30 November 2010

There's Gold in Them Thar Score Sheets!

A couple of years ago, in There's Gold in Them Thar Chess Photos!, I noted that photos of famous chess players can sell on eBay for hundreds of dollars. In this post, I note that original score sheets signed by famous chess players are also worth more than you might guess.


Unlike the items in the Photos! post, which were offered by several eBay sellers, the Score Sheets! were offered by bulkcover, last seen on this blog with Mikhail Tal in Italy. The first item in the second row isn't even a real score sheet.

Up for the auction the reconstruction of the score-sheet of the 31th Chess Championship of USSR played in Leningrad from Nov.23 till Dec.26 1963, from the game Bronstein - Polugaevsky, played in Nov.28 1963 on the fourth tour on the sixth board. (Game Nr.36). Due to unknown reason the original did not survive, so it was reconstructed by one of the arbiters of tournament for the needs of archive. No signatures.

Nevertheless, it received 5 bids and sold for US $10.50.

29 November 2010

Fischer - Najdorf, 1962 Varna

When I compared Fischer's annotations against Kasparov's for the game Fischer - Tal, Bled 1961, I expected to find only one point in the game where Tal could have changed the outcome. That was the point discussed in When Is a Blunder Not a Blunder.

For the next game in 18 Memorable Games -- Fischer - Najdorf, 1962 Varna Olympiad -- I expect to find similar. Here is the PGN, showing the annotation symbols of the two former World Champions. The game is no.40 in Fischer's 60 Memorable Games and no.69 in Kasparov's Predecessors IV.

[Event "Varna ol."]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1962.??.??"]
[Round "2"]
[White "Fischer, R."]
[Black "Najdorf, M."]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "B90"]

1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.h3 b5 {FIS: !?; KAS: !?} 7.Nd5 {FIS: !?; KAS: !?} 7...Bb7 {FIS: ?; KAS: ?!} 8.Nxf6+ gxf6 9.c4 {FIS: !; KAS: !?} 9...bxc4 {KAS: ?!} 10.Bxc4 Bxe4 11.O-O d5 12.Re1 {FIS: !; KAS: ?!} 12...e5 {KAS: ?} 13.Qa4+ {FIS: !; KAS: !} 13...Nd7 14.Rxe4 {FIS: !; KAS: !} 14...dxe4 15.Nf5 {FIS: !; KAS: !} 15...Bc5 16.Ng7+ {FIS: !; KAS: !} 16...Ke7 17.Nf5+ Ke8 18.Be3 Bxe3 19.fxe3 Qb6 20.Rd1 Ra7 21.Rd6 {FIS: !; KAS: !} 21...Qd8 22.Qb3 Qc7 23.Bxf7+ Kd8 24.Be6 1-0

The key sequence is 12.Re1 {FIS: !; KAS: ?!} 12...e5 {KAS: ?}, where (interpreting Kasparov's symbols) Fischer let Najdorf off the hook, Najdorf in turn missed the best continuation, and Fischer failed to flag the double error in his notes. To play through the complete game, see...

Robert James Fischer vs Miguel Najdorf; Varna Olympiad Final 1962
http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1008414

...on Chessgames.com.

26 November 2010

The Scene of the Crime

From PIX 11 News: 'Emerson Park in Inwood, a beautiful, quiet place where families can get a little fresh air. Last month there was a big bust here. Men were found here in the middle of the day... playing chess.'


NYPD Bust Chess Players In Manhattan Park (1:38) • 'A squad of police officers in bulletproof vests swooped into an upper Manhattan park in New York park and charged seven men with the "crime" of playing chess in an area off-limits to adults unaccompanied by a kid.'

25 November 2010

'Modern Chess Brilliancies' in PGN

In my most recent post, Two Items on GM Larry Evans, I wasn't happy about having two games without any PGN, so I set off looking for a digital copy of the game scores from 'Modern Chess Brilliancies', first published by Evans in 1970. I found one on Ossimitz: chess-collections from books. For many reasons, this site is not one of my favorites for digital game collections, but there appeared to be nothing else.

I downloaded the ZIP, discovered that it contained a single file from 2001 in Chessbase CBV format, and converted the CBV to PGN. The PGN turned out to be full of annofritz comments, which are worse than useless, so I stripped those out, leaving just the moves of the games. I noticed that the first game in the book was out of sequence in the file, so I moved it to its logical place. Then I noticed that many of the games had been continued beyond the point where the players resigned. Someone had added Evans' comments showing how mate was inevitable by including the mating sequence as part of the game. I stripped those out too.

The converted file is available at mark-weeks.com/cfaa/eva-mcbr.zip. I've always wanted to be able to analyze the games with the help of an engine and now I can.

23 November 2010

Two Items on GM Evans

Looking through resources at hand for info about Larry Evans (1932-2010), I came across the two items shown in the following table. On the left is the USCF rating list for events through 31 December 1951, the fourth such semi-annual list according to the April 1952 issue of Chess Review where I found it. On the right are six of Evans' own games, among the 101 selected for his 'Modern Chess Brilliancies', with links to Chessgames.com where they exist.

• Evans - Bisguier, US Chp 1958

• Evans - Berger, Amsterdam Izt 1964

• Evans - Blackstone, 1st American Open 1965

• R.Byrne - Evans, US Chp 1965

• Koehler - Evans, US National Open 1968

• Evans - Zuckerman, US Chp 1967

Throughout his career, Evans had a tremendous impact on American chess. None of today's player/writers comes close to him in stature.

22 November 2010

When Is a Blunder Not a Blunder?

The position in the diagram, from Fischer - Tal, Bled 1961 (see that post for punctuation by Fischer and Kasparov and for a link to the game on Chessgames.com), is the prelude to one of the best known opening blunders in chess history. After the moves 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 e6 5.Nc3 Qc7 6.g3, Tal played 6...Nf6. Fischer remarked,

Probably the losing move! Tal looked worried immediately having made it, but I'm not sure he was convinced he had really been careless. Correct is 6...a6.

and assigned the move a '?'. Kasparov gave it a '?!'. The difference in opinion between the 11th and 13th World Champions is significant and can be summed up by the question, 'At what point did Tal play the losing move?'


After 6.g2-g3

After 6...Nf6, the game continued 7.Ndb5 Qb8 8.Bf4 Ne5. Here Fischer commented

Tal took a long time on this risky reply. The alternative 8...e5 9.Bg5 a6 10.Bxf6 axb5 (not 10...gxf6 11.Na3 b5 12.Nd5) 11.Bg5 gives a clear advantage.

Kasparov gave the move 8...Ne5 a '?' and remarked,

Huebner did not agree with this: 'Fischer often lacks rigourness when evaluating two options in a cheerless position; to my mind, this is the case here. The text move loses by force; after 8...e5 9.Bg5 a6 10.Bxf6 axb5 11.Bg5, Black would still have had chances to offer resistance if he continues 11...Bb4 12.Bxb5 Bxc3+ 13.bxc3 d6'. [...] The weakness of White's Queenside greatly hinders the conversion of his extra Pawn.

Moreover, in the variation 10...gxf6 11.Na3 [instead of 11...b5], Black should go in for 11...Bxa3 12.bxa3 Ne7 13.Nd5 Nxd5 14.Qxd5 b5 with a somewhat inferior, but by no means lost position.

There followed 9.Be2 Bc5. Here Fischer added,

In the tournament book, Tal suggested the rather startling 9...Ng8, to avoid material loss. After 10.Qd4 f6 11.O-O-O a6 12.Nd6+ Bxd6 13.Qxd6 Qxd6 14.Rxd6 leads to a promising endgame.

Kasparov gave 9...Bc5 another '?', and stated that 9...Ng8, was 'Black's last chance', agreeing that 'he would at least have retained material equality'.

***

The preceding summary offers three candidates for 'the losing move': 6...Nf6, 8...Ne5, and 9...Bc5. Tal must have had an extremely bad day to make three mistakes in four moves. In the case of 6...Nf6, Kasparov wrote that

Tal intended the usual 6...a6 7.Bg2 Nf6, and had already written down 6..a6 on his scoresheet, but, by his own admission, 'roughly once a year it would happen that I would write down the first move of a variation, but make the second.

Nowadays the act of recording the move before playing it is against the rules, due to the rise of pocket electronic scorekeepers that display the resulting position. In 'Russian Silhouettes', Genna Sosonko also comments on this habit of Tal.

He always used to write his move before executing it on the board. [...] If he did not like the move, he would cross it out and write a new one. In his later years he used to say increasingly often, 'I even wrote the winning move on my scoresheet, but crossed it out at the last moment...' (p.28)

As for 9...Bc5, Fischer noted that the alternative 9...Ng8 allows a 'promising endgame' for White. After 14.Rxd6, the last move in the variation given by both Fischer and Kasparov, White is ready to activate his last piece with Rhd1, doubling the Rooks on the d-file. Black still has five pieces on the back rank and still needs to move a Pawn to develop the light squared Bishop. Given this significant lead in development plus the two Bishops, White's 'promising endgame' offers strong odds to achieve a win.

I checked the historical game databases and discovered that Tal's 6...Nf6, has been played many times. In the May 2003 issue of Chess Life, GM Andy Soltis commented,

Tal gave himself two question marks for 6...Nf6??. [...] Yet it has been played dozens of times since 1961, including by Judit Polgar -- and Igor Ivanov did it twice in one year. And there are 24 examples in my database when masters failed to find 7.Ndb5!.

I suspect that one reason these blunders keep coming back is that masters are always saying that you shouldn't waste your time on traps. You should be wasting your time on loftier stuff, like theoretical novelties on the 32nd move. (p.14)

Even after the correct sequence 7.Ndb5 Qb8 8.Bf4, I found four games that followed Kasparov's 8...e5 9.Bg5 a6 10.Bxf6 gxf6 11.Na3 Bxa3. These games ended in Black's favor by a margin of +1-3=0. While this is too small a sample to draw conclusions, maybe 6...Nf6 isn't a blunder at all. Instead of giving it '??', '?', or '?!', perhaps we should give it '!?'.

19 November 2010

'Highly Concentrated'


Concentradísimo © Flickr user Adn! under Creative Commons.

Caption: 'Pensando en el próximo movimiento.' • Google: 'Thinking about the next move.'