We are constantly looking for games in which the St. George or Polish opening
has made an appearance. This often happens by transposition, or through very
similar positions that aren't quite a Polish or St. George, but contain many of
the same ideas.
Below, we list games that we have annotated. Contributions
are welcome, just send
mail.
Here's a game I played over the internet, which is really a great place to
play without putting up with the usual tournament hassles and expense. I don't
like waking up at 9 AM on a Saturday to play chess. And the ugly fact is that
the people you meet at chess tournaments are just a couple of rungs up
the dork ladder from the losers that go to Star Trek conventions.
I used to like the leisure of correspondence chess, even if e-mail had
really changed it quite a bit, but waiting days for a move got to be too boring,
and postage rates each month easily add up to the price of an online
subscription. Not having people look over your shoulder is enjoyable and ensures
that the level of play is supported by concentration.
Online, "over-the-board" play is highly useful for innovations, allowing you to
test many variations in the span of a week or two at most, instead of the year
or more a correspondence game might entail. Also, those seeking to establish a
rating can have a fairly reliable one within a month or two on the internet,
assuming an average of one game per day.
There has been some discussion as to whether internet ratings are inflated. I
imagine they could be, but that may be a result of the large group of people
playing on the internet. There are more people who can be easily beat. Also,
there seems to be a loophole through which you can escape from early-game
blunders by aborting the game without rating effect. This doesn't bother me too
much, though. Why should your rating depend on a handful of early "oops" moves?
I've always thought that a beginning chessplayer should have a few "gimmes" to
use in his/her first year of play. Besides, a player who aborts too often on the
system will find it hard to get any competition, and his/her rating does not
improve because of quitting. In any case, random deviations can be applied to
the rankings, indicating what range they reliably fall within. Mine, for
instance, currently (on FICS...www.freechess.org...handle PIDizadji) goes
anywhere from 1860 to 2210, with the base being 2035. Now, considering that my
last (2002 last year of active play) documented correspondence ranking was 1846 in CCLA,
that helps tell you something about where I probably fall in an over-the board range.
My USCF ratings are barely above 1200,
but the last time I played in a USCF-rated game was around the year 1993.(A rating that takes
into account all games beyond a certain time control, whether played via the
internet, over-the-board, or by traditional correspondence would be a good
indicator of a player's strength.
Such a rating opportunity is offered by the World Chess League.)
If you want to factor in those earlier games, (which could also include my APCT rating of
about 1650, although APCT is gone now),
and weight each rating for numbers of games
played to get that rating, you come up with about 1850 for all games since I started rated play,
1900 if you drop those early USCF games,
and 1969 if you drop the early APCT games as well.
In the games below, I have susbstituted my last name for any
handles I may use on the internet servers. I also want to thank most of
my opponents for enjoyable, civilized games.
|
Bemused (1930) vs. Disadji (2100) |
FrightKnight (1419) vs. Disadji (2100)
Dizadji 1846 -- Gee 1723 More as I play them and remember to keep score! |
Another game with times included, in the style of Bronstein! (Putting the times in, that is. I don't know if the play would be considered his style.) I found it interesting that the computer played the "advance variation" of its own accord.
WHITE Computer -------------------------------- BLACK Disadji
1. Pawn E2
to E4 00:00:00 Pawn A7 to A6 00:00:11
2. Pawn D2 to D4 00:00:00 Pawn B7 to B5
00:00:03
3. Knight G1 to F3 00:00:00 Bishop C8 to B7 00:00:05
4. Pawn E4
to E5 00:00:00 Pawn E7 to E6 00:00:10
5. Pawn C2 to C4 00:00:00 Pawn B5 to C4
00:00:36
6. Bishop F1 to C4 00:00:00 Pawn C7 to C5 00:00:03
7. Pawn D4 to
C5 00:01:38 Bishop F8 to C5 00:00:03
8. King E1 to G1 00:01:24 Pawn D7 to D5
00:00:16
9. Pawn E5 to D6 00:02:31 Queen D8 to D6 00:00:02
10. Queen D1 to
D6 00:02:38 Bishop C5 to D6 00:00:23
11. Rook F1 to D1 00:02:17 Bishop D6 to
C7 00:00:06
12. Bishop C4 to E2 00:02:03 Knight G8 to F6 00:01:48
13.
Bishop C1 to G5 00:02:19 Knight B8 to D7 00:01:00
14. Knight B1 to C3
00:01:41 King E8 to G8 00:00:57
15. Bishop G5 to E3 00:02:00 Rook A8 to B8
00:01:37
16. Rook D1 to D2 00:03:43 Rook F8 to D8 00:00:36
17. Rook A1 to
D1 00:02:41 Knight D7 to B6 00:00:44
What to make of it at this point? I was really just trying to get a quick
draw, as I had to leave for an appointment in a few minutes. I wanted as many
pieces as possible off the board. So...
18. Bishop E3 to C5 00:03:05 Rook D8
to D2 00:17:06
19. Knight F3 to D2 00:01:37 Knight B6 to D7 00:02:48
20.
Bishop C5 to A7 00:02:26 Rook B8 to A8 00:03:07
21. Bishop A7 to E3 00:01:01
Bishop B7 to C6 00:03:42
22. Knight D2 to E4 00:02:11 Knight F6 to E4
00:02:35
23. Knight C3 to E4 00:01:02 Bishop C7 to E5 00:00:43
24. Pawn B2
to B3 00:01:12 Bishop C6 to E4 00:00:55
25. Rook D1 to D7 00:01:04 Bishop E4
to C6 00:01:24
26. Rook D7 to A7 00:01:01 Rook A8 to A7 00:00:23
27.
Bishop E3 to A7 00:01:22 Pawn A6 to A5 00:01:30
Now we come to an
opposite-end pawn majorities endgame, but the involvement of the four bishops
seems exceedingly rare. White would seem to have better chances for promotion on
the queenside, but I suspect a draw here, due to the scope of all the Bishops. I
managed to find only one similar position among my resources, Leonhardt --
Capablanca (San Sebastian, 1911), and there the queenside pawns were even and
each side still had a rook. Even "backing up" the computer game doesn't give me
a duplicate position. This is hardly what I expected when I started, but it just
goes to show you that computers can play some unique games when you lead them
along a little. I doubt a human opponent would have been so eager to trade away
pieces, but this is hardly a routine endgame. The Capablanca game took nearly
another forty or so moves to complete before Black won (with the extra kingside
pawn), and the annotations suggested even longer life if not a win for
White.
From time to time I'll look back on this position and continue for a
few moves. There are potentially lessons of strong fundamental value here, as
the proper play of pawns against enemy Bishops in the endgame is not obvious,
yet is often vital. I let a computer program run through the last position for
about fourteen hours, and it had no hope of finding a forced mate, so at least
it's not something that obvious. Thoughts? Mail us!
Upon Nf3 c5, when wishing to play the Polish Opening
(b4).
Here are a few variations that will allow you to play the
Polish/Sokolsky/Bugayev opening in spite of an early c5 by Black, while also
allowing you to develop your kingside Knight first. There is a lot of room for
experiment with these lines, and we, as always, welcome your contributions!
| Nf3 c5 a3 d5 No other move as good or as natural for Black. b4 e6 Again, natural. Bb2 Nf6 If Black plays cxb, White re-takes the pawn, and if Black tries to recapture then White plays Bxg7! You should play this out with real pieces for yourself, as the combination is a common one with the queenside fianchetto. With ...Nf6, Black protects the g-pawn. bxc5 Bxc5 d4!? --- This is roughly equal, and largely unexplored |
Nf3 c5 a3 d5 b4 e6 c3 Bd6 Again, roughly equal and unexplored. We have seen c6 be of value in the St. George against c4, so why not c3 against c5 in the Polish/Sokolsky/Bugayev? Those that like the kingside fianchetto may explore g3 next, with at least equality. The simple e3 next will work for equality as well. |
Let's assume Black is determined to stop b4 after Nf3. Nf3 c5 a3 Nc6 Black wants to keep the pawn off b4. Playing b4 now really just loses a pawn. d4 cxd4 White forgets b4 for a moment. If Black plays c4, White plays d5 and chases off the Knight. Nxd4 Nxd4 Qxd4 ---- White can mobilize more quickly and can still play b4. Black will probably not cooperate and try so hard to prevent b4. As we have seen with the St. George, trying too hard to prevent it leads to poor positions, and the same holds true here. |
| Nf3 c5 a3 d5 e4!? dxe4 Ne5 Qc7 Bb5+ Attacking possibilities for White? |
||
More material as we collect it!