View From

Down Under
Chris Depasquale
Trotter's Bottom
The World Championship
This being Christmas time I thought I would give you something special an
insight into the role Australia has had in determining the outcome of matches
for the World Chess Championship. It is a little known fact that, although
Australian chess players have never played a match for the world title,
Australian chess players have had a major influence on the outcome of every
single world title match.
It all started with the Steinitz-Zukertort match in 1886. To this day people have
wondered how Steinitz turned the match around from a three-game deficit to a
convincing five-point margin in his favour. The secret can be found in a long
letter to Steinitz from Melburnian J N Hanks, which reached Steinitz between
games five and six of the match. (One of these days when I am old enough or
poor enough I will make this letter available to the chess world, no doubt
through the auspices of The Chess Caf.)
In 1894 it was an Australian zoologist who pointed out to Lasker that Steinitz
had his eyes set very close together, and that Lasker could profit by attacking
on the flanks, a strategy that he was successful with throughout the match. In
other games, too, Lasker was able to "hide" pieces on the rooks files until a
critical moment; see for instance his use of the bishop on a3 in the 9
th
game of
the match.
Right throughout the history of world championship matches there has been a
key Australian behind the scenes having a major influence on the outcome.
There was the case of Abigail, the so-called "actress", at Buenos Aires in 1927.
There was also the Australian chemist who provided Euwe with his stimulants
during the 1935 match with Alekhine and the Ananda Marga sect Aussies who
would have got Korchnoi over the line in 1978 but for being banned from the
venue at a critical moment.
I could go through the entire list for you, right up to the 1995 Kasparov-Anand
match, but I wont bore you with the details. Either you already know them, or
you could find out with a modicum of research. Suffice to say that the
Australian influence has always been there.
Kasparov-Kramnik
No doubt we will get around to calling it the Kramnik-Kasparov match once we
get used to the fact that the King is dead, just as the Capablanca-Alekhine
match is now referred to as Alekhine-Capablanca, and so on. A lot has been
written about this match (no doubt the books have already started to appear),
most of it utter claptrap.
The critical position in the entire match was this one, in which it is White to
View From Down Under
file:///C|/Cafe/Chris/chris.htm (1 of 6) [12/12/2000 7:10:21 PM]
play (See Diagram):
"Just a minute," you are probably thinking,
"I dont recall this position occurring in the
match." Well, in the technical sense you
would be correct, but in a wider sense you
would be wrong. Virtually the entire match
revolved about Kramnik trying to steer the
game towards queenless middlegame
positions like the one diagrammed above, as
it has been demonstrated that Kasparov is a
mere mortal, who shows faulty judgment in
such positions.
"Yes, but I just checked my database," you
will probably tell me next, "and not only has Kasparov never had that position,
but I cannot find it having occurred at all." Again you are technically correct,
but wrong in the wider sense. Kasparov once annotated the ninth game of the
first Paris 1858 Morphy Anderssen match, and that game began like this:
Morphy,P - Anderssen,A [B44] Paris m1 Paris (9), 1858 [Kasparov]
1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 e6 5.Nb5 d6 6.Bf4 e5 7.Be3 f5 8.N1c3
Here Black played 8...f4. Kasparov observes, "8...a6 is now met by 9.Nd5!
axb5 10.Bb6 Qh4 11.Nc7+ Kd7 12.Nxa8 Qxe4+ 13.Qe2 winning." (See
Diagram):
That Kasparov is a mere mortal with faulty
judgment in such positions is shown by his
choice of square for the Black King on
move 11 in the line he gives. To place the
King on d7 where it blocks the Bc8 and
allows the d-pawn to be pinned by a Rd1
is downright amateurish. Particularly so as
the King has a perfectly good square on f7
where it does not impede the development
of any of the Black pieces.
Looking at the position with the King on
f7 and with the further moves (all forced)
of 13Qxe2+ 14.Bxe2 b4 we get the first diagrammed position, which is
repeated here for convenience. (See Diagram):
View From Down Under
file:///C|/Cafe/Chris/chris.htm (2 of 6) [12/12/2000 7:10:21 PM]
How to assess this position? Kasparov
says White is completely winning. When I
looked at it in a bit of depth I felt that if
White has any advantage at all it is less
than the advantage he started with before
the first move.
It is all very well to say, "White is the
exchange for a pawn up and doesnt have
any weaknesses, whereas Black has
isolated doubled pawns, lags in
development and has forfeited the right to
castle. Therefore White is better/winning."
That is a shallow assessment, which doesnt take into account the very
practical issue of "How should White proceed?"
A key to the position is that there is no obvious plan for White while Black
can improve the positions of all his pieces, advance his d-pawn (if allowed)
and his central pawn mass in general, and threaten to exploit the misplaced
White pieces on a8 and b6.
Hungary for Success
But dont just take my word for it. Before deciding to play the position I sent
it to a leading Grandmaster and opening theory expert, Andras Adorjan. He
sent me back a ream of complicated variations and explanations which, I had
to admit, I couldnt make sense of. When I asked him for a simplified version
of his verdict he replied, simply, "Black is OK".
Now compare what was actually played in the match. Games 1 and 3 started
like this:
Kasparov,G (2830) - Kramnik,V (2751) [C67] BGN World Chess
Championship (1), 08.10.2000
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 Nf6 4.0-0 Nxe4 5.d4 Nd6 6.Bxc6 dxc6 7.dxe5 Nf5
8.Qxd8+ Kxd8 9.Nc3 Bd7 (See Diagram)
Once again it is possible to argue that
White, with his lead in development and
no weaknesses, has a clear advantage over
Black, who has a damaged pawn structure,
poor development and has forfeited the
right to castle. But praxis proved otherwise
and Kramnik held the position on more
than one occasion without difficulty. For
the record game 1 concluded thus:
10.b3 h6 11.Bb2 Kc8 12.h3 b6 13.Rad1
Ne7 14.Ne2 Ng6 15.Ne1 h5 16.Nd3 c5
17.c4 a5 18.a4 h4 19.Nc3 Be6 20.Nd5
Kb7 21.Ne3 Rh5 22.Bc3 Re8 23.Rd2 Kc8 24.f4 Ne7 25.Nf2 Nf5 -
That Kasparov was not happy playing queenless middlegames was
View From Down Under
file:///C|/Cafe/Chris/chris.htm (3 of 6) [12/12/2000 7:10:21 PM]
demonstrated in game 2, which went this way:
Kramnik,V (2751) - Kasparov,G (2830) [D85] BGN World Chess
Championship (2), 10.10.2000
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 d5 4.cxd5 Nxd5 5.e4 Nxc3 6.bxc3 Bg7 7.Nf3 c5
8.Be3 Qa5 9.Qd2 Bg4 10.Rb1 a6 11.Rxb7 Bxf3 12.gxf3 Nc6 13.Bc4 0-0
14.0-0 cxd4 15.cxd4 Bxd4 16.Bd5 (See Diagram)
Here of course Black must play 16Qxd2
17.Bxd2 Rfc8 with an equal position.
Instead the game went:
16Bc3 17.Qc1 Nd4 18.Bxd4 Bxd4
19.Rxe7 Ra7 20.Rxa7 Bxa7 21.f4 Qd8
22.Qc3 Bb8 23.Qf3 Qh4 24.e5 g5 25.Re1
Qxf4 26.Qxf4 gxf4 27.e6 fxe6 28.Rxe6
Kg7 29.Rxa6 Rf5 30.Be4 Re5 31.f3 Re7
32.a4 Ra7 33.Rb6 Be5 34.Rb4 Rd7
35.Kg2 Rd2+ 36.Kh3 h5 37.Rb5 Kf6
38.a5 Ra2 39.Rb6+ Ke7 40.Bd5 1-0
After game 3, Kasparovs second
unsuccessful attempt to prove an advantage for White in the Lopez position
diagrammed above, the match was effectively over. Unable to get an
advantage with White with 1.e4 or to avoid a queenless middlegame in the
Grnfeld, Kasparov had no shots left to fire. But the story doesnt end there.
Imagine
After receiving Adorjans blessing, I did actually put the position to the test in
a game in the Australian Masters championship in 1998, when black against
Mark Chapman. I was particularly keen to win this game, as a short time
before it was played Chapman had killed my favourite beetle. This is how it
went.
Chapman,M - Depasquale,C [B32] 1998 Australian Masters (6),
25.05.1998
1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 e5 5.Nb5 d6 6.Be3 f5 7.N1c3 a6 8.Nd5
axb5 9.Bb6 Qh4 10.Nc7+ Kf7 11.Nxa8 Qxe4+ 12.Qe2 Qxe2+ 13.Bxe2 b4
(See Diagram)
View From Down Under
file:///C|/Cafe/Chris/chris.htm (4 of 6) [12/12/2000 7:10:21 PM]
14.Bc4+ This move had its critics, but it is
the only way to prevent Black from
playing ...d5. The alternative way for the
game to develop was 14.Nc7 Be6 15.a3
(15.Nxe6 Kxe6 16.c4 bxc3 17.bxc3 d5
18.Rb1 Nf6 19.Bc7 Ne4 is fine for Black)
15...bxa3 16.Rxa3 d5 17.Ra8 Nf6 18.0-0
g6 19.Rfa1 Bg7 20.Rxh8 Bxh8 21.Ra8
Bg7 and it is still not clear what White's
plan should be. After, say, 22.c3 Nd7
23.Be3 f4 24.Bd2 Nb6 it is apparent that
Black has made steady progress in
activating his pieces and utilising his pawn
centre, while White has achieved little of note. 14...Be6 15.Bxe6+ Kxe6
16.Nc7+ Kd7 17.a3 The obvious continuation is 17.Nd5 but after 17...Nge7
18.0-0-0 Ke6 19.c4 bxc3 20.Nxc3 (20.Nc7+ Kd7 21.bxc3 Nc8 22.Nd5 N6e7
23.Nxe7 Bxe7 24.Be3 f4 25.Bd2 Nb6 doesn't help White) 20...d5 Black has
much to look forward to. 17...Nge7 18.axb4 Nxb4 19.0-0-0 (See Diagram)
19...Nc8! 20.Na8 Kc6 21.Ba5 Na6 22.Rd3
b6 23.Rc3+ Nc5 24.Bb4 24.b4 bxa5
25.bxc5 d5 and Black is clearly on top.
24...Kb7 25.Bxc5 dxc5 26.Ra3 Be7 27.Rd1
Rd8 28.Rxd8 Bxd8 29.Kd1 Na7-+ The
knight is lost and the rest is just a matter of
technique. 30.Rd3 Bf6 31.Nxb6 Kxb6
32.Rf3 g6 33.g4 e4 34.Rb3+ Kc6 35.gxf5
gxf5 36.Rh3 Kd5 37.Rxh7 Nb5 38.c3 Nd6
39.Ke2 f4 40.Rh5+ Be5 41.h4 f3+ 42.Ke1
Ke6 43.Kf1 c4 44.Rh7 Nf5 45.Ra7 e3
46.Ra6+ Kd5 47.fxe3 Bg3 48.e4+ Kxe4
49.Re6+ Kf4 50.Rf6 Bxh4 51.Rf8 Ke4
52.Re8+ Kd3 0-1
Revenge
After the match Kasparov naturally went looking for scapegoats. As the
Chapman-Depasquale game, which so clearly demonstrated Kasparovs
Achilles heel, had never been published anywhere, he naturally assumed that I
had been in cahoots with the Kramnik camp. As a result, immediately after the
match I was sacked as Oceania region editor for Kasparov Chess Online. (Of
course the official reason given was the usual "restructuring, change in
direction" line, but we all know better than that.)
No doubt Kasparov will try to use his influence to have me sacked from The
Chess Caf as well. Rather than all this retribution, Kasparov would do much
better to invite me to be part of his team for the rematch. With his knowledge of
the history of world championship matches he must be fully aware that
Australians always play a pivotal role. And besides, I know how to beat
Kramnik, too!
Copyright 2000 Chris Depasquale. All rights reserved.
View From Down Under
file:///C|/Cafe/Chris/chris.htm (5 of 6) [12/12/2000 7:10:21 PM]
Want more Chris Depasquale? Order his very funny book My 60 Memorable
Columns now.

[The Chess Cafe Home Page] [Book Reviews] [Bulletin Board] [Columnists]
[Endgame Studies] [The Ninth File] [The Skittles Room] [Archives]
[Links] [Online Bookstore] [About The Chess Cafe] [Contact Us]
Copyright 2000 CyberCafes, LLC. All Rights Reserved.
"The Chess Cafe" is a registered trademark of Russell Enterprises, Inc.

View From Down Under
file:///C|/Cafe/Chris/chris.htm (6 of 6) [12/12/2000 7:10:21 PM]