Just to add that the deployments and strategic ideas are broadly speaking the same as those used in the Yugoslav Attack against the Dragon and the 150 Attack against the Pirc.
Saemisch KID crash course
Sort:
[COMMENT DELETED]
Karpark wrote:
[COMMENT DELETED]
Presumably you deleted this game because you don't know what White could have done if Black had played 26. ... d5
This thread is taken
No, I deleted it because I couldn't get the last few moves into the PGN diagram for reasons that I don't understand. Still trying but in the meantime here it is as I tried to put it in.
1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 Bg7 4. e4 O-O 5. f3 {Announcing the Saemisch<br />Variation, my weapon of choice against the Kings Indian.} 5... d6 6. Be3 c6<br />7. Qd2 Re8 8. Bd3 {Not sure if this bishop move constitutes approved theory<br />but otherwise it is hard to find a good square for it.} 8... Nbd7 9. Nge2 e5<br />10. d5 a5 11. g4 {Castling long is tried by many around now but I generally<br />prefer to leave my king in the centre until I see what's shaping up on the<br />queenside. No sense in wasting time with one's own attack on the kingside.}<br />11... Nc5 12. Bc2 Nfd7 13. Bh6 Bh8 {Around this time my opponent offered me a<br />draw! I graciously declined, declaring that I found the position to be<br />'interesting' and that I wished to see how it 'developed'.} 14. h4 cxd5 15.<br />Nxd5 Nb6 16. b3 {I now saw that my pawn formation resembled a Maroczy Bind<br />against what looked like a faux Dragon. I therefore decided to make sure that<br />I kept my c4 pawn and the half-open d-file onto his backward queen's pawn.}<br />16... Nxd5 17. Qxd5! {Sustaining the Bind.} 17... a4 18. b4 {Making it<br />difficult for black to open up the queenside.} 18... Be6 19. Qd2 Nd7 20. Bd3<br />{Further sustaining the Bind. I don't need to see ... d5 from my opponent.}<br />20... Qc7 21. Rc1 {No 0-0-0 now!} 21... Nb6 22. h5 Nxc4? {He wants to free<br />himself of the c4 pawn's constricting presence but is this wise with my rook<br />and his queen both on this now open file?} 23. Qc2 b5 {Creating an 'outpost'<br />for either his knight or light squared bishop (he thinks).} 24. hxg6 fxg6 25.<br />f4 exf4 26. Nxf4 Bxg4? {Black does not need to open up the g-file in this<br />position!} 27. Qg2 Qd7? {Removes a defender of the knight on its outpost.}<br />28. Rxc4! {What outpost? Black's position now begins to crumble with this<br />exchange sacrifice.} 28... bxc4 29. Bxc4+ Be6 30. Nxe6 Rxe6 31. Qh3! {Not Qg4.<br />The queen is needed on the h-file.} 31... Rae8 32. Bg7!! {Unless I've missed<br />something, this wins instantly.} 32... d5 {Desperation.} 33. Qxh7+ {The rest<br />is straightforward enough.} 33... Kf7 34. Bxh8+ Kf8 35. O-O+ {Perhaps castling<br />rather than simply playing Rf1 was a bit cheeky, especially after avoiding the<br />signature Saemisch 0-0-0! At this point black resigns. } 1-0
ModestAndPolite wrote:
Karpark wrote:
[COMMENT DELETED]
Presumably you deleted this game because you don't know what White could have done if Black had played 26. ... d5
I'm not sure that white has any real problems if black plays 26 ...d5 after 27 Bxc4. If 27... Rxe4+ then 28. Qxe4 and the would-be recapturing pawn is pinned by the bishop. If then 28 ... Qxf4, 29 Bxd5+ and black is in all kinds of s*@$ or have I missed something? Other less dramatic continuations look good for white to me.
I'll work on trying to get the full PGN up but in the meantime the text of the game is up there for anyone to consider.
The samisch is amazing. the ultimate anti-grünfeld is by far the best book on the samisch.I found this book to be really helpful in explaining the ideas.
Karpark wrote:
I'll work on trying to get the full PGN up but in the meantime the text of the game is up there for anyone to consider.
Here you go. PGN repaired and loaded:
"I'm not sure that white has any real problems if black plays 26 ...d5 after 27 Bxc4. If 27... Rxe4+ then 28. Qxe4 and the would-be recapturing pawn is pinned by the bishop. If then 28 ... Qxf4, 29 Bxd5+ "
But after 26. ... d5 27. Bxc4 bxc4 and (unless I am missing something) it is White that is in trouble.
@ModestAndPolite Nice game
M&P - Thanks for posting the game properly. I sincerely appreciate that as well as the time you took to look over it. I take your point that d5 was a better move 26 for black. I suggest after a quick look again that this might be met by 0-0 after which I feel that the position is unclear with both sides having to play very carefully. To be honest I don't exactly remember now what was in my mind at the time other than being aware of the fact that some of his choices around moves 25-27 could have been better, hence the ?s against them in my annotation.
Karpark wrote:
M&P - Thanks for posting the game properly. I sincerely appreciate that as well as the time you took to look over it. I take your point that d5 was a better move 26 for black. I suggest after a quick look again that this might be met by 0-0 after which I feel that the position is unclear with both sides having to play very carefully. To be honest I don't exactly remember now what was in my mind at the time other than being aware of the fact that some of his choices around moves 25-27 could have been better, hence the ?s against them in my annotation.
Thanks for your kind words. I agree that 0-0 looks essential after d5 by Black. My intuition, such as it is, tells me that Black still has better chances, but I am not strong enough to back that up with calculation in such a wild and messy position. Dvoretsky would probably devote 20 pages to the position!
A private (so as not to embarrass me publicly) message to my in-box politely and tactfully pointed out that 13... Qh4+ wins the piece and therefore the game. I have to confess that my correspondent is quite right and I am grateful for showing me this. Shaming the devil and telling the truth here, I hope through this confession that I am now putting to bed an original assumption that I might have deleted the first (incomplete) version of this game because I realised that black could have played 26 ... d5.
I ascribe this blunder (13. Bh6) and my opponent's failure to spot 13... Qh4+ (which would have properly punished it) to a classic instance of pattern mis-recognition by both of us, insofar as Qh4 in most 'standard opening' similar positions would not have produced a check, as the f pawn would have been on f2 preventing this, though it is not an excuse as f3 is of course the Saemisch's signature move.
This (unpunished) blunder and the complications M&P and I discuss above mean that my play is in this game (played more or less as 'blitz'/'rapid'/skittles in spite of the correspondence format of the site in which it was played out) has to be considered as very flawed to say the least. That said, until also proven to be unsound by reasonably competent OTB calculation, I'm still quite proud of my finish with the exchange sacrifice and the move 32. Bg7.
I'm a committed d4. player and almost always play the Saemisch when confronted with the KID. Yes, it's complicated and has a lot of theory but unless you are playing at the top end of things, your opponent probably won't know a lot of it either. I've had a lot of success with it. Here's an example of it used successfully against the chess.com computer. Not the greatest game but it will give readers coming to the Saemisch for the first time a sense of what the strategic ideas are for white in this variation, namely exchange off the black squared bishops on g7, castle queenside (in most lines but not here where the king is left in the centre), charge down the kingside with your pawns and get your major pieces bearing down the g and h files if the pawns have been able to prise these open. The job for the signature f3 pawn is to support your pawn on e4 and restrict the enemy knight coming to g5 and spoiling your plans for the black squared bishop exchange.