Annotated chess game

1. ... f5 doesn't stop White from playing 2. e4 starting Staunton Gambit. I prefer to look to 1. ... f5 as to Accelarated Old Indian defence...

2. g3 is thought as the strongest reply to Dutch defence. Anyway, there are a lot of other variations against it. / 3. ... e6 could be called as entruy to "Classical Variation" - quite good and solid. But more popular is 3. ... g6 - indicating Leningrad variation.

Black has set up a Stonewall Defence - very hard to break down, and it has it's aggressive side, too, seeking to attack on the K-side. I played quite a few Stonewall Defences myself in my early days on GK. It does have it's downside, though: a certain strategic rigidity, and Black's Queen's bishop could find itself without a future.

As Black, I like to develop the bishop at d6. This move, a somewhat unusual deployment for the knight, seeks to contest Black's occupation of d6 with the bishop.

I think that 6. Nh3 is quite qood move (and even more popular than 6. Nf3). It has an idea to 6... Bd6 reply 7. Bf4 - exchanging black-squared bishops...

I think this 5 move sequence deserves further comment, especially the last moves. After 9...Qe7, Black is threatening to repair the hole at e5 by playing a pawn there. White's third move with his king's knight inhibits that advance, but Black's 10th move renews the threat. How can White hold back Black's centre? Note here that it is White thinking defensively (or, to be exact, prophylactically), not Black

I like to note, that 8. ... Bxf4 was played against Lithuanian Cmilyte (she is best in Lithuania). But I would think more about 8. ... Be7 or 8. ... b6 / I don't think, that 10. ... e5 could be very effective at the moment, so I'd like to think in place of White about further development - for example, 10. Nd2

I agree with Ion that 12. ... Qxe2 was best for black; but after 14. Nf4, black should play Qh6 instead of Qf7. The reason is simple. Black in the Dutch needs to keep pressure on White's King. The name of the game in the Dutch for Black is attack. Never retreat unless absolutely necessary. The Queen is safe on h6 and offers attacking possibilities beyond 15. Qxf5 Nc5. Instead, 15. ... Ne4!! and White is in HUGE trouble.

[15-Jul-08] Had Black recaptured with the c-pawn, 12.Qc7 keeps an eye on e5. However, 11...Nxd5 was well worth considering, despite the unpleasant position of the e-pawn. After 11...exd5, the strategic hole on e5 is of some concern to Black. This knight is headed to f3, after which both knights will bear upon e5... Finally, Black could play here 12...Qxe2 13.Rae1 Qh5 14.Nf4 Qf7 15.Qxf5 Nc5 (16.Qc2) with maybe an OK game... [17-Jul-08] White ought probably to have played 12.e3 first. **********Responding to lighttotheright: I hadn't really considered, after 12.Nd2 Qxe2 13.Rae1 Qh5 14.Nf4, 14...Qh6!? as I felt, without thinking much about it, that the Q ought to stay close to the e-file, where White is looking threatening. Certainly White then has a problem after 14...Qh6 15.Qxf5? Ne4 that can be resolved only partially by 16.Bxe4 Rxf5 17.Bxf5 Nf6 when R+N for Q looks insufficient. Maybe White has to keep the e4-square free of enemy knights by 15.f3 and then see what can be done along the e-file, in conjunction with the pressure on the c5 and c6 squares. The game doesn't look at all easy from there on - for either side!

13...Nd6 came as something of a surprise, but it becomes clear that Black was striving to keep my knights out of e5. But maybe there was something to be said for 13...Nf6 instead, and, after 14.Nfe5 Be6 invite White to force the e4-knight to retreat by f2-f3 (which I think I would have done). After ...Nd6, then, White finds his bishop shut in. If he advances the f-pawn to f4 then a Black knight gleefully charges back into e4. I think a rather difficult strategic battle was in prospect after 13...Nf6. **** As things now stand, how is White to continue? The e5 point is too well defended. On the other hand, Black will have to mobilise the bishop via b7 or a6. Black's Q-side pawn constellation, and the rather committed stance of most of the Black pieces seemed to indicate a minority attack, a decision that took little time - maybe a minute - to reach!

In what follows, it is remarkable how quickly the main theatre of war shifts from the centre to the Q-side. Black can not yet contemplate mobilising the bishop by 15...b6 owing to 16.Qxc6.

The first objective of the minority attack has been reached: the weakening of the enemy majority. Black might have been better served by "getting in" ...a5 early in the attack. say at move 16. In some lines this move leads to a tradeoff in which Black's Q-side is weakened overall, but gets a protected passed pawn on the a-file. As things now stand, White's b-pawn, weak in itself, gives White a firm grip on c5 and a5, whilst Black's hold on the light squares b5 and c4 have very little relevance.

The situation is already difficult for Black. The problem with 21...Bc8 22.Rca1 is that Black's f8-rook is cut off from the Q-side. After this, White picks off the a-pawn with Bf1. Her actual choice, 21...Qd7, is probably best after all.

Almost completely locking up Black's Q-side. Observe that it is very difficult for the Black knight to approach to drive out the rook, or even perhaps to lock it up by playing to b5. The moment the knight vacates f7, in comes the White steed at e5. Remember e5?

There was nothing to be done about the a-pawn, but maybe here Black had to look around for a possible counterattack. The move played seems to commit Black to a completely passive defence, not generally a desirable stance when a pawn down, and having to nurse a sickly little fellow like the c6-invalid into the bargain. But it has to be admitted, Black's options are limited.

I rather like the idea of taking the bishop with the a-file rook. There's no big difference whatsoever in terms of advantage, but after 28. Raxa6 Rxb6 29. Rxa8, black's rook has to escape capture while attacks on black's pawns (like a Rg8/g7/Rg7 sequence) become very clear cut.

Here comes the cavalry! The intention is to go Ne1-d3-b4 and then Nxc6 or, in some circumstances, Na6. Meanwhile, 30.Ra7+ also looks OK.

After 35.Rg8, if not sometime earlier, Black needed to abandon passive defence for counterattack, even at the cost of the important c-pawn. True, Black is practically in a "zugzwang" position - she has to lose material somewhere. But, if the rook could get in amongst White K-side pawns, she might yet turn the tables, however remote the chances (Indeed, instead of taking at once on c6 if black had played 35...Rb7, I was considering 36.Kg2 or Kf2, or even h3, tidying up the K-side before grabbing the c-pawn).

Having enveloped the prey, now's the time to squeeze.

As time went on, ...Rb7 became less and less feasible.

I think that Black could not be said to have neglected her development, really, although it is true that the entrenchments dug around e5 cost the c8-bishop any kind of mobility. This bishop did its bit in defending against White's minority attack, but was always reduced to complete passivity until exchanged off. *** From the final position, had Joanne played 41...Ng5 it is highly likely I would have exchanged rooks (42.Rxg7+ Kd8 43.Rxc7 Kxc7 44.Kh4) after which there is no saving the h-pawn. Black has no worthwhile counterplay and White's 5-2 majority is unstoppable. 43.Rg6 does pick up quite a few pawns, but leaving Black with a rook and knight just might have led to complication White could live without!