Bf4-g5 After ...Bd6

Before I get to the topic that I would like to discuss, I should announce that I am finally going to enter another chess tournament because it fortunately falls on a weekend on which I do not have a baseball tournament.  I will be playing in the Hart House Summer Open on Canada Day weekend.  I am very excited that I will finally get to play chess again and going in my expectations will be high based on my strong performance at the Kitchener Rapid Tournament.  I will still be nervous though, as I am far removed from a standard rated event, and my most recent one in Hamilton was far from successful.

Today I intend to touch upon the discomfort that I feel when playing the Black pieces against a White Bishop on f4.  This sort of formation usually occurs from the London System after 1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Bf4, where after 3...e6 4.e3, when Black's 4...Bd6 runs into the 5.Bg5 pin.  I know that after 5...Be7 it is as if White has just played the Torre Attack instead of the London system, but I feel that Black deserves better due to White's greedy Bishop.

I will begin the topic by showing Hugo Ortiz (1493 Active, 1516 Standard) vs Patrick O'Sullivan (1750 Active, 1856 Standard).  In this game the theme of ...Bd6 with immediate Bg5 arises but I am able to handle it and eventually win the game.  This game was played at the Kitchener Waterloo Spring Active, so I do not remember the game and as such I do not remember all of the themes.  As a result, my annotations may be a bit bare, but I hope to explore in detail the Bg5 pin.  I am not sure if I won this game on purely strong play, or if I was aided by the fact that I was playing a weaker opponent.  I will explore my idea in handling Bg5 and any improvements that White could make following Bg5.
Hugo Ortiz (1493) vs Patrick O'Sullivan (1750)- Active
1.d4 c6 2.c4 d5 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bf4 e6- I have no problem with locking in the light-square Bishop here because it will be an effective defender of the a4-e8 diagonal should White choose to exchange on d5.
5.e3 Bd6!? 6.Bg5- According to Rybka Bg5 surrenders a minuscule edge to Black; however I feel that if Bg5 is left alone, White's initiative will grow.
6...Nbd7- The first order of business is to hold the Knight to potentially free the Queen.  Rybka evaluates castling here as a fine move, but I once again disagree as I feel it is necessary to keep the option of jostling that Bishop at will.  You will see that I never castle here when my Kingside pawns may be more effective when advanced.
7.c5- This is a positional mistake.  In my opinion, 7.c5 is a waste of a tempo, and it gives my bishop the choice of 2 good squares, both of which are better than d6.  It also allows me to later peel open the Queenside which, if I'm not mistaken, I did twice in that tournament; once in this game and once in another.
7...Be7- I now have an extra protector for my Knight, and I am prepared to now hunt down the White dark-square Bishop.

Though cramped, Black has a fine game as White's most effective resource is the target of Black's assault.
8.Bd3 h6- Getting the pawn off of the light square and starting the pressure on the White Bishop.
9.Bh4 e5- Perhaps white has put too many eggs in one basket and is too committed to hanging on to his investment, so I strike in the weakly contested center.  The light-square Bishop will soon come to life.  Every one of Black's moves after the first few has been centered around evicting the Bishop and White's efforts to preserve it are costing him too much time.
10.f3- Stopping ...e4 and ...Ne4, but perhaps the other intent is to pull the dark-square Bishop back.
10...exd4- Once again a move to exploit the Bishop; this time indirectly.  Now that the e-pawn is off of the board ...Nf8 is possible to prepare to threaten the Bg4.
11.exd4 Nf8 12.Nge2 Ne6- I chose 12...Ne6 instead of 12...Ng6 because I wanted to keep the Bishop sitting on h4 where its precarious position can be exploited.  12...Ne6 also pressures d4 which is especially weak now because of 10...exd4.
13.Qc2 Bd7 14.b4 Nh5- I decided that since my opponent has left the Kingside for the moment there would be no danger in placing my Knight on the edge of the board, and loosening the cramp.  Instead of 14.b4 my opponent should have tried 14.O-O when the abstract idea of 14...Nh5 15.Be1 is possible, which better prepares b4.
15.Bxe7 Qxe7- The only thing all of those wasted moves on the White Bishop has caused me is a "poor" Knight, which can be reconciled immediately with ...Nhf4 or ...Nf6.  It turns out that my Knight does not have to move from its post for a long time in this game, so the White Bishop really turned out to be a liability.  With that said, 15.Bf2 deserved consideration to support the center, as in that case I would be tripping over my own dark-square Bishop.

 Black has achieved a fine position here and will look to exploit the extended Queenside.

16.g3? Qf6?- I completely missed 16...Nxd4, but I am still significantly better here.  I will not annotate the remainder of the game because it lacks significance with regard to the concept.
17.f4 Nxd4 18.Nxd4 Qxd4 19.O-O-O Qxb4 20.Re1+ Kd8 21.Na4 b5 22.cxb6 axb6 23.Nc3 Ra5 24.Kd2 Rc5 25.Rb1 Qa5 26.Qb2 d4 27.Qxb6+ Qxb6 28.Rxb6 dxc3+ 29.Kc2 Kc7 30.Ra6 Kd6 31.Ra7 Rb8 32.Rd1 Rb2+ 33.Kc1 Rd5 34.Ra3 c2 35.Bxc2 Rxd1+ 36.Bxd1 Rxh2 37.Rd3+ Kc7 38.Kb1 Rg2 39.Bb3 Rxg3 40.Rd2 f6 41.Rh2 Nxf4 0-1

This game shows that Black does not have to worry about Bg5 if White is not coordinated on the Kingside.  Instead of  7.c5 a move like 7.Nf3 should be tried instead in order to make something of the Kingside that White has invested so much time in.  Other than that, my opponent played solidly out of the opening and I was simply able to prove that Bg5 is not always scary.  In my next post I will show a game where I thought it would be scary and as a result preceded ...Bd6 with ...h6.  Interesting to note is that during my game against Hugo Ortiz a fire alarm disrupted play for approximately 10 minutes.  That is the first time I have experienced that.

Israel Crooks (1782) vs Patrick O'Sullivan (1859)

Coming in to this game, I had won the first round against Doug Gillis (my second win against him) and my opponent Israel Crooks had upset the division's top seed Yelizaveta Orlova (1992). I was confident coming into this game because my victory against Doug Gillis was very efficient and I felt that I was precise.

Israel Crooks (1782) vs Patrick O'Sullivan (1859)
1.e4 c6 2.Nf3!?- This move was a surprise to me, but a quick glance at my opponent's score sheet showed that he thought I played 1....c5. He also told me in post-mortem that he had prepared a line in the Caro-Kann classical for this event, which I would have been happy to enter, especially after the position I reached in this game.
2....d5 3.exd5 cxd5 4.d4 Nc6 5.c4- I have had the position before c4 in many blitz games and I often came out better after the opening, but I had never seen c4 in a game. When my opponent exchanged on d5 I had a strong feeling that 5.c4 was coming.
5....Nf6- I spent a long time here evaluating Bg4 ,but after 5....Bg4 6.cxd5 Bxf3 7.Qxf3 Nxd4 8.Qe4, it looks like black has too much control of the board, and the game is not the slow maneuvering struggle that I enjoy.
6.Nc3 e6- This is a book move, but 6....Bg4 was much better. It makes no sense to play e6 because the bishop is useless inside the pawn chain, and my opponent remarked after the game that he was very happy about the position after this seemingly innocent move. I should add that in my opinion the reason that the bishop is fine inside the pawn chain in the Slav Defense is because White has no attack (more specifically no Bf4). Here my light square bishop does not contribute to the defense and it just gets in the way.
7.Bd3 Be7- A fine move, but my experience in the Slav shows that once White's light square bishop moves, the pawn must be exchanged. Here I think I got too attached to the idea that I could parry his attack with an advantage in the endgame, and I felt that I would just exchange when I was developed or when his queen got to c2. The queen never went there though, and I never exchanged, even though it was right to do so. The point here is you should never form conditional plans if they are not tactically rooted. This can blur your vision, and in my case, cause you to completely forget about particular ideas. Your strategy does not usually depend on your opponents moves if it involves a necessary device to unravel your position.
8.a3- intending b4
8....a5- I should still take on c4, but I already explained why I was blind to this move- there was no Qc2! Looking back, this is an embarrassing oversight, but it is one I hope to learn from. I am trusting after 8....a5 that the b5 hole cannot be exploited.
9.Bf4- I am now starting to worry about his attacking chances.
9....Bd6 10.Bg5- Here the computer screams that I take on c4, and there is no reason not to. His whole attack is based upon d5 pressure, and my next move will shock you. I guess my head was not in the game, and I can only hope that I have a clearer head in my next tournament.

10....dxc4 should be played- What else??
10....h6?- I lost focus over the center, because it had stayed dormant for a few moves and I focused my attention on the bishop, which loses a pawn. These oversights are not the norm for 1800 players.
11.Bxf6 Qxf6 12.cxd5 exd5 13.O-O?!- No concrete reason to avoid the d5 capture, but it is clear that my opponent loves the attack and could sense that I was drifting out of the game.
13....Ne7?- I could not decide between the text or Be6. My opponent put it nicely when he said that after Be6 both the knight and the bishop are on good squares but after Ne7 neither of them are. The point of Ne7 was to avoid Bb5 and then Qa4 where I am struggling to hold (or so I thought) but I can just castle and play Rfc8 if need be.
14.Bb5+ Bd7 15.Qe2- The idea is to come to b5 with the queen, but now I have a somewhat solid defense. More precise was 15.Bxd7+ Kxd7 16.Qa4+ Kc8 where my king is going to fall in the open board.
15....Qe6 16.Bxd7+ Qxd7 17.Nxd5- The exchange works out well for White here because of the coming pressure on my e7 knight.
17....Bxh2+- The reason I said "exchange"
18.Kxh2 Qxd5 19.Rfe1 Qd6+ 20.Kg1- The pressure on the knight is too much for Black to handle.

20....Kf8- A desperate attempt to escape the pin.
21.Rac1 Ng6- I did not like Nc6 because of 22.d5 Qxd5 23.Rcd8 but the computer argues that I can survive the onslaught on the central files, but in post-mortem we found 22.Qb5, where Black is collapsing.
22.Qb5 Qb8- My Queen is awful here, but it defends the back rank, the pawn, and prevents White from getting his Queen too deep for the moment.
23.Ne5 Nxe5 24.Rxe5 g6- Trying to let the king escape and connect the rooks.
25.Rce1 Kg7 25.Re7 b6 27.R1e3 Ra7- Here I thought I was holding on, but I cannot calculate more than two moves deep when I am losing. I guess I just do not want to experience near-inevitable defeat before it actually occurs on the board. It's a bad habit, but in this particular game it did not matter. I missed Rc8 though, the point of which is that since my queen is on h2, the attacking move Rf3 is impossible in view of Rc1+.
28.Rxa7- The only way to hold the advantage because it keeps me tied down.
28....Qxa7 29.Qe5+- Game over now....
29....Kh7 30.Qf6 Rc8- A very bad move, but the checks were my only practical chance.
31.Re7 Rc1+ 32. Kh2 Qb8+ 33.g3 1-0

This game demonstrates the importance of clarity required in the defense. I extend a hefty congratulations to my opponent, as he finished equal first at 4.0/5.0 at the end of the tournament. I leave this game with the understanding that you cannot attach your strategic aims to a specific move sequence, and that sometimes the best way to defend is not to huddle all of your pieces, but to eliminate your weaknesses by opening up the position a bit. I hope that this defensive concept will allow me to "steel plate" my Caro-Kann for a long time to come.

Sun Tzu Agrees

I just came across a Sun Tzu quote that seems to support my previous post about the importance of learning strategy before tactics. I know he was talking about war, and I am speaking of chess, but the two are closely tied, and kings used to play chess to prepare their minds for war. The message is clear, don't be flashy, just make sure you get the job done.

Strategy without tactics is the slowest route to victory. Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat. -Sun Tzu

Opening Inaccuracies

Throughout my learning process, I have always been drawn to the study of opening variations. Many people would argue that the study of the opening in chess development is destructive to your game, proposing the question, "What do you do when your opening knowledge runs out?". I will answer this question with another belief contrary to modern chess development theory. The answer is simple; study the strategic principles which govern all chess positions. Learn about support points, how to limit enemy counterplay, how to use space to your advantage, ect. Don't listen to the guys that say you have to slave over a tactics book looking for pins, forks, discoveries and skewers, because then you are missing what chess is all about. If you know how to launch a vicious kingside attack but put no pieces on the queenside just because you don't know strategic principles, your opponent will just calmly tuck his king away with a queenside castle. The point I want to make is that if you know strategy, your pieces will be in the right spots and you will always have a plan once your opening knowledge runs out. And as an added bonus, it will be difficult for your opponent to exploit your Maroczy Bind when you've shoved a knight on d5.

So I have been browsing through opening databases for the better part of two years now (notice how I say browsing; you don't have to memorize lines 20 moves deep if you only run into them once in a while), and I began my chess learning by reading Yasser Seirawan's book Winning Chess Strategy (Strategies perhaps??). According to myself, I am well positioned for chess growth. I also reccommend playing a healthy amount of internet blitz chess (?!-more controversy) and whenever you lose quickly out of an opening, go look up the correct line. You may be surprised at how much this deepens your knowledge.

Well, it looks like I think that I have all the tools to play strong chess, but what happens when one of those tools fails? What if you loose your way because of a distraction or just plain forgetfulness? I have already shown you my hideous opening against Dalia Kagramanov (1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 e6?) and I have made a few others in the dragon (1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 g6 6.Be3 Bg7 7.f3 O-O 8.Qd2 Nc6 9.Bc4 Bd7 10.O-O-O Rc8 11.Bb3 Nc4 12.Bxc4 Rxc4 13.Bh6?- in view of 13... Nxe4! (sorry for the long line)). When something lioke this happens, just fall back on strategic principles. Don't try to blow the opponent off of the board with tactics, because odds are the tactics won't work because your opponent will likely be more developped. In the opening, just take your time, you'll have plenty of time for the rest of the game.