However, bridge hands are not just about high card points. Because bridge is a game that features a trump suit (as do Spades and Pinochle), the concept of "Points Schmoints" is that the shape of your hand can often outweigh the point count, and that having a very long suit, such as 8 hearts, and a void in another suit, such as having no clubs in your hand, is often stronger than having 4 cards in one suit and 3 cards in each of the other 3 suits, despite the hand with 8 hearts and no clubs having fewer high card points, idea being that every time someone leads a club on a trick, you can win the trick by playing one of your hearts as the trump suit supercedes all other suits. Therefore, point count can often be deemed meaningless.
Well, it is no different in the game of chess. Many attacking players at the amateur level fall in love with playing a gambit in the opening, where they give up a Pawn (or maybe even a piece) for activity early on, but their mentality is often about getting the Pawn back and maintaining a strong center, but notice that they are still trying to equalize the point count. They still have that mentality that a Queen is 9, a Rook is 5, a Bishop or a Knight is 3, and a Pawn is 1, and that points decides who is better, which is a very common mistake. If there are no open files on the board, is a Rook really that good? A Knight or Bishop could be stronger than a Rook in many cases. If the position is blocked in the center, is a Bishop worth much? A Knight might be far stronger despite their "equal value". Is a Knight going to be able to join the party in time in a wild, open game while the long range Queens, Rooks, and Bishops join the show on the Kingside? But Knights are supposed to be the same as Bishops, right?
Another thing you will notice is that while these players are always talking about how great these opening gambits are due to the exciting play that follows, do you ever hear them talking about sacrificing a Pawn later on in the game, such as say, move 27, without there being a forcing line that follows? Probably not often. Often times, these sacrifices in the middlegame or endgame work out just as well, if not better, than in the opening. What the players gets in return for giving up the Pawn is something known as compensation. Yes, you might be one "point" down, but something else about your position is likely to be far superior than your Opponent's position. It could be a dominating Knight on an outpost, especially if the opponent lacks the Bishop of the color square the Knight resides on. It could be the Bishop pair. It could be well coordinated pieces of lesser point value, such as maybe three minor pieces for a Queen and a Pawn. If your total point count is lower than your Opponent's, but you have a redeeming feature that makes your position better than it would be if all you could say about it was that you were "a Pawn down" or "outright losing", then you have what is known as compensation.
The game we are going to be looking at is full of offerings of material imbalance. Some were rejected, but we will also see which ones really should have been rejected and which one should maybe have been accepted.
2019 Carolina's Classic, Round 4
W: Solomon Pointer (2002)
B: Patrick McCartney (2051)
King's Indian Defense, Saemisch Variation
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.e4 d6 5.f3 O-O 6.Be3 e5 7.d5
This is the main response to the classical 6...e5 line. The only real alternative that holds any value at all is 7.Nge2, but White is going to have to play d5 eventually anyway if he expects to have any advantage at all. After 7.Nge2, Black can play typical waiting moves such as ...Nbd7 and ...a6, with the idea that once White plays d5, Black will play ...f5, transposing back to the main line, which is 7.d5 Nh5 8.Qd2 f5 and there the waiting game begins. Black doesn't want to push ...f4 unless White castles Kingside, and White doesn't want to take on f5 unless Black is forced to recapture with a piece as Black still dominates the e4-square if he is able to retake with the g-pawn.
However, since this article is on compensation, we won't be seeing the main line, but rather a somewhat speculative sacrifice offer by Black as early as move 8.
7...Nh5 8.Qd2 Qh4+
This is a sideline known as the Bronstein Gambit, named after the former GM David Bronstein. The idea is simple. Black is going to offer White his Queen for two Bishops and two Pawns (9 "Points" for 8), the idea being that Black's slight deficit in material is compensated for in the form of a solid position and better piece coordination as White's remaining pieces are scattered about the board. There is still some question as to it's soundness, but at the time of the writing of this article, it is thought to give White a slightly greater advantage with best play than would the main line with 8...f5, but that Black's position is "ok". The idea is that Black has "some compensation" for the material deficit, but probably not a full Pawn's worth of compensation.
9.Qf2
This move, while not losing by any stretch, is not best. This is one of those times that the gambit should be accepted, and the way to do that is via 9.g3! Nxg3 10.Qf2 (10.Bf2 doesn't work as after 10...Nxf1, the Knight is attacking the Queen, and so Black simply wins a Pawn) 10...Nxf1 11.Qxh4 Nxe3 and then there is speculation as to whether a King move to the second rank or 12.Qf2 is best, but White must do something to stop the Knight fork on c2, and Black will follow with 12...Nxc4, getting two Bishops and two Pawns for the Queen with a solid position.
9...Qxf2+ 10.Bxf2
It probably would have been wiser to take with the King, not giving the Black Bishop control of the open diagonal.
10...Bh6 11.Nge2 Na6 12.a3 Nc5 13.Nc1
13...a5
This move allows White to force the win of a pawn if he wants it. However, Black will get the compensation for it to keep the balance. The idea behind Black's move is that he feels it is more important to delay White's ability to kick the Knight away with b4 than it is to hold on to the pawn, but Black must calculate what he will get in return. By the way, now 14.b4 fails to 14...axb4 as recapturing will lose the Rook on a1. Therefore, to evaluate the validity of 13...a5, we must look at the one critical move. After 14.Bxc5 dxc5 15.Nd3, we see that White is going to win either the c-pawn or the e-pawn. It turns out that Black gets his compensation by giving away the e-pawn. After 15...b6 16.Nxe5, Black has the move 16...f5 and there are two critical lines:
A: After 17.g3 Bg7 18.f4 (all other moves are worse for White) fxe4, White can't try to hold on to the extra Pawn as 19.Nxe4 fails to 19...Nxf4! and Black is winning as after 20.gxf4 Rxf4, one of the White Knights will fall. Instead, after 19.Be2 Nf6, Black is fine. He has regained the pawn back and has the Bishop pair to compensate for White's center.
B: After 17.Nb5 fxe4 18.fxe4, Black can equalize immediately with 18...Re8 19.Nxc7 Rxe5 20.Nxa8 Rxe4+ 21.Kf2 Be3+ with a likely draw, or he can play on with 18...Bg7 19.Nf3 Bg4 20.Nxc7 Ra7 21.Nb5 (21.d6 Bxb2!) 21...Raf7 and despite being two pawns down, Black has obvious compensation. The b2-pawn is hanging. There are threats on f3. Black's position is way too active for White's extra material to be worth anything, and only after you physically make moves on the computer, such as 22.Ng5 or 22.Be2, does it actually recognize that Black is equal.
Therefore, 13...a5 is a sound pawn sacrifice if White accepts the offer, and if he does, Black should hold on to the c-pawn, and give up the e-pawn with the White King still in the center.
14.Nb5
White instead goes for the c7-pawn, but again, we are going to see White be forced to give up the Bishop pair in return for it. This was the other line that had to be seen by Black when playing 13...a5, and yes, I had calculated this all the way to the threatened fork at the end of the line (see the note to White's 16th move), which lead to my knowing that I'd get the Bishop pair in return.
14...Bd7
Once again, egging White on to grab the pawn.
15.Nxc7
And this time he does it, but nothing comes for free.
15...Rac8 16.Bxc5
An unfortunate necessity for White. If he didn't have to give up the Bishop pair, Black would lack compensation for the Pawn, but here, 16.Nb5?? loses to 16...Bxb5! as 17.Bxc5 Rxc5 leaves the c4-pawn pinned and 18.Nb3 Rxc4! 19.Bxc4 Bxc4 20.Nxa5 Ba6 is winning for Black while 17.cxb5 allows a fork after 17...Bxc1 18.Rxc1 Nd3+ and 19...Nxc1, which is also winning for Black.
16...dxc5 17.d6 Rfd8 18.Nd3 Bf8 19.Nd5
Possibly stronger may have been 19.Nxe5 Bc6 20.Nd5, but not 20.Nxc6? bxc6 as after 21.Na6 Bxd6, the Knight is trapped. After 20.Nd5 Bxd6 21.Ng4, White might be able to claim a very slight advantage, but again, Black has definite compensation for the missing Pawn.
19...Bxd6 20.O-O-O
20...Kg7?!
Better is 20...Ba4, as this move would force White to play accurately to hold the balance after 21.Rd2 Bb3 and now White has to find 22.Be2 a4 (22...Bxc4 23.Nb6!) 23.g4 with equality. In the game, White has one last opportunity to get an advantage.
21.g3
21.Nb6 should be played here, forcing Black to recapture on d7 with a Rook. Waiting a move and allowing Black to recapture with the Knight, as done in the game, is inferior.
21...Nf6 22.Nb6 Rc6 23.Nxd7 Nxd7 24.Bh3
With the threat of 25.Bxd7 followed by 26.Nxe5, but Black can easily answer the threat. The problem is what follows if White sees it.
24...Bc7 25.Bxd7 Rxd7 26.Rd2?
And just like that it goes from advantage White to advantage Black. White had to play one of two prophylactic moves, namely either 26.a4 or 26.b3, with the latter probably being the safer of the two. Now, after 26...Rd4 27.Nb2, the Black Rook may look good on d4, but it is doing nothing, and even after something like 27...Rcd6, White can ignore it, and in the long run, the Knight is going to be better than that bad Bishop Black has on c7, giving White the advantage. It will still take a lot of work to win the game, but we are only looking at two results at this point. Also note that if Black tries to play 26...a4 here, then White has time for 27.Nb2 and since a4 is being attacked, Black has to play 26...Rxd1 27.Rxd1 axb3, but now 28.Rd7 is far better than what happens in the game with White failing to play this prophylactic move.
After the game move, Black is in the Driver's seat.
26...Rd4
The fact that this threatens c4 and White is now a move behind compared to before, he doesn't get the Rook on d7 and Black is simply better here.
27.b3 a4 28.Nb2 axb3
Now this is a case where compensation is lacking. Yes, the Bishop is still slightly bad, but not bad enough to make the Knight worth a full Pawn compared to the Bishop. This is a case where White lacks compensation for the Pawn.
29.Rhd1 Ra6 30.Rxd4 cxd4 31.a4 Ba5 32.f4 f6 33.Nd3 Bc3 34.Nc5 Ra5 35.Nxb3 Rxa4 36.c5 Ra2 37.h4
Which Pawn should Black be going after? Is the g-pawn the weakest one?
37...Re2!
No! This can only be covered by the Knight blocking the Rook from going to the third Rank, and is therefore the Pawn that Black should be going after, despite that from initial appearance, it looks like the g-pawn should be the target.
38.Nd2 Bb4 39.fxe5 fxe5 40.Nc4 Rxe4 41.Nd6 Re3 42.Rf1 Bxc5 43.Ne8+ Kh6 44.g4
Or 44.Rf7, with the idea of 45.Nf6 and 46.Rxh7#, but this can be easily stopped by 44...Rxg3 45.Nf6 Ba3+ 46.Kc2 Rg2+ 47.Kb3 g4 48.Kxa3 g3 winning.
44.Be7 45.g5+ Bxg5 46.hxg5+ Kxg5 47.Kd2 h5
This is easily winning for Black.
48.Nd6 h4 49.Nc4 Re4 50.Kd3 Rf4 51.Rg1+ Kf6 52.Nd6 h3 53.Ne4+ Kg7 54.Rh1 Rf3+ 55.Kd2 Kh6 56.Nc5 g5 57.Nd3 e4 58.Ne1 Rf2+ 59.Kd1 g4 60.Nc2 Rxc2 61.Kxc2 Kh5 62.Kd2 Kh4 63.Ke2 g3 0-1
The final position deserves a diagram given the title of this article.
We see equal material count in the final position. 5 on 5! However, White is completely dead in the water. So much for material count, huh? Points Schmoints!
This article should be a very valuable lesson to those of you that are always honed in on material count. Material is only one of many factors that determine who is better in any given position.
Til next time, good luck in your games.
No comments:
Post a Comment