[Event "Thrajin's March 2009 Invitational"]
[Site "http://gameknot.com/"]
[Date "2009.05.02"]
[Round "-"]
[White "bigmal1"]
[Black "weaponofchoice"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[WhiteElo "2196"]
[BlackElo "2185"]

<ChessBookForum: Hello!

Look upon me and tremble.

>

I had a fit when I "looked upon you"...

I don't much like the Classical 3...Nf6, and I like the trendy 4.e5 even less. But 4.Bg5 dxe4 is reasonable, a solid alternative to the MacCutcheon and Classic lines. Quite similar to 3...dxe4, which has the virtue of being playable after both 3.Nd2 and 3.Nc3.

These lines, where black concedes the centre early on, look playable, but I find them a little suspect. White often gets that famous 'nagging edge' and keeps it.

I'll stick with the Winawer after 3.Nc3, where I have several different lines -- Swarm, mainline, Petrosian/closed, etc -- to retreat to, if necessary.

It went 16.Qg4 Bg7 17.Ne5 Nf6 18.Qe2 c5, where black seems to have picked up some initiative and duly went on to win on move 53 (after throwing away the advantage and nearly losing - *also* an instructive game.

The line here with 16.c3 is more cautious, but black again has slightly the better game. 16.h4 c5 17.Qd6!? Nf8 has also been played, leading to queen exchange and a draw in Arizmendi Martinez - Baklan, 2001.

As played ... I wonder whether Black could have played for a win by taking it more slowly? The two tactical sequences are very nicely calculated, but they lead to a draw -- 27...Re8! is a very impressive, and brave, move.

It all reminds me of certain Karpov vs Korchnoi games in the French, especially their 1974 match. Korchnoi's opening strategy as black was to try out the Petrov, the Dragon, and the French, but he chose an unfortunate order in which to use them. After losing with the Petrov and Dragon, he then drew all the remaining games with the French and just lost the match 3-2. The winner was awarded the world title when Fischer ... etc.

The black play here is quite Korchnoiesque: risky, but powerful enough to get a definite advantage -- then a flurry of tactics and a draw. If we switch sides and give Karpov the black pieces, would he have played the same way? Not, I think.

It depends on B-vs-N, in one sense, and that's very tricky territory. One truism says that bishops are better with pawns on both sides of the board, because the knight is slower in crossing the board. I've found this is only really true in positions with 2 or 3 pawns each, widely separated. With 5 or more pawns, the knight gets stronger - the bishop can easily become bad, and anyway is almost as bad as the knight at stopping far-apart passed pawns.

But keep the rook and/or queen on, and black's dark square pressure on the centre is significant. I admit I don't see a single specific point where black can improve with a better move ... but maybe a different plan or strategy would have scored the full point?

He didn't? Right. Um, anyone see <A Month in the Country>? And why do some movie titles look like Spoonerisms even when they aren't?

Look at my garish surreal cartoon face and quake!!

Thanks for your recent EXCELLENT contributions to our garish surreal cartoon chesss book forum.

It means the world to "us."

Hey guess who I am- <Howard> or <Jess>?

Both. You wrote alternate words, constructing the whole post via an extended series of emails. A true collective effort.

This defines <Dom>, fighting back and discouraging any kind of opposition.

Mackian assuredness.

<Because you're worth more>

Would you guys please get to the point when it is in Yo Face?

Never mind. It's already in there.

I did enjoy the CBF attributions more than I had imagined.

A small series I found in my collection that is of top quality is:

'The Tournament Player's Repertoire of Openings'

I personally am the proud owner of:

- Queen's Gambit Orthodox Defence, Lev Polugayevsky

- ...d6 and ...e6 (Scheveningen) systems, Kasparov Nikitin

Not a patch - but the scars are unmistakeable.

Last gasp is very graphic - pity and good thing the graphic is so powerful.

But I agree of course, and let's lift it whenever possible.

<Polugayaevsky>, for the BCO tournament series was just a treat.

Now that's what I call a chess book.

Actually, I must confess a mild heresy. I'm a huge fan of magazines -- chess zines, art zines, comicbook zines, science zines, whatever. I have 1000's of 'em. In many ways I prefer them to books -- they're very non-linear: you can dip into a magazine today, and dip into it again next year and find something new.

I don't currently subscribe to any, but I pick up odd copies of NIC, Chess, etc, when I can ... and I have chess zines from the 1950s older even than I am ...

Does this makes me a heretic from Gutenberg Ghetto? A book apostate?

Maybe. In vernacular Dublinese, the word 'book' (rhymes with hook) signifies both a book and a magazine. So the difference is immaterial m'lud.

There are a mere THREE pages of posts on his personal player page, and quite a few eye-openers there for me.

Also, while I am in confessing mood, I can not remember being subscribed to a Chess-zine, aside from 'Schakend Nederland', just a few years in toto, and on and off the subscriptions to NIC, which is very good.

Pas Bibliophile, moi, even though I actually *love* a good book and was hospitalized for quite some time, but only really was interested in getting active again, swinging away and doing pull ups and all kinds of exercises in my hospital bed, driving the Nurses up the wall. <Also>, like Bobby Fisher, I read strips, a cowboy "novel" series (don't laugh at Karl May!)- and listened to Jaaaazz.

But the newspapers here were always covering chess events, with columnists like Ligterink, Ree, Jongsma (et al), and the important games were all printed, and that's where I replayed the games from.

Still awake?

OK

I was of course over the moon when I got a Mephisto chess comp - built in in a beautiful wooden board with magnetic piece recognition and these magical little red lights for each square, indicating the comp move. Upgrades too with modules that you could put in a little "drawer," that you could pull out of the wooden work of art - from my parents.

I sold it, and still regret I did.

So I see a lot of parallels with us, if you dip just a bit beneath the surface, except for Jaaaazz, perhaps.

Didn't extend my NIC subscription either, and pick one up when I want to, like you.

So - it seems Polu was a good looking man, but a rather nervous type person, who had trouble at times dealing with pressure.

But he'll remain Polu to me, and I must say that his book on <Queen's Gambit, Orthodox Defence>, is brilliant, thorough, and highly instructive re all stages of a game. Been having a lot of fun reading and analysing some today.

He spent 2 years minimum on a book, and fumed at all the books that were coming out during the Fischer BOOM, saying that "90% of the books you can stop reading after the first page, to never read them again."

Seems from the comments that there is an opening argument involved, will have to look more into that later, but from move 11 onward, Timman throws the Kitchen sink at Grandmaster Polu, but ends up resigning as soon as move 22 - no doubt utterly devastated at this cool defensive masterpiece.

Tilburg 1983 this is, and indeed Polu played in tournaments in A'dam several times in the 80's - so I may well have seen him in person.

I remember being a Polu-fan, for crying out loud! (Very cool name, Polugayevsky..)

Btw - if you type it like that (Poluga<y>evsky) in the search box, enter, and the message appears "SORRY, WE CANNOT ACCEPT YOUR SPELLING"

?????

OUTRAGE!!

Then how ironic is this?

CG Player page Bio:

<LEV POLUGAEVSKY
(born Nov-20-1934, died Aug-30-1995) Russia

Lev Abramovich <<< Polugayevsky >>> was born in Mogilev on November 20, 1934.>

@#$%@!!

Btw - the Dutch spelling, was, and *is*, Poloegajevski, which is most familiar to me, and I like best.

Or simply "Poloe"

(dutch 'oe' sounds like 'oo', like in "room")

And of course it is Kortsjnoj, here.

Hmmm - wonderful usage of the verb "to tease"