Showing posts with label Sarratt. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Sarratt. Show all posts

Sunday, May 10, 2020

Jerome Gambit: The Improved Face Palm Variation?!

163 Facepalm Stock Illustrations, Cliparts And Royalty Free ...

Having taken a look at what I called the "Face Palm Variation" of the Jerome Gambit, I wondered if there was an "improved" variation, where White played an early d2-d4, so that his Knight could safely move to g5 with the support of his dark square Bishop.

I quickly recalled the game Wright - Hunn, Arkansas,1874, played about a half year after Alonzo Wheeler Jerome published his first analysis of his gambit in the Dubuque Chess Journal. The game began 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.d4 exd4 5.Bxf7+.

The line was referred to as The Macbeth Attack on the Italian language website Sacchi64. It has a relationship to the Italian Gambit, (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.d4) as explored by Jude Acers and George S. Laven in their book The Italian Gambit and A Guiding Repertoire for White - 1.e4, (although they were not interested in Bxf7+)  as well as to the Lewis Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Bc5 3.d4) and the Von der Lasa Gambit, (1.e4 e5 2.d4 exd4 3.Bc4 Bc5).

The Database has 1,413 game examples, with White scoring 37%.

Here is a recent game. Beware: the tactics get out of hand, quickly. White (who has almost 700 games in The Database) shows a number of  practical choices to keep the clock at bay.

drumme - RikTheKing
4 0 blitz, FICS, 2020.

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ 




4...Kxf7 5.d4 exd4 

A bit stronger, according to Komodo 10, is 5...Bxd4, although the result for White of the 645 games in The Database was only 26%. 

6.Ng5+ 

By playing an early Bxf7+, White has avoided the Sarratt or Vitzthum Attack, although that's not necessarily a good thing.

6...Ke8 7.O-O h6 

Facing a gambit can be scary, and it's natural to want to kick at the attacking piece - but this dismantles Black's defense, rather than helping it.

8.Qh5+ Ke7 9.Qf7+ Kd6 



Black is now at risk for losing a lot of material.

10.Qd5+ 

White is not feeling very greedy, or perhaps in a 4-minute blitz game there wasn't the time (or need) to dig deeper: 10.Bf4+ Ne5 11.Bxe5+ Kxe5 12.Qxg7+ Nf6 (12...Qf6 13.f4+ Kd6 14.e5+) 13.f4+ Kd6 14.Nf7+ Kc6 15.Nxd8+ would have been painful for Black.

10...Ke7 11.Qxc5+

Grabbing the enemy Bishop, but it was stronger to play 11.Qf7+ Kd6 to return to the line given in the note above, 12.Bf4+ etc.

11...d6 


Do I have to do this all over again? 
Didn't I do it right the first time? 
Do I have to do this all over again? 
How many times do I have to make this climb? 
from Long Title: Do I Have to Do This All Over Again? 

12.Qc4 Ne5 

Black could have grabbed the Knight, and hung on: 12...hxg5 13.Bxg5+ Nf6 14.f4 Qg8 15.Qxg8 Rxg8 16.e5 dxe5 17.fxe5 Nxe5 18.Re1 Ke6 19.Bf4 Nfg4

13.Qxd4 Nf6 14.f4 Nc6 15.Qc3 hxg5 16.fxg5 Nxe4 



Well...

At first glance, Black seems to have played himself out of difficulty. Alas, it is actually a checkmate in 9, for White.

17.Qxg7+ Ke6 18.Qg6+ 

Now, interposing a piece will cost Black a piece. There wasn't time to suss out 18.Qf7+ Ke5 19.Nc3 Qg8 20.Bf4+ Kd4 21.Rfd1+ Kc5 22.Be3+ Kb4 23.a3+ Ka5 24.b4+ Ka6 25.Qf1+ Qc4 26.Qxc4+ b5 27.Qxc6 checkmate 

18...Kd5 

19.Nc3+

Again, development makes the most sense when time is short. Instead 19.c4+ Kc5 20. Be3+ Nd4 21.Qxe4 Kb6 22.Bxd4+ c5 23.Bxh8 was crushing. 

19...Nxc3 20.Qd3+ Ke6 



This might have seemed the safest choice, but it was not. 

21.Qxc3 

I am sure that after the game drumme found 21.Qf5+ Ke7 22.Qf7 checkmate 

21...Ne5 22.Qb3+ Kd7 

Black's uncomfortable King and extra piece is slightly outweighed by White's better development and 2 extra pawns. Although the players' fortunes now go up and down, White keeps the pressure on.

23.Bf4 Qe8 24.Rae1 Kd8 25.Qd5 Qc6 26.Qb3 Re8 



Note, for the umpteenth time, Black's light-squared Bishop at home, blocking his Rook. Typical defense-to-the-Jerome-Gambit "sin".

27.g6 Nxg6 28.Bg5+ Ne7 29.Rxe7 Rxe7 30.Bxe7+ Kxe7 31.Qf7+ Kd8 32.Qf6+ Ke8 33.Re1+ Kd7 34.Qe7 checkmate


Thursday, April 2, 2020

Sarrat Attack: No Way A World Champion...

In my never-ending search to uncover not only Jerome Gambit and Jerome-ish games, but also possible precursors that might have inspired Alonzo Wheeler Jerome to create his gambit, I have run across a number of interesting, if old, openings. 

For example, in "No Way A GM Plays the Jerome Gambit! (Part 1, Part 2 and Part 3)" I looked at a couple modern examples of the Sarratt Attack (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 exd4 4.Bc4 Bc5 5.Ng5 Nh6 6.Nxf7 Nxf7 7.Bxf7+ Kxf7 8.Qh5+): Grischuk, A. - Karjakin, Sergey, St. Louis Blitz, St. Louis, 2018 (1/2-1/2 69) and Grischuk, A. - Dominguez Perez, L., St. Louis Blitz, St. Louis, 2018 (1-0, 43).


This was all very interesting, as I had noted in my post "The Sarratt Attack"
Of the Sarrat / Vitzthum Attack (see the recent "Another Distant Relative" as well as "A Bridge To... Somewhere" and "Abridged"), The City of London Chess Magazine wrote in 1875
This attack, invented by Count Vitzthum, was very much practised about twenty years ago. [Here, Readers may recall Meek - Morphy, Mobile, Alabama, 1855Meek - Morphy, New Orleans, 1855; and Kennicott - Morphy, New York, 1857 as examples; although Lowenthal, in Morphy's Games (1860), had already opined "This {5.Ng5}is far from an effective mode of proceeding with the attack, and is decidedly inferior to castling" and "This mode of proceeding with the attack is comparatively obsolete, as with the correct play the defense is perfectly satisfactory." ] It is now abandoned in contests of strong players, as the analysis proved that Black can maintain his Pawn with a good position.
Recently, however, I ran across the following game:

Carlsen, Magnus - Vidit, Santosh Gujrathi
Tata Steel Rapid and Blitz, 2019

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.d4 exd4 5.Ng5
  drawn




GM Vidit was rated 2722, but, when a World Champion offers you a draw...

From ChessBomb.com: "The commentators confirm that Magnus is feeling unwell today"  

Wrote SportsStar.thehindu.com "Troubled by an upset stomach" 


Thursday, May 2, 2019

Jerome Gambit: Worst vs Best (Part 4)

Image result for free clip art gladiators




So far: no confirmation of a Steinitz loss to the Jerome Gambit; very likely a win by Lasker against the Jerome, but the game is unfindable - and, what about Alekhine facing the Jerome Gambit?

I turned to my trusty Big Database, did a position search with a White pawn on e4, a Black King on e8, and a White Bishop on f7. This turned up a number of games, only one of which comes near to what we are looking for.

Alekhine, Alexander
NN2 - Alekhine, Alezander, Kislovodsk, 1907

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 exd4 4.Bc4 Bc5 5.Ng5 Ne5 6.Bxf7+ Nxf7 7.Nxf7 Kxf7 8.Qh5+ g6 9.Qxc5 d6 10.Qxd4 Nf6 11.Nc3 h6 12.Nb5 Nxe4 13.Bxh6 Rxh6 14.Qxe4 Qg5 15.Qc4+ Be6 16.Qxc7+ Kg8 17.Qxd6 Bc4 18.Nc7 Rd8 19.Ne6 Qa5+ 20.
b4 Rxd6 21.bxa5 Rxe6+ White resigned

Alas, this is an example of  the Sarratt Attack or the Vitzthum Attackwhich has a lot of action going on at f7, and whichI have looked into in this blog as a possible precursor or inspriation to the Jerome Gambit.

Of course, The Database does have a couple dozen Jerome Gambit games by "AAlekhine", but those are from 2007 and 2008, by an online player playing in Jerome Gambit thematic tournaments at ChessWorld.net

Wednesday, November 21, 2018

No Way A GM Plays the Jerome Gambit (Part 3)

[continued from previous post]

Here is another recent game between two 2700+ rated Grandmasters, contesting an opening that had its heyday more than 150 years ago - an opening which may have inspired Alonzo Wheeler Jerome to create the Jerome Gambit, 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+.

Yes, even lacking the element of surprise, Grischuk played the Sarratt Attack, again. Even in blitz, that's saying something.

Grischuk, A. - Dominguez Perez, L.
St. Louis Blitz, St. Louis, 2018

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 exd4 4.Bc4 

Scotch Gambit.

4...Bc5 5.Ng5 

The Sarratt Attack. As long ago as 1860, in Morphy's Games of Chess, Johann Lowenthal noted
This mode of proceeding with the attack is comparatively obsolete, as, with correct play, the defence to it is perfectly satisfactory.
All is new that has been forgotten.

Perhaps both players recall Lajos Portisch's wisdom, that the goal of the opening is to reach a playable middlegame.

5...Nh6 6.Nxf7 Nxf7 7.Bxf7+ Kxf7 8.Qh5+ g6 9.Qxc5 d5



10.O-O dxe4 11.c3 Qd6 

Varying from 11...Be6, played by Karjakin.

12.cxd4 Nxd4 13.Qxd6 cxd6 



Grischuk is comfortable with exchanging Queens, as he no doubt is sure to recover a pawn, leaving his opponent with an isolated pawn - and an unsafe King. In fact, he now offers the exchange, expecting proper compensation.

14.Nc3 Bg4 15.Nxe4 Nc2 16.f3 Nxa1 17.fxg4+ Ke6 18.Ng5+ Kd7



19.Rf7+

The computer has a minor grumble with this move, preferring 19.Ne4 Nc2 20.Rd1 Kc7 21.Nxd6. This would remove the central passer, while Grischuk would prefer to improve his Kingside pawn majority.

19... Kc6 20.Nxh7 Rae8 21.Bd2 



Again, Stockfish 9 grumbles, preferring 21.Bg5, but I am not comfortable criticizing super-Grandmasters playing blitz. It comes down to what is adequate compensation for the exchange. White's Knight does seem to wander around a bit.

21...Re2 22.Bc3 Rhe8 23.Nf8 g5 24.Nh7 Nc2 25.Rf2 d5 26.Nxg5 



Mission accomplished: White has a 3 vs 0 pawn advantage on the Kingside. On the other hand, Black's overlooked passer quickly becomes a menace.

26...d4 27.Bd2 d3 28.Nf3 Rxf2 29.Kxf2 Re2+ 30.Kg3 Kd5 



White has 2 pawns for the exchange, but Black's isolani has become a troublesome passer, and his "unprotected" King is rushing into the action. Black certainly looks better - but things continue to be complicated, as the clock ticks. (For example, 30...Ne3!?, forcing 31.Bxe3 Rxe3 32.Kf4 Re2 33.h4 Ke6!? led to crazy play, with Black for choice.)

31.g5 Ke6 32.h4 Kf5 33.h5 Re4 



Black drafts the Rook to help defend against the advancing pawns, but it proves overmatched. Possibly better was returning the exchange with 33...Rxd2 34.Nxd2 Kxg5.

In the meantime, White has some interesting ideas.

34.g6 Nd4 35.Nxd4+ Rxd4 36.Kf3 Rg4 37.g3 b5 38.Bf4 



The Rook is locked up by the Bishop and pawns. White's King is free to munch on Black's pawns. Amazing.

38...a5 39.Ke3 b4 40.Kxd3 a4 41.Kc4 a3 42.bxa3 bxa3 43.Kb3 Black resigns

Monday, November 19, 2018

No Way A GM Plays the Jerome Gambit! (Part 2)

[continued from previous post]

It's true: Sad to say, you are not going to see a Grandmaster play the Jerome Gambit, 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+, in a serious, competitive game, any time soon.

However - what about a couple of 2700 players contesting a line of play that might have inspired Alonzo Wheeler Jerome to create his fantastical gambit?

It is quite reasonable to suspect that American chess players back in the mid- to late-1800s were familiar with the Sarratt Attack, if only because of the games Meek - Morphy, Alabama, 1855 (0-1, 21) and Kennicott - Morphy, New York, 1857 (0-1, 24). They also had access to Staunton's The Chess-Player's Handbook (1847) and Chess Praxis (1860), along with various chess magazines and newspaper chess columns.

But - modern Grandmasters?

Grischuk, A. - Karjakin, Sergey
St. Louis Blitz, St. Louis, 2018

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 

The Scotch Opening.

3...exd4 4.Bc4 

The Scotch Gambit.

4...Bc5 5.Ng5 

The Sarratt Attack. It has received a number of posts on this blog. For coverage, check out "Capt. Evans Faces the Sarratt Attack".

Grischuk plays it against the previous challenger in the world chess championship!

5...Nh6 6.Nxf7 

Of course, 6.Bxf7+ was also possible.

6...Nxf7 7.Bxf7+ Kxf7 8.Qh5+ 



Look familiar?

8...g6 9.Qxc5 d5 

The proper, "scientific" response, going back to at least Mongredien, Augustus - Williams, Elijah, London Chess Club, 1853 (0-1, 23). The game is about even, but, surely, White has the element of surprise on his side.

10.O-O dxe4 11.c3 Be6 12.Bf4 Qd5 13.cxd4 Qxd4 14.Qc1


Grischuk does not want to exchange Queens. The difference in King safety is probably compensation enough for Karjakin's extra pawn.

14...Bc4 15.Re1 Bd3 16.Nc3 Rhe8 17.Bxc7 Rac8 18.Bg3 Kg8 



19.Qg5 Rf8 20.Rad1 Rf5 21.Qg4 Re8 22.Kh1 Re6 23.f3 Ne5


Quite a complicated position - and at blitz speed, too.

Instead of the text, the computer suggests exchanging pieces with 23...exf3 24.Qxd4 Nxd4 25.Rxd3 Rxe1+ 26.Bxe1 f2 27.Bxf2 Rxf2 28.Kg1 Rf4 and an even game.

Now, White gains a pawn - temporarily.

24.Bxe5 Rfxe5 25.Nxe4 Kg7 26.b3 Qb4 27.h3 Bxe4 28.Rxe4 Rxe4 29.fxe4 Rxe4 

The game is less than 1/2 over, move-wise, but it is effectively "over" - barring a blunder, which 2700s don't do very often, even at blitz.

30.Qg3 Qe7 31.Kh2 Kh6 32.Rd5 a6 33.Qd3 Qc7+ 34.Qg3 Qxg3+ 35.Kxg3 

35...Re2 36.Rd7 b5 37.a4 Re3+ 38.Kf4 Rxb3 39.axb5 Rb4+ 40.Kf3 axb5 41.Rb7 Rb1 42.Kf4 g5+ 43.Kg4 b4 44.Rb6+ Kg7 45.Kxg5 Rc1 46.Rb7+ Kg8 47.Rxb4 



The Rook + 2 pawns vs Rook + 1 pawn, pawns on the same side of the board, is a known draw. Twenty or so more moves, perhaps with a nod to the clock, do not change things.

47...Rc5+ 48.Kf6 Rc6+ 49.Ke5 Rc5+ 50.Kd6 Rc2 51.Rg4+ Kf7 52.Ke5 Rc5+ 53.Kd4 Ra5 54.Ke3 Ra3+ 55.Kf4 Ra5 56.Rg5 Ra3 57.Rg3 Ra5 58.Rf3 Kg6 59.Rb3 Ra4+ 60.Kf3 Rc4 61.g4 Ra4 62.Kg3 h6 63.Kh4 Ra5 64.Rb6+ Kg7 65.Rc6 Rb5 66.Rc3 Ra5 67.Kg3 h5 68.Rc7+ Kg6 69.Rc6+ Kg7 drawn



Wow. That was fun. White uncorked an ancient opening and managed to "lose" only half a point.

Now that the element of surprise has evaporated, Grischuk wouldn't play the Sarratt Attack again, would he??


[to be continued]

Saturday, November 17, 2018

No Way A GM Plays the Jerome Gambit! (Part 1)

Readers of this blog have seen a lot of creative and historical coverage of the Jerome Gambit, 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+, and related openings, such as the Blackburne Shilling Jerome Gambit, 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nd4 4.Bxf7+In addition, there have been explorations of "proto-Jerome Gambits" - earlier lines of play that might have inspired Alonzo Wheeler Jerome to create his opening. 

One such Jerome Gambit "relative" was showcased in "Adolf Albin Plays the Jerome Gambit (Part 1 & 2)", highlighting the game Albin,A - Schlechter,C, Trebitsch Memorial Tournament Vienna, 1914. The game began 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Qe2 Bc5 5.Bxf7+, which easily could have been a transposition from 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Qe2 Nf6, a "modern" (no 5.Nxe5+) Jerome Gambit.

White's 4th move was anticipated at least by James Mason, who, in the August 1895 British Chess Magazine, gave a game “played recently by correspondence between Brandfort and Bloemfontein, South Africa” which went 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Qe2 d6. Mason suggested the move 4…Nf6, because “there would be plenty of time to play the Pawn - perhaps two squares instead of one. For, as the Cape Times remarks, if White adopts the ‘Jerome Gambit’ 5.Bxf7+ Black replies 5…Kxf7 6.Qc4+ d5 7.Qxc5 Nxe4 with advantage.”

The Salvio Gambit (see"The Salvio Gambit??" and "The Salvio Gambit?? [more]"), from analysis from the early 1600s, is related: 1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Bc5 and now 3.Qe2 Nf6/Nc6 4.Bxf7+.

It is probably timely to reiterate that I refer to 1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Bc5 3.Bxf7+ as the "Abrahams Jerome Gambit" (see "Abrahams Jerome Gambit" Part 1 & Part 2), not because Alonzo Wheeler Jerome ever played the line, nor Abrahams, as far as I know, but because it was referred to as the Jerome Gambit in The Chess Mind (1951) and The Pan Book of Chess (1965), by Gerald Abrahams.

It is hard to overlook another possible precursor: the game Hamppe - Meitner, Vienna Club, 1872, which begins a little bit like a reversed Jerome Gambit, 1.e4 e5 2.Nc3 Bc5 3.Na4 Bxf2+ and is covered in "Godfather of the Jerome Gambit? (Part I, Part II, Part III, and Endnote)".

Another opening with themes akin to the Jerome - with an initial Knight sacrifice at f7 - which may have caught Alonzo Jerome's eye - is the Sarratt Attack, 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 exd4 4.Bc4 Bc5 5.Ng5 usually followed by 5...Nh6 6.Nxf7 Nxf7 7.Bxf7+ Kxf7. Similar (although I occasionally mix them up) is the Vitzthum Attack, 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 exd4 4.Bc4 Bc5 5.Ng5 Nh6 followed by 6.Qh5. A good review can be found in the post "Capt. Evans Faces the Sarratt Attack".

Then, of course, there was the rumor that culminated in the post, here,"A GM plays the Jerome Gambit??", followed by "Here, have a Bishop..." and "Here, have another...".

That was topped by the rumor that Alexander Alekhine had defended against the Jerome Gambit - see "The Jerome Gambit is Going to Drive Me... (Part 1 & Part 2)"; and then, sadly "Much Ado About... Nothing".


Oh, oh, oh... Can we get back to the time when a modern, 2700+-rated Grandmaster didn't play the Jerome Gambit??


[to be continued]

Saturday, April 16, 2016

Capt. Evans Faces the Sarratt Attack


At different times on this blog, I have looked for possible fore-runners to the Jerome Gambit (inspirations to Alonzo Wheeler Jerome), including the Sarratt or Vitzthum Attack. (See "A Bridge To... Somewhere?", "Another Distant Relative?", "The Sarratt Attack", "Another look at the Sarratt Attack" and "Another Example of the Vitzthum Attack"). 

Recently I was reading Dr. Tim Harding's Eminent Victorian Chess Players Ten Biographies (2012), and in its Appendix II "Games by Captain Evans" I found the following game. While its date is unknown, the fact that it was published in 1843 makes it one of the earliest examples of the opening that I have seen. It also features a creative fortress defense (R + N vs Q) in the endgame.

Wilson, Harry - Evans, William Davies
Unknown place and date
Notes by Harding and CPC.

From CPC [Chess Player's Chronicle], IV (1843) pages 293-295: "This and the following game are from a choice collection of unpublished MS. games in the possession of Mr. Harry Wilson, which that distinguished Amateur, with his accustomed liberality, has kindly placed at the disposal of the Editor." The games could have been played in Wales (if before 1840) or in London, or at
Wilson's home at Carisbrooke on the Isle of Wight.

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 exd4 4.Bc4 Bc5 5.Ng5 Nh6 6.Nxf7 Nxf7 7.Bxf7+ Kxf7 8.Qh5+ g6 9.Qxc5 



9...Re8 10.Qd5+ Kg7 11.Bg5 Rxe4+ 12.Qxe4 Qxg5 13.O-O d5 14.Qf3 Ne7 15.Qg3 Qxg3 16.hxg3 Bf5 17.Rc1? c5 18.Nd2 c4 19.c3 d3 20.b3 Rc8 21.bxc4 dxc4 22.Rab1 Rc7 23.Rb4 Be6 24.Rcb1 b6 25.Re1 Rc6 26. Re4? a5 27.Rb5 Kf7 28.Rf4+? Kg7 29.Kf1 Nd5 30.Rxd5 Bxd5 31.Rd4 Rc5 32.f3 b5 33.a3 Kf6 34.Kf2 b4 35.axb4 axb4 36.cxb4 c3! 



37.bxc5 c2 38.Rxd5 c1=Q 39.Rxd3 Qxc5+ 40.Ke2 Qg1 41.Ne4+ Ke5 42.Re3 Qxg2+ 43.Nf2+ Kd4 44.Re4+ Kd5 45.g4 h5 46.gxh5 gxh5 47.Rh4 Qg5 48.Rh3 Kd4 49.Kf1 Ke3 50.Nd1+ Kd2 51.Nf2 Qb5+ 52.Kg2 Ke1 53.Rh1+ Ke2 54.Nh3 Qf5 55.Ng1+ Ke3 56.Rh3 Qc2+ 57.Kh1 Qg6 58.Rh2 Qg5



59.Re2+ Kd3 60.Rh2 h4 61.Rg2 Qf5 62.Rh2 Qf4 63.Rh3 Kd2 64.Rh2+ Ke1 65.Ra2 Qd4 66.Re2+ Kf1 67.Rg2 Qd7 68.Ra2 Qg7 69.Nh3 Qf6 70.Rf2+ Ke1 71.Kg1 Qg6+ 72.Rg2 Qf5 73.Ng5 h3 74.Rg4 Qc5+ 75.Kh2 Qf2+ 76.Kxh3 Kf1 77.Rg3 Qb6 78.f4 Qf2??

An egregious blunder! The game should have been drawn 20 moves before.

79.Rf3

Black resigned