The sacrifice on e4 in the Paleface Pirc

Yesterday I was crushed to death in a Paleface Pirc. The game was played at fast speed, but still, I was sort of humiliated with my opening. read carefully so you dont end up like this !

Guido De Bouver - Roel Hamblok ( Antwerpen )
1.d4 c5 2.d5 g6 3.e4 Bg7 4.Nc3 d6 5.Be3 Nf6 6.Qd2 Qa5 7.f3 a6 8.g4 b5 (diagram)

White has declared his intentions on the kingside whilst blacks expands on the queenside - a typical idea in the Paleface Pirc.

My next move was too slow : 9.h4. This move is too slow as it allows for 9...h5, but my opponent had a different plan : 9...b4 (diagram)

Oh horror - black is attacking a piece first. Probably an indication that I am not doing so well. But now I missed a simple sacrifice.

10.Nce2 ??? (diagram)

As soon as I released my piece, I saw the combination. 10.Nd1 would have been ok for white.

10...Nxe4 Of course.
11.fxe4 Bxb2 12.Rad1 Bxg4 (diagram)

And with one piece for three pawns, I could safely resign here as my position is hopeless.

Dont fall for this idea - it can happen in other Paleface Pirc positions also.

The times they are a changing.

Yes, the times they are a-changing. And so does the evaluation of some wild Blackmar Diemer lines.

Take the obscure line in teh Ziegler ( aka O'kelly ) defense 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3 exf3 5.Nxf3 c6 6.Bc4 Bf5 7.g4  !! This line was suggested by IM Stefan Bucker in a famous article published in 2010 on chesscafe.com.

I have played trhis lately twice in five minute games on chess.com and both of my opponents went astray quickly. And also, the gambit has some real potency. Look at the line

7...Nxg4 8.Nh4 g6 9.Nxf5 gxf5 10.h3 Nf6 11.Bg5 e6 and now 12.d5 (diagram)

I challenge you to defend this position here as black. Not simple, is it ?

I wont go as far as saying that 7.g4 is better than 7.Bg5. I wont play it, certainly not in rated over-the-board games, but it is perfect for blitz games.

And who knows, maybe one day, the times will be changing...

Bypassing that annoying Vienna defense

I have always hated the Vienna defense since black is always able to exchange some pieces and thus reduce white's winning chances. I always felt that white is fighting for a draw.

For that reason, I have worked in the past on several white options, originating aftre 5.g4 Bg6 6.g5 Nd5 7.Nxe4. Not without any modesty on my part, the line 7...Nc6 8.c4 was dubbed the "De Bouver attack" and yielded terrible complications.

However, black could bypass this dreaded attack and simply play 7...e6 and now 8.h4 does not seem to equalize.

That's why I look today at the next white option : the "More than Hara Kiri" line, originating after 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3 Bf5 5.g4 Bg6 6.h4 (diagram)

White's most ambituous try is probably 6...Qd6, but white's reply 7.Bg2 is both unexpected and good.

Also interesting is 6...exf3 7.Qxf3 and white gets an equal game with all pieces still on the board.

The popular 6...h5 is rather simple to play for white after 7.g5 Nd5 8.Nxe4 (diagram) and white is certainly not worse than in the lines without the h4 moves.

Let's look now at the best black repsonse, 6...h6. Scheerer suggests 7.Bg2 here, but I think he overlooked the simple 7...Nc6, leaving white a pawn down without any compensation.

Summary : the More than Hara Kiri line seems to be refuted by the simple 6...h6 as Scheerer's suggestion 7. Bg2 does not provide any equality.

screwed up in a Slav ambush

I partipated in a tournament last weekend. My 5th round opponent knew I played the Blackmar Diemer and was prepared for it, since I had played a Blackmar Diemer against him a year ago or so.

So I had the bad idea of playimng something else...

1.d4 d5 2.c4
No mother what the grandmasters say : bad choice - 2.e4 is far better/

2...c6
The Slav

3.Nf3 Nf6 4.Nc3 dxc4 5.e4 b5 6.Qc2
My knowledge of theory had ended here. Better was 6.e5, entering the Geller gambit.

6...e6 7.a4
Cant be bad, can it ?

7...a6 (diagram)
This cant be right !!!

8.axb5 cxb5 9.Nxb5 (diagram)
I won my gambit pawn back and my position is far better !!!

But my opponent got me into a known Slav ambush.

9...axb5!!! 10.Rxa8 Bb7 11.Ra1
I started to feel unconfortable, especially since my opponent was smiling all the time

11...Nxe4 (diagram)
And here I knew I was in really deep shit

12.Be2
Desperately trying to get my king into safety

12...Bb4+ (diagram)
Black develops quickly

13.Bd2 Nxd2 14.Nxd2 Qg5 (diagram)
Here I decided to resign. My king has no place to go as castling queenside is not possible anymore.

What a nice trap !!

Lessons learned - stick to the Blackmar Diemer and dont mess with Slav gambits.

Fixing the Ziegler

My previous post "A blow to the Ziegler" showed some problems in the "new" Ziegler lines.

After 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3 exf3 5.Nxf3 c6 6.Bc4 Bf5 7.Bg5 e6 8.Nh4 Bg6 9.Nxg6 hxg6 10.Qd3 Be7 11.0-0-0 Ng4, black seems to be clearly on top.

Not that this is the only problem to be fixed - after 11.0-0-0, a quick scan with Stockfish unearths many more problematic black moves, but that is another problem...

Back to the lines aftre 11...Ng4. It is obvious that 12.Bxe7 Qxe7 are necessary.

In my previous post, I only considered the aggressive 13.Bxe6, but now I am pretty sure that 13.Qf3 (diagram) is the best move.

It seems to me that both 13...Nf6 and 13...Qh4 are possible for black. Let;s look at 13...Nf6. White now tries to open the centre with 14.d5 (diagram).

It seems to me white has at leats an equal game in all lines, apart from one : 14...Rh4 !!! (diagram) Obviously, this move is hard to find over the board, but it poses white some serious problems.

a/ 15.d6 Qd8 16.Qe2
...a1/ 16...Nbd7 17.Kb1 (=) to (=+)
...a2/ 16...b5 17.Bxe6 fxe6 18.Qxe6+ Kf8 19.g3 (=)
...a3/ 16...Kf8 17.g3 (=)

b/ 15.Bb3
...b1/ 15...cxd5 16.Rhe1 (=+)
...b2/ 15...Nxd5 16.Nxd5 cxd5 17.Rhe1 (=+)

c/ 15.dxe6 Rxc4 16.exf7+ Kxf7 17.Rhe1 Qc7 18.Ne4 Rxe4!! 19.Rxe4 Nbd7 (=+)

d/ 15.dxc6 Nxc6 16.Bb5 Qc7 (=+)

So we see that 13.Qf3 Nf6 14.d5 Rh4 15.d6 Qd8 16.Qe2 gives a hard, but playable game.

What a relief, I beleived for some time the Ziegler actually did refute the Blackmar Diemer ! but that does not seem to be the case - provided I can fix all other problems :-(

A simple trap in the lemberger countergambit

This morning I enjoyed a simple victory in the Lemberger.
1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 e5 4.Nxe4 exd4 5.Bb5+ c6 6.Qe2 (diagram)

My opponent played the second best move here : 6...Be6 7.Bc4
And now fell for the simple trap 7...Bxc4 8.Bf6#

Surely it was just a blitz game, but I have won the same trap in a normal over the board game against an opponent rated fide 1750, so it is \surely not as simple as it seems. Let's look at the possibility starting from move 6.

a. 6...Be6 7.Bc4 (diagram)

...a1/ 7...Bb4+ 8.Bd2
......a1a/ 8....Bxd2+ 9.Nxd2 (+=)
......a1b/ 8....Bxc4 9.Nf6+ Kf8 10.Bxb4+ Ne7 11.Qxc4 (+)
......a1c/ 8....Qe7 9.0-0-0 Bxd2+ 10.Rxd2 (+)
......a1d/ 8....d3 9.cxd3 (+=)
...a2/ 7...Bd6 8.Bxe6 fxe6 9.Qg4 (+)
...a3/ 7...Be7 8.Bxe6 fxe6 9.Nf3 (+=)
...a4/ 7...Nf6 8.Ng5 (+=)
...a5/ 7...Na6 8.Bxe6 fxe6 9.Nf3 (+=)

b. 6...Be7 7.Bc4 (diagram)

...b1/ 7...Bf5 8.Nf3 (=)
...b2/ 7...Be6 8.Bxe6 fxe6 9.Nf3 (+=)
...b3/ 7...b5 8.Bd3 (+=)
...b4/ 7...Nf6 8.Nxf6+ gxf6 9.Qh5 (+=)

c/ 6...Qe7 7.Nd6+ Kd8 8.Qxe7 Kxe7 9.Nxc8+ Kd7 10.Bc4 (+=)

d/ 6...Bb4+ 7.c3 ( there are better ways for white, but this one is the only ones that maintains some winning chances for white ) (diagram)

...d1/ 7...cxb5 8.cxb4 

......d1a/ 8...Ne7 9.Qxb5+ (-)

......d1b/ 8...Nc6 9.Bf4 (=)

......d1c/ 8...a6 9.Bf4 (+=)

......d1d/ 8...Qe7 9.Nd6+ (+=)

......d1e/ 8...Bd7 9.Bg5 (+)

......d1f/ 8...Be6 9.Qxb5+ Nc6 10.Bf4 (=)

...d2/ 7...dxc3 8.bxc3 (=)

...d3/ 7...Be7 8.Bc4 (+=)

...d4/ 7...Ne7 8.Bd3 (=)

...d4/ 7...Qe7 8.cxb4 cxb4 9.Nd6+ (+=)

So we see that the gambit has many traps that may lead so a quick win, but it is not really correct, as it can be refuted, but white is no material down and can still fight back after 6...Bb4+ 7.c3 cxb5 8.cxb4 Ne7 9.Qxb5+ Nbc6 10.Ne2 (diagram)

A blow to the Ziegler

The Ziegler defense ( 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3 exf3 5.Nxf3 c6 6.Bc4 Bf5 has always posed a problem to the attacker as the traditional lines 7.0-0 e6 8.Ne5 is insufficient.

However, 7.Bg5 e6 8.Nh4 Bg6 9.Nxg6 hxg6 10.Qd3 (diagram) gives white decent chances.

Blitz play this morning continued 10...Be7 11.0-0-0 and now the new move 11...Ng4 (diagram)

Black wants to exchange some pieces and eyes the f2 square for his jumper - what can you expect more from a move ?

Play went 12.Bxe7 Qxe7 and now I threw in the standard sacrifice 12.Bxe6 (diagram)

Obvioulsy, I was hoping for 13...fxe6 14.Qxg6+ (++), but that would have been too easy.

My blitz opponent played 13...Qg5+ 14.Kb1 fxe6 and now 15.Qg3 (diagram)

Here I thought that white had the advantage, as I have two interesting attacking options
- the knight is pinned and can ve attacjed by means of the simple h3
- my knight can attack the queen with Ne4 and the check on d6.

But it seems that it is actually black who is on top. My trusted silicon assistant gives 15...Qh4 16.Qc7 0-0 17.Qxb7 Nf2 18.Qxa8 Nxh1 19.Qxa7, with black having the piece for two pawns.

Have we discovered the real refutation of white's alternative line in the Ziegler( or O'Kelly ) defense ? It surely looks so....