Tweed vs Whipps

Game Of The Week

By Matt Grinberg

Whitaker, though eventually awarded the International Master title by FIDE, is known not so much for what he did at the chessboard as for one singular thing he did away from the chessboard.  I first heard of him when "Chess Life & Review" ran a cover story about him in the December 1969 issue.  The story recognized his becoming a FIDE IM.  The story not only mentioned the IM title but also Whitaker's many major tournament wins in the 1920's and 30's, including winning the National Chess Federation Tournament in 1927.  But there were a couple of things about the story that were odd.  First, the "article" was a letter written by Whitaker himself.  Second, he had won the IM title more than 4 years earlier.

Chess Life & Review - December 1969

At the time, Whitaker lived in Washington, D.C.  In 1970, my family moved to the Washington area.  As I got to know the chess community there, I found out about the other side of Whitaker.  He was originally a lawyer by trade; but not a lawyer who practiced with integrity.  In fact, his story reminds me of present day lawyer, Michael Avenati, only Whitaker was worse.   

   

Whitaker's first brush with the law came in 1921.  He was arrested in a scheme to defraud car insurance companies.  Due to the arrest, he was unable to appear at the U.S. Chess Championship match he had scheduled with Frank Marshall the following year.  He served two years in Federal prison upon conviction and was disbarred.   

   

You might think he would have learned from that, but in 1932 was again arrested on an insurance fraud charge in Florida.  He skipped bail and headed north where he hooked up with another seedy character, Gaston Means, an ex DOJ agent.  About the same time, the kidnapping of the Lindbergh baby took place.  As the investigators were having trouble tracking down the kidnappers, let alone rescuing the baby, Whitaker and Means came up with a "bright" idea.   

   

They claimed to be representing the kidnappers and approached Evalyn McLean, publisher of the Washington Post, with an offer to obtain the release of the baby if she would give them $104,000 to be paid to the kidnappers as ransom.  Mrs. McLean paid, but the baby was not released.   

   

If Whitaker and Means had any sense, they would have disappeared with the money.  But noooo, they went back for seconds asking for an additional $35,000. Mrs. McLean, instead of paying up a second time, called the FBI.  Whitaker and Means were both arrested and sent to prison.   

   

All together, Whitaker served 7 stints in prison.  He eventually got out and stayed out of trouble, while taking up chess again, but not at the level he had played in the 20's and 30's.  He was an active player almost until his death in 1972.   

   

Whitaker's game below was played against Jackson W. Showalter at the 1915 Western Championship, the equivalent of today's U.S. Open Championship.  Showalter had been U.S. Chess Champion several times between 1891, when he won the title in a match with Max Judd, and 1909, when he lost the title in a match with Frank J. Marshall.  In those days, before there was a national chess organization, the championship was decided in a match when the recognized champion accepted a challenge from another player.  During that period, Showalter played 10 matches for the U.S. Championship, winning 5 and losing 5.  In only two of those matches did the title NOT change hands.   

   

The circumstances of the game were quite exciting.  Each had won seven straight games and they were tied for first.  With just three rounds to go in the 11 player round robin event, this looked to be the decisive game of the tournament.  Showalter seems to think that all he has to do is play a solid game and eventually his brash young opponent will go astray.  He is brought back to reality by Whitaker's 21st move!   

   

Whitaker, Norman T. - Showalter, Jackson W., 1-0   

Western Championship, Round 9   

Excelsior, Minnesota, 8/20/1915   

   

Ruy Lopez Opening 

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Ba4 Nf6 5. O-O d6

This is not the preferred move order today.

6. Re1

White allows Black to get back to normal lines. [He could try to take advantage of Black's last move by playing 6. Bxc6 bxc6 7. d4 White has better pawn structure but Black has the bishop pair]

6... b5 7. Bb3 Be7

Black has transposed back to the normal line. But now White plays an unusual move aimed at disrupting Black's normal set up on the queenside.

8. a4

[The normal Closed Ruy Lopez is 8. c3 O-O 9. h3 Na5 10. Bc2 c5 11. d4 which has been played a gazillion times before (and since)]

8... b4 9. a5 O-O 10. d3 Rb8 11. Bc4!?

He tries to tie Black's queen bishop to the defense of the a-pawn. [But continuing his development looks better. 11. Nbd2 Be6 12. Bc4 Bxc4 13. Nxc4 Rb5 14. b3 Nd7 15. Bb2 Bf6 16. d4 exd4 17. Nxd4 Nxd4 18. Bxd4 Re8 19. h3 h6 20. Re3 Bxd4 21. Qxd4 Qf6 22. Qxf6 Nxf6 23. Rae1 Nd7 24. f4 Kf8 25. Kf2 Nb8 26. Rd1 Nc6 27. Rd5 1/2-1/2, Grischuk, Alexander (RUS) 2764 - Kotsur, Pavel (KAZ) 2550 , Astana 7/10/2012 Ch. World (blitz) (final)]

11... Nd7!?

This move is rather passive. [Much better is 11... Be6! anyway! 12. Nbd2 (Taking the pawn gets White nowhere. 12. Bxa6 Ra8 13. Bb5 Rxa5=; Nor does taking the bishop make sense because it strengthens Black's center and opens up the f-file for his rook. 12. Bxe6!? fxe6) 12... Qc8 13. b3 Nd7 14. Nf1 Bxc4 15. dxc4 Nc5 16. Ne3 Re8 17. Nd5 Bd8 18. h3 Rf8 19. Nh2 Qe6 20. Nf1 f5 21. exf5 Qxf5 22. Be3 Ne6 23. Ng3 Qg6 24. c3 bxc3 25. Nxc3 Ncd4 26. Bxd4 Nxd4 27. Rb1 c6 28. Re4 Bxa5 29. Rg4 Qf7 30. Nce4 d5 31. cxd5 cxd5 32. Nh5 g6 33. Nhf6 Kg7 34. Nxh7 dxe4 35. Nxf8 Rxf8 36. Rxe4 Qxf2 37. Kh1 Nf5 38. Rxe5 Bc7 39. Re6 Ng3 40. Kh2 Nf1 41. Kh1 Qf4 42. Re7 Kh8 0-1, Stojanovic, Dalibor (BIH) 2501 – Hammer, Jon Ludvig (NOR) 2630 , Tromsoe 8/10/2014 Olympiad]

12. Be3 Bf6 13. Nbd2 Nd4 14. Nf1 Nc5 15. c3!?

White plays for a breakthrough in the center, but it also allows Black to open the b-file for his rook. [The exchanges 15. Bxd4! exd4 16. e5 dxe5 17. Nxe5 Bxe5 18. Rxe5 leave Black in an awkward situation due to the undefended knight and the weak pawns on d5 and a6]

15... Nde6 16. Ng3 g6?!

This was apparently played to keep White's knight off of f5 in preparation for playing Qe7. But it weakens Black's kingside and is again rather passive. [Much more dynamic is 16... bxc3! 17. bxc3 c6 18. d4 exd4 19. cxd4 d5! 20. exd5 cxd5 21. Bf1=]

17. d4! Nd7 18. Qd2 exd4

This is good if his intention is to follow with c5 and play on the queenside. But by opening the e-file with White's rook on e1, it negates the idea of Qe7.

19. cxd4 Qe7?

But he plays it anyway! [Better is 19... c5! 20. Bxe6 fxe6 21. Rec1 White has more space and more active pieces, but Black has good chances]

20. Bh6 Rd8 21. Nf5!

ANYWAY!! This move would not have been good for White if Black had not exchanged pawns on d4.

21... gxf5!?

Rather than passively defending a weak position, Showalter decides to meet Whitaker blow for blow. [Retreating may be better, but it leaves Black with no counter play. For instance 21... Qe8 22. Bg5 Bb7 23. Rac1 Rdc8 24. Nh6 Kg7 25. e5 Bxg5 26. Nxg5 d5 27. Bf1 Nxg5 28. Qxg5 White can quickly bring his remaining three pieces to Black's weakened kingside, while most of Black's pieces are uselessly posted on the queenside]

22. exf5 Ne5?

Maybe Showalter, who hailed from Kentucky, imbibed a little too much bourbon during the game. Now he not only returns the piece, but gives up another. [He can at least stay in the game with 22... d5 23. Bd3 Ndf8 24. fxe6 Nxe6 But his weakened kingside will spell his doom]

23. dxe5 dxe5

White to move

24. fxe6 Bxe6 25. Qe2 Bf5?

A non sequitur.

26. Nxe5

Black resigns. [1:0]

Aftermath:  This win put Whitaker a point ahead of second place Showalter with two rounds to go.  Showalter went on to win his last two games, taking first just half a point ahead of Whitaker, who only scored a draw his last two games and then went on to his life of crime. 

Tweed vs Whipps

[Event "16th Western Championship"]

[Site "https://cschessnews.blogspot.com/"]

[Date "1915.08.20"]

[Round "9"]

[White "Whitaker, Norman Tweed"]

[Black "Showalter, Jackson Whipps"]

[Result "1-0"]

[ECO "C88"]

[PlyCount "51"]

[EventDate "1915.08.16"]

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Ba4 Nf6 5. O-O d6 6. Re1 b5 7. Bb3 Be7 8. a4

b4 9. a5 O-O 10. d3 Rb8 11. Bc4 Nd7 12. Be3 Bf6 13. Nbd2 Nd4 14. Nf1 Nc5 15. c3

Nde6 16. Ng3 g6 17. d4 Nd7 18. Qd2 exd4 19. cxd4 Qe7 20. Bh6 Rd8 21. Nf5 gxf5

22. exf5 Ne5 23. dxe5 dxe5 24. fxe6 Bxe6 25. Qe2 Bf5 26. Nxe5 1-0

https://www.chessvideos.tv/chess-game-replayer.php?id=116800

This Week In Chess

On July 28th, the Colorado Springs Chess Club held the 4th Wednesday July Speed (6SS, G/5+0).  Will Wolf went unbeaten and earned the COATI sunglasses.

Place, 4th Wednesday July Speed, Score

1 William Leo Wolf 6.0

2 Paul D Anderson 4.5

3 Peter Barlay 4.0

4 Jose Llacza Magno 3.5

5 Rowen Oregel 3.5

6 Mark McGough 3.0

7 Tim Saffold 3.0

8 Brad Rome 3.0

9 Koen Beaver 3.0

10 Cris Pezoa 3.0

11 Earle P Wikle 2.5

12 Aiden Forbes 2.0

13 Charles Clark 1.0

14 Tim Clark 0.0

Killer Bloodgood

Game Of The Week

By Matt Grinberg

Claude Frizzel Bloodgood - the name is enough to scare you even before you know about his life.

He was born in 1937 in California, but lived most of his life in Virginia.  There is some suggestion that he may have been playing in chess tournaments as early as the mid 1950's, but the first time he appears on the annual USCF rating list was 1960.  He continued to play for the next two years, reaching a rating of 2043.  During this time he also served as the rating statistician for the Virginia Chess Federation (VCF).

But then he headed down the wrong path.  He was convicted on two counts of burglary and one of forgery.  He spent several years in prison.  He got out in 1969, but just nine days after his release he murdered his mother.  He was convicted of first degree murder and sentenced to death.  Fortunately for Bloodgood, before the sentence had been carried out, the Supreme court ruled in Furman vs. Georgia, 1972, that the death penalty, as then administered, was unconstitutional.  His sentence was commuted to life imprisonment in Virginia.

This is where his chess life picks up again.  As a recognized Expert, the prison officials were only too happy to have him organize a prison chess program.  He got the prison chess club registered with the USCF and started organizing tournaments in the prison.  He so impressed the prison administration that in 1974 they decided to allow Bloodgood and one of his fellow inmates a furlough to play in a VCF tournament with a guard.  Bloodgood and his fellow inmate disappeared at the earliest opportunity.  They were both recaptured shortly.  This was the first time I heard of him - the whole Virginia chess community was abuzz.

Needless to say, Bloodgood was not allowed another furlough.  However, the prison chess activities continued at least until 1977, when he had a rating of 1873 on the annual list.  After that apparently there were no more USCF events at the prison for a while.

Sixteen years go by and suddenly in 1993 Bloodgood reappears on the annual list with a rating of 2386.  What!  How could someone who was already 40 years old in 1977 with a rating of 1873, suddenly become almost a 2400 player in 1993 even though the USCF records show no activity for him between 1977 and 1993?

In early 1994, the prison started having USCF rated tournaments again.  USCF records show that over the next 5 years Bloodgood played 3,174 games in 699 prison tournaments.  What!!  Okay, maybe he didn't have anything better to do sitting in prison, but even so that strains credulity.

By the end of 1996 Bloodgood's rating had risen to 2712, making him one of the highest rated players in the U.S.A. and eligible to play in the U.S. Championship Tournament.  During this same period some of the tournaments in the Powhatan Correctional Center allowed outside players to enter.  According to Virginia players I knew who played Bloodgood, he played more like a 1700 player than a 2700 player.

When the USCF realized that they might be obligated to invite an imprisoned convicted murderer to the national championship, they launched an investigation.  It seems likely that Bloodgood, who was familiar with how the rating system worked, had manipulated the system to boost his own rating, not to mention the ratings of several other inmates who also had master ratings at that point.  Bloodgood himself claimed that he had done nothing wrong and the problem was with the way the USCF ran the rating system.  Whatever the case, he was not invited to the U.S. Championship, not that it is likely he would have been allowed to go anyway.

Bloodgood died in 2001 still holding a 2639 rating.

USCF Annual Ratings for Claude Bloodgood

1960 - 1798
1961 - 2043
1962 - 1856
1972 - 2089
1977 - 1982
1978 - 1873
1993 - 2386
1994 - 2234
1995 - 2573
1996 - 2712
1997 - 2639
1999 - 2639

There are not many of Bloodgood's games that can be found.  The game below is from before Bloodgood's first prison term.  The quality of the game is not particularly good, but it is interesting because of the unusual opening, Grob Opening, and the final combination.

Bloodgood, Claude - Evans, B, 1-0
USO Invitational
Norfolk, Virginia, 1961

Grob Opening

1. g4?!

The Grob Opening - probably the worst first move White can make.  He leaves the pawn out there undefended.  But the worst thing about it is that White weakens his whole kingside.  Bloodgood apparently played this on his first move as White in every game.  He even wrote a book on the Grob, "The Tactical Grob," which can be found as an e-book online.  There are some points to the Grob.  First, it is likely to take Black out of any opening preparation he has.  Second, due to the threat of g5, it makes it difficult for Black to develop his king knight to its normal square at f6.

1... d5 2. Bg2 c6

[Black could take the g-pawn, but it is risky due to the weakening of the h1-a8 diagonal.  This is the other main point of the Grob.  White hopes that Black will take, giving White good attacking chances on the light squares. 2... Bxg4 3. c4 c6 4. cxd5 cxd5 5. Qb3 White has potential threats along both the h1-a8 and a2-g8 diagonals, but he does not have enough for the pawn]

3. g5 e5 4. h4 Bd6 5. d3 Be6 6. e4 Ne7

To here, this is a normal Grob (to the extent that anything about the Grob could be considered "normal").  White's position has been compromised by the kingside pawn moves and Black is ahead in development.  Black is better.

7. Nd2

This move is a novelty.  That does not mean to say it is a bad move.  What it does say is that the Grob is so rarely played that it is easy to find a new move already at move seven.

[The "normal" move is 7. Nc3 but in the following game Black plays simple, straight forward chess and wins easily. 7... Nd7 8. exd5 cxd5 9. Bd2 a6 10. Nge2 Qc7 11. f4 O-O 12. O-O f6 13. Ng3 fxg5 14. hxg5 exf4 15. Qe2 Be5 16. Bxf4 Qb6 17. Be3 d4 18. Na4 Qb4 19. Bf4 Rxf4 20. Rxf4 Ng6 21. Nh5 Qxa4 22. Re4 Bf5 23. Rxe5 Ndxe5 24. Bd5 Kh8 25. Ng3 Bg4 26. Qg2 Qd7 27. Re1 Nh4 0-1, Holick, Manfred – Kranz, Armin (AUT) 2101, Goetzis 1995 It (open)]

7... O-O 8. Bh3 Bxh3 9. Nxh3 f5 10. gxf6 Rxf6

In spite of the opening, play has been reasonable on both sides up to here.  But now things get ugly.

11. exd5?!

This has to be bad since it gives up what little center control White has, but it is hard to come up with a good suggestion for him.

11... Nxd5?

Black wants to get his knight active, but in the process he gives White a beautiful square for his own knights on e4.

[Better is 11... cxd5 keeping White bottled up.  Black's strong center and better development, plus White's weak kingside, give Black the clearly better position]

12. Ne4 Rf7?

Since "clearly" one of White's knights is going to g5, this is not a good place for the rook.

[12... Rf8 is better]

13. Bg5?

But it wasn't so clear to Bloodgood.

[13. Nhg5 Re7 14. Qh5 g6 15. Qh6 to be followed by h5 gives White a very strong attack]

13... Be7 14. Qg4 Qa5?!

The check is dubious since it takes the queen away from the kingside where it is needed for defense.

[Much better is 14... Qd7 15. Qg3 Bb4 16. c3 Bf8 17. h5 Qf5 18. h6 g6 19. O-O-O Nd7 The chances are about equal]

15. c3?

White returns the favor.

[Since he should have a knight on g5 instead of his bishop, he should play 15. Bd2 which both clears g5 for his knights and gains a tempo off of Black's queen]

15... Bxg5??

Black facilitates a White knight coming to g5 and his position immediately falls apart.

[Houdini gives this spirited line leading to a perpetual check. 15... Na6 16. Rg1 Nc5 17. Nxc5 Bxc5 18. Bh6 Nxc3 19. Qe6 Nd5 20. Kd1 Qa4 21. Kc1 Bf8 22. Ng5 Qf4 23. Kb1 Qxf2 24. Nxf7 Qxg1 In what follows White will never be able to move his king to the second rank because doing so will allow Black to win by playing Qf2+ followed by Qxf7. 25. Bc1 Now White threatens 26. Nh6+ Kh8, 27. Qg8 mate. 25... Nc3! 26. bxc3 Qb6 27. Bb2 Qg1 28. Bc1 Qb6 29. Bb2 Qg1 Draw]

16. Nhxg5 Rf8??

White to move

Black is either not familiar with the idea of the smothered mate or he is committing suicide.  White now has a forced mate in five moves.

[The best try is 16... Qc7 17. Nxf7 Qxf7 18. Qc8 Qf8 19. Qxb7 Nb6 20. Rg1 White is an exchange and pawn up and still has a strong attack after he castles queenside and brings his other rook into play]

17. Qe6 Kh8 18. Nf7 Kg8

[18... Rxf7 19. Qe8 Rf8 20. Qxf8#]

19. Nh6 Kh8 20. Qg8! Rxg8 21. Nf7#

The finish is nice, but the game as a whole is not what you would expect of a 2700 player.

Killer Bloodgood

[Event "Norfolk USO Inv."]
[Site "https://cschessnews.blogspot.com/"]
[Date "1961.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Bloodgood, Claude Frizzel"]
[Black "Evans, B ."]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "A00"]
[PlyCount "41"]
[EventDate "1961.??.??"]

1. g4 d5 2. Bg2 c6 3. g5 e5 4. h4 Bd6 5. d3 Be6 6. e4 Ne7 7. Nd2 O-O 8. Bh3 Bxh3 9. Nxh3 f5 10. gxf6 Rxf6 11. exd5 Nxd5 12. Ne4 Rf7 13. Bg5 Be7 14. Qg4 Qa5+ 15. c3 Bxg5 16. Nhxg5 Rf8 17. Qe6+ Kh8 18. Nf7+ Kg8 19. Nh6+ Kh8 20. Qg8+ Rxg8 21. Nf7# 1-0

https://www.chessvideos.tv/chess-game-replayer.php?id=115602

This Week In Chess

On July 5th, the Colorado Springs Chess Club held the CSCC Black Hole Rapid Online event (4SS, G/10+10).

https://www.chess.com/tournament/live/cscc-black-hole-rapid-online-1307559

Place CSCC Black Hole (4SS, G/10+10) Score

1 "#1 DFSStar (2172)" 3.5
2 "#2 NM RichardShtivelband (2362)" 3.5
3 "#3 Czechmate1972 (1571)" 3.0
4 "#4 cschessnews (1687)" 2.5
5 "#5 JJ7X (1832)" 2.0
6 "#6 linuxguy1 (1496)" 2.0
7 "#7 bestatcheckers7 (1537)" 2.0
8 "#8 CosmicNovaGalaxy (1347)" 2.0
9 "#9 Navajo36us80917 (1130)" 1.5
10 "#10 KingVed (1460)" 1.0
11 "#11 alaynew (1283)" 1.0
12 "- tanguay1 (734)" 0.0
13 "- Honeybrook (1318)" 0.0

New Mexico Chess Champions: Josh Bloomer

Game Of The Week

By Matt Grinberg

Josh Bloomer won the 2017 New Mexico Open Chess Championship and was thus declared the New Mexico Chess Champion.  He took clear first place with 5.5 out of 6 and raised his rating to an impressive 2326.  His one draw was against Jesse Vicario of Las Cruces in the first round.  In clear second place with 5 was Brian Wall.  Brian lost the fourth round encounter with Josh, but won all his other games.

The outcome was a little unusual since both Josh and Brian live in Colorado.  States that decide their state championship in an open tournament usually specify that while the high scorer is the winner of the tournament, the state champion is the highest scoring player who resides in the state.  That was not done in this case, so Josh was rightfully declared the New Mexico State Chess Champion for 2017.

I had hoped to get a game played by Josh from the 2107 New Mexico Open, but apparently the score sheets were lost along with the NMCO computer that disappeared.  I thought I could get a game by contacting Josh, but an attempt through Facebook got no response.  So, I checked online and found the game below played between Josh Bloomer (White) and Brian Wall (Black) at the 2017 Fall Classic in Denver a month before they finished first and second in the New Mexico Open.  It is curious that the results of the Fall Classic mirrored the results of the New Mexico Open.  Here too Josh finished first giving up only a first round draw and Brian finished second losing only to Josh in round 4.

The game is fascinating!  The opening quickly goes out of book, typical for Brian, but the position looks normal, when Brian hands to Josh a common sacrifice that seems to force a win.  Brian manages to survive the initial onslaught, but when the dust settles Josh is a pawn up with a dominating center and Brian's king is still exposed - seemingly a clear win if Josh simply presses the attack in the center.

But then the game takes another unusual turn.  With all the major pieces on the board and bishops of opposite color and given the nature of the position, conventional wisdom would be that Josh should avoid exchanging major pieces and press home his attack.  The last thing he should do is trade off into a bishops of opposite color endgame where his extra pawn likely would not be enough to win.  And yet Josh deliberately heads for the bishop endgame!

I cannot say that the resulting endgame was a theoretical draw, but it is certainly difficult to find any winning plan other than waiting for Black to make a mistake.  On the other hand, if that was Josh's plan, it worked.  After a lot of maneuvering around, Brian finally makes the mistake that allows Josh's king to get into his position.

Pirc Defense

1. d4 g6 2. Nf3 Bg7 3. e4 d6 4. Bc4 c6 5. Nbd2 d5 6. Bb3 dxe4 7. Nxe4

7... Nd7??

This move amazes me.  Any experienced player would know that you cannot play Nd7 in a position like this.  It invites Josh's sacrifice on the next move because it blocks Black's queen bishop, thus making the e6 square weak.  I have no doubt that an experienced master like Brian is aware of this, but he does it anyway.  Brian has a reputation for playing unusual, provocative moves in the opening, but this is a bit much.

[White has a small edge due to his better center after 7... Nf6 8. Nxf6 Bxf6 9. O-O Bg4 10. Re1 O-O]

White to move

8. Bxf7!

[Also winning is the delayed sacrifice.  8. Neg5 Nh6 9. Bxf7! Nxf7 10. Ne6 Qb6 11. Nxg7 Kf8 12. Ne6 Kg8 13. O-O Black is down a pawn and his position is completely disrupted]

8... Kxf7 9. Nfg5!?

[9. Neg5 is better since it retains the option of playing the king knight to e5. 9... Ke8 10. Ne6 Qb6 11. Nxg7 Kf7 12. Ne6 h6 13. Qe2 Qb4 14. Bd2 Qd6 15. Nf4 Nf8 16. Ne5 With an extra pawn, better development and Black's king on the run, White is winning]

9... Ke8 10. Ne6

The reason 7... Nd7 was so bad is it blocked Black's queen bishop, thus making this move possible.

10... Qb6 11. Nxg7 Kf7

Oops!  The knight is trapped!  Perhaps Brian was correct in playing this line after all.

12. Ne6! h6

[Sorry, you can't win back the piece. 12... Kxe6?? 13. Ng5 Kd6 (13... Kf6 14. Qf3 Kg7 15. Qf7 Kh6 16. Ne4 Kh5 (16... g5 17. Bxg5#) 17. Qf3 Kh4 18. Bg5#) 14. Bf4 e5 15. dxe5 1-0, Borngaesser Rene (GER) 2345 - Lodes Hermann (GER) 2147, Germany 1989 15... Ke7 (15... Kc7 16. Ne6 Kb8 17. Qd6 Qc7 18. Qxc7#) 16. Qd6 Kd8 (16... Ke8 17. Qe6 Ne7 (17... Kd8 18. Nf7 Kc7 19. Qd6#) 18. Qf7 Kd8 19. Ne6#) 17. O-O-O c5 18. Ne6 Ke8 19. Nc7 Qxc7 (19... Kd8 20. Bg5 Ne7 21. Bxe7#; 19... Kf7 20. e6 Kf6 21. Ne8 Kf5 22. Rd5 Ne5 23. Qxe5 Kg4 24. Qg5#) 20. Qxc7 White wins]

13. Nf4

[The following is the only other game I know of in this line.  The end of the game is kind of nutty.  White is two pawns up and they are connected passed pawns on the queenside.  Plus White has two more pawns which could be decisive if he can divert Black into defending against the passed pawns.  Yes, the bishop on the open board is better than the knight and Black's king is better than White's king. But I can't see how that compensates for the connected passed pawns.  Even if White were to lose the passed pawns, he is in no danger of losing.  So why did he agree to a draw??? 13. N4c5 Nxc5 14. Nxc5 Nf6 15. O-O Bf5 16. Qe2 Rae8 17. Qc4 Nd5 18. c3 e5 19. dxe5 Rxe5 20. Bf4 Ree8 21. b4 Qb5 22. Qxb5 cxb5 23. Be3 Nxe3 24. fxe3 Kg7 25. Rae1 Re7 26. e4 Rhe8 27. Nxb7 Rxe4 28. Rxe4 Bxe4 29. Nd6 Re6 30. Nxb5 Bd3 31. Nd4 Ra6 32. Rf2 Ra3 33. Nb3 Bb1 34. Rf1 Bf5 35. h3 Rxa2 36. Ra1 Rxa1 37. Nxa1 Kf6 38. Nb3 Be4 39. Nd4 Bd5 40. Nb5 Bc4 41. Nxa7 1/2-1/2, Chudinovskikh, Alexander M (RUS) 2263 - Jansen, Christof (LUX) 2250 , Brno 6/26/2012 It "Duras Open"]

13... Ngf6 14. Nxf6 Nxf6 15. O-O g5 16. Ne2 Bf5 17. Ng3 Bd7?!

Moving the bishop away from the exposed king does not look good.  The king needs all the help he can get.

[Better is 17... Bg6 but even then White has an extra pawn, safer king and better pawn structure]

18. c3 Rae8 19. Re1 Bc8 20. b3 Qd8 21. Qe2 Qd7 22. Bb2 Qg4 23. f3 Qd7 24. Ne4 Nxe4 25. fxe4 Qg4

White has an extra pawn, a dominating center well supported by his pieces and Black's king is still exposed.  The one problem White has is the bishops of opposite color, which makes a win difficult if the major pieces come off the board.  Consequently conventional wisdom would say that White should avoid exchanging major pieces and try to win in the middle game.

26. c4!?

As with Brian's 7th move, this amazes me.  Unlike Brian's move, I can't say this is a mistake, but Josh clearly doesn't believe in conventional wisdom.  The following sequence makes it clear that Josh not only doesn't fear the bishops of opposite color endgame, he actually is playing for a win by trading off to a bishops of opposite color endgame!

There may have been a good reason for this.  The time control was G90+30 and he may have already been short of time.  Josh may have been thinking that trying to win with the major pieces on the board was just too risky.  He may have judged that a substantial risk of a draw in the bishops of opposite endgame was better than a small risk of a loss in the middle game.

[Better is 26. Qe3 Kg6 27. d5! a6 28. c4! Here comes the attack!]

26... Qxe2 27. Rxe2 Rhf8 28. Rf1!?

He continues the plan of trading the major pieces.

[28. d5 is a good alternative]

28... Kg8 29. Ref2 Rxf2 30. Rxf2 Rf8 31. Rxf8!?

The last pair of rooks comes off the board.

[I would prefer 31. Re2 Bg4 32. Re3;

or 31. Rd2 Bd7 32. d5 But it is hard to see how either would lead to a win anyway]

31... Kxf8

So here we are in the bishops of opposite color endgame Josh aimed for.  He still has an extra pawn and a strong center, but there is no clear winning plan.  The problem is that Black's bishop dominates the light squares.  Even if White manages to create a passed pawn, White's king and bishop will easily blockade it.  The next phase of the game sees Josh jockeying for position, but with no detectable plan other than waiting for Brian to make a mistake.

32. Kf2 Bg4 33. Ke3 e6 34. Ba3 Ke8 35. Bd6 Bd1 36. Kd2 Bh5 37. Bb8 a6 38. Be5 Bg6 39. Ke3 h5?!

Black is worried about the two pawns on the same color square as White's bishop, but advancing the pawns when his king and bishop have limited scope has its own risks.

[39... Kf7 is better.  White's bishop is only a threat to Black's kingside pawns while it is e5.  But with Black's king on f7, that is not a threat anyway.  Nor can White's king attack with the bishop on e5 because the king is tied down to defending the e-pawn]

40. g4!?

White hopes he can win both of Black's kingside pawns by giving up the g-pawn.  But it isn't there.

[If White wants to win he should avoid trading off pawns, which only makes the defense easier.  After 40. Bf6 g4 Black's bishop is perpetually tied to the defense of the h-pawn and the squares f4, e5 and g5 have been opened to an invasion by White's king]

40... hxg4 41. Bf6 g3!

A clever move!  He sets up a position where White will not be able to win both pawns without giving up his e-pawn.

42. hxg3 g4

The g-pawn is secure!  If Whites takes it with his king, he will lose his e-pawn.  If he moves the e-pawn forward, then Black's bishop can defend both of his weak pawns from f5.  But on the other hand, with the pawn no longer on g5 the path is now open for White's king to invade via f4.  This is why the whole idea of playing h5 was dubious.

43. Kf4 Bh7 44. Ke5 Kd7 45. a3

With Black's king stuck on d7 and his bishop stuck on g6 and h7, White now embarks on a plan of simply advancing his queenside pawns.  He hopes to either find a way to break through or set up a better position for going after Black's g-pawn.

45... Bg6 46. Bg5 Bh7 47. Bd2 Bg6 48. Bb4 Bh7 49. Bc5 Bg6 50. Kf4 Ke8 51. a4 Bh7 52. a5 Bg6 53. Bd6 Bh7 54. b4 Kd7 55. c5 Ke8

56. Kxg4!

The only way to play for a win.

56... Bxe4 57. Kf4

Now Black has to defend against two serious threats - the advance of the passed g-pawn and an invasion of White's king to attack the b-pawn.  This plus the need to defend the e-pawn will stretch Black's king and bishop to the limit.

57... Bd3 58. Ke5 Kf7 59. Bc7 Bb5?

White's king will now be able to get at Black's queenside pawns.

[He has to stop the invasion of White's king!  59... Ke7 60. Bd6 Kf7 61. g4 Advancing the g-pawn does White no good because Black's king and bishop will always control g6. 61... Bc4 62. Bc7 Ke7 63. g5 Bd3 64. Bd6 Kf7 65. Kf4 Bh7 66. Be5 Bc2 67. Bf6 Ke8 68. Kg4 Bd1 White cannot make progress]

60. Bd8?

As soon as he has it, White lets the win slip away again.

[While he has the chance, he must play 60. Kd6 Kf6 61. Kd7 Bf1 62. Be5 Kf7 63. Kc7 Bb5 64. Kxb7 White will win as in the game]

60... Be2?

The third successive bad move.  This time Josh doesn't let Brian off the hook.

[Black just barely holds after 60... Ke8! 61. Bh4 Kd7 62. g4 Bc4 63. Kf6 Ke8 64. Kg7 Be2 65. g5 Bb5 66. g6 Bd3 67. Be1 Be4 68. Kf6 Bd5 69. g7 e5!  Black gives up another pawn, but still holds because of bishops of opposite color.  70. Kxe5 (70. dxe5 Kd7= The position is drawn so long as Black keeps his king on d7 or e6 and his bishop on the a2 to g8 diagonal.  If White tries to promote the g-pawn by playing Kg6, Black stops him by playing Bg8, and if he tries to advance the e-pawn, Black will always be able to take with the bishop if White's king is defending e6 and he will always be able to take with the king if White's king is elsewhere) 70... Kd7 71. Kf6 Bg8 72. Kg6 Ke6 73. Bg3 Kd7 74. Bf4 Ke6 75. Be5 Ke7 76. d5 Ke8! Whether he takes, pushes or just leaves the pawn where it is, White still cannot make progress]

61. Kd6 Bd1 62. Kc7 Be2 63. Kxb7

Black is two pawns down, all his pawns are weak and White still has that pesky passed g-pawn.  In spite of the bishops of opposite colors, White wins.

63... Bb5 64. Bc7 Kf6 65. Be5 Ke7 66. Kc7 Ba4 67. g4 Bb5 68. g5 Kf7

[68... Ba4 69. Kb6 Bb5 70. g6!  Kf8 The king is forced to give way. 71. Bf6 Now the king can no longer defend the e-pawn. 71... Kg8 72. Kb7 Kf8 (72... Bd3 73. Kxc6 Bxg6 74. Be5 Kf7 75. Kd7 The c-pawn will cost Black his bishop) 73. Kc7 Ba4 74. Kd6 White wins because Black can no longer defend all the pawns]

69. Kd6 Ba4 70. g6 Kxg6 71. Kxe6 Bb5 72. Kd6 Kf7 73. d5! Ke8

[Or 73... cxd5 74. c6 Ke8 75. c7 Bd7 76. b5 Bc8 77. b6 Bb7 78. Ba1 Kf7 79. Kd7 d4 80. Bxd4 Kf8 81. c8=Q Bxc8 82. Kxc8 White wins]

74. Bf6 cxd5 75. c6 d4 76. c7 Bd7 77. Bxd4 Bc8 78. Kc6 Ke7 79. Be5 Ke6 80. Bg3 Ke7 81. Kb6 Kd7 82. Be5 Ke6 83. Bc3 Kd6 84. Bd2 Kd7 85. Bf4 Ke6 86. b5! One of White's pawns will queen. Black resigns. [1:0]

New Mexico Chess Champions: Josh Bloomer

[Event "Fall Classic"]
[Site "https://cschessnews.blogspot.com/"]
[Date "2017.10.08"]
[Round "4.1"]
[White "Bloomer, Josh"]
[Black "Wall, Brian"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "B06"]
[WhiteElo "2305"]
[BlackElo "2291"]
[PlyCount "171"]
[EventDate "2017.10.07"]
[TimeControl "5400+30"]

1. d4 g6 2. Nf3 Bg7 3. e4 d6 4. Bc4 c6 5. Nbd2 d5 6. Bb3 dxe4 7. Nxe4 Nd7 8. Bxf7+ Kxf7 9. Nfg5+ Ke8 10. Ne6 Qb6 11. Nxg7+ Kf7 12. Ne6 h6 13. Nf4 Ngf6 14. Nxf6 Nxf6 15. O-O g5 16. Ne2 Bf5 17. Ng3 Bd7 18. c3 Rae8 19. Re1 Bc8 20. b3 Qd8 21. Qe2 Qd7 22. Bb2 Qg4 23. f3 Qd7 24. Ne4 Nxe4 25. fxe4 Qg4 26. c4 Qxe2 27. Rxe2 Rhf8 28. Rf1+ Kg8 29. Ref2 Rxf2 30. Rxf2 Rf8 31. Rxf8+ Kxf8 32. Kf2 Bg4 33. Ke3 e6 34. Ba3+ Ke8 35. Bd6 Bd1 36. Kd2 Bh5 37. Bb8 a6 38. Be5 Bg6 39. Ke3 h5 40. g4 hxg4 41. Bf6 g3 42. hxg3 g4 43. Kf4 Bh7 44. Ke5 Kd7 45. a3 Bg6 46. Bg5 Bh7 47. Bd2 Bg6 48. Bb4 Bh7 49. Bc5 Bg6 50. Kf4 Ke8 51. a4 Bh7 52. a5 Bg6 53. Bd6 Bh7 54. b4 Kd7 55. c5 Ke8 56. Kxg4 Bxe4 57. Kf4 Bd3 58. Ke5 Kf7 59. Bc7 Bb5 60. Bd8 Be2 61. Kd6 Bd1 62. Kc7 Be2 63. Kxb7 Bb5 64. Bc7 Kf6 65. Be5+ Ke7 66. Kc7 Ba4 67. g4 Bb5 68. g5 Kf7 69. Kd6 Ba4 70. g6+ Kxg6 71. Kxe6 Bb5 72. Kd6 Kf7 73. d5 Ke8 74. Bf6 cxd5 75. c6 d4 76. c7 Bd7 77. Bxd4 Bc8 78. Kc6 Ke7 79. Be5 Ke6 80. Bg3 Ke7 81. Kb6 Kd7 82. Be5 Ke6 83. Bc3 Kd6 84. Bd2 Kd7 85. Bf4 Ke6 86. b5 1-0

https://www.chessvideos.tv/chess-game-replayer.php?id=114478

This Missed Week In Chess

On June 25th, the Colorado Springs Chess Club finished the June Swiss 90 event (4SS, G/90+30).

Standings. June Swiss 90

# Name Rtng Rd 1 Rd 2 Rd 3 Rd 4 Tot Prize

1 Paul D Anderson 1950 W6 W2 W3 W5 4.0 $30.00 1st
2 Mark McGough 1857 W10 L1 W5 W9 3.0 $25.00 2nd + GOW
3 Christophe Motley 1679 W4 W6 L1 U--- 2.0
4 Richard Buchanan 2000 L3 W12 U--- W10 2.0
5 Joey Arispe 1259 W11 H--- L2 L1 1.5 $13.00 U1600/unr
6 Grayson Ed Harris 1534 L1 L3 W9 U--- 1.0
7 William Leo Wolf 1300 U--- W13 U--- U--- 1.0
8 Peter Barlay 1906 W9 U--- U--- U--- 1.0
9 Dean W Brown 1460 L8 D10 L6 L2 0.5
10 Kenneth Macrae 1264 L2 D9 U--- L4 0.5
11 Michael Smith II 1713 L5 H--- U--- U--- 0.5
12 Joseph Griffin 761 U--- L4 U--- U--- 0.0
13 Joy Sato unr. U--- L7 U--- U--- 0.0

Theoretical vs Practical

Game Of The Week

By Matt Grinberg

You probably think the title is a reference to theoretical chess versus practical chess.  Actually, I mean the theoretical physicist, Albert Einstein, developer of the theories of special and general relativity, versus the more practical physicist, Robert Oppenheimer, who was the scientist who directed the development of the atomic bomb with the Manhattan Project in Los Alamos, New Mexico.

There is a chess game they played against each other in 1933 at Princeton University where Einstein had taken a position after leaving Germany.  It is known that Einstein played chess.  In fact, he was friends with Emanuel Lasker.

It is not known for sure whether or not Oppenheimer had an interest in chess.  The following is one of only two games known played by Einstein, and it is the only game known played by Oppenheimer.  There is some question as to the authenticity of this game.  Some claim that White was actually Hans Einstein, Albert's son, and the location was the University of California, Berkeley, where he and Oppenheimer were both professors in the late 1940's.  Others claim that Black was really Max Oppenheimer, the artist.

On the other hand, nobody has proved that the game was not played by Albert Einstein against Robert Oppenheimer.  So, here it is - the theoretical physicist versus the practical physicist.

Einstein, Albert vs Oppenheimer, Robert – 1-0

Princeton University, Princeton, New Jersey, 1933

Ruy Lopez

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Ba4

Einstein is definitely following theory. 4... b5  This is not bad, but it is a bit unusual.  Perhaps Oppenheimer is taking a practical approach by avoiding theory?

[The theoretical line is the Closed Ruy Lopez. 4... Nf6 5. O-O Be7 6. Re1 b5 7. Bb3 d6 8. c3 O-O 9. h3 White has a small edge]

5. Bb3 Nf6 6. O-O

[White could also try 6. Ng5 like a Two Knights Defense.  6... d5 7. exd5 Nd4! (Not 7... Nxd5? 8. Nxf7! like the Fried Liver Variation of the Two Knights, but better. 8... Kxf7 9. Qf3 Ke6 10. Nc3 Nce7 (10... Ncb4?! as in the Fried Liver Variation is useless here because White's bishop defends c2. 11. a3 Black is forced to return the knight) 11. d4 Bb7 12. Bg5 c6 13. O-O-O Black's king will die before it ever finds an escape) 8. O-O Nxb3 9. axb3 h6 10. Nf3 Bg4 11. d3 Qxd5=]

6... Nxe4!?

This definitely takes the game out of theoretical lines.  Taking the pawn with Black's king uncastled and White ready to play Re1 is risky.

[6... Be7 7. Re1 d6 8. c3 O-O 9. h3 transposes again to the Closed Ruy Lopez]

7. Re1

[7. d4 d5 8. dxe5 Be6 9. c3 transposes to the Open Defense of the Ruy Lopez]

7... d5 8. a4N?

A novelty and Einstein's only bad move of the game.

[8. Nc3 worked nicely in the following game. 8... Nxc3 9. dxc3 Be6 10. a4 Rb8? (10... b4 11. Nxe5 Nxe5 12. Rxe5 White is better) 11. axb5 axb5 12. Ra6 Qd7 13. Rxc6 Qxc6 14. Nxe5 Qc5 15. Nxf7 Kxf7 16. Qf3 Ke7 17. Bxd5 Rb6 18. Bg5 Kd7 19. Bxe6 Rxe6 20. Qf7 Re7 21. Bxe7 Bxe7 22. Qe6 1-0, Esserman, Marc (USA) 2394 - Simpson, Ronald (USA) 2304 , Internet 9/ 8/2009 US Chess League]

8... b4?

Oppenheimer is so worried about what Einstein is up to with a4, that he misses his one chance of the game.

[White is embarrassed after 8... Bc5! 9. Re2 Nxf2 10. Rxf2 Bxf2 11. Kxf2 e4 12. Qe2 O-O 13. Ne1 Material is even, but White's pieces are bottled up and his king is exposed. Black should win]

9. d3 Nc5?

Oppenheimer begins his slide into oblivion.

[The knight is needed for defense. 9... Nf6 10. Bf4 Be7 11. Nxe5 Nxe5 12. Bxe5 O-O 13. Nd2 Be6=]

10. Nxe5 Ne7

[Or 10... Nxe5 11. Rxe5 Be6 12. Bxd5 when White is a pawn up]

11. Qf3 f6??

It is tempting to stop mate and at the same time counter attack against White's knight, but this is very bad because it exposes Black's king on the h5-e8 diagonal.

[11... Be6 12. Nd2 White is better, but Black still has good chances]

White to move

12. Qh5! g6

Evidently Oppenheimer thought this would refute Einstein's attack because now he is threatening two of Einstein's pieces.  But he overlooked that the knight on e7 and the h-pawn are both pinned.

13. Nxg6! hxg6 14. Qxh8 Nxb3 15. cxb3 Qd6??

A second horrific blunder, effectively ending the game.

[After 15... Kf7 16. Qh7 Bg7 17. Bh6 Nf5 Black is down an exchange for nothing, but still has some chances]

16. Bh6 Kd7

There is no way to save the bishop.

17. Bxf8 Bb7 18. Qg7 Re8 19. Nd2 c5 20. Rad1 a5

21. Nc4!

A nice way to wind up the game.  Black has no way to hold e7 and save his queen.  His position falls apart. 21... dxc4 22. dxc4 Qxd1 23. Rxd1 Kc8 24. Bxe7 Black resigns. [1:0]

Theoretical vs Practical

[Event "Princeton University"]
[Site "https://cschessnews.blogspot.com/"]
[Date "1933.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Einstein, Albert"]
[Black "Oppenheimer, Robert"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "C78"]
[PlyCount "47"]
[EventDate "1933.??.??"]
[TimeControl "0"]

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Ba4 b5 5. Bb3 Nf6 6. O-O Nxe4 7. Re1 d5 8. a4 b4 9. d3 Nc5 10. Nxe5 Ne7 11. Qf3 f6 12. Qh5+ g6 13. Nxg6 hxg6 14. Qxh8 Nxb3 15. cxb3 Qd6 16. Bh6 Kd7 17. Bxf8 Bb7 18. Qg7 Re8 19. Nd2 c5 20. Rad1 a5 21. Nc4 dxc4 22. dxc4 Qxd1 23. Rxd1+ Kc8 24. Bxe7 1-0

https://www.chessvideos.tv/chess-game-replayer.php?id=112872

This Week In Chess

On July 10th, the Colorado Springs Chess Club finished the July Quick Six event (6SS, G/24+5).

Standings. July Quick Six

# Name Rtng Rd 1 Rd 2 Rd 3 Rd 4 Rd 5 Rd 6 Tot Prize

1 Aleksand Bozhenov 1789 W10 L4 W7 W2 W8 W9 5.0 $43.00 1st
2 Earle P Wikle 1933 W16 W13 W6 L1 W10 L3 4.0 $14.00 2nd
3 Paul D Anderson 1893 H--- W12 H--- U--- W7 W2 4.0 $14.00 2nd
4 Josh S Bloomer 2209 W7 W1 W11 U--- U--- U--- 3.0
5 Sara Herman 1848 W12 W17 W16 U--- U--- U--- 3.0
6 Jeffrey Fox 1813 W8 L11 L2 L7 W12 W10 3.0
7 Brian Jo Rountree 1703 L4 W8 L1 W6 L3 W14 3.0 $16.00 U1750
8 Gerardo Cruz 1113 L6 L7 W18 W12 L1 W15 3.0 $16.00 U1750
9 Mark McGough 1713 H--- U--- U--- W15 W14 L1 2.5
10 Tristan Cruz 708 L1 D15 W17 X13 L2 L6 2.5
11 Daniel Herman 1969 W15 W6 L4 U--- U--- U--- 2.0
12 Derek Eskeldson 1221 L5 L3 W15 L8 L6 W17 2.0
13 Laurence Rob Wutt 1769 W18 L2 H--- F10 U--- U--- 1.5
14 Michael Smith II 1567 H--- U--- U--- W17 L9 L7 1.5
15 Dean W Brown 1400 L11 D10 L12 L9 W17 L8 1.5
16 Joey Arispe 1279 L2 W18 L5 U--- U--- U--- 1.0
17 Lawrence R Osborn 961 H--- L5 L10 L14 L15 L12 0.5
18 Shaun Pat Creamer 559 L13 L16 L8 U--- U--- U--- 0.0

Chess Nuts Boasting In An Open Foyer

Game Of The Week

By Matt Grinberg

Have you ever heard this old chess joke?

It was sent in by Dennis Cravens in response to the Christmas Tree Chess Problems.  It was also sent to me by Jim Bailey's wife Katy a while back.  This was Katy's version:

A group of chess enthusiasts checked into a hotel and were standing in the lobby discussing their recent tournament victories.

After about an hour, the manager came out of the office and asked them to disperse.  "But why?" they asked, as they moved off.

"Because," he said, "I can't stand chess-nuts boasting in an open foyer."

A friend of mine, Ray Jones, claimed he was the originator of this joke.  In fact, he said it was based on an experience of mine!

In August 1973, when Ray and I were both living in Arlington, Virginia, Ray, his wife Gloria, and I decided to go to the U.S. Open Chess Championship at the La Salle Hotel in Chicago.  The plan was that we would drive out together in their car, and after the tournament, we would drive back together.

Ray had a tournament as bad as mine was good.  He decided that, before going back to Arlington, he wanted to visit his parents in southern Missouri.  Well, I had to get back to work.  So, Ray and Gloria headed off to Missouri while I was left at the hotel.

It so happened that the hotel was attached to a Greyhound bus terminal.  I bought a ticket for Washington, DC and sat down in the lobby of the hotel to wait for the bus.  I broke out my chess set and started analyzing some games I was playing by correspondence in the 1972 Golden Knights.  GM Yasser Seirawan (U.S. Chess Champion in 1981, 1986, and 1989) saw me analyzing and asked if I would mind if he joined me.  At the time, Seirawan was a 13 year old 1600 player.

This tournament is where he first gained national attention.  He scored an astounding 8.5 - 3.5 against very strong competition, sending his rating over 2000.  I certainly knew who he was based on his performance.  I was flattered that he would want to analyze my game with me.  We were studying the game and Seirawan had interesting ideas of which I had not thought.

Deeply engaged in our study, I suddenly heard someone say, "Excuse me gentlemen."

I looked up and saw someone from the hotel staff; "Yes," I said.

"You are not allowed to play chess in the lobby."

As I was putting my pieces away, I couldn't help but think, "Let's see.  They just had the U.S. Open Chess Championship here.  There were a record 778 chess players in the two week tournament.  The tournament rented the huge ballroom on the 18th floor, plus most of their meeting rooms.  Most of chess players probably stayed in the hotel for the entire two weeks.  They just made a ton of money off of chess.  And yet, they are telling us we cannot play chess in their lobby!?"

When I saw Ray back in Arlington, I told him what happened.  Later that year, he told me the joke and told me it was based on my experience and the lyrics "chestnuts roasting in an open fire" from "The Christmas Song."  The best known recordings of "The Christmas Song" were done by Nat King Cole in 1946 and 1953.

Was Ray telling me the truth, or had he already heard the joke somewhere?

Well, sorry to say Ray, but I did a little research.  It would seem that the joke dates back about a year and a half before Ray Jones told it to me.  But, perhaps, he thought of it independently.

Black to move

Chess Nuts Boasting In An Open Foyer

[Event "Golden Knights Preliminaries"]
[Site "https://cschessnews.blogspot.com/"]
[Date "1972.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Grinberg, Matthew"]
[Black "Lee, Carlton"]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "C55"]
[PlyCount "46"]
[EventDate "1972.??.??"]
[TimeControl "0"]

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Nf6 4. d4 exd4 5. O-O Bc5 6. e5 d5 7. exf6 dxc4 8. Re1+ Be6 9. Ng5 Qd5 10. Nc3 Qf5 11. Nce4 O-O-O 12. Nxe6 fxe6 13. g4 Qe5 14. Bg5 Rd7 15. fxg7 Rg8 16. Bf6 Qd5 17. Nxc5 Qxc5 18. Rxe6 Nd8 19. Re2 Qd6 20. g5 Ne6 21. Qe1 Nxg7 22. Rd1 Qc6 23. Bxd4 Ne6 0-1

https://www.chessvideos.tv/chess-game-replayer.php?id=110252

This Week In Chess

On April 25th, the Colorado Springs Chess Club finished its April Quick (6SS, G/24+5).

Standings. AQ

# Name Rtng Rd 1 Rd 2 Rd 3 Rd 4 Rd 5 Rd 6 Tot Prize

1 Aleksand Bozhenov 1771 W8 D4 W2 W3 W5 W7 5.5 $24.00 1st
2 Paul D Anderson 1986 L6 W11 L1 W4 W3 W5 4.0 $8.00 2nd
3 Mark McGough 1683 W10 W9 W6 L1 L2 W11 4.0 $8.00 2nd
4 Brian Jo Rountree 1617 W11 D1 L9 L2 W6 W8 3.5
5 Alemayeh Mekonnen 1307 L9 W10 W8 W6 L1 L2 3.0 $11.00 U1500
6 Michael Smith II 1569 W2 W8 L3 L5 L4 W10 3.0
7 Michael W Sandau 1023 H--- U--- U--- W10 W11 L1 2.5
8 Dean W Brown 1400 L1 L6 L5 W11 W10 L4 2.0
9 Peter Barlay 1703 W5 L3 W4 U--- U--- U--- 2.0
10 Clinton D Eads 1168 L3 L5 W11 L7 L8 L6 1.0
11 Douglas N Clark 496 L4 L2 L10 L8 L7 L3 0.0