CHESS by Philidor

No. 322 F. Kan.n.Eiti

(1907; reprinted in Problemin, January 1967) wiirrE to play and mate in five moves; solution next week. Solution to No. 321 (Dunaujvarosi):

Q - Kt 4, threat Q - K 1. I. . . P-Q6; 2 P x P.

. . P - B 6: Q - R 4; 2. Kt - B 5. . B - B 5; 2 Rx B. . . . B - B 4 ch; 2 B x B. In the original ('set') position there

are half-pin mates set, viz. K B moves; 2 B - B 5.

. . . Q B moves; 2 R - B 4. Key move abandons the half-pin of the bishops and replaces them by half-pins of black pawns—nevertheless retainia?, as a by- product the original mates.

In effect, a set of games this week, illustrating how opening theory is developed through master play. You can make either of two deductions (probably both wrong): that you must know everything or you'll be caught by the latest twist—or that you need know nothing because it will all be contradicted tomorrow anyway.

White, TRINGOV Black, PALMASON

Opening, SICILIAN

3P-$4

5 Kt-Q B3 2 Kt-K83 4 Ktx 6 B-1415 I P- K 4 7 P- B 4 Kt - K B3

P- Q3 PxP

P-Q R3

P- K3

Q- Kt 3 P-Q 84 • Q-Q2 QxP This variation is permanent challenge

to both players—to Black (7 Q- Kt 3) in threatening to take the fatal Q Kt P, to White (8 Q - Q a) in allowing it.

R- Kt r Q- R6 to P-K 5 ... The alternatives are B x Kt (thought to

give about equal chances) and P - B 5 (speculative, like the text).

PxP • PxP K Kt-Q2

12 B- Q B 4 ... 12 Kt - K 4 and 12 B - K 2 have both been tried—present verdict is that they favour Black. B - Kt 5 After 12. . B - K there is a lengthy analysis by Vukovic ending on move 21 in a draw by perpetual check! But (needless to say) White has other options.

• R-Kr3 Q-R4

14

which drives. . . Stronger than the older move P - Q R 3 drives the bishop to a better square.

14 • • 0-0 r5 B - B6! . . Here Truigov kagainst Fischer) played a year earlier (also at Havana): It Kt x Pt, P x Kt ; 16 B x P ch, K - R 1; 17 R xR di, Kt x R; 18 Q - B 4, Kt - Q B 3: 19 Q - B 7, Q - B 4 ch!; 20 K-k 1, 1Ct - 3! and Black won. In the meantime this new move was introduced in the game Byrne-Evans.

• . . . KtxB! Evans played 15 . . . P x 16 Q-K 6!,QxP; 17 Kt -B 5!,PxKt; 18 Kt-K 4!,13- 9 7; 19 Kt x B, Q - Q 5 ...."41; 20 h.- R 1, Kt - K 4; 21 R - kt ch, Kt - Kt 5; 22 P - R 3 and White won—but Palmason, like Tringov, knows this game.

r6 PxKt4 . .!? — Q r Threatening 17 x Kt ; t Q x R, B ... B , so 17 ItxB: . . . White gives up the exchange first. Q x R r8 - Kt P-K Kt 3 Not 18 . . . Q - B it, 19 PxP!; Q - K I; 20 Kt - K 4 and wins.

19 R- B4 P- Kt 3 Here in a later game against Hartston (Hastings, 1966) Mecking played 19 Iii; continuation 20R-R 4,P-S Kt 4; 21 B-1.0,P-Kt 5; 22 fitxP,Px13; 23 R -14 6, R x It t; 24 c drawn by perpetual check. O'Kelly suggests 19 . . . R x Kt; ao Q - R 6 (20 R xR, Q - Kt 3), Q - B I; 21 Q x Q ch, K x Q; 22 14 R, 11 - Q 2 though I still prefer White.

10 R - R 4 Q-Br ar Q 1,C3 R - R 2? Natural but wrong. 2! . . . B - Kt is better. Against this Deutsch. Schachzeiturig gives 22 Q - R 3, P - R 4; 23 Kt x K P! winning (23 . . • Pa Kt: 24 B xP eh, K -R 2; 25 R xP di, P xR; 46 Q xP ch, Q 3; 27 11- B 5 ch and 28 Q x Q), but Black could play instead 22 . . . Q - H 41 with an unclear position (23 Kt - K 2, Q - K Kt 4!).

22 Kt - K 41 1t(2) - Q 1 23 RxPl Resigns 23 . . . K x R; 24 Q - R 3 ch and now 24 . . . K - Kt 1; 25 Kt - Kt 5 and 24 . Q -K 3,• 25

Kt - Kt 5 ch are equally fatal. This whole variation still offers far-from-exhausted scope to the resourceful analyst.