CHESS Lubomir Kavalek
|
Discussion Policy
Comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.
|
Earlier this month, the University of Maryland Baltimore County (UMBC) won the President's Cup, the chess version of the Final Four. The defending champions scored nine points in 12 games, a full point ahead of their chief rival and the event host, University of Texas at Dallas (UTD). Miami-Dade College finished third with five points. Duke University was last with two points. The UMBC team achieved this success without its usual top board, the new U.S. champion Alexander Onischuk, who was playing in Russia. The team's new leader, Pawel Blehm, a grandmaster from Poland, performed excellently with two wins and one draw. Other UMBC players were IM Pascal Charbonneau, Bruci Lopez, Katerina Rohonyan and Beenish Bhatia.
The Polish Magician
The ultimate chess magician was the late world champion Mikhail Tal. Blehm did a nice imitation of Tal's wizardry against Renier Gonzalez, the 33-year-old Cuban-born International Master playing for Miami-Dade. In the Scandinavian defense, black lost a lot of time moving his rampaging queen, allowing the white pieces to swing freely.
Blehm-Gonzalez
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Qxd5 3.Nc3 Qa5 4.d4 Nf6 5.Bc4 c6 6.Bd2 Qb6 7.Nf3! Qxb2?! (Black takes the "poisoned" pawn and is willing to suffer.) 8.Ne5 e6 9.Rb1 Qa3 10.0-0 Qd6 (Black wasted six moves with his queen, giving white a clear edge in development.) 11.Re1!? (Another way to develop was 11.Bf4 Qd8 12.Qf3 because 12...Qxd4 is met by a dangerous knight sacrifice 13.Nb5!, for example 13...cxb5 14.Bxb5+ Nbd7 15.Nxd7 Bxd7 16.Rfd1 Qc5 17.Rxd7! Nxd7 18.Bxd7+ Kxd7 [18...Ke7 19.Rxb7!] 19.Qxb7+ Ke8 20.Qxa8+ and white should win.) 11...Be7 (After 11...Qxd4 comes 12.Qe2.)
12.Ne4!? Qxd4 (White has most of his pieces in play and black has to be careful. For example, the game Degraeve-Tomczak, Cappelle la Grande 2006, ended quickly after 12...Nxe4 13.Rxe4 0-0 14.Qh5 b5 15.Rb3 f6 16.Rg4 fxe5 17.Rxg7+! Kxg7 18.Rg3+ Kh8 19.Bd3 black resigned. After 12...Qd8 white breaks through with 13.Ng5 0-0 14.Nexf7 Rxf7 15.Rxe6!) 13.Ng5 0-0 14.Qe2 b5 15.Bb3 Nd5 16.Nef3 Qc5 17.c4! (Creating more space to include his rook on b1 in the onslaught.) 17...bxc4 18.Bxc4 h6 19.Ne4 Qa3 (The black queen cannot find peace and has to watch white's kingside attack from a distance.)
20.Bxh6!? (A dangerous sacrifice in Tal's style.) 20...gxh6 21.Rb3 Qa5 22.Ne5 Nf6?! (At first glance, black can try 22...Nf4 23.Rg3+ Bg5, but white can save himself with a queen sacrifice 24.Nxg5!? Nxe2+ 25.Rxe2 that leads to a draw after 25...hxg5 26.Rxg5+ Kh7 27.Re3 Kh6 28.f4 Qb6 29.Ng4+ Kh7 30.Rh5+ with a perpetual check.) 23.Rg3+ Kh8 24.Nc3 Nbd7 25.Qd2! Ng8 26.Nxc6 Qc5 27.Nxe7 Qxe7 28.Nd5 Qc5
29.Qc3+! (Another winning attempt was 29.Qf4, threatening 30.Qg4.) 29...f6 (After 29...e5 30.Rxe5! white has a decisive attack either after 30...Nxe5 31.Qxe5+ f6 32.Rxg8+! Rxg8 33.Qxf6+ Rg7 34.Qxh6+ Kg8 35.Nf6+; or after 30...Qxc4 31.Qxc4 Nxe5 32.Qf4 f6 33.Ne7!, threatening 34.Rxg8+ Rxg8 35.Qxh6 mate.) 30.Nf4 Ba6? (Losing quickly, but even after 30...Re8!? 31.Rxe6 Rxe6 32.Nxe6 Qe5 33.Nf8! Nxf8 34.Qxe5 fxe5 35.Rxg8+ Kh7 36.Rxf8, white should win. Also after 30...Ne5 31.Rxe5! fxe5 32.Ng6+ Kh7 [32...Kg7 33.Nxe5+ Kf6 34.Nd7+] 33.Nxf8+ Qxf8 34.Bd3+ Kh8 35.Qxe5+ Nf6 36.Rg6, white's attack prevails.) 31.Ng6+ Kh7 32.Qd3!? (An elegant way, but 32.Nxf8+ Qxf8 [or 32...Rxf8 33.Qd3+! wins] 33.Bxe6 Ne7 34.Bxd7 also wins material.) 32...Rf7 33.Ne5+ f5 34.Nxf7 (After 34...Bxc4 35.Qxd7 Qe7 36.Qd4 Qf6 [or 36...Nf6 37.Nxh6! wins.] 37.Qxc4 Qxf7 38.Qxe6 white wins.) Black resigned.
Blehm's win over UTD's Magesh Chandran Panchanathan was important for the final victory in the event. The Indian International Master with plenty of grandmaster norms chose a passive line in the Petroff defense. Blehm generated a powerful attack with a piece sacrifice.
Blehm-Panchanathan
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Nxe5 d6 4.Nf3 Nxe4 5.Nc3 Nf6 (This passive retreat, conceding space to white, is also a specialty of India's top woman, Humpy Koneru.) 6.d4 Be7 7.Bg5 0-0 8.Qd2 c6 9.Bd3 a5 (A new attempt. In Wijk aan Zee this year, Koneru played 9...Na6, but lost to Alexander Motylev and Zoltan Almasi.) 10.0-0-0 Na6 11.a3 b5 12.Bxf6 Bxf6 13.Ne4 Nc7 (White has a small edge after 13...d5 14.Nxf6+ Qxf6 15.Rde1.)
14.h4!? (Preparing a knight landing on g5.) 14...Be7 15.Rde1 h6 16.Neg5! hxg5?! (Giving white too much play. Better was 16...b4, for example 17.Bh7+ Kh8 18.Qd3? Ba6 19.Qe4 Nd5! and black beats the attack.) 17.hxg5 g6? (Loses. Black should have tried 17...f5!? with complications. After 17...Ne6 18.Bh7+ Kh8 19.Rh5! g6 20.Bxg6+ Kg7 21.Be4 white has a powerful attack, e.g. 21...d5? 22.Reh1 dxe4 23.Rh7+ Kg8 24.Rh8+ Kg7 25.R1h7+ Kg6 26.Nh4 mate.) 18.Qf4! (White's heavy pieces are ready to deliver the final blow along the h-file.) 18...Kg7 (After 18...Ne6 19.Rxe6! fxe6 20.Qh4 Kf7 21.Bxg6+ Kxg6 22.Qh7 mates.) 19.Rxe7! Nd5 (19...Qxe7 allows 20.Qh4 and white mates.) 20.Rh7+ Kxh7 21.Qh4+ (After 21...Kg8 22.Bxg6! the white queen gets to h7 one way or another.) Black resigned.
Solution to study by L. Prokes (White: Kf3,Rb3,Bb8,Bg2; Black: Ka8,Qa6,Bd7,P:a7): 1.Kg3+ (1.Bc7 Bc6+ 2.Kg3 transposes) 1...Bc6 2.Bc7 Bb7 3.Be4! Bxe4 4.Rb8 mate.


