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.