Showing posts with label Bogoljubow. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Bogoljubow. Show all posts

Thursday, July 7, 2011

Something New in Something Old

There is a phrase in chess, "annotation by result", which refers to the practice of judging a move or a series of moves by the outcome of the game. Won game? Good move! Lost game? Bad move!

Strong, inquisitive and creative players work against this tendency and are often rewarded with new ideas and positive results over-the-board.

Consider Yury V. Bukayev, whose opening discoveries have been mentioned here before. Recently, Yury has been looking at the Fritz Variation in the Two Knights Defense.

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6  4.Ng5 d5 5.exd5 Nd4


To quote from "Having Fun with the Two Knights" from Chess Asia, Volume 11, Issue 3, 1995, by Bobby Ang,
By way of a short historical background, this is known as the Fritz/Schlechter Variation, used by Hans Berliner extensively in his rise to first place in the World Correspondence Championship. Indeed, it seems to be a lot more logical than the usual 5...Na5 which locks the knight out of play on the edge of the board.
Some of our readers might be wondering how this opening got its name. In fact, if you are in possession of the excellent book by Warren Goldman on Carl Schlechter which is a biography and a collection of most of the wins of "The Austrian Chess Wizard", you might have noticed that this variation does not even appear even once. Lest you think that he lost all his games with this line we hasten to note that this Defense was suggested by the German player Alexander Fritz to Schlechter who analysed it in Deutsche Schachzeitung in 1904, thus the name.
6.d6

This line has largely been dismissed by the sources that I consulted.

6...Qxd6 7.Bxf7+ Ke7 8.Bb3 Nxb3 9.axb3 h6 10.Nf3


Black has good play for his sacrificed pawn in Bogoljubov - Rubinstein, Stockholm, 1919. He enjoyed his "two Bishops" and transitioned to one of those Rooks-and-pawns engame that he was famous for winning. What else did Bogoljubov expect? seemed to be the concensus of the observers.

Yury, in an email he sent me, enthused 
I think this new gambit is a distant relative (!!) of the Classical Jerome Gambit. Thus, the difference of Black's and White's material in my gambit and in Classical Jerome Gambit is the same after the acceptance of these gambits; the initial position (3.Bc4) is the same; White plays Bc4xf7; White plays without the white-squared bishop in result; Black's king is on f7 a in variant of acceptance of gambits etc.
I think that the line is interesting enough that I would point it out, even if it were not "Jerome-ish", but I can't resist sharing an odd line from the Blackburne Shilling Jerome Gambit Declined: 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 c6 3.Bc3 Nd4 4.Bxf7+ Ke7 (we have seen this before) 5.Ng5 (a bit unusual, but many people play the move in many Jerome variations) Nf6 6.Bb3 Nxb3 7.axb3 d5 8.exd5 h6 9.d6+ Qxd6 10.Nf3 and, indeed, we have reached that position from Bogoljubov - Rubinstein, above!

10...e4 11.Ng1

A gloomy retreat. An unkind annotator might say White is already lost.

An Italian correspondence game between Antritter and Balletti in 1969 introduced 11.Nh4, but White lost in 18 moves. A rather obscure game played in Tennessee in the United States, 15 years later, R. Carpenter - S. McGiffert, tried an improvement, but White lost in 13 moves.

Yet, Antritter and Carpenter were on the right trail.

I will leave it to readers to visit Yury's website and learn about the "Nh4-Bukayev-gambit" which gives White new hope! 

Monday, April 13, 2009

Long Lost Cousins & Perfect Strangers


Sometimes, when I'm in a Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) mood, especially when I'm in the position to give "Jerome Gambit odds," I tend to see many openings – some only distantly related to the Italian Game – as Jerome-izeable.

perrypawnpusher - dabbling
blitz 10 0 FICS, 2009


1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 a6


This move was news to me, but I just checked ChessBase's online games database and it has almost 360 examples, played by people like Bogoljubow, Reshevsky, and Steiner, so maybe it's just out of fashion.
4.0-0 Bb4
Ok, this is a bit odd. It reminds me of Alapin's defense to the Ruy Lopez: 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 Bb4. If I can kick the Bishop back to the 5th rank, though...

5.c3 Ba5 6.Bxf7+


Now, Perry, you know you had a good game with 6.d4...


But, Doctor, I can't help myself!

6...Kxf7 7.Nxe5+ Nxe5 8.Qh5+ g6


Instead, 8...Kf8 9.Qxe5 Bb6 led to a Black advantage.

9.Qxe5 Bb6 10.Qxh8

White is up the exchange and two pawns, but what is equally important is that Black feels like he's slipped and missed a step somewhere.
10...d6 11.Qxh7+ Kf8 12.d4 Qf6 13.Bh6+ Ke8

Rapidly going from bad to worse...

14.Qxg8+ Kd7 15.e5 dxe5 16.dxe5 Qxe5 17.Rd1+ Kc6

18.Qxg6+ Kb5 19.a4+ Ka5 20.b4 checkmate




Thursday, February 19, 2009

More of The Next Best Thing...

In his comment to "London Calling... Seven Months of Blog" and "The Next Best Thing..." Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) Gemeinde member Pete Banks ("blackburne") called readers attention to the opening 1.h4.

Would giving a couple of games by some top past masters give a different picture of the possibilities of that opening?


Janowski,D - Allies
Paris, 1901

1.h4 e5 2.h5 d5 3.e3 f5 4.b3 Be6 5.Bb2 Nd7 6.Nf3 Bd6 7.Nc3 a6 8.Bd3 Qe7 9.Nxd5 Bxd5 10.Bxf5 Nh6 11.Bxd7+ Kxd7 12.c4 Be4 13.d3 Bb4+ 14.Ke2 Bxf3+ 15.gxf3 c6 16.d4 e4 17.fxe4 Qxe4 18.Rg1 Nf5 19.Qd3 Qxd3+ 20.Kxd3 Rhg8 21.e4 Nh4 22.f4 Raf8 23.Raf1 g6 24.hxg6 Rxg6 25.f5 Rg2 26.Rxg2 Nxg2 27.Rh1 Rf7 28.d5 cxd5 29.cxd5 h5 30.Rh2 Nf4+ 31.Kc4 Be1 32.Be5 Bg3 33.Bxf4 Bxf4 34.Rxh5 Be5 35.Rh6 Bf6 36.Kc5 Bg5 37.Rd6+ Kc7 38.Re6 Be3+ 39.Kc4 Kd7 40.f6 Bf2 41.e5 Bg3 42.Kd4 Rh7 43.Ke4 Be1 44.Kf5 Bb4 45.Kg6 Rh4 46.Rb6 Kc7 47.Rxb4 Rxb4 48.f7 Rf4 49.Kg7 1-0



Bogoljubow,E - Schuppler
Haslach, 1949

1.h4 d5 2.d4 c6 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.Nbd2 Bf5 5.c3 Nbd7 6.Ne5 Nxe5 7.dxe5 Nd7 8.Qa4 h5 9.Nf3 Qc7 10.Bf4 e6 11.Bh2 g6 12.Nd4 Bg7 13.Nxf5 gxf5 14.f4 Nc5 15.Qc2 Ne4 16.g3 Bh6 17.Bg2 0-0-0 18.Rd1 Rdg8 19.Bxe4 dxe4 20.0-0 Rg4 21.Kh1 Rhg8 22.b4 Bf8 23.a4 Be7 24.Rd2 Rd8 25.Rxd8+ Qxd8 26.Rd1 Qc7 27.a5 Rg8 28.Bg1 Rxg3 29.Bxa7 c5 30.Qa4 Qc6 31.b5 Qe8 32.Rg1 Qg8 33.Rxg3 Qxg3 34.Qc4 Qh3+ 35.Kg1 Qg4+ 36.Kh1 Qh3+ 37.Kg1 Qe3+ 38.Kh1 Qh3+ 39.Kg1 Qg3+ 40.Kh1 Qxh4+ 41.Kg2 Qg4+ 42.Kh1 Qh3+ 43.Kg1 Qg3+ 44.Kh1 h4 45.a6 Qh3+ 46.Kg1 Qg3+ 47.Kf1 e3 0-1