The Decisive Game in Canberra

This game defined the winner of the tournament:
Arutinian,D (2575) - Deviatkin,A (2566) [B10]
Doeberl Cup Premier Canberra AUS (9), 25.04.2011
[Dejan Bojkov]
1.c4 c6 2.e4 d5 3.exd5 cxd5 4.cxd5 Nf6 5.Nc3 Nxd5 6.Nf3 Nc6 7.Bb5 Curiously, Arutinian had the very same position on board two around ago, with the black pieces. The Georgian GM likes to play against both sides of the isolani. 7...e6 8.0–0 Be7 9.d4 0–0 10.Re1 Qd6 11.a3 Rd8 12.Qc2


White usually starts with the move: [12.Bd3 which is a bit more flexible, here are a couple of examples: 12...Nf6 (12...Bd7 13.Bc2 Be8 14.Qd3 g6 15.h4 Rac8 16.Bh6 Nxc3 17.bxc3 e5 18.Bb3 Bf6 (18...exd4 19.cxd4) 19.Ng5 Bxg5 20.Bxg5 Rd7 21.Re4 Rdc7 22.Qe2 Na5 23.Ba2 Nc4 24.dxe5 Qxa3 25.Re1 b5 26.h5 Rc6 27.Bf6 Qxc3 28.Qg4 Qa3 29.Qg5 Qf8 30.Rh4 Re6 31.Ree4 h6 32.hxg6 Rxf6 33.Qxf6 fxg6 34.Rxc4 bxc4 35.Rxc4 1–0 Nevednichy,2538)-Kallai,G (2500)/ Hungary 2004/EXT 2011) 13.Be3 b6 14.Qc2 Bb7 15.Rad1 Rac8 16.d5!


A thematic breakthrough, which Black should always be aware of! 16...Nxd5 (16...exd5 17.Bf5 Ra8 18.Ne4 Nxe4 19.Bxe4 g6 (19...h6 20.Rxd5 Qb8 (20...Qf6 21.Bh7+ Kh8 (21...Kf8 22.Rf5 Qd6 23.Qb3+-) 22.Rf5+-) ) 20.Bxd5 Qc7 (20...Nb4 21.Bxf7+ Kxf7 22.axb4 Qxb4 23.Ne5+ Kg8 24.Nc6 Bxc6 25.Qxc6 Qb3 26.Bd4‚) 21.Bxf7+ Kxf7 22.Bh6 Kg8 23.Qb3+ Kh8 24.Qf7 Rg8 25.Ng5+-) 17.Nxd5 exd5 18.Bxh7+‚ Kf8 19.Qf5 d4 20.Bf4 Qf6 21.Qg4 g6 22.Bh6+ Ke8 23.Bg5 Qd6 24.h4 Qd7 25.Qg3 Qd6 26.Ne5 Rc7 27.Bf4 Qd5 28.Nxf7 d3 29.Bxg6 1–0 Matamoros Franco,C (2540) -Dias,P (2425)/Campillos 2007/CBM 117 ext] 12...Bd7 13.Bd3 h6 Now Black's position is much more solid than with the g7-g6 set-up. 14.Bd2 Rac8 15.Nxd5 exd5 Deviatkin plays solidly. In case of: [15...Qxd5 The d4-d5 breakthrough idea will still irritate Black- 16.Bc3 Bf6 17.Bh7+ Kh8 18.Be4 Qb5 19.Rad1 and White is already threatening d4-d5.] 16.Bc3 Bg4= Or else White will play h2-h3. It seems as Black had already equalized. 17.Ne5 [17.Bh7+ Kh8 18.Bf5 Bxf5 19.Qxf5 Qf6= (19...Kg8=) ] 17...Nxe5 18.dxe5 Qb6 19.Qa4 Bd7 [19...Be6? 20.Ba5] 20.Qf4 Be6


21.h4?! Black's active pieces will keep the balance in case of: [21.Bd4 Bc5 22.Bxc5 Rxc5 23.Qb4 (23.b4 Rc3 24.Red1 Rdc8) 23...Rc6 24.Rac1 Qxb4 25.axb4 Rb6 26.b5 a6= but this should have been preferred. Now Black will use his main trump.] 21...d4! 22.Bd2 Qb3 Of course not: [22...Qxb2?? 23.Reb1 and the queen is trapped.] 23.Be4?! One mistake leads to another. Arutinian should have preferred: [23.Qe4 g6 24.Qe2 h5 25.Bg5 Bxg5 26.hxg5 Rc5 although Black already has a pull here.] 23...d3 24.Qg3 Kh8 25.Bc3 d2 26.Red1 Rc4


Consistently following his plan. However, he is missing a strong tactical blow: [26...Bxa3! 27.Rxd2 (27.bxa3 Rxc3 28.Qf4 Qc4–+; 27.Rxa3 Qxd1+) 27...Rxd2 28.Bxd2 Qxg3 29.fxg3 Bxb2–+ 30.Rxa7 Bd4+] 27.Qf3 Bxh4 28.Ba5 Qxf3 Once more safe play by the Russian GM. The reason for this is understandable. A draw secures tie for the first place, while a possible loss will bring home nothing but peanuts. [28...Qxb2 29.Bxd8 Bxd8 30.Rab1 Qxe5 31.Bxb7 Bg5–+] 29.Bxf3 b6 30.Bxd2 Rc2 31.Be3 Rxb2 32.a4 Rxd1+ 33.Rxd1 Bg5 34.Bd4 Rb4 35.Bc6 Bg4 [35...Bf5!? with the idea Bf5-c2 was better, and Black should win. Now Arutinian seizes his chance.] 36.f3!? Sacrificing a pawn to liquidate into an opposite-coloured bishop endgame, which is famous for the drawing tendencies. 36...Bxf3 37.Bxf3 Rxd4 38.Rxd4 Be3+ 39.Kf1 Bxd4 40.Bd5 Kg8 41.e6 fxe6 42.Bxe6+ Kf8 43.Ke2 Ke7 44.Bh3 Kd6 45.Kd3 Kc5 46.Bd7 Bf6 47.Be6?! This move lets Black create a passed pawn. The further the distance is between the pawns, the less chances the defender has, as it is easier "to stretch" his defensive forces. [47.g4! was much better. White needs to keep the zone with his king, and not let the counterpart approach his king's side pawns, or help the b passer win the bishop. An important detail is that the promotional square of the h pawn is at the opposite colour of the bishop that Black has. 47...a6 48.Be8 b5 A b pawn is less harmful. 49.axb5 axb5 50.Bg6 Kd5! This is the only way to make progress: (50...b4 51.Bf7 Kd6 52.Ke4 Ke7 53.Bb3 g6 54.Bg8 h5? Once that the h pawn is moved, White will have an additional fortress resource. 55.gxh5 gxh5 56.Kf3=


White is just placing his hing to h1, and then can sacrifice the bishop for the b pawn- it is a fortress.; 50...Kb4 51.Be8 harassing the pawn, and not letting the black king move freely. 51...Ka5 52.Bf7 b4 53.Kc2 Ka4 54.Bb3+ Ka3 55.Bf7 and Black cannot make progress.) 51.Bf7+ Ke5 52.Ke3 Bg5+! 53.Kf3 (53.Kd3 Kf4 54.Be6 Bf6 55.Ke2 b4 56.Kf2 Kg5 followed by h6-h5. Once that a second passed pawn is created Black should be winning, although there are still technical difficulties.) 53...Kd4 followed by Kd4-c3, pawn is marching to b2, and once the White king comes to deal with the b pawn, his counterpart goes to the king's flank and wins the bishop. Still, White has more defensive resources than in the game. For example if Black prematurely advances the pawn to b2 White places the bishop on the b1–h7 diagonal, and this is a draw!] 47...b5! Now Black wins. 48.axb5 Kxb5 49.Bf7 a5 50.Ke4 Kb4 51.Kd3 a4 52.Bg8 h5 53.Bf7 h4 54.Bg8 a3 55.Bf7 g5 56.Be6 g4 57.Ke4 Kc3 58.Kf4 g3 0–1
Deviatkin is the proud winner of Doeberl Cup 2011.

Deviatkin Successful in Canberra

This year’s edition of the Doeberl cup appeared somewhat weaker than the previous one. The usual Indian flock was missing. Still four GMs from abroad took part in the event, as well as half of the Aussies’ GMs- Smerdon and Johansen. The third one, Zhao will represent them on the coming Sydney International open, while the last, but not least Ian Rogers was once again providing his excellent commentaries throughout the event. Those annotations attracted a great share of attention. Due to his work commitments Smerdon started with a half point bye at the start. So did Australia’s highest rated female Arianne Caoili who took two. Byes are allowed in Canberra for the first couple of rounds.
The tournament was once again hosted by the Hellenic club and started smoothly for the titled players. With two rounds per day we quickly passed the tournament equator when Andrey Deviatkin was most successful, with 5.5/6 score.
Seventh round appeared to be the longest, as Daryl Johanson pushed hard to overcome the young Mountlyn Ly. The game lasted more than 150 moves, and he finally managed to convert the tricky rook and bishop versus rook endgame. Eight’ round was postponed for half an hour, while they finish the game. That feast came too much for both the opponents and they both lost in the next round.
Remarkably, there were many long full-blooded games. Part of them is due to the price fund which Doeberl Cup provides. To claim it, a player is not allowed to make a draw before move thirty throughout the event, and to win their final game with a score equal to the lowest player’s score on board four in the final round.
The situation before the final round promised suspense. Two players on 6.5 were facing two GMs on 6 points with the white pieces. A third pair on six points was playing on board three where the top seeded Sune Berg Hansen managed to ground down the local surprise Eugene Schon. I totally messed the opening against David Smerdon on board two. The danger to get in the basic textbook of how not to play in the opening was there, but the Aussie was also nervous. He made a few inaccuracies and offered a draw, which I gladly accepted. In vain, the position was already much better for me.
Fortune favours the brave. In the meanwhile Andrei Deviakin showed guts by rejecting a similar draw offer against the Georgian GM David Arutinian. He won a pawn, then second, and converted it into the opposite coloured bishop endgame. Thus, the Russian took clear first place, scoring 7.5/9. This win also granted him a share of the thousand dollar fighting price fund. The other two who took a bite were Max Illingworth and Akshat Khamparia. They both made a performance over 2450 but for technical reasons could not fulfill the IM norm requirements.
While we were dealing with the price fund, the locals enjoyed themselves in the lobby of the hall with a game called “two up”. It is a rather simple gambling game, which the Australian soldiers used to play during the First World War, and which is repeated each year in their memories.
This year’s slogan for the Doeberl cup shirts was “It’s been a hard day’s knight.” But one other slogan attracts the attention- “Lost your bishop? Better start praying now…” It could be seen on the shirt that a two meter man wore. His name is Charles Bishop and he is the organizer of the event. It might really be trouble if Doeberl Cup loses their Bishop. The organization stuff that he does vary to wide ranges. His children played in the tournaments, and his wife Lara is involved in the organization as well. Charles was also our guide in the Australian life, showed us the wild kangaroos, and invited us to a delicious dinner. In previous years he even drove the bus from Canberra to Sydney to personally bring the guest players to their second event.
The next year is the 50-th jubilee edition of the tournament. We are looking forward for it.

KID on the Battlefield (2)

The next time when I had to defend my ideas was in Groningen, at the end of the year. My young opponent confidently blitzed the theoretical moves...

Ashwin,Jayaram (2420) - Bojkov,Dejan (2544) [E91]
Schaakfestival 2010 Open A Groningen (2.5), 22.12.2010
[Dejan Bojkov]
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.e4 d6 5.Nf3 0–0 6.Be2 Na6 7.0–0 e5 8.Be3 Ng4 9.Bg5 Qe8 10.Re1 exd4 11.Nd5 c6 12.Ne7+ Kh8 13.Nxc8 Rxc8 14.Nxd4 Nf6 15.f3 Qe5 16.Be3 d5 17.Qb3 Black is very active after: [17.cxd5 Nxd5 18.Bf2 Nf4 19.Bxa6 bxa6 20.Qc2 Qg5 with initiative- 21.Be3 (21.g3 Nh3+ 22.Kg2 Nxf2 23.Qxf2 Rfd8 24.Rad1 c5 25.Nb3 c4 and Black is already slightly better) 21...c5


22.Nb3 c4 23.Nd4 Qe5 24.Bxf4 Qxd4+ 25.Kf1 Qxb2 26.Qxb2 Bxb2і Jovanic,O (2527)-Saric,I (2566)/Rijeka 2009/CBM 128 Extra (48)] 17...c5 18.Nb5 dxe4 19.Rad1 Rcd8 20.Nxa7 Rxd1 21.Rxd1 exf3 22.Bxf3 Ne4 My opponent did not believe that I will repeat the same line that I played against Jakovenko. However, as we have seen from that game things were far away from clear, and the hunter became hunted in this game. Ashwin sank into deep thought.23.a3!?N


Logical move, which deprives the black knight from the b4 square. Still, it seems as Black has good counterplay here as well.[23.Qxb7 Nd6 24.Qb3 Nxc4 is unclear, while- 23.Re1 f5 24.Qxb7 leads to Jakovenko-Bojkov, ECC Plovdiv 2010 when 24...Nb4!] 23...f5 24.Qxb7


[24.Nb5!? Bringing back the knight into the action seems like a reasonable alternative for the first player. Note that the engame after: 24...Qxb2 (24...b6!? provides counterplay) 25.Qxb2 Bxb2 26.Bxe4 fxe4 27.Rd7± is again favourable for White.] 24...Nd6! The same manouver recommended in DVD solves Black's problems. 25.Qb3 Nxc4 26.Bc1 [Or- 26.Bf2 Nxb2 27.Re1 Qf4 with initiative.] 26...Nxb2 27.Nc6 Qf6 28.Rd7 Seems very active, but probably White had to try the endgame: [28.Bxb2 Qxb2 29.Qxb2 Bxb2 30.Rb1 Bc3 31.Rb6 and the a pawn and active pieces should compensate for Black's extra pawn.] 28...c4! Black's threats become too strong, and now White blunders- 29.Qb6 This loses on the spot. The only move was: [29.Qb5 Although Black is still much better here- 29...Re8 30.Rxg7 Re1+ 31.Kf2 Nd3+ 32.Kg3 f4+ 33.Bxf4 Qxf4+ 34.Kh3 Nf2#] 29...Nd3


[29...Qc3? 30.Bd2] 30.Qxa6 [30.Rxd3 cxd3 31.Qxa6 Qc3–+] 30...Qc3! 31.h3 Qxc1+ 32.Kh2 Qf4+ 33.Kg1 Nc5


34.Qa7 Nxd7 35.Qxd7 c3 0–1 This time things went well for me. In the meanwhile I was pleasantly surprised to receive this picture from a student of mine:


Thanks, Dom!

KID On the Battlefield (1)

My first DVD on the KID with Na6 came out in February, although it was recorded before. In the meanwhile and soon after it some theoretically important positions were tested on the battlefield.

Jakovenko,D (2726) - Bojkov,D (2552) [E94]
26th European Club Cup Plovdiv BUL (3.8), 19.10.2010
[Dejan Bojkov]
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.e4 d6 5.Nf3 0–0 6.Be2 e5 7.0–0 Na6 8.Be3 Ng4 9.Bg5 Qe8 10.Re1


White makes an useful move and does not commit yet in the center. The options are open, and the d4 pawn might be either exchanged or advanced forward, and there is also a very powerful idea c4-c5 in the area. The opposition of the white rook and black queen on the "e" file is also irritating for the second player. Black has various ways to threat the position. 10...exd4 Simplest, and most probably best. 11.Nd5 White's chances are currently linked with this idea of Huzman from 2005. 11...c6 12.Ne7+ Kh8 13.Nxc8 Rxc8 14.Nxd4 Nf6 15.f3 The latest trend of the line is connected with this interesting Polish idea to hold the center. Radoslav Wojtaszek used it to surprise and defeat Ivan Saric at the ETCC in Novi Sad 2009. The idea though belongs to his country-man G. Gajewski. 15...Qe5 The best reaction, Black must act quickly- [15...Nc5?! 16.Bf1 Qe5 17.Be3 Rfe8 18.Qd2± see Wojtaszek,R (2640)-Saric,I (2573)/Novi Sad SRB 2009/] 16.Be3 d5 17.Qb3 '!' 'Wojtaszek.' White sacrifices a pawn for the initiative. 17...c5 18.Nb5 dxe4 19.Rad1 'with compensation' Up to here we were following the analyzes of the Polish players. This was the first time that Jakovenko chose the line, and I could not exactly remember what I had analyzed. But finally, after investing a large amount of time I played the prepared moves. 19...Rcd8N The rook is moving away from the tempoes after Nb5xa7, and fights for the d file. 20.Nxa7 Rxd1 Deflects the rook from the defence of the bishops. 21.Rxd1 [‹21.Bxd1 Nb4] 21...exf3 22.Bxf3 Ne4


23.Re1 [23.Qxb7 Nd6 24.Qb3 Nxc4 with unclear play, when Black has his share of chances. This is the line that I give in for my DVD on the KID. I believe that Black has good chances on the king's flank.] 23...f5 24.Qxb7 Qxb2? This move leads to a difficult endgame. I missed an important detail in the other main line: [24...Nb4! After the game both Ugra's captain Alexander Khalifman and Jakovenko himself immediately pointed out this move. Jakovenko added: "I could not see salvation for me here". In fact the computer shows that the game is equal, but still it was White who needed to find the good moves: 25.Nc6 I was afraid of: (25.Bxe4 fxe4 26.Nc6 but Jakovenko showed me the nice tacical shot that I missed- 26...Qf5 27.Nxb4 (27.Ne7) 27...Bh6! and Black is winning


I have only considered using the bishop on the other diagonal and this move was simply a black spot for me.) 25...Qxb2 (25...Nxc6 is also good and leads to an equal endgame after: 26.Qxc6 Qxb2 27.Bxe4 Qc3 28.Bf2 Bd4 29.Bxd4+ Qxd4+ 30.Kh1 fxe4=) 26.Bxc5! The only move. The dangers that White experience demonstrates the line: (26.Bxe4? Qc3! 27.Bf2 fxe4 28.Nxb4


28...Qxe1+!! I saw this line, but unfortunately missed that the bishop can be useful on the other diagonal too (see the previous line). 29.Bxe1 Bd4+ 30.Bf2 Rxf2 and White loses the queen or is getting mated.; And if: 26.Nxb4? might lead to a smothered mate after: 26...Bd4! 27.Bxd4+ Qxd4+ 28.Kh1 Nf2+ 29.Kg1 Nh3+ 30.Kh1 Qg1+ 31.Rxg1 Nf2#) 26...Nxc5 27.Qxb4 Bd4+ 28.Kh1 Qxb4 29.Nxb4 Bc3 30.Rb1 Rb8 31.a3 Na6= with full equality.] 25.Qxb2 Bxb2 26.Bxe4 fxe4 27.Nb5±


27...Re8 28.a3 Rd8 29.Bf2 Re8 30.Re2 Bc1 31.Be3 Bxe3+ 32.Rxe3 Nb8 33.Nc3 Nc6 34.Rxe4 Ra8 35.Nb5 Nd4 36.Re7 Nc2 37.Re2 Nd4 38.Nxd4 cxd4 39.Ra2 Ra4 40.Kf2 Kg7 41.Ke2 Kf6 42.Kd3 Ke5 43.h3 g5 44.Ra1 h5 45.Ra2 h4 46.Ra1 Kd6 47.Kxd4 Kc6 48.Ra2 Ra5 49.a4 g4 50.hxg4 Rg5 51.a5 Rxg4+ 52.Ke5 Kb7 53.a6+ Ka7 54.c5 Rg5+ 55.Kf4 Rxc5 56.Kg4 Rc4+ 57.Kh3 Rb4 58.Ra5 Rc4 59.Rg5 Kxa6 60.Rg4 Rc3+ 61.Kxh4 Kb6 62.Rd4 1–0 Despite the fact that my first game did not bring the desired effect, I liked my position and kept on testing it. Two more games were played in the coming couple of months.


(To be continued.)

Belgium Interclubs

16-16. This was the final outcome of the top match in the last round of the Belgium league between the favourites KSK Rochade 1 KSK47-Eynatten 1. The first time of Eynathen had though secured the title long time ago. But what kind of result is that 16-16? Or 21-11, the largest win in the final round which my team Amay had achieved? Especially when there are only eight players in each team? Well, the system in Belgium this year is changed. The individual points are calculated as follows- 3 points for a win, 2 points for a draw, 1 point for a loss. Yes, a loss is awarded with a point, but if a player does not appear, he receives a zero. And that makes sense. Theoretically, a match can be tide 4-4, but if player from one of the teams does not appear, that team will lose the match 15-16 according to the new systems. And, if there were teams willing to save money from their expensive foreigners before they are no longer willing to do so. A match win is counted first and none is willing to lose due a sheer default of a player.
Belgium Interclubs is an all-play all 11 round Championship. Games are played on Sundays throughout the whole year. In total there are 5 Leagues, but starting from second league there are also groups. Fifth division for instance has groups A-M. The teams in second and third divisions consist of 6 players, and fourth and fifth divisions count on four players.
The last two teams from 1-st division relegate into second, and the top three qualify for the Champion’s League.
For many years a dominant force in Belgium is the Eynathen team. Khenkin, Van der Doel, Lutz, Sulskis, Horvath, Hausrath, these are only some of the GMs that the team can use in their matches. They also have a strong backbone of masters willing to prove themselves. If they want though, they can easily compose a team only of Grandmaster power. Their opponents can hardly do the same, although, the silver medalists Ans 1 have M. Hoffman and Luc Winants in their team, while the bronze winners KSK Rochade 1 can count on R. Vaganian, Berelovitsch, Feigin and Glek. Apart from the local players, the Belgium Interclubs recruits many foreigners, mainly from the countries in the neighborhood. Netherlands, Germany and France are well represented in the team squads. Top players include the names of Ivan Sokolov (NED), Georg Meier (GER), Tigran Gharamian (FRA). Players from other continents like Parimadjan Negi(IND) and Irina Krush(USA) also compete in the league.
Till Sunday the matches were always played in the home town of the hosting time. However this year an exception was made, and all the teams gathered together for the final round in Charleroi, in the hall where the traditional open tournament takes place in summer. This was made as an attempt to provoke the general interest towards our game in Belgium. The top three boards in each match were transmitted live, and despite the fact that the EICC is still in progress, 15 GMs and many IMs took part in the battles. The top match was KSK Rochade 1 KSK47-Eynatten 1, was tied as I mentioned before after a tough battle. In exciting games GMs Luts and Sulskis scored for Eynathen 1 on the top boards against colleagues Vaganian and Berelovitsch respectively, but Feigin and Coenen managed to level the score edging out Hausrath and Polaczek in return.
Namur 1 and Crelel 1 lost their spots in the top division.

UTD Invitational Tournament

(Pictures James Stallings & UTD)
UTD abbreviation means The University of Texas in Dallas.



As the Final Four University team is approaching the UTD members get ready. It will be played the weekend of April 2-3 in Washington D.C. at the headquarters of the consulting firm Booz Allen Hamilton. There is only one goal: defeat the other three teams and win the Presidents Cup. UTD defeated all of these teams (each with 3 GMs and 1 IM) at the Pan-American Intercollegiate Team Championship in December. The opposition includes GMs like Gareev, Kuljashevic, Erenburg, Bachman and other strong opponents.” It was not easy then, and we do not expect it will be easy this time”, says Chess Program Director James Stallings- the leading force behind the chess program at the University. Together with Luis Salinas and Coach Rade Milovanovic they form a successful unit that moves forward their chess project.
In the meanwhile, our tournament for preparation was in progress. We had hard time in the first seven rounds when the match was completely tied 21-21. James was even considering additional rapid games to determine the overall winner.
Then came the free day. It included an official lunch with the sponsors, demonstrative games in front of the University, interviews for the TV and publicity of chess, and a visit of the museum of the contemporary art.
The two games that we played with the big chessmen in front of the campus were extremely funny. As the chess pieces were very heavy (made by teak tree from Indonesia) guys did not want to castle (the king was around 20 kg heavy at least). We (the GM team) easily got winning position in the first game as white, but blundered a whole piece. At some stage a little lizard appeared, willing to help the UTD members, but coach Milovanovic realized that he does not have the scholarship and chased him off the board. We managed to get revenge in the second game, as black, and we won the moral win as that second game was recorded for the TV… And this was not the only time when the journalists took interest about us. The last round was attended by The Dallas Morning News journalists who both took interviews and lots of pictures.
After the free round the students’ team collapsed. We won the in the eight round by a two-point margin, and the next one demolished them 5.5-0.5, the biggest overall match win. Magesh Panchanathan, who started disastrously with four straight losses considerably improved his play, and in the second part of the event managed to recover his losses. The interesting fact about Magesh is that he is the first GM that UTD chess program “homebrewed”. Ray Robson, who was ill in the first half of the event, came back, as well as Julio Becerra, who finally even shared the second place scoring +3 in the second lap. In the meanwhile UTD’s top scorer from the first lap Ioan Chirilla lost some games, to finish on 6.5/12. Alejandro Ramirez who after the seventh round jumped over the 2600 mark had to swallow a bitter pill, losing 2 out of his five remaining games. Next year he might be representing the visiting team of “the examiners” as he is graduating by the end of the semester.
However, the students had an occasion to celebrate, as Julio Sadorra succeeded not only to fulfill his third and final GM norm, but also managed to improve his rating to the needed 2500 points. Congratulations for the freshly-elected GM! This norm makes the tournament successful for the UTD, despite the overall loss.
Almost all the members from the Grandmaster team were on positive score, and the best among us is Valentin Iotov. He scored four wins, and remained the only undefeated player in the event. I shared second place with Julio Becerra, both scoring 7.5/12. The most attractive participant from our team was though the oldest one. Alex Shabalov made only two draws for the whole event and was by far the most competitive participant.

What Rooks Want

When at the end of January a friend of mine invited me for a lecture with his young students I did not think twice, and accepted. “You choose a theme”, said Pavel. I decided that something that will help my young audience understand better their pieces will be most helpful. Therefore I picked up the theme “What Rooks Like”.
Here are a couple of samples from the lecture, which came to demonstrate that rooks prefer to torture the opponent’s king from far away. The first sample is given by Tarrasch:


Black can save himself here if he is to move by harrassing the opponent's king: 1...Ra8+ 2.Kd7 Ra7+ 3.Ke6 Ra6+ 4.Ke5 Ra5+ 5.Kd4 Ra4+ 6.Kc5 Ra5+ 7.Kb6


And only when the king is too far away from the pawn- 7...Re5 ½
However, a slight change of rok's operating area might change the situation dramatically:


1...Rb8+ 2.Kd7 Rb7+ 3.Kd8 Rb8+ 4.Kc7 Ra8


Seems like everything is OK for Black, the rook occupied "his" vertical and is ready to torture the white king again, but...
5.Ra1! Re8 6.Kd7 Kf7 7.Rf1+ 1–0