Hi! chess hustlers, I am checkmate the chess hustler detective, I am in charge of the chess detective corner where we investigate and find out about the many good things that have happened on the chess board throughout chess history and many other related facts, I started by finding a webpage from which we will be able to navigate to many nice commented chess games etc, you are more than welcome to post your findings from those pages to this forum so we can all learn from them, let's see who of us can find the most goodies while searching through those pages, here is the home page link, it is called "A. J.'s chess homepage" http://www.geocities.com/LifeMasterAJ/index.html

note: once you get to that site make sure you add it to your favorites, just one pointer!, the green "square" at the left on the homepage lets you click and navigate throught the different topics, please try to post to this forum letting us know the direct links to the goodies you find

well, I find this fact may be of interest to "the chess hustlers", since we had not added a picture of this following chess player/chess journalist to any of our albums or forums I thought it might be a good idea to start this detective corner by talking about him:

George Koltanowski

In 1937, George Koltanowski, a Belgian who emigrated to the USA in 1940, (and Dean of American Chess) set the blindfold record by playing 34 opponents in Edinburgh, Scotland, scoring +20, -0, =14. This topped Alekhine's 32, but was later broken Miguel Najdorf (Argentina) at Sao Paulo, 1947, who played 45 (+39, -2, =4). Then Janos Flesch of Hungary broke this mark by playing 52 in 1960 (+31, =3, - 18). Flesch's mark was tainted by reports that he was allowed to verbally recount the scores of games played. In any case, later in 1960 Koltanowski regained the record by playing 56 opponents (+50, =0, -6).

one of the games from the record breaking simul

Koltanowski G - Gemmell H [B36] Edinburgh blind simul, 1937

I think it's impressive to play that many games at once, and keep track of them, however more impressive is George's face, I hope I'm still enjoying chess at a ripe age as well!

Godena,Michele (2535) - Caruana,Fabiano (2594) [B51] Italian Championship Absolute '07 Martina Franca (8), 01.12.2007 [Annotations by Fabiano Caruana]

1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.Bb5+ Nc6 4.0-0 Bd7 5.Re1 Nf6 6.c3 a6 7.Ba4 b5 8.Bc2 Bg4 9.d3 e6 10.Nbd2 Be7 11.h3 Bh5 12.Nf1 0-0 13.Ng3 Bg6 14.Nh4 d5. I had prepared this variation before the tournament, specifically for Godena. I don't believe White has any advantage here, although with almost no practical tests it is hard to give a definite verdict now.

15.exd5. The safest choice, leading to an absolutely equal position. Indeed, in most games after this move the players would shortly agree to a draw. However, I know from experience that even the most equal positions can contain a lot of play and chances to outplay a weaker opponent. In this game I achieved exactly that after numerous small mistakes from my opponent. 15.e5 Nd7 16.Nxg6 hxg6 17.d4 has been the main choice recently, with satisfactory results for White. Of course this is the only way to fight for an advantage, and Black must play carefully, but I feel Black has reasonable chances after 17...b4 18.Ne2 Rb8.

C3d) 21.d4! cxd4 22.Nf3 (22.gxh5 d3! 23.Qxd3 Qxd3 24.Bxd3 Bxc3) 22...d3 23.Nxe5 Nxe5 24.Rxe5 Qc7 25.Re3 Qxc3 26.Bd2 Qxc2 27.gxh5+/- However, White's position is very suspicious and I'm sure Black is fine after 15.f4. Perhaps best is 20...Ne5!?.

15...Qxd5 Movsesian recaptured with the knight, but I prefer Tiviakov's move. The knight will remain on f6 to restrict White's on g3. 16.Nxg6 hxg6 17.Qe2 Rfd8

18.a3?! This is actually not helpful for White's cause at all. I would probably not want to play ...b4 anyway, as it increases the scope of White's light-squared bishop. It is interesting that Godena makes a series of small errors, which don't hurt his position tremendously but make it increasingly difficult to defend; eventually when he must play very accurately to hold the position and with limited time, he quite naturally collapses and gets a losing position. 18.Bf4 Nh5 (18...Rac8=) 19.Nxh5 Qxh5 20.Qe4 Qd5 21.Qxd5 exd5 22.Bd1 g5 23.Bh2 Bd6= (Smirin-Tiviakov, Gothenburg 2005). 18...Rac8 19.Be3. 19.Bf4 Bd6 shows the difference between 18.Bf4 and 18.a3: now there is no Bb3 for White and Black can achieve this favourable exchange. 19...Qe5!

20.Qf3. Again this is unnecessary. White is absolutely not worse in this position and therefore doesn't have to force equality! After a natural move like 20.Rad1 I will be hard-pressed to find any fruitful ideas. 20.Ne4 Nxe4 21.dxe4 Bg5!? 22.Rad1 Bxe3 23.Qxe3 g5=/+; 20.Rad1 Qc7 (20...Nd5 21.Bd2 Qxe2 22.Nxe2=) 21.Bd2 Bd6 22.Ne4 Nxe4 23.Qxe4. 20...Qc7 21.Bf4. Due to one tactical trick White cannot equalise immediately, but there are still no problems after the calm 21.Rac1. [21.Ne4? Nd4! 22.Nxf6+ (22.cxd4 cxd4) 22...Bxf6 23.Qd1 b4-/+; 21.Rac1 Ne5 (21...Nd5 22.Bd2; 21...Bd6 22.Ne4 Nxe4 23.Qxe4=) 22.Qe2 Nd5 23.Bd2=]. 21...Bd6 22.Bg5. After this the position becomes very unbalanced and Black certainly has more chances for an advantage than before. Of course White should have played it safe with 22.Bxd6. After 22.Bxd6 Qxd6 I still can't claim that Black is better. After the trade of bishops White cannot 'force' equality by Ne4 since that would lead to a clear good knight vs bad bishop position. Nevertheless, if White does nothing it is difficult to suggest a plan for Black. So although Black is now calling the shots, it shouldn't be enough for anything real. 22...Bxg3

23.Qxg3? Now this mistake is very real! After 23.fxg3 I would prefer to be Black, but perhaps this is compensated by the machine's endorsement of White's position. In any case it is roughly equal. 23.fxg3 Rd5 24.Bf4 (24.Bxf6? Rf5 25.Qe3 gxf6=/+) 24...e5 (24...Qd7 25.g4) 25.Be3 c4!? 26.dxc4 bxc4. 23...Qxg3 24.fxg3 Rd5 25.Be3 A tough choice for Godena, who was already down to a few minutes. The alternative 25.Bf4 is also unpleasant. 25.Bf4 Nh5 26.Rad1 a5!? (preventing b4) (26...Rcd8 27.b4) 27.Kf2 Nxf4 28.gxf4 g5! 29.fxg5 Rxg5=/+. 25...Ne5

26.Red1! A surprise for me, after which things are again far from simple. Godena's tenacious play in the following time trouble phase (only for him, as I had plenty of time) deserves much praise. In the end, however, the position proves too difficult to defend and he commits an error. 26.Rad1 Rcd8 27.Bxc5 (27.d4 Nc4) 27...Nxd3 28.Bxd3 Rxd3 29.Rxd3 Rxd3 30.Be3 Nd5 31.Kf2 f6=/+; 26.Bxc5 Nxd3 27.Bxd3 Rxd3 28.Bd4 (28.Be3 Rcd8 29.a4 Nd5) 28...Rxg3 29.Bxf6 gxf6 30.Rad1 Rg5 31.Rd6 a5-/+.

26...c4. 26...Rcd8 27.Bxc5 Nxd3 28.Bb6 (28.Be7 R8d7 29.Bxf6 gxf6) 28...R8d6 29.Bc7 Rd7 30.Bxd3 Rxd3 31.Rxd3 Rxd3 32.a4! Rd2 33.axb5 axb5 34.Ra8+ Kh7 35.Rf8 Rxb2 36.Rxf7 Kg8 (36...Rb1+ 37.Kh2 Rf1 38.Re7 Nd5 39.Rd7 Nxc3 40.Be5 Nd5 41.g4=) 37.Re7 Nd5 38.Re8+ Kf7 (38...Kh7 39.Be5 Ne3 40.Re7=) 39.Rb8!! (I looked for a while for something in this line, but couldn't find anything and in the end played 26...c4; the compter confirms my evaluation). 27.d4. The alternative looks very articifical but should also be taken seriously. However, Black must be much better. 27.dxc4 Nxc4 28.Bc1 (28.Rxd5 exd5! 29.Bc1 a5-/+) 28...a5 (28...Ne4!?) 29.a4 b4 30.cxb4 (30.b3? Ne3! 31.Bxe3 Rxc3-/+) 30...axb4 31.Bb3 Ne4. 27...Nc6 28.g4 Rd7

29.Re1! An incredibly powerful move. For a while I couldn't understand its value until I accurately calculated the consequences of 32.Re2!. In the end I spent 20 minutes and realised that even if White is fine there I have no other ideas and just have to go for it. The d5-square looks nice but by itself it won't amount to anything; it is difficult to find any chinks in White's armour and all pawn breaks will just open lines for White's bishops. White on the other hand has active counterplay with h4, g5, g4 and h5. – 29.g5 Nd5 30.Bd2 Na5 31.Kf2 Nb3 32.Rab1 a5 33.Be1 shows why the rooks must be placed on e2 and d1 respectively: 33...Re8 , and ...e5 comes next with an initiative for Black. 29.Kf2 Nd5 30.Bd2 Na5 31.Ke2 Nb3 32.Rab1 e5! 33.dxe5 Re8. 29...Nd5 30.Bd2 Na5. The knight goes to b3 to prepare the powerful ...a5 and ...b4. White has great difficulty defending against this and will struggle to make use of his clumsy rooks. However, with the regrouping manouver Re2 and Be1 White could sucsessfully combat White's initiative. This is indeed why I awarded 29.Re1 an exclamation mark. 31.Rad1 Nb3

32.Be3?! A mistake in very serious time trouble. White could have completed his great idea with 32.Re2, when Black has retains some pressure following 32...Nxd2, but not much more. 32.Kf2 is a more clumsy version of the following note, and indeed Black can take advantage of it: 32...a5 33.Ke2 b4 34.h4

33.Be4 White decides there is no alternative but to remove some pressure from c3, even at the cost of his valuable light-squared bishop. However, there was another possibility which shouldn't be worse than the game continuation. 33.Bf2 b4 34.axb4 axb4 35.cxb4

C) 35...Rb7! 36.Be4 Rxb4 37.Bxd5 (37.Bg3 Ra8) 37...exd5 38.Re5 Rb5=/+.

33...b4 34.axb4 axb4 35.Bxd5 Rxd5 36.Bf2 Ra8 37.Re2 [Also very bad for White is 37.Kf1 Raa5 38.Bg3 g5 39.Kf2 Kh7 40.Kf3 Kg6-/+] 37...bxc3 38.bxc3

38...Rda5. I naturally didn't want to allow White's rooks activity after 38...Nc5 39.Rb1 Nd3 40.Rb7 Ra1+ (40...Ra3 41.Rc2) 41.Kh2 Rc1 42.Ra2 Rxc3? (42...Nxf2 43.Rxf2 f6 44.Rf3=; 42...Kh7!?) 43.Ra8+ Kh7 44.g5! Rxg5 45.Rbb8+/-. 39.Be1? This is another error, even more serious than the previous one. It is amazing how resilient White's position has proven to be; although I've made enormous progress from a roughly equal position, it still isn't easy to bring the full point home. White must play the computer's recommendation, when Black's advantage should be manageable: 39.Be3! g5 40.Kf2 f6 (40...Kh7 41.g3) 41.g3 Kf7 42.h4. 39...Ra1 40.Rxa1 Rxa1. White has reached the time control but the damage to his position is done. Black has a strategically winning game due to the passivity of White's pieces. 41.Kh2

41...Kh7? Incredible! I can say I've played well so far, but it isn't time to relax yet! Work remains and only one move consolidates the advantage. I thought there was no difference between this and 41...g5, since 42.g5 is met by 42...Nc1 43.Rb2 Nd3, when there is no check on b8. This error stemmed from overestimating the ...Nc1-d3 idea. 41...Nc1 42.Rb2 Nd3 43.Rb8+ Kh7 44.Bg3; 41...g5! 42.Re5 (42.Bg3 Rc1 43.Be1 Kh7) 42...Kh7 43.Bg3

B) 43...Kg6 44.d5 Nd2 45.h4 (45.Be1 Kf6; 45.Bf2 Nf1+ 46.Kg1 Ne3+-+) 45...gxh4 46.Bf4 (46.Bxh4 exd5 47.Rxd5 Nf1+ 48.Kh3 Rc1-+) 46...Nf1+ 47.Kh3 exd5 48.Rxd5 Ne3! 49.Rg5+ Kh7! (49...Kf6 50.Kxh4 Nxg2+ 51.Kg3 Nxf4 52.Rf5+ Ke6 53.Rxf4 Ra4 54.g5) 50.Rh5+ Kg8 51.Kxh4 Nxg2+ 52.Kg3 Ne1!?-/+ This is a truly amazing variation, which I naturally couldn't work out over the board. My calculation wasn't too far off but I missed a number of details such as 48...Ne3 (which is why I rejected 44...Nd2) and, even more importantly, 46.Be5.

42.g5! Now I realised what I had done. My advantage is of course still there but it is much more difficult to win. 42...Nc1 43.Rc2 Nd3 44.Bg3 Kg8 45.Bd6. 45.h4 Kf8 (45...f6) 46.Bd6+ Ke8 47.Be5 Nxe5 48.dxe5 Re1 49.Rb2 Rxe5 50.Rb8+ Ke7 51.Rb7+= shows why the king cannot escape from its prison and why 45.Bd6 has little point. 45...Ra6

46.Be7!? Tricky. He obviously wanted to tempt me into 46...Nf4, when he sucseeds in activating his rook due to 47.Rb2 Nd5 48.Rb8 Kh7 49.Bb4! 46...Kh7. 46...Nf4? 47.Rb2 Nd5 48.Rb8+ Kh7 49.Bb4!<=>; 46...Ra7 47.Bd6 f6 48.gxf6 gxf6 is very similar to the game, but I wanted to manouver for a while and run him down on time. 47.Kg3 Ra5 48.h4 Kg8 49.Bd6 f6. Now I achieve this when he has only five minutes left again. With so little time the defensive task is undoubtedly very difficult. 50.gxf6 gxf6 51.Kh3 Ra1 52.g4 Kf7 53.h5!? 53.g5 f5 54.Kg3 Ke8; 53.Kh2 e5 54.dxe5 fxe5 White's situation is unenviable in both lines, as he has no counterplay and I can torture him for a long time. 53...g5. There are other good possibilities but I was attracted to this.

54.h6? Collapsing in what is essentially a losing position. After this White has no more chances. 54.Kh2 f5

Of course these variations cannot be properly analysed, as both sides have an endless plethora of possibilities, but my general feeling is that Black should win.

54...Kg6. I took some time to calculate everything to the end and it was worth it. 55.Bf8 Rc1 56.Ra2. 56.Rxc1 Nxc1 57.Be7 Ne2 58.h7 Kxh7 59.Bxf6 Kg6 60.Be5 Nxc3-+. 56...Rxc3 57.Ra7 Nf4+ 58.Kh2 Rh3+ 59.Kg1 Rg3+! The following variations demonstrate how not to finish a chess game: 59...c3? 60.Rg7+ Kxh6 61.Rd7+=; 59...Rxh6? 60.Rg7#. 60.Kf2 Rxg4 61.h7 Rh4 62.Rg7+ Kf5 63.Rc7 Nd5 0-1.

note: usuful for the die hard King's india players

WANG VS. CHEPARINOV (white) (black) King's Indian Defense

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3. Nc3 Bg7 4.e4 d6 5.f3 0-0 6. Be3 e5 7.d5 Nh5 8. Qd2 f5 9.0-0-0 a6 This line has been previously employed by both Kasparov and Topalov. Black's pawn thrust reveals his intention to act on the queenside. 10. Kb1 In game 21 of the 1990 Lyon/New York match between Karpov and Kasparov 10. Bd3 c5?! 11. dxc6 Nxc6 12. Nd5 Be6 13. Bb6 Qd7 14. Ne2 Rac8 15. Kb1 was played with better prospects for white. In Timman - Topalov, 1994 black created complications after 10. exf5 gxf5 11. Nge2 b5 12. Ng3 Nf6 13. Bg5 b4 14. Nb1 Qe8!? 15. Qxb4 h6 16. Bd2 a5 17. Qa3 Na6 18. Nc3 Bd7 with compensation for the pawn. 10... Nd7 11. Bd3 Nc5 12. Bc2 b5!? 13. cxb5 Deserving of attention was 13.b4!? Nd7 14. cxb5 axb5 15. Nge2 and it is not so easy for black to develop an initiative. 13... axb5 14. Nxb5 Ba6 15. Nc3 Qb8 16. Nge2 It was dangerous to open the long dark diagonal by 16. exf5 gxf5. For example: 17. Bxc5 (or 17.g4 Nf4 18. Bxc5 dxc5 19. Bxf5? Rxf5! 20. gxf5 Bd3+ 21. Ka1 Qb3! with a decisive attack: 22. Nh3 Bc4 23. Kb1 Rxa2! 24. Nxf4 exf4 25. Qg2 Qxc3!) 17... dxc5 18. Qg5 Bc4! 19. Qxh5 Rxa2! 20. Nxa2 e4! And black is winning. 16... Qb4 Releasing the tension in the center by 16...fxe4 was a reasonable alternative 17. Nxe4 (or 17. fxe4 Qb4 18. Nc1 Rfb8 19. Nb3 Bc4) 17...Nxe4 18. Bxe4 (18. fxe4 Qb7 followed by ...Rab8 and ...Nf4 or ...Nf6) 18... Bc4 19. Nc3 (19. Nc1 Qb7) 19...Qb4 with a pleasant initiative on the queenside. 17. Bxc5 After 17. Nc1 Rfb8 18. Nb3 Nxb3 19. Bxb3 Nf6 Black has comfortable play for a pawn. 17... dxc5 The natural 17...Qxc5!? was also good. For example, 18. exf5 gxf5 19. Qg5 Bxe2 20. Nxe2 Rxa2! 21. Kxa2 Qxc2 and black is winning. 18.a3!? In case of 18. Ng3 Bc4! 19. Nxh5 Rfb8! 20.b3 gxh5 21. exf5 Bxb3! 22. axb3 e4 white is defenseless. 18... Qa5 19. Nc1 Bc4! Worse was 19...c4?! 20.d6! cxd6 21. Nd5 forcing the exchange of queens because it is bad for black to enter upon 21...Qd8?! 22. exf5 gxf5 23. Bxf5! Rxf5 24. Ne7+ Qxe7 25. Qd5+ with white winning both black pieces on the queenside. 20. Bb3?! Black cannot use either of his bishops. Exchanging off one of them is good for him. A better defense was 20. Na4! Qb5 21. Nc3 Qa6 22. Ba4! and the position is unclear. 20... Bxb3 21. Nxb3 Qb6 22. Qc2 Rfb8 23. Ka2 Nf4! Including the knight in the attack. Worse was the immediate 23...c4 24. Nd2 Qa6 25.g3 Bf8 26. Ncb1 24. Nc1?! The best chance for defense was 24. Nb1! Nxg2 25. Rd3 Nf4 26. Rc3 Bf8 27. Rd1. 24... c4! 25. Rd2 This doesn't solve white's problems. Better was 25.g3 Nh3 26. Rd2 Bf8 27. Ka1 Ng1! 28. Qd1 Bc5! 25... Bf8! 26.g3 After 26. Nb1 Bb4 27. Rdd1 Black destroys his opponent's defense with 27...Nxg2! 28. Qxg2 Bxa3! 29. Nxa3 Rxa3+! 30. Kb1 (30. bxa3 Qb1#; 30. Kxa3 Ra8#) 30...c3 and black wins. 26... Bxa3! 27. bxa3 Rxa3+! 28. Kxa3 Qb4+ 29. Ka2 Ra8+ 30. Na4 c3! This is more precise than 30... Rxa4+ 31. Qxa4 Qxa4+ 32. Kb1 c3 33. Rc2 Nh3 34. exf5 Qb5+ 35. Ka1 gxf5 36. Re1. 31. Ka1 31. Rf2 loses after 31... 31...Rxa4+ 32. Qxa4 Qxa4+ 33. Kb1 Nh3 34. Re2 fxe4 35. fxe4 Nf2! 36. Rxf2 Qxe4+ 31... cxd2 32. Na2 Rxa4 33. gxf4 Qd4+ 34. Kb1 Rc4! 35. Qb3 fxe4 36.d6! The only way to prolong the struggle. Of no use was 36. Rd1 e3. 36... cxd6 37. fxe4 Qxe4+ 38. Kb2 Qxh1 39. Qxc4+ Kg7 40. Qe6! The best chance. It wouldn't have helped to play 40. Nc3 Qc1+ 41. Kb3 d1Q+ 42. Nxd1 Qxd1+ with a winning queen endgame

40... d1N+! A beautiful conclusion to a fascinating game! Of course not 40... d1Q?? 41. Qe7+ with a draw by perpetual check. 41. Kc2 Ne3+ 42. Kd3 Nf5 43. fxe5 Qf3+ 44. Kd2 Qf2+ 45. Kd3 Qd4+ 46. Kc2 dxe5 47. Nc3 Qf2+ 48. Kb1 Qg1+ 49. Kb2 Qxh2+ 50. Ka3 Qg3 51. Kb4 Qf4+ 52. Ka5 Qd4 53. Nd5 Qc5+ 54. Ka4 Qd6 0-1

bringing more interesting material about the sicilian defence, in this case a video featuring and Anand vs Ivanchuk game played at linares

note: very instructive video for sicillian defence players, our current champion lost that game, but we all know by now that better days for the champion were to follow http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J9HC-lm46ow

White: Karjakin Black: Radjabov Warsaw, Poland, 22 June

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 e5 The Sveshnikov – popular everywhere with young players blessed with powerful computers, a strong work ethic and excellent memories: not really for me, in other words. 6. Ndb5 d6 7. Bg5 a6 8. Na3 b5 9. Nd5 Be7 10. Bxf6 Bxf6 11. c3 Bg5 12. Nc2 Ne7 The strategic themes are very limited in this type of position: the fight for control of d5 is the most important idea. 13. h4 Bh6 13. ...Bxh4?? 14. Rxh4 Nxd5 was actually played in one game. White failed to spot that 15. Qxd5 Be6 16. Qb7! wins trivially. 14. a4 bxa4 15. Ncb4 TThe first new move and a good one. White reinforces the d5 square and threatens an awkward check on a4. 15. ...Bd7 16. Rxa4!! The logical sequel, although it still requires considerable courage. 16. ...Nxd5 17. Nxd5 Bxa4 Radjabov takes the bait. Indeed he would have little to show for his inferior position if he did not grab the proffered material.18. Qxa4+ Kf8 19. b4

What does White have to show for his sacrifice? A dominating knight on d5 certainly, but not too much else; nor is his development much to be proud of. Nevertheless it is extremely difficult for Black to obtain any sort of counterplay. The sacrifice is very reminiscent of Kasparov-Shirov, Horgen 1994, when the great genius paralysed his opponent with very few pieces. This has to be based on intuition and not pure calculation, as many of the variations are not forcing in nature. 19. ...a5 The pawn was a target on a6 but this move allows a potentially dangerous passed pawn. 20. b5 Rb8 Halting the pawn’s advance but rather passive. 20. ...Rc8 intending Rc5 and perhaps Rxd5 was probably better. 21. g3 g6 22. Bh3 Kg7 23. 0–0 Rf8 24. Ra1 White’s plan is clear. He intends to annex the a-pawn and push his own passer. In the meantime the black bishop on h6 remains a miserable bystander. 24. ...Kh8 This obscure retreat becomes understandable after considering the following variation 24. ...f5 25. exf5 gxf5 26. Bxf5! Rxf5 27. Qg4+ with a clear advantage. 25. Qxa5 Qe8 26. c4 f5 Eventually the counterplay gets underway but it is terribly slow. 27. Qc7 Qf7 27. ...fxe4? 28. Ra7 ends the game at once. 28. exf5! Qxc7 29. Nxc7 gxf5 30. Ra6 Karjakin remains material down in the endgame but his initiative is still strong. 30. ...Rf7 31. Nd5 Bf8 covering the threatened pawn.32. Rc6 Solidifying. Now the b-pawn will be pushed. 32. ...f4 33. Be6! Keeping the bishop in front of the pawn chain. 33. ...Rg7 34. g4 Re8 35. Bf5 Be7 36. h5 Bg5 37. b6 e4 38. Rc8 Rxc8? Shortening the resistance. 38. ...Rd8 was better, although it does not affect the result.39. Bxc8 e3 40. fxe3 fxe3 41. b7 Black resigns. 41. ...e2 is simply met by Kf2, halting the pawn. A high class game, showing that the youngster is far more than just a tricky tactician.

more interesting material on ths sicilian defence, this time is an analysis on the Keres attack (notice that at the time g4 was played there was a pawn on e6)

(This knight sacrifice, trying to unleash the e-pawn, was played in the game Naiditsch-Sax, Bad Zwesten 2002. It continued: 18 . . . exd5 19.Bxd5 and now after 19 . . . 0-0 the breakthrough worked: 20.e6! Bh4 21.exd7 Rcd8 22.Rf1 Nb6 23.Bxf7+ Rxf7 24.Rxf7 Kxf7 25.Ne6 Qb8 26.Bf4 Qa8 27.Nxd8+ Qxd8 28.Bc7 and black resigned. The blocking attempt 19 . . . Nf8 is met by 20.Qe4! and white opens up the lines towards the black king, for example 20 . . . Qb6 [or 20 . . . Nb6 21.e6!] 21.Rf1! Ne6 22.Rxf7!! Kxf7 23.Nxe6 Bxe6 24.Qf5+ Bf6 25.Bxe6+ Qxe6 26.Rd7+ and white wins.)

18 . . . Qd8 (Hoping to survive the immediate onslaught.)

19.Nf5!!

(What a sight! Kosintseva forces victory with marvelous knight sacrifices.)

19 . . . exf5

(After 19 . . . exd5 white cuts through with 20.e6! Bxe6 21.Nxg7+ Kf8 22.Nxe6+ fxe6 23.Bxh6+ Ke8 24.Qxe6 Qd7 25.Qg6+ Kd8 26.Rxe7!, for example 26 . . . Qxe7 27.Rxd5+ Kc7 28.Bf4+ Kb7 29.Rd7 mate; or 26 . . . Kxe7 27.Bg5+ Nxg5 28.Qxg5+ Kf8 29.Qf6+ Kg8 30.Bxd5+ winning.)

20.gxf5 0-0

(After 20 . . . Bxf5 21.Nf6+ gxf6 22.exf6! wins.)

21.f6! Bc5

(After 21 . . . gxf6 22.Bxh6 Nxe5 23.Qh5 Kh8 24.Be4 f5 25.Bxf5 Bxf5 26.Qxf5 white's attack is too powerful.)

22.Be4?!

(White should have played first 22.fxg7! Re8 23.Qh5 Re6 [23 . . . Rc6 24.Nf4!] and only now 24.Be4!, forcing the end.)

22 . . . g6 23.e6 fxe6?

(Loses quickly. After 23 . . . Bxe6! 24.Ne7+ Bxe7 25.Rxd8 Bxd8 26.Bxg6 Bxf6 27.b3 black is worse, but still in the game.)

The Knight's Tour is a mathematical problem involving a knight on a chessboard. The knight is placed on the empty board and, moving according to the rules of chess, must visit each square exactly once.

There are several billion solutions to the problem, of which about 122,000,000 have the knight finishing on a square from which it attacks the starting square. Such a tour is described as closed. Otherwise the tour is open. Oulipio writers such as Perec would use such paths as constraints in their work, while locally a possible link between algorithmic psychogeography is made.

A knight's tour libre would be to find the longest path that do not cross. Twixt is a game of making such links in competition on a board.

note: please don't drive yourselve nuts trying to perform every knight tour possible on a chessboard as if you were George Koltanowski (picture shown in this forums in a previous post), this was posted just to help you get skilled at spotting your opponent's/your knights possible moves during the game

... More fun with the sicilian defence, this time is a link to a video featuring a game between two great chess players their names are Efim Geller and Victor Korchnoi (google search if you would like to read about these two chess players), the video was made by Gary and posted at letsplaychess site, this time you will be able to see how Efim Geller and Victor Korchnoi fought a theoretical battle in the sicilian dragon yugoslav attack variation, this game was played in 1971, a lot has been discovered and added to chess theory since then, maybe Gellers's early Bh6 in that game is something that most of us won't see much often in today's chess, but still there is a lot that can be learned from this game

Note: we have more guys!, the video is not all, we also have a page where we can replay lots of sicilian Dragon games in which the theme RxNc3 was employed starting with this very Korchnoi vs Geller game

more fun in the sicialian defense, this time is a video featuring a game in the sicilian accelerated dragon maroczy bind variation in which GM Tiviakov plays the black pieces

I attribute Wojo's success with the Accelerated Dragon to four key characteristics: his positional understanding of the dark squares; his ability to remain comfortable in unclear, high-risk situations; his keen sense of piece placement; and his use of obscure move-orders to prevent the Maroczy Bind, which would yield fewer decisive results than other Sicilians.

here is a link to another interesting video by Dennis Monokroussos, we previously provided the link to his own chess related blog named the chess mind, the link can be found in our chesszilla corner forum as well as a link to one of his very entertaining and interesting videos

note: we recommend to visite Dennis's blog the chess mind where he offers a daitail explaination of what was the idea behind this last video, and where you will as well be able to find lots of interesting chess related information as always

from all chess fans all over the world we say Thanks a lot to Dennis Monokroussos, we please ask to offer your support to Dennis by linking your site to his blog, if you could donate to his (our) blog the chess mind I am sure we all will appreciate it

note: Thanks to greencastle for posting these videos!

videos

chess openings: Two knights chess openings: four knights chess openings: Ruy Lopez (both videos) chess openings: A Trap in the torre Attack

note: I guess you can check on other videos made by greencastle as you like, I pointed out which are the one videos I find to be more interesting and helpful (I am an 1.e4 player )

Edit: in regard to the video on the Two knights defense (Ulvestad Variation) I found that the line 6.Nd4 was completely left out of the analysis, I think it would be helpful to look into this following line with the help of your computer chess programs, this following line was analyzed by GM Larry Christiansen in one of his ICC lectures, he gives a plus for black in almost all the lines which happen in this line after 8.Ne4, I personally beleave that white should just play 8.cxd4 and hold on to an small advantage after 8..Qxg4 9.0-0 thus not getting into all the complications which come after 8.Ne4 Qh4 9.Ng3..etc, then again I think this is something you might want to double check with the help of a C chess program

here is the line GM Larry Christiansen talked about [the video lecture is available for ICC regular members (just in case you are one)]

Edit: I found a game which features the idea 8.h4 (stoping black's Qh4 plans at once) as an option to 8.cxd4, this 8.h4 idea I like even better than 8.cxd4.

here is the game:

..by the way this chess player has a nice chess career history, you might want to check it out!

GM Murray G Chandler

note: if you feel like having more fun after watching the chess openings: Two knights video by greencastle you can also do a search on the internet for the wikes Barre Gambit 4..Bc5!? , the Wikes Barre Gambit although a doubious line is a lot of fun to play and there are plenty of opportunities in that line for you to get your opponents in real trouble if you do the lines better than he does, I will point out a couple of links so you start looking into this linke

note: there are many more sources in the internet where to look into the Wikes Barre Gambit I leave the rest of the fun to you, believe it or not I have even found Fried liver attack analysis lines like 4.Ng5 d5 5.exd Bg4 6.f3 Nxd5 7.Nxf7 etc.., so if you like fun there you have it just don't forget to come back down to solid land on earth after all that fun

Edit: ... there is also the Fritz variation 5..Nd4 6.c3 b5 7.Bf1 Nxd5 8.Ne4

Edit: Guess what?

I found a page at youtube containing a two part lecture made by user schnuber on the Wikes Barre Gambit or Traxler Attack

here is a link to a video featuring a game played between GM Nigel Short and GM Vesilin Topalov in linares 1995, the video was made and posted to youtube by user canstein2

creative play against the Caro Kann by Tal and Deep blue

let's do a quick overview of a couple of creative ideas which could happen in the Caro Kann defence

1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Nd7 The Modern Line of the Caro-Kann 5.Bd3 Ngf6 6.Ng5 e6 ( 6...h6 7.Ne6 Qa5+ 8.Bd2 Qb6 9.Nxf8 +-) 7.N1f3

7...Bd6 [7...h6 8.Nxe6! Qe7 (8...fxe6 9.Bg6+ Ke7 10.0–0 white have tremendous compensation for the sacrifice piece) 9.0–0 fxe6 10.Bg6+ leads to a dangerous attack 8.0–0 h6 9.Ne4 Nxe4 10.Bxe4 0–0 11.c3 c5 12.Re1 Qc7 13.h3 Rd8 14.Qe2 Nf6 15.Bc2 b6 Fritz opening book suggest 15...cxd4 16.Nxd4 Bh2+ 17.Kh1 Bf4 18.Nb5 Qb8 19.a4 Bd7 20.Bxf4 Qxf4 21.Nd4]

illustrative game between the greatest chess player of all times and Deep blue C

The following is a link to a video featuring a game between Tal and Botvinik on the Caro Kann, the video was made and posted to youtuve by user canstein2, as we will see in the video Tal's idea agaisnt that particular line of the Caro kann didn't work as he expected, but the question remains -how many of your opponents will play as good as Botvinik did againts Tal's creative idea

Hi! chess hustlers, I am checkmate the chess hustler detective, I am in charge of the chess detective corner where we investigate and find out about the many good things that have happened on the chess board throughout chess history and many other related facts, I started by finding a webpage from which we will be able to navigate to many nice commented chess games etc, you are more than welcome to post your findings from those pages to this forum so we can all learn from them, let's see who of us can find the most goodies while searching through those pages, here is the home page link, it is called "A. J.'s chess homepage" http://www.geocities.com/LifeMasterAJ/index.html

note: once you get to that site make sure you add it to your favorites, just one pointer!, the green "square" at the left on the homepage lets you click and navigate throught the different topics, please try to post to this forum letting us know the direct links to the goodies you find

Bill Wall chess traps page II also recomended http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Lab/7378/traps2.htm

this following is another good page from Dan's chess pages, this page will allow you access to amazing chess material, it is a good place for "chess investigations" indeed! http://mywebpages.comcast.net/danheisman/Events_Books/Links.html#More%20Links

note: findings from different chess related pages of your choice are also welcome!

well, I find this fact may be of interest to "the chess hustlers", since we had not added a picture of this following chess player/chess journalist to any of our albums or forums I thought it might be a good idea to start this detective corner by talking about him:

George Koltanowski

In 1937, George Koltanowski, a Belgian who emigrated to the USA in 1940, (and Dean of American Chess) set the blindfold record by playing 34 opponents in Edinburgh, Scotland, scoring +20, -0, =14. This topped Alekhine's 32, but was later broken Miguel Najdorf (Argentina) at Sao Paulo, 1947, who played 45 (+39, -2, =4). Then Janos Flesch of Hungary broke this mark by playing 52 in 1960 (+31, =3, - 18). Flesch's mark was tainted by reports that he was allowed to verbally recount the scores of games played. In any case, later in 1960 Koltanowski regained the record by playing 56 opponents (+50, =0, -6).

one of the games from the record breaking simul

Koltanowski G - Gemmell H [B36]

Edinburgh blind simul, 19371 c4 Nf6 2 Nc3 c5 3 Nf3 Nc6 4 d4 cxd4 5 Nxd4 g6 6 e4 d6 7 Be2 Bg7 8 Be3 Nd7 9 0-0 0-0 10 Qd2 Nxd4 11 Bxd4 Ne5 12 Rad1 b6 13 f4 Nc6 14 Be3 Qc7 15 Rc1 e6 16 Nb5 Qd7 17 Rfd1 Rd8 18 Nxd6 Qe7 19 c5 e5 20 f5 gxf5 21 exf5 bxc5 22 Bxc5 Qd7 23 Bc4 Rf8 24 Qg5 Qd8 25 Nxf7 1-0

Interesting annotated game by Fabiano Caruana quoted from chessbase.com

http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=4331

Note:

important for Sicilian Najdorf playersGodena,Michele (2535) - Caruana,Fabiano (2594) [B51]Italian Championship Absolute '07 Martina Franca (8), 01.12.2007

[Annotations by Fabiano Caruana]1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.Bb5+ Nc6 4.0-0 Bd7 5.Re1 Nf6 6.c3 a6 7.Ba4 b5 8.Bc2 Bg4 9.d3 e6 10.Nbd2 Be7 11.h3 Bh5 12.Nf1 0-0 13.Ng3 Bg6 14.Nh4 d5.I had prepared this variation before the tournament, specifically for Godena. I don't believe White has any advantage here, although with almost no practical tests it is hard to give a definite verdict now.15.exd5.The safest choice, leading to an absolutely equal position. Indeed, in most games after this move the players would shortly agree to a draw. However, I know from experience that even the most equal positions can contain a lot of play and chances to outplay a weaker opponent. In this game I achieved exactly that after numerous small mistakes from my opponent. 15.e5 Nd7 16.Nxg6 hxg6 17.d4 has been the main choice recently, with satisfactory results for White. Of course this is the only way to fight for an advantage, and Black must play carefully, but I feel Black has reasonable chances after 17...b4 18.Ne2 Rb8.15.f4!? leads to highly tactical and unclear play: 15...d4

(15...Nxe4 16.Nxg6 Nxg3 17.Nxf8 Bxf8; 15...Ne8 16.Nxg6 hxg6 17.Qf3 f5+/=)16.f5 Bd6A)17.e5 Bxe5 18.Rxe5 Nxe5 19.fxg6 Nxg6=/+;B)17.Qf3 Nd7(17...Qc7 18.Ne2 exf5 19.Nxf5)18.Nxg6 hxg6 19.fxe6 Nde5-/+;C)17.Nf1! exf5 18.exf5 Bh5(18...Nh5? 19.fxg6 Qxh4 20.Re4+-)19.g4 dxc3 20.bxc3(20.gxh5 Be5; 20.Nf3? Nxg4 21.hxg4 Bxg4 22.bxc3 Qf6)C1)20...Nd5 21.Nf3 Nxc3 22.Qd2 Be5!?(22...Qf6? 23.Bb2 Bxg4 24.Bxc3 Qxf5 25.hxg4 Qxf3 26.Bd1; 22...Bxg4 23.hxg4 Qf6 24.Bb2 Nd4! 25.Nxd4 cxd4)23.Nxe5!(23.gxh5!? Ne2+ 24.Rxe2 Bxa1 25.h6)23...Qd4+ 24.Qf2 Nxe5 25.Be3 Qd5 26.Nh2!+/-;C2)20...Ne5!? 21.gxh5 Nd5 also must be considered and is perhaps the best option at Black's disposal.;C3)20...Be5C3a)21.gxh5? Bxc3;C3b)21.Bd2 Nd5 22.Qf3(22.Nf3 Nxc3 23.Qc1 Nd4-/+; 22.d4!? cxd4 23.Nf3)22...Bd4+!! 23.Kh1(23.cxd4 Nxd4 24.Qd1 Qxh4)23...Nxc3 24.Ng2(24.Qxc6 Qxh4 25.gxh5 Qxh3+ 26.Nh2 Qxh5; 24.Ng6!?)24...Nb4 25.Bb3 a5!;C3c)21.Bb2 Nd5 22.Nf3(22.Rxe5? Nxe5 23.Nf3 Nxg4 24.hxg4 Bxg4-/+)22...Nxc3 23.Qd2 Ne2+ 24.Rxe2 Bxb2 25.Rae1 Nd4-/+;C3d)21.d4! cxd4 22.Nf3(22.gxh5 d3! 23.Qxd3 Qxd3 24.Bxd3 Bxc3)22...d3 23.Nxe5 Nxe5 24.Rxe5 Qc7 25.Re3 Qxc3 26.Bd2 Qxc2 27.gxh5+/- However, White's position is very suspicious and I'm sure Black is fine after 15.f4. Perhaps best is 20...Ne5!?.15...Qxd5Movsesian recaptured with the knight, but I prefer Tiviakov's move. The knight will remain on f6 to restrict White's on g3.16.Nxg6 hxg6 17.Qe2 Rfd818.a3?!This is actually not helpful for White's cause at all. I would probably not want to play ...b4 anyway, as it increases the scope of White's light-squared bishop. It is interesting that Godena makes a series of small errors, which don't hurt his position tremendously but make it increasingly difficult to defend; eventually when he must play very accurately to hold the position and with limited time, he quite naturally collapses and gets a losing position. 18.Bf4 Nh5(18...Rac8=)19.Nxh5 Qxh5 20.Qe4 Qd5 21.Qxd5 exd5 22.Bd1 g5 23.Bh2 Bd6= (Smirin-Tiviakov, Gothenburg 2005).18...Rac8 19.Be3.19.Bf4 Bd6 shows the difference between 18.Bf4 and 18.a3: now there is no Bb3 for White and Black can achieve this favourable exchange.19...Qe5!20.Qf3.Again this is unnecessary. White is absolutely not worse in this position and therefore doesn't have to force equality! After a natural move like 20.Rad1 I will be hard-pressed to find any fruitful ideas. 20.Ne4 Nxe4 21.dxe4 Bg5!? 22.Rad1 Bxe3 23.Qxe3 g5=/+; 20.Rad1 Qc7(20...Nd5 21.Bd2 Qxe2 22.Nxe2=)21.Bd2 Bd6 22.Ne4 Nxe4 23.Qxe4.20...Qc7 21.Bf4.Due to one tactical trick White cannot equalise immediately, but there are still no problems after the calm 21.Rac1. [21.Ne4? Nd4! 22.Nxf6+(22.cxd4 cxd4)22...Bxf6 23.Qd1 b4-/+; 21.Rac1 Ne5(21...Nd5 22.Bd2; 21...Bd6 22.Ne4 Nxe4 23.Qxe4=)22.Qe2 Nd5 23.Bd2=].21...Bd6 22.Bg5.After this the position becomes very unbalanced and Black certainly has more chances for an advantage than before. Of course White should have played it safe with 22.Bxd6. After 22.Bxd6 Qxd6 I still can't claim that Black is better. After the trade of bishops White cannot 'force' equality by Ne4 since that would lead to a clear good knight vs bad bishop position. Nevertheless, if White does nothing it is difficult to suggest a plan for Black. So although Black is now calling the shots, it shouldn't be enough for anything real.22...Bxg323.Qxg3?Now this mistake is very real! After 23.fxg3 I would prefer to be Black, but perhaps this is compensated by the machine's endorsement of White's position. In any case it is roughly equal. 23.fxg3 Rd5 24.Bf4(24.Bxf6? Rf5 25.Qe3 gxf6=/+)24...e5(24...Qd7 25.g4)25.Be3 c4!? 26.dxc4 bxc4.23...Qxg3 24.fxg3 Rd5 25.Be3A tough choice for Godena, who was already down to a few minutes. The alternative 25.Bf4 is also unpleasant. 25.Bf4 Nh5 26.Rad1 a5!? (preventing b4)(26...Rcd8 27.b4)27.Kf2 Nxf4 28.gxf4 g5! 29.fxg5 Rxg5=/+.25...Ne526.Red1!A surprise for me, after which things are again far from simple. Godena's tenacious play in the following time trouble phase (only for him, as I had plenty of time) deserves much praise. In the end, however, the position proves too difficult to defend and he commits an error. 26.Rad1 Rcd8 27.Bxc5(27.d4 Nc4)27...Nxd3 28.Bxd3 Rxd3 29.Rxd3 Rxd3 30.Be3 Nd5 31.Kf2 f6=/+; 26.Bxc5 Nxd3 27.Bxd3 Rxd3 28.Bd4(28.Be3 Rcd8 29.a4 Nd5)28...Rxg3 29.Bxf6 gxf6 30.Rad1 Rg5 31.Rd6 a5-/+.26...c4.26...Rcd8 27.Bxc5 Nxd3 28.Bb6(28.Be7 R8d7 29.Bxf6 gxf6)28...R8d6 29.Bc7 Rd7 30.Bxd3 Rxd3 31.Rxd3 Rxd3 32.a4! Rd2 33.axb5 axb5 34.Ra8+ Kh7 35.Rf8 Rxb2 36.Rxf7 Kg8(36...Rb1+ 37.Kh2 Rf1 38.Re7 Nd5 39.Rd7 Nxc3 40.Be5 Nd5 41.g4=)37.Re7 Nd5 38.Re8+ Kf7(38...Kh7 39.Be5 Ne3 40.Re7=)39.Rb8!! (I looked for a while for something in this line, but couldn't find anything and in the end played 26...c4; the compter confirms my evaluation).27.d4.The alternative looks very articifical but should also be taken seriously. However, Black must be much better. 27.dxc4 Nxc4 28.Bc1(28.Rxd5 exd5! 29.Bc1 a5-/+)28...a5(28...Ne4!?)29.a4 b4 30.cxb4(30.b3? Ne3! 31.Bxe3 Rxc3-/+)30...axb4 31.Bb3 Ne4.27...Nc6 28.g4 Rd729.Re1!An incredibly powerful move. For a while I couldn't understand its value until I accurately calculated the consequences of 32.Re2!. In the end I spent 20 minutes and realised that even if White is fine there I have no other ideas and just have to go for it. The d5-square looks nice but by itself it won't amount to anything; it is difficult to find any chinks in White's armour and all pawn breaks will just open lines for White's bishops. White on the other hand has active counterplay with h4, g5, g4 and h5. – 29.g5 Nd5 30.Bd2 Na5 31.Kf2 Nb3 32.Rab1 a5 33.Be1 shows why the rooks must be placed on e2 and d1 respectively: 33...Re8 , and ...e5 comes next with an initiative for Black. 29.Kf2 Nd5 30.Bd2 Na5 31.Ke2 Nb3 32.Rab1 e5! 33.dxe5 Re8.29...Nd5 30.Bd2 Na5.The knight goes to b3 to prepare the powerful ...a5 and ...b4. White has great difficulty defending against this and will struggle to make use of his clumsy rooks. However, with the regrouping manouver Re2 and Be1 White could sucsessfully combat White's initiative. This is indeed why I awarded 29.Re1 an exclamation mark.31.Rad1 Nb332.Be3?!A mistake in very serious time trouble. White could have completed his great idea with 32.Re2, when Black has retains some pressure following 32...Nxd2, but not much more. 32.Kf2 is a more clumsy version of the following note, and indeed Black can take advantage of it: 32...a5 33.Ke2 b4 34.h4A)34...Rb7 35.g5(35.h5? g5! 36.Rh1 Nxd2 37.Kxd2 Nf6-/+)35...bxc3 36.bxc3 a4 37.g4;B)34...Kf8 35.g5 Ke7 36.g4 Rh8 37.Rh1 bxa3 38.bxa3 e5!?;C)34...e5!C1)35.Bxb3? cxb3 36.axb4 axb4 37.dxe5(37.cxb4 Rc2)37...bxc3 38.bxc3 Rxc3!-/+;C2)35.dxe5 Nxd2 36.Rxd2 bxc3(36...Nf4+ 37.Ke3 Rxd2 38.Kxd2 Nxg2 39.Re4 bxa3 40.bxa3 Nxh4 41.Bd1)37.bxc3 Nxc3+ 38.Ke3 Rxd2 39.Kxd2 Nb5 40.a4 c3+ 41.Kd3 Rd8+ 42.Kc4 Na3+ 43.Kxc3 Rc8+ 44.Kb2 Nxc2 45.Rc1 Rc4 46.Rxc2 Rxa4 47.Rc8+ Kh7 48.Rc7 g5!-/+; 32.Re2! a5(32...Nxd2! 33.Rdxd2 a5 34.Be4 b4 35.Bxd5 Rxd5 36.axb4 axb4 37.Kf2 Ra8=/+)33.Be1 (clearly an ideal setup for White) 33...Kf8 34.Kf2 Ke7 35.Kf3=.32...a533.Be4White decides there is no alternative but to remove some pressure from c3, even at the cost of his valuable light-squared bishop. However, there was another possibility which shouldn't be worse than the game continuation. 33.Bf2 b4 34.axb4 axb4 35.cxb4A)35...Rb8 36.Bxb3 cxb3 37.Rd3 Rxb4 38.Ra1 Nf4(38...g5 39.Ra3 Rdb7 40.Bg3 Kh7 41.Kf2 Kg6 42.Kf3=/+)39.Ra8+ Kh7 40.Rf3(40.Rd2? Rc7 41.Bg3 g5-/+)40...g5 41.Ra3 Rdb7 42.Kf1 Kg6 43.Be1=/+;B)35...Nxb4? 36.Bxb3 cxb3 37.Re3;C)35...Rb7! 36.Be4 Rxb4 37.Bxd5(37.Bg3 Ra8)37...exd5 38.Re5 Rb5=/+.33...b4 34.axb4 axb4 35.Bxd5 Rxd5 36.Bf2 Ra8 37.Re2[Also very bad for White is 37.Kf1 Raa5 38.Bg3 g5 39.Kf2 Kh7 40.Kf3 Kg6-/+]37...bxc3 38.bxc338...Rda5.I naturally didn't want to allow White's rooks activity after 38...Nc5 39.Rb1 Nd3 40.Rb7 Ra1+(40...Ra3 41.Rc2)41.Kh2 Rc1 42.Ra2 Rxc3?(42...Nxf2 43.Rxf2 f6 44.Rf3=; 42...Kh7!?)43.Ra8+ Kh7 44.g5! Rxg5 45.Rbb8+/-.39.Be1?This is another error, even more serious than the previous one. It is amazing how resilient White's position has proven to be; although I've made enormous progress from a roughly equal position, it still isn't easy to bring the full point home. White must play the computer's recommendation, when Black's advantage should be manageable: 39.Be3! g5 40.Kf2 f6(40...Kh7 41.g3)41.g3 Kf7 42.h4.39...Ra1 40.Rxa1 Rxa1.White has reached the time control but the damage to his position is done. Black has a strategically winning game due to the passivity of White's pieces.41.Kh241...Kh7?Incredible! I can say I've played well so far, but it isn't time to relax yet! Work remains and only one move consolidates the advantage. I thought there was no difference between this and 41...g5, since 42.g5 is met by 42...Nc1 43.Rb2 Nd3, when there is no check on b8. This error stemmed from overestimating the ...Nc1-d3 idea. 41...Nc1 42.Rb2 Nd3 43.Rb8+ Kh7 44.Bg3; 41...g5! 42.Re5(42.Bg3 Rc1 43.Be1 Kh7)42...Kh7 43.Bg3A)43...Rc1 44.Rxg5 Rxc3 45.d5A1)45...Rxg3? 46.Kxg3 exd5 47.Rh5+! Kg6 48.Rxd5 c3 49.Rd6++-;A2)45...exd5? 46.Be5!(46.Rxd5? Rxg3 47.Kxg3 c3-+)46...d4 47.Rxg7+ Kh6 48.g5+ Kh5 49.Bf6->;A3)45...f6!? 46.Rh5+ Kg6 47.dxe6 Re3 48.Rh8 Rxe6 49.Rc8 Re4-/+;A4)45...Re3 46.d6 Rd3 47.Rb5 f6-/+;B)43...Kg6 44.d5 Nd2 45.h4(45.Be1 Kf6; 45.Bf2 Nf1+ 46.Kg1 Ne3+-+)45...gxh4 46.Bf4(46.Bxh4 exd5 47.Rxd5 Nf1+ 48.Kh3 Rc1-+)46...Nf1+ 47.Kh3 exd5 48.Rxd5 Ne3! 49.Rg5+ Kh7!(49...Kf6 50.Kxh4 Nxg2+ 51.Kg3 Nxf4 52.Rf5+ Ke6 53.Rxf4 Ra4 54.g5)50.Rh5+ Kg8 51.Kxh4 Nxg2+ 52.Kg3 Ne1!?-/+ This is a truly amazing variation, which I naturally couldn't work out over the board. My calculation wasn't too far off but I missed a number of details such as 48...Ne3 (which is why I rejected 44...Nd2) and, even more importantly, 46.Be5.42.g5!Now I realised what I had done. My advantage is of course still there but it is much more difficult to win.42...Nc1 43.Rc2 Nd3 44.Bg3 Kg8 45.Bd6.45.h4 Kf8(45...f6)46.Bd6+ Ke8 47.Be5 Nxe5 48.dxe5 Re1 49.Rb2 Rxe5 50.Rb8+ Ke7 51.Rb7+= shows why the king cannot escape from its prison and why 45.Bd6 has little point.45...Ra646.Be7!?Tricky. He obviously wanted to tempt me into 46...Nf4, when he sucseeds in activating his rook due to 47.Rb2 Nd5 48.Rb8 Kh7 49.Bb4!46...Kh7.46...Nf4? 47.Rb2 Nd5 48.Rb8+ Kh7 49.Bb4!<=>; 46...Ra7 47.Bd6 f6 48.gxf6 gxf6 is very similar to the game, but I wanted to manouver for a while and run him down on time.47.Kg3 Ra5 48.h4 Kg8 49.Bd6 f6.Now I achieve this when he has only five minutes left again. With so little time the defensive task is undoubtedly very difficult.50.gxf6 gxf6 51.Kh3 Ra1 52.g4 Kf7 53.h5!?53.g5 f5 54.Kg3 Ke8; 53.Kh2 e5 54.dxe5 fxe5 White's situation is unenviable in both lines, as he has no counterplay and I can torture him for a long time.53...g5.There are other good possibilities but I was attracted to this.54.h6?Collapsing in what is essentially a losing position. After this White has no more chances. 54.Kh2 f5A)55.gxf5? exf5 56.Rg2 g4;B)55.Rg2 f4 56.Be5(56.Rg1!? Ra6 57.Be5 Ra2+ 58.Rg2 Ra3 59.Rc2 Ra1; 56.Rc2 f3 57.Bg3 Kf6-+)56...Re1 57.Ra2 f3 58.Ra7+ Ke8 59.h6 Nxe5 60.dxe5(60.h7 Ng6 61.Kg3 Rh1 62.Kxf3 Nf8-+)60...f2 61.h7 Rh1+ 62.Kxh1 f1Q+ 63.Kh2 Qf2+ 64.Kh3 Qh4+ 65.Kg2 Qxg4+ 66.Kf2 Qh4+ 67.Kf3 Qh3+ 68.Kf2 Kf8!-+;C)55.Re2!? Nc1(55...f4 56.Kg2)56.Re5(56.Rf2 Ra2 57.Rxa2 Nxa2-+; 56.Re1 Ra2+ 57.Kh1 Nd3 58.Rb1 Nf2+ 59.Kg1 Nxg4 60.Rb7+ Kg8 61.Be7 f4 62.Bxg5 f3-+)56...Ra2+ 57.Kh3 Nd3 58.gxf5 Nxe5 59.fxe6+ Kxe6 60.Bxe5 Kf5 61.h6 Kg6 62.Kg4 Ra1-+.Of course these variations cannot be properly analysed, as both sides have an endless plethora of possibilities, but my general feeling is that Black should win.

54...Kg6.I took some time to calculate everything to the end and it was worth it.55.Bf8 Rc1 56.Ra2.56.Rxc1 Nxc1 57.Be7 Ne2 58.h7 Kxh7 59.Bxf6 Kg6 60.Be5 Nxc3-+.56...Rxc3 57.Ra7 Nf4+ 58.Kh2 Rh3+ 59.Kg1 Rg3+!The following variations demonstrate how not to finish a chess game: 59...c3? 60.Rg7+ Kxh6 61.Rd7+=; 59...Rxh6? 60.Rg7#.60.Kf2 Rxg4 61.h7 Rh4 62.Rg7+ Kf5 63.Rc7 Nd5 0-1.this following is an interesting game from the past world cup annotated by GM Boris Gulko http://www.nysun.com/article/68952

note: usuful for the die hard King's india players

WANG VS. CHEPARINOV (white) (black) King's Indian Defense

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3. Nc3 Bg7 4.e4 d6 5.f3 0-0 6. Be3 e5 7.d5 Nh5 8. Qd2 f5 9.0-0-0 a6This line has been previously employed by both Kasparov and Topalov. Black's pawn thrust reveals his intention to act on the queenside.10. Kb1In game 21 of the 1990 Lyon/New York match between Karpov and Kasparov 10. Bd3 c5?! 11. dxc6 Nxc6 12. Nd5 Be6 13. Bb6 Qd7 14. Ne2 Rac8 15. Kb1 was played with better prospects for white. In Timman - Topalov, 1994 black created complications after 10. exf5 gxf5 11. Nge2 b5 12. Ng3 Nf6 13. Bg5 b4 14. Nb1 Qe8!? 15. Qxb4 h6 16. Bd2 a5 17. Qa3 Na6 18. Nc3 Bd7 with compensation for the pawn.10... Nd7 11. Bd3 Nc5 12. Bc2 b5!? 13. cxb5Deserving of attention was 13.b4!? Nd7 14. cxb5 axb5 15. Nge2 and it is not so easy for black to develop an initiative.13... axb5 14. Nxb5 Ba6 15. Nc3 Qb8 16. Nge2It was dangerous to open the long dark diagonal by 16. exf5 gxf5. For example: 17. Bxc5 (or 17.g4 Nf4 18. Bxc5 dxc5 19. Bxf5? Rxf5! 20. gxf5 Bd3+ 21. Ka1 Qb3! with a decisive attack: 22. Nh3 Bc4 23. Kb1 Rxa2! 24. Nxf4 exf4 25. Qg2 Qxc3!) 17... dxc5 18. Qg5 Bc4! 19. Qxh5 Rxa2! 20. Nxa2 e4! And black is winning.16... Qb4Releasing the tension in the center by 16...fxe4 was a reasonable alternative17. Nxe4(or 17. fxe4 Qb4 18. Nc1 Rfb8 19. Nb3 Bc4) 17...Nxe4 18. Bxe4 (18. fxe4 Qb7 followed by ...Rab8 and ...Nf4 or ...Nf6) 18... Bc4 19. Nc3 (19. Nc1 Qb7) 19...Qb4 with a pleasant initiative on the queenside. 17. Bxc5 After 17. Nc1 Rfb8 18. Nb3 Nxb3 19. Bxb3 Nf6 Black has comfortable play for a pawn.17... dxc5The natural 17...Qxc5!? was also good. For example, 18. exf5 gxf5 19. Qg5 Bxe2 20. Nxe2 Rxa2! 21. Kxa2 Qxc2 and black is winning.18.a3!?In case of 18. Ng3 Bc4! 19. Nxh5 Rfb8! 20.b3 gxh5 21. exf5 Bxb3! 22. axb3 e4 white is defenseless.18... Qa5 19. Nc1 Bc4!Worse was 19...c4?! 20.d6! cxd6 21. Nd5 forcing the exchange of queens because it is bad for black to enter upon 21...Qd8?! 22. exf5 gxf5 23. Bxf5! Rxf5 24. Ne7+ Qxe7 25. Qd5+ with white winning both black pieces on the queenside.20. Bb3?!Black cannot use either of his bishops. Exchanging off one of them is good for him. A better defense was 20. Na4! Qb5 21. Nc3 Qa6 22. Ba4! and the position is unclear.20... Bxb3 21. Nxb3 Qb6 22. Qc2 Rfb8 23. Ka2 Nf4!Including the knight in the attack. Worse was the immediate 23...c4 24. Nd2 Qa6 25.g3 Bf8 26. Ncb1 24. Nc1?! The best chance for defense was 24. Nb1! Nxg2 25. Rd3 Nf4 26. Rc3 Bf8 27. Rd1.24... c4! 25. Rd2This doesn't solve white's problems. Better was 25.g3 Nh3 26. Rd2 Bf8 27. Ka1 Ng1! 28. Qd1 Bc5!25... Bf8! 26.g3After 26. Nb1 Bb4 27. Rdd1 Black destroys his opponent's defense with 27...Nxg2! 28. Qxg2 Bxa3! 29. Nxa3 Rxa3+! 30. Kb1 (30. bxa3 Qb1#; 30. Kxa3 Ra8#) 30...c3 and black wins.26... Bxa3! 27. bxa3 Rxa3+! 28. Kxa3 Qb4+ 29. Ka2 Ra8+ 30. Na4 c3!This is more precise than 30... Rxa4+ 31. Qxa4 Qxa4+ 32. Kb1 c3 33. Rc2 Nh3 34. exf5 Qb5+ 35. Ka1 gxf5 36. Re1. 31. Ka1 31. Rf2 loses after 31... 31...Rxa4+ 32. Qxa4 Qxa4+ 33. Kb1 Nh3 34. Re2 fxe4 35. fxe4 Nf2! 36. Rxf2 Qxe4+31... cxd2 32. Na2 Rxa4 33. gxf4 Qd4+ 34. Kb1 Rc4! 35. Qb3 fxe4 36.d6!The only way to prolong the struggle. Of no use was 36. Rd1 e3.36... cxd6 37. fxe4 Qxe4+ 38. Kb2 Qxh1 39. Qxc4+ Kg7 40. Qe6!The best chance. It wouldn't have helped to play 40. Nc3 Qc1+ 41. Kb3 d1Q+ 42. Nxd1 Qxd1+ with a winning queen endgame40... d1N+!A beautiful conclusion to a fascinating game! Of course not 40... d1Q?? 41. Qe7+ with a draw by perpetual check. 41. Kc2 Ne3+ 42. Kd3 Nf5 43. fxe5 Qf3+ 44. Kd2 Qf2+ 45. Kd3 Qd4+ 46. Kc2 dxe5 47. Nc3 Qf2+ 48. Kb1 Qg1+ 49. Kb2 Qxh2+ 50. Ka3 Qg3 51. Kb4 Qf4+ 52. Ka5 Qd4 53. Nd5 Qc5+ 54. Ka4 Qd6 0-1Wow!, this following game got a little heated right out of the opening:

note: this game was analyzed at hairlurov's blog

[Event "Commonwealth Chess Championship 2007"]

18. Bg3 Qf6 19. Qb4+ Kg8 20. Rxh2 (20. Bxh2 Be4 21. Rxe4 dxe4 ) 20... Rxh2 21. Bxh2 Bxc2 22. Kxc2 (22. Rxd5 Qxf1+ 23. Kxc2 Qxg2+ 24. Qd2 Rc8+ 25. Kb3 Qxd2 26. Rxd2 Rc6 $16) 22... Qxf1 23. Qd2 (23. Rxd5 Qxg2+ 24. Qd2 Rc8+ 25. Kb3 Qxd2 26. Rxd2 Rc6 )) ({Not} 17... Rxh2 18. Rxh2 Bxh2 19. g3 )(26... Qb4 ! 27. Qb6 Bxb2+ 28. Kd1 Qxb6 29. Bxb6 f5 -+)

[Date "2007.12.09"]

[Round "9"]

[White " GM Negi Parimarjan"]

[Black "IM Mas Hafizulhelmi"]

[Result "0-1"]

[ECO "B96"]

[WhiteElo "2514"]

[BlackElo "2372"]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 a6 6. Bg5 e6 7. f4 Nc6 8. e5 h6 9. Bh4 g5 10. fxg5 Nd5 11. Nxd5 exd5 12. exd6 Bxd6 13. Qe2+ Kf8 14. O-O-O Nxd4 15. Rxd4 hxg5 16. Bf2 Bf5(16... Rxh2 {doesn't lead to anything significant} 17. Rxh2 )17. Qe1(17. Qd2 Be4 18. Be3 Be5 19. Bxg5 Qc7 20. Qb4+ Bd6 )17... Be4(17... Bxh2 { is no good because of}18. Bd3 Bxg2 19. Rg1 Bf3 20. h4 g4{White has a new passed pawn: h4. Black has a new passed pawn: g4}

21. Bf5 Qe7{The black bishop is well posted.} (22... Qxe1+ 23. Rxe1 Bxg4 24.22. Bxg4 Be4

Rxg4 )

23. Qd2 Be5 24. h5(24. Rb4 f5 25. Rf1 a5 (25... fxg4 26. Bc5+Kg7 27. Bxe7 ) 26. Rxe4 dxe4 27. Bxf5 Bf6 )

24... Rg825. Qh6+ ?!( 25. h6 !? {is worth looking at} f5 26. Rxd5 Bxd5 27. Qxd5 )25... Ke8(26. Qd2 Bxd4 27. Qxd4 Qd6 ) (26. Rdd1 Qc7 { Thretening Bf4 and Qxc2++})26. Rd2

26... Qc7 ?!{better is}27. Bh3 ?!{ there were better ways to keep up the pressure} (27. Bd1 {was necessary} Rxg1 28. Bxg1 )27... Rxg1+ -+ 28. Bxg1 Bf4 29. Qh8+ Ke7 30. Qc3(30. Qxa8 ? {leads to instant death in 1} Qxc2#)30... Qxc3 31. bxc3 f5 32. Bf1 Bf3 33. Bh2 Bh6 (33... Bh6 34. Bg1 Rh8 35. Bc5+ Ke6 )0-1

Hi!, everyboy!

bringing more interesting material about the sicilian defence, in this case a video featuring and Anand vs Ivanchuk game played at linares

note: very instructive video for sicillian defence players, our current champion lost that game, but we all know by now that better days for the champion were to follow http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J9HC-lm46ow

Hi everybody!

another entertaining anlysis in the sicialian defence, this time from GM Nigel Short

source: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/arts/main.jhtml;jsessionid=KUPKW4LLNTUCNQFIQMGSFF4AVCBQWIV0?view=CHESSCONTENT&grid=P8&RangeStartValue=1&master=nigel_short

White: Karjakin

Black: Radjabov

Warsaw, Poland, 22 June

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 e5The Sveshnikov – popular everywhere with young players blessed with powerful computers, a strong work ethic and excellent memories: not really for me, in other words.6. Ndb5 d6 7. Bg5 a6 8. Na3 b5 9. Nd5 Be7 10. Bxf6 Bxf6 11. c3 Bg5 12. Nc2 Ne7The strategic themes are very limited in this type of position: the fight for control of d5 is the most important idea.13. h4 Bh613. ...Bxh4?? 14. Rxh4 Nxd5 was actually played in one game. White failed to spot that 15. Qxd5 Be6 16. Qb7! wins trivially.14. a4 bxa4 15. Ncb4TThe first new move and a good one. White reinforces the d5 square and threatens an awkward check on a4.15. ...Bd7 16. Rxa4!!The logical sequel, although it still requires considerable courage.16. ...Nxd5 17. Nxd5 Bxa4Radjabov takes the bait. Indeed he would have little to show for his inferior position if he did not grab the proffered material.18. Qxa4+ Kf8 19. b4What does White have to show for his sacrifice? A dominating knight on d5 certainly, but not too much else; nor is his development much to be proud of. Nevertheless it is extremely difficult for Black to obtain any sort of counterplay. The sacrifice is very reminiscent of Kasparov-Shirov, Horgen 1994, when the great genius paralysed his opponent with very few pieces. This has to be based on intuition and not pure calculation, as many of the variations are not forcing in nature.

19. ...a5The pawn was a target on a6 but this move allows a potentially dangerous passed pawn.20. b5 Rb8Halting the pawn’s advance but rather passive. 20. ...Rc8 intending Rc5 and perhaps Rxd5 was probably better.21. g3 g6 22. Bh3 Kg7 23. 0–0 Rf8 24. Ra1White’s plan is clear. He intends to annex the a-pawn and push his own passer. In the meantime the black bishop on h6 remains a miserable bystander.24. ...Kh8This obscure retreat becomes understandable after considering the following variation 24. ...f5 25. exf5 gxf5 26. Bxf5! Rxf5 27. Qg4+ with a clear advantage.25. Qxa5 Qe8 26. c4 f5Eventually the counterplay gets underway but it is terribly slow.27. Qc7 Qf727. ...fxe4? 28. Ra7 ends the game at once.28. exf5! Qxc7 29. Nxc7 gxf5 30. Ra6Karjakin remains material down in the endgame but his initiative is still strong.30. ...Rf7 31. Nd5 Bf8covering the threatened pawn.32. Rc6Solidifying. Now the b-pawn will be pushed.32. ...f4 33. Be6!Keeping the bishop in front of the pawn chain.33. ...Rg7 34. g4 Re8 35. Bf5 Be7 36. h5 Bg5 37. b6 e4 38. Rc8 Rxc8?Shortening the resistance. 38. ...Rd8 was better, although it does not affect the result.39. Bxc8 e3 40. fxe3 fxe3 41. b7 Blackresigns. 41. ...e2 is simply met by Kf2, halting the pawn. A high class game, showing that the youngster is far more than just a tricky tactician.Hi everybody!

more interesting material on ths sicilian defence, this time is an analysis on the Keres attack (notice that at the time g4 was played there was a pawn on e6)

source: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/30/AR2007123001857.html

Kosintseva - Shadrina1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 e6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 d6 6.g4 h6 7.h3 a6 8.Bg2 Qc7 9.Qe2 Nc6 10.Be3 Ne5 11.f4 Nc4 12.0-0-0 Bd7 13.Kb1 Rc8 14.Bc1 b5 15.Rhe1 Be7 16.e5 dxe5 17.fxe5 Nh7 18.Nd5!(This knight sacrifice, trying to unleash the e-pawn, was played in the game Naiditsch-Sax, Bad Zwesten 2002. It continued: 18 . . . exd5 19.Bxd5 and now after 19 . . . 0-0 the breakthrough worked: 20.e6! Bh4 21.exd7 Rcd8 22.Rf1 Nb6 23.Bxf7+ Rxf7 24.Rxf7 Kxf7 25.Ne6 Qb8 26.Bf4 Qa8 27.Nxd8+ Qxd8 28.Bc7 and black resigned. The blocking attempt 19 . . . Nf8 is met by 20.Qe4! and white opens up the lines towards the black king, for example 20 . . . Qb6 [or 20 . . . Nb6 21.e6!] 21.Rf1! Ne6 22.Rxf7!! Kxf7 23.Nxe6 Bxe6 24.Qf5+ Bf6 25.Bxe6+ Qxe6 26.Rd7+ and white wins.)

18 . . . Qd819.Nf5!!(What a sight! Kosintseva forces victory with marvelous knight sacrifices.)

19 . . . exf5(After 19 . . . exd5 white cuts through with 20.e6! Bxe6 21.Nxg7+ Kf8 22.Nxe6+ fxe6 23.Bxh6+ Ke8 24.Qxe6 Qd7 25.Qg6+ Kd8 26.Rxe7!, for example 26 . . . Qxe7 27.Rxd5+ Kc7 28.Bf4+ Kb7 29.Rd7 mate; or 26 . . . Kxe7 27.Bg5+ Nxg5 28.Qxg5+ Kf8 29.Qf6+ Kg8 30.Bxd5+ winning.)

20.gxf5 0-0(After 20 . . . Bxf5 21.Nf6+ gxf6 22.exf6! wins.)

21.f6! Bc5(After 21 . . . gxf6 22.Bxh6 Nxe5 23.Qh5 Kh8 24.Be4 f5 25.Bxf5 Bxf5 26.Qxf5 white's attack is too powerful.)

22.Be4?!(White should have played first 22.fxg7! Re8 23.Qh5 Re6 [23 . . . Rc6 24.Nf4!] and only now 24.Be4!, forcing the end.)

22 . . . g6 23.e6 fxe6?(Loses quickly. After 23 . . . Bxe6! 24.Ne7+ Bxe7 25.Rxd8 Bxd8 26.Bxg6 Bxf6 27.b3 black is worse, but still in the game.)

24.Qg2! Rxf6(After 24 . . . g5 25.Bxh7+ Kxh7 26.Qe4+ Kh8 27.Qg6! wins.)

25.Nxf6+ Qxf6 26.Rf1 Qg7 27.Rxd7! Qxd7 28.Qxg6+ Qg7(After 28 . . . Kh8 29.Rf7 wins.)

(After 29 . . . Kh8 30.Qxc8+ Bf8 31.Bxh7 wins.)29.Qxe6+Black resigned.Where Chess meets Psychogeography and LiteratureThe Knight's Tour is a mathematical problem involving a knight on a chessboard. The knight is placed on the empty board and, moving according to the rules of chess, must visit each square exactly once.

There are several billion solutions to the problem, of which about 122,000,000 have the knight finishing on a square from which it attacks the starting square. Such a tour is described as closed. Otherwise the tour is open. Oulipio writers such as Perec would use such paths as constraints in their work, while locally a possible link between algorithmic psychogeography is made.

A knight's tour libre would be to find the longest path that do not cross. Twixt is a game of making such links in competition on a board.

note: please don't drive yourselve nuts trying to perform every knight tour possible on a chessboard as if you were George Koltanowski (picture shown in this forums in a previous post), this was posted just to help you get skilled at spotting your opponent's/your knights possible moves during the game

enjoy!

GM Victor Korchnoi

... More fun with the sicilian defence, this time is a link to a video featuring a game between two great chess players their names are Efim Geller and Victor Korchnoi (google search if you would like to read about these two chess players), the video was made by Gary and posted at letsplaychess site, this time you will be able to see how Efim Geller and Victor Korchnoi fought a theoretical battle in the sicilian dragon yugoslav attack variation, this game was played in 1971, a lot has been discovered and added to chess theory since then, maybe Gellers's early Bh6 in that game is something that most of us won't see much often in today's chess, but still there is a lot that can be learned from this game

here is the link to the video http://www.letsplaychess.com/chessclubs/forums_thread_show_one_posteronleftstyle.asp?forumid=11558&ThreadID=8194147#message8212153

Note: we have more guys!, the video is not all, we also have a page where we can replay lots of sicilian Dragon games in which the theme RxNc3 was employed starting with this very Korchnoi vs Geller game

here is the link http://www.queensac.com/archive/sacs/dragonrxc3/dragonrxc3.htm

Hi everybody!

more fun in the sicialian defense, this time is a video featuring a game in the sicilian accelerated dragon maroczy bind variation in which GM Tiviakov plays the black pieces

here is the link http://youtube.com/watch?v=u9CVpm7U4X8

there is also another interesting video which I found would be nice to watch, specially for sicilian accelerated dragon players

here is the link http://youtube.com/watch?v=uyiSTYer73M&feature=related

quote:

I attribute Wojo's success with the Accelerated Dragon to four key characteristics: his positional understanding of the dark squares; his ability to remain comfortable in unclear, high-risk situations; his keen sense of piece placement; and his use of obscure move-orders to prevent the Maroczy Bind, which would yield fewer decisive results than other Sicilians.

read more: http://main.uschess.org/content/view/8117/431/

.. a very interesting interview with IM Jonathan Schroer..

Here is the link http://youtube.com/watch?v=7R1tNCa8Frk

hi everybody!

here is a link to another interesting video by Dennis Monokroussos, we previously provided the link to his own chess related blog named the chess mind, the link can be found in our chesszilla corner forum as well as a link to one of his very entertaining and interesting videos

http://chessmind.powerblogs.com/posts/1199730740.shtml

here is the link to this other interesting video made by Dennis also at chessvideos-tv site

http://www.chessvideos.tv/forum/about1629.html

note: we recommend to visite Dennis's blog the chess mind where he offers a daitail explaination of what was the idea behind this last video, and where you will as well be able to find lots of interesting chess related information as always

from all chess fans all over the world we say Thanks a lot to Dennis Monokroussos, we please ask to offer your support to Dennis by linking your site to his blog, if you could donate to his (our) blog the chess mind I am sure we all will appreciate it

enjoy!

Hi, everybody!

this following is another link to an interesting seven parts video on a lecture given by 3 times US champion Alex Yermolinsky

here is the link http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=chessplayerb4

enjoy!

Hello everybody!

.. just wanted to link us to a couple of chess videos at youtube which I think are very interesting, the videos were made by user greencastle and can be found at this page http://youtube.com/profile_videos?p=r&user=GreenCastleBlock&page=2

note: Thanks to greencastle for posting these videos!

videos

chess openings: Two knightschess openings: four knights

chess openings: Ruy Lopez (both videos)

chess openings: A Trap in the torre Attack

note: I guess you can check on other videos made by greencastle as you like, I pointed out which are the one videos I find to be more interesting and helpful (I am an 1.e4 player )

Edit: in regard to the video on the Two knights defense (Ulvestad Variation) I found that the line 6.Nd4 was completely left out of the analysis, I think it would be helpful to look into this following line with the help of your computer chess programs, this following line was analyzed by GM Larry Christiansen in one of his ICC lectures, he gives a plus for black in almost all the lines which happen in this line after 8.Ne4, I personally beleave that white should just play 8.cxd4 and hold on to an small advantage after 8..Qxg4 9.0-0 thus not getting into all the complications which come after 8.Ne4 Qh4 9.Ng3..etc, then again I think this is something you might want to double check with the help of a C chess program

here is the line GM Larry Christiansen talked about [the video lecture is available for ICC regular members (just in case you are one)]

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Ng5 d5 5.exd5 b5 6.Bf1 Nd4 7.c3 Nxd5 8.Ne4 Qh4 9.Ng3 Bg4 10.f3 e4 11.Cxd4 Bd6 12.Bxb5+ Kd8 13.0-0 exf3 14.Qb3 Nb4 15.Rxf3 Rb8 16.Na3 c6

Edit: I found a game which features the idea 8.h4 (stoping black's Qh4 plans at once) as an option to 8.cxd4, this 8.h4 idea I like even better than 8.cxd4.

here is the game:

GM Murray G Chandlernote: if you feel like having more fun after watching the chess openings: Two knights video by greencastle you can also do a search on the internet for the wikes Barre Gambit 4..Bc5!? , the Wikes Barre Gambit although a doubious line is a lot of fun to play and there are plenty of opportunities in that line for you to get your opponents in real trouble if you do the lines better than he does, I will point out a couple of links so you start looking into this linke

http://www.chesscafe.com/text/kaiss23.pdf and http://www.uschess.org/cc/dunne/alex_9805.html

note: there are many more sources in the internet where to look into the Wikes Barre Gambit I leave the rest of the fun to you, believe it or not I have even found Fried liver attack analysis lines like 4.Ng5 d5 5.exd Bg4 6.f3 Nxd5 7.Nxf7 etc.., so if you like fun there you have it just don't forget to come back down to solid land on earth after all that fun

Edit: ... there is also the Fritz variation 5..Nd4 6.c3 b5 7.Bf1 Nxd5 8.Ne4

Edit: Guess what?

I found a page at youtube containing a two part lecture made by user schnuber on the Wikes Barre Gambit or Traxler Attack

here is the link http://www.youtube.com/profile_videos?user=schnuber&p=r

note: thanks a lot to schnuber for this lecture!

enjoy!

Hello everybody!

here is a link to a video featuring a game played between GM Nigel Short and GM Vesilin Topalov in linares 1995, the video was made and posted to youtube by user canstein2

http://youtube.com/watch?v=qr4NQ8DaQGM

note: a very interesting game!, thanks to canstein2 for the video (we will be checking wins from GM Nigel Short soon)

note: watching this video was a nice way to make up for all the draws at corus 2008 round 3

enjoy!

creative play against the Caro Kann by Tal and Deep blue1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Nd7 The Modern Line of the Caro-Kann 5.Bd3 Ngf6 6.Ng5 e6 ( 6...h6 7.Ne6 Qa5+ 8.Bd2 Qb6 9.Nxf8 +-) 7.N1f3

7...Bd6 [7...h6 8.Nxe6! Qe7 (8...fxe6 9.Bg6+ Ke7 10.0–0 white have tremendous compensation for the sacrifice piece) 9.0–0 fxe6 10.Bg6+ leads to a dangerous attack 8.0–0 h6 9.Ne4 Nxe4 10.Bxe4 0–0 11.c3 c5 12.Re1 Qc7 13.h3 Rd8 14.Qe2 Nf6 15.Bc2 b6 Fritz opening book suggest 15...cxd4 16.Nxd4 Bh2+ 17.Kh1 Bf4 18.Nb5 Qb8 19.a4 Bd7 20.Bxf4 Qxf4 21.Nd4]

illustrative game between the greatest chess player of all times and Deep blue C

The following is a link to a video featuring a game between Tal and Botvinik on the Caro Kann, the video was made and posted to youtuve by user canstein2, as we will see in the video Tal's idea agaisnt that particular line of the Caro kann didn't work as he expected, but the question remains -how many of your opponents will play as good as Botvinik did againts Tal's creative idea

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A3KWXdvoMwg

enjoy !