1985-04-25 - Ashby, Alan 0-1 Mordue, Tyson

Tyson - A game for those Sicilian players who worry about going under to big Kingside attacks when White pushes Pawns in front of his own King. This approach does leave gaps for the Black pieces to exploit later on. Here Black's unexpected 21st move forces White into a poor endgame and the aforementioned gaps come back to haunt the first player.

[Event "BRISTOL LEAGUE DIV 1"] [Site "?"] [Date "1985.04.25"] [Round "?"] [White "ASHBY, AP."] [Black "MORDUE, AT."] [Result "0-1"] [ECO "B84"] [Annotator "Mordue,Tyson"] [PlyCount "106"] [EventDate "1985.??.??"] 1. e4 c5 2. Nc3 d6 3. Nge2 {A favourite of Alan's but it quickly transposes back to a main line.} e6 4. d4 cxd4 5. Nxd4 Nf6 {So we end up in a Scheveningen rather than the Najdorf which I was habitually playing at the time.} 6. Be2 Be7 7. O-O O-O 8. f4 a6 9. a4 Qc7 10. Bf3 Nc6 11. Nb3 $6 {There is nothing too bad about this, but it goes into a particular line that I have played several times and have an excellent score with. The main feature of it is a startling and apparently anti-positional move that comes along shortly. However, it is playable precisely because White has ventured an early a2-a4 and weakened the b2 square, even though it may not be apparent at the moment.} Rd8 12. Qe2 b6 {Arutiunov (2088) vs. Livensky, Kiev Championship 2004, continued with 12...d5 13.e5 Nd7 14.Be3 Nb6 15.Rad1 Nc4 16.Bc1 b5 17.axb5 Qb6+ 18.Qf2 Qxf2+ 19.Rxf2 axb5 20.Nxb5 Rb8 21.N3d4 Nxd4 22.Nxd4 Bd7 23.b3 Na3 24.c3 Rdc8 25.Ra2 Nb1 26.Bb2 Nxc3 27.Bxc3 Rxc3 28.Ra7 Rd8 29.Rb7 Bc5 30.Kf1 Bc8 31. Nc6 Bxb7 32.Nxd8 Ba6+ 33.Be2 Bxe2+ 34.Kxe2 Be7 35.Ra1 g5 36.Ra8 Kg7 37.fxg5 Bxg5 38.b4 d4 39.h4 d3+ 0-1. This is not convincing as White seems to have a sound French-type game for a while, and there's the possibility of giving Black an IQP with 13 exd5. Plenty to think about here.} 13. Be3 Rb8 14. Kh1 Na5 $5 {This is the spectacular move referred to earlier. Black voluntarily accepts a pair of doubled a-Pawns in return for iron control of b5 and an outpost at b4. I found this idea in the book Sicilian: .e6 and .d6 Systems by Gary Kasparov and Aleksander Nikitin. Although I can commend the book to the reader I have to agree with GM Danny King who opined "I found that book confusing". That's not a surprise as the number of transpositions available to both sides make it difficult to find references easily. In fact according to the database we have left and now re-entered theory! There was also an intriguing quote by Grendel stalwart Jim Will who said to me afterwards "After you'd played this I felt as if I was up against the opening analysis of a dozen grandmasters!" Well, I suppose one could count Kasparov as a dozen grandmasters bearing in mind his contributions to opening theory. As already mentioned I've played this line several times. Here's one game from my praxis which has been described as 'a model game'. I find this somewhat ironic as Black twice offers White the chance to double his Pawns! Wragg N vs Mordue AT, Derby 2002, 1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 e6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 d6 6. Be2 Be7 7. O-O a6 8. a4 Nc6 9. Be3 O-O 10. Nb3 Qc7 11. f4 b6 12. Qe1 Rb8 13. Qg3 Na5 14. Nd2 (White declines this chance.) 14...Rd8 15. Bd3 d5 16. e5 Nh5 17. Qh3 g6 18. Ne2 Nc4 19. Nxc4 dxc4 20. Be4 Bb7 21. Bxb7 Qxb7 22. Nc3 Ng7 23. Rad1 Nf5 24. Bf2 h5 25. g3 Bc5 (The same idea as before. Exchanging Bishops on c5 gives Black pressure down the b-file, and in this instance also improved central control. Black would control d5, d4 and d3 all with Pawns, and after the elimination of the dark-square Bishops White has to be wary of allowing Rooks into d2. So White avoids this as well.) 26. Qg2 Bxf2+ 27. Rxf2 Rxd1+ 28. Nxd1 Qd7 29. Nc3 Rd8 30. Qe4 b5 31. axb5 axb5 32. Qe2 Qd4 33. Qe4 Qc5 34. Qe2 Ne3 35. Ne4 Qd4 36. Nf6+ Kg7 37. c3 Qd1+ 0-1. One of the reasons for giving this game is that Deep Rybka suggests that in Ashby-Mordue 15 Nd2 is the best reply, giving an evaluation of +0.25 to White. 15 Nxa5 it doesn't like at all saying that it's equal, yet it also gives the same evaluation after Alan's actual move.} 15. g4 $5 {An uncompromising approach or, if you now view the King King position, a compromising approach! Whatever, White chooses to go on a Kingside offensive while Black plays on the Queenside.. This finally takes us away from the theoretical database. In Kozjukova (1985) vs. Fossati (2104), Mureck 2004, White chose 15.Nd2. That game continued 15... d5 16.e5 Nd7 17.Bxd5 Nxe5 18.Ba2 Nd7 19.f5 Nf6 20.fxe6 Bxe6 21.Bxe6 fxe6 22. Bf4 Bd6 23.Qxe6+ Qf7 24.Qxf7+ Kxf7 25.Nde4 Bxf4 26.Rxf4 when White was a Pawn up and better placed. Neverheless he only drew after 40 moves. Alcazar Jimenez (2412) vs. Lopez del Alamo (2268), Albacete 2004, featured the odd 15. Rfd1 Nd7 16.Nd4 Bf8 17.Na2 Bb7 18.Rd3 Rbc8 19.Rc3 Qb8 20.b4 Rxc3 21.Nxc3 Qc8 22.Qd3 Nc4 23.b5 Nxe3 24.Qxe3 Qc5 with a complicated game which Black blundered away on move 41. Tomczak (2325) vs. Breyther (2395), German Bundesliga 1997 featured the more normal 15.Rad1 but after 15...Nc4 16.Bc1 b5 17.axb5 axb5 18.Nd4 Bd7 19.b3 b4 20.Qxc4 Qxc4 21.bxc4 bxc3 when Black had the advantage and won a long ending. It's difficult to draw conclusions from the above games. The stand-out feature for me is that if the a5 Knight gets to c4 then Black seems to have a playable game, and this is confirmed by my own praxis.} Nc4 {Black avoids 15...Nxb3 16 axb3 as experience shows that White gets control of the open c-file and, ironically, the doubled b-Pawns aren't a weakness because they can't be attacked which is the premise on which 14...Na5 is based; that the doubled a-Pawns wouldn't be vulnerable!} 16. g5 Nd7 17. Bd4 $5 {Alan refuses to be cowed into the obvious 17 Bc1 to defend the b2 Pawn. The text is an interesting move that tries to focus on the Black KIngside, although it should be emphasised that Black has not made any weakening moves there despite White's Pawn advance on that wing. He still has options of either ...Be7-f8 to reinforce g7 or ...Nd7-f8 to defend h7 if necessary.} Bb7 $1 {Deep Rybka approves of this move saying that 17...Nxb2 can be answered by 18 Nd2 threatening to trap the Knight with 19 R either to b1, or 18 Nd5!? with the point that after 18...exd5 19 exd5 Black has two pieces en prise on e7 and b2. This isn't so clear as Black could try not 19...Re8 20 Bxb2 Bxg5?? allowing 21 Qxe8+ because the Rook isn't defended, but instead the immediate 19...Bxg5 and if 20 fxg5 Nc4 remaining a Pawn up. However, White has compensation. The text links the Rooks, develops the Bishop on a good diagonal where it pressures e4, and gives Black the option of putting a Rook on c8 where it would facilitate the extraction of the Black Knight should it take on b2. I should add that if White wants to defend the b2 Pawn immediately it won't be with an active move.} 18. h4 $6 {I can understand this move as it gives the g5 Pawn a defence in anticipation of the forthcoming sequence, but there's a hole in both the calculation and in White's Kingside. Deep Rybka analyses the interesting 18.Nd2 Nxb2 19.Ncb1 Qxc2 20.Na3 Qd3 21.Bxb2 Qxe2 22. Bxe2 Nc5 and evaluates it as equal. Neither of us saw this although it probably is calcuable. After 18 Nd2 I would have probably played routinely with 18 ... either Rook to c8 or, as in the game, the messy 18...e5.} e5 $1 { This is a classic central break in reply to an advance on the wing. I was probably under the impression that White would, with or without swapping Pawns on e5, retreat his Bishop upon which I could safely take on b2.} 19. fxe5 { Deep Rybka analyses the sharp 19.Nd5 Bxd5 20.exd5 exd4 21.Nxd4 (Not 21.Qxe7?? Re8 trapping Her Majesty) 21...Bf8 22.Nc6 Na5 giving it as a small advantage to Black. Here I prefer 22...b5 so the Knight gets to b6 if necessary rather than voluntarily retreating to a5. However, once White takes a Rook Black has two Knights for it, the c6 square can't be occupied by a White one - he has no Knights left - and White's King position probably leaves a lot to be desired. That looks like a considerable plus for Black. The text fits in with Alan's idea conceived at move 19.} dxe5 20. Bc5 $5 {This came as a surprise to me, and it's a nice idea because Black can't now play 20...Bxg5 for free. That Pawn has been guarded in advance. The point of the text is that if Black takes on c5 then White gets to take the c4 Knight as the Black Queen's defence of same has been screened off. Note that 20...Bxc5 isn't check as the White King is on h1. However, I quickly realised that there was something wrong with the text. However, the refutation wasn't tactical but positional.} Nxc5 21. Qxc4 Qc8 $1 {A surprise retreat but a very strong move. Alan briefly looked startled then took a long time over his reply. The simple tactical threat is 22...Qh3+ which works because, ironically, the White King is on h1! The positional threat is 22...Ne6 coming into f4, maybe with check if White chooses 22 Kg2, and White is obliged to swap Queens to avoid the Black Queen and Knight combining against his exposed King. The ending is bad for White because of his overextended Kingside Pawns, weak dark squares - he's just swapped off that particular Bishop - and the poor placement of his other minor pieces. Note that the Bishop on f3 is blocking the combined attack of White Queen and Rook on f7. After the text Deep Rybka evaluates Black as better by +0.86. What's more where is White's counterplay?} 22. Bg2 $2 {The engine suggests that both 22 Kg2 and 22 Kh2 are better moves. I agree as it would give the White King a chance to get to g3 to defend the h4 Pawn which soon comes under fire.} Ne6 $17 23. Qxc8 Rbxc8 {Now Black's plus goes up to 1.2 according to the engine. Also all Black's pieces are on good thematic squares and fit neatly into the Pawn structure. The two Rooks are on open files. The Knight on e6 can come to d4 or f4 as appropriate, the b7 Bishop targets the e4 Pawn and the e7 Bishop glares at the g5 and h4 Pawns and there's a threat of 24...Bb4. In contrast the White Knights have no decent squares forward and the White Bishop has nothing to do. Deep Rybka looks at 24 Bh3 and refutes it with the afore-mentioned 24...Bb4. White's Queenside and the e4 Pawn are collapsing. White has a miserable ending and was also short of time to reach the time control at move 36. Unlike most of my opponents Alan made it.} 24. Rad1 Nf4 25. Bf3 Kf8 {The immediate 25...Ng6 is also good as are 25...h6 and 25...Bb4. I was probably keeping my options open and cutting out back rank mates, although that's not a concern right here.} 26. Rf2 Rxd1+ 27. Nxd1 Rc4 28. Nc3 Rb4 $1 { A strong move that stymies both White Knights. This is also the belated occupation of the b4 square that was potentially weakened by a2-a4 earlier. If that Pawn was back on a2 then 29 a3 traps the Rook!} 29. Rf1 {Not an inspiring move but 29 Rd2 is met by the simple 29...Ke8 preventing 30 Rd7. After Black's next the engine suddenly puts Black's superiority at +2.03.} Ng6 30. h5 Nf4 { Now Black is winning a Pawn. Alan tries a little tactic that fails to come off. } 31. Rg1 Nh3 32. g6 hxg6 {Avoiding the blunder 32...Nxg1?? 33 gxh7 promoting.} 33. Rg3 Nf4 34. hxg6 Nxg6 35. Kh2 Nf4 {So after its little pirouette the steed takes its proud outpost back up. In contrast White's next move is an embarassment for the White prelate.} 36. Bh1 g6 37. Rg1 {The sealed move. White chose to play on for the sake of his team but he's a Pawn down with no play.} Rc4 {Regrouping with the incidental threat of 38...Bb4 underming White's whole structure.} 38. Nd2 Rc8 {With the incidental threat of ...Kg7 followed by ...Bc5 and then ...Rh8+ when the White King is in a mating net.} 39. Nf3 f6 40. Rd1 Kf7 41. Kg3 {If 41.Rd7 then 41...Ke6 42.Rxb7 Rh8+ 43.Kg3 Rh3+ 44.Kf2 Bc5+ 45.Ke1 Rxh1+ 46.Kd2 Rh3 47 Ne1 Be3+ 48 Kd1 Rh1 and there's no defence to 49...Bf2. A convincing variation where White's King gets sucked into the void created by all his early Pawn advances and a nice triumph for Black's pieces which co-ordinate beautifully. Notice how the weakness of the dark squares has led to a collapse of the light squares as well.} Ke6 42. Nh4 Rc7 {Protecting the b7 Bishop so that the advance ...f6-f5 becomes feasible.} 43. Rf1 Bb4 {This has been coming for a while.} 44. Na2 Bd2 45. c3 a5 {A useful little move. It restrains b2-b4, ensures the a2 Knight can't get to b4 and then maybe to d5, but it also introduces ...Bb7-a6 ideas. For example ... Ba6, Rf2 Be1 wins the Exchange, another point of getting the Bishop to d2. Slowly but surely White is running out of moves and all his pieces bar his King are on the edge of the board.} 46. Bf3 {If 46 Rd1 Rd7 and 47...Rd3+ is now possible. An amusing line is 47 Nc1? Bxc3! 48 Rxd7 Be1+ winning another Pawn.} f5 47. Rd1 Be3 48. Re1 $2 {Falling into a little trap and losing another Pawn. There follows a tactical sequence in which the Black King could get involved as well. However, good moves are hard to suggest. The White pieces are on even more miserable squares than they were when we went into this ending back on move 23.} Nd3 $1 49. Re2 {Obviously 49 Rxe3 f4+ wins the Exchange. Now Black has a forced sequence which both liquidates and also shows that the White Rook is overloaded defending e4 and b2.} Bf4+ 50. Kg2 fxe4 51. Bxe4 {After 51 Bg4+ Kf6 Black has the amusing threat of 52...Kg5 53 Kh3 Rh7 winning the Knight.} Bxe4+ {This Bishop has been pressuring e4 for most of the game. With this exchange White's entire position collapses and it turns out that his Queenside Pawns are on exactly the wrong squares.} 52. Rxe4 Nxb2 { Black finally gets to take on b2!} 53. Nf3 {If 53 Nxg6?? not 53... Kf5? 54 Re2 but simply 53...Rg7 wins more material.} Kf5 {Now that White is two Pawns down with the one on a4 also falling there is longer any point playing on. Hence he resigned.} 0-1

The games viewer used here was developed by http://chesstempo.com and is licensed under CC BY 2.0.