GM Ben Finegold Plays The Chigorin Defense

Having taken up Chess at the advanced age of twenty your writer did not have as much time to spend on the game as would a much younger person. Initially I did what many other American players did and followed Bobby Fisher, playing openings like the Najdorf and Gruenfeld, because those are the openings played by Bobby. Later I began playing openings that are now called “offbeat” openings, as regular readers know. One of those openings was the Chigorin, which I played before beginning a love affair with the Leningrad Dutch. In the first round of the ongoing Chicago Open Grandmaster Ben Finegold trotted out the Queen’s horse on the second move. Before sitting down to compose this post I went to, learning it contained 21 games in which Ben has played the Chigorin ( From the years spent researching the opening phase of the game with computer programs I have learned much of what humans thought about some openings was incorrect, if not downright wrong. The following game is a case in point.

Ethan Sheehan 2075 vs GM Benjamin Finegold 2424

31st Annual Chicago Open
D07 Queen’s Gambit Declined, Chigorin defence

  1. d4 d5 2. c4 Nc6 3. Nc3 e5 4. cxd5 Nxd4 5. e3 Nf5 6. Nf3 Bd6 7. Bb5+ Bd7 8. Bxd7+ Qxd7 9. e4 Nfe7 10. O-O Ng6 11. Qb3 b6 12. a4 a6 13. Be3 Nf6 14. h3 O-O 15. Rac1 h6 16. Rfd1 Nh5 17. Ne2 f5 18. exf5 Rxf5 19. Nd2 1/2-1/2!31st-annual-chicago-open-2022/2068768054

1.d4 d5 2. c4 Nc6 3. Nc3 (SF 15 @depth 55 plays 3 cxd5, but @depth 62 changes to 3 Nf3) 3…e5 (SF 14.1 @depth 48 will play 3…e6. SF 040522 @depth 49 plays 3…Nf6, which appears in 387 games at the ChessBaseDataBase. The CBDB contains only 75 games with 3…e6, but does contain 748 games in which the inferior 3…dxc4 has been played. The move played in the game has been seen in 92 games) 4. cxd5 Nxd4 (The CBDB contains 82 games with this move and only one with 4…exd4, the choice of Houdini at a lower level; SF 13 at a higher level, and SF 14.1 at a mid-level depth 43) 5. e3 Nf5 6. Nf3 (Until now this has been the preferred move, with 51 examples in the CBDB, but Houdini, Komodo, and Stockfish 14.1 all show 6 e4 as best in the 8 games in which it has been tried the move has scored 69% compared to the 63% scored by the move played in the game) 6…Bd6 7. Bb5+ (This move is the choice of Fritz 17, so you know it is suspect. Both Houdini and SF 14.1 play 7 e4, and so should you) 7…Bd7 (Fritz 13 SE will play 7…Kf8. I kid you not…) 8. Bxd7 (SF 14.1 and SF 221221 both play 8 e4, and so should you in the event you play badly enough to reach this position) 8…Qxd7 9. e4 Nfe7 10. O-O (The CBDB shows only 8 games having reached this position; 4 with Nf6; 3 with Ng6; and 1 with f6. Houdini, and SF 7 & 11 show 10…h6 as being the best move. The game move has been the most often played move according to the 365Chess Big Database) 10…Ng6 11. Qb3 (SF 14 will play 11 Be3. See Pohlers vs Maahs below) 11…b6 (See Farago vs Plat below)

Frank James Marshall

vs R. Guckemus
Event: Sylvan Beach
Site: Sylvan Beach Date: ??/??/1904
Round: 4
ECO: D07 Queen’s Gambit Declined, Chigorin defence
1.d4 d5 2.c4 Nc6 3.Nc3 e5 4.cxd5 exd4 5.dxc6 dxc3 6.Qxd8+ Kxd8 7.cxb7 Bxb7 8.bxc3 Bd6 9.f3 Nf6 10.e4 Re8 11.Bb5 c6 12.Bc4 Ke7 13.Rb1 Rab8 14.Be3 Bc8 15.Rxb8 Bxb8 16.Bc5+ Bd6 17.Bxa7 Be6 18.Bxe6 Kxe6 19.Nh3 h6 20.Bd4 c5 21.Bxf6 gxf6 22.Kd2 Ra8 23.Ra1 Bxh2 24.f4 Rg8 25.Kd3 Rxg2 26.Kc4 Rg3 27.Nf2 f5 28.a4 Rf3 29.a5 Bxf4 30.a6 Bb8 31.Nd3 Ba7 32.exf5+ Kxf5 33.Rb1 Ke4 34.Rb7 1-0

Benjamin Leussen vs Aaron Nimzowitsch

Event: Barmen-B
Site: Barmen Date: ??/??/1905
Round: ?
ECO: D07 Queen’s Gambit Declined, Chigorin defence
1.d4 d5 2.c4 Nc6 3.Nc3 e5 4.cxd5 exd4 5.dxc6 dxc3 6.Qxd8+ Kxd8 7.bxc3 Nf6 8.g3 bxc6 9.Bg2 Nd5 10.Bd2 Be7 11.Nf3 Bf6 12.Nd4 Bd7 13.e4 Nb4 14.cxb4 Bxd4 15.Rd1 Kc8 16.O-O c5 17.Bf4 Bb5 18.bxc5 Bc3 19.Bh3+ Kb7 20.Rb1 Kc6 21.Rfc1 Bd4 22.e5 1-0

Juergen Pohlers (2133) vs Erich Maahs (2200)
Event: Bad Woerishofen op 18th
Site: Bad Woerishofen Date: ??/??/2002
Round: 8
ECO: D07 Queen’s Gambit Declined, Chigorin defence
1.d4 d5 2.c4 Nc6 3.Nc3 e5 4.cxd5 Nxd4 5.e3 Nf5 6.Nf3 Bd6 7.Bb5+ Bd7 8.Bxd7+ Qxd7 9.e4 Nfe7 10.O-O Ng6 11.Be3 Nf6 12.h3 O-O 13.Rc1 a6 14.Qd3 Nh5 15.Ne2 h6 16.g4 Nhf4 17.Nxf4 exf4 18.Bd4 Rae8 19.Rfe1 f6 20.Qb3 b6 21.Qc4 h5 22.Qc6 Qc8 23.Nh2 f3 24.Qxd6 cxd6 25.Rxc8 Rxc8 26.Nxf3 Nf4 27.gxh5 Rc2 28.Kh2 b5 29.h6 Ne2 30.hxg7 Kxg7 31.Be3 Rxb2 32.Nh4 Rd8 33.Kg2 Rxa2 34.Kf3 Nc3 35.Nf5+ Kh7 36.Bb6 Rd7 37.Bd4 b4 38.Bxf6 Rf7 39.Bxc3 bxc3 40.Rc1 Ra3 41.Ke2 Kg6 42.Rg1+ Kf6 43.Nxd6 Rc7 44.Ne8+ Ke5 45.Nxc7 Kd4 46.d6 Ra2+ 47.Kf3 Ke5 48.d7 Rd2 49.Nd5 c2 1-0

Ivan Farago (2340) vs Vojtech Plat (2556)
Event: FSGM May 2021
Site: Budapest HUN Date: 05/08/2021
Round: 7.4
ECO: D07 Queen’s Gambit Declined, Chigorin defence
1.d4 d5 2.c4 Nc6 3.Nc3 e5 4.cxd5 Nxd4 5.e3 Nf5 6.Bb5+ Bd7 7.Bxd7+ Qxd7 8.Nf3 Bd6 9.e4 Nfe7 10.O-O Ng6 11.Qb3 b6 12.h3 Nf6 13.Bg5 Nh5 14.Qb5 Nhf4 15.Rfe1 h6 16.Bxf4 Nxf4 17.Kh2 a6 18.Qxd7+ Kxd7 19.Rad1 g5 20.g3 Ng6 21.Kg2 f6 22.Nh2 h5 23.Nf1 b5 24.Ne3 h4 25.Ng4 Raf8 26.Re3 Ne7 27.Rf3 b4 28.Nb1 f5 29.exf5 e4 30.Rb3 Nxf5 31.Nd2 e3 32.Nxe3 hxg3 33.Nxf5 Rxf5 34.Ne4 gxf2 35.Nxf2 a5 36.Ng4 Bc5 37.Rbd3 Re8 38.R3d2 Kd6 39.b3 Re4 40.Nh6 Rff4 41.Rc2 Bd4 42.Ng4 Bc3 43.Rd3 Bd4 44.Rc6+ Kxd5 45.Rxc7 Re2+ 46.Kg3 Ke4 0-1

Since the tournament is still ongoing Ben has not had time to produce his latest youtube apologia explaining why he could only draw versus a much lower rated player so here is a pertinent video:

Duchamp’s Pipe: A Review Part 2

Published by North Atlantic Books, which can be found by clicking here:

Duchamp’s Pipe

The quoted text is pulled directly from the book.

Marcel Duchamp vs George Koltanowski

BEL Cup 01st Brussels 1923


1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 d5 4. cxd5 Nxd5 5. e4 Nxc3 6. bxc3 Bg7 7. f4 c5 8.Bb5+ Bd7 9. Bxd7+ Nxd7 10. e5 cxd4 11. cxd4 O-O 12. Nf3 e6 13. O-O Nb6 14. Ba3 Re8 15. Qb3 Bf8 16. Rfc1 Bxa3 17. Qxa3 Qd7 18. Rc2 Rec8 19. Rac1 Rxc2 20. Rxc2 Nd5 21. Qc1 a5 22. g4 Nb4 23. Rc7 Qd5 24. Qe3 Qxa2 25. f5 exf5 26. gxf5 Qb1+ 27. Rc1 Qxf5 0-1

“For Koltanowski, it was as much about what attracted him to the game as it was how to attract others to the game. To that end, he developed a chess persona along the lines of a visionary chess maniac.”

“Koltanowski understood his memory as a different order of knowledge outside conscious effort – a trance state that the fortunate artist or chess player might experience.”

Duchamp said, “Chess is a sport. A violent sport.”

“After crossing paths at a few tournaments in Europe, from their Paris match in 1924 to The Hague in 1928, Duchamp and Koltanowski met again in 1929 at a chess match at the Tournoi d’Echecs, the Paris International Chess Championship. In an unexpected twist, Koltanowski lost to Duchamp in fifteen moves.”

George Koltanowski vs Marcel Duchamp

Paris 1929

E00 Queen’s pawn game

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 d6 4.e4 b6 5.f4 Bb7 6.Bd3 Nbd7 7.Nf3 e5 8.d5 g6 9.O-O exf4 10.Bxf4 Bg7 11.e5 dxe5 12.Nxe5 O-O 13.Qd2 Nxd5 14.Nxd7 Nxf4 15.Nxf8 Bd4+ 0-1

“Koltanowski only casually mentions the game in his Chessnicdotes – in which he relates a more detailed win in 1944:

Marcel Duchamp vs George Koltanowski

New York 1944

Grunfeld (D94)

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 d5 4. e3 Bg7 5. Nf3 O-O 6. Be2 c5 7. O-O cxd4 8. exd4 Nc6 9. Bf4 Bg4 10. c5 Ne4 11. Ne5 Bxe2 12. Nxe2 Nxe5 13. dxe5 Nxc5 14. Nd4 Qd7 15. Re1 Rac8 16. Qd2 Ne6 17. Rac1 Rxc1 18. Rxc1 Nxf4 19. Qxf4 Rc8 20. Rc3 Rxc3 21. bxc3 Qc7 22. Nf3 Qxc3 23. h3 Qc4 24. Qg5 f6 25. exf6 Bxf6 26. Qe3 d4 27. Qf4 Qxa2 28. Ne5 Qb1+ 29. Kh2 Qf5 0-1

“Marcel Duchamp, the renowned artist (Nude Descending a Staircase),

loved the game of chess. He played in the French Championship on a number of occasions, was a member of a French Olympic team, and his book, L’Opposition et les cases conjuguees (1932) was very successful.

His painting of a family chess game in the garden, which hangs in the Philadelphia Museum, is one of the more famous paintings including chess as its theme.”

“He helped the American Chess Foundation tremendously with his works of art and getting the support of the New York elite…I played him twice in Brussels tournaments, winning in both cases. In Paris, 1929, I lost.”

“Following his triumph against Koltanowski in 1929, Duchamp was at the pinnacle of his chess career. In the following year, in Hamburg, he played his friend Frank Marshall-whom he knew from his many evening games at the Marshall Chess Club in New York. That the game was a draw was an impressive result, given that from 1909 to 1936 Marshall (1877-1944) was the US Chess Champion.”

Frank James Marshall vs Marcel Duchamp

Hamburg olypiad (Men) 07/13/1930

E12 Queen’s Indian defence

1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3 b6 3.c4 e6 4.Bg5 Be7 5.Nc3 Bb7 6.Qc2 d5 7.e3 O-O 8.cxd5 Nxd5 9.Bxe7 Qxe7 10.Nxd5 Bxd5 11.Bd3 h6 12.a3 c5 13.dxc5 Rc8 14.b4 bxc5 15.Rc1 Nd7 16.Ba6 Rc7 17.e4 Bb7 18.Bxb7 Rxb7 19.bxc5 Qxc5 20.O-O Qxc2 21.Rxc2 Kf8 22.Rfc1 Ke7 23.Nd4 Ke8 24.f4 Rab8 25.e5 Nf8 26.Rc5 Rb1 27.Rxb1 Rxb1+ 28.Kf2 Rb7 29.Rc8+ Ke7 30.Ra8 Ng6 31.g3 Kd7 32.a4 Ne7 33.Nb5 Nc8 34.g4 Rxb5 35.axb5 Kc7 36.g5 hxg5 37.b6+ Kb7 38.Rxc8 Kxc8 ½-½

“Koltanowski describes Frank Marshall

as an artist who loved the brilliance of chess: Love of the game for its own sake, rather than for the awards which fall in the path of a successful player, was apparent throughout Marshall’s career. Winning did not matter to him half as much as the creation of a masterpiece on the chessboard.” Koltanowski in Chessnicdotes

“At the least, Duchamp’s pipe is an latered industrial object that embodies a friendship of shared wit and a mutual love of Caissa. But the pipe is not only a utilitarian object; in chess it is part of the activity and environment in which it is used-held to the mouth in a physically intimate way, simultaneously concealing the smoker’s expression. Undulating smoke, the pipe’sn mutabel fumes enhanced concentration and reflection, creating a meditative state of mind within the comfort of habit. Duchamp’s pipe embodies a authentic gesture of exchange, infused with a Duchampian cocktail of ideas that unwrap the ebb and flow of their personal relationship.”

“Marcel Mauss askes: “What power resides in the object given that causes its recipient to pay it back?” This is the power of exchange. Embedded in the pipe, the relationship flows through the redolent smoke as ephemeral as thought. The pipe embodies something of Duchamp, something of Koltanowski, and something personal and “affectionately Marcel,” as Duchamp frequently signed his letters. The intimate nature of smoking – drawn from the mouthpiece, through the mouth and exhaled through the breath – is made visible in Duchamp’s pipe. The smoky vapors surround and scent both men, creating an atmosphere of communal enjoyment. Embodying the phenomenon of “the gift,” the pipe expresses an exchange beyond words or measure.”

“Mauss claims that “objects are confounded with the spirits who made them.” Given from Duchamp’s hands, Koltanowski’s pipe is not merely a material object; it is also an expression of kinship and reciprocity saturated with the smoky fragrance of the chess players. More than the sum of its parts, the pipe gives form to an altered significance. It is not surprising that pipe-smoking is linked to gift exchange in most world cultures.”

“I believe that pipe-smoking contributes to a somewhat calm and objective judgment in all human affairs.” – Albert Einstein

“Duchamp and Koltanowski puffed their pipes while playing chess, the transicent tendrils curling upward around each posture and gesture. The smoke veiled their thoughts and scented the surroundings. Smoke simultaneously revealed and concealed the chess game, joining the players together in an infrathin screed of smoke and intense concentration.”

“Duchamp’s attraction to Koltanowski derived from their mutual passion for chess, complemented by an interior mental focus that bordered on the mystical.”

“For Duchamp, chess was an art, its primary function cerebral “play.”

“Art is a road which leads towards regions which are not governed by time and place. – Marcell Duchamp

“A game of chess washes the mind.” – Koltanowski

“Koltanowski simply pursued the pure cerebral enjoyment of chess-and he made his passion contagious.”

“Duchamp enjoyed the pure intellectual play of the game; it was a cerebral pursuit without repetitious art production, and at the same time it required a great deal of imagination. Koltanowski found Duchamp’s chess choreography compelling. Both loved chess for its aestetic brilliance.”

Many people in the art world wondered why Duchamp “Gave up art for Chess.” They did not understand that Duchamp did not “give up art” because he knew Chess to be art or else he would not have said, “While all artists are not chess players, all chess players are artists.”

The review ends with the Afterword: Coffee House Chess, by Irwin Lipnowski:

“All the human attributes of intuition, judgment, creativity, rational foresight, and computational skill become inconsequential in competing with the processing speed of a chess-playing program. Admittedly, human beings designed the program’s evaluation function and human beings have significantly improved the processing speed of computers. Yet it is difficult to overestimate the negative impact that computer chess development has had on the sense of accomplishment and self-esteem of chess masters and grandmasters.”

























Irresponsible Chess Poetry Mediums

Irresponsible Mediums: The Chess Games of Marcel Duchamp

by Aaron Tucker, published by Book Thug of Toronto (, (Not to be confused with the bookstore with my all time favorite name, BookThugNation, which “…is an used bookstore and community space in Williamsburg, Brooklyn.”

is a small volume of poems created by a computer program, Chess Bard, created by the author. The only redeeming thing found in the book is the introduction by Jennifer Shahade,

and the only THREE games by Duchamp published. There are EIGHTY poems. There is enough blank space to include almost every Chess game played by Marcel Duchamp in his life!

“All artists are not chess players – all chess players are artists.” – Marcel Duchamp

Jennifer begins her introduction with, “In my study of Marcel Duchamp’s chess games and career, I am often struck by his statement that “Beauty in chess is closer to beauty in poetry; the chess pieces are the block alphabet which shapes thought; and these thoughts, although making a visual design on the chessboard, express their beauty abstractly, like a poem.” Duchamp’s understanding that visualization is at the centre of chess explains to me how he reached chess mastery at nearly 40 years old, a relatively advanced age to become fluent in chess patterns. In teaching adult students chess, this visual aspect is often the hardest-because they are so anxious for verbal cues and shortcuts.”

Also included in the introduction is her (in)famous picture sitting across from a tattooed naked man.

This one was left out of the book:

Jennifer writes about “blindfold” Chess:

“In the fall of 2015, I went to Toronto to play my first-ever public blindfold game with Aaron Tucker, as an experiment for this project. The blindfold game also generated a poem. I’d given hundreds of simultaneous chess exhibitions called and talks, but had firmly resisted on of the most crowd-pleasing of chess spectacles, the “blindfold.” I never enjoyed the mental exertion, which literally induces headaches. It never seemed like an efficient way to improve general chess strength.”

Contrast this with an article at Chessbase, Learning to play blindfold with Fritz 16 by Albert Silver on 1/20/2018, which begins, “The overriding theme of Fritz 16’s new functions is chess improvement, and among them is a special feature for blindfold chess that can help you refine your visualization skills like no other.”

Oh really? Jennifer begs to differ. Reading on one finds:

A valuable training technique

“On the surface the blindfold chess feature in Fritz 16 could be dismissed as just a curiosity, or as a function that is beyond your current skillset. Whatever the case, this would be a serious mistake, since used properly it could become one of your key training tools, even if you can barely play a few moves without seeing before you get lost. In fact, especially if that is the case!” (

That last sentence caused me to recall a grammar school teacher who said that because of my writing I alone had caused her to use “several” red ink pens that year. Knowing this guy is writing for a living would, no doubt, make her turn over in the grave…

The book begins with this game:

“Playing White vs Mario Schroeder (New York, 1922)

1. d4 d5 2. Nf3 Nf6 3. c4 e6 4. Nc3 Nbd7 5. cxd5 exd5 6. Qb3 c6 7. e4 Qb6 8.
Qxb6 Nxb6 9. e5 Ne4 10. Bd3 Bb4 11. Bd2 Nxd2 12. Nxd2 O-O 13. f4 Bd7 14. O-O c5
15. a3 cxd4 16. axb4 dxc3 17. bxc3 Rac8 18. Rfc1 Na4 19. c4 Nb2 20. Be2 Nxc4
21. Nxc4 dxc4 22. Rxa7 c3 23. Rxb7 Bf5 24. g4 Be4 25. Rd7 f5 26. Rd4 c2 27.
Bc4+ Kh8 28. Bb3 Rfd8 29. Rxd8+ Rxd8 30. Bxc2 Rc8 31. e6 Rxc2 32. Rd1 Rc8 33.
e7 Re8 34. b5 Kg8 35. Rd8 Kf7 36. gxf5 Rxe7 37. Kf2 Rb7 38. Rd4 Bxf5 39. Rb4
Rb6 40. Ke3 Bd7 41. Kd4 Rxb5 0-1

After this game was put into the “Chess Bard” the program ejected this “gem.”

machine sealed sand or
resistance, any blurred sketch, instant
questions deserted cell or cord

single cast or broken sand
warily measures some seashell

single silicon gobbles within
the reassemblage, dormouse beside coherence

each speed the purposeful decomposition
gobbles beside the cloudy redundancy

I cannot make this up. The Chess Bard did…

“Playing Black vs Henri Weenink (The Hague, 1928)

1. e4 c6 2. d4 d5 3. exd5 cxd5 4. Bd3 Nc6 5. c3 Nf6 6. Bg5 h6 7. Bf4 e6 8. Nf3
Bd6 9. Bxd6 Qxd6 10. O-O O-O 11. Re1 Bd7 12. Nbd2 Na5 13. Ne5 b5 14. b4 Nc4 15.
Ndxc4 dxc4 16. Bc2 a5 17. a3 Ra7 18. Re3 axb4 19. axb4 Rfa8 20. Rc1 Bc8 21. Rg3
Bb7 22. Ng4 Qf4 23. Nxf6+ Qxf6 24. Bb1 Kf8 25. Qh5 Ra1 26. Qd1 Qf4 27. Rg4 Qd6
28. Rg3 Bd5 29. Qg4 g6 1/2-1/2

Imagine that centre centers hooded diagonal!

personable estimate, some clogged radar
negates and blesses some fork

the knight, verbose can or
insult fits below evolution or
proud cog lithely reproduces

I once lost a game due to that centre centers hooded diagonal! Dammit!

The last game given in the book:

Playing Black vs Eduard Glass (Folkstone, 1933)

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 Bb4 4. Nf3 b6 5. Bg5 Bb7 6. Rc1 O-O 7. e3 d6 8. Be2
Nbd7 9. O-O Bxc3 10. Rxc3 Qe8 11. Nd2 e5 12. f4 exd4 13. exd4 Ne4 14. Nxe4 Bxe4
15. f5 f6 16. Bd2 Qd8 17. Bh5 d5 18. Qg4 Kh8 19. Rh3 g5 20. Bg6 1-0

Fortunately, the poem is as short as the game:

the estimated half or insult (insult)
rustically forgets bookshelf among memory

a L-shaped butt suspends
the centre devilishly contains plaster

Now I would like to focus on two poems with no game attached.

Playing Black vs Gosta Stoltz (Hamburg, 1930)

this centre or diagonal
suspends and forgets butt, curiosity
and estimate (estimate, estimate) between elderly punctuation

a memory, this centre
accusingly short-circuits or materializes database

clogged mathematics, any washed smartphone
reproduces woman under beefy ghost

a farm or truthful ownership
core slimes and traps

Playing Black vs Frank James Marshall (Hamburg, 1930)

this instant, estimate punctually slights
central noise and collared revision

Which personable path darkens any foreground?
a slight pitch

gear must delightfully evolve bust!

specific or wooden isolation, isolation
pitches bust or equivalent opposition

nonstop mineral and each smartphone tricks

I do not believe Stoltz, Marshall, or Duchamp had a smartphone in Hamburg back in 1930, but I could be mistaken.

For the record, I will publish the two games since the author, or the Chess Bard, chose to leave the pages blank. The book would have been better if the author had chosen to leave the “poems,” and I use the word loosely, off of the page in lieu of the games…

Playing Black vs Gosta Stoltz (Hamburg, 1930)
1. e4 c6 2. d4 d5 3. Nc3 dxe4 4. Nxe4 Nf6 5. Nxf6+ gxf6 (Duchamp, MY MAN!) 6. Nf3 Bf5 7. g3 Nd7 (…7 Qd5) 8.Nh4 (c3) Be4 9. f3 Bg6 10. Bg2 Qc7 11. O-O e6 12. Qe2 O-O-O 13. c4 Nb6 14. Bf4 Qd7 (14…e5!?)
15. Rfd1 Be7 16. a3 Na8 (16…Rhe8) 17. d5 e5 18. Be3 Nb6 (18…f5!?) 19. f4 cxd5 20. c5 Na4 21. c6 Qe6
22. Qb5 Nb6 23. Bxb6 axb6 24. Qxb6 bxc6 25. f5 Qd6 26. Rxd5 Qc7 27. Qa6+ Qb7
28. Rxd8+ Rxd8 29. Qxb7+ Kxb7 30. fxg6 fxg6 31. Rc1 Rd6 32. Bf3 f5 33. Rd1 Kb6 34. Ng2 Kb5 35. Be2+ Ka4 36. Ne3 Kb3 37. Rxd6 Bxd6 38. Bd1+ Ka2 39. Nc4 Bc5+ 40. Kf1 Bd4 41. a4 Kb1 42. a5 Kc1 43. Ba4 1-0

Playing Black vs Frank James Marshall (Hamburg, 1930)

1. d4 Nf6 2. Nf3 b6 3. c4 e6 4. Bg5 Be7 5. Nc3 Bb7 6. Qc2 d5 7. e3 O-O 8. cxd5
Nxd5 9. Bxe7 Qxe7 10. Nxd5 Bxd5 11. Bd3 h6 12. a3 c5 13. dxc5 Rc8 14. b4 bxc5
15. Rc1 Nd7 16. Ba6 Rc7 17. e4 Bb7 18. Bxb7 Rxb7 19. bxc5 Qxc5 20. O-O Qxc2 21.
Rxc2 Kf8 22. Rfc1 Ke7 23. Nd4 Ke8 24. f4 Rab8 25. e5 Nf8 26. Rc5 Rb1 27. Rxb1
Rxb1+ 28. Kf2 Rb7 29. Rc8+ Ke7 30. Ra8 Ng6 31. g3 Kd7 32. a4 Ne7 33. Nb5 Nc8
34. g4 Rxb5 35. axb5 Kc7 36. g5 hxg5 37. b6+ Kb7 38. Rxc8 Kxc8 1/2-1/2

The price for this book is $18, but it also available as an eBook, which must be cheaper. EIGHTEEN BUCKS!? Fortunately, I suggested my local library system, the Athens regional library system, the Georgia public library of the year in 2017, purchase this book, something I now deeply regret.