Dragon, or Najdorf?

As a Dragon purist, I have a natural aversion to this idea. Yet, Hess prevents top GM Gata Kamsky from getting any opening advantage and draws the game. Does this idea have a future?

Kamsky,G (2720) - Hess,R (2485) [B72]
ch-USA Saint Louis USA (6), 13.05.2009

1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 g6 6.Be3 a6 7.f3 b5 8.a4 b4 9.Nd5 Nxd5 10.exd5 Bb7 11.Bc4 Nd7 12.Qd2 Nb6 13.Qxb4 Nxc4 14.Qxb7 Qc8 15.Qxc8+ Rxc8 16.Bf2 Nxb2 17.0-0 Bg7 18.Rfb1 Nc4 19.Rb7 0-0 20.Rd1 Bf6 21.Nc6 e6 22.Bd4 Kg7 23.Ne7 Bxd4+ 24.Rxd4 e5 25.Nxc8 exd4 26.Rc7 Ne3 27.Nxd6 Nxd5 28.Rc4 Rd8 29.Nb7 Ne3 30.Rc7 Rb8 31.Nd6 Rb2 32.Rxf7+ Kg8 33.Rd7 Rxc2 34.Ne4 Rxg2+ 35.Kh1 Ra2 ½-½

An international chess server I've been playing on lately

A descendant of IECG. I think it still is IECG

A computer-generated brilliancy

While I was studying a Dragon game, Fritz came up with a brillancy. How many people would just leave that knight on e6 and go for the attack?

1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 g6 6.Be3 Bg7 7.f3 Nc6 8.Qd2 0-0 9.Bc4 Bd7 10.0-0-0 Ne5 11.Bb3 Rc8 12.h4 h5 13.Kb1 Re8 14.g4 hxg4 15.f4 Nc4 16.Bxc4 Rxc4 17.e5 Nh5 18.e6 Bxe6 19.Nxe6 Bxc3 [ 19...fxe6 20.Qd3 Rxf4 21.Qxg6 Rf3 22.Qxe6+ Kh8 23.Qxg4 Rxe3 24.Qxh5+ Kg8 25.Rdg1 Rxc3 26.Rxg7+ Kxg7 27.Qg5+ Rachela-Hlas, 1997] 20.bxc3 Qa5 [ 20...fxe6 21.Qd3 Qc7+/-] 21.Rhg1 Nf6 22.Ng5 Qa3 23.Bd4 Ra4 24.Qf2 Rc8 25.f5 Ra5 26.Qe2 gxf5 27.c4 Qxa2+ 28.Kc1 Rxc4 29.Bxf6 e5 30.Rg3 Rac5 31.Qxc4 Qxc4 32.Rd2 Qf1+ 33.Kb2 Ra5 34.Ra3 Rxa3 35.Kxa3 Qc1+ 36.Kb3 Qxd2 0-1

Susan Polgar's Rook Ending

Here is a rook ending from Susan Polgar's blog, from a simultaneous exhibition. There are some pretty endgame ideas emerging from one of the sidelines that were not developed in the comments on the game, so I thought I would include them here.

1. Rf7+

1. e7
is the correct move, and according to the database White can
win the Q v. R & P endings. Polgar was playing a simul, and so didn't want to have to try to win such a long ending. So she played the text instead which should permit a draw. The idea is that after Kxf6 e8(Q) Black can't build a fortress and will eventually be hunted down with best play. But it's not easy, it's supposed to take 48 moves! Given the ways Black has to go wrong after the text, it is understandable that Polgar chose the move she did in a simul.

1... Kg8 2. Rf3 Ra5

2... Rg1 was suggested as a draw by someone who consulted the tablebases. Unfortunately, I looked at Nalimov and this move is a loss. 3. Ke5 Re1+ 4. Kd6 Rd1+ 5. Kc6 Re1 6. Kd7 Kg7 7. e7 Rd1+ 8. Ke8 Rd4 9. Rf2 Rd3 10. Rf4 Rd2 11. Rb4 Re2 12. Rb7 g5 13. Kd8 Kg6 14. e8=Q+
Rxe8+ 15. Kxe8 Kf5 16. Rg7 Kf4 17. Kf7 Kf5 18. Ke7 Kf4 19. Kf6 g4 20. Kg6 Kf3 21. Kg5 g3 22. Kh4 g2 23. Kh3 Ke3 24. Kxg2.

3. e7 Ra8 4. Kd5 Kg7 5. Ra3
Rxa3!

5... Rb8 is another way to lose. 6. Ke6 Rb6+ 7. Kd7 Rb7+ 8. Kd6 Rb6+ 9. Kc7 Re6
10. Kd7 Re4 11. e8=Q Rxe8 12. Kxe8

6. e8=Q Rf3 and Black can draw, setting up a fortress.

Alekhine vs. Bogolyubov 1929 game 19

Here is a game from the 1929 World Championship. According to Levenfish and Smyslov's Rook Endings, perhaps the classic work on the subject, Black missed a draw. I was checking the lines on Fritz, and I think that silly box found something. L & S give what seems to be the obliging 72. b8 (Q), overlooking the possibility of checking along the rank with Rb4+ and, it seems, forcing the Black king to an inferior square. The best Black has it to knight the pawn for check and put it in a R vs. N ending, which I thought was winning for White but I suppose I could be wrong. Anyway, it looks like Levenfish and Smyslov are too obliging in any case.

[Event "World Championship 14th"]
[Site "GER/NLD"]
[Date "1929.10.27"]
[Round "19"]
[White "Alekhine, Alexander"]
[Black "Bogoljubow, Efim"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "D51"]
[Annotator "Reppert,V"]
[PlyCount "153"]
[EventDate "1929.09.06"]
[Source "ChessBase"]

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 c6 3. Nf3 d5 4. Nc3 e6 5. Bg5 Nbd7 6. e4 dxe4 7. Nxe4 Be7 8.
Nc3 O-O 9. Qc2 b6 10. O-O-O Bb7 11. h4 Qc7 12. Bd3 Rfe8 13. Kb1 Nf8 14. Bxf6
Bxf6 15. Ne4 c5 16. Nxf6+ gxf6 17. Qd2 Ng6 18. h5 Nf4 19. Rh4 Bxf3 20. gxf3 e5
21. d5 Qd6 22. h6 Kh8 23. Qc2 Nxd3 24. Qxd3 Rg8 25. f4 Rg6 26. Qf5 a6 27. Re1
exf4 28. Rxf4 Rxh6 29. Rfe4 Rg8 30. Re7 Rf8 31. a4 Rh4 32. Re8 Rxe8 33. Rxe8+
Kg7 34. Qc8 Kh6 35. Rg8 Qe7 36. Ka2 b5 37. Rg3 f5 38. Qxf5 f6 39. Re3 Qf7 40.
Re6 Kg7 41. Rd6 Qg6 42. Rd7+ Kh6 43. Qxg6+ Kxg6 44. axb5 axb5 45. cxb5 Ra4+ 46.
Kb3 Rb4+ 47. Kc3 Rxb5 48. Rc7 h5 49. d6 Rb8 50. Rxc5 Rd8 51. Rd5 h4 52. Kc4 Kf7
53. Kc5 Ke6 54. Rd4 Rc8+ 55. Kb6 Kd7 56. Rxh4 Rc6+ 57. Ka5 Rc2 58. b4 Kxd6 59.
f3 Rc3 60. f4 Ra3+ 61. Kb6 Ke6 62. Rh5 Rf3 63. f5+ Ke5 64. b5 Kf4 65. Kc6 Kg4
66. Rh1 Rc3+ 67. Kd5 Kxf5 68. Rb1 Rd3+ 69. Kc6 Rd8 70. b6 Kg4

Here Levenfish and Smyslov suggest 70... Ke4 71. b7 f5 72, b8=Q Rxb8 73. Rxb8 f4 74. Kf5 f3 75. Rf8 Ke3 76. Kf4 f2 77. Kf3 Ke2 78. Re8+ Kd1 draws.

Fritz came up with :72. Rb4+... Ke3 (72... Ke5 73. b8=Q+ Rxb8 74. Rxb8 f4 75. Kc5 Ke4 76. Kc4 Ke3 77. Kc3 Ke4 78.Re8+ 1-0) 73. b8=Q Rxb8 74. Rxb8 f4 (74... Ke4 75. Kc5 f4 76. Kc4 wins) 75. Kd5 f3 76. Rb3+ Ke2 77. Ke4 f2 78. Rb2+ Ke1 79. Ke3 f1=N+ 80. Kd3 Ng3 81. Rg2 Nf1 which looks like White should win, though I need to research it a bit to be sure.

Back to the game: 71. b7 f5 72. b8=Q Rxb8 73. Rxb8 f4 74. Kd5 f3 75. Ke4 f2 76. Rf8 Kg3 77. Ke3 1-0

Man Vs. Machine matches

As time goes on, the prospects for the "human" side in man vs. machine matches is getting dimmer. I read a report in Chess Life where a machine won a match against GM Ehlvest with odds of pawn but not move (the comp was always white).

There's one kind of match, though, that I'd like to see. Let some high-ranking GM play against a computer where the computer has its opening book disabled. It stands to reason. Chessplayers in ordinary OTB contexts can't bring their copies of ECO, NIC, to their chess tables, nor can they consult the ChessBase to be up on the latest theory. The opening is an important part of chess, and as things currently stand it is simply conceded that the computer will at least play that part of the game correctly, and must err in the middle game and endgame in order to lose. It would be a real test of programming ability if a computer could play openings properly without an opening book. I'm sure that programs will eventually clear that hurdle as well, but it would be nice to see it set before them. Until then, it would seem that we haven't quite been Fritzed to death yet.

Kasparov has been jailed again

I've of course, been away from here for rather a long time. But here is the best source for information of Kasparov going to jail. Maybe he'll write a book entitled "I was tortured in the Moscow City Jail," to keep up with one of his Great Predecessors. HT; Dennis Monokroussos.

Here.