Theory Of Shadows: A Review

It must be extremely difficult to write a historical novel because many have tried and most have failed. Many of the historical novels I have read were of the type, “What if he had lived?” Some concerned POTUS John F. Kennedy.

The last one read was years ago and it caused me to put other books of the type on the “back burner,” where they have since continued to smolder…It may have helped if the author could write, but he had as much business writing as I have running a marathon. The book was not one of those print on demand tomes which allow anyone to publish a book nowadays but a book published by an actual publishing company, which means there was an editor who must have thought the book good enough to earn money. I found the book, a hardback, only a few weeks after it had been published and it was marked down to a price low enough for me to take a chance and fork over the cash. P.T. Barnum said, “There’s a sucker born every minute.” In a way the editor was right, but then, marked down enough anything will sell.

There have been notable historical novels such as Michael Shaara‘s masterpiece, The Killer Angels,
which won the Pulitzer Prize in 1974.

It must be terribly difficult to write a novel about people who actually lived. A novelist invents a character. To write historical fiction about an actual living, breathing human being is another thing entirely.

Having recently returned to the city of my birth meant a visit to the local library, which happened to be selected as the 2018 Georgia Public Library of the Year. After renewing my lapsed library card I went to the catalog that very evening to check on, what else, Chess books. I had been pleasantly surprised when seeing the latest issue of Chess Life magazine in the reading room of the Decatur branch of the Dekalb county library system after obtaining my new card. While surveying the Chess books a jewel was found, a book I recalled being published years ago, but not in English. It was published at the end of the last century by the author of The Luneburg Variation,

Paolo Maurensig.

It was his first novel, published at the age of fifty, and it was a good read. The book about which I will write is, Theory Of Shadows,

published in Italy in 2015. It was published in the US by Farrar, Straus and Giroux in 2018 after being translated by Anne Milano Appel.

From the front inside jacket: On the morning of March 24, 1946, the world chess champion, Alexander Alekhine – “sadist of the chess world,”

renowned for his eccentric behaviour as well as the ruthlessness of his playing style – was found dead in his hotel room in Estoril, Portugal.”

There it is, a fictional account of how Alekhine died. The last paragraph on the jacket reads: “With the atmosphere of a thriller, the insight of a poem, and a profound knowledge of the world of chess (“the most violent of all sports,” according to the former world champion Garry Kasparov), Paolo Maurensig’s Theory of Shadows leads us through the glamorous life and sordid death of an infuriating and unapologetic genius: not only trying to work out “whodunit,” but using the story of Alexander Alekhine to tease out what Milan Kundera has called “that which the novel alone can discover.”

I loved everything about this book. The book begins with this quote : “If Alekhine had been a Jew hating Nazi scientist, inventor of weapons extermination and therefore protected by those in power, then that intellectual rabble would have held its breath. Instead, the victim had to drain the bitter cup to the last drop…Even the supreme act of his death was vulgarly besmirched. And we cowards stifled our feelings, remaining silent. Because the only virtue that fraternally unites us all, whites and black, Jews and Christians, is cowardice.” – Esteban Canal

After reading the above I had yet to begin the first chapter yet had been sent to the theory books…OK, the interweb, in order to learn who was Esteban Canal. “Esteban Canal (April 19, 1896 – February 14, 1981) was a leading Peruvian chess player who had his best tournament results in the 1920s and 1930s.” (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Esteban_Canal)

This was also found:

Who was Esteban Canal?

Writing in a 1937 edition of Chess Review, Lajos Steiner,


Lajos Steiner (1903-1975), by Len Leslie

who knew Canal when they were living in Budapest, said that Canal never reached the heights his talent deserved. He was awarded the IM title in 1950 and received the honorary GM title in 1977.
Not much is known about his life and what little is known is wrapped in a cloud of mystery. Canal himself claimed to have been a cabin boy on a cargo ship carrying wheat from Australia, but it has proven to be impossible to verify dates. It is known that he had an extensive nautical knowledge and sailors.
In 1955 the South African player Wolfgang Heindenfed, writing in his book Chess Springbok, An Account of a South African Chess Player’s Experiences Overseas wrote of Canal, “The grand old man of Italian chess is Esteban Canal, originally of Peru, who at the age of 57 won the 1953 Venice tournament to which I had the good luck of being invited. He is one of the most interesting and amusing of all chess personalities. Formerly a roving reporter, he speaks six or seven languages and still treasures mementos of such VIPs as Kemal Pasha and Abd el Krim. He is an inexhaustible raconteur of chess stories.” (http://tartajubow.blogspot.com/2018/03/who-was-esteban-canal.html)

About a third of the way through the one hundred seventy nine page book we read: “Though it was an essential task, armchair analysis of the matches he’s played in the past often bored him. Without the presence of the human element, the pieces on the chessboard lost their vitality. It was quite a different matter to play with an opponent in front of you: to enter his mind, predict his strategies by interpreting the slightest variations of his posture, the position of his hands, the subtle though significant contractions of his lips. During the period when he worked for the Moscow police, they had taught Alekhine how to interpret small signs such as these during interrogations, to see if their subjects were lying.”

During an interview, after discussing the murder of his brother at the hands of the Soviet communists as retribution of Alekhine leaving “Mother Russia” the interviewer asks, “And you never feared that you might suffer the same fate?”

“You mean being killed?”

The journalist nodded.

He hesitated a moment, then: “Perhaps, yes, now and then, the thought’s occurred to me.”

“After all,” Ocampo said, a little heavy-handedly, “Trotsky himself, despite taking refuge in Mexice, was ultimately hit by a hired assassin.”

“I took my precautions.”

For a time Alekhine was silent. In fact, he knew very well that it was not strictly necessary for a victim to be close to his murderer, that there was no place in the world where one could be assured of finding a completely secure refuge. A well-trained hit man could strike even in broad daylight and in the midst of a crowd.”

I’m thinking, “Just ask JFK…”

Jews and Chess:

“That was the first time he’d faced a Jewish chess player – it would certainly not be the last. He would endure a stinging defeat by Rubenstein


Akiba Rubenstein

in the first masters tournament in which he competed. He was eighteen years old then, and, encountering that young man, some years older than him, who was said to have abandoned his rabbinical studies to devote himself to chess, he’s had to swallow several bitter truths. Later on, he played against Nimzowitsch,


Aaron Nimzowitsch

Lasker,


Emanuel Lasker

and Reshevsky,


Sammy Reshevsky

soon realizing that, in his rise to the world title, his competitors would all be Jews.
Their faces were still sharply etched in his memory: Rubinstein, dapper, with a drew cut and an upturned mustache and the vacant gaze of a man who has peered too closely into his own madness; Lasker, with his perpetually drowsy air and spiraling, hopelessly rebellious hair; Nimzowitsch, looking like a bank clerk who, behind his pincenez, is haughtily judging the insufficiency of other people’s funds’ Reshevsky, resembling a prematurely aged child prodigy. Often he imagined them muffled up in long black cloaks, gathered in a circle like cros around a carcass, intent on captiously interpreting chess the way they did their sacred texts.”

Near the end of this magnificent book it is written, “By then, the harbingers of what in the coming decades would be called the Cold War were already looming. And if the weapons of the two blocs were to remain unused, it was essential that there be other arenas in which they could compete and excel. Chess was therefore, as ever, a symbolic substitute for war: gaining supremacy in it was a constant reminder to the enemy that you possessed greater military expertise, a more effective strategy.”

In beating the Soviet World Chess Champion Boris Spassky in 1972 Bobby Fischer won much more than a mere Chess match.

Bobby emasculated the Soviet Communist regime. Alekhine may have taken a brick out of the wall when leaving Mother Russia, but Bobby Fischer took the wall down.

Being a novel within a novel made the book was a pleasure to read and I enjoyed it immensely. I give it the maximum five stars.

Advertisements

The Dirty Laundry of Atlanta Chess

While living in Greenville, SC, the octogenarian, LM Klaus Pohl, said something that stuck with me. When asked what he thought of the new Chess Center in Charlotte Klaus said he did not like to play there because the young players offer too many draws. Upon further questioning Klaus said that with scholarships so important the young players were “afraid to lose,” so therefore made far too many draw offers. From the time I began playing in USCF tournaments rating has been King. This was, though, the first time I had heard anything concerning what the rating points could possibly mean toward earning a scholarship. Another player listening to the conversation said, “Everyone knows rating points are being bought and sold like it’s an open market.” My reply, “I did not know that,” elicited this response, “Ah, come on man. You worked at the Atlanta Chess Center. Surely you were aware of that kind of thing taking place.” With a blank look on my face I replied, “Not really.” I am not saying it did not happen, just that I was completely unaware of it if it did, in fact, happen while I was employed at the House of Pain.

There were rumors going around before I returned to Atlanta. I will not print rumors. I did, though, reach out to several people involved with Chess in Georgia, writing, “If you would like to comment on any of this, let me inform you that I may use anything you say, or write, UNLESS YOU WANT IT KEPT PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL!”

No one responded. They ain’t talking.

In an article appearing at the Georgia Chess News website, Meet the 2019 GCA Candidates (http://georgiachessnews.com/2019/04/27/meet-the-2019-candidates/), David Hater,

candidate for the position of OFFICE OF 1ST VICE PRESIDENT writes: “I am running for 1st Vice President of GCA. I previously served on the GCA Board in this position, but I resigned from the board because, in my opinion, the board had become dysfunctional. Several months ago several GCA Board members encouraged me to run for the position again. I agreed to do so only after Scott Parker also agreed to run for President of GCA. My hope is that the next board will place personal feelings and animosity aside and work for chess instead of for their own interests/pet projects or a narrow constituency.”

The fact that Colonel David Hater felt he had to resign from the GCA Board speaks loudly. The fact that David, a man I admire and respect, felt compelled to write, “…the board had become dysfunctional,” screams out in pain. Nevertheless, David did not respond to my entreaty.

One of the board members did say, in an off hand comment at the Ironman Chess Club, they were “fed up” with all the “screaming and shouting” at the meeting of the GCA board. Although no names were mentioned the fact is that it is now, and has been for some time, an open secret that Thad Rogers was not happy when Parnell Watkins used his affiliate, American Chess Promotions to rate some of the events listed below. The thing is that Thad Rogers

and Parnell Watkins

were earlier listed as running for the same office, that of 1st member at large. The only one leaving a statement at a page mentioned earlier was L. Thad Rogers, the man who became POTGCA again after the previous president, Fun E. Fong, abdicated, leaving Chess behind like it was the plague. From reports it is obvious Chess in my home state of Georgia has quickly devolved under the caretaker leadership of Thad Rogers.

The Georgia State Chess Championship begins tonight and there will be an election Sunday. Chess players, and members of the GCA, can only hope responsible leaders, such as Scott Parker

and David Hater, gain a seat on the board.

Alan Piper was known as “The Pipe” at the House of Pain. As one of Alan’s victims eased down the stairs those below watched as someone said, “It looks like he got hit by the Pipe,” while others nodded in agreement. One wag said, “Sometimes you hit the Pipe. Sometimes the Pipe hits you.” Alan once won a state championship (I want to say Missouri, but could be wrong) when younger and was a NM. Although uncertain about Alan’s age, the fact is he has been eligible for the Senior tournaments for many years and must be seventy, or older.

The following results for the past 12 months was taken from the USCF website:

10487030: ALAN G PIPER
Current Published
Rating ( Supplement)
Regular Rating 2000 2019-03
(Current floor is 1600)
Quick Rating 1905 2019-03
Blitz Rating 1808 2019-03

Rank USCF ID Name Games Wins Draws Losses
1 14916346 SHANMUKHA MERUGA 50 1 0 49
2 14114923 KAPISH POTULA 19 1 1 17
3 14299428 SAITHANUSRI AVIRNENI 14 7 0 7
4 14577814 DAVIDE NASTASIO 3 1 1 1
5 15909472 TAIYE HILARY ESTWICK 1 1 0 0
6 16045110 TYLER JAMES BREDOW 1 1 0 0
7 16045235 CASEY WASSERMAN 1 1 0 0
8 14822494 TYLER SCHMUGGEROW 1 1 0 0
9 14684432 JOSHUA MORGAN KAROL 1 1 0 0
10 12365700 J PARNELL WATKINS JR 1 1 0 0

http://www.uschess.org/datapage/gamestats.php

The Pipe has obviously played an inordinate amount of games with two players. The number of losses to the two much younger players is simply staggering. Usually when one is drubbed in a match there are no further matches. One of the members of the GCA board, a very nice woman, Anna Baumstark, told me it was all “public record on the USCF website.” I decided to take the time to check it out…You, too, can check it out here: http://www.uschess.org/msa/MbrDtlMain.php?14114923

On September 12, 2015. Alan Piper played in the INVITATIONAL QUAD #10 (GA), directed by Grant Oen. The Sponsoring Affiliate was SOUTHEAST CHESS.

Pair | Player Name |Total|Round|Round|Round|Round|
Num | USCF ID / Rtg (Pre->Post) | Pts | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 |
———————————————————————–
1 | KAPISH POTULA |2.5 |W 2|D 3|W 4|* |
GA | 14114923 / R: 2014 ->2053 | |B |W |B | |
———————————————————————–
2 | CARTER F PEATMAN |2.0 |* |W 3|W 4|L 1|
GA | 12945576 / R: 2101 ->2108 | | |W |B |W |
———————————————————————–
3 | ALAN G PIPER |1.5 |L 2|* |W 4|D 1|
GA | 10487030 / R: 2070 ->2071 | |B | |W |B |
———————————————————————–
4 | SHANMUKHA MERUGA |0.0 |L 2|L 3|* |L 1|
GA | 14916346 / R: 2088 ->2053 | |W |B | |W |

Alan would not play again until August 13, 2016 when he participated in the CHESS BUG ATLANTA TOURNAMENT, directed by JOSEPH COUVILLION, with CHESS BUG ATLANTA, being the affiliate. SHANMUKHA MERUGA was clear first with 3-0. KAPISH POTULA finished clear second with a 2-1 score, the loss was to Meruga. Alan Piper won a game from a class C player, and lost two other games, one with a class B player, the other to Kapish Potula.

Let us go back to the tournament prior to the Quad, August 8, 2015, the LOGANVILLE SUMMER QUAD, directed by Grant Oen, with the affilate being Southeast Chess. The Pipe won all three games; gained 29 rating points which raised his rating to 2079. He beat Shanmukha Meruga, rated 2054, in the first round, then two class A players, Vedic Panda and Davide Nastasio.

After playing in the aforementioned CHESS BUG ATLANTA TOURNAMENT Alan did not play again until January 22, 2018 when he played a match with Shanmukha Meruga. The TD was J PARNELL WATKINS JR, and the affiliate was Gwinnett Chess. The time control was G/30;d5. Meruga won all four games, gaining fourteen points to end with a rating of 2056. The Pipe lost twenty points dropping to 2019.

After a couple of blitz quads on July 13 the next match with Meruga took place the next day, July 14. The TD was J PARNELL WATKINS JR, using the affiliate of the acting President of the GCA, L. Thad Rogers, AMERICAN CHESS PROMOTIONS. It was a real old fashioned, “speed,” time control of five minutes only for the games. Meruga won all ten games.

Three days later another match was contested between the same two players, named, PIPER MERUGA MATCH 2. The time control was, G/25;d5. The TD was J PARNELL WATKINS JR, and it was rated using the affiliate of GWINNETT CHESS. Meruga won all five games.

Two days later, July 19, 2018 there was yet another tournament contested once again by the young whippersnapper and the old leaky Pipe. Once again it was directed by J PARNELL WATKINS JR and the sponsoring affiliate was again GWINNETT CHESS, and once again Meruga won all ten games played at a “speed” TC of five minutes for the entire game.

Three days later there was the NASTASIO-PIPER MATCH, which was held at the Chess Club and Scholastic Center of Atlanta in Roswell, Georgia, the seventh largest city in the great state of Georgia. The chief TD was BENJAMIN P FINEGOLD,


Meruga/Finegold in front of the Atlanta Chess and Scholastic Club of Atlanta located in Roswell, Ga.

assisted by KAREN BOYD.


Karen Boyd and Ben Finegold

The time control was G/60;+10. The three game match was drawn. In addition there was another match played that day between the same two players. The TC was G/4;+2, and Piper won 8-2.

A few weeks later, 9/8/18, Piper and Meruga were back at it, contesting not one, but two, more matches. J PARNELL WATKINS JR was again the TD and AMERICAN CHESS PROMOTIONS was the affiliate used to rate the matches. No one will be surprised to learn Meruga won the G/5 “speed” match 9-1. What is surprising is that Piper actually won a game…Three games were also contested at a TC of G/30;d10. Guess who won all three games? Yeah, Meruga.

The very next day, 9/9/2018, the two intrepid players were back at it. Once again J PARNELL WATKINS JR was the TD, but the affiliate used was now GWINNETT CHESS. The speed match, with only five minutes per game, was convincingly won by Meruga by a score of 20-0. That is ZERO, ZIP, NADA!

It will come as little surprise by now that Meruga also won the G/30;d10 match by a score of 4-0.

The very next day yet another match was contested between the same two players, again with the same TD and affiliate. The time control was G/30;d10 and Meruga won all six games.

Have you gotten a whiff of some sort of fishy smell yet?

A few days later the Pipe was back at it, but with a different opponent, Kapish Potula. The TD and affiliate was the same, J PARNELL WATKINS JR and GWINNETT CHESS. The time control was G/25;d5. Kapish Potula won all four games and increased his rating from 2136 to 2159.

One week later, on 9/28/18 the two players with the same TD and affiliate did it again. And again Potula won all four G/25;d5 to raise his rating from 2159 to 2179.

On October 6, 2018 the Pipe had a new opponent, SAITHANUSRI AVIRNENI, rated 1964. A six game match at a time control of G/35;d5 was contested and…the match was drawn! J PARNELL WATKINS JR and GWINNETT CHESS was at it again.

On October 13, 2018 there was another six game, G/25;d5 match with Kapish Potula, and again it was J PARNELL WATKINS JR and GWINNETT CHESS. Hold on to something as I inform you that Alan G Piper actually won, and drew, two of the games played, while losing the other four.

The thing is that on that very same day, October 13, 2018, the Pipe also played another match with someone else, SAITHANUSRI AVIRNENI. It was another G/25;d5 with all the usual suspects present, meaning Parnell and Gwinnett Chess. The match was drawn, 2-2.

Then we come to November 19, 2018, the 2018 MERUGA PIPER “dual.” It appears as though that between 2018-11-17 thru 2018-11-19 a NINETEEN GAME MATCH at a TC of G/25;d5 was contested by the usual suspects, Meruga and Piper. The aforementioned player, Meruga won all nineteen games…J PARNELL WATKINS JR and GWINNETT CHESS were again the usual suspects.

But wait, there’s MORE! On November 27 the same two players contested yet another G/25;d5 “dual,” which Meruga won 12-0. Again, J PARNELL WATKINS JR and GWINNETT CHESS were the responsible parties.

On December 7, a day which will live in infamy, 2018, another G/25;d5 match took place between Alan G. Piper and Kapish Potula. It was won by Potula, 5-0. J PARNELL WATKINS JR directed and GWINNETT CHESS sent it in to be rated.

After a couple more tournaments in December and a last one on January 26, the CCSCATL WINTER BLITZ CHAMPIONS, the record shows no more games, or matches, for the Pipe.

As a result of all these games, and others, Meruga became a 2300 rated player. Kapish Potula is currently rated 2187, knocking on the National Master door.

B12 Caro-Kann Defense, Advance Variation, Botvinnik-Carls Defense

If a player decides to defend the Caro Kann with 3…c5, the so called BotvinniKann, he should be prepared for an early Nf3 from the player in charge of the white army because many players are reluctant to move the Queen early in the opening of the game regardless of what the computer programs compute.

Emil Sutovsky (2651)

vs Jonathan S Speelman (2603)

North Sea Cup 16th 07/11/2001 Rd 6

B12 Caro-Kann, advance variation

1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 c5 4.Nf3 Nc6 5.Bb5 cxd4 6.Nxd4 Bd7 7.Nxc6 Bxc6 8.Bxc6+ bxc6 (All best according to SF)

9.O-O (The best move according to SF & Komodo is 9 c4, a move yet to be played in practice) e6 10.c4 Ne7 11.Qa4 Qd7 12.Nd2 Rb8 13.b3 Nc8 14.Rd1 Nb6 15.Qa5 dxc4 16.Bb2 cxb3 17.axb3 Nd5 18.Ne4 Be7 19.Rd3 Rb4 20.Nd6+ Bxd6 21.exd6 Re4 22.Rg3 e5 23.Rxg7 Kf8 24.Rg3 Re2 25.h3 Rg8 26.Qxa7 Qxa7 27.Rxa7 Rxg3 28.Ra8+ Kg7 29.d7 Nf4 30.Rg8+ 1-0

Nf3 has also been played after 4 dxc5 e6:

1. e4 c6 2. d4 d5 3. e5 c5 4. dxc5 e6 5. Nf3 Bxc5 6. Bd3 Ne7 7. O-O Nbc6 8. Nbd2

(Although 8…Ng6 has almost invariably been played Stockfish gives 8…Nb4, a move yet to be attempted in practice, best)

Komodo prefers 1. e4 c6 2. d4 d5 3. e5 c5 4. dxc5 e6 5. Nf3 Bxc5 6. Bd3 Ne7 7. O-O Nbc6 8. a3. The following game transposes into the 8 a3 line and follows the computer programs best play until 12…Kf7, when black should simply castle, a move that will become a theoretical novelty once played by a top GM.

Andrey Zhigalko (2576) vs Pavel Lomako (2385)

78th ch-BLR 2012 01/20/2012 Rd 9

B12 Caro-Kann, advance variation

1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 c5 4.dxc5 e6 5.Nf3 Bxc5 6.a3 Ne7 7.Bd3 Ng6 8.O-O Nc6 9.b4 Be7 10.Re1 f6 11.Bxg6+ hxg6 12.Qd3

Kf7 (12…0-0 Komodo) 13.Bb2 b6 14.c4 Bb7 15.Qe2 dxc4 16.exf6 Bxf6 17.Qxe6+ Kf8 18.Bc3 Rh5 19.Qxc4 Qd5 20.Qg4 Ne5 21.Bxe5 Bxe5 22.Rxe5 Rxe5 23.Nc3 Qe6 24.Nxe5 Qxe5 25.Qg3 Re8 26.Qxe5 Rxe5 27.Rd1 Ke7 28.h3 Rg5 29.Re1+ Kd6 30.Ne4+ Bxe4 31.Rxe4 a5 32.Kf1 Kd5 33.f3 Re5 34.bxa5 bxa5 35.Rg4 g5 36.Kf2 Kc5 37.a4 Kd5 38.Kg3 Rf5 39.Re4 Kc5 40.Kg4 Rd5 41.Kh5 Rd2 42.Rg4 Rd4 43.Rxg5+ Kb4 44.Rxg7 Kxa4 45.g4 Rf4 46.g5 Rxf3 47.h4 Kb3 48.Rb7+ Kc4 49.Ra7 Kb4 50.g6 Rg3 51.Kh6 a4 52.h5 a3 53.g7 1-0

The following game is the first game found in the database in which black played 3…c5. Chess Tempo gives Carl J M Carls his due.

Caro-Kann Defense, Advance Variation, Botvinnik-Carls Defense (B12)
https://chesstempo.com/gamedb/opening/247

CARL JOHAN MARGOT CARLS

(born Sep-16-1880, died Sep-11-1958, 77 years old) Germany
Carl Johan Margot Carls was born in Varel. Awarded the IM title in 1950, he was German champion in 1934.

A successful banker in Bremen with little time for tournament play or study, Carls specialized in the English Opening to help neutralize his relative lack of opening knowledge. Several variations bear his name or that of his city; for example, English, Bremen System, Keres Variation (A23) and English, Bremen System with …g6 (A24).
http://www.chessgames.com/player/carl_johan_margot_carls.html

Karel Treybal vs Carl Johan Margot Carls

Breslau 1912

1. e4 c6 2. d4 d5 3. e5 c5 4. dxc5 e6 5. Be3 Qc7 6. Qd4 Bd7 7. Nc3 Ne7 8. Bd3
Ng6 9. Nf3 Nc6 10. Nb5 Qb8 11. Qc3 Ncxe5 12. Bxg6 Nxf3+ 13. gxf3 hxg6 14. Qa5
Bxb5 15. Qxb5+ Kd8 16. O-O-O Qc7 17. c4 Rh5 18. cxd5 exd5 19. Rhe1 Qc6 20. Qc4
Be7 21. b4 Ke8 22. Qc3 Kf8 23. Bd4 Bf6 24. Bxf6 gxf6 25. Rd2 Kg7 26. f4 a5 27.
a3 axb4 28. axb4 Ra4 29. Rb2 Rxh2 30. Ree2 Qb5 31. Qd4 Ra1+ 32. Kd2 Rhh1 33.
Kc3 Rhc1+ 34. Rec2 Ra3+ 35. Rb3 Rxc2+ 36. Kxc2 Qe2+ 37. Kc3 Qf3+ 38. Qe3 d4+
0-1

Caro Kann Vitamin B12 Theory

Let us take a look at some cutting edge Caro-Kann opening theory in a topical line evolving almost daily.

Veselin Topalov (2740)

The Advantages of Being a Good Loser – Veselin Topalov

Who would have ever thought the man responsible for one of the most sordid incidents in the history of the Royal game would ever be thought of as a “good loser” by anyone at any time in the history of mankind. See: https://www.thesprucecrafts.com/what-was-toiletgate-611124

vs David Navarra (2739)


Need a better reason to play Chess guys?

http://chess-news.ru/en/node/8159

Gashimov Memorial 04/01/2019

B12 Caro-Kann, advance variation

1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 c5 4.dxc5 e6 5.a3 (SF 9 at depth 45 plays this, expecting 5…Bxc5 6 Nf3; or 5 Nf3 Bxc5 6 a3. At a lower depth SF plays 5 Bd3 Nd7 6 Nf3) Bxc5 6.Qg4 (6 b4 and 6 Nf3 have been played far more often but for SF the game move is best) 6…Ne7 (At a lower depth SF goes with 6…Bf8 but going deeper prefers 6…Ne7 expecting 7 Nf3 Nbc6 to follow) 7.Nf3 (Komodo, at a lower depth, plays 7 b4 h5 8 Qxg7. SF plays the game move with 7…0-0 8 b4 to follow)

7…Qb6 (SF 151218 at depth 48 plays 7…0-0 8 b4 Bb6; SF 10 at depth 42 goes with 7…Ng6 8 Bd3 Bd7. Neither of these moves has as yet been attempted in practice, by a human or A.I.)

8.Bd3 Nbc6 9.O-O Ng6 10.Nc3 Qc7 11.Re1 O-O 12.Qh5 Bd7 13.b4 Be7 14.Bd2 f5 15.exf6 Bxf6 16.Rac1 Nd4 17.Nxd4 Bxd4 18.Nd1 Qb6 19.Be3 e5 20.c3 Bxe3 21.Nxe3 Rae8 22.Bb1 d4 23.cxd4 exd4 24.Nc4 Qf6 25.f3 Rxe1+ 26.Rxe1 Bf5 27.Bxf5 Qxf5 28.Qxf5 Rxf5 29.Re8+ Rf8 30.Rxf8+ Kxf8 31.Nd6 Nf4 32.Kf2 d3 33.Ke3 Nxg2+ 34.Kxd3 Ne1+ 35.Ke4 Nc2 36.Nxb7 Nxa3 37.Nd8 Nc2 38.Nc6 a6 39.Kd3 Ne1+ 40.Ke2 Nc2 41.Kd2 Na3 42.Kd3 Nb5 43.Nb8 Nc7 44.Ke4 Ke7 45.Ke5 Kd8 46.h4 g6 47.f4 Ke7 48.Nc6+ Kd7 49.Nd4 Ke7 50.Nc2 Ne8 51.Ne3 Nf6 52.f5 Kf7 53.Nc4 gxf5 54.Kxf5 Nd5 55.b5 ½-½

Mateusz Bartel (2604) vs Suri Vaibhav (2556)

51st Biel Master Open 07/26/2018

1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 c5 4.dxc5 e6 5.a3 Bxc5 6.Qg4 Ne7 7.Nf3 Nf5 8.Bd3 h5 9.Qf4 Nc6 10.Bxf5 exf5 11.Qg3 g6 12.Bg5 Qa5+ 13.Nbd2 Qa4 14.Nb3 Qe4+ 15.Kd2 h4 16.Nxc5 hxg3 17.hxg3 Rf8 18.Nxe4 dxe4 19.Ng1 Nxe5 20.Bf6 Nd7 21.Bd4 b6 22.a4 Ke7 23.a5 b5 24.Ne2 a6 25.Rad1 b4 26.Ke3 Rb8 27.Nf4 Rb5 28.Bg7 Rg8 29.Rh7 Rxa5 30.Nd5+ Ke6 31.Nc7+ Ke7 32.c3 Rxg7 33.Rxg7 bxc3 34.Rg8 cxb2 35.Re8+ Kf6 36.Rb1 Nb6 37.Kd2 Ra2 38.Kc3 Ra1 39.Rxb2 Na4+ 40.Kd4 Rd1+ 41.Ke3 Rd3+ 42.Ke2 Nc3+ 0-1

Chigorin Variation Beats Bulletproof French Defense

Tigran L. Petrosian (ARM) 2605 vs Fabien Libiszewski (FRA) 2488

GAMMA Reykjavik Open 2019 round 09

1. e4 e6 2. Qe2 d5 (Stockfish 2…c5) 3. exd5 Qxd5 4. Nc3 Qd8 (SF 4…Qa5) 5. Nf3 c5 6. Ne5 (SF 9 plays 6 b3 Nf6 7 Bb2) Nd7 (SF and Komodo play 6…Bd6 7 g3 Ne7) 7. Nc4 TN Nb6 8. g3 Nxc4 9. Qxc4 Bd7 10. Bg2 Qc8 11. O-O Bc6 12. Ne4 Be7 13. b3 Nf6 14. Bb2 Nxe4 15. Bxe4 Bf6 16. Bxf6 gxf6 17. Rfe1 Bxe4 18. Rxe4 Qc6 19. Rae1 O-O-O 20. d3 h5 21. b4 Rd5 22. b5 Qd6 23. a4 f5 24. Qc3 Rd4 25. Re5 b6 26. a5 h4 27. axb6 axb6 28. Qa3 h3 29. Qa6+ Kd7 30. Rxf5 exf5 31. Qb7+ Qc7 32. Re7+ Kxe7 33. Qxc7+ Kf8 34. Qxb6 Ra4 35. Qd8+ Kg7 36. Qg5+ Kf8 37. Kf1 Rb4 38. b6 Rg8 39. Qxf5 Rb1+ 40. Ke2 Rg6 41. Qxc5+ Kg7 42. Qe5+ Kg8 43. Qf5 1-0
https://www.chessbomb.com/arena/2019-reykjavik-open/09-Petrosian_Tigran_L_-Libiszewski_Fabien

Alexander Reprintsev (2374) vs Petr Slavinsky, (2062)

RSHSH Masters Cup 2018 Moscow RUS 05/21/2018

ECO: C00 French, Chigorin variation

1.e4 e6 2.Qe2 d5 3.exd5 Qxd5 4.Nc3 Qd8 5.Nf3 c5 6.Ne5 Nd7 7.g3 Nxe5 8.Qxe5 Qd6 9.Bb5+ Bd7 10.Bxd7+ Qxd7 11.d3 Qc6 12.O-O Nf6 13.Bg5 Bd6 14.Qe2 Be7 15.Rae1 Nd5 16.Bxe7 Nxe7 17.Ne4 O-O 18.f4 Qd5 19.a3 b6 20.Rf2 Rac8 21.Ng5 c4 22.Qe4 g6 23.Qxd5 Nxd5 24.dxc4 Rxc4 25.b3 Rc3 26.Ne4 Re3 27.Rxe3 Nxe3 28.Re2 Nf5 29.Rd2 Rc8 30.c4 a5 31.a4 Rc6 32.Rd7 h6 33.Kf2 Kg7 34.g4 Nh4 35.Kg3 g5 36.fxg5 Ng6 37.gxh6+ Kxh6 38.Rxf7 Ne5 39.Rb7 Nd3 1-0

Yuri S Balashov (2481) vs Oleg Nikolenko,(2526)

ch-Moscow 2013 03/28/2013

ECO: C00 French, Chigorin variation

1.e4 e6 2.Qe2 c5 3.Nf3 Nc6 4.b3 d5 5.exd5 Qxd5 6.Nc3 Qd8 7.Bb2 Nf6 8.g3 Be7 9.Bg2 O-O 10.O-O b6 11.Rfd1 Bb7 12.d4 cxd4 13.Nb5 Qc8 14.Nbxd4 Rd8 15.c4 Nxd4 16.Nxd4 a6 17.Nf5 exf5 18.Qxe7 Bxg2 19.Rxd8+ Qxd8 20.Qxd8+ Rxd8 21.Bxf6 gxf6 22.Kxg2 Rd2 23.Re1 Rxa2 24.Re8+ Kg7 25.Rb8 b5 26.cxb5 axb5 27.Rxb5 Rb2 28.h4 Kg6 29.Kf3 Rc2 30.Ke3 Rb2 31.b4 h5 32.Rb8 f4+ 33.Kf3 fxg3 34.Kxg3 Kf5 35.f3 Kg6 36.b5 Kf5 37.Rb7 Rb1 38.Rb8 Rg1+ 39.Kf2 Rh1 40.Kg3 ½-½

The following game was NOT played in the last round, but in the fifth round. If Chess dies it will be from a billion little cuts like the following “game.”

Gyula Sax (2566) vs Viktor Erdos (2453)

Bizovac Metalis op 12th 02/26/2005

ECO: C00 French, Chigorin variation

1.e4 e6 2.Qe2 d5 3.exd5 Qxd5 4.Nc3 Qd8 5.Nf3 c5 6.b3 Nc6 7.Bb2 Nh6 8.O-O-O Nf5 9.Qe4 ½-½

Saidali Iuldachev(2550) vs Evgeny Gleizerov (2539)

Teheran Saipa Cup 2nd 09/21/2004

C00 French, Chigorin variation

1.e4 e6 2.Qe2 d5 3.exd5 Qxd5 4.Nc3 Qd8 5.Nf3 c5 6.b3 Nc6 7.Bb2 Nge7 8.Qd3 Qxd3 9.Bxd3 Bd7 10.O-O-O O-O-O 11.Ng5 Ne5 12.Be2 N7g6 13.Nb5 f6 14.Ne4 Nf4 15.Nbc3 Bc6 16.Bf1 f5 17.Ng5 h6 18.Nb5 hxg5 19.Bxe5 Bxb5 20.Bxb5 Nxg2 21.Rhg1 Nh4 22.Rxg5 Nf3 23.Bxg7 Rxh2 24.Rg3 Rxf2 25.Bc4 f4 26.Bxe6+ Kb8 27.Rg4 Bxg7 28.Rxg7 Rfxd2 29.Rxd2 Nxd2 30.Rf7 Rd6 31.Rxf4 ½-½

Allen Priest Started A Thread

The President of the USCF board, Allen Priest, started a new thread on the USCF forum under All Things Chess, titled: World senior team 50+ (http://www.uschess.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=24693&st=0&sk=t&sd=a).

I posed this question on the thread: “Why was there no 65+ team from the USA?” (by nocab on Wed Apr 24, 2019 8:14 pm #335352)

It was no surprise that the POTUSCF was the first to reply as he weighs in on almost everything on the forum.

“Well you can organize one – it is an open tournament. As many teams from any country can enter as wish.”

Allen Priest
National Tournament Director
Delegate from Kentucky

Maybe another person on the forum would have been surprised by the flippant remark but I was not because of having previously interacted “up close and personal” with Allen at a Kentucky State Championship. He allowed the tournament to begin without lighting because of no electricity after turning a deaf ear to the players.

My friend Michael Mulford replied with the following post:

Postby Mulfish on Wed Apr 24, 2019 9:30 pm #335356

Did US Chess fund the winning team? If they did, a more accurate answer might be US Chess did not budget to fund one and no self-funded team emerged”.

Allen answered:

Postby Allen on Wed Apr 24, 2019 9:41 pm #335357

We has a stipend for one team for 2018 and 2019 based on our invitional list rules. Again these are open events. Any team that wants to enter certainty can.

Last edited by Allen on Wed Apr 24, 2019 10:20 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Allen Priest
National Tournament Director
Delegate from Kentucky

by Mulfish on Wed Apr 24, 2019 10:01 pm #335358

Allen wrote:
We has a stipend for one team for 3018 and 2029 based on our invitional list rules. Again these are open events. Any team that wants to enter certainty can.

Ignoring the obvious typos on the years, would it be fair to say that we have budgeted for stipends for one team. That team could have been either an over 50 or an over 65 team, based on the invitational list rules?

And, as usual, Allen got the last word:

by Allen on Wed Apr 24, 2019 10:25 pm #335361

Sorry. The phone keyboard is hard to use. We budgeted for one set of stipends for two tournaments that occurred during a single budget year. The original motion didn’t address anything about divisions of the event. So, if the invitational list yielded a 65+ team that’s who would have received the stipend.

Allen Priest
National Tournament Director
Delegate from Kentucky

At this time there are twenty four posts on this particular thread and sixteen, or two thirds, of the posts were made by the POTUSCF. Does this make you think of the POTUS and his propensity for firing salvos via Twitter?

In the March issue of Chess Life magazine Allen writes about US Chess Affairs/ News for our Members in something named, ACROSS THE BOARD. He begins, “Not many people get Chess Life to read a missive from the president of the organization. I understand.”

I’m thinking, “Well, at least the man understands something.”

Allen also writes, “But we all share one thing-an interest in a grand game.”

And I’m thinking, “Interest?” Then I realize the difference between Allen and me is a chasm because I LOVE the Royal Game! I have played Chess seriously since 1970, and if you go back to when my father taught me the game, 1966. I have read extensively about the game and have followed it even when spending most of my time playing Backgammon professionally. I have played Chess in USCF rated tournaments in twenty five different states, more than any other native born Georgian. I have played Chess in seedy dives, such as the legendary Stein Club on Peachtree street in Atlanta, Georgia,

and opulent places such as the Biltmore in Asheville, North Carolina. (https://www.biltmore.com/)

Allen has played all of forty five USCF rated games IN HIS LIFE!

Allen is rated 701. Allen has NEVER BEATEN A PLAYER WITH A RATING CONTAINING FOUR DIGITS!

Why is Allen the president of the USCF? How did Allen become president of the USCF? What could Allen possibly know about Chess?

I asked myself the above questions after reading 25 Questions for Steve Doyle: A major figure in American chess relates his lifetime experiences in characteristically upbeat fashion, by Peter Tamburro, in issue #3 of the American Chess Magazine recently.

This question was posed, “How has the USCF fared over the years and what do you think its prospects are for the future? Now that there is a search for a new executive director, what qualities should they look for?”

The former President of the USCF, Steve Doyle

gave this answer: “The huge savings built up in my term were then the saving life blood for a series of incompetent boards – and that followed with very weak leaders in charge. They ran the book business into the ground., squandered resources and lived off the savings account. Finally the building in New Windsor was sold, the book business outsourced, savings used to pay off massive debt and the operation moved to Tennessee. Now new people are coming forward, the entire membership votes on officers and we have a 501c3 status. All positive moves. Of couse, millions wasted along the way.”

The current president of the USCF, Allen Priest, is, fortunately, on his way out. In his aforementioned column he wrote, “Many of our members are not particularly interested in the governance of US Chess. Few, if any, join to be involved in governance. I know. I was the same way.”

If only it had stayed the same way…

I am now one of the members who is “…not particularly interested in the governance of US Chess.” Frankly, at this point in my life I could care less as it is time for me to leave the future to those whom it will affect.

The fact is that Allen Priest, like all other Chess politicians, will be judged by history. Will he be considered a “very weak leader in charge?” Will history be kinder to him than those posting on the USCF forum have been to this point in his tenure? Only time will tell…

Checkmate! The Love Story of Mikhail Tal and Sally Landau: A Review

Checkmate! The Love Story of Mikhail Tal and Sally Landau,

is a beautiful book written about a lifelong love between two people, one of whom, Mikhail Tal,
happened to win a World Chess Championship match against the man called “the patriarch of the Soviet School of Chess,” Mikhail Botvinnik. (https://en.chessbase.com/post/botvinnik-the-patriarch)

The book, written by Sally Landau, and published by Elk and Ruby Publishing Company (http://www.elkandruby.com/), is a wonderful history of a time long gone with the wind. The author brings to life a different time and the people who lived during the Soviet Communist period. The book, like a Chess game, has only three chapters, the opening by Sally, the middle by Gera, the son of Mikhail and Sally Tal, and the end, again by Sally.

She begins the book by writing about herself. “I am an inconsistent and impulsive person, who first does and only then thinks about what I have done. I am an ordinary, vulnerable woman, in which a womanly nature lived and lives, found joy and finds joy, suffered and suffers, in the full sense of those words. The way I see it, selfishness and a desire for independence somehow manage to coexist inside me with love for the people surrounding me and a subconscious wish to be a woman protected by a man who lives for me – protected by him from all sorts of major and minor everyday troubles.”

Later she writes, “Still sharp contradictions coexisted within me: on the one hand, this immense fear of losing my personal freedom, on the other hand, this equally immense fear of solitude and a subconscious desire to have a strong man beside me with whom I wouldn’t be afraid of falling off an overturned boat in the open seas, even if I didn’t know how to swim. These contradictions played a significant role in my life with Misha…”

She writes about her impression of what it was like being a Jew in the Soviet Union. “So it wasn’t the external appearance of the Tals’ apartment that struck me that evening. Rather, it was its anti-Soviet spirit that I sensed. I immediately inhaled this pleasant middle-class air. It was apparent straight away that the people living there were not “mass-produced” but very much “hand-crafted”, and that relations between them did not fit into the usual framework of socialist society.”

“Misha was born a frail child. He had two fingers missing from his right hand. When she (Ida, Mikhail Tal’s mother) first saw her son after he was brought to her and unwrapped from his swaddling clothes she again fainted in shock at the site of his three crooked fingers. She was unable to breastfeed. Her lack of milk was perhaps due to those shocks. She was treated for a long time after that.

“When he was just six months old, Misha was struck by a nasty meningitis-like infection with a very high temperature and convulsions. The doctor said that his chances of making it were remote, but that survivors turn out to be remarkable people. Well, Misha began to read at the age of three, and by the age of five he was multiplying three-digit numbers – while adults were still struggling to solve the math with a pencil he would tell them the answer.”

“He got “infected” with chess at the age of seven and began to spend nearly all his time at the chess club, nagging adults to play him.”

Gera was a Medical Doctor and qualified to write about Tal’s well known medical problems.

“Well, the actual start of my father’s physical ailments, however banal it may sound, was the fact of his birth. Ever since then he simply collected illnesses. But the fundamental cause of course was his totally pathological, nephrotic kidney. It tortured him relentlessly. People suffering from kidney disease know that there is nothing worse in the world than pains in the kidneys. I don’t understand how such people can even exist, let alone play chess. I’m sure that it wasn’t my father who lost the return match to Botvinnik,

but his diseased kidney.”

“My father treated his life like a chess game, somewhat philosophically. There’s the opening, then the opening transposes into the middle game, and if no disaster strikes in the middle game you get into a dull, technical endgame, in which a person ultimately has no chances. As far as I know, father didn’t gain pleasure from playing endgames – he found them boring and insipid. Force him to give up smoking, brandy, partying and female admirers – basically, the source of intense experiences in the middle game of life – and he would find himself in the endgame, when he would have nothing left to do other than passively see out the rest of his life. However, that would have been a different person just resembling Tal. And what’s the difference – to die spiritually or die physically if you can no longer be Tal?”

Throughout their life, together and apart, Mikhail and Sally had other loves and lovers, yet remained friends. A love interest of his was written about but only named by the letter “L.” Research shows this was Larisa Ivanovna Kronberg,

a Soviet/Russian actress and a KGB agent. She was named Best Actress at the 1955 Cannes Film Festival for her performance in A Big Family. In 1958, she was involved in the Ambassador Dejean Affair, Kronberg lured Dejean in a honey trap. She was in a long-time relationship with World Chess Champion Mikhail Tal in the 1960s, they parted in the 1970s. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larisa_Kronberg)

Sally had an affair with a man about whom she writes, “I won’t name him in the book. Why? Let’s say he was a high-up government official…I will call him “The Minister”…Let that be his name here.” Reading this caused me to reflect upon something IM Boris Kogan said decades ago about the KGB. “Mike, KGB like octopus with many tentacles that reach everywhere!” The relationship between Sally and “The Minister” was doomed to failure because a good Soviet communist did not consort with a Jew. Sally writes, ” Misha was such a unique person! I was living with Alnis; at the time he was effectively a common-law husband; and Misha understood that perfectly well. And yet, while he treated Alvis with respect, he continued to consider me his only woman and the most important woman in the world – his Saska. Alnis took quite a liking to Misha, saw what a remarkable person he was, and would say of him: “Tal isn’t a Jew. Tal is a chess genius.”


Tal playing the husband of his former wife Joe Kramarz, not only a Chess player but a HUGE fan of Mikhail Tal!

The book is replete with things like this from Yakov Damsky writing in Riga Chess, 1986. “He has a wonderful ability with language and always has a sharp wit. I remember, for example, after a lecture some tactless dude asked Tal: “Is it true you’re a morphinist?” to which Tal instantly replied: “No, I’m a chigorinets!”

“Petrosian once joked morbidly: “If I lived the way Tal does I would have died a long time ago. He’s just like Iron Felix.” (The nickname of Felix Dzerzhinsky, the founder of the KGB)

Having worked at the House of Pain I got a kick out of this: “Chess players talk to each other in the language of notation. I was always amazed at this. Although I understood nothing of it, I listened to them as though they were aliens, observing their emotions. If, for example, Tal, Stein and Gufeld got together, their conversation could flow along the following lines:

Gufeld: What would you say to knightdfourfsixbishopg2?
Stein: Bishopgsevenfgknightdefivecheck!
Tal: Yes but you’ve forgotten about if knightfsixintermezzoqueenheight!
Gufeld: Pueenheightrookgeightwithcheckandrooktakesheight and you’re left without you mummy!
Tal: But after bishopeone you’re left without your daddy!
Stein: Bishopeone doesn’t work because of the obvious knighttakesoneecfourdekinggsevenrookasevencheck!

And this wonderful chitchat would continue endlessly, with people not “in-the-know” thinking they were in a madhouse.”

During tournaments at the Atlanta Chess & Game Center it could be, at times, a “Madhouse of Pain.”

A player would walk up talking about his game in these terms while having the position clearly in his mind. I, on the other hand, had no clue, but would nod in agreement, or frown when called for, while commiserating with the player, understanding, but not understanding, if you get my drift. The worst was when two players who had just finished their game would come downstairs talking in variations, bantering back and forth, then look at me asking, “What do you think, Mr. Bacon?!” To which my usual response was, “That’s a heckofaline!” Hopefully they would smile and nod in agreement before giving way to the next player or players wishing to tell me all about their game…

“A grandmaster said to me once: “When Misha finds himself in a hopeless position, his head tells him this but he doesn’t believe that he, Tal, has no chances. He starts to seek a saving combination, convinced that such a combination exists – it’s just a matter of locating it. And as a rule he finds it. However, despite all its beauty and numerous sacrifices, the combination turns out to be flawed, and then the defeat becomes for him even more painful and humiliating than if he had been physically dragged face down in the road.”

After reading the above I reflected upon a game recently played over contain in the latest issue of Chess Life magazine. In reply to a letter to the editor GM Andy Soltis writes, “Good point, Dr. Seda-Irizzary. Tal is a splendid example because he understood the principle of “Nothing Left to Lose.” That is, when you are truly lost, you should forget about finding a “best” move that merely minimizes your lost-ness.” The game follows:

Vassily Smyslov

vs Mikhail Tal

Candidates Tournament Bled/Zagreb/Belgrade 10/03/1959 round 15

B42 Sicilian, Kan, 5.Bd3

1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 e6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 a6 5.Bd3 Nc6 6.Nxc6 bxc6 7.O-O d5 8.Nd2 Nf6 9.Qe2 Be7 10.Re1 O-O 11.b3 a5 12.Bb2 a4 13.a3 axb3 14.cxb3 Qb6 15.exd5 cxd5 16.b4 Nd7 17.Nb3 e5 18.Bf5 e4 19.Rec1 Qd6 20.Nd4 Bf6 21.Rc6 Qe7 22.Rac1 h6 23.Rc7 Be5 24.Nc6 Qg5 25.h4 Qxh4 26.Nxe5 Nxe5 27.Rxc8 Nf3+ 28.gxf3 Qg5+ 29.Kf1 Qxf5 30.Rxf8+ Rxf8 31.fxe4 dxe4 32.Qe3 Rd8 33.Qg3 g5 34.Rc5 Rd1+ 35.Kg2 Qe6 36.b5 Kh7 37.Rc6 Qd5

38.Qe5 Rg1+ 39.Kh2 Rh1+ 40.Kg2 Rg1+ ½-½

I conclude the review with this paragraph:

“Salo Flohr,

with whom I was great friends, once showed me around the Moscow chess club, and told me, pointing at the photos of world champions on the wall: Sallynka, look at them. They are all the most normal, mad people.” Well, I’m ever thankful that I lived my life among such “normal, mad people” as Misha,

Tigran,

Bobby,

and Tolya Karpov.

(Garry Kasparov is also a genius, but not mad – that’s my opinion, anyway.)”

I enjoyed this wonderful book immensely. Anyone with a love of the history of the Royal Game will be greatly rewarded for spending their time reading a beautifully written love story surrounded by the “mad men” who play the game of Chess. Please keep in mind I have told you not all the words.
I give it all the stars in the universe!