Hello again everyone as we continue to cover the games during the road trip I took in mid-July. In the first game, we saw a fairly well played strategic win for Black. Maybe a slight hiccup or two, such as being under the assumption that trading the Bishop for the Knight was obligatory when it actually wasn't, but there were no blunders by Black, and so I felt pretty good going into this game.
Another story before getting into this game as it is relevant to what you will see in the game below. Literally during this time, while I was in Iowa, there was a thread on chess.com titled "Openings against e4 that are Open (except e5)", and the player was asking if there was any way to assure avoidance of a cramped position playing a Semi-Open Defense, to which I responded that no there is not. I also indicated that it does not mean your position will be cramped, but in all the Semi-Open Defenses, White has an option at a variation that specifically focuses on gaining space more than it does getting any kind of lead in development, where White is making a lot of early Pawn moves, for example, the French Advance, Sicilian lines with an early f4 (like Bg5 and f4 against the Najdorf), the Caro-Kann Advance, the Austrian Attack against the Pirc, the Four Pawns Attack against the Alekhine, etc. In no way am I saying these systems are necessarily White's best lines (especially the Alekhine Four Pawns Attack), but if White wants to play it, White can and there is nothing Black can do to prevent it once he's played 1...Nf6 against 1.e4. So my suggestion was to put in the effort to learn 1...e5 if he specifically wants to avoid being cramped, and grab his share of the center immediately.
Then this other user comes in, and diverts the topic, and starts talking about knowing an opening from one level or another, and that lead to this argument about whether it is possible to know openings at varying degrees, where my argument was you either know it or you don't, and used the French in my case as an example versus the Grunfeld. I can regurgitate 13 moves of the Seville Variation of the Grunfeld, but that doesn't mean I understand it. If White deviates, do I know what I'm doing? The answer is No! And I pointed out that there is no "Grunfeld at a 2000 level" versus a "Grunfeld at a 1700 level" and that there are 1700 players out there that know the Grunfeld better than I do. Does that make them better at chess? Absolutely not! Then I went over to the French and claimed that I understand the French as well as a GM, like Caruana, but made the distinct point that there are 4 key aspects to the game, not one. The first is "Understanding", not "Memorizing", the opening. Why are the pieces placed where they are? What are both White's and Black's general plans? It is NOT "What is Black's best move at move 49 in the Winawer?". Do you understand the opening moves, and do you understand both Black's and White's general plans? These questions, I can answer about the French as well as any GM. The problem becomes the other three items. Second, can you, if given a random position and all you are told is who is to move, evaluate the position correctly? At this point, we are not in the opening phase or the general plan phase. We are evaluating a specific position that could have come from any opening. Is White slightly better? Is Black winning? Etc. The third item is the ability to calculate, which is also where tactics come into play. How well can you calculate? How deep? Can you find all legitimate candidate moves? Etc. The fourth and final item is endgame knowledge. And so I specifically pointed out that it is only phase 1 of 4 and it is only the French, not all openings, that I can keep up with any GM. So I would point out that let's say Caruana and I both played the Black side of a French McCutcheon against Carlsen, and we both played the 8...g6 line. By move 12 or so, Caruana and I would likely have the same position and pretty much the same general plan. But by move 25, Caruana's far superior ability to evaluate and calculate is why he will likely have an equal position and I'm likely to be lost. At that point it has nothing to do with the opening. Then the one making the argument was picking at straws, saying things like (paraphrasing) "Well, how long did it take you to learn the French?", and let's say you respond "Two Years", and then he'd ask "Well, can you not have a different level of understanding the French after year 1?", to which I would tell him no, you don't. Let's say in the first year, you mastered the Advance and Exchange. Well, you know the French Exchange and the French Advance. You don't know the French Defense! He kept on trying to twist the question to get the answer he wanted and I wouldn't budge, and he eventually gave up, especially after others were backing up what I was saying. Overall, it got to the point of being funny because the other person was going to the point of stupidity to try to win the argument.
So how where does all this tie into the game you are about to see? Well, what you will see here is a game that wasn't as well played as the first one, and both sides had issues. From my perspective, White, I actually saw virtually all but one of the items that Black missed, and so why did I play the moves I played? It was poor evaluation of the position. The second of the four items mentioned in the argument above! Black, on the other hand, continues to miss these strong moves. So now you might ask how this is any different than the stink bomb games I played in the first six months of the year? The difference is, I actually saw what Black missed, whereas in the first six months of 2019, I was constantly blindsided by my Opponent's moves, and many things that my opponent missed were items that I missed as well until I ran it through a bot days later. The problem White has this game is position evaluation, something that is easier to fix than not being able to find threats by the opponent. So while observing this game, think from the perspective that White sees the lines given in the notes, but White's problem becomes the fact that he thinks the resulting position is say, "0.00" (using computer evaluation terms) when really it is "-1.80". For Black, this should be seen as a lesson on finding candidate moves and calculation.
With that said, let's take a look at Round 2 of the Des Moines Open.
Des Moines Open, Round 2
W: Patrick McCartney (1996)
B: Uddhav Aja Kanbur (1862)
Double Fianchetto Opening
1.Nf3 Nf6 2.g3 b6 3.Bg2 Bb7 4.O-O c5 5.b3
So this Double Fianchetto system is actually the first of what is now 15 opening videos (each roughly 10 hours long) by Grandmaster Damien Lemos. One rule of thumb that he gives is that White specifically wants to avoid the c4-d3 vs c5-d4 pawn complex, shutting out the Bishop on b2. One way to avoid this is whenever Black plays either ...d5 or ...c5 to answer with c4. If Black has played ...c5 and you play c4, the moment Black plays ...d5, White must either take or play e3. He cannot allow d5-d4 without e3 already played as then e3 can be answered by ...e5, and if Black plays ...e5 before ...d4, then White can take on d5 and Black will be forced to take back with a piece with a reversed Maroczy structure. The alternative is not to play c4 at all, and play a d3 and e4 setup, similar to a King's Indian Attack but with the Dark-Squared Bishop fianchettoed. Since the Black Knight is already on f6, White wouldn't have problems playing b3 if he plays c4, and so while White's move of 5.b3 is ok, he can also consider 5.c4. The only downside to 5.b3 is that if Black plays an early ...d5, then White needs to go for d3 and e4 instead of c4. Again, neither move is bad, but you have to understand the follow-up ideas in case Black plays an early ...d5.
5...g6 6.Bb2 Bg7 7.c4 O-O
So we now have this purely symmetrical position that is an odd hybrid between the Quadruple Fianchetto and the Symmetrical English. Now we will be talking quite a bit about symmetrical positions as the next game we are going to see also deals with symmetry early on. However, not all symmetry is the same. In certain openings, like the Exchange Slav or Exchange French, Black going purely symmetrical and putting the onus on White to prove his point is legitimate. But in other openings, there may be tactical issues (such as going symmetrical for too long in the Spanish Four Knights) or a legitimate advantage to going first, as would be the case here if White plays the right move.
8.d3
White should have played 8.d4 here with a slight advantage. Instead, White tries to make a useful waiting move, looking for a reaction by Black, and only then break the symmetry accordingly.
8...d6 9.a3
Often times a useful waiting move in these Double Fianchetto systems as it keeps the Knight out of b4 if developed to c6 and White might also play e3 and use the c2-square as a safe haven for either the Queen, or possibly the Rook and swing the Queen to a1, which is what happens in this game. If Black doesn't develop the Knight to c6 and goes to d7 instead, then possibilities of b4 may come into play at some point, expanding on the Queenside.
9...Nbd7 10.Nc3
So now the symmetry is broken.
10...a6 11.Rc1 Qc7 12.Rc2 e6 13.Qa1
White should take the time out here to play 13.e4, making it more difficult for Black to get in ...d5. For example, if he were to play 13...d5 here, White would have a fairly significant positional advantage after 14.cxd5 exd5 15.e5!
The move played allows ...d5 by Black, which I knew, but underestimated its value.
13...d5 14.e3
And here White should trade on d5 first. After 14.cxd5 exd5 15.e3, White might still be able to claim a slight edge because it's slightly easier for him to attack down his semi-open file (the c-file) than it is for Black to attack down his (the e-file) since White is much closer to breaking with b4 or d4 than Black is with d4 or f4.
14...Rfd8 15.Ne2
One last chance to trade on d5 and White doesn't do it.
15...dxc4!
The correct move by Black, avoiding any issues down the c-file as White can't legitimate take with the Rook here as 16.Rxc4 Bd5 would be a major problem for White.
16.dxc4 Ne8
Black can get a slight advantage if he goes after the weakened long diagonal via 16...Be4 17.Rd2 Qb7 18.Nh4 Bxg2 19.Nxg2 e5 as the Knights look clumsy, especially with f4 unavailable to them.
17.Rd1
And here, White should take on g7 for the same reason before going Rd1. After 17.Bxg7 Nxg7 18.Rd1, the Knight looks clumsy on g7.
17...Bxb2 18.Qxb2??
Here is another case of mis-evaluation. When I played this move, I was well aware that I am giving up an exchange, but my thought was that with the juicy holes on the dark squares around the Black King, the Knights were more valuable than the Rooks. This might be true if White had his remaining pieces swarmed around the Black King, like if the Knights were already there, and the other Rook was on the h-file. Then White might have something eliminating the Knight on d7, but here that isn't so. That said, unlike White's mis-evaluation, Black fails to execute it at all!
18...Ndf6??
Black should make White put his money where his mouth is, and play 18...Bxf3!. Here, White is forced to play 19.Rxd7 because the Rook was loose on d1, and so 19.Bxf3?? Ne5 leads to a double attack and White drops a full piece. After 19.Rxd7 Qxd7 20.Bxf3 Rb8, Black's simply winning. Instead, in a single move, we are back to an equal position.
19.Rcd2 Rxd2 20.Qxd2 Ne4
And this move is not good. Attacking the Queenside with 20...b5 or 20...Bc6 would maintain equality.
21.Qd3
And once again, White mis-evaluates the situation. I had seen the idea of 21.Qd7, which is the right move, and I saw that after 21...Qxd7 22.Rxd7 Bc6, the Rook is kicked back and that White has nothing better than 23.Rd1 and can't maintain infiltration. However, it's not the infiltration that's important here. It is the total control of the d-file, and we will see in the game that White gets into a bit of a situation where he has to worry about Black infiltrations of the Queen on the d-file.
21...N4f6 22.Nc3 Bc6 23.e4 Nd7 24.Qe3
Once again the wrong idea by White. He should be maintaining his domination on the d-file, and a move like 24.a4, stopping anything from Black over there, would maintain an advantage for White.
24...Ne5
Again the wrong idea by Black. Black is going for a trading mission when he should be playing on the Queenside. 24...b5 is roughly equal.
25.Nxe5 Qxe5 26.f4 Qc7 27.e5 Bxg2 28.Kxg2 Rd8 29.Rxd8 Qxd8
In this position, White is in the driver's seat. He has the space advantage with easier ability to maneuver the remaining pieces, the better Pawns, the better Knight. White has a large advantage here, but here is where things really start going south for White because of mis-evaluation of Black's threats.
30.Kf3
This is too slow. White should get on with it and play 30.Ne4. The reason I didn't do it was I feared infiltration by the Black Queen on d4, but the Queen alone can't win, and White can avoid tactics that would drop his pawns. For example, after 30.Ne4 Qd1 (30...Kf8 is relatively best), White can play 31.Nf2 with tempo and is ready to play 32.Qd3, either forcing Black to trade off his best piece, or taking over the open file.
30...Ng7!
This position is still at least equal, but White has more to worry about now. Infiltration by the Knight to f5 and d4 is one issue. The Queen coming in if White stops that is the other issue.
31.g4
White is willing to sacrifice a Pawn to keep the Knight out. This move would be ok if not for the one move missed by both players. 31.Kg2 with equality should be preferred.
31...Qh4
This leads to the Pawn sacrifice that I saw. The move that both missed was 31...h5!! Now White is going to get stripped open because 32.h3 is not possible. After 32...Qh4, Black wins at minimum a Pawn, and you might be saying to yourself "But didn't you say you were sacrificing a Pawn?" The difference is, this drops a Pawn on the Kingside. The Pawn that Black can win by force here is the a-pawn, out in Timbuktu, and that is what he does in the game.
32.Qf2 Qh3+ 33.Qg3 Qf1+ 34.Ke3
If White tries to hold the pawn with 34.Ke4 Qc1 35.a4, then 35...h5! is again a major problem for White, and this one I saw because the Queen is tied down to the Knight. After 36.h3 Qc2+ 37.Qd3, Black has 37...Qxb3.
34...Qc1+ 35.Kd3 h5 36.h3 Qxa3 37.Qh4?
The Pawn sacrifice was right, but now White needed to play 37.Kc2, maintaining equality. Instead, White went for the wrong idea of the mission of the Queen trying to perpetuate the King or else win a Kingside Pawn.
37...b5?
37...Qxb3 is simply winning for Black. Now the position's equal again.
38.Qd8+ Kh7 39.cxb5 axb5
White to Move and Draw
Here White has one move that draws, and the rest lose. Can you find it?
40.Nxb5??
Now White is losing, and Black has many ways to execute it, and so at this point, I'll simply point out times when he could put a complete end to White and then also the point Black blunders in the endgame as all White can do is watch and hope. The only move is 40.Ne4! Because of the mate threats, all Black can do is give perpetual check via 40...c4+ 41.Ke3 Qc1+ 42.Ke2 Qb2+ 43.Ke3 etc.
40...Qxb3+ 41.Nc3 Qa3 42.Qd7 Qc1 43.Qxf7 Qf1+ 44.Kd2 c4 45.Ne2 Qxh3 46.gxh5 Qd3+ 47.Ke1 gxh5 48.Qc7 Kg6 49.Qc5 Nf5 50.Qg1+ Kh7 51.Qa7+ Kh6 52.Qc5 Ng7 53.Qc8 Kg6 54.Qc5 Qb1+ 55.Kd2 Qa2+ 56.Ke1 Nf5 57.Qg1+ Kh7 58.Qg5 Ng7 59.Qg3 Qb1+ 60.Kd2 Nf5 61.Qg5
61...Qh1
Black missed on outright win here with 61...Qb4+, winning the Knight. If 62.Nc3, then 62...Qb2+ picks up the Knight. If 62.Kc1, then 62...Qe1+ picks up the Knight, and if 62.Kd1 or 62.Kc2, then 62...Ne3+ forces the King to c1 and then 63...Qe1+ picks up the Knight.
62.Qf6 Qd5+ 63.Ke1 h4 64.Qf7+ Ng7 65.Qf6 Qh1+ 66.Kd2 Qh3 67.Qe7 Qg4 68.Qc7 h3 69.Qxc4 Qg2
Here instead, 69...h2 is far stronger. Sure White can stop it with 70.Qe4+ and 71.Qh1, but the Queen is a horrible blockader and she is extremely restricted. Black is still winning there, despite White regaining the lost pawn. With Queens in an endgame, it's not a question of how many Pawns, but who has the best one! In this case, it's Black.
70.Qd3+ Kh6 71.Qg3
Last chance Black! One move maintains a winning advantage, the rest don't!
71...Kh5??
The game is now a draw. The only way to maintain the advantage was by trading Queens. 71...Qxg3! 72.Nxg3 Nf5 (using the tactic that the King is outside of the box) 73.Ne4 Kh5 and Black has a winning Knight ending.
72.Qxg2 hxg2 73.f5!
And here inlies the problem. Black cannot allow 74.f6 as then White is the one winning. So he must either surrender the g-pawn via promotion to drive the Knight back to g1, or else be forked and the White Knight will be on g2. Both of them lead to a draw as by the time Black gets both of White's pawns, he can't stop White from sacrificing the Knight for his final Pawn.
73...Nxf5 74.Nf4+ Kg4 75.Nxg2 Kf3 76.Ne1+
The Knight is headed for c5, from where it will sacrifice itself for the final Black Pawn.
76...Ke4 77.Nd3 Nd4 78.Nc5+ 1/2-1/2
Once Black responds with taking the Pawn, White will immediately grab the Pawn on e6 and K+N vs K is a draw.
So as mentioned in the introduction, we saw White mis-evaluate many of his moves. He also overlooked Black's possibility at move 31, and missed the draw at move 40, but otherwise, everything else explained in the game I physically saw while playing over the board. The problem was, I often saw it as being fine for White, when in actuality, it was far from that. As for Black, I'm not sure what to say. If I played Black in this game, I'd still be kicking myself now, two full weeks later. Call it a moral victory for White if you want, but to me it was more of a dirty draw. White did well to achieve the f5-push on move 73, but it was by no means forced. Oddly enough, while I do feel a little dirty about this game, the fact that I was able to see the vast majority of Black's winning ideas, with the lone exception of 31...h5, shows a sign that I at least played better than I was the first six months of the year. Sure, I should have lost this game, but how you lose does have a psychological impact. When my opponent is hitting me in the head with a baseball bat by playing strong moves that I never even considered, that's a sign of bad vision, and that can be far harder to fix than mis-evaluating positions.
I'll take the lucky draw, and next time, we'll be looking at the third round, where again, we will be looking at the theme of symmetry in the opening. Until then, good luck in your games.
