Our twelfth match of the season was a home match against Bristol Grendel A on 20th March. Perhaps due to various people being swamped with coursework at the moment, we were a bit low on players, so I asked Tommy and James to sub. While Grendel are a strong team and I was confident we would lose the match, our team was arguably the strongest team we’ve fielded this season, so I had to admit that we had a chance.
Before we got a chance to work out how much of a chance we had, however, a major problem arose. Basically, I was informed when I arrived to set up for the match that the section of the Richmond Building where our booked rooms are would be closed from 6pm every day until further notice. Since no other rooms were available, the best we could do was host the match in the 4th floor Link, which is a large open room where people study. Fortunately, as a study space, I figured the 4th floor Link would be relatively quiet, and certainly better than having people loudly singing next door as we did against Clevedon. After some students kindly made room for us on appropriately-sized tables, we were able to start the match, albeit far from smoothly. I’ll cover the games in the approximate order that they finished.
Board 3
Dimitar had Black on Board 3 and his game started with the Advance Variation of the Caro-Kann. White demonstrated good opening knowledge by accurately executing a kingside attack that featured 5. g4 and 7. h4, and Dimitar’s position quickly appeared to be on the ropes.
Since 10… Bg6 walks straight into 11. h5, there is no way to defend g7 and prevent 11. Nxe4 from winning a pawn, so White indeed won a pawn after 10… g6 11. Nxe4 dxe4 12. Qxe4. Dimitar then doubled White’s c-pawns and traded queens, which left White with the bishop pair and a semi-open b-file, but the position was at least still closed. Matters soon went from bad to worse as White’s rook on h3 swung over to a3 and won Dimitar’s a7 pawn, which left White up 2 pawns and positionally dominant.
The b6 pawn was promptly traded for the h4 pawn so White got an outside passed pawn and was able to double the rooks on the 7th rank. Despite the magnitude of White’s winning advantage, this advantage eventually started to slip as Dimitar won back a pawn and White didn’t stop his king from getting out of the centre with 25… Kf8. In fact, before long, White’s objective advantage evaporated as White traded the bishops for the knights and the players entered a double rook endgame where White had an extra pawn.
Despite White’s extra pawn and how dead lost Dimitar was for much of the game, the above position is objectively equal. This is because 31… Rc1+ forces White to either repeat or lose the f2 pawn in exchange for the d4 pawn, which would result in a theoretical draw. This sudden shift in momentum certainly surprised me when I walked over at this exact moment, and my surprise only increased when Dimitar played 34… Rh1+, which loses a rook after 35. Kg2 because there is simply no way to save the rook and prevent ladder mate, so the game ended with 35… Rhc1 and 36. Rd8#. In an unfortunate coincidence, the first game of our previous match also ended with a king on g8 getting unceremoniously mated by a piece on d8.
Board 4
James had White on Board 4 and he correctly predicted who his opponent would be so he prepared the Nimzo-Larsen Attack (1. b3) to specifically counter his opponent’s usual kingside fianchetto setups. He opted for a double fianchetto setup and soon had an opportunity to be much better objectively.
With what do you recapture? Well, 14. Rxf3 loses an exchange to 14… Bg4 so definitely not the rook. The most accurate recapture is 14. Qxf3 because of the pressure White exerts on b7, which makes it difficult to for Black to develop the light-squared bishop. In the game, James played 14. Bxf3. The key difference is that, after 14… cxd4 15. Nc2 Bc5, winning Black’s d-pawn is not as strong because Black can untangle by winning a tempo with 16. Bh3, which wouldn’t be possible if 14. Qxf3 had been played because the bishop would still be on g2, where it covers h3.
James eventually won Black’s d-pawn, but the subsequent weakness of his own d-pawn arguably gave Black sufficient counterplay. Black tried to exploit this weakness but James’ defences held and he was eventually able to play 29… d4. Despite this, James’ king had become relatively weak so Black still had some compensation for the pawn.
However, positional considerations soon proved unimportant because Black played 32… Bd6 here, which blunders the bishop to 33. Qe6+. James converted cleanly so his opponent quickly ran out of checks and resigned.
Board 5
Alex had Black on Board 5 and his game started with the Sicilian Dragon. White took a lot of space in the centre with moves like 11. f4 but Alex soon got some activity on the queenside with 13… Qa5.
After 14. h3, Alex had to decide what to do with the light-squared bishop. He chose to play 14… Be6 in order to plant the bishop on c4 where it pressures a2 and attacks the rook on f1, but the engine claims that Black is significantly better after 14… Bxf3. This is because Black can win the a2 pawn after 15. Rxf3 Bxc3, regardless of whether White recaptures on c3 with the queen or b-pawn. However, Black would have to accept giving up the bishop pair, including the strong dark-squared bishop.
While Alex opted for 17… Qc7 here, he could also have gone for the engine-approved capture chain 17… Bxc3 18. Nxa5 Bxd2 19. Bxd2 Nxa5 20. Bxa5. After 20… b6 21. Bc3, the capturing resumes with 21… Bxa2 22. Ra1 Be6 23. Rxa7, and the game is likely to fizzle out into a draw.
Speaking of fizzling out into a draw, the minor pieces proceeded to fly off the board and Alex’s opponent offered him a draw in the above position. He accepted, understandably believing that White had better winning chances.
Board 1
Tommy had Black on Board 1 and his game started with a Symmetrical English, which he had prepared because I knew in advance whom he would play.
Surprisingly, there is a problem with 9… Rb8, which is that 10. Nxd5 Qxd5 11. Bf4 forces 11… Ra8, so 9… Rb8 essentially wastes a tempo. It may seem at first glance that 11… e5 is possible but 12. Nxe5 opens up the bishop on g2, which attacks the queen, so the knight on e5 cannot be taken. White did, however, miss this opportunity, and played 10. Rc1 instead. The subsequent middlegame centred around the queenside, and this resulted in several trades. However, in the process, White missed a very strong move.
White played the simple 25. Qxa6, but 25. Rc7 is very strong here because the only way to prevent the crushing 26. Qxf7 is with 26… Be7, after which 27. Ne4 is strong and Black’s position is hanging by a thread. In the game, Tommy proceeded to give up his d-pawn in order to invest in his passed b-pawn, which made it all the way to b3.
White forced a draw here with 30. Nf6+ Kg7 31. Ng4+ Kg8, although both players amusingly thought momentarily that Tommy was getting mated by 32. Nh6+, but the bishop on f8 fortunately covers h6 when the king is on g8. Therefore, the players agreed to a draw after 32. Nf6+.
Board 6
Ismail had White on Board 6 and his game started with the Grand Prix Attack in the Sicilian. Ismail soon launched one of his signature kingside attacks by beginning a rook lift with 18. Rf4.
Black played 18… Bc5 here, which is a significant error because, after 19. Rg4 Bxd4 20. Rdxd4 g6, there is no way for Black to stop the knight on c3 rerouting itself to an excellent outpost on f6, which wouldn’t be nearly good if there was still a bishop on e7 covering f6. While Black is clearly in serious trouble, the knockout isn’t obvious.
In the above position, Ismail lost all of his objective advantage with 23. Qh4, which threatens 24. Qh7#. However, Black can simply play 23… Qxe5, after which there is no win because, after 24. Qxh7+ Kxf6 25. Rgf4+ Ke7, the king is entirely safe on e7. White could also try 24. Nxh7, but there’s no win there either if Black defends accurately. In fact, Black is much better after the rook sacrifice 24… Rfd8, which works because White’s queen is tied down to defending against Qe1#. In actuality, the best White has is a perpetual with 24. Nh5+, which doesn’t hang the knight because the g6 pawn is pinned by the rook on g4, and then 25. Nf6 regardless of where the king goes. However, none of this happened because Black instead defended h7 with 23… Rh8 and Ismail’s monumental advantage returned.
Ismail saw the juicy rook on g8 here and understandably grabbed the exchange with 27. Nxg8, but there is actually a forced win for White, which begins with 27. Nxh7+. Since 27… Kg7 loses to 28. Qf6+ and 29. Rh4#, Black must try 27… Ke8. White then has the brilliant exchange sacrifice 28. Rxd5. After 28… exd5 29. Nf6+, both 29… Kd8 and 29… Ke7 lose the queen to the discovery 30. Nxd5+, so Black must try 29… Kf8, after which White has 30. Qh6+. Now 30… Ke7 loses to the royal fork 31. Nxd5+ and 30… Rg7 loses at least a rook after 31. Qh8+, so this line wins by force. However, an exchange should still be sufficient to win, and Ismail indeed successfully converted his advantage. He traded into a winning endgame and his opponent resigned when the promotion of his final pawn was guaranteed. With the success of Ismail’s trademark attacking style, against all the odds, we had managed to at least draw the match, and, as ever, whether we would win the match was up to me.
Board 2
I had White on Board 2 and my game started with the Two Knights Attack in the Caro-Kann, which I had prepared that day because I correctly predicted who my opponent would be. However, my opponent surprised me in the opening with the rare but reasonable 7… Na6. In part due to the stress of the room-finding emergency, my form felt dubious at the start, and it soon showed.
I clumsily played 11. c3 here, which walks straight into 11… Nc5. I had been thinking that this didn’t work because I win a pawn with 12. cxd4, but this is not the case because 12… Nb3 is a rather problematic fork. Fortunately, after the funny-looking rook lift 12. Rc1 Nb3 13. Rc2 Nxd2 14. Rxd2, my position was still somewhat reasonable. The resulting middlegame centred around the precarious placement of my queen on the kingside, since I was repeatedly forced to use tactics to save me from discoveries and skewers. Eventually, my opponent offered me a queen trade and I obliged, which solved the issue of my precariously-placed queen but my pieces were still passive and I lacked space. I did, however, find a solution to my passivity, a 24-moves-delayed King’s Gambit, the pawn sacrifice 26. f4.
The benefit of this pawn sacrifice was that 26… exf4 allowed me to take more central space with 27. d4 and even start to think about pressing for a win. My opponent then responded with 27… 0-0, which highlights the amusing fact that, despite it being move 27, castling in either direction is still perfectly legal. I pressed forward and my e-pawn soon became passed, but, after several minutes of calculation, I concluded that I had nothing better than holding a pawn-down opposite-coloured bishops endgame.
While I don’t have the exact remaining moves, this is the fortress I constructed. If Black does nothing, I can just move my bishop back and forth along its current diagonal and keep my e6 pawn defended. Black has two attempts at making progress, the first of which is getting the king to h5 in order to break with g4. My opponent tried this but, after Kg6, my bishop can switch diagonals to target the f5 pawn because the king no longer makes contact with the e6 pawn. Black is then unable to play Kh5 because this loses the f5 pawn to Bxf5. Black’s only other attempt at making progress is walking the king to the queenside to target the weak a4 pawn, but this doesn’t work for a similar reason. After Ke5 and Kd4, I can simply target the f5 pawn again with my bishop. In fact, in the time it takes Black’s king to make it to the a4 pawn, my bishop can win the f5 pawn and return to c2 to defend the a4 pawn, so this is more of a losing attempt than a winning attempt. Therefore, my opponent eventually offered a draw and I of course accepted it.
Summary
Despite the first game to finish being a loss for us, we didn’t lose a single game for the remainder of the match. We were arguably the underdogs on every board so this was a tremendous upset. Maybe we’ll have to play in the Link more often. While that is a joke, I fear we may have to host our final home match in the Link. Anyway, this brilliant match win put is in 6th in the league table… for 4 days, since, remarkably, Clevedon drew against Bath the following Monday, so our time out of relegation territory was rather short-lived. Since our tiebreaks are still very good, to achieve 6th this season, assuming that Horfield will beat Clevedon, we need at least a draw in one of our final two matches. Our final match is against Yate, which should be a good opportunity to do that, but our next match and final home match is against Horfield & Redland B on 3rd April, so the next match report will be posted soon after that.