Championship preparation, modern style

Position No. 6099: White to play and win. From the game John Merriman-Martin Brown, Blackpool, England 2010.

Solution to Position No. 6098: White wins with 1 Be4! Nxe3+ 2 Qxe3 Qc8 3 Rxh7!, as 3 . . . Kxh7 leads to mate by 4 Qh3+ Kg8 5 Rh1 Bh4 6 Qxh4 Kf8 7 Nd5. If 2 . . . Qb6, then 3 Nd5 Qd8 4 Nxe7+ Qxe7 5 Rxh7 Kxh7 6 f6+ wins.

Viswanathan Anand and Veselin Topalov will be out of the public eye for the next month, preparing for the April 23 start of their 12-game world championship match. I wonder what the master of preparation, Mikhail Botvinnik, would think of refinements in the training regimen he pioneered.

Botvinnik, world champion from 1948 to 1963, described a five-stage process: reviewing interesting recent games, studying everything played by his opponents, choosing an opening repertoire, testing it in secret training games, and taking a rest from chess “five days or so” before the start of the event. The computer has prompted changes.

Today’s grandmasters must sift through a much larger collection of games transmitted almost instantly over the Internet and stored in chess databases. And they must know much more before they can add a novelty to their opening repertoire.

Secret training games have gone out of fashion, replaced by analysis with a computer. I suspect that Botvinnik would lament this trend. He claimed that training games provided opportunities to work on one’s weaknesses, such as a tendency to fall into time pressure. He famously conquered his aversion to cigarette smoke by having his trainer blow smoke at him during a series of training games. Would any modern grandmaster display such masochistic determination?

Botvinnik also advocated publishing analysis so readers could make helpful critical comments. Sadly, few stars today annotate games regularly. Part of the explanation may be capitalism, a foreign concept to a Soviet like Botvinnik. When top players make six- and seven-figure incomes, writing a magazine article or a book for a relative pittance seems fruitless.

Local news

The Western Class Championships attracted 208 players to Agoura Hills last weekend, making it the largest local tournament of the year. Former state champion IM Andranik Matikozyan and GM Alejandro Ramirez of Texas shared first place in the Master section with 4-1 scores. Next at 3 1/2 -1 1/2 were Ron Hermansen, GM Melikset Khachiyan, IM Enrico Sevillano and Chaitanya Vaidya.

Other sections were won by Francisco Alonso, Tony Miller and Marian Nita, each 4-1 in Under-2200; Jim Castro and Simone Liao, each 4 1/2 - 1/2 in Under-2000; Leo Kamgar, 4 1/2 - 1/2 in Under-1800; James Horton, 4 1/2 - 1/2 in Under-1600; Cory Bernard, 5-0 in Under-1400; Andrew Santoso and Michael Scrivner, 4-1 in Under-1200; and Marcus Sparks, 6-0 in Under-900.

The Southern California Chess Federation will conduct the Super State Scholastic Championship next weekend at Great Park in Irvine. Students will compete in nine sections based on grade level. More details are posted at chesspalace.com.

Today’s games

GM Alexander Motylev (Russia)-GM Michele Godena (Italy), European championship, Rijeka 2010: 1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 Bb5 g6 Smyslov’s defense to the Ruy Lopez. 4 d4 Slower treatments, such as 4 c3 d6 5 d4 Bd7, often resemble the Steinitz defense. exd4 5 Bg5! Harmless is 5 Nxd4 Bg7. Be7 More sensible than 5 . . . f6?! 6 Bf4 Bb4+ 7 c3 dxc3 8 Nxc3 Nge7 9 0-0, when White has more than enough for the pawn. 6 Bxe7 Qxe7 7 Bxc6 To obtain a small advantage after 7 . . . dxc6 8 Qxd4. Qb4+?! Youngsters learn not to be greedy in the opening, but even grandmasters occasionally succumb to temptation. 8 c3 Qxb2 Already, Black has no choice. White refutes 8 . . . dxc3? 9 bxc3 Qb2 convincingly by 10 Bd5 Qxa1 11 Qb3 Nh6 12 Nd4, intending 13 Nc2. 9 Ba4!? Morphy-like speculation, 150 years after the Romantic era. The more forcing 9 Qxd4 Qxa1 10 0-0 must be met by 10 . . . bxc6 11 Qxh8 Kf8. Although White will recover the pawn, his initiative will slacken, and the outcome is not clear. Qxa1 10 0-0 b5? The true test of White’s sacrifice is 11 . . . Qxa2 12 Qxd4 f6 13 e5 Qe6 14 Re1 Kf8 15 Nbd2 d6. Black remains far behind in development, but White has no immediate knockout. 11 Bb3 c5 Perhaps Black missed White’s reply. However, 11 . . . dxc3 12 Qd4 f6 would lose the Queen to 13 Nxc3 Qb2 14 Qb4, threatening 15 Bf7+, while 11 . . . Ne7 12 Qxd4 0-0 13 Qd2! b4 (else 14 Na3 wins the Queen) 14 Qh6 leaves Black defenseless against 15 Ng5. 12 Nxd4! cxd4 Even the best defense, 12 . . . Rb8 13 Qc1 c4 14 Nc2 Qxb1, is hopeless for Black. 13 Qxd4 f6 If 13 . . . Nf6, the interpolation 14 Qe5+! spoils Black’s dream of castling. 14 e5 Bb7 15 Na3 Qb2 After 15 . . . Qxf1+ 16 Kxf1 a6 17 exf6, White keeps attacking with even material. 16 exf6! Welcoming 16 . . . Qxa3, as 17 f7+ Kd8 18 Qxh8 Kc7 19 fxg8Q secures a huge advantage. Nh6 17 Qe5+ Kd8 18 Nxb5 Qd2 Or 18 . . . Nf5 19 Qc7+ Ke8 20 Re1+. 19 Qc7+ Ke8 20 Nd6+, Black Resigns.

GM Liviu-Dieter Nisipeanu (Romania)-GM Yannick Pelletier (Switzerland), European Championship, Rijeka 2010: 1 d4 Nf6 2 c4 e6 3 Nf3 b6 4 g3 Ba6 This “modern” version of the Queen’s Indian Defense was introduced by Nimzovich in the 1920s. 5 Qc2 Also heavily analyzed is 5 b3 Bb4+ 6 Bd2 Be7. Bb7 6 Bg2 c5 Black’s Bishop maneuver aims to prevent the reply 7 d5, yet White often plays it anyway as a pawn sacrifice. 7 d5!? exd5 8 cxd5 Nxd5 9 0-0 Be7 10 Rd1 Nc6 The alternative 10 . . . Qc8 11 a3 Nf6 was treated roughly in Topalov-Anand, Bilbao 2008, by 12 Bg5 d5 13 Bxf6 Bxf6 14 Nc3 Bxc3 15 bxc3 Na6 16 Nh4. 11 Qf5 Nf6 12 e4 d6 More reliable seems Leko’s idea of 12 . . . g6 13 Qf4 0-0 14 e5 Nh5 15 Qh6 Nd4, returning the pawn to reduce White’s Kingside threats. 13 e5 Qd7 14 Qc2!? Previously considered a blunder. Probably Nisipeanu passed up 14 Qxd7+ Nxd7 15 exd6 Bf6 16 Re1+ Kf8 17 Nc3, which has scored well for White, to shock his opponent. Pelletier had lost against Carlsen in 2008 with 17 . . . Nb4 18 Bg5 Nc2 19 Re7! Bxf3 20 Bxf3 Bxg5 21 Rxd7 Rd8 and was undoubtedly ready with an improvement for Black. Nb4 15 Qe2 Ba6 16 Qe1 Nc2 17 Qd2 Nxa1 18 exf6 White will need to capture the trapped Knight to restore the balance in material. Objectively, the position offers even chances. Bxf6 Not attractive is 18 . . . gxf6? 19 Nc3 0-0-0, as 20 Nd5 Rhe8 21 b4 prepares 22 Bb2. 19 Re1+ Be7 Most natural. White gets fair compensation from 19 . . . Kd8 20 Nc3 Re8 21 Rd1, but Black can consider 19 . . . Kf8!? 20 Ne5 Bxe5 21 Bxa8 Bd4, when 22 b4 Qf5 23 Na3 Qf6! gives him counterplay. 20 Nc3 0-0? If Black had foreseen the danger, he could have headed for a drawish endgame by 20 . . . Bb7 21 Qe2 0-0-0! 22 Qxe7 Nc2 23 Qxd7+ Rxd7 24 Rd1 Re8. 21 Ne5! Too slow is 21 Nd5? Rae8 22 b4 Bb7 23 Nxe7+ (not 23 Bb2? Bxd5 24 Qxd5 Nc2) Rxe7 24 Bb2, as Black takes charge with 24 . . . Rxe1+ 25 Nxe1 Bxg2 26 Kxg2 Re8 27 Bxa1 d5. Qc8? Maybe Black expected salvation from 22 Bxa8? Qxa8 23 Ng4 Re8 24 Nd5 Bg5! 25 Rxe8+ Qxe8 26 Qxg5 Qe1+ 27 Kg2 Qf1+ 28 Kf3 Qe2+ 29 Kf4 Qc4+, drawing. He should have tried 21 . . . Qf5 22 Bxa8 dxe5 23 Be4 Qe6 24 Nd5 Bc4 25 b3 Bxd5 26 Bxd5 Qd6 27 Be4 Qxd2 28 Bxd2 f5! 29 Bd5+ Kh8, as 30 Rxa1?? permits 30 . . . Rd8. White would keep an edge with 30 Rxe5 Bd6 31 Re6. 22 Nc6! Winning. Bd8 Hopeless is 22 . . . Bf6 23 Nd5. 23 Nd5 Qg4 After 23 . . . Kh8 24 Nxd8 Qxd8 25 b4, White will get the Knight without relinquishing his grip on the position. More tempting is 23 . . . Qd7 24 Nce7+ Kh8 25 b3 Re8, but White wins spectacularly with 26 Bb2 Bxe7 27 Bxg7+! Kxg7 28 Qc3+ Kg8 29 Rxe7 Rxe7 30 Nf6+. 24 b3 Bb7 25 h3 Qh5 26 Nce7+ Kh8 27 Nf4, Black Resigns. Black will lose the Bishop at b7 and later the Knight.