|
|
|
CC ChroniclesBo Bredenhof
Translate this page
|
Tactical Openings For CC I begin with addressing some Readers' Responses from last month: Geert from the Netherlands would like to read more about "real" top players and not about today's computer programs playing against each other. If we want to find the top CC players without computer assistance, we would have to go back to the middle of the 1990s or earlier. Nevertheless, to gain a top place in a CC tournament today, on any level, one has to be a good chess player; a strong chess program by itself is not enough. Mohan from India writes about how poorly chess programs behave in positions without queens. I agree. With queens, the positions are more tactical and that is the strength of the chess programs. In my experience the programs are weak in many endgame positions; particular in positions with two rooks on both sides apart from pawns and kings. The entire endgame must be handled with good "human" skills. Gerald from the USA asks if I meant the Closed Sicilian with 2.Nc3 and 3.g3. Yes, and I agree with his assessment that chess programs are not particularly good at handling these positions. Most programs are tactically inclined and these positions require knowing the proper plans to be successful. This month I would like to discuss tactical openings in CC. If you want to have fun, and not aspire to the top spots in a tournament, gambits are the place to go. I wrote about this subject in my September 2011 column. Bird's Opening is another choice if your play is not results orientated. I especially like From's Gambit, but in today's CC it does not score well. Of course, one's definition of "tactical" and one's opening choice is also a matter of taste to some extent. Some of us prefer calmer positions and some of us like chaos across the board. The latter is the reason for many CC players to have tactical openings in their repertoire. You must allow your opponent to go wrong, and it is more likely in a complicated tactical position. Yet, I must stress the importance of being aggressive in these openings. Playing too sedately often leads to a defensive and losing position. The number one move in this respect is, of course, 1.e4. From there, it is up to the opponent. Let's look at the choices: With 1...e5, we have the Open Games. The most tactical choice for White is the Scotch Game with 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4. It is a very tricky and complex opening. One will often end up in complicated endgames as well. With 1...c5, we have a very common and tactical choice: the Sicilian. If White enters the Open variations with 2.Nf3, the Najdorf and the Dragon are the most popular choices. With 1...e6, we have the French. This is a more positional choice in gener,al but it is can be very tactical. White should go for the Winawer variation with 3.Nc3 Bb4 and if possible the main line with 7.Qg4. This is a very sharp variation with a nice score for White in CC. Black often avoids it by selecting the Classical French with 3...Nf6, when White can play 4.Bg5, 5.e5, followed by 6.h4, and we have a very sharp position again. With 1...c6, we have the Caro-Kann. A very sharp variation is the Panov-Botvinnik Attack with 6.Nf3, 7.cxd5, and 11.0-0-0. With 1...d6, we have the Pirc opening. There are many sharp sub-variations here. Black must know the opening very well to survive in CC. White has many choices; the sharpest of which is perhaps the Four Pawns Attack. With 1...d5, we have the Scandinavian Defense. White gets plenty of action and attack for free in this opening, so perhaps Black should select something else in CC. Black can also select 1...b6 (English Defense) and 1...g6 (Modern Defense), but my experience is that Black gets into too much trouble here in CC. Many top players vary between 1.e4, 1.d4, and 1.Nf3 as white. As black, they go for the Sicilian or the Nimzo-Indian. The CC game we spotlight this month shows that both sides have to be prepared for surprises in even the most conventional openings. Wolf, Klaus (2474) – Efendiyev, Enver (2466) 1.e4 c5 2.c4 Nc6 A Sicilian for two moves, and then something else! Black selected a Symmetrical English in this game. According to Richard Palliser in Fighting the Anti-Sicilians, Black can play 3...e5 and upon 4.g3, 4...h5. This is apparently an old suggestion of Keres. 3.Nc3 g6 4.g3 Bg7 4.Bg2 d6 6.Nge2 Nf6 7.Rb1
White starts thematic play on the a- and b-files. I suppose Dragon players feel more at home in this kind of position, but they have no quick attack here. 7...a6 8.a3 h5 9.h3 Nd4 10.d3 Rb8 11.Be3 e5 12.b4 b5 13.Nd5 Nxd5 14.cxd5 Bd7 15.bxc5 dxc5 16.Nxd4 cxd4 17.Bd2 Rc8 18.0-0 0-0
The position is balanced. Both sides have passed pawns to work with. 19.Qb3 Re8 20.h4 Bf8 21.Kh2 Bd6 22.Bh3 Bxh3 23.Kxh3
This is the first decisive position in the game. Black decided on Qe7, followed by Bxa3, which is not a good plan. His bishop ends up locked in at a3 and White's center pawns become very dangerous. A better plan is Qd7+, followed by f5, and to keep the black bishop on the dark squares around the king. The game is then about even. 23...Qe7 24.Kg2 Bxa3 25.Ra1 b4 26.Qa4 Ra8 27.f4 Rec8 28.fxe5 Qxe5 29.Ra2 a5 30.Bg5
Black is in deep trouble. Yet Deep Fritz10 still evaluates a strong edge to Black. 30...f5 looks best, but then comes 31.Qd7 Rc5 32.Bf4 Qf6 33.Bg5 Qf7 34.Qd6 Rac8 (34...Rc7 35.g4!) 35.Bf6 Rc2+ 36.Rxc2 Rxc2+ 37.Kg1 Qc7 and suddenly there is 38.e5 and White wins. If 30...Rc3, so 31.Qd7 Qc7 32.Rxf7 Qxd7 33.Rxd7, and White wins again, because black cannot advance his passed pawns. In the game black tries a third alternative. 30...Qe8 31.Qxe8+ Rxe8 32.Bf6 a4 At depth 20, Deep Fritz still evaluates Black's position as OK; while you and I can see that Black is in serious trouble. His dark-squared bishop is out of play and it makes it impossible for him to advance his important passed pawns. 33.d6 Ra7 34.g4! A clever way to soften up Black's kingside and prepare an attack along the g-file. Deep Fritz is, of course, against it because of potential loss of material. 34...Re6 35.e5 Kf8 36.gxh5 gxh5 37.Kf3 Ra6
Black is helpless, even though he is a pawn ahead. 38.Rc2 Rxf6+ 39.exf6 Ke8 40.Rc7 Rxd6 41.Ke4 Rd7 42.Rc8+ Rd8 43.Rxd8 Kxd8 44.Kxd4 Bb2+ 45.Kc4 b3 46.Kb4 Bd4 47.Ka3 1-0
One continuation is 47...Kd7 48.Rf5 Ke6 49.Rxh5 Bxf6 50.Ra5 Le7+ 51.Kxa4 b2 52.Rb5 Bxh4 53.Rxb2 and White's d-pawn decides. This game also showed us the importance of being able to detect the critical positions and develop plans five to ten moves further on. Until next time, good luck with your CC play! Our links page includes many CC sites and resources. A PDF file of this month's CC Chronicles column, along with all previous columns, is available in the ChessCafe.com Archives. Comment on this month's column via our Contact Page! Pertinent responses will be posted below daily. Readers' Responses Don from the USA – I just want to say thanks for your most recent article. I'm new to CC having played in only a couple USCF events, and now an ICCF tournament. I have been wondering about how to approach the openings, because I know that OTB play and CC are different, especially if computers are used, as on the ICCF. Thanks for the many tips and suggestions on what type openings to play. It will be a good place to start as I try to build my repertoire. Matthieu from the Netherlands – I had to laugh reading these last articles. The general advice is to test your opponents preperation in closed pawn structures, because he/she is 'just following' the engine. OK, I get this point and in general this is very useful. However, I find it funny that this point is then explained by ... following the computer yourself. To get better at CC, one needs a bucketload of ideas, stolen from strong GMs. That's it. Really. The funny thing is, most players do not understand this and just follow the best move. Take, for instance, 1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Nf6 3.d3 c6 4.Nf3 d5 5.Bb3 Bd6 6.exd5 Nxd5 7.0-0 0-0 8.Re1 Nd7 9.Nc3!??!! Never played, but the best move according to Rybka and Houdini. So what is wrong? The computer cannot evaluate this properly. 9...Nxc3 10.bxc3 Qc7 11.d4 c5 12.Qd3 b6 and ... play is equal. My advice would be, make up a strategy and work it out. Follow it and win. This is what the 1.Nc3 CC WCC did, this is what the Tango playing Simmelink did. This is what works. Enough said. |
Purchases from our
|
|
|
|
[ChessCafe
Home Page] [Book
Review] [Columnists] © 2012 BrainGamz, Inc. All Rights Reserved. |
|
