[Event "corr 99/224"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2005.??.??"]
[White "Nickel, Arno"]
[Black "Jakobetz, L."]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]

[Event "WCCC27CT05(WS)"]
[Site "ICCF"]
[Date "2007.10.20"]
[White "Nickel, Arno"]
[Black "Schmidt, Theo"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]

1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.h3 e6 7.Qf3 Qb6 8.Nb3 Qc7 9.Bd3 Be7 10.Qg3 b5 11.O-O Bb7 12.a3 Nbd7 13.f4 O-O 14.Be3 d5 15.e5 Ne4 16.Bxe4 dxe4 17.Rad1 Rad8 18.Qf2 Bxa3 19.Nxb5 axb5 20.bxa3 Bd5 21.Rb1 Rb8 22.Rfd1 f6 23.Nc5 Nxc5 24.Bxc5 e3 25.Qxe3 Rfc8 26.Bd6 Qxc2 27.Qd2 Qxd2 1/2-1/2

[Event "WCCC27CT05(WS)"]
[Site "ICCF"]
[Date "2007.10.20"]
[White "Nickel, Arno"]
[Black "Siigur, Jüri"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]

[Event "Simon Webb Memorial"]
[Site "ICCF"]
[Date "2007.03.14"]
[White "Nickel, Arno"]
[Black "Palciauskas, Vytas Victor"]
[Result "*"]

1.Nf3 Nf6 2.d4 e6 3.c4 b6 4.e3 Bb7 5.Bd3 d5 6.O-O dxc4 7.Bxc4 a6 8.Qe2 c5 9.Rd1 Nbd7 10.Nc3 b5 11.Bb3 Qb6 12.d5 exd5 13.Nxd5 Nxd5 14.Bxd5 Bxd5 15.Rxd5 Be7 16.e4 Qb7 17.Bg5 f6 18.Bf4 O-O 19.Nh4 Nb6 20.Rd3 Rfe8 21.Nf5 Bf8 22.Re1 Rad8 23.Rxd8 Rxd8 24.h4 g6 25.Qg4 Qd7 26.h5 Kf7 27.hxg6+ hxg6 28.Bh6 Nc4 29.Bxf8 Ne5 30.Qh4 Rxf8 31.Ne3 Kg7 32.Rd1 Qc6 33.Rd5 Re8 34.Qg3 Kh7 35.Ng4 Nxg4 36.Qxg4 f5 37.Qh3+ *

[Event "Simon Webb Memorial"]
[Site "ICCF"]
[Date "2007.03.14"]
[White "Nickel, Arno"]
[Black "Persson, Conny"]
[Result "*"]

1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.f3 e5 7.Nb3 Be6 8.Be3 Be7 9.Qd2 O-O 10.O-O-O Nbd7 11.g4 b5 12.g5 b4 13.Ne2 Ne8 14.f4 a5 15.f5 a4 16.Nbd4 exd4 17.Nxd4 b3 18.Kb1 bxc2+ 19.Nxc2 Bxa2+ 20.Kxa2 Ne5 21.h4 Qb8 22.Rh3 Nc7 23.Bf4 Rc8 24.Rc3 Qb7 25.Rc1 Ne8 26.Nd4 Rc5 27.Rxc5 dxc5 28.Bxe5 cxd4 29.Qd3 a3 30.b3 Rd8 31.Rc4 Qb5 32.Bxd4 Bf8 33.e5 Nc7 34.e6 fxe6 35.f6 Ne8 36.Be2 e5 37.Qe3 Qd5 38.Bf3 Qd6 39.Bxe5 Qd2+ 40.Qxd2 Rxd2+ 41.Kb1 gxf6 42.gxf6 Kf7 43.Bh5+ Ke6 44.Bc3 Rd8 45.Re4+ *

[Event "Simon Webb Memorial"]
[Site "ICCF"]
[Date "2007.03.14"]
[White "Nickel, Arno"]
[Black "Gerhardt, Frank"]
[Result "*"]

1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bb5 g6 5.e5 Ng4 6.Bxc6 dxc6 7.d3 Bg7 8.Bf4 g5 9.Nxg5 Nxe5 10.O-O Bg4 11.Qd2 Ng6 12.Nge4 Qd7 13.Rae1 Rg8 14.f3 Bh3 15.Bg3 Bd4+ 16.Kh1 Be6 17.f4 Bf5 18.Bf2 O-O-O 19.Nxc5 Bxc5 20.Bxc5 b6 21.Bf2 h5 22.Qe3 h4 23.h3 c5 24.Qf3 Qb7 25.Ne4 Kb8 26.a4 a5 27.Re2 f6 28.b3 Rg7 29.Be1 Rdg8 30.Nc3 Qd7 31.Nd5 Qd6 32.c4 Rf7 33.Bc3 e6 34.Nxf6 Rgf8 35.Be5 *

[Event "Simon Webb Memorial"]
[Site "ICCF"]
[Date "2007.03.14"]
[White "Nickel, Arno"]
[Black "Toro Solís de Ovando, G F"]
[Result "*"]

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.d4 Nxe4 4.Bd3 d5 5.dxe5 Nc6 6.O-O Bg4 7.Nc3 Nxc3 8.bxc3 Bc5 9.Bf4 O-O 10.h3 Bh5 11.Rb1 b6 12.Re1 Na5 13.Bf5 c6 14.g4 Bg6 15.Nd4 b5 16.Qd3 Qh4 17.Qf3 Rae8 18.Kg2 a6 19.Re2 Bxd4 20.cxd4 Nc4 21.Rbe1 a5 22.c3 Qe7 23.h4 h6 24.Qg3 Bh7 25.Bg5 Qa7 26.Qd3 Bg6 27.Bc1 *

[Event "Simon Webb Memorial"]
[Site "ICCF"]
[Date "2007.03.14"]
[White "Nickel, Arno"]
[Black "Chytilek, Roman"]
[Result "*"]

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.O-O Be7 6.Re1 b5 7.Bb3 d6 8.c3 O-O 9.h3 Re8 10.d4 Bb7 11.Ng5 Rf8 12.Nf3 Re8 13.Nbd2 Bf8 14.a3 h6 15.Bc2 Nb8 16.b4 Nbd7 17.Bb2 g6 18.Qb1 Rb8 19.Nb3 Ba8 20.a4 Nb6 21.axb5 axb5 22.Bc1 Nc4 23.dxe5 dxe5 24.Nfd2 Nb6 25.Nc5 Nfd7 26.Na6 Rc8 27.Ra5 Bb7 28.Nc5 Nxc5 29.bxc5 Nd7 30.Qxb5 Nxc5 31.Qc4 Qd6 32.Nb3 Ne6 33.Ra7 *

[Event "Simon Webb Memorial"]
[Site "ICCF"]
[Date "2007.03.14"]
[White "Nickel, Arno"]
[Black "Coleman, Peter L."]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]

[Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2007.05.19"]
[White "Nickel, Arno"]
[Black "Niccoli, Paolo"]
[Result "1-0"]

1. Nf3 d5 2. c4 c6 3. d4 Nf6 4. Nc3 dxc4 5. a4 Bf5 6. Ne5 e6 7. g3 Nbd7 8. Nxc4 Bb4 9. Bg2 O-O 10. O-O Re8 11. Bf4 Nh5 12. Bd6 Nb6 13. Bxb4 Nxc4 14. b3 a5 15. Bc5 Nb6 16. e4 Bg6 17. e5 Nd5 18. Nxd5 exd5 19. f4 Be4 1-0

[Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2007.05.21"]
[White "Nickel, Arno"]
[Black "Mercandelli, Claudio"]
[Result "1-0"]

1. Nf3 Nc6 2. d4 d5 3. Bf4 Bg4 4. Nbd2 Nf6 5. h3 Bf5 6. a3 e6 7. e3 a6 8. c4 Be7 9. Rc1 O-O 10. Be2 Rc8 11. cxd5 exd5 12. Qb3 Na5 13. Qa2 c5 14. dxc5 Bxc5 15. O-O Ba7 16. b4 Nc6 17. Rfd1 d4 18. Nb3 Ne4 19. Qa1 Qf6 20. Nbxd4 Nxd4 21. Nxd4 Bg6 22. Bf3 Rfd8 23. Rxc8 Rxc8 24. Ne2 Qxa1 25. Rxa1 Rc2 26. Rc1 Rxc1+ 27. Nxc1 Kf8 28. Nb3 Ke7 29. Kf1 Kd7 30. Be5 f6 31. Bb2 Kc7 32. Ke2 Bb6 33. Nd4 Kd7 34. Bg4+ Ke7 35. Nf5+ Kf7 36. Nh4 Nd6 37. Nxg6 Kxg6 38. Kd3 Kf7 39. Bd1 Ke6 40. Bb3+ Kd7 41. g4 h6 42. Bd5 Kc7 43. f4 Kd7 44. e4 1-0

[Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2007.05.23"]
[White "Nickel, Arno"]
[Black "Pedroni, Marco"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]

1. Nf3 d5 2. b3 Nf6 3. Bb2 Bf5 4. e3 e6 5. Be2 Bd6 6. O-O Nbd7 7. c4 c6 8. d4 O-O 9. Nbd2 Ne4 10. Ne5 Nxd2 11. Qxd2 Nf6 12. f3 Qc7 13. g4 Bg6 14. h4 h6 15. Nxg6 fxg6 16. Bd3 Bg3 17. Qg2 Bxh4 18. Bxg6 Nh7 19. Ba3 Be7 20. Bxe7 Qxe7 21. f4 a5 22. a3 Rf6 23. Bd3 Raf8 24. Qc2 g5 25. Qd2 gxf4 26. Bxh7+ Kxh7 27. Rxf4 Rxf4 28. exf4 Qh4 29. Rf1 Qxg4+ 30. Qg2 Rxf4 31. Rxf4 Qxf4 32. Qc2+ Qf5 33. Qc3 b6 34. c5 Qg5+ 35. Kf2 b5 36. Kf1 Qf4+ 37. Kg2 Qg5+ 38. Kf1 Qf5+ 39. Kg2 Qg4+ 40. Kf1 Kg6 41. Qxa5 h5 42. Qc3 h4 43. a4 bxa4 44. bxa4 h3 45. Qc2+ Kf6 46. a5 Qxd4 47. Qf2+ Qxf2+ 48. Kxf2 d4 49. a6 d3 50. a7 d2 51. Ke2 d1=Q+ 52. Kxd1 h2 53. a8=Q h1=Q+ 54. Kc2 Qd5 55. Qf8+ Ke5 56. Kc3 Ke4 57. Qd6 Kf5 58. Qf8+ Kg4 59. Qd6 Kf3 60. Qf8+ Ke2 61. Qd6 Qe4 62. Qh2+ Kf3 63. Qh1+ Kf4 64. Qh2+ Kg5 65. Qg3+ Kf6 66. Qf2+ Qf5 67. Qg1 e5 68. Kc4 Qf4+ 69. Kc3 Kf5 70. Kd3 e4+ 71. Kc3 e3 72. Kd3 1/2-1/2

[Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2007.05.24"]
[White "Nickel, Arno"]
[Black "Deruda, Leonardo"]
[Result "1-0"]

1. Nf3 c5 2. e4 Nc6 3. Nc3 g6 4. Bb5 Bg7 5. d3 Nf6 6. Bxc6 dxc6 7. Be3 b6 8. h3 Ba6 9. Qd2 c4 10. d4 h6 11. O-O Bb7 12. a4 a6 13. Rfe1 g5 14. Nh2 b5 15. f3 Qc7 16. e5 Nd5 17. Ne4 O-O 18. Nc5 Rfd8 19. Bxg5 hxg5 20. Qxg5 Bc8 21. Re4 f6 22. Qg6 f5 23. Rh4 e6 24. f4 Qf7 25. Rh8+ 1-0

[Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2007.05.26"]
[White "Nickel, Arno"]
[Black "Cocchi, Andrea"]
[Result "0-1"]

this was now the corr chess part of my ccGM Nickel game collection - latest on top, older below

conclusion:
-----------------

he has changed from 1.d4 to 1.Nf3 (his surprise weapon? - not energetic enough to keep the white start advantage) and 1.e4 (the main weapon)

as he has already felt the strength of this team, and has recently lost a 1.Nf3 game (a White loss is always a major catastrophy for any strong cc player) I'd expect to see 1.e4

If the team is inclined to opt for the Najdorf, I could contribute a huge mass of games and opening theory (the essence of 40 own games) in any main or side line. I have not lost any of these games and won most of them, against 2300-up players.

1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 ==
(will he repeat 6. h3)

1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.Bb5+ Bd7 4.Bxd7+ Qxd7 ==

for <imag>s eyes only:

[Event "Champions League 2007 A"]
[Site "ICCF"]
[Date "2007.9.1"]
[Round "-"]
[White "Dufek, Jiri"]
[Black "Nickel, Arno"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nf3 b6 4.g3 Ba6 5.b3 Bb4+ 6.Bd2 Be7 7.Bg2 c6 8.Bc3 d5 9.Ne5 Nfd7 10.Nxd7 Nxd7 11.Nd2 O-O 12.O-O f5 13.Rc1 Ba3 14.Rc2 Qe7 15.Ba1 Bb7 16.Nf3 a5 17.Ne1 a4 18.Nd3 axb3 19.axb3 Bd6 20.Qd2 Nf6 21.Bb2 Ne4 22.Qe3 Nf6 23.Rcc1 Ng4 24.Qd2 Nf6 25.Qe3 Ng4 1/2-1/2

correction: his 1.Nf3 games were not from cc, but from a tt in ITA: "FE Capo d'Orso"

Arno has several promising positions in his unfinished games in the Simon Webb.

My guess is that his style in the forthcoming game will be more akin to the Simon Webb Tourney than the 1-hour freestyle games, where there would have been a lot of Rybka input.

I read that you feel comfortable with the Black side of the Nadjorf (as do I) although we need to keep the team on top of the fact that move-order is vitally important for both colours in the critical lines.

Cheers,

Where did you get your database??

It is better than mine.

I have joined all my commercial game collections and add each week several 10000 games from different sources (several cc servers, comp chess collections, periodic otb game collections)

as the commercial chess DB software I use, often crashes when I process my large game DB (1.5 GB, no doubles, no comments!) I got used to always create a backup prior to any change of the DB

I've included even comp blitz games, as I had cc games where I got into advantage by repeating a computer blitz game until move 24!

Hi Ceri, Kurt, team,

if he opens 1.e4 I'd fall into depression if we don't get the Najdorf on board.

It is objectively the best chance for Black to get a positionally completely unbalanced but dynamically balanced and nearly equal position, where usually the better player can take over initiative. Any deviation for white loses the opening advantage.

Kurt, you've mentioned:
" .. 9. Rb1 Qa3 10. e5 h6 11. Bh4 dxe5 12. fxe5 Nd5", the Antitoxin line (as I call it from now on).

I had 12. .. Nd5(!) prepared in 2003, but so far got no occasion to play it. Imho, it refutes the 11. Bh4 complex - white can only hope for draw.

Besides the Ciron game listed below, do you know any other maybe even older game with that line?

Cheers,

zsoyd

p.s.
I'm still the real and only 'zsoyd'. As this account was already occupied, I had to use 'zsoydd'.

It's a pity there's no copyright for self-designed avatar names.

if he opens 1.e4 I'd fall into depression if we don't get the Najdorf on board.>

I believe the voting system will favour first the Sicilian and then the Najdorf variation. It is so popular at all levels that it should win the vote.

"In Greek mythology, Chiron or Cheiron ("hand") was held as the superlative centaur among his brethren. Like the satyrs, centaurs were notorious for being overly indulgent drinkers and carousers, given to violence when intoxicated, and generally uncultured delinquents. Chiron, by contrast, was intelligent, civilized and kind."

if he opens 1.e4 I'd fall into depression if we don't get the Najdorf on board. >

In my cc games I used to take a slightly lazy approach, based upon the following logic:

That Joop van Oosterom would have heavily analysed any innovation played substantively prior to his reaching that position. Since he is a good OTB player, reputedly with GM help, as well as being able to afford the very highest tech computer help, then his preparation would have been up-to-date when he played it.

I therefore studied his games and any relevant later cc games - it seemed to work for me.

Cheers,

Dear Ceri,

I like the lazy approach very much.

(Lazyness in itself was always and still is the motor of real progress. The zestful ones on the other hand cannot stop transforming the biosphere on and on and on - we will soon see the consequences in full beauty.)

When I have to decide for a certain opening move, I check top level cc games first, then long time Rybka games, then GM games and so on, resulting in a rough overview, what move might be the best.

This works only if one is strong enough to objectively analyze such games, and maybe even find improvements.

I have no doubt that you have this strength.

Hello <Xenon Oxide>:

ccGM Nickel has nearly master strength on the board and is a very experienced chess engine user.

This enables him to play almost all types of positions on very high level. I don't think he has any subjective preference for certain position types in corr chess - he will strive for those which in his opinion offer the best winning resp. drawing chances.

Any strong cc player in our engine dominated era plays like this.

I left the LPC site and resigned all of my outstanding games. The effect was to drop me from number 1 to number 3 or 4.

My peak rating was 3166, overtaking zsoyd's previous record of 3110.

You are right that I used to analyse previous games of my opponents and try to ascertain which engine they were relying on and to set long-term traps for them.

GMAN will be different, in that he will be like a more experienced version of me and will, no doubt, be using Rybka 3, about which we know nothing at present. So, any Rybka weaknesses are yet to be seen. My guess is that they will still be in endings, but GMAN will know quite a lot about endings, so it will be hard to plan to finish him him there.

One hypothetical weakness is that Larry Kaufmann has increased the evaluation of the Bishop pair. zsoyd likes Bishop pairs as well.

There are limited sets of positions where Knights can do in a bad Bishop. I gained a lot of wins by indentifying such positions and exploiting them. It's tough to manage but extremely satisfying when achieved.

In reality, with Black, the optimum strategy is to equalize, expecting a draw and hope that, if White makes an error, that a draw might improve to a win.

It's a similar strategy to what has been achieved in the current game. One slight error and Black died.

It might take two slight errors for a White to die.

I might have to rejoin LPC to be able to access all of my old games, since a lot of data was lost when my older machine was corrupted and I had to re-install Windows XP.

Cheers,

Ceri

Hi Ceri

The Bishop pair is a frequent guest in my games. Maybe they like my style of play. :)

best regards,
zsoyd

p.s.
These LPC (cw.net) ratings are statistically meaningless.

Maybe you remember my ELOstat generated lists. According to these "Aurelian" was by far the strongest player LPC ever saw. In this list we were both ranked at about 40 if I remember right (I've thrown the files away after the divorce).

However, they switched to an elo-based system, so no more free points for bunny-bashing.

I improved a bit and, until I resigned those games I had lost two that were not mouse/moving in the wrong position errors. As a result, I was ahead in all match-ups against the leading players, although I never played Hector Walsh. Carmelo did and was ahead of Hector and I was ahead of Carmelo in our series - great opponent. We played a few Nadjdorfs, I was White in all of them and played Be3.

Cheers,

Hi, Ceri,

I know about this rating method change. The new ratings are still quite wrong as there was no "clean" recalculation of the ratings - the old ratings were simply extrapolated using the new calculation system.

If ccGM Nickel plays the Be3 Najdorf, I recommend the "standard refutation" Ng4 Bg5 h6 Bh4 g5 Bg3 Bg7, etc.

Do you maybe know a strong white line against this? (Yes/No is sufficient, the concrete line might be one of your opening secrets)

I don't.