Wood Green Stutter

Simon Ansell reports from the opening 4NCL weekend

Divisions One and Two of the new 4NCL season took place at Sunningdale Park on the weekend of 3-4 November 2013.

Division One: Pool A Wood Green have 20(!) Grandmasters reg-istered in their squad and kicked off with a routine 7-1 demolition of newly-promoted BCM Dragons. On the Sunday they faced e2e4 in what promised to be a similar mis-match – according to Professor Elo’s prob-ability tables, the average rating difference of 269 points would predict a 6.64-1.36 win for the defending champions.

e2e4 hadn’t just turned up for a lesson in statistics, though. The same squad made the Division One Promotion Pool last season and began setting their more illustrious op-ponents some surprising problems. On board one, Alexei Slavin outplayed David Howell in a main line Grünfeld.

A.Slavin-D.Howell

e2e4 vs. Wood Green

Grünfeld players are probably used to facing such a monster d-pawn that cuts their position in half, but it’s not to my taste. A few moves earlier, David should really have kept more influence in the centre of the board with ...Ìe5, rather than ...Ìa5 in re-sponse to White’s d4-d5 push. 19...f6

It’s hard to offer Black good advice here. The best the computer has is 19...Íxc3 20 e5 Ìc6 21 Íg5 Îd7 22 Íf6, but this leaves the kingside worryingly bare and it’s unlikely Black will survive the inevitable onslaught. 20 e5 f5 21 Îfe1 Îd7 22 h4 h6 23 Ëd2 Ìc4 24 Ëc1 Êh7 25 h5

White’s attack plays itself. 25...gxh5

25...g5 26 Íxg5! was no im-provement. 26 Ëc2 Îg8 27 Ìh4! Íf8

If the black rook had instead come to f8 to try and hold f5, White has many tempting options, but the most direct is invading on g6 with Ëd3-g3. 28 g3 Îdg7 29 Ìxf5! exf5 30 Ëxf5+ Êh8 31 e6

Both 31 d7 Íe7 32 Ëxh5 and 31 Ëxh5 would have won easily. The

text doesn’t spoil anything, but leaving the h-pawn on the board gives Black some vague counterplay. 31...h4!

The only chance. 32 Ëe4?

32 d7 hxg3 33 Ëe4 gxf2+ 34 Êxf2 Îg2+ 35 Êf3 still wins, as does 32 Îe4, excluding the black queen from the game. 32...Ìxd6! 33 Íxd6 Ëxe4 34 Îxe4

34...hxg3? After 34...Íxd6 35 Îxd6 Îe8 36 Îxh4 Îge7 White can’t hold the e-pawn and this would have given Black serious drawing chances in the rook endgame. The point is 37 Îxh6+ (or 37 Îe4 Êg7 with ...Êf6 to follow) 37...Êg7. 35 f4?!

Not a bad move, but the obvious 35 Íe5! would have won on the spot. 35...Íxd6 36 Îxd6 Îe7?!

36...Îg4, preventing f4-f5, at least for the moment, would have required White to find the difficult 37 Îe3! to win. All of 37...Îe8 38 f5, 37...Êg7 38 Îd7+, and 37...Îxf4 38 e7 don’t help the defence. 37 f5 Îf8 38 Îd7 Îee8 39 Îe5?!

39 e7 Îf7 (or 39...Îg8 40 f6) 40 Îd8 wins trivially. 39...Îf6 40 e7?

40 Îed5, to either play Îd8 or double on the seventh rank, depending on Black’s response, or 40 Êg2, approaching with the king, are both still easily good enough. 40...Êg8 41 Êg2 a6 ½-½

David Howell

8 January 2013

White is probably still slightly better, but after such a dramatic time scramble (I pre-sume), and so many missed opportunities, Slavin must have been both physically and mentally exhausted.

On board two, Canadian IM Raja Pan-

jwani comfortably held Jonathan Rowson with Black. Board three saw former Wood Green stalwart Peter Sowray, making his debut for e2e4, face Nick Pert. Peter kept Nick’s cramped Slav Defence position well restrained and had a sizeable advantage for most of the game, but without any obvious knockout blows. Nick defended excellently to eventually neutralise the pressure and hold the endgame.

Meanwhile Jon Speelman and Bogdan Lalic were unable to get anywhere much against their respective opponents, James Jackson and Rob Willmoth, and draws were agreed in both games in the early middle-game. Next, Chris Ward on board six was probably slightly worse against Alan Byron when his game was agreed drawn.

London Chess Classic commentator and one half of the Full English Breakfast, IM Lawrence Trent, faced Mark Josse on board seven.

M.Josse-L.Trent

e2e4 vs. Wood Green

My computer says this position is roughly equal, but it looks completely un-clear to me. Most endgames will be good for White due to the weak black pawns and squares, but if pressed I would choose to play Black here, as his kingside attacking chances are genuinely dangerous. 37 Êh2?

This is just asking for it. Lawrence, how-ever, doesn’t answer. 37 Îb1! was the best move, but was not easy to find. Black can now try 37...h4 (slower attempts, such as 37...Íg7, to perhaps come to h6 and bring another piece into the attack, run into the annoying 38 Îb6, hassling the dangerous unopposed light-squared bishop) 38 Íxh4 Ëh3 39 Íg3 Íxg2!? 40 Ìxg2 Îf5 when a sample line runs 41 Îfd1 Îh5 42 Êf1

Ëh1+ 43 Êe2 Ëxg2 44 Ëd3 and it’s not clear that Black has achieved anything. 37...Îfg7?

37...h4! 38 Íxh4 Îh6 39 g3 Íf3 would have won immediately, since after 40 Ìg2 (or 40 Îb1 Îxh4+ 41 gxh4 Ëh6) 40...Ëg4 the threat of ...Íxg2 followed by ...Îxh4 is terminal. 38 Îg1?

38 Îh1! would have turned the tables and set Black serious problems. After Êg1 next, Black is never going ...h5-h4 anymore and will somehow have to justify his weak pawns and strangely configured kingside pieces. 38...Ía8?

I don’t understand this move at all. Once more, I’m presuming time trouble! Again, 38...h4! was obvious and strong. 39 Ìd5

39 Îh1! again was strong, but the text is a good solid move. 39...h4

Finally! But not nearly as devastating now, as the bishop can’t participate in the attack. 40 Íxh4 Îh6 41 g3 Îg4?

41...Îgg6 immediately was better, when Black still has an attack. The poor h8-bishop will soon finally participate in the game via the f6-square. White probably has nothing better than 42 f3 anyway. 42 f3 Îgg6

42...Îgxh4+ 43 gxh4 Îxh4+ 44 Êg3 Ëh3+ 45 Êf2 is not even close to mate. 43 Ëd3?!

43 Îg2 was better, so that the king can escape via g1. After 43...Íf6 44 Êg1 Íxh4 45 gxh4 Îxh4 46 Ëc2 the position will probably liquidate to a drawn endgame. 43...Íf6 44 Ëe4 Íxd5 45 cxd5 Ëe7 46 Êh3

It’s hard to believe that White will sur-vive this position. 46...Ëd7+ 47 Êh2 Ëe7 48 Êh3 Ëd7+ 49 Êh2 Ëa7?

After repeating once, Lawrence goes astray. 49...Ëd8! 50 Êh3 Êh8! 51 Îb1 (what else?) 51...Ëg8! was the way to break through, when the threats are insur-mountable: for instance, 52 Êh2 Íg5! fol-lowed by ...Íf4.

50 Îg2 Êg8 51 Îc2 Íxh4 52 gxh4 Ëe7 53 Îc4

White is now fine. Here the .pgn file from the excellent 4NCL website (http://www.4ncl.co.uk) gives 53...Îh7?? as having been played. Playing through the games of this match, nothing would have surprised me anymore, so I did have to check with Lawrence that he didn't leave a rook en prise here. “I’m bad, but not that bad!” was his response. In any event the game did end up in a draw.

Finally, Keti Arakhamia-Grant had White

against Rasa Norinkeviciute on board eight.

K.Arakhamia-Grant- R.Norinkeviciute

Wood Green vs. e2e4 Sicilian Najdorf

1 e4 c5 2 Ìf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 Ìxd4 Ìf6 5 Ìc3 a6 6 Íe3 e5 7 Ìb3 Íe6 8 h3

This way of supporting the g2-g4 thrust has become a fashionable idea against vari-ous Sicilians. 8...Ìbd7 9 g4 h6 10 Ëd2 Ëc7 11 f4 exf4 12 Íxf4 Ìe5 13 0-0-0 0-0-0 14 Ìd4 Íe7 15 Êb1 Êb8 16 Ìf5 g5 17 Íe3 Íxf5 18 exf5 d5 19 Ëf2

White threatens Íb6, winning the ex-change. 19...Ìc4?

19...Íb4!, offering to sacrifice the ma-terial, would have kept the balance: 20 Íb6 (20 Íd4 Íxc3 21 Íxc3 Ìe4 is good for Black) 20...Ëc6 21 Íd4 (21 Íxd8 Îxd8 22 Ëg3 Íxc3 23 bxc3 Îe8 24 Íg2 Ìe4 25 Íxe4 dxe4 26 Îhe1 Êa8 with ...Ìc4 coming gives Black excellent attacking chances) 21...Îhe8 22 Íg2 leads to a complicated, roughly level middlegame. 20 Íd4?!

After 20 Íxc4! Ëxc4 21 Îhe1 Îhe8 (21...Ìe4 22 Ìxe4 dxe4 23 Íd4 Îhe8 24 Îxe4 wins a pawn) 22 Íd4 Ëc6 23 Ëf3 the d5-pawn will soon fall. 20...Îhe8 21 Íg2 Ëa5 22 Îd3?

Taking unnecessary precautions. 22

www.chess.co.uk 9

Îhe1! would have given White overwhelm-ing threats on the e-file, and 22...Ëb4 23 b3 Ìa3+ 24 Êb2 doesn’t give Black any real attacking chances. 22...Ëb4 23 b3 Ìa3+ 24 Êc1 Îc8? 25 Îe1?

25 Íe5+! Êa8 26 Íxf6 Íxf6 27 Ìxd5 wins something. With the king on b8 here (i.e if White had played 25 Íxf6 and not inserted the check), Black could play 27...Ëb5 with a playable position, but now this fails to 28 Ìb6+, winning the ex-change. 25...Îed8 26 Íe5+ Êa8 27 Ëd4

27...Ìc4!

A good move, giving White concrete problems to solve. 28 bxc4??

28 Íxf6 Ëa3+ 29 Êd1 Ìb2+ 30 Êe2 is complicated, but not bad for White. The resource 30...Íc5 31 Ìb5! may have been what Keti missed when 31...Íxd4 (31...axb5 32 Ëxb2 wins a piece) 32 Ìxa3 Íxf6 33 Îxd5 leads to an endgame where White has an extra pawn and the black knight is entombed on b2. Strangely, my computer only gives White a half-pawn advantage here! 28...dxc4 ½-½

Now Black is winning material, and of-fered a draw which was accepted. I find this a strange decision, as it would be virtually impossible to lose after something like 29 Ëxd8 Îxd8 30 Îxd8+ Íxd8 31 Îe3 Ëc5.

So all eight games were drawn and e2e4

pulled off a remarkable result – perhaps the biggest upset in the history of the 4NCL! Congratulations to them, but as the snip-pets above show it could have been even better. Wood Green were exceptionally lucky to draw this match – only Lawrence Trent came close to winning his game and even he eventually had to defend a worse rook endgame. I don’t know if manager Brian Smith uses a ‘hairdryer’ treatment, à la Sir Alex Ferguson, but it would be no sur-prise to see some ‘squad rotation’ from the champions come the next 4NCL weekend. In particular Bogdan Lalic and Jon Speelman took early draws in positions where they had reasonable chances of outplaying their

weaker opponents – decisions they may quickly have been regretting given the course of the match.

Of course, if e2e4 fail to qualify from Pool A for the Promotion Pool, this result will be wiped from the records and Wood Green will be able to play for the Champion-ship with a clean slate – a major flaw in the current system, in my opinion. Indeed it’s hard to think of a sensible alternative to the pool system with 16 teams in the top divi-sion, but personally I never understood the logic in moving to 16 from the old 12 team all-play-all in the first place.

e2e4 will have different ideas, however, especially considering that they won their Saturday match too. Guildford 2 outrated them by a mere 79 point average, so the 5-3 victory was never likely to be a problem. Peter Sowray demolished Graeme Buckley’s queenside in double-quick time.

G.Buckley-P.Sowray

Guildford II vs. e2e4 Grünfeld Defence

1 d4 Ìf6 2 Ìf3 g6 3 c4 Íg7 4 Ìc3 d5 5 cxd5 Ìxd5 6 Íd2

I’ve ventured the Grünfeld myself ex-actly once in my 25-year chess career. Needing to win with Black against the su-per-solid Russian GM Igor Naumkin, I no-ticed that he nearly always played 6 Íd2 here. A quick bit of research showed me that this line is considered completely harm-less, so I was able to easily get a dynamic position with no problems at all and went on to win a nice game. 6...0-0

I played 6...c5. Both moves are perfectly good for Black.

Ketevan Arakhamia-Grant

10 January 2013

7 e4 Ìxc3 8 Íxc3 Íg4 9 Ëd2 Íxf3 10 gxf3 Ìc6 11 d5

White must play this now as 11 0-0-0 e5! 12 d5 Ëh4! is very pleasant for Black. 11...Ìe5 12 0-0-0

12...c5!?

I’m not sure this is objectively the best

move, but it pays off spectacularly. Black intends to ram the b-pawn down White’s throat and now threatens to take on f3. If 12...Ìxf3?? immediately, then 13 Ëf4 and the knight is trapped. Instead, 12...c6, chal-lenging the white centre, looks normal. 13 Íe2 Ëc7 14 h4?!

Anyone that’s faced the Sicilian Dragon a few times will know how dangerous it is to leave the fianchettoed dark-squared bishop on the board. I don’t know why Graeme rejected 14 f4! Ìd7 15 Íxg7 Êxg7 16 h4 when it looks to me like White’s attack is more likely to get there first. 14...b5 15 Ëc2?!

Perhaps lacking his sense of danger. 15 Ía5 is suggested by my computer and holds up the black attack for a while, but looks a bit artificial to me. A sensible and solid alternative was 15 f4 again, when 15...Ìc4 16 Íxc4 Íxc3 17 Ëxc3 Ëxf4+ 18 Ëd2 Ëxd2+ 19 Êxd2 bxc4 20 Êc3 leads to a rook endgame where only White

can be better. 15...Îab8

The immediate 15...b4 was also good. 16 Êb1 b4 17 Íd4

Very risky, but 17 Íd2 c4 doesn’t look too appealing either. 17...Îfc8 18 Îc1 Ëa5 19 f4 Ìf3 20 Íxf3 Íxd4

21 Ëd3?

Attempting to stop ...c4, but this allows a devastating tactical shot. Redirecting the bishop with 21 Íe2! would have achieved the same thing while keeping everything protected. Black can take a pawn with 21...Íxf2, but 22 h5 will give White more than enough counterplay. 21...Íxb2! 22 Îc4

After 22 Êxb2 c4! 23 Îxc4 Îxc4 24 Ëxc4 Ëa3+ 25 Êc2 (if 25 Êb1 or 25 Êa1 then 25...b3 is curtains) 25...Ëxf3 the white position is falling apart. 22...Íc3 23 e5 Ëa3 0-1

Mate is inevitable. If e2e4 are unable to maintain their ex-

cellent start, Wood Green’s nearest chal-lengers in Pool A are likely to be the solid Barbican team. They started with two wins in close matches, over Cambridge and Cheddleton. David Moskovic came close to an IM norm playing for Cambridge last sea-son, but has his work cut out for a repeat performance after the following round one disaster.

M.Turner-D.Moskovic Barbican vs. Cambridge

c3 Sicilian

1 e4 c5 2 c3 Ìf6 3 e5 Ìd5 4 g3

A favourite of the Lithuanian GM Eduar-das Rozentalis. Not the most fashionable or even the most testing choice, but Matthew Turner has never really played highly theo-retical lines. 4...Ìc6 5 Íg2 e6 6 Ìf3 d6 7 exd6 Íxd6 8 0-0 0-0 9 d4 cxd4 10 Ìxd4 Ìxd4 11 Ëxd4 Íd7?!

11...Ëc7! is the normal move here. The game might continue 12 Ìd2 Íd7 13 Ìe4 Íe5 14 Ëd3 Íc6 which is roughly equal,

Matthew Turner

www.chess.co.uk 11

as in Morozevich-Svidler, Sochi 2005. 12 c4 Ëb6

The only move that doesn’t lose a piece. 13 Ëxb6 Ìxb6 14 Îd1

14...Ìxc4?? 14...Íe5! 15 c5 Ía4! 16 Îe1 Ìd7 17

Íxb7 Îad8 18 c6 Ìb8 might actually be okay for Black, but I doubt if it’s enough to make 11...Íd7 catch on. Instead 14...Íe7 also doesn’t lose a piece, but 15 Íxb7 Îab8 16 Ía6 should be better for White. 15 Íf1 Îac8

15...Ía4 16 Îd4 b5 (or 16...Îac8 17 Ìc3, as in the game) 17 Íxc4 Íc5 18 Îg4 bxc4 19 Îxc4 wins a piece too. 16 Ìc3! 1-0

One of Black’s bishops will fall.

Division One: Pool B Last season’s runners-up, Guildford, are favourites in Pool B. Their squad has been strengthened by the addition of Gawain Jones and the young Dutch Grandmaster Robin van Kampen. Gawain was held by

Ameet Ghasi on Saturday as Guildford thrashed Warwickshire Select 7-1, but I liked the finish to his round two game against Chris Dorrington of Barbican II.

G.Jones-C.Dorrington Guildford vs. Barbican II Nimzo-Indian Defence

1 d4 Ìf6 2 c4 e6 3 Ìc3 Íb4 4 Ëc2 d5 5 cxd5 exd5 6 Íg5 h6 7 Íh4 Ìbd7

Not the most popular move but it seems to be playable, if slightly passive. Of the alternatives, 7...c5 is the most common and has been regularly discussed at the top level, including in the 1993 Kasparov-Short match. 8 e3 0-0 9 Íd3 c5

10 dxc5

Gawain chooses a simple plan of playing against the isolated queen’s pawn. The text does justify Black’s knight being on d7 though, so I wonder if simple development with 10 Ìge2 or 10 Ìf3 might objectively be stronger, when it could be argued that Black would prefer his knight on c6. 10...Ìxc5 11 Ìge2 Íe6 12 0-0 Îc8 13 Îad1 Ëe7 14 Íh7+ Êh8 15 Íf5

15...g5

Loosening, but the pin was annoying. 16 Íg3 Ìce4 17 Íxe4 Ìxe4 18 Íe5+ f6 19 Íd4 a6 20 f3 Ìxc3 21 Ìxc3 Êg7

Without doing anything in particular, Gawain has secured a slight advantage. The

Gawain Jones

12 January 2013

d4-bishop is the best piece on the board and should it be exchanged, Black risks fal-ling into an unpleasant bad bishop vs. good knight position. Gawain now begins to probe Black’s slight kingside weaknesses. 22 f4! b5

Black is devoid of active plans and this move is as good as any. 23 fxg5 hxg5

24 Îf5!?

An interesting decision that has the de-sired effect. 24 Ëf2, transferring the queen to the kingside and possibly hinting at h2-h4, was a natural alternative. 24...Êh6?!

Black should have taken the bait: 24...Íxf5 25 Ëxf5 Íxc3 26 Ëxg5+ Êh7 27 Ëh5+ when it’s not clear to me that White has any more than a draw. 25 Îf2 Íxc3?!

This move gives White a stable advan-tage – just compare the quality of the two bish-ops. Perhaps seeking complications with 25...f5 was the best practical chance. 26 bxc3 Îc6 27 Îdf1 Íc8 28 Ëb3 Ëd8

The black position is full of holes and Gawain now opens another front on the queenside. 29 a4! bxa4 30 Ëxa4 Îe6

If 30...Íd7 31 Ëa1! with c3-c4 to follow, and the pressure on the f6-pawn will be too much. 31 Îf3 Îf7 32 Îh3+ Êg7 33 Îf5 Êg6

White to play and win! 34 Ëd1!

A very pretty finish, and the only clear way to victory! Other moves are

answered by 34...Îe4. 34...Îe4

34...Êxf5 35 Ëf3+ Êg6 36 Ëh5+ Êf5 37 Îf3+ Êe4 38 Îf2 will be mate in three.

35 Îxg5+! fxg5 36 Ëh5+ 1-0

Jutes of Kent, fresh from their European

Club Cup adventures in Israel, were convincing winners over Wood Green II on Saturday; but a typical Sunday team hang-over may have affected the team in round two, when they were lucky not to be white-washed by White Rose, who have started the season strongly after their excellent third place finish last season.

H.Gretarsson-P.Wells

Jutes vs. White Rose

24...Ìxg3!

24...Íxd4!? was an interesting alterna-tive. 25 hxg3 Ëxg3+ 26 Êh1 Ëh3+

Here Peter took the draw by perpetual check, but the surprising 26...Îe6! gives winning chances. To stop the crude threat of ...g5 and ...Îh6 mate, White has to play 27 Îe2 (both 27 Ëd1 Ëh3+ 28 Êg1 Îxc5! 29 dxc5 Îe5 with mate to follow, and 27 d5 Îe5 don’t help), after which 27...Íxd4! 28 Îg2 Ëh3+ 29 Êg1 Îxc5 leaves Black with four pawns for the piece and a continuing attack. My thanks to Guild-ford captain Roger Emerson for pointing out this neat opportunity. 27 Êg1 Ëg3+ 28 Êh1 Ëh3+ ½-½

Elsewhere in Pool B, there were a couple

of minor surprises. Warwickshire Select defeated my own team Blackthorne Russia. Blackthorne were disappointing last year, and our poor form seems to have continued into the new season. We were weakened by the absence of Harriet Hunt, who unfortu-nately had to withdraw at short notice due to illness; but on the other hand Warwick-shire were also inconvenienced – my pro-spective opponent, Li Wu, was also unable to play Sunday’s game and I found myself facing their reserve player Andrew Baruch, who was forced to travel at short notice on the morning of the game. Likewise, newly-promoted South Wales Dragons scored a good win over the higher-rated Wood Green second team, with James Cobb de-feating Andrew Greet on top board and Megan Owens winning despite a 200-point deficit on board 8.

With the exception of Guildford, this half of the draw seems to be wide open and all of the teams will harbour ambitions of qualifying for the Championship Pool.

Rounds three and four will take place on

13-14 January at Staverton Park. See you there!

Peter Wells

www.chess.co.uk 13