gm-ele ct daniel naroditsky candidates’...

JUNE 2013

CANDIDATES’ TOURNAMENT GM IAN ROGERS ON AN EPIC WIN BY GM MAGNUS CARLSEN

www.uschess.orgTHE WORLD’S MOST WIDELY READ CHESS MAGAZINE

OCTOBER 2013

GM-ELECT DANIEL NARODITSKY OVERCOMES MISPERCEPTIONS | TEN TIE FOR FIRST AT WORLD OPEN

www.uschess.orgTHE WORLD’S MOST WIDELY READ CHESS MAGAZINE

Our endgame columnist for the last 45 years turns 85

Profile / Daniel Naroditsky

n 2005, a tournament director at theFar West Open in Reno, Nevadawatched a boy walk to the front of theroom and sit down at the wrong board.

It was understandable. Nearly 200competitors had come out to the SandsRegency Hotel that weekend, and $20,000in prizes had the tournament hall bustlingwith activity between rounds. To say theleast, the board system was a bit confus -ing, but one thing was for certain: Thescholastic tournament was on the otherside of the room.

The kid began to set up camp at one ofthe Open’s top boards and, with the thirdround set to begin, the tournament direc -tor was quick to action.

Conversation was straight and to thepoint: You have reached the wrong end of thehall, this area is for grown-ups. And whenthe boy became adamant that he had,indeed, found the correct army to command,he was simply met with stern ness. Armedwith only the physical intim idation of afourth-grader, the boy became flustered

and was sent on his way.Distraught, Daniel Naroditsky ran back

to the only identification a nine-year-oldhas: his parents.

“For the first time,” said his father,Vladimir, “we noticed he was playing anadult game.”

Today, Naroditsky is the author of twobooks, a former World Youth champion,the reigning U.S. Junior champion and oneof the freshest grandmaster-elects on theworld scene. But despite an illustriousover-the-board career that has spannedmore than half of his 17-year-old life,Naroditsky keeps running into people whodoubt who he says he is.

Up until the Far West Open, it hadn’tbeen an issue. To that point, he had gottenby just fine as “Danya,” like any otherAmerican boy, with a Russian tweak. Heliked to read. He liked to write. He liked toshoot hoops. And there was no doubt thatthe boy liked chess. His brother, Alan,showed him how to move the pieces on asunny summer day in the park, and his

father showed him what it meant to study. “I would exaggerate if I say his talent was

discovered immediately, but it was clear hehad something,” Vladimir said. “He would -n’t play … how kids play chess: just mov ingthe pieces very quickly. It was noticeablethat he was thinking about his moves, andhe just had this natural ability to put thepieces in the right places.”

Danya got his feet wet in the Californiascholastic scene, a pond big enough tokeep his aspirations content—and perhapsbig enough to disguise just how comfort -ably he swam in the demep water. By thetime he was seven, he had crept into thetop 100 of his age group and received aninvitation by the USCF to play in the Pan-American games in Brazil. With only atwo-week notice before the event, theinvitation was ultimately passed, but theflattering moment left a profound effect onthe family, kindling curiosity in the nextlevel of chess.

It led the Naroditskys to San Francisco’siconic Mechanics’ Institute, where the boy

don’t doubt DANYA

Believe it: California’s Daniel Naroditsky, the U.S. Junior king, the GM-elect,

the world-champion author, is who he says he is.By

BRIAN JERAULD

18 October 2013 | Chess Life

I

CL_10-2013_Naroditsky_AKF_r8_chess life 9/10/13 1:36 PM Page 18

was instantly cast into the fire of adultchess. Danya was taken under the wing ofDirector IM John Donaldson, who becamea chess godfather of sorts, showing the pathto international chess, recommendingcoaches and guiding him through tourna -ments.

“It sounds primitive, but I had neverseen such a chess-oriented place with somany players,” Daniel said. “Some of theseplayers were absolute gods to me, these bigand burly 2200 masters. I was so intimi -dated.

“I met John and started getting involved,and the whole experience was kind of awake-up call for me. Here I am invited tothe Pan-American games: Just the thoughtof travelling internationally to this prestig -ious tournament and being one of thebest players in that age category. It wasstag gering.”

Still, Danya was just another fish in abig pond at the Mechanics. He was a classD player when he entered the hall, andthough he was often the spectacle of the

Tuesday Night Marathon—this eight-year-old, propped up on a cushion to faceopponents who averaged the far side of 50—Danya splashed around for several yearswithout turning many heads.

He found his share of successes—includingthe California scholastic cham pi onship threeyears in a row, and the national scholasticchampionship for two—but his name seemedto stay contained there, in scholastics. Danyawas always strong, just perhaps a bitshadowed, by those playing the adult game.

But on that fateful day in Reno, Daniel’schess game seemed to grow up—or thechess world seemed to grow up aroundhim. Vladimir noticed the landscapechange while he vouched that his nine-year-old son had found the correct seat inReno. Daniel would go on to clear upmatters himself, winning the Class Bsection outright with 51⁄2 points out of 6.

Soon, weekend tournaments aroundthe region were giving way to nationaltournaments on the opposite coast. Bythe time he was 10, Daniel was exhausting

his dominance over other children, firstmoving into the 100th percentile of hisage group in the U.S., and then flyingacross the world to find opponents.

He made his first international move inBelfort, France, placing fifth in the WorldYouth Chess Championship. And whenhe returned to the competition in 2007, inAntalya, Turkey, he won the World Under-12 crown.

“My single greatest chess achievement,”Daniel said. “Eleven rounds, the best kidsfrom all countries. I didn’t come in with toomany expectations, but then I just startedwinning. It was an absolutely incrediblefeeling: Infallible. Not capable of makingmistakes. Such a great feeling, and one Ivery rarely obtain. It was such a nice wayto win a tournament.”

Headlines in chess are hard to net, andDaniel seemed isolated to the inside pagesfor most of his career. His play was great—in scholastics—but he never tallied manywins with the big boys. And for that matter,he was young, but he wasn’t that young.

www.uschess.org 19

Kayden Troff (left) kibitzes during a blitz game between Daniel Naroditsky (center) and Victor Shen at the opening ceremony of the 2013 U.S. Junior Closed Championship. Robert Perez (center, rear) also weighs in on the action.

PH

OTO

CR

ED

ITS

: A

LL C

OU

RT

ES

Y O

F S

AIN

T L

OU

IS C

HE

SS

CLU

B A

ND

SC

HO

LAS

TIC

CE

NT

ER



He had quickly become a national master,but it wasn’t that quick. “In our area, a couple years ago, we

had players like Greg Young and SamShankland, Steven Zierk coming through,”Donaldson said. “Sam Sevian was becom -ing the youngest master under 10, and theyoungest master before him was anotherMechanics Institute member. There hasalways been a tradition of strong juniorplayers in the Bay Area, a lot of talentedkids.“Really, the first moment I realized that

Daniel was exceptional, his first excep -tional result, was when he won the WorldUnder-12.”To the point, Daniel needed to win the

world before it noticed him.And when the chess world finally

stopped to take in a full assessment ofNaroditsky, it was not for his play, but forhis prose, becoming the youngest chessauthor in history at age 14.Those notebooks that Vladimir would

grab from the $5 bin every time he wentto Barnes and Noble, those hardcoverpads that Daniel had insatiably filled withvarious topics of interest. From chickenscratch to fiction, short stories to magazinearticles about airline food—black caviar onAmerican Airlines in the ‘60s—thosenotebooks ranged all of the boy’s interestssince he was six-years-old. And, notsurprisingly, many were filled with chess.“I have certainly enjoyed writing for as

long as I can remember,” Daniel said.“Even when I could barely write legibly, Ijust loved putting words on paper. Shortstories, fiction, non-fiction—anything, andthat became a great thing for me: Chess isvery writing friendly.“If I put analysis into writing, rather

than just look at my mistakes on acomputer, writing those things down andputting a conclusion into words added anextra dimension for me. I was able toimmerse myself.”In the years following his victory in

Turkey, Daniel’s new desire to seek thenext echelon of chess was met with his firstrating plateau. He was 11 years old andrated 2100 FIDE when he became the bestin the world, but two years later he was stillspinning his wheels under 2300, unable tobreak the international master (IM) ceiling.It was a coaching tip, to strengthen his

positional prowess, that he reanalyze hisold games and begin studying those ofother famous players. So Daniel pulledout those old notebooks and started tostudy them. Then he started to reorganizethem. And as his new study methodsbegan to provide traction in his own career,those hardcover notebooks soon compiledneatly into a manuscript. He thought itmay help others.And for the second time in his life, people

doubted Daniel Naroditsky. It began fourdays after his father sent out themanuscript, a phone call from an editor atNew In Chess, with a question.“They called and were happy to publish

www.uschess.org 21

Naroditsky is the author of two books, a former World Youth champion, and the reigning U.S. Junior champion.

PH

OTO

CR

ED

ITS

: A

LL C

OU

RT

ES

Y O

F S

AIN

T L

OU

IS C

HE

SS

CLU

B A

ND

SC

HO

LAS

TIC

CE

NT

ER




the book, said it was unbelievable,”Vladimir said. “But they asked: ‘Who wroteit?’ They didn’t believe it was him. And ifyou didn’t know Daniel, it was so easy todoubt him. He was 13 years old … I didn’tknow what to say.”Dozens of hardcover notebooks did the

talking, page upon page of handwrittennotes, juvenile in appearance, exceptionallywise in their content. Any doubt left in theauthor’s identity was vetted throughpersonal assurances from Donaldson andcoach GM Gregory Kaidanov.“This sort of thing, if it was assigned to

Daniel, it would have never gotten done,”Donaldson said. “It was something that hadto happen by capturing his imag -ination. All of these notebooks heworked in were just different partsof the game, moments he thoughtwere fascinating, interesting posi -tions that he wanted to delve into.“He did it primarily to improve,

trying to answer questions thathad risen in his own study. Andalso, he wanted to give back to thegame.”Though real reviews of the book

were glowing, touting Daniel forhis stylistic conversation despitethe depth of content, brainlessamateur criticism surrounded him.“How many 15-year-olds use thewords ‘verbosity,’ ‘armada’ and‘multi tude?’ ” screamed the ano -nym ity of the Internet, pregnantwith the accusation that his par -ents had stood in the background,dictating. But his mother didn’teven play chess, and Vladimir wasa class B player at best. “It’s not uncommon to find a

parent working with a child, butchess is such a specialized subjectmatter: His parents were just notcapable of writing to an audience atthe level Daniel had written it,”Donaldson said. “There was quitea bit of initial skepticism, but thosenotebooks were filled with his ownnotes. Cut and pastes from Chess -Base, old school three-lined note books,handwritten exercises, drawings of dia -grams. You just couldn’t get much morebasic than that.”Said Daniel: “It was frustrating, a lot of

those comments were said right to myface. That I had a ghost writer, that thebook was a publicity stunt. It was nottaken seriously, this big effort that I hadexerted with the bottom line of helpingother players improve. It was distortedand slandered and blackened.“I wasn’t as thick-skinned back then, it

got to me a bit. A real life experience.”

Three years later, the only people leftdoubting Daniel Naroditsky—because they

must—are his opponents. And the waythis year has played out, membership tothat club is dwindling.

Mastering Positional Chess was pub -lished in 2010, and Naroditsky beganapplying for his IM title by the end of theyear. And when he ran into another ratingsplateau, he made amateur book criticseat their words by producing more of hisown: Mastering Complex Endgames, com -piled from more study on the weakestaspect of his own game, was released atthe close of 2012 and received to univer -sally warm reviews—now celebrating suchfresh content, suddenly praising hismature tone.

He picked up his second grandmasternorm—finally closing a gap of two years—with a 7/9 performance for top billing at the2013 Philadelphia Open in late March.Then he arrived at the Chess Club andScholastic Center of Saint Louis for theU.S. Junior Championship, his thirdappearance in the event, and one of the lastkiddy pools left to swim in. This time,however, he sat down as the top seed, thefavorite to win a tournament for the firsttime since his scholastic days. This time,under the bright lights of the national stage.He acknowledged the added pressure,

vowed to convert it to confidence, and hisplay throughout the tournament screamedof comfort and control. There was little

fanfare in Daniel’s games that week, mostof them straight and to the point, amidsta tournament that otherwise promisedexplosive drama. By the end, his approachlooked almost systematic: He finishedundefeated, with 61⁄2 points out of 9, draw -ing against the top-five placers and pickingup wins against the bottom four. And not surprisingly, he found his

familiar demon: a doubter.Idaho‘s Luke Harmon-Vellotti was invit -

ed to the Junior Championship as a wildcard, and the 14-year-old had lived up tothe title. Featuring dazzling tactical foot -steps and several lethal uppercuts forwins, Harmon-Vellotti was the darkhorse

that Junior-fans loved, he was thefire works. His second-round draw against

Naroditsky saw his white armyefficiently cleaned to opposite-colored bishops by 20 moves, andwhen he found himself tied with thefavorite entering the tournament’sfinal round, Harmon-Vellotti knewwho held the edge:“I’m going to win tomorrow, and

I’m going to win the tournamentoutright,” Harmon-Vellotti predicted.“Daniel is hard to beat, but he’seasy to draw against. He justdoesn’t have that winning spirit.” Ironically, Naroditsky was seeth -

ing winning spirit that day. At 17,he has just recently grown tall,but he has not yet grown out ofDanya. In another year, he willbegin to fill out his frame, but fornow he’s left long and lanky. It’seasy to miss mental aggression ina boy during this awkward phaseof his life, when his outwardappearance often looks uncom -fortable, almost unsure of hisplace. Not helping his case is aboyish soft smile and eyes that aregentle. Danya shows no sign ofjudgment or calculation. Naturallykind, with no intentions.Danya had been the sole front -

runner that morning, and aneighth- round win against Yian Liou wouldhave meant an early fitting for the nationalcrown. But he let a superior position withthe white pieces slip away, and Liou’ssquirm to a draw allowed Harmon-Vellottito catch pace for the last round. It set fireto Danya. He stood tall and filled out that frame as

he got up from the board, aggressive as hewalked from the Saint Louis Chess Club, hisonce-gentle eyes spitting fire. He left thehalf-point of today and immediately fo -cused fury on tomorrow. If it wasn’t win ningspirit that filled his broad shoulders thatday, it was a clear and definitive acceptanceof what lay ahead.And it steamed from Daniel Naroditsky’s

Daniel neededto win the world

before it noticed him.

PH

OTO

CR

ED

ITS

: A

LL C

OU

RT

ES

Y O

F S

AIN

T L

OU

IS C

HE

SS

CLU

B A

ND

SC

HO

LAS

TIC

CE

NT

ER



ears.“Tomorrow is a must-win. I will win

tomorrow.”

Infallible. Incapable of making mistakes.The feeling is familiar, but now Naroditskycommands it. He celebrated his U.S. Junior crown for

just one week, then he hopped on a planefor Spain, with just a little more doubtleft to squash. At the XXXIII Open Interna-cional “Villa de Benasque” in July, Danielgrabbed his third and final grandmaster(GM) norm by staying true to Harmon-Vellotti’s description: Hard to beat.His undefeated performance in

Benasque, tallying six points out of nine—including four points against sevenstraight grandmasters, culminated with atourna ment-closing draw that simulta-neously confirmed his last norm andpushed him over (2500) FIDE’s GM-watermark—to 2503 (August 2013). Hefollowed that up with another undefeatedperformance at the Open InternacionalCuitat de Balaguer, earning ninth-placeand another norm, just for kicks.Naroditsky wrapped up his 2013 sum -

mer surge at the RTU open A in Riga,Latvia in August. He turned in a strongperformance, tallying five wins and threedraws, good for a tie for 3rd-13th place, ahalf point out of a first-place tie. And aftera 30-game undefeated streak that spannedfive tournaments—netting the U.S. Juniorcrown, four norms and a new GM title—he seemed to find what he was looking for,in Latvia, buried in the fourth round.A loss. One of the lasting shreds of

doubt, now few and far between, for DanielNaroditsky.Something to fill the pages of his

note book.

Naroditsky annotates a game from the U.S.Junior for Chess Life:

Bogo-Indian (E11)IM Daniel Naroditsky (2558)FM Jeffrey Xiong (2496)U.S. Junior Closed, St. Louis, Missouri, 2013

1. d4!? Surprise, surprise! In my pre-game

preparation, I noticed that Jeffrey has aparticular affinity for sharp openingvariations such as the Najdorf or Dragon,and I felt that a relatively calm Bogo orQueen’s Indian—openings in which I hada fair bit of experience with both colors—would suit my style better.

1. ... Nf6 2. Nf3 e6 3. c4 Bb4+ 4. Bd2 Qe7 5. g3Nc6 6. Nc3

(see diagram top of next column)

So far, we are following the main line ofthe Bogo-Indian. While White has anundeniable space advantage and goodpiece coordination, Black’s impendingcentral counterplay (... d6 followed by ...e5) is nothing to sneeze at either. Themain move is 6. ... 0-0, but perhaps Jeffreywasn’t quite satisfied with the positionafter 7. Bg2 Bxc3 8. Bxc3 Ne4 (Alertnessis crucial. The nonchalant 8. ... d6?! wouldlead to an unpleasant position after 9.d5! Nb8 10. 0-0; in fact, 10. ... e5 11. Nd2transposes to the game!) 9. Rc1 d6 10. d5,when Black’s position is cramped and awee bit passive. Perhaps 7. ... Na5!? 8. b3b6 is a better try for equality, but that isa theoretical discussion beyond the scopeof these annotations!

6. ... d6?! Positionally justified, but tactically

flawed. By delaying ... 0-0, Black aims toexecute ... e6-e5 before White gets achance to fully coor dinate his pieces. Forinstance, after 7. Bg2?! Bxc3 8. Bxc3 Ne4 9. Rc1, Black can transpose to the mainline with 9. ... 0-0, but he has theadditional option of playing 9. ... Nxc3 10.Rxc3 e5, and although a transposition tothe main line is likely, I saw a far betterway to put Black’s move to the test.

7. d5! Simple but strong. The knight on c6

cannot move, since Qa4+ will pick up thebishop.

7. ... Bxc3 8. Bxc3 Nb8 9. Bg2 Only now does the seriousness of Black’s

error on the sixth move become clear: themove 9. ... Ne4, a crucial part of Black’s set -up, is now impossible because of 10. Bxg7.Unable to eliminate the dark-squaredbishop, Black suddenly finds himself intotal passivity, incapable of organizing anycounterplay on the kingside.

9. ... e5 10. Nd2! Of course, 10. 0-0 would allow 10. ...

Ne4 followed by 11. … Nxc3 or 11. … f5.In my opinion, one of the main reasons formy success at the Junior consisted in myability to limit my opponent’s counterplay.Moves like Nd2 are inordinately debili-tating for the opponent!

10. ... 0-0 11. 0-0 b6?! Black exacerbates the problem by fur -

ther weakening his position. Since White’smain play lies in a rapid queenside pawnassault (b2-b4-c4-c5), there was no needto create more targets on the queenside.Perhaps 11. ... c6!?, contesting White’scentral superi ority, was a better option,although after 12. Rc1 cxd5 13. cxd5 Na614. Nc4 White had a clear edge inGustafsson-Arnold, World Open 2010.

12. b4 Once again, simplicity reigns supreme.

During the post-mortem, GM Seirawansuggested 12. e4!? followed by 13. f4, butI could already smell blood on the queen -side. In addition, after 12. e4 a5 13. f4 Na614. f5 (a common idea; White “locks” thekingside in order to allow the g- and h-pawns to march forward) 14. ... Nc5 Blackhas the annoying idea of obtainingqueenside counterplay with ... Ba6 and ...b5 or even ... c7-c6 and ... b6-b5.

12. ... Bb7 13. Qb3?! A little too tentative. Although the rooks

are now connected and the queen on b3supports the d5-pawn, Black will nowhave the unwelcome opportunity to createsome luft (translation: breathing room; Iknow—I can’t resist the urge to vaunt mymulti-linguistic erudition) for his pieces.Instead, the banal but powerful 13. a4would have created serious problems forBlack; for instance, 13. ... c6 (13. ... a5 isimpossible on account of 14. bxa5 bxa515. Nb3! and White picks up the pawn) 14.e4 (Houdini’s first choice is 14. Ne4!?,but in my opinion 14. e4 creates morepractical problems) 14. ... Nbd7 15. a5!and Black is in serious trouble, since itisn’t clear how to stop the massive pawnassault on the queenside.

13. ... c6 14. Rfc1 Rc8 15. Bb2 Once again, my intention (to find optimal

squares for my pieces on the queenside) isunderstandable, but the execution is atad languid. Instead, 15. e4!?, followedby Nf1-e3, was a better perestroika (seecomment after move 13) to choose.

15. ... Nbd7 16. e4

www.uschess.org 23




2013 U.S. JUNIOR CLOSED CHAMPIONSHIP, ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI, JUNE 13-23, 2013Rating 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Score

IM Daniel Naroditsky 2494 x ½ ½ ½ ½ ½ 1 1 1 1 6½

FM Samuel Sevian 2390 ½ x 1 ½ 1 0 ½ ½ 1 1 6

FM Luke Harmon-Vellotti 2340 ½ 0 x 1 1 0 ½ 1 1 1 6

IM Victor C. Shen 2411 ½ ½ 0 x 1 1 ½ 0 1 1 5½

IM Kayden W. Troff 2443 ½ 0 0 0 x 1 ½ 1 ½ 1 4½

FM Yian Liou 2385 ½ 1 1 0 0 x ½ 0 1 ½ 4½

FM Jeffery Xiong 2370 0 ½ ½ ½ ½ ½ x ½ 0 1 4

Robert M. Perez 2359 0 ½ 0 1 0 1 ½ x 0 1 4

FM Atulya Shetty 2320 0 0 0 0 ½ 0 1 1 x 1 3½

WFM Sarah Chiang 2101 0 0 0 0 0 ½ 0 0 0 x ½

“It was not takenseriously, this big effort

that I had exerted with the bottom line

of helping other players improve.

It was distorted and slandered

and blackened.”

The author of Mastering Positional Chess and Mastering Complex Endgames dealt with skepticism of his authorship due to his youth.

PH

OTO

CR

ED

ITS

: A

LL C

OU

RT

ES

Y O

F S

AIN

T L

OU

IS C

HE

SS

CLU

B A

ND

SC

HO

LAS

TIC

CE

NT

ER



At this point, I sat back with a satisfiedsigh, took a sip of Sprite, and began watch -ing Jeffrey’s clock tick down. At first sight,my position seems totally dominating:given time (and a perfunctory glance at theposition seems to reveal that I have allthe time in the world), I will transfer myknight to e3 via f1, and either take on c6,following up with a frontal assault on thed6-pawn, or run my a-pawn up the board,wreaking havoc on Black’s cramped pieces.My utopian ruminations, however, werenipped in the bud:

16. ... b5?! The right idea, but the wrong pawn!

Clearly, Black has to alter the pawnstructure on the queenside, but thisshould have been done by 16. ... c5, whenit turns out that Black’s position is rathersolid. After 17. b5, Black has the annoyingidea of doubling up on the a-file: 17. ... a618. a4 Ra7!? followed by 19. ... Rca8.Although White’s advantage is undeniable,Black’s defensive prospects are still veryreal. After the text move, however, Black’sposition becomes very bad, very fast:

17. dxc6 Bxc6 18. cxb5 Bxb5 19. a4 Bc6 20.Qd3! I was quite proud of this quiet but

devastating move after the game. Due tothe devastating threat of 21. Nc4, Black’snext move is practically forced:

20. ... Qe6

After the computer’s cold-bloodedsuggestion of 20. ... Bb7, Black’s positionis untenable after 21. Nc4 Ne8 22. Na5. Now, 21. ... d5 is clearly threatened, so

I must act immediately:

21. Qa6! Devastating! Suddenly, White switches

from ‘positional crunch’ mode to ‘immedi -ate kill’ mode, and the effect is lethal.Black’s bishop on c6 has no squares, and21. ... d5 loses after 22. b5 Nb8 23. exd5!Nxd5 24. Bxd5.

21. ... Nb8?! Slightly winded by the turn of events,

Jeffrey misses his last chance. The“computeresque” 21. ... Rc7 (which I wasslightly worried about during the game!)

still leads to a very difficult ending after 22.Qc4 (note that 22. Rxc6? Nb8! is not at allclear) 22. ... Rac8 23. Qxe6 fxe6 24. Nc4,Black can still fight with 24. ... Ne8. Afterthe text move, Black’s position falls apart.

22. Qc4! Nbd7 23. Qxe6 fxe6 24. b5 Bb7 25.Nc4 Nxe4 Both 25. ... Ne8 26. Ba3 d5 27. Na5

and 25. ... Bxe4 26. Nxd6 Rxc1+ 27. Rxc1are not much better.

26. Bxe4 Bxe4 27. Nxd6 Rxc1+ Unnecessarily going with the flow. Black

could still have tried 27. ... Rc2, when thewin is a little tougher. Still, following 28.Ba3 (but not the impulsive 28. Rxc2?!Bxc2, and Black’s bishop is suddenly in anirksome position) 28. ... Bg6 29. Rxc2Bxc2 30. a5 Black’s position is hopeless.

28. Rxc1 Bf3 29. Rc7?! Rash, rash, rash! This doesn’t throw

away the win, of course, but 29. Rc3!,aiming to induce the diagonal-opening 29.... e4 before penetrating the seventh rankwith 30. Rc7.

Now, 30. ... Rd8 is impossible onaccount of 31. Nb7! (note the importanceof White’s 29th move: the e4-pawn impris -ons the f3-bishop!), winning a piece. On themore resilient 30. ... Nf6, White repliesnot 31. a5?!, and when Black can stillresist after 31. ... Ne8 32. Rc8!? (this isn’tcomputer chess; White simply goes forthe more important pawn and keeps hisback rank safe) 32. ... Rxc8 33. Nxc8 Be234. Nxa7 Nd6 35. b6 Nb7, but 31. Bxf6!,when 31. ... gxf6 32. Nc8 is crushing.

29. ... Rd8! Ugh! Only now did I realize that my

intended 30. Rxa7? leads nowhere after 30.... Nf6 31. Bxe5 Ne8!, and Black suddenlydevelops formidable counterplay basedon the weakness of White’s first rank.With time pressure rearing its ugly head,I missed both 30. a5 and 30. Ba3, both ofwhich win in a matter of moves, butdecided to liquidate into a winning, albeitslightly messy minor-piece ending.

30. Nb7!? Rb8! Of course, 30. ... Bxb7 31. Rxb7 loses

immediately.

31. Na5 Nb6 32. Rxg7+! This is the idea! Now, Jeffrey’s intended

32. ... Kf8 33. Rxh7 Kg8 fails to 34. Rh8+!,and White uses the same tactical motif totrade rooks and win a third pawn.

32. ... Kxg7 33. Bxe5+ Kf7 34. Bxb8 a6 Perhaps 34. ... Nxa4 35. Bxa7 Ke7 was

a better try, but White should still win byevicting the bishop from f3 and pushinghis kingside pawns; Black’s pieces areoverextended.

35. bxa6 Nxa4 36. Nc4! Precision is key in these types of

endings. Now, Black’s knight doesn’t haveaccess to the b6-square.

36. ... Ke7 37. Bd6+ Kd8 38. Bf4 Kc8 39. Nd6+Kb8 40. Nf7+ Ka7 41. Ng5

Finally! Black loses the h7-pawn, but,perhaps more importantly, his king is waytoo far away from White’s double passers.In short, Black is busted.

41. ... Bd5 42. Nxh7 Kxa6 43. Nf6 Bf3 44. h4Nc3 45. h5 Nd5 A good try, but White will have too many

passed pawns for the “opposite-coloredbishop endings are drawn” rule to takeeffect. Of course, Black had no other wayto stop White’s pawns.

46. Nxd5 exd5 47. h6 Be4 48. Be5! Care must be taken until the very end.

The impulsive 48. g4?! is less clear after 48.... d4.

48. ... Kb5 49. f4 Kc6 50. g4 Bh7 51. Bd4,Black resigned.Black is powerless to stop White’s

armada of passers (after f4-f5, Kf2-e3-f4and g4-g5), so he threw in the towel.All things considered, this is my best

effort at the Junior. Although both playerscommitted their fair share of inaccuraciesand errors, I found some nice ideas andcame out superior in all three stages of thegame (an advantage out of the opening, awinning position out of the middle game,and a relatively clean win in the ending)despite Jeffrey’s stubborn resistance. Inaddition, this game set the tone for the restof the tournament and imbued with much-needed confidence.

www.uschess.org 25


gm-ele ct daniel naroditsky candidates’...

Documents