A most exciting game between two of the strongest players on RedHotPawn. There is an long positional struggle in which white declines a draw offer from black. Then after white optimizes piece placement, there follows an intense tactical combination and black resigns.

mephisto2    --    david tebb
veggie-bad bishop   redhotpawn
2003.08.21     1-0     B53g


1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Qxd4 (D)

BR BN BB BQ BK BB BN BR
BP BP :: BP BP BP BP
:: BP :: ::
:: :: :: ::
:: WQ WP :: ::
:: :: :: WN ::
WP WP WP :: WP WP WP
WR WN WB WK WB :: WR

Against a strong player like David Tebb, I wanted to avoid the labyrinth of varations that could follow in the Dragon, the Najdorf or the Richter-Rauzer, in many of them he certainly has more experience than me. Therefore, I chose the less frequently played Qxd4. I had prepared the following variation: 4.... Nc6 5.Bb5 Bd7 6.Bxc6 Bxc6 7.Nc3 Nf6 8.Bg5 e6 9.0-0-0 Be7 10.Qd3, the Polgar system (10.Rhe1 would be the De Firmian system). The queen is well placed on d3, central action and horizontal flexibility.
4...a6
David obviously had a similar thinking: to avoid prepared lines. 4....a6 is one of the alternatives to avoid the above mentioned line. Also 4... Bd7 and 4.... Nf6 are often played. The pinning of Nc6 by Bb5 is avoided in a prophylaxic way. Now Nc6 threatens to make Qxd4 a tempo loss. I had to redo my preparation. Meanwhile I also found out that he had experience with this variation. I found a published game with him black where he played 4...a6. That game was drawn. I had to look again for a different plan.
( 4...Nc6 5.Bb5 Bd7 6.Bxc6 Bxc6 7.Nc3 Nf6 8.Bg5 e6 9.O-O-O Be7 10.Qd3 Polgar system ( 10.Rhe1 De Firmian system ) )
5.Be3
The alternatives were 5.c4 and 5.Bg5. In both cases the queen retreats, probably to d2 after Nc6. The latter has the advantage that the bishop is out first. But my plan was to leave the option open (to be less predictable for black) to follow 5... Nc6 by - 6. Qd2 with the advantage that the bishop on e3 was out, and could not be attacked by h6 or - 6. Qb6 Qxb6 7.Bxb6 with perhaps a small edge for white
5...Nf6
( 5...Nc6 6.Qd2 ( 6.Qb6 Qxb6 7.Bxb6 ) )
6.Nc3 Nbd7
Black has again annihilated the preparation. In the above mentioned game he had played 6. ... Ng4, and the game went on as follows: 7.Bg5 Nc6 8.Qd2 h6 9.Bh4 g5 10.Bg3 etc... It is very similar to the Be3, Ng4 variation of the najdorf. David wanted to find an improvement with Nbd7. After 5. ... Nbd7, white has more space and is a little ahead in development, but there are no real weaknesses in black's position, and without tension in the centre it is hard to take advantage of that.
( 6...Ng4 7.Bg5 Nc6 8.Qd2 h6 9.Bh4 g5 10.Bg3 )
7.Bc4
The other moves were 7.h3, to prevent Ng4, or 7.0-0-0. I played the developing Bc4, again to leave both castling options open making black work harder.
7...e6 8.O-O Be7 9.a4 O-O
This is becoming a very a-typical Sicilian (but I wanted to play an anti-Sicilian, didn't I). White is not playing on the kingside, and controls the queenside, keeping the space advantage (black still cannot play d5, making the d-pawn a worry).
10.Rfd1
There were several alternatives. - Rad1, reserving the f-rook for later kingside attacks (the type of play in the De Firmian system) - h3, to prevent Ng4 and keep the bishops - Bg5 to put pressure on the d6-pawn . - Be2 possibly followed later by c4. But that looked a litle inconsequent - a5 to further restrain black's queenside (which I tried later on) I chose Rfd1 to maintain strong hold of queenside and centre, and leave f1 free in case I wanted/needed to retreat the bishop.
10...Qc7 11.a5
perhaps 11.Bg5 to prevent Ng4 before playing a5?
11...Ng4 12.Bf1 Nxe3 13.Qxe3 b5 14.axb6 Nxb6 15.Nd4 Bb7 16.Bd3
White has given up the bishop pair, but his position is still looking good. At this point I felt that my white bishop hadn't done many useful things. A drawback of my 7-th move?
16...Bf6 17.Ra3
To cover Nc3 in case I had to play Nd4 away.
17...Rfd8 18.Rb3
A waiting move, also covering b2 (in case the two knights moved) and influencing a half-open line. Perhaps 18.f4 was more active, trying to build a kingside initiative, with black's pieces concentrated on the queenside. But I wasn't sure my initiative would have been fast enough.
18...Nd7 19.Be2 Nc5 20.Ra3 h6
Black was threathening to take the initiative. I had expected a rook on the b- or c-file, or Qb6 (I would have played Nb3 then), or even d5!. I found h6 a little passive from his side. Perhaps he was thinking of playing Bg5. Of course I still had f4 as a resource to counter that, but since I hadn't played f4 before.... Anyway, that gave me the opportunity to play an active move, sending the knight back to d7. Only consequence: b4 is a no-return move.
21.b4 Nd7 22.Na4
Still f4 could be considered for white. Also Rb3 would give the rook a nice covered but active role. Na4 was aiming at moves like Rc3, or c3 or even c4.
22...d5 (D)

BR :: BR :: BK ::
:: BB BQ BN :: BP BP
BP :: :: BP BB BP
:: :: BP :: ::
WN WP WN WP :: ::
WR :: WQ ::
:: WP :: WB WP WP WP
:: :: WR :: WK

The most active. The saying is that if black can play d5 in the sicilian, he has solved his pawn structure problem. David said afterwards that he was not happy with 22.... d5 because it left him with an isolated d-pawn (blocking the bishop for the rest of the game). An interesting alternative was 22. ... Bxd4 23.Rxd4 Qxc2 24.Nc3 and now both 24....e5 25.Rxd6 and 24.... Rac8 Bd1 would lead to interesting play.
23.exd5 exd5
I was slightly surprised. I had expected Bxd5. He may have thought, perhaps rightfully so, that c4! was going to follow. Bxc4 would have been good for white (Rc3) but black could play Bb7, and then the question is wether whites c- pawn could become dangerous or not.
24.c3 Re8 25.Qd2 a5 26.b5 Be5 (D)

BR :: :: BR :: BK ::
:: BB BQ BN :: BP BP
:: :: :: BP
BP WP :: BP BB ::
WN :: WN :: ::
WR WP :: ::
:: WQ WB WP WP WP
:: :: WR :: WK

I may have underestimated 23. ...exd5 because with the last few moves, black has grabbed the initiative. The queenside is temporarily blocked, he has the e-file and good looking bishops.
27.h3 Nf6 28.Qd3 Ne4 29.Raa1
Not sure this was the better move. I wanted to be able to cover both the b-pawn and c-pawn from behind if necessary. Ra2 could do as well (and leave doubling options for the rooks?). Qf3 or Bf3 were alternatives.
29...Qd6 30.Bg4
or immediately Bf3. If black wants to get c8 available, then he had to play something like g6 (and h5).
30...g6 31.Bf3 f5 32.Ne2 Bg7
Black had built quite an initiative here! Although with not many immediate threats, and whites position looks still fundamentally good. Just like I did earlier on, black chooses now to keep the bishop aiming at the queenside, rather than the kingside. I thought this was the time to test the validity of my play. Two knights against two bishops can be effective if there are pawns blocking the bishops. Especially an isolated d-pawn. David was afterwards disappointed with the result of his g6 & f5 maneuvre.
33.Bxe4 Rxe4 (D)

BR :: :: :: BK ::
:: BB :: :: BB
:: BQ :: BP BP
BP WP :: BP :: BP ::
WN :: :: BR :: ::
:: WP WQ :: :: WP
:: :: WN WP WP ::
WR :: WR :: WK

black wanted to maintain the open e-file (at the expense of the still isolated d-pawn). I would have played fxe4 in his place, although his white bishop would become even weaker, and despite the black bishop, white is better on the black squares (b6, c5, f4, d4).
34.Nd4 Re7
With this move, black offered a draw. I hesitated, but then refused. With Nb3, I can threaten to come in with the a- knight on c5, meanwhile attacking the a-pawn. Black wants to avoid that, but I thought that would cost him the e-file.
35.Nb3 Rc7 36.Re1 Rc4
Blocking the c-pawn, and aiming at e4 again.
37.Qe3 Re4 38.Qd2
with this maneuvre, white now has the e-file. Exchanging rooks would have helped white's case.
38...Rc4 39.Nd4
threatening Nb2, and blocking the path for the rook to e4.
39...Kf7 40.Nb2 Rcc8 41.Re3
white has now full control over the e-file, and plans to double rooks. His c-pawn is still weak, though.
41...Qc7 42.Rae1 Bf6
threatening Bg5.
43.Na4 (D)

BR :: BR :: :: ::
:: BB BQ :: BK ::
:: :: BB BP BP
BP WP :: BP :: BP ::
WN :: WN :: ::
:: WP WR :: WP
:: WQ WP WP ::
:: :: WR WK

white is not afraid of Bg5 immediately. If 43. ... Bg5 then Ne6. The potential fork with Nb6 is an asset. But perhaps 43.Re6 was stronger. I didn't get out of my calculations sufficiently well to take the risk. Although now I think I could have: a) 43. ... Qxc3? 44.Qxh6 Qxd4 45.Qh7+ Kf8 (if Bg7 then 46.Re7+ Kf8 47.Nd3 Qf6 48.Nf4) 46.Nd3! Qh4 Qxg6 must win b) 43. ... Bg5 44.Qe2 Bf6 (a4 45.Nd3 looks also very good for white) 44.Na6 leads to the played game c) 43. ... Rh8 44.Nc6! with strong attack
( 43.Re6 Qxc3? ( 43...Bg5 44.Qe2 a4 45.Nd3 ) ( 43...Rh8 44.Nc6! ) 44.Qxh6 Qxd4 45.Qh7+ Kf8 46.Nd3! Qh4 47.Qxg6 )
43...Rab8
The best. If 43. ... Bg6 then 44.Ne6! Qd6 45.Nxg5
44.Re6 Bg5 45.Qe2 Bf6
perhaps 45. ... Rf8, Rg8, Rg8 or Ba8 resisted longer.
46.Nb6 Rd8
Qd8 resisted longer, but Nxf5 would still follow
47.Nxf5! (D)

BR BR :: ::
:: BB BQ :: BK ::
WN :: WR BB BP BP
BP WP :: BP :: WN ::
:: :: :: ::
:: WP :: :: WP
:: :: WQ WP WP ::
:: :: WR WK

All white's pieces are ideally placed. It's now or never.
47...gxf5
the alternatives also don't work for black: a) 47. ... Qxc3? 48.Re7+ and now a1) 48..... Bxe7? 49.Qxe7+ Kg8 50.Nxh6+ Kh8 51.Nf7+ Kg8 52.Nxd8 Qxe1+ 53.Qxe1 Rxd8 54.Qe6+ Kf8 55.Nd7+ Rxd7 56.Qxd7 a2) 48.... Kg8 49.Nxh6+ Kh8 50.Nf7+ Kg8 51.Nxd8 Rxd8 52.Rxb7 b) 47. ... Bg5? 48.Re7+ Bxe7 49.Qe6+ Kf8 (Ke8? then 50.Qg8#) 50.Nxe7 Qxe7 51.Qxe7+ Kg8 52.Re6 wins c) 47. ... Re8? 48.Rxe8 gxf5 49.Qe6+ Kg8 50.Nd7 and wins
( 47...Qxc3? 48.Re7+ Bxe7 ( 48...Kg8 49.Nxh6+ Kh8 50.Nf7+ Kg8 51.Nxd8 Rxd8 52.Rxb7 ) 49.Qxe7+ Kg8 50.Nxh6+ Kh8 51.Nf7+ Kg8 52.Nxd8 Qxe1+ 53.Qxe1 Rxd8 54.Qe6+ Kf8 55.Nd7+ Rxd7 56.Qxd7 )
( 47...Bg5? 48.Re7+ Bxe7 49.Qe6+ Kf8 50.Nxe7 Qxe7 51.Qxe7+ Kg8 52.Re6 )
( 47...Re8? 48.Rxe8 gxf5 49.Qe6+ Kg6 50.Nd7 )
48.Qh5+ Kg7
or 48....Kf8 49.Rxf6+ or 48....Kg8 49.Rxf6 Qg7 (Qh7? 50.Rg6+ Kf8 51.Qxf5 Qf7 52.Rf6) 50.Rg6
49.Rxf6 Kxf6
other moves run checkmate
50.Qxh6+
Black loses the Queen and resigns.
1-0