20.Bxd2=] 20...c4 21.Bc2 Bd7 [21...c3! 22.Nxc3 Nc4 23.Rdh2 Rxb2+ 24.Ka1=] 22.Nc3 Rec8 23.Kc1 Kf7 24.Ng5+ Ke7 25.Nh3 [25.Bd1+/=] 25...Rc5 26.Be3 Ra5 [26...Rcc8 27.Ng5+/=] 27.a3 Na4 28.Nxa4 Bxa4 29.Ng1?! Nxd5? [29...c3!=] 30.Rxh7+ Ke6 31.exd5+ Kf6 32.g5# 1-0

142 – Ross 5.f3 Nc6 6.Be3 e5 One of the openings Hank Ross and I played was a King's Indian Defence. Ross responded to my Saemisch Variation by 5.f3 Nc6. When the center became closed after 6.Be3 e5 7.d5, we chose to castle on opposite sides. The normal strategy for Black is to castle kingside and attack queenside. White castled queenside and attacked kingside. Ross invested his time and army in an effort to defend against my attack. The White king was under no danger ever! Except for Black’s early moves 4…d6, 5…Nc6, and 9…c6, every Black move in the entire game was either on the kingside or to the kingside. My chess friend Hank Ross demonstrated that defense alone does not win. Good players balance attack with defence. They attack as much as possible. Of course they must play accurately. A good example of bad inaccurate play was my very short game vs Serdar Aykent (2113) in the notes. Spassky beat Fischer in the same line in 1992. I tried to improve upon Bobby Fischer’s play with my 11…Kh7, but then I accidently sacrificed a pawn. Forget it. Serdar Aykent was a good correspondence player. Last I looked his ICCF rating was 2266 based on 268 international games. Sawyer (2100) - Ross (1709), corr APCT 1981 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.e4 d6 5.f3 Nc6!? [5...0-0 6.Be3 Nc6 7.Nge2 a6 8.h4 h5 9.Nc1 e5 10.d5 Ne7 11.Be2 Kh7 12.g4 c5 13.Nd3 b5 14.g5 1-0 Aykent - Sawyer, corr APCT 1993] 6.Be3 e5 7.d5 Ne7 [7...Nd4!? 8.Nge2 Nxe2 9.Bxe2+/=] 8.Qd2 0-0 9.g4 [9.Bd3+/=] 9...c6 10.h4 h5 11.gxh5 gxh5? [Now White has open lines on the kingside and Black will be in big trouble. Correct is 11...Nxh5!=] 12.Nge2 Ng6 13.0-0-0 Nh7? [13...cxd5 14.cxd5 a6 15.Ng3+/-] 14.Ng3 Nxh4 15.Be2 f5 16.exf5 Ng2 17.Bh6 Qf6? 18.Bxg7

Qxg7 19.Nxh5 Qg5 20.Qxg5+ Nxg5 21.Rdg1 Bxf5? [This drops a second piece. 21...Rxf5 22.Rxg2 Kf8 23.Bd3+-] 22.Rxg2 Kf7 23.Rxg5 Rg8 24.Rxf5+ Ke7 25.Ng3 Raf8 26.Rh7+ Ke8 27.Rxb7 Rxg3 28.Rb8+ Ke7 29.Rfxf8 Rg7 30.dxc6 1-0

143 – Haines 5.f3 0-0 6.Be3 b6 Ray Haines sent me a King's Indian Defence win vs the longtime USCF master Graham Cooper. Haines and Cooper are two of the four players from Maine mentioned in the Acknowledgements in my first chess book "Blackmar-Diemer Gambit Keybook". These players had a profound impact of my play. Ray wrote: “This was my first tournament outside of Aroostook County in over ten years. I was not sure how I would do against strong players in southern Maine. Graham Cooper has been a strong player in Maine for many years. I first met him when I was in high school. I was not surprised that he did not remember me.” “I have studied the Kings Indian and have played the white side against many other players over the years. My method of playing this game may not seem normal for this opening, but the moves fit in with the plan. For example the white bishop normally goes to d3, but I chose to play the white bishop to e2. This move helped to support my kingside pawns. I did not wish to have white sac a piece to break up my pawns. I kept my king’s knight on its home square. This helped to also support my pawn at f3 to keep white from sacking a piece to attack my king. I wanted to get my queen rook into the game and get my king out of the center, so on move 19 I o-o-o to get my king out of the center. This should have lost the game, but white missed the line.” Haines - Cooper (2210), Eastern Maine Championship, Bangor ME (4), 16.05.2010 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.e4 d6 5.f3 0-0 6.Be3 b6 7.Qd2 c5 8.d5 [Ray mentions the tactical line 8.Bd3 Ng4 9.fxg4 cxd4 10.Bxd4 Bxd4=/+ with Fritz analysis.] 8...e6 9.h4 [9.Nge2=] 9...a6 10.a4 exd5 11.cxd5 Nbd7 12.Bh6 Ne5 13.Be2 Bd7 14.g4 b5 15.h5 b4 16.Nd1 Qe7 17.Bxg7 Kxg7 18.Nf2 Rae8 19.0-0-0 [19.Kf1= or 19.b3=] 19...Bxa4 [19...c4!-/+] 20.Re1 c4 [20...Bd7=/+] 21.Qd4 [21.Qxb4 Bd7=/+] 21...Nfd7 [Ray points out 21...Rc8 22.Kb1 Qc7-/+] 22.f4 Nc5 23.Bxc4? [White would like to move his king off the c-file. 23.Kb1 allows 23...c3!-/+ with good attacking chances.] 23...Qa7? [23...Rc8! since 24.fxe5? loses to

24...Nb3+!!-+] 24.Nf3 [24.Kb1!+-] 24...f6 25.fxe5 fxe5 26.Qe3 Rxf3 [Black sacrifices the Exchange. If 26...g5 27.h6+ Kg8 28.Kb1+-] 27.Qxf3 Rf8 28.Qe3 Rxf2 29.hxg6 hxg6 [Ray stops the game here. 30.Qh6+!+-] 1-0

144 – Haines 6.Be3 Nbd7 7.Qd2 Here my friend Ray Haines wins with the Saemisch Variation against the King's Indian Defence. Why do I include these wins by Ray Haines? Well, there are two reasons. One is that Ray Haines has sent me his games. I like them so I analyzed and wrote about them. The second reason is that Ray Haines and I have been friends for over 40 years. We used to play in each other’s homes. Often I have written about games that I won against Ray. These games provide a little balance. Ray Haines has won a lot of games too. Ray's opponent in this game is Bill Ellison. I believe the game was played at the University of Maine in Orono. UMO in Orono is where I first went to college. My university days were more devoted to chess study than school study. That was both good and bad, but I won’t discuss that further at this time. In this King’s Indian Defence, both sides castle kingside. Most of the action is in the center or on the queenside. Haines - Ellison, Orono 1986 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.e4 d6 5.f3 0-0 6.Be3 Nbd7 7.Qd2 c5 8.Nge2 a6 [This is the standard move. An alternative is 8...cxd4 9.Nxd4 Nc5 10.Be2 or 10.0-0-0] 9.Nc1 Rb8 10.Nb3 b5 11.cxb5 axb5 12.Bxb5 Ne8 13.0-0 Nc7 14.Bxd7 Bxd7 15.dxc5 Nb5 16.cxd6 Nxd6 [The smoke has cleared and Black is down two pawns.] 17.Qf2 Nc4 18.Bd4 e5 19.Bc5 Bh6 20.Rfd1 f5 [Black tries to mix things up, but in the end just gives up the Exchange. But then normal like 20...Re8 21.Nd5 Re6 22.Rd3 Kh8 23.Rad1+- was going to be a problem too.] 21.Qe2 Nb6 22.Bxf8 Bxf8 23.Kh1 Qe8 24.Nd5 Nxd5 25.Rxd5 Bc6 26.Rdd1 Bb5 27.Qd2 Bc4 28.Rac1 Qa4 29.Qc3 Bxb3 30.axb3 Rxb3 31.Qxe5 Rb5? 32.Qe6+ Kh8 33.Qf6+ Kg8 34.Rd7 Qb3 35.h3 [There is no possible back rank mate, so…] 1-0

145 – Koepcke 6.Be3 c6 7.Be3 Half the games I publish are ones that I won. Throughout my career many strong players have published notes on games in which they beat me. Richard Koepcke analyzed this game for APCT. It was published in the “Games from APCT Play” article edited by Jon Voth. I appear to have changed my mind early on as to what defensive set-up I wanted to employ. I started with 1.d4 Nf6. Then I threw in 2.c4 c6 like a possible Slav Defense. After 3.Nc3 g6 I pondered a Gruenfeld. White prevented 4…d5. After 4.e4 d6 we ended up with a King's Indian Defence. White’s choice of 5.f3 made it a Saemisch Variation. In his notes Richard Koepcke had consulted analysis by Geller. He went his own way with 12.0-0-0!? Since we castled opposite sides, I decided to attack his king. It seemed logical to open up the position. The problem was that White had a big space advantage in front of his king. His pieces were more coordinated. Koepcke noted that my queenside pawn moves 14…a5 and 18…b5 created weaknesses. This gave White targets that I found difficult to defend. When I resigned, the material on the board was still even. However White was about to infiltrate the Black queenside. There was no defense to Nc1Nb3-Nxa5 winning a pawn. Koepcke (2186) - Sawyer (2100), corr APCT 80CC-M-F, 1982 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 c6 3.Nc3 g6 4.e4 d6 5.f3 Bg7 6.Be3 0-0 7.Bd3 e5 8.d5 cxd5 9.cxd5 Ne8 10.Qd2 f5 11.Nge2 Nd7 12.0-0-0 f4 [12...Nc5=] 13.Bf2 Nc5 14.Bc2 a5 15.Na4 Nxa4 16.Bxa4 Bd7 [16...Nc7 17.Bb6+/=] 17.Bxd7

Qxd7 18.Kb1 b5 19.Bb6 b4 20.Rc1 Qb5 21.Rc6 Bf6 [21...Ra6 22.Bd8 Bf6 23.Bxf6+/=] 22.Rhc1 Bd8 23.Bxd8 Rxd8 24.Qc2 Rf7 25.Qc4 Qxc4 26.R1xc4 Ra7 27.Kc2 Kf7 28.Kb3 Ke7 29.Rc8 Kd7? 30.Rxd8+ Kxd8 31.Ka4 Nc7 32.Nc1 1-0

146 – Sharpshooter 6.Be3 Nc6 My English Opening vs SharpShooter transposed to a Kings Indian Saemisch in Panno style with 6...Nc6. From moves 25 to 52, I moved my king back and forth from h1 to g1. Once the queens and rooks came off the board, Black's threats were greatly reduced. Sawyer (2382) - SharpShooter (2706), ICC 3 2 u Internet Chess Club, 30.01.2000 begins 1.c4 Nf6 2.Nc3 g6 3.d4 Bg7 4.e4 d6 5.f3 0-0 6.Be3 Nc6 7.Qd2 a6 8.Bd3 [8.Nge2 Rb8 9.Nc1+/=] 8...Nb4 9.Nge2 Nxd3+ 10.Qxd3 e5 11.d5 Nd7 12.0-0 Qh4 13.Rac1 h6 [13...Bh6=] 14.b3 b6 15.Bf2 Qg5 16.Be3 Qh5 17.Ng3 Qh4 18.Bf2 Qf6 19.Be3 Re8 20.Kh1 [20.Nh1! h5 21.Qd2+/=] 20...Bb7 21.Rcd1 Qh4 22.Bf2 [22.Kg1+/=] 22...Qf4 23.Qe3 Qxe3 24.Bxe3 Rac8 25.Kg1 Kh8 26.Kh1 Red8 27.Kg1 Kg8 28.Kh1 Rf8 29.Kg1 Kh8 30.Kh1 Rfe8 31.Kg1 Rg8 32.Kh1 Rgf8 33.Kg1 Rfd8 34.Kh1 Kg8 35.Kg1 Kf8 36.Kh1 Re8 37.Kg1 Kg8 38.Kh1 Re7 39.Kg1 Kh8 40.Kh1 [40.h4!?=] 40...Nf6 41.Kg1 Ree8 42.Kh1 Kg8 43.Kg1 Rf8 44.Kh1 Kh8 45.Kg1 Rg8 46.Kh1 Rgd8 47.Kg1 Rb8 48.Kh1 Rdc8 49.Kg1 Nd7 50.Kh1 Kg8 51.Kg1 Ra8 52.Kh1 b5 53.Nb1 bxc4 54.bxc4 c6 55.Rc1 cxd5 56.cxd5 Rab8 57.Nd2 Bf8 58.Nb3 f5 59.Ne2 Rxc1 60.Rxc1 Nf6 61.Nd2 fxe4 62.fxe4 Ng4 63.Bg1 Rc8 64.Rxc8 Bxc8 65.Nc3 Nf6 66.h3 g5 67.Kh2 g4 68.h4 Kf7 69.g3 Bd7 70.Be3 Kg7 71.Kg2 Be8 72.Kf2 Kf7 73.Kg2 Ke7 74.Kf2 Bg6 75.Kg2 Bg7 76.Kf2 Kd7 77.Kg2 Nh5 78.Kf2 Bf7 79.Kg2 Ke7 80.Kf2 Bg6 81.Kg2 Nf4+ 82.Kf2 Nd3+ 83.Ke2 Nb2 84.Kf2 Be8 85.Kg2 Na4 86.Nxa4 Bxa4 87.Nb1 Bd7 88.Nc3 Bc8 89.Kf2 Bd7 90.Ke2 Be8 91.Kf2 Bd7 92.Ke2 Be8 93.Kf2 Bd7 Drawn by repetition 1/2-1/2

147 – Hill 7.Qd2 Re8 8.Nge2 Protests can bring unintended attention. Oscar Panno protested a rule exception that allowed Fischer to play their game at a later hour. No one remembers it. What people remember is that their game was the shortest in grandmaster tournament history. Robert J. Fischer had White. Oscar Panno had Black. The game went 1.c4 Black resigns 1-0. Palma de Mallorca Interzonal was a 24 player round robin. The top six qualified for the Candidates matches to see who would play Boris Spassky. Panno and Fischer were scheduled for the final round. If Panno won, he’d finish in seventh place, falling just short. The result would not matter. Fischer won the tournament by 3.5 points. Larry Evans who was Fischer’s second said that Bobby went to Oscar’s hotel and got him to return for the game. But Panno simply took his scoresheet and wrote “Resigns”. Eleven years later I played Doyle Hill in the Panno Variation of the King's Indian Saemisch. Things did not go as planned. I was much higher rated, but my Doyle Hill games had interesting twists. I blundered big time on move 16. Then Hill returned the favor. Sawyer (2100) - Hill (1464), corr APCT 1981 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.e4 d6 5.f3 Nc6 6.Be3 0-0 7.Qd2 Re8 8.Nge2 Rb8 9.g4 [9.h4=] 9...a6 10.Ng3 [10.h4=] 10...Na7 [10...e5=/+] 11.h4 b5 12.h5 bxc4 13.Bxc4 Nc6 14.hxg6 hxg6 15.Bh6 Bh8 16.Qh2? [I go from winning to losing. 16.Nf5!+-] 16...Nxd4 17.Be2 [17.Qg2 e6=/+] 17...Nc2+ [17...Rxb2!-+] 18.Kf2 Nxa1 19.Bf8 Nh5 20.Bh6 Nc2 [20...Rxb2! 21.gxh5 Bd4+ 22.Be3 Bxe3+ 23.Kxe3 Nc2+ 24.Kf2 g5-+] 21.gxh5 e5? [21...g5! 22.Bxg5 Rxb2-+] 22.hxg6 fxg6 23.Bg5 Bf6 24.Qh7+ 1-0

148 – Blumetti 7.Nge2 a6 In the early 1980s I was young, energetic and playing popular openings. I was paired with John Blumetti in two postal chess games in 1981, one with each color. Both were Indian Defence games after 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3. As Black I played a Gruenfeld Defence with 3…d5, and Blumetti played a King's Indian Defence with 3…g6. I chose a Saemisch after dancing around with 4.e4 0-0 5.Be3 d6 6.f3. I had no interest in 5.e5!? Sharp Saemisch strategy has White castle queenside and Black castle kingside. In our game Black opened the b-file with 9…b5 and 10…bxc4. He got no further. White lined up 5.Be3 and 8.Qd2 for 9.Bh6. After 10.h4 and 13.g4 the knight swung to g3 with 7.Nge2 and 14.Ng3. One thematic idea is the knight sacrifice Nf5 explained by Hans Kmoch in “Pawn Power in Chess”. I wrote about it in my analysis of a Menchik – Thomas KID and a Sawyer – Regan f3 Pirc. This tactical motif leaves the knight vulnerable to the capture by g6xf5. In theory Black can grab the piece and survive. I’m so tempted to play this that I can be premature in leaping my horse into battle. In our game 19.Nf5+! gxf5 gave White an instant victory with the threat 22.Qg2. Sawyer (2100) - Blumetti (1762), corr APCT 1981 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.e4 0-0 5.Be3 d6 6.f3 Nc6 7.Nge2 a6 8.Qd2 Rb8 9.Bh6!? [Maybe premature. More common are 9.h4 or 9.Nc1] 9...b5 10.h4 bxc4 [10...Bxh6 11.Qxh6 e5=] 11.Bxg7 Kxg7 12.h5 e6 13.g4 [13.hxg6 fxg6 14.Qh6+ Kf7 15.0-0-0] 13...Rh8!? 14.Ng3 h6 15.hxg6 fxg6 16.0-0-0 Bb7? [16...e5=] 17.Bxc4 e5? [All Black's defenses collapse. 17...Qe7 18.Kb1+/-] 18.g5 Ng8 19.Nf5+! gxf5 20.gxh6+ Kh7 21.Rdg1 1-0

149 – Madison 7.Nge2 Rb8 Harold O. Madison chose the Panno Variation 6…Nc6. The first eight moves were easy. Move nine gave White many reasonable choices. I followed my basic plan 9.Bh6, but that was a mistake. When Black failed to capture my bishop I was able to mount a successful attack. I added other options in the notes. In this game H.O. Madison showed up ready for battle. To counter Black’s aggressive plans White attacked kingside from moves 9-16. My attack may have been premature. I had to rush back home with my queen. Later I won on the queenside. Sawyer (2100) - Madison (1884), corr APCT 1981 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.e4 d6 5.f3 0-0 6.Be3 Nc6 7.Nge2 Rb8 8.Qd2 a6 9.Bh6?! [Computers like 9.Nc1 e5 10.d5 Nd4 11.Nb3 Nxb3 12.axb3+/=; Another try was 9.Rb1!? b5 10.cxb5 axb5 11.b4 e5 12.d5 Ne7 13.g4= 1-0 in 24. Quirk Sawyer, corr APCT 1983] 9...b5 [9...Bxh6 10.Qxh6 b5!=/+] 10.h4 e5 [10...Bxh6 11.Qxh6 bxc4=] 11.Bxg7 Kxg7 12.h5 Kh8 [12...bxc4! 13.d5 Na5=] 13.hxg6 [13.cxb5+/=] 13...fxg6 14.Qh6 Qe7 15.Qxg6 Rg8 16.Qh6 Nxd4? [16...Nb4 17.0-0-0 bxc4 18.Kb1+/=] 17.Nxd4 exd4 18.Nd5 Nxd5 19.cxd5 Bf5 20.0-0-0 [20.Qd2!+-] 20...Bg6 21.Rxd4 Qe5 22.Qe3 Rbc8 23.Qc3 [23.f4!+-] 23...Rge8 [23...c6 24.dxc6 Rxc6 25.Qxc6 Qxd4 26.Qc3+/-] 24.Rd3 Qxc3+ 25.Rxc3 b4 26.Rc6 a5 27.Ba6 [Or 27.Kd2+-] 27...Ra8 28.Kd2 Ra7 29.Rhc1 1-0

150 – Heinrich 6.Be3 e5 7.d5 c6 G. O. Heinrich of Denmark played 7.d5 in the King's Indian Defence Saemisch Variation. Heinrich planned to castled queenside and open the kingside against the grain. Such a sharp approach was rewarded by his attacking skill. My space advantage after 11...f4 was demonstrated by White’s move 15.g3. I played other games where I survived and even won as Black when I allowed an open g-file. Heinrich was far more ready to use the file. My game limped along until I dropped my e-pawn. Two protected passed central pawns was too much for me. I threw in the towel. There was no sense spending a small fortune on international postage to continue a game that I would almost certainly lose. White performed like the master he was. We played in the large World Tournament Master Class section WT/M/GT/156. The 15 player postal event had us playing all 14 opponents at the same time from early in 1984 until 1988. A decade later I won a different ICCF Master tournament, but that was not this time. Gunter O. Heinrich ended up with an ICCF rating of 2287. My ICCF rating is 2157. Heinrich - Sawyer, corr ICCF 1984 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.e4 d6 5.f3 0-0 6.Be3 e5 7.d5 c6 8.Bd3 cxd5 9.cxd5 Ne8 10.Qd2 f5 [10...Qh4+!?] 11.0-0-0 [11.exf5+/=] 11...f4 12.Bf2 Bf6 13.Kb1 Rf7 14.Nge2 b6 15.g3 g5? [15...fxg3 16.hxg3+/-] 16.gxf4 gxf4 17.Rdg1+ Kf8 18.h4 Ba6 19.h5 Bxd3+ 20.Qxd3 Nd7 21.Nc1 Nc5 22.Qf1 a6 23.h6 b5 24.Bxc5 dxc5 25.Nd3 Qd6 26.Rg2 Rc8 27.Rhg1 c4? 28.Rg8+ Ke7 29.Qh3 [29.Nb4!+-] 29...Qd7 30.Qxd7+ Kxd7 31.Nb4 Ra8? 32.a4 Be7 33.Nc6 1-0

151 – Menchik 7.Nge2 b6 “Checkmate.” “Where did you learn to play like that?” said Tommy. “Playing chess is a lot like hunting animals,” said Freedom. “I hunted you and you stepped right into my traps.” Teacher Rush Revere finds Tommy and a girl named Freedom playing chess. Rush had taken his students back in time in the book “Rush Revere and the Brave Pilgrims” by Rush Limbaugh. This reminds me of when the 6-time Women's World Champion Vera Menchik hunts down the king of another Tommy, of sorts, International Master Sir George Alan Thomas in a King's Indian Defence Saemisch game. Vera Menchik was born in Moscow to a Czech father and English mother. Their family moved to Hastings, England in 1921. Vera and her sister Olga were the best female players in England, sometimes finishing 12 in woman's events. Vera Menchik played the best players in the world during 1929-1939, including world champions Lasker, Capablanca, Alekhine, Euwe, and Botvinnik. In this classic book "Pawn Power in Chess", Hans Kmoch on page 222 in the chapter on Benoni Formations the author diagrams the position where Miss Menchik is about to play what he calls the Benoni Jump: 18.Nf5! against Sir G.A. Thomas. Hans Kmoch writes, "Forcing Black to trade this knight as he will otherwise be mated." Vera Menchik and her sister were killed in 1944 when a German bomb struck their London area home. Menchik - Thomas, London (4), 1932 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.e4 d6 5.f3 0-0 6.Be3 e5 7.Nge2 b6!? [This move makes it harder for Black to open up the queenside. More dynamic are 7...c6 or 7...Nc6] 8.Qd2 Nc6 9.d5 Ne7 10.g4 Nd7 11.Rg1 [Certainly 11.h4+/= is faster, but White has a plan in mind that will make use of the g-file as well.] 11...a5 12.0-0-0 Nc5 13.Ng3 Bd7 14.h4 a4 15.h5 Qb8 16.Bh6 Qa7 17.Bxg7 Kxg7 18.Nf5+ Nxf5 [Kmoch points out that 18...Bxf5 is better, although 19.gxf5 f6 20.hxg6 hxg6 21.Nb5 Qb7 22.fxg6+/- still favors White.] 19.gxf5 a3 [Black can avoid immediate mate with 19...Rg8 but 20.hxg6 hxg6 21.Qg5+- and

White still has a winning attack. But now after 19...a3, the Black king will be hunted down and there is no escape from checkmate.] 20.f6+ Kh8 21.Qh6 axb2+ 22.Kb1 Rg8 23.hxg6 fxg6 24.Qxh7+ 1-0

152 – NewStart 7.Nge2 c6 Jose Capablanca, Alexander Alekhine and Bobby Fischer greatly influenced my opening choices. Capablanca was a relaxed and popular personality. Capa won repeatedly in his classical style. Alekhine was an intense person. He searched for new ideas in tactics and theory. He loved complications. Fischer was an intense person who liked clear plans. Bobby kept playing the same predictable openings. Robert Fischer combined Alekhine’s intensity with Capablanca’s clear style. Fischer played the King’s Indian for most of his career, but after some losses to the Saemisch with 5.f3, he added the Gruenfeld. I played a five minute blitz game vs “NewStart”, and we contested a King's Indian Defence Saemisch 5.f3. White opened the g-file and the c-file. It helped my defense that we swapped queens. Then I posted a Black knight on f4. I offered to swap rooks which would leave me with a more active rook. When White refused, we repeated moves for a draw. NewStart (2929) - Sawyer (2391), ICC 5 0 u Internet Chess Club, 09.04.2001 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.e4 d6 5.f3 0-0 6.Be3 e5 7.Nge2 c6 8.Qd2 Nbd7 9.d5 cxd5 10.cxd5 a6 11.g4 h5 12.h3 b5 13.Bg5 Qa5 14.gxh5!? [Stockfish 14.a3+/=] 14...Nxh5 15.Nd1 [I was immediately concerned about 15.Be7 Re8 16.Bxd6 because I did not see that Black has 16...Qb6! 17.Ba3 b4 18.Na4 Qf6 19.Qxb4 Qxf3-+] 15...Qxd2+ 16.Bxd2 Nc5 17.Be3 Nd3+ 18.Kd2 Ndf4 19.Nxf4 Nxf4 20.Rc1 Bd7 21.Rc7 Rfd8 22.Nf2 Rac8 23.Ra7 Ra8 24.Rc7 Rac8 25.Ra7 Ra8 26.Rc7 Game drawn by repetition 1/2-1/2

153 – Wadman 7.Nge2 exd4 8.Nxd4 My first American Postal Chess Tournaments (APCT) pairings arrived 40 years ago on 7/7/77 from the loved and respected tournament director Helen Warren. She and her husband Jim Warren made APCT the best run chess organization I ever played in. I played a total of 1000 correspondence games in many clubs against players from all 50 states and 30 countries. By 1997 chess engines and internet play changed correspondence competition. Computers improved the quality of analysis, but it destroyed the innocence of postal play. I switched to online blitz 20 years ago. I played Gene Wadman two games in 1981. As Black, I won with the Gruenfeld Defence. As White, I chose the Saemisch Variation 5.f3 against the King's Indian Defence. Black opened up the center with 9...d5!? Tactical combinations allowed White to win a pawn by move 15. Black missed threats against his queen and resigned by move 23. Sawyer (2100) - Wadman (1507), corr APCT 1981 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.e4 d6 5.f3 0-0 6.Be3 e5 7.Nge2 exd4 8.Nxd4 c6 9.Qd2 d5 10.cxd5 cxd5 11.e5 Ne8 12.f4 Nc7 [12...f6!=] 13.Ndb5! b6? [13...Nxb5 14.Bxb5+/-] 14.Nxc7 Qxc7 15.Nxd5 Qd8 16.Rc1 Nd7 17.Bb5 Bb7? [17...Nc5 18.Bxc5 bxc5 19.Rxc5+-] 18.Bxd7 Rb8 19.Bc6 Bxc6 20.Rxc6 Rb7 21.Rd6 Qc8 22.0-0 Rd8 23.Ne7+ 1-0

154 – McCullough 8.Nxd4 Re8 Richard McCullough and I castled opposite sides and attacked simultaneously. Famous grandmasters from old taught me that White can castle on the queenside and attack kingside without undo fear. T.D. Harding in his, “Colle, London and Blackmar-Diemer Systems” ended his BDG coverage discussing options after 1.d4 Nf6. In his final paragraph Tim Harding wrote: “You are most likely to get what you want via 2.f3!? d5 (2…c5 can now lead to a Saemisch King’s Indian) 3.e4 de 4.Nc3. Good hunting!” That’s not a problem for me. I already played the Saemisch. Black must be careful in the King’s Indian Defence when opening up the position. White might take over the best lines. Sawyer (2100) - McCullough (1797), corr APCT 1981 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.e4 d6 5.f3 0-0 6.Be3 e5 7.Nge2 [More popular is 7.d5=] 7...exd4 8.Nxd4 [8.Bxd4 Nc6 9.Be3 Ne5 10.Nf4 c6 11.h4=] 8...Re8 [8...Nc6 9.Qd2 Nxd4 10.Bxd4 Be6 11.Be2=] 9.Qd2 [9.Be2 c6 10.Qd2 d5 11.cxd5 cxd5 12.Rd1 dxe4 13.fxe4 Nxe4 14.Nxe4 Rxe4 15.0-0 Bxd4 16.Bxd4 Nc6 17.Bc3 Qxd2 18.Rxd2= when White has drawish compensation for the pawn.] 9...Nc6 10.0-0-0 Nd7 [10...Nxd4 11.Bxd4 Be6 12.Kb1 a6 13.Be2=] 11.Nc2 [11.h4 Nxd4 12.Bxd4 Bxd4 13.Qxd4+/=] 11...Nde5 [11...Nb6! 12.h4 Be6 13.Na3=] 12.h4 a5 13.h5 Be6 14.Bh6 Bf6 [14...Bxh6 15.Qxh6 g5 16.Nd5 Nd7 17.f4=] 15.Ne3 Bg5 16.Bxg5 Qxg5 17.Ncd5 Qd8? [17...Bxd5 18.Nxd5 Qxd2+ 19.Rxd2+/-] 18.Be2 [18.f4!+-] 18...Nb4 19.a3 Nxd5 20.cxd5 Bc8 21.Qc3 c5? [21...g5 22.Kb1+/-] 22.dxc6 bxc6 23.f4 Nd7 24.hxg6 fxg6 25.Rxd6 [25.Bc4+! d5 26.Nxd5!+-] 25...Re7 26.Bc4+ Rf7 27.Rxg6+ 1-0

3.Nc3 Bg7 4.e4 d6 5.Nf3 This is the main line of the King’s Indian Defence.

155 – Pascute 5.Nf3 0-0 6.Bd3 Kings Indian allows flexibility in development, strategy and tactics. Consider the White light squared bishop. There are three main options: Bg2, Bd3, and Be2. In 1980 I played two postal chess games vs E. Bruce Pascute. I had Black in this Kings Indian Defence. Pascute as White played 6.Bd3. This changes Black’s strategy in two ways. One, the bishop on d3 can be attacked more easily by a knight from e5, c5 or b4. Two, if Black plays …Bg4 the knight on f3 will be pinned. Both of these strategies occurred in the game. After 7…Bg4 and 8…Ne5, the bishop retreated with 9.Be2. White could have maintained an equal game with 10.gxf3. White recaptured 10.Bxf3, and Black gobbled up a pawn by 10… Nxc4. The players battled on the queenside. Black got two extra passed pawns to the sixth rank. Then White resigned. Pascute (1623) - Sawyer (2050), corr APCT 1980 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.e4 d6 5.Nf3 0-0 6.Bd3 [6.Be2] 6...Nc6 [6...Bg4=] 7.a3 Bg4 8.d5 Ne5 [8...Nd4! 9.Be2 Nxe2 10.Qxe2 Nd7=/+] 9.Be2 Bxf3 10.Bxf3 [10.gxf3=] 10...Nxc4 11.0-0 Ne5 12.Be2 Ned7 [12...c5!] 13.Be3 c5 14.b4 a6 15.Rc1 b5 16.bxc5 [16.h3 Rc8=/+] 16...Nxc5 17.f3? [17.e5! Nfd7 18.e6 fxe6 19.dxe6 Nb6=/+] 17...Nfd7 18.Na2? [Now a3 falls and White is down two passed pawns on the queenside. 18.Nb1 Qa5-/+] 18...Qa5 19.Nb4 Qxa3 20.Nc2 Qa5 21.Bd2 Qb6 22.Be3 a5 23.Na3 b4 24.Nc4 Qb7 25.Rb1 a4 26.Bc1 Qa7 27.Kh1 Rfb8 28.Be3 a3 29.Bd4 Bxd4 30.Qxd4 b3 0-1

156 – Roys 5.Nf3 0-0 6.Be2 c5 This King's Indian Defence features the 5.Nf3 0-0 6.Be2 c5 variation. White gets a slight advantage but Black has reasonable chances in complications. The fact is that the KID is a full opening that keeps most of the pieces on the board for a long time. Players have flexibility in tactics and strategy. Harvey Roys and I played four correspondence games, each scoring one win as Black. My win came 40 years ago in postal chess. His came later in email correspondence play. Sawyer (1969) - Roys (2259), corr APCT EMN-A-1, 23.02.1996 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.e4 d6 5.Nf3 0-0 6.Be2 c5 7.0-0 Nbd7 8.d5 Nb6!? 9.h3 [I was very fortunate in 9.Nd2 Bg4? 10.Bxg4 1-0 Sawyer Johnson, Russ corr APCT 1981] 9...Bd7 10.a4 a5 11.Nd2 [11.Bf4+/-] 11...e6 12.Qc2 exd5 13.exd5 [More dynamic is 13.cxd5+/=] 13...Bf5 14.Bd3 Bxd3 15.Qxd3 Re8 16.b3 [16.Nf3+/=] 16...Nh5 17.Nf3 Qf6 18.Bd2 Nf4 19.Bxf4 Qxf4 [19...Qxc3 20.Qxc3 Bxc3 21.Rac1+/-] 20.Rae1 Nd7 21.Nb5 Ne5 22.Nxe5 Rxe5 23.g3 Qf6 24.f4!? [24.Rxe5 Qxe5 25.Qd2 Qe7 26.Re1+/=] 24...Re7 25.Qd2 Rd8 [25...Rae8!=] 26.Qxa5!? [Risky. White should play 26.Rxe7! Qxe7 27.Re1+/-] 26...Rde8 27.Qd2 h5 28.h4 Kh7 29.Kg2 Rxe1 30.Rxe1 Rxe1 31.Qxe1 Qb2+ 32.Kh3 [White could try 32.Qf2 Qxb3 33.Nxd6 Qxa4 34.f5+/=] 32...Qxb3 33.Nxd6 Qxa4 34.Nxf7 Qxc4 35.Ng5+ Kh6 36.Nf7+ Kh7 1/2-1/2

157 – Fischer 6.Be2 Nc6 7.0-0 Bobby Fischer was famous for his play with the King's Indian Defence as Black which he played 100 times in known recorded games. I collected and lightly annotated all those games. In the early 1990s many chess companies with programs and software were rapidly coming and going. Some were bigger and survived in one way or another. ChessBase proved to be best. Some were small with one item to sell on a floppy disk. I worked with one company, maybe from California. They were willing to pay $10 for content to publish. So, I submitted for publication my work on Fischer’s King’s Indian games. As often happened, the company informed me that they had gone out of business. At least I had the joy of studying those 100 Bobby Fischer games. Of course not every Fischer is Bobby Fischer. My opponent below was Gerhard Fischer. I think he was from Germany. Most researchers note that Bobby Fischer's father had a similar but different name: Hans-Gerhardt Fischer. The ICCF Cup V was an international postal tournament with nine players in my section. This took place before ICCF had ratings, so we did not know the relative strength of any player. Like most of my opponents from those early years, he did not get an established rating. My ICCF rating is 2157, but I am now inactive in correspondence. I chose the King's Indian Defence vs Fischer. This 5.Nf3 line had been my most common method of meeting the KID. Often I have tried the Saemisch 5.f3 as well. Later I would add 3.g3. Fischer blundered a pawn on move 8, blundered a second time 8 moves later, and resigned 8 moves after that. He wasn’t Bobby. Sawyer - Fischer, corr ICCF, 1981 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.e4 d6 5.Nf3 0-0 6.Be2 Nc6 7.0-0 Bg4 8.d5 Ne5?! [This drops a pawn.]

9.Nxe5 Bxe2 10.Nxf7 Rxf7 [Or 10...Bxd1 11.Nxd8 Raxd8 12.Rxd1+/-] 11.Qxe2 a6 12.Be3 Qd7 13.f3 b6 14.Qc2 b5? 15.cxb5 axb5 16.Ne2 [16.Qb3+-] 16...Ra6? 17.Nd4 Ra4 [Black gets frisky with his rooks on the rook files.] 18.Rfd1 Ne8 19.b3 Bxd4 20.Bxd4 Ra8 21.Rdc1 Rf4 22.Be3 Rh4 23.Qf2 Rh5 24.g4 1-0

158 – Jones 6.Be2 Nbd7 7.0-0 Craig W. Jones is one of the few players that I have faced live over the board and in postal chess. In 1981 we met in the third round of a tournament in Levittown, PA just north of Philadelphia. Jones became a master with a USCF rating as high as 2412 at one point. It might have been higher than that, but the online listing only goes back to 1991. This was a Saturday night game. I was about to change jobs. On Monday morning I would go from retail to the corporate business world. They were good preparation for my later careers in church ministry and in prison. This game features in the King's Indian Defence. My opponent chose baited me with 4.e4 0-0. I am sure he hoped I would play 5.e5 Ne8 when he could counter attack as Bobby Fischer had. I continued 5.Be2. After 5…d6 6.Nf3 Nbd7 7.0-0 e5, we were in a normal main line after 4.e4 d6 5.Nf3 0-0 6.Be2 e5 7.0-0 Nbd7. Note that Jones did not play 7…Nc6. He specialized in 7…Nbd7. His play in this game illustrates just how good that can be. This line is a very logical, systematic and thematic approach. It is one reason why attackers love the King’s Indian. After the game, Craig spent time to encourage me and explain how it happened. Sawyer - Jones (2100), Levittown, PA (3), 16.05.1981 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.e4 0-0 5.Be2 d6 6.Nf3 Nbd7 7.0-0 e5 8.d5 [8.Be3] 8...Nc5 9.Qc2 a5 10.Bg5 h6 11.Be3 Nfd7 [11...b6 12.Nd2 Ng4 13.Bxg4 Bxg4 14.a3=] 12.Nd2 f5 13.f3 [13.exf5 gxf5 14.f3+/=] 13...f4 14.Bf2 g5 15.b3 Nf6 16.a3 g4 17.b4 g3 18.hxg3 fxg3 19.Bxg3 Nh5 20.Bf2 Qg5? [20...Na6 21.b5+/=] 21.bxc5 Nf4 [If 21...Bh3 22.g4+-] 22.g4?! [Here I missed my chance. 22.g3!+- appears to be winning as White keeps his extra knight.] 22...h5 23.Bg3 hxg4 24.Bxf4? [White returns the favor. Better is 24.Kf2 Nh3+ 25.Kg2= and Black could repeat moves.] 24...exf4 25.fxg4

Bd4+ 26.Rf2 Qh4 27.Raf1? [27.Nd1 Qg3+ 28.Kf1 Qh3+ (28...Bxa1 29.cxd6 cxd6 30.Rg2 actually gives White some hope of survival.) 29.Ke1 Bxa1 30.cxd6 cxd6 31.e5 Bxe5 32.Nf3 Qh7-/+] 27...Qg3+ 28.Kh1 Bxf2 29.Qd3 Be3 30.Nf3 Rf7 31.e5 Rh7+ 0-1

159 – Small 6.Be2 e5 7.dxe5 This game features the King's Indian Defence. My opponent was Thomas Small in a team match. This was the only chess game I won while I was visiting New Jersey. I lived in Pennsylvania. I do remember having a draw vs Ernest Haile in a Dutch Defence. The Main Line of the King's Indian Defence after 5.Nf3 is a very dynamic variation. Black has every expectation to play for a win. However one line simplifies the position when lots of material disappear from the board very quickly. The Exchange Variation 7.dxe5 dxe5 is a natural choice for some players who wish to limit their study. White was very willing to exchange pieces throughout the game until he dropped a pawn. Then he tried to avoid exchanges. A lot of simple positions have one player attack at a time and the other defend. This game had many counter attacks. Let’s say, you attack me. Then instead of defending, I attack you! When we reached the endgame, Black threatened to win a second pawn which would have been a passed pawn. Then White resigned. Small (1971) - Sawyer (1981), Bordentown, NJ 09.02.1985 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.e4 d6 5.Nf3 0-0 6.Be2 e5 7.dxe5 dxe5 8.0-0 [The main line is 8.Qxd8 Rxd8 9.Bg5 Re8 10.Nd5 Nxd5 11.cxd5 c6 12.Bc4 cxd5 13.Bxd5=] 8...Nbd7 9.Be3 c6 10.Rb1 a5 11.a3 Ng4 12.Bc1 [12.Bg5!?] 12...Bh6 13.h3 Bxc1 14.Qxc1 Ngf6 15.Rd1 Qe7 16.Qh6 Re8 17.Ng5 Qf8 18.Qxf8+ Nxf8 19.Rd6 Kg7 20.Rbd1 Ne6 21.Nxe6+ Bxe6 22.b3 Kf8 23.Na4 [23.f3 Ke7 24.Na4 Red8=] 23...Nxe4 24.R6d3 b5 25.cxb5 cxb5 26.Nb2 Nc5 [26...Rac8-+] 27.Re3 f6 28.Bxb5 Reb8 29.Bc6?! [29.Bc4 Bxc4 30.Nxc4 Rxb3 31.Rxb3 Nxb3 32.Rd7=] 29...Ra6 30.Bd5 Nxb3 31.Bxe6 Rxe6 32.Nc4 a4 33.Rd7 Re7 34.Red3 Nd4 35.Rd6 Rc7 [35...Kg7=/+] 36.Nb6? [36.Rxf6+ Kg7 37.Rb6=] 36...Ke7 [36...Rc1+!] 37.Rxf6 Kxf6 [Even stronger is 37...Rd8!-+] 38.Nd5+ Ke6 39.Nxc7+ Kd6 40.Na6 Rb3 41.Nb4 Kc5 0-1

160 – Commons 7.0-0 Nbd7 When Kim S. Commons passed away, I remembered his King's Indian Defence games from the 1970s. We were about the same age. I took note of our similar names. He was “Kim” and I “Tim.” I read about Kim Steven Commons in Chess Life & Review during his rise to become an International Master. When I was a Junior player (later called Scholastic), Kim Commons was one of the best in the USCF. Then like many players from my generation, he dropped out of rated tournament play. He did something else with his life. Samuel Reshevsky (1911-1992) was a child prodigy 100 years ago. Sammy became superstar grandmaster. Reshevsky drew or defeated all the world champions of his life. These include: Lasker, Capablanca, Alekhine, Euwe, Botvinnik, Smyslov, Tal, Petrosian, Spassky, Fischer and Karpov. Commons defeated Reshevsky in the 1974 US championship with two bishops on the Bc4-g8 and Bb2-h8 diagonals combined with his queen. At the end if Black's undefended knight moves away to 27...Nb6, White has 28.Qe5! to force checkmate. Commons - Reshevsky, USA-ch Chicago (10), 1974 begins 1.Nf3 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.e4 d6 5.d4 0-0 6.Be2 e5 7.0-0 Nbd7 8.Re1 c6 9.Bf1 Qb6 [9...exd4 10.Nxd4=] 10.d5 Nc5 11.Rb1 a5 12.b3 Bd7 13.Ba3 cxd5 14.cxd5 Ng4 [14...Qc7=] 15.Rb2 f5 [15...Qc7 16.Bb5+/=] 16.Na4 Qa7 [16...Bxa4 17.bxa4+/-] 17.Nxc5 dxc5 18.h3 Nf6 19.Nxe5 [Or 19.exf5 e4 20.Ng5+/-] 19...fxe4 [If 19...Nxe4 20.Nxd7+-] 20.Nxd7 Nxd7 21.Rxe4 Bxb2 22.Bxb2 Rae8 23.d6 Rxe4 24.Qd5+ Rf7 25.Qxe4 Qb8 26.Bc4 Qf8 27.Qe6 1-0

161 – Swapnil 7.0-0 Nc6 White's lesser known line vs the Kings Indian Defence resulted in a quick win. In the game Sunil Dhopade Swapnil vs Yang-Fan Zhou, an inaccuracy on move 9 allowed White to pick off a pawn in exchange for the two bishops. Black's defensive task would be difficult, but a natural recapture by Black overlooked a winning tactic for White. Swapnil (2533) - Zhou (2449), PRO League Group Stage chess.com INT (4), 04.02.2018 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.e4 0-0 5.Nf3 d6 6.Be2 e5 7.0-0 Nc6 8.dxe5 dxe5 9.Bg5 h6 [9...Bg4 10.Qxd8 Nxd8 11.Bxf6 Bxf6 12.Nd5=] 10.Qxd8 Rxd8 11.Bxf6 Bxf6 12.Nd5 Kg7 13.Nxc7 Rb8 14.h3 Nd4 15.Nxd4 15...Rxd4? [15...exd4 16.Bd3+/=] 16.Ne8+ [The fork check wins a piece.] 1-0

162 – Norris 8.d5 Ne7 9.Bd2 The King's Indian Defence 5.Nf3 variation leads to opposite side attacks. White plays to pick off material on the queenside and win the endgame. Black plays for an attack on the kingside to mate or win material. FM Alan J. Norris of Scotland chose an interesting combination of 9.Bd2 and 10.g3. I held my hold, but I slipped up and lost in the middlegame. Norris stopped my kingside attack very quickly. When he turned to the queenside, where I was unable to defend properly. ICCF ratings online do not go back 30 years, but 20 years ago his ICCF rating is 2362 and mine was 2157. Neither of us have played in ICCF since then. Norris - Sawyer, corr ICCF 1984 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.e4 d6 5.Nf3 0-0 6.Be2 e5 7.0-0 Nc6 8.d5 Ne7 9.Bd2 Nh5 10.g3 [10.h3+/=] 10...f5 [10...Nf6] 11.exf5 Nxf5 12.Ne4 [12.Bg5] 12...Nf6 13.Bg5 h6 14.Bxf6 Bxf6 15.Bd3 Bg7 16.h4 c6 17.Kg2 Bd7 18.Qd2 cxd5 19.cxd5 Qb6 20.Rac1 Rf7 [20...Rac8=] 21.Rc3 Raf8 22.Rb3 Qc7 23.Rc1 Qb8 24.Ba6 Bc8 25.Qb4 Rc7 [Black misses 25...Qa8!=] 26.Rxc7 Qxc7 27.Bxb7 1-0

163 – Ash 9.b4 Nh5 10.Ne1 You must attack to win. Experts know this. You must defend when good players attack your position. This game features a King's Indian Defence 5.Nf3 against postal expert Robert Ash. We were young and gradually working our way up through the ranks. Within a year my rating would go over 2000. GM Mark Taimanov was one of the early proponents of 9.b4 in the 1950s and 1960s. Others who frequently adopted this line were the theoreticians Gligoric and Pachman. I played it well. My middlegame advantage grew until I reached a winning position. But Black kept attacking. I defended fine until about move 30. Then Black wore me down with his repeated assaults. I kept choosing second rate defenses and missed a saving resource. Sawyer (1900) - Ash (2060), corr APCT 77RF-6 (3), 06.1978 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.e4 d6 5.Be2 0-0 6.Nf3 e5 7.0-0 Nc6 8.d5 Ne7 9.b4!? Nh5 10.Ne1 [10.g3] 10...Nf4 11.Nd3 Nxe2+ [11...f5 12.f3=] 12.Qxe2 f5 13.f3 f4!? [13...fxe4!=] 14.c5 g5 [14...c6!=] 15.a4 Ng6 16.c6 Rf7 17.b5 Bf8 18.Nb4 h5 19.cxb7 Bxb7 20.Nc6 Qf6 21.Qf2 [21.a5+/-] 21...g4 22.fxg4 hxg4 23.Nxa7 Nh4 [23...Rh7 24.g3=] 24.Nc6 [24.a5!+/-] 24...Rh7 25.Ne2 f3 [25...Bxc6=] 26.g3 Qg6 [26...fxe2 27.Qxf6+/-] 27.gxh4 fxe2 28.Qxe2 Bxc6 29.bxc6 [29.dxc6!+-] 29...Rxh4 30.Ra3 Bg7 [30...Rh3 31.Rxh3 gxh3+ 32.Kh1 Qg2+ 33.Qxg2+ hxg2+ 34.Kxg2+/-] 31.Rf5 [31.Qg2!+-] 31...Bh6 32.Bxh6 Qxh6 33.Qf2 [33.Rg3+/-] 33...Rb8 34.Ra1 Rh3 35.Qa7 [35.Qe2=] 35...Rhb3 36.Ra3? [White can save the game with 36.Kh1! Rb1+ 37.Rf1 R8b2 38.Qg1!=] 36...Rb1+ [Not 36...Rxa3?? 37.Qxb8+ and White is winning.] 37.Kg2 R8b2+ 38.Rf2 Qc1 0-1

164 – Roys 9.b4 Nh5 10.Re1 My King's Indian game against Roys saw me sacrifice the Exchange and trap a rook in the endgame. I had chances to win as White, but I did not find anything during play. Roys was a master level opponent who chose complex main lines. I played Roys four times. We scored 1-1 with two draws. Sawyer (1960) - Roys (2200), corr APCT EMQ-2, 21.11.1996 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.e4 d6 5.Nf3 0-0 6.Be2 e5 7.0-0 Nc6 8.d5 Ne7 9.b4 Nh5 10.Re1 h6 [10...f5 11.Ng5 Nf6 12.f3 Nh5 13.c5 Nf4=] 11.Nd2 Nf4 12.Bf1 f5 [12...a5!=] 13.c5 g5?! [Black does not get his normal thematic kingside attack here. When things break wide open, White has the better game. Black should try 13...fxe4 14.Ndxe4 Nf5 15.g3 Nh5 16.Bg2+/=] 14.cxd6 cxd6 15.Nc4 g4 16.b5 fxe4 17.Nxe4 Nfxd5 18.Ncxd6 Qb6 19.Nxc8 Raxc8 20.Qxg4 Nf6 21.Nxf6+ Qxf6 22.Be3 Nf5 23.f3 [23.Bd3 Nxe3 24.fxe3+-] 23...e4 24.Qxe4 Rfe8 25.Qd5+ Qf7 26.Qxf7+ Kxf7 27.Bxa7 Bxa1 28.Rxa1 Re6 [28...Ne3 29.Bd3+/-] 29.Bf2 Rd6 30.a4 Nd4 31.Bxd4 Rxd4 32.a5 Rd2 33.a6 bxa6 34.bxa6 Ra8 35.Bb5 Ra7 36.Bc6 Rb2 37.Ra4 Rc7 38.Bd5+ Kg6 39.h3 Ra7 40.Bb7 Kf7 41.Re4 Kf6 42.Kh2 Rb1 43.Rc4 Re1 44.Rf4+ Kg5 45.Rg4+ Kf6 46.h4 [46.Rc4 Rb1 47.g4+-] 46...Re5 47.Rc4 Rh5 48.Rc6+ Kg7 49.Kh3 Rf5 50.Kg4 [50.Rb6 h5 51.g4!+- works because the bishop covers f3.] 50...Ra5 51.Re6 [51.Rb6! h5+ 52.Kf4 Ra4+ 53.Ke5+-] 51...Rb5 52.f4 [It is amazing hard to avoid a drawish ending.] 52...h5+ 53.Kf3 Rb4 54.g4 Rb3+ 55.Re3 hxg4+ 56.Ke4 Rb5 57.Rg3 Kh6 58.Rxg4 Rb4+ 59.Ke5 Kh5 60.Rg2 Rb5+ 61.Ke4 Rb4+ 62.Kf5 1/2-1/2

165 – Storch 9.Nd2 Ne8 10.b4 This was my first King's Indian Defence as Black in an actual USCF tournament. I had played it over 200 times in club, match, blitz, and correspondence, although not always particularly well. My desire was to play main lines as aggressively as possible. In many tournaments I had played the Gruenfeld Defence since the 1970s, but I liked the King's Indian Defence too. Larry Storch chose a line that Viktor Korchnoi had played against Bobby Fischer. Larry is from my generation. At this time we were in our 50s. Storch was at his floor of 2200; I was rated 1978. I told Larry that it had been since I was in my age 30s since I had played in a tournament where my rating went up. He said that you have to be a kid to raise your rating these days. I told him I had lost to Robson three times. He said, "Who hasn't? What is he, eight?" I am sure Larry knew Ray Robson was then age 12. Storch - Sawyer, Central Florida Class Ch (1), 06.01.2007 begins 1.d4 [I had expected an English, although Storch plays both.] 1...Nf6 [Often I play 1...d5 1...Nc6 or 1...f5, but I wanted to play sharper.] 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.e4 d6 5.Nf3 0-0 6.Be2 e5 7.0-0 Nc6 8.d5 Ne7 [Main Line stuff.] 9.Nd2 [Korchnoi played this. I play the Bayonet Attack 9.b4] 9...Ne8 [9...a5 is the normal move, and I knew it. But that is about all that I knew about it.] 10.b4 f5 11.c5 f4 12.Bg4 [This took me by surprise, but it is very logical. I will likely be lost on the queenside, so I must get going on the kingside.] 12...h5 13.Bxc8 Qxc8 14.f3 g5 15.Nc4 Ng6 16.Ba3 Rf7 17.Rc1 Bf8 18.Qc2 Qd8 19.Qe2 Rg7 20.Kh1 Rh7 [I had used a lot of time by this point. Damey suggested I could have tried 20...g4!? 21.fxg4 hxg4 22.Qxg4 Nh4] 21.Rfd1 Kh8 22.Rc2 Rg7 23.cxd6 cxd6 24.b5 Kg8 25.Rdc1 Rf7 26.Bb4 Rg7 27.a4 Nh8 28.Ba5 Qf6 29.Na2 g4 [Now seems to be the best time to throw everything at the White King.] 30.Nd2 Qh4 31.Rc8 Rxc8 32.Rxc8 Nf6 33.Bb4 Nf7 34.Nc4 Nxe4?! [Both of us were short of time. Here I missed my chance to play 34...gxf3! 35.gxf3 Qh3! 36.Nxd6 Nxd6

37.Rxf8+ Kxf8 38.Bxd6+ Kf7 39.Bxe5 Rg3 40.Bxf6 Rxf3 41.Kg1 Rd3-+] 35.Qxe4 Ng5 36.Qf5 Rf7 37.Qg6+ Rg7 38.Qxd6 Nxf3 [or 38...gxf3 39.Qxf8+ Kh7 40.Qf5+ Kh6+- and I am still lost.] 39.Qxf8+ Kh7 40.Qf5+ Rg6 41.gxf3 g3 42.Rc7+ Kh8 43.Qf8+ 1-0

166 – Podymov 9.Nd2 c5 10.dxc6 I played this Russian master by postal chess in 1984. Mail between our countries was long and slow during the Cold War. International Correspondence Chess Master Alexander Vladimirovich Podymov has a FIDE rating of 2300. His ICCF rating is 2311, down from 2363. My ICCF rating is 2157. Those who learned the game in the days of Bobby Fischer were drawn to the King's Indian Defence. We were able to consult chess books for opening theory. There were no databases nor strong chess engines to help. Podymov played the main line 5.Nf3 variation against my main line up to 9.Nd2 c5. The move 9.Nd2 is popular and dates back at least to the 1960s where it was played many times in grandmaster tournaments by Taimanov and Gligoric. The move 9…c5 was played by Tringov and Geller. By 1971 this line was played in the game Korchnoi vs Fischer. Here I give some analysis of the 9.Nd2 variation. Podymov - Sawyer, corr ICCF 1984 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.e4 d6 5.Be2 0-0 6.Nf3 e5 7.0-0 Nc6 8.d5 Ne7 9.Nd2 c5 [9...a5 10.a3 Nd7 11.Rb1 f5 12.exf5 Nxf5 13.Nde4 Nf6 14.Bg5=; 9...Nd7 10.b4 f5 11.f3 a5 12.bxa5 Rxa5 13.Nb3 Ra8 14.Be3=] 10.dxc6 bxc6 11.b4 [11.Nb3 a5 12.Bg5 h6 13.Be3=] 11...d5 12.Ba3 [12.Rb1 Rb8 13.Qc2=; 12.Re1 d4 13.Na4=] 12...a6 [12...Re8 13.Re1 Be6 14.Bf1 Rb8=] 13.Re1 Be6 14.Bf1 Re8 15.Bb2 d4! 16.Na4 Nd7 17.Nb3 Nc8 18.Nbc5 [Or 18.Nac5=] 18...Ncb6 19.Nxe6 Rxe6 20.Bc1 [20.Nxb6 Qxb6=] 20...Nxa4 [20...a5=] 21.Qxa4 c5 22.a3 f5 [22...Rc8=] 23.Bd3 [23.g3=] 23...f4 24.Bd2 1/2-1/2

167 – Cherner 9.Nd2 a5 10.a3 Old correspondence chess games were played by postcard at a pace of one move per week. Players carried on several games at once which meant making a handful of moves each day. My non-chess playing friends had seen movies and television shows. There would be a chess position set-up and no one sitting at the board. An actor came into the room, considered the position, made a move and went on with the show. That led to a question frequently asked me by non-chess players when then heard that I was playing 30 chess games at once: "Do you have 30 chess sets set up all around the house?" Lyle Cherner was one of APCT's more active players. He was a recipient of an APCT Life Achievement Certificate. I was as well. We faced each other 15 times. I was much higher rated, so my score of +11 =4 -0 was to be expected. Cherner played offbeat lines, such as the Grob and the Englund, even more that I did! The King's Indian Defence normally leads to an attack by Black on the White kingside. This is especially true in the main line. I have won and lost KID's where the Black army came crashing down on the cutoff White king. The proven strategy for White is to expand on the queenside, open lines and hit weak points hard and fast. Typical weak points for Black are d6, c7, b7 and a7. White tries to get Black to stop attacking kingside and start defending queenside where White's play is very promising. If White is too slow, Black will build up a strong attack. Cherner played White with 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6. I have played the King's Indian Defence and the Gruenfeld Defence hundreds of times each. After 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.e4 d6, we trotted down the main line of the King's Indian Defence. White allowed the queenside to be mostly closed. This gave Black time for a mating attack. Cherner - Sawyer, corr APCT EMN-A-2, 30.07.1996 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.e4 d6 5.Nf3 0-0 6.Be2 e5 7.0-0 Nc6 8.d5 Ne7 9.Nd2 a5

10.a3 Nd7 11.Rb1 f5 12.b4 Kh8 13.Qc2 Nf6 14.f3 axb4 15.axb4 c6 16.Kh1 f4!? [16…Nh5!=] 17.Bb2 g5 18.Ra1 Rb8 [18…Rxa1 19.Rxa1 +=] 19.b5 c5 20.Ra7 h5 21.h3 Ng6 22.Rb1?! g4 23.hxg4 hxg4 24.Rba1? g3 25.Kg1 Ne8 26.Nf1 Qh4 27.Bd1 Bf6 28.Qd3 Kg7 0-1

168 – Richardson 9.Ne1 Nd7 I played board four for the USA in the Xth Correspondence Team Olympiade. I don’t know who played on the upper boards for England, but my opponent was Keith B. Richardson. Our game was played from late 1982 through 1983. At that time Keith was one of the strongest postal chess players in the world. Bill Wall has a link entitled “Chess in 1942” where he wrote: “On February 22, 1942, Keith Bevan Richardson was born in Nottingham, England. He was awarded the IMC title in 1968 and the GMC title in 1975, he finished 3rd= in the World Correspondence Championships of 1975 and 1984.” Richardson had written a book on the Gruenfeld Defence that I used to own. Against me Keith chose the King’s Indian Defence. The key aspect of our opening was my choice of 11.g4?! When I was young this seemed like it was an interesting attempt to stop Black's kingside attack. White could enjoy his space advantage on the queenside and play for a win. All that sounds nice in theory, but in practice Richardson was very creative and energetic. I learned later that this game was published in the British Chess Magazine and in a book I owned. Sawyer (2050) - Richardson (2500), CCOL10 prel 8287 corr, 1982 begins 1.c4 g6 2.Nc3 Bg7 3.d4 Nf6 4.e4 0-0 5.Nf3 d6 6.Be2 e5 7.0-0 Nc6 8.d5 Ne7 9.Ne1 Nd7 10.f3 [10.Nd3 f5 11.f3 f4 12.Bd2 Nf6 13.Be1!?+/=] 10...f5 11.g4?! [Experience has shown now that the better way to play is 11.Be3 f4 12.Bf2 g5 13.Nd3+/=] 11...Nf6 12.Ng2 [In view of how things turned out on the kingside, 12.Nd3! looks like a much better move.] 12...c6 13.Be3 cxd5 14.cxd5 f4 15.Bf2 g5 16.Qd3 h5 17.h3 hxg4 18.hxg4 a6 19.a4 Kf7 20.Rfc1 Rh8 21.Ne1 Rh3 22.Bf1 Bxg4 23.Bxh3 Bxh3 24.Rc2?! [Houdini gives 24.Nb1! Qh8 25.Nd2 g4 26.Nc4 Rd8 27.Bb6=. Now instead, Black

finds a great concept. Playing the queen to the corner leads to a winning attack.] 24...Qh8! 25.Bb6 Qh4 26.Rh2 [White is already in a very difficult situation with his king trapped. 26.Bf2 Qh5 27.Bb6 g4-+] 26...Qg3+ 27.Kh1 Rh8 28.Bg1? Ng4 29.Qd2 Nxh2 30.Bxh2 Qh4 [Or 30...Bf1!-+] 31.Nd1 g4 32.fxg4 Bxg4 33.Qf2 Bf6 0-1

169 – Chaney 10.Be3 f5 11.f3 The King's Indian Defence promotes a strategy of attacking on opposite sides. White attacks on the queenside. Black attacks on the kingside. It becomes a race to see whose attack is stronger. My opponent Ronald Chaney transposed into the 5.Nf3 variation after 5.Be2 0-0 6.Nf3. He chose the main line 9.Ne1. The center became blocked with big pawn chains. After a dozen moves the White pawns stretched from g2, f3, e4, d5, c4 and a4. Black had pawns on c7, d6, e5, f4 and g5. White expanded quickly on the queenside. Chaney played the unusual move 16.Na7 followed by 17.Nxc8. He eliminated my light squared attacking bishop. Chaney kept up the pressure and busted open my queenside. Once White played 29.Rxc7, Black was in deep trouble. I attacked his White king. Unfortunately I did not bring enough fire power to the party. I had to sacrifice pawns to keep going. When I resigned, I still had some moves, but no serious threats. I was down two minor pieces plus three pawns for a rook. It was time to focus on other games and call it a day in this one. Ron Chaney played it well. We faced each other many times in correspondence play. In the early years of postal chess, I had the better record. In the later years of email, Chaney had a much better record. Chaney - Sawyer, corr APCT EMQ-2, 30.07.1996 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.e4 d6 5.Be2 0-0 6.Nf3 e5 7.0-0 Nc6 8.d5 Ne7 9.Ne1 Nd7 10.Be3 [10.Nd3 f5 11.f3+/=] 10...f5 11.f3 f4 12.Bf2 g5 13.a4 Ng6 14.a5 h5

15.Nb5 a6 16.Na7 Nf6 17.Nxc8 Qxc8 18.c5 g4 19.Rc1 Qd7 20.c6 [20.Qb3+/-] 20...bxc6 21.Rxc6 g3 [21...Ne7 22.Rxa6+/-] 22.hxg3 fxg3 23.Bxg3 h4 24.Bh2 [24.Bf2+-] 24...Nh5 25.Bxa6 [25.Qc1+/-] 25...Bh6 26.Qd3 Bf4 27.Bxf4 [27.b4+/=] 27...Ngxf4 28.Qc2 Ng3 29.Rxc7 Nh3+ [Black is winning after 29...Qd8! 30.Rc6 h3!-+] 30.Kh2 Nxf1+ 31.Bxf1 Qd8 32.gxh3 1-0

170 – Roys 11.f3 f4 12.Bf2 g5 My King's Indian Defence game here against Harvey Roys is one that got away... again. I got a good position against a correspondence master, but I let it slip. Black counter-attacked. I missed the unusual saving resource to move my queen from Qd2 to Qd1 to Qh1 and defend the kingside. I've noted that 1996 was one of the worst years of my chess career. I drew won games and lost drawn games. It ended my 20 years of correspondence play. But not to worry. My career was not over in 1996. The year 1998 was one of my best years when my ICC blitz rating peaked at 2492. That was fun! Don't give up after a bad year. Sawyer (1960) - Roys (2259), corr APCT EMN-A-2, 19.08.1996 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.e4 d6 5.Nf3 0-0 6.Be2 e5 7.0-0 Nc6 8.d5 Ne7 9.Ne1 Nd7 10.Be3 f5 11.f3 f4 12.Bf2 g5 13.a4 Ng6 14.a5 a6 15.Nd3 Nf6 16.c5 Bd7 17.Nb4 [17.Qb3+/-] 17...Ne7 18.Na4 g4 19.cxd6 cxd6 20.Nb6 gxf3 21.gxf3 [21.Bxf3+/-] 21...Bh3 22.Re1 [22.Nxa8 Qxa8 23.Qa4 Bxf1 24.Bxf1 Qe8 25.Nd3+/-] 22...Rb8 23.Bf1 Bxf1 24.Rxf1 Qe8 25.Kh1 Nd7 26.Nd3 [26.Nc4+/-] 26...Nxb6 27.Bxb6 Rc8 28.Rc1 Rxc1 29.Qxc1 Qb5 30.Qd2 Rc8 31.Kg2 Ng6 32.Rc1 Nh4+ 33.Kf2 Rxc1 34.Nxc1 Qd7 [White resigned after failing to see that 35.Qd1 Qh3 36.Qh1!= defends h2 and f3.] 0-1

Book 7: Chapter 7 – Gruenfeld Defence 3.Nc3 d5 and others Here we consider rare White third and fourth move alternatives when Black is playing 1.d4 Nf6 2 c4 g6 and 3…d5.

171 – O'Hearn 3.g3 d5 4.Bg2 A good method of development for White in chess is to play 1.d4 followed by kingside fianchetto, castling and c4. This flexible deployment can begin 1.d4, 1.c4, 1.Nf3 or even 1.g3. When Jim O’Hearn opened like this in our 1979 postal game, I chose the Gruenfeld Defence. The position became symmetrical. White played the thematic 6.c4. Black had the choice between 6…c6 and 6…dxc4. The solid 6…c6 7.cxd5 cxd5 left White with the one tempo advantage. I chose 6…dxc4. This pawn grab is temporary. White recaptured the pawn with 7.Na3 and 8.Nxc4 and built up a big pawn center. When White allowed Black to play 20…Nd3, White sacrificed the Exchange. Then Black destroyed the pawn center and won. O'Hearn (1822) - Sawyer (2000), corr APCT 1979 begins 1.Nf3 Nf6 2.d4 g6 3.g3 Bg7 4.Bg2 0-0 5.0-0 d5 6.c4 dxc4 [6...c6 7.cxd5 cxd5 8.Nc3=] 7.Na3 Na6 [7...Nc6 8.Nxc4 Bf5=] 8.Nxc4 c5 9.Bf4 [9.b3 Bf5 10.Bb2 Be4=] 9...Be6 [9...Nd5=] 10.Ne3 Nh5 [10...Nd5=] 11.d5 Nxf4 12.gxf4 Bd7 13.Ne5 Qc8 14.Nxd7 Qxd7 15.Nc4 Rad8 16.e4 Qc7 17.e5 b5 18.Ne3 Nb4 19.Qe2 [19.a3+/=] 19...c4 20.Rfd1 Nd3 21.Rxd3 cxd3 22.Qxd3 Qc5 23.Bf1? [23.Qd2 Rc8=/+] 23...Qb4 24.Ng2 a6 25.Rd1 Qxb2 26.Rd2 Qb4 27.a3 Qa4 28.Qe3 Kh8 29.Ne1 f5?! [29...Rc8-+] 30.Rd4 Qa5 31.h4 Qb6 32.Nf3 h6 33.Qd3 Rd7 34.Bg2 Rc8? [34...Qc5-/+] 35.Qd2? [White had a chance for 35.h5!=] 35...Qc5 36.Rd3 Qc1+ 37.Qxc1 Rxc1+ 38.Kh2 Rc5 39.d6 exd6 40.exd6 Kh7 41.h5 gxh5 42.Nh4 Bf8 43.Nxf5 Kg6 44.Be4 Kf6 0-1

172 – Shepherd 4…c6 5.Nf3 John Shepherd of Montreal started with a 1.c4 English Opening. White transposed to the Gruenfeld Defence by move six. The strategy of the 3.g3 Neo-Gruenfeld is that both sides have tactical possibilities along the long diagonal. Some players will choose complete symmetry with 7.cxd5 cxd5. Of course, in that case White has the very slight edge of the next move. The games may end in draws after significant exchanges. The main weakness for White is that with the bishop moved to g2, the protection for the c4 pawn is left to other White pieces. As Black I grabbed the pawn on c4 and tried to hold on. White could have played 8.e4! Instead he boldly planted an outpost with 8.Ne5 and protected it with 9.f4. Black counter attacked with 9…c5 to undermine the center. As it turned out, this also helped open the g1-a7 diagonal. That proved to be dangerous for White when he overlooked a tactic. Shepherd (2000) - Sawyer (2000), corr APCT 1979 begins 1.c4 Nf6 2.g3 c6 3.Bg2 d5 4.Nf3 g6 5.0-0 Bg7 6.d4 0-0 7.Nc3 [7.cxd5 cxd5 8.Nc3=] 7...dxc4! 8.Ne5 [8.e4!=] 8...Ng4 9.f4 [9.Nf3 e5 10.dxe5 Nxe5 11.Nxe5=] 9...c5 10.e3 cxd4 11.exd4 Nxe5 12.dxe5 Nc6 13.Qa4 Bf5 [13...Qb6+ 14.Rf2 Be6=/+] 14.Be3 Na5? [14...Bd3=] 15.Rfd1 Bd3 16.Ne4 [16.b3+/-] 16...Qc7 17.Nc5 Rad8 18.b4 Nc6 19.Nxb7 Qxb7 20.Bxc6 Bc2 [20...Qc8 21.b5+/=] 21.Rxd8 Rxd8 22.Qxc2 [22.Qa5+/-] 22...Qxc6 23.Bxa7 e6 24.Bc5 Qd5 25.Be3 Bf8 26.a3 Kg7 27.Rc1 Qd3?! [27...Qf3!=] 28.Bc5? [Big blunder. Black would have a difficult ending after 28.Qxd3! Rxd3 29.Bc5 Rxa3 30.Rxc4 Bxc5+ 31.bxc5+/-] 28...Bxc5+ [There is no defense to 29...Qe3-+] 0-1

173 – Tari 4…Bg7 5.Nf3 0-0 Bishops crisscross the center from afar in the Gruenfeld Defence 3.g3 Variation. Players fianchetto their kingside bishops to aim down the long diagonals. White opted for an unbalanced center with 6.cxd5 Nxd5. Black found a weakness when the game opened up. He targeted the f2 square to win in the game Lasse Ostebo Lovik vs Aryan Tari. Lovik (2376) - Tari (2603), TCh-NOR Club 2018 Bergen NOR (4.2), 12.05.2018 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.g3 Bg7 4.Bg2 0-0 5.Nf3 d5 6.cxd5 [6.0-0 c6 7.b3 Bf5 8.Bb2 Qb6=] 6...Nxd5 [6...Qxd5 7.Nc3 Qa5 8.0-0+/=] 7.0-0 [7.Nc3 c5 8.0-0 Nxc3 9.bxc3 cxd4=] 7...Nb6 [7...Nc6 8.e4 Nb6 9.d5 Na5 10.Nc3 c6=] 8.Nc3 Nc6 9.d5 Na5 10.Qc2 Bd7!? [10...Nxd5 11.Rd1 c6 12.e4 Nb4 13.Qa4=] 11.Rd1 c6 12.Nd4? [12.dxc6 Nxc6 13.Be3 Nc4 14.Bf4 Rc8=] 12...cxd5 13.Nxd5 Rc8 [13...Nxd5=/+] 14.Qe4 [14.Nc3=] 14...Nxd5 15.Qxd5 e6 16.Qf3 Ba4 17.b3 Bxd4 18.Bb2 Bc6 19.Qg4 e5 20.Bxc6 Rxc6 21.e3 Rc2 22.exd4 [22.Bxd4 Qf6 23.Qf4 Qxf4 24.gxf4 exd4 25.Rxd4 Rb2-+] 22...Qf6 0-1

174 – Kramnik 5.Nf3 0-0 6.0-0 White transposed to the Neo-Gruenfeld Defence with an early g3. Black found a creative way to swap off the light squared bishops with 7...Be6 8.cxd5 Bxd5 9.Nc3 Bxg2. White dominated the dark squares. Black played to counter the attack on d4 with c5. In a weird way, White's doubled pawns became an advantage. Black might have done better with a rook on the dfile. Play ended in this Gruenfeld Defence when Vladimir Kramnik was about to win the b-pawn of Peter Svidler giving White two passed b-pawns. Kramnik (2787) - Svidler (2768), 80th Tata Steel GpA Wijk aan Zee NED, 16.01.2018 begins 1.Nf3 Nf6 2.g3 d5 3.Bg2 g6 4.0-0 Bg7 5.d4 0-0 6.c4 c6 7.Ne5 Be6 8.cxd5 Bxd5 9.Nc3 Bxg2 10.Kxg2 Nbd7 11.Qb3 Qb6 12.Rd1 Qxb3 13.axb3 Rfc8 14.f4 c5 [14...Rd8=] 15.Be3 cxd4 16.Rxd4 Nxe5 17.fxe5 Ne8 18.Rd7 Rc7 [18...Bxe5 19.Rxe7 Bxc3 20.bxc3+/=] 19.Rxa7

Rb8 20.Rd5 b6 [20...Kf8 21.Bf4+/-] 21.Nb5 Rxa7 22.Nxa7 Kf8 23.Rd7 Ra8 24.Bd4 1-0

175 – Guest 3.Nf3 d5 4.cxd5 Nxd5 When White delays 3.Nc3 in the Gruenfeld Defence, there is the possibility of kicking the Black knight off d5 without allowing it to chop off the horse on c3. Here my "guest" opponent plays quite well. I gave him or her a fake rating of 1600. Of course that number might be off by a few hundred points. For the purpose of calculating my performance rating over thousands of games, I often make up a rating for unrated opponents. Such a rating is based on how hard I feel they pushed me or how much they let me get away with. It is purely subjective. My judgment is based on 50,000 games of personal experience. My own Internet Chess Club rating had crept back up to 2081 in this game. Guest - Sawyer (2081), ICC 4 2 u Internet Chess Club, 18.03.2015 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3 g6 3.c4 d5 4.cxd5 Nxd5 [A very interesting idea here is 4...Bg7 5.Qa4+ c6 6.dxc6 Nxc6 7.Nc3 Bf5 8.g3 0-0 9.Bg2 a6 10.0-0 b5 11.Qd1 Rc8 12.Bf4+/=] 5.e4 Nb6 6.h3 Bg7 7.Nc3 0-0 8.Be2 Nc6 9.Be3 e5 [The alternative is 9...f5 10.exf5+/=] 10.dxe5 [Up to here White has played very well. It would seem he should continue 10.d5! Ne7 11.Bc5+/-] 10...Nxe5 11.Qxd8 Rxd8 12.Nxe5 Bxe5 13.f4 Bg7 14.Kf2 c6 15.Rhd1 Be6 16.Rac1 Nc4 17.Rxd8+ Rxd8 18.Bxa7 [18.Bxc4! Bxc4 19.b3=] 18...Nxb2 19.Rb1? [19.Kf3 Nd3=/+] 19...Nd3+?! [Having previously planned this move in blitz, I missed the better move 19...Bxc3!-+] 20.Bxd3 Rxd3 21.Ne2 b5 22.Rc1 Bc4 23.Be3 Ra3 24.Rc2 [24.Rd1 h5-/+] 24...Rxa2 25.Rxa2 Bxa2 26.Nd4 [26.Bc5 Bf8-/+ and White cannot change the fact the Black has two connected passed pawns.] 26...b4 27.Nxc6 b3 28.Bc1 b2 29.Bxb2 Bxb2 30.g4 Kf8 31.h4 Bc4 32.h5 Bc3 33.hxg6 hxg6 34.Ke3 Bb5 35.Nd4 Bxd4+ 36.Kxd4 Ke7 37.Ke5 f6+ 38.Kd5 Be2 39.g5 fxg5 40.fxg5 Bf3 41.Ke5 Bg4 42.Kf4 Be6 43.Ke5 Bd7 44.Kd5 Bc8 45.Ke5 Bb7 46.Kf4 Ke6 47.e5 Bc6 White resigns 0-1

176 – Ross 4.e3 Bg7 5.c5 0-0 My Gruenfeld Defence against Paul Ross resulted in a rare pawn chain. White gained queenside space and locked the pawns with the dubious move 5.c5?! Immediately my focus went to e5. A proven strategy for success is to attack a backward point of the pawn chain. White wins against the Gruenfeld by attacking vulnerable points. Here White played for a space advantage and tactics on the queenside. Solid play can easily drift into passive play. Black attacked all over the board. White’s strategy failed in this game because he did not castle. In fact the White king never moved. After I had advanced my pawn from e7 to e4, White decided to attack my pawn chain from the front with f3. Pawn exchanges gave my Black pieces key squares in the center of the board. When Black finally checked the king with a pawn, White resigned rather than move his king. Another interesting tactical motif was my attack of Bg7 on Ra1. This led to the loss of White's c5 pawn. Ross (1700) - Sawyer (2000), corr APCT 1979 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 d5 4.e3 Bg7 5.c5?! [Better would be 5.Nf3 0-0 6.cxd5 Nxd5 7.Bc4=] 5...0-0 6.Nf3 c6 7.Qb3 Qc7 8.Bd3 Nfd7 9.Bd2 e5 10.Be2 e4 11.Ng1 Nf6 12.f3 exf3 13.Nxf3 Bf5 14.Qa4 Nbd7 15.b4 Rfe8 16.b5?! [16.Nh4 Bg4-/+] 16...Ng4 17.Nd1 [17.0-0 Nxe3-+] 17...Nxc5 18.Qa3 Ne4 19.Ba5 [19.bxc6 Nxh2 20.Rxh2 Qg3+ 21.Kf1 Nxd2+ 22.Nxd2 Qxh2 23.cxb7 Rab8-+] 19...b6 20.Bc3 c5 21.Rc1 Bh6 22.Bb2 Rac8 23.dxc5 bxc5 24.Bd4 Qd6 25.Bb2 Re7 26.Bd3 [Or 26.Rc2 d4-+] 26...Nxe3 27.Nxe3 Bxe3 28.Rc2 c4 29.Qa4 cxd3 30.Rxc8+ Bxc8 31.Rf1 Bc1 32.Be5 Rxe5 33.Qd4 d2+ 0-1

177 – Sayles 4.e3 Bg7 5.b3 0-0 Thomas Sayles responded solidly to my Gruenfeld Defence with 4.e3. After some central pawn exchanges, we both had pawn majorities. My pawn majority on the queenside was more mobile. This active quality in my pawn structure allowed me to win. Just as Black began to mobilize the queenside pawns and invade with his king, White resigned. There was no question that Black was better in the end. In postal chess you had to pay money to mail a postcard. If you were playing a match (2 games on 1 postcard) and one game got unbearable, it was common that you would resign both games or agreed to an early draw in one while resigning the other. It is a waste of money to drag out a losing game. Sadly I did that myself many times over my 1000 correspondence contests. Sayles - Sawyer, corr (2), 02.12.1974 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 d5 4.e3 Bg7 5.b3 0-0 6.cxd5 Nxd5 7.Nxd5 Qxd5 8.Qf3 Qxf3 [8...Qd6!?=/+] 9.Nxf3 c5 10.Bc4 Nc6 11.Bb2 Rd8 [11...cxd4 12.Nxd4 Nxd4 13.Bxd4 Bxd4 14.exd4 Rd8 15.d5=] 12.0-0 Bg4 [12...cxd4 13.Nxd4 Nxd4 14.exd4 Bxd4=] 13.Ne5 Bxe5 [13...Nxe5 14.dxe5=/+] 14.dxe5 Bf5 15.Bc3 Bd3 16.Rfc1 Bxc4 17.bxc4 Rd3 18.a3 Rad8 19.Kf1 e6 20.Ke2 Kf8 21.Rc2 Ke7 22.Rac1 h5 23.h4 b6 24.f4 Ke8 25.Rd2 Rxd2+ 26.Bxd2 Rd7 27.Be1 Kd8 28.Rd1 Rxd1 29.Kxd1 Kc7 30.Ke2 a6 31.Kd3 b5 32.cxb5 axb5 33.e4 Kb6 34.Bc3 Na5 35.Kc2 [An interesting idea follows 35.g3!? c4+ 36.Kd2 Nc6 37.Bb4 Nxb4 38.axb4 Kc6 when Black has a protected passed pawn, but how could I force its promotion?] 35...Nc6 [Black has a big advantage faster with 35...Nc4!-+] 36.g3 b4 0-1

178 – Belavitch 4.Bf4 Bg7 5.e3 Black has the opportunity to gambit a pawn when playing the Gruenfeld Defence. Some people play it on purpose. Others stumble into it because the moves are very natural. The Gruenfeld Gambit begins with 4.Bf4 after the normal moves of the opening. White targets the pawn on c7. Black has the c7 pawn covered for the moment. He can avoid the gambit with 4…c6 or 5...c6, but that is rather passive defense. More ambitious is 5...c5!? I usually chose 5…0-0. After the moves 4…Bg7 5.e3 0-0, White pulled the protection away from c7 with exchanges on d5. Thus after 6.cxd5 Nxd5 7.Nxd5 Qxd5 8.Bxc7. White accepted the gambit pawn. I faced it a few times over the years. Black got an attack which usually worked well for me. When I played Bob Belavitch in an APCT postal chess game, the White king remained in the center. That is normal in this gambit. Black has open lines for his two bishops, two rooks and queen. The critical lines lead to equality. Years ago the recommended theory was 8…Nc6!? While it did score fairly well, experience has shown 8…Na6 to be more reliable. I did not want doubled a-pawns, so I ventured 8…Nc6!? Fortunately I was able to pull off a successful attack. Belavitch (1500) - Sawyer (2100), corr APCT 1981 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 d5 4.Bf4 Bg7 5.e3 0-0 6.cxd5 [6.Rc1 c6 7.Nf3 Be6 8.Ng5 Bf5=] 6...Nxd5 7.Nxd5 Qxd5 8.Bxc7 Nc6 [8...Na6! 9.Bxa6 Qxg2 10.Qf3 Qxf3 11.Nxf3 bxa6 12.Rc1 f6=] 9.Ne2 Bg4 10.f3 Rac8 [10...Bf5 11.Nc3+/=] 11.Nc3 Qe6 [11...Qd7 12.Bf4+/=] 12.fxg4? [White needs to do two things

immediately. First he must save the Bc7. Second he must protect e3. Thus there is only one good move. 12.Bf4+/-] 12...Qxe3+ 13.Be2 Bxd4?! [13...Nxd4!-+] 14.Bg3 Rfd8 15.Qc2? [15.Qd2! Qxd2+ 16.Kxd2 Bxc3+ 17.Kxc3 Nd4+ 18.Kd3 Nc2+ 19.Ke4 Rd2=/+] 15...Nb4 16.Qa4 Bxc3+ 17.bxc3 Qxc3+ 18.Kf2 Qd4+ 19.Kf3 Rc3+ 20.Bd3 Rxd3+ 21.Ke2 Rd2+ 0-1

179 – Stirling 4.Bg5 Ne4 5.Nxe4 In the first round of a weekend Swiss tournament my opponent was William Stirling. I was paired down so I was expected to win. Stirling met my Gruenfeld Defence with 4.Bg5. White threatened to capture the knight and win the pawn on d5. To eliminate the defender is a tactical theme that many good players employ. There was a clash of purposes. When White attacks a minor piece, Black responded by attacking the attacker with 4…Ne4. After White chopped off my knight with 5.Nxe4 dxe4, I protected my advanced e4-pawn after 6.e3 Bg7 7.Ne2 0-0 8.Nc3 f5. The notes indicate that either of us would have done well to push a pawn to c5. Our focus was on the thematic d4 square. In an effort to hold off my attack, White dropped the d4 pawn on his move 15.Nc3 Then White sacrificed the Exchange with the move 17.Rxd4 to regain the pawn. A tactical skirmish followed for the next 20 moves. The material disadvantage was too much for White to overcome. I believe he was the same player I faced in postal chess about a decade later. There I was White in my own Sawyer Variation of the French Defence after 1.d4 Nf6 2.f3 d5 3.e4 e6 4.Bg5. In that case, White won a short game. Stirling - Sawyer, Levittown, PA (1), 15.05.1982 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 d5 4.Bg5 Ne4 5.Nxe4 [5.Bf4 Nxc3 6.bxc3 Bg7=] 5...dxe4 6.e3 Bg7 [6...c5!?=] 7.Ne2 [7.c5!?=] 7...0-0 8.Nc3 f5!? [8...h6=] 9.Be2 [9.c5+/=] 9...h6 10.Bf4 c5 [10...g5 11.Be5 Bxe5 12.dxe5 Nc6=] 11.Nb5 [11.d5=] 11...Na6 [11...cxd4=] 12.0-0 Bd7 [12...g5 13.Be5 Bxe5 14.dxe5 Be6=] 13.Qb3 Nb4 14.Rfd1 Nc6 15.Nc3?! [15.Bc7 Qc8 16.d5+/=] 15...cxd4 16.exd4 [16.c5+ Kh7 17.exd4 Nxd4 18.Qxb7 e5=/+] 16...Nxd4 17.Rxd4 Bxd4 18.Bxh6 Rf7 19.Qxb7 e5 20.Qb3 [20.c5 Rb8 21.Qd5 Rxb2 22.Bc4 Qe8-/+] 20...Rb8 21.Qc2 Qb6 [21...f4!-+] 22.Nd1 Be6 23.Rb1 Rh7 [23...f4-+] 24.Be3 Kf7 25.h3 Qb4 26.a3 Qb3 27.Qxb3 Rxb3 28.Bd2 f4

29.Nc3 [29.Bc3 Rh8 30.Bf1 Rc8-+] 29...e3 30.Be1 exf2+ 31.Bxf2 Bxc3 32.Bd1 Rxb2 33.Rxb2 Bxb2 34.Bb3 Bd4 35.Kf1 Bxf2 36.Kxf2 Kf6 37.Kf3 Bxh3 38.Ke4 Bxg2+ 0-1

180 – Kushner 4.Bg5 Ne4 5.Bh4 This Gruenfeld Defence game I played vs David Kushner in the second round game of a 1981 weekend tournament at Allentown, Pennsylvania. Both David and I were eager players with long chess careers in our future. After the variation 4.Bg5 Ne4 5.Bh4 both Boris Avrukh and Larry Kaufman recommend the line 5...Nxc3 6.bxc3 dxc4 7.e3 Be6 for Black. I do not remember what Gruenfeld theory was back then, but I played the natural move 6...Bg7. Kushner and I missed winning chances throughout the game. I went down two pawns while trying to queen my passed a-pawn. Then the queen checks started. My menacing queen checked him nine times from moves 28-51, wearing him down. Finally I regained material equality. Then we agreed to a draw. I was a young married man, working and raising our children. World events and finances always impact where and how much one plays chess. The American Civil War impacted Morphy. World War I impacted Lasker. World War II impacted Alekhine. The rise and fall of the USSR impacted money for chess in Russia. The 1981 US economy sensed a better future with a new President. One month before this Allentown event, I started a new job at a big company that was suddenly able to hire 500 new employees. 1981 was a busy chess year for me. Kushner (1903) - Sawyer, Allentown, PA (2), 13.06.1981 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 d5 4.Bg5 Ne4 5.Bh4 Nxc3 6.bxc3 Bg7 [6...dxc4! 7.e3 Be6 8.Nf3 Bg7=] 7.e3 0-0 [7...c5! 8.Nf3 Nc6 9.cxd5 Qxd5=] 8.cxd5 Qxd5 9.Qf3?! [9.Bxe7! Re8 10.Bh4+/=] 9...Qa5! 10.Rc1 Qxa2 [10...e5!=/+] 11.Bxe7 Re8 12.Bf6 Qb2 [12...Bxf6! 13.Qxf6 Bf5 14.Be2 Qb2-+] 13.Ne2 Bg4? [13...Bxf6 14.Qxf6-/+] 14.Qxg4 Bxf6 15.g3 a5 16.Bg2 a4 17.0-0 a3 18.Rb1 Qc2 19.Bxb7 Ra7 20.Qf3 a2 21.Ra1 c6 22.Bxc6 Nxc6 23.Qxc6 Rb8 24.Nc1 Bg7 25.Qc4 Rb1? [25...Rb2!=] 26.Rxa2 Rxa2 27.Nxa2 Rxf1+ 28.Kxf1 Qb1+ 29.Ke2 Qc2+ 30.Ke1 Qb1+ 31.Kd2 Qb2+ 32.Kd1 Qxf2 33.Qe2 Qg1+ 34.Kc2 Qa1 35.Kb3 Qb1+ 36.Qb2 Qd1+ 37.Qc2 Qg1 38.Qe2 [38.e4+-] 38...Qb1+ 39.Kc4 Qe4 40.Nb4 Qe6+ 41.Kd3 Qb6 42.Nd5 Qb3 43.Nb4 Qb1+ 44.Kc4 Qf5 45.e4 Qe6+ 46.d5 Qc8+ 47.Kb5

Bxc3 48.Qc4 [48.Nc6+-] 48...Qb7+ 49.Ka4 Bxb4 50.Qxb4 Qa6+ 51.Kb3 Qd3+ 52.Qc3 Qxe4 53.Qc8+ Kg7 1/2-1/2

4.cxd5 Nxd5 This is the Gruenfeld Exchange Variation.

181 – Swazey 5.e4 Nf6 6.Bc4 I played a variety of simultaneous exhibition games. Sometimes I was one of many opponents playing simultaneously against a grandmaster, master or expert. An Expert is also called a Candidate Master. Other times I am giving the simul, playing against lower club players and novices. In 1996 I gave a simultaneous exhibition at Penn College in Williamsport, Pennsylvania. I played about 30 games in a couple hours, but only 6-8 boards at a time with rotating players. When one player would finish, another took his place. Two of my opponents were club players. Most opponents just knew how to move the pieces and played chess for fun now and then. This game is against Roy Swazey, one of the club players whom I knew. Overall we played eight times. I won 7 and drew 1. That draw was in a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit Teichmann. The main game below transposed into an unusual Gruenfeld Defence. In the notes to that game are other games from this simul. I got some short but ugly games there, including some that were Blackmar-Diemer Gambit Avoided lines. Sawyer - Swazey, simul Williamsport PA 1996 begins 1.d4 Nf6 [1...d5 2.e4 Nf6? The knight becomes a target. 3.e5 Ne4? 4.f3 Ng5 5.Bxg5 e6? 6.Bxd8 1-0 Sawyer - NN, Williamsport PA 1996] 2.c4 d5 [Queen's Gambit Declined, Marshall Variation.] 3.cxd5 Nxd5 4.Nc3 [Usually White chooses between 4.e4 or first 4.Nf3] 4...g6 5.e4 Nf6 [Black chooses a very rare retreat. We have transposed into a Gruenfeld Defence, Exchange Variation which normal continues: 5...Nxc3 6.bxc3 Bg7 7.Nf3 or 7.Bc4] 6.Bc4 [6.Nf3 is the normal choice here.] 6...Bg7 7.Nge2 0-0 8.f3 e6 9.Bg5 Qd7 10.Qd2

Nc6 11.0-0 a6 12.Rfd1 b5 13.Bb3 Na5 14.Bc2 Bb7 15.b3 Rac8? [Now that the c4 square is no longer available, Black should return his knight 15...Nc6 16.Rac1+/-] 16.e5 Nd5 [Black loses two knights for one.] 17.Nxd5 Bxd5 18.Qxa5 c5 19.Bf6 cxd4 20.Nxd4 Qa7 21.Kh1 1-0

182 – Kampia 5.e4 Nf6 6.Nf3 An unorthodox player poses an opening challenge. Marshall Defence to Queens Gambit here resembles a Gruenfeld Defence. Robert Kampia avoided big mistakes as Black. The game drifted into a slight edge for White. I kept missing the most accurate shots. When I went in for wild tactics, I got into deep trouble. Black finally made a mistake on move 25. A few moves later White was winning. Sawyer - Kampia, Lansdale, PA 26.06.1981 begins 1.d4 d5 2.c4 Nf6 [Marshall] 3.cxd5 Nxd5 4.Nf3 g6 5.e4 Nf6 [5...Nb6 6.Bf4 Bg7 7.Qc2+/=] 6.Nc3 Bg7 7.h3 [7.Bc4 c6 8.h3+/-] 7...Nbd7 8.e5 Ng8 9.Bc4 [9.Bg5!+-] 9...e6 10.Bg5 Ne7 11.Qd2 h6 12.Bh4 a6 13.a4 c6 14.Ne4 g5? [14...0-0 15.0-0+/-] 15.Nd6+ Kf8 16.Bxg5 [16.Bg3+-] 16...hxg5 17.Nxg5 Nb6 18.Ngxf7 [18.Be2+-] 18...Nxc4 19.Qf4 [19.Qc3 Qa5=/+] 19...Ng6 [19...Qa5+ 20.Kf1 Nd5-+] 20.Qf3 Qa5+ 21.Ke2 Qd2+ 22.Kf1 Nxd6 [22...Nh4!-+] 23.Nxh8+ Nf5 24.Nxg6+ Kg8 25.Rd1 Qxb2? [25...Qh6 26.Nf4+/=] 26.h4?! [Correct is 26.g4!+-] 26...Bd7 27.g4 Be8 [Black could escape by 27...Nxd4 when White would draw by perpetual check after 28.Ne7+ Kh8 29.Ng6+ Kg8=] 28.gxf5 Bxg6 29.fxg6 Rf8 30.Qe2 Qb3 31.Rd3 Qxa4 32.Rhh3 Rf4 33.Qh5 Rxd4 34.Rhf3 Rxh4 35.Rd8+ Bf8 36.Rdxf8+ Kg7 37.R3f7# 1-0

183 – So 5.e4 Nxc3 6.bxc3 Bg7 Grandmaster Wesley Barbasa So won the London Classic and the Grand Chess Tour in 2016. He won this Gruenfeld Defence over Hikaru Nakamura. Exchange Variation 4.cxd5 gives White three major options: 7.Bc4, 7.Nf3, or 7.Be3. Black aims to move White’s pawn off d4 to provide fixed targets. This counterattack from Wesley So came by 7…c5 and 9… e5!? At the end Black was up a pawn on each side of the board. Nakamura (2779) - So (2794), 8th London Classic 2016 London ENG (1.1), 09.12.2016 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 d5 4.cxd5 Nxd5 5.e4 Nxc3 6.bxc3 Bg7 7.Be3 c5 8.Rc1 0-0 9.Qd2 e5!? [9...Qa5=] 10.d5 Nd7 [10...Qd6=] 11.c4 [11.Bd3 f5=] 11...f5 12.Bg5 [12.exf5 gxf5=] 12...Nf6 13.Ne2? [13.Bd3 fxe4 14.Bc2 b5 15.Ne2 bxc4 16.Nc3 Rb8=] 13...Nxe4 14.Bxd8 Nxd2 15.Be7 Rf7 16.Bxc5 Nxf1 17.Rxf1 b6 18.Bb4 Ba6 19.f4 Rc8 20.fxe5 Bxe5 21.Rf3 Bxc4 22.Re3 Bg7 23.Nf4 Rd7 24.a4 Bh6 25.g3 Bxf4 26.gxf4 Rxd5 27.Re7 Rd4 28.Bd2 Kf8 29.Bb4 Re8 0-1

184 – Grischuk 7.Nf3 c5 8.Rb1 The logical Gruenfeld Defence Exchange Variation 4.cxd5 pits White's central pawn play against Black threats on the queenside. Many pawns disappear from the board early in the game. Heavy pieces remain. The open lines allow complex tactics. Black tried a rare line in 8...Nd7 and lost a rook in the game Alexander Grischuk vs Ian Nepomniachtchi. Grischuk (2766) - Nepomniachtchi (2757), chess.com Speed 3m+1spm 2017 chess.com INT (14), 07.08.2018 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 d5 4.cxd5 Nxd5 5.e4 Nxc3 6.bxc3 Bg7 7.Nf3 c5 8.Rb1 Nd7 [8...0-0 9.Be2=] 9.Bd3 Qa5 [Another interesting try is 9...Nb6 10.Ba3 cxd4 11.cxd4 0-0 12.0-0 Bxd4 13.Nxd4 Qxd4 14.Bxe7+/=] 10.Bd2 Qxa2 11.0-0 0-0 12.Re1 Qa5 13.e5 e6?! [13...Qd8 14.h4 Nb6 15.h5 Bg4=] 14.h4 Qc7 15.h5 b6 16.hxg6 hxg6 17.Ng5 Rd8? 18.Qf3 [Or 18.Bxg6 fxg6 19.Nxe6+-] 18...Nxe5 19.dxe5 Bb7 20.Qh3 Rxd3 21.Qxd3 Rd8 22.Qe2 Bh6 [22...Bxe5 23.Qxe5 Qxe5 24.Rxe5 Rxd2 25.Rxc5 bxc5 26.Rxb7+-] 23.Bf4

Qc6 24.f3 Qa4 [24...Bg7 25.Ne4+-] 25.Qe3 Qc2 26.Rbc1 Qf5 27.Rcd1 Rxd1 28.Rxd1 Bd5 29.Nxe6 1-0

185 – Dudzik 8.Rb1 0-0 9.Be2 The Gruenfeld Defence Exchange Variation has been a favorite of mine ever since grandmaster Svetozar Gligoric wrote about it in Chess Life & Review in the early 1970s. After 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 d5, the main line continues 4.cxd5 Nxd5 5.e4 Nxc3 6.bxc3 when White can follow up with 7.Bc4. In the 1989 USCF Golden Knights Postal Chess Tournament, Dan Dudzik and I reach the 7.Nf3 line by transposition and continued with the trendy 8.Rb1 line. Why did I choose a Gruenfeld instead of my normal Dutch Defence? I went through a bad patch with the Dutch. After two years of very successful play over about 100 games, I hit two years of very difficult play. I wanted to try something new, or old. I played the Gruenfeld Defence a lot in the 1970s and early 1980s, so it was not completely new. Since we could use books in postal chess and I had a great chess library at the time, I was not likely to be on my own any time soon. Could the postal master Dan Dudzik find a line that would beat former postal master Tim Sawyer? Thankfully, not this time. Dudzik (2235) - Sawyer (1953), corr USCF 89NS53, 08.06.1992 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 d5 4.Nf3 Bg7 5.cxd5 Nxd5 6.e4 Nxc3 7.bxc3 c5 8.Rb1 0-0 9.Be2 cxd4 10.cxd4 Qa5+ 11.Qd2 Qxd2+ 12.Bxd2 b6 13.0-0 Bb7 14.d5 Ba6 15.Bxa6 Nxa6 16.Be3 f5 17.e5 f4 18.Bc1 Rad8 19.Ba3!? [19.Rd1 Nc7 20.d6 exd6 21.exd6 Ne6=] 19...Rxd5 20.Bxe7 Re8 21.Bd6 Nc5 22.Rfd1 Rxd1+ 23.Rxd1 Ne4 24.Bc7 [24.Bb4!?] 24...Nc3 [24...Rc8 25.Bd6 Rd8 26.Rd4 Nxd6 27.Rxd6 Rxd6 28.exd6 Bf6=/+] 25.Rd3 [25.Rd7 Nxa2 26.Bd6 a5 27.Rb7 Nc3 28.Rxb6=] 25...Nxa2 [Or 25...Nb5 26.Bd8 Bxe5 27.Nxe5 Rxe5=] 26.Ra3 Nb4 27.Rxa7 Nc6 28.Ra1 Kf7 29.Ng5+ Kg8 30.Bxb6 Nxe5 31.Rd1 h6 1/2-1/2

186 – Morford 7.Nf3 0-0 8.Ba3 The Exchange Variation of the Gruenfeld Defence has changed lot over the past 45 years. The opening moves are 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 d5 4.cxd5 Nxd5 5.e4 Nxc3 6.bxc3. Back in the 1970s the main line was still 6…Bg7 7.Bc4. The natural move 7.Nf3 was considered inaccurate. Only weaker players who did not study openings ever played 7.Nf3 against me. Then I entered postal chess tournaments where everyone used books. I had to rethink 7.Nf3. Theory showed that 7…c5 was best, but I liked to castle first. Wayne Morford challenged my 7.Nf3 0-0 with 8.Ba3!? I was expecting this bishop to go to Be3. White had some very good possibilities until he stutter stepped his other bishop with 9.Bd3 and 11.Bc4. Then Black gradually outplayed him and won. Morford (1778) - Sawyer (2000), corr APCT 1979 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 d5 4.cxd5 Nxd5 5.e4 Nxc3 6.bxc3 Bg7 7.Nf3 0-0 [7...c5=] 8.Ba3!? Nd7 [8...b6 9.Bc4 Bb7 10.0-0 c5=] 9.Bd3 c5 10.0-0 b6 [10...Qa5!=] 11.Bc4 [11.e5 Bb7 12.Re1+/=] 11...Qc7 12.Qe2 Bb7 13.Rad1 Rac8 14.Rc1 e6 15.d5 [15.e5=] 15...exd5 16.exd5 [16.Bxd5 Rfe8 17.Bxb7 Qxb7=/+] 16...Nf6 17.Rfd1 Ne8 [17...Rcd8-/+] 18.Bb2 [18.Bb3 Nd6=/+] 18...Nd6 19.Bd3 Bxd5 20.Ba6 Bb7 21.Bxb7 Nxb7 22.Rc2 Rfe8 23.Qf1 Rcd8 24.Re1 Rxe1 25.Qxe1 Qd7 26.Rd2 Qe8 27.Rxd8 Qxd8 28.h3 Bf6 29.Nd2 Qe7 30.Qd1 Qd6 31.Qe2 Qe5 32.Ne4 Bg7 33.Qd3 h6 34.f3 f5 35.Nd2 Nd6 36.Nc4 [36.a4 Bf6-+] 36...Qe1+ 37.Kh2 Nxc4 38.Qxc4+ Kh7 39.a4 Qd2 40.Qb3 Be5+ 0-1

187 – nando3 7.Nf3 0-0 8.Be2 In the blitz game below, I let the opening slip from a Queens Gambit Marshall Variation (1.d4 d5 2.c4 Nf6) to a Gruenfeld Defence after 3.cxd5 Nxd5 4.Nf3 g6. I played the co-operative 5.Nc3. Kaufman points out the White can be a tempo up on the 5.Bd2 line. In that line Gruenfeld Defence line, 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 d5 4.cxd5 Nxd5 5.Bd2 Bg7 6.e4 Nb6 7.Be3 0-0 8.h3 when Larry Kaufman suggests as Black 8...e5! His analysis leads to an equal game. I could have reached that same position with the extra move for White being Nf3, hitting e5. I think I knew this line once before, but I have forgotten far more than I remember. Here I outplayed Black and won a piece. Sawyer - nando3, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 02.06.2012 begins 1.d4 d5 2.c4 Nf6 3.cxd5 Nxd5 4.Nf3 [Chess Openings Essentials: "Inferior is the immediate 4.e4 Nf6 5.Nc3 e5 6.dxe5 Qxd1+ 7.Kxd1 Ng4 hitting both f2 and e5."] 4...g6 5.Nc3 [This just transposes to a Gruenfeld Defence. Larry Kaufman recommends 5.e4! Nb6 6.h3 Bg7 7.Nc3 0-0 8.Be3+/=] 5...Bg7 6.e4 Nxc3 7.bxc3 0-0 8.Be2 a6?! [The book move is 8...c5 9.Rb1 which has been reached thousands of times with many choices for Black.] 9.0-0 b6 10.Be3 Bb7 11.e5 Nd7 12.Rc1 [12.e6!?] 12...e6 13.Qd2 c5 14.Bh6 cxd4 15.cxd4 Rc8 16.Bg5 f6 17.exf6 Bxf6 18.Bh6 Rf7 19.Rxc8 Qxc8 20.Rc1 Qd8 21.Bf4 [21.Bc4!+-] 21...Bxf3?! 22.Bxf3 e5 23.dxe5 Nxe5 24.Qxd8+ Bxd8 25.Bxe5 Re7 26.Bf6 1-0

188 – Coffin 7.Bc4 c5 8.Ne2 Nc6 Ray Haines sent me the following excellent game vs Terry Coffin from 1982 in the Gruenfeld Defence 4.cxd5 which was and still is a popular sharp critical variation. “I had stopped playing in chess tournaments for a few years after I finished high school. I had started playing in 1980 and more in 1982. I had played in the World Open in July of 1982 and had finished with a good result. I bought some new opening books to study for that tournament.” “Former World Champion Boris Spassky had come up with a new line in the Gruenfeld, which not ever opening book had. I did not get to use it at the world open, but I was able to surprise Master Terry Coffin with this new line.” “I used only 2 minutes on my first 17 moves. Terry spent 30 minutes on the first 17 moves. This was still a fast time control of 40 moves in 60 minutes. I found a way to get my pawn back and thought that this was the safe thing to do.” Haines - Coffin (2120), Univ of Maine Dog Days Open (3), 20.11.1982 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 d5 4.cxd5 Nxd5 5.e4 Nxc3 6.bxc3 Bg7 7.Bc4 c5 8.Ne2 Nc6 9.Be3 cxd4 10.cxd4 0-0 11.0-0 Bg4 12.f3 Na5 13.Bd3 [Another line is 13.Bxf7+ Rxf7 14.fxg4 Rxf1+ 15.Kxf1 e5 16.d5 Nc4=] 13...Be6 14.Rc1 Bxa2 15.Qa4 Be6 16.d5 Bd7 17.Qb4 b6 [Many high rated players have been in this position from both sides. Some have followed this game. More have opted for 17...e6 18.Nc3] 18.Ba6 f5 19.Nd4! [This is an improvement over other moves that have been played here.] 19...fxe4 20.fxe4 Rxf1+ 21.Rxf1 Bf6 22.Rc1 Bc8 [22...Bg7 23.Kh1+/=] 23.Bb5 [After the position is level throughout the rest of the game. White had good chances after 23.Rxc8! Rxc8 24.Ne6 Qd7 25.Bxc8 Qxc8 26.e5! and Black has to play 26...Qc4 (because if 26...Bxe5? then27.Qxe7+- is very strong.) 27.Qxc4 Nxc4 28.exf6+/-] 23...Qd6 24.Qxd6 exd6 25.Nc6 Nb7 26.Nxa7 Nc5 27.Nxc8 Rxc8 28.Bf4 Bd4+ 29.Kh1 Ra8 30.Bxd6 Nxe4 31.Bg3 Nxg3+ 32.hxg3 Be5 33.g4 Kf8 34.Kg1 Ra2 35.Re1 Bg3 36.Re6 Rb2

37.Bd3 Rd2 38.Bf1 Kg7 39.Bc4 Bf2+ 40.Kh1 Bc5 41.Rc6 Rd1+ 42.Kh2 1/2-1/2

189 – Blumetti 8.Ne2 0-0 9.0-0 The main line Gruenfeld Defence Exchange Variation used to be the sharp 7.Bc4. In the 1970s, every chess player who knew opening theory knew that 7.Nf3 was bad and 7.Bc4 was good. The reason was that the natural move 7.Nf3 allowed Black to pin the knight. Later it was discovered that White has excellent play after 7.Nf3 and 8.Rb1. Then it became more popular. The pin of Nf3 is avoided in the 7.Bc4 line because White can play his kingside knight to 8.Ne2. This has been examined in great detail. In an APCT postal game John Blumetti played 7.Bc4 Exchange Variation. In my career I played this many times, but mostly as Black. In appears I played it only six times from the White side. White chose the critical Exchange Sacrifice line with 14.d5. The moves from 7.Bc4 to 14.d5 are not forced, but they are logical. Some players vary with 14.Rc1. Others play 13.Bxf7+!? Still others choose a different earlier path altogether. The greedy part of me always wants to be Black and take the rook with 14.d5 Bxa1. Then I try to hold on to the material. This gives White good attacking chances. White either gets an advantage or Black must give back some material. This line has been heavily tested in master play over the past 30 years. Back in 1981 John Blumetti and I were probably on our own by move 18. We only had to play ten good original moves. I was a little more accurate and came away with the win. Blumetti (1762) - Sawyer (2100), corr APCT 1981 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 d5 4.cxd5 Nxd5 5.e4 Nxc3 6.bxc3 c5 7.Bc4 Bg7 8.Ne2 0-0 9.0-0 cxd4 10.cxd4 Nc6 11.Be3 Bg4 12.f3 Na5 13.Bd3 Be6 14.d5 Bxa1 15.Qxa1

f6 16.Bh6 Re8 17.Nf4 Bf7 18.Kh1 a6 [18...Qc7=/+] 19.e5 g5 20.exf6 [20.e6+/=] 20...exf6 21.g3? [21.Nh3! Re5 22.f4 Rxd5=] 21...gxf4?! [21...Re5!-+] 22.gxf4 Bxd5 23.Rg1+ Kf7 24.Rg7+ Ke6 25.f5+? [25.Qe1+ Kd6 26.Qb4+ Kc6 27.Qc3+ Kb6 28.Qd4+ Kc6=] 25...Kd6 26.Bf4+ Re5 27.a4? Bxf3+ 0-1

4.Nf3 Bg7 Here we consider rare White third and fourth move alternatives when Black is playing 1…Nf6, 2…g6 and 3…d5.

190 – Fischer 5.Bf4 0-0 6.Qb3 Novels love chess themes. "The End Game: A Brit in the FBI novel" by Catherine Coulter and J.T. Ellison entitles its chapters after all the moves in a famous game. The Game of the Century between Donald Byrne and Bobby Fischer was a fantastic Gruenfeld Defence. I quote from the Author's Note near the back of the book: "When she realized we had eighty-two chapters, the same number of moves that are in The Game of the Century, she knew it was meant to be." Chess players call a game with 41 moves by each side as one that is 82 ply but only 41 moves. The above book is not about chess, as you might have guessed. Still you might find this book by Catherine Coulter interesting. Here I review this beautiful game from my childhood. The movie "Pawn Sacrifice" about Bobby Fischer cited it. This Gruenfeld Defence looks a lot like a Russian Variation (5.Qb3) with the early addition of 5.Bf4 for White. Fischer sacrifices his queen for an awesome attack that lasted from her capture on move 18 to checkmate on move 41. Byrne - Fischer, Rosenwald New York 1957 begins 1.Nf3 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.d4 0-0 5.Bf4 d5 6.Qb3 dxc4 7.Qxc4 c6! [7...Na6 8.e4+/=] 8.e4 Nbd7 9.Rd1 Nb6 10.Qc5 Bg4 11.Bg5 Na4 12.Qa3 Nxc3 13.bxc3 Nxe4 14.Bxe7 Qb6 [14...Qd5 15.Be2 Rfe8-+] 15.Bc4 Nxc3 16.Bc5 Rfe8+ 17.Kf1 Be6 18.Bxb6 [18.Qxc3 Qxc5 19.dxc5 Bxc3 20.Bxe6 Rxe6-/+] 18...Bxc4+ 19.Kg1 Ne2+ 20.Kf1 Nxd4+ 21.Kg1 Ne2+ 22.Kf1 Nc3+ 23.Kg1 axb6 24.Qb4 Ra4 25.Qxb6 [No better is 25.Qxa4 Nxa4 26.Rd7 Nc5-+] 25...Nxd1 26.h3 Rxa2 27.Kh2 Nxf2 28.Re1 Rxe1 29.Qd8+ Bf8 30.Nxe1 Bd5 31.Nf3 Ne4 32.Qb8 b5 33.h4 h5 34.Ne5 Kg7 35.Kg1 Bc5+

36.Kf1 Ng3+ 37.Ke1 Bb4+ 38.Kd1 Bb3+ 39.Kc1 Ne2+ 40.Kb1 Nc3+ 41.Kc1 Rc2# 0-1

191 – Viveiros 5.Bf4 0-0 6.e3 When I was a kid, mothers hung clothes on sagging clothes lines behind the house. These roped lines were low enough for moms to easily reach but high enough to keep the clothes off the ground. After dark the line was hard to see without clothes on it. If we chased each other around and forgot about the clothes line, we ran into it about head high. That would stop us in our tracks. When that happened to me a time or two, I was more careful not to get clothes lined again anytime soon. In a Gruenfeld Defence vs William Viveiros I was able to clothes line his dark squared bishop. I trapped it with my pawn by 12...f4. White was able to save his bishop only by giving me his knight. The open nature of the position led to very quick exchanges. By move 32, White had only pawns left. Black also had a knight. Viveiros (1794) - Sawyer (2000), corr APCT 1979 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 d5 4.Nf3 Bg7 5.Bf4 0-0 6.e3 c5 7.Qd2 Ne4!? 8.Nxe4? [8.Qd1 Qa5 9.Rc1=] 8...dxe4 9.Ng5 cxd4 10.Nxe4? [This allows White's bishop to be trapped and clothes lined. 10.exd4 Qxd4 11.Qxd4 Bxd4 12.0-0-0 Nc6 13.Nxe4 f5 14.Nc3 Bxf2=/+ and Black is up a passed e-pawn.] 10...e5 11.Bg3 f5 12.Nc5 [Not much better is 12.exd4 fxe4 13.d5 Qb6-+] 12...f4 [Also strong is 12...Qe7!-+] 13.exf4 exf4 14.Bxf4 Qe7+ 15.Be2 Qxc5 16.Bg3 Nc6 17.0-0 Be6 18.Rac1 Be5 19.b3 Bxg3 20.hxg3 Rad8 21.Rfe1 Rxf2 22.Kxf2 d3+ 23.Qe3 Qxe3+ 24.Kxe3 d2 25.Rcd1 dxe1Q 26.Rxe1 Bf5 27.g4 Re8+ 28.Kf2 Bc8 29.Rd1 [White is still lost after 29.Rf1 Rf8+ 30.Kg3 Rxf1 31.Bxf1 h6-+] 29...Rxe2+ 30.Kxe2 Bxg4+ 31.Ke1 Bxd1 32.Kxd1 Kf7 0-1

192 – madami 5.Bg5 Ne4 6.cxd5 Around 1971 I got a chess set that was a black and white rug, about 30 inches by 30 inches. The black and white pieces were hollow plastic with felt bottoms. As I recall, the king was about 7 inches high. It was also about that time that I began studying openings from Fred Reinfeld, a master who was in the top 10 in the USA in the 1930s according to Frank Marshall. One opening that fascinated me was the Gruenfeld Defence. Recently I played more Gruenfeld games attempting to re-learn the lines. The Gruenfeld Defence 4.Nf3 Bg7 5.Bg5 is one of the more popular noncritical lines that players choose when they are not trying to play the main lines or when they just do not know the main lines. This was only my 16th recorded game in this 5.Bg5 variation since 1981. White's idea is simple: classical straightforward development. Looking up the opening after this game I see that I could have played the defense in three other ways (Houdini, Rybka, or Avrukh). As it turned out, I got a good kingside attack. madami - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 01.12.2012 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 d5 4.Nf3 Bg7 5.Bg5 Ne4 6.cxd5 Nxg5 7.Nxg5 e6 8.Nf3 exd5 9.b4 0-0 [9...Bg4 Houdini; 9...Qd6 Rybka] 10.e3 Nc6 [10...c6 Avrukh] 11.a3 Ne7 12.Bd3 Bf5 13.0-0 Bxd3 14.Qxd3 c6 15.Rac1 Nf5 16.Na4 Nd6 17.Nd2 Qe7 18.Rfe1 Rae8 19.Nc5 f5 20.Qb3 Ne4 21.Ndxe4 fxe4 22.Qd1 Kh8 23.Nb3 a6 24.Nd2 Rf7 25.Nf1 Qh4 26.Ng3 Ref8 27.Re2 h5 28.Rec2 Kh7 29.h3 Qe7 30.Rc5? [30.Rb2 Qd6=] 30...Bf6? [Playing too fast, I missed the obvious 30...Rxf2-+ picking off a pawn and making White's kingside vulnerable.] 31.Qc2 Bh4 32.Nh1 Rf5 33.Qe2 Qf7 34.Rf1 Be7 35.Rcc1 Bd6 36.Rc2 Bb8 37.Rcc1 Qc7 38.g3 Qd7 39.Kg2 Rf3 40.Rc2 Qd6 41.Rg1 h4 42.Rf1 hxg3 43.fxg3 Rxf1 [43...Rxg3+! 44.Nxg3 Qxg3+ 45.Kh1 Qxh3+ 46.Kg1 Bh2+ 47.Kh1 Bf4+ 48.Kg1 Bxe3+ 49.Qxe3 Rxf1#] 44.Qxf1 Rxf1 45.Kxf1 Qe6 46.Kg2 Bd6 47.Rf2 Kg7 48.Kh2 Be7 49.Rf1

b6 50.Nf2 a5 51.Ng4 axb4 52.Ne5 bxa3 53.Rf7+ Qxf7 54.Nxf7 Kxf7 White resigns 0-1

193 – Raudenbush 5.e3 c5 6.dxc5 Bold play pays off, more often than not. When you develop rapidly and aggressively make threats, it puts pressure on your opponent to cover more possibilities. Masters, experts and lower club class players all succumb to problems posed by tactically sharp positions. Here is another game against USCF Expert William Raudenbush played at the North Penn Chess Club in Lansdale, Pennsylvania in December 1980. I was able to catch Bill in a few blitz games. I have always been a very good blitz player. I learned how to play blitz in college. I realized the importance of making a quick decision in my blitz games vs Graham Cooper in 1972-73. Bill played his solid 1.d4 approach usually headed for something against the Gruenfeld Defence with an early e2-e3. Sometimes he got me with a solid positional crush. In this game my boldness is rewarded, despite some tactical inaccuracies. Raudenbush - Sawyer, Lansdale, PA 03.12.1980 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 d5 4.e3 Bg7 5.Nf3 c5?! [Black usually chooses to castle 5...0-0 before committing to 6...c5 or 6...c6; or to play now the solid 5...c6] 6.dxc5 Qa5?! 7.Bd2 [The critical line is 7.cxd5! Nxd5 8.Qxd5 Bxc3+ 9.Bd2 Bxd2+ 10.Qxd2 leaves White up a pawn, since 10...Qxc5? 11.Rc1 Qf5 12.Nd4 Qd7 13.Bb5+- wins] 7...Qxc5 8.cxd5 Nxd5 9.Rc1 Be6? [9...0-0=] 10.Nb5! Qb6 11.Qa4?! [Attacking the knight that must defend c7 11.e4!+wins] 11...0-0? [11...Nc6 12.e4 Nf6 13.Be3 Qd8 14.Nbd4+/=] 12.Ba5! Qa6 13.Nc7 Nxc7 14.Bxa6 Ncxa6 15.Bc3 [White should get his king out of the center 15.0-0! and walk away with two minor pieces for the queen.] 15...Nc5 16.Qb4?? [Likely a blitz blunder.] 16...Nd3+ 17.Ke2 Nxb4 18.Bxb4 [Black has the best advantage of the two bishops: when one of them is an extra bishop!] 18...Nc6 0-1

194 – Ross 5.e3 0-0 6.Bd3 c5 Gruenfeld Defence has long been a favorite of mine. Typically White answers 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 d5 with moves that open lines for attack. Most frequently played are 4.cxd5 Nxd5 5.e4 or 4.Nf3 Bg7 5.Qb3 which leads to 5...dxc4 6.Qxc4 0-0 7.e4. White aims for sharp play. Black must find accurate tactical counterplay to survive. Hank Ross found another approach in our 1981 APCT postal game. He developed quickly after 4.Nf3 Bg7 5.e3 0-0 6.Bd3 c5 7.0-0. All White’s moves were good. The problem was that they did not directly threaten to attack Black. Since White did not go after d5, I decided that Black can go after d4. I executed a clear central strategy with my confused queenside knight. Look at this: 8…Nc6, 10…Nxd4, 11…Nc6, 14…Nd4. All those moves led to White regaining his pawn with 15.Rxe7. Tactical play followed that allowed White a missed chance to save the game. Black won with a discovered check combination. Ross (1709) - Sawyer (2100), corr APCT 1981 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 d5 4.Nf3 Bg7 5.e3 0-0 6.Bd3 [6.cxd5 Nxd5=] 6...c5 7.0-0 cxd4 8.exd4 Nc6 9.Qe2?! [9.h3=] 9...dxc4 [9...Bg4! 10.Be3 dxc4 11.Bxc4 Nxd4 12.Bxd4 Bxf3=/+] 10.Bxc4 Nxd4 11.Qd1? [11.Nxd4 Qxd4 12.Rd1=] 11...Nc6 12.Qxd8 Rxd8 13.Re1 Bf5 14.Bf4 Nd4? [14...Rac8-/+] 15.Rxe7 Nxf3+ 16.gxf3 Rd4 17.Bxf7+ Kf8 18.Rae1 Rxf4 19.Nd5? [White should play 19.Bb3! Rb4 20.Rf7+ Kg8 21.Rxb7+ Rxb3 22.Rxb3=] 19...Nxd5 20.Bxd5 Bh3 21.Bxb7 Rb8 22.Bd5 [Or 22.Bc6 Rf5-+] 22...Rf5 23.Bc4 Rg5+ 24.Kh1 Bg2+ 25.Kg1 Bxf3+ 26.Kf1 Bg2+ 27.Kg1 Bd5+ 28.Kf1 Bxc4+ 0-1

195 – Sawyer 7.0-0 cxd4 8.exd4 One of my job responsibilities was to ask an interview question that went something like: "When you decide to do something, do you make a plan or just wing it?" Almost everyone said they made a plan. My guess was sometimes their plan was to wing it! The value of making a plan in increases with the importance of a chess game and allotted thinking time. In a one minute bullet game your plan might last 2-5 seconds. In a blitz game you might be working on a general plan for minute. In a slower tournament game played for money and or ratings, you might spend an hour carrying out a particular plan. The Gruenfeld Defence is an opening I frequently played and studied in great detail in the 1970s. Since those days, it has become much more popular with many new ideas introduced. I played it periodically in blitz. In a three minute game I play by pattern recognition and general principles; I rarely try to calculate because that uses valuable time. Here "kamisama" chooses the quieter Gruenfeld Defence 5.e3 line. In this opening White builds up and strong pawn center that Black attacks. In this game, the situation completely flips around. In the end, Black has an overwhelming pawn center. kamisama - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 14.02.2013 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 d5 4.e3 Bg7 5.Nf3 0-0 6.Bd3 c5 7.0-0 cxd4 8.exd4 dxc4 [The main line is 8...Nc6 9.h3 dxc4 10.Bxc4 Na5] 9.Bxc4 Bg4 10.Be3 Nc6 11.Bb5N [11.d5 Bxf3 12.Qxf3 Ne5 13.Qe2 Nxc4 14.Qxc4 Qd7=] 11...Qa5 [Better is 11...Bxf3! 12.Qxf3 Nxd4 13.Bxd4 Qxd4 14.Qxb7 Qb4=/+ when Black has more threats than White.] 12.Bxc6 bxc6 13.h3 Bxf3 14.Qxf3 Rab8 15.Rfb1 Nd5 16.Nxd5 cxd5 17.b3 e5 18.Rd1 e4 19.Qe2 f5 20.Bf4 Rbc8 21.Be5 Bxe5 22.dxe5 Qc3! 23.Rac1 [23.Rxd5? Qxa1+ picks off a rook.] 23...Qxe5 24.Rxc8 Rxc8 25.Qb5 Rd8 26.Qa5 Qd6 27.Qxa7 d4

28.Rc1 Rd7 29.Rc8+ [29.Qa5 Kg7 30.Qd2 f4-/+ with an ominous looking Black pawn steamroller.] 29...Kg7 30.Qa8 [30.Rd8 Rxa7 31.Rxd6 d3-+] 30...d3 31.Rg8+ Kh6 32.Qa5 d2 White resigns 0-1

196 – Schneider 5.Qb3 c6 6.cxd5 In my early years I studied grandmaster games from the past, especially all games by the world champions. That impacted my choice of openings and variations. When I encountered the Gruenfeld Defence, at first I wanted to play the Exchange Variation with 4.cxd5 Nxd5 5.e4. But then I discovered that the position became wide open. Black’s pieces started making threats against my White army. The position often got away from me. That was no fun. Mikhail Botvinnik played 4.Nf3 Bg7 5.Qb3 on both sides of the board. He seemed to keep the game under control. Instead of trying to “do” with 4.cxd5 and 5.e4, I tried to “be” something with 4.Nf3 and 5.Qb3. Be active, be safe, and be improving my position every move. Don’t try to make something happen. Be ready when it does. With this philosophy in mind, I encountered Hans Schneider in an APCT postal tournament. By move 10 I had developed my knights, my bishops, my queen and I had castled. I had a good solid position. I was ready when something happened. Black placed his rook on an undefended square. This allowed White to play a winning combination. This illustrates the famous John Nunn saying that “Loose Pieces Drop Off”. Sawyer (2100) - Schneider (2050), corr APCT 1981 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 d5 4.Nf3 Bg7 5.Qb3 c6 [5...dxc4 6.Qxc4 0-0 7.e4=] 6.cxd5 cxd5 [6...Nxd5 7.e4+/=] 7.Bg5! e6 8.e3 0-0 9.Bd3 b6 10.0-0 Nc6 11.Ne5 Bb7 12.f4 Qe7 13.Rac1 Rfc8 14.h3 [14.Qd1+/=] 14...Qf8 15.a3 Ne8 16.Ng4 f6 17.Bh4 Na5 18.Qc2 Nd6 19.Qe2 Rc7? [Correct was 19...Nb3=] 20.Nxd5 Rxc1 [20...Rf7 21.Nc7+-] 21.Ndxf6+ Kh8 22.Rxc1 Nc6 23.Nd7 Qe8

[23...Qf7 24.Nde5+-] 24.Nde5 [24.Ngf6+-] 24...Rc8 25.Rf1 Rc7 [25...Nf5 26.Qf2+-] 26.Nf6 Qc8 [26...Bxf6 27.Bxf6+ Kg8 28.Ng4+-] 27.Bxg6 [Or 27.Nxg6+ hxg6 28.Bxg6+-] 27...Nxe5 28.Qh5 Nf3+ 29.gxf3 h6 30.Bd3 Nf5 31.Qg6 1-0

197 – Templin 5.Qb3 dxc4 6.Qxc4 The Gruenfeld Defence challenges White to attack or face counterattack. Ray Templin played the Gruenfeld against me at the North Penn Chess Club. We played it at the club and the speed was slow enough that I could write down the moves. I played this opening from both sides but preferred Black. What should I try as White? I chose 5.Qb3. I had studied old matches from the 1950s where this was popular in the games of Botvinnik or Smyslov. We did not follow the critical lines. White won two pawns and then the Exchange in this game. I returned the Exchange to get passed rook pawns on both sides of the board. Black's king could not cover everything fast enough. Sawyer - Templin (2000), Lansdale, PA 17.07.1981 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 d5 4.Nf3 Bg7 5.Qb3 dxc4 6.Qxc4 Bg4 [6...0-0 7.e4=] 7.Ne5 Be6 8.Qb5+ Nbd7 9.Qxb7 Nb6 [9...Nxe5 10.dxe5 Nd7 11.f4+/=] 10.Qc6+ [10.e4! Qxd4 11.Nc6+-] 10...Nfd7 11.Bf4 0-0 12.Nxd7 Bxd7 13.Qxc7 [13.Qc5!+/-] 13...Qe8 [13...Qxc7 14.Bxc7 Bxd4=] 14.e3 Be6? [14...Bc6 15.h4+/-] 15.Bb5 Qc8 [15...Bd7 16.Bxd7 Nxd7 17.0-0+-] 16.Qxc8 Raxc8 17.0-0 Nd5 18.Nxd5 Bxd5 19.Rfc1 f6 20.Ba6 [20.Bc7 Rf7 21.Bd7+-] 20...Rb8 [20...Rxc1+ 21.Rxc1 Bxa2 22.Rc5+/-] 21.Bxb8 Rxb8 22.b3 f5 23.Rc8+ Rxc8 24.Bxc8 e5 25.Ba6 Kf7 26.Bc4 Ke6 27.Rc1 exd4 28.exd4 Bxd4 29.Re1+ Kd6 30.Bxd5 Kxd5 31.Re7 Kd6 32.Rxh7 Ke5 33.Rg7 Kf6 34.Rd7 Bb6 [34...Ke5 35.b4+-] 35.Rd6+ Kf7 36.Rxb6 axb6 37.a4 Ke6 38.b4 Kd5 39.h4 Kc4 40.a5 bxa5 41.bxa5 Kb5 42.f3 Kxa5 43.g4 fxg4 44.fxg4 Kb5 45.h5 gxh5 46.gxh5 Kc5 47.h6 Kd6 48.h7 Ke6 49.h8Q 1-0

198 – Nolan 6.Qxc4 0-0 7.e4 Greg Nolan and I played in the same chess club and became friends. We must have spent 1000 hours just talking about chess and chess openings. Gregory was on his way to becoming a Master, but he plateaued for a long time as an Expert. Hard work made Greg Nolan a chess master. I was impressed that he kept working so long to achieve his goal. He earned a National Master Certificate in 1998. Nolan played a lot of tournaments, so his results and ratings fluctuated up and down. Greg Nolan was one of the best players at the Chaturanga Chess Club. He played a simultaneous exhibition against club players. His repertoire in 1981 included the Gruenfeld as Black. Years ago, chess theory sometimes treated the Gruenfeld Defence (also spelled Grünfeld and Gruenfeld) as the ugly younger sister of the King's Indian Defence. The Gruenfeld Defence blossomed into a beautiful opening that most of the best players want to dance with. Here I played White. Sawyer - Nolan, Hatboro, PA simul 03.12.1981 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 d5 4.Nf3 [Many times I played the Exchange Variation with 4.cxd5 Nxd5 5.e4 Nxc3 6.bxc3 Bg7 where there is a choice between 7.Nf3 or 7.Bc4/Ne2] 4...Bg7 5.Qb3 dxc4 6.Qxc4 0-0 7.e4 Nfd7 [At the time I had been studying old Smyslov games from the 1940s and 1950s that followed 7...Bg4 8.Be3 Nfd7 9.Qb3 Nb6 transposing back to the game below. The most popular variations are 7...a6 8.e5 b5 9.Qb3 Nfd7 or 7...Na6 8.Be2 c5 9.d5 e6 10.0-0 exd5 11.exd5] 8.Be3 Nb6 9.Qb3 Bg4 10.Rd1 Nc6 11.d5 Ne5 12.Be2 Nxf3+ 13.gxf3 Bd7!? [Now I am on my own. The main lines goes 13...Bh5 14.Rg1 Qd7 15.Rg3] 14.f4!? [14.h4 is another way to attack.] 14...Qc8 15.Rg1 e6 16.h4 [Pushing the other rook pawn 16.a4+/= could prove to be more inconvenient for Black.] 16...exd5 17.h5 dxe4 18.hxg6 hxg6 19.Nxe4? [Losing the Exchange. Ugh! White did have 19.Rxg6! Be6 20.Rxg7+ Kxg7 21.Qb4 is an interesting Exchange sacrifice.] 19...Ba4 20.Nf6+ Bxf6 21.Rxg6+ Kh7 22.Rh6+ [White desperately hopes for a

perpetual check or mate swindle.] 22...Kxh6 23.f5+ Kh7 24.Qb4 Bxd1 25.Qg4 Bxe2 26.Qh3+ Kg8 27.Qg2+ Bg7 28.Bh6 Bg4! [I had missed this game saving resource.] 29.Qxg4 Qe8+ 30.Kf1 Qe5 0-1

199 – Beckmann 7…Bg4 8.Be3 How do you choose your opening variations? Here are considerations that help me. 1. Play what you have always played in the past. It saves you time, but you might not improve much. 2. Play what the world champion is playing. You have a sound repertoire but it requires constant research. 3. Play what your favorite master plays. That works well if you have the skill to match his or her style. 4. Play what has brought you good results either by rating or percentage. That works if you like numbers. 5. Play what you would like to learn. Experimentation works best when no money or rating is at stake. For this game I chose Number 2 above. My opponent was “M.” Beckmann in Correspondence World Cup 5. It was an open tournament with ICCF players from all over the world. I think Beckmann was from West Germany. For this slow postal game I chose 5.Qb3. I had a good library, so I’d start well. I could gradually improve my position and just sit on it. My danger was minimal. If Black made a mistake, I could methodically calculate out the proper punishment. After I opened up the h-file and g-file, Black walked into a pin. Sawyer (2000) - Beckmann (1700), corr 1981 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 d5 4.Nf3 Bg7 5.Qb3 dxc4 6.Qxc4 0-0 7.e4 Bg4 8.Be3 Nfd7 9.Qb3 Nb6 10.Rd1 Nc6 11.d5 Ne5 12.Be2 Nxf3+ 13.gxf3 Bh3 [13...Bh5 14.Rg1+/=] 14.Rg1 a6 [14...Qb8 15.f4 c6 16.Rg3 Bd7 17.dxc6 Bxc6 18.f5 Kh8 19.fxg6 fxg6 20.h4=] 15.f4 Bd7 16.Rd2 Re8 17.f5 Qc8 18.h4 Kf8 [Or 18...Kh8 19.fxg6 fxg6 20.h5+-] 19.fxg6 hxg6 20.h5 gxh5 21.Bxh5 Rb8 22.f3 Kg8 23.Rdg2 1-0

200 – Wadman 8…Nfd7 9.Qb3 The main line Gruenfeld Defence Russian System presented me with a dilemma. I was familiar with the old lines from World Champion Vasily Smyslov. The Russian System begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 d5 4.Nf3 Bg7 5.Qb3. Play usually continues 5…dxc4 6.Qxc4 0-0 7.e4. Smyslov played the line 7…Bg4 from both sides of the board in games from the 1940s to the 1970s. I studied several of his games against Keres, Kotov, Botvinnik, and Euwe. New lines looked sharp and complicated. I tried 7…a6 and 7… c6. Also interesting are 7…Nc6, 7…Na6 and 7…Nfd7. It is funny how things come in phases. White gets a big pawn center. Both sides focus on the middle of the board. White may find play on the kingside. Black may find play on the queenside. The popular 13…Bh5 annoys me from either side. It ties both bishops down until White is ready to play f4. My Gene Wadman game was close to equal. I was much higher rated and did not want anything close to a draw. He did have some real attacking chances along the g-file. The result was not clear until White’s mistake on move 26. Black went up a piece and won quickly. Wadman (1507) - Sawyer (2100), corr APCT 1981 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 d5 4.Nf3 Bg7 5.Qb3 dxc4 6.Qxc4 0-0 7.e4 Bg4 8.Be3 Nfd7 9.Qb3 Nb6 10.Rd1 Nc6 11.d5 Ne5 12.Be2 Nxf3+ 13.gxf3 Bh5 14.Rg1 Qb8 15.f4 Bxe2 16.Kxe2 Nc8 17.f3 Nd6 18.h4 Qc8 19.Rh1 h5 20.Rdg1 Kh7 21.Qc2 [Or 21.f5 c5=] 21...c5 22.f5 gxf5?! [22...b5!=] 23.Rg5 f6 24.Rg2 e5 25.dxe6 Qxe6 26.Bxc5? [26.Rd1=] 26...Qc4+ 27.Kd1 Qxc5 28.Rhg1 Bh6 29.Re1 Nb5 30.Ree2 Nd4 0-1

201 – Sarana 7…Na6 8.Be2 c5 Black is blessed with several playable defensive options against the Gruenfeld Defence Russian Variation 5.Qb3. The trick is to keep your pieces safe and put your opponent's pieces in danger. White picked up a bishop and knight for a rook in the game between Alexey Sarana and Boris Ofitserian. Then White found a winning combination with the knight. Sarana (2588) - Ofitserian (2414), ch-RUS Junior 2018 Loo RUS (3.4), 22.04.2018 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 d5 4.Nf3 Bg7 5.Qb3 dxc4 6.Qxc4 0-0 7.e4 Na6 8.Be2 c5 9.d5 e6 10.0-0 exd5 11.exd5 Re8 [11...Bf5 12.Be3 Qb6 13.Nh4 Bd7 14.Nf3=] 12.Rd1 Bf5 13.d6 h6 14.Be3 [14.Bf4 Nd7 15.Bf1=] 14...Ng4 15.Bf4 [15.Bc1=] 15...Bxc3 16.bxc3 Re4 17.Qb5 Rxf4 18.Qxb7 Ra4 19.d7 Nc7 20.h3 Nf6 21.Ne5 Bxd7 [21...Nxd7 22.Nxf7 Kxf7 23.Qb3+ Kg7 24.Qxa4=] 22.Nxd7 Nfd5 [22...Nxd7 23.Qc6 Qf6 24.Qxa4+-] 23.Rxd5 Nxd5 24.Qxd5 Rc8 25.Bb5 Rf4 26.Qd6 Qc7 [26...Qg5 27.g3+-] 27.Nf6+! 1-0 [White wins material. For example, if 27...Kh8 28.Qxc7 Rxc7 29.Nd5 forks the rooks.]

202 – Stankovic 7…a6 8.Bf4 b5 A proven defense to the Gruenfeld Russian Variation 5.Qb3 line is 5...dxc4 6.Qxc4 0-0 7.e4 a6. The traditional sharp continuation leads to an equal position in a long mostly forced line after 8.e5. The alternative 8.Bf4 occurred in Manuel Angel Castro Perez vs Milos Stankovic. Unfortunately for White, he blundered on move 11 in an even position. Castro Perez (1949) - Stankovic (2416), 45th La Roda Open ESP, 28.03.2018 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3 g6 3.c4 Bg7 4.Nc3 d5 5.Qb3 dxc4 6.Qxc4 0-0 7.e4 a6 8.Bf4 [Sharp play after 8.e5 b5 9.Qb3 Nfd7 10.e6 fxe6 11.Ng5 Bxd4 12.Nxe6 Bxf2+ 13.Ke2 Nc5 14.Nxc5+ Kh8 15.Ne6 Bxe6 16.Qxe6 Rf6= leads to an equal position.] 8...b5 9.Qc5 [9.Qxc7 Qxc7 10.Bxc7 Bb7 11.Bd3 b4 12.Na4 Bxe4=] 9...Bb7 10.Bd3 Nbd7 11.Qa3? [11.Qxc7 Qxc7 12.Bxc7 b4=] 11...c5 12.dxc5 Nxc5 13.Qxc5 Qxd3 14.Rd1 Nxe4 15.Qb6 Bxc3+ 16.bxc3 Qxc3+ 17.Nd2 Nxd2 18.Bxd2 Qe5+ 19.Kf1 [White never castled and his king was vulnerable in the center. 19.Qe3

Qxe3+ 20.Bxe3 Bxg2-+] 19...Qd5 20.f3 Rfd8 21.Ke2 [21.Kf2 Qxa2-+] 21...Rd6 22.Qa5 Rad8 23.a3 [23.Rhe1 Qc4+ 24.Kf2 Qc2-+] 23...Qc4+ 24.Kf2 Qh4+ 25.Ke2 Bd5 0-1

Book 7: Index of Names to Games Acor – 48-49 Adhiban – 97 Aegis – 88 Akobian – 110 Alkaline – 89 Arnold – 137 Ash – 163 Bacon – 54 Baffo – 74 Bauer – 25 Beckmann – 199 Belavitch – 105, 178 Beloungie – 134 Benjamin – 140 bjerky – 124 BK-Chess – 136 BlackDragon – 59 blik – 55 Blumetti – 148, 189 BobSled – 14 Bocharov – 108 Bok – 91 Bologan – 93 Bovay III – 5 Browne – 114 Byrne – 190 canuck-eh – 58 Carneiro – 28 Castro Perez – 202 Cavicchi – 56 Champbuster – 8 Chaney – 169

charlypapa – 21 Chatalbashev – 120 Cherner – 167 ChessBeta – 77 Clauser – 7 Coffin – 188 Commons – 126, 160 Cooper – 143 Davis – 72 De Bouver – 66 Dempler – 116 Dobrotvorsky – 82 Drclumsy – 128 Dreev – 56 Dubois – 134 Dudzik – 185 Dvirnyy – 109 dyarbro – 75 Eldman – 123 Ellison – 144 escacsjocrei – 11 Fawbush – 115, 135 Fedoseev – 93 Fischer, G – 157 Fischer, R – 190 Fitter – 6 Fuerte2004 – 44-46 Funk – 37 Gareyev – 1 Goldbeck – 120 GreenPiece – 47 Grigoriants – 98 Grischuk – 184 Guest – 175 Gutman – 25 Haines – 11, 24, 30-35, 38-40, 94, 106, 107, 112, 113, 143, 144, 188 Harabor – 42

Hardison – 24, 30-35, 94, 106, 113 Harper – 84 Heinrich – 150 Hertan – 107 Hill – 147 Hughes – 133 Hurst – 112 Ingebretsen – 98 Jamison – 99 Johnson – 52 Johnston – 130 Jones – 158 julssants – 19 JureP – 4 Kachiani-Gersinska – 131 kamisama – 195 Karthikeyan – 78 Kasparov – 28 Kelires – 79 Kistler – 68 Kitten – 65 Koepcke – 145 Koller – 86 Koopmans – 127 Kovalenko – 97 Kramnik – 174 Kremer – 2 Kuhn – 9 Kushner – 180 La Bonte – 36 Lalith – 110 Lampkin – 122 Lenic – 79 leventh – 17 LoseOften – Lovik – 173 lynoli – 15

madami – 192 Madison – 149 Malamute – 70 Mandelkern – 43, 129 maniaq – 12 Mar99Arg – 53 Markov – 141 Martinmcfly – 83 McCullough – 154 McNiece – 3 Menchik – 151 MestreCapivara – 125 MickeyTJ – 20 Mingos – 66 Morford – 186 Morin – 39-40 Moryak – 90 mscp – 13 Mueller – 138 Mueller Ludwig – 131 Murray – 71, 121 Nakamura – 111, 183 nando3 – 187 Nepomniachtchi – 184 NewStart – 152 NN – 16 Nolan – 198 Norris - 162 Norton – 76 Ofitserian – 201 O'Hearn – 119, 171 oli2 – 23 Onischuk – 114 Paehtz – 117 Parsons – 96, 103 Pascute – 155 Peterson – 92

Pharo – 62 PII233Crafty – 132 Pitkanen – 80 Podymov – 166 Price – 61 Purser – 26 Rahman – 57 Raudenbush – 193 Reshevsky – 160 Richardson – 168 Riley – 41 Rind – 104 Roecker – 60 Rookie – 85 Roquentin – 139 Ross, H – 142, 194 Ross, P – 176 Roys – 156, 164, 170 Rybka – 64 Sanskriti – 78 Sarana – 201 Sawyer, E – 63 Sawyer, T – 2, 3, 5-7, 9, 10, 12, 13, 15, 17-23, 26, 27, 36, 37, 41-55, 57-65, 67-77, 80-85, 87-90, 92, 95, 96, 99-105, 115, 116, 118, 119, 121-125, 127130, 132, 133, 135-142, 145-150, 152-159, 162-172, 175-182, 185-187, 189, 191-200 Sayles – 177 Schafer – 10 Schlagenhauf – 50 Schneider – 195 Sebenik – 86 Shannon – 73 Sharpshooter – 146 Shepherd – 87, 172 Small – 159 So, W – 183 Spence – 67

Spigel – 51 Sredojevic – 29 Stankovic – 202 Stevens – 100 Stirling – 179 Storch – 165 Stuart – 1 Superpoil – 8 Svidler – 174 Swapnil – 161 Swazey – 181 Sytnik – 101 Tan Zhongyi – 117 Tarentule-noire – 22 Tari – 173 Templin – 197 Tencati – 109 Thomas – 151 Topalov – 111 Torning – 16 Tressell – 27 Van Foreest – 91 Veach – 69 Vitiugov – 108 Viveiros – 191 Vogel – 81 Wadman – 153, 200 Wallach – 38 Warren – 118 Weichert – 126 Xu Ruoying – 29 Zangetsu-Sims – 18 Zdun – 95, 102 Zhou – 161 Zilbermints – 4 Zintgraff – 14

Book 8: Rare First Moves: Chess Opening Games - Second Edition Copyright © 2015, 2016, 2018 by Sawyer Publications All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form without permission in writing from the author. This is the 2018 Second Edition of Rare First Moves in chess. The last half of the book covers games with Reti Opening 1.Nf3 and English Opening 1.c4. The front half has rare odds and ends such as 1.b4, 1.b3, 1.g4, 1.g3 and a few Fools Mates. Want to see the bold Englund Gambit 1.d4 e5!? Experiment with the Sokolsky or Polish Opening 1.b4, Larsen’s Opening 1.b3, the Spike or Grob Attack 1.g4 and the King’s Fianchetto 1.g3. Don’t let the rare lines scare you. You may want to try them yourself! The author expanded this 2018 edition to include 140 games, an increase of 50 additional games over the earlier 2016 edition. An Index of Names to Games is found at the back of the book. Chess author Tim Sawyer provides insights in annotated games over his 45 year career. He examines creative ideas by masters, experts and club players. You can benefit from his experience and insights. He hope you find his comments entertaining. There are games here that you won’t find anywhere else. The author reorganized this edition to make the book easier to use. The Table of Contents shows variations of specific lines. Related games are grouped together. You will find games full of interesting ideas from years of the author’s own writing. If you are tempted to avoid 1.e4 or 1.d4, check this book out. The author also covers 1.f4 in his Bird & Dutch book and 1.Nc3 in his Queen Knight book. Stay excited. Have fun playing chess! Tim Sawyer writes about Flank

Openings (1.c4, 1.Nf3, etc.) in this edition of the Rare First Moves book. Try it. Buy it. Enjoy it!

Book 8: Chapter 1 – Rare White Moves Fools Mates Now for a review of Fool's Mate. The fastest Fool's Mates are White losses. Since White moves first, he can start off playing blunders faster than Black can. All typical Fool's Mates that lose for White would also lose for Black if the colors were reversed (the games taking one move longer). Here are the Four Factors in a Fool's Mate for White: 1. The losing King is on his original e1 square. 2. The losing King is surrounded by his own army. 3. The losing King is open to danger when his f-pawn moves. 4. The losing King is checked along the e1-h4 diagonal, forcing mate. Many rare first moves are weak and lose very quickly. Here are some examples. Usually White plays 1.e4 or 1.d4. Those moves pretty eliminate most (but not all) Fool's Mate options. For example, there is the game 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nd2 d5 3.dxe5 Ng4 4.h3 Ne3 5.fxe3 Qh4+ 6.g3 Qxg3# 0-1. Gibaud – Lazard, Paris 1924. This is a variation of Fools Mate. However if one of White's early pawn moves are with the f-pawn, g-pawn, or h-pawn, many Fools Mate possibilities open up.

1 – 1.c3 Lesson Time What happens when a beginner plays an expert? Hopefully the beginner learns a lesson. This was an offhand skittle club game. Colquitt - Sawyer, Williamsport, PA 2000 begins 1.c3 e5 2.f3 d5 3.g4 Qh4# 0-1

2 – 1.h4 Way Out There

How does Black develop on the queenside and mate quickly on the kingside? It is possible. Here I started with 1…Nc6 and 2…d5. However red flags went up on the white side. Black noticed a serious White weakness on the kingside. So I made another queenside move 3…Qd6 with an eye to checkmate. It worked immediately. Guest - Sawyer, Internet Chess Club 2003 begins 1.h4 Nc6 2.h5 d5 3.f3 Qd6 4.g4 Qg3# 0-1

3 – 1.h3 d5 Can g3 Help? Can a pawn on g3 stop a Fool's Mate? Not when both the h-pawn and fpawn have moved. Here Black played a delayed Birds Opening, but his opening strategy never takes flight. JackBach - Sawyer, begins 1.h3 d5 2.f4 e5 3.fxe5 Qh4+ 4.g3 Qxg3# 0-1

4 – 1.h3 e5 Fool's Mate April Fool's Day 2013 was the day after Easter. I was reminded that King David wrote: The fool says in his heart, "There is no God." (Psalm 14:1). The missionary Jim Elliot wrote: "He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain what he cannot lose." Twila Paris put those words "He Is No Fool" to music. I went to two Twila Paris concerts. The song also refers to Olympic runner Eric Liddell from the 1981 "Chariots of Fire" movie. Jim Elliot was killed in Ecuador in 1956 along with four other missionaries. One of those missionaries was Nate Saint. I heard his son Steve Saint tell their story. Steve later went to live with the same people who killed his father. This true story was made into the 2005 movie "End of the Spear". A few years ago I chatted with Nathan Saint (grandson of the missionary) who played scholastic chess in Alabama up until 2007 and had a rating 1770.

I once had a vacation where I did nothing pertaining to chess. When I got back, I did not feel much like playing any serious chess. I challenged the weak program "JackBach" to 3 3 blitz games. That program seems to see and make 1-ply threats, but it misses all 3-ply threats. I played this short game that ended in a Fool's Mate motif from one of the Flank Openings. JackBach - Sawyer, ICC 3 3 Internet Chess Club, 30.03.2013 begins 1.h3 [There is no faster Fool's Mate than 1.f3 e5 2.g4 Qh4#] 1...e5 2.d4 e4 3.a4?! [A dubious novelty. 3.e3 stops the Fool's Mate idea.] 3...Bb4+!? 4.Nd2? [This was what I was hoping so I could play a Fool's Mate. 4.Bd2=] 4...e3! 5.fxe3? [5.c3 exd2+ 6.Bxd2 Be7-+ and Black has won a knight.] 5...Qh4+! 6.g3 Qxg3# White is checkmated. 0-1

1.f3 and others Rare but reasonable tries that do not occupy the center may avoid immediate loss. The problem is that White gives Black free reign in the middle of the board. This makes the Black pieces more effective.

5 – 1.f3 Gedult Opening Does developing a kingside knight early in the game help? Yes, but... it helps a lot more if the knight is on f3. The creative master David Gedult sometimes chose the first move 1.f3 in the hope of reaching a BlackmarDiemer Gambit. The example below is not what Gedult had in mind as a good follow-up to his first move. ramani2kmd2004 - Sawyer, Internet Chess Club 2004 begins 1.f3 e5 2.Nh3 d5 3.a4 Bxh3 4.gxh3 Qh4# 0-1

6 – Gedult 1.f3 Torning Rick Torning sent me a selection of games. Mr. Torning provided the following game with his comments. Torning - NN, Casual Bullet lichess, 06.03.2018 begins 1.f3?! [I played this opening system in tournaments during the late 1980s. (I won using this opening against George Winter, a nice bloke who looked at me with utter contempt when I played it - his only loss when he won the 1987/88 Australian Reserves Championship at Gosford.) A00 Gedult's Opening.] 1...e5 2.g3 d5 3.Bg2 e4 4.Nh3 exf3 5.exf3 Bxh3 6.Bxh3 Bc5 7.d4 Bd6 8.Qe2+ Ne7 9.Bg5 0-0 10.Nd2 Re8 11.0-0-0 [After opposite sides castling, in a fairly even position, Black makes a mistake weakening the king's pawn protection. Nec6!? would threaten the trade of queens.] 11...f6? [11...Nec6 12.Bxd8 Rxe2=] 12.Qe6+ Kf8 [perhaps to protect the rook and missing my next move. Better was Kh8.] 13.Bxf6! gxf6?? [Stockfish: 13...Qd7 14.Qxd7 Nxd7 15.Bxd7 gxf6 16.Bxe8 Kxe8 17.Rhe1 Kd7 leaves White the exchange and a pawn up with Black having two isolated pawns and a bad bishop.] 14.Qxf6+ Kg8 15.Be6# mate. 1-0 [Game notes by Torning]

7 – How to Invent an Opening How can you invent a chess opening? Look for rarely played early moves around which you can develop a reasonable plan for all your pieces. Focus on the center of the board for a good chess opening. I am impressed at how my Internet Chess Club opponent "stemli" developed 1.Nh3 into a sensible system. His plan is: 2.g3 with 3.f4. Moves like 4.d4 and 6.Nf2 and 8.Bg2 are common. His pawns fight for dark squares and his pieces for light squares, like a reversed Modern Defence 1...g6 with Nh6-Nf7. Nothing is completely original. Charles Amar and Dr. Tartakower played this in Paris, France in the 1930s. But "stemli" makes it his own, having played many of his 26,000 blitz games in this line. Experience allows him to play his moves rapidly. Our hero "stemli" is rated in the 1800s, but ICC blitz ratings fluctuate. Three weeks after this game, "stemli" reached a rating of 2034. Most players would love to perform at the Expert level, even if only occasionally. He executes a reasonable plan quickly. After he completed his development, White aggressively attacks his opponent's king. His ICC finger notes quote Capablanca: "A good player is always lucky". 1.Nh3 is risky but great for blitz! We all miss stuff and his opening is threatening. The notes below include some lines from other games we played. This time I won, but not always. stemli (1820) - Sawyer (1921), ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 24.07.2014 begins 1.Nh3 d5 [1...Nc6 2.g3 d5 3.f4 e5 4.fxe5 Nxe5 5.d4 Nc6 6.Nf2 Nf6 7.Bg2 Bd6 8.0-0 0-0=] 2.g3 e5 3.f4 e4 [3...Bxh3 4.Bxh3 exf4 5.0-0 fxg3 6.hxg3 Nf6 7.d4 Bd6=/+] 4.d4 exd3 5.cxd3 Nf6 [5...c6 6.Nf2 Nf6=] 6.Nf2 Bc5 7.e3 0-0 8.Bg2 Re8 9.d4 Bd6 10.0-0 c6 11.Qf3 h5 12.Nc3 Bg4 13.Nxg4 hxg4 14.Qf2 Ne4 15.Nxe4 dxe4 16.f5 Nd7 17.Bd2 Nf6 18.Bc3 Nd5 19.Qe2 Qg5 20.Rf2 Qxe3 21.Qxe3 Nxe3 22.Rf4 [White had to play 22.Bh1 Nd5 23.Re2 Bb4=/+] 22...Nxg2 [Obviously I should have grabbed

the rook instead of the bishop. 22...Bxf4 23.gxf4 Rad8-+] 23.Rxg4 Ne3 24.Rg5 Nd5 25.Re1 f6 26.Rg6 Kf7 27.g4 Nf4 [White resigns] 0-1

8 – Larry Wadsworth 1.Nh3 I met a fine rural Florida southern gentleman. Larry Wadsworth found out that I played chess. He wanted to play me in a game. Arrangements were made. When he arrived, he brought a nice gift of pickled squash. I set the board up. Then I took a pawn in each hand. Larry selected the hand with the White pawn. Mr. Wadsworth said he had never played a professional chess player before. I started to say that I was not a professional, but I have made a small amount of money over the past 25 years. Some were tournament winnings. Some came from coaching. Most were royalties from writing. Most years I spent more on chess than I earned from it. For many, chess is our fun hobby that we wish was our job except for the hard work and low pay. Larry began the game with 1.Nh3. I countered 1…e5. I dreamt of 2.f4 d5 3.fxe5? Bxh3 4.gxh3 Qh4 Fools Mate. Larry was no fool. Instead he played 2.e4. We transposed to 1.e4 e5 2.Nh3. All our knights came out quickly. With 4.Ng5 and 5.Bc4 White took aim at f7. This told me that he does know something about chess. After Black castled, I half expected White to give up two minor pieces on f7 for a rook and a pawn. There followed 6.Na4 Be7 7.b3 h6 when White had one last chance at attacking glory with 8.h4! I did not expect it, but I realized during the game that the knight on g5 could not be captured under such circumstances. Instead, White lost a pawn with 8.Nh3 Nxe4. Soon he dropped a piece on d5. I set a trap on e5 which netted me the a1 rook. Then I pushed for checkmate until he dropped his final knight. Wadsworth - Sawyer, Florida 18.06.2016 begins 1.Nh3 e5 2.e4 Nf6 3.Nc3 Nc6 4.Ng5 Bc5 5.Bc4 0-0 6.Na4?! [6.d3 Nd4=/+] 6...Be7 7.b3? [7.d3 d5=/+] 7...h6 8.Nh3 [8.h4! d5 (8...hxg5? 9.hxg5 Nh7 10.Qh5 Re8 11.Qxh7+ Kf8 12.Qh8#) 9.exd5 Nxd5 10.Ne4 a6-/+] 8...Nxe4 9.Qf3 Nf6 10.0-0 d5 11.Bxd5 [11.Be2 Bg4 12.Qe3 d4 13.Qd3 Nb4 14.Qc4 Be6 15.Qb5 a6 16.Qxb7 Bd5-+] 11...Qxd5 12.Qxd5 Nxd5 13.Re1 Bxh3 14.gxh3 Rad8 15.Bb2 a6 16.f3 Nf4 17.Bxe5 [17.Rad1 b5 18.Nc3 Nd4-+]

17...Nxe5 18.Rxe5 Bf6 19.Rf5 Nxh3+ 20.Kg2 Rxd2+ 21.Kxh3 Bxa1 22.Nc5 Bd4 23.Rd5 c6 24.Rxd4 Rxd4 25.Nxb7 g5 26.Na5 Re8 27.Nxc6 Rh4+ 28.Kg3 f5 29.Nd4 Rxd4 0-1

1.e3 White plays with far too much modesty for a first move. Pushing the epawn just one square is fully sound and playable, but it fails to pressure Black. White gives up one major advantage of the first move. Black possesses a wide range of options.

9 – My Little Idiot Game I tried "Lichess" on my PC. I spent 20 years on ICC. My rating is 2002 on chess.com, but I felt like checking out something new. In recent years my online blitz play suffers from bad mouse issues. No matter what mice I try, they malfunction with my PC. My Lichess experience began with my attempt to play 1.e4. A mouse slip gave me 1.e3, though I tried to push it to e4. My opponent played 1...d6, and 2.e4 instantly appeared as my pre-move! Our Delayed Sicilian was like an English. Still, I've enjoyed Lichess so far. I told my wife that I started playing Lichess, but I didn't know what the "LI" stands for. Immediately she said, "Little Idiot!" I said I began my first game with 1.e3. "I told you it stands for Little Idiot," she added. Like an idiot, I won a rook instead of a queen. Sawyer – NN (1271), Rated Classical game lichess, 24.10.2017 begins 1.e3 [Mouse slip.] 1...d6 2.e4 c5 3.Nc3 e6 4.Nf3 Qa5 5.Be2 Qd8 [5...Nf6 6.00=] 6.0-0 Qf6 7.d4! Qg6 8.e5 dxe5 9.dxe5 b6 10.Bd3 [My idea was to win the a8 rook, but look at 10.Nh4!+-] 10...f5 11.exf6 Qxf6 12.Be4 [12.Bg5+-] 12...e5 13.Bxa8 [13.Bg5+-] 13...Qg6 14.Nxe5 Bh3 15.Nxg6 hxg6 16.gxh3 Nd7 17.Re1+ Ne7 18.Bc6 Kf7 19.Bxd7 Rxh3 20.Qg4 [Black left the game.] 1-0

10 – What If No Book Moves? What if your opponent does not play book moves? What if he just develops his pieces in some irregular way? What if he seems to know what he is doing and plays quickly? The opening is the Van't Kruijs Opening 1.e3. My opponent "floian38" plays this opening often employing a variety of set-ups after 1.e3. The idea 2.Ne2, 3.Ng3, 4.Be2, and 5.0-0 is unique. We could call it the Florian Attack after my opponent. Chess.com indicated that "florian38" was Józef Zarajczyk from Poland. How do I handle this irregular openings? Here are some basics: 1. Note the time. I must play fast in a 3 minute game. 2. Safety 1-A. I must keep my own pieces safe. 3. Safety 1-B. I aim to make my opponent's pieces unsafe. 4. Activity 2-A. I make my pieces to be as active as possible. 5. Activity 2-B. I hinder my opponent’s piece activity. florian38 - Sawyer, Live Chess Chess.com, 23.08.2012 begins 1.e3 Nc6 2.Ne2 e5 3.Ng3 d5 4.Be2 Nf6 5.0-0 Bd6 6.f4 [I actually reached this position against another opponent and won after a solid set-up following 6.f3 Be6 7.a3 Qd7 8.b4 0-0] 6...exf4 7.exf4 0-0 8.Nh5 Nxh5 9.Bxh5 Qh4 10.g3 Qe7 11.Nc3 Bc5+ 12.Kh1 Qd8 13.d3 Ne7 14.d4 Bd6 15.Be3 c6 16.Bf3 Nf5 17.Bg1 Be7 18.Bg2 Nd6 19.Qh5 Bf6 20.Ne2 g6 21.Qh6? [This is a risky spot for the queen. Better is 21.Qf3 h5-/+] 21...Re8 22.Rae1? [22.Bf3 Nf5-+] 22...Bg7 [Here I missed 22...Bg4! 23.Bf3 Nf5 trapping and winning the queen.] 23.Qg5 Qxg5 24.fxg5 Bg4 25.Nf4 Bf5 26.c3 Be4 27.Bf2 Re7 28.Kg1 Rae8 29.Bh3 Nf5 30.Bxf5 Bxf5 31.Rxe7 Rxe7 32.Re1 Rxe1+ 33.Bxe1 Bf8 34.a3 Be7 35.h4 Be4 36.Kf2 Kg7 37.Bd2 Bf5 38.Ne2 f6 39.gxf6+ Bxf6 40.Bf4 Kf7 41.Bb8 a6 42.Nf4 Be6 43.Nxe6 Kxe6 44.Kf3 h5 45.Bc7 Kf5 46.Bf4 g5 47.hxg5 Bxg5 48.Bxg5 Kxg5 49.a4 b5 50.a5 Kf5 51.b3 Kg5 52.Kf2 Kg4 53.Kg2 h4 54.gxh4 Kxh4 55.Kf3 Kg5 56.Kg3 Kf5 57.Kf3 Kg5 58.Ke3? [I miss the first two chances to win, but found the third one. 58.Kg3=] 58...Kg4? [58...b4 59.cxb4 Kg4-+] 59.Kd3? [59.b4=] 59...Kf3?= [59...b4-+] 60.c4? [As I recall White played faster than

I did, but I had enough time to apply the mate. 60.b4 Kf2 61.Kd2=] 60...Kf4 61.cxb5 cxb5 62.Kc3 Ke4 63.Kb4 Kxd4 64.Ka3 Kc3 65.b4 d4 66.Ka2 Kc2 67.Ka3 d3 68.Ka2 d2 69.Ka3 d1Q 70.Ka2 Qb1+ 71.Ka3 Qa1# 0-1

11 – Alapin French Reversed In 2014 I goofed off of purpose and played risky openings for fun vs lower rated players. I know this is not a path to higher rated chess play, but sometimes the temptation was just too strong. After White's move 1.e3, we head for a French Defence reversed. When White wasted a tempo by 2.a3?! I chose an aggressive gambit strategy. Obviously 3...Nc6 is good, but I was in a mood to play an Alapin French Reversed. Black planned to use the f-file in Blackmar-Diemer style for a kingside attack. Instead of setting up a solid defense, White advanced his own fpawn. Briefly chances were even. Then the tactical tide shifted and White was swept away with checkmate. camposol (1417) - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 24.10.2014 begins 1.e3 e5 2.a3 d5 3.d4 Be6 [3...Nc6 is obviously good, but I was in a mood to play an Alapin French Reversed.] 4.dxe5 Nc6 5.Nf3 f6 6.exf6 Nxf6 7.Bb5 [7.Bd3+/=] 7...a6 8.Bxc6+ bxc6 9.Ne5 Qd6 10.f4 Be7 11.Nc3 0-0 12.Qd4!? [12.0-0 Rae8=] 12...Ng4 13.0-0 [White should play 13.Nxg4 Bxg4 14.0-0=] 13...Bf6 14.Qb4 [If 14.Bd2 Nxe5 15.fxe5 Bxe5 16.Qh4 Bf5+] 14...Bxe5 15.fxe5 Rxf1+ 16.Kxf1 Rf8+ 17.Kg1 Qxe5 18.Bd2 Qxh2# White checkmated 0-1

1.g3 The King Fianchetto allows White to always play the same first two moves: 1.g3 and 2.Bg2. White maintains familiarity with the opening. The downside to 1.g3 is that his opponent can play any first move as well. Black should take full control of the center.

12 – Goble 1.g3 f5 2.Nc3 Nf6 Dale Goble played an original King's Fianchetto with 1.g3. His play was unusual. It appears that White had a change of mind. First he began with 1.g3, but a handful of moves later he played 6.g4. Sometimes it makes perfect sense to advance the g-pawn one square and then two. Consider 2… g6 Kings Indian Defence lines when Black chases a Bg5 with h6 and g5 followed by Nh5. I did not immediately grab the center by 1...e5 or 1...d5. I angled for a Dutch with 1…f5. When White made his extra pawn advance he lost material. I am not sure if he meant to sacrifice the pawn, but it happened. White fought on gamely. Black whittled down the forces. Each exchange brought White nothing but more trouble. I missed the strongest continuations, but my tactics were good enough to win. One curious things about this game is that I had not yet castled when the game ended. Goble (1500) - Sawyer (2100), corr APCT 1982 begins 1.g3 f5 2.Nc3 [2.c4 English Opening] 2...Nf6 3.Bg2 g6 4.e4 [4.d4 Dutch Defence] 4...d6 [4...Nxe4 5.Nxe4 fxe4 6.Bxe4 d5 7.Bg2 Nc6=] 5.f3 [5.exf5 gxf5 (5...Bxf5? 6.Bxb7+/-; 5...Nc6!? 6.fxg6+/=) 6.d4+/-] 5...Bg7 6.g4? [White sacrifices a pawn. Better would be 6.d4 0-0 7.e5 Nfd7 8.f4=] 6...fxg4 7.h3 [7.d4 0-0-/+] 7...gxh3 [I wanted a passed h-pawn. Maybe even better to weaken White's center with 7...gxf3! 8.Nxf3 c5 9.d4 cxd4 10.Qxd4 Nc6-/+] 8.Bxh3 [8.Nxh3 Nh5 9.d4 Nc6 10.Ne2 e5=/+] 8...c5 9.Bg2 Nc6 10.Nd5 [10.d3 d5-/+] 10...Be6 [I missed the combination 10...Nxd5! 11.exd5 Nb4 12.f4 Bf5 13.d3 Qa5 14.Bd2 Bxb2 15.Rb1 Qxa2-+] 11.Nf4 Bf7 12.b3 Nd7 [I should have played 12...Nh5! 13.d4 Nxf4 14.Bxf4 Nxd4-+] 13.c3 Nb6 14.Nfe2 [14.Nge2 e5 15.Nh3 Qe7 16.d3 h6-/+] 14...e5 15.d4 [15.d3!? Qe7-/+]

15...exd4 16.cxd4 Nxd4 17.Bb2 [Or 17.Rb1 Nxe2 18.Nxe2 d5 19.0-0 0-0+] 17...Nxf3+ 18.Nxf3 Bxb2 19.Rb1 Be5 20.Nxe5 dxe5 21.0-0 Qe7 22.Ng3 Nd7 0-1

13 – Haines 1.g3 d5 2.Bg2 f5 Ray Haines sent me this fast win with his comment that it was a "quick lesson on how not to use the queen." True. Let me add that the game also shows what happens when White develops only one minor piece in 10 moves. That's almost always fatal against good play. Ray Haines found the tactical shot that instantly won White's queen. RodrigoPeligro (1493) - Haines, Live Chess, 10.12.2017 begins 1.g3 d5 2.Bg2 f5 [2...e5!] 3.c4 [3.Nf3] 3...e6 4.Qa4+ [4.Nf3+/=] 4...Bd7 5.Qb3 Nc6 [5...Bc6=] 6.cxd5 Nd4 [6...exd5] 7.Qc4 [7.Qd3] 7...e5 8.a4 [8.Na3!?] 8...b5 9.axb5? [9.Qd3 bxa4=] 9...Bxb5 10.Qc3? [10.Qa2 Nc2+ 11.Kf1 Nxa1 12.Qxa1 e4 13.Nc3 Bd7=] 10...Bb4! 0-1 [If 11.Qb4 or 11.Qe3 is forked by 11...Nc2+ winning the queen.]

14 – Adams 1.g3 d5 2.Bg2 e5 White aimed to counter-attack the center after initial slow play. Black grabbed space in the center to limit future options in this King's Fianchetto. White's king faced constant pressure in the game between Jules Moussard vs Michael Adams. Moussard (2571) - Adams (2709), Gibraltar Masters 2018 Caleta ENG, 31.01.2018 begins 1.g3 d5 2.Bg2 e5 3.c3 Nf6 4.d4 Nbd7 5.Nf3 Bd6 6.dxe5 Nxe5 7.Nxe5 Bxe5 8.Bf4!? [8.Nd2 c6=] 8...Bxf4 9.Qa4+ c6 10.Qxf4 0-0 11.Nd2 Re8 12.e3 Qb6 13.Qb4 [13.Nb3 c5=/+] 13...Qxb4 14.cxb4 d4! [Black attacks the pinned e-pawn.] 15.e4 a5 16.bxa5 Rxa5 17.0-0 Be6 18.a3 g6 19.Rfc1 Rd8 20.Bf1 h5 21.Bc4 Bxc4 22.Rxc4 Ng4 23.Rb4 Rc5 24.h3 Ne5 25.f4 [25.Kf1=] 25...Nd3 26.Nb3 [26.Rc4 Rxc4 27.Nxc4 b5 28.Ne5 Nxe5 29.fxe5 c5-/+] 26...Rc2 27.Rxd4 Rxd4 28.Nxd4 Rxb2 29.Rd1 Nf2 White drops the h3 pawn. Black has an extra passed queenside pawn plus kingside threats. 0-1

15 – Sawyer 1.g3 d5 2.Bg2 e5 The chess engine BountyHunter used a version of the program Rybka. It chose a wide variety of openings including the famed Blackmar-Diemer Gambit. 90% of the time I play 1.d4, 1.e4 or 1.Nc3. Here I chose 1.g3. This is a Rare First Move for me. We began 1.g3 d5 2.Bg2 e5. Now what do I do? I wanted to push a pawn two moves. What were my options? 3.f4 exf4 4.gxf4 Qh4+ is bad. 3.e4 blocks the diagonal of my Bg2 bishop. 3.d4 e4 again blocks the long diagonal. 3.c4 is a reversed Accelerated Dragon, not bad but not me. I hit upon 3.Nf3!? e4 4.Nd4 c5 5.Nb3 c4 6.Nd4. This resembles a reversed Alekhine Defence Two Pawns Attack. It goes 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.c4 Nb6 4.c5 Nd5. This was comfortable for me. My book on the Alekhine Defense Playbook was published in 2000. I lost a pawn, but I avoided checkmate. I kept the position closed. Black repeated moves in a double rook endgame. Sawyer (2382) - BountyHunter (2934), ICC 5 1 u Internet Chess Club, 17.03.2000 begins 1.g3 d5 2.Bg2 e5 3.Nf3 [3.d3 Nf6 4.Nf3 Bd6 5.0-0 c6=] 3...e4 [3...Nc6 4.d3 Nf6 5.0-0 Be7=] 4.Nd4 [4.Ng1 Bf5=/+] 4...c5 5.Nb3 c4 6.Nd4 Bc5 7.e3 [7.c3 Nc6 8.Nxc6 bxc6 9.b3 cxb3 10.axb3 Nf6=] 7...Bxd4 8.exd4 Bf5 9.Nc3 Nf6 10.Ne2 0-0 11.0-0 Re8 12.c3 [12.h3 Nc6=/+] 12...Nc6 13.b3 cxb3 [13...Bg4=/+] 14.axb3 Ne7 15.Ba3 Qd7 16.Bxe7 Rxe7 17.b4 Bg4 18.Re1 Qf5 19.Qa4 Bf3 20.Nf4 Bxg2 [20...g5=] 21.Nxg2 Ng4 22.Rf1 Qh5 23.h4 Qf5 24.Ne3 Nxe3 25.fxe3 [25.dxe3=] 25...Qh3 26.Rf2 Qxg3+ 27.Rg2 Qh3 [27...Qxh4-/+] 28.Qb5 Rd7 29.Rh2 Qe6 30.Rf1 [30.Rg2 a6=/+] 30...Qg4+ 31.Rg2 a6 32.Rxg4 axb5 33.Rf2 Ra1+ 34.Kh2 Ra2 35.Rfg2 g6 36.Rf2 f5 37.Rgg2 Kf7 38.Kh3 Kf6 39.Kh2 b6 40.Kh3 Ra1 41.Kh2 Rda7 42.Rg3 Rc1 43.Rgg2 [43.Rg1 Raa1 44.Rxc1 Rxc1-/+] 43...Raa1 44.Re2 Rh1+ 45.Kg3 Ra2 [45...f4+ 46.exf4 Kf5-/+] 46.Rh2 Rg1+ 47.Rhg2 Rc1 48.Rh2 Rac2 49.Rhg2 Rh1 50.Rh2 Rg1+ 51.Rhg2 Ra1 52.Kh2 Raa2 53.Kg3 Rcb2 54.Kh2 Rb1 55.Kg3 Rc2 56.Kh2 Rbb2 57.Kg3 Ra2 58.Kh2 Ra1 59.Kg3 Rca2 60.Kh2 Rc1 61.Kg3

Rac2 62.Kh2 Rb1 63.Rg1 Rbb2 64.Rgg2 Rc1 65.Kg3 Rh1 66.Rh2 Rd1 67.Rhg2 Rc2 Game drawn by mutual agreement 1/2-1/2

1.g4 This bold Grob Attack or Spike Attack is risky. Sometimes it works well, especially in blitz if you have a lot of experience in the positions. Other times the Grob loses badly. The Grob Attack 1.g4 is okay, but watch out for an early kingside assault. The Bird’s Opening 1.f4 is okay, but watch out for an early kingside check. The worst thing you can do as White is to combine a Grob with the Birds Opening. Then you would be the fool in the Fools Mate.

16 – Baby Bach Fools Mate What happens with premature kingside expansion? Permanent king elimination. BabyBach - Sawyer, Internet Chess Club 1998 begins 1.g4 d5 2.f4 e5 3.Nc3 Qh4# 0-1

17 – Ortiz Suarez 1.g4 e5 2.Bg2 d5 The Grob Opening 1.g4 allows White tactical play on the light squares. Black often plays in unfamiliar territory. The Grob works well for unorthodox players if their opponents play passively. The danger for White comes when Black develops carefully and rapidly. White lags in development in the game Fabrice Farou vs Isan Reynaldo Ortiz Suarez. Farou (1932) - Ortiz Suarez (2548), 33rd Avoine Open 2018 FRA, 21.07.2018 begins 1.g4 e5 2.Bg2 d5 3.c4 [The Grob Gambit. White offers pawns on c4 and g4. Black may capture either one with the reasonable defensive expectations. A more positional approach is 3.h3 Nc6=/+] 3...dxc4 [3...Bxg4 4.cxd5 Bd6=] 4.Qa4+ c6 5.Qxc4 Be6 6.Qa4 Nd7 7.Nc3 [7.d3 Nb6-/+] 7...Nc5 8.Qc2 Bxg4 9.b4 Ne6 10.e3 Bh5 11.b5 Bg6 12.Be4 Nf6 13.Bxg6 hxg6 14.bxc6 bxc6 15.Bb2 [15.Nf3 Qc7-/+] 15...Nc5 16.d4 exd4 17.0-0-0 [17.exd4 Qxd4-+] 17...d3 0-1

18 – Bond 1.g4 e6 2.Bg2 c5 Jocelyn Bond won a Grob Attack with 1.g4! I played the 1.g4 Grob and 1...g5 Borg (Grob backwards) often 20 years ago. My most memorable experiences were my games against the infamous Claude Bloodgood. “Hi Tim, I just played a nice Grob opening game as white. Can you publish this? It’s blitz but I enjoyed so much to have played this game! Thanks a lot and come and play black against my Grob.” Bond (1897) - nesalimar (1886), ChessCube Game, 13.02.2017 begins 1.g4 e6 2.Bg2 c5 3.c4 Qc7 [3...d5 4.Nc3!? d4 5.Ne4=] 4.d3 Nc6 5.Nf3 b6 6.Nc3 a6 7.g5 [7.Qd2!? h6 8.h4 Bb7 9.Kf1=] 7...Bb7 8.a3 Be7 [8...Ne5!=/+] 9.h4 g6 10.e4 [10.h5!+/-] 10...d6 11.Ne2 b5 12.cxb5 axb5 13.Be3 e5 14.Nc3 b4 15.Nd5 Qd8 16.axb4 Nxb4 17.Rxa8 Bxa8 18.Nxb4 cxb4 19.Qa4+ Kf8 20.h5 Qb8 [20...gxh5 21.Rxh5+-] 21.hxg6 fxg6 22.Qd7 Qd8 [22...Bb7 23.Bh3+-] 23.Qe6 Kg7 24.0-0 h5 [24...Bc6 25.Nxe5! dxe5 26.Qxe5+!+-] 25.Rc1 Bb7 26.Nh4 Qe8 27.Rc7 Ba6 28.Bh3 [28.Qxd6!+-] 28...Bxd3 29.f3 Qf7 30.Qd7 b3 31.Be6 Qf8 32.Rc8 Nf6 33.Rxf8 Nxd7 34.Rxh8 [Faster is 34.Rf7+ Kg8 35.Rxe7+ Kf8 36.Nxg6#] 34...Kxh8 35.Nxg6+ Kg7 36.Nxe7 Nf8 37.Bxb3 Nh7 38.Nf5+ Kf8 39.g6 Nf6 40.g7+ Ke8 41.Bg5 Ng8 42.Bxg8 Bxe4 43.fxe4 d5 44.Bxd5 h4 45.g8Q+ Kd7 46.Qe6+ Kc7 47.Qc6+ Kb8 48.Qb7# 1-0

19 – Bachler 1.g4 e5 2.c4 Nf6 In the early 1980s, FM Kevin Bachler was one of the stronger American postal chess players. Bachler went on to become not only a FIDE Master rated 2350 but also a FIDE Trainer and USCF Professional Coach for 30 years. Kevin Bachler is an experienced instructor and a successful player who has helped many others improve their chess skills. In the early 1990s I finished my first Blackmar-Diemer Gambit Keybook. I had over dosed on the BDG and wanted a break. I dabbled in the Grob’s Opening 1.g4 in 1992 as in this game. Then I took a break from that to play the London System. Later I returned to the Grob and then the BDG and then Queens Knight Attack and then London System and then 1.e4!? Will I ever stop changing openings? Probably not. I love them all! Black usually responds to the Grob with 1.g4 d5. This threatens to capture 2…Bxg4. If that does not seem good, then Black goes with either 2…e5 or 2…c6. Kevin L. Bachler chose a classical defensive approach to my Grob Attack. Instead of playing d5, he developed pieces with 1…e5, 2…Nf6, 3…Nc6, 4…Bc5, 5…d6 and 6…Be6. This is not an effort to refute the Grob. Black is a master who simply plans to outplay White by using better placed pieces. It worked. Sawyer (2000) - Bachler (2091), corr APCT 92R-40, 1992 begins 1.g4 e5 2.c4 Nf6 3.h3 Nc6 4.Bg2 Bc5 5.Nc3 d6 6.d3 Be6 7.Nf3 Qd7 [Black chooses rapid straight forward classical development. 7...0-0 8.a3=] 8.e4?! [This is rather committal. Better seems to be 8.Ng5=] 8...0-0-0 9.Be3 h5 10.g5 Ng8 11.h4 [11.Qc2 Nge7 12.Nd5=] 11...Nge7 12.Qd2 Ng6 13.0-0-0 Bg4 14.Rdg1 Kb8 15.Ne1 Nd4 16.Nc2 Rhe8 17.Bxd4 exd4 18.Ne2 Bxe2 19.Qxe2 d5 20.cxd5 Qa4 21.Kb1 Rxd5 22.Qxh5? [There is no time to pick off this pawn. White cannot afford to leave his king undefended. White

had to play 22.Qd1 Rd6 23.Na1 Qb5=/+ and hope to survive the attack.] 22...Rd6 23.Qf3 Ne5 24.Qd1 Ra6 25.a3 [25.Na3 Qa5 26.Qb3 Bxa3 27.Qxa3 Qxa3 28.bxa3 Nxd3-/+ looks ugly but it had to be tried.] 25...Qb5! 0-1

20 – DeVault 1.g4 d5 2.Bg2 c6 Postal chess players became experts in opening research. Over the years we carefully wrote everything down and collected our information to use in our future games. Correspondence players could easily turn our theoretical findings into chess books. Some, like myself and Roy DeVault, found publishers for our efforts. Why did we need a publisher? To cover printing and marketing. If you wrote an opening monograph to sell for $10 and printed 2000 copies, it might cost $3000 up front. The retail stores made 40% and the author made a 10% royalty as the sales occurred. Only after the copies sold did the publisher make a profit. In this example the publisher made $7000 minus marketing expenses. If the book failed to sell, then the publisher lost money big time. Some publishers like Ken Smith might pay a lower amount up front but no royalties on the back end. Ken Smith once offered me $500 to write a book for him. Thanks Ken, but no thanks. Roy DeVault did a lot of work with Ken Smith over the years. Roy DeVault was the author, and at times the co-author, or the editor. My guess is that often Roy DeVault was hired to do the computer typesetting for many books. The “London System” by Andy Soltis has me listed as a Research Assistant and Roy DeVault as both an editor and computer type setter. Roy did a lot of chess work. I played a Grob Attack vs Roy DeVault in what might be called a Spike Attack. That “Spike” idea is the move 3.g5!? Sawyer (1962) - DeVault (2150), corr APCT EMN-A-3, 09.09.1996 begins 1.g4 d5 2.Bg2 c6 3.g5 [3.h3 e5=/+] 3...e5 [3...h6 4.h4 e5=] 4.h4 [4.d4 Nd7=] 4...h6 5.d3 [5.d4 hxg5 6.hxg5 Rxh1 7.Bxh1 e4=/+] 5...hxg5 [5...Be6=/+] 6.hxg5 Rxh1 7.Bxh1 Ne7 [7...Be6=/+] 8.e4 Be6 9.Bf3 [9.Nc3 d4=/+] 9...Nd7 10.Bg4 Bxg4 [10...Nc5=/+] 11.Qxg4 Qa5+ 12.Ke2 0-0-0

13.Nd2 Kb8 14.Nb3 Qa4 15.Nf3 g6 [15...Nc8=/+] 16.Nxe5 Nxe5 17.Bf4 Nc8 18.Bxe5+ Bd6 19.Bxd6+ [19.Bf6 Re8 20.Kf3+/=] 19...Nxd6 20.f3 dxe4 21.fxe4 b6 [21...c5=] 22.Qf4 [22.Qg3+/=] 22...Kb7 [22...c5 23.Qe5+/=] 23.Qf6 Rd7 24.Qd4 Qxd4 25.Nxd4 Nxe4 26.dxe4 Rxd4 27.Ke3 1/2-1/2

21 – Muir 2.Bg2 e5 3.c4 c6 Robert F. Muir was a chess club friend that I played from 1994 until his death in 2002. Bob was unrated, but he had been a Class A player at a club in New York in his younger days. By the time I met him, Bob was already 65 years old. Politically, Bob Muir was a liberal democrat socialist type from New York, a Bill Clinton supporter. I love talking religion and politics, and of course, I am right!! Bob Muir and I had a great time playing chess at a coffee house and chatting every Tuesday night. One spring day just before his 73rd birthday, Bob Muir went for a walk and did not make it home. They found him, a victim of an apparent heart attack, along a walking trail. After his death, his wife sent me a very nice note, saying how much our friendship meant to Bob. Bob Muir and I played over 130 skittles games, unrated, often without a clock. Sometimes there was music playing and a television blaring. We even talked and joked around during play. Chess was more fun than serious, but we still wanted to win. I selected a dozen or more games vs Bob Muir that I plan to include at odd times over the next month. I won the majority of our games. Naturally we both scored better when playing White. For me as White, I scored +51, -2, =7. As Black, I scored +52, -13, =9. Below is one of my two losses as White: Grob’s Attack. Bob Muir uncorks a discovered check forcing mate in one. Sawyer (2010) - Muir (1800), Williamsport PA 1996 begins 1.g4 e5 2.Bg2 d5 [2...h5!=/+] 3.c4 [3.h3] 3...c6 [After 3...dxc4 the most common continuation is 4.Qa4+!? c6 5.Qxc4 Be6 6.Qc3!? Nd7 7.h3 Ngf6-/+. Material is even, but Black is way ahead in development.] 4.cxd5 cxd5 5.Qb3 [In a game against Bob Muir from the previous year, I played 5.h3 and managed to win in 22 moves.] 5...Ne7 6.Nc3 Be6 7.Qxb7 Nd7 8.Nxd5 Rc8 9.Nxe7 Bxe7 10.h3 0-0 11.Qxa7 Bc5 12.Qa6 Bc4 13.Qb7 Rc7 [13...Nf6-/+] 14.Qf3 Re8 15.e4 Nb6 [15...Re6-/+] 16.Ne2 [16.Bf1=] 16...Rc6 17.g5 Qxg5 18.d3 Qe7 [18...Qh4=] 19.dxc4 Rf6 [19...Nxc4 20.0-

0+-] 20.Qb3 [20.Bg5+-] 20...Bxf2+ 21.Kf1 Qc5 22.Qb5? [Played without thought. Required was 22.Bf3!=. Black finds a tactic forcing mate in one.] 22...Bg3+! 0-1

22 – Azmaiparashvili 2…Bxg4 Like most grandmasters, Zurab Azmaiparashvili plays a variety of openings. He wins games with Grob's Attack 1.g4 because of his aggressive skills in tactics and strategy. Playing Black in this game is International Master Mert Yilmazyerli of Turkey. GM Azmaiparashvili of Georgia was born in 1960. He has been a grandmaster since 1988. His current FIDE rating is 2637. He has served as a FIDE vice president. When Azmaiparashvili plays White after 1.g4 d5, he usually plays 2.Bg2. This is the way Henri Grob and Claude Bloodgood played. Michael Basman recommended 2.h3. The Grob 1.g4 is sometimes called the Spike Attack. When played in reverse as 1...g5, it used to be called the Macho Grob. Now it is more often called the Borg, which is literally the name Grob spelled backwards, but it reminds me of something from “Star Trek: The Next Generation”. Azmaiparashvili (2412) - Yilmazyerli (2373), ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 22.03.2016 begins 1.g4 d5 2.Bg2 Bxg4 [Gambit accepted. An alternative is 2...e5=/+] 3.c4 c6 4.Qb3 Nf6 5.Nc3 e6 6.cxd5 cxd5 7.Qxb7 Nbd7 8.Nb5 Rc8 9.Nxa7 [9.Qxa7 Bc5 10.Qa4 0-0 11.d4 Be7 12.Nf3 Rc4 13.Qd1 Qa5+ 14.Nc3 Qb6 15.e3 Ne4 16.0-0 Nxc3 17.bxc3 Rxc3-/+ Material is even, but the Black pieces have more scope.] 9...Rc7 [I wonder how White would answer 9...Rb8 10.Qc6 (or 10.Qa6 Rb6-+) 10...Qa5 11.Nc8 Qc5 Black wins 0-1 in 30 moves. Sam Sloan-Bill Brock, Chicago 2005] 10.Qa6 Bc5?! [The chances are even. Black should try 10...Nc5!-+] 11.Nb5 0-0 [11...Rc8 12.Nd6+ Bxd6 13.Qxd6=] 12.Nxc7 Qxc7 13.Nf3 e5 14.d4 Bb4+ [14...exd4 15.0-0=] 15.Bd2 Bxf3?[15...Bxd2+ 16.Nxd2 exd4 17.Nb3+/=] 16.Bxf3 [16.Bxb4! Bxg2 17.Bxf8 Kxf8 18.Rg1+-] 16...Bxd2+ 17.Kxd2 exd4 18.Rac1 Qf4+ 19.Kc2 Ne5 [19...Nc5=] 20.Kb1 Nxf3 21.exf3 Qxf3 22.Rhd1 Qxf2 23.Rc2 Qf4 24.Qd3 h6 25.Qxd4 Qf5 26.Qd3 Qe5 27.Re2 Qf4 28.a3 Rb8 29.Ka2 Qa4 30.Qc2 Qb5 31.Re7 Ne4

[31...Rf8 32.Rd4+/-] 32.Rd3 Qa5 33.Rb3 Rd8 34.Rbb7 Rf8 35.Qc7 d4? [35...Qxc7 36.Rbxc7+-] 36.Qxa5 Black resigns 1-0

23 – Cherner3.c4 Nf6 4.cxd5 In 1996 I entered several thematic Grob sections of APCT postal events. All the games in these tournaments were required to begin with 1.g4. Lyle Cherner was a very active postal player. According to my records, Cherner and I met in many APCT tournaments. Our first games were in 1981 by played postal chess. Some of our later games were played by e-mail, but probably not this event. I won this Grob Attack as White against Lyle Cherner. I chose the gambit line 2.Bg2 Bxg4 3.c4 which Bloodgood played. In fact Claude Bloodgood played in another thematic Grob section. When he resigned, we agreed to a draw in the other game we were most likely playing on the same postcards. The year 1996 was near the end of my 20 years and 1000 games of active correspondence play. By 1997 I had moved most of my play to blitz on the Internet Chess Club. As of 2016, I was still playing on ICC. Sawyer - Cherner (1621), corr APCT 96-Grob-4, 30.11.1996 begins 1.g4 d5 2.Bg2 Bxg4 3.c4 Nf6 4.cxd5 Nbd7 [4...c6 5.h3 Bf5 6.dxc6 Nxc6 7.d3 e5 8.Nc3 Rc8=/+] 5.Qb3 [5.Nc3 Nb6 6.d3=] 5...Nb6 [5...e5=/+] 6.Nc3 Rb8 [6...e5 7.dxe6 Bxe6 8.Qc2 c6=/+] 7.d3 h6 8.Bf4 g5 [8...a6 9.a4 e5 10.Bxe5+/=] 9.Bg3 [9.Be5+/-] 9...a6 10.e4 Bg7 11.Bf3 [11.h3+/=] 11...Bd7 12.Nge2 g4 13.Bg2 h5 14.Bf4 e6 [14...h4 15.0-0-0+/=] 15.dxe6 [15.Bg5 Bh6 16.Bxh6 Rxh6 17.dxe6 Bxe6 18.Qc2+/-] 15...Bxe6 16.Qc2 h4 17.0-0-0 h3 18.Bf1 Qe7 [18...Nh5 19.Be3+/=] 19.Ng3 Rd8 20.d4 0-0 [20...c6 21.Rg1+/-] 21.Bg5 Qb4 22.a3 Qb3 23.e5 Qxc2+ 24.Kxc2 Bc8? [24...Nfd5 25.Bxd8 Rxd8 26.Bd3+/-] 25.exf6 Bh8 26.Bd3 1-0

24 – Bloodgood 4.cxd5 Nxd5 All types of people play chess: young and old, male and female, rich and poor, good and bad. The most infamous opponent I have played was Claude Bloodgood. In 1996 APCT announced a thematic tournament with the Grob (1.g4). When I saw Claude Bloodgood had entered, I entered too, especially to play him via correspondence. Bloodgood was in prison for life; and a few years ago he died. There is no condoning the crimes for which Bloodgood had been convicted. Yet, I found this 72-year-old man to be a very friendly opponent. We carried on a lively discussion from postcard to postcard. At one point I mentioned to Tom Purser that I was playing Bloodgood. Tom inquired about the famous Humphrey Bogart game via 1.d4 Nf6 2.g4 played against an unknown opponent in New York in 1933. Bloodgood told me that it had been published. Our games ended with three draws and one Bloodgood win. We said our good-byes and I figured I'd never hear from him again. Then there comes this fascinating note about which I wrote an article that originally appeared in Purser's “BDG World 77”. Bloodgood wrote: "Dear Tim, “You asked me about the Bogart Poisoned Spike Game some time ago. I mentioned that it had been published. It was originally published in the New York Daily News circa 1935, later in the New York Times. “I first became aware of it when Bogart visited the U.S. Naval Hospital at Camp Pendleton (Calif.) in late 1955. I was playing chess when he and several other Hollywood actors arrived on the ward where I was recovering from a foot surgery. He watched me play for a while and then discovered I was playing for money. He got a great big grin and asked if I'd care to play him for a small wager. The games were blitz (no scores), but he held his own (I think we broke even after 8 games) and gave me a phone number to call him when I could get out of the hospital for a day or so.

“When I called, I got someone else, but arrangements were in place and a car was sent for me. I played Bogart (and some others) at beach houses in Santa Monica one time and Van Nuys several times. Bogart took real pride in his chess ability and was a born hustler. I am enclosing two Bogart games (1 against me) which I hope you will find interesting. Same opening line in Bloodgood-Lowmaster also enclosed... Best, Claude" Bloodgood called this opening the "Maltese Falcon Attack," a cousin of the BDG: Humphrey Bogart-Claude Bloodgood, Santa Monica 1955 1.d4 f5 2.Nf3 e6 3.e4 fxe4 4.Ng5 d5 5.f3 exf3 6.Qxf3 Nf6 7.Bd3 g6 8.Nxh7 Rxh7 9.Bxg6+ Rf7 10.0-0 Bg7 11.Bg5 Nbd7 (11...Kf8 12.Bxf7 Kxf7 13.Qh5+ Kg8 14.Bxf6 Bxf6 15.Qg6+ Bg7 16.Rf7 1-0. Claude Bloodgood Robert Lowmaster, Camp McGill, Japan 1956) 12.Nc3 Kf8 13.Bxf7 Kxf7 14.Rae1 c5 15.Nxd5 exd5 16.Qxd5+ Kg6 (16... Kf8 17.Qd6+ Kg8 18.Re7 Ne8 19.Qe6+ Kh8 20.Rxg7 1-0. Humphrey Bogart - NN, Santa Monica 1955) 17.Bxf6 Bxf6 18.Re6 Qh8 19.Qf5+ Kf7 20.d5 Qh4 21.c3 Qg5 22.Qh7+ Qg7 23.R1xf6+ Nxf6 24.Re7+ Kxe7 25.Qxg7+ Kd6 26.Qxf6+ Kxd5 27.Qd8+ 1-0. Claude Bloodgood was the author of The Tactical Grob. In fact he inspired me to do a project on the Grob myself. There is much more to write about Bloodgood. Someday I may do that with another of our games. Below is one of our drawn games. The Grob is a fascinating opening. Sometimes I follow Basman's more solid approach. Here I follow Bloodgood's own wild gambit approach. I suggest a few alternatives in the notes to this game. Sawyer (1960) - Bloodgood (2100), corr APCT 96-Grob-1 (2), 19.07.1996 begins 1.g4 d5 2.Bg2 Bxg4 [2...c6 3.h3 e5] 3.c4 Nf6 [3...c6 4.cxd5 cxd5 5.Qb3 Nf6] 4.cxd5 [4.Qb3] 4...Nxd5 [4...c6 5.Qb3 cxd5] 5.Qb3 c6 6.Qxb7 Nd7 [6...Nb6] 7.Bxd5 [7.Nc3] 7...cxd5 8.Qxd5 e6 [8...g6] 9.Qd4 Bf5 10.Nc3 Qa5 11.Nf3 Rc8 12.Qa4 Qc7 13.d3 Bc5 14.0-0 0-0 15.Be3 Nb6 16.Qf4 Bd6 17.Qh4 Be7 18.Qf4 Bd6 19.Qh4 Draw 1/2-1/2

1.b3 The move 1.b3 was rarely played until George Koltanowski and Aron Nimzowitsch played it several times in the 1920s. Several others like D.D. Van Geet took up 1.b3 in the 1960s. Bent Larsen made 1.b3 his own playing it over 30 times from 1968 to 1972.

25 – Zdun Anti-Larsen 1…f6 Richard Zdun played an Anti-Larsen Opening defense with 1.b3 f6!? This is about as Anti-Larsen as one can get. It is better to play 1...e5 and then defend with ...f6 if need be. This move 1…f6 reminds me of the recommended defense to a line of the Reti after 1.Nf3 d5 2.c4 d4 3.b4 f6. Black will opt for a set up similar to a Saemisch Kings Indian Defense in reverse. The big problem with first playing 1…f6 is that it becomes more difficult to safely play a pawn to e5. White took aim at e5 with 2.f4, 3.Nf3, 4.Bb2 and 5.d4. That might be over kill on White’s part. After all, Black need only to play the other central pawn. If he had played instead 6…d5 Black would have had equal chances. Sawyer (2010) - Zdun (1634), Williamsport, PA 1998 begins 1.b3 f6!? 2.f4 Nc6 3.Nf3 Nh6 4.Bb2 Nf7 5.d4 e6 6.e4 d6 [6...d5 7.Bd3 dxe4 8.Bxe4 Bd6 9.g3 0-0 10.0-0=] 7.Be2 [7.d5 Ne7 8.dxe6 Bxe6 9.Nd4 Bd7 10.Bc4+/-] 7...Be7 [7...d5 8.Nc3 Bb4 9.Qd3+/=] 8.0-0 [8.d5 Nb4 9.Qd2 c5 10.a3 Na6 11.dxe6 Bxe6 12.Nc3+/-] 8...0-0 [8...d5 9.Nc3 0-0 10.Qd2 Bb4 11.e5+/=] 9.d5 exd5 10.exd5 Nb8 11.c4 [11.Nd4! c6 12.Nc3+/-] 11...Nd7 [11...f5 12.Nc3+/-] 12.Nd4 Nc5 13.Bg4 [13.b4! Na6 14.a3+-] 13...Nh6 14.Bxc8 Qxc8 15.f5 c6 16.Nc3 cxd5 [16...Nf7 17.b4 Nd7 18.Ne6+/-] 17.Nxd5 Bd8 18.Qf3 [18.b4! Na6 19.Ne6+-] 18...Nf7 19.Rad1 Ne5 20.Qh5 Nf7 [20...a6 21.Ba3+/-] 21.Rfe1 Ne5 22.Re3 Qd7 23.Rh3 h6 24.Bc1 Qf7 [24...Rf7

25.Qh4+-] 25.Qh4 Bb6 26.Bxh6 gxh6 27.Qxh6 Qd7 28.Rg3+ Kf7 29.Qh5+ 1-0

26 – De Santis 1.b3 f5 2.Bb2 e6 Flank Openings like Larsen's 1.b3 only begin the chess game on the side. Good players strike quickly in the center. White saddled Black with isolated doubled f-pawns after 4.exf5 and 6.Bxf6! One of the pawns fell in Alessio De Santis vs Wolfgang Fiedler. De Santis (2223) - Fiedler (2006), 34th ChessOrg Open Bad Woerishofen GER (1.19), 23.02.2018 begins 1.b3 f5 2.Bb2 e6 [2...Nf6 3.Bxf6!? exf6=] 3.e4 Nf6 4.exf5 [4.e5!?+/=] 4...exf5 5.Qe2+ Qe7 [5...Kf7!? 6.Nf3 Nc6 7.Ng5+ Kg8 8.Nc3 h6 9.Nf3 Kh7 10.0-0-0 Bb4=] 6.Bxf6! gxf6 7.Nc3 c6 8.0-0-0 d5 9.Re1 Qxe2 10.Ngxe2 Bc5 11.f4 [11.Nd1+/=] 11...Kd8 12.d4 Bd6 13.g3 Nd7 14.Bh3 Nf8 15.Nd1 Ng6 16.Ne3 Ne7 17.Ng1 Bb4 [17...h5=] 18.Rd1 a5 19.Kb2 b6 [19...Re8 20.c3+/=] 20.a3 Bd6 21.Nf3 h5 22.Nh4 Bd7 23.Rhe1 Kc7 24.Nexf5 Nxf5 25.Bxf5 Rae8 26.c3 b5 27.b4 axb4 28.axb4 Ra8 29.Ra1 Rxa1 30.Rxa1 Bxf5 31.Nxf5 Re8 [31...Kd7 32.Ra7+ Bc7 33.Kc2 Kc8 34.Kd3+/-] 32.Ra7+ Kb6 33.Rh7 [Or 33.Rb7+!+-] 1-0

27 – Sedlak 1.b3 f5 2.Bb2 Nf6 Black played a Dutch against 1.b3. White pushed 7 pawns by move 13. Black castled early. White kept his king in the center. Wide open play followed. Black won a piece and forced a queen swap into a winning endgame in Jovan Milovic vs Nikola Sedlak. Milovic (2301) - Sedlak (2547), TCh-MNE Premier 2017 Canj MNE (1.3), 23.09.2017 begins 1.b3 f5 2.Bb2 Nf6 3.e3 [3.Nf3 e6=] 3...e6 4.Ne2 d6 [4...d5=] 5.d4 Be7 6.Nf4 0-0 7.Nd2 c6 8.Bd3 a5 9.h3 Na6 10.a3 Nc7 11.g4 Nfd5 12.Ng2 b5 13.c4 bxc4 14.bxc4 Nf6 15.Nf3 Ne4 16.Qc2 Rb8 17.Rb1 Bd7 18.gxf5?! [18.Nf4=] 18...exf5 19.d5 cxd5 20.Nf4 Bf6 [20...dxc4 21.Bxc4+ Kh8=/+] 21.Nd4 [21.cxd5=] 21...Nc5 22.cxd5 Be5 23.Nc6 Bxc6 24.dxc6 Qe8 [24...Bxf4 25.exf4 Qe8+ 26.Be2 Qxc6-/+ would leave White's position in shambles.] 25.Bxe5 Rxb1+ 26.Qxb1 dxe5 27.Bc4+ [White missed 27.Qb6!=] 27...Kh8 28.Qb6 exf4 29.Qxc5 Rf6 30.Be2 Rxc6 31.Qxf5 Rc1+ 32.Bd1 Qd8! [The pinned bishop leaves White in deep

trouble.] 33.Ke2 [33.Qg4 Nd5-/+] 33...Nd5 34.Bc2 Nc3+ 35.Kf3 Qa8+ 36.Kxf4 Ne2+ 37.Kg4 [37.Ke5 Qb8+ 38.Ke4 Rxh1-+] 37...Rxc2 38.Qxc2 Qg2+ 39.Kh5 Ng3+ [39...Qf3+ 40.Kh4 Qxf2+!-+] 40.Kh4 g5+ 41.Kxg5 Nxh1+ 42.Kf6 Qxf2+ 43.Qxf2 Nxf2 0-1

28 – Bosboom 1…d5 2.Bb2 Bg4 Black responded to Larsen's Opening with a Trompowsky type move 1.b3 d5 2.Bb2 Bg4. White pushed back with 3.f3 and 4.e4 but to little effect. Black had the better central play. White's pieces were of little help in the game Florian Grafl vs Manuel Bosboom. Black sacrificed the Exchange move 16 which led to a powerful coordinated mating attack. Grafl (2371) - Bosboom (2405), Dutch League 2017-18 Netherlands NED (9.4), 21.04.2018 begins 1.b3 d5 2.Bb2 Bg4 3.f3 [3.h3=] 3...Bh5 [3...Bf5 4.e3=] 4.e4 e6 5.exd5 Qxd5 6.Ne2 Nf6 7.Nbc3 Qd7 8.Nf4 Bg6 9.Nxg6 hxg6 10.Ne4 Be7 11.Qe2 Nc6 12.0-0-0 Rh5 13.g3 a5 14.g4 Rd5 [14...Rh4=] 15.c4 [15.Nc3=] 15...Rd4 16.Bxd4 [16.Nc3=] 16...Nxd4 17.Nxf6+ [17.Qe3 a4-/+] 17...Bxf6 18.Qe4 Qd6 19.Qxb7 Qa3+ 20.Kb1 Rd8 [20...Ne2 21.Qxa8+ Ke7 22.d4 Bxd4-+] 21.g5 Bxg5 22.Bg2 [22.Rg1 Bf6-+] 22...a4 23.Qa6 Rb8 24.Qa7 Rxb3+! [If 25.axb3 Qxb3+ 26.Kh1 Nc2 mate] 0-1

29 – Karthik 2.Bb2 Nf6 3.e3 g6 Larsen's Opening 1.b3 offers Black a wide variety of opening responses. White will attack e5 and potentially f6 and g7 with the move 2.Bb2. Black can play anything as long as everything remains safe. White won with a kingside attack against Black's Gruenfeld Defence type arrangement in the game Karthik Venkataraman vs Dr. Bernd Baum. Karthik (2514) - Baum (2280), Xtracon Chess Open 2018 Helsingor DEN (10.20), 29.07.2018 begins 1.b3 d5 2.Bb2 Nf6 3.e3 g6 4.d4 Bg7 5.Nc3 0-0 6.Qd2 b6 7.0-0-0 Bb7 8.h4 Nbd7 [8...c5=] 9.h5 Nxh5 10.g4 Nhf6 11.f3 [11.g5+/-] 11...h6 12.e4 dxe4 13.d5 Ne5 [13...exf3-/+] 14.g5 hxg5 15.Qxg5 Nxf3 16.Nxf3 exf3 17.Bd3 Qd7 [17...f2-/+] 18.Rh4 [18.Ne4=] 18...Rad8 [18...e5-/+] 19.Rdh1 Qe8 [19...f2 20.Ne4+-] 20.Ne4 Rxd5 [20...Nh5 21.Rxh5!+-] 21.Bxf6! exf6 [If 21...Rxg5 22.Rh8+ Bxh8 23.Rxh8 mate] 22.Rh8+ [If 22...Bxh8 23.Rxh8+ Kxh8 24.Qh6+ Kg8 25.Nxf6 mate] 1-0

30 – Motylev 1…e5 2.Bb2 Nc6 Black treated this Larsen's Opening like an Open Sicilian in reverse. White developed two minor pieces in the first dozen moves. Black moved all four minor pieces, the queen, and castled in the game Valery Sviridov vs Alexander Motylev. Guess who stood better? Sviridov (2513) - Motylev (2659), 71st ch-RUS HL 2018 Yaroslavl, 28.06.2018 begins 1.b3 e5 2.Bb2 Nc6 3.e3 Nf6 4.c4 d5 5.cxd5 Nxd5 6.a3 Bd6 7.d3 0-0 8.Nf3 Qe7 9.b4 a5 10.b5 Na7 11.d4 e4 12.Ne5 Be6 [Black leads in development.] 13.Nd2 f6 14.Nec4 f5 15.Nxd6 cxd6 16.g3 f4 17.exf4 [17.Nc4 fxe3-/+] 17...e3 18.Nf3 Rae8 [Or 18...Bg4 19.h3 e2!-+] 19.Be2 Bh3 [White cannot castle.] 20.Bc1 exf2+ [Black could move the king away from checks. 20...Kh8-/+] 21.Kxf2 Nc3 22.Qb3+ Kh8 23.Bd3 [23.Re1 Nxe2=/+] 23...Qe2+! [After 23...Qe2+! 24.Bxe2 Rxe2+ 25.Kg1 Rg2+ 26.Kf1 Rb2+ 27.Kg1 Rxb3-+ and Black is up a knight with a dominating position.] 0-1

31 – Nakamura vs Hou Yifan Two top speed chess players met in a match of genders. Hikaru Nakamura defeated Hou Yifan. The world's highest rated female made the games exciting in defeat. They chose a wide variety of openings. Here the players explore a critical line in Larsen's Opening 1.b3 where e5 is under constant attack. Eventually, White invades on the e-file to force a win. Nakamura (2777) - Hou Yifan (2658), chess.com Speed 1m+1spm 2017 INT (24), 26.07.2018 begins 1.b3 e5 2.Bb2 Nc6 3.e3 d5 4.Bb5 Bd6 5.f4 Qe7 [5...f6 6.fxe5 fxe5 7.Nf3 Nh6 8.0-0 Bg4 9.h3 Bh5=/+] 6.Nf3 f6 7.fxe5 fxe5 8.Bxc6+ bxc6 9.Nxe5 Nf6? [9...Qh4+ 10.g3 Qh3 11.Qf3 Nf6=/+] 10.Nxc6 Qf7 11.0-0 0-0 12.Bxf6 gxf6 13.Nc3 Kh8 14.Qf3 Bd7 15.Nd4 c6 16.Nf5 Be5 17.d4 Bc7 18.e4 dxe4 [18...Ba5 19.Rad1+-] 19.Nxe4 Rae8 [19...Rad8 20.Ned6+-] 20.Ned6 Bxd6 21.Nxd6 Qe7 22.Nxe8 Qxe8 23.Rae1 Qb8 [23...Qd8 24.Qf4+-] 24.Re7 1-0

32 – Funk 3.e3 d5 4.Bb5 Bb6 Does 1.b3 pose any real threat to the Black pieces? “Not much.” That was my original assessment. Then something happened to alter my thinking. Donald L. Funk played Larsen's Opening 1.b3. Don Funk was one of the key members of the North Penn Chess Club. In my early days I would adopt a familiar pieces arrangement such as the Kings Indian Defence, or Dutch Defence, or Queens Gambit Tarrasch, or the Slav Defence against such an opening. In this particular game I grabbed the center with 1.b3 e5 2.Bb2 Nc6 3.e3 d5. Then Don Funk played 4.Bb5 Bd6 5.f4. This puts pressure on e5. Black cannot take on f4 without losing after 5… exf4 6.Bxg7. Therefore I protected e5 with 5…f6. Then came a pawn exchange 6.fxe5 fxe5 that left an open f-file. Funk seized the chance to continue his attack with 7.Qh5+?! It seemed wiser to develop 7.Nf3 with an equal game. My move 10…Ne4 forced White to give up a piece to save his queen. White’s army was not dead, but it was severely hampered by the loss of the piece. Gradually Black took over the initiative. Funk (1707) - Sawyer, Lansdale, PA 1981 begins 1.b3 e5 2.Bb2 Nc6 3.e3 d5 [3...Nf6 4.Bb5 Bd6=] 4.Bb5 Bd6 5.f4 [5.Nf3 Qe7 6.c4 dxc4 7.bxc4 Nf6 8.c5 Bxc5 9.Nxe5 0-0=] 5...f6 6.fxe5 [6.Nc3 Nge7 7.fxe5 fxe5 8.Qh5+ g6 9.Qh4 Be6=] 6...fxe5 7.Qh5+?! [7.Nf3 Nh6 8.0-0 0-0 9.Bxc6 bxc6 10.Nxe5 Rxf1+ 11.Qxf1 Qh4 12.Nf3=] 7...g6 8.Qf3 [8.Qe2 Nf6 9.Nf3 Qe7 10.d3 0-0 11.Bxc6 bxc6=/+] 8...Nf6 9.Ne2 [9.Nc3 a6 10.Bxc6+ bxc6-/+] 9...0-0 10.Nbc3 Ne4! 11.Nf4 exf4 [11...Nd4 12.exd4 Rxf4-+] 12.Nxe4 [12.Bxc6 bxc6 13.Nxe4 dxe4 14.Qxe4 Qe7-+] 12...Be5 13.Nc3 [13.0-0-0 Bxb2+ 14.Kxb2 Ne5-+] 13...fxe3 14.Qxe3 d4 [14...Bg4!? 15.Bxc6 bxc6-+] 15.Bc4+ Kg7 16.Qd3 dxc3 [16...Bf5-+] 17.Bxc3 Qxd3 [17...Bg4-+]

18.Bxd3 Bxc3 19.dxc3 Bg4 20.Kd2 Rad8 21.Rae1 Rf2+ 22.Kc1 Bf5 23.Re2 Rxe2 24.Bxe2 Be4 25.Rg1 Ne5 [25...Rf8-+] 26.a4 c6 27.a5 Rf8 28.Kd2 Rf2 29.Ke3 Rxg2 30.Re1 Bxc2 31.Bf3 Rxh2 0-1

33 – Shibut 4.Bb5 Bd7 5.f4 Qh4 Macon Shibut played nine blitz games against me. In the 1990s I was in my prime for blitz chess. Then in my 40s I was a much stronger player than I am today in my 60s. I could run faster, think faster, and play faster. My score of +5 =1 -3 does not hide the fact that Shibut was the much better player. But in fact I was just good at blitz. Some of our games illustrate both facts. Shibut was beating me throughout this three minute game (two seconds per move). He made a one move blunder and I won. Our Larsen's Opening game began 1.b3 e5 2.Bb2 Nc6 3.e3 e5 4.Bb5 Bd6 5.f4. My earlier game against Don Funk, and multiple games since, taught me to watch out for a queen check. I decided to make a preemptive strike with 5…Qh4+ 6.g3 Qe7. This is an idea that reminds me of the Raymond Keene line in the Kings Gambit 2...Qh4+ 3.g3 Qe7. Things would have continued fine after 7.Nf3 f6, but in my haste I attacked f3 with 7…e4? This lost a rook with 8.Bxg7 exf3 9.Bxh8. But by move thirteen White returned the favor when I played 13…Qxa1. The dust cleared after move 16. White was up two pawns. Then his move 20 gave me an instant winning attack. Shibut - Sawyer, ICC u 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 26.11.1997 begins 1.b3 d5 2.Bb2 Nc6 3.e3 e5 4.Bb5 Bd6 5.f4 Qh4+ [An alternative 5...Qe7 6.Nf3+/=] 6.g3 Qe7 7.Nf3 e4? [7...f6 8.Nc3 (8.fxe5 fxe5 9.Nxe5 Bxe5 10.Bxc6+ Kd8 11.d4 Bxg3+ 12.Kd2 Bf2=/+) 8...Be6 9.0-0 0-0-0 10.Bxc6 bxc6 11.fxe5 fxe5 12.d4 e4 13.Ne5 Bxe5 14.dxe5 h5=; 7...Bg4 8.h3 Bxf3 9.Qxf3 Nf6 10.Nc3=] 8.Bxg7 exf3 [8...Bg4 9.Be2+-] 9.Bxh8 [9.Qxf3] 9...Bg4 10.Kf2 0-0-0 11.Bb2 [11.Nc3 Qe6 12.h3 Bxh3 13.Qxf3 Nge7

14.Rxh3 Qxh3 15.Rh1+-] 11...Nf6 [11...d4 12.Bxc6 dxe3+ 13.dxe3 Bc5=] 12.Bxf6 Qxf6 13.Bxc6 Qxa1 14.Bxd5 f5 [14...Qxa2 15.Bxf3 Bxf3 16.Kxf3+/-] 15.Bxf3 [15.h3 Bh5 16.g4+-] 15...Bxf3 16.Qxf3 Qxa2 17.Qd1 Qa5 18.Nc3 [18.d4+-] 18...Bb4 19.Qe1 Qc5 20.Na4? [20.Qe2+/-] 20...Qxc2 0-1

1.b4 Sokolsky made this first move into a viable opening system for White.

34 – Shoulder Gambit 1.b4 c5!? What if the chess board were a bird? We know that the Wing Gambit is when White sacrifices the b-pawn on b4, such as the Sicilian Wing Gambit (1.e4 c5 2.b4!?) or the French Defence Wing Gambit (1.e4 e6 2.Nf3 d5 3.e5 c5 4.b4!?). On a bird, the breast is in the center. What connects the wing to the breast? That has to be the shoulder! That must be the c-file. Thus in the Polish Opening, I like to think of the gambit 1.b4 c5!? as the Shoulder Gambit! When I face the Polish or Sokolsky Opening, I have played eight different lines. In 2012 I noticed that I had played 1...c5, and I won both games. I decided that I would play it again in a future blitz game. Without any detailed analysis, I set off on the adventure below for win number three. As of 2016, I had played the Shoulder Gambit a total of 15 times. My score was +13 =2 -0 with 1…c5!? Alas, my opponents were only rated about 1400. No big deal. Just fun. killer100 - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 17.12.2012 begins 1.b4 c5 2.bxc5 e5 3.Bb2 Nc6 4.Nf3 f6?! [Black can regain the gambit pawn by 4...e4 5.Ne5 Nf6 6.e3 Bxc5=] 5.d4 exd4 6.Nxd4 Qa5+ [6...Bxc5 7.Nb3 Bb4+ 8.c3+/=] 7.Bc3 Qxc5 8.Nxc6?! [8.e4!+/-] 8...dxc6 9.Bb2 Bf5 10.g3 Rd8 11.Qc1 Qd5 12.f3 Qa5+ [12...Bb4+ 13.Kf2 Ne7 14.e3 0-0 -/+] 13.Bc3 Bb4 14.Qb2 Bxc3+ 15.Qxc3 Qxc3+ 16.Nxc3 Bxc2 17.Kf2 Bg6 18.Bh3 Ne7 19.Rab1? b6? [Sloppy play. 19...Bxb1-+] 20.Rbd1 Nd5 21.Nxd5 cxd5 22.Rd4 Ke7 23.Rhd1 Bf7 24.e4 dxe4?? [Arrgh!?! 24...Rhe8 25.exd5 Rd6=] 25.Rxd8 [25.Rxe4+! wins for White!] 25...Rxd8 26.Rxd8 Kxd8 27.fxe4?! Ke7?! [In my haste I missed 27...Bxa2-+] 28.a3 Kd6 29.Ke3 Ke5 30.Bf1 Bb3 31.Bd3 Ba4 32.h4 Bc6 33.Bc4 g6 34.Bd3 f5 35.exf5 gxf5 36.Bc2 h6 37.Bd3 Be4 38.Bc4 Bb7 39.Bd3 Bc6 40.Bc4 b5 41.Bd3 a5

42.Bc2 b4 43.axb4 axb4 44.Bb3 Bd5 45.Bxd5 Kxd5 46.Kd3 Ke5 White resigns 0-1

35 – Shannon 1.Nf3 f5 2.b4 d6 I loved playing in American Postal Chess Tournaments (APCT) run by Helen Warren. They had 1000 active players. I peeked in 1982. I was ranked 13th in the club. Often I was in the top 30. An interesting aspect of most correspondence chess ratings is they changed when each game finished. Postal chess was played at a pace of one move per week. Players typically had 20-30 games in progress at a time. Your opponent’s rating might easily go up or down 100 points. The tournaments tended to be class events where most opponents were rated close to each other at the beginning, but they may be far apart by the end. Paul Shannon and I played in APCT during about the same years. Our ratings were very close, whether they were going up or down. In APCT we played four times, each winning one. Here Paul played the Polish Opening vs my Dutch Defence. In the end it looked a lot like a Closed English Opening. Chances for most of this game were about even. Then at one point I won a pawn. Sadly for me, I got careless and blew the ending. Shannon - Sawyer, corr APCT 84R-20 corr APCT, 1984 begins 1.Nf3 f5 2.b4 d6 3.Bb2 e5 4.e3 Nf6 5.c4 c6 [The most popular continuation is the line: 5...Be7 6.d4 e4 7.Nfd2 d5 8.b5 c6 9.a4 0-0 10.Qb3 Be6 11.Nc3 Nbd7 12.Be2=] 6.Be2 g6 7.d3 Bg7 8.Qb3 Qe7 9.Nbd2 Be6 10.0-0 h6 11.Nh4 Kf7 12.f4 Ng4 13.Bxg4 Qxh4 14.Be2 [White can make use of the loose Black king with 14.Bh3! Nd7 15.fxe5 dxe5 16.e4+/-] 14...Nd7 15.fxe5 dxe5 16.d4 exd4 17.Rf4?! [Better is 17.Nf3 Qe7 18.exd4+/=] 17...Qe7 18.Bxd4 Rhe8 19.Qc3 Kg8 20.Rf2 Rad8 21.Rd1 c5 22.Bxg7 [22.bxc5 Nxc5 23.Bf3 b6=/+] 22...Qxg7 23.Qxg7+ Kxg7 24.a3 cxb4 25.axb4 Nb6 [The knight should be centralized to maximize threats. 25...Ne5!-/+] 26.Rff1-/+ [26.c5=] 26...Rd7 [26...Re7!-/+] 27.c5 Nd5 28.Bb5 Nxe3 29.Bxd7 Bxd7 30.Nc4 Nxd1 31.Rxd1 Re7 [The combination has net me an extra pawn, but White's advanced queenside pawns are a threat. Eventually I mishandled them.] 32.Nd6 Bc6 [32...b6! 33.Ra1 bxc5 34.bxc5 Bc6=/+]

33.b5 Be4 34.Ra1 Re5? [Black has good chances after 34...Kf6 35.Rxa7 Bd5 36.Kf2 Rd7 37.Ra4 Ke5 38.Nc4+ Bxc4 39.Rxc4 Kd5 40.c6 Rc7 41.Ra4 bxc6 42.b6 Rb7-/+] 35.c6+/- 1-0

36 – Krystosek 1.b4 d6 2.Bb2 f5 Ted Krystosek and I played four postal chess games in 1982. Amazingly all of them were Flank Openings. As White I played an English Opening with 1.c4 and the Birds Opening with 1.f4. As White Ted Krystosek also played a Birds Openings with 1.f4 and this Polish Opening with 1.b4. Krystosek chose reasonable moves that fit the character of the opening. His king was safely castled. His forces aimed for a queenside attack. In this game Black played methodically and attacked very slowly. Eventually I woke up. I benefitted from White’s mistake on move 15. This was the longest game Krystosek and I played. Krystosek (1569) - Sawyer (2100), corr APCT 1982 begins 1.b4 d6 2.Bb2 f5 3.e3 Nf6 4.c4 e6 [4...e5 is a bolder and better move.] 5.Nf3 Be7 6.Be2 00 7.0-0 Qe8 8.Na3 [8.Qb3 Qg6 9.Nc3 a6 10.d4 Ne4 11.c5+/= gives White active play on the queenside.] 8...b6 9.d4 Bb7 10.Ng5 [10.Nb5!?] 10...Bd8 11.f4 [11.Nb5 h6 12.Nh3 e5=] 11...h6 12.Nh3 Nbd7 13.Nf2 Qg6 14.g3 [14.Bf3 Bxf3 15.Qxf3 Ne4 16.Nxe4 fxe4 17.Qe2=] 14...h5 15.Nh3? [15.Bf3=] 15...h4 16.Ng5 hxg3 17.hxg3 Ne4 18.Bh5 Qh6 19.Nxe4 Bxe4 20.Bc3? [20.Qe2 Nf6 21.Bf3 Bxf3 22.Qxf3 Ng4 23.Qg2 a5 24.b5 Kf7 25.Rfe1 Rh8 26.Re2 Bf6-/+] 20...Nf6 21.Bf3 Ng4 22.Qe2 d5 23.Bxg4 [23.cxd5 Bxf3 24.Rxf3 exd5 25.Rff1 Kf7-+] 23...fxg4 24.cxd5 Qh1+ 25.Kf2 Qg2+ 26.Ke1 Qxg3+ 27.Kd2 Bf3 28.Qe1 Qh3 29.dxe6 [Sacrificing the Exchange does not stop Black's attack. 29.Rxf3 gxf3 30.dxe6 Qg2+ 31.Kd3 Qg6+ 32.Kd2 c5-+] 29...Bh4 30.Rf2 Bxf2 31.Qxf2 a6 [Stronger would have been 31...Rae8 32.Rg1 Rxe6-+] 32.b5 a5 33.Bb2 [33.Nc4 Bd5 34.Ne5 g3-+] 33...Bd5 34.Qe2 Bxe6 35.Nc2 Rf5 36.a4 Rh5 37.e4 Re8 38.Ra3 Qh1 0-1

37 – Gilbert 1.b4 f5 2.Bb2 e6 John Gilbert and I played a Polish Opening 1.b4. I defended with the Classical Dutch Defence set-up 1...f5 and 2...e6. We were already playing an APCT tournament game. I believe this was an extra game played for fun since we were already sending a postcard to each other once a week. In the 1970s there were vinyl records called 45s that would spin 45 revolutions per minute when played on a record player. The recording artist hoped to have a popular hit song on one side. Artists would add any other song onto the flip side of 45. Once in a while it became a huge hit. Usually flip side song was one that did not receive much recognition. I played maybe 50 flip side unrated postal games in my twenty year correspondence career. They gave us the opportunity to try out openings "for free" in those long ago days before internet blitz chess. Below White expanded on the queenside while Black mounted a winning kingside attack. Gilbert (1600) - Sawyer, corr 1977 begins 1.b4 f5 2.Bb2 e6 3.e3 Nf6 4.b5 [4.a3 a5 5.b5 d5=] 4...Bd6 5.c4 0-0 6.Nf3 b6 7.d4 Bb7 8.Be2 c5 9.0-0 Bc7 10.dxc5 bxc5 11.a4 d5 12.Ne5 Nbd7 13.f4 Nxe5 14.Bxe5 Bxe5 15.fxe5 Nd7 16.Nc3 Nxe5 17.cxd5 exd5 18.Qb3 Kh8 19.a5 d4 20.Rfd1 Qg5 21.Nd5 Rad8 [Black is winning after 21...Bxd5 22.Qxd5 Qxe3+ 23.Kh1 Rfd8-+] 22.Nf4 Ng6 0-1

38 – Carebello 1.b4 f5 2.Bb2 e6 I have written about the dangers of Flank Openings where a player does not significantly occupy or attack the center early in the game. The key problems are lack of space, lack of mobility, lack of development, and / or lack of piece co-ordination. When pieces are separated, how do they carry out any meaningful plan? If a Flank Opening player faces an opponent who actually fights back, they could meet with a quick disaster. After having the White pieces in the first game, I expectedly get Black in the second round in this Hershey Action event. When my opponent Nate Carebello played 1.b4, I naturally assumed that he played it regularly. He was rated in the 1700s at the time. The Polish or Sokolsky Opening has the advantage that usually both players are on their own by move six or so. Those who are successful with this opening as White aim for a relatively quick e4, d4 or c4. I chose to fall back on the Dutch Defence which I was playing often in those days. The presence of my pawn on f5 makes an early e4 by White less likely. Carebello - Sawyer, Hershey PA 1990 begins 1.b4 f5 2.Bb2 e6 3.e3 Nf6 [Now that g7 is covered, Bxb4 is a real threat.] 4.b5 Be7 5.Be2 0-0 6.h4!? [White is dreaming of a kingside attack.] 6...d6 7.h5 Nbd7 8.Nf3 Qe8 9.Nd4?! [Going for e6 is tempting, but forcing Black to bring his lightsquared bishop into the game. 9.h6] 9...Nb6 10.Bf3 e5 11.Bxb7? [White sacrifices his bishop to help bring mine to a better diagonal. 11.Nb3 Qxb5-/+] 11...Bxb7 12.Ne6? [12.Nxf5 Bd8-+] 12...Qxb5 [Threat: Qxb2 and the queenside rook.] 13.Bc3 Rfc8 14.a4 Qd5 15.a5 Qxg2 [The attack on the kingside rook indicates that White's whole game is falling apart.] 16.Rf1 Bf3 17.Qc1 Nbd7 18.Na3 Ne4 19.Nb5? [Allowing mate in three.] 19...Ng3 20.d4 Qxf1+ 21.Kd2 Qe2# 0-1

39 – Johnson 1.b4 d5 2.Bb2 Bf5 In the 1970s and 1980s, Otis Johnson, Jr. of Georgia was an active postal player in APCT Master and Expert sections. “OJ” was in the Expert level (2000-2199), but I believe he was rated over 2200 from time to time. My game collection has 20 of his games all against well-known correspondence players of that era. Almost every one of these games had a different opening. "OJ" played me three times, all as White. There are many possible set-ups for Black. This was a 13 player round robin postal chess event. I think I tied for first with 9-3. In 1978-1979 I was rapidly moving up as well. This was our first game. Johnson won the other two. Of course there was a famous football player named "OJ", as in Simpson. Back when I played Otis Johnson, O.J. Simpson still had a good reputation. I saw his bust in the Pro Football Hall of Fame. In the middlegame I missed chances to get an advantage with 16...Ndc5! and 21...Qd5! In the endgame I had two extra pawns for his knight. White missed chances to win via zugzwang with 38.g4! or 46.h5! The Black king was forced to chase the white knight around forever. White could not allow Black's a-pawn to advance. Black could not allow the knight to stop the apawn. Johnson (2200) - Sawyer (1900), corr APCT Q-36, 1978 begins 1.b4 d5 [1...e5 2.Bb2 Bxb4 3.Bxe5 Nf6 =] 2.Bb2 Bf5 3.e3 Nf6 4.Nf3 e6 5.c4 c6 [Black opts for a Slav set-up.] 6.b5 Be7 7.Nc3 0-0 8.a4 Bg6 9.Qb3 c5 [9...Nbd7=/+] 10.a5 Qd6 11.Na4 Nbd7 12.d4 b6 [There is tension in the pawn structure with multiple captures looming.] 13.Ne5 cxd4 14.Nc6 dxe3 15.Qxe3 Ne4 16.Ba3 Nec5 [16...Ndc5!-/+] 17.Be2 Rfe8 18.Ra2 dxc4 19.00 Bd3 20.Rd2 Bf8 21.Rc1 Qc7? [21...Qd5!=/+] 22.Bxd3 cxd3 23.Rxd3 Kh8 24.Bxc5 Bxc5 25.Qd2 Ne5 26.Nxc5 Nxd3? [26...bxc5 27.Rd6+/-] 27.Nxd3 bxa5 28.Nc5 Qb6 29.Qxa5 Qxa5 30.Nxa5 Rab8 31.Ncb7 Rec8 32.Rc6 Rxc6 33.bxc6 Kg8 34.f3 Kf8 35.Kf2 Ke7 36.Ke3 e5 37.Ke4 Ke6

38.Nc5+ [38.g4!+-] 38...Kd6 39.Na6 Rb6 40.Nc4+ Kxc6 41.Nxb6 Kxb6 42.Nb4 f6 43.Kd5 a5 44.Nc2 Kb5 45.h4 a4 46.g4 [46.h5!] 46...g6 47.g5 f5 48.Kxe5 Kc4 49.Na3+ Kb3 50.Nb5 1/2-1/2

40 – Fredrick 1.b4 d5 2.Bb2 Qd6 Chess Informant has been a source of great chess information for 50 years. In my 20s I bought the latest issue as soon as it came out. In the next three Polish Opening games, I followed an idea from the famous contest Lalic - Uhlmann, Sarajevo 1980, 0-1 in 29. I had seen this game in Chess Informant. This idea was to meet 1.b4 with 1...d5 2.Bb2 Qd6!? The intent was to play 3...e5. Black wants to build and maintain a big center with pawns on both d5 and e5. Herb Fredrick played a Polish Opening against me at the North Penn Chess Club. This allowed me to test the idea of 2…Qd6!? If White was not careful, the Black queen could cause quite a stir. White played reasonably well. Black had only a slight edge until he castled into danger on move 32. Fredrick (1400) - Sawyer, Lansdale, PA 11.02.1981 begins 1.b4 d5 2.Bb2 Qd6 3.a3 e5 4.e3 [4.Nf3 e4 5.Nd4 a5 6.Nc3 c6 7.Nb3=] 4...f5!? [4...a5 5.b5 Nf6 6.c4 Bg4=] 5.Nf3 [White could try to undermine Black's big center and highlight the fact that Black has not developed any minor pieces. 5.c4!+/=] 5...e4 6.Ne5!? [6.Nd4 Nc6 7.c4 dxc4 8.Bxc4+/=] 6...Nf6 7.c4 Be6 8.d3 Nbd7 [8...dxc4 9.Qa4+ c6 10.Nxc4 Bxc4 11.dxc4+/=] 9.Nxd7 Qxd7 10.Nd2 [10.cxd5 Nxd5 11.dxe4 fxe4 12.Nd2+/=] 10...a5 11.b5 [11.cxd5 Bxd5 12.dxe4 fxe4 13.Be2=] 11...Be7 [11...dxc4 12.dxe4 Qxb5=] 12.Be2 00 13.Rc1 Rad8 [13...exd3 14.Bxd3 dxc4 15.Nxc4 Qxb5=/+] 14.Nb3 dxc4 15.dxc4 Qc8 16.Qc2 b6 17.Nd4 Bc5 18.Nc6 Rde8 19.Qb3 [19.0-0!+/=] 19...g5 [19...f4=/+] 20.Be5 [20.h4 g4 21.Rd1+/=] 20...Bd7 21.Bxf6 [21.Qc3 Re6=] 21...Rxf6 22.Qc3 Ref8 23.Ne5 Qe8 24.Rd1 Bd6 [24...Be6!=/+] 25.Nxd7 Qxd7 26.c5 bxc5 27.Qxa5 Qe7 [27...f4!? 28.exf4 gxf4 29.Qc3=] 28.Rd5 Kh8 29.Qc3 Qg7 30.a4 f4 31.f3?! [This opens lines to the White king. 31.exf4 gxf4 32.a5 Qxg2 33.Rf1=] 31...fxe3 [31...Re8=/+] 32.0-0? [32.a5 g4=/+] 32...Bxh2+ 33.Kxh2 Rh6+ 0-1

41 – Saxer 2.Bb2 Qd6 3.a3 e5 Alvin V. Saxer described himself to me as a pusher, a wood pusher, a pawn pusher. In our game from 1981 Al Saxer pushes pawns in the Polish Opening. This contest saw Saxer castle queenside and Sawyer kingside. White built up a strong attack. The most accurate defense should have beaten it back. There was a moment when Al Saxer actually had a forced checkmate. After he missed that, my counter attack won. Al Saxer was about 40 years older than me. Al did not worry about chess opening theory. He just had a great time playing. Saxer passed away in 1993 at age 80. It was a pleasure to know him. Saxer (1853) - Sawyer, Lansdale, PA 25.02.1981 begins 1.b4 d5 2.Bb2 Qd6 3.a3 e5 [More accurate is 3...a5! 4.b5 e5=] 4.e3 Nf6 5.h3 Be7 6.Nf3 Nbd7 7.c4 c6 8.Qb3 e4 9.Nd4 Ne5 10.c5 Qb8 11.Nc3 0-0 12.0-0-0 [12.Be2=] 12...a5 13.f4 Nd3+ 14.Bxd3 exd3 15.g4 Ne4 16.Nxe4 dxe4 17.f5 axb4 18.axb4 Bd7 19.Rhg1 b6 20.g5 bxc5 21.f6 [21.Ne6 Bxe6 22.fxe6 Qxb4-/+] 21...Bd6 [21...cxd4! Black's best winning idea is 22.g6 Bxf6 23.gxf7+ Rxf7-+] 22.g6 hxg6 23.Rxg6 cxd4? [23...Qxb4 24.Rxg7+ Kh8=] 24.Rxg7+ Kh8 25.Rg5 Be6 26.Rh5+ Kg8 27.Rg1+ Bg3 28.Bxd4? [White can force checkmate after the moves 28.Rg5+! Kh7 29.Qd1!+-] 28...Bxb3 29.Be5 Qxe5 30.Rxe5 Ra1+ 31.Kb2 Rxg1 32.Kxb3 Bxe5 0-1

42 – Nielsen 3.a3 e5 4.Nf3 Nd7 I played in the ICCF World Cup V postal chess tournament that began in 1981. According to my records, one of my international opponents was named Peter Heine Nielsen. This game stood out in my mind because of the blockade at the end. I read that Grandmaster Peter Heine Nielsen played a lot as a child. I do not know if the famous Danish grandmaster was an 8 year old opponent of mine. I have never seen another player named Peter Heine Nielsen, so I will take this opportunity to pay tribute to one of the best players in the world. Grandmaster Peter Heine Nielsen has been ranked in the top 100 in the world. His peak FIDE rating was 2700. Nielsen became an International Master in 1991 and Grandmaster in 1994. He has won the Danish Championship five times. Peter has written two books on the Sicilian Accelerated Dragon (with Carsten Hansen) and is one of the players used by Aagaard in his book "Inside the Chess Mind". Nielsen wrote Chapter 25 in "Experts On The Sicilian". He also writes for New In Chess. This game was even until I let things slip. I lost my queen in the middlegame, however I got a rook and bishop for it. I was in trouble but managed to build a blockade to keep White's king from approaching my king - avoiding mating possibilities. Nielsen - Sawyer, corr ICCF 1981 begins 1.b4 d5 2.Bb2 Qd6 3.a3 e5 4.Nf3 [Or 4.e3 Nf6 5.Nf3] 4...Nd7 [4...e4 5.Nd4 Nf6; 4...f6 5.e3 Be6] 5.e3 Ngf6 6.c4 c6 7.cxd5 Nxd5 8.Nc3 Nxc3 9.Bxc3 Be7 10.Qc2 0-0 11.d4 Bf6 12.Bd3 g6 13.0-0-0 Qc7 [13...exd4!? 14.Nxd4 a5=/+ favors Black.] 14.h4 exd4 15.Nxd4 Ne5 16.f3 Nxd3+ 17.Rxd3 Qe7 18.h5 Rd8? [The position is equal after 18...a5 19.hxg6 fxg6 20.Qb3+ Rf7=] 19.hxg6 hxg6+- [Better was 19...fxg6 20.Nxc6 bxc6 21.Rxd8+ Qxd8 22.Qb3+ Qd5 23.Qxd5+ cxd5 24.Bxf6 with drawing chances due to bishops of opposite color.] 20.Qb2 Kg7 21.Ne6+!? [After 21.g4!+- White is winning due to the weakness on the long diagonal.] 21...Bxe6 22.Rxd8 Rxd8 23.Bxf6+ Qxf6 24.Rh7+ Kxh7 25.Qxf6 Rd3 26.Qh4+ Kg8 27.Qf4 Rxa3 28.Qb8+ Kh7 29.Qxb7

a5 30.bxa5 Rxa5 31.Qxc6 Ra1+ 32.Kd2 Ra2+ 33.Kd3 Rxg2 34.Qd6 Rg5 35.e4 Rh5 36.Kd4 Kg7 37.f4 1/2-1/2

43 – Dernovoi 1.b4 e5 2.Bb2 d6 Long ago I played Russian master Ivan Nikolaevich Dernovoi. When I saw that Dernovoi played the Sokolsky Opening, I replied classically with 1.b4 e5. Postal chess moves back and forth from America to the old Soviet Union took a couple weeks. This gave me time to think about what I really wanted to play. Upon further reflection I chose to turn the position into a King’s Indian Defence with 2.Bb2 d6 3.c4 Nf6 4.e3 g6. We both seemed to be more interested in solid play than aggressive action. We exchanged down to an even endgame. White offered a draw when we were about to reach a knight ending with a symmetrical pawn structure. I found two couple short I.N. Dernovoi games with the Sokolsky Opening. Doubtless the winners submitted them for publication. After we finished our careers, Ivan Nikolaevich Dernovoi had an ICCF rating of 2217. Mine was 2157. Dernovoi - Sawyer, WT/M/GT/156 corr ICCF 1984 begins 1.b4 e5 [1...d5 2.Bb2 Nf6 3.e3 e6 4.b5 Bd6 5.c4 Nbd7 6.f4 0-0 7.Nf3 c5 8.Be2 d4 9.exd4 cxd4 10.Nxd4 Bxf4 11.0-0 Qc7 12.Nf3 b6 13.Qe1 Bb7 14.g3 Bh6 15.d4 Ng4 16.Qc3 Ndf6 17.Nbd2 Nh5 18.Kg2 Nxh2 19.d5 Qxg3+ 20.Kh1 Ng4 01 Dernovoi - Sokolov, corr 1981] 2.Bb2 d6 [2...Bxb4 3.Bxe5 Nf6 4.c4 0-0 5.e3 d5 6.cxd5 Nxd5 7.Nf3 Re8 8.Bb2 Nf4 9.Qb3 Na6 10.Bxa6 Nxg2+ 11.Kd1 bxa6 12.Qxb4 Qd5 13.Ke2 c5 14.Bc3 Qh5 15.Qa4 Bb7 16.Rg1 Bxf3+ 0-1 Dernovoi - Soerensen, corr 1980] 3.c4 Nf6 4.e3 g6 [An alternative is the Old Indian set up with 4...Be7 5.Nc3 0-0 6.Nf3 e4 7.Ng5 Bf5 8.d3=] 5.Nf3 Bg7 6.Be2 0-0 [6...e4 7.Nd4 0-0 8.0-0 c5=] 7.0-0 Nbd7 8.a4 [8.d3 a5 9.a3 e4 10.dxe4 Nxe4 11.Bxg7 Kxg7 12.Qc2 Re8 13.Nc3 Nxc3 14.Qxc3+ Qf6=] 8...Re8 9.d4 Nf8 10.Nc3 Bf5 11.Qb3 Ne4 12.Nxe4 Bxe4 13.dxe5 dxe5 14.Rfe1 [14.Rfd1 Qe7 15.Nd2+/=] 14...Qe7 15.Nd2

Bf5 16.c5 Be6 [16...a5 17.bxa5 Bd7=] 17.Bc4 [17.Qc2+/=] 17...Rad8 18.Bxe6 Qxe6 19.Qxe6 Nxe6 20.Nc4 e4 21.Bxg7 Kxg7 22.Kf1 Rd3 23.Red1 Red8 24.Ke2 1/2-1/2

44 – Williams 1…e5 2.Bb2 Bxb4 David G. Williams of Pennsylvania played the Sokolsky Opening against me. We both lived in the same state so this postal game progressed faster than most. I developed classically with my pieces in the center. White had to do something about his bishop on e5. I knew three men named Dave Williams in Pennsylvania. This Dave Williams played well until move eight. I redeployed my attackers to his weak points on the queenside. White fell to my tactical combinations. Things went from bad to worse. Williams - Sawyer, corr APCT N-340 1993 begins 1.b4 e5 2.Bb2 [2.a3 d5 3.Bb2 Bd6 4.Nf3 Nd7=] 2...Bxb4 3.Bxe5 [3.f4 d6 4.fxe5 dxe5 5.Bxe5 Nf6 6.Nf3 Nc6 7.Bc3 Bd6=/+] 3...Nf6 4.Nc3 [4.c4 0-0 5.Nf3 d5 6.e3 c5=] 4...Nc6 [4...Ba5 5.e3 d6 6.Bxf6 Qxf6=] 5.Bxf6 Qxf6 6.Nd5 Qe5 [6...Qd6 7.Nxb4 Qxb4 8.c3=] 7.Nxb4 [7.c4 Ba5 8.Nf3 Qd6 9.e3=] 7...Nxb4 8.Nf3 [8.Rb1 a5 9.a3 Nd5 10.e3=] 8...Nxc2+ [8...Qxa1 9.Qxa1 Nxc2+ 10.Kd1 Nxa1 11.Kc1 d5 12.Kb2 Bg4-+] 9.Qxc2 Qxa1+ 10.Qd1 Qxa2 [Or 10...Qxd1+ 11.Kxd1 b6-+] 11.e3 0-0 12.Bd3 Qd5 13.Qc2 h6 14.0-0 Qc6 15.Rc1 [15.Qb2 d5-+] 15...Qxc2 16.Rxc2 c6 17.h3 d6 18.Nd4 a5 19.Rc3 Bd7 20.Nc2 [20.Be4 a4-+] 20...b5 21.Be4 b4 22.Rb3 Ra7 23.d4 c5 24.Kf1 a4 25.Rb1 a3 26.Rb3 Ba4 0-1

45 – Kantor 3.Bxe5 Nf6 4.e3 0-0 Experience is a great teacher, but it can be surpassed by youth with a higher skill level. FIDE Master Attila Honos played many openings from main lines to offbeat options. Honos has been playing the Sokolsky Opening 1.b4 since before IM Gergely Kantor was born. The younger master picked apart White's reserved position with wide open central piece play. Honos (2207) - Kantor (2514), Team Ch-HUN 2017-18 Hungary, 06.05.2018 begins 1.b4 e5 2.Bb2 Bxb4 3.Bxe5 Nf6 4.e3 0-0 5.c4 d5 6.cxd5 [6.Nf3=] 6...Nxd5 7.Nf3 Nc6 8.Bb2 Qd6 [8...Bf5 9.Be2=] 9.a3 Ba5 10.Be2 Qg6 11.0-0 Bh3 12.Ne1 [12.Nh4 Qg5=/+] 12...Rad8 13.Kh1 Bf5 14.Qc1 Rfe8 15.Bb5 Qh5 [15...Rd6-/+] 16.Nc3 [16.Ba4 Rd6-/+] 16...Bxc3 17.Bxc3 Re6 18.Nf3 [18.Bxc6 Rxc6-+] 18...Rh6 19.Bxc6 Be4 20.Be5 Bxf3 21.gxf3 [21.Qb2 Rxc6-+] 21...Qxe5 22.f4 Qh5 0-1

Book 8: Chapter 2 – Rare Black Moves 1.e4 Here we consider rare Black moves after 1.e4 such as 1...g5, 1...b6, and 1...f5.

46 – Macho Grob 1.e4 g5 Odd flank openings like the Grob Attack (1.g4) and the Macho Grob (1.e4 g5 or first 1.d4 h6) feel like they should be swiftly and tactically crushed. Grob players combine bishop control of the long diagonal with a kingside pawn attack. A good idea is to challenge the g-pawn with your own h-pawn, as Bob Muir did. But then he sacrificed a bishop 8.Bxf7+? This failed tactically. I ended up fianchettoing my king on g7 where it is open but safer than White's king. Even after White castled, Black was able to threaten checkmate. David Alan Zimbeck asked, “Are you sure Kg7 was played? White has Qh5 with mate.” Maybe. It looks like I got away with one. I saw the mate on g6, but not on f7. Nice catch. This may have been a blitz game that I tried to record from memory. I might have recorded the actual move incorrectly, but often vs Bob we played 30 minute games when I wrote down the moves during play. Muir (1800) - Sawyer (2010), Williamsport, PA 1996 begins 1.d4 h6 2.e4 g5 3.h4 gxh4 4.Nf3 Nf6 5.Nc3 d5 6.exd5 Nxd5 7.Bc4 Nxc3 8.Bxf7+? [This is too much. Simply 8.bxc3+/- leaves White with good kingside targets.] 8...Kxf7 9.Ne5+ Kg7 [? The correct move is 9...Kg8!-+. I do not remember what I played, but according to my records I played Kg7.] 10.Qd3 Qd6 11.Qxc3 Nc6 12.Nf3 Qb4 13.Bd2 Qxc3 [Very powerful is 13...e5!-+] 14.Bxc3 e5 15.dxe5 [15.d5 Nb4-/+] 15...Bb4 16.Bxb4 Nxb4 17.0-0-0 Bg4 [The a2-pawn is pretty much free: 17...Nxa2+! 18.Kb1 Nb4-

+] 18.Rxh4 h5 19.a3 Nc6 20.Rd3 Rad8 21.Re3 Rhe8 22.Nh2? [If 22.Rh1 Bxf3 23.Rxf3 Rxe5-+] 22...Rd1# 0-1

47 – Owen 1.e4 b6 2.d4 Bb7 Rev. John Owen played a universal defense 1.e4 b6 2.d4 Bb7 3.Bd3 e6 twice against Paul Morphy in 1858. Sometimes this is known as the Owen's Defence. Morphy won the first game and Owen won the second. Sergeant presents two additional blindfold games where Morphy reached the same position. One was a draw in Paris vs the sculptor Eugene Lequesne in 1858 and the other a Morphy win in Philadelphia vs Samuel Lewis in 1859. Each time Paul Morphy played 4.Nh3. The most common Owen’s Defence is 1.e4 b6 2.d4 Bb7 3.Nc3 e6. The moves 1…b6 and 1…e6 can be played interchangeably. Against the Queens Fianchetto in an Internet Chess Club blitz game below vs "pothead", I chose a Semi-Morphy idea. This time I played 3.Nc3. After 4.f3 I played 5.Nh3. With the Black bishop on b7, there is no danger of ...Bc8xh3. Black went in for 6...Qh4+. Then I chose to cover up with 7.Nf2, and Black kept his king in the center. This gave me more targets. In the end his king was chased to the h-file and was mated. Sawyer - pothead, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 20.02.2013 begins 1.d4 e6 2.e4 b6 3.Nc3 Bb7 4.f3 Bb4 5.Nh3 Bxc3+ 6.bxc3 Qh4+ 7.Nf2 Ba6 8.Bxa6 Nxa6 9.g3 Qh5 10.Be3 c5 11.Qe2 Nc7 12.0-0 [12.dxc5 bxc5 13.0-0+would give White an open b-file to invade, but I was planning to rip open the center where Black has left his king.] 12...a6 13.Rae1 b5 14.Bf4 Rc8 15.g4 Qg6 16.Bg3 c4 17.Nh3 f6 18.Nf4 Qf7 19.d5 g5 20.dxe6 Nxe6 21.Nxe6 Qxe6 22.e5 f5 23.gxf5 Qxf5 24.Qe4?! [White lets his advantage slip. 24.e6!+- is correct.] 24...Ne7 [24...Qxe4 25.Rxe4 Ne7=] 25.f4 g4 26.Qb7 Kf7 [Black's last chance for survival is 26...0-0 27.Rd1+/-] 27.Bh4 [More accurate is 27.e6+! Kf8 28.Bh4 Qc5+ 29.Rf2+-] 27...Rb8 28.e6+ Kg6 29.Qxd7 Qc5+ 30.Bf2 Qd5 31.Qxe7 Rbe8 32.Qf7+ Kh6 33.f5 Qxf5 34.Be3+ Qf4 35.Bxf4# Black is checkmated 1-0

48 – Duras Gambit 1.e4 f5 Can you play a Dutch Defence against the King Pawn opening? Well, yes and no. You can play 1.e4 f5 as Black, but it won't be a Dutch. That is, not unless White wants to play a Dutch Staunton. Enterprising players only play this opening in blitz or against weak opponents. Also weak players might play it themselves. In the notes below, I cite two early games from 100 years ago. The Czech master Oldrich Duras played it several times against strong competition in Prague in the 1930s. The opening is called the Duras Gambit. Lev Zilbermints won with “the Fred” as this is also called. After 1.e4 f5, here are the main possibilities: 2.d4 is a Dutch Defence Staunton Gambit 1.d4 f5 2.e4. 2.Nf3 is a Lisitzin Gambit usually reached by 1.Nf3 f5 2.e4. 2.exf5 is the Duras Gambit. Black usually plays 2…Nf6 or 2…Kf7. Other options are 2…d5 and 2…e5. Zilbermints has tried many moves. In this game Lev chose 2…Nh6. His opponent “duarni” is listed as a Women’s International Master. She would not be a weak play. Lev Zilbermints was just having fun. It worked here. duarni (1957) - Zilbermints (2041), ICC 5 0 Internet Chess Club, 10.06.2016 begins 1.e4 f5 2.exf5 Nh6 [2...Kf7 3.d4 d5 4.Qh5+ g6 5.fxg6+ Kg7 6.Bd3 Nf6 7.Bh6+ Kg8 8.gxh7+ Nxh7 9.Qg6+ Bg7 10.Qxg7# 1-0 Pillsbury - Magana, Germany 1902; 2...Nf6 3.d4 (3.g4!+/-) 3...d5 4.Bd3 c5 5.dxc5 e5 6.Bb5+ Nc6 7.Nf3 Bxc5 8.Nxe5 0-0 9.Bxc6 bxc6 10.0-0 Bxf5 11.Nxc6 Qd6 12.Nd4 Ng4 13.Nf3 Bxc2 14.Qxc2 Rxf3 15.g3 Rxg3+ 16.Kh1 Rg1+ 17.Kxg1 Qxh2# 0-1 Schwartze - Hartlaub, Hamburg 1905] 3.g4!? [White plays this like a King's Gambit reversed. A good alternative would be 3.Qh5+! Nf7 4.Nf3 e6 5.Ne5+/-] 3...e6 4.fxe6 d5 5.d4 Qh4 6.Nf3 [6.Nc3+/-] 6...Qxg4 7.Rg1 [7.Ng5+/=] 7...Qxe6+ 8.Be2 Nf5 9.Nc3 Nc6 10.Bf4 Bd6 [10...Bb4=] 11.Bxd6 [11.Ng5!+/=] 11...Qxd6 12.Qd2 0-0 13.00-0 a6 14.Rg5 Bd7 15.Rdg1 Rae8 16.Bd3 Re7 17.h4 Kh8 18.h5 Ncxd4

19.Nxd4 Nxd4 20.Bxh7? [Chances were equal after 20.Rxd5 Qh2 21.Re1 Nf3 22.Rxe7 Nxd2 23.Rdxd7 Qf4=] 20...Nf3 21.Qxd5 Qf4+ 22.Kb1 Nxg5 White resigns 0-1

1.d4 Fool's Mate is a type of checkmate early in the game where losing king is trapped on its original square.

49 – Macho Grob 1.d4 g5 The Fool's Mate comes on the diagonal from h1-e1 or h5-e8. Here Black sacrifices a pawn. This rare first move is a simple oversight. White sacrifices a bishop. Then Black sacrifices a king. Sawyer - dede, Internet Chess Club 1998 begins 1.d4 g5 2.Bxg5 f6 3.e4 fxg5 4.Qh5# 1-0

50 – Sawyer 1.d4 a6 2.e4 h6 The weakest square on the board for Black is f7. When I played simultaneous exhibitions, I faced all levels of players. Here is a game from a simul I played at Penn College in Williamsport, Pennsylvania. Obviously this No Name (NN) or anonymous opponent was not a strong players. The flank moves 1…a6, 2…h6 and 3…g5 all invite disaster. The attacking counter 4.h4 was a powerful response. Instead, the temptation to sacrifice a bishop unsoundly was too great for me. Fortunately in this case it worked instantly. Sawyer – NN, Williamsport PA 1996 begins 1.d4 a6 2.e4 h6 [With this move, the vulnerable f7 square begs to be attacked.] 3.Bc4 g5 4.Bxf7+?! [Sacrificing the bishop is too speculative, but I am soon rewarded. 4.h4!+/-] 4...Kxf7 5.f4 Ke8? 6.Qh5# Black is checkmated 1-0

51 – Why 1.d4 b5 is Not Good Most chess openings focus pawns and pieces on the center of the board. Flank openings have the advantage in that any player who specializes in them does not have to learn many variations. The problem with flank openings is the lack of central control. The player with more space naturally becomes the attacker; typically he has 5 ranks vs 3 ranks for the defender. The attacker can usually force open the position with a pawn push. A sudden appearance of open lines can be challenging for the defender when the attacker is fully developed. Black has played five of his first eight moves on the a- or b-files. As the game progresses Black trades his good bishop for my bad bishop in 18...Bxf5. He should have played the dynamic 19.Bxf5 gxf5! Late in the game both sides made blunders. My knight proved better than his bishop. My opponent allowed me to open up the position with his 40...h4? I missed 47.Nxe5+! By the time Black's time ran out, all White had to do was walk over and take on d6 followed by quickly queening. Sawyer (1942) - El-Principiante (1809), ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 25.07.2011 begins 1.d4 b5 2.e4 Bb7 3.Bd3 a6 [Reaching a St. George which usually begins 1.e4 a6.] 4.f3 d6 [4...e6.] 5.Be3 e5 6.d5 [Grabbing space and keeping Black cramped while White finishes development.] 6… Nd7 7.c4 b4 8.Ne2 a5 9.b3 Nc5 [Now I give Black one shot at Nxd3 swapping off my bad bishop. I want to play Nd2, but my queen must watch Bd3.] 10.0-0 g6 [Black switches to the other flank. I decide to eliminate his knight in a closed position.] 11.Bxc5 dxc5 12.Nd2 Bd6 13.Rf2 Ne7 14.Nf1 0-0 15.Ne3 Bc8 16.Qd2 f5 17.exf5 Nxf5 18.Nxf5 Bxf5 19.Bxf5 Rxf5 20.Ng3 Rf4 21.Ne4 Qe7 22.Qe3 Raf8 23.Re2 h6 24.Rae1 g5 25.Qd3 Kg7 26.Ng3 Qf7 27.Re4 Qg6 28.Qe3 R8f7 29.Ne2 Rxe4 30.Qxe4 Qxe4 31.fxe4 Kg6 32.Rf1 Rxf1+ 33.Kxf1 h5 34.Ng3 g4 35.Nf5 Kg5 36.g3 Bf8 37.Kg2 Bd6 38.Kf2 Bf8 39.Kg2 Bd6 40.Ng7 h4 41.gxh4+ Kxh4 42.Nf5+ Kg5 43.Kg3 Bf8 44.Ne3 Bd6 45.Nxg4 Bf8 46.h4+ Kg6 47.Ne3?! [47.Nxe5+ would have decided the game almost instantly.] 47...Bd6 48.Kg4 Kh6 49.Nf5+ Kg6 50.Nxd6 cxd6 51.h5+ Kf6 52.Kh4 Kf7 53.Kg5

Kg7 54.h6+ Kh7 55.Kh5 Black forfeits on time. White still had 1:13 left on his clock. 1-0

52 – Salsicha 1.d4 d6 2.Nf3 g6 I played a three minute chess game on the Internet Chess Club. My opponent was "Salsicha" who was rated 2114, had played 13,100 rated blitz games on ICC, and peaked at 2523 (06-Sep-2010). "Salsicha" was a good active player. I set up London System vs Black’s Modern Defence. This closed opening tends to leads to longer games. However a curious thing happened in our game. My opponent for some reason chose to play rather slowly for a 3 0 game, more like at 5 0 speed. There is nothing wrong with slower chess. But if you choose to play a three minute game with no increment then you must play fast enough to last 60 moves or more. I aim for 70. My opponent ran out of time after 33 moves. That’s like playing at the odds of Mate in 33 or I lose! That's not my approach. I just want to win. Sawyer - Salsicha, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 11.03.2012 begins 1.d4 d6 2.Nf3 g6 3.Bf4 Bg7 [Black is playing a Modern Defence: g6 system without an early Ngf6.] 4.e3 c6 5.c4 Nd7 [With this very good theoretical novelty I am completely out of my database of several million games.] 6.Be2 Qb6 7.Qb3?! [At this point Black had used 42 seconds for six moves. I had used 13 seconds. I knew 7.Qb3 was not a good move, but my goal now was to give Black something to think about. 7.Qc2 Ngf6 8.0-0 0-0 9.Nc3 Re8 10.h3 e5 11.Bh2+/= would be normal and good chess.] 7...e5! 8.Qxb6?! axb6 9.Bg3 Nh6 10.Nc3 Nf5=/+ [Black now stands better. Clocks: 2:21-1:53] 11.d5 e4?! [11...h5!] 12.Nd4 Nxg3 13.hxg3 Bxd4 14.exd4 Nf6+/= [The advantage has swung back to White. Clocks: 2:131:05] 15.0-0 c5 16.Nb5 Kd7 17.f3 e3 18.g4 h6 19.Rfe1 Re8 20.Bd3 Nh7 21.g3 Ng5 22.Kg2 f6? [Leaving g6 hanging apparently we both miss. Clocks: 1:49-0:14. Here I stopped trying to play good moves and just played fast moves that did not get me mated! My opponent played the final 11 moves in 14 seconds.] 23.f4 Nf7 24.Kf3? [Powerful is 24.Bxg6! Re7 25.Kf3 Kd8 26.Bxf7 Rxf7 27.Nxd6 Re7 28.dxc5 bxc5 29.f5+-] 24...g5+25.Rxe3 Rxe3+ 26.Kxe3 Ke7 27.f5 [27.Kf3+-] 27...Bd7 28.a3?= [White

was winning after 28.Nc3!+-] 28...Bxb5 29.cxb5 cxd4+ 30.Kxd4 Ne5 31.Re1= [31.b4+/-] 31...Ra4+ 32.Kc3 Rxg4 33.Re3 h5 34.Kc2=/+ [34.Be2!+/=. Black forfeited on time. Clocks: 1:27-0.00] 1-0

1.d4 e5 This Englund Gambit allows Black to take the initiative very early with the investment of a pawn. Sometimes it works marvelously.

53 – Sawyer 2.d5 Bc5 3.a3 Qh4 I love a quick chess game that ends in a beautiful checkmate. In fast time blitz games, one gambit that comes up now and then is the tricky Englund Gambit after 1.d4 e5. One master that played this gambit was Henri Grob, famous for playing as White 1.g4!? I used to own Grob's Englund Gambit 1968 pamphlet entitled “Englund Gambit: 1.d4, e5. Theoretische Untersuchungen mit Partie-Beispielen aus der Praxis” that cited a lot of his games. It scores well in blitz. I had faced it 67 times as White scoring 75%; and 158 times as Black scoring 55%. How should Black play after 2.dxe5 being down a pawn? There are three basic ideas after 2.dxe5. (A.) Gambit the f-pawn with 2...f6 or 3...f6 intending ...Nxf6; (B.) Gambit the d-pawn with 2...d6 or 3...d6 intending ...Bxd6; or (C.) Attack the e5 pawn with pieces until you can recapture it. Four Black pieces that can take aim at e5: 2...Nc6; 3...Qe7; 3...Nge7 (intending 4...Ng6); and ...Bg7 (usually after Grob's idea of ...h6 and ...g5). How should White handle this brazen pawn sacrifice? Best is to take the pawn with2.dxe5! and hold on. Natural alternatives are 2.e4 exd4 Center Game or 2.Nf3!? Reversed Alekhine. Less effective is 2.d5 Bc5 as in the game below. I include my recent "lozchap" - Sawyer game because I love a quickie with a beautiful mate. lozchap (1288) - Sawyer (1988), ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 23.05.2014 begins 1.d4 e5 2.d5 Bc5 3.a3!? [3.e4] 3...Qh4!? [3...d6 4.b4 Bb6 5.e3 a5=] 4.e3 d6 5.Nf3 Qe7 6.b4 Bb6 7.Bd2 Nf6 8.a4 a6 [8...a5!=/+] 9.a5 Ba7 10.h3 0-0 11.g4 c6 12.c4 cxd5 13.Qc2 [If 13.g5 Ne4 14.cxd5 f5-/+] 13...dxc4 14.Bxc4 Be6 15.Bxe6 fxe6 16.Ng5 h6 17.Ne4 Nc6 18.Nxf6+ Qxf6 19.Rf1 Rac8 20.Qe4 d5 21.Qg2 e4 22.Na3? [Hastens the end.

22.Ra2 Ne5-+] 22...Qxa1+ 23.Ke2 Qxa3 24.g5 Qd3+ 25.Ke1 Nxb4 26.gxh6 Rc1+ 27.Bxc1 Nc2# White checkmated 0-1

54 – Storie 2.dxe5 Bb4+ 3.c3 Every chess game tells a story. Your opening moves show what you are thinking. They demonstrate your style, that is, how you play the game of chess. Many players follow the safety of theory from popular lines in grandmaster practice. More methodical players may select a comfortable system of development they can repeat again and again. Still others prefer the surprise of an exciting gambit or an unexpected novelty at an early stage. In this 1989 USCF Golden Knight Postal Chess Tournament I hoped to play the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit as White. I began with 1.d4. My opponent Terry Storie boldly played the Englund Gambit against me with 1...e5!? In the hands of a skilled attacker, this can be a dangerous gambit, especially in blitz chess. However, this game was played by postal mail at the pace of about one move for each side per week. In the Englund Gambit, Black must develop rapidly and open lines for tactical threats. This includes attacking e5 with a knight via ...Nc6 and / or ...Nge7-Ng6, or with a pawn after ...d6 or ...f6. Black did none of that in the game below, although he did play ...Qe7 and castled kingside quickly. The big problem was that all Black's queenside pieces were cut off from the action. This is one of several wins I had in a row for which I received no rating points when I reached my peak USCF Postal Master rating of 2211. I complained but to no avail. A casual bullet game by Richard Torning is included in the notes. Sawyer (2211) - Storie (1364), corr USCF 89N285, 21.05.1990 begins 1.d4 e5 2.dxe5 [2.Nf3 e4 3.Ne5 d6 4.Nc4 Nf6 5.Nc3 Bf5 6. e3 d5 7. Nd2 c5 8. b3 cxd4 9. exd4 Bb4 10.Ne2 Qe7 11.g3 e3 12.fxe3 Qxe3 13. a3 Ne4 14.axb4 Qf2 mate 0-1 NN-Torning, Casual Bullet 2018] 2...Bb4+?! [It would be better to develop a knight with either 2...Nc6 3.Nf3 Qe7 or 3...Nge7 4.Bf4 Ng6] 3.c3 Ba5 4.e4 c6 5.Bc4 [5.Qg4! would provoke a

weakness since the bishop does not cover g7.] 5...Qe7 6.Qd6 [White is playing for a blockade, but certainly 6.Nf3+- is very good.] 6...Qxd6 7.exd6 b5 8.Be2 Nf6 9.f3 [9.e5+-] 9...0-0 10.b4 Bb6 11.a4 Ba6? 12.a5 Bxg1 13.Rxg1 Ne8 14.Bf4 Black resigns in an ugly position. 1-0

55 – Soller 2.dxe5 f6 3.e3 Nc6 Is it possible to play the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit with the Black pieces? If the gambit is a challenge as White, wouldn't it be clearly inferior if you play it as Black? Yes, of course it is a risk, but it is one that pays off from time to time. When I was playing the "mscp" program on ICC, I decided to experiment with the Englund Gambit which begins 1.d4 e5 2.dxe5. Black has sacrificed a pawn. The pure Englund Gambit continues 2...Nc6 3.Nf3 Qe7 when there is a famous trap: 4.Bf4 Qb4+ 5.Bd2 Qxb2 6.Bc3? (Correct is 6.Nc3+=) 6...Bb4 7.Qd2 Bxc3 8.Qxc3 Qc1 mate! Another try here is the Zilbermints Variation 3...Nge7 intending ...Ng6 attacking e5. When Henri Grob was Black he used to play an early ...h7-h6 intending ...g7-g5 and Bg7. This gives Black the option of playing a queen or knight to e7. Still another option is the Blackburne Gambit is 2...d6 3.exd6 Bd6. The BDG Reversed is the Soller Gambit: 2...f6, developed by Karl Soller. The game continued 3.e3 Nc6 4.exf6 Nxf6 5.Bb5 d5. We had a BDG Euwe 6...Bb4 line reversed. Black had to hold back the ...Bg4 move until his king was safe. I thought I might get "mscp" to go after stuff on the queenside and ignore its king until too late. It worked. Later I saw the "mscp" is done by the same programmer as the much stronger programs "blik" and "Rookie", but "mscp" only looks ahead 4 ply. Sounds like fun for a BDGer. mscp - Sawyer, ICC 5 0 Internet Chess Club, 02.10.2011 begins 1.d4 e5 2.dxe5 f6 [2...Nc6 3.Nf3 Qe7 4.Bf4 Qb4+ 5.Bd2 Qxb2 6.Bc3 Bb4 7.Qd2 Bxc3 8.Qxc3 Qc1#] 3.e3 Nc6 4.exf6 Nxf6 5.Bb5 d5 6.Bxc6+ bxc6 7.Qd4 Bd6 8.Nf3 0-0 9.0-0 Qe8 10.c4 Qh5 11.c5 Be7 12.Nbd2 Bg4 13.Rd1 Rae8 [Black has full development and the queenside has been duly ignored in defense.] 14.b3 Bd8 15.a3 Ne4 16.Ra2 Nxd2 17.Raxd2 Bxf3 18.gxf3 Qxf3 [Closing in for the kill. White grabs pawns on the queenside while

Black works out a checkmate.] 19.Qa4 Rf5 20.h4 Re4 21.Qxc6 Bxh4 22.Qa8+ Kf7 23.Kh2 Bxf2 24.Qf8+ Kxf8 25.Rxf2 Rh4+ 26.Kg1 Rh1# White checkmated 0-1

56 – Cavicchi vs Naumkin 3.e4 Francesco Cavicchi sent me the following note:

“Tim, some time ago we were talking about Englund gambit as a possible blitz weapon for players rated under 2000 Elo. So many 1d4 repertoire books keep on telling us how silly and unsound this gambit is. Or is it? Well, according to my results, especially in simul games, I have to disagree. That's why I send you these games, where my opponents were definitely not weak players. Hope you enjoy.” Yes, I did enjoy these games. Clearly if a player like Francesco Cavicchi can draw a grandmaster, he can defeat those rated under 2000 Elo. This variation of the Englund Gambit 1.d4 e5 2.dxe5 with 2...f6 is the Soller Gambit. Here Black played a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit type position with colors reversed. The move 3.e4 that Grandmaster Igor Naumkin played reminded me of the BDG Lemberger with its 3...e5. I added a casual bullet game played by Richard Torning to the notes provided by Francesco Cavicchi. Naumkin - Cavicchi, Pedavena tournament simul game, 29.07.2009 begins 1.d4 e5 2.dxe5 f6 [2...d6 3.exd6 Bxd6 4.Nf3 Nc6 5.Nd4 Ne5 6.c3 Nf6 7.Bg5 O-O 8.e3 c5 9.Bxf6 Qxf6 10.Ne2 Bg4 11.Nd2 Nd3 mate 0-1. NNTorning, Casual Bullet Game 2018] 3.e4 [GM's trademark: of course variations with e4-in the spirit of the Alekhine attack from the Budapest gambit-are the most dangerous and difficult to face with black] 3...Nc6 4.exf6 Nxf6 5.Nc3 Bc5 6.Bg5 0-0 7.Qd2 d6 8.Bc4+ Kh8 9.0-0-0 Qe8 10.f3 Na5 11.Bb3 Nxb3+ 12.cxb3 Be6 13.Nge2 b5 14.Nd4 Bxd4 15.Qxd4 a5 16.Rhe1 b4 17.Bxf6 gxf6 18.Nd5 c5 19.Qe3 Qc6 20.Nf4?! [20.Qh6!+/-]

20...Bf7 21.Nd5 Be6 22.Nf4 Bf7 23.Nd5 Be6 [draw by repetition] 1/2-1/2 [Game notes by Cavicchi]

57 – Nash 3.exf6 Nxf6 4.c4 Bc5 Against Frank Nash I played the Englund Gambit 1.d4 e5 in the 1989 USCF Golden Knights Postal Tournament. The main game below was a Soller Gambit 2...f6!?(Our later game was with a standard Englund 2...Nc6). The Soller is basically a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit reversed with a move behind. The move that Black typically has trouble making in the Soller is to advance his d-pawn two squares (...d5), but a promising attack is possible with only 6...d6. What made this game really stand out was the knight sacrifice 15...Nxf2! This regained the gambit pawn. In the endgame, Black traps White's only remaining bishop. Nash (1879) - Sawyer (2187), corr USCF, 09.10.1989 begins 1.d4 e5 2.dxe5 f6 [2...Nc6 3.Nf3 Qe7 4.Qd5 f6 0-1 Nash-Sawyer, corr USCF 1993] 3.exf6 Nxf6 4.c4 Bc5 5.Nc3 Nc6 6.Nf3 d6 7.e3 0-0 8.Be2 Qe8 9.0-0 Bg4 10.Nd4 Bd7 11.Ncb5 Bb6 12.b3 Ne4 13.Bb2 a6 14.Nxc6 Bxc6 15.Nd4 Nxf2! [This sacrifice makes the game more beautiful.] 16.Qd2 Ne4 17.Rxf8+ Qxf8 18.Qe1 Re8 19.Bf3 Ng5 20.Bxc6 bxc6 21.Qh4 Qf6 22.Qf2 Ne4 [Black would do better to play 22...Qxf2+ 23.Kxf2 d5=/+] 23.Qf3 c5 [Equality is possible with 23...Qxf3 24.gxf3 Ng5 25.Kf2=] 24.Qxf6 Nxf6 25.Nf5 Ba5 26.Rf1 Bd2 27.Nxg7 [White has 27.Bxf6 gxf6 28.Kf2+/=] 27...Bxe3+ 28.Kh1 Kxg7 29.Bxf6+ Kg6 30.g4 Rf8 31.Re1 Bf2 32.Be7 Bxe1 33.Bxf8 Bh4 34.Kg2 Bg5 35.Kg3 Kf7 36.h4 Bd2 0-1

58 – Khairat 3.exf6 Nxf6 4.Nc3 Black won an Englund Soller Gambit 1.d4 e5 2.dxe5 f6. It resembles a Blackmar-Gambit Reversed. White played solid moves. Both sides completed their development, but then Black obtained a strong kingside attack in the game Taher Salama vs Ahmed Khairat. Salama (1769) - Khairat (2211), World Blitz 2017 Riyadh KSA, 29.12.2017 begins 1.d4 e5 2.dxe5 f6 3.exf6 Nxf6 4.Nc3 Bc5 5.e3 0-0 6.Nf3 d5 7.Be2 c6 8.0-0 Qe7 9.a3 a5 10.Nd4 Nbd7 11.Bd3 Ne5 12.Be2 Bd7 13.b3 Rae8 14.Bb2 [14.f3=] 14...Neg4 [14...Nfg4!-/+] 15.h3? [Now Black comes crashing through. 15.Qd2 Qe5=/+] 15...Nxe3! 16.fxe3 Qxe3+ 17.Kh1 Bxd4 [Black is up a pawn and with an attack.] 18.Bd3 [18.Nxd5 cxd5-+] 18...Ng4 19.Qe1 Rxf1+ 20.Qxf1 Qg3 0-1

59 – Zilbermints 2.dxe5 Nc6 Lev Zilbermints sent me notes to his win vs Vladimir Polyakin. Polyakin - Zilbermints, Red Bank Open (3), 2017 begins 1.d4 e5 2.dxe5 Nc6 3.Nf3 Nge7 [The Zilbermints Gambit] 4.Nc3 [After some thinking, Polyakin chooses this move. John Nunn, in his 1999 work, Nunn's Chess Openings, recommended this move as avoiding all the complications that arise from 4 Bg5 or 4 Bf4. The former is called the Wigglesworth Defense, while 4 Bf4 is called the Klein Defense.] 4...Ng6 [Another line, known since 1994, is 4...h6 which is recommended by the German master Stefan Buecker. The move prevents the pesky 5 Bg5 but allows White to develop his pieces further. In the game, I continued with the text move.] 5.Bg5 Be7 6.Bxe7 Qxe7 7.Nd5 Qd8 [White has a slight edge here.] 8.e4 0-0 9.Be2 Ncxe5 10.Nxe5 Nxe5 11.0-0 Nc6 [The computer gives 11...c6 but I am not convinced due to the backwardness of the d-pawn.] 12.Qd2 d6 13.Rad1 f5 [This might be premature. Still, it worked well in this game.] 14.exf5 Bxf5 15.Qc3 Kh8 16.Rfe1 a6 17.Bd3 Rc8? [A blunder. I completely overlooked the cheap shot 18 Bxa6! which wins a pawn. Correct is 17...Bxd3 18.Rxd3 when Black can still fight on.] 18.Bxa6 Ne5 19.Be2 [The computer says that 19.Bxb7 is better, but Polyakin grew afraid of my faint attacking chances on the Kingside. Thus he deployed the Bishop back to the defense. Going over the game with a computer, I found numerous instances where White could have consolidated and easily won. Perhaps my opponent was rattled by my stubborn defense and time pressure as well is nervousness?] 19...Qh4 20.f4 Nc6 21.Bf3 Bg4 22.g3 Qh5 23.Bxg4 Qxg4 24.b4 [Trying to drive away the Nc6.] 24...Rce8 25.Rd3 Qg6 26.Rxe8 Rxe8 27.Re3 h6 [By this point, Polyakin had 9 minutes left on his clock to my 23.] 28.Qd3 Qf7 [White has 7 minutes left, Black, 20.] 29.c4 [White has 7 minutes left, Black, 20.] 29...Rxe3 30.Qxe3 Qg6 31.Kf2 Qh5 [Hitting both h2 and e1 at the same time. Good strategy in time pressure.] 32.Kg2 Qg6 33.b5 Qc2+ 34.Qf2 Qxc4! [Now the position is even.] 35.Nxc7 Nd4 36.b6 Qc6+ 37.Kh3 Qe4 38.g4 Qd3+ 39.Qg3 Qf1+ 40.Kh4 [The last chance to draw was 40.Qg2! However, Polyakin decides to play for the win. He already refused three draw offers from me earlier. At this point, White has 1 minute 57 seconds left, Black, 16 minutes.] 40...Nf3+ 41.Kh5 Kh7 42.f5 Qd3

43.h4 g6+ [White overstepped on time rather than allow mate.] 0-1 [Notes by Zilbermints]

60 – Zilbermints 3.Nf3 Nge7 Lev Zilbermints is a long time player of the Englund Gambit 1.d4 e5. Lev has had great success in blitz games. Lev Zilbermints has his own variation 3...Nge7. White is a titled grandmaster with the handle "blindhawk" playing anonymously. Objectively we know that the gambit 1.d4 e5 is not the strongest move, but it can be very tricky. So tricky that even grandmasters can struggle when required to play at a very fast speed. The 3...Nge7 line has ideas similar to the Albin-Counter Gambit 5...Nge7 lines. The knight can swing from e7 to g6 to recapture the gambit pawn on e5. Often I have played my queenside knight to Ng6, but after 1...Nc6, 2...e5, 3.d5 Nge7 and 4...Ng6 in a Queens Knight Defence. However, Lev Zilbermints has another idea in his system which is reminds me of the way Henri Grob played Black in this line with 4...h6 and 5...g5 before moves like 6...Bg7 and 7...Ng6. Other Englund Gambit ideas include games by Francesco Cavicchi with 3...Qe7 or the counter gambit 2...f6. A chess engine or a FIDE titled GM with several minutes to think on each move would probably find a slight advantage for White. But vs a human in blitz chess, White's edge is very minor. In competitive play, any edge can disappear in a split second and quickly be reversed. Below is an example by Lev Zilbermints. blindhawk (2212) - Zilbermints (2205), ICC 5 0 Internet Chess Club, 22.12.2014 begins 1.d4 e5 2.dxe5 Nc6 3.Nf3 Nge7 4.Bg5 [The critical line seems to be 4.Nc3 Ng6 5.Bg5 Be7 6.Bxe7 Qxe7 7.Nd5 Qd8 8.Qd2 h6+/when Stockfish, Rybka and Houdini all favor White, but each have a completely different way to continue.] 4...h6 5.Bh4 g5 6.Bg3 Bg7 7.Nc3 Ng6 [Houdini likes regaining the pawn for Black with 7...g4 8.Nd4 Nxe5] 8.e3 Ncxe5 9.Nxe5 Nxe5 10.h4 [10.f4!?+/=] 10...g4 [10...d6=] 11.h5 f5 12.Nd5 d6 13.Bh4 Qd7 14.Nf6+ [14.Qd2+/-] 14...Bxf6 15.Bxf6 0-0 16.Bh4 Qe6 17.Qd2 Bd7 18.b3 Bc6 19.0-0-0 b5 20.Rg1 a6 21.f4 [21.Qa5+/=] 21...Nd7 22.Qc3 Be4 23.Be1 Rac8 24.Qd4 Qf6 25.Bc3 Qxd4 26.Rxd4 Nf6 27.Bb2 Kh7 28.a4 Nxh5 29.axb5 axb5 30.Bxb5 Ng3 31.Kb1 c6 32.Ba6 Rcd8 33.Rgd1 d5 34.Bb7 Rf7 35.Bxc6 Rc7 36.Bxd5?

[36.Rxe4 Nxe4 37.Bxd5 Nc3+ 38.Bxc3 Rxc3=/+] 36...Bxc2+ 37.Ka2 Ra7+ 38.Ba3 Bxd1 39.Rxd1 Ne2 40.Kb2 Rad7 White resigns 0-1

61 – Harry Potter 3.Nf3 f6 4.e4 By 1988 gone were my main line openings where I had followed grandmasters for 17 years. I was not going to be the next Bobby Fischer. My skill level was only around 2000 at that time. Since I was already well past age 30, I was not going to rocket up several levels. Indeed, a slow slide was likely due to age. I was assigned to play the chess opponent named Harry Potter. Little did we know that his name would become very famous ten years later thanks to author J. K. Rowling. My opponent Harry Potter was rated 1460, and I 2184, when our game finished. Then I happened upon gambits. I would play a gambits in every game. It was wild and crazy, but radical means were needed to jump start myself. I handled some games brilliantly. In other games I got rewarded for boldness like vs Harry Potter. Within two years of switching to gambits, my tournament rating jumped over 2000 to Expert and my postal rating jumped over 2200 to Master. Eventually age would catch up with me, but I had an enjoyable ride. Of course back in 1988, computers were not strong. My opponents could not simply plug the position into a chess engine and get a great evaluation. Back then computers were notorious for misreading the compensation of a gambit. In an episode of Nikita on television, it was said: "Sometimes you have to sacrifice a pawn to motivate your knights." This game sees me do just that. Harry Potter plays well for a while and even eliminates one of my knights. But the other horse does him in. I play the wild Englund Gambit, Soller Variation, which is sort of a Blackmar-Diemer in reverse. Potter - Sawyer, corr USCF 88N12, 1988 begins 1.d4 e5 2.dxe5 Nc6 3.Nf3 f6 4.e4 fxe5 [Picture a Scotch Game 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 f6 4.dxe5 fxe5. Here we have a transposition.] 5.Nc3 Nf6 6.Bc4 Bc5 7.0-0 Rf8 8.Bg5 h6 9.Bh4 d6 10.Nd5 Bg4 11.Nxf6+ gxf6 12.h3 Bh5 13.Qd2?

[13.c3! would keep my knight from d4 when White stands better.] 13...Bxf3 14.gxf3 Qd7 15.Qxh6 [15.Kh2 Nd4 16.Qd3 f5!=] 15...Qxh3 16.Qg6+ Kd7 17.Bxf6 [17.Qg7+ Ne7 18.Qg4+ Qxg4+ 19.fxg4 d5!=] 17...Nd4 18.Qg7+ Kc6 ["I overlooked Nd4! Good game. Harry."] 0-1

62 – Campion 4.exf6 Nxf6 William Campion had a profound impact on my chess life. Bill was a typical club player who showed up regularly at the Chaturanga Chess Club, a few miles north of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; Dan Heisman also played there. Bill Campion beat the lower rateds and lost to the higher rateds. I showed Campion my hand written analysis and games on the BlackmarDiemer Gambit. Bill took them and entered them into his computer. Then Campion ran nice printouts and gave them to me. That process was much more difficult back in the 1980s. Bill was a great encouragement to me. Campion was a champion in my book. From that point on, I started what would become the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit Keybook. Thanks again! I got paired against Campion in my USCF Golden Knights postal event 88N12. I played postal chess against people from all 50 states and 30 countries, but it was rare to play someone from my own little chess club. It was kind of cool though. I continued with an Englund Gambit that became a reversed BDG Teichmann. Campion - Sawyer, corr USCF 88N12 1988 begins 1.d4 e5 2.dxe5 f6 3.Nf3 Nc6 4.exf6 Nxf6 [Black has compensation for about half a pawn, but he is down a full pawn.] 5.c4 [White fights for control of the d5 square.] 5...Bc5 6.Nc3 d6 7.Bg5!? [White has two other excellent choices which give him an advantage. 7.Bf4; 7.e3] 7...0-0 8.e3 h6! [This is the thematic approach in the BDG Teichmann after 5.Nxf3 Bg4 6.h3!] 9.Bf4 [9.Bxf6 Qxf6 with compensation for the gambit pawn.] 9...g5 10.Bg3 Bg4 [Black is ahead in development.] 11.h4 Nh5! 12.hxg5 Nxg3 13.Qd5+ Kh8? [13...Kg7! 14.gxh6+ Kh8 15.fxg3 Nb4!=/+] 14.Rxh6+ [14.fxg3! Nb4 15.Qe4 Bf5 16.Qh4 Bxe3 17.Qxh6+ Kg8 18.g4!+- and White would be winning.] 14...Kg7 15.fxg3 [15.Bd3 Nf5 16.Bxf5 Bxf5=/+] 15...Nb4 16.Qd1? [16.Qe4! is a better idea. 16...Bf5 17.Qh4 Bxe3 18.Nd5 Nxd5 19.cxd5 Qe7 20.Re6 Bxe6 21.Qh6+ with some possible perpetual checks.] 16...Bxf3? [16...Qe7!-/+] 17.gxf3? [17.Qb1!!+- threatening mate wins!] 17...Qxg5 18.Re6 Rae8 19.Rxe8 Rxe8 20.Ne4 [20.e4 doesn't help. 20...Qxg3+ 21.Kd2 Qf4+ 22.Ke1 Rh8-+] 20...Rxe4 [Obvious and good.]

21.Kf2 [Here I announced mate in three.] 21...Qxe3+ 22.Kg2 Qg1+ 23.Kh3 Qh1# 0-1

63 – Murray 5.Bg5 h6 6.Bh4 “Groundhog Day” was a 1993 comedy movie staring Bill Murray. I loved that movie. Murray's character TV reporter Phil Connors lived the same day over and over again in Punxsutawney, PA (actually filmed in Woodstock, Illinois). February 2nd is Groundhog Day in Punxsutawney. This is always six weeks from the First Day of Spring. For a few days this town of 6000 in the coal mining mountains of Western Pennsylvania is a place to party. Around 1993, I had a job interview in Punxsutawney, but I did not get hired. In 1994 I met Pat Murray. He has no known connection to Bill Murray except that both have a good sense of humor. Pat and I played more than 100 unrated chess games together. When he was about 50 years old, Murray got a tournament rating of 1727. Pat and I had a Groundhog Day experience where he fell for the exact same BDG trap twice, once in May and later in November. We met in a coffee house with a big screen television playing on one side of us, music blaring on the other side of the room, with college kids eating and drinking around us. We chatted and played for fun. This is an entertaining Englund Gambit. Murray - Sawyer, Williamsport, PA 1997 begins 1.d4 e5?! 2.dxe5 Nc6 3.Nf3 f6 [It is coffeehouse chess actually played in a coffee house.] 4.exf6 [Even stronger is 4.e4 fxe5 5.Bc4+/- "and White's advantage is huge." GM Larry Kaufman] 4...Nxf6 5.Bg5 BDG Teichmann reversed. 5...h6 6.Bh4 g5 7.Bg3 Ne4 8.Nbd2 Nxg3 9.hxg3 Bg7 10.c3 [This position is just like the BDG except Black is a tempo behind (...d7-d5).] 10...0-0 11.Nc4 [White is clearly better after 11.Qb3+ Kh8 12.0-0-0+/- but Black still has play on the f-file.] 11...d5 [I get to play my d-pawn with tempo.] 12.Ncd2? [12.Ne3=] 12...Qf6 [Now the power of the open f-file attacking f3 / f2 will win material for Black.] 13.e3 g4 14.Qb3 Ne7 [14...gxf3-/+] 15.Be2 gxf3 16.Bxf3 c6 17.0-0-0 Be6 18.Qxb7? [18.Qb4 a5-+] 18...Rfb8 19.Qa6 Rxb2 20.Qa5 Rab8 [20...Rxa2!-+] 21.Nb3 Rxf2 22.Rd4? [22.Rd2 Rxd2-+] 22...Nf5 23.Rd3 Nxg3 24.Rhd1 Rb5 25.Qc7 Rxa2 26.Nd4 Ra1+ 27.Kd2

Ne4+ [A better check is 27...Rb2+!-+] 28.Ke1 Rxd1+ 29.Kxd1 Nf2+ 30.Kc2 Nxd3 31.Kxd3 Bf5+ 32.Nxf5 Qxc3+ 0-1

64 – Saeed 5.Bg5 d5 6.exf6 International Master Nasser Saeed and Lev Zilbermints are two of the top players who frequently play the Englund Gambit and the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit on ICC. Both win a lot of entertaining games with their bold aggressive approach. Of course they cannot always win, especially when they play each other. Here they tangle in what resembles a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit. This Englund Gambit begins 1.d4 e5 2.dxe5 Nc6 3.Nf3. Lev's pet line is 3...Nge7!? but IM Saeed chooses the Soller Gambit (2...f6) type move with 3...f6!? Black's set-up vs 5...Bg5 is like a BDG Teichmann. Capturing on move six, unprovoked by ...h6, saves Black a tempo and makes it a BDG with colors reversed and without being down a move. Lev Zilbermints is a fast an aggressive blitz player who often excels on the Internet Chess Club. The speed of his play below challenged Black to win on the board because White would likely win on time if the decision came down to the clock. IM Nasser Saeed was up to the task. This time his pieces found better squares. Zilbermints (2071) - Saeed (2069), ICC 5 0 Internet Chess Club, 08.02.2015 begins 1.d4 e5 2.dxe5 Nc6 3.Nf3 f6!? [3...Nge7 Zilbermints] 4.exf6 Nxf6 5.Bg5 d5 6.Bxf6 [6.e3+/=] 6...Qxf6 7.c3 Be6 8.e3 0-0-0 9.Be2 Bd6 10.Nbd2 g5 11.h3 h5 12.Qa4 g4 13.hxg4 hxg4 14.Rxh8 Rxh8 15.Nd4 Nxd4 16.cxd4 [16.Qxd4! Rh1+ 17.Bf1 Qf5 18.e4=] 16...g3!? [16...Kb8-/+] 17.f3 Kb8 18.0-0-0 c6 19.Bd3 Rh2 20.Rg1 Qh6 21.Nf1 [White may be okay after 21.f4 Bg4 22.Qa5=] 21...Rh1 22.Rxh1 Qxh1 23.Qd1 Qxg2 24.Nd2 Qf2 25.Qf1 Qxe3 26.Kc2 Bf4 27.Nb3 a5 28.Qg2 a4 29.Nc5 Bc8 [After this move the clocks were at 2:33-1:28. In other words, White had used only 27 seconds and Black had used over half his time. The cautious retreat of this bishop is understandable, but he missed immediate

checkmate with 29...Qc1#!] 30.Kc3 b5 31.Kb4 Qe1+ 32.Ka3 Qa5 33.b4 Bc1+ 34.Qb2 Bxb2+ 35.Kxb2 Qxb4+ 36.Kc2 Qxd4 White resigns 0-1

65 – Stefanova 3.Nf3 Qe7 4.g3 Francesco Cavicchi sent me the following Englund Gambit Black win vs WGM Antoaneta Stefanova of Bulgaria in a simultaneous exhibition. Previously Francesco sent this note: "Blackmar-Diemer gambit fits perfectly in a white blitz repertoire, and Englund gambit (main line with 3qe7) is a good weapon vs 1d4."

Here he demonstrates the 3...Qe7 line. I used to own a copy of Stefan Bucker's excellent book on the Englund Gambit. Ken Smith and John Hall in their Englund Gambit book call Stefanova's move 4.g3: "A 'positional' approach." The notes below are by Cavicchi. Stefanova - Cavicchi, FSI Arena simul game, 18.05.2014 begins 1.d4 e5 2.dxe5 Nc6 3.Nf3 Qe7 4.g3 Nxe5 5.Bg2 Nf6 6.0-0 d6 [GM Stefan Bucker, whose book in German, even if outdated, is still a precious source for the Englund players, claims this +=] 7.Nc3 h6 8.Re1 g5 9.Nd4 Bg7 10.e4 c6 11.Nf5 Bxf5 12.exf5 g4 13.Bf4 0-0-0 14.a4 h5 15.Bg5 Qd7 16.a5 Qxf5 17.Be3 h4 18.Bxa7 hxg3 19.hxg3 Nf3+ 20.Kf1 Nxe1 21.Qxe1 Rh2 22.a6 Rxg2?! [better was 22...Rdh8!] 23.Kxg2? [23.axb7+!] 23...Qf3+ 24.Kf1 Rh8 25.Kg1 Qh1# 0-1 [Game notes by Cavicchi]

66 – Kiefer 3.Nf3 Qe7 4.Bf4 Some games I don't remember, and then, I do. When I looked at my 1993 game vs Robert W. Kiefer Jr. in the Englund Gambit, I thought, “I don't remember playing that game at all.” But when I saw his 15h move, then painful memories came back. My approach in this game with the Englund Gambit was busted. This game was played in an advanced round of the 1989 USCF Golden Knights Postal Tournament. I do not know what our ratings were then, but anyone still around four years later in an elimination event must have been playing pretty well over all. With the Englund as Black, I went from taking a break from my Dutch to getting broken. White's d-pawn travels a journey he could tell his grand kids about with d2-d4, dxe5, e6, and exd7 allowing White to pick off the b7pawn if play had continued. This was one of the last Englund Gambits that I played in postal chess. Then I decided that I would just save it for blitz games. Kiefer - Sawyer, corr USCF 1993 begins 1.d4 e5 2.dxe5 Nc6 3.Nf3 Qe7 4.Bf4 Qb4+ [Better is 4...d6 5.exd6 Qf6 6.Bc1 Bxd6 7.Nc3+/=] 5.Bd2 Qxb2 6.Nc3 Bb4 7.Rb1 Qa3 8.Rb3 Qa5 9.a3 Bxc3 10.Bxc3 Qc5 11.e3 a6 [11...Nge7] 12.Be2 Nge7 13.0-0 Ng6 [13...0-0 14.Ng5+/-] 14.Qa1 0-0 15.e6! f6? [15...fxe6 16.Bxg7 Rf7 17.Bc3+/-] 16.exd7 1-0

Book 8: Chapter 3 – Reti Opening 1.Nf3 This is the Reti Opening. Here White controls e5 but not e4.

68 – First 2015 Win 1.Nf3 Nc6 A New Year brings new games. My first win came vs the Reti Opening 1.Nf3 where I played 1...Nc6 as Black. This may look like a transpositional device, but there is a threat that my opponent missed. White got a bad position and lost quickly. This Reti intends 1.Nf3, 2.g3 and 3.Bg2 without being disturbed. 1.Nf3 prevents 1...e5. White rarely needs to concern himself with Black's e-pawn. My move order changes that. With 1...Nc6 I was ready for 2...e5 and if allowed, 3...e4. The danger of 4.Nh4 is that this knight can barely move and may be lost. All Black has to do is cover f5 by my bishop with 4...d5 and stab the horse with 5...g5. By move 22, my attack netted more material, multiple threats, better development and a lead on the clock 0:44 to 1:31. My opponent "hammers45" is listed in the "Russia" group and may be from there. I like to imagine why a player chooses a handle. Does that stand for something special? Was he born in 1945? Was he age 45 when he joined ICC? Is he a carpenter? an enforcer? or someone who likes the Soviet flag with hammer and sickle. I find these things fun to ponder. hammers45 (2007) - Sawyer (2003), ICC 3 0 u Internet Chess Club, 03.01.2015 begins 1.Nf3 Nc6 2.g3 e5 3.Bg2?! [3.d3 d5 4.Bg2= Houdini; 3.d4 e4 4.Ne5= Komodo; 3.e4 Nf6 4.Nc3= Stockfish or 4.Bg2= Fritz] 3...e4! 4.Nh4?! [4.Ng1 d5=/+] 4...d5 5.c4? [Blunder. 5.d3 g5-/+ Rybka] 5...g5 6.cxd5 Qxd5 7.Nc3 Qe5? [Black should maintain his advantage with 7...Qd4 8.0-0 gxh4 9.d3 Be6-+] 8.Bxe4 [8.f4 gxf4 9.d4 Qxd4 10.Bxf4+/=] 8...gxh4 9.f4 Qd6 10.Nb5 Qd7 11.Qa4 a6 12.Bf5 Qd8 [I thought about playing 12...Qxf5-+ but I saw no reason to complicate when ahead in material and on time.] 13.Be4 Bd7 14.Nc3 Nf6 15.Bf3 Bg7 16.Qc2 Nd4

17.Qd3 Nxf3+ 18.Qxf3 Bc6 19.e4 Qd4 20.d3 0-0-0 21.Ke2 h5 22.Be3 Qxd3+ White resigns 0-1

69 – Herrstrom Gambit 1…g5 Lev Zilbermints sent me a 1.Nf3 g5 game against Stephen Hrop. Comments, opinions and analysis are those provided to me by Lev Zilbermints. Hrop (2117) - Zilbermints, West Orange, NJ G/100, 21.06.2016 begins 1.Nf3 g5 2.Nxg5 e5 3.d3 h6 4.Nf3 Nc6 5.e4 Nf6 6.Nc3 d5 7.exd5 Nxd5 8.Bd2 Be6 9.g3 Qd7 10.Bg2 0-0-0 11.a3 Be7 [Better is 11...Rg8 followed by 12...f6, controlling the g5-square.] 12.Qe2 Bf6 13.Nxd5 Bxd5 14.0-0 [14.h4 Be6 15.Bg5 Bg4 16.Qd2 Nd4 17.Nxd4 Bf5 18.Be4 Bxe4 19.f4 Qa4 20.dxe4 c6 21.Qa5 Kb8] 14...h5 15.h4 [At the point my opponent has 48 minutes left on the clock.] 15...Be6 16.Bg5 [42 minutes left] 16...Qe7 [72 minutes left for Black] 17.Bxf6 [38 minutes] 17...Qxf6 18.Ng5 [This is why 12...f6 would have been good.] 18...Bg4 19.Qd2 [33 minutes] 19...Nd4 20.Rae1 Rhe8 [So what have we here? An unfamiliar position for a player who loves solid, positional garbage and avoids gambits. Moreover, it is an open position, something Hrop is not good at. He tends to use up a lot of time thinking, and there is still some play left for Black. Psychologically, White is at a disadvantage!] 21.Re3 Nf5 22.Re4 Nd4 23.Ree1 Qg6 [Despite being a pawn down, I maintain some pressure in the center and on the Kingside. Is it enough? You decide. Me, I think so, given the other advantages.] 24.c3?? [Hrop is trying to chase my well-placed Knight away. In so doing, he fatally weakens the d3-pawn, which now becomes a juicy target for my heavy and light pieces.] 24...Nb3!! [I had to check out some lines in order to ensure Hrop did not have the much-despised cheap shots.] 25.Qc2 Nc5 26.Re3 Bf5 27.Ne4 Bxe4 28.Bxe4? [Taking with the pawn 28.dxe4 was better, but psychologically undesirable. The Bg2 would have been shut in, hence the text move.] 28...f5! [Infantry now moves in against Hrop's defenses.] 29.Bg2 f4 30.Rf3?? [A blunder which allows me to trap the Exchange and win the game.] 30...Nxd3! 31.Qa4 e4!! [Now it is over.] 32.Rxd3 Rxd3 33.Qxa7 [Last attempt at cheap shots. No, you don't!!] 33...c6 34.Bh3+ Kc7 35.Qa5+ [10 minutes left for Hrop] 35...Kb8 36.Qg5 Qxg5 37.hxg5 fxg3 [Black infantry pierces White defenses.] 38.fxg3 [7 minutes 53 seconds left] 38...Rxg3+ 39.Kh2 Rxg5 [The g5-square is under

my control. Hrop's surrender is inevitable.] 40.Re1 e3 Resigns. 0-1 [Notes by Lev Zilbermints]

67 – Carlsen 1.Nf3 b5 2.e4 a6 Magnus Carlsen attacks a Reti Opening with 1.Nf3 b5 2.e4 a6 3.d4 Bb7. This St. George Defence may also begin with 1.e4 a6 2.d4 b5 3.Nf3 Bb7. White played against b5 on the queenside while Black activated his queenside knight. Soon White dropped the Exchange to a knight fork in the game Evgenij Miroshnichenko vs Magnus Carlsen. Miroshnichenko (2606) - Carlsen (2834), PRO League Group Stage chess.com INT (7), 24.02.2018 begins 1.Nf3 b5 2.e4 a6 3.d4 Bb7 4.Bd3 e6 5.0-0 [5.a4!?+/=] 5...c5 6.c3 Nf6 7.Re1 Be7 [7...cxd4 8.cxd4 Be7 9.Nc3+/=] 8.a4 [8.e5 Nd5 9.dxc5 Bxc5 10.Nbd2+/-] 8...cxd4 [8...c4 9.Bc2 d5 10.e5 Nfd7 11.axb5 axb5 12.Rxa8 Bxa8 13.Be3=] 9.cxd4 Nc6 10.Nc3 Nb4 11.Bf1 bxa4 12.Qxa4 0-0 13.Bg5 Bc6 14.Qa5 Nc2 15.Qxd8 Rfxd8 16.d5 Bb7 17.Rac1 Nxe1 18.Rxe1 h6 19.Bh4 Bb4 0-1

71 – Baffo 1.Nf3 f5 2.d3 d6 Jeffrey Baffo provided me with a dozen examples of solid play in a variety of openings. Something is very strange in this game. I won! We started with a Reti Opening which transposed to the English Opening on move six. Black selected the Dutch Defence set-up with 1...f5. On move 17 White's bishop goes into the corner. The game ends with a tactical flourish and a very nice attack on my part. For some reason I seem to score better when the position turns to wide open tactics. I believe our 12 games were played simultaneously. Baffo (2254) - Sawyer (1999), corr USCF 95P139, 27.03.1996 begins 1.Nf3 f5 2.d3 d6 3.g3 Nf6 4.Bg2 g6 5.0-0 Bg7 6.c4 0-0 7.Nc3 e5 8.Rb1 a5 9.Bg5 [Far more popular is 9.a3 Nc6 10.b4 axb4 11.axb4=] 9...h6 10.Bd2 g5 11.e4 f4 12.Qb3 Kh7 [Nowadays I would be very tempted to play 12...g4 13.Nh4 f3=/+ hoping to drive the bishop into the corner, something that I do accomplish later.] 13.gxf4 exf4 14.Nd5? [White actually makes a rare correspondence chess mistake. 14.Nd4!=] 14...Nxd5 15.cxd5 g4 16.Ne1 f3 17.Bh1 Be5 18.Bc3 Bxh2+ 19.Kxh2 Qh4+ 20.Kg1 g3 21.fxg3 Qxg3+ 22.Bg2 f2+ 23.Rxf2 Qxf2+ 24.Kh1 Rf4 25.Nf3 Bh3 0-1

70 – Schultz 1.Nf3 f5 2.g3 Nf6 Sgt. Schultz of “Hogan's Heroes” was one of the most lovable actors on television when I began playing chess. In 1938 John Banner of Vienna fled Adolf Hitler's National Socialism (German: “nationalsozialismus” or “Nazi” for short.) movement just prior to World War II. IMBd notes John Banner “survived the war playing the very villains who were murdering his family who had been left behind in Austria, all of whom perished in concentration camps.” In real life, my own uncle was in a German Prisoner Of War camp. Our family heard nothing from him for much of the war, but my Uncle John did survive and returned home to enjoy the family reunion of Christmas 1945. War is hell, but people need to laugh. Twenty years after the war the Hogan's Heroes comedy was a huge hit. John Banner played Sergeant Hans Georg Schultz, a German soldier at the Stalag 13 prison. Schultz constantly found himself caught in the middle between his natural friendship toward prisoners and his need to follow orders from Nazi commanders. The 168 episodes provide Sgt. Schultz uttering many classic quotes, especially his “I see nothing” and “I know nothing” lines. My opponent in this game is Roger Schultz. I imagine that there is no connection whatsoever to the mythical TV sergeant. I met Roger Schultz in the 1989 USCF Golden Knights Postal Chess Tournament Semi-Finals, which means we both played well enough in earlier six game events to qualify. Roger Schultz chose the Reti-Opening with 1.Nf3. White played this game without an early d4 or c4. My response was the Dutch Defence. Our brief war ended peacefully. Schultz (1895) - Sawyer (2020), corr USCF 89NS53, 10.03.1992 begins 1.Nf3 f5 2.g3 Nf6 3.d3 d6 4.Nbd2 e5 5.Bg2 Nc6 6.0-0 Be7 7.b3 0-0 8.Bb2 Qe8 9.Re1 Qh5 10.e3 Be6 [10...Bd7=] 11.c4 Rae8?! 12.d4 e4 13.d5 exf3 14.Nxf3 Bd7 15.dxc6 bxc6 16.Nd4 c5 [It was safer for Black to play

16...Qxd1 17.Raxd1 Ne4=] 17.Qxh5 Nxh5 18.Nc6 Bxc6 19.Bxc6 Rb8 20.e4 fxe4 21.Rxe4 Bf6 22.Bxf6 Nxf6 23.Re7 Rf7 24.Rae1 Rbf8 1/2-1/2

72 – Fontinha 2.e4 fxe4 3.Ng5 Ray Haines wins a Reti Dutch Defence Lisitzin. Haines writes: “This is game three of my last tournament. I have played Richard in the past. He and his wife moved here from out of state a few years ago. He was a strong postal player in the past. He has not played for two years in our tournaments, but we were happy to have him back for this event.” “I choose to play a Dutch Defense against him because of his move order. He chose to play a well-known gambit line. I again chose to play quickly to avoid time trouble. I missed the win of a pawn on move 20. I needed to play knight takes knight and would have picked up a pawn with a good game for me. He missed some better lines also and resulted in me winning.” “I will not be able to play any more events for a few months, so I plan to work on tactics to help improve my play. I also plan on working with students to teach them how to play.” Ray Haines develops a nice attack against Richard Fontinha. Both sides had chances. In this game Black made the best of his chances in the end. Fontinha - Haines, Houlton, ME (3), 19.09.2015 begins 1.Nf3 f5 2.e4 fxe4 3.Ng5 Nf6 [The alternative is 3...d5 4.d3 Nf6 5.dxe4 h6 6.Nf3 dxe4=] 4.d3 e5 [4...d5!] 5.dxe4 h6 6.Nh3 Nc6 [6...Bc5=/+] 7.Nd2 d6 [7...d5!=/+] 8.Be2 Be6 9.c3 Qd7 10.Ng1 Be7 11.Ngf3 0-0 12.Qc2 d5 13.Bb5 Bd6 14.0-0 Qf7 15.c4 Qg6 [15...Nb4-+] 16.Bxc6 bxc6 17.c5 Be7 18.Nxe5 Qh5 19.f4 [19.Nxc6+-] 19...dxe4 20.Nxe4 [20.b4=] 20...Bd5 [20...Nxe4-/+] 21.Nxf6+ [21.Ng3+-] 21...Rxf6 [21...Bxf6!=] 22.Be3 Re6 23.Bd4 Bf6 24.Rae1 Rae8 25.b3 [25.Re3!+-] 25...g5 26.g3? [26.Qf5=] 26...gxf4 27.gxf4 Bxe5 28.Rxe5 Qg4+ 29.Kf2 Qxf4+ 30.Ke1 Rxe5+ 31.Bxe5 Rxe5+ 32.Qe2 Qc1+ 33.Kf2 Qxc5+ 34.Ke1 Qc3+ 35.Kd1 Bxb3+ 36.axb3 Rd5+ 37.Qd3 Rxd3+ 38.Ke2 Qd2# 0-1

73 – Ofstad 2.e4 fxe4 3.Ng5 e5 Per Ofstad was born in 1934. Ofstad won the Norwegian Chess Championship in 1961. He had a long career with many games against notable grandmasters. Probably his most famous was a brilliancy that Ofstad won as White against Wolfgang Uhlmann in a French Defence Tarrasch Variation at Halle in 1963. Writing for the Huffington Post in 2013, Grandmaster Lubomir Kavalek called Per Ofstad “a talented attacker with a plethora of wild ideas”. Kavalek noted that he used one of Ofstad’s ideas to win vs Khodos in 1965. Per Ofstad played a Reti Lisitzin Gambit against me. This time I came up with my own “wild idea” in the novelty 6…Bc5!? The notes include another game against Otis Johnson, Jr. (“OJ”). Ofstad - Sawyer, corr ICCF, 1982 begins 1.Nf3 f5 2.e4 fxe4 3.Ng5 e5 4.d3 e3 [4...Nf6 5.dxe4 c6 6.Nc3 Bb4=] 5.Bxe3 Nc6 [5...d5 6.d4 exd4 7.Qxd4 Nc6 8.Qd3=] 6.c4 [6.g3 Nf6 7.Bg2 d5 8.c4 dxc4 9.Qa4 Bb4+ (9...h6! 10.Bxc6+ bxc6 11.Ne4 cxd3 12.Qxc6+ Bd7 13.Nxf6+ gxf6 14.Qe4 Kf7=) 10.Nc3 Bxc3+ 11.bxc3 Bd7? (11...h6=) 12.Qxc4 Qe7 13.Rb1 (13.Bc5!+wins at least a piece immediately.) 13...Ng4 14.Bd2+/- and 1-0 in 32. Johnson - Sawyer, corr APCT 1982] 6...Bc5!? [Here I dreamed up this original move. Even now 30 years later I have never seen anyone else play it. More normal would be 6...Nf6 7.Nc3 Nd4=] 7.Bxc5 Qxg5 8.Nc3 d6 [8...Nf6 9.Nb5 Kd8=] 9.Be3 Qg6 10.Be2 Nf6 [I did not dare play 10...Qxg2! 11.Bf3 Qh3 12.Rg1 g6 13.Nd5 Qd7= but maybe I should have played this.] 11.Nd5 Qf7 12.Nxf6+ Qxf6 13.0-0 0-0 14.Bf3 Nd4 15.Bxd4 exd4 16.b4 [16.Qb3!?] 16...c5 17.Rb1 Rb8 18.Be4 b6 19.Qh5 g6 [19...Bf5 20.Bxf5 Qxf5 21.Qxf5 Rxf5 22.Rfe1 cxb4 23.Rxb4 Kf7=] 20.Qh6 Bb7 21.f3 Rfd8 22.bxc5 dxc5 23.Rbe1 Rd7 24.Re2 Rf8 25.Rfe1 Qg7 [25...Qf4 26.Qh3+/=] 26.Qg5 Qf6 27.Qxf6 Rxf6 28.Bxb7 Rxb7 29.a4 Kf7 30.Re5 Rc6 31.Kf2 Rcc7 32.f4 Kg7 [I did not dare to swap rooks because after 32...Re7 33.Rxe7+ Rxe7 34.Rxe7+ Kxe7 35.g4+/- this materially equal pawn ending is probably a win for White.] 33.g4 Rf7 34.Kf3 Rbc7 35.h4 Rb7 36.h5 Rbc7 37.f5 gxf5 38.g5 Rc6 [38...Rf8 39.Kf4 Kf7 40.a5+/-]

39.Kf4 Rc8 40.Re8 Rxe8 41.Rxe8 Rb7 [Or 41...h6 42.g6 Rb7 43.Kxf5+-] 42.h6+ Kf7 43.Rh8 Ke6 44.g6 1-0

74 – Zilka 1.Nf3 c5 2.g3 Nc6 Black has a free hand in the center if White does not quickly push a pawn two squares. The Kings Indian Defence 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.e4 d6 mirrors this Reti Opening after 1.Nf3 c5 2.g3 Nc6 3.Bg2 e5 4.d3 d5. The King's Indian Attack gives White an extra move, but Black's space advantage equalizes. White missed interesting tries on moves 16 and 26 and then fell for a mate in the game Pavel Chrz vs Stephan Zilka. Chrz (2032) - Zilka (2517), 29th Czech Rapid G1 2018 Pardubice CZE (2.34), 18.07.2018 begins 1.Nf3 c5 2.g3 Nc6 3.Bg2 e5 4.d3 d5 5.c4 [5.0-0 Nf6 6.Nbd2 Be7 7.e4=] 5...dxc4 6.Qa4 Bd7 7.Qxc4 Be6 [7...h6!?=] 8.Qa4 Qd7 9.Nc3 h6 [9...f6 10.Be3 Rc8 11.Nd2+/=] 10.Be3 Nf6 11.Rc1 Rc8 12.Nd2 Nd5 13.Nxd5 Bxd5 14.Bxd5 Qxd5 15.0-0 Be7 [15...Rc7 16.f4!? +/=] 16.Ne4 [16.Qg4! 0-0 (or 16...Kd8 17.Qxg7+/-) 17.Bxh6+/-] 16...b6 17.Rc2 0-0 18.a3 Na5 19.b4 cxb4 20.Rxc8 Rxc8 21.axb4 Nc6 22.Rc1 Bxb4 23.Rxc6 Rxc6 24.Qxb4 a5 25.Qe7 [25.Qa3=] 25...f5!? [25...Qe6=/+] 26.Nd2? [26.Bxh6 gxh6 27.Nf6+ Rxf6 28.Qxf6+/=] 26...Rc1+ 27.Nf1 Rxf1+ 0-1

75 – Potapov 1.Nf3 Nf6 2.g3 d5 Reti Opening may transpose into the King's Indian Attack. The same opening variation can be reached via the Sicilian Defence after a move order such as 1.e4 c5 2.d3 e6 3.Nd2 d5 4.Ngf3 Nc6 5.g3 Be7 6.Bg2 Nf6 7.0-0 or via a French Defence after 1.e4 e6 2.d3 d5 3.Nd2 c5 4.Ngf3 etc. In the game Alexander Potapov vs Pekka Koykka, White outplayed his opponent on obtained an extra passed protected c5 pawn. Potapov (2500) - Koykka (2382), 29th Czech Open A 2018 Pardubice CZE (6.22), 25.07.2018 begins 1.Nf3 Nf6 2.g3 d5 3.Bg2 e6 4.0-0 Be7 5.d3 c5 6.Nbd2 Nc6 7.e4 b5 8.exd5 exd5 9.d4 c4 [9...0-0 10.dxc5 Bxc5 11.Nb3 Bb6 12.Nbd4=] 10.a4 Ba6 11.Ne5 Na5 12.axb5 Bxb5 13.Nb1 Bb4 14.Bd2 c3 15.bxc3 Be7 16.Re1 Nc4 17.Nxc4 Bxc4 18.Na3 Ba6 19.c4 0-0 20.c5 Rb8 [20...Ne4 21.c4+-] 21.Nb1 White wins the a7 pawn after Black moves the Ba6 out of the way. White has two extra c-pawns and a big advantage. 1-0

1.Nf3 d5 The Reti Opening main line. Since e5 is covered, Black takes d5.

76 – Bond 2.b3 Nf6 3.Bb2 c6 Jocelyn Bond sent me a game from Canada in the Reti Opening: “Hi Tim, …I faced Alain Couture, an excellent chess player. He's difficult to beat him. Remember 30 minutes to mate per game. In our first game, I won easily after 1.d4 c5 2.d5 e5 3.Nc3 etc. but in the second game, as black, I won with much difficulties. With 1 minute less each one, he blundered a minor piece (34.Be5??) and after that I was lucky to win...” Couture (1800) - Bond (1957), Jonquiere ch (10), 25.07.2012 begins 1.Nf3 Nf6 2.b3 d5 3.Bb2 c6 4.Ne5 Bf5 5.f4 (hmm, a Bird) 5...e6 6.e3 Nbd7 7.Be2 Ne4 [7...Nxe5 8.fxe5 Ne4 9.0-0=/+] 8.0-0 [8.Nf3=] 8...f6 [8...Nxe5!? 9.fxe5 Bc5=/+] 9.Nf3 [9.Bh5+ g6 10.Nxd7 Qxd7+/=] 9...Qb6!? [Inspired by Dutch Leningrad b3 variation] 10.Nc3 Ndc5 [For the next moves, I took much time. 10...Nxc3 11.Bxc3 Bc5 12.Nd4= is similar to that I played later.] 11.Nd4 Nxc3 12.Bxc3 Ne4 13.Bb2 Bc5 14.Kh1 [14.Bh5+ g6 15.Bf3 0-0-0+/=] 14...Bxd4 15.Bxd4 c5 16.Bb2 h5 [A pawn sacrifice. The quiet line is 16...0-0 17.d3 Nd6 18.Qe1=] 17.a4 [An interesting surprise - 17.d3!? Nd6 18.Bxh5+ Kd7 19.Bf3+/-] 17...h4= 18.a5 Qc6 19.d3 Nd6 20.Bh5+ Ke7 21.Qe2 h3 22.g3 [22.gxh3=] 22...Raf8 [22...c4!?=] 23.Bf3+/= [an annoying pin] 23...Rhg8 [23...Qb5+/-] 24.c4 g5 25.cxd5 exd5 26.Kg1 Kd7 27.Rac1 gxf4 [Here and before Deep fritz gives a g4 as best alternative. I am skeptical.] 28.exf4+/- Re8 29.Qf2 b6 30.axb6 [30.Rfd1+/-] 30...axb6 31.Rfd1 Bg4 32.Bxf6 [Not the best. 32.Bxg4+!? Rxg4 33.Qf1+/- the pressure is high as white] 32...Bxf3 33.Qxf3 Rgf8 [What to say about 33...Nf5 34.Be5 d4 35.Qxc6+ Kxc6+/=?] 34.Be5?? [white is cracking. 34.Qg4+ at first and 34... .Kc7 35.Be5+-] 34...Rxe5 [Deviation: f4] 35.Qg4+ [35.fxe5 Rxf3] 35...Re6 [rook removes the check and wins the bishop] 36.Re1 Rfe8 [Better is 36...Nf5!? 37.Qxh3 Qd6!?] 37.Rxe6 Rxe6 and the rest of the game has been unwritten 0–1. The game was over after a

mate on f1 by the black queen helped by a rook on the f file. [Notes by Bond and Deep Fritz] 0-1

77 – Tari 2.b3 Bg4 3.Bb2 Bxf3 Black wins against this Reti Opening turned Larsen Opening with a surprise final move. White's king stayed too long in the center after 1.Nf3 d5 2.b3 Bg4. In the game between Jonathan Tisdall and Aryan Tari, Black placed a rook en prise that cut off communication between the White pieces. Black won instantly. Tisdall (2402) - Tari (2603), Team Ch-NOR Club 2018 Bergen, 13.05.2018 begins 1.Nf3 d5 2.b3 Bg4 3.Bb2 Bxf3 4.gxf3 Nf6 5.e3 Nbd7 6.c4 c6 7.f4 g6 8.Qc2 Bg7 9.h4 0-0 10.Be2 b5 [10...Ne4=] 11.h5 bxc4 12.f5!? [12.hxg6 fxg6 13.bxc4=] 12...Ne4 13.Bxg7 Kxg7 14.bxc4 e5 15.Nc3 gxf5 16.cxd5 cxd5 17.Nxd5 Rc8 18.Qb2 Rc5 19.h6+ Kh8 20.Nf4 [20.Nc3=] 20...Qa5 21.Rb1 Rfc8 22.Bd3? [22.Nd3 Rc2-/+] 22...Rc2! 0-1

78 – Nakamura 2.b3 Nf6 4.g3 Hikaru Nakamura employed a Double Fianchetto vs the classical opening of Vladimir Kramnik. White's Reti Opening 1.Nf3 kept Black from easily placing pawns on e5 and d5. Nakamura followed up with 2.b3, 3.Bb2, and 4.g3, Bg2. Kramnik was free to play almost anything. Black chose Nf6, d5, e6, Be7, and c5. After the players castled, White began to pry open the center. Right when it looked like Black might pick off a pawn, White won a piece by threatening to capture either rook with the surprise move 18.Be5! Nakamura (2769) - Kramnik (2792), GCT Blitz Paris 2018 Paris FRA (14.1), 24.06.2018 begins 1.Nf3 Nf6 2.b3 d5 3.Bb2 e6 4.g3 Be7 5.Bg2 0-0 6.0-0 c5 7.d4 [7.e3=] 7...Nc6 8.e3 b6 [8...cxd4 9.Nxd4 Nxd4 10.Qxd4=] 9.c4 Ba6 10.Ne5 Rc8 11.Nd2 cxd4 12.Nxc6 Rxc6 13.Bxd4 Rc7 14.Qe2 Bb4 15.Rfd1 Qe7 16.a3 [16.Be5 Rcc8=] 16...Bxd2 [16...Bd6 17.Bb2 Rfc8 18.e4=] 17.Qxd2 dxc4 18.Be5! Rd7? [18...c3 19.Qc2+/=] 19.Bxf6 1-0

79 – Donchenko 2.g3 c6 3.Bg2 Bg4 White wins in a Reti Opening 1.Nf3 with a forcing zwischenzug, or an inbetween move. After move 19, Black is a pawn up. All of a sudden, White pulls off a surprising idea that picks off a bishop in Alexander Donchenko vs the chess problemist Arno Zude. Donchenko (2559) - Zude (2370), Bundesliga 2017-18 Hofheim GER, 11.03.2018 begins 1.Nf3 d5 2.g3 c6 3.Bg2 Bg4 4.c4 e6 5.h3 Bh5 [5...Bxf3 6.Bxf3 dxc4=] 6.0-0 [Maybe 6.Qb3!?] 6...Nd7 [6...dxc4 7.a4=] 7.cxd5 cxd5 8.Nc3 Ngf6 9.d3 Bc5 [9...Be7=] 10.e4 [10.Bf4!?] 10...Nb6 11.g4 Bg6 12.Ne5 dxe4 13.dxe4 Nfd7 14.Nd3 Be7 15.f4 [15.Qb3+/=] 15...f6 16.Be3 0-0 17.Qb3 Bf7 18.e5 Nxe5? [18...fxe5 19.Nxe5 Nxe5 20.fxe5 Rc8=] 19.fxe5 Qxd3 20.Nd5! 1-0

80 – Aronian 2…Nf6 3.Bg2 Bf5 The London System vs the Kings Indian Defence remains popular among many chess players after 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3 g6 3.Bf4. Since it works for White, Black has good chances against the Reti Opening after 1.Nf3 d5 2.g3 Nf6 3.Bg2 Bf5. The bishop can retreat to h7 when necessary to flee the dangers of e4. Black outplayed his opponent in this speed chess blitz game between Fabiano Caruana and Levon Aronian. Caruana (2822) - Aronian (2767), chess.com Speed 3m+1spm 2017 chess.com INT (15), 24.07.2018 begins 1.Nf3 d5 2.g3 Nf6 3.Bg2 Bf5 4.0-0 e6 5.b3 Be7 6.Bb2 0-0 7.d3 c5 8.Nbd2 h6 9.Re1 Nc6 10.e4 Bh7 11.Ne5 [11.exd5 exd5 12.Ne5=] 11...Nxe5 12.Bxe5 Nd7 13.Bb2 Bf6 [13...d4=] 14.Bxf6 Nxf6 15.e5 Nd7 16.h4 Qa5 17.Nf1 Qc3 18.Qe2 Nb8 19.Nh2 Nc6 20.Rac1 Nd4 21.Qd1 b5 22.Ng4 [22.Nf1 a5=/+] 22...b4 23.Re3 a5 24.Kh2 [24.Re1 a4-/+] 24...a4 [24...h5-+] 25.h5 [25.Re1 Qb2-+] 25...axb3 26.cxb3 Qb2 27.Rxc5 Rxa2 28.Rc7 [28.Rc1 Bf5-+] 28...Bf5 0-1

81 – Muir 2.g3 Nf6 3.Bg2 g6 The Disney movie “Planes, Fire & Rescue” has an old steam locomotive named Muir who works at Piston Peak National Park. It reminded me of Bob Muir who played the Reti Opening. This move 1.Nf3 can transpose to the English Opening after an early c4 or to a Queen Pawn Game after an early d4. Bob Muir plays 2.d3 and 5.c3 which are unique to the Reti. White may play for a King's Indian Attack with moves like 7.Nbd2 and 8.e4. Bob Muir chose to go his own way. This worked well for him as he got the better position. When is it appropriate to offer a draw? In polite tournament chess play, if one player is much higher rated, then the much lower rated player should not offer a draw. Of course some players are ignorant of good manners. Other players intentionally want to be rude. I don’t recommend that. In online blitz, frequent draw offers come from weak players who are afraid of losing, but they are routinely and easily ignored. If I am the higher rated, I may offer a draw when I stand worse. Below, my old friend's reaction to my draw offer was to try to force a quick win which turned out to be a blunder. So I won. Muir (1800) - Sawyer (2010), Williamsport, PA, 24.04.2001 begins 1.Nf3 Nf6 2.d3 d5 3.g3 g6 4.Bg2 Bg7 5.c3 0-0 6.0-0 c5 7.Bf4 Nc6 8.a3 Nh5 [8...Re8=/+] 9.Bd2 e5 10.Qc2 h6 11.b4 cxb4 [My original intention of 11...b6 was better. But then I got a bright idea which at first I thought would win a Pawn, but obviously I miscalculated.] 12.axb4 Nxb4 13.cxb4 e4 14.Bc3 exf3 15.Bxf3 Nf6?! [15...Be6] 16.Nd2 Bh3 17.Rfc1 Qd7? 18.Qb2

Ne8 19.Bxg7 Nxg7 20.Qe5 Rfe8 [Black offers a draw here, before White realizes his advantage. White reacts to my offer with a blunder.] 21.Rc7? [21.Qc7 Rac8 22.Qxd7 Rxc1+ 23.Rxc1 Bxd7 24.Nb3+/=] 21...Rxe5 22.Rxd7 Bxd7 0-1

82 – Sawyer 2…Nc6 3.Bg2 Bg4 The Reti Opening 1.Nf3 gives White many options to transpose into good lines with a timely pawn advance such as 1.c4, 1.d4 or even 1.e4, depending on how Black sets up. The only way White can get an opening advantage is to fight for the center early. In this game, White holds back any big pawn advance until move 10, thus Black has complete freedom to develop any way he wishes. Three days before against this same "vargold" I had White in the weak Blackmar-Diemer Gambit Declined Variation 4.f3 e5? He fell for the standard trap that left Black down two pawns, but he outplayed me in the blitz that followed. I blundered and lost. In one way, this game was my revenge, except that I forgot that he was the one that I had played before! Thus I was not thinking about revenge, only winning. Indeed here with slow White development, I win a pawn by move 16. When White's flag falls, he was in a position where he had to give up his last piece to stop me from immediately queening. vargold (1933) - Sawyer (2021), ICC 5 0 u Internet Chess Club, 06.07.2013 begins 1.Nf3 d5 2.g3 Nc6 3.Bg2 Bg4 4.d3 Nf6 5.Nbd2 Qd7 6.h3 Bf5 7.Nh4 Be6 8.c3 g6 9.Qc2 Bg7 10.e4 dxe4 11.Nxe4 Nxe4 12.dxe4 0-0-0 [At this point you will note that White has only two minor pieces developed and has not castled.] 13.Be3 Ne5 14.Rd1 Qxd1+ [Briefly I considered 14...Nd3+! but I did not look ahead to 15.Kf1 Qb5-+] 15.Qxd1 Rxd1+ 16.Kxd1 Bxa2 [Black has won a pawn.] 17.Kc2 Bc4 18.Rd1 Rd8 19.Bd4 f6 20.b3 Ba6 21.f4 Nc6 22.Nf3 e5 23.fxe5 Nxe5 24.Bxe5 Rxd1 25.Kxd1 fxe5 26.Ng5 h6 27.Ne6 Bf6 28.h4 Be7 29.c4 b6 30.Bh3 Kb8 31.Ng7 Bc8 32.Bxc8 Kxc8 33.h5 gxh5 34.Nxh5 Kd7 35.Ke2 Ke6 36.Kd3 [Clocks: 0:50-2:01. If 36.Ng7+ Kf7 37.Nf5 Bf8 38.Ne3 c6-/+] 36...a5 37.Ng7+ Kf6 38.Nf5 Bf8 39.Ne3 Kg5 40.Ke2 c6 41.Kf3 b5 42.cxb5 cxb5 43.Ng4 [43.Nd5 a4 44.bxa4 bxa4 45.Nc3 a3-+ would have required just a

little more technique on my part.] 43...Bd6 44.Ne3 a4 45.bxa4 bxa4 46.Nc4 a3 White forfeits on time 0-1

83 – Sawyer 3.c4 d4 4.Nf3 f6 Bold and not bald. I'm blessed to still have lots of brown hair. When I was in high school, the Cowsills recorded the song “Hair” (though they replaced “God” with “I”.). I prefer to give God credit for growing my hair. When I started playing chess, my hair was so long that I could reach around and grab it in the back. Now my hair is so short that it all sticks up. I never need a comb! “Hair raising” implies an encounter where you barely escape death. In chess, it means you barely escape being checkmated. My opponent "fallavena" adopted the Reti Opening. He got a strong attack with pieces swarming around my king like bullets flying past my hair. White came very close to winning, but he missed by a frog hair. The opening became a Pirc Defence 150 Attack in reverse where I was able to advance my Black d-pawn to d4. We castled opposite sides. I attacked his g3 formation when I played ...h5-h4xg3. Both of us tried to attack too fast when one defensive pawn move would have greatly delayed the opponent. I did not want to move any queenside pawns, hoping my opponent would run out of time before he found a mate. Either 12...b6 or 14...b6 would have been wiser. White could have responded to my 21...hxg3 by 22.fxg3 with winning chances. Instead of defending, White beat me to b6 with his own pawn push. This allowed me as Black to force mate in five with all checks. Won by a whisker! fallavena (1762) - Sawyer (1955), ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 16.03.2014 begins 1.g3 Nc6 2.Bg2 d5 3.c4 d4 4.Nf3 f6 5.d3 e5 6.0-0 Be6 7.a3 Qd7 8.b4 0-0-0!? 9.Qa4 Kb8 10.b5 Nce7 11.Nbd2 g5 [11...h5! is faster.] 12.Nb3 Ng6? [Black should defend with 12...b6 13.Bd2+/=] 13.Bd2 h5? [13...Bh3!= is correct.] 14.Bb4 [14.Na5!+-] 14...Bh3?! [Better is to slow down White's attack first with 14...b6 15.Nfd2 and then 15...Bh3 16.Bc6 Qe6 17.Rfb1 h4 with winning chances for both sides.] 15.c5 [15.Bc5! b6 16.Qa6 Qc8 17.Bxh3+/-] 15...Bxg2 16.Kxg2 h4 17.c6 Qc8 [Wrong direction. 17...Qg4!=] 18.cxb7 Qd7 19.Nc5 Qf5 20.Na6+ Kxb7 21.Nxc7 [21.Rfc1!+-] 21...hxg3 22.Qa6+ [22.fxg3+-] 22...Kb8 23.b6?

[White's last winning choice was 23.fxg3!+-] 23...Nf4+ 24.Kh1 g2+ 25.Kg1 Nxe2+ 26.Kxg2 Qg4+ 27.Kh1 Qxf3# White is checkmated 0-1

Book 8: Chapter 4 – English Opening 1.c4 The English Opening was often played by the English Master Howard Staunton. We begin with rare Black defensive lines to the English Opening.

84 – Calvanico 1…g5 2.d4 Bg7 From time to time life got in the way of my chess play. Due to some family issues in the mid-1980s, I had quit playing chess while I worked on other things. Eventually I found the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit. By 1987 I planned a return to correspondence play. I entertained myself with wild unorthodox offbeat gambits. In 1988 I entered one section of the USCF Golden Knights Postal Chess Tournament. My first opponent was Sal Calvanico. My opponent was rated 2007 and I was rated 2124. Calvanico tried the English Opening. I chose the Hugh E. Myers Defence reply 1.c4 g5!? Of course back in 1988 there were no strong computers to show a human how White might get some type of advantage in such a position. We were on our own. After move 35 Sal Calvanico wrote to me: “I realized after I mailed the move how awful 35.Qa5 was; should have played 35.Qe3= with some chances to trade down and draw. Good luck in your next round. Regards, Sal” Calvanico - Sawyer, corr USCF 88N12 1988 begins 1.c4 g5!? 2.d4 Bg7 3.Bxg5 c5 4.Nf3 Qb6 [4...cxd4 5.Nxd4 Qb6 6.Nb5 a6 7.Be3 Qa5+ 8.N5c3+/=] 5.Nc3 Nc6 6.Nd5 Qa5+ 7.Bd2 [7.Qd2!+-] 7...Qd8 8.Bf4 Kf8 9.Bc7 Qe8 10.Bg3 Qd8 11.e3 b6 12.Bc7 Qe8 13.Bxb6? [13.Bf4+-] 13...axb6 14.Nc7 Qd8 15.Nxa8 Bb7 16.Be2 cxd4 17.exd4 Qxa8 18.0-0 h5 19.a3? Nh6 [19...Rh6!=] 20.Rb1 Ng4 21.h3? [21.d5 Nce5=] 21...Qb8 22.g3 Ne3 23.Qd2 Nxf1 24.Bxf1 Qd6 25.d5 Ne5 26.Nxe5 Qxe5 27.Qb4

Qd4 28.Re1 Be5 29.Rxe5 Qxe5 30.Qxb6 Kg7? [30...Bc8!-+] 31.Qxb7 Rb8 32.Qxd7 Rxb2 33.Qa7 Ra2 34.a4 Ra1 35.Qa5? Rd1 0-1

85 – Scheerer 1…Nc6 2.g3 d5 In 2007 Christoph Wisnewski wrote one of my favorite books on the Queens Knight Defence called “Play 1…Nc6!: a complete chess opening repertoire for Black.” In 2011 Christoph Scheerer wrote one of my favorite books on “The Blackmar-Diemer Gambit: a modern guide to a fascinating chess opening.” This game was played when Christoph still used the last name of Wisnewski. I believe he changed it to Scheerer when he married. International Master Christoph Scheerer played 1…Nc6 with the basic intention of following it up when feasible with 2…d5. Here Christian Laqua played the English Opening. Clearly the move 1… Nc6 is easy to play against such an opening. Laqua - Scheerer, Bundesliga 2006 begins 1.c4 Nc6 2.g3 [Other options include 2.Nc3 e5 3.g3 Bc5 4.Bg2 d6 5.e3 Bf5=; 2.Nf3 e5 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.e3 Bb4 5.Qc2 Bxc3 6.Qxc3 Qe7=] 2...d5 3.cxd5 Qxd5 4.Nf3 Nf6 5.Nc3 Qh5 6.d3 Bh3 7.Bxh3 Qxh3 8.Qb3 0-0-0 9.Be3 [9.Qxf7 e6-/+] 9...e6 10.Ng5 Qh5 11.Qa4 Nd5 12.g4 Qg6 13.h4 [13.Qe4 Qxe4 14.Ngxe4 Be7=] 13...Nxe3 14.fxe3 h6 15.Nf3 Bc5 16.Kd2 f5 17.Rhg1 Qf6 18.g5 hxg5 19.Rxg5 Ne5 20.Rf1 Ng4 21.Nd1 [21.Rxg4 fxg4 22.Qxg4 Rd7=/+] 21...Rxh4 22.Qc4 [22.Rg1 Kb8 23.Rxg7 Qxg7 24.Nxh4 Qe7-/+] 22...Nxe3 23.Qxh4 Nxf1+ 24.Ke1 Ne3 25.Nc3 Bb4 26.Kd2 Nd5 27.Qc4 Rd6 28.e4 fxe4 [Or 28...Rc6-+ ] 29.Qxe4 Nxc3 30.bxc3 Qxc3+ 31.Ke2 Qc2+ 32.Ke3 Bc5+ 33.Kf4 Qf2 34.Rxg7 Rd4 35.Rg8+ Kd7 36.Rg7+ Ke8 37.Rxc7 0-1

86 – Sawyer 1.c4 d5 2.Qc2 There is a thematic trap of the queen in many openings went she captures a knight pawn on b2 or b7 or g2 or g7. She can check out but she can never leave and never survive. All the dying queen can do it to take someone with her. Typically this queen will give herself up for a rook. The trap is found in many tactical exercises. Below is an example from an English Opening, but the idea is repeatable somehow from almost any opening. The game ends with a cute little bank rank mate in two moves. JackBach - Sawyer, ICC 3 3 Internet Chess Club, 08.08.2012 begins 1.c4 d5 2.Qc2 [2.cxd5! Qxd5 3.Nc3 is the critical line, but JackBach seems to choose its opening moves completely at random.] 2...dxc4 3.Qxc4 Nc6 4.e4 e5 5.Nc3 Be6 6.Nd5 Nge7 7.Qb3 Nxd5 8.exd5 Bxd5 9.Qxb7 a6 10.Rb1 [10.Bc4 Bxg2-+] 10...Ra7 [Also good is 10...Nd4!-+] 11.Bxa6 Rxb7 12.Bxb7 Nb4 13.Bxd5 Qxd5 14.Ne2 Qe4 15.d3 Qxd3 16.a3 Nc2+ 17.Kf1 Qd1# White checkmated 0-1

87 – Karpov 1.c4 d5 2.cxd5 Gambits tend to be riskier for the second player because Black lags behind a half move in development. White handled an English Opening logically when Black chose a gambit on move two with 1.c4 d5. Anatoly Karpov wins easily in this game vs Tatiana Gutknecht. Karpov (2670) - Gutknecht, ch-Euro Blitz Ajaccio FRA (1), 25.10.2007 begins 1.c4 d5 2.cxd5 e6 [2...c6 3.dxc6 Nxc6 4.Nc3 e5 5.e3 Nf6 6.Nf3 Bd6 7.d4 exd4 8.exd4 0-0 9.Be2 Re8 10.0-0 h6 11.Be3+/=; 2...Qxd5 3.Nc3 is the critical line.] 3.dxe6 fxe6?! [3...Bxe6 4.Nc3 c5 5.d3 Nf6 6.g3 Nc6 7.Nh3+/=] 4.Nc3 c6 5.Nf3 b6 6.d4 g6 7.g3 [Or 7.e4 Bg7 8.Qb3 Nh6 9.Bc4+-] 7...a6 8.Bg2 Nd7 [Black finally develops a piece. If 8...Ne7 9.Qb3+-] 9.Ng5 Bd6 10.Bxc6 a5 11.Nxe6 b5 12.Bxa8 Bb7 13.Bxb7 g5 14.Nxb5 Ngf6 15.Nxd6+ Ke7 16.Nxd8 Kxd8 17.Nf7+ Kc7 18.Bg2 Rf8 19.Nxg5 Rg8 20.Qc2+ Kd8 21.Bf4 Rxg5 22.Bxg5 h6 23.Bxf6+ Nxf6 24.Qc6 Ke7 25.Rd1 Kf8 26.Qc8+ 1-0

88 – Michi 2…Qxd5 3.Nc3 Qd8 Black can play any first move vs the English Opening. The move 1…d5!? may cost Black some tempi, but it makes White think more on his own. Any aspect of the game that gains time on the clock is a bonus in blitz. The blessing and curse of the English Opening is its flexibility. White commits to 1.c4. Moves like Nc3 and Bg2 are common, but beyond that White has a lot of decisions to make in both strategy and tactics. The set-up for White's kingside knight, dark squared bishop and central pawns can be anything, depending on what Black does. In the 1980s I even experimented with 1.c4 f6, intending 2...e5, Nge7, d5, Nbc6, Be6, Qd7, 0-0-0 followed by ...g5 and ...h5, an ironic twist: the Sicilian English Attack vs the English Opening. Below White continued logically and could have obtained a slight positional advantage with best play. My opponent Michi played reasonable moves, but Black was able to equalize. Michi (1802) - Sawyer (1941), ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 28.06.2014 begins 1.c4 d5 2.cxd5 Qxd5 3.Nc3 Qd8 4.g3 [4.d4 e5!? 5.dxe5 Qxd1+ 6.Nxd1 Nc6 7.Nf3+/=; 4.Nf3 Nf6 5.d4 e6 6.e4 Be7 and after six moves both sides have developed two pieces. White's space advantage may dissipate over time. 7.Bd3+/=] 4...Nf6 [4...e5 5.Bg2 Nf6= is a standard English Opening type of position.] 5.Bg2 c6 6.Nf3 Bg4 7.0-0 Nbd7 8.d4 e6 9.Ne5?! [This allows Black to equalize immediately. 9.h3+/= putting the question to the bishop seems better.] 9...Nxe5 10.dxe5 Qxd1 11.Rxd1 Nd5 12.Nxd5 exd5 13.f3 Be6 [13...Bc5+!?] 14.f4 g6 15.e4 dxe4 16.Bxe4 Bc5+ 17.Kg2 Ke7!? [17...0-0!=] 18.a3 [18.b4!] 18...Rhd8 19.Rxd8?! [19.f5!=] 19...Rxd8 20.b4? Bb6 [20...Bd4!-+] 21.Kf3 h5 22.Be3 [22.f5 gxf5 23.Bg5+ Ke8-/+] 22...Bg4+ 23.Kf2 Rd2+ 24.Ke1 Bxe3 25.b5 Re2+ 26.Kf1 Bd4 27.Bd3 Bxa1 28.Bxe2 Bxe2+ 29.Kxe2 cxb5 White resigns 0-1

89 – MaryDawson 3.Nc3 Qd6 The move 1...d5 is a universal move that can be played against any first move by White. The only real challenges are e4 or c4 intending to capture the d5-pawn on move two. The first option is 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 called the Scandinavian Defence. After the second option 1.c4, White can increase pressure on d5 by Nc3 / g3+ Bg2 / Qb3 / e4 etc. Black can fight for d5 with pawns by first playing 1...e6 or 1...c6 (heading for a Slav Defence after 2.d4 d5). The weakness of 1.c4 is that it does not counter other central squares available for Black's focus, such as c5, d4, e5 and e4. Black can play 1...c5, 1...e5, 1...Nf6 or 1...f5. Sometimes I also play 1...Nc6 intending 2...e5, 2...d5 or 2...Nf6 depending on what White chooses and what Black prefers. Some books on the English Opening hardly mention 1.c4 d5!? The obvious positive plus about this line is that if Black already knows a line after 2.d4, then he does not have to learn much that is unique to the English Opening after 1.c4. Such books tend to be a summary of how top players handle the opening. This MaryDawson - Sawyer game saw me play my prepared line after 1.c4 d5 2.cxd5 Qxd5 3.Nc3 Qd6! 4.Nf3 e5. White has a lead in development, but Black is not dead. There are good chances for Black to complete his development. MaryDawson (1958) - Sawyer (2094), ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 19.03.2011 begins 1.c4 d5 2.cxd5 Qxd5 3.Nc3 Qd6 4.Nf3 e5 5.g3 a6 6.Bg2 Nf6 7.d3 Be7 8.0-0 0-0 9.Bg5 Nc6 10.Bxf6 Bxf6 11.Ne4 Qd8 [11...Qe6=] 12.Nxf6+ Qxf6 13.a3 Be6 14.Rc1 Bd5 15.b4 Rac8 16.Qd2 Rfd8 17.Rfd1 Nd4 18.Nxd4 exd4 19.Bh3 Be6 20.Bg2 Bd5 21.f3 Bb3 22.Re1 b5 23.Rc5 c6 24.Qc1 Bd5 25.h4 g6 26.Kh2 Qd6 27.e4 dxe3 28.Rxe3 Re8 29.Qe1 Kf8 30.Rxe8+ Rxe8 31.Qc3 [31.Qd2 Qe5=/+] 31...Qe5 [31...Re2!-+] 32.d4 Qe3 33.Qxe3 Rxe3 34.g4 Rxa3 35.Kg3 Rb3 36.h5 Rxb4 37.hxg6 hxg6 38.f4 Rc4 [38...Rb3+ 39.Kf2 Rb2+ 40.Ke3 Rxg2-+] 39.Bxd5 [39.Rxc4 Bxc4-+] 39...Rxc5 40.dxc5 [40.Be4 Rc3+

41.Kf2 b4-+] 40...cxd5 41.Kf3 a5 42.Ke3 a4 43.Kd3 a3 44.Kc2 b4 45.Kb3 Ke7 46.f5 gxf5 47.gxf5 Kd7 48.f6 Kc6 49.Kxb4 a2 50.Kb3 a1Q 51.Kc2 Qa3 52.Kd2 Kxc5 White resigns 0-1

1.c4 f5 This is the Dutch variation of the English Opening. It only becomes a Dutch Defence if White plays an early d2-d4.

90 – Jamison 2.e3 Nf6 3.g3 Be7 Larry Jamison played the English Opening 1.c4. He held back the pawn move d2-d4 for the opportunity to bust open the center later. Alexander Kotov in his book “Train Like A Grandmaster” calls this method of opening strategy the “coiled spring”. On pages 12-13 we read: “Sometimes grandmasters will decide to avoid the deeply studied book lines by using a method that reminds one of a coiled spring. They make just one pawn advance to the centre, fianchetto the bishops and allow the opponent to occupy the centre. The calm here is apparent since just one incautious pawn advance by Black and White's pieces will uncoil with great force and inflict damage on the enemy.” That is the plan. But if a coiled player never springs forth from his compact position, then he goes from being a threat to being a target. Given enough time, I mounted a winning attack. Jamison (1550) - Sawyer (2100), corr APCT 1981 begins 1.c4 f5 2.e3 Nf6 3.Nc3 e6 4.g3 Be7 5.Bg2 0-0 6.Nge2 Qe8 [6...d5!=] 7.b3 Nc6 [7...c6=] 8.00 d6 9.Bb2 a6 10.a3 Bd7 11.Rc1 g5 [11...Na5!] 12.h3 Qh5 13.f4 Kf7? [Not a good square for the Black king. 13...Rae8 14.Qc2+/=] 14.d4 Nd8 15.Rf2 [15.fxg5 Qxg5 16.e4+/-] 15...Bc6? [15...gxf4 16.Nxf4+/-] 16.d5 exd5 17.cxd5 [Spring forth! 17.fxg5 Qxg5 18.Nxd5+-] 17...Bd7 18.Nd4 Qg6 19.Nf3 [White is winning after 19.fxg5 Qxg5 20.Qd3 Kg8 21.Nxf5+-] 19...h6 20.Nh2 [Now is the time for White to open the game up with advantage. 20.fxg5 hxg5 21.e4+-] 20...Kg8 21.Rcc2 Nf7 22.Qd4 Rae8 23.Bc1 [23.Nf1+/=] 23...Nd8 [23...gxf4=/+] 24.Nf1 Rf7 25.Kh2 Bf8 26.Bh1 Rfe7 27.Bg2 Bg7 28.Qd2 Qh5 29.Kg1 Nf7 30.Qe2 Qg6 31.Qd2 Bc8 32.Kh2 Kh8 33.Re2 h5 34.Bb2 h4 35.Bf3? [35.gxh4! g4 36.hxg4=] 35...g4 36.hxg4 fxg4 37.Bh1 h3 38.a4 Bf5 39.Nd1 Bxc2 40.Qxc2 Qxc2

41.Rxc2 Nh5 42.Bxg7+ Kxg7 43.Re2 Nf6 44.b4 Nh6 45.Kg1 Ne4 46.Kh2 Kg6 47.Kg1 Kh5 48.Kh2 Ng8 49.Rc2 Ngf6 50.Bxe4 Nxe4 51.Rb2 c5 52.bxc5 dxc5 53.Rc2 Rd8 0-1

91 – Ferranti 2.g3 Nf6 3.Bg2 e6 Throughout 1989 I played a lot of postal chess. One section was from the USCF Golden Knights: section 88N300. This opponent came from that section. At that time John Ferranti and I both lived in Pennsylvania. Since we were less than 200 miles apart, the post moved faster than most. Our game moved quickly. John was new to postal chess and had many questions. We carried on a lively and friendly conversation on the postcards. Ferranti played the English Opening as White and I tried the Dutch Classical as Black. He expanded on the queenside while I focused on the kingside mating attack. First Ferranti stood better. Then I was winning. Then it was even. Then I was lost. It was time to resign. On the board I stood much worse, but it was not over. I knew that USCF gave no rating points either way when your opponent did not yet have a rating. They just gave the unrated player your rating + or - 400 points, depending on who won. I had to break into a little Kenny Rogers with “The Gambler” song and fold, walk away and run. My USCF Postal rating was 2124 at the time. My resignation gave John Ferranti a temporary rating of 2524; mine did not move. John wrote on his final card: “I was surprised to receive your resignation, and a little sad. Your comments and thoughts have improved my game and chess thought process. Of all my games, you are the only opponent willing to spare some time to answer my endless questions! I thank you for your time and effort on my behalf! Wishing you the very best, John.” Yes, it was sad. Later we met in person at a tournament that I won in Hershey, Pennsylvania. John Ferranti turned out to be just as nice face to face as he was through the mail. Ferranti - Sawyer, corr USCF 88N300, 10.04.1989 begins 1.c4 [English Opening] 1...f5 [The Dutch Defence is one of those openings that can be played against anything except 1.e4 and 1.g4.] 2.g3 Nf6 3.Bg2 e6 4.Nf3 Be7 5.0-0 0-0 6.d3 [6.d4 transposes to the Dutch Defence proper.] 6...d6 [I

choose a classical set-up. The Stonewall 6...d5 is more risky, as you might see from some other games.] 7.Nc3 Nc6 8.Rb1 Qe8 [Some prefer to throw in 8...a5 9.a3 Qe8 to slow down the queenside expansion.] 9.b4 Qh5 10.b5 Nd8 11.Be3 [Now we are out of the book/database. Play could also continue: 11.a4 Nf7 12.e4 e5+/= with a slight edge to White.] 11...Nf7 12.Qa4?! [Better is 12.h3 preventing Black's next move] 12...Ng4 13.Bxa7? Ng5!? [Now Black has a strong attack. 13...Bf6!-/+] 14.h4 d5?? [The old maxim is that play in the center is the best way to stop an attack on the wing. But I am stopping my own attack?? I should have played 14...Nxf3+ 15.Bxf3 Bf6 16.Rfc1 Bd4 Attacking the king. 17.Bxd4 Rxa4-+ Picks off the queen.] 15.Nxg5 [15.cxd5! Nxf3+ 16.Bxf3+/-] 15...Bxg5 16.cxd5 f4 [If 16...Bxh4 17.gxh4 Qxh4 I still have play.] 17.Bf3 Be7? [Wrong way! 17...Bxh4!=] 18.dxe6 Bxe6 19.Qe4+- 1-0

92 – Brennar 3.Bg2 g6 4.Nf3 I played at a Penn State chess tournament on March 31, 1990. Penn State University is located in central Pennsylvania about 200 miles east of Pittsburgh and 200 miles west of Philadelphia. Penn State is not to be confused with University of Pennsylvania. Penn is an Ivy League school located in Philadelphia. Both schools are impressive in their own way. Generally the overall cost of going to Penn is about double what it cost to go to Penn State, especially as there was a big discount for students who live in Pennsylvania to go to Penn State. Anyway, here I was at University Park in State College enjoying the hospitality of Happy Valley. Round Two had me playing Black. My opponent was rated below my first round opponent, so it is likely he won or drew his first round game vs a higher rated opponent. My opponent is John Brennar who was rated 1592. The Dutch Defence with 1...f5 is a handy defensive system since it can be employed vs almost anything. This game started out as an English Opening. The result was determined by my kingside attack that suddenly netted me some material. It must have discouraged my opponent, because just as suddenly White resigned. There is no sense wearing oneself out with two more rounds to go that day. Brennar - Sawyer, Penn State 1990 begins 1.c4 f5 [The English Dutch, or Englutch, where the two armies don't touch much, until they get to know each other better.] 2.g3 Nf6 3.Nf3 g6 4.Bg2 Bg7 5.d3 [White intends to attack e4 instead of e5. The alternative 5.d4 d6 6.0-0 0-0 7.Nc3 is the main line of the Leningrad Dutch Defence.] 5...d6 6.0-0 0-0 7.Nc3 e5 8.e4 Nc6 9.Ne1 Kh8 10.f4 Qe8 11.Be3? Ng4 12.Bd2 exf4 13.Bxf4? [13.gxf4 fxe4 14.dxe4 Bd4+ 15.Kh1 Qd8 (15...Nf2+ 16.Rxf2 Bxf2 17.Nd5 Bb6 18.Bc3+ Kg8 19.Nf6+ Rxf6 20.Bxf6+/=) 16.Nf3 Ne3 17.Bxe3 Bxe3 18.f5 gxf5=/+] 13...Bd4+ 14.Kh1 Nf2+!? [Black wins the Exchange for a pawn. Objectively there might be a stronger continuation, but White was apparently so discouraged at this point that he resigned. After 14...Nf2+,

play could have continued 15.Rxf2 Bxf2 16.Bh6 with some compensation.] 0-1

93 – Haines 4.Nc3 Bg7 5.d3 d6 I have played chess against Harry Potter and Tommy Morrison. Ever play chess vs anyone whose real name was famous? My friend Ray Haines played Rick Perry in the first round at Houlton, Maine, the town where we went to buy groceries every Saturday 50 years ago. This Rick Perry was not the Governor of the great state of Texas. He was a high school player from Caribou. That is the very same town where I worked one winter more than 40 years ago. The game below was the typical first round Swiss system rating mismatch. Ray Haines is much higher rated, but Rick Perry is showing steady improvement. Rick Perry raised his rating from 101 to 1004 after 14 tournaments. Rick Perry did not play too badly. A characteristic of Rick's English Opening is that White plays 1.c4 without the Reti idea of an early Nf3, and with pawn to d3 instead of d4. Ray Haines mounted a Dutch Defence attack. White's big problem was being slow to bring his kingside knight into the game. White left the Nh3 too loose for too long. Black's technique is up to the task. Perry - Haines, Houlton ME (1), 30.05.2014 begins 1.c4 f5 2.g3 Nf6 3.Nc3 g6 4.Bg2 Bg7 5.d3 d6 6.Bg5 [It would be wise for White to first complete his kingside development. 6.Nf3 0-0 7.0-0=] 6...Nc6 7.b4 0-0 8.b5 Ne5 9.Nd5 Nxd5 10.Bxd5+ Kh8 11.d4 Nf7 12.Nh3? [12.Bxf7 Rxf7 13.Nf3 Qe8= and chances are still close to equal.] 12...Qe8 [12...f4! wins material after 13.Bxf7 Bxh3 14.Bd5 c6! since if 15.bxc6 bxc6 16.Bxc6 Qb6 17.Bxa8 Bxd4-+ Black has a strong mating attack.] 13.0-0 e6 14.Bf3 [Better is 14.Bg2 Nxg5 15.Nxg5 e5=/+] 14...e5 15.e3? f4 16.g4 e4 17.Re1 [White could try to get something for the bishop, but after 17.Bxe4 Qxe4 18.Bxf4 h5-+ Black's attack rolls on.] 17...exf3 18.exf4 Qd7 19.f5 Nxg5 [19...gxf5! is also very strong.] 20.Nxg5 gxf5 21.Qc2 Bf6 22.Qd2 Qg7 23.h4 h6 24.Nf7+ Rxf7 25.Re8+ Kh7 26.g5 hxg5 27.Kh2 g4 28.Kg3 Bxd4 29.Rh1 Be5+ [29...f4+!-+ leads to a forced mate, but when you are winning easily,

there is no need to complicate things unless you have lots of time and feel like calculating.] 30.Rxe5 Qxe5+ 31.Qf4 Qxf4+ 32.Kxf4 Bd7 33.Kg5 Rg8+ 34.Kf4 Re7 0-1

94 – Ward 5.d3 d6 6.e4 Nc6 The Dutch Defence is a universal system that can be played against virtually anything except 1.e4. Here against Leslie V. Ward in the 1989 USCF Golden Squires Postal Chess Tournament we reach what is a Closed English. This might also be called the Closed Sicilian reversed. In this English Opening, a fight breaks out on the f-file, but the position stays relatively closed. Gradually I picked off a couple pawns. When Ward resigned, he wrote: “Your two pawns in open files should be good enough to win without much trouble.” Yes, I completely agree. There was no sense in spending more money on postage for every move to drag out such a game. Ward (1792) - Sawyer (2013), corr USCF 89SS60, 01.04.1991 begins 1.c4 f5 2.g3 Nf6 3.Bg2 g6 4.Nc3 Bg7 5.d3 d6 6.e4 Nc6 [The most common line here is 6...e5 7.Nge2 Nc6 8.0-0 0-0 9.Nd5 Be6 10.Bg5 Qd7 11.Qd2=] 7.Nge2 0-0 8.h3 e5 9.0-0 Be6 10.Nd5 Ne7 11.Bg5 c6 12.Nxf6+ Bxf6 13.Bxf6 Rxf6 14.exf5 Nxf5 15.Nc3 Nd4 16.Ne4 Rf8 17.b3 Qe7 18.Rc1 Kg7 19.Rb1 h6 20.Rb2 Rf7 21.b4 Raf8 [21...Bf5=/+] 22.c5 Bd5 23.cxd6 Qe6 24.a3 Nb5 25.a4 Nxd6 26.b5 Nxe4 27.dxe4 [27.Bxe4 Qxh3 28.bxc6 bxc6=/+] 27...Bc4 28.Re1 cxb5 29.Rd2 [29.axb5 Qb6-/+ gaining time by hitting f2.] 29...Bb3 30.Rd6 Qc4 [Swapping queens is the strongest for Black with 30...Bxd1 31.Rxe6 Bxa4-+] 31.Qg4 Rf6 32.Rxf6 Rxf6 33.Qd7+ Rf7 34.Qxb5 Qd4 35.Re3 Bxa4 36.Qe2 [36.Qa5 b6-/+] 36...Rd7 37.f4 Qd1+ 0-1

1.c4 c6 This leads to the English Opening Slav Defence. Black plays 1...c6 and 2… d5, but White avoids an early d4.

95 – Cekro 2.b3 d5 3.Bb2 Nf6 Slav Defence with Black pawns at c6 and d5 threatens to take a pawn by ...dxc4 and hold onto it with ...b5. The English Slav has a vulnerable c4 pawn without one at d4. One idea to protect c4 is with b3 as in Ekrem Cekro vs Jan Hobusch. Both masters developed all four minor pieces and castled by move nine. White pushed forward and Black retreated until the higher rated player found a winning combination. Cekro (2408) - Hobusch (2241), 2nd Bundesliga Germany 19.03.2017 begins 1.c4 c6 2.b3 d5 3.Bb2 Nf6 4.Nf3 Bf5 5.g3 [5.Nh4 Be6=] 5...e6 6.Bg2 h6 7.0-0 Nbd7 8.d3 Bc5 9.Nc3 0-0 10.Qc2 Bh7 11.e4 dxe4 12.dxe4 [12.Nxe4 Nxe4 13.dxe4 Qe7 14.Rfd1 Rfd8=] 12...Qe7 13.Rad1 Rfd8 14.Qe2 a5 15.e5 Ne8 16.Na4 Ba7 17.Nd4 Nc5 18.Ba3 Nc7 19.Qe1 Qf8 20.Qxa5 Rxd4? [20...N7a6 21.Bxc6 bxc6 22.Nxc6 Rxd1 23.Rxd1+/-] 21.Rxd4 Nxb3 22.Qxc7 [After 22.Qxc7 Qxa3 23.Rd8+ Rxd8 24.Qxd8+ Qf8 25.Qxf8+ Kxf8 26.axb3+- White is up a rook.] 1-0

96 – Fedoseev 3…Nf6 4.Nf3 g6 The Slav and the Gruenfeld seem like a strange combination. The Slav ...c6 pawn solidly supports d5. The bold Gruenfeld g6 craves for a ...c5 push to attack d4, along with the bishop on g7. Black intends to develop first and attack eventually, but danger lurks in slow play. White took advantage of an inaccuracy to win material in the game Vladimir Fedoseev vs Maxim Lugovskoy. Fedoseev (2731) - Lugovskoy (2474), ch-RUS Blitz 2017 Sochi RUS (13.16), 02.10.2017 begins 1.Nf3 d5 2.b3 Nf6 3.Bb2 g6 4.c4 c6 5.cxd5 cxd5 6.e3 [6.Bxf6 exf6 7.e3 Nc6 8.Bb5 Be7=] 6...Bg7 7.Nc3 Nc6 8.d4 0-0 9.Be2 Bf5 10.0-0 Rc8 11.Rc1 Ne4 [11...Qd6=] 12.Nxe4 Bxe4 13.Qd2 Qa5 [13...Qd6=] 14.Bc3 [14.Qxa5 Nxa5 15.Ba3+/=] 14...Qb6 15.g4 Bxf3 16.Bxf3 e6 17.Be2 Rc7? [17...Rfe8=] 18.b4 a5? [18...a6 19.a4+/=] 19.b5! [If 19...Nb4 20.a3 and White wins the knight.]1-0

97 – Pileckis 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.e3 g6 I was privileged to play Grandmaster Edmar Mednis. In his books, Mednis promoted the slogan, "Passed pawns must be pushed." It usually works. Here Black played a methodical Gruenfeld Defence after 1.c4 c6 in this English Opening game between Nikita Meskovs and Emilis Pileckis. The Bg7 fianchetto supported the constant advance of Black's a-pawn and bpawn. At a key moment, Black sacrificed the Exchange with 27...Rxd6 to eliminate White’s best defense. The final position has Black pawns on b2 and a2, both eager to become queens. Meskovs (2524) - Pileckis (2430), Liepajas Rokade Open 2018 LAT, 02.08.2018 begins 1.c4 c6 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.e3 g6 4.Nc3 Bg7 5.Be2 [5.d4 0-0=] 5...0-0 6.0-0 d5 7.h3 Ne4 [7...c5!?] 8.d4 a6 9.Qb3 dxc4 10.Bxc4 Nd6 11.Bd3 Nd7 12.e4 [12.Rd1 c5=] 12...c5 13.e5 cxd4 14.exd6 dxc3 15.Bg5 Nc5 [15...Nf6 16.dxe7 Qxe7=] 16.dxe7 Nxb3 17.exd8Q Rxd8 18.Bxd8 Nxa1 19.Rxa1 [19.bxc3 Bxc3=] 19...Be6 20.Bb6 cxb2 21.Re1 Bxa2 22.Kf1 a5 23.Nd4 a4 24.Nb5 Rc8 [24...a3-+] 25.Bc7 Be6 26.Bd6 Rd8 [Or 26...Rc1!-+] 27.Ke2 Rxd6! 28.Nxd6 a3 29.Bb1 a2 0-1

98 – Sebag 2.Nf3 d5 3.e3 Nf6 Players all over the world love blitz chess. The cadence of moving every five seconds keeps the game flowing with constant action. Blitz allows us to quickly learn openings. We compete with many opponents in one day. This English Opening game between Lilit Galojan and Marie Sebag saw Black choose a Semi-Slav piece arrangement. The players posted knights on the cfile, but then White forgot about a critical tactical detail. Galojan (2300) - Sebag (2492), World Blitz Women 2017 Riyadh KSA (4.23), 29.12.2017 begins 1.c4 c6 2.Nf3 d5 3.e3 Nf6 4.Nc3 e6 5.b3 Bd6 [5...Nbd7 6.Bb2 Bd6 7.Qc2 0-0 8.Be2 b6=] 6.Bb2 0-0 7.Qc2 a6 [7...e5 8.cxd5 cxd5 9.Nb5 Nc6 10.Nxd6 Qxd6 11.d4 Nb4 12.Qd1 e4 13.Ne5 Ne8=] 8.Be2 e5 9.cxd5 cxd5 10.d4 e4 11.Ne5 Nbd7 12.Nxd7 [12.Na4 Re8 13.Rc1 Nxe5 14.dxe5 Bxe5 15.Bxe5 Rxe5=/+] 12...Bxd7 13.a3 Rc8 14.h3 Qe7 15.b4 Be6 16.Qb3 Bb8 17.Na4 Ne8 18.Nc5 Nd6 19.Rc1 Qg5 20.g3 Qe7 21.h4 Nc4 22.Kf1? [22.Qc3 b5=/+] 22...Nd2+! [A royal fork of the king and queen.] 0-1

1.c4 e6 This leads to a Classical English where White withholds an early d4 move. This avoids the transposition in the Queens Gambit Declined lines that would otherwise occur after 1.c4 e6 2.d4 d5. Many lines after in this section could just as easily be found put into the Reti section after 1.Nf3 d5 2.c4 e6.

99 – duckbreath 2.g3 d5 3.Bg2 I played the Catalan Opening in a 15 minute standard game vs “duckbreath” (rated 2505). I rarely play games at that particular speed, but I used to. At the time I was trying to learn this opening variation. The chess engine taught me a fast lesson in a slower game. The game began as an English Opening. Probably I should have stayed in that opening. I transposed into a poor line of the Catalan with my 9.d4. I could have held it back and first played 9.a4! That would have left me with a much better game and a playable position. As we continued, I allowed my queen to remain in line with his rook on the c-file. When the position suddenly opened up due to exchanges, my knight was pinned and attacked by 12...b4. Yup, that's all she wrote. Hopefully you can learn from my mistake. I want to play better in the future than I did in this 2001 space odyssey. At least here my computer opponent was not named “HAL 9000”. Sawyer (2226) - duckbreath (2505), ICC 15 0 u Internet Chess Club, 09.10.2001 begins 1.c4 e6 2.g3 d5 3.Bg2 dxc4 4.Nf3 Nd7 5.Qa4 [5.Na3 Bxa3 6.bxa3 Nb6-/+] 5...a6 6.Qxc4 b5 7.Qc2 [7.Qc6 Rb8 8.Qc2] 7...Bb7 8.0-0 Ngf6 9.d4 [9.a4!=] 9...c5=/+ 10.dxc5 Bxc5 11.Nc3 Rc8 12.Bg5 b4 White resigns 0-1

100 – Horvath 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.g3 Bishop strategy in Flank Openings like the English sees the fianchetto player attack the center from a distance while awaiting further developments. Here Black chose to keep his king in the center until there was no longer any safe option. White opened the center with pawns and forced a mate in the game between Dominik Horvath and Josef Jurek. Horvath (2429) - Jurek (2277), 29th Czech Open A 2018 Pardubice CZE (3.44), 22.07.2018 begins1.Nf3 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 a6 [3...d5=] 4.Bg2 b5 5.b3 c5 [5...Bb7 6.0-0 Be7 7.d4 0-0 8.Nc3 b4 9.Na4=] 6.0-0 Bb7 7.Nc3 Qb6 [7...Qa5 8.Bb2 Be7 9.e4 d6 10.e5 dxe5 11.Nxe5+/=] 8.Re1 d6 9.e4 Nbd7[9...Nc6 10.Nd5!? exd5 11.exd5+ Ne7 12.d4=] 10.d4 cxd4 11.Nxd4 bxc4 12.bxc4 Qc7 13.Nd5 Qxc4 [13...exd5 14.exd5+ Kd8 15.Nc6+ Bxc6 16.dxc6+-] 14.Ba3 exd5 15.exd5+ Ne5 16.Rc1 Qxa2 17.Qa4+ Nfd7 18.Rc7 [18.Rc2+-] 18...Bc8 [18...Be7 19.Rxe5+-] 19.Qc6 Kd8 [19...Be7 20.Rxc8+ Rxc8 21.Qxc8+ Bd8 22.Bxd6+-] 20.Bxd6 Bxd6 21.Qxd6 Re8 22.Bh3 Qa5 23.Nc6+ [Forces mate after 23.Nc6+ Nxc6 24.Rxd7+ Bxd7 25.Qxd7#] 1-0

101 – Kobo 2.Nf3 d5 3.g3 Nf6 A great chess opening move for White is e4! It's good on move one. It can be good on move two, or three, or in this case, move 14! Black prevented e4 at first with 1...d5 and 2...Nf6. This Reti Opening morphed into an English Catalan by move 4. White held e4 back until Black misplaced his minor pieces in a game between Ori Kobo and Bjoern Bente. The e-pawn surges forth with glee to fork Black’s minor pieces at e5 and win. Kobo (2508) - Bente (2219), 29th Czech Rapid G1 2018 Pardubice CZE, 18.07.2018 begins 1.Nf3 d5 2.g3 Nf6 3.Bg2 e6 4.c4 dxc4 5.0-0 [5.Qa4+ Nbd7 6.Qxc4=] 5...a6 6.Qc2 [6.a4 Nc6 7.Na3=] 6...Nbd7 [6...Bd6 7.Qxc4=] 7.a4 c5 8.a5 Rb8 [8...Nd5 9.Qxc4 b5 10.axb6 N7xb6 11.Qb3+/=] 9.Qxc4 b5 10.axb6 Nxb6 11.Qc2 Bd6 12.d3 0-0 13.Bd2 [13.Nbd2+/=] 13...Nbd5? [This blunder allows White to gain time attacking Black's knights with the e-pawn. Better was 13...Nfd5.] 14.e4! Nb4 15.Bxb4 Rxb4 16.e5 White wins a piece with a pawn fork. 1-0

102 – Galyas 3.g3 Nf6 4.Bg2 d4 The English Reti Opening may resemble a reversed Modern Benoni Defence. Black can advance a pawn to d4 to gain space. White's bishop dominates the long light squared diagonal. Black attempted to cramp the queenside with the addition of a pawn on a4. White developed a sudden deadly attack in the game Miklos Galyas vs Peter Horvath. Galyas (2517) - Horvath (2424), ch-HUN Rapid 2018 Ajka HUN (11.6), 22.07.2018 begins 1.Nf3 d5 2.c4 e6 3.g3 Nf6 4.Bg2 d4 5.0-0 c5 6.e3 Nc6 7.exd4 cxd4 8.d3 Be7 9.Re1 0-0 10.Na3 Nd7 11.Nc2 e5 12.Bd2 [12.b4 Bxb4 13.Nxb4 Nxb4 14.Nxe5+/-] 12...a5 13.a3 a4 14.Nb4 f6 15.Nh4 Ndb8 [15...Nc5 16.Nxc6 bxc6 17.Bxc6+/=] 16.Bd5+ Kh8 17.f4 Bd6 [17...g6 18.Qe2+/-] 18.f5 [18.Be4 f5 19.Bg2+/-] 18...Qe8 [18...Ne7 19.Ng6+ Nxg6 20.fxg6+/-] 19.Ng6+ hxg6 20.Qg4 Black must give up material to save the king. 1-0

103 – Kovalyov 4.Bg2 Be7 Alexander Kotov described hypermodern flank openings as the coiled spring strategy. White holds back his central pawns until they leap forward with great energy. White delayed moving his d-pawn until move 13. Then 15.d5 challenged Black with strong threats in this English Opening between Anton Kovalyov and Teddy Coleman. Kovalyov (2651) - Coleman (2380), 12th Philadelphia Int USA (9), 02.07.2018 begins 1.c4 e6 2.g3 d5 3.Bg2 Nf6 4.Nf3 Be7 5.0-0 0-0 6.b3 [6.d4 is the Catalan Opening.] 6...b6 7.Bb2 Bb7 8.e3 c5 9.Nc3 dxc4 10.bxc4 Nc6 11.Qe2 Qd7 12.Rad1 Rfd8 13.d4 cxd4 [13...Qc8!?] 14.exd4 Na5 15.d5 exd5 16.Nxd5 Nxd5 17.cxd5 Bd6 [Black blockades the isolated pawn on d5. Is that pawn strong or weak?] 18.Qd3 Qg4 19.Nd2 Rac8 20.Ba1 Bf8 21.Rfe1 Qa4 [21...Rc5=] 22.Qf5 [22.Ne4+/-] 22...Rd6 23.Ne4 [After 23.Ne4 Rg6 24.h4+-] 1-0

1.c4 Nf6 This leads to the English Indian Defences.

104 – Eglitis 2.f4 e6 3.Nf3 d5 This is my great undevelopment game. I conceived a plan to relocate all my pieces back to the first rank. How often in your chess career do you get to do that in a serious game? Six of my back rank pieces had been moved. All were returned to different squares from where they started by move 16. My opponent was Imants R Eglitis. In 1991 when ICCF gave out ratings, Eglitis got an initial rating of 2110. Mine was less than that, but it went up to 2157 after I won a later tournament. ICCF notes that for Latvia chess, “First we have to mention Prof. Imants Eglitis who was head of the ICCF thematic tournaments office and was awarded with a Bertl von Massow medal.” Actually I knew of Imants Eglitis from books that I had. Eglitis was one of the leading Latvian Gambit players from the 1970s. In this game I followed the Hugh E. Myers idea of 1.c4 and 2.f4!? I did okay vs Eglitis but not so well against Manfred Schaefer. Sawyer - Eglitis, corr ICCF 1982 begins 1.c4 Nf6 2.f4 e6 [2...e5!? 3.fxe5 Ng4 4.Nf3 d6 5.e6 (5.exd6 Bxd6 6.g3 Nxh2 7.Rxh2 Bxg3+ 8.Rf2 g5 9.e3 g4 10.Nd4 h5 11.Nc3 Bxf2+ 12.Kxf2 h4 13.Qc2 Qf6+ 14.Ke1 h3 15.Nd5 Qh4+ 16.Kd1 h2 17.Qe4+ Kd8 18.Qh1 Qf2 0-1 Luder – Nehlert, Porz op 1988) 5...Bxe6 6.e4 Be7 7.d4 c5 8.d5 (8.Be2=) 8...Bc8 9.Bd3 (9.Be2=) 9...Bh4+ 10.Nxh4 Qxh4+ 11.Kd2 Na6 and 0-1 in 24. Sawyer - Schaefer, corr ICCF 1982] 3.Nf3 d5 4.e3 Be7 5.Nc3 0-0 6.b3 c5 7.Ne2 [7.Bd3 dxc4 8.Bxc4=] 7...Nc6 8.Ng3 b6 [8...d4=/+] 9.Be2 d4 10.Qc2 Nb4 [10...Qd6 11.0-0 Bb7 12.Bb2 Rad8=/+] 11.Qb1 d3 [11...Bb7 12.0-0 Qd6 13.Ne5 Rad8=] 12.Bd1 Bb7 13.0-0 [This was better than 13.Bb2 Bxf3 14.gxf3 Nc6=/+] 13...Ne4 14.a3 Na6 [Black could have spoiled my plans with 14...Nxg3 15.hxg3=] 15.Nh1!? [A good alternative was 15.Nxe4 Bxe4 16.Ne5 f6 17.Ng4 Rb8 18.Nf2=] 15...Qd6 16.Ne1 [With this move I have completed my master plan, to undevelop all my pieces to the first rank. In

fact it is not a bad move in this position.] 16...Rad8 17.Bf3 Rd7 18.Nf2 Nxf2 19.Bxb7 Rxb7 20.Rxf2 Bf6 21.Bb2 Bxb2 22.Qxb2 b5 23.cxb5 [Or 23.Qc3=] 23...Rxb5 24.Qc3 Rfb8 25.Qxd3 Qc6 26.Nf3 Rxb3 1/2-1/2

105 – MacAngus 2.Nf3 g6 3.Nc3 d5 Playing White in the English or Reti Openings, White has flexibility but he must make quick strategical choices to avoid tactical losses. Here are three key questions that White has to answer: (1) What will I do with my dpawn? (2) What do I do if Black plays ...d5 attacking my c4 pawn? and (3) Where will I develop my light squared bishop from f1? Here are some important considerations to help you answer these questions: 1. Playing d4 will transpose into other openings from the 1.d4 and 2.c4 complex. 2. You might exchange pawns with c4xd5 or protect c4 with a move like b3. 3. Pushing e3 allows the bishop to protect c4 but g3/Bg2 adds pressure on d5. Experience has shown which opening set-ups tend to produce good middlegames and which ones do not. Mixing plans can be creative or fatal in chess. It is a waste of time and weakening to play both e3 and g3, unless White is playing Nge2 / Bg2, which leaves c4 potentially undefended. The c4 square was a problem for White in my English Opening in my Donald MacAngus game from the 1989 USCF Golden Squires Postal Tournament. MacAngus (1381) - Sawyer (2030), corr USCF 89SS90, 18.02.1992 begins 1.Nf3 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 d5 4.e3 Bg7 5.g3 0-0 6.Bg2 c6 7.0-0?! [White could sacrifice the c4-pawn after 7.d4 dxc4 with a long of compensation after 8.Qe2 b5 9.Ne5] 7...dxc4 8.Rb1? [8.b3!? is worth a shot here, preparing Bb2.] 8...Bf5 9.e4 Nxe4 10.Nxe4 Bxe4 11.Re1? [A tactical oversight, but Black is still up two c-pawns after 11.Ra1 Nd7-+] 11...Bxb1 12.a3 Bd3 13.Ne5 Bxe5 14.Rxe5 Nd7 15.Re3 Nc5 16.Bf3 Nb3 17.Be4 Nxc1 18.Qxc1 Bxe4 19.Qxc4 [Taking the bishop with 19.Rxe4 is better, but White is still down a rook after 19...b5-+] 19...Bf5 20.g4 Be6 21.Rxe6 fxe6 22.Qxe6+ Rf7 23.Qb3 Qxd2 24.Qxb7 Qxf2+ 25.Kh1 Qf1# 0-1

106 – Adel Lahchaichi 2.Nf3 d5 An early ...d5 is required if Black wants to play a Gruenfeld Defence against an English. Otherwise, White may play 1.c4, 2.Nc3, and 3.e4 to take total control of d5. The process is easy if White delays Nc3. A Gruenfeld follows if an early d4 is played. White attacked kingside with 5.h4 in the game Oussama Adel Lahchaichi against Jordi Ferrer Teixido. Adel Lahchaichi (2316) - Ferrer Teixido (1903), 20th Torredembarra Open ESP (2.7), 01.07.2018 begins 1.Nf3 Nf6 2.c4 d5 3.cxd5 Nxd5 4.Nc3 g6 [Black plays a Gruenfeld Defence setup.] 5.h4 h5 6.e4 Nf6 [6...Nxc3 7.bxc3 Bg7 8.Ba3 Bg4 9.Qb1+/=] 7.d4 Bg7 8.Bc4 Ng4 9.Ng5 Nh6 10.Ne2 0-0 11.Nf4 [11.Be3+/=] 11...Kh8 [f7 is vulnerable.] 12.Bxf7 [12.Nxf7+! Nxf7 13.Nxg6+ Kg8 14.Nxf8 Qxf8 15.0-0+/-] 12...Rxf7 13.Nxf7+ Nxf7 14.Nxg6+ Kg8 15.Qxh5 Nc6 [15...Bxd4 16.Bg5+/-] 16.d5 Nce5 17.Nxe5 Nxe5 18.0-0 Bg4 19.Qg5 e6 [19...Qd6 20.f4 Qb6+ 21.Kh2 Be2 22.fxe5 Bxf1 23.Be3+-] 20.f3 Qxg5 21.Bxg5 1-0

107 – So 2.Nf3 e6 3.g3 d5 English Opening 1.c4 players expect strategy where they take shots at the center from a distance. White chose 3.g3 while Black reached a classical development with 3...d5. All Black's pieces went to the queenside by move 18. The situation offered White a tactical opportunity to threaten a mate on g7 in this game that pitted Wesley So against Wei Yi. So (2780) - Wei Yi (2729), chess.com Speed 5m+1spm 2017 chess.com INT, 29.07.2018 begins 1.c4 Nf6 2.Nf3 e6 3.g3 d5 4.Bg2 dxc4 5.Qa4+ c6 6.Qxc4 b5 7.Qc2 Bb7 8.Nc3 a6 9.d4 Nbd7 10.Ne5 Nxe5 [Black could consider 10...Qc8=] 11.dxe5 Nd7 [11...Nd5 12.0-0+/=] 12.0-0 Be7 13.Rd1 0-0 14.Ne4 Qc7 15.Bf4 c5 16.Nf6+! Bxf6 17.exf6 e5 [17...Qc8 18.fxg7+-] 18.Qf5 Rfd8 [18...Nxf6 19.Bxe5+-] 19.Rxd7 [If 19...Qxd7 20.Qg5+-] 1-0

108 – Scholz 2.Nc3 g6 3.g3 Bg7 Black plays a Kings Indian Defence against English Opening. The KID gives practical chances in the hands of an aggressive master. White did not play d4 until move eight. Black opened the e-file and found a White weak bishop on e3. Black's h-pawn proved surprisingly useful in the game between Norbert Elsner and the International Master Dr. Christian Scholz. Elsner (2034) - Scholz (2388), 1st Bamberg Open 2018 Bamberg GER (1.9), 09.05.2018 begins 1.c4 Nf6 2.Nc3 g6 3.g3 Bg7 4.Bg2 d6 5.e3 0-0 6.Nge2 Nc6 7.0-0 e5 8.d4 a6 9.a3 [9.d5 Ne7=] 9...Re8 10.h3 h5 11.b3 exd4 12.exd4 Bf5 13.Be3 Qd7 14.Kh2 Ne4 15.Nd5 [15.Rc1=] 15...Ne7 16.Nef4 Nxd5 17.Nxd5 Rab8 18.Rc1 c6 19.Nf4 b5 20.Re1 Qb7 [20...bxc4 21.bxc4 Qc8=/+] 21.f3 [21.Nd3 bxc4 22.bxc4 Qc8=] 21...Nf6 22.g4 [22.Bd2 bxc4 23.bxc4 Rxe1 24.Qxe1 Qb2=/+] 22...Rxe3 23.Rxe3 Bh6 24.Kg3 h4+ [24...bxc4 25.bxc4 Qd7-+] 0-1

109 – Arman 2.g3 g6 3.Bg2 d5 Gruenfeld Defence players face a challenge against the English Opening after 1.c4. After the moves 3...d5 4.cxd5 Nxd5 Black does not always have a knight on c3 to capture or a pawn on d4 to attack. Many times Black slides a knight over to b6. The winner invades the enemy territory. Black succeeds with 21...Rd2 in Paul Spruit vs Deniz Arman. Spruit (2017) - Arman (2366), 41st Eastman Open 2018 Ghent BEL (4.17), 15.07.2018 begins 1.c4 Nf6 2.g3 g6 3.Bg2 d5 4.cxd5 Nxd5 5.Nc3 Nb6 [5...Nxc3 6.bxc3 Bg7 7.Rb1+/=] 6.d4 Bg7 7.Nf3 0-0 8.0-0 Nc6 9.e3 e5 10.dxe5 [10.d5 Ne7 11.e4 Bg4 12.h3 Bxf3 13.Qxf3+/=] 10...Nxe5 11.Nxe5 Bxe5 [11...Qxd1 12.Rxd1 Bxe5 13.e4=] 12.Qc2 c6 13.Rd1 Qe7 14.f4 [14.e4 Bg4 15.Ne2=] 14...Bg7 15.e4 Bg4 16.Re1 Bd4+ 17.Be3 Bxe3+ 18.Rxe3 Nc4 19.Ree1 Rad8 20.Na4 [20.Nd1 Qb4 21.Qc3 Qb6+ 22.Kh1 Bxd1 23.Qxc4 Rd4=/+] 20...b5 21.h3 [21.Qc3 Rd2-/+] 21...Rd2! [Black invades and attacks.] 22.Qc3 [22.Qc1 Qd7-+] 22...Rfd8 23.Bf1 Bxh3 24.Bxc4 [24.Be2 R8d4-+] 24...bxc4 0-1

110 – Mamedyarov 2.Nc3 e6 White plays an English Opening with the moves 4.e3 and 5.b3. This set-up resembles a type of Queens Indian Defence in reverse. Both sides have active pieces on open lines. White maintains long-term plans Bb2 on the long diagonal. He threatens mate threat on g7 to attack weak points in the game Shakhriyar Mamedyarov vs Nico Georgiadis. Mamedyarov (2801) - Georgiadis (2526), 51st Biel GM 2018 SUI (1.2), 22.07.2018 begins 1.c4 Nf6 2.Nf3 e6 3.Nc3 d5 4.e3 a6 5.b3 c5 6.Bb2 Nc6 7.cxd5 exd5 8.Rc1 Bg4!? [8...b5=] 9.h3 Bh5 10.Na4 Nd7 11.Be2 b5 12.Nc3 Nf6 13.0-0 Be7 14.a4 Bxf3 [14...b4 15.Nb1 Qd6 16.d4+/=] 15.Bxf3 Rb8 16.axb5 axb5 17.Ne2 Qd6 18.Nf4 Nb4 19.Ba3 Na6 [19...Qd7 20.Bxb4 cxb4 21.Qc2+/=] 20.d4 b4 21.Bb2 0-0 22.Bxd5 Nxd5 23.dxc5 Nxc5 24.Nxd5 Rfd8 [Now White attacks the Black king. 24...Rfc8 25.Rc4+-] 25.Qg4 Bf8 [25...Ne6 26.Rfd1+-] 26.Nf6+ Kh8 27.Qf5 g6 28.Ne4+ White wins at least a piece. 1-0

111 – Potkin 2…e6 3.e4 c5 4.e5 The English Opening Indian 1.c4 Nf6 2.Nc3 e6 leads to unbalanced central play after 3.e4 and 4.e5. It allows strong players to combine strategy and tactics to outplay their opponents. Here Black loosed position with 28...g5 in an attempt to drive away White's dangerous queen in the game Vladimir Potkin vs Artem Gogolev. Potkin (2592) vs Gogolev (2407), 71st ch-RUS HL 2018 Yaroslavl RUS (1.24), 26.06.2018 begins 1.c4 Nf6 2.Nc3 e6 3.e4 c5 4.e5 Ng8 5.Nf3 Nc6 6.d4 [6.Be2 d6=] 6...cxd4 7.Nxd4 Nxe5 8.Ndb5 [8.Bf4 Ng6 9.Bg3 a6=] 8...Bb4 [8...a6 9.Nd6+ Bxd6 10.Qxd6 f6 11.Be3=] 9.Bf4 f6 10.Bxe5 [10.a3+/=] 10...fxe5 11.Qh5+ Kf8 12.0-0-0 Qf6 13.Nc7 g6 14.Qe2 Bxc3 15.bxc3 Rb8 16.g3 [16.Qd3=] 16...e4 17.Nb5? [17.Qxe4 Qxc3+ 18.Kb1 Nf6 19.Qf4 Qb4+ 20.Ka1 Qc3+ 21.Kb1=] 17...a6 18.Nd4 Qg5+ [18...b5=/+] 19.Kb2 Nf6 20.Bg2 d5 21.f4 Qh5 22.Qe3 Bd7 23.h3 dxc4 24.Bxe4 Kf7 [24...Qa5=] 25.f5 exf5 26.Bf3 f4 27.Qxf4 Qc5 28.Bg4 g5? [28...Bxg4 29.hxg4+/-] 29.Qf3 [29.Bh5+! Kg8 30.Qxb8+ Kg7 31.Qxb7+-] 29...Bc6? [29...Bxg4 30.hxg4+/-] 30.Bh5+! 1-0

112 – Khalifman 3.e4 d5 4.cxd5 Both players attack the d5 square on each move in this English Opening with 1.c4 Nf6 2.Nc3 e6 3.e4 d5 4.cxd5 exd5. Black keeps a pawn on d5. White switches the attack to the e-file and f-file in the game between Alexander Khalifman and Kirill Shevchenko. Khalifman (2614) - Shevchenko (2538), Aeroflot Open 2018 Moscow RUS, 21.02.2018 begins 1.c4 Nf6 2.Nc3 e6 3.e4 d5 4.cxd5 [4.exd5 exd5 5.cxd5 Nxd5=; 4.e5 is the main line.] 4...exd5 5.e5 Ne4 [5...d4 6.exf6 dxc3 7.Bb5+ c6 8.Qe2+ Be6 9.Bc4+/=] 6.Nf3 Bf5 7.d3 Nxc3 8.bxc3 c5 9.d4 Nc6 [9...c4=] 10.Bd3 Be4 11.0-0 cxd4 12.Nxd4 Bxd3 13.Qxd3 Qd7 14.Bg5 Be7 15.Bxe7 Nxe7 16.f4 g6?! 17.f5 Nxf5 [17...gxf5 18.Nxf5 Nxf5 19.Rxf5 transposes to the game.] 18.Nxf5 [18.e6! fxe6 19.Nxe6+-] 18...gxf5 19.Rxf5 Rc8 [19...0-0-0 20.Raf1+/-] 20.Raf1 Rg8? 21.Rxf7 Qxf7 22.Rxf7 Kxf7 23.Qf5+ Ke7 24.Qf6+ Black will be forced to play Ke8 which loses a rook theQe6 check. 1-0

113 – Wang Hao 3.e4 d5 4.e5 Larry Evans called two or more connected pawns in the center a "steamroller" if unopposed by other pawns. Steamroller pawns chase away everything in their path until they win big material. There was no adequate defense to White's central steamroller pawns in the English Opening game between Wang Hao and Dinara Saduakassova. Wang Hao (2713) - Saduakassova (2479), 8th HD Bank Cup 2018 Hanoi VIE (4.5), 12.03.2018 begins 1.c4 Nf6 2.Nc3 e6 3.e4 d5 4.e5 d4 5.exf6 dxc3 6.bxc3 Qxf6 7.d4 [7.Nf3 b6 8.d4 Bb7=] 7...c5 [7...e5 8.Nf3 Nc6 9.Bg5 Qg6 10.d5 Nb8=] 8.Nf3 cxd4 [8...h6 9.Bd3 Nc6 10.Be4 Bd6 11.0-0 0-0 12.Rb1+/=] 9.Bg5 Qf5 10.cxd4 Bb4+ 11.Bd2 Qa5 12.Bd3 Nc6 13.Rb1 Bxd2+ 14.Qxd2 Rb8 15.Rb5 Qxd2+ 16.Kxd2 b6 17.d5 Nd8 [17...Ne7 18.Re1+/=] 18.Rhb1 Bd7 19.Ra5 Rb7 20.Ra3 Ke7 21.Ng5 [21.Re1+/=] 21...f6 22.Ne4 exd5 23.cxd5 Nf7 [23...f5=] 24.Re1 Rc7? [24...Kd8 25.Ba6+/-] 25.Ng5+ Ne5 26.f4 fxg5 27.fxe5 1-0

1.c4 c5 This is the English Indian Defences.

114 – Van Willigen 2.f4 g6 I had experimented with 1.c4 Nf6 2.f4, so it was logical that I also try this rare line against the Symmetrical English 1.c4 c5 2.f4. Loewe won as White against Kennedy in 1849. Chigorin drew as White with this line in 1880. Hansen vs Nimzowitsch 0-1 in 1928. Black responds most of the time with 2...Nc6 or 2...Nf6 leading to equal chances. I had a short draw against Poul Rasmussen of Denmark. He had a peak ICCF rating of 2267 in 1993. My English Opening vs van Willigen began 1.c4 g6 2.f4. This was played in Vospernik vs Minic in 1961. Basman vs Hartston reached the same position by transposition in 1974 via 1.f4. Basically I was on my own. The King’s Indian Four Pawns Attack was possible, but I was not headed there. My plan was similar to the Marmaduke Wyvill formation 1.c4, 2.Nc3, 3.e3 and 4.f4. Jan Willem van Willigen of the Netherlands rated 2422 earned the title of International Correspondence Chess Master in 2007. Sawyer - Van Willigen, corr ICCF, 1982 begins 1.c4 g6 [1...c5 2.f4 Nc6 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.Nc3 d5 5.cxd5 Nxd5 6.g3 Bg4 7.Bg2 e6 8.0-0 Be7 9.d3 0-0 10.Nxd5?! (10.Bd2=) 10...exd5 11.e4!? dxe4 12.dxe4 Qxd1 13.Rxd1 Nd4 14.Rf1 (14.Kf2=) 14...Bxf3 15.Bxf3 Nxf3+ 16.Rxf3 Rfd8 17.Rf1 Rd4 18.e5 Rad8 1/2-1/2. Sawyer - Rasmussen, corr ICCF 1982] 2.f4 c5 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.e3 Bg7 5.Nc3 d6 6.g3 [6.Be2=] 6...Nc6 7.Bg2 0-0 8.d3 [8.0-0=] 8…a6 9.Qd2 [9.0-0=] 9...Ne8 [9...b5=/+] 10.b3 Rb8 10...Bf5!?=] 11.Bb2 e6 [11...b5 12.0-0=] 12.0-0 Bd7 13.a4 Na5 14.Qc2 b5 [14...Qb6=] 15.axb5 axb5 16.Nd2 f5 17.Ra2 [17.Nxb5 Bxb2 18.Qxb2 Bxb5 19.Qc3 Nxb3

20.Nxb3+/=] 17...Nc6 [17...bxc4 18.bxc4 Nc6=] 18.Bxc6 Bxc6 19.Ne2 [19.cxb5 Bxb5 20.Nxb5 Rxb5 21.Bxg7 Kxg7 22.Rfa1+/=] 19...Bxb2 [19...Nf6=/+] 20.Rxb2 Nf6 21.Ra1 Ng4 [21...b4=/+] 22.Nf1 Rf7 23.Rba2 [23.cxb5 Bxb5=] 23...bxc4 24.bxc4 Rfb7 25.Nc3 h5 [25...e5=/+] 1/2-1/2

115 – Paz 2.Nc3 g6 3.g3 Bg7 In 1982-1984 I played for USA in the ICCF 10th Correspondence Olympiade. Going into the year 1982 I was on a roll and winning a lot of postal chess games against strong American players. I was an active player who competed both in the US and in ICCF. All of a sudden the USA needed to field an Olympic team. Then Helen Warren of APCT asked me if I would like to play. That was awesome! They put me on Board 4 just ahead of Alex Dunne. I’m sure there were many other qualified players. As I recall, the USCF, CCLA and APCT each provided two players on this six member team. Unfortunately these organizations did not always seem to cooperate with each other, but they made up a team. Play in the Olympiad did not begin until near the end of 1982. My problem was that I was too active. At one point earlier in 1982 I had 100 games going all at once. I made 15-20 moves per day. I agreed to draws to weed out as many games as possible. Still several spilled over into the calendar year of 1983. Gradually more and more of my time went to the Olympiad games. They progressed at the pace of about one move every two weeks. The year 1983 was rough. My corporate job moved to another state. I declined to go. I found another position. But then came a bigger problem. One of my kids slowly became terminally ill. In the midst of all this I played Luis Paz in the English Opening. This was my only win in the Olympiad, along with some draws. Sawyer - Paz, corr ICCF 1982 begins 1.c4 g6 2.Nc3 c5 3.g3 Bg7 4.Bg2 Nc6 5.Nf3 e6 6.0-0 Nge7 7.d3 0-0 8.Bd2 [8.Bg5 h6 9.Be3=] 8...d5 [8...b6 9.Qc1 d5=] 9.a3 b6 10.Rb1 Bb7 11.cxd5 [11.b4=] 11...Nxd5 12.Nxd5 [12.Qa4 a6 13.Rfc1=] 12...exd5 13.b4 Qd7 14.bxc5 bxc5 15.Qb3 Nd8 16.Bg5 f6 [16...Ba6 17.Bf4=] 17.Be3 Rc8 18.Rfc1 Qd6 19.Bf4 Qe6

20.Nd2 Rf7 21.e4 d4 22.Nc4 Bf8 23.Bd2 Nc6 24.Bf4 [24.f4+/-] 24...Ne5 [24...Ba6 25.h4=] 25.Nxe5 Qxb3 26.Rxb3 fxe5 27.Bxe5 Bg7 28.Bf4 Bf8 29.Bh3 Rc6 30.Rcb1 Bc8 [30...Ba6 31.e5+/-] 31.Bxc8 Rxc8 32.Rb8 Rxb8 33.Rxb8 Kg7 34.Be5+ Kg8 35.Bd6 1-0

116 – Lovenstein 2.Nc3 Nc6 International Master John L. Watson completed a labor of love when he wrote the complete four volume series on the English Opening. These books were edited by R.G. Wade and published by Batsford in hardcover about one per year from 1979 to 1982. I owned all those copies. But before John Watson, there was no comprehensive study of these openings. Since chess engines were of no practical use in 1979, Watson’s assessments and evaluation of each line proved invaluable. I was more likely to play 1.d4 and 2.c4. However I learned there was a lot of room for creativity in the English Opening. What I could not do as fast after 1.c4 was to attack like I did with 1.e4. However I did play the Sicilian Defence as Black a fair amount in tournaments. Therefore the English Opening was a reasonable addition to my repertoire. Robert H. Lovenstein was an active member of the Chaturanga Chess Club. We played three games that I have recorded from my days in that club after I moved back to Pennsylvania from Texas. In 1984 I was in my 30s and Bob was a generation older. This English Opening against Robert Lovenstein saw me control d5 with my first five moves: 1.c4, 2.Nc3, 3.g3, 4.e4, and 5.Bg2. Black controlled d4. We castled opposite sides and attacked. Sawyer - Lovenstein (1503), Hatboro, PA 26.07.1984 begins 1.c4 c5 2.Nc3 Nc6 3.g3 e6 4.e4 [4.Nf3 Nf6 5.Bg2 d5 6.cxd5 Nxd5 7.0-0 Be7 8.d4 0-0 9.e4+/=] 4...Nf6 5.Bg2 Bd6 [5...Be7 6.Nge2 d6 7.0-0 0-0 8.d4 cxd4 9.Nxd4= which feels a lot like a Sicilian.] 6.Nge2 e5 7.h3 0-0 8.d3 Nd4 9.Bg5 Be7 10.Qd2 h6 11.Be3 [11.Bxf6 Bxf6 12.Nxd4 cxd4 13.Nd5=] 11...Nxe2 12.Qxe2 d6 13.f4 b6 14.0-0-0 Bb7 15.f5 a6 16.g4 b5 [16...Nh7!? =] 17.Rdg1 [An interesting try is 17.g5 hxg5 18.h4 g4 19.h5=] 17...Nh7

18.Qf2 Bg5 [18...Bh4 19.Qe2 b4=/+] 19.h4 Bxe3+ 20.Qxe3 b4 21.Ne2 Qa5 [21...f6=] 22.Kb1 [22.g5+/-] 22...Rab8? [22...f6 23.Bf3+/=] 23.g5 b3 24.a3 h5 25.Bf3 Qd8 26.Bxh5 f6 [26...Kh8 27.Bf3+-] 27.g6 Ng5 28.hxg5 fxg5 29.Bg4 Qf6 30.Rh8+ Kxh8 31.Qh3+ Kg8 32.Qh7# 1-0

117 – Caruana 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.e3 The Symmetrical English Opening 1.c4 c5 sees both sides attack an opposing central d-file square. Early pawn exchanges break the symmetry. These exchanges change the pawn structure to allow for a clear strategy and a chance to play for the victory. White won the Exchange in the game between Fabiano Caruana and Atulya Shetty. Caruana (2811) - Shetty (2389), PRO League Group Stage chess.com INT (5), 07.02.2018 begins 1.c4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.e3 Nf6 4.Nc3 d5 5.cxd5 Nxd5 6.Bb5 Nxc3 7.bxc3 Bd7 [7...Qc7 8.0-0 a6 9.Be2 Bf5 10.Nh4 Bd7 11.d4 e6=] 8.0-0 g6 [8...e6 9.d4 Be7 10.e4 cxd4 11.cxd4 0-0 12.Rb1=] 9.Ba3 Qa5 10.Qb3 e6 11.c4 Be7 12.d4 a6 13.Bxc6 Bxc6 14.d5 exd5 15.cxd5 Bb5 16.Rfc1 Rc8 17.Bb2 0-0 18.a4 Bd7 [18...Be2 19.Ne5+/=] 19.Qxb7 Rfd8 [19...Rc7 20.Qb3+-] 20.Bc3 Qc7 21.Qxc7 Rxc7 22.Ba5 [White wins the Exchange.] 22...Rcc8 23.Bxd8 Rxd8 24.e4 1-0

118 – Tregubov 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 The flexibility of the English Opening 1.c4 c5 provides a wide variety of strategic options. Either player can focus on any part of the board, or on the whole board at once. Black began on the queenside and worked his way across the board. Three black moves on the kingside were all the tempi White needed to attack a weakness on the queenside in the game Pavel Tregubov vs BogdanDaniel Deac. Tregubov (2581) - Deac (2582), 5th Purtichju Open 2018 Porticcio FRA (4.2), 02.07.2018 begins 1.c4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 e6 6.g3 Qb6 7.Ndb5 [7.Nb3 Ne5 8.e4 Bb4 9.Qe2 d6 10.f4 Nc6 11.Be3=] 7...Ne5 8.Bg2 a6 9.Na4 Qa5+ 10.Nbc3 Nxc4 11.b3 Nb6 [11...Bb4 12.0-0 Na3 13.Bb2 d5 14.Qc1=] 12.Nxb6 Qxb6 13.0-0 Qa5 14.Bd2 Qd8 15.Bf4 Be7 16.Qc2 Nh5 [16...0-0 17.Rfd1=] 17.Nd5 Nxf4 18.Nc7+! Kf8 [18...Qxc7 19.Qxc7 Nxe2+ 20.Kh1 Nd4 21.Rad1+/-] 19.Nxa8 d5 [19...Nxg2 20.Rac1+-] 20.gxf4 Bd7 21.Qc7 1-0

119 – Straszacker 2.Nf3 Nf6 The American Postal Chess Tournaments (APCT) set up a match vs the South African Correspondence Chess Association (SACCA) in 1978. As I recall, there were maybe 20 boards on each side. These were two game matches played on the same postcard. With the speed of mail, our games lasted about a year. I played a board somewhere in the middle of the APCT team. I don't think we had any ratings to judge potential strength. Since we were on the team we were better than average club players. Dr. Reinhardt Ludwig Straszacker was called a gifted chess player at an early age. Dr. Straszacker was an electric power company business executive of some significant renown who retired in 1980. He was killed in a car accident in 1999. Bill Wall noted this about Dr. Straszacker: “Longest running correspondence chess rivalry. Reinhart Straszacker and Hendrick van Huyssteen, both of South Africa, played their first game of correspondence chess in 1946. They played for over 53 years, until Straszacker died in 1999. They played 112 games, with both men winning 56 games.” The game I had Black started as a Reti English Opening and transposed into a Queens Gambit. This game had more moves that than our other game. Probably we sent several “IF-moves” to save time. For example, "10.Nxc6 IF bxc6 THEN 11.a3". Straszacker - Sawyer, corr APCT-SACCA 1978 begins 1.Nf3 Nf6 2.b3 c5 3.Bb2 e6 4.c4 d5 5.e3 Nc6 6.d4 Be7 [6...cxd4] 7.Nc3 0-0 8.Ne5?! [White tries to mix things up while his king is still in the center. This tends to turn out badly for him.] 8...cxd4 9.exd4 Qa5 10.Nxc6 bxc6 11.a3 dxc4 12.Bxc4 c5 13.dxc5 Qxc5 14.Qc2 Bb7 15.0-0 [White has castled but he has nothing else on the kingside.] 15...Qg5! [The threat of checkmate begins as attack vs the White king.] 16.f3 Qh4? [16...Rfd8!-/+] 17.Bd3? [White is thinking attack when he should think defence. 17.Qf2 would have greatly neutralized the risk.] 17...Bc5+ 18.Kh1 Bd6 19.g3 [19.h3 Qg3-+] 19...Bxg3 20.Qg2 Be5 21.Nd1 Bxb2 22.Nxb2 Rfd8 23.Qg3 Qxg3?! [23...Qd4!-+] 24.hxg3

Ng4 25.Kg1 Ne5 26.Rad1 Nxd3 27.Nxd3? Ba6 28.Nc5 Bxf1 29.Rxf1 Rac8 30.Rc1 Rd2 31.b4 a5 32.Kf1 axb4 0-1

120 – Haines 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 When you play with the White chess pieces, do you like to face the Benoni Defence or do you avoid it? Ray Haines transposed to the English Opening in the first round of the 1982 World Open. Ray Haines got a good position as White against Parsons. Black overextended with 12...e4?! Then White had a small advantage. Through a series of exchanges, White got an extra pawn on c6. Parsons fought back. When it was obvious White could not hold that pawn a draw was agreed in the face of an even endgame. Haines - Parsons (2153), World Open (1), 1982 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 c5 3.Nf3 cxd4 4.Nxd4 e5 5.Nb5 d5 6.cxd5 Bc5 7.N1c3!? [7.N5c3 0-0 8.g3+/= Deep Fritz, Critter, Houdini] 7...a6 8.Na3 b5 9.Nc2 Bf5 10.Ne3 Bg6 11.g3 0-0 12.Bg2 e4?! [12...Nbd7=] 13.0-0 Qe7 14.a3 Rd8 15.b4 Bb6 16.Qb3 Nbd7 17.a4 Rab8 18.Nc2 Ne5 19.axb5 axb5 20.Be3 [20.Bg5+/-] 20...Nc4 21.Bxb6 Rxb6 22.Rfd1 [22.Rfc1+/=] 22...e3 23.Nd4? [23.f3=] 23...exf2+ 24.Kh1 Ne3 25.Nc6 Rxc6 26.dxc6 Nxd1 27.Rxd1 Rc8 [27...Ng4! 28.Rf1 Ne3 29.Rxf2 Nxg2 30.Kxg2 Qd6=/+ and Black picks up the c-pawn.] 28.Qb2 [28.Bf3=] 28...Ne4 [28...Qe8! 29.Qd2 Rxc6!=/+] 29.Nxe4 Bxe4 30.Qd4 f1Q+ 31.Rxf1 1/2-1/2

121 – Duda 3.Nc3 g6 4.g3 Bg7 Masters choose tactics based on recognized patterns. When White saw the move 3...g6 in an English Opening, he planned to attack weak points along the h-file. Grandmaster Jan-Krzysztof Duda first developed his minor pieces. White began attacking with 8.h4. Later, Black couldn't defend against mate in his game vs Johan-Sebastian Christiansen. Duda (2724) - Christiansen (2492), Gibraltar Masters 2018 Caleta ENG, 24.01.2018 begins 1.c4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Nc3 g6 4.g3 Bg7 5.Bg2 e6 [5...d6 6.0-0 e5 7.d3 Nge7 8.a3 0-0 9.Rb1=] 6.d3 Nge7 7.Bd2 [7.0-0 0-0 8.Bg5 h6 9.Bd2 d5=] 7...0-0 8.h4 h6 [8...h5 9.0-0 d5 10.Bg5=] 9.Qc1 Kh7 10.Ne4 Qb6 [10...d6 11.h5 g5 12.Nfxg5+ hxg5 13.h6=] 11.Bc3 e5 12.h5 Nd4 13.hxg6+ Nxg6 14.Nxd4 exd4 15.Bd2 Ne5 [15...Ne7 16.Bg5+-] 16.Bxh6 Bxh6 17.Qg5! f5 [17...Ng4 18.Qxg4+-] 18.Qe7+ Kg8 [18...Rf7 19.Qxe5+-] 19.Nd6 Rf7 20.Qxe5 Bd2+ 21.Kf1 White mates in three. 1-0

122 – Clauser 3.Nc3 d5 4.cxd5 Jack Clauser is my long time chess friend from Pennsylvania. We played in person a few times. We played postal chess off and on for about 10 years, mostly unrated games. In the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit world, Jack Clauser is known for his interesting games. Also, Jack Clauser was the proofreader for the rough first drafts of several of my BDG books. Clauser offered me many good suggestions. Any mistakes that slipped through into print were not his fault. It was relatively rare for me to play the English Opening. I prefer 1.e4 or 1.d4 or sometimes 1.Nc3. I find that playing a variety of openings improves my overall chess knowledge and experience, although it rarely improves ones chess rating. To get and keep a high rating, you do best to play the same good lines over and over again. In this game Clauser treated the position like a Semi-Tarrasch Defence with 4.cxd5 Nxd5. The main difference was that Black retreated his knight with 5…Nc7 instead to capturing 5…Nxc3. The wide open symmetrical pawn structure was typical of a line in the Queens Gambit Accepted. This position was hard to win. Sawyer - Clauser, corr 1996 begins 1.c4 c5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Nc3 d5 4.cxd5 Nxd5 5.e3 Nc7 [Black could adopt a Gruenfeld approach with 5...Nxc3 6.bxc3 g6 7.d4 Bg7 8.Bd3 0-0 9.0-0 Qc7=] 6.Bc4 e6 7.0-0 Nc6 8.d4 Be7 [8...cxd4 9.exd4 Be7 10.Bf4+/=] 9.dxc5 Qxd1 10.Rxd1 Bxc5 11.Ne4 [Or 11.a3 and the position resembles a Queens Gambit Accepted.] 11...Be7 12.Nd6+ Bxd6 13.Rxd6 Ke7 14.Rd1 Rd8 15.Rxd8 Kxd8 16.Bd2 [16.b3+/=] 16...f6 17.b4 Bd7 18.b5 Ne7 19.a4 e5 20.Bd3 g6 21.e4 Rc8 22.Rd1 Ke8 23.Be3 a6 24.bxa6 Bxa4? [24...Nxa6!=] 25.Ra1 b5 26.a7 Nc6 27.h3? [Here White returns the favor. Now chances are equal again. White could obtain the better chances for an advantage with 27.g4! h6 28.Bxh6

Nxa7 29.g5 fxg5 30.Bxg5 Ne6 31.Bf6 Nc6 32.Nxe5 Nxe5 33.Bxe5+/=] 27...Ra8 28.Rc1 Kd7 29.Nh2 Nxa7 30.Ng4 Ne8 31.Ra1 Kc6 32.Bb1 Nc8 33.Ba2 Bb3 34.Rc1+ Bc4 35.Bxc4 bxc4 36.Rxc4+ Kd7 37.f3 1/2-1/2

123 – Turner 3.Nc3 Nc6 4.g3 In 1996 I played many correspondence games by email. In fact probably I played too many. My mixed results were mostly bad. I played Howard Turner of California in APCT. I am guessing that this may have been Howard Farley Turner who had at one point a USCF correspondence rating of 1785. Mark Dvoretsky wrote “Secrets of Chess Training” translated by someone named Howard Turner. It seems like a rather common name, and I do not if know that was the same person or not. We played an English Opening. Yes, I played 1.c4 as White!? Truly that is rare for me. The Black retreated with 6…Nc7 which is similar to the 5… Nc7 in my Jack Clauser game. This game took on the character of a reversed Maroczy Bind after 1.c4 c5 followed by 4.g3 d5 5.cxd5 Nxd5 and 7…e5 8.d3. The key moment of the game was move 10. Black castled and lost the e5 pawn to a combination. Better would have been to support e5 with 10…f6. Play continued for another 20 moves. Black resigned when he was “only” down a pawn. However that pawn was an extra passed pawn as the endgame approached. Black’s knight on d5 was under attack. After it moved, 34.Bb4+ seemed likely. White would continue to advance his forces. Sawyer (1960) - Turner (1500), corr APCT EMQ-2, 1996 begins 1.c4 c5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Nc3 Nc6 4.g3 d5 5.cxd5 Nxd5 6.Bg2 Nc7 7.0-0 e5 8.d3 Be7 9.Nd2 Bd7 10.Nc4 0-0 [10...f6 11.f4 b5 12.Ne3 exf4 13.Nf5 b4 14.Nxe7 Qxe7=] 11.Bxc6 Bxc6 12.Nxe5 Be8 13.a4 [13.Be3+/=] 13...b6 [13...f6 14.Nf3=] 14.Qc2 Bf6 15.Ng4 Bd4 16.e3 Bxc3 17.bxc3 Bd7 18.f3 [18.Ne5 Bh3 19.Re1+/=] 18...Bxg4 19.fxg4 Qd7 20.h3 [20.a5 Qxg4 21.e4=] 20...Rad8 21.d4 Ne6 [21...Rfe8=] 22.Kh2 Rfe8 23.Qf5 cxd4 24.exd4 Nc7

25.Qxd7 Re2+ [25...Rxd7 26.Kg2 Nd5 27.Bd2=] 26.Rf2 Rxf2+ 27.Kg1 Rxd7 28.Kxf2 Nd5 [28...f6 29.Ke3+/-] 29.Bd2 Rc7 30.Ra3 Kf8 31.Ke2 Ke7 32.Kd3 Rd7 33.c4 1-0

1.c4 e5 This variation of the English Opening 1.c4 e5 is in effect the reverse of the Sicilian Defence 1.e4 c5. The move wide open the opening becomes, the more White’s extra move matters.

124 – Grandelius 2.g3 Nc6 3.Bg2 Bc5 The bold attacking schemes of Nils Grandelius lead to exciting chess. The grandmaster pushes his h-pawn against the English Opening 2.g3 of Maxime Lagarde. White castles quickly on the kingside, but his pieces on the queenside make very slow progress. Black castles queenside and opens major kingside lines to force checkmate. Lagarde (2591) - Grandelius (2652), Lasker 150 Blitz Swiss Berlin GER, 28.04.2018 begins 1.c4 e5 2.g3 Nc6 3.Bg2 Bc5 4.Nc3 a6 5.Nf3 d6 6.e3 Ba7 7.0-0 f5 8.d4 e4 9.Nd2 h5!? [9...Nf6 10.f3 exf3 11.Nxf3 0-0=] 10.f3 h4 11.fxe4 hxg3 12.hxg3 Qg5 13.Qf3 Nf6 14.Nb3 [14.exf5 Nxd4 15.exd4 Bxd4+ 16.Rf2 Qxf5 17.Qxf5 Bxf5 18.Bxb7+/=] 14...Qh6 [14...Ng4 15.exf5 Qh5 16.Qe4+ Ne7 17.Rf4 Bxf5 18.Rxf5 Qxf5 19.Qxf5 Nxf5 20.Bxb7=] 15.exf5 Bd7 16.c5 [16.Kf2+/-] 16...0-0-0 17.cxd6 Rdf8 18.Bd2 [18.Rf2 g6=] 18...Ng4 19.Qxg4 Qh2+ 20.Kf2 Bxf5 21.Qg5 [21.Qf4 Bh3-+] 21...Bg4+ 22.Ke1 [22.Qf4 Rxf4+ 23.gxf4 Rh3-+] 22...Qxg3+ and mate next move. 0-1

125 – Socko 2…Nc6 3.Nc3 g6 The Closed English Opening sounds like an oxymoron. How can an opening be closed? It starts when both sides initially huddle behind their pawns before engaging in combat. Players have to open the position to win, but where? Black attacks d4 and e4 from e5 and f5 in the game Mateusz Paszewski and Bartosz Socko. Black found a win by pin. Paszewski (2322) - Socko (2588), TCh-POL Ekstraliga 2018 Poland POL, 10.06.2018 begins 1.c4 e5 2.g3 Nc6 3.Nc3 g6 4.Bg2 Bg7 5.e4 d6 6.d3 f5 [6...Nge7 7.Nge2 0-0 8.0-0 Bd7=] 7.Nge2 Nf6 8.0-0 [8.Nd5=] 8...0-0 9.h3 Be6 [9...f4!? 10.gxf4 Nh5 11.f5 Qh4=] 10.exf5 gxf5 11.f4 Qd7 12.Be3 Rae8 13.Qd2 e4 14.b3 exd3 15.Qxd3 Ne4 16.Bd4? [16.Rac1 Nb4 17.Qb1=] 16...Nxd4 17.Nxd4 Nxc3 18.Qxc3 c5 0-1

126 – Smirnov 2.g3 Nf6 3.Bg2 c6 I love chess openings. All of them, from one side or the other, or both! It's great to start well. It's better to play finish strong. This English Opening game between Zviad Izoria and Anton Smirnov led to a roughly even opening. Black's two bishops proved stronger in tactics than White's two knights. Anton Smirnov attacked all over the board. Izoria (2599) - Smirnov (2527), PRO League Group Stage chess.com INT, 25.01.2018 begins 1.c4 e5 2.g3 Nf6 3.Bg2 c6 4.Nf3 [4.d4 e4 5.Nc3 Bb4 6.Qb3 Bxc3+ 7.Qxc3 0-0=] 4...e4 5.Nd4 Qb6 [5...d5 6.d3=] 6.e3 [6.Nc2 d5 7.cxd5 cxd5 8.Nc3 Nc6=; or 6.Nb3 a5 7.d3 a4 8.N3d2 d5=] 6...Bc5 [6...d5 7.Nc3 Bg4 8.Qb3 Qxb3 9.axb3=] 7.d3 exd3 8.0-0 d5 9.cxd5 Nxd5 10.Nb3 Be7 11.Qxd3 [11.Bxd5 cxd5 12.Nc3 Bh3 13.Re1 Qc6=] 11...Nb4 12.Qe2 [12.Qd1 Qa6=] 12...Nxa2 13.Na5? [13.Rxa2 Qxb3 14.Ra1 0-0=/+] 13...Nxc1 14.Rxc1 0-0 15.Nd2 Be6 [15...Na6=/+] 16.Ndc4 Qb5 17.Qc2 Na6 18.Bf1 Nb4 19.Qb1 b6 20.Nd6 [20.Nb3 c5 21.Ne5 Qe8-/+] 20...Qh5 21.Nab7 a5 22.Bg2 [22.Qe4 Bf6-+] 22...Rab8 23.Bxc6 Nxc6 24.Rxc6 Bd5 [24...Qf3 25.Rc3 Bh3-+] 25.Qc2 [25.Qf5 Qxf5 26.Nxf5 Bb4 27.Rxb6 Bxb7-+ Black has won a piece.] 25...Rxb7 [White is busted. For example, after 25...Rxb7 26.Rc7 Rxc7 27.Qxc7 Qf3-+] 0-1

127 – Shvartsman 2.Nc3 Bb4 Michael R. Shvartsman is a USCF National Master rated 2208. We played a sharp contest in the relatively rare 2.Nc3 Bb4 line of the English Opening. Mike Shvartsman exhibited a fighting spirit. In the notes I include my game with Horst Niedermayr of Austria. We played in the Olympiad. Niedermayr has a 2344 ICCF rating. Sawyer (1969) - Shvartsman (2082), corr APCT EMQ-1, 1996 begins 1.c4 e5 2.Nc3 Bb4 3.Nd5 [3.g3 Ne7 (3...Nf6=) 4.Bg2 0-0 5.e3 (5.Nf3=) 5...Bxc3 6.bxc3 d6 7.d4 Nbc6 8.Ne2 b6 9.0-0 Rb8 10.Ba3 Bg4= but my chances went downhill from here. 0-1 in 35. Sawyer - Niedermayr, corr ICCF 1982] 3...Bc5 [3...Be7 4.Nf3=] 4.e3 c6!? [This is an aggressive approach. Another interesting line is 4...Nf6 5.b4 Nxd5 6.bxc5 Nf6 7.Bb2 Qe7 8.Nf3 Nc6 9.d4 exd4 10.Nxd4 Qxc5 11.Nb5 0-0 12.Ba3 Nb4 13.Nxc7 Qxc7 14.Bxb4 Re8=] 5.Nc3 [5.d4!?] 5...Qe7 6.g3!? [6.Be2] 6...d6 7.Bg2 f5 8.Nge2 Nf6 9.0-0 0-0 10.d4 Bb6 11.b4 [11.b3=] 11...e4 12.Bb2 Be6 13.d5 Bf7 14.Qd2? [14.a4=] 14...Nbd7 15.Nd4 Bxd4 16.Qxd4 Ne5 17.Rfd1 Bh5 18.Rdb1 Nfd7 [18...Nd3!-/+] 19.c5 Rf6? [19...dxc5 20.bxc5 Qf7=/+] 20.dxc6 bxc6 [20...Nxc6 21.Nd5+-] 21.Nd5 Qf7 22.Nxf6+ gxf6 [22...Qxf6 23.Qxd6 Qxd6 24.cxd6+-] 23.Qxd6 Bf3 24.Bxf3 [24.b5!+/-] 24...exf3 25.Bxe5 Nxe5 26.b5 Qh5 27.h4 Qg4 28.Kh2 Qc4 29.bxc6 Ng4+ 30.Kg1 Nxf2 31.Rb2 [31.Rb8+! Kf7 32.Qd7+ Kg6 33.h5+ Kh6 34.Qxf5 Nh3+ 35.Kh2 Rxb8 36.Kxh3+-] 31...Ne4 32.Qd4 Qf7 33.c7?! [33.Rf1 f2+ 34.Rfxf2 Nxf2 35.Kxf2+-] 33...Qg6 34.Kh1 [34.Qxe4 fxe4 35.Rb8+ Kf7 36.Kh2+/-] 34...Qg4 35.Rab1? [35.Qd6 Nxd6 36.cxd6=] 35...Qh3+? [35...Kg7!-+] 36.Rh2? [36.Kg1 Qxg3+ 37.Kf1=] 36...Nxg3+ [36...Nf2+! 37.Kg1 Qxg3+ 38.Kf1 Nh3-+ wins the king or queen or two rooks.] 37.Kg1 f2+ 38.Kxf2 Qxh2+ 39.Kf3 Ne4 40.Rb2 Qg3+ 41.Ke2 Qf2+ [Black settles for a draw by perpetual check. He still had winning chances after 41...Qxc7 42.Qd5+ Kg7 43.Qxa8 Qh2+ 44.Kd3 Qxb2-+] 42.Kd3 Qf1+ 43.Kc2 Qe2+ 44.Kc1 Qe1+ [What a battle!] 1/2-1/2

128 – Wisnewski 2.Nc3 Nc6 3.d3 Nigel Davies noted on Facebook that he was seriously thinking about daily blogging. I understand that. Sure takes a lot of work! Since 2011 through 2016 most of the time I bogged every day, but many months in 2015 and 2016 I chose three days a week. After you play a game, it is helpful to look up the opening in a book to see how you could improve for the next time to play it. Sometimes it can be difficult to find the actual opening variation that you played. This is especially true when positions are reached by different move orders than what the book gives. In this game we have another English line. As I was looking it up, at first I had a hard time finding it in Christoph Wisnewski's book "Play 1...Nc6!" This book is excellent, although he focused on a very limited repertoire. Eventually I found the position I was looking for by transposition in Chapter 13, in a note to Game 66. As the game continued, I was able to build up an attack. I did blunder a couple times in this blitz game as noted below. Fortunately for me, the favor was returned. moli (1393) - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 12.07.2011 begins 1.c4 Nc6 2.Nc3 e5 3.d3 [This is a waiting move. White is likely a Dragon Sicilian player who wants to get a Reversed Dragon with an extra move.] 3…Nf6 4.g3 Bc5 [At first I was confused in the book by Chapter 14 which is really the English Four Knights directly without the early d3.] 5.Bg2 0-0 [The book gives 5...a6 first here with a move order that has d3 coming on move 5. Apparently he doesn't like to castle just yet. After 6.Nf3 d6 7.0-0 he plays 7...h6. 7...0-0 would transpose to my game.] 6.Nf3 d6 7.0-0 a6 [Better late than never.] 8.Bg5 h6 9.Bd2 [This has got to be a waste of time. Now after 9...Bg4 10.a3 Qd7 Black has a good position.] 9…Bg4 10.a3 Qd7 11.Qc1 Kh7 12.b4 Ba7 13.Be3 Bd4 [13...Nd4!] 14.Nxd4 exd4 15.Bxc6 Qxc6 16.Bxd4 Bh3 17.e4 Bxf1 18.Qxf1 Qd7? [18...Ng8+/=] 19.e5? [19.Bxf6 gxf6 20.Nd5+/-] 19...dxe5 20.Bxe5 Ng4 21.Bf4 g5 22.Bd2

f5 [22...Rad8-+] 23.h3 Nf6 [23...Ne5-+] 24.Kg2 c6 25.Be3 Rae8 26.Rd1 Qe6 [26...f4-+] 27.d4 Ne4? 28.Nxe4 [28.d5!=] 28...Qxe4+ 29.Kg1 f4 30.Bc1 fxg3 0-1

129 – Sawyer 2.Nc3 Nc6 3.Nf3 Bc5 Since 2003 I have played 1...Nc6 over 3000 times. I tried every typical setup for Black many times. My second move is usually some push of my epawn or d-pawn. I never know what kind of game will result. Christoph Scheerer published a book on the BDG with Everyman. I enjoyed book immensely. As Black I followed Christoph Scheerer from his book "Play 1...Nc6!" (written when he was Christoph Wisnewski). I do not know these lines by heart. I just play blitz games and look them up afterwards. If I win, I naturally store some good patterns in my mind. If I lose, I will be highly motivated to find an improvement. One good thing about playing Black is that White rarely spends time preparing for 1...Nc6. Usually I am comfortable playing familiar lines. I like to head toward patterns that make sense to me and watch for combinations. In today's game the center becomes closed. Black gets to finish with a nice mating pattern. ansako (1749) - Sawyer (1939), ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 09.07.2011 begins 1.Nf3 Nc6 2.c4 e5 [I am attempting to follow Wisnewski (now Scheerer) from his book "Play 1...Nc6!" I don't know the lines, but I plan to just play and look them up afterwards.] 3.Nc3 Bc5 [Wisnewski recommends Nf6 which is what I usually play. I seem to remember seeing Bc5 when glancing through his book. Looking now I see that he plays Bc5 in g3 lines. Vs the 4.e3 lines, he suggests 3...Nf6 4.e3 Bb4] 4.e3 d6 5.Be2 Nf6 6.0-0 0-0 7.d3 a6 8.a3 Bg4 9.b4 Bb6 10.Nd5 Nxd5 11.cxd5 Ne7 12.Qb3 Qd7 [Chances are about equal.] 13.Bb2 f5 14.e4 f4 [Black plays to close the center and overwhelm the White king in classic King's Indian Defence fashion. 14...Ng6=/+] 15.a4 g5 16.b5 [16.h3!?] 16...Bxf3 17.Bxf3 g4 18.Be2 f3 19.Bd1 Ng6 20.a5 Bc5 [20...fxg2! Here or just about any time during the next four moves, Black can take on g2 with advantage. I decided for the time being to allow the position to remain somewhat closed and play for mate.] 21.Ba3 Bxa3 22.Qxa3 Nf4 23.Qc3 Qg7?! [Again taking now on g2 is good. My idea was to go to Qh6 and threaten a mate after fxg2.]

24.Ra4 Qf7!? [Still taking on g2 is good. By now I see the fork on the Q+K as well as the entire final mating combination that is actually played in the game.] 25.d4? Ne2+! 26.Bxe2 fxe2 27.Re1 Qxf2+ 28.Kh1 Qf1+ 0-1

130 – Bond 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.d3 Bb4 Here we see one of the final games by Jocelyn Bond from the Jonquiere chess championship. That is located in the region of Quebec, Canada. Jocelyn Bond wrote: "My opponent of this week was Risto Heinoo. Even with about a 1500 rating, he's still dangerous even at 70 y.o. As years go, he got the reputation of tactician and also dangerous attacking player." "In the first game, I was very lucky to get a half of one point; probably he got the win. I apprehended this game as black against the very experienced Risto Heinoo, the Jonquiere chess club president." "He played 1.c4 as I thought before the game. But I played very good opening moves. So I left the white queen come to the king side and I played softly and I defended badly my position. With 6 minutes left (me 8) my opponent preferred to offer to me the draw by moves repetition." Risto Heinoo (1500) - Jocelyn Bond (1957), Jonquiere chess ch (13), 09.08.2012 begins 1.c4 Nf6 2.Nc3 e5 [English Opening (with 2...Nf6): My English Opening is in reconstruction, but I like 1.c4 e5 as black.] 3.d3 Bb4 4.g3 d5 5.Bd2 0-0N [5...Be6 6.Bg2 c6 7.cxd5 cxd5 8.Qb3 Nc6 9.e3 Rb8 La Couvee -Landry, Victoria 2005/1/2–1/2 (35)] 6.a3 Bxc3 7.Bxc3 Re8 8.Bg2 c6 [also interesting is 8...d4 9.Bd2=/+] 9.cxd5= Nxd5 10.Bd2 Qb6 11.Qc2+/= Bg4 12.b4 Nd7 13.Qc4 [I considered that move risky. 13.Nf3!? =] 13...Be6=/+ 14.Qh4 f5 [risky I think. Better is 14...Nf8-+ is more solid] 15.Nf3= Ne7 16.Ng5+/= Bf7?? [With much time I didn't see 16...Nf8!] 17.Qxh7++- Kf8 18.Qh8+ Bg8 19.Ne6+ Kf7 20.Ng5+ [Better is 20.Nxg7 Rf8 21.Bf3 must win] 20...Kf8= 21.Ne6+ (My opponent ask to me for a draw; naturally I said yes. In the final position he was not sure how to continue and had only 6 minutes on the clock. A draw made us happy) [Notes by Bond and Deep Fritz] 1/2-1/2

131 – Kurth 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.g3 Bb4 In 1982 I played the English against some strong postal players. My opponent Wilfried Kurth of Germany became an International Correspondence Chess Master in 1997 and Senior International Correspondence Chess Master in 2000. His ICCF rating is 2524. In the notes I mention Dr. Claudio Casabona, an International Correspondence Chess Grand Master who is rated 2586. Also in the notes is a game I played against George Butler from the APCT Regional Team Tournament. Anyone could enter, but I tried to stack the deck in my region’s favor. TD Helen Warren organized the club into seven geographical regions divided evenly by the number of the 1000 APCT players in each state. I had home mailing addresses for the top masters and experts in my region because I had played many of them. When this annual event came around, I wrote and asked each of them to enter. Material was equal in this game. The heavy pieces remained but most of the central pawns were gone. Unless someone blunders, it could take years of postal play for either side to win this game. Sawyer - Kurth, corr ICCF 1982 begins 1.c4 e5 2.Nc3 Nf6 [2...Nc6 3.g3 g6 4.Bg2 Bg7 5.d3 d6 6.f4 (6.e4 h5!? 7.Nge2 h4 8.0-0 h3 9.Bh1 Bg4=) 6...f5 7.Nh3!? (7.fxe5 Nxe5 8.Nf3=) 7...Nf6 8.0-0 0-0 9.Nd5 (9.e3=) 9...Nd4 10.Kh1 c6 11.Nxf6+ Bxf6 12.fxe5 dxe5 13.Bh6 Bg7 14.Bxg7 Kxg7 15.Qd2 Qd6 16.e3 Ne6 17.b4 Bd7 18.Rad1 Rad8 19.d4 e4 20.Nf4 Nxf4 21.gxf4 Be6 22.c5 1/2-1/2. Sawyer - Casabona, corr ICCF 1982] 3.g3 [3.Nf3 Nc6 4.g3 Bb4 5.Bg2 0-0 6.0-0 e4 7.Ne1 Bxc3 8.dxc3 Re8 (8...h6 9.Nc2 d6 10.Ne3 Re8=) 9.Bg5 (9.Nc2 d6 10.Bg5=) 9...h6 10.Bxf6 Qxf6 11.Nc2 Qe6 (11...d6 12.Ne3 Bf5 13.f4 Ne7=) 12.Ne3 Ne7 13.Qd2 c6 (13...b6=) 14.b3 (14.Rfd1 b6 15.Qd6+/=) 14...d6 15.Rfd1 Rd8 16.Qd4 f5 17.f4 b6 18.a4 Bb7 19.Qd2 d5 1/2-1/2. Sawyer - Butler, corr APCT 1983] 3...Bb4 4.Bg2 0-0 5.Nf3 Re8 6.0-0 e4 7.Nd4 Bxc3 [7...Nc6 8.Nc2 Bxc3

9.dxc3=] 8.bxc3 [8.dxc3 d6 9.Be3 Nbd7=] 8...Nc6 [8...h6 9.d3 d6 10.Nc2 Nbd7 11.Ne3=] 9.d3 exd3 10.exd3 Nxd4 11.cxd4 h6 [11...d5 12.Bf4 c6 13.Rb1 Bg4=] 12.Bf4 [12.d5!+/=] 12...d5 13.Be5 dxc4 14.dxc4 Ng4 15.Bf4 c6 16.d5 cxd5 1/2-1/2

132 – Muir 3.Nf3 d6 4.d4 Bg4 The English Opening gives Black such a large buffet of choices that it can be difficult to pick one. As Black I tried 12 different moves vs 1.c4. In an English Opening against Bob Muir we chose a variation that could have come from a Queen Pawn Indian opening after 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 d6 3.Nc3 e5 4.Nf3 as well as after 1.c4 e5. Black's options remind me of the Golden Corral which is a buffet restaurant chain. You pay one price for all you can eat. You serve yourself, grab a clean plate, go to the buffet food tables, fill your plate with what you want and then return to sit at your own table to eat. Repeat the process as desired. That leads me to a story. Before we had cell phones we were on a 1000 mile trip with family. We stopped at a Golden Corral near Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Later our vehicles got separated and we could not find each other. We made calls to another relative to make a plan. Finally we decided to meet at a Golden Corral in a small town where I had never been but it was near our final destination. We made it for lunch at noon on the appointed day and were reunited with family at that restaurant. The problem with a buffet is the temptation to eat too much food and get fat. I am successful in controlling my weight when I eat from a limited menu. I am successful in my chess openings when I limit myself to a few lines I know well. Often my repertoire has too much fat in it. This game shows how easy it is to drift into trouble if Black stops pushing forward. The defence I chose was fine. When I could force a draw by 22...Nxf2! I backed off my knight with 22...Nc5? and got a losing position. Muir - Sawyer (2010), Williamsport PA 1996 begins 1.c4 e5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.Nf3 d6 4.d4 Bg4 [The main line is 4...Nbd7 5.e4 c6 6.Be2 Be7 7.0-0 0-0 8.Re1+/=] 5.dxe5 Bxf3 6.exf6 Bc6 7.fxg7 Bxg7 8.Qc2 Qe7 9.e3 Na6 10.a3 Nc5 11.Nd5 Bxd5 12.cxd5 0-0-0 13.Be2 Rhg8 14.Bf3 Nd7 15.Qxh7 Ne5 16.Qf5+ Kb8 17.Rb1 Bh6 18.Bd2?! [18.h4+/-] 18...Rg5! 19.Qe4 Rdg8 [19...f5!=] 20.Bc3 f5 21.Qa4 Nd3+ 22.Ke2 Nc5? [Black should have played 22...Nxf2! 23.Kxf2 Rxg2+! 24.Bxg2 Qxe3+ 25.Kf1 Qd3+ with a draw by perpetual check.] 23.Qc2 Bg7 [If 23...Ne4 24.g3+/-] 24.Bxg7 [Or

24.h4!+-] 24...Qxg7 25.h4 Rg6 26.Qxf5 Rf6 27.Qc2 Nd7 28.Rbc1 Ne5 29.Be4 Ng4 30.f3 Ne5 31.g4 1-0

133 – Quinones 3.g3 Nf6 4.Bg2 Chess kings hide behind the safety of pawns in the same way generals and kings lead battles from the rear in the real world. The monarch risks great danger if he ventures forth even a short distance onto an open line or in front of the pawns. However luck favors the bold in most chess games for tactics and strategy. Jorge Victor Quiñones Borda sent me this correspondence game in the English Opening. The White king advanced to ensure the success of his kingside assault. He had to calculate very accurately. Black will have to give up material to stop the mate. Quiñones Borda (2263) - Herrera (2171), CAD/ML/01-16 ICCF, 30.05.2016 begins 1.c4 e5 2.g3 Nf6 3.Bg2 Nc6 4.Nc3 Bb4 5.Nd5 0-0 6.Nf3 [6.a3 Bc5 7.b4 Bd4 8.Rb1 d6 9.e3 Bb6 10.Nxf6+ Qxf6 11.Bb2=] 6...Bc5 [6...e4 7.Nh4 d6 8.Nxb4 Nxb4 9.a3 Nc6 10.d3 Re8=] 7.0-0 [7.d3 h6 8.Bd2=] 7...d6 8.d3 h6 9.e3 a5 10.b3 [10.Bd2=] 10...Ba7 11.Nc3 Bf5 12.Nh4 Bg4 13.Qd2 Qd7 14.Bb2 Bh3 15.f4 Bxg2 16.Kxg2 Ng4 17.Rae1 exf4 18.gxf4 [18.Rxf4 =] 18...Rae8 19.e4 Qd8 20.Kh3 Nf6 21.Nd5 Nxd5 22.cxd5 Qd7+ 23.f5 Ne5 24.Kg3 g5 25.d4 Bxd4 26.Bxd4 gxh4+ 27.Kxh4 Qd8+ 28.f6 Kh7 29.Kh5 Rh8 30.Rg1 1-0

134 – Repka 3.Nf3 Nc6 4.a3 d5 This English Opening 1.c4 e5 resembles the Open Sicilian Defence reversed. Black's king stayed in the center. White castled queenside to speed up the attack. Eventually, White found a winning combination in the game Christopher Repka vs Stefan Mazur. Repka (2519) - Mazur (2425), ch-SVK 2018 Banska Stiavnica SVK (5.1), 11.07.2018 begins 1.c4 Nf6 2.Nc3 e5 3.Nf3 Nc6 4.a3 d5 [4...g6 5.g3 Bg7 6.Bg2 0-0 7.0-0 d6 8.d3=] 5.cxd5 Nxd5 6.Qc2 Nxc3 [6...Be6 7.e3=] 7.dxc3 Bg4 8.h3 Bh5 9.g4 [9.e4 Bxf3 10.gxf3 Qf6=] 9...Bg6 10.e4 h5 11.g5 h4 12.Be3 Qd7 13.Bb5 Bd6?! [13...f6=] 14.0-0-0 f6 15.Rdg1 f5 16.Rd1 Qe6 17.Qa4 Rd8 18.Qxa7 Ke7? [18...Qc8 19.Nxe5 Bxe5 20.Rxd8+ Kxd8 21.Rd1+ Ke7 22.Bxc6 bxc6 23.f4+/=] 19.Bxc6 bxc6 20.Rxd6! Rxd6 21.Bc5 1-0

135 – Sawyer 3.Nf3 Nc6 4.d4 Everyman Chess is an awesome publisher of books for the typical tournament and club player. They are written by excellent authors who have practical advice on how to play and enjoy various aspects of chess. Their authors are experienced and interesting. Forty five years of chess play means I have seen 1.c4 hundreds of times. Because I change openings (not recommended) I have developed no consistent reply against the English Opening. Here I decided to follow the book 1...Nc6 by Christoph Wisnewski (now Scheerer) published by Everyman Chess. At least that’s the way things started. But then I went my own way in blitz. This time I face the Four Knights Variation after 1.c4 Nc6 2.Nc3 e5 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.d4 e4!? In my other games I played the line that Wisnewski recommends: 4...exd4 5.Nxd4 Bb4. 5.Ng5 Bb4. Later I missed 6.Qc2 Nxd4! and then I missed 10...e3! leading to excellent attacking chances. After this White got an advantage; I also missed 21...Rfc8=. However White missed some things too, and in the end he offered a draw in a rook and pawn ending. PSarmory (1886) - Sawyer (1949), ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 20.08.2011 begins 1.c4 Nc6 2.Nc3 e5 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.d4 e4 [4...exd4 5.Nxd4 Bb4 (5...Bc5!? 6.e3 0-0 7.Be2 d5 8.cxd5 Nxd5 9.0-0 Bxd4 10.exd4 Bf5=) 6.g3 (6.Nxc6 Bxc3+ 7.bxc3 bxc6 8.Ba3 d6=) 6...Ne4 7.Nxc6 bxc6 8.Qd4 Nxc3 9.bxc3 Be7 10.Bg2 0-0=] 5.Ng5 Bb4 [5...h6! 6.Ngxe4 Nxe4 7.Nxe4 Qh4=] 6.Qc2 Bxc3+ [6...Nxd4] 7.bxc3 d5 8.cxd5 Qxd5 9.Nh3 Bxh3 10.gxh3 0-0 [10...e3 11.f3 Nxd4 12.cxd4 Qxd4 13.Rb1 Qh4+] 11.Rg1 Kh8 12.Be3 Na5 [12...b6] 13.h4 [13.Rg5] 13...Nc4 14.Bg5 Nd7 15.e3 f6 16.Bf4 Nd6 17.Bxd6 cxd6 18.c4 Qa5+ 19.Qd2 Qxd2+ [19...Qc7] 20.Kxd2 Nb6 21.a4 d5 [21...Rfc8] 22.a5 Nxc4+ 23.Bxc4 dxc4 24.Rgc1 Rfc8 25.Ra4 b5 26.axb6 axb6 27.Rxa8 Rxa8 28.Rxc4 Kg8 29.d5 Ra2+ 30.Kc3 Kf7 31.Rxe4 Rxf2 32.d6 Rf1 33.Kc2 Ra1 34.Re7+ Kf8 35.Rb7 Ra5 [35...Ke8] 36.Rxb6 [36.Rb8+] 36...Rd5 37.Kc3 Ke8 38.Kc4 Rd1 39.Rb7 [39.Kc5]

39...Rxd6 40.Rxg7 h5 41.Rh7 Ra6 42.Rxh5 Kf7 43.Rd5 Ra2 44.h5 Rxh2 45.Kd4 Ke6 46.e4 Rh1 47.Ke3 Clocks: 0:47-1:02 Game drawn by mutual agreement 1/2-1/2

136 – Santos Latasa 4.e3 Bb4 The English Opening Four Knights line 4.e3 Bb4 5.Qc2 implies White plans to recapture on c3 with the queen to maintain a solid intact pawn structure. On the contrary, the game between Jaime Santos Latasa and Gupta Prithu saw White play continue 6.bxc3 e4. In the end, White got the better of the wild tactical play. Santos Latasa (2576) - Prithu (2436), Portuguese Top League Maia POR, 17.07.2018 begins 1.c4 e5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.Nf3 Nc6 4.e3 Bb4 [4...Be7 5.Qb3 0-0 6.a3=] 5.Qc2 [5.Nd5 e4 6.Ng1 0-0 7.a3 Bd6 8.d3 Re8=] 5...Bxc3 [5...00 6.Nd5 Re8 7.Qf5 d6 8.Nxf6+ gxf6 9.Qh5 d5 10.Bd3 e4 11.cxd5 Bf8 12.Bxe4 Rxe4 13.dxc6=] 6.bxc3 e4 [6...0-0 7.e4 d6=] 7.Ng5 [7.Nd4 0-0 8.Be2 Ne5=] 7...d5 [7...Qe7 8.f3 exf3 9.Nxf3 0-0 10.Be2 d6 11.0-0=] 8.f3 h6 9.cxd5 hxg5 10.dxc6 Qd6 [10...exf3 11.gxf3 bxc6 12.Qa4+/=] 11.Qa4 b5 12.Qd4 Qe6 13.Ba3 Ba6 14.Qc5 Rd8 [14...exf3 15.gxf3 g4 16.Bg2+/-] 15.Qxg5 Rd5 16.Qxg7 Rg8 17.Qh6 exf3 18.gxf3 b4 19.Bxa6 Rxd2 [19...Rh5 20.Qf4 bxa3 21.Qxc7+-] 20.Bxb4 Rxa2 21.Rxa2 Qxa2 22.Be2 Qa1+ 23.Bd1 Nd5 24.Qh7 [Or 24.Qh3!+-] 1-0

137 – Cornette 3.Nf3 Nc6 4.e4 The English Opening Four Knights 1.c4 e5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.Nf3 Nc6 allows many interesting and playable fourth move options for White. Most common is 4.g3. The option 4.e4 looks like a Four Knights Game with the addition of a pawn at c4. The game Matthieu Cornette vs Linus Johansson features a classic pawn fork after 4...Bc5 5.Nxe5 Nxe5 6.d4. Cornette (2602) - Johansson (2468), Bundesliga 2017-18 Munich GER, 03.02.2018 begins 1.c4 e5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.Nf3 Nc6 4.e4 Bc5 [4...Bb4 5.d3 d6 6.a3=] 5.Nxe5 Nxe5 [5...Bxf2+ 6.Kxf2 Nxe5 7.d4 Neg4+ 8.Kg1 d6 9.h3 Nh6 10.Bg5+-] 6.d4 Bb4 7.dxe5 Nxe4 8.Qf3 [8.Qd4 Nxc3 9.bxc3 Be7=] 8...d5 [8...Nxc3 9.bxc3 Ba5 10.Bf4=] 9.Be2 0-0 10.0-0 Bxc3 11.bxc3 Re8 12.Bf4 f6 13.cxd5 fxe5 14.Qxe4 exf4 15.Qf3 Qd6 16.Rab1 a5 17.Bd3 b6 [17...g6 18.h4=] 18.Bxh7+ Kf8 19.Bd3 Bd7 20.h4 Qh6 21.Rfd1 [21.h5!+-] 21...Qxh4 22.Bg6 Kg8? [22...Qg5 23.Bxe8 Bg4 24.Qd3 Bxd1 25.Rxd1 Rxe8 26.d6+/=] 23.d6 cxd6 24.Rxd6 Black cannot defend all the loose pieces at once. 1-0

138 – Nolan 3.Nf3 Nc6 4.g3 Losses are a part of life, though certainly not the happy part. In November 2013 I lost a friend named Jeff from high school. We had become reacquainted after 40 years apart. He is missed. Thirty years prior, 1983, was one of the most difficult periods of my life. One of my children died. Thank God that moments of grief are not permanent. I suffered during that period. After that, I went on to enjoy 35 more years of faith, family, friends and fun. I played a postal chess match against my friend Gregory Nolan in 1982. He was about to become a master. Greg and I used to play in the same club together. We spent a lot of time talking about chess. Postal games last for months. They start in one year and finish in another. I selected the English Opening. That was all the rage back in the early 1980s. As it turned out, I have not played 1.c4 nearly as often with White as I have played 1.d4 or 1.e4. On the same weekly postcards with Greg Nolan we played another game. In that game as Black I tried a Slav Defence. In the English Opening game below, I got properly and painfully punished when I was caught in a powerful pin. Sawyer - Nolan, corr USCF 1982 begins 1.c4 e5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.Nf3 Nc6 4.g3 Bb4 5.Nd5 e4 6.Nh4 Bc5 7.Bg2 0-0 8.0-0 Re8 9.d3 exd3 10.Qxd3 Ne5 11.Qc2 c6 12.Be3 cxd5 13.Bxc5 Qc7!? [13...d6 14.Bd4 dxc4 15.Rfd1=] 14.Bd4 dxc4 15.f4 Ng6 16.Nxg6 hxg6 17.e4 [17.f5!+/=] 17...d5 18.Bxf6 Qb6+ 19.Rf2 gxf6 20.exd5 Bf5 21.Qxc4 Re3 22.Rd1? [White needs to break the pin with 22.a4 Rae8 23.a5 Re1+ 24.Bf1 Qd6 25.Rc1 Rxc1 26.Qxc1 Qxd5 27.Qd2=] 22...Rc8 23.Qd4 [Best is to give up the queen with 23.Qf1 Bg4 24.Rdd2 Rce8 25.h3 Re1 26.hxg4 Rxf1+ 27.Bxf1 Qd6-/+] 23...Re1+ 24.Rf1 [White is also lost after 24.Bf1 Rxd1 25.Qxd1

Rc2 26.Qe1 Rxb2 27.g4 Bxg4 28.Kg2 Bh3+ 29.Kg3 Rxf2 30.Qxf2 Qxf2+ 31.Kxf2 Bxf1 32.Kxf1 Kf8-+] 24...Rxd1 25.Rxd1 Rc1 0-1

139 – Bond 3.Nf3 Nc6 4.g3 Bb4 Jocelyn Bond sent me this game with his notes in French of how he beat an English Opening in Canada. Canada uses both English and French, it makes sense to me, but I am using the English language for the English Opening. His opponent is Yves Plourde from the second round for the Championnat regional Alma played on February 18, 2012. The comments are mine, but some of the moves in the notes came from Jocelyn Bond. Plourde - Bond, Championnat régional Alma Canada (2), 18.02.2012 begins 1.c4 [English Opening] 1...e5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.Nf3 Nc6 4.g3 Bb4 5.Bg2 0-0 6.0-0 d6 [In my database, 6...d6 has a slightly higher winning percentage than other choices. The most common line is 6...e4 7.Ng5 Bxc3 8.bxc3 Re8 with this position having occurred over 1000 times. Chances are equal.] 7.Qc2 [7.d3] 7...Be6 8.b3 Qd7 9.d3 [9.Nd5] 9...Bg4 10.Be3 h6 11.Rac1 Ne7 12.Ne4 Ne8 13.Bd2 Bxd2 14.Nexd2 [14.Nfxd2 Bxe2 15.Rfe1 Bg4-/+ Bond] 14...c5 15.e4 [15.Ne4 Nc7= Bond] 15...Nc7 16.Nh4 Ne6 17.f3 Nd4 18.Qd1 Be6 19.f4 Bg4 20.Nhf3 exf4 21.gxf4 Ng6 22.Qe1 [22.f5 Nf4-+ Bond] 22...Nxf3+ [22...Nxf4 23.Nxd4 Nxd3 24.Qe3 Nxc1 25.Rxc1 cxd4 26.Qxd4-+ Bond] 23.Nxf3? [23.Bxf3 Nxf4 24.Qg3 Bxf3 Bond 25.Qxf4-/+ when White at least has some active play for the lost pawn.] 23...Nxf4 24.Qe3 Nxg2 25.Kxg2 [and White resigned when he noticed] 25...Bh3+ winning the Exchange. 0-1

140 – Mann 3.Nf3 Nc6 4.g3 Bc5 Calvin Blocker is an International Master rated 2360. He earned that title from FIDE in 1982. Five years before that, while he was on way up, Calvin Blocker played Richard Mann in the English Opening in 1977. I stumbled across this game. I took note because I had played Mann too. FIDE lists Richard Mann with a rating of 2205. He has earned a FIDE Candidate Master title. The USCF lists Richard J. Mann as having earned a National Master Title with a rating of 2200 from back in the year 1990. Many times I have seen over the board masters had lower postal chess ratings. Those two types of play have slightly different skill sets, as do both blitz and tournament play. My game with Richard Mann came in a 1985 APCT postal chess section. Our Caro-Kann Defence Exchange Variation ended in a draw in 26 moves. Blocker - Mann, Cleveland-Phoenix, 1977 begins 1.c4 e5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.Nf3 Nc6 4.g3 [4.e3 Bb4 5.Qc2 0-0 6.Nd5 Re8 7.Qf5 d6 8.Nxf6+ Qxf6 9.Qxf6 gxf6 10.a3 Bc5 11.b4 Bb6 12.Bb2=; 4.e4 Bb4 5.d3 d6 6.Be2 0-0 7.0-0 Bxc3 8.bxc3 h6 9.Ne1=] 4...Bc5 [4...Bb4 5.Bg2 0-0 6.0-0 e4 7.Ng5 Bxc3 8.bxc3 Re8 9.f3 exf3 10.Nxf3=; 4...d5 5.cxd5 Nxd5 6.Bg2 Nb6 7.0-0 Be7 8.d3 0-0 9.Be3 Be6 10.Rc1=] 5.Bg2 [5.Nxe5 Bxf2+ 6.Kxf2 Nxe5 7.b3 0-0 8.d4 Neg4+ 9.Kg1 Re8=] 5...0-0 [5...d6 6.0-0 0-0 7.d3 h6 8.a3 a6 9.b4 Ba7 10.Bb2=] 6.0-0 d6 7.d3 [7.e3 Bb6 8.d4 h6 9.Na4 Bf5 10.c5 dxc5 11.Nxe5 Nxe5 12.dxe5 Ne4=] 7...h6 8.e3 [8.a3 a6 9.b4 Ba7 10.e3 Be6 11.Bb2 Ne7=] 8...Bb6 [8...Bg4 9.h3 Bf5 10.a3 a5 11.b3 Qd7 12.g4 Bh7 13.Bb2=] 9.d4 Bf5 10.d5 Ne7 11.Na4 Qd7 12.Nxb6 axb6 13.Qe2 Ng6 14.b3 Bh3 15.Re1 [15.Nd2 Bxg2 16.Kxg2 c6=] 15...Bxg2 16.Kxg2 e4 17.Nd4 Rae8 18.Bb2 Re5 [18...Ne5 19.Red1=] 19.Rh1 Rh5 20.h3 Re8 21.Raf1 Rg5 22.f4 [22.Rd1 Nh5 23.Qc2 Ne5=] 22...exf3+ 23.Nxf3? [23.Rxf3 Ne4 24.h4 Rg4 25.Nf5 f6-/+] 23...Nf4+ 24.exf4 Rxe2+ 0-1

Book 8: Bonus Chapter Chess Training Repertoire This is a sneak preview of my Chess Training Repertoire book. The Chess Training Repertoire books cover all chess openings and whatever interests me at the moment. Some repertoires are the main lines. Some are offbeat and unorthodox. I updated my repertoire book a few times. My final version was Chess Training Repertoire Moves 4 (published in 2019) which is four times the size of the original version. These three samples include the following: Grob & Borg (1.g4 & 1…g5) Birds Opening From Gambit English Opening Four Knights

White – A00 Grob 1.g4 & Borg 1…g5 1.g4 d5 1...e5 2.Bg2 h5 3.gxh5 and now: 3...Qg5 4.Bf3 Qh4 5.Nc3 Nf6 6.d3 Bc5 7.e3 Nc6= 3…Nc6 4.c4 Qh4 5.d3 Bc5 6.e3 d6 7.Nc3 Nf6 8.Nge2 Qxh5=/+ 1...c5 2.Bg2 Nc6 3.c4 g6 4.g5 e6 5.Nf3 Nge7 6.d3 Bg7 7.h4 d5 8.Nc3 0-0= 1...d6 2.Bg2 Nc6 3.h3 e5 4.c4 h5 5.gxh5 Be7 6.d3 Rxh5 7.Nc3 Nf6 8.Nf3 Kf8= 1...g6 2.Bg2 Bg7 3.d4 d5 4.Nc3 c5 5.e3 e6 6.dxc5 Nc6 7.Nge2 Nge7 8.0-0 0-0= 1...h5 2.g5 e5 3.d3 d5 4.Bg2 Ne7 5.Nf3 Nbc6 6.Nc3 Be6 7.0-0 h4 8.e4 d4-/+ 2.h3 e5 3.Bg2 c6 3...Nc6 4.d3 h5 5.g5 Nge7-/+ 4.d4 e4 4...exd4 5.Qxd4 Na6 6.Nc3 h5 7.Be3 hxg4 8.hxg4 Rxh1 9.Bxh1 Qh4 10.Bf3 Nf6 11.0-0-0 Nxg4= 5.c4 Bd6 5...h5!? 6.g5 Bd6 7.Nc3 Ne7 8.h4 Be6 9.e3 Qd7 10.Nge2 0-0 11.Qa4 b5 12.cxb5 cxb5 13.Nxb5 a6 14.Nbc3 Nbc6=/+ 6.Nc3 Ne7 7.Bg5 f6 7...0-0 8.e3 f6 9.Bh4 g5 10.Bg3 Bxg3 11.fxg3 f5=

8.Bd2 0-0 9.Qb3 Kh8 10.e3 f5 11.gxf5 =

Black – A00 Grob 1.g4 & Borg 1…g5 1.g4 1.e4 g5 2.d4 Bg7 (2...h6 see 1.d4 h6 2.e4 g5) 3.Bxg5 c5 4.c3 cxd4 5.cxd4 Qb6 6.Nf3 Nc6 7.Nc3 Nxd4 8.Rc1 Ne6 9.Nd5 Qxb2 10.Bd3+1.d4 h6 2.e4 g5 and now: 3.h4 g4 4.Qxg4 d5 5.Qf4 dxe4 6.Qxe4 Nf6 7.Qd3 Nc6 8.Nf3 Bg4 9.Be3+/= 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.Be3 d6 5.h4 g4 6.Nge2+/1.c4 g5 and now: 2.Nc3 Bg7 3.d4 h6 4.e4 c5 5.dxc5 Bxc3+ 6.bxc3 Qa5 7.h4 Qxc3+ 8.Bd2 Qe5 9.Bd3+/= 2.d4 and now: 2...Bg7 3.Bxg5 c5 4.Nf3 cxd4 5.Nxd4 Qb6 6.Nb5 Bxb2 7.N1c3 Qg6 8.h4+/2...h6 3.e4 Bg7 4.h4 g4 5.Ne2 d6 6.Nbc3+/1…d5 2.h3 2.Bg2 Bxg4 3.c4 c6 4.Qb3 e6 5.Qxb7 Nd7 6.Nc3 Ngf6 7.Nf3 Bxf3 8.Bxf3 Ne5=/+ 2.g5 e5 3.Bg2 Qxg5 4.Bxd5 Nf6 5.d3 Qg6 6.Bf3 e4 7.dxe4 Nxe4=/+ 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 e5 4.d3 exd3 5.Bxd3 Nc6-/+ 2.e3 e5 3.Nc3 d4 4.exd4 exd4 5.Ne4 Nc6=/+ 2...e5 3.Bg2 3.d3 h5 4.g5 Nc6 5.Nf3 Nge7 6.a3 Ng6=/+ 3...c6 4.d4 4.d3 h5 5.gxh5 Rxh5=/+ 4...e4 5.c4 Bd6

6.Nc3 Ne7 7.Bg5 f6 8.Bd2 0-0 9.Qb3 Kh8 10.e3 f5 11.gxf5 Bxf5 =

White – A02 From Gambit 2.fxe5 1.f4 e5 2.fxe5 d6 2...Nc6 3.Nf3 g5 4.e4 g4 5.Ng1 d6 6.exd6 Bxd6 7.Ne2 +/= 3.exd6 Bxd6 3...Nf6 4.dxc7 Qxc7 5.e3 Bd6 6.Bb5+ Nc6 7.Nf3 Ng4 8.Kf1 Bxh2 9.Nxh2 +/= 4.Nf3 Nf6 4...Nc6 5.d4 Nf6 see 4...Nf6 4...Bg4 5.e3 Nc6 6.d4 Qe7 7.Bb5 +/= 4...g5 and now either 5.g3 g4 6.Nh4 Ne7 7.d4 Ng6 8.Nxg6 hxg6 9.Qd3 Nc6 10.c3 Qe7 11.Nd2 +/= or 5.d4 g4 6.Ne5 Bxe5 7.dxe5 Qxd1+ 8.Kxd1 Nc6 9.e4 Be6 10.Be3 Nge7 11.b3 +/= 5.g3 Nc6 5...Ng4 6.Bg2 h5 7.0-0 h4 8.h3 Bxg3 9.d4 Nc6 10.Nc3 = 5...h5 6.d4 h4 7.gxh4 Nc6 8.Bg5 Bf5 9.Nc3 Qd7 10.Bg2 = 5...0-0 6.Bg2 Re8 7.0-0 c5 8.d3 Nc6 9.Nc3 Bg4 10.e4 = 6.d4 Bg4 6...h5 7.Bg5 Be7 8.Nc3 Bg4 9.Qd2 Bxf3 10.exf3 Qxd4 11.Qxd4 +/= 6...Qe7 7.Bg2 Bg4 8.c3 0-0-0 9.0-0 Rhe8 10.Bg5 Qxe2 = 7.c3 h6 7...0-0 8.Bg2 Qd7 9.Nbd2 Rfe8 10.0-0 =

8.Bg2 0-0 9.0-0 Qd7 10.Nbd2 Rfe8 11.Nc4 =

Black – A02 From Gambit 2.fxe5 1.f4 e5 2.fxe5 d6 3.exd6 3.Nf3 dxe5 and now: 4.Nxe5 Bd6 5.Nf3 see 4.Nf3 4.e4 Nf6 and now: 5.Nc3 Bc5 6.Bc4 0-0 7.d3 Nc6 =/+ 5.c3 Nbd7 6.d4 exd4 7.e5 Nd5 = 3...Bxd6 4.Nf3 4.g3 h5 5.Nf3 h4 6.Rg1 hxg3 7.hxg3 Rh1 8.Kf2 Rh5 =/+ 4...Nf6 5.g3 5.d4 0-0 6.Nc3 Bf5 7.e3 c5 8.Be2 Re8 9.0-0 Nc6 = 5.Nc3 Ng4 6.g3 h5 7.Ne4 h4 8.Nxd6+ Qxd6 9.gxh4 Nc6 = 5.e3 Ng4 6.d4 Qe7 7.Nc3 Nxe3 8.Bxe3 Qxe3+ 9.Qe2 Qxe2+ 10.Bxe2 0-0 = 5...Nc6 6.d4 6.Bg2 h5 7.d4 h4 8.gxh4 Bg4 9.c3 Bxf3 10.exf3 Nd5 = 6...Bg4 7.c3 7.Bg2 Bxf3 8.Bxf3 Nxd4 9.Bxb7 Rb8 10.Bg2 0-0 11.e3 Ne6 = 7…h6

8.Bg2 0-0 9.0-0 Qd7 10.Nbd2 Rfe8 11.Nc4 Rad8 =

White – A29 English Four Knights 1…e5 1.c4 e5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.Nf3 Nc6 4.g3 d5 4...Bc5 5.Bg2 d6 6.0-0 0-0 7.e3 a6 8.d4 Ba7 9.dxe5 dxe5 10.Qc2 Bg4 11.Rd1 Qe7 12.h3 Bxf3 13.Bxf3+/= 4...Bb4 5.Bg2 0-0 6.0-0 and now: 6...d6 7.d3 Re8 8.Bd2 h6 9.a3 Bxc3 10.Bxc3 Bd7 11.Nd2= 6...e4 7.Ng5 Bxc3 8.bxc3 Re8 9.Qc2 Qe7 10.d3 exd3 11.exd3 d6 12.Nf3 h6 13.Nd4 Nxd4 14.cxd4 c6 15.Bf4 Bf5 16.h3= 5.cxd5 Nxd5 5...e4 6.dxc6 exf3 7.e3 bxc6 8.Qxf3+/6.Bg2 Nb6 6...Be6 7.0-0 Be7 8.d4 and now: 8...Nxc3 9.bxc3 e4 10.Nd2 f5 11.f3 exf3 12.Rxf3 0-0 13.e4+/= 8...exd4 9.Nb5 Qd7 10.Nfxd4 Nxd4 11.Nxd4 Bh3 12.Bxh3 Qxh3 13.Qc2+/= 7.0-0 Be7 8.d3 0-0 8...Bg4 9.Be3 0-0 10.Rc1 Qd7 11.a3= 9.a3 Be6 9...a6 10.Be3 Be6 11.Rc1 f5 12.b4= 10.Be3 f5

10...f6 11.Bxb6 axb6 12.e3 Bc5 13.b4 Bd6 14.d4 Bc4 15.Re1 exd4 16.Nxd4 Be5 17.Nxc6 Qxd1 18.Rexd1 bxc6 19.Rdc1= 11.Rc1 a5 12.Na4 f4 13.Bc5 =

Black – A29 English Four Knights 1…e5 1.c4 e5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.Nf3 Nc6 4.g3 4.e3 Bb4 5.Qc2 0-0 6.Nd5 Re8 7.Ng5 g6 8.h4 Bf8 9.Nxf6+ Qxf6 10.Ne4 Qe7= 4.d4 exd4 5.Nxd4 Bb4 6.Bg5 h6 7.Bh4 Bxc3+ 8.bxc3 0-0 9.Nxc6 bxc6 10.e3 Re8= 4.d3 d5 5.cxd5 Nxd5 6.e3 Be7 7.Be2 0-0 8.0-0 Be6 9.a3 f5 10.Qc2 a5= 4.e4 Bb4 5.d3 d6 6.g3 0-0 7.Bg2 Bg4 8.h3 Bxf3 9.Bxf3 Nd4 10.Bg2 a5= 4.a3 d5 5.cxd5 Nxd5 6.Qc2 Be6 7.e3 a6 8.b4 Nxc3 9.dxc3 f5 10.e4 f4= 4...d5 5.cxd5 5.d4 exd4 6.Nxd4 Nxd4 7.Qxd4 dxc4 8.Qxd8+ Kxd8 9.e4 Be6 10.Bg5 Ke8= 5...Nxd5 6.Bg2 6.d3 Be7 7.Bg2 Be6 8.0-0 0-0 9.d4 exd4 10.Nb5 d3 11.Qxd3 Ncb4 12.Qb1 c5= 6...Nb6 7.0-0 Be7 8.d3 0-0 9.a3 9.Be3 Be6 10.d4 exd4 11.Nxd4 Nxd4 12.Bxd4 c6 13.b3= 9...Be6 10.Be3 10.b4 a5 11.b5 Nd4 12.Bb2 Nb3 13.Rb1 f6 14.Nd2 Nxd2 15.Qxd2 Nc4 16.Qc1 Nxb2=

10...f5 11.Rc1 a5 12.Na4 f4 =

Book 8: Index of Names to Games Adams – 14 Adel Lahchaichi – 106 ansako – 129 Arman – 109 Aronian – 80 Azmaiparashvili – 22 BabyBach – 16 Bachler – 19 Baffo – 71 Baum – 29 Bente – 101 blindhawk – 60 Blocker – 140 Bloodgood – 24 Bond – 18, 76, 130, 139 Bosboom – 28 BountyHunter – 15 Brennar – 92 Calvanico – 84 Campion – 62 camposol – 11 Carebello – 38 Carlsen – 67 Caruana – 80, 117 Cavicchi – 56, 65 Cekro – 95 Cherner – 23 Christiansen – 121 Chrz – 74 Clauser – 122 Coleman – 103 Colquitt – 1 Cornette – 137 Couture – 76 De Santis – 26

De Vault – 20 Deac – 118 Dede – 49 Dernovoi – 43 Donchenko – 79 duarni – 48 duckbreath – 99 Duda – 121 Eglitis – 104 El-Principiante – 51 Elsner – 108 fallavena – 83 Farou – 17 Fedoseev – 96 Ferranti – 91 Ferrer Teixido – 106 Fiedler – 26 florian38 – 10 Fontinha – 72 Fredrick – 40 Funk – 32 Galojan – 98 Galyas – 102 Georgiadis – 110 Gilbert – 37 Goble – 12 Gogolev – 111 Grafl – 28 Grandelius – 124 Guest – 2 Gutknecht – 87 Haines – 13, 72, 93, 120 hammers45 – 68 Heinoo – 130 Herrera – 133 Hobusch – 95 Honos – 45

Horvath, D – 100 Horvath, P – 102 Hou Yifan – 31 Hrop – 69 Izoria – 126 JackBach – 3-4, 86 Jamison – 90 Johansson – 137 Johnson – 39 Jurek – 100 Kantor – 45 Karpov – 87 Karthik – 29 Khairat – 58 Khalifman – 112 Kiefer – 66 killer100 – 34 Kobo – 101 Kovalyov – 103 Koykka – 75 Kramnik – 78 Krystosek – 36 Kurth – 131 Lagarde – 124 Laqua – 85 Lovenstein – 116 lozchap – 53 Lugovskoy – 96 MacAngus – 105 Mamedyarov – 110 Mann – 140 MaryDawson – 89 Mazur – 134 Meskovs – 97 Michi – 88 Milovic – 27 Miroshnichenko – 67

moli – 128 Motylev – 30 Moussard – 14 mscp – 55 Muir – 21, 46, 81, 132 Murray – 63 Nakamura – 31, 78 Nash – 57 Naumkin – 56 nesalimar – 18 Nielsen – 42 NN – 6, 9, 50 Nolan – 138 Ofstad – 73 Ortiz Suarez – 17 Parsons – 120 Paszewski – 125 Paz – 115 Perry – 93 Pileckis – 97 Plourde – 140 Polyakin – 59 Potapov – 75 pothead – 47 Potkin – 111 Potter – 61 Prithu – 136 PSarmory – 135 Quiñones Borda – 133 ramani2kmd2004 – 5 Repka – 134 RodrigoPeligro – 13 Saduakassova – 113 Saeed – 64 Salama – 58 Salsicha – 52 Santos Latasa – 136

Sawyer – 1-5, 7-12, 15, 16, 19-21, 23-25, 32-44, 46, 47, 49-55, 57, 61-63, 66, 68, 70, 71, 73, 81-84, 86, 88-92, 94, 99, 104, 105, 114-116, 119, 122, 123, 127-129, 131, 132, 135, 138, 140 Saxer – 41 Scheerer – 85 Scholz – 108 Schultz – 70 Sebag – 98 Sedlak – 27 Shannon – 35 Shetty – 117 Shevchenko – 112 Shibut – 33 Shvartsman – 127 Smirnov – 126 So – 107 Socko – 125 Spruit – 109 Stefanova – 65 stemli – 7 Storie – 54 Straszacker – 119 Sviridov – 30 Tari – 77 Tisdall – 77 Torning – 6 Tregubov – 118 Turner – 123 Van Willigen – 114 vargold – 82 Wadsworth – 8 Wang Hao – 113 Ward – 94 Wei Yi – 107 Williams – 44 Yilmazyerli – 22 Zdun – 25

Zilbermints – 48, 59-60, 64, 69 Zilka – 74 Zude – 79

Book 9 - Queens Knight 1.Nc3 & 1...Nc6 Second Edition - Chess Openings Games Copyright © 2015, 2016, 2018 by Sawyer Publications All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form without permission in writing from the author. Play Queen’s Knight Openings against anything! It’s sharp and easy. 1.Nc3! for White is the Van Geet Queen’s Knight Attack. 1...Nc6! for Black is the Nimzowitsch Queen’s Knight Defence. You have a complete repertoire that works against any opening. This second edition from 2018 is a major revision. Many more grandmaster games have been added. The book now has 188 games with an Index of Names to Games including a few by Magnus Carlsen. Follow Miles, Myers, Short, Mikenas, Van Geet, Nimzowitsch, Bogoljubow, Keres, Keilhack, Bauer and Wisnewski. I have played these openings thousands of times. My goal is to introduce you to the super stars of this opening. I show you through their games how 1.Nc3 and 1…Nc6 have been handled. Many masters play this from both sides. My personal philosophy is to play the Queen’s Knight on move 1 and either center pawn two squares on move 2. Sometimes this leads me to wellknown openings. Often I choose lesser known openings. Sometimes I play the center pawn only one square. White plays the knight on the left in the 1.Nc3 Van Geet also called the Dunst Opening. As Black you play the knight on the right in the dark knight system. It works. A few games from the Sicilian Defence and Vienna Game have been added in case you wish to transpose. But you don’t have to. Consider new strategy and tactics and your interest will soar! Some of the author’s best rated tournament games were with the Queen’s Knight. You

are going to win games that you want to show your friends. Stay excited. Have fun playing chess!

Book 9: Chapter 1 – 1.Nc3 Attack That Queens Knight Attack may transposition to other openings. White chooses whether to play 2.e4, 2.d4, or something else.

Various – 1…g6 etc. My goal in the Queen’s Knight Attack is to develop quickly. When Black does not immediately contest the center, I take control. Note that the Copy Cat line 1.Nc3 Nc6 2.d4 d5 3.e4 transposes to 1.e4 Nc6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 covered in a later section.

1 – Queen Trap 1…d6 2.e4 Let’s be honest. The Pirc Defence gives White the center. There are no better moves after 1.Nc3 d6 than e4 and d4. This leads to the standard Pirc lines. Here I played 4.f4 as Boris Spassky did with White against Bobby Fischer in 1972. My opponent played the first eight moves accurately. Then Black fell into my trap. The b2 pawn was poisoned. Black's queen bit off more than she could chew. After the move 11.Nb5! Black realized it was over. The knight threatened 12.Nc7+ and 13.Nxa8 picking off the rook. This must be dealt with by 11...Kd8. But then 12.Rfb1 when the Black lady would have no escape route since the Nb5 covered both c3 and a3. I completed my development by move 10: both knights, both bishops, the queen, and castled, connecting the rooks for six developing moves. Black made only four in the first 10 moves; he never made it to move 11. My opponent kindly resigned at the right moment to make this game a good illustration of the trap. Sawyer - iAttack (1488), ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 2014 begins 1.Nc3 d6 [In 2004 I won a Fools Mate game after 1… h6 2.e4 g5 3.d4 f6 4.Qh5# 1-0 Sawyer - dragonmaster555552000, Yahoo 2 12, 31.10.2004] 2.e4 Nf6 3.d4 g6 [The Pirc Defence] 4.f4 Bg7 5.Nf3 c5 6.dxc5 Qa5 7.Bd3 Qxc5 8.Qe2 Nc6 [Or 8...0-0 9.Be3 Qa5 10.0-0] 9.Be3 Qb4?! [This is a waste of time since b2 is poisoned. Better is 9...Qa5 10.0-0=] 10.0-0 Qxb2 [Black

should play 10...0-0 11.a3 but not 11...Qxb2? because 12.Na4+-] 11.Nb5! [Black resigns as he sees his queen is trapped.] 1-0

2 – Braun 1…g6 2.h4 h5 Black offers White the option to transpose to a Modern Defence with 2.d4 Bg7 3.e4. What if White wants an original approach? Simply insert the attacking move 2.h4. If I am correct the players below were FM Walter Braun against Lee Davis. White chose a popular set-up with 5.Bc4 and 7.Bg5. White stood better for much of this contest. But even then, Black had chances too. Braun (2236) - Davis (1956), 10th South Wales Int 2013 Penarth WLS, 14.07.2013 begins 1.Nc3 g6 2.h4 h5 3.e4 Bg7 4.d4 d6 5.Bc4 Nc6 6.Nge2 e5 7.Bg5 Bf6 8.Nd5 Bxg5 9.hxg5 Nce7 10.Nec3 [More forcing is 10.dxe5! dxe5 11.Nf6+ Nxf6 12.Qxd8+ Kxd8 13.gxf6 Ng8 14.Bxf7 Nxf6 15.Bxg6+/-] 10...Nxd5 11.Nxd5 c6 12.dxe5 cxd5 13.Qxd5 Be6 14.Bb5+?! [14.Qb5+ Bd7=] 14...Kf8 15.Qxd6+ Ne7 [15...Kg7! 16.Qxd8 Rxd8 17.f4 Ne7=/+] 16.0-0-0 Kg7 17.f4 Rc8 18.Bd7 Bxd7 19.Qxd7 Qc7 20.Rd2 Nc6 21.Rhd1 Nb8 22.Qa4 Rhe8 23.c3 Qc5 24.Qd4 b6 25.Kb1 Re6 26.Qxc5 bxc5 27.Rd5 Ree8 28.Kc2 Kf8 29.Kd3 c4+ 30.Ke3 Nc6 31.R1d2 a5 [31...Red8=] 32.Rc5 Nxe5? 33.Rxe5 Rxe5 34.fxe5 Ke7 35.Rd5 Rb8 36.Rxa5? [36.Rd2+/=] 36...Rxb2 37.Kd4 Rxg2 38.Ra7+ Kf8? [38...Ke6!=] 39.e6! Rxg5 40.exf7 h4 [Black is still losing after 40...Rg4 41.Kd5+-] 41.e5 h3 42.e6 Rf5 43.Ra8+ Kg7 44.Rg8+ 1-0

3 – Sanchez Jerez 2.h4 Bg7 3.h5 White dominated the center by move 5 in this Modern Defence. Black confined development moves to the three ranks in the first ten moves. White occupied four ranks. The 4-3 space advantage allowed White more freedom to search for winning tactical ideas in Emilio Miguel Sanchez Jerez vs Jaime Benedito Salavert. Sanchez Jerez (2253) - Benedito Salavert (1897), IV Xativa Open 2018 Xativa ESP (2.7), 17.07.2018 begins 1.Nc3 g6 2.h4 Bg7 3.h5 b6 [It's dangerous for either player to avoid the center for too long. 3...d5=] 4.d4 gxh5 5.e4 e6 6.Nf3 h6 7.Bd3 [Or 7.Bf4+/-] 7...Bb7 8.Rxh5 d6 9.Be3 Nd7 10.Qd2 Qe7 11.a4 a5 12.0-0-0 0-0-0 13.Rdh1 Ndf6 14.R5h4 h5 15.Kb1

Nh6? [15...Qf8 16.Bg5 Bh6 17.Bxh6+/-] 16.Bg5 Nhg4 [16...e5 17.dxe5 dxe5 18.Rxh5+-] 17.e5 dxe5 18.dxe5 Bxf3 19.exf6 Bxf6 20.Bxf6 Qxf6 21.gxf3 Ne5 [21...Qxf3 22.Rxh5 Rhg8 23.Qe2 Qxe2 24.Bxe2+-] 22.Ba6+ Kb8 23.Qe3 Nxf3 24.Ne4 1-0

Dutch – 1…f5 The Dutch can be played against anything except 1.e4 or 1.g4. The Queen’s Knight Player can choose between 2.d4 and 2.e4.

4 – Sawyer 2.d4 e6 3.e4 Winning chess strategy involves successfully transitioning through the phases of a game. This game has five very clear phases: 1. Fight for the center in the early opening. 2. Activate all pieces in the early middlegame. 3. Exchange into a better bishop ending. 4. Reach a winning pawn ending. 5. Queen my pawn and stop my opponent's pawn. The Dutch Defence variation 1.d4 f5 2.Nc3 is a popular choice at the club level. Often play continues 2…Nf6 3.Bg5. I pick opening moves I feel like playing at the moment. By move four we are in original territory. This is a powerfully simple game. Sawyer - challanger100, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 29.12.2012 begins 1.Nc3 f5 2.d4 [2.e4!?] 2...e6 3.e4 Nf6 [3...fxe4 4.Nxe4! +/=. White should not try for a Staunton Gambit. If 4.f3?! Bb4! =/+ and White would have little compensation for the gambit pawn.] 4.e5 Nd5 5.Nxd5 exd5 6.Nf3 [6.Nh3!+/- with plans to eventually play Nf4 is more dynamic.] 6...d6 7.Bg5 Be7 8.exd6 Qxd6 9.Bxe7 Qxe7+ 10.Qe2 Qxe2+ 11.Bxe2 0-0 12.0-0 c6 13.Bd3 g6 14.Ne5 Nd7 15.Nxd7 Bxd7 16.f4 Rfe8 17.Rfe1 Kf7 18.Kf2 Rxe1 19.Rxe1 Re8 20.Rxe8 Bxe8 21.b4 Kf6 22.Ke3 h6 23.h4 g5 24.hxg5+ hxg5 25.g3 gxf4+ 26.Kxf4 Bd7 27.Be2 b6 28.g4 [White could probe the position a little more with 28.Bh5+/-] 28...fxg4 29.Bxg4 Bxg4 30.Kxg4 Ke6 31.Kg5 Kd6 [Interesting but failing is 31...a5?! 32.b5! cxb5 33.c3 b4 34.cxb4 axb4 35.Kg6+- White wins due to his king position, despite Black's extra b-pawn. Eventually Black will run out of tempi and

have to back up his king. Black should play 31...b5! 32.Kg6 Ke7 with a draw.] 32.Kf6 c5 33.c3 a5 34.a3 cxb4 35.cxb4 axb4 36.axb4 Kc6 37.Ke6 Kb5 38.Kxd5 Kxb4 39.Kc6 Kc4 40.d5 b5 41.d6 b4 42.d7 b3 43.d8Q b2 44.Qd1 Black resigns 1-0

5 – Matheis 2.e4 fxe4 3.d3 Strong International Correspondence Chess Federation (ICCF) players generally excel in opening preparation. Thomas Matheis chose the Queens Knight Attack with 1.Nc3. Jo A Wharrier responded with the Dutch Defence move 1…f5. White could have a good game with 1.d4 which transposes to the Dutch 1.d4 f5 2.Nc3 line. However White opted for a more enterprising approach. Matheis attempted the From Gambit with the colors reversed. Normally that opening begins 1.f4 e5 2.fxe5 d6 3.exd6 Bxd6. The From Reversed gives White the extra move Nc3. The From Gambit is sound with the extra move, especially if White plays 5.Nf3. However here he chose 5.g4!? to mirror the regular From Gambit Lasker Variation 4…g5. White got into trouble with 7.Ne4?! Better would have been 7.Nge2 with equal chances. Black played well and won. Matheis (2354) - Wharrier (2341), BFCC-45 ICCF, 15.09.2007 begins 1.Nc3 f5 2.e4 fxe4 3.d3 [3.Qh5+ g6 4.Qe5 Nf6 5.Nd5 Nc6 6.Nxf6+ Kf7 7.Qd5+ e6 8.Qxe4 Qxf6 9.c3 d5 10.Qf3 Qxf3 11.Nxf3 e5 12.d3=] 3...exd3 4.Bxd3 Nf6 5.g4 [5.Nf3 e6 (5...g6 6.Bg5 Bg7 7.Qe2 Nc6 8.0-0-0 0-0 9.h4=) 6.Ng5 d5 7.Qe2 Qe7 8.0-0 Nc6 9.Re1+/=] 5...g6 [5...d5 6.g5 Ne4 7.Nxe4 dxe4 8.Bxe4 Qxd1+ 9.Kxd1 Nd7 10.Be3 e5=] 6.g5 Nh5 7.Ne4?! [More in line with the From Gambit is 7.Nge2 Bg7 8.Ng3 Nxg3 9.hxg3 d6 10.Qe2 Nc6 11.Rxh7 Bxc3+ 12.bxc3 Rxh7 13.Bxg6+ Rf7 14.Bxf7+ Kxf7 15.Qh5+ with a possible perpetual check.] 7...d5 8.Ng3 Nxg3 9.hxg3 Qd6 10.Bf4 e5 11.Qe2 Nc6 12.0-0-0 Be7 13.Be3 Nb4 14.Bc4 a5 15.c3 Qe6 16.cxb4 dxc4 17.b5 0-0 18.Rh4 Qf7 19.Qxc4 Be6 20.Qe4 Bxa2 21.Ne2 Bb3 22.Rdh1 h5 23.Nc3 Qf5 24.g4 hxg4 25.Rxg4 Kg7 26.Rf4 Qxe4 27.Rxe4 Rf5 28.Reh4 Rd8 29.Rh7+ Kf8 30.R7h6 Bxg5 31.Rxg6 Bxe3+ 32.fxe3 b6 33.Ne4 Rd7 34.Ng5 [34.Rh8+ Ke7 35.Rg7+ Rf7 36.Rxf7+ Bxf7-/+] 34...Rd3 35.e4 Rf2 36.Rc6 Rh2 37.Rf1+ Ke8 38.Rxc7 Rg2 39.Nh7 Rf2 40.Re1 a4 41.Rg1

Rdd2 42.Nf6+ Kd8 43.Rc6 Rxb2 44.Ng4 Rfc2+ 45.Rxc2 Rxc2+ 46.Kb1 Rc5 47.Kb2 Rxb5 48.Ka3 Rc5 49.Ne3 Rc3 50.Ng4 Kc7 51.Nxe5 Re3 52.Rg7+ Kd6 53.Ng4 Rxe4 54.Nf6 Re1 55.Rg4 Kc6 0-1

6 – Blanco Fernandez 3.Nxe4 International Master Alvaro Blanco Fernandez of Mexico played 1.Nc3 vs the Dutch Defence 1…f5 from Jorge Beltran Medina. White need not venture From Gambit Reversed with 2.e4 fxe4 3.d3. White can simply recapture 3.Nxe4. He found dynamic ideas with 4.Bd3!? and 6.Qg4!? The IM outplayed his opponent. Blanco Fernandez (2323) - Beltran Medina (1992), XXI Carlos Torre Merida MEX (2), 14.12.2008 begins 1.Nc3 f5 2.e4 fxe4 3.Nxe4 Nf6 [3...g6 4.d4 d5 5.Ng5 Bg7 6.Bd3 Nf6 7.h4+/=; 3...d5 4.Qh5+ g6 5.Qe5 dxe4 6.Qxh8 Nf6 7.d4+/-; 3...Nc6 4.d4 d5 5.Ng5 Qd6 6.c3 e5 7.dxe5=] 4.Bd3!? Nxe4 [4...e5 5.Nxf6+ Qxf6 6.Be4 c6 7.c4 Na6 8.Nf3 Nc5 9.Qe2 Nxe4 10.Qxe4 d6 11.d4=] 5.Bxe4 g6 6.Qg4!? [6.c4 Bg7 7.Nf3 e6 8.d4 d5 9.Bg5 Qd7 10.Bd3 Nc6 11.0-0=] 6...Bg7 7.Nf3 0-0 [7...d5! 8.Bxg6+ hxg6 9.Qxg6+ Kf8 10.Ng5 Qe8 11.Nh7+ Rxh7 12.Qxh7 Qf7-/+ White has an undeveloped rook and two pawns for two minor pieces.] 8.Bd5+ e6 9.Bb3 Nc6 10.c3 Qf6 [10...a5=] 11.d4 Kh8 12.0-0 e5 13.Bg5 d6 14.Qg3 Qf5 15.h3 h6 16.Bxh6 Bxh6 17.Nh4 Qg5 18.Nxg6+ Kg7 19.Nxf8 Kxf8 20.dxe5 dxe5 21.Qf3+ Qf4 [21...Qf5 22.Qe2+/-] 22.Qd5 Ke7 22...Ke8 23.Rad1+-] 23.Qg8 [23.Rae1!+-] 23...Rb8 [23...Qf8 24.Qc4+/-] 24.Qh7+ Ke8 25.Rad1 Black resigned before he lost a third pawn. 1-0

7 – Rydstrom 3…Nf6 4.Nxf6+ White has the advantage of the first move in this symmetrical opening position after 1.Nc3 f5 2.e4 fxe4 3.Nxe4 Nf6 4.Nxf6+ exf6. Black's slightly weakened kingside with the pawn on f6 helped the White attack in Tom Rydstrom vs Lennart Fransson. Rydstrom (2312) - Fransson (2082), Kvibergspelen 2017 Gothenburg SWE (5.10), 06.05.2017 begins 1.Nc3 f5 2.e4 fxe4 3.Nxe4 Nf6 4.Nxf6+ exf6 5.d4 d5 [5…Qe7+ 6.Be2 d5 7.c3 Bf5 8.Qb3 c6 9.Nf3 Bd3 10.0-0 =] 6.Bd3 Be6 7.Ne2 Bd6 8.Nf4 Bf7 9.0-0 0-0 10.Qg4 Re8 11.Bd2 Nd7 [11...Nc6 12.c3 Bxf4 13.Bxf4 Ne7 14.Rfe1+/=] 12.Nxd5 [12.Nh5!] 12...Bxd5 13.Qf5 Be6 [13...Nb6 14.Qxh7+ Kf8 15.Bg6 Bg8 16.Qh8 Qd7

17.Bxe8=] 14.Qxh7+ Kf8 15.Bh6 Re7? [15...Bxh2+! 16.Kxh2 gxh6 17.Qxh6+ Ke7 18.Qg7+ Kd6 19.Qg3+ Ke7 20.Rfe1+/-] 16.Qh8+ Bg8 17.Bc4 Rf7 18.Bxf7 Kxf7 19.Qxg7+ Ke6 White has a winning attack after 20.Qg4+ f5 21.Rfe1+ etc. 1-0

Book 9: Chapter 2 – 1.Nc3 c5 Black shows a willingness to transpose into the Sicilian Defence. White may oblige with 2.e4 or try moves like 2.d4 or first 2.Nf3.

Sicilian – 2.e4 This Sicilian transposes to 1.e4 c5 2.Nc3. Many 1.Nc3 players prefer the Anti Sicilian lines in the next section. I’m just giving a taste of games in this line that avoids the popular 3.g3 variation.

8 – Zlatanovic 2.e4 a6 3.f4 Black begins play on the queenside for six moves in this Sicilian Defence. White responds with a strategy of a full kingside pawn assault. The pawns open lines of attack for a bishop and queen to invade in the game Boroljub Zlatanovic vs Sasa T Jovanovic. Zlatanovic (2382) - Jovanovic (2222), ch-Central Serbia 2015 Kragujevac SRB, 13.03.2015 begins 1.Nc3 c5 2.e4 a6 3.f4 b5 4.Qe2 [4.d4 cxd4 5.Qxd4=] 4...Bb7 5.Nf3 Nc6 6.d3 Nd4 [6...e6 7.Be3=] 7.Qf2 Nxf3+ 8.Qxf3 g6 [8...e6 9.Be2=] 9.g4 Bg7 10.f5 e6 11.h4 gxf5 12.gxf5 Qa5 13.Bd2 Bh6 [13...b4 14.Nd1+/=] 14.Bxh6 Nxh6 15.fxe6 fxe6 16.Qf6 Nf7 17.Be2 Qd8 18.Qg7 1-0

9 – Sadilek 2.e4 Nc6 3.Bb5 White’s light squared bishop embarks on an exciting adventure in this Sicilian Defence. The bishop goes to Bb5, Bc4, Ba2, Bb1 followed by Bxh7+ in Maximilian Sadilek vs Klaus Neumeier. Sadilek (2258) - Neumeier (2286), TCh-AUT 2nd Ost 2016-17 Austria AUT (4.3), 13.11.2016 begins 1.Nc3 c5 2.e4 Nc6 3.Bb5 Nd4 4.Bc4 a6 5.d3 e6 6.a4 Qc7 [6...Nf6=] 7.Nge2 Nf6 8.0-0 Be7 9.f4 d6 10.Ba2 [10.Be3=] 10...0-0 11.Kh1 Bd7 12.Be3 Nxe2 13.Qxe2 b5 14.g4 [14.Nd1=] 14...b4 15.Nd1 Bc6 16.Kg1 d5 17.g5 Nd7 18.Nf2 Rfe8 19.h4 c4 20.e5 Nxe5 [20...Bb7-/+] 21.fxe5 Qxe5 22.Qf3 Qc7 23.Ng4 Bd6 24.d4 Bxa4 [24...Rf8 25.h5+/-] 25.Bb1 Bc6 26.c3 a5 [26...bxc3 27.bxc3+/-] 27.Bxh7+ Kh8 [27...Kf8 28.Ne5+-] 28.Nf6 g6 29.h5 e5 [29...Bh2+ 30.Kg2 Qg3+ 31.Qxg3

Bxg3 32.Kxg3+-] 30.hxg6 fxg6 31.Bxg6 Kg7 32.Nh5+ Kxg6 33.Qf5+ Kxh5 34.Rf3 1-0

10 – Suba 3.Nge2 Nf6 4.g3 g6 One can attack the Sicilian Defence either fast in the Open 3.d4 lines or opt for slower in other lines. Here White fianchettoed his kingside bishop and castled. Then he pushed pawns and opened lines for attack. I loved the move 27.Be4 which uncovers the Rg1 in the game Mihai Suba vs James Steedman. Suba (2416) - Steedman (2130), 14th ch-Euro Seniors over 65 2014 Porto POR (6.8), 14.03.2014 begins 1.Nc3 c5 2.e4 Nc6 3.Nge2 Nf6 4.g3 g6 5.Bg2 Bg7 6.d3 d6 7.h3 Rb8 8.f4 e6 9.0-0 0-0 10.Be3 a6 11.Qd2 Qc7 12.g4 [12.e5=] 12...b5 13.g5?! [13.f5=] 13...Ne8 14.a3 Nd4 15.Rf2 f5 16.gxf6 Bxf6 17.Kh1 Bg7 [17...Ng7-/+] 18.Rg1 Bb7 19.Nd1 d5 20.Bxd4 Bxd4 21.Nxd4 cxd4 22.exd5 exd5 [22...Ng7 23.dxe6=] 23.f5 Nd6 [23...Ng7 24.fxg6 hxg6 25.Bf1 Rxf2 26.Nxf2+/=] 24.fxg6 hxg6 [24...Nf5 25.Bf3 Ng3+ 26.Kg2+/=] 25.Qg5 [25.Be4+-] 25...Kh7 26.Qh4+ [26.Be4! Nf5 27.Qxg6+ Kh8 28.Rxf5+- mates in three moves.] 26...Kg8 [26...Kg7 27.Bf3+-] 27.Be4! Qh7 [27...Rxf2 28.Rxg6+ Kf8 29.Qh8+ Ke7 30.Qe5+ Kf8 31.Nxf2+-] 28.Rxg6+ 1-0

11 – Lu Shanglei 3.Nf3 g6 4.Bc4 White transposed to a Sicilian Defence in this battle of Chinese grandmasters. The opening resembled French Defence after 14...d5 and 16.e5. White’s bishop on b1 appeared to be trapped with no safe moves, but ultimately it assisted in the attack on g6 in Lu Shanglei vs Wei Yi. What happened to Black’s queen? Lu Shanglei (2606) - Wei Yi (2718), ch-CHN 2015 Xinghua CHN, 29.05.2015 begins 1.Nc3 c5 2.e4 Nc6 3.Nf3 g6 4.Bc4 Bg7 5.d3 d6 6.a3 e6 7.h4 [7.0-0=] 7...Nf6 8.Ba2 a6 9.Ne2 b5 10.Ng3 h6 11.c3 Bb7 12.d4 Qb6 13.0-0 [13.h5=] 13...0-0-0 [13...h5=] 14.a4 d5 15.axb5 axb5 16.e5 [16.exd5 Nxd5 17.dxc5 Qxc5 18.Qe2+/-] 16...Ne4 [16...Ng4 17.Bb1+/-] 17.Be3 Nxg3 [17...cxd4 18.cxd4+/-] 18.fxg3 c4 19.Qd2 Kc7 20.Nh2 Rd7 21.Rae1 b4 22.Bb1 Kc8 [22...h5 23.g4+/=] 23.Rf3 b3 24.Ref1 Nd8 25.R3f2 Bc6 26.Ng4 h5 27.Bh6 Bxh6 28.Nxh6 Rh7 [28...Qc7 29.Qg5+/=]

29.Qg5 Ra7 30.g4 hxg4 31.h5 g3 32.Rf6 Be8 [32...Rh8 33.hxg6 fxg6 34.Bxg6+/-] 33.hxg6 fxg6 34.Rf8 Qc6 [34...Bf7 35.Ng4+-] 35.Ng8 [35.Bxg6 Rhg7 36.Bxe8 Rxg5 37.Bxc6+-] 35...Rhg7 36.Nf6 Rae7 [36...Rge7 37.Qxg3+-] 37.Qh6 1-0

12 – Ekebjaerg 3.f4 g6 4.Nf3 Two top International Correspondence Grandmasters clashed in this Queens Knight Attack that transposed into the Grand Prix Sicilian Defence. Playing Black was Michel Lecroq. Ove Ekebjaerg of Denmark was one of the leading 1.Nc3 players in the world during the 40 period of 1963 to 2002. Take note. The Sicilian Defence is a popular chess opening because it allows Black to counter any of White’s attempts to win. One excellent approach is the Grand Prix Attack with 2.Nc3 and 3.f4. GM Roman Dzindzichashvili promoted this method. Roman is persuasive. From time to time I play the Grand Prix as White. I recommend the book “Chess Openings for White, Explained” by Lev Alburt, Dzindzichashvili, Perelshteyn and Al Lawrence. They wrote this in Chapter 14 on Meeting the Sicilian Defence: "A practical White player needs something that reduces Black's options and that offers a straightforward way to play for the advantage. "In the 1970s, British masters put together such an approach, using the pawn-push f4, for their weekend circuit of tournaments - the Grand Prix. Their approach caught the attention of chess players around the world." Ekebjaerg (2590) - Lecroq (2570), W-ch14 corr9499, 1994 begins 1.Nc3 c5 2.f4 Nc6 3.Nf3 g6 4.e4 Bg7 5.Bb5 Nd4 6.a4 [6.0-0 Nxb5 7.Nxb5=; 6.Bc4!?] 6...b6 [6...Nh6 7.Bc4 e6 8.0-0 0-0 9.d3=; 6...Nf6 7.0-0 0-0 8.d3 d6 9.Nxd4 cxd4 10.Nd5 Nxd5 11.exd5=] 7.Bc4 [7.0-0 Bb7 8.Be2!?=] 7...Bb7 8.Bd5 Bxd5 9.Nxd5 e6 10.Ne3 d6 [10...Ne7 11.0-0 d5 12.d3 0-0 13.e5=] 11.c3 Nxf3+ 12.Qxf3 Nf6 [12...Ne7 13.f5 Nc6 14.0-0 0-0=] 13.0-0 0-0 14.d3 d5 15.c4 dxe4 16.dxe4 Qc7 17.e5 Nd7 18.a5 Rae8 19.Rd1 bxa5 20.Rd6 Rb8 21.Ra6 g5 22.g3 gxf4 23.gxf4 Qb7 24.Qxb7 Rxb7 25.R1xa5 Ra8 26.Ra2 Bf8 27.R6a3 Be7 28.Ng4 h5 29.Nf2 f6 30.exf6 Bxf6 31.Ne4 Bd4+ 32.Kg2 Nb6 [32...Nf6 33.Ng5 e5 34.f5+/=] 33.b3 Nd7 34.Bb2 Bxb2 35.Rxb2 Rab8 36.Rd2 Kf8 37.Rd3 Ke7 38.Rg3 Rh8 [38...Kf8 39.Ng5

Ke7 40.Re3+/-] 39.Ra6 Rh7 40.Rg6 Nf8 41.Rg8 Kf7 42.Rg5 Rc7 43.Nxc5 Re7 [43...Rg7 44.Rxg7+ Kxg7 45.Ne4+-] 44.Ne4 1-0

Anti-Sicilian – 2.d4 White has alternatives to the Closed Sicilian 2.e4. There is 2.d4.

13 – Torning 2.d4 cxd4 3.Qxd4 Rick Torning sent me an Old Benoni which transposed to 1.Nc3. Torning - NN, Casual Bullet lichess, 03.03.2018 begins 1.d4 c5 [Old Benoni Defense] 2.Nc3 cxd4 3.Qxd4 a6 4.Qh4 Nc6 5.f4 b5 6.a3 Bb7 7.e4 b4 8.axb4 Nxb4 9.Bd3 Nxd3+ 10.cxd3 Nf6 11.Nf3 d6 12.0-0 Qc7 13.e5 e6 [I assumed Black wanted to open the g-file and try and get a windmill attack on my king with the bishop and rook. I was confident my attack was stronger with the Black king in the open.] 14.exf6 gxf6 15.Qxf6 Rg8 16.Ng5 blocking the g-file threats 16...Be7 17.Qxf7+ Kd7 18.Qxe6+ Kd8 19.Qxg8+ Kd7 20.Qe6+ Kd8 21.Nf7+ Ke8 22.f5 Qd7 23.Nxd6+? [The luxury of being material up and looking for a king hunt! I could liquidate into a winning endgame at any time being material up.] 23...Kd8 [23...Kf8?? 24.Bh6#; 23...Qxd6! gets back one minor piece but Black is still material down.] 24.Qg8+ Kc7 25.Qc4+ Kxd6? [Now the hunt is on!] 26.Ne4+ Ke5 27.Bf4+ Kxf5 28.Bd6+ Kg6 [28...Kg4 29.Rf4+ Kh5 30.Qf7+ Kh6 31.Rh4+ Bxh4 32.Bf4+ Bg5 33.Bxg5#] 29.Qf7+ Kh6 30.Bf4+ White wins on time. 30...Bg5 31.Bxg5# 1-0 [Game notes by Torning]

14 – Christiansen 3.Qxd4 Nc6 Accelerated Open Anti Sicilian 1.Nc3 c5 2.d4 cxd4 3.Qxd4 forces the White to lose time. Black attacked on both sides of the board in the game Erez Kupervaser vs Johan-Sebastian Christiansen. Kupervaser (2234) - Christiansen (2506), 29th Czech Open A 2018 Pardubice CZE, 20.07.2018 begins 1.Nc3 c5 2.d4 cxd4 3.Qxd4 Nc6 4.Qh4 [4.Qa4 e6 5.Nf3 Bc5 6.Bf4 Nf6 7.e3=. 4.Qd3 a6 (or 4…Nf6 5.e4 e5 6.a3 Bc5 7.Nf3=) 5.e4 Nf6 6.Nd5 Nxd5 7.exd5 Nb4 8.Qb3 e6 9.dxe6 dxe6 10.a3 Nd5 11.Nf3=] 4...d5 5.e4 d4 6.Nd5 Nf6 7.Nxf6+ [7.Bc4 Be6 8.Nxf6+ exf6 9.Bxe6 Bb4+ 10.Kf1 fxe6=/+] 7...exf6 8.Bd2 Qb6 9.b3 Bb4 [9...Bd7=/+] 10.Nf3 0-0 11.a3 Bxd2+ 12.Nxd2 Ne5 13.Be2 Qc7 14.0-0 Qxc2 15.Rfd1

Be6 [15...d3 16.Bh5 Be6-/+] 16.f4 [16.Rac1 Qb2 17.f4 d3-/+] 16...d3 17.Bh5 Ng6 18.Qg3 [18.Bxg6 fxg6-/+] 18...Qc5+ 19.Qf2 [19.Kh1 Qxh5 20.f5 Rfd8-+] 19...Qxh5 20.f5 Ne5 0-1

15 – Morozevich 4.Qh4 Nf6 The game Alexander Morozevich vs Gary Kasparov at Frankfurt in 2000 reached a sharp position. White could have played for a draw. Morozevich boldly chose an inferior position with the hope to win rather than to draw vs the world champion. Five years later I played the same line on ICC against the chess engine “Over-Rated”. I was happy to draw an opponent rated 500 points above me. The amazing thing for me was that this computer allowed me to get a position where I could draw at all! Sawyer (2255) - Over-Rated (2799), ICC 15 5 Internet Chess Club, 06.08.2005 begins 1.Nc3 c5 2.d4 cxd4 3.Qxd4 Nc6 4.Qh4 Nf6 5.Nf3 [5.Bg5 e6 6.0-0-0 Be7 7.e4 h6 8.f4=] 5...d5 6.Bg5 Qa5 [6...e6 7.0-0-0 Be7 8.e4 h6 9.exd5 exd5 10.Bd3=] 7.0-0-0 Be6 8.Bd2 [8.Nd4 Ne4 (8...Nxd4 9.Qxd4 a6 10.f3+/=) 9.Nb3 Qb6 10.Nxe4 dxe4 11.Qxe4 Bxb3 12.Be3 Bxc2 13.Qxc2+/=] 8...g6 9.e4 [9.a3 Bg7 10.e4 dxe4 11.Nxe4=] 9...d4 10.e5 Ng4 [10...dxc3 11.Bxc3 Qxa2 12.exf6 exf6 13.Bxf6=] 11.Nxd4 Nxd4 12.h3 Bg7 13.hxg4 Bxe5 14.a3 [14.Bd3 Bxa2 15.Nb5 Qa4 16.Nc3=] 14...Rc8 [14...Qc7=] 15.Bd3 Nb3+ [15...Bc4=] 16.cxb3 [16.Kb1 Nxd2+ 17.Rxd2 Rxc3!-+] 16...Bxc3 17.Bxc3 Rxc3+ 18.bxc3 [This is an improvement over 18.Kb1? Rxb3 19.Qh2 Qc3! 0-1 in 44. Morozevich - Kasparov, Frankfurt 2000] 18...Qxc3+ 19.Kb1 [19.Bc2 Bxb3 20.Rd2 Qa1+ 21.Bb1 Qc3+ 22.Bc2=] 19...Qxb3+ 20.Kc1 Qc3+ 21.Kb1 Qb3+ 22.Kc1 Qc3+ 23.Kb1 Qb3+ Game drawn by repetition 1/2-1/2

16 – Perez-Ponsa 5.Bg5 d6 Trompowsky Attack 1.d4 Nf6 2.Bg5 reminds me of the Queens Knight Sicilian after 1.Nc3 c5 2.d4 cxd4 3.Qxd4 Nc6 4.Qh4 Nf6 5.Bg5. It's great to present unique challenges, but you must play the position with tactical accuracy. White castled into the Black attack in the game Jack Van ZylRudd vs Federico Perez Ponsa. Van Zyl-Rudd (2197) - Perez Ponsa (2553), Gibraltar Masters 2018 Caleta ENG (1.57), 23.01.2018 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.Bg5 c5 3.Nc3 cxd4 4.Qxd4 Nc6

5.Qh4 d6 6.0-0-0 Bd7 7.e4 Rc8 8.f4 [8.Kb1=] 8...Qa5 9.Nf3? [9.a3=] 9...Nb4! 10.Bxf6 gxf6 11.a3? [11.Qe1 f5-/+] 11...Rxc3! 12.axb4 Qa1+ 13.Kd2 Qxb2 14.Bd3 Qxb4 15.Rb1 [15.Ke2 Bb5 16.Rd2 Qxe4+ 17.Kf2 Bxd3-+] 15...Rb3+! [Black wins a rook and keeps a strong attack.] 0-1

17 – Vaganian 5.Bg5 e6 6.0-0-0 The flexible Trompowsky Attack can remain completely unique. In addition it can transpose to almost anything that employs the moves d4 and Bg5 by White. Here we find the Trompowsky reaches a position found in a rare Queen Knight attack. After White’s fifth move the position arrived at the exact same position as the previous game. The line begins 1.Nc3 c5 2.d4 cxd4 3.Qxd4 Nc6 4.Qh4 Nf6 5.Nf3. There Gary Kasparov played 5…d5. Here Rainer Knaak chose 5…e6. Rafael Vaganian from Armenia became a grandmaster in 1971. His style seems to favor intuition based on his experience in a variety of sharp tactical positions. Vaganian won tournaments for 20 years among the world’s best players. Grandmaster Vaganian chose lesser known opening variations. His choice of the Trompowsky Attack was very rare in 1979. Rainer Knaak competed for many years with Wolfgang Uhlmann for honors as the top player in East Germany before unification. I remember that I studied many of his games in Chess Informant in the late 1970s and early 1980s. Grandmaster Knaak has worked for ChessBase for a long time. His writings on many aspects of chess history and theory have received wide acclaim. Vaganian (2570) - Knaak (2565), Tallinn (11) 1979 begins 1.d4 [1.Nc3 c5 2.d4 cxd4 3.Qxd4 Nc6 4.Qh4 Nf6 5.Bg5 transposes to the game.] 1...Nf6 2.Bg5 c5 3.Nc3 cxd4 4.Qxd4 Nc6 5.Qh4 e6 6.0-0-0 Be7 7.e4 a6 8.f4 b5 9.e5 b4 10.exf6 [10.Nce2 Nd5=/+] 10...gxf6 11.Ne4 fxg5 12.fxg5 Qa5 [12...Qc7 13.Nf3 Bb7=] 13.Kb1 b3 [13...Bb7=] 14.axb3 [Better is 14.cxb3! h6 15.Nf3+/=] 14...Nb4 15.Nf6+ Kd8 16.Qd4 [16.Nf3 Qa2+ 17.Kc1 Qa1+ 18.Kd2 Qxb2 19.Bd3 Nxd3 20.Kxd3 Bb7=] 16...Qa2+ 17.Kc1 Qa1+ 18.Kd2 Qa5 19.Ke2 Nxc2 20.Qe4 Rb8 21.Nf3 Bxf6 22.gxf6 Qb5+

23.Kd2 Qb4+ 24.Qxb4 Nxb4 25.Ne5 Ke8 26.Nc4 Rg8 27.Nd6+ Kf8 28.Rc1 Nc6 29.Be2 Rg5 30.Bf3 Rg6 31.Rhf1 Bb7 32.Be4 Rg4 33.h3 Rg5 34.Rc3 Ba8 35.Rfc1 Rb4 36.Rd3 Kg8 37.g4 h5 [37...h6 38.Rc4 Rb8=] 38.gxh5 Rb6 39.h6 1-0

Anti-Sicilian – 2.Nf3 White plays 2.Nf3 which resembles some Sicilian Defence lines.

18 – Robson 2…Nf6 3.e4 d6 Let's be clear: Grandmaster Ray Robson is a great chess player and a tremendous talent who works very hard. Robson did not need me to become a master. He just needed to beat someone to get his USCF rating over the 2200 master level. There I was. We were both rated as Experts in the first round of the Florida Class Championships in 2006. Ray Robson's rating had risen to just below 2200 and my rating had fallen to just above 2000. Ray Robson was the World Under-12 Champion. I chose 1.Nc3 which I’d played for three years. My chess opening study habits were poor. I should have also trained more on tactics, but Ray Robson would have been very hard for me to beat in any case. Sawyer (2006) – Robson (2193), Florida Class Championship (1), 06.01.2006 begins 1.Nc3 c5 [I expected this. Robson played the Sicilian Defence.] 2.Nf3 Nf6 [Ray Robson chooses the most flexible option. He knows that this knight wants to go to f6. I was familiar with the 2...Nc6 lines where play often continues 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Bg5] 3.e4 [I opted for a Sicilian type set-up.] 3...d6 4.Bb5+ [4.d4 heading to the Open Sicilian is clearly the strongest move. I was still chicken running from the main lines. I aimed to put both of us on our own. That was dumb.] 4...Bd7 5.Bxd7+ Qxd7 6.d4 [Simply 6.0-0+/= was worth a try.] 6...cxd4 7.Nxd4 e6 8.0-0 Be7 9.Be3 0-0 10.Re1 [10.g4!?+/=] 10...Nc6 11.Nxc6 bxc6 12.f3 [This is consistent with my idea of swapping off the light squared bishops, but it was not very helpful.] 12...Rfd8 13.Qd3 d5 14.Rad1? [My last chance was 14.e5!= but I did not yet see the danger.] 14...Qb7! 15.exd5 Qxb2! 16.Rb1 [16.Bd4 Qa3 Black is going to eat and run. Ray had it all calculated out.] 16...Qa3 17.Rb3 Qa5 18.Bd2 cxd5 19.Ne4? [This is a serious blunder.] 19...dxe4 20.Bxa5 exd3 21.Bxd8 d2 22.Rd1 Rxd8 23.Kf1 a5 24.Ke2 a4 25.Rb7 [I almost played 25.Rd3 Nd5 26.Kxd2 Rb8 27.g3 Rb2 28.Ra1 Bf6 and Black's two minor pieces were stronger than White's

extra rook.] 25...Nd5 26.Rxd2 Bg5 27.Rd4 Nf4+ 28.Ke3 Ne2+ 29.Kxe2 Rxd4 30.c3 Rd2+ 31.Ke1 h6 [I asked if we could go over the game. But his dad very politely said that it was Ray's bedtime at 10 PM.] 0-1

19 – Fernandez 2…e6 3.d4 Daniel Fernandez played the Anti-Sicilian Queens Knight 1.Nc3 c5 2.Nf3 and 3.d4. The pawn push to e4 was held back until the eighth move. Play resembled an Open Sicilian in strategy and in tactics without allowing Black to follow the standard 1.e4 c5 memorized lines. White won by removing the defender of a rook against Nikolaos Georgakopoulos. Fernandez (2483) - Georgakopoulos (2346), Capablanca Mem GM 2018 Irakleio GRE (5.4), 13.04.2018 begins 1.Nc3 c5 2.Nf3 e6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.g3 d5 6.Bg2 Be7 7.0-0 0-0 8.e4 dxe4 9.Nxe4 a6 [9...e5 10.Nxf6+ Bxf6 11.Nb5=] 10.Nb3 Qc7 11.Nxf6+ Bxf6 12.c3 Rd8 [12...Bd7=] 13.Qh5 Nc6 14.Be3 Ne7 15.Qc5 Qxc5 16.Bxc5 Nc6 17.Bb6 Rd7 18.Rad1 Kf8 19.a4 Ke8 20.Nd2 Be7 21.a5 Rb8 22.b4 Rd3 [22...e5 23.Nc4 Rxd1 24.Rxd1+/-] 23.Bc7 Rxc3 [23...Bd7 24.Bxb8 Nxb8 25.Ne4+-] 24.Bxc6+ This check removes the defender of Rb8. 1-0

20 – Teske 2…e6 3.e4 a6 White transposed from the Queens Knight Attack to an irregular Sicilian Defence. Black adopted a standard structure with pawns on e6 and d6, flexible but not aggressive. White fianchettoed his bishops and then surged forward. The doubled rooks and raking bishops led to a winning tactic in Henrik Teske vs Pavel Zpevak. Teske (2486) - Zpevak (2353), 28th Czech Rapid G1 2017 Pardubice CZE (5.7), 20.07.2017 begins 1.Nc3 c5 2.Nf3 e6 3.e4 a6 4.g3 Nc6 [4...b5 5.Bg2 Bb7 6.d4 cxd4 7.Nxd4=] 5.Bg2 Qc7 6.0-0 d6 7.b3!? [7.d4 cxd4 8.Nxd4=] 7...Nf6 8.Bb2 Be7 9.d4 cxd4 10.Nxd4 Bd7 11.Nce2 0-0 12.c4 Rac8 13.h3 Rfd8 14.Rc1 Qa5 15.Bc3 Qc5 16.Qd2 Be8 17.Rfe1 Ne5 18.Bb4 Qc7 19.f4 Nc6 20.Bc3 Qb8 21.Kh2 [21.Nxc6 bxc6=] 21...b5 22.Nxc6 Bxc6 23.Nd4 Be8 [23...bxc4 24.bxc4 Ba8=] 24.Ba5 Rd7 [24...bxc4 25.bxc4 Qa7 26.Bxd8 Rxd8 27.Rb1+/-] 25.cxb5 axb5 26.Nc6 Rxc6 27.Rxc6 Rb7 [27...Ra7 28.Rc2+-] 28.Rc2 e5 29.Rec1 exf4 [29...Bd7 30.Bc7+-] 30.gxf4 Bd7 31.Bc7 Qf8 32.e5 1-0

21 – Carlsen 2...Nc6 3.e4 g6 Magnus Carlsen played the Queens Knight Attack 1.Nc3. White could have played 4.d4 to transpose into an Accelerated Dragon, but the move order with 1.Nc3 allowed him White to avoid that popular line. Black mistimed his tactical plan of ...Bh6 by three moves too late in the game Magnus Carlsen vs Anish Giri. Carlsen (2832) - Giri (2771), 5th Norway Blitz 2017 Stavanger NOR (3.1), 05.06.2017 begins 1.Nc3 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.e4 g6 4.Bb5 [4.d4 leads to an Accelerated Dragon] 4...Bg7 5.0-0 d6 6.Re1 [6.e5!?=] 6...Bd7 7.a4 [7.d3 Nf6=] 7...Rc8 8.d3 Nf6 9.Nd5 0-0 10.Bg5 a6 11.Bxf6 exf6 12.Bc4 f5 13.c3 fxe4 14.dxe4 Na5 15.Qd3 Re8 16.Ne3 Bc6 [16...Nxc4 17.Nxc4 Bc6=] 17.Bd5 Qb6 18.Qc2 [18.Rab1+/=] 18...Re7 [If Black wants to exchange off the Ne3 with ...Bh6, this is a good time to do it. 18...Bh6 19.Rad1 Bxe3 20.Rxe3 Bxd5 21.Rxd5=] 19.Rad1 Rce8 20.Bxc6?! [20.Nd2+/=] 20...bxc6 21.Rxd6 Rxe4 22.Red1 [22.Rf1=] 22...Bh6? [The timing fails here due to a winning pin of c6 and a fork on f6. 22...c4=] 23.Nd5! Qb3 24.Nf6+ Kg7 25.Nxe8+ Rxe8 26.Qxb3 Nxb3 27.Rxc6 Re2 28.g3 Rxb2 29.Rd7 1-0

22 – Ibarra Jerez 4.Nxd4 e6 Here Jose Carlos Ibarra Jerez and Jose Maria Sanchez Dengra proved that the natural move 5...d6 leads to a very bad position where White can win material. Even though Ibarra Jerez missed his best chance at first, he had a great position. Black appeared to be on his own and got outplayed by a grandmaster. Ibarra Jerez (2521) - Sanchez Dengra (2134), 79th ch-ESP 2014 Linares ESP (4.8), 28.08.2014 begins 1.Nc3 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 e6 [Another common approach is 5.Bg5 e6 6.Qd2 Be7 7.e3=] 5.Ndb5 d6? [Black almost always misses the only good move 5...a6 6.Nd6+ Bxd6 7.Qxd6 Qe7=] 6.Bf4 e5 7.Nd5 Be6 8.Ndc7+ Kd7 9.Be3?! [9.Nxa8! exf4 10.Nac7 a6 11.Nxe6 fxe6 12.Nc3+-] 9...Rc8 10.Nxe6 fxe6 11.c4 a6 12.Nc3 Nf6 13.g3 Ng4 14.Bd2 Qb6 15.e3 Nf6 16.Bh3 Nb4 [16...Rb8 17.a3+/=] 17.Na4 Nd3+ 18.Ke2 Qc6 19.Ba5 Ke7 20.Nb6 Nxb2 21.Qb3 Nxc4

22.Rhc1 d5 23.Rab1 Rc7 24.Nxc4 dxc4 25.Bxc7 cxb3 26.Rxc6 bxc6 27.Rxb3 Nd7 28.Rc3 Nf6 29.Bxe5 Kf7 [29...Nd7 30.Rxc6 Nxe5 31.Rxe6+ Kf7 32.Rxe5+-] 30.Rxc6 Bb4 31.Bxe6+ Kg6 32.Rxa6 Rd8 33.Bd4 1-0

23 – Dragon Plan 4.Nxd4 g6 The Sicilian Defence provides Black with well thought out pawn structures and piece placements. In the Queens Knight Attack it is customary that White will have the option to transpose to one of those main lines. Often I prefer to remain on the back roads. If White wants to avoid variations that Black knows well, then the 1.Nc3 makes that a possibility. The problem for White is finding good moves that make progress in development and yet do not veer back onto the main highways. This game presented White with the opportunity to play a Sicilian Defence Accelerated Dragon with 5.e4. I chose 5.Be3. If I had chosen 5.e4 after 1.Nc3, I could not play the Maroczy Bind 5.c4. Any chess program that is rated over 3000 is very impressive. It is usually out of reach for me to win unless someone pulls the plug on its internet connection. Sometimes I manage a draw. When CraftyWiz stopped playing on the Internet Chess Club in 2006 the finger notes mentioned that it used Crafty v20.1. The program played from Las Vegas, Nevada in the United States. Its operator was “TheWiz”. Sawyer (2385) - CraftyWiz (3096), ICC 5 0 Internet Chess Club, 15.06.2004 begins 1.Nc3 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 g6 5.Be3 [5.Nxc6 bxc6 6.e4 Bg7 7.Bc4 Qc7 8.0-0=] 5...Bg7 [5...Nf6 6.g3 d5(6...Ng4 7.Bg5=) 7.Nb3 e5 8.Bg5 d4 9.Bg2 Be7 10.Bxf6 Bxf6 11.Nd5 Bg7 12.c4 00 13.0-0=] 6.Nxc6 bxc6 7.Bd4 Nf6 8.Ne4 Rb8 9.Nxf6+ Bxf6 10.Bxf6 exf6 11.b3 0-0 12.e3 Qa5+ 13.Qd2 Qe5 14.Qd4 [14.Rd1 d5 15.Be2+/=] 14...Qxd4 [This move gives Black short term activity but long term White is better the 4 vs 3 pawns on the queenside.] 15.exd4 Re8+ 16.Kd2 d6 17.Bd3 Be6 18.Rhe1 Rb7 19.Rad1 Rbe7 20.c3 Kg7 21.c4 h5 22.g3 a5 23.f4 Kh6 24.Re3 d5 25.c5 Bg4 26.Rxe7 Rxe7 27.Re1 Rxe1 28.Kxe1 h4 29.Kd2 g5 30.Be2 hxg3 31.hxg3 Bd7 32.Ke3 Kg6 33.Bd3+ [33.a3!? gives winning chances, but my super opponent was a minute ahead on the clock.

It is unlikely that I could win, and very likely that I would lose on time.] 33...Kh5 34.Be2+ Kg6 35.Bd3+ Kh5 36.Be2+ Kg6 Game drawn by repetition 1/2-1/2

Book 9: Chapter 3 – 1.Nc3 e5 Black aims for a classical king pawn game. This may transpose to the Open Game with 2.e4 or White can delay e4 with 2.Nf3.

Vienna – 2.e4 The Vienna Game with 2.Nc3 is a logical opening where White controls d5 and delays Nf3. While rich in possibilities, I give only a few games here. Queens Knight players prefer 2.Nf3 to 2.e4. The first two examples are illustrate more risky lines by Black (2...f5) and then White (4.Nxe5).

24 – Baffo Gambit 2…f5 3.Bc4 Jeffrey Baffo does a great job playing 1.Nc3. Jeffrey Baffo has a good feel for the opening which he has played for many years. Baffo (1719) - xory (1601), Live Chess Chess.com, 01.06.2018 begins 1.Nc3 e5 2.e4 [2.Nf3= Napoleon] 2...f5 3.Bc4 [3.exf5! +/- is a Reversed King's Gambit with an extra move.] 3...Nf6 4.exf5!? [4.d3+/=] 4...d5 [4...Nc6 5.d4 Nxd4 6.Nf3 Nxf3+ 7.Qxf3 c6 8.Bg5 d5 9.0-0-0=] 5.Bxd5!? [White might also try 5.Nxd5! Nxd5 (5...Nc6 6.Ne3 Bc5 7.d3 Bxe3 8.Bxe3 Bxf5 9.Nf3+/-) 6.Qh5+ Ke7 7.d4 Qd6 8.Bg5+ Nf6 9.Nf3+/-] 5...Nxd5 6.Qh5+ Ke7 7.d4 Nf6 [7...exd4 8.Bg5+ Nf6 9.0-0-0+-] 8.Bg5 Qxd4 [8...e4 9.Bxf6+ gxf6 10.Nge2+/=] 9.Nf3 Qd6 10.Rd1 Qa6 11.Nd5+ [Or 11.Nxe5! g6 12.Nd5+! +- wins] 1-0

25 – Halloween 3.e4 Nc6 4.Nxe5 Four Knights Game 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Nc3 Nf6 is reached in many variations after 1.Nc3 or 1...Nc6. The knight moves can be played in almost any order. The Halloween Gambit 4.Nxe5 is fun for blitz games. Jeffrey Baffo must have smiled after this win. Baffo (1741) - biteme2 (1796), Live Chess Chess.com, 20.06.2018 begins 1.Nc3 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.e4 Nf6 4.Nxe5?! Nxe5 5.d4 Ng6 6.e5 Ng8 7.Bc4 d6 8.Qf3 Qd7 [8...f5-/+] 9.exd6 [9.0-0!?] 9...Bxd6 10.0-0 Nf6 11.Re1+ [11.Bg5 0-0 12.Bxf6 gxf6 13.Ne4 Qf5-+] 11...Kf8 [11...Be7-+] 12.Bg5 Ng4 [12...Qf5 13.Qxf5 Bxf5-+] 13.Be7+! 1-0

26 – Sadilek 4.d4 exd4 5.Nd5 Four Knights Game Belgrade Gambit 5.Nd5 avoids the routine 5.Nxd4 lines that lead to equality. White wins with the help of a double attack in the game Maximilian Sadilek vs Marko Rubil. Sadilek (2251) - Rubil (2278), TCh-AUT 2nd Ost 2017-18 Austria AUT (2.4), 22.10.2017 begins 1.Nc3 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.e4 Nf6 4.d4 exd4 5.Nd5!? [5.Nxd4 Bb4 6.Nxc6 bxc6=] 5...Be7 [5...Nxe4 6.Bd3 Nc5 7.0-0=] 6.Bc4 [6.Bf4 d6 7.Nxd4 0-0 8.Nb5 Nxd5 9.exd5 Ne5 10.Be2 Ng6=] 6...0-0 7.0-0 d6 [7...Nxe4 8.Re1 Nf6 9.Nxe7+ Nxe7 10.Qxd4=] 8.Nxd4 Ne5 9.Bb3 c5 [9...Nxd5=] 10.Nf5 Bxf5 11.exf5 c4 12.Ba4 Nxd5 [12...a6 13.c3 Nd3=] 13.Qxd5 Qc8 14.Re1 Bf6 15.f4 Nd7 16.Bxd7 Qxd7 17.Be3 Bxb2 18.Rab1 Bc3 19.Rxb7 Qa4 [19...Qxb7 20.Qxb7=] 20.Rxf7 Rxf7 21.Qxa8+ Rf8 22.Qd5+ Kh8 23.Qxd6 Qe8 24.Bd2! 1-0

27 – Piehl 2…Nc6 3.g3 Nf6 When I played the Vienna Game as White, I preferred 3.f4, 3.Nf3 or 3.Bc4. Mike Piehl backed into a Vienna 3.g3 after 1.e4 Nc6! Piehl was about to jump his rating 100 points to be near mine. At another tournament, we were playing next to each other. I lost to a master while he drew an expert. Mike told me that my chess was as exciting as his was boring with his basic 1.e4 / 2.Nc3. Piehl (1827) – Sawyer (2006), Florida Class Championship (2), 07.01.2006 begins 1.e4 Nc6 2.Nc3 Nf6 [Another Vienna idea is 2…Nc6 3.f4 exf4 with wild gambit play.] 3.g3 [Black can choose between pushing either center pawn two squares. The choices are both playable and about equal in strength.] 3...e5 [Black could play 3...d5!? which transposes to a sort of Alekhine 4.exd5 Nxd5 5.Bg2 Nxc3 6.bxc3 e5=] 4.Bg2 [4.Nf3 Bc5 5.Bg2 d6 6.d3 a6 7.0-0=] 4...Bc5 5.d3 d6 6.Na4 0-0 [6...Bb6=] 7.Nxc5 dxc5 8.f4 c4! [I sacrifice a pawn for activity.] 9.Nf3 [White does not accept my pawn. 9.fxe5 Ng4 10.Nf3 cxd3 11.Qxd3=] 9...cxd3 10.cxd3 Bg4 11.0-0 Qd6 12.Qb3 b6? [12...Bxf3! 13.Bxf3 Rad8 14.Qxb7 Qc5+ 15.Kh1 Rxd3-/+] 13.Qc3 [13.fxe5! Qc5+ 14.Kh1 Nd7 15.Bf4+/=] 13...Bxf3 14.Bxf3 Nd4

15.fxe5 Qxe5 16.Bf4 Nxf3+ 17.Rxf3 Qxc3 [17...Qh5!?] 18.bxc3 c5 19.a4 Rfe8 20.c4!? Nd7 21.a5 f6?! 22.Rf2 Ne5 23.Bxe5 fxe5 24.Rb2 Rab8 25.axb6 axb6 26.Ra7 Re6 27.Rf2 Rf8 28.Rxf8+ Kxf8 29.Kf2 Re7 30.Rxe7 Kxe7 31.Ke3 Kd6 32.Kd2 Kc6 33.Kc3 1/2-1/2

28 – Fancy 2…Nf6 3.Bc4 Nxe4 White tried the speculative 4.Bxf7+ in the Vienna Game. Black had a good game in a wild position with a queen vs two rooks. White found a win in the game Stuart Fancy vs Harry Press. Fancy (2049) - Press (1889), Oceania Zonal 2015 Cammeray AUS, 05.07.2015 begins 1.Nc3 e5 2.e4 Nf6 3.Bc4 Nxe4 4.Bxf7+ [The sharp Frankenstein-Dracula variation 4.Qh5 Nd6 5.Bb3 Nc6 6.Nb5 g6 7.Qf3 f5 8.Qd5 Qe7 9.Nxc7+ Kd8 10.Nxa8 b6 gives compensation for the Exchange. I played it several times as White in the 1970s.] 4...Kxf7 5.Nxe4 d5 6.Nc3 [In my game Regan - Sawyer, corr 1989 White played 6.Qf3+?! Kg8 7.Ng3? c6 8.Qe2 Bd6 9.d3 Nd7 10.Nf3. Black missed 10...Qf6= and later lost the game.] 6...c6 7.Qh5+ g6 8.Qe2 Bd6 9.d3 Re8 10.h4 e4 [10...Nd7=] 11.dxe4 Bf5 12.Bg5 Qa5 13.0-0-0 Bb4 14.exf5 [14.Be3+/-] 14...Rxe2 15.fxg6+ hxg6 [15...Kxg6=] 16.Ngxe2 Nd7 17.Rd4 [17.a3=] 17...Re8 18.h5 Bxc3 19.Nxc3 gxh5 20.Rdh4 [20.Rxh5=] 20...Qc5 [20...d4-+] 21.Be3 Rxe3 22.fxe3 Qxe3+ 23.Kd1 [23.Kb1 Nf6=/+] 23...Ne5 [23...Nf6-/+] 24.R4h3 Qd4+ 25.Kc1 Qf4+ 26.Kb1 d4 27.Nd1 Ke7 28.Rxh5 Nc4 29.b3 Ne3 [29...Na3+ 30.Kb2+/=] 30.Nb2 [30.R5h4+/=] 30...Qf2 31.Rc1 Qxg2 32.Rh7+ Kf6 33.Rxb7 Nd5 34.Rxa7 Nc3+ 35.Ka1 Qd2 [35...Ne2 36.Re1=] 36.Nd3 Ne4 [36...Nd5 37.Kb2+/-] 37.Kb2 Qc3+ 38.Ka3 Nd2 [38...Nc5 39.Rf1+ Ke6 40.Nb4+/-] 39.Ra4 [39.Ka4+-] 39...c5 [39...Ke7 40.Nb2+/=] 40.Ra6+ Ke7 [40...Kg7 41.Ka4+-] 41.Rh1 Nc4+ 42.Ka4 Nd6 43.Rh7+ Ke6 44.Rh6+ Kf5 45.Raxd6 Qxc2 46.Rd5+ [If 46...Ke4 47.Re5+] 1-0

29 – Sadilek 2…Nf6 3.g3 Bb4 The positional 3.g3 Vienna Game exploded with fireworks when White sacrifice a piece for 2 pawns by 13.Nxd5!? White regained the material with interest in Maximilian Sadilek vs Daniel Koffler. Sadilek (2227) - Koffler (2173), TCh-AUT 2nd Ost 2015-16 Austria AUT (11.4), 10.04.2016 begins 1.Nc3 e5 2.e4 Nf6 3.g3 Bb4 4.Bg2 0-0 5.Nge2 c6 6.0-0 d5 [6...Re8 7.d4=] 7.exd5 Nxd5 8.Nxd5 cxd5 9.d4 e4 10.Nf4 Nc6

[10...g5 11.Nh3 Be7 12.Qh5=] 11.c3 Ba5 12.f3 g5 13.Nxd5 [13.Nh5+-] 13...Qxd5 14.fxe4 Qd8 [14...Qd6 15.Bxg5+/=] 15.Qh5 f6 16.e5 Nxd4 [16...Qe8 17.Qxe8 Rxe8 18.exf6+/-] 17.exf6 Rxf6 18.Bxg5 Ne2+ [18...Nf5 19.Bxf6 Qxf6 20.Bd5+ Kg7 21.Rae1+-] 19.Kh1 1-0

30 – Andreikin 3.f4 d5 4.fxe5 Chess openings to not always lead directly to immediate victory. Often the opening sets the table for a creative middlegame combination or checkmate. If such tactics do not develop, the best strategy for a win might be to head to the endgame. The Vienna Game begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nc3. This is an old variation of the Open Game that has been covered in many books from the 1800s to the present. Both sides have several good options. Dmitry Andreikin reached the top 20 in the world in June of 2016. Andreikin had won the World Junior Championship back in 2010. That same year he played Vladimir Kramnik in blitz. These two players weaved their way through opening theory. The game when from 1.Nc3 Nf6 (Queens Knight Attack) to 2.e4 (Alekhine Defence) to 2...e5 (Vienna Game) to 3.f4 (Vienna Gambit). Andreikin (2683) - Kramnik (2791), VI World Blitz Moscow RUS (37), 18.11.2010 begins 1.Nc3 Nf6 2.e4 e5 3.f4 [Vienna Gambit. Other options are 3.Nf3 Nc6 Four Knights Game; or 3.Bc4 Nxe4 4.Qh5 Nd6] 3...d5 4.fxe5 Nxe4 5.Nf3 Bc5!? [This more dynamic variation is favored by Larry Kaufman. The point is to tempt White to push d4 and then pin the knight with ...Bb4 as in the game. 5...Be7 is the main line.] 6.d4 [6.Qe2 Bf5 7.d4 Bb4 8.a3 Nxc3 9.Qe3 Na2+ 10.Bd2 Bxd2+ 11.Qxd2 Be4=] 6...Bb4 7.Bd2 c5 8.Nxe4 [8.Bd3 Nxd2 9.Qxd2 cxd4 10.Nxd4 Nc6=/+. And after 8.Bb5+ Nc6 9.0-0 0-0 10.Qe1 Larry Kaufman recommends 10.a3 Bxc3 11.Bxc3 Qb6 with possibly a slight Black edge.] 8...dxe4 9.Bxb4 cxb4 10.Ng1 0-0 11.Bc4 Nc6 12.c3 bxc3 13.bxc3 Qg5 [13...Qc7! 14.Ne2 Nxe5 15.dxe5 Qxc4 16.Qd4 Be6-+] 14.Qe2 Bf5 15.Nh3 Bxh3 16.gxh3 e3 17.0-0-0 Rac8 18.Bb3 Na5 19.Kb2 Nxb3 20.axb3 f6 21.e6 Qd5 22.Qxe3 Rfe8 23.Rhe1 Rc6 24.c4 Rcxe6 25.Qxe6+ Qxe6 26.Rxe6 Rxe6 27.d5 Re2+ 28.Kc3 Kf7 29.c5 Ke8 30.Ra1 a6 31.c6 bxc6 32.dxc6 Kd8 33.Rxa6 Kc7 34.b4 Re5 35.Kc4 Re4+ 36.Kc5 Re5+ 37.Kc4 Re4+ 38.Kb5 Re5+ 39.Ka4 Re1 40.Kb3 Rb1+ 41.Kc4 f5 [41...Rc1+ 42.Kb5 Kd6 43.h4 h5=] 42.b5

[42.Kb5+-] 42...f4 [42...Rc1+ 43.Kd5 Rd1+ 44.Ke5+-] 43.Ra7+ Kd6 44.Rd7+ Ke6 45.Rd2 f3 46.Rf2 Rc1+ 47.Kb4 Rb1+ 48.Kc5 Rc1+ 49.Kb6 Rc3 50.Kb7 Kd6 51.Rf1 g5 52.b6 h5 53.c7 Kd7 54.Rxf3 1-0

Napoleon – 2.Nf3 White has the choice of 2.e4 transposing into a Vienna Game or 2.Nf3 which I call the Napoleon Attack.

31 – Bullockus 2…Bc5 3.Nxe5 “Knights before bishops” is the rule of thumb for bringing out your pieces in the opening. Generally that works well, but there are some dangers too. In the Queens Knight Attack it can appear that White is horsing around a little too much. The game Laird vs Bullockus began 1.Nc3 e5 2.Nf3 Bc5 3.Nxe5. What can Black do? The answer is a bishop sacrifice 3…Bxf2+! 4.Kxf2 Qh4+ and the Black queen will regain the piece on e5. This was a postal game between two California players. Scott W. Laird was a master in correspondence and in tournament play. Dr. Theodore Bullockus was an international arbiter and longtime postal chess player. His peak ICCF rating was 2299. Ted Bullockus was a teammate of mine in the Correspondence Olympiad. We represented the USA in the 1980s. This Queens Knight Attack opening line is actually the reverse of an Alekhine Defence variation. Ted Bullockus was an expert in the Alekhine. In fact he influenced me to study it for many years. An Alekhine line goes 1.e4 Nf6 2.Bc4 Nxe4 3.Bxf7+ Kxf7 4.Qh5+ when White regains the piece on e4 with equal chances. In the Queens Knight Attack White has the added useful move 1.Nc3. Laird - Bullockus, USA corr 1980 begins 1.Nc3 e5 2.Nf3 Bc5 3.Nxe5 Bxf2+ [3...d6 4.Nf3+/-] 4.Kxf2 Qh4+ 5.g3 [5.Kg1 Qd4+ 6.e3 Qxe5 7.d4 Qe6 8.d5 Qe5 9.d6+/-] 5...Qd4+ 6.e3 [6.Kg2 Qxe5 7.d4 Qh5 8.e4 Qxd1

9.Nxd1 Nc6 10.c3+/=] 6...Qxe5 7.Qf3 [7.d4 Qf5+ 8.Qf3 Qxf3+ 9.Kxf3+/=] 7...Nf6 8.d4 Qe7 9.e4 d6 10.h3 [10.Bg5!? Ng4+ 11.Qxg4 Bxg4 12.Bxe7 Kxe7 13.Nd5+ Kd8 14.Ne3+/=] 10...0-0 11.Bc4?! [11.Bg5+/=] 11...Nc6 12.Be3 Re8 [12...Be6=] 13.a3 Kh8 [13...h6 14.Bd3+/=] 14.Bd3 Be6 15.g4 [15.Rae1+/-] 15...Nd7 [15...h6 16.Rae1+/-] 16.d5 1-0

32 – Rookie 2…d5 3.Nxe5 d4 The Queens Knight Attack 1.Nc3 has long been thought to be a transpositional move order that usually leads to other openings. For example: 1...c5 2.e4 is a Sicilian Defence; 1...d5 2.d4 is a Veresov or BDG; and 1...e5 2.e4 Vienna Game. That is true, but many 1.Nc3 players are trying not to play popular lines. If Black hopes for a Vienna Game, White can use the Napoleon Bonaparte idea 1.Nc3 e5 2.Nf3 (instead of 2.e4). The main line continues 2...Nc6 3.d4 exd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Bg5 Bb4 6.Nxc6 with equal chances although White probably is more comfortable. Black has two gambit ideas vs the Napoleon. First is 2...Bc5?! 3.Nxe5 Bxf2+ 4.Kxf2 Qh4+ (see previous game). Second is the incredible sacrifice 2...d5!? 3.Nxe5 d4 4.Nb1. Harald Keilhack gives a game after 4...Qd5 and adds: "Black obtained useful compensation. It is all too easy after the event to offer some suggestions for an improvement... But when playing such a position over the board it is very easy to miss the point at which one should give the right direction to the game." Amen, especially in blitz! The computer chess engine Rookie beat me six games in a row with 2...d5 before today's game below. After this perpetual check draw when I had been clearly winning, Rookie stopped playing this gambit vs me. Darn. Sawyer (2004) - Rookie (2513), ICC 5 0 Internet Chess Club, 26.01.2014 begins 1.Nc3 e5 2.Nf3 d5!? 3.Nxe5 d4 4.Nb1 Bd6 5.Nf3 Nc6 [Deep Rybka and Deep Fritz prefer 5...c5 when White will push his e-pawn one or two squares.] 6.c3 Nf6 7.cxd4 0-0 8.e3 [White's 2 extra d-pawns give him an advantage.] 8...Re8 9.Be2 h6 10.0-0 Rb8 11.d3 Be7 12.Nc3 Be6 13.Ne4 Qd7 14.Nxf6+ [There is no need to exchange pieces, but this is a logical strategy when up material. 14.Bd2+-] 14...Bxf6 15.Bd2 a5 16.a3 a4 17.Re1 Ra8 18.Bc3 Bb3 19.Qd2 Na7 20.Bd1 Bxd1 21.Rexd1 Nb5 22.Rac1 c6

23.Bb4 Nc7 24.Qc2 Nd5 25.Bd2 Ne7 26.Bb4 [26.Ne5+-] 26...Nf5 27.Bd2 Nh4 28.Nxh4 Bxh4 29.Bb4 Re6 30.g3 Be7 31.Bxe7 Qxe7 32.Qc5 [I could avoid his draw by 32.Qd2+-, but I missed it in blitz.] 32...Rxe3 33.fxe3 Qxe3+ 34.Kf1 Qf3+ 35.Kg1 Qe3+ 36.Kf1 Qf3+ 37.Kg1 1/2-1/2

33 – Napoleon 2…d6 3.e4 f5 Napoleon Bonaparte played chess throughout much of his life. One of the games given is in the Queens Knight Attack vs Madame de Remusat played at La Malmaison Castle in 1804. There was no video of the game. We do not know if it was real. Composed games are clean and pretty. This game includes the time wasting move 4.h3 which actually adds to its credibility. The other version has the colors reversed. There Napoleon as Black does not waste time and wins a nice game. It seems more likely that the game he had White was real and the other was not. Golombek: "Napoleon Bonaparte I (15 August 1769-5 May 1821) was a keen but seemingly weak player, who is known to have played chess from his college days to the end of his life, when he played much during his captivity at St. Helena. Of the three games extant by him, none are authentic but seem to have been composed after his death to fit in with likely but legendary encounters. One is against General Bertrand, another is against the Automaton (the Turk) at Schonbrunn in 1809, and the third is against Mme de Remusat at La Malmaison in 1804." Irving Chernev in his "1000 Best Short Games of Chess" (Game 167) gives this game as an Alekhine Defense with the colors reversed, Napoleon being Black played in Paris 1802. That seems to be historically inaccurate, but it is entertaining. Chernev wrote: "As befits a great general, Napoleon manipulates his Knights expertly to land the King in a mating net." Those beginning moves were 1.e4 Nf6 2.d3 Nc6 3.f4 e5 4.fxe5 dxe5 continuing as in this game with the h3 move being omitted. Napoleon - de Remusat, La Malmaison Castle, 1804 begins 1.Nc3 e5 2.Nf3 d6 3.e4 f5 4.h3?! [4.d4 fxe4 5.Nxe4 Nf6 6.Nxf6+ gxf6 7.Bd3+/=] 4...fxe4 5.Nxe4 Nc6 6.Nfg5 d5 7.Qh5+ g6 8.Qf3 Nh6? [Black stands better

after 8...Bf5! 9.Bb5 dxe4 10.Bxc6+ bxc6 11.Nxe4 Bxe4 12.Qxe4 Qd5-+] 9.Nf6+ Ke7 10.Nxd5+ Kd6 [10...Ke8 11.Nf6+ Ke7 12.Nfe4+-] 11.Ne4+ Kxd5 [11...Kd7 12.Bb5 a6 13.Bxc6+ bxc6 14.Ndf6+ Ke7 15.d4+-] 12.Bc4+ Kxc4 13.Qb3+ Kd4 14.Qd3# 1-0

34 – Gavin 2…d6 3.d4 Bg4 The nickname for Orlando is "The City Beautiful". The sun shines almost every morning year round. The tropical sea breeze affect brings rain almost every afternoon in the summer. These storms are scary for some people. If you remain calm, the storm trouble will pass and a beautiful sunny morning will follow. In a chess game, there are stormy moments when the armies clash. If you remain cool and deal with the important issues of keeping your pieces safe and making threats, the sun is likely to shine on you. When it does, you will see weaknesses in your opponent's position that allow you an advantage. Once a week during the summer of 2003 I played at the Borders bookstore in Orlando. This was my only game vs James Gavin. The opening was the Queens Knight Attack Napoleon Variation. Sawyer - Gavin, Orlando, FL, 17.07.2003 begins 1.Nc3 e5 2.Nf3 [Napoleon Attack.] 2...d6 [Rather passive. An interesting sacrifice is 2...d5!? 3.Nxe5 d4 4.Nb1 Bd6 with space, open lines and faster development.; Normal is 2...Nc6 3.d4 exd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6=] 3.d4 [3.e4+/=] 3...Bg4?! [3...Nd7 4.e4 is a Philidor.] 4.dxe5 [4.Qd3!? Nc6 5.d5 Nce7 6.h3+/-] 4...Bxf3 5.gxf3 [5.exf3! dxe5 6.Qxd8+ Kxd8 7.Be3+/=] 5...Nc6 [Black loses a pawn so as to be able to castle. 5...dxe5 6.Qxd8+ Kxd8 7.Bg5+ f6 8.0-0-0+ Bd6 9.Be3 Ke7 10.Bh3 Nc6 11.Nd5+ Kf8 12.c4+/-] 6.exd6 Bxd6 7.Ne4! Bb4+ 8.c3 [8.Bd2 Bxd2+ 9.Qxd2 Qxd2+ 10.Nxd2 Nb4 and White must decide whether to play 0-0-0 and lose the a2 pawn or to play Kd1 and lose the right to castle.] 8...Qxd1+ 9.Kxd1 [White loses the right to castle to be up a pawn.] 9...Be7 10.Bf4 [10.Bh3!+/-] 10...0-0-0+ 11.Kc2 Nf6 12.Nxf6 Bxf6 13.e3 [13.Bh3+ Kb8 14.Rad1+/- and White heads to an endgame with the advantage of two bishops and a pawn.] 13...Be5 14.Bxe5 Nxe5 15.Be2 Rd6 16.f4 Nc6 [16...Rhd8 17.Rad1 Rxd1 18.Rxd1 Rxd1 19.Kxd1+/- would at least force White to demonstrate some endgame technique.] 17.Rad1 Rh6 18.h4 [18.Bg4+! Kb8 19.Rd7+-] 18...f5 19.h5 Ne7 20.Bf3 [20.Bc4 Nc6 21.Rhg1 g6 22.Be6+ Kb8 23.hxg6 hxg6 24.Rd7+-] 20...Ra6 21.a3 Rf8 22.Rhg1 g6 23.hxg6 hxg6 24.Rh1 Ng8

25.Rh8 c6? 26.Rd6 c5? [Black loses more material and it’s over.] 27.Rxa6 bxa6 28.Bd5 Kd7 29.Rxg8 Rf6 30.Rg7+ Kd6 31.Rf7 1-0

35 – Rashkovsky 3.d4 Nd7 This Queens Knight Attack 1.Nc3 resembles a Philidor Defence after the move 7.e4. White made the relatively rare choice to fianchetto a bishop. Then multiple exchanges took place in the center until suddenly both Black knights were in danger in the game between Nukhim Rashkovsky and Dieter Villing. Rashkovsky (2483) - Villing (2113), World Senior Teams +65 Dresden GER (2.1), 08.07.2018 begins 1.Nc3 e5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 Nd7 4.g3 Ngf6 5.Bg2 Be7 [5...c6 6.0-0 Be7 7.a4=] 6.0-0 0-0 7.e4 c6 8.a4 a5 9.Re1 Re8 10.h3 Qc7 11.Be3 Qb8 [11...b6 12.Qd2=] 12.Bf1 Bd8 13.Nd2 d5 [13...h6 14.Nc4+/=] 14.exd5 [14.dxe5 Nxe5 15.exd5+/=] 14...cxd5 [14...Nxd5 15.Nxd5 cxd5 16.c4+/-] 15.Nb5 Bb6 16.Nf3 [16.Bg2 Bxd4 17.Nxd4 exd4 18.Bxd4+/-] 16...Ne4 [16...Bc7 17.Nxe5 Nxe5 18.Bf4 Nf3+ 19.Qxf3 Bxf4 20.Qxf4 Qxf4 21.gxf4+/=] 17.c4 Ndf6 18.dxe5 Bxe3 19.Rxe3 1-0

36 – Grafl 3…exd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 The symmetrical pawn structure in this Queens Knight Attack after 7.exd4 opened only the e-file for both sides. Black tried to block it with bishops. White focused on a kingside attack. The queenside knight sacrifice travels from 1.Nc3, to 14.Ne2, to 19.Ng3 to the 20.Nh5. This sacrifice indicated that White was going all out for checkmate. Black could not avoid the loss of material. The knight on f6 is lost and White’s attack continues in the game between Florian Grafl and Felipe Porras Mateo. Grafl (2384) - Porras Mateo (2298), TCh-CAT Gp2 2017 Barcelona ESP (6.4), 25.02.2017 begins 1.Nc3 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 exd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Bg5 Bc5 6.e3 Nxd4 7.exd4 Be7 8.Bd3 0-0 [8...d5 9.Qd2=] 9.Qf3 d6 10.h3 [10.0-0+/=] 10...c6 11.0-0 d5 12.Rfe1 Re8 13.Re3 Be6 [13...h6 14.Bf4=] 14.Ne2 Nd7 15.Bxe7 Qxe7 16.Re1 Qd6 17.Qf4 Qb4 18.c3 Qb6 19.Ng3 g6 [19...Nf6 20.R1e2+/=] 20.Nh5 gxh5 [20...Kh8 21.Qh6+-] 21.Rg3+ Kf8 [21...Bg4 22.Bxh7+ Kg7 23.Rxe8 Rxe8 24.hxg4+-] 22.Qd6+ Re7 23.Bxh7 Nf6 24.Qe5 [If 24...Ke8 25.Qxf6+-] 1-0

37 – Nepomniachtchi 5.e4 Nepomniachtchi played the Queens Knight Attack with 1.Nc3 d5 2.Nf3 in a Napoleon Attack. Play resembled a Philidor Defence. Playing the Black pieces was Murtas Kazhgaleyev. He is a grandmaster from Kazakhstan. Kazhgaleyev was born in 1973. Murtas Kazhgaleyev has represented Kazakhstan in events and coaching for about 20 years in many countries. In addition to chess play, Murtas is known for writing stories about his life. Ian Nepomniachtchi is a Russian grandmaster born in 1990. As of September 2016 FIDE ranked him as number 21 in the world with a rating of 2740. That’s way up there. GM Nepomniachtchi has been mostly a 1.e4 player as White, but not exclusively. He is a universal openings player. About a fourth of the time Nepomniachtchi plays 1.Nf3, 1.d4 or 1.c4. What really stands out to me is that Nepomniachtchi plays just about every opening variation as long as it is sound and has a focus directly on the center. It would be hard to predict his opening choices. This game is the first one I have seen where GM Ian Nepomniachtchi played 1.Nc3. Nepomniachtchi (2719) - Kazhgaleyev (2582), Eurasian Blitz Chess Cup Almaty KAZ (14.8), 18.06.2016 begins 1.Nc3 e5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 exd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.e4 Be7 6.Bc4 [6.Bf4!?+/=] 6...0-0 7.Bb3 Re8 8.0-0 Bf8 [8...Nbd7 9.Re1=] 9.f3 c6 10.Kh1 Nbd7 11.a4 [11.a3!?] 11...Ne5 12.Bg5 h6 13.Bh4 Ng6 14.Bf2 Qc7 15.a5 Bd7 16.Qd2 b5 17.axb6 axb6 18.Rad1 b5 19.Nf5 Bxf5 20.exf5 Ne5 21.Bh4 Nfd7 22.f6 g6 23.f4 Ng4 [23...Nc4 24.Bxc4 bxc4 25.f5=] 24.f5 [24.Qd3+/-] 24...g5 25.Bxg5 Ndxf6 26.Bf4 Ne5 [26...b4-/+] 27.Bxh6 Kh8 28.Bxf8 Rxf8 29.Qh6+ Nh7 30.Ne4 f6 31.Rxd6 Rad8 32.Rxd8 Qxd8 33.Qe3 Qc7 34.h3 Re8 35.Be6 Rd8 36.Ra1 Qb8 37.Qh6 Rf8 38.Ra3 Qc7 [38...Nf7 39.Bxf7 Rxf7 40.Nc5+-] 39.Rg3 Qe7 40.c3 Rd8 41.Kh2 c5 [41...Ra8 42.Nc5+-] 42.Rg6 [42.Nxc5+-]

42...Qc7 43.Rg3 [43.g3+-] 43...Qe7 44.b3 c4 45.bxc4 bxc4 46.Nd2 Qc7 47.Ne4 [47.Nxc4 Ng4+ 48.hxg4+-] 47...Qe7 48.Nf2 Rb8 49.Qf4 Qc7 50.Ne4 Rb2 51.Rg8# 1-0

38 – Manea 2…Nc6 3.e3 Nf6 White approached this Queens Knight Attack 1.Nc3 as sort of a French Defence in reverse. When attacked by 4...e4 the knight jumped to Ne5. At first glance, this knight appears exposed to possible danger, but Black has no good way to take advantage. The recapture via 9.dxe5 must have come as a jolt. Both d5 and the knight on f6 were under attack. Black hung a piece while in trouble in the game Alexandru Manea vs Robin Veysseyre. Manea (2394) - Veysseyre (1882), 33rd Avoine Open 2018 Avoine FRA (4.26), 24.07.2018 begins 1.Nc3 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.e3 Nf6 4.d4 e4 [4...exd4 5.exd4 d5=] 5.Ne5 Ne7 6.Be2 [6.Bc4 d5 7.Bb3=] 6...d5 [6...d6 7.Ng4 Nxg4 8.Bxg4 Bxg4 9.Qxg4 f5=] 7.f3 [7.0-0 Ng6 8.f3 exf3 9.Nxf3=] 7...Ng6 [7...exf3 8.Bxf3 Ng6=] 8.f4 [8.0-0 exf3 9.Nxf3=] 8...Nxe5? [8...Bd6=] 9.dxe5! Ng4 [9...Ng8 10.Qxd5+-] 10.Qxd5 [10.Bxg4?! Qh4+ 11.g3 Qxg4 12.Qxd5+/=] 10...Bb4? [10...Qxd5 11.Nxd5 Kd8 12.h3 Nh6 13.g4+-] 11.Qb5+ White wins a bishop and more. 1-0

39 – Bogdanovich 3.d4 exd4 White chose the Napoleon line Queens Knight Attack after 1.Nc3 e5 2.Nf3. The move 5.Be3 led to the exchange of two sets of minor pieces. It left White’s queen active in the center without much fear. His attack pressed the initiative with moves like 10.e5 and 19.Re7. Then White won the Exchange with 21.Bxh7+ drawing the king away from 20.Qxf8. Black was left with nothing to play for in the game Stanislav Bogdanovich vs Luca Kessler. Bogdanovich (2596) - Kessler (2431), 18th ch-EUR Indiv 2017 Minsk BLR (8.95), 07.06.2017 begins 1.Nc3 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 exd4 4.Nxd4 Bc5 5.Be3 Nxd4 [5...Bb6 6.Nf5 Bxe3 7.Nxe3=] 6.Bxd4 Bxd4 7.Qxd4 Nf6 [7...Qf6 8.Qe3+ Ne7 9.Nd5 Qd6 10.0-0-0+/-] 8.e4 d6 9.0-0-0 0-0 10.e5 Ne8 11.f4 [11.Kb1+/-] 11...Be6 12.Bd3 [12.Bc4+/-] 12...Qh4 13.g3 Qh3 14.Ne4 dxe5 15.Qxe5 f6 [15...h6 16.Rd2+/-] 16.Qc5 c6 17.Rhe1 Bd5 18.Nc3 Bf7 [18...b6 19.Qa3+/-] 19.Re7 Qxh2 [19...Qh5 20.Qxh5 Bxh5 21.Bc4+ Kh8 22.Be2+-] 20.Rxb7 [20.Rxf7 Rxf7 21.Bc4+-] 20...Qxg3 21.Bxh7+ Kxh7 22.Qxf8 Qxf4+ [22...Bh5 23.Rd2+-] 23.Kb1 1-0

40 – Andreikin 4.Nxd4 Nf6 The main line of the Napoleon Attack is illustrated in Andreikin vs Mozharov. In some ways this line looks like a Scotch Game or Scotch Four Knights Game. White has the option to transpose. Dmitry Andreikin is among the top players in the world. Andreikin is a former World Junior Champion. Mikhail Mozharov is a Russian grandmaster born in 1990. Because of the popular nature of this line I have provided quite a bit of detailed analysis. The move 4…Nf6 is the most common among many fourth move possibilities. When White plays the Queens Knight Attack then positions like this one can be reached frequently. Black has a wide choice of moves but the basic set up is similar. White likely plays it more often than Black, and thus White would be more familiar with the typical tactics and strategy. Andreikin (2720) - Mozharov (2573), 69th Moscow Blitz Moscow RUS (2.9), 06.09.2015 begins 1.Nc3 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 exd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Bg5 Bb4 [5...Be7 6.Nf5 0-0 (6...h6 7.Nxg7+ Kf8 8.Bxf6 Bxf6 9.Nh5 Bxc3+ 10.bxc3 Qg5 11.Ng3+/-) 7.Nxe7+ Nxe7 (7...Qxe7 8.Nd5 Qe5 9.Bxf6 gxf6 10.e3 f5 11.c4+/=) 8.Bxf6 gxf6 9.e4 f5 10.Qh5 fxe4 11.Nxe4+/-; 5...h6 6.Bxf6 Qxf6 (6...gxf6 7.Nd5 Nb4 8.e4 Nxd5 9.exd5 Bc5 10.Qg4 Qe7+ 11.Kd2+/-) 7.Ndb5 Qd8 (7...Qe5 8.Nd5 Kd8 9.Nbxc7 Rb8 10.Nb5 Qxb2 11.Rb1 Qxa2 12.e3+/=) 8.Nd5 Bb4+ 9.c3 Ba5 10.b4 a6 11.Nd4 Bb6 12.Nf5+/=; 5...Bc5 6.e3 Nxd4 7.exd4 Be7 8.Bd3 0-0 9.0-0=] 6.Nxc6 bxc6 [6...dxc6 7.Qxd8+ Kxd8 8.0-0-0+ Ke7 9.e4 h6 10.Be3=; 6...Bxc3+ 7.bxc3 bxc6 8.e3 h6 9.Bh4 0-0 10.Qf3=] 7.Qd4 Be7 [7...Qe7 8.Bxf6 gxf6 9.e3 Bc5 10.Qh4=] 8.e4 d6 [8...0-0 9.Bd3 h6 10.Bh4 and 1-0 in 97. Benjamin Nunn, London ENG 1987] 9.0-0-0 0-0 [9...h6 10.Bf4 Be6 11.e5 dxe5 12.Bxe5=] 10.e5 Ne8 11.h4 Be6 12.Bd3 d5 13.f4 f6 14.exf6 Bxf6 15.Qe3 Qd7 16.Na4 Bg4 17.Nc5 Qf7 18.Rde1 Nd6 19.Qg3 Qh5 [19...h5 20.Kb1

a5 21.Qe3 a4 22.Bxf6 Qxf6 23.Qe7=] 20.Ne6 Rf7 [20...Bxe6 21.Rxe6 Bxg5 22.Qxg5 Qxg5 23.hxg5+/=] 21.Bxf6 Rxf6 22.Re5 Nf5 23.Bxf5 Bxf5 [Black resigned in view of mate on g7. 23...Rxf5 24.Rhe1+/-] 1-0

Book 9: Chapter 4 – 1.Nc3 d5 We begin with the Queens Knight Attack. There are many transpositional possibilities as well as unique variations.

Closed – Without 2.e4 White can transpose to some type of 1.d4 Queen Pawn Game or play something else entirely. Usually the Queens Knight Attack player chooses 2.e4. This section covers two other choices.

41 – Fine 1.Nc3 d5 2.f4 Reuben Fine played 1.Nc3 against Adolf Jay Fink in Pasadena, California in 1932. Grandmaster Reuben Fine was born in 1914, three years after Mikhail Botvinnik and two years before Paul Keres. They were all in their prime from the 1930s to the 1950s. Fine retired early. He authored some of my favorite chess books. Fine scored +7 -4 =14 against Lasker, Capablanca, Alekhine, Euwe and Botvinnik. After World War II Reuben Fine was invited as one of six players to play for the world championship so as to replace Alekhine who had died. Fine declined to play. He worked on his doctorate from USC and his profession as a psychologist. The 1.Nc3 d4 2.f4 is the rare Bird’s Opening line 1.f4 d5 2.Nc3. On the one hand White makes a commitment with the early Nc3. On the other hand the knight gets into play quicker and more aggressively than it might in other lines. Note 2.f4 allows 4.Nf2. Fine - Fink, Pasadena 1932 begins 1.Nc3 d5 2.f4 d4 3.Ne4 Nf6 4.Nf2 [4.Nxf6+!? exf6 (or 4...gxf6 5.Nf3 Qd6 6.c3 c5 7.cxd4 cxd4 8.e3=) 5.Nf3 Nc6 6.e4 dxe3 7.dxe3 Qxd1+ 8.Kxd1=] 4...Bf5 [4...Ng4 5.Nxg4 Bxg4 6.h3 Bf5 7.Nf3=] 5.Nf3 Nc6 [5...c5 6.e3 dxe3 7.dxe3 Qxd1+ 8.Kxd1 Nc6 9.Bd3=] 6.g3 [6.c3 Qd7 7.d3 e6 8.Bd2 dxc3 9.bxc3=] 6...Qd7 7.Bg2 0-0-0 8.0-0 h6 [8...h5=] 9.a3 g6 10.b4 a6 11.Bb2 Bg7 12.c4 Ng4?! [12...dxc3 13.Bxc3+/=] 13.Qa4?! [13.Nd3! Bxd3 14.exd3+/-] 13...Nxf2 14.Rxf2 Bf6? [14...Kb8 15.b5+/=] 15.b5 Nb8 16.Qb3 c5 17.bxa6 Nxa6 18.Ne5 Bxe5

19.fxe5 Qc7 20.d3 Rd7 21.Bc1 e6 22.Bd2 Nb8 [22...Qxe5 23.Rb1+-] 23.Qb5 Nc6 24.Rb1 Nd8 25.Qa4 g5 26.Qa7 Qxe5 27.Ba5 Re7 28.Rb5 Nc6 29.Rxc5 Rc7 30.Bxc6 1-0

42 – Mikhaletz 2.Nf3 c5 3.d4 Bishops capture pinned knights and a knight takes a bishop to double and undouble pawns. This Queens Knight Attack could be reached from a Trompowsky Attack 1.d4 Nf6 2.Bg5. I present it here in its actual move order but beware of transpositions to lines covered under 1.Nc3 c5 2.d4. Neither king appears safe, but Black’s king is more vulnerable than White’s in this game between Lubomir Mikhaletz and Oleksandr Shymanskyi. Mikhaletz (2405) - Shymanskyi (2365), Nebesna Sotnya Mem Blitz Lutsk UKR (9.5), 17.02.2017 begins 1.Nc3 d5 2.Nf3 c5 3.d4 Nf6 4.Bg5 cxd4 [4...Ne4=] 5.Qxd4 Nc6 6.Qh4 e6 7.0-0-0 Bb4 8.e4 Bxc3 9.bxc3 Qe7 10.Bxf6 gxf6 11.exd5 exd5 12.Bb5 Be6 13.Qa4 [13.Nd4+/-] 13...Rc8 14.Nd4 a6 [14...0-0=] 15.Bxc6+ bxc6 16.Rhe1 Kf8 17.Nxe6+ [17.c4+/-] 17...fxe6 18.Qxa6 Kf7 19.Qe2 Qa3+ 20.Kd2 e5 21.Qh5+ Ke7 [21...Ke6 22.Qg4+ Kd6 23.Qf5+/=] 22.Re3 [22.Rxe5+ fxe5=] 22...Rce8 [22...Qa7=] 23.Rg3 Kd8 24.Qf7 [24.Qh4+/-] 24...Qe7 25.Qh5 Qa3 [25...Kc7 26.a4=] 26.Rb1 1-0

43 – Kabanov 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.d4 Everyone makes mistakes in blitz chess. Masters play blitz at a higher level than others play at tournament speed, but anyone can blunder. Black saddled White with tripled c-pawns in this Queens Knight Attack, but tripled pawns means to extra open files for moves like 12.Rb1 and 19.Rfd1. The open lines favored White in the game Nikolai Kabanov vs Pavel Bublei. Then came the one move lemon: 31...Nd4? dropped a piece to 32.Rxd4! Kabanov (2478) - Bublei (2387), TCh-RUS Blitz 2017 Sochi RUS (2), 05.10.2017 begins 1.Nc3 d5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.d4 c5 4.Bg5 Nc6 5.e3 h6 6.Bh4 Ne4 7.Bd3 Bf5 8.0-0 g5 9.Bg3 Bg7 10.dxc5 Nxc3 11.bxc3 Be4 12.Rb1 Qc8 13.Nd4 0-0 14.f3 Bh7 15.Bxh7+ Kxh7 16.Qd3+ Kg8 17.Qb5 [17.Nf5+-] 17...e5 18.Ne2 Rb8 19.Rfd1 Rd8 20.c4 a6 21.Qa4 dxc4 [21...d4=] 22.Qxc4 Na5 23.Qc3 Nc6 24.Qa3 Qc7 [24...Bf8 25.Nc3+/=] 25.Nc3 Rxd1+ 26.Rxd1 Qe7 [26...Qa5 27.Qxa5 Nxa5 28.Nd5+/-] 27.Nd5

[27.Rd6+-] 27...Qe6 28.e4 g4 29.fxg4 Qxg4 30.Qf3 [30.Qd3 Nd4 31.Rb1+-] 30...Qxf3 31.gxf3 Nd4? [31...Bf8 32.Bf2+/-] 32.Rxd4! Wins a knight. If 32...exd4 33.Bxb8+- 1-0

44 – Bauer vs Koch 2.d4 Bf5 Grandmaster Christian Bauer sometimes plays 1.Nc3. Here he appeared to be headed for a Veresov Opening with 1.d4 d5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.Bg5. His opponent Uwe Koch sidetracked him by delaying ...Nf6 to move seven. Uwe Koch played 2...Bf5 which fights for e4 without giving any purpose to 3.Bg5. Therefore Bauer chose to enforce e4 with 3.f3 and 4.e4 in the style of the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit. Black's slow response 3...h6 provided additional retreat space for his ...Bf5 as well as preventing a White Bg5. One idea of 2.Nc3 is that after here 7.Bf4, White can mount an attack vs c7 with 9.Nb5. In this game the Black king got caught in the center for too long. Grandmaster Bauer made Black pay. Bauer's sharp central attack led to a crushing quick victory. The Veresov Opening is a system of opening development where White begins by playing 1.d4, 2.Nc3 and 3.Bg5. Of course 1.Nc3 could also transpose. One cannot just blindly set-up this pattern without paying attention to what Black does. The basic strategy is the threat to occupy the center with pawns d4 and e4. After 1.d4, Black usually hinders 2.e4 with moves like 1...d5, 1...Nf6 or 1...f5. If 1.d4 d5 2.Nc3, White now threatens 3.e4. If Black responses 2...Nf6, hitting e4 with both his d5 pawn and Nf6, then 3.Bg5 is the Veresov approach. White threatens 4.Bxf6 giving Black doubled f-pawns and less influence over e4. Note that 1.d4 d5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.Bg5 e6 4.e4 transposes to a French Defence. Bauer - Koch, Mehlingen PSB (ch) H, 1999 begins 1.d4 d5 2.Nc3 Bf5 [2...Nf6 3.Bg5 Veresov] 3.f3 h6 4.e4 dxe4 5.fxe4 Bg6 6.Nf3 e6 7.Bf4 Nf6 8.Bd3 Nbd7 9.Nb5 Bb4+ 10.c3 Ba5 11.Qe2 a6 12.Na3 c6 13.Nc4 Bc7 [13...0-0 14.Bd6+/-] 14.Bxc7 Qxc7 15.e5 Bxd3 16.Qxd3 Nd5 17.Nd6+ Ke7 18.0-0 Raf8 [If 18...Nf4 19.Qd2+-] 19.c4 [Or 19.Nh4+-] 19...N5b6 [If

19...Nf4 20.Qe3+-] 20.c5 Nc8 [20...Nd5 21.Nh4+-] 21.Nh4 b5 22.Rxf7+ Kd8 23.Ng6 Nxd6 24.exd6 Qa5 25.Nxh8 Rxh8 26.Qg6 Kc8 27.Rxd7 1-0

45 – Van Geet 2.d4 e6 3.Nf3 The 1.Nc3 opening is most often called the Van Geet Opening and for good reason. Dirk Daniel Van Geet was an International Master and an International Correspondence Grandmaster. For more than 50 years he played 1.Nc3 and published analysis. Van Geet was born in 1932 and died at age 80 in 2012. The first move 1.Nc3 was not the only thing Van Geet played, but it was by far the most common. He defeated many masters. Why do I use the descriptive term Queens Knight Attack for 1.Nc3? It is because it is easier for most to understand it. I mean no disrespect to Van Geet or Dunst or Aasum or any other prominent 1.Nc3 player. I have seen a huge pile of 1.Nc3 players. In my mind, Van Geet belongs at the top of the pile. Here Van Geet played his fellow countryman Jan Timman. Both were from the Netherlands, but this is not a Dutch Defence. In 1968 Jan Timman was about 16 years old. The previous year he finished third in the World Junior Championship in Jerusalem. Jan Timman earned the titles of International Master in 1971 and Grandmaster in 1974. Later in his career Timman became best known for New In Chess. Timman has served as one of the chief editors for many years. Jan Timman also wrote many books. Timman is a contemporary of Anatoly Karpov. In 1993 Timman lost the FIDE World Championship title match to Karpov 12.5-8.5 after Gary Kasparov had been stripped of his title by FIDE. But most players still considered Kasparov to be the world champion.

Van Geet - Timman, The Hague (3), 1968 begins 1.Nc3 d5 2.d4 [White often plays 2.e4] 2…e6 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.Bg5 Bb4 [4...Be7 5.e3 0-0 6.Bd3 h6 7.Bh4=] 5.e3 h6 6.Bf4 a6 [6...Ne4 7.a3 Ba5 8.Bd3 Nxc3 9.Qd2 Nd7 10.bxc3 c5=] 7.Ne5 [7.a3 Bxc3+ 8.bxc3 c5=] 7...c5 8.dxc5 Bxc5 9.Bd3 Nc6 10.0-0 Bd6 11.Nxc6 bxc6 12.Bxd6 Qxd6 13.e4 0-0 14.f4 dxe4 15.Bxe4 Nxe4 16.Nxe4 Qb4 17.Qd3 Qxb2? [17...Qb6+ 18.Kh1=] 18.Rfb1 1-0

46 – Tartakower 3.Bg5 Nbd7 Savielly G Tartakower is the favorite grandmaster of Tom Purser. Partly this is because Tartakower played so many Blackmar-Diemer Gambits. Another fun thing about Savielly Tartakower was that he played so many less popular openings repeatedly. Dr. Tartakower won in a critical line of an opening Gavriil Nikolayevich Veresov would later make popular. German Master Kurt Richter also played it quite a bit. Sometimes the opening is called the Richter-Veresov. Sir George Alan Thomas was twice British chess champion. He was born in Turkey in 1881 but lived most of this life in England. He played tennis at Wimbledon in singles and doubles. He won 21 titles in the All-England Badminton Championship. George Thomas lived to be age 91, but he retired from chess at age 69. In the Veresov Opening White develops his queenside pieces quickly so as to focus on the e4 square. Note that the 2.Nc3 aims at e4 and 3.Bg5 attacks the Nf6 to undermine Black's influence on e4. If Black plays 3...e6, 4.e4 transposes to the Classical Variation of the French Defence. Otherwise, White often plays 4.f3 or 4.Qd3 to threaten 5.e4. Tartakower - Thomas, Karlsbad (9), 1923 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d5 3.Bg5 Nbd7 4.f3 c6 5.e4 dxe4 6.fxe4 Qa5 [The main line is 6...e5! 7.dxe5 Qa5 8.Bxf6 gxf6 9.exf6 Ba3 10.Qc1 Nxf6=/+ according to Houdini 4, Deep Rybka and Deep Fritz] 7.Qd2 e5 8.Nf3 Be7 9.Bc4 exd4 10.Qxd4 Qb6 11.Qd2 Qc5 12.Bb3 Ne5 13.Be3 Nc4 14.Bxc5 Nxd2 15.Bxe7 Nxb3 16.axb3 Kxe7 17.e5 Ng4 18.0-0 Bf5 19.Nd4 Bg6 20.Rae1 Rhd8 21.Rf4 h5 22.h3 Nh6 23.g4 hxg4 24.hxg4 c5 25.Nf5+ Bxf5 26.gxf5 Rd2 27.f6+ Ke6? [27...gxf6 28.exf6+ Kd7=] 28.fxg7 Ke7 29.Ne4 [29.Rh4+-] 29...Rxc2 30.Rh4 Rg8 31.Rxh6 Rxg7+ 32.Kh1 Rxb2 33.Nd6 Rg6 [33...Rgg2 34.Rf1+-] 34.Rxg6 fxg6 35.e6 Rxb3 [35...Rd2 36.Nc8+ Ke8 37.e7 Rd4 38.Re6+-] 36.Nc8+ Ke8 37.e7 Rd3 38.Rf1 Rh3+ 39.Kg2 Rh8 40.Rd1 Kf7 41.Kf3 Rxc8 42.Rd8 Kxe7 43.Rxc8 Kd6 44.Ke4 b6 45.Rg8 Kc6 46.Rxg6+ Kb5 47.Kd3 Kb4 48.Rg1 b5 49.Ra1 c4+ 50.Kd4 Kb3 51.Rb1+

Ka4 52.Kc3 Ka5 53.Rh1 Kb6 [If 53...Ka6 54.Rh6+ Ka5 55.Rf6+-] 54.Rh6+ 1-0

47 – Short 2.d4 Nf6 3.Bf4 a6 Nigel Short wins vs Michael Welsh of Ireland. The grandmaster attacks as White on both sides of the board simultaneously. I read a report in 2018 that GM Nigel Short wanted to be the President of FIDE. That could be very interesting. Short would certainly bring a different perspective than what FIDE appears to have had over the past many years. Time will tell. Short (2662) - Welsh (1985), 18th BCC Open Cha-Am THA, 13.04.2018 begins 1.Nc3 d5 2.d4 Nf6 3.Bf4 a6 4.e3 e6 5.g4 c5 6.g5 Nfd7 7.a3 Nc6 8.Nf3 b5 9.h4 Be7 10.Ne2 cxd4 11.Nexd4 Qb6 12.h5 Nxd4 13.exd4 f6 [13...b4=] 14.c3 [14.Qe2 0-0 15.0-0-0+/-] 14...Ra7 15.Bh3 [15.gxf6 Nxf6 16.Bd3+/=] 15...0-0 16.g6 e5 [16...h6 17.Qd2+/=] 17.gxh7+ Kh8 18.Be3 [18.Nh4+-] 18...exd4 19.Nxd4 Bc5 [Or 19...Ne5 20.Ne6+-] 20.b4 1-0

48 – Fries Nielsen Plays 3.Bf4 IM Jens Ove Fries Nielsen wrote to me about 1.d4 d5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.Bf4!? He noted, “I have given the name Rinor since 2011, long before Jobava, Rapport, etc. with a total of 150 games! Second, I have nice wins against some strong GMs such as Grandelius, Hector, and Tukhaev, but have played it against a lot of other GMs... Best wishes, Jens Ove Fries Nielsen” Later he sent this: "Okay. Then I will give you my game against GM Adam Tukhaev (2548) from 8 round in Allsvenskan 2011-12." Fries Nielsen - Tukhaev (2548), Allsvenskan (8), 2011-2012 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d5 3.Bf4!? Bf5!? [Or 3...g6 4.Qd2 Bg7 5.Bh6 0-0 6.Bxg7 Kxg7 7.Nf3!? c6 8.h4!? h5 9.Ng5 Nbd7 10.f3 e5! 11.e3 exd4 12.exd4 Re8+ 13.Be2 b5!? 14.a3 Qc7 Fries Nielsen - Bitan, Lueneburg Open 2013 and White had 15.0-0-0!] 4.f3 e6 5.g4!? Bg6 6.e3 [6.h4 h6 7.e3 c5 8.Nb5 Na6 9.c3 Be7 10.Bd3 Bxd3 11.Qxd3 Fries Nielsen - Drugge, Visma IMB 2015 Vaxjo SWE, 28.06.2015] 6…Be7 7.h4 h5 8.g5 Nfd7 9.Bd3!? Bxd3 10.cxd3 Na6!? 11.Nge2 c6 12.e4 g6 13.Be3 b5!? 14.Ng3!? Nc7 15.Nce2!? Rc8 16.Rc1 Na8 17.0-0 Nab6 18.b3!? a5 19.f4 f5 20.exd5!? exd5 [20...Nxd5!?] 21.Bd2! b4 22.Nxf5! gxf5 23.Ng3 Kf7 24.Nxf5 Bf8 25.Re1

Nf6! 26.Ng3! Qd7 27.f5 Re8 28.Qf3 Bd6 29.Re6 Ng4 30.Nxh5 Rxh5 31.Qxg4 Rhh8 32.Rce1 Rd8 33.g6+ Kg8 34.f6 Qc7 35.Re8+ 1-0

Caro-Kann – 2.e4 c6 The Caro-Kann 1.e4 c6 2.Nc3 d5 is easily reached via 1.Nc3. White usually continues 3.d4. Here I consider some rare moves.

49 – Chess Challenger 3.Qf3 In 1993 I played a game vs the computer Chess Challenger in a rare CaroKann variation. Warren H. Goldman wrote a book published in 1976 on the line 1.e4 c6 2.Nc3 d5 3.Qf3 line called “New Ideas in Old Settings: 3 Q-B3 against the Caro-Kann etc.” Chess Challenger (1400) - Sawyer (2011), Bellefonte, PA 1993 begins 1.e4 c6 2.Nc3 d5 3.Qf3 [More common is 3.Nf3] 3...dxe4 [3...d4] 4.Qxe4 [Warren Goldman only recommended lines with 4.Nxe4.] 4…Nf6 5.Qd3?! [This blocks harmonious development. Better would be a move like 5.Qf4=] 5...Qxd3 6.Bxd3 Nbd7 7.Nge2 [7.Nf3=] 7...Ne5 [7...Nc5! 8.Bc4 b5=/+] 8.0-0?! [8.Be4 Nxe4 9.Nxe4= and Black has the two bishops.] 8...Nxd3 9.cxd3 e5 [9...Bf5!-/+] 10.f4 [10.d4=] 10...Bc5+ 11.Kh1 exf4 12.Rxf4 [12.Nxf4 0-0-/+] 12...Be6 13.b4 Bd6 14.Ng3? [14.Rf1 0-0-/+] 14...Bxf4 15.Nge2 Bd6 16.Ba3?! a5 17.Rb1 0-0 18.Nd4 Nd5 19.Nxd5 Bxd5 20.Nf5 Bxb4 21.Bxb4 axb4 22.Rxb4 Rxa2 23.Ne7+ Kh8 24.Rxb7? Ra1+ 25.Rb1 Rxb1 mate 0-1

50 – Tauriainen 3.Qf3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 This Queens Knight 1.Nc3 transposes to the Caro-Kann Defence 3.Qf3 Variation. White takes aim at Black kingside. The bishop joins in at c4. White sacrificed a pawn for open lines with 6.d4 in the game Marko Tauriainen vs Adam Lubos Polansky. Tauriainen (2103) - Polansky (1977), 28th Czech Open B 2017 Pardubice CZE (3.25), 23.07.2017 begins 1.Nc3 d5 2.e4 c6 3.Qf3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Nf6 5.Bc4 [Or 5.c3 e5 6.Bc4=] 5...Nbd7 6.d4 [6.Bb3] 6...Nb6 7.Bd3 Qxd4 8.Ne2 Qd8 [8...Qe5 9.0-0 Nxe4 10.Bxe4 Qf6=] 9.N2c3 [9.Bf4=] 9...Nbd5 10.Bg5 [10.Nxd5=] 10...Qa5 11.0-0 Nxc3 12.Bd2 Nfxe4 [12...Qc7 13.Bxc3=] 13.Bxe4 Qc7 14.Bxc3 e5 15.Bxe5 [15.Rad1+/=] 15...Qxe5

16.Bxc6+ Kd8 17.Bxb7 Bxb7 [17...Bd6 18.g3=] 18.Qxb7 Rc8 19.Rfe1 Qc7 20.Rad1+ Bd6 21.Qd5 [21.Qa6+-] 21...Kd7 [21...Re8 22.Qxd6+ Qxd6 23.Rxd6+ Kc7 24.Red1+/-] 22.Qxf7+ Kc6 23.Qd5+ Kd7 24.Re6 1-0

51 – Sawyer 2.e4 c6 3.f3 Nf6 Black initially played to hold the center in a Caro-Kann Defence game. When White did not move forward, Black jumped into the void. The pawn structure indicated that White would have the better chances on the kingside and Black on the queenside. At a key point Black moved from queenside expansion to a direct kingside mating attack. This would have been impossible had White focused more on attacking my kingside. vicnice01 - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 09.04.2013 begins 1.e4 c6 2.Nc3 d5 3.f3 [A very rare move. More common are 3.Nf3 or 3.d4] 3...Nf6 4.Nge2 d4 5.Nb1 e5 6.Ng3 c5 7.Bc4 g6 [7...Nc6] 8.d3 Bg7 9.Bd2 0-0 10.Qc1 Qe7 11.Bh6 Be6 12.Bxg7 Kxg7 13.Bb3 b5 14.Nd2 Nbd7 15.00 Nb6 16.a3? [I expected 16.Bxe6=] 16...c4 17.Ba2 a5 18.h3 Rfc8 19.Qd1 b4 20.f4 c3 21.bxc3 bxc3? [21...Bxa2 22.Rxa2 dxc3=/+] 22.Nb1? [White has the in-between move 22.fxe5!+/-] 22...Bxa2 23.Rxa2 Na4 24.Qc1 Nb2 [24...Rab8!-+] 25.Ra1 Rab8 26.a4 Rb4 27.fxe5 Qxe5 [27...Nd7-/+] 28.Rf3 [28.Nf5+!=] 28...Rc6 [28...Ne8-+] 29.Na3 [White misses the bold 29.Nf5+ gxf5 30.Qg5+ Kh8 31.Rg3=] 29...Rxa4 30.Nc4? Nxc4 [Black switches direction and aims at a kingside mating attack. Strong is 30...Rxa1! 31.Qxa1 Nxc4 32.dxc4 Rxc4-/+] 31.Rxa4 Nd2 32.Rxf6 Rxf6 33.Kh2 h5 34.h4 Nf1+ 35.Kg1 Qxg3 36.Qxf1 Qe3+ White resigns 0-1

52 – Fernandez 3.Nf3 Bg4 4.h3 Black determined to play the Caro-Kann Defence against 1.Nc3 with the move 1…c6. White refused to trade off pieces into a draw. Tensions heated up. White found the winning killer move 24.Qe7! in the game Daniel Fernandez vs Daniel Gormally. Fernandez (2500) - Gormally (2474), 4NCL 2017-18 England ENG (6.61), 11.02.2018 begins 1.Nc3 c6 2.Nf3 d5 3.e4 Bg4 4.h3 Bxf3 5.Qxf3 e6 6.a3 [6.d4 dxe4 7.Qxe4 Nf6 8.Qd3=] 6...Nf6 7.d4 dxe4 8.Qe3 Nbd7 9.Nxe4 Nxe4 10.Qxe4 Be7 11.Be2 Qa5+ 12.c3 Bg5 13.f4 [13.b4 Qd8 14.Qg4+/=] 13...Bh4+ 14.Kf1 0-0 15.g3 Be7 16.Kg2 Qc7 17.Bf3 Nf6 18.Qe5 Bd6 19.Qe2 Rac8 20.b4 b6 21.Rd1 c5 22.dxc5 bxc5 23.b5 Rfe8

24.Bc6 Red8 25.Be3 e5 [25...Qb6 26.Bf2+/-] 26.fxe5 Bxe5 27.Bxc5 Bxg3 [27...Re8 28.Qf3+/-] 28.Qe7! [After 28.Qe7 Qxe7 29.Bxe7 Rxd1 30.Rxd1+-] 1-0

53 – Kampars 3.Nf3 Bg4 4.h3 Peter Webster sent me this story of Nikolajs Kampars. It tells his journey from Latvia to Wisconsin to the editor of BDG Magazine. "This information comes from two visits to Nikolajs Kampars at his home and one with his family after his death. When I met Mr. Kampars, he was living with his wife and sister in the lower portion of a Victorian-era home in Milwaukee. A brother lived nearby; I do not know if there were other living relatives. He had heart trouble and had retired from his work in a bakery. "In Latvia he had been a member of the judicial system. I was not able to work out which position in the United States would have been most comparable to the one he held. His father had been a police chief in Russia during the Czarist regime. One of the few things which the family had brought with them when they escaped from Latvia was an oil painting of their father in dress uniform; this was hanging on the dining room wall. He told me that once he and his brother entered the police station and found the entire staff asleep. It was the custom in those days to have waxed mustaches with the ends curling upwards, and the two boys were unable to resist the temptation to clip the ends off those mustaches! "When Soviet troops entered the Baltic States, thousands of people fled. For the Kampars family this was a life-or-death decision; the Soviets were under orders to eliminate anyone who might be antagonistic to the Communist regime (I have read an estimate that eleven thousand Latvians were murdered and thousands more deported to Siberia), and as the family of a Czarist police official they would have been on this list even though their father had died between the World Wars. Some Estonians were able to enter Finland, with which there was then a common border, but Lithuanians and Latvians had nowhere to go but German-controlled territory. The family was fortunate to reach a camp in Austria, which was not overrun by the Soviet armies. "All I learned of his chess life in Latvia is that he and his brother were given lessons by Aaron Nimzovich and that at one point he was the librarian for the national organization. The book Alekhine in Europe and Asia (Donaldson, Minev, and Seirawan) includes a simul loss by Alekhine in Riga, Latvia, against "Kampar" (see p. 98); no initial, and the final "s" is

missing, but this may well have been Nick. Games from a tournament held in the Austrian DP camp indicate that he was a conservative player with a classical style and opening repertoire; the gambit ideas for which he became known when he published Opening Adventures were not typical of his cross board play. He became one of the best in Wisconsin using this classical style; before I began to play tournament chess he drew against a very young Bobby Fischer as Black in a Caro-Kann, (he also lost one to Fischer) and my records show that in the 1958 North Central Open in Milwaukee (Pal Benko headed a field of 88) he was the top Wisconsin player (4-1,2) and repeated this in the 1959 Western Open (4-1,3) (Benko again, 112 players) and 1959 North Central Open (4-0,3) (master Curt Brasket of Minnesota won ahead of future world correspondence champion Hans Berliner, 90 players, Kampars 5th). I don't know whether he ever competed outside Milwaukee. His USCF rating was Expert. "I do not know how Mr. Kampars became aware of the German master Emil J. Diemer. The family participated in European chess life to some extent. His sister told me that GM Savielly Tartakower wrote a poem for her! He would occasionally send the aging Diemer a little money when he could spare it; he showed me a strange letter which seemed to indicate that Mr. Diemer had some sort of mental glitch, although he noted that other letters gave no indication of problems. "Although I did not see a pet in the home, copies of the bulletin of the Milwaukee Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals were on the sideboard. Appropriate reading material for a gentle man and gentleman. "Peter Webster" Thank you for that wonderful piece! USCF Master Peter Webster is a long time BDG player. I mentioned him in the Introduction to my BDG books. Kampars drew Bobby Fischer in this Caro-Kann. Robert J Fischer - Nikolajs Kampars, Milwaukee WI 1957 begins 1.e4 c6 2.Nc3 d5 3.Nf3 Bg4 4.h3 Bxf3 [4...Bh5!?] 5.Qxf3 e6 6.d4 [6.d3 d4=] 6...Nd7 7.Bd3 dxe4 8.Nxe4 Ngf6 9.0-0 Nxe4 10.Qxe4 Nf6 11.Qe3 Nd5 [11...Bd6!?] 12.Qf3 Qf6 13.Qxf6 Nxf6 14.Rd1 0-0-0 15.Be3 Nd5 16.Bg5 Be7 17.Bxe7 Nxe7 18.Be4 Nd5 19.g3 Nf6 20.Bf3 Kc7 21.Kf1 Rhe8 22.Be2 e5 23.dxe5 Rxe5 24.Bc4 Rxd1+ 25.Rxd1 Re7 26.Bb3 Ne4 27.Rd4 Nd6 28.c3 f6 29.Bc2 h6 30.Bd3 Nf7 31.f4 Rd7 32.Rxd7+ Kxd7 33.Kf2

Nd6! 34.Kf3 f5 35.Ke3 c5 [White's king is denied entry points.] 36.Be2 Ke6 37.Bd3 1/2-1/2

French – 2.e4 e6 The move 2.e4 was favored by Van Geet. Black can play the French Defence 2...e6. White has 3.Nf3 or more likely 3.d4.

54 – Lopez 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.e5 I played Aldo Lopez in the 2005 Florida State Championship. Six years later I drew Aldo Lopez in the 2011 State Championship. After 1.Nc3 d5 2.e4 e6, we have French Defence. I chose to hold back d2-d4 for several moves. This limits the amount of material White needs to know after 1.Nc3, but it also limits White options. I played what Harald Keilhack called "a somewhat clumsy line" of the Steinitz French with 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.e5 Nfd7 5.d4 c5. Aldo Lopez outplayed me and deserved the win. Afterward Lopez suggested I spend more time playing slower Standard games on ICC. He was probably right. Instead I spent more time playing blitz chess. Sawyer (2011) - Lopez (2109), FL State Championship (3), 04.09.2005 begins 1.Nc3 d5 2.e4 e6 3.Nf3!? [3.d4] 3...Nf6 4.e5 Nfd7 5.d4 c5 6.dxc5 Nc6 7.Bf4 Nxc5!? [7...Bxc5 8.Bd3=] 8.Bd3 [8.a3!? or 8.Bb5!?] 8...Be7 [Black can be left with the 2 bishops after 8...Nxd3+ 9.Qxd3 although his light squared bishop is not necessarily stronger that my extra knight in a French formation.] 9.0-0 0-0 [Again 9...Nxd3 10.Qxd3 when a computer idea for an immediate kingside attack is 10...g5!? 11.Bg3 h5 but Black's king in not well placed to support this action.] 10.Re1 f6 11.exf6 Bxf6 [During the game Black thought that White was better in this variation.] 12.Ne5?! [White does not have any major threats, but the game is about equal after 12.Qd2=] 12...Bd7 [12...Nxe5! 13.Bxe5 Bxe5 14.Rxe5 Qb6-/+] 13.Bg3 a6 [13...Bxe5! 14.Bxe5 Nxe5 15.Rxe5 Qb6-/+] 14.Rb1 Rc8 15.Qd2 Be8 16.Nxc6 Rxc6 17.Be5 Nxd3 18.cxd3 Bg6 19.f4? [19.Rbc1 d4 20.Bxf6 Qxf6 21.Na4=/+] 19...Bxe5 20.Rxe5 Qb6+ 21.Kh1 Qd4 [Material is even, but White's position is too loose. Sometimes will fall. Even stronger for Black would be 21...Qb4-+] 22.g3 Qxd3 23.Qxd3 Bxd3 24.Rd1 Bf5 25.Rd2 Bh3 26.Kg1 Rfc8 27.Kf2 b5 28.a3 g6 29.Re1 Kf7 30.Ke3 Bf5 31.Ne2 Rc2 32.Nd4 Rxd2 33.Kxd2 Be4 34.Ke3 Ke7 35.Re2 Rc1 36.Rd2 Kd6 [White tries to blockade the position, but Black forces it

open and wins.] 37.Kf2 e5 38.fxe5+ Kxe5 39.Nf3+ Bxf3 40.Kxf3 Re1 41.Kf2 Re4 42.Rc2 Kd4 43.Rd2+ Kc4 44.Kf1 a5 45.Kf2 a4 46.Kf1 Re5 47.Kf2 d4 48.Kf1 d3 49.Kf2 Re2+ 50.Rxe2 dxe2 51.Kxe2 Kb3 0-1

55 – Levi 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.e5 Nfd7 This Queens Knight transposes to the French Defence where Black plays on the flanks with moves like 5...c5 and 9...f6 as well as 7...Qa5 and 12...Nh5. All the while the Black king remains in the center. White complete his development by move 12. He opens lines to attack the Black king in Eddy Levi vs Kris Chan. Levi (2152) - Chan (2183), Australasian Masters IM Melbourne AUS, 15.12.2016 begins 1.Nc3 d5 2.e4 e6 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.e5 Nfd7 5.d4 c5 6.dxc5 Nc6 7.Bf4 Qa5!? [7...Bxc5 8.Bd3 a6=] 8.a3 Qxc5 9.Bd3 f6 10.exf6 Nxf6 11.Nb5 Kd8 12.0-0 Nh5 13.b4 Qe7 14.Bg5 Nf6 15.c4 a6 16.cxd5 exd5 17.Nc3 [White might win the queen with 17.Re1 axb5 18.Rxe7 Bxe7 19.Bxb5+-] 17...Be6 18.Bc4 Qd6 [18...Kc8 19.Bxd5 Bxd5 20.Nxd5 Qd8 21.Nxf6 gxf6 22.Qxd8+ Nxd8 23.Bxf6+-] 19.Bxd5 Kc7 20.Bxe6 Qxe6 21.Re1 Qf5 22.Qb3 Rd8 23.b5 axb5 [23...Na5 24.Qa4+-] 24.Nxb5+ Kc8 25.Qa4 Bc5 26.Bf4 1-0

56 – Stefansson 3.d4 Nf6 4.Bg5 The players back into a Classical French Defence 4.Bg5 Be7. White repositioned the queen’s knight with 8.Nd1 and 10.Ne3. The dream is for 21.Ng4 and beyond, as in 23.Nh6+. White got the better kingside attack in this the game between Vignir Vatnar Stefansson and Konstantinos Emmanouilidis. Stefansson (2277) - Emmanouilidis (1982), 11th Paleochora Open 2018 GRE, 22.07.2018 begins 1.Nc3 d5 2.e4 e6 3.d4 Nf6 4.Bg5 Be7 5.e5 Nfd7 6.Bxe7 Qxe7 7.Qd2 a6 8.Nd1 [Or 8.f4 c5 9.Nf3 Nc6=] 8...f5 [8...c5 9.c3 f6 10.f4 g5!?=] 9.exf6 gxf6?! [9...Nxf6 10.Bd3=] 10.Ne3 c5 11.c3 b5 12.Ne2 Nc6 13.g3 Nb6 14.Bg2 Bb7 15.0-0 0-0 16.Nf4 c4 [16...cxd4 17.cxd4+/-] 17.Rfe1 Qd6 [17...Nd8 18.Nexd5 Nxd5 19.Nxd5+-] 18.Qe2 [18.Nxe6!? Qxe6 19.Nxd5 Qxd5 20.Bxd5+ Nxd5 21.Qe2+-] 18...Bc8 19.Qg4+ Kh8 20.Qh4 Rf7 [20...Ne7 21.Ng4+-] 21.Ng4 [21.Nexd5 Nxd5 22.Bxd5 exd5 23.Re8+!+-] 21...e5 [21...Qd8 22.Nxe6 Bxe6 23.Rxe6+-] 22.Ng6+ Kg8 [22...Kg7 23.dxe5 Nxe5 24.Qh6+ Kg8 25.N6xe5+-] 23.Nh6+ Kg7 24.Nxf7

Kxf7 25.Qxh7+ Ke8 26.dxe5 fxe5 27.Nxe5 Nxe5 28.Qh5+ Kd8 29.Rxe5 Bd7 [29...Ra7 30.Bxd5 Kc7 31.Bg2+-] 30.Bxd5 Nxd5 [30...Rc8 31.Be6+-] 31.Rxd5 Qc6 [31...Qe6 32.Rad1+-] 32.Rad1 Ra7 33.Qh8+ Kc7 34.Rxd7+ White wins a rook. 1-0

57 – Bernal 3.d4 Bb4 4.a3 The Blackmar-Diemer Gambit idea can be played vs the French Defence Winawer Variation as Black. The Winckelmann-Reimer Gambit which can transpose into a BDG Euwe Variation. My opponent was Manny Bernal. This is one of 40 skittles games I played at Borders bookstore in Orlando, Florida from 2003-2005. In the Queens Knight Attack I almost always follow up with e4 or d4, depending on what I feel like playing. My opponent played 1...e6 signaling that we could head toward a French Defence. Sawyer - Bernal, Orlando, FL, 06.11.2003 begins 1.Nc3 e6 2.d4 Bb4 3.e4 [3.Nf3 is an option for 1.Nc3 players who wish to avoid the well-known lines.] 3...d5 [Transposing to the French Defence Winawer] 4.a3 Bxc3+ 5.bxc3 dxe4 6.f3!? [This is an interesting approach. Another idea is 6.Qg4 Nf6 7.Qxg7 Rg8 8.Qh6=] 6...exf3 7.Nxf3 [7.Qxf3!? Nf6 8.Bd3 0-0 9.Ne2=] 7...Nf6 8.Bd3 0-0 [8...c5! 9.0-0 0-0 10.Qe1! Nbd7 (10...Qd5 11.Qg3 Nbd7 12.Ne5 Nxe5 13.dxe5+/-) 11.Qh4 b5 12.Ng5 h6 13.Ne4+/=] 9.0-0 [White has excellent attacking prospects on the kingside.] 9...Qd6 [9...Qd5 10.c4 Qd8 11.Qe1 Nc6 12.Qh4+/-; 9...b6 10.Bg5 Bb7 11.Ne5 Qd5 12.Qd2+/-] 10.Qe1 c5 11.Qh4 cxd4 12.Bg5 e5? [Hastens the end.] 13.Bxf6 Qxf6 14.Qxh7# 1-0

58 – Rydstrom 3.d4 Bb4 4.e5 Here I give just one example of the Winawer French Defence with the 1.Nc3 move order. Black had chances in sharp play but White won in the game Tom Rydstrom vs Petter Stigar Rydstrom (2313) - Stigar (2235), FSIM April 2017 Budapest HUN (9.2), 11.04.2017 begins 1.Nc3 d5 2.e4 e6 3.d4 Bb4 4.e5 Ne7 5.a3 Bxc3+ 6.bxc3 c5 7.Qg4 Qc7 8.Qxg7 Rg8 9.Qxh7 cxd4 10.Ne2 Nbc6 11.f4 dxc3 [11...Bd7 12.Qd3+/=] 12.h4 Bd7 13.h5 0-0-0 14.Qd3 Nf5 15.Rb1 d4 16.Rh3 [16.Rg1+/=] 16...f6 17.exf6 e5 18.f7!? [18.fxe5 Nxe5 19.Qe4 Nc4=] 18...Rgf8 19.g4 Nd6 [19...Nh6!?] 20.Bg2 [20.f5 Rxf7 21.Bg2 Nxf5=/+] 20...e4?! [20...Bxg4!-+] 21.Qg3 Qa5 22.Kf1 [22.Nxd4 Nxd4

23.Qxc3+ Qxc3+ 24.Rxc3+ Bc6=] 22...Qd5 [22...Qa4!-+] 23.f5 Bxf5 24.gxf5 Qa2 25.Rb4 Nxb4 26.axb4 Qxc2 27.Qe1 Nxf5? [27...Nb5=] 28.Nxd4 Rxd4 29.Rxc3+ Rc4 30.Rxc2 Rxc2 31.Bxe4 Ng3+ 32.Qxg3 Rxc1+ 33.Ke2 White's queen and bishop win against Black's two rooks. 1-0

59 – Martinez 3.d4 Nc6 4.Nf3 How do you handle it when your opponent copies your moves? At the Borders bookstore in Orlando, Florida one Marty Martinez copied my first couple moves. Then Marty went his own way. Sawyer - Martinez, Orlando, FL, 08.01.2004 begins 1.Nc3 Nc6 [Being a copycat has some value. You have to watch out for tactics. Any winning combination or checkmate will favor White.] 2.d4 d5 3.e4 e6 [French and Nimzowitsch Defence meet here.] 4.Nf3 dxe4 [4...Nf6 5.e5 Ne4 6.Bd3 f5 is recommended in the 2007 repertoire book “Play 1...Nc6!” by Christoph Wisnewski (now Scheerer)] 5.Nxe4 Bb4+ 6.c3 Ba5 7.a4 Nge7 8.b4 Bb6 9.a5 Bxd4 10.Nxd4 Nxd4 11.Qxd4 Qxd4 12.cxd4 [Black has only one pawn for his lost bishop.] 12...0-0 13.Be3 Nf5 14.Ng3 Nxe3 15.fxe3 e5 16.Bc4 exd4 17.exd4 Bg4 18.0-0 Rad8 19.d5 Rde8 20.Rae1 Rxe1 21.Rxe1 Bd7 22.Ne4 [22.Re7!+-] 22...c6 23.dxc6 Bxc6 24.Nd6 h6 25.Nxf7 a6 26.Ne5+ Kh7 27.Nxc6 Rc8 28.Bd3+ g6 29.Ne7 Re8 30.Bxg6+ 1-0

60 – Mastrovasilis 4.Nf3 Nf6 This French Defence is a variation that the Queens Knight player might play from either side: after 1.Nc3 as White or after 1...Nc6 as Black. White avoided a natural bishop swap with the retreat 9.Bf4. Complication ensued where Black sacrificed his queen and three pawns for rook, bishop, and knight when the dust cleared on move 24. White was outplayed by his higher rated opponent in the game Nenad Ristic vs Athanasios Mastrovasilis. Ristic (2372) - Mastrovasilis (2501), 1st Pelion Open 2018 Agios Ioannis GRE (9.3), 23.06.2018 begins 1.e4 Nc6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 e6 4.Nf3 Nf6 5.e5 Nd7 6.Bg5 [6.Ne2 f6 7.Nf4 Qe7 8.exf6+/=] 6...Be7 7.h4 a6 [7...0-0 8.Qd2 f6=] 8.Qd2 h6 9.Bf4 b5 10.Ne2 Nb6 11.b3 Bb7 12.Ng3 Qd7 [12...0-0 13.Nh5+/=] 13.Nh5 Rg8 14.Rh3 0-0-0 15.Rg3 f6 16.Nxg7 fxe5 17.Nxe5 Nxe5 18.Bxe5 Bxh4 19.Rc3 Rxg7 20.Rxc7+ [20.g3 Bg5 21.f4 Be7 22.Bxg7+/-] 20...Qxc7 21.Bxc7 Rxc7 22.Qxh6 Be7 23.Qxe6+ Kb8 24.0-00 Ba3+ 25.Kb1 Rd6 26.Qe8+ Nc8 27.Bd3 Re7 28.Qf8 [28.Qh5+/-]

28...Rde6 29.Qf4+ Nd6 30.c3 Ka7 31.Qd2 [31.b4=] 31...Ne4 32.Qc2 b4 33.Bxe4 Rxe4 34.cxb4 Bxb4 35.Qd3 [35.a3 Bxa3=/+] 35...Bc8 36.Ka1 [36.f3 Bf5-+] 36...Bf5 37.a3 [37.g4 Bh7-+] 37...Re1 0-1

61 – Panko 4.Nf3 Nf6 5.e5 Black will be down a rook in the ending of the game Radoslav Panko vs Slavomir Furman in a French Defence transposition. Panko (2049) - Furman (1768), V4 Stiavnica Open 2018 SVK, 12.07.2018 begins 1.Nc3 d5 2.e4 e6 3.d4 Nc6 4.Nf3 Nf6 5.e5 Ne4 6.Bd3 Bb4 7.Bd2 Nxd2 8.Qxd2 Be7 9.a3 Bd7 10.b4 a5 11.b5 Nb8 12.0-0 c5 13.Rfb1 c4 14.Bf1 a4 15.g3 Qb6 16.Ra2 Ra5 17.h4 0-0 18.Nh2 Bxb5 [18...Be8 19.Ng4=] 19.Rab2 Bxa3 20.Rxb5 Rxb5 21.Rxb5 [21.Nxb5+/-] 21...Qa6 22.Rb1 Qa5 [22...Nc6 23.Na2+/=] 23.Rb5 [23.Qe3+/-] 23...Qa6 24.Rb1 Qa5 25.Qe3 Bb4 26.Na2 Bd2 [26...Nc6 27.c3+/-] 27.Qe2 [27.Qa3+-] 27...b5 [27...Nc6 28.Nf3+/=] 28.Nf3 Bh6 29.g4 [29.c3+/-] 29...g6 30.g5 Bg7 31.c3 Nc6 32.Nh2 Rb8 33.Ng4 b4 34.Nxb4 Nxb4 35.cxb4 Rxb4 36.Qd2 Bf8 [36...Rb5 37.Qxa5+/=] 37.Nh6+ Bxh6 38.Qxb4 [38.gxh6 Rxb1 39.Qxa5+-] 1-0

62 – Douglas 3.d4 Nc6 4.e5 I played Mark Douglas at Borders bookstore in Orlando, Florida. Once I got a winning advantage, Fritz 8 gave variety of ways to describe the hopelessness of Black's plight which I quote below. Sawyer - Douglas, Orlando, FL, 10.02.2005 begins 1.Nc3 Nc6 2.d4 d5 3.e4 e6 4.e5 Bb4 [4...Nge7 5.Nf3+/=] 5.Qg4 f5?? [Better is 5...Bf8+/=] 6.Qxg7+- Nxd4 7.Qxh8 Nxc2+ 8.Kd1 Nxa1 9.Qxg8+ Kd7 10.Qxd8+ Kxd8 11.Bg5+ Ke8 12.Kc1 Nb3+ [12...Bc5 a fruitless try+-] 13.axb3 Bc5 14.Nh3 Bd7 15.Bb5 c6 [15...Bxb5 does not save the day+-] 16.Bd3 Bd4 [16...Kf7 is not the saving move] 17.f4 c5 [17...Kf7 cannot change destiny+-] 18.Bb5 Be3+ [18...a6 doesn't change the outcome] 19.Kc2 d4 [19...a6 doesn't get the cat off the tree] 20.Bxd7+ Kxd7 21.Nd1 Rg8 22.Nxe3 dxe3 23.g3 Rg6 [23...h6 does not help much] 24.Re1 h6 25.Bf6 Ke8 [25...Kc7 cannot change what is in store] 26.Rxe3 Rg4 [26...Kd7 is not much help 27.Rd3+ Kc7 28.b4+-] 27.Nf2 Rg6 28.Rd3 h5 [28...Rg8 doesn't change anything anymore] 29.Rd6 Kf8 [29...h4 doesn't improve anything] 30.Nd3 Rg8 31.Rd8+ Kf7 32.Rxg8 Kxg8 33.Nxc5 b6 34.Nxe6 a5 35.Nd4

Kf7 36.Nxf5 Ke6 37.Ne3 b5 38.f5+ Kf7 39.Bd8 Ke8 40.Bxa5 Kd7 41.e6+ Ke7 42.Bb4+ Kf6 43.Nd5+ Kxf5 44.e7 Ke6 45.e8Q+ Kxd5 [45...Kf5 does not improve anything 46.Qf7+ Kg4 47.Ne3+ Kh3 48.Qxh5 mate] 46.Kd3 h4 47.Qe4 mate 1-0

Alekhine – 2.e4 Nf6 I play the Alekhine Defence 1.e4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d5 often as Black.

63 – Zlatanovic 3.e5 Nfd7 The players capture the central pawns with knights on move 4 in this Alekhine Defence. White’s bold 17.Nd5 leads to tactics that won material in Boroljub Zlatanovic vs Dalibor Radisavljevic. Zlatanovic (2408) - Radisavljevic (1760), Open ch-Paracin 2017 Paracin SRB (1.2), 31.01.2017 begins 1.Nc3 d5 2.e4 Nf6 3.e5 Nfd7 4.Nxd5 Nxe5 5.Ne3 Ng6 [5...Nbc6 6.b3=] 6.d4 e6 [6...e5!=] 7.Nf3 Be7 8.g3 b6 9.h4 h5 10.Bg2 Bb7 11.0-0 c6 12.c4 Qd7 13.Re1 Na6 14.a3 c5 15.Bh3 [15.d5+/-] 15...cxd4 16.Nxd4 0-0-0 [16...Nc7 17.Re2+/=] 17.Nd5 Nc7 18.Qc2 Nf8 [18...Bc5 19.Nxe6 Nxe6 20.Rxe6 fxe6 21.Qxg6+/=] 19.Nxc7 Qxc7 [19...Qxd4 20.Nd5+-] 20.Nb5 Qb8 [20...Qd7 21.Bf4+-] 21.Bf4 Bd6 22.Nxd6+ 1-0

64 – CraftyWiz 3.e5 d4 The high rated CraftyWiz play 1...Nf6 2.e4 d5. Instead 3.exd5 or 3.d4, I chose 3.e5 which is an Alekhine Defence. After 3...d4, Black is saddled with three pawn islands. This can be difficult to defend in the endgame. Black has active middlegame piece play to offset this weakness. The specifics of any potential future ending are far from clear. The better player usually wins. This Crafty is a Whiz. When it was done with me, I became a Was. Sawyer (2380) - CraftyWiz (3101), ICC 5 0 Internet Chess Club, 16.06.2004 begins 1.Nc3 Nf6 2.e4 d5 3.e5 d4 4.exf6 dxc3 5.fxg7 cxd2+ 6.Qxd2 [6.Bxd2 Bxg7 7.c3 Nc6=] 6...Qxd2+ 7.Bxd2 Bxg7 8.0-0-0 Nc6 9.Bb5 [9.Bc4 Ne5=; 9.Nf3 Be6] 9...Bd7 [9...Bg4!?=] 10.Nf3 e6 [10...0-0-0 11.Rhe1] 11.Rhe1 [11.Kb1=] 11...a6 12.Bd3 h6 13.c3 0-0-0 14.Be3 f5 15.Bc4 Na5 16.Bf1 e5 17.Bc5 Be6 18.Kb1 Rxd1+ 19.Rxd1 Rd8 20.Rxd8+ Kxd8 21.g3 Kd7 22.Nd2 b5 23.Bg2 c6 24.b3 Nb7 25.Be3 Kd6 26.Kc2 Nc5 27.Nf3 Nd7 28.Ne1 c5 29.Bb7 a5 30.Nd3 [30.Ba6! b4 31.c4

e4 32.Ng2=] 30...c4 31.Nc1 Nc5 32.Bxc5+? [32.Bg2! cxb3+ 33.Nxb3 Nxb3 34.axb3 e4 35.Bf1 Kc6 36.Kb2=] 32...Kxc5 33.Bf3 cxb3+ 34.axb3 a4 35.b4+ Kb6 36.Be2 a3 37.Na2? [37.Bh5 Bd5 38.Bg6 f4-/+] 37...Bxa2 White resigns 0-1

65 – Baffo 3.e5 d4 Jeffrey Baffo has included the Queens Knights Attack 1.Nc3 in his repertoire for many years. This game transposed into the Alekhine Defence that resembles a Scandinavian 2.Nc3 d4 line. Black's dark-squared bad bishop became completely useless. White attacked on the light squares and won a queen. Baffo (1417) - temujin1206 (1310), Live Chess Chess.com, 15.07.2018 begins 1.Nc3 Nf6 2.e4 d5 3.e5 d4 4.Nce2 [4.exf6 dxc3=] 4...Nfd7 5.f4 [5.e6!?] 5...e6 6.Ng3 f6 7.Nf3 Nc6 8.Bb5 Bc5 9.d3 a6 10.Bxc6 bxc6 11.0-0 0-0 12.Bd2 Bb7 13.a4 [13.f5! exf5 14.e6 Ne5 15.Nxf5+/=] 13...Ba7 14.a5 c5 15.b3 Bxf3 [15...f5 16.Ng5 Qe8=] 16.Qxf3 fxe5 17.f5 exf5 18.Nxf5 Qf6? [18...Kh8 19.Qg4+/=] 19.Qd5+ Qf7 20.Ne7+ Kh8 and the Black queen falls. 1-0

66 – Kamer 3.e5 Ne4 4.d4 This Queens Knight Attack transposes to an Alekhine Defence. White sets up central pawns on the dark squares like one might find in a French Defence. Black does not move his king. Instead, he seems to welcome exchanges in the hope that a draw might result. Then comes a tactical shocker. Thus the game ends with an unexpected brilliant shot in Kayra Kamer vs Serkan Bozkurt. Kamer (2164) - Bozkurt (1588), Turkish Cup 2017 Antalya TUR (1.28), 28.01.2017 begins 1.Nc3 Nf6 2.e4 d5 3.e5 Ne4 4.d4 Nxc3 5.bxc3 Bf5 [5...c5 6.Nf3 Nc6 7.Be2 Bg4 8.Rb1=] 6.f4 [6.Rb1+/=] 6...c5 7.Nf3 [7.Ne2!? Nc6 8.Ng3=] 7...Nc6 8.Bd3 Bxd3 9.Qxd3 e6 10.0-0 Be7 11.f5 Qc7? [11...c4=] 12.fxe6 fxe6 13.Ng5 Bxg5 14.Bxg5 Ne7 15.Qh3 [15.Rf2!+-] 15...Qd7 16.Rf4 Rc8 [16...Nf5 17.g4+/-] 17.Raf1 Ng6 18.R4f2 Rc6 [18...Rc7 19.Qg4+/-] 19.dxc5 [19.Qf3!+-] 19...Rxc5 [19...Rc7 20.Be3+/-] 20.Qe3 b6 21.h4 h6 22.Qd3 Nxe5 23.Qh7! This powerful knockout punch wins the rook or mates. 1-0

67 – Grifter 3.e5 Ne4 4.Nce2 Here is a critical variation where I drew a 2896 rated opponent. Usually I am on the Black side of the Alekhine Defence, but in this game I transposed from a Queens Knight Attack. After 1.Nc3 d5 2.e4, Black played 2...Nf6 instead of a Van Geet Advance with 2...d4. The same position after two moves can be reached from a Scandinavian Defence after 1.e4 d5 2.Nc3 Nf6. More common is the Alekhine move order 1.e4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d5, which allows for a transposition to the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit after 3.d4!? dxe4 4.f3 or to the Huebsch Gambit with 3…Nxe4. I chose the Alekhine move 3.e5. The idea behind 4.Nce2 was to play 5.d4 and trap the e4 knight with 6.f3. Back in 2003 I was still playing some good chess. My opponent was "Grifter". This handle is no longer active on ICC. Probably it was a chess engine. That handle made me think of the 1990 movie "The Grifters", staring Anjelica Huston, John Cusack and Annette Bening. The term "Grifter" refers to someone who is tricky and pulls off swindles. Somehow Black swindled himself and walked into an inferior line. To escape the danger that it might have feared, my opponent chose to take a quick draw by repetition. Sawyer (2401) - Grifter (2896), ICC 3 0 u Internet Chess Club, 22.07.2003 begins 1.Nc3 d5 2.e4 Nf6 3.e5 Ne4!? [This is a favorite line of mine.] 4.Nce2 d4 [4...f6=] 5.c3! Nc6! [5...dxc3?! 6.bxc3 (Black has set a little trap in case White tries the check and capture: 6.Qa4+ Nd7! 7.Qxe4? fails to 7...Nc5!-/+) 6...Nc5 7.d4+/- and in my Alekhine Defense Playbook I thought this line was okay for Black. That analysis does not work, thus 5… Nc6!] 6.cxd4 [6.Nxd4+/-] 6...Ng5 7.f4 [Jeffrey Baffo played against me 7.Qa4 a6 8.f4 Ne6 9.Nf3 b5 10.Qa3 Bb7 11.Qc3 g6 12.d3 Baffo - Sawyer, corr USCF 95P135, 1996 and 1-0 in 22. I should have played 12...Bg7=]

7…Ne6 8.Nf3 g6 9.d3 [9.d5! Qxd5 10.d4+/-] 9...Ncxd4 10.Nexd4 Nxd4 11.Nxd4 [11.Qa4+ Nc6 12.Be3=] 11...Qxd4 12.Qe2 Qb4+ 13.Qd2 Qb6 14.Qf2 Qb4+ 15.Qd2 Qb6 16.Qf2 Qb4+ 17.Qd2 Game drawn by repetition 1/2-1/2

68 – Van Geet 3.exd5 Nxd5 The game Dirk Daniel Van Geet vs Stefan Briem transposed into the Alekhine Defence. This can easily happen after an early Nf6. Compare 1.Nc3 d5 2.e4 Nf6 and 1.Nc3 Nf6 2.e4 d5 and 1.e4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d5. Each move order reaches the exact same position. This exchange 3.exd5 is a variation of the Scandinavian Defence after 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Nf6 3.Nc3. Further commentary and analysis may be found in some books on that opening. Stefan Briem of Iceland was born in 1938 according to FIDE. He sometimes played the Alapin 1.e4 e5 2.Ne2. At the Reykjavik Open in 1988 generations and genders clashed. The veteran Stefan Briem had Black vs Judit Polgar born in 1976. So a guy about 50 played a girl about 12. Of course Judit Polgar may be the greatest woman player of all time. Their game went from a King’s Gambit to a Falkbeer Counter Gambit and ended drawn. Since Van Geet himself played 3.exd5, I take this opportunity to present more detailed analysis. Van Geet - Briem, WchT U26 fin-B 05th Varna (3), 1958 begins 1.Nc3 d5 2.e4 Nf6 3.exd5 Nxd5 [3...Bg4 4.Bb5+ c6 5.dxc6 Nxc6 6.Nf3 e6 7.h3+/=; 3...c6 4.dxc6 Nxc6 5.Nf3 e5 6.Bb5 Bd6 7.0-0 0-0 8.Bxc6 bxc6 9.Re1+/=] 4.Bc4 [4.Nxd5 Qxd5 5.d4 e5 6.Nf3 Nc6 7.Be3 exd4 8.Nxd4 Nxd4 9.Qxd4 Qxd4 10.Bxd4 Be6 11.0-0-0 f6=; 4.Nf3 Nxc3 5.bxc3 g6 6.d4 Bg7 7.Bc4 00 8.0-0 c5 9.h3 Nc6=; 4.g3 Nxc3 5.bxc3 Qd5 6.Qf3 Qa5 7.Bg2 e5 8.Ne2 Bd6=] 4...Nb6 [4...c6 5.Nf3 Bg4 6.Ne4 e6 7.0-0 Be7 8.d4 0-0 9.Bb3=; 4...e6 5.Nf3 Be7 6.0-0 0-0 7.Re1=; 4...Nxc3 5.Qf3 e6 6.dxc3 Bd6 7.Bf4=; 4...Be6 5.Qf3 c6 6.Nge2 Nc7 7.Bxe6 Nxe6 8.0-0 g6 9.d4 Bg7 10.Be3 0-0 11.Rad1+/=; 4...Nf6 5.d4 c6 6.Nf3 Bf5 7.Ne5 e6 8.g4+/=] 5.Bb3 Nc6 [5...c5 6.d3 Nc6 7.Qh5 e6 8.Nf3 Be7 9.Ne4=] 6.Nf3 [6.Qf3 e6 7.Nge2 Be7 8.d3 0-0 9.0-0 Ne5=] 6...Bf5 7.a4 [7.0-0 e6 8.d3 Be7 9.Re1 0-0 10.h3 h6 11.Qe2 Qd7 12.Bf4 Bf6=] 7...a5 8.Nh4 Bg6 9.d3 e6 10.Nxg6 hxg6 11.Nb5 Bd6 12.Qg4 [12.c3+/=] 12...Qf6 [12...Bb4+ 13.Ke2=] 13.c3 Rxh2 14.Nxd6+ cxd6 15.Rxh2 Qe5+ 16.Be3 Qxh2 17.0-0-0 Nc8 18.d4 Qh5

19.Qf4 Nd8 [19...d5 20.Re1+/=] 20.g4 Qh4 21.Qf3 [21.d5 e5 22.Qf3 f5 23.gxf5+/-] 21...Qf6 22.Qe4 Ne7 23.d5 e5? [23...Qe5 24.Qxe5 dxe5 25.d6+/=] 24.Rh1 Kf8 [24...Nc8 25.Bc4 Ke7 26.Bb5+-] 25.Rh8+ Ng8 26.Qh1 1-0

Blackmar-Diemer – 2.e4 Nf6 3.d4 The Alekhine Defence Scandinavian 2.Nc3 line was covered in the previous section. One further option is a transposition into the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit family of opening variations. I have written many books and devoted thousands of pages to thousands of games with commentary and analysis on the BDG. Here I limit myself to just three games that began with 1.Nc3. Some Van Geet players enjoy the occasional Blackmar-Diemer Gambit. Others are fanatically devoted to this gambit. The Blackmar-Diemer begins 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3. There are 20 different move orders to reach this position. One Queens Knight Attack path is 1.Nc3 d5 2.e4 Nf6 3.d4 dxe4 4.f3.

69 – Grafl Huebsch 5.Be3 International Master Florian Grafl (FIDE rated 2403) attempted to play a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit vs Jaime Anguera Maestro. The game began as a Queens Knight Attack 1.Nc3. Black deviated to a Huebsch Gambit with 3...Nxe4 (instead of 3...dxe4 4.f3 BDG). White had three choices. They were the traditional moves 5.Bc4 or 5.Bf4 hindering ...e5, or what seems to be the strongest move 5.Be3! So again we have a master headed toward a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit only to have Black avoid it. Note: Mark Crowther and TWIC have been a labor of love. I found this game on TWIC. Grafl (2399) - Anguera Maestro (2172), TCh-CAT 2014 Catalonia ESP (11.2), 05.04.2014 begins 1.Nc3 d5 2.d4 Nf6 3.e4 Nxe4 4.Nxe4 dxe4 5.Be3 Nd7 6.f3 exf3 [6...e6!?] 7.Nxf3 Nf6 8.Ne5 e6 9.Qf3 c6 [9...Qd5!=] 10.Bd3 Be7 11.0-0 0-0 12.Qh3 g6 13.Qh6 Nd5 [White has built up a strong attack. If 13...Bd6 14.Rf4 Bxe5 15.Rh4!+-] 14.Rf3 f5 15.Rh3 Nf6 16.Nxg6 [Or 16.g4!+-] 16...Rf7 17.Nxe7+ Qxe7 18.Rg3+ Kh8 [If 18...Rg7 19.Bg5+-] 19.Bf4 Bd7 20.Be5 [Another good move is 20.Re1+-] 20...Rg8 21.Rg5 Qf8

22.Rxg8+ Kxg8 23.Qg5+ Qg7 24.Qxg7+ Kxg7 25.g4 Kg6 26.h3 h5 27.gxf5+ exf5 28.Kh2 Be6 29.Rg1+ Kh6 30.Bf4+ Kh7 31.Rg5 Nd5 32.Rxh5+ Kg7 33.Bd2 Kf8 34.c4 Nb6 35.b3 Ke8 36.Rh8+ Rf8 37.Rh6 Kd7 38.Rh7+ Kc8 39.Bf4 Nd7 40.h4 [Or 40.Re7!+-] 40...Rf7 41.Rxf7 1-0

70 – Steinbacher Sicilian BDG FIDE Master Dr. Matthias Steinbacher backed into a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit Declined in the 3.Nc3 c5 line. After 4.d5 the game transposed to an Albin-Counter Gambit Reversed. The move order 1.Nc3 d5 2.d4 c5 3.e4 reaches Sicilian Defence if the moves are played in reverse order: 1.e4 c5 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3. This would be a Smith-Morra Gambit Avoided. I covered this line in my Sicilian Defence book in the section 2.d4 d5. Dr. Steinbacher is an experienced player from Germany who was born in 1951 according to FIDE. Playing Black was Malte Colpe rated 2394. He was born in 1992. The position after the first four moves mirrors the Albin Counter after 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e5 3.dxe5 d4 4.Nf3 Nc6. There in the Albin Counter, the gambit player is Black and it is not his move. In Steinbacher vs Colpe, the gambit player is White and it is his move. The BDG becomes an Albin with an extra move. I analyzed some possibilities starting with move five. White had good alternatives on moves 5, 6, and 9. White was outplayed by a younger higher rated player. Congratulations to Malte Colpe! Steinbacher (2182) - Colpe (2394), Pyramiden Cup 2016 Fuerth GER (5.4), 03.09.2016 begins 1.Nc3 d5 2.d4 c5 3.e4 dxe4 4.d5 Nf6 5.Bf4 [5.Nge2 e6 6.Bg5 Be7 7.dxe6 Qxd1+ 8.Rxd1 Bxe6 9.Nf4=] 5...a6 [5...g6 6.Qd2 Bg7 7.0-0-0 0-0 8.f3 exf3 9.Nxf3 Bg4 10.Be2 Nbd7=] 6.a4 [6.Nge2 b5 7.Ng3 Bb7 8.Ngxe4 Nxe4 9.Nxe4 Qxd5 10.Qxd5 Bxd5 11.Nxc5=] 6...g6 [6...Nbd7 7.f3 exf3 8.Nxf3 Nb6 9.Qe2 Qd7 10.Qe5=] 7.Bc4 Bg7 8.Nge2 00 9.h3 [9.0-0 Nbd7=] 9...Nbd7 10.Qd2 [10.0-0 Nb6 11.b3 Nxc4 12.bxc4 Nh5 13.Bh2 f5=/+] 10...Nb6 11.Ba2 e6 12.d6 Bd7 13.Bg5 [13.a5 Nbd5 14.Bxd5 exd5 15.Nxd5 Nxd5 16.Qxd5 Bxb2=/+] 13...Bc6 14.0-0 Nbd5 15.Ng3 Nxc3 16.bxc3 Qd7 17.Rad1 b6 18.a5 Nd5 19.Nxe4 f5 20.Ng3 [20.Bxd5 Bxd5 21.Ng3 b5 22.Bf4 Qc6 23.f3 Rf7=/+] 20...Nxc3 21.Ne2

[21.Ra1 b5 22.h4 Nxa2 23.Rxa2 Bd5-+] 21...Nxa2 22.c3 Bd5 23.Be7 Rfe8 24.axb6 Bc4 25.Rb1 Bxe2 26.b7 Rab8 27.Qxa2 Bxf1 28.Kxf1 Bf8 29.Bxf8 Rxf8 30.Qxa6 Rf7 31.Qd3 Rxb7 32.Ra1 Rf8 33.Ra6 Qb5 34.Ke2 c4 0-1

71 – BountyHunter 6.Bd3 If the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit is unsound, you should expect a 2772 rated computer to win as Black. The chess engine ArasanX lost as Black in a five minute game. It resigned on move 54. The BountyHunter computer used Rybka 4 in 2014. I do not know what it used in 2010. In 2007 it peaked with Internet Chess Club ratings in the 3300s. It ceased to be active on March 8, 2014. BountyHunter (3102) - ArasanX (2772), ICC 5 0 Internet Chess Club, 04.02.2010 begins 1.Nc3 d5 2.d4 Nf6 3.e4 dxe4 4.f3 exf3 5.Nxf3 Bf5 6.Bd3 Bg4 7.h3 Bh5 8.g4 Bg6 9.Ne5 c6 10.g5 Qxd4 [10...Bh5 11.Be2 Bxe2 12.Qxe2+/=] 11.Nf3 Qd6 12.gxf6 Qg3+ 13.Ke2 Qg2+ 14.Ke3 exf6 [14...e5!?=] 15.Re1 Be7 16.Qe2 Qg3 17.Kd2 0-0 18.Qxe7 Qxf3 19.Qe3 Qh5 20.b3 Qa5 21.a4 Bxd3 22.cxd3 Nd7 23.Ba3 Rfd8 24.Kc2 Ne5 25.Rad1 Ng6 26.Kb2 Qh5 27.d4 h6 28.Qg3 Qa5 29.d5 cxd5 30.Bd6 d4 31.Rxd4 Qb6 32.Red1 Re8 33.h4 Rac8 [33...h5 34.Qf3+-] 34.h5 Ne5 [34...Ne7 35.Bxe7 Rxe7 36.Rg4+-] 35.Ne4 Kh8 36.Bxe5 [Or 36.Nxf6 gxf6 37.Qf4+-] 36...fxe5 37.Rd7 Qe6 [37...Qc6 38.Rxf7+-] 38.Qf3 f5 [38...Qc6 39.Qxf7+-] 39.R1d6 fxe4 40.Qf1 Qxd6 41.Rxd6 Rc7 42.Qb5 Rce7 43.Rd7 e3 44.Rxb7 e2 45.Rxe7 Rxe7 46.Qxe2 Kg8 47.Qe4 Kf7 48.Qg6+ Kf8 49.Kc3 e4 50.Kd2 Re5 51.Ke3 Kg8 52.b4 Kf8 53.Qd6+ Re7 54.Qd5 Ke8 Black resigns 1-0

72 – Nc3-4Me 5.Nxf3 Bg4 The player who uses the handle “Nc3-4Me” has been a long time member of the Internet Chess Club, as have I. Our play extends back 20 years. He transposes this Queens Knight Attack into the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit. White picks off a queen on move 14. Nc3-4Me (1950) - Nikol (1727), ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 02.03.2016 begins 1.Nc3 Nf6 2.d4 d5 3.e4 dxe4 4.f3 exf3 5.Nxf3 Bg4 6.Bc4!? [6.h3! Bh5 7.g4 Bg6 8.Ne5 is the most reliable way to play this line.] 6...e6 7.0-0 c6 8.Be3 Nbd7 9.h3 Bh5 10.g4 Bg6 11.Qe2 Bd6 12.Rad1 Qc7 13.d5 exd5? [This loses the queen to a discovered check. Better was 13...cxd5

14.Nb5 Qb8 15.Bxd5!?] 14.Bb6+! Kf8 15.Bxc7 Bxc7 16.Bd3 Re8 17.Qg2 b5 [17...Nc5 18.Bxg6 hxg6 19.g5 Nh5 20.Qg4 Nf4 21.h4 Nce6 22.Nd4+-] 18.Rde1 b4 19.Rxe8+ Nxe8 20.Ne2 Nef6 21.g5 Ne4 22.Bxe4 Bxe4 23.Qg4 Black resigns 1-0

Van Geet Exchange – 2.e4 dxe4 The Van Geet Exchange Variation begins 1.Nc3 d5 2.e4 dxe4. Black has many possibilities. Basically all lines lead to different arrangements with equal chances. This same position can be reached in a Scandinavian Defence after 1.e4 d5 2.Nc3. Defensive moves like 2…e6, 2…c6, or 2…Nf6 transpose to other openings and are covered far more extensively in other books. In this section the focus is on the Black capture of White’s central pawn. Naturally White recaptures 3.Nxe4. Now Black is missing a d-pawn and has nothing developed. White has the lone knight in the middle, but Black has the next move. Chances are equal.

73 – Zivic 3.Nxe4 g6 4.d4 Bg7 Beware your original opening may transpose. The Scandinavian becomes a Queen's Knight Attack after 1.e4 d5 2.Nc3. Black often follows 2...d4 or 2...dxe4 (as below). Black could also try the Caro-Kann 2...c6, French 2...e6, or Alekhine 2...Nf6. Play could continue 3.d4 exe4 4.f3 for a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit. When FM Dragan Zivic of Serbia took on Viktor Varezhkin of Russia they chose 2...dxe4 3.Nxe4 g6. If Black wants to create a potential pawn target on the e-file he may do better with 3...e5=. Tactics in this game were aimed at the squares e6 and f3. These entry points led to combinations. In the end White was up to pawns with threats to win a piece. Zivic (2264) - Varezhkin (2230), TCh World Deaf 2014 Opatija CRO (3.1), 21.06.2014 begins 1.e4 d5 2.Nc3 dxe4 3.Nxe4 g6 [3...e5=] 4.d4 Bg7 5.Nf3 Bg4!? [5...Bf5] 6.Bc4 Qc8 [6...e6 7.h3+/=] 7.Neg5 Nh6 8.h3 Bxf3 9.Qxf3 0-0 10.c3 c6 11.0-0 e6 12.Re1 Qd8? [12...Nd7 13.Bf4+/-] 13.Rxe6

fxe6 [13...Nd7 14.Re2+-] 14.Nxe6 Rxf3 15.Nxd8+ Kh8 16.gxf3 Nd7 17.Nxb7 Nb6 18.Bb3 Nf5 19.Bf4 Nh4 20.Bg3 Nxf3+ 21.Kg2 Nd2 22.Re1 Rc8 23.Nd6 1-0

74 – ChessDoc 3.Nxe4 f5 Ng5 “ChessDoc” won a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit vs “Harthor”. This BDG Lemberger variation 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 e5 is often recommended by chess opening theoreticians as a good way for Black to equalize. Some players prefer to accept the gambit with 3…Nf6 4.f3 exf3 and dare White to try to get the pawn back. But if equality is good, then the BDG Lemberger 3…e5 is great. This game began as the Queen's Knight Attack 1.Nc3. I examine this game from the point of view of each opening. The normal BDG Lemberger move order would be 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 e5 4.Nxe4 f5 5.Ng5. This transposes to the game. In addition to 5.Ng5, White could play 5.Bc4. That transposes to the game as well after 5…Qxd4 6.Qxd4 exd5 7.Ng5. A slightly different idea is 5.Nc3. Black takes on d4. 5…Qxd4 6.Qxd4 exd4 7.Nb5 Bb4+ 8.Bd2 Bxd2+ 9.Kxd2 Kd8 10.Nxd4=. The Queen’s Knight or Van Geet move order usually continues 1.Nc3 d5 2.e4 d4. Here the Van Geet Exchange 2…dxe4 3.Nxe4 leads to equal chances. Whoever plays better wins the game. ChessDoc (2457) - Harthor (2458), ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 16.02.2009 begins 1.Nc3 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nxe4 f5 4.Ng5 [4.Nc3! e5 (4...Nf6 5.Nf3 Nc6 6.d4 e6 7.a3 h6 8.Bb5+/=; 4...Nc6 5.Nf3 e6 6.Bc4 Bc5 7.0-0 Nf6 8.Ne2+/=) 5.Bc4 Nc6 6.d3 Nf6 7.Nf3 Bd6 8.Ng5 Qe7 9.Bf7+ Kf8 10.Bb3 Na5 11.0-0 Nxb3 12.axb3 h6 13.Nf3=] 4...e5 5.d4 Qxd4 6.Qxd4 exd4 7.Bc4 Bb4+ [7...Nc6! 8.N1f3 h6 9.Ne6 Bxe6 10.Bxe6 Bb4+ 11.Ke2 g6 12.Rd1=] 8.Kf1 Nf6 9.a3 Bc5 10.b4 [10.Bf4+/=] 10...Bb6 11.Bf4 h6 12.Re1+ Kf8 13.Nf7 Rg8?! [13...Rh7 14.h4 Nc6 15.Nf3+/=] 14.Ne5 g5 15.Bxg8 Kxg8 16.Bd2 [16.Bc1+/=] 16...Ne4 17.Bc1 Be6 18.f3 Nc3 19.h4 g4 20.Bxh6 a5 21.Nd3 Bc4 22.Re8+ Kf7 23.Rf8+ Kg6 24.Bd2 axb4 25.axb4 Ra1+ [25...Ra2 26.Rxb8=] 26.Kf2 Bxd3 27.cxd3 Nd7? [27...Nc6=] 28.h5+ Kg7 29.Rd8 [White is winning after 29.h6+! Kh7

30.Rf7+ Kh8 31.Rxd7+-] 29...Nf6 [29...Ne5 30.h6+ Kh7 31.Kg3+/-] 30.h6+ Kg6 31.h7 Nxh7 32.Rh6+ Kg7 33.Rd7+ Kg8 34.Rhxh7 [34.Rg6+! Kh8 35.Rd8+ Nf8 36.Rxf8+ Kh7 37.Rfg8+-] 34...f4 35.Bxf4 g3+ 36.Kxg3 Rxg1 37.Be5 Ne2+ 38.Kf2 1-0

75 – Ezquerro 3…Nf6 4.Nxf6+ Your queen is your valuable piece. You don’t give her up for just any reason. If you can sacrifice your queen successfully, she becomes even more beautiful. But don’t waste her. Use her effectively. A common Queen's Knight Attack 1.Nc3 d5 2.e4 transposes to the Scandinavian Center Counter Defence. A game between Alburt Ezquerro Luque and Jaume Grau Garsaball featured the exchange line 2...dxe4 3.Nxe4 Nf6 4.Nxf6+. These Spanish players fought for control of key central lines. White got a valuable queenside pawn majority when Black allowed ...exf6. To compensate Black must attack kingside either with pieces or with pawns. Below Black chose the piece approach. Black’s plan failed this game to two bold and beautiful White queen moves that left the Black queen forked. Ezquerro Luque (2059) - Grau Garsaball (2083), TCh-CAT Final GpB Barcelona ESP, 11.04.2015 begins 1.e4 d5 2.Nc3 dxe4 3.Nxe4 Nf6 [Black accepts on that he will have doubled pawns. Better is 3...Nc6 4.Bc4=] 4.Nxf6+ exf6 5.Nf3 Bd6 6.Be2 0-0 7.0-0 Bg4 8.d4 Re8 9.Re1 c6 10.c3 Qc7 11.h3 Bh5 12.Nh4 Bxe2 13.Rxe2 Nd7 14.Nf5 Bf4!? [14...Bf8=] 15.Qe1 [15.d5!?+/=] 15...Rxe2 16.Qxe2 Bxc1 17.Rxc1 Qf4 18.Ne7+ Kf8 19.Re1 Qd6 [19...g6 20.Nxc6+/=] 20.Nf5 [20.Qh5! is also very powerful.] 20...Qd5 [Black can last longer by giving back the pawn with 20...Qe6 21.Qxe6 fxe6 22.Rxe6+-] 21.Qe7+ Kg8 22.Qe8+! 1-0

76 – Sengupta 4.Nxf6+ exf6 Black accepts doubled pawns in a Scandinavian Queens Knight Caro-Kann Defence. I prefer the 4-3 queenside pawn structure to Black’s open lines. White increased his piece activity until Black missed a tactic in Dipankar Sengupta vs Thendup Tamang. Sengupta (2579) - Tamang (1953), Kathmandu Open 2018 Kathmandu NEP (2.3), 13.04.2018 begins 1.e4 d5 2.Nc3 dxe4 3.Nxe4 Nf6 4.Nxf6+ exf6 5.d4 c6 [This move 5...c6 transposes to the Caro-Kann Defence. An alternative is 5...Bd6=] 6.c3 Bd6 7.Bd3 0-0 8.Qc2 h6 9.Ne2 Qc7 10.Be3 Nd7 11.0-0-0 Re8 12.Ng3 Nf8 13.Kb1 Be6 14.c4 b5 15.cxb5 Qa5 16.Bc4

cxb5 [16...Bxc4 17.Qxc4 cxb5=] 17.Bxe6 fxe6 18.d5 Rac8 19.Qb3 Rc4 20.dxe6 Rxe6 [20...Be5 21.e7 Rxe7 22.f4+/=] 21.Rd5 a6 [21...Qa4 22.Rxb5 Qxb3 23.Rxb3+/-] 22.Qxc4 1-0

77 – Bauer 3…Nd7 4.Bc4 e6 GM Christian Bauer of France played 1.Nc3 to win a nice game vs FM Antoine Favarel. Black answered 1.Nc3 with 1...d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nxe4 Nd7. This reminds us of French or Caro-Kann lines. Bauer played 5.Qe2. The obvious alternative is 5.d4=, however White probably played 1.Nc3 with the intention to avoid main lines. Bauer redeployed his pieces with an eye toward d7. White attacked in the center and on the queenside. Bauer (2624) - Favarel (2374), TCh-FRA Top 12 2015 Montpellier FRA (10.3), 08.06.2015 begins 1.Nc3 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nxe4 Nd7 4.Bc4 e6 5.Qe2 [5.d4=] 5...Ngf6 6.Ng5 Nb6 7.Bb3 h6 8.N5f3 a5 9.a3 a4 10.Ba2 g6 11.Ne5 Bg7 12.Ngf3 0-0 13.d4 Nbd7 14.0-0 Qe8 15.Rd1 b6 16.Bc4 Nxe5 17.dxe5 Nd5 18.Bb5 c6 19.Bd3 Ra7 20.h4 Ne7 21.Be3 c5 22.Bb5 Bd7 23.Rxd7 Rxd7 24.Bxa4 Rd2 25.Qc4 [Also good is 25.Qxd2 Qxa4 26.b3+- when White is up an a-pawn and threatening h6.] 25...Rd7 26.Qb5 Rd8 27.Qb3 [27.Qc4+-] 27...Nc6 [The best shot is 27...c4! 28.Qxc4 Rc8 29.Qb3 Qd8 30.Bxb6+/- when White has three pawns for the Exchange.] 28.Qxb6 Rc8 29.Rd1 1-0

78 – Sawyer 3…Bf5 4.Ng3 Qc8 The Queen's Knight Attack allows you to look for patterns in the center. Pawns and pieces get shuffled and exchanged. I avoided a quick d4 in a blitz game as White after 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nxe4 Bf5. Black missed 9...Ne5! Back and forth we battled. White came out on top after I found a good angle to Black's king. Sawyer - mnn1954_1, Yahoo 2 12, 18.08.2003 begins 1.Nc3 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nxe4 Bf5 4.Ng3 Qc8 [Logical is 4...Bg6=. An idea from another of my blitz games is 4…e6 5.Nxf5 exf5 6.Qf3 Qe7+ 7.Be2 Qe4 8.d3 Qxf3 9.Nxf3 Bd6 10.0-0 Ne7 11.d4+/=] 5.Bc4 [5.d4! is also a good move.] 5...Nf6 6.Nf3 Nc6 7.0-0 Bg4 8.h3 Bxf3 9.Qxf3 e6 [9...Ne5!=] 10.Bb5 Qd7 11.d4 a6 12.Bxc6 bxc6 [12...Qxc6 13.Qxc6+ bxc6=] 13.c3 Bd6 14.Bf4 [14.Bg5!+/-] 14...0-0 15.Ne4 Nxe4 16.Qxe4 c5 17.dxc5 Bxc5 18.Rfd1 Qb5 [18...Qe7 19.Rd3+/=] 19.b3 [19.b4!+/-] 19...Bb6 20.c4 Qc5 21.Be3 Qa5 22.Bxb6

Qxb6 23.Rd2 Rae8 24.Rad1 f5 25.Qe5 f4? [25...Qc6 26.Rd4+/-] 26.Rd7 Rf7 27.Rxf7 Kxf7 28.Qxf4+ [More to the point was 28.Rd7+! Re7 29.Qh5+!+-] 28...Kg8 29.Rd7 e5? [29...Rf8 30.Qxc7 Qxf2+ 31.Kh2+-] 30.Qf7+ 1-0

79 – Grigoriev 3…Bf5 4.Ng3 Bg6 White developed pieces and connected rooks by move 16 in this Scandinavian Queens Knight 2.Nc3. Chances on the board were equal. White probed for weaknesses on each side. Then Black overlooked a tactical skewer combination from the center to the corner in this game between A. Grigoriev and Muhammed Bulut. Grigoriev (2145) - Bulut (1759), Mersin Open 2017 Mersin TUR (7.19), 26.10.2017 begins 1.e4 d5 2.Nc3 dxe4 3.Nxe4 Bf5 4.Ng3 Bg6 5.d4 e6 6.c3 Qd5 [6...Nf6 7.Nf3 Nbd7 8.Bd3=] 7.Nf3 Nf6 8.Qb3 Qxb3 9.axb3 Bd6 10.Be2 0-0 11.Ne5 Bxe5 12.dxe5 Ne4 [12...Nd5 13.f4=] 13.Be3 Nxg3 14.hxg3 Nc6 15.f4 Be4 16.Kf2 Rfd8 17.b4 b6 [17...a6 18.Rhd1=] 18.b5 [18.Ra4+/-] 18...Ne7 19.Ra3 Nf5 20.Bc1 g6 [20...Ne7 21.Rd1+/=] 21.g4 Ne7 22.c4 g5 [22...c5 23.Re3+/-] 23.Re3 [23.f5+/-] 23...Rd4? [23...Bg6 24.Ra3+/-] 24.Rxe4! If 24...Rxe4 25.Bf3 regains one rook or the other. White remains up a piece. 1-0

80 – Rashkovsky 3…Bf5 4.Ng3 Bg6 White treated this Queens Knight 1.Nc3 as if the position would transpose into a Main Line Caro-Kann 4...Bf5. Black sacrificed a queen for a rook and a knight, but it turned out poorly in the game Nukhim Rashkovsky vs Viacheslav Dydyshko. Rashkovsky (2483) - Dydyshko (2506), Kupreichik Mem GM 2018 Minsk BLR (13.1), 23.06.2018 begins 1.Nc3 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nxe4 Bf5 4.Ng3 Bg6 5.Nf3 Nd7 6.h4 h6 7.h5 Bh7 8.d4 e6 9.Bd3 Bxd3 10.Qxd3 Ngf6 11.Bd2 c5 12.0-0-0 [12.Rd1!?+/=] 12...cxd4 [12...Be7 13.Ne4 0-0 14.dxc5 Qc7=] 13.Nxd4 Nc5 14.Qb5+ Qd7 15.Bb4 0-0-0 [15...Rc8 16.Kb1=] 16.Qc4 [16.Nxe6! Qxe6 17.Rxd8+ Kxd8 18.Bxc5 Bxc5 19.Qxc5 Qxa2 20.Rd1+ Nd7 21.Rd5+-] 16...Qd5 17.Nxe6? [17.Qc3=] 17...fxe6? [Black sacrifices the queen for a rook and knight. Better is 17...Qxe6! 18.Rxd8+ Kxd8-/+] 18.Rxd5 exd5 19.Qc3 b6 20.Rd1 [20.Bxc5 bxc5 21.Re1+-] 20...Kb8 21.Nf5 Rc8 22.Qe5+ Kb7 23.Kb1 Re8 24.Nd6+ Bxd6 25.Qxd6 Nce4 26.Qf4 a5 27.Ba3 Re6 28.f3 Ng5 29.b3 Rhe8 [29...Re2 30.Qf5+-] 30.Bb2

Re1 31.Rxe1 Rxe1+ 32.Bc1 Re2 [32...Ne6 33.Qh4+-] 33.Qd6 Ne6 34.a4 [34.Bxh6 gxh6 35.Qe7+ Nd7 36.Qxd7+ Nc7 37.g4+-] 34...Nc7 35.g4 Nfe8 [35...Re1 36.Kb2+-] 36.Qd7 Rf2 37.Bf4 Rxf3 38.Bxc7 Nxc7 39.Qxg7 1-0

81 – Ekebjaerg 3…e5 4.Bc4 Be7 Ove Ekebjaerg of Denmark played 1.Nc3 in the Fifth European Correspondence Championship back in 1967. His opponent was Oskar Kallinger (1925-1999) in the Queens Knight Attack. In this 15 player event Ekebjaerg finished in a tie for third and Kallinger finished in a tie for tenth. Oskar Kallinger of Belgium made the semi-finals of the ICCF world championship four times. Oskar Kallinger was an International Correspondence Chess Master. For most of his life ICCF did not use ratings. After ICCF started using them, Oskar Kallinger had a peak rating of 2433. Kallinger is not a common name beyond the serial killer Joseph Kallinger born in Philadelphia in 1935, hopefully no relation. I found two interesting aspects of this game. One was how easy it is for Black to drop a pawn. When Black played 3…e5, who would have thought White would quickly pick it off by move six? The second interesting aspect was that after 2.e4 dxe4 White would have no pawns moved at all until 17.d3. White maintained the initiative with piece play. Being a pawn up, White rushed to the endgame by move 23. But Black did not give up. In fact the game lasted for 33 additional moves. Ekebjaerg - Kallinger, EU-ch05 corr 1967 begins 1.Nc3 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nxe4 e5 4.Bc4 Be7 [4...Nc6] 5.Qh5 g6 [5...Nh6 6.d3+-] 6.Qxe5 f6 7.Qc3 Nc6 8.Nf3 Bf5 9.Ng3 Qd7 10.0-0 [10.Nxf5 Qxf5 11.0-0 0-0-0 12.Re1+-] 10...Be6 11.Bxe6 Qxe6 12.Nd4 Nxd4 13.Qxd4 h5 [13...Qd7 14.Qe3+-] 14.Qe4 [14.Ne4 Qe5 15.Qxe5 fxe5 16.d3+/-] 14...Qxe4 15.Nxe4 f5 16.Nc3 Kf7 17.d3 Nf6 18.Re1 c6 19.Bg5 Bb4 20.Re2 Bxc3 21.bxc3 Rhe8 22.Rae1 Rxe2 23.Rxe2 Rd8 24.Re5 Rd7 25.c4 Ne4 26.Bc1 Nd6 27.Re1 Ne8 28.f3 Nc7 29.Kf2 Ne6 30.Bb2 Rd8 31.a4 Nc5 32.a5 Ne6 33.Be5 c5 34.Rb1 Rd7 35.Rb5 f4 36.h4 Re7 37.Rb1 Ke8 38.Re1 Kd7 39.Re4 Rf7 40.c3 Rf5 41.d4 cxd4 42.cxd4 g5 43.hxg5 Rxg5 44.Re2 Rf5 45.Rb2 Kc8

46.Ke2 Rg5 47.Kf1 h4 [47...Rf5 48.Ke2+/-] 48.Re2 h3 49.gxh3 Rg3 50.h4 Rxf3+ 51.Rf2 Rh3 [51...Rd3 52.d5+/-] 52.d5 Rh1+ 53.Kg2 Rxh4 54.dxe6 Rh6 55.e7 Kd7 56.Rb2 1-0

82 – Aasum Tauber 4.Bc4 Nf6 Anker Aasum of Norway was born in 1940 according to FIDE and last FIDE rated was 1862. He is a stronger correspondence player in Norway. There I saw Anker Aasum rated 2196. He wrote the book “1.Sc3 Sleipner-Eröffnung” published in 1988. In it Aasum analyzes many 1.Nc3 Queens Knight Attack games. That is an interesting opening name. “Sleipnir” is an eight legged horse in Norse mythology, sometimes called “slippy” or “slipper.” I can picture applications for those meanings to 1.Nc3 opening. The knight on c3 is not easy to catch. It leaps to e4 or onto other squares as needed. Then it gallops off for another attack. Anker Aasum is best known for playing 1.Nc3 d5 2.f4 as White, but he is not limited to only that set-up. In fact a major plus for White after 1.Nc3 is its flexibility. In this game Aasum follows the normal Van Geet method of play with 2.e4. Aasum played Manfred Tauber in a Queens Knight Attack. Manfred Tauber of Germany has a FIDE rating of 2281. Manfred Tauber chose the Van Geet Exchange 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nxe4 e5 4.Bc4. This time Black challenged e4 with 4…Nf6. Aasum - Tauber, corr 1986 begins 1.Nc3 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nxe4 e5 4.Bc4 Nf6?! [4...Nc6 5.Nf3 Be7 6.d3=] 5.Ng5! Nd5 6.d4 [6.Qf3!? Qxg5 7.Bxd5 Qf6 8.Bxb7 Bxb7 9.Qxb7+/=] 6...Bb4+ [6...exd4 7.Nxf7 Qe7+ 8.Qe2 Kxf7 9.Bxd5+ Kf6 10.Qxe7+ Bxe7 11.Nf3+/=] 7.c3 Nxc3?! [7...Be7 8.Qf3 Bxg5 9.Bxg5 Qxg5 10.Qxd5+/-] 8.bxc3 Bxc3+ 9.Kf1! Qxd4 [9...Bxd4 10.Bxf7+ Ke7 11.N1f3 Bxa1 12.Ba3+ Kf6 13.Qxa1+-] 10.Bxf7+ Ke7 11.Ba3+ c5 12.Ne2 [12.Qc2! b6 (12...Bxa1? 13.Bxc5+ wins the queen) 13.N1f3+-] 12...Qxd1+ 13.Rxd1 Bb4 14.Bxb4 cxb4 15.Bb3 Nc6 16.f3 a5 17.Kf2 a4 18.Bc4 Bf5 [18...Rd8 19.Rxd8 Nxd8 20.Rb1+/-] 19.g4 Bc2 20.Rd2 b3 21.Nc3 Nb4 [21...Rad8 22.Nd5+ Kd6 23.axb3 axb3 24.Bxb3 Bxb3

25.Ne4+ Ke6 26.Nc5+ Kf7 27.Nxb3+-] 22.Re1 Rad8 [22...Nc6 23.Nd5+ Kd6 24.Nf7+ Kc5 25.Nxh8+-] 23.Rxe5+ [White is forcing checkmate after 23.Rxe5+ Kf6 24.Re6+ Kxg5 25.Kg3 g6 26.f4+ Kh6 27.g5+ Kg7 28.Re7+ Kf8 29.Rf7+ Ke8 30.Re2+ Be4 31.Rxe4#] 1-0

83 – Queen's Knight 4.Bc4 Nc6 You may find that the Queen's Knight Attack has many lines that resemble the King Pawn (1.e4 e5) openings. Consider the moves 1.Nc3 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nxe4 e5 4.Bc4. Note the similarities between this position and the Vienna Game or Bishop's Opening complex. The Portuguese Masters in 2013 had a game in this variation. They played the critical line with 4…Nc6 as opposed to 4…Be7 or 4…Nf6 as given in the previous games. Luis Sousa Reis and Al Fernandes (I assume Al is Alberto) continued 4...Nc6 5.d3 Be7 6.Nf3 which looks a lot like a King Pawn opening. Did you notice that White played his d-pawn only to d3? That is typical in the Queens Knight Attack. White pushed his kingside pawns. Then both sides castled queenside. White had the slightly better position. When tactics broke out, White outplayed his opponent and won quickly. Reis (2232) - Fernandes (2139), Portuguese Masters Sintra POR (5.5), 13.06.2013 begins 1.Nc3 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nxe4 e5 4.Bc4 Nc6 5.d3 Be7 6.Nf3 h6 7.Bd2 [7.Bb5+/=] 7...Nf6 8.Nc3 a6 9.a3 Bg4 10.h3 Bh5 11.g4 Bg6 12.Qe2 Qd6 13.0-0-0 0-0-0 14.Rhe1 Rhe8 [14...Nd7 15.Ne4+/=] 15.Nxe5 Bf8 16.f4 Nd7? [16...Nxe5 17.fxe5 Qc5 18.Qf3 Rxe5 19.Bxh6 gxh6 20.Qxf6+/-] 17.Ne4 Bxe4 18.Nxc6 [18.Nxf7+-] 18...Qxc6 19.dxe4 Nc5 20.Bd5 Rxd5? 21.exd5 Nb3+ 22.Kb1 Rxe2 23.dxc6 Nxd2+ 24.Kc1 1-0

84 – Dahl 3…e5 4.Nf3 Bg4 This Scandinavian Defence transposes to the Queens Knight Attack 1.Nc3. Black plays an early 3...e5 which must be handled with care. The natural pin 4...Bg4 overlooked that White could play 6.Bxf7!+ to win in this game Trygve Dahl vs Petter Gjertsen. Dahl (2209) - Gjertsen (1753), Kragero Resort Chess 2017 NOR, 25.02.2017 begins 1.e4 d5 2.Nc3 dxe4 3.Nxe4 e5 4.Nf3 Bg4? [4...f5 5.Nc3

e4 6.Qe2=] 5.Bc4 Nf6 [5...Bb4 6.Bxf7+ Kxf7 7.Nxe5+ Kf8 8.Qxg4+-] 6.Bxf7+! Kxf7? [6...Ke7 7.Nxf6 gxf6 8.Bb3+/-] 7.Nxe5+ Kg8 8.Nxf6+ Qxf6 9.Nxg4 Qd6 10.Qf3 Nc6 11.Qb3+! [White forces mate: 11.Qb3+ Qe6+ 12.Qxe6 mate] 1-0

Van Geet Advance – 2.e4 d4 The most common line White will face in the Queens Knight Attack is the Van Geet Advance Variation 1.Nc3 d5 2.e4 d4. Play usually continues 3.Nce2 e5. As I recall from D.D. Van Geet’s own recommendation, it is best to play 4.Ng3 immediately. This allows the light squared bishop to enter the fray with a possible 5.Bc4 for example.

85 – Diemer 3.Nce2 e5 4.d3 A couple players who survived World War II sat down to play a quiet Queens Knight attack. The game Hanke vs Emil Josef Diemer began 1.Nc3 d5 2.e4 d4 3.Nce2 e5 4.d3. The position was closed. One can imagine a strategy of slow build up with the trench warfare more in line with World War I than II. However Black was played by a fast tactical player. Emil Josef Diemer boldly attacked at every opportunity. Consider his first eight moves as Black in this game: 1…d5, 2…d4, 3…e5, 4…g5, 5…h5, 6…g4, 7…Qf6, and 8…Nh6. Diemer was a master of attack. He is famous as White for his BlackmarDiemer Gambit 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3. This involves a whole system of attacks after 1.d4. As Black, Diemer played many counter gambits such as 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 d5 or 2…f5 and 1.d4 e5. Here Diemer gets overextended and outplayed. Hanke - Diemer, Wangen 1950 begins 1.Nc3 d5 2.e4 d4 3.Nce2 e5 4.d3 [4.Ng3] 4...g5 [4...Bd6=] 5.Ng3 [5.Nf3 f6 6.h3 Be6 7.c3 c5 8.cxd4 cxd4 9.Ng3=] 5...h5 [5...Nc6 6.Be2 h6=] 6.Nxh5 [6.a3=] 6...g4 [6...Bb4+! 7.Bd2 Bxd2+ 8.Kxd2 Nf6 9.Ng3 Ng4=] 7.Ng3 Qf6 8.h3 Nh6 [8...gxh3 9.Nxh3+/=] 9.Be2 gxh3 10.Nxh3 Rg8 11.Bf3 Nc6 12.Bd2 Ng4 13.Bxg4 [13.a3 Bh6 14.Bxh6 Nxh6 15.Qd2+/=] 13...Bxg4 14.Qc1 Kd7 [14...Rh8

15.a3 Qg6 16.b4 0-0-0=] 15.Ng1 [15.f3+/=] 15...a5 16.N1e2 Rh8 17.Rxh8 Qxh8 18.f3 Bxf3 [18...Be6=] 19.gxf3 Qh2 20.c3 [20.Bg5+-] 20...Be7 21.Kd1 Qg2 [21...Rg8 22.Be1+-] 22.Kc2 Rg8 23.Qh1 Rxg3 24.Nxg3 Qxg3 25.Rg1 Qf2 26.Qg2 [26.f4 dxc3 27.bxc3+-] 26...Qxg2 27.Rxg2 1-0

86 – Abdilkhair 3.Nce2 e5 4.f4 Masters possess a wealth of strategical and tactical patterns in my memory banks. Amateurs enjoy skills but can run afoul of a move the instantly wins big for the master. This Scandinavian Defence 2.Nc3 led to many threats and counter threats. Finally at one point White retreated a bishop to pin and win material in the game between Abilmansur Abdilkhair and Andrey Stroganov. Abdilkhair (2235) - Stroganov (1826), Chess Amateur Minsk 2018 Minsk BLR (6.30), 28.06.2018 begins 1.e4 d5 2.Nc3 d4 3.Nce2 e5 4.f4 Nc6 5.Nf3 f6 6.d3 Be6 [6...Bg4 7.a3=] 7.c3 Qd7 8.Bd2 [8.fxe5 fxe5 9.cxd4 exd4 10.Nf4=] 8...Nh6 9.Qa4 0-0-0 10.cxd4 exd4 11.b4 Kb8? [11...Nxb4 12.Qxd7+ Rxd7 13.Nexd4 Bf7 14.a3=] 12.b5 Ne7 13.Nexd4 c5 14.Nxe6 Qxe6 15.Be2 Nc8 16.0-0 [16.Rd1+-] 16...Nf5 [16...c4 17.d4+/-] 17.Ba5 [17.Qd1 Nd4 18.Nxd4 Rxd4 19.Be3+-] 17...b6 [17...Nb6 18.Bxb6 axb6 19.exf5 Qxe2 20.Rfe1+/-] 18.exf5 Qxe2 [18...Qe3+ 19.Rf2+/-] 19.Rfe1 Qb2 20.Rab1 Rd4 [20...Qxb1 21.Rxb1 bxa5 22.Qxa5+-] 21.Qxd4 [21.Nxd4!+-] 21...Qxd4+ 22.Nxd4 cxd4 [22...Kb7 23.Nc6+-] 23.Re8 Kb7 24.Bb4 1-0

87 – Pridorozhni 4.Ng3 g6 5.Bc4 Opening wins are fun. Middlegame wins are nice. Endgame wins can be easy. This Scandinavian transposed to Queens Knight 1.Nc3 where the knight rushes to 4.Ng3. Black’s reply of 4...g6 keeps the knight at bay and prepares 7...h5. White simplified into a winning ending in Aleksei Pridorozhni vs Pavel Potapov. Pridorozhni (2565) - Potapov (2479), ch-RUS Blitz 2017 Sochi RUS (3.5), 02.10.2017 begins 1.e4 d5 2.Nc3 d4 3.Nce2 e5 4.Ng3 g6 5.Bc4 Bg7 6.d3 Nc6 7.f4 h5 8.h3 h4 9.N3e2 Nf6 10.Nf3 exf4 11.Nxf4 Qe7 12.0-0 Bd7 13.e5 Nh5 14.e6 Bxe6 15.Nxe6 fxe6 16.Ng5 0-0-0 [16...Ne5 17.Nxe6+/=] 17.Rf7 [17.Nf7+/-] 17...Qd6 18.Nxe6 Rd7 19.Nxg7 Rxf7 [19...Nxg7 20.Bf4+/-] 20.Bxf7 Nxg7 21.Qg4+ Kb8 22.Qxg6 Qe5 23.Bd2 Nf5 24.Qg5 Ng3 [24...Rf8 25.Bb3+/-] 25.Qxe5 [25.Re1+-] 25...Nxe5

26.Bd5 Rf8 [26...Rh5 27.Re1+/-] 27.Re1 c6 [27...a6 28.Bb4+-] 28.Be4 Kc7 [28...Re8 29.Bf4+-] 29.Bg5 Nxe4 30.Rxe4 Ng6 31.Bxh4 c5 32.Be7 Re8 [32...Nxe7 33.Rxe7+ Kd6 34.Rxb7+-] 33.Bd6+ After the rooks come off White will have two extra passed pawns in a minor piece endgame. 1-0

88 – Green 4.Ng3 g6 5.Nf3 My 5th round game of the 2005 Florida championship was short but violent. My opponent sacrificed a pawn and two rooks for a mating attack. I felt like I was playing a 35-year younger version of myself!? Almost sounds disturbing, but I really enjoyed this game. The opening was a Queen's Knight's Attack transposing to the Scandinavian Defence: 1.Nc3 d5 2.e4. My opponent this round was Andrew Green, a kid who appeared to be a high school teenager. But clearly Andrew had done well to get such a good rating at this point in his life. His rating in 2005 was above average at 1791. I was rated 2010. Since 2005, Green has raised his rating another 100 points and actually topped 1900 at least once. Andrew Green was not one of those "super-kids", rated over 2000 before they could vote. In the next round I played Ray Robson who was the World Under-12 Champion at age 10. Sawyer (2010) – Green (1791), FL State Championship (5), 05.09.2005 begins 1.Nc3 d5 2.e4 d4 3.Nce2 e5 4.Ng3 g6 5.Nf3 Bg7 6.Bc4 Nc6 7.d3 Na5 8.Bb3 Nxb3 9.axb3 Ne7 10.0-0 0-0 11.Qe2 [Hmmm. Now what do I do? Why am I playing this crap? Because I have no confidence in my other openings. Okay then, I will just play it by ear and await developments.] 11...Bg4 12.h3 Bxf3 13.Qxf3 f5!? [Whoa! This pawn sacrifice signals that Black is boldly playing for a mating attack on the kingside.] 14.exf5 gxf5 15.Qxb7! [Show me what you've got kid. Another way is 15.Bg5 c6 16.Nxf5 Rxf5 17.Bxe7 Rxf3 18.Bxd8+/-] 15...f4 16.Nh5!? [This was a game where I missed many tactical ideas. My brain was swimming, and I just tried to keep my head above water. My original idea was to play 16.Ne4! which seems best.] 16...f3?! 17.Nxg7 [17.Re1+-] 17...Kxg7 18.Bg5 Qd7 19.Bxe7 [19.Ra6!+-] 19...Qxe7 20.g3 Qd7 21.Kh2 Rf6?! [After the game Green said he meant to play 21...Rab8 first. And I think he meant here, but it could have been earlier. Now of course White would play 22.Qe4 when play might continue 22...Rf6 23.Rxa7 Re8 24.Qg4+! Qxg4 25.Rxc7+! Rf7 26.Rxf7+ Kxf7 27.hxg4+/-] 22.Qxa8 Rh6 23.h4 [My

original plan was 23.g4?? but while 23...Qxg4 24.Rg1 pins the queen, it allows 24...Rxh3#! Ouch.] 23...Qg4 24.Qd8! Rxh4+ 25.Qxh4 1-0

89 – Wilson 4.Ng3 Be6 5.Nf3 My Queen's Knight Van Geet Attack vs Jeffrey Wilson had a tremendous impact on my future chess openings. I never took 1.Nc3 all that seriously. This game stuck a thought in the back of my mind that I remembered. When I see a good player make an opening into a strong weapon, I begin to think about playing that opening myself! About 10 years after this 1989 USCF Golden Squires postal game I added 1.Nc3 to my own repertoire as one of my most popular first moves, and I began to play 1...Nc6 as Black. Van Geet's normal plan was to play the Queens Knight Attack 1.Nc3 d5 2.e4 d4 as a variation of the Scandinavian Defence (1.e4 d5 2.Nc3 d4 reaches the same position). Of course the position occur rather rarely after 1.e4 but it seems it appears close to 50% of the time after 1.Nc3. After 2...d4 the White knight is relocated from Nce2 to Ng3. In this game White played 6.Nh5 enticing me to play 6...Kf8. The inability for me to castle as Black made it hard for me to coordinate my pieces into an effective strategy. Wilson (2198) - Sawyer (2053), corr USCF 89SS40, 05.11.1991 begins 1.Nc3 d5 2.e4 d4 3.Nce2 e5 4.Ng3 Be6 5.Nf3 Bd6 [5...f6 has been played five times as much.] 6.Nh5 Kf8 7.c3 c5 [7...g6=] 8.d3 Nc6 9.Ng5 Bc8 10.f4 h6 11.fxe5 Bxe5 12.Nf3 Bg4 13.Be2 Bxh5 14.Nxe5 Nxe5 15.Bxh5 Nxd3+ [Black had a chance for an advantage with 15...dxc3! 16.0-0 Qd4+ 17.Rf2 c2 18.Qxc2 Nf6=/+] 16.Qxd3 Qh4+ 17.g3 [17.Qg3+/=] 17...Qxh5 18.cxd4 cxd4 [18...Nf6 19.0-0 cxd4 20.Qxd4=] 19.Qxd4 [19.Qa3+ Ne7 20.0-0+/=]

19...Nf6 20.0-0 Kg8 21.Bd2 Ng4 22.h4 Qe5 [22...Kh7 23.Bc3 f6 24.Rf5 Qf7=] 23.Qxe5 Nxe5 24.Bc3 Re8 25.Rad1 f6 26.Bxe5 Rxe5 27.Rd7 Rb5 [27...Rxe4 28.Rxb7+/=] 28.Rc1 Kh7 29.Rcc7 Rg8 30.Rxb7 Rxb7 31.Rxb7 Ra8 32.h5 Re8 33.Rxa7 Rxe4 34.Ra5 1-0

90 – Pribelszky 4.Ng3 Be6 5.Bb5+ White responds to 4.Ng3 Be6 by swinging a light squared bishop around to counter the pressure after 5.Bb5+, 6.Ba4, and 7.Bb3. After these bishops were exchanged, White turned the focus to the kingside. White dominated the attack after the f-file was opened. Black would lose the king or queen in this game between Bence Pribelszky and Andrea Lengyel. Pribelszky (2206) - Lengyel (1854), Hungarian Youth Teams 2018 Zalakaros HUN (7.5), 29.07.2018 begins 1.Nc3 d5 2.e4 d4 3.Nce2 e5 4.Ng3 Be6 5.Bb5+ c6 6.Ba4 [6.Be2=] 6...Bd6 [6...Na6=/+] 7.Bb3 Bxb3 8.axb3 g6 [8...d3!?=] 9.Nh3 Ne7 10.0-0 0-0 11.d3 Qd7 12.Bh6 Re8 13.f4 exf4 14.Nxf4 Be5 15.Qf3 Nc8 [15...c5 16.Nh3+/=] 16.c4 [16.Ra5+/-] 16...Na6 [16...dxc3 17.bxc3 Bxc3 18.Rad1=] 17.Ra5 c5 [17...Bh8 18.Nfh5+-] 18.b4 Nxb4 [18...Ne7 19.bxc5+-] 19.Rxc5 Nc6 [19...Nd6 20.Nd5+-] 20.Nxg6 Re6 [20...hxg6 21.Rxe5+-] 21.Nxe5 Nxe5 22.Rxe5 Rxh6 23.Nh5 Kh8 24.Nf6 Rxf6 25.Qxf6+ [If 25...Kg8 26.Rd5 wins.] 1-0

91 – Brito 4.c3 e5 5.Nf3 Nc6 6.Ng3 Queens Knight Attack can be either a unique opening or a transpositional device to reach other openings. Van Geet played 1.Nc3 d5 2.e4 d4 3.Nce2 intending 4.Ng3. This Scandinavian Defence (1.e4 d5 2.Nc3 d4) occurred in the game Luismar Brito vs Arthur Schena. White answered 3.Nce2 c5 with an immediate 4.c3 rather than the routine 4.Ng3. Brito (2352) - Schena (1863), IV Concordia Open 2018 BRA, 29.06.2018 begins 1.Nc3 d5 2.e4 d4 3.Nce2 c5 4.c3 e5 5.Nf3 Nc6 6.Ng3 d3 [6...a6 7.Bc4 b5 8.Bd5=] 7.Qa4 Bd7 8.Qc4 b5 9.Qxd3 c4 10.Qc2 Nf6 11.d3 Be6 [11...Bc5 12.Bg5+/-] 12.dxc4 bxc4 [12...b4 13.a3!+-] 13.Qa4 [13.Ng5 h5 14.Nxe6 fxe6 15.Bxc4+-] 13...Rc8 14.Nxe5 Bc5 15.Nxc6 [After 15.Nxc6 Qd7 16.b4 cxb3 17.axb3 Rxc6 18.Bb5+-]1-0

92 – Van Geet 5.c3 c5 6.Nf3 f6 Dirk Daniel Van Geet played Anker Aasum in a Queens Knight Attack at an event listed as “Mariac 1993”. I am curious as to the nature of this tournament. I see that there is a commune in the south of France with that name, but the players in that event seem to be primarily postal chess players from many countries. The line 1.Nc3 d5 2.e4 d4 3.Nce2 e5 4.Ng3 Be6 is quite popular. It seems deserving of a detailed analysis. Natural is the move 5.Nf3. The bishop check 5.Bb5+ is tempting. Most challenging both strategically and tactically is 5.c3. With this move White strikes the Black pawn center right on the nose. Black cannot easily ignore it. White has a playable game in all lines. Van Geet - Aasum, Mariac 1993 begins 1.Nc3 d5 2.e4 d4 3.Nce2 e5 4.Ng3 Be6 5.c3 [5.Nf3 f6 6.Bb5+ c6 7.Bd3=; 5.Bb5+ c6 6.Be2 (6.Ba4 Na6 7.Bb3 Bxb3 8.axb3 d3=/+) 6...Nf6 7.Nf3 Bd6 8.0-0 0-0 9.b3=] 5...c5 [5...Nc6 6.Bb5 f6 7.f4 exf4 8.N3e2=; 5...a6 6.cxd4 Qxd4 7.Nf3 Qd6 8.d4 exd4 9.Qxd4 Nc6 10.Qxd6 Bxd6 11.Nh5 Kf8 12.Be3=; 5...f6 6.Qa4+ Nc6 7.Ba6 Qc8 8.Nf3=; 5...d3 6.Qf3 Bc4 7.b3 Ba6 8.c4+/=; 5...dxc3 6.bxc3 Nf6 7.Nf3 Nbd7 8.Rb1+/=] 6.Nf3 [6.Bb5+ Nc6 7.Nf3 Bd6 8.0-0 Nf6 9.Bxc6+ bxc6 10.b3=] 6...f6 [6...Nc6 7.Bb5 Bd6 8.0-0 Nf6 9.b4=] 7.Qa4+ [7.Bb5+ Nc6 8.0-0 Qd7 9.d3 Nge7=] 7...Nd7 [7...Qd7 8.Bb5 Nc6 9.0-0 a6 10.Bxc6 Qxc6 11.Qxc6+ bxc6 12.b3=] 8.Bc4 Qb6 [8...Bxc4 9.Qxc4 Nb6 10.Qb3=] 9.0-0 Ne7 10.Rd1 g6 11.Bxe6 Qxe6 12.b4 Kf7 13.Qb5 b6 14.bxc5 bxc5 15.Ba3 Rb8 16.Qa4 Nc6 17.d3 Nb6 18.Qa6 Be7 19.Ne2 Rhd8 20.c4? [20.cxd4 cxd4 21.Bxe7 Qxe7 22.Ne1=] 20...Nd7 21.Rab1 Rxb1 22.Rxb1 Rb8 [22...Nb4 23.Qxe6+ Kxe6 24.Bxb4 cxb4=/+] 23.Rxb8 Ndxb8 24.Qb5 Nd7 25.Nc1 Nb4 26.Bxb4 cxb4 27.Nb3 a6 28.Qa5 Qc6 29.Nfd2 Bc5 30.Qd8 Be7 31.Qa5 Bc5 32.Kf1 Qb6 33.Qa4 Ke7 34.Ke2 Bd6 35.Kd1 Nc5 36.Nxc5 Bxc5 37.Nb3 Kd6 [37...Bd6=] 38.Nxc5 [38.Qe8+-] 38...Kxc5 39.Qd7 Qc6 40.Qe7+ Qd6 [40...Kb6 41.Qxb4+ Ka7 42.Ke2+/-] 41.Qxh7

g5 42.Qa7+ Qb6 [42...Kc6 43.Qxa6+ Kd7 44.Qxd6+ Kxd6 45.Ke2+-] 43.Qxb6+ Kxb6 44.f3 Kc5 45.g3 a5 46.h4 1-0

93 – Kaliebe 4.Ng3 Nf6 5.Nf3 Dan Heisman wrote the helpful book called "Looking for Trouble: Recognizing and Meeting Threats in Chess". The book helps you with your understanding of what your opponent is threatening. Heisman says that when you see a threat you have three ways to meet it: 1. Ignore it; 2. Create a bigger threat; or 3.Stop it. How do you know your chess playing level based on threats? Dan Heisman categorizes players into roughly three levels: “1. Beginners - who ignore most threats, specifically those made on the previous move, “2. Intermediate - who meet threats made by the opponent's previous move, but may allow unstoppable threats next move, and “3. Advanced - who do not make a move unless it not only meets threats made by the opponent's previous move, but also prepares answers to all of the possible threats generated by the opponent's next move (if possible)." Bobby Fischer said, “My opponents make good moves too. Sometimes I don't take these things into consideration.” I highly recommend chess books by Dan Heisman. My opponent for this game was Ekkehard Kaliebe. He did not spend enough time looking for trouble. He kept losing material. The game was played at Borders bookstore in Orlando, Florida. This game was a tactical melee; when the dust cleared, Black was busted. Sawyer - Kaliebe, Orlando, FL, 06.01.2005 begins 1.Nc3 d5 2.e4 d4 3.Nce2 e5 4.Ng3 Nf6 5.Nf3 Bg4 [This bishop is better placed at e6, but of course e5 is threatened; the pawn needs to be defended by knight or bishop.] 6.Bc4 [Threatening 7.Bxf7+ Kxf7 8.Nxe5+ and 9.Nxg4.] 6...Bd6 7.h3 Bh5? [7...Bxf3 8.Qxf3 Nbd7 9.Nf5+/=] 8.Nxh5 Nxh5 9.Nxe5 Bxe5 10.Qxh5 Qf6 11.Bxf7+ Kf8 12.Bb3 Nd7 13.d3 Nc5 14.Bg5 g6 [or 14...Qg6 15.Be7+ Kxe7 16.Qxe5+ Ne6 17.Bxe6 Qxe6 18.Qxg7+ Qf7 19.Qe5+ Qe6 20.Qxc7+ Qd7 21.Qxd7+ Kxd7 22.f4+-] 15.Bxf6 gxh5

16.Bxe5 Nxb3 17.Bxh8 [17.axb3 Rg8 18.Rh2 c5] 17...Nxa1 18.Kd2 Nxc2 19.Kxc2 1-0

94 – Bogoljubow 5.Nf3 Bd6 One hundred years ago the chief known proponent of 1.Nc3 was the British player John Herbert White, one of the co-founders of Modern Chess Openings (MCO) in 1911 (along with R.C. Griffith, who died 1955). In the early editions of MCO, 1.Nc3 had a whole page or section to itself. After White died in 1920, later editions reduced coverage to one or two columns. Before J.H. White, there were games by Arved Heinrichsen from the Baltic area. As I recall from my years studying 1.Nc3, MCO cited a game or two by Heinrichsen, whose idea was to play 2.e3 and make the opening a type of reversed French Defence. Efim D. Bogoljubow played 1.Nc3 once against Nikolay Zubarev in the USSR Championship at Leningrad in 1925 (below). Sixty years ago Ted Dunst played 1.Nc3 in some notable American events and MCO named the opening the Dunst Opening. IM Dirk Daniel Van Geet (Netherlands), Correspondence GM Ove Ekebjaerg (Denmark), Correspondence Expert Anker Aasum (Norway) and FM Harald Keilhack (Germany) have all done a lot to promote 1.Nc3. IM Zvonimir Mestrovic (Slovenia) played a variety of openings including 1.Nc3 hundreds of times. Bogoljubow - Zubarev, URS-ch04 Leningrad (10), 1925 begins 1.Nc3 d5 2.e4 d4 3.Nce2 e5 4.Nf3 Bd6 5.Ng3 c5 6.Bc4 Nc6 [Black can castle quickly with 6...Nf6 7.0-0 0-0 8.d3 Nc6 9.a4=] 7.d3 Be6 8.Nf5!? [8.Bxe6 fxe6 9.c4=] 8...Bxc4 9.dxc4 Bf8 [9...g6 10.Nxd6+ Qxd6 11.0-0=] 10.0-0 g6 11.Ng3 Bg7 12.Ne1 [12.a3!?=] 12...Nge7 [12...Nf6 13.Nd3 Qe7 14.Bg5 00=] 13.Nd3 Qd6 14.f4 f6 [14...exf4 when White has either 15.e5 (or 15.Bxf4 Ne5 16.Bxe5 Bxe5 17.Qg4=) 15...Nxe5 16.Bxf4 0-0 17.Ne4=] 15.a3 a5 16.Qg4 h5 [16...0-0! 17.f5 b6 18.fxg6 hxg6 19.h4 Rad8 20.h5 Qd7=] 17.Qh3 b6 18.fxe5 Nxe5 19.Nxe5 fxe5 20.Bg5 Rf8 21.Ne2 Ng8 22.Rxf8+ Bxf8 23.Rf1 Bg7 [23...Be7 24.Bxe7 Kxe7 25.Qh4+ Nf6 26.Qg5 Rg8 27.Nc1+/=] 24.Nc1 Bf6 25.Qh4 Bxg5 26.Qxg5 Ra7 27.Nd3 Re7 28.b4 Re6 [28...cxb4 29.axb4 Re6 30.bxa5 bxa5 31.Qd2 Qc7 32.Ra1+/-]

29.bxc5 bxc5 30.Rb1 Nf6 [30...a4 31.Rb5+-] 31.Qxg6+ Kd8 32.Rb5 Nd7 33.Qxh5 Rf6 [33...Kc7 34.h4+-] 34.h3 Qe6 35.Qh8+ Ke7 36.Rb7 Qc6 37.Qg7+ 1-0

95 – Redway 5.Nf3 Nc6 6.Bb5 This was my first rated tournament win in many years! In Round Two of the 2005 Florida State Championship I was paired vs the kind of player I always expected to find in Florida, an older guy with White hair. My opponent Frank Redway was certainly a nice man. I was in my 50s and I guessed him to be in his 60's. I chose the Queens Knight Attack 1.Nc3. It is completely sound. After 1.Nc3 d5 2.e4 we transposed into a Scandinavian Defence. Frank Redway played the Van Geet Advance Variation 2...d4. Sawyer (2010) – Redway (1817), FL State Championship (2), 03.09.2005 begins 1.Nc3 d5 2.e4 d4 [One problem for White in the Van Geet is that Black gets a significant space advantage without really falling behind in development. But the position is closed, so White is not in much danger.] 3.Nce2 [Headed to the kingside.] 3...e5 [This is the normal move. White could attack e5 with f2-f4, but Van Geet recommends the 4th move...] 4.Ng3 Nf6 5.Nf3 Nc6 6.Bb5 Bd6 7.Bxc6+ [I decided to double Black's cpawns and hope to play against that weakness.] 7...bxc6 8.0-0 d3? [Black sacrifices a pawn to hamper the development of White's queenside. Normal play would be 8...0-0 9.d3 Rb8=] 9.cxd3 0-0 [9...c5 would have restricted White from freeing his d-pawn. 10.b3+/-] 10.d4! [Freeing d3 for the backseat d-pawn.] 10...Re8? [After the game I told Frank that the best continuation looked to me to be: 10...Bg4! 11.dxe5 Bxe5 although now I see that White still gets a good game. 12.d3 Qd6 13.h3 Bxf3 (13...Bxg3 14.hxg4 Bf4 15.g5 Bxc1 16.Rxc1 Ng4 17.d4+-) 14.Qxf3 Rfd8 15.Nf5+/-] 11.dxe5 +- Bxe5 12.Nxe5 Rxe5 13.d4 Re8 14.f3 [White tries to make his center indestructible. Another way to active pieces is: 14.Re1 a6 15.Qa4 Rb8 16.b3 Rb5 17.Bb2+-] 14...Ba6 15.Re1 h6 16.Be3 Rb8 17.Qc2 Qd7 18.b3 Qe6 19.Rac1 [White continues the attack on the c-pawns.] 19...Rb6 20.d5 [Another way to go is to play for a kingside attack with 20.Nf5 Bb5 21.Qf2+-] 20...cxd5 21.Bxb6 Qxb6+ 22.Qc5 [By principle White swaps the big stuff when up in material.] 22...dxe4 23.Qxb6 cxb6 24.Nxe4 Nxe4 25.Rxe4 Rd8 26.Re7 Bc8 27.Rxa7 Be6 28.Rb7 h5 29.Rxb6 Rd2 30.a4 Ra2 31.Rb5 g6 32.a5 Kg7 33.b4 Kh6 34.Rbc5 g5 35.R5c2 Ra3 36.Rb2

g4 37.fxg4 hxg4 38.Kf2 Kg5 39.Re1 Bc4 40.Re4 Be6 41.Rxe6 White gives back the Exchange for a winning rook ending. 1-0

96 – Haddaway 4…Nc6 5.Bc4 The Queen's Knight Attack with 1.Nc3 is a complete opening system where White can choose to transpose into variations of well-known openings or just completely avoid them. Many players have tried 1.Nc3 and contributed ideas to the opening. I mentioned many throughout this book. I have played this opening thousands of times myself. The Queens Knight 1.Nc3 and 1…Nc6 prove that specialization in any opening can bring great success. Even if the computer evaluations of the lines are only equal, the experience of playing it over and over will help a player deal with plans and tactics faster as they build on prior understanding. Below is a game I played vs Doug Haddaway at a coffee shop in Borders bookstore in Orlando, Florida. Sawyer - Haddaway, Orlando, FL, 20.11.2003 begins 1.Nc3 d5 2.e4 [We get a position in the Scandinavian Defence that could be reached via 1.e4 d5 2.Nc3. Aasum liked to play 2.f4 heading for a Bird's Opening hybrid. When I am in a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit mode, I play 2.d4 intending 2...Nf6 3.e4!?] 2...d4 [Van Geet Advance Variation. 2...dxe4 is the major alternative, the Van Geet Exchange Variation. 2...Nf6 is a variation of the Alekhine Defence.] 3.Nce2 [3.Nd5?! is very risky.] 3...e5 4.Ng3 [Van Geet prefers to play this knight to g3 immediately.] 4...Nc6 5.Bc4 Nf6 6.Nf3 Bd6 7.0-0 0-0 8.d3 [With this solid set-up White intends to eventually expand on the kingside. 8.c3 playing to expand on the queenside is an active and common plan.] 8...h6 9.a3 [Creating a retreat square for the Bc4 in case of ...Na5.] 9...Be6 10.Nd2!? [White is going after the bishop. 10.Bxe6 fxe6 11.c3=] 10...a6 11.Bxe6 fxe6 12.Nc4 b5 13.Nxd6 cxd6 14.f4 d5 [14...exf4 15.Bxf4=] 15.fxe5? Nh7? [15...Nxe5=/+] 16.Rxf8+ [16.Qg4! threatening either Qxe6+ or Bxh6.] 16...Qxf8 [16...Nxf8 17.Bf4+/-] 17.exd5

[17.Qg4!+-] 17...exd5 18.Qg4 Nxe5 19.Qxd4 Qf6?? [Hangs the rook.] 20.Qxd5+ Kh8 21.Qxa8+ Nf8 22.Be3 Ng4 23.Bc5 [23.Rf1! nails the knight on f8.] 23...Kh7 24.Qxf8 Qxb2 25.Qf5+ 1-0

Book 9: Chapter 5 – 1…Nc6 Defence We begin with the Queens Knight Defence. There are many transpositional possibilities as well as unique variations.

Closed Lines What if White does not head to the main lines with 1.e4 or 1.d4? What if White develops more quietly on the flanks with 1.c4 or 1.Nf3? What about 1.d4 Nc6 2.Nf3? Just play good moves.

97 – Scheerer English 1.c4 Nc6 In 2007 Christoph Wisnewski wrote one of my favorite books on the Queens Knight Defence called “Play 1…Nc6!: a complete chess opening repertoire for Black.” In 2011 Christoph Scheerer wrote one of my favorite books on “The Blackmar-Diemer Gambit: a modern guide to a fascinating chess opening.” This game was played when Christoph still used the last name of Wisnewski. I believe he changed it to Scheerer when he married. International Master Christoph Scheerer played 1…Nc6 with the basic intention of following it up when feasible with 2…d5. Here Christian Laqua played the English Opening. Clearly the move 1…Nc6 is easy to play against such an opening. Laqua - Scheerer, Bundesliga 2006 begins 1.c4 Nc6 2.g3 [Other options include 2.Nc3 e5 3.g3 Bc5 4.Bg2 d6 5.e3 Bf5=; 2.Nf3 e5 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.e3 Bb4 5.Qc2 Bxc3 6.Qxc3 Qe7=] 2...d5 3.cxd5 Qxd5 4.Nf3 Nf6 5.Nc3 Qh5 6.d3 Bh3 7.Bxh3 Qxh3 8.Qb3 0-0-0 9.Be3 [9.Qxf7 e6-/+] 9...e6 10.Ng5 Qh5 11.Qa4 Nd5 12.g4 Qg6 13.h4 [13.Qe4 Qxe4 14.Ngxe4 Be7=] 13...Nxe3 14.fxe3 h6 15.Nf3 Bc5 16.Kd2 f5 17.Rhg1 Qf6 18.g5 hxg5 19.Rxg5 Ne5 20.Rf1 Ng4 21.Nd1 [21.Rxg4 fxg4 22.Qxg4 Rd7=/+] 21...Rxh4 22.Qc4 [22.Rg1 Kb8 23.Rxg7 Qxg7 24.Nxh4 Qe7-/+] 22...Nxe3 23.Qxh4 Nxf1+ 24.Ke1 Ne3 25.Nc3 Bb4 26.Kd2 Nd5 27.Qc4 Rd6 28.e4 fxe4 [Or 28...Rc6-+ ] 29.Qxe4 Nxc3 30.bxc3 Qxc3+ 31.Ke2 Qc2+ 32.Ke3 Bc5+ 33.Kf4 Qf2 34.Rxg7 Rd4 35.Rg8+ Kd7 36.Rg7+ Ke8 37.Rxc7 0-1

98 – Milovic 1.c4 Nc6 2.Nf3 g6 English Opening allows for multiple transpositions such that the Queens Knight line 1.c4 Nc6 ceases to be unique as soon as more moves are played. Below Black won with a kingside pawn assault in the game Zoran Lakusic vs Jovan Milovic. Lakusic (1682) - Milovic (2307), Cetinje Open 2016 MNE), 04.05.2016 begins 1.c4 Nc6 2.Nf3 g6 3.g3 Bg7 4.Nc3 e5 5.Bg2 Nge7 6.d3 0-0 7.0-0 d6 8.Bg5 h6 9.Bxe7 [9.Bd2 Be6=] 9...Nxe7 10.Qb3 c6 11.a4 Rb8 12.Qa3 f5 13.Rab1 [13.Nd2 Be6=] 13...g5 14.Rfd1 g4 15.Nd2 f4 16.Nce4 Nf5 17.Nb3 c5 18.Kh1 [18.Nc3 Be6 19.Be4 Qg5=] 18...h5 19.gxf4 [19.Rg1 h4-/+] 19...exf4 20.d4 Qh4 21.Ng3 [21.Nbd2 Nxd4-+] 21...fxg3 22.fxg3 [22.h3 gxh3-+] 22...Nxg3+ [After 22...Nxg3+ 23.Kg1 Nxe2+ 24.Kh1 g3 25.h3 Bxh3 26.Nd2 Bxg2+ 27.Kxg2 Qh2 mate] 0-1

99 – Scheerer Reti 1.Nf3 Nc6 Reti Opening allows White to control e5. Queen Knight Defence players as Black like Christoph Scheerer (formerly Wisnewski) develop 1…Nc6 systems that avoid most popular openings. White was GM Michal Krasenkow. The grandmaster is known for the King’s Indian Defence line 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.e4 d6 5.Nf3 0-0 6.h3 with the idea to continue 6…e5 7.d5 a5 8.Bg5. Against Christoph Scheerer the Polish grandmaster transposes to a Queen Pawn Game 1.Nf3 Nc6 2.d4 d5. Christoph Scheerer quickly develops his bishops with 3.g3 Bg4 4.Bg2 e6 5.c3 Bd6. Krasenkow (2676) - Scheerer (2392), Bundesliga 0405 Germany (9.3), 30.01.2005 begins 1.Nf3 Nc6 2.d4 [White must be careful after 2.g3 e5. He might lose a knight after 3.Bg2 e4 4.Nh4 d5 due to the threat of 5…g5.] 2… d5 3.g3 Bg4 4.Bg2 e6 5.c3 [5.0-0 Nf6 6.c4 Bd6 7.Nc3 0-0 8.cxd5 Nxd5=] 5...Bd6 6.0-0 Nf6 7.Qb3 Rb8 8.Bg5 h6 9.Bxf6 Qxf6 10.Nbd2 0-0 11.e4 Bxf3 [11...dxe4 12.Nxe4=] 12.Bxf3 dxe4 13.Bxe4 e5 14.d5 Ne7 15.c4 [15.Rad1!?=] 15...b6 16.Bc2 Nc8? [16...Nf5!=] 17.Rae1 [Or 17.Rfe1+/-] 17...a5 18.Ne4 Qe7 19.f4 exf4 20.Qd3 f5 21.Nxd6 Qxd6 22.Rxf4 Qc5+

23.Kg2 Nd6 24.g4!? [24.h4=] 24...b5!? [24...Rbe8=] 25.cxb5 [25.b3=] 25...Rxb5 26.gxf5 Rxb2 27.Re2 Re8 28.Rxe8+ Nxe8 29.Rc4 Qe7 30.a4 Qg5+ [30...Nf6=/+] 31.Kh3 [31.Kh1=] 31...Nf6 [31...Nd6-/+] 32.Qf3 Qd2 [32...Kh8 33.Qe2 Rb8-/+] 33.Qc3 Qc1 34.Rxc7 Qf1+ 0-1

100 – Carlsen Plays 1.d4 Nc6 World Champion Magnus Carlsen played Queen Knight Defence 1...Nc6. Grandmaster Magnus Carlsen of Norway was a prodigy who worked very hard to develop and sharpen all his skills. His efforts made Magnus Carlsen the highest rated player in history. White was Laurent Fressinet who is a grandmaster from France born in 1981. His games began to appear in my database in 1993. By 1996 he held his own against veterans such as Mednis, Smyslov and Ivkov, but Fressinet was still losing to Korchnoi. Now 20 years later Grandmaster Fressinet is in his prime. Our Fressinet vs Carlsen game began 1.d4 Nc6 2.Nf3 Nf6. This is a completely different Two Knights Defence than the King Pawn open game move 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6. The game here continued 3.d5 Nb8. It reminds me of their blitz game from 2014 that began 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Ng8 when the players smiled at each other and played on. Then Carlsen played pawn moves and then brought out his pieces. Carlsen won in that endgame. Fressinet and Carlsen have played each other at least 10 times. By my count Magnus Carlsen scored eight wins and two draws. This 1.d4 Nc6 game took on the flavor of a Pirc Defence. Fressinet (2687) - Carlsen (2855), GCT Blitz Paris 2016 Paris FRA (17.2), 12.06.2016 begins 1.d4 Nc6 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.d5 Nb8 [3...Nb4 4.c4+/=] 4.Nc3 [4.c4 d6 5.Nc3 g6 6.e4 Bg7 7.h3 0-0 8.Be2+/=] 4...d6 [4...e6!?] 5.e4 g6 [5...Bg4!?] 6.Be3 Bg4 7.h3 Bxf3 8.Qxf3 Bg7 9.0-0-0 Nbd7 10.g4 c6 11.Qe2 Rc8 12.Bd4 c5 13.Be3 Qa5 [13...a6 14.f4 b5 15.Qf3=] 14.Qb5 [14.f4+/-] 14...Qxb5 15.Bxb5 a6 16.Be2 b5 17.g5 Nh5 18.a4 b4 19.Nb1 c4 20.Nd2 c3 21.Nb3 cxb2+ 22.Kb1 Rc3 23.Bd4 0-0 24.Bxa6 Nc5 25.Bxc3 bxc3 26.Nxc5 dxc5 27.d6 exd6 28.Rxd6 Nf4 29.Rhd1 [29.Bb7+-] 29...Bd4 30.Bb7 Nxh3 31.a5 Nxf2 32.R1xd4 cxd4 33.Rxd4 Re8 [33...f5 34.Bd5+ Kg7=] 34.a6 Nh3 35.Rd3 Nxg5 36.Rxc3 Kg7 37.a7 Ne6 38.Rc8 [38.Bc8!+-] 38...Rxc8 39.Bxc8 Nc7 40.Bb7 Kf6 41.e5+ Kxe5 42.Kxb2 h5 43.Kb3 g5 44.a8Q Nxa8 45.Bxa8 g4 46.Kc3 h4 47.Kd3 h3 48.Ke3 f5

49.c4 f4+ 50.Kf2 Kd4 51.Bd5 Kc5 52.Kg1 g3 53.Kh1 Kd4 54.Kg1 [54.Be6! h2 55.Bd5=] 54...Ke3 55.c5 f3 56.c6 f2+ 57.Kf1 g2+ 58.Bxg2 hxg2+ 0-1

Bogoljubow – 2.d5 Bogoljubow played 1.d4 Nc6. The Advance Variation is a natural reply, but the White pawn is not necessarily better placed on d5.

101 – Muse 3.Nf3 Nxf3+ 4.exf3 Bogoljubow proved that Black is fine in Queens Knight Defence against the advance variation 1.d4 Nc6 2.d5. In the game Uwe Hecht vs Drazen Muse, Black equalizes after a few exchanges. White decided to keep his darksquared bishop posted in the center, but he overlooked one little pawn move that trapped the bishop. Hecht (1788) - Muse (2393), Lichtenrader Herbst 2015 Berlin GER (1.13), 24.10.2015 begins 1.d4 Nc6 2.d5 Ne5 3.Nf3 Nxf3+ 4.exf3 Nf6 5.Bc4 g6 6.0-0 Bg7 7.c3 0-0 8.Bg5 c6 9.Re1 [9.d6 exd6 10.Qxd6 Ne4 11.fxe4 Qxg5=] 9...cxd5 10.Bxd5 e6 [10...Qa5=/+] 11.Bb3 d5 12.Nd2 Qc7 13.Qe2 b6 14.Qe3 Bb7 15.Bf4 Qc5 16.Be5 Qxe3 17.fxe3 Rfd8 18.Ba4 Rac8 19.Nb3 Nd7 20.Bxd7 Rxd7 21.f4? [21.Bxg7 Kxg7=] 21...f6 The White bishop is trapped in the center. 0-1

102 – Bryan 3.e4 Ng6 4.Nc3 e5 The White pawn push immediately makes e5 and c5 available for Black’s minor pieces. Black quickly enjoys what resembles a King Pawn Open Game after moves like 4...e5, 5...Bc5, and 6...Nf6. Black employs the thematic 15...Nxg2! to win the game between Ray Haines and Jarod Bryan. Haines (1868) - Bryan (2238), Maine Championship (2), 09.04.2016 begins 1.d4 Nc6 2.d5 Ne5 3.e4 Ng6 [3...e6 is the normal move.] 4.Nc3 [James Schuyler wrote: Black has scored well with 3...Ng6?!...but his position is highly suspect after 4.h4+/= ] 4...e5 5.Bd3 Bc5 6.Nge2 Nf6 7.00 a6 8.Ng3 0-0 9.Nce2 [9.Nf5!?] 9...d6 10.Bg5 h6 11.Bd2 Ba7 12.c4 Nh4 13.Qc2?! [13.Nc3=] 13...Re8 [13...Qd7-/+] 14.b4?! [14.Nc3=] 14...Qd7 15.Qc1? Nxg2! [A thematic move in 1...Nc6 defenses, but this is a great move here.] 16.Nf5 Nh4! 17.Bxh6 Nxf5 18.exf5 Ng4 19.Be3 e4 20.Bc2 Qxf5 21.Ng3 [21.Bxa7 Qh5-+] 21...Qh7 0-1

103 – Penrose 3.e4 e6 4.Nf3 Harry Golombek born in 1911 won the British Championship on three occasions. Golombek went on to become a noted author. Harry Golombek was one of the best chess journalists of the Twentieth Century. I enjoyed many of his books. As a player Harry Golombek was a FIDE International Master. Prior to the War he played many of the top players in the world. Golombek became famous for games he lost to grandmasters. During World War II Harry Golombek worked as a code breaker. Golombek played hundreds of games against many of the best players in the world from the 1930s to the 1970s. Certainly Harry Golombek played all the top British players, some many times. Jonathan Penrose of England was born in 1933. He became an ICCF grandmaster in correspondence. After his career Penrose was awarded the grandmaster FIDE title in 1993. Penrose was one of the most successful postal chess players in history. As a teenager he defeated both Efim D. Bogoljubow and Dr. Savielly Tartakower. In 1960 he defeated World Champion Mikhail Tal. Golombek and Penrose played each other several times in the 1950s and some later. Jonathan Penrose won the majority of their games. Jonathan Penrose adopted a sharper and more aggressive style. This Queens Knight Defence was from one of their first games. Golombek - Penrose, Hastings (5), 1950 begins 1.d4 Nc6 2.d5 Ne5 3.e4 e6 4.Nf3 [4.f4 Ng6 5.dxe6 is the most critical line.] 4...Nxf3+ 5.Qxf3 exd5 [5...Bd6!?] 6.exd5 Nf6 7.Be3 Be7 8.Nc3 0-0 9.Bd3 d6 10.h3 [10.0-0 Ng4 11.Bd4 Ne5 12.Bxe5 dxe5 13.Qe4 f5 14.Qxe5+/=] 10...Nd7 11.0-0-0 Ne5 [Or 11...Re8 12.Qe4 g6 13.Rhe1 Bf6=] 12.Qe2 c5 13.f4 Nxd3+ 14.Qxd3 f5 15.g4 Qa5 16.g5 Bd7 17.Rhe1 Rfe8 18.Kb1 b5 19.Qd2 [19.Ne2=] 19...b4 20.Ne2 Rab8 21.c4 bxc3 22.Qxc3 Qa6 23.Nc1 Ba4 24.Rd3 [24.b3 Bf8-/+]

24...Bb5 25.Rdd1 Ba4 [25...Bf8-/+] 26.Rd3 g6 27.Bd2 Bf8 28.Rxe8 Bxe8 29.b3 c4 30.Re3 cxb3 [30...Bf7-+] 31.Nxb3 [31.axb3 Bf7-/+] 31...Bg7 32.Qc1 Ba4 [32...Bb5-+] 33.Qa3 Qf1+ 34.Re1 Qd3+ 35.Kc1 0-1

104 – Bogoljubow 3.f4 Ng6 4.e4 e5 Efim Bogoljubow played the Queens Knight Defence 1.d4 Nc6 at least nine times. The first time Bogo played it was against Fritz Saemisch in 1920. In the early years Bogoljubow won every game as Black. In his later years Bogo drew with it three times. Heinz Ullrich was a strong enough chess player to face several famous masters. Expectedly Ullrich lost most of those games. The typical variation after 1.d4 Nc6 2.d5 Ne5 is 3.e4 e6 4.f4 Ng6. When White played 3.f4 Ng6 4.e4 it allowed the possibility of e5 (rather than 4…e6) which Grandmaster Bogoljubow exploited. Efim Dmitriyevich Bogoljubow was born in Russia. The German master E.J. Diemer spelled his name Bogoljubow as it is often seen in English. The Russian spelling of his name is Bogoljubov. Bogoljubow was trapped in Germany when World War I broke out. He married a German girl and moved to Germany by 1926. There he lived until his death in 1952. Alexander Alekhine won World Championship matches against Bogoljubow (1929, 1934). Ullrich - Bogoljubow, Bad Elster 1937 begins 1.d4 Nc6 2.d5 Ne5 3.f4 Ng6 4.e4 e5 [4...e6 5.dxe6] 5.f5? [5.dxe6 see 4...e6] 5...Qh4+! 6.Kd2 [6.Ke2 Qxe4+ 7.Be3 Bc5 8.Qc1 Nf4+ 9.Kf2 Nf6! 10.Bxc5 Ng4+ 11.Kg3 Nh5+ 12.Kh3 Qxf5-+ and White should be mated in six or seven moves.] 6...Qxe4 [More accurate is 6...Nf6! 7.Qf3 Nxe4+ 8.Ke2 Nf4+ 9.Bxf4 Qxf4 10.Qxf4 exf4 11.Kf3 Nf6 12.Nc3 Bb4 13.Bd3 g5 14.fxg6 hxg6-/+] 7.Bd3? [White should take the piece with 7.fxg6 Qxd5+ 8.Ke1 Qxd1+ 9.Kxd1 hxg6 10.c4= when Black has three pawns for the knight.] 7...Qxg2+ 8.Ne2 Qg5+ [8...Nh4 9.Qf1 Nf3+ 10.Kc3 Qxf1 11.Rxf1 Nxh2-+] 9.Kc3 Qh4 10.a3 [10.b3 N6e7-+] 10...N6e7 11.Kb3 [11.Ng3 b5-+] 11...e4 12.Bxe4 Qxe4 13.Nbc3 Qxf5 14.Nd4 Qg6 15.Ndb5 Kd8 16.Bf4 d6 17.Nxc7 [17.Rg1 Qf5-+] 17...Kxc7 18.Nb5+ Kd8 19.Bxd6 Nf5 20.Bc7+ Kd7 21.Rg1 Ne3 22.Qf3 [22.Qe2 Qxc2+ 23.Qxc2 Nxc2 24.Kxc2 a6-+] 22...Qxc2+ 23.Ka2 Qc4+ 24.Kb1 Qxb5 25.Qxf7+ Ne7 26.Qe6+ Kxc7 27.Rc1+ Nc6 0-1

105 – Muse 3.f4 Ng6 4.e4 e6 Chasing a horse around the pasture is fun, but you wear out before the horse does! When you chase the Queen's Knight of an International Master with your pawns then you may wear out your chances to complete your own piece development. One of the best possible first moves is 1.d4. I play it about half the time. The reply 1...Nc6 is very provocative. That is probably why Wisnewski recommends 1.d4 d5 followed by 2...Nc6. The game Vardan Hovsepyan against IM Drazen Muse began 1.d4 Nc6 2.d5 which was "the 'Nimzo' Queen's Pawn" [MCO-8]. This Advance keeps a lot of people from playing 1.d4 Nc6!? The naming of 1.d4 Nc6 is difficult. Generally it goes by Queen's Knight Defence when Black plays 2.d5, but specific lines have specific names. 2.e4 transposes to the Nimzowitsch Defence. 2.c4 d5 is the Chigorin; while 2.c4 e5 is the Mikenas. Is it wise to develop only one piece in the first nine moves? No. Clearly not. In the heat of the battle, we rationalize our choices. Let me just do this first. Then I will develop another piece next move. Except when your opponent is a master, he keeps you busy until it is too late. Here a good player loses in 17 moves. Hovsepyan (2115) - Muse (2404), Werner-Ott-Open 2015 Kreuzberg GER (3.3), 13.07.2015 begins 1.d4 Nc6 2.d5 Ne5 3.e4 e6 [Mestrovic specializes in 3…d6. Here with 3…e6 Black challenges for the center and frees up action on the dark square diagonals.] 4.f4 [4.dxe6!? If 4.Qd4 d6 5.c4 Nf6 6.h3 Be7 7.Bf4 Ng6 8.Be3 0-0 9.Nc3=] 4...Ng6 [The knight move is obvious and good, but an interesting alternative is the Full Metal Jacket line 4...exd5!? 5.fxe5 Qh4+ 6.Ke2 dxe4=] 5.Nf3 [Now 5.dxe6 fxe6 is "a dangerous position" [Avrukh]. True. But I have been known to play a lot of dangerous positions from both sides. This is not so bad as long as you know what danger to look out for and where it might come from.] 5…exd5

6.Qxd5 Nf6 7.Qd4 d5 8.exd5!? [8.Nc3!=] 8...Qxd5 9.Qe3+ Qe6 10.Nc3 [10.Qxe6+ Bxe6=/+] 10...Bb4 [10...Nxf4!=/+] 11.Bc4 Qxe3+ 12.Bxe3 0-0 13.0-0 Ng4 14.Bd4 c5 15.f5? [15.Bf2 Nxf4=/+] 15...cxd4 16.fxg6 dxc3 17.Ng5 [Or 17.Bxf7+ Kh8 18.bxc3 Bxc3-+] 17...Bc5+ 0-1

106 – Caruana 5.dxe6 fxe6 Fabiano Caruana plays the Queens Knight in a fast speed game against Levon Aronian. The Advance Variation 2.d5 is critical to the 1.d4 Nc6 opening. Caruana chose the dynamic recapture of 5...fxe6 which gains an open f-file. White gradually obtained the advantage of the first move. Aronian outplayed one of the best players in the world at a very quick pace. Nice win for White. Aronian (2767) - Caruana (2822), chess.com Speed 1m+1spm 2017 chess.com INT (24), 24.07.2018 begins 1.d4 Nc6 2.d5 Ne5 3.f4 Ng6 4.e4 e6 5.dxe6 fxe6!? 6.Nf3 Bc5 [6...d5!? 7.g3 Bc5 8.Qe2 Qe7 9.Nc3 Nf6=] 7.Nc3 Nf6 [7...d5 8.exd5 exd5 9.Qxd5+/=] 8.e5 Ng4 9.Ne4 Bb6 10.c4 Qe7 11.Qc2 Be3 12.g3 0-0 13.Bh3 Bxc1 14.Rxc1 Nh6 15.0-0 b6 16.Neg5 [16.c5+/-] 16...Bb7 [16...Nf5 17.Bxf5 exf5 18.c5+/=] 17.Nxh7 Bxf3 [17...Nxf4 18.gxf4 Rxf4 19.Qg6+-] 18.Qxg6 Qc5+ [18...Bh5 19.Qc2+-] 19.Rf2 Qe3 [19...Bh5 20.Qd3+-] 20.Rc3 Qe1+ 21.Rf1 Qe2 [21...Qe4 22.Nxf8 Kxf8 23.Qxe4 Bxe4 24.Bg2+-] 22.Rcxf3 1-0

107 – Stevic 5.dxe6 dxe6 This wild Queens Knight Defence 1.d4 Nc6 began with the solid 5...dxe6 and the swap of queens. Don’t let that fool you. The rest of Black’s army was very effective when well-coordinated. The players battled it out with pieces flying and disappearing. A lowly Black pawn made it to f2. White could not stop the pawn from queening without getting mated in Sinisa Drazic vs Hrvoje Stevic. Drazic (2430) - Stevic (2600), 24th TCh-CRO Div 1a 2015 Bol CRO (2.31), 04.10.2015 begins 1.d4 Nc6 2.d5 Ne5 3.f4 Ng6 4.e4 e6 5.dxe6 dxe6 6.Qxd8+ Kxd8 7.Nf3 Bc5 8.Nc3 [8.Bd3 Bd7 9.Nc3 Nh6 10.e5 Bc6=] 8...Bd7 9.Bd2 f6 10.0-0-0 Kc8 11.Bc4 N8e7 12.Rhe1 [12.e5 fxe5 13.fxe5+/=] 12...a6 13.g3 b5 14.Bf1 e5 15.Bg2 Bd6 16.a3 exf4 17.e5 fxe5 18.Nxe5 Bxe5 19.Rxe5 [19.Bxa8 fxg3 20.hxg3 Bg4 21.Rxe5 Nxe5=] 19...Nxe5 20.Bxa8 f3 21.Nd5 N7g6 22.Ba5 [22.h4 Bh3-/+] 22...f2 23.Bxc7

[23.Rf1 Rf8-+] 23...Bh3 24.Bxe5 Nxe5 25.Ne3 Ng4 26.Nxg4 Bxg4 27.Bf3 [27.Rf1 Rf8-+] 27...Bxf3 28.Rf1 Rd8 0-1

108 – Baishanski 6.Qxd8+ I played 40 chess games at the Borders bookstore in Orlando, Florida. Most of my opponents were mid-level to weaker. My score of +35 -1 =4 shows that the players were not superstars. During 2003-2005, Milos Baishanski was a USCF expert rated 2050. Usually Milos Baishanski was rated in the 2100s, but he has been rated as a master over 2200. I was an expert rated 2010 at the time. Milos Baishanski is a notable chess coach of successful players. We only played this one skittles game. We had watched each other play other players at Borders from time to time. Milos was roughly my age, i.e. not a young rising star. Our better playing days were behind us, but we could still play a great game against anyone from time to time. Baishanski - Sawyer, Orlando, FL, 15.01.2004 begins 1.d4 Nc6!? [Black dares White to advance the d-pawn.] 2.d5! [Most players are hesitant to play this move. This advance causes Black the most concern if White follows it up accurately.] 2...Ne5 3.f4 Ng6 4.e4 e6 5.dxe6 dxe6 [5...fxe6!? is more unbalanced. In that line Black sometimes plays Ng8-h6.] 6.Qxd8+ Kxd8 [Black cannot castle, but the queens are off the board.] 7.Nc3 [Boris Avrukh recommends 7.Nf3 Bc5 and tries to prove that White has more than a tiny edge.] 7...Bb4 [7...Bc5!?] 8.Nge2 Nf6 9.a3 Bc5 10.h3 Ke7 [10...Bd7!=] 11.g3 Rd8 [Even though Black could not castle, one could argue that Black is ahead in development.] 12.Bg2 c6? [Ouch. A serious mistake. White can force the exchange of Black's active dark squared bishop with advantage. 12...a5 13.Bd2 e5=] 13.Bd2 [13.Na4! Bb6 14.Nxb6 axb6 15.Be3 c5 16.e5 Nd5 17.Bd2+/-] 13...Kf8 [A waste of time. 13...e5!=] 14.0-0-0 Bd7 15.e5 Nd5 16.Ne4 [Now White stands better.] 16...Be3 17.c4 Bxd2+ 18.Kxd2 Nde7 19.Ke3 Be8 20.h4 Nf5+ 21.Kf2 Ke7?! [Occupying a square a knight could use.] 22.h5 Nf8 23.Bf3 Rxd1 24.Rxd1 Rd8 25.Rxd8 Kxd8 26.c5 Nd7 27.b4 b6 28.Bg4?! [We stopped playing here. White should have played 28.g4 Ne7 29.Nd4+- with a large positional edge to White in view of the weak queenside targets and the trapped bishop on e8.] 28...f6+/= [This was what I intended to play but the Borders store closed. Therefore play ceased. White has a slightly better game with due to

a better bishop. Material is even. There has not been a breakthrough. The game is still very much alive.] 1/2-1/2

Chigorin – 2.c4 d5 The Chigorin Defence is a Queen’s Gambit Declined variation. After 1.d4 d5 2.c4 Black does not accept the gambit by 2…dxc4 but rather declines the offer. Mikhail Chigorin born in 1850 used to play 2…Nc6 as a fighting defence. It is still playable today.

109 – Kohut 3.Bf4 dxc4 4.Nf3 I played Gregory Kohut in Ron's Postal Chess Club (RPCC). In the late 1970s I played standard 1.d4 and 2.c4 openings. My opponent Kohut surprised me with 2...Nc6, which is the Chigorin Defence. I decided to go my own way with the natural bishop development 3.Bf4!? White does better to bring out a knight. I headed toward original territory. The game took on the character of a Queen's Gambit Accepted after he played 3...dxc4. I did not recapture until 15.Bxc4. By that time I was up a b-pawn. Even though my play was original, it was not very strong. Black missed better moves in the opening such as 6...f6 or 8...Nf6. I discovered Gregory Kohut had a brilliant middlegame defense available that we both missed in 18...Bb4! This would have given him much better chances. Instead he fianchettoed his queenside bishop. When Black lost material, he threw in the towel. Sawyer - Kohut, corr RPCC 1977 begins 1.d4 d5 2.c4 Nc6 3.Bf4!? [Theory recommends 3.Nc3, 3.Nf3 or 3.cxd5] 3...dxc4 [3...Nf6=] 4.Nf3 Bg4 5.Ne5 [5.d5+/=] 5...Nxe5 6.Bxe5 Bd7 [6...f6 7.Bg3 e5 8.Qa4+ c6 9.dxe5 b5 10.Qc2 fxe5=/+] 7.a4 c6 8.d5? [8.e3+/=] 8...b5? [The correct way to keep an extra Black pawn is 8...Nf6 9.dxc6 Bxc6-/+] 9.dxc6 Bxc6 10.Qxd8+ Kxd8 11.axb5 Bxb5 12.Nc3 Bc6 13.e4 f6 14.Bd4 e6?! [14...e5 15.Be3+/=] 15.Bxc4 Ke7 16.Rxa7+?! [16.0-0! a5 17.Bc5+ Kf7 18.Bxf8 Kxf8 19.Bxe6+- and White has an extra pawn with a much better position.] 16...Rxa7 17.Bxa7 Kf7 18.Bb5 Bb7? [Amazingly Black can regain a piece with 18...Bb4! 19.Bxc6 Ne7 20.Bb7 Rd8 21.Ke2 Rd7 22.Ra1 Rxb7 although White still has one extra pawn. 23.Be3+/=] 19.Ke2 Bb4 20.Rd1 Ne7 21.Rd7 Bc8 22.Rd4 Bxc3 23.bxc3 Bb7? [This drops a piece. Better is

23...e5 24.Rc4 Ke6 25.Bc5 Bd7 26.Bxd7+ Kxd7 27.Bxe7 Kxe7 28.Rc7+ Ke6 29.Rxg7+/- when White is up two pawns in a rook ending.] 24.Rd7 Bxe4 25.Bc5 Bxg2 26.Rxe7+ Kg6 27.Rxe6 Rc8 1-0

110 – Fitter 3.cxd5 Qxd5 4.Nf3 Playing chess vs a high rated computer is a tall challenge. If you study openings after your games, you will discover teachable moments. Back in 1998 I was still playing strong blitz chess. I decided to experiment (for me) with the Chigorin Defence. This variation is part of the Queen's Gambit Declined where after 1.d4 d5 2.c4 Black does not take 2...dxc4. The Chigorin continues 2...Nc6. This hinders the push of Black's c-pawn, but it prepares the push of Black's e-pawn. Upon re-examination I found that I missed the move 7...e4! That would have made my position fully playable. Alas the 3014 rated "Fitter" was more fitter than I. In my adult years I have been more fatter than fitter. God has a sense of humor. I led a church small group. We were doing the Rick Warren series entitled "Transformed: How God Changes Us". The weekly topics cover spiritual health, physical health, mental health, emotional health, relational health, financial health and vocational health. I scheduled to write about this "Fitter" game long ago. When I got to it, I discovered that the topic of the week was Physical Health. So I set a goal in 2014. I gave myself 60 days to lose 10 pounds. How did I do? Did my chess exercises help? I did thousands of chess exercises. They helped my play but not my weight. So, I would have to do some physical exercise. Ugh!?! No way. Alas, I did not lose weight for over another year, not until after I retired. Fitter (3014) - Sawyer (2409), ICC 5 0 Internet Chess Club, 04.12.1998 begins 1.d4 d5 2.c4 Nc6 3.cxd5 Qxd5 4.Nf3 e5 5.Nc3 Bb4 6.Bd2 Bxc3 7.Bxc3 exd4?! [7...e4!=] 8.Nxd4 Nxd4 [8...Nf6 9.Nxc6 Qxc6 10.Rc1 Qe6+/=] 9.Qxd4 Qxd4 10.Bxd4 f6 11.e4 Be6 12.Bb5+ Bd7 13.Bc4 Ne7

14.e5 Nc6?! [14...f5 15.e6 Bc6 16.0-0-0+/-] 15.exf6 Nxd4? 16.fxg7 0-0-0 17.gxh8Q Rxh8 18.0-0-0 Nc6 19.Rhe1 Black resigns 1-0

111 – Mellado Trivino 3.cxd5 International Master Juan Mellado Trivino specializes in offbeat lesser known openings. I know him from his Blackmar-Diemer Gambit games where he plays White. As Black the master from Andorra chose the Chigorin Defence. His opponent as White was Roland Albets Armengol of Spain. White chose the Exchange Variation of the Chigorin with 3.cxd5. Play is wide open and basically equal, however the minor pieces are unbalanced. White has bishops and Black has knights. Albets Armengol (2147) - Mellado Trivino (2450), I Cerrado Ciutat De Manresa ESP (1.5), 19.10.2012 begins 1.d4 d5 2.c4 Nc6 3.cxd5 Qxd5 4.e3 e5 5.Nc3 Bb4 6.Bd2 Bxc3 7.Bxc3 [7.bxc3 Nf6 8.c4 Qd6 9.d5 Ne7=] 7...exd4 [7...e4!?=] 8.Ne2 Bg4 [8...Nf6 9.Nxd4 0-0 10.Nb5 (10.Nxc6 Qxc6 11.Rc1+/=) 10...Bg4 11.Nxc7 (11.Qxd5 Nxd5 12.f3 Be6=) 11...Qxd1+ 12.Rxd1 Rac8 13.f3 Rxc7 14.Bxf6 gxf6 15.fxg4 Ne5=; 8...Nge7 9.Nxd4 Nxd4 10.Qxd4 Qxd4 11.Bxd4 0-0=] 9.f3 Bxf3 [9...0-0-0 10.Nxd4 Be6 11.Qa4 Nge7 12.Nxc6 Nxc6 13.Bb5+/=] 10.gxf3 Qxf3 11.Nxd4 [11.Bxd4! Nxd4 (11...0-0-0 12.Rg1 Nge7 13.Bg2+/-) 12.Qxd4 Qxh1 13.Qxg7 0-0-0 14.Qxh8 Qxh2 15.Qg7 Qh4+ 16.Qg3 Qb4+ 17.Kf2+/= when White would have a bishop for two pawns in a wide open position.] 11...Qxh1 12.Nxc6 Nf6 13.Bxf6 [13.Ne5 Qe4 14.Qf3 Qxf3 15.Nxf3 0-0-0=; 13.Na5 Qe4 14.Qe2 Qh4+ 15.Qf2 Qxf2+ 16.Kxf2 Ne4+ 17.Kf3 Nxc3 18.bxc3 Rb8=] 13...gxf6 14.Nd4 Qxh2 [14...0-0-0 15.Qg4+ Kb8 16.Qf3 Qxf3 17.Nxf3 Rhe8=] 15.Qa4+ c6 16.0-0-0 Qe5 17.Qb3 [17.Kb1 Rd8 18.Qb3 Qe7=] 17...0-0-0 18.Bh3+ Kc7 19.Qxf7+ Kb8 20.Qb3 [20.Rd3 Qd5=] 20...Rd6 [20...Ka8=/+] 21.Rg1 [21.Bg2=] 21...Re8 22.Rg8 a6 23.Bg2 [23.Rxe8+ Qxe8=/+] 23...Rxg8 24.Qxg8+ Ka7 25.Qb3 Rxd4 26.exd4 Qg5+ 27.Kb1 Qxg2 28.Qe3 Qg6+ 29.Ka1 Qg5 0-1

112 – Sjugirov 3.cxd5 Qxd5 4.e3 Queens Gambit Chigorin Defence leads to unbalanced opening positions with the pawn structure and the minor pieces. Here White exchanged on d5 and later occupied that square with the pawn push 9.d5. Black's capture 14...Nxd5 turned out to be premature based on the tactics that followed in the game Sanan Sjugirov vs Vasilios Kotronias. Sjugirov (2652) - Kotronias (2529), Aeroflot Open A 2018 Moscow RUS (1.14), 20.02.2018 begins1.d4 d5 2.c4 Nc6 3.cxd5 Qxd5 4.e3 e5 5.Nc3 Bb4 6.a3 [6.Bd2 Bxc3 7.Bxc3 exd4 8.Ne2 Nf6 9.Nxd4+/=] 6...Bxc3+ 7.bxc3 Nf6 8.c4 Qd8 [8...Qd6 9.d5 Nb8 10.Ne2 0-0 11.Nc3+/=] 9.d5 Ne7 [9...Nb8 10.Ne2 0-0 11.Nc3 Nbd7 12.Bd3 Nc5 13.Bc2 c6=] 10.Bb2 c6 11.Bxe5 Ne4 12.Nf3 [12.Qb3+/=] 12...Qa5+ 13.Nd2 cxd5 14.cxd5 Nxd5? [Black must protect g7. 14...0-0!= ] 15.Bxg7 Rg8 16.Bd4 Bf5 [16...Bd7 17.f3+/-] 17.f3 Ndc3 [17...Nc5 18.Kf2+-] 18.Qc1 Rc8 [18...Nb5 19.fxe4 Nxd4 20.exd4 Bxe4 21.Qc5+-] 19.fxe4 Bxe4 [19...Nxe4 20.Qb2+-] 20.Qb2 Rxg2 [20...Ke7 21.Nc4 Rxc4 22.Bxc4 Nd5+ 23.Qd2+-] 21.Bxg2 Bxg2 22.Rg1 1-0

113 – Kveinys 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.cxd5 Nxd5 Black turned this Queens Gambit Chigorin Defence into an inferior Gruenfeld Defence variation after 5...g6. More accurate and promising was 5...e5! White built up a strong center and attacked kingside. Black tried to hold off the attack with 10...f5 and 13...h5. White got a winning attack in the game Aloyzas Kveinys vs Vaishali Rameshbabu. Kveinys (2519) - Vaishali (2310), 4th ad Gredine Open 2018 Ortisei ITA (3.8), 18.06.2018 begins 1.d4 d5 2.c4 Nc6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.cxd5 Nxd5 5.Nf3 [5.e4 Nxc3 6.bxc3 e5 7.d5 Na5=] 5...g6 [5...e5! 6.dxe5 Bb4 7.Bd2 Nxc3 8.bxc3 Ba5=] 6.e4 Nxc3 7.bxc3 Bg7 8.Be2 0-0 9.Bg5 [Or 9.0-0+/=] 9...Na5 10.Qd2 f5 11.e5 Be6 12.h4 Nc4 13.Qf4 h5 14.Bh6 Bd5 15.Rh3 Bf7 [15...Qe8 16.Rg3 a5 17.Bxg7 Kxg7 18.Kf1+/-] 16.Rg3 Qd5 17.Bxg7 Kxg7

18.Ng5 Rh8 19.e6 [After 19.e6 Bxe6 20.Bxc4 Qxc4 21.Qe5+ Kh6 22.Nxe6+-] 1-0

114 – ruval 3.Nc3 dxc4 4.e3 e5 White played 3.Nc3. After 3...dxc4, Larry Kaufman recommends 4.d5 in "The Kaufman Repertoire for Black and White". Another author GM Lar Schandorff recommends 4.Nf3 Nf6 5.Bg5 in his "Playing the Queen's Gambit". Both are sharp and forcing lines. White played 4.e3. Valery Bronzik calls this a "not very ambitious continuation" in his book "The Chigorin Defence". Then Bronzik gives a game with 4...e5 5.Nf3 exd4 6.exd4. Black in my game played 6...Nxd4. This allowed me to exchange knights and ponder a possible ending vs the isolated d-pawn. When White delayed castling, I found a combination. ruval - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 13.07.2012 begins 1.d4 Nc6 2.c4 d5 3.Nc3 dxc4 4.e3 e5 5.Nf3 exd4 6.Nxd4 Nxd4 7.exd4 Nf6 8.Bxc4 Bd6 9.Bg5 [9.0-0] 9...0-0 10.Qd2? [Preparing to castle queenside. Clearly White should have castled kingside immediately. 10.0-0 h6=] 10...Re8+ 11.Ne2? [11.Be3 Ng4 12.0-0-0 c6=/+ Black stands better, but it is still a game.] 11...a5 [Threat: 12...Bb4] 12.0-0? [Two moves too late. Castling queenside is not quite so bad after 12.0-0-0 a4-/+] 12...Ne4! [Take me!] 13.Bxd8 Nxd2 14.Bxc7 Nxc4 15.Bxd6 Nxd6 16.Rac1? Rxe2 White resigns down two pieces. 0-1

115 – Kharitonov 3.Nc3 dxc4 4.Nf3 Queens Gambit Chigorin Defence 1.d4 d5 2.c4 Nc6 3.Nc3 dxc4 resembles Queens Gambit Accepted. Black doubled the f-pawns with 4...Bg4 and 5...Bxf3. White opened the center when Black's king remained in the center. White forced mate after 22.Qxd5+ in the game between Alexandr Kharitonov and Maarten Post. Kharitonov (2566) - Post (1820), La Palma Island Open 2018 Santa Cruz de La Palma ESP (1.2), 10.08.2018 begins 1.d4 d5 2.c4 Nc6 3.Nc3 dxc4 4.Nf3 Bg4 [4...Nf6 5.e4 Bg4 6.Be3 e6 7.Bxc4 Bb4 8.Qc2 0-0=] 5.d5 Bxf3 [5...Nb8 6.Ne5+/-] 6.exf3 Ne5 7.Bf4 Nd3+ 8.Bxd3 cxd3 9.0-0 a6 10.Qb3 Rb8 11.Rad1 Nf6 12.Rxd3 Nd7 13.Re3 b5 14.Ne4 Rb6 15.Rc1 e5 16.dxe6 Rxe6 17.Bxc7 Qc8 [17...Nc5 18.Rxc5 Bxc5 19.Bxd8 Bxe3

20.fxe3+-] 18.Rec3 [18.Nd6+ Bxd6 19.Rxe6+ fxe6 20.Qxe6+ Be7 21.Re1+-] 18...Qb7 [18...Rxe4 19.fxe4+-] 19.Ba5 [19.Ng5 Be7 20.Nxe6 fxe6 21.Qxe6+-] 19...Nb6 20.Bxb6 Qxb6 21.Rc8+ Kd7 22.Qd5+ [If 22...Bd6 23.Nxd6 Rxd6 24.Qxf7 mate]1-0

116 – Keres 3.Nf3 e5 4.Nxe5 Grandmaster Paul Keres was one a handful of players during the Twentieth Century who was good enough to be World Champion but never made it. Some others I would include in that group are Rubinstein, Nimzowitsch, Bronstein and Korchnoi. All were great. Paul Keres had a long and very successful career. Keres played every world champion from Capablanca to Karpov. When he was not winning, he usually held his own. Paul Keres totaled about 97 drawn games against Smyslov, Tal, Petrosian and Spassky. Feliks Kibbermann born in 1902 was a master from Estonia. He faced his fellow countryman Paul Keres maybe 10 times over a 20 year period from the 1930s to the 1950s. In 1935 both Keres and Kibbermann represented Estonia in the Warsaw Olympiad. Early in his career Paul Keres chose the sharpest lines he could find. It worked well. Experience has shown that the fastest way to make early progress is to learn tactics. Keres won here with what began as a Queens Knight Defence after 1.d4 Nc6. Black transposed to a wild gambit in the Chigorin 2.c4 Nc6 3.Nf3 e5!? Kibbermann - Keres, Match Tallinn (Estonia), 1935 begins 1.d4 Nc6 2.Nf3 d5 3.c4 e5!? 4.Nxe5 [4.dxe5 Nge7!? 5.cxd5 Qxd5 6.Qxd5 Nxd5 7.a3+/= and Black has an extra queenside pawn to compensate for White's extra doubled e-pawns on the kingside.] 4...Nxe5 5.dxe5 d4 [Another try is 5...dxc4 6.Qxd8+ Kxd8 7.e4 Be6 8.f4 g6 9.Be3+/=] 6.e4?! [This aggressive move allows Black to equalize. 6.g3 Ne7 7.Bg2 Nc6 8.f4+/=] 6...Ne7 7.Bd3 [7.f4 Nc6=] 7...Ng6!? [7...Nc6 8.f4 Qh4+ 9.g3 Qh3=] 8.f4 Bb4+ 9.Bd2? [9.Kf2 0-0 10.a3 Be7 11.Rf1+/=] 9...Nxf4 10.Bxb4? [10.Qf3 Qh4+ 11.g3 Nxd3+ 12.Qxd3 Qe7-/+] 10...Nxg2+! 11.Kf2 Qh4+ 12.Kg1 [The point of the knight sacrifice is 12.Kxg2 Qh3+ 13.Kf2 Qe3+ 14.Kg2 Bh3#] 12...Qg5 13.Qf3 Ne1+ 14.Qg3 Qxg3+ 15.hxg3 Nxd3 16.Ba3 Nxe5 [The opening is over. Black is up two pawns.] 17.Nd2 Be6 18.b3 a5 19.Kg2 Bg4 20.Rhf1 f6 21.Rh1 Kd7 22.Bc5 Nc6 23.Nf3 b6 24.Ba3 Rae8 25.Rhe1 Bxf3+

26.Kxf3 h5 27.Re2 [27.c5 Ne5+ 28.Kg2 bxc5 29.Bxc5 Nd3-+] 27...h4 28.c5 Ne5+ 29.Kg2 hxg3 30.Kxg3 Rh5 31.cxb6 [Or 31.Rd1 Reh8 32.Rxd4+ Ke6 33.cxb6 Rg5+ 34.Kf2 Rh2+ 35.Kf1 Rh1+ 36.Kf2 Rgg1-+] 31...Rg5+ 32.Kf2 Rh8 0-1

117 – Cramling vs Short 3.Nf3 Bg4 GM Pia Cramling played Nigel Short in Queens Knight Defence that became a Chigorin Defence. The basic opening repertoire of Grandmaster Nigel Short is not limited to the most popular lines. Short plays a wide variety of attacking schemes. In 1992 Pia Cramling of Sweden became only the third female to earn the grandmaster title from actual play. The year before in 1991 Susan Polgar and her youngest sister Judit Polgar earned the grandmaster title. Grandmaster titles were awarded to both Nona Gaprindashvili and Maia Chiburdanidze. These women proved themselves over many years with ratings around 2500. I have enjoyed watching the career of Pia Cramling for over 30 years. I found her to be an attractive lady who is a strong chess player. Pia Cramling regularly defeats men and women over the board. She married Grandmaster Juan Manuel Bellon Lopez. Also her older brother Dan Cramling is an International Master. GM Pia Cramling has remained an active player at an age when many of us retire from most competition. I’m sure she will slow down eventually. I wish her well. Nigel Short likes to challenge his opponents with bold opening play. Sometimes like here GM Short chooses 1.d4 Nc6. Cramling (2516) - Short (2658), Gibraltar Masters Caleta ENG (2.9), 26.01.2011 begins 1.d4 Nc6 2.Nf3 d5 3.c4 Bg4 4.Nc3 e6 5.cxd5 exd5 6.Bf4 [6.Qb3!? Nf6 7.Bg5 Be7 8.e3 Na5 9.Qa4+ c6 10.Ne5 Be6 11.Be2=] 6...Bd6 7.Bg3 Nge7 8.e3 Qd7 9.Be2 0-0 10.0-0 Bxg3 11.hxg3 Bxf3 12.gxf3 Nd8 13.f4 Ne6 14.Rc1 c6 15.Kg2 g6 16.Bd3 Ng7 17.Ne2 Rae8 18.Ng1 Nef5 19.Re1 Re7 20.Nf3 f6 21.b4 a6 22.a4 Nd6 23.Qb3 b5 24.axb5 axb5 25.e4 Nc4 26.e5 Ne6 27.Bf1 f5 28.Ra1 h6 29.Bd3 g5 30.Rh1 gxf4 31.Rxh6 fxg3 32.Rah1 Nf4+ 33.Kg1 Rg7 34.Rh8+ [34.Bxc4 dxc4 35.Qe3 Ne6 36.R1h5=] 34...Kf7 35.R8h7 [35.R8h4 Nxd3 36.Qxd3

Ra8 37.Rh7 gxf2+ 38.Kxf2 Ra2+ 39.Kf1 Ra1+ 40.Kf2 Rxh1 41.Rxh1=] 35...gxf2+ [35...Ke8-+] 36.Kxf2 Ke8 37.Ng5 [37.Rxg7 Qxg7 38.Bf1 Qa7-/+] 37...Qa7 38.Bxc4 [38.Qc3 Qa2+ 39.Bc2 Rxg5-+] 38...bxc4 39.Rxg7 Qxd4+ 40.Qe3 Qb2+ 41.Kf1 Qg2+ 42.Ke1 Nd3+ 43.Kd1 Qxh1+ 44.Kc2 d4 0-1

Mikenas – 2.c4 e5 When White adopts the standard queen pawn 1.d4 Nc6 2.c4, Black can reply with 2…e5. Kevitz and Trajkovic played this too.

118 – Mikenas 3.e3 exd4 Developing your knights quickly in a chess game is good, but if you only move your knights, that is risky, especially as Black. Years ago Georgi Orlov wrote a book entitled "Black Knights Tango" covering 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 Nc6 with a 2nd edition in 1998. This is often called the Two Knights Tango. Since I often play 1...Nc6 this opening is familiar to me, but I prefer other lines. Gideon Stahlberg was a Swedish grandmaster born in 1908. He was noted for playing 400 games in 36 hours at Buenos Aires. Vladas Mikenas of Lithuania was born in 1910. Mikenas became an International Master with a long and illustrious chess career. Most of opening theoretical work was in the Alekhine Defence. As White he was a 1.d4 player, but he dabbled in 1.e4 and 1.c4. Mikenas served as a chief arbiter of the World Championship in 1985 match between Anatoly Karpov and Gary Kasparov. I have found 15 games were Vladas Mikenas played the Queens Knight Defence 1…Nc6. Most were after 1.d4, but five were after 1.e4 and one after 1.c4. Mikenas lost almost all of them. Some of these opponents were grandmasters at the top of their game like Reshevsky and Fine. Against Keres he both lost one and drew one. This game vs Stahlberg was one of his wins with 1…Nc6. Stahlberg - Mikenas, Muenchen ol (7), 1936 begins 1.d4 Nc6 2.c4 e5 [Two Knights Tango resembles a Nimzo-Indian Defence if 2…Nc6 3.Nf3 e6 4.Nc3 Bb4] 3.e3 exd4 4.exd4 d5 5.Nf3 Bg4 6.Be2 dxc4 7.0-0 Bd6 8.Bxc4 Qf6 9.Qe1+ Kf8 10.Ng5 Nxd4 11.Nc3 [11.Qe4 Be2 12.Bxe2 Re8 13.Nxh7+ Rxh7 14.Qxh7 Nxe2+ 15.Kh1 Nxc1 16.Nc3 Bf4=] 11...h6

12.Nce4 hxg5 13.f4 Qh6 [13...Qe7-+] 14.h3 Nf3+ 15.Rxf3 Bxf3 16.fxg5 Qh5 17.Nxd6 cxd6 18.Bf4 Re8 [18...Ne7!-+] 19.Bxd6+ Ne7 20.Qf1 [20.Qe3 Qh4 21.Bb5 Bc6=/+] 20...Qh4 21.Rd1 Bh5 22.Kh2 Qxg5 23.Re1 Qf6 [23...Qd2!-+] 24.Qxf6 gxf6 25.Bb5 Rc8 26.Rxe7 Kg7 27.Rxb7 Rhd8 28.Bf4 Rc2 29.Ba4 Rc4 0-1

119 – Roquentin 4.e4 f5 The Mikenas Variation (or Lithuanian Variation) is 1.d4 Nc6 2.c4 e5. Players may push d5 to attack the knight and grab space. With 3.d5 Nce7 we have moves that resemble the eighth moves in a King’s Indian Defence such as 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.e4 d6 5.Nf3 0-0 6.Be2 e5 7.0-0 Nc6 8.d5 Ne7. In this game I turned it into a sort of King's Indian Defence with 8...g6. I used the open f-file, e-file and long dark diagonal. My opponent Roquentin attacked aggressively, but my pieces were better placed and my king safer. The tactics flowed in my direction. Roquentin (2150) - Sawyer (2013), ICC 3 0 u Internet Chess Club, 31.05.2013 begins 1.c4 Nc6 2.d4 e5 3.d5 Nce7 4.e4 f5 [4...Ng6 5.Nc3 Nf6 is much more popular.] 5.Nc3 Nf6 6.exf5 Nxf5 7.Nf3 d6 8.Bd3 g6 9.Bg5 [9.0-0+/= is a good move, but White wants more.] 9...Bg7 10.Qc2 0-0 11.g4? [This is too much too soon. White should either prepare g4 with h3 or play 11.0-0] 11...Nd4 12.Nxd4 exd4 13.Ne4 Bxg4 14.h3 [14.Be2 Qd7 15.Bxf6 Bxf6 16.0-0-0 Rae8-/+] 14...Bf3 15.Rg1 Qe8!? 16.Kf1 [At first it looks like White could survive a bishops of opposite color position after 16.Bxf6 Bxf6 17.Kd2 Bxe4 18.Bxe4 Bh4 19.f3 but 19...Rxf3! 20.Bxf3 Qe3+ leads to 21.Kd1 Qxg1+ 22.Ke2 Qf2+ and mate next move.] 16...Bxe4 [Even stronger is 16...Nxe4!-+] 17.Re1 Bxd3+ 18.Qxd3 Qd7 19.Rg3 Rae8 20.Qxd4 [If 20.Rxe8 Rxe8 21.Rf3 Ne4-+ Black is up a knight and pawn with an attack.] 20...Rxe1+ 21.Kxe1 Re8+ 22.Kf1 Ne4 White resigns 0-1

120 – Harikrishna 4.Nc3 Ng6 5.a3 Queens Knight 1.d4 Nc6 2.c4 e5 indicates Black plans to attack kingside and White on the queenside. Black played the thematic 14...Nxg2+ to win in Nino Batsiashvili vs Pentala Harikrishna. Batsiashvili (2498) - Harikrishna (2743), Qatar Masters Open 2015 Doha QAT (2.24), 21.12.2015 begins 1.d4 Nc6 2.c4 e5 3.d5 Nce7 4.Nc3 Ng6 5.a3 f5 6.e4 fxe4 7.Nxe4 Nf6 8.Bg5 d6 9.Bd3 Be7 10.Bxf6 gxf6 11.Ng3 Nf4 12.Bf5 [12.Be4 h5=] 12...Bxf5 13.Nxf5 Qd7 14.Nxe7 [14.g4 h5=] 14...Nxg2+ 15.Kf1 Nf4 16.Rc1 [16.Qf3 Qxe7-/+] 16...Kxe7 17.Rc3 Rag8

18.Ne2 Nxe2 19.Qxe2 h5 20.Ke1 Qf5 21.Kd2 Rg4 22.Kc1 Rhg8 23.Rf1 b6 24.h3 [24.Rf3 Qe4 25.Qxe4 Rxe4-+] 24...Rf4 25.Qe3 [25.Qc2 Qxc2+ 26.Kxc2 Rg2-+] 25...Rg2 26.Rc2 Rf3 27.Qh6 Qg5+ 0-1

121 – Marholev 4.Nc3 Ng6 5.a3 You need good open lines to attack. Advanced pawns toward your opponent's king are good, but you really need open lines for them to be useful. In his book “The Dark Knight System” author James Schuyler in 2013 noted that 3…Nce7 was played 90% of the time. Schuyler recommended that Black play 3...Bb4+! He provided eight pages of reasonable analysis to support his viewpoint. I think Schuyler’s book has had an effect. In 2016 my database shows that more often than before Black has played 3…Bb4+! The popular 3…Nce7 has dropped to “only” 85%. It seems that both moves are good. If Black does not want to get his bishop trapped behind his pawns, he should play 3…Bb4+! In the Mikenas a good White strategy is to push the h-pawn early with h4 and h5 to attack the Ng6 and maybe h6. But there should be more than just pushing a pawn to h6. The Queen's Knight Defence game between Emil Stefanov and Dimitar Marholev began 1.d4 Nc6 2.c4 e5 3.d5 Nce7 4.Nc3 Nc6. White continued with 5.a3 Nf6 6.h4 Be7 7.h5 Nf8 8.h6. This only looks aggressive. International Master Marholev calmly relocated his minor pieces behind closed lines. The big problem was the safety of White's king, not Black's king. Later the opened c-file favored Black in all the tactics that mattered. Stefanov (2088) - Marholev (2317), Int ch-Central SRB Op A Paracin SRB (5.21), 07.07.2015 begins 1.d4 Nc6 2.c4 e5 3.d5 Nce7 4.Nc3 Ng6 5.a3 Nf6 6.h4 Be7 7.h5 Nf8 8.h6 g6 9.Nf3 [9.Qa4!?+/=] 9...Ng4 10.g3 d6 11.Bh3 a6 12.e4 Bd7 13.Nd2 Nf6 14.Bxd7+ N8xd7 15.b4 0-0 16.Qe2 c6 17.Bb2 Rc8 18.Nb3 cxd5 19.cxd5 Nb6 20.Na5 Qd7 21.f3? [21.Rc1

Rc7=/+] 21...Na4 [21...Nh5-/+] 22.Nxa4 Qxa4 23.g4 Bd8 [23...Rc2-+] 24.Nc4 b5 25.Ne3 Bb6 26.Rh2 Qb3 27.Nd1 Rc4 28.Rc1 Rfc8 29.Rxc4 Rxc4 30.Rg2 a5 31.bxa5 Bxa5+ 32.Kf1 Bb6 33.Ke1 Bc5 [33...Nd7-+] 34.Kf1 Nd7 35.Ke1 Nb6 36.Kf1? Na4 37.Ke1 Bb6 38.g5 Ba5+ 39.Kf1 Nxb2 40.Nxb2 Rc1+ 0-1

122 – Dunst 4.e4 Ng6 5.Bd3 In the Twentieth Century New York was the hub to chess in the United States. Marshall, Reinfeld, Fine, Reshevsky, and Fischer all played a significant amount of chess in the New York area. If you can be famous in New York you can be famous anywhere. The city that never sleeps has a culture all its own. The attitudes and money in New York are different from the rest of the USA. Both the incomes and expenses in New York are approximately double what they are in most of the rest of America. Most cities have a significant chess scene with local masters, but New York also had books and magazine publications in the days before the Internet. I think Ted Dunst wrote for Chess Review. Theodore Alexander Dunst (1907-1985) was a New York master famous for playing offbeat or less popular opening lines. Among those openings were both 1.Nc3 as White and 1…Nc6 as Black. I have only a small selection of his games, less than two dozen. About have the time Dunst played 1.Nc3 or 1…Nc6 as Black. The rest of his games were in a variety of other openings. I have seen only a few games by W. Radspinner. Ted Dunst played his favorite Queens Knight Defence this time with 1.d4 Nc6. Radspinner - Dunst, New York 1957 begins 1.d4 Nc6 2.c4 e5 3.d5 Nce7 4.e4 [4.Nc3 Ng6 5.Nf3 Bb4 6.Bd2 a5 7.e3 d6=] 4...Ng6 5.Bd3 [5.Be3 Bb4+ 6.Nd2 Nf6 7.Bd3 b6=] 5...Bc5 6.Nf3 d6 7.Be3 [7.0-0 a5 8.Bg5!?=] 7...Bxe3 8.fxe3 Nh6 9.Qe2 0-0 10.h3 f5 11.exf5 [11.Nc3=] 11...Nxf5 [11...Bxf5 12.Nbd2 e4 13.Nxe4 Re8=] 12.Bxf5 Bxf5 13.Nc3 e4 14.Nd4 Qh4+ 15.Kd2 Ne5 16.Raf1 Bd7 17.b3 Nd3 18.Nd1 [18.Rxf8+ Rxf8 19.Rf1=] 18...a6 19.a4 b5 20.Rxf8+ Rxf8 [20...Kxf8=/+] 21.Rf1 [21.axb5 axb5 22.cxb5 Qg5 23.Rf1=] 21...Rb8 [21...Ra8!-/+] 22.Kc3 [22.cxb5 axb5 23.axb5 Bxb5 24.Nc3 Bd7=/+] 22...bxa4 23.Nf2 Ne5 24.b4 c5 25.dxc6 Nxc6 26.Nxc6 Bxc6 27.Nd1 [27.Qd2 Qf6+ 28.Qd4 Qxd4+ 29.exd4 Rf8-+] 27...Qe7

28.Qh5 [28.Qb2 Qe5+ 29.Kc2 Qxb2+ 30.Kxb2 Rxb4+ 31.Kc3 Rxc4+ 32.Kxc4 Bb5+ 33.Kb4 Bxf1-+ White is down three pawns in a minor piece endgame.] 28...d5 29.cxd5 Qxb4+ 30.Kc2 Qc4+ 31.Kd2 Qxf1 32.dxc6 Rd8+ 33.Kc1 Qc4+ 34.Kb1 Qd3+ 35.Kb2 Rb8+ 0-1

123 – Short 4.e4 Ng6 5.g3 Bc5 Previously on “Nigel Short wins with the Queens Knight Defence” we saw our hero transpose the opening into a Chigorin Defence against Pia Cramling after 1.d4 Nc6 2.Nf3 d5 3.c4 Bg4. This time Alina l'Ami does not control e5 with 2.Nf3. Therefore Short adopted the Mikenas Variation after 2.c4 e5. White closed the position with 3.d5 Nce7 4.e4 Ng6 and the game was equal. Grandmaster Nigel David Short MBE was a prodigy in the 1970s. He lost a World Championship match to Gary Kasparov in 1995. Short has made a number of controversial statements during his time in the public eye. I don’t agree with some of them, but they don’t bother me. I just enjoy his exciting approach to chess play. Alina l'Ami born in 1985 is a Romanian International Master and a Woman Grandmaster. She was good at chess before age 10. She reminded me of the 1969 song by Tee Set: “Ma Belle Amie”. I have read some of her chess writing and found to be thought provoking and entertaining. l’Ami plays in tournaments all over the world. She married Dutch grandmaster Erwin l’Ami. White had a space advantage and attacked kingside. Black had good squares for his pieces. Nigel Short sacrificed his bishop for checkmate. When White resigned Black had a mate in five. l'Ami (2345) - Short (2682), Spicenet Tanzania Open Dar es Salaam TAN (5.1), 16.06.2013 begins 1.d4 Nc6 2.c4 e5 3.d5 Nce7 4.e4 Ng6 5.g3 [5.Nc3 Nf6 6.g3 Bc5 7.Bg2 0-0 8.Nge2 d6 9.Na4 Bb4+ 10.Nec3 c6 11.0-0 Ba5=] 5…Bc5 [5...Nf6 6.Bg2 Bc5 7.Nc3 d6=] 6.Nc3 a5 7.h4 h6 8.h5 Nf8 9.f4 [9.Nge2 d6 10.Na4=] 9...d6 10.f5 [10.Nf3 Nf6=] 10...Nf6 11.Bd3 c6 12.Qe2 a4 13.a3 N8d7 14.g4 Qb6 15.Nh3 Bd4 16.g5 [16.Bc2 Nc5-/+] 16...hxg5 17.Nxg5 Nc5 18.Bc2 Bd7 19.Rb1 cxd5 20.Nxd5 Nxd5 21.exd5 Nb3 22.Bxb3 Qxb3 23.Rh3 Qb6 [23...Qa2!? 24.Qc2 b5-/+] 24.Qg4? 0-0-0

25.Nxf7 [25.b4 g6-/+] 25...Rhf8 26.Qg6 [26.Nxd8 Bxf5 27.Qg2 Rxd8-+] 26...Bxf5 [26...Be8 27.Qe6+ Rd7-+] 27.Qxf5+ Rd7 28.h6 [28.Rf3 Rfxf7 29.Qg4 Kb8-/+] 28...gxh6 [28...Rfxf7!-+] 29.Rxh6 [29.b4 Rfxf7-+] 29...Rfxf7 30.Rh8+ Kc7 31.Qe6 Bc3+ 32.bxc3 Qg1+! 0-1

Book 9: Chapter 6 – 1.e4 Nc6 This line of the Queens Knight Defence is called the Nimzovich or Nimzowitsch Defence. Transpositional possibilities abound.

King Pawn – 1.e4 Nc6 First let us consider games where White avoids 2.Nf3 or 2.d4.

124 – Moser 2.g3 Nf6 3.Bg2 Years ago I had a little pamphlet on the Queens Knight Attack by G. Moser entitled “1.Sc3”. The German Sc3 equals the English notation Nc3. “Springer” is the German chess term for “Knight.” This pamphlet published in 1987 gave games and analysis on the Queens Knight Attack 1.Nc3. As I recall it had some original material. The book was about 60 pages in length. In the game below Black is listed as Goetz Moser. He played the Queens Knight Defence with 1…Nc6 against G. Moersch which began 1.e4 Nc6 2.g3 Nf6 3.Bg2 e5. I do not know how strong these players were. I added a skittles game that I played at the Borders bookstore in 2003 against Steve Thompson with 2.a3!? Moersch - Moser, BRD-ch Tuebingen 1985 begins 1.e4 Nc6 2.g3 [Another odd line is 2.a3?! Nf6 3.d3 d5 4.d4? dxe4 5.Bb5 Bd7 6.Bxc6 Bxc6 7.c3? e5 8.Be3 exd4!? 9.cxd4 Be7 10.h3 0-0 11.Ne2 Nd5 12.Bd2? Bg5 13.Be3? Bxe3 14.fxe3 Nxe3 15.Qb3 Nxg2+ 16.Kd2? Qg5+ 17.Kc3 Qe3+ 18.Kb4 a5+ 19.Kc5 Qxb3 20.Nec3 b6+ 21.Kxc6 Qc4+ 0-1 Thompson - Sawyer, Orlando, FL, 2003] 2…Nf6 3.Bg2 e5 4.d3 Bc5 5.Nf3 d6 6.0-0 h6!? [6...a5 7.Nc3 0-0=] 7.c3 Bg4 [7...a5 8.d4 Ba7 9.Be3 Ng4=] 8.h3 Bh5 9.Qe2 Bb6 10.Be3 Qd7 11.Nbd2 g5 [11...0-0=] 12.g4 Bg6 13.Bxb6 [13.b4 h5 14.b5 Na5=/+] 13...axb6 14.d4 h5 15.dxe5 hxg4 16.exf6 [16.hxg4 dxe5 17.Nxg5 Qxg4 18.Qxg4 Nxg4=/+] 16...gxh3! 17.Nxg5 [Hugh Myers gave 17.Bh1 Qg4+ 18.Kh2 Qf4+ 19.Kg1 h2+ 20.Kg2 (20.Nxh2 Qxh2#) 20...Qg4#] 17...hxg2 18.Kxg2 Ra5 19.f4 Rxg5+ 20.fxg5 Qh3+ 21.Kf2 Qh4+ 22.Ke3

Qxg5+ 23.Kd3 Qb5+ 24.Ke3 Qxb2 25.Rh1 Qxc3+ 26.Qd3 [26.Kf2 Bh5+] 26...Qc5+ 27.Ke2 Nd4+ 28.Kf2 Nc2+ 29.Kg2 Qg5+ 30.Kf2 Qxf6+ 0-1

125 – Pickard 2.f4 d5 3.Nc3 I was at home on a Saturday night in 1998. A friend asked me if I was going to revise my Blackmar-Diemer Gambit Keybook (Thinkers’ Press in 1992). I told him that I had no publisher. Bob Long had no interest in doing another BDG book at that time. My friend said that Sid Pickard was interested. Next thing I know Sid Pickard was calling me on the phone. We worked out a deal. Sid was great. We worked together on several projects including two paperbacks. Pickard & Son, Publishers published Blackmar-Diemer Gambit Keybook II and my Alekhine Defense Playbook. Later my family and I drove across the country on vacation. Sid kindly invited us to spend the night with his family when we were in the Dallas, Texas area. They were wonderful hosts. Sid Pickard played 1.f4 as White and 1…Nc6 as Black. One time I told him it bothered me to play that knight in front of the c-pawn. He said that the knight is not stuck on c6. It will move again! I found this game in my database. Charles Herbers played a young Sid Pickard in the Queens Knight Defence. After 1.e4 Nc6 2.f4 some players choose the King’s Gambit with 2…e5!? Here Sid Pickard chose the stronger alternative with 2…d5. Herbers - Pickard, Memphis 1980 begins 1.e4 Nc6 2.f4 d5 3.Nc3 [3.exd5 Qxd5 4.Nf3 Bg4 5.Be2 0-0-0 6.Nc3 Qf5=] 3...dxe4 [3...d4 4.Nce2 e5 5.d3 Bg4 6.h3 Bh5 7.fxe5 (7.g4? Qh4+ 8.Kd2 Bxg4-/+) 7...Nxe5 8.Bf4 f6=] 4.Nxe4 e6 [4...Nf6 5.Nxf6+ (5.Nf2 Qd6=) 5...exf6 6.c3 Qe7+ 7.Be2 Bf5 8.d4 0-0-0 9.Nf3 Re8=] 5.Nf3 Nf6 6.Nxf6+ Qxf6 [6...gxf6!?=] 7.d4 Bd7 [7...Bd6=] 8.Be3 g6 [8...Nb4 9.a3 Nd5 10.Qd2 Bc6=] 9.Qd2 Bg7 10.Ne5 00-0 11.0-0-0 Be8 12.Qc3 Qe7 13.Be2 f6 14.Nd3 Kb8 [14...Qd6 15.Bf3 Ne7 16.Qb3+/=; or 14...f5 15.Bf3 Nxd4 16.Bxb7+ Kb8 17.Bxd4 Bxd4 18.Qb3+/=] 15.Bf3 Qd6 [15...Rd6 16.Rhe1+/-] 16.Nc5 f5 17.Qb3 [17.Qa3!+-] 17...b6 18.d5 Na5 19.Qb4 e5 20.fxe5 Bxe5 21.Bg5 Rc8?

22.Nd3?! [22.Be7!+-] 22...Qxb4 23.Nxb4 Bd6 24.Nc6+ Nxc6 25.dxc6 Bf7 26.Bd5 [26.b3=] 26...Bxd5 27.Rxd5 Rhe8 28.h4 Re2 29.Rd2 Rce8 30.h5 a5 31.hxg6 hxg6 32.Rxe2 Rxe2 33.Rh8+ Ka7 34.Rh7 [34.Rc8 Rxg2-/+] 34...Rxg2 35.Be7 Bf4+ 36.Kd1 Rd2+ 37.Ke1 Rxc2 0-1

126 – Woods 2.Bc4 Nf6 3.Nc3 Back when the famous golfer Tiger Woods lived in Orlando, a few miles away from Tiger's home I played some chess games at a Borders bookstore in 2003-2004. One frequent opponent was Damian Woods with probably no relationship to Tiger. Damian showed up fairly often. He was just learning chess and made gradual progress. In this line we played three games. The main game was our third. The others are in the notes. Woods was learning to play better. I was already a rated expert. When I started coming to this club, I was rated 2010. There was one other strong player in Milos Baishanski. He was rated about 2050 at that time. In my final game vs Woods, Milos gave my opponent in this friendly skittles game some helpful advice. See the note to White's 14th move below. Woods - Sawyer, Orlando, Florida, 15.01.2004 begins 1.e4 Nc6 2.Bc4 [2.Nf3 d6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bc4 Bg4 5.h3 Bxf3 6.Qxf3 Ne5 7.Qf4 Nxc4 8.d3 Ne5 9.0-0 e6 10.Be3 Be7 11.Bd4 Ng6 12.Bxf6 Nxf4 13.Bxg7 Rg8 14.Bh6 Bg5 15.Bxg5 Nxh3+ 16.Kh1 Qxg5 17.g3 Qh5 18.Kg2 Nf4+ 19.Kg1 Qh3 20.Rfe1 Qg2# 0-1 Woods-Sawyer, Orlando, Florida, 15.01.2004; 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.Nf3 d5 4.exd5 Nxd5 5.Nxd5 Qxd5 6.d4 Bg4 7.Be2 0-0-0 8.h3 Bxf3 9.Bxf3 Qxd4 10.Qxd4 Nxd4 11.Bg4+ e6 12.Bg5 f6 13.Be3 Nxc2+ 14.Ke2 Nxa1 15.Rxa1 f5 16.Bf3 e5 17.Bg5 Rd7 0-1 Woods - Sawyer, Orlando, Florida, 05.06.2003] 2…Nf6 3.Nc3 e6 4.d3 d5 5.Bb5 Bb4 6.Nf3 dxe4 7.Ng5 exd3 8.Qxd3 Qxd3 9.cxd3 Bd7 10.0-0 h6 11.Nge4 Nxe4 12.Nxe4 00-0 13.Bf4 Nd4 14.Bc4 [White played 14.Rac1. Then he looked up and saw Baishanski shaking his head no. When he asked why, Milos told him Black has three major threats and White was just "whistling Dixie". So White took his move back and dealt with two of the threats. Sadly for him, I had a third threat; 14.Bxd7+ was a must.] 14...Ne2+ 15.Kh1 Nxf4 16.g3 Nd5 17.Bxd5 exd5 18.Nc3 Bxc3 19.bxc3 d4 20.c4 Bc6+ 21.Kg1 Rhe8 22.c5 Rd5 23.Rac1 Rde5 24.f4 Re2 25.Rf2 Re1+ 26.Rxe1 Rxe1+ 27.Rf1 Rxf1+

28.Kxf1 Bd5 29.a3 b5 30.cxb6 axb6 31.Ke2 c5 32.Kd2 Kb7 33.h3 Ka6 34.Kc2 Ka5 35.Kb2 Ka4 36.h4 h5 37.f5 Bg2 38.Ka2 Bf1 0-1

127 – Bentrup 2.Nc3 e6 3.Nge2 Why do many chess players retire around age 40? Because it gets harder to perform at a level that brings enjoyment. I did not play as a child. I was told that chess was a game for grown-ups. I learned about chess at a city park in the summer, but I never really learned the rules completely. I started playing chess with friends in high school, but there were no rated events for us. Only in college did I start to play in rated tournaments. In my 50s, I returned to tournament chess. I played in 13 events from 2005 to 2012. At the Florida State Championship 2011 held in Naples all of my games were against players rated above me. My first opponent was Ben Bentrup, a law student who seemed to be in his chess prime. Ben told me he was over rated, but I doubted that. He had a very good tournament. After beating me, he then defeated the highest rated master in the event. He beat another master in round three and drew against another master. Against me White lost a tempo in the opening. Bentrup realized this and told me later that he just decided to treat it as if he was playing Black. Bentrup told me he thought I should have attacked queenside. That certainly is a valid option, but the 150 Attack is usually played with the idea to attack kingside or in the center. He simply outplayed me and won with ease. Ben told me that I won the opening and everything went downhill after that. Bentrup - Sawyer, FL State Championship Naples FL (1), 03.09.2011 begins 1.e4 Nc6 2.Nc3 e6 [Wisnewski suggested the French Defence. I often transpose to a Vienna Game with 2...e5. Bentrup expected that. A 2.Nc3 player should know that opening well.] 3.Nge2 d5 4.d3 [Whoa! White is daring Black to take over the center. Okay.] 4…d4 5.Nb1 e5 6.g3 Bg4 7.Nd2 Qd7 [This is the 150 Attack (colors reversed.] 8.f3 [8.f4? exf4 9.gxf4 Be7! with advantage to Black according to Bentrup] 8...Be6 9.f4 f6

10.Nf3 Bd6 [10...0-0-0 11.Bg2 Nh6=/+] 11.Bg2 0-0-0 12.0-0 h6 [12...Nge7=/+] 13.a3 g5 14.Qe1 Nge7 15.f5 Bf7 16.b4 Rdg8 [16...a6=] 17.c4 dxc3 18.Qxc3 Kb8 19.Be3 Nc8 [19...a6=] 20.b5 N6e7 21.a4 h5 22.d4 g4 23.Nxe5 fxe5 24.dxe5 Bxe5 25.Qxe5 Qd3 26.Bf4 Nd6 27.Qxe7 Qxe2 28.Bxd6 1-0

Romantic – 2.Nf3 The White move 2.Nf3 invites Black to transpose into the Open Game with 2…e5. Presumably White is more comfortable there. Here Black chooses unique Queen’s Knight Defence positions after 2...f5 or 2...Nf6. For 2.Nf3 d5, see 1.e4 Nc6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5.

128 – Gajic 2…f5 3.exf5 d5 The Colorado Gambit is a bold counter attack by Black after the moves 1.e4 Nc6 2.Nf3 f5!? This pesky pawn threatens to capture in turn both the pawn and the knight! That cannot be ignored. In the early days of the Queens Knight Defence, R.E. Lean also liked what has become known as the Colorado Gambit 2…f5!? I have included a brief overview of the possibilities in the game notations. I see that Blackmar-Diemer Gambit player Frank Drill has played the Colorado Gambit as Black. The main game below sees International Master Vladimir Sergeev Petrov of Bulgaria as White and FIDE Master Mladen Gajic of Sweden as Black. Petrov (2362) - Gajic (2295), Nis Open 2016 Nis SRB (5.4), 02.07.2016 begins 1.e4 Nc6 2.Nf3 f5 3.exf5 [3.e5 d6 4.exd6=] 3...d5 4.d4 [4.Nh4 Nf6!? 5.d4 e6 6.fxe6 Bxe6 7.Nf3 Bd6 8.c3 0-0 9.Bd3 Bg4 and 0-1 in 45. Dillon Galvin, Colorado 1978] 4...Bxf5 5.Bb5 [5.Bd3 Bg4 6.Be3 e5 7.dxe5 Nxe5= and 0-1 in 99. Onischuk - Schneider, Berlin GER 2015] 5...e6 [5...Qd6 6.Ne5 Nf6 7.0-0+/= and 1/2-1/2 in 74. Short - Vovk, Minsk BLR 2015] 6.Ne5 Nge7 [6...a6 7.Bxc6+ bxc6 8.Nxc6!? Qh4 9.Nd2 Ne7 10.g3 Qh3 11.Ne5 Ng6 1/2-1/2. Wolter - Drill, Bad Homburg GER 2015] 7.g4 [7.Qh5+ g6 8.Qe2 Bg7 9.Bxc6+ Nxc6 and 1-0 in 28. Bologan - Schneider, Mainz GER 2010; 7.Bg5 Qd6 8.c4 Qb4+ 9.Nc3 a6=] 7...Be4 8.f3 Bg6 9.h4 [9.Bg5 Qd6 10.Nc3 a6 11.Bxc6+ Nxc6 12.Nxg6 hxg6 13.Qd3 Rxh2=] 9...a6 10.Bxc6+ Nxc6 11.Bf4?! [11.Nxc6 bxc6=] 11...Nxe5 12.Bxe5 h5 13.g5 Qd7 14.Nc3 Bd6 15.Qd2 0-0 16.f4 Bxe5 17.fxe5 Rf3 18.0-0-0 Raf8 19.Rh2 b6 20.Qe2 Qc8 21.Nb1 [21.Qe1 c5-/+] 21...c5 22.Nd2 R3f4 23.dxc5 Qxc5 24.Nb3 Qc7 25.Nd4 Re4 26.Qxa6 Qxe5 27.Rhd2 Qc7

[27...Rxh4-+] 28.c3 Kh7 29.a4 e5!? [29...Re8-+] 30.Ne6 Qd6 31.Nxf8+ Qxf8 32.Rf1 Qc5 33.Qa8 Rxh4 [33...Qc4-+] 34.Qxd5 [34.Rxd5 Qe3+ 35.Rd2 Rc4 36.Kd1 Re4-/+] 34...Rxa4 35.Kd1 Qe3 0-1

129 – El Columpio 2…Nf6 3.e5 I began this "Kick blik Day" by playing a curious line Wisnewski recommended in his 1...Nc6 book called by GM Marc Narcisco Dublan the "El Columpio" ("The Swing") variation. It looks ugly. White can use his bishops to capture the two Black knights leaving doubled pawns where they stand on h6 and c6. White's position seems a little better, but the game is not over. Over the years I spent a lot of time playing “blik” and its cousin “Rookie” on the Internet Chess Club. These chess engines were stronger than I was, but they had a flaw. They repeated the exact same few dozen opening variations. This allowed me to prepare. blik - Sawyer, ICC 5 0 Internet Chess Club, 01.09.2011 begins 1.e4 Nc6 2.Nf3 Nf6 [Attacking e4.] 3.e5 [3.Nc3 d5!? (3...e5! is a Four Knights Game) 4.e5 Ne4 5.d3! Nxc3 6.bxc3+/=] 3…Ng4 ["The Swing" attacking e5. 3...Nd5 is an Alekhine Defence.] 4.d4 d6 [Attacking e5 again.] 5.h3 Nh6 6.Bb5 a6 7.Bxc6+ bxc6 8.Bxh6 gxh6 9.Nbd2!? Bg7 [9...Rg8 10.g4 Rb8 11.b3 d5=] 10.Nb3 0-0 11.Qe2 Be6 12.c4 Qb8 [12...a5] 13.0-0 Qb4 14.Rfc1 a5 15.Rc3 Rfb8 16.a3 Qb6 17.a4 Qa6 18.Qc2 Rb4 19.Nbd2 Rab8 20.b3 Qb7 21.Rd1 Qc8 22.Qe4 Qd7 23.Re1 Bf5 24.Qf4 Bg6 25.Rcc1 e6 26.Red1 d5 27.cxd5 cxd5 28.Rc5 Ra8 29.Rdc1 Rb7 30.Rc6 Bf8 31.Qg3 Rb6 [31...Ba3=] 32.Rxc7 Qd8 33.h4 Kh8 34.Qf4 Ba3 35.R1c3 Bb4 36.Rc1 Ba3 37.R1c6 Rxc6 38.Rxc6 Bb4 39.Qxh6 Rc8 40.Rxc8 Qxc8 41.h5 Bf8 42.Qg5 Bf5 43.g4 Bd3 44.h6 Qd7 45.Ne1 Be2 46.f4 Qe7 47.Qxe7 Bxe7 48.Nef3 Bb4 49.g5 Bd1 50.Kg2 Kg8 51.Kf1 Kf8 52.Kg1 Ke7 53.Kh2 Kf8 54.Kg2 Ke7 55.Kg1 Kf8 56.Kg2 Ke7 57.Kf2 Kf8 58.Kf1 Ke7 59.Kf2 Kf8 60.Kf1 Ke7 61.Kg2 Kf8 62.Kh2 Ke7 63.Kg3 Kf8 64.Kh2 Ke7 65.Kg3 Kf8 66.Kh3 Ke7 67.Kg2 Kf8 68.Kh3 Ke7 69.Kh2 Kf8 70.Kg3 Ke7 71.Kh3 Kf8 72.g6 fxg6 [72...hxg6 73.Kg2 Kg8 74.Kf2 Kh7 75.Ng5+ Kxh6 76.Nxf7+ Kg7 77.Ke1 Bxb3 78.Ng5 Bxa4 79.Nxe6+ Kf7-/+] 73.Kh2 Bxd2 74.Nxd2 Bc2 75.Kg1 Ke7 76.Kf1 Kf7 77.Nf3 Bxb3 78.Ng5+ Kg8 79.Nxe6 Bxa4 80.Ke2 Bc2 81.Nc7 a4 82.Nxd5 a3 83.Nb4 Bb3 84.Kd3 a2 85.Nxa2 Bxa2 86.Ke4 Kf7 87.d5 Ke7 88.d6+?

[88.Kd4=] 88...Kd7 89.Kd3 Be6 90.Kd2 Bf5 91.Kc3 Be6 92.Kb4 Bf5 [92...Kc6-/+] 93.Kc5 Be6 94.Kb5 Bf5 95.Kc5 Be6 Draw agreed. Black had 26 seconds left. 1/2-1/2

130 – Markovic 2…Nf6 3.Nc3 Goran Markovic is an incredible blitz player. His skill is obvious to anyone who has seen him play. And indeed if you have seen him play, you cannot miss his blitz skill. Every time Markovic enters a blitz tournament, he finishes near the top. A dozen times I have sat next to him in Florida tournaments, but we had never actually played each other in a tournament game until here. I asked him if he was still playing on ICC and he said he was. I do not remember what handle he was using. He told me his ICC rating was 2700. I said I never get above the 2400s. Markovic plays tournaments as if they were 15 minute games. Goran plays sharp main line complicated aggressive variations, and he plays the opening moves instantly. If you expect a 4-5 hour tournament game where you do your planning on your opponent's time and you’re calculating on your own time, there won't be any planning time. If you like to take your time, all you get is your time. It will seem like Markovic doesn't use any time. Goran will do his thinking on your time. That's just the way it is. Someone suggested I play Markovic slowly to bother him. I said, "But I am him. I am a blitz player. It would bother me as much as him!" I took about half an hour more than Goran did. Our four hour game plus post-mortem was over in two hours. I loved that! Markovic (2114) - Sawyer, FL State Championship Naples FL (4), 04.09.2011 begins 1.e4 Nc6 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Nc3 d5 4.exd5 Nxd5 [This is an Alekhine Defence 1.e4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d5 3.exd5 Nxd5 with the addition of two knight moves.] 5.Bb5 [5.Bc4 Nb6 6.Bb3=] 5…Nxc3 6.bxc3 Qd5 7.Qe2 Bg4 8.d4 e6 9.0-0 Bd6 [Goran told me later he had not seen this move. Now he realizes that I have possible kingside attack.] 10.h3 Bxf3 11.Bxc6+ Qxc6 12.Qxf3 Qxf3 13.gxf3 Kd7 14.Rb1 b6 15.Rd1 Rhc8 16.Kf1 Ke7 17.c4 c6 18.Ke2 Rab8 19.Be3 a6 20.Rb3 b5 21.c5 Bc7 22.Kd3 Rd8 23.Rdb1 Ra8 24.c4 bxc4+ 25.Kxc4 Rdb8 26.Rb7 Kd8 27.a4 Kc8 28.R7b3 [He almost played 28.Rxc7+? Kxc7 29.Bf4+ Kc8 30.Bxb8 Rxb8

31.Rb6 Rxb6 32.cxb6 a5 33.Kc5 Kb7 34.Kd6 Kxb6 35.Ke7 c5-+] 28...Rxb3 29.Rxb3 Rb8 30.Rc3 Ba5 31.Rc1 Bc7 32.Ra1 Kd7 33.Bd2 Ke7 34.Bc3 Kd7 35.Re1 g6 36.Bb4 Rb7 37.Bc3 Rb8 38.Bb4 Rb7 39.Rh1 Rb8 40.Bc3 Rb7 1/2-1/2

Williams – 2.Nf3 d6 Elijah Williams played 2…d6 in the 1800s. The move has been a favorite of many Queens Knight Defence players ever since.

131 – Ludwig 3.Bb5 Bd7 4.d4 In my first Florida tournament I was paired vs Daniel J. Ludwig, the highest rated master in the event. He went on to become an International Master with a peak USCF rating of 2615 by 2013. Daniel Ludwig was the Florida high school champion. After this he won the US Masters in Nashville, TN. The next year in 2006 Ludwig became the US 11th Grade National Champion. Ludwig (2324) – Sawyer (2010), FL State Championship (1), 03.09.2005 begins 1.e4 Nc6!? [Nimzowitsch Defence.] 2.Nf3 d6 [I declined an invitation to return to Open Game lines with 2...e5.] 3.Bb5!? [Ludwig must know the Ruy Lopez Steinitz. Most of the my practice games in this line continued with 3.d4.] 3...Bd7?! [This was my first tournament game in many years. I was having a hard time concentrating. My first response to a non-book move was dubious. This Bishop is usually better placed on g4. Better is 3...Nf6 4.d4 a6 5.Bxc6+ bxc6 6.Nbd2+/=. Daniel thought that I might play 3...e5 transposing to what he called "old stuff."] 4.d4 Ne5?? [Throughout my games in this event, whoever got bold and frisky first was the player who lost!? What a bad move!] 5.Nxe5! [I took myself out of the book and lost a pawn due to my very weak analysis. I missed his piece sacrifice only two moves deep.] 5...Bxb5? [Better is 5...dxe5 6.Bxd7+ Qxd7 7.dxe5 Qxd1+ 8.Kxd1 e6 when at least his extra pawn is doubled.] 6.Nxf7!+- [Darn! At this point, I know that I am lost. Wow. That didn't take long. Welcome back to tournament chess. Smack!] 6...Kxf7 7.Qh5+ g6 8.Qxb5 Qc8 [Okay. I'm busted. There was a long time before the next round so I chose to play to the first time control (move 30) though I played quickly).] 9.Nc3 c6 10.Qe2 e6 11.0-0 Bg7 12.Qf3+ Ke8 13.Qg3 Kd7 14.d5 [Ludwig's play is aggressive and impressive.] 14...cxd5 15.exd5 Bxc3 16.dxe6+ Kxe6 17.bxc3 Qc6 18.Re1+ Kd7 19.Qg4+ Kc7 20.Qd4 Nf6

21.Qxf6 Raf8 22.Qd4 Kb8 23.Be3 b6 24.a4 Qc5 25.Qd3 Qf5 26.Qxd6+ Kb7 27.a5 Rf7 28.axb6 a6 29.Bd4 Rd7 30.Qa3 Rf8 31.Qxa6+ Kc6 32.b7+ mate in 2. This was an ugly loss. 1-0

132 – Robson 3.Bb5 a6 Bxc6+ I first met GM Ray Robson in the final round of the 2005 Florida State Championship. “So kid, how old are you?” “10”, Ray said. Robson was a cute kid from a nice family. He became an FIDE Master in 2005 He wore a baseball cap that celebrated the 2004 world championship of my Boston Red Sox. Ray Robson went on to become one of the strongest grandmasters in the USA. Robson was rated 100 points above me, but I outweighed him by 100 pounds. Since then his rating and my weight have gone up! Once again I chose to play the Queen's Knight Defence. Robson said I played that first game so terribly that he figured he would just copy what Daniel Ludwig played. So he continued 3.Bb5 and I improved on the Ludwig game with 3...a6 to clarify the position. Vic Rislow had been after me to return to tournament play. The set and clock I used for this event were gifts from him. Sadly, Vic passed away from cancer three months after this tournament. The good news is that I tied for 3rd and 4th among non-masters. Robson - Sawyer, FL State Championship (6), 05.09.2005 begins 1.e4 Nc6 2.Nf3 d6 3.Bb5 [3.d4 Nf6 4.Nc3 Bg4 is normal.] 3...a6 [3...Nf6 is also playable.] 4.Bxc6+ bxc6 5.d4 Bg4 6.0-0 Nf6 7.Nc3 e6 8.h3 Bh5 9.Qe2 Be7 10.Bf4 0-0 11.Rad1 Re8 [I do not like this move. Generally, Black plays on the b-file or for a d6-d5 French position.] 12.Rfe1 [I did not know Robson at all prior to this game. Ray reminded me of a young Karpov in style. But Karpov played fast. Robson played very slowly. He thought deeply even if he knew the position.] 12...d5 [This is a thematic move, but I am getting a little loose on h5 and c6. I almost played 12...Bg6! After the game Robson told me he had intended to play 13.Nh4 but that move probably needs more preparation. 13...Bxe4! 14.Nxe4 Nxe4 15.Qxe4 d5 16.Qe5 Bxh4 17.Qxc7 Qxc7 18.Bxc7 Be7=] 13.g4 Bg6 14.Ne5 Nxe4!? 15.Nxg6 hxg6 16.Nxe4 dxe4 17.Qxe4 Qd5?! [Robson suggested after the game that I play 17...Bd6+/=] 18.Bxc7 Qxa2?! [I was fishing for trouble. Turns out I was just a fish.] 19.b3 c5? [I was worn out and did not put up much resistance in

this final game of the event. I finish up with two serious tactical errors. A couple older masters watching us rightly criticized me for not playing better.] 20.dxc5 Bxc5? 21.Ra1 Qb2 22.Be5 f5 23.Qd3 1-0

133 – Bauer 3.Bb5 Nf6 4.Nc3 Christian Bauer demonstrates a good way to play the Queens Knight Defence 1.e4 Nc6 2.Nf3 d6 line. Black chooses between a move like ...Bg4 or the fianchetto with ...g6. Black amassed five pawns in three central files to attack kingside. White gave up after he lost pawn after pawn in this contest between Jonathan Cruz and Christian Bauer. Cruz (2417) - Bauer (2625), TCh-CAT Gp1 2018 Barcelona ESP (6.1), 24.02.2018 begins 1.e4 Nc6 2.Nf3 d6 3.Bb5 Nf6 4.Nc3 a6 5.Bxc6+ bxc6 6.e5 [6.d4 Nd7=] 6...Nd5 7.0-0 Bg4 [7...g6=] 8.h3 Bh5 9.e6 fxe6 10.d4 Qd7 11.Re1 Nxc3 12.bxc3 h6 13.Qd3 g5 14.Re3 [14.h4 g4=] 14...Bg7 15.Bd2 0-0 16.g4 [16.h4 g4 17.Nh2 e5=] 16...Be8 17.h4 [17.Qe2 Bf7-/+] 17...e5 18.Nh2 Qe6 [18...gxh4 19.dxe5 Bxe5-/+] 19.h5 [19.hxg5 hxg5 20.Rg3 e4-/+] 19...c5 20.d5 Qd7 21.f3 [21.Rc1 Rb8-+] 21...e6 22.a4 exd5 23.Qxd5+ Bf7 24.Qd3 c4 25.Qe2 Bd5 26.Nf1 [26.a5 Qc6-+] 26...Bxf3 0-1

134 – Bauer 3.Nc3 g6 4.d4 Bg7 When Grandmaster Christian Bauer plays 1.e4 Nc6 as Black he might transpose into some type of a Pirc Modern Defence. Even though the cpawns are doubled, progress can be made by the timely push ...c5. In the end of this short battle between Rainer Polzin and Christian Bauer, Black threatens mate. White would only delay checkmate by giving up a lot of material. Polzin (2416) - Bauer (2623), World Blitz 2015 Berlin GER (14.65), 14.10.2015 begins 1.e4 Nc6 2.Nf3 d6 3.Nc3 g6 4.d4 Bg7 5.h3 Nf6 6.Bb5 0-0 7.0-0 a6 8.Bxc6 bxc6 9.Be3 Rb8 10.Rb1 Bb7 11.Qd2 Re8 12.Bh6 Bh8 [12...c5=] 13.Rfe1 Nd7 14.e5 c5 15.exd6 [15.e6 fxe6 16.Ng5 cxd4! 17.Nxe6 dxc3 18.Nxd8 cxd2-+] 15...Bxf3 16.dxe7 Rxe7 17.gxf3 cxd4 18.Nd5? [18.Rxe7 Qxe7-/+] 18...Re5 [18...Rxe1+! 19.Rxe1 Ne5!-+] 19.Nf4 [19.Qa5 Rh5=/+] 19...Qh4 20.Ng2 [20.Ne2 Rh5-+] 20...Qxh3 21.Rxe5 [21.Bg5 h6-+] 21...Nxe5 22.Qf4 [22.Ne1 Nxf3+ 23.Nxf3 Qg4+ 24.Kh1 Qxf3+ 25.Kg1 Qg4+ 26.Kf1 Qh3+ 27.Kg1 Be5-+] 22...Nxf3+ 23.Kf1 Re8 0-1

135 – Mestrovic 3.d4 g6 4.d5 International Master Zvonimir Mestrovic has specialized in the Queens Knight Defence 1…Nc6 for 40 years of tournament play throughout his chess career. I found 300 of his 1…Nc6 games in my database. I noticed that a couple of times Grandmaster Anthony J. Miles beat him with the White pieces. Maybe those games made an impression, since later Tony Miles was playing 1…Nc6 himself. Borislav Ivkov born 1933 was a grandmaster from Serbia. Ivkov played a wide variety of openings against top players. He played 1.e4 Nc6 against Tal, but 2.Nf3 e5 3.Bb5 became a Ruy Lopez. In “Secrets of Russian Chess Masters: vol. 2 Beyond the Basics” the authors Lev Alburt and Larry Parr wrote, “Mental flexibility is absolutely necessary to play good and consistent chess.” One of the skills Mestrovic exhibited was flexibility in his thinking regarding piece placement. Many players commit to playing the same pieces to the same squares in the same openings all the time. IM Mestrovic was willing to take 1…Nc6 in any direction. He was not afraid to avoid popular openings or to play them. Here Mestrovic heads to the Modern (g6) without the Pirc (Nf6). Ivkov - Mestrovic, JUG-ch Novi Sad, 1975 begins 1.d4 Nc6 2.Nf3 d6 3.e4 g6 4.d5 Ne5 [4...Nb8 5.h3 Bg7 6.Bd3 Nf6 7.c4 0-0 8.Nc3+/=] 5.Nxe5 dxe5 6.c4 Bh6 [6...Bg7 7.Nc3 Nf6 8.Be2 c6 9.Be3 0-0 10.0-0+/=] 7.Nc3 [7.Bxh6 Nxh6 8.Qd2 Ng8 9.Qc3+/-] 7...c6 [7...Bxc1 8.Rxc1 Nf6 9.Be2 0-0 10.00+/=] 8.Bxh6 Nxh6 9.Qd2 Ng4 10.Be2 Nf6 11.Qh6 Qb6 12.Rb1 Bg4 13.f3 Bd7 14.b4 [14.dxc6 Bxc6 15.g3+/=] 14...Qd4 15.Qd2 0-0 16.Rd1 a5 17.b5 Qa7 [17...Qxd2+ 18.Kxd2 cxb5 19.cxb5 a4=] 18.a4 [18.Qg5 Qc5 19.bxc6 bxc6 20.Qxe5 cxd5 21.Nxd5 Nxd5 22.Rxd5+/-] 18...Rac8 19.Qg5 cxd5 20.exd5 Bf5 21.Qh4 [21.g4 e4 22.gxf5 exf3 23.Bxf3 Rxc4 24.Ne2+/=] 21...Qe3 22.Nb1 Bc2 23.Qf2 Qxf2+ 24.Kxf2 Bxd1 25.Rxd1 Nd7 26.Nc3 [26.Nd2 Nb6 27.Ra1 Rfd8-+] 26...Nb6 27.d6 exd6 28.Rxd6

[28.Nd5 Nxd5 29.Rxd5 Rfd8-+] 28...Nxc4 29.Rd7 Rfd8 30.Rxd8+ Rxd8 31.Bxc4 Rc8 32.Bd5 Rxc3 33.Bxb7 Ra3 34.Bc6 Rxa4 35.b6 Rb4 36.b7 a4 37.Bxa4 Rxb7 38.Bc6 0-1

136 – Schuyler 3.d4 Nf6 4.c3 James Schuyler wrote "The Dark Knight System: a repertoire with 1...Nc6" published by Everyman Chess in 2013. That is a nice descriptive title for a major branch of the Queen's Knight Defence. This book interested me greatly since I play 1...Nc6. Who is Schuyler? Page 3 has this note: "James Schuyler is a FIDE Master. He was Nevada State Champion in 2007 and won the Virginia State Championship in both 2011 and 2012. He has been teaching chess for over 25 years." The Dark Knight System teaches how to play a well-coordinated method of development that helps you to win future games. Why call it "Dark" Knight? We begin with the Black horse that starts on a dark square. From 1...Nc6, this knight hits important dark squares, often preparing ...e5. The knight works in conjunction with the dark squared bishop. Starting from Bf8, the author has this bishop going to Bb4, Bc5, Bd6, Be7, Bg7 or even Bh6. Schuyler's concepts are understandable. He provides specific theory with analysis going deeper. Starting on page 134 are 100 annotated games, illustrating how to go from the opening to the finish. I chose to annotate the FIDE Master Levy Rozman game against James Schuyler. This contest became a Pirc Defence. Rozman (2200) - Schuyler (2345), Washington International 2012 Rockville USA (5), 30.07.2012 begins 1.e4 Nc6 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 Nf6 4.c3 g6 [Black heads for a Pirc Defence without Nc3. Other options are 4...e5 5.Bd3 Bg4 6.d5 Ne7 7.h3 Bd7 8.c4 Ng6 9.Nc3 Be7=; or 4...Bg4 5.Nbd2 e6 6.Bd3 Be7 7.0-0 0-0 8.b4+/=] 5.Bd3 Bg7 6.0-0 0-0 7.h3 e5 8.Na3 [More common are 8.Re1 h6 9.Na3 Re8 10.Nc2 d5 11.exd5 Qxd5=; or the King's Indian approach with 8.d5 Ne7 9.c4 Nh5 10.Nc3 f5 11.Re1 fxe4=] 8...d5 [8...exd4 9.cxd4 Nb4 10.Bb1 Be6=] 9.Bg5 [9.exd5 Nxd5 10.dxe5 Nxe5 11.Nxe5 Bxe5 12.Re1 Bg7=] 9...dxe4 10.Bxe4 exd4 11.Bxc6 dxc3 12.Qa4 [12.Qxd8 Rxd8 13.Bb5 cxb2 14.Rab1 Rd5 15.Bc4 Ra5=] 12...bxc6 13.Qxc6

[13.Rad1 Qe8=/+] 13...cxb2 14.Rad1 Bd7 15.Qc2 Qc8 [15...Rb8!-+] 16.Qxb2 Ne4 17.Qb4 Re8 18.Kh2 Bf8 19.Qa5 [19.Qd4 Bxa3-+] 19...Bd6+ 20.Kg1 Bxh3 21.gxh3 [21.Nh4 Qg4-+] 21...Qxh3 22.Rd3 Ng3 23.fxg3 Qxg3+ 24.Kh1 Re2 0-1

137 – Miles 3.d4 Nf6 4.d5 Anthony J. Miles (1955-2001) was a British grandmaster known for his activity and creativity. His rivals were Keene and Short. Grandmaster Tony Miles played the main lines and lesser known openings like 1…Nc6. I remember Miles beat the then World Champion Anatoly Karpov with 1.e4 a6 and again with 1.e4 c6. Elijah Williams was one of the leading players in England during the Howard Staunton era in the 1800s. Opening theory was not well developed. Elijah Williams was known to play strategically sound openings that were what we might call offbeat. Williams tried 1.e4 Nc6 long before Aron Nimzowitsch played it. His earliest recorded Queens Knight Defence was from 1845. His handling of it was amazingly modern with 2.Nf3 d6. The strategy behind the Williams idea is to play ...Bg4 combined with Nf6, e6 and Be7. Black's central pawns will likely advance to d5 and/or e5 depending on later developments. It's not super aggressive chess, but it takes away some of White's fun. This line is easy to set-up. Black must push back as soon as he is ready to avoid playing passively, and thus poorly. Many other players have added this variation to their repertoire. Some of the more notable were Rainer Knaak, Hugh Myers and Tony Miles. In this game Michael Rohde lost to Anthony Miles in the Queens Knight Defence. I lost to Rohde in the 1974 US Junior Open blitz tournament, but there I began just 1…c6 instead of 1…Nc6. Rohde - Miles, Masters Invitational Chicago (6), 1990 begins 1.e4 Nc6 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 Nf6 4.d5 Nb8 5.Nc3 g6 6.Bg5 Bg4 7.Qd2 Bxf3 8.gxf3 Nbd7 9.0-0-0 c6 10.Kb1 Bg7 11.Bh6 [11.Rg1+/=] 11...Bxh6 12.Qxh6 Qb6 13.Bh3 Ne5 14.Rhg1 Qxf2 15.f4 Nc4 16.e5 Nh5 17.exd6 Qxf4 18.d7+

[18.Rg5=] 18...Kd8 19.Rg5 [19.Qxf4 Nxf4-/+] 19...Nxb2 20.Kxb2 Qb4+ 21.Kc1 Qxc3 22.Rd3 Qe1+ 23.Kb2 Qb4+ [23...f5!-+] 24.Rb3 Qd4+ 25.Kb1 f5 [25...c5!-/+] 26.Rxb7 [26.Bxf5 Qd1+ 27.Kb2 Qxd5 28.Bh3=] 26...Qd1+ 27.Kb2 Qxd5 28.Rxh5 [28.Bxf5 c5-/+] 28...c5 29.Qg7 [29.Rb5 gxh5-+] 29...Qxb7+ 30.Kc1 Qh1+ 0-1

138 – Carlsen 3.d4 Nf6 4.Nc3 No opening and no position remains quiet when Magnus Carlsen in playing. This Queens Knight Defence 1.e4 Nc6 transposes into the Classical Pirc Defence with Nf3 and Nc3. Soon Black began to counter attack with moves like 8...e5, 10...c6, and 12...d5. White had good chances in sharp play, but Black turned the tide in the game Sergei Movsesian vs Magnus Carlsen. Movsesian (2647) - Carlsen (2837), World Rapid 2017 Riyadh KSA (6.1), 27.12.2017 begins 1.e4 Nc6 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 Nf6 4.Nc3 g6 5.h3 Bg7 6.Be3 00 7.Qd2 a6 8.Bd3 e5 9.d5 Ne7 10.g4 c6 11.dxc6 bxc6 12.0-0-0 d5 [12...Qc7=] 13.Nxe5 Nxe4 14.Bxe4 Bxe5 15.Bg2 Rb8 16.Rhe1 Be6?! [Black could protect Be5 with 16...Qd6= ] 17.Na4 [17.Bh6! Bh8 18.Bxf8+/-] 17...Qd6 [17...Nc8 18.Bh6+/=] 18.c3 Rb5 19.f4 [19.Bf1+/-] 19...Bg7 20.Bf1 [20.Qf2+/=] 20...Ra5 21.Qc2? c5 22.c4 [22.f5 gxf5-/+] 22...Rb8 23.Bd2 [23.b3 Rxa4-+] 23...Rxa4 24.Qxa4 Bxb2+ 25.Kc2 [25.Kb1 dxc4-+] 25...Bd7 26.Qb3 Rxb3 27.axb3 Bd4 Black is up a knight and pawn. 0-1

139 – Usmanov 4.Nc3 Bg4 5.d5 The proven strategy when players castle opposite sides to push pawns to open up the opponent’s king. Attack with every move. Defend as little as possible. White’s attack was strong but Black was better in the game Zaza Bargandzhiya vs Vasily Usmanov. Bargandzhiya (2094) - Usmanov (2459), ch-RUS Blitz 2017 Sochi RUS (5.26), 02.10.2017 begins 1.e4 Nc6 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 Nf6 4.Nc3 Bg4 5.d5 Nb8 6.h3 Bxf3 7.Qxf3 g6 8.Bd3 Bg7 9.Bd2 Nbd7 10.0-0-0 a6 [Black plays for an immediate counter attack. Otherwise, 10...0-0=] 11.g4 b5 [11...Ne5=] 12.Kb1 c5 13.dxc6 Ne5 14.Qe2 Nxc6 15.f4 0-0 16.h4 Nd4 17.Qg2 b4 18.Nd5 [18.Ne2 Nxe2 19.Qxe2+/-] 18...Nxd5 19.exd5 a5 [19...Nb5 20.Bxb5 axb5 21.Bxb4+/-] 20.h5 b3 [20...a4 21.hxg6+-] 21.axb3 [21.cxb3 a4 22.b4+-] 21...a4 22.hxg6 axb3 23.cxb3 [23.Bc3+/-] 23...Nxb3 24.Bc3 Bxc3 25.bxc3 [Correct is 25.Qh3! h5 26.Qxh5 Ra1+ 27.Kc2 Nd4+ 28.Kxc3 Qa5+!= and White cannot easily avoided checks.] 25...Qb6 26.Qg1

[26.gxf7+ Rxf7-+] 26...Nd4+ [Black can force mate with 26...Ra1+! 27.Kc2 Ra2+ 28.Kb1 Nd2+ 29.Kxa2 Ra8+ 30.Ba6 Rxa6 mate] 27.Kc1 Ra1+ 28.Kd2 Nf3+ 0-1

Center Pawns – 2.d4 White’s first two moves can be played in either order. He sets up a big pawn center.

140 – Parrella 2…g6 3.d5 Space is a significant advantage in chess, because it allows you to be more active and make threats. In your Trek to become a Star you will not live long and prosper if you play passively. In his book "Elements of Positional Evaluation: How the Pieces Get Their Power" (4th edition), author Dan Heisman calls Space a "Pseudo-Element". Daniel Heisman defined space is "the area between a player's back rank and the pawn structure...." Dan Heisman continued, "On average, having more space is an advantage. However it should be clear that the real goal you are trying to achieve is more active play, not space." My Queens Knight Defence vs Nick Parrella was typical. Until move 10, Black never moved anything beyond the third rank. The big problem is that lack of space limits your piece power. Sawyer (2030) - Parrella (1236), corr USCF 89N261, 1991 begins 1.d4 Nc6 2.e4 g6 [If Black pushes this pawn two squares there is a possible Fool’s Mate after 2…g5 3.Bxg5 f5 4.Qh5# 1-0 Sawyer - luisongo2345, Yahoo 2002] 3.d5 Nb8 4.Qd4 f6 5.Nc3 [Or 5.Nf3 taking aim at e5.] 5...Bg7 6.Be3 d6 7.0-0-0 a6 8.f3?! [8.Nge2+/-] 8...c6 9.dxc6 Nxc6 10.Qd2 e5? [This loses a pawn. 10...Be6 11.Nd5+/-] 11.Qxd6 Qxd6 12.Rxd6 Nge7 13.Bc4 b5? [13...Na5 14.Bd3+/-] 14.Bd5 [Even stronger is 14.Nd5! Rb8 15.Nc7+ Kf8 16.Bb3+-] 14...Bb7 15.Nge2 Nxd5? [15...b4 16.Na4+/-] 16.Nxd5 0-0 17.Rd1 [17.Rxc6! Bxc6 18.Ne7+ Kf7 19.Nxc6+- leaves White with 2 knights and a pawn for a rook.] 17...a5 18.Nc7 Rac8 19.Nxb5 Nb4 20.Nbc3 Ba6 21.R6d2 Rf7 22.Rd8+ Rf8 23.Rxc8 Rxc8 24.Rd2 Bf8 25.Bb6? [After all this, I do give Black a chance. 25.a3!+-] 25...a4? [Black

can survive with 25...Bh6! 26.f4 exf4 27.Nd4 f3 28.gxf3 Rxc3 29.bxc3 Nxa2+ 30.Kd1 Nxc3+ 31.Ke1 a4 32.Bc5=] 26.Kd1 Nc6 27.Nxa4 Nb4 28.a3 Nxc2 29.Rxc2 Rxc2 30.Kxc2 Bxe2 31.Bc5 Bh6 32.Nc3 Bf1 33.g4 Bf4 34.h4 Bg2 35.b4 1-0

141 – Nakamura Pickard 2…e6 Defeating the US Champion is extremely difficult for most people and that includes masters. Defeating a grandmaster rated 500 points above you is extremely difficult, even if it’s in a simul. Grandmaster Hikaru Nakamura (born in 1987) won the United States Chess Championship four times. Often Nakamura is the highest rated player in the USA and in the top 10 in the world. Nakamura played on the Internet Chess Club for about 10 years. On this one occasion he played a simultaneous exhibition. One of his opponents was National Master Sid Pickard. Sid Pickard sent me this Queens Knight Defence game shortly after it finished. This opening 1.e4 Nc6 2.d4 e6 3.Nf3 d5 can also be reached by the French Defence after 1.e4 e6 2.d4 Nc6. Nakamura (2718) - Pickard (2200), 50/20 simul Internet Chess Club, 25.09.2005 begins 1.d4 Nc6 2.Nf3 e6 3.e4 d5 4.e5 [More popular are either 4.Nbd2 Nf6 5.e5 Nd7 6.Nb3 Be7 7.Bb5 0-0 8.0-0 a5=; or 4.Nc3 Nf6 5.e5 Ne4 6.Bd3 Bb4 7.Bd2 Nxd2 8.Qxd2 f6=] 4...b6!? [4...f6 5.Bb5 Nge7 6.exf6 gxf6 7.0-0 Bg7 8.Re1 0-0=] 5.c3 Bb7 6.Bd3 Qd7 7.b4 a5 ["Perhaps unnecessary. Black could play 7...0-0-0 to be followed by ...Kb8 and ...f7f6." Pickard] 8.b5 Nce7 9.a4 Nf5 10.g4!? [White decides not to castle kingside. 10.0-0 0-0-0 11.Nbd2+/=] 10...Nfe7 11.h3 h5 12.Rg1 hxg4 13.hxg4 f6 14.Bf4 [14.exf6 gxf6 15.g5+/- Pickard] 14...0-0-0 15.Nbd2 f5 16.gxf5 Nxf5 17.Bxf5 exf5 ["Black stands well now." Pickard] 18.Qe2 [18.Qc2+/=] 18...Re8 19.0-0-0 Nh6 20.Ng5 Kb8 21.e6 Ba3+ [21...Qe7=] 22.Kb1 Qe7 23.Ka2 Bd6 24.Bxd6 cxd6 25.f3? [25.Qf3+/=] 25...Rc8 [25...f4!=/+] 26.Kb3 Rc7 [26...f4 27.Nf7 Nxf7 28.Rxg7 Rhf8=] 27.Rc1 [27.Qe3+/=] 27...Re8 [27...f4=] 28.f4 [28.Qh2+/-] 28...Ng4 29.Nf1 Nf6 30.Nd2 Ne4 31.Ndxe4 dxe4 32.Kb2 Rec8 33.Rgd1 [33.c4 d5 34.c5 bxc5 35.b6 Rc6=/+] 33...Bd5 34.Qh5 Bxe6 [34...Qf6-+] 35.d5 Bg8 36.Qg6 Qf6 [36...e3 37.Ne6 Bxe6 38.dxe6 e2-+] 37.Qxf6 gxf6 38.Ne6 Bxe6 39.dxe6 Rd8 40.Rd5 Re7 41.Rxf5 Rxe6 42.c4 Rc8 43.Kc3 [43.Rd5 Kb7=/+]

43...Rc5 44.Rxc5 dxc5 45.f5 [45.Kd2 Rd6+ 46.Ke3 f5 47.Rg1=] 45...Re5 46.Rf1 e3 47.Kd3 e2 48.Re1 Kc7 49.Kd2 Kd6 50.Kd3 Re7 51.Kd2 Re4 White resigns 0-1

142 – Conquest 2…d6 3.Bg5 Stuart C. Conquest is a British grandmaster. He has been active in chess activities for a long time as a player, commentator and tournament director. I found his writing to be very entertaining. One of Stuart Conquest most successful playing years was 1990. This led to Conquest earning the grandmaster title in 1991. According to FIDE, his peak rating of 2601 came in 2001. Raymond Keene, another British GM, wrote a book with Byron Jacobs entitled “A Complete Defense for Black”. Keene played 1…Nc6. They wrote in the Forward that “1…Nc6 is a pleasant blend of soundness and aggression. There are few Black defences in which White can be overrun with such rapidity…” Zvonimir Mestrovic wins with active creativity in a Queens Knight Defence 1…Nc6. Black pushed the initiative and won a beauty. White pinned the phantom knight with 1.e4 Nc6 2.d4 d6 3.Bg5. Black’s pawn structure after move 8 reminded me of a position Michael Basman might reach after 1.e4 g5. This game is a good example of full court action. Both players are attacking and defending at the same time. Mestrovic speeds up his assault when he responds to an attack with an attack on moves 22 to 24. On move 26 Black sacrifices a rook for a mating attack. The winner’s conquest was the result of bold strategy and accurate tactics. Conquest (2465) - Mestrovic (2440), Bad Woerishofen op 1990 begins 1.e4 Nc6 2.d4 d6 3.Bg5 h6 4.Bh4 g5 5.Bg3 Bg7 6.c3 Nf6 7.Nd2 0-0 8.h4 g4 9.h5 e5 10.dxe5 Nxe5 11.Qc2 c6 [11...Rb8=] 12.Ne2 Re8 13.0-0-0 Qa5 [13...b5=] 14.Kb1 Be6 15.Nb3 [15.Nc1+/=] 15...Qb6 [15...Qa4=] 16.Nf4 Bc4 17.Bxc4 [17.Bh4+/=] 17...Nxc4 18.Rhe1 [18.f3 Ne3=] 18...a5 19.Qd3

[19.Kc1 a4-/+] 19...Qb5 20.Re2 c5 21.f3 d5 22.e5 a4 23.exf6 [23.Na5 Rxa5-/+] 23...Rxe2 24.Qxe2 axb3 25.a3 Bxf6 26.Qd3 Rxa3 27.bxa3 Nxa3+ 28.Kc1 Nc4 29.Qf5 Qa5 30.Qc8+ Bd8 31.Qxg4+ Kh8 [31...Bg5 32.Qc8+ Kg7 33.Qh8+ Kxh8 34.Kb1 Qa2+ 35.Kc1 Qb2#] 32.Ng6+ fxg6 01

Book 9: Chapter 7 – 1.e4 Nc6 2.d4 e5 My preferred Queens Knight Defence is to strike the center with 2…e5 or 2…d5 if possible. Kevitz and Mikenas played 2…e5.

Scotch –3.Nf3 exd4 The move 3.Nf3 leads to the Goring Gambit, Scotch Gambit and Scotch Game. I am not going to cover these openings in detail. Black can avoid these lines with 2...f5, 2...Nf6, 2...d6 or 2...d5.

143 – Miles 4.c3 d3 5.Bxd3 In the early 1970s, I got a very small pamphlet by David Levy on the Goring Gambit. I tried it on several occasions throughout the years 197277, mostly in blitz and offhand games. The Goring Gambit 4.c3 is a lefthanded Blackmar-Diemer Gambit 4.f3. In the Queens Knight Defence 1.e4 Nc6, Tony Miles tried many ideas against 3.Nf3 to reach lesser known positions. In this game Miles declined the Goring Gambit with 4…d3. Playing the White pieces was FIDE Master Dirk Troltenier from Germany. Troltenier (2300) - Miles (2580), Bundesliga 1990 begins 1.e4 Nc6 2.d4 e5 3.Nf3 exd4 4.c3 [The main lines are 4.Nxd4 Nf6 (or 4...Bc5 5.Be3 Qf6 6.c3 Nge7 7.Bc4 0-0 8.0-0 d6=) 5.Nxc6 bxc6 6.e5 Qe7 7.Qe2 Nd5 8.c4 Ba6 9.b3 g6=] 4...d3!? [There is a lot of good theory for both the gambit accepted 4...dxc3 5.Nxc3 Bc5 6.Bc4 d6 7.0-0 Nge7=; and the gambit declined 4...d5 5.exd5 Qxd5 6.cxd4 Bg4 7.Be2 Bxf3 8.Bxf3 Bb4+ 9.Nc3 Qc4=] 5.Bxd3 d6 6.h3 Nf6 [or 6...g6 7.Be3 Bg7 8.0-0 Nf6 9.Nbd2 0-0=] 7.0-0 Be7 8.c4 [8.Be3 Ne5 9.Nxe5 dxe5 10.Qc2 0-0 11.Nd2 Be6 12.Rad1 c6 13.Nf3 Qc7=] 8...Ne5 [Or 8...Nd7 9.Nc3 0-0 10.Nd5 Bf6=] 9.Nc3 0-0 10.Be2 Re8 11.Nd4 c6 12.f4 [12.Be3+/=] 12...Ng6 13.Kh1 Bf8 14.Bd3 Qc7 15.Qf3 a6 16.a4 b6 17.Bd2 Bb7 18.Rae1 Rad8 19.Bc1 Nd7 20.Bc2 Be7 21.Nf5 Bf6 22.Qg3 Nc5 23.b4 Ne6 24.h4 Nd4 [24...h5!?] 25.Nxd4 Bxd4 26.h5 Nf8 27.Rd1 [27.Ne2 Bf6=] 27...Bf6 28.Bb2 [28.e5!+-] 28...Qe7 29.e5 dxe5 30.Rxd8 [30.Ne4=] 30...Qxd8 31.Rd1 Qe7 32.f5 e4 33.c5 [33.Ba1 c5-/+] 33...bxc5 [33...e3-+] 34.bxc5 Be5 [34...e3-+] 35.Qg4 Nd7 36.Qxe4

[36.Nxe4 Bxb2-+] 36...Nxc5 [36...Bc8-+] 37.f6 Nxe4 38.fxe7 Nf2+ 39.Kg1 Nxd1 0-1

144 – Mutesi 4.Bc4 Nf6 5.e5 The word "Roman" has many meanings. In history, Roman is the Empire during the life of Jesus Christ. In building, Roman refers to an architectural style. In math, Roman is a set of numerals. In language, Roman is an alphabet. In religion, Roman is the Catholic Church. A frisky man with a girl has Roman hands and Russian fingers. In chess Roman is GM Roman Dzindzichashvili. One of Dzindzi's favorite openings is the Scotch Gambit. This opening is maybe not the strongest, but it is playable and tricky. “The Queen of Katwe” is a book and a movie based on the chess life of Phiona Mutesi, the girl from Katwe, Uganda, Africa. Phiona learned the game from Coach Robert Katende. Yeonhee Cho of South Korea played the Scotch Gambit at the 40th Olympiad in Istanbul, Turkey. As Black, Phiona Mutesi played aggressively. She opened the f-file by 14...f6 and finished with a mating attack. Cho (1542) - Mutesi, 40th Olympiad Women Istanbul TUR (9.55), 06.09.2012 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 exd4 4.Bc4 Nf6 [If 4...Bb4+ 5.c3 dxc3 6.0-0 (6.bxc3 is the recommended move by Dzindzichashvili) 6...Nge7 (The full Danish Gambit type move is 6...cxb2 7.Bxb2 Nf6 8.Ng5 0-0 9.e5 d5 10.exf6 dxc4 11.Qh5 with a promising attack for White.) 7.bxc3 Bc5 8.Ng5! Ne5 9.Nxf7 Nxf7 10.Bxf7+ Kxf7 11.Qh5+ regained the piece on c5.] 5.e5 d5 [5…Ne4 6.0-0 (Other ideas are 6.Qe2 Nc5 7.c3 or 6.Bd5 Nc5 7.0-0) 6...Be7 7.Re1 Nc5 (7...d5 8.exd6 Nxd6 9.Bd5=) 8.Nxd4 Nxd4 (8...0-0 9.Nc3+/=) 9.Qxd4 Ne6 10.Qg4 0-0 11.Bh6 d5! 12.exd6 Bf6 13.c3 Qxd6 14.Be3=] 6.Bb5 Ne4 7.Nxd4 Bc5 [Or 7...Bd7 8.Bxc6 bxc6 9.0-0 Bc5=] 8.Nxc6!? [8.Be3] 8...Bxf2+ 9.Kf1 Qh4 [9...bxc6 10.Bxc6+ Kf8=] 10.Be2? [White gets confused. Better is to deal with the hanging Nc6 issue by 10.Nxa7+! c6 11.Nxc8 Rxc8 and only then play 12.Be2=] 10...bxc6 11.Nc3 Nxc3 12.bxc3 Bd4? [Black returns the favor. I thought this might be a typo, but the next move proves it was not. After 12...Bb6 and Black is winning.] 13.cxd4 0-0 14.Be3 f6 15.exf6 Rxf6+ 16.Kg1 Bf5 17.Qd2 Be4 18.h3?! [This leaves a hole for the black queen on g3. More challenging is 18.Qe1!+-] 18...Qg3 [Black plays for mate.] 19.Bf1 Raf8 20.Re1 [White

should try 20.h4!+/- to threat Rh3.] 20...Bxc2 21.Rc1 Be4 22.Qe2? [22.h4] 22...Rf3! 23.Re1 Rxe3 24.Qxe3 Rxf1+ 25.Kxf1 Qxg2# Checkmate. 0-1

145 – Karpatchev 4.Nxd4 Qh4 The Scotch Game 4.Nxd4 Qh4 was played by Staunton in the 1840s. Steinitz and others played it a lot from 1860 until 1905. Then the Scotch and the Steinitz 4…Qh4 took a 60 year break when hardly anyone played it. GM Lev Gutman and Sid Pickard specialized in this line and wrote books on it. It is not a well-known line. If you are new to the Scotch Game, the Steinitz 4…Qh4 quickly poses a serious challenge for you. The first thing to notice after 4…Qh4 is both the White pawn on e4 and knight on d4 are under attack. None of the moves White might first think of are playable, such as 5.f3, 5.Bd3, or 5.Nf3. The most common choices are 5.Nc3 or the gambit 5.Nb5. My initial assessment of this line was that White could easily lose a pawn. To hold onto the extra pawn, the Black king may have to slide over to Kd8 (to protect c7) and lose castling privileges. There is real risk for both sides, and real reward in the form of victories. The prepared player profits most. Roland Schmaltz is a German grandmaster and 1-minute bullet chess champion. That requires a quick mind for fast play. Here the Russian Grandmaster Aleksandr Karpatchev won quickly. Schmaltz (2390) - Karpatchev (2505), Cappelle op (5), 1993 begins 1.e4 Nc6 2.Nf3 e5 3.d4 exd4 4.Nxd4 Qh4 [The main lines are 4.Nxd4 Nf6 (or 4...Bc5 5.Be3 Qf6 6.c3 Nge7 7.Bc4 0-0 8.0-0 d6=) 5.Nxc6 bxc6 6.e5 Qe7 7.Qe2 Nd5 8.c4 Ba6 9.b3 g6=] 5.Nc3 [5.Nb5 Bb4+ 6.Bd2 Bc5 7.Qf3 Bb6 8.Be3 Ba5+ 9.c3 a6 10.Nd4 Ne5 11.Qg3 Qxg3 12.hxg3 d6 13.Nd2 Bb6=] 5...Bb4 6.Ndb5 [6.Be2 Qxe4 7.Ndb5 Bxc3+ 8.bxc3 Kd8 9.0-0 Nf6 10.Nd4 Nxd4 11.cxd4 d6 12.Bg5 Qf5 13.Bh4 Bd7 14.Qd2+/=] 6...Ba5 7.Bd3 [7.Be2 a6 8.Nd4 Qxe4 9.Nxc6 dxc6 10.0-0 Qe7 11.Bc4 Nf6 12.Re1 Be6 13.Bg5 0-0 14.Qf3 h6=] 7...a6 8.Na3 b5 9.Bd2? [9.Nab1 Ne5 10.0-0 Nf6 11.Nd2 0-0=] 9...Nf6 10.g3 Qh3 11.Nd5 Nxd5 12.exd5 0-0 13.dxc6 [13.Bxa5 Re8+ 14.Be2 Qg2 15.dxc6 Qxh1+ 16.Kd2 Qxh2-/+] 13...Re8+ 14.Be2 dxc6 15.Rf1 [15.c3 Qg2 16.Rf1 Bh3 17.Be3 Qxh2 18.Bf3 Rxe3+

19.fxe3 Qxb2 20.Nc2 Qxc3+ 21.Kf2 Bxf1 22.Kxf1 Qf6-/+] 15...Bg4 16.f3 [16.Bxa5 Bxe2 17.Qxe2 Rxe2+ 18.Kxe2 b4-+] 16...Qxh2 17.Bxa5 Rad8 18.Bd2 Qxg3+ 19.Rf2 Bh3 0-1

146 – Miles 4.Nxd4 Bb4+ 5.c3 When Tony Miles transposed from the Queens Knight Defence 1...Nc6 into a King Pawn Open Game with 2...e5, White had the opportunity to choose a romantic opening. Here Miles plays his special 4...Bb4+ against the Scotch Game. This avoids opening theory in the more popular 4...Bc5. I like the maneuver 13...Be6, 15...Bd5, and 16...Bc6. Miles picked up three pawns and a knight after a multitude of checks in the game of Andrei-Nestor Cioara vs Anthony J Miles. Cioara (2353) - Miles (2579), 5th HIT Open Nova Gorica SLO (2), 02.02.2000 begins 1.e4 Nc6 2.Nf3 e5 3.d4 exd4 4.Nxd4 Bb4+ 5.c3 Bc5 6.Be3 Bb6 7.Bc4 [7.Nf5] 7...Ne5 [7...Nf6 8.Nxc6 bxc6=] 8.Be2 Nf6 9.f4 Nc6 [9...Ng6 10.Nd2 d5=] 10.Nd2 Nxd4 [10...d5=] 11.Bxd4 0-0 [11...d5=] 12.0-0 d6 13.Bf3 Be6 14.Qe2 Re8 15.h3 Bd5 16.Qd3 Bc6 17.Rfe1 Nd7 18.Qe3 f5 19.Qd3 Qh4 20.e5 [20.Rf1 fxe4 21.Bxe4 d5=] 20...Qxf4 21.Bxc6 bxc6 22.exd6 cxd6 [22...Ne5-/+] 23.Qc4+ [23.Nc4 Nc5=] 23...d5 24.Rxe8+ Rxe8 25.Qxc6 Bxd4+ 26.cxd4 Qxd4+ 27.Kh1 Nf6 28.Nf3 [28.Qc2 Ne4-/+] 28...Qxb2 29.Rd1 [29.Re1 Rxe1+ 30.Nxe1 Qxa2-/+] 29...Qxa2 30.Nd4 [30.Qb7 Qa3-+] 30...Qf2 31.Qb7 [31.Kh2 h6-+] 31...Re1+ 32.Rxe1 Qxe1+ 33.Kh2 Qe5+ 0-1

147 – Schultz 4.Nxd4 Bc5 5.Nxc6 The Scotch Game allows players quick development and sharp attacks. Black played 4.Nxd4 Bc5 below and continued 6...Qh4 to threaten mate in one. Black finished with a knight attack on the queen to defend h7 and uncover the pin to win the bishop on e3 in the game Kai Gylling Nielsen vs Jesper Schultz Pedersen. Nielsen (1897) - Schultz Pedersen (2235), Politiken Cup 2014 Helsingor DEN (10.91), 29.07.2014 begins 1.e4 Nc6 2.Nf3 e5 3.d4 exd4 4.Nxd4 Bc5 5.Nxc6 bxc6 6.Bc4 [6.Bd3 d6 7.0-0 Nf6=] 6...Qh4 7.Qf3 Nf6 [7...d5=/+] 8.Nd2 [8.Bf4 0-0 9.0-0 d5 10.exd5 cxd5=] 8...0-0 9.g3 Qh3 10.Bf1 Qe6 11.Bd3 d5 12.0-0 Re8 13.exd5 cxd5 14.Nb3 Bb6 15.Bd2 Ne4 16.Rae1 Bb7 [16...c5 17.c4 Bb7 18.Bxe4 dxe4-/+] 17.Qh5 [17.Be3 Qd7=/+]

17...Qf6 18.Be3 Re5 [18...Qxb2-/+] 19.Qh3 [19.Qd1 Rae8=/+] 19...Rae8 [19...Ng5 20.Bxg5 Bxf2+ 21.Kg2 d4+ 22.Re4 Qxg5-+] 20.f3 [20.Nd4 Bc8-/+] 20...Ng5 0-1

148 – Miranda 4.Nxd4 Bc5 5.Be3 White plays the Scotch Game line 4.Nxd4 Bc5 5.Be3 to defend the knight on d4. Normal play followed until the move 9.Bf3. After the players castled, Black mounted a kingside attack by opening line with 16...f5. The White pieces were pushed back until Black found a beautiful mate in Miranda Gonzalez vs Russell Granat. Miranda Gonzalez (2027) - Granat (2213), 4NCL 2011-12 Hinkley Island ENG (4.88), 15.01.2012 begins 1.e4 Nc6 2.d4 e5 3.Nf3 exd4 4.Nxd4 Bc5 5.Be3 Qf6 6.c3 Nge7 7.Bc4 Ne5 8.Be2 Qg6 9.Bf3 [9.0-0 d6 10.f3 0-0 11.Nd2 d5 12.Kh1 dxe4 13.fxe4 Bg4 14.Bf4 Bxe2 15.Qxe2 Bd6=] 9...a6 10.Nd2 Nxf3+ 11.Qxf3 d6 12.h3 Bd7 13.0-0 0-0 14.Kh1 Rae8 15.b4? [15.Rac1 Bb6=/+] 15...Bxd4 16.cxd4? f5 17.exf5 Rxf5 18.Qe2 Bb5 19.Qd1 Nd5 20.Rg1 [20.Qb3 Bxf1 21.Nxf1 Qf7-+] 20...Nxe3 21.fxe3 Rxe3 22.Nf3 [22.Qg4 Bc6-+] 22...Bc6 23.Qd2 [23.Rf1 Qg3-+] 23...Qh6 24.Rae1 [24.Rge1 Rfxf3 25.Rxe3 Rxh3+ 26.Rxh3 Qxd2-+] 24...Rfxf3 25.gxf3 Qxh3+ 26.Qh2 Bxf3+ [If 27.Rg2 Rxe1 mate!] 0-1

149 – Markovic 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nxc6 This Queens Knight Defence 1...Nc6 provides just a taste of the popular Scotch Game 4.Nxd4 Nf6 line. White does handle the position well for about 20 moves. Then Black wins a bishop with an x-ray tactic in the game Maja Milanovic vs Marko Markovic. Milanovic (1851) - Markovic (2285), 19th Skopje Open Skopje MKD (3), 26.10.2011 begins 1.e4 Nc6 2.d4 e5 3.Nf3 exd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nxc6 bxc6 6.e5 [6.Bd3 d5=] 6...Ne4 [6...Qe7 7.Qe2 Nd5 8.c4 Nb6=] 7.Be2 [7.Nd2 Nxd2 8.Bxd2 g6=] 7...Bc5 8.0-0 0-0 9.Nd2 [9.Qd3 d5=] 9...Qh4 10.Nxe4 Qxe4 11.Bd3 Qxe5 12.Re1 Qd5 [12...Qf6=] 13.c4 Qd6 14.Qf3 Bd4 15.Bf4 Qf6 16.Qe4 g6 17.Rab1 d6 18.Qxc6 [18.Be3 Bf5=] 18...Qxf4 19.Qxa8 Bxf2+ 20.Kh1 Bxe1 21.Rxe1 Qd2 22.Qe4 Bf5! Black wins the Bd3 by a skewer through the queen. 0-1

Kennedy – 3.dxe5 This line was played as Black by Hugh Alexander Kennedy in London, England several times in 1848. Fritz Reimann reached this same position in Germany in the 1880s, but his games were from the move order 1.e4 e5 2.d4 Nc6.

150 – Chun 3…Nxe5 4.f4 Ng6 I played some rated games on Chess.com. This is a very fine site. When I first started playing there, I beat some low rated players. That only got me a somewhat higher low rating. Then I played people rated near me. Gradually I saw my rating rise to over 2000. Then I stopped playing there and returned to the Internet Chess Club where I’ve been for 20 years. At one point I faced my own defense! That is always challenging. Paul Chun of New York played the Queen's Knight Defence. This particular game was short and sweet, music to my ears. I do not think my move 4.f4 is the best, but it feels more aggressive than the dependable 4.Nf3. I hope for the best of everything in the opening: space, control, development and tactics. I mistimed my g4 move, but I was rewarded with a quick mate anyway. Sawyer - Chun, Live Chess Chess.com, 10.08.2012 begins 1.d4 Nc6 2.e4 e5 3.dxe5 Nxe5 4.f4 [4.Nf3] 4...Ng6 [Black can also simply return with 4...Nc6 5.Nf3 Bc5 6.Nc3 Nf6 (6...d6!? 7.Na4 Bb6 8.Nxb6 axb6 9.Bd3 d5 10.e5 Nge7 11.0-0 Nb4 12.Be2 Bf5 13.Nd4 Be4=) 7.e5 Ng4 8.Bc4 d6 (8...Nf2? 9.Qd5 Qe7 10.Rf1+/-) 9.Ng5+/=] 5.Be3 [The point of 5.Be3 is to prevent 5...Bc5, but White has other good choices. 5.Nf3 d5 6.Nc3 Bb4 7.Qxd5 Qxd5 8.exd5+/=; 5.Nc3 Bb4 6.Qd4 Bxc3+ 7.Qxc3 d5 8.Qxg7+/=; 5.Bc4 c6 6.Nc3 Bc5 7.Nf3 Qe7 8.Qe2=] 5...b6 [5...Nf6 6.e5 (or 6.Nc3 Bb4 7.e5 Qe7 8.Nge2 Ng4 9.Bg1 d6=) 6...Qe7 7.Qf3 Qb4+ 8.Nd2 Nh4 9.Qe2 Nd5 10.0-0-0 Nxe3 11.Qxe3 Nf5=] 6.Nf3 Bc5 7.Bxc5 bxc5 8.Bc4 Nh6

9.Nc3 0-0 10.0-0 d6 11.Ng5 Bg4 12.Qd5 Rb8 13.h3 Bd7 14.e5 [14.b3+/-] 14...Ne7 15.Qd3 Nhf5 [15...Bf5 16.Qe3=] 16.exd6 [16.g4!+-] 16...cxd6 17.g4 Nh4? [17...h6 18.gxf5 Nxf5 19.Nxf7 Rxf7 20.Bxf7+ Kxf7 21.b3+/-] 18.Qxh7# 1-0

151 – Spirin 3…Nxe5 4.Bf4 In the Queens Knight Defence game between Murad Abelyan and Alexandr Spirin the players castled opposite sides. White's attack arrived first, but Black’s king found safety. White's king was not so fortunate, and Black crashed through for checkmate. Abelyan - Spirin, Moscow Open RUS (7.120), 06.02.2015 begins 1.e4 Nc6 2.d4 e5 3.dxe5 Nxe5 4.Bf4 Ng6 [4...Qf6 5.Be3 b6 6.Qd2 Bb7 7.Nc3 Qd6=] 5.Bg3 [5.Be3 Nf6 6.h4 Nxe4 7.h5 Ne7 8.Bd3 Nf6=/+] 5...d6 [5...Nf6 6.Nc3 Bb4 7.Qd4 c5 8.Qd3 0-0 9.Nge2=; 5...Bc5 6.Nc3 d6 7.h4 h5 8.Nf3 Nf6 9.Qd2 0-0 10.0-0-0=] 6.Nc3 Nf6 7.Bc4 [7.Qd2 Be7 8.f4 0-0 9.Nf3 c6 10.f5 Ne5 11.0-0-0=; 7.f4 h5 8.Qd2 h4 9.Bf2 Ng4 10.0-0-0 Nxf2 11.Qxf2=] 7...Be7 8.Qd2 0-0 9.0-0-0 a6 10.f4 b5 11.Bd3 Nh5 12.Nd5 Bg4 [12...c5=] 13.Nf3 c5?! [13...c6=] 14.Bf2 [14.f5+/=] 14...Bf6 [14...Bxf3 15.gxf3 Ngxf4=/+] 15.h3 [15.f5+/=] 15...Bxf3 16.gxf3 Nhxf4 17.Nxf6+ Qxf6 18.Be3 Rfd8 19.h4 c4 [19...Nxd3+ 20.Qxd3 Qxf3-+] 20.h5 cxd3 21.hxg6 Rdc8 22.gxh7+ Kh8 23.c3 Ne2+ [23...b4-/+] 24.Kb1 Rxc3 25.bxc3 [25.Bg5! Qd4 26.Be3=] 25...Nxc3+ 26.Kc1 Ne2+ [26...Rc8-+] 27.Kb1 Nc3+ 28.Kc1 Rc8 29.Qe1 Na4+ 30.Bc5 Qb2 mate 0-1

152 – Bauer 4.Nf3 Qf6 5.Nxe5 This 3.dxe5 Kennedy Exchange line of Queens Knight Defence leads to rapid equality. Black wins many pawns and a bishop in the game between Jean-Christophe Olivier and Christian Bauer. Olivier (2371) - Bauer (2621), 3rd ch-Francophonie Rapid Geneva SUI, 03.07.2016 begins 1.e4 Nc6 2.d4 e5 3.dxe5 Nxe5 4.Nf3 Qf6 5.Nxe5 [5.Nc3 Nxf3+ 6.gxf3 Bb4 7.Bd2 Ne7 8.Qe2+/=] 5...Qxe5 6.Bd3 Bb4+ [6...d5=] 7.Nc3 Bxc3+ 8.bxc3 d6 [8...Qxc3+ 9.Bd2 Qe5 10.0-0=] 9.0-0 Nf6 10.f4 Qxc3 11.Be3 [11.Rb1=] 11...Bg4 12.Qb1 [12.Qc1 0-0=] 12...0-0 13.Re1 Rfe8 14.Bf2 [14.Qxb7 Be6=] 14...Bd7 15.h3 Bc6 16.Re3 Qd2 17.c3 Re6 [17...d5=/+] 18.a4 Rae8!? [18...Kh8=] 19.Bc4? [19.e5+/=] 19...Bxe4 [19...Nxe4-+] 20.Qb4 c5 21.Qa5 Bd5 22.Rxe6 fxe6 23.Bb5 [23.Bxd5 Nxd5-+] 23...Rf8 24.Re1 Ne4 25.Re2 Qxc3 [25...Qc1+! 26.Be1 Ng3-+]

26.Qxa7 [26.Qxc3 Nxc3-+] 26...Nxf2 27.Rxf2 Qe3 28.Qb6 h6 29.Kf1 [29.Qxd6 c4-+] 29...Rxf4 30.Rxf4 Qxf4+ 31.Kg1 Qd4+ 32.Kf1 [32.Kh2 Qe5+ 33.Kg1 Qe1+ 34.Kh2 Qd2-+] 32...Qd1+ 33.Kf2 Qd2+ 34.Be2 Bc4 0-1

153 – Miles 4.Nf3 Bb4+ 5.c3 Sergey Kudrin born in 1959 has been an American grandmaster for over 30 years. I remember him from tournaments in the early 1980s. In those events where I played, Kudrin was always rated at or near the top in the pairing charts. The biggest impact Kudrin has had on me has been my study of his Gruenfeld Defence games. Sergey has played this opening at a high level for decades. He does not always play the same variations, but any that he does play must be good. Kudrin has demonstrated great endgame skill. Also I have been amazed at how well he attacks and defends at the same time in wide open positions. Originally Kudrin was born in the Soviet Union, however he has spent almost all his life in the United States. Here Sergey Kudrin played against the Queens Knight Defence of Anthony Miles. Years ago I read a great book entitled, “Tony Miles: It's Only Me: England's First Chess Grandmaster” compiled by Geoff Lawton. Miles played a lot of Sicilian Defences, but a whole book could have been done on just his 1.e4 Nc6 games. Kudrin (2570) - Miles (2580), USA 1989 begins 1.e4 Nc6 2.d4 e5 3.dxe5 Nxe5 4.Nf3 Bb4+!? 5.c3 Bd6 [5...Nxf3+ 6.Qxf3 Bc5 7.Qg3 Qf6 8.e5 Qg6 9.Bd3 Qxg3 10.hxg3+/=] 6.Nbd2 [6.Nxe5 Bxe5 7.f4 Bf6 8.Bc4+/=] 6...Nxf3+ [6...Qe7!?] 7.Nxf3 [7.Qxf3 Qf6 8.Nc4+/-] 7...Ne7 8.e5 [8.Be3+/=] 8...Bc5 9.b4 [9.Bd3+/=] 9...Bb6 10.Bf4 [White delays castling to the point where Black equalizes. Better is 10.Bd3+/=] 10...0-0 11.Bc4 Ng6 12.Bg3 d6 13.exd6 Re8+ 14.Be2 Qf6 15.0-0 cxd6 16.Bb5 Rd8 17.Qd2 Bg4 [17...a5!?=] 18.Nd4 Rac8 19.Rac1 Ne5 20.Rfe1 Rc7 [20...a6=] 21.Bf1 a6 22.Re4 Qg6 23.Rce1 f6 24.Kh1 Rdc8 [24...Rcc8=] 25.R4e3 [25.f3+/=] 25...Bd7 [25...Qf7=] 26.a4 [26.f4+/=] 26...h5 27.f4 Ng4?! [27...Nc4!=] 28.Re7 h4 29.Bxh4 Qh5 30.Bg3 [30.Nf3+/-] 30...Rxc3 31.Rxd7? [31.Nf3 Rxf3!=] 31...Rxg3 32.h3 Qd5 33.Nf3 Qxf3 34.Bc4+

Rxc4 35.gxf3 Rxh3+ 36.Kg2 Rh2+ 37.Kg3 Rxd2 38.Ree7 Nh6 39.Rxg7+ Kf8 40.Rh7 Rcc2 41.Rh8+ Ng8 42.Kg4 Rg2+ 43.Kf5 Rg7 44.Rxd6 Rc6 0-1

Kevitz – 3.d5 Alexander Kevitz played against this in the 1940s and 1950s in several notable games. Kennedy, Nimzowitsch, Van Geet and many others also played against 3.d5, but it is confusing to name every line after every significant player to touch it. I pick Kevitz.

154 – Djurhuus 3…Nce7 4.g3 Black treated this Queens Knight 3.d5 Nce7 like a Kings Indian Defence. White won the Exchange but gave up too much, like a bishop and five pawns, in Erlend Mikalsen vs Rune Djurhuus. Mikalsen (2297) - Djurhuus (2421), TCh-NOR Elite 2017-18 Oslo NOR (1.4), 01.12.2017 begins 1.e4 Nc6 2.d4 e5 3.d5 Nce7 4.g3 Nf6 5.Bg2 d6 6.Ne2 g6 7.0-0 Bg7 8.Nbc3 0-0 9.h3 c6 10.f4 exf4 11.Bxf4 [11.Nxf4 cxd5 12.exd5 b5=/+] 11...cxd5 12.Bg5? [12.exd5 Qb6+ 13.Kh1 Nh5=/+] 12...Nxe4 13.Bxe4 dxe4 14.Nd5 Re8 15.Nec3 Qd7 16.Nxe7+ Rxe7 17.Bxe7 Qxe7 18.Kh2 [18.Re1 f5-/+] 18...Qe6 19.Qg4 Qxg4 20.hxg4 Bxc3 21.bxc3 Bxg4 22.Rab1 b6 23.Rfe1 f5 24.Kg2 Rc8 25.Rb3 Kf7 26.Kf2 Ke6 27.Ke3 [27.a4 Rc5-+] 27...Ke5 28.a4 g5 29.Rf1 d5 30.a5 bxa5 31.Kd2 f4 32.gxf4+ gxf4 33.Rb7 [33.Ra3 e3+ 34.Kd3 h5-+] 33...e3+ Black's passed pawns cannot be stopped. If 34.Ke1 h5+- or if 34.Kd3 Bh3+. 0-1

155 – Sawyer 3…Nce7 4.f4 The Queen's Knight Defence 1.e4 Nc6 2.d4 e5 transposes to the King Pawn 1.e4 e5 2.d4 Nc6. The position also can be reached in an Englund Gambit 1.d4 e5 2.e4 Nc6. The advance 3.d5 Nce7 looks good to White at first. Black has no immediate threats. The knight on e7 temporarily blocks Black’s pieces. White’s 4.f4 is a double-edge sword as White is vulnerable to a queen check. That happened in my game below. After 5.fxe5? Qh4+, Black was winning. The fight continued until a tactic decided the game. jchr (1857) - Sawyer (2025), ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 03.11.2012 begins 1.e4 e5 2.d4 Nc6 3.d5 Nce7 4.f4 Ng6 5.fxe5? [Better is 5.Nh3 exf4

6.Nxf4 Bd6=] 5...Qh4+ 6.g3 [6.Kd2 Qxe4-/+] 6...Qxe4+ 7.Be2 Qxh1 8.Be3 Qxh2 9.Nd2 Qxg3+ 10.Bf2 Qxe5 11.Ndf3 Qf6 12.Bd4 Qf4 13.Qd3 Nf6 14.Be3 Qe4 15.Qc3 Bb4 White resigns 0-1

156 – Wood 3…Nce7 4.Nf3 Most major tournaments in Florida had an Under 2000 or Under 2100 section. You could only play up one section, so the Open section often had no one below 1800 or 1900. The State Championship was different. They gave everyone a chance for the title. Daryn Wood boldly decided to play for the championship which was played in 2005 in Altamonte Springs, a few miles north of Orlando, Florida. Daryn was rated 1764. He was the lowest rated player that I faced in a Florida tournament. I chose the Queen's Knight Defence 1.e4 Nc6 (or the Nimzowitsch Defence). After 2.d4 e5 (Mikenas), White turned down the chance to play a Scotch Game with 3.Nf3 and played 3.d5. The game featured a blockade in the nature of "My System" by Aron Nimzowitsch. I made two piece sacrifices, each of which net me a pawn. Once again I even my record in this tournament. Wood - Sawyer, FL State Championship (4), 04.09.2005 begins 1.e4 Nc6 2.d4 [This is almost as common as 2.Nf3, but not any better.] 2...e5 [2...d5 is the alternative. I play both moves.] 3.d5 [3.Nf3 Scotch Game] 3...Nce7 4.Nf3 Ng6 [Here we have a Van Geet Advanced Variation Reversed.] 5.c4 Bb4+ 6.Nc3 Bxc3+ [Exchanging off the bad bishop.] 7.bxc3 d6 8.Be2 Nf6 9.Qc2 0-0 10.0-0 b6 [My idea is obviously to hinder c4-c5 and allow my bishop to move away from c8 without leaving the b-pawn hanging on b7. More dynamic is to play for ...c7-c6 (instead of ...b7-b6), but here I decided to play for a kingside attack and ignore the queenside. Alternatives are 10...Qe7!? or 10...Nf4!?] 11.h3 Nd7 12.a4 a5 [12...Nc5=] 13.Be3 Nh4!? 14.Nd2 Ng6 15.Nf3 Nc5! 16.Ne1 f5 17.f3 fxe4 [Also good is 17...Qh4!-/+] 18.fxe4 Rxf1+ 19.Bxf1 Qh4 20.Bxc5 dxc5 [There is a lot in favor of 20...bxc5! 21.Nf3 Qh5-/+] 21.Nf3 Qf6 22.Bd3? Bxh3! 23.Rf1 Bd7 24.Qd1 [I thought White might play 24.Nd4 when Black has 24...Qg5-+] 24...Rf8 25.Bc2 Ne7 [25...Nf4!-+] 26.Rf2 Nc8 27.Qf1 Qe7 28.Qe2 Nd6 [I learned this idea of blockading the pawn with the knight from Nimzowitsch when I was young. White will be tied down to defending e4/c4. Black will gradually advance the kingside pawns and increase his advantage.] 29.Kf1

Bg4 30.Ke1 Bxf3 31.gxf3 Qg5 32.Kd1 g6 33.Bd3 Kg7 34.Kc2 h5! 35.Qf1 Qe3! 36.Be2? Nxe4! 37.Bd3 Qxf2+ 0-1

157 – Kevitz 4.Nf3 Ng6 5.Nc3 Benjamin Altman of Flushing, New York was a prominent chess player in the 1930s and 1940s. Altman finished third in the US Open in 1943. The next year in 1944 Altman again competed in the United States Chess Championship. This time he posted a winning record of 9-8, just ahead of Weaver W. Adams with 8-9. During the World War II years of 1941-1945, the top players in America were Samuel Reshevsky and Reuben Fine. Both would have been potential contenders for the World Championship, but Alexander Alekhine and any challengers were unable to play. The US tournament competition to Fine and Reshevsky were players like Arnold Denker, Herman Steiner, Anthony Santasiere, Weaver W. Adams, Isaac Kashdan and Israel Albert Horowitz. Many others just below that top level were a couple dozen other masters who had a great tournament from time to time. Alexander Kevitz (1902-1981) of Brooklyn was a chess master. He contributed original ideas to wide variety of openings. Kevitz graduated from Cornell and worked as a pharmacist. In the Queens Knight Defence, Alexander Kevitz was known to play as Black 1…Nc6 and 2…e5. Altman played Kevitz in the Nimzowitsch Defence after 1.e4 Nc6 2.d4 e5 3.d5 Nce7. This position is a Van Geet Advance Variation in reverse. Altman - Kevitz, New York 1946 begins 1.e4 Nc6 2.d4 e5 3.d5 Nce7 4.Nf3 Ng6 5.Nc3 [5.h4 h5 6.Bg5 Nf6 7.Nc3 Bb4 8.Nd2 d6 9.g3 c6 10.Be2 Nf8=] 5...Nf6 6.Bd3 Bc5 7.Qe2 [7.Na4 Bb4+ 8.c3 Be7=] 7...0-0 8.Be3 d6 9.h3 a6 10.g3 b5 11.a4 Bxe3 12.Qxe3 Bd7 13.Qe2 [13.Kf1 b4=/+] 13...c6 14.Nd2 [14.dxc6 Bxc6 15.axb5 axb5 16.0-0=] 14...b4 15.Na2 cxd5 16.Nxb4 dxe4 17.Nxe4 Rb8 18.c3 a5 19.Nxf6+ gxf6 20.Nd5 f5 [20...Bc6=] 21.Qd2 [21.Bb5+/=] 21...f4 22.h4 Bc6 23.Be4 [23.Bb5+/=] 23...f5 24.Bg2 fxg3 25.fxg3 e4 26.Nf4 [26.0-0=] 26...Nxf4 27.gxf4 Qb6

28.Rb1 Bxa4 29.Qd5+ Rf7 30.Qd2 Rg7 31.Bf1 Bb3 32.c4 Qc5 [32...e3-+] 33.Rc1 a4 34.Qd5+ Qxd5 35.cxd5 Bxd5 36.Rd1 Ba2 37.Rxd6 Rxb2 38.Ra6 Bb3 39.Rb6 [39.Ra8+ Kf7 40.Ra7+ Kf6-+] 39...e3? [39...Rc7-+] 40.Bc4+ [Or 40.Rb8+ Kf7-+] 40...Kf8 41.Rb8+ Ke7 0-1

158 – Gasanov 4.c4 Ng6 5.g3 This Queens Knight Defence illustrates a tactical sacrifice that allows Black to fork the queen and rook. White was not prepared for the possibility of 13...fxe4+ winning the queen. Eventually, Black won the double Exchange and more in this game between Ruslan Kurayan and Eidar Gasanov. Kurayan (2379) - Gasanov (2482), ch-UKR Blitz 2017 Omelnyk UKR (6.3), 14.10.2017 begins 1.e4 Nc6 2.d4 e5 3.d5 Nce7 4.c4 Ng6 5.g3 Bc5 6.Bg2 d6 7.Qd3 [7.Nc3 Nf6=] 7...Nf6 8.Be3 Bxe3 9.Qxe3 0-0 10.Nc3 [10.Nf3 h5=] 10...Ng4 [10...c5=] 11.Qd3 [11.Qe2 c5=] 11...f5 12.h3? [12.Qe2 f4=] 12...Nxf2! 13.Qe3 [Not 13.Kxf2? fxe4+ wins queen.] 13...Nxh1 14.Bxh1 f4 15.Qf2 fxg3 16.Qxg3 Qh4 17.Nce2 Qxg3+ 18.Nxg3 Nf4 19.h4 Bg4 20.Kd2 g6 21.Rc1 c5 22.dxc6 bxc6 23.c5 [23.Ke3 Rab8-+] 23...Rad8 24.Bf3 dxc5+ 25.Kc2 Bxf3 26.Nxf3 Nd3 27.Ng5 [27.Ng1 Nxc1+] 27...Rf2+ 28.Kb1 Nxc1 29.Kxc1 [29.Nh3 Rh2-+] 29...Rdd2 30.Nh3 Rc2+ 31.Kd1 Rfd2+ 32.Ke1 Rd3 0-1

159 – Teichmann 4.c4 Ng6 5.Nc3 As far as I know, FIDE Master Erik Teichmann of England is not connected to the one-eyed German master Richard Teichmann from 100 years ago (after whom the BDG 5.Nxf3 Bg4 is named). Today’s Teichmann played Black in a Queens Knight Defence. White threatens early queen checks on b5 to win the Bc5, which Black avoided by 10...Ba5 since 11.Qb5+ c6 and Black’s queen protects the bishop. Black mounted a strong attack on both sides of the board in Marc Capellades Subirana vs Erik Teichmann. Capellades Subirana (2153) - Teichmann (2312), 18th Sant Marti Open 2016 Barcelona ESP (9.21), 21.07.2016 begins 1.e4 Nc6 2.d4 e5 3.d5 Nce7 4.c4 Ng6 5.Nc3 Bc5 6.Qd3 d6 7.a3 N8e7 8.b4 Bb6 9.c5 dxc5 10.bxc5 Ba5 11.Bd2 0-0 12.Nge2 f5 13.f3 fxe4 14.fxe4 b6 15.Qc4 Kh8 16.c6 a6 17.a4 [17.h3 Ng8=/+] 17...Qd6 18.Nc1 [18.h3 Qf6=/+] 18...Qf6 19.Kd1 Bg4+ 20.Be2 [20.Kc2 Nc8-/+] 20...Bxe2+ [20...Qf2!-+] 21.N1xe2 Nc8 22.Kc2 Nd6 23.Qd3 Nf4 [23...Qf2=/+] 24.Nxf4 exf4 25.Rhf1 Qe5 26.Rae1 b5 27.g3 fxg3 28.Rxf8+ [28.Qxg3 Qe7=/+] 28...Rxf8 29.Qxg3 Qd4 30.axb5

[30.Qd3 Bxc3-/+] 30...Nxb5 31.Qe3 [31.d6 cxd6-+] 31...Qc4 32.Ra1 Bxc3 33.Bxc3 Nxc3 0-1

Book 9: Chapter 8 – 1.e4 Nc6 2.d4 d5 Previously we considered Queens Knight Defence games with 2…e5 such as what Schuyler recommended. Now we turn to the games with 2…d5. This was the recommendation of Wisnewski. Many positions have a Scandinavian or French Defence flavor.

Mieses – 3.Nc3 These first three moves 1.e4 Nc6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 could be played by either side in any order. Now it is decision time for Black. If Black plays 3...e6, see French Defence.

160 – Copy Cat 3...Nf6 4.e5 Ne4 What happens in a Double Queen Knight Opening? Here is one example that included a trap. Great traps work best when losing moves look like good ideas. Equestrian competitions require horses to jump over obstacles. Some leaps are too dangerous. While it may be easy to get onto a square, it may be very hard to get out. Jumping a Black knight over a White e5 pawn with Nf6Ne4 is risky business especially if White still has a pawn at d2 or f2. The steed may need to retreat from foreign territory if kicked by a pawn. I knew the position after 1.Nc3 Nc6 2.d4 d5 3.e4 both from the BlackmarDiemer Gambit Avoided 1.d4 d5 2.e4 Nc6 3.Nc3 and the Queens Knight Defence 1.e4 Nc6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3. Black's move 3...Nf6 is playable and 4...Ne4 is provocative. White's best reply is 5.Nxe4! The knight trap try 5.Nce2!? is tempting in blitz. Sawyer - lolo (1728), ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 30.03.2014 begins 1.Nc3 Nc6 2.d4 d5 3.e4 Nf6 4.e5 Ne4 5.Nce2!? [5.Nxe4 dxe4 6.c3 Bf5 7.Ne2 e6 8.Ng3+/=] 5...Bf5?! [Black must play 5...f6!= when White chooses between 6.Nf4 or 6.f3 Ng5 7.Bxg5] 6.f3 e6? [Most people miss Black’s brilliant defense: 6...Nb4! 7.fxe4 Bxe4 8.Kf2! Nxc2 9.Rb1 Na3 10.bxa3 Bxb1 11.Qb3 Bf5 12.Qxb7=] 7.fxe4 dxe4 8.c3 b5 9.Be3 b4

10.Ng3 a5? [Losing a second knight.] 11.Bb5 Qd7 12.Qa4 0-0-0 13.Bxc6 Qe7 14.Qxa5 [Black resigns just before 15.Qa8# checkmate.] 1-0

161 – Arman 3…Nf6 4.e5 Nd7 Queens Knight Defence 1...Nc6 Mogens Moe vs Deniz Arman. John Vehre used to play 4...Nd7 since 5.Nxd5 Ndb8! Black regains the pawn by taking on d4, however White is better are 6.Nc3+=. Moe (2185) - Arman (2377), Copenhagen CC 2017 Ballerup DEN (5.10), 12.05.2017 begins 1.e4 Nc6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.e5 Nd7 5.Nxd5 Ndb8 6.Ne3 [Maybe be better is 6.Nc3! Qxd4 7.Be3 Qxe5 8.Nf3 Qd6=] 6...Qxd4 7.Qxd4 Nxd4 8.c3 Ne6 9.Nf3 g6 10.b3 [10.h4 h5=] 10...Bg7 11.Bb2 Nd7 12.c4 Ndc5 13.Be2 c6 14.Rd1 a5 15.Nd4 Nf4 16.g3 Nxe2 17.Nxe2 [17.Kxe2=] 17...a4 18.b4 a3 19.Bd4 Na4 20.Rd2 Nb2 21.f4 f6 22.exf6 Bxf6 23.Bxf6 exf6 24.Nd4 Kf7 25.Ke2 [25.c5 Bh3=] 25...Re8 26.Rc1 Ra4 27.Rc3 Rxb4 28.Ndc2 Rxc4 29.Rxa3 Rce4 30.Kf3 Nc4 31.Nxc4 Rxc4 32.Ne3 Rce4 33.Rb2 h5 34.Rb6 Rd4 35.Rab3 Rd2 36.Rb2 [36.h3 Rxa2+] 36...Rd3 37.Re2 Bg4+ 0-1

162 – Gilevych 3…Nf6 4.e5 Nd7 The strategy of my early Caro-Kann Defence years as Black was to castle queenside and attack kingside. This worked against my weaker opponents. It’s sometimes a great strategy to use in the Queens Knight Defence. Black mounts a kingside assault after 11...0-0-0 with moves like 12...f5, 13...h6, 14...g5, and 17...Rdg8. White held his own for a while, but eventually Black’s strength prevailed in Valerio Carnicelli vs Artem Gilevych. Carnicelli (2149) - Gilevych (2409), 26th Porto San Giorgio Op Porto San Giorgio ITA (4.2), 25.08.2015 begins 1.e4 Nc6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.e5 Nd7 5.Nf3 Nb6 6.h3 Bf5 7.Bd3 Bxd3 8.Qxd3 e6 9.0-0 Be7 10.Nh2 [10.Ne2 Nb4=] 10...Qd7 11.a3 0-0-0 12.f4 f5 13.Ne2 h6 14.b3 g5 15.Be3 gxf4 [15...Kb8=/+] 16.Nxf4 Bg5 17.Qe2 Rdg8 18.Kh1 Bxf4 19.Rxf4 Nd8 [19...Kb8 20.Rh4=] 20.Bd2 Nf7 21.h4 Qc6 22.Rc1 Rg7 23.Rf2 Qd7 [23...Rhg8=] 24.a4 Kb8 25.Qb5 Qd8 26.Nf3 a6 27.Qe2 Rg4 28.a5 [28.c4 dxc4=] 28...Nc8 29.c4 Ne7 30.Rg1 [30.Be1 Qd7-/+] 30...dxc4 [30...Ng5 31.g3 Nh3-+] 31.bxc4 [31.Rb1 c3-+] 31...Qxd4 [31...Re4-+] 32.Rc1 Qe4 33.Be3 Nc6 0-1

163 – Muse 3…e5!? 4.Nxd5 The Queens Knight 1.e4 Nc6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 e5 looks risky. Black throws all the same punches. White’s punches may land first, but his king gets stuck in the center in Joerg Feikes vs Drazen Muse. Feikes (2022) - Muse (2393), Lichtenrader Herbst 2015 Berlin GER, 26.10.2015 begins 1.e4 Nc6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 e5 4.Nxd5 exd4 [4...Nxd4 5.Nf3 Bg4 6.Be2 Bxf3 7.Bxf3 c6 8.Ne3 Nf6=] 5.Nf3 [5.Bc4 Nf6 6.Nf3 Be6 7.Bg5 Be7 8.0-0 h6 9.Bxf6 Bxf6=] 5...Nf6 6.Nxf6+ Qxf6 7.Bg5 [7.Bb5 Bc5=] 7...Qg6 8.Bb5 h6 9.Bh4 Qxe4+ 10.Kf1 Bc5 11.Qd2 0-0 12.Re1 Qd5 13.c4 Qd6 [13...Qf5-/+] 14.a3 [14.Bxc6 Bb4 15.Be7 Bxd2 16.Bxd6 cxd6 17.Bxb7 Bxb7 18.Nxd2 d5=/+] 14...a5 [14...a6!?-/+] 15.Bxc6 Qxc6 16.Nxd4 Qb6 17.Nb5 [17.Nf3 Bf5-+] 17...Be6 18.Qf4 Rac8 [18...Rae8-+] 19.Bg3 Rfe8 20.b3 g5 21.Qf3 [21.Qc1 c6-+] 21...a4 22.Qc3 axb3 23.Rb1 c6 24.Nd6 Bxd6 25.Bxd6 Rcd8 26.Qg3 [26.c5 Qb5+ 27.Kg1 Bf5-+] 26...Bxc4+ 27.Kg1 Qd4 0-1

164 – Keilhack 3…e5 4.Bb5 Harald Keilhack is a FIDE Master from Germany. Keilhack is the author of two Queens Knight books. The first was “1…Sc6!” with Rainer Schlenker. Then he wrote “Knight on the Left 1.Nc3” first in German and later in English. I bought all of these books. His training partner here is FM Aleksandar Vuckovic from Germany. Vuckovic - Keilhack, rapid (training) Germany, 1995 begins 1.e4 Nc6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 e5 4.Bb5 [Best is 4.dxe5! d4 5.Nd5 (5.Nce2 Bc5 6.f4 f6 7.Nf3 fxe5 8.fxe5+/=) 5...Nge7 6.Bg5 Be6 7.Nf4 Qd7 8.Nf3 Ng6 9.Nxg6 +/=] 4...dxe4 5.d5 [5.Nge2 f5 6.0-0 Bd6 7.dxe5 Bxe5 8.Bf4 Qxd1 9.Raxd1 Bxf4 10.Nxf4 Bd7=] 5...a6 6.Ba4 b5 7.Bb3? [7.Nxb5 axb5 8.Bxb5 Nge7 9.dxc6 Qxd1+ 10.Kxd1 Nf5 Bc5=] 7...Nd4 8.Nge2 Nxb3 9.axb3 Bb7 10.0-0 Nf6 [10...f5-/+] 11.Bg5 Be7 12.Bxf6 Bxf6 13.f3 [13.Ng3 g6=/+] 13...exf3 14.Rxf3 0-0 15.Ne4 [15.Ng3 Be7-/+] 15...Be7 16.c4 f5 17.N4g3 Qd7 18.Qc2 [18.Kh1 Rad8-+] 18...e4 [18...g6 19.Rd3 Bc5+ 20.Kh1 b4-+] 19.Rff1 Bc5+ 20.Kh1 b4 21.Nf4 Rae8 22.Ne6 [22.Ra5 Bb6-/+] 22...Rxe6

23.dxe6 Qxe6 24.Ra5 Qb6 25.Raa1 g6 [25...f4-+] 26.Rad1 [26.Ne2 Qd6+] 26...Qe6 27.Ne2 Qe5 28.Nf4 e3 [28...g5!-+] 29.Qe2 [29.Nd3 Qe7-/+] 29...Re8 [29...Bd6-+] 30.Rd7 [30.Nd3 Qe7-/+] 30...Bd6 31.c5 Qxc5 32.Nh5 gxh5 33.Qxh5 Bxg2+ 34.Kxg2 Qc6+ 35.Kg1 Qxd7 0-1

165 – Penullar 3…dxe4 4.Be3 Peter Mcgerald Penullar, our chess friend from the Philippines, played a match in Christian Chess World attempting to play the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit. The game began 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 Nc6, which could be called a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit Avoided. This transposes to the Queen's Knight Defence 1.e4 Nc6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4. Eric Schiller called this the Mieses Defense in his 1986 book on the "Blackmar-Diemer Gambit": "To be perfectly truthful, Mieses was not the first to employ the system against the Blackmar-Diemer. That honor belongs to Kipke, but his destruction at the hands of Kurt Richter was so devastating that I passed him over. One day the BDG crowd will straighten out the nomenclature." Christoph Wisnewski (now Scheerer) wrote in his "Play 1...Nc6!" that it is "a line that lives on the brink of refutation every day." He prefers 3...e6. The main line is 4.d5! Against "ArthurSU" Penullar chose 4.Be3!? Gradually White began to outplay his opponent. Penullar - ArthurSU, CHRISTIAN CHESS WORLD, 2012, Match #6 Chess.com, 04.01.2012 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 Nc6 [This transposes 1.e4 Nc6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4.] 4.Be3!? [The most forceful and popular move is 4.d5! Ne5 5.f3! exf3 6.Nxf3 Nxf3+ 7.Qxf3 Nf6 8.Bf4 Milner Barry - Mieses, Margate 1935 when White has a lead in development and play for the pawn.] 4...Nf6 5.f3 exf3 6.Nxf3 Bg4 7.h3 Bxf3 8.Qxf3 e6 9.0-0-0 [White has an excellent attacking position.] 9...Bd6 10.d5 [Interesting is the surprising tactical shot 10.Ba6!+/=] 10...Ne5 11.Qe2 0-0?! [Natural is 11...exd5 12.Nxd5 Nxd5 13.Rxd5 0-0 where Black is a pawn up.] 12.dxe6 fxe6 13.Bg5 Qe7 14.Ne4 Qf7 [14...Nf7!?] 15.Nxd6 cxd6 16.Rxd6 h6? [After 16...Nfd7 17.Qe4+/- White has two bishops.] 17.Bxh6!? [17.Qxe5 hxg5 18.Bc4 is very powerful.] 17...gxh6 [17...Nc6 and Black is "just" down a pawn.] 18.Qxe5 Rae8 19.Bc4 Nd5 20.Rf1 Qc7? [Losing more material. 20...Qg7 21.Qxg7+ Kxg7 22.Rxf8 Kxf8 23.Bxd5 exd5 24.Kd2+-] 21.Rxf8+ Kxf8 22.Bxd5 Qf7? 23.Bxe6 Qf1+? 24.Rd1 Qf2? [Allows a mate in 6.] 25.Qh8+ Ke7 26.Rd7+ [If Black plays on, the

end comes 26.Rd7+ Kxe6 27.Qxe8+ Kf5 28.Rf7+ Kg6 29.Qg8+ Kh5 30.Qg4#] 1-0

166 – Okhotnik 4.d5 Nb8 How often do you undevelop a knight and return it to its original square? The Closed Ruy Lopez Breyer Variation sees Black play 9...Nb8 to shift the knight from c6 to d7. Black has a choice in the Queen's Knight Nimzowitsch Defence line after 1.e4 Nc6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.d5. Weak players drop the knight with 4… Na5 5.b4! Club players often choose 4...Nb4 5.a3 Na6. Then as White may try either 6.Nxe4+= or first 6.Bxa6+=. Most players play 4…Ne5 (see next game). Some masters and most chess engines prefer 4…Nb8! as best. Bogoljubow, Deppe, Van Geet and Larsen played this in the early years. Note this variation can arise from the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit after 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 Nc6 4.d5 Nb8. Viacheslav Malyi born in 1992 is a FIDE Master from Ukraine. Grandmaster Vladimir Okhotnik was born in the Soviet Union in 1950 in Ukraine. In the 1990s Okhotnik became a French citizen. The grandmaster has played 1.e4 Nc6 off and on for 20 years. In the game FM Viacheslav Malyi against GM Vladimir Okhotnik players castled opposite sides. Black obtained constant pressure along the long dark diagonal. The grandmaster returned material to reach a won pawn ending. Malyi (2316) - Okhotnik (2391), Mukachevo UKR (8.3), 05.05.2013 begins 1.e4 Nc6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.d5 Nb8 5.Bf4 Nf6 6.Bc4 a6 7.Qe2 [7.Bb3=] 7...g6 [7...Bf5=/+] 8.Nxe4 Nxe4 9.Qxe4 Bg7 10.0-0-0 Bf5 11.Qe3 0-0 12.f3 b5 13.Bd3? [13.Bb3+/=] 13...Qxd5 14.Bxf5 Qxf5 15.Ne2 Nc6 16.Qe4 Qf6 17.c3 e5 18.Be3 Rfd8 19.h4 Qe6 20.Kb1 f5 21.Qc2 b4 22.cxb4 Nxb4 23.Qa4 Nd5 24.Bc5 Rab8 25.b3 [25.Qc2 a5-/+] 25...e4 26.fxe4 Qe5 [26...Rb5-+] 27.Rd4 [27.Qd4 fxe4-/+] 27...fxe4 28.Qxa6 Nc3+ 29.Nxc3 Rxd4 30.Bxd4 Qxd4 31.Rc1 e3 32.Qe6+ Kh8 33.Qd5 Qxh4 34.Qe4 Qf2 35.Nd1 Qf6 36.Nc3 c5 37.Qxe3 c4 38.Qf3 Qxf3

39.gxf3 cxb3 40.a3 [40.Ne4 bxa2+ 41.Kxa2 h5-/+] 40...Rf8 [40...b2-+] 41.Kb2 Rxf3 42.Kxb3 h5 43.a4 Rxc3+ 0-1

167 – Shanava 4.d5 Nb8 5.Bf4 The gambit Queens Knight line 1.e4 Nc6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.d5 may be reached via a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit. White’s d4 is under attack, so 4.d5 hitting the knight is logical. The cautious retreat 4...Nb8 allows the knight to be redeployed to d7 unless a better idea comes along. Here the knight supported 6...c6 in the game Stanislav Bogdanovich vs Konstantine Shanava. Bogdanovich (2528) - Shanava (2498), TCh-TUR 1st League 2018 Konya TUR (1.6), 16.07.2018 begins 1.e4 Nc6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.d5 Nb8 5.Bf4 [5.Nxe4 c6 6.Bc4 cxd5 7.Qxd5 Qxd5 8.Bxd5 Nd7 9.Nf3 e6 10.Bc4 Ngf6 11.Nxf6+ Nxf6=] 5...Nf6 6.Qd4 [6.Bb5+ c6 7.dxc6 Qxd1+ 8.Rxd1 Nxc6=] 6...c6 7.0-0-0 [7.Bxb8 Rxb8 8.Qxa7 Bd7 9.dxc6 bxc6 10.Bc4 e6 11.Nge2 Bd6=/+] 7...cxd5 8.Nxd5 Qxd5 9.Qc3 [9.Qxd5 Nxd5 10.Rxd5 Nc6=/+] 9...Qf5 10.Bxb8 Rxb8 11.Qc7 Nd7 12.Rxd7 Qxd7 13.Qxb8 a6 14.Qe5 Qc6 15.Ne2 f6 16.Qg3 e5 17.Nc3 g6 18.Qh4 f5 19.Be2 Be7 20.Qh6 Kf7 21.Rd1 [21.h4 Be6-+] 21...Be6 22.h4 Bf8 23.Qg5 h5 24.Kb1 Bh6 25.Qg3 Bf4 26.Qh3 b5 27.a3 Rb8 28.Na2 a5 [28...Rc8-+] 29.Qc3 Qb6 30.g3 Rc8 31.Qe1 Bh6 32.Nc3 b4 33.Nb5 bxa3 34.Rd6 [34.Nxa3 Bf8-+] 34...Qc5 35.c3 Rb8 0-1

168 – Jablonicky 4.d5 Nb8 5.Bf4 The 4.d5 Nb8 retreat variation sometimes allows Black to win a pawn in the opening. In this game Black eventually also won a knight in the game Eduard Prandstetter vs Martin Jablonicky. Prandstetter (2236) - Jablonicky (2319), Tatry Open 2017 Tatranske Zruby SVK (2.5), 09.10.2017 begins 1.e4 Nc6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.d5 Nb8 5.Bf4 Nf6 6.Qd2 [6.Bc4 a6 7.Qe2 Bg4 8.Qe3 Nbd7=] 6...c6 7.dxc6 Qxd2+ 8.Bxd2 bxc6 9.Nge2 Bf5 10.Ng3 Bg6 [10...e6 11.Nxf5 exf5=] 11.00-0 e6 12.Re1 Bc5 13.Ngxe4 Nxe4 14.Nxe4 Bxe4 15.Rxe4 Bxf2 16.Bb4 Nd7 17.Bd6 Rd8 18.Re2 Bc5 [18...Nf6 19.Rxf2 Rxd6=/+] 19.Bxc5 Nxc5 20.Re3 Ke7 21.Be2 Rd6 22.Ra3 Ra8 23.Bf3 Nd7 24.Re1 f6 25.Re4 Ne5 26.Rea4 Rd7 27.Be2 g5 28.b4 f5 29.Ra5 Kf6 30.Re3 Rd5 31.Ra6 f4

32.Rea3 [32.Rh3 Rb8=] 32...g4 [32...Rad8-/+] 33.c4 [33.R6a4 Rad8-/+] 33...Rd4 34.Rc3 Rad8 35.Rxa7 [35.a3 Re4-+] 35...Re4 36.Rc2 f3 37.gxf3 gxf3 38.Bxf3 Nxf3 39.Rxh7 Ne1 Black is up a knight. 0-1

169 – Torning 4.d5 Ne5 5.Nxe4 Richard Torning plays against one of my pet Nimzowitsch Defence lines. He reaches the gambit after 1.e4 Nc6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.d5 by transposition. I cover the same position in my Blackmar-Diemer Theory 4 book. Black can play 4...Nb8. After 4...Ne5, White has several choices that lead to equal chances: 5.Qd4!, 5.Bf4, 5.f4, or my BDG recommendation 5.f3. White played 5.Nxe4 below. Another Torning game continued 5.Nxe4 Bf5?! 6.Ng3 Bg6? 7.Nf3?! Here Black should play 5...e6= or 5...c6=. White’s move 7.Nf3?! just gave away the advantage. Correct was 7.f4! which wins a piece, either the Ne5 or the Bg6. Notes to the 5.Nxe4 Nf6 game below are by Richard Torning. Torning - NN, Casual Bullet game, 27.05.2018 begins 1.d4 d5 2.Nc3 Nc6 3.e4 dxe4 4.d5 Ne5 transposing from BDG lines into a Nimzowitsch Defence. 5.Nxe4 [5.f4 Bg4 6. fxe5 Bxd1 7. Bb5+ c6 8.dxc6 Qb6 9. cxb7+ Qxb5 10. bxa8=Q+ 1-0. Sawyer - Cheshire, 1997] 5...Nf6 6.Qd4!? [This sets a trap. The only other game in my databases in which this position was also reached is Seba - Benkiar, Algiers, 2000. Black did not fall for the trap and eventually won.] 6...Qxd5?? 7.Nxf6+ exf6 [Black resigns. White has won a queen!] 8.Qxd5 1-0 [Game notes by Torning]

170 – Vlasenko 4.d5 Ne5 Nxe4 This sharp game reminds me of the Blackmar-Diemer Ryder Gambit 5.Qxf3. Black looks to be in great danger in a Queens Knight 1.d4 Nc6. Tactics abound until Black escapes with an extra bishop in the game Vasily Usmanov vs Miroslav Vlasenko. Usmanov (2260) - Vlasenko (2371), Botvinnik 100th Open St Petersburg RUS (9), 20.08.2011 begins 1.d4 Nc6 2.e4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.d5 Ne5 5.Nxe4 c6 6.Nc3 Nf6 7.Bf4 [7.f4 Ned7 8.Nf3 cxd5 9.Nxd5 Qa5+ 10.Nc3 e6=] 7...Ng6 8.dxc6 [8.Bg3 Nxd5 9.Nxd5 Qxd5 10.Qxd5 cxd5=/+] 8...Nxf4 9.Qf3 [9.Bb5 bxc6 10.Bxc6+ Bd7-+] 9...Qc7 10.cxb7 Bxb7 11.Bb5+ Nd7

12.Bxd7+ Kxd7 13.0-0-0+ Ke8 14.Nb5 Qb6 15.Qxf4 Qxb5 16.a4 [16.Nf3 Bxf3 17.Qxf3 Rb8-+] 16...Qc5 17.Ne2 e6 18.Nc3 Be7 19.h4 [19.Ne4 Bxe4 20.Qxe4 Rb8-+] 19...g5 20.Qd2 [20.Qg4 h5-+] 20...Bxg2 21.Rhg1 Bf3 22.Qd7+ Kf8 23.Rd2 g4 Black has won a piece. 0-1

171 – Vlasenko 4.d5 Ne5 5.Bf4 The gambit line 4.d5 Ne5 Bf4 led to very unbalanced and wild play in this Queens Knight Defence. Black won the Exchange, but White had a lot of play for a long time. Finally, White pawns began to fall in the game Kalle Kiik vs Miroslav Vlasenko. Kiik (2409) - Vlasenko (2415), 27th Heart of Finland Op Jyvaskyla FIN (8.3), 22.07.2017 begins 1.e4 Nc6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.d5 Ne5 5.Bf4 Ng6 6.Bg3 a6 7.h4 e5 8.dxe6 Bxe6 9.h5 N6e7 10.Nxe4 Nd5 [10...Nc6 11.Qxd8+ Rxd8 12.a3=] 11.Nf3 Ngf6 12.Qe2 Qe7 13.Nxf6+ gxf6 14.c3 00-0 15.Rh4 Bh6 16.Rc4 [16.Nd4 Rhe8=/+] 16...Rhe8 17.Rd1 Nf4 18.Rxf4 Bxf4 19.Bxf4 Bc4 20.Qxe7 Rxe7+ 21.Be3 Rxd1+ 22.Kxd1 Bxf1 23.Nh4 Re5 24.h6 Bc4 25.b3 Rd5+ 26.Ke1 Rh5 27.g3 Be6 28.c4 Kd7 29.Kd2 b5 30.c5 [30.cxb5 axb5-+] 30...b4 31.Kc2 Bf5+ 32.Kb2 [32.Nxf5 Rxf5-+] 32...Be4 33.a3 a5 34.axb4 axb4 35.f3 Bd3 36.Kc1 Kc6 37.Kd2 Rd5 38.Kc1 Be2 0-1

172 – Bykovskiy 4.d5 Ne5 5.f3 I analyze the move 5.f3 in my Blackmar-Diemer Theory 4 book after the move order 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 Nc6 4.d5 Ne5 5.f3. The variation resembles other BDG lines, and 5.f3 is about as good as anything else. White has equal chances in a position that he is likely to understand better than Black. Against the BDG, players who play 3...Nc6 tend to do so without my thought or preparation. Not so for the Queens Knight Defence player. I assume Black played 1.e4 Nc6 with confidence. White made the last blunder in the game Robert Oros vs Oleg Bykovskiy. Oros (2302) - Bykovskiy (2368), 34th Mukachevo Rating IM Mukachevo UKR (1.1), 16.05.2017 begins 1.e4 Nc6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.d5 Ne5 5.f3 exf3 6.Nxf3 Nxf3+ 7.Qxf3 Nf6 [7...g6 8.Nb5 a6 9.Qc3 axb5 10.Qxh8 Qxd5 11.Qxg8 Ra6 12.Be2 Re6 13.Rf1=] 8.Bf4 a6 9.h3 g6 10.0-0-0 Bg7 11.g4 [11.Be2 0-0=] 11...0-0 12.Qg3 Ne8 13.h4 h6 14.Be2 Nd6 15.Qe3 Kh7 16.Qd3 f5 17.g5 h5 18.Bf3 Ne4 19.Nxe4 fxe4 20.Qxe4 Bf5 21.Qe3 Qd7 22.Be5 Qa4 23.Rh2 Bxe5 24.Qxe5 Rae8 [24...Qxa2=] 25.Kb1 Qd7

26.Re1 e6 27.Rhe2 exd5? [27...Rd8!=] 28.Qxe8 Rxe8 29.Rxe8 Be4 30.Rf8? [Here 30.Re5!+/- since 30...Qd6 31.Bxe4! Qxe5 32.Bxg6+! wins queen.] 30...Qe7 31.Rc8 [31.Bxe4 Qxf8 32.Bxd5 Qd6-+] 31...Bxc2+ 32.Kxc2 Qxe1 33.Rxc7+ Kh8 0-1

173 – Dunne 4.d5 Ne5 5.Qd4 Alex Dunne is a famous correspondence master and columnist for the USCF Chess Life magazine for decades. He wrote “The Check Is in the Mail” column for Chess Life. I used to be a USCF correspondence master in postal chess A few times Dunne published short wins of mine in the magazine. FIDE Master Alex Dunne possesses a certain amount of wisdom developed from a lifetime of chess experience. In 2006 interview Alex Dunne said that the way to improve your chess is study and practice. Each gives you different things. The practice gives you confidence. The study gives you knowledge. Study and practice work together to make players stronger. The World Open is a tournament that has been played for many decades during Fourth of July week. This is Independence Day in the United States. The World Open has usually been played in or near Philadelphia, the site of Independence Hall. Alex Dunne won this Queens Knight Defence against Joseph Veach. Veach (2275) - Dunne (2285), World Open, Philadelphia (4), 1995 begins 1.e4 Nc6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.d5 Ne5 5.Qd4 [5.Bf4 Ng6 6.Bg3 a6 7.h4 e5 8.dxe6 Bxe6 9.h5 N6e7 10.Nxe4 Nc6=] 5...Ng6 6.Qa4+ [6.Qxe4 Nf6 7.Qa4+ Bd7 8.Bb5 a6 9.Bxd7+ Qxd7 10.Qxd7+ Kxd7 11.Nf3 Re8=] 6...Bd7 7.Qb3 Nf6 8.Be3 [8.Qxb7 Rb8 9.Qxa7 e5 10.dxe6 fxe6 11.Nh3 Bd6 12.Be2 0-0 13.0-0 h6=] 8...e6 [8...c6 9.0-0-0 Qc7=] 9.Bc4 exd5 10.Nxd5 Bd6 11.Bg5 0-0 12.Nxf6+ gxf6 13.Bh6 b5 14.Bd5 [14.Be2 Re8 15.0-0-0 a5-/+] 14...c6 15.Bxf8 Qxf8 16.0-0-0 cxd5 17.Qxd5 Bf4+ 18.Kb1 Be6 19.Qxe4 Re8 20.Qb7 [20.Qd3 Qc5 21.Nf3 Bf5-/+] 20...Qb4 21.Nf3 Ne5 [21...Be5 22.Nxe5 Nxe5-/+] 22.a3 Qc4 23.b3 Qc5 24.Qe4 [24.Nd4 Qxa3 25.Nxb5 Qa5=/+] 24...Bh6 [24...Qxa3 25.Qd4 Bf5 26.Qb2 Qxb2+ 27.Kxb2 Nxf3 28.gxf3 Re2-+] 25.Qb4 [25.Nd4 Nc4 26.Qc6 Nd2+ 27.Ka2 Qxc6 28.Nxc6 Ne4-/+] 25...Qxb4 26.axb4 Nxf3 27.gxf3 Bf4 28.Kb2 Bf5

29.Rd5 Be5+ [29...Bg6 30.c4 Re2+ 31.Ka3 bxc4 32.bxc4 Rxf2-/+] 30.Kb1 a6 31.Re1 [31.Rhd1 Be6-/+] 31...Be6 32.Rd3 Bxh2 33.Rc3 [33.Re4 Bb8+] 33...Bd6 34.Rc6 Bxb4 35.Rg1+ Kf8 36.Rxa6 Bc3 37.Rc6 b4 38.Ra6 Bf5 39.Rh1 h5 0-1

Scandinavian –3.exd5 The position after 3.exd5 Qxd5 transposes to the Scandinavian Defence or the Center Counter Defence after 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Qxd5 3.d4 Nc6. White usually defends the d4 pawn.

174 – Vlassov 2…d5 3.exd5 Qxd5 This is a non-standard move order that begins 1.e4 Nc6 2.Nf3. The rest of the games in this section begin with 2.d4. This game transposes on move 5. The best way to play the Scandinavian Defence is to play aggressive tactics. Black does an amazing job at this in the game between Peter Polanyi and Nikolai Vlassov. Polanyi (1990) - Vlassov (2415), World Senior 50+ 2016 Marianske Lazne CZE (1.13), 19.11.2016 begins 1.e4 Nc6 2.Nf3 d5 3.exd5 Qxd5 4.Nc3 Qa5 5.d4 [5.Bb5 Bd7 6.0-0 0-0-0 7.d4 Nf6 8.Qe2 a6 9.Bxc6 Bxc6 10.Ne5 Be8=] 5...Bg4 6.Be2 0-0-0 7.Be3 Nf6 8.h3 Bxf3 9.Bxf3 e5 [9...Nxd4 10.Bxd4 Qb4=/+] 10.d5 [10.Bxc6 bxc6 11.Qd3 exd4 12.Bxd4 Re8+ 13.Be3 Nd5=] 10...e4 11.Bg4+ Kb8 12.0-0 Nxd5 13.Nxd5 Rxd5 14.Qc1 Bc5 15.c4 Rdd8 16.a3 Bd4 [16...Bxe3 17.fxe3 h5-/+] 17.Rb1 f5 18.b4 Qe5 19.b5 Ne7 20.Bf4 Qe6 21.Be2 h6 22.c5 [22.a4 Ng6-/+] 22...g5 [22...Nd5-/+] 23.Be3 f4 24.Bxd4 Rxd4 25.c6 [25.b6 axb6 26.cxb6 c6-/+] 25...f3 26.gxf3 [26.Rd1 Nf5-+] 26...Qxh3 27.Qe3 [27.Rd1 exf3 28.Bxf3 Rf4-+] 27...Nf5 0-1

175 – Libiszewski 3…Qxd5 4.Be3 White routinely protects d4 in the Queens Knight Scandinavian with 4.Nf3. The below sees White defend d4 with 4.Be3 which allows the equalizer 4...e5. Black kept White from castling in the game Olamide Patrick Ajibowo vs Fabien Libiszewski. Ajibowo (2107) - Libiszewski (2545), PRO League Group Stage chess.com INT (6), 15.02.2017 begins 1.e4 Nc6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 Qxd5 4.Be3 e5 5.c4 Qa5+ 6.Nc3 Bb4 7.Nge2 exd4 8.Bxd4 Nxd4 9.Qxd4 Nf6 10.0-0-0 [10.Ng3 0-0-/+] 10...0-0 11.a3 Bc5 12.Qh4 Bf5 13.Qg3 Rad8 14.Rd5 Nxd5 15.cxd5 Rfe8 [15...Rxd5-+] 16.Qf3 Bg6 17.h4 Bxa3

[17...h5-+] 18.bxa3 [18.h5 Bxb2+ 19.Kxb2 Qb4+ 20.Kc1 Qa3+ 21.Kd1 Be4-+] 18...Qxa3+ 19.Kd1 Qb3+ 20.Ke1 Be4 [20...Qb2-+] 21.Qxe4 [21.Qf4 Bxd5-+] 21...Rxe4 22.Nxe4 Qb1+ 0-1

176 – Bacrot 4.Nf3 e5 5.Nc3 Do grandmasters play your favorite openings? Peter Leko and Etienne Bacrot are super grandmasters whose ratings often exceed 2700. It is hard to keep up with all grandmaster games. I was pleased to discover this Queens Knight Defence contest from 2014. They began 1.Nf3 Nc6 and then transposed to a Queens Knight Defence after 2.e4 d5 3.exd5 Qxd5 4.d4 e5. Slightly more popular is 4...Bg4, but both moves completely equalize. In his “Play 1...Nc6!” book author Christoph Wisnewski calls 4...e5 "the more solid option" but he likes 4...Bg4 when playing for a win. At all levels almost every chess game is decided by tactics. Here Etienne Bacrot won the Exchange with a combination. For a long time Grandmaster Leko defended well. Peter made it difficult for Black to win. But in the end the material mattered. Black's h-pawn could not be stopped without the loss of a bishop. Leko (2723) - Bacrot (2718), SportAccord Blitz 2014 Beijing CHN (18.2), 13.12.2014 begins 1.Nf3 Nc6 2.e4 d5 3.exd5 Qxd5 4.d4 e5 [4...Bg4=] 5.Nc3 Bb4 6.a3 Bxc3+ 7.bxc3 e4 8.Nd2 Nf6 9.Nc4 Bg4 10.Qd2 Bh5 [10...Be6=] 11.Qg5 [11.Rb1+/=] 11...Qxg5 12.Bxg5 Nd5 13.Bd2 0-0-0 14.Ne3 Nb6 15.Rb1 Rhe8 16.g4 Bg6 17.h4 f6 18.g5 Bf7 19.gxf6 gxf6 20.Rb5 Ne7 21.Rg1 a6 22.Ra5 Rg8 23.Rxg8 Rxg8 24.Bh3+ [24.Nf5 Rg1 25.Nxe7+ Kd7 26.Nf5 Nc4=/+] 24...Kd8 25.Rc5 Na4 [25...Rg1+ 26.Ke2 Ng6-/+] 26.Ra5 Nb2 27.d5 Rg1+ 28.Bf1 b6 29.Rxa6 Nxd5 30.Ra8+ Kd7 31.Rf8 [31.Bc1 Nxe3 32.fxe3 Bc4-/+] 31...Nxe3 32.Rxf7+ Ke8 33.Bxe3 Kxf7 34.Ke2 Nc4 35.Bf4 c6 36.a4 Nb2 37.Bh3 Nxa4 38.Bd2 Nb2 [38...Nc5-+] 39.Bf5 Nc4 40.Bf4 h5 41.Bxe4 Rg4 42.Kf3 Rxh4 43.Kg3 Rg4+ 44.Kf3 Ne5+ 45.Ke3 h4 46.Bf5 Rg1 47.Ke2 c5 48.Bh2 Rh1 49.Bf4

h3 50.Be4 [50.Bg3 c4-+] 50...Rg1 51.Bh2 Rc1 52.Kd2 Rb1 53.Bg3 Ng4 54.Bd5+ Kg7 0-1

177 – Armando 4.Nf3 Bg4 5.Nc3 There is a common variation in the Queen's Knight Defence that also comes up in the Scandinavian Defence (formerly called the Center Counter Defence). It can be reached in two ways. 1.e4 Nc6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 Qxd5 (Nimzowitsch Defence) 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Qxd5 3.d4 Nc6 (Scandinavian Defence) Usually play continues as below with 4.Nf3. Sometimes White loses or intentionally sacrifices the d-pawn with 4.Nc3!? Qxd4. To illustrate 4.Nf3 I picked a simple game against Armando (I do not know if it was his first or last name) played at the old Borders bookstore near the Florida Mall in Orlando, Florida. This was a loosely organized club. People wandered in and out of the store. Some people (like me) came there once a week to play chess. Armando - Sawyer, Orlando, FL, 08.04.2004 begins 1.e4 Nc6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 Qxd5 [This leads to a type of Scandinavian Defence without an early Nc3.] 4.Nf3 Bg4! [One of my blitz opponents played 4…Nf6 5.Nc3! Qd8 (5...Qa5 6.Bd2!+/=) 6.d5 Nb8? (6...Nb4 7.Bb5+ Bd7 8.Qe2+/=) 7.Bg5 e6 8.Bxf6!? (8.Bc4+/-) 8...gxf6 9.Bb5+?! (9.Bc4+/-) 9...Bd7? (9...c6! 10.dxc6 Qxd1+ 11.Rxd1 Nxc6=) 10.dxe6 Bxb5 11.Qxd8+ (Too late I noticed that 11.exf7+! Ke7 12.Qxd8+ Kxd8 13.Nxb5+- was even stronger.) 11...Kxd8 12.Nxb5 fxe6 13.0-0-0+ Ke7? (13...Kc8 14.Nfd4+/-) 14.Nxc7 a6 15.Nxa8 Black resigns 1-0 Sawyer - rabbismoli, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 04.10.2014] 5.Nc3 Qh5! 6.Be2 e6 [6...0-0-0! seems to be the most accurate move order. 7.h3 when Scheerer (Wisnewski) recommends 7...Bxf3 8.Bxf3 Qg6 9.d5 (or 9.Be3 e5) 9...Ne5] 7.Bf4 0-0-0 8.Be3 Nf6 9.Ng5 Bxe2 10.Qxe2 Qg6 11.0-0-0 h6 12.Nge4? [White throws away a piece. If 12.Nf3 Ne4 I intended (12...Bb4=/+) 13.Nxe4 Qxe4=/+] 12...Nxe4 13.Nxe4 Qxe4 14.f3 Qd5 15.c4 Qa5 16.Kb1 Be7 17.Rd3 Rhe8 18.Rhd1 Kb8 19.c5 Qb5 20.a4 Qc4 21.Rc1 Qd5 22.Rcc3 Nb4 23.Rd2 Qa2+ with mate in one. 0-1

178 – Buss 4.Nf3 Bg4 5.Nc3 Christoph Scheerer (Wisnewski) wrote in his book "Play 1...Nc6!" this about the Scandinavian line 1.e4 Nc6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 Qxd5 4.Nf3: "Black has the luxury between two almost equivalent alternatives." He considered 4...e5 rather drawish in the critical line. The main line is 4...Bg4 5.Be2 0-00. In this game White mixes things up with 5.Nc3!? After 5...Qh5 6.Be2 Black transposed back into the main line with 6...0-0-0. I found this unannotated game when I was scanning “The Check is in the Mail” postal chess columns by Alex Dunne. It was a good game that illustrated possible play in this line. The contestants for this game were Timothy Caskey as White and Michael Buss as Black. I believe it was part of the Golden Knights tournament which is an open event. The rating differences imply that Black should win, but that does not mean it will be an easy game. White played the first dozen moves reasonably well. Then things began to slip away. Caskey (1843) - Buss (2416), corr USCF, 2012 begins 1.e4 Nc6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 Qxd5 4.Nf3 Bg4 [4...e5 5.Nc3 Bb4 6.Bd2 Bxc3 7.Bxc3 e4 8.Ne5 Nxe5 9.dxe5 Ne7=] 5.Nc3 [5.Be2 0-0-0 6.Be3 e5 7.c4 Qa5+ 8.Bd2 Qa6 9.d5 Bxf3 10.Bxf3 Nd4=] 5...Qh5 [5...Qf5 6.d5 Ne5 7.Be2 Bxf3 8.gxf3 Nf6 9.f4+/=] 6.Be2 [Another critical line is 6.d5 0-0-0 7.Be2 Bxf3 8.Bxf3 Qe5+ 9.Be3 e6=] 6...0-0-0 [6...Nf6 7.h3 0-0-0 8.Be3 (8.0-0 transposes to game) 8...e5 9.d5 Bxf3 10.Bxf3 Qg6=] 7.0-0 [7.d5 see 6.d5 0-0-0 7.Be2] 7...Nf6 8.h3 [8.Be3 e5 9.h3 exd4 10.Nxd4 Bxe2 11.Ncxe2 Bc5 12.c3 Nd5=; 8.Qe1!? e6 9.h3 Bxh3 10.gxh3 Qxh3 11.Ng5 Qf5 12.f3 Nb4=] 8...Nxd4 [8...e5?! 9.Bd2 Bxf3 10.Bxf3+/=] 9.Nxd4 Bxe2 10.Ncxe2 [10.Qxe2 Rxd4 11.Qe3 e5 12.Nb5 Rd1=] 10...e5 11.c3 exd4 12.cxd4 Bd6 13.Qc2 [13.Nc3 Qxd1 14.Rxd1 Rhe8=] 13...Rhe8 14.Be3 Nd5 15.Nc3 [15.Qd2 g5=/+] 15...Nxe3 16.fxe3 Rxe3 17.Rf5 Qg6 18.Nd5? [18.Ne4 Bb4!-+] 18...Rxh3 19.Rc1 [If 19.Qf2 Bh2+ 20.Kh1 Bg3+ 21.gxh3 Rxd5 22.Qe3 Qxf5 23.Qxg3 Rxd4-+ Black is up a rook.] 19...Qg3 20.Re5 g6 21.Nxc7 [No better is

21.Ne7+ Kb8 22.Nc6+ bxc6 23.Qb3+ Qxb3 24.axb3 Bxe5 25.gxh3 Bxd4+ 26.Kf1 Bxb2 when White is busted.] 21...Qh2+ 22.Kf1 Qf4+ 23.Ke2 Qg4+ 24.Kf1 Qf4+ 0-1

179 – Belezky 4.Nf3 Bg4 5.Be2 White invites danger if he enters into a tactical melee without first protecting his king. The Queens Knight Scandinavian gives both players tempting targets for pins and multiple attacks. Black won a piece and threatened to queen a pawn in the game Prokopios Mamalis vs Alexander Belezky. Mamalis (1725) - Belezky (2368), 1st Zurich Easter Op 2018 Zurich SUI (3.8), 31.03.2018 begins 1.e4 Nc6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 Qxd5 4.Nf3 Bg4 5.Be2 e6 6.h3 Bh5 7.c4 [7.0-0 Nf6 8.Be3 Qd7=] 7...Bb4+ 8.Nc3 Qa5 9.Bd2 Bxf3 10.Bxf3 Nxd4 11.Bxb7 Rb8 12.Bf3 Qe5+ 13.Be2 Nf6 14.a3 Bd6 15.b4 c5 16.f4 Qf5 17.0-0 0-0 18.b5 Rbd8 19.Bg4 [19.Rf2 Be7=/+] 19...Nxg4 20.Qxg4 Qd3 21.Rfd1 [21.Rf2 Qxc4-+] 21...Nb3 22.Ra2 Qxc4 [22...Qd4+ 23.Kh1 Bc7-+] 23.f5 Qxg4 24.hxg4 Be5 25.Nb1 [25.Be1 Rxd1 26.Nxd1 exf5 27.gxf5 Nd4-+] 25...Bf4 26.fxe6 [26.g3 Bxg3-+] 26...fxe6 27.Rb2 c4 28.Rf1 [28.Rc2 Nxd2 29.Nxd2 c3 30.Rxc3 Bxd2-+] 28...Bxd2 29.Rxf8+ Kxf8 30.Nxd2 c3 0-1

180 – Pletnev 4.Nf3 Bg4 5.Be2 The Scandinavian Defence requires Black to play aggressively and answer a threat with a threat whenever possible. This game began as a Queens Knight 1...Nc6 leading to very sharp play. Both kings faced danger, but Black found the checkmate in the game between Sergey Androsov and Evgeniy Pletnev. Androsov (2114) - Pletnev (2278), Chigorin Memorial St Petersburg RUS (5.70), 09.10.2013 begins 1.e4 Nc6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 Qxd5 4.Nf3 Bg4 5.Be2 0-0-0 6.Nc3 Qa5 7.Be3 Nf6 8.0-0 e5 9.Ng5 [9.d5 Nxd5 10.Nxd5 Qxd5 11.Qxd5 Rxd5 12.Bc4 Rd7=/+] 9...Be6 10.Nxe6 fxe6 11.Nb5 a6 12.a4 exd4 13.Nxd4 Nxd4 14.Bxd4 Qf5 15.c3 e5 16.Bd3 e4 17.Bc4 Bd6 18.g3 h5 19.Qb3 [19.Bxf6 gxf6=] 19...Rde8 20.Bxf6 [20.h4 Qh3=] 20...gxf6 21.Rad1 [21.Bd5 c6=/+] 21...h4 22.Bd5 [22.Rxd6 cxd6-+] 22...b5 23.axb5 [23.Bxe4 Rxe4-+] 23...hxg3 24.fxg3 Qh3 25.Rd2 [25.Qc2 Bxg3-+] 25...Bc5+ 26.Kh1 Qxf1# 0-1

Nimzowitsch – 3.e5 This advance gives White a pawn chain in the flavor of a French Defence. With Nc6, the most natural counter is to attack with f6.

181 – Rosenthal 3…f6 4.d4 The Florida Championship is a six round tournament played on Labor Day weekend each year. My final opponent in 2011 was Nicholas Rosenthal. He was a 15 year old scholastic champion. He had won the 2011 Florida Super State, the K-12 Open, and already has a FIDE rating of 2019 at the time of our game. Our Rosenthal-Sawyer game began 1.e4 Nc6. This is called the Nimzovich Defence or Queens Knight Defence. Rosenthal then played 2.f4!? I asked him why he did not play 2.Nf3 and he said it was because he does not play those 2...e5 lines. He plays the Bishop's Opening after 1.e4 e5 2.Bc4. Rosenthal - Sawyer, FL State Championship Naples FL (5), 05.09.2011 begins 1.e4 Nc6 2.f4 [2.d4 d5 3.e5 f6 4.Nf3 Bg4. 5.Bf4 Bxf3 6.gxf3 fxe5! 7.dxe5 e6=] 2…d5 [The alternative is to play a King's Gambit which is very sharp and complicated after 2...e5 3.Nf3 f5!] 3.e5 f6 [Wisnewski suggests 3...d4! 4.Nf3 Qd5!] 4.d4 [This transposes into the line 2.d4 d5 3.e5 f6 4.f4] 4…Nh6 [Black should not play 4...Bf5 5.Ne2! intending Ng3.] 5.Nf3 Bf5 6.c3 Qd7 [Wisnewski gives 6...e6, 7...Be4, 8...f5 and 9...Qd7. All these moves I played in a slightly different order.] 7.h3 [Not in the book.] 7…Be4 8.Nbd2 f5 [8...Nf5!? to make use of the hole on g3.] 9.Nb3 e6 10.Be3 g6 [A waiting move. Where are the two kings going? More consistent is 10...Nf7.]11.Rc1 [White is going to rip open the c-file and I am potentially in trouble.] 11…Kf7 12.c4 Nd8 13.cxd5 exd5 14.Ng5+ Kg7 15.Rg1 c6 16.g4 Bb4+ 17.Kf2 Ne6 18.Nxe4 dxe4 19.g5 [19.d5+/-] 19...Nf7 [Nicholas thought I would play 19...Ng8, but then my knight is trapped.] 20.Bc4 Rhd8 21.Qc2 Nc7 22.Rgd1 Nd5 23.a3 Be7 24.Nc5 Bxc5 25.dxc5 Qe6 26.Qb3 Rd7 27.Rd2 =/+ [27.h4+/-] 27...a6? [Very promising was 27...Nxg5! 28.Bxd5 cxd5 29.fxg5 f4 30.Bd4 e3+-/+] 28.Bxd5 cxd5 29.Qb6 Nd8 30.Rcd1 Kf7 31.Qb3 -/+ [31.Qb4=] 31...d4 32.Qxe6+ Nxe6 33.Bxd4

Rad8?! [33...Nxf4-+ with a big advantage for Black.] 34.Ke3 Rd5 35.b4 R8d7 36.a4 Ke8 37.h4 [Rosenthal offered a draw.] 1/2-1/2

182 – Damia 3…f6 4.exf6 exf6 This Queens Knight Defence is one of the more bizarre lines where both h7 and h2 are vulnerable. On the face of it, it doesn’t feel like the 4...exf6 should be that good, but Black outplayed his opponent in an impressive manner. White dropped 2 pawns and Black threatened 30...Nf3+ in Marco Zenari vs Angelo Damia. Zenari (2094) - Damia (2378), 16th Bergamo Open 2017 Bergamo ITA (5.10), 16.07.2017 begins 1.e4 Nc6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 f6 4.exf6 exf6 [4...Nxf6=] 5.Bd3 Nxd4 6.Bxh7 Rxh7 7.Qxd4 Bd6 8.Qd3 Rh8 9.Ne2 [9.Nf3 Ne7 10.Nc3 c6 11.Be3 Bf5=/+] 9...Ne7 10.Bf4 Bf5 11.Qd2 Bxf4 12.Nxf4 Qd6 13.Nc3 d4 14.Nce2 g5 15.Nd3 Rxh2 16.Rxh2 Qxh2 17.0-0-0 0-0-0 18.Qb4 Nc6 [18...Nd5-/+] 19.Qb5 Bxd3 20.Rxd3 [20.Qxd3 Qxg2-/+] 20...Qxg2 [20...Ne5-+] 21.Qf5+ Kb8 22.Ng3 Ne5 [22...Nb4 23.Qxf6 Nxd3+ 24.cxd3 Qd5-+] 23.Rd2 [23.Rd1 Qc6-+] 23...Qf3 [23...Nf3 24.Qxf6 Re8-+] 24.Qe6 [24.Qxf3 Nxf3-+] 24...a6 25.Nf5 [25.Qf5 Rh8-+] 25...Rh8 [25...Qf4-+] 26.Rd1 [26.Ng3 Qf4-+] 26...Rh1 27.Qg8+ Ka7 28.Rxh1 Qxh1+ 29.Kd2 Qe4 0-1

183 – Pandurevic 3…Bf5 4.h4 Black invaded the kingside despite 4.h4. While White probed for a mate on the queenside, Black attacked and won two rooks on the kingside. The game ended when a queen swap could not be avoided in the game Mirko Raljic vs Miro Pandurevic. Raljic (2126) - Pandurevic (2263), 12th Hum na Sutli Open CRO, 30.08.2018 begins 1.e4 Nc6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 Bf5 4.h4 Qd7 5.Be2 h5 6.c3 g6 [6...f6=] 7.Nh3 f6 8.f4 Nh6 9.Na3 Be4 10.Nf2 0-0-0 11.Nxe4 dxe4 12.Nc2 [12.b4 Nf5 13.b5 Na5 14.Qa4 b6=] 12...Nf5 13.Rh3 Bh6 14.Bb5 a6 15.Ba4 b5 16.Bb3 fxe5 17.fxe5 Nxe5 18.Nb4 [18.Bxh6 Nd3+ 19.Rxd3 exd3 20.Qf3 c6=] 18...Nd3+ [18...Bxc1 19.Rxc1 Nd3+ 20.Nxd3 exd3 21.Qxd3 e5-/+] 19.Nxd3 exd3 20.Bxh6 Rxh6 21.Qxd3 e5 22.Qe4 Kb8 23.d5 Nd6 24.Qe3 Rhh8 25.0-0-0 e4 26.Bc2 Rde8 27.Qc5 [27.a4 Rhf8=/+] 27...Qg4 28.a4 Qxg2 29.Rhh1 Rhf8 30.Rhg1 [30.Rdg1 Qf3-/+]

30...Qf2 31.Qb4 [31.Qxf2 Rxf2 32.Rxg6 Rh2-/+] 31...e3 32.axb5 e2 33.bxa6+ Ka8 34.Qa5 [34.Kb1 exd1Q+ 35.Rxd1 Re1-+] 34...Qxg1 35.Qxc7 [35.Rxg1 Rf1+ 36.Rxf1 exf1Q+ 37.Bd1 Qf4+ 38.Kc2 Nc4-+] 35...exd1Q+ 36.Bxd1 Qe3+ 37.Kb1 Qe4+ 38.Ka2 Qc4+ 0-1

184 – Kaliebe 3…Bf5 4.h4 Bobby Fischer is quoted as saying these three statements on winning and losing: "Don't even mention losing to me. I can't stand to think of it." "If you don’t win, it’s not a great tragedy - the worst that happens is that you lose a game." "Americans like a winner. If you lose, you're nothing. I'm going to win, though. It's good for the match that Spassky has a plus score against me. We've met five times. He's won three times and we've drawn twice. But I'm a stronger player and a long match favors me." As for me, I want to win. I want to win every game. If I cannot win, I want to draw. If it looks like I am losing (perish the thought but it happens), then I want to escape the loss with a draw. I played Ekkehard Kaliebe at the Borders bookstore in Orlando, Florida. The game begins with a Queen's Knight Defence 1.e4 Nc6 2.d4 d5. White goes in for the Advance Variation with 3.e5 Bf5; the placement of the epawns allows this development. White advanced all his kingside pawns. Black got provocative with 10...Nh6!? Later Black ripped open the queenside with a strong attack. But on move 22, I grabbed a pawn, missing the winning combination. Then I was in trouble. White had a solid protected passed pawn on e5. Rybka pointed out that if I did not force a draw by perpetual check, I would lose. I took the draw. Kaliebe - Sawyer, Orlando, FL, 06.01.2005 begins 1.e4 Nc6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 Bf5 [3...f6] 4.h4 [4.Bd3? Nxd4 5.Bxf5 Nxf5-/+] 4…Nb4 [4...Qd7] 5.Na3 f6 6.c3 Nc6 7.g4 Be6 8.f4 fxe5 9.fxe5 Qd7 10.Bh3 Nh6!? 11.Bxh6 gxh6 12.g5 0-0-0 13.Qf3 Bxh3 14.Nxh3 e6 15.0-0-0? [15.Nc2=] 15...Bxa3 16.bxa3 Na5 17.gxh6 Nc4 18.Rh2 Qa4 [18...Rdf8 19.Qd3 Rhg8 20.Ng5 Rg6-/+] 19.Kb1 [19.Ng5 Qxa3+=/+] 19...Rdf8 20.Qd3 Rf5 21.Ng5 Rhf8 22.Ka1 Nxa3? [22...Rf2!! 23.Rxf2 Rxf2 24.Qb1 (24.Rb1 Rxa2+ 25.Kxa2 Qxa3#) 24...Rb2-+] 23.Nxe6 Qxd1+ [23...Rf3 24.Nxf8 Rxd3 25.Rxd3

Nc2+ 26.Kb2 Nb4 27.cxb4 Qxb4+ 28.Ka1 Qxf8=/+] 24.Qxd1 Rf1 25.Nxf8 Rxd1+ 26.Kb2 Nc4+ 27.Kc2 [27.Kb3? Rb1+ 28.Kc2 (28.Ka4 b5#) 28...Rb2+ 29.Kc1 Rxh2-/+] 27...Ne3+ 28.Kb2 Nc4+ 1/2-1/2

185 – Myers 3…Bf5 4.g4 Hugh E. Myers (1930-2008) was one of the greatest contributors to original opening theory in my lifetime. One of his favorites was 1.c4 g5 Myers Defence to the English Opening. Hugh Myers was a master who authored books on many offbeat opening lines. From 1979-1988 he wrote “The Myers Opening Bulletin”. Myers presented games from any unusual line in numbered periodicals referred to as MOB, volume x, number y, etc. He published them and then he stopped due to money or health. When he resumed publication from 1992-1996, they were called “New MOB”. A large portion of the Myers Opening Bulletin covered 1.e4 Nc6. In addition Hugh E. Myers wrote three books on 1.e4 Nc6. These editions of the Nimzovich Defence were in 1973, 1985 and 1993. My favorite Hugh E. Myers volume was his biography. It was called “A Chess Explorer: Life and Games” published in 2002. At times his opinions in the chess community were controversial. Hugh Myers made it clear that you do not have to be a famous professional grandmaster to have good ideas in chess openings. Hugh Myers lived in Iowa and won state championships in four different states. In the 1960s he lived in the Dominican Republic. He played on their Olympiad team. I remember his 1.Nc3 games. Hugh Myers called 1.e4 Nc6 the “Nimzovich Defence”. I refer to the whole 1…Nc6 opening complex descriptively as the Queens Knight Defence. Alberto Malagon played against Hugh Myers in this Nimzovich Defence. They continued 2.d4 d5 3.e5 Bf5 4.g4. Malagon - Myers, Santo Domingo 1968 begins 1.e4 Nc6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 Bf5 4.g4 Be4 5.f3 Bg6 6.h4 h5 7.a3 [7.g5 e6 8.c3 Nb8!? 9.Ne2 c5=/+] 7...e6 [7...f6!=/+] 8.g5 Nge7 9.Be3 Qd7 [9...Nb8!?=/+] 10.Nc3 0-0-0 11.Qd2? [11.Nge2=] 11...Nf5 [11...Nxe5! 12.dxe5 d4-/+] 12.Bf2 Be7 13.Nh3 f6 14.f4 Na5 15.b3 [15.0-0-0=] 15...c5 [15...Kb8-/+] 16.dxc5 d4 17.Nb5 Nc6 18.Nd6+ Kb8 19.Bb5 Qc7 20.exf6 gxf6 21.Nxf5 Bxf5 22.b4 e5 23.0-0-0 Qd7 [23...e4=] 24.gxf6 [24.fxe5! Qd5 25.Kb2 fxe5 26.Bg3+/-] 24...Bxf6 25.fxe5 Bxe5 26.Nf4? [26.Qe1 Rhe8=/+] 26...Qf7 27.Kb1 Qb3+ 28.Kc1 Qxa3+ 29.Kb1 Nxb4 0-1

186 – Christiansen 4.c3 The Queens Knight Defence gives equal chances, so let me ask you this question. What determines who wins the game? The winner is the one that who uses the pieces most effectively. Put another way, you have to make your pieces dance. The loser just shuffles the pieces along throughout the game. The winner has the pieces gracefully flow for a beautiful finish. If you can develop a coordinated attack, then you can make your opponent look bad, even if your opponent is a master. Larry M. Christiansen is a leading player in my generation. Sure there were other grandmasters, but most dropped off along the way. Very few grandmasters born in the 1950s are still playing. Christiansen is a three time US Champion. Larry is teaches on chess. His specialty is tactical ideas for winning attacks. Jeroen Piket is a grandmaster who won the Dutch championship four times and drew a match with Anatoly Karpov. Then Piket retired from active play. His peak rating was 2670. Christiansen defeated Jeroen Piket in a critical Queens Knight Defence line. Both players played without sight of the board. Piket - Christiansen (2620), Monaco blind Monaco (11), 1993 begins 1.d4 Nc6 2.e4 d5 3.e5 Bf5 4.c3 f6 5.Nf3 fxe5 6.dxe5 [6.Bb5 exd4 7.Nxd4 Bd7 8.Qh5+ g6 9.Qxd5 Nxd4 10.cxd4 c6 11.Qe5 Nf6 12.Bc4 Bf5=] 6...e6 7.Bb5 Bc5 [7...Nge7!? 8.Nd4 a6 9.Bxc6+ Nxc6 10.Nxf5 exf5 11.0-0 Qe7 12.Qxd5 Qxe5 13.Qd1 (13.Qxe5+ Nxe5 14.Re1 0-0-0=/+) 13...Be7 14.Re1 Rd8 15.Nd2 Qd5=] 8.Nd4 Bxd4 [8...Nge7=] 9.cxd4 Qh4!? [9...Nge7=] 10.Nc3 Nge7 11.Be3 0-0 12.Rc1 Bg4 13.Qd2 Nf5 14.Bg5 [14.Bxc6! bxc6 15.Na4+/=] 14...Qh5 15.Bxc6 bxc6 16.h3 h6 [16...c5!?] 17.Qf4 [17.Be3=]

17...Bf3 18.Qxf3 Qxg5 19.0-0 [19.Ne2 Nh4=/+] 19...Nxd4 20.Qg4 Qxe5 21.Rce1 Qf6 22.Na4 [22.Ne2 Nf5 23.Ng3 Rae8-/+] 22...e5 23.Nc5 Qd6 24.b4 Rf4 25.Qg3 [25.Qd1 a5 26.a3 axb4 27.axb4 Qg6-+] 25...Raf8 26.Nd3 Nf3+ 27.gxf3 Rxf3 28.Qxe5 Qg6+ 29.Kh1 Rxh3+ 0-1

187 – Maksimovic 4.Ne2 e6 In the Queen's Knight Defence after 1.e4 Nc6 2.d4 d5 White can choose between 3.Nc3, 3.exd5 or 3.e5. Do you prefer to develop a piece, open up the center, or grab a space advantage on move three? The Nimzowitsch Advance 3.e5 Bf5 looks like the Caro-Kann Advance Variation 3.e5 Bf5 except for what Black piece has on c6. The difference between these openings is perspective. The c6 pawn protects d5 while the Nc6 attacks e5. This makes the Caro-Kann Defence sound passive or solid. This makes the Nimzowitsch Defence sound aggressive or risky. Black must determine on which side to castle. Each side leads to a different middlegame strategy. This game was between young Catalin-Lucian Patrascu (before he became a FIDE Master) and WGM Suzana Maksimovic. Black castled kingside and attacked kingside. Her plan as Black worked in part because his White's e5 pawn blocked some of his own attacking prospects. Maksimovic found a nice checkmate to finish. Patrascu (2069) - Maksimovic (2238), 25th Seacoast Trophy 2015 Eforie Nord ROU (8.5), 30.06.2015 begins 1.e4 Nc6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 Bf5 4.Ne2 e6 5.Ng3 Bg6 6.h4 f6!? [6...h5 7.Be2 Nb4 8.Na3 c5 9.c3 Nc6=/+] 7.Bb5 Qd7 8.0-0 a6 9.Ba4 fxe5 10.dxe5 b5 11.Bb3 Bc5 12.h5 Bf7 13.Bf4 Nge7 [13...g6!?] 14.c3 Nf5 15.Nxf5 exf5 16.Re1 Be6 17.Nd2 0-0 18.h6 Rad8 19.Nf3 g6 20.Nd4 Be7 21.Qd2 Na5 22.Bg5 c5 [22...Bxg5 23.Qxg5+/=] 23.Nf3 [23.Nxe6 Qxe6 24.Bxe7+-] 23...Nc4 24.Bxc4 bxc4 25.Bxe7 Qxe7 26.b4 d4 27.bxc5 dxc3 28.Qxc3 Rd3 29.Qa5 Bd5 30.Qxa6 Rxf3 31.gxf3

[31.Qd6!=] 31...Qg5+ 32.Kf1 Bxf3 [32...Qh5-/+] 33.Qxc4+ Kh8 34.Red1 [34.Re3!+-] 34...Qxh6 35.Ke1 Qh1+ 36.Kd2 [36.Qf1!=] 36...Rd8+ 37.Ke3 Bxd1 38.Qf4 Qe1# 0-1

188 – Nimzowitsch 5.Ng3 Aron Nimzowitsch wrote that chess books should include humor as we relate the game to life. What could be more humorous than winning a Queens Knight Defence with the move 1...Nc6? A book on the Nimzovich Defence should of course include at least one game by Aron Nimzowitsch. Why the different spelling? When Fred Reinfeld edited “My System” for David McKay, and later Tartan, he spelled the author’s name as Aron Nimzovich. Hugh E. Myers followed suit in his Nimzovich Defense books. Raymond Keene pointed out that this is not the most accurate spelling of this name. Better was seen in the title of the Batsford book by Tim Harding called “Nimzowitsch Defence: 1.e4 Nc6.” Aron Nimzowitsch (1886-1935) born in Russia was the founder of the Hyper-Modern School of chess theory. Grandmaster Aron Nimzowitsch settled in Denmark from 1922 to the end of his life. Rudolf Spielmann (1883-1942) wrote “The Art of Sacrifice”. On moves 8 and 9 Rudolf Spielmann picked off the Black h5 pawn. Then Aron Nimzowitsch turned the tables. On moves 10 and 11 he picked off the White h4 pawn. Then the attack continued. Spielmann - Nimzowitsch, Stockholm 1920 begins 1.e4 Nc6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 Bf5 4.Ne2 [4.c3 e6 5.Nf3 f6=] 4...e6 [4...f6=] 5.Ng3 Bg6 6.h4 h5!? [6...f6 7.h5 Bf7=] 7.Be2 [7.c3 f6 8.exf6 Nxf6=] 7...Be7 [7...f6 8.Bxh5 Bxh5 9.Nxh5 fxe5 10.dxe5 Qd7 11.Qe2 Qf7 12.Nf4 g5=] 8.Bxh5 [8.Nxh5 Nh6 9.Nxg7+ Kd7 10.h5 Qg8 11.hxg6 Qxg7 12.Bxh6 Rxh6 13.Rxh6 Qxh6 14.gxf7 Qg6 15.g3 Rh8 16.Bf3 Qxf7 17.Bg2 Rf8=] 8...Bxh5 9.Nxh5 g6 10.Nf4 Rxh4 11.Rxh4 Bxh4 12.Qd3 Nge7 13.g3 [13.Nd2 Nf5 14.Nf3 Be7=] 13...Nf5 14.gxh4 Nfxd4 15.Na3 Qxh4 16.Qh3 Qg5?! [16...Qxh3 17.Nxh3 Nf3+ 18.Ke2 Nfxe5= Black has three pawns for the bishop.] 17.Be3?! [17.Nd3 Qg1+ 18.Kd2 Qg5+ 19.Kc3 Ne2+ 20.Kb3 Nxc1+

21.Rxc1 0-0-0 22.c3+/=] 17...Qg1+ 18.Qf1 Nf3+ 19.Ke2 Nfd4+ 20.Kd2 Nf3+ 21.Ke2 Ncd4+ 22.Kd3 [22.Bxd4 Nxd4+ 23.Kd3 Qg4 24.Kxd4 Qxf4+ 25.Kc3 Qxe5+ 26.Kb3 a5=/+] 22...Qg5 23.Qh3? [23.Bxd4 Qxf4-/+] 23...Qxe5 24.Rf1 0-0-0 25.b3 b5 26.Nxb5 Qe4+ 27.Kc3 Qxc2+ 28.Kb4 c5+ 0-1

Book 9: Index of Names to Games Aasum – 82, 92 Abdilkhair – 86 Abelyan – 151 Ajibowo – 175 Albets Armengol – 111 Altman – 157 Andreikin – 30, 40 Androsov – 180 Anguera Maestro – 69 ArasanX – 71 Arman – 161 Armando – 177 Aronian – 106 ArthurSU – 165 Bacrot – 176 Baffo – 24, 25, 65 Baishanski – 108 Bargandzhiya – 139 Batsiashvili – 120 Bauer – 44, 77, 133, 134, 152 Belezky – 179 Beltran Medina – 6 Benedito Salavert – 3 Bentrup – 127 Bernal – 57 biteme2 – 25 Blanco Fernandez – 6 blik – 129 Bogdanovich – 39, 167 Bogoljubow – 94, 104 BountyHunter – 71 Bozkurt – 66 Braun – 2 Briem – 68

Brito – 91 Bryan – 102 Bublei – 43 Bullockus – 31 Bulut – 79 Buss – 178 Bykovskiy – 172 Capellades Subirana – 159 Carlsen – 21, 100, 138 Carnicelli – 162 Caruana – 106 Caskey – 178 challanger100 – 4 Chan – 55 Chess Challenger – 49 ChessDoc – 74 Cho – 144 Christiansen, JS – 14 Christiansen, LM – 186 Chun – 150 Cioara – 146 Colpe – 70 Conquest – 142 CraftyWiz – 23, 64 Cramling – 117 Cruz – 133 Dahl – 84 Damia – 182 Davis – 2 de Remusat – 33 Diemer – 85 Djurhuus – 154 Douglas – 62 Drazic – 107 Dunne – 173 Dunst – 122 Dydyshko – 80

Ekebjaerg – 12, 81 Emmanouilidis – 56 Ezquerro Luque – 75 Fancy – 28 Favarel – 77 Feikes – 163 Fernandes – 83 Fernandez – 19, 52 Fine – 41 Fink – 41 Fischer – 53 Fitter – 110 Fransson – 7 Fressinet – 100 Fries Nielsen – 48 Furman – 61 Gajic – 128 Gasanov – 158 Gavin – 34 Georgakopoulos – 19 Gilevych – 162 Giri – 21 Gjertsen – 84 Golombek – 103 Gormally – 52 Grafl – 36, 69 Granat – 148 Grau Garsaball – 75 Green – 88 Grifter – 67 Grigoriev – 79 Haddaway – 96 Haines – 102 Hanke – 85 Harikrishna – 120 Harthor – 74 Hecht – 101

Herbers – 125 Hovsepyan – 105 iAttack – 1 Ibarra Jerez – 22 Ivkov – 135 Jablonicky – 168 jchr – 155 Jovanovic – 8 Kabanov – 43 Kaliebe – 93, 184 Kallinger – 81 Kamer – 66 Kampars – 53 Karpatchev – 145 Kazhgaleyev – 37 Keilhack – 164 Keres – 116 Kessler – 39 Kevitz – 157 Kharitonov – 115 Kibbermann – 116 Kiik – 171 Knaak – 17 Koch – 44 Koffler – 29 Kohut – 109 Kotronias – 112 Kramnik – 30 Krasenkow – 99 Kudrin – 153 Kupervaser – 14 Kurayan – 158 Kveinys – 113 Laird – 31 Lakusic – 98 l'Ami – 123 Laqua – 97

Lecroq – 12 Leko – 176 Lengyel – 90 Levi – 55 Libiszewski – 175 lolo – 160 Lopez – 54 Lu Shanglei – 11 Ludwig – 131 Maksimovic – 187 Malagon – 185 Malyi – 166 Mamalis – 179 Manea – 38 Marholev – 121 Markovic, G – 130 Markovic, M – 149 Martinez – 59 Mastrovasilis – 60 Matheis – 5 Mellado Trivino – 111 Mestrovic – 135, 142 Mikalsen – 154 Mikenas – 118 Mikhaletz – 42 Milanovic – 149 Miles – 137, 143, 146, 153 Milovic – 98 Miranda Gonzalez – 148 mnn1954_1 – 78 Moe – 161 Moersch – 124 Moser – 124 Movsesian – 138 Mozharov – 40 Muse – 101, 105, 163 Mutesi – 144

Myers – 185 Nakamura – 141 Napoleon – 33 Nc3-4Me – 72 Nepomniachtchi – 37 Neumeier – 9 Nielsen – 147 Nikol – 72 Nimzowitsch – 188 NN – 13, 169 Okhotnik – 166 Olivier – 152 Oros – 172 Over-Rated – 15 Pandurevic – 183 Panko – 61 Parrella – 140 Patrascu – 187 Penrose – 103 Penullar – 165 Perez Ponsa – 16 Petrov – 128 Pickard – 125, 141 Piehl – 27 Piket – 186 Pletnev – 180 Polansky – 50 Polanyi – 174 Polzin – 134 Porras Mateo – 36 Post – 115 Potapov – 87 Prandstetter – 168 Press – 28 Pribelszky – 90 Pridorozhni – 87 Radisavljevic – 63

Radspinner – 122 Raljic – 183 Rashkovsky – 35, 80 Redway – 95 Reis – 83 Ristic – 60 Robson – 18, 132 Rohde – 137 Rookie – 32 Roquentin – 119 Rosenthal – 181 Rozman – 136 Rubil – 26 ruval – 114 Rydstrom – 7, 58 Sadilek – 9, 26, 29 Sanchez Dengra – 22 Sanchez Jerez – 3 Sawyer – 1, 4, 15, 18, 23, 27, 32, 34, 49, 51, 54, 57, 59, 62, 64, 67, 78, 88, 89, 93, 95, 96, 108-110, 114, 119, 126, 127, 129-132, 140, 155, 156, 160, 177, 181, 184 Scheerer – 97, 99 Schena – 91 Schmaltz – 145 Schultz Pedersen – 147 Schuyler – 136 Sengupta – 76 Shanava – 167 Short – 47, 117, 123 Shymanskyi – 42 Sjugirov – 112 Spielmann – 188 Spirin – 151 Stahlberg – 118 Steedman – 10 Stefanov – 121 Stefansson – 56

Steinbacher – 70 Stevic – 107 Stigar – 58 Stroganov – 86 Suba – 10 Tamang – 76 Tartakower – 46 Tauber – 82 Tauriainen – 50 Teichmann – 159 temujin1206 – 65 Teske – 20 Thomas – 46 Timman – 45 Torning – 13, 169 Troltenier – 143 Tukhaev – 48 Ullrich – 104 Usmanov – 139, 170 Vaganian – 17 Vaishali – 113 Van Geet – 45, 68, 92 Van Zyl-Rudd – 16 Varezhkin – 73 Veach – 173 Veysseyre – 38 vicnice01 – 51 Villing – 35 Vlasenko – 170, 171 Vlassov – 174 Vuckovic – 164 Wei Yi – 11 Welsh – 47 Wharrier – 5 Wilson – 89 Wisnewski – see Scheerer Wood – 156

Woods – 126 xory – 24 Zenari – 182 Zivic – 73 Zlatanovic – 8, 63 Zpevak – 20 Zubarev – 94

Book 10 - Bird & Dutch 1.f4 & 1…f5: Second Edition – Chess Opening Games Copyright © 2016, 2018 by Sawyer Publications All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form without permission in writing from the author. Play Bird’s Opening 1.f4 and Dutch Defence 1...f5 and win! This 2018 Second Edition has 200 games. You can always play 1.f4 as White. You play 1…f5 as Black against 1.d4 or 1.c4 or 1.Nf3 or anything except 1.e4. Don’t worry about other openings. The Bird 1.f4 and the Dutch 1...f5 openings mirror each other. Author Tim Sawyer shares 200 games where he explains what it is like to play these openings or play against them. He spent 45 years playing masters, experts and club players in tournament, correspondence (3 days per move) and blitz games. Bird’s Opening begins with 1.f4. It was promoted by Henry Bird. Later Tartakower and Larson tried it. Schwarz, Soltis, Schiller, Hayward, Taylor and Lakdawala have written on it. Tim Sawyer learned from them. Many masters, experts and club players like these openings. The author has played them since the 1970s. Dealing with Dutch Defence 1…f5 chess opening surprises in your games can make you a better player. Over the years Tim Sawyer has studied Dutch Defence theory in books by Smith, Schwarz, Bellin, Harding, Christiansen, Schiller, Martin, McDonald, Johnsen, Kindermann, Pinksi, and Williams, as well as many others. Sometimes it is called the Hollandaise Defense. Related games are grouped together. They are full of interesting ideas. They tell about fascinating chess players. Examine a huge variety of openings from main lines to gambits. They provide creative ideas and ways to improve. Try the Bird and Dutch!

Book 10: Chapter 1 – 1.f4 without d5 1.f4 misc. In this chapter we look at rare first moves for Black.

1 – Quick Fool's Mate 1.f4 f5 Checkmate! We love it. Fool's Mate is a type of checkmate early in the game where losing king is trapped on its original square. The mate comes on the diagonal from h1-e1 or h5-e8. Here is a very fast win for a Symmetrical Bird's Opening. Black might think that since 1.f4 is playable for White , then 1…f5 is good for Black too. The move 1…f5 is okay, but not with 2…g6? Black must take 2…fxe4. Then White has either 3.d3 or 3.Nc3. Sawyer - dincogan, Yahoo 2004 begins 1.f4 f5 2.e4 g6? 3.exf5 gxf5? 4.Qh5# 1-0

2 - Fool's Mate Joke 1.f4 h6 Lev Zilbermints sent this funny game and wrote, "The Joke is on jokeface. I played the Hobbs - Zilbermints Gambit on the Internet Chess Club. My opponent had an interesting handle, "jokeface". The game lasted 7 moves, one move longer than in the classic Zilbermints - Judah Ash, Brooklyn Children's Chess School, New York 1991. That game went 1 d4 f5 2 g4 fg4 3 h3 Nf6 4 hg4 Nxg4 5 Qd3 Nf6?? 6 Rxh7! 1-0." jokeface (2013) - Zilbermints (1978), Internet Chess Club, 19.03.2018 begins 1.f4 [Bird Opening] 1...h6!? [An important nuance. Were I to play the Hobbs Gambit, 1...g5, there could follow 2.fxg5 h6 3.g6! which leaves Black with a vulnerable g-pawn after 3...fxg6 Thus, 1...h6 avoids all this. I should mention that the Hobbs Gambit was first played by Richard Hobbs of California in 1977.] 2.Nf3 g5 [The Hobbs - Zilbermints Gambit, invented by me in 1996. It is a reverse form of the Krejcik Gambit against the Dutch Defense, 1 d4 f5 2 g4!] 3.fxg5 hxg5! [This is the whole point behind 1...h6! Now White does not have the cowardly 3.g6 push.] 4.Nxg5 d5 5.Nf3 Qd6

[Black has a roaring attack on the Kingside. White does not see the threat.] 6.c4?? 6...Rxh2!! [Game over.] 7.Nxh2 Qg3# 0-1 [Notes by Zilbermints]

3 – Hobbs-Zilbermints 4.d4 Lev Zilbermints once again shows how bold gambit play leads to exciting blitz chess. The Bird's Opening often sees White plan for a slow build up. Lev Zilbermints uses his g-pawn to force White into fast action that allows Black attacking threats against the Nf3 and the White monarch. Compare this to the previous game with the Hobbs Gambit after 1.f4 g5!? Here in this game, Black chooses a delayed Hobbs with 1...h6 and 2...g5. This game illustrates just how a tactical fight gives both sides chances in rapid play, and how quickly the advantage can change sides. Lev Zilbermints keeps throwing punches and pulls off a crushing victory. Lev Zilbermints adds: “This is the Hobbs-Zilbermints Gambit. The difference is that after the immediate 1 f4 g5 2 fxg5 h6 White plays 3 g6! declining the gambit, and creating a weakness on Black's Kingside. However, after 1 f4 h6 2 Nf3 g5! 3 fxg5 hxg5 White no longer has the option of chickening out.” vabol (2113) - Zilbermints (2141), ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 04.05.2015 begins 1.f4 h6 2.Nf3 g5 3.fxg5 [Not 3.f5? d5!=+, but 3.d4!? g4 4.Nfd2!= is playable for White.] 3...hxg5 4.d4 [Usually White plays 4.Nxg5 e5 5.d3 d5= and Black has great practical chances for the pawn.] 4...g4 5.Ng5 d5 6.e4 dxe4 [6...f6!-/+ looks like an improvement for Black.] 7.Bc4 Nh6 8.0-0 f6 9.Nxe4 Nc6 10.c3 Bg7 11.Bf4 e6? [White is only up a pawn in complications after 11...e5! 12.dxe5+/-] 12.b4 [12.Qe2!+-] 12...f5 13.Ng5 Qe7? 14.Re1 Nd8 15.Qb3 Bf6 16.Nxe6 Nxe6 17.d5? [17.Bxe6!+-] 17...Nf7? [17...Nxf4!-/+] 18.dxe6 Nd6 19.Bd3 Qh7 [19...a5 20.Nd2+/-] 20.Nd2 b6 21.Nc4 Bb7 22.Bxd6 [22.Nxd6+! cxd6 23.Qa4+ Kf8 24.e7+ Bxe7 25.Qd7!+-] 22...cxd6 23.Nxd6+ Kf8 24.Nxb7 [Houdini gives an incredible line to save the game: 24.h3 gxh3 25.Bxf5 Qg7 26.Bxh3 Rxh3 27.e7+ Bxe7 28.Nxb7=] 24...Qxh2+ 25.Kf2 Bh4+ 26.Ke2 Qxg2+ 27.Kd1 Bxe1 28.e7+ Kxe7 29.Kxe1 Rh1+ White resigns 0-1

4 – Hobbs Gambit 1…g5 IM David Strauss played the Bird's Opening hoping to attack from a fortress type Stonewall position. He battled Lev Zilbermints in the bold counter of a Hobbs Gambit 1.f4 g5!? Richard Parker Hobbs was a USCF Expert who played this gambit several times around 1977 in Berkeley, California. His last USCF tournament was the US Open 1995 in Concord, CA. This line is a little risky. But in a blitz game anything active and aggressive is playable, even against an International Master. White swaps off his "bad" dark squared bishop as the kingside is blasted wide open. He castles queenside and the fight is on in a race against the clock. Though there is a two second increment, Black wins on time in a theoretically drawn endgame. Strauss (2188) - Zilbermints (2200), ICC 2 2 Internet Chess Club, 16.12.2014 begins 1.f4 g5 2.fxg5 h6 3.d4 hxg5 4.Bxg5 d5 5.c3?! [Too slow. 5.Nf3+/= Critter; 5.Nc3+/= Houdini] 5...Qd6 6.Nf3 Bh6 7.Qd2 f6 8.Bxh6 Nxh6 9.Na3 c6 [9...a6! 10.e3 Nc6 11.0-0-0 Bf5=] 10.0-0-0 Ng4 [10...Bf5=] 11.e3 Bf5 12.Bd3 [12.h3 Nh6 13.Bd3+/=] 12...Bxd3 13.Qxd3 Nf2 14.Qg6+ Kf8 [14...Kd8!=/+] 15.c4 [15.Rhf1 Ne4 16.Nc4!+/-] 15...Nxh1 [15...Qe6-/+] 16.Rxh1 [White has a great shot with 16.Ng5!+-] 16...Qe6 17.Re1 Nd7 18.e4 Qf7 19.Qxf7+ Kxf7 20.exd5 cxd5 21.cxd5 Nb6 22.d6 Rac8+ 23.Kd2 exd6 24.Nb5 Nc4+ 25.Kd3 a6 26.Nc3 Nxb2+ 27.Kd2 Nc4+ 28.Kd3 b5 29.Nd5 Nb2+ 30.Kd2 Rhe8 31.Rf1 Nc4+ 32.Kd3 Nb2+ 33.Kd2 Kg6 [33...Ke6-+] 34.Nh4+ Kg7 35.Nf5+ Kg6 36.Nxd6 Nc4+ 37.Nxc4 [37.Kd3 Nxd6 38.Rxf6+ Kg5 39.Rxd6=] 37...Rxc4 38.Rxf6+ [38.Kd3 Ra4-/+] 38...Kg7 39.Rf4 Rd8 40.Ne3 Rdxd4+ 41.Rxd4 Rxd4+ 42.Kc3 Ra4 43.Kb2 Re4 44.Nc2 Re2 45.Kb3 Rxg2 46.Nb4 a5 [46...Rg6!-+] 47.Nc6 a4+ 48.Ka3 Rxh2 49.Nd4 [49.Na7!=] 49...Rh3+ 50.Kb4 Rh4 51.Kc5 Rh5+ [Black wins with 51...b4!-+] 52.Kb4 Rh2 53.Nxb5 Rxa2 54.Nc3 Rb2+ 55.Kxa4 Kf6 56.Ka3 Rb8 57.Ka4 Ke5 58.Nb5 Kd5 59.Na3 Kc5 60.Nc2 Rb2 61.Na3 Rb8 62.Nc2 Kc4 63.Na3+

Kc5 64.Nc2 Rb2 65.Na3 Rb6 66.Nc2 Kc4 67.Na3+ Kc3 68.Nb5+ Kc4 69.Na3+ Kc5 70.Nc2 Rb1 71.Ka3 Kc4 72.Ne3+ Kc3 73.Nd5+ Kd4 74.Nb4 Kc4 75.Nc6 Rb5 76.Ka4 Rh5 77.Ka3 Kc3= [White forfeits on time.] 0-1

5 – Morozevich 1…g6 2.g3 h5 Birds Opening remains popular at the club level all over the world. White has a laser focused repertoire. Black has limited possibilities for counter attack. Maksim Chigaev is a Russian grandmaster born in 1996. In 2015 Chigaev began playing 1.f4 in games that made my database. His record as White after 24 games is +12 =6 -6. That’s great! Some of his opponents were rated over 2700. Grandmaster Alexander Morozevich was Number 2 in the World behind Gary Kasparov at one point. Moro does not face the Bird’s Opening often. Against the Leningrad 2.g3 Morozevich chose to play 2...h5!? The only other game I have with this is G.B. Smith vs J.T. Farrand in the 1969 British Correspondence Championship. Black won after 3.Bg2 h4 4.Nc3 e5 5.d3 Bc5 6.Nh3 d5 7.fxe5 Bxh3 and 0-1 in 28. Chigaev (2551) - Morozevich (2683), TCh-RUS Blitz 2016 Sochi RUS (7.1), 07.10.2016 begins 1.f4 g6 2.g3 h5 3.Nf3 d5 4.c4 d4 5.Rg1 [5.Bg2 Nh6 6.b4 Bg7 7.Bb2=] 5...Nc6 6.Bg2 h4 7.b4 hxg3 8.hxg3 Bg7 9.b5 [9.Qb3=] 9...Nb8 10.a4 Nf6 11.Ra3 c5 12.e3 [12.a5 a6=/+] 12...Bf5 [12...Nh5=/+] 13.d3 dxe3 14.Bxe3 Nbd7 15.Nbd2 [15.Rh1 Rxh1+ 16.Bxh1 Qc7=/+] 15...Ng4 16.Bf2 [16.Nf1 Qc7-/+] 16...Nxf2 17.Kxf2 Nf6 18.Ne5 Qd4+ 19.Kf1 Nh5 20.Bxb7 [20.Ne4 Nxg3+ 21.Nxg3 Qxf4+ 22.Nf3 Qxg3+] 20...Bxe5 [20...Nxg3+ 21.Rxg3 Qxf4+ 22.Kg2 Bxe5-+] 21.Nf3 Nxg3+ 22.Rxg3 Qxf4 23.Qe1 Bd4 24.Kg2 Rd8 25.Bc6+ [25.Bd5 Rd6-+] 25...Kf8 26.Nxd4 Rxd4 27.a5 Qh4 28.Qe5 Rh5 29.Qb8+ Kg7 30.b6 Rf4 31.Qe5+ Kh7 32.Rf3 Qh2+ 33.Kf1 Rxf3+ 0-1

6 – Fernandez 1…g6 2.e4 d5 Modern Defence 1...g6 can be played against anything. Black may transpose into a well-known theoretical variation or head off into uncharted territory. According to my database of millions of games, the players were on their own by White’s move 4.c4. White developed all his pieces and his rooks were connected. The game looks strategically chaotic. Black’s kingside remained weak in this Birds Opening. White won material by move 19 and broke through in Daniel Fernandez vs Konstantin Kavutskiy. Fernandez (2485) - Kavutskiy (2397), 36th Balaton GM 2018 Balatonlelle HUN (2.1), 13.06.2018 begins 1.f4 g6 2.e4 d5 3.e5 h5 4.c4 d4 5.Nf3 Nh6 6.b4 Nf5 7.Bd3 e6 8.b5 a6 9.Bb2 axb5 10.cxb5 c5 11.Na3 Nd7 [11...Bh6 12.g3=] 12.Nc4 Nb6 13.Nxb6 Qxb6 14.a4 h4 15.Kf2 [15.Qc2+/=] 15...Qc7 [15...Ne7 16.Rf1=] 16.Be4 Bh6 17.g3 f6 [17...Bd7 18.Rc1+/=] 18.Qc2 0-0 19.Nxd4 [Or 19.Bxf5 exf5 20.Qc4+ Kh7 21.Bxd4 fxe5 22.Qxc5 Qxc5 23.Bxc5+-] 19...Ne7 [19...fxe5 20.Nxf5 exf5 21.Bxe5+/-] 20.exf6 [After 20...Rxf6 21.Nf3 Rf7 22.Bxg6+-] 1-0

7 – Shirov 1…g6 2.Nf3 Bg7 White sets up a pretty pyramid with pawns on h2, g3, f4, e4, d3, and c2 in this Birds Opening. The king hides in the corner on h1. Everything seems fine on the surface, but things are not always what they seem. In reality, White’s structure is a little loose. His army is not fully employed to support the center. Black is a world class grandmaster who systematically attacks weak points on d4 and e4 in this game between Lars Andersson and Alexei Shirov. Andersson (1996) - Shirov (2631), CellaVision Cup 2018 Lund SWE (1.2), 03.08.2018 begins 1.f4 g6 2.Nf3 Bg7 3.g3 d6 4.d3 e5 5.Nc3 Ne7 6.Bg2 Nbc6 7.0-0 0-0 8.e4 [8.fxe5 dxe5=] 8...Nd4 9.Nxd4 exd4 10.Ne2 f5 11.Kh1 [11.c3!? c5=] 11...Bd7 12.Ng1 Bc6 13.Re1 Qd7 14.Nf3 Rae8 15.Re2 Kh8 16.Qg1 [16.Kg1=] 16...fxe4 17.dxe4 Nf5 18.Ne1 Re7 19.Nd3

Rfe8 20.Nf2 Ne3 21.Bf3 [21.Bxe3 dxe3 22.Rxe3 Bxb2=/+] 21...Bb5 22.Rd2 c5 [22...g5-/+] 23.h4 c4 [23...Rf8-/+] 24.h5 [24.Rb1 Qc6-/+] 24...c3 [24...gxh5-+] 25.bxc3 dxc3 26.Rd3? [26.Rxd6 Qxd6 27.Bxe3=] 26...Nxc2! 27.Rb1 Bxd3 0-1

8 – Skoberne 1…Nh6 2.Nf3 g6 Black backs into the Modern Defence with pawns on g6, c6, and d5 and pieces on Bg7 and Nh6 while castling kingside. White begins with a modest center in this Birds Opening with pawns on d3 and c3. After a series of exchanges, White’s attacks the Black his with two f-pawns in Jure Skoberne vs Julio Catalino Sadorra. Skoberne (2553) - Sadorra (2539), PRO League Group Stage chess.com INT (7), 24.02.2018 begins 1.f4 Nh6 2.Nf3 g6 3.e4 d5 4.d3 Bg7 5.Be2 c6 6.c3 0-0 7.0-0 [7.h3!?=] 7...Qb6+ 8.Kh1 dxe4 9.dxe4 Ng4 10.Nd4 e5 11.Bxg4 Bxg4 12.Qxg4 exd4 13.e5 Na6 14.Nd2 dxc3 15.bxc3 Nc5 [15...Qe3 16.Nb3 Qxc3 17.Ba3=] 16.Ba3 Rfd8 17.Nc4 Qa6 18.f5 Nd3 19.e6 [19.fxg6 fxg6 20.Qe6+ Kh8 21.Be7+-] 19...c5 20.f6 Bh6 21.exf7+ [21.Qh4+-] 21...Kh8 22.Rf3 b5 [22...Qa4 23.Qe4+/-] 23.Rxd3 Rxd3 24.Ne5 Qxa3 25.Qh4 Rg8 26.fxg8Q+ Kxg8 27.Qxh6 1-0

9 – Foust 1…b6 2.Nf3 Bb7 3.e3 I played three interesting postal chess games vs Michael Foust. The first was wonderful Blackmar-Diemer Gambit win that came after 1.e4 d5 2.d4. That and the game below were APCT postal. Another time we played an Alekhine Defence in USCF postal. Michael Foust turned up the pressure with pawn moves in this Bird’s Opening. I sacrificed my knight to be up three pawns on the kingside with the better chances. Alas, I let my advantage slip. In less than 10 moves I went from winning to lost. Michael Foust proved that aggressive play can pay big dividends. Sawyer (1950) - Foust (1943), corr APCT 1986 begins 1.f4 b6 2.Nf3 Bb7 3.e3 c5 4.Be2 Nf6 5.0-0 e6 6.b3 d5 7.Bb2 Bd6 [7...Be7=] 8.Ne5 Nbd7 9.Qe1 0-0 10.d3 Qc7 11.Nxd7 Nxd7 12.Nd2 f5 13.g3 e5 14.Bf3 Rae8 15.Qf2 Re6 16.Rae1 g5? [16...Nf6=] 17.fxg5 Rg6 18.Qg2 [18.Bg2+/-] 18...e4 19.dxe4 dxe4 20.Nxe4! fxe4 21.Bxe4 Bxe4 22.Qxe4 Ne5 23.Rxf8+ Kxf8 24.Rf1+ Ke7 [24...Ke8 25.Rf5+/=] 25.Qf5 Nc6 [25...Qd7 26.Qf8+

Ke6 27.Rf6+ Kd5 28.c4+ Ke4 29.Rxd6+/=] 26.Qf8+ [26.h4+-] 26...Kd7 27.Rf7+ Be7 28.Bf6? [28.Rxh7+/-] 28...Qd6 29.Qa8 Qd1+ 30.Kf2 Qxc2+ 31.Kg1 [31.Ke1=] 31...Qb1+ 32.Kf2 Qxa2+ [32...Qf5+ 33.Kg1 Qe6-/+] 33.Kf3 Qa6 34.Rxh7? [34.Kf2=] 34...Qf1+ 35.Kg4 Qxf6! 36.Qb7+ Kd6 0-1

10 – Nijboer 2.Nf3 Bb7 3.e3 f5 I went to “GatorLand” in south Orlando to see Florida wildlife like snakes, panthers, cattle, birds, turtles and alligators. I saw the rookery and naturally thought of chess. My wife explained that a rookery is where the birds nest. I said, “That works. Chess has Birds too!” My thoughts went to Birds Opening. Then I wondered what is new in the world of the Bird. When I got home I looked for a good game. Many new Bird’s Openings see White playing g3. I preferred a game with the classical e3. The one I chose here was played by Grandmaster Friso Nijboer of the Netherlands against the young Lucas Van Foreest. With his final pawn move 29.e7 GM Nijboer attacked a forest rookery with imminent plans to hatch a queen. Nijboer (2545) - Van Foreest (2350), 8th Batavia GM 2016 Amsterdam NED (1.1), 19.02.2016 begins 1.f4 b6 2.Nf3 Bb7 3.e3 f5!? 4.b3 Nf6 5.Bb2 e6 6.c4 c5 7.Nc3 Nc6 8.a3 d5 [8...Be7 9.Be2 0-0 10.0-0=] 9.d4 [9.cxd5! exd5 10.Qc2 d4 11.Nd1 g6 12.b4!?+/=] 9...Bd6 10.Ne5 0-0 11.Be2 cxd4 12.exd4 Ne4 13.Nxe4 fxe4 [13...dxe4=/+] 14.0-0 Qe7 [14...Ne7=] 15.b4 Bxe5 16.fxe5 Rxf1+ [16...Qg5=] 17.Bxf1 Qg5 18.Bc1 e3 [18...Qf5 19.cxd5 exd5=] 19.cxd5 Ne7 20.dxe6 Rf8? [20...Bd5=] 21.Ra2 Bd5 22.Re2 Bf3 23.Bxe3 Qxe3+ 24.Rxe3 Bxd1 25.d5 Ba4? [25...Nxd5 26.Rd3 Bg4 27.Rxd5+/=] 26.d6 Nd5 27.Re1 Bb3 28.Bb5 Nc3 29.e7 [This pawn queens on the next move.] 1-0

11 – Sawyer 1.f4 Nc6 2.Nf3 d6 The smothered mate is well known, but how often do you get to play one? Below I play a smothered mate in a Bird's Opening. No deep theory here. Pieces were tossed around and a tactical opportunity presented itself: the smothered mate combination! klowz (1373) - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 26.07.2014 begins 1.f4 Nc6 2.Nf3 d6 3.e3 g6 4.Be2 Bg7 5.0-0 Nf6 6.b3 Ne4 7.c3 0-0 8.Bb2 f5 [8...e5=] 9.d3 Nf6 10.Ng5 h6 11.Nf3 e5 12.fxe5 dxe5 13.c4?! [13.Na3=] 13...e4 14.Nd4? [14.dxe4 Nxe4=/+] 14...Bd7? [14...Ng4!-/+] 15.Nd2 [15.Nxc6 Bxc6 16.d4 Be8=] 15...exd3 16.Bxd3 Nb4 [16...Ng4-+] 17.Bb1

c5 18.Nc2 Nd3 19.Qf3? [19.Bc3 Bc6-/+] 19...Nxb2 20.Na3 Bc6 21.Qg3 Qxd2 22.Qxg6 Qxe3+ 23.Kh1 Ng4 24.Nc2 Nf2+ 25.Kg1 Nh3+ 26.Kh1 Qg1+ 27.Rxg1 Nf2# White is mated 0-1

12 – Bad Kitty 2.Nf3 d6 e3 e5 We used to have a cat named "Kit". Sometimes he was bad. When he ran to hide, Kit would often run into dead ends, like the space behind an open door. Kit was a fast cat, but he got caught. Against "BadKitty" I was behind on the clock throughout the game. When White resigned, the clocks stood at 1:00-0:38, but my 38 seconds was plenty of time to queen a pawn and mate this feline. The rare Bird's Opening has been a favorite of mine as White during times that I have not wanted to play other openings. As Black against the Bird I have ventured several approaches. My top choice against good players is 1.f4 d5 (over 200 games). Against lower rated players I often choose From Gambit 1.f4 e5 (200 games). I have scored well with 1.f4 Nc6 (100 games). BadKitty - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 05.10.2012 begins 1.f4 Nc6 2.Nf3 d6 3.e3 e5 4.Bb5 exf4 5.exf4 Bd7 [5...Nf6=] 6.0-0 Be7 7.Nc3 Nf6 8.d3 0-0 9.Bxc6 Bxc6 10.Re1 Re8 11.Be3 b6 12.Bf2 a5 [12...Bb7=/+] 13.a3 Qd7 14.Ne4 Nxe4 15.dxe4 Bf6 16.e5 Bxf3 17.Qxf3 dxe5 18.Rad1? [White should first play 18.fxe5 Be7 19.Rad1=] 18...Qc8 19.fxe5 Rxe5 20.Rxe5 Bxe5 21.Bd4 Bxd4+ 22.Rxd4 Qe8 23.Re4 Qd7 24.h3 Rd8 25.Re2 g6 26.Qe3 Qd4 27.Kh2 Qxe3 28.Rxe3 Rd2 29.Rc3 Rd7 30.b3 f5 31.a4 Kf7 32.Kg3 Ke6 33.Rc6+ Kd5 34.Rc3 c5 35.Rd3+ Kc6 36.Rc3 Re7 37.Kf3 Kd5 38.Rd3+ Ke5 39.Re3+ Kf6 40.Rd3 h6 41.Rd6+ Re6 42.Rd8 g5 43.Rf8+ Ke5 44.Rd8 Rd6 45.Re8+ Kd4 46.Re2 Kc3 47.Ke3? [This makes it easy for Black, but White was still in trouble after 47.g4 fxg4+ 48.hxg4 Rf6+ 49.Kg3 Rc6 50.Kf3 c4-+] 47...Re6+ 48.Kf2 Rxe2+ 49.Kxe2 Kxc2 0-1

1.f4 Nf6 Games in this chapter begin with the Indian approach of 1…Nf6 or something that transposes. Black avoids or delays ...d5.

13 – Muir 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 e6 Bob Muir met my Birds Opening with a rare Black queenside castling. I choose the famed Stonewall set-up with pawns on f4, e3, d4 and c3 in the center. The blocked nature of this opening means both sides have a good bishop and one bad one. Black's dark squared bishop was much stronger that White's. An aggressive mistake on move 13 led to the trade of dark squared bishops. On the other hand the White light squared bishop remained very strong as the tactics proved up to the final move. Sawyer (2010) - Muir (1800), Williamsport PA 1997 begins 1.f4 Nf6 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 e6 4.e3 b6 5.Bd3 [5.c4= Komodo] 5...Bb7 6.0-0 d5 [6...Nb4=] 7.c3 Qd7 8.Nbd2 Ng4 9.Qe1 f5 10.Ne5 Ngxe5 11.fxe5 0-0-0 12.a4 g5 13.b4 f4? [This drops a pawn. 13...h5=] 14.exf4 gxf4 15.Nf3 Bh6 16.Qh4 Qg7 17.Bxf4 Bxf4 18.Qxf4 Rhg8 19.g3 h6 20.Qf6 Qd7 [20...Qg4 21.Qxh6+-] 21.Nh4 h5 22.Qf7 [22.Bg6!+-] 22...Qe8 23.Qxe8 Rdxe8 24.Bg6 [Now Black loses a second pawn, so he throws in the towel.] 1-0

14 – Hillarp 2.Nf3 c5 3.e3 b6 Black has a variety of possible defensive structures when facing Bird Opening. Below Black chose to fianchetto both his bishops. He held back his d-pawn in somewhat of a Hedgehog fashion. White’s pieces ended up in an unfortunate situation. Black won a piece to a knight fork in Kjell Petersson vs Tiger Hillarp Persson. Petersson (2059) - Hillarp Persson (2512), Elite Hotels Vaxjo Open Vaxjo SWE (2.3), 10.02.2017 begins 1.f4 Nf6 2.Nf3 c5 3.e3 b6 4.b3 g6 5.Bb2 Bg7 6.Be2 [6.g3=] 6...Bb7 7.0-0 0-0 8.Qe1 e6 9.d4 cxd4 [9...Nc6 10.dxc5 bxc5 11.Nbd2=] 10.exd4 [10.Nxd4 Nc6 11.Nd2=] 10...Nc6 11.Ne5 [11.Na3 Ne7=/+] 11...Ne7 12.Nd2 d6 13.Ng4 [13.Bf3] 13...Nf5 14.Qf2 Rc8 15.c3 Nd5 16.c4 Nb4 17.Nf3 Bxf3 18.Bxf3 [Black wins a piece with a knight

fork, but White was in trouble anyway. 18.Qxf3 h5-/+] 18...Nd3 19.Qd2 Nxb2 20.Rab1 Bxd4+ 21.Kh1 [21.Nf2 Qf6 22.Kh1 Rfd8-+] 21...Qh4 0-1

15 – Marfia 2.Nf3 g6 3.b3 Bg7 USCF National Master Jim Marfia from Michigan was best known for his ability to translate Russian chess works into English, especially for American readers. Jim Marfia was known as the excellent translator of the classic David Bronstein book entitled "Zurich International Chess Tournament, 1953" published by Dover. "Euwe Defence - Blackmar-Diemer Gambit" written by Anders Tejler and Jim Marfia has none of my games. It was originally published by Chess Enterprises in 1979, before I ever played a BDG from either side of the board! The updated 1995 reprint mentions my first Blackmar-Diemer Gambit Keybook from 1992. I have never known anyone else named "Marfia", though I have known various mafia (note the difference in spelling) organized crime people during my lifetime because of where I lived and where I worked in prison. That is no connection to Jim. "The Marf" and I played four draws over a 17 year period. This was our second and shortest game. In 1982 I left a decade of playing the main lines to take a flyer with the Bird's Opening. Marfia authored a book on the double fianchetto. He takes that approach here. We agreed to a draw in an even middlegame. During 1982-83, foolishly I played over 100 postal games at once. It was a wonder that I did not lose them all. Sawyer (2100) - Marfia (2081), corr APCT 1982 begins 1.f4 Nf6 2.Nf3 g6 3.b3 Bg7 4.Bb2 0-0 5.e3 c5 [5...d5=] 6.c4 b6 7.Be2 Bb7 8.0-0 d6 9.Nc3 Nbd7 10.d3 [10.Qc2=] 10...e5 11.fxe5 Ng4 12.Qd2 Bh6 13.Nd1 Ndxe5 14.h3 Nxf3+ 15.Bxf3 Bxf3 16.Rxf3 Ne5 17.Bxe5 dxe5 18.Nc3 e4

[18...f5=] 19.Nxe4 f5 20.Nc3 Qd4 21.exd4?! [21.g3! Rad8 22.Rd1+/=] 21...Bxd2 22.Nb5 1/2-1/2

16 – OceanBlue 2.Nf3 g6 3.e3 Bg7 History tells us that in 1492 Christopher Columbus sailed the ocean blue. My opponent has the handle "OceanBlue". People come to America for many reasons. 500 years ago Europeans travelled by ship to explore, trade or just to visit. 400 years ago my own ancestors came from England on the Mayflower in 1620. They came with hope to escape their living conditions there. The USA is a land of opportunity. Those who work hard win the most often. In this Bird's Opening, I did not push a pawn two squares until move 12. All my pieces joined in the attack. I won a pawn and was far ahead on the clock when my opponent resigned. OceanBlue (1846) - Sawyer (1937), ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 07.08.2014 begins 1.f4 g6 2.Nf3 Bg7 3.e3 d6 4.Nc3 Nf6 5.d4 0-0 6.Bd3 Nc6 [Or 6...c5=] 7.0-0 Nb4 8.Bd2 Nxd3 9.cxd3 b6 10.Ne4 Nd5 11.Qc2 Ba6 [11...c5=/+] 12.Rac1 [12.Nf2=] 12...c5 13.Nc3? [13.a3 cxd4 14.Nxd4 Rc8-/+] 13...Nb4 14.Qd1 [If 14.Qa4 Bxd3-+] 14...Nxd3 15.Qa4 Qc8 16.Rb1 Nb4 White resigns. Final clocks: 1:37-2:07. 0-1

17 – Arnold 2.Nf3 g6 3.c4 Bg7 My opponent G. Robert Arnold started with a Birds Opening and led me to a Kings Indian Defense. Bob Arnold frequently played 1.f4 to avoid the big highways of opening theory. However, soon White’s flank pawns 1.f4 and 3.c4 were joined by center pawns 5.e4 and 6.d4. Voila! We transposed to a King's Indian Defence. I didn't mind it, but I didn't expect it either. I rarely faced the Four Pawns Attack. I chose a common book variation that turned out to be bad. I followed the crowd and drove right off the cliff. Bravo to Bob for finding this. He outplayed me and deserved the win. Arnold (2113) - Sawyer (1944), corr APCT EMN-A-4, 08.01.1997 begins 1.f4 Nf6 2.Nf3 g6 3.c4 Bg7 4.Nc3 0-0 5.e4 d6 6.d4 Na6 7.Be2 e5 8.fxe5 dxe5 9.Nxe5 [9.d5 Nc5 10.Bg5 h6=] 9...c5 10.Be3 cxd4 [10...Nb4!=] 11.Bxd4 Ng4? [This is most common, but it is a bad line for Black. Worth exploring is 11...Nb4 12.Bc5 Qa5 13.Bxf8 Bxf8 14.Nf3 Nxe4 15.a3 Nxc3 16.axb4 Nxd1 17.bxa5 Ne3=] 12.Nf3 Bxd4 13.Qxd4 Nb4 14.Qxd8 [14.0-

0-0!+/-] 14...Rxd8 15.Rc1 Nd3+? [From bad to worse. Black should play 15...f5 16.Nd5+/-] 16.Bxd3 Rxd3 17.Nd5 Be6 18.Ke2 [Black's rook is trapped.] 1-0

18 – Nolan 2.Nf3 g6 3.e3 Bg7 Here is how Bird's Opening drove me to the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit. I beat the expert Greg Nolan. The position became so messy that both sides made blunders in complications. It dawned on me that if I can outplay stronger players in such wild positions, why not start that way and play gambits in the opening? Then I learned to charge up the middle with my pawns instead of sliding in from the flanks. After a decade of learning the main line theory of the Ruy Lopez, Sicilian Defence, Queen's Gambit and King's Indian, I got burned out reading Chess Informant. So I took up Bird's Opening. My friend Gregory Nolan and I were paired against each other about the fourth round. He had won all his games. If he beat me like he usually did, Greg Nolan's rating would go above the 2200 master mark. He did become a master, but just not this time. I experimented with the structure f4, e3, c4 which I learned from Marmaduke Wyvill. Twice in 1851 Wyvill played 1.c4, 2.Nc3, 3.e3, 4.f4 against Elijah Williams. After 20 moves, I decided on a desperate risky kingside attack. It was dangerous for both sides. Sawyer (1981) - Nolan (2191), Hatboro, PA 1985 begins 1.f4 g6 2.Nf3 Bg7 3.e3 Nf6 4.Be2 0-0 5.0-0 d6 6.c4 Nbd7 [6...c5=] 7.Nc3 e5 8.d3 c6 9.Qc2? [9.fxe5=] 9...Re8 [9...exf4=/+] 10.e4 Ng4 11.h3 Qb6+ [11...Ngf6=] 12.Kh1 Ne3 13.Bxe3 Qxe3 14.fxe5 Nxe5 15.Qc1 Qb6 16.Qd2 f5 17.Nxe5 Bxe5 18.Bf3 Rf8 19.Rac1 Be6 20.b3 f4 21.Ne2 c5 22.Nc3 g5 23.g4 [23.Qe2=] 23...fxg3 24.Qxg5+ Kh8 25.Ne2 Bxh3 26.Bg2 Rg8 27.Qh4 Be6 28.Nf4 Rg4 [28...Bd7!-+] 29.Qh6? [29.Qe7 Bg8-/+] 29...Bf7 30.Bh3? [30.Qh3 Rag8-+] 30...Bg7 31.Nd5 Qd8 [31...g2+!-+] 32.Qd2? Qh4 [32...g2+!-+] 33.Kg2 Bxd5 [33...Be6!-+] 34.exd5 Bh6 35.Qb2+ Bg7 36.Qd2 Rg6 37.Rf4 Qg5 38.Rcf1 [38.Rd1 Be5-/+] 38...Bh6? [38...Re8! 39.Rd1 Qe7 40.Re4 Be5-+] 39.Qb2+ Kg8? [39...Qe5 40.Qxe5+ dxe5 41.Rf7+/=]

40.Be6+ Rxe6 41.dxe6 Bg7 42.Qc1 [42.Qe2!+-] 42...Qh5 43.Qe1 Qh2+ 44.Kf3 g2? [44...Qh5+ 45.Kxg3 Be5 46.Kg2 Bxf4 47.Rxf4=] 45.Rg1 Qh3+ 46.Qg3 Qxe6 47.Rxg2 Qe5 48.Qg5 Qa1 49.d4 Qf1+ 50.Kg3 Qd3+ 51.Kh2 Qg6 52.Qd5+ 1-0

1.f4 e5 The gambit 1.f4 e5 allows Black to adopt a tactical approach with the investment of a pawn.

19 – Roberts 2.fxe5 Nc6 3.Nf3 Bird Opening Schlechter games look like the From Gambit. Instead of 1.f4 e5 2.fxe5 d6, Black develops with 2...Nc6 immediately attacking the White e5 pawn. The Bird's Opening Schlechter might take a 1.f4 Birds Opening player out of his comfort zone to positions he does not know quite as well as From's Gambit. Statistically the Schlechter Gambit scores better than the From Gambit. Tim Taylor recommends 3.Nc3 instead of the natural 3.Nf3 g5! As Taylor notes, "Black gets an improved Lasker without even sacrificing a pawn!" My own practice backs up Tim Taylor's comments. Lance Roberts ventured a Bird vs me in an APCT postal chess game. White picked off a rook and kept Black from castling. On the other hand, Black grabbed a bishop and trapped both White knights. The net result of this sharp unbalanced line was that Black won three pieces for his rook. Roberts (1100) - Sawyer (2000), corr APCT 92R-40 (3), 12.1992 begins 1.f4 e5 2.fxe5 Nc6!? 3.Nf3 g5 [3...d6 4.exd6 Bxd6 5.d4+/=] 4.d4 g4 5.Ng5 d5 6.exd6 Qxd6 [Or 6...Bxd6 7.d5 Nce7 8.c4+/=] 7.c3 [7.d5!+/=] 7...f5 [7...Qe7!?] 8.Na3 [8.d5 h6 9.dxc6 hxg5=] 8...h6 9.Nb5 Qe7 10.Bf4? [10.d5 hxg5 11.dxc6 bxc6 12.Bxg5 Qxg5 13.Nxc7+ Kf7 14.Nxa8 Qe7=] 10...hxg5 11.Nxc7+ Kd8 [Even stronger is 11...Kf7!-+] 12.Nxa8 [12.Nd5 Qe4 13.Bxg5+ Nce7=/+] 12...gxf4 13.d5 Ne5 14.Qd4 b6 15.0-0-0 Qd6 16.e3

fxe3 17.Bb5 Bb7 18.Nxb6 axb6 19.Rhf1 [If 19.Kb1 Bh6-+] 19...Ne7 20.Bc6 e2 21.Qxb6+ Qc7 0-1

20 – Jesper 3.Nf3 Nc6 4.e4 White might decline the Birds Opening after 1.f4 e5 2.fxe5 d6 with 3.e4 dxe5 4.Nf3 Nc6 or 3.Nf3 Nc6 4.e4 dxe5. This same position could be reached after move four via a King’s Gambit after 1.e4 e5 2.f4 d6 3.Nf3 Nc6 4.fxe5 dxe6. Of course, if White really loves the King’s Gambit, then 1.f4 e5 2.e4 works great! The initial battle in From’s Gambit is over the e5 square. Black used the pawn there to launch an attack until White chopped off the pawn in this blitz game played between masters from on the Internet Chess Club. White won a piece in Jesper vs inmortal. Jesper (2336) - inmortal (2274), ICC 5 0 Internet Chess Club, 07.07.2017 begins 1.f4 e5 2.fxe5 d6 3.Nf3 Nc6 4.e4 dxe5 5.Bb5 Bc5 6.Bxc6+ bxc6 7.d3 Nf6 [7...Ne7 8.Qe2=] 8.Qe2 Bg4 [8...Qe7 9.Nbd2 h6 10.Nc4=] 9.Nbd2 0-0 10.Nc4 Re8 11.Be3 Bb6 [11...Bxf3 12.Qxf3 Bxe3 13.Qxe3+/=] 12.0-0 Nh5 13.Kh1 Re6 [13...f6 14.g3 Qd7 15.a4 Rab8=] 14.Qf2 Nf4? [14...Bxe3 15.Qxe3+/=] 15.Nfxe5 Black resigns as White wins a piece. 1-0

21 – Haines 4.Nf3 Bg4 5.g3 Black has an enterprising response to Bird's Opening in the form of a gambit named after Mr. From: 1.f4 e5!? Here Ray Haines won with From's Gambit by chasing the king until checkmate. Black has three choices after 4.Nf3: (1) Drive Nf3 away with 4...g5!? (2) Destroy White's kingside with 4...Nf6! and a possible Ng4xh2. (3) Threaten some of both with 4...Bg4. Haines chose option (3). Im2Trill (1525) - rrhaines33 (1579), Live Chess Chess.com, 22.06.2018 begins 1.f4 e5 2.fxe5 d6 3.exd6 Bxd6 4.Nf3 Bg4 5.g3 Nc6 6.b3 [6.Nc3=] 6...Qd7 [6...h5=/+] 7.Bb2 f6 [7...Nf6!?] 8.e3 h5 9.Be2 0-0-0 10.Nd4 [10.Nc3=] 10...Nxd4 11.Bxg4 [11.Bxd4 Ne7-/+] 11...hxg4 12.Bxd4 Bxg3+ 13.Kf1 Qf5+ 14.Ke2 Qf2+ [14...Rxh2+! 15.Rxh2 Qf3!+ 16.Kd3 Qxd1-+]

15.Kd3 Qf5+ [15...Be5-+] 16.Kc3 Be5 [16...Bxh2 17.Qe2 g3-+] 17.Kb2 Bxd4+ 18.exd4 Rxd4 19.c3 Rd8 20.Na3 Ne7 21.Qg1 Rxd2+ 22.Kc1 Rf2 23.Nb5 Qc2# 0-1

22 – Haines 4.Nf3 Bg4 5.g3 Martin Severin From developed a gambit against Bird's Opening that begins 1.f4 e5!? Ray Haines gets an attack as Black. White can lose quickly after 2.fxe5 d6 3.exd6 Bxd6, but not by force. cyborg801 (1512) - Haines (1592), Chess.com, 24.04.2018 beings 1.f4 e5 2.fxe5 d6 3.exd6 Bxd6 4.Nf3 Bg4 5.g3 Nc6 6.d4 Qe7 7.Bg2 0-0-0 8.0-0 h5 [8...Bxf3 9.exf3 Nxd4!=/+] 9.Nc3 h4 10.Ng5? [10.Nd5 Qe8=] 10...hxg3 [Black wins by pin with 10...Bc5!-+] 11.h3 [11.Rxf7 gxh2+ 12.Kh1 Qe8-/+] 11...Nxd4 [Tactically stronger is 11...Bc5!-+] 12.Nd5 [12.Rxf7 Nxe2+ 13.Kh1 Qe8-/+] 12...Nxe2+ 13.Kh1 Qd7 14.Rxf7 Bxh3 15.Rxd7 Bxd7+ 16.Nh3 Bxh3 17.Bxh3+ [17.Qxe2 Bg4+ 18.Kg1 Bxe2-+] 17...Rxh3+ 18.Kg2 Rh2+ 19.Kf3 Rf2+ 20.Kg4 g2 21.Be3 g1Q+ 22.Qxg1 Nxg1 23.Bxf2 Ne2 24.Re1 c6 25.Rxe2 cxd5 26.Bxa7 Nf6+ 27.Kf5 Kc7 28.Rg2 [28.Bd4 Nh5-+] 28...Rd7 [28...b6-+] 29.Bd4 Ne8 30.Re2 Rf7+ 31.Kg6 Re7 32.Rf2 Be5 33.Rf7 [33.Bxe5+ Rxe5-+] 33...Kd6? [This throws the game away. Correct is 33...Rxf7 34.Bxe5+ Nd6-+] 34.Bc5+ Kc6 35.Bxe7 Bxb2 36.Rf8 Nd6 37.Bxd6 Kxd6 38.Rf3 Kc5 [38...b6 39.Rb3+/-] 39.Rb3 Bf6 [39...Ba1 40.Rxb7+-] 40.Rxb7 Kc4 41.a4 d4 [41...Bd8 42.Rxg7+-] 42.a5 Kc3 43.Rc7+ Kb4 44.a6 1-0

23 - EggSalad 4.Nf3 Bg4 5.e4 Black plays 4...g5 (Lasker) with a quick checkmate threat about half the time in the From Gambit Accepted, but Black has other options. Black may choose 4...Nf6 (Mestel), 4...Nc6, or 4...Bg4!? This last one had been analyzed by John Watson. I drew this game as White vs a 2730 when we repeated moves. Sawyer (2391) - EggSalad (2730), ICC 5 0 Internet Chess Club, 31.03.2000 begins 1.f4 e5 2.fxe5 d6 3.exd6 Bxd6 4.Nf3 Bg4 5.e4 [5.e3 Nf6 6.Be2=] 5...Nf6 6.d3 0-0 7.Be2 Bc5 8.Nc3 [8.Nbd2! Re8 9.c3+/=] 8...Re8 [8...Nc6! 9.Na4=] 9.Bg5 [9.Bf4!+/=] 9...h6 [9...Bxf3 10.Bxf3 (10.gxf3 h6 11.Bh4=) 10...Nxe4 11.Nxe4 Qxg5 12.Kf1 Rxe4 13.Bxe4 Nd7 14.d4+/=] 10.Bxf6 [10.Bf4 Nh5 11.Qd2 Bxf3 12.Bxf3 Nxf4 13.Qxf4+/=] 10...Qxf6

11.Qd2 Qb6 [11...Nc6=] 12.Na4 Bf2+ 13.Kf1 Qe3 14.Qxe3 [14.Bd1! Qxd2 15.Nxd2 Bxd1 16.Rxd1 Bd4 17.Nf3+/=] 14...Bxe3 15.Nc3 Be6 [15...c6=] 16.Nd1 [16.d4+/=] 16...Bb6 17.Nc3 Be3 18.Nd1 Bb6 19.Nc3 Be3 1/2-1/2

24 – Wesseltj 4.Nf3 Bg4 5.e3 The sharp Bird's Opening From Gambit 1.f4 e5 often leads to short games. One side or the other blunders early in the game. Here Black avoids the more critical lines 4...g5 (Lasker) or 4...Nf6 (Mestel). My opponent "Wesseltj" goes his own way with the interesting move 4...Bg4 in an ICC blitz game. My 5.e3 seems like that best choice. The day I posted this, I once again finished all 480 exercises in Chessimo Endgames Module 1. It took me an average of 25 seconds per exercise; some are over 20 moves long. Chessimo has 3 total Modules on Endgames. I like the Strategy Modules too. Now that I use Apps instead of CDs, most of the time I just work on the Tactics Modules. In the game below I kept the advantage until late into the middlegame. However in the rook ending, Black let me get a passed g-pawn and that won the day. Sawyer - Wesseltj, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 01.12.2012 begins 1.f4 e5 2.fxe5 d6 3.exd6 Bxd6 4.Nf3 Bg4 5.e3 h5 [5...Nf6 6.Be2] 6.Be2 [6.d4+/-; 6.Nc3+/-] 6...Nc6 7.d4 Qd7 8.Nc3 [8.c4+/-] 8...0-0-0 9.Bd2 Nh6 10.0-0 Rhe8 11.e4 Bxf3 12.Bxf3 Nxd4 13.Bxh6 Nxf3+ 14.Qxf3 gxh6 15.Qxf7 [15.Rad1+/=] 15...Qg4 16.Qf5+ Kb8 17.Qxg4 hxg4 18.g3 Bc5+ 19.Kh1 Rd2 20.Rac1 a6 21.Rfd1 Red8 22.Nd5 Rxd1+ 23.Rxd1 c6 24.Nc3 Rf8 25.e5 Re8 26.Re1 Bd4 27.e6 Bxc3 28.bxc3 Kc7 29.Re4 Kd6 30.Rxg4 Rxe6 31.Rd4+ Kc5 32.Rd7 b5 33.Rd2 Re1+ 34.Kg2 Re3 35.g4 Rxc3 36.h4 Rc4 37.Kf3 a5 [37...h5!=] 38.g5 Rxh4 39.g6 Rh1 [39...Rh5! 40.Rg2 Rf5+ 41.Ke4 Rf8 42.g7 Rg8 and Black can come close to a draw, although it seems White should win. 43.Kf5 Kb4 44.Rg3 c5 45.Kg6 c4 46.Kf7 Rd8 47.g8Q Rxg8 48.Kxg8 c3 49.Kg7+-] 40.g7 Black resigns 1-0

25 – FriskyKitty 4.Nf3 Nf6 5.d4 0-0 Once we had a cat that did not last long in our house. He used to leap at our kids, from the floor up to their heads, and scare them. While I was at work, he liked to jump on my desk, grab a pawn from my chessboard, and hide it somewhere in the house. I do not mind my opponent playing a gambit now and then, but I don’t want someone to hide the pawn, especially a cat! Another time we had frisky kittens who liked to eat birds. They are natural enemies. Thus, the term "FriskyKitty" seems to me like an odd handle for a Bird's Opening player as White. When I play unrated blitz games, I often try sharp lines for fun. In one contest, I offered a pawn and the cat grabbed it. My opponent played the Bird's Opening. I replied with a From Gambit. After White's acceptance with 2.fxe5 (not King's Gambit with 2.e4), I played the usual 2...d6 3.exd6 Bxd6 4.Nf3. My opponent for this game is rated 2050, so White would be comfortable facing the Lasker Variation 4...g5. Therefore I chose the Mestel Variation with 4...Nf6. The idea in this line is to develop pieces quickly and then attack. I castled on move 5. White had a pretty good position, at least until 10.h3!? Thankfully I managed to win. FriskyKitty (2050) - Sawyer (2021), ICC 5 0 u Internet Chess Club, 04.07.2013 begins 1.f4 e5 2.fxe5 d6 3.exd6 Bxd6 4.Nf3 Nf6 5.d4 [5.e3 Ng4 6.h3? Bg3+ 7.Ke2 Nf2 and Black wins big material. 0-1 gentaha Crompton, Chess.com 2018] 5...0-0 [The critical line is 5...Ng4 6.Qd3 c5=] 6.g3 [Alternatives are 6.e3 Ng4=; or 6.e4 ("really quite difficult to meet!" Taylor) 6...Nxe4 7.Bd3=] 6...Ng4!? [6...c5=] 7.Bg2 Nc6?! 8.c3 Bf5 9.0-0 Qd7 10.h3 [10.Nh4! Be6 11.e4+/-] 10...Nf6 11.Bf4 [11.g4+/=] 11...Rfe8?! [11...Bxf4 12.gxf4 Bxh3-/+] 12.Nbd2 Rad8 13.Nh4? [13.Bxd6+/=] 13...Bxh3 14.Bxd6 cxd6 15.Qe1 Bxg2 16.Nxg2 d5 17.Qf2 Ne4 18.Nxe4

Rxe4 19.Nf4 f6 20.Kg2 Rde8 21.Rae1 Nd8 22.Rh1 Ne6 23.Nd3 b6 24.Qf3 [24.e3 Ng5-/+] 24...Ng5! 25.Qh5? [Somewhat better is 25.Qf1 Re3+] 25...g6 26.Qh6 Rxe2+ 27.Rxe2 Rxe2+ 28.Kf1 Re3 [Or 28...Rd2-+] 29.Kf2 Rxd3 White resigns 0-1

26 – DrLund 5.d4 Ng4 6.e4 Birds Opening leaves White vulnerable to potential checks along the e1-h4 diagonal. Some of these checks lead to Fool’s Mate. The checks may be blocked by g2-g3, but what if Black first takes the supporting h2 pawn? Checks in this Internet Chess Club blitz contest led to a king hunt. White missed the proper defense and was mated in the game inmortal vs DrLund. inmortal (2340) - DrLund (2068), ICC 5 0 Internet Chess Club, 11.09.2017 begins 1.f4 e5 2.fxe5 d6 3.exd6 Bxd6 4.Nf3 Nf6 5.d4 Ng4 6.e4 Nxh2 [6...Bxh2 7.Nxh2 Qh4+ 8.Kd2 Nxh2 9.b3 Nxf1+ 10.Rxf1=] 7.Nxh2 Qh4+ 8.Kd2 Bxh2 9.Kd3 Nc6 10.Nd2 [10.c3=] 10...Bf5? [10...Bg4!-/+] 11.Qf3? [11.Rxh2! Qxh2 12.exf5+/=] 11...Bg6 12.Be2? [12.c3 0-0-0 13.Qh3+ Qxh3+ 14.gxh3 Bf4=] 12...Rd8 13.Qg4 Rxd4+ 14.Kc3 [14.Ke3 Bf4+ 15.Qxf4 Qxh1-+] 14...Qf6 15.Kb3 Rb4+ [Faster is 15...Na5+! 16.Kc3 Rxe4+ 17.Kd3 Qd4#] 16.Ka3 Bd6 17.e5 Rxg4+ 18.exd6 [18.b4 Rxb4-+ mates in a few moves.] 18...Qxd6+ 19.Kb3 Qb4# White is checkmated after a king hunt. 0-1

27 – Loutragotis 6.Qd3 Qe7 This curious Birds Opening follows one of the most critical lines in the From’s Gambit Mestel Variation 4...Nf6. Play continued 5.d4 Ng4 6.Qd3. The final positon looks equal but the official result was 0-1 in Vasilios Kotrotsos vs Dimitrios Loutragotis. Kotrotsos (2269) - Loutragotis (2143), 20th Iraklio Open 2017 Athens GRE (3.4), 19.06.2017 begins 1.f4 e5 2.fxe5 d6 3.exd6 Bxd6 4.Nf3 Nf6 5.d4 Ng4 6.Qd3 Qe7 [6...c5 7.dxc5 Bxc5 8.Qxd8+ Kxd8 9.h3 Bf2+ 10.Kd1 Ne3+ 11.Bxe3 Bxe3 12.Na3 Kc7 13.Nc4=] 7.Nc3 [7.e4 c5 8.Nc3+/=] 7...Nc6 8.Nd5 [8.e4+/=] 8...Qe6 9.Nf4 [9.e4+/= It's funny how hard White resists the move e4.] 9...Qe7 10.c3 Nf6 11.Qe3 Qxe3 12.Bxe3 Bf5 13.Bd2 0-0-0 14.e3 Rhe8 15.Bd3 Ng4 [15...Be4 16.Bxe4 Nxe4 17.Nh3+/=] 16.Ke2 [16.Bxf5+!+-] 16...Re7 [16...Ne7=] 17.h3 [17.Bxf5+!+-] 17...Nxe3 18.Bxe3 Rde8 [18...Bxf4 19.Bxf5+ Kb8 20.Ne5+/=] 19.Ne5 [19.Bxf5+!+-] 19...f6 [19...Bxd3+ 20.Kxd3+/-] 20.Rad1 [20.Bxf5+ Kd8 21.Ne6+ Rxe6

22.Bxe6+-] 20...fxe5 [20...Bxd3+ 21.Nfxd3=] 21.d5 [White is wins a piece after 21.Bxf5+! Kb8 22.Nd5 exd4 23.cxd4+-] 21...Nd4+ [21...exf4!-/+] 22.Kd2 [Looks equal, but the official result is given as...] 0-1

2.fxe5 d6 3.exd6 Bxd6 4.Nf3 g5 This Lasker variation is the main line of the From Gambit.

28 – Miller 5.d4 g4 6.Ng5 f5 Birds Opening has a King's Gambit Allgaier line with 6.Ng5!? My game vs Cleve Miller saw pieces fly all over the place at a postal pace of one move per week. We both missed chances to win. During the calendar year of 1983, my non-chess life was turned upside down. I was playing over 100 postal chess games at once when all of a sudden I got hit from two sides. I found that I was losing my job to a company reorganization and relocation. At the same time, one of my children became terminally ill. The excitement quality of my chess was good, but the level of analysis was very uneven at that time. It led to a lot of superficial play, ugly losses and quick draws. Thank God life is not all tragedy. A few years later I would discover the comedy of the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit and I could smile once again! I prefer to play 4.Nf3 g5!? vs weaker opponents. See my little Fool’s Mate game in the notes. Sawyer - Miller, corr ICCF 1983 begins 1.f4 e5 2.fxe5 d6 3.exd6 Bxd6 4.Nf3 g5 5.d4 [A common blunder that loses the game is any move like 5.c3? g4! (White needs to prepare a safe place for his knight.) 6.Nd4 Qh4+. (White resigned and noted to me that this was a trap.) 0-1. keka - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 20.09.2012] 5...g4 6.Ng5 f5 7.e4 h6 8.e5 Be7 9.Nh3 gxh3 10.Qh5+ Kf8 11.Bc4 Rh7 12.Be3 [12.Qg6!? Bb4+ 13.Ke2 Rg7 14.Bxh6 Nxh6 15.Qxh6 Qg5-/+ and Black stands better.] 12...hxg2 13.Rg1 Bh4+ 14.Ke2 Bg5 15.Rxg2 Rg7 16.Nc3 Nc6 17.Rag1 Nxd4+ 18.Kf2 [18.Kf1 Be6 19.Bxe6 Nxe6-+] 18...Bxe3+? [18...Be6! 19.Rxg5 Rxg5 20.Bxg5 hxg5-+] 19.Kxe3 Nxc2+ 20.Rxc2 Qe7 21.Rxg7 Qxe5+ [21...Qxg7 22.Rg2 Qxe5+ 23.Kf3+-] 22.Kf3 Qxg7 23.Rg2 Nf6 24.Rxg7

[24.Qh4!+-] 24...Nxh5 25.Rxc7 Ke8 26.Rh7 Nf6 27.Nd5? [27.Rh8+! Ke7 28.Kf4+/-] 27...Nxd5 [Black wins after 27...Nxh7! 28.Nc7+ Kd7 29.Nxa8 Nf6-+] 28.Bxd5 Bd7? [28...Rb8 29.Kf4+-] 29.Bxb7? [29.Rh8+! and White wins.] 1/2-1/2

29 – Eldridge 5.d4 g4 6.Ne5 Qf6 In the 1970s, it was hard to keep up with any opening. Books and periodicals were rare. For the Maine Championship in 1977, I decided to play the Bird's Opening. Some of my ideas came from Tim Harding's classic little book "Counter Gambits". I won an earlier 1974 game vs Michael Eldridge with an Alekhine Defence. Eldridge probably beat all the best players in the state several times on his way to becoming a USCF Expert. Against me, Mike made early mistakes and gifted me both our games. It think it was Mike's father whom I played in a 1973 tournament. I remember that I gifted him a knight quite by accident. I played it en prise around move 12. Happens to all of us in the early years. Here I had White. Mike was a more aggressive player than I, so it was no surprise that he answered my Bird's Opening with the From Gambit. Nowadays I study openings and work on tactical exercises daily. In the 1970s I played over master games from books. However, I did not train in tactics back then. In his book on Bird's Opening, Timothy Taylor wrote: "Basically the Lasker is a succession of one move threats - sometimes very fancy, but one-movers nonetheless." My very short game vs Mike Eldridge gave me the opportunity to execute one of those fancy one-move threats for a win. I include a short draw from 1982 vs Paul D. Shannon in the notes. Sawyer - Eldridge, Maine Champ Maine (2), 16.04.1977 begins 1.f4 e5 2.fxe5 d6 3.exd6 Bxd6 4.Nf3 g5 5.d4 [The main line for From's Gambit goes: 5.g3 g4 6.Nh4 Ne7 7.d4 Ng6 8.Nxg6 hxg6 9.Qd3 Nc6 10.c3 with compensation for the pawn.] 5...g4 6.Ne5 6...Qf6?! [The standard equalizing variation is 6...Bxe5 7.dxe5 Qxd1+ 8.Kxd1 Nc6 9.Nc3 Be6 10.Bf4=] 7.Bd2!? [Best is 7.Nc3!+/-] 7...Nc6 8.Bc3 Nxe5 [8...g3 9.hxg3

Qg5 10.Qd3 Bf5 11.e4 (11.Qf3+/-) 11...Bxe5 12.dxe5+/= 1/2-1/2. Sawyer (2100) - Shannon (2116), corr APCT 1982] 9.dxe5 Bxe5 10.Qd3?! [This queen lift can be risky and sneaky in the From. Fortunately for me, sneaky wins out. The queen should keep on lifting higher and higher to 10.Qd5 Bxc3+ 11.Nxc3=] 10...Be6?? [Loses a piece. Correct is 10...Ne7!=/+ Black stands better.] 11.Qb5+ 1-0

30 – Winichenko 7.Nc3 Be6 Who's afraid of the From Gambit? There's no need to fear Bird's Opening after 1.f4 e5!? White has as good attacking chances as Black has, and White's up a pawn. Players castled opposite sides in the game Mikhail Winichenko vs Oleg Doronin. The battle was on in this sharp From Gambit Accepted. White’s army overwhelmed the queenside to notch the victory. Winichenko (2284) - Doronin (2107), Zolochiv Chess Winter Zolochiv UKR (6), 06.12.2017 begins 1.f4 e5 2.fxe5 d6 3.exd6 Bxd6 4.Nf3 g5 5.d4 g4 6.Ne5 Qf6 [6...Bxe5 7.dxe5 Qxd1+ 8.Kxd1+/=] 7.Nc3 Be6 8.e4 [8.g3!+-] 8...Bxe5 9.dxe5 Qxe5 10.Bb5+ c6 11.Be3 Nf6 12.Be2 Nbd7 13.0-0 0-0-0 [13...0-0 14.Qd4 Qxd4 15.Bxd4+/-] 14.Qd4 Qa5 15.b4 Qc7 16.Qxa7 Ne8 [16...Qb8 17.Qxb8+ Kxb8 18.Bd4+-] 17.b5 Nd6 18.bxc6 bxc6 [18...Qxc6 19.Rad1 Qxc3 20.Rxd6+-] 19.Ba6+ Nb7 20.Rab1 1-0

31 - Machinegun 6.Ne5 Bxe5 The players reached this Birds Opening From Gambit taking one more move than the normal move order 3.exd6 Bxd6 4.Nf3 g5. Now 5.d4 g4 6.Ne5 Bxe5 is as in the game after move seven. White obtains an extra doubled e-pawn as compensation for the loss of castling privileges. All of Black’s best ideas were shot down in the ICC blitz game Machinegun vs Ditto. White’s slight advantage grew until Black had a momentary lapse and hung a rook on move 23. Machinegun (2324) - Ditto (2103), ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 20.05.2017 begins 1.f4 e5 2.fxe5 d6 3.Nf3 dxe5 4.Nxe5 Bd6 5.Nf3 g5 6.d4 g4 7.Ne5 Bxe5 8.dxe5 Qxd1+ 9.Kxd1 Nc6 10.Bf4 [Maybe 10.e4+/=] 10...Bf5 [10...f6 11.exf6 Nxf6 12.Bxc7 Nd5 13.Bg3+/=] 11.e3 [11.Nc3 0-00+ 12.Kc1 Nge7 13.e4+/-] 11...0-0-0+ 12.Nd2 Nge7 13.Bc4 Be6 14.Bxe6+ fxe6 15.Ke2 Nd5 16.Ne4 Nxf4+ 17.exf4 Nd4+ [17...Rd4 18.Ke3 Rb4 19.b3=] 18.Kf2 Nxc2 19.Rad1 Nb4 [19...h5 20.g3+/=] 20.Ng5 Nd3+

21.Kg3 Nxb2 22.Rxd8+ Rxd8 23.Nxe6 h5? [23...Rd2 24.h3+-] 24.Nxd8 Kxd8 25.f5 Nc4 26.Kf4 Black resigns 1-0

32 - Haendiges 5.g3 g4 6.Nh4 Bird's Opening 1.f4 forces an opening where White plans to control e5 and greatly limit counter play. How might Black respond? First he can play the classical 1...d5 to control e4. Second he can choose an Indian approach with 1...Nf6 and maybe 2...g6 or 2...c5. And third, Black can try to win with From Gambit traps after 1...e5!? In the From Gambit, Black threatens to quickly checkmate or win a piece. Players familiar with Birds Opening keep looking for tactical combinations. If White avoids all the dangers, then the tables turn. The chances of a tactical error by Black increase. Will White survive the next 15 moves? If so, White can dominate the center and attack with an extra pawn. William Haendiges played 4...g5 5.g3 g4 6.Nh4 f5 instead of the normal 6...Ne7 intending 7...Ng6. Black's f-pawn joined the attack, but White had enough to keep the pawn and the attack. Here Black lost a piece on move 17 but played on until he ran out of counter threats. In the final position White threatened 36.Nd6+ and 37.Bxh7. Sawyer (2100) - Haendiges (1500), corr APCT 1982 begins 1.f4 e5 2.fxe5 d6 3.exd6 Bxd6 4.Nf3 g5 5.g3 g4 6.Nh4 f5 [6...Ne7 7.d4+/=] 7.e3 Nc6 8.Bd3 Qg5 9.0-0 Nge7 10.Nc3 Be6 11.Ne2 0-0-0 12.Nf4 Bf7 13.a3 Ne5 14.Be2 Nd5 [14...N5g6 15.Nfg2+/=] 15.c4 Nb6 16.b3 Bc5 [16...Nbd7 17.Qc2 Nf3+ 18.Bxf3 gxf3 19.Bb2 Rhe8 20.Nxf3+-] 17.Qc2 Nbd7 [This loses a piece, but even after 17...Rhg8 18.Qxf5+ Qxf5 19.Nxf5+- and White is up two pawns.] 18.d4 Be7 19.dxe5 Nxe5 20.Bb2 Bf6 21.Qxf5+ Qxf5 22.Nxf5 h5 23.Bxe5 Bxe5 24.Rad1 Rxd1 25.Rxd1 Bf6 26.Nd5 Bxd5 27.Rxd5 a6 28.Kf2 Rf8 29.e4 Bb2 30.a4 c6 31.Rd1 Ba3 32.Bd3 Bc5+ 33.Ke2 Rf7 34.Rf1 Rh7 35.e5 1-0

33 – O'Connell 6.Nh4 Be7 Dale O'Connell met my Bird's Opening with the From Gambit. Of course White can fall for the From Gambit Lasker Trap and get checkmated, but there is no need to do that. If played perfectly, 5.g3 is a sharp complicated variation where White has a big pawn center. Black must play aggressively. In theory White has a small edge. In practice White often blunders. In this tournament game, I obtained a big advantage. But I had begun the game with a bad attitude toward the TD about pairings (which had nothing to do with this opponent). My reaction to that issue led me to foolishly play this game rapidly and superficially. My opponent held on and stuck around long enough for me to blunder on move 23. Then Dale O'Connell played a great tactical finish and won very convincingly. Thus, I got what I deserved. Don't let your attitude affect your aptitude for good chess. Sawyer - O'Connell (1763), Lansdale PA (3), 1985 begins 1.f4 e5 2.fxe5 d6 3.exd6 Bxd6 4.Nf3 g5 5.g3 g4 6.Nh4 Be7 [The main line is 6...Ne7 7.d4 Ng6 8.Nxg6 hxg6 9.Qd3 Nc6 10.c3+/=] 7.Ng2 h5 8.d4 h4 9.Rg1 [9.Bf4! hxg3 10.Bxg3 Bd6 11.Nf4+/- is better.] 9...hxg3 10.hxg3 Bd6 [10...Nf6! 11.Nf4 Bf5 12.Bg2 Nc6 13.c3 Qd7 14.Nd2 0-0-0=] 11.Bf4 Nf6 12.Qd3 [12.Nc3!?+/=] 12...Nc6 13.c3 Nh5 14.e4 [Now White can slide the rook back to the open h-file with advantage: 14.Rh1! Bf8 15.Nd2+/-] 14...Bxf4 15.Nxf4 Nxf4 16.gxf4 Qh4+ 17.Qg3 Bd7 [White is also better after 17...Qxg3+ 18.Rxg3 f5 19.Nd2 Ne7 20.Kf2+/=] 18.Nd2 [The winning idea is 18.f5! 0-0-0 19.Nd2 Kb8 20.0-0-0+- and White should pick up a second pawn.] 18...0-0-0 [18...f5! 19.0-0-0+/-] 19.0-0-0 [Again 19.f5+-] 19...Qe7 [19...f5!] 20.f5 Qg5 21.Kb1 Rdg8 22.Nf3!? [Too cute. Better is simply 22.d5+-] 22...Qe3 23.Re1?? [Hanging a piece?! Ugh?! 23.Nd2+- White would maintain a big advantage.] 23...Qxf3 24.Bc4 Qxg3 25.Rxg3 Nd8 26.Reg1 Rh4 27.Be2 Rh2 [Or 27...c5!-+] 28.Bxg4 Rgh8 29.d5 Rd2 30.R3g2 Rxg2 31.Rxg2 Rg8 32.e5? [A second blunder is too much. At

least if White tried 32.Bh3 Rxg2 33.Bxg2 f6-/+ Black would have to prove he had the endgame technique to make his knight worth more than White’s extra two pawns. Instead Black plays a crushing move.] 32...Rxg4! 0-1

34 – Karasev 7.Ng2 h5 8.d4 h4 Black meets Birds Openings with a From Gambit and the push of the hpawn all the way to h3. This interferes with White’s ability to easily protect all his pieces. Black threatened the queenside and the Bf4. White had chances for a good game. An inaccuracy on move 18 and a blunder on move 19 led Black to win the queen and king in the game between Rudy Van Kemenade and Vladimir Karasev. Van Kemenade (1948) - Karasev (2337), World Senior Teams +65 Dresden GER (1.5), 07.07.2018 begins 1.f4 e5 2.fxe5 d6 3.exd6 Bxd6 4.Nf3 g5 5.g3 g4 6.Nh4 Be7 [6...Ne7] 7.Ng2 h5 8.d4 h4 9.Bf4 h3 [9...hxg3 10.Bxg3+/=] 10.Ne3 Nf6 [10...Bg5 11.Bxg5 Qxg5 12.Qd2+/-] 11.Qd3 Nc6 12.c3 Be6 13.Nd2 Qd7 14.b3 0-0-0 15.0-0-0 Nh5 16.Nec4 Nxf4 17.gxf4 f5 18.Ne5?! [18.e4 fxe4 19.Nxe4=] 18...Nxe5 19.dxe5? [19.fxe5 f4=/+] 19...Qc6 20.e4 Rxd3 21.Bxd3 Qxc3+ 22.Bc2 Ba3+ 23.Kb1 Qb2# 0-1

35 – Muzychuk 6.Nh4 Ne7 7.d4 Strong players play blitz chess much better than weak players play slower chess. Higher rated players know opening theory and recognize tactical patterns almost instantly. The challenge comes when good players compete against each other. This Birds Opening pits two highly skilled female players who are some of the best in the world. Their game illustrates a critical line in the From Gambit after 4.Nf3 g5 5.g3. Black’s primary minor piece is the Bd6. White expanded the center with 17.e5 to play 18.exd6 in Anna Muzychuk vs Karina Szczepkowska Horowska. Muzychuk (2576) - Szczepkowska Horowska (2406), ch-EUR Women Blitz 2017 Monaco MNC, 23.10.2017 begins 1.f4 e5 2.fxe5 d6 3.exd6 Bxd6 4.Nf3 g5 5.g3 g4 6.Nh4 Ne7 7.d4 Ng6 8.Nxg6 hxg6 9.Qd3 Nc6! 10.c3 Qe7 11.Bg2 Bf5 [11...Bd7 leads to 12.Nd2 0-0-0 13.Ne4 Rh5 14.Nxd6+ cxd6 15.Qe3+/=] 12.e4! 0-0-0 13.Be3 Rde8 [13...Bd7 14.Bf2 f5

15.Nd2 fxe4 16.Nxe4=] 14.Nd2 Bd7 15.0-0-0 f6 16.Nc4 Nd8 17.e5 Qf7 18.exd6 Bf5 19.Qf1 b5 20.dxc7 Qxc7 21.Ne5 fxe5 [21...Qa5 22.Nxg6 Bxg6 23.Qf4+-] 22.Qxb5 exd4 23.Rxd4 Rxe3 24.Rc4 1-0

36 – Maisuradze 7.d4 Ng6 8.Nxg6 I’ve always found Birds Opening theory in the From Gambit to be somewhat confusing beyond the first few moves. White played accurately in the game Nino Maisuradze vs Alexandr Fier. Maisuradze (2256) - Fier (2583), Tsaghkadzor Open 2017 Tsaghkadzor ARM (1.8), 23.11.2017 begins 1.f4 e5 2.fxe5 d6 3.exd6 Bxd6 4.Nf3 g5 5.g3 g4 6.Nh4 Ne7 7.d4 Ng6 8.Nxg6 hxg6 9.Qd3 Bf5!? 10.e4 Qe7 11.Bg2 Nc6 12.Qe3 Bd7 13.Bd2 Rh5 14.Nc3 Nb4 15.0-0-0 c5 16.e5 Bc7 17.Ne4 cxd4 18.Qb3 Nc6 [18...Nxa2+ 19.Qxa2 Bxe5 20.Nf2+-] 19.Qxb7 Rc8 [19...Bxe5 20.Qxa8+ Nb8 21.Qxa7+-] 20.Nf6+ Kd8 21.Nxd7 Nxe5 [21...Qxd7 22.Bxc6+-] 22.Nxe5 Rxe5 23.Rhe1 1-0

37 – Perry 8.Nxg6 hxg6 9.Qd3 Senior International Master Dan Perry has a rating of 2486 based on 218 ICCF games. I played him 20 years ago when he was at the high Expert level. Alex Dunne wrote about Dan Perry in his The Check Is in the Mail column for the USCF. Below Daniel Perry played the Bird's Opening. Boldly I turned our correspondence battle into a From Gambit. The key position is reached after 12 moves. Daniel Perry played 13.0-0. Best seems to be 13.Be3! This gives a slight edge for White. Against Russell Haag in another APCT postal chess game from earlier in 1986, I tried 13.Bf4 Bxf4 14.gxf4 Bxe4 when 15.Qxe4 Qf6 would have led to equal chances. I played the inferior 15.Bxe4 although Haag and I agreed to a draw after move 21. Perry - Sawyer (1969), corr APCT EMQ-1, 01.1996 begins 1.f4 e5 2.fxe5 d6 3.exd6 Bxd6 4.Nf3 g5 5.g3 g4 6.Nh4 Ne7 7.d4 Ng6 8.Nxg6 hxg6 9.Qd3 Bf5!? 10.e4! Qe7 11.Bg2 Nc6 12.c3 0-0-0 13.0-0 [13.Be3!+/=; 13.Bf4 Bxf4 14.gxf4 Rh3 (14...Bxe4 15.Qxe4 Qf6=) 15.Qe2 Bxe4 16.Bxe4 f5 17.Nd2 Qh4+ 18.Qf2 fxe4 19.Qxh4 Rxh4=] 13...Ne5 [13...Be6!=] 14.Qe3 Bd7 15.Nd2 f5 16.Rf2 Rdf8 17.Nf1 Bb5 18.exf5 Rxf5 19.Rxf5 gxf5 20.Bd2 Qf8 21.b3 Bd7 [21...Bc6!=] 22.Re1 Ng6 23.Qd3 Qf6 24.Ne3 f4 25.Nd5 Qf7 [25...Qg5 26.Nxf4 Nxf4 27.gxf4 Bxf4 28.Bxf4 Qxf4=] 26.Nxf4 [26.Bxf4 Nxf4 27.Nxf4 Bxf4 28.Qf1+/-] 26...Bxf4 27.gxf4 Nxf4

28.Bxf4 Qxf4 29.Qg3 Qd2 30.a4 a6 31.d5 b5 32.axb5 axb5 33.c4 [33.Ra1+/-] 33...bxc4 34.bxc4 Qd4+ 35.Qe3 Qxc4? [35...Qf6 36.Qa7 Kd8 37.Qa8+ Bc8 38.Qa1+/=] 36.Ra1 1-0

Book 10: Chapter 2 – 1.f4 d5 1.f4 d5 without 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.e3 Black occupies the center and takes control of e4.

38 – Perry 2.b3 Qd6 3.e3 e5 Daniel Perry and I combined for an early Bird's Opening original. After two moves we got to a position that occurs only once in a thousand 1.f4 games. While our 2.b3 Qd6 was not completely unique, it was definitely a rare Bird. White's 6.Bb2 had been played by Stefan Buecker as White the year before. Black won that 1995 game. During halftime in my high school basketball days, there was a bag of sliced oranges in our home locker room. We would eat them while the coach urged us on for the second half. One game when he was particularly frustrated with our lackadaisical play. He blurted out, "You guys are just here to eat the oranges." Against Dan Perry I played a good first half. I stood well after 23 moves and ate some oranges. But my effort halfway through the game did not lead to full success in the end. During the second half Perry outplayed me. His Bird soared to victory. Perry (2150) - Sawyer (1960), corr APCT EMQ-2, 1996 begins 1.f4 d5 2.b3 Qd6 3.e3 e5 4.fxe5 Qxe5 5.Nc3 c6 6.Bb2 Qc7 7.Nf3 Nf6 8.g3!? [8.Bd3 would be Lasker's set-up for White.] 8...Bg4 9.Bg2 Bd6 10.0-0 Nbd7 11.Ne2 Ne5 12.Nxe5 Bxe5 13.d4 Bd6 14.c4 Qe7 15.Qd3 Bxe2!? [15...0-0=] 16.Qxe2 0-0 [16...0-0-0!?= is also playable.] 17.Rf5 dxc4 18.bxc4 Rae8 19.Re1 g6 20.Ra5 Bb4 21.Re5 Qc7 22.Rxe8 Rxe8 23.Rf1 Ne4 24.Qd3 Qe7 [24...f5= would have continued Black's excellent defense.] 25.Rf4 f5 26.Bxe4 fxe4 [26...Bd6 27.Bf3+/-] 27.Qb3 Bd2 28.c5+ Qe6 29.Rxe4 [White is winning after 29.d5! cxd5 30.Rf2+-] 29...Qxb3 30.Rxe8+ Kf7 31.axb3 Kxe8 32.Kf2 Kf7 33.e4 Ke6 34.Ke2 Bg5 35.Bc3 h5 36.Ba5 Be7 37.h3 Bg5 38.Bc7 Be7 39.Bb8 a6 40.Bc7 Bg5 41.Kd3 Be7 42.Kc4 Bf6 43.Ba5 Bg5 44.d5+ cxd5+ [44...Kd7 45.e5+/-] 45.exd5+ Kd7

46.b4 Bd2 47.Bb6 Be1 48.g4 hxg4 49.hxg4 Bd2 50.b5 axb5+ 51.Kxb5 Bf4 52.Ba5 Bg5 53.Bb4 Kc7 54.d6+ Kc8 55.c6 1-0

39 – Thompson 2.e3 e5 3.fxe5 On a cold November night in 1981, I played Donald Thompson in a team event. Thompson had a profound impact on me. Here he surprised me with his 1.f4. Why did a good player choose Bird’s Opening in a serious game? Maybe I should try a From Gambit. But then in a team event generally one should avoid undue risk. Almost any chess opening variation can be played, but many off the wall ideas should not be played if you want to win. However at the board I made up a wild and crazy unsound Delayed From Gambit, after which I was losing for most of the game. Then my opponent made a mistake of his own in the endgame and I won. There is nothing new under the sun. In 1915, Capablanca faced this line from Ballou (6...c6 instead of my 6...Nc6). Capablanca's endgame skill was renowned and he won as White in 51 moves. Thompson - Sawyer, Hatboro, PA team, 05.11.1981 begins 1.f4 d5 2.e3 e5? [Oh what the heck. I thought I could get my pawn back with this sacrifice. 2...Nf6 would be sane and equal.] 3.fxe5 Qh4+ 4.g3 Qe4 5.Nf3 Bg4 6.Bg2 Nc6 [Now I see Black is in big trouble: 6...Bxf3 7.Qxf3 Qxe5 (or 7...Qxc2 8.0-0 Qg6 9.Qxd5+-) 8.d4 Qe6 9.Qxd5+-] 7.Nc3 Qg6 8.Nxd5 0-0-0 9.Nf4 Qf5 10.h3 Bxf3 11.Qxf3 Qxe5 12.Nd3 [12.0-0+- castling opposite sides gives White great attacking chances on the queenside with the extra pawn. Instead, it seems White is waiting for his opponent to die, and Black just keeps wiggling around trying to survive.] 12...Qe6 13.b3 Bd6 14.Bb2 Nge7 15.0-0-0 f6 16.Rdf1 Rhe8 17.h4 Kb8 18.Bh3 Qd5 19.Qxd5 Nxd5 20.Nf4 Ndb4 21.a3 Na6 22.Ne6 Rd7 23.Nd4 Rdd8 24.Nxc6+ bxc6 25.Bf5 g6 26.Bxf6 Bxa3+ 27.Kd1 gxf5 28.Bxd8 Rxd8 29.Rxf5 Bb4 30.d4 c5 31.d5 c6 32.c4 cxd5 33.Rxd5 Rg8 34.Rg1 Rg7 35.Ke2 Nc7 36.Rd6 Bc3 37.Rc6 Re7 38.Rd1 Ne6 39.Kf3 Be5 40.Ra6 Kb7 41.Ra2 Rf7+ 42.Kg4 h5+ 43.Kh3? [43.Kxh5!+-] 43...Rf3 44.Rg2 Rxe3 45.Kh2 Nd4 46.Rf1 Kb6 [46...Rxb3-+] 47.Rf7 Ne2 48.Rf5 Nxg3? [48...Bxg3+! 49.Kh1 Bd6-+] 49.Rxe5 Nf1+ 50.Kg1 Rxe5 51.Kxf1 Re4 52.Rh2? [52.Rg6+ Ka5 53.Rg5=] 52...Rg4 53.Kf2 Ka5 54.Rh3 Kb4

55.Ke2 a5 56.Kf2 a4 57.bxa4 Kxa4 58.Rg3 Rxh4 59.Rg5 Kb4 60.Re5 Kxc4 61.Kg3 Rd4 62.Rxh5 Re4 63.Kf3 Re8 64.Rh1 Kd3 65.Rd1+ Kc2 66.Rd5 c4 67.Rc5 c3 68.Rb5 Kc1 69.Rb7 c2 70.Rc7 Re5 71.Kf2 Kd2 72.Rd7+ Kc3 73.Rc7+ Kd3 74.Rd7+ Kc4 0-1

40 – Sawyer 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 Bf5 White’s Stonewall Attack started as a Queen Pawn Game after 1.d4 d5 and ended up as a Bird's Opening after White chose the Stonewall Attack 2.f4. That surprise did not take long. I wanted a quick three minute game, so everything was going to be fast. My focus was on speed with the hope that my moves would be good enough. White began picking off my pawns, while I looked for open lines. My major trump card was my advanced epawn. Slowly this pawn worked forward. Then faster. Finally on move 31 my e-pawn was promoted to a queen for checkmate! Guest - Sawyer (2001), ICC 3 0 u Internet Chess Club, 12.10.2015 begins 1.d4 d5 2.f4 Nc6 3.Nf3 Bf5 4.e3 e6 5.a3 a6 6.h3 Be4 7.Nbd2 Nf6 8.Be2 Be7 9.0-0 0-0 10.Ne5 Nd7 11.Nxe4 dxe4 12.c4 f5 [12...Ndxe5=] 13.b4 [13.Nxc6+/=] 13...Ncxe5 14.dxe5 Nb6 15.Bb2 c5 16.Qb3 Qe8 17.bxc5 Bxc5 18.Bd4 Qa4 [18...Na4=] 19.Rab1 Bxd4 20.exd4 Qxb3 21.Rxb3 Na4 22.Rxb7 [22.c5+/-] 22...Nc3 23.Bd1 [23.Re1+/=] 23...Rfb8 24.Re7 Rb1 25.Bc2 Rb2 26.Bd1 e3 [26...Rd2-/+] 27.Bf3 Rab8 28.Rxe6? [28.Kh2+/=] 28...e2! 29.Re1 Rb1 30.Rxb1 Rxb1+ 31.Kf2 e1Q# White checkmated 0-1

41 – Kovalev 2.Nf3 Nh6 3.g3 g6 Black backs into Birds Opening 1.f4 d5 with Nh6 added first. This knight on the edge heads to 6...Nf5 with the threat of 7...Ne3. Black gained the advantage after White opened the center with 9.cxd4?! in the game Dmitri Bulanov vs Vladislav Kovalev. Bulanov (2363) - Kovalev (2598), Bronstein Memorial 2017 Minsk BLR (4.2), 18.02.2017 begins 1.f4 Nh6 2.Nf3 d5 3.g3 g6 4.Bg2 Bg7 5.d3 d4 6.Nbd2 Nf5 7.Ne4 [7.Nc4 0-0 8.e4 dxe3 9.c3 Nd7 10.Nxe3=] 7...h5 8.c3 Nc6 9.cxd4?! [9.Bd2 0-0 10.0-0 Rb8 11.Rc1=] 9...Nfxd4 10.Nxd4 Nxd4 11.h3 Nf5 12.e3 e5!? [12...0-0=/+] 13.0-0 [13.fxe5 Bxe5 14.0-0 with equal chances as long as Black does not try to win a pawn by 14...Nxg3? 15.Nxg3 Bxg3 16.Qf3+/-] 13...exf4 14.gxf4? [14.Rxf4=] 14...Nh4 15.Ng5 Nxg2 16.Kxg2 Qd7 17.f5 [17.Qf3 Qxd3 18.Rd1 Qc2+ 19.Rd2 Qc5 20.Qe4+ Qe7-/+] 17...gxf5 18.Rf4 [18.h4 Qc6+ 19.Kg1 Be6-+] 18...Be5 19.Nf3

Bxf4 20.exf4 Qd5 21.Qa4+ Bd7 22.Qd4 Qxd4 23.Nxd4 c5 24.Nf3 Bc6 25.Be3 0-0-0 26.Rd1 c4 27.Kf2 Bxf3 28.Kxf3 Rxd3 Black is up the Exchange with more to come. 0-1

42 – Arnold 2.Nf3 g6 3.c4 Nf6 Books on the Bird's Opening used to be rare. I collected a dozen, before I sold them off and moved to Florida. Bob Arnold was one of several who discussed the old German volume by theoretician Rolf Schwarz. In 2016 Bob Arnold wrote on Facebook: "I always play the Bird's Opening as white. My first book on the BO was Schwarz' Die Bird-Eroffnung which I purchased in 1961." Yes, I owned that same green hardcover Schwarz book myself. I used it often when I played the Bird in the 1980s. Bob Arnold started with the Bird and we got a type of KID. The difference between this and a Four Pawns Attack is that here White's epawn is on e3 instead of e4. I should have equalized with 7...Qb6 or 8...Bb7! I still had a good game. Black saddled White with a bad dark squared bishop. I got a passed a-pawn which I thought might win. Then somehow he got a passed e-pawn which he combined with threats to my king. That made all the difference. Arnold (2087) - Sawyer (1976), corr APCT EMN-A-3, 1996 begins 1.f4 d5 2.Nf3 g6 3.c4 Nf6 [3...d4 4.e4 c5 5.d3 Nc6 6.Be2 Bg7 7.0-0=] 4.e3 Bg7 5.Nc3 0-0 6.d4 c6 [A critical line is 6...c5! 7.dxc5 Ne4 8.Nxe4 dxe4 9.Qxd8 Rxd8 10.Nd4 Na6 11.c6 Nb4 12.cxb7 Bxb7 13.Kf2=] 7.Qb3! b6 [7...Qb6 8.Qxb6 axb6=] 8.Bd3 Bf5!? [8...Bb7! 9.0-0 e6=] 9.Bxf5 gxf5 10.0-0 e6 11.Ne5 [11.Bd2+/=] 11...Ne4 12.Nxe4 dxe4 13.c5 Bxe5 14.dxe5?! [14.cxb6 axb6=] 14...Na6 15.Rd1 Qc7 16.cxb6 axb6 17.Bd2 Nc5 18.Qc2 Nd3 19.a3 c5 20.a4 Rfc8 21.Bc3 Rd8 22.b3 Rdc8 23.Qe2 Qe7 24.Rab1 Rab8 [24...c4-/+] 25.Qh5 Kh8 26.Be1 Nxe1 27.Rxe1 c4 28.bxc4 Rxc4 29.a5 Rb4 30.Rxb4 Qxb4 31.Rf1 bxa5 32.Qxf7 Qb3 [32...Rf8 33.Qxe6+/=] 33.Kh1 Qd3 34.Qf6+ Kg8 35.Qxe6+ Kg7 36.Qf6+ Kg8 37.Qg5+ Kh8 38.Rg1 Rb1 [Or 38...Rf8 39.e6+-] 39.h3 Rxg1+ 40.Kxg1 Qxe3+ 41.Kh2 Qd4 42.e6 Qd6 43.Qf6+ Kg8 44.Qf7+ Kh8 45.Qe8+ Kg7 46.Qd7+ 1-0

43 – T34 2.Nf3 Bg4 3.e3 Nd7 Sunday, December 7, 1941 the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor, Hawaii. The attack hoped to weaken US forces. Japan aimed to conquer the Pacific Rim before US reinforcements arrived. The gambit was effective, but it woke up America to their problem of undeveloped material. Americans counter attacked and won. In Europe, Russians fought Nazi Germany aggression with a T-34 Soviet medium tank, one of the best weapons available when introduced in 1940. The term T34 is also used by others since World War II. My Bird's Opening opponent below used "T34". Just as Allied powers fought Axis countries on both sides of the world, so I fought on both sides of the board. My first three moves were from the queenside, but White's defeat was on the kingside. First, I pay tribute to another great competitor. For me, "T" stands for Ronnie Taylor, Sr., my generous friend who passed away at the age of 55. We worked together for 12 years, mostly in a small office area. Ronnie loved Florida State University where he was nicknamed "Train" as an All-American track star for the Seminoles. We travelled in his FSU colored truck and talked about food and cars, sports and women, politics and co-workers, music and family. Ronnie was a master of fun lively office banter. Taylor had a name for everyone but he liked to call me "Timmy." His sudden loss is a shock. Ronnie Taylor, you are loved and dearly missed. His death changed my life. T34 (1583) - Sawyer (1929), ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 13.09.2014 begins 1.f4 d5 2.Nf3 Bg4 [This reminds me of the Dutch Defence variation 1.d4 f5 2.Bg5.] 3.e3 [Here I like to play 3.Ne5!?=] 3...Nd7 4.h3 Bxf3 5.Qxf3 c6 6.Bd3 [New move. Most players fight for e5 with 6.d4 e6 7.Bd3 when Black plays 7...Ngf6= or first 7...f5=] 6...e5 [The threat is an e4 pawn fork.] 7.Qh5? [Moving the queen again costs time and material. White's best aggressive approach is 7.e4!? but open lines will likely favor Black.] 7...g6 [Kicking the queen forces her to move again.] 8.Qg4 f5 [Developing

another piece with 8...Ngf6!-/+ is also very good.] 9.Qg5? [With pawns hitting key light squares, White tries a dark square, but the wrong one. White must play 9.Qg3 Bd6-/+ and try to survive longer.] 9...Be7! [Black's knight covers h6, so...] 10.Qg3 Bh4! [White resigns] 0-1

44 – Allard 2.Nf3 c5 3.e3 g6 Bird's Opening is one of those openings with which I have a love / hate relationship. You may ask, “If you don’t like it, then why do you play it?” Good question. As a universal player, I play all openings. For 40 years off and on I have played the Dutch Defence (1.d4 f5) as Black. It just seems natural to play it reversed as 1.f4. The funny thing about the Bird is that it has given me some nice wins vs higher rated players, but not enough of them to let me fall in love and stay in love with it. Here I rolled one out in a blitz game. Black got good pressure on the queenside but then got carried away by pushing the a-pawn cutting off its possible queen retreat. In this five minute game I kept missing the key idea of Nc5 going after that queen. Years ago I read that the hardest tactical maneuver for a chess player to see is a serious threat from a bishop retreat. That is how this game ends. Sawyer - Allard, Internet Chess Club 2011 begins 1.f4 d5 2.Nf3 c5 3.e3 g6 [This is the standard approach when facing the Bird as Black or facing the Dutch as White.] 4.d4 [This day I choose a stonewall set-up.] 4...cxd4 5.exd4 Bg7 6.Bd3 e6 7.Qe2 Ne7 8.0-0 Nbc6 9.c3 0-0 10.Be3 a6 11.Nbd2 b5 12.g4 b4 13.h4 bxc3 14.bxc3 Qa5 [My mind was torn between the dream of kingside attack and the need for queenside defense.] 15.Rfc1 Rb8 16.Nb3 Qa3 17.Rc2 [17.h5+/=] 17...a5? 18.Ne5 [18.Nc5] 18...Nxe5 19.fxe5 Nc6 [19...Rxb3=/+] 20.Rf1 [20.Nc5+-] 20...Rd8 21.Nc5 [Better late than never.] 21...Bd7 22.Bc1 Black resigns 1-0

2.Nf3 Nf6 3.g3 White employs a Leningrad Dutch structure with an extra move.

45 – Hansen 3.g3 e6 4.Bg2 Nc6 Chris Hansen won a Polar Bear System in Birds Opening 1.f4. Henrik Danielsen has added to its theory and practice for many years. This Flank Opening gives White an easy, repeatable strategy. White wins this bullet chess game due to his better tactics in a position that he understands. One key to the Polar Bear System is 7.c3 and 8.Na3. The opening is equal, but usually White knows it better. Hansen was an Expert level player who has returned to chess after a long layoff. Chris likes that the Polar Bear System does not require as much memorization as more popular lines. Here Chris Hansen is "Polar Bear". He seems to be having fun. Polar Bear - Lord Vedder, Friendly Game, 2m + 0s Café, 21.03.2017 begins 1.f4 d5 2.Nf3 e6 3.g3 Nf6 4.Bg2 Nc6 [4...c5 is more popular.] 5.0-0 g6 6.d3 Bg7 7.c3 [The Polar Bear System. 7.Nc3= is a natural alternative.] 7...0-0 8.Na3 b6 9.Qe1 Bb7 10.e4 dxe4 11.dxe4 Ne7 [11...e5= is a good thematic move.] 12.e5 Ng4 13.h3 Nh6 14.g4 Ba6 [14...Qd3!?] 15.Rf2 Rb8 16.Be3 c5 17.Rd1 Qc7 18.Rfd2 Rfd8 19.Bf1 [19.Ng5+/-] 19...Bb7 [19...Bxf1 20.Qxf1+/=] 20.Kf2 [20.Nb5!+-] 20...Nd5 21.Nb5 Bc6 [Black should play 21...Qe7+/= ] 22.a4 [Playing very fast both players missed 22.Nxc7!+- which would still work for the next couple moves.] 22...Bf8 23.Ng5 Nxe3 24.Qxe3 Bxb5 25.axb5!? [This blocks b5 for the White king to invade the queenside. 25.Bxb5!+-] 25...Be7 26.Ne4 Kg7 [26...Rxd2+ 27.Rxd2 Rd8 28.Rxd8+ Qxd8 29.Qd3 Qxd3 30.Bxd3+/=] 27.Nd6 Bh4+ 28.Ke2 Be7 29.Bg2 Ng8 30.Qe4 Bh4 31.f5 Bg5 32.Rd3 exf5 33.gxf5 1-0

46 – Schroeder 3.g3 c5 4.Bg2 James Schroeder and I met in a Master/Expert correspondence event. Next thing I know, he is criticizing my moves! Schroeder thought the Bird's Opening was a terrible choice. White fails to pressure and threaten Black. I should consider a King's Gambit! USCF honored James Schroeder for his lifetime of service as a tournament director, author and editor, and promoter of prison chess. I found these quotes attributed to him: James Schroeder principles of chess play: 1.P-K4 is the strongest move, and the easiest way to win is to attack by creating open lines through judicious Pawn exchanges and then by making combinations. The best way to play Chess is to attack and attack, and attack some more. You don't become a great player by waiting for an error; you become a great player by forcing errors. Don't lose. Win, if possible. Play good moves in the Opening. Do NOT try to find the "best" moves in the Opening. If I lose a Pawn it won't affect my play - I will still try to attack my opponent's King. I am playing amateurs, not Grandmasters - there is no need for me to be afraid of anyone nor anything. Remember - my opponent may not have the knowledge to win the position he has. In our game, James Schroeder crushed me. My Bird was bad. 1.f4 is not bad, but the way I played it stunk. I took this National Master's words to heart. I began playing the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit. I made more threats. I learned more. I won more. Bird's Opening is fine for many reasons. I still play it, sometimes. Sawyer - Schroeder, corr ICCF, 1983 begins 1.f4 Nf6 2.Nf3 c5 3.g3 d5 4.Bg2 Nc6 5.0-0 e6 6.d3 b5 7.c3 [7.c4! bxc4 8.dxc4=] 7...Qc7 8.Re1 Bb7

9.e4 dxe4 10.dxe4 c4 11.e5 [11.Qe2=] 11...Bc5+ 12.Be3 Rd8 13.Qe2 [13.Nd4 Nd5-/+] 13...Bxe3+ 14.Qxe3 Ng4 15.Qe2 Qb6+ 16.Kf1 Rd3 17.Rc1 Ncxe5 18.Nbd2 Re3 19.Re1 Rxe2 20.Rxe2 Nd3 [20...Nxf3 21.Nxf3 Ne3+ 22.Kf2 Nc2+ 23.Nd4 Nxa1-+] 21.h3 Ne3+ 22.Kg1 Nc2+ 01

47 – Lundin 3.g3 e6 4.Bg2 Be7 This Birds Opening demonstrates a wonderful Leningrad Dutch counter attack. White sets up a flexible structure after 3.g3. Black expanded on the queenside and probed for weaknesses. White kept immediate combat to a minimum until he was ready. Black missed the winning chance with 17...d4! White launched a winning kingside attack. The surprise knight sacrifice 26.Ng6+! forced checkmate in the game Jan Lundin vs Boris Dimitrijeski. Lundin (2282) - Dimitrijeski (2283), Third Saturday 62 Jan GM Backi Petrovac SRB (2.4), 09.01.2018 begins 1.f4 d5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.g3 e6 4.Bg2 Be7 5.0-0 0-0 6.d3 b5 [More common is 6...c5=] 7.Kh1 Bb7 8.c3 c5 9.Na3 Qb6 10.Nc2 a5 11.Be3 b4 12.Bg1 Nc6 13.Ne3 a4 14.cxb4 Qxb4 15.Rb1 Qb5 16.Qe1 [16.Nc2 Rab8=/+] 16...Rfc8 [16...Nb4-/+] 17.g4 c4 [17...d4!-/+] 18.g5 Ne8 19.f5 cxd3 20.exd3 Qxd3 21.Rd1 Qa6 22.fxe6 fxe6 23.Nxd5 exd5 24.Qe6+ Kh8 25.Ne5 Nd6 [25...Nxe5 26.Qxe7+/=] 26.Ng6+! [White forces checkmate after 26...hxg6 27.Qh3+ Kg8 28.Bxd5+ Nf7 29.Bxf7+ Kf8 30.Qh8#] 1-0

48 – Grafl 3.g3 g6 4.Bg2 Bg7 White sets up a Leningrad Malaniuk variation in reverse in this Birds Opening. Black delayed the advance of his queen pawn until 6...d5. Then came Malaniuk’s move 7.Qe1. White mounted a kingside attack complete with a pawn sacrifice on f5. Black’s army sat on the queenside while White ripped open the kingside. The coup de grace came as a rook sacrifice 26.Rxe6 forcing resignation in Florian Grafl vs Joaquim Lacasta Palacios. Grafl (2364) - Lacasta Palacios (2105), 20th Sant Marti Open 2018 Barcelona ESP, 17.07.2018 begins 1.f4 Nf6 2.Nf3 g6 3.g3 Bg7 4.Bg2 0-0 5.0-0 c5 6.d3 d5 7.Qe1 e6 [7...Nc6 8.e4 dxe4 9.dxe4 e5 10.Nc3 Nd4 11.fxe5 Ng4 12.Nxd4 cxd4 13.Nd5=] 8.e4 b6 [8...Nc6 9.e5 Nd7 10.c3=] 9.Nc3 Bb7 10.e5 Ne8 11.g4 Nc7 12.f5 exf5 13.gxf5 gxf5 [13...Nc6 14.Qg3 gxf5 15.Nh4+/-] 14.Nh4 Nd7 15.Nxf5 Bxe5 16.Bf4 Bxf4 17.Rxf4 Kh8 18.Nd6 Bc6 [18...d4 19.Nxb7 Qg5 20.Ne2+-] 19.Nxf7+ Rxf7 20.Rxf7 Qg8

21.Rf3 Ne6 [21...Re8 22.Qh4+-] 22.Rg3 Ng7 [22...Qf7 23.Nxd5+-] 23.Qd2 Qe6 24.Re1 Qd6 [24...Qf6 25.Rf1+-] 25.Qg5 Ne6 [25...Qf6 26.Nxd5 Qxg5 27.Rxg5+-] 26.Rxe6! 1-0

49 – Hill 3.g3 g6 4.Bg2 Bg7 What is this scary sight? None other than the Bird's Opening! Wait a minute. I played in the USCF Golden Knights Tournament that began in 1989 and the rounds that followed in future years. Most of my games from that event were played with an aim to reach the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit. That is true. The three years playing all those BDG games were during the same time period that I wrote my first Blackmar-Diemer Gambit Keybook. By the time of this game, I was done the BDG writing. The book was already with the publisher awaiting release in February 1992. Now finally, I could take a break and play something besides a BlackmarDiemer Gambit. My contest vs Jonathan Hill is a Reversed Leningrad Dutch Defence. Usually I played 3.e3. I did not play 3.g3 very often in Bird’s Opening. And it shows. This game was not all that exciting. We shuffled some pieces for 25 moves and agreed to a draw. There are not many games like this in the book, but it does reflect that not all Birds fly to glory. Sawyer (2005) - Hill (2004), corr USCF 89NS48, 27.12.1991 begins 1.f4 Nf6 2.Nf3 g6 3.g3 Bg7 4.Bg2 d5 5.0-0 0-0 6.d3 c6 7.e3 [A logical continuation would be 7.Nc3 d4 8.Ne4 Nxe4 9.dxe4=] 7...Bg4 8.Nbd2 Qb6 9.Qe2 Nbd7 10.h3 Bxf3 11.Bxf3 e5 12.Kh2 Rae8 13.Qf2 exf4 14.exf4 Qxf2+ 15.Rxf2 Nb6 16.a4 Re1 17.Rf1 Rfe8 18.Kg2 Nfd7 [18...R1e7 19.Nb3 Nfd7 20.c3=] 19.a5 Nc8 20.Rxe1 Rxe1 21.Kf2 [21.Nb3 a6 22.c3 Nd6 23.Kf2 Re8 24.Be3=] 21...Re7 22.c3 [22.Nb3= looks better.] 22...Nd6 [22...Nc5 23.Be2 Nd6] 23.Nb3 f5 24.Be3 a6 25.Re1 1/2-1/2

50 – Dzhumaev 7.Qe1 Nc6 8.e4 One straightforward strategy for White in the Birds Opening Leningrad 3.g3 is to play 7.Qe1 which supports 8.e4. Typically, this leads to issues with the e-pawns for both players. Equal positions may suddenly turn onesided if a player can make serious threats. White dominated the f-file in the game between Marat Dzhumaev and Sergei Tiviakov. Dzhumaev (2434) - Tiviakov (2584), 10th Chennai Open 2018 Chennai IND (8.3), 23.01.2018 begins 1.f4 d5 2.g3 Nf6 3.Nf3 g6 4.Bg2 Bg7 5.0-0 0-0 6.d3 c5 7.Qe1 Nc6 8.e4 dxe4 9.dxe4 e5 10.Nc3 Nd4 11.Rf2 [11.fxe5 Ng4 12.Nxd4 cxd4 13.Nd5 Nxe5 14.Qb4=] 11...Nxf3+ [11...exf4 12.gxf4 Re8 13.e5 Ng4 14.Rd2 f6 15.h3=] 12.Bxf3 Re8 13.f5 gxf5 14.Bg5 Bd7 [14...f4 15.gxf4 exf4 16.Bxf4+/=] 15.Rd1 Qc8 16.Bxf6 Bxf6 17.Bg4 fxg4 18.Rxf6 Re6 [18...c4 19.Qd2 Qc5+ 20.Kg2 Be6 21.Qg5+ Kh8 22.Nd5+/-] 19.Qf2 Bc6 [19...Rxf6 20.Qxf6+-] 20.Rxf7 Qe8 21.Rf1 Rd8 [21...Re7 22.Rf5+-] 22.Qf5 Rg6 23.Nd5 Bxd5 24.exd5 e4 [24...Kh8 25.d6+-] 25.d6 Rg7 26.Rxg7+ Kxg7 27.Qf6+ Kg8 28.Rf5 1-0

51 – Becx 7.c3 Nc6 8.Na3 Rb8 Black fought for the center in this Birds Opening. White chose a flexible 8.Na3 variation. There the horse stood like a statue for the rest of the game. Unfortunately for that White knight, the main action was far away in the center and on the kingside. Black sacrificed a pawn to force open the center. Black’s rooks rocked the open files. They coordinated with a bishop and queen to win material in the game Cesar Becx vs Tanguy Ringoir. Becx (2107) - Ringoir (2530), 34th Geraardsbergen Open Geraardsbergen BEL (8.2), 14.08.2018 begins 1.f4 d5 2.Nf3 g6 3.g3 Bg7 4.Bg2 Nf6 5.0-0 0-0 6.d3 c5 7.c3 Nc6 8.Na3 Rb8 9.Ne5 Nxe5 [9...Qc7 10.Nxc6 Qxc6 11.Qc2 Qa6 12.e4 c4 13.dxc4 dxe4 14.Re1=] 10.fxe5 Nd7 11.d4 e6 12.Be3 [12.Rf2 b5 13.e3 f6 14.exf6 Rxf6=] 12...b5 13.Qd2 [13.Nc2=] 13...b4 14.cxb4 cxd4 15.Bxd4 Qc7 16.Rac1 Qb7 17.b5 Bxe5 18.e4 dxe4 [18...Bxd4+ 19.Qxd4 Qb6=] 19.Bxe5 Nxe5 20.Qd4 Nf3+ 21.Bxf3 exf3 22.Rc3 [22.Rf2 Bd7=/+] 22...e5 23.Qxe5 [23.Qe3 e4-+] 23...Bh3 24.Rfxf3

Rbe8 25.Qd4 [25.Qf6 Re1+ 26.Kf2 Qe4-+] 25...Re1+ 26.Kf2 Rf1+ 27.Ke2 Re8+ 0-1

52 – Carlsen 7.c3 Nc6 8.Na3 Re8 It’s easy to love the Magnus Carlsen style. He plays many different openings. I used to find that hard to understand, but now it makes more sense to me. Modern training techniques allow us to practice openings, tactics, and strategy from all grandmaster games in history. I do tactics training exercises every day to find the winning moves from actual games. I see games from every opening in my training. Often I recognize the position from famous games from Morphy, Alekhine, Fischer, Kasparov, or someone else. Carlsen got a good position out of the opening until his misstep on move 18. Michael Adams held his own for much of this game, but Carlsen won in the end. Carlsen (2837) - Adams (2715), 9th London Classic 2017, 09.12.2017 begins 1.f4 d5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.g3 g6 4.Bg2 Bg7 5.0-0 0-0 6.d3 c5 7.c3 Nc6 8.Na3 Re8 9.Nh4 b6 10.e4 dxe4 11.Qa4 Qxd3 12.Qxc6 Bd7 13.Qc7 Ng4 14.Re1 Bd4+ 15.cxd4 Qxd4+ 16.Be3 Nxe3 17.Qe5 f5 [Black threatens a discovered check.] 18.Bh3? [18.Nf3! exf3 19.Bxf3 Nc2+ 20.Qxd4 Nxd4 21.Bxa8 Rxa8 22.Rxe7+/-] 18...Nc2+ 19.Qxd4 Nxd4 20.Rxe4 fxe4 21.Bxd7 Red8 22.Ba4 e5 23.Re1 exf4 24.gxf4 a6 25.Bd1 b5 26.Nb1 Nf5 [26...Ra7-/+] 27.Nxf5 gxf5 28.Kf2 Kf7 29.Be2 Rd6 30.h4 c4 31.a4 Rc8 [31...Kf6-/+] 32.axb5 axb5 33.Na3 Rd5 34.Rc1 Rdc5 35.Nc2 Ra8 36.Ne3 Rac8 37.h5 Ke6 38.h6 Kf6 39.Ra1 b4 40.Ra6+ Ke7 41.Ra7+ Kf6 42.Ke1 b3 [42...R8c6=] 43.Rb7 Ke6 [43...Kg6=] 44.Rb6+ [44.Rb4 c3 45.bxc3+/=] 44...Ke7 45.Rb4 R8c6 46.Bxc4 Rxh6 47.Rxb3 Kd8 48.Rb8+ Kc7 49.Rf8 Rh3 50.Nd5+ Kb7 51.Rf7+ Kb8? [51...Kc6=] 52.b3 Rh2 [Or 52...Rc6 53.Rxf5+-] 53.Nb4 Kc8 54.Na6 Rc6 55.Rf8+ Kb7 56.Bd5 Kxa6 57.Bxc6 Kb6 58.Bd7 1-0

Book 10: Chapter 3 – Bird Classical 3.e3 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.e3 White fights to control the dark squares in the center.

53 – Krystosek 2.Nf3 c5 3.e3 Bf5 Ted Krystosek was a veteran postal chess player. Here his light squared bishop kept changing his mind vs my Birds Opening. My premature attack toward Black’s king was rewarded with a mate. Sawyer (2100) - Krystosek (1569), corr APCT 1982 begins 1.f4 d5 2.Nf3 c5 3.e3 Bf5 4.Bb5+ Nd7 5.0-0 [5.c4=] 5...Ngf6 6.d3 e6 7.b3 [7.c4=] 7...Bd6 8.Bb2 0-0 9.Bxd7 Nxd7 10.Nbd2 Bg4 11.Qe1 f6 12.Qg3 Bh5 13.Qh3 [13.e4=] 13...Bf7 14.g3 a5 [14...Re8=/+] 15.a4 e5 16.f5? [16.fxe5!=] 16...g5 [16...c4!-/+] 17.fxg6 hxg6 18.e4 d4 19.Rf2 Qe7 20.Raf1 Be6 21.Qg2 Qg7 22.Bc1 Nb8? [22...Nb6=] 23.Nc4 Bxc4 [23...Be7 24.Nb6+/=] 24.dxc4 [24.bxc4+/-] 24...Nc6 [24...Bc7 25.h4+/=] 25.Qh3 Qe7 [25...Rfe8 26.Ne1+/-] 26.Bh6 Rfe8 27.Nh4 Kf7 28.Nxg6 Qc7 29.Rxf6+ Kg8 30.Qg4 Kh7 31.Rf7+ Kxh6 32.Qh4+ Kxg6 33.R1f6# 1-0

54 – Savchenko 3…Nc6 4.Bb5 Early bishop pins in this Birds Opening led to players castling on opposite side. White hindered Black’s play with 20.e6 to win big material in the game Boris Savchenko vs Vladislav Kolyuzhnov. Savchenko (2550) - Kolyuzhnov (1960), Kolomna Rapid 2018 Moscow RUS (1.3), 16.02.2018 begins 1.f4 d5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.e3 Nf6 4.Bb5 Bg4 5.d3 Qd6 6.Nbd2 0-0-0 7.0-0 Qc5 8.Bxc6 Qxe3+ [8...Qxc6 9.h3 Bxf3 10.Nxf3=] 9.Kh1 bxc6 10.Nc4 Qc5 [10...Qe6 11.Nce5+/=] 11.b4 Qb5 12.Nce5 Bh5 13.h3 [13.Qe1+/=] 13...Nd7 14.a4 Qb7 15.g4 Nxe5 16.Nxe5 f6 17.gxh5 fxe5 18.Qg4+ Kb8 [18...e6 19.Qxe6+ Kb8 20.fxe5+/=] 19.fxe5 Qc8 20.e6 [20.Rf7+/-] 20...Rd6 [20...g6 21.h6+/-] 21.Re1 [21.Bb2 Rxe6 22.Rf7+-] 21...g5 22.Bb2 Rg8 23.Be5 Rd8 24.b5 c5 25.d4 c4 26.a5 Bg7 27.Bg3 Ka8 [27...Kb7 28.Ra3+/-] 28.b6 c5 [28...Rd6 29.Bxd6 cxd6 30.Reb1+-] 29.Reb1 Rh8 [29...Bxd4 30.b7+ Qxb7 31.Rxb7+-] 1-0

55 – Schmidt 3…Nc6 4.c3 Bd7 Black played an early 3...Nc6 against Birds Opening. This was countered with the Stonewall Attack 5.d4. White opened lines on the queenside instead of an immediate kingside attack. The unfortunate Nc6 was poorly placed. First it failed to defend the Black b5 pawn and it fell. Moments later White attacked the Nc6 with a White b5 pawn. The horse had no safe retreat in the game Sebastian Schmidt Schaeffer vs Giorgio Lundmark. Schmidt Schaeffer (2367) - Lundmark (1824), TCh-SUI 2018 Switzerland SUI (3.7), 29.04.2018 begins 1.f4 d5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.e3 Nc6 4.c3 Bd7 5.d4 e6 6.Bd3 Be7 7.Nbd2 a6 [7...Bd6 8.Ne5 Ne7 9.e4+/=] 8.0-0 0-0 9.Qe2 [9.e4 dxe4 10.Nxe4 Nxe4 11.Bxe4+/=] 9...b5 10.b3 Rc8 11.a4 Rb8 12.b4 Ne8 [12...bxa4 13.Ne5 Be8 14.Bc2=] 13.axb5 axb5 14.Bxb5 f5 [14...Rxb5 15.Qxb5 Nxd4 16.Qd3 Nxf3+ 17.Nxf3+/=] 15.Bd3 Nf6? [15...Bd6 16.b5 Ne7 17.Ne5 Nf6 18.Ba3+/-] 16.b5 1-0

56 – Haines 3…Nc6 4.d4 Bg4 Ray Haines transposed into a Bird's Opening Stonewall Attack from a Queen Pawn Game and won quickly. White picked off a pawn and then sacrificed a bishop to force tactics. If Black's king took the piece, White would be up two pawns. But Black's choice to hide was even worse. Haines (1566) - zeitgeist-movement (1512), Live Chess Chess.com, 07.03.2018 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e3 Nc6 3.f4 Nf6 [3...Bf5!=] 4.Nf3 Bg4 5.c3 [5.c4=] 5...e6 6.Bd3 Bd6 7.0-0 0-0 8.Nbd2 Qd7 9.Qe1 Ne7 [9...Bf5=] 10.Ne5 Bxe5 [10...Qd8 11.Nxg4 Nxg4 12.e4 dxe4 13.Nxe4+/=] 11.fxe5 Ne4 12.Nxe4 dxe4 13.Bxe4 Nd5 14.c4 [14.b3+-] 14...Nb6 [14...f5 15.Bc2+/-] 15.b3 c6 [15...Bf5 16.Bxb7+-] 16.Ba3 Rfd8 [16...f5 17.exf6 Rxf6 18.Bxh7+ Kxh7 19.Rxf6!+-] 17.Bxh7+! Kh8 [17...Kxh7 18.Qh4+ Kg8 19.Qxg4+-] 18.Qh4 g6 19.Bxg6+ Kg7 20.Qh7# 1-0

57 – Fawbush 3…c6 4.b3 Bg4 George Fawbush was impossible to draw, if he cared about the event. I either beat him or he beat me. In this Bird's Opening, Black developed classically by playing Bg4 and placing his pawns on the light squares. At first I tried to shake things up with 10.c4 to go with my earlier 1.f4. After several pawn exchanges, the center files were opened. We swapped a set of queens, rooks, bishops and knights, but he did not stop attacking. He gave me one saving chance for 36.Re2, but I missed it. Then he drove my king into the corner and checked. I was done for. This Fawbush finish was impressive. As I recall this game was published in the APCT News Bulletin, although I do not remember which issue. I am sure that I did not submit it to Helen Warren myself, but it takes two to play. The good thing was that I defeated Fawbush in a couple other games at just the right moment. Those got me an invitation to a big tournament that I would not otherwise have had. Sawyer (2000) - Fawbush (2200), corr APCT, 1982 begins 1.f4 d5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.b3 c6 4.Bb2 Bg4 5.e3 e6 6.Be2 [6.Nc3 Nbd7 7.h3=] 6...Bd6 7.0-0 00 8.Ne5 Bxe2 9.Qxe2 Nbd7 10.c4 Qe7 11.d3 Rad8 12.Nd2 Ne8 13.Ndf3 f6 14.Nxd7 Rxd7 15.g3 f5 16.e4 dxe4 17.dxe4 Nf6 18.exf5 exf5 19.Qxe7 Bxe7 20.Rad1 Rfd8 21.Rxd7 Rxd7 22.Re1 Bc5+ 23.Kg2 Ne4 24.Re2 Rd3 25.Ne5 Rd1 26.Nf3 a5 27.Be5 g6 28.Bc7 a4 29.bxa4 Rc1 30.Ne5 [30.a5 Rxc4 31.Rb2=] 30...Rg1+ 31.Kf3 g5 32.Rc2 Re1 33.g4 h5 34.h3? [34.gxh5 Kh7=/+] 34...fxg4+ [34...Re3+! 35.Kg2 gxf4-+] 35.hxg4 h4? [35...Re3+! 36.Kg2 gxf4-+] 36.Nd7? [36.Re2 Rxe2 37.Kxe2=] 36...Re3+ 37.Kg2 Rg3+ 38.Kh2 Bg1+ 39.Kh1 Nf2+ 0-1

58 – Keiser 3.e3 Bg4 4.b3 e6 When I commit to an opening, I play it constantly. What if I meet a repeat opponent? Do I copy the moves from our previous chess game? Well, yes and no. Yes, I copy my moves if I played a tactically sound win in our previous game. In fact, I have won some repeat games with all the exact same moves against the same opponent. No, I do not copy my moves if I made an opening mistake. No, I do not copy my moves if it is a strategical variation with equal chances and multiple choices. No, I do not copy my moves if I want to try out multiple variations of the same opening. Here is a second Bird's Opening played against Art Keiser. The first time after the moves 1.f4 d5 2.Nf3 Bg4 3.e3 Nf6, I continued 4.h3 Bxf3 5.Qxf3 (see next game). I did not want twin Birds, so here I chose 4.b3 e6 5.Bb2. The position was equal. Black blundered on move 19. White won a piece and quickly mounted a successful attack. Sawyer (2100) - Keiser (1856), corr APCT 1982 begins 1.f4 d5 2.Nf3 Bg4 3.e3 Nf6 4.b3 e6 5.Bb2 Be7 6.d3 [6.Nc3=] 6...c5 7.Be2 Nbd7 8.0-0 0-0 9.Nbd2 [9.h3=] 9...b5 10.Ne5 [10.Qe1=] 10...Bxe2 11.Qxe2 a5 [11...Nxe5=] 12.Nc6 Qe8 13.Nxe7+ [13.a4+/=] 13...Qxe7 14.g4 Ne8 15.Nf3 f6 16.Rae1 Rb8 [16...b4=] 17.e4 d4 18.Bc1 Qf7 19.Qg2 f5? [19...Nc7 20.f5=] 20.Ng5! Qg6 21.exf5 exf5 22.Qd5+ Kh8 23.Qxd7 fxg4 24.f5 Qh5 25.Ne4 Nf6 26.Nxf6 Rxf6 27.Re7 g6 28.Re8+ Rxe8 29.Qxe8+ Kg7 30.Qe7+ Rf7 31.f6+ 1-0

59 – Keiser 3.e3 Bg4 4.h3 Bxf3 I almost drove over a white bird as it walked slowly across the highway. Then the bird saw my car. It ran quickly to the side of the road to avoid getting crushed. Bird's Opening is a reversed Dutch Defence with an extra move for the White 1.f4 player. An interesting idea in the Dutch is 1.d4 f5 2.Bg5. When the position is reversed with 2...Bg4, White has better defensive possibilities in the Bird. Ah, but there lies the danger! White must play active moves. Otherwise he gets stuck defending too much and is run over. This was one of two Bird's Keiser and I played simultaneously. We also played two Caro-Kann Defence games. Art may be gone, but he is not forgotten. Those who play the Bird benefit from a limited familiar repertoire. I played a lot of Birds Openings in the mid-1980s. If I was playing Black, I could kill two Birds with one stone. Here however, I played White. My Birds did the killing and lived to tell about it. This opening gave equal chances. I slipped up on move 23, but Black returned the favor over the next few moves. I pressed for a win when Black missed his saving reply. Suddenly White had a winning pawn endgame. Sawyer (2100) - Keiser (1856), corr APCT 1982 begins 1.f4 d5 2.Nf3 Bg4 3.e3 Nf6 4.h3 Bxf3 5.Qxf3 e6 6.Nc3 c5 7.g4 Nc6 8.Bb5 [8.g5=] 8...Qc7 9.g5 Nd7 10.Bxc6 Qxc6 11.Ne2 [11.b3=] 11...0-0-0 [11...c4=/+] 12.d3 h6 13.h4 hxg5 14.hxg5 Rxh1+ 15.Qxh1 f6 16.gxf6 gxf6 17.c4 [17.b3=] 17...Be7 [17...f5=/+] 18.b3 f5 19.Bb2 Nf6 20.0-0-0 Ng4 21.cxd5 exd5 22.Qh7 Qd7 23.d4? [23.Be5 Nxe3=/+] 23...Nxe3 24.Rd3 Ng4 [White would be in trouble after 24...Qe6! 25.Qh3 Ng4!-+] 25.Ng3 cxd4?! [This allows White to equalize. Better is 25...c4! 26.bxc4 dxc4 27.Rc3 b5-/+] 26.Qxf5 Qxf5 27.Nxf5 Bf6 28.Bxd4 Bxd4 29.Rxd4 Kc7 30.Ne7 Nf6 31.Kc2 Rd7 32.Ng6 Kd6 33.Rd3 Rc7+ 34.Rc3 Rxc3+ 35.Kxc3 Ke6 36.Kd4 Kf5 37.Ne7+ Kxf4 38.Nxd5+ Nxd5? [This blunder throws away

the game. 38...Kf5!= holds the draw.] 39.Kxd5 Ke3 40.Kd6 Kd4 41.Kc7 b6 42.Kb7 1-0

60 – McManus 5.Qxf3 Nbd7 In the Bird's Opening, White fights for the dark squares. This chess strategy makes it difficult for Black to mount an attack. In this game I played seven of my eight pawns to the dark squares. I never moved my a2 and b2 pawns. My other six pawns all were advanced to dark squares. My opponent Frank McManus chose the strategy of exchanging off his bad light squared bishop. Black set up pawns on the light squares. This gave him a good dark squared bishop. My kingside pawn expanse began in response to Black's early pin of my bishop with 3...Bg4. By move 9, I had pawns on f4, g5 and h4. This led to a big kingside space advantage for White. Controlling only one color square is not enough to win. In fact, my dark squared bishop had very little scope. I may have played even better if I had attacked the light colored squares as well. Fortunately for me, Black opened up attacking lines to his own king. He surrendered before I threw the knockout punch. Sawyer (2100) - McManus (1701), corr APCT 1982 begins 1.f4 d5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.e3 Bg4 4.h3 [4.Be2=] 4...Bxf3 5.Qxf3 Nbd7 [5...Nc6!?=] 6.Nc3 e6 7.g4 [7.a3=] 7...Nb6?! [7...Bb4=] 8.g5 Nfd7 9.h4 Bb4 10.Ne2 0-0 11.Ng3?! [11.b3+/=] 11...Re8 [11...a5!=] 12.c3 [12.b3!+/=] 12...Bd6 13.d4 c5 14.Bd3 c4 [14...Rc8!=] 15.Bc2 f6 16.gxf6 Nxf6 17.Bd2 Rf8 18.0-0-0 Nfd7 19.Qg4!? [19.Rdg1!+-] 19...Qe7 20.Rdg1 Nf6 21.Qe2 Rf7 [21...Nbd7 22.Rh2+/-] 22.Nh5 [22.e4!+- is even stronger] 1-0

61 – Ruiz 6.Nc3 c6 7.d4 e6 Glenn Ruiz became a national master. This game was one of those times where Ruiz showed moments of brilliance. Glenn wins the game with a great tactical shot. In this Bird's Opening both of us played classically. After 1.f4 d5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.e3, Black chose the 3...Bg4 line. Ruiz swapped off his light squared bishop. I expanded my pawns and grabbed space on the kingside. Yes, it all sounded nice. But my opponent dodged my pawns. Black attacked with his pieces. His final move 19...Nxd4! was a crusher. In another game played that year, I was run over by Glenn Ruiz in a Sicilian Defence. He got my respect. Sawyer (2100) - Ruiz (2083), corr APCT 1982 begins 1.f4 d5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.e3 Bg4 4.h3 Bxf3 5.Qxf3 Nbd7 6.Nc3 c6 7.d4 e6 8.g4 [8.a3!?=] 8...Bb4 9.Bd3 0-0 10.g5 [10.Bd2!=] 10...Ne8 11.Bd2 Nd6 12.Nb1?! [12.a3=] 12...Bxd2+ 13.Nxd2 Qb6!? [13...c5=/+] 14.b3? [This seriously weakens the White queenside structure. There was at least a chance with 14.0-0-0 c5 15.c3=] 14...c5 15.c3 Rac8 16.h4 cxd4 17.cxd4 Rc3 18.Qe2 Nf5 19.Kf2? [Losing instantly, but White was in trouble anyway after 19.Bxf5 exf5 20.00 Qe6 21.Rfe1 Rfc8-/+] 19...Nxd4! 0-1

2.Nf3 Nf6 3.e3 e6 Both sides opt for classical development with 3.e3 e6.

62 – Haines 4.d4 Ne4 5.Bd3 This Queen Pawn Stonewall win by Ray Haines shows the danger of passive play by Black. White transposes to the Bird by move 4. He gradually aimed two minor pieces and his queen at the opposing king. The Black army had opportunities to fight back. Instead, White blasted through for the win. Haines (1547) - Lovecraft5000 (1543), Live Chess Chess.com, 10.06.2018 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.e3 e6 3.Bd3 d5 4.f4 Ne4 5.Nf3 Be7 6.0-0 Nd7 7.c4 c6 8.Nc3 Ndf6 9.Ne5 0-0 10.Qf3 Nxc3 11.bxc3 Nd7 12.Qh3 h6 [12...f5=] 13.Ng4 [13.Rf3+/=] 13...e5? [13...f5=] 14.Nxh6+ [14.fxe5!+-] 14...gxh6 15.fxe5? Bg5 [15...Nxe5 16.Qg3+ Ng4=/+] 16.Qh5 Kg7? [16...dxc4 17.Bxc4+/-] 17.e4?! [17.h4!+-] 17...f6 [17...Bxc1=] 18.exd5 [18.Bxg5 fxg5 19.exd5+-] 18...f5 19.d6 Nb6 20.g3 Be6 21.h4 Bf7 22.Qf3 Bxc1 23.Raxc1 Nxc4? [23...Bxc4 24.Bxf5+/-] 24.Qxf5 1-0

63 – Penullar 4.d4 c5 5.Bb5+ Peter Mcgerald Penullar playing Black faces the Bird's Opening. We all have to face this opening from time to time. What does Black do after 1.f4? In this game the defense selected is the classical formation ...d5, c5, e6, Nf6, Nf6, Bd6, 0-0, etc. White for his part in the Birds Opening has the choice to play either a reversed Dutch Defence Classical (e3) or reversed Dutch Defence Leningrad (g3). The Classical Bird (1.f4 d5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.e3) can be divided into 4.d4 (Stonewall), 4.b3 (Bird-Larsen) or just 4.Be2. Of course both sides will react to their opponent's set-up. If Black plays 2...g6 and 3...Bg7, White is unlikely to want to play 4.b3. The game below shows White playing some type of reversed Nimzo-Indian Defence and Stonewall hybrid. Play gets sharper as pawns get exchanged. JoseGabrielMorenoCam - penullar, PF ALAY SA DIYOS AT SA BAYAN 26 - Board Chess.com, 15.12.2011 begins 1.f4 d5 2.d4 [White could have the same position with 1.d4/2.f4.] 2...e6 3.e3 Nf6 4.Nf3 c5 5.Bb5+ Nc6 [This looks like a reversed Nimzo-Indian Defence.] 6.c3 Bd7 7.0-0 Bd6 8.Nbd2 0-0 9.b3 Qc7 10.Bxc6 bxc6 11.Ne5 Be8 [11...cxd4 Black is trying to hold on to his bad bishop, but the Ne5 seems like a more powerful piece. 12.cxd4 c5=] 12.Ndf3 Nd7 13.Bd2 f6 14.Nxd7 Bxd7 15.Qc2 cxd4 16.cxd4 e5 17.fxe5 fxe5 18.dxe5 Bxe5 19.Bc3? [White should snap off Black's dark-squared bishop in a heartbeat. 19.Nxe5 Qxe5 20.Qc5 with a good game.] 19...Bd6 20.Qb2 Bg4 [I don't know what the speed of these games were, but both the 21st moves for each side miss ...Qxg7.] 21.Bxg7? Bxf3? [21...Qxg7-+] 22.Bxf8 Bxh2+ 23.Kh1 Rxf8? [23...Be5-/+] 24.gxf3 [24.Rxf3!+- walks away with the Exchange.] 24...Be5 25.Qg2+ Kh8 26.Rg1? [26.Rac1 Rf6 27.Qh3 Bf4! 28.exf4 Qxf4 29.Qc8+ Rf8 30.Qh3=] 26...Qf7 [26...Qe7!-+] 27.f4 Bxa1 28.Rxa1 Qh5+ 29.Qh2 Qf3+ 30.Qg2 Qh5+ [30...Qxe3-/+] 31.Qh2 Qf3+ 32.Qg2 Qh5+ 1/2-1/2

64 – Doucette 4.d4 Bd6 5.Bd3 Ray Haines chose a positional Stonewall vs Leroy Doucette, but Haines dealt with another major issue. Ray described it in his note to me which I edit here: "I forgot to push the clock after move 42. I do not know how much time I lost. When I did check the time I had only about a minute and 30 seconds remaining. My opponent had about five minutes. Because of the time trouble, I did not play the strongest moves." Haines (1795) - Doucette (1400), Maine State Championship (1), 08.04.2017 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e3 e6 3.Bd3 Bd6 4.f4 Nf6 5.Nf3 c5 6.c3 c4 7.Bc2 0-0 8.0-0 b5 9.b3 Bb7 10.Nbd2 Nbd7 11.Ne5 g6 12.Ndf3 Rc8 13.bxc4 dxc4 14.Bd2 Kg7 15.Rb1 a6 16.a4 Qb6 17.axb5 axb5 18.Nxd7 Nxd7 19.e4 Be7 20.Qe1 Rfe8 21.Kh1 Ra8 22.Qc1 Bc6 23.Ne5 f5 [23...Nxe5=] 24.exf5 [24.d5!+/- looks strong.] 24...exf5 25.Nxc4?! [Maybe White thought he won a pawn.] 25...Qc7? [25...Bxg2+! 26.Kxg2 Qc6+ 27.Kg1 bxc4=/+. Because Black missed this, White is better.] 26.Ne5 Nf6 27.Nxc6 Qxc6 28.Qb2 Reb8 29.Rfe1 Ba3 30.Qb3 Ne4 31.Bxe4 fxe4 32.Re3 Bd6 33.Rbe1 Ra3 34.Qe6 Re8 35.Qg4 Ra7 36.h4 h5 37.Qg5 Rae7 38.f5 [38.d5! Qd7 39.Rg3+-] 38...Bc7 39.g4 Qf6 40.Qxg6+ Qxg6 41.fxg6 Kxg6 42.R3e2 Bg3 43.Rg1 Bxh4 44.gxh5+ Kxh5? [44...Kh7] 45.Rh2 e3 46.Be1 Re4 47.Rg7 R8e6 [47...Rf4=] 48.Rg3 Rg4 [48...Ra6=] 49.Rxg4 Kxg4 50.Rxh4+ Kf3 51.Rh2 Rg6 52.Rh3+ Ke4 53.Rg3 Rf6 54.Kg2 Kd3 55.Rf3 Rg6+ 56.Bg3?! Kxc3 57.d5 Rg8 [57...Kd2!=] 58.Kf1 b4 59.Ke2 b3 60.Bh4 Kd4 61.d6 b2 62.Rf1? Rh8? [62...Ke4!-+] 63.Bg3 [63.Bf6+!+-] 63...Rd8 64.Rb1 Rg8 65.d7 1-0

65 – Snapstys 4.b3 c5 5.Bb2 Victor Snapstys was one of those rare players whose rating went up when he got past age 60. Victor started winning games and playing better than ever. Vic told he did not know why he was suddenly doing so well, but he enjoyed it while it lasted. By the time he passed age 70, his rating slipped below 2000. He kept playing until past age 80. I played the Bird's Opening very well in this tournament. My game with Victor resembled a reversed Nimzo-Indian Defence. I doubled his c-pawns and then won one of them. I missed the powerful 15.Ba3!+- which was the most accurate path to a great position for White. Fortunately, it was still good on move 16. Vic played more regular at the Chaturanga Chess Club that I did. For some reason, I won the majority of our contests. I would beat him, and then Snapstys would beat people who beat me. Victor Snapstys passed away in 2006. Vic seemed like a really nice guy. Sawyer - Snapstys (2044), Hatboro, PA 1985 begins 1.f4 Nf6 2.Nf3 e6 3.e3 d5 4.b3 c5 5.Bb2 Nc6 6.Bb5 Be7 7.Ne5 Qb6 8.Bxc6+ bxc6 9.c4 [9.Nc3!?] 9...Ba6 10.d3 Rd8 11.Qf3 Bb7 12.0-0 a5 [12...0-0=] 13.Nc3 d4 14.Na4 Qc7 15.e4 [15.Ba3!+-] 15...0-0 16.Ba3 Nd7 17.Nxd7 Rxd7 18.Bxc5 e5!? [This drops a second pawn, but Black is still in trouble after 18...Bxc5 19.Nxc5+/-] 19.Bb6 Qb8 20.fxe5 Qxe5 21.Qf5 Qxf5 22.Rxf5 g6 23.Rxa5 Bb4 24.Ra7 f5 25.Bc5 Bc3 26.Nxc3 dxc3 27.Bxf8 fxe4 28.dxe4 [The most powerful finish is 28.Bh6!+-] 28...c2 29.Rf1 Rf7 30.Bh6 1-0

66 – Brann 4.b3 c5 5.Bb2 Be7 I went back to the Birds Opening for the final round of the 1977 Maine State Chess Championship. In this event I won both the Bird games I played. Sometimes the Bird is a disaster for me. My opponent was Mark Brann. He outplayed me in the opening but later he blundered into a lost endgame. I did give him one more chance to draw, but fortunately for me Black missed it. This was one of my last events as a Class B player. The Class B trophy I won was a heavy stone in the shape of a knight. It was not very valuable, but it made a good door stop for 35 years. Sawyer - Brann, Maine Champ Maine (5), 17.04.1977 begins 1.f4 d5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.e3 c5 4.b3 e6 5.Bb2 Be7 6.Be2 Nc6 7.0-0 0-0 8.Ne5 Nd7 9.d4 Ndxe5 10.fxe5? [Way too passive. Correct was 10.dxe5=] 10...f6 11.exf6 Bxf6 12.c3 Ne7 13.Qd3 e5 [Black's pieces are much better placed.] 14.dxe5 Bxe5 15.Rxf8+ Qxf8 16.e4 [16.Nd2! Bf5 17.e4 Bg6 18.Rf1= would be a remarkable improvement in White's position.] 16...Qf4 17.g3 Qxe4 18.Qxe4 dxe4 [Black has temporarily won a pawn, but now White's pieces come alive.] 19.Nd2 Bf5 20.Bc4+ Kh8 21.Nxe4 Rd8 [White has made a piece sacrifice, but he gets the piece back by attacking three undefended pieces on the e-file. 21...Bxe4 22.Re1+/=] 22.Ng5?! [White can pick off the c-pawn with advantage. 22.Nxc5! Probably I was worried about 22...Rd2 23.Re1 Bf6 24.Bc1 Rxa2 but 25.Nxb7+/- and White is still up a pawn.] 22...Bg6 23.Re1 Bf6 24.Ne4 Bxe4 25.Rxe4 h6 26.Re2 Rd1+ 27.Kf2 Nc6 28.Be6 Ne5 29.Bf5 g6 [29...Nd3+! 30.Bxd3 Rxd3 31.c4 Bxb2 32.Rxb2 with a very likely draw.] 30.c4 Nd3+ 31.Bxd3 Bxb2 32.Rxb2= [I decided to swap off the bishops of opposite color and go into a rook ending. It was probably my best option in view of my skill level at the time. 32.Bxg6 Bd4+ 33.Kf3+/= with an extra pawn. There are some winning chances for White with the rooks on the board.] 32...Rxd3 33.Re2 Kg7 [33...Rd7!=] 34.Re7+ Kf6 35.Rxb7 Rd2+ 36.Kf3 Rxa2 37.Rc7 Ra3 [37...Rxh2=] 38.Rc6+ Ke7? [38...Kf7=] 39.Rxc5? [Here I missed a great chance to win with 39.Rxg6! Rxb3+ 40.Ke4+/-] 39...Rxb3+ 40.Kf4 Kd6 41.Ra5 Rb7

42.Ra6+ Kc5 43.Rxg6 Rb6 44.Rxb6 axb6 45.g4 Kxc4 46.h4 b5? [Losing. Instead 46...Kd5!= draws] 47.g5 b4 48.g6 b3 49.g7 Kc3 50.g8Q 1-0

67 – Funk 4.b3 c5 5.Bb2 Be7 Donald Funk flies from Larsen's Opening 1.b3 to Bird's Opening in just three moves. Larsen's Opening 1.b3 is one of those Rare First Moves that may or may not transpose into other lines. Many Bird's Opening chess games began as part of Larsen's Opening theory. White tries to control the long dark diagonal, so 3.f4 fits in well with its aim at e5. Bobby Fischer played 1.b3 vs Henrique Mecking in the Palma de Mallorca Interzonal in 1970; that game transposed to Birds Opening after 11.f4, ending 1-0 in 42 moves. Transpositions occur often in closed openings where no one plays a pawn to the central four squares. The game below took until move six with 6...d5. One thing that makes this game unique for a Bird is that White castles queenside. Don Funk dreams of a kingside assault. While his 17.Nf6+?! knight sacrifice to open up the king looks very promising, here Black has sufficient defense. Mr. Funk's bold sacrifice was unsound. Funk (1707) - Sawyer, Lansdale, PA 22.05.1981 begins 1.b3 Nf6 2.Bb2 e6 3.f4 c5 4.Nf3 Be7 5.e3 Nc6 6.Nc3 d5 7.d3?! [7.Bb5=] 7...Qc7 [7...d4!-/+] 8.Qd2 0-0 9.Be2 b6 10.0-0-0 Rd8 11.Rhg1 a6 12.g4 Bd6 [12...d4!-/+] 13.g5 Ne8 14.h4? [14.Bf1= clears out to allow White to play Ne2.] 14...d4 15.Ne4 dxe3 16.Qc3 Bxf4 17.Nf6+?! [If 17.h5 Nd4 18.Qe1 Bb7-+] 17...gxf6 18.gxf6+ Kh8 19.Ng5 [Or 19.Qe1 e5 20.Qf1 h5 21.Ng5 Nd4-+] 19...Nd4 20.Rde1 Be5 [20...Nxf6!-+ seems even stronger.] 21.Kd1 h6 22.Rg2 Bb7 23.Ne4 Bxe4 0-1

68 – Tate 4.Be2 Be7 5.0-0 0-0 IM Emory Tate passed away at a chess tournament. Tate provided us with decades of exciting attacking chess. His death reminds me to take better care of my body since Tate was younger than I am. My retirement leads me to think more often about these health issues. The late Tate won a Bird's Opening the night before he died. He could play any opening but avoided those that require constant upkeep. His repertoire was unpredictable. Tate chose openings that favor skills in tactics and strategy more than memory. I never played Emory Tate as far as I know. We did, however, have several mutual opponents. Tate was a very active player and coach with a USCF rating in the 2300s. This five minute game was one of the last blitz games Tate played on the Internet Chess Club. Tate (2090) - AlexRequelme (2087), ICC 5 0 Internet Chess Club, 16.10.2015 begins1.f4 d5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.e3 e6 4.Be2 Be7 5.0-0 0-0 6.b3 Nbd7 7.Bb2 c5 8.d3 b6 [Black can be more bold here with 8...b5!=] 9.Kh1 Bb7 10.Ne5 Nxe5 11.fxe5 Nd7 12.Rf3!? [Blitz chess is all about attack. 12.d4=] 12...Re8 [12...d4!-/+] 13.Rh3 Bf8 14.d4 g6 15.Nd2 Bg7 16.Nf3 Rc8 17.c3 a6 18.Qf1 b5 19.a4 cxd4 20.exd4 b4 21.cxb4 Qb6 [If Black plays on the side with his extra pawn, White still stands better. 21...f6 22.exf6 Qxf6 23.b5+/-] 22.b5 Nf8 23.a5 Qc7 24.bxa6 Ba8 25.b4 Qc2 26.Rb1 Qa4 27.Ng5 Rc7 28.Bc3 [28.Bb5!+-] 28...Rec8 29.b5 Rxc3 [29...h6 30.b6+-] 30.Qxf7+ [Even stronger is 30.Rxc3! Rxc3 31.b6+-] 30...Kh8 31.Nxe6 [31.Rxc3] 31...Rc1+ 32.Bf1 Rxb1 [32...Nxe6 33.Qxe6+-] 33.Qxg7# Black is checkmated 1-0

2.Nf3 Nf6 3.e3 g6 In this chapter we look at the main line where both sides fight for the long dark diagonal with 1.f4 d5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.e3 g6.

69 – Dawson 4.d4 c5 5.Bb5+ Bd7 Can you win a game without really fighting? Yes, but only if your opponent plays poorly. You have to attack to defeat someone who plays well. Against Jerry Dawson, I was late and too slow. I was busy at this point in my life. I remember that I did not feel like spending a lot of time in this particular game. I was bored as Black in a Bird's Opening. I hoped White would make mistakes and give me an easy win. My lack of effort led only to a draw. Black got an endgame with a better bishop and a passed a-pawn. I advanced my pawn to a4. I took aim. However, the two times I had a shot at pushing to a3, I failed to pull the trigger. I discovered that if I went long enough without attacking, Jerry Dawson would attack me on the board. He did. Then I was the one who had to search for a draw. And so, we repeated moves. The next year I had White in another APCT correspondence game. In that game, we drew a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit. Dawson (1974) - Sawyer (1969), corr APCT EMN-A-1, 1995 begins 1.f4 d5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.e3 g6 4.d4 [4.c4 Bg7 5.cxd5 Nxd5 6.d4=] 4...c5 5.Bb5+ Bd7 6.Bxd7+ Nbxd7 7.0-0 Bg7 8.Ne5 0-0 9.Nd2 [9.Nc3=] 9...Rc8 10.c3 e6 11.a4 b6 12.Qf3 Qc7 13.Ng4 Nxg4 14.Qxg4 f5 15.Qh4 Nf6 16.h3 c4 17.g4 a5 18.g5 Nd7 19.Nf3 b5 20.Bd2 Ra8 21.Rfb1 Rfb8 22.Qe1 Bf8 23.h4 Qc6 24.Qd1 Be7 25.b3 cxb3 26.Rxb3 bxa4 27.Rxa4 [27.Rxb8+ Rxb8 28.Qxa4=] 27...Rxb3 28.Qxb3 Nb6 29.Ra1 a4 30.Qc2 Nc4 31.Bc1 Bd6 32.Kf2 Kf8 33.Nd2 Ke8 [33...a3-/+] 34.Nxc4 dxc4 35.Qd1 Kd8 36.Qf3 [36.Ba3=] 36...Kc7 37.Qxc6+ Kxc6 38.Kf3 Kd5 [38...a3-/+]

39.Ba3 Bxa3 40.Rxa3 Ra6 41.e4+ fxe4+ 42.Ke3 Ra7 43.Ke2 Kc6 44.Ke3 Kb5 45.Kxe4 Ka5 46.d5 exd5+ 47.Kxd5 Rf7 48.Ke5 Rf5+ 49.Ke4 Rb5 50.Kd4 Rf5 51.Ke4 Rb5 1/2-1/2

70 – Torning 4.d4 Bg7 5.Bd3 0-0 6.Nd2 b6 7.c3 Richard Torning sent me a short game with his comments. The game begins 1.d4 Nf6, but it transposes to 1.d4 d5 on move 5. "Greetings Tim, I went through Ray Haines Stonewall game…. I teach the Stonewall Attack to juniors. The game attached starts out as an Indian ECO - A45 but my intention was to weave a Stonewall. It has an interesting rook sacrifice and perpetual check motif. Contrary to Griffith and Golombek's comment in their Pocket Guide to the Chess Openings - the Stonewall is not 'dull and bad'. Regards, Rick Torning" Torning - NN, Casual Bullet game lichess, 19.05.2018 begins 1.d4 Nf6 A45 Indian Game 2.e3 g6 3.Bd3 Bg7 4.Nd2 controlling the e4 square 4...00 5.c3 d5 6.f4 the Stonewall Attack 6...b6 7.Ngf3 c5 [or 7...Bb7] 8.0-0 c4 [any of the following are better 8...Qc7; 8...Nbd7; 8...Nc6; 8...Bb7] 9.Bc2 e6 10.Ne5 Nbd7 11.Ndf3 Nxe5 12.Nxe5 [12.fxe5 is also good] 12...Nd7 13.Rf3 Nxe5 14.fxe5 Bd7? [I prefer these moves: 14...f6; 14...f5; 14...Bb7] 15.e4! Bc6 16.exd5 exd5? [16...Bxd5; 16...Qxd5 with an x-ray threat of mate on g2] 17.Rh3 [17.Qe1] 17...h5?! [17...Qe7] 18.Rxh5!? [a speculative rook sacrifice] 18...gxh5= 19.Qxh5 Be8?? [19...f5! 20.exf6 Rxf6 21.Bg5=] 20.Qh7# White wins by checkmate. 1-0 [Game notes by Torning]

71 – Tom 4.b3 Bg7 5.Bb2 0-0 When I go through a period of poor play, I sometimes resort to offbeat openings such as the Bird-Larsen Attack or the London System. Celebrate Recovery is a program that helps people deal with past failures and future fears. I have had a lot of both. I am not alone. A friend of mine gave me a paper that outlined the following famous failures: Albert Einstein: teacher said he would not amount to much. Michael Jordan: cut from his high school basketball team. Walt Disney: fired from a newspaper; he lacked imagination. Steve Jobs: removed from the computer company he started. Oprah Winfrey: demoted because she wasn't fit for television. The Beatles: rejected since they had no future in show business. All of these people later succeeded when they would not give up! Against Joe D. Tom in the 1989 USCF Golden Knights Postal Chess Tournament, my Bird's Opening 4.b3 game gradually drifted from equal to inferior. It proved the old Tal adage that if the position is equal, Black is better. About this time in my career, I was facing many reverses. So I dodged my favored BDG and 1.e4 openings for the quiet Bird. Alas, it was too quiet. I fell asleep and was rudely awoken by Mr. Tom's good play. Sawyer (1981) - Tom (2108), corr USCF 89NS48, 01.04.1992 begins 1.f4 d5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.e3 g6 4.b3 Bg7 5.Bb2 0-0 6.Be2 c5 7.0-0 Nc6 8.Ne5 Bd7 [8...Qc7=] 9.Bf3 Qc8 10.Nc3 Be6 11.Ne2 Nxe5 12.Bxe5 Bg4 13.Ng3 Qd7 14.Bxg4 Nxg4 15.Bxg7 Kxg7 16.f5 Nf6 17.d3 e6 18.fxg6 fxg6 19.Qe2 e5 20.e4 [20.h3=] 20...dxe4 21.Nxe4 Nxe4 22.Qxe4 Qd4+ 23.Qxd4 Rxf1+ 24.Rxf1 cxd4 25.Rf2 Rc8 26.Kf1 [26.g4=] 26...b5 27.Ke1 Rc6 28.Kd2 Ra6 29.Re2 [Black might struggle to make progress after 29.g4! Rxa2 30.g5 Ra6 31.h4=] 29...Kf6 30.Rf2+ Ke7 31.Re2 Ke6 32.Kc1 Rxa2 33.Kb1 Ra6 34.Kb2 Rc6 35.Ka3 [35.Rf2=/+ would have presented Black

with more technical problems to convert the advantage of an extra backward pawn.] 35...a5 36.Kb2 Rc7-/+ 0-1

72 – Schuler 4.b3 Bg7 5.Bb2 0-0 How important is a space advantage in chess? Is it better to control five ranks than three ranks? Of course. But a space advantage is only good if you can use the extra squares to accomplish important strategical and tactical goals. If the position becomes blocked, the space is useless. My Bird's Opening against Rich Schuler was marked by two pawn advances. I hoped moves 18.g5 and 21.c5 would cramp my opponent. In reality they simplified and blocked the position to the point that White could not win without a lot of help from Black. For five years I entered every postal tournament APCT offered. Twice I met Rich Schuler in the same section. Schuler played well both times. Our other game was an Orthodox Queens Gambit Declined. Sawyer (2100) - Schuler (1786), corr APCT, 1982 begins 1.f4 d5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.e3 g6 4.b3 Bg7 5.Bb2 0-0 6.Be2 Bg4 7.0-0 Nbd7 8.h3 Bxf3 9.Bxf3 c6 10.c4 e6 11.Qc2 Ne8 12.Bxg7 [12.Nc3= is a more active move.] 12...Nxg7 13.d4 Nf6 [13...Rc8 14.Qf2 Nf5= and Black has a comfortable game.] 14.Nc3 Re8 15.g4 Nd7 16.Rad1 Qh4 17.Bg2 f5 18.g5 [18.Qf2 Qxf2+ 19.Kxf2 Nf6=] 18...h6! 19.gxh6 Qxh6 20.Qf2 Nf6 21.c5 [21.Qg3=] 21...Ne4 [21...Kf7! prepares for a further kingside attack. For example 22.Rde1 g5 23.fxg5 Qxg5 24.Ne2 Rh8=/+] 22.Qc2 Nxc3 23.Qxc3 Kf7 24.Kf2 Qh4+ 25.Ke2 Nh5 26.Qe1 Qxe1+ 27.Rfxe1 Ng3+ 28.Kf2 Ne4+ 29.Bxe4 dxe4 30.Rg1 Rh8 31.Rg3 Rh6 32.Rdg1 Rah8 33.R1g2 Rxh3 34.Rxg6 R3h7 35.Ke2 1/2-1/2

73 – Mussio 4.b3 Bg7 5.Bb2 0-0 I played John Mussio one game. We lived only 200 miles apart in Pennsylvania, so that game probably moved along quickly, for postal chess. The Tribune-Democrat notes that Dr. John August Mussio passed away in 2009 at the age of 72. I quote from their note: "Dr. Mussio and his family moved to Johnstown, where he practiced medicine for 25 years. ...avid photographer, loved opera, classical music and a good game of chess." Our Bird's Opening had opposing fianchettoes with 4.b3 Bg7 5.Bb2. A good set up Soltis suggested in his Bird-Larsen book was to play Bb2, Bd3, Nc3, and Nce2 intending Ng3 for a kingside attack. My moves took a different and slower approach. When Dr. John Mussio captured on e5, I mixed things up with 9.fxe5!? White built up a crushing attack. Mussio had one chance to reverse things on move 19, but he missed it. Black resigned just as I was about to win more material or force checkmate. Sawyer (2000) - Mussio (1702), corr APCT 1985 begins 1.f4 d5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.e3 g6 4.b3 Bg7 5.Bb2 0-0 6.Be2 c5 7.0-0 Nc6 [7...Bf5=] 8.Ne5 Nxe5 9.fxe5!? [9.Bxe5=] 9...Ne4 10.Bf3 [10.d3 Nd6 11.Qd2 Nf5 12.g4 Nh6 13.h3=] 10...Nd6 11.Bxd5 e6 12.Bf3 Nf5 [12...Qg5!=] 13.Qe2 Rb8 14.a4 b6 15.Na3 a6 16.Rad1 Qc7 17.d4 [17.g4! Nh4 18.Nc4+/-] 17...cxd4 [17...Bh6 18.Rd3+/=] 18.exd4 Bh6 19.Bc1? [White is up a pawn and strong with 19.c4+/-] 19...Bg7? [Black had his shot right here: 19...Bxc1! 20.Rxc1 Nxd4 21.Qe3 Nf5=/+] 20.c4 Rd8 21.Nc2 Bb7 22.g4 Ne7 23.Qf2 Nc6 24.Bg5 Rd7 25.Qe3 Rf8 26.Bf6 Rc8 27.Rd2 Na5 28.Bxb7 Qxb7 29.h4 [29.Rf3!+-] 29...Rdc7 30.h5[30.Bxg7 Kxg7 31.Rdf2+-] 30...Nc6 [30...Nxb3 31.Qxb3+/-] 31.Rh2 [The most accurate finish would be 31.Bxg7 Kxg7 32.Qf4+-] 1-0

74 – Wood 4.b3 Bg7 5.Bb2 c5 When you play Bird's Opening your targets revolve around the long dark diagonal. If you fianchetto a bishop on that line you can find yourself challenged when your opponent does the same! Martin Wood from England in the United Kingdom met my Birds Opening in this manner. Martin W. Wood reached a peak ICCF rating of 2392 in 1993. My own rating leveled off at 2157 after 65 international games. We played 30 years ago long before chess engines were of any significant positive use. Mostly our opening led to equal chances in this correspondence tournament. I made an inaccuracy on move 16. Black missed a good chance to punish me on move 18. Then we drifted to a draw. Sawyer - Wood, corr ICCF 1985 begins 1.f4 Nf6 2.Nf3 g6 3.b3 Bg7 4.Bb2 0-0 5.e3 c5 6.Be2 b6 7.0-0 Bb7 8.Qe1 d5 9.Ne5 Nfd7 [9...Nc6 10.Bf3=] 10.Bf3 [10.d4 Nc6 11.Nxc6 Bxc6 12.Nd2=] 10...Nxe5 11.fxe5 Nc6 12.d4 Ba6 13.c4 e6 14.Rf2 [14.Na3=] 14...Rc8 15.cxd5 exd5 16.Be2? [16.Rd2=] 16...Bxe2 17.Qxe2 cxd4 18.exd4 Qd7 [18...f6! 19.Nd2 fxe5 20.Rxf8+ Qxf8 21.dxe5 Qc5+ 22.Kf1 d4=/+] 19.Nd2 Qe6 20.Nf3 f6 21.exf6 [21.Qd2 fxe5 22.dxe5 Rcd8 23.Rc1=] 21...Qxf6 22.Raf1 Rce8 23.Qb5 Qe6 24.Kh1 Bh6 25.Bc1 Bxc1 26.Rxc1 Rc8 27.Rfc2 Ne7 28.Re1 1/2-1/2

75 – Peeples 4.Be2 Bg7 5.0-0 c5 It’s a race. How fast can you bring out your pieces? In this Bird’s Opening I felt I was running uphill as White. Objectively I had good moves. I found a lot of them but not enough of them. The bottom line was my opponent Roger Peeples played very well. After 1.f4 d5 2.Nf3 g6 3.e3 Bg7, I could not play 4.b3. Therefore I went with the modest 4.Be2. Here 7.Nc3 would have been better. My pieces were cramped. Black opened the center with 10…e5! He attacked my kingside. My plan to extricate myself was excruciatingly slow. Black came crashing through and smashing me flat. I could not avoid material loss. When it was over, I wished that I had played his moves. Roger Peeples played a beautiful game. It was just the type of win that I would enjoy if I were Black against the Bird. We played another postal game four years later. That time I managed to win as White in a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit in 19 moves. Sawyer (2100) - Peeples (2151), corr APCT 1982 begins 1.f4 d5 2.Nf3 g6 3.e3 Bg7 4.Be2 Nf6 5.0-0 c5 6.d3 0-0 7.a4 [7.Nc3=] 7...Nc6 8.Ne5 [8.Qe1 Bf5=/+] 8...Nd7 [8...Qd6!=/+] 9.Nxd7 [9.Nxc6! bxc6 10.Nd2=] 9...Bxd7 10.Qe1 [10.Bf3!?; 10.Nc3!?] 10...e5! 11.fxe5 Bxe5 12.Nc3 [12.c3 Qe7=/+] 12...Be6 [12...Nb4-/+] 13.Bd2 d4 14.Nd1 Qd6 15.g3 Bh3 16.Rf2 f5 17.Bf1 Bg4 18.Be2 Bg7 19.Bxg4 fxg4 20.e4 Qe7 21.b3 Ne5 22.Kg2 Nf3 23.Qe2 Rf7 24.Nb2 Be5 25.Nc4 Bc7 26.Raf1 h5 27.Be1 h4 28.Nd2? [28.Rxf3 gxf3+ 29.Rxf3 Rxf3 30.Qxf3 Rf8-/+] 28...hxg3 29.hxg3 Bxg3 0-1

76 – Cummins 4.Be2 Bg7 5.d4 Before I took up the BDG, I played the BDF, the BLD or the BAD. Before I took up the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit, I played the Bird, Dutch and French, the Bird, Latvian Gambit and Dutch, or the Bird's Opening, Alekhine and Dutch Defence. Robert Cummins chose a Gruenfeld Defence set-up vs my Birds Opening Stonewall. This is in effect a main line Dutch Defence in reverse. The opening reaches positions that give equal chances, but that does not mean the games are going to be drawn. Any creative and energetic player will have good chances to win. In the 1970s and 1980s, I played the Bird's Opening just before I dropped out of playing rated chess games for a while. Here Black offered to repeat moves, I was all too happy to comply. By 1988 I returned to active chess through the exciting world of the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit. Sawyer (2000) - Cummins (1812), corr APCT 1985 begins 1.f4 g6 2.Nf3 Bg7 3.e3 c5 4.Be2 Nc6 5.d4 d5 6.c3 b6 7.0-0 Nf6 8.Ne5 Qc7 9.Nd2 [9.Bb5 Bb7 10.Qa4 Rc8 11.Qxa7=] 9...0-0 10.Qe1 Ne4 11.Qh4 [11.Nxe4 dxe4 12.b3=] 11...Bf6 [11...Nd6! 12.Re1 Nf5=/+] 12.Qh6 [12.Qe1=] 12...Bg7 [12...Nd6! 13.g4 Bg7 14.Qh4 f6-/+] 13.Qh4 Bf6 14.Qh6 1/2-1/2

77 – Chaney 5.0-0 0-0 6.Ne5 Ronald L Chaney and I contested games in many openings, beating each other several times. Here he begins 1.f4. This Bird’s Opening started out slowly in the center with 3.e3 and 9.d3. White expanded on the queenside with 7.c4, 10.d4 and 11.b4. His 13.Ba3 turned out to be a powerful piece. White kept the position dynamic with lots of tension between pawns and pieces. Chaney was able to pick off a pawn with 18.Bxe6! If Black recaptured, he would get mated quickly. I tried to wiggle out of it. The more I squirmed, the stronger his forces became. Lines and lanes opened up. White had a bishop and queen on active squares. His doubled rooks on the f-file were too strong. Ron Chaney’s army could not be stopped. I pinned his queen. He checkmated my king. Chaney (1970) - Sawyer (1960), corr APCT, 1995 begins 1.f4 d5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.e3 g6 4.Be2 Bg7 5.0-0 0-0 6.Ne5 Nbd7 7.c4 c6 8.Nc3 e6 9.d3 Qc7 10.d4 b6 11.b4 a5 12.b5 c5 13.Ba3 Rd8 14.Qb3 [14.Nc6=] 14...cxd4 15.exd4 Bb7 16.Rac1 dxc4 17.Bxc4 Rac8 [17...Nxe5 18.fxe5 Rxd4 19.exf6 Bh6=] 18.Bxe6 Nxe5 19.fxe5 fxe6 20.Qxe6+ [20.exf6!+-] 20...Qf7 21.Qxb6 Bh6 22.Rxf6 Be3+ [22...Qc4 23.Rc2+/=] 23.Kh1 Qc4 [23...Bxd4 24.Qxd8+ Rxd8 25.Rxf7 Kxf7 26.Rd1+/-] 24.Rcf1 [24.Be7!+-] 24...Bxg2+ 25.Kxg2 Bxd4 26.Rxg6+ hxg6 27.Qxg6+ Kh8 28.Rf5 Rg8 29.Rh5# 1-0

78 – Steiner 5.0-0 0-0 6.d3 b6 Bird's Opening victories often follow a kingside attack. The move 1.f4 is a good start. White must keep going to achieve success. The f4 pawn controls e5, protects Ng5, opens up a diagonal for Qe1-Qh4, and threatens a future f4f5. Tim Steiner played a nice Bird's Opening against me in a 1993 postal game. I chose a Gruenfeld type set-up as Black by combining the moves d5, Nf6 and g6. This game looked like a Dutch Defence Classical Variation in reverse. Black double rooks on the open d-file. I made threats in the center and on the queenside. However, White did have a shot when he got two f-pawns. He planted one pawn on f6. If he had played 25.f5, the combined f-pawn threats and the open diagonal to h6 would have given White some winning chances. That missed opportunity meant Black stood better. There's an old saying about killing two birds with one stone. My final move threatened to kill two pawns with one queen. That was enough for my Bird buddy Tim Steiner. Steiner (1803) - Sawyer (2003), corr APCT Q-139, 1993 begins 1.f4 d5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.e3 g6 4.Be2 Bg7 5.0-0 0-0 6.d3 b6 [The main continuation here is 6...c5 7.Nc3 d4 (7...Nc6 8.Ne5=) 8.Ne4 Qb6 9.Nxf6+ exf6 10.e4 f5=] 7.Nc3 Bb7 8.Qe1 c5 9.Bd1 Nc6 10.e4 dxe4 [10...d4 11.Nb1 Ne8=] 11.dxe4 Nd4 12.e5 Nd5 13.Nxd5 Qxd5 14.c3 Nf5 15.Bc2 e6 16.Qf2 Rad8 17.Re1 Qc6 18.Nd2 Rd7 19.Ne4 Rfd8 20.a4 Ba6?! [20...a5!=] 21.g4 Ne7 22.Nf6+ Bxf6 23.exf6 Nc8 24.Be4 Qc7 25.Be3? [25.f5! Nd6 26.fxe6 Nxe4 27.exd7 Bb7 28.Bh6+/=] 25...Bb7 26.Bf3 Bxf3 27.Qxf3 Nd6 28.b4 cxb4 29.cxb4 Qc3 0-1

79 – Coon5.0-0 0-0 6.d3 c5 Edmund Coon and I were paired together for two games. These games were played simultaneously on our weekly postcards. I played Bird's Opening as White and the Caro-Kann Defence as Black. I was the higher rated player, but Edmund Coon played well in both games for quite a while. As White chose the Classical Dutch Defence reversed approach. I posted a knight on e5. This was replaced by a White pawn when knights were exchanged. Black had the right idea to challenge my e5 with 11…f6. It seems he had the better position. After some tactics, the center was wide open. Black's knight made continual threats. Then I left all my queenside pawns unguarded so I could get a rook on the seventh rank. Soon I had two White rooks doubled on the seventh rank with Black's king pinned in the corner. It was over. He resigned both games. In the other he was in danger in a rook and pawn ending. Sawyer (2100) - Coon (1429), corr APCT 1982 begins 1.f4 d5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.e3 g6 4.Be2 Bg7 5.0-0 0-0 6.d3 [6.d4=] 6...c5 7.Qe1 Nc6 8.a4 [8.Nc3 is the most popular and most successful move here: 8...d4 9.Nd1 dxe3 10.Nxe3 Nd5 11.Nxd5 Qxd5 12.c3=] 8...Re8 9.Ne5 Nxe5 [9...Qc7!=/+] 10.fxe5 Nd7 11.d4 f6 12.exf6 Bxf6?! [12...exf6!? 13.Nc3 f5 14.Nxd5 cxd4 15.Kh1=] 13.Nc3 cxd4 14.Nxd5 Bg7 15.exd4 e6 [Or 15...Bxd4+ 16.Be3+/-] 16.Ne3 Bxd4 17.c3 Bg7 18.Kh1 [Better is 18.Ng4!+/-] 18...Nc5 19.Bc4 Nd3 20.Qe2 Ne5 21.Bb5 Bd7 22.Bxd7 Qxd7 23.Ng4 Qd3 24.Qxd3 Nxd3 25.Nh6+ Bxh6 26.Bxh6 Nxb2 27.Rab1 Nxa4? [27...Nc4

28.Rxb7+/=] 28.Rxb7 Red8 [Or 28...Reb8 29.Rc7+-] 29.h3 Nc5 30.Rg7+ Kh8 31.Rff7 1-0

80 – Davies 5.0-0 0-0 6.d3 c5 Martin Davies played a very direct line of development against my Bird's Opening. Black started with a Gruenfeld type set-up Nf6, g6, and d5. Then he played 9...e5!? Suddenly all his pieces benefited from the open lines. Objectively White had a playable game, but Black's pieces had more scope and effective open lines. My 14th move Bd2 underestimated the power of the reply 14.Ne4! This set off a string of tactical moves and combinations. Davies outplayed me in the fireworks. In the notes is a short draw I had against Walter Wittmann in the same line. The Davies games shows that even if the opening offers level chances, you still have to play well to avoid losing. Martin Davies showed great energy in this game. Sawyer - Davies (2055), corr Cat-X 1996 begins 1.f4 Nf6 2.Nf3 c5 3.e3 g6 4.Be2 Bg7 5.0-0 0-0 6.d3 d5 7.Qe1 [7.Ne5!=] 7...Nc6 8.Nc3 [8.Qh4!? b6 9.Nbd2 Ba6 10.Ne5 Nxe5 11.fxe5 Nd7 12.e6 fxe6 13.Nf3 e5 (13...Qc7 14.Qxe7 Rae8 15.Qh4 e5=/+) 14.e4 dxe4 15.Qxe4 Nf6 16.Qxe5 Qd7 (16...Qd6=) 17.Ng5 Nd5 18.Qe6+ Qxe6 19.Rxf8+ Rxf8 20.Nxe6 Bd4+ 21.Nxd4 cxd4+/= 1/2-1/2 Sawyer-Wittmann, corr ICCF 1983] 8...Re8 [8...d4 9.Nd1 dxe3 10.Nxe3 Nd5 11.Nxd5 Qxd5 12.c3 Bf5 13.Qf2 Rad8 14.Rd1=] 9.Qh4 [9.e4! d4 10.Nd1 Nb4 11.Qd2 Qb6 12.a3 Nc6 13.Qe1=] 9...e5!? [9...d4=+] 10.fxe5 Nxe5 11.Nxe5 Rxe5 12.Bf3 Bf5 13.Kh1 Re8 14.Bd2? [14.Qf4!=] 14...Ne4! 15.Qxd8 Raxd8 16.Rad1 Nxd2 17.Rxd2 Rxe3 18.Nxd5 [18.g4 Be6-/+] 18...Rxf3 19.Rxf3 Rxd5 20.h3 c4 21.g4 Be4 22.dxe4 Rxd2 23.b3 c3 0-1

Book 10: Chapter 4 – Dutch without 1.d4 1.g3, 1.b3, 1.b4 The Dutch Defence 1...f5 can be played vs 1.g3, 1.b3, and 1.b4.

81 – Goble 1.g3 f5 2.Nc3 Nf6 Dale Goble played an original King's Fianchetto with 1.g3. His play was unusual. It appears that White had a change of mind. First he began with 1.g3, but a handful of moves later he played 6.g4. Sometimes it makes perfect sense to advance the g-pawn one square and then two. Consider 2… g6 Kings Indian Defence lines when Black chases a Bg5 with h6 and g5 followed by Nh5. I did not immediately grab the center by 1...e5 or 1...d5. I angled for a Dutch with 1…f5. When White made his extra pawn advance he lost material. I am not sure if he meant to sacrifice the pawn, but it happened. White fought on gamely. Black whittled down the forces. Each exchange brought White nothing but more trouble. I missed the strongest continuations, but my tactics were good enough to win. One curious things about this game is that I had not yet castled when the game ended. Goble (1500) - Sawyer (2100), corr APCT 1982 begins 1.g3 f5 2.Nc3 [2.c4 English Opening] 2...Nf6 3.Bg2 g6 4.e4 [4.d4 Dutch Defence] 4...d6 [4...Nxe4 5.Nxe4 fxe4 6.Bxe4 d5 7.Bg2 Nc6=] 5.f3 [5.exf5 gxf5 (5...Bxf5? 6.Bxb7+/-; 5...Nc6!? 6.fxg6+/=) 6.d4+/-] 5...Bg7 6.g4? [White sacrifices a pawn. Better would be 6.d4 0-0 7.e5 Nfd7 8.f4=] 6...fxg4 7.h3 [7.d4 0-0-/+] 7...gxh3 [I wanted a passed h-pawn. Maybe even better to weaken White's center with 7...gxf3! 8.Nxf3 c5 9.d4 cxd4 10.Qxd4 Nc6-/+] 8.Bxh3 [8.Nxh3 Nh5 9.d4 Nc6 10.Ne2 e5=/+] 8...c5 9.Bg2 Nc6 10.Nd5 [10.d3 d5-/+] 10...Be6 [I missed the combination 10...Nxd5! 11.exd5 Nb4 12.f4 Bf5 13.d3 Qa5 14.Bd2 Bxb2 15.Rb1 Qxa2-+] 11.Nf4 Bf7 12.b3 Nd7 [I should have played 12...Nh5! 13.d4 Nxf4 14.Bxf4 Nxd4-+] 13.c3 Nb6 14.Nfe2 [14.Nge2 e5 15.Nh3 Qe7 16.d3 h6-/+] 14...e5 15.d4 [15.d3!? Qe7-/+] 15...exd4 16.cxd4 Nxd4 17.Bb2 [Or 17.Rb1 Nxe2 18.Nxe2 d5 19.0-0 0-0-

+] 17...Nxf3+ 18.Nxf3 Bxb2 19.Rb1 Be5 20.Nxe5 dxe5 21.0-0 Qe7 22.Ng3 Nd7 0-1

82 – De Santis 1.b3 f5 2.Bb2 e6 Flank Openings like Larsen's 1.b3 only begin the chess game on the side. Good players strike quickly in the center. White saddled Black with isolated doubled f-pawns after 4.exf5 and 6.Bxf6! One of the pawns fell in Alessio De Santis vs Wolfgang Fiedler. De Santis (2223) - Fiedler (2006), 34th ChessOrg Open Bad Woerishofen GER (1.19), 23.02.2018 begins 1.b3 f5 2.Bb2 e6 [2...Nf6 3.Bxf6!? exf6=] 3.e4 Nf6 4.exf5 [4.e5!?+/=] 4...exf5 5.Qe2+ Qe7 [5...Kf7!? 6.Nf3 Nc6 7.Ng5+ Kg8 8.Nc3 h6 9.Nf3 Kh7 10.0-0-0 Bb4=] 6.Bxf6! gxf6 7.Nc3 c6 8.0-0-0 d5 9.Re1 Qxe2 10.Ngxe2 Bc5 11.f4 [11.Nd1+/=] 11...Kd8 12.d4 Bd6 13.g3 Nd7 14.Bh3 Nf8 15.Nd1 Ng6 16.Ne3 Ne7 17.Ng1 Bb4 [17...h5=] 18.Rd1 a5 19.Kb2 b6 [19...Re8 20.c3+/=] 20.a3 Bd6 21.Nf3 h5 22.Nh4 Bd7 23.Rhe1 Kc7 24.Nexf5 Nxf5 25.Bxf5 Rae8 26.c3 b5 27.b4 axb4 28.axb4 Ra8 29.Ra1 Rxa1 30.Rxa1 Bxf5 31.Nxf5 Re8 [31...Kd7 32.Ra7+ Bc7 33.Kc2 Kc8 34.Kd3+/-] 32.Ra7+ Kb6 33.Rh7 [Or 33.Rb7+!+-] 1-0

83 – Sedlak 1.b3 f5 2.Bb2 Nf6 Black played a Dutch against 1.b3. White pushed 7 pawns by move 13. Black castled early. White kept his king in the center. Wide open play followed. Black won a piece and forced a queen swap into a winning endgame in Jovan Milovic vs Nikola Sedlak. Milovic (2301) - Sedlak (2547), TCh-MNE Premier 2017 Canj MNE (1.3), 23.09.2017 begins 1.b3 f5 2.Bb2 Nf6 3.e3 [3.Nf3 e6=] 3...e6 4.Ne2 d6 [4...d5=] 5.d4 Be7 6.Nf4 0-0 7.Nd2 c6 8.Bd3 a5 9.h3 Na6 10.a3 Nc7 11.g4 Nfd5 12.Ng2 b5 13.c4 bxc4 14.bxc4 Nf6 15.Nf3 Ne4 16.Qc2 Rb8 17.Rb1 Bd7 18.gxf5?! [18.Nf4=] 18...exf5 19.d5 cxd5 20.Nf4 Bf6 [20...dxc4 21.Bxc4+ Kh8=/+] 21.Nd4 [21.cxd5=] 21...Nc5 22.cxd5 Be5 23.Nc6 Bxc6 24.dxc6 Qe8 [24...Bxf4 25.exf4 Qe8+ 26.Be2 Qxc6-/+ would leave White's position in shambles.] 25.Bxe5 Rxb1+ 26.Qxb1 dxe5 27.Bc4+ [White missed 27.Qb6!=] 27...Kh8 28.Qb6 exf4 29.Qxc5 Rf6 30.Be2 Rxc6 31.Qxf5 Rc1+ 32.Bd1 Qd8! [The pinned bishop leaves White in deep

trouble.] 33.Ke2 [33.Qg4 Nd5-/+] 33...Nd5 34.Bc2 Nc3+ 35.Kf3 Qa8+ 36.Kxf4 Ne2+ 37.Kg4 [37.Ke5 Qb8+ 38.Ke4 Rxh1-+] 37...Rxc2 38.Qxc2 Qg2+ 39.Kh5 Ng3+ [39...Qf3+ 40.Kh4 Qxf2+!-+] 40.Kh4 g5+ 41.Kxg5 Nxh1+ 42.Kf6 Qxf2+ 43.Qxf2 Nxf2 0-1

84 – Krystosek 1.b4 d6 2.Bb2 f5 Ted Krystosek and I played four postal chess games in 1982. Amazingly all of them were Flank Openings. As White I played an English Opening with 1.c4 and the Birds Opening with 1.f4. As White Ted Krystosek also played a Birds Openings with 1.f4 and this Polish Opening with 1.b4. Krystosek chose reasonable moves that fit the character of the opening. His king was safely castled. His forces aimed for a queenside attack. In this game Black played methodically and attacked very slowly. Eventually I woke up. I benefitted from White’s mistake on move 15. This was the longest game Krystosek and I played. Krystosek (1569) - Sawyer (2100), corr APCT 1982 begins 1.b4 d6 2.Bb2 f5 3.e3 Nf6 4.c4 e6 [4...e5 is a bolder and better move.] 5.Nf3 Be7 6.Be2 00 7.0-0 Qe8 8.Na3 [8.Qb3 Qg6 9.Nc3 a6 10.d4 Ne4 11.c5+/= gives White active play on the queenside.] 8...b6 9.d4 Bb7 10.Ng5 [10.Nb5!?] 10...Bd8 11.f4 [11.Nb5 h6 12.Nh3 e5=] 11...h6 12.Nh3 Nbd7 13.Nf2 Qg6 14.g3 [14.Bf3 Bxf3 15.Qxf3 Ne4 16.Nxe4 fxe4 17.Qe2=] 14...h5 15.Nh3? [15.Bf3=] 15...h4 16.Ng5 hxg3 17.hxg3 Ne4 18.Bh5 Qh6 19.Nxe4 Bxe4 20.Bc3? [20.Qe2 Nf6 21.Bf3 Bxf3 22.Qxf3 Ng4 23.Qg2 a5 24.b5 Kf7 25.Rfe1 Rh8 26.Re2 Bf6-/+] 20...Nf6 21.Bf3 Ng4 22.Qe2 d5 23.Bxg4 [23.cxd5 Bxf3 24.Rxf3 exd5 25.Rff1 Kf7-+] 23...fxg4 24.cxd5 Qh1+ 25.Kf2 Qg2+ 26.Ke1 Qxg3+ 27.Kd2 Bf3 28.Qe1 Qh3 29.dxe6 [Sacrificing the Exchange does not stop Black's attack. 29.Rxf3 gxf3 30.dxe6 Qg2+ 31.Kd3 Qg6+ 32.Kd2 c5-+] 29...Bh4 30.Rf2 Bxf2 31.Qxf2 a6 [Stronger would have been 31...Rae8 32.Rg1 Rxe6-+] 32.b5 a5 33.Bb2 [33.Nc4 Bd5 34.Ne5 g3-+] 33...Bd5 34.Qe2 Bxe6 35.Nc2 Rf5 36.a4 Rh5 37.e4 Re8 38.Ra3 Qh1 0-1

85 – Gilbert 1.b4 f5 2.Bb2 e6 John Gilbert and I played a Polish Opening 1.b4. I defended with the Classical Dutch Defence set-up 1...f5 and 2...e6. We were already playing an APCT tournament game. I believe this was an extra game played for fun since we were already sending a postcard to each other once a week. Below White expanded on the queenside while Black mounted a winning kingside attack. Gilbert (1600) - Sawyer, corr 1977 begins 1.b4 f5 2.Bb2 e6 3.e3 Nf6 4.b5 [4.a3 a5 5.b5 d5=] 4...Bd6 5.c4 0-0 6.Nf3 b6 7.d4 Bb7 8.Be2 c5 9.0-0 Bc7 10.dxc5 bxc5 11.a4 d5 12.Ne5 Nbd7 13.f4 Nxe5 14.Bxe5 Bxe5 15.fxe5 Nd7 16.Nc3 Nxe5 17.cxd5 exd5 18.Qb3 Kh8 19.a5 d4 20.Rfd1 Qg5 21.Nd5 Rad8 [Black is winning after 21...Bxd5 22.Qxd5 Qxe3+ 23.Kh1 Rfd8-+] 22.Nf4 Ng6 0-1

86 – Carebello 1.b4 f5 2.Bb2 e6 Flank Opening players risk danger if they fail to occupy or attack the center early in the game. I had the White pieces in my first game, so I expected Black for the second round at the Hershey Action event. Nate Carebello played 1.b4. I naturally assumed that he played it regularly, since he was rated in the 1700s. The Polish or Sokolsky Opening has the advantage that usually both players are on their own by move six or so. Those who are successful with this opening as White aim for a relatively quick e4, d4 or c4. I chose the Dutch Defence which I played often. My pawn on f5 made an early e4 by White less likely. Carebello - Sawyer, Hershey PA 1990 begins 1.b4 f5 2.Bb2 e6 3.e3 Nf6 [Now that g7 is covered, Bxb4 is a real threat.] 4.b5 Be7 5.Be2 0-0 6.h4!? [White is dreaming of a kingside attack.] 6...d6 7.h5 Nbd7 8.Nf3 Qe8 9.Nd4?! [Going for e6 is tempting, but forcing Black to bring his lightsquared bishop into the game. 9.h6] 9...Nb6 10.Bf3 e5 11.Bxb7? [White sacrifices his bishop to help bring mine to a better diagonal. 11.Nb3

Qxb5-/+] 11...Bxb7 12.Ne6? [12.Nxf5 Bd8-+] 12...Qxb5 [Threat: Qxb2 and the queenside rook.] 13.Bc3 Rfc8 14.a4 Qd5 15.a5 Qxg2 [The attack on the kingside rook indicates that White's whole game is falling apart.] 16.Rf1 Bf3 17.Qc1 Nbd7 18.Na3 Ne4 19.Nb5? [Allowing mate in three.] 19...Ng3 20.d4 Qxf1+ 21.Kd2 Qe2# 0-1

1.Nf3 f5 The standard Dutch Defence begins 1.d4 f5. However the move 1…f5 is very playable against moves often transpose back to the Dutch. Here we consider 1.Nf3 f5 when White does not play d4 any time soon.

87 – Fontinha 2.e4 fxe4 3.Ng5 Haines develops a nice attack against Richard Fontinha in a Reti Dutch Defence Lisitzin Variation. Both sides had chances. Ray Haines writes: "I have played Richard in the past. He and his wife moved here from out of state a few years ago. He was a strong postal player in the past. He has not played for two years in our tournaments, but we were happy to have him back for this event." "I chose to play a Dutch Defense against him because of his move order. He chose to play a well-known gambit line. I again chose to play quickly to avoid time trouble. I missed the win of a pawn on move 20. I needed to play knight takes knight and would have picked up a pawn with a good game for me. He missed some better lines also and resulted in me winning." Fontinha (1747) - Haines, Houlton, ME (3), 19.09.2015 begins 1.Nf3 f5 2.e4 fxe4 3.Ng5 Nf6 [The alternative is 3...d5 4.d3 Nf6 5.dxe4 h6 6.Nf3 dxe4=] 4.d3 e5 [4...d5!] 5.dxe4 h6 6.Nh3 Nc6 [6...Bc5=/+] 7.Nd2 d6 [7...d5!=/+] 8.Be2 Be6 9.c3 Qd7 10.Ng1 Be7 11.Ngf3 0-0 12.Qc2 d5 13.Bb5 Bd6 14.0-0 Qf7 15.c4 Qg6 [15...Nb4-+] 16.Bxc6 bxc6 17.c5 Be7 18.Nxe5 Qh5 19.f4 [19.Nxc6+-] 19...dxe4 20.Nxe4 [20.b4=] 20...Bd5 [20...Nxe4-/+] 21.Nxf6+ [21.Ng3+-] 21...Rxf6 [21...Bxf6!=] 22.Be3 Re6 23.Bd4 Bf6 24.Rae1 Rae8 25.b3 [25.Re3!+-] 25...g5 26.g3? [26.Qf5=] 26...gxf4 27.gxf4 Bxe5 28.Rxe5 Qg4+ 29.Kf2 Qxf4+ 30.Ke1 Rxe5+ 31.Bxe5 Rxe5+ 32.Qe2 Qc1+ 33.Kf2 Qxc5+ 34.Ke1 Qc3+ 35.Kd1 Bxb3+ 36.axb3 Rd5+ 37.Qd3 Rxd3+ 38.Ke2 Qd2# 0-1

88 – Ofstad 3.Ng5 e5 4.d3 e3 Per Ofstad was born in 1934. Ofstad won the Norwegian Chess Championship in 1961. He had a long career with many games against notable grandmasters. Probably his most famous was a brilliancy that Ofstad won as White against Wolfgang Uhlmann in a French Defence Tarrasch Variation at Halle in 1963. Writing for the Huffington Post in 2013, Grandmaster Lubomir Kavalek called Per Ofstad “a talented attacker with a plethora of wild ideas”. Kavalek noted that he used one of Ofstad’s ideas to win vs Khodos in 1965. Per Ofstad played a Reti Lisitzin Gambit against me. This time I came up with my own “wild idea” in the novelty 6…Bc5!? The notes include another game against Otis Johnson, Jr. (“OJ”). Ofstad - Sawyer, corr ICCF, 1982 begins 1.Nf3 f5 2.e4 fxe4 3.Ng5 e5 4.d3 e3 [4...Nf6 5.dxe4 c6 6.Nc3 Bb4=] 5.Bxe3 Nc6 [5...d5 6.d4 exd4 7.Qxd4 Nc6 8.Qd3=] 6.c4 [6.g3 Nf6 7.Bg2 d5 8.c4 dxc4 9.Qa4 Bb4+ (9...h6! 10.Bxc6+ bxc6 11.Ne4 cxd3 12.Qxc6+ Bd7 13.Nxf6+ gxf6 14.Qe4 Kf7=) 10.Nc3 Bxc3+ 11.bxc3 Bd7? (11...h6=) 12.Qxc4 Qe7 13.Rb1 (13.Bc5!+wins at least a piece immediately.) 13...Ng4 14.Bd2+/- and 1-0 in 32. Johnson - Sawyer, corr APCT 1982] 6...Bc5!? [Here I dreamed up this original move. Even now 30 years later I have never seen anyone else play it. More normal would be 6...Nf6 7.Nc3 Nd4=] 7.Bxc5 Qxg5 8.Nc3 d6 [8...Nf6 9.Nb5 Kd8=] 9.Be3 Qg6 10.Be2 Nf6 [I did not dare play 10...Qxg2! 11.Bf3 Qh3 12.Rg1 g6 13.Nd5 Qd7= but maybe I should have played this.] 11.Nd5 Qf7 12.Nxf6+ Qxf6 13.0-0 0-0 14.Bf3 Nd4 15.Bxd4 exd4 16.b4 [16.Qb3!?] 16...c5 17.Rb1 Rb8 18.Be4 b6 19.Qh5 g6 [19...Bf5 20.Bxf5 Qxf5 21.Qxf5 Rxf5 22.Rfe1 cxb4 23.Rxb4 Kf7=] 20.Qh6 Bb7 21.f3 Rfd8 22.bxc5 dxc5 23.Rbe1 Rd7 24.Re2 Rf8 25.Rfe1 Qg7 [25...Qf4 26.Qh3+/=] 26.Qg5 Qf6 27.Qxf6 Rxf6 28.Bxb7 Rxb7 29.a4 Kf7 30.Re5 Rc6 31.Kf2 Rcc7 32.f4 Kg7 [I did not dare to swap rooks because after 32...Re7 33.Rxe7+ Rxe7 34.Rxe7+ Kxe7 35.g4+/- this materially equal pawn ending is probably a win for White.] 33.g4 Rf7 34.Kf3 Rbc7 35.h4 Rb7 36.h5 Rbc7 37.f5 gxf5 38.g5 Rc6 [38...Rf8 39.Kf4 Kf7 40.a5+/-]

39.Kf4 Rc8 40.Re8 Rxe8 41.Rxe8 Rb7 [Or 41...h6 42.g6 Rb7 43.Kxf5+-] 42.h6+ Kf7 43.Rh8 Ke6 44.g6 1-0

89 – Shannon 2.b4 d6 3.e3 e5 I loved playing in American Postal Chess Tournaments (APCT) run by Helen Warren. They had 1000 active players. I peeked in 1982. I was ranked 13th in the club. Often I was in the top 30. An interesting aspect of most correspondence chess ratings is they changed when each game finished. Postal chess was played at a pace of one move per week. Players typically had 20-30 games in progress at a time. Your opponent’s rating might easily go up or down 100 points. The tournaments tended to be class events where most opponents were rated close to each other at the beginning, but they may be far apart by the end. Paul Shannon and I played in APCT during about the same years. Our ratings were very close, whether they were going up or down. In APCT we played four times, each winning one. Here Paul played the Polish Opening vs my Dutch Defence. In the end it looked a lot like a Closed English Opening. Chances for most of this game were about even. Then at one point I won a pawn. Sadly for me, I got careless and blew the ending. Shannon - Sawyer, corr APCT 84R-20 corr APCT, 1984 begins 1.Nf3 f5 2.b4 d6 3.Bb2 e5 4.e3 Nf6 5.c4 c6 [The most popular continuation is the line: 5...Be7 6.d4 e4 7.Nfd2 d5 8.b5 c6 9.a4 0-0 10.Qb3 Be6 11.Nc3 Nbd7 12.Be2=] 6.Be2 g6 7.d3 Bg7 8.Qb3 Qe7 9.Nbd2 Be6 10.0-0 h6 11.Nh4 Kf7 12.f4 Ng4 13.Bxg4 Qxh4 14.Be2 [White can make use of the loose Black king with 14.Bh3! Nd7 15.fxe5 dxe5 16.e4+/-] 14...Nd7 15.fxe5 dxe5 16.d4 exd4 17.Rf4?! [Better is 17.Nf3 Qe7 18.exd4+/=] 17...Qe7 18.Bxd4 Rhe8 19.Qc3 Kg8 20.Rf2 Rad8 21.Rd1 c5 22.Bxg7 [22.bxc5 Nxc5 23.Bf3 b6=/+] 22...Qxg7 23.Qxg7+ Kxg7 24.a3 cxb4 25.axb4 Nb6 [The knight should be centralized to maximize threats. 25...Ne5!-/+] 26.Rff1-/+ [26.c5=] 26...Rd7 [26...Re7!-/+] 27.c5 Nd5 28.Bb5 Nxe3 29.Bxd7 Bxd7 30.Nc4 Nxd1 31.Rxd1 Re7 [The combination has net me an extra pawn, but White's advanced queenside pawns are a threat. Eventually I mishandled them.] 32.Nd6 Bc6 [32...b6! 33.Ra1 bxc5 34.bxc5 Bc6=/+]

33.b5 Be4 34.Ra1 Re5? [Black has good chances after 34...Kf6 35.Rxa7 Bd5 36.Kf2 Rd7 37.Ra4 Ke5 38.Nc4+ Bxc4 39.Rxc4 Kd5 40.c6 Rc7 41.Ra4 bxc6 42.b6 Rb7-/+] 35.c6+/- 1-0

90 – Schultz 2.g3 Nf6 3.d3 d6 Sgt. Schultz of Hogan's Heroes was one of the most lovable actors on television 45 years ago when I began playing chess. In 1938 John Banner of Vienna fled Adolf Hitler's National Socialism (German: "nationalsozialismus" or "Nazi" for short.) movement just prior to World War II. IMBd notes John Banner "survived the war playing the very villains who were murdering his family who had been left behind in Austria, all of whom perished in concentration camps." In real life, my own uncle was in a German Prisoner Of War camp. Our family heard nothing from him for much of the war, but my Uncle John did survive and returned home to enjoy the family reunion of Christmas 1945. War is hell, but people need to laugh. Twenty years after the war the Hogan's Heroes comedy was a huge hit. John Banner played Sergeant Hans Georg Schultz, a German soldier at the Stalag 13 prison. Schultz constantly found himself caught in the middle between his natural friendship toward prisoners and his need to follow orders from Nazi commanders. The 168 episodes provide Sgt. Schultz uttering many classic quotes, especially his "I see nothing" and "I know nothing" lines. My opponent in today's game is Roger Schultz, probably no connection to the mythical TV sergeant. I met Roger Schultz in the 1989 USCF Golden Knights Postal Chess Tournament Semi-Finals. That means we both played well enough earlier to qualify. Roger Schultz chose the Reti-Opening which begins 1.Nf3 without an early d4 or c4. My response was the Dutch Defence. Our brief war ended peacefully. Schultz (1895) - Sawyer (2020), corr USCF 89NS53, 10.03.1992 begins 1.Nf3 f5 2.g3 Nf6 3.d3 d6 4.Nbd2 e5 5.Bg2 Nc6 6.0-0 Be7 7.b3 0-0 8.Bb2 Qe8 9.Re1 Qh5 10.e3 Be6 [10...Bd7=] 11.c4 Rae8?! 12.d4 e4 13.d5 exf3 14.Nxf3 Bd7 15.dxc6 bxc6 16.Nd4 c5 [It was safer for Black to play

16...Qxd1 17.Raxd1 Ne4=] 17.Qxh5 Nxh5 18.Nc6 Bxc6 19.Bxc6 Rb8 20.e4 fxe4 21.Rxe4 Bf6 22.Bxf6 Nxf6 23.Re7 Rf7 24.Rae1 Rbf8 1/2-1/2

91 – Baffo 4.Bg2 g6 5.0-0 Bg7 Jeffrey Baffo provided me with a dozen examples of solid play in a variety of openings. Baffo was a master level postal player. He often beat me, but something very strange happened in this game. I won! We started with a Reti Opening which transposed to the English Opening on move six. Black selected the Dutch Defence set-up with 1...f5. On move 17 White's bishop goes into the corner. The game ends with a tactical flourish and a very nice attack on my part. For some reason I seem to score better when the position turns to wide open tactics. I believe our 12 games were played simultaneously, but I don’t remember for sure. Baffo (2254) - Sawyer (1999), corr USCF 95P139, 27.03.1996 begins 1.Nf3 f5 2.d3 d6 3.g3 Nf6 4.Bg2 g6 5.0-0 Bg7 6.c4 0-0 7.Nc3 e5 8.Rb1 a5 9.Bg5 [Far more popular is 9.a3 Nc6 10.b4 axb4 11.axb4=] 9...h6 10.Bd2 g5 11.e4 f4 12.Qb3 Kh7 [Nowadays I would be very tempted to play 12...g4 13.Nh4 f3=/+ hoping to drive the bishop into the corner, something that I do accomplish later.] 13.gxf4 exf4 14.Nd5? [White actually makes a rare correspondence chess mistake. 14.Nd4!=] 14...Nxd5 15.cxd5 g4 16.Ne1 f3 17.Bh1 Be5 18.Bc3 Bxh2+ 19.Kxh2 Qh4+ 20.Kg1 g3 21.fxg3 Qxg3+ 22.Bg2 f2+ 23.Rxf2 Qxf2+ 24.Kh1 Rf4 25.Nf3 Bh3 0-1

1.c4 f5 Many 1.d4 f5 games follow with 2.c4. White can play the moves in reverse order. Here we cover 1.c4 f5 without d4 by White.

92 – Jamison 2.e3 Nf6 3.g3 Be7 Larry Jamison played the English Opening 1.c4. He held back the pawn move d2-d4 for the opportunity to bust open the center later. Alexander Kotov in his book “Train Like A Grandmaster” calls this method of opening strategy the “coiled spring”. On pages 12-13 we read: “Sometimes grandmasters will decide to avoid the deeply studied book lines by using a method that reminds one of a coiled spring. They make just one pawn advance to the centre, fianchetto the bishops and allow the opponent to occupy the centre. The calm here is apparent since just one incautious pawn advance by Black and White's pieces will uncoil with great force and inflict damage on the enemy.” That is the plan. But if a coiled player never springs forth from his compact position, then he goes from being a threat to being a target. Given enough time, I mounted a winning attack. Jamison (1550) - Sawyer (2100), corr APCT 1981 begins 1.c4 f5 2.e3 Nf6 3.Nc3 e6 4.g3 Be7 5.Bg2 0-0 6.Nge2 Qe8 [6...d5!=] 7.b3 Nc6 [7...c6=] 8.00 d6 9.Bb2 a6 10.a3 Bd7 11.Rc1 g5 [11...Na5!] 12.h3 Qh5 13.f4 Kf7? [Not a good square for the Black king. 13...Rae8 14.Qc2+/=] 14.d4 Nd8 15.Rf2 [15.fxg5 Qxg5 16.e4+/-] 15...Bc6? [15...gxf4 16.Nxf4+/-] 16.d5 exd5 17.cxd5 [Spring forth! 17.fxg5 Qxg5 18.Nxd5+-] 17...Bd7 18.Nd4 Qg6 19.Nf3 [White is winning after 19.fxg5 Qxg5 20.Qd3 Kg8 21.Nxf5+-] 19...h6 20.Nh2 [Now is the time for White to open the game up with advantage. 20.fxg5 hxg5 21.e4+-] 20...Kg8 21.Rcc2 Nf7 22.Qd4 Rae8 23.Bc1 [23.Nf1+/=] 23...Nd8 [23...gxf4=/+] 24.Nf1 Rf7 25.Kh2 Bf8 26.Bh1 Rfe7 27.Bg2 Bg7 28.Qd2 Qh5 29.Kg1 Nf7 30.Qe2 Qg6 31.Qd2 Bc8 32.Kh2 Kh8 33.Re2 h5 34.Bb2 h4 35.Bf3? [35.gxh4! g4 36.hxg4=] 35...g4 36.hxg4 fxg4 37.Bh1 h3 38.a4 Bf5 39.Nd1 Bxc2 40.Qxc2 Qxc2

41.Rxc2 Nh5 42.Bxg7+ Kxg7 43.Re2 Nf6 44.b4 Nh6 45.Kg1 Ne4 46.Kh2 Kg6 47.Kg1 Kh5 48.Kh2 Ng8 49.Rc2 Ngf6 50.Bxe4 Nxe4 51.Rb2 c5 52.bxc5 dxc5 53.Rc2 Rd8 0-1

93 – Ferranti 2.g3 Nf6 3.Bg2 e6 I played only one section in the 1988 USCF Golden Knights: My opponent John Ferranti and I both lived in Pennsylvania. Since we were less than 200 miles apart, our game moved quickly. John was new to postal chess and had many questions. We carried on a lively and friendly conversation on the postcards. Ferranti played the English Opening as White and I tried the Dutch Classical as Black. He expanded on the queenside while I focused on the kingside mating attack. First Ferranti stood better. Then I was winning. Then it was even. Then I was lost. I stood much worse. I could play on, but I knew a trick about the USCF. My rating would not change if I was the first person to finish a game vs an opponent who did not yet have a rating. The unrated player got your rating + or - 400 points. My USCF Postal rating was 2124 at the time. My resignation gave John Ferranti a temporary rating of 2524; my rating did not move. In 1990, I met Ferranti in person at a tournament that I won in Hershey, Pennsylvania. John Ferranti turned out to be just as nice face to face as he was through the mail. Ferranti - Sawyer, corr USCF 88N300, 10.04.1989 begins 1.c4 [English Opening] 1...f5 [The Dutch Defence can be played vs anything except 1.e4 and 1.g4.] 2.g3 Nf6 3.Bg2 e6 4.Nf3 Be7 5.0-0 0-0 6.d3 [6.d4 transposes to the Dutch Defence proper.] 6...d6 [I choose a classical set-up. The Stonewall 6...d5 is more risky, as you might see from some other games.] 7.Nc3 Nc6 8.Rb1 Qe8 [Some prefer to throw in 8...a5 9.a3 Qe8 to slow down the queenside expansion.] 9.b4 Qh5 10.b5 Nd8 11.Be3 [Now we are out of the book/database. Play could also continue: 11.a4 Nf7 12.e4 e5+/= with a slight edge to White.] 11...Nf7 12.Qa4?! [Better is 12.h3 preventing Black's next move] 12...Ng4 13.Bxa7? Ng5!? [Now Black has a strong attack. 13...Bf6!-/+] 14.h4 d5?? [The old maxim is that play in the center is the best way to stop an attack on the wing. But I am stopping my own

attack?? I should have played 14...Nxf3+ 15.Bxf3 Bf6 16.Rfc1 Bd4 Attacking the king. 17.Bxd4 Rxa4-+ Picks off the queen.] 15.Nxg5 [15.cxd5! Nxf3+ 16.Bxf3+/-] 15...Bxg5 16.cxd5 f4 [If 16...Bxh4 17.gxh4 Qxh4 I still have play.] 17.Bf3 Be7? [Wrong way! 17...Bxh4!=] 18.dxe6 Bxe6 19.Qe4+- 1-0

94 – Brennar 3.Bg2 g6 4.Nf3 I played at a Penn State chess tournament on March 31, 1990. Penn State University is located in central Pennsylvania about 200 miles east of Pittsburgh and 200 miles west of Philadelphia. Penn State is not to be confused with University of Pennsylvania. Penn is an Ivy League school located in Philadelphia. Both schools are impressive in their own way. Generally the overall cost of going to Penn is about double what it cost to go to Penn State, especially as there was a big discount for students who live in Pennsylvania to go to Penn State. Anyway, here I was at University Park in State College enjoying the hospitality of Happy Valley. Round Two had me playing Black. My opponent was rated below my first round opponent, so it is likely he won or drew his first round game vs a higher rated opponent. My opponent is John Brennar who was rated 1592. The Dutch Defence with 1...f5 is a handy defensive system since it can be employed vs almost anything. This game started out as an English Opening. The result was determined by my kingside attack that suddenly netted me some material. It must have discouraged my opponent, because just as suddenly White resigned. There is no sense wearing oneself out with two more rounds to go that day. Brennar - Sawyer, Penn State 1990 begins 1.c4 f5 [The English Dutch, or Englutch, where the two armies don't touch much, until they get to know each other better.] 2.g3 Nf6 3.Nf3 g6 4.Bg2 Bg7 5.d3 [White intends to attack e4 instead of e5. The alternative 5.d4 d6 6.0-0 0-0 7.Nc3 is the main line of the Leningrad Dutch Defence.] 5...d6 6.0-0 0-0 7.Nc3 e5 8.e4 Nc6 9.Ne1 Kh8 10.f4 Qe8 11.Be3? Ng4 12.Bd2 exf4 13.Bxf4? [13.gxf4 fxe4 14.dxe4 Bd4+ 15.Kh1 Qd8 (15...Nf2+ 16.Rxf2 Bxf2 17.Nd5 Bb6 18.Bc3+ Kg8 19.Nf6+ Rxf6 20.Bxf6+/=) 16.Nf3 Ne3 17.Bxe3 Bxe3 18.f5 gxf5=/+] 13...Bd4+ 14.Kh1 Nf2+!? [Black wins the Exchange for a pawn.

Objectively there might be a stronger continuation, but White was apparently so discouraged at this point that he resigned. After 14...Nf2+, play could have continued 15.Rxf2 Bxf2 16.Bh6 with some compensation.] 0-1

95 – Haines 4.Nc3 Bg7 5.d3 d6 I have played chess against Harry Potter and Tommy Morrison. Ever play chess vs anyone whose real name was famous? My friend Ray Haines played Rick Perry in the first round at Houlton, Maine, the town where we went to buy groceries every Saturday 50 years ago. This Rick Perry was not the Governor of the great state of Texas. He was a high school player from Caribou. That is the very same town where I worked one winter more than 40 years ago. The game below was the typical first round Swiss system rating mismatch. Ray Haines is much higher rated, but Rick Perry is showing steady improvement. Rick Perry raised his rating from 101 to 1004 after 14 tournaments. Rick Perry did not play too badly. A characteristic of Rick's English Opening is that White plays 1.c4 without the Reti idea of an early Nf3, and with pawn to d3 instead of d4. Ray Haines mounted a Dutch Defence attack. White's big problem was being slow to bring his kingside knight into the game. White left the Nh3 too loose for too long. Black's technique is up to the task. Perry - Haines, Houlton ME (1), 30.05.2014 begins 1.c4 f5 2.g3 Nf6 3.Nc3 g6 4.Bg2 Bg7 5.d3 d6 6.Bg5 [It would be wise for White to first complete his kingside development. 6.Nf3 0-0 7.0-0=] 6...Nc6 7.b4 0-0 8.b5 Ne5 9.Nd5 Nxd5 10.Bxd5+ Kh8 11.d4 Nf7 12.Nh3? [12.Bxf7 Rxf7 13.Nf3 Qe8= and chances are still close to equal.] 12...Qe8 [12...f4! wins material after 13.Bxf7 Bxh3 14.Bd5 c6! since if 15.bxc6 bxc6 16.Bxc6 Qb6 17.Bxa8 Bxd4-+ Black has a strong mating attack.] 13.0-0 e6 14.Bf3 [Better is 14.Bg2 Nxg5 15.Nxg5 e5=/+] 14...e5 15.e3? f4 16.g4 e4 17.Re1 [White could try to get something for the bishop, but after 17.Bxe4 Qxe4 18.Bxf4 h5-+ Black's attack rolls on.] 17...exf3 18.exf4 Qd7 19.f5 Nxg5 [19...gxf5! is also very strong.] 20.Nxg5 gxf5 21.Qc2 Bf6 22.Qd2 Qg7 23.h4 h6 24.Nf7+ Rxf7 25.Re8+ Kh7 26.g5 hxg5 27.Kh2 g4 28.Kg3 Bxd4 29.Rh1 Be5+ [29...f4+!-+ leads to a forced mate, but when you are winning easily,

there is no need to complicate things unless you have lots of time and feel like calculating.] 30.Rxe5 Qxe5+ 31.Qf4 Qxf4+ 32.Kxf4 Bd7 33.Kg5 Rg8+ 34.Kf4 Re7 0-1

96 – Ward 5.d3 d6 6.e4 Nc6 The Dutch Defence is a universal system that can be played against virtually anything except 1.e4. Here against Leslie V. Ward in the 1989 USCF Golden Squires Postal Chess Tournament we reach what is a Closed English. This might also be called the Closed Sicilian reversed. In this English Opening, a fight breaks out on the f-file, but the position stays relatively closed. Gradually I picked off a couple pawns. When Ward resigned, he wrote: “Your two pawns in open files should be good enough to win without much trouble.” Yes, I completely agree. There was no sense in spending more money on postage for every move to drag out such a game. Ward (1792) - Sawyer (2013), corr USCF 89SS60, 01.04.1991 begins 1.c4 f5 2.g3 Nf6 3.Bg2 g6 4.Nc3 Bg7 5.d3 d6 6.e4 Nc6 [The most common line here is 6...e5 7.Nge2 Nc6 8.0-0 0-0 9.Nd5 Be6 10.Bg5 Qd7 11.Qd2=] 7.Nge2 0-0 8.h3 e5 9.0-0 Be6 10.Nd5 Ne7 11.Bg5 c6 12.Nxf6+ Bxf6 13.Bxf6 Rxf6 14.exf5 Nxf5 15.Nc3 Nd4 16.Ne4 Rf8 17.b3 Qe7 18.Rc1 Kg7 19.Rb1 h6 20.Rb2 Rf7 21.b4 Raf8 [21...Bf5=/+] 22.c5 Bd5 23.cxd6 Qe6 24.a3 Nb5 25.a4 Nxd6 26.b5 Nxe4 27.dxe4 [27.Bxe4 Qxh3 28.bxc6 bxc6=/+] 27...Bc4 28.Re1 cxb5 29.Rd2 [29.axb5 Qb6-/+ gaining time by hitting f2.] 29...Bb3 30.Rd6 Qc4 [Swapping queens is the strongest for Black with 30...Bxd1 31.Rxe6 Bxa4-+] 31.Qg4 Rf6 32.Rxf6 Rxf6 33.Qd7+ Rf7 34.Qxb5 Qd4 35.Re3 Bxa4 36.Qe2 [36.Qa5 b6-/+] 36...Rd7 37.f4 Qd1+ 0-1

Book 10: Chapter 5 – Dutch Rare Moves 1.d4 f5 We begin with rare second move lines in the Dutch after 1.d4 f5.

97 – Laird 2.b4 e6 3.a3 Nf6 In the year 1988 I was just returning to postal chess. It was USCF Golden Knights section: 88N300 which probably started near the end of 1988. I had previously entered 88N12 early in 1988 and finished those games. Most of the 88N300 games finished in 1989, but one game lasted well into 1990. I do not know much about Bobby Dee Laird. The USCF says his postal rating was 1344. I think he was unrated when we played this game. What stands out to me about our game was his 2nd move: 2.b4!? I shall call this the Laird variation in the Dutch Defence! An interesting note is that it transposes to the Polish Opening or Sokolsky after 1.b4 f5 2.d4. Actually it is quite playable. Laird - Sawyer, corr USCF 88N300 1988 begins 1.d4 f5 2.b4 e6 [2...e5!?] 3.a3 Nf6 4.c4 Be7 5.Nc3 0-0 [White has played only on the queenside and Black only on the kingside.] 6.Nf3 d5 7.e3 c6 8.c5 a6 9.a4 Nbd7 10.Be2 Qc7?! [10...h6! prevents White's next move.] 11.Ng5! [The e6 point is a weakness, forcing Black to undevelop.] 11...Nb8 12.Bh5?! g6 [Maybe White was dreaming of 12...Nxh5 13.Qxh5 g6?? 14.Qxh7#] 13.Be2 e5 14.0-0 Ng4 15.Bxg4?! [15.f4!=] 15...fxg4 16.Nxh7?! [Actually White has 16.h4! exd4 17.exd4 a5 18.b5 h6 19.Nge4 dxe4 20.Bxh6 Rf7 21.Nxe4 with some real attacking chances.] 16...Kxh7 17.f3 [Or 17.Ne2 Bf5 18.Ng3 Nd7+ when White has very little compensation for the piece.] 17...gxf3 18.gxf3 Bh3 19.Qd2 e4 20.Rf2 Bh4 21.Re2? exf3 22.e4? fxe2 23.Qh6+? Kg8 24.Qxg6+ Qg7 25.Qxg7+ Kxg7 26.Bb2? There is no good defense. White sees that ...Rf1+ forces mate and therefore White resigns. 0-1

98 – Anurag 2.Qd3 d5 3.c4 e6 The early queen move 2.Qd3 is only good against the Dutch Defence. From the d3 square the queen attacks the undefended f5 pawn and aims at the squares in two diagonals. White may play g4 in conjunction with Qd3 to open up lines of attack as in the game between Mhamal Anurag and Alberto Tirado Parra. Anurag (2472) - Tirado Parra (1789), 43rd Seville Open 2018 Seville ESP (1.14), 12.01.2018 begins 1.d4 f5 2.Qd3 d5 3.c4 e6 4.g4 [4.Nf3=] 4...fxg4 5.Nc3 Nf6 6.h3 [6.cxd5 Nxd5=/+] 6...Nc6 7.hxg4 dxc4 8.Qb1 Nxg4 [8...Qxd4 9.g5 Ng4-/+] 9.Rxh7 Rxh7 [9...Qf6 10.Rxh8 Qxf2+ 11.Kd2 Qxd4+ 12.Ke1 Qf2+ 13.Kd2 Nge5=/+] 10.Qxh7 Qf6? [10...Nxd4 11.Qg6+ Kd7 12.Bh3+/=] 11.Qh5+ Qf7 12.Qxg4 e5 13.Qg3 Bd6 14.dxe5 Nxe5 15.f4 Nc6 16.Bd2 Bf5 17.e4 Nb4 18.0-0-0 0-0-0 [18...Be6 19.Kb1 00-0 20.Nf3+-] 19.exf5 1-0

99 – Balogh 2.h3 d6 3.g4 Nc6 Your opponent’s flank or wing attack is best met by your active counterattack in the center. This is a classic chess principle. When White met the Dutch Defence 2.h3, Black began to play against the d4 pawn with 2...d6, 3...Nc6, and 4...d5. Higher rated players tend to have much better in tactical skills. Thus, they generally favor an increase in tension. That worked well in this game between Marton Balogh and Hoang Thanh Trang. Balogh (1973) - Hoang Thanh Trang (2423), ch-HUN Rapid 2018 Ajka HUN (5.15), 20.07.2018 begins 1.d4 f5 2.h3 d6 3.g4 Nc6 [3...Nf6 4.Nf3 fxg4 5.hxg4 Bxg4 6.Nc3=] 4.c3 [4.d5 Ne5 5.gxf5 Bxf5 6.Nc3 Nf6 7.Bg2+/=] 4...e5 5.Bg2 [5.Nf3 e4 6.d5 exf3 7.dxc6 bxc6 8.exf3 d5=] 5...fxg4 [5...e4=] 6.hxg4 Bxg4 7.Qd3 [7.Qb3=] 7...Qd7 8.f3 Bf5 9.e4 Bg6 10.Bh3 Qd8 11.Be3 d5 12.Nd2 Nf6 13.0-0-0 Be7 [13...Bd6 14.Ne2 0-0=/+] 14.Ne2 a6 15.Rdg1 [15.dxe5 Nxe5 16.Qc2+/-] 15...Qd6 16.Bf5 Bxf5 17.exf5 Rg8 18.Bg5 [18.dxe5 Nxe5 19.Qc2 0-0-0=] 18...0-0-0 19.Bxf6

[19.dxe5 Nxe5=/+] 19...Bxf6 20.Rxh7 [20.dxe5 Nxe5-/+] 20...exd4 21.cxd4 [21.Nxd4 Bxd4 22.cxd4 Qf6-+] 21...Rge8 22.a3 Rd7 23.Nb3 Rde7 24.Rg2 Re3 [After 24...Re3 25.Qc2 Nxd4 26.Nbxd4 Bxd4 27.Nxd4 Re1+ 28.Kd2 Qf4+ Black mates in five more moves.] 0-1

100 – Gokhvat 2.g4 fxg4 3.h3 The Dutch Defence 2.g4 variation reminds me of a bold kingside Benko Gambit. White offers the two pawns on his far right flank to open lines for attack. This bold adventure into speculative fun carries with it the possibility of great risk and great reward as seen in the game Peter Gokhvat vs Orkhan Abdulov. The higher rated gets crushed in the tactical melee. It’s rare, but it happens. Gokhvat (2248) - Abdulov (2412), 19th ch-EUR Indiv 2018 Batumi GEO (7.108), 24.03.2018 begins 1.d4 f5 2.g4 fxg4 3.h3 d5 [3...g3 4.fxg3 Nf6 5.Nc3 d5 6.Bg2 c5 7.e4=] 4.hxg4 [4.Qd3 g3 5.fxg3 c5 6.Nf3 Nc6=] 4...Bxg4 5.Qd3 Nf6 6.f3 Bc8 [6...Bh5 7.Nh3 Nc6 8.Ng5 Bg6 9.Qb3=] 7.Bf4 [7.Nc3 c5=] 7...e6 8.e4 dxe4 9.fxe4 c5 10.Nc3 cxd4 11.Nb5 Na6 12.0-0-0 Ng4 13.Qg3 e5 14.Bxe5 Bc5 [14...Qb6 15.Nxd4+-] 15.Nxd4 0-0 [15...Qg5+ 16.Bf4 Qg6 17.Bb5+ Kf8 18.Ngf3+-] 16.Bc4+ Kh8 [16...Rf7 17.Bxf7+ Kxf7 18.Qb3+ Kg6 19.Ngf3+-] 17.Ngf3 Qe7 18.Qh3 [18.Rxh7+ Kxh7 19.Rh1+ Kg6 20.Nh4+ Kh7 21.Nhf5+ Nh6 22.Nxe7+-] 18...Nf6 19.Qh4 h6 20.Rdg1 Nc7 [20...Bxd4 21.Bxd4+-] 21.Qxh6+ gxh6 22.Rxh6+ Qh7 23.Bxf6+ 1-0

101 – Elguezabal 2.g3 Nf6 3.Bg2 Ignacio M. Elguezabal sets up a double fianchetto with excellent bishop play in our 1989 USCF Golden Knights postal game. My opening play was good, but my positional handling of the d-file and e-file was insufficient. I foolishly failed to focus on the center in the middlegame. White delayed c4 until move 9. As our battle ensued, I failed to control the d-file. White's dark squared bishop won with a hit and run that went like this: 7.Bb2 (taking aim), 28.Bxd4 (grabbing my knight) and 31.Ba1 (safe retreat). Elguezabal - Sawyer, corr USCF 1990 begins 1.d4 f5 2.g3 Nf6 3.Bg2 g6 4.Nf3 Bg7 5.0-0 0-0 6.b3 [6.c4 d6 7.Nc3] 6...d6 [6...Ne4=] 7.Bb2 Qe8 8.Nbd2 Nc6 9.c4 e5 10.dxe5 [10.d5=] 10...dxe5 11.e4 f4 12.Qe2 fxg3 13.fxg3 Bg4 [13...Qe7=/+] 14.h3 Bxf3 15.Nxf3 Nh5 16.Kh2 Qe7 17.Rad1 Rad8 18.Rd5 Nf6 19.Rxd8 Rxd8 20.Rd1 Re8? [20...Rxd1! 21.Qxd1

Qd6=] 21.a3 Nd7 22.b4 b6 23.Qd2 Nf8 [Black loses more slowly with 23...Nd4 24.Nxd4 exd4 25.Bxd4 Bxd4 26.Qxd4+/=] 24.Qd5+ Qe6 25.Ng5 Qxd5 26.exd5 Nd4 27.d6 cxd6? 28.Bxd4 h6 29.Bd5+ Kh8 30.Nf7+ Kh7 31.Ba1 1-0

102 – Sawyer 2.Bf4 Nf6 3.e3 d6 I have been unusually successful with the Dutch Defence 2.Bf4 lines. Part of the reason might be my experience with playing the London System as White. Success often follows solid and active play like 2.Bf4 However, I have the feeling my success with it may be because Black is less familiar with the position. When I have played the Dutch Defence Staunton Gambit 2.e4, Black rattles off the first 7-10 moves like there's no problem. After 2.Bf4, Black takes more time on moves 2-6. My performance rating with 2.Bf4 is sometimes 50 ratings points above anything else. I often beat players rated above me. A thematic move after 2.Bf4 is h3 at some point. This supports attacking possibilities with g2-g4! Sawyer - Unbeliever, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 17.11.2012 begins 1.d4 f5 2.Bf4 Nf6 3.e3 d6 4.Nf3 g6 5.Nc3 [More natural is 5.h3 Bg7 6.Bc4+/=] 5...Bg7 6.Bc4 e6 7.Qe2 Nc6 8.h3 Qe7 9.Bg5 h6 10.Bxf6 Bxf6 11.d5 Ne5 12.dxe6 Bxe6 13.Bxe6 Qxe6 14.Nd4 [14.Qb5+!?] 14...Qd7 15.Qb5 [15.Nd5+/=] 15...c6 16.Qe2 0-0 17.0-0-0 Qc7 [17...d5=/+] 18.g4! [This is a thematic attacking move in with Dutch Bf4 lines. Also good is 18.Ne6+/winning the Exchange.] 18...Qe7 19.gxf5 a6 20.fxg6 Bg7 21.f4 Nd7 22.f5 Nc5 23.Rhf1 Rae8 24.e4 Nxe4 25.Nxe4 Qxe4 26.Qxe4 Rxe4 27.Ne6 Rf6 28.Rxd6 1-0

103 – Haines 2.e3 c6 3.Bd3 d5 Ray Haines defeated Black's effort at the Stonewall Attack when Black failed to activate the Bc8 or the Ra8. That made it easy for White to successfully attack kingside. Haines (1624) - keramos (1654), Live Chess Chess.com, 17.02.2018 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e3 c6 [2...Bf5=] 3.Bd3 f5 [3...Nd7=] 4.Nf3 e6 5.b3 Bd6 6.0-0 Nd7 [Now White can trade off his worst minor piece. 6...Qe7=] 7.Ba3 Ndf6 8.Bxd6 Qxd6 9.c4 Ne4 [9...Ne7 10.Nc3 0-0 11.Rc1+/=] 10.Ne5 Ngf6 11.Qc2 0-0 12.Nd2 Nxd2 13.Qxd2 Ne4 [13...Nd7 14.Nf3+/=] 14.Qc2 Rf6 [14...Nf6 15.Rac1+/=] 15.f3 Ng5 16.f4 Ne4 17.Bxe4 fxe4 18.c5 Qd8 19.b4 Rh6 20.g3 a5 21.a3 a4?! 22.Rab1 g5? [22...Bd7 23.Qe2+/-] 23.b5 [More forceful was 23.fxg5! Qxg5 24.Rf4+-] 23...gxf4 24.Rxf4 Rf6 [If 24...Rh5 25.bxc6 bxc6 26.Nxc6+-] 25.Rbf1 [Sharper is 25.Rxf6! Qxf6 26.Rf1 Qe7 27.Qe2+-] 25...Rxf4? [After 25...Rf5 26.Qe2+- White should win.] 26.Rxf4 Qe8 27.Rg4+ Kh8 28.Qf2 h6 29.Qf6+ [and mate next move.] 1-0

104 – Haines 2.e3 e6 3.Bd3 Nf6 The Colle is a universal system of development for the White pieces to begin a chess game. The typical move order is 1.d4, 2.Nf3, 3.e3, 4.Bd3, and 5.0-0. White can almost ignore Black while he arranges his pieces in the familiar pattern. While this opening can be played vs anything, it is primarily designed to play against a Black pawn on d5. Most masters do not prefer the Colle vs the Dutch because the e3 set-up does not threaten the key squares along the long light squared diagonal, especially e4 and d5. Black gets an easier game than normal. Haines - Beloungie, Presque Isle, Maine, 26.06.2014 begins 1.d4 e6 2.e3 f5 3.Bd3 Nf6 4.Nf3 b6 5.Qe2 Bb7 6.0-0 Be7 7.Nbd2 Ne4 8.Ne5 0-0 9.f3 Nxd2 10.Bxd2 d6 11.Nc4 Nd7 [11...Nc6=] 12.Bc3 b5 [12...d5 13.Nd2 c5=] 13.Nd2 [13.Na5!+/-] 13...a6 14.b3 Bf6 15.e4 fxe4 16.fxe4 Nc5 17.dxc5 Bxc3 18.Rad1 Bd4+ 19.Kh1 Bxc5 20.e5 Rxf1+ 21.Rxf1 Qg5 [Black's winning ideas combine kingside attack and advancing queenside pawns. Activating the queen is good. 21...Qh4-/+ is even better.] 22.Nf3? [22.Ne4

Qxe5 23.Qf3 Qf5 24.Qe2 Qd5 25.Qf3= repeating moves.] 22...Qh6 23.Be4 d5 24.Bd3 Rf8 25.c3 Be3 26.h3 c5 27.Re1 d4 28.Ng1 [Or 28.Rf1 dxc3-+] 28...Rf2 0-1

105 – Haines 4.Nf3 Be7 5.b3 Ray Haines defeated longtime friend Lance Beloungie in this Dutch. Ray Haines wrote (I edit for space): “My game with Lance was interesting. He played normal moves for this opening by moving Qh5. The problem was that he did not stop my king pawn from moving forward. I think he should have played Ne4.” Haines - Beloungie, Houlton Open (2), 07.01.2017 begins 1.d4 e6 2.e3 f5 3.Bd3 Nf6 4.Nf3 Be7 5.b3 0-0 6.Bb2 b6 7.Nbd2 Bb7 8.0-0 Qe8 [Another approach is to challenge the center with 8...c5=] 9.Qe2 Qh5 [9...Ne4!=] 10.c4 d6? [10...Nc6!? =] 11.e4! f4 12.e5 dxe5 13.dxe5 Ng4 14.Be4 Bxe4 15.Qxe4 Nd7 16.Qc6 Nc5 17.b4 Nd3 18.Qxe6+ Kh8 19.Qxe7 Nxb2 20.Rab1 [20.h3!+-] 20...Nd3 21.Rb3 Ndxe5 [21...Ngxe5 22.Qxc7=] 22.h3 Nxf3+ 23.Nxf3 Nf6 24.Rd3 [24.Qxc7+/-] 24...Qf7 25.Qxf7 Rxf7 26.Rfd1 Rff8 27.Rd4 Nh5 28.Rd7 c5 29.b5 Nf6 30.Rb7 Rfb8 31.Re7 Re8 32.Rde1 Kg8 33.Kf1 Kf8 34.Rxe8+ Rxe8 35.Rxe8+ Nxe8 36.Ke2 Nd6 37.Kd3 h6 [37...Ke7=] 38.Ne5 g5 39.Nc6 Kf7 40.Nxa7 Kf6 41.Nc6 Kf5 42.Ne7+ [42.a4!+-] 42...Ke6 43.Nd5 Nc8 44.a4 h5 45.Nxb6 [45.Nc3+-] 45...Nxb6 46.a5 Nd7 47.b6 Nb8 48.Ke4 Na6? [48...h4!=/+] 49.h4 g4 50.Kxf4 Kf6 51.f3 gxf3 52.gxf3 Nb8 53.Ke4 Na6 54.f4 Ke6 55.f5+ Kf6 56.Kd5 Kxf5 57.Kc6 Nb4+ 58.Kc7 Ke6 59.b7 Na6+ 60.Kb6 Nb8 61.a6 1-0

106 – Haines 5.0-0 0-0 6.Nbd2 Ray Haines and Lance Beloungie are friends who have played against each maybe a hundred times. Lance Beloungie falls behind in development. Predictably, things get difficult for Black. Haines - Beloungie, Houlton ME (2), 30.05.2014 begins 1.d4 e6 2.e3 f5 3.Bd3 Nf6 4.Nf3 Be7 5.0-0 0-0 6.Nbd2 [Another good approach is 6.c4 b6 7.Nc3 Bb7=] 6...d6 7.e4 f4 8.b3 b6 9.Qe2 Nh5 10.Bb2 Bb7 11.Rad1 [Black has been too slow to develop. White can now win tactically with 11.d5! exd5 (11...e5 12.Nxe5! dxe5 13.Qxh5+-) 12.exd5 Bxd5 13.c4 Bc6 (or 13...Bf7 14.Qe4+-) 14.Qe6+ Rf7 15.Bxh7+ Kxh7 16.Qxf7+-] 11...Nd7 12.e5 d5 13.g4 fxg3 14.hxg3 c5 15.Kg2 g6 16.Rh1 Ng7 17.Rh2 Nf5?

[17...Qe8 18.Rdh1+/=] 18.g4 Nxd4 19.Nxd4 cxd4 20.Rdh1 Rf7 21.Bxg6 d3 22.Bxf7+ Kf8 23.Qxd3 d4+ 24.f3 Nxe5 25.Qxh7 Nxf7 26.Qg6 Bf6 27.g5 [27.Ba3+ mates faster, but Black was already in deep trouble.] 27...Be5 28.Ba3+ Ke8 29.Qxe6+ 1-0

107 – Howell 2.Bg5 g6 3.Nc3 Dutch Defence 2.Bg5 Attack throws a monkey wrench into Black’s plans to develop before direct contact. White assaults his opponent immediately. Black struggled to defend against the early Exchange sacrifice in the David Howell vs Natasha Regan. White polished off the game with a cool Boden checkmate. Howell (2687) - Regan (1942), 6th Kings Place Open 2017 London ENG, 07.07.2018 begins 1.d4 f5 2.Bg5 g6!? [2...c6 3.e3 g6 4.Nd2 Bg7 5.h4=] 3.Nc3 d5 4.h4!? Nf6 [4...Bg7 5.e3+/=] 5.h5 Nxh5 6.Rxh5 gxh5 7.e4 Be6 8.exd5 Bxd5 9.Qxh5+ Bf7 10.Qf3 c6 11.0-0-0 Qa5 [11...Rg8 12.Qxf5 +/=] 12.a3 Rg8 13.Bf4 Nd7 14.d5 cxd5 15.Bb5 [15.Nxd5 Rc8 16.Ne2=] 15...00-0? [15...e6! 16.Nge2 a6 17.Bxd7+ Kxd7-/+] 16.Rxd5 Bxd5 17.Qxd5 Qb6 18.Na4! Qxf2 [Or 18...Qa5 19.Qc4+ Nc5 20.Qxc5+ Qc7 21.Qxc7 mate] 19.Qc6+! [If 19...bxc6 20.Ba6 mate] 1-0

108 – Koksal 2.Bg5 h6 3.Bh4 The Dutch Defence 2.Bg5 Attack pawn chase line increases the danger level. White may lose or sacrifice a bishop. Black may fall to a checkmate. I find ample room for creativity as long as no one makes a quick blunder. White pried open the h-file, so both players castled queenside. The White made threats all over the board and finished with a beautiful combination in the game Ege Koksal vs Das Soham. Koksal (2356) - Soham (2355), 36th Balaton GM 2018 Balatonlelle HUN (7.5), 18.06.2018 begins 1.d4 f5 2.Bg5 h6 3.Bh4 [3.Bf4 Nf6 4.e3 d6 5.Be2 g6=] 3...g5 4.e3 [4.e4!? Bg7 5.Bg3=] 4...Nf6 [4...Bg7 5.Bg3 c5 6.c3 Qb6 7.Na3=] 5.Bg3 d6 6.Nc3 e6 [6...Bg7 7.h4 g4 8.Bc4 Nh5 9.Nge2 e6 10.Qd2+/=] 7.h4 Rg8 8.hxg5 hxg5 9.Qd2 [Maybe 9.Qf3 Nc6 10.0-0-0+/=] 9...Qe7 10.0-0-0 Nc6 11.Bc4 Bd7 12.d5 exd5 13.Nxd5 Nxd5 14.Bxd5 Rg6 15.f4 Bg7 16.fxg5 0-0-0 [16...Qxg5 17.Bh4+/=] 17.Nf3 Ne5 18.Bf4 c6 [18...Kb8 19.Kb1+/-] 19.Bb3 d5 [19...Nxf3 20.gxf3 Be6 21.Bxe6+ Qxe6 22.Qa5+-] 20.Qa5 a6 [20...Be8 21.Qxa7+-] 21.Rh7 Be8 22.Bxe5 Rxg5

[22...Rdd6 23.Bxd5 Rxd5 24.Rxd5 cxd5 25.Qc3+ Rc6 26.Rxg7+-] 23.Nxg5 Qxe5 24.Rxg7 [If 24...Qxg7 25.Qxd8+! Kxd8 26.Nxe6+ wins easily.] 1-0

2.Nf3 White chooses the simple development of the knight. Games in this chapter are ones that to not simply transpose to lines that might logically begin with 2.c4.

109 – Bloodgood 2.Nf3 e6 3.e4 All types of people play chess: young and old, male and female, rich and poor, good and bad. The most infamous opponent I have played was Claude Bloodgood. In 1996 APCT announced a thematic tournament with the Grob (1.g4). When I saw Claude Bloodgood had entered, I entered too, especially to play him via correspondence. Bloodgood was in prison for life; and a few years ago he died. There is no condoning the crimes for which Bloodgood had been convicted. Yet, I found this 72-year-old man to be a very friendly opponent. We carried on a lively discussion from postcard to postcard. At one point I mentioned to Tom Purser that I was playing Bloodgood. Tom inquired about the famous Humphrey Bogart game via 1.d4 Nf6 2.g4 played against an unknown opponent in New York in 1933. Bloodgood told me that it had been published. Our games ended with three draws and one Bloodgood win. We said our good-byes and I figured I'd never hear from him again. Then I received this fascinating note about which I wrote an article that originally appeared in Purser's “BDG World”, Issue 77. Bloodgood wrote: "Dear Tim,

“You asked me about the Bogart Poisoned Spike Game some time ago. I mentioned that it had been published. It was originally published in the New York Daily News circa 1935, later in the New York Times.” “I first became aware of it when Bogart visited the U.S. Naval Hospital at Camp Pendleton (Calif.) in late 1955. I was playing chess when he and several other Hollywood actors arrived on the ward where I was recovering from a foot surgery.” “He watched me play for a while and then discovered I was playing for money. He got a great big grin and asked if I'd care to play him for a small wager.” “The games were blitz (no scores), but he held his own (I think we broke even after 8 games) and gave me a phone number to call him when I could get out of the hospital for a day or so.” “When I called, I got someone else, but arrangements were in place and a car was sent for me. I played Bogart (and some others) at beach houses in Santa Monica one time and Van Nuys several times.” “Bogart took real pride in his chess ability and was a born hustler. I am enclosing two Bogart games (1 against me) which I hope you will find interesting. Same opening line in Bloodgood - Lowmaster also enclosed... Best, Claude" Bloodgood called this opening the "Maltese Falcon Attack," a cousin of the BDG: Humphrey Bogart - Claude Bloodgood, Santa Monica 1955 1.d4 f5 2.Nf3 e6 3.e4 fxe4 4.Ng5 d5 5.f3 exf3 6.Qxf3 Nf6 7.Bd3 g6 8.Nxh7 Rxh7 9.Bxg6+ Rf7 10.0-0 Bg7 11.Bg5 Nbd7 [11...Kf8 12.Bxf7 Kxf7 13.Qh5+ Kg8 14.Bxf6 Bxf6 15.Qg6+ Bg7 16.Rf7 1-0. Claude Bloodgood - Robert Lowmaster, Camp McGill, Japan 1956] 12.Nc3 Kf8 13.Bxf7 Kxf7 14.Rae1 c5 15.Nxd5 exd5 16.Qxd5+ Kg6 [16... Kf8 17.Qd6+ Kg8 18.Re7 Ne8 19.Qe6+ Kh8 20.Rxg7 1-0. Humphrey Bogart - NN, Santa Monica 1955] 17.Bxf6 Bxf6 18.Re6 Qh8 19.Qf5+ Kf7 20.d5 Qh4 21.c3 Qg5 22.Qh7+

Qg7 23.R1xf6+ Nxf6 24.Re7+ Kxe7 25.Qxg7+ Kd6 26.Qxf6+ Kxd5 27.Qd8+ 1-0

110 – Morin 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Nc3 g6 Roger Morin, a former state of Maine champion, won a nice game vs the Dutch Defence in the second round of the UMPI Open. In this game, Morin avoided the common d4 opening set-up vs the Dutch with its g3/c4 moves in favor of swift development. Roger was richly rewarded when Black opened up the center (6...e5 / 8...exd4) without any of his pieces being developed. Black soon finds himself with weaknesses all over the place without putting any pressure on White. Persistent threats on Black targets pays off for a nice short White win. Morin - Haines, UMPI Open, Round 2, 31.03.2012 begins 1.Nf3 f5 2.d4 Nf6 3.Nc3 [This is an immediate sign that White plans rapid central and kingside piece deployment while probably castling queenside.] 3...g6 [3...e6!?] 4.Bg5 Ne4?! [Why move the only developed piece to exchange it? Obvious and good is 4...Bg7 White often continues with 5.Bxf6 when Black can recapture with either the pawn or the bishop. White has a very slight edge, but Black has plenty of time to bring out his queenside army and equalize. One possible continuation is 5...Bxf6 6.e4 fxe4 7.Nxe4 0-0 8.Nxf6+ exf6 9.Be2 d5 10.0-0 Nc6=] 5.e3 [5.Bf4!?] 5...Nxg5 6.Nxg5 e5? [It is a mistake to open up the position without having any pieces in action. For better or worse, Black has to play either 6...e6 7.h4; or 6...Bg7 7.h4] 7.h4 h6 8.Nf3 exd4 9.exd4+/- [Very powerful is 9.Qxd4!+-] 9...d5 10.Ne5 Rg8 11.Qf3 Be6 12.0-0-0 c6 13.h5 [Or 13.Re1!+-] 13...g5 14.Bd3 Qf6 15.Rhe1 Kd8 16.Qe2 Bd6 17.Nxc6+ [Winning material. Black's game completely falls apart.] 17...Nxc6 18.Qxe6 Qxe6 19.Rxe6 Bf4+ 20.Kb1 Ne7 21.Rde1 Rg7 22.Nxd5 Nxd5 23.Re8+ Kc7 24.Rxa8 1-0

111 – Gordon 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Nc3 d6 White played for rapid development in this Reti Opening to Dutch Defence. By move 11, White had activated his queen and all four minor pieces. Black had swapped off the only two minor pieces that he moves. White sacrificed a pawn for a powerful attack in the game Stephen J Gordon vs David Pires Tavares Martins. Gordon (2528) - Martins (2384), 4NCL 2017-18 England ENG (3.41), 13.01.2018 begins 1.Nf3 d6 2.d4 f5 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5 Ne4 [4...Nbd7 5.Qd3 g6 6.e4 fxe4 7.Nxe4 Bg7 8.0-0-0+/=] 5.Nxe4 fxe4 6.Nd2 Bf5 7.f3 d5 [7...exf3 8.e4 f2+ 9.Kxf2 Bg6 10.c3+/-] 8.e3 [8.fxe4 dxe4 9.e3+/=] 8...exf3 9.Nxf3 c5 [9...g6 10.Bb5+ c6 11.Bd3+/-] 10.Bd3 Bxd3 11.Qxd3 c4 12.Qe2 Qb6 13.e4 Qxb2 14.0-0 Nc6 [14...Qb6 15.exd5+-] 15.Rab1 Nxd4 16.Qf2 Nxf3+ 17.Qxf3 Qd4+ 18.Be3 Qf6 19.Qh5+ White has multiple threats. Black's king and queen are in deep trouble 1-0

112 – Mallott 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Bg5 e6 Harpers Ferry, West Virginia is just south of the Martinsburg-Sharpsburg area where three states (West Virginia, Maryland and Virginia) and two rivers (Potomac and Shenandoah) meet. Harpers Ferry is a low lying village of 300 people surrounded by beautiful hills on every side. Our family once spent a fascinating day there as one of at least 1000 visitors. In 1859, the abolitionist John Brown led 21 men to capture the U.S. Arsenal in Harpers Ferry. Brown hoped to use the weapons to start a slave uprising in the South. The local people pinned down John Brown and his men in the firehouse. President James Buchanan ordered the U.S. Marines under Robert E. Lee and his aide J.E.B. Stuart to deal with the problem. Two of John Brown's sons were killed. Brown was tried, convicted and hanged in Virginia. The American Civil War would follow a couple years later, during which the town changed sides eight times. I admire how Harpers Ferry people dealt with their losses. What do you do when you throw a game away at the end?

New York Yankees baseball closer Mariano Rivera told Jonathan Papelbon that to be successful he needed was a short-term memory. Papelbon said that when you fail, "You go over things and try to learn from them, but you have to turn the page." That's what happens when you lose a chess game or have a bad tournament. You learn from it, turn the page, and move on. Looking at my Martinsburg tournament 20+ years later, I was out of shape; it showed. I wore out as the day progressed. I got up and drove over 100 miles to Martinsburg. In the first round I played well, winning quickly. The second round was okay and another win. The third round was sloppy and a very long draw. The fourth round was awful. This final game was a Dutch Defence with 1.Nf3 f5. It seemed like I was waiting for my opponent Stephen Mallott to fall apart. However, that did not happen. Steve Mallott ripped away my queenside while I accomplished nothing on the kingside. I was in one of those moods where I played on until mated. Thus ended a long day. Thankfully, my next tournament went much better! Mallott - Sawyer, Martinsburg, WV (4), 09.12.1989 begins 1.Nf3 f5 2.d4 Nf6 3.Bg5 e6 4.Nbd2 [More normal is 4.c4 Be7 5.Nc3 to put pressure on d5.] 4...d5 5.c4 Be7 6.e3 0-0 7.Bd3 c6 [It is best to put the question to the bishop right now. 7...h6!=] 8.0-0 Nbd7 9.Qc2 [More common is 9.cxd5 cxd5 10.Rc1+/= giving White the better game.] 9...Ne4 10.Bxe7 Qxe7 [From this position White has tried eight different moves to make something of his slight lead in development and better bishop.] 11.Rac1 Ndf6 12.cxd5 exd5 13.Ne5 Be6 14.Ndf3 Nd6 15.Ng5 Nfe4 16.Nxe6 [16.Nh3 Nf7=] 16...Qxe6 17.Qe2 Rf6 18.b4 a6 19.a4 Rh6 20.Nf3 g5 21.b5 axb5 22.axb5 g4 23.Ne5 Nxb5 [I gave up looking for a kingside attack right when I actually had one! After 23...cxb5 24.Bxb5 I missed the rook sacrifice 24...Rxh2! 25.Kxh2 Qh6+ 26.Kg1 g3 From here we have a pretty much forced variation: 27.fxg3 Nxg3 28.Qc2 Qxe3+ 29.Qf2 Nxf1 30.Rxf1

Qxf2+ 31.Rxf2 Nxb5 32.Rxf5 Nxd4=/+ and Black is likely to remain up at least one pawn in what would likely be a long and complicated R+N endgame.] 24.Bxb5 cxb5 25.Qxb5 Ng5 [25...Nd6 26.Qb3+/-] 26.Qxb7 Rd8? 27.Rc6 Nf3+? 28.gxf3 Qxc6? 29.Nxc6 Rdd6? 30.Ne7+ [30.Ra1!+mates quicker.] 30...Kh8 31.Rc1 Rhg6 32.Rc8+ Kg7 33.Nxf5+ Kf6 34.Nxd6 gxf3+ 35.Kf1 Rg2 36.Rf8+ Ke6 37.Ne8 Rxh2 38.Qf7# 1-0

2.Nc3 Many players prefer to avoid the main lines with 2.c4 or the gambit lines with 2.e4 and just play 2.Nc3.

113 – Sawyer 2…e6 3.e4 Nf6 Winning chess strategy involves successfully transitioning through the phases of a game. This game has five very clear phases: 1. Fight for the center in the early opening. 2. Activate all my pieces in the early middlegame. 3. Exchange into a better bishop ending. 4. Reach a winning pawn ending. 5. Queen my pawn and stop my opponent's pawn. The Dutch Defence variation is reached by transposition. After 1.Nc3 f5, White has two good choices: 2.d4 and 2.e4. I pick opening moves I feel like playing at the moment. By move four we are in original territory. This is a powerfully simple game. Sawyer - challanger100, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 29.12.2012 begins 1.Nc3 f5 2.d4 [2.e4!?] 2...e6 3.e4 Nf6 [3...fxe4 4.Nxe4+/=, but if 4.f3?! Bb4!=/+ White would only have a little compensation for the gambit pawn.] 4.e5 Nd5 5.Nxd5 exd5 6.Nf3 [6.Nh3!+/- with plans to eventually play Nf4 is more dynamic.] 6...d6 7.Bg5 Be7 8.exd6 Qxd6 9.Bxe7 Qxe7+ 10.Qe2 Qxe2+ 11.Bxe2 0-0 12.0-0 c6 13.Bd3 g6 14.Ne5 Nd7 15.Nxd7 Bxd7 16.f4 Rfe8 17.Rfe1 Kf7 18.Kf2 Rxe1 19.Rxe1 Re8 20.Rxe8 Bxe8 21.b4 Kf6 22.Ke3 h6 23.h4 g5 24.hxg5+ hxg5 25.g3 gxf4+ 26.Kxf4 Bd7 27.Be2 b6 28.g4 [White could probe the position a little more with 28.Bh5+/-] 28...fxg4 29.Bxg4 Bxg4 30.Kxg4 Ke6 31.Kg5 Kd6 [Interesting but failing is 31...a5?! 32.b5! cxb5 33.c3 b4 34.cxb4 axb4 35.Kg6+- White wins due to his king position, despite Black's extra b-pawn. Eventually Black will run out of tempi and have to back up his king. Black should play 31...b5!

32.Kg6 Ke7 with a draw.] 32.Kf6 c5 33.c3 a5 34.a3 cxb4 35.cxb4 axb4 36.axb4 Kc6 37.Ke6 Kb5 38.Kxd5 Kxb4 39.Kc6 Kc4 40.d5 b5 41.d6 b4 42.d7 b3 43.d8Q b2 44.Qd1 Black resigns 1-0

114 – Torning 2…d6 3.e4 g6 Rick Torning sent me a Dutch Defence game with this comment: "Against Shabalov (2408) I used my faithful Basman Variation of the Dutch Defence and managed a pawn fork on d4 which wins a knight or bishop. Perhaps they too were fasting? (The computer refers to it as the Raphael Defence?)" Dr. Benjamin I. Raphael of Louisville, Kentucky played 1.d4 f5 2.Nc3 as White vs Napoleon Marache of New York in the 1857 American Chess Congress. Play continued 2...Nf6 3.Nf3 e6 and White won with a mate on move 30. Paul Morphy won the event. Shabalov (2408) - Torning (1801), Casual Bullet game lichess, 22.10.2017 begins 1.d4 f5 2.Nc3 d6 3.e4 g6 4.f3 [4.exf5 Bxf5 5.Nf3 Bg7 6.Bd3+/-] 4...Bg7 5.Be3 [5.Bc4+/=] 5...Nh6 [5...Nc6!?] 6.Qd2 Nf7 7.0-0-0 Nc6 8.h4 [8.Kb1+/-] 8...e5 9.h5? [9.d5!?+/-. Black's bishop fianchetto is strong at one second per move.] 9...exd4 [White left the game.] 0-1

115 – Haines 2…g6 3.Bg5 Bg7 Roger Morin takes an excellent approach similar to a Veresov Opening in playing 2.Nc3 and 3.Bg5. This supports the move 4.e4. The players castle opposite sides and proceed to attack each other and defend at the same time. White avoids both the risky 5.f3 and the drawish 6.Nxf6+, choosing instead to build up an assault with his full army against the Black monarch. Chances are even until White's natural move 14.h4? This turned out to be an unfortunate mistake. There was a chance for a brilliant save with 17.Qxf2! Nxh5 18.Nf5!! Instead, White continued to attack the king with 17.hxg6 until the whole operation ran out of steam. Morin - Haines, Houlton, Maine, 02.04.2011 begins 1.d4 f5 2.Nc3 g6 3.Bg5 Bg7 4.e4 fxe4 5.Nxe4 [5.f3!?=] 5...Nf6 [5...d5=] 6.Bd3 [6.Nxf6+ exf6 7.Qe2+ Kf7 8.Be3=] 6...d5 [6...Nxe4 7.Bxe4 d5 8.Bf3=] 7.Ng3 [7.Nxf6+ exf6 8.Bd2=] 7...Qd6 8.Nf3 Bg4 9.h3 Bxf3 10.Qxf3 0-0 11.Qe3 [11.Bf4!?=] 11...Nc6 12.0-0-0 e5 13.dxe5 Nxe5 14.h4? Rae8 [14...Nfg4!-+]

15.h5 Neg4 [15...Nfg4!-+] 16.Qxa7 [16.Qf4 Qxf4+ 17.Bxf4 Nxf2-+] 16...Nxf2 17.hxg6 [17.Qxf2! Nxh5 18.Nf5!! Bxb2+ 19.Kxb2 Qb4+ with a likely perpetual chess draw.] 17...Nxd3+ 18.cxd3 [18.Rxd3 Ng4-+] 18...Qxg3 19.gxh7+ Kh8 20.Bh6 Bxh6+ 21.Rxh6 Qg5+ 0-1

116 – Beloungie 2….Nf6 3.g3 g6 Ray Haines wrote about this game against Lance Beloungie: “We traveled five hours south to play in the Maine State Closed Champ. We wanted to play new people. We were not real happy about having to play each other. We both play the Dutch…” There’s a saying, “If mama ain’t happy, ain’t nobody happy!” In chess, keep your queen happy, or your family will be unhappy. White in this game asked the queen to do more. “Mama, can you watch over the light squared bishop? How about the other bishop too? Mama, can you watch over the dpawn? The c-pawn? The a-pawn? Can you protect the king from the Black queen?” Mama was not happy! White gave his poor queen too much to handle. Beloungie - Haines, Maine State Championship (4), 10.04.2016 begins 1.d4 f5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.g3 g6 4.Bg2 Bg7 5.e4 fxe4 [Or 5...Nxe4 6.Nxe4 fxe4 7.Bxe4 d5=] 6.Nxe4 0-0 7.Be3 d5 [7...Nxe4=] 8.Nxf6+ Rxf6 9.Ne2 c6 10.Qd2 Bf5 11.h4 h5 12.0-0-0 Nd7 13.f3 e5!? 14.Rdg1 [14.Bg5!+/- wins the Exchange.] 14...Qf8 15.c3 Nb6 [15...Re8=/+] 16.b3 e4 17.fxe4 dxe4 18.Nf4 Nd5 19.Nh3? Bxh3 20.Bg5 Rf2! 0-1

117 – Williams 2…d5 3.g3 Nf6 White does not always play for the early pawn push c2-c4. Many players prefer to meet the Dutch Defence 1.d4 f5 with 2.Nc3. My opponent Philip Williams responded with 3.g3. He started well enough. Williams brought out all his minor pieces and castled. White fought for control of the center. However when Black’s pawns kicked back, White dropped a piece. The fight continued until checkmate a dozen moves later. Williams - Sawyer, corr USCF 1989 begins 1.d4 f5 2.Nc3 d5 3.g3 Nf6 4.Bg2 e6 5.Bf4 [5.Nf3=] 5...c6 6.Nf3 Be7 7.Qd2 0-0 8.0-0 Bd7 9.Ne5 Be8 10.Nd3 Nbd7 11.b4 [This pawn push leaves a hole on c4. Maybe White might try 11.Qe3 Ne4=] 11...Nb6 12.Nc5 Qc8 13.a3 Nc4 14.Qd3 b6 15.Nb3 Nd7 16.Nd2 g5 17.Be5 [White also loses a piece to 17.Nxc4 dxc4

18.Qe3 gxf4-+] 17...Ndxe5 18.dxe5 Nxe5 19.Qe3 Bf6 20.f4 [20.Nb3 f4-+] 20...d4 21.Qf2 Ng4 22.Qf3 dxc3 23.Nb1 [Or 23.Nb3 e5-+] 23...Qd8 24.e3 Nxe3 25.Qe2 Nxf1 26.Kxf1 g4 27.Qxe6+ Bf7 28.Qxf5 Qd1+ 29.Kf2 Bd4# 0-1

118 – Sawyer 2…Nf6 3.Bg5 g6 It may sound like an oxymoron. Chess has a specific term called a “Closed Opening”. That description fits almost all methods to start a game except those that begin 1.e4. These Closed Openings are positions that have few pawn exchanges and few immediate tactical threats. I love the Dutch Defence which begins 1.d4 f5. I always have. In the last 45 years, I have played the Dutch over a thousand times from one side or the other. In this closed opening both players develop methodically. They look to break open the position at the proper place and time. Opening the center too early can be disastrous, as seen in my Dutch Defence blitz game vs "InfoWars73". Black had developed both knights and a bishop, but his king was not yet safe. In his eagerness to attack, Black opens the center too early. This blunders at least a pawn when he ventures 8...e5? (instead of the more cautious move 8...e6=). Sawyer - InfoWars73, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 02.02.2013 begins 1.d4 f5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.Bg5 g6 4.h4! h6 [Or 4...Bg7 5.h5 Nxh5 6.e4!+/-] 5.Bf4 [5.Bxf6 exf6 6.e3+/-] 5...d6 6.Qd2 Bg7 7.0-0-0 Nc6 8.e3 e5? [8...e6=] 9.dxe5 Ne4 [9...dxe5 10.Qxd8+ Nxd8 11.Bxe5+/-] 10.Nxe4 fxe4 [10...dxe5! 11.Qxd8+ Nxd8 12.Bb5+ c6 13.Nd6+ Ke7 14.Bc4 exf4 15.Nh3!+-] 11.exd6 cxd6 12.Qxd6 Qb6? [This allows a mate in four, unless Black sacrifices all his minor pieces and both rooks. To keep playing he had to try 12...Bf5 13.Bb5 Qb6 14.Rd5+-] 13.Qxg6+ Kf8 14.Bd6+ Kg8 [This allows mate in two. However, Black loses most of his material after 14...Ne7 15.Bxe7+ Kxe7 16.Qxg7+ Ke8 17.Qxh8+ Ke7 18.Bc4 Be6 19.Qg7+ Ke8 20.Bxe6 Qxe6 21.Qh8+ Kf7 22.Qxa8+-] 15.Bc4+ Black resigns 1-0

119 – keka 2…Nf6 3.Bg5 d5 A common tactic in many openings is the queen check on the diagonal followed by a capture horizontally. As White the queen has natural checks with Qh5+ and Qa4+. As Black the queen has natural checks with Qa5+ and Qh4+. Any time that White moves the f-pawn early, there is a possible Qd8-Qh4+. This opens up additional tactics. In this Dutch Defence, White mounts and attack on e4 with his moves: Nc3 / Bg5 / f3 / e4. This leads to a flurry of exchanges. White forgets the Check and Capture tactic for a moment and plays the combination in the wrong order. White loses a whole piece and resigns after move 10. keka - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 16.05.2012 begins 1.d4 f5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.Bg5 d5 4.f3 e6 [4...Nc6 5.Qd2 e6 6.0-0-0 Be7 7.e4 fxe4 8.fxe4 Nxe4 9.Nxe4 dxe4 10.Bxe7 Qxe7 11.Re1 Bd7=] 5.e4 Be7 [5...h6 6.Bxf6 Qxf6 7.exd5 Bd6 8.dxe6 Qh4+ 9.Ke2 Bxe6=/+] 6.Bd3 [6.e5 Nfd7 7.Bxe7 Qxe7 8.f4 0-0=] 6...fxe4 [6...dxe4 7.fxe4 Nc6 8.Nf3 h6=] 7.fxe4 dxe4 8.Nxe4? [8.Bxf6 Bxf6 9.Nxe4 Qxd4=] 8...Nxe4 9.Bxe7 Qxe7 10.Bxe4? Qh4+ White resigns 0-1

120 – Rotstein 2…d5 3.Bg5 c6 With age comes wisdom. I can vouch for that. In chess, I can be sneaky without fear of embarrassment. It’s a game. Enjoy! This Dutch Defence has both players fiddle around on the queenside. Who needs to castle? Not these guys. Suddenly Black launches a sneak attack and wins in Andreas Huss vs Jefim Rotstein. Huss (2276) - Rotstein (2318), World Senior Teams +65 Dresden GER, 15.07.2018 begins 1.d4 f5 2.Nc3 d5 3.Bg5 c6 4.e3 Qb6 [4...Nf6=] 5.Na4

[5.Rb1+/=] 5...Qa5+ 6.c3 e5 7.b4 Bxb4 8.cxb4 Qxb4+ 9.Ke2 h6 10.Bh4 [10.Qb3 Qa5 11.Bh4 g5 12.dxe5 gxh4 13.f4=] 10...g5 11.f4 exf4 12.Bf2? [12.Be1=] 12...b6 13.exf4 Ba6+ 14.Kf3 g4+ 15.Kg3 [Or 15.Ke3 Bxf1 16.Qxf1 Qxa4-+] 15...Nf6 There is no good defense to the knight check on e4. 0-1

121 – Wiggett 2…d5 3.Bg5 Nf6 There is a wonderful descriptive term called Pennsylvania Dutch. It stands for the German people who settled a large part of rural Pennsylvania hundreds of years ago. They brought with them to America their cultures, their religions and their delicious food. They are really not Dutch, but Deutsch, which means “German”. There are some historical and technical reasons, but it seems to me that the English speaking people in Pennsylvania just chose to call the "Deutsch" people the "Dutch". Most of the Pennsylvania Dutch have completely Americanized themselves. For generations they taught their children to speak excellent English so they could be as successful as possible in America. Two groups of Pennsylvania Dutch that have not completely adopted American culture are the Mennonites and the Amish. The Mennonites are usually evangelical Christians who dress plainly (often in black) but many of them do drive cars. The Amish use horses and buggies to travel around and farm the land. They do not have electricity in their homes and do not drive cars, although they do ride in them. Some refer to the Americans as the “English”. These Amish may or may not be religious, but culturally they are very different from most Americans. I spent 20 years in Pennsylvania. The comments above are just my observations. Often we visited Lancaster on vacation where the Pennsylvania Dutch influence is very strong. Sometimes we would go over to the town of Gettysburg, site of the famous Gettysburg Civil War battle in July 1863. We went there on our honeymoon. I returned to that battlefield town a dozen times. About 50 miles southwest of Gettysburg is Martinsburg, West Virginia, site of the four round tournament in which I played. During 1988-1990, I was

on a hot streak in postal chess. I played hundreds of games using the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit as White and Latvian Gambit and Dutch Defence as Black. Here I am from Pennsylvania playing the Dutch Defence in West Virginia. My round 2 opponent was Bruce Wiggett. Wiggett - Sawyer, Martinsburg, WV (2), 09.12.1989 begins 1.d4 f5 Dutch Defence 2.Nc3 This is a popular variation at the club level. 2...d5 3.Bg5 Nf6 [3...g6 4.h4 Bg7 5.e3 c6 is another reasonable set-up.] 4.e3 [4.Bxf6 exf6 5.e3 Be6 leads to approximate equality.] 4...e6 5.Bd3 Be7 6.Qe2 c6 7.Nf3 0-0 8.Ne5 Bd7 [Now looks like a good time to attack the center with 8...c5=/+] 9.f4 Be8 10.h3 Ne4 11.Bxe7 Qxe7 12.Nxe4? [Dropping a piece. White should play 12.Bxe4 fxe4 13.0-0 Nd7=] 12...fxe4 13.g4 Qh4+ 14.Kd2 exd3 15.Nxd3 Nd7 16.Raf1 Bg6 [My bad bishop finally springs to life.] 17.Nf2 Nf6 18.Rfg1Ne4+ 19.Nxe4 Bxe4 20.Rh2 Qe7 [I decided to break through on the queenside.] 21.c3 c5 22.g5 c4 23.h4 b5 24.a3 a5 25.h5 Rfb8 26.Ra1 b4 27.Ke1 bxc3 28.bxc3 Rb3 [Doubling rooks on the open file leads to an easy win.] 29.Qa2 Rab8 30.a4 Qb7 [30...Rxc3-+] 31.Rd2 Rxc3 32.Kf2 Rb3 33.Re2 Rb2 [33...c3!-+ wins] 34.Rxb2 Qxb2+ 35.Qxb2 Rxb2+ 36.Ke1 Rh2 37.Rd1 Rxh5 [Creating two passed pawns for a simple endgame win.] 38.Rc1 Rh1+ 39.Kd2 Rxc1 40.Kxc1 h5 41.Kd2 h4 42.Ke2 c3 43.Kf2 c2 0-1

2.Nc3 d5 3.e4 dxe4 The Blackmar-Diemer Gambit Poehlmann is also a line in the Dutch Defence. White might choose 4.Bf4, 4.Bg5, or 4.f3.

122 – Sawyer 4.Bf4 Nf6 5.Qd2 I chose 4.Bf4 vs Edmundich. We castled opposite sides. Black opened up my king, but I defended reasonably well. My focus was on the center. Then I launched my h-pawn attack. Finally I was able to sneak in with 34.Rg8+ and 35.Qh8 mate. Sawyer - Edmundich (1784). ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 18.01.2013 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 f5 4.Bf4 Nf6 5.Qd2 [5.Bb5+!?] 5...e6 6.00-0 Bb4 7.a3 Bxc3 8.bxc3 [8.Qxc3 Nd5 9.Qg3 Nxf4 10.Qxf4=] 8...Nd5 9.Be5 0-0 10.c4 Nf6 11.f3 Qe7 12.Kb2 Nc6 13.f4 Rd8 14.Qc3 Nxe5 15.fxe5 Ng4 16.Nh3 c5 17.Be2 cxd4 18.Rxd4 Rxd4 19.Qxd4 Nh6 20.g4 b6 21.g5 [21.Nf4 Bb7-/+] 21...Nf7 22.g6 hxg6 23.Nf4 Nh8 [23...g5 24.Ng6 Qc5-+] 24.h4 Bb7 25.h5 Rd8 26.Qc3 g5 27.Ng6 Qc5 28.Nxh8 Kxh8 29.h6 gxh6 30.Rxh6+ Kg7 31.Rxe6? [31.Qh3!+-] 31...Rd7? [31...Bc8!=/+] 32.Re8?! [32.Qh3!+-] 32...Re7? 33.e6+ Kg6 34.Rg8+ Kh7 35.Qh8# Black checkmated 1-0

123 – Hess 4.Bf4 Nf6 5.f3 Nc6 I decided to give 4.Bf4 a try vs Alfred Hess. At the time, I owned every book known to cover this BDG-Dutch Defence, but at that time, there was not much theory. We were on our own quickly. Sawyer (2000) - Hess (1887), corr USCF 89NS48, 10.12.1991 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 f5 4.Bf4 Nf6 5.f3 Nc6 [Black provokes the pawn advance. More popular is 5...e6 6.fxe4 fxe4 7.Bc4] 6.d5 e5! [The point is: 4.Bf4 does not prevent ...e5! forever.] 7.dxc6 [7.Bg3 Nb4 8.fxe4 fxe4=/+] 7...Qxd1+ [7...exf4 8.Qxd8+ Kxd8 9.0-0-0+ Bd6 10.cxb7 Bxb7 11.Nb5 Ke7 12.Nxd6 cxd6-/+ and Black is still up a pawn.] 8.Rxd1 exf4 9.fxe4 fxe4 10.Rd4 bxc6 11.Nxe4 Nd5 12.Nc3 Nxc3 13.bxc3 Bd6 14.Bc4 Bf5 15.Ne2 Bxc2 [Picking off the extra doubled c-pawn is almost useless, as

this allows me to capture the important f4 pawn. Now White's drawing chances go way up. Better is 15...c5 16.Rd2 Rf8 17.0-0 g5-/+] 16.Kd2 Bf5 17.Nxf4 c5 18.Re1+ Kf8 19.Ne6+ Bxe6 20.Rf1+ Ke8 21.Re4 Rf8 22.Rxe6+ Kd7 23.Rxf8 1/2-1/2

124 – Lau 4.Bf4 Nf6 5.f3 exf3 Gambiteers make it hard on those who avoid sharp tactics by a slow build up. I headed toward a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit after 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3. Rather than play 3...Nf6, Brian Lau played 3...f5 which is known both as the BDG Poehlmann variation and a Dutch Defence after 1.d4 f5 2.Nc3 d5 3.e4 dxe4. I chose 4.Bf4, mentioned by Andrew Martin in his 1990 book “The Contemporary Anti-Dutch”. I played a natural BDG style attack after 5.f3, 6.Nxf3, 7.Bc4, 8.Ne5 and 9.Qf3. White regained the pawn and was able to trap the Black queen by move 20 in an unusual manner. Brian S. Lau was the older brother of David S. Lau. It was nice having these boys playing in our Williamsport chess club years ago. Their play at our Tuesday night club helped them improve. At the time of our game below, Brian Lau's rating on a very fast rise toward the 1800s where it leveled off. His last tournament in 2003 left him with a USCF rating of 1833. As kids, David's style was tactical but loose; he threw everything at you until he had nothing left. Brian's style was more positional and solid; he kept his pieces safe and active. Brian was usually rated 100 points higher than his younger sibling. I enjoyed facing Brian because he could punish my wild and crazy tendencies. We played 18 games. Brian won three and drew three. Below is one of the 12 that I won. Sawyer (2011) - Lau (1544), Williamsport, PA 1994 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 f5 4.Bf4 Nf6 5.f3 exf3 6.Nxf3 e6 7.Bc4 Bd6 8.Ne5 [8.Qd2 0-0 9.0-0-0=] 8...0-0 [8...Nc6=/+] 9.Qf3 Bxe5 10.dxe5 Ne4 11.Nxe4 fxe4 12.Qxe4 Qh4+ 13.g3 Qg4 14.Bd3 Qh5 15.g4 Qh3 16.0-0-0 [Even better is

16.Rf1!+-] 16...g6 [16...Bd7 17.Qc4+/-] 17.Rdf1 [17.Bg5 Qf3 18.Rhf1+-] 17...Nd7 [17...Bd7 18.Bg5+-] 18.Bg5 Rxf1+ 19.Bxf1 Nc5 20.Qf4 1-0

125 – Sawyer 4.Bg5 Qd6 5.Bc4 There is a variation of the Dutch Defence that grandmasters play which transposes to the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit Poehlmann. The move orders are 1.d4 f5 2.Nc3 d5 3.e4 dxe4 or 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 f5. Black threatens to play 4...e5! with a great game. White has two ways to prevent the 4...e5 advance: 4.Bf4 and 4.Bg5. I play both. The most common 4th move for White is 4.f3 when most capture 4...exf3 or develop 4...Nf6. The strong is pawn push 4.f3 e5! This immediately equalizes; in my database it scored exactly 50% when I annotated this game. White usually plays 5.dxe5, but sometimes 5.d5 which transposes to a BDG Lemberger normally reached via 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 e5 4.d5 f5 5.f3. Below was the 100th time I played 4.Bg5 scoring 61% and a performance rating of 2111. Here I played a speculative piece sacrifice on e4 when my opponent was behind in development and time. In the end Black's clock runs out in the face of mate in one. Sawyer - CHELLER, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 04.08.2012 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 f5 4.Bg5 [4.f3 e5] 4...Qd6!? 5.Bc4?! [5.Qd2=] 5...Qg6 6.Nh3 e6? [6...f4 7.Rg1 h6 8.Bxf4=] 7.Qd2? c6 [7...h6! 8.Bf4 Qxg2 9.0-0-0 Qxh3-/+] 8.0-0-0 Nf6 9.f4?! [9.f3+/=] 9...Be7 10.Nf2 0-0 11.h4 Nd5 12.Bxe7 [12.Bxd5!+/=] 12...Nxe7 13.g4 [13.h5] 13...Kh8 14.g5 Qe8 15.h5 Nd5 16.Nfxe4?! [16.Rde1=] 16...fxe4 17.Nxe4 Rxf4? [Black has 17...b5 18.Bb3 Nd7=/+] 18.Bxd5 exd5 [If 18...Qf8 19.Nf6!+-] 19.Qxf4 dxe4 20.Rhf1 Nd7 21.Rde1 b6 22.Rxe4 Qd8 23.Qf7 Qxg5+? 24.Kb1 Ba6 25.Re8+ Rxe8 26.Qxe8+ 1-0

126 – Morris 4.Bg5 h6 5.Qh5+ It had been 9 years since my early days playing at the North Penn Club in Lansdale, Pennsylvania. In the meantime I had changed jobs twice and moved to Texas and back. I added another son and lost one. After that, I played very little for years. In 1988 I returned to playing postal chess. By 1989 I had entered ten sections of the USCF Golden Knights postal tournament. I was on a hot run at one point winning 26 postal games in a row. That made me a USCF Postal Master rated over 2200. One Saturday morning in December 1989 I got up early with my youngest son and drove over a hundred miles to Martinsburg, West Virginia for a one day four round tournament. I had not played much face to face chess with a clock for several years. We found the tournament site near the intersection of King Street and Queen Street. Anyway, things got off to a good start. I got a BlackmarDiemer Gambit Declined, Poehlmann Variation (3...f5). This is also a variation of the Dutch Defence after 2.Nc3 d5 3.e4. I had stopped playing main line openings and fell in love with the BDG. Then I began to write my first BDG Keybook (published in 1992). I had energy in the morning and played well enough to win. My first round opponent was Peter Morris. Sawyer - Morris, Martinsburg, WV (1), 09.12.1989 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 f5 4.Bg5 [This Bg5 was a favorite of David Gedult. 4.f3 was recently played by Peter Mcgerald Penullar.] 4...h6? [This is a common mistake. Black forgets that he is weakening the h5-e8 diagonal to the king. Better is 4...Nf6] 5.Qh5+ Kd7 6.Bh4 [6.Bc4!+- is usually played with a winning advantage.] 6...g5 7.Bxg5 Qe8 8.Qh3 [Also good is 8.Qxe8+ Kxe8 9.Bf4 with the better chances.] 8...e6 9.0-0-0 Bg7 10.Bh4 c6 [Hoping to stop the advance.] 11.d5! Bxc3 12.Qxc3 [Missing the power of 12.dxe6+! when 12...Kxe6? leads to a forced mate 13.Bc4+ Ke5 14.Qxc3+

Kf4 15.Qg3#] 12...exd5 13.Qxh8 Kc7 14.c4 Be6 15.Qe5+ Kc8 16.cxd5 Nd7 [There are no good moves.] 17.Qxe6 Qxe6 18.dxe6 Nc5 19.Rd8+ 1-0

127 – ChessBeta 4.Bg5 g6 5.Bc4 My Blackmar-Diemer Gambit vs ChessBeta was a Poehlmann 3...f5 that "I pin the imaginary horse" with 4.Bg5, as David Gedult used to say. White's chances were equal in theory, but not in practice when Black is rated 3266. I have won about 50 games vs opponents rated over 3000 and just about all were on time (when the silicon monster glitched) or when it was forfeited. Most of those games were unrated, because strong computers rarely play rated games if they cannot gain at least one rating point from crushing you. Here I test Gedult's 4.Bg5 line. Sawyer (2391) - ChessBeta (3266), ICC 3 1 u Internet Chess Club, 15.03.2002 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 f5 4.Bg5 g6 5.Bc4 Bg7 6.Nge2 Nc6 7.d5 Na5 8.Bb3 [8.Bb5+ Bd7 9.Nd4 c6 10.dxc6 Nxc6-/+] 8...Nxb3 9.axb3 a6 10.Qd2!? [10.0-0 h6 11.Be3 e5 12.dxe6 Qxd1 13.Raxd1=] 10...h6 11.Be3 e5 [This position resembles a line in the BDG Lemberger 4.Nge2 variation.] 12.dxe6 [12.d6!? Be6 13.dxc7 Qxd2+ 14.Kxd2 Rc8 15.Bb6 Nf6=/+] 12...Qxd2+ 13.Bxd2 Bxe6 14.Nf4 Bf7 15.0-0-0 0-0-0 16.h4 Nf6 17.g3 Rd7 18.Be3 Rhd8 19.Rxd7 Rxd7 20.Rd1 Ng4 21.Rxd7 Kxd7 22.Nfd5 Kd6 23.Bf4+ Kc6 24.Nb4+ Kd7 25.Be3 Nxe3 26.fxe3 Be5 27.Ne2 a5 28.Na2 a4 29.Nac3 axb3 30.cxb3 Bxb3 31.Kd2 c5 32.Nf4 Bf7 33.Nce2? [If 33.Kc2 Kc6-+] 33...Bxb2 White resigns 0-1

128 – Sawyer 4.Bg5 Nf6 5.Bc4 In the Dutch Defence BDG Poehlmann, we both miss the power of a timely ...Nc6-Na5 which would have cost me a few rating points. Instead I win again. Methinks I need to be more accurate. Sawyer - Unbeliever, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 27.05.2012 begins 1.d4 f5 2.Nc3 d5 3.e4 dxe4 [3...fxe4? 4.Qh5+ is great for White.] 4.Bg5 [This is a favorite of mine.] 4...Nf6 5.Bc4!? Nc6! 6.Nge2 e6 7.Qd2 Be7 [7...Na5!=/+ is inconvenient for White.] 8.0-0-0 0-0 [8...h6!-/+] 9.Bxf6 [9.Nf4!=] 9...Bxf6 10.d5 Ne5 [10...Na5! Fortunately Black missed 11.Bb3 Nxb3+ 12.axb3 Bg5 13.Nf4 e5-+] 11.Bb3 Qe7 12.Nf4 a5 [12...Rd8=/+] 13.a4? [Looks like I should have played 13.dxe6! a4 14.Ncd5 Qc5

15.Nxf6+ gxf6 16.Bd5+/-] 13...Rd8 14.Kb1 Bd7? [14...c6 15.d6 Qe8=/+] 15.dxe6! Be8 16.Qe2?! [16.Ncd5!+- is crushing.] 16...b5? [16...c6 17.g4+/=] 17.Nfd5 Qc5 18.Nxf6+ gxf6 19.e7+ 1-0

129 – Schuda 4.f3 e5 5.dxe5 With the fourth pick in the National Football League draft, Oakland chose Amari Cooper. Yahoo Sports noted that Cooper “fits the mold of a chess piece” as he can “can run every route, can play every receiver position”. Passing patterns resemble knight moves. Michal Schuda and I both missed opportunities for knight pattern plays – twice each! White could have tried 7.Nb5!? or 16.Neg5! Black passed on 6...Nc6 and 16...Nf6. Schuda (1698) - Sawyer, corr BDGW 5-B (3.1), 03.1992 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 f5 4.f3 e5 5.dxe5 Qxd1+ 6.Kxd1 Be6 [6...Nc6= Rybka, Stockfish, Fritz] 7.fxe4 [7.Nb5!? Houdini] 7...Nc6 8.Nf3 0-0-0+ 9.Bd3 fxe4 10.Nxe4 Bg4 11.Ke2 Nxe5 12.Be3 Nxd3 13.cxd3 Be7 14.h3 Bh5 [Black can split the White pawns with 14...Bxf3+ 15.gxf3 Nf6=/+] 15.g4 Be8 16.a4 [16.Neg5!=] 16...Kb8?! [Better is 16...Nf6-/+] 17.Bd4?! [17.Nfg5! Nf6 18.Ne6 Nxe4 19.dxe4 Rd6 20.Nxg7 Bf6 21.Nxe8 Rxe8 22.g5 Bxb2=] 17...Nf6 18.Bxf6 Bxf6 19.Nxf6 gxf6 20.Kd2 Bg6=/+ 1/2-1/2

130 – SafeHouse 4.f3 Nf6 5.Bg5 I grew up in a safe house blessed with wonderful parents who did a great job raising me. I am grateful for their encouragement and wisdom throughout the ups and downs of my life. Thanks! Sometimes my ICC blitz rating drops when I experiment for fun with risky openings. When I take things more seriously, I make a comeback. I played this Blackmar-Diemer Gambit in 2014. White took aim at the weak f5 point to win vs the BDG Poehlmann which is also a Dutch Defence. My opponent SafeHouse falls for a thematic tactic. His pawn on e6 is pinned by the White bishop aimed at the Black king. Mate comes quickly. Sawyer - SafeHouse (1761), ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 09.09.2014 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 f5 4.f3 Nf6 5.Bg5 exf3 6.Nxf3 e6 7.Bc4 Bd6 8.0-0 [8.Qe2+/= is more accurate.] 8...0-0 [8...h6! 9.Bh4 g5 10.Bf2 0-

0=] 9.Qe2 Re8?! [9...Kh8=] 10.Ne5! c6? [10...g6 11.Rae1+/=] 11.Rxf5! h6 12.Bxf6 gxf6 13.Qg4+ Kf8 14.Qg6 Bxe5 15.dxe5 exf5 16.Qf7 mate 1-0

131 – LeviRook 4.f3 exf3 5.Nxf3 At first glance Black holds the gambit pawn, but if White hits the center with all his army, Black will not maintain any advantage. Anything slight wavering on the defenders part places Black in grave danger. White forces smash through for a quick and sudden checkmate on move 12. I love these fun quickies! Sawyer - LeviRook, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 07.11.2014 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 f5 4.f3 exf3 5.Nxf3 g6!? [5...Nf6 6.Bc4=] 6.Bc4 e6 7.00 Bg7 8.Bf4 [Even better is 8.Re1!+- immediately.] 8...Ne7 9.Re1 [9.Qe2!+-] 9...Kf7? [9...0-0 10.Qd2+/-] 10.Bxe6+! Bxe6 11.Ng5+ Kf6 [11...Kg8 12.Nxe6 Qd7 13.Nxg7 Kxg7 14.Be5+ wins material.] 12.Rxe6# Black is checkmated 1-0

132 – Penullar 5.Nxf3 e6 6.Bc4 In chess openings there is a race to complete the development of all the pieces (not counting pawns). Whichever side wins that race has the best chance to win the game. This concept is aptly illustrated below. Peter Mcgerald Penullar faces the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit Declined 3...f5. Peter wins the development race. It pays off. Under the pressure of facing White's entire army, which was poised for battle, Black blunders. Penullar makes another of his Bxh6 sacs which leads to a quick checkmate. Penullar - pousbois, UNITED MACEDONIANS, #4 Chess.com, 17.01.2012 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 f5 4.f3 [Penullar chooses the most popular fourth move option. All four options are good.] 4...exf3 [Accepting the gambit after having played ...f5 is very co-operative. White wants an open e-file. Better is 4...Nf6 with chances for both sides.] 5.Nxf3 e6 [This backward e6 pawn on a half-open file is chronically weak in the Poehlmann Variation. It can be attacked with moves like Bc4, Ng5, Qe2, or Rae1, depending on how Black defends.] 6.Bc4 Bb4 7.0-0 Nf6 8.a3 Bxc3 9.bxc3 b6 10.Qe1 Qd6 11.Bg5 0-0 12.Qh4 Bb7 13.Rae1 [White is first to complete his development: the Pole Position.] 13...Bd5 14.Bd3 Bxf3 15.Rxf3 Nbd7 16.Bc4 Rae8 [Black completes his development, only to

drop a pawn.] 17.Rxf5 c5 18.Rf3 h6? 19.Bxh6 [There goes Peter with one of his Bxh6 sacrifices again.] 19...gxh6 20.Qxh6 Kf7? [Trying to run away, the Black king falls for a pretty mate.] 21.Qh7# 1-0

133 – Juggernot 5.Nxf3 Nf6 6.Bc4 This BDG Poehlmann Dutch Defence shows how easy it is for a good player to walk into a dangerous position. At two seconds per move I did not find the best moves, but I did get to the Black king. He avoided getting mated only by immediate resignation. Sawyer - JUGGERNOT, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 29.12.2012 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 f5 4.f3 exf3 5.Nxf3 Nf6 6.Bc4 e6 7.0-0 Bd6 8.Bg5 [8.Ng5!+/- likely regains the gambit pawn with a better position.] 8...0-0 9.Qe1 Re8 10.Qh4 h6 11.Bxh6?! [I knew this was risky, but it was fun blitz game. A more sane approach is 11.Bxf6 Qxf6 12.Qxf6 gxf6 13.Nh4=] 11...gxh6 12.Qxh6 Qe7 13.Ng5 Qg7 14.Qh4 Nc6? [Black should protect f5 with 14...Qg6 and a critical line might be 15.Ne2 Nc6 16.Rae1 Na5 17.Bxe6+ Bxe6 18.Nxe6 Rxe6 19.Nf4 Bxf4 20.Rxe6 Bg5-/+] 15.Rxf5 Na5 [Now I play a very nice attack all the way to the end. Black could play 15...Nh7 16.Nxh7 Qxd4+ 17.Qxd4 Nxd4 18.Nf6+ Kf7 19.Rf2+/-] 16.Rxf6!? [I was focused on playing for mate, but of course picking off the queenside knight 16.Rxa5+- wins.] 16...Nxc4 17.Raf1 [17.Nce4 Rf8 18.Raf1+-] 17...Be7 18.Rf7 [18.Qh5+-] 18...Qg6 19.Nce4 Ne3 20.Nf6+ [A more crisp mate is 20.R1f6! Bxf6 21.Nxf6+ Qxf6 22.Qh7#] 20...Bxf6 21.R1xf6 Qxc2 22.Rg7+ Kxg7 23.Qh6+ Kg8 24.Rg6+ Qxg6 25.Qxg6+ Black resigns 1-0

134 – Sawyer 5.Nxf3 e6 6.Bc4 Tiger Woods planned a comeback in 2011. I had hoped his form would return, but he had mixed results. I’ve had periods of time when I am not in good form. Such was the case with me in 2011. This BDG Poehlmann / Dutch Defence took on the character of a Dutch Staunton. I missed 8.Ng5! and 11.Rxf5! I kept attacking his king. Eventually I found a mating combination to finish. Sawyer - worldcitizen, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 28.07.2011 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 f5 4.f3 exf3 5.Nxf3 e6 6.Bc4 Nf6 7.0-0 Bd6 8.Bg5 [8.Ng5!] 8...0-0 9.Qe2 Re8 10.Ne5 Qe7 11.Rad1 [11.Rxf5!]

11...Nbd7 12.a3 b6 13.Kh1 Bb7 14.b4 a5 15.b5 Qf8 16.Rxf5 Kh8 17.Rff1 Re7 18.Ne4 Rae8 19.Nxd7 Rxd7 20.Nxf6 gxf6 21.Bxf6+ Kg8 22.Qg4+ Kf7 23.Qh5+ [23.Bh4+ Bf3 24.Rxf3+ Bf4 25.Rxf4#] 23...Kg8 24.Qg5+ Kf7 25.Be5+ Black resigns 1-0

Book 10: Chapter 6 – Staunton Gambit 2.e4 The Staunton Gambit is a bold counter to the Dutch Defence. In this chapter we look at the less common possibilities.

135 – Sawyer 2.e4 Nf6 3.exf5 On the day I played this game I went to McDonalds drive-thru to get a chicken sandwich meal. The person taking my money said they messed up recording my transaction. They told me to pull ahead and just pick up my meal for free! If I’d known they were going give me my meal for free, I might have ordered more! Sometimes your opponent just gives you stuff for free. This Dutch Defence game began 1.d4 f5. I surprised him with a Staunton Gambit, and then 2.e4 Nf6? I was obvious that he had made up his mind to play 2...Nf6. Now, how should White take advantage? I grabbed the f-pawn. Eventually I let my advantage slip. It went from equal to me losing, back to equal and finally to me winning. My final move 54.c6+ was a pre-move. Sawyer (1946) - bsireta (1898), ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 29.07.2011 begins 1.d4 f5 2.e4 Nf6? 3.exf5 d5 4.Bd3 e5 [Black makes a practical choice to treat the position like a gambit. He opens up the game to let his bishops out.] 5.dxe5 Ne4 6.Bxe4 dxe4 [Good here is 7.Qh5+ g6 8.fxg6 with a big advantage. I decided to head for an endgame up a pawn or two.] 7.Qxd8+ Kxd8 8.Bg5+ Be7 9.Bxe7+ Kxe7 10.e6 [10.Nc3! would have been better.] 10…g6 11.fxg6 hxg6 12.Nc3 e3? 13.fxe3 [13.Nd5+!] 13...Bxe6 14.0-0-0 Nc6 15.Nf3 Bg4 16.h3 Bxf3 17.gxf3 Rad8 18.Rxd8 Kxd8 19.f4 Ne7 20.Kd2 c6 21.Ne4 Nf5 22.Ng5 Ke7 23.Rd1? [23.Rg1] 23...Rd8+ 24.Ke1 Rxd1+ 25.Kxd1 Nxe3+ 26.Kd2 Ng2 27.c3 Nxf4 28.Ke3 Nd5+ 29.Kd4 b6 30.c4 Nf4 31.Ke4 Ne2 32.b3? Nc1? 33.Nf3 Nxa2 34.Ne5 Kf6 35.Nxc6 a5 36.Kd4 Nc1 37.Kc3 Kg5 38.Nd4 Kh4 39.Kd2 Nxb3+ 40.Nxb3 Kxh3 41.Nxa5 g5 42.Nb3 g4 43.Nc1 Kg3 44.Ne2+ [44.Ke3+/-] 44...Kf3 45.Kd3 g3 46.Nxg3 Kxg3 47.Kd4 Kf4 48.Kd5 Kf5?

[48...Ke3=] 49.Kc6 Ke6 50.Kxb6 Kd7 51.c5 Kc8 52.Kc6 Kb8 53.Kd7 Kb7 54.c6+ Black resigns 1-0

136 – Sawyer 2.e4 g6 3.exf5 Checkmate! We love it. Fool's Mate is a type of checkmate early in the game where losing king is trapped on its original square. The mate comes on the diagonal from h1-e1 or h5-e8. Here is a Fool’s Mate I pulled off in a three minute blitz game. Black does best to accept the Staunton Gambit with 2...dxe4. Sawyer - northchess3, Internet Chess Club 2007 begins 1.d4 f5 2.e4 g6? [Black defends f5, but this move still loses a pawn due to the mate threat.] 3.exf5 gxf5? 4.Qh5# 1-0

137 – Regan 2.e4 d5 3.exf5 My final USCF rated postal chess game against James Regan was another attempt at a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit, this time vs the Dutch Defence. After 1.d4 f5 2.e4 d5 we reached a position that could have been played in the standard BDG move order with 1.d4 d5 2.e4 f5. I got a little crazy with my g-pawn. I attacked kingside in a game where Black castled queenside. This finished my eight game series vs James Regan. Overall I was +5 =1 -2, going 3-1-1 in rated games. However, I did get the advantage of the pairings with White in five of the eight games. It was fun for me to experiment with sharp openings in those years. Now strong chess engines provide both players with more accurate computer evaluations regarding good and bad moves. Back then we just had to guess. Sawyer - Regan, corr USCF 1989 begins 1.d4 f5 2.e4 d5?! [2...fxe4 is the normal Staunton Gambit.] 3.exf5 [3.exd5!+/-] 3...Bxf5 4.g4!? Bd7 5.Nc3 e6 6.g5?! [6.Nf3=] 6...Ne7 7.Bd3 Nbc6 8.Nf3 Nb4 9.Be2 Ng6 10.a3 Nc6 11.Bd3 Bd6 12.Qe2 Qe7 13.Be3 0-0-0 [13...Nf4!-/+] 14.0-0-0 Nf4 15.Qf1 Nxd3+ 16.Qxd3 Rdf8 17.Ng1 Be8 18.Nge2 a6 19.h4 [19.Qd2 Bh5-/+] 19...Bg6 20.Qd2 h5 [20...Bxa3! is quite promising.] 21.gxh6 gxh6 22.Kb1

Bh5 23.Bxh6 Rxf2 24.Bg5 Qf7 25.Qe3 Rf8 26.Rde1 Qf5 27.Qh3 Kd7 28.Qxf5 R8xf5 29.Be3 R2f3 [-/+] 0-1

138 – Devereaux 2.e4 d6 3.exf5 How do you meet a new chess friend? Obviously you can go to a tournament, visit a chess club or meet at an online internet site. I've done all those things, but sometimes we just meet going about our daily business. I do not remember how I met John Paul Devereaux, but it was in July of 1990. I think we were at a bookstore or library where we were looking at chess books. At any rate we got talking. Mr. Devereaux was 74 years old at that time, a retired college professor near Penn State. He invited me to visit his home where we could play some chess. We exchanged contact information; some days later I showed up. John Paul Devereaux was a kind host and a friendly person. He is gone but not forgotten. We played two games. Here is the first. Sawyer-Devereaux, (Game 1) State College, PA 1990 begins 1.d4 f5 [Dutch Defence] 2.e4 [Staunton Gambit] 2...d6 [Balogh Defence, which can also be reached via the Pirc Defence after 1.e4 d6 2.d4 f5.] 3.exf5 Bxf5 4.Qf3 Qc8 5.Bd3 g6 6.Ne2 Nc6 7.c3?! [Played to strengthen d4 and guard against ...Nb4, however it looks slow.] 7...Qe6 8.0-0 Qf6 9.Ng3 e6 [9...Bxd3 10.Qxd3+/=] 10.Nd2 [10.Ba6!? or first 10.Nxf5] 10...0-0-0 11.Nde4 Qh4? [Too frisky.] 12.Bg5 Qg4 13.Qxg4 Bxg4 14.Bxd8 Kxd8 15.Ng5 Bh6? 16.Nf7+ 1-0

139 – Devereaux 3.Nc3 d5 4.Qh5+ State College, Pennsylvania (home of Penn State University) was a town of about 40,000 people. Penn State had another 40,000. Some lived in State College, but most students were only in town during the school year. When Coach Joe Paterno led the Nittany Lions in home football games at Beaver Stadium for 60 years, another 100,000 people came to visit for those few Saturdays each fall. So when school was in session, the roads, stores and restaurants were full. When I had to go to State College on a football game day, I timed my trips to come and go during the three hour game. The roads were empty. You could see everyone at the stadium. In the summer and during holidays, the town was much quieter. As I recall, I told John Paul Devereaux that I was writing my BlackmarDiemer Gambit Keybook on playing the White pieces. This original edition was published in February 1992. Devereaux had me play White for our games so I could practice my gambit system. He was rated 1594 at the time. He liked to use the Dutch Defence, so I got to try my Staunton Gambit. Sawyer - Devereaux, (Game 2) State College, PA 1990 begins 1.d4 f5 2.e4 fxe4 3.Nc3 d5? [A common blunder by club players. Correct is 3...Nf6 4.f3 or 4.Bg5] 4.Qh5+ g6 5.Qxd5 Qxd5 6.Nxd5 Kd7 7.Bf4 Na6 8.Bxa6 bxa6 9.Nxc7 Rb8 10.0-0-0 [Here I missed the tactic 10.Ne6! Rxb2 11.Nxf8+ Ke8 12.d5+- winning a piece due to the threat of 13.Be5 attacking both Black rooks.] 10...Bg7 11.Nxa6 Rb6 12.Nc5+ Kc6 13.Nxe4 [White is up three pawns.] 13...Nf6 14.Nxf6 Bxf6 15.Be5 Rf8 16.Bxf6 exf6 17.Ne2 and White won. 1-0

2.e4 fxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5 Black does best to take this pawn. This chapter covers the gambit accepted lines with 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5.

140 – Mosesov 4.Bg5 d5 5.Bxf6 Black lost or sacrificed a pawn in this Dutch Defence Staunton 4.Bg5 after the dubious move 4...d5?! White regained the gambit pawn with interest in Danylo Mosesov vs Vladimir Meleshko. Mosesov (2040) - Meleshko (2219), Leonid Stein Mem 2017 Pustomyty UKR (8.1), 29.08.2017 begins 1.d4 f5 2.e4 fxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5 d5 5.Bxf6 exf6 6.Qh5+ g6 7.Qxd5 Bb4 [7...Nc6 8.Qxe4+ Qe7 9.0-0-0+/=] 8.Qxe4+ Kf7 9.Bc4+ [9.0-0-0 Bxc3 10.bxc3 Re8 11.Qf4+/=] 9...Kg7 10.Nge2 Re8 11.Qd5 [11.Qf4+/=] 11...Qxd5 12.Bxd5 c6 13.Bf3 Bxc3+ 14.bxc3 Nd7 15.0-0 Nb6 16.Nf4 Bf5 17.Nd3 Na4 18.c4 Nc3 19.Rfe1 Rac8 20.Nc5 b6 21.Nb7 Rxe1+ 22.Rxe1 Rc7 [22...Bxc2 23.Re7+ Kf8 24.Rxh7+/-] 23.Nd6 Rd7 24.c5 Nd5 25.g4 Bxc2 26.Bxd5 cxd5 27.Ne8+ Kh6? [27...Kf8 28.Nxf6+/-] 28.c6! Rd8 29.c7 [29...Rc8 30.Re7 Bd3 31.Nd6 and Black must give up the rook.] 1-0

141 – Sonjaya 4.Bg5 c6 5.f3 A defense vs the Staunton Gambit is 4...c6 and 5...Qa5. Black’s queen pinned Nc3, attacks Bg5, and prepared ...0-0-0. Black had a tactical surprise in Tawin Matthew Nunbhakdi vs Deni Sonjaya. Nunbhakdi (2023) - Sonjaya (2309), 4th Johor Open 2017 MAS, 13.12.2017 begins 1.d4 f5 2.e4 fxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5 c6 5.f3 Qa5 [5...d5 6.fxe4 dxe4 7.Bc4=] 6.Qd2 [Maybe 6.Bd2 e3 7.Bxe3+/=] 6...exf3 [6...d5 7.fxe4 dxe4 8.Nxe4 Qxd2+ 9.Nxd2 Bf5 10.0-0-0+/=] 7.Nxf3 d6 8.Bd3 Bg4 9.0-0 Nbd7 10.a3 [10.b4! Qxb4 11.Rab1 Qa5 12.Rxb7+/=] 10...0-0-0 [10...e5!?] 11.b4 Qc7 12.d5 Bxf3 13.Rxf3 Ne5 14.Rh3 Kb8 15.dxc6 Qxc6 16.b5 Qc8 17.Rh4 [17.Rf1=] 17...Nfd7 [17...g6=/+] 18.Be3 [18.Rf1=] 18...g5 19.Rb4 Bg7 20.Bd4 Nc5 [20...Nf3+!-+] 21.Nd5 e6 [21...Qe6-/+] 22.Nc3 [22.Ne7 Qc7=/+] 22...Rhf8 [22...Ncxd3 23.cxd3 Nf3+ 24.gxf3

Bxd4+ 25.Rxd4 Qc5 26.Qe3 e5 27.Re4 Qxc3-/+] 23.Na4 [23.Be2 h6-/+] 23...Nexd3 24.Bxg7 Rf2 25.Qe3 Rxc2 26.Rd1? [26.Nxc5 Qxc5 27.Qxc5 dxc5-+] 26...Nxb4! 27.Nxc5 dxc5 Black is up a rook. 0-1

142 – Sandipan 4.Bg5 g6 5.d5 Black castled quickly in this Dutch Defence Staunton Gambit after 4.Bg5 g6 5.d5 Bg7 6.Qd2 0-0. Then Black got a queenside attack after eight pawn moves in a row. White had chances but was outplayed in Syed Mahfuzur Rahman vs Sandipan Chanda. Rahman (2188) - Sandipan (2573), 3rd Kolkata GM Open 2018 Kolkata IND (1.7), 14.05.2018 begins 1.d4 f5 2.e4 fxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5 g6 5.d5 [5.h4 d5 6.h5=] 5...Bg7 6.Qd2 [6.f3!? exf3 7.Nxf3=] 6...0-0 7.0-0-0 d6 8.Re1 c6 9.Bxf6 exf6 10.Nxe4 c5 11.Nf3 h6 12.c4 b5 13.cxb5 f5 14.Nc3 a6 15.bxa6 [15.Re6!?=] 15...Nxa6 16.h4 [16.Bc4=] 16...Nb4 17.a3 Bxc3 [17...Rxa3!? 18.bxa3 Bxc3 19.Qxh6 Na2+!-/+] 18.bxc3 Rxa3 19.cxb4 Ra1+ 20.Kb2 Qf6+ 21.Kb3 Bd7 22.Rxa1 Qxa1 23.Bb5 Qxh1 24.Bxd7 Qb1+ 25.Qb2? [25.Kc3 Qxb4+ 26.Kd3 Qb3+ 27.Ke2 Ra8=/+] 25...c4+ 0-1

143 – Bordon 4.Bg5 Nc6 5.Bxf6 When you play a gambit, you increase the tactical pressure on both sides, at least for the first few moves. Pawns, pieces and even kings are in danger of being chopped off. In my game vs Francisco Bordon, my opponent played the Staunton Gambit vs me. White should play d5 on move 5 or 6. After that the gambit pawn will likely be returned soon. Below White chose to regain the gambit pawn too early. It costs him material. White makes mistakes on moves 6 and 7. Black wins a piece. The rest of the game is consolidation and simplification. Bordon - Sawyer, corr USCF 1989 begins 1.d4 f5 2.e4 fxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5 Nc6 5.Bxf6 [The main line is 5.d5 Ne5 6.Qd4 Nf7 7.Bxf6 exf6=] 5...exf6 6.Nxe4? [6.d5=] 6...Qe7 7.Qf3? [This loses a piece. Relatively better is 7.Qe2 Nxd4 8.Qd3 d5 9.Qxd4 Qxe4+ and Black is a pawn up in the endgame.] 7...d5 [7...f5! 8.Qxf5 Nxd4-+] 8.Qh5+ g6 9.Qxd5 f5 10.0-00 Qxe4 [Or 10...fxe4 when in either case Black is up a bishop.] 11.Qb5 Bh6+ 12.Kb1 0-0 13.Bc4+ Kh8 14.Nf3 a6 15.Qc5 b6 16.Qd5 Qxd5 [Even stronger is 16...Bb7! 17.Bb3 Na5 18.Qd7 Nxb3 19.axb3 Rad8-+] 17.Bxd5 Bb7 18.Ne5 Nxe5 19.Bxb7 Ra7 20.dxe5 Rxb7 21.Rd7 Re8 22.Re1 Bf4

23.e6 Bd6 24.Kc1 Rbb8 25.Kd2 Rbd8 26.Kd3 Rc8 27.h3 Kg8 28.a3 Re7 29.f4 Kf8 30.g4 Rxd7 31.exd7 Rd8 32.gxf5 Rxd7 0-1

144 – Wells 5.d5 Ne5 6.Qe2 Peter Wells played 6.Qe2 in the Dutch Defence Staunton Gambit 4.Bg5 Nc6 5.d5 Ne5 variation. The line is an excellent alternative to the standard 6.Qd4. White gets a promising attack. Black continued 6...Nf7 7.Bxf6 gxf6?! This recapture left Black vulnerable to Qh5 in the game Peter K Wells vs Dominic Gibbs. The position opened up quickly which favored the attacker. I like the move 10.d6! White found a checkmate on move 17. Wells (2426) - Gibbs (1948), 19th 4NCL Congress 2018 Telford ENG (1.2), 13.07.2018 begins 1.d4 f5 2.e4 fxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5 Nc6 5.d5 Ne5 6.Qe2 Nf7 7.Bxf6 gxf6?! [7...exf6 8.Nxe4 Bb4+ 9.c3 Be7 10.0-0-0 0-0=] 8.Nxe4 e5 [8...Bg7 9.0-0-0 c6 10.Ng3+/=] 9.Qh5 Bg7 10.d6! Kf8 [10...0-0 11.Bc4+/-] 11.Bc4 Nh6 12.0-0-0 c6 13.f4 Qe8 14.Nxf6 Bxf6 15.Qxh6+ Bg7 16.Qg5 Qg6 [16...Qf7 17.Bxf7 Kxf7 18.Qe7+ Kg8 19.Rd3 will force mate in a few moves.] 17.Qe7# 1-0

145 – Murray 6.Qd4 Nf7 7.h4 White plan in the Dutch Defence Staunton Gambit 7.h4 line is to castle queenside and attack kingside. The move looked eerily familiar to me when I saw the game between David Murray and Gavin Wall. I checked my database, and there it was. Herbert Hickman had played it against me long ago. I include a portion of a postal chess game vs Herbert Hickman where we both blundered on move 16. Hickman won in 22. Murray (2149) - Wall (2341), ch-IRL 2018 Dublin IRL (3.3), 06.08.2018 begins 1.d4 f5 2.e4 fxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5 Nc6 5.d5 Ne5 6.Qd4 Nf7 7.h4 [7.Bxf6 exf6 8.0-0-0 f5 9.f3=] 7...c6 [7...e5 8.Qa4 Nd6 9.Nge2=] 8.0-0-0 Qb6 9.Bxf6 gxf6 10.Qxe4 Qxf2 11.Nf3 Bh6+ [11...f5 12.Qxf5 Qe3+ 13.Kb1 d6 14.Qh5 Qh6=] 12.Kb1 Qe3 13.Qa4 Qf4 14.Nd4! [14.Qb3!? a5 15.Nd4 Qd6 16.Ne6?! (Hickman-Sawyer, corr 1985) 16...Rb8!=+] 14...b5

15.Qb3 c5 16.Ndxb5 a6 17.d6 axb5 18.Nxb5 0-0 [18...Kf8 19.Nc7 Nxd6 20.Nxa8+/-] 19.dxe7 Re8 20.Bc4 Rxe7 21.Nd6 Ba6 22.Bxf7+ Kf8 [22...Kh8 23.Bd5+-] 23.Bd5 Rd8 [23...Qxd6 24.Bxa8+-] 24.Qb6 White attacks both Ba6 and Rd8. 1-0

146 – Sawyer 6.Qd4 Nf7 7.Bxf6 Here is one of my early blog posts. Progress was being made in 2011. I got more comfortable with fast blitz play. I offered Seek Games on ICC for anyone within about 700 points of my rating. Thus I did not pick my opponents. They picked me. Most who accept a Seek Game want to “play up”. They want to challenge someone rated above them. During a 20 game stretch, I had played 20 different opponents. 19 of those opponents were rated below me, though some just slightly below. I lost to the one rated above me, lost a second game and drew one. I won the other 17. My rating generally rose during this time. This game below saw me playing White in a 3 0 blitz game vs an opponent rated about 1700. At first he was slow (for a three minute blitz game) but then he played the book moves rapidly. I decided to leave the book with a dubious 8.Qxe4?! My choice put him on his own to make him think. He spent a full minute of his time to finish only 12 moves. Then he stepped up the pace. Black made a small blunder, which I missed, followed by a big blunder which I did not miss. Game over in 22 moves. That strategy off less critical moves works fine in beating lower rated players; they beat themselves. But if I am going to make personal progress, I must challenge more with sharper lines. The opening was the Dutch Defence, Staunton Gambit which begins 1.d4 f5 2.e4 fxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5. I preferred 4.f3 in my BDG Keybook 1; but I had played both choices many times. Sawyer - highwire (1699), ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 13.07.2011 begins 1.d4 f5 2.e4 fxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5 Nc6 5.d5 Ne5 6.Qd4 Nf7 7.Bxf6 exf6 8.Qxe4+?! [A better choice would be 8.0-0-0 f5 9.f3 Bd6 10.fxe4 Be5

11.Qd2 fxe4 12.Nxe4 0-0 13.Nf3=] 8...Qe7 9.0-0-0 Qxe4 10.Nxe4 f5 11.Nc3 c6 12.dxc6 bxc6 13.f4 Bd6 14.g3 0-0 15.Bc4 Bc5 16.Nf3!? d5 17.Bd3 Nd6 18.Ne5 Ne4 19.Bxe4 fxe4? 20.Nxc6 Bg4 21.Rde1 [21.Rxd5!+- My brain had not yet adjusted to the fact that d5 was now undefended.] 21...Rac8 22.Ne5 Bd4?? 23.Nxg4 1-0

2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3 This White attack in the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit style appears to be fully sound according to current chess engine theory.

147 – Mercier 4…Nc6 5.fxe4 e5 Ray Haines is a long time Dutch Defence player who loves to attack. He plays Duane Mercier (whom I played in 1972) at the University of Maine in Orono. Ray Haines writes of this game: "I need to tell you a story about the game with Mr. Mercier. I will start with the world open I played in that event before going to the tournament in Orono. The result was that my rating had started to go up. I played a master rated player in the Orono event and had a draw with him; you have that game with Terry Coffin. I told Terry about playing in the world open and he told Mr. Mercier and showed him my game. I think this is part of why Mr. Mercier did not take the piece in the game. ...you can use my game with Mr. Mercier. The only problem is that my play was not sound in the game." According to Ray Haines, "Tal once said 'in chess there are two kinds of sacrifices: sound ones and my sacrifices'. I have always wanted to say that." Sound or not, it is interesting when someone sacrifices a knight for an attack. Ray Haines works up a beautiful attack that forces checkmate against a good player in his prime. Mercier - Haines, Orono, Maine 1982 begins 1.d4 f5 2.e4 fxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3 Nc6!? [Better are 4...d5 5.fxe4 or 4...exf3 5.Nxf3] 5.fxe4 e5 6.Nf3 [Better is 6.dxe5! Nxe5 7.Nf3 Bd6 8.Nb5 Nxf3+ 9.Qxf3 Be5 10.Bf4+/=] 6...exd4 7.Nxd4 [7.Nd5=] 7...d5 [7...Bb4!] 8.Bb5 Bd7 9.Bxc6 bxc6 10.e5 Bc5 11.Bg5 [11.exf6! Qxf6 12.Qh5+ g6 13.Qe2+ Kd8 favors White after either 14.Nf3+/- or 14.Rf1+/-] 11...0-0 12.Qd3? [White has to grab the knight with 12.exf6+/-] 12...Qe8 13.0-0-0 Qxe5 [Or 13...Ng4!-+] 14.Nf3 Qf5 15.Qd2 Ne4 16.Nxe4 Qxe4 17.Rde1 Qa4 18.Kb1 Rab8 19.b3 Bf5 20.Ka1 Qa3 21.Qd1 Bb4 22.Bc1 [This allows immediate checkmate. If

22.Bd2 Black attack continues with 22...a5-/+ or 22...Bd6-/+] 22...Bc3+ 23.Kb1 Rxb3+ 0-1

148 – Omelja 4…exf3 5.Nxf3 g6 You must attack to win beat a strong player. Staunton Gambit gives White an immediate attack against the Dutch Defence. Victoriano Sanz Losada had good chances against vs Artem Omelja. White stood well in the opening. He got outplayed by his higher rated opponent until Black was able to queen a pawn. Sanz Losada (2091) - Omelja (2445), 6th POL-HUN Open 2018 Katowice POL (7.11), 06.05.2018 begins 1.d4 f5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.e4 fxe4 4.f3 exf3 5.Nxf3 g6 6.Bg5 [6.h4 Bg7 7.h5 gxh5 8.Bg5 d6 9.Qd2+/=] 6...Bg7 7.Qd2 d5 8.Bh6 [8.Bd3 0-0 9.0-0 c5 10.dxc5 Nc6 11.Rae1+/=] 8...0-0 9.Bxg7 Kxg7 10.Bd3 [10.0-0-0 Qd6 11.Re1 Nc6=] 10...Nc6 11.0-0-0 [11.0-0 a6 12.Rae1 Qd6=] 11...Bg4 12.Bb5 Bxf3 13.gxf3 Qd6 14.Rde1 Nh5 15.Bxc6 bxc6 16.Qg5 Rae8 17.Qe5+ Qxe5 18.Rxe5 Rxf3 19.Rhe1 Kf7 20.Na4 Rf5 [20...Nf4-/+] 21.R5e3 [21.Nc5 Rxe5 22.Rxe5 Ng7-/+] 21...Nf4 22.Rc3 Rf6 [22...Rh5-/+] 23.Nc5 Rd8 24.Ra3 Ra8 25.Nd7 Re6 26.Ne5+ Ke8 27.Ra6 c5 28.Rxe6 Nxe6 29.Nc6 Kf7 30.dxc5 a5 31.Rf1+ Kg7 32.Nxe7 d4 33.Re1 Nxc5 34.Nc6 d3 35.Re5 Nb7 36.Re7+ Kh6 37.cxd3 Rf8 38.d4 [38.Rxc7+/-] 38...Rf1+ 39.Kc2 Rf2+ 40.Kc3 Nd6 41.a4 Rxh2 42.Nxa5 g5 43.Nc6 g4 44.Ne5 Rh3+ 45.Kb4 g3 46.Rxc7 [46.Nf3 Rh1=] 46...g2 47.Rc6 and Black queens a pawn. 0-1

149 – Sawyer 4…exf3 5.Nxf3 e6 The day before Halloween 2012 I played a cute little game. Here I sacrificed a piece for a speculative attack. This left Black with a naked king. It became a tactical trick or treat. My opponent did not use all his pieces. I won my piece back with interest. Short and sweet. Like taking candy from a baby in a Staunton Gambit. Sawyer - vespa2, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 30.10.2012 begins 1.Nc3 f5 2.d4 e6 3.e4 fxe4 4.f3 exf3 5.Nxf3 Nf6 6.Bd3 Bb4 7.0-0 Bxc3 8.bxc3 0-0 9.Bg5 h6 10.Bd2!? [Best was 10.Bxf6 gxf6 11.Qd2 Kg7 12.Qf4+- with a strong attack.] 10...Nc6 11.Qc1 d6 12.Bxh6 gxh6 13.Qxh6 Qe7 14.Ng5 Qg7 15.Qh4 Qh8 16.Qg3? [This gives Black a good game. Correct is

16.Nh7! Nxh7 17.Bxh7+ Kg7 18.Rxf8 Qxf8 19.Rf1+-] 16...Qg7 17.Rf3 Nh5? [Black can defend with 17...Ne7!=] 18.Rxf8+ [18.Bh7+!] 18...Kxf8 19.Rf1+ [19.Nh7+!+-] 19...Ke7? [19...Ke8 20.Qe3+/-] 20.Qh4 Nf6? 21.Ne4 Black resigns 1-0

150 – Zintgraff 6.Bd3 Be7 7.Qe2 Gary Zintgraff sent me this Dutch Defence Staunton Gambit. Zintgraff wrote: "Dear Tim: I just signed up for your chess site and have found a lot of great material to keep me busy. I have your 3 BDG "books" which opened my eyes to an exciting way to play chess. It was very fun to see bits of 2 of my games in your 2nd book.” [Here’s a game that I...] “use the aggressive approach I learned from the BDG. I just started playing weekly tournaments recently after a long layoff. David Nightingale is a strong advocate of the Dutch Defense so I played a Staunton Gambit to open up the game. When I offered the second Bishop sacrifice, he took over 25 minutes (in a game 90) to study his options. Of the 3-4 choices he had, taking my Bishop was the best. Sincerely, Gary D. Zintgraff" Thanks, Gary! The comments below are by Zintgraff except where noted. Zintgraff - Nightingale, MHCC, 2016 begins 1.d4 f5 2.e4 fxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3 exf3 5.Nxf3 e6 6.Bd3 Be7 7.Qe2 b5 8.Ne4 Bb7 9.Nxf6+ Bxf6 10.0-0 Qe7 11.Ne5 0-0 12.Bxh7+ [12.c3 d6 13.Ng4= Sawyer] 12...Kxh7 [This unsound sac was knowingly made by me because I wanted to prevent him from getting his favorite Dutch setup.] 13.Qh5+ [13.Qd3+ Kg8 14.Ng6 Qd6 15.Nxf8 Qxd4+ 16.Qxd4 Bxd4+ 17.Kh1 Bf6 18.Ng6= Sawyer] 13...Kg8 14.Bg5 Qe8 [I analyzed this Bishop move and 14...Bxg5 as being favorable for White during the game, but did not see 15.Ng6 Rxf1+ 16.Rxf1 Be3+ 17.Kh1 Bxg2+ the sac move which would have probably won for him.] 15.Ng6 Be4 16.Qh8+ Kf7 17.Rxf6+ gxf6 18.Qh7# 1-0

151 – Hathaway 6.Bd3 Be7 7.0-0 I played a brilliant quick crushing win. What a beautiful open field mate! It's too bad we cannot play these types of quick crushes more often. I sacrificed a rook on move 9. Seven checks in a row and it was checkmate against John Hathaway in the Dutch Defence. I played the Staunton Gambit before I began playing its cousin, the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit. This is the best one I ever played in my life. After 1.d4 f5 2.e4 fxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6, White had a choice to make. The move 4.Bg5 often allowed White to regain the pawn by Bxf6 and Nxe4. When I was in a gambit mood, I chose 4.f3. It worked great this time! Lots of people have won pretty games with the Staunton Gambit. This was my best. John and I were friends who played at the North Penn Chess Club. We enjoyed some memorable times. Hathaway became the Pennsylvania state chess champion a few years later. Sawyer - Hathaway, Lansdale, PA 24.07.1981 begins 1.d4 f5 2.e4 fxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3 exf3 [Against me most players have declined the gambit with 4...d5.] 5.Nxf3 e6 6.Bd3 Be7 7.0-0 b6 [7...0-0= is much safer.] 8.Ne5 Bb7 [Black is calmly developing, but now...] 9.Rxf6! [or 9.Bxh7 Rxh7 10.Qd3!+-] 9...Bxf6 10.Qh5+ g6 11.Bxg6+ hxg6 12.Qxg6+ Ke7 13.Qf7+ Kd6 14.Nb5+ Kd5 15.c4+ Ke4 16.Qg6# 1-0

152 - Kirkpatrick 4…d5 5.Bg5 Bf5 Stopping Staunton Gambit is something any player of the Black pieces wants to do when playing the Dutch Defence. I played this gambit from both sides during the 1989 Golden Knights. There is always some line where you have to play against yourself. This was it for me. While lines with the more popular 2.c4 main lines keep Black busy, he must also focus on 2.e4. Against Harold Kirkpatrick I find myself playing Black vs a Staunton Gambit. White's approach was not quite sharp enough. Black got the upper hand quickly, and the game was short. Kirkpatrick - Sawyer, corr USCF 1989 begins 1.d4 f5 2.e4 fxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3 d5 5.Bg5 [5.fxe4 dxe4 6.Bg5] 5...Bf5 6.Nce2 [This is not fast

enough. White should try 6.fxe4] 6...Nc6 7.Ng3 Qd7 [7...Bg6-/+] 8.fxe4 [8.Bb5 Bg6=/+] 8...Nxe4 9.Nxe4 [9.Nf3] 9...Bxe4 10.Qd2 Qf5 [10...e5!-+] 11.0-0-0 Nxd4 12.c3 Nc6 13.Nf3 [13.Ne2 0-0-0-/+] 13...0-0-0 [13...e5!-+] 14.Be2 h6 0-1

153 – Hess 5.fxe4 dxe4 6.Bg5 Nc6 The Staunton Gambit vs Dutch Defence was the one line I usually played from both sides during my 150+ USCF postal games played more than 20 years ago, including many from the 1989 USCF Golden Knights event. The Staunton Gambit begins 1.d4 f5 2.e4 fxe4 and after 3.Nc3 Nf6, White has the choice between 4.f3 [A82] or 4.Bg5 [A83]. Usually during that period, I went more often with the riskier though possibly stronger 4.f3!? This more closely resembled the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit. As White vs Alfred Hess, I missed a couple good shots with 13.Qh5+! and 15.Ng5! which gave Black more chances. We maneuvered through an equal middlegame where both sides had one extra pawn: White on the queenside and Black on the kingside. After we moved into a rook endgame, I got a slight edge. Then Black chose to exchange into a King and Pawn ending, which was lost for him by force. Sawyer - Hess, corr USCF 1989 begins 1.d4 f5 2.e4 fxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3 d5 5.fxe4 dxe4 6.Bg5 Nc6 [More common is 6...Bf5 7.Bc4 Nc6 8.Nge2 Qd7] 7.d5 Bg4?! [7...Ne5=] 8.Be2 Bxe2 9.Ngxe2 Nb4 10.Bxf6 exf6 11.a3 Na6 12.Nf4 Qd7 13.Nxe4 [Good for White is 13.Qh5+! Qf7 14.Qf5+/-] 13...0-0-0 14.0-0 f5 15.Nc3?! [15.Ng5!+/-] 15...Bc5+ [Or 15...Bd6=] 16.Kh1 Rde8 17.Ne6 g6 18.Nxc5 Nxc5 19.Qd4 b6 20.Rad1 Kb8 21.b4 Na4 22.h3 Nxc3 23.Qxc3 h5 24.Qd4 Rhg8 25.d6 Rd8 26.dxc7+ Qxc7 27.Qf4 Qxf4 28.Rxd8+ Rxd8 29.Rxf4 Rd2 30.Rc4 Kb7 31.b5 Rd5 32.a4 Rd7 33.Rc6 Rc7 34.Rxg6 Rxc2 35.Rg7+ Rc7? [The K+P ending is lost for Black. He had to try to mix it up with rooks on the board. Maybe 35...Kc8 36.Rxa7 Rc4 37.Rf7 Rxa4 38.Rxf5 h4 39.g4 hxg3 40.Kg2+/=] 36.Rxc7+ Kxc7 37.Kh2 Kd6 38.Kg3 Ke5 39.Kh4 Kf4 40.Kxh5 Kg3 41.Kg5 1-0

154 – Tabaska 6.Bg5 Be6 7.Nge2 About once a week I go to the grocery store and walk up and down all the aisles. In America we are blessed with choices. One item I found this week was Pennsylvania Dutchman Canned Mushrooms. I believe that they are now made in China instead of by the Amish. I do not usually eat mushrooms, but their products remind me of the 20 years I lived near the Pennsylvania Dutch. They are actually Deutsch - they are of German descent. Pennsylvania is so very beautiful throughout the Christmas season. I had many wonderful friends there. Some of them have passed away, but our times together live on in my memories. In this Dutch Defence Staunton Gambit my opponent David Tabaska returned the gambit pawn by move 10. I missed a good continuation on move 12 and Black stood better for a few moves. Gradually I maneuvered to a position where I had a better center and the more active knight. On move 31 he missed a tactic and I would stick a knight fork in him to finish the game. Sawyer - Tabaska, corr USCF 1991 begins 1.d4 f5 2.e4 fxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3 d5 5.fxe4 dxe4 6.Bg5 Be6!? [6...Bf5] 7.Nge2 g6 8.Nf4 Bf7 9.Bxf6 exf6 10.Nxe4 Qe7 11.Qe2 [11.Bb5+!? c6 12.0-0! Nd7 (12...cxb5? 13.Re1+-) 13.Ba4 0-0-0 14.Re1=] 11...f5?! [11...Nd7 12.0-0-0 0-0-0=/+] 12.Nf6+?! [12.Ng5] 12...Kd8 13.Qxe7+ Bxe7 14.N6d5 Re8 [Better for Black is 14...Bd6 15.c4 c6 16.c5 Bxd5 17.cxd6 Kd7-/+] 15.Nxe7 Rxe7+ 16.Kd2 Nc6 17.c3 Kd7 18.Bb5 a6 19.Ba4 b5 20.Bb3 Rae8 21.Bxf7 Rxf7 22.Rae1 Rfe7 23.Nd5 Re6 24.Rhf1 Nd8 25.Rxe6 Rxe6 26.Rf3 Nc6 27.Re3 Rd6 [27...Rxe3 28.Kxe3 h6=] 28.Nf4 b4 29.Nd3 bxc3+ 30.bxc3 h5 [30...Ne7 31.Nc5+ Ke8 32.Re6+/=] 31.Nc5+ Kd8? 32.Nb7+ 1-0

155 – Spanton 6.Bg5 Bf5 7.Bc4 Tim Spanton got an advantage in a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit against Wim Van Hoek. The game began as a Queens Knight Attack with 1.Nc3, but it soon transposed a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit Poehlmann after three moves and into a Staunton Gambit of the Dutch Defence after five moves. Black's extra doubled pawn on e4 is hard to hold. The Black king is stuck in the center for the moment. White had a good position at first, but things spun out of control after an unfortunate blunder on move 14. The normal move order to reach the position after the fifth move below is 1.d4 f5 2.e4 fxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3 d5 5.fxe4 dxe4. Spanton (1858) - Van Hoek (1907), 43rd Guernsey Open 2017 Vale GCI, 18.10.2017 begins 1.Nc3 d5 2.d4 f5 3.e4 dxe4 4.f3 Nf6 5.fxe4 fxe4 6.Bg5 Bf5 7.Bc4 [7.Nge2!?=] 7...a6 8.Nge2 Nc6 9.0-0 Bg6 [9...e6!?] 10.a3 [10.Be6!+/=] 10...Qd7 11.b4 b5 [11...0-0-0=] 12.Bb3 Rd8 13.d5 Qg4 14.Nf4? [White drops a piece. Better was 14.Qc1+/-] 14...Qxg5 15.Ne6 Qe3+ 16.Kh1 Qxc3 17.Nxc7+ [17.dxc6 Rd6 18.Nxc7+ Kd8 19.Ne6+ Kc8+] 17...Kd7 18.Ne6 Kc8 19.Rxf6 [Even if White picks up the Exchange with 19.Nxd8 Nxd8-+ Black still has three extra pieces for a rook.] 19...gxf6 20.Qg1 e3 21.dxc6 Rd2 22.Nc5 e5 23.Nxa6 Qxc6 24.Qxe3 Qxg2# 0-1

156 – Tillett 7.Bc4 Nc6 8.Nge2 Steven Tillett plays a critical line with the Dutch Defence against my Staunton Gambit 4.f3 variation. Black played well for the first dozen moves. When I analyzed this, I found possibilities where Black could have played even better. He eased up and allowed White to regain the gambit pawn. Then he stopped playing. Maybe he wasn't doing well in this 1989 tournament. I was rated as a USCF Postal Master at 2200+ around this time, so he might not have lost many or even any rating points for this game. Sawyer - Tillett, corr USCF 1990 begins 1.d4 f5 2.e4 fxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3 d5 5.fxe4 dxe4 6.Bg5 Bf5 7.Bc4 Nc6 8.Nge2 e6 [8...Qd7] 9.0-0 Be7 10.Qd2 Na5 11.Bb3 Nxb3 12.axb3 0-0 13.Ng3 Qd7 [This is good, and

maybe even better is 13...h6!-/+] 14.Rad1 c6?! [14...Rad8-/+] 15.Bxf6 Bxf6 [15...Rxf6=/+] 16.Ncxe4 Rad8 17.Nxf5 exf5 18.Nxf6+ [This final position offers equal chances but Black stopped playing here.] 1-0

157 – Cofer 7.Bc4 Nc6 8.Nge2 This Dutch Defence Staunton Gambit comes from my games in the 1989 USCF Golden Knights Postal Chess Tournament. It's a quickie. From my perspective, the wrong side won. When it was time for clutch, my play was such in facing the Dutch I did not get much. My opponent David Cofer did not let me get away with superficial play. He outplayed me in the opening and maintained the gambit pawn with advantage to Black. On my 17 I tried to initiate some exchanges that would leave me only down an e-pawn. But David Cofer turned down my wishes. His eagle eyes spotted a powerful threat 17...Rf6! intending 18...Rh6+. I would have to give up a lot more material to avoid immediate checkmate, so I threw in the towel. Nice game by David Cofer. Sawyer - Cofer, corr USCF 1991 begins 1.d4 f5 2.e4 fxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3 [4.Bg5] 4...d5 5.fxe4 dxe4 6.Bg5 Bf5 7.Bc4 Nc6 8.Nge2 e6 [8...Qd7] 9.0-0 Na5 10.Bb3 [10.Bd5=] 10...Nxb3 11.axb3 Bd6 12.Bxf6 Qxf6 13.d5 Qh6 14.Ng3 Qe3+ 15.Kh1 Bxg3 16.hxg3 0-0 17.dxe6? Rf6! 0-1

158 – Zdrazila 8.Nge2 Qd7 What opening do you play from both sides? For the 1989 USCF Golden Knights Postal Tournament that key variation for me was the Dutch Defence Staunton 4.f3 variation. I had only faced this line 10 times as Black, scoring 7-1 with two draws. I certainly should have lost this game by the position on the board. At the time this game was played, theory on this line was quite limited. Taimanov had suggest the ...Na5 idea. In my game vs Vaclav Zdrazila I chose the wrong moment to play it in my 10...Na5. I was playing about 50 games at once back then, but I should have spent more time on this one. Clearly his 10.Qe1 potentially threatened to attack my knight. White was definitely losing when my opponent quit playing. That was a lucky break for me. Zdrazila (2164) - Sawyer (2106), corr USCF 89N285, 06.09.1990 begins 1.d4 f5 2.e4 fxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3 [4.Bg5 is the major alternative] 4...d5 5.fxe4 dxe4 6.Bg5 Bf5 7.Bc4 Nc6 8.Nge2 Qd7 9.0-0 e6 10.Qe1 Na5? [The

usual continuation is 10...0-0-0! 11.Rd1 Na5=/+] 11.Bxe6 Bxe6 12.Bxf6 gxf6 13.Nxe4 Qb5? [13...0-0-0 14.Qxa5+/-] 14.Nf4 0-0-0 15.Nxe6 Re8 16.Nxf6 Re7 17.Qe4 Nc4 [White forfeits on time] 0-1

Book 10: Chapter 7 – Main Line 2.c4 2.c4 without 3.g3 After 2.c4 White can develop his kingside bishop to either Be2 or Bd3. In such case he first plays e3 with or without Bf4 or Bg5.

159 – Saric 2…g6 3.Nc3 c5 4.d5 Bg7 5.e4 d6 Here is a Dutch game that does fit anywhere else. White glides from an English Opening to a cross between the Benoni and the Leningrad Dutch in the game Ante Saric vs Andrej Stankovic. The Black's weakness of a backward pawn on an open file allows White a mating attack beginning with a knight sacrifice. Saric (2543) - Stankovic (2130), 32nd Pula Open 2018 CRO, 24.06.2018 begins 1.c4 g6 2.d4 Bg7 3.e4 c5 4.d5 d6 5.Nc3 f5!? [5...Nf6 is a Benoni Defence.] 6.exf5 Bxf5 7.Bd3 Qa5 [7...Qc8 8.Nf3+/=] 8.Nge2 Bg4 [8...Bxd3 9.Qxd3+/=] 9.0-0 Nh6 [9...Bxc3 10.bxc3 Nd7 11.f3+/-] 10.h3 Bd7 11.Re1 0-0 12.Nf4 Re8? [12...Nf5 13.Bd2+/-] 13.Nxg6! hxg6 14.Bxg6 Rf8 15.Bxh6 Bxh6 [15...Bd4 16.Bxf8 Kxf8 17.Qf3+ Bf6 18.Ne4+-] 16.Qh5! Kg7 17.Rxe7+ Kf6 18.Rae1 [Or 18.Ne4+! Kxe7 19.Qh4+ leads to a slightly quicker mate] 1-0

160 – Ragnarsson 2…e6 3.Nf3 White developed all his minor pieces to queenside by move 10. Black mounted a big kingside attack in this Dutch Defence Stonewall with the addition of a pawn to g4. Black developed a knight to Nh6 in the game between Hedinn Briem and Dagur Ragnarsson. Briem (1613) - Ragnarsson (2332), Reykjavik Congress, 17.01.2018 begins 1.d4 e6 2.c4 d5 3.Nf3 c6 4.e3 f5 5.Bd3 Bd6 6.Nc3 Nh6 7.0-0 0-0 8.b3 Nd7 9.Bb2 g5 10.Nd2 g4 11.f3? [11.Ne2+/=] 11...Bxh2+ 12.Kxh2 Qh4+ 13.Kg1 g3 14.Rf2 Ng4 15.fxg4 gxf2+ 16.Kf1 fxg4 17.Ke2 [Or 17.Qc2 Qh1+ 18.Ke2 Qxg2 19.Bxh7+ Kh8 20.Rf1 Qh3 21.Ba3 g3-+] 17...f1B+ 0-1

161 – Daniel 2…e6 3.Nf3 d5 Does anyone play chess at your place of employment? In the 1980s I worked for a large business corporation. In the course of my duties, I met hundreds of people. Joe Daniel was a friendly salesman and co-worker from Cleveland, Ohio. We found out each other played chess. Since we lived in different states, Joe Daniel and I decided to play a two game postal chess match. As Black, I chose the Dutch Defence. In this game Joe Daniel chose to grab space with pawn moves on the queenside like 2.d4, 3.c4, 6.c5, 9.b4 and 11.a4. I played too slow in the center and was fortunate that Joe did not follow up well with 15.Qb3! White went the wrong way with a knight on move 19. This finally gave me good chances and I went on to win with a kingside attack. Daniel - Sawyer, corr, 1986 begins 1.Nf3 d5 2.d4 f5 3.c4 e6 4.Nc3 c6 5.e3 [5.Bf4+/=] 5...Nf6 6.c5 Nbd7?! [6...Be7=] 7.Be2 [7.Ng5+/=] 7...Qe7 [7...Ne4!=] 8.0-0 e5 9.b4 e4 10.Ng5 g6 11.a4 a6 12.Ba3 Bg7 13.b5 axb5 14.axb5 0-0 15.h4 [15.Qb3+/=] 15...h6 16.Nh3 Rf7 17.Nf4 Nf8 18.h5 g5 19.Nh3? [19.Ng6 Nxg6 20.hxg6 Rf8 21.Na4+/=] 19...f4 20.Bb4 [Or if 20.Re1 f3-+] 20...Rxa1 21.Qxa1 f3 22.gxf3 Bxh3 23.Rb1 exf3 24.Bxf3 Qe6 25.Ne2 Ne4 26.Nf4 gxf4 0-1

162 – Mamedyarov 3.Nc3 g6 Shakhriyar Mamedyarov is the twelfth highest rated player in the world at the time I write this. He attacked the Dutch Defence Leningrad directly with the sharp 4.h4 line in the 2016 World Rapid. White reached an advantageous position after 5.h5 e6 6.hxg6 hxg6 7.Rxh8+ Bxh8 8.Nh3. Lu Shanglei avoided the drawish line 5...Nxh5 as Black, but I'm not sure why. I assume Grandmaster Mamedyarov may have had something special in mind for it. The game ended with a short sharp assault. Mamedyarov (2768) - Lu Shanglei (2627), World Rapid 2016 Doha QAT (1.5), 26.12.2016 begins 1.d4 f5 2.c4 Nf6 3.Nc3 g6 4.h4 [Most popular is 4.Nf3] 4...Bg7 5.h5 [A slower approach is 5.e3 d6 6.Be2=] 5...e6 [The most popular and critical is that perpetual check after 5...Nxh5 6.e4 fxe4 7.Rxh5 gxh5 8.Qxh5+ Kf8 9.Bh6 d6 10.Nxe4 Qd7 11.Bxg7+ Kxg7 12.Qg5+ Kf7 13.Qh5+ Kg7=] 6.hxg6 hxg6 7.Rxh8+ Bxh8 8.Nh3 [8.Bg5+/=] 8...Qe7 9.Bg5 Qf7 10.g3 d5 11.Bg2 c6 12.Qb3 Nbd7 13.0-0-0 Nb6 14.c5 Nbd7 15.Rh1 [15.Bf4 b6 16.Ng5+/-] 15...b6 16.Bf4 Nh5 17.Ng5 [17.e4! fxe4 18.Nxe4 dxe4 19.Ng5 Qg8 20.Nxe6 Nxf4 21.Nxf4 Qxb3 22.Rxh8+ Kf7 23.axb3+-] 17...Qg8? [17...Qe7 18.e3+/=] 18.e4 [18.Nxd5! cxd5 19.Nxe6 Qxe6 20.Bxd5+-] 18...Bxd4 [18...fxe4 19.Ncxe4 dxe4 20.Nxe6+-] 19.Qa4 e5 [19...Nxf4 20.gxf4+-] 20.Qxc6 Rb8 21.Nxd5 Bb7 22.Nc7+ Kd8 23.Nge6+ Kc8 24.Nb5+ 1-0

163 – Curtis 3.Nf3 g6 4.e3 Bg7 I like the name Curtis. I grew up with friends named Curtis. In the long running TV series "Gunsmoke", Ken Curtis played "Festus". Also I played two Sicilian Defence games vs Curtis Rhudy. In 1991, I played Warren Curtis three games when I was competing in various rounds of the 1989 USCF Golden Knights Postal Chess Tournament. My Latvian Gambit win vs him was the 6th most popular post I wrote in 2013. Probably all of our games were played on the same weekly postcards. Our contest below started as a Reti Opening with his 1.Nf3. After my 1...f5, Curtis transposed into the Dutch Defence with 2.d4. We had a clash of styles. I opted for a Leningrad set-up with the fianchetto of my kingside bishop (g6/Bg7). Curtis developed his bishop classically (e3/Bd3). This is common in club play, though most grandmasters prefer to fianchetto as White (g3/Bg2). In our game I commenced an attack on his king. It looked very strong, but I misplayed it right at the end when he concluded our correspondence. I do not remember if this was a rated game. Curtis (1632) - Sawyer (2016), corr USCF 1991 begins 1.Nf3 f5 2.d4 Nf6 3.c4 g6 4.e3 Bg7 5.Nc3 0-0 6.Bd3 [This fights for e4. 6.Be2= is a little more common, potentially aiming at the g4 and h5 squares.] 6...d6 7.0-0 Nc6 8.b3 [If 8.d5 Nb4 9.Be2= Stockfish 4, Deep Rybka 4, Houdini 4] 8...e5 9.dxe5 dxe5 10.Bc2 [10.e4 is the logical follow-up to Bd3, when play might continue 10...fxe4 11.Nxe4 Bf5=] 10...e4 11.Nd2 Ng4! 12.Bb2 Qh4!? [12...Qd6!] 13.h3 Be5 14.Qe2 f4?? [A winning blunder. I was lucky that White gave up here, since my attack fails after 15.Bxe4!+-. Better was 14...Be6=/+] 0-1

164 – Murray 3.Nc3 e6 4.a3 In the Dutch Defence after 1.d4 f5 2.c4 Nf6, must White fianchetto his light squared bishop with g3/Bg2? No, of course not. White can play classically in the center with e3 and Be2/Bd3. After standard moves like 3.Nc3 e6, White may develop his dark squared bishop to Bf4/Bg5 before playing e3. Below my friend Pat Murray played 4.a3 preventing 4...Bb4. This reminded me of the Queen's Indian Defence variation made popular by Tigran Petrosian that runs 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nf3 b6 4.a3. This skittles game was played at Lycoming College in Williamsport, Pennsylvania where about half a dozen of us met each Tuesday night for chess. There was a big screen TV where we played and music blasting and college kids talking. Often it was a festive atmosphere. This was not the relatively quiet focused tournament conditions. It was chess in public where we were freely allowed to use the tables in a real coffee house setting. During the years I lived there, I loved it and rarely missed a week. This game featured my 7...Qe8 intending possibly ...Qg6 or ...Qh5 which is similar to a Bird's Opening or some lines of the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit. White attacked c7 with 8.Nb5 and then sacrificed a piece for two pawns. A couple careless moves gave White chances, but the ship was soon righted. My move 22...Bb7 appeared to be protecting my queen. White missed that my move also supported a checkmate on g2. Murray - Sawyer, Williamsport PA 1996 begins 1.d4 f5 2.c4 Nf6 3.Nc3 e6 4.a3 Be7 5.Nf3 0-0 6.Bf4 d6 7.e3 Qe8 8.Nb5 Bd8 9.Nxd6 cxd6 10.Bxd6 Be7 11.Be5 Nc6 12.Be2 b6 13.Bf4 Kh8 [13...Bb7-+] 14.0-0 Ne4 15.Ne5 g5? [Black should protect Nc6 with 15...Bb7-/+] 16.Nxc6? [16.Bh5! Qd8 17.Nxc6+- wins for White.] 16...Qxc6 17.Be5+ Bf6 18.d5 [18.f3 Bxe5 19.dxe5 Nc5 20.b4 Nb7=/+ and Black is up a knight for two pawns.] 18...exd5 19.cxd5 Qd7 20.Bxf6+ Nxf6 21.Qd4 Qxd5 22.Rfd1 Bb7 23.Qc3? Qxg2# 0-1

165 – Levin 3.Nc3 e6 4.Bg5 Years ago I faced Burton Levin where White chose a very playable straight forward classical bishop development. This was played in the USCF Golden Knights Postal Chess Tournament. Levin began the game playing 1.c4, the English Opening. As was my practice in those days, I countered with 1...f5, the Dutch Defence. After 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.d4, we reached a normal Dutch position that might follow from 1.d4. Typically White fianchettoes his light squared bishop with g3 / Bg2 to challenge the key squares along the h1-a8 diagonal. White often holds off the development of his dark squared bishop for 8-10 moves until Black clarifies his defensive set-up. Instead this game below, Levin chooses an easy classical development with 4.Bg5, 5.e3 and 7.Bd3. Levin could have played 11.Bh4! with some advantage, but alas he advanced on the queenside with the pawn move 11.b4? This was an aggressive one move blunder. The tactics after Black's 12...Ne4! led to a massive among of exchanges which left Black up material and winning. Levin - Sawyer, corr USCF 1989 begins 1.c4 f5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.d4 e6 4.Bg5 Be7 5.e3 0-0 6.Nf3 d6 7.Bd3 Nc6 8.0-0 Qe8 9.a3 Qh5 10.Be2 Qg6 11.b4? [This leaves the knight on c3 unprotected and vulnerable to the combination that eventually follows. 11.Bh4+/=] 11...Bd7?! [11...Ne4!-/+] 12.c5 [12.Bh4+/=] 12...Ne4! 13.Nxe4 fxe4 14.Bxe7 exf3 15.Bxf3 Nxe7 16.Bxb7 Bc6 17.Bxc6 Nxc6 18.f4 Qe4 19.Qf3 Qxf3 20.Rxf3 dxc5 21.bxc5 [Somewhat better is 21.Rc1 Nxb4 22.Rxc5 Nd5 23.f5 Rac8 24.fxe6 c6-/+] 21...Rab8 22.Rff1 Rb3 23.Rfe1 Rfb8 24.Kf2 Rb2+ 25.Kf3 R8b3 26.Red1 Kf7 [26...Ne7!-+ seems more accurate.] 27.h4 Ne7 28.g4 h5 29.gxh5 Nf5 30.h6 Rxe3+ 31.Kg4 Rg2+ 32.Kh5 g6# 0-1

166 – Wheatley 3.Nc3 e6 4.Nf3 Bb4 Back in the 1990s, Pastor Sidney Wheatley and I were both involved in ministry in the Williamsport, Pennsylvania area. Sometimes on a Tuesday night we would take a break from church work and meet for some relaxing chess play with a group of guys at Lycoming College. Sid and I played 37 games that I have record of from 1996-2001, an average of one game every two months. Of course Sid did not always play just me. Other club players in those days included David Parsons, Pat Murray, Dick Zdun, Bob Muir, Allen Taylor, Eugene Schrecongost, Roy Swazey, and David Lau. Sid and I are about the same age. Sid Wheatley meets my Dutch Defence with good solid development playing moves like 1.d4, 2.c4, 3.Nc3, 4.Nf3, 5.Bg5, 6.e3, and 7.Be2. Any system like this is a very practical approach for a good player who does not want to spend a lot of time in opening preparation. This set-up is good for White against almost anything Black would play. Sid is probably no relation to one of my postal opponents Daniel Wheatley who beat my Blackmar-Diemer Gambit. In the game below, Bishop Sid Wheatley gave me the better light squared bishop, with which I won the Exchange by move 19. Later I gave back the extra material to swap into an easily won endgame where I was up two pawns. Wheatley - Sawyer, Williamsport PA 1996 begins 1.d4 f5 2.c4 Nf6 3.Nc3 e6 4.Nf3 Bb4 5.Bg5 0-0 6.e3 b6 7.Be2 Bb7 8.a3 Bxc3+ 9.bxc3 d6 10.0-0 Nbd7 11.Qb3 Qe8 12.Rad1 h6 13.Bxf6 Rxf6 14.d5!? [14.Nd2 a5 15.Bf3=] 14...e5 15.Qc2 Nc5 16.Nd2 Bc8 17.e4 Bd7 18.Bf3? [18.Rde1 Qg6-/+] 18...Ba4 19.Qc1 Bxd1 20.Rxd1 f4 21.g3 [If 21.Qb2 Rf8-+] 21...fxg3 22.hxg3 [Or 22.fxg3 Qg6-+] 22...Qf7 23.Kg2 Rf8 24.Kg1 Rxf3 25.Nxf3 Qxf3 26.Rf1 Nxe4 27.Qd1 Nxf2 28.Qxf3 Rxf3 29.Rxf2 Rxf2 30.Kxf2 Kf7 31.Ke3 Kf6 32.Kf3 Kf5 33.g4+ Kg5 34.a4 g6 0-1

167 – Zdun 3.Nf3 e6 4.Nc3 b6 GM Neil McDonald wrote his book “Play the Dutch” published by Everyman in 2010. McDonald notes on page 65 about White avoiding an early g3: "If White avoids putting the bishop on g2 versus the Leningrad set-up, it might mean one of three things:" "1. He doesn't know much theory and is happy with simple, albeit passive, development in the opening.” “2. He is a subtle positional master who has spent years developing a pet system with Be2 and b2-b4.” “3. He knows a lot of sharp theory and wants to destroy his opponent with 2.c4 and 3.Nc3. In other words, you can't take anything for granted." Wise observations by the grandmaster. In the case of my friend Dick Zdun whom I played often at the Williamsport chess club, I knew number 1 above applied. Richard K. Zdun was a generation older than I and did not play much sharp theory. He played good solid chess and was rated from the 1600s to the 1800s. Here is a Dutch Defence game that Dick played in his later years. He chose a 5.Bf4 vs my classical defensive development. We both missed some moves and I got the better of him in the end. Zdun (1634) - Sawyer (2010), Game/30 Williamsport PA, 12.1997 1.d4 f5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.c4 e6 4.Nc3 b6 5.Bf4 Bb7 6.Nb5 Bb4+ 7.Nd2 d6 8.a3 Bxd2+ 9.Qxd2 Ne4 10.Qe3? [White traps is own bishop. Better is 10.Qc1=] 10...g5 11.Bxg5 Nxg5 12.h4 Ne4 13.f3 Ng3? [13...a6-+] 14.Rh3 Nxf1 [14...Rg8=] 15.Kxf1 [White would be better after 15.Qxe6+! Qe7 16.Nxc7+ Kd8 17.Qxe7+ Kxe7 18.Kxf1 Nc6 19.Nxa8+/-] 15...Qe7 16.Qh6 a6 17.Nxc7+ Qxc7 18.Qxe6+ Qe7 19.Qxf5 Nd7 20.Qh5+ Qf7 21.Qxf7+ Kxf7 22.e4 h5 23.f4 Bxe4 24.Re1 Rae8 25.Rhe3 Bf5 26.Rxe8 Rxe8 27.Rxe8 Kxe8 28.g3 Bd3+ 0-1

168 – Muir 3.Nc3 e6 4.Bf4 b6 This classical Dutch Defence was one of my favorite chess openings. This defence is sound with many good ideas for Black, but some sharp lines have the players on a knife edge. Inaccurate play can lead to sudden ugly disasters, especially where White overwhelms and crushes Black. But in the heat of battle, anything can happen. In this club game my friend Bob Muir played 4.Bf4 with the move 6.e3 and 11.Bd3 in conjunction with the duel knight attacks 7.Nb5 and 8.Ng5. After my blunder 8...Qc8? I became vulnerable to tactics. First White was strong on the light squares and then all over the board. My pal Bob lets me escape to a draw in our informal and often loud coffeehouse club setting. Muir (1800) - Sawyer (2010), Williamsport, PA, 07.03.2000 1.d4 f5 2.c4 Nf6 3.Nc3 e6 4.Bf4 b6 5.Nf3 Bb7 6.e3 Be7 [6...Bb4] 7.Nb5 d6 8.Ng5 Qc8? [8...Bc8] 9.Nxe6! Na6 10.d5 Kf7 11.Bd3 g6 12.0-0 Nxd5? 13.Bxf5 [13.cxd5!+- is stronger.] 13...gxf5 14.cxd5 Bxd5 15.Nexc7 Nxc7 16.Nxc7 Bxg2 [Black is also way behind after 16...Qxc7 17.Qxd5+ Kg7 18.Qxf5+-] 17.Qh5+ Kg8 18.Kxg2 Qxc7 19.Qxf5 [Very powerful is 19.Rg1!+-] 19...Qc8 [Maybe 19...Qb7+ 20.f3+-] 20.Qd5+ Kf8 21.Rac1 Qg4+ 22.Kh1 Rc8 23.Bh6+ Ke8 24.Qb5+ [24.Rxc8+! Qxc8 25.Bg7!+- wins the Exchange.] 24...Kf7 25.Qd5+ Qe6 26.Qf3+ Qf6 27.Qh5+ Qg6 28.Qf3+ Qf6 29.Qd5+ [This lets the win slip and gives Black drawing chances. Better is 29.Bf4+-] 29...Qe6 30.Qxe6+ Kxe6 31.Kg2 Rhg8+ 32.Kf3 Rc5 33.Rg1 Rxg1 34.Rxg1 Rc2 35.Bg7 Bf6 36.Bxf6 Kxf6 37.Rb1 d5 38.Kg3 Kf5 39.f3 Re2 40.Rd1 Ke6 41.Rc1 Kd6 42.h4 1/2-1/2

2.c4 e6 3.g3 Black pawns on f5, and e6 cover the squares e4 and d5. To fight for the central light squares, White plans g3 with Bg2.

169 – Balog 4.Nf3 Be7 5.Bg2 0-0 Better tactics is better chess. Three things help you improve fast: Learn specific opening moves, play lots of games, and train on tactical exercises. One tactical training program I've used for 10 years is Chessimo by GM Gilberto Milos. This Dutch Defence features White playing 6.d5 in the game Imre Balog vs Dirk Van Dooren. It ends with one of my favorite queen sacrifices. Balog (2537) - Van Dooren (2333), 2nd Bundesliga West 2017-18 Germany GER (1.2), 08.10.2017 begins 1.d4 f5 2.Nf3 e6 3.c4 Nf6 4.g3 Be7 5.Bg2 0-0 6.d5 [6.0-0 d6 7.Nc3+/=] 6...Ne4 7.0-0 Bf6 8.Nbd2 Nc5 9.Nb3 Nba6 10.Be3 d6 11.dxe6 Bxb2 [11...Nxe6 12.Nfd4+/=] 12.Rb1 Bf6 13.Nfd4 g6 14.Bd5 Qe7 15.Na5 Bxd4 16.Qxd4 c6 17.Bg5 Qxg5 18.e7+ cxd5 [18...Be6 19.exf8Q+ Rxf8 20.Rxb7+-] 19.Qh8+! 1-0 [If 19...Kxh8 20.exf8=Q mate! Or if 19...Kf7 20.Qxf8+! Ke6 21.e8=Q+]

170 – Leconte 5.Qc2 0-0 6.Nc3 Stick with the basics and defeat a master. Develop all four minor pieces. Keep your opponent busy with threats. Look for tactical patterns. Maria Leconte of France rated 2208 offered the French Defence against Irina Turova of Russia rated 2422. White allowed a Dutch Defence. Black's active queen and knights proved to be too much for White's loose king. Turova (2422) - Leconte (2208), ch-EUR Women Blitz 2017 Monaco MNC (4.7), 23.10.2017 begins 1.d4 e6 2.c4 f5 3.g3 Nf6 4.Bg2 Be7 5.Qc2 0-0 6.Nc3 d6 7.Nf3 Nc6 8.d5 Ne5 [8...Nb4! 9.Qb3 a5=] 9.Nd4 Nxc4 10.Nxe6 Bxe6 11.dxe6 c6 12.Qxf5 d5 13.Qc2 [13.0-0+/=] 13...Qd6 14.Bh3 d4 15.Nb1 Ne5 16.0-0 Qd5 [16...d3! 17.exd3 Nf3+ 18.Kh1 Qe5=] 17.Bf4 [17.Qb3!+/=] 17...d3!? [Objectively 17...Ng6= is best, but you want to force your opponent to solve problems in a blitz game.] 18.exd3? [It's

natural to eliminate the attacker. White keeps her queen but this loses it. Instead 18.Nc3! dxc2 19.Nxd5 cxd5 20.Bxe5+/=] 18...Nf3+ 19.Kh1 Ne1+ 0-1

171 – Carlsen 4…d5 5.Nd2 Bd6 The Stonewall Variation is a great way to play the Dutch Defence. White cannot easily break it. Black places pawns on f5, e6, d5, and a knight on f6. The dark square bishop goes to Bd6 or Be7 as needed. Black will castle kingside. The queenside gives many strategy options for tactic play. Magnus Carlsen chose an aggressive line against Sergey Karjakin earlier in 2017. Black played 7...Nc6, 8...b6, 9...a5, and 10...Ba6. A less dynamic approach for Black is to play pawns to c6 and a6. If White plays slowly, Black can attack with a quick ...c7-c5. In this game White resigned after Black's attack won a piece. Dutch Stonewall Playbook is a coordinated repertoire for Black with 200 positions with another five moves after each diagram. That covers about 1000 moves preparing you to meet 1.d4, 1.c4, and 1.Nf3. Karjakin (2781) - Carlsen (2832), 5th Norway Blitz 2017 Stavanger NOR (5.1), 05.06.2017 begins 1.d4 f5 2.g3 Nf6 3.Bg2 e6 4.c4 d5 5.Nd2 Bd6 6.Nh3 0-0 7.0-0 Nc6 8.e3 b6 9.b3 a5 10.Bb2 Ba6 11.Nf4 Bxf4 12.exf4 Ne4 13.Re1 Re8 14.Re3 Qd7 15.Nxe4 fxe4 16.f3 dxc4 17.fxe4 [17.Rxe4 cxb3 18.Qxb3 a4=] 17...cxb3 18.d5 exd5 19.Qxb3 a4 20.Qxa4 Bf1 21.Qd1 Bxg2 22.Kxg2 Na5 23.Rc3 [23.Re1 Nc4=/+] 23...d4 24.e5 Nc4 25.Rf3 [25.Bc1 b5-/+] 25...c5 26.Bc1 Qd5 27.Kh3 [27.Kg1 b5-+] 27...Rad8 28.Rd3 Re6 29.Qf3 Qxf3 30.Rxf3 d3 31.Be3 [31.Rf2 d2 32.Bxd2 Rxd2 33.Rxd2 Nxd2-+] 31...d2 32.Rd1 [32.Bxd2 Rxd2 33.Re1 Rxa2-+] 32...Rd3 33.f5 Rxe5 0-1

172 – SharpShooter 3…d5 4.Bg2 I dabbled in the Dutch Defence. The Stonewall set-up for Black puts central pawns on the light squares f5, e6, d5, c6. This rock solid formation comes from the Classical Variation after ...e6 as opposed to the sharper more flexible Leningrad ...g6. I play both these lines interchangeably depending on my mood. I played Sharpshooter with its high rating to test my ability to hold on to my pieces. Usually when we face such strong opponents, our slightest weakness can be ripped apart. To avoid losing we must train ourselves to keep everything safe: our pawns, our pieces, and our king. I was pretty good in blitz in the 1990s. Black actually dropped his bad bishop to a knight fork in the ending, but Black's extra pawns were enough to draw. SharpShooter (2967) - Sawyer (2408), ICC 3 2 u Internet Chess Club, 27.12.1999 begins 1.d4 f5 2.g3 d5 3.Bg2 e6 4.Nf3 c6 5.0-0 Nf6 6.c4 Be7 [6...Bd6=] 7.b3 0-0 8.Ba3 [8.Bb2=] 8...Bd7 9.Bxe7 Qxe7 10.Nbd2 Be8 11.Ne5 Nbd7 12.Nxd7 Nxd7 13.e3 Nf6 14.Bf3 Bf7 15.g4 [15.Qc2=] 15...g6 [15...fxg4-/+] 16.gxf5 gxf5 17.Kh1 Kh8 18.Rg1 Rg8 19.Qc2 Rxg1+ 20.Rxg1 Rg8 21.cxd5 cxd5 22.Qc5 Qxc5 23.dxc5 Rxg1+ 24.Kxg1 Be8 25.Kg2 Ne4 26.Bxe4 fxe4 27.f3 exf3+ 28.Nxf3 Kg7 29.Kg3 Kf6 30.Kf4 Bh5 31.Ne5 Be8 32.Ng4+ Ke7 33.Ke5 Bg6 34.b4 Bd3 35.Nf6 a6 36.a4 Bc2 37.b5?! [37.a5+-] 37...Bxa4 [37...a5=] 38.c6 bxc6 39.b6 [39.bxa6+-] 39...Kd8 40.b7 [40.Nxh7=] 40...Kc7 41.Nd7 Kxb7 42.Nc5+ Kb6 43.Nxa4+ Kb5 44.Nc3+ Kb4 45.Ne2 c5 46.Kxe6 d4 [46...Kc4 47.Nf4 d4=/+] 47.exd4 cxd4 48.Nxd4 Kc5 49.Ne2 a5 50.Kf6 a4 51.Ke6 a3 52.Nc1 Kd4 53.Na2 Ke4 54.h4 Kf4 55.Kd6 Kg4 56.Ke5 Kxh4 57.Kf4 Kh3 58.Nb4 Kg2 59.Kg4 Kf2 60.Na2 Ke2 61.Kh3 Kd3 62.Kh2 Kc2 63.Nb4+ Kb3 64.Nd3 Kc3 65.Nc1 Kd2 66.Na2 Kc2 67.Kh3 Kb2 68.Nb4 Kb3 69.Nd3 a2 70.Nc1+ Kb2 71.Nxa2 Kxa2 72.Kh4 Kb3 73.Kh5 1/2-1/2

173 – Gorovets 5.Nf3 Bd6 6.0-0 Andrey Gorovets wins this Dutch Defence vs Ju Wenjun of China. She is one of the top female players in the world. Black must activate his Bc8 in the Stonewall. Since pawns were on f5, e6, and d5, Black played b6, Bb7, and c5 to open up the center and attack. Ju Wenjun (2568) - Gorovets (2496), PRO League KO Stage 2018 chess.com INT (1), 13.03.2018 begins 1.d4 e6 2.c4 f5 3.g3 Nf6 4.Bg2 d5 5.Nf3 Bd6 6.0-0 0-0 7.b3 b6 8.Ba3 [8.Nc3=] 8...Bb7 9.Qc2 Ne4 10.Rc1 c5 11.cxd5 exd5 12.Nc3 Nd7 13.Bb2 Rc8 14.e3 Ndf6 15.Ne5?! [15.Qe2=] 15...cxd4 16.exd4 Nxc3 17.Bxc3 Ne4 18.Qb2 Qe7 19.Bxe4 [19.a3 Bxe5 20.dxe5 Nxc3 21.Rxc3 Qxe5=/+] 19...Ba3 20.Bxd5+ Bxd5 21.Qd2 Bxc1 22.Rxc1 f4! [22...Rc7-/+] 23.Bb2 [23.Re1 fxg3 24.fxg3 Qc7-+] 23...Rxc1+ 24.Qxc1 [24.Bxc1 Rc8-+] 24...fxg3 25.hxg3 Qe6 26.Qf1 Rc8 27.Bc1 Qf5 28.Bf4 Qe4 29.f3 Qxd4+ 30.Kh2 Rc2+ 31.Kh3 Be6+ 0-1

174 – Akobian 5.Nc3 c6 6.Nh3 The Dutch Defence leads to unbalanced play and ample room for creativity. This 2018 US Championship grandmaster battle saw Alexander Onischuk face Varuzhan Akobian. Black chose a Stonewall f5-e6-d5-c6 pawn set-up. My Dutch Stonewall Playbook gives a good repertoire for Black. Here White played 6.Nh3 which supports f4 while the bishop on g2 supports 9.e4. Black counter attacked with 9...e5 and 11...c5. Onischuk (2672) - Akobian (2647), ch-USA 2018 Saint Louis USA (1.4), 18.04.2018 begins 1.d4 e6 2.c4 f5 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.g3 d5 5.Bg2 c6 6.Nh3 Bd6 7.0-0 0-0 8.Qc2 [8.Bf4=] 8...dxc4 9.e4 e5 10.exf5 exd4 11.Ne2 c5 12.Qxc4+ Kh8 13.Ng5 Nc6 14.Bf4 Bxf5 15.Nf7+ Rxf7 16.Qxf7 Rb8 17.Bxc6 bxc6 18.Rfe1 d3 19.Bxd6 [19.Rad1 Rxb2 20.Bxd6 Qxd6 21.Nf4=] 19...Qxd6 20.Nc3 d2 21.Re7 Rg8 22.Rxa7 [22.Kg2 Qd4=/+] 22...Bg4 [22...Qd3-/+] 23.Qe7 Qxe7 24.Rxe7 Nd5 25.Re2? [25.f3 Bxf3

26.Rd7 g5=/+] 25...d1Q+ [White resigns. If now 26.Nxd1 Bxe2 or 26.Rxd1 Nxc3 27.bxc3 Bxe2 and Black is up a bishop in either case.] 0-1

175 – Haile 6.Nf3 Bd6 7.Bf4 My Chaturanga Chess Club team and I travelled to Trenton, New Jersey for a match. My opponent Ernest Haile was born about a century ago and died at the age of 88. He must have been age 65 when we played a Dutch Defence that later came to be known as the Modern Stonewall. USCF lists Haile as playing 312 events from 1991-2004. Old timers like myself played much of our career in the Bobby Fischer days some 20 years earlier. 1981 was a very active chess year for me and my rating was rapidly going up. Ernest Haile obviously had a long chess career. He must have loved the game to have played so much late in life. In my mind his last name is pronounced "Hail", but it may have been "Hi Lee", as in the first name given to the former Emperor of Egypt, Haile Selassie (1892-1975). Ernest Haile played the 6...Bd6 Stonewall vs me. In the 1980 World Open a player listed in my database as Edmund Haile played the 6...Be7 Stonewall and lost as Black to Steve Mayer in 47 moves. I do not know if there is a connection. It makes me wonder with similar names, same opening, same Philadelphia area, and same time frame. Below I missed a pin on the kingside that could allow me a win on the queenside. Sawyer - Haile (1900), Trenton, NJ team, 1981 begins 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 f5 4.g3 Nf6 5.Bg2 c6 6.Nf3 Bd6 7.Bf4!? [The main line is 7.0-0 0-0 8.Qc2 Ne4 9.Rb1+/=] 7...Bxf4 8.gxf4 dxc4 9.Ne5 Nd5 10.e3 g6 [10...Nd7 11.Nxc4 0-0 12.Qb3 Qe7=] 11.Nxc4 Qe7 12.Ne5 Qh4 13.Qf3 Nd7 14.Qg3 Qe7 15.Nd3 Nb4 16.0-0-0 a5 17.h4 Nxd3+ 18.Rxd3 Nf6 19.Bf3 Rg8 20.h5 Bd7 21.hxg6 Rxg6 22.Qh4 Qg7 23.Bh5 Nxh5 24.Qxh5 h6? [A serious error by Black. White would stand only a little better after 24...Kd8 25.Qxh7 Kc7 26.Qxg7 Rxg7 27.Rd2+/=] 25.Rg1 Kf7 26.e4 Rg8 27.Rdg3 Qh7 28.Na4 [28.exf5! exf5 29.Ne4! fxe4 30.f5+- and Black position collapses.] 28...Kf6 29.Qh4+ [29.e5+! Kf7 30.Nc5 Bc8 (30...Be8 31.Nxb7+-) 31.Kc2 b6 32.Na4 b5 33.Nb6+-] 29...Kf7 30.Qh5 Kf6

31.Qh4+?! [We just repeated moves and I still fail to play 31.e5+!+-] 31...Kf7 32.Qh5 1/2-1/2

176 – Perry 6.e3 d6 7.Nge2 c6 Our flight was scheduled to leave the cold north for a vacation down in sunny Florida one March. The weather forecast was for heavy snow, so we changed our tickets to one day earlier. When boarding, the airline announced they overbooked by one passenger, my wife! They offered a free future ticket to anyone who would swap with her and take a later flight that day. A businessman jumped at the offer. So, we enjoyed our trip. Like successful airlines, postal chess players would overbook their tournaments. We expected games to finish at a typical pace, but sometimes they went long, lasting a year or more. We found ourselves still playing old games when it was time for our next event to start. In such cases, some of us chose to ease our load of games. We picked a few roughly even games and agreed to short draws. Daniel Perry had White in all four of our correspondence games. Our last three came by email. He won them all at the faster pace. In an earlier slow postal game, we agreed to a peaceful quickie in a Classical Dutch. About the same time I had another short draw in a Stonewall line vs John Helmbrecht. They were typical examples of this opening, but there were no middlegames here. Perry (2100) - Sawyer (2100), corr APCT 1982 begins 1.d4 f5 2.c4 [2.g3 Nf6 3.Bg2 e6 4.Nf3 Be7 5.0-0 0-0 6.c4 d5 7.b3 c6 8.Ne5 Nbd7 9.Nxd7 Bxd7 10.Nd2 Be8 11.Nf3 Bh5 1/2-1/2 Helmbrecht -Sawyer, corr APCT 1982] 2...e6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.g3 Be7 5.Bg2 0-0 6.e3 d6 7.Nge2 c6 8.0-0 e5 9.d5 Qe8 10.dxc6 bxc6 11.Qa4 Be6 12.Rd1 Qd7 13.c5 d5 14.b4 Qb7 1/21/2

177 – Hess 6.b3 d6 7.Bb2 c6 In April 1977, I came out of chess retirement to play in the Maine state chess championship held in Sanford, Maine. Three of my opponents were among the strongest players in the state. I went to university in 1972. I spent so much time on chess that I did not pass all my school studies. I competed in tournaments up through the US Junior Open in 1974. By the fall of 1974 I had been playing tournament chess for two years. Then I stopped playing chess for the next two and a half years to focus more on my school work. This time I would do much better in college. One week before I got married, my brother and I played in the Maine Chess Championship. In the first round I was paired down against Carl Hess who was rated 1548. We started with 1.Nf3 f5 and transposed eventually into the Dutch Defence. I had rarely played this opening. Fortunately my opponent found a faulty queenside plan that allowed my central pawns to win the day. I had a good start winning round one. Hess - Sawyer, Maine Champ Maine (1), 16.04.1977 begins 1.Nf3 f5 2.g3 Nf6 3.Bg2 e6 [In my early days of playing the Dutch Defence, I would almost always play the e6 Classical lines. Later I would add the g6 Leningrad lines.] 4.c4 Be7 5.Nc3 0-0 6.b3 d6 7.Bb2 c6 8.d4 [Finally d4 makes it an actual Dutch Defence.] 8...Ne4 9.Qc2 d5 10.Nxe4?! [10.e3 Nd7 11.0-0+/= and White's position is freer.] 10...fxe4 11.Ne5 Nd7 12.f4 Nxe5 13.dxe5 Bd7 14.0-0 Qe8 15.a4! Qh5 16.Ba3 Bxa3 17.Rxa3 Rac8 [My Bd7 looks pretty sick.] 18.a5 g5 19.e3 gxf4 20.exf4! [This builds up a pawn majority on the kingside where White could eventually mount an attack.] 20...Qg4 21.Qd1 Qxd1 22.Rxd1 Be8 23.c5 a6 24.Ra2 Bg6 25.Rd4 Kf7 26.Bf1 Bh5 27.Rb4 Rc7 28.Rb6?! [Putting this rook completely out of play. Much better is 28.Kf2 Bg4 29.Ke3+/-] 28...d4! [Black's central pawns break free and White is suddenly in trouble. He chooses to attack my e4 pawn, but then he is lost.] 29.Bg2? e3 30.Bf1 Rd8 31.Bd3 Bg6 32.Bxa6?

[Desperation. However, passive play cannot stop my d-pawn. 32.Be2 d3 33.Bg4 d2 34.Ra1 Bc2-+] 32...bxa6 33.Rxa6?-+ [Or 33.f5 Bxf5 34.Kg2 Be4+ 35.Kh3 d3-+] 33...d3 0-1

178 – Beloungie 6…d6 7.b3 a5 Lance Beloungie wins a FIDE rated game in a Dutch Defence. Years ago it was hard to play FIDE rated games in the USA unless you lived near a city and had a master rating. I did not play any FIDE rated games until I was over 50 years old and well past my prime. Nowadays many tournaments might have qualified games rated by FIDE. Lance is a longtime friend of Ray Haines. I appreciate his humor. Beloungie wrote: "Ray said you were looking for Dutch defense games (no matter how meager), so, here one is (along with my musings). This is my first win over a FIDE rated opponent in a FIDE rated event, thus, I'll get a rating if I live long enough. His pre-event USCF rating was 2013 and his FIDE was 1947.” “One interesting sidelight. His chess board mannerisms are very similar to my own; Huffing and puffing with lots of moanings. It must have been amusing if anyone watched us." Yes, I enjoyed receiving games from readers. I used some of his annotations in the notes. Scheinwald - Beloungie, Portsmouth NH Open (4), 30.01.2016 begins 1.Nf3 f5 2.c4 Nf6 3.b3 d6 4.d4 e6 5.g3 Be7 6.Bg2 0-0 7.0-0 a5 8.Nc3 Ne4 9.Qc2 Nxc3 10.Qxc3 Bf6 11.Bb2 Nc6 12.Qc2 Qe8 13.a3 e5 14.d5 Nd8 15.e4 Qg6 16.Nd2 f4 17.c5 Nf7 18.cxd6 cxd6 19.Nc4 Bd8 20.a4 Ng5 21.Nxd6 Bh3 [21...f3 22.Nf5 fxg2 23.Kxg2 Rxf5 24.exf5 Bxf5 25.Qd1 Bh3+ 26.Kg1 Bb6 27.Kh1 Bxf1 28.Qxf1 Ne4-+; or 21...Qxd6-+] 22.Nf5 f3[22...Qh5 23.Bxh3 Qxh3 24.f3 g6-/+] 23.Bxh3 Nxh3+ [23...Qh5 24.Kh1 Qxh3 25.Nh4 Rf6 26.Bxe5+/-] 24.Kh1 Nf4 25.Bxe5 Ne2 26.Nd4 [26.d6+-; 26.Nxg7+-] 26...Qh5 27.Nxf3 [27.Bxg7 Kxg7 28.Ne6+ Kg8 29.Nxf8 Qh3 30.Rg1=] 27...Qxf3# 0-1 [Notes by Beloungie]

179 – Haines Wins 7.Nc3 a5 After a month (February 1974) of playing 1.e4 vs Ray Haines, I switch up in March to play 1.d4. My chess friend responds with the Dutch Defence. This 6...d6 classical variation has cost me many losses from each side of the chess board. I played the 2.g3 line and we reached the main tabiya position after my 7.Nc3, possible from many move orders. Black has 7...Qe8, 7...Ne4, or what Ray chose, 7...a5. I started well. I was doing well. And then, I wasn't. I did not look deep enough. Play proceeded normally until I made an unlucky 13th move which costs me the game. Soon after that my queen was trapped. Sure, I played on, but I was losing all the way from move 13 until I resigned on move 27. Nice game by Ray. Sawyer - Haines, Ft Fairfield, Maine 12.03.1974 begins 1.d4 f5 2.g3 e6 3.Bg2 Nf6 4.Nf3 Be7 5.0-0 0-0 6.c4 d6 [6...Ne4 was Alekhine's move] 7.Nc3 a5 [The old main line is 7...Qe8 8.b3 a5 9.Bb2 Na6 when White has a slight space advantage and many ways to proceed or 7...Ne4 8.Qc2 Nxc3 9.Qxc3 a5 10.b3 Nc6 11.Bb2 Bf6=] 8.Qc2 [8.b3 Qe8 transposes to the old main line] 8...Nc6 9.e4 [If 9.a3 e5 10.d5 Nb8=] 9...Nb4 [9...Nxe4 10.Nxe4 Nb4 11.Qe2 transposes to the game.] 10.Qe2 Nxe4 11.Nxe4 fxe4 12.Qxe4 e5 13.Be3?? [I cut off my important queen retreat! 13.dxe5! Bf5 14.Qxb7 Rb8 15.Qa7 Nc6 16.Qe3+/-] 13...Bf5 14.Qxb7 Rb8 15.Qa7 Nc6 16.Qa6 Rb6 [My queen, she is a trapped?!] 17.Qxb6 cxb6 18.Nh4 Bxh4 19.gxh4 e4 [Down a queen for a rook I have no chance.] 20.Bg5 Qd7 21.Rae1 Nxd4 22.Bxe4? [Jumping into the toaster.] 22...Bxe4 23.Rxe4 Nf3+ 24.Kh1? [I am toast.] 24...Qh3 25.Bf4 Rxf4 26.Re8+ Kf7 27.Re7+ Kxe7 0-1

180 – O'Hearn 7.Nc3 Qe8 8.Nd2 It's funny the things you remember about your opponents. As I recall Jim O'Hearn lived in Portland, Oregon. Years later, I made an unexpected brief visit to Portland to have lunch in the rain. What I remember was that Jim O’Hearn wrote out his postcards with chess moves using purple colored ink. Other the years, every once in a while, someone would ask me to sign something with a purple pen. At such times, I remember my opponent Jim from long ago. Jim O'Hearn takes on my Dutch Defence Classical Variation where I played 6...d6 and 7...Qe8. In the mid-1980s I played very little chess while raising a family. Soon I would fall in love with the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit and renew my chess interest. I had Black in three of my four APCT games vs Jim O'Hearn. My score vs him was two wins and two draws. Time control was three days per move, but I almost replied by the next business day. Below is our final game. I earned an APCT Life Achievement Certificate for finishing more than 200 games there. American Postal Chess Tournaments were run well by Helen and Jim Warren for over 30 years. Helen directed the tournaments and Jim handled the business finances. They made their money through membership dues, entry fees and selling chess books to players like me. O'Hearn - Sawyer, corr APCT 1985 begins 1.d4 e6 2.Nf3 f5 3.g3 Nf6 4.Bg2 Be7 5.0-0 0-0 6.c4 d6 7.Nc3 Qe8 [A critical line is 7...Ne4 8.Qd3+/=] 8.Nd2 Nc6 9.d5 Nd8 10.e4 e5 11.f4 exf4 12.gxf4 fxe4 [12...Qg6=] 13.Ndxe4 Nxe4 14.Nxe4 [14.Bxe4+/=] 14...Qg6 15.Kh1 Bf5 16.Qf3 b6 17.Rg1 Bf6 18.Nxf6+ Qxf6 19.Qf2 [19.Bd2=] 19...Nf7 20.Be3 Nh6 21.Bf3 Rf7 22.Bd4 Qd8 23.Rg5 Bd7? [23...Bg6=/+] 24.Rag1 Nf5 25.Bc3 g6?[25...Qe8 26.R1g2+/-] 26.Bh5 [White is winning with 26.Rxf5

Bxf5 27.Qd4!+-] 26...Qe7 27.Re1 Qd8 28.Bd1 [White would be winning with 28.Bxg6 hxg6 29.Qg2+-] 1/2-1/2

181 – Chaney 7.Nc3 Qe8 8.b3 The Classical Variation of the Dutch Defence after 1.d4 f5 is a very flexible set-up. White plays the standard pawn structure of 1.d4, 2.c4 and 3.g3. Black places pawns 1...f5, 3...e6, and 6...d6 with the rest of the pieces placed around them. Key issues for Black are where to locate his queen, his light squared bishop, and which central pawn to push again. I experimented with this dozens of times with good overall results. I played Ronald Chaney of Iowa 17 times over a 20 year period in correspondence chess in a wide variety of openings. Early games were played by postcard and the later were by email. Our Dutch Defense game was the second of six lifetime draws. Early on I won 4-2 in decisive games. Later Chaney got the best of me and won a lot more. Usually our ratings were fairly close. Below we reached an even middlegame and headed toward an even endgame when a draw was agreed. In the notes I added two more games. Chaney (2000) - Sawyer (2100), corr APCT 1982 begins 1.d4 f5 2.c4 Nf6 3.g3 e6 4.Bg2 Be7 5.Nf3 0-0 6.0-0 d6 7.Nc3 Qe8 8.b3 a5 [8...Nc6 9.d5 Nb4 10.dxe6 Bxe6 11.Nd4 Bc8 12.Ba3 Nc6 13.Nd5 Bd8 14.e3 a6 15.Ne2 Ne5 16.Qc2 Kh8 17.Rad1 Rb8 18.Nxf6 Bxf6 19.c5 dxc5 20.Qxc5 Rf7 1-0. Albano - Sawyer, corr APCT 1986] 9.Bb2 Na6 10.e3 c6 11.Qe2 Bd7 12.e4 fxe4 13.Nxe4 Qh5 14.Neg5 [14.Rae1 Nc7 (14...Nxe4! 15.Qxe4 a4=) 15.Nfd2 Qxe2 16.Rxe2 Nxe4 17.Nxe4 d5 18.Nc5+/= 1-0. Van der Hoek Sawyer, corr ICCF 1983] 14...Nc7 15.Nh3 e5 16.dxe5 Bxh3 17.exf6 Bxg2 18.Kxg2 Bxf6 19.Bxf6 Rxf6 20.Nd4 Qxe2 21.Nxe2 d5 22.Rac1 Re8 23.Rfe1 Rfe6 1/2-1/2

182 – Davies 7.Nc3 Qe8 8.Re1 USCF Master Jim Davies of Missouri was one of the best APCT postal chess players 30-40 years ago. My rating rose up close to his for a while in the early 1980s. In our first meeting Jim offered me the chance to play White in a French Defence. Instead we moved into a Classical Variation of the Dutch Defence. That brought back memories of my game in this line against Ray Haines from 1974. James Davies had written about my 1975 win vs Jim Charette in the CaroKann Defence in the APCT News Bulletin column. Play in my Davies game revolved around e4. The position opened up to my advantage. Alas, I missed the critical move 19.Bd5+! Later I blundered on move 32 and lost quickly. In the notes I include another game that I won quickly as White vs Ussery. Sawyer (1900) - Davies (2200), corr APCT 1978 begins 1.d4 e6 2.Nf3 f5 3.g3 Nf6 4.Bg2 Be7 5.0-0 0-0 6.c4 d6 7.Nc3 Qe8 [This is the most common 7th move for Black. While it may not be the best, 7...Qe8 is certainly better than 7...Nbd7? 8.Qc2 Nh5 9.e4 fxe4 10.Nxe4 Nhf6? 11.Nfg5 Nxe4 12.Nxe6 d5? 13.Nxd8 1-0 Sawyer - Ussery, corr APCT 1981] 8.Re1 Qg6 9.e4 fxe4 10.Nxe4 Nxe4 11.Rxe4 Nc6 12.Qe2 Bf6 13.Bd2 e5 14.dxe5 Nxe5 15.Nxe5 Bxe5 16.Bc3 Bxc3 17.bxc3 Bd7 18.Re7 Rae8 19.Bxb7 [19.Bd5+!+/=] 19...c6 20.c5 Rxe7 21.Qxe7 Qf5 22.Qe3 Re8 23.Qd2 Qxc5 24.Re1 Rf8 25.Qd4 [25.Ba6=] 25...Qxd4 26.cxd4 Rb8 27.Ba6 Kf7 28.Bc4+ Kf6 29.Bb3 [29.Re3=] 29...Rb4 30.Re4 g5 31.f4 h6 32.h4? [32.fxg5+ hxg5=/+] 32...gxh4 33.gxh4 d5 0-1

183 – Amin 7.Nc3 Qe8 8.Qc2 Maybe I’m foolish for this, but gambits don’t scare me. I like Dutch Defence 1.d4 f5 even though it allows White a Staunton Gambit 2.e4!? Good players may not want to be bothered with wild lines. I can’t blame them. They get results when they expect to outplay their opponents with little risk. Those who play the French Defence 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 as Black may avoid the Staunton Gambit with the move order 1.d4 e6. Here Black maintains the choice between 2...d5 and 2...f5. He can make his choice after seeing White’s second move. Egyptian Grandmaster Bassem Amin was the highest FIDE rated player in Africa in 2016. He tends to avoid the most popular lines. As Black Amin answers 1.d4 with 1...Nf6, 1...d5, 1...f5 or as here 1...e6. He backed into this Classical Variation of the Dutch Defence against Grandmaster Mohamad Al Sayed from Qatar. Al Sayed (2508) - Amin (2662), World Rapid 2016 Doha QAT (1.32), 26.12.2016 begins 1.d4 e6 2.Nf3 f5 3.g3 Nf6 4.Bg2 Be7 5.0-0 0-0 6.c4 d6 7.Nc3 Qe8 [7...a5 and 7...Ne4 are the major alternatives.] 8.Qc2 [8.b3 c6 9.Qc2+/=] 8...Qg6 [8...a5 9.Be3+/=] 9.Nh4 [9.d5!?+/=] 9...Qh5 10.Bf3 Qf7 11.d5 c6 12.b3 Ng4 13.dxe6 Bxe6 14.Ng2 Qh5 [Maybe 14...Ne5 15.Nf4=] 15.h4 g5 16.Bxg5 Bxg5 17.Bxg4 fxg4 18.hxg5 Qxg5 19.Rad1 Bf5 [19...Qe5 20.Qd3+/-] 20.Qd2 Qg7 21.Qe3 Rf6 22.Qe8+ [White stands better after 22.Nh4!+-] 22...Rf8! 23.Qe3 Rf6 24.Nf4 Qf7 [24...Rh6 25.Qe8+ Qf8 26.Qxf8+ Kxf8 27.Ng2+/-] 25.Rd4 [25.f3 gxf3 26.Qxf3+-] 25...Nd7 26.Rfd1 Re8 27.Qd2 d5 [27...Qf8 28.Rxd6 Rxd6 29.Qxd6 Qxd6 30.Rxd6+/-] 28.cxd5 c5 29.Ra4 a6 30.b4?! [White slips. 30.d6!+-. Now Black attacks.] 30...b5! 31.Ra5 cxb4 32.Nb1? Be4 33.Qxb4 Rh6 34.Ng2 Bxg2 35.Kxg2 Qh5 0-1

184 – Fawbush 7.Nc3 Qe8 Re1 When you play the same opening pawn structure repeatedly, you become comfortable, and maybe competent in your play. Or you may slip into lazy lackadaisical lost positions. The Dutch Defence can be played by Black against anything except 1.e4. My set-up here was the Classical Ilyin-Zhenevsky 3...e6 and 6...d6 variation. Black left the center available for moves like 5.c4 and 6.d4. This classical line of the Dutch Defence is favored by GM Simon Williams. I played George Fawbush nine times in my postal chess career. In six I had the Black pieces. We both scored +4 -4 =1. "G.E.F." played a wide variety of openings, often at a 2300 master level. At times, he dropped out of tournaments for health reasons. My Dutch Defence became a Bird's Opening in reverse. It feels like I just passively sat back and waited for things to happen. The real danger came when White gained the initiative and won material. Here I resigned when down two pawns. Fawbush (2200) - Sawyer (2100), corr APCT 1982 begins 1.g3 f5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Bg2 e6 4.0-0 Be7 5.c4 0-0 6.d4 d6 7.Nc3 Qe8 [A critical line is 7...Ne4 8.Qd3+/=] 8.Re1 Ne4 9.Nxe4 fxe4 10.Ng5 d5 11.cxd5 exd5 12.Qb3 c6 13.f3 Kh8 [13...a5 14.fxe4 a4 15.Qc3+/=] 14.fxe4 h6 15.Nf3 dxe4 16.Nd2 Bf6 17.e3 Qe7 18.Nxe4 Be6 19.Qc3 Nd7 20.Nxf6 Nxf6 21.e4 Rad8 22.Be3 Bg4 23.d5 Rfe8? [But Black is still in trouble after 23...Nxe4 24.Bxa7+/-] 24.Bxa7 cxd5 25.exd5 Qd7 26.Bb6 1-0

2.c4 g6 3.g3 Both sides opt for the most dynamic set-up. The fianchettoed bishops attack the center on crisscrossing diagonals. I chose the main line to be 1.d4 f5 2.c4 g6 3.g3 Nf6 4.Bg2 Bg7 5.Nf3 d6 6.0-0 0-0 7.Nc3 Qe8. This variation was popularized by the late Grandmaster Vladimir Malaniuk of Ukraine.

185 – 3…Nf6 4.Bg2 Bg7 5.Nh3 In the Dutch Defence game between P. Phoobalan and Marat Dzhumaev, White played the Karlsbad idea of Nh3 instead of the more normal Nf3. Then White got a little too loose on move 15. The grandmaster as Black picked up on that weakness and attacked. Almost all the action took place on the e-file or the f-file during the last half of the game. Phoobalan (2158) - Dzhumaev (2434), 10th Chennai Open IND, 20.01.2018 begins 1.d4 f5 2.c4 Nf6 3.g3 g6 4.Bg2 Bg7 5.Nh3 Nc6 6.0-0 00 7.d5 Ne5 8.Qc2 [8.Qb3=] 8...c6 9.b3 Qc7 10.dxc6 dxc6 11.Nc3 Bd7 12.Ba3 Rae8 13.Rad1 Bc8 14.Bc1 h6 15.f4? [15.e3+/=] 15...Neg4 16.e4 e5 17.Kh1 Nh5 18.exf5 [18.Bf3 Qe7=/+] 18...Bxf5 19.Be4 exf4 20.Bxf5 Rxf5 21.Nxf4 Nxf4 22.Bxf4 Qf7 23.Rfe1 [23.Kg1 g5-/+] 23...Rxe1+ 24.Rxe1 Rh5 25.Re2 [25.Ne4 Rxh2+ 26.Qxh2 Nxh2 27.Kxh2 g5-/+] 25...g5 26.Ne4 gxf4 27.Nd6 Qf6 0-1

186 – Hill 5.Nc3 0-0 6.Nh3 Nc6 In the Dutch Defence after 1.d4 f5 there is a battle over the central squares e5 and e4. White's first move controls e5 and Black's e4. Normally the players will follow soon with moves like Nf3 and ...Nf6, further emphasizing their mutual plans. The Leningrad Dutch fights against White's control of e5 with Black moves like ...g6, ...Bg7 and ...d6. The knight goes to Nf6. In the Karlsbad Variation, White plays g3, Bg2, and Nh3. This allows his bishop full access to the light diagonal and giving his knight the option of Nf4 taking aim at e6 and e5. One game from my 1989 USCF Golden Knights tournament began as an English Opening but transposed to the Dutch Defence. We started down the road of the Karlsbad Variation. When I responded to 6.Nh3 with 6...Nc6, my opponent David Hill played 7.Ng5. I answered with 7...h6?! His knight ended up back at Nf3 anyway. Each of us had a slight edge at times. The game was roughly equal until the endgame when he outplayed me. My blunder on move 34 really hurt. Hill - Sawyer, corr USCF 1990 begins 1.c4 f5 2.d4 Nf6 3.Nc3 g6 4.g3 Bg7 5.Bg2 0-0 6.Nh3 [The Karlsbad Variation. The more common 6.Nf3 d6 7.00 is a standard Leningrad position.] 6...Nc6 7.Ng5 h6?! [7...d6=] 8.Nf3 d6 9.d5 Ne5 10.Nxe5 dxe5 11.0-0 e6 12.dxe6?! [12.Be3+/=] 12...c6 13.Qxd8 Rxd8 14.e7 Re8 15.e4 Rxe7 16.Rd1 Be6 17.exf5 gxf5 18.b3 e4 19.Bb2 Ng4 20.Rac1 Ne5 21.Ba3 Rd7 [21...Ree8=/+] 22.Rxd7 Nxd7 23.Ne2 Ne5 24.Nf4 Kf7 25.Rd1 Re8 26.Rd6 Bc8 27.Nh5 Nf3+ 28.Bxf3 exf3 29.Bb4 c5 [29...Be5!=] 30.Nxg7 Kxg7 31.Bc3+ Kh7 32.Rd3 f4 [32...Re2 33.a4+/=] 33.Rxf3 Re4 34.gxf4 Bg4? [34...Kg6 35.Kf1+/-] 35.Rg3 Rxf4 36.h3 1-0

187 – Spears 5.Nc3 0-0 6.e3 d6 One of the tips to good chess is to not exchange. Let your opponent do the exchanging and you can do the recapturing. Generally this will leave you with better placed material. Think about it. Let's say you both bring a piece out toward the middle of the board. When your opponent takes your piece and you recapture, then you still have something out there while his piece is off the board. Another advantage is that piece captures in tense tactical positions require accurate calculation. Recaptures are often forced and easy. In my 1989 Golden Knights tournament game vs William Spears, White made five moves with his king's knight whereupon he traded the mighty steed to win two pawns and pick up my light squared bishop. Alas, this worked only temporarily; he did not see far enough ahead. The combination began on move 13. My opponent grabbed my bishop on move 15. White wiggled around until move 20, when it became evident that he had to return the piece. At that point he would be down his king's knight for one pawn, so he resigned. The opening was the trendy English Opening 1.c4 and 2.g3 set-up. After I responded with the Leningrad Variation defensive scheme by 1...f5, 2...Nf6, 3...g6, and 4...Bg7, my opponent played 5.d4 transposing to the Dutch Defence. Spears - Sawyer, corr USCF 1991 begins 1.c4 f5 2.g3 Nf6 3.Bg2 g6 4.Nc3 Bg7 5.d4 0-0 6.e3 [6.Nf3] 6...d6 7.Nge2 Na6 8.0-0 c6 9.Qb3 Kh8 10.Nf4 [White makes five moves with this knight, only to exchange it. Better is 10.Rd1!?=] 10...e5 11.Nd3 [11.Nfe2=] 11...Qe7 12.Nb4 Nc7 13.Nxc6 bxc6 14.Bxc6 Bb7 15.Bxb7 Rab8 16.dxe5 [White's bishop on b7 is pinned and will be lost, but Black is also better after 16.c5 dxc5 17.dxc5 Qxc5 18.Rb1 e4 19.Rd1 Ng4-+] 16...dxe5 17.c5 Qxc5 18.e4 [The only defence is 18.Rb1 e4 19.Rd1 Qe7 20.Qa3! Ng8 21.Qxe7 Nxe7 22.Bxe4 fxe4 23.Nxe4

Ncd5=/+ and White walks away with three pawns for the knight.] 18...Qe7 19.Be3 Ne6 20.Nd5 Nxd5 0-1

188 – Morin 5.Nf3 d6 6.0-0 Nc6 Subtitled: Ray Haines Almost Beats Roger Morin with the Dutch Defence. It is often cold in Houlton, Maine where I-95 runs into Canada. The chess heated up on the first Saturday of January 2012. USCF Expert Roger Morin has won a lot of these local events since he usually has been the highest rated player in Aroostook County. Also, Roger Morin has been one of the strongest players in Maine for many years. Last I looked Morin was ranked 5th in that state. This time around Roger faced my friend Ray Haines in the second round. Both had won their first round contests. Ray Haines wrote: "ROUND 2 ROGER MORIN “He has won most of the games which we have played over the last 2 years. I played poorly in some of those games, but I have been improving.” “I seem to be able to get a good game against him in the openings about every time, but I end up losing in the end. I need to control his counter play. I need to keep him from getting open lines for his pieces.” “I did not see the danger of him having mating threats in this game. I put this through the computer and found many places where I could have stopped him. I made the mistake of opening the king night file, which I should have seen it as a mistake.” “I should have tried to force him to trade one of the rooks off. Also this would have made the win easier I will keep playing this line in the Dutch against him and should be able to change my result against him." Ray, sorry for picking your loss to write about. You played very well in an exciting game!

Morin (2007) - Haines, Houlton ME (Rd 2), 07.01.2012 begins 1.Nf3 [This move is as flexible and inflexible as 1.d4, limiting both sides.] 1...f5 [Pretty much a Dutch.] 2.g3 [White's sharpest reply is 2.e4!? fxe4 Lisitzin Gambit (2...Nc6 Queens Knight Nimzowitsch Defence, Colorado Variation; 2...e5 Latvian Gambit) 3.Ng5 Nf6 (3...d5 4.d3 Qd6) 4.d3 when Black could try to hold the gambit pawn with 4...d5 (or return it via 4...e3 or 4...e5) 5.dxe4 h6] 2...Nf6 3.Bg2 g6 4.0-0 Bg7 5.c4 d6 6.d4 [With the pawn on d4 we now have a Dutch Defence Leningrad Variation. 6.Nc3 e5 7.d3 is an English Opening.] 6...Nc6 [6...0-0 The main line Leningrad goes 7.Nc3 and now if 7...Nc6 8.d5 Ne5 9.Nxe5 (9.Nd2 transposes back to the game) 9...dxe5 and White usually chooses between 10.e4 or 10.Qb3] 7.d5 Ne5 8.Nfd2 White seems to be intentionally avoiding the slight advantage of the main line in hopes to outplay Black later. 8...0-0 9.Nc3 Bd7= 10.f4 Neg4 11.Nf3 c6 12.h3 Qb6+ 13.Qd4 Qxd4+ 14.Nxd4 Nxd5 15.Nc2? [The better alternative is a semi-forced line with multiple exchanges: 15.Nxd5 Bxd4+ 16.e3 Bg7 17.hxg4 cxd5 18.Bxd5+ e6 19.Bxb7 Rab8=] 15...Nxc3 16.bxc3 Nf6 Black has won a pawn and stands much better. 17.Rb1 Rab8 18.Be3 b6 19.Nd4 c5 [19...Ne4!-+] 20.Nc6 Bxc6 21.Bxc6 Nh5 [21...e6 prevents the coming check] 22.Bd5+ Kh8 23.Kg2 Bxc3 24.Rb3 Bg7 25.Ra3 a5 26.Rb1 Nf6 27.Bf3 e5 28.Bd5? Giving Black a dangerous passed pawn. 28...Nxd5 29.cxd5 b5 30.Rxa5 b4 31.Ra6 Rfd8 32.Kf2 Ra8 33.Rc6 Rxa2 Two passed pawns. 34.Ke1 e4 35.Bd2 Bf8 36.Rc7 Ra3 37.e3 Rda8 38.Bc1 Rd3! 39.g4 Rxd5 [The d5-pawn is not going anywhere. Better to activate the bishop with 39...Bg7!-+] 40.gxf5 Rxf5 41.Kf2 d5 42.Bb2+ [White is in deep trouble. All he can do is grab the long diagonal and hope.] 42...Kg8 43.Be5 Ra2+ 44.Kg3 [From here to the end, there are blunders on both sides like a blitz game.] 44...g5?! [44...Re2; 44...Rf7] 45.h4 gxf4+ 46.exf4 Rf7 47.Rc8 d4 48.Kh3 [All of a sudden there are direct tactics against the Black king.] 48...Ra3+ 49.Kh2 h6? [49...Rfa7 would likely force exchanges that would weaken White's threats.] 50.Bd6?! [Played to win the bishop, but that is not enough to win the game. Given time, White might choose to end the game with 50.Rg1+! Kh7 51.Rxf8 Rxf8 52.Rg7+ Kh8 53.Rg1+ draw by perpetual check!] 50...Rc3 51.Rg1+ Kh7 52.Bxf8 [White has won a bishop but the passed pawns are still worth more than a piece.] 52...b3 53.Bd6 b2? [Missing checkmate. Black is winning after 53...Rc2+ 54.Kh3 Rg7-+] 54.Be5! Rc2+ 55.Kh1 1-0

189 – Nakamura 7.b3 c6 8.Bb2 I visited the eighth round of US Open held in Orlando, Florida in August of 2011 to see some grandmasters and watch openings. I wasn’t able to play in the event due to my job. I worked early every morning. The games were played in the evening when I needed to be sleeping. I went to the Airport Hyatt tournament site on Saturday night when I didn’t have to work the next day. The game I remember most was between Kidambi Sundararajan and Hikaru Nakamura in the Dutch Defence Leningrad Variation. Nakamura won a beautiful game by winning a pawn and the rook and pawn endgame. The Leningrad Dutch is excellent for those who like the kind of sharp tactics in which Nakamura excels. Sundararajan (2491) - Nakamura (2770), 112th US Open Orlando USA (8), 06.08.2011 begins 1.d4 f5 2.g3 Nf6 3.Bg2 g6 4.Nf3 Bg7 5.0-0 0-0 6.b3 d6 7.Bb2 c6 8.c4 Qc7 [8...Na6 9.Nc3 Bd7 10.Rc1 Re8 11.d5=] 9.Nbd2 Re8 10.Qc2 [10.Re1 e5 11.e4=] 10...Na6 11.a3 e5 12.c5 e4 13.cxd6 Qxd6 14.Ne5 Be6 15.b4 Bd5 16.Ndc4 [16.f3 exf3 17.exf3=] 16...Qe6 17.Bc1 Ng4 18.Nxg4 Bxc4 19.Ne5 Bb3 20.Qc3 Ba4 21.g4 fxg4 22.Bxe4 Nc7 23.f4 [23.Bd3 Bb5-/+] 23...gxf3 24.Qxf3 Nb5 25.Bb2 Nxd4 26.Bxd4 Bxe5 27.Bxe5 Qxe5 28.Qf7+ Kh8 29.Bd3 Re7 30.Qf6+ Qxf6 31.Rxf6 Rd8 32.Raf1 Kg7 33.Bc4 Rdd7 34.Be6 Rd1 35.Bc4 Rxf1+ 36.Rxf1 a6 37.Rf4 Bc2 38.Kf2 Be4 39.Ke3 Bd5+ 40.Kd3 g5 41.Rd4 Bxc4+ 42.Rxc4 Rd7+ 43.Ke3 h5 44.Kf3 Kf6 45.h3 Rd5 46.Rc3 Ke6 47.Re3+ Kd6 48.Re8 Rf5+ 49.Ke4 Rf4+ 50.Kd3 Rh4 51.Re3 a5 52.Kc3 [Or 52.bxa5 Ra4 53.Kd2 Rxa5-/+] 52...axb4+ 53.axb4 b5 54.Rg3 Rc4+ 55.Kd2 Rxb4 56.Rxg5 Rh4 57.Rg3 Kc5 58.Kd3 Rd4+ 59.Kc3 b4+ 60.Kb3 Kb5 61.Rg5+ c5 62.Rxh5 [62.Re5 Rh4 63.Re3 c4+ 64.Kc2 Ka4-+] 62...Re4 63.h4 Re3+ 64.Kc2 Rxe2+ 65.Kd3 [65.Kb3 Rh2-+] 65...Rh2 66.Rh8 c4+ 67.Kd4 c3 68.h5 c2 69.Rc8 b3 0-1

190 – Bridgham 7.Nc3 Nc6 8.Bg5 An old chess saying is that a knight on the rim is grim (or is dim). Things can easily go wrong with a knight on the edge. It has less scope and freedom. But it is only a maxim. You want your pieces to use the whole board if it helps. At times you can hook to the edge and dive back toward the middle with great affect. Timing is everything. Ray Haines sent me this Dutch Defence against Robert Bridgham. White played well. Below are comments from Ray Haines which I edited. “On move 12 I decided to trade my king knight for his queen knight and then move my queen knight to a5. I do not know why I ended up picking up my queen knight and not my king knight. I dropped a piece as a result. That one is not as good. I tried to make a fight out of it, but he did a good job defensing his king. He did have places where he could have gone wrong, but he did not go wrong.” In the notes I add a short draw that I played vs John Hathaway. Bridgham - Haines, Houlton Open (1), 07.01.2017 begins 1.c4 f5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.Nf3 g6 4.d4 Bg7 5.g3 d6 6.Bg2 Nc6 7.0-0 0-0 8.Bg5 [8.d5 Ne5 9.Nxe5 dxe5 10.e4 Rb8 11.Qc2 e6 12.dxe6 Bxe6 13.b3 Qe7 14.Bg5 c6 15.Rad1 Rbd8 1/2-1/2 Sawyer -Hathaway, Lansdale 1981] 8...h6 [8...Ne4!=] 9.Bf4 [9.Bxf6 Bxf6 10.Qd2=] 9...g5 10.Bc1 Ne4 [10...e5!=] 11.e3 [11.d5! Nxc3 12.bxc3 Na5 13.h4+/=] 11...e5 12.d5 Na5? [12...Nxc3 13.bxc3 Na5 14.Nd2 b6 15.e4=] 13.Nxe4 fxe4 14.Nd2 Bf5? [14...b6! 15.b4 Nb7 16.Bb2 a5 17.a3+/- and White picks up the e4 pawn.] 15.b4 c5 16.bxa5 Qxa5 17.Qc2 b5 18.cxb5 Qxb5 19.Rb1 Qe2 20.Qc4 Qh5 21.Bxe4 Bh3 22.Bg2 g4 23.Bxh3 Qxh3 24.Rb7 Rf5 25.f4 exf4 26.Rxf4 Rh5 27.Qe2 Re8 28.Nc4 Rg5 [28...Be5 29.Nxe5 dxe5 30.Qc2 Qxh2+ 31.Qxh2+-] 29.Bb2 Qh5 30.Rxg7+ Rxg7 31.Bxg7 Kxg7 1-0

191 – Panico 7.Nc3 c6 8.Rb1 My chess friend Nick Panico from the New York area sent me this game he played on the Internet Chess Club vs a players listed as the International Master Venkat Saravanan from India. The opening is the Leningrad Variation of the Dutch Defence. It was played at a fast pace of 3 minutes for each side total. The game only took about four minutes for the whole thing. White was in a little time trouble and overlooked something at the end. Nick Panico was close at the end of this game. Black avoided making the final mistake and the game belonged to him. Saravanan (2059) – Panico (2060), ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 24.01.2012 begins 1.d4 f5 [Dutch Defence.] 2.c4 Nf6 3.g3 d6 4.Bg2 g6 5.Nf3 Bg7 6.0-0 0-0 7.Nc3 c6 [Here we have reached the main line of the Leningrad Variation. Other Black options include 7...Qe8 or 7...Nc6 and I have played them all.] 8.Rb1 [Sebald - Sawyer, corr ICCF 1983 begins 1.c4 f5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.g3 g6 4.Bg2 Bg7 5.0-0 0-0 6.d4 d6 7.Nc3 c6 8.d5 e5 9.dxe6 Bxe6 10.Qd3 Na6 11.Ng5 Bc8 12.Bf4 Nh5 13.Qxd6 Nxf4 1/2-1/2] 8...Na6 9.b4 Nc7 [Another way to play this is 9...Ne4 10.Nxe4 fxe4 11.Ng5 d5 12.cxd5 cxd5=] 10.b5 Bd7 [10...Ne4=] 11.a4 Qe8 12.d5 [White chooses a forcing line. An alternative approach is to use the space advantage by methodically increasing the activity of each piece. Black has a cramped camp that might lead to weak targets. White could start with 12.Qd3!?+/=] 12...cxd5 13.cxd5 Rc8 14.Bb2 Ne4 15.Nxe4 fxe4 16.Ng5 Bxb2 17.Rxb2 [Material is still even but that linebacker on e4 is a dead quacker. Might as well blitz him forward.] 17...e3 18.fxe3 Rxf1+ 19.Qxf1 h6 20.Nh3 Qf7 21.g4 [21.Qb1+/=] 21...Qxf1+ 22.Kxf1 Bxg4 23.Nf4 Rf8 24.Ke1 g5 25.Nd3 Rc8 26.e4 Ne8 27.e5 dxe5 28.Nxe5 Bf5 29.e4 Bh7 30.Ng4 Kg7 31.e5 [This pawn cuts off good squares for the Ne8.] 31...Bf5 32.Ne3 Bd3 33.Kd2 Bh7 34.Bh3 [34.b6! axb6 35.Rxb6 Rc7 36.Bh3 Be4 37.d6 exd6 38.exd6 Nxd6 39.Rxd6+- and the extra knight gives White good winning chances.] 34...Rc7 35.Ra2 [35.b6!+- see previous note.] 35...h5 36.Ra1 g4 37.Rf1?? [White was down to 41 seconds on the clock and trying to come

up with an active plan. For one second he failed to notice the attack on his bishop. After the natural 37.Bg2+/- White stands better due largely to the knight positions.] 37...gxh3 White resigns 0-1

192 – Haines 7.Nc3 c6 8.Qb3 The Dutch Defence is a chess opening that you can play for a lifetime. My longtime friend Ray Haines has played it more than 40 years. Haines plays other defenses too, but against the closed systems with 1.d4, Ray Haines prefers the Dutch Defence. At first he favored the Classical lines with 3...e6. Later he preferred the Leningrad lines with 3...g6. Experience does not guarantee perfection. Ray Haines wrote: "I did make a mistake on move 9. I did not look at everything that could happen. He could have played 10.c5+ and could have won a pawn or had the better game depending on my reply." With this final round victory Ray Haines tied for first place. It is curious that he played the same old three opponents he most often plays, and all four of them raised their ratings in this event. That is because his friends all defeated other opponents that Ray did not face. All in all, it was a good chess tournament for Aroostook County, Maine. Beloungie - Haines, Houlton, ME (3), 02.05.2015 begins 1.d4 f5 2.c4 Nf6 3.g3 g6 4.Nc3 Bg7 5.Bg2 d6 6.Nf3 0-0 7.0-0 c6 8.Qb3 Qe8 [8...Na6= Stockfish] 9.Re1 e5? [9...Nbd7=] 10.dxe5 [10.c5+! d5 (or 10...Qf7 11.d5!+/-) 11.Nxe5+/-] 10...dxe5 11.e4 Nbd7 12.exf5 gxf5 13.Be3 Qh5 14.h3 e4 15.c5+ Kh8 16.Ng5 Ne5 17.Rad1 h6 18.Bf4 Nd3 19.Rxd3 [19.Ne6 Bxe6 20.Qxe6 Nxb2-/+] 19...hxg5 20.Bd6 exd3 21.Bxf8 Bxf8 22.Re5 Bg7 23.Nd1 Ne4 24.Re7 Nxc5 25.Qf7 Qxf7 26.Rxf7 Na4 [26...Be6 27.Re7 Bf6-+] 27.b3 Nb2 28.Nxb2 Bxb2 29.Bf3 Be6 30.Re7 Bd5 31.Bh5 d2 32.Kf1 Be4 [32...g4!-+] 33.Ke2 Bc3 34.Kd1 Rd8 35.Be2 Bg2 36.h4 gxh4 37.gxh4 Be4 38.f3 Bd5 39.Re3 Bb4 40.Re5 Rg8 0-1

193 – Hickman 7.Nc3 Qe8 8.b3 My opponent Herbert W. Hickman was well known in the USA postal chess world. Herb played in CCLA for over 40 years and was president of that club in 1972-73. He was an International Correspondence Master in ICCF and a USCF master. Herb Hickman co-authored with Roy DeVault "Play the Dutch Against 1 c4 and 1 Nf3." Hickman also invented a gambit vs the English-Dutch that begins 1.c4 f5 2.e4 fxe4 3.d3. In the 1960s analysis of it appeared in Chess Opening Adventures that began as the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit magazine. Bill Wall's excellent collection of chess opening names calls it the "Hickmann Gambit" but there is only one "n" in his name. In 1983-84 I was working in Texas and got a business memo from the corporate office by one Herbert W. Hickman. Out of curiosity I wrote to him and asked if he was the same one who played postal chess. He was! We decided to play four games for fun. He was rated about 2300 and I was rated 2100 in ICCF. Hickman won three of the games. He made me look awful. It’s more fun here to present the only game I won. I began 1.c4. Horrors! What is this? I played the English Opening in the 1980s. I chose the risky 38.a5 instead of the natural and good 38.axb5. Hickman missed my pending pawn sacrifice 42.g4! which won. Sawyer (2100) - Hickman (2300), corr 1984 begins 1.c4 f5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.g3 d6 4.d4 g6 5.Bg2 Bg7 6.0-0 0-0 7.Nc3 Qe8 [Black wants to play ...e5 to attack without swapping queens.] 8.b3 e5 9.dxe5 dxe5 10.Bb2 [10.e4 Nc6 11.Nd5 Qd7 12.Ba3 Rf7? (12...Rd8=) 13.Ng5 [White wins the Exchange.] 1-0. Baffo-Sawyer, USCF 95P139, 1996] 10...e4 11.Nd4 Bd7 12.e3 Nc6 13.Nxc6 Bxc6 14.Ne2 b6 15.Qc2 Rd8 16.Rad1 Qe7 17.Qc1 Bb7 18.Rxd8 Rxd8 19.Rd1 c5 20.Rd2 Rd7 21.Qd1 Qd8 22.Rxd7 Qxd7 23.Qxd7 Nxd7 24.Bxg7 Kxg7 25.Nc3 Kf6 26.Bf1 Ke6 27.Be2 Ne5 28.Kf1 g5 29.Ke1 Nf3+ 30.Bxf3 exf3 31.Kd2 Ke5 32.Kd3 Bc6 33.a4 Be8 34.Nd5 Bf7 35.Ne7 a6 36.Nc8 b5 [36...Be6 37.Nxb6 a5=] 37.cxb5 axb5 38.a5?!

[38.axb5+/=] 38...Bxb3 39.Nb6 Ba2 40.Kc2 Bd5? [40...Bf7 41.a6 Be8 42.a7 Bc6 43.a8Q Bxa8 44.Nxa8 Kd6 45.Nb6 Kc6 46.Nc8 Kd7 47.Na7 b4=] 41.Nxd5 Kxd5 42.g4! fxg4 43.e4+ Kc6 44.e5 h5 45.a6 h4 46.a7 Kb7 47.e6 Black resigns 1-0

194 – Bloom 8.Bg5 Qf7 9.Bxf6 The Malaniuk Variation 7...Qe8 is very playable, but it also gives White a lot of latitude for choice. Philip Bloom opted for 8.Bg5 with the plan to eliminate Black’s knight on f6 and play 10.Nd5. White’s straightforward strategy limits Black’s opportunities. The game was equal in theory. I needed to keep my pieces safe and make threats. Instead, I played to pick off a pawn and lost. Bloom- Sawyer, corr USCF 1990 begins 1.c4 f5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.g3 g6 4.Bg2 Bg7 5.0-0 0-0 6.Nc3 d6 7.d4 Qe8 8.Bg5 Qf7 [8...c6 9.Qd2+/= Deep Rybka] 9.Bxf6 Bxf6 10.Nd5 e6 11.Nxf6+ Qxf6 12.Qd2 Nc6 13.d5 Ne5 14.Nxe5 dxe5 15.Rac1 e4 16.Rfd1 b6 17.b3 Bb7 18.dxe6 Rad8 [18...Qxe6=] 19.Qf4 Qe7 20.Rxd8 Rxd8 21.g4 fxg4 22.Bxe4 Bxe4 [22...Rf8=] 23.Qxe4 Rd6 24.Qxg4 Rxe6 [24...Qxe6 25.Qxe6+ Rxe6 26.e3+/=] 25.Rd1 Rxe2? [25...Kg7 26.e3+/-] 26.Qc8+! 1-0

195 – Jessee 8.Re1 Qf7 9.Qd3 I entered the maximum number of 10 sections in the 1989 USCF Golden Knights Postal Chess Tournament. That meant I played 60 games at once. I aimed for the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit as White. I ventured the Latvian Gambit and Dutch Defence as Black. At one point, I won 26 games in row. I made about ten moves every day. By 1990, the USCF awarded me a Postal Master certificate. My rating dipped and went back up over 2200 again, so they sent me another Postal Master Certificate. My opponent Burke Jessee III of Virginia employed a controlled gradual advance of his army. White kept his pieces safe. Black got too loose and suffered for it. I had good choices. As happens sometimes, I just missed them. I couldn’t win them all. Jessee - Sawyer, corr USCF 1989 begins 1.d4 f5 2.c4 Nf6 3.g3 g6 4.Bg2 Bg7 5.Nf3 0-0 6.0-0 d6 7.Nc3 Qe8 8.Re1 Qf7 9.Qd3 h6 10.b3 Nc6 11.Ba3

Ne4 12.e3 Nxc3 [12...e5!=] 13.Qxc3 e5 14.Rad1 [White could try 14.dxe5 Nxe5 15.Nd4+/=] 14...e4 15.Nd2 b6 16.f3 exf3 17.Bxf3 Bb7? [Defending against only one of the two threats. 17...Qd7!=] 18.Bd5! Kh7 19.Bxf7 Rxf7 20.Qa1 Raf8 21.Bb2 g5 22.d5 Bxb2 23.Qxb2 Ne5 24.Qb1 1-0

196 – Merli 8.Re1 Qf7 9.b3 Ne4 Christopher Merli of Illinois became a notable chess coach and a tournament director. This USCF postal game was likely played in the later rounds of the USCF Golden Knights tournament. We qualified by scoring well in an earlier 1989 round. By 1991 we would have been out of the running for prize money in such a large event. We played a rated game where he had chances. I had chances. After a bit, we agreed to a draw. Merli - Sawyer, corr USCF 1991 begins 1.c4 f5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.g3 g6 4.Bg2 Bg7 5.0-0 0-0 6.d4 d6 7.Nc3 Qe8 8.Re1 Qf7 9.b3 Ne4 10.Bb2 Nc6 [10...Nd7 11.e3 Ndf6 12.Nxe4 Nxe4 13.Nd2 Nf6 14.Qe2 c6=] 11.Rf1 Nxc3 12.Bxc3 h6 13.Qc2 Bd7 14.Rad1 Rae8 15.d5 Nd8 16.Nd4 [Sharper play would follow after 16.Bxg7 Qxg7 17.c5 f4 18.Nd4+/-] 16...a6 17.e4 f4 18.e5 Bxe5 19.Be4 Kg7 20.b4 g5 [20...Qf6=/+] 21.c5 Qh5 22.Nf5+ Kg8 [Black could have won material with 22...Rxf5! 23.Bxf5 Bxf5 24.Bxe5+ (or 24.Qxf5 Bxc3-+) 24...Kg6-+] 23.Bxe5 dxe5 24.d6 exd6+/- 1/2-1/2

197 – Palachev 8.Re1 Qf7 9.e4 Black picked off a pawn with his queen in this Dutch Defence Leningrad. White gained the initiative. The center opened up. Black lagged in development. White pressed the attack. Black tried to defend in the game Petr Palachev vs Vasily Volovich but to no avail. Then White trapped the Black queen with a sneaky bishop retreat. Palachev (2405) - Volovich (2244), 22nd Voronezh Master Open Voronezh RUS (6.33), 18.06.2018 begins 1.d4 f5 2.g3 Nf6 3.Bg2 g6 4.c4 Bg7 5.Nc3 0-0 6.Nf3 d6 7.0-0 Qe8 8.Re1 Qf7 9.e4 fxe4 10.Nxe4 Qxc4?! [10...Nc6 11.d5 Nxe4 12.Rxe4 Ne5=] 11.Nxf6+ exf6 12.Re7 d5 13.Bf4 c6 14.Qd2 Rf7 15.Rxf7 Kxf7 16.Bd6 [Or 16.Bxb8+-] 16...Nd7? [16...Bf5 17.Re1+-] 17.Bf1! Qa4 18.b3 wins the Black queen. 1-0

198 – Perks 8.d5 e5 9.dxe6 Nc6 I played Grant Perks of Ohio in APCT (American Postal Chess Tournaments). The Rook event served as the club’s open championship. The Rook had more than one round and took a few years to finish. Each event was noted by the year it started. This game was played in section 20 and began in 1984. The top finishers advanced to the next round. This Leningrad Dutch Defence 7...Qe8 idea from Malaniak was a relatively new move back in 1984. Later, 7...Qe8 became the main line for a while. Alternatives are 7...c6 or 7...Nc6. My moves eight and nine were stinkers. Grant Perks punished me. Perks - Sawyer, corr APCT 84R-20, 1984 begins 1.c4 English Opening 1...f5 Dutch Defence 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.g3 g6 4.Bg2 Bg7 5.Nf3 0-0 6.d4 d6 7.0-0 Qe8 8.d5 e5? [Strategically correct but tactically flawed. Usually Black plays 8...Na6 or first 8...a5 9.Nd4 Na6] 9.dxe6 Nc6? [Black had to play 9...Qxe6 although White much stands better.] 10.Nd5 Qd8 [Another game from my database continued 10...Nxd5 11.cxd5 Ne5 12.Be3 Nxf3+ 13.Bxf3 Bxb2 14.Rb1 Bg7 15.Qc2 Qe7 16.Rfc1+- and White won material on the queenside.] 11.Ng5 [Black loses material after 11.Ng5 For example, 11...h6 12.Nf7 Qe8 13.Nxc7 Qe7 14.Qxd6+-] 1-0

199 – Sessions 8.d5 Na6 9.a3 My game vs Benjamin Sessions transposed to the Malaniuk after 8...Qe8. The normal move order would be 7.Nc3 Qe8 8.d5 Na6 which was a major improvement over the blunder I had played vs Grant Perks five years earlier. White’s queenside expansion with the moves 9.a3 and 10.b4 strategy left him vulnerable along the long diagonal from my bishop on g7 to his rook on a1. Sessions - Sawyer, corr USCF 1989 begins 1.d4 f5 2.g3 Nf6 3.Bg2 g6 4.Nf3 Bg7 5.c4 0-0 6.0-0 d6 7.d5 [7.Nc3 and 7.b3 are alternatives.] 7...Na6 8.Nc3 Qe8 9.a3 [Now we are back in the main line where White usually plays 9.Rb1 or 9.Nd4] 9...Bd7 [Black plays a waiting move that prepares

what could be play immediately: 9...c6] 10.b4 [10.Qc2] 10...Ne4 11.Nd4? [He had to sacrifice the Exchange with 11.Nxe4 Bxa1 12.Neg5 when White has a lot of compensation.] 11...Nxc3 0-1

200 – Cohen 8.d5 Bd7 9.Nd4 Harry Cohen was one of the most active tournament players in America. If my memory serves me correct, he averaged about one USCF rated tournament game every day for many years. On the other hand, I rarely played in live tournaments. Instead, most of my games in those days were postal chess correspondence games played at the leisurely pace of three days per move. I was at a week-long conference in Washington, DC. I took a break from the conference one morning to tour the White House. I took another break on Friday night to play in this three round chess tournament. As I recall, Harry Cohen and I each won our other games. Our second round draw knocked us out of first place. Another player went 3-0 and won the tournament. Cohen (2070) - Sawyer (1981), Arlington, VA (2), 25.05.1990 begins 1.c4 English Opening 1...f5 Dutch Defence 2.g3 Nf6 3.Bg2 g6 4.Nf3 Bg7 5.0-0 0-0 6.Nc3 d6 7.d4 [English Opening diehards might still avoid d4 with 7.d3 e5 8.Rb1 Nc6 9.b4 h6 10.b5 Ne7 11.a4 While both sides expand on opposite wings, there will eventually be a clash in the center.] 7...Qe8 Malaniuk Variation which was all the rage 20 years ago. 8.d5 Bd7!? [This is one of six good moves for Black. 8...a5 is often throw in here to hinder b4. More often Black just plays 8...Na6 at this point.] 9.Nd4 Na6 10.a3 Nc5 [The knight can jump to a4 or support Nfe4.] 11.f3 a6!? [Black has equal chances after either 11...a5 ; or 11...e6 ] 12.b4 Na4 [12...e5 13.Nxf5 Bxf5 14.bxc5 e4!=] 13.Nxa4 Bxa4 14.Qd3 Bd7 15.Bb2 b5?! [Better is 15...e5 16.dxe6 Bxe6 17.Nxe6 Qxe6=] 16.Ne6 [16.Rac1!+/= gives White a positional advantage.] 16...bxc4 17.Qxc4 Bxe6 18.dxe6 Qb5! [Headed toward a playable endgame.] 19.Qxb5 axb5 20.Rac1?! [Wrong rook. Correct is 20.Rfc1=] 20...Ne8 [20...Rfc8=/+] 21.Bxg7 Kxg7 22.Rc3 Kf6 23.f4 Rb8 24.Bd5 Ng7 25.Rxc7 Rfc8 26.Rfc1 Rxc7 27.Rxc7 Nxe6 28.Bxe6 Kxe6 [We reach an endgame with a rook and six pawns each. Both sides play well and the game is drawn in 20 more moves.] 29.Kf2 Ra8 30.Rc3 Kd5 31.Ke3 e5 32.fxe5 dxe5 33.Rc5+ Kd6 34.Rxb5 Rxa3+ 35.Kf2 Rb3 36.Rb7 Kd5 37.Rxh7 Rxb4 38.Rh6 Rb6 39.h4 Re6 40.Kf3

Kd6 41.e4 Ke7 42.h5 gxh5 43.Rh7+ Kf6 44.exf5 Kxf5 45.Rxh5+ Kg6 46.Rh4 e4+ 47.Rxe4 Rxe4 48.Kxe4 Kg5 1/2-1/2

Book 10: Index of Names to Games Abdulov – 100 Adams – 52 Akobian – 174 Al Sayed – 183 AlexRequelme – 68 Allard – 44 Amin – 183 Andersson – 7 Anurag – 98 Arnold – 17, 42 BadKitty – 12 Baffo – 91 Balog – 169 Balogh – 99 Becx – 51 Beloungie – 104-106, 116, 178, 192 Bloodgood – 109 Bloom – 194 Bogart – 109 Bordon – 143 Brann – 66 Brennar – 94 Bridgham – 190 Briem – 160 bsireta – 135 Bulanov – 41 Carebello – 86 Carlsen – 52, 171 challanger100 – 113 Chaney – 77, 181 CHELLER – 125 ChessBeta – 127 Chigaev – 5 Cofer – 157

Cohen – 200 Coon – 79 Cummins – 76 Curtis – 163 cyborg801 – 22 Daniel – 161 Davies, J – 182 Davies, M – 80 Dawson – 69 De Santis – 82 Devereaux – 138 ,139 Dimitrijeski – 47 dincogan – 1 Ditto – 31 Doronin – 30 Doucette – 64 DrLund – 26 Dzhumaev – 50, 185 Edmundich – 122 EggSalad – 23 Eldridge – 29 Elguezabal – 101 Fawbush – 57, 184 Fernandez – 4 Ferranti – 93 Fiedler – 82 Fier – 36 Fontinha – 87 Foust – 9 FriskyKitty – 25 Funk – 67 Gibbs – 144 Gilbert – 85 Goble – 81 Gokhvat – 100 Gordon – 111 Gorovets – 173

Grafl – 48 Guest – 40 Haendiges – 32 Haile – 175 Haines – 21, 22, 56, 62, 64, 87, 95, 103-106, 110, 115, 116, 147, 179, 188, 190, 192 Hansen – 45 Hathaway – 151 Hess, A – 123, 153 Hess, C – 177 Hickman – 193 highwire – 146 Hill, D – 186 Hill, J – 49 Hillarp Persson – 14 Hoang Thanh Trang – 99 Howell – 107 Huss – 120 Im2Trill – 21 InfoWars73 – 118 inmortal – 20, 26 Jamison – 92 Jesper – 20 Jessee – 195 jokeface – 2 JoseGabrielMorenoCam – 63 Ju Wenjun – 173 JUGGERNOT – 133 Karasev – 34 Karjakin – 171 Kavutskiy – 4 Keiser – 58, 59 keka – 119 keramos – 103 Kirkpatrick – 152 klowz – 11 Koksal – 108

Kolyuzhnov – 54 Kotrotsos – 27 Kovalev – 41 Krystosek – 53, 84 Lacasta Palacios – 48 Laird – 97 Lau – 124 Leconte – 170 Levin – 165 LeviRook – 131 Lord Vedder – 45 Loutragotis – 27 Lovecraft5000 – 62 Lu Shanglei – 162 Lundin – 47 Lundmark – 55 Machinegun – 31 Maisuradze – 36 Mallott – 112 Mamedyarov – 162 Marfia – 15 Martins – 111 McManus – 60 Meleshko – 140 Mercier – 147 Merli – 196 Miller – 28 Morin – 110, 115, 188 Morozevich – 5 Morris – 126 Mosesov – 140 Muir – 13, 168 Murray, D – 145 Murray, P – 164 Mussio – 73 Muzychuk – 35 Nakamura – 189

Nightingale – 150 Nijboer – 10 NN – 70 Nolan – 18 northchess3 – 136 Nunbhakdi – 141 OceanBlue – 16 O'Connell – 33 Ofstad – 88 O'Hearn – 180 Omelja – 148 Onischuk – 174 Palachev – 197 Panico – 191 Peeples – 75 Penullar – 63, 132 Perks – 198 Perry, D – 37, 38, 176 Perry, R – 95 Petersson – 14 Phoobalan – 185 pousbois – 132 Ragnarsson – 160 Rahman – 142 Regan, J – 137 Regan, N – 107 Ringoir – 51 Roberts – 19 Rotstein – 120 Ruiz – 61 Sadorra – 8 SafeHouse – 130 Sandipan – 142 Sanz Losada – 148 Saravanan – 191 Saric – 159 Savchenko – 54

Sawyer – 1, 9, 11-13, 15-19, 23-25, 28, 29, 32, 33, 37-40, 42-44, 46, 53, 57-61, 65-67,69, 71-81, 83-86, 88-94, 101, 102, 109, 112, 113, 117-119, 121-131, 133-139, 143, 146, 149, 151-154, 156-158, 161, 163-168, 172, 175-177, 179-182, 184, 186, 187, 193-196, 198-200 Scheinwald – 178 Schmidt Schaeffer – 55 Schroeder – 46 Schuda – 129 Schuler – 72 Schultz – 90 Sessions – 199 Shabalov – 114 Shannon – 89 SharpShooter – 172 Shirov – 7 Skoberne – 8 Snapstys – 65 Soham – 108 Sonjaya – 141 Spanton – 155 Spears – 187 Stankovic – 159 Steiner – 78 Strauss – 4 Sundararajan – 189 Szczepkowska Horowska – 35 T34 – 43 Tabaska – 154 Tate – 68 Thompson – 39 Tillett – 156 Tirado Parra – 98 Tiviakov – 50 Tom – 71 Torning – 70, 114 Turova – 170 Unbeliever – 102, 128

vabol – 3 Van Dooren – 169 Van Foreest – 10 Van Hoek – 155 Van Kemenade – 34 vespa2 – 149 Volovich – 197 Wall – 145 Ward – 96 Wells – 144 Wesseltj – 24 Wheatley – 166 Wiggett – 121 Williams – 117 Winichenko – 30 Wood – 74 worldcitizen – 134 Zdrazila – 158 Zdun – 167 zeitgeist-movement – 56 Zilbermints – 2-4, Zintgraff – 150

Before you go Tim Sawyer chess books Ruy Lopez Tactics: Chess Opening Combinations & Mates Chess Games Collection: Second Edition (non-BDG games) Blackmar-Diemer Gambit Games Collection: Second Edition Chess Training Repertoire Moves 4: 200 Openings Chess Puzzle Collection: Easy Opening Checkmates Chess Word Puzzles – Large Print Word Puzzles Main Line 1.e4 Playbook: 200 Opening Positions for White Main Line 1.d4 Playbook: 200 Opening Positions for White Main Line 1...e5 Playbook: 200 Opening Positions for Black Main Line 1...c5 Playbook: 200 Opening Positions for Black French 3.Be3 Playbook: 200 Opening Positions for White Philidor 2.Nf3 Playbook: 200 Opening Positions for White Italian 2.Bc4 Playbook: 200 Positions Bishop Opening White Kings Gambit Playbook: 200 Opening Positions for White Caro-Kann Playbook: 200 Opening Positions for Black Slav Defence Playbook: 200 Opening Positions for Black Queens Gambit Playbook: 200 Opening Positions for White Alekhine 1...Nf6 Playbook: 200 Opening Positions for Black Dutch Stonewall Playbook: 200 Opening Positions for Black Bird Stonewall Playbook: 200 Opening Positions for White Petroff 2...Nf6 Playbook: 200 Opening Positions for Black Four Knights Playbook: 200 Opening Positions for White London 2.Bf4 Playbook: 200 Opening Positions for White London 2.Bf4 Tactics: 200 Winning Opening Positions

https://sawyerbdg.blogspot.com/ amazon.com/author/timsawyer