The video above is an amateur's analysis of one of his own favorite games. He ignores some of the opening inaccuracies on both sides and presents no alternative moves for some glaring errors. However, in spite of the downsides to this video the presenter possesses and enthusiasm that is refreshing to me. This video is a great introduction to the Ideas of Jeremy Silman (as well as the uncredited ideas brought to chess education by GM Alexander Kotov, my personal favorite among chess thinkers). I recommend this to all viewers concerned with either learning the fundamentals of chess thinking or to those of higher level that are looking for good methods of presenting chess material to others.

I wanted to bring to the attention of the chess community at large a site I recently came across. A new and exciting looking website that is still growing. It is called simply WhyChess. They offer everything form free news and articles of chess interest to chess teaching and soon playing services. I'm not certain who is the mastermind(s) behind this website but they're thinking big and that's something I'm prepared to get behind and lend my support without being asked.

Truthfully, the site has not given me any kind of remuneration for this article. I've not even spoken with any of its representatives. I just happened to find it and I'm passing it on to you to look around and explore its features. Check it out!

The following correspondence game was played by me against an unidentified opponent and I thought that for my own benefit I'd go through it and give some commentary:

E33: Nimzo-Indian: Classical: 4...Nc6
White: Online Opponent
Black: Me

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 Bb4 4. Qc2 Nc6 5. Nf3 O-O 6. e3 d5 7. a3 Bxc3+ 8. bxc3

After this move the game enters a very dynamic but normally drawn character. I choose the most active move (albeit perhaps a little too ambitious).

8. ...Re8 9. cxd5

some people may criticize white here for releasing the central tension. However, they are overlooking the dominant position of White's two Bishops. White is trading one advantage for another -the central tension for an open field for his Bishop pair. Owever, Black is happy with this change because he gains a half open file for his rook.

9. … exd5 10. Be2 Bg4

Black appreciates a lead in development but can't really exploit it so the position her is roughly equal. White's plan will be to activate his drak-square bishop and black's will be to activate his rooks and try to trade off one of the enemy Bishop's to break up the pair.

11. O-O a6

in hindsight this may have been a mistake. The threat of Bb5 only trades off my least active minor piece for one of the demon bishops.

12. h3 Bh5 13. Bd1

This was a good chance for White to put in c4. He neglects to do so and Black has a chance to improve himself ...

13. … b6?

… but fails to do so. I mistakenly want to edge for a c5 break. I need to keep the game closed … not play for breaks.

14. Nd2 Bg6?

Simply trading bishops gives Black a powerful attack. I'm not certain what was thinking. Gain a tempo? Captures do that anyway (as the tempo gets passed back to you after a recapture).

15. Qb2 Bd3 16. Re1 Na5 17. Be2 Bxe2 18. Rxe2

I'm going to ignore the justification for the last few moves. Neither player has done very well but at least Black has a plan involving the c4 square. What is white's plan? At any rate Black is back on track. He is set up now so that white has an undefended rook, a trade on c4 will now result in white becoming passive and my remaining knight would dominate the terribly bad bishop.

18. … c5

well, I got the break I wanted !?

19. a4 Qc7 20. Rb1 Rab8 21. Qa2 b5 22. Nf3 Rb7 23. Ne5 Reb8 24. Reb2 Ne4 25. Bd2 f6??

after some inventive play I missed the best move. The worst part is that I looked at the move but considered the knight kick-out better.

26. Qxd5+ Kh8 27. Qxe4 fxe5 28. Qxe5

This turns out to be the decisive mistake. Fritz (yes, I said Fritz) gives the continuation 28. axb5 Nc4 29. b6 Qd6 30. dxe5 Nxe5 with White just better.

28. … Qxe5 29. dxe5 Nc4 30. Ra2 bxa4 31. Rxb7 Rxb7 32. Be1 a3

I think some players may be tempted to play 32. … Nxe5? When 33.
Rxa4 Kg8 34. Kf1 and again white is just better and on his way to fixing his biggest problems with an extra pawn.

33. Kf1 Rb2 34. Ra1 a2 35. Rd1 Kg8 0-1

White resigned with no way of stopping the coming queen without big sacrifice. I would describe this game as a muddle with the occasional spark of inspiration. I had poor plans in many positions but the thing I can honestly say is that I DID have a plan. A poor plan is always better than no plan. Sadly, this was a correspondence game so it just goes to show my skills have waxed old over the past couple of years. I need to get back into tournament play where the opposition is better prepared and I can start my analyzing engine (my brain) back up once more.

Hank has had difficulty in adding this as a comment to my previous post so I'm posting it here on his behalf:

Hello Colonel Crockett (and ChessVine readers),

I’m very sorry you took the comments in my blog post of July 24th as negative criticism. I did not intend my comments to be critical in either a constructive or negative way. They were just observations based on what I observed from your blog and noting what blogs did well in last year’s CJA awards. From what I saw of ChessVine’s posts, I consider it was an excellent blog or chess portal (take your pick) and I did like the Fisher book review (although I didn’t care for the book as much as you).

I try to write with a good humor and not take myself especially seriously. I’ve written on and off about my experiences with the CJA over the past 2 years, including my CJA entry last year that garnered the absolute lowest score (1 out of 12 possible points) of all 100+ entries and the entry I submitted in 2006 where I asked the judge of my section in person the day after the awards had been made public what he thought of my entry only to have him tell me he had never heard of it! I never thought my quirky blog would win (or even be seriously considered) and writing about the entire process was a lot of fun to share with my readers. Looking at the post in question with a different perspective, I probably made too much of my chances in order to contrast it to the stories of sure things not coming through that I followed it up with. I have posted my thoughts on winning the award on August 16th, but chessvines would have been a worthy winner.

Again, I think highly of your blog and I am very sorry for your disappointment at my post. I think congratulations are in order for both of us for being willing to risk rejection and submit our creative efforts to the judge’s scrutiny.

Regards,
Hank Anzis (http://brokenpawn1.blogspot.com)