David Sprenkle vs Jon Jacobs (1975)

Members · Prefs · Laboratory · Collections · Openings · Endgames · Sacrifices · History · Search Kibitzing · Kibitzer's Café · Chessforums · Tournament Index · Players ·

Kibitzing

David Sprenkle vs Jon Jacobs
Starship Open Finals (Corresp.) (1975) (correspondence), Correspondence
Sicilian Defense: Najdorf. Browne Variation (B98) · 0-1

ANALYSIS [x]

FEN COPIED

explore this opening	find similar games	36 more games of D Sprenkle
	PGN: download \| view \| print	Help: general \| java-troubleshooting

TIP: Some people don't like to know the result of the game in advance. This can be done by registering a free account then visiting your preferences page, then checking "Don't show game results".

For help with this chess viewer, please see the Olga Chess Viewer Quickstart Guide.

PREMIUM MEMBERS CAN REQUEST COMPUTER ANALYSIS [more info]

Jun-04-18		notatiger54: Back-story of this game: In 1973, a major upset from the U.S. Championship (Grefe-Browne) appeared to doom the then-popular mainline Najdorf sub-variant where Black plays an early ...h6. Until then, Black had always relied on 11...Rb8 followed by ...b5 -- an anti-positional approach that maroons the black king in the center where it must ultimately succumb to withering crossfire from both major and minor white pieces. In an effort to rehabilitate the ...h6 line, I came up with an alternative system that eyes queenside castling, while mobilizing the black kingside via the thematic idea ...g5, executed in an original way. Although I did not invent the move 11...Rg8 (GM Matulovic played it at least once in the early '70s), I was probably the first (and only?) person to play and analyze it extensively. I tested 11...Rg8 in numerous tournament games in the mid- to late 1970s (probably the most important game was against Bob Wachtel in a crucial round of the Pan-American Intercollegiate in 1974 or 1975), and in a dozen or so postal games in a postal chess club I then belonged to, which I arranged specifically to test my idea (I advertised for opponents to play against me taking both sides of the position after 11...Rg8). I went on to publish extensive analysis in a lengthy article in Chess Horizons (the Massachusetts state chess magazine) in 1977 or 1978. I eventually gave up on 11...Rg8 after concluding that my main line -- in which White plunges into the frothiest tactical whitewater to prevent Black from castling -- probably ends in an unfavorable position for Black. However, recent engine analysis suggests some improvements for Black that might revive the line.

Jun-04-18		notatiger54: I gave the year as 1975, but that was probably the year the tournament began. This was played in the final "round" -- and in those days of snail-mail, years could elapse between rounds. My recollection is that I actually played the game during 1977 and/or 1978. Sprenkle went on to become a Senior Master (US 2400+). I don't know what he was rated when this correspondence game took place; I was just out of college, and he may be younger than me.

Jun-04-18		notatiger54: A few concrete analytical notes: 14...Bd7!? This was my original contribution to the line that I dubbed the "Phoenix Variation" in my published articles, in recognition that the whole 8...h6 variation had been left for dead after a series of spectacular miniatures between GMs in the early '70s (starting with Grefe-Browne, as mentioned above). Instead of leaving his king in the center by going for ...Rb8 and ...b5, I decided it would be wise for Black to quickly finish queenside development, preparing to castle long. A key line of my analysis justifying 14...Bd7 goes: 15.Nxe5 dxe5 16.Rhf1 hxg5 17.Bxg5 Nh7 18.h4 0-0-0 19.Rxf7 Bxg5+ 20.hxg5 Nxg5 21.Rff1 Nxe4= 19.Kb1?! A few months before this game, I had suggested this move in my Chess Horizons article, as a possibly promising alternative to 19.Nxg5. I didn't intend to mislead anyone; I simply discovered the strong Black response that follows in this game after my article came out. (Better is 19.Nxg5 Rxg5 20.g4, with advantage.) 23.Rdd1 At first glance, 23.Rd2 looks strong, with the idea 23...Rxg2 24.Ne5 threatening Bh5+ with discovered attack on the g2-rook. But then the tactical justification behind 19...f5! and 20...Nc6! appears: after 23.Rd2 Rxg2 24.Ne5 Nxe5 25.Bh5+ Rg6 26.Rg1 Kd8! 27.Bxg6 Nf3, and Black escapes with better chances (2Bs + united passed pawns). 30...Nd4!? I was quite proud of this positional pawn sac. But Stockfish is unimpressed: it says the sac actually diminished my winning chances.

NOTE: Create an account today to post replies and access other powerful features which are available only to registered users. Becoming a member is free, anonymous, and takes less than 1 minute! If you already have a username, then simply login login under your username now to join the discussion.

Please observe our posting guidelines:

No obscene, racist, sexist, or profane language.
No spamming, advertising, duplicate, or gibberish posts.
No vitriolic or systematic personal attacks against other members.
Nothing in violation of United States law.
No cyberstalking or malicious posting of negative or private information (doxing/doxxing) of members.
No trolling.
The use of "sock puppet" accounts to circumvent disciplinary action taken by moderators, create a false impression of consensus or support, or stage conversations, is prohibited.
Do not degrade Chessgames or any of it's staff/volunteers.

Please try to maintain a semblance of civility at all times.

See something that violates our rules? Blow the whistle and inform a moderator.

NOTE: Please keep all discussion on-topic. This forum is for this specific game only. To discuss chess or this site in general, visit the Kibitzer's Café.

Messages posted by Chessgames members do not necessarily represent the views of Chessgames.com, its employees, or sponsors.
All moderator actions taken are ultimately at the sole discretion of the administration.

This game is type: CORRESPONDENCE. Please report incorrect or missing information by submitting a correction slip to help us improve the quality of our content.