| Here are my games from the Continental Open. |
|
L. Stevens - V. Rajlich
[B07/08] Pirc
Continental Open, 22 July 1999, (1)
|
1.e4 c5 2.c3 d6 3.d4 Nf6 4.Bd3 Nc6 5.Ne2
| This game was just horrible. First of all,
I am not sure about the opening, 5.Ne2 is supposed to be harmless but I
don't see clear equality for Black if White plays 9.Nc3. I like White
in that position. |
| I correctly dismissed 8...Qb6 due to 9.Nc3 Qxb2
10.a3. |
| I wasn't sure at first what to think of 9.0-0, but
now I'm convinced it's a mistake. Black should have at least a small
advantage in the case of something simple like 11...b6. |
| 11...Qb6 was very bad. I was very impressed
with his 12.Qd2 at the board, since it defends b2 while threatening e4-e5.
While playing 11...Qb6 I had overlooked this possibility. |
| However, 12.Qd2 is itself a mistake. Black
can just play 12...Rd8 and White is doing nothing to take advantage of
the placement of Black's queen. Instead, 12.Nf4 would have been very,
very strong, since 12...Qxb2 would lose to 13.Ncd5. Sometimes when
I look at stuff like this with the computer it seems like it really spoils
all the fun. What human will find 12.Nf4? Well, for one thing, it
sure is easier to find after 11...Qb6 is played than it is to find while
thinking about 11...Qb6 as a candidate move. Really, the main thing
to take from this is that when you play an anti-positional move like 11...Qb6
based on a tactical justification you should realize that there might be
unpleasant surprises. This happened to me several times in this tournament,
the best (or worst) other example was 20...Qb6 in my round 6 game. |
| 12...Qa6 was another mistake. 12...Rd8 was
the economical way to deal with White's threat of e4-e5 - White can find
no way to take advantage of the fact that Black's queen is hanging after
13.e5 dxe5 14.dxe5. 13.Rfe1 was just a waste of time. I also
calculated two sharper variations: 13.e5 dxe5 14.dxe5 Nd7 15.Nd5 Bxe5 16.Nxe7+
Kh8 when Black is fine, and this calculation was correct; and 13.Bh6 Nxe4
14.Nxe4 Nxh6 15.Qxh6 Qxe2 16.Ng5 Qh5 when Black is again fine, but here
White can improve with 16.Rfe1 Qh5 17.Qxh5 gxh5 18.Rac1 when he clearly
has more than enough compensation for the pawn. So, 13...Nxe4 would
be incorrect, but 13.Bh6 is no huge deal anyway. |
| 13...Be6 was also wrong. I thought that it was forced to deal
with White's threat of e4-e5 (after 13.Rfe1 White's king's knight is defended
so something like 13...b6 would lose to 14.e5 dxe5 15.dxe5 Nd7 16.Nd5 Bxe5
17.Nxe7+ Kh8 18.Nxc8 Raxc8 19.Qxd7), but in fact Black has two other (and
better) ways to do this: 13...b5, with the idea of 14.a3 Bb7; and
(again) 13...Rd8. |
| White probably should have taken advantage of 13...Be6
with either 14.Nf4 or 16.Nf4, though perhaps Black is equal or close to
it in these two cases. 16.d5 was anti-positional, after that I think
the advantage passes to Black. |
| 17...Rc4 and 18...Rb4 I am not sure about. When
playing 17...Rc4 I missed that 18.b3 was possible due to 18...Rb4 19.Nd4.
Perhaps Black should just play 17...Rc4 18.b3 Rc7. There were no
wins for White after 18...Rb4, this made it through the Fritz inspection
intact, but there was one near-win which I missed: 20.Na2 Rxa4 21.Qb2 with
the idea of 21...Ra3 22.Nc2, fortunately Black has 21...Qb6. This
was Ben's idea. By the way, this is a resource which the computer
will not show you, since it just calculates that 20.Na2 loses and so it
just doesn't even make it on the list of top moves. Either way, giving
White these sorts of tactical ideas may have been an unjustified risk,
since Black doesn't really accomplish anything major by having his rook
on b4: it has its good points there and its bad points. |
| I think the ending after 21...Rxd2 is a little better
for black. |
| 30.h4 was a further error, Black has an awkward
time finding a good spot for his knight in the case of just 30.Ke3. |
| 32...b6 was fine but inaccurate, the immediate 32...f5
was much stronger. When playing 32...b6 I calculated for quite a
while to make sure that White can't clear both his rooks from the c-file
and play Nc2, for example 33.Rd1 f5 34.Ra2, but Black is more than fine
after 34...Rc3+. Even in the final position, with all of White's
mistakes, he would still be very much in the game in the case of something
simple like 34.Rd1 or 34.g3. |
|
|
V. Rajlich - W. Browne
[B96/02] Sicilian: Najdorf
Continental Open, 23 July 1999, (2)
|
1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Bg5 e6 7.f4 Nc6
8.Nxc6 bxc6 9.e5 h6 10.Bh4 g5 11.fxg5 Nd5 12.Ne4 Qb6 13.c4 dxe5 14.a3 Ne3
| My conclusion is that after 14...Ne3 Black is just
lost. The computer was not able to find any defensive resources after
that. I was really suprised to see him go into this, the win isn't
trivial since there are all sorts of distracting variations which don't
work such as 17.Rd1 Qd4, and 19.Kd2 Rb8 20.Nxc8 Nf5, I spent a lot of time
on both of these positions looking for a decisive continuation, plus it
is may not be immediately clear that after 22.Kc3 White is just winning,
it wasn't to me, but still Black is just really asking for it. |
|
|
| Quite a contrast to the previous game. Not
all six times are equal. (Ask Ben what that means.) |
V. Rajlich - B. Finegold
[C90/09] Spanish: Closed (Pilnik)
Continental Open, 23 July 1999, (3)
|
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.d3 Be7 5.0-0 0-0 6.Re1 d6 7.c3 Na5
8.Bb5 a6 9.Ba4 b5 10.Bc2 c5 11.Nbd2 Re8 12.Nf1 Bf8 13.Bd2 Bb7 14.Ng3 g6
15.b4 Nc6 16.Bb3 Bg7 17.h4
| 17.h4 was the first mistake. The maneuver
...Bb7-c8-g4 then becomes a real pain for White to deal with - and it even
stops h4-h5. I think that the immediate 17...Bc8 is more accurate
than 17...cxb4 18.cxb4 Bc8 (with the idea of trying to land a knight on
d4 after ...Bg4) due to 19.Rc1 since Black doesn't have 19...Rc8 yet.
White is fortunate to have this, else 17.h4 would have been even worse
than it was, this ...Bc8 & ...cxb4 idea didn't even occur to me until
after Ben played 17...Bc8. |
| I was tempted to play 18.Ng5 Rf8 (or 18...Ra7/Re7)
19.h5, unfortunately it looks unjustified due to 19...Bg4. I was
looking for tactics here involving taking on f7 or playing f3 and trapping
the bishop but I didn't see anything and neither does Fritz. |
| I think my maneuver 19.Qe2 and 20.Qe3, as awkward
as it looks, is best. Black is a little better, but he would be more
better in the case of something like 19.Qc2 Bxf3 etc. |
| My second mistake - or at least my second significant
mistake - was 22.h5. It's a strange position and the pawn sac looked
very thematic since to win the pawn (apart from ...gxh5) Black has to play
...d5-d4, activating once again White's light-squared bishop. White's
play looked pretty economical here, plus he gets the two bishops, plus
otherwise his h4 pawn is stupid; but the fact is that White has basically
nothing for the pawn, and on top of that Black is intending ...d4 in just
about all lines anyway! For example, it looks like 22...d4 is the
best move even in response to 22.Ba2 (with the idea of staying out of the
range of ...Nd4). My conclusion right now is that White's best continuation
was 22.exd5 Nxd5 23.Qe4 Nf6 24.Qe3. Black can of course either take
the draw by repetition with 24...Nd5, or he can set out to demonstrate
that he stands better. I think he does stand better, but only a little
bit - white is finally out of the Bg4 pin. |
| 23.Qg5 and 23.cxd4 seem to have roughly equal merit.
23.Qg5 forces Black to win his pawn, while after 23.cxd4 Black would have
a choice. I rejected 23.cxd4 due to 23...Bxf3, i.e. 24.hxg6 hxg6
25.dxe5 Nxe5 26.gxf3 Qxd3, but on closer look this ending doesn't look
so bad for White. However, Black has an improvement in this line:
25...Ng4 26.Qxf3 Ngxe5 and White is hosed. So, White would have to
play 25.Qxf3 or 25.gxf3, when he has managed to avoid losing material but
stands worse. Black's other possibility was the one Ben said he was
planning to play, the simple 23...exd4 24.Qf4 Bxh5, when White would have
little comp for his pawn. This might be a little more playable for
White than the game continuation, however. |
| 23...Bxh5 was the obvious simple move, the one I
expected, and I don't remember Ben thinking for that long over it.
We agreed that 23...Nxh5 would have been wrong due to 24.Nxh5 Bxh5 25.Nh2.
However, there are some super-precise tactics here: 25...dxc3 26.Bxc3 Qxd3
27.Re3 Qd6 28.g4 h6 and Black saves his bishop since the Re3 blocks his
queen! Better is just 24.Nh2, then Black's best is 24...dxc3 25.Bxc3
Nf6. Now, White could play 26.Nxg4 Nxg4, when it is hard to appreciate
how Black has improved over the 23...Bxh5 line, but he probably has since
he threatens 27...Bf6 and 28...Bh4. Perhaps White should just refrain
from 26.Nxg4 and play something like 26.Bd5. It is hard to compare
this position to the one arising after 23...Bxh5, probably 23...Nxh5 was
more precise. From a practical standpoint, however, this whole 23...Nxh5
line is probably just stupid. Black has a simple solution at his
disposal which gives him a very large advantage. I think this whole
thing about getting to the truth of a position and all of that is just
overrated and actually maybe it's just not even that highly rated by players
who play to win and know how. There are a few positions now and then
when you have to calculate, for the others just decent stuff is enough. |
| 25.Bd5 was another error. I don't have any
really good alternatives to suggest, but 25.Bd5 is definitely bad.
After 28...Nf4 White needs a move, but he doesn't have one. I looked
at the three sharp tries 29.Bxc6, 29.Bxe5 and 29.Nxe5 and picked the one
I liked best, 29.Bxe5. It is in fact the best of the three, but it's
still just losing. 29.Bxc6 was hopeless after 29...Qxc6 30.Bxe5 Nxd3
31.Bxg7 Nxe1 (I kept looking at this position looking for stuff to try,
but there's nothing), and 29.Nxe5 was really hopeless after either 29...Nxe5
30.Qxf4 Nxd3 or 29...Bxe5 30.Bxe5 Nxd3 etc. There was actually a
fourth tactical try I missed, 29.d4, but Black just has 29...h6 30.Qh4
g5 defending the knight, probably among other things. |
| After 29.Bxe5, I wasn't sure how Black would win,
if he wants to be up more than just a pawn it looked like White would have
some chances, and Ben agreed, but the computer refutes it: 29...Nxe5 30.Qxf4
Nxd3 31.Qh4 Nxe1 32.Rxe1 (32.Ng5 Bxa1 is a little too much) 32...Rad8 (32...h6
would transpose to the game) and now the intended 33.Ng5 can be met with
33...Qxd5. The rest of the game deserves little comment. There
was never a position where Black wasn't winning. |
| 39...Bxe5+ was a faster win, while my 43.Rd7 did
not put up the best resistance, I missed 43...Qxb4 somehow. |
|
|
W. Paschall - V. Rajlich
[E60/05] King's Indian
Continental Open, 24 July 1999, (4)
|
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nf3 Bg7 4.g3 0-0 5.Bg2 d6 6.b3 e5 7.dxe5 dxe5
8.Qxd8 Rxd8 9.Bb2 e4 10.Ng5 e3
10...e3 was a slight mistake. The resulting
complications seem to lead only to rough equality. Instead, Black
could have secured at least a slight advantage with 10...Bf5. If
he can use the tactics down the a1-h8 diagonal to win the battle for control
over e4 and force White's g5 knight to h3 with ...h6, then he will stand
in good shape since White's light-squared bishop will be locked out of
the game, and this is in fact what will happen. The natural 11.Nd2
runs into the immediate 11...h6 when the tactics force 12.Nh3, i.e. 12.Ngxe4
Nxe4 13.Bxg7 Rxd2, or 12.Ndxe4 Nxe4 13.Bxg7 hxg5.11.Nc3 manages to prevent
11...h6 for the time being due to some crazy tactics: 11...h6 12.g4 hxg5
(12...Bxg4 13.Ngxe4 Nxe4 14.Bxe4 would be fine for White) 13.gxf5 gxf5
14.h4 g4 15.h5 and the tactics down the h-file and a1-h8 diagonal seem
to give White at least equality. Note that after 11.Nd2 h6 12.g4
would lose to just 12...Bxg4 13.Ngxe4 Nxe4. Unfortunately for White,
while this tactic can delay ...h6, it cannot prevent it, as after 11.Nc3
Black just plays 11...Na6 when White has no good way to increase the pressure
against e4 and delay ...h6 further.
In playing 10...e3 I missed a bunch of tactics.
First of all, I thought that 11.f4 was unplayable due to 11...Ng4 12.Bxg7
Nf2. As it turns out, White has four adequate responses (13.0-0,
13.Nc3 with the idea of 13...Nxh1 14.Bf6 Rd6 15.Ne4, 13.Na3 with the same
idea, and 13.Bd5 Kxg7 14.0-0). I also thought that 11.fxe3 Ng4 12.Bxg7
Kxg7 13.0-0 f6, with the idea of 14...Nxe3 next, would be good for Black,
missing 14.Bxb7! This is a pretty tough position to analyze at the
board, I can normally find stuff like this. However, there is a difference
between these two misanalyzed lines, and it's a difference which I think
illustrates well one of the key principles of combining tactical analysis
with positional judgment when making decisions.
In the case of 11.f4, Black is to a considerable
extent relying on the tactic 11...Ng4 12.Bxg7 Nf2, since without it he
will be left trying to justify having a very weak e-pawn which White has
a very natural plan for attacking. This is what happened in the game,
though at least fortunately it seems that Black has enough play to hold
the balance.
In the case of 11.fxe3, on the other hand, black
is not relying on the tactic given above to the same extent. 11.fxe3
is weakening and antipositional, so even when an unexpected resource is
found, Black has good chances of repairing the line, as in fact he can.
For example, 11.fxe3 could be met with 11...h6 12.0-0 Nbd7 13.Nf3 Ng4 14.Bxg7
Kxg7 and Black again stands better since 15.e4 loses an exchange to 15...Ne3.
I don't know how it is when other people calculate,
it's not easy to tell, everybody has his own way of doing it. It's
interesting to read the different accounts in the literature for how it
should be done. It shows how much variation there is. For me,
when I calculate, sometimes I do what I would call hard-core calculation,
when I don't care about positional principles or anything like that, I'm
just trying to sift through the moves like a computer. For example,
I might do this when trying to decide if a perp exists, or a mate of some
sort. Other times, I calculate, but it's a sort of soft calculation,
when I am looking at moves but not really being superlogical and supersystematic
about the whole thing. This is fine when I'm trying to feel a position
out without planning to rely on tactics or the lines I'm looking at, but
it is not fine when I am looking at a line that I plan to rely upon.
Any move which carries a positional risk needs to have a calculation of
the first variety supporting it. I obviously didn't really look at
the line 10...e3 11.f4 Ng4 12.Bxg7 Nf2 "hard" enough, since as soon as
my opponent played 11.f4 I saw one of his resources (13.0-0). |
| 12...Rd2 was interesting. I had thought after
the game that maybe it was an error - that maybe I was trying too hard
to justify having the pawn on e3 and trying too hard to get play, and that
maybe the simple 12...Bf5 was better. However, it seems to me now
that the position is pretty balanced in either case. 12...Bf5 keeps
the e3 pawn safe from Nc2 for the time being, and 13.0-0 is probably an
error due to 13...Rd2 14.Bc1 Rxe2 15.Bf1 Nd4 with excellent compensation
for the exchange. I thought that I had to try 12...Rd2 to stop White
from consolidating with 13.Nf3, but 12...Bf5 13.Nf3 also seems playable
for Black. |
| 15...Rb2 was risky but best. Black's activity is
considerable. |
16...Nd4 was an error which should have lost.
16...Nh6 was playable and in fact forced. However, the activity of
my pieces tempted me towards the piece sac 16...Nd4. I spent a lot
of time on the position arising after 17.hxg4 Rxe2+ 18.Kf1 Bxg4 and concluded
that it was better for me, and I am very happy with my judgment in this
case, since my conclusion now is that this position is in fact good for
me. In fact, at the board I considered the moves 19.Rd1, 19.Re1,
19.Rh4, 19.Nb5 and 19.Nc3, and after I was unable to flat-out refute the
last two I decided to play the sacrifice based on intuition. There
was no immediate refutation, and it seemed right on a general basis.
This turned out to come in handy, as I missed White's best defensive resource
(19.Rxh7+), yet this resource is not enough to equalize. At any rate,
I am happy that I judged this correctly, this is a lot better way to go
than with tons of analysis, which will have mistakes.
Unfortunately, I completely missed the winning countershot
17.0-0-0. |
| 19.Rh4 was in turn an error which should have lost.
My opponent was banking on 19...Rxg2 20.Rxg4 Rh2 21.Rh4 but Black has 21...e2+.
I misanalyzed 19.Nb5, I intended 19...Nc2 but then after 20.Rc1 White is
on his way to consolidating. Instead, Black should play 19...Nxb5
20.cxb5 Rd8 with a very strong attack. The best defense seems to
be 19.Rxh7+ Kxh7 20.Nf6+ Kg7 21.Nxg4 but Black still plays 21...Rd8 when
White still doesn't have a good response to ...f5 and ...Rf2+. |
| I am pretty sure that Black should win the ending.
26.Ke2 was necessary, 26.Re1 runs into 26...Rd2. |
| 30...h5 was inaccurate, 30...Rxg3 was better.
I missed 31.g4, though Black is still much better. |
| 37...Kf8 threw away the remainder of Black's advantage.
37...Kg8 38.Rh6 Rc3 39.Rxg6+ Kf8 should still be really good for Black. |
| In the final position I spent forever trying to
see if I could still do something with 41...Kd8 42.Rh8+ Ke7 43.Nc5+ Kc7
44.Nxd3 Bxd3+ 45.Kf3, but it's hopeless. If 45.Bb1 Black has just
46.a3 Ba2 47.c5, probably among other things. |
|
|
V. Rajlich - V. Mezentsev
[B77/05] Sicilian: Yugoslav Dragon
Continental Open, 24 July 1999, (5)
|
1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 g6 5.Nc3 Bg7 6.Be3 Nf6 7.Bc4
0-0 8.Bb3 d6 9.f3 Bd7 10.Qd2 Nxd4 11.Bxd4 b5 12.h4 a5 13.a4 bxa4 14.Nxa4
Be6 15.Bxe6 fxe6 16.h5
This game was just disgusting. 16.h5 was premature.
After 21...e5 and 22...Rh8 White just has nothing on the kingside.
I was really happy with my position until he played 21...e5, it seemed
that the pawn was irrelevant while I was attacking and he was defending,
but he's got a plan to hold everything together really well with a knight
on f4 so it needs to be investigated whether he can attain the desired
setup. Furthermore, even without detailed analysis of this sort it
should be clear that h4-h5 should follow the necessary preparatory moves
such as 0-0-0 and Nc3, not precede it.
If 16.0-0-0 what does Black do? 16...e5 gives
white play in the center and locks the bishop out, and 16...Rb8 at the
very least gives white a ton of play with 17.h5, this is a huge improvement
over the game. After 16.0-0-0 Black has problems. |
| 22.Rdg1 is just wrong, White needs to realize what's
going on and go for 22.Qf2 Nf4 23.Nb6 and 24.Nd5. This is probably
a draw if White plays correctly. |
| The same holds for 23.Rg4. There was a tactical
resource available, 23.Nc5, when 23...dxc5 24.Qxe5+ leads to a draw by
perpetual while 23...Nf4 24.Qxf4+ etc. leads to a double-rook ending which
White also has good chances to draw. |
| After 25...Ng3 Black wins. I missed it but
there was nothing to be done about it anyway. In the ending I'm sure
White can't draw if Black plays it right, but I'm even more sure that White
can put up better resistance, for example 36.Nd3 instead of 36.Na4 would
be a good place to start. |
|
|
A. Olmos - V. Rajlich
[B93/03] Sicilian: Najdorf (Amsterdam)
Continental Open, 25 July 1999, (6)
|
1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.f4 Qc7 7.Nf3 Nbd7
8.a4
This was a very interesting game. Normally
Black plays an early ...b5 in this system, White responds with a2-a3, and
Black then fianchettoes his light-squared bishop. I remember wondering
before what would happen if White just played a2-a4 right away. Well,
now I had to decide. I could have just played ...b6 and fianchettoed
my queen's bishop anyway, the tempi would work out the same, but I thought
that in this case White would be a little better off (with a white pawn
on a4 and black pawn on b6 vs. white pawn on a3 and black pawn on b5).
So, why not do something else with the light-squared bishop altogether?
For one thing, White normally plays f4-f5 (after Qe1-h4) in this system,
so maybe Black can make use of his extra control over that square.
The main risk is that he has to play ...Nc5 and this might open the door
for some tactics involving Bh6, Ng5 and Rxf6.
I think that the decision I made was right.
The moves leading up to (and including) 14.f5 were very natural, and Black
seems safe enough. In fact, I have found several of the lines I rejected
at the board to be actually playable, and nothing vice versa. Black's
positions seems to just be solid enough. |
| Instead of 12...e6, I considered 12...Nxd3 13.cxd3
Qc5+ 14.Kh1 Qh5, but White then seems better after 15.Qxh5 Nxh5 16.Nd5.So,
12...e6 13.Kh1 Qa5, with the same idea. 14.f5 is the logical attacking
move, else 14.Nxd3 cxd3 15.Qh5 with a good edge for black. 14.e5 would
be anti-thematic but I looked at it, it looks comfortable for black after
14...Ne8. |
| After 15.Bh6, I hardly considered anything besides
15...Bxh6, the line 15...fxe4 16.Ng5 exd3 looked insane, White has ideas
of b2-b4 as well as Bxg7 and Rxf6. There is nothing wrong with 15...Bxh6,
Black is fine, but as it turns out 15...fxe4 is playable as well.
This shows just how solid Black's position really is. Best play after
15...fxe4 seems to be 16.Ng5 exd3 17.b4 Qd8 18.Bxg7 Kxg7 19.Rxf6 h6 20.Rxf7+
(what a resource! and still Black is better in the end) 20...Rxf7 21.Qxh6+
Kxh6 22.Nxf7+ etc. |
After 20.Bxe4, the critical position of the game
arose. So far I've played really well, I think that every move was
correct despite the complicated position. Now, however, I made a
serious error. First of all, Black had a shot which forces a trade
of queens: 20...f5 21.Bd3 f4. Had I seen this I would have played
without hesitation. However, I didn't see this, and my original idea
had been to play the normal 20...Nxe4 21.Nxe4 Nf5. Black is very
solid here, though White also clearly has at least some comp for the pawn.
I'd prefer Black easily, though.
However, there was an interesting tactical possibility:
20...Qb6. Offhand this looks like the worst move ever (and in fact
it's close), White has sac'd a pawn to attack Black, Black has been fighting
for the dark squares around his king, and now he'll just let them be to
go after a queenside pawn? However, I thought that 20...Qb6 was a
double threat: ...Qxb2 as well as ...Nxe4 and ...Nf5 followed by ...Qxf2.
I knew it was risky as hell, but it also seemed to just win. I missed
that after ...Nxe4 Nxe4 White's knight defends f2. I am not sure
what to think of my decision, the move is a blunder of course but this
is the eternal question of relying on calculation vs. refusing to rely
on it when mistakes are lethal and very possible. In the past I've
often just relied on calculation instinctively, here I was fully aware
of what I was doing and the risk I was taking... and I did it. I'm
not sure what to conclude, you have to trust your calculation to a certain
extent.
Fortunately for Black, White seems to have nothing
more crushing in response to 20...Qb6 than a better ending. |
| 27...d4 may have been inaccurate, perhaps just the
lame 27...Kg7 was best. 27...Be6 would have been wrong due to 28.Ng5.
After 27...d4 White probably should have first played 28.g4 Ne3 29.g5 when
Black's best is probably 29...Nf5. Then White could have continued
with 30.Rd2. |
| This ending is quite good for him. In the
game, 29.Red1 was inaccurate, 29.Re4 was better, maintaing the advantage.
After 29.Red1, the advantage passes to Black. |
| There were several blunders in time trouble, right
before time control I missed the easy win 40...Nf3. The position
after time control is also winning for me, however, 42.Nf2 loses to 42...Ne2;
42.Nc3 Ne2 lets White keep playing with 43.Kg2 but Black has 42...Nd5. |
|
|
V. Rajlich - E. Tate
[B56/01] Sicilian: Open (Venice)
Continental Open, 25 July 1999, (7)
|
1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 e5 6.Bb5+ Nbd7 7.Nf5
a6 8.Bxd7+ Qxd7 9.Bg5
| A very crazy game! This line is supposed to
be a little questionable for Black. My big decision came on move
9, and I think I made the right choice. The normal continuation would
have been just 9.Ne3. I rejected it due to 9...Qc6 when White's advantage
seems very small, as Black will successfully challenge for control of d5.
Instead, 9.Bg5 is wild, but it seems to yield a bigger advantage than 9.Ne3. |
12.Nf6+ was clearly correct. 12.Bh6/f6 0-0
13.Bxg7 would favor Black. The other alternative was 12.Qh5, but
this is bad due to 12...Qc6 and now both 13.Rd1 and 13.0-0-0 are met with
13...Bf5.
Black could also consider 13...Rg8 14.Bxe5 Rxg2
15.Bg3. Since his rook is on a light square, it will be difficult
for White to really terrorize it, but on the other hand Black should feel
uncomfortable. |
| I am not sure whether White can win the ending.
I committed several errors. The first was 19.Rd8+, White's rook is
better than Black's; 19.Bh4 was best, 19.Bh4 Be4 20.Rd2 Bxg2 21.Rg1 Rg6
22.f4 is nothing for White to fear. |
| The second was 21.f3, with it disappear White's
winning chances, 21.Rg1 was correct. |
| I completely underestimated 22...e4, which seems
to give Black enough to draw with ease. |
| 33.Kg5 was another inaccuracy, as well as refusing
to undo it with 34.Kf4 or 35.Kf4, White must be a little careful after
that. |
|
|
|
