Los Angeles Times
May 3 2009
Levon Aronian leads Grand Prix
By Jack Peters, International Master
May 3, 2009
Position No. 6053: White to play and win. From the game Joshua
Friedel-Teddy Coleman, Foxwoods Open, Connecticut 2009.
Solution to Position No. 6052: White wins with 1 Rxb8+ Qxb8 2 Rxe6+
fxe6 3 Qxe6+ Kd8 4 Bb6+ Qc7 5 b8Q mate.
The fourth Grand Prix tournament neared a dramatic finish last week in
Nalchik, Russia. Levon Aronian of Armenia and Peter Leko of Hungary
shared the lead with scores of 7 1/2 -4 1/2 before the last game of
the 14-grandmaster round robin. By the luck of the pairings, they were
due to face each other, with Aronian playing White. At stake was the
first prize of 30,000 Euros (about $40,000).
Aronian is a crowd-pleasing gambler whose many successes overshadow
his occasional failures. Leko, the only undefeated competitor, may be
the world’s best defender but often seems too eager to draw.
Interestingly, two of Leko’s wins in Nalchik came against the
ultra-drawish Petroff Defense, which let Leko press White’s tiny
advantage without risk.
Former U.S. champion Gata Kamsky, renowned for his relentless style,
led the tournament in one category — moves played. Six of his games
lasted 67 moves or longer, but his 5 1/2 -6 1/2 score left him out of
contention.
The World Chess Federation will also award substantial prizes to the
overall leaders of the six-tournament series. Aronian, who took first
prize in the second Grand Prix event in Sochi, Russia, last year, is a
strong candidate for the top bonus of 75,000 euros (about $100,000).
For final standings and player interviews, see nalchik2009.fide.com.
National news
California’s top player, grandmaster Varuzhan Akobian, defeated
U.S. champion Yury Shulman of Illinois in an exhibition match in Lake
County, Calif. Akobian scored 3 1/2 -2 1/2 in 25-minute games and 6-2
in five-minute games.
The 2009 U.S. Championship begins Friday in St. Louis. It’s a
nine-round tournament with 24 players and a prize fund of
$130,000. First prize is a record $35,000. The field includes Kamsky,
Shulman and former champions Joel Benjamin, Larry Christiansen, Hikaru
Nakamura, Alexander Onischuk and Alexander Shabalov. California will
be represented by Akobian, GM Melikset Khachiyan, IM Enrico Sevillano
and IM Sam Shankland.
Today’s games
GM Etienne Bacrot (France)-GM Shakhriyar Mamedyarov (Azerbaijan),
Nalchik 2009: 1 e4 c5 2 Nf3 e6 3 d4 cxd4 4 Nxd4 Nc6 Taimanov’s
variation of the Sicilian Defense. 5 Nc3 a6 6 Nxc6 Recently
fashionable. bxc6 7 Bd3 d5 8 0-0 Nf6 9 Re1 Be7 Or 9 . . . Bb7. 10 e5
Nd7 11 Qg4 g6 Weakening his dark squares, but 11 . . . 0-0? 12 Bh6 is
worse. 12 Na4 Another sharp line begins 12 Bh6 Rb8 13 Qh3 Rb4. c5?!
Mamedyarov claimed he mixed up the order of moves. Indeed, he played
the superior 12 . . . Qa5 13 Bh6 c5 14 b3 c4! 15 Bf1 Bb7 in 2006
against Carlsen, and drew. 13 c4! Limiting central counterplay. Qa5 14
Qd1 dxc4?! Black should hold White to a small advantage with 14
. . . d4 15 Be4 Rb8 16 Bh6 Bf8. 15 Be4! Black would not mind 15 Bxc4
0-0. Rb8 16 Bh6 To strand Black’s King uncomfortably in the
center. Black’s position is already very unpleasant. Rb4 Not 16
. . . Nxe5? 17 Bg7 or 16 . . . f5? 17 exf6 Nxf6 18 Bg7 Rg8 19 Bxf6
Bxf6 20 Qd6. More reasonable is 16 . . . Bf8 17 Bxf8 Kxf8, but 18
Qd6+ Kg7 19 Bc6 still favors White. Maybe 16 . . . Qc7 is best. 17 Nc3
Rxb2 18 Qc1 Rb8 Black could prevent 19 Bc6 by 18 . . . Rb6, but 19 Bd2
embarrasses the Queen. 19 Bc6! Pinning the Knight and preparing
Nc3-e4, aiming at d6 and f6. Bb7 20 Ba4! A very effective
maneuver. White may attack the pinned Knight or invade with Bh6-g7 and
Qc1-h6xh7. Kd8 Feeble, but there is nothing satisfactory. For example,
20 . . . Bf8 loses to 21 Rd1 Rd8 22 Bg5! Be7 23 Bxe7 Kxe7 24 Qg5+ Ke8
25 Qf6 Rf8 26 Rd6! (threatening 27 Rxe6+) Rg8 27 Bxd7+ Rxd7 28 Rxd7
Kxd7 29 Qxf7+. 21 Rd1 Bd5 Hoping for 22 Nxd5?! Qxa4. 22 Qc2 Rb4 After
22 . . . Kc8, both 23 Nxd5 and 23 Rxd5 exd5 24 Nxd5 win for White. 23
Bd2 Intending to gain a Rook by 24 Nxd5 Qxa4 25 Nxb4. Ba8 24 Be1 Rxa4
25 Nxa4 White has recovered his sacrificed material and retains an
unstoppable initiative. Black’s Rook still sits idly at h8. Qb5 Or 25
. . . Qc7 26 Nb2. 26 Rab1 Qc6 27 f3 Ke8 Similar is 27 . . . Kc8 28
Rxd7. 28 Rxd7! Kxd7 Hopeless is 28 . . . Qxd7 29 Ra8+ Bd8 30 Rxa8. 29
Qd1+! Relying on 29 . . . Qd5? 30 Nb6+. Kc8 30 Nb6+ Kb7 Black finds no
shelter after 30 . . . Kc7 31 Ba5. 31 Nd5+, Black Resigns.
GM Vassily Ivanchuk (Ukraine)-GM Rustam Kasimdzhanov (Uzbekistan),
Nalchik 2009: 1 c4 e6 2 Nc3 d5 3 d4 Be7 4 cxd5 exd5The Exchange
variation of the Queen’s Gambit. 5 Bf4 Nf6 Another common line begins
5 . . . c6 6 e3 Bf5 7 g4. 6 e3 Bf5 Putting his "bad" Bishop on a
useful diagonal. 7 Qb3 The most critical challenge of Black’s
idea. White gets nothing from 7 Bd3, while 7 Nge2 0-0 8 Ng3 Be6 9 Bd3
c5 10 dxc5 Bxc5 allows Black easy development and equal chances. Nc6 8
a3?! Theory once recommended 8 Qxb7 Nb4 9 Bb5+ Kf8 10 Rd1, but Black
can draw by 10 . . . Bd6 11 Bxd6 cxd6 12 Nf3 Rb8 13 Qxa7 Ra8. Several
games have tested 8 Rc1 0-0 9 Nf3 Na5 10 Qa4 c6 11 Be2 b5 12 Qd1
without demonstrating more than equality. Na5 9 Qa2 A time-consuming
maneuver. Black will respond by trying to open lines for his better
developed pieces. 0-0 10 Nf3 Although 10 b4 Nc6 11 Rc1 restrains
. . . c7-c5, Black can fight back with 11 . . . a5 12 b5 Na7 13 Nf3 c6
or 11 . . . Bd6 12 Bg5 a5 13 b5 Ne7. c5! Very desirable, and
apparently sound. 11 dxc5 Bxc5 Not fearing 12 b4 Bb6 13 bxa5? Bxa5, as
Black will capture the pinned Knight. 12 Be5 Maintaining control of
d4. Also plausible is 12 b4 Bb6 13 Rd1 Be6 14 Na4, but Black takes the
initiative with 14 . . . Bc7! 15 Bxc7 (not 15 bxa5? Bxf4 16 exf4
because of 16 . . . Qxa5+) Qxc7 16 Nc5 Ne4. Be6 13 Bd4 Bxd4 14 Nxd4
Nc6 15 Nxe6 Skillful defense! White improves Black’s pawn structure
but gains time to finish development. Instead, 15 Bd3 Nxd4 16 exd4 Qb6
17 Rd1 lets Black exploit the uncastled King by 17 . . . Bg4! 18 f3
Rfe8+ 19 Ne2 Bd7, securing a small advantage. fxe6 16 Be2 Qe7 17 0-0
Rac8 18 Rac1 White has neutralized the danger since 10 . . . c5. Black
has the tiniest edge because of his extra center pawn. Kh8 19 Rfd1
Nd7!? 20 Rd2 Nde5 An excellent post. White cannot evict the Knight, as
21 f4?? loses to 21 . . . Qc5. 21 Qb3 Qf7 22 Bf1?? Overlooking a
devastating tactic. After 22 f4 Nc4 23 Bxc4 Na5 24 Qd1 Nxc4 25 Re2 or
22 Rf1 Na5 23 Qc2, Black’s advantage should not be decisive. d4! As
White would lose too much material by 23 exd4? Nxd4 24 Qd1 Ndf3+! 25
gxf3 Nxf3+ 26 Kh1 Qf4. 23 Na2 Another piece is exiled to a2, but 23
Ne4 would lose the exchange to 23 . . . Na5 24 Qd1 Rxc1 25 Qxc1
Nb3. Ng4! 24 Rdc2?! White must yield a pawn by 24 Qd1 dxe3. Not 24
exd4?, as 24 . . . Qf4 costs a Rook. dxe3 25 fxe3 Na5, White
Resigns. Even stronger is 25 . . . Nd4! 26 exd4 Qf4, anticipating 27
Qg3 Qxd4+ 28 Kh1 Rxc2 or 27 g3 Qxd4+ 28 Kh1 Rxc2 29 Qxc2 Nf2+ 30 Kg1
Nd1+! 31 Kg2 Ne3+. Kasimdzhanov’s 25 . . . Na5 merely wins a piece by
26 Qd3 Rxc2 27 Qxc2 Qxf1+! 28 Rxf1 Rxf1+ 29 Kxf1 Nxe3+.