Chess Games 1.e4 Series - 5 Book - Tim Sawyer PDF

Chess Games 1.
e4 Series
5 books in 1
By Tim Sawyer
Chess Games 1.e4 Series: 5 books in 1
Copyright © 2015, 2016, 2017 by Sawyer Publications.
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form
without permission in writing from the author. Reviewers may quote brief
passages in reviews.
Disclaimer and FTC Notice
No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or
by any means, mechanical or electronic, including photocopying or
recording, or by any information storage and retrieval system, or transmitted
by email without permission in writing from the publisher.
While all attempts have been made to verify the information provided in this
publication, neither the author nor the publisher assumes any responsibility
for errors, omissions, or contrary interpretations of the subject matter herein.
This book is for entertainment purposes only. The views expressed are those
of the author alone, and should not be taken as expert instruction or
commands. The reader is responsible for his or her own actions.
Adherence to all applicable laws and regulations, including international,

federal, state, and local governing professional licensing, business practices,
advertising, and all other aspects of doing business in the US, Canada, or any
other jurisdiction is the sole responsibility of the purchaser or reader.
Neither the author nor the publisher assumes any responsibility or liability
whatsoever on behalf of the purchaser or reader of these materials.
Any perceived slight of any individual or organization is purely

unintentional.
Table of Contents
Forward to Chess Games 1.e4 Series
Book 1: King Pawn
Introduction to King Pawn
Book 1 – Chapter 1 – Early Deviations
1.e4 e5
2.d4
2.d4 exd4 3.c3
2.Bc4
Book 1 – Chapter 2 – Vienna Game
2.Nc3
2.Nc3 Nf6 3.Bc4
2.Nc3 Nf6 3.Bc4 Bc5
2.Nc3 Nf6 3.Bc4 Nc6
2.Nc3 Nf6 3.Bc4 Nxe4
4.Qh5 Nd6 5.Bb3 Nc6
Book 1 – Chapter 3 – King’s Gambit
2.f4
2.f4 Bc5
2.f4 d5
2.f4 exf4
2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3 g5
4.h4 g4 5.Ne5
Book 1 – Chapter 4 – Various 2.Nf3 Lines
2.Nf3 f6
2.Nf3 d5
2.Nf3 d6
2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 f5
2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 exd4
Book 1 – Chapter 5 – Latvian Gambit
2.Nf3 f5
3.exf5
3.Bc4
3.Nxe5
3.Nxe5 Qf6 4.Nc4
3.Nxe5 Qf6 4.d4
Book 1 – Chapter 6 – Petroff Defence
2.Nf3 Nf6
3.d4 exd4
3.d4 Nxe4
3.Nxe5 d6
3.Nxe5 d6 4.Nf3 Nxe4 5.d4
Book 1 – Chapter 7 – Romantic 2.Nf3 Nc6
3.c3
3.Nc3 Nf6
2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4
2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4
2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5
Book 1 – Chapter 8 – Ruy Lopez
3.Bb5
3.Bb5 f5
3.Bb5 Nf6
3.Bb5 a6
3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6
3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.0-0 Be7
Book 1 – Index of Names to Games
Book 2: Sicilian Defence
Introduction to Sicilian Defence
Book 2 – Chapter 1 – Various Lines
1.e4 c5
2.d4 d5
2.d4 cxd4
2.c3
2.Nc3
Book 2 – Chapter 2 – 2.Nf3 without 2…d6
2.Nf3 Various
2.Nf3 Nc6
2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4
4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 e5
4.Nxd4 g6
2.Nf3 e6 3.d4 cxd4
Book 2 – Chapter 3 – 2.Nf3 d6
3.d4 cxd4
4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 g6
4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 Nc6
Book 2 – Chapter 4 – Najdorf
5.Nc3 a6
5.Nc3 a6 6.f4
5.Nc3 a6 6.Be3
5.Nc3 a6 6.Bg5
Book 3: French Defence
Introduction to French Defence
1.e4 e6
2.d4 d5 3.Bd3
2.d4 d5 3.exd5
Book 3 – Chapter 2 – Alapin-Diemer
3.Be3 with rare lines
3.Be3 Nf6 4.e5
3.Be3 dxe4
3.Be3 dxe4 4.Nd2 Nf6 5.f3 exf3
Book 3 – Chapter 3 – Advance Variation
3.e5
3.e5 c5 4.c3 Nc6 5.Nf3 Qb6
Book 3 – Chapter 4 – Tarrasch Variation
3.Nd2
3.Nd2 Nf6
3.Nd2 c5
Book 3 – Chapter 5 – Classical Variation
3.Nc3
3.Nc3 Nf6
3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5
Book 3 – Chapter 6 – Winawer Variation
3.Nc3 Bb4
3.Nc3 Bb4 4.a3
3.Nc3 Bb4 4.e5
Book 4: Caro-Kann
Introduction to Caro-Kann
Book 4 – Chapter 1 – Rare Lines
1.e4 c6
2.d4 d5 3.f3
3.f3 dxe4
3.e5
3.e5 Bf5 4.Bd3 Bxd3
3.e5 Bf5 4.Nc3 e6
Book 4 – Chapter 3 – Exchange & Panov
3.exd5 cxd5
3.exd5 cxd5 4.Bd3 Nc6 5.c3
3.exd5 cxd5 4.c4
3.exd5 cxd5 4.c4 Nf6 5.Nc3 g6
Book 4 – Chapter 4 – Main Line
3.Nc3
3.Nc3 dxe4
3.Nc3 dxe4 4.f3 Nf6
3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Nf6
3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Nd7
Book 4 – Chapter 5 – Classical 4.Nxe4 Bf5
Various Alternatives
5.Ng3 Bg6 6.h4
Book 5: Alekhine & Pirc
Introduction to Alekhine & Pirc
Book 5 – Chapter 1 – Semi Opens
1.e4
1.e4 Nc6
1.e4 Nc6 2.d4
1.e4 d5 2.exd5
Book 5 – Chapter 2 – Alekhine Defence
1.e4 Nf6
2.Nc3 d5 3.exd5
2.Nc3 d5 3.e5
2.e5 Nd5
2.e5 Nd5 3.Nc3
3.c4 Nb6 4.c5
3.d4 d6 4.c4 Nb6
4.c4 Nb6 5.f4
4.Nf3
4.Nf3 Bg4
Book 5 – Chapter 3 – Modern Defence
1.e4 g6
Book 5 – Chapter 4 – Pirc Defence
1.e4 d6 2.d4 Nf6
3.Nc3 g6 4.Nf3
3.Nc3 g6 4.f4
3.Nc3 g6 4.f3
4.f3 Bg7 5.Be3 0-0
Before You Go
Forward to Chess Games 1.e4 Series
This “Chess Games 1.e4 Series: 5 books in 1” is a box set bundle of five
books in one volume. Those five books are:
Book 1: “King Pawn: 1.e4 e5 Open Games in Chess Openings” is a

collection of 202 games with anecdotes and commentary.
Book 2: “Sicilian Defence: 1.e4 c5 in Chess Openings” is a collection of 112

games with anecdotes and commentary.
Book 3: “French Defence: 1.e4 e6 in Chess Openings” is a collection of 122

games with anecdotes and commentary.
Book 4: “Caro-Kann Defence: 1.e4 c6 in Chess Openings” is a collection of

120 games with anecdotes and commentary.
Book 5: “Alekhine & Pirc: 1.e4 in Semi-Open Chess Openings” is a

collection of 113 games with anecdotes and commentary.
These books discuss chess situations, players, game issues, styles, stories,
opinions, passions, and a little bit of theory.
Tim Sawyer presents his light hearted views on 1.e4 openings by looking at
games played against a variety of chess opponents. What’s solid? What’s
wild? What’s bad? What’s fun? Tim shares his opinions on players, on his
chess memories, and on his life in general. Skill levels range from master to
disaster.
Most games were played by the author. Some games were sent to the author
by other players. Others simply caught the author’s attention. They cover a
wide variety of chess opening variations. The games deal with real life chess
issues and characters. There is an Index of Names to Games at the back of
each book.
This is a game collection rather than an instruction book.

See my companion: Chess Games 1.d4 Series: 5 books in 1
See my Playbooks for basic opening repertoire guidance.
See my Puzzles books for chess opening checkmates.
See my Chess Training Repertoire for theoretical analysis.
Book 1: King Pawn
1.e4 e5 Open Games in Chess Openings
By Tim Sawyer
Introduction to King Pawn
Play Open Games with 1.e4 e5 lead to sharp tactics and fun fast wins. I share
my adventures in these openings. I tell stories from 45 years of play vs
masters, experts and club players. I provide you with opening insights from
main lines to gambits.
This upgraded version matches the paperback version. There are 202 games,
updated commentary and an index of player names to the game numbers.
This book covers Vienna Game, King’s Gambit, Latvian Gambit, Italian
Game, Ruy Lopez and others. Double King Pawn lines are played by
grandmasters from both sides of the board.
You can find checkmate themes in all these openings. To help you, related
games are grouped together. You will find games full of interesting ideas
from years of the author’s own writing. They provide creative ideas and ways
to improve.
Consider new strategy and tactics and your interest will soar! When the
author tried new variations 30 years ago, it turned his own career around and
led to higher ratings. You are going to win games that you want to show your
friends. Stay excited. Have fun playing chess!
1.e4 e5
The Open Game 1.e4 e5 is one of the most popular ways to begin a chess
game at all levels. This chapter considers very second moves for White.
1 - Poole Counting Error
Counting errors in chess are extremely common. Dan Heisman wrote about
this for chesscafe.com in his Novice Nook called “A Counting Primer”.
There Dan Heisman wrote:
“Counting is the process of determining whether any sequences of captures

on a square might lead to loss of material. If not, the piece on the square is
considered safe.”
Gary Poole plays with originality and aggression. He opens the center and
develops quickly. Generally this is a good thing. Alas, his position becomes
too loose with undefended material.
White loses one knight to a counting error and another knight to a double
attack. His king never wanders far from home and is mated on his original
square. This Golden Knights Postal game finished while I still had my peak
master rating of 2211.
Poole (1658) - Sawyer (2211), corr USCF 89N260, 25.06.1990 begins 1.e4
e5 2.Bb5 f5 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.d3 c6 5.Bc4 Bb4 6.h4 d5 7.exd5 cxd5 8.a3? [This
8.a3? is a counting error. Black stands better anyway, but losing two pieces
for one makes White's game virtually hopeless. 8.Bb3 d4 9.a3 Ba5 10.Ba4+
Bd7 11.Bxd7+ Nbxd7 12.b4 dxc3 13.bxa5 Qxa5-/+ and White would only be
down a pawn.] 8...Bxc3+ 9.bxc3 dxc4 10.Bg5 0-0 11.h5 Nc6 12.h6 g6
13.Nf3 [If 13.Ne2 Qd6-+] 13...Qa5 [Or 13...e4 14.dxe4 Qxd1+ 15.Rxd1
Nxe4-+ and Black is up a knight.] 14.Nxe5? [After 14.0-0 Qxc3 15.Qb1 Nd4
16.Nxd4 Qxd4 17.Bxf6 Rxf6-+ White is only down a bishop and a pawn.]
14...Qxc3+ 15.Bd2 Qxe5+ 16.Be3 f4 17.Qf3 Qxa1+ 18.Qd1 Qxd1+
19.Kxd1 fxe3 20.fxe3 c3 21.Rh4 Ng4 22.Rxg4 Bxg4+ 23.Ke1 Nd4 24.exd4
Rae8# 0-1
2 - Four Move Checkmate
Thousands of people have done it. You can win a chess game quickly. People
might think you are a great player when in reality you only know four moves.
It is ideal for those who play only one game a year. Here is what you need to
know. You need to play the White pieces and move first to checkmate in four
moves.
When playing White, all of your moves will be on light colored squares.
Your best first move is to push the pawn in front of your king two squares:
1.e4. It is hoped that your opponent will follow suit and play the same with
1...e5. Now you have a choice.
For your second move, there are three options: one tricky, one weak and one
good. The tricky move 2.Qh5 is best for pulling off the four move checkmate.
This queen advance attacks Black's e-pawn. A good reply for Black is 2...Nc6
protecting e5. (Bad would be 2...g6, since you could take the e-pawn
3.Qxe5+ with check and take his rook the next move after 3...Qe7 4.Qxh8.
Any person who plays once a year might fall for this.
For your third move you will bring out a bishop with 3.Bc4. The target of
your sneaky play is the Black pawn on the light colored f7 square. It sits in
front of the bishop that is right next to the Black king. It is logical that Black
would want to develop another knight. Thus if Black’s plays 3...Nf6 attacking
your queen, you can triumphantly win the game with 4.Qxf7# checkmate!
This is called the Scholar's Mate which requires just one mistake by your
opponent on move three. A different checkmate is called the Fool's Mate.
That mate requires two foolish moves by your opponent very early in the
game. You can try for a Scholar's Mate as above, but a Fool's Mate has to be
given to you.
Here are other ways to try for a Scholar's Mate beyond 2.Qh5. There is the
weak 2.Qf3 when play could continue 2...Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Qxf7# mate. Or
White might try the good move 2.Bc4 when there might follow 2...Bc5 3.Qh5
d6 4.Qxf7# mate.
This is your dream four move win with Scholar’s Mate.
White – Black, begins 1.e4 e5 2.Qh5 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Qxf7# mate. 1-0
3 - David Heim Plays 2.f3
What can we say about the Open Game variation beginning 1.e4 e5 2.f3?
David Heim is one of many club players who have played that as White vs
me.
When I saw this move in my postal chess games, I wondered if it was a

transcription error. Maybe White simply forgot to include the “N” when
writing 2.Nf3.
The move 2.f3 shows that White can get away with almost any early move.
When Black plays 1.e4 e5 with the corresponding early move 2...f6, it is very
risky.
Of course there is always the fantasy idea of transposing to a Blackmar

Gambit with 2...d5 3.d4 dxe4, but that is highly unlikely from this move
order. Even more unlikely with be a BDG Lemberger 4.f3 after 2...d5 3.Nc3
dxe4 4.d4.
Back to reality. Here is a game from the USCF 1989 Golden Knights Postal
Tournament section 89N214.
Heim (1485) - Sawyer (2187), corr USCF 89N214 29.11.1989 begins 1.e4
e5 2.f3 Bc5 [2...Nc6 is a good alternative.] 3.Ne2 Nc6 4.f4?! [Consistent but
risky. 4.c3 Bb6=/+] 4...d6 5.fxe5 dxe5 6.d3 Bg4!? [6...Nf6-+] 7.Nbc3?
[7.h3] 7...Qf6 [7...Qh4+! 8.g3 Qf6-+] 8.d4 Bxd4 9.Kd2 0-0-0 10.Nd5 Qf2
11.Qe1 Nf6 12.Qxf2 Nxe4+ 13.Ke1 [This allows a mate, but after 13.Kd1
Nxf2+ 14.Ke1 Nxh1-+ White is hopelessly lost.] 13...Bxf2+ 14.Kd1 Rxd5+
15.Bd2 Rxd2+ 16.Kc1 Nb4 17.Kb1 Rd1+ 18.Nc1 Nd2# 0-1
4 - Beware of Check after 2.f3
As I recall, Michael De La'O lived in Texas and worked in the restaurant
business. Those who worked on weekends could easily play correspondence
chess even when they were not available for over-the-board events. Of course
nowadays we can all play online.
The USCF lists Michael DeLa'O of Texas with a correspondence rating of

1996. He has not been active in recent years. Our game below was probably
one of his earlier efforts. This game would have begun in 1989 and finished
in the summer of 1990.
This Open Game (1.e4 e5) example was played in the 1989 USCF Golden
Knights Postal Chess Tournament. For those who wonder why my rating
fluctuated wildly from game to game, it helps to understand that in USCF
postal chess, the individual games were rated as they finished.
I played in ten 1989 sections at the same time, with 40-50 games going
simultaneously. Games from the same section would finish several months
apart. This means that during each postal game, my rating kept changing as I
finished games in other sections.
De La'O (1758) - Sawyer (2107), corr USCF 89N275 10.08.1990 begins

1.e4 e5 2.f3 Bc5 3.Bc4 Bxg1!? [3...Nf6=/+ favors Black.] 4.Rxg1 Qh4+
5.g3? [5.Kf1! Qxh2 6.Nc3 Qh4?! 7.d4+/=] 5...Qxh2 6.Rf1 [6.Kf1? d5
7.Bxd5 Bh3+ and Black wins a lot of material.] 6...Qxg3+ 7.Rf2 d6 8.Qe2
Nc6 9.c3 Bh3 10.Na3? [This leaves White down the Exchange and two
pawns. Better is to create an escape hatch for his king with 10.d3 Nge7-+]
10...Qg1+ 11.Rf1 Bxf1 12.Qxf1 Qxf1+ 13.Bxf1 f5 14.Nb5 Kd8 15.Bh3 a6
16.Na3 f4 17.d4 Nf6 18.dxe5 dxe5 19.Bd2 Ke7 20.0-0-0 g5 21.Rg1 Rag8
22.Bf5 h5 23.Nc2 g4 24.fxg4 Nxg4 25.c4 f3 26.Rf1 Nh2 0-1
2.d4
The Center Game sees White immediately challenge the center, however this
opening gives Black good play as well.
5 - Meserve Avoids BDG
When White wants to walk directly towards the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit,
Black may sidetrack the game into another opening of the BDG Avoided,
especially if they deviate on moves 2 or 3.
After the straightforward 1.d4 d5 2.e4, I faced three popular strong moves
and four less popular moves. Some I saw hundreds of times and others
dozens of times. The contest below transposed to the Center Game as if 1.e4
e5 2.d4 d5.
When you play in large Open tournaments, there are players of all levels.
This postal opponent in the USCF Golden Knights section 88N300 was
William Meserve. He would be rated in the lower half of players in this
tournament.
When our game finished, Meserve was rated 1425. The USCF believed his
rating was too low for me to get any rating points at all for beating him. It
seemed like a rather funky formula to me. Anyway, it was one of those
games that a good player just has to win and move on to the next level.
Sawyer - Meserve, corr USCF 88N300, 26.06.1989 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e4 e5?
[White is ready for a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit. The main line goes: 2...dxe4
3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3 exf3 5.Nxf3] 3.dxe5! [3.Nf3 transposes to a line in the
Elephant Gambit after 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 d5 3.d4!?] 3...Be6?! [Black admits that
he is going to be a pawn down, so he at least develops a piece.] 4.exd5 Qxd5
[Black could keep the queens on the board when down material. 4...Bxd5
5.Nc3+/-] 5.Qxd5 Bxd5 6.Nc3 Bb4 7.Bd2 Bxc3 8.Bxc3 Nc6 9.0-0-0 0-0-0
10.Nh3 Nge7 11.Nf4 Bxa2? [Whoops. Black goes pawn snatching and gets
his bishop trapped. 11...g5!? 12.Nxd5 Nxd5 13.Bd2+/-] 12.Rxd8+ [Since I
will be up material, I might as well head for an endgame.] 12...Rxd8 13.b3
g5 14.Nd3 Nd5 15.Bd2 Re8 16.Kb2 Nxe5 17.Kxa2 Nc6 18.Bxg5 Ncb4+
19.Nxb4 Nxb4+ 20.Kb2 [There is no good defense to make up for the extra
bishop. Black throws in the towel.] 1-0
6 - Slow Chess Comeback
A friend asked, "How does one return to chess when he does not feel like
playing?" We all have times of discouragement.
Twice I pretty much quit chess 1975-76 (for school) and 1986-87 (after the
death of my son). I played only two games in 1987. When I came back to
playing, I did not play well at first. But a few of those games were the most
enjoyable I ever played in my life!
When I feel paralyzed, I reach out to God and good friends who helped me
make better choices. I learned not to worry about what I cannot control. I
came back slowly.
Gone was my youth with its energy and nervousness. With age, I had more
wisdom and boldness.
The Bible tells of a man named Job in ancient times who lost almost
everything. Job felt that he was without hope and lacked any prospects. He
said in Job 6:11: "But I do not have the strength to endure. I do not have a
goal that encourages me to carry on" (NLT). Years later things turned out
well for Job, and eventually, my own life improved too. All the chess books
that I wrote and my highest ratings came after the hard times.
In 1987, I worked for an insurance company in a large office building. That

year I added a second job as a church pastor on nights and weekends. The
next year I left the business world to pursue ministry full-time. Chess moved
from the back seat of my life to the garage. I stopped playing almost
completely.
The games that I played vs Brad Winter were during lunch. Our game below
resembles a Center Game.
Sawyer (1981) - Winter, Horsham PA 1987 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e4 e5 3.dxe5

dxe4 4.Qxd8+ Kxd8 5.Nc3 e3 [5...Nc6 6.Bf4+/-] 6.Bxe3 Ne7 7.0-0-0+ Bd7
8.Bc4 f6 [This drops a piece and things go downhill from here, but Black was
already in trouble. 8...Nf5 9.Bf4+-] 9.e6 Kc8 10.exd7+ Nxd7 11.Be6 Kb8
12.Bxd7 a5 13.Nf3 Ra6 14.Bb5 Rd6 15.Bc5 Rxd1+ 16.Rxd1 b6 17.Rd8+
Nc8 18.Rxf8 Rxf8 19.Bxf8 1-0
7 - Delayed Danish Mate
I used to play the Englund Gambit (1.d4 e5) frequently as Black. As White
usually I accept this gambit with 2.dxe5.
The ICC opponent "BeSomeone" tried to play the Englund Gambit against
me a few times. A few weeks earlier I had opted for the Danish Gambit with
2.e4 exd5 3.c3.
This time I chose to play a delayed Danish Gambit with 2.e4 exd4 3.Nf3 c5
4.c3! The position opened up very wide very quickly when I decided to
regain my pawn with a lead in development.
Both sides swapped off c-pawns and castle to an open queenside. One missed
tactic led to a quick checkmate.
Sawyer - BeSomeone, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 24.05.2012 begins 1.d4

e5 2.e4 [Overall 2.dxe5+/= scores better in my database.] 2...exd4 3.Nf3 [The
full Danish Gambit is 3.c3 dxc3 4.Bc4 cxb2 5.Bxb2] 3...c5 [3...Nc6 4.Nxd4
Scotch Game] 4.c3! d5! 5.exd5 Qxd5 6.cxd4 cxd4 7.Qxd4 Qxd4 8.Nxd4
Nf6 9.Nb5 Na6 10.N1c3 Bb4 [10...Bc5!] 11.Bf4 Bd7 12.0-0-0 Bxc3
13.Nxc3 [13.Nd6+!+-] 13...0-0-0 14.Bc4 Be6? 15.Nb5! Bxc4 16.Nxa7#
Black checkmated 1-0
2.d4 exd4 3.c3
The Danish Gambit is a bold and exciting scheme of bringing out pieces to
attack quickly. White will start down a pawn or two, but Black can easily go
wrong and lose suddenly.
8 - Know How to Move Pieces
I once encountered Sergey from Moscow, Russia. He now lives in the United
States. At one point the subject of chess came up. Sergey asked me if I was a
good chess player. I answered, "Yes." Here is what he told me he likes to do.
Sergey said sometimes when he sees people enjoying a game of chess, they
ask the normal question, "Do you play chess?" Sergey replies, "I know how
to move the pieces." (This implies that he is barely a beginner and easy to
beat.) When they invite him to play a game, he surprises them by winning.
Sergey told me, "I have been playing since age 4."
I have played in many simultaneous exhibitions. Sometimes I was the

opponent playing against a grandmaster, master or expert, called a Candidate
Master. Other times I give the simul myself where I play against lower club
players and novices.
In 1996 I gave a simultaneous chess exhibition at Penn College in

Williamsport, Pennsylvania. I played 30 games in a couple hours. That
sounds like more than it really was. I played 6-8 boards at a time with
rotating players. When one player would finish, another took his place.
Two of my opponents were club players. Most opponents just knew how to
move the pieces. They played chess for fun now and then.
Sawyer - NN, simul Williamsport PA 1996 begins 1.d4 e5 2.e4 [Transposing

to the 1.e4 e5 Open Game.] 2...exd4 3.c3 [Danish Gambit] 3...dxc3 4.Nxc3
Bc5 5.Bc4 Qf6 6.Nf3 h5? [This move ignores piece development and the
center.] 7.Nd5! Qd6 8.Bf4 Qe6? 9.Nxc7+ [A Family Fork on the King,
Queen and Rook.] 9...Ke7 10.Nxe6 1-0
9 - Danish Gambit Breakfast
On Thanksgiving Day 2012 in the USA, I’m thinking about having a Danish
for breakfast! I reached a Danish Gambit after I tried to play a Blackmar-
Diemer Gambit.
In this game I only let my opponent eat half the Danish (3...dxc3) before I
took a bite myself (4.Nxc3). I got to play 10.Bg5, which is actually a tactical
move that is in my Chessimo exercises.
Speaking of Chessimo, I owned the full program from 2008. I also owed the
two prior versions of Personal Chess Trainer.
Years later I tried the online version of Chessimo. Then I started using the
app version on my phone. That works well for me.
In the 3 minute blitz game below, I played 1.d4 hoping for a BDG. My
opponent played 1...e5, the Englund Gambit. It is very good to play 2.dxe5!
At the time my personal performance rating was even higher with 2.e4. This
transposes into a Center Game. Black played very fast, using only 65 seconds
total for his 30 moves. I used a little more time at 75 seconds for my 31
moves.
Sawyer - BeSomeone, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 21.11.2012 begins 1.d4

e5 2.e4 exd4 3.c3 dxc3 4.Nxc3 Bb4 5.Nf3 Bxc3+ [5...Nc6 6.Bc4 Goring
Gambit] 6.bxc3 Nf6 7.Bc4 0-0 8.e5 Re8 9.0-0 Ng4? [9...d5 10.Bb3+/=]
10.Bg5 [Amazingly even stronger is 10.Bxf7+!] 10...Re7 11.Bxe7 Qxe7
12.Qd4 d5 13.Bxd5 Nc6 14.Bxc6 bxc6 15.h3 Nh6 16.Rad1 Ba6 17.Rfe1
Nf5 18.Qd7 Qxd7 19.Rxd7 Rc8 20.Red1 Kf8 21.Nd4 Nxd4 22.R7xd4 c5
23.Rd8+ Ke7 24.Rxc8 Bxc8 25.Rd5 c4 26.Rc5 Ba6? 27.Rxc7+ Ke6
28.Rxa7? [I missed 28.Rc6+!+- the first time around, but not the second.]
28...Bc8 29.Rc7 Ba6? 30.Rc6+ Kxe5 31.Rxa6 Black resigns 1-0
10 - Dine on Danish Gambit
The Danish and Goring Gambits are left-handed versions of the Blackmar-
Diemer Gambit. Sometimes Black loses very quickly. The story goes like
this:
Both sides begin with the same central pawn. White offers the tasty morsel of
the other center pawn. Black devours it with its capture on move 2.
Then White attacks this newly advanced Black pawn with a bishop pawn on
moves 3 or 4. Black eats the bishop pawn and White uses the time to lead in
development. That's the plan.
Below I get to it by transposition after 1.d4 e5 2.e4. Of course White could

opt to defend against an Englund Gambit, but on this day I chose to offer my
own gambit.
It is amazing that one wrong move led to a forced tactical win in short order,
maybe like a short order cook.
Sawyer - vt, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 29.06.2012 begins 1.d4 e5 2.e4
[2.dxe5] 2...exd4 3.c3 dxc3 [The Danish Declined goes 3...d5 4.exd5 Qxd5
5.cxd4 Nc6 6.Nf3 Bg4 7.Be2 Bb4+ 8.Nc3 Bxf3 9.Bxf3 Qc4=] 4.Nxc3 [4.Bc4
cxb2 5.Bxb2 d5 6.Bxd5 with some compensation.] 4...Bb4 5.Bc4 Nc6 6.Nf3
d6 7.Qb3 [The main line here is 7.0-0 Bxc3 8.bxc3 Nf6 9.e5 Nxe5 10.Nxe5
dxe5 11.Qb3 Qe7 12.Ba3 c5 and Black must choose a response to some
likely check along the a4-e8 diagonal.] 7...Bxc3+ 8.bxc3 Ne5? [Black must
defend f7 with the queen. One way transposes to 7.0-0 after 8...Qe7 9.0-0 Nf6
10.e5 Nxe5 11.Nxe5 dxe5] 9.Nxe5 dxe5 10.Bxf7+ Kf8 [10...Ke7 11.Ba3+
Kf6 12.Rd1 Bd7 13.f4+- cannot be appealing for Black.] 11.Bxg8 Rxg8
12.Ba3+ Ke8 13.Qxg8+ Black resigns 1-0
2.Bc4
The Bishop’s Opening was one of my favorite openings in the late 1970s and
early 1980s. This chapter covers games where White does not transpose into
a Vienna Game.
11 - 2…f5!? Roman Strockyj
One of the most risky opening variations I played in my drive to be a USCF
Postal Chess Master was the Calabrese Counter-Gambit in the Bishop's
Opening 2.Bc4 f5?! I really doubt its complete theoretical soundness, but in
practical terms I did well.
Naturally in blitz it can be a promising gambit. I played it in postal chess vs

Roman Strockyj in the Golden Knights tournament.
In my database the Calabrese as scored 53% for Black. The performance

rating was not great, because usually White was rated much lower. That same
was true in my own games.
This game vs Strockyj was not decided in the opening, nor in the
middlegame. We reached a drawish rook ending, and somehow I pulled off a
win. Postal players got into a lot of endgames.
Strockyj (1685) - Sawyer (2085), corr USCF 89N215 15.08.1989 begins

1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 f5 3.Bxg8 Rxg8 4.Nc3 d6 [4...Nc6] 5.h3 [5.d4] 5...g6 [5...fxe4!
6.Nxe4 Nc6 7.Qh5+ g6 8.Qxh7 Rg7 9.Qh8 d5-+ with initiative for the gambit
pawn.] 6.d4 exd4 7.Qxd4 Bg7 8.Qd5 Rf8 9.exf5 c6 10.Qe4+ Kd7 11.Nge2
Rxf5 12.g4 Rf7 13.Be3 Qe7 14.0-0-0 d5 15.Qg2 Na6 16.a3 Nc7 17.Rhe1 b6
18.Nxd5 [18.Bd4+/-] 18...cxd5 19.Rxd5+ Ke8 20.Bg5 Bf6 21.Bxf6 Rxf6
22.Rd4 Re6 23.f4 Ba6 24.Kd1 [24.f5 Qg5+ 25.Kb1 gxf5=/+] 24...Bxe2+
[Taking the knight is okay, but stronger is 24...Rd8!-+] 25.Rxe2 Rxe2
26.Qxe2 Qxe2+ 27.Kxe2 Rd8 28.Rc4 Rd7 29.f5 gxf5 30.gxf5 Rf7 31.Ra4
a5 32.Rf4 Nd5 33.Rh4 Kf8 34.c4 Nf6 35.Kd3 Re7 36.Rf4 Kg7 37.b4 axb4
38.axb4 Ra7 39.Kd4 Ra3 40.h4 h5 [40...Rb3 41.b5 Kf7-/+] 41.c5 bxc5+
42.Kxc5 Rb3 43.b5 Nd7+ 44.Kd6 Rxb5 45.Kxd7 Kf6 46.Rd4 Kxf5 47.Kc6
Rb8 48.Rd5+ Kg4 49.Rd4+ Kg3 50.Ra4 Rd8 51.Kc5 Rd1 52.Re4 Rh1
53.Re5 Kxh4 54.Re4+ Kg3 55.Re3+ Kf4 56.Rd3 h4 57.Kc4 [57.Rd4+ Ke3]
57...h3 58.Rd4+ Ke3 [58...Kf5!] 59.Rd3+ Ke2 60.Ra3 [60.Rc3!] 60...Kf2
61.Ra2+ Kg3 62.Ra3+ Kg4 63.Kb5 Rb1+ 64.Ka6 h2 0-1
12 - Face Favorite Opening
What do you do when someone plays your favorite opening variation against
you? In the late 1970s one of my favorite openings as White was the Bishop's
Opening. It usually began 1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Nf6. Then I played either 3.Nc3
(Vienna Game) or 3.d3. GM Konstantin Sakaev in "The Petroff: an Expert
Repertoire for Black" wrote:
"However, if Black replies with 3...c6 the game is quite different from the
usual developments in the Italian Game. Our analysis shows convincingly
that there is not a single variation in which White can obtain even a minimal
edge and Black has an excellent position in all lines."
In the 1989 USCF Golden Knights Postal Chess Tournament, expert Paul
Kruger played Bishop's Opening 3.d3 against me. After Black chose 3...c6
(instead of 3...Nc6), he had to make a decision about his d-pawn and dark
squared bishop. Often Black sets up with 4...d5 and 5...Bd6. I chose 4...Bc5
and 5...d6. Either way Black equalizes.
An equal opening does not prevent me from being outplayed. Paul Kruger
played very strong moves.
I eventually reached an inferior ending. I did not finish out the final
combination of 32...Rc1 33.Rxc1 Nxc1 34.Nxe5 Nxa2 35.Nc4 when there is
nothing to prevent 36.Nxa3 leaving White ahead by four connected passed
pawns.
Kruger (2089) - Sawyer (2192), corr USCF 89N261, 20.07.1990 begins 1.e4
e5 2.Bc4 Nf6 3.d3 c6 4.Bb3 Bc5 [4...d5 5.Nf3 Bd6=] 5.Nf3 d6 6.0-0 Be6
7.Bxe6 fxe6 8.Nc3 Nbd7 9.Na4 Bb4 [9...Bb6=] 10.c3 Ba5 11.Qb3 b5
12.Qxe6+ Qe7 13.Qxe7+ Kxe7 14.b4 Bxb4 15.cxb4 bxa4 16.Nh4 g6
17.Bd2 a5 [17...Rab8=] 18.bxa5 Nc5 19.Rad1 Nxd3 20.Bg5 Nc5 21.Bxf6+
Kxf6 22.Rxd6+ Ke7 23.Rxc6 Rxa5 24.f3 Rd8 25.Rc1 Nd3 26.Rc7+ Ke8
27.Rb1 Rc5 28.Rxh7 a3 [28...Rdc8 29.Rf1 Rc2 30.Nxg6+/-] 29.Rh8+
[29.Nxg6!+-] 29...Kd7 30.Rxd8+ Kxd8 31.Nxg6 Rc2 32.Rd1 1-0
13 - Learned Helpful Lesson
Often my Bishop's Opening games had me playing White. But I also had to
learn how to play Black. After all, if one plays 1.e4 e5 there is no avoiding
2.Bc4.
Here I get a lesson from a higher rated player and learn more by looking up
the opening after the game. Our post game ratings were Dhoom2 (2175) -
SawyerTE (2000).
Dhoom2 - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 06.10.2012 begins 1.e4 e5

2.Bc4 Nf6 3.d3 [The other common move is to transpose into a Vienna Game
with 3.Nc3] 3...c6 [3...Nc6 4.Nf3 Bc5 5.c3 is a line in the Giuoco
Pianissimo.] 4.Nf3 d5 [This is the most aggressive and most popular. On
4...Be7 White should castle. Definitely not good is 5.Nxe5? Qa5+ winning
the Ne5.] 5.Bb3 Bd6 6.exd5 [An alternative is 6.Nc3 dxe4 7.Ng5 0-0
8.Ncxe4 Nxe4 9.Nxe4 Bf5=] 6...cxd5!? [I thought the pawn center was
correct. Sakaev calls it very risky and recommends 6...Nxd5 7.0-0 0-0=] 7.0-
0 Nc6 8.Nc3 Be6 9.Bg5 d4?! [9...Bc7=/+] 10.Ne4 Bxb3?! [I avoided doubled
e-pawns and got the worse doubled f-pawns. 10...Be7 11.Bxe6 fxe6 12.Nfd2
0-0=] 11.Bxf6 gxf6 12.axb3 Qe7? [Black must try 12...f5! 13.Nxd6+ Qxd6
14.Nh4 f4 15.Qh5+/= but Black has the better chances.] 13.Nh4! Qd7?
[Hanging my queen in a 3 minute blitz game. White has a bind after 13...Qe6
14.Nf5 Bf8 15.Qh5+/-] 14.Nxf6+ Black resigns 1-0
Book 1 – Chapter 2 – Vienna Game
2.Nc3
The Vienna Game with 2.Nc3 is a logical opening where White controls d5
and delays Nf3.
14 - Exciting or Boring Chess
The Vienna Game is hard to figure. The opening has attracted both
aggressive attacking masters and very strategical minded masters. The
Vienna can be sharp or dull, tactical or positional. White can play for an early
advantage or for a long term endgame edge. As Black it can be easy to obtain
equality and difficult to play to win.
When I played the Vienna Game as White, I usually opted for either 3.f4 or
3.Bc4. Sometimes I got the Vienna after 1.Nc3 Nf6 2.e4 e5. (I also played
2.d4 d5 3.e4 dxe4 4.f3 Blackmar-Diemer Gambit). The other move order of
the Queens Knight Attack allows the Napoleon Attack 1.Nc3 e5 2.Nf3!
which I have played over 400 times, mostly vs weaker competition. Stronger
players rarely play 1.Nc3 e5 as Black.
For Round 2 of the 2006 Florida Class Championships, I faced Mike Piehl.
He was rated 1827 at the time and had chosen to play up. This was the first
time that I met Mike. He was very friendly and I enjoyed our conversations.
Piehl was about to jump his rating 100 points to be near mine. I helped a
little. At another tournament sometime later, we were playing next to each
other. I lost to a master while he drew an expert. Mike told me that my chess
is as exciting as his is boring with his basic 1.e4/2.Nc3.
Here we begin 1.e4 Nc6 2.Nc3, which presents Black with a dilemma.
Usually the 1...Nc6 player intends to play 2...d5 or 2...e5, whichever avoids
main lines the best. I chose 2...Nf6, but after 3.g3 I decided that this time I
felt more like playing 3...e5 than 3...d5. Christoph Wisnewski in his "Play
1...Nc6!" recommends Black head into a sort of French Defence with 2...e6
3.g3 d5. I played this game sharply, and I tried to win.
Piehl - Sawyer, Florida Class Championship (2), 07.01.2006 begins 1.e4 Nc6
2.Nc3 Nf6 3.g3 [Now Black can choose between pushing either center pawn
two squares. The choices are both playable and about equal in strength.]
3...e5 [Okay, I go into a Vienna. 3...d5!? transposing into a sort of Alekhine
4.exd5 Nxd5 5.Bg2 Nxc3 6.bxc3 e5=] 4.Bg2 [4.Nf3 Bc5 5.Bg2 d6 6.d3 a6
7.0-0=] 4...Bc5 5.d3 d6 6.Na4 0-0 [6...Bb6=] 7.Nxc5 dxc5 8.f4 c4! [I like
this idea because I sacrifice a pawn for activity.] 9.Nf3 [White does not
accept the pawn. 9.fxe5 Ng4 10.Nf3 cxd3 11.Qxd3=] 9...cxd3 10.cxd3 Bg4
11.0-0 Qd6 12.Qb3 b6? [12...Bxf3! 13.Bxf3 Rad8 14.Qxb7 Qc5+ 15.Kh1
Rxd3-/+] 13.Qc3 [13.fxe5! Qc5+ 14.Kh1 Nd7 15.Bf4+/=] 13...Bxf3 14.Bxf3
Nd4 15.fxe5 Qxe5 16.Bf4 Nxf3+ 17.Rxf3 Qxc3 [17...Qh5!? I never
considered this move. 18.Kg2+/=] 18.bxc3 c5 19.a4 [I was concerned that
White might continue: 19.Bd6! Rfe8 20.e5 when I planned to play 20...Re6
21.exf6 (21.d4!?) 21...Rxd6 22.fxg7 Rad8 23.Raf1 Rxd3 24.Rxf7. This was
as deep as I looked, figuring that maybe Black could survive.] 19...Rfe8
20.c4!? [White makes his d-pawn even weaker to make b6 weaker.] 20...Nd7
21.a5 f6?! [A dubious move, after which I could easily lose.] 22.Rf2 Ne5
23.Bxe5 fxe5 24.Rb2 Rab8 25.axb6 axb6 26.Ra7 Re6 27.Rf2 Rf8 28.Rxf8+
Kxf8 29.Kf2 Re7 30.Rxe7 Kxe7 31.Ke3 Kd6 [Another idea is 31...Kf6
32.Kf3 (There is no time to run to the queenside. 32.Kd2? Kg5 33.h3 h5
34.Kc2 h4-+) 32...Kg5=] 32.Kd2 Kc6 33.Kc3 [Fritz evaluates the position as
even: 0.00. 33.Kc3 h5 34.h3 g5 35.g4 h4 36.Kd2 b5 37.cxb5+ Kxb5=] 1/2-
1/2
15 - Winning Endgame Race
Chess openings to not always lead directly to immediate victory. Often the
opening sets the table for a creative middlegame combination or checkmate.
If such tactics do not develop, the best strategy for a win might be to head to
the endgame. There the tactical skill of the King as a fighting piece comes
into play.
The Vienna Game begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nc3. This is an old variation of the Open
Game. Both sides have several options and there are many transpositional
possibilities.
I have sometimes reached the White side of a Vienna Gambit after 1.Nc3
(Queens Knight Attack) 1...Nf6 2.e4 (Alekhine Defence) 2...e5 3.f4 etc. Here
I am playing Black. At first I decided to play an Alekhine Defence. Usually I
answer 1.e4 Nf6 2.Nc3 with 2...d5, but there is always the danger that Black
has to face the dreaded Blackmar-Diemer Gambit after 3.d4.
blik - Sawyer, ICC 5 0 Internet Chess Club, 29.01.2012 begins 1.e4 Nf6
2.Nc3 e5 3.f4 [The Vienna Gambit. Other options are 3.Nf3 Nc6 Four
Knights Game; or 3.Bc4 Nxe4 4.Qh5 Nd6] 3...d5! 4.fxe5 Nxe4 5.Nf3 Bc5!?
[This is a more dynamic variation favored by Larry Kaufman. The point is to
tempt White to push d4 and then pin the knight with ...Bb4 as in the game.
5...Be7 is the main line.] 6.d4 Bb4 7.Bd2 c5 8.Bb5+ Nc6 9.0-0 0-0 10.Qe1
[Larry Kaufman recommends 10.a3 Bxc3 11.Bxc3 Qb6 with possibly a slight
Black edge.] 10...Nxd2 11.Qxd2 Qb6 12.Bxc6 bxc6 13.a3 Bxc3 [In this blitz
game I missed that 13...cxd4 14.axb4 dxc3+ 15.Qd4 Qxd4+ 16.Nxd4
cxb2=/+ and Black will remain a pawn ahead.] 14.bxc3 cxd4 15.cxd4 c5
16.Rab1 Qc6 17.c3 Be6 18.Ng5 h6 19.Nxe6 fxe6 20.Qe2 cxd4 21.cxd4
Rxf1+ 22.Rxf1 Rf8 23.Rxf8+ Kxf8 24.Qb2 Qb6 [I decided to try my luck in
a pawn ending. I was immediately rewarded.] 25.Qxb6 axb6 26.g4? [Big
mistake. The g-pawn is going nowhere. The kings must hurry toward the
queenside. The best try is 26.Kf2 Ke7 27.Ke3 Kd7 28.Kd3 Kc6 29.a4 b5
30.Kc3 with a drawn position.] 26...Ke7 27.Kf2 Kd7 28.Ke1 [An interesting
try to sidetrack Black is 28.g5 but after 28...Kc6 29.gxh6 gxh6 30.Kf3 Kb5
31.Kg4 Kc4! Black's d-pawn will queen long before White's h-pawn.]
28...Kc6 29.a4 b5 30.a5 b4 31.a6 Kb6 32.a7 Kxa7 33.Kd1 Kb6 34.Kc2
Kb5 35.Kb2 Kc4 36.h4 g5 0-1 White resigns 0-1
2.Nc3 Nf6 3.Bc4
The Vienna Game can be played like the Bishop’s Opening with both moves
2.Nc3 and 3.Bc4 reaching the same position by either move order.
16 - World Record Holder
Dr. R.L. Straszacker holds the Guinness Book of World Records for the
longest match in postal chess. He played one opponent continuous games
from 1946 to 1999, a total of 112 games over 50 years. During that time, I
also played Dr. Straszacker two games as part of the APCT-SACCA match.
Reinhardt Ludwig Straszacker was a very friendly opponent. He was a

significant business leader in South Africa at that time.
Non-correspondence players think that postal chess would never have simple
tactical mistakes. Wrong. Postal players were not always quietly focused on
the game at home. Life happened.
You set up your chess set while listening to a ball game or while watching a
movie. Your kids run into the room while you ponder your move. It's time for
supper. The dog hides your rook. We had a cat that took pawns from my
chess set and hide them while I was away at work. That evil cat did not last
long in my house!
I was heavily influenced by Tim Harding's book on the Bishop's Opening and
a little book by Tony Santasiere on the Vienna Game published by Ken
Smith.
Sawyer - Straszacker, corr APCT-SACCA 1978 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Nf6

3.Nc3 Bb4 4.f4!? [4.Nf3 is more solid.] 4...Bxc3?! [4...Qe7; 4...Nc6] 5.dxc3
Nc6 6.Nf3 Qe7 7.Qe2 d6 8.0-0 Bd7?! [8...exf4! 9.Bxf4 Be6=] 9.f5 h6 10.b4
a6 11.a4 Rb8?! [The rook does not do much here. This is simply a waste of
time.] 12.Bd2 Na7 13.h3 0-0 14.Nh4 c6? [Missing the forking threat. Black
had to move his king.] 15.Ng6 [A fun move to play.] 15...Qd8 16.Nxf8 Qxf8
17.g4 d5 18.exd5 [18.Bd3+-] 18...cxd5 19.Bb3 Qd6 20.Rae1 Ne4? [Black
dreams of a fork on g3. If 20...Re8 21.Be3+/-] 21.Qd3 Bc6? [21...Nxd2+-
and White would still have to convert the advantage of the Exchange.]
22.Rxe4 1-0
17 - Tempting Target on d6
Winning attacks strike at weak points. How do you find such targets?
The Vienna Game2.Nc3 allows White to control d5 right off the bat.
In a blitz contest, my opponent misplayed some exchanges and found himself

with a vulnerable d6 pawn.
My threats to capture this pawn kept Black tied down until I could mount
other unstoppable threats.
White had the choice of backing into a King's Gambit Declined. Here I chose
simple development with 5.Nf3.
On move nine Black went for a combination that lost a pawn. With 27.Bh6,
White had potential back rank mate threats. This could only be met by losing
more material.
In the end Black was in a bind and could hardly move.
Sawyer (2084) - guest5420, ICC 5 0 u Internet Chess Club, 05.05.2015

begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nc3 Be7 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.d3 0-0 5.Nf3 [5.f4 d6 6.Nf3= is a
good King's Gambit Declined where Black is solid but somewhat passive.]
5...d6 6.h3 Nc6 7.a3 Nd4 8.0-0 Be6 9.Nxd4 Bxc4? [This drops a pawn.
Correct is 9...exd4 10.Bxe6 fxe6 11.Ne2 c5=] 10.dxc4 exd4 11.Qxd4 Re8
12.Be3 Nd7 13.f3 Bf6 14.Qd2 Ne5 15.b3 c5? [This gives White a target on
d6. 15...Ng6 16.Rad1+/-] 16.Rad1 Qa5 17.Nd5 [17.Nb5!+- is even stronger.]
17...Qxd2 18.Nxf6+ gxf6 19.Rxd2 Re6 20.Rfd1 b5 21.cxb5 a6 22.bxa6 [Or
22.b6+-] 22...Rxa6 23.a4 c4 24.f4 c3 25.Rd5 Nd7 26.f5 Rxe4 27.Bh6 Re5
[If 27...Re8 28.Rxd6 Rxd6 29.Rxd6+- Black is still down two connected
passed pawns in a rather helpless position.] 28.Rxd6 Rxd6 29.Rxd6 Re7
30.a5 Black resigns 1-0
2.Nc3 Nf6 3.Bc4 Bc5
Both sides opt for the classical bishop placement.
18 - Dangling Puckett Knight
In the summer of 1977, my wife and I travelled to Crossville, Tennessee one
Saturday in July. Many of the state's 95 counties could have served as
inspiration for the famous TV show "Dukes of Hazzard" that would become
popular in 1979-1985.
It was obvious the little towns in the Tennessee hills and valleys were known
more for football than chess. It seemed like every county had some kid who
had grown up to be an NFL player.
Crossville, Tennessee was on the Central Time Zone west side of a small
mountain range on the southern end of the Appalachians; the valley on the
east side was in the Eastern Time Zone. It was there in Crossville that Harry
Sabine ran chess tournaments. Many years later, the USCF would move its
headquarters to this same town.
My first round I was Black in an Albin-Counter Gambit. I won the game, but
I do not have the game score.
In the second round, I faced Randy Puckett who was rated about 450 points
below me. First we reached a Bishop's Opening. Then we transposed into a
Vienna Game.
When we started to back into a King's Gambit Declined, Black chose instead
to play the Dangling Knight Variation 5...Ng4. It is not a bad line, but it is
risky for Black to castle kingside.
This was the second time in the 1970s that I played a tournament game as
White that lasted only 10 moves.
Sawyer - Puckett, Crossville, TN (2), 16.07.1977 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Bc5

3.Nc3 Nf6 4.d3 d6 5.f4 Ng4 [5...Nc6 6.Nf3 is a King's Gambit Declined] 6.f5
Nf2 7.Qh5 0-0 [Usually 7...g6 8.Qh6 is played.] 8.Bg5 Qe8 9.Nd5! [White is
winning in all lines.] 9...g6 [If 9...Nxh1 10.Nf6+ gxf6 11.Bxf6+- and the best
Black can do is to sacrifice a couple bishops before getting checkmated.]
10.Nf6+ 1-0
19 - Red Bank Chess Simul
In the late 1970s and early 1980s, I was afraid to sacrifice material. I did not
dare play the King's Gambit. I used what I called the "Chicken King's
Gambit".
It starts: 1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Nf6 3.Nc3 Bc5 4.f4 d6 5.d3 Nc6 6.Nf3. See what
happens against a scholastic player during my February 1980 simultaneous
exhibition at a school in Red Bank, Tennessee.
This game deviates with 5...Ng4?! This is not a well-known line to typical
club players, yet all the moves are very natural. Black intends 6...Nf2 forking
the Qd1 and Rh1.
In retaliation, the White queen and all four minor pieces focus on the Black
king and queen. The undeveloped Black queenside is of little help. White's
attack is powerful!
Sawyer - Sims, Red Bank, TN simul 07.02.1980 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Nf6
3.Nc3 [Sometimes I played 3.d3.] 3...Bc5 [After 3...Nc6 4.d3 in addition to
4...Bc5, Black has 4...Na5 and 4...Bb4] 4.f4 d6 5.d3 Ng4 [Here 5...Nc6 6.Nf3
is a King's Gambit Declined.] 6.f5! Nf2? [The Nf2 fork looks good at first,
but it is bad. If you are going to play this line correctly as Black, you have to
go in for 6...h5! 7.Nh3 Qh4+ 8.Kf1 and White might have slightly better
position after either 8...Nc6 (or 8...c6 9.Qe2) 9.Nd5] 7.Qh5 [Threatening
mate on f7.] 7...Qd7? [A critical line is 7...g6 8.Qh6 Nxh1 9.Bg5!+-] 8.Nf3
[Obvious and good. This is easy to play in a simul. Even better is winning a
piece with 8.Be6! Qe7 9.Nd5 Qf8 10.Bxc8+-] 8...Nxh1 9.Ng5 Rf8 10.Nxh7
[Again 10.Be6! Qd8 11.Nxf7 also wins.] 10...c6 [If 10...d5 11.Nxd5 with the
threat of Ndf6+ forking king and queen.] 11.Nxf8 Kxf8 [White has regained
the rook. Black is still ahead in material with the Nh1, but his position is a
disaster. This is easy to play in a simul.] 12.Qh8+ Ke7 13.Bg5+ [Junior 12
likes 13.Bh6! d5 14.f6+!] 13...f6 14.Be6 [Also powerful is 14.Qxg7+! Kd8
15.Bxf6+ Kc7 16.Qf8 Na6 17.Be6+-] 14...Qxe6 [The Black queen is lost. If
14...fxg5 15.Bxd7 Nxd7 16.Qxg7+ Kd8 17.f6+- and Black will lose more
material.] 15.fxe6 fxg5 [Of course 15...Nd7 16.exd7 Bxd7 17.Qxa8+-]
16.Qxc8 Na6 17.Qd7+ White has Qf7 mate next move. 1-0
20 - C. Stanley McMahon
The curse of postal chess was setting up a position incorrectly. In this game I
pick up a bishop for two f-pawns. Probably I am winning, but Black suddenly
resigned.
As I recall, Stanley McMahon later wrote to me that he had set the board up
wrong, omitting his e5 pawn. Without that pawn he is lost, so he resigned. So
I got lucky.
Later, David Moody (as Phony Benoni) wrote: "If there were two guys I
remember from APCT in the 1970s, they were C. Stanley McMahon and Ted
Krystosek. Neither were masters, but they did play entertaining chess."
Yes, I also played Krystosek (four times in 1982), but not in this section. I
believe that McMahon was rated about 200 points above Krystosek.
In the game below vs C. Stanley McMahon, I played the Bishops Opening

and backed into Vienna Game. Then we headed toward a King's Gambit
Declined.
I was too afraid to play a gambit like the King's Gambit in my younger years.
In middle age when I no longer cared, I started playing gambits and won
more often!
Sawyer - McMahon, corr APCT 77R-11 (2), 08.1977 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Bc4
Nf6 3.Nc3 Bc5 4.d3 d6 5.f4 Ng4 6.f5 Nf2 7.Qh5 g6 8.Qh6 c6 9.Qg7?
[Strongest is 9.Bg5! Qc7 10.Bb5!! and White is winning.] 9...Rf8 10.Bh6
Kd7? [10...Nd7! 11.Qxh7 Nf6 12.Qg7 d5 13.Bg5 dxc4-/+] 11.Qxf8 Qxf8
12.Bxf8 Nxh1 13.Nh3 Ke8 14.Bg7 gxf5 15.Ke2 f4 16.Rxh1 Bg4+ 17.Ke1
Bxh3 18.gxh3 Nd7 19.Ne2 Be3 20.d4 Ke7 21.Bh6 1-0
2.Nc3 Nf6 3.Bc4 Nc6
Black can choose a solid double knight development with 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.Bc4
Nc6. All these moves can be played in any order.
21 - Temptation of Bxf7
During the first 10 days of November 2012, I played the Open Game (1.e4
e5) quite a bit from both sides. As Black I have started with 7 wins in a row.
Then I lost one, won one, lost one. This was followed by 7 more wins in a
row.
The Vienna Game was a favorite of mine as White in the 1970s. Now I find
myself on the Black side. Throughout my past 45 years of play, I have chosen
three different approaches: 2...Nf6; 2...Nc6; and 2...f5!?
My opponent's ICC handle "Talkeres" honors some great chess players.

During our three minute blitz game he had good attacking chances.
I knew he wanted to play Bxf7 to win material or play checkmate. I figured

out a way to let him play.
This gave me an attack vs his king. "Talkeres" yielded to temptation and got
checkmated himself a few moves later.
Talkeres - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 10.11.2012 begins 1.e4 e5

2.Nc3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.d3 Bb4 5.Nge2 d5 6.exd5 Nxd5 7.0-0 Nxc3 [7...Be6
8.Bxd5 Bxd5 9.f4 0-0=] 8.bxc3 Bd6 9.f4 0-0 10.f5 Kh8 11.f6 gxf6 12.Ng3
Be6 13.Bb3 Rg8 14.Qh5 Rg6 15.Nf5 Bxf5 16.Rxf5 Qd7 17.Be3 Rag8 18.g3
e4 19.Bf4? [White has a good game after 19.dxe4+/=] 19...Bxf4 20.Rxf4
exd3 21.cxd3 Qxd3 22.Bxf7? [White yields to the temptation to win the
Exchange but Black plans to sack a rook for a mating attack. 22.Kh1 Qxc3
23.Rd1 Ne5 24.Rh4 Qf3+!=/+] 22...Rxg3+ 23.hxg3? Qxg3+ 24.Kf1 Qxf4+
25.Ke2 Rg2+ 26.Kd3 Rd2# 0-1
22 - Classic Bxf7+ Attack
Against John Gilbert I play a wild game where I sacrifice a bishop (8.Bxf7+)
for a classical attack. The combination wins the Black queen and chases the
king. The monarch goes from Ke8 to Kg6 to Kc6.
The whole line of play was greatly influenced by Tony Santasiere and Tim
Harding, with additional pushes from Weaver Adams and Ken Smith. Their
books on the Bishops Opening and Vienna Game were a great help,
encouraging me to play more aggressively than my normal Caro-Kann ways.
All major openings lead to a slight edge for White, somewhere between +=
and =, otherwise one side or the other would not play those variations. Here
with 1.e4 I was playing more forcing lines which puts both sides under more
tactical pressure. I did not get around to the Blackmar-Diemer for many more
years.
My tactical skill was quite limited in those days. Twice in this game I grab
big material instead of finding a forced checkmate.
This was my first APCT event. It shows I had a lot to learn about postal
chess. After 100 such games, I was a lot stronger, reaching the Expert level.
Eventually I would play 1000 correspondence games, win an ICCF Master

section and become a USCF postal master. I reached my peak after about 12
years of postal play.
Sawyer - Gilbert, corr APCT 77R-11 (4), 08.1977 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Nf6
3.Nc3 Nc6 4.f4 Nxe4 5.Nf3 Nxc3 6.dxc3 exf4 [Black drops a pawn. Correct
is 6...Qe7=] 7.Bxf4 Bc5 8.Bxf7+! Kxf7 9.Qd5+ Kf6? 10.Bg5+ Kg6 11.Bxd8
[Grabbing the queen, I missed a checkmate. 11.Nh4+! Kh5 12.Bxd8+ Ne5
13.Qxe5+ Kg4 14.h3#] 11...Re8+ 12.Kd1 Rxd8 13.Qxc5 [Grabbing the
bishop, I missed another checkmate. 13.Qe4+! Kf6 14.Qf4+ Ke7 15.Re1+
Ne5 16.Rxe5+ Kd6 17.Qd2+ Kc6 18.Qd5+ Kb6 19.Qxc5+ Ka6 20.Qa5#]
13...d6 14.Nh4+ Kf7 15.Qd5+ Be6 16.Rf1+ Ke7 17.Qg5+ Kd7 18.Qxg7+
Ne7 19.Nf5 Bxf5 20.Rxf5 Rg8 21.Qxh7 Rh8 22.Qf7 Rag8 23.Rf2 Rxh2
24.Kd2 [24.Re2!+-] 24...Rgxg2 25.Raf1 Kc6 26.Qf3+ 1-0
2.Nc3 Nf6 3.Bc4 Nxe4
Black moves the game into a more tactical Vienna with 3.Bc4 Nxe4.
23 - How to Handle 3...Nxe4
The traditional Frankenstein-Dracula Variation in Vienna Game or Bishop's
Opening follows after 1.e4 e5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.Bc4 Nxe4 4.Qh5 Nd6 5.Bb3 Nc6
when Black gets compensation for the sacrifice of the Exchange.
However, there are options for both sides on moves 4 and 5 as given in the
notes below. My ICC blitz opponent "alain" chose 4.Bxf7?! Kxf7 5.Nxe4 d5
to keep me from castling.
In his excellent book on the Petroff repertoire grandmaster Konstantin

Sakaev writes:
"It is weaker for Black to play 4.Bxf7 Kxf7 5.Nxe4 d5=+; Black occupies the
centre and later he can castle artificially, since he has more than sufficient
time for this."
In trying to castle by hand, I miss the power of Qf3+ attacking d5 at a couple

points which would have given White equality.
alain - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 02.06.2012 begins 1.e4 e5

2.Bc4 Nf6 3.Nc3 Nxe4 4.Bxf7+?! [4.Qh5 Nd6 5.Bb3 (5.Qxe5+ Qe7 6.Qxe7+
Bxe7=) 5...Nc6 (5...Be7 6.Nf3 Nc6 7.Nxe5 g6=) 6.Nb5 g6 7.Qf3 f5 8.Qd5
Qe7 9.Nxc7+ Kd8 10.Nxa8 b6=; 4.Nf3 Nxc3 5.dxc3 c6! 6.Nxe5 d5=]
4...Kxf7 5.Nxe4 d5=/+ [Sakaev] 6.Ng3 Bd6? [6...Nc6=/+] 7.b3? [7.Qf3+!=]
7...Nc6 8.Bb2 Rf8? [8...Qf6-/+] 9.Nf3? [9.Qf3+!=] 9...Bg4 10.Qe2? Kg8
[10...e4!-+] 11.0-0-0? e4 [White loses a piece and eventually the game.]
12.h3 exf3 13.Qb5 fxg2 14.hxg4 gxh1Q 15.Rxh1 Bxg3 16.fxg3 Qd6 [Now
White is a rook down.] 17.Qd3 Qg6 18.Qxd5+ Qf7 19.Qg2 Qf3 20.Qh3 h6
21.Kb1 Rae8 22.g5 h5 23.g6 Qg4 24.Qh2 Re2 25.Qg1 Rff2 26.Bc3 Nd4
27.Rh4 Nf3 28.Rxg4 hxg4 29.Qc1 Re1 30.Kb2 Rxc1 31.Kxc1 Rg2 32.d4
Rxg3 33.d5 Rg1+ 34.Kb2 Rd1 35.Ba5 b6 0-1
24 - James Regan 4.Bxf7+
In this postal game James Regan tries a Vienna Game 3.Bc4 Nxe4 variation.
This was one of many games we played.
Normally as White I played my favorite 4.Qh5. That line sometimes sees

Black sacrifice the Exchange by move 10.
Here White goes in for 4.Bxf7!? This continuation is in the style of the
Jerome Gambit.
The line leads simply to positions with equal chances. However in this
unrated game James Regan outplays me.
Regan - Sawyer, corr 1989 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.Bc4 Nxe4 4.Bxf7+!?
[4.Qh5 Nd6 5.Bb3 is the main line.] 4...Kxf7 5.Nxe4 d5 6.Qf3+?! [6.Nc3=]
6...Kg8 7.Ng3? c6 8.Qe2 Bd6 9.d3 Nd7 10.Nf3 Qe7? [This allows a nasty
knight fork. Better is to keep going with 10...Qf6=] 11.Bd2 [11.Nf5!+/-]
11...Nf6 12.0-0-0 Bg4 13.h3 Bxf3 14.gxf3 g6? [14...Qd7=] 15.Rde1 Kf7
16.h4 h5 17.Qf1 Qc7 18.Qg2 Rae8 19.Rh3 [19.Rhg1+/-] 19...Rhg8 20.Kb1
a5 21.Ne2 b5 22.Rg1 Re6?! 23.d4 [23.Rg3+/-] 23...b4 [23...exd4!=] 24.Rg3
Nd7 25.Rg5 1-0
25 - Robert Grattan 5.Qxe5+
My record was 3-2 in the APCT 84 Rook-20 section. The other games had
finished quickly. Robert Grattan who was rated 1851 at one point. I went to
great lengths to avoid the draw, only to find myself losing. Somehow I
struggled back. I won this game that lasted from late 1984 to late 1985.
Grattan - Sawyer, corr APCT 84R-20 1984 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.Bc4
Nxe4 4.Qh5 Nd6 5.Qxe5+ [White choses a drawish continuation. The main
line of the Frankenstein-Dracula Variation goes 5.Bb3 Nc6 6.Nb5 g6 7.Qf3
f5 8.Qd5 Qe7 9.Nxc7+ Kd8 10.Nxa8 b6 and Black has compensation for the
Exchange.] 5...Qe7 6.Qxe7+ Bxe7 7.Bb3 Nf5 8.Nf3 c6 9.0-0 d5 10.Re1 [Or
10.d4 0-0 11.Re1 Bf6=] 10...Na6!? 11.d4 Nc7 12.Ne2 Ne6 13.c3 Bd7
[13...f6! prevents Ne5 and allows Kf7] 14.Ne5 Nd6 15.Nxd7 [15.Bc2]
15...Kxd7 16.Bc2 g6 17.b3 Rae8 18.Nf4 Ng7 [Good is 18...Bf6= but I
avoided exchanges.] 19.Bb2 f5?! [19...Ngf5!?] 20.Nd3 Nf7 21.c4! [White
stands better, but I fight to unbalance the game so I can win.] 21...Bf6?
22.Ne5+? [22.cxd5! cxd5 23.Nf4 Ne6 24.Nxd5 and Black cannot regain the
pawn due to 24...Bxd4? 25.Bxd4 Nxd4 26.Nf6+] 22...Bxe5 23.dxe5 Ne6
[23...Ke6 24.cxd5+ cxd5 25.b4+/=] 24.cxd5 cxd5 25.Rad1 Kc6 26.b4 Re7
27.a4 Rd8 28.Bb3 Red7 [My attempts to avoid a draw are working. Now I
am losing.] 29.Ra1 [29.f4! h5 30.g3+- and White is winning.] 29...Kc7
30.Rad1 b6 31.b5 Nfg5 32.f3? [I am able to reshuffle my knights and regain
equality. 32.Rc1+!+/-] 32...Nc5 33.Bc2 Nge6 34.Bd4 Kb7 35.g3 Rc7 36.Re2
Nxd4 37.Rxd4 Ne6 38.Rd1 Rc3 39.f4 d4 40.Rd3 Rdc8 41.Rdd2 R8c4
42.Kf1 Nc5? [42...Kc7!-/+] 43.e6! Nxe6 44.Rxe6? [White returns the favor.
44.Bd3!+/=] 44...Rxc2 45.Rxc2? [Now White remains a pawn down. Correct
is 45.Re7+ Rc7 46.Rxc7+ Rxc7 47.Rxd4 and a draw is very likely.]
45...Rxc2 46.Re7+ Rc7 47.Re2 d3 48.Rd2 Rc3 49.Kf2 Kc7 50.Ke3 Kd6?!
[50...Ra3! 51.Rxd3 Rxa4-/+] 51.Rxd3+ Rxd3+ 52.Kxd3 Kd5 53.Kc3? [The
only move to draw is 53.h3!=] 53...Ke4 54.Kc4 h5 55.h4 Kf3 56.Kd5 Kxg3
57.Kc6 Kxh4 58.Kb7 g5!? [The Queen and Pawn ending is a tough one to
win. 58...Kg4 59.Kxa7 h4-/+] 59.fxg5 Kxg5 60.Kxa7 h4 61.a5 bxa5 62.b6
h3 63.b7 h2 64.b8Q h1Q 65.Qg3+ Kh5 66.Qf2? [66.Qe5 Qe4 67.Qxa5 at
least eliminates all but one of Black's pawns.] 66...Qe4 67.Qh2+ Kg6
68.Qg3+ Kf7 69.Qb3+ Qe6 70.Qa4 Qe7+ 71.Ka6 Qd6+ 72.Kxa5? [Black
swaps queens. The f-pawn wins easily.] 72...Qd8+! 0-1
4.Qh5 Nd6 5.Bb3 Nc6
In some circles this is called the Frankenstein-Dracula Variation.
26 - Ing. Jozef Spanik Mail
In 1978 Walter Muir convinced me to try some international chess play. I
made my first very tentative attempt at competition in the International
Correspondence Chess Federation (ICCF).
I was the only player from the USA. The transmission time between moves
was very slow. This was my shortest game.
My first opponent was Ing. Jozef Spanik whom I think was from
Czechoslovakia. That was a country made up of what is today the Czech
Republic and Slovakia.
I wore out my copy of the book Bishop's Opening by Tim Harding. Probably
we were still in the book when my opponent failed to reply to my 14th move.
In ICCF, if you did not receive a move from your opponent within say 2-3
weeks, then you were to send a repeat of your last move via registered mail
and notify the tournament director. If your opponent did not reply to your
repeat move, then eventually you were awarded a forfeit win.
In most countries, the cost of registered mail was a slight increase to normal
mail prices. In the USA registered mail was like 10 times the cost of a normal
postcard.
The US economy was terrible back at that time 1978-1980, leading Jimmy
Carter to be voted out of office by a landslide. Almost every state voted for
Ronald Reagan and the economy turned around.
Like most people, I voted for Jimmy Carter the first time, but would not
make that mistake that second time. I voted for Reagan in 1980 and 1984.
I found myself spending a lot of money in the late 1970s. Those were my
early poverty years. I was trying to support my family.
For my game vs Ing. Jozef Spanik, I was awarded a win. The process
annoyed me. I decided to spend my money on my family. That worked. I am
still married to the same wife!
I quit my 1978 ICCF section. In future years I returned to ICCF and

sometimes played very well.
Sawyer - Spanik, corr ICCF corr ICCF, 1978 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Nf6
3.Nc3 Nxe4 [After 3...Nc6 I played what I called the "Chicken King's
Gambit". I would back into that opening via 4.d3 Bc5 5.f4 d6 6.Nf3 King's
Gambit Declined. Then White does not actually sacrifice a pawn.] 4.Qh5
Nd6 5.Bb3 [5.Qxe5+ Qe7 6.Qxe7+ Bxe7 7.Bb3=] 5...Nc6 [5...Be7 6.Nf3
Nc6 7.Nxe5=] 6.Nb5 g6 7.Qf3 f5 8.Qd5 Qe7 9.Nxc7+ Kd8 10.Nxa8 b6
11.d3 [Another way to play this is 11.Nxb6 axb6 12.Qf3 Bb7 13.d3 Nd4
14.Qh3] 11...Bb7 12.h4 h6 [The more popular way to stop the threat of
13.Bg5 winning the Black queen is by 12...f4 13.Qf3 Bh6 14.Bd2 Nd4=]
13.Qf3 Nd4 14.Qg3+/= Black stopped playing. 1-0
27 - Gambit You Do Not Trust
Chess gambits have always fascinated me. Some develop tested theory in
thousands of games, like the King's Gambit.
Others are speculative but with very promising practical results, like the
Blackmar-Diemer Gambit. Right or wrong, it wins!
I hit Bob Davis with my Bishops Opening. That transposed to a Vienna

Game in our four game postal chess match.
All the moves were sent on one postcard per week. The four games
simultaneously stayed at about the same move number, with the exception of
possible IF-moves.
In the 1970s I found a gambit in the Vienna Game that I liked to play against
because, although masters recommended it as Black, I did not trust it.
White threatens mate on moves 4, 7 and 8. After ten moves in the

Frankenstein-Dracula variation White is up a full rook. It is supposed to be
good for Black? I did not buy that way back then.
White has play, even with his knight trapped. Black can equalize, but finding
best moves is not easy. As a young man, my rating was headed up, up, up.
Sawyer - Davis (1600), corr RPCC (1), 23.06.1977 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Nf6
3.Nc3 Nxe4 4.Qh5 Nd6 5.Bb3 Nc6 [5...Be7! 6.Qxe5 0-0=] 6.Nb5 g6 7.Qf3
f5 8.Qd5 Qe7 9.Nxc7+ Kd8 10.Nxa8 b6 11.d3 Bb7 [Black has a better
chance with 11...Nd4! when there could follow 12.Nxb6 axb6 13.Qa8 Kc7
14.Qa4 Bb7=] 12.h4 f4 13.Qf3 Nd4 14.Qg4 Bh6 15.Nh3 [15.c3+/-
Stockfish, Komodo, Houdini] 15...N6f5 16.Ng5 Bxg5 17.hxg5 f3 18.g3 e4
19.Be3 Bd5? [19...Ne2 20.Nxb6 axb6 21.Bxb6+ Kc8 22.dxe4+/-] 20.Qf4 d6
21.Bxd5 Nxc2+ 22.Kd2 Ncxe3 [If 22...exd3 23.Kxd3 Nfxe3 24.fxe3 Nxa1
25.Rc1 Rf8 26.Be6!+- with mate in a few moves.] 23.fxe3 Rf8 24.Qxe4
Qxe4 25.Bxe4 f2 26.Bxf5 1-0
28 - Edmund Poscher in ICCF
Edmund Poscher of Austria was the friendliest opponent I played in my first
ICCF tournament. Edmund communicated well in English.
I seem to recall he liked the Beatles and Bobby Fischer, both of whom pretty
much ceased to perform after 1972. A check of ICCF ratings finds Edmund
Poscher rated 2120 and inactive since 1995.
We played the sharp Vienna Game 3.Bc4 Nxe4 line called by Tim Harding
the Frankenstein-Dracula Variation. I devoured Harding’s books.
I played the same first 10 moves in my game vs Ing. Jozef Spanik. Poscher
varied with 11...Nd4 (instead of 11...Bb7). He mounted a very impressive
attack for the Exchange. When I blundered, Edmund Poscher polished me off
in good form.
Sawyer - Poscher, corr ICCF 1978 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Nf6 3.Nc3 Nxe4
4.Qh5 Nd6 5.Bb3 Nc6 6.Nb5 g6 7.Qf3 f5 8.Qd5 Qe7 9.Nxc7+ Kd8
10.Nxa8 b6 11.d3 Nd4 12.Nh3 [Junior 12 suggests 12.Nxb6 axb6
13.Qa8+/=] 12...f4 13.Nxb6 axb6 14.Qa8 Kc7 15.Bd5 Nxc2+ 16.Ke2 Nb5
[Chances are equal after 16...Bb7 17.Bxb7 Nd4+ 18.Kf1 Nxb7 19.Bd2=]
17.Be3?? [This is a stupid move. It throws the game away. Black gets a
direct attack. White's king is toast. Correct is 17.Bd2 Nbd4+ 18.Kd1 Nxa1
19.Qa7+ Kd8 20.Qxb6+ Ke8 21.Qb8!? Qc5 22.Qxe5+ Ne6 23.Nxf4+/= and
though both kings are in danger, White seems better off.] 17...fxe3 18.fxe3
Qc5 19.d4 Nbxd4+ 20.exd4 Nxd4+ 0-1
Book 1 – Chapter 3 – King’s Gambit
2.f4
The Open Game 1.e4 e5 is one of the most popular ways to begin a chess
game at all levels. At first we consider very rare second moves for White.
29 – I Did Wrong and Won
At the end of 2012, I tried many openings I rarely play, just for the fun of it.
This game started out as a Bird's Opening, then moved to a From Gambit. I
opted this time for a King's Gambit, and my opponent chose the King's
Gambit Declined.
In this 3 minute blitz game I play safe logical active moves quickly in a rare
position at 2 seconds per move. However, when I stop to look at the game for
more than 2 seconds, I see that I missed much better moves at several points.
Analyzing my game vs "realityczech" becomes a reality check. Obviously

4.fxe5 wins a piece vs Black's 2...Bd6/3...Nf6? set-up. On my next move 5.e5
also wins a piece. How embarrassing!
I missed improvements. The good news is that I picked off two pawns
reaching an ending with my bishop vs Black's knight. My central pawns
became an unstoppable steamroller.
Sawyer - realityczech, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 19.12.2012 1.f4 e5 2.e4

Bd6 3.Nf3 Nf6? [3...f6 4.d4 exf4 5.e5 fxe5 6.dxe5 Bc5 7.Nc3+/-] 4.Nc3?!
[4.fxe5+-] 4...exf4 5.d4? [5.e5 Qe7 6.Qe2+-] 5...Be7 6.Bxf4 d5 7.e5 Ne4
8.Bd3 Nxc3 9.bxc3 Bg4 [9...c5=] 10.0-0 0-0 11.h3 Bxf3 [11...Be6
12.Rb1+/=] 12.Qxf3 Bg5? [Black drops a pawn, but defense was difficult in
any case. 12...Qd7 13.Qh5+-] 13.Bxg5 Qxg5 14.Qxd5 c6 15.Qe4 g6 16.Rf2
[16.Rab1+-] 16...Nd7 17.Raf1 Rae8 18.h4 [18.Bc4+-] 18...Qh6 19.Qg4
[19.Bc4+-] 19...Re7 20.h5 Qxh5 21.Qxh5 gxh5 22.Rf5 h6 23.Rxh5
[23.R1f3+-] 23...Kg7 24.Rf3 f5 25.Rhxf5 Rxf5 26.Rxf5 Nb6 27.c4 Rf7
28.Rxf7+ Kxf7 29.Kf2 Ke6 30.Ke3 Nd7 31.Ke4 Nf8 32.d5+ cxd5+
33.cxd5+ Ke7 34.c4 Ng6 35.g3 Nh8 36.Kf5 Nf7 37.d6+ Kd7 38.c5 Nd8
39.Bb5+ Black resigns 1-0
30 - Attack 2...Nc6 and 3...f5
As Black against the King's Gambit, I have normally chosen to play 2.f4 exf4
3.Nf3 g5. As a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit player as White, I am very familiar
with the rapid advance of my g-pawn. Sometimes this is combined with my
own castling kingside.
The main line of the King's Gambit Accepted is comfortable for me as Black.
My lifetime winning percentage was 64% in 88 games as Black after 3.Nf3
g5.
My favorite backup vs the King's Gambit is the 2.f4 Nc6 line. The sharpest
and most successful idea behind 2...Nc6 is 3.Nf3 f5!? Below we back into
this line from a Queens Knight Defence.
challanger100 - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 29.12.2012 begins

1.e4 Nc6 2.f4 e5 [I decided to go for a King's Gambit. Sometimes I play
2...d5 3.exd5 Qxd5= with a Scandinavian Defence where the early f4 is not
so helpful to White.] 3.Nf3 f5!? [An alternative is 3...exf4 4.d4 d5 5.exd5
Qxd5 6.Nc3 Bb4=] 4.exf5 exf4 5.d4 d5 6.Bxf4 Bxf5 [Better is 6...Bd6
7.Bxd6 Qxd6 8.Bd3 Nge7 9.Nc3 Bxf5 10.Bxf5 Nxf5 11.Qe2+ Qe7 12.Qxe7+
Nfxe7= with an even endgame.] 7.Bd3 Bxd3 8.Qxd3 Nf6 9.0-0 Be7 10.c3
[Now the game is dead even all the way until the ending. White could play
for a win with 10.Ng5! Qd7 11.Nc3 0-0 12.Rae1+/-] 10...0-0 11.Ne5 Ne4
12.Nd2 Nxd2 13.Qxd2 Nxe5 14.Bxe5 Qd7 15.Qd3 Bd6 16.Qg3 Bxe5
17.Qxe5 Rxf1+ 18.Rxf1 Rf8 19.Rxf8+ Kxf8 20.h3 a6 21.b3 c6 22.Kh2 Qe7
23.Qb8+ Kf7 24.Qf4+ Qf6 25.Qc7+ Qe7 26.Qxe7+ Kxe7 27.g4 Kf6
28.Kg3 g5 29.Kf3 Ke6 30.Ke3 Kd6 31.Kd3 b5 32.a4 Kc7 33.axb5 axb5
34.c4 Kb6 35.Kc3 Ka5 36.Kb2? [Throwing the game away. White can draw
by 36.c5 h6 37.Kc2 Kb4 38.Kb2 Ka5 39.Kc3=] 36...Kb4 37.cxd5 cxd5
38.Ka2 Kc3 39.Ka3 b4+ 40.Ka4 h6 41.Kb5 Kxb3 42.Kc5 Kc3 43.Kxd5 b3
White resigns 0-1
31 - Zilbermints vs Vasiukov
Lev Zilbermints wrote to me:
" I crushed GM Evgeni Vasiukov on the Internet Chess
Club with the Adelaide Counter-Gambit in 25 moves. He
tried the King's Gambit against me, but was in for a
surprise. The game started out 1 e4 e5 2 f4 Nc6 3 Nf3 f5!
Check it out! "
I replied: "Wow, 25 moves. Lev, you got a lot out of that position!"
It is amazing how the entire Black army mounts a coordinated assault on the
White king. The grandmaster opened up the kingside for attack, but was
unable to talk his queenside pieces into joining the fray. Thus it was Black
who got the attack.
This King's Gambit Declined variation 2.e4 Nc6 3.Nf3 f5 is one of my

favorites. Black throws the gambit right back at White in a lesser known line
that has notched some impressive results.
The 6.g4 move is not mentioned by John Shaw. It appears that Vasiukov is
attempting to play a Classical King's Gambit Accepted reversed.
Vasiukov (2215) - Zilbermints (2184), ICC 5 0 Internet Chess Club,

14.01.2015 begins 1.e4 e5 2.f4 Nc6 3.Nf3 f5 4.exf5 e4 5.Ne5 Nf6 6.g4 [The
main line seems to be 6.Nc3 Qe7 (6...Bd6!?) 7.Ng4 Nxg4 8.Qxg4 Qf7=]
6...Bc5!? [6...Nd5!=] 7.g5 0-0 8.gxf6 [8.Nc3+/=] 8...Qxf6 9.Bc4+ Kh8
[Another idea is 9...d5 10.Bxd5+ Kh8 11.Qh5 Nxe5 12.fxe5 Qxe5 13.Bf7
Bxf5-/+] 10.Qg4 [A more aggressive approach seems to be 10.Qh5 Nxe5
11.fxe5 Qxe5 12.Bf7 d5 13.Rf1+/=] 10...d5 11.Ng6+? [11.Nxc6 Bxf5=]
11...Qxg6 12.Qxg6 hxg6 13.Bxd5 Nd4 14.Bb3 Nf3+ [Or 14...Bxf5-+]
15.Ke2 Bxf5 16.Nc3 Rae8 [Black has many ways to increase his advantage.
16...Bg4 17.h3 Nd4+ 18.Ke1 Bf3 19.Rf1 Bg2 20.Rf2 Bxh3-+] 17.Nd5 Nd4+
18.Ke1 Nf3+ 19.Ke2 Bg4 20.Ne3 Nd4+ 21.Ke1 Bf3 22.Rg1 Bh5 23.Rf1
Nf3+ 24.Kf2 Rxf4 25.Kg3 Ref8 White resigns 0-1
32 - James Corter 2…d6
James H. Corter was an active member of the Williamsport chess club that
me on Tuesday nights at Lycoming College. I played James and his son
Travis Corter about 30 games each.
At that time, James was a typical club player rated in the 1500s-1600s; Travis
was learning. They were very friendly guys, a joy to play. It happened that I
won every game against them 59-0.
I was the only player in the club rated over 2000. By the rating odds, I was
"supposed" win, but one does not always win every game, even if favored to
do so.
I tried a King's Gambit and James Corter played the 2.f4 d6 line. We had
similarities to a Philidor Defence or a Black Lion System.
Grandmaster John Shaw writes of 2...d6: "This is a bit passive, unless Black
captures on f4 shortly." You may recognize 3.Nf3 exf4 transposes to the
Fischer Variation normally reached by 2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3 d6.
Corter's move here of 3...Bg4 reminded me of the Paul Morphy game vs the
Duke of Brunswick. As always, the best idea in such games is rapid
development using your army to make threats.
I managed to angle my pieces and take aim at Black's king. Alas, my move
8.f5 had closed off the best attacking chances until his 17...g6 allowed me to
win material and open the f-file with advantage. A mutual kingside attack
followed, until I came crashing through with my final move.
Sawyer (2010) - Corter (1603), Williamsport, PA 22.06.1999 begins 1.e4 e5

2.f4 d6 3.Nf3 Bg4 4.Bc4 Bxf3 5.Qxf3 Nf6 6.0-0 [6.fxe5! dxe5 7.Qb3+/-]
6...Be7 7.d3 0-0 8.f5?! [8.Nc3+/=] 8...h5 9.Qg3 Kh7 10.Nc3 c6 11.Bg5?!
[11.Bb3+/=] 11...Ng4 [11...Qb6+! 12.Kh1 Qxb2=] 12.Bd2 Bg5 13.Rad1?!
[13.Bxg5 Qxg5 14.h3 Qe3+ 15.Qxe3 Nxe3 16.Rf2 Nxc4 17.dxc4+/=]
13...Bxd2 14.Rxd2 Qg5 [14...Qb6+ 15.Kh1 Qxb2 16.Ne2 Nd7=] 15.Re2 h4
16.Qf3 Nd7 17.Nd1 g6? 18.Bxf7! 1-0
33 - Philidor Draw vs 2520
Bobby Fischer played a famous King's Gambit vs Robert Wade in the 2.f4
Nf6 variation. John Shaw gives it as Game 71 in his book on "The King's
Gambit", a Quality Chess masterpiece.
Shaw writes: "Incidentally, choosing Fischer - Wade to illustrate the 3.fxe5

line is like choosing vanilla as your favourite flavour of ice cream. No
apologies though, as there is no better example of how to handle the white
side of this line. Besides, any chess book is improved by the addition of a
Fischer game."
Below vs "duckbreath" (rated 2520) I had White in this line and played a
textbook draw. You may know the Philidor opening. The Philidor Endgame
allows you to draw a pawn down in a rook ending. Starting at move 44, this
game demonstrates the proper procedure to draw the Philidor Endgame, a
specific rook and pawn ending with your king is directly in front of the
enemy pawn and your rook on the pawn's 6th rank. Once the pawn is
advanced to that 6th rank, slide your rook back and check the enemy king
from behind. There is no way to avoid the draw.
Sawyer (2226) - duckbreath (2520), ICC 15 0 u Internet Chess Club,

07.07.2001 begins 1.e4 e5 2.f4 Nf6 3.fxe5 ["3.Nf3 aims for a more complex
struggle" - Shaw] 3...Nxe4 4.Nf3 d5 [4...Ng5 5.d4 Nxf3+ 6.Qxf3 Qh4+ 7.Qf2
Qxf2+ 8.Kxf2 and 1-0 in 38. Fischer-Wade, Vinkovci 1968] 5.d3 Nc5 6.d4
Ne6 7.c4 Nc6 8.Be3 [8.cxd5 Qxd5 9.Nc3 Bb4 10.Bd2 Bxc3 11.bxc3+/=]
8...Bb4+ 9.Nc3 Ne7 10.a3 Bxc3+ 11.bxc3 0-0 12.Bd3 dxc4 13.Bxc4 Nd5
14.Qd2 Qd7 15.0-0 b6 16.Ng5 Bb7 17.Nxe6 fxe6 18.Bd3 Rxf1+ 19.Rxf1 h6
20.Bxh6 Nxc3 21.Bg6 Qxd4+ 22.Qxd4 Ne2+ 23.Kh1 Nxd4 24.Be3 Rd8
25.Bxd4 Rxd4 26.Bf7+ Kh8 27.Bg6 Bxg2+ 28.Kxg2 Rg4+ 29.Kh3 Rxg6
30.Rf7 c5 31.Rxa7 Rg5 32.Ra6 Rxe5 33.Rxb6 Re3+ 34.Kg2 Rxa3 35.Rxe6
c4 36.Rc6 Rc3 37.Kf2 Kg8 38.Ke2 Rc2+ 39.Kd1 Rxh2 40.Rxc4 Kh7
41.Ke1 g6 42.Kf1 Kh6 43.Kg1 Rd2 44.Rc3 [This is the Philidor Endgame
position to draw a rook and pawn ending.] 44...Kh5 45.Ra3 g5 46.Rb3 g4
47.Ra3 Kh4 48.Rb3 g3 49.Rb8 Rc2 50.Rh8+ Kg4 51.Rg8+ Kf3 52.Rf8+
Ke2 53.Re8+ Kf3 54.Rf8+ Ke2 55.Re8+ Kd1 56.Rd8+ Ke1 57.Re8+ Kd2
58.Rd8+ Ke3 59.Re8+ Kd2 60.Kg2 Kc1+ 61.Kxg3 Ra2 62.Re1+ Kb2
63.Re2+ Ka1 64.Rxa2+ Kxa2 [Game drawn because neither player has
mating material] 1/2-1/2
2.f4 Bc5
The classical King’s Gambit Declined is a solid well recommended choice.
34 - Last Words of Bender
My opponent was Mr. Bender. Back in the 1970s there were two Benders in
APCT. I played a King's Gambit vs Sam Bender who was rated about 100
points below me. On his last postcard, after making his move he wrote,
"Looks like you got me."
Friendly chit-chat or banter was common on postcards during games. A week

or two later I got a card from his wife informing me that Sam had died. It is
rare in the USA to win a chess game because your opponent dies, but it is
more likely in a postal game than during an over-the-board game that might
take hours.
I heard an old tale of a postal player in Connecticut who died without

informing his opponents. The tournament director I.A. Horowitz secretly
took over the games and won the tournament!
The Sam Bender game was a King's Gambit Declined, the classical 2...Bc5,
recommended by opening theoreticians. After 3.Nf3, Mr. Bender avoided the
solid 3...d6! for the risky 3...Nf6!? This allowed White to develop all his
pieces in an aggressive attacking formation aimed at the Black monarch. His
position was lost. The game was adjudicated a rated win for White.
Sawyer (1900) - Bender (1822), corr APCT 78CC-A-3 (4), 05.1978 begins
1.e4 e5 2.f4 Bc5 3.Nf3 Nf6 [Better is 3...d6 when White has either 4.Nc3 or
4.c3] 4.fxe5 Nxe4 5.d4 Be7 6.Be3 [6.Bd3!+/=] 6...d5 7.exd6 cxd6 8.Nbd2
Nxd2 [8...d5=] 9.Qxd2 0-0 10.Bd3 Nd7 11.0-0 d5 12.Rae1 Nf6 13.Bg5 Be6
14.Qf4 h6? 15.Qh4 [Nowadays with my BDG experience I would play
15.Bxh6!+- in a heartbeat. But back then I was afraid to sacrifice.] 15...Re8
16.Bxf6 [White has 16.Rxe6! fxe6 17.Bxh6 Ne4 18.Qg4 Bf6 19.c3+/-]
16...Bxf6 17.Qf4 Be7 18.Ne5 Rf8 19.Ng4 [19.c3+/=] 19...Bg5 20.Qf3?
[20.Qg3! Bh4? 21.Nxh6+!+-] 20...Qb6 21.c3 Rad8 [Black missed his chance
with 21...Qxb2! 22.Re2 Bxg4=/+] 22.Re2 Bxg4 23.Qxg4 Qc6 [Better is
23...Rd6 24.h4+/-] 24.h4 f5 25.Bxf5 Bf6 26.Qg6 1-0
35 - Cooper Principle "!?"
In 1972 I was working my way up through the bottom ranks of chess. My
best opponent was the future master Graham Cooper. We played hundreds of
blitz games in his dorm room. Graham taught me to play fast. He was much
better than I was. Though Graham played a lot of speculative sacrifices, he
rarely lost our games on the board. I won about one fourth of them, most of
them when his time ran out just before he could checkmate me.
Cooper taught me to love chess books. He was a great student of openings.

He loved to attack. In addition to the King's Gambit, he played all the
sharpest main lines of the 1.e4 openings. As Black he liked the Ruy Lopez
Marshall Attack and the King's Indian Defence. He loved to sacrifice
something in every game. We played about once a week. Constantly I
prepared new lines from my own growing library to surprise him in our blitz
games.
I learned three things from Graham Cooper about chess books.

1. Read chess books written beyond just those written in English.
2. Think for yourself. Be willing to disagree with the theoreticians.
3. Look for the most interesting moves. Cooper pointed out that in opening
manuals like MCO, best moves are indicated by "!"
Graham said that the good players often knew the best moves. He liked to try
all the interesting moves with "!?" Those moves surprise opponents. I call it
the "Cooper Principle". Experiment. Try those moves with “!?” That concept
changed my chess life!
This King's Gambit Declined comes from the 1972 University of Maine
Championship. I learned that defending open games requires exact opening
knowledge. Good defensive possibilities are often overlooked. Boldness is
rewarded for gambit players.
Graham Cooper became a USCF Life Master.
Cooper (1900) - Sawyer (1450), UMO ch Orono, Maine (2), 09.12.1972

begins 1.e4 e5 2.f4 Bc5 3.Nf3 d6 4.Bc4 Nf6 5.d3 Nc6 6.Nc3 Bg4 7.h3 Bxf3
8.Qxf3 Nd4 9.Qg3 0-0 10.f5 Nxc2+ 11.Kd1 Nxa1 12.Bh6 g6? [12...Nh5!
13.Qg4 c6 -+] 13.fxg6 hxg6 [13...Nh5 14.Qg4 d5 15.gxf7+ Kh8 16.Qxh5
Qd6 17.Bxd5 +-] 14.Qxg6+ 1-0
2.f4 d5
The famous Falkbeer Counter Gambit dates back to the 1800s when the 2.f4
Gambit was truly King.
36 - Fry Cooks My Falkbeer
Luther Fry's f-pawn follows a fabulous flight from f2 to f7 in a Falkbeer from
moves 2 to 9. The game started as a King's Gambit Declined 1.e4 e5 2.f4 and
I switched to the Falkbeer Counter Gambit with 2...d5!? Fry varied from the
normal 3.exd5 with 3.Nc3 which offered me two good choices: Vienna
Gambit with 3...Nf6 or Van Geet 3...d4. I chose the latter.
The game was played in the 1989 USCF Golden Squires Postal Chess
Tournament. I assume that Luther Fry was comfortable heading into a Vienna
Gambit, but he certainly handled the Van Geet like option well enough to
outplay me when my king got caught in the center.
Black has good options, but I did not understand them well enough at the
time. The early advance of 2.f4 makes it harder to develop White's light
squared bishop. Fry chose 5.d3 and kept the bishop home for the time being.
Fry (2072) - Sawyer (2030), corr USCF 89SS104, 18.02.1992 begins 1.e4 e5
2.f4 d5 3.Nc3 [The main line Falkbeer Gambit is 3.exd5 e4 (Often Black
prefers 3...exf4 or 3...c6) 4.d3 Nf6 5.dxe4 Nxe4 6.Nf3 Bc5 7.Qe2 Bf5 8.Nc3
Qe7 9.Be3+/=] 3...d4!? [More common is to transpose into the Vienna
Gambit with 3...Nf6 4.fxe5 Nxe4 5.Nf3 Be7=] 4.Nce2 Nc6 5.d3 Bd6 [Black
has a good position after either 5...Bg4 or 5...exf4] 6.f5!? [6.fxe5 Bxe5
7.Nf3=] 6...g6 7.g4 h5 [Maybe best is 7...Bb4+! 8.c3 Qh4+ 9.Kd2 Ba5-/+]
8.fxg6 Bxg4 9.gxf7+ Kxf7 10.Qd2 Nf6?! [10...Bf8! heading for ...Bh6 is
better.] 11.h3 Be6 [Here is an interesting combination that I missed: 11...Bb4
12.c3 Nxe4 13.dxe4 Qh4+ 14.Kd1 Rad8 15.hxg4 Qxh1 16.cxb4 d3 17.Ng3
Qxg1 18.Qe3 Qxe3 19.Bxe3 hxg4 with an unbalanced position that might
favor Black.] 12.Nf3 Ke7 13.Ng5 Bg8 [13...Qd7=] 14.h4 Qf8 [14...Bb4
15.c3+/=] 15.Ng3 [15.a3+/-] 15...Re8 [15...Bb4 16.c3+/=] 16.Bh3 Kd8 17.a3
Nh7? [17...Ne7 18.Rf1+/-] 18.Rf1 Qg7 19.Nxh5 Qe7 20.Qg2 Nf8 21.Qg4 1-
0
37 - Callahan King's Gambit
This game is a King's Gambit played by Daniel Callahan. I chose the
Falkbeer Counter Gambit approach with 2...d5.
However, after 3.exd5 c6 4.Nc3 exf4 5.Nf3 Bd6 we reach a line also possible
after 2...exf4 3.Nf3 d5 4.exd5 from the King's Gambit Accepted. White
delayed d2-d4, and I got a good game.
When I see the name "Callahan" (common in Florida), for some reason I
think of the character Peggy Callahan (played by Jennifer Darling) from the
1970s both in the TV series "The Six Million Dollar Man" and later "The
Bionic Woman". Darling went on to become the voice of many animated
characters in movies and television shows.
During my final APCT years, Helen Warren and Jim Warren offered e-mail
sections. These games were played much faster than the old postal chess that
I had played for 20 years. Many of my e-mail games were played
superficially by me.
Once in a while I enjoyed a nice gift. They were as treasured as a wrapped

present under the Christmas tree.
Callahan (1868) - Sawyer (1969), corr APCT EMN-A-1, 28.12.1996 begins

1.e4 e5 2.f4 d5 3.exd5 c6 4.Nc3 exf4 5.Nf3 Bd6 6.Bc4 [6.d4] 6...Ne7 7.dxc6
[7.d4] 7...Nbxc6 8.d4 0-0 9.0-0 Bg4 10.Ne4 Rc8 [10...Bc7 11.c3] 11.Bb3
Bb8 12.c3 Ng6 13.Bc2 Nh4 14.Ned2 f5 15.Qe1 Bxf3 16.Nxf3 Nxf3+
17.Rxf3 Nxd4 18.Rd3 Nxc2 19.Qe6+ Kh8 20.Rxd8 Rcxd8 21.Rb1 Rfe8
22.Qc4 [22.Qf7 a6-/+] 22...Rd1+ 0-1
38 - Arthur Stobbe Bird
The names of chess openings can rapidly change from one to another with
each new move. Arthur J. Stobbe (1916-2008) was a librarian who conferred
on me the honorary title of "Doctor" because I got my Blackmar-Diemer
Gambit Keybook published in 1992. Arthur thought that anyone who got a
book published ought to be given an honorary PhD.
As I recall, we had an enjoyable year of conversation on our weekly

postcards. Arthur Stobbe was a veteran postal chess player who preferred
gambits or offbeat openings.
Here Arthur started with a Bird's Opening. After I offered the From Gambit,
Mr. Stobbe settled on the King's Gambit.
I countered with the Falkbeer Counter Gambit. Thus in the matter of two
moves, we flipped openings four times.
In our contest the opening and middlegame were roughly equal, but I had the
better chances in the endgame. Eventually, White blundered on move 42 and
ran out of steam by move 50.
Stobbe - Sawyer, corr USCF 1992 begins 1.f4 e5 2.e4 d5 3.exd5 e4 4.Nc3
[The main line of the Falkbeer is 4.d3 Nf6 5.dxe4 Nxe4 6.Nf3 Bc5 7.Qe2 Bf5
8.Nc3 Qe7 9.Be3+/=] 4...Nf6 5.d3 Bb4 6.Bd2 e3 7.Bxe3 0-0 8.Be2 Bxc3+
9.bxc3 Nxd5 10.Bd2 Qf6 11.c4 Nxf4 12.Bxf4 Qxf4 13.Nf3 Re8 14.Qd2
Qxd2+ [Black may wish to keep the queens on the board with 14...Qd6.]
15.Kxd2 Nc6 16.Rab1 b6 17.d4 Ba6 18.Bd3 g6 19.Rhe1 Kf8 20.d5 Na5
21.c5 Bxd3 22.cxd3 Nb7 23.c6 Nd6 24.Ne5 f6 25.Ng4 Kg7 26.Ne3 Kf7
27.Nc2 Rxe1 28.Rxe1 Re8 29.a4 [29.Rxe8 Nxe8 30.Kc3=] 29...Rxe1
30.Kxe1 Ke7 31.Ke2 Ne8 [31...Nc8 32.Ne3 Kd6 33.Ng4 f5 34.Nf6 Ne7
35.Nxh7 Kxd5-/+] 32.Ke3 f5 33.Kd4 Kd6 34.Na3 a6 35.h4 h6 36.Nc4+
Ke7 37.g3 Nf6 38.d6+ cxd6 39.Nxb6 Kd8 40.Na8 Kc8 41.Nb6+ Kc7
42.Nd5+? [Better to keep the knights on with 42.Nc4 Kxc6-/+] 42...Nxd5
43.Kxd5 g5 44.a5 gxh4 45.gxh4 f4 46.Ke4 Kxc6 47.Kxf4 Kb5 48.Ke3
Kxa5 49.Kd2 Kb4 50.Kc2 a5 0-1
39 - Romantic Falkbeer
On Valentine’s Day I thought of seems like a great time for a romantic
opening that ends in a mate! My King's Gambit game vs Jim Watt fits the bill
quite nicely. I met his advance with the Falkbeer Counter Gambit.
The USCF lists James Watt as rated 1833 by 1991, but with no further
tournament games played since. This game played three years earlier in 1988.
His aggressive style shows that he was a player who was rapidly improving at
the time.
I like openings like the Falkbeer. The gambit player pushes both center
pawns two squares. Here the e-pawn is sacrificed. This same thing happens
by White in the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit.
This game as Black below reminds me of the Elephant Gambit and the Albin-
Counter Gambit. The open lines give the gambit player practical chances for
a quick advantage.
In the Open Game 1.e4 e5, the natural move 2.Nf3 develops a piece, attacks
e5, and protects the vulnerable f2 square. When White plays the Kings
Gambit, he temporarily leaves the knight at home.
With the Falkbeer move 3...e4, Nf3 is taken away, so White needs a different
plan. John Shaw recommends 4.d3. Here White chose 4.Bb5+!?
By move 9, I had developed all four minor pieces and castled. White had
moved one bishop, one knight and left his king in the center. Two moves
later, White lost his lady friend.
Watt (1584) - Sawyer (1981), Hatboro, PA 1988 begins 1.e4 e5 2.f4 d5

3.exd5 e4 4.Bb5+ c6 5.dxc6 Nxc6 6.Qe2 [6.Ne2; 6.Nc3] 6...Nf6 7.Nc3 Bc5
8.d3 0-0 9.Bxc6 Bg4 10.Qd2 e3 11.Bxb7 exd2+ 12.Bxd2 Qe7+ 13.Be4
Nxe4 14.dxe4 Bxg1 15.Rxg1 Qh4+ 16.Kf1 Rad8 [Or 16...Rab8-+] 17.Be1
Qxh2 18.Nd5 Rxd5 19.exd5 Re8 20.Bc3 Qxf4# 0-1
40 - Falkbeer with 4.d3 Qxd5
What do you learn from the way a strong chess engine treats a gambit? When
I played a King's Gambit against SharpShooter (rated 2929) it did not take on
f4.
Instead the computer played a Falkbeer Counter Gambit with 2...d5 3.exd5
e4. However when I continued with the normal 4.d3, Sharpshooter recaptured
with 4...Qxd5 with a wide open position rather than playing the standard
4...Nf6.
White obtains a slightly better game, but tactics will decide the game. I was a
pretty good blitz player in my 40s, but I was no match for this silicon
monster.
I missed a good chance for an edge on move 17. Later I blundered the game
away.
Sawyer (2368) - SharpShooter (2929), ICC 3 2 u Internet Chess Club,

15.01.2000 begins 1.e4 e5 2.f4 d5 3.exd5 e4 4.d3 Qxd5 5.Qe2 Nf6 [Another
game vs the same opponent continued 5...f5 6.Nc3 Bb4 7.Bd2 Bxc3 8.Bxc3
Nf6 9.dxe4+/- although 0-1 on move 32. Sawyer - SharpShooter, ICC 2000]
6.Nd2 Bf5 7.dxe4 Bxe4 8.g4 Bb4 9.c3 Be7 10.Nxe4 Qxe4 11.Qxe4 Nxe4
12.Nf3 Nd7 13.Bd3 Ndc5 14.Bc2 0-0-0 15.0-0 Rhe8 16.Be3 Bf8 17.Bf2
[17.Rad1! Rxd1 18.Rxd1 f5 19.Ne5+/=] 17...Nxf2 18.Kxf2 Bd6 19.f5 Ne4+
20.Kg2 Nf6 21.h3 Nd5 22.Kh1 Re2 23.Bb3 Nf4 24.h4 Rxb2 25.Bxf7 Ne2
[25...Rf8! 26.Bb3 h5-+] 26.Rfb1? Ng3+ 27.Kg1 Bc5+ 28.Nd4 Rxd4
29.Rxb2 Rd2# White checkmated 0-1
41 - Falkbeer Counter Sac
Is it better to sacrifice or grab a pawn? The King's Gambit player chooses to
gambit a pawn. This increases open lines and aims to tactically threaten the
strategical weak points in his opponent's position.
Black can fight back with the Falkbeer Counter Gambit. The sharp main line
contains threats and counter threats.
To win a game you need to gain some kind of advantage. My guest opponent
in 2002 met my King's Gambit with a Falkbeer when I played White on the
Internet Chess Club.
Black offers a pawn on move two and grabs a pawn on move 12. My
subsequent attacks on his bishop gave me the advantage of his weak f5 pawn.
Black picked up my d5 pawn on move 18. This costs him the Exchange
almost immediately.
The moral of the story is that a gambit sacrifice is fine early in the game.
However, the time and space you gain must allow you a good chance to end
up with an advantage.
Sawyer (2000) - guest1103 (1500), ICC 2 12 u Internet Chess Club,

06.05.2002 begins 1.e4 e5 2.f4 d5 3.exd5 e4 4.d3 Nf6 5.dxe4 Nxe4 6.Nf3
Bc5 7.Qe2 Bf5 8.Nc3 Qe7 9.Be3 Bxe3 10.Qxe3 Nxc3 11.Qxe7+ Kxe7
12.bxc3 Bxc2 [12...Be4 13.Ng5] 13.Kd2 Bf5 [13...Bg6 14.Re1+ Kd6
15.Nd4] 14.Re1+ Kd7 15.Nd4 g6 16.Nxf5 gxf5 17.Bd3 Kd6 18.Bxf5 Kxd5
19.Be4+ Kd6 20.Bxb7 Nc6 21.Bxa8 Rxa8 22.Kc2 Ne7 [22...Na5 23.Re4+-]
23.Rd1+ Kc5 24.Rhe1 Black resigns 1-0
2.f4 exf4
In this section we look at less common continuations after accepting the
gambit pawn.
42 - 3.Bc4 Still Wins
King's Gambit brings excitement to chess players just like Black Friday sales
bring excitement to holiday shoppers. When gambit players are strong
grandmasters like Vassily Ivanchuk and Sergey Karjakin, you know they may
test popular theory.
The playground for this opening was the King's Bishop's Gambit 3.Bc4.
Grandmaster John Shaw gives us convincing arguments to prefer 3.Nf3. Both
moves have a long and glorious history. Bobby Fischer won as White with
3.Bc4, but he lost as Black to 3.Nf3 as played by Boris Spassky. Both moves
are playable if you are good in tactics.
Stronger players excel in complex unbalanced positions. The evaluation of

the advantage can change on any move. Players often turn to positional
openings when they get older. Masters rarely lose solid positions. Ivanchuk
wants to win! He continues to play sharp theoretical lines vs against many
grandmasters!
Ivanchuk (2731) - Karjakin (2757), Vladimir Petrov Mem 2015 Jurmala

LAT (9.1), 08.03.2015 begins 1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Bc4 Qh4+ 4.Kf1 d6
5.Nc3!? [5.Nf3 Qf6 6.d4 Ne7 7.h4!? Be6=] 5...Be6 6.Bb3!? [More common
is 6.Qe2 Nd7 7.Bxe6 fxe6 8.Qc4 0-0-0 9.Qxe6 when 9...g5!=/+ looks like a
good idea.] 6...Nd7 [6...Nf6 7.Nf3 Qh6=/+] 7.d4 g5 [7...Ngf6 8.Nf3 Qh6=/+]
8.Nf3 Qh5 9.h4 h6 [9...Ngf6 10.Nxg5 Bxb3 11.axb3 Qxd1+ 12.Nxd1 Bg7=]
10.Kg1 g4 11.Ne1 Bxb3 12.axb3 Ngf6 13.Nd3 g3 14.Qf3 Qxf3 15.gxf3 Nb8
16.Ne2 Nc6 17.c3 Rg8 18.Kg2 d5 19.e5 Nh5 20.Nexf4 Nxf4+ 21.Nxf4 0-0-0
22.Nh5 b6 23.Nf6 Rh8 24.h5 Kb7 25.Kxg3 Na5 [25...Ne7 26.Rg1 Nf5+
27.Kf4+/-] 26.b4 Nb3 27.Rb1 a5 28.bxa5 bxa5 29.Be3 Kc6 [or 29...Bg7
30.Ng4+-] 30.Kf2 a4 31.Ke2 Na5 32.Ra1 Nc4 33.Rxa4 Nxb2 34.Ra6+ Kb7
35.Rha1 Nc4 36.Kd3 Nb6 37.Bf4 Rc8 38.Ng4 Bg7 39.Ne3 Bf8 40.Ra7+
Kc6 41.R1a6 Kb5 42.Nxd5 Rg8 43.c4+ Nxc4 44.Nc3+ 1-0
43 - Natural Development
Here we have another example of how the King's Gambit often and easily
wins against Black's natural development moves. There are probably 20
different reasonable methods of defense to the Kings Gambit, although
admittedly some are just barely playable. Three Black defenses are proven to
be really good:
The traditional main line of the King's Gambit Accepted 2...exf4 3.Nf3 g5
allows Black to hold on to the pawn at least temporarily. Play is tactical, but
Black's chances are just as good as White's.
Larry Kaufman recommends reaching the Modern Defence by the 2...d5

move order 1.e4 e5 2.f4 d5 3.exd5 exf4 4.Nf3 Nf6.
Mihail Marin recommends a solid Classical Defence of the King's Gambit

Declined 2...Bc5. Typical play follows 3.Nf3 d6 4.Nc3 Nf6 5.Bc4 Nc6 6.d3,
a position that can also be reached via a Bishop's Opening or Vienna Game.
Here is a game where White wins in a crushing attack. Black played what
would normally be good moves against other openings, but they do not
defend against the Kings Gambit.
tgralex - Penullar, world players vs Kasparov's Chess Chess.com,

25.02.2012 begins 1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3 Nc6 4.Bc4 d6 5.0-0 [5.d4!+/=
grabs the center, threatens Bxf4 and in some cases like ...Be6 the pawn fork
d4-d5.] 5...Nf6 6.Nc3 Ne5 7.Bb3 Be6!? 8.d4 Nxf3+ 9.Qxf3 Bxb3 10.axb3
Be7 11.Bxf4 0-0 [White has a very promising kingside attack.] 12.e5! dxe5
13.dxe5 Nd7 14.Rad1 [White is for choice. There is plenty of time to grab
the pawn with 14.Qxb7+/- and return to Qf3 with advantage on both sides of
the board.] 14...Qc8 15.Qg4 [15.Nd5!+/- hits e7, c7, f6 with the possibility of
redeployment to f5 or g4 via e3.] 15...f5 16.Qg3 [Or 16.exf6 Nxf6 17.Qe2
when all White's pieces are well placed.] 16...g6 [16...Nc5 17.Nd5+/-
] 17.Bh6 Re8 18.Rxf5 [The gambit player has won a pawn with a great
position. Black is lost.] 18...Nc5 19.Rdf1 Ne6 20.Rf7 Bf8 21.Qh4
[21.Ne4!+- adds even more tactical threats.] 21...Ng7 22.Nd5 [Or 22.Ne4!+-]
22...Bc5+ 23.Kh1 Nf5 24.R1xf5 gxf5 25.Qf6 Qe6 26.Qg7# 1-0
44 - King's Gambit Simul
During my Williamsport simultaneous exhibition in 1996 at Penn College, I
played both 1.e4 and 1.d4, mixing it up. Against the club players who know
openings, I played main lines.
Against the others, I tried to crush them and win in short order. A great
opening for quick attacks against 1.e4 e5 players is the King's Gambit.
About this time, I was offered money by a publisher to write a book on the
King's Gambit. It was tempting. I had played the opening a few times in
tournaments and in some of my more deeply researched postal chess games.
This was before e-mail and the internet were so popular.
Nowadays it would be much easier to write such a book with large databases
and strong chess engines. There are always King's Gambit fans to buy it. But
it would take a lot of hard work to produce a great product. I already had a
full-time job!
Here are a few short odd King's Gambits from my simul.
Sawyer - NN, simul Williamsport PA 1996 begins 1.e4 e5 2.f4 King's

Gambit 2...exf4 [2...d6 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.Nc3 c6 5.fxe5 dxe5 6.Bc4 (6.Nxe5)
6...Be6 (6...b5!? 7.Bb3 b4 8.Nxe5!) 7.Bxe6 fxe6 8.Nxe5 Na6 9.d4 White has
won a pawn. 9...Nc7 10.0-0 h6? 11.Ng6 Rg8 12.e5 Nfd5 13.Qh5 Nxc3
14.bxc3 Qd5? 15.Nf4+ g6 16.Nxd5 gxh5 17.Nf6+ (17.Nxc7+!) 17...Kf7
18.Nxg8+ 1-0 Sawyer-NN/Williamsport PA 1996; 2...f6? 3.fxe5 fxe5?
(3...Nc6 transposes to an Englund Gambit) 4.Qh5+ g6 (4...Ke7 5.Qxe5+ Kf7
6.Bc4+ d5 7.Bxd5+ and Black is in deep trouble.) 5.Qxe5+ Ne7 6.Qxh8 d6
7.d4 c6 8.Bh6 Nd7 9.Nc3 d5 10.exd5 Nxd5 11.Bxf8 Nxf8 12.Nxd5 1-0
Sawyer-NN/Williamsport PA 1996] 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.e5 Ne4 5.d3 Nc5 6.d4 Ne4
7.Bxf4 [White has regained the gambit pawn with a better position.] 7...d5
8.Bd3 Bf5 9.Nbd2 Bb4 10.0-0 Qe7 [10...Nxd2 11.Bxd2 Bxd3 12.Bg5 Be7
13.Bxe7 Qxe7 14.Qxd3+/- White is more active but the material is still even.]
11.c3 Nxc3 12.Qb3 [12.bxc3! Bxd3 13.cxb4 Bxf1 14.Nxf1+- White has two
pieces for a rook.] 12...g6? [12...Bxd3 13.bxc3 Bxf1 14.Rxf1+-] 13.Bg5 Qf8
14.Bxf5 gxf5 15.bxc3 1-0
45 - Diemer vs Rohricht
In the December 1983 issue of Tom Purser's "BDG World" magazine, Gerard
Welling comments about the Liege Open 1983 where Emil J. Diemer played.
Welling wrote:
"To my surprise, Mr. Diemer played in Liege. But he is old, and with his
intensive style it costs him all his energy within a few rounds..." Welling then
gives the Debast - Diemer game where Diemer won with an Elephant Gambit
in 26 moves in an early round. After a story regarding Diemer's lost in the
third round, Welling added:
"Diemer showed some games with 1.d4 Nf6 2.f3 g6 3.e4 g6 (or d6) 4.g4!?,
1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3 Qe7, and other strange openings.
"White: 1.d4 Nf6 (1...d5 2.e4; 1...g6 2.h4) 2.f3 (or 2.Nc3 d5 3.e4 or 2...g6
3.h4) 2...g6 (2...d5 3.e4) 3.e4 d6 4.g4.
"Black: 1.e4 (1.d4 e5; 1.Nf3 f5 or Nc6; 1.c4 e5 2.Nc3 f5/2.g3 h5; 1.g3 h5;
1.b3 Nc6) 1...e5 2.f4 (2.Nf3 d5 or 2...f5; 2.d4 exd4 3.c3 Qe7!?) 2...exf4 3.Nf3
Qe7!?
"Some of these openings surely are dubious, but they show a very personal
approach to the game!"
These comments by Welling, and published by Purser, had a profound impact

on my life. From 1984-1988 (in my early 30s), on those rare occasions when
I did play, I often experimented with these Diemer variations.
One experiment was 3.Nf3 Qe7!? in the King's Gambit. I had no games on
this line, so I did my own analysis. My game vs Wayne Rohricht was in the
Diemer Variation of the King’s Gambit.
Rohricht - Sawyer (1950), corr APCT 1986 begins 1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3
Qe7 [Diemer Variation] 4.Nc3 [4.d3 g5 5.Nc3 c6=; 4.d4 d5 5.e5 g5=] 4...d5!
5.e5 [5.Nxd5 Qxe4+ 6.Qe2 Qxe2+ 7.Bxe2 Bd6 8.d4 Ne7! 9.Nxf4 Bf5 10.c3
Nd7 11.0-0 0-0 12.Nd2 Rae8 13.Nc4 Bxf4 14.Bxf4 Nd5 15.Ne5 Nxf4
16.Rxf4 Be6 17.Nxd7 Bxd7 18.Bc4 c6 19.Raf1 Be6 =] 5...c6 [5...d4 6.Nd5
Qd8 7.Nxf4 g5 8.Nh5 g4 9.Bc4 Nc6 10.0-0 Be6=] 6.d4 g5 7.h4 f6? [7...g4!]
8.Be2 fxe5 9.0-0 e4 10.Nxg5 Nf6 11.Bh5+ Nxh5 12.Qxh5+ Kd7 13.Rxf4
Qe8 14.Rf7+ Kd8 15.Ngxe4 Be6 16.Bg5+ Black resigns 1-0
46 - Bacon Fries Diemer
Against the King's Gambit vs Joe Bacon, I decided to try an experiment. This
time I chose the Diemer line 3.Nf3 Qe7!?
Joe Bacon and I played four other postal games about 10 years later, two
drawn London Systems (where I was White) and two games in a BDG
thematic event where we both won as Black.
Bacon defended my attack on e4 with 5.d3. White managed an edge

throughout the game.
At the end Black will lose the g-pawn and White stands better. It is somewhat
curious that I resigned when I did, however my APCT membership was about
to run out at the end of 1986.
In 1987 I worked two full-time jobs. About the only chess I did was to
continue my BDG World magazine subscription.
I returned to active play in late 1988 with the BDG. In 1989 I began writing
my original BDG Keybook. By 1990 I was a USCF Postal Chess Master.
Bacon (2132) - Sawyer (1950), corr APCT 1986 begins 1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4
3.Nf3 Qe7 [Diemer Variation] 4.Nc3 [4.d3 g5 5.Nc3 c6=; 4.d4 d5 5.e5 g5=]
4...d5! 5.d3 c6 [5...Nf6!=] 6.Bxf4 Bg4 7.Qd2 Nf6 8.0-0-0 d4 9.Ne2 c5 10.h3
Be6 11.Kb1 Nc6 12.g4 Qd7 13.Bg2 0-0-0 14.Ng5!? Bd6! 15.Nxe6 Qxe6
[15...fxe6 16.g5 Ne8 17.Rdf1+/=] 16.Bxd6 [16.g5 Nd7 17.h4+/=] 16...Qxd6
17.Rdf1 Ne5 18.Nf4 g5? 19.Nd5 Nxd5 20.exd5 f6 21.h4 Nxg4 22.Bh3 h5
23.hxg5 fxg5 24.Qxg5 Kb8 25.Bxg4 hxg4 26.Rxh8 Rxh8 27.a3 Rd8 28.Rf5
g3 29.Re5 g2 30.Rf5 +=. Black resigns 1-0
47 - Passive Defence 3…d6
Here is a game by Peter Mcgerald Penullar. It is an example of how the
King's Gambit wins against passive defense.
This fact has been true for about 200 years. It is still true.
Black accepts the gambit with 2...exf4. Then he fails to hold the pawn with
the move ...g7-g5.
Instead he selects the natural development of Nc6/d6/Nf6. This gives White

complete control of the center with few weaknesses.
The entire White army can focus on weaknesses in Black's cramped position.
White plays very well.
Oil_beef_hooked - Penullar, Kings and Queens - Board 3 Chess.com,

22.02.2012 begins1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3 d6 4.d4 Nf6?! [Correct is 4...g5!=]
5.Nc3 Be7 6.Bxf4 0-0 7.Bd3 Nc6 8.0-0 [+/= White has a wonderful position
with an open f-file.] 8...Nh5 9.Be3 Nf6 10.h3 Bd7 11.Bg5 [11.e5+/- looks
very promising.] 11...h6 12.Bh4 Ne8 13.Bxe7 Qxe7 14.Qd2 Nb4 15.Bc4 a6
16.a3 Nc6 17.Rae1 Kh7 18.e5! [The thematic breakthrough.] 18...dxe5
19.Nxe5 Nxe5 20.Rxe5 Be6 21.Qe3 Nd6 22.Bd3+ g6 23.Rh5! [A great
tactic! Black is busted.] 23...f5 24.Qxh6+ Kg8 25.Qh8+ Kf7 26.Rh7+ Ke8
27.Rxe7+ Kxe7 28.Qg7+ Bf7 29.Nd5+ Kd7 30.Nf6+ Kc6 31.d5+ Kb6
32.Nd7+ Ka7 33.Nxf8 Re8 34.Ne6 Rg8 35.Qd4+ Kb8 36.Re1 Re8 37.Kf2
Nb5 38.Bxb5 axb5 39.Qg7 Bxe6 40.dxe6 c6 41.Qd7 Rh8 42.e7 Ka7 43.e8Q
Rxe8 44.Rxe8 g5 45.Re7 Kb6 46.b4 g4 47.Qxb7# 1-0
48 - Book by GM John Shaw
When I first picked up this book by John Shaw I thought, "Wow! 680 pages!"
Years ago I was offered a contract to write a book on the King's Gambit (like
I did on the BDG), but I knew I was not the man for the job.
John Shaw has done what I wish I could have done. There are a lot of games,
a lot of analysis, a lot of variations and a lot of diagrams. John Shaw carried
on years of computer analysis to prove the viability (or not) of every line.
Grandmaster Shaw gives many options for both sides and expresses his
preferences. The multitude of variations can be confusing. Playing a gambit
is sometimes scary, but the more you play it, the less overwhelming it
becomes.
The best way to learn a gambit is to play it all the time. Then look up your
opening after each game. Even the theoretically equal lines in your hands will
be a dangerous threat to your opponents.
Now for a few specifics. Of the 21 chapters, 14 of them cover 2.f4 exf4
3.Nf3. The two most popular lines for Black are 3...g5 (my personal favorite)
and 3...d5. Against 3.Nf3 g5, Shaw devotes 80 pages of dense analysis. He
likes both 4.h4 g4 5.Ne5 Nf6 6.Bc4 and 4.Nc3. After 3.Nf3 d5 4.exd5 Nf6
5.Bb5+ the author suggests a "new direction". John Shaw considers 3.Bc4 to
be no longer playable since 3...Nc6! favors Black in all lines.
In the KG Declined I mention recommendations by John Shaw vs two major

options: First in the Classical 2.f4 Bc5 3.Nf3 d6 4.Nc3 Nf6 5.Bc4 Nc6 6.d3
Bg4 7.Na4 or 6...a6 7.Nd5. Second against the Falkbeer 2.f4 d5 3.exd5 e4
4.d3 Nf6 5.dxe4 Nxe4 6.Nf3 Bc5 7.Qe2. Over 150 pages are dedicated to
2...Bc5 or 2...d5, and then he covers more!
Shaw mentions almost every played branch of this opening and does well
editing out the worst. He does not waste space of deep analysis of rarely
played choices. Consider two of my pet off-beat lines. First, vs 3.Nf3 Qe7
(Diemer) Shaw recommends 4.Nc3 but does not cover my 4...d5. And
second, vs 2.f4 Nc6 3.Nf3 f5, Shaw gives 4.exf5 but not my 4...exf4. Of
course my lines might be much weaker than what he presents.
From my early years of chess, the King's Gambit had an amazing impact on
my life. Ray Haines and Graham Cooper chased me enough that by 1974 I
fled the Open Game for the Caro-Kann.
But I kept coming back to the King's Gambit from both sides of the board. I
purchased about every book on the KG written in the past 45 years.
Tim Bishop recently sent me a Kings Gambit game by two masters: Stanley
Elowitch vs Graham Cooper in the Maine State Championship in April 1980.
I played in this event in 1977.
Against Fischer's 3...d6, Shaw recommends 4.d4 in Quaade style aiming for a
Nc3 / g2-g3 set-up. Cooper gets the best out of the opening, but Elowitch
manages to hold his own in final 20 moves of flying pieces and
complications.
Elowitch - Cooper, Maine State Championship, 04.1980 begins 1.e4 e5 2.f4

exf4 3.Nf3 d6 4.Bc4 h6 5.d4 [5.h4!? Shaw] 5...g5 6.c3 [6.0-0 Bg7 7.c3 Nc6
8.Qa4 Bd7 9.Qb3=] 6...Bg7 7.Qb3 Qe7 8.0-0 Nc6 9.g3 [If 9.h4 Nf6 10.hxg5
hxg5 11.Nxg5 Nxd4-+] 9...fxg3 10.hxg3 Nf6 11.e5 dxe5 12.dxe5 Ng4
13.Nxg5 hxg5 14.Bxf7+ Kd8 15.Qd5+ Qd7?! [This throws away the
advantage in a complicated position. Houdini 3 gives 15...Bd7! 16.e6 Nce5-+
and Black remains up a piece.] 16.Bxg5+ Ne7 17.Bxe7+ Kxe7 18.Qc5+ Kd8
19.e6 Qd3 20.Qg5+ Bf6 21.Qxg4 Rh1+ 22.Kxh1 Qxf1+ 23.Kh2 Qf2+
24.Kh3 Ke7 25.Na3 Bd7 26.exd7 Kxf7 27.Qh5+ Kg7 28.Qg4+ Kf7 1/2-1/2
2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3 g5
This is the main line of the King’s Gambit. Black immediately defends the
gambit pawn.
49 - James Regan 4.d3
Is there an opponent you have faced many times in the same year? When I
was playing in the 1989 USCF Golden Knights Postal Chess Tournament, I
played eight games against James Regan.
We played a wide variety of openings. Both of us were playing many other

games against many correspondence opponents simultaneously.
Since James and I were already writing to each other about once a week for
rated games, it seemed like a good idea to play a few fun games on the side.
All the games were short, under 30 moves. This game was the shortest.
James Regan decided to throw in a King's Gambit which makes for sharp
play. He chose to take me out of the book with the quiet 4.d3, but that did not
work well here.
Regan - Sawyer, corr 1989 begins 1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3 g5 4.d3?! [The
aggressive choices are 4.h4 g4 5.Ne5 Nf6 6.d4 or 4.Bc4 g4 5.0-0 gxf3 6.Qxf3
Qf6 7.e5] 4...Nc6 5.h3 h6 [Also good is 5...d5=/+] 6.Nc3 Bg7 7.Be2 Nge7
8.h4 Ng6 9.Qd2 g4 10.Ng5? hxg5 0-1
50 - King's Gambit Endgame
The King's Gambit is a great opening with 200 years of famous games. White
is given the chance to play very aggressively attacking the center and
kingside.
It often leads to a lot of fun. I have played the White side over 400 times and
the Black side over 200 times.
After 1.e4 e5 2.f4, Black usually accepts the gambit with 2...exf4. The King's
Gambit Declined 2...Bc5 is also good.
In the King's Gambit Accepted, 3.Nf3 (which prevents the ...Qh4+) is five
times more popular than 3.Bc4. Bobby Fischer and many other masters used
to prefer 3.Bc4, but it is not so popular in club practice.
I prefer the King's Gambit 3.Nf3 g5 line as Black. In my 3 minute blitz game
"BBranko" (1712) I chose to set up a solid defense and hold on to the f4
pawn.
Rather than hit my h6-g5-f4 pawn chain with either h4 or g3, White just left
it intact. This allowed me to win with the extra pawn in the endgame.
However, I missed pushing ...g4! on moves 7-9. This would have been
stronger.
BBranko - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 22.09.2012 begins 1.e4 e5

2.f4 exf4 [2...Bc5] 3.Nf3 g5 [3...d5] 4.Bc4 [4.h4] 4...Bg7 5.0-0 d6 6.d4 h6
7.Re1? [This takes away a retreat square for the Nf3. More common is 7.c3
Nc6 8.g3 (or 8.h4 Qe7) 8...Bh3] 7...Nc6 [7...g4!=/+] 8.a3 Nge7 [Now 8...g4!-
/+ is even stronger.] 9.Nc3 0-0 [9...g4!] 10.d5 Ne5 11.Nxe5 Bxe5 12.Ne2
Ng6 13.c3 f5 14.Nd4 fxe4 15.Rxe4 Bxd4+ 16.Qxd4 Bf5 17.Re1 Qf6
18.Qxf6 Rxf6 19.Bd2 Rff8 20.Re2 Rae8 [20...Ne5 21.Bb3 Rae8-+ was a
little better.] 21.Rae1 Rxe2 22.Rxe2 Kf7 23.Kf2 Re8 24.Rxe8 Kxe8
25.Bb5+ Ke7 26.c4 Ne5 27.Bc3 a6 28.Bxe5 dxe5 29.Ba4 e4 30.c5 b6
[30...e3+!-+] 31.b4 a5 [31...bxc5 32.bxc5 e3+!-+] 32.Bb3 axb4 33.axb4
bxc5 34.bxc5 Kf6 35.h3 Ke5 36.g4 e3+ 37.Ke2 Be4 38.Bc4 Bxd5 39.Bd3
Kd4 0-1
51 - Winning with 3.Nf3 g5
In his classic book "Chess Advantage in Black and White", author Larry
Kaufman writes: "The King's Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.f4) is among the most
interesting and exciting of chess openings. Why then is it so rarely played in
modern times? Very simply, both statistics and analysis show that the two
sides have equal prospects, and serious tournament players are not satisfied
with equality as White. Nevertheless, you will surely encounter it, and if you
are not prepared you can expect to get into trouble."
Check out Kaufman’s books for excellent variations to play. Larry Kaufman
has good lines for each side.
Here I won a game with the King's Gambit 3.Nf3 g5 variation. This time I
face a more critical line after 4.Bc4 Bg7.
My opponent "Voiarnalung" (rated 1820) challenged my f4-g5-h6 pawn

chain with 8.g3. In our wild 3-minute blitz game both sides had chances.
Eventually I managed to get a winning ending.
Voiarnalung - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 26.09.2012 begins 1.e4

e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3 g5 4.Bc4 Bg7 5.d4 [5.0-0 d6 6.d4 transposes] 5...d6 6.c3
h6 7.0-0 Nc6 8.g3 [8.h4 Qe7] 8...Bh3 9.gxf4 Bxf1 [I wanted to grab the
Exchange while I could, but more often Black prefers 9...Qd7 10.Rf2 Nf6-/+]
10.Qxf1 gxf4 [10...g4-/+] 11.Bxf4 Nf6 [Black should castle queenside while
he has the chance. 11...Qf6! 12.Bg3 0-0-0=/+] 12.Nbd2 [I was concerned
about 12.e5!=] 12...0-0 13.Kh1 Qe7? 14.Bd3 [14.Nh4!+/=] 14...Kh8 15.Qh3
Qe6 16.Qh4 Qg4 17.Rg1 Qxh4 18.Nxh4 Ne7 19.e5 Nh5 [19...Ne8=/+]
20.Be3? [20.exd6=] 20...d5? [20...Nd5-+] 21.Nf1 f6 22.Be2 fxe5 23.Bxh5
exd4 24.Bxd4 Bxd4 25.cxd4 Rg8? [25...Rf4] 26.Ng6+ [26.Ng3+/-]
26...Nxg6 27.Bxg6 Raf8 28.Ne3 c6 29.Rg3 Rf6 30.Bf5 Rxg3 31.hxg3 Kg7
32.Kg2 Rf8 33.Kf3 Kf6 34.Kf4 Re8 35.Ng4+ Kg7 36.Ne5 a6 37.g4 Rf8
38.Nd7 Rf7 39.Ke5 Re7+ 40.Kd6 [40.Be6+-] 40...Re2 41.b4 Rxa2 42.Kc5
Rf2 43.Be6 Rb2 44.Ne5 b6+ [44...Rc2+! 45.Kb6 Rb2=] 45.Kxc6?
[45.Kxb6! Rxb4+ 46.Kc5 Rb1 47.Bd7+/=] 45...Rxb4 46.Kxd5 a5 47.Nd3
Rb1 48.Ke5 a4 49.d5 Rd1 50.Bf5 a3 51.d6? [51.Nb4 Re1+ 52.Kd4 Re2=/+]
51...Rxd3 [Quicker is 51...a2!-+] 52.Bxd3 a2 53.d7 a1Q+ 54.Kd6 Qd4+
55.Kc7 Qxd3 56.d8Q Qxd8+ 57.Kxd8 b5 0-1
52 - Allgaier Horny Defence
My opponent "lordbluff" (1877) played the Allgaier variation of the King's
Gambit. After4.h4 g4 5.Ng5?! h6 George Walker wrote in "A New Treatise
on Chess" (1833), "I consider this to be the best move for Black, although
you certainly get a fine attack in exchange for the knight."
White sacrifices the knight to open up Black’s king by 6.Nxf7 Kxf7. In his
book "The Petroff: an Expert Repertoire for Black", GM Konstantin Sakaev
gives "7.Bc4 d5 8.Bxd5 Ke8 -/+ and his compensation for the piece is
insufficient." My opponent played 7.Qxg4. Bill Wall listed this opening after
7.Qxg4 Nf6! 8.Qxf4 as called the "Horny Defence" of the King's Gambit
Accepted.
Who is "Horny"? I found on page 63 where George Walker wrote after

8.Qxf4: "This move is given as best by Horny." He gave a footnote indicating
it came from "Anweisung das Schachspiel" (1824) by Johann Horny. Since
Horny gave the line for White, I would have called it the Horny Gambit
rather than Defence. In any case, I avoided the whole Horny line when I
played 7...Qf6.
lordbluff - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 27.09.2012 begins 1.e4 e5

2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3 g5 4.h4 g4 5.Ng5?! h6 6.Nxf7 Kxf7 7.Qxg4 [The normal
continuation is 7.d4 d5 8.Bxf4] 7...Qf6 [7...Nf6! 8.Qxf4 Bd6-+] 8.Bc4+
[Allgaier preferred 8.d4] 8...Ke7 9.0-0 h5 [9...Qd4+! 10.Kh1 Qxc4 11.Qxf4
Bg7-+] 10.Qe2 Qxh4 11.d3 Bh6 12.Nc3 c6 [12...Nf6! 13.Nd5+ Nxd5
14.exd5+ Kd8-+] 13.e5 b5 14.Bb3 Na6 15.Ne4 Qg4 16.Rf3 Nc7 17.Nd6
Ne6 18.Bxe6 dxe6 19.Bd2 Nf6 20.Bb4 [White missed 20.Nxc8+! Rhxc8
21.exf6+] 20...Nd5 21.Bc5 Kd7 22.c4 Nb6 23.cxb5 cxb5 24.Qe4 Ba6
[24...Rg8-/+] 25.Nf7? [25.Bxb6!=] 25...Rhg8 26.Rf2 Bf8 27.Bxf8 Raxf8
28.Qd4+ Kc7 29.Qd6+ Kb7 30.Rc1 Rc8 31.Qe7+ Ka8 32.Rxc8+ Rxc8
33.Rf1 f3 [33...Rc2! 34.Rf2 Rc1+ 35.Rf1 f3-+] 34.Rxf3 Rc1+ 35.Rf1 Rxf1+
[35...Qd4+!-+ wins a rook.] 36.Kxf1 Bb7 37.Qd8+ Nc8 38.Nd6 Qxg2+
39.Ke1 Qh1+ 40.Kd2 Qg2+? 41.Kc3? Qc6+ 42.Kb3 Kb8 43.Nxc8 Bxc8
44.Qg5 Qd5+ 45.Kc3 Qc5+ 46.Kd2 Qf2+ 47.Kc3 Qc5+? 48.Kd2 Qf2+?
[48...Qd4-+] 49.Kc3 Qf5 50.Qd8 Qxe5+ 51.d4 Qc7+ 52.Qxc7+ Kxc7
53.Kd3 a5 54.Ke3 Kd6 55.Kf4 Bb7 56.Kg5 Kd5 57.Kxh5 Kxd4 58.Kg5 e5
59.Kg4 e4 60.Kg3 e3 White is in a losing position when his flag fell. 0-1
53 - Deep Darkside Defence
A simple way to win a chess game is get your opponent to make a big
sacrifice. If he cannot obtain enough compensation, then you have a great
chance to win.
In the King's Gambit 5.Ng5 variation, White hopes to invest a knight in order
for long term attacking chances. If it takes too long, Black will consolidate
and begin his own attack.
My opponent playing White ("neuhaus44") chose the Allgaier Gambit.

Frankly, I do not know the proper lines for Black. I just learn a little every
time I play a blitz game.
At first White got great attacking chances against me. Now I realize I should
have followed 5.Ng5 h6 6.Nxf7 Kxf7 7.d4 with 7...d5 8.Bxf4 Nf6.
neuhaus44 - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 04.11.2012 begins 1.e4

e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3 g5 4.h4 g4 5.Ng5 h6 6.Nxf7 Kxf7 7.d4 d6 [More popular
is 7...d5 8.Bxf4 Nf6-/+] 8.Bxf4 [8.Bc4+!?] 8...Bg7 9.Bc4+ Be6? 10.0-0
[10.Bxe6+! Kxe6 11.Qxg4+ picking up a second pawn and continuing the
attack.] 10...Nf6 11.Qe2 Ke7? [11...Re8] 12.Nc3 Bxc4 13.Qxc4 c6 14.d5?
[14.e5!+-] 14...Nfd7 15.e5 Nxe5 16.Rae1 Nbd7 17.dxc6 bxc6? [17...Qb6+
18.Kh1 Qxc6-/+] 18.Kh1? [18.Bxe5! wins outright. 18...dxe5 19.Rf7+ Kd6
20.Nb5+ cxb5 21.Rd1#] 18...Qb6 [18...Qc8=/+] 19.Bxe5 Bxe5 20.Qxg4?
[20.Rf7+ Kd8 21.Qe6 Qc7 22.Rxe5 dxe5=] 20...Rag8? [20...Raf8-+]
21.Qh5? [The final losing move. White has a likely perpetual check with
21.Rf7+! Kxf7 22.Qxd7+ Kg6 23.Qe6+ Kh7 24.Qf7+ Rg7 25.Qf5+ Kg8
26.Qc8+ Kh7=] 21...Kd8 22.Rf7 Qxb2 [22...Rf8!-+] 23.Ne4 Qb4 24.Rxd7+
Kxd7 25.Qf5+ Kc7 26.Rd1 Rf8 27.Qe6 Qxe4 28.Qe7+ Kb8 29.Rb1+ Kc8
30.Qe6+ Kd8 31.Rb8+ Kc7 32.Rb7+ Kxb7 33.Qd7+ Kb8 White resigns 0-
1
4.h4 g4 5.Ne5
The main line of the Kieseritzky is the basis of this chapter.
54 - Checkmate Mr. Rogers
Rev. Herschel Rogers was the pastor of a Baptist Church in Presque Isle,
Maine. My friend Mr. Rogers in Maine was an ordained minister. Rev.
Hershel Rogers like to play chess.
The church had a hall (the basement I think) that we used for playing chess. I
traveled to Presque Isle on Saturday mornings to play chess in the club that
met at the church. There were usually only half a dozen players or so, but it
was fun.
I kept only one game score that I played vs Herschel Rogers. In a show of
unusual boldness, I began with the King's Gambit. He played the 5...h5!?
line. This line when played correctly is deceptively strong for Black.
The pastor was a friendly older man with white hair. Mr. Rogers passed away
some years ago, but he brought me joy one February morning. If all my
King's Gambits were like this one, I might never have played the Blackmar-
Diemer Gambit.
Sawyer - Rogers, Presque Isle, Maine 22.02.1974 begins 1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4
3.Nf3 g5 4.h4 g4 5.Ne5 h5 6.Bc4 Nh6 [This is one of the two common
choices. The better alternative is 6...Rh7 7.d4 d6 8.Nd3 f3 9.gxf3 Be7 10.Be3
Bxh4+ 11.Kd2 Bg5 12.f4 Be7! White has obviously a big center. Black has
two connected passed pawns, one of them being an extra pawn. A fascinating
struggle awaits.] 7.d4 f6? [This is a mistake creating a hole on g6 and an
invitation to bring in my pieces. Normal here is 7...d6 8.Nd3 f3 9.gxf3 Be7
10.Be3 Bxh4+ 11.Kd2+/= A problem here is the Nh6 keeps the rook from
protecting h5.] 8.Ng6 Rh7 9.Bxf4 [White has regained the gambit pawn and
has a big uncontested center.] 9...Nc6 10.Nc3 Bb4 11.0-0 Bxc3 12.bxc3 d6
13.e5 [I missed the subtle tactical shot 13.Bg5!+- is very powerful.] 13...f5?
14.Bg5 [14.exd6!+-] 14...Qd7 15.exd6 Nf7 16.Re1+ Nce5 17.dxe5
[17.Nxe5! Nxe5 18.Rxe5+ Kf8 19.Be7+ Kg7 20.Qd2 and the Black king is in
mating net that even his queen cannot prevent.] 17...Nxg5 18.hxg5 Rg7?!
[Hastens the end.] 19.e6 Qc6 20.d7+ Bxd7 21.exd7+ Kd8 22.Re8# 1-0
55 - Amateur to IM Hawkins
New In Chess announced the book "Amateur to IM" by Jonathan Hawkins
published by Mongoose Press. Jonathan describes himself as a "relatively
weak" university age player who had spent years studying openings. His
early progress leveled off.
Then Jonathan Hawkins started studying endgames. He jumped his rating 400
points and got two GM norms. Most of the book is a training method that
demonstrates how endgame skill radically improved his success level. Sure
makes sense to me!
In the King's Gambit game below, I am able to pull out a pawn endgame win
that illustrates something I often mention. Players rated in the 1700s often
lose pawn endings.
This was a three minute blitz game, but I noticed that same fact in tournament
and correspondence games. My opponent played the opening okay but not
the ending.
shalilsnv (1757) - Sawyer (2032), ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 07.11.2012

begins 1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3 g5 4.h4 g4 5.Ne5 d6 6.Nxg4 Nf6 7.Nxf6+
Qxf6 8.Qf3? [8.Nc3 Nc6 9.Nd5 Qg6!= Sakaev] 8...Nc6 9.Bb5 h5?
[9...Bd7=/+] 10.d3 Bd7 11.Qxf4 Qxf4 12.Bxf4 Nd4 13.Bxd7+ Kxd7
14.Kd2 [14.Na3!+/=] 14...Rg8 15.g3 Be7? [Ouch. Now I am down a pawn,
but ahead on the clock. Better is 15...Ne6=] 16.Nc3 f5 17.Raf1 fxe4 18.Nxe4
Raf8 19.Bg5 Nf3+ 20.Ke3 Nxg5 21.Rxf8 Rxf8 22.hxg5 d5 23.Nf6+ Bxf6
24.gxf6 Rxf6 25.Rxh5 c6?! 26.g4 [26.Rh7+!+-] 26...Rf7 27.g5 Ke6 28.Rh1
Rg7 29.Rg1 Kf5 30.Kd4 b6 31.b4 Rg6 32.Rf1+ Ke6 33.Rf6+ Rxf6 34.gxf6
Kxf6 35.a4? [This allows me to draw. I was hoping he would miss 35.b5!+-]
35...Ke6 36.c4 dxc4 37.dxc4 Kd6 38.c5+? [Throwing away the game in a
pawn ending. White had only 21 seconds left on the clock. Correct was 38.b5
c5+ 39.Ke4 Ke6=] 38...bxc5+ 39.bxc5+ Ke6 40.Ke4 [Or 40.a5 Kf5 41.a6
Kf4-+] 40...a5 41.Kd4 Kf5 42.Kd3 Ke5 43.Kc4 Ke4 44.Kc3 Kd5 45.Kd3
Kxc5 46.Kc3 Kd5 47.Kd3 c5 48.Kc3 c4 49.Kc2 Kd4 White forfeits on time
0-1
56 - Early Gambit Steps
Ray Haines loved the King's Gambit when he was in high school. He loved
tactics and attacking. He got the Chess Digest opening monograph by Trevor
Hay. Ray studied the Hay way to play day after day. We tested lines and
debated their value.
Dan Heisman points out that a good opening for players who are learning is a
tricky or trappy opening. It teaches you tactics you need to learn to improve.
You could not get me to play a gambit back in the early 1970s. It was hard
enough to keep from losing pawns without giving any away. I was impressed
with gambits, but I did not dare play one!? Here were two of our early
learning steps as young men. Unfortunately, we did not really learn to play
the game as children. We still had fun!
Haines - Sawyer, Ft Fairfield, ME 02.11.1973 begins 1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3

g5 4.h4 [The alternative is 4.Bc4 when Black can choose between 4...g4 (or
4...Bg7 5.0-0 d6 6.d4 h6 7.c3 Nc6 8.g3 Bh3) 5.0-0!? Muzio Gambit 5...gxf3
6.Qxf3 Qf6 7.e5 Qxe5 8.Bxf7+ Kxf7 9.d4] 4...g4 5.Ne5 [Kieseritzky Gambit]
5...Nf6 6.Bc4 [The main line for the 4.h4 variation goes 6.d4 d6 7.Nd3 Nxe4
8.Bxf4] 6...d5 7.exd5 Bg7 [7...Nxd5 8.d4 (More promising seems either
8.Qe2 or 8.Nc3) 8...Be6 (8...Nc6!?) 9.Nxg4? (9.Nc3 Nc6 10.Nxc6 bxc6
11.Nxd5 and White will check next move with a fine game.) 9...Nc6
(9...Bg7!=/+ favors Black.) 10.Bxd5 Bxg4? 1/2-1/2 Haines – Sawyer, Ft
Fairfield 1974. (10...Bxd5=) My records indicate we agreed to a draw here,
but obviously White can win a knight by 11.Bxc6+ bxc6 12.Qxg4+-; The
recommended continuation is 7...Bd6 8.d4 Nh5 9.Nc3 Qe7] 8.d4 Nh5 9.Nc3
0-0 10.Ne2 c5 11.Bxf4 [Play normally follows the line 11.Nxf4 Ng3
12.Ne6!? fxe6 13.dxe6 Bxe6 14.Bxe6+ Kh8-+ leaving a messing position that
seems to favor Black.] 11...Nxf4 12.Nxf4 b5 [12...cxd4! leaves the Ne5
unprotected.] 13.Be2 [Not 13.Bxb5? Qa5+ picking off the bishop.] 13...f5
14.g3 [14.c3+/= strengthens the center and leaves White better.] 14...cxd4
15.Ned3 Na6 16.0-0 Bb7 17.Bxg4 fxg4 18.Qxg4 Nc7? [First Black needs to
insert the rook move 18...Rf7! 19.Rae1 Nc7 and now if 20.Ne5 (20.Nh5?
Qxd5-+ wins) 20...Rxf4 21.Rxf4 Qxd5=/+ Black is threatening mate.]
19.Nh5 Qe7 20.d6! Qe3+ 21.Rf2 Qh6 22.dxc7 Rxf2 23.Nxf2+- White is
winning. Ray may have offered a draw because of the lateness of the hour.
1/2-1/2
57 - Scott Whittle Chess Life
How many games have you played that have been published?
I do not know how many of mine were published.
My postal chess game with Scott Whittle was published in USCF Chess Life,
January 1990 issue in the column by Alex Dunne. It is a nice short tactical
King's Gambit variation.
I learned a lot about the King's Gambit from my early chess life. My friends
from Maine such as Ray Haines and future master Graham Cooper frequently
played the King’s Gambit.
Generally I have preferred the 3...g5 line. Sometimes I enjoy other lines like
Diemer's 3...Qe7 and the King’s Gambit Declined line 2.f4 Nc6 3.Nf3 f5.
In my game here with Scott Whittle, we play a critical variation of the

Kieseritzky Gambit. It seems to me that Black's attack is as good as White's.
Things get very tactical. In a rather predictable line our knights head to
opposite corners. Who saw further?
I know White walked into trouble, getting one knight stuck on a8 and the
other one undefended on h2. Had the game continued, Black could play
16.Ke1 Ng4+ and take on h2.
Whittle (1900) – Sawyer (2124), corr USCF 88NS3, 26.06.1989 begins 1.e4
e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3 g5 4.h4 g4 5.Ne5 Nf6 6.Nxg4!? [Most common is 6.d4 d6
7.Nd3 Nxe4 8.Bxf4 which I have played from both sides many times; the
other idea is 6.Bc4 d5 7.exd5 Bd6 8.d4 Nh5] 6...Nxe4 7.Qe2?! [An
interesting alternative is 7.d3 Ng3 8.Bxf4 Nxh1 9.Qe2+ Qe7 10.Nf6+ Kd8
11.Bxc7+ Kxc7 12.Nd5++/=] 7...Qe7 8.Nc3 Ng3 9.Qxe7+ Bxe7 10.Nd5?
[10.Rh2 Rg8 11.Nf2 Nc6-/+] 10...Nxh1 11.Nxc7+ Kd8 12.Nxa8 Bxh4+
13.Kd1 Re8 14.Be2 d6 15.Nh2 Nf2+ Black will win both knights. 0-1
58 - Beechey Kieseritzky
The King's Gambit leads to a variety of positions with both sides influencing
the choices. Black may grab material and have his king chased all over
kingdom come. Romantic swashbuckling attacks can lead to beautiful
victories or very ugly losses.
Several lines give White a positional advantage for the endgame after the
initial fireworks die down. The critical lines have Black holding on to the
pawn but feeling some real pressure.
One such line is the King's Gambit 5.Ne5. Kieseritzky Gambit leaves Black
with an extra backward f-pawn blocked by a White bishop or knight on f4.
I have had good but not great results on the Black side of the Classical
Variation after 3.Nf3 g5 4.h4 g4. At one point my lifetime performance rating
was exactly the same as my average rating: 2032.
In the 1989 USCF Golden Knights Postal Chess Tournament I reached this
position vs Thomas Beechey. Back then before computers could analyze with
great accuracy, there was some theoretical question as to what were the best
8th, 9th and 10th moves for Black. I could have improved at each move.
Beechey played well and got an initiative after the queens came off the board.
Eventually we reached a drawn position where either of us would lose if we
tried to win.
Beechey (1436) - Sawyer (2176), corr USCF 89N285, 20.07.1990 begins

1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3 g5 4.h4 g4 5.Ne5 Nf6 6.d4 d6 7.Nd3 Nxe4 8.Bxf4
Qe7 [Another critical line is 8...Bg7 9.c3 0-0 10.Nd2 Re8 11.Nxe4 Rxe4+
12.Be2 Nc6-/+] 9.Qe2 Bg7 [Much more accurate is 9...Nc6 10.c3 Bf5
11.Nd2 0-0-0 12.0-0-0 Re8 13.Nxe4 Qxe4=/+] 10.c3 h5?! [10...Nc6=/+]
11.Nd2 Nxd2 12.Kxd2 Qxe2+ 13.Bxe2 Nc6 14.Bd1 Ne7 15.Ba4+ Bd7
16.Bxd7+ Kxd7 17.Rae1 Bh6 18.g3 f5 19.Bxh6 Rxh6 20.Nf4 Ng6?
[Houdini prefers 20...Ng8 21.Rhf1 Nf6=] 21.Re6 Rg8 22.Rhe1 a5 23.a4 b6
24.b4 Rg7 25.bxa5 bxa5 26.Rb1 [White misses winning chances after
26.Kc2! Kc6 27.Rf6+/-] 26...Nxf4 27.Rxh6 Nh3 28.Rxh5 f4 29.gxf4 g3
30.Rg5 Rxg5 31.fxg5 g2 32.Ke3 Ke6 33.Kf3 1/2-1/2
59 - Custer's Last Stand
My opponent here is Larry Custer (rated 1712). After this win my rating went
to 2178. At one point in my USCF postal play, I won 26 games in a row. This
might have been one of those wins. The game lasted about nine months. It is
possible during this game that I made one of several visits to the town of
Gettysburg, Pennsylvania, the site of the famous Civil War battle. My wife
and I went there on our honeymoon long ago.
East of the town, George Armstrong Custer was a hero for the Union Army.
Custer was a bold leader who became a famous general. The general became
best known for his final loss: Custer's Last Stand. I do not know if Larry
Custer was related to General Custer, but Larry surely came charging right at
me!
Our opening was a King's Gambit Kieseritzky Variation. White gambits the
f-pawn to get a grip on the center and open lines on the kingside. I managed
to hold him off and get into an endgame still up the pawn. While he was
picking off most of my other pawns, I worked to advance my passed g-pawn
for a forced win.
Custer - Sawyer, corr USCF 88N300, 19.09.1989 begins 1.e4 e5 2.f4 [King's
Gambit] 2...exf4 3.Nf3 g5 4.h4 g4 5.Ne5 Nf6 6.d4 d6 7.Nd3 Nxe4 8.Bxf4
Qe7 [Equally popular is 8...Bg7 9.c3 0-0 10.Nd2 Re8 11.Nxe4 Rxe4+ when
Black's extra pawn looks pretty good.] 9.Qe2 Bg7 [9...Nc6 10.c3 Bf5 11.Nd2
0-0-0 12.0-0-0 Re8 13.Nxe4 Qxe4 14.Qxe4 Bxe4=] 10.c3 h5 [10...Bf5!?]
11.Nd2 Nxd2 12.Qxe7+ Kxe7 13.Kxd2 Be6 [White has some compensation,
but I prefer the endgame with the extra pawn.] 14.Re1 [14.Bg5+! f6
15.Be3=] 14...Kd7 15.b3 Nc6 16.Nb2 Rae8 [-/+. Black position has really
improved in the last few moves. He is fully developed.] 17.Bc4 Bxc4
18.bxc4 Rxe1 19.Rxe1 Bh6?! [19...Re8=/+] 20.Bxh6?! [20.Rf1! Bxf4+
21.Rxf4 keeps White more active.] 20...Rxh6 21.g3 Rf6 22.Nd3 Ne7 23.Nf4
Rf5 24.Kd3 Ng6 25.Ke4 Ra5?! [25...Rf6!-/+] 26.Re2? [26.Nd5!] 26...c6
27.Rb2 Nxf4 28.Kxf4 Ke6 29.Ke4 Rf5 30.Rxb7 d5+! 31.cxd5+ cxd5+
32.Ke3 Rf3+ 33.Kd2 Rxg3 [Black's passed g-pawn is now a BIG threat.]
34.Rxa7 Rf3 35.Ra6+ [White's best hope is to send his a-pawn on a mad
dash from a2-a8: 35.a4 Rh3 36.a5 Rxh4 37.a6 g3 38.Ra8 g2 39.Re8+ Kf5
40.a7 g1Q 41.a8Q but 41...Kf4!-+ and White is busted.] 35...Kf5 36.Rh6 g3
37.Rxh5+ Kg4 38.Rxd5 g2 39.Rg5+ Kh3 40.h5 Rg3 0-1
Book 1 – Chapter 4 – Various 2.Nf3 Lines
2.Nf3 f6
Damiano Defence is not necessarily intended to be a gambit. If White
sacrifices his knight on e5, Black cannot recapture without getting crushed.
60 - Dispatching Damiano
Fast Eddy-Booth was rated around 1800. He played blitz chess as fast as
bullet chess. Against me he sometimes won because of his speed. Eddy-
Booth chose the "rope-a-dope" approach in a variety of closed openings. He
could move his king and other pieces around behind the wall of pawns which
allowed him to ignore as much as possible his opponent's moves.
Dispatching the Damiano Defence requires White to play exact moves in

sharp tactics. Eddy-Booth took only 9 seconds total to play the first 10
moves, which included a draw offer around move 7. I used 32 seconds for my
first 10 moves. I tried to remember 3.Nxe5, 8.h4, 9.Bxb7 and 10.Qa5. When
the dust clears, usually Black has sacrificed four pawns for little
compensation.
Suddenly I had played 9.h5+, not a blunder but it took me out of my plans.
Next thing I know, I threw away the entire advantage with 11.Qd5?? Eddy-
Booth was rewarded with an advantage on the board and the clock.
Fortunately for me he hung a piece 10 moves later on a move where he took
20 of his 51 total seconds.
Sawyer - Eddy-Booth, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 11.01.2013 begins 1.e4

e5 2.Nf3 f6 3.Nxe5! fxe5? [As Black I always play 3...Qe7! This sets a trap
hoping for 4.Qh5+? g6 5.Nxg6 Qxe4+ winning the White knight on g6.
White does get a good game after 4.Nf3+/-] 4.Qh5+ Ke7 5.Qxe5+ Kf7
6.Bc4+ d5 [Or 6...Kg6 7.Qf5+ Kh6 8.h4! winning] 7.Bxd5+ Kg6 8.h4! h6
9.h5+ [The most accurate is 9.Bxb7! Bd6 10.Qa5!+-] 9...Kh7 10.Bxb7 Bd6
11.Qd5?? [Whoops. I make a big blunder! Ugh?! Correct is 11.Qa5!+-]
11...Ne7 12.Qd3 Bxb7 13.e5+ Kg8 14.exd6 Qxd6 15.Qxd6 cxd6 16.0-0
Kh7 17.d4 Rf8 18.c4 Be4 19.Be3 Nbc6 [I expected 19...Bd3 20.Rc1 but
Black is better after 20...Nf5-/+] 20.Nd2 Nf5? [20...Bf5=/+] 21.Nxe4 Black
resigns 1-0
61 - Nobody Won Defending
Long time popular radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh has a saying that in
war, sports and politics, "Nobody ever won anything by defending."
Rush went on to explain that if all you do is defend, it does not bring victory.
He said that to win, "At some point you have to attack your opponent." That
general principle is true in chess.
Let me compare politics and chess. To win, a good politician needs to get the
attention of voters by demonstrating these three qualities: 1. Look good. 2.
Sound smart. 3. Make sense.
Chess openings get the attention of players in the same way that politicians
get voters’ attention. They look good, sound smart and make sense. A
successful chess opening must: 1. Develop rapidly. 2. Control the center. 3.
Make threats.
Winning with the Damiano Defence?! Now there's a dubious promise. Black
hopes to win by defending the e5 pawn with 2...f6. White makes a promising
knight sacrifice, but he must be able to demonstrate its value to win.
Both sides have promise, but only one side in this line has good substance.
Here I demonstrate how this defense falls short in a blitz game win against
the weak computer program JackBach.
Sawyer - JackBach, ICC 3 3 Internet Chess Club, 17.07.2009 begins 1.e4 e5

2.Nf3 f6?! 3.Nxe5 fxe5? [The correct way to play this is 3...Qe7 Black
attacks the knight and sets a trap. 4.Nf3! (4.Qh5+? Falling for the trap. 4...g6
5.Nxg6 Qxe4+ winning the knight on g6.) 4...Qxe4+ 5.Be2 White has a lead
in development and the tactical threat of Re1 to potentially attack both the
queen and king.] 4.Qh5+ Ke7 [4...g6 5.Qxe5+ Qe7 6.Qxh8 Qxe4+ 7.Kd1 and
Black has lost at least a rook for a knight.] 5.Qxe5+ Kf7 6.Bc4+ Kg6 [6...d5
7.Bxd5+ Kg6 8.h4! h6 9.Bxb7+- and if the bishop is captured, White mates
on f5.] 7.Qf5+ Kh6 8.h4! [I had won with 8.d4+ g5 9.h4 before I found that
8.h4! forces a faster mate.] 8...Bb4 [Only temporarily preventing d4.] 9.c3 g6
10.d4+ g5 11.hxg5+ Kg7 12.Qf7# Black is checkmated. 1-0
2.Nf3 d5
This is the Elephant Gambit. It begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 d5.
62 - Sawyer vs Tom Purser
The Elephant Gambit 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 d5 is very rare. When I first started
playing chess around 1970, absolutely nobody played the Elephant Gambit at
all. No one had ever heard of it. And if they did, it had the unwieldy name
Queen Pawn Counter Gambit.
When a grandmaster did play one, it came from a simul or it felt like a game
played at odds. Despite a rare spectacular win in the olden days, it looked like
Black was losing a pawn for nothing. Published games in this opening were
almost unheard of.
Those few brave souls who did play it included E.J. Diemer, Walter Muir, G.
Halasz, and sometimes Roald Berthelsen. But in the late 1980s, the Elephant
Gambit caught on in some circles.
Now and then a tactical master would play it frequently. Postal experts would
play it, since their opponents could not find much in theory about it in books
and no one had strong chess engines or databases to show the way.
Tom Purser has long been a proponent of the Elephant Gambit. In 1988 the
group Rasmus Pape, Niels Jensen and Tom Purser published the 1st edition
of their Elephant Gambit book. After that, many Blackmar-Diemer
Gambiteers played the Elephant.
I tried it in 1988 and won 3 of my first 4 games with it, beating two players
rated over 2000. In 1994 the Jonathan Rogers monograph appeared. Below
was the first time I had White in the Elephant Gambit. In additional to Tom's
choice of 3...Bd6, the immediate pawn push 3...e4 is often played by Black.
Sawyer - Purser, corr IECG 1995 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 d5 3.exd5 Bd6 4.d4
e4 5.Ne5 Nf6 6.Nc3 [6.Bb5+! Bd7 7.Nxd7 Nbxd7 8.Bg5+/=] 6...Nbd7 7.Bb5
[Or 7.Nxd7 Bxd7 8.Bc4 0-0] 7...0-0 8.Nxd7 Bxd7 9.Be2 a6 10.Bg5 Bf5
11.0-0 h6 12.Be3 Qd7 13.Qd2 Rad8 14.Bf4 Bh7 15.Rac1 Rfe8 16.a3 Re7
[16...b5!?] 17.Be3 [17.Bc4 Rde8 18.Rce1= is a reasonable way to keep
fighting.] 17...Qf5 18.f3 [18.h3!?=] 18...Rde8 1/2-1/2
63 - Ray Alexis vs Purser
Ray Alexis takes on Tom V. Purser in the Elephant Gambit 2.Nf3 d5 in
postal chess. Until I ran into the games and analysis of Tom Purser, I never
used to take this gambit seriously.
Then I saw the Emil J. Diemer won a lot of games with it as Black. Various
players took it up. They did amazingly well, whether in tournament, blitz or
postal play.
Below Black plays the 3...Bd6 variation that Rogers favored. Tom Purser
played it against an experienced postal player.
The positional evaluation in this game has Black very close to equality the
entire game against a strong player. Some years later Tom Purser would
publish a book on this opening with Jensen and Pape.
Alexis - Purser, corr, 1979 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 d5 3.exd5 Bd6 [The most
common line is 3...e4 4.Qe2 Nf6 5.d3 Bb4+ 6.c3 0-0 7.dxe4 Bc5 8.Bg5+/-]
4.d4 e4 5.Ne5 [5.Nfd2!?] 5...Ne7 [5...Nf6 6.Bb5+ Bd7 7.Nxd7 Nbxd7
8.Bg5+/=] 6.Bb5+ Kf8 7.Qh5 Bxe5 8.Qxe5 Qxd5 9.Bf4 Qxe5 10.Bxe5 c6
11.Bc4 Nd7 12.Bd6 Nb6 13.Bb3 Ke8 14.c3 [14.Nd2 Bf5 15.0-0+/-]
14...Ned5 [14...Kd7 15.Bg3+/=] 15.Nd2 [15.c4+/-] 15...Bf5 16.0-0 Kd7
17.Bg3 h5 18.h3 Rae8 19.Bc2 Bh7 20.Bb3 Re7 21.Rfe1 Rhe8 22.Nf1 g5
23.a4 a5 24.h4 g4 25.Ne3 f5 26.Bxd5 Nxd5 27.Nxd5 cxd5 28.Bf4 Rc8
29.Ra3 Rc6 30.Rb3 Ke6 31.Ra1 Ra6 32.Rc1 Bg6 [32...Rd7 33.Rb5+/=]
33.c4 dxc4 34.Rxc4 1-0
64 - Elephant Run Over
The Elephant Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 d5!?) is one of those lines where Black
sacrifices a valuable center pawn. The position opens up with Black slightly
behind in development.
White should stand better. However there are some things about the Elephant
Gambit that are in Black's favor.
1. The Elephant Gambit is not very well known by most players.

2. Normal White development can lead to a good Black game.
3. Black's pieces have open lines to active development.
4. Black frequently gets a pawn on e4 to disrupt White's plans.
5. Often Black regains the gambit pawn anyway.
Against my Elephant Gambit, Daren Casey chose the 3.exd5 e4 4.Ne5 line.
This led to an even position in our game from the 1989 USCF Golden
Squires Postal Chess Tournament.
When Black's pieces became more active, White's choice to swap queens
(13.Qxg4?) was fatal.
Casey (1570) - Sawyer (2006), corr USCF 89SS104, 06.01.1992 begins 1.e4
e5 2.Nf3 d5 3.exd5 e4 4.Ne5 [4.Qe2+/=] 4...Qxd5 5.d4 exd3 6.Nxd3 Bd6
7.Nc3 Qf5 8.Be2 Nf6 9.0-0 Nc6 10.Re1 0-0 11.Bf3 Nd4 12.Be4 [12.Be3
Nxf3+ 13.Qxf3 Qxf3 14.gxf3 Bf5=] 12...Qg4 13.Qxg4? [The losing move.
White had to keep developing with 13.Bf4 Qxd1 14.Raxd1 Nxc2 15.Bxd6
Nxe1 16.Bxf8 Nxd3=] 13...Bxg4 14.Nf4 [If White just sacrifices the
Exchange with 14.Bg5 Nxc2 15.Bxf6 Nxa1-+ White does not have much
compensation.] 14...Nxe4 15.Rxe4 Nxc2 16.Rb1 Bf5 17.Re2 [17.Rc4 Rfd8-
+] 17...Nd4 18.Re1 Bxb1 19.Nxb1 Bxf4 20.Bxf4 Rfe8 0-1
65 - Puzey Beats Back Black
What is the main line of the Elephant Gambit? It seems to run something like
this: 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 d5 3.exd5 e4 4.Qe2 Nf6 5.d3.
Both sides have alternatives on move three:

3.exd5 or 3.Nxe5 for White; and 3...Bd6 or 3…e4 for Black.
In my Glenn Puzey game from the 1989 USCF Golden Squires Postal Chess
Tournament, White played most of the main line. He deviated with 5.Nc3.
His play seems critical and very good. Check it out!
Puzey (1913) - Sawyer (2001), corr USCF 89SS104, 1992 begins 1.e4 e5
2.Nf3 d5 3.exd5 e4 [3...Bd6 is also popular.] 4.Qe2 Nf6 5.Nc3 Be7 6.Nxe4
0-0 [The main alternative is 6...Nxd5 7.d3 0-0 8.Qd1 f5 9.Ng3!+/=] 7.Nxf6+
[Or again 7.d3 Nxd5 8.Qd1 f5 9.Ng3!+/=] 7...Bxf6 8.d4 Bg4 [8...Qxd5 9.Be3
Bg4 transposing to the game; or 8...Bf5 9.c3+/=] 9.Be3 [White could have
tried 9.Qe4 Re8 10.Ne5+/-] 9...Qxd5 10.c3 Nc6 [10...Nd7 seems better.]
11.h3 Bh5 12.Qd1 Rfe8 [12...Na5 13.Be2 Nc4 14.Bxc4 Qxc4 15.Ne5 Bxd1
16.Nxc4+/= when Black's compensation for the gambit pawn is two bishops.]
13.Be2 g5!? 14.0-0 g4? 15.Nd2 gxh3 16.gxh3 Kh8 [Black is in trouble but
could still organize some attack with 16...Bxe2! 17.Qxe2 Re6 18.Qf3 Ne7+/-]
17.Bxh5 Rg8+ 18.Bg4 h5 19.f3 hxg4 20.hxg4 [20.fxg4!+-] 20...Bh4 21.Bf2
Bg5 22.Ne4 Rae8 23.Kg2 1-0
66 - Robert Kostanski Attack
My passion for the Latvian Gambit throughout the 1980s and early 1990s
began to wane. Several critical postal chess losses led me to switch to another
gambit.
After 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3, I changed from 2...f5 to 2...d5. Thus I began playing the
Elephant Gambit.
Vs Robert Kostanski I played the Elephant Gambit 3.exd5 e4 variation. This

seemed to be the most popular third move at the time. Later 3…Bd6 would
become very popular.
The result of this game is a little confusing to me. I am usually really careful
to be accurate.
Clearly Black was winning near the end. But I let the advantage slip and the
game appears to have ended in a perpetual check for a draw.
Kostanski (2032) - Sawyer (2077), corr USCF 89SS40, 1990 begins 1.e4 e5
2.Nf3 d5 3.exd5 e4 [3...Bd6] 4.Qe2 Nf6 5.d3 [5.Nc3 Be7 6.Nxe4 0-0 7.d3
Nxd5 8.Qd1 f5+/=] 5...Be7 6.dxe4 0-0 7.Nc3 Re8 8.Bd2 b5 [8...Bb4 9.0-0-0
Bxc3 10.Bxc3 Nxe4 11.Be5+/=] 9.Qxb5 Nbd7 10.Qa4 Nc5 11.Qc4 Ba6
12.Qd4 Nfxe4 13.Nxe4 Nxe4 14.Ne5 Bf6 15.f4 Bxf1 [15...Nxd2 16.Bxa6
Qd6 17.Kxd2 Bxe5 18.fxe5 Qxa6 19.c4+/-] 16.Qxe4 Bxe5 17.fxe5 f5 18.Qf3
Bc4 19.Bc3 [19.0-0-0+/-] 19...Bxd5 20.Qf2 Qg5 21.0-0 Re6 22.Rad1 Be4
23.Rd7 Rg6 24.g3 h5 25.Rxc7 [25.Qf4+/-] 25...h4 26.Qf4 [26.Qd2=]
26...Qh5 27.Be1 Rg4 [27...hxg3 28.Bxg3 Qh3-/+] 28.Qe3 [28.Qd2=]
28...hxg3 29.Bxg3 Qh3 30.Rf2 [30.Kf2 f4 31.Bxf4 Rxf4+ 32.Qxf4 Rf8-+]
30...Rd8 31.Rd2 Rxg3+ [An indication of how poorly I was playing at times
was the fact that I missed the win that would follow 31...Rxd2 32.Qxd2 f4-+]
32.hxg3 Rxd2 33.Qxd2 Qxg3+ 34.Kf1 Qf3+ 35.Ke1 Qh1+ 36.Kf2 Qf3+
1/2-1/2
67 - Stomped by an Elephant
What is your attitude when facing questionable gambits? Mine is to accept
gambits and make them pay for material sacrificed. Of course, sometimes the
gambiteer wins!
Almost any grandmaster would consider the Elephant Gambit to be

questionable. The fact that I used to play it as Black reveals my non-
grandmaster-ness quality.
Here the Elephant stomped on me pretty hard. I played well, but then I
blundered and lost.
Sawyer - jethro369, Internet Chess Club 2012 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 d5

3.exd5 e4 [3...Bd6 4.d4 e4 5.Ne5+/=] 4.Qe2 Nf6 5.d3 Bd6 6.dxe4 0-0 7.Bg5
[More common is 7.Nc3 Re8 8.Bg5+/-] 7...Nbd7 8.Nc3 a5 9.0-0-0 a4 10.a3
Qe7 11.Qd2 Bxa3 12.bxa3 Qxa3+ 13.Kb1 Qb4+ 14.Ka1 a3 15.Na4? [In
one move I go from winning with 15.Rb1!+- to losing.] 15...Qxa4 16.Qc3
Nxe4 17.Qb3 Qa5 18.Bd3 Ndc5 19.Qc4 Nxd3 20.Rxd3 Nxf2 21.Rb3 Nxh1
22.Bd2 Qa6 23.Qd4 Qf1+ 24.Ka2 Qxg2 25.Ne5 Nf2 26.Rg3 [Here things
get a little sloppy.] 26...Qf1? [26...Qe4-+] 27.Rxg7+? [27.Bh6!+-] 27...Kxg7
28.Ng4+? [28.Nxf7+ Kxf7=] 28...f6 29.Bh6+ Kg6 30.Nxf2 Kxh6 31.Qh4+
Kg6 32.Qg3+ Kf7 33.Qxc7+ Kg8 34.Qg3+ Kh8 35.Qh4 Bf5 36.Nd3 Bxd3
37.cxd3 Qe2+ 38.Kb3 Qxd3+ 39.Kb4 Qxd5 40.Qc4 Qxc4+ 41.Kxc4 a2
White resigns 0-1
68 - Attacking the Elephant
Once in a while when I play the White pieces, I am surprised by an Elephant
Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 d5). In my opinion the main line is 3.exd5 e4 4.Qe2
and White stands better.
I found the gambit to be very tricky in a 3 minute blitz game. This is

especially true if I do not remember the exact moves.
Elephants can stomp pretty hard. In this game, I was crushed but managed to
survive and win. I forgot how I had played it correctly Thanksgiving 2011
(see next game).
Sawyer - chelsee, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 23.06.2012 begins 1.e4 e5

2.Nf3 d5 3.exd5 e4 [3...Bd6 4.d4 e4 5.Ne5+/=] 4.Qe2 Nf6 5.d3 Bb4+
[5...Bd6 was played vs me by jethro369 in the previous game.] 6.Bd2 0-0
7.Bxb4 [7.dxe4! Re8 8.e5!+/=] 7...exf3 8.Qxf3 Re8+ 9.Be2 Bg4 10.Qg3
Bxe2 11.Kd2 Bh5 12.Na3 Nxd5 13.Bc3 Nxc3 14.bxc3 Qf6 15.Nc4 Qh6+
[15...Re2+! 16.Kc1 Qxc3-+ and Black would be mated in a few moves.]
16.f4 Re2+ 17.Kc1 Qg6 18.Qxg6 Bxg6 19.g4 h5 20.Ne5 hxg4 21.Nxg6 fxg6
22.Rg1 Rxh2 23.Rxg4 Rh1+ 24.Kb2 Rxa1 25.Kxa1 Nc6 26.Rxg6 Re8
27.c4 Kf7 28.Rg2 Re1+ 29.Kb2 Nd4 30.Kc3 Nf3 31.Rf2 Ng1 32.Kd2 Ra1
33.a4 Nh3 34.Rf3 Ng1? [This allows White back into the game. 34...Rh1-+]
35.Rf2 Kf6 36.Ke3 Rxa4 37.Rg2 Ra1 38.Rg3 Re1+ 39.Kf2 Rc1 40.Rxg1
Rxc2+ 41.Ke3 g6 42.Rh1 b5 43.cxb5 Rb2 44.Rh7 Rxb5 45.Rxc7 a5
46.Ra7 Kf5 47.Rf7+ Ke6 48.Ra7 Kf5 49.Rf7+ Kg4 50.Ke4 Rb4+ 51.d4 a4
52.Ra7 Kg3 53.Ke5 Kf3 54.d5 Rxf4? [Now White is winning.] 55.d6 Rf5+
56.Ke6 Rf4 57.d7 Re4+ 58.Kf7 Rd4 59.Kxg6 a3 60.Rxa3+ Kf4 61.Ra7
Kg4 62.Kf7 Rf4+ 63.Ke7 Re4+ 64.Kd8 Kf5 65.Ra1 Ke6 66.Rd1 Rh4
67.Kc8 Rc4+ 68.Kb7 Rb4+ 69.Kc6 Rc4+ 70.Kb5 Rc1 71.d8Q Rxd1
72.Qxd1 Ke5 73.Qf3 Kd4 74.Qe2 Kd5 75.Qe3 Kd6 76.Qe4 Kd7 77.Qe5
Kc8 78.Qe7 Kb8 79.Kb6 Ka8 80.Qd8# Black is checkmated 1-0
69 - How to Eat an Elephant
How do you eat an elephant? One bite at a time. After I left the 2011
Thanksgiving table stuffed with turkey, I watched the Dallas Cowboys win
over the Miami Dolphins by one point
Then I sat down to a feast at the chess table. This time it was on the Internet
Chess Club. I played my old favorite "blik". My game began as an Alekhine
with 1.e4 Nf6 2.d3 e5. White surprised me with 3.d4!? This is an Elephant
Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 d5!?) with colors reversed. This gambit was a favorite
of the famous BDG player Diemer, so I have some knowledge of the
opening. My general opinion is that White (in my game Black) does best to
play 3.exd5 e4 4.Qe2 (which is 4…Qe7 here) and the fight is on.
blik (2410) – Sawyer (2100), Internet Chess Club, 24.11.2011 begins 1.e4
Nf6 2.d3 e5 [I play 2...d5 to immediately challenge e4. I recommended this
in my Alekhine Defense Playbook.] 3.d4 exd4! [This is the best chance of
keeping an edge vs the Elephant Gambit. 3...Nxe4 is also playable.] 4.e5 Qe7
5.Nf3 [5.Qe2 Nd5=/+] 5...d6 6.Bb5+ c6 7.0-0 dxe5 8.Bc4 Be6!? [8...Bg4!
9.Nbd2 Nbd7-/+] 9.Nxe5 Nbd7 10.Bxe6 Qxe6 11.Nf3 0-0-0 12.Nxd4 Qg4!
[I like my chances of drawing or winning endgames against this opponent.]
13.Qxg4 Nxg4 14.Nf5 g6 15.Ng3 Bg7 16.Nc3 f5 17.h3 Ngf6 18.Be3 Nb6
19.Bxb6 axb6 20.Rad1 Rxd1 21.Rxd1 Rd8 22.Rxd8+ Kxd8 23.Na4 Kc7
24.Nc3 Nd7 25.Nge2 b5 26.g3 Nc5 27.f3 Na4 28.Nxa4 bxa4 29.c3 [29.b3
axb3 30.axb3 Kd6=/+] 29...Be5 30.f4? [30.Kf2! Kd6 31.Ke3 Kd5 32.Kd3
b5=/+] 30...Bf6 31.g4?! fxg4 [Decision time. My clock dropped below two
minutes while I thought.] 32.hxg4 Kd6 33.Kg2 b5 34.Kf3 h6 35.Ng3
[35.Ke4 Ke6=/+ still leaves White with the inherent weakness of the outside
passed pawn.] 35...Kd5 36.Ne4 Be7 37.Ke3 Bc5+ [As I pondered this move,
my clock dropped below one minute.] 38.Nxc5 Kxc5 39.f5 gxf5 40.gxf5 Kd5
41.Kf4 c5 42.b3 axb3 43.axb3 b4 44.c4+ [44.cxb4 cxb4 45.Kf3 Ke5 46.Kg4
Kf6 47.Kf4 h5-+] 44...Kd6 45.Ke4 Ke7 46.Kd3 Kf6 47.Ke4 h5 48.Kf4 h4
[At this point I had 38 seconds left.] 49.Kg4 h3 50.Kxh3 Kxf5 51.Kg3 Ke4
52.Kf2 Kd3 53.Kf3 Kc3 54.Ke2 Kxb3 55.Kd3 Ka2 56.Kd2 b3 57.Ke3 b2
58.Kf4 b1Q 59.Kg5 Qd3 60.Kf6 Qxc4 61.Ke5 Qd4+ 62.Kf5 c4 63.Ke6 c3
64.Ke7 c2 65.Kf7 c1Q 66.Kg6 Qce3 67.Kf7 Qdf4+ 68.Kg6 Qeg3+ 69.Kh5
Qfh4# White is checkmated; Black had 27 seconds left on his clock. 0-1
2.Nf3 d6
This natural defence of e5 is known as the Philidor Defence.
70 - Famous Ryder Mate
Players rated 500 points below me sometimes get so involved in what is
interesting that they forget what is important. These mistakes lead to
predictable results.
Here I began with a Queens Knight Attack. We transposed into a Philidor

Defence.
An important opening principle is to develop all your pieces and castle. My

opponent in the game below moved his kingside knight and bishop three
times each in the first 10 moves.
When he left his king in the center, trouble was brewing.

I was able to play checkmate to the king on e7 with 18.Bc5#!
This is a well-known mating theme in the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit variation

5.Qxf3. This line is called the Ryder Gambit.
My Internet Chess Club opponent had the handle "scubadoo". That reminds
me of Scooby Doo, where are you? and of Scuba Do and of Ski-Doo.
Sawyer (1924) - scubadoo (1367), ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 19.04.2014

begins 1.Nc3 e5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 Nd7 4.e4 c6 5.Be3 [Briefly I thought about
5.Bc4 or first 5.a4 but instead I just decided to develop a piece and make
Black think.] 5...Be7 6.Qd2 Bf6 [White has developed three minor pieces
and my queen. Black has developed two minor pieces.] 7.0-0-0 Ne7 8.h3
Ng6 9.g4 Nh4 10.Nxh4 Bxh4 11.f4 Nb6 [Since White's Bf1 prevents ...Nc4,
Black would do better to castle 11...0-0] 12.dxe5 d5 13.exd5 Nxd5 14.Nxd5
cxd5 15.Qxd5 Qxd5 16.Rxd5 Be6 17.Bb5+ Ke7 [17...Kf8 18.Rd2+- leaves
White up two pawns with a better position.] 18.Bc5#! Black checkmated 1-0
71 - Dalton Chess Simul
It was May 1980. This was another Presidential election year. The American
economy was terrible: high unemployment, high inflation. I had been laid off
from one company after another. It was hard to make ends meet. This would
be the third time I could vote for US President.
In 1972 I voted for the Democratic candidate George McGovern because I

did not want to go to the Vietnam War. The military had already given me
my physical and pronounced me fit to go in January 1973.
In November 1972, Richard Nixon won almost every state in the Election.
Nixon promptly cancelled the draft so I did not join the military after all. But
Richard Nixon had lied about Watergate and was forced to resign in 1974.
Oh for the days when lying was just about the worst thing a President might
do!
Gerald Ford had been a "do-nothing" politician. They made him Vice-
President hoping he would do no harm. Ford replaced Nixon in 1974. By
1976 I was hoping for somebody who would do good things. I voted for the
Democrat Jimmy Carter. Carter won, and I had high hopes.
By 1980 it was obvious to all of America that Jimmy Carter's policies had
hurt almost everyone. In the summer I moved to Pennsylvania for school and
work. When I registered to vote, this time the Democrat Jimmy Carter
convinced me to become a Republican. Not that I always vote for the GOP. I
do not. And I have a lot of government or union worker friends. Since 1980
the Republicans have had my attention more than they used to.
Carter did win Georgia in the 1980 election and five other states. Ronald
Reagan won 44 states, including California, New York and Illinois. When
those three heavily Democrat states vote for the Republican, that says a lot
about that Democratic candidate. After that election, by the summer of 1981,
my financial life made significant and immediate improvements. Years later I
had the privilege of visiting Plains, Georgia, the home town of Jimmy Carter.
I respect anyone who gets elected President, but one Jimmy Carter term was
more than enough for me.
Back to May 1980. I went to Dalton, Georgia, known as the carpet capital of
the world! I played a Saturday simultaneous exhibition.
None of the games were that impressive and I do not know who I played. I do
remember that those northern Georgia folks were very kind to me.
This is a very typical simul game. The weaker opponent loses material in the
opening and gets mated in the early middlegame by the stronger player.
Nice checkmate at the end. When the name of a player is unknown, it is often
recorded as "NN" = "No Name".
Sawyer - NN, Dalton, GA simul 10.05.1980 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 [Philidor

Defence.] 2...d6 3.d4 Nc6 [This position could have been reached via the
Scotch Game after 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 d6 instead of the normal 3...exd4.] 4.d5
Nd4? [Black makes a counting error. White has two pieces attacking d4
while Black has only one defender.] 5.Nxd4 exd4 6.Qxd4 Nf6 7.c4?!
[Playing a more closed game when up material is a little slow. White could
swap off his bad bishop with 7.Bb5+] 7...Be7 8.Nc3 0-0 9.Qd1?! [Maybe I
thinking about Bd3.] 9...c6 10.Be2 Qa5 11.0-0 cxd5 12.cxd5 h5? [Another
counting error. The h5-pawn faces two attackers with only one defender.]
13.Bxh5 b5 14.Bf3 Rb8 15.Bf4 b4 16.Ne2 Bg4 17.Bxg4 Nxg4 18.Nd4
Rbc8? [Black misses that 18.Nd4 uncovers a White queen attack on the
Ng4.] 19.Qxg4 Rc4 20.Nc6 [20.Nf5! wins more material after 20...Bf6
21.Nxg7! as 21...Bxg7 22.Bh6 leads to mate next move.] 20...Qc7 21.b3
Rxe4 22.Rfe1 Bf6 [22...f5 23.Qg6+-] 23.Rxe4 Bxa1 24.Ne7+ Kh8 [Black
must lose the king or the queen. 24...Qxe7 25.Rxe7+-] 25.Qh4# 1-0
72 - Philidor Mixed with Scotch
The Philidor Defence has a crossover line after three moves that can
transpose to a Ruy Lopez, Italian Game or Four Knights Game. This Philidor
Defence begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4.
With Black's next move 3...Nc6 we arrive at a position that could be reached
in a Scotch Game after 2...Nc6 3.d4 d6. This line is never recommended but
club players try this logical continuation all the time.
In theory two responses give White a slight edge: 4.dxe5 and 4.d5 leaving
Black with a difficult position. I play both moves.
Here as White I chose to capture with 4.dxe5 vs a young David Lau. He

played a bold but risky sacrifice against me in this club game.
David's active and creative play led to equal chances until he dropped the
Exchange on move 23. In the end I offered the rook back so I could queen my
g-pawn.
Sawyer (2011) - Lau (1414), Williamsport, PA 1994 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3

d6 3.d4 Nc6 4.dxe5 Qe7 5.Bg5 f6 6.exf6 Qxe4+ 7.Be2 gxf6 8.Bc1 [8.Nc3!
Qg6 9.Be3+/-] 8...Bf5 9.c3 Bh6 10.0-0 0-0-0 11.Nbd2 Bxd2 12.Bxd2 Nge7
13.Re1 Qd5 14.Bh6 Qxd1 15.Raxd1 Rhg8 16.Nd4 Nxd4 17.Rxd4 Nc6
18.Rd2 [18.Rf4+/-] 18...Rg6 19.Bf4 Re8 20.Kf1 Reg8 21.Bc4 R8g7
22.Be6+?! [22.Bg3+/=] 22...Bxe6 23.Rxe6 Rxg2? [23...Kd7! 24.Re1=]
24.Bg3 R2xg3 25.hxg3 Rg6 26.Re8+ Kd7 27.Rh8 Rg7 28.Kg2 Ne5 29.Rd4
c5 [29...Rf7 30.Ra8+-] 30.Rh4 h5 31.R4xh5 Nd3 32.R5h7 Rxh7 33.Rxh7+
Kc6 34.Rf7 Nxb2 35.Rxf6 Na4 36.g4 Nxc3 37.g5 Ne4 38.Rf5 Kd7 39.g6
Ke6 40.g7 1-0
2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 f5
Andre Philidor seems to have chosen 2…d6 with the intention of playing 3…
f5 which is a very aggressive continuation.
73 - Zilbermints Mates Bratanov
Andre Philidor planned to attack (1...e5), defend (2...d6) and counter attack
(3...f5) with pawns. Against IM Zsivko Bratanov our friend Lev Zilbermints
finds a nice mate in 28 moves.
Philidor wrote "the pawns are the soul of chess." Lev Zilbermints begins this
game with five consecutive pawn moves, but they set up an ensuing attack
with pieces.
Central pawn chains in the opening are pointers for strategy. They point like
an arrow in the direction where one's attack is most likely to be successful.
The Black pawns at c7-d6-e5 point toward g3. There we find the White king
in the crosshairs on move 24. Checkmate follows a few moves later. Pretty
finish.
Bratanov (2624) - Zilbermints (2223), ICC 3 0 u Internet Chess Club,

27.02.2011 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 f5 4.dxe5 fxe4 5.Ng5 d5 6.c4 Bb4+
7.Bd2 [The critical line for the IM here is 7.Nc3! d4 8.a3 Bxc3+ 9.bxc3 Nc6
10.Nxe4 Bf5 11.Bg5 Nge7 12.Ng3+/=] 7...Qxg5 8.Bxb4 Nc6 [8...d4 9.Qxd4
Nc6 10.Qd2 e3 11.fxe3 Nxb4 12.Qxb4 Qxe3+ 13.Be2 Bg4=] 9.Bc3?
[9.Bd2=] 9...d4 10.Bxd4 Nxd4 11.Qxd4 Qc1+ 12.Ke2 Bg4+ 13.f3 Rd8
14.Qc3 Qd1+ 15.Kf2 Bf5 [15...Ne7-+] 16.g4 Bg6 [Black has the brilliant
shot 16...Rd3!-+] 17.Bg2 Qd7 18.Na3 exf3 [18...Qe7=] 19.Bxf3 Nh6
20.Rad1 Qe7 21.Rxd8+ Qxd8 22.Rd1? [22.h3+/=] 22...Qe7? [22...Qh4+!-+]
23.Bd5? [23.Kg1+/=] 23...c6 24.Kg3 cxd5 25.cxd5 0-0 26.Nc4 Qg5 27.h3
Qf4+ 28.Kh4 Nf5# White checkmated 0-1
74 - Zilbermints Crushes Tatai
Zilbermints wrote to me: "I crushed Tatai with the PCG on ICC". Here is his
game vs IM Stefano Tatai.
This gambit places a lot of pressure to play very accurately. White has good
moves, but it is an unbalanced tactical position.
White needs to find and play many good moves in a row to gain the
advantage. This can be hard to do in practice.
Lev shows that in a three minute blitz game, a prepared attacker has great
practical chances against a human opponent.
The Philidor Defence can be played in many ways, either solid or aggressive.
As I see it, Black has three key choices:
1. Play ...Nbd7 with ...c6, or play ...Nc6.

2. Play ...exd4, or protect and hold e5.
3. Play an early ...Nf6 or play first ...f5.
This last approach is the Philidor Counter Gambit. After 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 White
can play 3.Nxe5 against openings such as 2...Nf6, 2...d5, or 2...f5. However
2...d6 protects e5, therefore Black forces White to enter the fray in a manner
that can threaten the Nf3. Lev Zilbermints ends up on top in this short tactical
clash.
Ornitologo (1885) - Zilbermints (2055), ICC 5 0 Internet Chess Club,

26.04.2015 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 f5 4.dxe5 [Common alternatives are
4.Nc3+/= and 4.exf5+/-] 4...fxe4 5.Ng5 d5 6.Nc3 [Komodo and Houdini
prefer 6.e6+/- while Fritz prefers 6.c4+/=] 6...Bb4 7.e6 [Or 7.Be2 Nc6 8.0-
0+/= Stockfish] 7...Nh6 [7...Qf6! 8.Nf7 Bxe6 9.Nxh8 Nc6 gives Black
compensation for the pawn.] 8.Qh5+ Kf8 9.Nf7 [9.Bd2; 9.Be3; or 9.f3]
9...Qe8 10.Bxh6 [10.Qxd5! Nxf7 11.exf7 Qxf7 12.Qd8+ Qe8 13.Qxc7+- and
White is up a pawn with a solid position.] 10...Bxe6 11.Qe5? [11.Qg5! gxh6
12.Qf6 Qxf7 13.Qxh8+ Qg8 14.Qf6+ Qf7 15.Qxh6+ Qg7 16.Qxg7+ Kxg7
17.0-0-0+/-] 11...Qxf7 12.Bxg7+? Qxg7 13.Qxe6 Bxc3+ 14.Ke2 Nc6
[14...Bxb2-+] 15.bxc3 Qxc3 16.Rd1 [A knight fork is coming, so White
resigns 0-1
75 - Gambit vs Lawson
Is chess a sport or not? Competitive chess places the focus on the battle, not
just the study.
Check out this game where International Master Eric Lawson of Canada
takes on our gambit hero Lev Zilbermints in a Philidor Defense Counter
Gambit.
In slower play IM Lawson with his FIDE rating of 2371 would have a big
advantage in the depth of calculation and accuracy of evaluation. However in
blitz play Lev Zilbermints excels with his great feel for fast attack and
defense.
Lev Zilbermints wins when IMs played three different sixth moves for White
in a critical Philidor Defence Counter Gambit after 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 f5
4.dxe5 fxe4 5.Ng5 d5. Previously we looked at 6.c4 and 6.Nc3. Here 6.e6 is
covered.
Each of these give a slight edge to White with perfect play. Since this line is
less likely known by most players of the White pieces, Black has great
practical chances.
Lawson (2148) - Zilbermints (2132), ICC 4 0 Internet Chess Club,

02.06.2015 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 f5 4.dxe5 fxe4 5.Ng5 d5 6.e6 Nh6
[Another idea is 6...Bc5 7.Nxe4 Bb4+ 8.c3 dxe4 (8...Be7 9.Qg4 g6 10.Ng5+/-
) 9.Qxd8+ Kxd8 10.cxb4 Bxe6 11.Nc3 Nf6 12.Bg5 Nbd7 13.Nxe4+/-] 7.c4
[The IM could have tried 7.g3 c6 8.Bh3 Na6 (8...Qf6 9.e7+/-) 9.0-0 g6 10.c4
Be7 11.Nxe4 dxe4 12.Qxd8+ Bxd8 13.Bxh6+/-] 7...Bb4+ [7...d4! 8.Nxe4
Bxe6=] 8.Nc3 d4 9.Qa4+? [From here the attacking skills of Lev Zilbermints
shine bright. White could have played 9.a3! e3 (9...dxc3 10.Qxd8+ Kxd8
11.axb4+/-) 10.axb4 exf2+ 11.Kxf2 0-0+ 12.Kg1 dxc3 13.Qxd8 Rxd8
14.bxc3+/-] 9...Nc6 10.a3 e3!? [10...dxc3! 11.axb4 cxb2 12.Bxb2 Qxg5-+]
11.Nf7 [11.axb4 Qxg5-+] 11...Qf6 12.axb4 Qxf2+ 13.Kd1 Bxe6 14.Nxh8
dxc3 15.Be2 0-0-0+ 16.Kc2 Qxe2+ 17.Kb3 Qxc4+ 18.Ka3 cxb2 19.Kxb2
Qd4+ 20.Kb1 Bf5+ 21.Ka2 Nxb4+ 22.Kb3 Be6+ 23.Ka3 Qc3+ White
resigns 0-1
2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 exd4
Black exchanges pawns to relieve the immediate pressure on this center.
76 - Black Attacks Quickly
In a Philidor Defence my chess club friend Lorenzo Skip Spence attacks my
weakest point f2. That is a logical strategy.
How should I handle Black’s threat against f2?
First, be aware of the danger.

Second, rapidly develop my own pieces.
And third, castle to keep that square from being vulnerable.
Skip Spence probably did not study openings. Still, all players begin their
game somehow.
The natural approach of pushing center pawns and moving minor pieces
works well most of the time at the club level.
In other games against me, Skip Spence played the Benoni Defence 3...Na6
as Black and the Sicilian Defence with 2.Bc4 as White.
Sawyer - Spence, Williamsport, PA 1996 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 exd4

4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 c6 [More common is 5...Be7 6.Be2+/=] 6.Bd3 Qb6 7.Nb3
Ng4 8.0-0 Be6 9.h3 Ne5 10.Be3 Qc7 11.f4 Nxd3 12.cxd3 g6 13.f5 gxf5
[13...Bxb3 14.Qxb3+/-] 14.exf5 Bxb3 15.Qxb3 Nd7 16.Rae1 Kd8 [Better is
16...0-0-0 17.Qxf7+- when White is up a pawn in a good position.] 17.Qxf7
Ne5 18.Bg5+ Kc8 19.Qe6+ [A faster win was 19.Qe8+ Qd8 20.Qxd8#]
19...Kb8 20.Bf6 Bg7 21.Rxe5 Rc8 22.Bxg7 Qxg7 23.Qxd6+ Qc7 24.Qxc7+
Kxc7 25.Re7+ Kb6 26.Rxh7 1-0
77 - Carissa Yip Expert at 9
July 2013 news articles described how nine year old Carissa Yip became a
chess expert with a rating over 2000. Some reports prematurely called her a
master.
Carissa Yip is very talented and her future is very promising. She has played
in about one tournament per week.
First her rating rose to 2007. She slipped back to 1951 in a later tournament.
Her rating started to go back up in the Harlow B. Daly Memorial event from
July 24, 2013.
I actually met Harlow B. Daly, who was born in 1883, that's back when Paul
Morphy was still alive! That’s a long time ago.
Harlow B. Daly was still finishing in first and second place in the Maine
championship when I was in high school.
Below is a game from earlier this year where Carissa Yip plays vs the
Philidor Defence of William B. Ruegner from the US Amateur Team East in
2013. Her style is active and open but not reckless. Here Carissa finds the
winning tactical shot of 16.Nf5!
Yip (1835) - Ruegner (1689), US Amateur Team East 2013 Parsippany USA
(1), 16.02.2013 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 exd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 Be7
6.Bc4 0-0 7.0-0 Nxe4 8.Nxe4 d5 9.Bd3 dxe4 10.Bxe4 Bd6!? [More normal
would be 10...Nd7 11.Re1+/=] 11.Qh5 g6 12.Qf3 c6 13.Rd1 Re8 14.Bf4
Bg4? [Black makes a tactical mistake missing White's 16th. 14...Bxf4
15.Qxf4 Qe7=] 15.Qxg4 Rxe4 16.Nf5! Rxf4 17.Qxf4 gxf5 18.Rxd6 Qe7
19.Rad1 Na6 20.Rd7 Qe6 21.R7d6 [Or 21.Rd8+! Rxd8 22.Qg5+ with an
easy win.] 21...Qe7 22.Qxf5 Re8 23.h3 Nb4 24.Qg4+ 1-0
78 - Ben Franklin and Philidor
Francois Andre Danican Philidor was a French music performer and
composer. Philidor also played chess at the Cafe de la Regence in Paris,
where Paul Morphy would play 100 years later. There at that café, Philidor
played the visiting American, Dr. Benjamin Franklin.
Both men wrote books on chess. Philidor published "l'Analyse du jeu des
Echecs" in 1749. The most famous Philidor quote is translated into English
on Wikipedia:
Philidor: "play
the pawns well; they are the soul of chess: it is
they which uniquely determine the attack and the defence,
and on their good or bad arrangement depends entirely the
winning or losing of the game."
Benjamin Franklin wrote an essay "The Morals of Chess" where he compares
chess to life. Ben Franklin was inducted into the US Chess Hall of Fame in
1999.
Franklin, Philidor and George Washington were contemporaries, who were

born and died in that order. All were alive during the American Revolution
and the French Revolution.
Philidor died in London on August 31, 1795. That was two years after
Franklin died and four years before Washington died.
Below I draw a chess game in the Philidor Defence vs a high rated opponent.
We repeat moves in a mostly blocked position.
Sawyer (2411) - CraftyWiz (3108), ICC 5 0 Internet Chess Club,

17.06.2004 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 exd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 Be7 6.Be2
0-0 7.0-0 c5 8.Nf3 Nc6 9.h3 a6 10.Re1 Ne5 11.Nxe5!? dxe5 12.Be3 Be6
13.Qxd8 Rfxd8 14.Rad1 b5 15.b3 b4 [15...c4=] 16.Na4 Nd7 [16...Nxe4
17.Bf3+/=] 17.Rd2 Kf8 18.Red1 Ke8 19.Kf1 g6 20.Nb2 Nf6 21.Rxd8+
Rxd8 22.Rxd8+ Kxd8 23.f3 Bc8 24.Bc4 Ke8 25.Nd3 Nd7 26.g4 h5 27.Ke2
hxg4 28.hxg4 Bb7 29.Kf2 Bd6 30.Ke2 [30.g5+/=] 30...f6 [30...Be7=] 31.Bf2
Ke7 32.Be3 Ke8 33.Bf2 [33.g5!?+/=] 33...Ke7 34.Be3 Ke8 1/2-1/2
Book 1 – Chapter 5 – Latvian Gambit
2.Nf3 f5
Here we cover rare White third moves against the bold Latvian Gambit.
79 - Winter Meets Latvian
When I was a church pastor for 20 years, some people only showed up only
for Christmas and Easter (called C&Eers). They were regular attenders, but
they were not frequently involved.
In 1987, I had become that very same kind of chess player. I rarely played. In
fact, I only two games recorded games all year and both of those were against
my co-worker Brad Winter.
We worked in Horsham, Pennsylvania and played every once in a while

during lunch. Short games like this one rekindled my appetite for chess. My
activity picked up to 78 games in 1988.
I returned to postal tournament play for a higher level of competition. In 1989

I played 127 games. In my eagerness, I chose an attacking gambit style. I
won a lot of games. As a result, I became a USCF Postal Master in 1990.
Brad Winter meets my Latvian Gambit with the solid but quiet 3.d3 line.
White's lack of aggression allowed Black to work up his own attack. The
game is only 17 moves and not so much by itself, except that it restarted my
chess motor. On move 13 below White starts a series of chopping off pieces,
but Black picks off more than White.
Winter - Sawyer (1981), Horsham PA 1988 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f5 3.d3

Nc6 4.Nc3 Nf6 5.Be3 Bb4 6.Qd2 [6.exf5 d5 7.d4 0-0=] 6...fxe4 [6...f4!-+]
7.dxe4 Nxe4 8.Qd3 Nxc3? [8...d5-/+] 9.bxc3 Ba5? [Wrong direction.
9...Be7=] 10.Bg5 Ne7 11.Nxe5 d6? [Better is 11...d5! 12.0-0-0 c6
13.Qf3+/=] 12.Qb5+ [White is winning after 12.0-0-0!+- because the d-pawn
is pinned.] 12...c6 13.Bxe7 [13.Qb3 dxe5-+] 13...Bxc3+ 14.Ke2 Qxe7
15.Qd3 Qxe5+ 16.Qe3 Qxe3+ 17.fxe3 Bxa1 0-1
80 - Attack vs Luis Uballe
Sharp aggressive play characterized my openings in the 1989 USCF Golden
Knights Postal Chess Tournament.
Luis Uballe decided to meet my Latvian Gambit with 3.d4. This line leads to
unbalanced but equal play.
By move nine Black had a slight advantage. That advantage grew throughout
the middlegame attack.
In the end White's king is flushed out to the kingside. There a knight mate
ends the nightmare.
Uballe (1536) - Sawyer (2108), corr USCF 89N261, 10.09.1990 begins 1.e4
e5 2.Nf3 f5 3.d4 fxe4 4.Bg5 [This is unusual. The line usually goes 4.Nxe5
Nf6 5.Bg5 d6 6.Nc4 Be7=] 4...Be7 5.Bxe7 Qxe7 [5...Nxe7 6.Nxe5 d6 7.Ng4
0-0 8.Ne3 Nbc6 9.Nc3 d5 10.Be2 Nf5 11.Ncxd5 Nfxd4=] 6.Nxe5 Nf6 7.Nc3
d6 8.Nc4 d5 9.Ne5 [9.Ne3 0-0 10.Be2 c6=] 9...Nbd7=/+ 10.Bb5 c6 11.Nxc6
bxc6 12.Bxc6 Rb8 13.b3 [13.Nxd5 Nxd5 14.Bxd5 Ba6-/+] 13...Qd6 14.Ba4
Ba6 15.Qd2 0-0 16.0-0-0 Qa3+ 17.Kb1 Nb6 18.Bb5 Nc4 19.Qc1 Bxb5
20.Qxa3 Nxa3+ 21.Kc1 Bd7 [21...Ng4!-+] 22.Rhe1 Rfc8 23.Kd2 Nb5
24.Nxb5 Bxb5 25.a4 Bd7 26.f4 exf3 27.gxf3 Bf5 28.Rc1 Rc7 29.Ke3 Re8+
30.Kf2 Rxe1 31.Rxe1 Rxc2+ 32.Kg3 g5 33.Re5 Nh5# 0-1
81 - Less Travelled Latvian
The Latvian Gambit is a risky opening which has the practical value of giving
open lines in variations less known to most players. As Black, an enterprising
player can often get great positions when White is thrown on his own at
move 3.
Half the time White plays 3.Nxe5. Also, 3.Bc4 and 3.exf5 are popular. Less
common moves like 3.d4, 3.Nc3 and 3.d3 are seen only 5%-10% of the time.
In a 1989 USCF Golden Squires Postal Chess Tournament game, Mark

Thompson goes his own way. He responds to my Latvian Gambit with the
3.d4 variation on a road less travelled.
The game leads to quite a fight. As Black I had the advantage most of the
way, but somehow Mark Thompson manages to hold his own with good
defensive moves.
I have the result listed as a draw, but Black is up a pawn at the end. Possibly
White resigned and I mislabeled it. Nowadays I would fight on and not offer
a draw as Black nor resign as White!
Thompson (1727) - Sawyer (2013), corr USCF 89SS66, 01.04.1992 begins

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f5 3.d4 fxe4 4.Nxe5 Nf6 5.Be2 [5.Bg5 d6 6.Nc4 Be7 7.Be2 0-0
8.0-0 d5=] 5...d6 6.Ng4 Nbd7!? [6...Be7=] 7.Bg5!? Be7 8.Nc3 d5 9.Ne5 0-0
10.0-0 c6 11.Nxd7 [11.f4=] 11...Bxd7 12.Rb1?! [12.f3=] 12...Qe8 13.Bf4
Qg6 14.Bg3 Bg4 15.h3 Bh5 16.Qd2 Rae8 17.b4 [17.Bd1 Bb4=/+] 17...a6
[17...Bxe2 18.Nxe2 Nd7-/+] 18.Qe3 Bxe2 19.Nxe2 Nh5 20.Nf4 Nxf4
21.Bxf4 Bd6 22.Bxd6 Qxd6 23.a4 Qg6 24.Kh2 Re6 25.Rb3 Ref6 26.Qg3
Qh6 27.b5 axb5 28.axb5 Qd2 29.bxc6 bxc6 30.Kg1 [30.Qc3 Qe2=/+]
30...Qxd4 31.Rb7 Rg6 32.Qe3 Qe5 33.Kh1 [33.f4 Qd6 34.c4 Rgf6-/+]
33...Qf4 [33...h6!-+] 34.Qxf4 Rxf4 35.Kg1 Rgf6 36.Rb3 h6 37.Rc3 [37.Re3
g5-/+] 37...d4 38.Rc4 d3 39.cxd3 exd3 40.Rc3 Rd6 1/2-1/2
82 - Tactical Trick by Shaw
During the years I was most active in USCF correspondence play, I chose
gambits from both sides of the board as my main repertoire plans of
development. Some rare gambits can lead to even rarer variations.
Jack Shaw chose the Latvian Gambit 3.d4 line in the 1989 USCF Golden
Knights Postal Chess Tournament. I had won against this variation as Black
before in section 89N261.
Here in a later round I miss several good moves against Jack Shaw. In the
end I tried to hold the position with solid play.
My pieces were too loose and my king was too exposed. This allowed Jack
Shaw to play a combinative tactical trick and win material. Very nice.
Live by the sword; die by the sword.
Shaw (2021) - Sawyer (2107), corr USCF 89N286, 26.09.1990 begins 1.e4
e5 2.Nf3 f5 3.d4 fxe4 4.Nxe5 Nf6 5.Be2 d6 6.Ng4 Bxg4 [6...Be7 is more
common.] 7.Bxg4 d5 8.0-0 Nbd7 [8...Bd6=] 9.Bg5 Be7 10.Bh5+ g6 11.Be2
0-0 12.c4 c6 13.c5 Kg7 [13...b6=/+] 14.Qd2 Rf7 [14...Ng8=] 15.Nc3 Ng8
16.Be3 Nf8 17.f3 exf3 18.Bxf3 Qd7 19.b4 a6 [19...Ne6=] 20.a4 Re8 21.b5
axb5 22.axb5 h5 23.Ra7 Qc8 24.Bf4 Ne6 25.Be5+ Bf6 26.Bxf6+ Nxf6
27.bxc6 bxc6? [27...Qxc6+/=] 28.Rxf7+ Kxf7 29.Bxd5 1-0
83 - Koks Like Ruy Lopez
Back in the late 1980s and early 1990s, I played the Latvian Gambit vs men
and women alike. The highest rated female opponent I played it against was
Irene Aronoff.
From the same preliminary round of the 1990 United States Correspondence
Chess Championship I played another lady. Barbara Koks responded to my
2...f5 with 3.Nc3, handling it like the main line of a Ruy Lopez Schliemann:
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 f5 4.Nc3 fxe4 5.Nxe4.
If Barbara Koks had boldly captured my hanging e5 pawn with either

4.Nxe5! or 5.Nxe5, I would have been in some trouble. However, after her
natural moves 4.Nxe4 d5 5.Ng3 e4, the position shifted to my favor.
We exchanged into an ending. There Black had the better bishop, better pawn
structure, better king position, and ultimately, the better result.
Koks (1818) - Sawyer (2083), corr USCCC 10P05, 21.06.1990 begins 1.e4
e5 2.Nf3 f5 3.Nc3 fxe4 4.Nxe4 [4.Nxe5!+/-] 4...d5! 5.Ng3 [5.Nxe5 Qe7 6.d4
dxe4 7.Qh5+ g6 8.Nxg6 hxg6 9.Qxh8 Be6 10.Qe5 Bg7 11.Qxe4 Nf6=] 5...e4
6.Nd4 Nf6 7.Be2 Nc6 [7...c5!?=/+] 8.Nxc6 bxc6 9.0-0 Bd6 10.d3 exd3
11.Bxd3 0-0 12.Bg5 Qd7 13.Qd2 Qf7 14.h3 [14.f3=] 14...c5 15.c3 Bd7
16.Rad1 Rae8 17.Rfe1 h6 18.Bxf6 Qxf6 19.Rxe8 Rxe8 20.Re1 Bxg3
21.Rxe8+ Bxe8 22.fxg3 d4 23.Qe2 Bc6 24.c4 Kf8 25.Qf2 Qxf2+ 26.Kxf2
Ke7 27.g4 g5 28.g3 Kf6 29.Bf1 Ke5 30.Ke2 Be4 31.Kd2 Bb1 32.a3 Be4
33.Kc1 Bh1 34.h4? [Making the win is easier. 34.Kd2 Ke4-/+] 34...Ke4
35.hxg5 hxg5 36.Be2 d3 37.Bd1 Bf3 0-1
84 - Leite Latvian Lesson
Winners play winners in the 1989 USCF Golden Knights Semi-Finals. Here I
was taught a lesson in the Latvian Gambit by Master George Leite who was
rated 2351.
George Leite chooses the rare 3.Nc3 variation. While this line is not has
popular as 3.Nxe5, 3.Bc4 or 3.exf5, White develops a piece and still gets a
good position.
Possible improvements for Black are 3...Nf6, 4...Nf6 or 5...Nc6. In any case,
White maintains the better position.
Master Leite shows that Black is not the only player who can attack early
with the f-pawn. His 5.f4 move led to a line where I captured his pawn en
passant.
White’s attack resembled a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit or a Dutch Defence

Staunton Gambit after his 6.Nxf3. Black was crushed under the pressure!
Leite (2351) - Sawyer (2075), corr USCF 89NS14, 04.10.1990 begins 1.e4
e5 2.Nf3 f5 3.Nc3 fxe4 4.Nxe5 Qf6 5.f4! [Very strong continuation!] 5...exf3
6.Nxf3 c6 7.Be2 d5 8.0-0 Bd6 9.d4 Bg4? [9...Ne7+/=] 10.Ne5 Bxe2 11.Qxe2
1-0
3.exf5
The variation 3.exf5 treats the Latvian like a King’s Gambit reversed.
85 - Loose Lady Vs Latvian
Chess pieces hate to be "Loose". What do we know about loose pieces?
Nobody loves them. Nobody pays attention to them. No other pieces on the
chess board protect them.
Someone who loves their family, who pays attention to them and who
protects them will have a strong family. Someone who loves chess, who pays
attention to the pieces and who protects them will be a strong player.
Dana MacKenzie did several videos for ChessLecture.com. This was a great
site which I recommended. When I could afford it, I subscribed to it myself.
On his website own Dana MacKenzie described his video for February 10,
2009 as follows:
"Undefended pieces are often a red flag for combinations, even if they are not
currently being attacked. They are the ones most likely to be victimized by
pins, forks, etc. John Nunn has a saying: LPDO (loose pieces drop off). I
invented a new acronym: LPCRF (loose pieces cause red faces)."
In chess, the King is the most valuable piece, but the Queen is the most
powerful piece. She can move as far as she wants in any direction. And, just
like women want their own way, so the queen starts on her own color: White
queen on light square d1; Black queen on dark square d8. Remember: Every
lady deserves to be cherished and protected.
Our friend Bill Chandler noticed that his opponent's queen is loose. The red
flag for a combination was waving. Bill saw the combination and grabbed the
loose Lady. His ICC handle was "ProjectAlpha". I did not know his opponent
"Earth".
The opening is a Latvian Gambit in which the Black pieces risk being loose
to develop rapidly and shake up White. I played it many times in the late
1980s. Nowadays players rated over 2000 probably know a line that gives
White at least some advantage.
Earth - ProjectAlpha, ICC 5 0 Internet Chess Club, 02.01.2012 begins 1.e4
e5 2.Nf3 f5 3.exf5 [White captures one of the two loose pawns. The main line
of the Latvian Gambit is to capture the other pawn with 3.Nxe5 Qf6 when
White has two good options to gain the better game. 4.d4 (or 4.Nc4 fxe4
5.Nc3 Qf7 6.Ne3 c6 7.Nxe4 d5 8.Ng5 Qf6 9.Nf3+/-) 4...d6 5.Nc4 fxe4 6.Nc3
Qg6 7.f3 exf3 8.Qxf3 Nc6 9.Bd3+/-] 3...Nf6 4.Bc4 [If White grabs the
second loose pawn 4.Nxe5 Qe7 5.Qe2 d6 Black has faster development as
partial compensation for the gambit.] 4...d5 [Black gains time by attacking a
bishop with his pawn and attacking a pawn with his bishop.] 5.Bb3 Bxf5 6.0-
0 [Now White does have time to take the loose pawn 6.Nxe5+/= intending
7.d4 protecting the knight that can no longer be driven away from e5 by a
pawn.] 6...Nc6 7.Re1 Bd6 8.Nc3 [White deserves a lot of credit for rapidly
developing his pieces. So far so good.] 8...0-0 [Black is developing just as
fast, even while giving up a pawn.] 9.Nxd5 Nxd5 10.Bxd5+ Kh8 11.Bxc6!?
[Most strong players would keep this active bishop on the board.] 11...bxc6
12.d3?! [Once again the e-pawn is loose and could be snatched with
advantage. 12.Nxe5! Bxe5 13.Rxe5+/= and White is ahead two pawns.]
12...e4? [Best is 12...Bg4! pinning the knight with a double attack on f3.]
13.dxe4 [White has the in-between-move 13.Bg5! which attacks the Black
queen and adds protection from Ra1 to the White queen.] 13...Bxe4
14.Rxe4? [A fatal mistake. The knight can leap into action with 14.Ng5 Bg6
15.Ne6+/= causing Black some concerns.] 14...Bxh2+! [As Dana MacKenzie
noted, loose pieces lead to combinations. Chandler sees the combination at
blitz speed and is rewarded.] 15.Nxh2 [Black picks up the Lady.] 15...Qxd1+
White resigns 0-1
86 - Four Pawns Latvian
During the 1989 USCF Golden Knights Postal Tournament I met a wide
variety of people. The event was open to players of all levels.
Wayne Heckman was rated a little lower than most of my opponents. He

chose the Latvian Gambit Accepted 3.exf5 line.
This may not be the strongest line, but it’s not bad. It is certainly good for
White when handled accurately.
White followed 3.exf5 e4 up with the reasonable looking 4.Nd4!? (Instead of

the stronger 4.Ne5!). This gave me a chance to launch what became the Four
Pawns Attack against the Latvian Gambit.
Black threatens to regain the gambit pawn and dominate the center, but White
still had plenty of play left.
At this point White forfeited on time. I do not know why he stopped playing.
We all have our own reasons for playing or not.
In postal chess, you played several games at once. You paid for postage for
every move.
After six moves vs six opponents, he might realize that he was unlikely to
win this event. Some people just stop playing.
Forfeits are part of the competition. I played to win events or raise my rating.
This was one of those quickie wins one gets in correspondence chess. Those
games never bothered me. It was another win in the event and gave me time
for a new game.
Heckman (1453) - Sawyer (2193), corr USCF 89N285, 12.04.1990 begins

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f5 3.exf5 e4 4.Nd4 [For better or worse the main line is 4.Ne5!
Nf6 5.Be2 d6 6.Bh5+ Ke7 7.Nf7 Qe8 8.Nc3+/-] 4...Nf6 5.Nc3 c5!? [Probably
better is 5...Nc6 6.Nxc6 dxc6 7.g4 h5 8.g5 Nd5 9.Nxe4 Bxf5 10.Qe2=]
6.Nde2 d5 [Here White forfeited on time, but he still has a good game after
7.Ng3+=.] 0-1
87 - Bad Bishops Adventure
My first Latvian Gambit was against Jeffrey Moore, a star scholastic player
from the "Bad Bishops" team in Philadelphia. He had come up through the
famous Vaux team that had won seven consecutive National Junior High
School championships (1977-1983).The Chess Drum website has a 30 year
old team picture that includes a younger Jeffrey Moore.
Mr. Moore would sometimes visit the Chaturanga Chess Club to play
simultaneous exhibitions. I played him a couple times in simuls when he was
about 16-17 years old. He was already a rated expert. Moore was a good
tactical player who seemed to know the main line openings fairly well.
I surprised him with a rare Latvian Gambit. All I used to study this opening
was the monograph by Ken Smith from Chess Digest. I played a few Latvian
Gambits vs the weak computers Atari and Sargon in 1984. This was the first
time I played it in a live game.
This game began 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f5 3.exf5 e4. A key difference between the
Latvian Gambit and the King's Gambit is that this e-pawn push attacks a
knight in the Latvian but the move 3.e5?! is pointless after the King’s Gambit
1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4.
We continued 4.Ne5 Nf6 5.d4. White fought for the center in a natural
continuation. Critical is 5.Be2! d6 6.Bh5+ Ke7 7.Nf7 Qe8 when White stands
a little better after either 8.Nc3 or 8.Nxh8. Probably Jeffrey Moore did not
know this line. It was a simul so I had much more time than he did to think.
Soon Black activated his bishops. White lost to a queenside mating attack.
Moore - Sawyer, Hatboro, PA simul Hatboro, 07.06.1984 begins 1.e4 e5

2.Nf3 f5 3.exf5 e4 4.Ne5 Nf6 5.d4 [5.Be2! d6 6.Bh5+ Ke7 7.Nf7 Qe8 8.Nc3
(8.Nxh8 Qxh5 9.Qxh5 Nxh5 10.g4 Nf6) 8...Nxh5 9.Nd5+ Kxf7 10.Qxh5+ g6
11.fxg6+ Kg7] 5...d6 6.Ng4 Bxf5 7.Nxf6+ Qxf6 8.Nc3 c6 9.d5 c5!?
[9...Nd7=] 10.Nb5 [10.g4! Bg6 11.Bg2] 10...Qe7 11.Bf4 Qd8 12.c4 a6
13.Qa4 Kf7 14.Nc3 g5 15.Be3 Bg7 16.Qb3 Nd7 17.Be2 h5 18.0-0-0 Qe7
19.h3 Ne5 20.f4? [20.Rhe1=] 20...exf3 21.gxf3 Nxc4 22.Bxc4 Qxe3+
23.Rd2 Bxc3 24.bxc3? [24.Qxc3 Qxc3+ 25.bxc3 Rae8-+] 24...b5 25.Be2 c4
26.Qb2 b4 27.Bxc4 bxc3 28.Qb7+? Kf6 29.Rhd1 Rhb8 White resigns 0-1
88 - Tricky Latvian Gambit
Tricky openings are a double-edged sword. For about 10 years from the mid-
1980s to the early 1990s, I played many sharp gambits to trick or swindle
people. Usually it worked like a charm. My rating generally went up as I won
more than I lost.
When playing White, my choice of the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit was

particularly effective. I defeated many class A players, and experts and some
masters.
However as Black, playing risky chess can lead to the occasional ugly loss,
especially if one does not play it accurately. The secret is to learn lessons
from losses that become wins later in life.
In the Latvian Gambit Black usually has the option of playing ...f5xe4 fairly
soon. That was prevented by John G. Coriell when he chose 3.exf5 in our
game from the 10th US Correspondence Chess Championship in 1990.
Unfortunately for me, I foolishly experimented with the line 5...d5? Back
then it seemed like just another playable option. Nowadays we know that it is
not good.
Black must play 5...Be7 or the standard 5...d6. This was another example of
me losing a game in a Latvian Gambit due to my poor play. There were better
moves for Black that I missed. Also, John Coriell played some pretty good
moves of this own!
Coriell (1910) - Sawyer (2065), corr USCCC 10P05, 27.11.1990 begins 1.e4
e5 2.Nf3 f5 3.exf5 e4 4.Ne5 Nf6 5.Be2 d5? [The main line is 5...d6 6.Bh5+
Ke7 7.Nf7 Qe8+/-; but Black might do better with 5...Be7 6.Bh5+ Kf8+/=]
6.Bh5+ Ke7 7.Nf7 [7.d3!+-] 7...Qe8 8.Nc3 c6 [8...g6 9.Nxh8 gxh5 10.d3+-]
9.Nxh8 [9.d3!+-] 9...Qxh5 10.Qxh5 Nxh5 11.g4 Nf6 12.Rg1 Nbd7 13.f4
exf3? 14.d4 Ne4? 15.Nxe4 dxe4 16.Kf2 Kf6 17.Bf4?! [Correct is 17.Re1!+-]
17...c5? [Black might wiggle out with 17...g6! 18.Rae1 Kg7 19.fxg6 hxg6
20.Rxe4 Kxh8 21.Kxf3+/= and Black has a bishop and a knight for a rook
and two pawns.] 18.Rae1 Nb6? 19.Be5+ 1-0
3.Bc4
This 3.Bc4 move places the bishop on an active diagonal and leaves both e-
pawns hanging.
89 - Penullar Wins Latvian
Peter Mcgerald Penullar plays a Latvian Gambit that transposes into a
Philidor Defence after 3.Bc4. The best approach for White to deal with the
Latvian Gambit or the Philidor Defence is to develop quickly.
Then White can control the center and attack Black weaknesses. Typically
Black has trouble activating all his pieces quickly in these defenses.
White plays a few rather quiet moves like 4.d3, 5.h3 and 9.a3. From there
Peter castles queenside and he mounts a kingside attack that leads to
checkmate.
This is a good example of how to defeat passive White play.
lakhote - penullar, TPOC vs. IM - Board 4 Chess.com, 22.02.2012 1.e4 e5

2.Nf3 f5 3.Bc4 [This is a good move. The best continuation vs the Latvian
Gambit is 3.Nxe5] 3...d6 [Black transposes to a Philidor Defence. Sharper
play follows 3...fxe4 4.Nxe5 d5 or 4...Qg5] 4.d3 [If 4.d4! fxe4 White has
powerful piece sacrifice 5.Nxe5! dxe5 6.Qh5+ Kd7 7.Qf5+ Kc6 8.Qxe5 a6
9.d5+ Kb6 10.Be3+ Bc5 11.Bxc5+ Kxc5 12.b4+ Kxb4 13.Nd2 Qf6 14.Rb1+
Kc5 15.Qxc7+ Nc6 16.Qb6+ Kd6 17.Nxe4+ Black's king has barely avoided
checkmate, but the queen is lost and mate may follow soon after anyway.]
4...Be7 5.h3?! Nf6 6.Bg5 [6.Nc3+/-] 6...c6 7.Bxf6?! [White gives up his
good bishop and activates Black's bad bishop.] 7...Bxf6 8.0-0 Qe7 9.a3 f4
10.c3 Be6 11.Qb3 Bxc4 12.Qxc4 Nd7 13.b4 Nb6 14.Qb3 h5 15.Nbd2
[White develops this knight about 10 moves too late.] 15...g5 16.Nh2 0-0-0
17.Ndf3 [If White defends the kingside with 17.f3 Black can break open the
center 17...d5=/+] 17...g4 18.hxg4 hxg4 19.Nxg4 Rdg8 20.Nfh2 Rxg4
21.Nxg4 f3! 22.gxf3 [Everyone is invited over to White's house for a party!]
22...Qh7 23.Qe6+ Kc7 24.Kg2 Qh3+ 25.Kg1 Qh1# 0-1
90 - Take a Shot at King
In the series "Line of Duty" DCI Anthony Gates tells DS Steve Arnott of
Anti-Corruption, “You take a shot at the king, make sure you kill him, son.”
Gates had been honored as the "Officer of the Year". Chief Gates refers to
himself as king of the cops. Arnott suspects Gates of corruption. He tries to
prove Gates is dirty.
In real life, to shoot at the king is a terrible thing. Don't do it! However the
game of chess has violent ideas. The ultimate goal in chess is the death of
your opponent's king. Checkmate!
To win in chess, you must go after the king. It is worth the risk of sacrifice,
but how much should you risk? If you can get the king, it is worth any
sacrifice. But make sure you are likely to get the king before you plan to
throw away too many valuable pieces. If you sacrifice too much and fail, you
are doomed to lose.
In a Latvian Gambit my opponent Warren Curtis decided to go after my king.

His timing was off. White's Bc4 was under attack. White did not take my b-
pawn, nor did he back off with the move 4.Bb3. He boldly played 4.Nxe5
threatening my king along the h5-e8 diagonal. He did not win enough
material to compensate for the loss of his bishop after my 4...bxc4. If White
wants the Qh5+ threat, he should play 3.Nxe5, or retreat with 4.Bb3.
Curtis (1632) - Sawyer (2016), corr USCF 89N278, 04.03.1991 begins 1.e4
e5 2.Nf3 f5 3.Bc4 b5 4.Nxe5?! [The most popular response is 4.Bb3 but
White chooses to sacrifice a bishop to attack the Black king.] 4...bxc4
5.Qh5+ g6 6.Nxg6 Nf6 7.Qh4 [Not 7.Qxf5? d6-+] 7...Rg8 8.Nxf8 Rxf8 9.d3
fxe4 [9...cxd3 10.cxd3 Nc6=/+] 10.dxe4 d6 11.Nc3 Bb7 [11...Be6!?] 12.Bg5
Nbd7 13.Qf4 Qe7 14.0-0 0-0-0 15.Rfe1 [15.Qd2 Rg8-/+] 15...Rde8 [Even
stronger is 15...Rg8! 16.Bxf6 Nxf6-/+] 16.f3 Qe6 17.Qe3 Kb8 18.Bxf6 Rxf6
19.a4 Rg8 20.Re2 Rh6 21.f4 [Or 21.g3 a6-+] 21...Rh3 22.g3 Qg4 [22...Nf6!-
+] 23.Rg2 h5?! [This leaves Black vulnerable to a knight f2 fork. 23...Nf6!-
+] 24.Rf1 [Black can swap into an ending with an extra bishop. White could
defend better with 24.Nd1 Qg7 25.Nf2 Rh4=/+] 24...h4 25.f5 hxg3 26.Rxg3
Rxg3+ 27.Qxg3 Qxg3+ 28.hxg3 Rxg3+ 29.Kf2 Rg4 30.Ke3 Ne5 31.f6
Rg3+ 32.Kd2 Rg2+ 33.Ke3 Rg3+ 34.Kd2 Rf3 35.Rxf3 Nxf3+ 36.Ke3 Ne5
37.Kd4 Kc8 38.f7 Nxf7 39.Kxc4 Kd7 40.b4 Ke6 41.Nb5 Ba6 42.Kd4 Bxb5
0-1
91 - Latvian Wing Gambit
This is a hard fought game in the Latvian Gambit 3.Bc4 b5 variation. I
offered my b-pawn as a sacrifice, but Daryn Smith turned it down. We
maneuvered around a mass of closed central pawns.
I failed to break through on the kingside. Then White succeeded in breaking

through on the queenside.
However, the exact point in time at which I resigned is rather curious. No one
likes to resign but if I am losing, why resign at this point?
White will have an extra passed a-pawn and a passed f-pawn. Black also has
some little compensation with a passed e-pawn.
Probably what dictated the timing of my resignation was White's current

rating. It was temporarily high due to not having finished many or maybe not
even any rated USCF postal games. In any competition, it helps to know the
rules that the organizers follow.
Thus a loss right at that moment would not hurt my rating much. There were
many wins for which I received no rating points. I complained about those.
“Where are my rating points?”
Once in a while I lost a game for which I lost very few rating points. I never
complained about those. In the long run, the ratings balance out.
Smith (2514) - Sawyer (2112), corr USCF 89N278, 07.08.1990 begins 1.e4
e5 2.Nf3 f5 3.Bc4 b5 4.Bxg8 Rxg8 5.d4 fxe4 6.Nxe5 d6 7.Ng4 d5 8.Ne3 g6
9.Nc3 c6 10.a4 b4 11.Ne2 Bd6 [11...Nd7=] 12.c3 [12.c4] 12...Be6 13.Qc2
[13.cxb4] 13...Qb6 [13...Kf7 14.0-0 Kg7=] 14.Bd2 Na6 15.0-0 Qc7 16.g3 g5
[16...Bh3 17.Rfc1 Rf8=] 17.Ng2 [17.f3! exf3 18.Rxf3 0-0-0 19.Nf5+/=]
17...Bh3 18.f4 bxc3 19.bxc3 g4?! 20.Rf2 Bxg2 21.Rxg2 [21.Kxg2+/=]
21...Qf7 22.Rb1 Rb8 [22...Kd7=] 23.Rxb8+ Nxb8 24.c4 Nd7 25.c5 Bb8
26.Qb3 Rg6 27.Nc1 Rf6 28.Qb7 Qe7 29.Ba5 Kf7 30.Rb2 h5 31.Bc7 1-0
92 - Brooks Sacs Rooks
The 2010 action movie "Three Kingdoms" tells about fighting factions in
China in 228 A.D. (based on "Romance of the Three Kingdoms" by Luo
Guangzhong).
One wise man advises his troops with these words: "A battle is like chess.
Instead of standing pat, playing defensively... you must sacrifice a rook to
take a king."
I am not sure how a chess rook in China compares to medieval castles of

Europe 1000 years later. But the quote works for me.
I played a postal chess game vs Richard Wade Brooks in the 1989 USCF
Golden Knights Semi-Finals. Our opening was the Latvian Gambit.
After I sacrifice one rook, my opponent sacrifices two rooks. One can give up
too much material.
Brooks (1909) - Sawyer (2030), corr USCF 89NS20, 04.03.1991 begins 1.e4
e5 2.Nf3 f5 3.Bc4 b5 4.Bb3 fxe4 5.Nxe5 Qg5 6.Nf7 [A better line is 6.d4!
Qxg2 7.Qh5+ g6 8.Bf7+ Kd8 9.Qg5+ Qxg5 10.Bxg5+ Be7 when White
could try 11.h4+/=] 6...Qxg2 7.Rf1 d5 8.Nxh8 Nf6? [8...Bg4!-+ wins]
9.Bxd5? [Giving Black another option. 9.d4 Bg4 10.Qd2=] 9...Bh3! 10.Bf7+
Ke7 11.Qe2 Nc6 12.Qxb5 Rb8 13.Qc4 Rb4 14.Qe2 Nd4 15.Qa6 [White is
running out of ways to defend f1 and e2. 15.Bc4 Nxe2 16.Bxe2 Qxh2 17.Nc3
Bxf1 18.Bxf1 Ng4-+] 15...Nxc2+ [15...Qf3!-+ with mate threats.] 16.Kd1
Nxa1 17.b3 Qxf1+ [17...Bg4+!-+] 18.Qxf1 Bxf1 0-1
93 - James Regan Latvian
The sharpest attacking line against the Latvian Gambit is the variation 3.Bc4.
White plays for an immediate kingside attack.
After the normal 3...fxe4 4.Nxe5 d5 5.Qh5+ g6 6.Nxg6 hxg6, White has the
choice of 7.Qxh8 or 7.Qxg6+. However, Black has other options.
James Regan and I played many postal games. In one game, I tried the
Latvian Gambit 3.Bc4 b5 variation.
The notes below show how this extra 3...b5 tempo move can make a real
difference. Black turns the tables and attacks the White king!
Regan - Sawyer, corr USCF, 1989 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f5 3.Bc4 b5 [3...fxe4

4.Nxe5 Qg5 5.d4 Qxg2 6.Qh5+ g6 7.Bf7+ Kd8 8.Bxg6= is playable. The
Black king needs to escape, but the Bc8 cannot immediately move out of the
way.] 4.Bb3 fxe4 5.Nxe5 Qg5 6.d4 Qxg2 7.Qh5+ g6 8.Bf7+ Kd8 9.Bxg6?
[This is a mistake that allows Black to benefit handsomely from 3...b5!?
Correct is to force a queen swap with 9.Qg5+! Qxg5 10.Bxg5+ Be7
11.h4+/=] 9...Qxh1+ 10.Ke2 Ba6 11.Nd2 b4+ 0-1
94 - I Sacrifice Six Pawns
My Latvian Gambit 3.Bc4 fxe4 against Harbey Santiago saw me get open
lines for my pieces in exchange for some pawns. When I failed to play
10...c6!? or 11...Kc6!, things got ugly for me. Thus I sacrificed all six of my
remaining pawns. When you play risky openings, you have to learn to live
with some bad positions.
What do you do when way behind in material? Since I was rated over 500
points above my opponent, I just kept on playing and hoping for months and
months. Our moves in my Golden Knights Postal Tournament were played at
a pace of about one move each per week. White had multiple passed pawns.
That can be confusing. When his king stayed in the middle, it gave me hope.
Gradually I got more and more compensation. It was a miracle that I lasted
long enough to find a nice checkmate. This game finished at my peak USCF
Postal rating of 2211. I won about six games at that point for which I
received zero rating points due to their goofy rating system at the time. Rest
assured that as soon as I failed to win games, I definitely lost rating points. It
was still fun playing postal chess back before everyone had access to strong
chess engine analysis. We were all just on our own.
Santiago (1614) - Sawyer (2211), corr USCF 89N189 corr USCF,

18.06.1990 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f5 3.Bc4 [3.Nxe5] 3...fxe4 4.Nxe5 d5
5.Qh5+ g6 6.Nxg6 hxg6 7.Qxg6+ [Black gets active play for the Exchange
after 7.Qxh8 Kf7 8.Qd4 Be6 9.Be2 Nc6 10.Qe3 Bh6] 7...Kd7 8.Bxd5 Nf6
9.Nc3 Nxd5 10.Nxd5 Rh6 [10...c6!?=] 11.Qf7+ Kd6? [Now Black is in
trouble. It is important to play 11...Kc6 so there is no check from f8. 12.Nxc7
Qxc7 13.Qxf8 Re6=] 12.Nxc7 Nd7?! [This is just ugly. White goes up a rook
and four pawns. Somewhat better is 12...Be6 13.Qf4+ Kd7 14.Nxa8+-]
13.Nxa8 Rf6 14.Qc4 b6 15.d3 Ba6 16.Qd4+ Ke7 17.Nxb6!? [This leaves
me with a bishop and knight vs six pawns and a rook. Instead, 17.Bg5+-
wins] 17...Rxb6 18.dxe4 Qc7 19.c3 [19.Bg5+ Kf7 20.0-0-0+-] 19...Ke8
20.b4 Rd6 21.Bf4 Rxd4 22.Bxc7 Rxe4+ 23.Kd1 Bg7 24.Rc1 Kf7 25.Re1
Rc4 26.Bd8 Bb5 27.Re7+ Kf8 28.Rxg7 Kxg7 29.Kd2 Ne5 30.h3 Re4
31.Bg5? [White finally loses it and allows me win. To avoid collapse he
could play 31.Bc7=] 31...Re2+ 32.Kd1 Rxf2 33.Be3 Ba4+ 34.Rc2 Bxc2+
35.Kc1 Nd3# A pretty checkmate! 0-1
95 - Blood Barely Escapes
I was so close to a great victory. Here was another exciting contest vs John
Blood Sr. This time I boldly play Black in the Latvian Gambit.
Frequently I played the 3.Bc4 b5 variation, but this time my choice was
3.Bc4 fxe4 where I sacrificed the Exchange.
When the dust cleared after move 18, the White queen had given up her
precious life after capturing both rooks on h8. For the lost queen and knight,
White had two rooks and a pawn.
In this unbalanced position Black was winning. But a game still had to be
played, and played correctly to win.
My unexplainable blunder on move 27 threw away the win.
Blood (1988) - Sawyer (2032), corr USCF 89NS14, 11.02.1991 begins 1.e4
e5 2.Nf3 f5 3.Bc4 fxe4 4.Nxe5 d5 5.Qh5+ g6 6.Nxg6 hxg6 7.Qxh8 Kf7
8.Qh7+ [The main line here is 8.Qd4 Be6 9.Be2 Nc6 10.Qe3+/= when
White's material should be worth more than the tempo or two Black will gain
by attacking the White queen.] 8...Bg7 9.Bb3 Be6 10.f3 e3! 11.Ba4 [If
11.dxe3 Nd7 White can get his queen out by sacrificing a piece. 12.Bxd5
Bxd5 13.Qh3=] 11...Nc6? [Houdini likes 11...Nh6!-/+] 12.dxe3 Qg5 13.g3?
[13.0-0! Nf6 14.f4 Qg4 15.Qh3+/-] 13...Nh6 14.f4 Qh5 15.f5 gxf5 16.Bb5
Rh8 17.Be2 Qg5 18.Qxh8 Bxh8 19.Na3 Ng4 20.h4 Qe7 21.0-0 Kg6 22.c3
Be5 23.Kg2 d4 24.cxd4 Nxd4 25.exd4 Bd5+ 26.Kh3 Bxg3 27.h5+ Kxh5??
[After 27...Kh7! 28.Kxg3 Qxe2 29.Rxf5 Qg2+ the White king will be mated
in a dozen moves or so.] 28.Rxf5+ Kg6 29.Rg5+ Kf6 30.Bxg4 Qe1 [Better is
30...Qe4 31.Rf5+ Kg7 32.Rxd5 Qxd5 33.Kxg3 Qxd4 34.Bf3+/- when Black
has some perpetual check possibilities.] 31.Rxd5 1-0
96 - Robin Smith Analysis
In a tournament I found myself paired vs a guy named "Smith". I didn't think
much about it. But Smith turned out to be one of the best analysts I ever
played in 20 years of postal competition.
Ten years ago the book "Modern Chess Analysis" by Robin Smith was
published by Gambit. It shows "techniques that have revolutionized chess
analysis." By then, author Robin Smith was a correspondence chess
grandmaster and twice US Correspondence Champion. His current ICCF
rating is 2642.
This book covers in great detail how to get the most out of computer analysis.
In ICCF play, everyone can turn to their favorite chess engine. So how does
Robin Smith keep finishing at the top? He demonstrates various methods of
analysis, the proper use of multiple chess engines, how to benefit from
database use, what statistics to believe and what to doubt. Smith covers
openings, middlegames and endgames.
In conclusion Robin Smith wrote in 2004: "Regardless of how many

advances are made in the next decade or so, and what program weaknesses
are or are not solved, I believe that it is clear that the human-computer
partnership will continue to be far more powerful for analysis then either
could ever be alone. The techniques outlined in this book will continue to
play a role for the chess analyst for the foreseeable future."
When I played Robin Smith in a Latvian Gambit game, I did not know what I
was up against. It turned out that he became a far stronger player than I had
imagined, to his credit. We played in the 10th United States Correspondence
Chess Championship. It did not take a computer to win this game. I chose a
risky line that worked vs weaker folks. Robin Smith was a good player who
remained wide awake to my mistake on move 17.
Smith - Sawyer, corr USCCC 10P05, 1990 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f5 3.Bc4
fxe4 [Many times I played 3...b5!?] 4.Nxe5 d5 5.Qh5+ g6 6.Nxg6 hxg6 [Or
6...Nf6 7.Qe5+ Be7 8.Bb5+ c6 9.Nxe7 Qxe7 10.Qxe7+ Kxe7 11.Be2]
7.Qxh8 [Or 7.Qxg6+ Kd7 8.Bxd5 Nf6 9.Nc3 Qe7] 7...Kf7 8.Be2 [8.Qd4]
8...Bg7 9.Qh7 Nc6 10.0-0 Nd4 11.Bd1 Be6 12.d3 Nf6 13.Qh4 Nf5 14.Qh3
Nd4 15.Qe3 Nf5 16.Qe1 Qd6 17.dxe4 Rh8? [17...Nxe4 18.Nd2+/-] 18.e5 1-
0
3.Nxe5
The knight takes the pawn and opens up the threat of 4.Qh5+ which Black
must defend.
97 - Loosey Goosey Losing
I do not know what a "hawkstorm" is, but my mind immediate goes to a trip I
made in 2000 across the United States. Kansas is called the Hawkeye state. In
the afternoon we went through Kansas City, Missouri (where the Major
League Baseball All-Star game will be played in 2012). Then it was Kansas
City, Kansas and beyond.
As we drove west across the great flat plains, tilted ever so slightly up toward
mile-high Colorado, we saw a huge line of ominous dark clouds creeping
toward us from 40 miles away. It was a hawkeye storm of great proportions.
All of us on Interstate 70 could see it. There was no place to run, no place to
hide. We were going to get wet!
When the storm hit us, the wind and rain was so fierce that the traffic had to
pull over and stop. I expected to Dorothy from the “Wizard of Oz” to go
sailing by at any moment. After 15 minutes or so, the worst of it had passed.
The next day was beautiful. Months later we kept finding small pieces of
Kansas wheat or chaff in various places throughout our car.
Below is an unusual three minute blitz game where I lost as White very
quickly. There was no mouse slip. No forgetting the lines. Just playing too
loose and getting mated on move 15 in the Latvian Gambit. My opponent
was "hawkstorm".
I was higher rated and over-confident; I just grabbed every pawn he offered.
The next thing I knew, the winds were blowing hard in my face and his army
was raining down upon me. Nice game.
Sawyer - hawkstorm, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 24.06.2012 begins 1.e4

e5 2.Nf3 f5 3.Nxe5 Nc6 4.Nxc6 dxc6 5.exf5 [5.Nc3!+/-] 5...Bxf5 6.Bc4
[Caution suggests 6.Nc3 Nf6 7.d3+=] 6...Nf6 7.Qe2+ Be7 8.0-0 Nd5 9.d3 0-
0 10.Bxd5+ cxd5 11.Nd2 Bd6 12.h3 Qd7 13.Nf3? Bxh3 14.gxh3 Qxh3
15.Ng5 Qh2# White is checkmated 0-1
98 - Livingston, I Presume
The 1989 USCF Golden Knights Postal Tournament was an open tournament
for any USCF member who wished to pay an entry fee. Some players were
very strong.
Other players hoped to be strong someday. As I recall, the winner of a game

got no rating points for defeating any player rated more than about 400 below
the winner.
Sheldon Livingston was rated over 1000 points below me. It is expected that
I would win.
In this Latvian Gambit, my first two moves saw me push pawns to e5 and f5.
In the next two moves Mr. Livingston captured both of these pawns.
Alas, he dropped a knight. The game lasted only 10 more moves.
On November 10, 1871 the journalist and explorer Henry Morton Stanley
found in Africa the famous missionary and explorer David Livingstone.
Stanley is reported to have said, "Doctor Livingstone, I presume."
Both men had lived very different and very fascinating lives. They can be
admired most for what they accomplished. I thought of their meeting when I
played Sheldon Livingston.
Livingston (1123) - Sawyer (2183), corr USCF 89N214 21.03.1990 begins

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f5 3.Nxe5 Qf6 4.exf5? [White drops a knight for the pawn, and
that's the game. He should play 4.Nc4 or 4.d4 with good prospects in either
case.] 4...Qxe5+ 5.Qe2 Qxe2+ 6.Bxe2 d5 7.0-0 Bxf5 8.Re1 Be7 9.Nc3 c6
10.a4 Nd7 11.a5 Ngf6 12.Ra4 Bxc2 13.Rd4 0-0 14.Bd3 Bc5 0-1
99 - Penn State Latvian
Here is a game from a tournament played March 31, 1990 on the campus of
Penn State University in State College, Pennsylvania. It was spring in a
beautiful setting. They were about done getting snow. The grass is beginning
to grow.
I was mostly a postal chess player. This was back before computers had a
major influence on correspondence chess, so I had no reason to fear an
opponent was using one. Most chess engines only went about six or seven ply
deep at tournament speed, so their evaluations were very shallow by today's
standards. Later of course, all that would change.
In my spare time I wrote my first book on the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit

which I played as White. As Black I played the Dutch Defence vs anything
other than 1.e4 and the Latvian Gambit in the Open Game after 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3
f5. The Latvian Gambit served me pretty well throughout the 1980s and
1990s. I won about 30 games out of 50 attempts plus maybe three draws. The
wins were wild and crazy. The losses tended to be short and catastrophic as
more analysis got published on this opening.
My opponent in this game was Rich Alden. It was the only time we played.
The time controls were fast enough to play all four rounds easily in about
eight hours. Fast play in a sharp style leads to blunders on both sides that can
be quite entertaining.
Alden (1730) - Sawyer, State College, PA 1990 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f5

[Latvian Gambit] 3.Nxe5 Qf6 4.Nf3?! [This move implied that White had
reached a position that he did not know. Correct moves are 4.d4 or 4.Nc4
both favoring White according to theory in 2011.] 4...fxe4 5.Qe2 d5?
[5...Qe7=] 6.d3 Bf5 7.dxe4 dxe4 8.Nfd2!? Qe6 [8...Nc6=] 9.Nc4? [9.Qb5+
Nc6=] 9...Nc6 10.Be3 0-0-0 11.Nbd2 Nf6 12.h3 Bb4 13.g4 Nxg4??
[Instantly going from better to worse. Simply 13...Bg6 is good. 14.0-0-0 h5-
/+] 14.c3?? [Instantly going from better to worse. Boldly accepting the
sacrifice nets White an extra piece after 14.hxg4! Bxg4 15.Qxg4 Qxg4
16.Bh3!+- pinning and winning the queen.] 14...Nxe3 15.Qxe3 Be7 16.Bg2
Rhe8 17.0-0-0 Kb8?! [17...Rd3!-+] 18.Kb1 h6 19.Qe2? e3+ 20.Ka1 exd2
21.Qxe6 Bxe6 22.Bxc6 bxc6 23.Na5? Bd5 24.Rhg1 Bf3 25.Rxg7? Bxd1
26.Nxc6+ Kb7 27.Nxe7? Bc2 White resigns 0-1
3.Nxe5 Qf6 4.Nc4
White immediately saves his knight with the retreat 4.Nc4.
100 - Uphill Down A Pawn
The Latvian Gambit seems to me to favor White. It feels to me that the
gambit player is standing at the bottom of a hill in a fight.
In the 1980s I had a lot of fun playing Black vs weaker players. Alas I did not
do well at all vs my rated higher opponents.
I drew a couple notable players, and won a few games, but I lost many games
with this gambit.
I will still try a Latvian Gambit now and then in blitz. Do not expect me to
play it in a tournament ever again.
My only two Latvian wins in tournament play were vs lower rated players
whom I was likely to defeat with any opening.
Here is an example of playing for a winning endgame with the extra material.
Sawyer (2078) - challanger100 (1932), ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club,

10.11.2012 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f5 3.Nxe5 Qf6 4.Nc4 b5 [4...fxe4 5.Nc3+/-]
5.Ne3 fxe4 6.Nc3 c6 7.Nxe4 Qe7 8.Ng3 d5 9.Qe2 [9.d4+- is better, but since
I am up a pawn, I wanted to swap queens.] 9...Nf6 10.Nef5 Bxf5 11.Nxf5
Qxe2+ 12.Bxe2 g6 13.Ne3 Bd6 14.0-0 0-0 15.Ng4 Nbd7 16.Nxf6+ Nxf6
17.d3 Rae8 18.Bf3 Nd7 19.Bh6 Rf7 20.Rfe1 Rfe7 21.Kf1 Ne5 22.Bg5 Re6
23.Be2 d4 24.Bh4 Kg7 25.Bg3 Nf7 26.Bxd6 Nxd6 27.Bg4 Rxe1+ 28.Rxe1
Rxe1+ 29.Kxe1 c5 30.f4 Kf6 31.Kf2 c4 32.g3 a5 33.Be2 c3 34.bxc3 dxc3
35.Ke3 Nf5+ 36.Ke4 Ke6? [36...b4 37.g4 Nd6+ 38.Kd5+-] 37.Bg4 b4
38.Bxf5+ gxf5+ 39.Kd4 Kd6 40.h3 h6? 41.g4 fxg4 42.hxg4 Ke6? 43.Kc4
Kd6 44.Kb5 Kd5 45.Kxa5 Kd4? 46.Kxb4 Black resigns 1-0
101 - Mirabile in Latvian
The year 1993 was my 5th straight year of playing frisky and risky gambits.
As I won more postal chess games, I kept getting paired with other winners. I
faced ever increasing competition.
As White I played some of the most beautiful chess games in my life. As

Black, it was sweet and sour sauce.
Tim Mirabile was a very good player in his own right. My Latvian Gambit
got only the sour flavor. In the "heads I win, tails I lose", there were too many
tales from the dark side.
If this had been on Halloween, the Tim with Black got tricked and the Tim
with White got treated.
Mirabile - Sawyer, corr USCF 1993 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f5 3.Nxe5 Qf6
4.Nc4 fxe4 5.Nc3 Qf7 6.d4 Bb4 [6...Nf6 7.Bg5 Bb4 8.Ne5 Qe7 9.Be2+/=]
7.Bd2!? [7.Ne5!+/-] 7...Nf6? [This is the most popular move, but better is
7...Bxc3 8.Bxc3 Nf6 9.Be2 0-0 10.0-0+/=] 8.Nb5! Bxd2+ 9.Qxd2 Kd8
10.Be2 a6? [Black has to play 10...d6 first, and then 11.Ne3 a6 12.Nc3 Re8
although White stands much better after 13.0-0+/-] 11.Nxc7 1-0
102 - Latvian Jim Marfia Story
The Latvian Gambit fills the heart of chess players with excitement and
anticipation, or fear and dread. In November 1985 a book was released
entitled “The Latvian Gambit: Encyclopedic Games Collection” by Kon
Grivainis, a noted chess master.
I entered a postal chess section for that winter. There was snow on the ground
when I ordered a copy of the book. Boldly I sent off to Jim Marfia my second
move 2...f5!? He was a long time 1.e4 player. This gambit was going to
surprise him for sure!
I got this beautiful book. I opened it up. Published by Thinkers' Press. Edited
by Robert B. Long. Translated by Jim Marfia! What? Are you kidding me? I
was the one who got surprised!
We played a sharp variation. Both threatened to win, but we missed our best
shots. Then we repeated moves. Later James Marfia told me that all he
translated were the words at the beginning of the book, like the Forward. All
moves were in algebraic notation and needed no translation.
Jim Marfia may be most famous for his Dover translation of the David
Bronstein classic on the Zurich 1953 tournament.
Marfia - Sawyer, corr APCT 1986 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f5 3.Nxe5 Qf6
4.Nc4 fxe4 5.Nc3 Qf7 6.d4 Bb4 [6...Nf6 7.Be2+/=] 7.Ne5 Qe6 8.Bd2
[8.Qh5+ g6 9.Nxg6 Nf6 10.Qh4 Rg8 11.Nf4+/-] 8...Bxc3 [8...Nf6 9.Nb5
Bxd2+ 10.Qxd2 Na6=] 9.bxc3 Nf6 10.Bc4 d5 11.Bb3 Nc6 12.Bf4 0-0 13.0-0
Kh8 [13...Na5=] 14.c4 Ne7 [14...Nxe5 15.dxe5 dxc4 16.exf6 Qxf6 17.Bxc7
cxb3 18.axb3+/=] 15.cxd5 Nexd5 16.Bg5 [16.f3 exf3 17.Qxf3+/-] 16...Qf5
17.Bxf6 [17.Qd2+/-] 17...gxf6 18.Bxd5 fxe5 19.Qe2 exd4 20.Bxe4 Qf6
21.Bd3 [21.Qd3+/=] 21...h6 [21...Bf5=] 22.Rab1 Rb8 23.f4 b6 24.Rf3
[24.Rbe1+/=] 24...c5 [24...Bg4=] 25.f5 Bb7 26.Rbf1? [26.Rg3 Rg8=]
26...Bxf3 [Black is winning after 26...Rbe8! 27.Qd1 Bxf3 28.Rxf3 Re3-+.
Kevin Sheldrick noted that I had wrongly listed the moves as 26...Be4?
27.Qxe4. This has been corrected to present game accurately.] 27.Qxf3 Rbe8
28.Qf4 Qg5 29.Qd6 Qf6 30.Qf4 Qg5 31.Qd6 1/2-1/2
103 - Bashed by Borbash
Some games did not last long in postal chess. It seemed like a good idea to
enter a tournament. Later turned out not to be good after just a month or two
of play. It has happened to me too. For whatever reason, it happened to my
opponent Gerald Sojka.
In the 1989 Golden Knights postal event I won a couple of very short games.
In one brevity, I played 1.d4; my opponent never answered. Another was
even shorter; that opponent was White and never played a first move. Such
games are won on time.
My game against Gerald Sojka is listed in the notes to my game below. We

began play in the Semi-Finals. We reached an interesting and critical
position. Then he stopped playing.
Gambit players must play the openings accurately, especially with the Black
pieces. In my 1989 USCF Golden Knights Postal Semi-Finals game against
Steve Borbash I tried a line in the Latvian Gambit variation that gave White
too many chances.
In 1991 I had a hard time evaluating this gambit. Modern chess engines like
Houdini make it much easier to see that 6...Nf6! allows White only a slight
edge, but after 6...Bb4 White is just better. Later on move 17, Mr. Borbash
caught my tactical slip.
Borbash (1936) - Sawyer (2043), corr USCF 89NS20, 1991 begins 1.e4 e5
2.Nf3 f5 3.Nxe5 Qf6 4.Nc4 fxe4 5.Nc3 Qf7 6.d4 Bb4 [6...Nf6!] 7.Be2
[7.Ne5! Qf5 8.Bc4 Ne7 9.0-0+-] 7...Nf6 [After 7...Nf6 another game ended 0-
1 when White stopped playing in Sojka (1777) - Sawyer (2038), corr USCF
89NS48, 1990] 8.0-0 d5 9.Ne5 Qe7 10.Bg5 c6 [Another idea is 10...Bxc3
11.bxc3 0-0+/= when material is even, but White's pieces have a little more
scope.] 11.f3 exf3 12.Bxf3 0-0 13.Qd3 Be6 14.Rae1 Nbd7 15.Re2 Rae8
16.Rfe1 Qd8? [16...Bxc3 17.bxc3 Qd6 18.Bf4+/=] 17.Nxc6 1-0
3.Nxe5 Qf6 4.d4
White protects his advanced knight with 4.d4.
104 - Steven Dowd Withdraws
In the olden days of postal chess, games did not last minutes or hours but
rather months and years. This means one could start an event only to find
later that life gets in the way. When this occurred, a good player would
officially withdraw from the event.
Withdrawals were usually done without rating penalty, pending adjudications

of any lost positions the player who withdrew had. A bad player would
simply disappear. The rest of the opponents had to send repeat postcards and
then win on time.
I withdrew from an ICCF thematic Blackmar-Diemer Gambit tournament

(preliminary group 6). It began November 15, 2006. Soon after I received my
pairing assignments, I realized that I had too much going on in my life right
then in 2006. I may have made one or two moves in games, but I withdrew
quickly. Thus I scored 0 out of 10 games. Some people were surprised to see
that I scored zero in a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit event. Yup.
In my Latvian Gambit game below, I get outplayed by Mr. Dowd. I stand

worse by move 15 due to my weak d5 pawn and lack of queenside
development.
Then my opponent Steven Dowd withdrew from the tournament. I got a

tournament win, probably without gaining rating points. I do not remember
the details.
Dowd (2091) - Sawyer (2129), corr USCF 88NS3 24.07.1989 begins 1.e4 e5
2.Nf3 f5 3.Nxe5 Qf6 4.d4 d6 5.Nc4 fxe4 6.Be2 d5 [Better is 6...Qd8 7.0-0
Nf6 Black has chances after 8.Bg5 Be7 9.Ne3 0-0 10.Nc3 Nbd7 11.Bc4+
Kh8 12.f3 exf3 13.Qxf3 c5!=] 7.Ne3 c6 8.c4! [White aims at Black's pawn
center, which will be difficult to hold together.] 8...Bb4+ 9.Nc3 Ne7 10.0-0
Bxc3 [Black is in trouble. Also not good enough is 10...0-0 11.Qb3 Bxc3
12.bxc3+-] 11.bxc3 0-0 12.f3 Qe6 13.fxe4 Qxe4 14.Bf3 Qe6 15.cxd5 cxd5
[+/-. My opponent withdrew.] 0-1
105 - Endgame vs Lee Nigen
It is great when a gambit wins outright in the opening. But sometimes you
have work out the win in the middlegame.
When all that fails, you still might get enough pressure to gain an advantage
in the endgame. That was exactly what happened in my Latvian Gambit game
below.
This was another of my games from the 1989 USCF Golden Knights Postal
Chess Tournament. My opponent was Lee Nigen.
We castled opposite sides. We moved back and forth like a chess game.
Slow and steady, I turned the balance of the game to Black's favor.
Eventually I won the endgame.
Nigen (1617) - Sawyer (2019), corr USCF 89N286, 28.12.1990 begins 1.e4
e5 2.Nf3 f5 3.Nxe5 Qf6 4.d4 d6 5.Nc4 fxe4 6.Ne3 [One powerful way to
play as White is 6.Nc3 Qg6 7.f3 exf3 8.Qxf3 Nc6 9.Bd3 Qg4 10.Qe3+ Be7
11.0-0 Nf6 12.d5 Nb4 13.Rf4 Qd7 14.Bf5+/-] 6...Nc6 7.Bb5 Bd7 8.c3 Qg6
9.0-0 Nf6 10.Nd2 d5 11.Qb3 [11.f3!?] 11...a6 12.Bxc6 Bxc6 13.c4 0-0-0
14.f3 exf3 15.Nxf3 Bd6 16.cxd5 Nxd5 17.Nxd5 Bxd5 18.Qe3 Rdf8 [Even
better is 18...Rde8!-+] 19.Qg5 Bxf3 20.Qxg6 hxg6 21.Rxf3 Rxf3 22.gxf3
Rxh2 23.b3 Rc2 24.Kf1 Bb4 25.Bf4 Bc3 26.Rd1 Rxa2 27.Be5 Ra1
28.Rxa1 Bxa1 29.Bxg7 c5 30.Ke2 Bxd4 31.Bxd4 [White could last longer
with 31.Bh6 Kd7 32.Kd3 Kc6-+] 31...cxd4 32.Kd3 Kd7 33.Kxd4 Kd6 34.b4
b6 0-1
106 - Pawned by Probasco
On my way up to a 2200 rating, I played a lot of openings that specialized in
the f-pawn. My openings were dangerous for both players.
I threw punches on the board at my opponent’s army. There I stood within

arm’s length only a few squares away.
Here’s a news flash. I wasn’t the only one throwing punches. My opponents
hit back.
Along the way, I took a few punches square on the nose. One nice game was
played by Robert Probasco.
I missed a few chances to equalize after I had boldly advanced my f-pawn in

a Latvian Gambit. Everything was looking okay. Then White started pushing
his f-pawn.
Once he got started, that pesky pawn poised problems for my position. It
looked like I would lose maybe two pawns when he played 16.f6!
In postal chess, you knew who you would be paired against for future games.
Why? Because you were already playing them.
You might be up a knight or down a pawn in some of those other games. I

knew I had several wins coming in other games.
Against Probasco, it wasn’t looking good. I could not likely avoid the loss, so
I might as well take it now before my future wins got rated. A loss now
would give me more rating points when I win the others. Thus I did not drag
out this game. He played well.
Probasco (2135) - Sawyer (2042), corr USCF 89N214 1990 begins 1.e4 e5
2.Nf3 f5 3.Nxe5 Qf6 4.d4 d6 5.Nc4 fxe4 6.Ne3 Nc6 7.d5 Ne5 8.Be2 Qf7
9.Nd2 Nf6 10.0-0 Be7 11.f3 Nxd5 12.Nxe4 Nxe3 [12...Nf4=] 13.Bxe3 h6?
[Better is 13...Bf5 14.Ng3 Bd7 15.f4 Nc6 16.c3 0-0-0=] 14.f4 Nc6 [14...Nc4
15.Bd4+/-] 15.f5 0-0 16.f6! 1-0
107 - Surprised by the Greco
Below I faced a rare Latvian Gambit.
“Chess Openings Essentials notes”:
"This is sometimes called the Greco Counter-Gambit, after the Calabrian

Gioacchino Greco, who analyzed a variety of lines in the early part of the
17th century. It was later revived by the Latvian Karl Behting, who studied it
at the beginning of the 20th century."
Most of the Latvian Gambits in my chess career have been with me playing
the Black pieces. Now and then I find myself on the White side.
I prefer the main line 3.Ne5. After the normal 3...Qf6, it was decision time:
4.d4 or 4.Nc4.
Previously I have chosen 4.Nc4! This day I chose the move 4.d4. I got the
normal White advantage.
In the speed of a three minute game, I missed a few good shots. Eventually, I
came up with a good time to play the winning move Nf5.
Sawyer - kwiz, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 09.06.2012 begins 1.e4 e5

2.Nf3 f5 3.Nxe5 Qf6 4.d4 [Previously I played 4.Nc4 fxe4 5.Nc3 Qf7
6.Ne3+/-] 4...d6 5.Nc4 fxe4 6.Nc3 Qg6 7.f3 Nf6 [Usually Black plays
7...exf3 8.Qxf3 Nc6 9.Bd3 Qg4 10.Qe3+!+/-] 8.Ne3 c6 [8...Be7 9.Bc4] 9.d5
[9.fxe4!+/-] 9...Be7 10.Be2 0-0 11.0-0 Bf5 12.fxe4 Bxe4 13.Nxe4 Nxe4
14.Bd3 [14.Rxf8+!+/-] 14...Rxf1+ [14...Nd7!=] 15.Qxf1 Nd7 16.Qf3
[16.Nf5!+-] 16...Ndf6 17.b3?! [Again 17.Nf5+-] 17...Ng5?! 18.Qe2?! Qe8?
19.dxc6 bxc6 20.Nf5 [Finally I play the move! Black resigns] 1-0
108 - Fischer Lost to Latvian
Bobby Fischer lost a tournament game to the Latvian Gambit. That amazed
me, but there is more to the story.
The game was played at the 1955 U.S. Junior Championship in Lincoln,
Nebraska. Viktors Pupols was 20 and Fischer was 12. This was before
Fischer won eight US Championships. Bobby's time was devoted to long
hours of detailed opening study.
The day Fischer was to play Pupols in the evening, they were all together in
the home of Aleks Liepnieks. The older guys played poker. When Pupols
dropped out of a poker game, he played blitz vs Fischer, beating Bobby
repeatedly with the Latvian.
Viktors told him that he would play the Latvian that night vs Bobby in their
tournament game. Fischer did not believe him and continued to study the Ruy
Lopez and Giuoco Piano all day long.
In the Larry Parr book Viktors Pupols: American Master, we read that
Viktors Pupols said, "Bobby lost more Latvian Gambits that afternoon than in
all the rest of his life!"
Fischer - Pupols, USA-chJ, 1955 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f5 3.Nxe5 Qf6 4.d4
d6 5.Nc4 fxe4 6.Nc3 Qg6 7.Ne3 Nf6 8.Bc4 [A critical line is 8.Be2 c6 9.0-0
Be7 10.f3+/-] 8...c6 9.d5 Be7 10.a4 Nbd7 11.a5 Ne5 12.Be2 0-0 13.0-0 Bd7
14.Kh1 Kh8 15.Nc4 Nfg4 16.Qe1 [16.Nxe5=] 16...Rf7? [Black is winning
after 16...Nf3!-+] 17.h3 Nf6 18.Nxe5 dxe5 19.Bc4 Rff8 20.Be3? [20.dxc6
Bxc6 21.Be3= Stockfish, Rybka, Fritz] 20...Nh5 [20...cxd5!-+] 21.Kh2 Bd6
22.Bb3 Nf4 23.Bxf4? [23.Rg1=] 23...exf4 24.Qxe4? [24.f3 Rae8-/+] 24...f3+
25.g3 Bf5? [25...Qh5!-+] 26.Qh4 Rae8 27.Rae1 Be5 28.Qb4 Qh6 29.h4 g5
[At various points Black had a mating attack with 29...Bxg3+! 30.fxg3 Qd2+
31.Ne2 Rxe2+ 32.Kg1 Rg2+ 33.Kh1 Rh2+ 34.Kg1 Qg2#] 30.Rh1 gxh4
31.Kg1 h3 32.dxc6 bxc6 33.Qc5 Qg7 [Again 33...Bxg3!-+] 34.Kh2 Qf6
[34...Bd4!-+] 35.Qxa7 Bd4 36.Qc7 Bxf2 37.Rxe8 Rxe8 38.Rf1 Bd4
39.Rxf3? [39.Qf4!=] 39...Bxc3 [39...Bg1+!-+] 40.bxc3 Re2+ 41.Kh1 Be4
42.Qc8+ Kg7 43.Qg4+ Qg6 44.Qd7+? [The only way to avoid immediate
loss is 44.Qf4! but as Lev Zilbermints pointed out, Black is still better after
44…Bxf3-/+. White may survive a bishop and pawn vs rook ending.]
44...Kh6-+ White lost on time. 0-1
109 - Learning a Chess Truth
Experience has shown us certain chess truths.
You can study openings and play them with energy.
You can understand strategy and play reasonable middlegames.
You can learn endings and play them accurately.
But how do you avoid one move blunders?

The solution is to consider how your intended move will change the position.
In the 1989 USCF Golden Knights Postal Tournament, I played in 10

preliminary round sections at the same time. All these games began in 1989
but many like this one finished in 1990.
The moves for each game were played at a pace of about one move per week.
The quality of the games varied widely in the first round.
My rating was usually in the 2100s but sometimes I had a master rating over
2200. My opponent below was lower rated.
Keith Koval played a very good game against my Latvian Gambit. From
move 8 onward, White was probably on his own. For the next eight moves
Keith continued to play well.
But White dropped the Exchange with 17.Nf1? He resigned soon after. White
missed that his move changed the position significantly by leaving g4
unguarded.
Koval (1437) - Sawyer (2107), corr USCF 89N278, 13.08.1990 begins 1.e4
e5 2.Nf3 f5 3.Nxe5 Qf6 4.d4 d6 5.Nc4 fxe4 6.Nc3 Qg6 7.Ne3 Nf6 8.Ned5
[8.Be2!?] 8...Nxd5 9.Nxd5 Qf7 10.Bc4 c6 11.Ne3 [11.Nb6!? d5 12.Nxa8
dxc4=] 11...d5 12.Bb3!? [Up to here White has played well. Probably best is
12.Be2=] 12...Bd6 13.0-0 Nd7? [I should have castled 13...0-0=] 14.f3
[14.c4!+/=] 14...exf3 15.Rxf3 Nf6 16.Qe2 [16.c4+/=] 16...0-0 17.Nf1? [The
brilliant move 17.Nc4!= attacking the bishop on d6 works because the knight
cannot be captured without Black suffering along the a2-g8 diagonal.]
17...Bg4 18.Rxf6 [Or 18.Bd2 Bxf3 19.Qxf3 Rae8-+] 18...Qxf6 19.Qe1
Qxd4+ 20.Kh1 Rae8 0-1
110 - Mrofka Bishop Moves
At the time this game was played I had a USCF Postal Master rating of 2211.
My opponent Ray Mrofka was an average level player rated 1572.
We met in the 1989 USCF Golden Knight Postal Tournament. This was an
open event where players were routinely paired off in groups of seven to
form a section. Players were assigned 3 Whites and 3 Blacks vs their six
opponents.
Anybody could enter. All they had to be was an active USCF member. They
had to pay the entry fee for each preliminary round section. Their second
round depended on first round performance.
The Latvian Gambit had the advantage of being rarely played. This opening
was little known in the days before computer chess databases. Most books
gave very little coverage.
Mrofka did not make any mistakes in the opening. Both players castled on
move 13.
It became a game of pushing pawns and pieces. Unfortunately for White he

got his bishops loose and dropped one of them.
Mrofka (1572) - Sawyer (2211), corr USCF 89N215 16.07.1990 begins 1.e4
e5 2.Nf3 f5 3.Nxe5 Qf6 4.d4 d6 5.Nc4 fxe4 6.Nc3 Qg6 7.Ne3 Nf6 8.Ned5
[8.Be2+/=] 8...Nxd5 9.Nxd5 Qf7 10.Bc4 c6 11.Ne3 d5 12.Bb3 Bd6 13.0-0
0-0 14.c4 Be6 15.f3 Qh5 16.f4? [16.h3=] 16...Qxd1 17.Nxd1 [Or 17.Rxd1
Bxf4=/+] 17...dxc4 18.Bc2 Nd7 19.Bxe4 Nf6 20.Bc2 Nd5 21.f5 Bd7 22.Nc3
Rae8 23.Nxd5 cxd5 24.Bd2 Re2 25.Bc3? [White throws away a bishop and
the game. 25.Rad1 h6-/+] 25...Rxc2 0-1
111 - How I Survived Irene
In 2011 the east coast of the USA was hit by a big rain storm called
Hurricane Irene. It reminded me of another Irene from 20 years ago. In 1990
I got paired to compete against Irene Aronoff. She was one of the stronger
female masters in America. We met in the United States Correspondence
Chess Championship which was a postal tournament. Thus we were playing
at a pace of about one move per week.
Irene was no wimpy little girl who would easily lose to most men. In fact
Irene Aronoff was one of the best correspondence players in the USA, man or
woman, at the peak of her playing skill. In 1985 she had won the USCF
Golden Squires Tournament.
Aronoff was the best female opponent I faced in correspondence play. My

record vs females is about the same as vs males; it is just that I played a lot
more guys. As always, I win a lot vs weaker players and not so much vs
stronger ones.
Irene Aronoff also played in over-the-board tournaments. When she stopped

playing over 20 years ago, she was rated 2255. Irene Aronoff is a USCF
Master; she also earned a Women's FIDE Master Title.
From 1984-1991 I played the Latvian Gambit several times per year with
mixed results. I had some good wins and draws, and several disgusting
losses. A few losses made their way into Tony Kosten books on the Latvian
Gambit. The game stayed level throughout. At one point I had a chance to
open the position up and dare her to attack me. I decided to play it safe and
draw.
Aronoff - Sawyer, corr USCCC 10P05 corr USCCC, 30.08.1990 begins 1.e4
e5 2.Nf3 f5 3.Nxe5 Qf6 4.d4 d6 5.Nc4 fxe4 6.Nc3 Qg6 7.Bf4 [Some like
7.f3 or 7.Ne3] 7…Nf6 8.Ne3 Be7 9.Bc4 c6 10.d5 Nh5 11.Bg3 Nxg3 12.hxg3
Nd7 13.Qd4 Nf6 14.0-0-0 c5! 15.Bb5+ Kf7 16.Qd2 a6 17.Be2 b5 18.Rdf1
[18.Rh4!?] 18...Rf8 19.f3 Qxg3 20.Ng4 [20.fxe4 Kg8=] 20...Kg8 [Playing it
safe. 20...Bxg4! 21.fxg4 Kg8 22.Rh3 Qxg2 23.Rfh1 Nxg4 24.Nxe4 Qxe4
25.Bd3 Qe5 26.Bxh7+ Kf7-+] 21.Nxf6+ Bxf6 22.Nxe4 Qe5 23.Nxf6+ Qxf6
24.Bd3 Bf5 25.Re1 Qd4 26.Be4 Qxd2+ 27.Kxd2 Bxe4 28.fxe4 Rf2+
29.Re2 Raf8 30.Ke3 Rxe2+ 31.Kxe2 h6 32.Ke3 Rf6 33.Rd1 Kf7 34.a4 Rg6
1/2-1/2
112 - Well Played Latvian
The main line Latvian Gambit leads to a position where the White pieces
stand very well, but Black regains the pawn.
Furthermore, the slightest White inaccuracy allows Black an aggressive

unbalanced position where chances are roughly equal.
Below is my game vs TE Todd played in the 1989 USCF Golden Knights

Postal Chess Tournament.
Here I got a great position as Black. I held the advantage for about 10 moves.
Houdini says I stood much better.
Then I carelessly blundered a piece to a combination on move 33. Ugh!
My opponent TE Todd jumped at the chance to punish my tactical error. Nice

shot.
Todd (2330) - Sawyer (2053), corr USCF 89N280, 09.11.1989 begins 1.e4
e5 2.Nf3 f5 3.Nxe5 Qf6 4.d4 d6 5.Nc4 fxe4 6.Nc3 Qg6 7.Bf4 Nf6 8.Ne3 Be7
9.Bc4 c6 10.d5 Nh5 11.Bg3 Nxg3 12.hxg3 Nd7 13.Be2 0-0 14.dxc6 bxc6
15.Bc4+ Kh8 16.Ne2 Nb6 17.Nf4 Qe8 18.Be2 Kg8 19.Bc4+ [19.a4 g5=]
19...Nxc4 20.Nxc4 d5 21.Ne3 Qf7 22.Qh5 [22.0-0 Bc5-/+] 22...Qxh5
23.Rxh5 Rb8 24.0-0-0 g5 25.Ne2 Rxf2 26.Nd4 Bf6 27.b3 [27.Nxc6 Bxb2+
28.Kb1 Rb7 29.Na5 Bd4+ 30.Nxb7 Bxe3 31.Rdh1 Bf5-+] 27...Bd7 [27...c5!-
+] 28.g4 c5 29.Ndf5 d4 30.Nd5 Bxf5 31.gxf5 Kg7 32.g4 Rg2 [32...Rh8
33.Nc7 h6-/+] 33.Rd2 Rxg4? [33...Rg1+ 34.Rd1 Rxd1+ 35.Kxd1 Bd8-/+]
34.Rxh7+ 1-0
Book 1 – Chapter 6 – Petroff Defence
2.Nf3 Nf6
The opening moves 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 are commonly called the Petroff
Defence or the Russian Defence.
113 - Great Rook Pawn Race
I have out-lived age-wise, many great players of the past who did not die
young. These include Morphy, Nimzowitsch, Capablanca, Alekhine, Tal and
Petrosian. All died younger than I am. I picture them as old men, but I feel
like I am a younger man.
I had many wonderful birthday greetings on Facebook.

Michael Niefünd who wrote:
"Happiness, Peace and Joy on your Birthday, Tim!
“And may there always be a pawn left for queening that you wisely haven't
sacrificed in the opening. ;D"
Here my opponent played what looked like a good middlegame move in the
advance of the e-pawn. It turned out to be a flawed strategy for the endgame.
This game was played vs "blik".
blik (2307)- Sawyer, Internet Chess Club 2011 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6
3.Bc4 Nxe4 4.Qe2 [This caught me by surprise. I am on my own.] 4...Nd6!?
[This reminded me of a Vienna Game without the Nc3. The official correct
move 4...d5! Black is at least equal and maybe slightly better.] 5.Nxe5 Qe7
[5...Be7] 6.Bb3 Nc6 7.Nxc6 dxc6 8.Nc3 Bf5 9.d4 Qxe2+ 10.Kxe2 Be7
11.Re1 0-0 12.Kf1 Rfe8 13.Bf4 Bf8 14.Re5 Bd7 15.Rae1 Kh8 16.f3 f6
17.Rxe8 Rxe8 18.Rxe8 Bxe8 19.Ne4 Nxe4 20.fxe4 Bd6 21.e5 fxe5 22.dxe5
Be7 23.e6?! [This looks like a good move initially, but I was happy to see it.
The pawn is eventually corralled and captured.] 23...Bd6 24.g3 Bxf4 25.gxf4
g6 26.c3 Kg7 27.Kf2 Kf6 28.a4 g5 29.fxg5+ Kxg5 30.Bc2 h6 31.Bd1 Kf6
32.Bg4 Bg6 33.a5 b6 34.axb6 cxb6 35.Kg3 Be4 36.Kh4 Bd5 37.Kh5 Bxe6
38.Bf3 Bd5 39.Bxd5 cxd5 40.Kxh6? [The game becomes a race for rook
pawns. Both have a problem. White's h-pawn has both kings in the way.
Black's a-pawn has a3 and the b4 lever square covered. If 40.Kg4 a5-+]
40...a5 41.h4 b5 42.Kh5 a4 43.Kg4 d4 44.cxd4 b4 45.Kg3 a3 46.b3 a2
White resigns 0-1
114 - Alekhine to Elephant
Bob Muir and I changed chess openings four times in this game.
We went from the
Alekhine Defence to
Vienna Game to
Three Knights to
Elephant Gambit.
White stood well with a better game. Alas he would only play four more
moves in the game due to a tactical error.
How easy it is to overlook the specific details of a combination. Suddenly

White is down a piece.
What can you learn here? The lesson of this short game is that theory is just
that. Theory.
In theory your opponent could win from this position. In practice you did win
from your position.
Even if theory leans in your direction, you may fall flat on your face.
Practice is what matters most.
Muir (1800) - Sawyer (2011), Williamsport, PA 1994 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.Nc3
e5 3.Nf3 d5 4.Nxe5 [4.exd5 Bd6 5.Bb5+ c6 6.dxc6 Nxc6 7.Bxc6+ bxc6 8.0-0
0-0 9.d3 Nd5 10.Ne4+/=] 4...Bd6 5.d4 dxe4 6.Bg5 0-0 7.Nd5? [7.Be2 Bf5=]
7...Bxe5 8.dxe5 [Or 8.Bc4 c6 9.dxe5 cxd5-+] 8...Qxd5 0-1
115 - What is Three Knights?
Several chess openings can be called the Three Knights Game. They all make
three early knight moves by move three.
Consider the Four Knights Game minus one with 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Nc3
when Black plays something like 3...Bc5 or 3...Bb4.
The Petroff Defence with 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Nc3 Bb4 (not 3...Nc6) is a
Three Knights Game.
The line 1.e4 e5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.Bc4 Nc6 is called a Vienna Game.
What about 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6? That is the Two Knights Defence
variation of the Italian Game.
This is not to be confused with 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 Nc6 which is a Two Knights
Tango, even though White almost always follows with a third knight move
by 3.Nf3 or 3.Nc3.
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 Nf6 is a Ruy Lopez Berlin Defence.
The Petroff Defence Three Knights Game with the standard moves 1.e4 e5
2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Nc3 Bb4 leads to equal chances.
Here I transpose to one vs Over-Rated. I held my own for about 20 moves in

a blitz game. Then I let my pieces get tangled and got crushed.
The chess engine Over-Rated has played tens of thousands of blitz games on
the Internet Chess Club using a strong computer. Currently it uses a Stockfish
5 version.
Sawyer (2408) - Over-Rated (3547), ICC 2 12 u Internet Chess Club,

06.08.2004 begins 1.Nc3 Nf6 2.e4 e5 3.Nf3 Bb4 4.Nxe5 0-0 5.Be2 Re8
6.Nd3 Bxc3 7.dxc3 Nxe4 8.0-0 d5 9.Nf4 c6 10.c4 d4 11.Bf3 [11.Re1!+/=
Komodo] 11...Ng5 12.Bg4 Na6 13.Nd3 Ne4 14.Bxc8 Qxc8 15.f3 Nd6 16.b3
Nf5 17.Re1 Ne3 18.Bxe3 dxe3 19.a4 [19.Re2=] 19...Qe6 20.Nf4 [20.Re2=]
20...Qf6 21.Ne2? [Things are beginning to slip away. 21.g3 Nb4-/+]
21...Rad8 22.Qc1 Nb4 23.Rb1 [Or 23.Ng3 Re6-+] 23...Rd2 24.Kf1? Rxc2
25.Qd1 Rd2 26.Qc1 Qh4 White resigns 0-1
3.d4 exd4
This Petroff Defence variation with 3.d4 exd4 can transpose to some other
lines or be unique.
116 - Center Game to Petroff
The opening moves 1.e4 e5 2.d4 exd4 is one of the easiest ways to begin a
chess game. Expert Moran demonstrated that White had many transpositional
possibilities. Ray Haines writes:
"I keep looking at my games, so I can remember what I did wrong. Maybe
that is why my games show more clicks. My games are far from perfect. I
played more back in the 1980"s in Bangor. They had a new college Prof. who
taught computers A.I. His name was Danny Kopec and he was an IM chess
master. He played in the tournaments which I played in at that time. I did not
get to play him before he moved out of the area. The thing that surprised me
was that he spoke to me between rounds once and said he had been looking at
my games. He thought I had a very interesting style of play. This was a
surprise for me coming from him."
I replied, "Yes, Danny Kopec is a well-known chess teacher."
Ray Haines played well in this 1982 game against a much higher rated
opponent. The position was equal or slightly in Ray's favor. Then came the
blunder of 33...Kc6? It threw the game away.
Moran (2130) - Haines, World Open (2), 1982 begins 1.e4 e5 2.d4 exd4
3.Nf3 Nf6 [The Petroff. Others include: 3...Bc5 Houdini; 3...Bb4+ Deep
Rybka; 3...Nc6 Scotch Game] 4.Bg5 [4.e5 Ne4 5.Qxd4 d5 6.exd6 Nxd6=]
4...h6 [4...Bb4+! Stockfish] 5.Bxf6 Qxf6 6.Qxd4 Qxd4 7.Nxd4 Bc5 8.Nb3
Bb6 9.a4 Nc6 10.a5 Bd4 11.c3 [11.Nxd4 Nxd4 12.Bd3=] 11...Bf6 12.Na3 d6
13.Nb5 Kd8 14.0-0-0 [14.N5d4=] 14...Be6 15.c4 [If 15.N5d4 Bxd4 16.Nxd4
Nxa5=/+] 15...a6 16.Nc3 Bxc3 17.bxc3 Ne5 18.Rd4 g5!? [18...Ke7=/+]
19.Kb2 Ke7 20.c5 Rhd8 21.cxd6+ Rxd6 22.Be2 Bxb3 23.Rxd6 Kxd6
24.Kxb3 b5 25.axb6 cxb6 26.Rd1+ Kc7 27.g3 g4 28.h3 h5 29.hxg4 hxg4
30.Rh1 a5 31.Rh5 Re8 32.Rf5 Kd6 33.Ka4 [33.Rg5=] 33...Kc6? [An
accidental gift. After 33...Nd7=/+ there is plenty of play left. Black would
have equal or better chances.] 34.Bb5+ 1-0
117 - Tom Ward near Perfect
Sandwiched in between playing two weaker opponents I faced a master by
the name of Tom Ward. I did not write it down, but I am guessing it was
Thomas M. Ward of Michigan. He has a correspondence rating of 2395.
The position after four moves can be reached via the Bishop's Opening or the
Petroff Defence.
This is one of those few games I played where the chess engine Blunder
Check function turned up no mistakes for either side.
After move 32 we reached an unbalanced ending where both sides had one
knight and four pawns to start.
Both of us had connected passed pawn majorities that we advanced on

opposite sides of the board.
Once it became clear that the final pawn was about to disappear, we agreed to
a draw.
Ward (2320) - Sawyer (2035), corr USCF 89N275, 24.05.1989 begins 1.e4
e5 2.Bc4 Nf6 3.d4 exd4 4.Nf3 Nxe4 [4...Nc6 transposes to the Two Knights
Defence.] 5.Qxd4 Nf6 6.Bg5 Be7 7.Nc3 c6 8.0-0-0 d5 9.Rhe1 0-0 [The main
line is 9...Be6 10.Qh4 Nbd7 11.Bd3 Nc5 12.Nd4 with compensation for the
pawn.] 10.Qh4 Nbd7!? [Or 10...Bf5 11.g4 Bg6 12.Ne5 Qd6=] 11.Bd3 g6
12.Nd4 Re8 13.Re3 Ne4!? 14.Bxe7 Qxe7 15.Qxe7 Rxe7 16.Rde1!? [Maybe
White should have tried 16.Bxe4 dxe4 17.Rxe4 Rxe4 18.Nxe4+/= when at
least for the moment White's pieces are better placed in a symmetrical pawn
structure.] 16...Ndc5 17.f3 Ne6 18.fxe4 Nxd4 19.exd5 Rxe3 20.Rxe3 Kf8
21.dxc6 bxc6 22.Ne4 Bf5 23.c3 Nb5 24.a4 Nc7 25.Nf6 Bxd3 26.Rxd3 Ne6
27.Rd7 h5 28.Kc2 Nc5 29.Rc7 Nxa4 30.Rxc6 Nb6 31.c4 Rc8 32.Rxc8+
Nxc8 33.Kd3 Ke7 34.Nd5+ Ke6 35.Kd4 Nd6 36.Kc5 g5 37.b4 f5 38.Kd4 f4
39.Nc3 Nf5+ 40.Kd3 Nh4 41.Nb5 Nxg2 42.Nxa7 f3 43.Nc6 Nf4+ 44.Ke3
g4 45.Nd4+ Kd7 46.Nf5 Ne2 47.b5 Kc7 48.Ng7 h4 49.Nf5 g3 50.hxg3 hxg3
51.Kxf3 Nc3 52.Kxg3 Kb6 53.Nd4 Ne4+ 54.Kf4 Nd6 55.Ke5 Nxc4+
56.Kd5 Na3 1/2-1/2
3.d4 Nxe4
In this chapter Black follows through with his threat to take the e4 pawn.
118 - Bob Muir and Fischer
The Petroff Defence has always looked to me to be hard for White to beat,
unless I am playing the Black pieces and White is some super computer rated
over 3000.
In my early years I studied the games of Bobby Fischer, a committed 1.e4 e5

2.Nf3 player. There are no Petroff Defence games in his "My 60 Memorable
Games" book.
Fischer must have faced 2...Nf6 in hundreds of blitz and simul games. My
database has seven only of his Petroffs. It was not popular in his day among
masters.
Fischer played 3.Nxe5 vs three grandmasters. He chose 3.d4 vs the four

others.
Another good move is 3.Nc3, Three Knights or Four Knights. In an offhand

club game vs Bob Muir I chose 3.d4 as White.
Active pieces and tactics decide the outcome.
We both get a little tipsy on move 15. Then I sober up and win material.
Sawyer (2011) - Muir (1800), Williamsport PA 1995 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3

Nf6 3.d4 Nxe4 4.dxe5 d5 5.exd6 [More complicated is 5.Bd3 although
5...Be7 6.0-0 0-0=] 5...Nxd6 [5...Bxd6!=] 6.Bd3 Be7 7.0-0 0-0 8.Re1 Bg4
[8...Nc6=] 9.h3 Bf5 10.Bf4 Bxd3 11.Qxd3 Nd7 12.Nc3 Nf6 13.Rad1 Re8
14.Nd5 [14.Nb5+/-] 14...Bf8 15.Nxc7? [15.Rxe8 Ndxe8 16.Qb3 Nxd5
17.Rxd5 Nd6 18.c4+/= and White can probe for weaknesses.] 15...Rxe1+?
[Returning the favor. 15...Qxc7 16.Bxd6 Bxd6 17.Qxd6 Qxc2=] 16.Nxe1
Rc8? [Dropping the Exchange. Black would only be down a pawn after
16...Qxc7 17.Bxd6+/-] 17.Bxd6 Bxd6?! [Now White wins a piece due to the
back rank mate threat. 17...Rxc7 18.Bxc7 Qxc7 19.Qd4+-] 18.Qxd6 1-0
119 - Petroff Poisoned Pawn
The advantages of the Petroff Defence as Black in a chess opening are that
Black develops his pieces quickly and his king is safe. The problem for Black
is that it can be difficult to develop an attack vs White.
Or Cohen in “A Vigorous Chess Opening Repertoire for Black” refers to the

old main line with 11.Qxd5 "as a 'poisoned pawn' because capturing it hands
over the initiative."
In a 45 45 game vs BethO the position was equal for the first 15 moves after
3.d4 Nxe4. Finally I got a kingside attack.
It took me a while. My calculation was not computer accurate. I missed the

first couple shots including a forced mate in six.
I have played 15,000 rated games on the Internet Chess Club over the past 20
years. Plus I have played thousands more unrated games.
At one point the ratios were as follows:

Every 43 of my rated games, I played:
40 games at blitz speed (3-5 minutes),
2 games at bullet speed (1-2 minutes) and
1 game at standard speed (15 minutes or slower).
This is one of those few slower games. It worked out well. I kept the pressure
on. Then I found a checkmate on move 33.
BethO (1848) - Sawyer (2277), ICC 45 45 Internet Chess Club, 23.09.2008

begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.d4 Nxe4 4.Bd3 d5 5.Nxe5 Nd7 6.Nxd7 Bxd7
7.0-0 Bd6 8.c4 c6 9.cxd5 cxd5 10.Qh5 0-0 11.Qxd5 Bc6 12.Qf5 [12.Qh5
g6=] 12...g6 13.Qg4 [13.Qh3 Ng5=] 13...f5 [13...h5=+ Cohen] 14.Bc4+ Kh8
15.Qd1 Qh4 16.g3? [White should play 16.f4!=] 16...Qh3 [16...Nxf2!
17.Rxf2 Bxg3-+] 17.d5 Bd7 18.Qd4+ Nf6 19.Bg5 Kg7 20.Rc1 h6 [20...f4=]
21.Bf4 [21.Bxf6+ Rxf6 22.Nd2+/-] 21...Bxf4 22.Qxf4? [22.gxf4=] 22...Ng4
23.Qd4+ Kh7 24.Nc3 Rae8 [24...Qxh2+! 25.Kf1 Rfe8 26.Ne4 Rxe4 27.f4
Qh1+ 28.Qg1 Qf3+ 29.Qf2 Qxf2#] 25.Qxg4 Qxg4 26.Nb5 Bxb5 27.Bxb5
Rc8 28.f4 a6 29.Bf1 Qf3 30.Rxc8 Rxc8 31.Bg2 Qe3+ 32.Kf1 Rc2 33.Re1
Qf2# 0-1
120 - Helpful Ending to Know
Exact endgame knowledge allows you to play faster and more accurately. It
helps you convert your excellent middlegame play into a full point. And it
helps you drawn positions in even games.
Here is how you can draw the rook ending when your opponent has pushed a
rook pawn all the way to the 7th rank and his rook is in front of it on the 8th
rank. Often you can usually hold the position and draw the game when you
are down a pawn.
That is what happens in this blitz game vs the computer engine LinuxKnight.
The game begins as a Petroff Defence, however this endgame can be reached
from any opening.
LinuxKnight (3077) - Sawyer begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.d4 [3.Nxe5]

3...Nxe4 4.Bd3 d5 5.Nxe5 Nd7 6.Nxd7 Bxd7 7.0-0 Bd6 8.c4 c6 9.cxd5 cxd5
10.Nc3 Nxc3 11.bxc3 0-0 12.Qh5 g6 13.Qxd5 Qc7 [In the previous game I
forgot the move order and played 13...Bc6 14.Qg5+/= It did not turn out
well.] 14.Bh6 Rfd8 15.Qg5 Qxc3 16.Rfd1 Bf8 17.Bxf8 Rxf8 18.Rac1 Qb2
19.Be4 Bc6? [19...Ba4 20.Rb1 Qxa2 21.Bd5 Qa3=] 20.Rc2 Qb5?! 21.Qxb5
Bxb5 22.Bxb7 Rab8 23.Rc7 Rfd8 24.g3 Rd7 25.Rxd7 Bxd7 26.Bd5 Be6
27.Bxe6 fxe6 28.Rc1 Rb7 29.Kg2 Kf7 30.Kf3 Kf6 31.Rc6 Rb4 32.d5 Ra4
33.Rxe6+ Kf7 34.Re2 Rd4 35.Rc2 [35.Re5!+- appears to be winning.]
35...Rxd5 36.Rc7+ Kf6 37.Rxa7 h5 38.a4 Rd1 39.a5 Ra1 40.a6 Ra5
41.Ra8 Kg7 42.h4 Ra4 43.a7 Ra5 [I have reached the standard blockading
position with enemy pieces Ra8/Pa7. All Black has to do to draw is to keep
his king on g7 {h7 is a weaker alternative} and my rook on the a-file. If the
White king advances toward a7, I check him from behind until he come back
towards the first rank.] 44.Ke4 Ra1 45.Kd5 Rd1+ 46.Kc6 Rc1+ 47.Kb6
Rb1+ 48.Kc7 Rc1+ 49.Kd6 Rd1+ 50.Kc5 Rc1+ 51.Kd4 Rd1+ 52.Kc4
Rc1+ 53.Kb5 Rb1+ 54.Ka4 Ra1+ 55.Kb4 Rb1+ 56.Kc3 Ra1 57.Kb3 Ra6
58.Kc4 Ra1 59.f3 Rc1+ 60.Kd5 Rd1+ 61.Kc5 Rc1+ 62.Kb6 Rb1+ 63.Ka6
Ra1+ 64.Kb7 Rb1+ 65.Kc6 Rc1+ 66.Kd6 Rd1+ 67.Ke5 Re1+ 68.Kf4 Ra1
69.Ke3 Ra3+ 70.Kd4 Ra4+ 71.Kc5 Ra1 72.f4 Rc1+ 73.Kb5 Rb1+ 74.Ka6
Ra1+ 75.Kb6 Rb1+ 76.Kc7 Rc1+ 77.Kd6 Rd1+ 78.Ke6 Re1+ 79.Kd5
Rd1+ 80.Kc6 Rc1+ 81.Kb7 Rb1+ 82.Kc8 Rc1+ 83.Kd7 Rd1+ 84.Kc6
Rc1+ 85.Kd7 Rd1+ 86.Ke7 Re1+ 87.Kd8 Rd1+ 88.Ke8 Re1+ 89.Kd7
Rd1+ 1/2-1/2 Game drawn by repetition 1/2-1/2
3.Nxe5 d6
In this section White immediately captures the undefended e5 pawn.
121 - Cochrane Gambit 4.Nxf7
I did not realize it until later, but this was exactly my 3000th recorded game
in which I played 1.e4 e5 with the Black pieces and exactly my 500th
recorded game with the Petroff Defence.
However, it is only the sixth time I faced the Cochrane Gambit 4.Nxf7. With
this game I am 4 wins vs 2 losses as Black with a plus performance rating.
The funny thing about this game was that I kept refusing to play ...Re8-Rf8
(to the open f-file) until it was too late. I had the advantage until my mistake
on move 19. This my position became more difficult.
I think my opponent "foxsden" got into time trouble, because on move 28 he

returned the favor. After that I was winning.
foxsden (1645) - Sawyer (2015), ICC 3 1 u Internet Chess Club, 07.06.2013

begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Nxe5 d6 4.Nxf7 Kxf7 5.Nc3 [The most common
continuation is 5.d4 c5 6.dxc5 Nc6 7.Bc4+ Be6 8.Bxe6+ Kxe6=] 5...Be7 6.d4
Re8 7.Bc4+ Be6 8.Bxe6+ Kxe6 [It seems risky to bring the king out this far,
but there is plenty of time to retreat. Why? Because White has only one
developed piece, while Black has a knight, bishop and rook already in play.]
9.0-0 Kf7 10.f4 Kg8 11.e5 dxe5 12.fxe5 Nd5 13.Ne4 Nc6 14.c3 Qd7
15.Qh5 Kh8!? [15...Rf8!=/+] 16.Bg5 Qe6 [Again, 16...Rf8!=/+] 17.Rf3
[17.Bxe7 Ncxe7 18.Qxh7+ Kxh7 19.Ng5+ Kg6 20.Nxe6 Nf5=] 17...Qg6
18.Qh4 Bxg5 19.Nxg5 h6? [The only move to keep the advantage was
19...Rf8=/+] 20.Nf7+! Kg8 21.Raf1 Rf8 22.Rg3 Qxf7 23.Rxf7 Rxf7
24.Qxh6 [24.e6!+-] 24...Raf8 [24...Nf4 25.Rxg7+ Rxg7 26.Qxf4+/-] 25.h3
Nde7 26.e6 [26.Rg4!+-] 26...Rf1+ 27.Kh2 Nf5 28.e7? [28.Qg5 Nxg3
29.Qxg3=] 28...Nxh6 29.exf8Q+ Kxf8 White resigns 0-1
122 - Battle of Book Ideas
Chess opening repertoire books present a plan for you to follow. They choose
a set of similar ideas at the beginning of a game.
I played a game where the line in a book for White intersected the line given
in a book for Black. The two authors had differing views of how to handle
the Petroff Defence Kaufmann Attack developed over 100 years ago by Dr.
Arthur Kaufmann.
Larry Kaufman in his classic book "The Chess Advantage in Black and
White" calls the Petroff by its other common name the Russian Defense.
Larry Kaufman follows 5.c4 idea of the Kaufmann with the extra "n" by
giving 10 pages of games and analysis for White including this quote: "Some
of the lines are a bit drawish, but I'm afraid that is unavoidable when dealing
with the Petroff. All we can ask for is a position where most of the winning
chances are on the White side, and I believe the Kaufmann Attack fits that
description."
For Black, I chose the 2011 book "The Petroff: an Expert Repertoire for
Black" by Konstantin Sakaev. His comment on 5.c4 is: "This is an original
move, but that's about the most positive thing that can be said about it."
After 5...Nc6 6.Nc3 Nxc3 7.dxc3 both writers mention the typical 7...Be7,
but the line reminds me of the popular 5.Nc3 Nxc3 6.dxc3 Be7 line and the
Alekhine Defence Exchange Variation 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 Nb6
5.exd6 exd6 6.Nc3 Be7. These lines tend to be solid but potentially passive.
Our authors mention the development of the Black's light squared bishop
with 7...Bf5 (Sakaev) or 7...Bg4 (Kaufman). In general after 5.c4 Nc6, Larry
Kaufman considers the dynamic approach of castling opposite sides as a good
idea to play for a win: 0-0-0 vs 0-0.
Konstantin Sakaev's improvement is 7...g6, where he considers only 8.Be2

and 8.Bd3. My opponent below played something logical but new to me: 8.0-
0. We reached a bishop vs knight endgame where the White king had no
entry points to invade the Black defenses. Some of the lines are drawish.
Draw agreed.
blik (2374) - Sawyer (2109), ICC 5 0 Internet Chess Club, 17.09.2013

begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Nxe5 d6 4.Nf3 Nxe4 5.c4 Nc6 [The more popular
and passive continuation 5...Be7 6.d4 0-0 7.Bd3+/= seems to favor White a
little bit.] 6.Nc3 Nxc3 7.bxc3 g6 [7...Qf6!?] 8.d4 Bg7 9.Bd3 Qe7+ [9...0-0
10.0-0 Qd7 11.Re1 b6 12.Bg5 Bb7=] 10.Be3 0-0 11.0-0 Bg4 12.Rb1
[12.h3+/=] 12...b6 13.h3 Bxf3 14.Qxf3 Na5 15.Rfe1 Qf6 16.Qxf6 Bxf6
17.Bh6 Rfe8 18.Bf4 Bg7 19.a3 Kf8 20.Kf1 Rxe1+ 21.Rxe1 Re8 22.Rxe8+
Kxe8 23.a4 Ke7 24.Bg5+ Bf6 25.h4 Bxg5 26.hxg5 c5 27.Ke2 Nc6 28.Be4
Nd8 29.Ke3 Ne6 30.f4 Ng7 31.g4 Ne6 32.Bd5 Nc7 33.dxc5 bxc5
[33...Nxd5+ 34.cxd5 bxc5 should also draw.] 34.Bc6 Ne6 [34...a5 eliminates
all possible White king invasions.] 35.a5 Nc7 36.f5 Na6 37.Bf3 Nb8 38.Bd5
Nd7 39.f6+ Kf8 40.Kf4 Ne5 41.Kg3 Ke8 42.Kh4 Kf8 43.Kg3 Ke8 44.Kh4
Kf8 Game was drawn by mutual agreement 1/2-1/2
123 - Symmetrical Positions
Winning in a symmetrical position is much more difficult than winning from
a more unbalanced position. However, as Jeremy Silman points out, there are
many types of imbalances.
Even if pawn structure and material are even, there are issues to consider.
Here are my four strategical considerations in symmetrical positions:
1. Elements of space, time, king safety, better minor pieces and combinative
skill.
2. Entry points to determine where either side can invade the territory of the
other.
3. Exchanges of material, determine which pieces to swap and when to swap

them.
4. Endgames are coming so if there is no middlegame mate, head to the best

ending.
My opening repertoires are ones that I can play reasonably well vs higher
rated opponents. I want to use my current skill set.
Memorizing openings is an important skill. I know the value of memory, but

I don't want to require myself to do too much memory work at my age just to
survive a game.
Another thing I try to avoid is sharp openings that require me to be a tactical

genius to survive. I get creative combinative ideas during games, but
sometimes nothing comes to me.
I prefer positions where the strategy is obvious to me, even if the position is
mostly complicated and tactical. That way if I don't see a combination right
off, I still know which direction to point my army.
The Petroff, or Russian, is an opening I have played off and on for decades
with mixed success. I bought Konstantin Sakaev's book: "The Petroff: an
Expert Repertoire for Black." I used to be an Expert, so I like the title
already. It covers everything after 1.e4 e5.
One of the Petroff Defence variations after the popular 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Nxe5 d6
4.Nf3 Nxe4 is the symmetrical 5.Qe2. Things start out rather even, but it is
still a chess game.
Below is another ICC blitz game vs "blik". There is an interesting contrast in

this game: White plays based on middlegame evaluations while Black plays
based on endgame considerations.
White was slightly better in the middlegame. This chess engine lost in the
endgame.
blik (2200) - Sawyer (1969), Internet Chess Club 2011 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3
Nf6 3.Nxe5 d6 4.Nf3 Nxe4 5.Qe2 Qe7 6.d3 Nf6 7.Bg5 Nbd7 8.Nc3 Qxe2+
[I use a little phrase to remind myself in this line: "Take on eight."] 9.Bxe2
h6 10.Bd2 c6 11.0-0-0 Be7 [11...d5=] 12.d4 d5 13.Bd3 0-0 14.Rde1 Bd6
15.Kb1 Re8 [Black offered to swap rooks and also frees up the f8 square for
a king or knight.] 16.Rxe8+ Nxe8 17.Re1 Kf8 18.Be3 Ndf6 19.Ne5 Ng4
20.Nxg4 Bxg4 21.h3 Bh5 22.Ne2 Bg6 23.Bxg6 fxg6 24.Bf4 g5 25.Be5 Rd8
26.f4 gxf4 27.Nxf4 Nc7 28.h4 [28.Nd3 Bxe5 29.Nxe5=] 28...Bxe5 29.dxe5
Re8 30.Rf1 Kg8 31.Ng6 Ne6 32.g4? Nf8 33.Nxf8 Rxf8 34.Rf5? [This
allows an exchange which helps Black go from a winning rook ending into a
more easily won pawn ending.] 34...g6 35.Rf6 Rxf6 36.exf6 g5 [Of course
one cannot allow White to play g4-g5.] 37.h5 Kf7 38.Kc1 Kxf6 39.Kd2 Ke5
40.Ke3 c5 41.Kf3 Kd4 42.a3 a5 43.a4 b6 44.Kf2 Ke4 45.Ke2 Kf4 46.Kd2
Kxg4 47.c3 Kf3 48.Kc2 g4 White resigns 0-1
124 - 5.Nc3!? Attack vs Grant
Petroff Defence 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 holds a solid reputation among chess
openings for good reason. White must work hard to find winning
possibilities.
The 5.Nc3 Attack leads to castling on opposite sides with corresponding

pawn assaults. In the book “Chess Openings for White, Explained”, the GM
authors Alburt, Dzindzichashvili and Perelshteyn note: "The knight move
leads to dynamic and interesting play."
This assumes White wants to play for a win. The pawn structure remains
essentially symmetrical. If White is content with a draw against a much
higher rated opponent, and if White can avoid weaknesses, then White may
split the point.
Such was the case vs my ICC opponent "UlyssesSGrant". His 2500+ rating
proves that Black is a frequent winner, but I managed to hold him off this
time.
That handle is based on the Union General in the American Civil War who
fought to win when other generals in the North were either incompetent or
afraid. General Grant rose quickly through the ranks by actually winning in
battle. The war ended when General Robert E. Lee surrendered to Grant at
Appomattox Courthouse in Virginia. This is a place I visited years ago. Later
Ulysses S. Grant became President of the United States.
Sawyer (2203) - UlyssesSGrant (2512), ICC 0 6 u Internet Chess Club,

24.04.2009 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Nxe5 d6 4.Nf3 Nxe4 5.Nc3 Nxc3
6.dxc3 Be7 7.Bf4 [7.Be3 0-0 8.Qd2 Nd7 9.0-0-0 Nf6 10.Kb1 Re8=] 7...Nd7
[7...0-0 8.Qd2 Nd7=] 8.Qd2 0-0 9.0-0-0 Nc5 10.Bc4 Be6 [10...Bf5=]
11.Bxe6 Nxe6 [11...fxe6 12.Be3=] 12.Be3 Qd7 13.Ng5 [13.Kb1=] 13...Nxg5
[13...Bxg5 14.Bxg5 Qa4=/+] 14.Bxg5 Bxg5 15.Qxg5 Rae8 16.Rhe1 h6
17.Qd5 b6 18.f3 Rxe1 19.Rxe1 Re8 20.Rxe8+ Qxe8 21.Qd2 Qe6 22.b3
Qe5 23.g3 a5 24.Kd1 Kf8 25.Qe1 [Or 25.f4=] 25...Ke7 26.f4 Qxe1+
27.Kxe1 Ke6 28.Kf2 Kd5 29.Ke3 f5 30.h4 h5 31.c4+ Kc5 32.c3 d5 33.cxd5
Kxd5 34.Kd3 b5 35.c4+ bxc4+ 36.bxc4+ Kc5 37.a3 Kc6 38.Kd4 Kd6
39.c5+ Ke6 40.a4 c6 41.Kc4 Ke7 42.Kd4 Kf6 43.Kc4 Ke6 44.Kd4 Kf6 1/2-
1/2
3.Nxe5 d6 4.Nf3 Nxe4 5.d4
The most natural continuation is for both players to advance their d-pawns on
move five.
125 - Fast and Loose Pieces
Clive Heyn liked to play five minute games. Clive was very fast, but a little
loose with the pieces.
At the time of this game, I was rated 2011 in USCF tournament play. Heyn
was rated 1751.
I expected to win. Once in a while Clive would make me pay for a blitz
blunder. And I did blunder in this game. But then I got away.
This game is an example of how bishops of opposite color can give attacking
chances to the side with the initiative.
Sawyer - Heyn, Williamsport, PA begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 [The Petroff

Defence, also called the Russian Defence.] 3.Nxe5 d6 4.Nf3 Nxe4 5.d4 d5
6.Bd3 Bg4 [6...Nc6 is the main line. Play usually continues 7.0-0 Be7 8.c4 or
8.Re1] 7.h3 Bh5 8.Qe2 Qf6 9.g4 Bg6 10.Ne5 Be7 11.Nc3 [11.Bxe4! Bxe4
12.f3+/-] 11...Nxc3 12.bxc3 0-0 [12...Bxd3=] 13.Nxg6 fxg6 14.Be3 Ba3
[14...c5!=] 15.Rb1 b6 16.c4 Nc6 17.cxd5?? [17.c3+/=] 17...Nxd4 18.Bxd4
Qxd4 19.0-0 Rae8 20.Qd2 Qxd5 21.Qc3 Qc5 22.Bc4+ Kh8 23.Rb3 Re4
24.Bd3 Qxc3 25.Rxc3 Bb4 [25...Ra4=/+] 26.Rxc7 Ref4 27.Kg2 Bc5 28.f3
h5? [28...Ra4=] 29.Bxg6 hxg4 30.hxg4 Ra4 31.Rh1+ Kg8 32.Rh7 [More
accurate is 32.Bh7+ Kh8 33.Be4+! Kg8 34.Bd5+ Rf7 35.Bxf7+ Kf8
36.Rh8#] 32...Bd4 33.Rh5 Rxa2 34.Bh7+ Kh8 35.Bd3+ Kg8 36.Bc4+ Rf7
37.Bxf7+ Kf8 38.Rh8# 1-0
126 - 100 Years of Petroff
The Petroff Defence, or Russian Defence, has changed a lot. In my early
years it was hard to find anyone who would champion this as Black. Most
games in books were White wins, unless you were studying games by
masters who died decades before.
Around 1900, Harry Pillsbury played it some during his short but brilliant
career. Then Frank Marshall played the Petroff regularly for thirty years.
Why was his Marshall Attack in the Ruy Lopez a surprise to Jose R.
Capablanca in 1918? Because Marshall had played the Petroff six of the most
recent eight games that he had Black vs Capablanca; the other two were
French Defences.
Sure, thousands of other players used 2...Nf6, but generally they were not the
leading players who had the kind of frequently published Black wins that
everyone hopes to copy. For the next thirty years Petroff players included
Boris Kostic, David Bronstein and C.H.O'D. Alexander, which brings us
through World War II.
The top frequently published Petroff players from 40 years ago were
Smyslov, Dvoretsky, Benko, Kholmov, Morgado, and Bisguier. Indeed, GM
Arthur Bisguier lost some famous Petroffs in the US Championships:
Bisguier lost Petroffs to Larry Evans in 1958 (beautiful game!), to Robert
Fischer in 1959 and to Walter Browne in 1974. The Browne game was often
quoted; I am sure it kept a lot of players from jumping to this defence.
As a frequent 1.e4 e5 player from both sides, I have been in the Petroff
Defence about 500 times to date, more often as Black than White. Below is
one of my early games.
Back in 1974 I was already over 20 years old and not a very good player. I
made some strides later that year. But when I went back to college I quit
playing until 1977.
Why? Because the first time I went to university, I mostly played chess
instead of doing my school work.
When I went back to college in late 1974, I took my schooling much more
seriously. For me I had to stop playing, but I would reappear. I am an
example of a player who improved later as an adult, not as a scholastic
player.
Here is my game vs Kirk Rideout from my early days. Nice mate.

I unknowingly follow through my 13th move the game Burn-Marshall,
Karlsbad 1911. Yes, exactly 100 years ago. I missed some moves in this
game, something I still do all these years later. I hope you like the checkmate
combination at the end.
Sawyer - Rideout, Ft Fairfield, Maine 02.04.1974 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6

3.Nxe5 [This is my favorite, but I've also played the moves 3.Nc3, 3.d4 and
3.Bc4.] 3…d6 [When my opponents fell for the famous trap is 3...Nxe4?
4.Qe2!, I scored 25-0.] 4.Nf3 Nxe4 5.d4 d5 6.Bd3 Bd6 [Two other options
are recommended for Black: 6...Be7 and 6...Nc6.] 7.0-0 0-0 8.Re1 Re8 9.c4
c6 10.Nc3 Nxc3 11.Rxe8+ Qxe8 12.bxc3 Bg4 13.Bd2 g6 14.h3 Bd7 15.Qb3
b6 16.Re1 [16.cxd5+-] 16...Qd8 17.cxd5 cxd5 18.Bg5 Qc7 19.Ne5
[19.Qxd5+-] 19...Be6 20.f4 Kg7 21.f5 gxf5 22.g4? [22.Bxf5! Bxf5
23.Qxd5+-] 22...fxg4 23.Nxg4 Bxg4 24.hxg4 h6? [24...Be7=] 25.Qxd5! Nc6
26.Bxh6+! Kxh6 27.Qh5+ Kg7 28.Qh7+ Kf6 29.Qh6# 1-0
127 - Knights Can Back Up!
There is an old saying: I have forgotten more than I know. This can be true of
opening variations that I used to know, but that I have not played for a while.
When my memory is rusty, I sometimes miss opportunities to punish

inaccurate play, especially in blitz games. It helps to review my blitz game
openings. That way I can improve my knowledge. Probably it would help
you too.
Below is a game in the main line Petroff Defence. We are rattling off the
opening moves and I expected 7.0-0 Be7.
My opponent played the blunder 7.Bg5? This bishop was protected by his
knight, and he attacked my queen. In a blitz game it is most effective to play
safely and quickly. This I did.
Alas I forgot that my knight could back up. I should have just picked off his
bishop for free! Fortunately I still one.
Shafkat - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 20.10.2012 begins 1.e4 e5

2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Nxe5 d6 4.Nf3 Nxe4 5.d4 d5 6.Bd3 Nc6 7.Bg5? [The main line
is 7.0-0 Be7] 7...Be7?! [So intent was I on playing developing my Black
bishop that I missed 7...Nxg5!-+ winning White's bishop.] 8.Bxe7 Qxe7 9.0-0
0-0 10.Re1 Bg4 11.h3 Bh5 [11...Bxf3! 12.Qxf3 Nxd4=/+] 12.c3 f5 13.Na3
a6 14.Nc2 Qf6 15.Ne3 g5? 16.Nxd5 Qd6 17.Bc4 Kg7 18.Rc1 Rae8 19.Re3
[19.Qc2+/=] 19...g4 20.hxg4 Bxg4 [20...fxg4!-/+] 21.Qe1 b5 22.Bb3 Re6?
[22...Na5=] 23.Nxc7 [23.Nh2+-] 23...Rh6 24.Rxe4? [24.Ne6+ Rxe6 25.Bxe6
Qxe6 26.Nh2+/-] 24...Bxf3? [24...fxe4 25.Qxe4 Bxf3-+] 25.Re7+? [25.Ne6+
Kh8 26.Rf4 Rxe6 27.Bxe6 Qxf4 28.gxf3 Re8=] 25...Nxe7 26.Ne6+ Kh8
27.Nxf8? Qh2+ 28.Kf1 Qh1# 0-1
128 - The "Incorrect" 7...Bg4
Bobby Fischer was my guide when I first learned openings. What did I learn
from Fischer on how to play vs the Petroff? Not much. That was because in
Bobby's day the Petroff was not played by grandmasters.
When Fischer took the White pieces after 3.Nxe5 d6 4.Nf3 Nxe4, I find only
three Fischer games. In one he played 5.Qe2 and won in 60 moves. The other
two saw Bobby play 5.d4 reaching an even position after 5...Nf6 6.Bd3 Be7
7.h3.
Fast forward to my APCT game with Lazaro Munoz. He chose the Petroff
Defence with the line 5.d4 d5 6.Bd3 Nc6 7.0-0 Bg4 following a Kasparov-
Karpov match game from 1986 which ended in a draw.
Or Cohen writes in his book “A Vigorous Chess Opening Repertoire for

Black” that 7...Bg4 is an "incorrect" move order. However, Cohen notes that
sometimes he likes to play it as Black anyway.
White should play 8.c4 to play for an advantage. I chose the popular 8.Re1.
There I did not find much of an advantage.
Sawyer (1944) - Munoz (1817), corr APCT EMQ-3, 08.01.1997 begins 1.e4
e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Nxe5 d6 4.Nf3 Nxe4 5.d4 d5 6.Bd3 Nc6 7.0-0 Bg4
[7...Be7=] 8.Re1 [8.c4 Nf6 9.Nc3+/=] 8...Be7 9.c4 Nf6 10.cxd5 Nxd5
11.Nc3 0-0 12.h3 Be6 13.a3 Bf6 14.Na4 [14.Be4+/=] 14...Nxd4 15.Nxd4
Bxd4 16.Bxh7+ Kxh7 17.Qxd4 b6 18.Nc3 c5 [18...Kg8=] 19.Qd3+ Kg8
20.Nxd5 [A good way to play on would be 20.Qg3+/=] 1/2-1/2
129 - Following Grandmasters
In 1974 Anatoly Karpov and Viktor Korchnoi played a match to see who
would play Bobby Fischer for the World Championship in 1975. When
Karpov won, Fischer would not play at all.
Bobby had stopped playing everybody after his 1972 match. He only returned
briefly in 1992 to play a rematch with Spassky.
The Karpov-Korchnoi battles in 1974 frequently centered on games where

Korchnoi was Black in the French Defence 3.Nd2 c5 Tarrasch Variation. One
Petroff game was a flashback to a famous Capablanca-Kostic line in the
Petroff Defence. In that 1919 game Capablanca answered 11…Kh8 with
12.Nf1.
In 2011 I tested the line vs the 3098 rated computer HOTBIT which almost
always beats me. When it does, I search for an improvement and go back for
another game.
HOTBIT - Sawyer, Internet Chess Club 2011 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6
3.Nxe5 d6 4.Nf3 Nxe4 5.d4 d5 6.Bd3 Nc6 [The old move order was 6...Be7
7.0-0 Nc6] 7.0-0 Be7 8.Re1 Bg4 9.c3 f5 10.Qb3 0-0 11.Nbd2 Na5 [I have
tried to follow Korchnoi with mixed results after 11...Kh8!? 12.h3 (12.Nf1!?
Capablanca. 12.Qxb7 Rf6 13.Qb3 Rg6 14.Bb5+/=) 12...Bh5 13.Qxb7 Rf6
14.Qb3 Rg6? (14...g5!? 15.Ne5 Nxe5 16.dxe5 Rb6) 15.Be2! Bh4 16.Rf1
Bxf3 17.Nxf3 Bxf2+ 18.Rxf2 Nxf2 19.Kxf2 Qd6 20.Ng5! Rf8 21.Qa3 Qd8
22.Bf4 h6 23.Nf3 Re8 24.Bd3 Re4 25.g3 Rf6 26.Qc5 g5 27.Nxg5 hxg5
28.Bxg5 Ree6 29.Re1 Qg8 30.h4 Rg6 31.Rxe6 1-0 Karpov-Korchnoi,
Moscow 1974] 12.Qc2 [HOTBIT is out for blood. Earlier I played this
variation against the more peace loving "blik" computer: 12.Qa4 Nc6 13.Qb3
Na5 14.Qa4 Nc6 15.Qb3 Na5 Game drawn by repetition 1/2-1/2. blik-
Sawyer, Internet Chess Club 2011] 12...Nc6 13.b4 a6 14.a4 Bd6 [14...h6!
15.h3 Bh5=] 15.Rb1 Kh8 16.b5 axb5 17.axb5 Na5 18.Ne5 Bxe5 19.dxe5
Bh5 [19...Qh4 20.Nf1!+/=] 20.c4 Nxc4 21.Nxc4 dxc4 22.Bxc4 Bf7?! 23.e6
Bg6 24.Rd1 Qf6 25.Rd7 Rac8? 26.Bb2 Black resigns 1-0
130 - 5 Ways to Draw a Game
How can you score well against high rated chess engines? The simplest is to
outplay the grandmaster computer program and defeat it. Too hard, you say?
I agree.
A second more feasible option is to get a draw. Still not easy but a draw is
actually possible.
Here are 5 ways to draw:

1. Get the better position and repeat moves.
2. Completely close off the position.
3. Reach a safe simplified position.
4. Head for a drawn endgame.
5. Get a time advantage in blitz and force the computer to play faster and
weaker.
None of these work all the time, but if you draw 1 in 10 games, your rating
will likely go up.
From 1998 to 2004 I was usually rated around 2400 in ICC blitz. I defeated
some engines that played the same openings repeatedly.
During that time period, I learned my lines well. My occasional win or draw
every ten games or so kept my rating up there.
Below I drew vs a 3124 rated computer chess engine in the Petroff Defence.
As White I was probably short on time and took a draw from a better
position. I played my best and tool a rest.

16.06.2004 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Nxe5 d6 4.Nf3 Nxe4 5.d4 d5 6.Bd3
Nc6 7.0-0 Be7 8.c4 Nf6 [Popular is 8...Nb4 9.Be2=] 9.cxd5 [9.Nc3+/=]
9...Nxd5 10.Nc3 Be6 11.Re1 0-0 12.a3 Bf6 13.Be3 Re8 14.Bc2 Bg4 15.h3
Nxe3 16.fxe3 Bd7 [16...Bh5=] 17.Qd3 g6 18.Rad1 Bg7 19.e4 h6 20.e5 Ne7
21.Bb3 Bf5 22.Qe2 Nc6 23.Qf2 Na5 24.Ba2 g5 [Or 24...Qc8 25.Nh4+-]
25.Nh4 [White has good chances after 25.b4 Nc6 26.Nh4!+-] 25...Be6
26.Nf5 Bxa2 27.Nxg7 Kxg7 28.Nxa2 Qe7 29.Nc3 Rad8 30.Ne4 Nc4 31.Nf6
Rh8 32.Nh5+ [White stands better after 32.Rf1!+-] 32...Kg8 33.Nf6+ Kg7
34.Nh5+ Kg8 35.Nf6+ Kg7 Game drawn by repetition 1/2-1/2
131 - Walter Browne Memory
Grandmaster Walter S. Browne passed away in his sleep. The Vegas Chess
Festival posted items on Walter Browne. I like this comment:
Mike Anderson says: On the way to Reno 2014 he told me: “If you lose you
learn, then you win and earn.” – GM Walter Browne
Browne was a six time US chess champion. He was a leading player from my
generation. I was one of his many Facebook friends and followed his career
since the early 1970s.
Walter Browne wrote “The Stress of Chess: My Life, Career and 101 Best
Games”. In memory of Walter Browne, I decided to post one of his games.
His Petroff Defence win from 1974 was mentioned by me in 2011. Walter
Browne found the move 14.Bh6! vs the long time Petroff Defence expert
Arthur Bisguier.
This Brown game made a big impression on me and on many of my

contemporaries. For years I thought that the Petroff Defence was not sound.
In reality Black just missed the way to equalize.
Browne (2575) - Bisguier (2435), USA-ch Chicago (9), 1974 begins 1.e4 e5
2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Nxe5 d6 4.Nf3 Nxe4 5.d4 d5 6.Bd3 Be7 7.0-0 Nc6 8.c4 Nb4
9.cxd5 [9.Be2 0-0 10.Nc3=] 9...Nxd3 10.Qxd3 Qxd5 11.Re1 Bf5 12.Nc3
[12.g4!? Bg6 13.Nc3 Nxc3 14.Qxc3=] 12...Nxc3 13.Qxc3 c6? [Black should
play 13...Be6!=] 14.Bh6! Rg8 [14...gxh6 15.Re5+/=] 15.Re5 Qd7 16.Rae1
Be6 17.Ng5 0-0-0 18.Nxf7 Bxf7 19.Rxe7 Qxd4 20.Rxf7 [20.Qh3+!?+/-]
20...Qxc3 21.bxc3 gxh6 22.Rb1 Rg5 23.h4 Rb5 24.Rxb5 cxb5 25.Rxh7
Rd1+ 26.Kh2 Rd2 27.Rxh6 Rxa2 28.h5 Rxf2 [Or 28...Kd7 29.Rh7+ Ke6
30.Rxb7+-] 29.Rh8+ Kc7 30.h6 Kb6 31.Kh3 a5 32.g4 b4 33.cxb4 axb4
34.Re8 Rf1 35.Kg2 Rf7 36.g5 Rf5 37.h7 Rxg5+ 38.Kf3 Rh5 39.h8Q Rxh8
40.Rxh8 1-0
Book 1 – Chapter 7 – Romantic 2.Nf3 Nc6
3.c3
This covers many third move option in the old double King Pawn openings.
132 - Poison Ivy Ponziani
“Chess Opening Essentials” (from Italy) has a great introduction to the
Ponziani Opening:
"Domenico Lorenzo Ponziani, from the Italian town of Modena, analyzed

various important lines in the 18th century. He was also a member of the
Pope's inner circle. The c2-c3 push is logical in that it supports d2-d4. But it
has two drawbacks: it leaves the e4-pawn undefended and it prevents the
development of the queen's knight to c3. Black's two best responses are
3...Nf6 and 3...d5, both of which highlight these drawbacks."
In my own games I have played both 3...Nf6 and 3...d5 pretty much
interchangeably. This blitz game vs "Ivy" will serve as an introductory game
to this opening.
Black can basically equalize after 1.e4 e5 anyway. Thus it is not a bad thing
to play a rarer line that might lead to equality in positions you know better
than your opponent.
However, if you really do not know the opening well, then the Ponziani just
gives Black an easy to play game.
Ivy (1643) - Sawyer (2013), ICC 3 0 u Internet Chess Club, 31.05.2013

begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.c3 d5 4.Qc2?! [4.Qa4] 4...dxe4 5.Qxe4 Nf6
6.Qh4 Be7 7.Qa4 0-0 8.d3 Re8 [8...Bf5-/+] 9.Bg5 h6 10.Bxf6 Bxf6 11.Nbd2
Bf5 12.Ne4 Be7 13.Rd1 a6 14.Be2 Qd7 15.0-0? [This drops a piece. Better
is 15.Qc2 Rad8=/+] 15...Nd4 16.Qxd7 Nxe2+ 17.Kh1 Bxd7 18.Rfe1 Nf4
19.Nxe5 Bf5 20.g3 Nh3 21.Kg2 Ng5 22.f4 Nxe4 23.dxe4 Be6 24.a3 f6
25.Nf3 Rad8 26.Nd4 Bg4 27.Rc1 c5 28.Nb3 b6 29.h3 Be6 30.Na1 Rd2+
White resigns 0-1
133 - Shipley Short Ponziani
Vs Shipley it's short, sharp, and shweet... Okay... "sweet", but it was hard for
my tangled tongue to there say "sweet".
In a Ponziani Opening I found myself playing Black against William Shipley.

Our meeting was from the 1989 USCF Golden Squires Postal Chess
Tournament.
Once again there is the theoretical strategic choice after 3.c3 between 3...d5
or 3...Nf6. I play both 3rd moves, but never at the same time in the same
game!
Shipley (1481) - Sawyer (2083), corr USCF 89SS66, 19.07.1991 begins 1.e4
e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.c3 d5 4.Bb5 [4.Qa4 f6 5.Bb5 Nge7 6.exd5 Qxd5=/+] 4...dxe4
5.Nxe5 Qg5 [Or 5...Qd5 6.Qa4 Nge7 7.f4 exf3 8.Nxf3 a6 9.Be2=] 6.d4
[6.Qa4 Qxg2 7.Bxc6+ bxc6 8.Qxc6+ Kd8=/+] 6...Qxg2 7.Rf1 a6 [7...Bd6!-
/+] 8.Qa4? Nge7 9.Bf4 g5?! [9...f6!-/+] 10.Bg3 Bh6 11.Nxc6 Bd7 12.c4?
[White accidentally traps his Bb5. An unbalanced position with equal
chances follows 12.Nd2 bxc6 13.Bc4 Nd5 14.0-0-0=] 12...bxc6 0-1
3.Nc3 Nf6
Here we consider the Three Knights and Four Knights Game in their various
forms.
134 - Prey in Three Knights
A snowy owl is a white bird natural to various northern snowy climates. An
Icelandic snowy owl played a significant part in the 1994 comedy movie
"Dumb and Dumber".
The snowy owl is the official bird of Quebec, Canada. It preys on little
rodents and swallows them whole. I like to think of my opponent "snowowl"
as a mid-level club player who crushes the lower rated players but loses to
the higher rated.
It is common that both sides miss the same tactics for several moves in a blitz
game. In my game below, I blundered with 12.Bb2?? This turned an
advantage into a loss. However, for three moves we both were focused on the
center of the board and missed Black's tactic Qd8-Qb6+ followed by Qxb2.
By the time I played 15.Bxf6, I had maintained my edge.
Note that there are two valid versions of the Three Knights Game where
Black avoids the Four Knights Game or some other opening by transposition.
One comes from the Petroff Defence after 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Nc3 when
Black might play 3...Bb4. Another is the line 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Nc3 when
Black might play 3...g6 or 3...Bc5.
Sawyer - snowowl, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 22.09.2012 begins 1.e4 e5

2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Nc3 Bc5 4.Nxe5! [More popular is the simple development with
4.Bc4 Nf6 5.d3 d6 6.Bg5 h6 7.Bxf6 Qxf6 8.Nd5 Qd8 9.c3] 4...Nxe5 5.d4
Bd6 6.dxe5 Bxe5 7.f4!? Bxc3+ 8.bxc3 d6 9.c4 Nf6 10.Bd3 0-0 11.0-0 c6
12.Bb2?? [12.Qf3+/=] 12...Re8? [12...Qb6+!-+ wins my Bb2.] 13.Qf3? d5
[13...Qb6+!-+] 14.cxd5? [14.Bxf6+/=] 14...cxd5 [14...Qb6+!-/+] 15.Bxf6
Qxf6 16.exd5 Rd8 17.c4 b5 18.cxb5 Bb7 19.Qe4 g6 20.Bc4 Rac8 21.Rad1
Re8 [Black should do better with 21...Rc5 22.Qd4+/-] 22.Qd4 Qd6 23.f5
Red8 24.fxg6 hxg6 25.Qxa7 Ba8 26.Qd4 [More accurate is 26.Qxf7+! Kh8
27.Rd3+-] 26...Rd7 27.a4 Rcd8 28.a5 Qb4 29.d6 Qxa5 30.Qf6 Qb6+
31.Kh1 Rxd6 32.Rxd6 Rxd6 33.Qxf7+ Black resigns 1-0
135 - Get Better at Chess
I love short chess games that end in a beautiful checkmate! If I can win such
a game as Black, so much the better.
In this Four Knights Game, my opponent "GetBetterAtChes" adopted a rather

solid slow approach. Thus I started to play more aggressively to see how
much I could get away with.
I took everything he gave me. I gave nothing back.
I worked a lot on the "Chessimo" program (formerly Personal Chess Trainer)

by GM Gilberto Milos. This involves doing daily Tactics, Endgame and
Strategy exercises.
The strategy positions come with an explanation of why the move he

recommends is best. I often did hundreds of these positions.
When I played 15...f4 in the game below, I could imagine the grandmaster
telling me "so as to attack the White king and open the diagonal for the Black
bishop."
GetBetterAtChes - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 17.11.2012 begins

1.e4 e5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.Nf3 Nc6 4.d3 Bb4 [This is a Reversed Ruy Lopez
Steinitz with Black being down a tempo.] 5.Be2 0-0 6.Bd2 d5 7.exd5 Nxd5
8.Nxd5 [8.0-0=] 8...Bxd2+ 9.Nxd2 Qxd5 10.0-0 f5 11.Bf3 Qf7 12.g3 Bd7
[The immediate 12...f4 is also playable.] 13.c4 Rab8 14.a3 Nd4 15.Bg2
[15.Bd5 Be6-/+] 15...f4 16.Be4 f3 17.Nb3? [This is a dream come true as I
envisioned a possible mating net. 17.Re1 Qh5 18.Re3 Bh3=/+ and White is
pretty much forced to sacrifice the Exchange for a pawn.] 17...Ne2+ 18.Kh1
Bh3 19.Nd2? [Allows mate in one, but the alternative 19.Rg1 Bg2+ 20.Rxg2
fxg2+ 21.Bxg2 Qxf2-+ leaving White down the Exchange is no fun.]
19...Bg2# 0-1
136 - Halloween Gambit
October is a great time for a Halloween Gambit!
Playing chess for fun allowed me to play some fanciful variations that were
not theoretically sound. I am skeptical of a full piece sacrifice in the opening,
but in practice it might actually work.
One such try is the piece sacrifice in Four Knights Game called the
Halloween Gambit (4.Nxe5?!). White gets more space and faster
development.
For Halloween Gambit success, three conditions improve the odds that White
may win:
1. White has very strong tactical skills.
2. Black has very weak tactical skills.
3. Black is under blitz speed time pressure.
That said, the sacrifice is more interesting than first supposed. For one thing,
White will have a central pawn for the piece and will likely pick up at least
one more tempo after 4.Nxe5 Nxe5 5.d4 and maybe more than that with
further pawn advances.
I tried it in a blitz game vs the computer engine "mscp". At the end I kept
missing the tactics of moving my knight away from c3. It worked out okay
because while Black was planning to win this knight, I worked up a mating
attack against the Black king.
Sawyer - mscp, Internet Chess Club, 2011 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Nc3
Nf6 4.Nxe5?! [The Halloween Gambit. It has to be unsound to give up a
piece for a pawn and tempo, but in a blitz game almost anything is playable.]
4...Nxe5 5.d4 Nc6 6.e5 [An important alternative is 6.d5.] 6...Ng8 7.Bc4 Qh4
8.Be3 Nxe5 [8...d6=/+] 9.g3 Qg4 10.Be2 Qe6 11.dxe5 Qxe5 12.0-0 d6
13.Re1 c6 14.Bf4 Qf6 15.Bg4+ Kd8 16.h4 [16.Bxc8] 16...Bxg4 17.Qxg4 h5
18.Qe2 Ne7? 19.Rad1 d5 20.Bg5 [20.Nxd5] 20...Qd6 21.Bf4? [21.Ne4]
21...Qb4 [21...Qf6=] 22.Qe5 [22.Nxd5] 22...Qxb2 23.Qc7+ Ke8 24.Bd6
Qxc3 25.Rxe7+ Bxe7 26.Qxe7# Black checkmated 1-0
137 - Italian Jerome Gambit
What is a Jerome Gambit? Our chess friend Rick Kennedy had a great site on
the various forms of the Jerome Gambit.
Rick Kennedy listed five Jerome Gambit options and wrote about them
passionately:
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Jerome Gambit
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Nc3 Bc5 5.Bxf7+ Italian Four Knights
Jerome Gambit
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 h6 4.0-0 Bc5 5.Bxf7+ Semi-Italian Jerome Gambit
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 h6 4.0-0 Nf6 5.Nc3 Bc5 6.Bxf7+ Semi-Italian Four
Knights Jerome Gambit
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nd4 4.Bxf7+ Blackburne Shilling Jerome Gambit
I humbly present a sixth option: 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Nc3 Nxe4
5.Bxf7+ Open Italian Four Knights Jerome Gambit.
My ICC opponent "jeromed" chose a form of the Jerome Gambit. White gets
the piece back. In that way it is more Queen's Gambit than King's Gambit,
but it has an aggressive feel. Bill Wall listed it as a "Noa Gambit, Four
Knights", but it is so Jerome-ish.
jeromed - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 24.05.2012 begins 1.e4 e5

2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Nc3 Nxe4 5.Bxf7+ [The Jerome Gambit idea.
Normal is 5.Nxe4 d5 6.Bd3 dxe4 (6...Nb4!= Kaufman) 7.Bxe4 Bd6=
(7...Ne7!?)] 5...Kxf7 6.Nxe4 d5 7.Ng3!? [Common is 7.Neg5+ Kg8-/+
Material is even. Theory favors Black with his two pawns and two bishops.]
7...Bd6 [7...e4! 8.0-0 (or 8.Ng1 h5-/+) 8...exf3 9.Qxf3+ Qf6 10.Qxd5+ Be6
11.Qb5 Nd4 12.Qxb7 Bd6 Black is well developed and aggressively poised,
but White has three pawns for the sacrificed bishop.] 8.d3 Rf8 9.Bg5 [White
can quickly castle kingside: 9.0-0 Kg8 10.h3 h6 11.c4 Fighting for e4 for the
Ng3. 11...Be6 12.cxd5 Bxd5 13.Ne4 Nd4 14.Nxd4 exd4 15.Qg4 with a
playable game for White, although it seems Black a little stands better.]
9...Qe8 10.Qd2 Kg8 [10...h6 forces White to give up his bishop, but I wanted
a safer king.] 11.0-0-0 Bg4 12.h3 Bxf3 13.gxf3 Rxf3 14.Rhg1 Qf7 15.Nh1
Kh8 [Unpinning the pawn.] 16.c3 d4 17.c4 Rf8 [I missed 17...Nb4!-+]
18.Bh4? [White missed the diagonal threat.] 18...e4 19.dxe4? Bf4 White
resigns as the queen is lost. 0-1
138 - Italian Four Knights
Jeff Hoskavich and I played a few times at the Williamsport chess club in the
mid-1990s. As they used to say in the newspaper business, “A good time was
had by all.”
We played 8 games. I was the higher rated player and won most of them.
This was an offhand game, and my hand was way off.
Hoskavich caught me in this one game for an instructive win. Maybe I should
say an instructive loss. I probably learned more than he did. Now I am more
sensitive about protecting my king. Jeff may have completely forgotten about
this game.
We began as an Alekhine Defence with 1.e4 Nf6. Jeff Hoskavich avoided

2.e5. He played 2.Nc3. I often play 2…d5. I have scored well as Black in that
line of the Scandinavian Defence 1.e4 d5.
Here I transposed into a Vienna Game with 2…e5. After 3.Nf3 I often play
3...Bb4. This Three Knights Game amounts to a Ruy Lopez reversed.
Instead we entered the Four Knights Game. Hoskavich played the Italian
pawn fork line with 4.Bc4 Nxe4 5.Nxe4 d5. All was fine until move 18. Then
I went from having the advantage to a completely lost position in one move.
That is never good.
On move 20, Jeff Hoskavich had two ways to win. He chose to move his king
which won my queen. He could have moved his queen which won my king.
Put a fork in me. I’m all done.
Hoskavich (1750) - Sawyer (2010), Williamsport, PA 1994 begins 1.e4 Nf6

2.Nc3 e5 3.Nf3 Nc6 4.Bc4 Nxe4 5.Nxe4 d5 6.Bxd5 [A good way to play this
position is 6.Bd3 dxe4 7.Bxe4 Bd6 8.0-0 0-0 9.c3=] 6...Qxd5 7.Nc3 Qd8 8.0-
0 Be6 9.Re1 Bd6 [9...Bc5! 10.d3 0-0=/+] 10.d3 [10.d4 exd4 11.Nb5=] 10...0-
0 11.Nb5 a6 [11...Bc5=/+] 12.Nxd6 cxd6 13.Ng5 Bf5 14.g4?! [14.Be3 h6
15.Ne4 d5 16.Ng3 Bg6=] 14...Bg6 [Or 14...Bc8-/+ ] 15.h4 h6 16.h5 hxg5
[16...Bxh5! 17.gxh5 hxg5 18.c3 f5-/+] 17.hxg6 f6?! [More powerful is
17...Qf6!-/+] 18.Qf3 Qe8?? [Black was still fine after 18...Ne7! 19.Qxb7
d5=/+] 19.Qd5+ Kh8 20.Kg2 [There is a mate in two with 20.Qh1+ Kg8
21.Qh7#] 1-0
139 - Beating 4.Bb5 Bc5!
In his excellent book “The Kaufman Repertoire for Black & White”, Larry
Kaufman recommended for Black in the Four Knights Game the line 4.Bb5
Bc5! Kaufman’s first book was a classic.
This newer book is even more accurate. Kaufman wrote this in his note to
4...Bc5!:
"This obvious move has rarely been seen due to the coming 'fork trick', but
since this game and notes show that it is not promising for White I expect
4...Bc5 to become the main line of the Four Knights, and 4.Bb5 to lose
popularity."
In the game below vs Pelle Lingsell, White won a pawn in the Four Knights
Game with a knight fork. This led to a winning endgame which required
some technical play.
Sawyer - Lingsell, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 02.06.2012 begins 1.e4 e5

2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bb5 Bc5 5.0-0 d6 [Larry Kaufman's critical line is
5...0-0 6.Nxe5 Nxe5 7.d4 Bd6 8.f4 Neg4 9.e5 Be7 10.Be2 d6=] 6.d4 Bxd4
7.Nxd4 exd4 8.Qxd4 0-0 9.Bxc6 bxc6 10.Bg5 c5 11.Bxf6 cxd4 12.Bxd8
Rxd8 13.Nd5 c6? [Black blunders a pawn to a fork. There is still plenty of
play after 13...Bd7 14.f3 c6 15.Nf4=] 14.Ne7+ Kf8 15.Nxc6 Re8 16.Nxd4
Rxe4 17.c3 Ba6 18.Rfe1 Rae8 19.Rxe4 Rxe4 20.f3 Re5 21.Kf2 Rc5 22.Re1
g6 23.Re3 h5 24.Nc2?! [24.a4+-] 24...Ra5 25.a3 Bc4 26.b4 Rd5? [Now
White can activate his pieces and wins with the extra pawn. 26...Ra4
27.g4+/=] 27.Nd4 a5 28.f4 axb4 29.axb4 Bb5 30.Nxb5 Rxb5 31.Ke2 Rf5
32.g3 Rb5 33.Kd3 Rb8 34.Kd4 Rb5 35.Kc4 Rf5? 36.b5 Rc5+ 37.Kb4 1-0
140 - Back into Four Knights
The Queen's Knight Attack first move 1.Nc3 found its way into almost every
game I played during 2003. From there I took whatever path I felt like at the
moment.
Sometimes that meant a visit to an original line. Other times it meant a

transposition into a popular opening variation.
Here we passed from a Vienna Game to a Spanish Four Knights Game after
4.Bb5 Bb4, I benefited from Black's move 7...a6.
This proved to be too slow. Later I mounted a strong attack and checkmated
her on move 19.
By opponent's handle was "lynch_valeria", which happens to be the artist

stage name for an Argentine singer. That actress was about my age.
Whoever she was, a 1701 Yahoo rating was pretty good since they started
everyone at 1200. Yahoo chess ratings over 2000 were rare when I played
there, except for maybe computers rated 3000.
Sawyer (1900) - lynch_valeria (1701), Yahoo 2 12, 13.08.2003 begins

1.Nc3 Nf6 2.e4 e5 3.Nf3 Nc6 4.Bb5 Bb4 5.0-0 Bxc3 6.bxc3 0-0 7.Re1 a6?
8.Bxc6 dxc6 9.Nxe5 Re8 10.d4 c5 11.Bg5 [11.Bf4!?+/-] 11...cxd4 12.cxd4
h6 13.Bxf6 Qxf6 14.Qf3 Qb6? [14...Qxf3 15.Nxf3+/=] 15.Qxf7+ Kh7
16.Qxe8 Qxd4 17.Rad1 Qb2 18.Qg6+ Kg8 19.Rd8# 1-0
2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4
The move 3.d4 leads to the Goring Gambit, Scotch Gambit and Scotch Game.
141 - Blitz Time Trouble
During the years I played the Queen's Knight Defence 1...Nc6 vs everything,
from time to time I faced the Scotch Game after 1.d4 Nc6 2.e4 e5 3.Nf3. I
hoped to avoid main lines.
Fondeo was higher rated. Vs his Scotch I went with 3...Bb4?! This must be
dubious, but somehow I kept winning with it in blitz.
Here I was way ahead in time. After move 27, White had only 24 seconds left
to make all his moves. Less than 30 seconds on the clock is deep time trouble
for a middlegame position.
What do you do when your opponent is in deep time trouble?

Remember these three important things:
1. Stay away from any position where you can get mated quickly.
2. Do not get yourself into time trouble by trying to do too much.
3. Keep enough material on the board so you get a win on time.
Fondeo - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 13.10.2012 begins 1.e4 e5

2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 Bb4+?! [3...exd4] 4.c3 Bd6 5.Bg5 f6 6.Bh4 g5 7.Bg3 h5
8.h4 [8.dxe5+/-] 8...g4 9.Nfd2 Qe7 10.d5 Nd8 11.Nc4 Nf7 12.Nbd2 c6
13.Ne3 Ngh6 14.Qb3 0-0 15.a4 Kg7 16.Ndc4 Bc5 17.Be2 Bxe3 18.Nxe3 d6
19.f3 c5 [Clocks: 0:58-1:53] 20.fxg4 Bxg4 21.Nxg4 Nxg4 22.Bxg4 hxg4
23.0-0-0 Nh6 24.Rdf1 f5 25.exf5 Rxf5 26.Qc4 Raf8 27.Rxf5 Nxf5 [Clocks:
0:24-1:35] 28.Qxg4+ Kh7 29.Qh5+ Nh6 30.Be1 Qf7 31.Qg5 Qf4+? [This
was a mistake. It was obvious as soon as White made his next move. Since
my opponent had only 11 seconds left. I just needed to avoid getting mated to
win. Better was 31...Rg8 32.Qd2+/=] 32.Bd2 Qxg5?+- [32...Qf6 33.g4! made
more sense, but I figured he would have a hard time mating me without the
queen. There was no time to win a longer endgame.] 33.hxg5 Kg6 34.Rxh6+
Kf5 35.Rh7 Ke4 36.Rxb7 Kxd5 37.g6 Rg8 38.g7 e4 39.Bf4 Kc6 40.Rf7 d5
0-1
142 - Goring vs Glen Wilbur
From 1971-72, I played more chess games against Glen Wilbur than anyone.
They were just off-hand games.
We barely knew the rules and had no one to teach us. We played for fun at
school, at home, and on the same chess team.
Ronald Robinson played our board one; he won the Maine High School
championship on tied-breaks in 1973. Glen played board two, and I played
board 3.
Eventually I got some chess books and actually read them. Glen and Ronald
were rated higher than I in the early days. But in the long run I would pass
them both.
After I started studying openings, I got a very small pamphlet by David Levy
on the Goring Gambit. It seemed like a lot of fun, so I tried it on several
occasions throughout the years 1972-77, mostly in blitz and offhand games.
In those days I was afraid to sacrifice pawns. The only gambit I dared play in
an actual tournament was the Queen's Gambit.
Sawyer - Wilbur, Glen Cove, Maine 2.11.1976 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6
3.d4 exd4 4.c3 d6 [Goring Accepted goes 4...dxc3 5.Bc4 (or 5.Nxc3 Bb4
6.Bc4) 5...cxb2 6.Bxb2] 5.cxd4 Bg4 6.Nc3 Nf6 7.Bc4 Bxf3 8.gxf3 Qd7 9.0-0
0-0-0 10.Bf4 Nh5 11.Bg3?! [The bishop has more scope at 11.Be3] 11...f5
[Right idea. Wrong Pawn. Black can attack kingside with 11...g5! 12.Nd5
Nf4 13.Bxf4 gxf4 14.Kh1 Bg7 15.Bb5+/=] 12.d5 [12.Bb5+/-] 12...Nxg3?
[12...Ne5 13.Bb5 Qf7 14.f4+/=] 13.dxc6 bxc6 [This leads to mate, but
otherwise Black is down a knight after 13...Qxc6 14.Bd5+-] 14.Ba6+ Kb8
15.Qb3+ 1-0
143 - Danish Gambit to Goring
The Danish and Goring Gambits are left-handed versions of the Blackmar-
Diemer Gambit. Sometimes Black loses very quickly.
The story goes like this. Both sides begin with the same central pawn.
White offers the tasty morsel of the other center pawn. Black devours it with
its capture on move 2.
Then White attacks this newly advanced Black pawn with a bishop pawn on
moves 3 or 4. Black eats the bishop pawn.
White uses the time to lead in development. That's the plan.
Here I get to the Danish Gambit by transposition after 1.d4 e5 2.e4. Of course
White could opt to defend against an Englund Gambit.
On this day I chose to offer my own gambit. It is amazing that one wrong
move led to a forced tactical win like a short order cook.
Sawyer - vt, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 29.06.2012 begins 1.d4 e5 2.e4
[2.dxe5] 2...exd4 3.c3 dxc3 [The Danish Declined goes 3...d5 4.exd5 Qxd5
5.cxd4 Nc6 6.Nf3 Bg4 7.Be2 Bb4+ 8.Nc3 Bxf3 9.Bxf3 Qc4=] 4.Nxc3 [4.Bc4
cxb2 5.Bxb2 d5 6.Bxd5 with some compensation.] 4...Bb4 5.Bc4 Nc6 6.Nf3
d6 7.Qb3 [The main line here is 7.0-0 Bxc3 8.bxc3 Nf6 9.e5 Nxe5 10.Nxe5
dxe5 11.Qb3 Qe7 12.Ba3 c5 and Black must choose a response to some
likely check along the a4-e8 diagonal.] 7...Bxc3+ 8.bxc3 Ne5? [Black must
defend f7 with the queen. One way transposes to 7.0-0 after 8...Qe7 9.0-0 Nf6
10.e5 Nxe5 11.Nxe5 dxe5] 9.Nxe5 dxe5 10.Bxf7+ Kf8 [10...Ke7 11.Ba3+
Kf6 12.Rd1 Bd7 13.f4+- cannot be appealing for Black.] 11.Bxg8 Rxg8
12.Ba3+ Ke8 13.Qxg8+ Black resigns 1-0
144 - Goring Gambit Endgame
The Scotch Game has important side variations after 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4. In
my 4.c3!? Goring Gambit postal chess contest vs Robert Moore from APCT
in 1978, Black chose to accept the gambit pawn with 4...dxc3.
White built up a standard attack on the squares e6 and b7 which I defended

with 10...Qc8!? After a long battle where both sides had chances, we reached
an even rook and pawn ending.
One of my favorite endgame books was Fine's “Basic Chess Endings”. It was
later revised by Pal Benko. I read the original descriptive notation version
cover to cover in the mid-1970s.
I remember writing out pages of analysis following principles I learned for

my endgame texts. I thought I had everything worked out for a draw. I
miscalculated and threw the game away.
I think my opponent was Robert C. Moore from North Carolina. The USCF
lists him these many years later as having an 1887 correspondence rating.
The ratings below were in APCT in 1978.
Moore (1882) - Sawyer (1950), corr APCT 78CC-A-3, 11.1978 begins 1.e4
e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 exd4 4.c3 dxc3 5.Nxc3 Bb4 6.Bc4 d6 [6...Nf6=] 7.0-0
Bxc3 8.bxc3 Be6!? [8...Nf6!=] 9.Bxe6 fxe6 10.Qb3 Qc8 [10...Qd7! 11.Qxb7
Rb8 12.Qa6 Nf6 13.e5=] 11.Ng5 [11.Rb1=] 11...Nd8 12.f4 [12.c4!?] 12...h6
13.Nf3 Ne7 14.f5 [14.Ba3=] 14...0-0 [14...exf5!?] 15.Nd4 Rf6 16.g4 c5
17.Nf3?! c4 18.Qa4 Qc5+ [18...Nf7=/+] 19.Nd4 e5 20.Ba3 b5? [20...Qc7=]
21.Qa6 Qb6 22.Qxb6 axb6 23.Nxb5 Nb7 24.Bb4 Nc5 25.Bxc5 bxc5
26.Rfd1 Nc8 27.Rd2 Kf8 28.Rb1 Rf7 29.Nxd6 Rd7 30.Nxc4 Rxd2
31.Nxd2 Rxa2 32.Rb8 Rxd2 33.Rxc8+ Ke7 34.Rxc5 Kf6 35.Rc6+
[35.h4+/-] 35...Kg5 36.Rg6+ Kf4 37.Kf1 Kf3 38.Ke1 Kxe4? [38...Rxh2
39.Rxg7 Kxe4=] 39.Rxg7? [39.Kxd2 Kd5 40.Rxg7+-] 39...Rxh2 40.Kd1
Kd3 41.Rd7+ Kxc3 42.Ke1 Rg2 43.Rg7 Kd4 44.Kf1 Ra2 45.Rg6 Ke3
46.Kg1 e4 47.f6 Rf2 48.Rxh6 Rf4 49.Rh3+ Kd4 50.g5 e3 51.Rh8 Kd3
52.Kg2 e2 53.Rd8+ Kc3 54.Re8 Rg4+? [54...Kd2=] 55.Kf3 Rxg5 56.Kxe2
Rf5 57.Rf8 1-0
145 - Chandler Finds Checkmate
Early in our chess training we learn that f7 is the weakest square on the
chessboard. Here on f7 starts the Black pawn that is only protected by the
king.
Even if the f-pawn has moved, the square is still weak. Black's pieces must
develop. He must move his king safety.
Since White moves first, the f7 square is more of a weakness for Black.
White’s active threats throw Black on the defensive.
If Black takes over the initiative, then f2 becomes the weakest square. It
would be the same thing with colors reversed.
Bill Chandler played with the handle "ProjectAlpha". He attacked f7

prematurely at first. Then Bill Chandler demonstrated what happens when
Black fails to protect f7.
This was a blitz game played on the Internet Chess Club. The opening started
as a Scotch Game and moved to a Scotch Gambit.
ProjectAlpha - Archilleus, ICC 5 0 Internet Chess Club, 15.02.2012 begins

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 [Scotch Game] 3...exd4 4.Bc4 [Scotch Gambit]
4...Bb4+ 5.c3 dxc3 6.0-0 [6.bxc3 is the recommended move by
Dzindzichashvili; 6.Nxc3 is a line in the Goring Gambit: 4.c3 dxc3 5.Nxc3
Bb4 6.Bc4] 6...Nge7 [The full Danish Gambit type move is 6...cxb2 7.Bxb2
Nf6 8.Ng5 0-0 9.e5 d5 10.exf6 dxc4 11.Qh5 with a promising attack for
White.] 7.bxc3 Bc5 8.Bxf7+?! [This is risky business, sacrificing the bishop
before the rest of the troops show up. A better try is 8.Ng5! Ne5 9.Nxf7 Nxf7
10.Bxf7+ Kxf7 11.Qh5+ regained the piece on c5.] 8...Kxf7 9.Ng5+ Kg8
10.Qb3+ Kf8?? [Black forgets about the weakness of his f7 square. 10...d5!-
+ Saves the game.] 11.Qf7# Black is checkmated 1-0
146 - Roman and Scotch Gambit
The word "Roman" has many meanings.
In history, Roman is the Empire during the life of Jesus Christ.
In building, Roman refers to an architectural style.
In math, Roman is a set of numerals.
In language, Roman is an alphabet.
In religion, Roman is the Catholic Church.
A frisky man with a girl has Roman hands and Russian fingers.
In chess, Roman means Grandmaster Roman Dzindzichashvili.
Roman Dzindzichashvili is famous for his opening repertoire which he

presents in many videos available on Chess4Less.com and in two books:
“Chess Openings for White Explained” and “Chess Openings for Black
Explained”.
These books Roman prepared and wrote with GM Lev Alburt, GM Eugene
Perelshteyn and Al Lawrence. They all put in a lot of work on these books.
They cover Roman's basic repertoire.
One of Dzindzi's favorite openings is the Scotch Gambit. This opening is

maybe not the strongest, but it is playable and tricky.
In some ways this is like the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit, but in the Scotch
Gambit, White usually gets his pawn back fairly soon. Below is my game vs
"sequitamorena" which ended in a quick mate when Black missed a tactic.
Sawyer - sequitamorena, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 12.01.2013 begins

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 exd4 4.Bc4 Nf6 5.e5 Ne4 6.0-0 [Other ideas are
6.Qe2 Nc5 7.c3 or 6.Bd5 Nc5 7.0-0] 6...Be7 7.Re1 Nc5 [7...d5 8.exd6 Nxd6
9.Bd5=] 8.Nxd4 Nxd4 [8...0-0 9.Nc3+/=] 9.Qxd4 Ne6 10.Qg4 0-0 11.Bh6
f5? [Fortunately for me in this blitz game I realized in time that Black just
pinned his Ne6. 11...d5! 12.exd6 Bf6 13.c3 Qxd6 14.Be3=] 12.Qxg7#! Black
is checkmated 1-0
147 - Phiona Mutesi Olympiad
At church recently, a friend said she thought of me when she read the
Readers Digest article by Tim Crothers (8 pages - great reading!) about
Phiona Mutesi, the young girl from Katwe, Uganda, Africa. Phiona learned
chess at Agape Church from Coach Robert Katende. She qualified for two
chess Olympiads by 2012. Here are three quotes from the article:
"When I first saw chess, I thought, ‘What could make all these kids so
silent?’" Phiona recalls. "Then I watched them play and get happy and
excited, and I wanted a chance to be that happy."
"Chess is a lot like my life," Phiona says through an interpreter. "If you make
smart moves, you can stay away from danger, but you know any bad decision
could be your last."
"When I first met Phiona, I took it for granted that girls are always weak, but
I came to realize that she could play as well as a boy," Ivan [Mutesasira] says.
"She likes to attack, and when you play against her, it feels like she's pushing
you backward until you have nowhere to move."
Here is a game from the 40th Olympiad in Istanbul, Turkey between Yeonhee
Cho of South Korea in the Scotch Gambit. As Black, Phiona Mutesi plays
aggressively, opens the f-file with 14...f6, and finishes with a mating
combination.
Cho (1542) - Mutesi, 40th Olympiad Women Istanbul TUR (9.55),

06.09.2012 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 exd4 4.Bc4 Nf6 5.e5 d5 6.Bb5
Ne4 7.Nxd4 Bc5 [Or 7...Bd7 8.Bxc6 bxc6 9.0-0 Bc5=] 8.Nxc6!? [8.Be3]
8...Bxf2+ 9.Kf1 Qh4 [9...bxc6 10.Bxc6+ Kf8=] 10.Be2? [White gets
confused. Better is to deal with the hanging Nc6 issue by 10.Nxa7+! c6
11.Nxc8 Rxc8 and only then play 12.Be2=] 10...bxc6 11.Nc3 Nxc3 12.bxc3
Bd4? [Black returns the favor. I thought this might be a typo, but the next
move proves it was not. After 12...Bb6 and Black is winning.] 13.cxd4 0-0
14.Be3 f6 15.exf6 Rxf6+ 16.Kg1 Bf5 17.Qd2 Be4 18.h3?! [This leaves a
hole for the black queen on g3. More challenging is 18.Qe1!+- ] 18...Qg3
[Black plays for mate.] 19.Bf1 Raf8 20.Re1 [White should try 20.h4!+/- to
threat Rh3.] 20...Bxc2 21.Rc1 Be4 22.Qe2? [22.h4] 22...Rf3! 23.Re1 Rxe3
24.Qxe3 Rxf1+ 25.Kxf1 Qxg2# 0-1
148 - Great Gerace Rook Lift
The Scotch Game opening chess theory was new to me in 1978. I regularly
defended 1.e4 with the 1...c6 Caro-Kann Defence.
I chose the Open Game with 1.e4 e5 in the APCT Class A championship.
These game taught me several memorable lessons.
My short game against James Gerace is marked by his excellent move

10.Ra4! This challenged my bishop.
I failed to handle it correctly and was completely busted tactically. By move

12, half my army faced immediate annihilation.
My knight, bishop, queen and king were all in grave danger. I could save
some, but the final result was not in doubt.
This was an APCT Class A game. USCF lists James Gerace of California
whose last correspondence rating is 1780.
Postal games were rated in order of finish. My quick resignation of a lost

game meant my rating would go up higher in the wins that soon followed. I
quickly reached the 2000 expert level, despite this crushing loss.
Gerace (1821) - Sawyer (1900), corr APCT 78CC-A-3, 05.1978 begins 1.e4
e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 exd4 4.Nxd4 Bc5 5.Nb3 [5.Be3] 5...Bb6 6.a4 [6.Nc3]
6...Qh4!? [6...a5 7.Nc3 Nf6=] 7.Qe2 Nf6? [7...a6=] 8.a5 Nd4 9.Nxd4 Bxd4
10.Ra4! Bc5? [10...c5 11.c3 Be5 12.g3+/-] 11.Rc4 d6 12.e5 1-0
2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4
The move 3.Bc4 leads to various forms of the Italian Game.
149 - Italian Beginner Logic
Can you play chess openings using common sense? Yes, but exact
knowledge of basic theory will boost your success. The move 3...h6 in the
Italian Game is surprisingly common for players rated 1500-1600. How do
masters respond to 3...h6?
Attack minded masters such as Morphy, Steinitz, and Svidler played 4.d4 to
open up the center quickly. Others such Koltanowski and Gipslis first played
4.0-0. Alekhine opted for 4.Nc3 in a simul when he was the world champion.
The Italian Game begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4. How do you handle the
move 3...h6 vs the Italian Game? I've always played 4.0-0 or 4.d4. Our move
3...h6 is played fully 1% of the time.
The beginner logic of 3...h6 goes like this. Black wants to play 3...Nf6. He
notices White can play 4.Ng5. If Black does not know the theoretical move
4...d5 nor enjoy the gambit 4...Bc5, then preventing 4.Ng5 by 3...h6 seems
reasonable, almost forced!
In the game Ray Haines vs David Hunter, we find another example of the
move 3...h6. White continues with 5.d3 against his less experienced
opponent. Ray Haines demonstrates that solid but rapid development leads to
a playable middlegame.
Haines - D. Hunter, Presque Isle, ME 05.01.2016 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6

3.Bc4 h6 [3...Bc5; 3...Nf6] 4.0-0 Nf6 5.d3 [5.d4+/= makes use of open lines.]
5...Bc5 6.Nc3 d6 7.Be3 Bxe3 8.fxe3 Bg4 [8...Na5=] 9.Qe1 Bxf3? [Black is
too slow to complete his development. Now White's attack will pick up
speed. Better is 9...0-0 10.Qg3 Na5=] 10.Rxf3 a6 11.Qg3 Qd7? [This loses
faster than 11...0-0 12.Raf1+-] 12.Qxg7 0-0-0 13.Qxf6 Nb4 14.Bxf7 Rhf8
15.Be6 Rxf6 16.Bxd7+ Rxd7 17.Rxf6 Nxc2 18.Rf8+ Rd8 19.Rxd8+ Kxd8
20.Rf1 Nxe3 21.Rf7 Kc8 22.Nd5 Nxd5 23.exd5 c6 24.dxc6 bxc6 25.g4 d5
26.h4 Kd8 27.g5 Ke8 28.g6 c5 29.Rc7 e4 30.g7 exd3 31.g8Q# 1-0
150 - Rousseau Gambit Hayward
Keith Hayward left a comment on my Mike Kaplan game: "I played Keith
Kaplan too. He was a very aggressive player."
They played an Italian Game (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4). One does not see
the Rousseau Gambit (3...f5) played or analyzed very often. Clearly it is a
critical response in that Black threatens 4...fxe4. Also Black gets a good
game after 4.exf5 e4!
Tim McGrew (wrote the Forward to my Blackmar-Diemer Gambit Keybook

II) wrote written three articles for ChessCafe.com on the Rousseau Gambit.
The first covered 4.d3 and all the other alternatives to the main line. The
second covered 4.d4. The third covered a critical line sent to McGrew by
Dennis Monokroussos.
Keith Hayward is a FIDE Master and an ICCF-IM known for his expertise in
chess openings. Christoph Scheerer wrote in "The Blackmar-Diemer Gambit"
(page 290) on a game which "gave White got good play in K. Hayward - T.
Sawyer, correspondence 2007". Keith Hayward plays Keith Kaplan (he’s a
National Master from Massachusetts or Rhode Island). On to their exciting
game!
Hayward - Kaplan, Jaffrey NH, 29.10.1978 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4
f5 4.d4! [4.d3 Nf6 5.Nc3 Bb4 6.0-0 Bxc3 7.bxc3 d6 8.Ng5 Qe7 9.Bf7++/=
White's advantage is not great.] 4...fxe4 [4...Qe7!? 5.0-0 fxe4 6.Nxe5 Nxe5
7.dxe5 Qxe5 8.Nc3 Nf6 9.Nd5 Nxd5 10.Bxd5 c6 11.Bxe4+/- Material is
even, but the Black king and queen on the open e-file is likely to cause big
problems.] 5.Nxe5 Nxe5 [Tim McGrew recommends 5...d5 6.Bb5! (6.Nxc6
bxc6 7.Qh5+ Ke7!=/+; 6.Qh5+ g6 7.Nxg6 Nf6 8.Qh4 Nxd4-/+) 6...Qd6
analysis by Monokroussos after 7.0-0+/- shows White is better.] 6.dxe5 g6
[6...Qe7 7.0-0 Qxe5 see note to Black's fourth move.] 7.Qd5 Qe7 8.Bg5 Qe6
9.Qxe4 d5 10.Qxd5 [10.Bxd5 Qf5 11.Qxf5 Bxf5 12.Nc3+-] 10...Qxd5
11.Bxd5 [Black is down two pawns and two tempi in development. There is
no defence.] 11...Be7 12.Bxe7 Nxe7 13.Nc3 c6 14.Bc4 Bf5 15.0-0-0 b5
16.Bd3 Be6 17.Ne4 0-0 18.Nf6+ Kg7 19.f3 a5 20.Kb1 a4 21.Be4 b4 22.Rd6
Bxa2+?! [Unsound, but this is a practical try for a miracle mating trap. If
22...Bf5 23.Bxf5 Nxf5 24.Rxc6 White is up three pawns.] 23.Kxa2 b3+
24.cxb3 axb3+ 25.Kxb3 Rfb8+ 26.Kc2 Ra5 27.Nd7 Rb4 28.Rd2 c5 29.Rc1
Raa4 30.Nxc5 Rc4+ 31.Kd1 1-0
151 - Italian Game 3.Bc4 Nd4
When White plays the Italian Game (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4) most of the
time it transposes into a more specific variation such as the Giuoco Piano,
Evans Gambit, Two Knights Defence, Four Knights Game, Max Lange,
Scotch Gambit or Philidor Defence.
The line 3.Bc4 Nd4 is called a Shilling Gambit or Kostic Gambit. The lines
contains some traps. There is a good way (4.Nxd4!), a bad way (4.Nxe5?!),
and an ugly way (5.Nxf7?) for White to play.
I played a game early on Christmas morning while the stockings were still
hung by the chimney with care after St. Nicholas had been there. Okay, really
a few things were put in some stockings and set at the foot of the tree. For us,
the highlight of Christmas is the whole season to think about Jesus and the
times we enjoy with friends and family.
Later on Christmas day one family member "skyped" us while we were

sitting around our square table. He said that it would be easier to see us if we
all sat on the same side like in the famous painting "The Last Supper" by
Leonardo da Vinci. There you see Jesus and the disciples. They all look like
Italians in the painting around 1495. This painting was done about the time
the current version of chess was invented to give more power to the queen
and bishops. That made the game faster and more exciting.
andrei - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 25.12.2012 begins 1.e4 Nc6
2.Nf3 e5 3.Bc4 Nd4?! 4.Nxe5?! [The best move is considered to be 4.Nxd4!
exd4 5.0-0 Nf6 6.Re1 d6 7.c3 when 7...Ng4 is tricky. If White grabs the pawn
with 8.cxd4? (Correct is 8.Qe2! dxc3 9.Nxc3 Ne5 10.Bb5+ and White
controls the center with a big lead in development.) 8...Qh4 and Black has
threats against h2 and f2. A critical line is 9.h3 Nxf2 10.Qe2 Nxh3+ 11.gxh3
Qg3+ 12.Kh1 Bxh3 13.Rg1 Qh4 14.d3 Bg4+ 15.Qh2 Bf3+ 16.Rg2 Qe1+
17.Qg1 Qh4+ with a perpetual check.] 4...Qg5 5.Nxf7? [5.Bxf7+ Kd8 6.0-0
Qxe5 7.c3 Ne6 8.d3 Ne7=/+ when Fritz and Houdini slightly favor Black's
extra knight over White's two extra pawns.] 5...Qxg2 6.Rf1 Qxe4+ 7.Be2
Nf3# White is checkmated 0-1
152 - Wilkes Barre Traxler
I chose to play the game below like a maniac. Michael Spiegel was a notable
USA chess player. His old FIDE rating was 2155. When we played, Spiegel
was at his peak ICCF rating of 2281. I had seen his published games and was
very impressed.
Michael Spiegel was a correspondence opening expert. I was stuck playing

the Black pieces. What would I do?
I answered Michael Spiegel's Italian Game with the Two Knights Defence.
When he played the aggressive 4.Ng5, for only the second time in my life I
played 4...Bc5!? The year before I drew a club game as Black vs David
Parsons. That was it for my prior experience in this famous gambit, but of
course I knew about it.
In the 1800s the Czech player Karel Traxler played the gambit in a handful of
published games. Decades later, Kenneth Williams and John Menovsky
analyzed the line in great detail, so much so that they named it the Wilkes-
Barre Variation after their club. What inspired me to play this was that the
city of Wilkes-Barre was between where the two of us lived at the start of the
game.
Tim Harding wrote in his excellent “Counter-Gambits” book that Wilkes-

Barre was in New England, but that is not quite true. New England is the six
states east of New York. Wilkes-Barre is in Pennsylvania, west of New York.
It is about 140 miles from New England. Maybe that is about the distance
from Dublin, Ireland to Liverpool, England. In the grand scheme of world
geography, they are about the same, but not quite the same if you actually
live there. It was a minor inaccuracy in a book by a great author.
Since Michael Spiegel played the Italian Game, it seemed fitting to battle
over a Wilkes-Barre (pronounced "Wilks Barry"). During the game Michael
moved to Asia which made this a long game.
After the tournament finished, ICCF published that two of my opponents had
tied for first place with very fine 4.0-2.0 records. I wrote to the tournament
director and asked what place I finished with my 4.5-1.5 record. They
changed the result and put me first. ICCF never sent me the Master certificate
(a postcard, not a title) that noted the achievement of winning such a section.
What I got was a full year of satisfaction playing a lot of very good chess.
Spiegel (2281) - Sawyer (2157), corr ICCF 1995 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6
3.Bc4 Nf64.Ng5 Bc5 [4...d5 5.exd5 Na5] 5.Bxf7+ [5.Nxf7 Bxf2+ 6.Kf1 Qe7
7.Nxh8 d5 8.exd5 Nd4 9.d6 Qxd6 (9...cxd6 10.Kxf2 Bg4 11.Qf1+-) 10.Nf7
Qc5 11.d3 Bh4 12.b4 Qe7 13.Nd2+/-] 5...Ke7 6.Bd5 [6.Bb3] 6...Rf8 7.0-0 d6
8.h3 [8.c3 Bg4 9.Nf3] 8...Qe8 [8...h6 9.Nf3] 9.c3 Qg6 10.d4 Bb6 11.f4
[11.a4] 11...exf4 12.Bxf4 h6 13.Nf3 Nxd5 14.exd5 Rxf4 15.dxc6 bxc6
16.Qe2+ Be6 [16...Kf8=] 17.Nbd2 Kd7 18.Kh2 [18.a4=] 18...Re8 19.Qf2
Qc2 20.Nc4 Qxf2 21.Nxb6+ cxb6 22.Rxf2 Bd5 23.Kg3 Ref8 [23...Rf6=/+]
24.Raf1 g5 25.b3 [25.Nh2 h5 26.Rxf4 gxf4+ 27.Kf2=] 25...h5 26.h4 gxh4+
27.Nxh4 Rg4+ 28.Kh3 Rxf2 29.Rxf2 Be6 30.Nf3 Rxd4+ 31.Kh2 Rd3 32.c4
Re3 33.Kg3 Re4 34.Rd2 d5 35.cxd5 Bxd5 36.Kf2 a5 37.Nd4 a4 38.bxa4
Kd6 39.g3 [White could try to draw a rook ending down a pawn: 39.Ne2
Rxa4 40.Nc3 Ra5 41.a4 Kc7 42.Nxd5+ Rxd5-/+] 39...Kc5 40.Ne2 Rxa4
41.Nc3 Rd4 42.Rb2 Bf7 43.Ke3 Bg6 44.Ne2 Rd3+ 45.Kf4 b5 46.Kg5 Bf7
47.Rc2+ [Black is better after 47.g4 hxg4 48.Kxg4 Ra3 49.Nc1 b4-+]
47...Kb6 48.g4 hxg4 49.Kxg4 b4 50.Kf4 c5 51.Nc1 Rd1 52.Ke3 c4 53.Ke2
Bh5+ 54.Ke3 Kc5 55.Nb3+ Kd5 56.Na5 Rd3+ 57.Kf2 c3 58.Nb3 Bd1
59.Rc1 Bxb3 [Black can force a win by 59...c2 60.Na1 Rc3 61.Nb3 Rxb3-+]
60.axb3 Rd2+ 61.Ke3 Rb2 62.Rd1+ Kc5 63.Rd8 Rxb3 64.Rc8+ Kb5
65.Rb8+ Ka6 66.Ra8+ Kb7 67.Ra5 Rb2 68.Kd3 c2 0-1
153 – 4.Ng5 vs Yu Yangyi
Yu Yangyi rated 2723 demonstrated a good way to play the Two Knights
Defence. White challenged Black with aggressive 4.Ng5.
Normally Black plays some type of a gambit in this line. Here Black
continued 4...d5 5.exd5 Na5. White remained up a pawn after the normal
moves 6.Bb5+ c6 7.dxc6.
Black must keep up the opening and middlegame pressure with threats. In
response White usually does not move anything on the queenside for the first
ten moves.
Then Liu Qingnan played 11.d4. As Black, Yu Yangyi threatened h2, f2, e2,
c2 and others squares. Chess engines evaluate the position as having equal
chances.
The game does not necessarily have to end in a draw. However, these strong
players from China did repeat moves and draw.
Liu Qingnan (2523) - Yu Yangyi (2723), ch-CHN 2015 Xinghua CHN

(4.2), 21.05.2015 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Ng5 d5 5.exd5 Na5
6.Bb5+ c6 7.dxc6 bxc6 8.Be2 h6 9.Nf3 e4 10.Ne5 Bd6 [Or 10...Bc5 11.0-0
Qd4 12.Ng4 Bxg4 13.Bxg4 Nc4=] 11.d4 exd3 12.Nxd3 0-0 13.0-0 Qc7
14.h3 [14.g3 Bf5 15.Nd2 Rfe8 16.Bf3 Rad8=] 14...c5 [14...Re8 15.Re1=]
15.b3 c4 16.bxc4 Nxc4 17.Nd2 Nxd2 18.Bxd2 Bf5 19.Ne1 Ne4 20.Bd3
Rac8 21.Nf3 Bc5 22.Be3 Rfd8 23.Qc1 Nc3 24.Qd2 Ne4 25.Qc1 Nc3
26.Qd2 [26.Re1 Bxe3 27.Qxe3 Nd5 28.Qd2 Nf4 29.Ne5=] 26...Ne4 27.Qc1
Nc3 1/2-1/2
2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5
Here we cover the Evans Gambit and Giuoco Piano.
154 - Haines Attacks Evans
At the end of 1973, I experimented with the Evans Gambit. I had a copy of
the little Chess Digest monograph by the late GM Larry Evans. The Evans
Gambit is named after the Welsh sea Captain William Davies Evans who
played it in 1827. Paul Morphy made it seem like a forced win for White
except when he played Black.
Our town library had a copy of the black and white paperback “Chess
Openings: Theory and Practice” by I.A. Horowitz (1964). Ray Haines and I
studied every detail of it in our learning years.
Even when I tried a gambit, Ray insisted on turning the tables. He attacked
me! Our game continued 4.b4!? d5!? Eric Schiller called this variation the
Hein Counter Gambit. This line is not as strong as accepting the Evans
Gambit by 4...Bxb4, but the move hides some tricks. I fell for one on move 7.
I never recovered.
Ray Haines had a tactical approach in his early years. It was a beautiful game.
I just wish I had been on the winning side!
Sawyer - Haines, Ft Fairfield, ME 02.12.1973 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6

3.Bc4 Bc5 4.b4 d5!? [Hein Counter Gambit. Evans Accepted is 4...Bxb4 5.c3
Ba5 6.d4 exd4 (or 6...d6 7.Qb3 Qd7 8.dxe5) 7.0-0 where Black has tried
several set-ups. The Evans Declined continues 4...Bb6 5.a4 a6=] 5.exd5
Nxb4 6.Nxe5!? [I am on my own. White most often plays 6.0-0 Nf6 7.Nxe5
Nbxd5 8.d4+/= with a slight edge.] 6...Nf6 [Junior suggests 6...Bd4! 7.c3
Bxe5 8.d4 and Black has some interesting options with his Be5; 6...Qe7 7.0-
0!+/-] 7.d4? [White misses a tactic. Correct is 7.0-0 Nbxd5 (7...Bd4
8.Ba3!+/=) 8.d4+/=] 7...Bxd4! 8.c3 [8.Qxd4?? falls to the knight fork
8...Nxc2+ winning the queen.] 8...Bxe5 9.Qa4+ Nc6 [9...c6!-+] 10.dxc6 0-0
11.Ba3 Re8 12.0-0 bxc6 13.Rd1 Bxh2+! [The classic bishop sacrifice!]
14.Kf1 [After 14.Kxh2 Ng4+ 15.Kg1 Qh4 16.Bxf7+ Kxf7 17.Qf4+ Kg8-+
when Black a much better game.] 14...Nd5 15.Bxd5 cxd5 16.Nd2 a5 17.c4
Bd7 18.Qc2 Qh4 19.Nf3 Qh5 20.Rxd5?! [Desperation.] 20...Qxd5! [The
fitting end to a beautiful game. After 21.cxd5 Bb5+ wins the queen and
knight.] 0-1
155 - Ultimate Ullrich Evans
The Evans Gambit presents both players with some significant challenges.
White needs to develop his pieces quickly, attack the center, make constant
threats, and keep Black’s weak points weak.
Black needs to fight back to keep from getting completely run over. The
placement of his center pawns and queen are critical.
Usually White is ready, willing, and able to sacrifice a second pawn after
4.b4 Bxb4 5.c3 Ba5 6.d4 exd4. Black may take the second pawn and then
return it as I did vs “blik” in the notes.
I played a postal chess game against Juergen Ullrich in the Evans Gambit. I
do not remember which part of Germany he lived in. DDR was East
Germany, and BRD was West Germany. I faced many postal opponents from
each side of the Berlin wall.
The International Correspondence Chess Federation (ICCF) lists Jürgen

Ullrich of Germany with a rating of 2159 in 308 games. His peak rating was
2220 in 1994. My ICCF rating is 2157 based on 65 games. I have been
inactive there for 20 years.
I don’t think I played badly at first, but I chose a line that is too passive for
my own good. Later in the game, I was outplayed.
Ullrich - Sawyer, corr ICCF 1985 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.b4
Bxb4 5.c3 Ba5 6.d4 [Another line is 6.0-0 Nf6 7.d4 exd4 8.Ba3 d6 9.cxd4
Nxe4 10.d5 Ne7=] 6...d6 [6...exd4! 7.0-0 Nge7 8.cxd4 d5 9.exd5 Nxd5 and
1/2-1/2 in 152 moves. blik - Sawyer, Internet Chess Club 2009] 7.Qb3 Qd7
8.dxe5 dxe5 [8...Bb6!=] 9.0-0 [9.Ba3!?] 9...Bb6 10.Rd1 Qe7 11.a4
[11.Rd5!?] 11...a6 12.Bd5 Nf6 13.Ba3 Bc5 14.Bxc5 Qxc5 15.Bxf7+ Ke7
16.Bd5 Nxd5? [16...Rd8 17.Nbd2+/-] 17.Rxd5 [17.exd5! Na5 18.Qc2 Bg4
19.Nbd2 Qxd5 20.h3 Bxf3 21.Nxf3 Qe6 22.Nxe5+-] 17...Qb6? [17...Be6
18.Rxc5 Bxb3 19.Nbd2+/-] 18.Qxb6?! [White is winning after 18.Qa3+! Ke8
19.a5 Qa7 20.Nxe5+-] 18...cxb6 19.Nxe5 Be6 20.Nxc6+ bxc6 21.Rd2 Rhd8
22.Kf1 Bc4+ 23.Ke1 Bd3 24.f3 Rd6 25.Na3 Rad8 26.Rad1 b5 27.axb5
axb5 28.Kf2 b4? [Blunder. Black is still in the game after 28...c5 29.Rb2+/=]
29.cxb4 1-0
156 - Koltanowski Italian Mate
What do you do when your girlfriend lives far away and it is Valentine's
Day? I probably wrote or telephoned her. I have no idea what else I did in
1974, but I took time to play chess.
I read pamphlets by Chess Digest and by George Koltanowski on chess

openings: specifically the Giuoco Piano and the Max Lange Attack. Kolty
recommended a method of playing the Max Lange Attack from the Italian
Game. I had studied the games of Paul Morphy and was very interested in the
3.Bc4 openings.
My regular chess opponent and study partner was Ray Haines. We knew
what we both played, so we were able to prepare fairly well. In today's game,
the first 10-15 moves follow what I remembered of Koltanowski’s plan
against 5...Bxd4.
We were not tactical geniuses. In fact we were still learning the art of attack.
These days still I work on tactical exercises every day. I have to stay sharp in
tactics. No matter what opening, we know any player who is not good at
tactics is not good at chess!
In the game below, the concepts I played were good. I get full compensation
for my sacrificed pawn and more.
I played inaccurately at a couple points. At least the two move checkmate at

the end is instructive.

3.Bc4 Bc5 4.0-0 [In another game I played 4.c3] 4...Nf6 5.d4 Bxd4 6.Nxd4
Nxd4 7.f4 d6 8.c3! [More common 8.fxe5 dxe5 9.Bg5 Be6 and Black is
okay.] 8...Nc6 9.f5! [This f-pawn keeps one bishop out of e6 and allows
another bishop to get to g5.] 9...Na5?! 10.Bd3 d5 11.Bg5!? Nc6 12.Qf3 dxe4
[12...d4 13.Na3] 13.Bxe4 Bd7 14.Nd2 Qe7 15.b4 [Played to discourage
queenside castling, to threaten b4-b5, and to take control of c5.] 15...0-0
16.Bd5 [Clearing out e4.] 16...a5 17.Ne4 Kh8?! [17...axb4! tries to provoke
a White blunder. 18.cxb4?(18.Qh3!+/- is correct) 18...Nd4 19.Qh3 Bxf5]
18.Bxf6 gxf6 19.Qh5 [19.a3!+-] 19...Rg8?! 20.Rf3?! [20.a3+-] 20...axb4
21.Rh3 Rg7 22.Qh6?? Rag8 [22...Bxf5!-+] 23.Nxf6 Rxg2+ [23...Bxf5=/+]
24.Kh1 R2g7 25.Qxh7+ Rxh7 26.Rxh7# 1-0
157 - Koltanowski Max Lange
George Koltanowski developed an opening repertoire for White. He played
for a win with the Max Lange Attack. Koltanowski was well-known for
giving simultaneous exhibitions. Kolty would play either the Colle System or
the Max Lange Attack.
Max Lange was a leading German player in the mid-1800s. Max Lange wrote
a classic book "The Chess Genius of Paul Morphy" published in 1860. This
book was translated from German into English by another opening
theoretician: Ernest Falkbeer.
The Max Lange Attack leads to a complex unbalanced position. Right from
the beginning, each move by each player has a tactical purpose. To be
successful, you need a good tactical eye.
It helps to have the one main variation of the Max Lange Attack memorized
to move 16 at least. If you understand the threats, you can handle positions
when your opponent deviates.
Against Ray Haines, I only knew the first 14 moves. Then things got crazy.
During the next eight moves the advantage swung back a forth wildly. The
evaluations went from equal to Black edge to equal to White winning to
Black winning to drawish to a victory for White.

3.Bc4 Bc5 4.0-0 Nf6 5.d4 exd4 6.e5 d5 7.exf6 dxc4 8.Re1+ Be6 9.Ng5 Qd5
10.Nc3 Qf5 11.Nce4 0-0-0 12.g4 Qe5 13.Nxe6 fxe6 14.fxg7 Rhg8 15.Nxc5?
[After 14 correct book moves, I get sidetracked. I probably did not know any
more book moves. The standard continuation is 15.Bh6 d3 16.c3= with equal
chances.] 15...Qxc5 16.Bh6 d3 17.c3 [17.cxd3 cxd3=/+] 17...d2 [17...Ne5-
/+] 18.Rxe6 Rd3? [18...Qd5 19.Rf6=] 19.Re2? [19.Qe2!+-] 19...Ne5 20.Re3
Rxg7 [Black can pick up g7 at his leisure. Much stronger is 20...Rxe3
21.Bxe3 Qd5-+] 21.Rxd3? [21.Bxg7 Rxe3 22.fxe3 Qxe3+ 23.Kf1=]
21...Nxg4? [21...Nxd3-+] 22.Qe2 Qh5? [Junior gives the critical line as
22...Ne3+ 23.Kh1 Qc6+ 24.f3 cxd3 25.Qxe3 Rg6 26.Bf4 Re6 27.Qxd2
Qxf3+ 28.Qg2 Qxf4 29.Qg8+ Kd7 30.Qxh7+ Kc6 31.Qxd3 Rd6 32.Qe2 Rd2
33.Qe6+ Rd6 with a repetition of moves.] 23.Qe6+ 1-0
158 - Morphy Keyes Book
I took a book to read in the doctor's office: "The Chess Players" by Frances
Parkinson Keyes published in 1960. This novel was based on the life of Paul
Morphy. This American was the world's best player in the 1850s. In Chapter
2 there is a fictitious chess game supposedly played by Paul Morphy's real
grandfathers Don Diego Morphy and Joseph Le Carpentier. The game is to
have been played during a discussion of arrangements for the wedding of
their children, Paul Morphy's parents: Alonzo Morphy and Louise Therese
Felicite Thelcide Le Carpentier.
According to "Old Families of Louisiana" edited by Stanley Clisby Arthur

(pages 54-58), Don Diego Morphy Sr. was born in Madrid. His Irish name
was "Murphy", but Diego changed it to "Morphy" to make it easier for the
Spaniards to pronounce. From the first Don Diego Morphy Sr. marriage came
two sons: Diego Jr born on the island of San Domingo and Ernest born in
Charleston, South Carolina. After his first wife died, Diego Sr. married again
and had a third son, Judge Alonzo Morphy. Alonzo had two sons and two
daughters. The boys were first Edward and second Paul born three years
later. Diego Morphy Sr. arrived in New Orleans in 1803 and died in 1814.
Paul Morphy was born June 27, 1837.
Those were facts. Now to fiction. "The Chess Players" theoretical game
between Diego Morphy Sr. and Joseph Le Carpentier was played about 1827
(it makes for nice fiction). No sense letting the fact Morphy Sr. had died
earlier stand in the way of a good story! As I played through the game in my
mind in the waiting room, it sounded real enough. In fact, the opening is an
Italian Game trap that has been repeated many times. The earliest game with
this line in my database was Dubois - Steinitz, London 1862.
Dom Diego Morphy Sr. - Le Carpentier, New Orleans, LA 1827 begins

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.0-0 Nf6 5.d3 d6 6.Bg5 h6 7.Bh4 g5 8.Bg3
h5 [8...Na5=] 9.Nxg5 [Maybe 9.h4 Nh7 10.c3=] 9...h4 10.Nxf7 hxg3 [Or
10...Qe7 11.Nxh8 hxg3 12.Bf7+ Kd8 13.hxg3=] 11.Nxd8 Bg4 12.Qd2 Nd4
[Here Diego Morphy is distracted by the beautiful and provocative Thelcide
who came to stand behind her father.] 13.Nc3? [White has to return the queen
with 13.h3 Ne2+ 14.Qxe2 Bxe2 15.Ne6=] 13...Nf3+ 14.gxf3 Bxf3 0-1 [Diego
Morphy said: "I see it is useless to continue this struggle, my friend... Shall
we ask Alonzo to join us?"]
159 - Love & Paul Morphy
Previously I cited the opening trap game between Paul Morphy's
grandfathers: Don Diego Morphy Sr. and Joseph Le Carpentier. In that
mythical Morphy Sr. - Le Carpentier game, Black played the brilliant move
8...h5!!
This move was played as Black by Wilhelm Steinitz in 1862. Dubois played
9.h4 (see game below). In the fictional game Don Diego Morphy continued
9.Nxg5. He accepted Black's sacrifice in a manner that has been repeated
many times.
Don Diego Morphy passed away before his famous grandson Paul was born,
but the other grandfather Joseph Le Carpentier lived a long life. He often
played his grandson Paul Morphy.
In fact, Paul Morphy's real parents Alonzo Morphy and Thelcide Le

Carpentier probably met each other and fell in love through some chess
connection. There were likely many games between her father Joseph and her
future husband Alonzo. These notable players probably played many games
in her father’s home.
In his book "Modern Chess Analysis", Robin Smith writes about 8...h5!! He
says that "Steinitz's move was probably the result of home preparation." He
also states that Dubois declined the sacrifice, indicating that White did not
play 9.Nxg5. After a little digging, I found the Dubois - Steinitz game from
the British Chess Association Tournament 1862 with notes by Henry Bird.
These two opponents played each other several times, but my guess is that
only once did Dubois allow Steinitz to play 8...h5!!
Dubois - Steinitz, London 1862 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.0-0
d6 5.d3 Nf6 6.Bg5 h6 7.Bh4 g5 8.Bg3 h5 9.h4 Bg4 10.c3 Qd7 11.d4 exd4
12.e5 dxe5 13.Bxe5 Nxe5 14.Nxe5 Qf5 15.Nxg4 hxg4 16.Bd3 Qd5 17.b4 0-
0-0 [The commencement of a marvelous combination.] 18.c4 Qc6 19.bxc5
Rxh4 20.f3 Rdh8 21.fxg4 Qe8 22.Qe1 [22.Bf5+ Kb8 and then 23.Qxd4
would have relieved White from his difficulties.] 22...Qe3+ 23.Qxe3 dxe3
24.g3 Rh1+ 25.Kg2 R8h2+ 26.Kf3 Rxf1+ 27.Bxf1 Rf2+ 28.Kxe3 Rxf1
29.a4 Kd7 30.Kd3 Nxg4 31.Kc3 Ne3 32.Ra2 Rxb1 33.Rd2+ Kc6 34.Re2
Rc1+ 35.Kd2 Rc2+ 36.Kxe3 Rxe2+ 37.Kxe2 f5 38.Ke3 Kxc5 39.Kd3 f4 0-
1 [Notes by Henry Bird]
160 - Pianissimo Quick Mate
The strength of the quiet Italian Game Giuoco Pianissimo is that Black can
drift into a passive position. While this is happening, White may build up a
gradual advance following d3 / c3.
In the game below, White quickly expanded on the queenside. My opponent

"trubble" got in trouble.
White boldly sacrificed a knight to open up the kingside. But then he had no
follow-up. Instead White played on the queenside.
Every gambit player knows that when you are missing a pawn or two, there
are open lines where the pawns are absent. This situation gives the gambit
player opportunity to use these open lines for his own pieces.
I parried White's threats until he retreated. Then my bishop, knight, queen

and rook combined to attack the White king.
trubble - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 09.11.2012 begins 1.e4 e5

2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.c3 Nf6 5.d3 a6 6.a4 [Normally White plays 6.Bb3 or
6.0-0] 6...d6 7.b4 Ba7 8.Bg5 h6 9.Bh4 g5 10.Nxg5?! [10.Bg3=] 10...hxg5
11.Bxg5 Qe7 12.b5 axb5 13.Bxb5 Bd7 14.0-0 Nd8 15.Bc4 Be6? [Correct
was 15...Ne6-+] 16.Qb3? [White returns the favor, but if 16.Qf3! Bg4
17.Qxf6 Qxf6 18.Bxf6 Rh6 19.Bxd8 Kxd8 20.h3+/-] 16...Rb8 17.Nd2 Bxc4
18.Nxc4 Ne6 19.Bd2 Ng4 20.h3 Qh4 21.Na5? [21.d4 exd4 22.Qb5+ Ke7
23.Qf5 Rbg8-+] 21...Nxf2 [This is a good and winning move, but there is a
forced mate in six. 21...Bxf2+! 22.Kh1 Qg3 23.Qb5+ Kf8 24.Bh6+ Rxh6
25.Qxe5 dxe5 26.Rxf2 Qh2#] 22.d4? [If 22.Rxf2 Qxf2+ 23.Kh1 Rg8 24.Bg5
Rxg5 25.Qa2 Rxg2-+ Black is up a bishop and a rook.] 22...Nxh3+ 23.gxh3
Qg3+ White resigns 0-1
161 - Is 7.Nc3!? Worth It?
The old open Italian Game begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.c3 Nf6
5.d4 exd4 6.cxd4 Bb4+. White has the choice between two moves that are
relatively equal in popularity.
Both variations have White performance ratings that are higher than their
actual ratings. That is normal. Each of these lines are about as successful as
any good White opening.
Higher rated players have chosen 7.Bd2 in my database. In our ICC blitz
game, my opponent "lupus53" chose the sacrifice line 7.Nc3!?
Grandmasters Lev Alburt, Roman Dzindzichasvili and Eugene Perelshteyn

recommend playing the Giuoco Piano via the Scotch Gambit (as in this
game) and playing 7.Bd2. They wrote about 7.Nc3!? in “Chess Openings for
White Explained” (2nd edition):
"Players seeking active play have generally been advised to select the heavily
analyzed pawn sacrifice 7.Nc3, which leads to a sharp game after 7...Nxe4
8.0-0."
I was able to go into an ending when my opponent chose 8.Qb3 and 11.Qa4?!
This left me up a pawn with a good knight posted on Nc4 vs a bad bishop.
lupus53 - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 15.12.2012 begins 1.e4 e5

2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 exd4 4.Bc4 Bc5 5.c3 Nf6 6.cxd4 Bb4+ 7.Nc3 Nxe4 8.Qb3
[8.0-0 Bxc3 9.d5 (9.bxc3 d5=) 9...Bf6 10.Re1 Ne7 11.Rxe4 d6=] 8...Bxc3+
9.bxc3 0-0 10.0-0 Na5 11.Qa4?! [11.Bxf7+ Rxf7 12.Qd5 Nxc3 13.Qxa5
Ne2+ 14.Kh1 d6=/+] 11...Nxc4 12.Qxc4 d5 13.Qd3 Bf5 14.Qe3 Re8 15.Qf4
Bg6 16.Bb2 Qd6 17.Qxd6 Nxd6 18.Ne5 f6 19.Nxg6 hxg6 20.Rfe1 Kf7
[20...Nc4!-+] 21.Rac1 Rxe1+ [More accurate is 21...Nc4!-+] 22.Rxe1 Re8
23.Kf1 Rxe1+ 24.Kxe1 Nc4 25.Bc1 b6 26.Ke2 c5 27.dxc5 bxc5 28.Kd3
Ke6 29.f4 f5 30.g3 Kd6 31.h3 Kc6 32.g4 Kb5 33.Be3?! Nxe3 34.Kxe3 Kc4
35.Kd2 d4 36.cxd4 cxd4 37.gxf5 gxf5 38.h4 g6 39.a4 d3 40.a5 Kd4 41.a6
Ke4 White resigns 0-1
162 - Sacrifice in Giuoco Piano
For the winter of 1973-1974, I lived in the same town of Fort Fairfield as Ray
Haines in northern Maine. I could see Canada out my bedroom window. It
was cold and snowy.
The scene was like the Russian farm house where Rocky trained in the movie
Rocky IV (which was filmed in Wyoming). There was not much to do in a
place like that long before cable TV and the Internet. Ray Haines and I
played chess at his farm house.
When players are young and learning, they advance faster if they play
openings that are sharp and tactical. This we did.
Ray Haines and I spent a lot of our time talking about chess openings. We
may have spent more time going over lines in books rather than simply
playing against each other.
One week in February we tested out several variations of the Italian Game. In
the main line with 9.d5, Ray played 11...0-0 of which Wikipedia notes: "is
considered to lead to a draw with best play, although Black has many
opportunities to go wrong."
I played the standard knight sacrifice 14.Nxh7 to threaten mate in one on

move 16. There are chances for both sides, but I managed to pull off a mate
by move 24.

3.Bc4 Bc5 4.c3 Nf6 5.d4 exd4 6.cxd4 Bb4+ 7.Nc3 Nxe4 8.0-0 Bxc3 9.d5
Bf6 10.Re1 Ne7 11.Rxe4 0-0 [11...d6 12.Bg5 Bxg5 13.Nxg5 h6 14.Qe2 hxg5
15.Re1 Be6 16.dxe6 f6 17.Re3 c6 18.Rh3 Rxh3 19.gxh3 g6=] 12.Bg5 [12.d6
cxd6 13.Bg5 (13.Qxd6 Nf5 14.Qd5 Ne7= repeating moves.) 13...d5 14.Bxd5
Nxd5 15.Qxd5 d6 16.Bxf6 Qxf6 with dynamic equality.] 12...Bxg5 13.Nxg5
d6 14.Nxh7 Kxh7 15.Qh5+ Kg8 16.Rh4 [With a threat of mate in one.]
16...f5 17.Re1 [17.Be2 Ng6 18.Qh7+ Kf7 19.Rh6 Nf4 20.Bh5+ Nxh5
21.Qg6+ Kg8 22.Qxh5 gxh6 23.Qg6+ Kh8 24.Qxh6+ Kg8 with a draw by
repetition.] 17...Qe8? [17...Ng6! 18.Rh3 (Not 18.Qh7+? Kf7 19.Rh6 Qg5!-+)
18...Rf6-/+] 18.Qh7+ Kf7 19.Bd3 Qd8 [19...Bd7! 20.Qh5+ Kf6 21.Qf3 Qg6
22.Bb5 c6 23.dxc6 bxc6 24.Bc4 d5-/+] 20.Rh6 Rg8 21.g4 [21.Be2+/=]
21...Bd7 22.g5? [22.Ree6+/=] 22...Rh8 [22...Kf8-/+] 23.Rf6+ Ke8 24.Qxh8#
1-0
Book 1 – Chapter 8 – Ruy Lopez
3.Bb5
The Ruy Lopez chapter begins with a look at lesser player lines.
163 - 3…d5!? Harding Gambit
In the 1974 I bought Tim Harding’s “Counter Gambits” book. On page 81 he
discussed 3.Bb5 d5 4.Nxe5 Qg5 5.Nxc6 Qxg2 6.Rf1 a6 7.Ba4 Bh3 8.Qe2
Qxf1+ 9.Qxf1 Bxf1 10.Kxf1 dxe4 “with a rough material balance (discovered
checks are met by …b5). However, White’s position is surely preferable?”
I played my 3…d5!? vs Keith Hayward and others in non-rated games.

Thomas Morris suggested I share them. Anders Tejler wrote me, “This is
your chance to get a namesake if you do some analysis of the line and present
a number of illustrations.”
In 1979 I wrote an article entitled “Original Analysis” for APCT News

Bulletin. My improvement over the Harding line above was to play 6.Rf1
Bh3. Sometimes this is called the Sawyer Gambit. Later I discovered a
different line is best here with 6.Rf1 Qxe4+!
Hayward (2100) - Sawyer (2000), corr 1979 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6
3.Bb5 d5 4.exd5 [4.Nxe5 Qg5 (4...Nge7 5.Nc3 dxe4 6.0-0+/-) and now: 5.d4
a) 5.Nxc6 Qxg2 6.Qf3 (6.Rf1 Qxe4+! 7.Qe2 Qxe2+ 8.Kxe2 a6 9.Nc3
Bd7=/+) 6...Qxf3 7.Ne5+ c6 8.Nxf3 cxb5 9.exd5 Nf6 10.0-0 1/2-1/2 Curt
Jones - Sawyer, corr 1978; b) 5.Nf3! Qe7 (5...Qxg2? 6.Rg1 Qh3 7.exd5 a6
8.Bf1 Qd7 9.dxc6+-) 6.e5+/-; c) 5.d4 Qxg2 6.Qf3 (6.Rf1 a6 7.Bxc6+ bxc6=)
6...Qxf3 7.Nxf3 dxe4 8.Ne5 1-0 in 39, Ed Sawyer - Tim Sawyer, corr 1976,
when Black should have played 8...Nge7!=/+] 4...Qxd5 5.Nc3 Qd6! [5...Qc5
6.d4 exd4 7.Nxd4 Bd7 8.Be3 Qb4 9.a3 Qd6 10.Qe2 0-0-0 11.0-0-0 Nxd4
12.Rxd4 Qe7 13.Rhd1 Nf6 14.Nd5 Nxd5 15.Rxd5 c6 16.Bxc6 1-0 Curt Jones
- Sawyer, corr 1978] 6.d4 [Thomas Morris beat me with the move 6.Qe2!?+/-
; The best move seems to be 6.0-0!+/-] 6...exd4 7.Nxd4 Bd7 8.Be3 a6
9.Bxc6 Bxc6 10.Nxc6 [10.Qe2 0-0-0 11.0-0-0+/=] 10...Qxc6 11.Qd5 Qxd5
12.Nxd5 0-0-0 13.0-0-0 Ne7 14.Nxe7+ Bxe7 15.Bd4 Bg5+ 16.Kb1 Bh6
17.g4 f5 18.g5 Bxg5 19.Bxg7 Rxd1+ 20.Rxd1 Rg8 21.Be5 1/2-1/2
164 - Bird Knight Flight Nd4
Henry Bird developed a defense to the Ruy Lopez with 3…Nd4 in the 1800s.
This is the same Bird who played the opening 1.f4.
At first the move 3…Nd4 looks like a waste of time. However the knight
flight to d4 gains time because it attacks the bishop on b5.
White should eliminate the knight on d4 immediately, since f3 is under

attack. This clarifies the center after 4.Nxd4 exd4.
What is White’s strategy against the Ruy Lopez Bird Variation?

1. Castle kingside and play d3.
2. Note that the Bb5 hinders the movement of Black’s d-pawn.
3. When necessary retreat the bishop to either Ba4 or Bc4.
4. Play f4 or Qh5 early to attack the kingside.
White may get a slight middlegame edge. Black often equalizes making the
line reasonably playable.
Against “sashagel71” I pushed my pawn to f5 to limit Black’s light squared

bishop. Black could have countered with a pawn push to d5. This would
undermine my central pawns.
I was fortunate to outplay my opponent and win the game. In the end I was
up a rook.
Sawyer (1937) - sashagel71 (1929), Yahoo 3 4, 17.02.2001 begins 1.e4 e5

2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 Nd4 4.Nxd4 exd4 5.0-0 Qf6 [A critical variation is 5...Bc5
6.Bc4 d6 7.d3 c6 when White chooses between 8.Qh5 or 8.a4.] 6.d3 Bc5 7.f4
[7.Qh5 Bb6 8.e5+/=] 7...Ne7 [7...c6 8.Bc4+/=] 8.Nd2 0-0 9.Nf3 [9.Bc4+/=]
9...d6 [Sharper is 9...d5!= ] 10.f5 h6 11.g4 g5 [11...d5=] 12.Kg2 [Best is
12.h4!+/-] 12...Kh7 [12...d5 13.e5+/=] 13.h4 gxh4 14.Rh1 Rh8 15.Rxh4
Kg8 16.Qh1 d5 17.e5 Qg7 18.f6 Qg6 19.fxe7 Bxg4 [19...Bxe7 20.Rxh6
Rxh6 21.Qxh6 Qxh6 22.Bxh6+- leaves White up a knight.] 20.e8Q+ Rxe8
21.Bxe8 Bd7+ 22.Kf2 Bxe8 23.Qg2 [Stronger was 23.Bxh6! Be7 24.Rg1+-]
23...Qxg2+ 24.Kxg2 h5 25.Kf2 Bd7 26.Bg5 Bg4 27.Bf6 Rh6 28.Rg1 Rg6
29.Nh2 Bf5 30.Rxg6+ [30.Rxh5!+- forces mate in two.] 30...Bxg6 31.Nf1
Kf8 32.Ng3 Ke8 33.Nxh5 Kd7 34.Nf4 Bf8 35.Nxg6 fxg6 36.Rh8 Bc5
37.Rg8 Ke6 38.Rxg6 Kf5 39.Rg7 Bb6 40.Kf3 a5 41.Rg5+ Ke6 42.Kf4 Bc5
43.Rg6 1-0
165 - Logical Lau 3…Nge7
One of the most logical variations in the Ruy Lopez is 3…Nge7. If White
chops off the knight on c6, Black replaces it with the other knight.
I faced this line a few times in 1994 at the Williamsport chess club. Against
Dick Zdun I chose simple development with 4.0-0, followed by opening the
center with 5.d4.
When David Lau met my Ruy Lopez with 3…Nge7, I was in more of a hurry
to challenge him in the center. I played 4.d4.
I should have punished his passive 4…f6?! with 5.d5! This would take the c6
square away from both knights.
Instead I reverted to the simple 5.0-0. Later I used my f-pawn to attack.
This safe approach took longer and gave Black chances for a good game.
However, in the end the differences in our rating played out on the board.
Sawyer (2011) - Lau (1414), Williamsport, PA 1994 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3

Nc6 3.Bb5 Nge7 4.d4 [4.0-0 g6 5.d4 Bg7 6.dxe5 Nxe5 7.Nxe5 Bxe5 8.f4
Bg7 9.f5 c5? 10.f6 1-0 Sawyer - Zdun, Williamsport PA 1994] 4...f6?!
[4...Nxd4 5.Nxd4 exd4 6.Qxd4=] 5.0-0 [5.d5!+/-] 5...a6 6.Bxc6 Nxc6 7.d5
Ne7 8.Nh4 g6 9.f4 d6 10.f5 [10.fxe5!+/= opening the f-file makes more
sense.] 10...Bd7 [10...c6=] 11.fxg6 hxg6 12.Qf3 Bg7 13.g3?! [13.Qf2=]
13...g5 14.Nf5 Nxf5 15.exf5 Qe7 16.Nd2 0-0-0 17.c4 Rh3 18.a4 Rdh8
19.Rf2 Qf8 20.Ne4 Qe8 21.b3 Qg8 22.Be3 Qh7 23.Raa2 Kd8 [23...g4
24.Qxg4=] 24.Rac2 Ke7? [24...Qh5 25.Qxh5+/-] 25.c5 Be8 [25...Qh5
26.Qxh5+-] 26.cxd6+ cxd6 27.Nxg5 fxg5 28.f6+ Kd8 29.Bb6+ Kd7
30.Qg4+ 1-0
166 – William Steinitz 3…d6
Richard Zdun was one of the oldest players at the Williamsport chess club
during my years there. Coincidently Dick Zdun chose the old Steinitz
Variation 3…d6 to defend against my Ruy Lopez.
William Steinitz was born May 17, 1836 in Prague. That city was part of the
Austrian Empire known as the Kingdom of Bohemia. Prague became the
capitol of the Czech Republic.
Steinitz began in the attacking style common to the 1800s. He won the 1862
London tournament. At that time Paul Morphy was involved in the American
Civil War. Morphy retired from chess.
In 1866 Steinitz defeated Anderssen in a match. In 1873 Steinitz added

positional skills and developed a new style of defense. William Steinitz was a
prolific chess journalist and theoretician.
Steinitz became world champion by defeating Zukertort. He held the title

from 1886 to 1894. Then he lost to Emmanuel Lasker.
The Steinitz Variation 3…d6 is a solid but passive defence to the Ruy Lopez.
This Black pawn protects e5, but it blocks the dark squared bishop. It also
loosens control of c6.
The key move in our game was 7…c5?! With that pawn thrust, Dick Zdun
was saddled with a backward d6 pawn.
White blockaded and attacked the d6 pawn. The tactics around d6 allowed
White to win a piece. If Black recaptured at the end, then a discovered knight
check would pick off a Black rook.
Sawyer (2010) - Zdun (1635), Williamsport, PA 1996 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3

Nc6 3.Bb5 d6 4.d4 Bd7 5.Nc3 Nxd4 [5...Nf6 6.0-0 exd4 7.Nxd4 Be7 8.Nxc6
bxc6 9.Bd3 0-0 10.f4+/=] 6.Nxd4 exd4 7.Qxd4 [7.Bxd7+ Qxd7 8.Qxd4 Ne7
9.0-0+/=] 7...c5?! [7...Bxb5 8.Nxb5 a6 9.Nc3 Nf6 10.Be3+/=] 8.Qd3 Nf6
9.0-0 Bxb5 10.Qxb5+ Qd7 11.Qxd7+ Nxd7 [11...Kxd7 12.Bg5+/=] 12.Nd5
[12.Nb5+/-] 12...Kd8 13.Bf4 Ne5 14.Rad1 Kd7? [14...Ng6 15.Bg3+/-]
15.Bxe5 1-0
167 - Classical 3.Bb5 Bc5
It is hard to imagine the days of the 1970s when there were few books on
openings, no personal computers, and no databases. For those of us who lived
far from big cities, our best form of chess competition was by postcard.
Hank Ross and I met for eight games in APCT events. We chose a variety of
openings. Somehow I won all our games.
Usually we played two games at a time on the same postcard. We got a

postcard with moves one day and replied the next day. Typically we played
about one move per week in each game.
In the Classical Ruy Lopez 3.Bb5 Bc5, first I made sure to castle quickly on
the kingside. I knew I wanted to do that. My further play would depend on
Black’s defensive choices.
A natural continuation is 4.0-0 d6 5.c3 Bd7 6.d4 when White has good
chances. Instead our game continued 4.0-0 Nf6.
I played for the central pawn fork with 5.Nxe5 Nxe5 6.d4. Black went wrong
with 6...Bd6?
Then White would be winning after the best reply is 7.dxe5! Here I tried the
tricky move 7.f4?! It worked this time.
Black’s knight was trapped when he took with 7…Nxe4? After 8.fxe5 Be7
9.Qf3, White won a piece due to a mate threat on f7.
Hank Ross played on until checkmate, since he had to write to me for a while
anyway to play our other game.
Sawyer (1980) - Ross (1700), corr APCT P-388, 1978 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3
Nc6 3.Bb5 Bc5 4.0-0 Nf6 5.Nxe5 Nxe5 6.d4 Bd6? [6...a6 7.Be2+/=] 7.f4?!
[7.dxe5! Bxe5 8.f4 Bd6 9.e5 Bc5+ 10.Kh1 Ng8 11.Nc3+-] 7...Nxe4? [7...Nc6
8.e5 0-0 9.exf6 Qxf6 10.c3 b6=] 8.fxe5 Be7 9.Qf3 Ng5 10.Bxg5 0-0 11.Bxe7
Qxe7 12.Bd3 Qb4 [12...d6 13.Nc3+-] 13.Qe4 g6 14.Nc3 c6 15.a3 Qe7
[15...d5 16.axb4 dxe4 17.Nxe4+-] 16.Qf4 d6 17.exd6 Qe6 18.Rae1 Qg4
19.Qf6 Be6 20.Rf4 Qh5 21.Rh4 Qa5 22.Rxh7 [Or 22.Rxe6!+-] 22...Kxh7
23.Re5 Qd8 24.Rh5+ Kg8 25.Rh8# 1-0
3.Bb5 f5
Here Black meets the Ruy Lopez with the Schliemann Gambit. This leads to
very sharp play.
168 - Experiment in Ruy Lopez
In all my years of chess, I have played the Open Game 1.e4 e5 thousands of
times. I have been Black in the Ruy Lopez Schliemann Gambit hundreds of
times.
Amazingly White has accepted 3...f5 gambit with 4.exf5 only seven times. I
won six and lost one. Here is one of those wins.
I had a vague recollection that there is a line where the players might repeat
moves (see note to my 5th move) and that Black can avoid it with 7...Nf6 or
7...Nh6 or something. I did not really remember it.
It is common knowledge that the weakest point in White's position at the

beginning of the game is f2. If White castles kingside then it becomes h2 or
g2.
However if Black attacks with overwhelming material, then any point

anywhere near the White king is potentially vulnerable. My 3-minute blitz
game attack is topped off with a queen sacrifice and checkmate.
hbandersen - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 27.01.2013 begins 1.e4

e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 f5 4.exf5 e4 5.Qe2 d5? [Played on the spur of the
moment, and not good. Black should play 5...Qe7! 6.Bxc6 dxc6 7.Nd4 Nh6
(7...Qe5 8.Nf3 Qe7= repeats moves) 8.0-0 Nxf5 9.Nb3 a5= is recommended
by GM Sabino Brunello] 6.d3 [6.Ne5!+- with dual threats on c6 and h5.]
6...Bxf5 7.dxe4 dxe4 8.Bxc6+ bxc6 9.0-0 Bd6 10.Nd4?! [10.Nc3+/-]
10...Qd7?! [10...Bxh2+! 11.Kxh2 Qxd4=] 11.Nxf5 Qxf5 12.Nc3 Nf6
13.Re1?! [White should not allow Black to castle kingside. 13.Qc4+/-]
13...0-0 14.Qc4+ Kh8 15.Qxc6 [Now White's king is in serious danger.
Critical here is 15.h3 Ng4 16.Nxe4 Nxf2 17.Nxd6 Nxh3+ 18.Kh2 cxd6
19.Qe6 Nf2 20.Qxf5 Rxf5=/+] 15...Ng4 16.Nxe4 Bxh2+ 17.Kf1 Qxf2+
18.Nxf2 Rxf2# White checkmated 0-1
169 - Checkmate on the f-file
The Ruy Lopez Schliemann 4.d3 gives Black the opportunity to play for an
attack. Sometimes White seems more unprepared for this attack than for
some of the more famous gambits like the Marshall Attack.
I studied the Schliemann off and on for years. I did research and worked up
theory on it. However, I rarely had that opening theory memorized.
The Psalmist said to God, "Your word have I hid in my heart." Years ago an
old teacher said in his class we could paraphrase that Bible verse to mean
"Your word have I hid in my notebook."
Why? Because we wrote down lots of helpful information, but it did not
make it from our pen to our brain. We were like the chess players who buy
lots of opening books that go mostly unread.
Against "ButchCroft" I missed some good moves early in the game. I had
expected 14.Bh6.
White returned the favor. This gave me a promising attack on the f-file which
ended in checkmate.
ButchCroft - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 15.12.2012 begins 1.e4

e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 f5 4.d3 fxe4 5.dxe4 Nf6 6.Nc3 Bc5 7.0-0 d6 8.h3 [The
main line for 4.d3 is 8.Bg5 0-0 9.Nd5 Kh8] 8...Bd7?! [8...Be6!=] 9.Bg5 0-0
10.Bc4+ Kh8 11.a4 [11.Nd5+/=] 11...a6? [11...h6=] 12.Nd5 Ne7 13.Nxf6
gxf6 14.Bh4?! [14.Bh6+/-] 14...Ng6 15.Bg3 f5 16.Bd5?! c6 17.exf5 Bxf5
18.Bb3 Qf6 19.Re1 [19.Kh2 e4-/+] 19...Bxh3 20.gxh3 Qxf3 21.Qxf3 Rxf3
22.Rad1? [Hanging a piece. White should play 22.Kg2 Raf8-+] 22...Rxg3+
23.Kh2 Rf3 24.c3 Rxf2+ 25.Kg3 [Or 25.Kh1 Nf4-+] 25...Raf8 26.Rd3 h5
27.Bd1 h4+ 28.Kg4 Kg7 29.Re4 Kh6 30.Rf3 R2xf3 31.Bxf3 d5 32.Re1
Rf4# White checkmated 0-1
170 - Surprise in Schliemann
Momir Radovic posted a chess lesson on the Four Principles of Warfare that
apply to Chess Strategy. Good stuff! The third principle is Deception and
Surprise.
"All war is deception, advised Sun Tzu. The concentration of forces must be
carried out in such a way that you manipulate the enemy’s perceptions so
they think they fight on favorable terms. You entice them with lures of (in
chess, usually material) profit, while you wait for them in strength at a
decisive point where your assault ratio overpowers their defenses."
Here my opponent was the chess engine "blik" on the Internet Chess Club.
Black’s choice of the Ruy Lopez Schliemann was a mild surprise. The line
4.Nc3 Nd4!? was a big surprise. Leonid Shamkovich and Eric Schiller wrote
on this opening years ago, but nobody plays this line anymore. I played the
frisky 5.Nxe5!?
Larry Kaufman in his repertoire book "The Chess Advantage in Black and
White" suggested 4.d3 giving an analyzed game for White. “This now
appears to be a simple route to advantage.”
Sawyer - blik (2398), ICC 5 0 Internet Chess Club, 21.01.2012 begins 1.e4
e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 f5 4.Nc3 Nd4!? [Oh no. I never play this as Black. I
prefer the main line 4...fxe4 5.Nxe4 Nf6 (The old main line is still playable
after 5...d5 6.Nxe5 dxe4 7.Nxc6 Qg5 8.Qe2 Nf6 9.f4 Qxf4 10.Ne5+ c6 11.d4
Qh4+ 12.g3 Qh3 13.Bc4 Be6) White has to make a choice between 6.Nxf6+
(or 6.Qe2 d5 7.Nxf6+ gxf6 8.d4 Bg7 9.dxe5 0-0) 6...Qxf6 7.Qe2 Be7 8.Bxc6
dxc6 9.Nxe5 Bf5 10.d3 0-0 11.0-0 Rae8] 5.Nxe5! [5.Ba4 Nf6 6.0-0 Bc5
7.Nxe5+/=; 5.Bc4 c6 6.0-0 d6 7.Re1+/=] 5...Qg5 [5...Nf6 6.exf5; 5...Nxb5
6.Nxb5] 6.0-0 fxe4 7.f4!? [Junior 12 likes 7.Re1!+- and White is winning.]
7...Qh4 8.g3 [8.d3!?+/-] 8...Qh3 9.d3 Bc5 10.Kh1 Nxc2 [10...c6 11.Be3+/=]
11.Qxc2?? [I thought quickly, I took only one second of thought. Had I taken
3-5 seconds I might have felt the potential looseness of the Rf1. Of course as
soon as I mistakenly grabbed the knight, there was instant mate! 11.Nxe4!
Nxa1 12.Ng5+- and one of the White knights might play Nf7xRh8.]
11...Qxf1# White checkmated. Black’s surprise opening gambit paid off! 0-1
171 - Successful Schliemann
This was the final of three consecutive blitz games that I played vs
"GetBetterAtChes". Black won all three games, and I was fortunate to have
Black twice.
In the second game I made an unsound sacrifice that did not work out well.
This game begins as a Three Knights Game.
Since I have done well with the risky 3...f5, I decided to try it again in blitz.
I would not play this Three Knights 3...f5 in a tournament game. We

transposed into a Ruy Lopez Schliemann 3...f5. That I would play in a
tournament, if I felt like it was my best approach in the given situation.
White got into trouble early and stayed in trouble throughout. In the endgame
I was threatening to queen both rook pawns.
GetBetterAtChes - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 17.11.2012 begins

1.e4 e5 2.Nc3 [The normal Ruy Lopez move order is 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 f5
4.Nc3 which transposes to the game below.] 2...Nc6 3.Nf3 f5 4.Bb5 fxe4
5.Nxe4 Nf6 6.Bxc6 [Almost everyone plays either 6.Qe2 or 6.Nxf6+]
6...dxc6 7.Nc3 [Sabino Brunello gives a line that begins with 7.Qe2 Bg4=]
7...e4 8.Ng1 Bc5 9.Nge2 0-0 10.0-0 Bg4 [Wrong piece! I might have had a
quick win after 10...Ng4!-+] 11.h3 Bh5 12.Qe1 Qd6 13.d3 exd3 14.cxd3
Qxd3 15.Nf4 Qd6 16.Nxh5 Nxh5 17.Be3 Bxe3 18.Qxe3 Rae8 19.Qg5 Nf6
20.Rad1 Qe5 21.Qg3 Qxg3 22.fxg3 Rd8 23.g4 Rxd1 24.Rxd1 Re8 25.g5
Ne4 26.Re1 Nd6 27.Rxe8+ Nxe8 28.Kf2 Kf7 29.Ke3 Ke6 30.g4 Nd6 31.b3
b5 32.Ne2 c5 33.Nf4+ Ke5 34.Nh5 c4 35.Nxg7 cxb3 36.axb3 a5 37.h4 a4
38.Kd3 a3 39.Kc3 b4+ 40.Kc2 Kf4 41.Ne6+ Kxg4 42.Nc5? [42.Nf8 Kxh4-
+] 42...Kxh4 43.Na6-+ Kxg5 44.Nxb4 h5 45.Kd3 h4 46.Ke3 Kg4 47.Kf2
Kf4 [Faster would be 47...h3!-+] 48.Nd3+ Ke4 49.Nc5+ Kd4 50.Ne6+ Kc3
51.Kg2 a2 White resigns 0-1
172 - Kick blik Schliemann
Ruy Lopez or Spanish Opening is one of the oldest on record. Ruy Lopez was
a Spanish priest around 1500. He is supposed to have suggested the strategy
of placing your opponent so the sun is in his eyes. I wonder if that works on
the computer “blik”.
Here we played the Schliemann Variation or Jaenisch Gambit. Once in a

while blik played a perpetual check variation after 10.e6 Ne5 11.Bf4 Qd6
12.0-0 Qxe6 13.Rfe1 Qb6 14.Nxe5 fxe5 15.Bxe5 Bxe5 16.Qxe5 Qxb5. Black
was ahead a bishop for a pawn, so White chose to perpetual check on g5 or
g3 and then again on e5. Black could not avoid the draw without losing.
After the game continuation of 10.Bxc6 Black had some chances to play for a
win. My basic idea in this game was to head for a "bishops of opposite color"
ending. All I had to do after move 38 was to protect a6 & c6 with my bishop
and keep his king away from f7. Many computer programs do not quickly see
the drawish nature of these bishop endings even if ahead a pawn or two.
blik - Sawyer, ICC 5 0 Internet Chess Club, 01.09.2011 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3
Nc6 3.Bb5 f5 4.Nc3 fxe4 5.Nxe4 Nf6 6.Nxf6+ gxf6 7.d4 d5 8.Qe2 Bg7
9.dxe5 0-0 10.Bxc6 [10.e6 Ne5 11.Bf4 Qd6 12.0-0 Qxe6 13.Rfe1 Qb6
14.Nxe5 fxe5 15.Bxe5 Bxe5 16.Qxe5 Qxb5 17.Qg3+ Kh8 18.Qe5+ Kg8 1/2-
1/2 blik-Sawyer, Internet Chess Club 2008] 10...bxc6 11.e6 Re8 12.0-0 Bxe6
13.Nd4 Qd6 14.Qf3 Bd7 15.Nf5 Qe6 16.Nxg7 Kxg7 17.Qg3+ Kh8 18.Qxc7
Rec8 19.Qf4 Qf5 20.Qd6 Qe6 21.Bf4 Qxd6 22.Bxd6 Kg7 23.c3 Kf7
24.Rfe1 Re8 25.Bc5 a6 26.b4 Rxe1+ 27.Rxe1 Re8 28.Rxe8 Bxe8 29.g4 Ke6
30.f4 f5 31.h3 fxg4 32.hxg4 h5 33.f5+ Kf6 34.Bd4+ Kg5 35.gxh5 Bxh5
36.f6 Kg6 37.a4 Bd1 38.a5 Kf7 39.Kg2 Ba4 40.Kf3 Bb5 41.Be5 Bc4
42.Kf4 Bb5 43.Bd4 Bc4 44.Ke5 Bb5 45.Be3 Bc4 46.Bd4 Bb5 47.Kd6 Ba4
48.Kc5 Bb5 49.Kd6 Ba4 50.Kc7 Bb5 51.Be5 Ke6 52.Kd8 Kf7 53.Bd4 Ba4
54.Be5 Bb5 55.Bd4 Ba4 56.Kc7 Bb5 57.Kb7 Ke6 58.Be5 Kf7 59.Bd4 Ke6
60.Kb6 Kf7 61.Kc7 Ke6 62.Be5 Kf7 63.Kb7 Ke6 64.Kb8 Kf7 65.Kc8 Ke6
66.Bd4 Kf7 67.Be5 Ke6 68.Bd4 Kf7 69.Kc7 Ke6 70.Kd8 Kf7 71.Be5 Bc4
72.Kd7 Bb5 73.Kd8 Bc4 74.Kc8 Bb5 75.Bd4 Bc4 76.Kd7 Bb5 77.Be5 Ba4
78.Kc8 Bb5 79.Kc7 Ba4 80.Kb8 Bb5 81.Ka7 Ke6 82.Bd4 Kf7 83.Be5 Ke6
84.Kb6 Kf7 85.Kb7 Ke6 86.Ka7 Kf7 87.Kb8 Ke6 88.Bd4 Ba4 Game
drawn by 50 move rule 1/2-1/2
173 - Mating Attack in Spanish
Most of the time when I beat a computer program, it was in the endgame.
Once in a while I pulled off a middlegame mating attack that went beyond the
chess engine's horizon.
I might not have seen to the end either. However, by intuition born out of
experience I could feel the likelihood of there being moves available to
complete a successful attack.
Here is one of many games I played vs the computer program "Rookie". I

have also played its older cousin "blik" quite a bit. They played the same
lines a lot, until Rookie got stronger. It did not seem to matter whether the
opening lines were sound or not.
If these chess engines were winning, then every few games they would repeat
that same opening lines. There were a probably 50 lines that I got to know
pretty well by playing these computers. Lots of losses taught me lessons.
Then I found improvements.
Some were in the Ruy Lopez or Spanish Opening which begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3
Nc6 3.Bb5 f5, Schliemann (or Jaenisch) Gambit.
Grandmasters Radjabov, Aronian, Zvjaginsev and Sokolov have played the

Schliemann. This has increased its popularity.
Rookie - Sawyer, ICC 5 0 Internet Chess Club, 02.02.2008 begins 1.e4 e5

2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 f5 4.Nc3 [The main line Schliemann. Also good is 4.d3.
Less promising are 4.d4, 4.exf5 or 4.Bxc6.] 4…fxe4 [4...Nd4 was popular
about 20-30 years ago] 5.Nxe4 Nf6 [The old main line continued 5...d5
6.Nxe5 dxe4 7.Nxc6 Qg5.] 6.Nxf6+ [Equally as popular is 6.Qe2 d5 7.Nxf6+
gxf6 8.d4 Bg7 9.dxe5 0-0 which I have played many times.] 6...Qxf6 7.Qe2
Be7 8.Bxc6 [Black can recapture with either pawn.] 8…bxc6 [I think I got
this line from the Nigel Davies book Gambiteer II. Here I mounted a mating
in a few moves.] 9.Nxe5 c5 10.0-0 Bb7 11.Re1 0-0-0 [I got my king out of
the center and progressed with an attack that won fairly quickly. It was the
only time Rookie allowed me to do this, but it was fun!] 12.d3 Rhf8 13.Ng4
[13.Bd2] 13...Qg6 14.f3 Bh4 15.Rf1 Rde8 16.Ne3 d5 17.Qd1 d4 18.Ng4 h5
19.h3 hxg4 20.hxg4 Bg3 0-1
174 - Testing Technique in Ruy
I decided to play one blitz game vs the chess engine “blik”. We played at 5 0
speed. This Ruy Lopez Schliemann chosen led me to try to draw a bishops of
opposite color ending. I was forced to play very fast to get the draw. At the
end I had only two seconds left on my clock. “blik” had four pawns left and I
had two.
blik - Sawyer, ICC 5 0 Internet Chess Club, 25.02.2012 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3
Nc6 3.Nc3 f5 [I knew blik transposed.] 4.Bb5 fxe4 5.Nxe4 Nf6 6.Nxf6+
Qxf6 7.Qe2 Be7 8.Bxc6 dxc6 9.Nxe5 Bf5 10.d3 0-0 [10...0-0-0 was a valid
alternative.] 11.0-0 Bd6 [Black sacrificed a pawn for rapid development.]
12.Nc4 a6 13.Be3 Rae8 14.Rae1 b5 15.Nxd6 cxd6 16.b3 Bd7 17.Qd2 Qg6
18.Kh1 Qf6 19.Qa5 Bc8 20.c3 Qd8 21.Qxd8 Rxd8 22.Bg5 Rde8!? 23.Be7
Rf5 24.Bxd6 Rxe1 25.Rxe1 Bd7 26.Bg3 Rf6 27.a4 Re6 28.Be5! g6 29.axb5
axb5 30.d4 Kf7 31.c4 bxc4 32.bxc4 Re8 33.d5 cxd5 34.cxd5 [Black needed
to cover f5 and d7 to hold the position. Clocks: 2:11-2:07.] 34...h5 35.d6 Bf5
36.f4 Rd8 37.Ra1 Rd7 38.Kg1 Rb7 39.Ra8 Rd7 40.Kf2 Ke6 41.Ra6 Bd3
42.Rb6 Be4 43.h3 Rb7 44.Ra6 Rd7 45.h4 Bf5 46.g3 [Now we started
counting to 50 moves. Clocks: 1:29-1:28.] 46...Rb7 47.Rc6 Rd7 48.Rb6
Kd5 49.Ra6 Ke6 50.Ke1 Kd5 51.Kd2 Rb7 52.Ke3 Rb3+ 53.Kf2 Rb7
54.Ra4 Rd7 55.Ra6 Rb7 56.Ra3 Rd7 57.Ra5+ Ke6 58.Ra6 Kd5 59.Ke3
Rb7 60.Kf2 Rd7 61.Ke2 Rb7 62.Ra3 Rd7 63.Ra5+ Ke6 64.Ra6 Rb7
65.Rc6 Rd7 66.Rb6 Ra7 67.Kf2 Rd7 68.Ke2 Ra7 69.Rb3 Rd7 70.Rb5 Ra7
71.Rb8 Rd7 72.Rf8 Kd5 73.Kf2 Ke6 74.Re8+ Kd5 75.Ra8 Ke6 76.Rf8
Kd5 77.Rb8 Ke6 78.Rb5 Ra7 79.Rb8 Rd7 80.Rb4 Ra7 81.Rb2 Rd7
82.Rb6 Ra7 83.Rc6 Rd7 84.Kf1 Ra7 85.Rc7 [I exchanged rooks and did
another 50 moves. Clocks: 1:14-0.19.] 85...Rxc7 86.dxc7 Kd7 87.Ke1 Kc8
88.Ke2 Bg4+ 89.Kd3 Bf5+ 90.Ke2 Bg4+ 91.Kd3 Bf5+ 92.Kc4 Bg4 93.Kc3
Bf5 94.Kb4 Bg4 95.Kc4 Bf5 96.Kc5 Bg4 97.Kc6 Bf5 98.Kb6 Bg4 99.Ka6
Bf5 100.Ka7 Bg4 101.Kb6 Bf5 102.Ka7 Bg4 103.Kb6 Bf5 104.Kc6 Bg4
105.Bd6 Bf5 106.Bc5 Bg4 107.Bd6 Bf5 108.Be5 Bg4 109.Kc5 Bf5 110.Kb6
Bg4 111.Bd6 Bf5 112.Be7 Bg4 113.Bf6 Bf5 114.Bd8 Bg4 115.Be7 Bf5
116.Ba3 Bg4 117.Bf8 Bf5 118.Bd6 Bg4 119.Be7 Bf5 120.Bd8 Bg4 121.Bf6
Bf5 122.Bc3 Bg4 123.Bb4 Bf5 124.Bf8 Bg4 125.Ba3 Bf5 126.Bf8 Bg4
127.Bd6 Bf5 128.Bb4 Bg4 129.Ba3 Bf5 130.Bc1 Bg4 131.Bb2 Bf5 132.Bc1
Bg4 133.Bd2 Bf5 134.Ba5 Bg4 135.Ka7 Bf5 136.Kb6 Bg4 Draw by 50
move rule. Clocks: 1:08-0.02. 1/2-1/2
175 - Games Vs Gambit Player
I played four blitz games against the gambit player BigSerge while my wife
was cooking supper. On that day, his rating was above mine. Here is a
summary of our four games.
Game 1: King's Gambit Accepted 3.Nf3 g5 4.h4 g4 5.Ng5!? h6. As Black I

blundered my queen and resigned on move 19.
Game 2: Pirc Defence 4.Be2 Bg7 5.g4!? (E. J. Diemer's idea). BigSerge
ripped apart my center and won after 24 moves.
Game 3: King's Gambit Accepted 3.Nf3 d5. I held off his many threats. He
blundered a queen on move 24 and resigned.
Game 4: Ruy Lopez Schliemann 3...f5 4.Nc3. BigSerge was down in time.
He played for a win and lost in the endgame here.
Sawyer - BigSerge, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 19.11.2012 begins 1.e4 e5

2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 f5 4.Nc3 fxe4 5.Nxe4 Nf6 6.Nxf6+ Qxf6 7.Qe2 Be7
8.Bxc6 dxc6 9.Qxe5 [Headed for an endgame with an extra pawn. Most
players play 9.Nxe5 Bf5 10.d3 0-0 11.0-0+/= Black has compensation for
White extra pawn in two bishops, open lines and probable pressure against
the king.] 9...Bg4 10.Qxf6 Bxf6 [Clocks: 2:40-2:11] 11.c3?! [11.d3]
11...Bxf3 12.gxf3 c5 13.d3 0-0-0 14.Be3 [14.Ke2] 14...Rxd3 15.Ke2 Rd5
16.Rad1 Rxd1 17.Rxd1 b6 18.Rd2 Rd8 19.Rxd8+ Kxd8 20.Kd3 Kd7
[Clocks: 1:57-1:46] 21.b3 [I want to place my queenside pawns on the light
squares so my 3 pawns could hold off Black's 4 pawns with no entry points
for his king. 21.Ke4 was another good idea.] 21...Ke6 22.c4 [22.Kc4!?]
22...Kf5 23.Bd2 Be5 24.h3 g6 25.Be3 Bf4 26.Ke2 Be5 27.Kd3 Bb2 28.Bd2
Bd4 29.Be3 Ke5 30.Ke2 a6 [Clocks: 1:18-1:10] 31.Kd3 Bb2 32.a4 Kf5
33.Ke2 Be5 34.Kd3 Bf4 35.Ke2 Kg5 [Clocks: 1:10-0:48] 36.Kd3 Bxe3
37.fxe3 Kh4?! [37...Kf5=] 38.e4 Kg5 39.Ke3 Kf6 40.h4 h6 41.f4 c6
[Clocks: 0:55-0:38] 42.Kf3 Ke6? [The losing move. 42...h5= gives Black
good drawing chances.] 43.Kg4 Kf6? 44.h5 g5 45.fxg5+ hxg5 46.h6
[46.e5+! Kxe5 47.Kxg5+- wins more easily.] 46...Kg6 47.h7 Kxh7 48.Kxg5
Kg7 49.Kf5 Kf7 50.e5 Ke7 51.e6 Kf8 52.Kf6 Ke8 53.e7 b5 54.Ke6 bxa4
55.bxa4 a5 56.Kd6 Kf7 [Clocks: 0:30-0:12] 57.Kd7 Black resigns 1-0
176 - Bishops of Opposite Color
Some Ruy Lopez Schliemann (3.Bb5 f5) lines lead to bishops of opposite
color endgames. White may have an extra pawn or two.
How do you draw as Black in bishops of opposite color endings? Here are
some suggestions based on hundreds of my games:
1. Leave only the kings, bishops and pawns on the board.
2. Blockade the opponent’s pawns with anything you can.
3. Exchange pawns so you will not have too much to defend.
4. Have your bishop protect your pawns where necessary.
5. Use your king to keep your opponent's king from invading.
6. Give yourself squares to use so that you can repeat moves.
7. Play fast enough so that you do not lose on time.
blik (2346)- Sawyer (2212), ICC 5 0 Internet Chess Club, 2012 begins 1.e4
e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 f5 4.Nc3 fxe4 5.Nxe4 Nf6 [The main line.] 6.Nxf6+
Qxf6 7.Qe2 Be7 8.Bxc6 dxc6 9.Qxe5 Qxe5+ 10.Nxe5 Bd6 11.d4 Bxe5
12.dxe5 Bf5 [Opposite colored bishops.] 13.c3 c5 14.Be3 c4 15.0-0 0-0-0
16.Rad1 Rxd1 17.Rxd1 Rd8 18.Rd4 Rxd4 19.cxd4 c6 [Black will put his
pawns on the light squares.] 20.Bd2 b5 21.f3 h5 22.Bb4 Kd7 23.Kf2 Ke6
24.Kg3 g6 25.Kf4 Kd5 26.Bc5 a5 27.g4 hxg4 28.fxg4 Bd3 29.h4 Ke6 30.h5
gxh5 31.gxh5 b4 32.Ke3 Bh7 33.Bb6 a4 34.Kd2 Bg8 35.Bc5 b3 36.axb3
axb3 [White must guard c3/b2 area against c4-c4, b2xc3, b3-b2-b1=Q.]
37.Ba3 Kf5 38.h6 Kg6 39.Bf8 Bd5 40.Kd1 Be6 41.Bg7 Bd5 42.Kc1 Be6
43.Kd1 Bd5 44.Bf8 Be6 45.Kd2 Bd5 46.Bg7 Be6 47.Kc3 Bd5 48.Bf8 Be6
49.Kb4 Bd5 50.Kc3 Be6 51.Kb4 Bd5 52.Bg7 Be6 53.Kc3 Bd5 54.Kd2 Be6
55.Kc1 Bd5 56.Bf8 Be6 57.Be7 Bd5 58.Bf8 Be6 59.Kd1 Bd5 60.Ke1 Be6
61.Bb4 Kxh6 [Now it is just a matter of playing 50 more moves.] 62.Bd2+
Kg6 63.Kf1 Kf5 64.Bc3 Ke4 65.Ke2 Bd5 66.Ke1 Be6 67.Kf2 Bd5 68.Ke2
Be6 69.Kf1 Bd5 70.Ke2 Be6 71.Kf1 Bd5 72.Kf2 Be6 73.Kg2 Bd5 74.Kg3
Be6 75.Kg2 Bd5 76.Kg3 Kf5 77.Kf2 Be6 78.Ke1 Bd5 79.Kf2 Be6 80.Bb4
Bd5 81.Ba5 Be6 82.Bc3 Bd5 83.Kg3 Be6 84.Kg2 Bd5+ 85.Kg3 Be6
86.Kg2 Bd5+ 87.Kh3 Be6 88.Kg3 Bd5 89.Kh4 Be6 90.Kh5 Bd5 91.Kh6
Ke6 92.Bb4 Be4 93.Kg5 Bd5 94.Ba3 Be4 95.Kf4 Bd5 96.Kg5 Be4 97.Kf4
Bd5 98.Bb4 Bg2 99.Kg3 Bd5 100.Kf4 Bg2 101.Bc3 Bd5 102.Kg5 Be4
103.Kf4 Bd5 104.Ke3 Bg2 105.Ke2 Bh1 106.Bb4 Bg2 107.Kf2 Bd5
108.Kg3 Be4 109.Kh4 Bd5 110.Kh5 Be4 111.Kg5 [I had 10 seconds left.]
111...Bd5 Drawn by the 50 move rule 1/2-1/2
3.Bb5 Nf6
177 - Four Knights to Ruy Lopez
Ever been fooled into transposing from one opening that you are happy to
play to another that you don’t want to play? Openings have very specific
move orders that reach certain positions.
Early moves in Closed 1.d4 openings where White intends to play d4 / c4 /

Nf3 can be played in any order. The Open 1.e4 lines require a more exact
approach.
Once in a while I play the first move 1.Nc3. This opening has many
transpositional options. White has the choice. He can flip into popular
openings or stay with lines more original to 1.Nc3.
After 1.Nc3 e5, I usually play the Napoleon move 2.Nf3 attacking e5.
Immediately White is ahead in development. Meanwhile the only pawn that
Black has move is under attack.
For this game I chose the more conventional 2.e4. Therefore we transposed
from a Queens Knight Attack to a Vienna Game to a Four Knights Game to a
Ruy Lopez.
A common Ruy Lopez move order is 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 Nf6 4.0-0 d6
5.d4 Bd7 6.Nc3 exd4 7.Nxd4 Be7. We reached this position in my ICC blitz
game vs “catz”. He was rated 1585.
I won a piece for a pawn. Gradually I strengthened my position until he ran

out of time.
Sawyer - catz, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 08.02.2013 begins 1.Nc3 e5

2.e4 Nf6 3.Nf3 Nc6 4.Bb5 d6 5.d4 exd4 6.Nxd4 Bd7 7.0-0 Be7 8.Bf4 Nxd4
9.Qxd4 0-0 10.Bxd7 Qxd7 11.Rad1 Rad8 12.f3 [Going fishing with
12.Qxa7+/= never entered my head.] 12...Nh5 13.Be3 Bf6 14.Qd3 Bxc3
15.Qxc3 a6 16.e5! Qe7? [16...f5! saves the knight but 17.Qb3+ Kh8
18.Qxb7+/- wins a pawn.] 17.g4 dxe5 18.gxh5 Rd6 19.Rxd6 cxd6 20.Qc4
Kh8 21.Qg4 f5 22.Qg5 Qe6 23.b3 f4 24.Bf2 h6 25.Qg2 Rf6 26.Qg4 Qf7
27.Bh4 Rf5 28.Qg6 Qf8 29.c4 Black is down a bishop and forfeits on time 1-
0
178 - Steinitz Berlin Combo
“Combo” is a combination of things. In a restaurant a “combo” is a meal with
a drink. It chess, “combo” has other meanings.
In tactics it is a series of moves that accomplish some goal. In openings, it is

a transposition that unites more than one opening.
My game with Bob Muir was a Philidor to Scotch to Ruy Lopez Steinitz to
Berlin combo. Either of us could have varied at any point from moves two to
five and reached a different position.
We began with a Philidor Defence after 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4. Black

responded with 3...Nc6. This can be reached via a Scotch after 2.Nf3 Nc6
3.d4 d6.
Instead of playing 4.dxe5 or 4.d5, I chose 4.Bb5. This is a Ruy Lopez. A

common Steinitz continuation is either 4…exd4 or 5…exd4.
After Black played 4…Bd7 5.Nc3 Nf6 6.0-0 and we have a line in the Ruy
Lopez Berlin Variation. The normal continuation to reach that line would be
2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb4 Nf6 4.0-0 d6 5.d4 Bd7 6.Nc3.
I don’t like my idea to treat this like a King’s Indian Defence after 7.Bg5 h6
8.Bxf6 Bxf6 9.d5. Black got a strong attack here. Other seventh moves in the
notes (7.dxe5 or 7.Re1) look better.
Sawyer (2010) - Muir (1800), Williamsport, PA 14.11.2000 begins 1.e4 e5

2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 Nc6 4.Bb5 Bd7 5.Nc3 Nf6 6.0-0 Be7 [6...exd4 is more normal
here] 7.Bg5!? [7.dxe5 Nxe5 8.Bxd7+ Qxd7 9.Nd4 0-0 10.Nf5+/=; 7.Re1
exd4 8.Nxd4 0-0 9.Bxc6 bxc6 10.Bg5 h6 11.Bh4!?= and 1/2-1/2 in 18.
Sawyer - Riesenbeck, corr CCLA 1980] 7...h6 8.Bxf6 Bxf6 9.d5 Ne7 10.Qd3
Ng6 11.Ne2 0-0 12.Bxd7 Qxd7 13.c4 Rab8 14.b4 a6 15.a4 Rfe8 16.Rfc1
Qe7 17.a5 Nf4 18.Qc2 g5 19.Ng3 Kh7 20.Nf5 Qf8 21.Ne1 g4 22.Nd3 Qg8
23.Ra2 [23.Nxf4! exf4 24.e5+-] 23...Qg5 24.Rd1 h5 25.c5 h4 26.Rb2 Nxd5
27.cxd6 cxd6 [27...c6 28.Nc5+-] 28.Nxd6 Red8? [Hastens the end.] 29.Nxf7
Qg6 30.Nxd8 Qxe4 31.Ne6 h3 32.Ne1 [32.Ndc5!+- is the strongest move
here.] 32...Qxc2 33.Nxc2 Nc3 34.Rd7+ Kg6 35.Ne3 Nb5 36.Rbd2 Nd4
37.Nxd4 exd4 38.Nxg4 Re8 39.f4 Bh4 40.g3 Be7 41.Re2 1-0
179 - Fishing Pole Chess Bull
“Chess Bull”" sent me three Ruy Lopez blitz games where Black won using
the Fishing Pole variation. Part of Chess Bull's email got cut off on my end,
but basically he wrote: “I need your help to improve my chess career. What
are my mistakes in the games?”
The Fishing Pole begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 Nf6 4.0-0 Ng4. The knight
is the bait on g4. If White nibbles with 5.h3, Black can reach out the pole
with 5...h5. If White bites the bait 6.hxg4 hxg4 7.Nf3 moves away, then
Black plays 7...Qh4 with a mate threat.
We can learn from the three games of “Chess Bull” called here (A), (B) and
(C). Game (C) is the full game given at the end.
(Game A). 5.d4 exd4 6.Nxd4 and now I suggest 6...Nxd4 (Since after 6...Bc5
7.Nf5! White had a big advantage.) 7.Qxd4 c6 8.Be2 Qf6 with only a
temporary White space advantage.
(Game B). 5.d3 Bc5 6.c3 a6 7.Ba4 b5 8.Bc2 and now I suggest 8...d6. This is
better than 8...h5 which “Chess Bull” played.
(Game C). We learn the most from this last game. White avoided 4.0-0 Ng4
with 4.Qe2. After 4...Bc5 5.c3, the Fishing Pole idea with 5...Ng4 was more
risky than Black needed to be. However fishing is fun! White nibbled with
9.h3 but did not bite. Black switched bait with 14...Bg4. White took the bait
and got hooked.
Lesson: Black's dark squared bishop, active kingside knight, open h-file for
the rook, advanced g-pawn and powerful queen, force an impressive
checkmate threat. In the end, there was no defence to this “Chess Bull”
Fishing Pole Attack.
NN - Chess Bull, Fishing Poles Games, 2014 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6
3.Bb5 Nf6 4.Qe2 Bc5 5.c3 Ng4?! [Better is 5...0-0 6.0-0 when Black has
three playable lines: 6...d6, 6...Re8 or 6...Qe7] 6.0-0 d6 7.d3 [7.d4!+-] 7...a6
8.Bxc6+ bxc6 9.h3 h5 10.Nbd2 Qe7 11.Nc4 Be6 12.Ne3 Nf6 13.Bd2 Qd7
14.Ng5 Bg4 15.hxg4 hxg4 16.f3 [Again 16.d4+-] 16...g3 17.Qe1 Nh5 18.b4
Ba7 19.Qe2? [Last chance for 19.d4+/-] 19...Nf4 20.Qe1 Qe7 21.Nh3 [If
21.Qxg3 White loses the queen to a fork check after 21...Ne2+ 22.Kf2 Nxg3-
+] 21...Rxh3 22.gxh3 Qh4 0-1
180 - Fishing Pole Rocky Top
I ate a bowl of Chocolate Lucky Charms for supper, while chatting with my
wife about things that happened during the day. Finally, I finished my cereal.
She got hungry and went to cook something for herself.
Then I logged on to the Internet Chess Club for a quick game or two before
getting into the evening's later activities.
My opponent "RockyTop" and I sat down to nice game of blitz chess online.
With a handle like that, I assume he likes the famous 1967 country bluegrass
song about Tennessee.
We spent some wonderful years in that beautiful state. I even won a chess
tournament in Crossville. I like the words from the song "Rocky Top”.
In chess, life can be simple. Just play for fun! My opponent and I started with
the normal looking moves of the Ruy Lopez when I tossed out an old country
fishing pole with a Black Knight for bait in a Ruy Lopez.
White's first five moves were very good. But when he nibbled at the bait and
got hooked, I reeled in a nice catch. It worked like a lucky charm.
RockyTop (1400) - Sawyer (2021), ICC 3 2 u Internet Chess Club,

18.07.2013 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 Nf6 4.0-0 Ng4 5.h3 h5 6.hxg4?
[Better are either 6.c3 a6 7.Ba4 Bc5 8.d4 Ba7; or 6.d3 Bc5 7.c3 a6] 6...hxg4
7.Bxc6 dxc6 8.d4 gxf3 9.Qxf3 Qh4 White resigns 0-1
181 - Brian Wall's Fishing Pole
Brian Wall, the master from Colorado, is famous for many of his variations
that he has given creative names. One of Brian Wall's most well-known
openings it the Fishing Pole in the Ruy Lopez.
The Fishing Pole includes the idea of Nf6-g4 as Black. If the knight is
attacked by h2-h3, then Black continues h7-h5. This includes a trap as
presented below.
There is more to the variation than just the trap. Taking the knight is very
risky. Here is another look at the Fishing Pole in the style of Brian Wall.
Here are the most common continuations:

A. 6.d4 exd4 7.Nxd4 Bc5
B. 6.c3 a6 7.Ba4 Bc5
C. 6.d3 Bc5 7.c3 a6
I am not saying the variation is super strong or even completely sound. But it
sure is tricky.
I win a short and sweet blitz game vs the computer chess engine program
"mscp".
mscp - Sawyer, ICC 5 0 Internet Chess Club, 29.10.2011 begins 1.Nf3 Nc6
2.e4 e5 [Transposing to the Open Game.] 3.Bb5 Nf6 4.0-0 Ng4 [This looks
like the bait.] 5.h3 h5 [This is the pole.] 6.Bxc6 dxc6 7.hxg4 hxg4 8.Nxe5
[Taking the bait.] 8...Qh4 [White cannot avoid checkmate.] 9.f3 g3 10.d4
Qh1# White is checkmated 0-1
182 - Berlin Road Not Taken
The Ruy Lopez Berlin Variation has been very popular in recent years. After
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 Nf6 4.0-0 Ne4 5.d4 there is a fork in the road.
Almost everyone follows the path 5…Nd6 6.Bxc6 dxc6 7.dxe5 Nf5 8.Qxd8+
Kxd8. The road not taken is 5…Be7. This bishop move appears only about
15% of the time.
What is Black’s idea with the 5…Be7 move?

1. It develops a new piece.
2. It protects the king against an open e-file.
3. It prepares Black to castle kingside.
4. It keeps the queens on the board.
The disadvantage after 6.Qe2 Nd6 7.Bxc6 bxc6 8.dxe5 Nb7 is that Black’s
knight has been temporarily fianchettoed to b7. It takes more time to get
rearranged and untangled.
After 9.Nc3 0-0 10.Re1 Nc5 11.Be3 Ne6, theory favors White slightly.
12.Rad1 is close to equal. It looks like either 12.Nd4 or 12.Qc4 are better.
In my Ruy Lopez game against “bjewe”, I focused on the e-file. Gradually

White picked off all of Black’s kingside pawns for an endgame win.
Sawyer (2226) - bjewe (1631), ICC 20 20 u Internet Chess Club, 31.10.1999

begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 Nf6 4.0-0 Nxe4 5.d4 Be7 [More popular is
5…Nd6 6.Bxc6 dxc6 7.dxe5 Nf5 8.Qxd8+ Kxd8=] 6.Qe2 Nd6 7.Bxc6 bxc6
8.dxe5 Nb7 [8...Nf5 9.Qe4 g6 10.b3+/=] 9.Nc3 0-0 10.Re1 [10.Nd4 Bc5
11.Qd3=] 10...Nc5 11.Be3 Ba6 [11...Ne6 12.Rad1=] 12.Qd2 Rb8 13.b3 f6
[13...Ne6 14.Nd4+/=] 14.exf6 Rxf6 15.Bg5 Re6 16.Rxe6 Nxe6 17.Bxe7
Qxe7 18.Re1 Rb4 19.Ne5 Bc8 20.Ne4 Rd4 21.Qe3 c5 22.Nf3 Rb4 23.Nxc5
Qxc5 24.Qxc5 Nxc5 25.Re8+ Kf7 26.Rxc8 Rb7 27.Ne5+ Ke7 28.Nd3
[28.g3+/-] 28...Nxd3 29.cxd3 d5 30.Kf1 Kf6 31.Ke2 Ke5 32.Ke3 Kd6
33.Rd8+ Kc5? [33...Ke6 34.Rh8+/-] 34.Rd7 Kc6 35.Rxg7 Kc5 36.Rxh7
d4+ 37.Kd2 [37.Ke4+-] 37...Kb6 38.Re7 c5 39.Rxb7+ Kxb7 40.h4 Kb6
41.h5 Kb5 42.h6 Kb4 43.h7 Black resigns 1-0
3.Bb5 a6
This is the Morphy Variation.
183 - Ed Sawyer vs Tim Sawyer
This is my first recorded game vs my chess friend Edward G. Sawyer. Ed and
I are not related, but we became good friends for several years. For a time we
both lived at opposite ends of Washington County in the southeast corner of
Maine. 40-50 years ago it was one of the poorest counties in America.
Washington County was a nice place to grow up, but a difficult place to make
a living. That situation seems to still be true.
As I recall I had met Ed Sawyer previously. While I was a student at the

University of Maine (just a few years behind author Stephen King), I assisted
George Cunningham who travelled to direct a scholastic event in Washington
County. Ed Sawyer won that scholastic event. In those days I remember he
studied chess a lot. Ed Sawyer later became a USCF master.
This game was played in a four round Saturday tournament held at the
University of Maine in Orono during the next fall. I was no longer in college,
having invested more time the previous year playing chess than passing
courses. Both of us lived 100 miles or more from UMO in different
directions. This game was played in the final round.
The opening is a Ruy Lopez Exchange Variation. Instead of Bobby Fischer's

well known favorite 5.0-0, Ed chose the old 5.d4 line from the famous game
Lasker-Capablanca, St Petersburg 1914. The point was to exchange queens
and head into an endgame where the pawn structure favored White; Black
had the two bishops.
After a long struggle, I ended up winning two pieces for a rook. I was able to
guide my passed c7 pawn to become a queen on d1.
Three things I learned:

1. Watch for checks that lead to a discovered attack elsewhere.
2. Activate the king in the endgame.
3. Box the king in and then check for mate.
Edward Sawyer - Tim Sawyer, Orono, Maine (Round 4), 13.10.1973 begins
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Bxc6 dxc6 5.d4 [Lasker. More common is
5.0-0 Fischer] 5...exd4 6.Qxd4 Qxd4 7.Nxd4 Bd7 8.0-0 [Usually White also
castles queenside in this 5.d4 variation. The main line is 8.Be3 0-0-0 9.Nc3
(or 9.Nd2 Ne7 10.0-0-0) 9...Bb4 10.Nde2] 8...0-0-0 9.Nc3 Bc5 10.Nb3 Bd6
11.Be3 Ne7 12.a3 f5 [Black plays to open the position up where his two
bishops might be of more importance.] 13.Rad1 Be5 14.Bg5 Rhe8 15.exf5
Bxf5 16.Rxd8+ Kxd8 17.Rd1+ Kc8 18.Re1 Bf6 [18...Ng6!=/+] 19.Bxf6
gxf6 20.Nd4 Bg6 21.Ne4? [A tactical error, allowing the Ne4 to be pinned by
Black's protected rook. 21.g4=] 21...Nd5 22.f3 f5 [It looks like White just
loses the Ne4, but he wiggles out and makes a game of it with a knight
sacrifice check that picks up my rook.] 23.Nxf5 Bxf5 24.Nd6+ cxd6
25.Rxe8+ Kc7 26.Re2 Nf4? [26...Kd7 covering e7.] 27.Rd2? [27.Re7+ Kb6
28.Rf7 Ne2+ 29.Kf2 Bg6 30.Rf6+/- The d6-pawn falls and White might get
something going with his 3-1 kingside pawn advantage.] 27...d5 28.Kf2 Kd6
29.g4 [29.g3! and the game could go either way.] 29...Bg6 30.Kg3 Ne6 31.f4
Nc5 32.Re2 Ne4+ 33.Kh4 a5 34.f5 Bf7 35.c4? [Hastens the end, but Black
was better anyway. 35.b4 a4 36.g5 Ke5 37.Kg4 b6=/+] 35...Ke5 36.cxd5
cxd5 37.Rc2 d4 38.Rc7 Bd5 39.Re7+ Kd6 40.Rxh7 d3 41.Rh8 d2 42.Rd8+
Ke5 43.Re8+ Kf4 44.Rxe4+ Bxe4 45.f6 d1Q 46.h3 Bg6! 47.f7 Qe1# 0-1
184 - Ruy Lopez Exchange 5.0-0
Throughout my career, my most successful 1st move based on winning
percentage and performance rating has been between 1.e4 and 1.d4. My
winning percentage is higher with 1.e4.
I tend to play 1.d4 more against higher rated opponents and 1.e4 against
lower rated opponents. I like both moves. Each game I just have to pick one.
I played a three minute blitz game in the Ruy Lopez 3...a6 4.Bxc6 dxc6 5.0-0
which was made popular by Bobby Fischer in my early chess years.
Usually I played 4.Ba4. At that moment I remembered that my performance

rating was temporarily slightly higher with 4.Bxc6.
I did not really know Spanish Exchange theory deeply. I varied from the
recommended 7.Nxd4 to play my 7.Qxd4.
I swapped queens and headed to an ending where I had an extra kingside

pawn. That seemed promising to me.
On second thought, 7.Nxd4 looks better. That’s what I hope to play if I get
into this position again.
Sawyer - joe1314, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 14.09.2012 begins 1.e4 e5

2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Bxc6 dxc6 5.0-0 f6 6.d4 exd4 [Or 6...Bg4] 7.Qxd4
[Play usually continues 7.Nxd4 c5 8.Nb3 Qxd1 9.Rxd1] 7...Qxd4 [7...Bd6!?
8.Be3 Ne7 9.Nbd2 Be6 10.Rfd1] 8.Nxd4 Bc5 [8...Bd7! followed by castling
queenside gives Black a good game.] 9.Be3 Ne7 10.c3 Kf7 11.Nd2 Bg4
12.f3 Be6 13.Kf2 Rad8 14.Nxe6?? [I felt like I should play 14.Rad1 but I
did not see the tactic in this 3 minute blitz game.] 14...Bxe3+? [Black also
misses 14...Rxd2+! winning at least a piece.] 15.Kxe3 Kxe6 16.Rad1 Ng6
17.Nb3 b6 18.Nd4+ Kd6 19.Nf5+ Kc5 20.Nxg7 Ne5? 21.b3 [I play well
enough to win from here on out, but it would have been nicer to see 21.Ne6+
Kc4 22.Nxd8+-] 21...Rdg8 22.Ne6+ Kb5 23.Nxc7+ Ka5 24.g3 h5 25.Ne6
h4 26.g4 Ng6 27.Nf4 Ne5 28.Nd3 Ng6 29.a3 h3 30.Nb2 c5 31.b4+ [Missed
a mate in 3 with 31.Nc4+! Kb5 32.Rd6! Rb8 33.a4#] 31...Kb5 32.Rd6 cxb4
33.cxb4 Nh4 34.Rfd1 Ng2+ 35.Kf2 Rc8 36.R1d5+ 1-0
185 - Penullar in Modern Steinitz
Peter Mcgerald Penullar played in a Ruy Lopez thematic match. The starting
position was predetermined through eight moves.
The Steinitz is the variation with 3…d6. The Modern Steinitz is the
improvement with first 3…a6 4.Ba4 and then 4…d6.
This line contains one of the classic Noah's Ark traps. Black can trap and win
the White Bb3 with the a6 / b5 / c4 pawns.
All else being equal, in the opening a minor piece is always worth more than
two pawns. In the middlegame the pawns become more valuable as they
advance.
For whatever reason in this game, Black chooses not to win the bishop, thus
allowing an even game. However, after this Black went on to outplay his
opponent for a nice victory.
petemaric - penullar, CHRISTIAN CHESS WORLD, 2012, Match #65

Chess.com, 13.02.2012 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 d6 5.d4 b5
6.Bb3 Nxd4 7.Nxd4 exd4 8.Qxd4 c5 [Thematic Game - This is the starting
position.] 9.Qd5 Ra7? [This lets White off the hook. Normal is 9...Be6
10.Qc6+ Bd7 11.Qd5 c4 12.Bxc4 bxc4 13.Qxc4 Nf6 14.Nc3 Be7 15.0-0 0-0-
+ when White has only two pawns for the bishop.] 10.0-0 [10.c4!= saves the
bishop and gives White at least an equal game.] 10...Be6 11.Qc6+ Qd7?
[11...Bd7! 12.Qd5 c4-/+ again winning a piece for two pawns.] 12.Qxd7+
Kxd7 13.Bxe6+ fxe6 14.Be3 Rc7 15.Nd2 Nf6 16.a4 b4 17.b3 Be7 [The
position is equal.] 18.Rad1 Rd8 19.Bf4 Kc6 20.f3 Nh5 21.Be3 d5 22.exd5+
[22.g4 Nf6=] 22...exd5 23.Rc1? [Better would have been 23.g4 Nf6 24.Bf4
Bd6 25.Bxd6 Rxd6 with chances for both sides.] 23...Nf6 [23...Bf6! 24.g4
Re7-/+] 24.Bg5 h6 25.Bxf6 [White could try 25.Bf4 Bd6 26.Bxd6 Rxd6=/+]
25...Bxf6 26.Nb1 Re7 27.Rce1 Rde8 28.Rxe7 Rxe7 [From here Black goes
on to push his queenside pawn majority to victory.] 29.g3 Re2 30.Rc1 Bb2
[Or 30...Bd4+! 31.Kf1 Rxh2-+] 31.Rd1 Rxc2 32.Nd2 Rc1 33.Rxc1 Bxc1
34.Nf1 c4 35.bxc4 dxc4 36.Kf2 b3 37.Ke2 b2 0-1
186 - Workman Makes Work
The Ray Haines Ruy Lopez vs Bradley Workman in the 2016 Maine State
Championship raises possibilities to offer coaching advice. Ray was
interested in what I thought about his game. Here I pretend that he asked me
three questions. My answers attempt to offer help. Comments from Haines
are in quotations.
“I decided to play a gambit line in the Ruy Lopez, which has worked well for
me in the past. He did not take the gambit pawn.”
Question 1: What about my choice of opening?
1.e4 and 1.d4 are good for you. You play well in active positions. Ruy Lopez
is a good choice if you do not want to memorize a lot.
After 6 moves White had not moved anything on the queenside. Ruy Lopez is
like a slow tank. It cannot be hurried, and it cannot be stopped. Moves like
7.d3 or 7.Re1 seem better with d4 later.
That gambit made life easier for Black. His first plan would last to about
move nine. After six, he had moved three pieces. His plan might include Bc5,
d6 and 0-0. After those moves it becomes more difficult for Black to avoid
mistakes which give you targets.
Your rush to quickly open the center gave his developed pieces something
good to do. So he does not need to find a plan. All he needs to do is attack
before you develop.
“I did not check his rating before the game started. He did things, which may
have distracted me a little. I would make my move. He would look at it. Then
he would get up from the table without making a move. He would either
leave the playing room or walk around looking at the other games. He then
would come back to the table and sit down, but before making his move he
would look at the floor. He did this with the first 10 or 15 moves.”
Question 2: How should I react to my opponent’s behavior?
You knew that he was not one of the masters rated above you in this event. It
sounds to me like his were normal nervous actions of a young man who does
not play in tournaments very often. As much as possible, I suggest you ignore
him. Analyze on his time.
“My first small mistake was on move 12… I helped him develop his king
bishop… The next mistake should have cost me the game because I missed
the fact that he had a double pin on my queen bishop. This let him win a
piece… The game did not end at move 51 but because of the time trouble I
did not write down the right moves. The game went on for 20 more moves…
We traded off all of the pieces at the end, which forced a draw.”
Question 3: What do you think about how I handled the game?
The gambit chosen jump started Black’s game. Database results slightly favor
Black in this line. I agree with your assessment of move 12. His pin of your
bishop on move 19 was a challenge.
Your opponent appears to be an improving player who had the better position
throughout most of the game. He missed several chances for advantage.
Workman made you work for 70 moves. You used all your time. Considering
this, a draw is not that bad.
Haines - Workman (1638), Maine State Championship (3), 09.04.2016

begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 b5 5.Bb3 Bb7 6.0-0 Nf6 7.d4
[Many players prefer the slower build up with 7.d3=; or to prepare d4 with
7.Re1 Bc5 8.c3 d6 9.d4=] 7...Nxd4 8.Nxd4 exd4 9.e5 Ne4 10.c3 d3 [Maybe
best is 10...Nc5=; Interesting but risky is 10...dxc3 11.Qf3 Nd6!=] 11.Qxd3
d5?! [11...Nc5!=] 12.exd6?! [12.Nd2+/=] 12...Bxd6 13.Qe2 0-0 14.Nd2 Nc5
[Black has a strong attack with 14...Qh4!-/+] 15.Qg4 Nd3 16.Nf3 Ne5?
[16...Qf6=/+] 17.Nxe5 Bxe5 18.Bg5 Qd3 19.Rad1 Qg6 20.Qh4? [20.f4!
Qb6+ 21.Rf2+/=] 20...h6 21.f4 hxg5 22.fxg5 Qh7? [Black returns the favor.
22...Bd6-+] 23.Bxf7+! Rxf7 24.Qxh7+ Kxh7 25.Rxf7 Re8 26.h4 [26.Rdd7
Kg6 27.Rfe7 Rxe7 28.Rxe7 Bd6=/+] 26...Kg6 27.Rfd7 [27.Rdd7 Rh8-/+]
27...Bc6 [27...Bg3!-+] 28.R7d3 Re6 [28...Kh5-/+] 29.Kf1 Rd6 30.b3 Rxd3
[30...Kh5 31.Rxd6 cxd6-/+] 31.Rxd3 Kf5 32.Kf2 Be4 33.Rd7 Ke6 34.Rd8
Bxc3 35.Re8+ Kf5 36.h5 Bd4+ 37.Ke2 Bxg2 [Black has a better endgame
after 37...Bc6 38.Re7 Kxg5 39.Rxc7 Bxg2-/+] 38.h6 gxh6 [Much stronger is
38...Kg6!= ] 39.gxh6 Be4 40.h7 Bb1 41.h8Q [41.a3+/-] 41...Bxh8 42.Rxh8
Bxa2 43.Rh3 Ke5 44.Kd2 Bb1 45.Rc3 Kd6 46.Rh3 Kc5 47.Kc3 b4+
48.Kb2 Bg6 49.Rh6 Bd3 50.Rh4 Kb6 [50...c6=] 51.Rh5 [White could pick
off a pawn here, and maybe he did during the next 20 moves. 51.Rxb4+ Bb5
52.Rh4+/=] 1/2-1/2
187 - Haines Draws Weinstein
Ray Haines and I played IM Norman Weinstein when he came to Maine for a
simultaneous exhibition. This event was held in Waterville, Maine. Friday
night before a weekend tournament.
Five of us travelled together from northern Maine. We split a motel room

together for the weekend. I believe the young man Ray slept on the floor.
Last I knew, Haines still had his original scoresheet for this game. Ray wrote:
“Here is a game you asked me for earlier. I had trouble finding it. It is a game
score which I did not wish to lose. I was unrated at that time. I had played
less than 16 rated games at that time. This is the game with Norman
Weinstein. The computer says he made a mistake on move 19. He should
have play QRXP and would have had the better game.”
This game is a Ruy Lopez. Ray Haines played the Modern Steinitz (4...d6)
which he was fond of in those days. Black sometimes wins material with the
Noah's Ark Trap.
Weinstein - Haines, Waterville, ME simul, Board 7, 1974 begins 1.e4 e5

2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 d6 5.0-0 [5.d4 b5 6.Bb3 Nxd4 7.Nxd4 exd4
8.Bd5 (Not 8.Qxd4? c5 9.Qd5 Be6 10.Qc6+ Bd7 11.Qd5 c4-+ Noah's Ark
Trap) 8...Rb8 9.Qxd4=; More common is 5.c3] 5...Bd7 6.d4 b5 7.Bb3 Nxd4
8.Nxd4 exd4 9.c3 Nf6 [After 9...dxc3 10.Nxc3 Nf6 11.f4+/= the tactical
skills of an international master are likely to shine.] 10.cxd4 c5 11.dxc5 dxc5
12.e5 c4 13.exf6 cxb3 14.Qe2+ Be6 15.Nc3 Qxf6 16.axb3 Be7 17.Nxb5 0-0
18.Nc7 Rab8 19.Nxe6 [It is natural to head for an endgame with an extra
pawn, especially in a simul. However White had better chances in the
middlegame after 19.Rxa6! Bc5 20.Nxe6 fxe6 21.Rxe6 Qf7 22.Re5 Bd4
23.Re4 Bf6 24.b4+-] 19...Qxe6 20.Qxe6 fxe6 21.Rxa6 Rxb3 22.Rxe6
[White could probably win a bishop ending and certainly a pawn ending, but
with rooks on the board, the game is very drawish.] 22...Bf6 23.Rd1
[23.Re2!?] 23...Bxb2 24.Be3 Bf6 25.g3 Rfb8 26.Rd7 R3b4 27.Ra6 Rc8
28.Raa7 Rb5 29.Bd4 Bxd4 30.Rxd4 Rg5 31.Rdd7 h6 32.h4 Rg6 33.Kh2
h5 34.f4= [34.Ra5! Rf6 35.f4 g6 36.Raa7+/= White might swap off a set of
rooks, but the game is still drawn as long as Black keeps one of his rooks on
the board.] 34...Rc3 35.Rd5 Rcxg3 36.Rxh5 Rg2+ 1/2-1/2
188 - My Arrogant Play Lost
Ray Haines is younger than me, but he is one of my oldest friends. We first
met in the state high school chess championship in 1972 held at the
University of Maine. My record in that event was +3 =1 -1; Ray was one of
the three players I beat. When my family moved near his family, Ray Haines
looked me up.
There were hardly any chess players around, so Ray Haines and I got
together several times to play and talk chess. We played a lot. Later I moved
away, but Ray Haines and I kept in touch.
Since I was a couple years older, I had moments of arrogance that sometimes
comes with youth. There is no way I should lose to a younger player. But
darn it, Ray was about as good as I was. Also, he was more aggressive than I.
Here is one of our early games. Good play led to a draw. I avoided that and
lost.

3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 d6 5.c3 Bd7 6.0-0 Nge7 7.d4 Ng6 8.Be3 Be7 9.Qe2!?N
[9.Nbd2 0-0 10.Re1 Bf6 11.d5 Nce7] 9...h6 10.Rd1 Bg5 11.Nbd2 Bxe3
12.Qxe3 0-0 [Black has equalized.] 13.Nf1 Qe7 [Black has 13...Nxd4!
14.cxd4 Bxa4 15.b3 Bc6 At first glance e5 is weak, but 16.dxe5 Re8!=/+]
14.Ng3 Rad8 [14...Nxd4=/+] 15.Bc2 Qf6 16.Nh5 Qe7 17.d5 [Finally.]
17...Nb8 18.b4 b6 [18...f5!?] 19.h3 [19.Ng3+/=] 19...f5! 20.exf5 Bxf5
21.Bxf5 Rxf5 22.g4? [22.Ng3!+/=] 22...Rf7 [The half-open f-file is a big
advantage for Black.] 23.Nd2 Nf4 24.Nxf4 Rxf4 25.Re1 Rdf8 26.f3 Qh4
27.Kg2 Nd7 28.Qf2 Qxf2+ 29.Kxf2 Nf6 30.c4 Nd7? [30...b5!-+] 31.Re4 g5
32.Kg3? [32.Rc1=] 32...Nf6?! [32...b5!=/+] 33.Rxf4 exf4+ 34.Kf2 Re8
35.Re1? [35.a4=] 35...Rxe1 36.Kxe1 Kf7? [36...b5!=/+] 37.Ke2 Nd7 38.Ne4
Nf6 39.Kd3 Ke7 40.Nxf6 Kxf6 [Reaching a drawn position.] 41.Ke4 b5
42.Kd3 Ke7 43.Kc3 Kf6 44.Kd4 Ke7 45.c5 Kf6 46.a3 Kg6 47.Kc3 Kf6
48.Kd4 Kg6 49.cxd6 cxd6 50.Ke4 Kf6 51.Kd4 Kg6 52.Kd3 Kf6 53.Ke4
Kg6 54.h4?? [Frustrated with the draw, I miscalculate and throw the game
away. Ugh!! 54.Kd4=] 54...gxh4 55.Kxf4 h5! 56.Ke3 [If 56.g5 h3 57.Kg3
Kxg5 58.Kxh3 Kf4-+ and the outside passed pawn wins.] 56...hxg4 57.fxg4
Kg5 58.Kf3 h3 59.Kg3 h2 60.Kxh2 Kxg4 61.Kg2 Kf4 62.Kf2 Ke4 63.Ke2
Kxd5 64.Kd3 Ke5 65.Ke3 d5 66.Kd3 d4 67.Kd2 Ke4 68.Ke2 d3+ 69.Kd2
Kd4 70.Kd1 Kc3 71.Kc1 Kb3 0-1
3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6
This leads to common lines in the Ruy Lopez.
189 - Ruy Lopez Move by Move
In the Ruy Lopez, the 5.d3 line is suggested as one possibility in the
Everyman book “The Ruy Lopez: Move by Move” by Neil McDonald. While
the book covers all major ideas in Ruy Lopez (also called the Spanish
Opening), Neil McDonald notes that 5.d3 as "A plan to get you started with
the Ruy Lopez".
My game below reminds me of the rich ideas in this popular opening. It

combines strategy with tactics. The game is a three minute blitz game with
both of us being rated over 2000.
Most of the moves were good, but I made two poor moves. First I missed the
winning line 27...Kh8! and then in time trouble I missed the drawing line
41...Qa7+. But all in all I was happy with my play, despite the loss. My
opponent played good moves too.
DrMenghy - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 14.10.2012 begins 1.e4

e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.d3 [This move 5.d3 is trendy, but much
more common is 5.0-0] 5...b5 [Another approach is 5...d6 6.c3 g6 7.0-0 Bg7]
6.Bb3 d6 7.c3 Be7 8.0-0 Na5 [The main line is 8...0-0 9.Re1 Na5 10.Bc2 c5
11.Nbd2] 9.Bc2 c5 10.a4 Bd7 11.Re1 0-0 12.Nbd2 Re8 13.Nf1 g6 14.h3
Qc7 15.Ne3 Bf8 16.axb5 axb5 17.d4 exd4 18.cxd4 Bc6 19.d5 Bd7 20.Nd2
b4 21.Qf3 Bg7 22.Nec4 Nxc4 23.Rxa8 Rxa8 24.Nxc4 Bb5 25.Ne3 [This
helps Black. Better is 25.e5 Re8=] 25...Nd7 26.Ng4 Ne5 27.Nf6+ Bxf6?
[Here I missed the subtle winning line 27...Kh8! 28.Qf4 Qe7 29.Ng4 b3
30.Bb1 Ra1 31.Bd2 Nxg4 32.Qxg4 Bxb2-+] 28.Qxf6 Qd8 29.Qf4?
[29.Qxd8+ Rxd8 30.Bg5+/=] 29...c4 [There is one last chance to make use of
the knight fork on d3: 29...b3! 30.Bb1 Ra1 31.Bd2 Bd3 32.Bxd3 Nxd3
33.Rxa1 Nxf4-/+] 30.Qg3 b3 31.Bb1 Ra1 32.Bd2 Nd3 33.Bxd3 Rxe1+
34.Bxe1 cxd3 35.Bc3 f6 [35...Qc7=] 36.Qe3 Qe7 37.f4 Kf7 38.Qd4 h5
39.Kf2 h4 40.Ke3 Ba6 41.Qb4 [White can pick off a pawn with 41.Kf3 Bb5
42.Qb4 Qd7 43.Qxb3+/=] 41...Qb7? [The fatal blunder. Black could draw
with 41...Qa7+ 42.Bd4 Qc7= due to the threat of ...Qc1+!] 42.Qxd6 Qa7+
43.Kf3 d2 44.Qxf6+ Ke8 45.Bxd2 1-0
190 - Arkhangelsk 5…b5
Arkhangelsk Variation of the Ruy Lopez begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6
4.Ba4 Nf6 5.0-0 b5 6.Bb3 Bb7. This variation is named after a city in Russia
near the White Sea that is about 1200 kilometers north of Moscow and east of
Finland.
The strategy in this line is for White to develop his kingside first. He only
starts on the queenside later. In contrast, Black develops the queenside. Black
delays castling until White shows his plan.
The variation had been played in a few notable games in chess history, but
White usually won. Schlechter beat Chigorin in 1897. Capablanca beat Dale
in 1919. Kotov beat Keres in 1950.
In the 1960s the line finally became popular. Malich, Vasiukov, and Bagirov
all played the Arkhangelsk several times as Black.
One of those early proponents was the energetic attacker Rashid

Nezhmetdinov. He played the line against many famous players in the early
1960s, defeating opening theoretician Alexey Suetin.
I played Tom Elliott in a Ruy Lopez. He always seemed to have my number.

White started well enough, but the idea of playing the bishop to Bg3 instead
of Be3 did not work well.
The losing move was the lemon 21.f3? You might want to call that a
Blackmar-Diemer Gambit delayed way too long. I was outplayed. Tom
Elliott deserved the victory that he earned.
Sawyer (1969) - Elliott (2144), corr APCT EMN-A-1, 05.12.1995 begins

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.0-0 b5 6.Bb3 Bb7 7.Re1 [This is
most popular. Also good are 7.d3 and 7.c3] 7...Bc5 8.c3 d6 9.d4 Bb6 10.Bg5
[Best seems to be 10.Be3 0-0 11.d5=] 10...h6 11.Bh4 g5 12.Bg3 0-0
13.Qd3!? [13.a4 exd4 14.cxd4 Re8=] 13...Nh5 14.Bd5 Nxg3 15.hxg3 Qf6
16.Nbd2 [16.g4!?=] 16...Rae8 17.Nb3 exd4 18.Bxc6 Bxc6 19.cxd4 Re7
20.Nfd2 Rfe8 21.f3? [21.Rac1 Bb7-/+] 21...d5 [21...a5!-+ makes d4 hard to
defend.] 22.Kh2 [22.Rad1 dxe4 23.Nxe4 Qg6-/+] 22...Qg6 23.g4 [23.Nc5
dxe4 24.fxe4 Bxc5 25.dxc5 Rd7-+] 23...dxe4 24.fxe4 Bxe4 25.Nxe4 Rxe4
26.Rxe4 Rxe4 27.Qd1 [27.Rf1 Rxg4 28.Qxg6+ fxg6-+] 27...Qd6+ 28.Kh1
Bxd4 [Or 28...h5-+] 29.Nxd4 Qxd4 30.Qxd4 Rxd4 31.Rc1 Rc4 0-1
191 - Hastings h-file Mate
Do you know the famous opening trap I call the "Hastings h-file Mate"? This
pattern can be reached from many openings.
Memory work gives you a great practical edge when you can choose in
advance how you wish to play vs the most popular early moves. Years ago I
memorized all 14 moves of this game.
The mate is illustrated in the Ruy Lopez line played at Hastings in 1919. A
generation earlier, the line was played in Maroczy - Marco, but Black played
more solidly, not allowing the mate.
A.D. Clark pointed out that this trap is Anastasia’s Mate. He is correct. It is
an Anastasia on the h-file, my "Hastings h-file Mate".
This checkmate theme is a variation of the back rank rook mate. Here the
mate is done on the h-file with the help of a knight and queen sacrifice, prior
to the rook mate. Here's what to look for:
Black has castled kingside with a normal Rf8, Kg8 and pawns on f7, g7 and
h7; however the typical Nf6 has moved away and does not cover h7. Ready
for the combination?
White begins with 1.Ne7+. It drives the Black king from g8 to h8. Then
2.Qxh7+ forces Black to capture Kxh7. Finally White slides over to the h-file
for mate: 3.Rh5#. Black's king has no moves since he has a pawn on g7 and
the Ne7 covers g8 and g6.
Berryman - Straat, Hastings 1919 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6

4.Ba4 Nf6 5.0-0 Nxe4 6.Re1 [The Open Ruy Lopez is almost always played
6.d4 b5 7.Bb3 d5 8.dxe5 Be6] 6...Nc5 7.Nc3 [7.Bxc6 dxc6 8.Nxe5 leaves
White with a better pawn structure while Black as two bishops.] 7...Nxa4
8.Nxe5 Nxe5? [8...Be7 9.Nd5 0-0 10.Nxc6 dxc6 11.Nxe7+ Kh8 12.Qh5 Be6
13.Rxe6 fxe6 14.Ng6+ Kg8 15.Nxf8 Qxf8 16.Qg4 Nb6 17.Qxe6+ Kh8 18.b3
Re8 19.Ba3 Qxf2+ 20.Kxf2 Rxe6 21.Re1 Rxe1 22.Kxe1 1/2-1/2. Maroczy-
Marco, Budapest 1896] 9.Rxe5+ Be7 10.Nd5 0-0 11.Nxe7+ Kh8 12.Qh5 d6
[This allows the thematic mate, but there is no playable defense. 12...g6
13.Qh4 and White is going to win a lot of material. 12...h6 13.d3 and White
threatens to rip open Black's kingside with 14.Bxh6 winning.] 13.Qxh7+
Kxh7 14.Rh5# 1-0
192 - Tricky Open Ruy Riga
The Open Ruy Lopez Riga Variation is tricky for club players. White
sacrifices his e4 pawn and d4 pawn for an attack.
White threatens to win a piece. Black has a counter attack. My only prior
game against the Riga was in 1979. My opponent played 8…Bd7. I got his
knight and won the game in 45 moves.
This variation gets its name from a correspondence match between the city of
Berlin in Germany and the city of Riga in Latvia. Black won an ending where
White had an extra knight while Black had three extra kingside pawns.
I played in several an ICCF Master Class events in the 1980s. These were
events that you played in to become a master or to compete in the World
Championship cycle.
That cycle used to take about 10 years of continuous winning. Some

grandmaster would win, but we all had our own hopes.
One of my opponents was Albert Maier from Austria. In 1994 Maier reached
his peak ICCF rating of 2152.
Our 1984 ICCF game was an Open Ruy Lopez Riga Variation. Because it
was postal chess, we had access to chess books.
We followed the original Berlin vs Riga game for 17 moves. That game
continued 18.g5 Rag8 19.Bd4 h6 20.Bf6+ Kf7 21.Bxh8 Rxh8 21.Rd1 hxg5+
22.Kg2 Kf6. Instead, I varied with 18.Kg3.
In our game I managed to get a good position. I increased my advantage and

outplayed him. I won as White in 25 moves.
Sawyer - Maier, corr ICCF 1984 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4
Nf6 5.0-0 Nxe4 6.d4 exd4!? [The main line is 6...b5 7.Bb3 d5 8.dxe5 Be6=]
7.Re1 d5 8.Nxd4 Bd6 9.Nxc6 Bxh2+ 10.Kh1 Qh4 11.Rxe4+ dxe4 12.Qd8+
Qxd8 13.Nxd8+ Kxd8 14.Kxh2 Be6 15.Be3 f5 16.Nc3 [16.c3+/= Houdini;
16.Nd2+/= Komodo] 16...Ke7 17.g4 g6 18.Kg3 b5 19.Bb3 h5 20.Nd5+
Bxd5 21.Bxd5 h4+ [21...c6 22.Bc5+ Kd7 23.Bf7+/-] 22.Kh3 Rae8 23.Rd1
fxg4+ 24.Kxg4 h3 [24...Rh5 25.Bxe4+-] 25.Bc5+ 1-0
193 - Vehre Open Ruy Lopez
John Vehre, Jr. is a USCF National Master from Ohio. In the early 1980s we
played three short postal chess games. One was in CCLA and the other two
were in APCT.
I only had White in one of our games. We played an Open Ruy Lopez after
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.0-0 Nxe4.
This famous variation had been played many times in the world
championship at Baguio City in the Philippines. Always Anatoly Karpov had
the White pieces and Victor Korchnoi played Black.
Vehre and I followed the main line 6.d4 b5 7.Bb3 d5 8.dxe5 Be6. This is the
only time I ever reached this position against a human as White. I did play it
twice as Black and scored a split 1-1. Also I tested the line a few times vs
computers.
There are four popular ninth moves for White. I chose the most popular 9.c3
which is the one that has the lowest winning percentage at 54%. The other
three moves are 9.Nbd2 (61%), 9.Be3 (61%), and 9.Qe2 (58%) according to
my database.
After 9.c3 Black scores well with my opponent’s choice 9…Bc5. On move
11, John Vehre played the line 11…f5!?
Many players sacrifice a knight with 11…Nxf2. This is known as the

Dilworth Variation. It contains many traps, but we did not go there. A critical
Dilworth line is given in the notes below.
John Vehre and I agreed to a draw. In the final position, critical lines lead to
Black giving a perpetual check or repeating moves.
Sawyer (2050) - Vehre (2150), corr APCT 1980 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6
3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.0-0 Nxe4 6.d4 b5 7.Bb3 d5 8.dxe5 Be6 9.c3 Bc5
10.Nbd2 0-0 11.Bc2 f5!? [The Dilworth variation goes 11...Nxf2 12.Rxf2 f6
13.exf6 Bxf2+ 14.Kxf2 Qxf6 15.Nf1 Ne5 16.Be3 Rae8 17.Bc5 Nxf3 18.gxf3
Rf7 19.Kg2 = 1/2-1/2 in 47. Sofia Polgar - Jan Votava, Singapore 1990.]
12.Nb3 Bb6 13.Nfd4 Nxd4 14.Nxd4 Bxd4 15.Qxd4 [15.cxd4 +/=] 15...c5
16.Qd1 f4 17.f3 Ng5 18.a4 b4 19.h4 [19.cxb4 +/-] 19...Nh3+ 20.gxh3 Qxh4
21.Rf2 1/2-1/2
3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.0-0 Be7
This is the Closed Ruy Lopez.
194 - Haines Wins Tim Bishop
Ray Haines wins vs the USCF rated Master Tim Bishop. Ray wrote that the
time control was 40 moves in 60 minutes.
Tim Bishop was one of the stronger players in Maine at that time. At first
Ray thought he was a master. Later Tim Bishop wrote me to thank me and
note that he never quite made it to master yet.
Looking up Timothy G Bishop, he had not been active in recent years. His
last tournament was the Maine Closed Championship. I noticed that Ralph
Townsend won. That reminds me of 1972.
In September 1972 Ralph Townsend played a simultaneous exhibition at the

University of Maine against a bunch of us who were just beginning to play.
That month the Spassky - Fischer match ended. Ralph played the King's
Gambit against me. I think it was the first time I had ever seen a King’s
Gambit.
I got crushed. After the event, George Cunningham said that Ralph was a
positional player who was trying to change and play sharper chess. His
tactical style sure worked against me!
Now back to the Ray Haines-Tim Bishop, Ruy Lopez contest below. White
sacrificed a pawn for open lines. This in turn led to tactical threats with pins
and forks. Black hung a queen.
Haines - Bishop, Univ. of Maine at Orono, 20.05.1983 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3

Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.0-0 Be7 6.d4 [Ray knows that 6.Re1 is the main
line, but he likes the open tactics of 6.d4.] 6...b5?! [The standard continuation
is 6...exd4 7.Re1 b5 8.Bb3 d6 9.Bd5 Nxd5 10.exd5 Ne5 11.Nxd4 0-0 and
Black has a good game.] 7.Bb3 d6 8.c3 Bg4 9.h3 Bxf3 10.Qxf3 exd4
11.Qd1 [An interesting try is 11.Qg3!? 0-0 12.Bh6 Ne8 13.Bd5 Bh4
14.Qf4+/=] 11...dxc3 12.Nxc3 0-0 13.f4 Qd7?! [13...Na5 14.Bc2 c6=]
14.Be3 b4? [14...Rfe8] 15.Nd5! Nxe4? [After this Black is lost. He must deal
with the Nc6 problem. 15...Na5 16.Ba4+/=] 16.Rc1 Ng3 17.Rf3 Bh4 18.Ba4
Nd4? 19.Bxd7 Nde2+ 20.Kh2 1-0
195 - Hasty Black Castle 6...0-0
Chess has many types of traps. There are opening traps. This game features
the trap of a minor piece right out of the opening.
The Ruy Lopez has so many moves that we take for granted. But there is a
tactical or strategical reason for each one of them.
My chess game against Chester Nygren in American Postal Chess

Tournaments was a Closed Ruy Lopez. All was normal for the first five
moves.
By move six, Black had developed both knights, one bishop, and castled.
Wait. Black castled on move 6 instead of moves 7 or 8? Yes indeed. How
does 6…0-0 affect the position?
Let’s think about it. Fairly normal move is 6…b5 7.Bb3 0-0. Why does Black
chase away the White bishop? Because White has a threat. Since White has
castled and protected his e4 pawn, he can capture Black’s e5 pawn. White
wins a pawn.
Play continued 7.Bxc6 dxc6 8.Nxe5 Bc5 9.Nf3 Re8 10.d4 Ba7!? The
placement of this bishop is active but risky.
White challenges the knight with 11.e5 Nd5 12.c4 Ne7 and now 13.c5.
Suddenly Black’s dark squared bishop is buried alive.
He tried to claw his way out of the casket with 13…b6 14.b4 a5 15.a3 bxc5
16.bxc5. In desperation the bishop sacrifices himself for a brief final gasp of
fresh air with 16…Bxc5. White picked up the piece with 17.dxc5. Checkmate
followed ten moves later.
Sawyer (2000) - Nygren (1500), corr APCT 1979 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6
3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.0-0 Be7 6.Re1 0-0?! [Black sacrifices the e5 pawn.
Correct is 6...b5] 7.Bxc6 dxc6 [7...bxc6 8.Nxe5 Bb7 9.d4+/=] 8.Nxe5 Bc5
[8...Re8 9.d3+/=] 9.Nf3 Re8 [9...Bg4 10.h3+/=] 10.d4 Ba7!? 11.e5
[11.Qd3!?+/=] 11...Nd5 12.c4 Ne7 13.c5 b6 14.b4 a5 15.a3 bxc5 16.bxc5
Bxc5 [Black was desperate to get something for his trapped bishop. White
was also winning after 16...Bg4 17.Nbd2 Rb8 18.h3 Be6 19.Rb1+-] 17.dxc5
Qd5 18.Be3 Ng6 19.Nc3 Qxd1 20.Rexd1 Bg4 21.Bd4 Bxf3 22.gxf3 Nxe5
23.Bxe5 Rxe5 24.Rd7 Rxc5 25.Rad1 Rxc3 26.Rd8+ Rxd8 27.Rxd8# 1-0
196 - Aggressive Ruy Lopez
Bob Muir was a frequent 1.e4 player. He played it over half the time as
White. As Black, I tried many different defenses.
At the time of this game our club did not have many 1.e4 e5 players. Here we
head down an old main line of the Ruy Lopez.
I was familiar with the popular 8.c3 0-0 9.h3 lines, but Bob Muir surprised
me with 8.d4. My 8...exd4 was good.
Even better would have been 8...Nxd4! This could have given me a chance to
play a possible Noah's Ark Trap.
White got carried away with his central advances with 9.e5? This was too
much of a good thing. Black won material.
Muir (1800) - Sawyer (2010), Williamsport, PA 10.1998 begins 1.e4 e5

2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.0-0 Be7 6.Re1 b5 7.Bb3 d6 8.d4 [White
usually prepares this advance with 8.c3] 8...exd4 [8...Nxd4 9.Nxd4 exd4
10.c3 (Not 10.Qxd4? Noah's Ark Trap 10...c5-+ and Black's a material.)
10...dxc3 11.Nxc3 0-0=/+] 9.e5? [Better would be 9.Bd5 Nxd5 10.exd5 Ne5
11.Nxd4 0-0=] 9...dxe5 10.Nxe5 Nxe5 11.Rxe5 0-0 12.Bf4?! [Or 12.Bg5 c5-
+] 12...Bd6 13.Qf3 Bg4 0-1
197 - Marshall Attack 9...e4!?
Surprise your opponent. Play the Ruy Lopez Marshall Attack. You have a
choice. You could rattle off 12-15 main line moves quickly. Or you could try
9...e4.
Paul Shannon played this idea against me in 1980. This was back before
computer chess engine software programs played at master levels. ChessBase
had not been invented. We were on our own.
Fortunately for me this was a postal chess game. We took about one week
between each move. We both had other chess games going at the same time. I
was not rushed in making my moves.
During 1980 I was busy raising a family, moving far away to another state,
and changing jobs. Still there was time for chess!
The time tested main line 9...Nxd5. Another possible variation is 9...e4!?
That is probably not quite as strong. Otherwise many grandmasters would
play it to avoid the beaten pathways.
Unbalanced variations carry the possibility that you can outplay your
opponent in sharp tactics. This time the complications of the position settled
in my favor.
Sawyer (2050) - Shannon (2050), corr APCT 1980 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3
Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.0-0 Be7 6.Re1 b5 7.Bb3 0-0 8.c3 d5 9.exd5 e4!?
[The main line 9...Nxd5 10.Nxe5 Nxe5 11.Rxe5 c6= is the time tested way to
play.] 10.dxc6 exf3 11.d4 fxg2 12.Qf3 Be6 [12...a5!?] 13.Bxe6 fxe6 14.Rxe6
Nd5 15.Qxg2 Bh4 16.Re5 [16.f3+/-] 16...Bxf2+ [16...Ne7!?] 17.Kh1 Ne7?
[17...Nf4 18.Bxf4 Rxf4 19.Nd2+/-] 18.Bg5 Rf7 19.Nd2 Bxd4 20.Rxe7 1-0
198 - Fischer Wade Marshall
My game on the Wade Defence 1.d4 d6 2.Nf3 Bg4 led me to wonder. What
interesting game did International Master Robert G. Wade play that I might
like to look at? I found one against Bobby Fischer in the Ruy Lopez Marshall
Attack.
In 1965 Fischer accepted an invitation to play in Havana at the Capablanca

Memorial Tournament. The US State Department would not allow him to
travel to Cuba.
A compromise was found. Bobby Fischer played from a little room in the
Marshall Chess Club. The games were played by teletype with Fischer in
New York. His opponents responded from Cuba. This arrangement made for
very long games.
Bob Wade co-authored a book on the Ruy Lopez Marshall Attack. He was a
great source of chess information.
When Bobby Fischer prepared for Boris Spassky, Frank Brady tells us in his
book "Endgame" that Bob Wade sent Fischer two loose leaf notebooks. They
had analysis on Spassky's openings, one book with each color Spassky
played.
Fischer - Wade, Havana, Cuba 1965 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6
4.Ba4 Nf6 5.0-0 Be7 6.Re1 b5 7.Bb3 0-0 8.c3 d5 9.exd5 Nxd5 10.Nxe5
Nxe5 11.Rxe5 c6 12.d4 Bd6 13.Re1 Qh4 14.g3 Qh3 15.Be3 h5 [A more
popular approach is 15...Bg4 16.Qd3 Rae8 17.Nd2+/=] 16.Qf3 h4 17.Bxd5
cxd5 18.Nd2 Be6 19.Bf4 Bg4 20.Qg2 [20.Qxd5!? Bxf4 21.gxf4+/-]
20...Qxg2+ 21.Kxg2 h3+ 22.Kg1 Bxf4 23.gxf4 Rfd8 24.f3 Be6 25.Nb3
Rab8 26.a3 Rb6 27.Kf2 g6 28.Re5 Kg7 29.Rae1 Kf6 30.Na5 [30.Nc5!+/-]
30...Rh8 31.b4 Rc8 32.R5e3 Rg8 33.Nb3 Ra8 34.Ra1 g5 35.fxg5+ Kxg5
36.Rg1+ Kf6 37.Ree1 Rc6 38.Rc1 Bf5 39.Rge1 [Now the game is equal.
Maybe White should try 39.Rg3+/=] 39...Rg8 40.Rg1 Ra8 41.Nc5 a5
42.Ra1 Rcc8 43.Ra2 Rg8 44.Rg3 axb4 45.cxb4 Rh8 46.Rg1 Rhg8 47.Rxg8
Rxg8 48.Ke3 Re8+ 49.Kf4 Rg8 50.Ke3 Re8+ 51.Kf4 Rg8 52.Re2 Rg2
53.Ke3 Rg1 54.a4 bxa4 55.Nxa4 Rd1 56.Rb2 Rd3+ 57.Kf2 Rxd4 58.Nc3
Rd3 59.Ne2 d4 60.b5 Bc8 61.Nc1 Rd1 62.Nb3 Rh1 63.Kg3 Rg1+ 64.Kf4
Rg2 65.Rd2 Bb7 66.b6 Ba8 67.Rxd4 Rxh2 68.Rd6+ Ke7 69.Rh6 Rb2
70.Nd4 h2 71.Kg3 1/2-1/2
199 - Matan Marshall Mate
Matan Prilleltensky mounts a Marshall Attack in the famous Ruy Lopez
opening. Andy Soltis is proved right! In this gambit after move 19, I was at
the end of my book knowledge.
I played slowly for a known variation. I used 27 minutes for the first 19
moves. My opponent used 16 minutes. I took seven minutes to talk myself
into what was a blunder on move 20.
In his book "Attacking the Spanish", Sabino Brunello wrote:

“20.Bd1?? was played in Hellers - I. Sokolov, Haninge 1989, as well as quite
a few other games. Amazingly, so far no-one seems to have noticed that
Black can win by force after 20...Nxe3!N 21.fxe3 (21.Re3 Bxd1 wins a piece
for nothing.) 21...Bxg3! 22.hxg3 Rh6 with a mating attack.”
My opponent found the win others missed. Matan Prilleltensky became a

USCF Life Master. Despite this game, my rating went up 5 points for this
tournament. Sharper play suits me.
After this game I read "Grandmaster Secrets: Openings" book by Andy

Soltis. His alter-ego GM Noah Tall says: "If you don't know the book at
move 20 in a Lopez, it won't kill you - unless it's a sharp line like the
Marshall Attack. The main Lopez variations are relatively quiet so the risk is
only that you'll make a second-best move, a minor sin." I confirm that not
knowing move 20 in a Marshall can kill you. My move lost by force, a major
sin.
Sawyer (1960) - Prilleltensky (2129), Florida Championship (3), 02.09.2007

begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.0-0 Be7 6.Re1 b5 7.Bb3 0-0
8.c3 d5 9.exd5 Nxd5 10.Nxe5 Nxe5 11.Rxe5 c6 12.d4 [Fischer drew
Spassky with 12.g3 (Santa Monica 1966), but I did not know it beyond
12.g3] 12...Bd6 13.Re1 Qh4 14.g3 Qh3 15.Be3 Bg4 16.Qd3 Rae8 17.Nd2
Re6 18.a4 Qh5 19.axb5 axb5 20.Bd1? [White prefers 20.Nf1 or 20.Qf1, but
I did not know theory at this point.] 20...Nxe3! [20...Bxd1? 21.Raxd1 f5
22.Nf1 f4 23.Bc1 Ref6 24.Qe4 Kh8 25.Qd3 h6 26.b3 b4 27.cxb4 fxg3
28.fxg3 Bxb4 29.Nd2 Rf2 30.h4 Nc3 0-1 Hellers - Sokolov, Haninge 1989]
21.fxe3 Bxg3! 22.hxg3 [22.Re2 Bf4-+] 22...Rh6 23.Nf1 Qh1+ 24.Kf2 Rh2+
25.Nxh2 Qxh2+ 26.Kf1 Bh3# [My opponent played really well!
Congratulations.] 0-1
200 - Yates Bogoljubow 9.d4
Let’s face it. In the Closed Ruy Lopez main line it looks and feels like a
waste of time to play 9.h3. My friend Bob Muir liked to play the Yates
Variation with 9.d4 as White.
Many played 9.d4 before the Englishman Frederick Yates. He had the
distinction of doing well with it against grandmasters.
Yates drew both Alekhine and Capablanca with 9.d4. Yates won against Efim
Bogoljubow after 9.d4 exd4 at London 1922. When these two met again in
New York 1924, Bogoljubow won as Black after 9.d4 Bg4. This became
known as the Bogoljubow variation, even though he played both ninth moves
repeatedly.
Others tried the line in early games. Emanuel Lasker and Euwe played it was
White. Edward Lasker and Rubinstein played it as Black. Capablanca and
Thomas both played it from both sides. Prior to all those, Spielmann played
9.d4 vs Marshall in 1911.
As for my adventures, when I had Black against Muir and his Yates line 9.d4,
I chose the Bogoljubow variation 9…Bg4. The bishop pins the f3 knight.
This puts added pressure on d5.
White’s two most common tenth move responses are 10.Be3 or 10.d5. Bob
Muir chose the second move in this game.
I combined my kingside threats with capturing queenside pawns. White was

down two pawns with two more in danger when he resigned.
Muir (1800) - Sawyer (2011), Williamsport, PA 1995 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3

Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.0-0 Be7 6.Re1 b5 7.Bb3 d6 8.c3 0-0 9.d4 Bg4
10.d5 [10.Be3 exd4 11.cxd4=] 10...Na5 11.Nbd2 Nxb3 12.axb3 Ne8 [12...c6
13.dxc6 Qc7 14.Nf1 Qxc6=] 13.c4 bxc4 [13...Bd7 14.Nf1 f5=] 14.Nxc4
[14.bxc4+/=] 14...f5 15.Ne3? [15.exf5 Rxf5=] 15...Bxf3?! [15...fxe4 16.Nxg4
exf3 17.gxf3 Bg5-/+] 16.Qxf3 fxe4 17.Qg4 Nf6 18.Qe6+ Rf7 19.Nf5 Bf8
20.Bg5 Qe8 21.Qxe8?! [21.b4=] 21...Nxe8 22.Ng3 h6 23.Be3? [23.Bd2
Rb8=/+] 23...Nf6 24.Rad1 Rb8 25.Rc1 Rxb3 0-1
201 - Pieces Need Squares
The Ruy Lopez allows both sides to keep their pieces on the board. A fight
with many pieces increases the tactical and strategical possibilities.
This makes the Ruy Lopez a favorite with stronger players the world over.
More possibilities means more mistakes and more chances for the more
careful player to win.
In this game from our early years, the future chess master Ed Sawyer had all
his pieces protected. White played the standard attack on b5 with 20.a4.
Clearly if 20.axb5 axb5, the rook on a8 was protected by the knight on b6.
Everything was safe.
Then Black apparently intended to redeploy his dark squared bishop to the
queenside via d8. With one move Black nudged the queen ahead to free up
d8.
There was just one problem. She moved to d7 which was the only retreat
square for his knight. White pushed to a5 and the knight was lost.
Sawyer, Tim - Sawyer, Edward, correspondence 1978 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3

Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.0-0 Be7 6.Re1 b5 7.Bb3 d6 8.c3 0-0 9.h3 Na5
10.Bc2 c5 11.d4 Nd7 12.dxc5 dxc5 13.Nbd2 f6 14.Nh4 Nb6 [14...g6=
would keep White's knight out of f5.] 15.Nf5 Kh8 16.g4!? [16.b3+/=]
16...Nac4 [16...Qc7=] 17.Nxc4 Nxc4 18.Qe2 [18.Qxd8 Bxd8 19.b3+/=]
18...Rf7 19.b3 Nb6 20.a4 Qd7? [Black overlooks one little detail. 20...bxa4
21.bxa4 a5 22.Rd1+/=] 21.a5 1-0
202 - 9 Ways Ruy is Reliable
Why is the Ruy Lopez so reliable? Chess masters trust this opening from both
sides of the board. They have for 150 years.
My first tournament Ruy Lopez was played when Boris Spassky was world
champion. Bobby Fischer won a Ruy Lopez in the 1972 match when the title
changed hands. Much of the world calls this the Spanish Opening after 1.e4
e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5.
Consider nine reasons masters love Ruy Lopez.

1. It is completely sound but not a forced draw.
2. There are very few early piece exchanges.
3. Any piece might become useful and active.
4. There are lines to please any style of player.
5. Both sides have options for pawn structures.
6. Middlegames strategy influences the result.
7. Tactics are the reason for strategical moves.
8. Club players like to copy master openings.
9. Masters understand what to do and why.
One way I test openings is to play vs chess engines. I copy what computers
play vs me in multiple blitz games, changing colors after every game.
Typically against a strong engine in the same opening I lose as White, then
lose as Black, lose as White, etc. But not always. Sometimes I win or draw.
Shredder chose the Ruy Lopez Chigorin 9...Na5. I obtained a good position
but let it slip on move 32. After my blunder, I offered a draw. Fortunately it
was accepted.
Sawyer (2002) - Shredder (3322), Florida, 14.02.2006 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3

Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.0-0 Be7 6.Re1 b5 7.Bb3 d6 8.c3 0-0 9.h3 Na5
10.Bc2 c5 11.d4 Qc7 12.Nbd2 cxd4 13.cxd4 Nc6 14.Nb3 a5 15.Be3 a4
16.Nbd2 Bd7 17.Rc1 Qb7 18.Qe2 Rfe8 19.Bd3 Rab8 20.dxe5 dxe5
[20...Nxe5 21.Nxe5 dxe5 22.Bc5=] 21.Bc5 Nh5 22.g3 Nb4 23.Nxe5 Nf6
24.Nxd7 Qxd7 25.Bb1 Qxh3 26.e5 Ng4 27.Nf1 g6 28.Bxe7 Rxe7 29.Rc5
Re6 30.Rxb5 Rxb5 31.Qxb5 Nc6 32.Qxa4? [32.f4! Nd4 (or 32...Nh2
33.Re3+/-) 33.Qd3 Nf5 34.Qd8+ Kg7 35.Bxf5 gxf5 36.Qg5+ Kf8 37.Qxf5
Rh6 38.Qe4+-. Now Black could be up the Exchange for a pawn after my
32.Qxa4? Ncxe5 33.Rxe5 Rxe5 34.Be4 Nf6 35.Bg2 Qg4-/+] 1/2-1/2
alain – 23
Alden – 99
Alexis – 63
andrei – 151
Archilleus – 145
Aronoff – 111
Bacon – 46
BBranko – 50
Beechey – 58
Bender – 34
Berryman – 191
BeSomeone – 7, 9
BethO – 119
BigSerge – 175
Bisguier – 131
Bishop – 194
bjewe – 182
Black – 2
blik – 15, 69, 113, 122, 123, 170, 172, 174, 176
Blood – 95
Borbash – 103
Bratanov – 73
Brooks – 92
Browne – 131
ButchCroft – 169
Callahan – 37
Casey – 64
catz – 177
challanger100 – 30, 100
Chandler – 85, 145
chelsee – 68
Chess Bull – 179
Cho – 147
Cooper – 35, 48
Coriell – 88
Corter – 32
CraftyWiz – 78, 130
Curtis – 90
Custer – 59
Davis – 27
De La'O – 4
Dhoom2 – 13
Dowd – 104
DrMenghy – 189
Dubois – 159
duckbreath – 33
Earth – 85
Eddy-Booth – 60
Elliott – 190
Elowitch – 48
Fischer – 108, 198
Fondeo – 141
foxsden – 121
Fry – 36
Gerace – 148
GetBetterAtChes – 135, 171
Gilbert – 22
Grattan – 25
guest1103 – 41
guest5420 – 17
Haines – 56, 116, 149, 154, 156, 157, 162, 186-188, 194
hawkstorm – 97
Hayward – 150, 163
hbandersen – 168
Heckman – 86
Heim – 3
Heyn – 125
Hoskavich – 138
HOTBIT – 129
Hunter – 149
Ivanchuk – 42
Ivy – 132
JackBach – 62
jeromed – 137
jethro369 – 67
joe1314 – 184
Kaplan – 150
Karjakin – 42
Koks – 83
Kostanski – 66
Koval – 109
Kruger – 12
kwiz – 107
lakhote – 89
Lau – 72, 165
Lawson – 75
Le Carpentier – 158
Leite – 84
Lingsell – 139
LinuxKnight – 120
Liu Qingnan – 153
Livingston – 98
lordbluff – 52
lupus53 – 161
lynch_valeria – 140
Maier – 192
Marfia – 102
McMahon – 20
Meserve – 5
Mirabile – 101
Moore, J – 87
Moore, R – 144
Moran – 116
Morphy Sr. – 158
Mrofka – 110
mscp – 136, 181
Muir – 114, 118, 178, 196, 200
Munoz – 128
Mutesi – 147
neuhaus44 – 53
Nigen – 105
NN – 8, 44, 71, 179
Nygren – 195
Oil_beef_hooked – 47
Over-Rated – 115
Penullar – 43, 47, 89, 185
petemaric – 185
Piehl – 14
Poole – 1
Poscher – 28
Prilleltensky – 199
Probasco – 106
Puckett – 18
Pupols – 108
Purser – 62 63
Puzey – 65
realityczech – 29
Regan – 24, 47, 93
Rideout – 126
RockyTop – 180
Rogers – 54
Rohricht – 45
Rookie – 173
Ross – 167
Ruegner – 77
Santiago – 94
sashagel71 – 164
Sawyer, E – 183, 201
Sawyer, T – 1, 3-30, 32-41, 44-47, 49-62, 64-72, 76, 78-84, 86-88, 90-107,
109-115, 117-130, 132-144, 146, 148, 151, 152, 154-157, 160-184, 188-190,
192-193, 195-197, 199-202
scubadoo – 70
sequitamorena – 146
Shafkat – 127
shalilsnv – 55
Shannon – 197
SharpShooter – 40
Shaw – 82
Shipley – 133
Shredder – 202
Sims – 19
Smith, D – 91
Smith, R – 96
snowowl – 134
Spanik – 26
Spence – 76
Spiegel – 152
Steinitz – 159
Stobbe – 38
Straat – 191
Straszacker – 16
Strockyj – 11
Talkeres – 21
Tatai – 74
tgralex – 43
Thompson – 81
Todd – 112
trubble – 160
Uballe – 80
Ullrich – 155
UlyssesSGrant – 124
Vasiukov – 31
Vehre – 193
Voiarnalung – 51
vt – 10, 143
Wade – 198
Ward – 117
Watt – 39
Weinstein – 187
White – 2
Whittle – 57
Wilbur – 142
Winter – 6, 79
Workman – 186
Yip – 77
Yu Yangyi – 153
Zdun – 166
Zilbermints – 31 73 74 75
Sicilian Defence
1.e4 c5 in
Chess Openings
By Tim Sawyer
Sicilian Defence Copyright © 2015, 2016 by
Sawyer Publications

whatsoever on the behalf of the purchaser or reader of these materials. Any
perceived slight of any individual or organization is purely unintentional.
Table of Contents
Introduction
Chapter 1 – Various Lines
1.e4 c5
2.d4 d5
2.d4 cxd4
2.c3
2.Nc3
Chapter 2 – 2.Nf3 without 2…d6
2.Nf3 Various
2.Nf3 Nc6
2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4
4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 e5
4.Nxd4 g6
2.Nf3 e6 3.d4 cxd4
Chapter 3 – 2.Nf3 d6
3.d4 cxd4
4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 g6
Chapter 16 – Najdorf
5.Nc3 a6
5.Nc3 a6 6.f4
5.Nc3 a6 6.Be3
5.Nc3 a6 6.Bg5
Index of Names to Games
Before You Go
Free Training Repertoire

Click here to get weekly updates
You can receive my chess training repertoire for free. I send one page of
detailed analysis each week. This covers a popular opening that masters
frequently play. As a chess openings coach I provide you with one set of lines
for White and another for Black. You receive a basic suggested repertoire for
each side for that one line. Each week a different opening is covered. Enjoy it
for free. Try it!
Book 2: Sicilian Defence
1.e4 c5 in Chess Openings
By Tim Sawyer
Introduction to Sicilian Defence
Welcome to the Sicilian Defence: 1.e4 c5 in Chess Openings. Tim Sawyer
analyzes 112 games. This expanded version has updated commentary, and an
Index of Names to Games.
This book covers this most popular chess opening, especially the Najdorf,
Dragon, and Sveshnikov variations. Also included are the 2.c3 Alapin, 2.d4
Smith-Morra Gambit, 2.Nc3 Closed or Grand Prix variations, 2.b4 Wing
Gambit and others.
Most of the games in this book were played by the author. Many were against
masters, experts and club players over 45 years of play. The author shows
you typical examples in these variations.
Of special note is the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit Declined Sicilian Defence.

The very same position occurs in both openings after 1.d4 d5 2.e4 c5 (BDG)
or 1.e4 c5 2.d4 d5 (Sicilian Defense).
Most of the games are by experts or masters. You benefit from the author’s
lifetime study of grandmasters who play the Sicilian Defense. They include
Paulsen, Lasker, Capablanca, Alekhine, Nimzowitsch, Kotov, Botvinnik,
Polugaevsky, Korchnoi, Tal, Petrosian, Spassky, Fischer, Larsen, Karpov,
and Kasparov of old. More modern players include Anand, Leko, Gelfand,
Ivanchuk, Nunn, Shirov, Svidler, Topalov and Magnus Carlsen.
Follow ideas to surprise your opponent and win. Have fun playing chess.
Enjoy this book!
Book 2 – Chapter 1 – Various Lines
1.e4 c5
We begin with White’s second move alternatives that avoid the more popular
book lines. These moves are comparatively rare. They include 2.Ne2, 2.b3,
2.b4, and 2.f4.
1 - Sicilian Bg2 without Nc3
Kingside fianchetto chess moves in the Sicilian Defence are common for
Black with Bg7 Dragon variations.
The White move Bg2 appears in the Closed Sicilian after 2.Nc3.
Why? Because an e4 pawn, the Nc3 and the Bg2 all fight against Black's d5
square.
When White controls d5 in the Sicilian, he slows Black's counter attack.

What if White plays Bg2 without Nc3?
Black reacts quickly with ...d5 and instant equality.
Ernest Huber competed actively in APCT postal chess in the late 1970s and
early 1980s.
We met four times when I was always slightly higher rated.
Here White's creative set-up fell apart due to the 10th move.
White turned his attention to the queenside where Black had castled.
Alas for him, the main action was on the kingside where White had castled.
Huber (1850) - Sawyer (2050), corr APCT 1980 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Ne2 Nc6
3.g3 d5 4.Bg2 dxe4 [4...d4 5.d3 e5 6.f4=] 5.Bxe4 Nf6 6.Bg2 [6.Bxc6+ bxc6
7.d3 g6=/+] 6...Bg4 [6...e5 7.0-0=] 7.0-0 Qd7 8.d3 0-0-0 [8...e5 9.Nd2=]
9.Nbc3 h5 10.b3? [10.Bg5=] 10...h4 11.Qe1 [11.f3 Bf5-/+] 11...hxg3
12.Nxg3 [12.fxg3 Nb4-/+] 12...Bh3 13.Bxh3 Qxh3 0-1
2 - Snyder Anti-Sicilian 2.b3
Jocelyn Bond provides us with a Sicilian Defence vs his opponent Normand
Corneau in the Championnat club d'échecs de Jonquiere in Canada.
As Bond notes: "In the second game I won too as black in only 14 moves...
Big opponents to come!!"
Back in the 1970s, the Snyder Sicilian (1.e4 c5 2.b3) was well-known as the
favorite line of Master Robert M. Snyder in a book he wrote and heavily
promoted.
The line is fine, but apparently Snyder was not fine. Snyder is a convicted sex
offender. I do not know the circumstances.
America's Most Wanted had done an episode on him scheduled for October
24, 2009. That episode was pre-empted by the baseball playoffs and
apparently never aired.
Robert Snyder fled the United States. He was captured in Belize. The USCF
had a note about his capture.
The variation 1.e4 c5 2.b3 is one of many Anti-Sicilian lines that is fully
playable.
This same position could be reached from a Larsen’s Opening after 1.b3 c5
2.e4. It leads to equality.
If you can play it all the time, you will score well because you will know it
better than those who don’t know it.
Here White missed some tactics. Such mistakes and losses can happen to any
of us.
Corneau - Bond, Championnat club d'échecs de Jonquiere (4), 04.07.2012

begins 1.e4 c5 2.b3 Nc6 3.Bb2 d6 4.Bc4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.a4 e6 7.Nf3 d5N
8.exd5 [8.Bd3!?=] 8...exd5=/+ 9.Qe2+ Be7-/+ 10.Nxd5? [Better is 10.Bd3-
/+] 10...Nxd5-+ 11.Bxg7 Rg8 12.Bf6 Rg6 [12...Nxf6 13.0-0 Bh3-+ Oops. I
dream of the gain of the White queen and didn't see that the bishop is in the
air.] 13.Bh4?? [13.Bxe7 Ncxe7 14.Ne5-+] 13...Re6 won the queen. 0-1
[Notes by Bond/Deep Fritz]
3 - Faydi Draws Wing Gambit
Jonathan Faydi of the Netherlands drew a nice attacking game vs Fritz 13. He
sent me this Sicilian Defence Wing Gambit.
Jonathan wrote: “Hello, Here is a game I played recently that could be

interesting to you and your readers… I've been experimenting for some time
with the Wing Gambit against the Sicilian and in this game I managed to
draw against Fritz 13 (4 minutes + 2 seconds per move for the computer Vs
14 minutes + 2 seconds per move for me). Kind regards, Jonathan”
Jonathan Faydi wrote a blog “From Patzer to Master” where he analyzed this
game. I present the same game with my analysis. Jonathan Faydi (FIDE rated
2138) presented a reasonable goal and approach for chess improvement.
The Sicilian Defence Wing Gambit begins after 1.e4 c5 2.b4!? White deflects
Black's c-pawn so he can set up a pawn center. This gambit was played at
least a handful of times by many great masters of old: Capablanca, Alekhine,
Spielmann, Koltanowski, Bronstein and most often by the US champion
Frank Marshall. Modern masters who often employ the Wing Gambit
repeatedly include Bonafede, Dimitrov, Shivananda and Shirazi.
Patzer2master (2138) - Fritz 13, Netherlands 14m+2s, 13.06.2014 begins

1.e4 c5 2.b4 cxb4 3.a3 e6 [About half the time Black plays 3...d5!= forcing
White to commit his e-pawn.] 4.axb4 Bxb4 5.c3 Be7 6.d4 d6 7.Bd3 Qc7
[7...Nf6=] 8.Ne2 Bd7 9.0-0 Nf6 10.Na3 0-0 11.Bg5 [11.Nc2] 11...a6 12.f4
h6 13.Bh4 Nc6 14.e5 Nd5 15.Bxe7 Ndxe7 16.Nc2 b5 17.Ne3 [17.Ng3!?
gives different attacking chances.] 17...d5 [17...b4!? would try to hurry things
up on the queenside before White picks up speed on the kingside.] 18.Bc2
Rfb8 19.Qd3 Nf5 20.Rf3 Kf8 21.g4 Nxe3 22.Rxe3 Qd8 23.Qh7 [23.f5!+/=
looks very promising.] 23...b4 24.Rf1 b3 25.Qh8+ [After 25.f5 Qg5 26.Nf4
Ke7 27.Bd3 Rh8= the position is close to equal, but maybe not quickly
drawn. In such a position, a computer might outplay a human with either
color.] 25...Ke7 26.Qxg7 bxc2 [Maybe Fritz thought all roads led to a draw,
such as 26...Qg8 27.Qf6+ Ke8 28.Bd3 Ne7 29.f5 Nxf5 30.Bxf5 exf5 31.e6
fxe6 32.Nf4 Qg5 33.Rxe6+ Bxe6 34.Qxe6+ Kf8 35.Nxd5 Kg7 36.Qe5+ Kg6
37.Qe6+ Kg7=] 27.Qf6+ Kf8 28.Qh8+ Ke7 29.Qf6+ Kf8 30.Qh8+ Ke7
31.Qf6+ Kf8 1/2-1/2
4 - Short Grand Prix Eilmes
The Sicilian Defence can be met by the famous Grand Prix Attack. This
variation typically begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nc3 Nc6 3.f4 g6 4.Nf3 Bg7.
And now it is decision time for White. Where will White develop the light
squared bishop? Usually it is played 5.Bc4 or 5.Bb5.
Don Eilmes played the shorter bishop move 5.Be2 vs me in the 1970s.
Both sides must analyze original positions at the postal speed of three days
per move.
Donald P. Eilmes had a USCF correspondence rating of 2232 with a

tournament rating in the 1900s.
Eilmes played a total of 820 ICCF games. He was frequently rated in the
2300.
He was a very thorough analyst in the years before there were strong chess
engines.
In 1979 Don Eilmes and I were working our way up through the ranks of
postal players in America.
As I recall when we played our APCT game Don lived in Escondido,

California. Eilmes outplayed me.
What stood out was that I got mated and never saw it coming! Bravo! The
USCF notes Donald Eilmes passed away at age 82.
Eilmes (1948) - Sawyer (2000), corr APCT 1979 begins 1.e4 c5 2.f4 Nc6
3.Nf3 g6 4.Nc3 Bg7 5.Be2!? d6 6.0-0 a6 7.d3 b5 [7...Nf6=] 8.Qe1 e6 9.Nd1
Nge7 10.c3 Qc7 11.Be3 0-0 12.g4 f5! 13.Qh4 fxg4 14.Qxg4 e5 [14...Rb8
15.Ng5 Nd8 16.Qh4 h6 17.Nf3 b4=] 15.Qh4 exf4 16.Bxf4 Ne5 17.Ne3 Ra7
[17...Nxf3+ 18.Bxf3+/=] 18.Bxe5 [18.Nxe5! dxe5 19.Bg5+/-] 18...dxe5
19.Ng4 Rf4? [Now Black is losing. Instead he should play 19...h5! 20.Ne3
Bh6=/+] 20.Nh6+ Kh8? 21.Nxe5 Bxe5 22.Rxf4 Bxf4? 23.Qf6# 1-0
5 - Parsons Trapped Bishop
David Parsons was one of my favorite players. David came to my home and
invited me to join the Williamsport Chess Club. There I played every
Tuesday night for about eight years.
Usually Parsons liked offbeat trappy openings, such as the Wing Gambit in
the Sicilian Defence. Here David played 2.f4.
In the Sicilian Defence game below, David made the mistake of never
moving his d-pawn. I’m sure he would tell you that you should move your
center pawns early in the game.
It is one thing to play early moves like f4 / Nc3, moves I might play myself.
Things start out a little sloppy in this skittles game.
We were probably playing rather fast in a college lounge with TV playing in

front of us and music behind us.
Then White got his pawns locked on d2, c3, and b4.
Trapped! His dark squared bishop on c1 had no opportunity to come out and
play with all the other pieces.
Parsons - Sawyer, Williamsport, PA, 28.11.2000 begins 1.e4 c5 2.f4 d5

3.Nc3 [The other two common continuations are: 3.exd5 Nf6 4.Bb5+ Bd7
5.Bxd7+ Qxd7 6.c4 e6 or 3.e5 Nc6 4.Nf3 Bg4] 3...d4 4.Na4?! [4.Nce2 or
first 4.Bb5+ would lead to equal chances.] 4...e6 [4...e5! 5.fxe5? Qh4+!
winning.] 5.Nf3 Nf6 6.Bb5+?! [White position feels very loose with several
unprotected men. 6.Bd3] 6...Bd7 7.Qe2 a6?! [7...Bxb5 8.Qxb5+ Qd7
9.Qxd7+ Nbxd7 10.b3 Nxe4-/+ and Black has won a pawn.] 8.Bxd7+ Qxd7?
9.b3? [9.Nb6!+-] 9...b5? 10.Nb2 [10.Nb6!+-] 10...Nc6 11.c3 Be7 12.0-0
Rd8 13.Nd1 d3 14.Qe1 c4 15.b4? [White traps in his bishop forever.
15.bxc4 bxc4=/+] 15...0-0 16.e5 Qa7+ [16...Nd5-/+] 17.Ne3 Nd5 18.Ng5
Bxg5 19.fxg5 Nxe5 20.Qg3 Ng6 21.h4 e5 [21...Nxe3 22.Qxe3 Qxe3+
23.dxe3 d2-+] 22.Kh1 Ngf4 23.Nxd5 Rxd5 24.Bb2 Ne2 25.Qf3 e4 26.Qf2
Qxf2 [26...e3-+] 27.Rxf2 f5 28.gxf6 Rxf6 29.Rxf6 gxf6 30.a4 Rh5 31.g3
Nxg3+ 32.Kg2 Ne2 33.axb5 axb5 34.Kh3 Kg7 35.Ra7+ Kg6 36.Rc7 Rf5
37.Rc5 h5 38.Ba3 Re5 [38...e3!-+] 39.Bb2 e3 0-1
2.d4 d5
This Sicilian is also the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit Avoided. The first two
moves could be 1.e4 c5 2.d4 d5 or 1.d4 d5 2.e4 c5. One continuation is
3.Nc3. That could arise by 1.Nc3 d5 2.d4 c5 3.e4. Each of the next five
games could have begun 1.e4 c5 2.d4 d5.
6 - Mik Jorgensen 4.dxc5
This Blackmar-Diemer Gambit Avoided variation resembled an offbeat
Albin-Counter Gambit Reversed. I have played 3.exd5 and 3.Nc3
interchangeably and scored very well with each.
This game is Mik Jorgensen vs Arunn Ananthan played in 2012.
Jorgensen - Ananthan, Bronshoj Lang Weekend 2012 Copenhagen DEN

(6), 13.02.2012 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e4 c5 3.dxc5 d4 [3...Nf6 4.exd5 Qxd5
5.Qxd5 Nxd5 6.Bd2+=] 4.Nf3 Nc6 5.Bd3 [5.c3!+/- dxc3? 6.Qxd8+ Kxd8
7.Nxc3+-] 5...e5 6.0-0 Nf6 7.Nbd2 Bxc5 8.a3 0-0 9.b4 Bd6 10.Nc4 Re8
11.Bg5 h6 12.Bd2 a6 13.Re1 Bg4 [Both sides have completed their
development with equal chances.] 14.Nxd6 Qxd6 15.h3 Bh5 16.g4 Nxg4
[Black decides to unbalance the game. Otherwise, 16...Bg6=] 17.hxg4 Bxg4
18.Bf1 Qf6 19.Bg2 d3?! 20.cxd3 [20.c3!+/- takes away d4.] 20...Nd4 21.Re3
Rac8 22.Rc1 Rxc1 23.Bxc1 Rc8 24.Bb2 Nc2 25.Qd2 [White has a bishop
and knight for a rook and pawn. 25.Bc1 Nxe3 26.Bxe3 Rc6 27.Bc5 Rc7
28.Be3=] 25...Nxe3 26.Qxe3 Bxf3 27.Bxf3 Rc2 28.Bc1 Qg5+ [Or
28...Rxc1+ 29.Qxc1 Qxf3 30.Qc8+ Kh7=/+ when Black is a pawn up in a
hard to win queen ending.] 29.Qxg5 hxg5 30.Bxg5 Rc3 31.Be7 Rxd3 32.Be2
Rxa3 33.Bc4 Ra1+ 34.Kg2 a5 35.bxa5 Rxa5 36.Bd5 b5 37.Bd6 b4
38.Bxb4 [Now with all the pawns on the kingside, the two bishops vs the
rook and extra pawn is a draw.] 38...Ra6 39.Bc3 Rg6+ 40.Kf3 Rg5 41.Bd2
Rg6 42.Bc3 Rg5 43.Bd2 Rh5 44.Kg2 Kf8 45.Bb4+ Ke8 46.Bc6+ Kd8
47.Bd5 f6 48.Bd2 g5 49.Be6 Ke7 50.Bf5 Rh8 51.Bb4+ Kf7 52.Bc5 Ra8
53.Be3 Ra6 54.Kg3 Kg7 55.Bc5 Ra1 56.f3 Kh6 57.Bf8+ Kh5 58.Bg4+ Kg6
59.Bf5+ Kf7 60.Bc5 Rc1 61.Bf2 Ke7 62.Be3 Rc2 63.Bf2 Kd6 64.Be3 Kc6
65.Be6 Kd6 66.Bf5 Ke7 67.Bf2 Kf7 68.Bb6 Kg7 69.Bd8 Rc1 70.Kg2 Rd1
71.Be7 Ra1 72.Bc5 Rc1 73.Be7 Kf7 74.Bb4 Rc4 75.Bd6 Ra4 76.Bc5 Ra8
77.Kg3 Kg7 78.Be7 Rh8 79.Bc5 Rh1 80.Kg2 1/2-1/2
7 - Famous Bourne Identity
Adolf Anderssen played 1.e4 c5 2.d4 long before Pierre Morra or Ken Smith
were born. Smith and Morra analyzed 2…cxd4 3.c3!? At Amsterdam in 1861
Adolf Anderssen vs Van't Kruys began 1.e4 c5 2.d4 d5.
Is this Sicilian Defence a Smith-Morra Gambit Avoided? Or is it a Blackmar-

Diemer Gambit Avoided (1d4 d5 2.e4 c5)? Or is it an Albin Counter Gambit
(1.d4 d5 2.c4 e5) Reversed with a move?
Before Jason Bourne was famous, there was Alfred Bourne. The name
"Alfred Bourne" is famous in golf, soccer and finances.
However, more specifically, my USCF postal chess opponent was Alfred

Scott Bourne. He was probably nowhere near as famous as some others. But I
don’t know for sure.
Our game began 1.d4 d5 2.e4 c5. Anderssen continued 3.exd5 Qxd5 4.dxc5
and White chased around Black's queen.
I chose to take a slight lead in development in the hope to reach a winning

endgame. We both had pawn majorities: White on the queenside and Black
on the kingside. Bourne pushed me around until finally he was about to drop
a pawn in the endgame.
Sawyer (2153) - Bourne (1635), corr USCF 89N215, 07.08.1990 begins

1.d4 d5 2.e4 c5 3.exd5 [The previous game saw 3.dxc5. White has several
other playable options. 3.e5 cxd4 4.Qxd4 Nc6 5.Bb5 Bd7 (5...e6=; or
5...Qa5+ 6.Nc3 Qxb5 7.Nxb5 Nxd4 8.Nxd4=) 6.Qxd5 e6 7.Qd3 Nxe5
8.Bxd7+ Qxd7 9.Qxd7+ Nxd7=; 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.d5 Nf6(4...e6? 5.Bb5+ Bd7
6.dxe6 fxe6! 7.Qh5+ g6 8.Qe5+/-) 5.f3 (5.Be3=) 5...exf3 6.Nxf3= Blackmar-
Diemer Gambit.] 3...Qxd5 [Another idea is 3...cxd4 4.Qxd4 Nc6 5.Qd1 Ne5
6.Nc3+/-] 4.Nc3 [The Anderssen vs Van't Kruys game continued 4.dxc5
Qxc5 5.Be3 Qe5 6.Nc3 and 1-0 in 19.] 4…Qxd4 5.Qxd4 cxd4 6.Nb5 Na6
7.Nxd4 [7.Nf3+/=] 7...e5! 8.Bxa6 [8.Bb5+ Bd7=] 8...bxa6 9.Nb3 Nf6 10.Nf3
e4 11.Nfd4 Bd6 12.h3 0-0 13.Bd2 [13.Bg5] 13...Bb7 14.Na5 Be5 15.Nxb7
Bxd4 16.c3 Bb6 17.Nd6 [17.Bf4] 17...Rad8 18.Nc4 h6 19.Be3 Nd5
20.Nxb6 Nxe3 21.fxe3 axb6 22.Ke2 Rd7 23.Rad1 Rfd8 24.Rd4 Rxd4
25.exd4 f5 26.Rf1 g6 27.g4 fxg4? [27...Rf8 28.Ke3+/=] 28.hxg4 Kg7
29.Ke3 Re8 30.Rf4 1-0
8 - Mark Kluge 4.d5 e6
In 2016 I wrote a series of newer books on the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit. My
starting position began 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4. If Black does not play 2…dxe4,
the line transposes into another opening.
The BDG line 1.d4 d5 2.e4 c5 transposes to the Sicilian Defence Smith-
Morra Gambit Avoided line 1.e4 c5 2.d4 d5. Furthermore play can continue
with 3.Nc3 dxe4 as a reversed Albin Counter Gambit. This line is a type of
Blackmar-Diemer Gambit Declined.
I became a USCF Postal Master before e-mail was widely used and chess
engines were weak. Correspondence players were on their own, except for an
opening book or two in their favorite lines. Some of my games were very
long and others very short.
1980s databases were limited. Only a few books covered the BDG. Almost
all of them were not in English, so I decided to write one myself. Bob Long
from Thinkers' Press / Chessco of Davenport, Iowa offered me a contract.
I wrote the original "Blackmar-Diemer Gambit Keybook" over a three year

period of time, late 1988 to late 1991. I received my first copy in print late
February 1992. I do not remember how many copies were printed, but they
all sold out.
While I was writing the book, I tested the opening as White every chance I
got. Mark D. Kluge initially captured my e-pawn after 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4, but
we transposed back to what could be a Sicilian Defence with 3.Nc3 c5.
This Albin-Counter Gambit Reversed comes with an extra tempo for the
gambit player. My opponent slipped up with 4.d5 e6? In 1973 I made the
same Albin Counter Gambit blunder as White with my 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e5
3.dxe5 d4 4.e3? Nowadays I more often play the Black side of the Albin-
Counter Gambit.
Sawyer (2182) - Kluge (1726), corr USCF 89N189, 02.10.1989 begins 1.d4
d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 c5 4.d5 e6? 5.Bb5+! Bd7 6.dxe6 fxe6 7.Qh5+ ["I don't
feel like playing with an exposed king. Good game!" - Kluge. Houdini 3
gives 7.Qh5+ g6 8.Qe5 Nf6 (or 8...Qf6 9.Qxe4 Nc6 10.Nd5+/-) 9.Bg5 Be7
10.0-0-0 0-0 11.Bxd7 Nbxd7 12.Qxe6+ Rf7 13.Bxf6 Bxf6 14.Nxe4+/-] 1-0
9 - Yang Hainan 3.Nc3 dxe4
In the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit players battle for the center in many ways.
Usually it involves pawns: the d-pawn and e-pawn, as well as the f-pawn and
c-pawn.
One line is like a reversed Albin-Counter Gambit after 1.d4 d5 2.e4 c5 3.Nc3
dxe4 4.d5. This position can arise from other move orders such as the Sicilian
Defence 1.e4 c5 2.d4 d5.
The contest between Yang Hainan and Chan Peng Kong came to this position
by heading in the direction of a Veresov Opening. That opening is 1.d4 d5
2.Nc3 Nf6 3.Bg5. These players varied with 2.Nc3 c5 3.e4 which is a Sicilian
Defence again. After the moves 3…dxe4 4.d5 the best continuation is 4...Nf6
5.Bg5.
This game from the Hong Kong Open in China is the critical line. Both sides
played well. White obtained an edge which gradually grew. In BDG
nomenclature, this 3...c5 line is the Dries Variation.
Yang Hainan (2137) - Chan Peng Kong (2264), Hong Kong Open 2014
(7.15), 04.10.2014 begins1.d4 d5 2.Nc3 c5 3.e4 dxe4 4.d5 Nf6 5.Bg5 Qb6
6.Qd2 Nbd7 7.0-0-0 a6 8.Re1 h6 9.Bh4 g6 10.f3 exf3 11.Nxf3 Bg7 12.Bc4
Qb4 13.Bd3 0-0 14.a3 Qa5 15.Rxe7 c4 [Correct is 15...b5! 16.d6 c4 17.Be4
Nxe4 18.Nxe4 Qxd2+ 19.Nexd2=] 16.Bxc4 Qc5 17.Qe2 Nb6 18.Bf2 Qxc4
19.Bxb6 Qxe2 20.Rxe2 Bg4 21.Re7 Nd7 22.Bc7 Bf6 23.Ree1 Bxc3 24.bxc3
Bxf3 25.gxf3 Rfe8 26.Kd2 Rec8 27.d6 Nc5 28.Re7 Kf8 29.Rhe1 Ne6
30.R1xe6 fxe6 31.Rxe6 Rxc7 32.dxc7 Kf7 [32...Rc8 33.Rxg6 h5 34.Rh6
Rxc7 35.Rxh5+/-] 33.Rb6 Rc8 34.Rxb7 g5 35.Ke3 Ke6 36.Ra7 Kd5
37.Kd3 Kc5 38.Rxa6 Rxc7 39.Rxh6 Rf7 40.Ke4 Re7+ 41.Kd3 Rf7 42.Ke3
Re7+ 43.Kf2 Ra7 44.Rg6 Rxa3 45.Rxg5+ Kd6 46.Rg2 [46.c4! Rc3 47.c5+
Kc6 48.h4 Rxc2+ 49.Kg3+-] 46...Rxc3 47.Kg3 Ke5 48.Kg4 Rc8 49.Re2+
Kf6 50.h4 Rg8+ 51.Kf4 Rh8 52.Rh2 Rg8 53.h5 Kg7 54.h6+ [Getting rid of
the rooks with 54.Rg2+! Kf8 55.Rxg8+ Kxg8 56.Ke5+- wins far more
easily.] 54...Kh7 55.Ke3 Re8+ 56.Kd2 Rd8+ 57.Kc1 Rf8 58.Rh3 Rc8 59.f4
Rc4 60.Rh4 Rc8 61.Kd2 Rd8+ 62.Ke3 Re8+ 63.Kf3 Rc8 64.Rh2 Rc4
65.Kg4 Rc5 66.f5 Rc3 67.Kg5 [67.f6!+-] 67...Rg3+ 68.Kf6 Kg8 69.c4 Rc3
70.Rh4 Rc1 71.Ke6 Re1+ 72.Kd6 Rd1+ 73.Kc6 Rf1 74.Rh5 Kh7 75.c5
Rc1 76.Kd6 Rd1+ 77.Kc7 Rc1 78.c6 Rc2 79.Kd7 Rd2+ 80.Kc8 Rc2 81.c7
Rc1 82.f6 1-0
10 - WFM Khlichkova 6.b3
It is nice to see so many girls playing chess these days. When I was a young
player, women at tournaments were very rare.
Back then most females only came to tournaments because their husband or
boyfriend played. Now girls are everywhere.
And just like the boys, the girls play at every level of strength and
experience. We are all better off for it.
The lines 1.d4 d5 2.Nc3 c5 3.e4 transposes to the BDG and to the Sicilian
Defence after 1.e4 c5 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3. These players followed the natural path
with 3…dxe4 4.d5.
WFM Tatiana Khlichkova defeated vs IM Elena Zaiatz with the standard

5.Bg5. The continuation 5.Nge2 also looks good. The BDG approach with
5.f3 is more risky, as is the counterpart 5...f6 in the Albin Counter Gambit.
This is a contest between high rated Russian women. On this occasion, youth
triumphs over experience. Black keeps her king in the center and attacks on
the flanks.
The game demonstrates how the bishops of opposite color middlegame

favors the attacker. She worked up a checkmate.
Khlichkova (2249) - Zaiatz (2408), 64th ch-RUS HL w 2014 Vladivostok

RUS (3.6), 06.06.2014 begins 1.d4 d5 2.Nc3 c5 3.e4 dxe4 [3...e6 4.exd5
exd5 5.dxc5+/-] 4.d5 [4.Bb5+!?; 4.Nge2!?] 4...Nf6 5.Bg5 [5.f3 exf3 6.Nxf3
g6 7.Bf4 Bg7 8.Qd2 0-0 9.0-0-0 BDG Long Bogo] 5...Qb6 6.b3 [6.Bb5+!?]
6...Nbd7 7.Nge2 g6 8.Qd2 h6 9.Be3 Bg7 10.Rd1 a6 11.Ng3 Qb4 12.Be2
[12.d6!?] 12...h5 [12...Ng4=/+] 13.0-0 h4 14.a3 Qxa3 15.Ra1 Qb4 16.Ra4
Qb6 [16...hxg3 17.Rxb4 gxh2+ 18.Kh1 cxb4 19.Na4=] 17.Ngxe4 Nxe4
18.Nxe4 f5 19.Ng5 Qd6 20.Ne6 Be5 21.f4 Bf6 22.Bb5 b6 23.Bc6 Rb8 24.c4
Kf7 25.Ra2 Nf8 26.Ng5+ Kg7 27.Nf3 Nh7 28.Qf2 Nf8 29.Bc1 e6
[29...Ne6=] 30.Re1 exd5 [30...Bb7 31.Bb2+/=] 31.Bxd5 Ne6 32.Bxe6 Bxe6
33.Rd2 Qc6 34.Ne5 Bxe5 35.Rxe5 Rbd8 36.Bb2 Kf7 37.Re1 [37.Re3 Rxd2
38.Qxd2+/-] 37...Rxd2 38.Qxd2 Rg8 39.Qc3 Bd7 40.Re5 Bc8 41.Rd5 Qe6
42.Qd2 Qe4 43.Rd6 Be6 [43...h3 44.gxh3+/=] 44.Qc3 Ke7 45.Rd1 Rf8
46.Qg7+ Rf7 47.Bf6+ 1-0
2.d4 cxd4
The Smith-Morra Gambit is the mirror image for the Blackmar-Diemer
Gambit. Its popularity wavers up and down. In the 1900s two famed players
played 1.e4 c5 2.d4 intending 2…cxd4 3.c3!?
Pierre Morra was a postal player from France. He was active from the 1920s
to the 1950s. He wrote a pamphlet about this gambit, but I have never seen
any games where Morra played it.
Ken Smith was a poker player from Texas and a USCF Master. Smith played
this gambit against master and grandmasters. He won and lost many games.
Smith analyzed and promoted this opening for decades in his books on the
Smith-Morra Gambit.
11 - Guido De Bouver Blog
Congratulations to Guido De Bouver for his blog on Blackmar-Diemer
Gambit! I know how much work it is to write so much. De Bouver
demonstrated an eagerness to prove the soundness of the BDG. He analyzed
many of the most critical lines.
Here is a creative effort De Bouver played in a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit

Avoided. The players transposed into a Sicilian Defence. Guido's gambit play
is efficient and effective in this short mating attack. His opponent is Jan
Staes. Since Guido De Bouver is from Belgium, I assume that is where this
game was played.
De Bouver - Staes, Belgium, 2012 begins 1.d4 c5 [Blackmar-Diemer Gambit

Avoided] 2.e4 [Sicilian Defence] 2...cxd4 3.Nf3 g6 [Black hopes to play a
Sicilian Dragon, but it would be more prudent to first play 3...Nc6 or 3...d6 to
see what White plans to do.] 4.c3!? dxc3 [Correct is 4...Bg7 5.cxd4 d5=]
5.Nxc3 Bg7 [Another idea is 5...Nc6 6.Bc4 Bg7 7.0-0 (7.e5!?) 7...d6 8.Qe2
Nf6] 6.Bc4 e6? [6...Nc6 see previous note] 7.Nb5! d5 8.exd5 Nf6 9.Bf4 Na6
10.Nd6+ Ke7 11.Ng5! [Black is losing because his king is caught in the
center surrounded by White's pieces.] 11...Rf8 [11...Qa5+ 12.Kf1 Nxd5
13.Ndxf7+- does help much.] 12.0-0 h6 13.Re1! hxg5 14.dxe6 Bxe6
15.Bxe6 fxe6 16.Rxe6+ Kxe6 17.Qe2+ Kd5 [17...Kd7 18.Qb5+ Ke6
19.Re1+ Ne4 20.Rxe4+ leads to mate: 20...Be5 21.Qxe5+ Kd7 22.Qb5+ Kc7
23.Qxb7#] 18.Qc4# 1-0
12 - Saturday TV Westerns
When I was a kid in the 1950s, every Saturday morning there were westerns
on American television. The classics were Gene Autry, the Lone Ranger, Roy
Rogers and Dale Evans. By the 1960s they added Maverick, Cisco Kid, Rin
Tin Tin, Sky King, the Rifleman and others. Wagon Train, Bonanza, and
Gunsmoke ran on various nights. Then there was the chess knight on
Paladin's calling card that read: Have Gun Will Travel.
They were harmless fun. Good guys wore white hats. Bad guys wore black
hats. People got shot, but no one got seriously hurt unless they were really
bad. If the heroes were shot, they were just grazed. The heroes were fine for
the next new episode.
Playing a gambit in chess is harmless fun. For most of us chess is a game, a

hobby, albeit also a passion. You might get shot on the board. If your king
gets checkmated, you learn something and your king is fine for the next new
game. I experimented with the Smith Morra Gambit in a postal game vs the
future master Edward Sawyer in 1974 when we both lived in Maine. The
dark squared bishop play on the a3-f8 is a key factor this time.
I never personally met Ken Smith. We talked on the phone quite a bit. He
once offered me $600 to write a book on King's Gambit and then he would
keep all future profits. It wasn’t a bad deal but that opening was not my
specialty. Ken Smith loved the Sicilian Defence Gambit 1.e4 c5 2.d4 cxd4
3.c3 or Smith Morra Gambit. Once in a while I essay a Smith Morra Gambit.
It is fully playable. I prefer the Open Sicilian 3.d4. The extra pawn comes in
handy.
Tim Sawyer – Edward Sawyer, corr (2), 21.05.1974 begins 1.e4 c5 2.d4
cxd4 3.c3 dxc3 4.Nxc3 e6 [The most common defensive set-up is 4...Nc6
5.Nf3 d6 6.Bc4 e6 7.0-0] 5.Nf3 [The Chicago Defence is 5.Bc4 a6 6.Nf3 b5
7.Bb3 d6 8.0-0] 5...Bb4!? 6.Qd4 Bxc3+ [6...Bf8 7.Be2+/=] 7.bxc3 [7.Qxc3
Nf6 8.Bd3+/=] 7...Nf6 8.Ba3 [White aims to take control of the dark squares
on the very diagonal Black recently used. More dynamically White could
have played 8.Bd3 d5 9.e5+/=] 8...Nc6 9.Qa4 Qa5 [9...d5 10.Nd4=] 10.Qxa5
Nxa5 11.e5 Ng8 [11...Nd5 12.Nd4+/=] 12.Be2 [12.Nd4+/=] 12...Ne7 13.0-
0!? Nac6 14.Bb5?! a6 15.Bxc6 Nxc6 16.Bd6 f6 17.Rfe1 b5 18.a4 Bb7
19.axb5 axb5 20.Rxa8+ Bxa8 21.Rb1 1/2-1/2
13 - Smashing Smith-Morra
Ray Haines and Edward Sawyer lived 150 miles apart in Maine near Canada.
I had the privilege of visiting both their homes.
In this sharp Sicilian Defence Smith-Morra Gambit, Ray Haines notches an

impressive win. I added new notes in 2015 using more powerful computer
chess engines.
My first two rated games were losses against the two newspaper columnists
George Cunningham and Gerry Dullea in a five round weekly tournament in
1972. I won my last three rounds to finish 3-2. That result gave me a portion
of the unrated prize money.
In their 1975 Bangor Daily News weekly chess column George Cunningham
and Gerry Dullea wrote this:
“In a postal game against inter-county rival Ed Sawyer, 1974 champion of

Washington County, Ray makes victory look easy again as he employs one of
his favorite attacks, the Smith-Morra line of the Sicilian.”
“Tim Sawyer to whom we are indebted for these games and his comments on
them, says Ray has demonstrated several beautiful forced wins from the key
position after White's 11th move. He also notes Black's slow development.”
“Ed sees that his queen is no protection for the knight after all because taking
the rook leaves him on the painful end of a king-queen fork by the White
knight.”
“Our thanks go to Ray for creating these brief beauties and to Tim for being
thoughtful enough to share them.”
Ray Haines - Edward Sawyer, corr Maine, 1974 begins 1.e4 c5 2.d4 cxd4
3.c3 dxc3 4.Nxc3 Nc6 5.Nf3 d6 6.Bc4 a6 7.0-0 Nf6 [7...e6 8.Qe2=] 8.Bg5!?
[8.Bf4= Komodo, Stockfish] 8...e6 9.Qe2 h6! [40 years ago I thought this
was a mistake, but since then it has become the top move. 9...Be7 10.Rfd1
Qc7 11.Rac1 0-0 12.Bb3=] 10.Bf4! e5 [10...g5!=/+ Stockfish] 11.Rfd1!?
exf4 [11...Bd7 12.Be3=] 12.e5 Nxe5? [12...Qe7 13.exf6 Qxe2 14.Bxe2 gxf6=
Black has an extra pawn among his ugly islands.] 13.Nxe5 Qe7 14.Bxf7+
Kd8 15.Rxd6+!? Kc7? 16.Rxf6! 1-0
14 - Smith-Morra by Taylor
Years ago Randy Pals asked this following question about the Smith-Morra
Gambit in a forum:
“And how can a postal master like David Taylor successfully use the SM in
international correspondence chess?”
“You would think that if it was really unsound, high level correspondence
games would tell the tale...”
The answer might be that David C. Taylor researched the Smith-Morra

Gambit in the Sicilian Defence for several decades.
With the death of Jim Warren, my mind went down the road of memories. I
remember the games that we had played.
I searched Jim Warren's games to see what mutual opponents we had. I found
a game between long time tournament and postal chess players.
David Taylor and Jim Warren both lived in the greater Chicago area. Here
they contested the Sicilian Defence.
David Taylor was the seventh US Correspondence Chess Champion. His

favorite openings were the Goring Gambit and Smith-Morra Gambit. Taylor
was rated 2382 in postal play and 2188 over-the-board.
David Taylor as White began his Smith-Morra Gambit assault right out of the
opening. Jim Warren fought back as Black. Then Warren mounted a sudden
successful counter attack.
Taylor - Warren, Illinois open 1965 begins 1.e4 c5 2.d4 cxd4 3.c3 dxc3
4.Nxc3 Nc6 5.Nf3 d6 6.Bc4 Nf6 7.0-0 e6 8.Qe2 Be7 9.Rd1 e5 10.Be3 0-0
11.Rd2 [11.Rac1=] 11...Bg4 12.h3 Bh5 13.Rad1 Qc8 14.Bd5 Rd8 15.a3 h6
16.b4? [16.Rc2 Qd7 17.Ba2=] 16...Nd4 17.Bxd4 exd4 18.Nb5 Nxd5
19.exd5 Bf6 20.Nbxd4 Re8 21.Qb5 [21.Qf1 a6-/+] 21...Bxd4 22.Rxd4 Bxf3
23.gxf3 Qxh3 24.Qxb7 [24.Qd3 Rac8-/+] 24...Qxf3 25.R4d3 Qg4+ 26.Kf1
Rac8 27.Qxa7 Rc2 28.Qd4 Re4 29.Qa1 Qe2+ 0-1
15 - Smith Morra vs Sildmets
Sicilian Defence gambits abound. Usually I played the main lines but not
always.
Here all of a sudden I veered off from my favorite lines. I headed to the
Smith-Morra Gambit against one of the strongest postal chess players in
America.
I rarely played gambits, but I had opening books.
When I received moves from Sildmets, I planned to surprise him with secret
tricks.
I trusted in the knowledge I would find in my Smith-Morra book collection.
We reached a certain variation, I looked it up and found it in the book. The

game cited was played by Anton Sildmets. Ugh!
I had chances in this game, but I got outplayed by the master. It was a
privilege to play Sildmets.
The USCF gives an Anton Sildmets obituary which reads in part:
"Member: Faith Lutheran Church; Golden Knights Chess U.S. Champion,

1964; State Chess Champion, 1962; four time city chess champion; postal
expert; Master chess rating. Retired Goodyear Tire and Rubber after 30 plus
years."
Sawyer (2100) - Sildmets (2356), corr APCT 1982 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6
3.d4 cxd4 4.c3 dxc3 5.Nxc3 d6 6.Bc4 e6 7.0-0 Be7 8.Qe2 Nf6 9.Rd1 e5
10.h3 [10.Be3 0-0 11.Rac1 (11.h3 transposes back to the game) 11...Be6
12.b4 Nxb4 13.Bxe6 fxe6 14.Nxe5=] 10...0-0 11.Be3 a6 [11...Be6 12.Ng5
Bxc4 (12...Bd7 13.a3=) 13.Qxc4 Rc8 14.Qe2=] 12.Rac1 Bd7 13.a3 Rc8
14.b4 h6 [14...b5 15.Bb3=; 14...Qe8 15.Qd3=] 15.Nd5 [15.Bb3 b5 16.Nd5
Nxd5 17.Bxd5=] 15...Be6? [15...Nxd5 16.Bxd5 Qe8=] 16.Bc5? [16.Nb6!
Bxc4 17.Qxc4 Rb8 18.Qd3+/=] 16...Bxd5 17.exd5 Nb8 18.Nxe5 [18.Be3
Qd7=/+] 18...Nh7 [18...b5!-/+] 19.Nf3 [Alas I missed 19.Nc6! bxc6 20.dxc6
Rxc6 21.Bd5 Rc8 22.Bb7 Rc7 23.Bb6 Rxc1 24.Bxd8 Rxd1+ 25.Qxd1=]
19...dxc5 20.d6 Bg5 0-1
2.c3
The Sicilian Defence Alapin Variation 2.c3 is a completely sound system of
development. The 2.c3 Alapin Sicilian is often met by the Alekhine Defence
type move 2…Nf6. Sometimes the games actually transpose from one
opening to another.
16 - Morris Meets My 2.c3
Thomas Morris was the chess champion of the state of Georgia. One of our
postal games saw me try the Sicilian Defence 2.c3.
The Alapin variation was a rare choice for me as White, since I like the
normal Open Sicilian 2.Nf3/3.d4 lines.
The year 1981 was one of my most active chess years, and 1982 was even
more successful. I developed a reputation among the experts and masters in
APCT.
My promising chess career crashed with my personal life tragedy in 1983.

Happily, sunny days do follow storms. In the late 1980s I found pleasure and
success in the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit.
Here is a game from my blissful early days. At first we held back our d-
pawns. Then by move 7, we both had isolated d-pawns in the center of the
board at d4 and d5.
I remember studying this type of position in books on chess strategy by

Grandmaster Ludek Pachman. I owned the entire three book series with
complete games. I also had the edited summary edition "Modern Chess
Strategy" published by Dover.
In our game after some maneuvering, we agreed to a draw in a symmetrical

position. There were no tactical flashes or deep theory. Just solid play with
possibilities passed.
Sawyer (2100) - Morris (2250), corr APCT 1982 begins 1.e4 c5 2.c3 e6
3.Nf3 Nc6 4.Be2 d5 5.exd5 exd5 6.d4 cxd4 7.cxd4 Nf6 8.0-0 h6 9.Nc3 Bd6
10.Re1 0-0 11.h3 Be6 12.a3 Rc8 13.Be3 [13.Bd3=] 13...Bb8 14.Rc1 Ne4
15.Nd2 Qd6 16.f4 f5 [16...Nxc3 17.bxc3 Qxa3=/+] 17.Nf3 a6 18.Ne5 Ba7
19.Bf3 Rfd8 20.Ne2 Na5 21.b4 Nc4 22.Qb3 Nxe3 [22...Qe7 23.Kh1 Rc7-/+]
23.Qxe3 Bd7 24.Kh2 Nf6 1/2-1/2
17 - Chandler Mating Attack
Bill Chandler played an attacking Sicilian Defence Alapin (2.c3).
Playing as White, Bill did several important things correctly.

1. He took control of the center of the chess board.
2. He developed most of the pieces quickly.
3. He made tactical threats against enemy pieces.
4. He moved his army toward his opponent's king.
5. He successfully pushed the attack to checkmate.
If Black had not resigned, Bill had mate in one. Tactics is about safety.
Strategy is about doing the right thing. Not all the moves were perfect, but
White did what he was supposed to be doing. Bill Chandler was playing
under the handle "ProjectAlpha".
Perfect games rarely happen, because none of us are perfect. That's why we
need God. If you get too upset with the lack of perfection in yourself and
others, you will have a real bummer of a life. Lighten up. It's a game. Have
fun!
ProjectAlpha - TommyRuff, ICC 5 0 Internet Chess Club, 16.02.2012

begins 1.e4 c5 2.c3 [Sicilian Alapin] 2...Nc6 3.Nf3 g6 [Dragon idea.] 4.d4
cxd4 5.cxd4 Bg7 6.Bb5 a5?! [This move makes no sense. Maybe Black was
trying for 6...a6 and missed the square with the mouse.] 7.Nc3 Nf6 8.Bg5 [It
is good to develop the bishop, but gaining space and time with 8.e5!+- is
even better. White will play this a few moves later.] 8...0-0 9.Qd2 Qb6
[9...d5!= In this game Black suffers for never moving the d-pawn.] 10.e5 Ne8
11.a4 f6 12.Nd5 [The knight attacks the queen and moves closer to the Black
king.] 12...Qd8 13.Bh6 fxe5 14.Bxg7 Kxg7 15.Nxe5 Nxe5 16.dxe5 e6
17.Nf4 Nc7 18.Bd3 [18.Be2+/- is a better square, but at least White shows
the value of aiming several pieces at the opponent's king. It pays off!] 18...b6
19.h4 Bb7 20.h5? [This h-pawn push is premature because it is not safe. The
rook lift 20.Rh3!+/= looks pretty good.] 20...Nd5? [It is logical to want to
swap off attacking pieces, but here Black misses the tactical shot 20...Qg5!
21.Ne2 (to save the knight) 21...Qxd2+ 22.Kxd2 Rxf2=/+ and Black's pieces
come to life around White's uncastled king.] 21.Nxd5 Bxd5 22.hxg6 hxg6?
[Black's last chance to pull up before crashing is 22...h5 23.Rxh5+- and
White has a much better game.] 23.Qh6+ Kf7 24.Qxg6+ Ke7 25.Rh7+ 1-0
18 - Alapin 2.c3 Chess Mess
Welcome to another Sicilian Defence! In the main lines Black has an extra
center pawn after 2.Nf3 and 3.d4 cxd4 and White has an extra queenside
pawn.
The Alapin Variation 2.c3 ensures White can have another pawn in the center
against the Sicilian Defence.
The question is will White have three pawns at e4, d4 and c3? Or will it be
two pawns? Or just one pawn?
Black's basic choices are 2...Nf6 3.e5 Nd5 like an Alekhine Defence and
2...d5 3.exd5 Qxd5 like a Scandinavian Defence.
My move 2...d5 below allowed the game to be wide open.
White castled quickly but Black's king stayed in the center vs "messchess".
As late as move 15 I still had a chance for 15...0-0 with equality.
I waited too long and got into a big mess.
messchess (2626) - Sawyer (2391), ICC 3 1 u Internet Chess Club,

27.11.2002 begins 1.e4 c5 2.c3 d5 3.exd5 Qxd5 4.d4 cxd4 [4...Nf6 5.Nf3 e6
6.Be2=] 5.cxd4 Nc6 6.Nf3 Bg4 7.Be2 e6 8.Nc3 Qa5 9.0-0 Nf6 10.h3 Bxf3
11.Bxf3 Rc8 12.d5 exd5 13.Re1+ Be7 14.Nxd5 Nxd5 15.Bxd5 Qd8 [15...0-
0 16.Bxc6 Rcd8 17.Qe2 Bb4 18.Rd1=] 16.Bg5 f6 [16...0-0 17.Bxe7 Nxe7
18.Bxb7+/-] 17.Be3 [Or 17.Bxf6+-] 17...Qd6 18.Qg4 Rd8 19.Bxc6+ bxc6
20.Qxg7 Kd7 21.Rad1 Black resigns 1-0
19 - Alapin Curious King Move
Sometimes White plays Kf1 but rarely in the Sicilian Defence. Against the
2.c3 Alapin Variation, as Black I played 2...Nf6 3.e5 Nd5 4.Nf3 Nc6 5.d4
cxd4 which transposes to a Smith-Morra Gambit Declined which begins 2.d4
cxd4 3.c3 Nf6 etc.
When Ken Smith was promoting the Morra in the 1970s, 2.d4 seemed more
popular than 2.c3. Here White got an opening advantage. Then Rookie
played 13.Kf1? This was a blunder.
It looks like a fingerfehler (German slip of the finger) or a mouse slip. How
can a computer make such a mistake? Touch move errors are common by
humans in blitz.
For example, once I meant to play 1.d4 d5 2.e4 but actually I played 2.e3.
Trying to correct my mistake, I pushed my e-pawn further ahead, only to
realize that it wasn’t my move! Now I had accidentally pre-moved 3.e4?
Thus after 2...Nf6 3.e4 Nxe4, I was down a tempo and a pawn vs a higher
rated player. That mistake did not turn out well.
In the game below for some strange reason Rookie played 13.Kf1? I had
defeated Rookie three other times in a Ruy Lopez, in a Slav Defence, and in
an Alekhine Defence. I also drew a Queen's Knight Attack 1.Nc3. This time I
did not make the best of my chances, but I did drew my higher rated
opponent.
Rookie (2486) - Sawyer (2241), ICC 5 0 Internet Chess Club, 05.09.2009

begins 1.e4 c5 2.c3 Nf6 3.e5 Nd5 4.Nf3 Nc6 5.d4 cxd4 6.cxd4 d6 7.Bc4 Nb6
8.Bb5 dxe5 9.Nxe5 Bd7 10.Nc3 Nxe5 11.dxe5 a6 12.Bd3 [12.Bxd7+! Qxd7
13.Qe2+/=] 12...Bc6 13.Kf1? [13.e6 f5 14.Qc2+/=] 13...e6 14.Qe2 Be7
15.h3 0-0 16.Be3 Nd5 17.Rd1 Qc7 18.Nxd5 Bxd5 19.Qc2 [19.f4 Bxa2=/+]
19...Qxc2 [Better is 19...Qxe5! 20.Bxh7+ Kh8 21.Bd4 Qf4-/+] 20.Bxc2 Rac8
21.Bb1 Bc4+ [Black have an advantage with 21...Bc5! 22.Ke2 Bxe3 23.Kxe3
Bxg2 24.Rhg1 Bd5=/+] 22.Kg1 Rfd8 23.Kh2 Rxd1 24.Rxd1 Rd8 25.Rxd8+
Bxd8 26.b3 Bd5 27.Kg1 Be7 28.Bc2 h6 29.Bd3 Kf8 30.Be2 Ke8 31.Bd4 g6
32.g3 h5 33.h4 Kd7 34.f3 Kc6 35.Kf1 Bd8 36.Kg2 Be7 37.Kf2 Bd8 38.Bf1
Be7 39.Be2 Bd8 40.Bf1 Be7 1/2-1/2
20 - Baffo Two Pawns Attack
In this game as Black I managed to hold correspondence master Jeffrey Baffo
to a draw. He began with 1.e4. I defended with the Alekhine Defence, one of
my most successful defenses.
In our 12 match games, Jeff Baffo and I chose a wide variety of openings.
Here Baffo chose the Two Pawns Attack with 2.e5 and 4.c5 favored by many
attacking players who prefer White in the Sicilian Defence Alapin. That
variation begins 1.e4 c5 2.c3 Nf6 3.e5 Nd5. Those lines transpose to the
Alekhine Two Pawns, although either side can avoid the transpositions.
Two Pawns is called the Alekhine Chase Variation. Sicilian Defence

transpositions come by challenging advanced White pawns with 6...d6, while
6...b6 stays strictly in the Alekhine.
The confusing and tricky part following the maze of Sicilians is that they
reach the same position one move quicker than they do in the Alekhine. So
the numbers are off. For example, 1.e4 c5 2.c3 Nf6 3.e5 Nd5 4.d4 cxd4
5.cxd4 d6 6.Nf3 e6 7.Nc3 Nxc3 8.bxc3 Qc7 reaches the 9...Qc7 position of
our Alekhine game. GM Evgeny Sveshnikov (famous for a Black Sicilian
line) plays this position as White against both opening move orders.
Sveshnikov prefers the move 9.Bd2 (via Sicilian) or 10.Bd2 (via Alekhine).
However in 2012, the grandmaster did play Baffo's move 10.Qb3!? There he
followed the line 12.Bxe5 Nxe5 13.Nxe5 Bd6 14.Bb5+ and 1-0 in 37 moves
(Sveshnikov - Degraeve, 28th Cappelle Open, 2012). In our USCF
correspondence game below, we exchanged into a roughly equal bishop
ending where Baffo and I agreed to a draw.
Baffo (2273) - Sawyer (1960), corr USCF 95P135, 18.03.1996 begins 1.e4
Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.c4 Nb6 4.c5 Nd5 5.Nc3 [5.Bc4 e6=] 5...e6 6.d4 d6 7.cxd6
cxd6 8.Nf3 Nxc3 9.bxc3 Qc7 10.Qb3!? [10.Bd2= is the normal book move.]
10...Nd7 11.Bf4 dxe5 12.Nxe5 [12.Bxe5 Sveshnikov] 12...Bd6 13.Bg3 Nxe5
14.dxe5 Be7 15.Bb5+ Bd7 16.Bxd7+ Qxd7 17.0-0 0-0 18.Rab1 b6 19.Rfd1
Qc7 20.Rd3 Rfd8 21.Rbd1 Rxd3 22.Rxd3 Rd8 23.Qd1 Kf8 [If I wanted to
try for more, Houdini suggests 23...Rxd3 24.Qxd3 g5=/+ but I had no energy
for that in 1996.] 24.Rd4 Rxd4 25.Qxd4 Qd826.Qxd8+ Bxd8 27.Kf1= 1/2-
1/2
21 - Mike Sharp 2.c3 Attack
When I played the Sicilian Defence in postal chess, we were allowed to use
books during the game. I had a large chess library when I played Mike Sharp.
He tried the 2.c3 Alapin which was quite rare back in 1980.
Mike Sharp and I were rated Experts in the American Postal Chess
Tournaments club. This was our only meeting. The books gave analysis to
moves 13-15. Then we were on our own.
I have two APCT rating lists from about 35 years ago. The first has M. Sharp
of California and later of Missouri. I found one game Mike Sharp played in
1978. I also found a draw Sharp played vs the prolific postal master Michael
Brent in 1981.
My records indicate that I never played Michael Brent. However my database

has about 30 games that he played vs opponents whom I also played during
my correspondence career.
Except for a few geeks, home computers were not available until 1982. By
1984 I used computers in business. At home I got a Commodore 64. It was
popular but had a very limited function.
Chess databases did not exist until about 1985-1988. And while some chess
engines did exist, they were slow and very weak. So Michael Sharp and I did
the best we could. Here I won a pawn and outplayed him in a rook ending.
Sharp (2050) - Sawyer (2050), corr APCT 1980 begins 1.e4 c5 2.c3 Nf6
3.e5 Nd5 4.d4 cxd4 5.Qxd4 e6 6.Nf3 Nc6 7.Qe4 d6 8.Nbd2 dxe5 9.Nxe5
Nxe5 10.Qxe5 Qd6 11.Bb5+ Bd7 12.Bxd7+ Qxd7 13.0-0 Qd6!?
[13...Qc7=] 14.Qxd6 Bxd6 15.Ne4 Bc7 16.c4 Nf4 17.Rd1 Ne2+ 18.Kf1
Nxc1 19.Raxc1 Ke7 20.c5 Rhd8 21.Nd6? [Clearly White miscalculated,
since this line loses a pawn. 21.g3 Rxd1+ 22.Rxd1 f5=] 21...Bxd6 22.cxd6+
Rxd6 23.Rc7+ Kd8! 24.Rxd6+ Kxc7 25.Rd3 Rd8 26.Rc3+ Kd7 27.Ra3 a6
28.Rb3 Kc7 29.Rc3+ Kb8 30.Rg3 g6 31.Ke2 Rd7 [With this well placed
rook, Black can make real progress.] 32.Rf3 Kc7 33.Ke3 Kd6 34.Ke4 f5+
35.Kf4 e5+ 36.Kg3 e4 37.Rb3 Ke5 38.f3 [If 38.f4+ Ke6-/+] 38...f4+!
39.Kg4? [This hastens the end. 39.Kf2 e3+ 40.Ke1 b5-+] 39...e3! 40.Rb4
Re7! 0-1
22 - Sicilian vs David Taylor
Chandler Bolt noted you often learn the most from someone who is just two
rungs above you on the ladder of success.
Many beginners and young kids have very helpful coaches and teachers who
themselves are rateds in the 1800 to 2000 range.
Those who are rated much higher may be helpful, if they have good teaching
skills. But masters deal with different issues.
For example a 2600 rated grandmaster may be trying to avoid a draw vs a

2400 rated international master.
Most players rated around 1400 would love to get a draw against a 2400
master. Do that many times and a 1400 would be a 1600.
The key for lower rated players is piece safety. Most cannot go 20 moves
against a master without losing material.
When I learned how to play solid openings and keep my pieces safe, then I
raised my rating way up.
David Taylor was an experienced master and higher rated than I, but our
postal ratings were often within 200 points of each other.
Our Sicilian Defence Smith Morra Gambit Declined became an Alapin

Sicilian. Our line 2.d4 cxd4 3.c3 Nf6 4.e5 Nd5 transposed to the same
position as 2.c3 Nf6 3.e5 Nd5 4.d4 cxd4.
Fortunately I turned a solid equal opening in a draw.
Taylor (2200) - Sawyer (2050), corr APCT 1980 begins 1.e4 c5 2.d4 cxd4
3.c3 Nf6 4.e5 Nd5 5.Qxd4 e6 6.Nf3 Nc6 7.Qe4 d6 [7...f5 8.Qe2 b5=]
8.Nbd2 dxe5 9.Nxe5 Nxe5 [9...Be7!?=] 10.Qxe5 Qd6 [10...Bd7 11.Be2 f6
12.Qh5+ g6 13.Qf3 Bc6=] 11.Bb5+ Bd7 12.Bxd7+ Qxd7 13.Nf3 [The
alternative is 13.0-0 Qc7 14.Qxc7 Nxc7 15.Ne4 Be7 16.Rd1 0-0=] 13...Qc7
[Black could sacrifice a pawn for counter play with 13...Be7!? 14.Qxg7 Bf6
15.Qh6 Qb5=] 14.Bf4 [14.Qxc7 Nxc7 15.c4=] 14...Qxe5+ 15.Bxe5 f6
16.Bg3 e5 [16...Be7 17.Nd4 Kf7=] 17.0-0-0 0-0-0 18.c4 Nb6 19.Rxd8+
Kxd8 20.Rd1+ Kc8 21.b3 Bc5 22.Nd2 h5 23.f3 1/2-1/2
2.Nc3
This leads to the Closed Sicilian and Grand Prix variations.
23 - Run Over By Closed Ruiz
USCF Master Glenn James Ruiz had white in our 1982 APCT postal chess
game. I chose the Sicilian Defence.
His 2.Nc3 Closed System was known to me from Karpov's chess games. But,
I was not sure which way to approach it as Black.
This game reminds me of some small forest animals that I hit with my car.
They start to run across the road. Then they see my car coming. Instead of
continuing on to safety, they turn around and run right back in front of my
vehicle. Thud. Squish. Ugh!
In this game I started across the board with c5, d6, e6, Nc6, Nf6, Be7, etc. I
should castle kingside to safety with a good position.
Instead I went back to the center and played 7...d5 while my king still is in
the middle of the road.
I never did castle. My king hindered the coordination of my own pieces and
the protection of my little pawns.
When I tried 17...f5, all I ended up doing was daring him to hit one of my
loose pawns.
My position got run over by White walled tires with his rolling rooks in the
center and the queenside. He hit one of my pawns.
Ruiz (2083) - Sawyer (2100), corr APCT 1982 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nc3 d6 3.g3
Nf6 4.Bg2 e6 5.d3 Be7 6.f4 Nc6 7.Nf3 d5!? [The main line here is 7...0-0
8.0-0 a6 9.h3 Qc7=] 8.0-0 [8.e5 Ng4=] 8...a6 [Better was grabbing space and
time with 8...d4 9.Nb1 0-0=] 9.a4 [9.Ne5!?+/=] 9...dxe4 10.dxe4 Qxd1
11.Rxd1 Nb4 12.Ne1 Rb8 [12...e5 13.fxe5 Ng4 14.Nd5!+/=] 13.e5 Nd7
[13...Nfd5 14.Ne4+/=] 14.Ne4 b6 15.Be3 Bb7 16.Rd2 Nd5 17.Bf2 f5?
[17...c4 18.Rd4+/=] 18.exf6 gxf6 19.Rad1 f5 [19...c4 20.Re2+/-] 20.Ng5
Bxg5 21.fxg5 b5 [21...c4 22.Nf3+/-] 22.Nd3! c4 23.Nf4 Nxf4 24.gxf4 Bxg2
25.Kxg2 Rb7 26.Rd6 Ke7 27.Rxa6 1-0
24 - Richy Rich Grand Prix
When your opponent plays a quiet closed game, especially if his play appears
passive, it is wise to open up the position.
In this game against my ICC opponent "RichyRich", I had the choice of solid
equality or mix things up by letting my opponent have an extended central
pawn.
I was able to surround and devour the pawn, followed by pushing a mating
attack on the e-file.
The Sicilian Defence Closed 2.Nc3 line used to be reserved for the 3.g3
Closed Sicilian. There White plays Bg2.
The 3.f4 Grand Prix Attack became popular to play 4.Nf3. Then White
develops the light squared bishop to Bc4 or Bb5.
Here White played a much more modest setup with 3.d3, 4.Be2 and 5.f4.
This bishop has very little scope.
Experience has taught me that there are two principal dangers for me in
chess. One is aggressive play by my opponent that threatens to win material
or checkmate me. Two is unsafe play by me that leaves my pieces
unprotected or my king vulnerable.
When White plays passively, danger number one disappears.
RichyRich - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 11.12.2012 begins 1.e4

c5 2.Nc3 Nc6 3.d3 [3.g3 g6 4.Bg2 Bg7 5.d3 is the Closed Sicilian.] 3...g6
4.Be2 Bg7 5.f4 e6 6.Nf3 Nge7 7.0-0 [If 7.e5 d5=] 7...d5 8.e5 0-0 9.Nb5 a6!?
10.Nd6 Nf5 [10...f6 11.Nxc8 Rxc8 12.exf6 Bxf6=] 11.Nxf5 exf5 12.b3 f6
13.Bb2 fxe5!? [13...d4=/+ gives Black a slight edge, but the pawn structure is
drawish. I decided to let White have an advanced but unprotected pawn on
e5.] 14.Nxe5 Nxe5 15.Bxe5 Bxe5 16.fxe5 d4 17.Bf3 Qc7 18.Bd5+ Kg7
[18...Kh8] 19.Qe2 [19.Qf3] 19...Re8 20.Rfe1 Be6 21.Bf3 Re7 22.g3?
[22.Rac1 Rae8 23.c3 dxc3 24.Rxc3 Qa5=/+] 22...Rae8 23.Qg2 Bc8! 24.c3
Rxe5 25.Rec1 dxc3 26.Rxc3 [26.Qc2 Re3-+] 26...Re1+ 27.Rxe1 Rxe1+
28.Kf2 Qe5 29.Rc2 [White could avoid immediate mate by giving up a lot of
material after 29.d4 cxd4 30.Rd3 Ra1-+] 29...Qe3# White checkmated 0-1
25 - Taormina Grand Prix
The Sicilian Defence is a popular chess opening because it allows Black to
counter any of White’s attempts to win.
One excellent approach is the Grand Prix Attack with 2.Nc3 and 3.f4. GM
Roman Dzindzichashvili promoted this method. Roman is persuasive. From
time to time I play the Grand Prix as White.
The book “Chess Openings for White, Explained” by Lev Alburt,

Dzindzichashvili, Perelshteyn and Al Lawrence had this in Chapter 14 on
Meeting the Sicilian Defence:
"A practical White player needs something that reduces Black's options and
that offers a straightforward way to play for the advantage.
"In the 1970s, British masters put together such an approach, using the
pawn-push f4, for their weekend circuit of tournaments - the Grand Prix.
Their approach caught the attention of chess players around the world."
I had Black vs Daniel J. Taormina in a club game at Lycoming College in

Williamsport, Pennsylvania. Daniel Taormina was an enthusiastic but not a
very regular player at our club.
Daniel and I played many times in 1995 and then again in 2001. Taormina
made progress when he played. I am higher rated, so statistically and
logically I should win. I have to play good moves.
Here White completed the development of all four minor pieces and castled
quickly. But his bishops were passively placed. His aggressive plan on the
kingside was the right strategy, but tactically he created more weaknesses
than threats. Counter punches to his king netted me a full rook and White
resigned.
Taormina (1241) - Sawyer (2010), Williamsport, PA 15.05.2001 begins

1.e4 c5 2.Nc3 Nc6 3.f4 e6 4.d3?! [This traps in a bishop. Better is 4.Nf3,
allowing 5.Bc4 or 5.Bb5] 4...g6 5.Nf3 Bg7 6.Bd2 Nge7 7.Be2 0-0 8.0-0 Nd4
9.g4?! [This leaves White's kingside vulnerable. Better is 9.Nxd4 cxd4
10.Nb5 d5=] 9...d5 10.h4 Nec6 11.a3 [11.h5!?] 11...Nxf3+ [11...Nxe2+!
12.Qxe2 Nd4-/+] 12.Rxf3? [12.Bxf3 Qxh4-/+] 12...Qxh4 13.Rf2? Bd4
14.Qf1 Qg3+ 15.Qg2 Bxf2+ 16.Kf1 Qxg2+ 17.Kxg2 Bd4 0-1
26 - Wolff Closed Sicilian
Stephen D. Wolff of Texas was a master in the Correspondence Chess
League of America (CCLA). In 1995 Wolff won games vs two opponents
that I had previously played: John Vehre and Herbert Hickman.
I played the Sicilian Defence against Wolff in 1980. I had the advantage that
postal players were allowed to use books.
As wonderful as opening books are, they do not play the game for you. Once
you leave the published theory, you need good strategy and accurate tactics.
Vs me Wolff chose the 2.Nc3 Closed Sicilian Defence where White plays
1.e4, 2.Nc3, 3.g3, 4.Bg2, 5.d3. Then White might or might not include 6.f4
before playing Nf3 and 0-0. Black in turn plays 1...c5 and 2...Nc6. Then
Black can be creative. One can choose either a solid or aggressive structure to
defend White's likely onslaught in the center and on the kingside.
I got a very good position as Black out of the opening. I imagine that my
books helped. Back then, I played through sections of Chess Informant in the
openings that I might play to see where grandmasters placed their pieces.
That helps with strategical ideas, but it does not train you in tactical skills.
Wolff completely outplayed me. I resigned when Wolff began a combination

vs g6 and d5. Black is losing, but I wish I had played one or two more moves
to allow him to demonstrate exactly how he planned to win. In the end,
moves such as 24.e6, 24.Bxd5, and moves like Rxg6 and Qg2 were
threatened.
Wolff (2200) - Sawyer (2000), corr CCLA 1980 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nc3 Nc6
3.g3 g6 4.Bg2 Bg7 5.d3 d6 6.f4 e5 [Alternatives are 6...Nf6=, 6...Rb8= or
6...e6=] 7.Nf3 Nge7 8.0-0 0-0 9.Be3 Nd4 10.Qd2 [10.fxe5 dxe5 11.Nd5=]
10...exf4 [10...Bg4=] 11.gxf4 [11.Bxf4=] 11...b5 [11...Bg4!=/+] 12.Nd1
Nxf3+ 13.Rxf3 Bg4 14.Rg3 Bxd1 [14...Bh5=] 15.Rxd1 f5 16.c3 Rb8 17.b4
Qc7 18.bxc5 dxc5 19.e5 Rfd8 20.d4 Nd5 21.h4 Kf7 [21...cxd4 22.Bxd5+
Rxd5 23.cxd4+/-] 22.h5 a5 [22...Nxe3 23.Rxe3+/-] 23.hxg6+ 1-0
Book 2 – Chapter 2 – 2.Nf3 without 2…d6
2.Nf3 Various
Normally Black answers 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 with moves like 2…d6, 2…e6, or 2…
Nc6. These moves are very flexible and can transpose into each other,
especially when Black plays all three of those by move six. This section
covers other second moves by Black.
27 - Sicilian Alapin Dragon
The Sicilian Defence Alapin 2.c3 g6 variation is an attempt to avoid the more
popular 2.c3 d5 and 2.c3 Nf6 lines.
The 2.c3 g6 lines are recommended by Grandmaster Roman

Dzindzichashvili.
His Accelerated Sicilian Dragon repertoire has been very popular by players
at all levels.
Frequently I have faced the Dragon Sicilian many times from the White side
throughout my chess career.
I have won and lost some very exciting games.
Here is a short little blitz game where I played the Black side.
I captured on d4 but not the gambit pawn on c3.
sr2015 - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 13.12.2012 begins 1.e4 c5

2.Nf3 g6 3.d4 cxd4 4.c3 Bg7 5.Bc4 e6 6.0-0 Ne7 7.e5 d5 8.exd6 Qxd6
9.cxd4 0-0 10.Nc3 a6?! [10...Nbc6 11.Ne4 Qc7=] 11.Ne4 Qb6 12.Bg5 Nbc6
13.Nf6+ Bxf6 [13...Kh8=] 14.Bxf6 Nd5?! 15.Qd2? Nxf6 White resigns 0-1
28 - Delayed Wing Stretch
Do you have a favorite gambit in the Sicilian Defence from either side of the
board?
Bill Stretch played a Delayed Wing Gambit after the initial moves of 1.e4 c5
2.Nf3 d6 3.b4!?
White obtained good play for the gambit pawn.
As Black I moved my queen to the kingside and was fortunate to escape.
William Stretch and I became experts with ratings over 2000.
In this 1982 tournament at Levittown, Pennsylvania we were out of the

running for first.
I rarely played gambits, but here I found myself defending to survive.
Then White stood better after my mistake on move 7.
White pushed a passed pawn to d6 where I blockaded with a knight.
Once I demonstrated Black had a good defense while up material, White

resigned.
Stretch - Sawyer, Levittown, PA (5), 16.05.1982 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6

3.b4 cxb4 4.d4 d5 [4...Nf6=] 5.exd5 Qxd5 6.c4 bxc3 7.Nxc3 Qh5? [7...Qa5
8.Bd2 Nf6 9.Bb5+ Bd7 10.Qe2 e6 11.Nd5 Qd8 12.Nxf6+ gxf6=] 8.Rb1
[8.Qa4+!+-] 8...a6 9.Bc4 [9.Qa4+!+-] 9...e6 10.0-0 Nf6 11.d5 b5 12.Bb3
[12.dxe6 fxe6 13.Bxe6 Bxe6 14.Re1+-] 12...Be7 [12...e5 13.Re1+/-] 13.d6
[13.Re1+-] 13...Bd8 14.Ba3 Nbd7 15.Ne2 Bb7 16.Nf4 [16.Ng3 Qg4=/+]
16...Qg4 17.Nxe6 [17.Bc1 Rc8-/+] 17...fxe6 18.Bxe6 Bxf3 [18...Qxe6!
19.Re1 Ne4-+] 19.Qxf3 [19.Bxg4 Bxd1-+] 19...Qxf3 20.gxf3 Bb6 21.Rbc1
Kd8 22.Rc6 Rc8 23.Rfc1 Rxc6 24.Rxc6 Re8 25.Bf5 Re2 26.Bb4 g6 [Or
26...Nd5-+] 27.Bh3 Ke8 28.Bc3 Rc2 29.Be6 b4 30.Rc8+ Bd8 0-1
29 - Haines Never Gave Up
Ray Haines sent me a Sicilian Defence game vs Steve Morgan:
“Hi Tim, I have a club game for you to see. The game ended in a draw. I ran
it through my computer and it found the game as being even after I lost the
pawn. This is not one of my best games, but it shows how important it is to
not give up... Ray"
Steve Morgan was rated 2047. Ray Haines proved that being up one pawn is
not always enough to win. Never give up too soon. It reminds me of British
Prime Minister Winston Churchill. He stood against Adolf Hitler of
Germany. In a speech before the House of Commons, June 4, 1940, Winston
Churchill said:
"Even though large tracts of Europe and many old and famous States have
fallen or may fall into the grip of the Gestapo and all the odious apparatus of
Nazi rule, we shall not flag or fail. We shall go on to the end, we shall fight in
France, we shall fight on the seas and oceans, we shall fight with growing
confidence and growing strength in the air, we shall defend our Island,
whatever the cost may be, we shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the
landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight
in the hills; we shall never surrender..."
Morgan (2047) - Haines, Club Game, Maine, 10.04.2014 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 e6

3.c3 [White avoids the 3.d4 Open Sicilian] 3...d5 4.Bb5+ Nc6 5.exd5 exd5
6.Qe2+ Be7 [6...Qe7=] 7.Ne5 [7.0-0=] 7...Bd7 8.Nxd7 Qxd7 9.d4 0-0-0!?
10.0-0 Nf6 11.Bxc6 bxc6 12.Be3 Rhe8 13.Qa6+ [13.dxc5+/=] 13...Kb8?
[13...Qb7 14.Qxb7+ Kxb7 15.dxc5 Nd7 16.b4 Bf6=] 14.dxc5 Ne4 15.b4 Bf6
16.Bd4 Qb7 17.Qxb7+ [White's queen is the more dangerous and therefore
their exchange helps Black. 17.Qa4+/-] 17...Kxb7 18.Rd1 Rd7 19.f3 Bxd4+
20.cxd4 Ng5 21.Nc3 Re3 22.Rac1 f6 23.h4 Nf7 24.Kf2 Rde7 25.b5 Nd8
26.bxc6+ Kxc6 27.Re1 Rxe1 28.Rxe1 Rxe1 29.Kxe1 Ne6 30.Ne2 g6
31.Kd2 h5 [Black is stuck on the queenside, so he chose active kingside play.
If 31...Ng7 32.g4+/-] 32.g3 [Unnecessarily slow. After 32.g4! f5 33.gxh5
gxh5 34.Ke3+- Black will likely have to give up a second pawn.] 32...Ng7
33.g4 g5 34.hxg5 fxg5 35.Kd3 hxg4 36.fxg4 Ne8 37.Ng3 Nf6 38.Kc3?
[White gives back a pawn and now it is a draw. He could have probed longer
with 38.Nf5+/-] 38...Nxg4 39.Nf5 Nf6 1/2-1/2
30 - Cat Who Played Bb5+
The Moscow Variation 3.Bb5+ of the Sicilian Defence was once
recommended for White by GM Larry Kaufman in his excellent 2004 book
"The Chess Advantage in Black and White" with the subtitle "Openings
Moves of the Grandmasters".
The bishop check avoided the popular Open Sicilian 3.d4 lines with all their
exciting and complicated opening theory. Of course White could just push
the d-pawn to d4 later if he chose.
The cat loving handle "chesspurr" put my opponent in good company. The
former world champion Alexander Alekhine used to bring his cat named
"chess" to the board in the 1930s. In a famous picture the cat looks like a
Siamese to me.
This reminds me of a woman who rented a room to me in her trailer. I was

working in her area for the summer. It was just me, that woman and her
Siamese cat. I found out that the cat was "literally" toilet trained or should I
say "litter free" toilet trained.
chesspurrr - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 20.09.2014 begins 1.e4

c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.Bb5+ Bd7 4.Bxd7+ Qxd7 5.0-0 Nc6 6.d4 [The most common
line is 6.c3 Nf6 7.Re1 e6 8.d4 cxd4 9.cxd4 d5 10.e5 Ne4 11.Nbd2 Nxd2
12.Bxd2 Be7 13.Rc1=] 6...cxd4 7.Nxd4 Nf6 8.Nxc6 bxc6 9.Qe2 g6 10.e5
dxe5 11.Qxe5 Bg7 12.Nc3 0-0 13.h3 Nd5 14.Qg3 Nxc3 15.bxc3 Qd6
16.Bf4 Qc5 17.Rfe1 [17.Rad1=] 17...Qxc3 [17...Bxc3-+] 18.Be5 Bxe5
19.Qxe5 Qxe5 20.Rxe5 e6 21.Rc5 Rfc8 22.Rb1 Rc7 23.Rb4 Rd8 24.Rbc4
Rd1+ 25.Kh2 Rd6 26.f4 Kf8 27.Kg3 Ke7 28.Kf3 Kd7 29.Ke4 Rd5 30.c3?
[30.Rc3 Kd6=/+] 30...Rxc5 [30...Kd6-+] 31.Rxc5 Kd6 32.Rc4 c5 33.Ra4 f6
34.g4 f5+ 35.Ke3 Kc6 36.Ra6+ Kd5 37.c4+ Kxc4 38.Rxe6 a5 39.gxf5 gxf5
40.Re5 Kb4 41.Rxf5 Ka3 42.Rf8 Kxa2 43.Kd3 c4+ 44.Kc3 a4 45.f5 a3
46.f6 Kb1 [46...Rc6=] 47.Rb8+ [47.Re8+-] 47...Kc1 48.Rg8 [48.Ra8=]
48...Kd1 49.Rg7 Rc6 50.Rg1+ Ke2 51.Rg2+ Kf1 52.Ra2 Rxf6 53.Kxc4 Rf3
54.h4 h6 55.Kd5 h5 56.Ke4 Rh3 57.Kf4 Rxh4+ 58.Kg5 [58.Kg3 Ra4=/+]
58...Rh3 59.Kf5 Ke1 60.Kf4 Kd1 61.Rg2 Kc1 62.Ra2 Kb1 63.Rg2 a2
64.Rg1+ Kb2 65.Rg2+ Ka3 66.Rg1 Rb3 67.Kg5 Rb1 68.Rg3+ Ka4
69.Kxh5 a1Q 70.Rg4+ Rb4 71.Rg5 Qh1+ White forfeits on time 0-1
2.Nf3 Nc6
This section covers games that begin with 2.Nf3 Nc6 but without 3.d4.
31 - King's Indian Attack
Bob Muir often played closed variations from 1.e4.
I tried many different openings against him.
These included the Alekhine Defence or the Caro-Kann Defence.
Sometimes I chose the 1.e4 e5 Open Game as Black playing either the
Elephant Gambit or the Ruy Lopez.
This time I ventured the sharper Sicilian Defence.
Generally players who prefer the Open Sicilian continue the opening with the
moves 2.Nf3 / 3.d4.
In this game Bob Muir played 2.d3 / 3.Nf3. Then we transposed to the King's
Indian Attack.
Early in his career Bobby Fischer sometimes adopted this set-up, especially
against 2…e6.
Our position was closed. Black expanded and grabbed space by advancing all
his pawns on the queenside.
Black applied pressure and White dropped a pawn.
When Black was about to win more material, White resigned.
Muir (1800) - Sawyer (2011), Williamsport, PA 1995 begins 1.e4 c5 2.d3

Nc6 3.Nf3 e6 4.g3 d5 5.Nbd2 Nf6 6.Bg2 Be7 7.0-0 b5 8.b3 a5 9.c4 dxc4
10.dxc4 b4 11.Bb2 0-0 12.Qe2 Qc7 13.e5 Nd7 14.Rfe1 Bb7 15.Bh3
[15.Ne4=] 15...a4 16.bxa4 Nb6 17.Rac1 Rxa4 18.Ra1 Rfa8 19.a3 bxa3
20.Bc3 Nb4 21.Ne4 Bxe4 22.Qxe4 N4d5 0-1
32 - Draw 3375 with 3.c4
From time to time I play a high rated computer like LinuxKnight on the
Internet Chess Club. Usually I get crushed quickly if the monster chess
engine is rated over 3000.
Here is a Sicilian Defence that I managed a draw in a three minute game.

Previously I drew this opponent in the Caro-Kann / BDG and in the Petroff
Defence.
Human grandmasters put their pants on one leg at a time (except for when
they wear a dress!). Human, grandmasters could blunder at any time in ways
that computers cannot.
Mistakes by high rated players are rare, which is how they get to be high
rated.
These chess engines possess a high level of tactical skill, pattern recognition,
calculation ability and exact knowledge of thousands of opening and
endgame positions.
In the game below LinuxKnight, I headed for an Accelerated Dragon Sicilian

in the same vein as recommended by GM Roman Dzindzichashvili.
White instead chose a hybrid of the English Opening after 1.e4, 2.Nf3 and
3.c4. It could be an Accelerated Maroczy Bind, except White plays 4.d3.
After 17 moves, the White knight attacks the Black queen back and forth for
a draw. Curious. I wish this game had been rated!
LinuxKnight (3375) - Sawyer (1951), ICC 3 0 u Internet Chess Club,

09.06.2008 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 g6 3.c4 Nc6 4.d3 [4.d4 cxd4 5.Nxd4 is a
Maroczy Bind Accelerated Dragon.] 4...Bg7 5.Be2 Nf6 6.Nc3 d6 7.0-0 0-0
8.Bg5 Bg4 9.h3 Bxf3 10.Bxf3 Nd4 11.Nb5 Nxf3+ 12.Qxf3 a6 13.Nc3 Nd7
[13...Re8=] 14.Qd1 [14.Nd5 Re8 15.Qe2=] 14...Ne5 15.Qd2 Nc6 [15...b5!
16.cxb5 axb5 17.Nxb5 Qa5!=] 16.Rad1 Rb8 17.Nd5 Qd7 [17...f6 18.Be3
f5=] 18.Nb6 Qc7 [18...Qe8=] 19.Nd5 Qd7 20.Nb6 Qc7 21.Nd5 Qd7 1/2-1/2
33 - Lack of Decision
"What will I play against the Sicilian Defence?" Back in 1973 one would
choose the popular Open Sicilian with 2.Nf3/3.d4; Closed Sicilian with
2.Nc3/3.g3; or Smith-Morra Gambit with 2.d4/3.c3.
It really doesn't matter which line White chooses vs the Sicilian Defence as
long as you actually make a decision! From that commitment will come
confidence to play well. This game looks to be my worst game from 1973,
but life is not all about success. One can also learn lessons from losses. My
opponent was my friend Ray Haines who was in the process of adding the
Sicilian Defence to his repertoire. It was a friendly game but I fought on to
the bitter end. Ray played better than I did.
Sawyer - Haines, Ft Fairfield, ME 20.12.1973 begins 1.e4 c5 [A surprise.

Ray had been playing 1...e5] 2.Nc3 [I have a moment of indecision. Usually I
had played the Open Sicilian with 2.Nf3 and 3.d4 but what has Haines
prepared for me?] 2...Nc6 3.Nf3 [Once again I change my mind. I did not
play a Closed Sicilian.] 3...d6 4.Bc4 [I am still unsure what to do. Ray
probably did not know much book, but chess players like to worry.] 4...e6
5.0-0 Nf6 6.d4 [Finally I head back toward the normal Open Sicilian.]
6...cxd4 7.Nxd4 Be7 8.Be3 Bd7 [Here Ray leaves the book continuation
8...0-0 9.Bb3 a6 10.f4 reaching a position typical of Bobby Fischer's games.]
9.Qf3?! [This move invites an obvious knight fork to swap off a bishop.
Better is 9.Bb3 with a typical position.] 9...Ne5 10.Qe2 Nxc4 11.Qxc4 0-0
12.Nf3 [White has no plan.] 12...Rc8 13.Qe2 Qa5 14.Rad1 Bc6 15.Bd2 Qb6
16.b3 Rfd8 17.Bg5 Qb4 18.Qe3? Ng4 19.Qd4 Qxd4 20.Rxd4 Bf6? [Both
20...f6-/+ and 20...Nf6-/+ leave Black with a much better position.] 21.e5?
[21.Bxf6 Nxf6 22.Rfd1 gives White pressure on d6.] 21...Bxf3 22.exf6 gxf6?
[Black lets things slip. 22...Rxc3! 23.fxg7 Rdc8 24.gxf3 Ne5 wins due to the
threat of ...Nxf3+ forking king, rook, and bishop.] 23.gxf3? [After this Black
has a commanding advantage. The only hope for White was 23.Bd2 Ne5=/+
but Black still is up a pawn.] 23...fxg5 24.Rxg4 Rxc3 25.Rxg5+ Kf8 26.Rc1
Rdc8 27.Ra5 a6 28.Kg2 d5 29.Ra4 Rxc2 30.Rxc2 Rxc2 31.a3 Rc3 32.Rb4
b5 33.a4 Rc5 34.axb5 Rxb5 35.Rxb5 [35.Rh4 at least would try to get a
passed pawn. Swapping rooks just leads to a simple pawn ending. I
stubbornly play on.] 35...axb5 36.b4 e5 37.f4 e4 38.Kf1 Ke7 39.Ke2 d4
40.Kd2 Kf6 41.Ke2 Kf5 42.Ke1 Kxf4 43.Ke2 d3+ 0-1
34 - Skip Spence 2.Bc4
When you play the Sicilian Defence at a club, you see a wide variety of
responses.
Naturally moves 2.Nf3, 2.Nc3 and 2.c3 are popular, but you also see 2.d4,
2.f4 and 2.b4 quite often.
Here we look at a game vs Lorenzo Skip Spence.
Against my Sicilian Defence, Skip chose 2.Bc4.
In theory there was nothing wrong with developing a bishop early.
But Black can adjust his pawn structure to make the Bc4 ineffective. Thus
my 2...e6.
The position remained equal for the first couple dozen moves until I gained
the edge.
Spence - Sawyer, Williamsport, PA 1996 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Bc4 e6 3.Nf3 Nc6

4.Nc3 a6 [4...Nf6=] 5.a3 b5 6.Ba2 Qc7 7.d4 cxd4 8.Nxd4 Nf6 9.Nde2 b4
10.axb4 Bxb4 11.Bd2 0-0 12.0-0 Bb7 13.Ng3 Ne5 14.Nb5 Qc5 15.Bxb4
Qxb4 16.Nd6 Bc6 17.Bb3 Bb5 [17...Rfb8 18.Ra3 Ne8 19.Nxe8 Rxe8 20.f4
Ng6=] 18.Nxb5 [18.c3] 18...axb5 19.Rxa8 Rxa8 20.c3 Qc5 21.Qd4 Qxd4
22.cxd4 Nd3 23.Rb1 d5 24.exd5 Nxd5 25.Bd1 [25.Bxd5 exd5 26.Nf5=]
25...Ra2 26.Be2 N5f4 27.Bxd3 Nxd3 28.Ne4 Rxb2 29.Rxb2 Nxb2 30.Kf1
Nc4 31.Ke2 Kf8 32.Kd3 Ke7 33.Nc3 Nd6 34.f4 Kf6 35.g4 b4 36.Na2 b3
37.Nc3 g5 38.fxg5+ Kxg5 39.h3 Kh4 40.Nb1 Kxh3 41.g5 Kg4 42.Kc3 [Or
42.Nd2 b2 43.Kc2 Kxg5 44.Kxb2 Kf4 45.Kc2 h5-+] 42...Nb5+ 43.Kc4 Nxd4
44.Kxd4 Kxg5 45.Nd2 b2 46.Nb1 h5 47.Ke3 h4 48.Kf2 [Or 48.Nc3 Kg4
49.Kd2 h3 50.Kc2 h2 51.Nd1 Kg3-+] 48...Kg4 49.Nd2 e5 50.Nb1 f5 51.Nd2
e4 52.Nb1 f4 53.Ke2 h3 54.Nd2 h2 55.Nb1 h1Q 56.Nd2 b1Q 57.Nxb1
Qxb1 58.Kd2 e3+ 59.Kc3 e2 60.Kd4 e1Q 61.Kd5 Qb5+ 62.Kd4 Qee5# 0-1
35 - Ready for Rossolimo
What is a good way to play the Sicilian Defence against the Rossolimo
Variation?
The line begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5, also known as the Nimzovich-
Rossolimo Attack.
White avoids the Open Sicilian 3.d4 and with 3.Bb5 threatens to double
Black's pawns.
However 4.Bxc6 would involve giving up the two bishops, so Black often
plays 3...g6. As Black vs Robert Lovenstein I followed this set-up with 5...e5,
6...Nge7 and 7...d6.
By the time Bob took my knight on c6, I recaptured with my other knight.
The queens came off the board and by move 15 White had to give up a piece
for my kingside pawns.
He resigned when Black's c-pawn was going to promote to a queen.
Robert H. Lovenstein was an active member of the Chaturanga Chess Club.
We played three games that I have recorded from my days in that club after I
moved back to Pennsylvania from Texas.
In 1984 I was in my 30s and Bob was a generation older.
Lovenstein (1503) - Sawyer, Hatboro, PA 26.07.1984 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3

Nc6 3.Bb5 g6 4.0-0 Bg7 5.c3 [5.Nc3=] 5...e5 [5...Nf6=] 6.a3 Nge7 7.b4 d6
8.d4?! [8.d3+/=] 8...a6? [8...exd4! 9.cxd4 0-0!=/+] 9.Bxc6+ Nxc6 10.dxc5?!
[10.d5+/-] 10...dxc5 11.Qxd8+ Nxd8 12.Bg5 f6 13.Bh4 [13.Be3=] 13...h5
14.Rd1 g5 15.Nxg5 fxg5 16.Bxg5 Ne6 17.Bh4 c4 18.Nd2 b5 19.Nf3 [19.a4
Bb7-/+] 19...Bb7 20.Rd6 Nf4 21.Kf1 [21.Rad1 0-0-+] 21...Bxe4 22.Re1
Bd3+ 23.Kg1 Ne2+ 24.Kh1 0-0 25.h3 Nxc3 26.Nxe5 Bxe5 [26...Ne4!-+]
27.Rxe5 Ne4 28.Rg6+ Kh7 29.Rge6 c3 30.Rxh5+ Kg7 31.Re7+ Rf7
32.Rh7+ Kxh7 33.Rxf7+ Kg6 34.Rc7 c2 35.Rc6+ Kh7 36.Rc7+ Kh8
37.Kh2 Bc4 0-1
2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4
Here we begin to consider the lines where White chooses the Open Sicilian
with 3.d4.
36 - Irish Experiment Murray
Every St. Patrick's Day I think of my friend from Williamsport.
Here I select a game that I played against my Irish chess friend John Patrick
Murray.
His pet lines in the Sicilian Defence involved an early ...a6.
His lines were a cross between the Taimanov, Najdorf and Sveshnikov
variations.
Here Pat opened the position up prematurely leading to sharp play and a short
game.
Neither of us took time to castle.
In the fire fight that followed, Black's king got caught in the center.
Sawyer - Murray, Williamsport, PA 1994 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4

cxd4 4.Nxd4 a6 5.c4 [5.Nc3+/=] 5...e6 6.Nc2 Nf6 7.Nc3 d5? [7...Bc5=]
8.cxd5 exd5 9.exd5 Ne5 10.Qe2 Qe7 11.Ne3 g6 12.f4 Neg4 13.h3 Nxe3
14.Qxe3 [14.Bxe3!+/-] 14...Qxe3+ 15.Bxe3 Bb4 16.Bd4 Ke7 17.d6+?! [It is
even stronger to castle first with 17.0-0-0! Re8 18.d6+ Bxd6 19.Bxf6+ Kxf6
20.Rxd6+ Kg7 21.Bc4+-] 17...Bxd6 18.Nd5+?! Ke6 [18...Nxd5 19.Bxh8
f6=/+] 19.Nxf6 Bxf4 20.Bc4+ 1-0
37 - Accelerated Pawn Push
In my early chess years I studied the main line Dragon Sicilian Defence
(5...g6) more than the Accelerated Dragon (4...g6).
David Levy wrote a pamphlet on the Hyper-Accelerated Dragon (2...g6).
In my youth I thought that was too risky, but now I know that almost
anything is playable.
Most opponents do not study much opening theory beyond a pet line here or
there.
Richard Zdun was a regular at the chess club in Williamsport.
I think he was in his 60s for most of the nine years we played.
Dick played a wide variety of openings.
I am pretty sure that Zdun was originally from Europe somewhere.
He possessed some general knowledge and a certain amount of practical

experience.
The main issue here was that Black delayed the move …Nf6.
In this Sicilian Defence Accelerated Dragon Variation the players castled

opposite sides.
Black traded off his bishop on g7 by 12...Bxd4.
A few moves later White was able to move a pawn to g7 with a winning
position.
Sawyer (2010) - Zdun (1634), Williamsport, PA 11.02.1998 begins 1.e4 c5

2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 d6 5.Nc3 Bd7 6.Be3 g6 7.Bc4 Bg7 8.Qd2 Ne5
9.Bb3 [9.Be2!?] 9...Nc6 [9...Rc8=] 10.a3 a6 11.f3 Nxd4 [11...Nf6=] 12.Bxd4
Bxd4 13.Qxd4 Nf6 14.0-0-0 0-0 15.g4 Bc6 16.h4 Qc7 [16...Qa5 17.h5 g5
18.Nd5+/-] 17.h5 Rad8 [17...Qa5 18.hxg6 Qg5+ 19.Kb1 hxg6 20.Rh3+-]
18.hxg6 e5 19.Qd2 Be8 20.g7 1-0
38 - How to Play 4...d5!?
Clive Heyn loved to play very fast blitz chess in our games. He could make
many moves in one second each.
His speed meant Clive Heyn was always a threat to win games on time.
The down side to his instant moves was that Clive seemed to play the first
thing that came into his mind.
Below Heyn chose the Sicilian 4...d5!?
The critical line is 5.exd5 Qxd5 which has similarities to the Queens Knight
Defence with 1.e4 Nc6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 Qxd5.
The line Clive Heyn chose gave White a slight advantage with accurate play.
Perfect opening play in blitz is rare. How players follow it up makes all the
difference.
Clive obtained an equal position.
Heyn took away my castling privileges and castled queenside himself as

Black in this Sicilian Defence.
Both kings were exposed to danger. I set a trap that Black missed.
Suddenly we had an instant checkmate on move 13!
Sawyer (2011) - Heyn (1751), Williamsport, PA 1994 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3

Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 d5 5.Nc3 [5.exd5 Qxd5 6.Be3 e6 7.Nc3 Bb4 8.Qd2
Qa5 9.Nb3 Qe5 10.f4 Bxc3 11.bxc3+/=] 5...dxe4 6.Nxc6 Qxd1+ 7.Kxd1
bxc6 8.Nxe4 Bf5 9.Bd3 0-0-0 [9...e6 10.Ke2 0-0-0 11.Be3 Kb7 12.Rhd1 Be7
13.c3 Nf6=] 10.Ke2 e6 11.Bf4 [11.Rd1] 11...h6? [11...Kb7 12.Rad1 Be7
13.Be5 Nf6 14.Nxf6 Bxd3+ 15.Rxd3 Rxd3 16.cxd3 gxf6 17.Bc3 Rd8=]
12.Rhd1 Nf6? [Logical and fatal. 12...Rd7 13.Ba6+ Kd8 14.Rxd7+ Kxd7
15.Rd1+ Ke7 16.Bd6+ Ke8 17.Bxf8 Kxf8 18.Nc5+/-] 13.Ba6# 1-0
39 - Kalashnikov by Hofford
Frank Hofford fired a Kalashnikov Sicilian Defence at me in the days before
I knew what one was.
I met his aggressive 4...e5 with the rather tame 5.Nb3.
My plan was to castle opposite sides and play for mate in the English Attack
style years before it was popular!
My set-up was Qd2, 0-0-0, f3, g4, h4, with g5 driving away the defender
knight from f6 and forcing mate.
It worked marvelously and the game lasted just 16 moves.
This APCT Semi-Class tournament came during my early days of postal

chess as I was rapidly moving my rating up over 2000. This win was a
stepping stone in that process.
I never saw another game played by Frank Hofford, but I note that he was
good at chess problems.
Every month Newman Guttman published The Problem Solver in the APCT
News Bulletin. Contestants sent in solutions, usually a mate in two or three
moves. The first move was almost never a check nor a capture.
When I topped the APCT Problem Solver Ladder in mid-1979, Frank

Hofford was then listed as 7th out of 48 participants.
Some guy I had never heard of named Tom Purser was 26th. My own brother
was listed at 33rd.
Sawyer - Hofford (1694), corr APCT 77SC-11 (1), 11.1977 begins 1.e4 c5
2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 e5 5.Nb3 [5.Nb5 is the most popular move.]
5...Bb4+ 6.Bd2 Bxd2+ 7.Qxd2 Nf6 [7...a5=] 8.Nc3 a6 9.0-0-0 0-0 10.f3 b5
11.g4 h6? [This creates a target. Better is 11...b4 12.Na4=] 12.h4 Ne8 13.g5
hxg5 [Black can try to keep the position closed with 13...h5 but White's army
is on the march. 14.f4 exf4 15.Be2 g6 16.Rhf1 d6 17.Qxf4+/-] 14.hxg5 d6
15.Kb1 [Or 15.f4+- which also keep g5 from being taken with check.]
15...Be6 16.Qh2 1-0
4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 e5
The two sides tangle in the Sveshnikov Sicilian Defence.
40 - Save Seconds Short
A draw can be the better part of wisdom, especially in a fast 3 minute blitz
game vs a good player.
We contested a popular Sicilian Defence. In this Sveshnikov Variation, Black

usually plays 8...b5 attempting to pawn fork the White knights on Nc3 and
Na3.
My opponent Fuerte2004 played a side line 8...Be6. We reached an endgame

where I was winning on the board but losing on the clock. At move 44,
Houdini found a mate in 25 more moves. I didn't have time for that! I
managed two moves to draw just barely before my clock expired, eliminating
his last pawn. In the final position I was up a single bishop with kings on the
board and nothing else. Thus, it was drawn due to no material to mate.
Sawyer (2280) - Fuerte2004 (2250), ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club,

19.04.2009 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 e5
6.Ndb5 d6 7.Bg5 a6 8.Na3 Be6 9.Nd5!? [9.Nc4! Rc8 10.Bxf6 gxf6
11.Ne3+/=] 9...Bxd5 10.exd5 Qa5+ 11.Bd2 [11.c3! Qxd5 12.Bxf6 Qe4+
13.Be2 gxf6 14.0-0=] 11...Qxd5 12.c4 Qe4+ 13.Be2 Nd4 14.f3 Qxe2+
15.Qxe2 Nxe2 16.Kxe2 d5 17.Rac1 Bxa3 18.bxa3 0-0 19.cxd5 Nxd5
20.Rhd1 Rfe8 21.Bb4 Nf4+ 22.Kf2 Rad8 23.Rxd8 Rxd8 24.Rc7 b5 25.Ra7
Nd3+ 26.Ke3 Nc1 [26...Nb2 27.Rxa6 h6 28.Ke2 Rd1 29.Rb6 Rc1 30.Kf2
Rc2+ 31.Kg3 Nd3 32.Rxb5 Rxa2 33.Rb8+ Kh7 34.Rd8 Nxb4 35.axb4 Rb2=]
27.Rxa6 [27.Rc7+/-] 27...Nxa2 28.Rb6 f5 29.Rxb5 Re8 30.Rb7 [30.Bd2+/-]
30...e4 31.Re7 Rxe7 32.Bxe7 exf3 33.Kxf3 Nc3 34.Bb4 Na4 35.Kf4 g6
36.Ke5 Kf7 37.h4 h6 38.g3 Nb6 39.Kd6 Nc4+?! [Black does better to keep
pushing kingside pawns with 39...g5] 40.Kc5 Nxa3 41.Bxa3 g5 42.hxg5
hxg5 43.Bc1 f4 44.gxf4 [Houdini found a mate in 25: 44.g4 Kg8 45.Bb2 Kf7
46.Kd5 f3 47.Bd4 Ke7 48.Be3 f2 49.Bxf2 Kd7 50.Bd4 Kc7 51.Be3 Kd7
52.Bxg5 Kc7 53.Be3 Kd8 54.Ke4 Ke8 55.Bd4 Kf7 56.g5 Kg6 57.Kf4 Kf7
58.Kf5 Ke7 59.g6 Kf8 60.g7+ Kf7 61.Kf4 Kg8 62.Ke4 Kh7 63.Kf5 Kg8
64.Kf6 Kh7 65.Kf7 Kh6 66.Be3+ Kh5 67.g8Q Kh4 68.Bf2+ Kh3 69.Qg3#]
44...gxf4 45.Bxf4 1/2-1/2
41 - Sicilian Result Oriented
You know how it goes. When we win a game, we think, "Wow. That's a great
opening!" When we lose, that variation was to blame.
Our result oriented approach colors our evaluations of chess openings. Of

course some openings fit better with our current skill set, while other
openings will actually sharpen our skills.
Early on, I liked the unbalanced 5...e5 Sveshnikov Variation. I played two
games from each side. White won all four games.
That streak ended in 1980. That year I played six Sveshnikov games: two
draws and four Black wins!
After 6.Nbd5 d6, White chooses 7.Bg5 most of the time. In 1979 I faced
7.Nd5. William O'Neal outplayed me and I lost as Black. Thus I decided to
try 7.Nd5 one time as White.
My chance came when James Marfia played a Sicilian Defence. Jim chose
the more popular 8...Nb8, while I had opted for 8...Ne7 vs O'Neal. Both lines
are okay, but Black has to find good moves to avoid trouble in either case.
Jim Marfia and I were rated about the same in APCT. Here I got a passed
pawn on d6, while he pinned my king to an uncomfortable position on h1.
With bishops of opposite colors in a rook endgame, we agreed to a draw.

Later I changed my preference to the main line 7.Bg5.
Sawyer (2050) - Marfia (2050), corr APCT 1980 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6
3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 e5 6.Ndb5 d6 7.Nd5 [7.Bg5 a6 8.Na3 b5=]
7...Nxd5 8.exd5 Nb8 [8...Ne7=] 9.c4 Be7 10.Bd3 0-0 11.0-0 f5 [11...a6=]
12.c5 a6 13.cxd6 Bxd6 14.Nxd6 Qxd6 15.Qc2 e4 [15...Kh8=] 16.Be2 Nd7
17.f3 [17.Rd1+/=] 17...exf3 18.Bxf3 Ne5 19.Qb3 Nxf3+ 20.Rxf3 f4 21.Bd2
Bg4 22.Rf2 Rf7 23.Raf1 f3 24.gxf3 Bh3 25.Re1 Rd8 26.Bb4 [26.f4+/=]
26...Qg6+ [26...Qb6!=] 27.Kh1 Rf5 28.d6+ Kh8 29.Qe6?! [Now the
position is equal. White still could have kept some advantage with 29.Qe3!+/-
] 29...Qxe6 30.Rxe6 Rb5 1/2-1/2
42 - Fighting Sveshnikov
The Correspondence Chess League of America (CCLA) was an old and well
respected postal chess club. I met Mihai Harabor in 1980. He was destined
for a rapid rise in his correspondence career. Although I won two of our three
games, Mihai Harabor would become a much higher rated correspondence
master.
Here I played Black in a Sicilian Defence Sveshnikov Variation. My favorite

book on that opening was: "Sicilian: Lasker-Pelikan", by R. Wade, J.
Speelman, N. Povah, L. Blackstock. I felt like I was exploring original moves
in uncharted territory! Also, I got the Chess Informant issues to study the
latest games.
The World Champion Emmanuel Lasker played 5...e5 a couple times in

1910. Pelikan played it quite a bit in the 1950s. In the mid-1960s Gennadi
Timoshchenko and Evgeny Sveshnikov both played it in big tournaments.
They continued through the 1970s.
Eventually the name "Sveshnikov Variation" stuck. He proved in game after

game that Black's position has a lot of compensation. Black often enjoys two
bishops. This leads to attacks all over the board and at the White king.
Analysis goes 15-20 moves deep.
I gave up the two bishops. That left us bishops of opposite color. In the
endgame that could be drawish. In the middlegame with other pieces on the
board, bishops of opposite color can lead to attacks that cannot easily be
defended. I enticed his king forward to the point where I sacrificed a rook and
checkmated him.
Harabor (2100) - Sawyer (2000), corr CCLA 1980 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3
Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 e5 [This leaves a hole on d5 for a White
piece, like a knight. Black cannot drive it away from d5 with a pawn. In the
olden days, this was thought to be too serious a weakness.] 6.Ndb5 d6 7.Bg5
a6 8.Na3 b5 9.Nd5 [White must decide whether to play 9.Nd5 immediately
or to play 9.Bxf6 gxf6 10.Nd5.] 9…Be7 10.Bxf6 Bxf6 11.c3 0-0 12.Nc2 Rb8
13.Be2 Bg5 14.0-0 Be6 15.Ncb4 Nxb4 16.Nxb4 Qb6 17.Nd5 Qb7 18.b3
Bxd5 19.Qxd5 Qxd5 20.exd5 Bd2 21.c4 bxc4 22.Bxc4 a5 23.Rad1 Bb4
24.f3 f5 25.g3 g5 26.f4 Bc5+ 27.Kg2 gxf4 28.gxf4 e4 29.h4 Rf6 30.h5 Kf7
31.Kh3 Rg8 32.Be2 Ke7 33.Kh4 Rf7 34.h6 Rf6 35.Kh5 Rg2 36.Bc4 Rfg6
37.Rh1 Kf6 38.Rdf1 Bf2 39.Be2 R2g5+ 40.fxg5+ Rxg5# 0-1
43 - Draw EggSalad 3146
Beating the chess engine EggSalad was difficult. I had a great chance in a
Sicilian Defence Sveshnikov. We weaved through the mine field of this
unbalanced popular opening. Rather than play for a middle game advantage
vs a computer program whose tactical skills far exceeded mine, I went for the
endgame with 16.Qc1. After multiple exchanges, we reached a pawn ending.
Chess engines were notoriously weaker in endings, but I was the first to
blunder. On move 33 I allowed Black a win. Fortunately for me EggSalad
missed it. We were dynamically equal again. On move 39 the machine
blundered and gave me a forced win. Sadly, I let it slip on move 45. The
game ended in a draw. If I had the time to calculate the race to queen the
pawns, I could have won. Typical play led to mate on move 62. Back then
when I was in my 40s, I was still a pretty good blitz player. Alas we all have
our limitations when the clock is ticking in speed chess.
Sawyer (2382) - EggSalad (3146), ICC 5 0 u Internet Chess Club,

28.01.2000 begins with 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 e5
6.Ndb5 d6 7.Bg5 a6 8.Na3 b5 9.Bxf6 [9.Nd5 Be7 10.Bxf6 Bxf6 11.c3=]
9...gxf6 10.Nd5 f5 11.Bd3 Be6 12.0-0 Bg7 [12...Bxd5 13.exd5 Ne7 14.c3 or
14.Nxb5=] 13.c3 0-0 14.Nc2 Rc8 15.f3 [White has natural play vs the
queenside with 15.a4+/=] 15...Qg5 [15...Bxd5 16.exd5 Ne7=] 16.Qc1
[16.a4+/=] 16...Qxc1 17.Raxc1 fxe4 18.fxe4 Bxd5 19.exd5 Ne7 20.Ne3
[20.Nb4=] 20...Bh6 21.Rce1 Bxe3+ 22.Rxe3 f5 23.Rh3 [23.Rg3+ Kh8
24.Rgf3 Rc5 25.Be4 Kg7 26.Rg3+ Kh8 27.Rgf3=] 23...Rc5 24.Rh5 Rxd5
25.Bxf5 Nxf5 26.Rhxf5 Rxf5 27.Rxf5 Rd1+ 28.Rf1 Rxf1+ 29.Kxf1 Kf7
30.b3 Ke6 31.Ke2 a5 32.Ke3 d5 33.g4? [33.a3=] 33...a4? [33...b4!-+]
34.bxa4 bxa4 35.a3 Kd6 36.h4 Kd7 37.Kd3 Ke6 38.Ke3 Kd6 39.Kd3 e4+?
[39...Kc5=] 40.Kd4 h6 41.c4 dxc4 42.Kxe4 c3 43.Kd3 Ke5 44.Kxc3 Kf4
45.g5? [This allows Black to draw. If I had the time to calculate in this blitz
game, then I could have won with 45.Kb4 Kxg4 46.Kxa4 Kxh4 47.Kb5 h5
48.a4 Kg3 49.a5 h4 50.a6 h3 51.a7 Kh2 52.a8Q Kg1 53.Qg8+ Kf2 54.Qh7
Kg2 55.Qe4+ Kg1 56.Qg4+ Kh2 57.Kc4 Kh1 58.Qxh3+ Kg1 59.Kd3 Kf2
60.Qg4 Kf1 61.Ke3 Ke1 62.Qg1#] 45...hxg5 46.hxg5 Kxg5 47.Kb4 Kf5
48.Kxa4 Ke6 49.Kb5 Kd7 50.Kb6 Kc8 51.Ka7 Kc7 52.a4 Kc6 53.a5 Kc7
54.Ka8 Kc6 55.Ka7 Kc7 56.Ka8 Kc6 57.a6 Kb6 58.a7 Kc7 White is
stalemated 1/2-1/2
4.Nxd4 g6
This 4…g6 variation is known as the Accelerated Dragon which follows 2…
Nc6. It may transpose from the Hyper-Accelerated Dragon 2…g6 or it may
transpose to the main line 2…d6 Dragon Sicilian with 4.Nf6 5.Nc3 g6.
44 - Count Blacula Sicilian
I began this game with the Hyper-Accelerated Dragon Sicilian Defence
2...g6.
My fourth move 4…Nc6 transposed to the Accelerated Dragon that normally

has 2…Nc6 and 4…g6.
White can choose to avoid the main lines of 5.Nc3 or 5.c4.
In my Internet Chess Club game vs "Blacula" White captured my knight with

5.Nxc6.
Black recaptured toward the center with ...bxc6.
This pawn structure supported the future advance 9…d5.
My strong pawn center which made it difficult for White to mount long
lasting threats.
Blacula - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 12.12.2012 begins 1.e4 c5

2.Nf3 g6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nc6 5.Nxc6 bxc6 6.Nc3 [6.Qd4 Nf6 7.e5 Nd5
8.e6 f6=] 6...Bg7 7.Bd3 [7.Bc4 Qc7=] 7...Nf6 8.0-0 0-0 9.Kh1 d5 10.e5 Nd7
11.f4 Nc5 12.Be2 f6 [12...d4!?] 13.Be3 Ne6 14.exf6 exf6 [14...Rxf6!?] 15.f5
gxf5 16.Bg1 Ng5 17.Qe1 Ne4 18.Bd3 Qd6 19.Rd1 Qe5 20.Bxe4? [20.Ne2
Qxb2=] 20...fxe4 21.Bd4 Qh5 22.Qg3 Kh8? [22...Qg6-/+] 23.Rf4 Be6
24.Rh4 Qg5 25.Qxg5? [Swapping pieces ends the attack. Better was 25.Qf2
Rab8=/+] 25...fxg5 26.Bxg7+ Kxg7 27.Rh3 Bxh3 28.gxh3 Rf2 29.Rc1 Raf8
30.Nd1 Rf1+ 31.Kg2 Re1 White resigns 0-1
45 - Hidden Queen Trick
In the Sicilian Defence or the Pirc Defence, I sometimes pull off the hidden
queen trick. This game began as a Dragon Variation against Dick Zdun.
The hidden queen trick happens when White places his queen on d2 and
castles queenside. Black plays his queen to a5 and castles kingside.
At the key point White moves his king to b1 followed by his knight to d5.
Then the White Qd2 and Black Qa5 are staring at each other.
If Black swaps queens, White first inserts a check with the knight before
recapturing the queen.
In this game Black could have defended with 14...Rfd8. Instead Black played
the move 14...Nd5. This allowed White to pick up a piece when moving to
d5. The 16.Ne7+ move that followed attacked the bishop on c8.
When Black has a knight on f6, White may choose to use the hidden queen
trick to swap into a favorable endgame.
When you consider this tactical shot, make sure the Black Qa5 does not cover
d5, because Qa5xd5 could be embarrassing.
In blitz the embarrassment can go the other way. Black may miss that his
queen is hanging after Nd5 and lose to Qd2xa5. I like to win games that are
short and sweet. Tactics win.

2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 g6 6.Bc4 Bg7 7.Be3 Qa5 [7...0-0
8.Bb3=] 8.f3 0-0 9.Qd2 a6 [9...d6 10.0-0-0 Nxd4 11.Bxd4=] 10.0-0-0
[10.Bb3+/=] 10...b5 11.Bb3 Bb7 [11...Ne5 12.Bh6+/=] 12.Kb1 e6 13.Nxc6
dxc6 14.e5 [14.Qf2+/=] 14...Nd5 [14...Rfd8!=] 15.Nxd5 Qxd2 16.Ne7+ Kh8
17.Rxd2 Bxe5 18.Rd7 Rab8 19.Ba7 Bc8 20.Bxb8 1-0
46 - Roman Accelerated Dragon
GM Roman Dzindzichasvili recommended the Sicilian Defence. His videos
and DVDs have been all the rage among tournament players of all ages.
Roman is passionate about the lines he plays and explains them thoroughly.
His book "Chess Openings for Black, Explained: A Complete Repertoire"
was co-authored by former US champ GM Lev Alburt, Roman's student GM
Eugene Perelshteyn and Al Lawrence who has written a lot on chess.
One of Dzindzi's favorites for Black is the Accelerated Dragon Sicilian. I

faced this opening against Juan Magarinos in a game we played at Borders
bookstore in Orlando, Florida. Juan was a tournament player. His USCF
rating had peaked at 1798 four years before this game.
During that time period, I frequently played 1.Nc3. This game started as a
Queens Knight Defence. But after 1...c5, White chose to head for an Open
Sicilian Defence with an eventual e2-e4. I missed several chances to get an
advantage. We finished play in an even endgame. When the store closed we
had to quit.
Sawyer - Magarinos, Orlando, FL, 04.12.2003 begins 1.Nc3 c5 2.Nf3 [2.e4

is the Closed Sicilian] 2...g6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Bg7 5.e4 [Transposing to the
Open Sicilian Defence.] 5...Nc6 6.Be3 a6? [This leaves weaknesses on the
dark squares and does not help in the center. Correct is 6...Nf6 7.Bc4 0-0
8.Bb3 a5 reaching the main line of book Dzindzichashvili book.] 7.Bc4
[Good but not the best. Very powerful is 7.Nd5!+/= e6 8.Nxc6 bxc6 (8...dxc6
9.Bb6 Qd7 10.Nc7+ Kf8 11.Bc5+ Ne7 12.Qxd7 Bxd7 13.Nxa8+-) 9.Bb6 Qh4
10.Nc7+ Kf8 11.Qd6+ Ne7 12.Nxa8+-] 7...e6 8.0-0 [8.Nxc6 bxc6 9.Qd6+/=]
8...Nge7 9.Qd2 b5 10.Bb3 Bb7 11.f3 Rc8 12.Rad1 0-0 13.Nde2 [13.Nxc6
Bxc6 14.Qd6+/=] 13...Ne5 14.h3 [14.f4!? Ng4 15.Bd4 Bxd4+ 16.Nxd4 b4
17.Nce2 Bxe4 18.h3 Nf6 19.Qxb4+/=] 14...b4 15.Na4 d5 16.exd5
[16.Qxb4!+-] 16...Nxd5 17.Bxd5 Bxd5 18.Nb6 Nc4 19.Nxc4 Rxc4
[19...Bxc4 20.Qxb4 Qc7=] 20.b3 Rc8 21.Qxb4 Rxc2 22.Rd2 Qc8 23.Rxc2
[23.Nf4 Ba8 24.Rxc2 Qxc2=/+] 23...Qxc2 24.Qd2 Qxd2 25.Bxd2 Rc8
26.Rc1 Rxc1+ 27.Bxc1 Kf8 28.Kf2 Ke7 29.Ba3+ Kd7 30.Nf4 Bb7 31.Nd3
Bd4+ 32.Ke2 Kc7 33.Nc5 [The position is equal. The game was
discontinued at this point (most likely because the store was closing), thus I
list it as a draw for database purposes.] 1/2-1/2
47 - Dragon Capablanca Style
Jose Raul Capablanca was my hero forty years ago.
I had the joy of transcribing four of his books into ChessBase format for
ChessCentral.
Here is an unrated fun blitz game I played vs a chess friend on ICC who uses
Capablanca's name for his handle.
The funny thing is that J.R. Capablanca did not normally play the Sicilian
Defence as Black.
Sawyer - capablanca1 Internet Chess Club 2011 begins 1.e4 c5 [The

Sicilian Defence.] 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 g6 [The Accelerated
variation of the Dragon Sicilian. A key to this line is that Black holds back
his d-pawn from the normal ...d7-d6 to play for a ...d7-d5 in one move] 5.Nc3
[Another good idea is to play 5.c4 the Maroczy Bind, which prevents ...d7-
d5. My friend was rated below me. It seemed I had good chances of a win
tactically if the pieces were flying around.] 5...Bg7 6.Be3 Nf6 7.f3 [The
critical continuation here is 7.Bc4 0-0 (7...Qa5 8.0-0+=) 8.Bb3 Qa5 9.f3 d5.]
7...Qa5!? [7...0-0! (Dzindzichashvili) 8.Qd2 d5=] 8.Qd2 0-0 9.Nb3!?
[Kicking the queen away. The alternative is 9.Bc4.] 9...Qd8 10.0-0-0 a5
11.Nd4 [Junior 12 likes 11.Na4+=.] 11...d5 [Sacrificing a pawn which can be
temporary or permanent. Black can transpose into a normal Sicilian Dragon
formation with 11...d6 with a playable game.] 12.Nxc6 bxc6 13.exd5 cxd5
14.Nxd5 Be6? [Here Black falters. Correct is 14...Nxd5 15.Qxd5 Qxd5
16.Rxd5 Be6= when Black can probably take on a2 soon.] 15.Nxf6+
[Capablanca often exchanged off the heavy pieces after he won a pawn.
Junior 12 notes 15.Nb6! is also very promising for White, but it is more
human to exchange into a winning ending.] 15...Bxf6 16.Qxd8 Rfxd8
17.Rxd8+ Rxd8 18.a3 Rb8 19.c3 a4 20.Bd3 Bb3 21.Bc2 Bxc2 22.Kxc2 e5
23.Rd1 Black resigns 1-0
48 - Peter Dyson in Dragon
It had been 25 years (1982) since I regularly played 1.e4 over the board. My
opponent here was Peter Dyson. He helped write the book “G.M.Ram:
Essential Grand Master Chess Knowledge” by IM Rashid Ziyatdinov with
NM Peter Dyson.
He chose the Sicilian Defence. The Accelerated Dragon is very popular. It

appeared to me that Dyson played the repertoire recommended in "Chess
Openings for Black Explained."
I figured Peter Dyson was very familiar with 8.Bb3. Therefore I chose
something less well-known. With my move 8.Nxc6!? I was trying to leave
the known book paths. It is actually one of the best choices, but there are
many playable continuations.
Sawyer (1966) - Dyson (2141), 14th Space Coast Open (1), 27.04.2007
begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 g6 5.Nc3 Bg7 6.Be3 Nf6 7.Bc4
0-0 8.Nxc6!? [I was tempted to play 8.f3!? but I did not feel comfortable
sacrificing a pawn. The Fritz move was 8.0-0! After the game, Dyson said it
was a good move that nobody played. 8...Nxe4 9.Nxe4 d5 10.Nxc6 bxc6
11.Bd3 dxe4 12.Bxe4=] 8...bxc6 [8...dxc6 9.Qxd8 Rxd8=] 9.f3 Qa5 10.0-0
Rb8 11.Rb1 d5 12.exd5 Rd8 13.Qd2 cxd5 14.Bb3 Qc7 15.Qf2 e5 16.Bxa7
Rb7 17.Bc5 d4 18.Na4 [18.Ne4? Nxe4 19.fxe4 Qxc5 20.Bxf7+ Kh8-/+ and
Black should easily defend.] 18...Bh6 19.Qh4 Nh5 20.Kh1 Be3 21.Rbd1
[21.c3!+/=] 21...Re8 22.c3 Ng7 23.cxd4 exd4 24.Rfe1 Nf5 25.Qf6 Rxb3?!
26.axb3 Re6 27.Rxe3?! [Here I missed the tactical shot 27.Bb6! Qxb6
28.Nxb6 Rxf6 29.Nxc8+=] 27...Nxe3 [Forced. 27...Rxf6?? allows a mate
theme common in my tactical exercises. 28.Re8+ Kg7 29.Bf8+ Kg8
30.Bh6#] 28.Qxd4 Nxd1 29.Qxd1 Ba6 30.b4 [Black had five minutes left on
the clock.] 30...Qc8 [Black forgot about his clock. He happened to look at it
when he had only 08 seconds left. Flustered made this move with 04 seconds
to spare.] 31.Nc3 Qe8 32.Bg1!? [32.Bf2! looks better, but Fritz seems to
show that both are equally playable.] 32...Re1 33.Qd4 [Here I begin to lose
my way and get outplayed by a former master. 33.Qd2! f5 34.Qd5+ Kg7
35.Qd4+ Kf7 36.h3 Bb7 37.Qh4=] 33...Bb7 34.h3 [34.b5 Rf1=+] 34...h5 [or
34...Rf1 35.Qd3 Ra1=+] 35.Kh2 Qb8+ 36.Kh1 Qc7 37.Qd2 Qe5 38.Qf2
Ra1 39.Qd2 g5 40.Ne4 Bxe4 41.fxe4 Rb1 42.Qd5 Qf4 43.Qd4 g4 44.h4 g3
45.Qd8+ Kh7 46.Qg5 Rxg1+ [with mate in two.] 0-1
49 - Daly Dragon Draw
I first played USCF Life Master Troy Daly in a Sicilian Defence at the 2007
Florida State Championship.
The Accelerated Dragon 8.0-0 was suggested to me by Peter Dyson. He said

this was a little known line that was better than its reputation.
I figured my 16-year old opponent knew the main line which goes 8.Bb3 a5.
Troy told me that the main line favors White very slightly, but Troy added
that he had been playing it "since I was born" and that he usually won as
Black anyway.
Troy is not the first chess Daly that I have known. I met Harlow B. Daly at
the Downeast Open chess tournament in 1973 when I travelled to Portland,
Maine.
Harlow Daly (1883-1979) played Frank Marshall and Samuel Reshevsky.

Also, Harlow B. Daly defeated World Champion Alexander Alekhine in a
1929 Boston simul.
I do not know of any relationship to the New England Daly family, but the
Florida Daly family carried on a fine chess tradition.
Sawyer (1959) - Daly (2111), Florida State Championship (2), 01.09.2007

begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 g6 5.Be3 Bg7 6.Nc3 Nf6 7.Bc4
0-0 8.0-0 Nxe4 9.Nxe4 d5 10.Nxc6 bxc6 11.Bd3 dxe4 12.Bxe4 Qc7 [A
possible improvement was 12...Ba6! 13.Qxd8 Rfxd8 14.Rfd1 Bxb2=] 13.Rb1
Rb8 14.b3 e5 15.Qe2 Kh8 16.Rfd1 [16.Bc5! Rd8 17.Rfd1+=] 16...f5 17.Bd3
c5 18.f3 Bb7 19.a4 Rbd8 20.Bc4 e4 21.Rxd8 Rxd8 22.fxe4 Bxe4 23.Rd1
Rxd1+ 24.Qxd1 Be5 25.h3 Qe7 26.Qd2 Bf6 27.Qf2 Bxc2 28.Bxc5 Qe4
29.Bxa7 Bxb3 [After 29...Bxb3 the logical continuation is 30.Bxb3 Qb1+
31.Kh2 with a draw, however 31.Qf1! Qxb3 32.a5+=] 1/2-1/2
50 - Sicilian Dragon Escape
The Sicilian Defence Accelerated Dragon Variation that I played against my
chess friend ATtheGreat is not my typical crushing victory. Instead this is an
escape.
This game began as a Queen's Knight Attack 1.Nc3 g6. After 2.e4 c5 3.Nf3
Bg7 4.d4 cxd4 5.Nxd4 we were in an Accelerated Dragon Sicilian. Pieces
started flying. Queens came off the board. White was winning, but then I
missed 11.Rxd1 with an advantage.
White picked off three pawns in exchange for a piece. But Black stood better,
so that idea didn't work well. How do I escape? We got into a bishop and
pawn endgame. ATtheGreat had the bishop and pawns. I had only pawns but
three more of them.
I saw the drawn rook pawn ending. Black had a useless wrong color bishop
that does not cover the queening square of his rook pawn. A draw was not my
goal in the opening. When I reached an endgame with no pieces, a draw
seemed wonderful.
Sawyer (2377) - ATtheGreat (1550), ICC 2 12 u Internet Chess Club,

14.02.2004 begins 1.Nc3 g6 2.e4 c5 3.Nf3 Bg7 4.d4 cxd4 5.Nxd4 Nc6 6.Be3
Nf6 7.Bc4 Ng4 8.Nxc6 Nxe3 9.Bxf7+ Kf8 10.Nxd8 [10.Qf3 suggested by
ATtheGreat. 10...Nxc2+ 11.Kd2 bxc6 12.Bb3+ Bf6 13.Kxc2 d6=/+]
10...Nxd1 11.Nxd1 [11.Rxd1!+-] 11...e6 12.0-0 [12.h4 Bf6 13.h5 g5 14.h6
Bxd8 15.Bh5+/-] 12...Ke7 13.Nxe6 dxe6 14.Bxe6 Bxe6 15.c3 Bc4 16.Re1
Rhf8 17.Ne3 Be6 18.Nd5+ Bxd5 19.exd5+ Kd7 20.Re2 Rae8 21.Rae1
Rxe2 22.Rxe2 Re8 23.Rxe8 Kxe8 24.Kf1 Kd7 25.Ke2 Kd6 26.Kd3 Kxd5
27.f4 b5 28.b3 a5 29.g4 Bf8 30.h3 Bd6 31.Ke3 Ba3 32.Kd3 Bc1 33.f5 gxf5
34.gxf5 Ke5 35.c4 bxc4+ 36.Kxc4 Bd2 [Better is 36...Kxf5! 37.b4 axb4
38.Kxb4 Kf4 39.a4 Kg3 40.Kc3 Kxh3 41.Kd3 Kg3! 42.Ke2 h5 43.a5 Ba3
44.a6 Bc5-+] 37.a3 Kxf5 38.Kd3 Be1 39.Ke2 Bg3 40.b4 axb4 41.axb4 Bd6
42.b5 Kg5 43.Kf3 Kh4 44.Kg2 h5 45.b6 Be5 46.b7 Bd6 47.Kh1 Kxh3
48.b8Q Bxb8 49.Kg1 Kg3 50.Kh1 Kf3 51.Kg1 Game drawn by mutual
agreement 1/2-1/2
51 - Taylor Benoni to Sicilian
The Sicilian Defence Accelerated Dragon has a variation that is a curious
transposition. It arises from an English Opening or from what might be called
a Benoni Declined.
I knew that Allen Taylor played reliable openings. We met from time to time
at the Williamsport chess club at Lycoming College.
As Black my friend played either the Sicilian Defence or the King’s Indian
Defence. This time he tried a Benoni Defence.
The possibility of a transposition exists since the Sicilian begins 1.e4 c5 and
the Benoni begins with 1…c5 or more commonly 2…c5.
This game began 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 c5. The standard Benoni move is 3.d5. Then
Black might choose the Modern Benoni with 3…e6 or the Benko Gambit
with 3…b5.
Apparently I was not in the mood for a Benoni. I played 3.Nf3. This
transposes into an English Opening. The normal move order for this
Symmetrical English is 1.c4 c5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.d4.
Now it was Taylor’s turn to transpose. After 3…g6 4.Nc3 d6 5.e4 cxd4
6.Nxd4 we are in a Sicilian. This Maroczy Bind type line could arise with the
moves 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 g6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 d6 5.c4 Nf6 6.Nc3. The actual
Maroczy Bind follows 2…Nc6.
Black attacked on the kingside. In the process White picked off pawn after
pawn. When the attack stalled, the game was lost.
Sawyer - Taylor, Williamsport, PA 1995 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 c5 3.Nf3 g6

4.Nc3 d6 5.e4 cxd4 6.Nxd4 Bg7 7.Be2 0-0 8.0-0 a6 [8...Nc6 9.Be3=] 9.Be3
Nc6 10.Qd2 Ng4 11.Bxg4 Bxg4 12.f3 [12.Nd5!?] 12...Bd7 [12...Be6!?]
13.Nd5 Nxd4 [13...Ne5!=] 14.Bxd4 Bxd4+ 15.Qxd4 e5 16.Qd2 Be6 17.Kh1
a5 18.b3 Kg7 [18...Bxd5 19.Qxd5+/=] 19.Rfd1 [19.Nc3+/-] 19...f5
[19...Bxd5 20.Qxd5+/=] 20.Nc3 f4 21.Qxd6 Qf6 22.Nd5 Bxd5 23.Qxf6+
[Or 23.Qxd5+-] 23...Rxf6 24.Rxd5 Re6 [24...Rb6 25.h4+/-] 25.Rd7+ Kf6
26.Rad1 Raa6 27.h3 [27.Rxb7+-] 27...Rab6 28.R1d5 h5 29.Rxa5 Kg5
30.Rb5 Rbd6 31.Rxe5+ Rxe5 32.Rxd6 Kh4 33.Rxg6 Re7 34.Kh2 1-0
52 - Ted Talks Maroczy Bind
Ted talks with his opening in this Sicilian Defence Accelerated Dragon. I
ventured 5.c4 against Theodore J. Greiner.
This Maroczy Bind is rare for me. I prefer straight forward piece
development like 5.Nc3. I always think that I might want the c4 square
available for my bishop.
Ted Greiner was a postal player with an ICCF rating as high as 2355. When
we played, we were both on the rise. Greiner wrote many articles on chess.
I enjoyed playing in CCLA for a year or two where we played this game. I
got to meet several experts and masters. In 1982 Ted and I played another
short draw in APCT with a Sicilian Defence. That time I had the Black
pieces. This time I am White.
In the notes below I provide is an earlier 1978 game vs my friend Hardon

McFarland. In 1980 I moved to Pennsylvania. We played in the same club.
He was a generation older than me.
Hardon McFarland and I rarely got paired against each other in live events,
but we had several long talks about chess and life. I appreciated his life
experience and wisdom.
These games were played in the days before the Accelerated Dragon was
popular. I rarely faced it as White, except in my blitz games against Greg
Nolan.
Sawyer (2000) - Greiner (2000), corr CCLA 1980 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6
3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 g6 5.c4 Nf6 6.Nc3 Nxd4 7.Qxd4 d6 8.Be2 Bg7 9.Bg5
[9.0-0 0-0 10.Qe3 Be6 11.Bd2 Nd7 12.f4 Qb6 13.Qxb6 Nxb6 14.b3 a5 15.a4
f5 16.Rae1 Nd7 17.exf5 Bxf5 18.Nd5 Bd4+ 19.Kh1 e5 20.fxe5 dxe5 21.Nc7
Rac8 22.Nd5 Ra8 1/2-1/2 McFarland-Sawyer, corr APCT 1978] 9...0-0
10.Qd2 Be6 11.Rc1 Qa5 12.f3 Rfc8 13.b3 a6 14.Na4 Qxd2+ 15.Kxd2 Nd7
16.g4 Kf8!? [16...Re8 17.Be3=] 17.h4 Bd4 18.h5 f6 19.Bh6+ Kf7 20.hxg6+
hxg6 21.Kd3 Ba7 22.Bd2?! [22.Be3=] 22...Rh8 [22...b5=/+] 23.Nc3 Ne5+
24.Kc2 Nc6 25.Nd5 Rac8 26.Rcf1 [26.g5=] 26...Kg7 [26...g5!?] 27.Bd1
Rxh1 28.Rxh1 Rh8 1/2-1/2
2.Nf3 e6 3.d4 cxd4
The 2.Nf3 e6 lines are solid but not as popular as some others. This can
transpose to other lines were Black later plays …e6.
53 - Baffo Scheveningen
Jeffrey Baffo and I have enjoyed many correspondence games in 1996. I
think Jeff enjoyed them more than I did, if the results were any indication.
He played the Sicilian Defence vs my Classical Scheveningen approach. This

game was our only straight Sicilian but we did transpose to a Sicilian Alapin
2.c3 from the Alekhine Defence.
The Sicilian Defence is flexible for Black. Sometimes moves 2, 4, 5, and 6

can be played in any order to reach the same position.
Baffo held back the queenside moves …Nc6 and …a6 until moves 8 and 9.
By then I knew that we were not playing the Sveshnikov, nor the Dragon, nor
the Najdorf.
As White I prefer the Open Sicilian 3.d4 lines. Usually I avoid closed or
gambit lines but not always.
The flexible 6.Be2 has been less common for me as White. More often I play
Keres Attack 6.g4 vs the Scheveningen. When Black plays ...Nc6 and ...a6, I
like the English Attack set-up after 6.Be3, which resembles the 150 Attack vs
the Pirc Defence.
Here White mounted a kingside attack, but Black broke through with his own
counter attack. It is a good example of how well a queen and knight co-
ordinate together effectively.
Sawyer (1986) - Baffo (2248), corr USCF 95P139, 08.04.1996 begins 1.e4
c5 2.Nf3 e6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 d6 6.Be2 [6.g4!? or 6.Be3] 6…Be7
7.0-0 0-0 8.f4 Nc6 9.Be3 a6 10.a4 Qc7 11.Kh1 Re8 12.Bd3 Bd7 13.Qe1 e5
14.fxe5 dxe5 15.Nf5 Bxf5 16.Rxf5 Bb4 17.Qg3 Bxc3 18.bxc3 Kh8 19.Qh4
Ng8 20.Raf1 f6 21.g4 Rf8 22.g5 Nce7 23.R5f3 Ng6 24.Qh5 fxg5 25.Bxg5
Rxf3 26.Rxf3 Qxc3 27.Rh3 Nh6 28.Bxh6? [28.Rf3 Ng8=/+] 28...gxh6
29.Qxh6 Qe1+ 30.Kg2 Nf4+ 31.Kf3 Qd1+ 32.Ke3 Qg1+ 33.Kd2 Qg2+ 0-1
54 - Haines Sicilian Switch
In the early years like most players, Ray Haines and I played the Open Game
(1.e4 e5) from each side against each other.
Later we would each incorporate many additional openings into our opening
repertoires.
Ray Haines would sometimes switched to the Sicilian Defence.
I had played through enough games by the world champions that I knew
some basic ideas.
However, I did not have any real concrete well-prepared opening variations.
In this game I chose a combination of the Richter/Rauzer (6.Bg5) and

Classical (6.Be2) variations.
Shortly after the opening, Ray sacrificed (or lost) material in an effort to
attack my king.
Very quickly things fell apart and he dropped a couple pieces.
This is a reminder that in almost every game at almost every level the result
is decided by the loss of material or mate.
What does that teach us? That we need to train on tactical skills.
The ability to recognize combinations and checkmates are far more important
that ideas and strategy.
Sawyer - Haines, Ft Fairfield, ME 19.02.1974 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 e6 3.d4

cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nc6 5.Nc3 d6 6.Be2 [A popular choice is to transpose into a
Sozin Variation with 6.Be3 Nf6 7.Bc4 Be7 8.Qe2] 6...Nf6 7.Bg5 Be7 8.f4!?
[8.Qd2 a6] 8...a6 9.Nb3 0-0 10.0-0 b5 11.Bf3 [White could play 11.a3!? to
hinder ...b4.] 11...Qb6+ 12.Kh1 b4 [12...Bb7 13.a3] 13.e5! dxe5 14.fxe5
Nxe5 15.Bxa8 Nfg4? [With Be7 undefended, this is knight move is a major
blunder. Black's game almost immediately falls apart. Junior 12 likes
15...bxc3 16.bxc3 Bd7 17.Qd4 Qb8 18.Bf4 Qxa8 19.Bxe5 Bc6=] 16.Bxe7
Nf2+ 17.Rxf2 Qxf2 White is way ahead in material. Black resigns. 1-0
Book 2 – Chapter 3 – 2.Nf3 d6
3.d4 cxd4
This Open Sicilian 3.d4 cxd4 is the most popular 2.Nf3 d6 line.
55 - Sicilian Qxd4 or Nxd4
Do you play 4.Nxd4 or 4.Qxd4? You have a choice in the Sicilian Defence as
White after 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4. Which recapture on d4 is better?
4.Qxd4 was popular in the 1980s.
Black has a playable game against either. 4.Nxd4 seems better, since 4.Qxd4
can be attacked by Nc6. When White delays 3.d4, the added time to develop
improves Black's chances.
When Ray Haines played the Black side of a Sicilian Defence, his opponent
"Hro61" temporarily held back 3.d4 for a couple more moves. After 5.d4
cxd4 White chose the unusual move 6.Qxd4. This supported the tactical
thrust 7.e5, but the resulting position would only lead to equality.
At one point White did develop a good position and a strong attack. When
White missed his chance on move 16, Black took over. Ray Haines won the
Exchange and began his own attack.
The players had bishops of opposite color. While they may lead to drawish
endgames, they favor the attacker in middlegames. Haines demonstrates that
his attack on the dark squares could not be stopped by White's light squared
bishop.
Hro61 - Haines, chess24, 17.02.2016 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.Nc3 Nf6

4.Bc4 e6 5.d4 cxd4 6.Qxd4!? [6.Nxd4=] 6...Be7 [6...a6=] 7.e5 Nc6 [7...dxe5
8.Qxd8+ Bxd8 9.Nxe5 Nbd7=] 8.Bb5 dxe5 9.Qxd8+ Bxd8 10.Nxe5 Bd7
11.Nxd7 Nxd7 12.Be3 0-0 [12...Bb6=] 13.0-0-0 Nde5 14.f4 Ng4 15.Bc5 Be7
16.Bxc6? [16.Bxe7! Nxe7 17.Rd7+/=] 16...Bxc5 17.Bxb7 Rab8 18.Bf3 Nf2
19.Ne4 [19.Rhe1 Nxd1 20.Nxd1 Rfd8-/+] 19...Be3+ 20.Kb1 Nxh1 21.Rxh1
Bxf4 22.g3 Be5 23.c3 Rfc8 [23...f5 24.Nc5 Bxc3-+] 24.Rd1 f5 25.Ng5 Bxc3
26.b3 e5 27.Bd5+ Kf8 28.Nxh7+ Ke8 [28...Ke7 29.Ng5 e4-+] 29.Be6 Rd8
30.Rxd8+ Rxd8 31.Bxf5 Rd2 32.Bc2 Rxh2 33.a4 Rh1+ 34.Ka2 Ra1# 0-1
56 - Strategy Fails to Tactics
Ray Haines sacrifices a bishop on e6.
Caleb Hunter chose a Sicilian Defence with 1.e4 c5.
Hunter had good opening strategy.
He developed both knights, a bishop and a queen, but Black was a little too
slow to castle.
He missed tactics which we all do when facing a stronger player.
Haines chose his favorite 5.Bc4 line in the Sicilian Defence.
After 7.Nc3 they transposed to normal lines.
Ray Haines wrote in part:
"I played against twin brothers. Lance Beloungie and I have been working
with them. Lance has done more than I have, and they are both getting better.
They still have to learn to do more book work, but they are the strongest
players in high school in the Aroostook area at this time. I played an opening
line which I played a lot in high school and won many games with it."
Haines - C. Hunter, Presque Isle, ME 05.01.2016 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6

3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 a6 5.Bc4 e6 6.0-0 Nf6 7.Nc3 Qc7 8.Bb3 Nbd7 [8...Be7
9.Be3=] 9.Kh1 Be7?! [9...Nc5! 10.f3=] 10.Bxe6! fxe6 11.Nxe6 Qc4
12.Nxg7+ Kd8 [12...Kf7 13.Nf5+/-] 13.Nf5 [13.Nd5!+-] 13...Nxe4?
[13...Bf8 14.f3+/-] 14.Nxe7 Kxe7 15.Nxe4 Kd8 16.Nxd6 Rf8 17.Nxc4 b5
18.Bg5+ Kc7 19.Qd6+ Kb7 20.Na5+ Ka7 21.Be3+ Nb6 22.Bxb6# 1-0
57 - Haines Gambit Sicilian
Ray Haines won against the Sicilian Defence with his own Haines Gambit
5.Bc4!?
If Black accepted the gambit with 5...Nxe4, White would gain time for a
quick attack with his extra two tempi for the pawn.
In the game below after move 7, White had developed Bc4, castled and
played a rook to the half-open e-file.
Black had only one piece developed with Nf6 (played twice).
I won a few games with this gambit myself.
My personal favorite was a postal chess game in APCT played back in 1978
vs Ron Chaney (see next game).
Ray Haines played at Chess24 online and wins a quick game even though
time control was a standard Game 30.
His opponent with the Black pieces was Mohamed Moufeed from Egypt.
Haines offered his analysis by Rybka to show how Black could have
equalized.
Black did not choose that line.
So, the game is over in 14 moves.
Haines - MOHAMED MOUFEED, Chess24 - Game 30, 28.01.2016 begins

1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Bc4 Nxe4 6.0-0 e6 7.Re1 Nf6
8.Qf3 Qa5 9.Bd2 Qc5 10.Bxe6 Bxe6 11.Nxe6 fxe6 12.Qxb7 Qc6?? [Rybka
4 w32: 12...Qd5 13.Rxe6+ Qxe6 14.Qxa8 0.05/16 Qc8 15.Nc3=] 13.Rxe6+
Kd8 14.Ba5+ 1-0
58 - 5.Bc4 Gambit vs Chaney
During 1978-79 my American Postal Chess Tournaments rating jumped from
about 1800 to about 2000. Each event followed the old postal chess rules. We
could use books but we could not ask for analytical help from other players.
Computers in 1978 were about 1500 strength, so they weren’t much help at
all.
The APCT Queen event was a one round 13-player section that had a higher
entry fee and higher prize money. I think I tied for first place in this event,
scoring something like 9-3. It gave me confidence by showing me that I made
progress in my skill.
All the games would be played at the same time, at a pace of about one move
each per week, so the shorter games would have more likely finished first.
Time control was three days per move, but almost everyone replied in one
day. It often took two more days for the postcard to arrive at the new
location.
I faced Ron Chaney 17 times over a 20 year period. We were about the same
age, about the same strength, played in the same events and sometimes
played the same openings. In our first six games, I had a slight edge. The next
six we broke even, but in the final five games, Chaney won four of them.
This short game features a rare gambit that my longtime chess friend Ray
Haines showed to me. I don't know where Ray got it from. Things go from
bad to worse until Black has had enough.
Sawyer - Chaney, corr APCT Q-36, 1978 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4
4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Bc4 [Standard is 5.Nc3] 5...a6?! [5...Nxe4 6.Bxf7+ Kxf7
7.Qh5+ g6 8.Qd5+ e6 9.Qxe4. Chaney was ready for a transposition to the
Najdorf Sicilian after 6.Nc3.] 6.0-0 Nxe4 [Black accepts the hanging e-
pawn.] 7.Qh5 e6? [Black can hit back at center and equalize no matter which
way White takes on d5 after 7...d5=] 8.Bxe6 [Regaining the gambit pawn.
Also looks good is 8.Nxe6] 8...Bxe6 9.Nxe6 Qc8 [9...Nf6 10.Qxf7+ Kxf7
11.Nxd8++/-] 10.Nxf8 Kxf8 11.Re1 Qxc2 [Black's king is stuck in the
center.] 12.Qh4!+- Nf6? [A natural retreat, but it misses a tactical threat.]
13.Qxf6! [Gotta love that move! Black has just lost a piece since 13...gxf6
14.Bh6+ Kg8 15.Re8 is checkmate!] 13…Qc7 14.Bf4 Qd7 15.Qxd6+ Kg8
16.Nc3 f6 17.Re7 Qxd6 18.Bxd6 Nc6 19.Rxb7 Rd8 20.Re1 1-0
59 - Morin Defeats 5.Bc4
Roger Morin defeated Ray Haines in the Sicilian Defence. The variation
chosen was the gambit 5.Bc4!?
Ray Haines has played this gambit successfully for decades. He defeated
Roger Morin last year with 5.Bc4!?
I used it myself to beat Ron Chaney in a pretty little postal chess game. See
previous game.
Obviously 5.Bc4 can transpose into the 6.Bc4 Sozin Sicilian that Mike Porter
played vs Ray Haines.
In this tournament each of Ray's games featured a knight retreat to the second
rank as a key aspect of the final result. This third round game sees him play
21.Nh2!? This removed coverage on g5 which allowed Roger Morin to play
for a tactical combination.
Almost every game is decided by tactics. At the lower levels, players leave
unprotected pawns or play pieces to squares where they can be captured. At
the mid-levels, players make counting errors in exchanges or make unsound
sacrifices.
At the higher levels, players lose material to double attacks or they fail to
look deep enough in a series of forced moves. Your skills at chess tactics
determine your strength.
Haines - Morin (2002), Houlton, Maine (3), 15.11.2014 begins 1.e4 c5

2.Nf3 a6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Bc4 [This is Ray Haines gambit line in the
Sicilian Defence, which works well from time to time. 5.Nc3] 5...d6 6.0-0!?
[At 23 ply, Fritz actually prefers this over the normal move 6.Nc3] 6...e5
[Black chooses the Najdorf approach, as opposed to the Scheveningen set-up
with 6...e6] 7.Nf3 Be7 8.Nc3 0-0 9.Bg5 [9.Be3 would transpose to a popular
variation, where White's advantage is very small.] 9...Nbd7 10.Qd2 [10.a4
h6=] 10...b5 11.Bb3 Bb7 12.Rfe1 b4 13.Nd5 Bxd5 14.Bxf6 Nxf6 15.Bxd5
[15.exd5= is a more dynamic approach.] 15...Rb8 16.Rad1 Qc7 17.Rc1
[17.Bb3=] 17...Rfc8 [Or 17...Nxd5 18.Qxd5 Rb5=] 18.c4 a5 19.Red1 Qa7
20.h3 h6 21.Nh2!? [21.b3] 21...Rc5 [The point of this move is to prevent
White from recapturing on d5 with the queen.] 22.Qe3? [22.Qc2=] 22...Nxd5
23.Rxd5 Bg5! 0-1
60 - Haines 5.Bc4 Gambit
During a high school chess tournament in Presque Isle, Maine the younger
generation of players duked it out in longer and slower games.
While this was going on, the veteran players Ray Haines and Roger Morin
played a lively 10 minute game for fun.
Ray Haines discusses his choice of one of his favorite gambit lines - which I
learned from him: Sicilian Defence 5.Bc4.
“I have been playing this line in the Sicilian defense against the computer and
most of the lines are equal or better for white.
“I came up with the line a long time ago and showed you it then. You won a
postal game with it.
“I am planning to use it in tournaments, because it will get people out of the

lines which they know, quickly.
“I think it is worth using. I would never have thought of using it without the
computer to help me.”
Here his creativity is rewarded for a pretty win.
Haines - Morin (2029), Presque Isle, Maine, April 2013 begins 1.e4 c5
2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Bc4 e6 6.0-0 a6 7.Qe2 Nc6 8.Nxc6 bxc6
9.e5 Nd5 10.Nc3 Nxc3 11.bxc3 d5 12.Bd3 c5 [Ray provided a couple lines
of analysis by Fritz 11: 12...Rb8 13.Be3 Qc7 14.Qg4 g6 15.Qa4 Bg7 16.f4 f6
17.exf6 Bxf6 18.Rfb1 Rxb1+ 19.Rxb1 Bxc3 20.Bb6 Qd6 21.Bd4 Bxd4++/=;
12...Qc7 13.Rb1 Be7 14.Bf4 0-0 15.h4 Rb8 16.h5 Rxb1 17.Rxb1 Qa5 18.h6
Qxa2 19.Rb3 g6 20.Qg4 Bc5+/=] 13.c4 Bb7 14.Rb1 Bc6 15.cxd5 exd5 16.e6
f6 17.Qh5+ Ke7 18.Qf7+ Kd6 19.Bf4# 1-0
61 - Keres Attack 6.g4
This postal game highlights one of my lovable flaws. I love speculative
sacrifices. I’m not always in the mood for one, but I play them whenever they
strike my fancy.
I played a Sicilian Keres Attack 6.g4 against the Scheveningen Variation of

Ray Haines. The 6.g4 Keres Attack is a quick White pawn push. It threatens
7.g5 driving the knight away from f6. White dreams of a big space advantage
and lots of tactics.
Black counters by 6…h6 or by redeploying the knight after 7.g5 Nfd7.

Black’s pawns on d6 and e6 prepare a counter attack with either d5 or e5.
Many move orders reach this position.
Our chances were about even for the first dozen moves. Then I sacrificed a
piece with 13.Ne6?! I had what might be considered two pawns
compensation.
Haines stood better as Black, at least until he missed 16…Ke7! Then it was
equal again, at least until he missed 22…Bc5! The advantage switched to
White in a complicated middlegame.
Just like in a Dragon Sicilian, White’s extra pawns were on the queenside.
Black’s extra pawns were on the kingside.
When we reached the ending, both sides tried to queen passed pawns on
opposite sides of the board. When the pawns queened White was up the
Exchange and a pawn. Black resigned.
Sawyer - Haines, corr 1980 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6
5.Nc3 e6 6.g4 a6 [6...h6 7.h4=] 7.g5 Nfd7 8.Be3 b5 9.a3 Nb6 10.Rg1 [10.h4
N8d7 11.h5 Ne5=] 10...N8d7 11.f4 Bb7 12.f5 [12.Qh5 g6 13.Qh3=] 12...e5
13.Ne6?! [13.Nb3=] 13...fxe6 14.Qh5+ Ke7 15.fxe6 Kxe6 16.0-0-0 g6
[16...Ke7! 17.g6 Nf6-/+] 17.Bh3+ Ke7 18.Qg4 Qe8 19.Qe6+ Kd8 20.Bxb6+
Nxb6 21.Rxd6+ Kc7 22.Rxb6 Qxe6 [22...Bc5!=] 23.Rxe6 Bc8 24.Re8 Bb7
25.Rxa8 Bxa8 26.Rf1 Be7 27.Rf7 Kd6 28.Kd1 Bxg5 29.Ra7 Kc5 30.Rxa6
Kd4? 31.Nxb5+ [31.Ke2+/-] 31...Ke3 32.Nd6 Rd8 33.Kc1!? Bxe4 34.Kb1
Bf4 35.Nxe4 Rd1+ 36.Ka2 Kxe4 37.Bg2+ [37.a4=] 37...Ke3 38.Rc6 Rd2
39.Bh3 e4 40.Bf1 Kf2 41.Bb5 Rd5 42.c4 Rxb5? [42...Rf5 43.c5 e3=/+]
43.cxb5 g5 44.b6 e3 45.Rf6 e2 46.b7 e1Q 47.b8Q 1-0
62 - Mike Porter 5…e6 6.Bc4
Here is a game from the Maine Potato Blossom Festival by Ray Haines from
the third round.
Ray has played the Sicilian as Black for decades. Here he meets someone
new.
They contest a Sicilian Defence Sozin 6.Bc4. We hope to see more Mike
Porter games.
“This was round 3. I was playing Mike Porter for the first time. He and his
son have just move here.
“They are both very welcomed here as new players in the area. I look forward
to playing both of them again.
“We both got into time trouble. I made a mistake on move 37 and lost a
piece.
“I should have played my bishop to queen 8, not my rook.”
This was a nice win by Mr. Porter. He stayed alive long enough to catch a
tactical mistake by Mr. Haines.
M. Porter - Haines, Potato Blossom Festival Ft Fairfield, Maine (3),

13.07.2013 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 e6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 d6 6.Bc4
Be7 7.h3 [This seem slow. More popular is 7.Be3 Nc6 when White needs to
decide on which side to castle.] 7...Na6!? 8.f3 [White loves his pawn moves.
Worth considering is 8.Bxa6 bxa6 9.Nc6 Qd7 10.Nxe7 Qxe7 11.Bf4+=]
8...Nc5 9.a3!? a6 10.0-0 Qc7 11.Ba2 Bd7 12.Bd2 b5 13.Nce2 0-0 14.Rc1
Qb6 [14...e5!?] 15.Kh1 e5 16.Nb3 Be6 17.Nxc5 Bxa2 18.Nd3 Be6 19.Qe1
Nd7 20.Qg3 Kh8 21.Nc3 Qd8 22.Nb4 Nb6 23.b3 [I like going after the
bishop with 23.Nc6 Qc7 24.Nxe7 Qxe7 and then 25.b3=] 23...d5? [This
drops the e5-pawn. Black was better after 23...Bh4!=+] 24.Nc6 Qc7 25.Nxe7
Qxe7 26.Qxe5 [26.Nxd5 Nxd5 27.exd5 Bxd5 28.Bb4!+-] 26...Rad8 27.exd5
[27.Be3+-] 27...Nxd5 28.Nxd5 Rxd5 29.Qf4 Qd7 30.Bc3 f6 31.Bb4 Rd8
32.Qe3? [32.Rfe1+= maintains White's advantage.] 32...Bxh3! [White's 7th
move is "punished" 25 moves later.] 33.f4 Bg4 34.c4 Rd3 35.Qb6 Be2
36.Rfe1 Qg4 37.Rc2 Rd1? [Big mistake. 37...Bd1!=+] 38.Rcxe2 1-0
4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 g6
63 - Rhudy Dragon Patriots
On Patriot's Day in Boston, Massachusetts they run the Boston Marathon
Race and the Boston Red Sox play the only morning game on the annual
schedule.
In 2013 a bombing led to “Boston Strong”, a theme used by the Red Sox to
win the 2013 Major League Baseball World Series.
I read the children's book “Rush Revere and the First Patriots” by Rush
Limbaugh. In that book the adventures of Tommy and Freedom continue. But
unlike in the book Rush Revere and the Brave Pilgrims, there is no chess in
the First Patriots book.
My wife and I descend from the Pilgrims and had Patriots in our families. We
grew up in New England. In fact we descend from the same one guy who was
born before the Mayflower sailed.
By 1979 I had moved to Tom Purser’s area of Tennessee. I was actively

playing APCT postal chess. One of my opponent's was Curtis Rhudy of
Pennsylvania, a state I would later call home for a wonderful 20 years.
My game vs Rhudy was in the Sicilian Defence. The famous Dragon

Variation has been popular at the club level all my chess life. In this game, I
avoided the main line 6.Be3 lines with 6.f4.
This f-pawn supports and early 8.e5 push that allows White an early attack
with some tricky ideas. Black has good moves available to equalize, but not
everyone finds them all the time.
Sawyer (2000) - Rhudy (1662), corr APCT 1979 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6
3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 g6 6.f4 [6.Be3 is about 20 times more popular
than what I chose here.] 6...Nc6 7.Nxc6 bxc6 8.e5 Nd7 [8...dxe5 9.Qxd8+
Kxd8 10.fxe5 Ng4 (10...Nd7! 11.Bf4=) 11.Bf4 Bg7 12.0-0-0+ Bd7 (Not
12...Ke8? 13.Nb5!+-) 13.Re1+/=] 9.Qf3 Bb7 10.Be3 dxe5 11.0-0-0 exf4
[11...Qc7=] 12.Bd4!? e5? [12...f6=] 13.Bxe5 f6? [13...Nxe5 14.Rxd8+ Rxd8
15.Qxf4+/-] 14.Bxf4 Bg7 15.Bc4 Qb6 16.Rhe1+ Kd8 17.Rxd7+ Kc8
18.Be6 with a mate in four. 1-0
64 - Carlisle Brandt Dragon
I came out of my semi-retirement in 1996. I played in a three round event at
Carlisle, Pennsylvania. We had a small club up in Williamsport where we
played unrated skittles games. I was the only player in that club rated over
2000. Four players travelled with me to Carlisle. They played in the Reserve
section.
As White in round one I trotted down a familiar path in a sharp Sicilian

Defence Dragon 9.Bc4. The idea is castle opposite sides and mutually attack
the opponent's king. I was not in a mood to play. I figured I had a much better
chance outplaying an 1800 player in an endgame. I do not recommend
choosing a sharp opening to reach an endgame, but it worked here.
Sawyer (2011) – Brandt (1800), 4th Saturday Carlisle Open (1), 25.05.1996
begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 g6 6.Be3 Bg7 7.f3 Nc6
8.Qd2 0-0 9.Bc4 [9.0-0-0] 9...Bd7 10.0-0-0 Qa5 [10...Rc8] 11.Kb1 Ne5
12.Bb3 Rfc8 13.Nd5!? [White decides to outplay his opponent in an
endgame. Better is 13.h4] 13...Qxd2 14.Rxd2 [Or 14.Bxd2 Nxd5 15.Bxd5
Nc4=] 14...Kf8 [14...Nxd5 15.Bxd5 Nc4 16.Bxc4 Rxc4 and Black has a
slight advantage of the two bishops.] 15.Bg5 Nxd5 16.Bxd5 Nc6 [Again,
White chooses to exchange material and head toward an ending.] 17.Nxc6
Bxc6 18.Bxc6 Rxc6 19.Be3 a6 20.Bd4 Rac8 21.Bxg7+ Kxg7 22.c3 Rc5
23.Rhd1 Kf6 24.Rd5 Rxd5 25.Rxd5 Rc5 26.Rd4 g5 [I reached a rook
endgame. Black would stand better after 26...Rh5! 27.h3 Ke5=/+] 27.Kc2 h5
28.Kd3 Ke5 29.b4+/= [White now has a slight advantage.] 29...Rc6 30.Rd5+
Kf6 31.h4 e5 32.g3 gxh4 33.gxh4 Ke6 34.b5?! [34.c4! f5 35.a4 fxe4+
36.fxe4 Rc8 37.c5+/-] 34...axb5 35.Rxb5 Ra6 36.Rb2 f5 37.Rg2 fxe4+
38.fxe4 Kf6 39.Rf2+ Ke6 40.Rg2 Kf6 41.Rb2 b6 42.Rf2+ Ke6 43.Rb2 Kf6
44.Rf2+ Ke6 45.Rg2 Kf6 46.Kc4 Ra5 47.Kb4 Kf7? [Now Black is losing.
He had to play immediately 47...d5! 48.exd5 Rxd5 49.Rg5 Rd2 50.Rxh5 e4=
with a likely draw.] 48.a4 d5 [Too late.] 49.exd5 Rxd5 50.Rg5 Kf6 51.Rxh5
Kg6 52.Rg5+ Kh6 53.Rf5 Kg6 54.Rg5+ Kh6 55.c4 Rd4 56.Rxe5 Rxh4
57.Re6+ Kg5 58.Rxb6 Rh1 59.Re6 Rb1+ 60.Kc5 Ra1 61.Kb6 [This is a
known Rook and Pawn ending. I only need the c-pawn to win, since Black's
king is cut off from the queenside.] 61...Rxa4 62.c5 Kf5 63.Re1 Rb4+
64.Kc7 Rc4 65.c6 Kf6 66.Kd7 Rd4+ 67.Kc8 Rc4 68.c7 Kf7 69.Rb1 Ke7
70.Kb8 Kd7 71.Rd1+ Ke7 72.c8Q Rxc8+ 73.Kxc8 1-0
65 - Dragon Rook Battle
I challenged Protej and the battle was on. I was ready. We’re off! It was a
Dragon Sicilian Defence. My pieces arrived aggressively placed. Black
fought back. What could I do? Aha! The hidden queen trick. That will work.
The opening was complex but equal.
Then I screwed up on move 29 and dropped a pawn. Black was a high rated
chess engine. What kind of ending could I draw? I would have been happy
with a bishop ending, but Black kept one set of rooks on the board. Black
should have swapped down to a pawn ending when the extra pawn won
easily. Instead Black kept the rooks on the board. Where could I find an
advantage? My queenside pawn majority. If only I could gain a passed pawn
that kept the Black rook so busy he could not win the game.
Black should have won, because I only had 8 seconds left on my clock. The
computer still had a minute. A smart human would know that I did not have
time to run down from behind two connected and protected pawns, pick them
off and mate the king in eight seconds. White would have lost on time, but
instead, once I got my passed pawn pushed to the seventh rank, my silicon
buddy took a draw on the board by repetition. Very nice.
Sawyer (2038) - Protej (2401), ICC 3 0 u Internet Chess Club, 30.01.2016

begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 g6 6.Be3 Bg7 7.f3 0-0
8.Qd2 Nc6 9.0-0-0 Nxd4 [9...d5 10.exd5 Nxd5 11.Nxc6 bxc6 12.Bd4 e5
13.Bc5=] 10.Bxd4 Be6 11.Kb1 Qc7 12.g4 [12.h4!+/= might be slightly
better.] 12...Rfc8 13.h4 Qa5 14.Nd5!? [14.a3+/=] 14...Qxd2 15.Nxf6+
[15.Rxd2 Bxd5 16.exd5=] 15...Bxf6 16.Rxd2 Bxd4 17.Rxd4 h6 18.g5 hxg5
19.hxg5 Kg7 20.Rd2 Rh8 21.Rdh2 Rxh2 22.Rxh2 Rc8 23.a3 Rc5 24.f4
Bd7 25.Bd3 Rc7 26.Kc1 Rc5 27.Kd2 a6 28.Bf1 e5 29.Bd3? [White is fine
after 29.Ke3! exf4+ 30.Kxf4 f6 31.gxf6+ Kxf6 32.Rh7 Bc6 33.Bd3=]
29...exf4 30.Rf2 Rxg5 31.Rxf4 d5 32.exd5 Rxd5 33.c4 Rd6 34.c5 Rd5
35.b4 Bb5 36.Rf3 Rd7 [Black easily wins the pawn endgame after 36...Bxd3
37.Rxd3 Rxd3+ 38.Kxd3 Kf6-+] 37.Kc3 Bxd3 38.Rxd3 Re7? [Black lets me
off the hook. Correct is 38...Rxd3+ 39.Kxd3 Kf6-+] 39.a4 Kf6 40.b5 axb5
41.axb5 Kg5 42.Kc4 f5 43.c6 Kf6 44.Kc5 bxc6 45.bxc6 Kf7 46.Kb6 Re6
47.Kb7 Re2 48.c7 Rb2+ 49.Kc8 Ke8 50.Re3+ Kf7 51.Kd8 Rd2+ 52.Kc8
Rb2 53.Kd8 Rd2+ 54.Kc8 Rb2 55.Kd8 Game drawn by repetition 1/2-1/2
66 - Zdun Dragon Double
It is fun to attack as White in the Sicilian Defence. Against a Dragon
Variation, we know by move 4...g6 or 5...g6 that Black will fianchetto a
bishop on g7.
When Dick Zdun played the Dragon Sicilian against me in a Williamsport

club game, I discovered he was going to fianchetto both bishops.
Because Black castled kingside, his queenside expanse could be more than
just ...b6. Zdun played 8...a6 and 9...b5 before 10...Bb7.
I continued with typical kingside attacking moves like 12.h4, 13.g4, and
14,h5. But then I got sacrifice happy with 15.Rxh5?! That looked reasonable,
but it failed.
I missed a winning line with 16.fxg4! So then, I had to win the game all over
again. I hate when that happens.
As noted, Black's plan with his placement of ...Bb7 was a surprise to me.
That move would be common in a Najdorf, but not so much in a Dragon.
Still, in practice it worked here.
Black could have equalized with 13...Na5. When I play Black, I prefer to
develop ...Be6 in the Dragon so as to aim at the White castled queenside.

2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 g6 5.Nc3 Nf6 6.Be3 Bg7 7.f3 0-0 8.Qd2 a6
9.Bc4 b5 10.Bb3 Bb7 11.0-0-0 Nc6 12.h4 h5 13.g4 hxg4? [13...Na5=] 14.h5
Nxh5 15.Nxc6 Bxc6 16.Rxh5? [16.fxg4!+-] 16...gxh5 17.Bh6 e6 18.fxg4
Qf6 [18...h4!-+] 19.Bxg7 Kxg7 20.Qxd6 Qg5+ 21.Kb1 Bxe4 22.Nxe4 Qxg4
23.Qd4+ Kh6 24.Rg1 [24.Qe3+!+-] 24...e5 25.Qe3+ [25.Qb6+!+-] 25...Qf4
26.Qb6+ f6 27.Qb7 Rg8 28.Bxg8 Rxg8 29.Rd1 Rg7 30.Qc6 Rg6 31.Qa8
Rg7 32.Qh8+ Rh7 33.Qf8+ Kg6 34.Rg1+ Kf5 35.Nd6+ Ke6 36.Qg8+
Kxd6 37.Rd1+ Kc6 38.Qxh7 e4 39.Qd7+ Kc5 40.Rd5+ Kb6 41.Rd6+ Kc5
42.Qc7+ Kb4 43.Rd4# 1-0
67 - Dragon Chess Ideas
You know it happens. Your opponent takes you out of the book. Now what?
"Just play chess," they say. But how? Try this approach. 1. Remember the
ideas of your opening. 2. Pick an idea that looks good now. 3. Play it. The
Sicilian Defence Dragon Variation is an aggressive opening you can play
without much knowledge of theory. Really? Sure.
Picture the Sicilian Dragon as a tree. The main line is fairly skinny up to
moves 9 or 10. Then branches go all over the place. Trying to know all the
lines is like trying to know all the names in an old phone book. It's impossible
and unnecessary. Just follow the plan. White castles queenside. Black castles
kingside.
As White you play g4, h4, Bh6, Kb1, and h5 if possible in some order. You
open up the kingside and threaten the king.
As Black you aim your pawns and pieces to open queenside files and
diagonals. Eliminate the defenses and threaten the king.
Adjust your plan based on the tactical needs of the moment.
I recall Mark Blitshteyn as a friendly young man, with maybe a Russian

accent. During the Cold War, the Russian chess players I knew of were
masters. Mark was a just club player rated 1747. He came to America and
enjoyed playing chess. Wonderful!
Our game was from an event at the North Penn Chess Club near Philadelphia.
Black sacrificed to keep attacking, but his position was in pieces when he ran
out of pieces.
Sawyer - Blitshteyn (1747), Lansdale, PA 22.05.1982 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3

d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 g6 6.Be3 Bd7 7.f3 Bg7 8.Qd2 0-0 9.0-0-0
Nc6 10.Bc4 a6 11.h4 b5 12.Bb3 Na5 13.Bh6 Nxb3+ [13...Bxh6 14.Qxh6
e5=] 14.Nxb3 Be6 15.g4 Bxb3 16.axb3 Qa5 [16...Bxh6 17.Qxh6+/=]
17.Kb1 b4 [17...Bxh6 18.Qxh6+/-] 18.Nd5 Nxd5 19.exd5 Rac8 [19...f6
20.Bxg7 Kxg7 21.h5+-] 20.h5 Bxb2 [20...Bxh6 21.Qxh6+-] 21.Kxb2 Qa3+
22.Kb1 Rc5 23.Bxf8 Ra5 24.Qd4 Qa2+ 25.Kc1 f6 26.Bxe7 Rc5 27.Qb2
Qa5 28.Qxf6 Qa3+ 29.Qb2 Qa5 30.hxg6 Rxc2+ 31.Kxc2 1-0
68 - Halwick Sharp Dragon
Some who know my Blackmar-Diemer Gambit may wonder why I played
1.e4 and a Sicilian in an ICCF Master Class Tournament. One of my favorite
desserts is a Banana Split with three scoops of different ice cream flavors on
a sliced banana. I like variety.
Floyd J Halwick had an initial rating of 2386. Later it dropped into the 2200s
for a while, but after 181 games Halwick ended with a current ICCF rating of
2358. Floyd Halwick was from New York and had a USCF correspondence
rating of 2255.
To be that high rated for that long, Floyd Halwick must be good with
databases and chess engines, since ICCF his opponents do the same. Twenty
years ago those computer tools were almost useless, but today they are
essential for correspondence play.
The Sicilian Defence Dragon is unbalanced and fun to play from either side
of the board. Halwick sacrificed a pawn for attack. He fell prey to a long
forced combination. All of my pieces seemed to be on the right squares
whenever I needed them there. This victory helped me to win this master
class tournament 4.5 - 1.5.
Sawyer (2157) - Halwick (2386), corr ICCF 1995 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6
3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 g6 6.Be3 Bg7 7.f3 0-0 8.Qd2 Nc6 9.Bc4 [9.0-
0-0 later became more popular.] 9...Bd7 10.0-0-0 Qa5 [The recommended
line is Soltis Variation goes 10...Rc8 11.Bb3 Ne5 12.h4 h5 13.Bg5 Rc5=]
11.Bb3 Rfc8 12.Kb1 Ne5 13.h4 b5!? [13...Nc4 14.Bxc4 Rxc4 15.Nb3 Qc7
14.Bd4 Be6 15.h5+=] 14.Ncxb5 Qxd2 15.Bxd2 Nc4 [15...Rab8 16.Nc3+=]
16.Bxc4 [16.Nc3! Nxd2+ Rxd2+=] 16...Rxc4 17.Be3 [17.b3+=] 17...Rb8
18.b3 Rcc8 19.Nxa7 [19.Na3+=] 19...Rc7 [19...Rc3 20.Bf2 Rb7] 20.c4 Rxa7
21.Nc6 Bxc6 22.Bxa7 Ra8 23.Bd4 Nh5 24.Bxg7 Kxg7 25.Rhe1 Nf4 26.g3
[26.Rd2+=] 26...Nh5 27.g4 Nf4 28.a4 Rb8 29.Ka2 Kf6 30.Ka3 Ke5 31.b4
Ng2 32.Rh1 f5 33.exf5 [33.gxf5 gxf5 34.b5+/-] 33...gxf5 34.Rd3 [34.gxf5
Bxf3 35.Rd2+=] 34...fxg4 [34...f4=] 35.fxg4 Be4 36.Rc3 Kd4 37.Kb3 Ne3
38.Rh2 Nxg4 39.Rd2+ Ke5 40.a5 Ra8 41.c5 Nf6 42.c6 Nd5 43.Rc1
[43.Rxd5+ Bxd5+ 44.Ka4+/-] 43...Nc7 44.Ka4 Rb8 45.Rb2 Bd3 46.Re1+
Kf6 [46...Kd4=] 47.Rf2+ Bf5 48.Rxf5+ Kxf5 49.Rxe7 Rxb4+ 50.Kxb4
Nd5+ 51.Kb5 Nxe7 52.Kb6 d5 53.a6 d4 54.a7 Nc8+ 55.Kb7 Nxa7 56.Kxa7
d3 57.c7 d2 58.c8Q+ Kf4 59.Qc2 1-0
69 - Four Rook Sacrifices
The Sicilian Defence is known for its wild tactics. My APCT game vs Robert
Sah had four thematic rook sacrifices in the 9.Bc4 Yugoslav Dragon
variation.
The first rook sacrifice was a positional Exchange sacrifice that both humans
and chess engines routinely play on c3. Here it was 19...Rxc3 to open up a
queenside attack on the king.
Often the battle leads to pawn assaults when the players castle opposite sides.
Black sacrifices a piece to pick off some White pawns. With 21...Bxf3 the
Black bishop forks both rooks. White wiggled. White played the second rook
sacrifice with 27.Rxg2.
The endgame becomes a pawn race. Black advances a pawn to f2. White
sacrifices the third rook for the pawn with 42.Rxf2+.
The final position still had a rook on the board. White had two pawns and
Black had a rook. When White played 45.Kb5 and 46.a7, it became clear that
Black was forced to sacrifice his rook for the a-pawn (otherwise White
queens that pawn). After the fourth rook sacrifice, Black would devour the
last pawn. There would be no rooks to sacrifice. Just two lonely kings for a
draw.
Sawyer (2000) - Sah (1950), corr APCT 1979 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4
cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 g6 6.Be3 Bg7 7.f3 0-0 8.Qd2 Nc6 9.Bc4 Bd7 10.0-
0-0 Qa5 11.Bb3 Rfc8 12.h4 Ne5 13.Kb1 Nc4 14.Bxc4 Rxc4 15.Nb3 Qd8
[15...Qc7 16.g4+/=] 16.Bh6 [16.e5 Ne8 17.exd6 Nxd6 18.Bd4+/-] 16...Qf8
[16...Bxh6 17.Qxh6+/=] 17.Bxg7 Qxg7 18.g4 Rac8 19.h5 [19.e5!?+/-]
19...Rxc3 20.bxc3 Bxg4 21.hxg6 Bxf3 22.gxh7+ [White eliminates the
outside passed pawn, but he might have done better with 22.gxf7+ Qxf7
23.Rhg1+ Kh8 24.Rdf1=] 22...Kh8 23.Rdg1 Nxe4 24.Qd3? [This should not
have worked well. Better is 24.Rxg7 Nxd2+ 25.Nxd2 Bxh1 26.Rxf7=]
24...Nxc3+ 25.Ka1 Bg2 26.Nd4 Ne2 27.Rxg2 Qxg2 28.Re1 Nxd4!?
29.Qxd4+ Qg7 [This leads to an unbalanced but drawn rook and pawn
ending. Houdini gives 29...e5! 30.Qxd6 Re8-/+] 30.Qxg7+ Kxg7 31.Rxe7
Rf8 32.Rxb7 Kxh7 33.Rxa7 Kg6 34.Rd7 f5 35.Rxd6+ Kg5 36.Kb2 f4
37.a4 f3 38.Rd1 f2 39.Rf1 Kg4 40.a5 Kg3 41.Kb3 Kg2 42.Rxf2+ Kxf2
43.Kb4 Ke3 44.a6 Kd4 45.Kb5 Kd5 46.a7 Kd6 1/2-1/2
70 - Dragon vs Troy Daly
I love books by Cyrus Lakdawala. In his "A Ferocious Opening Repertoire"
book on the Veresov, Lakdawala wrote of himself on page 125: "Unlike my
opponent, I just don't have the open game gene. I tend to over-finesse and try
to control some weak square when I should be going after the opponent with
a meat axe! I remember one exasperated ICC kibitzer offering me this piece
of constructive criticism after I had blotched a similar game: "It's called the
initiative. You ought to try it sometime! Idiot!!""
I can relate to Cyrus Lakdawala. I began my career with the Caro-Kann,

Capablanca, and Fine's "Basic Chess Endings". At the most inopportune
moments I head for the endgame.
This Sicilian Defence is a good example. Troy Daly was soon to become a
master and head off to college. We ran into the middle of a sharp main line.
International Master Javad Maharramzade was watching our game. After we
finished very late at night, this IM reminded us that in this variation, White
has to focus on attack, to push pawns and throw everything at the kingside. I
may win or I may not, but it is the only good way to play this line.
Sawyer (1964) - Daly (2161), Space Coast Open (1), 08.05.2009 begins 1.e4
c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 g6 5.Nc3 Bg7 6.Be3 Nf6 7.Bc4 0-0 8.Bb3
d6 9.f3 Bd7 10.Qd2 Qa5 11.0-0-0 Rfc8 12.h4 h5 13.Kb1 Ne5 14.Nd5?! [At
this point I thought I might do better in an endgame vs a young opponent who
is rated 200 points above me. More promising is 14.Bg5+/=] 14...Qxd2
15.Rxd2 Nxd5 16.Bxd5 Nc4 17.Bxc4 Rxc4 18.Rhd1 Rac8 19.c3 Bf6 20.g3
Be5 21.Ne2 [21.Bf4= Houdini 3] 21...a6 22.Bd4 Bxd4 23.Nxd4 b5 24.a3
Kg7 25.Re1 f6 26.f4 e5 27.fxe5?! [Probably better is 27.Nb3 Rxe4 28.Rxe4
Bf5 29.Kc1 Bxe4 30.Rxd6=] 27...dxe5 28.Nf3 Bc6 29.Rde2 Bb7 30.Kc2
Kf7 31.Nd2 R4c7 32.Re3 Rd8 33.Rd3 Rxd3 34.Kxd3 Ke6 35.Re3 f5
36.exf5+ gxf5 37.c4 e4+ 38.Kd4 bxc4 39.Nxc4 Bd5 40.Rc3? [This counting
error allows Black to use tactics to exchange into a winning pawn ending.
40.Nb6 Rc2 41.b3 Rb2 42.Nxd5 Rd2+ 43.Kc3 Rxd5=/+] 40...Rxc4+ 41.Rxc4
Bxc4 42.Kxc4 Ke5 43.Kc3 f4 44.gxf4+ Kxf4 45.Kd2 Kf3 46.Ke1 Ke3
47.b4 Kd3 48.a4 Kc4 49.b5 axb5 50.axb5 [Or 50.a5 Kc5-+] 50...Kxb5
51.Kf2 Kc4 52.Ke2 Kd4 53.Kd2 Ke5 54.Ke2 Kf4 55.Kf2 Kg4 56.Ke3
Kxh4 57.Kxe4 Kg3 0-1
71 - Vehvilainen with Dragon
One of my stronger international correspondence opponents was Pertti
Vehvilainen of Finland. His Sicilian Defence Dragon Variation was in a very
critical line. After about a dozen common moves, the position became sharp
and extremely complex.
The players castled on opposite sides. Then they attacked the kings with all
they have, defending only when they must.
My position was strong at first in our game. Then it was equal for a while.
Then I messed up my attack. I had the right ideas at the wrong time.
I pushed my h-pawn when I should have played my bishop. Then I played my

bishop when I should have pushed my h-pawn.
Finally I missed a chance to draw with 27.Kxc2! when I played 27.Kc1. He

did not play perfect, but it was better than I played.
Pertti Vehvilainen finished in second place in our 15 player round robin

ICCF Master Class tournament. This event started in 1984.
His score was 10.5 out of 14. I had four wins, four draws and six losses. My
score was 6 out of 14. His ICCF rating is 2359.
Sawyer - Vehvilainen, corr ICCF 1986 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4
4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 g6 6.Be3 Bg7 7.f3 0-0 8.Qd2 Nc6 9.Bc4 Bd7 10.h4 Rc8
11.Bb3 Ne5 12.0-0-0 h5 13.Kb1 [13.Bh6 Bxh6 14.Qxh6 Rxc3 15.bxc3 Qa5
16.Kb1 Rc8 17.g4 Qxc3 18.gxh5 Nc4 19.Bxc4 Rxc4 20.Rd3 Qb4+
21.Rb3!+/=] 13...Nc4 14.Bxc4 Rxc4 15.Nb3 Qc7 [15...Qb8 16.Bd4=]
16.Bd4 Bc6 17.g4!? [17.a3!?; 17.Qe2!?] 17...e5 18.Be3 hxg4 19.h5?
[19.Bg5!=] 19...Rc8 [19...gxf3! 20.h6 Nxe4 21.Nxe4 Bxe4 22.hxg7 Rxc2
23.gxf8Q+ Kxf8 24.Qxd6+ Qxd6 25.Rxd6 f2-/+] 20.Bh6?! [20.h6!=]
20...Rxc3 21.bxc3 gxf3 22.Bxg7 Kxg7 23.hxg6 fxg6 24.Qh6+ Kf7 25.Nd2
Ba4 26.Nxf3 Bxc2+ 27.Kc1 [White draws with 27.Kxc2! Qxc3+ 28.Kb1
Qb4+ 29.Ka1=] 27...Bxd1 [Black is winning with 27...Qxc3! 28.Ng5+ Ke8
29.Qh8+ Kd7-+] 28.Ng5+ Ke8 29.Qh8+ [29.Qxg6+! Kd7 30.Qf5+ Kc6
31.Qxf6 Bg4=/+] 29...Kd7 30.Qg7+ Kc6 31.Qxf6 Bh5 32.Kd2 b5 33.Nf7
Kb6 34.Rh3 Rf8 35.Qxd6+ Qxd6+ 36.Nxd6 Rf2+ 37.Kd3 Kc5 0-1
72 - Sicilian Dragon Novelty
I discovered a new move in the Sicilian Defence Dragon Variation. Then I
found a few months later World Champion Anatoly Karpov played the same
move about the same time! It was a novelty for me. Karpov maybe already
knew 14.Rhe1!?
The Sicilian Dragon naturally allows White to attack kingside or in the

center. Black attacks queenside or in the center.
Thus 14.Rhe1 (center) and 14...b5 (queenside) look logical. Probably the
champion planned this idea in advance, since Sosonko was likely to repeat a
line in which he had previously won.
The game Zuidema - Sosonko, 1976 continued 15.f4 Nc4 16.Bxc4 bxc4
17.e5 and Black won. Karpov took the knight before pushing the e-pawn with
17.Bxf6 Bxf6 18.e5 and White won in 30 moves.
My opponent Daniel M. Horwitz became a strong postal chess player. Danny

is frequently rated over 2300 by ICCF and by USCF. Daniel Horwitz has
maintained an active and successful correspondence career.
The Dragon provokes mistakes. Sharp players hope their opponents will
make more and bigger mistakes. My central strategy in this game paid off.
Sawyer (2000) - Horwitz, corr APCT 1979 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4
cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 g6 6.Be3 Bg7 7.f3 0-0 8.Qd2 Nc6 9.Bc4 Bd7 10.0-
0-0 Rc8 11.Bb3 Ne5 12.h4 h5 13.Bg5 Rc5 14.Rhe1 [14.Kb1 b5 15.Rhe1 a5
16.f4=] 14...b5 15.Nd5?! [15.f4 Nc4 16.Bxc4 bxc4 17.Bxf6 Bxf6 18.e5=
Karpov] 15...Nxd5 16.exd5 a5 [16...Re8=/+] 17.f4 f6? [Attacking the wrong
bishop. Better is 17...a4! 18.fxe5 Bxe5 19.Rxe5 dxe5 20.d6 Qa8!=] 18.fxe5
fxg5 19.exd6 exd6 20.Ne6 Bxe6 [20...Qf6 21.c3+/=] 21.dxe6 Qe7 22.Qxd6
Re8 23.Qxe7 Rxe7 24.Rd7 Bf8 25.Rd8 Rf5 26.c4 bxc4 27.Bxc4 gxh4
28.Red1 Rc5 29.b3 Rxe6? [29...Kg7 30.R1d7+/-] 30.Kb2 [30.Rf1+-]
30...Rxc4 31.bxc4 Rf6 32.R1d7 Rf5 33.Kb3 Rg5 34.Rd2 Kg7 35.R8d5
Rg3+ 36.R5d3 Rg5 37.Rc2 Rc5 38.Rd5 Kf6 39.Rf2+ Kg7 40.Rd7+ 1-0
73 - Sicilian Dragon Breath
I love beef jerky. Strips of lean meat with the fat missing. What can be wrong
with that? It tastes great to me, but my wife cannot stand the smell.
Apparently it gives me Dragon breath.
After a day of playing 1.d4 and a couple hours working on BDGs, I decided
to go online and play a blitz game before bedtime. This time I ventured 1.e4!
My opponent for this three minute blitz game was "bjerky". Fortunately we
cannot smell or tell anything about bad breath online.
We rattled off the first 14 moves very quickly in a Sicilian Defence variation.
By transposition we got into a well-known rich and wild position.
For the next 20 moves pieces were flying all over the place. In the end I
caught the Black king before he caught mine.
Sawyer - bjerky, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 18.11.2012 begins 1.e4 c5

2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Bc4!? [I keep playing this line because I
keep winning with it. When I stop winning, I will go back to 5.Nc3] 5...Nc6
6.Nc3 g6 7.Be3 Bg7 8.f3 0-0 9.Qd2 Bd7 10.0-0-0 Ne5 11.Bb3 Rc8 12.h4 h5
13.Bg5 Rc5 14.g4 [This Soltis Variation has been reached thousands of
times. I used to play it 30 years ago. Equally popular is 14.Kb1 b5 15.g4 with
complications.] 14...hxg4 15.Bh6? [I play and new move, and it stinks?!
About 1000 games in my database went 15.f4 Nc4 16.Qe2 with an unclear
position.] 15...Nc4? [Black lets me off the hook. I would have been in trouble
after 15...gxf3!-+] 16.Bxc4 Rxc4 17.Bxg7 Kxg7 18.h5 Rh8 19.fxg4 Bxg4
20.Rdg1? [Correct was 20.hxg6! because if 20...Bxd1? White has 21.Nf5+
Kf8 22.Rxh8+ Ng8 23.Rxg8+ Kxg8 24.Qh6+- and mate next move.]
20...Bxh5 [20...Qb6!-/+] 21.Nf5+ Kf8 22.Nd5 Nxe4 23.Qg2? [23.Qd3=]
23...e6 24.Nfe3 Ra4 25.Nf4 Ra5? [25...Qb6!-+] 26.Rxh5? [26.Qxe4+- turns
the tables.] 26...Raxh5? [26...Rhxh5-+] 27.Nxe6+? fxe6 28.Qxe4 Qb6
[28...Qe7-/+] 29.Qxe6 Re5? [Black has a drawing line: 29...Rh1! 30.Qc8+
Kg7 31.Qd7+ Kf8= repeating moves.] 30.Rf1+ Kg7 31.Qf6+ Kh6 32.Qxh8+
Kg5 33.Qf6+ Kh6 34.Ng4+ 1-0
74 - Erv Sedlock Dragon
Ervin F. Sedlock was one of many APCT players from Illinois, the home of
Jim and Helen Warren. It appears that Erv Sedlock retired to Florida. I did the
same thing.
Sedlock was a USCF National Tournament Director. Erv Sedlock played

chess for over 60 years. I have a dozen of his games in my database. He was
in his 40s when we played this game.
We contested a popular Sicilian Defence Dragon Variation. This game saw

the battle of two rooks. Black doubled his rooks on the c-file. They were
ready for attack.
Meanwhile the White pawns were racing toward the Black king. Soon the
White queen invaded.
White doubled his rooks on the first rank. Then the kingside pawns
disappeared, The White rooks on g1 and h1 proved to be very powerful on
those open lines.
Black had the advantage of the two bishops against two knights. However,
White had the initiative. His knights were side by side hitting many strategic
squares.
The Black king was flushed out of the pocket to the open field. In a tactical
combination black lost one of his bishops.
Down a piece in the endgame, Black resigned. This is one of the better
Dragon Sicilians that I played.
Sawyer (2150) - Sedlock (2000), corr APCT 1982 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6
3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 g6 6.Be3 Bg7 7.f3 Nc6 8.Bc4 0-0 9.Qd2 Bd7
10.0-0-0 Ne5 11.Bb3 Qa5 12.h4 Rfc8 13.Kb1 Nc4 14.Bxc4 Rxc4 15.Nb3
Qd8 [15...Qc7 16.g4+/=] 16.Bh6 [16.e5!+/-] 16...Bh8 [16...Bxh6
17.Qxh6+/=] 17.h5 Rac8 18.hxg6 hxg6 19.g4?! [19.e5!+/-] 19...b5
[19...Bxg4!=] 20.Qh2 b4 21.Bf8 [Wrong direction. Correct is 21.Bf4! Bg7
22.Nd5 Nxd5 23.Qh7+ Kf8 24.Bh6+-] 21...Nh5 22.gxh5 Qxf8 [22...g5
23.Bxe7 Qxe7 24.Nd5+/-] 23.hxg6 Qg7 24.gxf7+ Kxf7 25.Qh5+ Qg6
26.Qxg6+ Kxg6 27.Rdg1+ Kf7 28.Rh7+ Ke6 29.Nd5 Bf6 30.Rg6 Re8
31.Rxe7+ Rxe7 32.Rxf6+ Ke5 33.f4+ Kxe4 34.Nxe7 1-0
This is the Classical Richter-Rauzer Sicilian variation.
75 - Sicilian Classical 6.Bb5
Do you like the move 6.Bb5 for White? In the classical open Sicilian Defence
White plays 3.d4. Black plays 2...d6 and 5...Nc6 in either one order or the
other. After 6.Bb5 Bd7 7.Nxc6 bxc6, Black prepared for the counter thrust
...d6-d5. This worked well with pawns on e6 and c6.
Then, Ray Haines boldly played 12...e5. This fought for d4 and f4 but
weakened d5. The big idea of this game is a Black pawn sacrifice with
17...d5?! In theory the pawn advance to d5 is a logical strategy, but here
Black was just a pawn down.
The logical move 6.Bb5 used to be rare. Strong chess engines consider it to
be as good as anything else. It looks like a waste of time. The move 6.Bb5
forces Black to improve his position and defend c6. If the bishop is chased
away, White has lost a tempo.
After he gave up a pawn, Ray Haines did well to survive. He worked the
position into a drawn rook and pawn endgame.
Guest - Haines, chess24, 17.02.2016 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4

4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 Nc6 6.Bb5 Bd7 7.Nxc6 bxc6 8.Bd3 [8.Bc4 is more
common.] 8...e6 9.0-0 Rb8 10.b3 Be7 11.Bb2 0-0 12.f3 e5 13.Ne2 Be6 14.c4
Qb6+ 15.Kh1 Rfd8 16.Nc3 Bf8 [Black could activate his kingside pieces
with 16...Nh5=] 17.Qe1 d5?! [This is a risky sacrifice. 17...Nh5=] 18.cxd5
[18.Na4! seems to win a pawn, or more in the case of 18...Qc7? 19.exd5 cxd5
20.Bxe5 Bd6 21.Bxf6 gxf6 22.cxd5 Bxd5 23.Qh4+-] 18...cxd5 19.Nxd5
[19.Na4 Qd6 20.exd5 Qxd5 21.Bc4 Qd7 22.Bxe6 Qxe6 23.Qxe5+/=]
19...Nxd5 20.exd5 Bxd5 21.Bxe5 Re8? [21...Rbc8 22.Rd1+/=] 22.f4?!
[22.Qh4! g6 23.Bxb8+-] 22...Rbd8 23.Qf2 Qxf2 24.Rxf2 Bxg2+ 25.Rxg2
Rxd3 26.Bb2 Re4 27.f5 Rde3 28.Rgg1 Re2 29.Bc3 [29.Bxg7=] 29...Rc2
[29...Rf4=/+] 30.Bxg7 Bxg7 31.f6 Ree2?! [31...Rh4=] 32.Rxg7+ Kf8
33.Rxh7 Kg8 [33...Ke8 34.Rd1+/=] 34.Rg7+ [34.Rh5+/-] 34...Kh8 35.Rd1
Rxh2+ 36.Kg1 Rhd2 37.Re1 Re2 38.Rd1 Red2 39.Re1 Re2 40.Rd1?! [This
leads to a draw. Better is 40.Rxe2 Rxe2 41.a4+/-] 40...Red2 1/2-1/2
76 - Zdun Rauzer with Be6
Dick Zdun was a practical player with decades of experience. He did not play
openings with the intention of winning immediately. Although if you
blundered, he would happily win.
Sharp players choose openings based on exact knowledge. Other players are
more philosophical. They play the opening following general principles.
There are players who play the same openings repeatedly. Dick was not that
type of player. I never knew what he would play. Mr. Zdun made his
selections based on a wide variety of reliable openings. He had a basic
knowledge of many popular lines.
I won a game vs Dick Zdun in the Sicilian Defence Rauzer. Black plays 2…
d6 or 5…Nc6 (or in reverse order as here).
White in the Rauzer plays 6.Bg5 with a threat to leave Black with doubled
pawns. The normal reply is 6…e6.
In this game Zdun treated the position like a Najdorf with the moves 6…a6,
7…Qb6 and 8…Be6. But he left his e-pawn on e7.
Then Black attacked kingside and queenside. When he tried to activate his
dark squared with 16…Bh6 and 17…Bg5, the bishop became basically a
super pawn hemmed in by pawn f4 and f6.
White invaded through light squared holes in Black’s defense. Then White
sacrificed a knight on d8 and rook on e7 to force checkmate with a queen and
rook.

2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 d6 6.Bg5 a6 7.Qd2 Qb6 8.Nb3 Be6
9.Be2 Ng4 10.0-0 f6 11.Nd5 Bxd5 12.exd5 Nce5 13.Bf4 g5 14.h3 gxf4
15.Bxg4 Nxg4 16.hxg4 Bh6 17.Nd4 [17.Qd3+/=] 17...Bg5 [17...f3!
18.Qc3+/=] 18.Ne6 [18.Nf5+/- looks good] 18...h6 19.Qd3 Kf7 20.b3 Rac8
21.c4 Qa5 22.a4 Qb4 23.Rfe1 b5 24.axb5 axb5 25.Qf5 Rce8 [25...bxc4?
26.Nxg5+ hxg5 27.Rxe7+ Kxe7 28.Ra7+ mates] 26.cxb5 Qxb3 27.Nd8+!
Rxd8 [On 27...Kf8 I intended 28.Qg6 (28.Ra8! Kg7 29.Ra7+-) 28...Qxd5
29.Ne6+ Qxe6 30.Rxe6+-] 28.Rxe7+ Kxe7 29.Ra7+ Kf8 30.Qg6 1-0
77 - Sicilian Richter-Rauzer
In the Sicilian Defence Richter-Rauzer Variation the players normally castle
on opposite sides.
The strategy follows in which both sides plan an attack against the enemy
king.
My opponent "cassiopea" in the game below went for a quick build up on the
c-file.
I should have crossed up Black's move order with 11.Nbd5, but I backed off
with 11.Nb3.
Chances were pretty much even, but in the endgame I had a fortunate fork
that won.
This was one of those times were I chose my opening line based on which
had given me the highest performance rating.
Note that my move order was chosen because at the time my performance
with 2.Nc3 was one rating point higher than 2.Nf3.
Later the two moves scored equally well. Other times I choose my openings
based on winning percentage.
After all, once the pieces are developed it is just me playing. My results tend
to be about the same in any opening.
Sawyer - cassiopea, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 08.11.2012 begins 1.e4 c5

2.Nc3 d6 3.Nf3 Nc6 4.d4 cxd4 5.Nxd4 Nf6 6.Bg5 e6 7.Qd2 Be7 8.f3 [8.0-0-
0 0-0 9.f3 transposes] 8...0-0 9.0-0-0 Bd7 [Black usually plays 9...a6 or
9...Nxd4] 10.Kb1 Rc8 11.Nb3 [11.Ndb5+/=] 11...a6 12.g4 Ne5 13.Be2 Nc4
14.Bxc4 Rxc4 15.h4 b5 16.h5 Qc7 17.Be3 Rc8 18.Rc1 b4 19.Ne2 a5 20.g5
Ne8 21.g6 Bf6 22.gxf7+ Kxf7 23.Bd4? [23.Qd3 a4 24.Nd2=] 23...a4
24.Bxf6 Nxf6 25.Nbd4 e5 26.Nf5 Bxf5 27.exf5 d5?! [27...Qd7=/+] 28.h6 b3
29.cxb3 Rxc1+ 30.Rxc1 Qd7 31.Rxc8 Qxc8 32.hxg7 axb3 33.axb3 Qxf5+
34.Qc2 Qxf3 35.Qc7+ Kg8 36.Qxe5 Kxg7 37.Nd4 [37.Ka2=] 37...Qe4+
38.Qxe4 Nxe4 [38...dxe4-/+] 39.b4 h6 40.b5 h5? [40...Kf6 41.b6 Nd6
42.Kc2=] 41.b6 Nd6 42.Nf5+ Nxf5 43.b7 [Black forfeits on time just before
White gets a new queen.] 1-0
78 - Taylor Rauzer Sicilian
Why do players sacrifice material? A chess sacrifice increases the drama in a
game. It adds to the beauty. It provides comedy. Yes, a chess sacrifice is a
wonderful move.
I love to sacrifice and I am past 60 years old! Emanuel Lasker famously said,
“The delight in gambits is a sign of chess youth... we with maturing
experience leave off gambit playing…”
My wife asked me when I was going to write my book, “Maturity and How I
Attained It”. She said it would be a work of fiction. She is only half joking.
We met in 1976, and she knows me very well.
Immaturity in chess makes me want to sacrifice when I should be serious and

hold on to more material. I don’t want to throw my material away for no
reason. I just want to have fun when I win. I find sacrifices even when I do
not play gambits.
To complicate matters, a lot of my games were played in online blitz games

or in unrated club games. I could and did play boldly. The risks in such
contests were minor.
I won this game in the Rauzer Sicilian Defence vs Allen Taylor in

Williamsport. I focused my play on the center with rooks on d1 and e1. Then
on move 15, I sacrificed a knight. On move 17, White can regain the piece.
Instead I got too cute. I sacrificed the Exchange. I took a bishop with the
rook.
I should just grab the other bishop with a pawn. Waiting a move to play
18.dxc6 gave Black a chance for a better defense. In this club game Black
missed it. I was able to pull off a pretty finish. When Black resigned, he was
up the Exchange. But we were headed to a pawn endgame where only I
would have a bishop.
Sawyer - Taylor, Williamsport PA 1995 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4

4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 Nc6 6.Bg5 e6 7.Qd2 Be7 8.0-0-0 a6 9.f3 [9.Bxf6=]
9...Rb8 10.Be2 Bd7 11.Rhe1 b5 12.Nxc6 Bxc6 13.Bf1!? [13.Bxf6!=] 13...b4
[13...0-0 14.Bf4=] 14.Bxf6 Bxf6 15.Nd5 exd5 [15...Bxd5 16.exd5 e5=]
16.exd5+ Be7 17.Rxe7+!? [Better is 17.dxc6+-] 17...Kxe7 18.dxc6 Re8
[18...Qc7 19.Bc4+/=] 19.Bxa6 Kf8 20.Qxd6+ Qxd6 21.Rxd6 Re6 22.Rxe6
fxe6 23.c7 1-0
79 - Haines Kasparov Sicilian
Ray Haines sometimes plays the Sicilian Defence Scheveningen line in
fashion similar to what Aleksander Nikitin wrote about with the moves 2...d6,
5...e6, 6...a6 in some order.
I think Ray had one of Nikitin's books from the 1970s. Nikitin coached a kid
named Garry Kasparov. Using the same line, that young man became world
champion.
In the third round of the World Open in 1982, Ray outplayed Mockler (2059)
to win.
The Open Sicilian Defence 3.d4 allows White to play in the center, the
queenside or the kingside.
Mockler chose a thematic sacrifice of a piece on b5 for pawns and open lines,
similar to what Mikhail Tal might have played.
This particular tactic did not work well. Ray Haines defended well and
countered with a nice mating attack against the White king.
Mockler (2059) - Haines, World Open (3), 1982 begins 1.e4 c5 2.d4 cxd4
3.Nf3 d6 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 e6 6.Be2 a6 7.Be3 b5 8.a3 [This is one of those
variations that is equal in theory but tends to favor Black in practice. White
seems to do better with either 8.Bf3 or 8.0-0!?] 8...Bb7 9.f3 Nbd7 10.0-0 Be7
11.Qd2 Qc7 12.Rfd1 0-0 13.Bxb5?! [13.Qe1=] 13...axb5 14.Ndxb5 Qb8
15.Nxd6 Rd8 16.Ncb5 Ba6 17.c4 Ne5 18.Qd4 Nxf3+ 19.gxf3 Bxb5
20.Nxb5 [White sacrifices a queen. The alternative is 20.cxb5 Bxd6 21.Qb6
Bxh2+ 22.Kh1 Qxb6 23.Bxb6 Rdb8 24.Kxh2 Rxb6 25.a4 Kf8-/+] 20...Rxd4
21.Bxd4 Qf4 22.Kg2 Nxe4 23.fxe4 Qxe4+ 24.Kg1 Qg4+ 25.Kf1 Qf3+
26.Kg1 e5 27.Bf2 Ra6 28.b4 Rg6+ 29.Bg3 f5 30.Nc7 f4 31.Nd5 Bh4 [Black
is clearly winning with this move. A little faster would be 31...fxg3!
32.Nxe7+ Kf7 33.Rf1 gxh2+ 34.Kxh2 Rh6+ 35.Kg1 Rh1#] 32.Rf1 Rxg3+
33.hxg3 Qxg3+ 34.Kh1 Qh3+ 35.Kg1 Qg4+ 36.Kh1 f3 37.Ne3 Qh3+
38.Kg1 Qg3+ 39.Kh1 f2 40.Rxf2 Qxf2 41.Ng2 Bg3 42.Rd1 Qe2 [Ray
Haines provides the following analysis from Fritz 11: 43.Rb1 Qf3 44.b5 Bf2
45.Rb3 Qxb3 46.Ne3 Qxe3 47.Kg2 Bh4 48.Kh2 g5 49.Kg2 Qf2+ 50.Kh1
Bg3 51.a4 Qh2#] 0-1
80 - Commons Beats Benko
How do you beat a strong player in chess? Make double threats. When you
threaten to do two things at once, even a famous grandmaster will be
challenged.
In this example, Kim Commons wins a very nice Sicilian Defence against Pal
Benko. It was played at the US championship which was held that year in
Oberlin, Ohio.
White began 1.e4 c5 2.Nc3. Commons varies from his normal choice of
2.Nf3. Maybe Kim expected Benko to play 2...Nc6 and was prepared with
either 3.g3 Closed Sicilian or 3.f4 Grand Prix.
Once Black played the moves, 2...d6 and 3...a6, White headed for the Open
Sicilian lines with 4.d4 cxd4 5.Nxd4 e6. Black moved only pawns for five
moves.
The principle is this: When your opponent gives you the center, take it!
White employed the set-up with 6.f4 and 7.Bd3. By move 23 the position
resembled a King's Gambit.
White attacked in the center and on the kingside. Once his e-pawn took off
for promotion, there was no stopping him.
Why? Because the only way to guard against 37.e8=Q was to allow the final
move of the game: 37.Qf8 checkmate.
Commons (2415) - Benko (2515), USA-ch Oberlin (8), 1975 begins 1.e4 c5
2.Nc3 d6 3.Nf3 a6 4.d4 cxd4 5.Nxd4 e6 6.f4 Nf6 7.Bd3 Nc6 [7...Qc7=]
8.Nxc6 bxc6 9.0-0 Be7 10.Qe2 e5 11.fxe5 dxe5 12.Bc4 0-0 13.h3 Ne8
14.Be3 Nd6 [14...Rb8 15.Rad1+/=] 15.Rad1 Qc7 16.Bd3 Nb5 17.Na4 Nd4
18.Qf2 Be6 19.Qg3 [19.c3+/-] 19...Bd6 [19...Rfd8 20.b3+/=] 20.c3 f5
21.cxd4 f4 22.Bxf4 exf4 23.Qh4 [23.Qf3+/-] 23...Be7 24.Qh5 Bxa2
[24...Bf7 25.Qe2+/=] 25.e5 g6 26.Qe2 [26.Bxg6!?] 26...Bd5 27.Nc3 Qb6
28.Bc4 Bxc4 29.Qxc4+ Kh8 30.Kh1 Rad8 31.Qe6 Qxb2? [31...Qb7
32.Rf3+/=] 32.Qxe7 Qxc3 33.Rxf4 Rxf4 [Or 33...Kg8 34.Qe6+ Kg7
35.Rf6+-] 34.Qxd8+ Kg7 35.e6 Qe3 36.e7 Re4 37.Qf8# 1-0
81 – James Davies 7.a3 Sozin
St. Louis has become one of the leading locations in the United States for
chess activity. The Chess Club and Scholastic Center of Saint Louis is a
driving force for the game.
Across the street from the club is the World Chess Hall of Fame. Ten years
ago it was in Miami in a building that was shaped like a rook. I visited it
when we were in Miami on business.
As I recall APCT player and columnist James Davies lived in the St. Louis
area. I chose the Sicilian Defence in our 1980 game. In postal chess, you sent
each of your moves to their address.
Davies played the Sozin Variation 6.Bc4 against my classical Sicilian

5...Nc6. He took me out of the book with his move 7.a3. It was new to me,
but maybe James Davies had played it before.
Jim's plan was to retreat the bishop to a2 to assist long range like a sniper in
his kingside attack aiming at e6 and f7 and g8.
White sacrificed a rook for an attack. Black survived, but in the end White
still had a perpetual check to draw.
Davies (2170) - Sawyer (2050), corr APCT 1980 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6
3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 d6 6.Bc4 e6 7.a3!? [This may look slow, but
White has long term attack plans in mind. 7.Be3 Be7 8.Qe2 a6 9.0-0-0 Qc7
10.Bb3 0-0=] 7...Be7 8.0-0 0-0 9.Ba2 Nxd4 10.Qxd4 b6 11.Qd3 Bb7 12.f4
[12.Bf4=] 12...d5 [12...Qc8!=/+] 13.e5 Ng4 14.Qg3 Bc5+ 15.Kh1 Ba6
16.Rf3 Nh6 [16...h5 17.f5 exf5 18.Rxf5 Qd7= when Black threatens the rook
on f5 and a check on f2.] 17.f5 Nxf5 [17...Kh8 18.Bg5+-] 18.Rxf5 exf5
19.Bh6 g6 20.Nxd5 Be7 21.Rd1 [The winning move is 21.e6! fxe6 22.Nc7
Rf6 23.Nxa6+- and White is up a piece.] 21...Kh8 22.Ne3 [22.Qe1 Re8
23.e6+/-] 22...Qc7 [22...Qc8=] 23.Bd5 [Another good chance is the
complicated line after 23.Re1! Rfe8 24.Nxf5 Bf6 25.Nd6 Bxe5 26.Nxf7+
Qxf7 27.Bxf7 Bxg3 28.Rxe8+ Rxe8 29.Bxe8 Be5 30.c3+/- and White is up a
pawn in a four bishop endgame.] 23...Rad8 24.Qf4 Rfe8 25.b4 Bf8 26.Bg5
Rd7 27.Bf6+ Bg7 [Black could return material in an effort to win, but that
might favor the higher rated player. 27...Kg8 28.h4 Re6 29.Bxe6 Rxd1+
30.Nxd1 fxe6=/+] 28.Bxg7+ Kxg7 29.Nxf5+ gxf5 1/2-1/2
82 - Sicilian Sozin vs Sogin
Who was Sozin? Veniamin Innokentevich Sozin was a Russian master,
author of articles and books, and opening theoretician. He was born in 1896
and died in 1956.
Sozin is best known for the Open Sicilian Defence variation 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3
Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 d6 6.Bc4 e6 7.0-0 Be7 8.Be3 a6 9.f4.
These moves could be played in a different order.
The name “Sozin Sicilian” often means almost any classical line with 6.Bc4.
Black may have pawns at d6, e6, and or a6. Black’s knights may be at Nf6
and at Nc6 or at Nbd7.
Master Sozin developed the idea of castling kingside with the f4-f5 attack on
e6. Bobby Fischer played 6.Bc4 with great success.
One thematic tactical combination is …Nf6xe4, Nc3xe4, …d6-d5 with a

pawn fork on the Ne4 and Bc4. Because of this, Fischer and others
sometimes play Bc4-b3 on move 7 or soon after.
Lou Sogin was an active postal chess player from the 1960s to the 1990s. I
have a dozen of his games in my database. More often than not, Sogin was on
the losing side in those games.
I played the Sozin against Lou Sogin in APCT. Note that I played 7.Bb3 to
avoid the pawn fork. On move 13 he dropped a piece.
Sawyer (1973) - Sogin (1683), corr APCT 94R-29, 1994 begins 1.e4 c5
2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 e6 6.Bc4 a6 7.Bb3 e5 [The most
popular continuation is 7...b5 8.0-0 Be7=] 8.Nf3 [Stronger players go for the
tactically unbalanced 8.Nf5! Bxf5 9.exf5+/=] 8...Be7 9.h3!? [If I played 9.0-0
0-0 10.Be3 Black may put a bishop or knight on g4. I decided to avoid that.]
9...0-0 10.Be3 Nc6 11.Qd3 Be6 12.0-0 Qa5 [Black has played well so far. A
reasonable idea would be to play the rook to the half open c-file with
12...Rc8=] 13.Nd5 [13.a3+/=] 13...Nxd5? [This drops a piece. Black must
play 13...Bxd5! 14.exd5 (14.Bxd5 Nb4 15.Qd2 Bd8 16.Bxb7 Rb8 17.a3
Rxb7 18.axb4 Qxb4=) 14...e4 15.Qd2 exf3 16.dxc6 Qxd2 17.Bxd2 bxc6
18.Rfe1 Rfe8 19.gxf3=] 14.exd5 Nb4 15.Qd2 Bxh3?! [Black sacrifices
another piece out of desperation, but there was not escape. 15...Bxd5 16.Bxd5
Qxd5 17.Qxb4+-] 16.gxh3 1-0
83 - Sozin Bachler vs Fawbush
The classical Sicilian Defence with 6.Bc4 is known as the Sozin variation.
Bobby Fischer specialized in that line 50 years ago.
The Sozin still works well, but as in most Sicilian lines, Black equalizes with
good play. In some ways it is like the Italian Game or the Scotch Gambit. The
bishop at c4 aims at key squares d5, e6, f7 and g8.
Here is the game Kevin L. Bachler vs George E. Fawbush in the Sozin. I

knew these both as strong postal chess players 30 years ago. I played them
both. Bachler beat me in our only game.
Like me, Fawbush was a very active postal player. Fawbush and I met many
times in correspondence play.
George Fawbush crushed me a bunch, but a couple of the wins I had over
Fawbush came at key moments in my chess career.
In the game below, "G.E.F." (as his moves were signed) won out during a
long battle. Fawbush was an APCT Life Master.
Bachler - Fawbush, corr 1982 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 e6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4
Nf6 5.Nc3 d6 6.Bc4 Nc6 7.Bb3 Be7 8.f4 Qa5 [8...0-0 9.Be3=] 9.Qd3 [9.0-0
d5 10.Nxc6 bxc6 11.e5=] 9...0-0 10.0-0 [10.Bd2=] 10...Nxd4 11.Qxd4 d5
12.Be3 dxe4 13.Nxe4 Rd8 [13...b6=/+] 14.Qc3 Qxc3 15.Nxc3 Ng4 16.Bf2
Nxf2 17.Kxf2 Bc5+ 18.Kg3 Bd7 19.Ne4 Bd4 20.c3 Bc6 [20...Bb6=/+]
21.Ng5 Bf6 22.Nf3 a5 23.Rad1 a4 24.Bc4 a3 25.bxa3 Bxc3 26.Bb3 Kf8
27.Rxd8+ Rxd8 28.Rd1 Ra8 29.f5?! [29.a4 Bf6=/+] 29...e5 30.Ng5 e4
[30...Ke7-/+] 31.Kf4 Re8 32.Nxh7+ Kg8 [32...Ke7=] 33.Ng5 e3 34.Bxf7+
Kf8 35.Bc4 [35.Bxe8!+/-] 35...Bd2 36.Be2 Ra8 37.Nf3 Ra4+ 38.Kg3 Ba5
[38...Rxa3=] 39.Rd3 [39.Nd4+/=] 39...Bc7+ 40.Kh3 Be4 41.Rd4 Bxf3
42.Rxa4 Bxe2 43.Re4 Bb6 44.Re6 Bd3 [44...Bc5-+] 45.g4 Bf1+ 46.Kg3 e2
47.h4 Ba5 48.Kf2 e1Q+ 49.Rxe1 Bxe1+ 50.Kxe1 Bh3 51.g5 Bxf5 52.h5
Be6 53.Kd2 Bxa2 54.Kc3 Bf7 55.h6 gxh6 56.gxh6 Be8 57.Kc4 [Or 57.Kb4
Bh5-+] 57...Ba4 58.Kd5 b5 59.Ke6 Kg8 60.Kf6 Kh7 61.Kg5 Bd1 62.Kf5
Kxh6 63.Kf6 Bc2 64.Ke5 Kg5 65.Kd5 Kf4 66.Kd4 Ba4 67.Kd3 Kf3
68.Kd4 Ke2 0-1
84 - Tribute to Jim Warren
Chess expert Jim Warren outplayed Bobby Fischer twice in the Sicilian
Defence.
This same James E. Warren developed the computer program for Elo chess
ratings.
On Friday, December 12, 2014, Tim Just posted the following:
"Helen Warren informed me this AM that her husband Jim

Warren died. His heart gave out. I have few details. The
death notice and funeral details will be in the Chicago
Tribune a week from Saturday, according to Helen.
“Jim worked with Elo in developing the ratings formula. Along with Helen
he ran APCT for years. They sponsored many Master chess events over the
years, including the U.S. Masters.”
When Professor Arpad Elo produced the FIDE Rating List in 1969 he wrote:
"Grateful acknowledgement is made to Mr. James Warren of Western

Springs, Illinois, who wrote the computer program for the method of
successive approximations and performed the computation for the 200
selected players."
Arpad E. Elo, Member, FIDE Qualification Committee, USCF Ratings
Chairman
Jim Brotsos, Co-founder of the Chicago Industrial Chess League wrote in
part:
"Jim Warren has already received mention as one of the pillars of the League.
In addition, he has had leadership roles in the Illinois Chess Association and
the APCT. In 1997 he received the U.S.C.F. Meritorious Service Award for
helping to establish the FIDE rating system. He and his wife have sponsored
major regional tournaments and the U.S. Masters, often acting as financial
patrons... They are, no doubt, the most influential couple in the history of
Midwestern American chess. Jim has a significant collection of chessmen and
one of the largest collections of chess books/magazines in the Midwest."
Robert James Fischer was born March 9, 1943 in Chicago, Illinois, but
Fischer grew up in New York. He returned to Chicago on March 23, 1964 for
his simultaneous exhibition tour and scored +49 =4 -1. Just two months later
in another simul Bobby Fischer scored +44 =5 -1 in Cicero, Illinois on May
20, 1964.
In both simuls, Bobby Fischer played the same first 18 moves vs Jim Warren
in the sharp 6.Bc4 Sozin line of the Sicilian Defence. Note that Fischer
employed the Sozin pawn push with 15.f5!?
Jim Warren won a pawn in each game. Bobby Fischer had to fight hard just
to draw Jim Warren.
Fischer - Warren, Cicero simul 20.05.1964 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4
cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 d6 6.Bc4 e6 7.Bb3 Be7 8.Be3 0-0 9.0-0 Bd7
[9...a6=] 10.f4 Nxd4 11.Bxd4 Bc6 12.Qe2 b5 13.Nxb5 Bxb5 14.Qxb5 Nxe4
15.f5!? Bf6 [15...e5 16.Be3 Bg5 17.Bxg5 Qxg5=] 16.Qd3 Bxd4+ [16...d5!=]
17.Qxd4 d5 18.c4 [White should play 18.fxe6! fxe6 19.c4+/=] 18...dxc4
19.Qxe4! [An improvement over their earlier meeting in the Chicago simul
where Fischer played the weaker 19.Qxd8?! Rfxd8 20.Bxc4 Nd2 21.Rfc1
Nxc4 22.Rxc4 exf5=/+. Warren was up two f-pawns in a rook ending. But
late in a simul when other games are done, the grandmaster returns faster and
play speeds up. Mistakes on moves 56 and 64 allowed White to escape with a
draw on move 67.] 19...cxb3 20.fxe6 Qb6+ 21.Kh1 fxe6 22.axb3 Qxb3
23.h3 Qxb2 24.Qxe6+ Kh8 25.Qe7 Rxf1+ 26.Rxf1 h6 27.Rf8+ Rxf8
28.Qxf8+ Kh7 29.Qf5+ Kg8 30.Qc8+ Kh7 31.Qf5+ g6 32.Qa5 Qb6 33.Qa2
Qb7 34.Qa1 Qc7 1/2-1/2 [Black cannot make progress with his extra a-
pawn.]
Book 2 – Chapter 4 – Najdorf
5.Nc3 a6
Here are games with some of the less popular sixth moves for White in the
Najdorf Variation.
85 – Eric Smith Sharp Sozin
I played a Sicilian Defence against Eric Smith in a Najdorf Sozin. This
opening was very sharp. Alas the players were not sharp.
One of the thematic tactical treats in the Najdorf Sozin is for Black to push
his b-pawn to drive away the protection of e4.
Black cannot normally win the pawn without facing a very strong attack. As
Black I tried it. I got in big trouble. I escaped and won.
Smith - Sawyer, Williamsport, PA 1994 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4

4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Bc4 e6 7.0-0 b5 8.Bb3 Bb7 [Safer and more
common is 8...Be7=] 9.Re1 [Those who like the murky waters of a
speculative sacrifice might be happy to try 9.Bxe6!? fxe6 10.Nxe6 Qc8
11.Nd5=] 9...b4?! [Now it is Black who goes in the risky play. He dares
White to sacrifice. A more sound approach would be 9...Nbd7=] 10.Na4
[10.Nd5! Nbd7 11.Bg5+/- gives White a strong attack.] 10...Nxe4? [10...Nc6
11.c3 bxc3 12.Nxc3+/=] 11.f3! Nc5 12.Be3?! [This leads only to equality.
White can win by 12.Nxc5! dxc5 13.Ba4+ Nc6 (13...Nd7 14.Nxe6 fxe6
15.Bg5 Be7 16.Rxe6 0-0 17.Bxe7+- and Black is busted.; and moving the
king loses to a pretty mate after 13...Ke7 14.Nf5+ Kf6 15.Qxd8+ Be7
16.Qxe7+ Kxf5 17.Qg5#) 14.Nxc6 Qd7 15.Qxd7+ Kxd7 16.Ne5+ Ke7
17.Be3+- White is up a knight with a great position.] 12...Nxb3 13.Nxb3?!
[13.axb3=] 13...Nd7 14.c3 bxc3 15.Nxc3 [Black has an extra passed d-pawn.
White's attack has stalled. If Black has time to complete his development and
to consolidate his position, he will gain a big advantage.] 15...Be7 16.Qd3 0-
0 17.Rad1 d5 18.f4 Qc7 19.Ne2 [19.Rc1 Qd6 20.Na4 Bc6 21.Nac5 Bb5-/+]
19...Rac8 20.Rc1 Qb8 21.Kh1 Rxc1 22.Rxc1 Rc8 23.Rxc8+ Qxc8 24.Ng3
Nc5 25.Qe2 [Or 25.Bxc5 Bxc5 26.Ne2 Bb6-+ when Black has the two
bishops and an extra pawn.] 25...Nxb3 26.axb3 Bc5 27.Bxc5 Qxc5 0-1
86 - Chaney vs 6.Bc4 Najdorf
Ronald L. Chaney of Burlington, Iowa is a very experienced Najdorf player.
Five times he had Black against me in the Sicilian Defence.
I won. He won. Then drew. I won. He won. Score +2 -2 =1.
I was impressed with his understanding of the Najdorf Variation. Chaney was
active in APCT postal.
In the game below Kevin L. Bachler employed the 6.Bc4 Fischer Attack.
Kevin Bachler as a master is usually on the winning side.
Ron Chaney boldly played pawn moves for six of his first seven moves. This
was required to defeat such a strong master.
By move 10 all Black's minor pieces were developed, but his king was still in
the center.
White sacrificed a bishop for three pawns and the attack to keep Black from
castling.
Both sides had chances in a sharp tactical position.
The fight resembled a hand to hand martial arts movie with about 15 moves
of punches and counter punches.
When the dust cleared, Ron Chaney had mate in one and won.
Bachler - Chaney, APCT corr 1992 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4
4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Bc4 e6 7.Bb3 b5 8.f4 [8.0-0=] 8...Bb7 9.Be3 Nbd7
10.0-0 Be7!? 11.Bxe6 fxe6 12.Nxe6 Qc8 13.Nxg7+ Kf7 14.Nf5 Bf8
[14...b4=] 15.e5 [15.Bd4! Rg8 16.Ne3+/=] 15...Rg8 16.Rf2 Qc6 17.Ng3 Ng4
18.Re2 Nxe3 [18...dxe5!-+] 19.Qd3 dxe5 20.fxe5 Nxg2 21.Qxh7+ Rg7
22.Rf1+ Ke8 [22...Nf6!-+] 23.Rxf8+ Nxf8 24.Qxg7 Nf4 25.Rd2 Nh3+
26.Kf1 Qf3+ 27.Ke1 Qe3+ 28.Kd1? [28.Nce2 Qf2+ 29.Kd1 Bf3=/+]
28...Qg1+ 0-1
87 - Garcia Palermo 6.g3
We enjoy when a little amateur rises up to smite a giant master. Cavicchi
wins a Sicilian Najdorf vs GM Carlos Garcia Palermo:
"Hi Tim, I send you another "Amateur-David vs GM-Goliath" 3min.online

match. No strange stuff this time, but the good, old (and very well known)
Sicilian Najdorf, now part of my main repertoire against 1e4. And the
"victim" is... GM Carlos Garcia Palermo (2398)"
3000 years ago, the little boy David was destined to be a famous king in
Israel. The giant Goliath was a Philistine from Gath in between Jerusalem
and the Gaza strip. People have fought over that area ever since. I care what
happens; I have friends on both sides. But I cannot solve their problems, so I
just play chess.
Little David amateur chess players may be future masters. The giant GM
Carlos Garcia Palermo is my age with a FIDE rating of 2449. He meets a
Sicilian Defence 5...a6 with 6.g3. A key difference in this line is that after the
standard Najdorf 6...e5, White retreats 7.Nde2. This knight supports f4,
covers d4, protects c3 and is not in the way of 8.Bg2.
I wonder if Grandmaster Garcia Palermo is related to founders of the famous

city Palermo, Sicily, Italy. Who knows? It makes me think of George C. Scott
in the 1970 movie "Patton". Here sharp tactics make White’s king vulnerable
to a nice mating attack!
Garcia Palermo (2398) - Cavicchi (1855), Fsi Arena online, 23.07.2014

begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.g3 e5 7.Nde2 Be7
8.Bg2 Be6 9.0-0 Qd7 [Another approach is 9...0-0 10.h3 Nbd7=] 10.f4 Bh3
11.f5 Bxg2 12.Kxg2 h5!? [12...Qc6=] 13.Bg5 Nc6 14.Bxf6 Bxf6 15.Nd5
Bd8 16.h4 Rc8 17.c3 Ne7 18.f6 Nxd5 19.Qxd5 [19.fxg7 Ne3+ 20.Kf3 Rg8
21.Kxe3 Bb6+ 22.Kd2=] 19...Bxf6 20.Rad1 Qg4 21.Rf3 [21.Ng1 0-0=/+]
21...0-0 22.Kf2 Rfd8 23.Qxb7 [23.Rd2 Rd7-/+] 23...Rb8 24.Qd5 [Multiple
exchanges 24.Qxa6 Rxb2 25.Rxd6 Rxd6 26.Qxd6 Qxe4 27.Qd3 Qc6 28.Re3
Rxa2-+ still leave Black up a pawn.] 24...Rxb2 25.a4 Rxe2+ [25...Rc8!-+]
26.Kxe2 Rb8 27.Rd2 Rb1 28.Qxd6? [28.Qc4=] 28...Qxe4+ 29.Kf2 Qe1+
30.Kg2 Qh1+ [White resigns due to 31.Kf2 Rf1+ 32.Kf3 Qf3 checkmate] 0-1
88 - Early Learning Najdorf
When Boris Spassky was World Champion, I was a scholastic player. I did
not keep many score sheets. I couldn't imagine that years later I’d like to see
them. Not that my games were brilliant, but my losses taught me good
lessons that helped me improve.
We had a travelling high school chess team. We got permission from our
school to be at the other school when their classes ended. We played two
game matches on each board at their club. With the speed of young players,
most games were over in half an hour. I don't recall we even used clocks! Ah,
the old days.
My high school score was 9-1-1. My loss was a back rank mate in some
Open Game where I was Black. My draw as White was in a Slav Defence. I
only played one game because our game lasted so long. I forgot all nine of
my early wins.
Our high school also competed in the state high school chess tournament in
early 1972. I went 3-1-1. My loss was as Black vs David Rowe in an Italian
Game. I drew someone when I did not know how to win a queen vs pawn
endgame. One of my wins was vs Ray Haines. Later we become lifelong
chess friends.
I played in the University of Maine Championship in December of 1972. It

was an eight player round robin tournament. I lost my first three games to
Mercier, Cooper and Greenlaw. I won my next four games. My first round
was a Najdorf Sicilian Defence.
Sawyer - Mercier, University of Maine 1972 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4

cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.h3 [Weaver Adams reasoned since Black has
time for a6, White has time for h3.] 6...b5 7.a3 [After this game I found
Fischer's suggestion of 7.Nd5! See next game vs Salisbury.] 7...Bb7 8.f3
Nbd7 9.Be3 e6 10.Qd2 Be7 11.0-0-0 0-0 12.g4 Nb6 13.h4 d5 14.e5 Nfd7
15.f4 Nc4 16.Bxc4 dxc4 17.Rh3 b4 18.axb4 Bxb4 19.Nxe6 Bxc3 20.Nxd8
Bxd2+ 21.Bxd2 Rfxd8 22.Ba5 Bc6 23.Bxd8 Rxd8 24.Rh2 Re8 25.Rd6 Bb5
26.Rhd2 Nc5 27.Rd8 Kf8 28.Kd1 Ne6 29.Rxe8+ Kxe8 30.f5 Nc5 31.Ke1
Nd7 32.Rd5 Bc6 33.Rd4 Nxe5 34.Kf2 Ke7 35.g5 f6 36.g6 h5 37.Kg3 Bd7
38.Kf4 Ba4 39.b3 cxb3 40.cxb3 Bxb3 41.Kg3 a5 42.Kh3 Nc6 43.Re4+ Ne5
44.Re1 Bc2 45.Kg3 Bxf5 46.Kf4 Bxg6 0-1 White resigns.
89 - Salisbury Sicilian Sacrifice
Material sacrifice in chess is difficult unless you have confidence based on
knowledge and skill. When I first started playing chess, my knowledge and
skill were minimal; to sacrifice was scary. I spent a year playing blitz chess
with Graham Cooper, a future Master. Cooper loved to sacrifice. He kept
throwing pawns and pieces at me. But he taught me the value of research in
chess openings, something I have used almost daily ever since.
When I lost a Sicilian to Mercier, I looked up how to play it in Bobby

Fischer's book. He suggested the sacrifice 7.Nd5!? That night I prepared to
face Darrell Salisbury and his Sicilian. I won the Exchange. Then I returned
the Exchange to queen a pawn.
Sawyer - Salisbury UMO Championship 1972 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4

cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 [Salisbury and I were tied at 3-3 in the final
round. I tried to prepare this line. I did not play it perfectly, but it worked!]
6.h3 b5 7.Nd5!? Nxe4! [7...Bb7? 8.Nxf6+ gxf6 9.c4 bxc4 10.Bxc4 Bxe4
11.0-0 d5 12.Re1 e5 13.Qa4+ Nd7 14.Rxe4 dxe4 15.Nf5 Bc5 16.Ng7+ Ke7
17.Nf5+ Ke8 18.Be3 Bxe3 19.fxe3 Qb6 20.Rd1 Ra7 21.Rd6 Qd8 22.Qb3
Qc7 23.Bxf7+ Kd8 24.Be6 1-0 Fischer - Najdorf, Varna 1962] 8.Qf3 Nc5
9.Nf6+? [Fischer gives: 9.b4! e6 10.bxc5 exd5 11.Qxd5 Ra7=] 9...exf6?
[9...gxf6! 10.Qxa8 Bb7 11.Qa7 e5-/+ Fischer] 10.Qxa8 Bb7 11.Qa7 Be4
12.b4 Na4 13.Nxb5 Be7 14.Nc7+ Kf8 15.Nxa6 Nc6 16.Qc7 Qxc7 17.Nxc7
Nxb4 18.Rb1 Nxc2+ 19.Kd2 Bd8 20.Rb8 Ke7 21.Nd5+ Bxd5 22.Kxc2
Be4+ 23.Bd3 Bxd3+ 24.Kxd3 Nc5+ 25.Kc2 Re8 26.Re1+ Ne6 27.Bd2 Kd7
28.a4 Kc7 29.Rb2 Kc6 30.Rc1 Nc5 31.Kd1 Bc7 32.Bb4 Re4 33.Bxc5 dxc5
34.Rbc2 Bb6 35.Rc4 Re7 36.a5 Rd7+ 37.Ke2 Bxa5 38.Rxc5+ Kb6
39.Rc6+ Kb7 40.R6c2 Bc7 41.g3 Kc8 42.Ra1 Re7+ 43.Kf3 Kb7 44.Rb1+
Kc8 45.Rd1 g6 46.Kg2 f5 47.f4 h5 48.Kf3 Kb7 49.Re2 Rxe2 50.Kxe2 Bb6
51.Rd7+ Kc6 52.Rxf7 Bd4 53.Rf8 Kd6 54.Rg8 Bf6 55.Rxg6 Ke7 56.Rh6
h4 [This was given in the Bangor Daily News chess column on a Saturday
around Christmas 1972. George Cunningham and Gerry Dullea diagrammed
it and congratulated me on giving back the Exchange to win the ending. They
were tournament directors and professors at the University of Maine. They
wrote the weekly newspaper column.] 57.Rxh4! Bxh4 58.gxh4 Kf6 59.Ke3
Kg6 60.Kd4 Kh5 61.Ke5 Kxh4 62.Kxf5 Kh5 63.Ke6 Kg6 64.f5+ Kg7
65.Ke7 Kg8 66.f6 Black resigns 1-0
90 - Tommy Johns Sicilian
In the early 1970s there was a left-handed major league baseball pitcher
named Tommy John. His major league career stretched from 1963-1989.
Tommy John played for the Cleveland Indians, Chicago White Sox, Los
Angeles Dodgers, New York Yankees, California Angels, Oakland Athletics
and he finished back with the Yanks. Tommy John retired when his dentist's
son got two hits off him, a future superstar named Mark McGwire.
In 1974 John had 13 wins and only 3 losses. All of a sudden he permanently
damaged ligaments in his arm. When it appeared that Tommy John's career
was over, Dr. Frank Jobe performed surgery on his arm. After taking off the
entire 1975 season, Tommy John was able to return and pitch very well for
many years. I am a lifelong baseball fan. I knew this pitcher long before the
famous "Tommy John surgery" was named after him.
Back in 1973 I was a young whipper snapper. I had only climbed a few rungs
of the ladder of chess success. My opponent in this game was Thomas Johns.
We played this game in a tournament held at the UMO chess club. Johns
played the Najdorf Variation of the Sicilian Defence as Black, following
Bobby Fischer who had won the World Championship six months earlier. I
played 6.h3, a line Fischer won with as White when he faced GM Miguel
Najdorf. In a moment of boldness I sacked a rook with 22.Rxg7+!
Sawyer - Johns, University of Maine, Orono, Maine 07.03.1973 begins 1.e4

c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.h3 e5 [This is the standard
Najdorf Sicilian move. The backward pawn on d6 cannot be easily attack by
Ne4 or Nb5, and we are a long way from a possible Nc4.] 7.Nb3 [7.Nf3!?
Be7 8.Bc4 0-0 9.Be3 Nc6 10.0-0 b5 11.Bd5+=; Theory usually recommends
7.Nde2=] 7...Be7 [7...Be6 8.Bg5 Be7 9.Qf3 Nc6 10.Be2 and any White edge
seems small.] 8.Be3 0-0 9.Be2 Nbd7 10.Qd2 b5 11.a3 Bb7 12.f3 [I set up
what would be known as the English Attack vs the Sicilian Defence.]
12...Nh5 13.0-0-0 Ng3 14.Rhg1 Nxe2+ [Black takes my bad bishop.]
15.Qxe2 Nf6 16.g4 Qc7 17.h4 h6 18.g5 hxg5 19.Bxg5 Nh5 20.f4 Nxf4
21.Bxf4 exf4 22.Rxg7+! Kxg7 23.Qg4+ Kh6 24.Qxf4+ [Or 24.Rg1!+-]
24...Bg5? [Black had to try 24...Kh7 when 25.Nd4 Rg8 26.Qf5+ is very
strong. Now if 26...Kg7 27.Rg1+ Kf8 28.Ne6+ Ke8 29.Rxg8+ and mate in a
few moves.] 25.Qxg5+ Kh7 26.Rg1 1-0
91 - Maine Stanley Elowitch
Stanley Elowitch won or tied for the Maine State Championship at least 10
times. After Harlow B. Daly was well past his prime, Elowitch reigned as the
number one rated player in the state.
Our chess ratings in Maine were deflated. It was like we played in a closed
pool of players. We were all improving, but we only ever played each other.
At that time Stanley Elowitch was rated only as an Expert. Then several of us
started playing out of state. Our ratings went up. Then Stanley Elowitch
became a National Master. It was a privilege to play him. He encouraged me.
In this event, I had planned to play Bird's Opening (1.f4) as White and Dutch
Defence and Caro-Kann Defence as Black. However, vs Elowitch I decided
to play another first move that I heard was pretty good: 1.e4! Elowitch often
played 1...e5, but he wanted a more complex opening vs me so he could win.
Stan chose 1...c5, the Sicilian Najdorf. I played the Weaver Adams 6.h3
variation. I tried an unsound attack and was outplayed.
Elowitch played this game well; my play was ridiculous. Stanley took time
after our game to review it with me. Elowitch told me he usually played 1.e4
e5. I showed him that I was prepared to play the Goring Gambit. We went
over some lines. When he wandered into some inferior variations, Stanley
Elowitch said he was glad that he had played the Sicilian Defence vs me.
Duane Mercier and Gary L. White tied for 1st place in that 1977 Maine
Championship. I had played that 6.h3 line vs Mercier in 1972.
Sawyer - Elowitch, Maine Champ (4), 17.04.1977 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4

cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.h3 [Weaver Adams Variation, which Fischer
played.] 6...e5 [6...e6 7.g4] 7.Nde2 Be7 8.Ng3 [Not knowing the line well, I
failed to play the key move 8.g4 when play could continue 8...Be6 9.Bg2 Nc6
10.Be3 0-0 11.0-0 b5 12.Ng3] 8...Be6 9.Be2 0-0 10.0-0 Qc7 11.Bg5!? Nbd7
12.Rc1? [12.a4] 12...Nb6 13.Bxf6 Bxf6 14.Nd5 Bxd5 15.exd5 Bg5 [Black
takes over the initiative.] 16.Rb1 f5 17.b3 Rae8 18.c4 Nd7 [White is in deep
trouble so I try to sac a piece for complications.] 19.Nxf5? Rxf5 20.Bd3?
[The last chance it keep it messy is 20.Bg4 Rf6 21.Be6+ but Black still has a
much better game.] 20...e4 21.Qg4 Rfe5 22.f4 Nf6 23.Qg3? Nh5 24.Qg4
Bxf4 25.Rxf4 Nxf4 26.Qxf4 exd3 27.Rf1 Re1 0-1
92 - Sicilian Gift Horse
There is a saying, "Don't look a gift horse in the mouth!" The condition of a
horse's teeth indicates its value.
The point of the saying is this: If someone gives you a gift, you should
politely accept it without immediately looking too closely to check on its
value. It may have some flaws but it is a gift.
In chess, however, when offered a knight, you should look that gift horse in
the mouth. Check it out! Taking a piece is usually a winning advantage.
But make sure that you do not get bitten by the free knight. Remember the
Trojan horse! It allowed the enemy to invade.
In my 1977 APCT Rook-11 section, I got paired with Curtis Rhudy, a

friendly opponent from Pennsylvania. Our opening was a Sicilian Defence.
In an equal position on move 11, Rhudy provided me with a gift horse by

11...Ng4. The knight was defended only once and attacked twice by my Be2
and x-ray by the Qd1.
By taking the knight, I awakened Black's aggressive intentions. After another

dozen moves of sharp tactics and material being chopped off, I reached a
winning endgame.
Sawyer - Rhudy, corr APCT 77R-11 (3), 08.1977 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6
3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Be2 e5 [Black must decide between this
Najdorf move and the Scheveningen option 6...e6] 7.Nb3 Be7 8.0-0 0-0
9.Be3 Nc6!? [Usually the knight goes to d7 in the Najdorf with the pawn on
e5. For example 9...Be6 10.Qd2 Nbd7=] 10.f4 [10.f3!? Be6 11.Nd5+/=]
10...exf4 11.Bxf4 [11.Rxf4 Be6=] 11...Ng4? [Black hangs a knight. Probably
he was angling for e5, but the move failed tactically. 11...Be6= or 11...Ne5=
would have been fine.] 12.Bxg4 f5 [12...Re8 13.Bxc8 Rxc8 14.Nd5+-]
13.exf5 Bxf5? [13...Kh8 14.Nd5+-] 14.Qd5+ Kh8 15.Bxf5 Nb4 16.Qe6 Rf6
17.Qd7 Qxd7 18.Bxd7 Nxc2 19.Rac1 Nb4 20.Ne4 Rff8 21.Bxd6 Bxd6
22.Nxd6 Nxa2 23.Rxf8+ Rxf8 24.Rc8 1-0
93 - Surviving Palkendo
Back around 1971, I had a great aunt who retired after 50 years of teaching
school. She knew I showed an interest in learning chess so she bought me the
book "My 60 Memorable Games" by Bobby Fischer. I devoured all of those
60 Fischer games.
I played Russell Palkendo at Carlisle, Pennsylvania. He was a friend of one

of my students, the late Vic Rislow. Russ played 1.e4. I chose the Sicilian
Defence. Palkendo played the Classical 6.Be2. This gave me a chance to
transpose into a Scheveningen with 6...e6, but I stayed with the Najdorf idea
of 6...e5.
I equalized as Black. Then from moves 21-24 I got outplayed. It culminated

in the sacrifice 25.Ne6! This netted my queen in the end. Once we got to the
endgame, White had trouble putting me away. His clock kept counting down.
How did I survive a losing endgame? I determine exactly how my opponent
could win. In this game, I was stuck in a passive position. It became critical
that my rook, knight, b-pawn and g-pawn were always protected. I had to
make it difficult for White's king to invade my position.
Palkendo - Sawyer, 4th Saturday Carlisle Open (2), 25.05.1996 begins 1.e4
c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Be2 e5 7.Nb3 Be7 8.0-0 0-0
9.Be3 Be6 10.f4 [The main line is 10.Qd2 Nbd7 11.a4 Rc8 12.a5 Qc7 which
has played over a thousand times.] 10...exf4 11.Rxf4 Nc6 12.Nd5 Bxd5
13.exd5 Ne5 [Black has completely equalized.] 14.Kh1 Nfd7 15.Qd2 Bg5
16.Rf5 Bxe3 17.Qxe3 Rc8 18.c3 Nc4?! [18...Re8=] 19.Bxc4 Rxc4 20.Raf1
Ne5 21.Nd2 Rc7? [Now White gains the advantage. 21...Ra4!=] 22.Qg3 Kh8
23.Ne4 Re7 24.Ng5 Kg8? [Black loses the queen to a pretty tactical move. I
do get some compensation, so the game keeps going.] 25.Ne6! fxe6 26.Rxf8+
Qxf8 27.Rxf8+ Kxf8 28.dxe6 Rxe6 29.h3 h6 30.Qf4+ Ke8 31.Qb4 Re7
32.Qxd6 [White has a queen and pawn for Black's rook and knight.] 32...Nc6
33.b4 Rd7 34.Qg6+ Kd8 35.a4 Kc8 36.b5 axb5 37.axb5 Nd8 38.c4 Rf7
[All Black's pieces are protected.] 39.c5 Kd7 40.Qd6+ Kc8 41.b6 Rd7
42.Qe5 Rf7 43.Qa1 Nc6? [Probably both sides were in time trouble. Black
should try 43...Kd7 44.Qa8 Ke8 45.c6 bxc6 46.Kh2+- which favors White.]
44.Qe1? [44.Qa8+ Nb8 45.Qa2+-] 44...Nd8 45.Qg3 Rd7 46.Qg4 Nc6
47.Qf5 Nd8 A draw was agreed. White was probably in serious time trouble.
1/2-1/2
5.Nc3 a6 6.f4
The move 6.f4 may team up with Bd3 or transpose
elsewhere.
94 - Jeffrey Moore 6.f4
This Sicilian Defence Najdorf was my second simultaneous exhibition win
against Jeffrey Moore. He was rated about 100 points above me. The
previous game was a Latvian Gambit. For some reason I like to practice new
lines when I play in simuls.
In the 1980s, Jeffrey Moore was a talented young Philadelphia Expert

tournament player. He sometimes visited the Chaturanga Chess Club to play
simuls. Jeff Moore was well-known as a member of one of the top scholastic
chess teams in the country.
Moore - Sawyer, Hatboro, PA simul 1985 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4

cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.f4 [There are four bishop moves more popular
than 6.f4: 6.Bg5, 6.Be3, 6.Be2 and 6.Bc4.] 6...e6 [The Najdorf question in
many lines is whether Black should push his e-pawn one or two squares. If
6...e5 the main line is 7.Nf3 Nbd7 8.a4 Be7 9.Bd3 0-0 10.0-0] 7.Bd3 [The
bishop protects e4, but leaves the Nd4 unprotected. White often tries the set-
up 7.Be2 Be7 8.0-0 0-0 9.Be3 Nc6 10.a4 Qc7 11.Kh1 Re8 12.Bf3] 7...b5 8.0-
0 Bb7 9.Qe1 [9.Kh1 would have been a good precaution.] 9...Qb6! [Black
focuses on the weak diagonal a7-g1 by pinning the knight.] 10.Be3 Ng4
11.Kh1 Nxe3 12.Qxe3 Nd7 13.Rae1 0-0-0! [Castling opposite sides
sharpens the situation.] 14.Nb3? [14.a4=] 14...Qxe3 15.Rxe3 Nc5 16.Na5!?
[16.Nxc5 dxc5 17.e5 c4 18.Be4 Bc5=/+ and Black has a slight edge with the
two bishops.] 16...Ba8 17.Rd1 Be7 18.a4 Nxd3 19.cxd3 b4 [Black drives the
knight away from d5, but there is no need to wait. If 19...d5 20.exd5 b4
21.Ne4 Rxd5=/+ and Black appears better.] 20.Na2? [20.Ne2!] 20...d5
21.Rc1+ Kd7 22.exd5 [Trying to block in the Ba8 with 22.e5 fails to
22...d4!] 22...Bxd5 23.Nc4 Bxc4?! [23...Rb8 24.Ne5+ Ke8 25.Nc6 Rc8-+]
24.dxc4? [This allows the Black king an active safe role on c6. Better is
24.Rxc4 when the position is still a little messy.] 24...Kc6 25.c5 a5 26.Re5
[White is trying to hold c5, but the real threats are with rooks on the first and
second ranks.] 26...Rd2 27.Rb1 Rhd8 28.Rf1 [Not a help.] 28...Rxb2
29.Nc1 Rdd2 30.Rh5 Rb1 31.Rh3 Rc2 0-1
95 - Vestergaard 6.f4 e6
The novel “1984” was written by George Orwell just a few years before I
was born. It imagined surveillance cameras 35 years in the future with the
reminder, “Big Brother is Watching You.”
Steen Skovmose Vestergaard of Denmark had an ICCF rating of 2091 based

on 582 correspondence games. His peak rating appears to have been 2349 in
2005. I have over 50 of his games in my database. We played in 1984 back
before the International Correspondence Chess Federation posted chess
ratings.
Our game in 1984 was a Sicilian Defence. During the 1980s I played the
Najdorf Variation, especially in the first half of that decade. The latter half of
the 1980s I played the Latvian Gambit.
I played this game very well until I made a big blunder on move 23. White
noticed my mistake and punished me with 24.Rxf6!
Vestergaard - Sawyer, corr ICCF 1984 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4
4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.f4 e6 [Another popular Najdorf approach is 6...e5
7.Nf3 Nbd7 8.a4 Be7 9.Bd3 0-0 10.0-0=] 7.Be3 [7.Be2 Be7 8.0-0 0-0 9.Be3
would be a typical Scheveningen line.] 7...b5 8.a3 [The question after 8.Bd3
b4 9.Na4!? is to the position of this knight. Is the Na4 strong or weak? The
line 8.Qf3 Bb7 9.Bd3 Nbd7 10.g4 leads to a sharp position.] 8...Bb7 9.Bd3
Nbd7 10.Nf3 [White retreats the knight to f3. Another idea is for the queen to
occupy that same square. 10.Qf3 Rc8 11.0-0 Be7 12.Rad1=] 10...Qc7 11.Qe2
Be7 12.h3 0-0 13.0-0 Nc5 14.Nd2 Rac8 15.f5 d5! 16.exd5 exd5 17.Bd4
Rfe8 18.Qf3 Nce4 19.Bxe4 dxe4 20.Qe3 Nd5 [Black may wish to sacrifice
the Exchange with 20...Red8 21.Bb6 Qe5 22.Nf3 (22.Bxd8? Bc5!-+ wins the
White queen.) 22...Qd6 23.Bxd8 Bxd8 24.Rad1 Bb6 25.Nd4 Rc4 26.Nce2
Rxc2=/+] 21.Nxd5 Bxd5 22.b4 [White should grab f6 while he can with
22.f6! Bc5 23.Bxc5 Qxc5 24.Qxc5 Rxc5 25.Rf5=] 22...Qxc2 [Now it is
Black's turn to occupy f6 with a pawn. 22...f6! 23.c3 Qd7 24.Rae1 Bd6-/+
Black has a slightly better position due to the two bishops and advanced e-
pawn.] 23.f6 Bxf6? [Big blunder. Black throws away a fine position due to
White's tactical response. Better was 23...Bf8 24.fxg7 Be7=/+] 24.Rxf6! gxf6
[24...Qd3 25.Rxa6+- leaves Black down a knight.] 25.Qg3+ Kf8 26.Qd6+
Re7 27.Bxf6 Qxd2 28.Bxe7+ Ke8 29.Bh4 1-0
96 - Pelle Lingsell 6.f4 e5
Pelle Lingsell of Sweden is a good blitz player and 30 years younger than me.
Lingsell obtained a peak Internet Chess Club blitz rating on 2307 on 15-Feb-
2013. We played five games in a wide variety of openings during the year
2012. I scored 4-1.
In the Sicilian Defence I answered his Najdorf Variation with 6.f4. Usually as
White I develop a bishop on move 6 but not always.
Now Black must choose between the Scheveningen approach with 6…e6 or
the Najdorf with 6…e5. The main difference lies in which pawn push fits
well. The move 6…e6 which supports d5.
The move 5…a6 kept White from attacking a backward d6 with a move like
Nb5. Pelle Lingsell chose the Najdorf idea 6…e5.
White is supposed to solidify his position with Nd4-Nf3. Then White can
play Bd3 and hope to enjoy his space advantage.
But then I went off half-cocked with my move 7.fxe5. It allowed Black to
swap queens and keep my king in the center.
Black attacked me. I was on the defensive and struggling. At the key moment
in this fast paced blitz game Black missed a winning combination on move
22. That turned the tables and I won.
Sawyer (2007) - Lingsell (2093), ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 04.11.2012

begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.f4 e5 7.fxe5?
[The normal line is 7.Nf3 Nbd7 8.a4 Be7 9.Bd3 0-0 10.0-0=] 7...dxe5 8.Nf3
Qxd1+ 9.Kxd1 Nc6 10.Bd3 Bb4 11.Bd2 0-0 12.a3 Bc5 13.Ke2 b5 14.Nd5
Nxd5 15.exd5 Nd8?! [15...Nd4+ 16.Nxd4 Bxd4=] 16.b4 Bd6 17.c4 bxc4
[Black has a chance to cross me up with 17...e4!=/+] 18.Bxc4 f5 19.Bg5 Nf7
20.Be3 Bb7 21.Bc5?! [21.g3=] 21...Rac8 22.Rhc1 e4? [The winning
combination is 22...Bxc5 23.bxc5 Rxc5 24.d6 Bd5 25.Bxa6 Ra5 26.Bc4
Bxc4+ 27.Rxc4 Nxd6-+] 23.Nd4 Bxc5 24.bxc5 Ne5? [24...Rxc5 25.Rab1+/-]
25.c6 Nxc4 26.Rxc4 Ba8 [During the game I expected 26...a5 but I see White
is still winning after 27.Ke3+-] 27.Rac1 Rfd8? 28.Nxf5 Kf7 29.d6 g6 30.d7
Rc7 31.Nd6+ Ke6 32.Nxe4 Kd5 33.Nf6+ [I missed 33.Rc5+! Kxe4?
34.R1c4#] 33...Ke6 34.Ne8 Rcxd7 35.cxd7 Rxd7 36.Nc7+ Kf5 37.Nxa8 1-0
5.Nc3 a6 6.Be3
The move 6.Be3 is the English Attack played by Robert Byrne.
97 - Jackson Morrison 6.Be3
My best ICCF effort came in 1994-1995. Then I won a 7-player Master Class
event. It is great to win a chess tournament! The success of a first place finish
gives a sense of accomplishment for the hard work. Every game was
important to the final result.
The ICCF Master Class tournaments were for candidate masters (experts) and
masters who wanted to compete for the world correspondence championship.
If you won two 7-player events or won one 15-player event, you moved on to
the preliminary round of the world championship. If you won one of those
events, maybe a 15-player round robin event, you went to the semi-finals, and
then on to the finals. If you kept defeating postal tournament winners, then in
about 10 years, you could become the world champion.
This Sicilian Defence Najdorf against Jackson E. Morrison of California

ended in a draw. I won the tournament by half a point. Morrison chose the
6.Be3. I was fortunate that Morrison was in a peaceful mood. The rest of my
games were hard fought.
Although 6.Be3 was played by many masters in the 1950s and 1960s,
Grandmaster Robert Byrne became famous in the early 1970s for winning
with 6.Be3 vs Browne and vs Najdorf himself, as well as losing with it vs
Korchnoi and Fischer.
Morrison (2208) - Sawyer (2157), corr ICCF 1994 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6
3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Be3 e5 7.Nf3 [7.Nb3= is more popular]
7...Be7 8.Bc4 0-0 9.0-0 Qc7 10.Qd3 [10.Bb3 Be6=] 10...Nc6 [10...b5
11.Bd5=] 11.a3 Bg4 12.Nd2 b5 13.Ba2 b4!? [13...Rac8=] 14.Nd5 Qb7 15.f3
Be6 16.Nxf6+ gxf6 17.Bd5 bxa3 18.bxa3 Rab8 19.Rab1 Qc8 20.Nc4 Qc7
21.f4 [21.Bb6!+- and White is winning.] 21...Rxb1 22.Rxb1 Rb8 23.Bb6
[White would have stood better after 23.Rb6! Rxb6 24.Bxb6 Qb7 25.f5 Bxd5
26.Qxd5+/-] 23...Qc8 24.f5 Bxd5 25.exd5 Nd4 26.Rf1 Nb5 [In a position
that slightly favors White, I offer a draw.] 1/2-1/2
98 - Hardison English Attack
Roger Hardison met the Sicilian Defence with the bold English Attack.
White's pieces focused on the d5 square. Hardison had a powerful shot
13.Nd5! but he missed it.
Ray Haines had Black. He tends to play best in sharp positions. The bottom
line was Ray Haines played better overall. He wrote:
"My game with Roger Hardison ... I made some mistakes in that game which
he did not take advantage of. I was looking at different attacking lines and
chose one which had a rook sac. This was the wrong line of play. It would
have been better to trade his bishop for my knight. I would then have a pawn
fixed on his b3 square and could have pushed the rook pawn to open the rook
file."
In a couple phases, as Ray noted above, White "did not take advantage" of his
chances. We all miss stuff. Most of this game favored Black, and Ray Haines
won in the end.
Hardison - Haines, Houlton Open (1), 05.03.2016 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6

3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 Nc6 6.Be3 e6 7.f3 Be7 8.Qd2 a6 9.Bc4 Qc7
10.0-0-0 0-0 11.Bb3 b5 12.g4 Nd7? [Both sides had played well so far, but
this move gives White a strong attack. If Black wants to redeploy his knight
from f6, first he should trade off his other knight on d4 with 12...Nxd4
13.Qxd4 Nd7=] 13.Qf2?! [Because of the position of the Black knights, the
d5 square is weak. White has the powerful response in 13.Nd5! exd5 14.Nxc6
Ne5 (14...Qxc6? 15.Bxd5+-) 15.exd5+/=] 13...b4? 14.Nce2?! [14.Nd5!+/-
still works.] 14...Nxd4 15.Nxd4 Nc5 16.Ne2? a5 [This is good. Even better is
16...Nxb3+! 17.axb3 a5-+] 17.Bxc5 dxc5 18.Bc4 a4 19.Kb1 b3 20.cxb3
axb3 21.a3 Ba6 22.Rc1 Bf6 23.f4? [23.Bxa6 Qd6=/+] 23...Bxc4 [23...Bxb2!
24.Kxb2 Bxc4 25.Rxc4 Qa5-+] 24.Rxc4 Rxa3? [This was the last chance for
24...Bxb2!-+] 25.bxa3 Qa5 26.Nc1 [White is winning, as he was a dozen
moves earlier. The best winning continuation may be 26.Nc3!+-] 26...Bd4
27.Qe2?! [27.Rxd4! cxd4 28.Rd1 Qxa3 29.Qb2+-] 27...Qxa3 28.Rxd4 cxd4
29.Qb2 Qa8 30.Re1 Rc8 31.Re2 [31.Qxd4+/=] 31...Qa6 32.Qxb3 Qc6
[32...Qa8=] 33.Qc2 [33.Nd3+/-] 33...Rb8+ 34.Nb3?! [34.Ka1=] 34...Qb5
35.Kb2? [35.Rd2 Qxb3+ 36.Qxb3 Rxb3+ 37.Kc2 Rc3+ 38.Kd1 h5-/+]
35...d3 0-1
99 - 6.Be3 Harold Obando
My third round Space Coast Open game was the most fun I had enjoyed in a
chess tournament for a long time! Harold Obando arrived to play in the third
round. It was the only game he played in the tournament. I played White in a
Sicilian.
It had been 25 years since I faced a Najdorf Variation as White over the
board. Then I played 6.Bg5, but I was concerned with my current ability to
handle the Poisoned Pawn Variation after 6...e6 7.f4 Qb6. So I tried 6.Be3
known as the English Attack. In recent years it has been the most popular
move. I played several training blitz games in this line from each side vs
computers.
After this Saturday night game, since I slept poorly the previous two nights, I
went back to my hotel room, and I fell into a deep sleep. Somehow my
wristwatch alarm went off at 1:00 AM??
I'm was asleep and totally out of it in a dark strange hotel room. I tried to turn
off the alarm on a new watch. Five minutes later it went off again! By the
time I got it fixed, I was unable to sleep. My wife got up early and we went to
breakfast Sunday morning.
Along the way, I saw my 4th round pairing was vs an ex-master Expert who
had lost while sitting next to me during my Najdorf game. I wanted to play
him.
I expected his Scandinavian and wondered if I would choose a Blackmar-

Diemer or follow the main lines. After breakfast my wife left and went home.
I showed up at the tournament for my fourth round. Hmmm. My opponent

had not arrived. I set up my pieces, played 1.e4 and started my clock.
In the meantime, I checked out of the hotel. After about half an hour, the TD
informed me that my opponent was not coming. The forfeit win gave me 1-3
vs all Experts, but really 0-3.
That left me with nothing to do for five and a half hours, when I would
almost certainly have to play Black vs a Class A player at my most exhausted
point. I decided to withdraw from the final round. I went home and fell
asleep.
Sawyer (1966) - Obando (2046), 14th Space Coast Open (3), 28.04.2007
begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 [Najdorf Sicilian.
Here I thought for a long time.] 6.Be3 e5 7.Nb3 [7.Nf3 is the positional line,
but I wanted a scalp.] 7...Be6 8.f3 Nbd7 [Black played the opening quickly.]
9.Qd2 Be7 10.0-0-0 b5 11.g4 0-0 12.g5 Nh5 [A good alternative to 12...b4.
After the game my opponent said he forgot to play ...b4 at the right moment
after which he eventually felt that he must have been lost at some point.]
13.Rg1!? [13.Nd5 Nxd5 14.exd5= Stockfish, Komodo] 13...Rc8 14.Kb1 Qc7
15.Rc1 Nb6 16.Qf2?! [16.Na5=] 16...Rb8 [My king is in trouble than his. He
has the hole in d5 well covered. There seems to be a slight static advantage to
Black. With this in mind, I thought of Dorfman's principle in "The Method in
Chess": "If for one of the players that static balance is negative, he must
without hesitation employ dynamic means, and be ready to go in for extreme
measures." Consequently I need to open lines toward the Black king
immediately. Therefore, my move:] 17.f4! Nxf4 18.Bxf4 exf4 19.Qxf4 Nc4!?
20.Nd5! Bxd5 21.exd5 Ne5 22.Nd4 g6? [A common move in this line, but
here it gives me a target. Black has better options like 22...Qc5=] 23.h4 Qb7
24.Bg2 Rfd8 25.h5!? [White should cash in on both the queenside and
kingside. 25.Nc6! Nxc6 26.dxc6 Qa7 27.Bd5 Rf8 28.h5!+-] 25...Bf8 26.hxg6
hxg6 27.Rh1 Bg7 28.Rcf1 Re8 29.Qh4 [29.Qh2! wins] 29...Kf8 30.Nc6?!
[The last move of time control. I thought this led to a forced mate in five.
Other moves looked promising but were unclear to me in the short time I had
to decide. I thought seriously about playing the promising 30.Ne6+!? but it
does not work. Before I thought I saw a mate in five, I thought I might play
30.Qh7!] 30...Rbc8 [This was a surprise!] 31.Qh7 [At this point I saw my
intended mate in five with 31.Qh8+? fails. My original plan did not envision
his king on g7. My time trouble did not help.] 31...Rxc6 32.dxc6 Qb6
33.Bd5 Qd4 34.Bxf7? [White still has a good game with 34.Bb3!+-]
34...Nxf7 35.Rxf7+? Kxf7 36.Rf1+ Ke7 37.Re1+ Kd8 38.Rxe8+ Kxe8
[There is no attack for White nor any defence against Black's attack!] 0-1
5.Nc3 a6 6.Bg5
This sharp continuationwith 6.Bg5 is the traditional main line.
100 - Loose Pieces by Taylor
In my early years I played through 530 games by Anatoly Karpov in the
RHM David Levy collection up through 1974. At his peak, Karpov could
control the entire board with his pieces. He took away almost any square that
his opponent wanted to use.
A few years after the game below, Anatoly Karpov wrote a book on Queen
Pawn Openings without 2.c4 (only in Russian). There Karpov mentioned me
in his section on the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit. As I recall, Karpov called me
a Baptist minister.
I won nice games in Karpov style vs lower rated players but I found myself
just waiting for mistakes. Higher rated players did not make many mistakes.
In fact, they enjoyed my mistakes.
To beat higher rated players, I had to sharpen my approach to openings. I

needed to increase the risk to get the reward. I chose some wild gambits and
some sharp main lines. This led to ugly losses and glorious victories. But my
rating and skill improved.
Sometimes I played the BDG with 1.d4. When I played the 1.e4 openings as
White I continued my aggressive ways. I looked for complicated lines where
my opponent could go wrong.
I won in the Sicilian Defence Najdorf 6.Bg5. I did not know all the lines, but
neither did my opponents. Vs Allen Taylor the result could have gone either
way. Black lost due to loose pieces. In the final position I had a double threat
of Nxe6xf8 and gxf6.
Sawyer - Taylor, Williamsport, PA 19.09.2000 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4

cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Bg5 Nbd7 7.Bc4 e6 8.f4 [8.0-0 h6 9.Be3+/=]
8...Be7 9.Qf3 [9.Bxe6! fxe6 10.Nxe6 Qb6 11.Nxg7+ Kf7 12.Nf5 Qxb2
13.Nd5 Bf8 14.0-0+/-] 9...h6 10.Bh4 Qc7 11.Bb3 Nc5 12.0-0!? Bd7
[12...Nfxe4! 13.Bxe7 Nxc3 14.Bxd6 Qxd6 15.Qxc3 0-0 16.Rad1 Qb6=]
13.Rad1 Nxb3 14.axb3 Rc8 15.g4 b5 16.Rfe1 0-0 [16...b4!=/+] 17.g5 Ne8
18.Qh5 Qc5 19.Bf2 Nf6 20.Qf3 1-0
101 - Curt Jones Champion
In 1977 I got paired against a teenage player named Curt Jones. He was an
expert whose rating was rapidly rising. While I was in college; I think Curt
was in high school. Curt Jones became a Life Master. His current rating is in
the 2400s. Curt's father was one of the better Tennessee chess players in the
1970s.
Many chess parents would love to see their children become chess masters. In
general, how does the child of a chess playing parent become good? Here are
some observations:
1. Curt was polite and friendly during our five games. This speaks to
excellent parenting.
2. Curt regularly played in chess events. He was given opportunity (time and
money).
3. Curt's father had an extensive chess library. Knowledge and training were
available.
4. Curt said he studied books from his father's library. It shows a passion to
improve.
5. Curt went on to be quite active for 20 years. This implies Curt probably
loved playing.
Curt Jones and I first met in a Tennessee Chess Association postal event. In
my initial Sawyer-Jones game, I was White in a Sicilian Defence Najdorf. I
played 6.Be2. Curt Jones outplayed me and won. After our first game, Curt
and I agreed to play a two game rated postal match in 1978. During our
games, Curt Jones won the Tennessee State Championship. In our match we
both won as White. He won a King's Indian Attack. I won here below.
Sawyer - Jones, corr TCA 1978 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4
Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Bg5 Nbd7 [Jones told me he had never lost in this line.
Normal is 6...e6.] 7.Bc4 Qa5 8.Qd2 e6 9.0-0 Be7 10.Rad1 h6 11.Bh4 Ne5
12.Bb3!? [The book move was 12.Be2; I wanted to stay lined up on e6/f7.]
12…g5 13.Bg3 Nh5 14.f4! [Black's king is in the center. The way to victory
is straight ahead!] 14…Nxg3 15.hxg3 Ng4 16.f5 [Attacking e6 with both the
f-pawn, the Nd4 and the Bb3.] 16…e5 17.f6! [Keep going! The threat of fxe7
is that Bxf7+ can follow. Thus Black dares not capture on d4.] 17...Bf8
[17...Bd8] 18.Nf5 Qc5+ 19.Kh1 Bxf5 20.Rxf5 Ne3? [20...h5 21.Qxg5+/=]
21.Rxe5+ Qxe5 22.Qxe3 Qxf6 23.Nd5 Qg6 24.Rd3 Bg7 25.Nc7+ Ke7
26.Nxa8 Rxa8 27.Qb6 Rd8 28.Ba4 Be5? [28...Qh5+ 29.Kg1+-] 29.Qc7+ 1-
0
102 - Gabasjelisjvili 6…Nbd7
In the early 1980s I played in a selection of master level postal chess
tournaments in the International Correspondence Chess Federation (ICCF).
I played postal chess against people from 30 different countries. This gave
me the opportunity to “meet” a lot of good players.
Numerical notation was used to combat the language barrier. Every square is
a two digit number. Every move was a four digit number. The algebraic “a1”
square is “11” in numerical notation. The first move 1.Nf3 in algebraic is
1.7163 in numeric.
Numbers are one thing. Names are another. The spellings of my opponent’s
names would change depending the alphabet used.
Here I played G. Gabasjelisjvili in the Sicilian Defence. There are players

with similar spelled names to this player, but I am not sure exactly who he
was. ICCF was not online until years later. By the spelling I am guessing this
player was from Russia.
At any rate, we played the same sharp Najdorf Variation in which I defeated
Curt Jones in the previous game. The key moves were 6.Bg5 Nbd7 7.Bc4
Qa5 8.Qd2 e6.
Against Curt Jones I castled kingside. Here I castled queenside and turned up
the heat. I had a great game until I got burned.
Sawyer - Gabasjelisjvili, corr ICCF 1984 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4
4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Bg5 Nbd7 7.Bc4 Qa5 [7...Qb6 8.Bb3 e6=] 8.Qd2 e6
9.0-0-0 [Another idea is to play 9.f3 b5 (9...h6 10.Be3 Ne5 11.Bb3=) 10.Bb3
Bb7 11.0-0 Be7 12.a3=] 9...b5 10.Bb3 Bb7 11.Rhe1 0-0-0 [11...Be7 12.Kb1
Nc5 13.Bxf6 Bxf6 14.Nf5 0-0 15.Nxd6 Be5 16.Nxb7 Nxb7=] 12.f3 Kb8
13.Be3 [13.Kb1+/=] 13...Rc8 14.Kb1 Ne5 15.Qf2 [15.Bg1+/=] 15...Nfd7
16.Rd2 [16.Nde2+/=] 16...Be7 17.h3 g5 18.Rc1 Ka8 [Now Black can
sacrifice the Exchange with good compensation after 18...Rxc3 19.bxc3 Qxc3
20.Ne2 Qc7 21.Rcd1 Rc8=] 19.g3?! [19.Nde2 b4 20.Na4+/=] 19...Rxc3
[19...b4!?=] 20.bxc3 Nc4 21.Bxc4 bxc4=/+ [Apparently White could not find
a good defense. Black is better, but there seems to be a possibility of survival
after 22.Ne2 Bxe4 =+] 0-1
103 - Price and Polugaevsky
A week after Art Price beat me with his bold Budapest Gambit we played
again. This time I had Black and held my own.
Price played 1.e4. I responded with the Sicilian Defence that I had been
studying at the time. Like Fischer I chose the Najdorf Variation. However, I
was not following Bobby Fischer this time.
Lev Polugaevsky had written several books on how to study the opening. As
his example Polugaevsky chose his own line of the Najdorf which is 6.Bg5
e6 7.f4 b5.
Polugaevsky was in the mix of World Championship Candidates for a couple

decades. He found it difficult to beat Viktor Korchnoi. Most grandmasters
never even made it to Korchnoi.
I studied the Polugaevsky books on the Sicilian Defence. He had developed

his 7…b5 Variation through home analysis and over the board competition.
When his ideas were refuted Lev just kept searching deeper for new ideas. I
thought of Lev Polugaevsky’s passion when working on my Blackmar-
Diemer Gambit Keybook.
Arthur Price played the sharp 6.Bg5 which Spassky used to beat Fischer 10
years earlier. Price avoided the sharpest 8.e5 lines.
Price (2054) - Sawyer (1900), Lansdale, PA 22.05.1982 begins 1.e4 c5

2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Bg5 e6 7.f4 b5 8.a3 [White
avoids the sharpest theory. In those days I was studying the Polugaevsky
books on the Sicilian. I was familiar with this variation. I was ready for the
sharp lines after 8.e5 dxe5 9.fxe5 Qc7 and now: 10.exf6 (10.Qe2 Nfd7 11.0-
0-0 Bb7=) 10...Qe5+ 11.Be2 Qxg5+/=] 8...Bb7 9.Be2 Nbd7 10.0-0 [White
can hold onto the e-pawn with 10.Bf3=] 10...Qb6 11.Bxf6 Nxf6 12.Kh1
Nxe4 13.Nxe4 Bxe4 14.Bf3 Bxf3 15.Qxf3 Rc8 [15...d5=/+] 16.c3 g6? [I was
way too concerned about White's possible f5 attack. I should have played
16...Be7 17.f5 e5=] 17.Rae1?! [I did not prevent f5. White has a strong attack
with the sacrifice 17.f5! gxf5 18.Qh5 Rg8 19.Nxe6+-] 17...Be7? [17...Bg7
18.f5 0-0=] 18.Qe4 [18.f5! exf5 19.g4+/-] 18...d5 19.Qe2 Rc7 20.Rf3 [20.f5
exf5=/+] 20...Kd8 [20...0-0-/+] 21.Re3 Re8 22.Rd3 Bh4 23.g3 Bf6 24.Nf3
Ree7 25.g4 Qc5 26.g5 Bg7 27.Kg2 h5 [Black stood better after 27...Qc4=/+]
1/2-1/2
104 - Chaney Poisoned Pawn
Bobby Fischer had a philosophy that if he could grab and pawn in the
opening, even a risky pawn, and if he could get away, then he would have a
won endgame. Fischer was a great defender.
Fischer played the Sicilian Defence Poisoned Pawn Variation as Black in the
Najdorf maybe a dozen times. He won six, lost once to Spassky in the World
Championship and drew the rest.
My chess Ronald L. Chaney played the Sicilian Najdorf in three of our

games. Most of the time played 6.Bg5 e6 7.f4 Be7. Chaney did too, but there
was this one time Ron played 7…Qb6.
It is one thing to watch grandmaster play this wild line. It is quite another to
try and attack a slippery king.
This time I tried 10.Be2!? The Poisoned Pawn sometimes feels to me like the
position is full of holes for both sides. My position went from Swiss chess to
Limburger. My game stunk.
Sawyer (1944) - Chaney (1972), corr APCT EMN-A-4 1997 begins 1.e4 c5
2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Bg5 e6 7.f4 Qb6 8.Qd2 Qxb2
9.Rb1 Qa3 10.Be2!? [Usually I play 10.f5 Nc6 11.fxe6 fxe6 12.Nxc6 bxc6
13.Be2 Be7 14.0-0 0-0 15.Rb3 Qc5+ 16.Be3 Qe5 with a draw by repetition
after either 17.Bd4 (17.Bf4 Qc5+ 18.Be3=) 17...Qa5 18.Bb6 Qe5 19.Bd4=]
10...Nbd7 11.0-0 Qc5 12.Kh1 Be7 13.Rf3?! [13.f5 e5 when White can
choose between 14.Ne6!? (14.Nb3 Qc7=/+) 14...fxe6 15.fxe6 Nb6 16.Rxf6
Bxf6 17.Bxf6 gxf6 18.Bh5+ Kd8 19.e7+ Kxe7 20.Rxb6=] 13...b5 14.Re3
[Another attempt to complicate the position would be 14.Rd3!? Bb7 15.Bf3
Rd8 16.e5 dxe5 17.Nxe6 fxe6 18.Bxb7 exf4=/+] 14...h6 15.Bxf6 Nxf6
[15...Bxf6!=/+] 16.Bf3? [I missed my chance for 16.e5! dxe5 17.fxe5 Nd5
18.Nxd5 exd5 19.Rc3=] 16...Rb8? [16...Bb7 17.e5 dxe5 18.fxe5 Rd8=/+]
17.Nce2? [17.e5! dxe5 18.fxe5 Nd5 19.Nxd5 exd5 20.e6+/=] 17...Bb7
18.Nb3 [My position was getting worse, but there was still a chance for
complications. 18.a4 bxa4 19.e5 Nd5 20.Bxd5 Qxd5 21.Nc3 Qxg2+ 22.Qxg2
Bxg2+ 23.Kxg2 Rxb1 24.Nxb1 Kd7 25.exd6 Bxd6 26.Rd3 Rc8=/+ when
White has two knights for a bishop and three pawns.] 18...Qb6 19.Na5 Ba8
20.c4 Bd8 21.cxb5 Qxa5 22.Qxd6 Qb6 0-1
105 - Poisoned Pawn Najdorf
In December 1980 I returned to active play with some sharp chess. I played
five games that month at the North Penn Chess Club in Lansdale,
Pennsylvania. Here are two of them.
William Raudenbush at that time was a USCF Expert and a very strong postal
player. Raudenbush had a well-defined, prepared and thought out opening
repertoire that he played all the time with confidence. As White, Bill played
1.d4 / 2.c4. As Black, he played the King's Indian (Nbd7 lines) and the
Sicilian Defence.
Bill was twenty years older than I and he had a positive influence on my
chess. I was quite familiar with main line theory. This made our games very
entertaining. One of my favorite books back then was the Sicilian Najdorf by
Michael Stean.
The Poisoned Pawn Variation of the Najdorf Sicilian Defence is a very

tactical line. Black is in danger of being mated while trying to walk off with a
winning amount of material.
Sawyer - Raudenbush, Lansdale, PA 03.12.1980 begins 1.e4 c5 [Sicilian

Defence] 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Bg5 e6 7.f4 Qb6
8.Qd2 Qxb2 9.Rb1 [This rook move is the main line. Boris Spassky played
9.Nb3 against Bobby Fischer in 1972.] 9...Qa3 10.f5 [The other main line is
10.e5 dxe5 11.fxe5 Nfd7 12.Ne4 h6 13.Bh4 Qxa2 14.Rd1 Qd5 15.Qe3 Qxe5
16.Be2 Bc5 17.Bg3 Bxd4 18.Rxd4 Qa5+ 19.Rd2 0-0 20.Bd6 Rd8 21.Qg3
Qf5 22.Be5. This line scores very well for White.] 10...Nc6 11.fxe6 fxe6
12.Nxc6 bxc6 13.e5 dxe5 14.Bxf6 gxf6 15.Ne4 Be7 [Black usually chooses
this over 15...Qxa2 16.Nxf6+ (16.Rd1) 16...Ke7? (16...Kf7) 17.Rd1 Kxf6
18.Be2 (18.Bd3!+-) 18...Bc5? 19.Qh6+ Kf7 20.Rf1+ (20.Bh5+! mates one
move faster.) 20...Ke8 21.Bh5+ 1-0 Sawyer – Raudenbush, Lansdale 1980]
16.Be2 0-0 [Nowadays we know 16...h5 to be correct. 17.Rb3 Qa4 18.Nxf6+
(18.c4!?) 18...Bxf6 19.c4 Bh4+ 20.g3 Be7 21.0-0 h4 22.Bd3 Rg8 23.Qf2 Kd7
24.Qd2 Bc5+ 25.Kg2 Bd4 26.c5 is a critical line.] 17.Rb3 Qa4 18.0-0?
[Castling is a risky piece sacrifice. Better is 18.c4+/=] 18...Qxe4 19.Rg3+
Kh8 20.Qh6 Rf7?! [20...Rg8!-+] 21.Bh5 Bc5+ 22.Kh1 Qc4? [22...Raa7!
23.Bxf7 Rxf7=] 23.Rg8+?? [White has mate in six starting with 23.Rd1!+-]
23...Kxg8 24.Bxf7+ Kxf7 25.Rxf6+ Ke7?? [25...Ke8!-+] 26.Qf8+ Kd7
27.Rf7+ Be7 28.Qxe7# 1-0
106 - Viveiros Najdorf 9…Nc6
Florida has constant construction. People from all over the world want to
enjoy 350 mornings of sunshine per year. It rains every afternoon in the
summer, but people still want to come to Florida.
Roads change with the construction. Streets are relocated. You don’t always
end up where you think you were headed.
William Viveiros from South Florida played two interesting postal games
against me. I played Black in our Gruenfeld Defence.
Here we started down the main highway of the Sicilian Defence. We turned
onto the expressway of the Najdorf Variation 6.Bg5. Then Black took an exit
into another line. He mixed his defensive systems with ...Nc6. I got the
advantage, but I let him slip away.
Sawyer (2050) - Viveiros (1800), corr APCT 1980 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6
3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Bg5 e6 7.f4 Be7 8.Qf3 0-0 [The normal
continuation is 8...Qc7 9.0-0-0 Nbd7=] 9.0-0-0 Nc6?! [9...Qc7=] 10.Bxf6
[10.e5 Nd5 11.Nxd5 exd5 12.Bxe7 Nxe7 13.exd6+/=] 10...gxf6 11.Qh5
[11.Nxc6 bxc6 12.Rd3 Kh8 13.Qh5 Rg8 14.Qxf7+/=] 11...Kh8 12.Rd3 Rg8
13.Qxf7 Rg7 [13...Nxd4 14.Rxd4 Rg7 15.Qh5+/=] 14.Qh5 [14.Nxc6 bxc6
15.Qh5 Bd7 16.Rg3+/-] 14...Bd7 [14...Nxd4 15.Rxd4 e5 16.Rd5!?+/=]
15.Nf3 Qg8 16.Kb1 Rc8 17.Nd2 e5 18.Nd5 Qf8 [18...exf4 19.Nxe7 Rxe7
20.Rxd6+/-] 19.f5 [19.g3+-] 19...Bd8 20.g4!? [20.Qh6!+-] 20...Qg8
[20...Ne7 21.Ne3+/-] 21.Qh6 Qf7 [21...Qf8 22.Rg1+-] 22.Nc4 Qf8 23.Rd1
b5 24.Nce3 [24.Ncb6 Bxb6 25.Nxb6+-] 24...Nd4 25.c3 Nc6 26.Be2 b4
27.Nxb4 [27.cxb4!+-] 27...Nxb4 28.cxb4 Rb8 29.a3 Ba4 30.Rc1 [30.Bxa6+-
] 30...a5 31.b5 Bxb5 32.Bxb5 Rxb5 33.Nd5?! [33.Rc2+-] 33...Rxb2+
34.Ka1 Rb8?! [Black has an amazing draw sequence with 34...Rb3! 35.Ka2
Rb2+ 36.Ka1 Rb3= because if the White king takes the rook, Black wins the
White queen by discovered check.] 35.Rc6 [35.Rb1+/-] 35...Qf7 36.h3 Qb7
37.Qc1 Rd7 [37...Qa7!=] 38.Qc2 Qa7 39.Qd2 [39.Rb1+/-] 39...Rb3 40.Rc3
Rdb7 [40...Rxc3! 41.Qxc3 Rb7=] 41.Rhc1?! [My last chance for victory was
41.Qh6! Rxa3+ 42.Rxa3 Qd4+ 43.Nc3 Kg8 44.Rb1 Rb4 45.Rd1 Qc5 46.Qd2
Rd4 47.Qa2+ Kg7 48.Rxd4 Qxd4 49.Qd5 Qg1+ 50.Qd1+- and White remains
up a rook.] 41...Qb8 42.Qd3 a4 43.Rxb3 Rxb3 44.Rc3 Rb2 45.Rc8 Rb1+
46.Qxb1 1/2-1/2
107 - Swazey Sicilian Simul
When I give a simultaneous exhibition, I play different openings on alternate
boards. If I play 1.e4 on one board, then I will play 1.d4 on the next board. I
don’t want my opponents to simply be able to copy what the person next to
them played.
Tactics decide almost every game. Weak players suck at tactics so I play for
them. In simuls I aim for fast direct piece contact. Typically I have a big
advantage in tactical skills. I train daily.
For a simul, I like open games but I avoid most gambits. I want tactical
positions, but I avoid most wild and crazy gambit lines. My exception is the
Blackmar-Diemer Gambit because I know it.
My goal is to find good moves in five seconds and keep moving. Most of my
opponents will blunder of their own accord. The level of competition varies
widely in a simul. Some opponents are near beginners. Others are seasoned
tournament competitors.
I gave a simul at Penn College in Williamsport, Pennsylvania back in 1996.

There were about six boards with rotating players.
Roy Swazey had a USCF rating of 1657. We had played at the local club, so I
knew him. We played several games in this simul. Swazey chose the Sicilian
Defence Najdorf Variation. That is not a beginner’s opening. Roy wanted to
win, but he forgot the ninth move. Then I blundered. He thought he was
losing and gave up.
Sawyer - Swazey, simul Williamsport, PA 1996 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6

3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Bg5 e6 7.f4 Be7 8.Qf3 Qc7 9.0-0-0 b5?
[9...Nbd7 10.g4=] 10.e5 Bb7 11.Qg3 Nh5 [11...dxe5 12.fxe5 Nbd7 13.exf6
Qxg3 14.hxg3 Nxf6 15.Nb3+-] 12.Qg4 g6 [Or 12...0-0 13.Bxe7 Qxe7
14.Qxh5 Nd7 15.exd6 Qxd6 16.Qg5+-] 13.Rg1?! [Here I threw away my
advantage. Correct was 13.Nxe6! Qd7 14.exd6 Bxg5 15.Nc7+ Kf8
16.Qxg5+-] 13...dxe5 14.fxe5 Bxg5+ 15.Qxg5 0-0 16.Bxb5 [16.g4 Ng7
17.Bg2 Bxg2 18.Rxg2+/=] 16...Nd7? [Black returns the favor. 16...axb5
17.Ndxb5=] 17.Bxd7 Qxd7 18.Nf5 Qe8 19.Ne4?? [This changes the
evaluation from a win to a loss. 19.Nh6+! Kh8 20.g4+-] 19...exf5 [Also
strong is 19...Bxe4!-+] 20.Nf6+ [Black saw that he was forked and resigned.
Actually he had a win after 20...Nxf6 21.exf6 Qe6 22.Rd4 Be4-+] 1-0
108 - Improvement 9…Nbd7
I played another game against Roy Swazey from my 1996 Penn College
simul. This simultaneous exhibition saw Sawyer play 30 games in two hours,
but never more than seven boards at once.
Roy Swazey played a few back to back games. When he gave up in the
previous game, we just set up the pieces and played another.
I played White in a sharp Sicilian Defence. We chose the Najdorf Variation

after 6.Bg5 e6 7.f4 Be7 8.Qf3 Qc7 9.0-0-0.
In the previous game, Roy Swazey played the premature 9…b5? This time he
improves by first inserting 9…Nbd7. Our play led to a very complex position
that was rich in possibilities.
Here I was beating player after player after player. The attitude in the room
was that most of my moves were brilliant. That was not true of all moves, but
it impacted the mind set of my opponents.
Once again I blundered with a powerful looking but tactically unsound move.
Fortunately for me, Black resigned.
Sawyer - Swazey, simul Williamsport, PA 1996 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4

4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Bg5 e6 7.f4 Be7 8.Qf3 Qc7 9.0-0-0 Nbd7 10.g4 b5
11.Bxf6 Nxf6 12.g5 Nd7 13.f5 Bxg5+ [Other possibilities include: 13...0-0!
14.Rg1 b4 15.Nce2=; 13...Ne5 14.Qg3 0-0 15.Kb1+/=; 13...Nc5 14.f6 gxf6
15.gxf6+/=] 14.Kb1 Ne5 [14...0-0 15.fxe6 Nb6 16.Nd5 Nxd5 17.exd5=]
15.Qh5 Bf6!? [Normally Black plays either 15...Qd8 16.h4 Bf6 17.fxe6 0-0
18.Bh3+/-; or 15...Qe7 16.Nxe6 Bxe6 17.fxe6 g6 18.exf7+ Kxf7 19.Qh3 Kg7
20.Nd5+/-] 16.fxe6 [Maybe better is 16.Nxe6 Bxe6 17.fxe6+/-] 16...g6
17.exf7+?! [17.Nd5! Qd8 18.Qh3!?+/=] 17...Kxf7 [17...Qxf7! 18.Qh6 Bg7
19.Qg5 0-0=] 18.Qh6 Ng4 19.Qf4 Kg7 20.h3 [I missed the correct move
20.Nd5!+/- when White stands better.] 20...Be5 21.Qf3?! [21.Qd2!=]
21...Rf8 22.Qe2 [Now was the time to play 22.Nf5+! Bxf5 23.exf5 Nh6
24.f6+ Bxf6 25.Nd5 when Black would have to find the move 25...Qa7!
26.Nxf6 Rxf6=/+ and White has only a little compensation for the pawn
minus.] 22...Nf2 23.Nd5 Qf7 24.Bg2 Nxd1 25.Rxd1 Qf2 26.Nf5+?? [Black
resigned, but he could have won with 26...Rxf5!-+] 1-0
109 - Chaney Najdorf 10.g4
Ron Chaney often outplayed each other in opening theory. This game turned
out to be in his favor. Ron Chaney played well. He crushed me and deserved
the win. I learned an important lesson. The game was a Sicilian Defence
which he played against me five times. We both scored two wins and a draw.
There is a fork in the road of the main line Najdorf Variation after 6.Bg5 e6
7.f4 Be7 8.Qf3 Qc7 9.0-0-0 Nbd7. The most popular choices for White are
10.g4 and 10.Bd3 (see next game). Both lines are equally playable in theory.
Both sides have chances.
Sawyer (2000) - Chaney (1900), corr APCT 1979 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6
3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Bg5 e6 7.f4 Be7 8.Qf3 Qc7 9.0-0-0 Nbd7
10.g4 [The alternative is 10.Bd3=] 10...b5 11.Bxf6 Nxf6 12.g5 Nd7 13.a3!?
[The most reliable attack follows 13.f5! 0-0 (13...Nc5 14.f6 gxf6 15.gxf6 Bf8
16.Kb1+/=) 14.Rg1 b4 15.Nce2 e5 16.f6 exd4 17.fxe7 Re8 18.Nxd4=]
13...Rb8 14.h4 b4 15.axb4 Rxb4 16.Bh3 Qc5 [Or 16...Qb6 17.Nf5 Bf8
18.Qd3 Rxb2 19.Nxd6+ Bxd6 20.Qxd6 Rb4=] 17.Nb3 Qb6 18.h5? [This
move was popular at the time. However games like this one and subsequent
analysis by modern chess engines show that theory tends to favor Black.
18.Na2! Ra4 19.Nc3 Rb4 when the players might repeat moves, or White
could try 20.Rhf1 0-0 21.f5=] 18...Nc5 19.Nxc5 dxc5 20.g6 fxg6 [Because
White's king is the more vulnerable, Black has the happy choice of several
sharp attacking possibilities. 20...0-0 21.gxh7+ Kxh7 22.Rdg1 Rd8 23.h6 g6
24.f5 exf5 25.exf5 Bf6-/+; or 20...Rxb2 21.gxf7+ Kxf7 22.Rdg1 c4-/+]
21.hxg6 h6 22.Nd5 exd5 23.Bxc8 0-0 24.e5? [This loses badly. It's going to
be ugly. But even if White mounts a better attack with 24.Qg4 Rxe4 25.Rde1
Rfxf4 26.Qd7 Qd8-/+ Black can return to defend everything with two extra
pawns.] 24...Rxb2 25.Rh3? Rb1+ 26.Kd2 Qb4+ 27.Ke2 [27.c3 Rxd1+
28.Kxd1 Qb1+ 29.Ke2 Qa2+ 30.Kf1 Rxc8-+] 27...Rxd1 28.Be6+ Kh8
29.Kxd1 Rxf4 30.Qh1 Bg5 [If this was an American football play, one could
describe the situation like this. The quarterback goes back to pass. The
receivers are covered downfield. The two largest defender have invaded the
backfield. The White king is about to be sacked. This will be a painful loss.
Black has many ways to win. He can force mate a little quicker with
30...Rd4+!-+] 31.Rb3 Rf1+ 32.Ke2 Qe1+ 33.Kd3 Qd2# 0-1
110 - Win vs Chaney 11.h4!?
Grandmasters seem to win with almost any chess opening. But not me. I
frequently win with some, but then I lose with others.
I know the Sicilian Defence as well as anything. I have played it more than
1000 times from each side of the board. Many famous grandmaster games
were with the Sicilian. The tactical training I use every day has multiple
positions from this opening.
Nowadays there are databases and chess engines that provide detailed
information on every position. None of that existed when this game was
played. I tried to learn from Fischer’s games.
Again I faced Ronald L. Chaney. Later he would become a much stronger

player and beat me repeatedly. But not here. In this Sicilian Defence we
trotted down the familiar trail of the Najdorf 6.Bg5 main line. Earlier I chose
10.g4. Smyslov, Mednis, and Gligoric all had played it vs Bobby Fischer. I
got crushed. The lesson I learned was that I cannot just follow the master
games.
I looked further. I found that Boris Spassky had played 10.Bd3. Furthermore
Velimirovic and others had played the fascinating sacrifice 11.h4 in response
to 10…h6. That looked like fun! This proved to be a creative and ambitious
approach.
My win against Curt Jones and this against Chaney stand out as my personal
favorites when I had White in the Najdorf Sicilian.
Sawyer (2050) - Chaney (1900), corr APCT 1980 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6
3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Bg5 e6 7.f4 Be7 8.Qf3 Qc7 9.0-0-0 Nbd7
10.Bd3 h6 11.h4!? [11.Qh3; 11.Bh4] 11...hxg5?! [11...Nc5 12.Bxf6 Bxf6=]
12.hxg5 Nh7 [12...Rxh1 13.Rxh1+/=] 13.g6 Ndf6 [13...Ndf8 14.gxh7 Rxh7
15.Rhe1+/-] 14.gxh7 Rxh7 15.Rhe1 [15.Kb1+/-] 15...e5 16.Nf5 Bxf5
17.exf5 0-0-0 18.g4 Rh4 19.g5 Rxf4 20.Qe2 Ng4? [20...Ng8 21.f6+/-]
21.Nd5 Bxg5 22.Kb1 Qc5 23.Nxf4 Nf2 24.Rd2 [24.Nh3! Nxh3 25.Qg4+-]
24...Bxf4 25.Qxf2 Bxd2 26.Qxd2 f6 27.Qg2 Rd7 28.c4 Kb8 29.Rc1 Qd4
[29...d5 30.cxd5 Qxd5 31.Qxd5 Rxd5 32.Kc2+-] 30.Qd5 Qxd5 31.cxd5 Re7
32.Rc2 Rd7 33.Kc1 Re7 34.Kd1 Re8 35.Rh2 Kc7 36.Be4 Kd7 37.Rh7 Rg8
38.Ke2 Ke7 39.Bf3 Kf7 40.Bh5+ Kf8 41.Bg6 Ke7 42.Kd3 b6 43.Kd2 Kf8
44.Kc3 Ke7 45.Kb4 Kf8 46.a4 Ke7 47.Bh5 1-0
111 - Taylor Najdorf 10.Bd3
In 1996 I played a simultaneous exhibition at Penn College in Williamsport,
Pennsylvania. There were about 30 games and I played 6-8 games at a time
over a two hour period with rotating players. When one game finished,
another player would take the board. Some opponents played several games.
Most of my opponents were casual players unknown to me. Two of them
were club players: Allen Taylor and Roy Swazey.
As I recall, Allen Taylor helped organize and publicize the simul from the
Penn College end. Allen and I were chess friends and frequent opponents.
According to my records, we played 37 games. My score was +35 =1 -1.
This Sicilian Defence, Najdorf Variation was my only loss to Allen Taylor
and also my only loss in the Penn College simul. In the notes I include part of
another game from that simul against Roy Swazey that I won (same variation,
same opening).
Sawyer - Taylor, Williamsport PA simul 1996 begins 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4

cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Bg5 e6 7.f4 Be7 [The main line of the Poisoned
Pawn Variation 7...Qb6 goes: 8.Qd2 Qxb2 9.Rb1 Qa3 when White usually
chooses between 10.f5 or 10.e5] 8.Qf3 Qc7 9.0-0-0 Nbd7 [9...b5 10.e5 (Or
first 10.Bxf6!) 10...Bb7 11.Qg3+/- White eventually won after some sloppy
play. Sawyer-Swazey, Williamsport PA 1996] 10.Bd3 h6 11.h4!? [Offering
one of the thematic Najdorf bishop sacrifices.] 11...b5 12.Bxf6 Nxf6 13.g4
Bb7 14.g5 Nd7 15.Rhe1 Nb6 16.Qg3 [16.f5! hxg5 17.fxe6!+/- looks
promising.] 16...b4 17.Nce2 Rc8 18.gxh6 [18.g6! attacks f7 to remove the
guard of e6.] 18...g6 19.f5 [19.Nxe6! fxe6 20.Qxg6+ Kd7 21.Nd4+- with a
great attack.] 19...Rxh6 20.e5? [20.Qe3! sidesteps the threat of ...Bxh4.]
20...Bxh4 21.Qe3 Rh5 22.Rg1? [I had played not great, but at least good
until this 22nd move. Now is the last chance to bust open lines the Black king
and queen; there is no need to worry about the rook just yet. 22.Nxe6! fxe6
23.exd6!+-] 22...Nd5 23.Qd2 gxf5 24.Nf3 Be7 25.Rg8+ Kd7 26.Rxc8 Qxc8
[26...Kxc8!-+ and Black is winning.] 27.Ng3 Rh3 28.Nxf5 Rxf3 29.Nxe7
Nxe7 30.exd6 Nd5 31.Be4 Rh3 [Black is up a knight.] 32.Qg2 Ne3 33.Bxb7
Nxg2 34.Bxc8+ Kxc8 35.d7+ Kd8 36.c4 bxc3 37.b4 Rh2 38.a4 Ne3 39.Re1
Rc2+ 40.Kb1 Rb2+ 41.Kc1 Nd5 42.b5 axb5 43.axb5 Kxd7 0-1
112 - Walter Browne Memory
In memory of the late Walter Shawn Browne we look at a win the
grandmaster had in his beloved Sicilian Defence.
Walter Browne played every line in the Najdorf Sicilian with great success
for over 40 years.
Many of us followed and played the same openings as the World Champion
Bobby Fischer, but Walter Browne was one of the most successful.
GM Browne was a very successful poker player who excelled in competitive

battles.
He excelled in playing the time scrambles in tournament games.
Browne took on one of his contemporaries, Dutch grandmaster Jan H.

Timman.
The game involves a very sharp line where Black castles on the queenside.
Browne outplays Timman in the center and wins on the kingside.
Timman (2540) - Browne (2575), Wijk aan Zee (6), 1974 begins 1.e4 c5
2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Bg5 e6 7.f4 Be7 8.Qf3 Qc7 9.0-
0-0 Nbd7 10.Bd3 h6 [Or 10...b5 11.Rhe1 Bb7 12.Qg3=] 11.Qh3!? [More
common is 11.Bh4 g5 12.fxg5 Ne5 13.Qe2 Nfg4=] 11...Nb6 12.Rhe1 e5!?
[12...Rg8=] 13.Nf5 Bxf5 14.exf5 0-0-0 15.Bh4 exf4 16.Bf2 Rhe8
[16...Rd7=] 17.Bxb6 [17.Bd4=] 17...Qxb6 18.Bc4 d5 19.Nxd5 Nxd5
20.Bxd5 Bf6 21.Qb3 Qxb3 22.Bxb3 Rxe1 23.Rxe1 Bg5 24.Kb1 Rd2
25.Rg1 f3 26.gxf3 Rxh2 27.Bxf7 h5 28.f6?! [28.c3 Bf6=/+] 28...Bxf6
29.Rd1 Kc7 30.a3 Rh3 31.Bg6 h4 32.Bh5 Rg3 33.Bg4 Be5 34.Ka2 Kc6
35.Rh1 g5 36.Rd1 [36.b4 Rg2=/+] 36...h3 37.Rh1 Rxg4 38.fxg4 h2 39.b4?
[39.c4 Kc5-/+] 39...Kd5 40.Kb3 Ke4 0-1
Ananthan – 6
ATtheGreat – 50
Bachler – 83, 86
Baffo – 20, 53
Benko – 80
bjerky – 73
Blacula – 44
Blitshteyn – 67
Bond – 2
Bourne – 7
Brandt – 64
Browne – 112
capablanca1 – 47
cassiopea – 77
Cavicchi – 87
Chan Peng Kong – 9
Chandler – 17
Chaney – 58, 86, 104, 109-110
chesspurrr – 30
Commons – 80
Corneau – 2
Daly – 49, 70
Davies – 81
De Bouver – 11
Dyson – 48
EggSalad – 43
Eilmes – 4
Elowitch – 91
Fawbush – 83
Faydi – 3
Fischer – 84
Fritz13 – 3
Fuerte2004 – 40
Gabasjelisjvili – 102
Garcia Palermo – 87
Greiner – 52
Guest – 75
Haines – 13, 29, 33, 54-57, 59-62, 75, 79, 98
Halwick – 68
Harabor – 42
Hardison 98
Heyn – 38
Hofford – 39
Horwitz – 72
Hro61 – 55
Huber – 1
Hunter – 57
Johns – 90
Jones – 101
Jorgensen – 6
Khlichkova – 10
Kluge – 8
Lingsell – 96
LinuxKnight – 32
Lovenstein – 35
Magarinos – 46
Marfia – 41
Mercier – 88
messchess – 18
Mockler – 79
MOHAMED MOUFEED – 57
Moore – 94
Morgan – 29
Morin – 59 60
Morris – 16
Morrison – 97
Muir – 31
Murray – 36
Obando – 99
Palkendo – 93
Parsons – 5
Porter – 62
Price – 103
Protej – 65
Raudenbush – 105
Rhudy – 63, 92
RichyRich – 24
Rookie – 19
Ruiz – 23
Sah – 69
Salisbury – 89
Sawyer, E – 12-13
Sawyer, T – 1, 4-5, 7-8, 12, 15-16, 18-28, 30-54, 58, 61, 63-74, 76-78, 81-
82, 85, 88-97, 99-111
Sedlock – 74
Sharp – 21
Sildmets – 15
Smith – 85
Sogin – 82
Spence – 34
sr2015 – 27
Staes – 11
Stretch – 28
Swazey – 107-108
Taormina – 25
Taylor, A – 51, 78, 100, 111
Taylor, D – 14, 22
Timman – 112
TommyRuff – 17
Vehvilainen – 71
Vestergaard – 95
Viveiros – 106
Warren – 14, 84
Wolff – 26
Yang Hainan – 9
Zaiatz – 10
Zdun – 37, 45, 66, 76
French Defence
1.e4 e6 in
Chess Openings
By Tim Sawyer
French Defence: 1.e4 e6 in Chess Openings
Copyright © 2015, 2016 by Sawyer
Publications

whatsoever on the behalf of the purchaser or reader of these materials.
Any perceived slight of any individual or organization is purely
unintentional.
Table of Contents
Introduction
Chapter 1 – Early Deviations
1.e4 e6
2.d4 d5 3.Bd3
2.d4 d5 3.exd5
Chapter 2 – Alapin-Diemer
3.Be3 Nf6 4.e5
3.Be3 dxe4
Chapter 3 – Advance Variation
3.e5
3.e5 c5 4.c3 Nc6 5.Nf3 Qb6
Chapter 4 – Tarrasch Variation
3.Nd2
3.Nd2 Nf6
3.Nd2 c5
Chapter 5 – Classical Variation
3.Nc3
3.Nc3 Nf6
3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5
Chapter 6 – Winawer Variation
3.Nc3 Bb4
3.Nc3 Bb4 4.a3
3.Nc3 Bb4 4.e5
Index of Names to Games
Before You Go
Chess Training Repertoire
frequently play. As a chess openings coach I provide you with one set of lines
for White and another for Black. You receive a basic suggested repertoire for
each side for that one line. Each week a different opening is covered. Enjoy it
for free. Try it!
Book 3: French Defence
1.e4 e6 in Chess Openings
By Tim Sawyer
Introduction to French Defence
Welcome to the French Defence chess opening after 1.e4 e6. Tim Sawyer
analyzes 122 games. This expanded version matches the 2016 paperback
edition. It includes updated commentary, and an Index of Names to Games.
The author tells stories and explains the chess opening strategy and tactics.
In a French Defence game you want to win! Spice up your play. Discover
new ideas in the French Defence Advance Variation and Alapin Diemer
Gambit. Choose the Classical Variation, MacCutcheon or French Winawer.
Focus on active piece play with the Tarrasch Variation. Or boldly try to
transpose to the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit in answer to the Burn Variation.
Try it!
Most of the games see White playing 3.Be3, 3.Nd2 or 3.Nc3. Many were
played by the author against masters, experts and club players over 45 years
of play. The author shows you typical examples in this proven defence.
Follow ideas to surprise your opponent and win.
The games tell stories about fascinating chess players. Examine a huge
variety of openings from main lines to gambits. Find creative ideas and ways
to improve. Have fun playing chess. Enjoy this book!
1.e4 e6
This section covers lines that do not continue 2.d4 d5.
1 - Bryan vs Beloungie 4.b4
In round 3 of the Maine State Closed Championship, Lance Beloungie got
paired against FIDE master Jarod Bryan. There was a three-way tie for first
place at 4/5, but in the final standings Bryan is listed first. Many years ago
Jarod Bryan also played my friend Ray Haines.
FM Bryan played the French Defence Wing Gambit. Beloungie declined the
gambit with 4...c4 and defended the constant attacks quite well until Lance
blundered on move 41.
As Mr. Beloungie noted: "The third game against FM Bryan is my favorite. I

played him to a standstill until about 11:00 P.M. when, short of time and
physically and mentally drained, I succumbed. Still, for near 70 year old, I
thought I did well on the first day."
Bryan - Beloungie, Maine State Closed (3), 23.04.2012 begins 1.e4 e6 2.Nf3
d5 3.e5 c5 4.b4 c4 [Accepting the gambit with 4...cxb4 5.a3 Nc6 6.axb4
Bxb4 7.c3 Be7 8.d4 Bd7 9.Bd3 gives White some compensation.] 5.a3 Ne7
6.d3 cxd3 7.Bxd3 Ng6 8.Bb2 Qc7 9.0-0 Be7 10.Re1 0-0 11.h4 Nc6 12.b5
Na5 13.Nbd2 b6 14.Ng5 h6 15.Nxf7 Nf4 16.Nd6 Nb7 17.Bf1 Nxd6 18.exd6
Bxd6 19.Nf3 Qf7 20.Be5 Bc5 21.g3? [21.Bd4=] 21...Ng6 22.Bg2 Nxe5
23.Rxe5 Bd7!? 24.a4 Rae8!? 25.Qe2 Bd6 26.Re3 Qf6 [Junior 12 likes the
complicated line 26...e5 27.Nxe5 Bxe5 28.Rxe5 Bg4 29.Rxe8 Bxe2
30.Rxe2= where White has a rook, bishop and f-pawn for his sacrificed
queen.] 27.Re1 Bc5 28.Re5 Rf7 29.c3 Rfe7 30.Nh2 Bd6 31.Re3 Rf8 32.Ng4
Qf5 33.Rf3 Qh5 34.Re3 [Before protecting the Ng4, White could attack with
34.c4!+/-] 34...Qf5 35.Rf3 [35.Ne5+/=] 35...Qh5 36.Rf6 Qe8 37.Rxf8+
Qxf8 38.Ne5 Bxe5 39.Qxe5 Rf7 40.Re2 Rf5 41.Qc7 Qc8? [After 40 good
moves, Black finally slips up. The game might have ended with a repetition
of moves after 41...Rf7 42.Qe5 Rf5 43.Qc7!? Rf7=] 42.Qxa7 1-0
2 - Mark Aikins with 2.d3
Throughout my career people would find out that I played chess. I have many
interests. I talk about chess, but hopefully not too much. I try not to annoy my
non-chess playing friends!
Sometimes people ask if they can play me a game. Other times I happen upon
a chess game in progress and play the winner.
I do not remember the exact occasion of this game played in 1997. Probably I
was at some church related conference in Pennsylvania. We would meet
friendly people and have some spare time during breaks or after the meetings.
Sometimes we played golf. I’m terrible at it. If I play a good golfer then I lose
18 holes in a row! Some are close but all are lost. I met Mark Aikins in chess.
Clearly he knew how to play, but he was not a competitive tournament
player. It was just nice to play. Here I am winning in 18 moves instead of
losing in 18 holes.
For some strange reason I played the French Defence 1.e4 e6 as Black. Two
years before this game I had written a book on the Alapin French. That book
covered the line after 2.d4 d5 3.Be3. Our game below sees White also play a
pawn and bishop but to the more conservative squares of 2.d3 d5 3.Be2.
At this point I realized my opponent knew how to play but he was still at the
beginner stage of opening theory. My strategy was to go after him tactically
with a constant stream of threats. The result was brutal and predictable, like
my golf game in reverse.
Aikins - Sawyer, Mt Bethel 1997 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d3 d5 3.Be2 [A more

tricky move would be 3.Qe2 Be7 4.Nf3 Nf6=] 3...Nf6 4.Nf3? [This loses the
first pawn. 4.e5 Nfd7 5.f4 Be7=] 4...dxe4 5.dxe4 Qxd1+ 6.Kxd1 Nxe4
7.Re1? [This loses the second pawn. 7.Be3 Nc6-/+] 7...Nxf2+ 8.Kd2 Ne4+
9.Ke3 Nf6 10.Kf2 Bc5+ 11.Be3? [This drops a piece to a knight fork.
Otherwise White is just down two pawns. 11.Kf1 Nc6-+] 11...Ng4+ 12.Kg3
Nxe3 13.Bb5+ Bd7 14.Nc3? [White could defend the c2 pawn and the rooks
with 14.Na3 Nc6-+] 14...Nxc2 15.Bxd7+ Nxd7 16.Red1 Nxa1 17.Rxa1 0-0-
0 18.Ne5? [After 18.Re1 Be7-+ Black would only be up a rook and three
pawns.] 18...Nxe5 0-1
3 – KIA by Squash with 2.d3
I worked as a flag man on a road construction crew. We paved one lane wide
ten miles a day. The powerful paving equipment did not move fast, but it
flattened everything in its path.
The move 2.d3 in the French Defence makes slow progress. The key is the
power behind the move. Can White be stopped? If you are normally a King’s
Indian Defence player as Black then the King's Indian Attack 2.d3 makes
sense against the French Defence. Bobby Fischer would play it sometimes.
The theory is that when someone plays White against the King’s Indian
Defence, they push for an early 4.e4. If you turn the board around, Black has
played only …e6 and is also a tempo down just because they move second to
begin the game.
In ICC I was squished by Squash. The 3054 rated player using that Internet
Chess Club handle back in 2011 was probably a computer. Humans were
rarely rated that high. If they were, they would not likely play someone like
me rated only 2101. I played this game well for 25 moves, but that was not
enough.
Squash (3054) - Sawyer (2101), ICC 5 0 Internet Chess Club, 24.11.2011

begins 1.e4 e6 2.d3 d5 3.Nd2 c5 4.Ngf3 Nc6 5.g3 Nf6 6.Bg2 Be7 7.0-0 0-0
8.c3 [The most popular line is 8.Re1 b5 (8...h6!?=) 9.e5 (9.exd5=) 9...Nd7
10.Nf1 a5 11.h4 b4=/+] 8...Qc7 9.exd5!? [More common is 9.Re1 dxe4
10.dxe4 e5=] 9...exd5 10.Re1 h6 [Or 10...Bd6=] 11.d4 cxd4 12.Nxd4 Nxd4
13.cxd4 Be6 14.Nf1 Rac8 15.Ne3 Bb4 [15...Rfd8=] 16.Bd2 Bxd2 17.Qxd2
Qd7 18.Rac1 Rxc1 19.Rxc1 Rc8 20.Rxc8+ Qxc8 21.f3 Ne8 22.Bf1 Nd6
23.Bd3 b5 24.b3 Qc7 25.Ng2 Bf5 [25...Nf5 26.Bxf5 Bxf5=] 26.Be2 Qc2?!
[Black could defend better with the queens on the board. 26...a6=] 27.Qxc2
Bxc2 28.Ne3 Bb1 29.a3 a5 30.Kf2 b4 [This drops a pawn. Black might have
still been able to survive. Here is a possible continuation: 30...Ba2 31.Bd1
Nc8 32.Ke2 Ne7 33.Kd2 Bb1 34.Kc3 Bf5 35.f4 Bd7=] 31.axb4 axb4
32.Nxd5 Nf5 33.Nxb4 Nxd4 34.Bc4 Nc2 [White is also better after 34...Kf8
35.g4 Ke7 36.Ke3 Ne6 37.Nd5+ Kd6 38.f4+/-] 35.Nxc2 Bxc2 36.b4 Bf5
[36...Kf8 37.Ke3 Ke7 38.Kd4 f6 39.Kc5+-] 37.b5 Bd7 38.b6 Bc6 39.Bd3
Kf8 40.Be4 Black resigns 1-0
4 - Bond Pardon My French
Jocelyn Bond presented another game from north of the border:
"Hi Tim, 4th of 7 weeks 30 minutes for mate. This week I'd like to present to
you a game I've played last Wednesday in my Jonquiere chess championship
against Elwan Certon.
"This young man was born in Brazil but lived young in France and now lives
in Canada. An aggressive player but opening knowledge is low. Tell me?
What's the name to give to this opening? Really a French? After the game,
my opponent told me that in Internet blitz it pays for him 1.e4 e6 2.d4 Nc6!
Ok....but tonight man we play serious chess!!
"Actually, I lead the championship with 8 points in 8 games followed by
Michael Dufour 5.5 in 6 games. Thanks for the publication and continue your
very good work!!!"
Bill Wall called the opening after 2...Nc6 the "French Connection,
Nimzovich Defense". I like Certon's 2...Nc6!? but one must play more
accurately with 3...d5. The inclusion of 3.Nf3 prevented an early Qg4 or f4
line for White. This gave Black helpful tempos.
Bond (1957) - Certon (1350), Jonquiere chess championship (8), 18.07.2012

begins 1.d4 e6 2.e4 Nc6 [seems to me risky] 3.Nf3 b6 [provoking] 4.d5
[4.c4!?] 4...Nce7 [I waited 4...exd5 5.exd5 Nce7 6.Bc4 or even 6.d6!? could
be fun] 5.dxe6N [5.c4!?] 5...fxe6 [5...dxe6? 6.Qxd8+ and 7.Ne5 comes]
6.Bg5 [pin and perturbs black activation] 6...Bb7? 7.Nc3 [Stronger was
7.Ne5!? (Deep fritz) d6 (7...g6 8.Qf3 or 8.Bb5 was strong) 8.Qh5+ g6 9.Nxg6
hxg6 10.Qxh8 Bxe4 11.Nc3+-] 7...h6?! +/-(bad) 8.Bh4 g5? 9.Ne5! Nf6
10.Be2! [My opponent did not see this move before to play 8...g5] 10...gxh4?
[Leads to more trouble. 10...Bg7 11.Bh5+ Kf8+/- would have just been
uncomfortable] 11.Bh5++- Ng6 12.Bxg6+ [12.Nxg6? Rh7 13.Ne5+ Ke7+-]
12...Ke7 13.Nf7 Rg8 [13...Qc8 saved nothing 14.Nxh8 Bg7 15.Nf7+-]
14.Nxd8 Rxd8 15.e5 Rxg6 16.exf6+ Rxf6 17.0–0 [17.Qg4 was more solid
17...h3 18.Qxh3 Rg6+-] 17...Rg6 18.f3 18...Ke8 [18...h3 19.g3] 19.Qd3 Rg8
20.Ne4 h3? [20...Bg7+-] 21.Nf6+ Kf7 22.Nxg8 Bc5+ 23.Kh1 hxg2+
24.Kxg2 Rxg8+ 25.Kh1 Ke8 26.Rad1 d5? [26...Bc6] 27.Qh7 Kf8
28.Qxh6+ Ke8 29.Qxe6+ Kf8 30.Rde1 Kg7 31.Rg1+! Bxg1 32.Rxg1+ Kh8
33.Qxg8# 1–0 [Notes by Jocelyn Bond and Deep Fritz]
5 - Beat the Hippopotamus
How do you beat a Hippopotamus chess opening? You outrun it! Let me
explain. First things first. What is it? The Hippopotamus is when Black
begins by moving many pawns just one square to the third rank very early in
the game.
In the example of Ray Haines vs “rafa47”, we have a Hippo that began 1.d4
e6 2.e4. This looks like a French Defence, but Black avoids 2...d5. His first
four moves were only with pawns. Black's next four moves had one with a
knight and three with pawns.
The strategy of this defense is the opposite of Hungry Hippos. In this Hippo,
Black has little interest in eating. He just hides behind his third rank pawns.
Only the strongest Hippo players venture out, and then only when they are
good and ready.
You outrun a Hippo using the “fast and blast” method. Develop your pieces
fast and blast open the center with pawns. Put your central pawns on the
fourth rank. Bring out your pieces to support the advance of one of those
pawns. Then push a pawn and force pawn exchanges. Crack Black's wall of
pawns.
You need open lines to favor your active army. Don't take too long! Black's
problem is temporary. Given time, he will catch up. Open up the position
before move 10 if possible.
This is a good illustration of a Hippo. Ray Haines handled it well. My main

suggestions for him would be to add an early f4 or c4, and avoid playing the
flank move 7.a4.
Haines - rafa47, chess24, 17.02.2016 begins 1.d4 e6 2.e4 c6 3.Nf3 h6 4.Bd3

d6 5.0-0 Ne7 6.Nc3 b5 7.a4 [Better would be 7.Be3!+/-] 7...b4 8.Ne2 a5
9.Ng3 Ba6 10.Qe2 Qb6 11.Be3 Bxd3 12.Qxd3 Qa6 13.Qd2 [13.c4+/-]
13...d5?! [13...Nd7 14.c3+/=] 14.e5 Nd7 15.h4 Nb6 16.b3 0-0-0? [16...Rc8
17.Rac1 Nd7 18.Rfd1+/=] 17.Rac1 Kb7 18.c3 Ng8 19.Ne1 Rc8 20.Nd3 Be7
21.h5 f6 [21...bxc3 22.Qxc3 Nd7 23.Bd2+-] 22.exf6 Nxf6 23.cxb4 Bxb4
24.Nxb4 axb4 25.Qxb4 Ka8 26.Qd6 [26.Rc5!+-] 26...Rhe8 27.a5 Nbd7
28.Bf4 Qb7 29.Qa3 Qa6 30.Rc2 Qd3 31.Rfc1 Qxd4 32.Be3 Qe5 33.Rxc6
Rxc6 34.Rxc6 Qb8 35.Ra6+ Kb7 36.Ra7+ Kc8 37.Bb6 Qe5 38.Qc1+ 1-0
2.d4 d5 3.Bd3
The 3.Bd3 variation is a favorite of Ray Haines.
6 - Haines Delayed Tarrasch
You may want to be aware of transpositions to other opening variations. In
the final round of the Maine Potato Blossom Festival, Ray Haines played his
longtime friend Lance Beloungie.
The opening was a French Defence with 3.Bd3. This game had the flavor of a
delayed Tarrasch Variation after 4.Nd2. White got a nice attack. In the
middlegame Haines included the pretty bishop sacrifice 23.Bxh7+!
"This was round four. I was playing Lance Beloungie. I saw that I could win
material and stopped looking for more at that point. I did not check to see if I
was missing a mating possibility. I did not wish to use a lot of time on my
clock in this game the way I did the other games. I cut my planning short for
this reason."
Haines - Beloungie, Potato Blossom Festival Ft Fairfield, Maine (4),

13.07.2013 begins 1.d4 e6 2.e4 d5 3.Bd3!? Nf6 4.Nd2 c5 5.c3 [5.e5 Nfd7
6.c3 leads to a very popular line.] 5...Nc6 6.Ngf3 a5!? [Playable, but I am not
sure how this contributes to Black's two strategic issues: (1) Activate his
bishops and castle; and (2) Choose his best pawn structure for the squares d4,
e4, e5, d5, c5, c4.] 7.0-0 Be7 8.Re1 cxd4 9.cxd4 Bb4 10.exd5 Nxd5 11.Bc4
0-0 [11...a4!?=] 12.a3 Bd6 13.Ne4 Nb6 14.Bd3 Be7 15.Be3 a416.Nc5 Bd7?
[Black was in a difficult position.] 17.Nxb7 Qc7 18.Nc5 Na5 19.Nxd7Qxd7
20.Ne5 Qd5 21.Rc1 Nb3 22.Rc3 Rfc8? 23.Bxh7+! Kf8 [23...Kh8 24.Qh5
16.83 24.Qg4 Bf6 25.Be4 Qa5 26.Qh5+ Kg8 27.Rxc8+ Rxc8 28.Bh7+ Kf8
29.Qxf7# Haines] 24.Qg4 [Even better is 24.Qh5! g6 25.Bxg6!+-] 24...Bf6
25.Be4 Qa5 26.Bxa8 Rxc3 27.bxc3 Qxc3 28.Rf1 Bxe5 29.dxe5 Nxa8
30.Qb4+ [The "mating possibility" Ray mentioned may have been after
30.Rd1! Nb6 31.Qh4+- with an attack that forces Black to give up more
material.] 30...Qxb4 31.axb4 Nc7 32.Bc5+ Nxc5?! 33.bxc5 a3 34.Ra1 Nb5
35.h4 Ke7 36.g4 f6 37.f4 fxe5 38.fxe5 Kf7 39.Kg2 Kg6 40.Kg3 Kh6 41.c6
g5 42.h5 Nc7 43.Rxa3 Nd5 44.Rf3 Kg7 45.Rf6 Nc7 46.Rg6+ Kh7 47.Rxg5
Kh6 48.Rg6+ Kh7 49.g5 1-0
7 - Bold Bishop Sacrifice
Ray Haines pressured Lance Beloungie with another classic Bxh7+ sacrifice.
The previous game saw the same players in the same event and in the same
opening one year earlier.
This game began with the Ray Haines 3.Bd3 move. The players reached a
thematic French Defence.
The kingside position was difficult for Black to defend. Ray Haines wrote the
following:
“I won as White. He left his king undefended. I looked at the kingside and
wanted to sacrifice the king bishop for the attack. I could not see mate in
every line, but I could see a lot of attacking chances.”
“The best move for him would have been to play his king to king knight three
on move 14 (14...Kg6). I thought that it might even win for him at first, but
the computer seems to show I had a lot of play in this line also.”
“I think that the attack was worth the piece. I could have taken the bishop on
move 15 with my queen and the game could have ended in a draw as a result,
but I saw the attacking chances and did not wish it to just end in a draw.”
In the final round of the Potato Blossom Festival, Ray Haines sealed his first
place victory by defeating the French Defence. The Ray Haines move 3.Bd3
allowed Black to equalize with 3...dxe4 4.Bxe4. Instead Black played 3...Nf6
4.Nd2 c5.
Haines - Beloungie, Potato Blossom Festival (3), 12.07.2014 begins 1.d4 e6

2.e4 d5 3.Bd3 Nf6 4.Nd2 c5 5.c3 [5.e5 Nfd7 6.c3 Nc6 7.Ne2 is standard.]
5...Nc6 6.Ngf3 dxe4 7.Nxe4 Nxe4 8.Bxe4 cxd4 9.cxd4 Bd6 10.0-0 0-0
11.Be3 Qc7 12.Rc1 Rd8 13.Bxh7+!? [13.Bb1+/=] 13...Kxh7 14.Ng5+ Kg8
[Correct defense is the bold 14...Kg6! 15.Qg4 f5! 16.Qh4 Bd7 17.Qh7+
Kf6=] 15.Qh5 Bxh2+ 16.Kh1 Bf4 [Black should last longer after 16...Rd5!
17.Qh7+ Kf8 18.Qh8+ Ke7 19.Qxg7+-] 17.Qh7+ Kf8 18.Qh8+ Ke7
19.Qxg7 Rf8 20.Nh7 Rd8 21.Qf6+ Ke8 22.Bxf4 Qe7 23.Qh8+ Kd7
24.Nf6+ 1-0
8 - Practical 3.Bd3 Approach
French Defence has always been very popular. French theory appears in
books and DVDs. If you study the opening in great detail, understand the
concepts and memorize your main lines your effort should yield a good
return in wins.
It is not the only way to win. If you have limited time or little interest in deep
opening theory there are good moves you can play to put your opponents on
their own early in the game. Ray Haines sent me this game played against a
veteran club player.
"Here is the game I played this week at the club. I think I got it right. Ray
Haines vs Lance Beloungie on 9-19-2013. This was a club game played at the
Univ. of Maine at Presque Isle without a time clock. Lance resigned the
game. I do not play many gambits, but I am still an attacking style player."
"I do not like playing the new main lines because they need a lot of work to
learn the lines. The older ideas are good even now to use, and I do not need to
remember a lot of lines. I guess a lot of other people have the same idea."
Ray Haines is in good company. The position after White's 5.Bf3 was played
100 years ago by the best players in the world, such as Lasker, Schlechter and
Capablanca. No matter what opening you choose, you still have to outplay
your opponent to win.
Haines - Beloungie, Presque Isle Maine, 19.09.2013 begins 1.d4 e6 2.e4 d5

3.Bd3 dxe4 4.Bxe4 Nf6 5.Bf3 c6 6.Ne2 Bd6 7.0-0 0-0 8.Nbc3 Nbd7 9.Bg5
Qc7 10.g3 b6 11.Ne4 Be7 12.Bf4 Qb7 13.Be5 Nxe4 14.Bxe4 Nxe5 15.dxe5
Bd7 16.Nf4 Qc7 17.Qe2 Rfd8 18.Rfe1 Rac8 19.Qh5 g6? [This natural move
turns out to be the wrong pawn, creating a fatal weakness on the dark
squares. 19...h6!= keeps Black in the game.] 20.Nxg6 hxg6 21.Bxg6 fxg6
22.Qxg6+ Kf8 23.Re3 [Also very strong is 23.Qh6+! Kg8 24.Re4+-]
23...Be8 24.Rf3+ Bf6 25.Rxf6+ [Or 25.Qxf6+!+-] 25...Bf7 26.Qh6+ Ke7
27.Qg7 Rf8 28.Rd1 Rcd8 29.Re1 [Ray wrote: 29.Rxe6+! 29...Qd7 0.69
29...Kxe6 30.Qf6# "I missed this mate, because I was looking at moving the
queen rook to f3."] 29...c5 30.Re3 Rd4 31.Ref3 Rd1+ 32.Kg2 Qc6 33.Rxf7+
Rxf7 34.Qxf7+ Kd8 35.Kh3 1-0
2.d4 d5 3.exd5
The Exchange Variation 3.exd5 is chosen by those who want open lines and
wish to avoid the more popular theory.
9 - French Exchange Drawn?
French Defence Exchange Variation 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 exd5 has a
reputation for being drawish. That is not necessarily accurate. The better
player usually wins no matter what. I had reached the French Exchange
position a total of 85 times from either side. White outscored Black 39 wins
to 33 wins; only 13 of those games were drawn.
Here I chose 4.Nf3, which has been favored by USCF master James R. West.
I wrote about winning a symmetrical pawn structure position from a Petroff
Defence.
I transposed to this French Exchange after 1.e3, a first move that I rarely
play. This is my 15th game vs LeviRook on the Internet Chess Club. He beat
me two of those games, both as White.
In 2012 I won two games as White vs this same opponent, with a Blackmar-
Diemer Gambit and with a Queens Gambit Accepted. Below features a game
with a lengthy knight and pawn ending.
Sawyer (1971) - LeviRook (1384), ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 02.05.2014

begins 1.e3 e5 2.d4 exd4 3.exd4 d5 [French Defence, Exchange Variation]
4.Nf3 [A sharper line is 4.c4 Nf6 5.Nc3=] 4...Bd6 5.Bd3 c6 [A very popular
line 5...Nf6 6.Ne5 0-0 7.0-0 c5 8.c3 Re8=/+ favors Black.] 6.h3 Qe7+ 7.Qe2
Qxe2+ 8.Bxe2 f6 9.Bd3 b6 10.0-0 Kf7 11.b3 Ba6 12.Bxa6 Nxa6 13.c3 Nc7
14.Re1 Ne7 15.Ba3 Bxa3 16.Nxa3 Rae8 17.Nc2 Nf5 18.Kf1 Rxe1+
19.Rxe1 Re8 20.Rxe8 Nxe8 21.Nb4 Ne7 22.Nd3 Nd6 23.g4 [23.Ng1=]
23...Ne4 24.c4 dxc4 25.bxc4 g6 [25...b5!=/+] 26.a3 Ke6 27.Ke2 Nd6
28.Nb2 Nec8 29.Kd3 h6 30.Nd2 f5 31.f3 g5 32.Na4 Ne7 33.Nc3 Ng6
34.Ne2 a6 35.a4 Nb7 36.Ng3 fxg4 37.hxg4 Nf4+ 38.Ke3 Ng2+ 39.Kf2 Nf4
40.Nf5 h5 [40...Nd6! 41.Nxh6 c5!=] 41.Ng7+ Kf6 [41...Kf7 42.Nxh5+/=]
42.Nxh5+ Nxh5 43.gxh5 Kf5 [43...Kg7 44.Kg3+/-] 44.Ke3 [44.Ne4!+-]
44...Nd6 45.c5 bxc5 46.dxc5 Ke5 47.cxd6 Black resigns 1-0
10 - Oriero Exchange French
North Penn Chess Club had events directed by E. Olin Mastin. I was paired
with a young girl named Jaquelline Sussane Oriero. She arrived in the United
States from Bulgaria, a country known for its chess players. As I recall she
was given an initial rating of 1900, but she did not perform consistently at
that level. She was good but not quite that strong. Years later she was no
longer listed as an active USCF player. I hope she's had a good life.
Our French Defence game reached the Exchange Variation 3.exd5 exd5 with
me as Black. After about 40 moves, our game was adjourned by the
tournament director so as to begin the next round. For pairing purposes, this
game was considered a win for White due to the fact that she had an extra
pawn. This annoyed me greatly. I wanted to face higher rated players. I
entered the next round with a bad attitude and I suffered for it. After my next
round game, Miss Oriero and I finished our game which ended as a win for
Black, after she missed a drawing opportunity.
Oriero (1549) - Sawyer (1981), Lansdale PA (2), 1985 begins 1.e4 e6 2.Nf3
d5 3.exd5 exd5 4.d4 Bd6 5.Nc3 [The main line is 5.Bd3 Nf6 6.0-0 (6.Ne5?!
0-0 7.0-0 c5=/+) 6...0-0 7.Re1=] 5...Ne7 6.Bd3 [6.Nb5=] 6...c6 7.Be3 Bf5
8.Ne2 Qc7 9.Qd2 Bxd3 10.Qxd3 Nd7 11.Qd2 [11.0-0 0-0 12.Ng3=]
11...Nf6 12.Bf4 Ne4 13.Bxd6 Qxd6 14.Qc1 [Preferring to avoid 14.Qd3
Qb4+ 15.Nd2 Nxd2 16.Qxd2 Qxb2 17.0-0 Qb6=/+] 14...0-0-0 15.c3 f6
16.Qf4 Qe6 17.Nd2 g5 18.Qf3 f5 [18...Nf5!-/+] 19.Nxe4 dxe4 20.Qe3
[White could do better with 20.Qh3 Qg6=/+] 20...f4 21.Qd2 h5 [Black
position is very strong after 21...Nf5!-+ ] 22.0-0-0 Qxa2 23.Qc2 Qe6
24.Rde1 Nf5 25.Ng1 e3 26.Nh3 Rhg8 27.Qe2 h4 [Gives Black a crushing
position. 27...c5! 28.fxe3 Nxe3 29.Qd3 cxd4 30.cxd4 Qb6-+] 28.Qg4 Nxd4
29.Qxe6+ Nxe6 30.fxe3 Nc5 31.Kc2 fxe3 32.Rxe3 Rge8 33.Rhe1 Rxe3
34.Rxe3 Rd5 35.Re8+? [35.b4=] 35...Kd7 36.Rg8 Ne4 37.Rg7+ Kd6
[37...Ke6!-+] 38.Kc1 b5 39.Rxa7 Rd2? [Black is still winning after 39...g4!
40.Nf4 Rf5-/+] 40.Nxg5 Re2 41.Nxe4+ Rxe4 42.Rg7 Re2 43.h3 c5 44.Rg4
Kd5 45.b3 c4 46.bxc4+ bxc4 47.Kd1 Re4 48.Kd2 Rxg4 49.hxg4 Ke4 50.g5
Kf5 51.Ke3 Kxg5 52.Kf3 Kf5 53.Ke3 Kg4 54.Kf2 Kf4 55.g3+ [White can
draw with 55.Ke2! Kg4 56.Kf2 Kf4=] 55...hxg3+ 56.Kg2 Ke3 57.Kxg3 Kd3
58.Kf2 Kxc3 59.Ke2 Kb2 0-1
Book 3 – Chapter 2 – Alapin-Diemer
The Alapin French offers the e4 pawn as a gambit. Black can take the pawn
with 3…dxe4 or attack the pawn with 3…Nf6 4.e5. Other options are
covered in this section.
11 - Chandler Wins Nice Game
Bill Chandler sent me a BDG game. White looking for that game I stumbled
upon this nice Alapin French game that he also won.
The object in chess it to get the opponent's king. Your own focus must be on
aggression toward the enemy army. But it is easy to forget to protect your
own king. In the midst of battle, when bullets start flying, it is vital that your
king is safe. You only get one king. Protect him!
Unless you can immediately finish the attack on your opponent's king, the
good general rule is protect your king first and attack his second. Black was
slow to protect his king. William Chandler kept up the attack through the
middlegame and reached a winning endgame. Bill's play was sharp, tactical,
logical and effective.
WilliamChandler - Gelgolan, Main Playing Hall, 21.09.2013 begins 1.e4 e6

2.d4 d5 3.Be3 c5 4.exd5 [4.dxc5+/= is more common.] 4...exd5 5.dxc5 Nf6
6.Nc3 Nbd7 7.Nxd5 Bxc5 8.Bxc5 Nxc5 9.Qe2+ Be6 10.Nxf6+ gxf6
[10...Qxf6!? 11.Qb5+ Nd7 12.Nf3 (Not 12.Qxb7? Rb8 13.Qc7 Qxb2-+)
12...0-0 13.Bd3 Rac8 14.0-0+/=] 11.Qb5+ Nd7 12.0-0-0 Qc7 13.Nf3 Rc8
[13...0-0-0 14.Be2+/=] 14.Bd3 0-0 15.Qh5 Rfe8 [15...Qf4+ 16.Kb1 h6
17.Nd4+-] 16.Qxh7+ Kf8 17.Rhe1 Ne5 18.Nxe5 fxe5 19.Qh8+ [Or 19.f4!
since 19...exf4 20.Qh6+ Ke7 21.Rxe6+ fxe6 22.Qg7+ Kd6 23.Be2+ Kc5
24.Qc3+ Kb6 25.Qb4+ Kc6 26.Qb5#] 19...Ke7 20.Qxe5 Qxe5 21.Rxe5 f6
22.Re3 Kf7 23.Bb5 Re7 24.Rde1 Rc5 25.a4 a6 26.Bd7 Re5 27.Bxe6+
R7xe6 28.Rxe5 Rxe5 [It is better for the defender to keep the rooks on the
board, but three extra pawns wins for White. 28...fxe5 29.h4+-] 29.Rxe5 fxe5
30.Kd2 b5 31.axb5 axb5 32.Ke3 Ke6 33.Ke4 Kd6 34.h4 1-0
12 - Charles Szasz in Alapin
Charles Szasz played a significant role in the spread of the Blackmar-Diemer
Gambit in America over the past 50 years. Here he played 3.Be3 vs the
French. Black's most immediate threat is simply 3... dxe4.
Playing against the French is like banging your head against a cement block;
you get a headache. The cement block will rarely attack, but how do you
break it? Black will hardly be surprised by anything, but White can try a
potentially powerful karate chop.
The move 3.Be3 was developed and played by Semyon Alapin in the 1890's!
The game usually remains wide open. White gets quick slashing attacks and
often wins in about 20 moves. Psychologically, Black faces a dilemma. He
prefers a closed game. This may explain why about one third of the time, he
declines the tempting gift pawn hanging there on e4. Shocked, Black
wonders, "Are you sure you meant to play that?!"
Szasz - Sheppards, US Intercollegiate, 1976 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e4 e6 3.Be3!?

b6 [This allows the B/c8 to have a useful function at either b7 or a6. In this
line all Black's minor pieces can be developed easily. A lunch time chess
friend once ventured 3...Bb4+? 4.c3 Ba5 (Now 4...Bf8!? appears to be a
waste of time.) 5.Nd2 Ne7 6.Qg4 e5? 7.Qxg7 Rg8 8.Qxh7 dxe4? 9.Nxe4
exd4 10.Nf6+ Kf8 11.Bh6+ Rg7 12.Bxg7# (Fast food!) 1-0 Sawyer - Black,
Horsham PA 1988; Another inferior alternative is 3...e5? 4.dxe5 dxe4
5.Qxd8+ Kxd8 6.Nc3 Bf5 7.0-0-0++/-] 4.e5 [White closes the center, so that
the B/c8 will have very limited scope if it is fianchettoed on the normal b7. If
4.Nd2 dxe4 5.Nxe4 Bb7= with equal chances or 4.Bd3!?=. The critical and
best line is 4.exd5! exd5 5.Nf3+/=] 4...Bb7 [Black could equalize with either
4...c5= or 4...Ba6!?=] 5.f4 Nd7 [Charles Szasz wrote an article on the Alapin
Gambit found in BDG World (Issue 4, April 1983] 6.Nf3 c5 7.c3 cxd4
8.cxd4 Rc8 9.a3 Ne7 10.Bd3 Nc6 [10...g6 11.0-0 a6 12.Nc3+/=] 11.0-0
Ncb8 [11...Be7 12.Qe2 g6 13.Nc3 0-0 14.Rac1+/-] 12.Nc3 [Or 12.f5! exf5
13.Bxf5 g6 14.Bh3+-] 12...Ba6 13.Nb5 Bxb5 14.Bxb5 a6 15.Bd3 Be7
16.Bd2 [16.f5+-] 16...0-0 17.Bb4 Bxb4 18.axb4 [18.Bxh7+! Kxh7 19.Ng5+
Kg6 20.axb4+-] 18...a5 19.Bxh7+ Kh8 20.Ng5 g6 21.Qg4 f5 22.Qh4 Kg7
23.Nxe6+ 1-0
13 - Alapin 3.Be3 by Diemer
Emil Josef Diemer (1908-1990) was a master who became very famous for
his bold gambit play. Diemer had an incredible career living in Germany
throughout both World Wars.
Diemer is most well-known for Blackmar-Diemer Gambit (BDG): 1.d4 d5

2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3. In 1956, E.J. Diemer wrote his BDG book
covering early deviations and 4... exf3 5.Qxf3 entitled (in German) "From the
First Move until Mate!" Diemer intended to write a second volume covering
the more popular 5.Nxf3 line; alas, he never did.
My Alapin French book cites 35 Diemer games. Many players call the moves
1.d4 d5 2.e4 e6 3.Be3 the "Alapin-Diemer Gambit". As Black, Diemer played
both the Elephant Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 d5) and the Soller Gambit (1.d4 e5
2.dxe5 f6!?).
In 1992, I wrote a book covering everything that Diemer played after 1.d4
entitled the "Blackmar-Diemer Gambit Keybook." For ten years I enjoyed
playing Diemer's repertoire from both sides. E.J. Diemer's games taught me
how to play a mating attack. This Alapin Diemer vs Stefan Martin was
played late in Diemer’s life.
Diemer - Martin, Viernheim 1984 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e4 e6 3.Be3 Nf6 4.f3
Be7 5.Bd3 [A possibility is 5.Nd2 0-0 6.e5 Nfd7 7.Bd3 f6 8.f4 f5 9.g4 Bh4+
10.Kf1 fxg4? 11.Qxg4+/- and 1-0 in 22. Sawyer - Huth, Skittles game,
Hatboro PA 1989] 5...b6 [Black could try 5...dxe4 6.fxe4 e5 7.dxe5 Ng4
8.Qe2 Nxe3 9.Qxe3=] 6.c3 c5 [Again, 6...Ba6? 7.Bxa6 Nxa6 8.Qa4+ winning
the N/a6] 7.e5 Nfd7 8.Nd2 Ba6 [Beware of 8...cxd4 9.cxd4 Ba6=] 9.Bc2 Nc6
10.a3 Rc8 11.f4 0-0 12.Ngf3 f6 13.h4!? [Diemer weakens his kingside to
attack. A safer choice was 13.Qb1= but that was not the Diemer way.] 13...f5
[13...h6 14.Qb1 f5=/+] 14.Ng5! Bxg5 15.hxg5 g6 16.Rc1 cxd4 17.cxd4 Na5
18.g4 Qe7 19.gxf5 exf5 20.Qf3 Qe6 21.Kf2 Rfd8 22.b3 [22.Bb1! Nf8
23.Ba2+/=] 22...Nf8 23.a4 Nc6 24.Qd1 Nb4 25.Nf3 Rc6 [25...Na2=/+]
26.Bb1 Rdc8 27.Qd2 Qe7 28.Rxc6 Rxc6 29.Rc1 Rxc1 30.Qxc1 Bd3
31.Ne1 Bxb1 32.Qxb1 Qc7 33.Bd2 Nc6 34.Qc1 Ne6 35.Nf3 Qd7 36.Ke3
Kf7 37.Qh1 Ke8 38.b4 Kd8? [38...a6=] 39.b5! Nb8 40.Bb4 Kc8 41.Bd6
Kb7 42.Nd2 a6 43.Qxd5+ Kc8 44.Nc4 Qf7 45.Nxb6+ Kd8 46.Bxb8+ Ke8
47.bxa6 1-0
14 - Battle vs Allan Kaletsky
In the French Defence Alapin Gambit Declined with 3.Be3 Nf6, White
should play 4.e5! It took me some years to learn this.
Early on in my Blackmar-Diemer Gambit playing days I used to prefer 4.f3.

This was because I got the same position by transposition after 1.d4 Nf6 2.f3
d5 3.e4 e6 4.Nc3.
My game against Allan Kaletsky was played in the 1989 USCF Golden
Knights Postal Tournament. At that pace we both made about one move per
week.
The position became closed when I played 7.e5. Then Black played 9...c4.
This move locked in our bad bishops.
That is a bigger problem for Black. White has more space and can rearrange
his army as needed.
After many months of maneuvering, I finally achieved a winning rook

ending.
Sawyer (2011) - Kaletsky (1523), corr USCF 89N214, 26.12.1990 begins

1.d4 d5 2.e4 e6 3.Be3 Nf6 4.f3 Be7 5.Nd2 b6 6.c3 c5 7.e5 [The game
becomes a positional struggle typical of the French Defense. Another
approach is 7.Bd3 0-0 8.Rc1 Nc6 9.e5 Nd7 10.f4 f5 11.g4!? Daring.
(11.Ndf3+/=) 11...Bh4+ 12.Kf1 cxd4 13.cxd4 Nb4 14.Bb1 Ba6+ 15.Kg2 Nd3
16.Bxd3 Bxd3 17.g5 Bxg5+/= and 0-1 in 37. Webster - Schroeder, Elo Open
1988] 7...Nfd7 8.f4 Ba6! 9.Ngf3 c4?! [This positional error traps in Black's
bad bishop. Better is to trade off the light squared bishops with 9...Bxf1
10.Nxf1=] 10.Be2 Qc7 11.0-0 Nc6 12.a4 [12.Qc2+/=] 12...Bb7 13.Kh1 h6
14.Qc2 a6 15.Rfc1 [15.f5+/=] 15...Nf8 16.Qb1 b5 17.b4 g5 18.axb5 axb5
19.Rxa8+ Bxa8 20.Qa2 Bb7 21.g3 f6 22.exf6 Bxf6 23.Kg1 g4 24.Ne5 h5
25.Qc2 Qg7 26.Nf1 Bxe5 27.fxe5 Ne7 28.Bf2 Nh7 29.Be3 Ng5 30.Bxg5
Qxg5 31.Qd2 Qxd2 32.Nxd2 Nf5 33.Ra1 0-0 34.Nf1 Rf7 35.h3 Nh6 36.Ne3
Nf5 37.Nxf5 exf5 38.Kf2 Re7 [38...Bc8 39.Ke3 gxh3 40.Kf4 h2 41.Bf3 Be6
42.Rh1+/-] 39.Ke3 Bc8 40.Ra8 Rc7 41.Rb8 Kf7 42.Rxb5 Ra7 43.Rxd5
[43.hxg4! fxg4 44.Rxd5+-] 43...Ra3 44.Rc5 Rxc3+ 45.Kf4 Rc2 46.Rxc8
[46.Bxc4+!+-] 46...Rxe2 47.hxg4 1-0
15 - Allensworth Hybrid Alapin
Blackmar-Diemer Gambit players have several ways to face the French
Defence beyond such main lines as 1.d4 d5 2.e4 e6 3.Nc3. One is the
Diemer-Duhm Gambit with 3.c4 dxe4 with possibilities of Nc3 and f3.
Another Anti-French variation is the Alapin-Diemer Gambit 3.Be3!? dxe4.

White intends 4.f3, 4.Nc3, or more commonly 4.Nd2 Nf6 when Alapin liked
5.c3 and Diemer preferred 5.f3.
There are French Defence options after 1.d4 Nf6 2.f3 (Paleface) 2...d5 3.e4
e6 after which there are four 4th move options:
4.Nc3 (Classical with f3); 4.e5 (Steinitz a tempo behind); 4.Bg5 (Sawyer
Variation which sometimes transposes to a BDG Euwe); and 4.Be3 (French
Alapin 3.Be3 Nf6 with 4.f3).
In the 1989 USCF Golden Knights Postal Tournament against John

Allensworth I tried the Paleface Attack with 1.d4 Nf6 2.f3 e6 3.e4 d5 4.Be3.
This French Alapin 3.Be3 Nf6 could also be reached after 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5
3.Be3 Nf6 4.f3. I prefer 4.e5 with that move order. On move 6, Black
captured my e-pawn in exchange for a knight. Maybe John thought my
written pawn move 2.f3 was 2.Nf3.
At any rate, after this the game was well in hand. It was just a matter of time,
probably six months at a move per week, before Black chose to resign.
Sawyer (2107) - Allensworth (1265), corr USCF 89N260, 22.08.1990

begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.f3 e6 3.e4 d5 4.Be3 Bb4+ 5.c3 Be7 6.Nd2 Nxe4? [Black
sacrifices or loses a piece. 6...dxe4 7.fxe4 c5=] 7.fxe4 e5 8.Ngf3 exd4
9.Bxd4 0-0 10.exd5 Qxd5 11.Bc4 Qh5 12.Qc2 [The most powerful move is
12.0-0! Nc6 13.Ne5+-] 12...Nc6 13.0-0-0 Bf5 14.Bd3 Nxd4 15.Nxd4 Bxd3
16.Qxd3 Rad8 17.Qf5 Qh4 18.g3 Qh6 19.Qg4 Bg5 20.h4 Be3 21.N4f3 c5
22.Ng5 [22.Rhe1 b5 23.Qf5 b4 24.Ng5 Bxg5 25.Qxg5 Qxg5 26.hxg5 bxc3
27.bxc3+-] 22...Qd6 [22...Qg6 23.Qc4 h6 24.Ngf3+/=] 23.Rh2 b5? [23...Qg6
24.Qf3+/-] 24.Qe4 Bxg5 25.hxg5 Qg6 26.Qxg6 fxg6 27.Rdh1 h6 28.gxh6
gxh6 29.Rxh6 Kg7 30.Rh7+ Kg8 31.Rh8+ Kg7 32.R1h7+ 1-0
16 - Avalos Teaches Lesson
I played 1000 correspondence chess games over a 20 year period. My
opponents came from 30 countries and all 50 states in the USA.
Only rarely did I actually meet any of my opponents face to face. In the 1989
USCF Golden Knights Postal Tournament, section 89N280, I had the White
pieces vs Carlos Avalos Sarravia.
This might have been his first USCF Postal rated game. Avalos was given my
rating plus 400 points which put him temporarily at 2576. Last I looked, his
correspondence rating had settled down to 2178. His tournament rating was
2062, and he was still active.
About 15 years later at a chess tournament in Florida, a nice man came up to

me and introduced himself to me as the Carlos Avalos. He said that we
played many years before.
Indeed I remember him. Avalos taught me a valuable lesson. He clearly

crushed me.
Our game was in the French Defence Alapin Gambit Declined after 3…Nf6.
This game pretty much cured me from playing 4.f3.
Sometimes this same variation results from a transposition, after say 1.d4 Nf6
2.f3 e6. Our game was a straight French Defence Alapin 3.Be3 Nf6.
My continuation was terrible. Carlos Avalos showed the value of the counter
attack 4…c5! Do not do what I did. I felt the pain. I learned the lesson.
White would get a playable game if handled correctly. I should have played
4.e5 or at least 5.e5 with equal chances.
Sawyer (2176) - Avalos (2576), corr USCF 89N280, 18.01.1990 begins 1.d4
e6 2.e4 d5 3.Be3 Nf6 4.f3?! c5! [Enterprising.] 5.dxc5?! [Best is 5.e5 Nfd7=]
5...Qc7! 6.c3 [Better seems to be 6.Nc3] 6...Bxc5 7.Bxc5 Qxc5 8.e5 Nfd7
9.f4? [The last try is 9.Qd4=/+] 9...Qe3+ 10.Ne2 Nc5 [10...Nc5
Embarrassing. 11.Qd4 Nd3+ 12.Kd1 Nf2+-+] 0-1
17 - Haines with Alapin
Ray Haines sent me his three games from the Presque Isle March Event,
Open Section which was played in Maine on March 31, 2012. Ray was in a
three way tie for first place. The event was played at the University of Maine
at Presque Isle (U.M.P.I.). This is about 150 miles north of the main campus
of the University of Maine at Orono, where I attended years ago.
In the first round Ray Haines faces the French Defence and chooses the
Alapin-Diemer Gambit (3.Be3) vs his longtime friend Lance Beloungie.
Black declined the gambit and missed a thematic French Check & Capture
tactic that allowed White to win a piece.
This same tactic also comes up in the Tarrasch Variation after 3.Nd2 and the
Advance Variation 3.e5. Three things must be available: (1) White plays c2-
c3; (2) Black swaps a piece with Ba6, Bxa6, with an undefended Nxa6; and
(3) the Qa4 is check. Sometimes Black defends against this threat with an
earlier ...a7-a5 or ...Qd7 prior to ...Ba6.
We all drop a piece from time to time. The game continued until an ending
was reached with White up a knight. Ray did not make any big blunders
when up a piece. He won fairly easily.
Haines - Beloungie, UMPI Open, Round 1, 31.03.2012 begins 1.d4 e6 2.e4

d5 3.Be3 Nf6 [Alapin-Diemer Gambit Declined] 4.f3!? [The proven best
move by results and analysis is 4.e5! Nfd7 (since 4...Ne4? blunders a piece to
5.f3 Qh4+ 6.g3 Nxg3 7.Bf2+-) when both 5.Nf3 and 5.f4 are good.] 4...b6
5.Nd2 Ba6!? [Black wants to exchange his bad French bishop.] 6.Bxa6 Nxa6
7.c3 c5? [Black misses the tactical threat and drops a piece. Better is 7...c6
8.e5+/=] 8.Qa4+ Qd7 9.Qxa6 dxe4 10.fxe4 cxd4 11.Bxd4 Be7 12.Ngf3 0-0
13.0-0 Ng4 14.Qe2 [White has nicely consolidated with his extra knight. The
rest is just a matter of working toward and endgame. Black is lost.] 14...f6
15.e5 Rad8 16.h3 Nh6 17.exf6 Bxf6 18.Ne4 Bxd4+ 19.Nxd4 e5 20.Rxf8+
Rxf8 21.Nf3 Qd5 22.Neg5 Re8 23.Qc2 g6 24.Qb3 Qxb3 25.axb3 e4 26.Nd4
e3 27.Kf1 a5 28.Ke2 Nf5 29.Nxf5 gxf5 30.Rf1 h6 31.Nf3 f4 32.Ne1 Rd8
33.Nd3 Kg7 34.Rxf4 Re8 35.Rf3 1-0
18 - 4.f3 vs Eric Tobias
When I lived near Philadelphia, I played dozens of enjoyable games vs
Expert Eric Tobias at the Chaturanga Club.
For some reason, it seems that we played a lot of 10 minute games, but I do
not remember the time limit of this particular game for sure.
This game transposed to the French Defence Alapin Gambit Declined with
3.Be3 Nf6.
The point of 1.d4 Nf6 2.f3 is to transpose into a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit

(after 2...d5 3.e4 dxe4 4.Nc3) without having to face the Huebsch Gambit
after 2.Nc3 d5 3.e4 Nxe4.
The problem with 2.f3 in the French Defence (if Black does not take on e4) is
that White wastes a tempo.
This allows Black to equalize easily, but at least White gets out of the book
with Be3. The same French Defence position could be reached via 1.e4 e6
2.d4 d5 3.Be3 Nf6 4.f3, but in that case better would be 4.e5!
Eric Tobias and I were rated almost exactly the same for a time. Tobias
played me tough.
Usually Eric Tobias did not let me get away with as much as I did in this
game. Both sides could have improved, but at least I was the one who had fun
of victory this time.
Sawyer - Tobias, Hatboro, PA 1989 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.f3 d5 3.e4 e6 4.Be3
b6 5.c3 [Hoping for the cheapo. 5.e5 is clearly playable 5...Nfd7 6.f4= leaves
White with a wasted tempo but a playable game.] 5...Bb7 [5...Ba6? 6.Bxa6
Nxa6 7.Qa4+ wins a piece.] 6.Nd2 c5 7.Bd3 g6 8.e5 Nfd7 9.f4 Bg7 10.Ngf3
0-0 11.0-0 Nc6 12.Qe1 c4 13.Bc2 b5 14.g4 a5 [Black equalize with 14...f6= ]
15.Qg3 [15.f5!+/-] 15...b4 [15...f6 16.f5+/=] 16.Rf2 [16.f5+/-] 16...a4
17.Raf1 b3 18.axb3 axb3 19.Bb1 Nb6 [19...f5 20.exf6 Nxf6 21.f5+/=] 20.f5
Na4 21.f6 Bh8 22.Bh6 Re8 23.Ng5 Nxb2 24.Qh4 Nd3 25.Nxh7 Kxh7?
[Black can try 25...Nxf2 26.Rxf2 Nxe5 27.dxe5+- to avoid immediate mate.]
26.Bg7+ 1-0
3.Be3 Nf6 4.e5
This line combines the characteristics of the Alapin and other 3…Nf6 4.e5
French lines. Continuations without 4.e5 (such as 4.f3) were covered in the
previously section.
19 - Trap in French Alapin
The French Defence Alapin Gambit Declined 4.e5 contains a deadly trap.
Various players fall for the trap from time to time.
When playing Black in the French Defence Classical Steinitz 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5
3.Nc3 Nf6 4.e5, it is reasonable, although not recommended, to attempt
4...Ne4?!
However against the French Defence Alapin, this maneuver fails terribly after
3.Be3 Nf6 4.e5 Ne4?
In my 1989 USCF Golden Knights Postal Chess Tournament game vs Gerald

Donohue, Black illustrated the trap perfectly. White wins a piece.
This opponent was my first win in with this trap, but I won the same way four
times with 7.Bf2! Each of those players chose a different seventh move, but
there are no available good moves for Black.
Sawyer (2183) - Donohue (1355), corr USCF 89N275, 09.03.1990 begins

1.d4 d5 2.e4 e6 3.Be3 Nf6 4.e5 Ne4? [Black falls for the trap. 4...Nfd7 5.f4
or 5.Nf3] 5.f3! Qh4+ [If 5...Ng5 6.h4!+- wins the knight anyway.] 6.g3 Nxg3
7.Bf2! Qh6 8.Bxg3 1-0
20 - French Royal Skewer
Before the Polgar sisters were world famous, I played Donna Marie
Woodland. Postal chess was pretty much a man's world.
I am guessing I played about a dozen women in my 1000 correspondence

games.
One of the most notable women I remember playing was my game vs Irene
Aronoff.
I also met Rachel Crotto during the 1974 US Junior Open at Franklin &
Marshall College in Lancaster, Pennsylvania. We only played blitz and
skittles.
My game vs Donna Marie Woodland (rated 1806) was in the 1989 USCF
Golden Knights Postal Tournament. During that event I achieved a USCF
Postal Master rating.
This lady met me at a time I was playing the best chess of my life. Our
opening was a French Defence Alapin 3.Be3 Nf6 4.e5.
Usually I follow up 3.Be3 Nf6 4.e5 Nfd7 with 5.f4 but here I tried 5.Bd3 and
6.Qg4. When she tried to connect her rooks 11...Ke7, she stepped into two
tactical ideas at once after 12.Bg5. The White bishop had a skewer on the
Black king which could not be captured due to the pin on the Black queen.
The royal family had fallen and with it, the game.
Sawyer (2208) - Woodland (1806), corr USCF 89N286, 10.05.1990 begins

1.d4 e6 2.e4 d5 3.Be3 Nf6 4.e5 Nfd7 5.Bd3 [The main line of the Alapin-
Diemer Declined is 5.f4 c5 6.c3 Nc6 7.Nf3+/=] 5...Be7 [A natural
continuation would be 5...c5 6.c3 Qb6=] 6.Qg4 c5? [This is too risky. Black
has to cover the 6...g6 spot.] 7.Qxg7 Rf8 8.c3 c4 [If Black goes for queenside
counter play with 8...Qb6 after 9.b3+/- White still has a good position.]
9.Bxh7 Bf6? [Hanging a piece. Better is either 9...b5 or 9...Qb6] 10.exf6
Qxf6 11.Bh6 Ke7? [Black is in for a royal skewing.] 12.Bg5! Nc6 13.Nf3 b6
14.Ne5 Ke8 [14...Ncxe5 15.Bxf6+ Nxf6 16.dxe5+- White is up a queen for a
rook.] 15.Bxf6 Ncxe5 16.Bxe5 Bb7 17.Bd6 Kd8 18.Bxf8 Kc7 19.Be7 Bc6
20.Qxf7 e5 21.dxe5 Nxe5 22.Qf4 1-0
21 - Semyon Alapin Plays Be3
Semyon (Simon) Alapin was a creative tactical player. He faced strong
players from Blackburne to Nimzovich. Alapin once mated Marshall in 16
moves! Semyon Alapin is most remembered for his unusual early opening
moves.
One of his openings is in the Open Game with 1.e4 e5 2.Ne2!? Another has
become a popular Sicilian Defence 1.e4 c5 2.c3!? How did Alapin play
against the French Defence his 3.Be3!? Here are several examples. The stem
game is against A. Zinkl.
Alapin - Zinkl, Vienna 1899 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Be3 Nf6 [3...dxe4
4.Nd2 Nf6 (4...f5 5.f3 exf3 6.Ngxf3 Nf6 7.Bc4 Nd5 8.Qe2 Be7 9.0-0-0 0-0
10.Rhg1 c6 11.g4 b5 12.Bb3 a5 13.c4 a4 14.Bc2 bxc4 15.Nxc4 Ba6 16.Bd2
Bxc4 17.Qxc4 a3 18.b3 g6 19.gxf5 exf5 20.Bh6 Rf6 1/2-1/2 Alapin - Noa,
Dresden 1892) 5.c3 (Alapin's idea was to attack e4 with Qc2 and Ng3.
Diemer played 5.f3 known as the Alapin-Diemer Gambit.) 5...Bd7! (5...Nbd7
6.Qc2 Be7 7.Ne2 0-0 8.Ng3 Nd5 9.Qxe4 N7f6 10.Qd3 c5 11.Be2 cxd4
12.cxd4 Bd7 13.0-0 Rc8 14.Rac1 Bc6 15.Nc4 Nb4 16.Qb1 Bd5 17.a3 Nc6
and 1/2-1/2 in 50. Alapin - Burn, Berlin 1897 18.Qd3=) 6.Qc2 Bc6 7.Ne2
Be7 8.c4 0-0 9.0-0-0 Na6 10.Nc3 Nb4-/+ and 0-1 in 29. Alapin - Showalter,
Vienna 1898] 4.e5 [This reliable line provides a clear positional advantage
for White. The whole line is an improvement on the Tarrasch line 3.Nd2 Nf6
4.e5.] 4...Nfd7 [In blitz games, and occasionally in serious games, one sees
the piece blunder 4...Ne4? 5.f3! Qh4+ 6.g3 Nxg3 7.Bf2+-] 5.c3 [Normal is
5.f4 c5 6.c3 Nc6 7.Nf3 Be7 8.Bd3 (8.Be2!?+/=) 8...cxd4 9.cxd4 Qb6 10.Qd2
Nb4 11.Be2 0-0 12.Nc3 f6 13.0-0 Nc6 14.Bd3 Nb4 15.Be2 Nc6 16.Rac1 f5
17.Kh1 Qd8 and 1/2-1/2 in 28. Alapin - Von Gottschall, Dresden 1892
18.Na4+/-] 5...c5 6.a3 [Solid and cautious. More common is 6.f4 which could
transpose to 5.f4 c5 6.c3.] 6...c4?! [6...Nc6= is better.] 7.b4 a5 8.Nd2 a4
9.Qg4 f5 [9...Nc6 10.Be2+/=] 10.Qg3 b5 11.Be2 Qe7 12.Nh3 [12.h4!?+/-]
12...Qf7 [12...Nc6 13.Nf3 g6 14.0-0+/-] 13.Ng5 [13.Nf4!?+/-] 13...Qg8
14.h4 Be7 15.h5 h6 16.Nh3 Nf8 17.Nf4 Bg5 18.Nf3 Bxf4 19.Bxf4 Ra7
20.Nh4 Re7 21.Qh2 Kd7 22.g4 fxg4 23.Bxg4 g5 24.hxg6 Nxg6 25.Bh5
Nxf4 26.Qxf4 Rg7 27.0-0-0 Qf8 [27...Kc7 28.Qh2+/-] 28.Qf6 Rhg8 29.Rh3
[Or 29.Ng6!+-] 29...Qe7 30.Rf3 Nc6 31.Bf7! 1-0
22 - Catania in Alapin Gambit
When facing the Alapin Gambit Declined 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Be3 Nf6 what is
the best 4th move for White? It must be 4.e5. After 4...Nfd7 White continues
5.f4, strengthening the central pawn wedge. White expects a space advantage
on the kingside. After completing development, the plan is a pawn storm with
an eventual g2-g4 and f4-f5.
In the 1989 USCF Golden Knights Semi-Finals my opponent Duane Catania

countered my obvious plan with 5...g6. This left Black with gaping holes on
the dark squares.
The g6 pawn will eventually become a target for pawn exchange and the
opening of the kingside for pieces. White obtained a big positional advantage.
Temporarily I gave Black a chance to save the game on move 33. A few
moves later it was all over.
Sawyer (2078) - Catania (1795), corr USCF 89NS20, 09.10.1991 begins

1.d4 d5 2.e4 e6 3.Be3 Nf6 4.e5 Nfd7 5.f4 g6?! [This keeps White from
quickly pushing a pawn to f5. Black has no intention of the fianchetto 6...
Bg7, since the Bishop is more useful on e7. Another rare try is 5...b6 6.Nf3
(A bold approach is 6.Qg4!?+/=) 6...c5 7.c4+/= Cody] 6.Nf3 c5 [After
6...Be7 7.c3 b6 8.Bd3 Ba6 9.0-0 Bxd3 10.Qxd3, Black has a slightly better
Bishop, while White has more space.] 7.c3 Nc6 8.Qd2 a6 9.Bd3 b5 10.0-0
Bb7 11.Qf2 c4 [With the center closed, Black expands on the queenside,
moves his pieces to the queenside, has his best play on the queenside. Then
for some unknown reason, Black closes off the position on the queenside!]
12.Bc2 Rc8 [Here a positional struggle ensued:] 13.a3 Be7 14.Nbd2 a5
15.g4 Nf8 16.f5 Qd7 [16...gxf5 17.gxf5 exf5 18.Bxf5+/-] 17.Ng5 [17.f6! Bd8
18.Bh6+- should eventually lead to the win of the h7 pawn.] 17...Bxg5
18.Bxg5 gxf5 19.gxf5 Rg8 20.Qh4 exf5? [20...Ne7+/=] 21.Bxf5 Qe7 22.Nf3
Ne6 23.Bxe6 [23.Kh1!+- wins] 23...Qxe6 24.Qxh7 Kd7 25.Kh1 Rh8
26.Qg7?! [26.Qc2+-] 26...Rcg8 27.Qf6 Ne7 28.Qxe7+ Qxe7 29.Bxe7 Kxe7
30.Rg1 Bc8 31.Rxg8 Rxg8 32.Rg1 Rh8 33.Rg7 [33.Kg2!+/=] 33...Kf8
[Black can equalize with 33...Bf5!=] 34.Rg3 Bf5 35.Ng5 Rh5 36.Kg2 b4
37.axb4 axb4 38.Nh3 Be4+ 39.Kg1 bxc3 40.bxc3 Rh6 41.Nf2 Bf5 42.Ng4
Ra6? [42...Bxg4 43.Rxg4+/=] 43.Nf6 1-0
23 - Alapin-Diemer Declined
It's ridiculous! But it's true. I scored better as White against the French
Defence with the Alapin 3.Be3!? (57%) than I had with the 3.Nc3 (55%)
against the exact same level of competition.
When we were playing a postal game in 1978 Dr. Ted Bullockus first told me
about the move 3.Be3!? I dismissed it as foolish.
I looked the move up in the excellent thick book on the French Defence by
Gligoric, Karpov, etc. and published by RHM around 1975. To my shock, the
move 3.Be3!? was not mentioned at all! At the time I preferred Karpov's
3.Nd2 French Tarrasch. I was not a gambit player, but Bullockus sparked my
interest in 3.Be3!?
Here is a French Defence Alapin vs "Veigar" in a 3 0 blitz game from the

Internet Chess Club. At such speed, I cannot really calculate anything. I just
play rapid "hope chess" for fun. I use pattern recognition, intuition and
experience... an adrenalin rush. Maybe someday I might slow down to 5
minute games.
Sawyer - Veigar, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 21.01.2013 begins 1.e4 e6

2.d4 d5 3.Be3 Nf6 4.e5 Nfd7 5.f4 c5 6.c3 Nc6 7.Nf3 f6 8.Nbd2 [8.Bd3!+/=
is more accurate.] 8...Be7 9.Bd3 0-0 10.0-0 cxd4 11.cxd4 Nb6 12.b3
[Houdini 3 also likes 12.exf6+/=] 12...Bd7 13.a3 Be8 14.Qc2 f5 15.g4!?
[15.Qb2+/=] 15...Bg6 16.g5 Rc8 17.Qb2 Qd7 18.Rfc1 Na5 19.Kg2 Rc7
20.Rxc7 Qxc7 21.Rc1 Qd7 22.a4 Rc8 23.Rxc8+ Qxc8 24.Qc2 Be8 25.Qxc8
Nxc8 26.h4 Nb6 27.Ne1 Nc6 28.Nc2 Nb4 29.Nxb4 Bxb4 30.Kf2 Bh5
31.Nb1 Kf8 32.Bd2 Be7 33.Bc1 Ke8 34.Ba3 Bxa3 35.Nxa3 a6 36.Ke3 Kd7
37.a5 Nc8 38.Nc2? [This move leaves the White pawns on a5, d4, f4, and h4
as potential targets for the Black knight. 38.b4= holds the position.] 38...Bd1
39.Kd2 Bxc2 40.Kxc2 Ne7 41.b4 Nc6 [Black misses his chance with
41...Ng6!-/+] 42.Kc3 g6 [42...Na7=] 43.b5 Nxa5 44.bxa6 bxa6 45.Bxa6
Kc6? [45...Nc6=] 46.Kb4? [46.Bc8! Nc4 47.Bxe6+- wins quickly.] 46...Kb6
47.Bc8 Nc6+ 48.Kc3 Nd8 49.Bd7 Ka5 50.Be8 Kb6 51.Kb4 Kc7 52.Kb5
Nb7? [52...Kb7=] 53.Bc6 [53.Bf7!+-] 53...Nd8 54.Be8 Nb7? [Black is
desperately down on time. In hopes to draw by repeating moves he repeats
the blunder. 54...Kb7=] 55.Bf7 Kd7 56.Bg8 Nd8 57.Bxh7?! [Black forfeits
on time. Correct is 57.Kb6 Nc6 58.Bxe6+ wins] 1-0
24 - Dyba Battles Alapin Gambit
My French Defence Alapin Gambit Declined game vs Paul Dyba was one of
the 52 annotated games [Game 19] in my 1995 Alapin French book published
by Bob Long and Thinkers' Press.
In the book I followed a specific move order of 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 (and later
7.Nf3 Be7 8.h4 Qb6 9.Qd2 cxd4 10.cxd4 f6) from the game Diemer-Busca
given in the notes below.
That Diemer game transposed to my game with Paul Dyba. Here is the actual
move order of our 1989 USCF Golden Squires Postal Chess Tournament
game. In the book I analyzed the variation using a consistent move order
between games 18-20. This helps the reader to compare subtle differences.
There are many paths to the same positions.
Moves 12-16 against Dyba imply a willingness for both players to draw the
game. We were both probably out of contention for any prizes three years
after the tournament started. We had finished about 10 games each, so we had
a pretty good idea of where we stood in the standings. The notes below are
revised with the help of chess engine analysis not available back in 1991.
Sawyer (2006) - Dyba (2019), corr USCF 89SS60, 31.12.1991 begins 1.d4
e6 2.e4 d5 3.Be3 Nf6 4.e5 Nfd7 5.f4 c5 6.c3 Nc6 7.Nf3 Qb6 8.Qd2 f6
9.h4!? [This move is quite an enterprising attempt to weaken the kingside by
provoking a pawn advance. After Black castles there might be a possible
Ng5!? sacrifice to open the h-file. 9.Be2+/=] 9...cxd4 10.cxd4 Be7 11.Nc3 0-
0 [This is more sensible than opening lines by 11...fxe5 12.fxe5 0-0 13.0-0-0
Bb4 14.Ng5 Ne7 15.Bd3 Nf5 16.g4 h6 17.gxf5 hxg5 18.fxe6 Nxe5 19.dxe5
Qxe6 20.hxg5 Qxe5 21.Bd4 Bxc3 22.Bxc3 1-0. Diemer - Busca, simul Genf
1956] 12.Bd3 f5 13.0-0 Nd8 14.Na4 Qb4 15.Qxb4 Bxb4 16.Bd2
[16.Rfc1+/-] 16...Bxd2 17.Nxd2 Nc6 18.Nf3 Re8 19.Nc3 a6 20.a3 Nf8
[20...Nb6=] 21.g3 [21.Na4+/=] 21...h6 22.Kf2 Bd7 23.Ke3 Na5 [23...Re7=]
24.Nd2 b5 25.b3 Rec8 26.Rfc1 Kf7 27.b4 Nc4+ 28.Ke2 Nxd2 [28...Rcb8=]
29.Kxd2 Ke7 30.Na2 [A draw was agreed, but White appears to had the
better chances due to the better light-squared bishop after 30.a4+/- ] 1/2-1/2
25 - Hershey Action Alapin Diemer
Milton S. Hershey was a man who did great things for people. In the late
1800s Hershey worked in Pennsylvania making candy and ice cream. He got
many creative ideas from other people to improve his craft. In 1900 Mr.
Hershey decided to build a factory town. His employees would make
chocolate. I first visited there in 1974. You could smell the chocolate in the
air. I loved it.
At Halloween each year, millions of pieces of Hershey candy are purchased

by Americans and given away. I do not like to wait for Halloween myself. I
eat Hershey chocolate year round.
In addition to the chocolate factory in Hershey, Pennsylvania, there is also

many things to make it a community in which his employees would enjoy
living. There are attractive wide streets well decorated, a major teaching
hospital and good schools. Wikipedia notes: It is popularly called
"Chocolatetown, USA." Hershey is also referred to as "The Sweetest Place on
Earth."
Mr. Hershey also built an amusement park for his employees to enjoy. It is
now known as Hershey Park. At the park there is also a hockey arena and
football stadium.
Back in 1991 the chess club in Hershey held an Action Chess tournament
with 30-minute games. As I recall it was held on the south east side of town
either at or near a golf country club or a retirement center. I played some
really good tournaments and some really bad tournaments in those days. This
was a good one, so it is easy to write about.
I seem to recall that my son came with me to Hershey. I don't recall if Travis
played in that tournament. He was the only one of my kids who actually
played rated tournament chess.
My own opponent in the first round was Philip Rowe. His name reminded me
of the first tournament game I ever lost about 30 years before this. That was
to a David Rowe in Maine when we were in high school. Anyway, my first
round game in Hershey was an Alapin-Diemer Gambit of the French Defence
on which I wrote a book published by Thinkers' Press in 1995. Like all my
early books it sold out, but used copies are still floating around.
Sawyer - Rowe, Hershey, PA 1991 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e4 e6 3.Be3 Nf6 4.e5!
Nfd7 [4...Ne4? loses the knight to 5.f3 Qh4+ 6.g3 Nxg3 7.Bf2!+-] 5.f4!?
[5.Nf3 c5 6.c3 Nc6 7.Bd3 Qb6 8.Qc1+/=] 5...c5 6.c3 Nc6 7.Nf3 Qb6 8.Qd2
[White covers both the P/d4 and the P/b2. Unfortunately, the Queen
sometimes gets in the way on d2. How should White develop his N/b1?]
8...Be7 [8...a6 is practically a waste of time. 9.Bd3 cxd4 10.cxd4 Be7 11.Nc3
0-0 12.h4 f6 13.Qc2 g6 14.Bxg6 hxg6 15.Qxg6+ Kh8 16.Ng5! 1-0. Diemer -
Klauser, Le Locle 1958; Attacking the front of the pawn chain can lead to
8...f6 9.h4 h5 10.Bd3 f5 11.Ng5 Ne7 12.Na3 c4 13.Bxc4! dxc4 14.Nxc4 Qc6
15.Nd6+ Kd8 16.Nxe6# 1-0. Diemer - NN, simul Waldsee 1953] 9.Be2 0-0
[Black can try 9...cxd4 10.cxd4+/=] 10.0-0 f6 11.a3? [Ugly. White leaves a
huge hole at b3 under Black's control. 11.Na3!?] 11...a5 [Correct is
11...Na5!=/+] 12.a4 Qa7 13.Na3+/= b6 14.Nb5 Qb8 15.Kh1 Ba6 16.Rfe1
c4 17.Na3 Bxa3 18.bxa3 b5 19.axb5 Bxb5 20.Reb1 a4 21.Bd1 Ra5 22.Ra2
Qc7 23.Rab2 Rb8 24.Bc2 Rb7 25.Qd1 Qb8 26.h3 Ra6 27.Nd2 Rab6
[White suddenly shifts sides and attacks kingside.] 28.Qh5 f5 29.Nf3 Na5
30.g4 g6 31.Qh6 Nf8 32.gxf5 exf5 33.Rg1 Bd7 34.Rxb6 Rxb6 35.Bc1 Nb3
36.Be3 Na5 37.Bc1 Nb3 38.Be3 Na5 39.Nh4 Rb2 40.Bxf5 Bxf5 41.Nxf5
Qb7 42.Nd6 Qb3 43.Ne8 Ne6 44.Nf6+ Kf7 45.Qxh7+ Ng7 46.Qxg6+ 1-0
3.Be3 dxe4
Black initially accepts the gambit pawn.
26 - Doty Wins French Alapin
Elmo Doty sent me a nice game. He demonstrated the value of attacking play
at the middle levels of chess.
You do not have to play gambits, but you do have to attack to win in chess
against good players. The more you attack, the better you get at it.
Elmo chose the French Defence Alapin Gambit 3.Be3 dxe4. Doty sacrificed
material on e4, f3 and h6 leading to a nice checkmate.
Here is what Doty wrote:
“Hi Tim, I played my first tournament in ages last weekend at the Marshall,
and owe you (and your book) some credit for this victory in round 3 against
the French Defense.
“I came across your blog (which I quite enjoy), and thought I would share
this game. Obviously far from Master strength, but perhaps representative of
the kind of tactical themes white can develop if black captures on f3.
“So, thanks for exposing players to the Alapin Gambit. I'll keep at it until it
fails me. Warm Regards, Chris ('Elmo') Doty”
This game comes with a classic gambit bishop sacrifice of Bxh6 which is
typical of the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit and here in the Alapin-Diemer
Gambit.
We always enjoy gambits that end in checkmate!
Doty - Serota, Marshall Chess Club Under 1800 (3), 06.10.2012 begins 1.e4
e6 2.d4 d5 3.Be3 dxe4 4.f3 exf3 5.Nxf3 Nc6 6.Bd3 Nf6 7.0-0 Be7 8.c3 Bd7
9.Qe1 0-0 10.Qg3 Bd6 11.Qh4 Be7 12.Ne5 h6 ["needed 12...g6 instead" -
Doty] 13.Bxh6 gxh6 14.Qxh6 Nxe5 15.dxe5 Bc5+ 16.Kh1 Bc6 17.Qg5+
Kh8 18.exf6 Qxd3 19.Qg7# 1-0
27 - Paul Keres Plays 3.Be3
I always like Paul Keres. In his early years Keres lived in the country of
Estonia far from strong tournaments. To improve in chess he collected any
game he could find in the newspaper. He wrote them down in books.
Paul Keres turned to correspondence chess to improve his skills. Keres said
that in his youth he always chose the sharpest opening variations he could
find.
The unknown young Keres played the Alapin Diemer Gambit against the
French Defence with 3.Be3.
Black weakened his pawn structure to hold the pawn with 4...f5. The idea
may look bad, but it is fairly popular.
The ending of this game has been presented in several different ways and
with several different move orders.
I chose the one that makes the most sense to me and looks to be the most
reasonable finish.
Keres - Verbac, corr 1932 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Be3 dxe4 4.Nd2 f5 5.f3
exf3 [This helps lines White. One line Diemer faced as White repeatedly was
5...Nf6 6.fxe4 fxe4 7.Nh3 Bd6 8.Bc4 Qe7 9.0-0 0-0 10.Ng5 Kh8
11.Ndxe4+/-] 6.Ngxf3 Nf6 7.Bd3 [Here Alapin tried 7.Bc4 Nd5 8.Qe2 Be7
9.0-0-0 0-0 10.Rhg1 c6 11.g4 b5 12.Bb3 a5 13.c4-/+ Alapin - Noa, Dresden
1892] 7...c5 [If 7...Be7 8.Ne5 0-0 9.0-0 Nbd7 10.Ndf3 c6 11.c3 Qc7 12.Qe2
Bd6 13.Nc4= and 1-0 in 26. Szulmistrat-Munster, Corres. 1982] 8.0-0 cxd4
9.Nxd4 f4? [9...Nc6 10.Nxc6 bxc6 11.Qf3=] 10.Rxf4 e5 11.Bb5+ [Even
better is 11.Rxf6! gxf6 12.Qh5+ Ke7 13.Rf1+-] 11...Kf7 [11...Bd7 12.Ne6
exf4 13.Nxd8+/-] 12.Qh5+ g6 13.Bc4+ Kg7 14.Qh6+! [Brilliant! White
wins.] 14...Kxh6 15.Rh4+ Kg7 16.Bh6# 1-0
28 - Welcome Back Cotter
From 1975-1979 there was a classic television show called "Welcome Back,
Kotter". The sitcom was the story of a teacher who returned to his high
school to teach low-performing students like Kotter was himself when he was
a student 10 years prior.
Imagine someone who was a lower rated high school chess player. Ten years
later he returns after as a chess expert or master. Such teachers can be very
effective, because they can relate to the situations those teenage students are
facing.
My French Defence Alapin 3.Be3 dxe4 4.Nd2 game vs Norman Cotter

reminded me of that TV show. Note that the name of my opponent is spelled
differently than the famed TV character.
The French Defence Alapin-Diemer Gambit has four popular variations after
1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Be3:
A. 3...Nf6 4.e5 Nfd7 5.f4
B. 3...dxe4 4.Nd2 f5 5.f3
C. 3...dxe4 4.Nd2 Nf6 5.f3 Nd5 6.Qe2
D. 3...dxe4 4.Nd2 Nf6 5.f3 exf3 6.Ngxf3
Why do I play the French Alapin? Because I like playing lines that Black
does not know. Because I like winning some quick games. Because I have a
better performance rating with 3.Be3 than any other third move. Cotter
played an excellent game.
Sawyer (2112) - Cotter (1876), corr USCF 89N215, 10.08.1990 begins 1.d4
e6 2.e4 d5 3.Be3 dxe4 4.Nd2 f5 5.f3 Nc6 6.fxe4 Nxd4 7.Ngf3 Bc5 8.Bc4!?
[White has three alternatives worthy of consideration: 8.exf5, 8.c3 and
8.Bxd4] 8...Nxc2+ 9.Qxc2 Bxe3 10.exf5 exf5 11.0-0-0 Qf6 12.Rhe1 [12.Qb3
f4 13.Bxg8 Qc6+ 14.Bc4+/-] 12...f4 13.g3 Ne7 14.gxf4 Bxf4 15.Kb1 Bg4
16.Ne4 Qg6 17.Qd3 Bd6? [White's advantage would be smaller after 17...a6
18.h3 Bxf3 19.Qxf3 Rf8 20.Qd3+/-] 18.Nxd6+ [I missed a win with
18.Bb5+! Kd8 19.Ne5 Qf5 20.Nxd6 Qxd3+ 21.Rxd3+-] 18...cxd6 19.Qxg6+
hxg6 20.Rxd6 Bxf3 21.Rde6 0-0-0 22.Rxe7 Rxh2 23.Rxg7 Be4+ 24.Ka1
Bf5 25.a4 Rd7 26.Rg8+ Kc7 27.Be6 Re7 28.Rc1+ Kd6 29.Bxf5 gxf5
30.Rg6+ Kd5 31.Rd1+ Kc4 32.Rf1 Rf7 33.Rg5 Kb3 34.Rf3+ Kxa4
35.Rfxf5 Rxf5 36.Rxf5 b5 37.Rf4+ b4 38.Ka2 1/2-1/2
29 - Diebert Wins 4.Nd2 f5
Charles M. Diebert won a game in the French Defence Alapin-Diemer
Gambit with 3.Be3. At the time this game was played, Diebert was the most
successful BDG player in the USA. He defeated several masters with the
Blackmar-Diemer.
The National Master Charles Diebert of Columbus, Ohio wrote the book,
"The Blackmar-Diebert Gambit" published in 1991.
I order a copy directly from Chuck Diebert when it was new. He wrote me a
nice note when I bought the book from him.
Diebert starts college the same year I did. Charles began his chess career with
22 straight rated losses. Shortly after that, he discovered the Blackmar-
Diemer Gambit.
After the book was written, Charles Diebert went on to play other openings.
In his prime Diebert was rated about 2400 both with and without the
Blackmar-Diemer Gambit.
On this occasion, Diebert played the Alapin French Defence against Terence
W. Niehoff.
Diebert (2396) - Niehoff (2300), US Amateur Team Midwest 1987 begins

1.d4 d5 2.e4 e6 3.Be3 dxe4 4.Nd2 f5 5.f3 Nc6 6.c3 exf3 [Interesting is the
Pachman idea of 6...e5 7.dxe5 Nxe5 8.fxe4 Nd3+ 9.Bxd3 Qxd3 but White
can play 10.Qh5+! g6 11.Qe2 Qxe2+ 12.Nxe2=; 6...Nf6 7.fxe4 fxe4 8.Bg5 e3
9.Bxe3 e5 10.Ngf3 and 1-0 in 23. Chance - Armstead, USCF Corres.
1992/93] 7.Ngxf3 Nf6 [Or 7...Bd6 8.Nc4= with compensation for a pawn.]
8.Bc4 [If 8.Bd3?! e5!=/+] 8...Nd5 9.Qe2 Be7 10.0-0 0-0 11.Rae1 [The
creative attacking master Janowski ventured 11.a3 Bf6 12.Rad1 a6 13.Ba2 b5
14.Nb3= and 1-0 in 40. Janowski - Corzo, Habana 1913] 11...Bf6 12.g3
[Diebert liked this idea. The alternative is 12.Bf2= ] 12...Kh8 13.Bf4 Nce7
[13...Nxf4 14.gxf4 Qd6=/+] 14.Ng5 Nxf4 15.gxf4 Bxg5 16.fxg5 Nd5 17.Qh5
h6 [17...b5 18.Bb3=] 18.Nf3 Nf4 19.Qh4 Ng6 20.Qg3 Re8 21.Kh1 Qd6
22.Re5 [22.Qh3!+/-] 22...Nf8 [22...Re7 23.gxh6+/=] 23.Qh4 [23.gxh6! g6
24.h4+-] 23...Bd7 [23...Qd8 24.Qg3+/-] 24.gxh6 Bc6 25.hxg7+ Kxg7
26.Rg1+ Ng6 27.Qh5 Bxf3+ 28.Qxf3 Kf6 29.Qg3 Qc6+ 30.Bd5 1-0
30 - Chandler Finds French Targets
Bill Chandler won a classic mating attack with the French Defence Alapin-
Diemer Gambit (3.Be3).
This was Chandler's step by step plan of attack:

Step 1: Develop his own pieces rapidly.
Step 2: Aim at targets near the opponent's king.
Step 3: Rip open the defense in front of opponent's king.
Step 4: Make continual mate threats.
Step 5: Checkmate opponent's king.
White's play was not perfect; the move 9.Ne5 seems premature. Because of
this, Black had some chances that he missed. But Bill Chandler's boldness
was richly rewarded.
Andy Soltis points out that a master always looks for targets. It is only one
aspect about being a chess master, but it is a very important one!
Here Bill Chandler shows a touch of master. He plays below as the ICC
handle "Attaqarax".
Attaqarax - MaMi98, ICC 5 0 Internet Chess Club, 07.04.2012 begins 1.e4

e6 2.d4 d5 3.Be3 dxe4 4.Nd2 b6 5.f3 [Of course there is nothing wrong with
5.Nxe4 but White plans a BDG-style attack with an open f-file.] 5...exf3
6.Ngxf3 Bb7 7.Bd3 Nf6 8.0-0 Be7 9.Ne5!? [Often White prefers to protect
d4 with 9.c3 before launching the attack. The alternative is 9.Qe1 0-0 when
White can choose between 10.Qh4 or 10.Bg5] 9...0-0 10.Rxf6 Bxf6 11.Qh5
h6 [11...g6-+] 12.Bxh6 gxh6? [12...Qxd4+ 13.Kh1 Qxe5-+] 13.Qxh6 Qxd4+
14.Kh1 Be4 [The only good move for Black is 14...Qh4 but White still has a
promising attack after 15.Bh7+ Kh8 16.Qxf8+ Kxh7 17.Qxf7+ Bg7 18.Qg6+
Kh8 19.Ndf3 Bxf3 20.Qe8+ Kh7 21.Nxf3 Qf4 22.Re1 e5 23.Qh5+ Kg8
24.Ng5 Qf6 25.Qe8+ Bf8 26.h4+-] 15.Bxe4 Qxe4 16.Nxe4 Bxe5 17.Ng5 Bf4
18.Qh7# Black checkmated 1-0
31 - Jocelyn Bond vs Tremblay
Jocelyn Bond sent this on a French Diemer-Alapin game:
“Now is a more serious BDG game!!!
“Hello Tim, I just began this summer event, the Jonquiere club championship
in Quebec province in Canada.
“In the second of twelve rounds (2 games a week against the same player)
each 6 Wednesday night game in June and July months) I won as White with
a big attack in an Alapin Diemer French in just 21 moves. It's an interesting
game.
“I surprised my opponent {Tremblay} who laughed at me when I played the

first moves of the game, but less some moves later (he he).
“The control time is 30 minutes to do mate in this event. Actually I lead in

the event 2 wins in a row! Thanks for the publication!”
I enjoy publishing the games of readers. Jocelyn Bond of Canada sent me

many games.
Jocelyn Bond, (1957) - Serge Tremblay (1500), Jonquiere club

championship (2), 27.06.2012 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e4 e6 3.Be3 dxe4 4.f3 [4.Nd2
is the alternative 4...Nf6 5.f3 etc.] 4...Nf6 5.Nd2 Nc6 [5...c5!? 6.dxc5 Qc7 is
possible ] 6.c3 exf3 7.Ngxf3 Bd6 [7...Nd5!? Or 7...Be7] 8.Bd3 h6 (?!) 9.0–0
a6?! 10.Qe2 0–0 11.Ne4 [11.Nc4] 11...Re8?? [Hum, not that; 11...Nd5!?
Deep Fritz.] 12.Nxf6+! (wins) 12…Qxf6? [12...gxf6 is unappetizing] 13.Ne5
Qh4 [or 13...Bxe5 14.Rxf6 Bxf6+-] 14.Rf4 Qd8 [14...Qg5 15.Nxf7] 15.Nxf7
Qd7 [15...Bxf4 16.Nxd8 +-] 16.Nxd6 [a difficult choice to do: 16.Nxh6 was
a big temptation but 16..gh 17.Qg4 and now I saw 17...Qg7 so I played the
risk zero move 16.Nxd6] 16...cxd6 17.Qh5 e5? 18.Bc4+ d5 19.Bxd5+!
[Deviation: e8] 19...Qxd5? [19...Re6 20.Bxe6+ Qxe6+ covering e8 square]
20.Qxe8+ Kh7 21.Rf8! [the mate will come] 1–0. [Notes by Jocelyn Bond
and Deep Fritz (30 minutes to do mate)]
32 - Heisman Trophy Winner
It is always a nice trophy to win that rare game vs a master, even if it is only
in blitz or in a simultaneous exhibition. Here I beat the renowned chess
teacher Daniel Heisman. In his teaching, Dan mentions the value of playing
tricky openings. Heisman cites the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit as a good
option for the White pieces.
My original BDG Keybook Introduction (from 1992) began with:

“Welcome to the exciting and entertaining world of the Blackmar-Diemer
Gambit! This is an opening system where White wins. He wins often and he
wins quickly. USCF Master Dan Heisman once told me of a statistical
analysis of chess openings that gave the BDG the top scoring percentage -
85% for White.”
Dan Heisman referenced the 1950s Blue Book of chess. Years later I
purchased a copy. In the 1950s a large number of known BDGs were the best
games of Diemer. Those stats of published games were one sided. Still it is
fun to be number one on the list.
This blitz game shows how defending an Alapin-Diemer attack can easily get
out of hand. Tricky openings are dangerous for the defender. White attacked
the king. Black dropped the queen!
Sawyer (1981) - Heisman (2250), Hatboro, PA 1989 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.f3
d5 3.e4 e6 [Dan chooses to go into a French. 3...dxe4 4.Nc3 =BDG] 4.Be3!?
[4.e5= is objectively the strongest move.] 4...dxe4 [We now have an Alapin
French, also known as the Alapin-Diemer.] 5.Nd2 [The main line to this
position is 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Be3 dxe4 4.Nd2 Nf6 5.f3.] 5...c5 6.c3 cxd4
7.cxd4 Nc6 8.Bb5 [White has to develop the kingside pieces and Bd3 does
not work at the moment.] 8...exf3 9.Ngxf3 Be7 10.Bg5 0-0 11.0-0 a6 12.Bd3
[Objectively Black must be better here. White wasted two tempi to get his
bishops at the great squares Bg5 and Bd3. Possibly the d4 pawn can be safely
taken, but this is a blitz game. Black can chose to avoid undo risk a few
seconds ago on move 3.] 12...Qc7?! 13.Rc1 [White is fully developed.]
13...Nd5?! 14.Qe1!? [Down a pawn, White tries to make something happen
by heading toward h4.] 14...Bd7?? [14...f6!? 15.Qe4 f5 16.Qh4 unclear]
15.Qh4+- Nf6? 16.Ne5!? h6 17.Bxf6 Bxf6 18.Rxf6 Qd6 19.Ndf3!? Ne7?
20.Rxh6 gxh6 21.Qxh6 Nf5 22.Bxf5 exf5 23.Qxd6 [Whoops.] 1-0
33 - Whitaker vs Heidenfeld
Norman Whitaker won a French Defence in much the same way that Semyon
Alapin himself played 3.Be3. He chose 5.c3.
At the Downeast Open in Portland, Maine during the summer of 1973

Norman Whitaker was the first International Master I ever met personally.
Whitaker played on the upper boards. I played on the lower boards.
It was one of my worst tournaments, but I learned some very important

lessons. I kept no recorded games from that event. Still, I remember that I
made a rare opening blunder. Ouch.
The Black pieces in this French Defence was played by the notable master
Wolfgang Heidenfeld. Back in 1959 Heidenfeld had played White in a
Huebsch Gambit against Kirby. Here Whitaker played a persistent attack and
won in the end.
Whitaker (2300) - Heidenfeld (2400), Lugano 1968 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5

3.Be3 dxe4 4.Nd2 Nf6 5.c3 Nbd7 [Black sets a trap with 5...Be7 6.Qc2 Nd5!
7.Nxe4 (Not 7.Qxe4? f5 8.Qf3 f4 9.Bxf4 0-0 10.g3 g5-/+ and 0-1 in 29.
Kemna - Geveke, Germany 1986) 7...f5 8.Nc5 Bxc5 9.dxc5 Nxe3 10.fxe3=]
6.Qc2 b6 [Interesting is 6...Nd5 7.Nxe4 (7.Qxe4=) 7...Nxe3 8.fxe3 Qh4+
9.g3 Qh6 10.0-0-0!? Qxe3+ 11.Kb1=; 6...c5 suggested by Keres and Minev
can be met simply by 7.Nxe4=] 7.Nxe4 [If 7.g3 Be7 8.Bg2 Nd5=] 7...Bb7
8.Bd3 [Another idea is 8.Nxf6+ Nxf6 9.Bb5+!?= and 1-0 in 33. Arnold -
Gatzke, Germany 1981] 8...Be7 9.Nf3 Nxe4 10.Bxe4 Bxe4 11.Qxe4 0-0
12.h4 Nf6 13.Qc2 Qd5 14.Ng5?! [14.0-0=] 14...h6 [It looks risky, but it
appears the position can be defended after 14...Qxg2! 15.0-0-0 Qd5 16.Rdg1
c5-/+ and Black is up a pawn.] 15.f3 b5 16.Ne4 e5 17.dxe5 Qxe5 18.Bd4
Qe6 19.Bxf6 Bxf6 20.0-0-0 Rfd8 21.Qb3 Rxd1+ 22.Rxd1 Bxh4 23.Qxe6
fxe6 24.Rd7 Re8 [24...Rc8 25.Kc2+/=] 25.g3 [25.Rxc7+/-] 25...Bd8 26.Kd2
Kh7 27.g4 Kg6 28.Ke2 Rg8 29.Nc5 c6 30.f4 h5 [30...Bb6 31.Nxe6 Kf6
32.Nd4+/=] 31.gxh5+ Kxh5 32.Nxe6 Bb6 33.Kf3 Kg6 34.Rd6 Kf7 35.Rxc6
Ke7 36.Nd4 Kd7 37.Rg6 b4 38.f5 bxc3 39.bxc3 Ke7 [39...Bc5 40.Ne6+-]
40.f6+ Kf7 41.Rxg7+ Rxg7 42.fxg7 Kxg7 43.Ke4 Kf7 44.Kd5 Ke7 45.Kc6
Kd8 46.Kb7 Kd7 47.Nb5 Bc7 48.Nxa7 1-0
34 - Tiger Alapin Diemer
In 1995 I wrote a book on the Alapin Diemer Gambit which was called the
“Alapin French: Tactics for White”. It is a fun gambit for those who take
chess as a game and not too serious.
The French Defence is an opening with well-known time tested methods of

development. After 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 (in whatever move order), White has
good knight moves such as 3.Nc3 and 3.Nd2. There are reasonable pawn
moves like 3.e5 and 3.exd5.
The bishop moves receive little comment in theory. My friend Ray Haines
likes the solid 3.Bd3 and Alapin played the gambit line 3.Be3!? Later Emil J.
Diemer revived the idea of 3.Be3!? There is no big difference for me. My
own personal performance rating is about the same, no matter which third
move I choose.
The Alapin French is basically a slower Blackmar-Diemer Gambit. If your

opponent does not counter sharply, then White is blessed with a great game.
In this game Tiger of Chess as Black ultimately declines the gambit by 5...b6.
So I did a dangerous thing. I grabbed a tiger by the tail. This time I survived
and won.
In 2014 I intentionally goofed off all year playing a lot of fast blitz games in
speculative lines vs lower rated players. Often I won. Then at the end of the
year my life changed with the death of my co-worker friend Ronnie Taylor.
In 2015 there was little time for chess. Pressure at work became serious. My
health deteriorated. Finally I chose to retire. By 2016 chess was fun again.
Sawyer - TIGEROFCHESS (1682), ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club,

14.09.2014 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e4 e6 3.Be3 dxe4 4.Nd2 Nf6 5.f3 b6?! [A
critical line is 5...Nd5 6.Qe2 Nc6 7.c3 exf3 8.Ngxf3 Be7=/+] 6.fxe4 Bb7
7.Bd3 Be7 8.Ngf3 Nbd7 9.0-0 c5 10.e5 Ng8? [10...Nd5=] 11.c3 a6 12.Qe2
b5 13.Be4 Qc7 14.Bxb7 Qxb7 15.Ng5 Nh6 [15...cxd4 16.Nxf7 dxe3
17.Nb3+/-] 16.Nge4 [The best way to continue is 16.Qh5!+-] 16...c4? [Black
missed the good move 16...Nf5! 17.Bg5!+/= when White is only a little
better.] 17.Bxh6 gxh6 18.Qf3 0-0-0 19.Qxf7 Bg5? 20.Nd6+ Black resigns 1-
0
35 - Rookmagier vs Alapin
The Alapin-Diemer French Defence is both exciting and stupid, both
rewarding and ugly. Boldness is required from both sides.
White is sacrificing a pawn in what often turns out to be a Blackmar-Diemer

Gambit down a tempo. But with the slightest slip in unfamiliar territory,
White has a good or great game.
The best way for Black to get an advantage is to accept the gambit on move
three and counter-attack quickly. Naturally aggressive players prefer the
Sicilian or Open Game, a small point in White's favor with the Alapin.
In a blitz game, there is little time for perfect play, especially in gambits.
Here in a three minute game vs "Rookmagier", we see a French Defence
Alapin 5.f3 where Black allows White to regain his gambit pawn. In the brief
rough and tumble, evaluations moved back and forth between equality and an
advantage for Black. Both of us missed chances on the board, but to his credit
"Rookmagier" plays faster than I do. He was ahead on the clock when we
agreed to a draw by repetition after move 40.
Sawyer (2021) - Rookmagier (1837), ICC 3 0 u Internet Chess Club,

21.07.2013 begins 1.d4 e6 2.e4 d5 3.Be3 dxe4 4.Nd2 Nf6 5.f3 b6 [The main
line is 5...exf3 6.Ngxf3 Be7 7.Bd3 0-0 8.0-0 =] 6.fxe4 Bb7 7.Bd3 Be7
8.Ngf3 0-0 9.0-0 Nbd7 10.Bg5 [10.Qe2=] 10...c5 11.e5? [11.Qe1=] 11...Nd5
[11...Ng4!=/+] 12.Bxe7 Qxe7 13.Qe2 cxd4 [13...Nf4=/+] 14.Ne4 [14.Qe4]
14...Nc5 [14...Nf4-/+] 15.Nxc5? [Chances are equal after 15.Nxd4! Rad8
16.c3 Nxd3 17.Qxd3=] 15...bxc5 16.Qe4 g6 17.h4 Nb4 [I expected 17...Ne3-
+] 18.Qg4? [18.Qf4 Bxf3 19.Rxf3 Nd5-/+] 18...Nxd3 [18...c4!-+] 19.cxd3
Bxf3 20.Rxf3 f5 21.exf6 Rxf6 22.Rh3 Raf8 23.Re1 [After I moved I noticed
I was in trouble on the clock: 1:36-2:11] 23...Qd6 24.h5 e5 25.hxg6 Rxg6
26.Qh5 Qe7 27.Qxe5 Qf7 28.Kh2 Qf2 29.Qd5+ Rf7 30.Re8+ Kg7 31.Re6
Qf4+ 32.Kg1 Qf2+ 33.Kh2 Rxe6 34.Qxe6 Qf4+ 35.Rg3+ Kh8 36.Qc8+
Rf8 37.Qxc5 [37.Qe6=] 37...Qh4+ [37...Rg8!-+ picks off the rook.] 38.Rh3
[If 38.Kg1!+/- White stands better on the board but behind on the clock.]
38...Qf4+ 39.Rg3 [Another drawing line is 39.Kg1 Qf1+ 40.Kh2=]
39...Qh4+?! 40.Rh3?! Qf4+ [Clocks: 0:23-0.37. Game drawn by mutual
agreement] 1/2-1/2
36 - Alapin vs Andy Debaets
In 1995 Thinkers' Press published my book on the Alapin French 3.Be3!?
This is also called the Alapin-Diemer Gambit. Usually I played 3.Nc3, but I
had a lot of success with 3.Be3. This was especially true in the pre-Fritz
chess engine computer days.
Obviously after 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Be3!? dxe4, Black has accepted a gambit
pawn. White has four typical methods of play: 4.c3; 4.f3; 4.Nc3/5.f3 and
main line 4.Nd2/5.f3 (see our game below). The full acceptance is 4.Nd2 Nf6
5.f3 exf3 6.Ngf3 and now Be7/Be7/Nbd7 7.Bd3/8.0-0 or 8.Bg5 intending a
possible 0-0-0. For those who do not wish to accept the gambit, 3.Be3 Nf6
4.e5 Nfd7 with typical French Defence play.
I made it to the mountain top with a master 2200 rating following 26 postal
chess wins in a row. The USCF sent me a certificate as a USCF Postal
Master. Then I descended. My game against Andy Debaets (rated 1844)
raised my postal rating back up to 2195. I was able to climb the mountain
again and reach 2200. It might be easy for some, but it was hard for me to get
there.
Sawyer - Debaets, corr USCF 88N300, 16.04.1990 begins 1.d4 e6 2.e4 d5

3.Be3 dxe4 4.Nd2 Nf6 5.f3 Nd5 6.Qe2 c5 7.dxc5 Qa5 [Black might consider
7...exf3 8.Ngxf3 Nd7 9.Ne4! Qc7 10.Bd4+=; The Bishop could be captured
immediately 7...Nxe3 8.Qxe3 Qa5 9.0-0-0!?] 8.c3 Nxe3 9.Qxe3 Bxc5
10.Qxe4 Qc7 [Weaker is 10...Bxg1? 11.Rxg1 Qb6 12.0-0-0 Nd7 13.Be2 Nf6
14.Qh4 Qa5 15.Nc4 Qxa2 16.Nd6+ Kf8 17.Qb4 a5 18.Qc5 Nd7 19.Nxc8+
Nxc5 20.Rd8# 1-0. Diebert - Bath, Columbus 1983] 11.0-0-0 Nc6 [After a
long struggle White obtained a winning advantage for the endgame:] 12.Bd3
f5 13.Qh4 0-0 14.Ne2 Ne5 15.Bc2 b5 16.Kb1 Ng6 17.Qe1 e5 18.Nb3 Be7
19.g3 a5 20.f4 Bb7 21.Rf1 a4 22.Nbc1 Be4 [22...a3!-/+] 23.fxe5 Bxc2+
24.Kxc2 a3 25.b3 Bc5 26.Nd3 Nxe5 27.Nxc5 Qxc5 28.Nf4 Ng4 29.Ne6
Ne3+ 30.Kc1 Qb6 31.Nxf8 Rxf8 32.Qf2 Qh6 33.Qd2 Nxf1 [33...Qb6=]
34.Qxh6 gxh6 35.Rxf1 Re8 36.Rf2 [36.Kd2!+/-] 36...Kg7 37.b4 Kg6
38.Kc2 Kg5 39.Kb3 Re3 40.Rc2 [40.Rd2+/-] 40...h5 41.Kxa3 h4 42.Kb3
hxg3 43.hxg3 Rxg3? [43...Rg4=] 44.a4 bxa4+ 45.Kxa4 f4 46.b5 f3 47.b6
Kh4 48.b7 Rg8 49.Ka5 Kg3 50.c4 f2 51.Rxf2 Kxf2 52.c5 h5 53.c6 h4 54.c7
h3 55.b8Q Rxb8 56.cxb8Q Kg2 57.Qb2+ 1-0
37 - King Value Van Valkenburg
King safety is the top priority in chess since losing the king loses the game.
You must keep your own king safe and make your opponent’s king as unsafe
as possible. Castling is wise. This move removes the king from the center
where the most armies congregate.
In my long game vs Todd Van Valkenburg from the 1989 USCF Golden
Knights Postal Chess Tournament, we transposed into a French Defence.
After 3.Be3 dxe4 4.Nd2 Nf6 5.f3, we were in the Alapin-Diemer Gambit
where Black has two principle options: take on f3 with 5...exf3 or first, as
was played below, attack the hanging Be3 with 5...Nd5.
Van Valkenburg chose 6...Be7!? This allowed me to regain my gambit pawn

with 7.fxe4. When he did not castle a few moves later, Black's position
became very difficult to play.
Black dropped a piece which disappeared on move 22 and his king was
checkmated 22 moves later.
Sawyer - Van Valkenburg, corr USCF 1991 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e4 e6 3.Be3
dxe4 4.Nd2 Nf6 5.f3 Nd5 [The Alapin-Diemer Gambit Accepted usually
continues 5...exf3 6.Ngxf3 Be7 7.Bd3 0-0 8.0-0] 6.Qe2 Be7!? [6...Nxe3
7.Qxe3 exf3 8.Ngxf3=] 7.fxe4 Nxe3 8.Qxe3 Bg5 9.Qd3 Bxd2+ 10.Kxd2
Nc6 [Castling here with 10...0-0= would have prevented some of the troubles
that hounded Black later.] 11.Nf3 Nb4?! 12.Qb5+ Nc6 13.c3 a6 14.Qh5 g6
[14...0-0 15.Bd3+/=] 15.Qh6 e5 16.Qg7 Ke7? [Black has to try 16...Rf8
17.Nxe5 Qg5+ 18.Kc2 Nxe5 19.Qxe5+ Qxe5 20.dxe5 Ke7= when White's
extra double e-pawn is not all that helpful.] 17.Nxe5 Nxe5 18.Qxe5+ Be6
[This drops a full piece in a very difficult position. After this everything is
downhill for Black. 18...Kd7 19.Kc2 Rf8 20.Bd3+-] 19.d5 Rg8 20.Kc2 Qd6
21.Qxd6+ cxd6 22.dxe6 fxe6 23.Be2 b5 24.Rad1 Rad8 25.Rhf1 h5 26.Rf2
Rgf8 27.Rxf8 Rxf8 28.Rf1 Rxf1 29.Bxf1 h4 30.a4 bxa4 31.Bxa6 g5 32.Bb5
d5 33.exd5 exd5 34.Bxa4 Kf6 35.b4 g4 36.b5 Kf5 37.b6 Kf4 38.b7 Ke3
39.b8Q Kf2 40.Bd7 Kxg2 41.Bxg4 h3 42.Qg3+ Kf1 43.Bf5 d4 44.Bd3# 1-0
38 - Muir in Alapin 5…Nd5
Ted Bullockus played the Alapin-Diemer variation of the French Defence
(1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Be3!?). My own book on the Alapin French was published
in 1995 by Thinkers' Press (Bob Long & his Chessco Company).
Unfortunately for Ted Bullockus, my book was published just before Ken
Smith of Chess Digest was planning to publish a Bullockus book on the same
gambit. When my book came out, Ken Smith decided there was not enough
market for two books on this gambit. Smith pulled the plug on the Bullockus
project. Very sad. I am sure Ted's book would have been excellent.
Fortunately this is no longer a problem. The old book stores had limited shelf
space. Most books were available for one to three months. If they did not sell,
they pulled them from the shelves. They did not replace them. Today online
space is unlimited. Books can sell forever, even if only one at a time.
In this game Bob Muir avoids the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit with the French
Defence. In this case I responded with the Alapin-Diemer Gambit 3.Be3 dxe4
4.Nd2 Nf6 5.f3.
My old buddy Bob Muir went after my unprotected Be3 with 5...Nd5. This is
a good alternative to the main line 5...exf3.
We castled opposite sides. Normally the proper strategy in such situations is

to push pawns toward the opponent's king. This worked wonders for me. I
was given a present, a marvelous gift: the checkmate of his king by my pawn.
Sawyer (2010) - Muir (1800), Williamsport, PA 01.1998 begins 1.d4 d5

2.e4 e6 3.Be3 dxe4 4.Nd2 Nf6 5.f3 [Alapin used to play 5.c3!?] 5...Nd5
[This is a good alternative to the main line, which runs 5...exf3 6.Ngxf3 Be7
7.Bd3 0-0 8.0-0] 6.Qe2 exf3 7.Ngxf3 Bd6 8.Ne4 0-0 9.0-0-0 Qe7 10.c4 Nf4
11.Qf2 Ng6 12.c5 Bf4 13.h4 c6 14.h5 Bxe3+ 15.Qxe3 Nh8 16.Bd3 Nd7
[16...f6 17.Nd6+/-] 17.g4 e5 18.Neg5 Nf6 19.Qxe5 Qd7 20.Qxf6 gxf6
[Trying to get the knight out of the corner also loses. 20...Ng6 21.Nxh7 gxf6
22.Nxf6+ Kg7 23.Nxd7 Bxd7 24.hxg6 fxg6 25.Ne5+-] 21.Bxh7+ Kg7
22.h6# 1-0
39 - Peter Webster 5.f3 Nd5
Peter Webster won a French Defence in the 3.Be3 Alapin Diemer Gambit. In
the 1970s and 1980s Peter was one of Wisconsin's strongest masters.
Webster is a long time Blackmar-Diemer Gambit player. Peter also played

the Alapin Gambit, as well as the BDG, in a slightly different way than many
gambiteers, i.e. he often castled on the queenside.
Although his variations appear less popular, remember Peter Webster played
many games before there was any book knowledge available. And, there is
the wisdom of more than twenty years in Webster's selections.
Because of Peter Webster's geographical location in small town Wisconsin,

he doubtless has played the same lines against the same players year after
year. Therefore, he can rarely benefit from the "surprise" factor of his
gambits.
Thus, Peter Webster played at a disadvantage which may have kept his
master rating somewhat lower than it would otherwise have been.
Here Webster’s opponent was T. Moore. The players castled on opposite

sides. Then they commenced the race to attack their opponent's King. White
won in fine fashion.
Webster - Moore, Janesville, WI 1979 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e4 e6 3.Be3 dxe4

4.Nd2 Nf6 5.f3 Nd5 6.Qe2 Nxe3 7.Qxe3 exf3 8.Ngxf3 Be7 9.Bd3 Nd7 10.0-
0-0 Nf6 11.Ne5 0-0 [Another try is 11...Nd5 12.Qf3 0-0 13.Rhf1 f5 with
chances for both sides in Bullockus - Velasco, American Open 1976]
12.Rhf1 c5 13.dxc5 Qd5 [Black is still in the game with 13...Qa5=] 14.Nb3
Qxg2 15.Rg1 Nd5 16.Qd4 [White has many ways to win. Another is
16.Bxh7+! Kh8 17.Rxd5+-] 16...Qh3?! [16...Qxh2 17.Rxg7+!+-] 17.Rxg7+
Kxg7 18.Rg1+ Kh6 19.Ng4+ Kh5 20.Qg7 Bg5+ 21.Kb1 h6 22.Qxf8
[22.Nxh6!+- leads to mate in a few moves.] 22...f5 23.Nxh6 Qe3 24.Rxg5+
[Or 24.Be2+ Qxe2 25.Nf7+-] 24...Qxg5 25.Be2+ Kg6 26.Nf7 Qe7 [If
26...Qg1+ 27.Nc1 Qxh2 28.Qg8+ Kf6 29.Nd6+-] 27.Qg8+ Kf6 28.Qh8+ 1-0
In this section Black fully accepts the Alapin-Diemer Gambit. Play resembles
a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit.
40 - King in the Corner Pocket
Good gambits have typical combinations. Such moves flow from repeatable
recognizable patterns. Here is one from the French Defence in the Alapin-
Diemer Gambit. The same idea I used many times in the Blackmar-Diemer
Gambit, Euwe Variation.
The Alapin line costs White one tempo for the Bc1-e3-g5 moves. However, if
Black does not hit back hard and fast, the tempo does not matter much.
My opponent was rated below me and this was a 3 0 blitz game. Thus
everything was played very quickly. The whole game was probably
completed in one minute.
Black’s moves 6...b6 and 7...Bb7 were fine logical developing moves.
However the only impact these moves had on this game was to cost Black
two tempi in the defense of the kingside.
The move ...h6 made an easy target. Once stripped naked of his defenses, the
Black king had nowhere to escape. He tried to hide behind the White bishop,
but checkmate followed.
Sawyer - Finiseur, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 01.05.2012 begins 1.d4 e6

2.e4 d5 3.Be3!? dxe4 4.Nd2 Nf6 5.f3 exf3 6.Ngxf3 b6 [There are many
playable 6th move options. The only line at this point where Black has a
winning record is 6...Nbd7 7.Bd3 c5 and even here White has some
compensation.] 7.Bd3 Bb7 8.0-0 Be7 9.Bg5 Nbd7 10.Qe1 0-0 11.Qh4
[When I reach this position in a blitz game, I feel my chances of success are
very high.] 11...h6 [11...Re8 is forced. 12.Ne5 Nxe5 13.dxe5 Qd5 14.Nf3
Bc5+ 15.Kh1 Ne4 16.Bh6! gxh6 17.Rae1 Qd8 18.Qg4+ Kh8 19.Bxe4 Rg8
20.Qf4=] 12.Bxh6 gxh6 13.Qxh6 Re8 [13...Nc5 14.dxc5 Qd5 15.Nb3 Rad8
16.Rae1+/-] 14.Ng5 Bf8 15.Bh7+ Kh8 16.Nxf7# Black is checkmated 1-0
41 - Jeremy Katz Best Alapin
Jeremy Katz of Brooklyn, New York was rated 2256 in USCF postal at the
time of this game. Suffice it to say that Katz was a very good postal chess
player. I myself was often listed among the top APCT players years ago. I
had played Board 4 for the 10th World Correspondence Chess Olympiad
1982-84 US team, was a USCF Postal Master off and on in 1990, and won an
ICCF Master Class section 1995-97.
I tend to play chess more by instinct and pattern recognition than by analysis.
Of course, often in my correspondence play, like in the game below, I had to
make very specific calculations.
Against the French Defence, White can choose from several good third
moves. Below is a beautiful little game played in BDG style. Some come to
the BDG after years of playing against the French after 1.e4 and feel
comfortable with whatever they have been playing. I played all four common
responses, 3.Nc3, 3.Nd2, 3.e5 and 3.exd5, as well as the offbeat and risky
3.Be3!? Alapin French. My performance with 3.Be3 has been slightly higher.
Sawyer (1993) - Katz (2256), corr USCF 89NS61, 28.07.1991 begins 1.d4
d5 2.e4 e6 [We reached a very normal and popular French Defence.] 3.Be3
dxe4 [Consider the psychology at work. Most French Defense players do not
capture 3...dxe4 in other lines. They provoke the e4 pawn to advance to e5;
but the e-pawn is just hanging there. If Black wants to refute this gambit, he
must make the capture now. Anything else gives White at least equality, and
usually the better position with equal material.] 4.Nd2 Nf6 5.f3 exf3 6.Ngxf3
Be7 7.Bd3 b6 8.0-0 Bb7 9.Bg5 [No longer needed on e3, the Bishop
redeploys to g5 where it threatens to capture on f6 leaving h7 less defended.]
9...0-0 10.Qe1 [This prepares Qh4 with combinations on h7 and f6.] 10...c5
11.Qh4 [White has compensation for the pawn and practical chances.]
11...h6 [Black challenges White to attack or slink away.] 12.Bxh6 [When
Black combines kingside castling with a pawn on h6, I capture that pawn and
rip open the protection of Black's king.] 12...gxh6 13.Qxh6 Qd5 14.g4!
[Black missed this winning pawn advance which takes h5 away from the
Black Queen and threatens to dislodge the Knight on f6.] 14...cxd4 15.g5
Nbd7 16.gxf6 Nxf6 17.Kh1 Qh5 18.Rg1+ 1-0
42 - Alapin Wins Again
In this French Defence Alapin-Diemer 5.f3 exf3 my White pieces reach their
ideal squares for a powerful kingside mating attack.
Such positions have been determined from hundreds of games in the

Blackmar-Diemer Gambit Euwe.
After move 14 here are my pieces:
My queen is Qh4 attacking h7 and f6.
My bishops are on Bd3 attacking h7 and Bg5 attacking f6.
My knights are on Nd2 covering e4 and f3 while my knight on Nf3 eyes g5

or e5.
My rooks are on Rf1 aiming at f6 and Rd1 adding extra protection for my
knight, bishop and d-pawn.
Often in the French Alapin, reaching these hoped for squares is difficult
because White is one or two tempi behind the BDG.
Here Black was too slow to fight back. I threatened to win the Exchange with
16.Bxh7+.
Black decides to redeploy his d7-knight, forgetting its important need to

protect f6. The Nf6 falls and that's all she wrote.
Sawyer - xsf, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 18.03.2013 begins 1.d4 e6 2.e4
d5 3.Be3 dxe4 4.Nd2 Nf6 5.f3 [The f3 gambit was Diemer's approach, while
5.c3 with the idea of Qc2 was Alapin's idea.] 5...exf3 [5...Nd5 6.Qe2 Nc6=/+]
6.Ngxf3 b6 7.Bd3 Bb7 8.0-0 Be7 9.Qe1 Nbd7 10.c3 c5 11.Rd1 Qc7 [My
pieces lean toward the kingside. When Black sets up to castle queenside, I
throw in my next move to make him think I can easily attack him if he castles
long. Probably he should just go after my dark squared bishop.] 12.a4 0-0
[12...Ng4-/+] 13.Bg5 Rad8 14.Qh4 cxd4 15.cxd4 Nb8? [Retreating the
knight drops a piece. The threat was 16.Bxh7+ Nxh7 17.Bxe7 winning the
Exchange. In interesting try would be 15...h5 when White might try 16.Nc4
or 16.Ne4] 16.Bxf6 Black resigns 1-0
43 - Joy of Alapin-Diemer
The Alapin-Diemer may not be sound, but it can be very dangerous for
Black. Bill Wall's 500 French Miniatures gave 16 games (and others that
would transpose); White scored 16-0.
In 1995 my book on the variation called the "Alapin French, Tactics for
White" was published. In the introduction to that book I wrote: "Welcome to
the King's Gambit of the French Defense! White gets quick slashing attacks
that often win in 20 moves.
John Watson cited my book in "Play the French" (1996 edition). Watson gave
about half of a page to the Alapin with variations that go beyond move eight
in only a few cases. Eric Schiller recommended the Alapin as the gambit to
play vs the French Defense in his book "Gambit Opening Repertoire For
White".
Here I faced a French Defence and chose the Alapin-Diemer Gambit. Years
ago I played it all the time. I still wheel it out once in a while since my
performance rating with 3.Be3!? has been higher than any other variation
after the position reached by 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5. I refer to anything after 3.Be3
as the Alapin French.
When White follows 3.Be3 with f3 on moves 4 or 5, it is an Alapin Diemer

Gambit. Emil Jozef Diemer played 3.Be3 vs the French Defence many times
with some impressive wins. The gambit can be declined with 3...Nf6, but
White gets a good game after 4.e5!
Critical is 3...dxe4. White can play 4.f3 or 4.Nc3, but the main line is 4.Nd2
Nf6 5.f3. Alapin's original idea was 5.c3 and 6.Qc2. With Diemer's
continuation of 5.f3, the pawn on e4 is double attacked. More often than not,
Black plays 5...exf3 6.Ngxf3.
Sawyer - superdave99, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 07.07.2012 begins 1.d4

e6 2.e4 d5 3.Be3 dxe4 4.Nd2 Nf6 5.f3 exf3 6.Ngxf3 Bd6 7.Bd3 0-0 8.0-0
Nbd7 9.Bg5 c5 10.Qe1 cxd4 11.Qh4 h6 12.Bxh6 gxh6 13.Qxh6 Qa5
14.Ng5 [14.Nc4 Qh5 15.Qxh5 Nxh5 16.Nxd6+-] 14...Qe5 15.Ndf3 [15.g3+-]
15...Qe3+ 16.Kh1 Bf4 17.Rae1 Bxg5 18.Nxg5 Qxg5 19.Qxg5+ Kh8
20.Qh6+ Kg8 [At this point that clocks read 2:00 - 0:55. Here I slowed way
down to consider which checkmate is the fastest. Seeing that I was now
thinking, Black resigned.] 1-0
44 - Mart Renders Alapin
Mart Renders (playing as CzwartyWymiar) sent me an e-mail with the
following game:
"Dear Mr. Sawyer,

"As I am a novice in the Alapin French and you are an expert, I would like to
ask you where in this game I could have improved. I do not seem to get a
winning attack launched and I am wondering if I should have employed a
different set up. Kind regards, Mart Renders"
Time control was 45 45. Dan Heisman advises players to use the time and
think. White started with 45 minutes and ended with 46. The opening was
very well played in the French Defence Alapin 5.f3 exf3 variation. Black
chose the solid line 6.Ngxf3 Be7 after which I begin my comments. The
natural move 10...Nc6 gave White the time for a promising attack.
CzwartyWymiar (1761) - NimzoMal (1673), ICC 45 45 Internet Chess

Club, 21.02.2013 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Be3 dxe4 4.Nd2 Nf6 5.f3 exf3
6.Ngxf3 Be7 7.c3 [Do not defend d4 until it is under more pressure. White
must activate his pieces quickly. Therefore, most common here is 7.Bd3 0-0
8.0-0 with a slight lead in development and some open lines toward the Black
king.] 7...0-0 8.Bd3 Bd7 9.0-0 h6 10.Qe1 [An alternative set-up is to play
10.Qe2 with ideas of Rae1 and Ndc4-e5.] 10...Nc6 11.Qg3 [This queen sortie
leads to somewhat forcing play and possible draws by repetition. It is not bad,
but I like 11.Nc4 which brings another piece to bear on e5 and giving the Be3
a retreat square on d2 if needed, such as after 11...Nd5 12.Bd2= when White
has good attacking chances for the pawn.] 11...Bd6 12.Ne5 Bxe5 13.dxe5
Nh5 14.Qh3 Nxe5 15.Bc2 Nf6 16.Bxh6 gxh6 17.Qxh6 Ng6 18.Rad1?
[Developing the rook here is logical but tactically dangerous. Better is 18.Nf3
Nh7 (or 18...Ng4 19.Qh5 Nf6 20.Qh6 repeating moves) 19.h4 Qf6 20.h5 Qf4
21.Qxf4 Nxf4 22.Ne5=] 18...Qe7 [Black could have made things difficult for
White with 18...Ng4! 19.Qh5 Qh4 20.Bxg6 Qxh5 21.Bxh5 Ne3-+ winning
the Exchange.] 19.Nf3 Rfd8 20.Ng5 Be8 21.Rde1 Qf8 [After this the game
is even. Black could have played for some advantage with 21...Rd5!-/+]
22.Qxf8+ Nxf8 23.Rxf6 Rd2 24.Rf2 [Clocks: 46:15-35:37 Game drawn by
mutual agreement] 1/2-1/2
45 - Guezennec 7.Bd3 Nd5
Here is a classic example of the Alapin-Diemer Gambit in the French
Defence played in France. Frankly it makes sense to me.
The Alapin-Diemer Gambit in the French has the feel and look of a
Blackmar-Diemer Gambit. The game began 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Be3 dxe4
4.Nd2 Nf6 5.f3 exf3 6.Ngxf3. Black’s defensive set up is identical to a BDG
Euwe Variation. In the BDG, White would have Nc3 instead of Nd2, and
likely Bg5 instead of Be3.
White is Franck Guezennec. At the time he was rated 2193. His rating later
rose to 2232. Black was played by Lucas Bajoni. His rating later rose to
2016.
Both sides played good logical moves. Black was up the gambit pawn. He
used several tempi to successfully force the minor exchange of his knights for
the White bishops.
Undeterred, White aimed at the Black king with his knights and queen. To
avoid mate, Black returned the two bishop advantage. The White knights
chopped off the Black bishops on f6 and e6.
Both sides threatened checkmate, on g7 and g2 respectively.

Then some tricky play ensued with the rooks and queens. In the end, Black
fell to a combination that would cost him a rook.
Guezennec (2193) - Bajoni (1930), 7th d'Ille et Vilaine Open 2014 Rennes
FRA (8.7), 10.07.2014 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Be3 dxe4 4.Nd2 Nf6 5.f3
exf3 6.Ngxf3 Nbd7 7.Bd3 Nd5 8.Qe2 c5 9.0-0 [9.0-0-0 can work well too.]
9...Nxe3 10.Qxe3 Be7 11.Kh1 [Another idea is to play 11.c3 to keep a pawn
on d4.] 11...0-0 12.Rae1 cxd4 13.Nxd4 Nc5 14.Bc4 Bg5 15.Qf2 Bf6 16.c3
e5 17.N4f3 Nd3 18.Bxd3 Qxd3 19.Ne4 Qa6 20.Qg3 [Or 20.Nxf6+ Qxf6
21.Rxe5=] 20...Kh8 21.Nfd2 [21.Nxf6! gxf6 22.Qh4 Rg8 23.Nd2 Rg6
24.Ne4=] 21...Rd8? [21...Be7 22.Qxe5 Be6=/+] 22.Nxf6 Rxd2 23.Ne4
[23.Qg5+/-] 23...Re2 24.Ng5 Be6 25.Nxe6 fxe6 26.Rd1 Qc6? [26...Rd2=]
27.Rf7 Rg8 28.Rxg7 Re1+ 29.Qxe1 Kxg7 30.Qxe5+ [Even more powerful
is 30.Qg3+! Kf7 31.Rf1+ Ke7 32.Qxg8+-] 30...Kf7? 31.Rf1+ Ke8 32.Qb8+
1-0
46 - Thematic Mating Attack
The Alapin-Diemer Gambit in the French Defence is a Blackmar-Diemer
Gambit Euwe with White being a move behind (Be3-g5 instead of Bg5).
Still there is the thematic mating attack if Black does not defend forcefully
and intentionally to stop the attack.
In this game my Internet Chess Club 3 minute blitz opponent was "anxat"
rated 1900. He failed to stop my mate this time.
On the weekend this game was played, my own rating was bouncing back
and forth over and under and over 2000. It ended at 2001.
As White I was playing well these days, and when not, I was getting breaks
to obtain draws or even wins. As Black however I was having lots of trouble.
Thus the rating fluctuation.
I wondered if I needed to play something different as Black. But sometimes

that is not the problem. What I may have needed was to better learn the lines
that I was already playing as Black.
Sawyer - anxat, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 11.08.2012 begins 1.d4 e6

2.e4 d5 3.Be3 dxe4 4.Nd2 Nf6 5.f3 exf3 6.Ngxf3 Nbd7 [Black seems
somewhat better after 6...Be7 7.Bd3 0-0 8.0-0 Nbd7 9.Qe1 c5 10.c3 Ng4=/+]
7.Bd3 c5 8.c3 cxd4 9.cxd4 Bb4 10.0-0 0-0 11.Qe1 Nd5 12.Bg5 Be7 13.Qh4
N7f6 14.Bxf6 [White can get the advantage by 14.Ne5! g6 15.Rac1 Nh5
16.Bxe7 Nxe7 17.Ne4+/=] 14...Nxf6 15.Ne5 Bd7? [Both 15...g6=/+ and
15...h6=/+ give Black good defensive chances.] 16.Rxf6 Black resigns 1-0
47 - Craig Jones Keeps Pawn
Craig Jones is one of the few players that I played in postal chess and over-
the-board in USCF. At the time he was one of Pennsylvania's best masters.
Master Craig Jones is not to be confused with contemporary Master Curt

Jones of Tennessee, whom I also played.
Here Craig Jones handled my French Defence Alapin Gambit 5.f3 exf3 by
defending better than I attacked.
Most of the time Black develops a bishop on move six such as 6…Be7 or 6…
Bd6. These moves are fine.
Craig Jones instead played for a quick central counter attack with 6...Nbd7
and 7...c5.
I began with a standard attack formation as White. I developed all my pieces

and my queen and castled by move 10.
However, I was too slow. I acted like Black was just going to sit there and let
me pound away at his defenses.
On the contrary, Black hit back quickly. This variation has to be considered a
critical line for the 3.Be3 Alapin-Diemer French.
Sawyer (2070) - Jones (2061), corr USCF 89NS20, 02.11.1990 begins 1.d4
d5 2.e4 e6 3.Be3 dxe4 4.Nd2 Nf6 5.f3 exf3 6.Ngxf3 Nbd7 [More common is
a bishop move, such as 6...Be7.] 7.Bd3 c5 8.c3 [In light of what follows, this
seems to close. Maybe 8.0-0 or 8.Qe2.] 8...Be7 9.Qe2 0-0 10.0-0 b6 11.Bg5
Bb7 12.Qe1?! [This is too slow. 12.Rad1 cxd4 13.Nxd4 Nc5 14.Bc2 Nd5
15.Bxe7 Qxe7=/+] 12...cxd4 13.cxd4 h6 14.Qh4 Re8 15.Rae1? [White
could try 15.Bf4 Nd5 16.Qg3 Nxf4 17.Qxf4 Rc8-/+] 15...hxg5 16.Nxg5 Nf8
17.Rxf6? [Or 17.Ndf3 Bxf3 18.Rxf3 Ne4 19.Rh3 Qxd4+ 20.Ree3 Qxe3+
21.Rxe3 Nxg5-+ and for the sacrificed queen Black has two knights, a rook
and a pawn.] 17...Bxf6 0-1
3.e5
White pushes the e-pawn to gain a kingside space advantage.
48 - Advance Fighting f-Pawn
A natural method in the French Defence to attack White's e5 pawn is to push
Black's f-pawn. This leaves the first player with a decision to make. Should I
play exf6 or not?
If White takes on f6, he gets a half-open e-file from which to attack the e6
pawn and the e5 square. Black gets an open f-file, as enjoyed by Blackmar-
Diemer Gambit players.
If White does not take the pawn, the position may become closed, giving
Black time to complete his development with less risk, albeit in a cramped
area.
In my Advance Variation game vs "NightKnight" (rated 2238), I faced the

rare 5...f5!? in the French Defence. This time I chose to take on f6. The
position quickly opened up but I got into trouble. Black got a slight edge. I
felt like a person who was arm wrestling, and my hand was being pushed
downward.
I flexed my own muscle being rated 2287 at the time. I equalized and pushed
for an advantage. After I made the wrong capture on move 31, Black got a
perpetual check for a draw.
Sawyer (2287) - NightKnight (2238), ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club,

18.04.2009 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 c5 4.c3 Nc6 5.Nf3 f5 6.exf6 [6.Be2!?
+/=] 6...Nxf6 7.Bg5 cxd4 8.cxd4 Qa5+ 9.Bd2 Qd8 10.Bg5 Bd6
[10...Qb6=/+] 11.Nc3 a6 12.Bd3 Bc7 13.Bh4 0-0 14.0-0 Qd6 [14...Bd7=]
15.Bg3 Qd7 16.Bxc7 Qxc7 17.Re1 Bd7 18.Ne2 [18.h3+/=] 18...Ng4 19.h3
Rxf3 20.hxg4 Rf7 21.f3 Raf8 [21...Qb6=] 22.Rc1 Qd6 23.Bb1 e5 24.dxe5
Nxe5 25.Nd4 Ng6 [25...Rf4=] 26.Qd3 Bb5 27.Nxb5 axb5 28.a3 Qg3
29.Re2 [29.Rf1+/=] 29...Rxf3 30.Qxd5+ Kh8 31.Bxg6 [31.Qxf3 Rxf3
32.Rc3 Qxg4 33.Rxf3+/=] 31...hxg6 32.Re8 Qf2+ 33.Kh2 Qg3+ 34.Kg1
Qf2+ 35.Kh2 Qg3+ 36.Kg1 1/2-1/2
49 - Collemer vs Beloungie
Chess friend Lance Beloungie competed in the Maine State Closed
Championship.
Lance is a retired man who played many of the top players in the state,
including the master who finished in first.
In the first round Beloungie got paired down vs the lower rated player Frank
Collemer in a straightforward French Defence Advance Variation.
Lance Beloungie noted, "It's nice when they gift a piece to the old man." [I
agree completely.]
White was a relative newcomer to USCF tournament play. He still had a

provisional rating.
Since this game was played, Frank Collemer has gained far more experience.
He has raised his rating at least 100 points.
Collemer - Beloungie, Maine State Closed (1), 23.04.2012 begins 1.e4 e6

2.d4 d5 3.e5 c5 4.c3 Nc6 5.Nf3 Nge7 [5...Qb6 is 10 times more popular, but
it does not score any better than what Black plays here.] 6.Bb5 Bd7 [Black
sets a trap to win a pawn.] 7.0-0? Nxe5 8.Bxd7+ Nxd7 [The trap worked.]
9.dxc5 Nxc5 10.Be3 Nf5 11.Bd4 Nxd4 12.Qxd4 f6 13.Re1 Qd6 14.Nbd2
Be7 15.Qg4 h5 [Black can make a new square of his knight on e6 after
15...e5=/+] 16.Qxg7 0-0-0 17.b4 Nd7? [17...Nd3=/+] 18.Nd4 Ne5 19.Nb5?
[Both his Nb5 and Qg7 become too loose. 19.f4+/-] 19...Qd7 20.Rxe5 fxe5
21.Qxe5 Qxb5 [White has a few pawns for a rook, but that is not enough.
Black wraps things up in a few more moves.] 22.Qxe6+ Qd7 23.Qe3 Kb8
24.Nb3 Rdg8 25.Nd4 Bg5 26.Qe5+ Ka8 27.Qe2 Qg4 0-1
50 - Advance 3.e5 vs a Rookie
The French Defence is a proven chess opening that can be handled in various
ways by either side.
After 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5, White can play 3.Nc3, 3.Nd2, 3.e5, 3.exd5 or 3.Be3. I
play them all depending on my mood.
In the Advance Variation 3.e5 in my 5.Nf3 Qb6 6.Be2 game, Kevin Bachler
played the knight maneuver Ng8-Nh6-Nf5 attacking d4.
Below after 5.Nf3 Bd7 6.Be2, "Rookie" plays Ng8-Nge7-Ng6-Nf4. Then I

promptly chopped it off with 13.Bxf4.
I kept my play solid. This computer chess engine rated 2583 repeated moves
for a draw on move 28.
In October 2014 I listed many of the games I played "blik", the cousin of
"Rookie".
Here is a sample with results and the openings of some of my better games I
played against "Rookie" in ICC blitz games.
I played White:
Queens Knight Attack - 1/2-1/2
I played Black:
Sicilian Defence - 1/2-1/2
Alekhine Defence - 0-1
Slav Defence - 0-1
Ruy Lopez - 0-1
Sawyer (2173) - Rookie (2583), ICC 5 0 Internet Chess Club, 19.08.2007

begins 1.d4 d5 2.e4 e6 3.e5 c5 4.c3 Nc6 5.Nf3 Bd7 6.Be2 [6.a3] 6...Nge7
7.0-0 Ng6 8.Be3 cxd4 9.cxd4 f6 10.exf6 gxf6 11.Nc3 Qb8 12.Rc1 Nf4
13.Bxf4 Qxf4 14.Re1 Bh6 15.Rb1 a6 16.a3 a5 17.Bf1 Ne7 18.Ne2 Qb8
19.Ng3 b5 20.b3 Ng6 21.Rb2 Bf8 22.Ra2 Nf4 23.Qd2 h6 24.Ne2 Ng6
25.Ng3 Nf4 26.Ne2 Ng6 27.Ng3 Nf4 28.Ne2 1/2-1/2
51 - Baffo Wins French Advance
This game follows a French Defence where Jeff Baffo chose the Advance
Variation. After 3.e5 c5 4.c3 Nc6 5.Nf3, we experiment with a logical but
less popular line 5...Bd7 6.Be2 Nge7.
By the ninth move, I had completely equalized. Nine moves more and I stood
better as Black. However then I got into trouble as he moved his army toward
my king.
Our match games in the spring of 1996 followed this pattern: I would start
well, maybe even get an opening advantage. We moved into the middlegame
and disaster would strike me, usually a self-inflicted wound. My notable
opponent would pick at it in keeping with Baffo’s ability as a postal chess
master.
The French Defence with me as Black is comparatively rare. Once in a while

I play this fine and well respected opening, but my personal results as Black
have not been pretty.
In both winning percentage and performance rating as Black over the past 45
years, I have scored much better after 1.e4 with 1...e5, 1...Nf6 and 1...Nc6.
Even 1...c6 and1...c5 have been good for me. All of those I have played at
least 1000 times.
The French I have played less than 500 times as Black, Maybe the thousands
of times I have been on the White side colors my perception. You have to
find what works well for you.
e6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 c5 4.c3 Nc6 5.Nf3 Bd7 [Avoiding the usual move 5...Qb6]
6.Be2 Nge7 7.0-0 Ng6 8.g3 Be7 9.h4 [At 40 ply Stockfish evaluates this
position as completely equal: 0.00] 9...cxd4 10.cxd4 0-0 11.h5 Nh8 12.h6 g6
13.Nbd2 f6 14.exf6 Bxf6 15.Nb3 Nf7 [15...b6= would prevent 16.Nc5.]
16.Nh2 [16.Nc5] 16...Nd6 17.Bg4?! [17.Ng4=] 17...Rc8 18.Nf3 Ne4
[18...b6=/+] 19.Be3 Rf7?! [19...Ne7=] 20.Rc1 b6 21.Re1 Ne7? [21...Rf8=]
22.Rxc8 [22.Nbd2!+/=] 22...Qxc8 [22...Bxc8=] 23.Nbd2 Nxd2? [23...Nf5
24.Bf4+/=] 24.Qxd2 Nf5 25.Bxf5 exf5 26.Bf4 Re7 27.Be5 Bxe5 28.dxe5
Be6 29.Nd4 Rc7? [Hastens the end, but after 29...Qe8 30.Nxe6 Rxe6
31.Qxd5 Kf8 32.f4+- White is up a solid protected passed pawn.] 30.Qg5 1-0
3.e5 c5 4.c3 Nc6 5.Nf3 Qb6
Black continually attacks White’s backward pawn on d4.
52 - Kevin Bachler in Advance
In the early 1980s, FM Kevin Bachler was one of the stronger American
postal chess players. Bachler went on to become not only a FIDE Master
rated 2350 but also a FIDE Trainer and USCF Professional Coach for 30
years.
Kevin Bachler is an experienced instructor and a successful player who has

helped many others improve their chess skills. I recommend you check out
his sites.
We met once in postal chess as young men with me playing White in a

French Defence. Instead of my pet Alapin French or even the Tarrasch
French, I chose something else.
This time I went with the Advance Variation. This was very rare for me. Our
game continued 3.e5 c5 4.c3. I avoided the Milner-Barry Gambit 6.Bd3 and
played the more solid 6.Be2.
I was fine for the first 20 moves, but his greater understanding and skill led
Black to a winning position. It was our only game vs each other, but I have
examined a handful of other Kevin Bachler games that he played vs some of
our mutual opponents.
Sawyer (2000) - Bachler (2129), corr APCT, 1985 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5
3.e5 c5 4.c3 Nc6 5.Nf3 Qb6 6.Be2 cxd4 7.cxd4 Nh6 8.Nc3 Nf5 9.Na4 Bb4+
[9...Qa5+ 10.Nc3=] 10.Bd2 [10.Kf1!=] 10...Qa5 11.Bc3 b5 [11...Bxc3+
12.Nxc3 Qb6 13.Bb5 Bd7 14.Bxc6 Bxc6=] 12.a3 Bxc3+ 13.Nxc3 b4
14.axb4 Qxb4 15.Bb5 [15.Qa4=] 15...Bd7 16.Bxc6 Bxc6 17.Qd2 0-0 18.0-0
Rfb8 19.Rfb1 Qe7 20.Nd1 Rb3 21.Qc2 [21.Rc1=] 21...Qb7 22.Ra3 Rxf3
23.gxf3 Nxd4 24.Qc5 Ne2+ 25.Kf1 Bb5 26.Ke1 [26.Kg2 a6=/+] 26...Nf4
[Stronger is 26...Ng1!-+] 27.Kd2 a6 28.Nc3? [28.Rc1 Ng6=/+] 28...Bd3 [Or
28...Rc8!-+] 0-1
53 - Milner-Barry Gambit Mastin
Before I took up the BDG, I played the BDF. I played Bird, Dutch, and
French. E. Olin Mastin Jr. chose the Milner-Barry Gambit 6.Bd3!? This
gambit was invented by a notable player.
Philip Stuart Milner-Barry (1906-1995) was an original contributor to many

openings. As White, Milner-Barry beat Pal Benko with the 2.c3 Sicilian. He
drew Jose Capablanca in a Sicilian Dragon, and he defeated Jacques Mieses
in a Queens Knight Defence with 5.f3 BDG style. As Black, he drew Samuel
Reshevsky in 4.Qc2 Nc6 Nimzo-Indian Defence and Vera Menchik in the
Bogo-Indian. Milner-Barry played hundreds of games vs masters for over 50
years. It is no shame that he also lost to the likes of Capablanca, Alekhine,
Euwe and Botvinnik, all world champions. He was also famous for the Caro-
Kann Milner-Barry variation.
After my inaccurate play on move 11 and my blunder on move 21, Olin

Mastin stood well until move 23. Fortunately I won.
Mastin (1767) - Sawyer (1981), Lansdale PA (1), 1985 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4
d5 3.e5 c5 4.c3 Nc6 5.Nf3 Qb6 6.Bd3 [This is a gambit. More popular are
6.a3= or 6.Be2=] 6...cxd4 7.cxd4 Bd7 8.0-0 Nxd4 9.Nxd4 Qxd4 10.Nc3 a6!
[I considered 10...Qxe5 but White has a promising attack for the two pawns
after 11.Re1 Qd6 (or 11...Qb8 12.Nxd5 Bd6 13.Qg4=) 12.Nb5 Qb6 13.Be3=]
11.Qe2 Bb4!? [The main line is 11...Ne7 12.Kh1 Nc6 13.f4 Nb4 14.Rd1
Nxd3 15.Rxd3 Qb6 16.Be3 Bc5 17.Bxc5 Qxc5=/+; Maybe better is 11...Rc8!
12.Rd1 Bc5 13.Bc2 Qh4-/+] 12.Bd2 [12.Rd1=] 12...Ne7 13.a3 Ba5 14.Kh1
Bc7 15.f4 Qa7 16.Qg4 g6 17.Rf3 0-0-0 18.Rc1 Nc6 19.Ne2 Kb8 20.Qg3
Rc8 21.b4 Nd4? [21...h5 22.a4 h4=/+] 22.Nxd4 Qxd4 23.Bc3? [23.Be3!
Qb2 24.Qe1+/=] 23...Qa7 24.Be1 Bb6 25.Rxc8+ Rxc8 26.h4 h5 27.Kh2 [If
27.Bd2 Bb5 28.Bxb5 axb5-/+] 27...Bd4 [27...Rc1!-+] 28.Qg5 [28.f5!? gxf5
29.Rxf5 Be8-/+] 28...Qb6 29.Qe7 Be8 30.a4 Qc7 31.Qxc7+ Rxc7 32.b5
axb5 33.axb5 Bc3 34.Bxc3 Rxc3 35.Be2 Rxf3 36.Bxf3 Bxb5 37.Kg1 Kc7
38.Kf2 Kc6 39.Ke3 Kc5 40.Kd2 [Or 40.g4 hxg4 41.Bxg4 Be8 42.Kd3 b5
43.Bd1 b4-+] 40...Kd4 41.g3 Bd3 42.Bd1 b5 43.Bb3 b4 44.Ba4 Kc4 45.Bd1
b3 46.Bxb3+ Kxb3 47.Kxd3 Kb4 48.Kd4 Kb5 49.Kd3 Kc5 50.Kc3 d4+
51.Kd3 Kd5 52.Kd2 Ke4 53.Ke2 d3+ 54.Kd2 Kd4 55.Kd1 Ke3 56.Ke1
d2+ 57.Kd1 Kd3 0-1
Book 3 – Chapter 4 – Tarrasch Variation
3.Nd2
In this and the next few sections we examine the Tarrasch with 3.Nd2. This
variation allows White classical piece development.
54 - Tarrasch Pain by Payne
Let's say you are prepared. You know the book theory in your opening. All of
a sudden your high rated opponent takes you out of the book. Ugh!
What a pain! Even if his move is just okay, you have questions. Is it a trap? Is
it sound? Does he know it well?
Fred R. Payne of Texas played a lot of master level postal chess. Payne was
near his peak when I played him more than 30 years ago.
His ICCF rating later dropped to 2278 later in his career. (2312) corr
USCCC. In our French Defence Tarrasch game Payne played 3...Nd7!?
Ralph Marconi wrote a nice article dedicated to Dr. Payne. There Marconi
notes that in 1951 Fred Payne became the youngest chess champion of
Kentucky in state history.
Sawyer (2000) - Payne (2312), corr USCCC 1981 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5
3.Nd2 Nd7!? 4.Ngf3 c5 5.exd5 exd5 6.c3 [6.dxc5 Bxc5 7.Nb3=] 6...Ngf6
7.Bb5 a6 8.Qe2+ [8.Bd3=] 8...Be7 9.Ba4?! [9.Bd3] 9...0-0 10.Nf1!? [10.0-0
Re8=/+] 10...cxd4 11.Nxd4 Nc5 12.Bc2 Bg4 13.f3 Bd7 14.Ne3 Ne6 15.Nxe6
fxe6 16.0-0 Bc5 17.Kh1 Qe7 18.f4 Rae8 19.Bb3 [19.a4 Rf7=/+] 19...Kh8
[19...Bb5-/+] 20.Bd2 Ne4 21.Ng4? [21.Bc2 Bb5-/+] 21...Qh4 0-1
55 - Rawlings from Canada
“The Man From U.N.C.L.E.” movie had a scene where a girl tried to distract
a guy from playing chess. The secret agents were American, Russian,
German, and British with action in Berlin and Rome. Those are places where
people read my blog.
Thank you! In addition to the United States, Russia, Germany, United

Kingdom and Italy, I have readers from Canada.
The theater in which I saw that movie had a pre-movie quiz about the
meaning of the word “Canada”. Wrong answers were “Nothing Here” or
“Evening Star”. Correct was “Big Village”.
I played a Canadian correspondence player William Rawlings in an APCT

postal game that began as a French Defence. Black met my Tarrasch
Variation 3.Nd2 Nc6 4.Ngf3 e5 and a sharp battle followed.
The name Rawlings is well known in competition for its sports equipment.
My opponent was active in the USCF prior to 1991.
One William Rawlings played in the 1930s in Canada. He might be the same
guy who played in the 1970s or 1980s. That is a big spread of 45 years, but I
have played that long myself!
It is just that now I am the old man. Back in 1978 I was the young man. You
will note that I had excellent classical development in the center of the board
and found a tactical win.
Sawyer (1900) - Rawlings (1946), corr APCT 78CC-A-3, 05.1978 begins

1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nd2 Nc6 4.Ngf3 e5?! [The main line here is 4...Nf6 5.e5
Nd7 6.Nb3 when White has space in an otherwise equal position.] 5.Bb5
exd4 6.0-0 Bd7? [6...Bb4 7.Nxd4+/-] 7.exd5 Nb4 8.Qe2+ Be7 9.d6 [9.Ne5+-
is also strong.] 9...cxd6 10.Nxd4 a6 [or 10...Nc6 11.N2f3+-] 11.Bxd7+ Qxd7
12.Re1 Kf8 13.N2f3 Bf6 14.Bf4 Nd5 15.Bg3 g6 16.Rad1 Rd8 17.Nb5
[17.Nb3+-] 17...axb5 18.Rxd5 Bxb2 19.Bxd6+ Qxd6 20.Rxd6 Rxd6
21.Qxb5 Bc3 22.Qc5 1-0
56 - Shannon Plays French
Here I attempted to play a Tarrasch French Defence in Karpov style. When I
play positional chess, I am good but not great. When I play in a tactical style,
I am good, great, or ugly. There is a tendency to only publish the great. My
ugly games are painful. Another approach is to play main lines and look for
tactical surprises along the way. Alas, that takes a lot of energy!
My opponent was Paul Shannon. Paul has been a mainstay in USCF

tournaments on the west coast of the USA for decades. He was one of my
favorite opponents. Shannon and I played five times over a 20 year period.
Over time our ratings gradually went up. Amazingly both our ratings were
almost exactly the same each time we played. This was our first game.
During this game, Paul found out that I like baseball. Shannon generously
sent me a scorebook for the Los Angeles Dodgers. I loved it!
Paul Shannon played a wide variety of openings as do I. That is easier in

correspondence chess, since one can consult opening books and learn the
opening as the game progresses. In our other games, I won as White in a Ruy
Lopez Marshall Attack. We had a short draw with me as White in a Bird’s
Opening, From Gambit. He won as White in a Reti/Polish/Dutch after 1.Nf3
f5 2.b4. Years later we played one blitz game where Shannon as White won
again in a Benko Gambit. Here in our first game we played a French Defence
as noted.
Sawyer - Shannon, corr APCT Q-36 corr APCT, 1978 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5
3.Nd2 Nc6 4.Ngf3 g6 5.c3 Bg7 6.Bb5 Nge7 7.0-0 f5 8.exf5 exf5 [I don't
know if Shannon had been in this position before, but he certainly succeeded
in getting me on my own.] 9.Re1 [Grabbing the open file. 9.Nb3+/- seems to
give White an edge.] 9...0-0 10.Nf1 a6 11.Bd3!? [11.Bxc6 Nxc6 12.Bf4+/=]
11...Qd6 [Black has 11...f4!=] 12.g3 h6 13.Bf4 Qd8 14.Be5 [This led to
several exchanges and a fairly level position throughout. I could be winning
if I had played 14.h4!+-] 14...Nxe5 15.Nxe5 Bxe5 16.Rxe5 Nc6 17.Re1 Qd6
18.f4 Bd7 19.Qf3 Rae8 20.Nd2 Nb8 21.Bf1 Bc8 22.Bg2 c6 23.a4 Nd7 24.b4
[24.Qd3+/=] 24...Nf6 25.Qd3 Ne4 26.Nf3 Rf7 27.Ne5 Rg7 28.a5 g5 29.Ra2
Be6 30.Kf1 Kf8 31.Bf3 Ke7= 32.Ke2!? Reg8 33.Kd1 Kd8 34.Qe3 gxf4
35.gxf4 Qe7 36.Rc2 Qh4 37.Kc1 Kc7 1/2-1/2
57 - John Martin Tarrasch
After I began playing the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit, I reached the French
Defence most often after 1.d4. My stats shows I have played the French over
2000 times as White. Those games began 1.d4 (50% of the time), 1.e4 (40%),
and 1.Nc3 (10%).
A typical fact of American Postal Chess Tournaments (APCT) events was

that a section began before it was filled. This was done in the reasonable faith
that more players would pay to play. They did. If too many entered, they
filled out a new section.
The first round of the Rook events had seven players each, three games with
each color. When a new player was added, they already knew what colors
they had vs each opponent. The newly arriving player notified their
opponents and begin play.
In this game from APCT 84 Rook-20, I was White in a French Defence

Tarrasch. My opponent John Martin played 3...Nc6. It is highly possible that
when I first got the assignments, I was gung ho on the BDG. Then by the
time I was assigned to John Martin (rated 1809), my worry of the two BDGs
that were already in progress might have led me to play 1.e4. Or Martin may
have been assigned earlier and then I got excited about the BDG later.
As White in this game I tried to improve my position from move to move.

Black did not make major blunders. He drifted toward a weaker and weaker
position until he lost significant material.
Sawyer - Martin, corr APCT 84R-20 corr APCT, 1984 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5
3.Nd2 Nc6 4.Ngf3 Nh6 [Far more popular is 4...Nf6 5.e5 Nd7 6.Nb3 or
6.Be2] 5.c3 f6 [Black fights for e5 instead of the more normal fight for e4
with 5...f5] 6.Bd3 Nf7 7.0-0 Be7 8.Re1 0-0 9.Nf1 Bd6 10.Ng3 dxe4 11.Nxe4
[White has a comfortable space advantage.] 11...Be7 12.Bf4 [12.b4+/-
attempts to set up a positional bind.] 12...Re8 13.Qc2 f5 14.Ng3 Bd6
15.Bxd6 Nxd6 16.Rad1 Qf6 17.Ne5 Ne7 18.f4 Nd5 19.Qf2 Qh6 20.Ne2
Nf6 21.h3 g5 22.Qg3 g4 23.hxg4 fxg4 24.Nxg4 Nxg4 25.Qxg4+ Kh8
26.Ng3 Rf8 27.Qh5 Qg7 [White does well with the queen exchange also:
27...Qxh5 28.Nxh5 Bd7 29.Kh2 Be8 30.Re5+-] 28.Qe5 Bd7 29.Nh5 Qxe5
30.dxe5 and White wins more material. 1-0
58 - Gill 3...Nc6 Tarrasch
In the 1970s I was a big fan of World Champion Anatoly Karpov who
dominated the chess world for 10 years, 1974-1984. His style of play was
basically to control the board with active pieces rather than with sharp pawn
attacks.
Years later Anatoly Karpov would kindly write about me in his book on the
Queen Pawn Games (only in Russian) where he covered all 1.d4 openings
without 2.c4, including my beloved Blackmar-Diemer Gambit.
In the fourth and final round of my tournament in Crossville, Tennessee I got

to play a little like Karpov in a French Defence 3.Nd2 Nc6 Variation.
Harrison Gill found himself very cramped on the queenside. Gill was rated
over 200 points below me.
Since those rated above me all got knocked off before I was able to play
them. I breezed through this event and won every game.
The money I got for 1st place covered my motel, food and travel costs. My
wife was with me which made it a nice day all the way around in beautiful
central Tennessee.
And here’s a real shocker. Years later the USCF relocated their headquarters
from New York state to this affordable southern small town. Crossville is in
the Central Time Zone and just over the mountain from the Eastern Time
Zone. It’s a pretty area.
Sawyer - Gill, Crossville, TN (4), 16.07.1977 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nd2

Nc6 4.Ngf3 Nf6 5.e5 Nd7 6.Nb3 Be7 [Some players insert 6...a5 7.a4] 7.Bb5
a6 8.Bxc6 bxc6 9.0-0 c5 10.Na5 Nb8 11.c4 c6 12.Qa4 Bd7 13.dxc5 Bxc5
14.b4 Be7 15.c5 [The point is to leave Black cramped on the queenside.]
15...Qc7 16.Bf4 0-0 17.Rfe1 f6+- [17...h6 18.Nd4+/-] 18.Qb3 [Even stronger
may be 18.exf6 Qxf4 19.fxe7 Re8 20.Ne5 Rxe7 21.g3 Qf6 22.Nb3+-]
18...Qc8 19.exf6 Bxf6 [19...gxf6 20.Bh6+/-] 20.Be5 Bxe5 21.Nxe5 Qc7
22.Rac1 Rf5 23.Qe3 Be8 24.Rc3 Ra7 [Or 24...Nd7 25.Nexc6+-] 25.Nexc6
Bxc6 26.Qxe6+ Rf7 27.Rf3 Qd7 [If 27...h6 28.Rxf7 Qxf7 29.Nxc6 Nxc6
30.Qxc6+- Black is up two pawns.] 28.Nxc6 Qxe6 29.Rxe6 Rxf3 30.gxf3
Nxc6 31.Rxc6 a5 32.b5 1-0
3.Nd2 Nf6
Black continues with classical development to provoke 4.e5.
59 - Surak 5.f4 and I Quit
Why do people quit chess? I will put on my pop psychology hat and suggest
four possibilities, each beginning with the letter “D”.
1. Distracted. They are so busy making money, making good grades, or
making love that there is no time for chess in their life.
2. Disappointed. They lost a game or two. Chess is not fun. It takes work.
They decide to go look for something easier to do.
3. Discouraged. They have lost a lot of games. They make more blunders
than they think they should. Chess is hard. Too hard.
4. Depressed. They lose all the time. They will never win again. Their life is
full of troubles. They cannot bear to play anymore.
In the 1980s I went down this road myself. I experienced major losses in my
family and my job. I needed to make changes. In my chess career, I had
progressed to the point where I played a steady stream of experts and
masters. I lost a lot of games. My ratings yo-yoed from 2100 to 1900 up and
down, up and down.
For a while during that time period I played the French Defence as Black.
Here in a Tarrasch, I played APCT Expert Steve Surak. He chose 5.f4. When
I had to renew my membership, I withdrew. My chess life was not over. After
I became established in a new job, I returned to chess. Then I switched to the
Blackmar-Diemer Gambit. I won a lot of games in 1989. Chess was fun
again!
Surak (2172) - Sawyer (1950), corr APCT 1986 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5
3.Nd2 Nf6 4.e5 Nfd7 5.f4 c5 6.c3 Nc6 7.Ndf3 cxd4 8.cxd4 Qb6 9.g3 Bb4+
[9...Be7=] 10.Kf2 f5!? [10...g5 11.fxg5 Ndxe5 12.Nxe5 Nxe5 13.Kg2=]
11.Ne2 g6? [11...0-0=] 12.Be3 Ndb8 13.h3 [13.Kg2+/-] 13...h5 14.Bg2
[14.Rc1+/-] 14...Qc7 15.g4 hxg4? [15...Na5 16.Ng5+/=] 16.hxg4 Rxh1
17.Qxh1 Qg7 18.gxf5 gxf5 19.Rg1 Bf8 20.Bf1 Qe7 21.Rg8 Na6 22.Ng5
Bd7 23.Qh5+ Kd8 24.Nf7+?! [24.Qh8+-] 24...Kc7 25.Nd6 Rd8 26.Ke1?!
[26.Nc3+/-] 26...Be8 27.Qh2 Kb8 28.Bf2 Bf7 29.Rh8 Qd7 30.Nxf7 Qxf7
31.Rh7 Qe8 32.Nc1 Nc7 [32...Na5=] 33.Nb3 Rd7 34.Rh8 Rd8 35.Kd1 b6
36.Be1 a5 37.Bf2 Nb4 38.a3 Qa4 39.Qg3 Nba6 40.Be1 Nb5= Black
withdrew. 1-0
60 - Tarrasch Queen Trap
Timid Timmy. That was me. I was deathly afraid of gambits. If I offered a
pawn to my opponent, you could bet that it was a trap. I had to know for sure
how I was getting my material back.
Later I learned about the great benefits of getting compensation for sacrifices.
After that, I added gambit play to my repertoire.
John Hathaway played the French Defence. I liked the active Tarrasch
Variation.
In this short game Black fell for a trap. Then he lost his queen.
Hathaway got some compensation for his troubles, but it was not nearly
enough.
The placement of 3.Nd2 temporarily blocked White's control of the g5

square.
My chess friend John jumped at the chance to threaten my g2 pawn with

7...Qg5.
The queen trap came from the always hard to see backwards bishop move. In
this case it was 10.Bf1 Qxh1 11.Nxh1.
Sawyer saw your Hathaway plan. Black hath my rook but away with your
queen. White castled with check and mate next move.
Sawyer - Hathaway, Lansdale, PA 04.03.1981 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nd2

Nf6 4.e5 Nfd7 5.Bd3 c5 6.c3 Nc6 7.Ne2 Qg5 [7...cxd4 8.cxd4 f6 9.exf6
Nxf6 10.Nf3 Bd6 11.0-0=] 8.Nf3 Qxg2? [8...Qd8 9.0-0+/=] 9.Ng3 cxd4
10.Bf1 Qxh1 11.Nxh1 dxc3 12.bxc3 Ndxe5 13.Nxe5 Nxe5 14.Bf4 Ng6
15.Bg3 h5 16.h4 Bd7 17.Qb3 b6 18.Bb5 Bxb5 [18...Rd8 19.Qa4+-]
19.Qxb5+ Kd8 20.c4 Be7 [20...Bc5 21.cxd5+-] 21.cxd5 Nxh4 [21...e5
22.Rc1+-] 22.dxe6 fxe6 23.0-0-0+ Kc8 24.Qc6# 1-0
61 - Hathaway 8.Nf3 Be7
John Hathaway was one of those guys who beat the players who beat me. Yet
in our club, I won more of our games against him.
In this French Tarrasch Variation John Hathaway improved upon his mistake
in the previous game. There, Hathaway had played 7…Qg5 8.Nf3 Qxg2.
Black lost his queen when it got trapped.
The strategy for Black in the 3.Nd2 Nf6 4.e5 Nfd7 5.Bd3 line is to play along
either the b6-d4-f2 diagonal or the c7-e5-h2 diagonal.
Those ideas are illustrated in the lines 7…Qb6 8.Nf3 cxd4 and 7…cxd4
8.cxd4 f6. John avoided both options.
In this game Black kept the position closed. That was reasonable, but Black
had to make sure he stayed active.
Passive play tends to prove fatal in chess long term. Hathaway played 7…
Qb6 8.Nf3 Be7.
This was one of those games were my creativity and boldness led to an
advantage. I offered a knight sacrifice with 14.Ng5!?
Black should have accepted the sacrifice and tried to outplay me in

complications. White went on to win the Exchange.
Technical difficulties remained, but White was able to exchange material.

This led to an endgame where my material finally won.
Sawyer - Hathaway, Lansdale, PA 04.03.1981 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nd2

Nf6 4.e5 Nfd7 5.Bd3 c5 6.c3 Nc6 7.Ne2 Qb6 8.Nf3 Be7 9.0-0 0-0 10.Nf4
[10.a3+/=] 10...cxd4 [10...Re8=] 11.cxd4 Nb4 12.Bb1 f6 13.a3 Na6
14.Ng5!? f5? [14...fxg5 15.Qh5 h6 16.Qg6 Rxf4 17.Qh7+ Kf8 18.Bxf4 gxf4
19.Bg6+/-] 15.Nfxe6 Bxg5 16.Nxf8 Bxc1 17.Nxd7 Qxb2 [17...Bxd7
18.Qxc1] 18.Qd3 [18.Bxf5! Bxd7 19.Rb1+-] 18...Bxd7 19.Ra2 Qb6
20.Rxc1 Rf8 21.f4 Bb5 22.Qc3 Bc4 23.Rb2 Qc6 24.Ba2 b5 25.Bxc4 [25.a4
b4 26.Qxc4 dxc4 27.Rxc4+-] 25...bxc4 26.Qa5 Nc7 27.Qxa7 Ra8 28.Rb8+
Rxb8 29.Qxb8+ Ne8 30.Rb1 c3 31.Qb3 Nc7 32.Rc1 Nb5 33.Qb4 Qb6
34.Rxc3 Qxd4+ 35.Qxd4 Nxd4 36.Rc8+ Kf7 37.Kf2 1-0
62 - Tarrasch Win vs Fred Bies
King pawn and Blackmar-Diemer players encounter the French Defence
frequently. Some players as Black think they are taking White out of their
plans, but BDGers face the French about as much as anything.
Years ago I chose the 3.Nd2 Tarrasch Variation. Later I switched to 3.Nc3
and 3.Be3, but I always kept a fondness for 3.Nd2.
The Tarrasch Variation leads to active piece play with tactical wins by
combination. The dark squared bishop even ends up on Be3 a lot in the
Tarrasch.
Fred Bies is not a name commonly thrown about in chess circles. I think he
was from Illinois (home of APCT).
I found a book on basketball rules authored by a Fred Bies in 1999. I have no

idea if it is the same one. Maybe not.
Below after my opponent Fred Bies played move 20, the Black queen is
facing a two on one fast break, to borrow a basketball metaphor.
My capture of his rook on c8 left the Black queen overworked.
When she recaptured my rook, I picked up a three pointer with her knight on
move 22.
Sawyer (1950) - Bies (1925), corr APCT 78SC-5, 11.1978 begins 1.e4 e6
2.d4 d5 3.Nd2 Nf6 4.e5 Nfd7 5.Bd3 c5 6.c3 Nc6 7.Ne2 Qb6 8.Nf3 cxd4
9.cxd4 f6 10.exf6 Nxf6 11.0-0 Bd6 12.Nc3 0-0 13.Be3 Bd7 [13...Qxb2
14.Nb5+/-] 14.a3 Be8 15.Ne5 [15.Ng5 Nd8! 16.Qc2=] 15...Qc7? [15...Bxe5!
16.dxe5 Qxb2 17.exf6 Qxc3 18.fxg7 Qxg7 19.Qd2=] 16.f4 [16.Nb5+/-]
16...Rc8 17.Rc1 Bh5 18.Qe1 Qb6 19.Na4 Qd8 20.h3 Na5? [20...Be8
21.Nc5+/=] 21.Rxc8 Qxc8 22.Qxa5 Qb8 23.Qe1 b6 24.Nc3 Be8 25.g4 b5
[25...Qc7 26.Qe2+-] 26.g5 Nd7 27.Qh4 g6 28.Qg4 Nxe5 29.fxe5 Bf7
30.exd6 1-0
63 - French Tarrasch vs Klein
Eugene Klein and I played three long games in the space of a few years. I had
White in three different openings. In our French Defence game Black solved
his bad light squared bishop problem with the maneuver 15...Be8, then
16...Bh5, and 21...Bxf3. White obtained an extra pawn on both the queenside
and kingside while Black had an extra center pawn.
Eventually we exchanged into a rook endgame. Gene Klein just kept playing
on almost until checkmate. It did not cost him more because he had to send
me a move in another game anyway.
It took about a week for each of us to receive new postal chess moves. I may
hear from one the same day every week and he from me on a different day.
The game below was middle of three games and the longest. We would play
more than one game on a postcard from APCT tournaments in that began in
1978-1979.
Sawyer (1950) - Klein (1923), corr APCT 78SC-5, 11.1978 begins 1.e4 e6
2.d4 d5 3.Nd2 Nf6 4.e5 Nfd7 5.Bd3 c5 6.c3 Nc6 7.Ne2 Qb6 8.Nf3 cxd4
9.cxd4 f6 10.exf6 Nxf6 11.0-0 Bd6 12.Nc3 0-0 13.Be3 Bd7 14.a3 a6 15.b4
Be8 [15...Qc7=] 16.Re1 Bh5 17.Na4 Qc7 18.h3 e5 [18...Ne4-/+] 19.dxe5
Nxe5 20.Be2 Nxf3+ 21.Bxf3 Bxf3 22.Qxf3 Qf7 [22...Rae8=] 23.Nc5 Bb8
24.Bd4 Ba7 25.Ne6 Bxd4 26.Nxd4 Rac8 27.Ne6 Rfe8 28.Nc5 Red8
29.Rad1 Rc6 30.Qe3 Re8 31.Qf3 Rd8 32.Re3 Rdc8 33.Qf5 g6 34.Qe5 Re8
35.Qd4 Rd8 [35...Re7 36.Rde1+/-] 36.Rde1 Re8 37.Rxe8+ Nxe8 38.Nxb7
Qd7 39.Nc5 Qf7 40.Qe5 [40.Re5!+-] 40...Nc7 41.Qe7 Qxe7 42.Rxe7 h6
43.Kf1 a5 44.Ke2 Nb5 45.Re3 Kf7 46.Nd7 Rd6 47.Ne5+ Kg7 48.bxa5 Ra6
49.Rg3 g5 50.h4 Nd4+ 51.Kd2 Nf5 52.Rd3 Rxa5 53.hxg5 hxg5 54.Nc6
Rc5 55.Nd4 Nxd4 56.Rxd4 Kf6 57.a4 Kf5 58.Rd3 Ra5 59.Ra3 d4
[59...Ke4 60.Kc3+/=] 60.Kd3 Ke5 61.Kc4 [61.f3+/-] 61...Ke4 [61...g4
62.f3+/=] 62.f3+ Ke5 63.Kb4 [63.Kd3+/-] 63...Ra8 [63...Rd5!?] 64.a5 Kd5
65.Kb3 Ra6 66.Kc2 Ke6 67.Kd3 Kd5 68.Ra2 Rc6 [68...Kc5 69.Ra4 Kb5
70.Rxd4+-] 69.a6 Rc3+ 70.Kd2 Rc8 71.a7 Ra8 72.Kd3 Ke5 73.Ra5+ Kf4
74.Kxd4 g4 75.fxg4 Kxg4 76.Kd5 Kg3 77.Kc6 Kxg2 78.Kb7 Rf8 79.a8Q
Rxa8 80.Rxa8 Kf3 81.Re8 Kf4 82.Kc6 Kf5 83.Kd5 Kf4 84.Re5 Kf3
85.Re4 Kg3 86.Ke5 Kf3 87.Kf5 Kg3 88.Re3+ Kf2 89.Kf4 Kg2 90.Re2+ 1-
0
64 - Tarrasch vs Harabor
How often do you face the French Defence in your games? For me it has
always been lot. As White I like the King Pawn 1.e4 openings and also the
Blackmar-Diemer Gambit 1.d4 d5 2.e4.
The French Defence can be attacked with pawns or pieces. The Tarrasch
Variation 3.Nd2 allows White more open piece play.
In the 3...Nf6 4.e5 Nfd7 line Black seeks counter play with the moves 5...c5
and 9...f6 to open both bishop files.
Here I review one of my games against Mihai Harabor. Our French Defence
and Sicilian Defence games were played when we were up and coming postal
chess players in 1980.
Years later we both much more experienced. By then Mihai Harabor had
become a much stronger correspondence player.
But this was a game from the early days. Our French Defence Tarrasch saw
us play a popular 3.Nd2 Nf6 line.
White attacked the e-file and e6 in particular. Black hoped his piece activity
compensates for this weakness.
Black got too aggressive. His thematic ...e5 counter attack in the center did
not work well on this occasion.
White ended up with an extra bishop after some tactics. That was enough to
decide the game.
Sawyer (2000) - Harabor (2100), corr CCLA 1980 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5
3.Nd2 Nf6 4.e5 Nfd7 5.Bd3 c5 6.c3 Nc6 7.Ne2 Qb6 8.Nf3 cxd4 9.cxd4 f6
10.exf6 Nxf6 11.0-0 Bd6 12.Nf4 0-0 13.Re1 Bd7 14.Be3 [14.Nxe6 Rfe8
15.Bf5=] 14...Qc7 [14...Rae8 15.g3=] 15.g3 e5? [15...Rac8 16.Ng5+/-]
16.dxe5 Nxe5 [16...Bxe5 17.Ng5+/-] 17.Nxe5 Bxe5 18.Rc1 Bc6 [18...Qd8
19.Nxd5+-] 19.Ne6 Qf7 20.Nxf8 Rxf8 21.Rc2 Qd7 22.Bc5 Re8 23.Rce2
Bd6 [23...Qc7 24.Bxa7+-] 24.Rxe8+ Nxe8 25.Rxe8+ Qxe8 26.Bxd6 Qe6
27.Bf4 d4 28.Qe2 1-0
65 - Burke French Miniature
French Defence Tarrasch Variation gave me several games with tactical piece
combinations. There were a lot of good ones, but my game with Bob Burke
has to be my favorite.
Black played the opening well. On move nine Black decided to go for the
aggressive 9…Bb4+ 10.Kf1 f6. Maybe he did not think I would play
10.Kf1!? I did not want to forfeit castling, but the move was recommended as
a possibility in books. Spielmann played it, but he might have played
anything wild and tactical.
I was a positional player. However, the continuation 11.Nf4 fxe5 12.Nxe6

looked very inviting. I decided to try it. Black’s 13…Kf7 appears to be a
novelty. A couple games in the 1960s continued 13…Kf8 14.Bh6 Kg8
15.Qc1 +-.and White won both of them.
The winning combination took calculation. That is the good thing about
correspondence play. I had three days to figure out each move. I could move
the pieces around and write out my analysis. This is what I routinely did
when I carried out a tactical attacks. Black's army was somewhat poised to
attack the White king. The problem leading the attack was the Black king,
right out in front. I'm sure that wasn't his original plan.
At the time I was an active postal chess player in both APCT and CCLA. I
believe that this game was played in CCLA. Bill Wall published it in his first
book “500 French Defence Miniatures”.
I do not remember but this Bob Burke might be Robert W. Burke. I played
him about the same time. Pretty quickly after this game, Robert W. Burke
raised his rating above mine and beat me with him as White in a King’s
Indian Attack. Robert W. Burke has been a good correspondence player for a
long time.
Sawyer (2000) - Burke, corr 1980 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nd2 Nf6 4.e5
Nfd7 5.Bd3 c5 6.c3 Nc6 7.Ne2 Qb6 8.Nf3 cxd4 9.cxd4 Bb4+ 10.Kf1 f6
11.Nf4 fxe5 12.Nxe6 Nf6 [12...g6 13.dxe5=] 13.Nxg7+ Kf7 14.Nh5 e4
[14...Nxh5 15.Ng5+ Ke7 16.Qxh5 Qxd4 17.Be2+/-] 15.Ng5+ Ke7 16.Nxf6
Kxf6 [16...Qxd4 17.Ngxe4 dxe4 18.Nxe4+-] 17.Qh5 Be6 [17...Rf8
18.Nxh7+ Kg7 19.Nxf8+-] 18.Qh6+ 1-0
66 - French Mexico Mate
My French Defence Tarrasch game vs Julio Etienne led to a quick sharp
Mexico Mate! Normally I played for kingside castling as White. Theory in
one line recommended that I answer 9...Bb4+ with 10.Kf1.
The theory was that White got an attack, but it made me nervous. What if my
attack failed? Usually I won big. Here is an example.
Some people go to Mexico on vacation. They mail postcards from Mexico to

friends and family back home. But here I did the reverse. I mailed my
postcards to Mexico with my chess moves.
In my mind, I picture a comedy scene. I pretend that I mailed my moves to

Texas. Then the cartoon character Speedy Gonzalez ran my postcard south of
the border down to Julio in Tampico.
I enjoy meeting a new opponent from a new country. Players in American

Postal Chess Tournaments (APCT) rarely came from Mexico.
Every state in the USA was represented in APCT. Many players from Canada
also competed in the events that I entered.
But Julio Etienne was my only APCT opponent from Mexico. That's a fairly
popular name, and that's all I remember about him.
Spielmann – Stoltz 1930 continued 13…exf3 14.Bc7 +/-. White stood better
but he lost in the end.
Sawyer (2050) - Etienne (1900), corr APCT 1980 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5
3.Nd2 Nf6 4.e5 Nfd7 5.Bd3 c5 6.c3 Nc6 7.Ne2 Qb6 8.Nf3 cxd4 9.cxd4
Bb4+ 10.Kf1 [10.Bd2 f6 11.exf6 Nxf6 12.0-0 0-0 13.Bc3 Bd7 14.Qb3+/=]
10...f6 11.Nf4 fxe5 12.Nxe6 e4 [12...g6 13.dxe5=] 13.Bf4 exd3 14.Nc7+ Kf7
15.Nxa8 Qd8 16.Nc7 [16.a3+-] 16...Nf6 17.Nb5 Bf5 18.a3 Ba5 [18...Be7
19.Ne5+ Kg8 20.Nxd3+/-] 19.Nd6+ Ke7 20.Nxf5+ Kd7 21.Qxd3 Rf8
22.Ne5+ Nxe5 23.dxe5 Ng4 24.Qxd5+ Ke8 25.Qe6+ Qe7 26.Qxe7# 1-0
67 - Both Bishops Sacrificed
Can you believe it? Both bishops were sacrificed for the h-pawns with check.
Both kings declined the bishops.
My friendships with French people in America and with players from France
go back many years. I studied the French language for four years in school.
Here the French Defence wins!
As White I chose the Tarrasch Variation 3.Nd2 in the French Defence. My

opening was strong, White's position was good for the first 18 moves.
The Tarrasch can lead to wide open tactics. In this game I was outgunned in
complications by a good player.
My opponent J. Scott Pfeiffer has a USCF rating in the 2100s. We were both
up and coming players back at that time.
Like many players of my generation, Pfeiffer has not played much in the last
25 years.
As I recall the conversations on our weekly chess postcards in 1980, Scott

chose his life priorities carefully and chose them well.
I do not know how his plans turned out, but at least in 1980 Scott Pfeiffer
seemed to be headed in a good direction.
Sawyer (2050) - Pfeiffer (2050), corr APCT 1980 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5
3.Nd2 Nf6 4.e5 Nfd7 5.Bd3 c5 6.c3 Nc6 7.Ne2 Qb6 8.Nf3 cxd4 9.cxd4 f6
[9...Bb4+ 10.Bd2+/=] 10.exf6 Nxf6 11.0-0 Bd6 12.Nf4 [12.Bf4 Bxf4
13.Nxf4+/=] 12...0-0 13.Re1 Re8 14.Ng5 [14.a3 Bd7 15.Be3 Qxb2 16.Rb1
Qxa3 17.Rxb7=] 14...Qxd4 15.Nfxe6 Bxe6 16.Nxe6 Bxh2+ 17.Kf1 Rxe6
18.Rxe6 Qh4 [18...Rf8 19.Be3=] 19.Re3? [19.Rxf6 gxf6 20.Qf3=] 19...Ng4
20.Bxh7+ [20.Qf3 Nce5=/+] 20...Kh8 21.Rf3 Bd6 22.Ke2? [Or 22.Be3
Nh2+ 23.Ke2 Nxf3 24.gxf3 Qxh7 25.Qxd5 Be5-+] 22...Nxf2 23.Rxf2 Re8+
24.Be3 Rxe3+ 25.Kxe3 Bc5+ 26.Kd2 Qxf2+ 27.Qe2 Qxe2+ 28.Kxe2 Kxh7
29.Rh1+ Kg6 30.Rh8 b6 31.Rc8 Ne5 32.Rd8 d4 33.a3 a5 34.Kd1 d3
35.Rb8 Kf5 36.b4 axb4 37.axb4 Be3 0-1
68 - Your Favorite French
What is your favorite French variation? After 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5, you can
choose the popular 3.Nc3, the solid 3.Nd2, the positional 3.e5, the simple
3.exd5 or the gambit 3.Be3!?
Note that 3.Nd2 Nf6 4.e5 resembles 3.Be3 Nf6 4.e5 in pawn structure and
piece placement.
World champion Mikhail Tal favored the Tarrasch 3.Nd2 with success in the
1970s. White got a good pawn structure and open lines for attack.
In Tal-Hecht, Nice Olympiad 1974, White kept Black's knights at bay on Nc6
and Nb6 at bay with pawns a3 and b3.
I copied Tal's idea when Larry Ousley played a French Defence vs me in

1977. We met in a Tennessee Chess Association postal tournament.
The USCF had Larry Ousley rated in the 1800s until a few years ago. We
were young men during this game.
My strategy included playing 15.a3 and 16.b3 in line with the Tal game
mentioned above. Also I played Ne3 instead of Be3.
As the game continued, Black missed some tactics on a4. White doubled his
queen and rook on the 7th rank to win.
Sawyer - Ousley, corr TCA 1977 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nd2 Nf6 4.e5
Nfd7 5.Bd3 c5 6.c3 Nc6 7.Ne2 cxd4 8.cxd4 Nb6 9.0-0 Bd7 10.f4 [10.a3 a5
11.Nf3+/=] 10...g6 11.Nf3 h5 [11...Nb4!?] 12.Bd2 Nb4 13.Bxb4 Bxb4
14.Qb1 Rg8 15.a3 Be7 16.b3 Rc8 17.Ne1 [17.Qe1+/=] 17...Kf8 18.Nc2 Kg7
19.Ne3 Qe8 20.a4 a6 21.Qe1 Rc7 22.g4 [22.Qg3+/=] 22...hxg4 23.Nxg4
Bxa4? [23...Rh8=/+] 24.bxa4 Nxa4? [24...Rh8 25.Qg3+-] 25.Qa5 Rc8
26.Qxa4 Qd8 27.Qa5 b6 28.Qxa6 f5 29.exf6+ Bxf6 30.Qb7+ Be7 31.Ra7
1-0
69 - Weak End at Bernie’s
The name “Bernie” was popular in 2016 when Bernie Sanders ran for
President. Bernie was a senator from Vermont. I lived in Vermont during the
summers of 1975 and 1976. While it is a very small state, I found it to be
unique and quite interesting.
This Green Mountain state of Vermont borders the French speaking Quebec
province south of Montreal in Canada. French was one of my favorite
subjects in school, but I forgot a lot of it.
Bernie Hagerty played the White pieces against my rare French. I was
playing Steve Surak in another French at the same time.
Hagerty chose the same Tarrasch Variation that I also played as White. We
followed the main line for the first eleven moves.
Black defends in the French Defence, but Black can also attack. I played
along the c7-h2 diagonal after 10.0-0 Bd6 11.Nf3 Qc7.
It looked funny to me to see White develop the knight to f3 after he castles.

That is because the White knights crisscross with 3.Nd2 to 11.Nf3 and 7.Ne2
to 13.Nc3.
I played the opening well. However the more we entered the middlegame, the
worse I did. I struggled to find good moves.
White had a clear advantage in this French Defence. Because of my bad light
squared bishop, I suffered a weak end at Bernie's.
Bernie Hagerty was a postal expert. My APCT games were lost when I failed
to renew my membership. I hope I resigned this one. Previously Hagerty and
I drew a King’s Indian Defence.
Hagerty (2003) - Sawyer (1950), corr APCT 1986 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5
3.Nd2 Nf6 4.e5 Nfd7 5.Bd3 c5 6.c3 Nc6 7.Ne2 cxd4 8.cxd4 f6 9.exf6 Nxf6
10.0-0 Bd6 11.Nf3 Qc7 [11...0-0 12.Bf4 Bxf4 13.Nxf4 Ng4=] 12.h3 0-0
13.Nc3 a6 14.Re1 Bd7 15.Be3 Rae8?! [15...Be8 16.Rc1 Bh5=] 16.Rc1 Kh8
17.Ne5 Bc8? 18.f4 g6 19.Qe2 Bxe5 20.fxe5 Ng8? 21.Qg4 [21.b4+/-]
21...Qg7 22.Qh4 Nce7 23.g4 [23.Na4+/-] 23...h6 24.Bg5 Nf5 25.gxf5 gxf5
26.Kf2 Qxg5 27.Qxg5 hxg5 28.Rg1 g4 1-0
70 - Karpov Tarrasch Baffo
At times during my career I have followed Anatoly Karpov. He chose
variations where his pieces dominated the most important squares on the
board. Karpov became champion mostly through piece control rather than
pawn advances or rapid attacks.
In his early 1.e4 days Karpov played the Tarrasch Variation 3.Nd2 vs the
French Defence to win the title. I won some nice games with 3.Nd2, but then
I switched to gambits. When I lose an Alapin-Diemer 3.Be3 or a Winawer
Variation 3.Nc3 Bb4, I think about returning to the simple open piece
development of the Tarrasch 3.Nd2.
Jeff Baffo and I played two six-game correspondence matches 18 years ago.
Jeff won most of the games and this one is no exception. I have a foggy
memory of that year. It seems the games were played maybe during
February, March and April.
I know I was in Atlanta, Georgia for a Promise Keepers clergy conference

during the week of Valentine's Day 1996. Later that summer the Olympics
came to Atlanta.
For some reason in this game vs Jeffrey Baffo, I resigned in an equal

position! Maybe I was seeing ghosts. I cannot blame the opening, a good
active and logical variation.
One key point of the 3.Nd2 Nf6 line is that White's kingside knight plays to
7.Ne2 (after 5.Bd3) to protect d4 and c3, leaving f3 open for the queenside
knight 10.Nf3. As Anatoly Karpov demonstrated, it can be good for White to
trade bad dark squared bishops. I did everything well - except keep playing!
e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nd2 Nf6 4.e5 Nfd7 5.Bd3 c5 6.c3 Nc6 7.Ne2 cxd4 8.cxd4 f6
9.exf6 Nxf6 10.Nf3 Bd6 11.0-0 Qc7 12.Bg5 0-0 13.Bh4 Bd7 14.Bg3 a6
15.Rc1 Bxg3 16.Nxg3 Qf4 17.Ne2 Qd6 18.Nc3 Be8 19.Re1 Bh5 20.Be2
Qb4= [White resigned in an equal position. Maybe I thought White would
lose a pawn due to the threats on b2 and d4, however 21.Ne5! Nxe5 22.dxe5
Bxe2 23.Nxe2 (or 23.Rxe2) 23...Nd7 24.Qd4= holds everything.] 0-1
71 - Richard Kasa Tribute
Richard Kasa passed away in July 2015. Kasa was a long time chess master
and an energetic scholastic chess teacher. From what I saw online, I am sure
Rich is missed by the people who knew him well. Kasa and I played only this
one time.
Our encounter came in the International Correspondence Chess Federation

(ICCF) Master Class section WT/M/GT/156. We were the only two USA
players out of the 15 in this round robin event. I finished in eleventh with 6
out of 14. Kasa was next with 5.5.
My chess game with Richard Kasa began as a French Defence 1.e4 e6 2.d4
d5. I chose the Tarrasch 3.Nd2 Nf6 4.e5 Nfd7.
When GM Seirawan played this against Kasa in 1992, Yasser as White

played 5.c3 c5 6.f4. They drew in 36 moves. That is C05.
I preferred C06 in ECO with 5.Bd3 and White knights on d2 and e2. I
relocated my knights to their natural squares 10.Nf3 and 12.Nc3. This kept
the White bishops active.
I followed the White strategy of exchanging the dark squared bishops via
Bg5-Bh4-Bg3. Anatoly Karpov used this strategy against Victor Korchnoi in
their world championship matches.
Our game was a sharp contest with constant attacks and counter attacks. We
both played well for about a year (postal chess). White had a better move 20.
Black had a better move 34. The position remained basically equal until my
blunder on move 40.
Sawyer - Kasa, corr ICCF 1984 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nd2 Nf6 4.e5
Nfd7 5.Bd3 c5 6.c3 Nc6 7.Ne2 cxd4 8.cxd4 f6 9.exf6 Nxf6 10.Nf3 Bd6
11.0-0 Qc7 12.Nc3 [12.g3=] 12...a6 13.Bg5 0-0 14.Bh4 [14.Rc1=] 14...g6
15.Bg3 Bxg3 16.hxg3 Qg7 17.Qd2 Ng4 18.Be2 Bd7 19.Rad1 Rae8 20.Nh2
[20.Na4+/=] 20...Nh6 21.g4 Kh8 22.Bf3 Re7 23.Ne2 Ref7 24.g5 Nf5 25.g3
Nd6 26.Bg2 Nc4 27.Qc3 Rc8 28.b3 Nd6 29.Qb2 Ne4 30.f4 Nb4 31.Bxe4
dxe4 32.Rc1 Rxc1 33.Nxc1 Bb5 34.Re1 Bd3 [34...Rc7!=/+] 35.Ng4 Rc7
36.Nf6 Rc2 37.Qa3 Qe7 38.Qa5 Nc6 39.Qb6 Qb4 40.Qxb4 Nxb4 41.Nxe4?
[41.a3 Nd5=] 41...Bxe4 42.Rxe4 Rxc1+ 0-1
3.Nd2 c5
Black immediately and directly challenges the White center since the White
Nd2 does not attack d5.
72 - Four Tips for Tactics
Here are four tips for you to win chess games quickly.
1. Develop all your minor pieces before your opponent does.
2. Grab big open lines.
3. Aim for weak points.
4. Look for combinations.
Watch what happens in my French Defence vs Ernest Huber.
In the 1970s World Champion Anatoly Karpov controlled the board with
piece play in all his openings. Karpov's skill and expertise with pieces
allowed him to dominate the best masters in the world for a decade after
Bobby Fischer quit playing.
Fischer was awesome when he played! That ended in 1972. From 1972-1982
Karpov sharpened his skills playing 50 master games per year. Fischer was
not playing. If Fischer wanted to play Karpov we can imagine the games
would have been great!
I copied Karpov's openings in my own games. In the French Defence

Tarrasch Variation 3.Nd2 game vs Ernest Huber, my army was at full
strength.
Black got into big trouble after a dozen moves. He had weak points at f7, e6,
d7, and c7. I had many combinations because of my advantage in
development and found one that won a piece.
Sawyer (1980) - Huber (1874), P-388 corr APCT (1.2), 12.1978 begins 1.e4
e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nd2 c5 4.exd5 Qxd5 5.Ngf3 cxd4 6.Bc4 Qd6 7.0-0 Nf6 8.Nb3
Bd7 9.Nbxd4 Be7 10.Qe2 a6 [10...Nc6 11.Rd1+/=] 11.Rd1 Qc7 12.Ne5 0-0
[12...b5 13.Bb3+-] 13.Bf4 [13.Nxf7!+-] 13...Qc8 [13...Qb6 14.c3+/-] 14.c3
[14.Nxd7! Nbxd7 15.Nxe6 fxe6 16.Bxe6+ Rf7 17.Rxd7 Nxd7 18.Rd1+-]
14...Nc6? [14...Kh8 15.Bb3+/-] 15.Nxd7 Nxd4 16.Nxf6+ Bxf6 17.cxd4 Re8
18.Rac1 Qd7 19.Be5 1-0
73 – Knight Mate 4.exd5 cxd4
I played several openings against Bob Muir with my tendency to gradually
move to the right. Most often I began 1.d4.
This led to some Queen’s Gambit Declined games as well as some Blackmar-
Diemer Gambits. We played a lot over maybe eight years’ time.
Shifting to right further I played 1.e4 quite a few times with the French
Defence and the Ruy Lopez.
Once in a while I played the Bird 1.f4. One rare occasions I even played 1.g4,
but the Grob is further to the right than I like to go.
His French Defence choice led me to play a typical Tarrasch Variation. We

continued 4.exd5 cxd4.
The game reminded me of the von Hennig Schara Gambit. That opening
begins 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 c5 4.cxd5 cxd4.
Black plays the same exact first four moves. White starts with 1.d4 in both
cases. After that he attacks Black’s d5 pawn on move two. White develops a
knight on move three. And finally White captures on d5 with a pawn on
move four. Soon after the queens come off the board in both openings.
Here Black lost his stranded pawn on d4, although he had some
compensation. Black castled queenside. White castled kingside. Then the
pieces started flying with attacks threats and counter threats. White
maintained the one pawn advantage.
Black kicked a White knight, expecting it to retreat. Instead the knight leaped
over the pawns for checkmate!
Sawyer (2010) - Muir (1800), Williamsport, PA 03.1998 begins 1.d4 d5

2.e4 e6 3.Nd2 c5 4.exd5 cxd4 5.Bb5+ Bd7 6.Bxd7+ Qxd7 7.dxe6 Qxe6+
8.Qe2!? [8.Ne2!+/-] 8...Qxe2+ 9.Nxe2 Nc6 10.Nb3 0-0-0 11.0-0 Bb4
[11...Nge7 12.Bf4=] 12.Rd1 Nf6 13.Nexd4 Ne5 [13...Nxd4 14.Rxd4 Rxd4
15.Nxd4+/=] 14.c3 Be7 15.Bf4 Nc4 16.Nb5 [16.Nf5+/-] 16...Rxd1+
17.Rxd1 a6? [17...b6 18.Re1+/-] 18.Na7# 1-0
74 - Chris Urgena 4.exd5 Qxd5
Helen Warren attracted many players to APCT from her home state of
Illinois. One postal player from Illinois was Chris Urgena.
He and I played the same French Defence line two times in 1979. I like the
Tarrasch Variation 3.Nd2 due to the open nature of the position.
Here Black chose the line 3…c5 4.exd5 Qxd5. This keeps Black from having
an isolated pawn on d5. Normally White drives the queen back with 5.Ngf3
Nc6 6.Bc4 Qd8.
Temporarily Black may have an extra pawn after 7.Nb3 cxd4. The risk to
White is minor since there is no good way for Black to keep the pawn. Here I
regained the pawn with 11.Nbxd4.
In our other game I reached the same position as below after 8.0-0. There
Urgena played 8…g6. I should have responded with 9.Nbxd4 Nxd4 10.Nxd4
a6 11.Qd3 Bg7 12.Rd1 Bd7 13.Bf4+=.
Then White would have had an advantage due to the better bishops. Instead I
played 9.Bg5 and we drew a long game.
This shorter game below features a tactical skirmish. White has a lead in
development and better placed pieces. My strategy led to a positional
advantage for White. My pieces had better scope, especially the bishops.
One knight move that jumps out at me in this game is 16.Nd7. This move
headed toward complications.
White had multiple possibilities. Black chose the wrong defensive

arrangement and apparently miscalculated.
Sawyer (2000) - Urgena (1840), corr APCT 1979 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5
3.Nd2 c5 4.exd5 Qxd5 5.Ngf3 Nc6 6.Bc4 Qd8 7.Nb3 cxd4 8.0-0 Be7
[8...Nf6 9.Nbxd4 Nxd4 10.Nxd4=] 9.Qe2 Nf6 10.Rd1 0-0 11.Nbxd4 Qc7
12.Nxc6 [12.Bg5+/=] 12...bxc6 13.Bg5 Bb7 14.Qe5 [14.Ne5!?] 14...Qxe5
15.Nxe5 Rfd8 16.Nd7 Nd5 17.Bxe7 Nxe7? [17...Rxd7 18.Bc5+/=] 18.Nc5
Rxd1+ 19.Rxd1 Rb8 20.Nxb7 Nd5 21.Na5 g6 22.Nxc6 Rb7 23.Bb3 1-0
75 - Parsons Plays on Right
We may not like politics in chess, but politics and chess can mix and survive.
We have our personal opinions, but remember, we come together to play
chess.
Just keep moving. If we kicked out everyone who disagreed with us, we
could play only solitaire chess.
As I recall David Parsons loved conservative American politics. He probably

liked every Republican President from Abraham Lincoln to George W. Bush.
Another vocal player in the club was a liberal Democrat. This made for some
good natured banter.
Love covers a multitude of sins. At our chess club we all liked each other
well enough that we did not let political differences get in the way.
Just keep moving. Beyond being able to vote, what the heck can we do about
the government anyway?
In our French Defence Tarrasch, Dave chose 4...Qxd5. Black avoids the
isolated pawn at the cost of a few tempi. I tried to focus on the center.
Parsons pushed play to his right. Most of his moves were from the e-file to
the a-file. My queen got distracted from the center on move 23. That gave
him good play.
Just keep moving. Pieces kept flying with each tactical threat and counter. In
the ending White was up a pawn, so Black resigned.
Sawyer (2011) - Parsons (1682), Williamsport, PA 1994 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4

d5 3.Nd2 c5 4.exd5 Qxd5 5.Ngf3 cxd4 6.Bc4 Qd8 7.Nb3 Bb4+ 8.Bd2 Qb6
9.Nfxd4 Nf6 10.0-0 0-0 11.Bxb4 Qxb4 12.Bd3 [12.Qe2=] 12...Rd8 13.c3
Qe7 14.Qf3 e5 15.Nf5 [15.Rfe1+/=] 15...Bxf5 16.Bxf5 Nc6 17.Rad1 e4
18.Qe3 Qe5 19.Qc5 Rd5 [19...g6=] 20.Rxd5 Nxd5 21.Bd7 Nce7 22.c4
[22.Re1=] 22...b6 23.Qb5? [23.Qd4=] 23...a6 24.Qa4 Nf6 25.Bc6 Ng4
[Black threatens mate in one.] 26.g3 Rd8 27.c5 bxc5 [27...Nxc6! 28.Qxc6
e3-+] 28.Qxe4 [28.Bxe4=] 28...f5 [28...c4=/+] 29.Qxe5 Nxe5 30.Bb7 c4
31.Na5 Rd2 32.Bxa6?! [32.f4+/-] 32...c3? [32...Rxb2 33.Nxc4=] 33.Nc4
Nxc4 34.Bxc4+ Kf8 35.bxc3 Rc2 36.Rb1 Nc6 37.Rb6 1-0
76 - French Greed vs Benner
In a French Defence game I grabbed a pawn and tried to keep it. This greedy
approach was too risky. I got away with it here, but I do not play this way
anymore.
Here I examine a Tarrasch Variation 3.Nd2 game that I played by postal

chess in 1978. As I recall, my opponent Steve Benner was an Iowa farmer.
My choice was to take 7.dxc5 and try to defend with 8.b4? This resembles a
Queens Gambit reversed. I would have been in trouble if Black found the
correct 10th move.
APCT Semi-Class tournaments listed players in order of rating. They divided

all the entrants into groups of seven.
At that point, you would play the other six in your group with three games as
White and three as Black. At the beginning of the event, everyone had ratings
that were close to each other.
The games were played at a pace of about one move each per week, so games
tended to last for several months.
By the end of the event, player ratings were often far apart. The final results
were rated based on each players ratings at the time the game ended. My
postal rating was on a rapid rise in 1978.
Helen Warren directed APCT tournaments. Jim Warren ran the ratings for
APCT. According to Professor Arpad Elo, Jim Warren wrote the computer
program FIDE used for its Elo rating system. APCT set ratings 1000 points
below the Elo rating scale. USCF postal did not. I changed all my APCT
ratings to the Elo scale.
Sawyer (1950) - Benner (1722), corr APCT 78SC-5, 11.1978 begins 1.e4 e6
2.d4 d5 3.Nd2 c5 4.exd5 exd5 5.Bb5+ Bd7 6.Qe2+ Be7 7.dxc5 Nf6 8.b4?
[White is being greedy. Better is 8.Ngf3 0-0 9.Nb3 Re8 10.Be3=] 8...0-0
9.Nb3 Re8 10.Be3 Ng4 [10...a5!-/+] 11.Bxd7 Qxd7 12.Nf3 Bf6 13.Nbd4
Nc6 14.c3 Re4 [14...Nxe3 15.fxe3 Rxe3 16.Qxe3 Re8=/+] 15.0-0 Rae8
16.Qd2 [16.Rae1=] 16...Nxe3 17.fxe3 Rxe3 18.Rae1 Rxe1 19.Rxe1 Rxe1+
20.Qxe1 Kf8 1/2-1/2
77 - Russia Chess Vacation
Shortly after I played Michael Johnson of California, a fascinating article
appeared in the APCT News Bulletin. It was entitled: “A Chess Vacation:
Russia and Michael Johnson”. The article was well written. It was published
around May. 1979. I only have page 135 of the article. One of my other wins
from our same event is on the back (page 136).
Michael Johnson took a chess group vacation to Russia. His observations

made an interesting travel log for the Western chess player during the cold
war period. In part he wrote:
“In Russia it is not enough merely to play well; one must be able to pass
along his knowledge and skills... Geller is on the staff.”
“...at Moscow University... Botvinnik told us that it's his opinion that
computers will soon play better than people, but that this should not influence
human chess in any way.”
“We were met by Maya Chiburdanidze, the Women's World Champion. She
is a very pleasant 17 year old girl with a very pleasant killer-instinct at the
board. Her full-time trainer is Gufeld”
“In the states, when someone finds out that you play tournament chess, their
first question is likely to be, "How many moves ahead can you think?"... In
Russia, when they learn that you play the game, their first question is, "What
openings do you play?”
Our Sawyer - Johnson game was a Tarrasch French Defence. The basic
theme of this 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nd2 c5 line is for White to play against the
isolated Black pawn on d5. Our game was level until Johnson missed a
simple tactic. It happens to us all. He lost a piece and the game. Some wins
do come easy.
Sawyer - Johnson, corr APCT Q-36 corr APCT, 1978 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5
3.Nd2 c5 4.exd5 exd5 5.Bb5+ Bd7 6.Qe2+ Be7 7.dxc5 Nf6 8.Nb3 0-0 9.Be3
Re8 10.Nf3 a6 11.Bxd7 Nbxd7 12.0-0 Bxc5 13.Nxc5 Nxc5 14.Rfe1 Ne6
15.Qd3 Qc7 16.h3 Rac8 17.c3 Qc4 18.Ne5 Qxd3 19.Nxd3 Red8 20.Rac1
h6 21.Nb4 d4 22.cxd4 Nxd4 [22...Rxc1 23.Rxc1 Nxd4=] 23.Rxc8 Nf3+
24.gxf3 1-0
78 - Corter Delays Nc6
James Corter played the French Defence against me several times. His son
Travis also played it against me some.
This time against Jim Corter I countered with the Tarrasch Variation 3.Nd2.
Corter opted for the classical open move 3...c5.
I proceeded to exchange off the e-pawns at d5. Years earlier I would follow
up with 5.Bb5+. Even though I had good results, I did not like those positions
out of the opening.
Knights before bishops. That’s almost always a better idea. So I developed

my kingside knight with 5.Ngf3.
Normally Black stops a bishop check on move six with 5…Nc6 on move
five. Here James Corter developed 5...Nf6.
This looks playable enough, but White was able to mix things up for a few
moves with 6.Bb5+ and 7.Qe2+. None of this amounted to much. Black was
still fine.
We kept maneuvering. Eventually White got a slight edge. Black opened up

his kingside and pushed to attack. This allowed me to threaten the pin of his
queen to his king. Corter dodged that, but then he fell prey to the pin of his h-
pawn to his queen.
This is one of those unusual games were a player resigned without get
checkmated nor losing material. However Black was about to lose a pawn
when White would have a big advantage.
Sawyer (2010) - Corter (1603), Williamsport, PA 20.03.2001 begins 1.e4 e6

2.d4 d5 3.Nd2 c5 4.exd5 exd5 5.Ngf3 Nf6 6.Bb5+ Bd7 7.Qe2+ Be7 8.dxc5
0-0 9.0-0 [9.Nb3 Re8 10.Be3 a6 11.Bd3 Ba4 12.Nfd4=] 9...Bxc5 10.Nb3 Re8
11.Qd3 Bxb5 [11...Bb6=] 12.Qxb5 Bb6 13.Bg5 Qd7 14.Nbd4 Bxd4
15.Nxd4 a6 16.Qd3 Ne4 17.Bf4 Nc6 18.c3 Nc5 19.Qd1 Ne6 20.Nxe6 fxe6
21.Qg4 Qf7 22.Bg5 Qg6 23.Qf4 Rf8 24.Qd2 Ne5 25.f4 Nc4 26.Qe2 h5
[26...Rae8 27.Bh4=] 27.b3 Nb6 28.Be7 Rfe8 29.Bc5 Nd7 30.Bd4 Nf6
31.Bxf6 [31.Qe5+/=] 31...gxf6 32.Rf3 Kf7 33.Re1 h4 [33...Rac8 34.a4+/=]
34.Rh3 [34.Qf2+/-] 34...Qh6 35.g3 1-0
79 - Rook Sac vs Werner
RxN, Resigns! I love it. My game vs Edmund Werner of Florida was decided
on a rook sacrifice. Our APCT game was a French Defence. We played the
open Tarrasch Variation 3.Nd2 c5.
White ripped open the queenside pawns in Ruy Lopez style with 14.a4!?
Then I ganged up on the weak Black pawns.
Eventually White won a pawn. Black made a sly mate threat on move 15. He
moved a bishop to protect his a-pawn and aimed for mate at White’s h-pawn
on the other side of the board.
The struggle continued. White was up a pawn. Black had a hard time finding
good squares for his pieces when he walked into the final combination that
dropped a piece.
The Daytona Beach Morning Journal listed Ed Werner’s obituary on June 6,

1981. Apparently Werner had worked in his younger days as an entry clerk
for Master Eagle Photo Engraving Corp. in New York. Then Edmund Werner
retired to Florida where he played postal chess for many years. The paper
lists Werner as age 68 at the time of death. The article says that Werner was a
member of the International Correspondence Chess Federation.
According to games in my database, Werner was very active in many postal

chess organizations from the 1950s until his death. Old-timers will remember
Ed Werner.
This game was played in the APCT Rook Finals. The players qualified for
this section by finishing first or second in the prior round of an open section.
Sawyer (1900) - Werner (1747), corr APCT 77RF 1978 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4
d5 3.Nd2 c5 4.exd5 exd5 5.Ngf3 a6 [5...Nc6=] 6.dxc5 Bxc5 7.Nb3 Ba7
8.Be2 Ne7 9.0-0 Qc7 10.c3 0-0 11.Nfd4 Nbc6 12.Be3 Nxd4 13.Nxd4 b5?
[13...Nc6 14.Re1+/=] 14.a4 bxa4 15.Qxa4 Bb8 16.g3 Bb7 17.Bf4 Qc8
18.Bxb8 Qxb8 19.Qd7 Re8 20.Ra5 [20.Rfe1+/-] 20...Qc8 21.Qxc8 Rexc8
22.Rfa1 Rab8 23.R1a2 g6 [23...Nc6 24.Nxc6 Rxc6 25.Bxa6 Bxa6 26.Rxa6
+/=] 24.Bxa6 Rc7 25.Rb5 Ra8 26.Rba5 Rb8 27.Bd3 Bc8 28.Ra7 Rxa7
29.Rxa7 Kf8 30.Rxe7 1-0
80 - Tarrasch 7.0-0 cxd4 blik
Do computer chess engines fear the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit? Can’t Black
just take the pawn and win easily? Only sometimes.
Here game vs “blik” Black refused to take the gambit pawn. I did a quick
count vs this opponent from 2008 - 2013. As White in the BDG I won 98
games and lost 101 games with 34 draws.
Fear is not part of the computer algorithm for opening selection. Such choices
are based on its approved book lines, its winning percentage with specific
moves and some “random” selection.
Instead of entering the BDG this computer transposed into the French
Defence with 1.d4 d5 2.e4 e6. I chose 3.Nd2. The Tarrasch Variation leads to
very solid and equal positions. This game continued 7.0-0 cxd4 instead of
7.dxc5 Bxc5 8.0-0.
After multiple exchanges we reached a bishop and pawn ending where

neither king had any entry points to his opponent’s pawns. After 34.g5 we
drew this game on move 84 by the 50 move rule.
Sawyer (1984) - blik (2422), ICC 5 0 Internet Chess Club, 20.06.2008

begins 1.d4 d5 2.e4 e6 3.Nd2 c5 4.Ngf3 Nc6 5.exd5 exd5 6.Bb5 Bd6 7.0-0
[7.dxc5 Bxc5 8.0-0 Nge7 9.Nb3 Bd6=] 7...cxd4 8.Nb3 Nge7 9.Nbxd4 0-0
10.c3 Bg4 [10...Re8 11.Re1=] 11.h3 Nxd4 12.cxd4 Bxf3 13.Qxf3 Qb6
14.Qd3 Nc6 15.Bxc6 bxc6 16.b3 Qb5 17.Qxb5 cxb5 18.Bd2 Rfe8 19.Rfe1
Rxe1+ 20.Rxe1 Rc8 21.Rc1 Rxc1+ 22.Bxc1 f6 23.f3 Kf7 24.g4 g6 25.Kf2
h5 26.Be3 Ke8 27.Ke2 a6 28.Kd3 a5 29.a4 hxg4 30.hxg4 bxa4 31.bxa4
Kd8 32.Bd2 Bc7 33.f4 f5 34.g5 [34.gxf5 gxf5=] 34...Ke7 35.Be3 Kf7
36.Bd2 Kf8 37.Be3 Ke7 38.Bd2 Ke6 39.Be3 Kd6 40.Bd2 Ke6 41.Be3 Ke7
42.Bd2 Bb6 43.Ke3 Ke6 44.Kd3 Bd8 45.Be1 Ke7 46.Bd2 Bb6 47.Ke3 Bd8
48.Kd3 Kd7 49.Ke3 Kc8 50.Kd3 Bb6 51.Ke3 Kc7 52.Kd3 Kc6 53.Ke3
Kb7 54.Kd3 Kc7 55.Ke3 Kd8 56.Kd3 Kd7 57.Ke3 Kd8 58.Kd3 Kc8
59.Ke3 Kd7 60.Kd3 Ke8 61.Ke3 Ke7 62.Kd3 Bc7 63.Ke3 Bb6 64.Kd3
Kd8 65.Ke3 Kc8 66.Kd3 Kd7 67.Ke3 Bc7 68.Kd3 Bd6 69.Kc2 Ke8
70.Kd3 Bc7 71.Ke3 Kd7 72.Kd3 Ke8 73.Ke3 Bd8 74.Kd3 Bb6 75.Ke3 Kf8
76.Kd3 Kg8 77.Ke3 Kf7 78.Kd3 Kg8 79.Ke3 Kf8 80.Kd3 Kf7 81.Ke3 Kg8
82.Kd3 Kf8 83.Ke3 Kg8 84.Kd3 1/2-1/2
81 - DLP Ballard 7.dxc5 Bxc5
DLP Ballard from Oklahoma is a Life member of the USCF who earned the
National Master title. He and I played postal games almost every year from
1978 to 1982. DLP won the first game with 1.g3 in what was basically a
Reversed Pirc Defence. Duncan Suttles was famous at that time for playing
1.g3. Grandmaster Suttles was very active. Usually Suttles played 1.e4, but if
not he chose 1.g3, 1.c4 or 1.Nc3.
My early loss vs DLP Ballard occurred when I was very much in the learning
phase of my chess skills and experience. All the rest of my games vs DLP
Ballard were drawn.
When I would write to someone every week for months, I might have
ongoing conversations on the postcards. DLP Ballard was a friendly guy.
Sometimes we would chat.
I was curious and asked him one time what the “DLP” stood for. As I recall
he said, “D La Pierre Ballard”. He said his first name was just the letter “D”.
I think he signed his postcards “D”. Nice.
Since he was rated over 2200 in tournament play, I am guessing that he was
stronger face to face than via correspondence. Still he was a pretty good
postal chess player for several years.
This was the only game where I had White. We reached a critical variation of
the French Defence Tarrasch after 3.Nd2 c5.
I traded off both my bishops for both of his knights. Then we mixed things
up. After multiple exchanges I had a queen and a pawn for his two rooks. We
agreed to a draw when we could have repeated moves.
Sawyer (2100) - Ballard (2050), corr APCT 1980 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5
3.Nd2 c5 4.exd5 exd5 5.Ngf3 Nc6 6.Bb5 Bd6 7.dxc5 Bxc5 8.0-0 Nge7
9.Nb3 Bd6 10.Bg5 0-0 11.Re1 a6 12.Bxc6 [12.Bd3!?] 12...bxc6 13.Bxe7
Bxe7 14.Nbd4 Bd7 15.Ne5 Bf6 16.Ndxc6 Bxc6 17.Nxc6 Qd6 18.Nd4 Qb4
19.Nc6 Qxb2 20.Qxd5 Qxa1 [20...Qb5 21.Rad1=] 21.Rxa1 Bxa1 22.g3 Bc3
23.Qc5 Bf6 24.a4 g6 25.Ne7+ [25.Qb6+/=] 25...Bxe7 26.Qxe7 Rfe8 27.Qb7
Reb8 28.Qc7 Rc8 1/2-1/2
82 - Know Thyself or Go Wild
The Greek philosopher Socrates gave us the famous maxim “Know Thyself.”
The point was that we are not gods. We have limitations. Know them. During
my chess career, I learned things about myself that I did not expect.
Outwardly I am a peaceful person. Inwardly I can become rather wild and
frisky.
I am comfortable with solid chess, but when a game gets wild, I somehow
naturally crank up my play to a higher level. When the pieces are flying
around, I tend to find more good moves than my opponent does. It is not that
I see everything; I don't, and I do hate that. But I have more success when
combinations abound.
David Spigel and I played four times. I won this French Defence and drew a
London System as White. I lost a Bird's Opening as White and I lost a
Latvian Gambit as Black.
This game followed some Karpov-Korchnoi 1974 match games through

move 12. After my move 14, 14...Nxd4 15.Nxd4 would have led to equality.
Instead Black decided to mix things up. When pieces start flying, I got the
better chances. At a critical moment I missed the powerful move 20.Bh7+!
Missing moves happens, but the point is I got to a position where White was
winning. Often I was not so successful with positional chess.
Things swung back to equal as we approached the ending. All of a sudden

Black hung a piece. Maybe Spigel meant to play other moves first and forgot
that he had not played them yet. Maybe he set the board up wrong. For
whatever reason, I got a gift win.
Sawyer - Spigel, corr APCT Q-36 corr APCT, 1978 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5
3.Nd2 c5 4.exd5 exd5 5.Ngf3 Nc6 6.Bb5 Bd6 7.dxc5 Bxc5 8.0-0 Nge7
9.Nb3 Bd6 10.Nbd4 0-0 11.c3 Bg4 12.Qa4 Bh5 13.Bg5 Qc7 14.h3 f6?!
[14...Nxd4 15.Nxd4=] 15.Ne6 Qc8 16.Nxf8 fxg5 17.Nxh7 Bxf3 18.Nxg5
Bh5 19.Bd3 Ne5 20.Qh4 [I missed the move 20.Bh7+!] 20...Nxd3 21.Qxh5
Qf5 22.g4? [22.Rad1] 22...Nf4 23.gxf5 Nxh5 24.Rad1 Rf8 25.Ne4 Bb8
26.Nc5 Rxf5 27.Rfe1 Kf7 28.Nxb7 Nf4 29.Nd8+ Kf6 30.Rxe7 Nxh3+
31.Kg2 Nf4+ 32.Kf1 Kxe7 33.Nc6+ Kd6 34.Nxb8 Nd3 [34...Rh5 35.Ke1
Rh1+ 36.Kd2 Rxd1+ 37.Kxd1 Nd3=/+] 35.Rxd3 1-0
Book 3 – Chapter 5 – Classical Variation
White develops his knight to protect e4 and attack d5.
3.Nc3
83 - Curious Caro-French
Dan Heisman recommended playing a million blitz games to improve your
opening play. I love blitz chess. I learned many openings that way, but I am a
long way from a million games! Over my career I have tried to play
opponents of every level. Club players will often play lines never seen at the
master level. Common non-master lines rarely make it into openings books.
This curious line combines a Caro-Kann and a French Defence. We began

1.d4 d5 2.e4 e6 3.Nc3 c6. How should White play? Good moves are 4.Nf3,
4.e5 or 4.Bd3. More speculative are 4.f3, 4.Be3 and 4.a3. I have played all of
them; it is a matter of taste.
Here I chose 4.Be3 Be7 5.e5 (5.Bd3!?) 5...c5 when 6.Qg4! looks better than
my choice of 6.f4. I made errors on moves 24, 25, 32 and 33. My opponent
played well, but I was still in the game. Up until this point, he played slightly
faster than I did. I had to step it up and make him think. I tried to pry open the
kingside; he began to use more time. At the end I had a 0:40-0:33 edge on the
clock when he made a tactical blunder dropping his rook. He resigned.
Sawyer (1991) - ZEPFAN4EVER (1583), ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club,

04.08.2011 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e4 e6 3.Nc3 c6?! 4.Be3 [4.Nf3+/=; 4.e5+/=]
4...Be7 5.e5 c5 6.f4 [6.Qg4+/=] 6...cxd4 7.Bxd4 Nc6 8.Nf3 b6 9.Bb5 Bd7
10.0-0 a6 11.Bxc6 Bxc6 12.Bf2 Rc8 13.Ne2 Bc5 14.Ned4 Qd7 15.c3 Ne7
16.Qd2 0-0 17.Rad1 Qb7 18.Kh1 b5 19.Nxc6 Qxc6 20.Nd4 Bxd4 21.Bxd4
Nf5 22.g4 Nxd4 23.Qxd4 Qc4 24.a3? [24.f5] 24...Rc7 25.Kg2 [25.f5]
25...Qb3 26.Rd2 Rc4 27.Qf2 Rfc8 28.Re1 Qa4 29.Kg3 Re4 30.Re3 Rcc4
31.Rde2? [31.Rxe4=] 31...h6? [31...Rxf4?] 32.Qf3 [32.Rxe4=] 32...Rxe3
[32...Rxf4-+] 33.Rxe3 Qb3 34.Re2 a5 35.h3 b4 36.axb4 axb4 37.cxb4
Qxb4 38.f5 d4 39.Qa8+ Kh7 40.f6 Qb3+ 41.Kf2 gxf6 42.exf6 [42.Qf8=]
42...Rc2? [42...d3-+] 43.Qe4+ Black resigns 1-0
84 - Zerg Defeats Caro-French
I heard from the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit player Howard Zerg.
"Hello Tim, My name's Howard, and I'm a huge fan of your BDG book. Way
to go!"
"I can't imagine writing down so much notation..."
"This is my favorite game that I have played recently."
Thanks Howard! I have always found the Caro-French a little perplexing for
the BDGer. White plays 1.d4 / 2.e4 / 3.Nc3 (in any order) and Black plays
1...e6 / 2...d5 / 3...c6 (in any order).
At this point, White has many playable moves. In my experience the odds are
very small of reaching a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit from this position.
I have tried 4.Be3!? as did Howard. My best results were from 4.Nf3 and
4.e5. I have also stubbornly played 4.f3.
Howard Zerg treated it with a Huebsch Gambit flavor. That worked well for
him here.
Zerg (2030) - niccion (2047), Blitz 3 min, 28.03.2013 begins 1.d4 e6 2.Nc3
d5 3.e4 c6 [3...Nf6= French Defence] 4.Be3!? Nf6 5.Qd2 Nxe4 6.Nxe4 dxe4
7.f3 exf3 8.Nxf3 Be7 9.0-0-0 0-0 10.Bd3 Nd7 11.h4 f5 [The natural move is
11...Nf6 when White has compensation for the gambit pawn after a move like
12.h5!?=] 12.h5 h6 13.Rdg1 Bd6 14.g4 f4 [If 14...fxg4 15.Rxg4 Rxf3
16.Bxh6 Rf7 17.Rhg1 Bf8 18.Bxg7 Rxg7 19.Rxg7+ Bxg7 20.h6+/=] 15.Bf2
Be7 16.Bh4 [16.g5+-] 16...Bg5 17.Bxg5 hxg5 18.h6 Rf7 19.Rh5 gxh6
20.Rgh1 Rg7 21.Rxh6 Qe7? [This move invites disaster, but White is still
better after 21...Kf7 22.Rh8+-] 22.Qh2 e5 23.Rh8+ Kf7 24.Qh5+ [24.Bc4+!
could lead to the pretty and quick finish after 24...Kf6 25.Rh6+ Rg6
26.Rxg6+ Kxg6 27.Qh6#] 24...Ke6 25.Re8 Kd5 26.Rxe7 Rxe7 27.Nxe5
Nxe5 28.dxe5 [Or 28.Qxg5!+-] 28...Rxe5 29.Rd1 Kc5 30.b4+ Kb6 31.a4
[31.Qh8!+- wins more material.] 31...a6 32.Qh8 Re7 33.Qd4+ Kc7 34.a5
Be6 35.Qb6+ Kd7 36.Bf5+ Ke8 37.Bxe6 Rxe6 38.Qxb7 Re7 39.Qxa8+ Kf7
40.Qxc6 Re6 41.Qc7+ Re7 42.Qd6 Re6 43.Qd7+ Re7 44.Qd5+ Re6 45.Re1
Kg6 46.Qxe6+ Kg7 47.Qe7+ Kg8 48.Re6 1-0
85 - Marshall Gambit French
US Champion Frank Marshall seemed to have a gambit or an offbeat line for
every opening. He was amazingly creative for many decades.
My friend David Parsons sometimes played the Marshall Gambit of the

French Defence against me. Below is one of those games with another one in
the notes.
This classical line begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 c5. Many years ago Rick
Kennedy and Riley Sheffield wrote a detailed analysis of this line in their
book "The Marshall Gambit: in the French and Sicilian Defenses".
Frank Marshall was known to play the Diemer-Duhm Gambit 3.c4 as White.
The line 3.Nc3 c5 for Marshall as Black is logical.
In each case Marshall attack the opposing d-pawn with his c-pawn. Below
White gets the better position, but this variation does present some less
common issues for White.
The big question is “Can White win a pawn and keep it?” White will
normally capture on both d5 and c5. This leaves the new d5 pawn in
jeopardy.
Black hoped for extra play. That hope was dashed in these games. Why?
Because White also got extra play. When the position opened up White got
even more and better play.

d5 3.Nc3 c5 4.exd5 exd5 5.dxc5 Nf6 [5...d4 6.Ne4!? Qd5 7.Qe2 Be6 8.c4!?
Qf5 9.Nf3 Bxc5? 10.Nxd4 Bxd4 11.Nd6+ Kd7 12.Nxf5 Bxf5 13.Qf3 1-0
Sawyer - Parsons, Williamsport PA 1994] 6.Bg5?! [6.Be3+/=] 6...d4
[6...Bxc5=] 7.Bxf6 Qxf6 8.Nd5!? Qe5+? [8...Qe6+ 9.Qe2+/=] 9.Qe2 Qxe2+
10.Bxe2 [10.Nxe2!+-] 10...Kd7 [10...Kd8 11.0-0-0+/-] 11.b4 Nc6 12.Rd1
Be7 [12...Ne7 13.Nc3+-] 13.Bg4+ [13.Nf3+-] 13...Kd8 14.Bxc8 Rxc8
15.Nf3 a5 16.b5 [16.a3+-] 16...Bxc5 [16...Nb4 17.Nxb4+/-] 17.bxc6 Re8+
18.Ne3 Rxc6 19.Nxd4 Rd6 20.Nb5 Rxd1+ 21.Kxd1 Bxe3 22.fxe3 Rxe3
23.Re1 1-0
86 - Win When Up Material
What do you do when you win a lot of material early in a blitz game and
there is no immediate mate? You are likely to win eventually, but things can
go bad when moves are made rapidly. I follow these five rules of thumb to
win such games.
1. I play fast enough to avoid losing on time.

2. I watch my King and major pieces. Don’t lose anything big!
3. I look for strong threats to make my opponent think longer.
4. I swap off the major pieces when practical.
5. I look for little ways to get a quick easy win.
Here my opponent avoided the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit. Black opted for

1.d4 d5 2.e4 c5.
Adolf Anderssen reached the same position against Van’t Kruys in

Amsterdam 1861 via Sicilian Defence after 1.e4 c5 2.d4 d5. That game
continued: 3.exd5 Qxd5 4.dxc5. Many players choose 4.Nc3 Qxd4 5.Qxd4
cxd4 6.Nb5 and White stands better. I usually play that. One other option is
the Alapin Sicilian 4.c3.
I chose a different third move in 3.Nc3. Black headed for the French Defence
with 3…e6. An alternative is 3...dxe4 4.d5 is a Reversed Albin-Counter
Gambit. By move 10 I had won material.
I followed my five rules listed above. I did miss a very strong threat with
25.R8d6+! Eventually Black walked into a mate.
Sawyer - samo66, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 06.08.2011 begins 1.d4 d5

2.e4 c5 3.Nc3 e6 4.exd5 exd5 5.dxc5 Bxc5 [5...d4 6.Bb5+ Nc6 7.Qe2+ Be6
8.Ne4+/=] 6.Qxd5 [6.Bb5+!? Bd7 7.Qxd5 Qe7+ 8.Qe4+/=] 6...Qxd5 [Black's
game goes from bad to worse. 6...Qe7+! 7.Qe4 Bf5 8.Qxe7+ Nxe7 9.Be3
Bxe3 10.fxe3 Bxc2 11.Rc1 Bf5 12.Nb5+/- with advantage.] 7.Nxd5 Bb6
8.Be3 Kd7? 9.Bxb6 axb6 10.Nxb6+ [wins the Exchange] 10…Kc6 11.Nxa8
Bf5 12.Bd3 Ne7 13.Bxf5 Nxf5 14.0-0-0 Nd7 15.Nf3 Rxa8 16.a3 Nc5
17.Nd4+ Nxd4 18.Rxd4 Ne6 19.Rd2 Nf4 20.g3 Nh3 21.f4 Re8 22.Rhd1 g5
23.fxg5 Nxg5 24.Rd8 Re2 25.R8d2 [25.R8d6+!] 25...Re6 26.b4 Nf3 27.Rd3
Ne5 28.Re3 f6 29.Rde1 Rd6 30.Rd1 Re6 31.h3 Re8 32.Rc3+ Kb5 33.Rd5+
Kb6 34.Rd6+ Kb5? 35.Rc5+ Ka4 36.Ra5# 1-0
87 - Copy Cat Chess Moves
How do you handle it when your opponent copies your moves? Imitation
may be a form of flattery, but you cannot both win the same chess game! If
moves are copied to mate, White wins.
Jose Raul Capablanca played a humorous game. His opponent copied all his
moves in 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bb5 Bb4 5.0-0 0-0 6.d3 d6 7.Bg5
Bg4 8.Nd5 Nd4 9.Nxb4 Nxb5 10.Nd5 Nd4 11.Qd2 Qd7 12.Bxf6 Bxf3
13.Ne7+ Kh8 14.Bxg7+ Kxg7 15.Qg5+ Kh8 16.Qf6# 1-0 Capablanca – NN,
New York 1918.
At the Borders bookstore in Orlando, Florida one Marty Martinez copied my

first couple moves. Then Marty went his own way.
Sawyer - Martinez, Orlando, FL, 08.01.2004 begins 1.Nc3 Nc6 [Being a

copycat has some value. You have to watch out for tactics. Any winning
combination or checkmate will favor White.] 2.d4 d5 3.e4 e6 [French
Defence and Nimzowitsch Defence both meet here. Black has three
reasonable alternatives. It is risky but possible to continue copying for one
more move with 3...e5!? 4.dxe5 d4! (4...dxe4 5.Qxd8++/- and the copycat
moves would end.) 5.Nd5 f5 6.exf6 Nxf6 7.Bg5 Be6 8.Bxf6 gxf6 9.Bc4 Ne5
10.Qxd4 c6 11.Nc7+ Qxc7 12.Bxe6 Rd8 White seems to be okay, but his
king is still in the center, and Black has open lines and active pieces.; 3...dxe4
4.d5 when Black must choose between 4...Ne5 (or 4...Nb8 ); 3...Nf6 4.e5 Nd7
5.Nxd5 Ndb8 6.Ne3 Qxd4 and both sides have to decide what to do about the
pawn on e5.] 4.Nf3 [4.e5+/= is the alternative move.] 4...dxe4 [4...Nf6 5.e5
Ne4 6.Bd3 f5 is recommended in the 2007 repertoire book "Play 1...Nc6!
Christoph Wisnewski (now Scheerer)] 5.Nxe4 Bb4+ 6.c3 Ba5 7.a4 [A strong
player would see the danger to his Ba5. My opponent is a more mid-level
player. When I was at that level, I missed more things than I do now.]
7...Nge7 8.b4 Bb6 9.a5 Bxd4 10.Nxd4 Nxd4 11.Qxd4 Qxd4 12.cxd4 [Black
has only one extra pawn for his lost bishop. It is just a matter of time.] 12...0-
0 13.Be3 Nf5 14.Ng3 Nxe3 15.fxe3 e5 16.Bc4 exd4 17.exd4 Bg4 18.0-0
Rad8 19.d5 Rde8 20.Rae1 Rxe1 21.Rxe1 Bd7 22.Ne4 [22.Re7!+-] 22...c6
23.dxc6 Bxc6 24.Nd6 h6 25.Nxf7 [Black is on the ropes and does not block
the final flurry of punches.] 25...a6 26.Ne5+ Kh7 27.Nxc6 Rc8 28.Bd3+ g6
29.Ne7 Re8 30.Bxg6+ 1-0
88 - Funny Fritz Comments
The famous chess engine Fritz makes some comments that at times sound
humorous in English. I love its cute expressions. My opponent is Mark
Douglas. We played at Borders bookstore in Orlando, Florida. I began with
1.Nc3 for a Queens Knight Attack. We transposed into a French Defence.
The notes below are by Fritz 8. Once I got a winning advantage, it came up
with a variety of ways to describe the hopelessness of Black's plight.
Sawyer - Douglas, Orlando, FL, 10.02.2005 begins 1.Nc3 Nc6 2.d4 d5 3.e4
e6 [3...dxe4 4.d5 Nb8 5.Nxe4=] 4.e5+/= [White gets more space] 4...Bb4
[4...Nge7 5.Nf3+/=] 5.Qg4 [Better is 5.a3 Bf8 6.Nf3+/-] 5...f5?? [Better is
5...Bf8+/= this is the best way to fight back] 6.Qxg7+- Nxd4 7.Qxh8 [Better
is 7.Bd3!? might be the shorter path 7...Qh4 8.Qxh8 Qg4+-] 7...Nxc2+ 8.Kd1
Nxa1 9.Qxg8+ Kd7 10.Qxd8+ Kxd8 11.Bg5+ Ke8 12.Kc1 Nb3+ [12...Bc5
a fruitless try to alter the course of the game 13.Kb1+-] 13.axb3 Bc5 14.Nh3
Bd7 15.Bb5 [15.Be2 makes it even easier for White 15...Bc6+-] 15...c6
[15...Bxb5 does not save the day 16.Nxb5 Kd7 17.b4 Bxb4 18.Nf4+-] 16.Bd3
Bd4 [16...Kf7 is not the saving move 17.Bf6+-] 17.f4 [17.Bf6 and White can
already relax 17...Bc5+-] 17...c5 [17...Kf7 cannot change destiny 18.Kd2+-]
18.Bb5 [18.Kd2 might be the shorter path 18...Rc8+-] 18...Be3+ [18...a6
doesn't change the outcome of the game 19.Bxd7+ Kxd7 20.Ne2 Be3+
21.Kc2+-] 19.Kc2 d4 [19...a6 doesn't get the cat off the tree 20.Bxd7+ Kxd7
21.Re1+-] 20.Bxd7+ Kxd7 21.Nd1 Rg8 22.Nxe3 dxe3 23.g3 Rg6 [23...h6
does not help much 24.Rd1+ Kc7 25.Bf6+-] 24.Re1 h6 25.Bf6 Ke8 [25...Kc7
cannot change what is in store for ? 26.Rxe3 Rg8 27.Rd3+-] 26.Rxe3 Rg4
[26...Kd7 is not much help 27.Rd3+ Kc7 28.b4+-] 27.Nf2 Rg6 28.Rd3 h5
[28...Rg8 doesn't change anything anymore 29.Rd8+ Kf7 30.Rd7+ Kg6
31.Rxb7+-] 29.Rd6 [Better is 29.Rd8+ secures victory 29...Kf7 30.Rd7+ Ke8
31.Re7+ Kd8 32.Rg7+ Kc8 33.Rxg6 a5+-] 29...Kf8 [29...h4 doesn't improve
anything 30.Rxe6+ Kd7 31.Re7+ Kc6 32.Bxh4+-] 30.Nd3 [30.Rd8+ seems
even better 30...Kf7 31.Rd7+ Kf8+-] 30...Rg8 31.Rd8+ Kf7 32.Rxg8 Kxg8
33.Nxc5 b6 34.Nxe6 a5 35.Nd4 Kf7 36.Nxf5 Ke6 37.Ne3 b5 38.f5+ Kf7
39.Bd8 Ke8 40.Bxa5 Kd7 41.e6+ Ke7 42.Bb4+ Kf6 43.Nd5+ Kxf5 44.e7
Ke6 45.e8Q+ Kxd5 [45...Kf5 does not improve anything 46.Qf7+ Kg4
47.Ne3+ Kh3 48.Qxh5#] 46.Kd3 h4 47.Qe4# 1-0
89 - French Rubinstein 3…dxe4
My chess friend Allen Taylor backed into the French Defence Rubinstein
Variation in our game played in 1995. White must be able to handle such
transpositions.
The standard French Rubinstein begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4. At that
point the normal continuation is 4.Nxe4. Note that the same position can be
reached after 3.Nd2 dxe4 4.Nxe4.
I attempted to reach a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit as White after 1.d4 d5 2.e4

dxe4 3.Nc3. The BDG continues 3…Nf6 4.f3.
Taylor played 3…e6 as Black. Sometimes I venture 4.f3?! It that case I have
to hope that Black does not grab the advantage with the move 4...Bb4!
This was not an online blitz game. I chose the main line 4.Nxe4. The problem
for Black in the Rubinstein French is that White has almost complete
freedom in the center. The advantage for Black is that lines are relatively
predictable, repeatable, and simple.
In this game Black weakened e6 with the move 9…f5. In an effort to protect
e6, Black lost one pawn and then another. After move 22, each side had two
rooks and a minor piece still on the board. Mass exchanges began on move
28. Suddenly Black was in a pawn endgame and still down two pawns. Black
resigned.
Sawyer - Taylor, Williamsport PA 1995 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 e6

4.Nxe4 [4.f3?! Bb4!=/+] 4...Be7 [4...Nd7 5.Nf3 Ngf6 6.Nxf6+ Nxf6 7.Bd3=]
5.Bd3 Nf6 6.Nf3 Nc6 [6...Nbd7 is a more solid move when White has many
interesting options.] 7.c3 [If 7.0-0 Black must not play 7...Nxd4? 8.Nxd4
Qxd4? 9.Bb5+!+- and White wins the Black queen.] 7...Nxe4 8.Bxe4 0-0 9.0-
0 f5 10.Bc2 Bf6 11.Re1 Ne7 12.Bg5 Ng6 13.Bxf6 Qxf6 14.Bb3 Kh8 15.Ne5
Nf4 16.Qf3 Nd5 [16...Ng6 17.Re2+/-] 17.Bxd5 exd5 18.Qxd5 c6 19.Qb3 b6
20.Qc4 f4 [20...Bb7 21.Nd7 Qf7 22.Qe6 Qxe6 23.Rxe6 Rf7 24.Rae1 g6
25.Nf6+-] 21.Qxc6 Qxc6 22.Nxc6 Bb7 23.Ne5 Rf5 24.Re2 [24.c4+-]
24...Rf6 [Black is still busted after 24...f3 25.Nxf3 Bxf3 26.gxf3 Rxf3 27.d5
Rd3 28.c4+-] 25.Rae1 Kg8 26.f3 Bd5 27.c4 Bf7 28.Nxf7 Rxf7 29.Re8+
Rxe8 30.Rxe8+ Rf8 31.Rxf8+ Kxf8 32.Kf2 1-0
3.Nc3 Nf6
In this line both sides develop knights classically on move three.
90 - French to Blackmar-Diemer
We reach the Classical Variation of the French Defence after 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5
3.Nc3 Nf6. All these moves can be played in any order except 1.e4 Nf6 2.d4?
in view of 2...Nxe4.
White has two good moves, two okay moves and two gambit moves. The
good moves score the highest, but the other moves score reasonably well,
depending on the level of competition.
Let's look at White's 4th move options in order of popularity:

Good: 4.Bg5 Classical Variation
Good: 4.e5 Steinitz Variation
Okay: 4.exd5 Exchange Variation
Okay: 4.Bd3 Solid development
Gambit: 4.Be3 Rasa-Studier, cousin to 3.Be3!? Alapin-Diemer
Gambit: 4.f3 Often reached via transposition after 1.d4 Nf6 2.f3
In November 2011, Peter Mcgerald Penullar changed the French Defence

into something akin to the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit.
Penullar - wttyoung913, PF ALAY SA DIYOS AT SA BAYAN 18 - Board

Chess.com, 15.11.2011 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 e6 3.e4 d5 4.f3 Bb4 5.a3
Bxc3+ 6.bxc3 0-0 [6...dxe4 transposes to the Winckelmann-Reimer Gambit.]
7.Bd3 [White is ready to solidify e4.] 7...dxe4 8.fxe4 b6 [If 8...Nxe4 9.Nf3
Nxc3 10.Bxh7+ Kxh7 11.Qd3+ f5 and White is better after either 12.Qxc3 or
12.Ng5+] 9.Nf3 Bb7 10.e5 [Or 10.Qe2+/=] 10...Nd5 [10...Ne4 11.0-0 Nxc3
12.Qe1 Bxf3 13.Rxf3 Qxd4+ 14.Kh1 Nd5 15.c3!+/= and White takes over
the initiative.] 11.Bd2 [This is a good move, but even more immediately
powerful is 11.Bxh7+! Kxh7 12.Ng5+ Kg6 13.h4+-] 11...Nd7 12.0-0 c5
13.Qe1 [13.Bxh7+!+- wins] 13...cxd4? [13...f5 14.exf6 N7xf6 15.Qxe6+ Kh8
16.Ne5+-] 14.Bxh7+! Kxh7 15.Ng5+ Kg6 16.Qe4+ with mate in a few
moves. 1-0
91 - Haines Takes 3.Bd3 to 3.Nc3
In January 2015 Ray Haines finished in first place. The chess tournament was
held in Houlton, Maine. There I-95 meets New Brunswick, Canada.
In the first round vs Lance Beloungie the two played a French Defence
3.Bd3. This continuation is a "rare" choice for most, but not for Ray Haines.
His friend Lance Beloungie has doubtless faced it many times in their
multiple French Defence games.
I often play 3.Be3, but I like 3.Bd3 too. To debate theory in lines Black
knows well, we may play 3.Nc3, 3.Nd2, 3.e5 or 3.exd5. Haines avoided 4.e5.
That would give White a solid positional advantage. But Black would also be
in familiar territory after a move like 4.e5. It would lead to a common French
structure.
Ray got frisky with his knights. He mixed things up which made the game
more tactical. The danger was that these tactics would favor Black. In fact
Beloungie could and did dominate the center. Black was clearly winning by
move 18.
Unfortunately for Lance, his 25th move did not turn out well. White opened
the center, turned the tables and won quickly.
Haines - Beloungie, Houlton, Maine (1), 24.01.2015 begins 1.d4 e6 2.e4 d5

3.Bd3 Nf6 [3...dxe4 4.Bxe4 Nf6 5.Bd3= or 5.Bf3=] 4.Nc3!? [4.e5+/=]
4...Bb4 [4...c5!=] 5.e5! Nfd7 6.Nge2?! [A risky approach that allows Black a
lot of control in the center. 6.Qg4!+/-] 6...c5 7.dxc5 Nc6 [7...Bxc5!=/+] 8.0-0
Ndxe5 [8...Bxc5] 9.a3 [9.Na4=] 9...Bxc5 10.b4 Nxd3!? [10...Bd6-/+]
11.Qxd3 Bd6 12.Bb2 a6 13.Rad1 0-0 14.f4 Qc7 15.Na4 f6 16.Rc1 [16.c4
b5=/+] 16...Bd7 17.Qb3 b5 18.Nc5 Qb6 [18...Bxc5+! 19.bxc5 Na5 20.Qd3
Nc4 21.Bd4 e5-+] 19.Qc3 e5 20.fxe5 fxe5 21.Kh1 Bxc5 22.bxc5 Qa7
23.Rcd1 d4 [Black has a promising continuation that could leave him up two
extra center pawns: 23...Bg4 24.Rfe1 d4-+] 24.Qb3+ Kh8 25.Qd5 Ne7?
[This hangs the e-pawn. Better is 25...Qc7-/+] 26.Qxe5 Nc6 27.Qd6 Rfe8
28.Nxd4 [Another good idea is 28.Rf7+-] 28...Nxd4 29.Qxd4!? Bc6 30.Qd6
Qb7 31.Rfe1 Bxg2+ 32.Kg1 Bc6 33.Re6 Rxe6 34.Qxe6 Bh1 35.Qg4 Bf3
[35...Bc6! 36.Rd6+/=] 36.Qd7 Qxd7 37.Rxd7 1-0
92 - Steinitz French vs Lopez
This was my first game vs Aldo Lopez from Altamonte Springs at the 2005
Florida State Championship. I played Mr. Lopez again in the 2011 State
Championship in Naples, Florida. After 1.Nc3 d5 2.e4 e6, the opening was a
French Defence. I chose to hold back d2-d4 for several moves. This just
limits the amount of material White needs to know if he only plays 1.Nc3.
I played what Harald Keilhack called "a somewhat clumsy line" of the
Steinitz French with 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.e5 Nfd7 5.d4 c5. Aldo Lopez outplayed me
and deserved the win. Afterward Lopez suggested that I spend more time
playing Standard games on ICC. He was probably right. Instead I spent more
time playing blitz games.
Sawyer - Lopez (2109), FL State Championship (3), 04.09.2005 begins

1.Nc3 d5 2.e4 e6 3.Nf3!? [3.d4 leads to normal French Defence lines.]
3...Nf6 4.e5 Nfd7 5.d4 c5 6.dxc5 Nc6 7.Bf4 Nxc5!? [The normal
continuation is 7...Bxc5 8.Bd3=] 8.Bd3 [This is the most normal. Two other
tries are 8.a3!? or 8.Bb5!?] 8...Be7 [Black can be left with the two bishops
after 8...Nxd3+ 9.Qxd3 although his light squared bishop is not necessarily
stronger that my extra knight in this French formation.] 9.0-0 0-0 [Again
9...Nxd3 10.Qxd3 when a computer idea would be for an immediate kingside
attack with 10...g5!? 11.Bg3 h5 but Black's king in not well placed to support
this action.] 10.Re1 f6 11.exf6 Bxf6 [During the game Black thought that
White was better in this variation.] 12.Ne5?! [White does not have any major
threats, but the game is about equal after 12.Qd2=] 12...Bd7 [12...Nxe5!
13.Bxe5 Bxe5 14.Rxe5 Qb6-/+] 13.Bg3 a6 [13...Bxe5! 14.Bxe5 Nxe5
15.Rxe5 Qb6-/+] 14.Rb1 Rc8 15.Qd2 Be8 16.Nxc6 Rxc6 17.Be5 Nxd3
18.cxd3 Bg6 19.f4? [19.Rbc1 d4 20.Bxf6 Qxf6 21.Na4=/+] 19...Bxe5
20.Rxe5 Qb6+ 21.Kh1 Qd4 [Material is even, but White's position is too
loose. Sometimes will fall. Even stronger for Black would be 21...Qb4-+]
22.g3 Qxd3 23.Qxd3 Bxd3 24.Rd1 Bf5 25.Rd2 Bh3 26.Kg1 Rfc8 27.Kf2
b5 28.a3 g6 29.Re1 Kf7 30.Ke3 Bf5 31.Ne2 Rc2 32.Nd4 Rxd2 33.Kxd2
Be4 34.Ke3 Ke7 35.Re2 Rc1 36.Rd2 Kd6 [White tries to blockade the
position, but Black forces it open and wins.] 37.Kf2 e5 38.fxe5+ Kxe5
39.Nf3+ Bxf3 40.Kxf3 Re1 41.Kf2 Re4 42.Rc2 Kd4 43.Rd2+ Kc4 44.Kf1
a5 45.Kf2 a4 46.Kf1 Re5 47.Kf2 d4 48.Kf1 d3 49.Kf2 Re2+ 50.Rxe2 dxe2
51.Kxe2 Kb3 0-1
93 - BethO Steinitz 7.Be3 a6
I did not completely ignore the advice of Aldo Lopez mentioned in the
previous game. Here is a slower game played at the speed of 45 45 on the
Internet Chess Club.
My standard ICC rating has been over 2200 for many years. That is mostly
due to inactivity at the slower speeds.
I won a French Defence in the Steinitz Variation after 4.e5. My opponent was
BethO. The theme of this game is good bishops and bad bishops. The point of
the 7.Be3 line is for White to exchange off dark squared bishops. The dark
squared bishops are good for Black if they stayed on the board.
Many exchanges followed until we reached an ending with only pawns and
light squared bishops. These bishops favored White. Soon White won a pawn
and swapped bishops for an easy win.
Sawyer (2272) - BethO (1809), ICC 45 45 Internet Chess Club, 22.09.2008

begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.e5 Nfd7 5.f4 c5 6.Nf3 Nc6 7.Be3 a6
[Equally popular is 7...cxd4 8.Nxd4 Bc5 9.Qd2=] 8.Qd2 b5 9.dxc5 Bxc5
10.Bxc5 Nxc5 11.Qf2 Qb6 12.Bd3 Bb7 [More common is 12...b4 13.Ne2 a5
14.0-0 Ba6=] 13.0-0 b4 14.Ne2 Qa5 [14...a5 15.f5!?] 15.Ned4 [15.Nc1+/=]
15...Ne4 16.Nxc6 Bxc6 17.Qe3 Qa4? [17...0-0 18.a3=] 18.Nd2 [I did not
want to exchange my good bishop for his knight, but White could pick up a
pawn with 18.Nd4 Bd7 19.Bxe4 dxe4 20.Qxe4+/-] 18...Nxd2 19.Qxd2 Qa5
[19...Bb5 20.f5 Bxd3 21.cxd3 exf5 22.Rxf5 a5=] 20.a3 [20.f5 Qc5+ 21.Kh1
exf5 22.Rxf5+/=] 20...Qb6+ 21.Qf2 Qxf2+ 22.Kxf2 a5 23.axb4 axb4
24.Rxa8+ Bxa8 25.Ra1 0-0 26.Ra5 Rb8 27.Rb5 [27.Ke3 d4+ 28.Kxd4
Bxg2 29.Rb5+/-] 27...Rxb5 28.Bxb5 Kf8 [Black should play 28...d4! 29.g3
Be4=] 29.g3 Kg8 [29...d4=] 30.Ke3 Bb7 31.Kd4 Kf8 32.Ba4 h5 33.Kc5
Ke7 34.Kxb4 Ba8 [34...f6 35.exf6+ gxf6 36.Kc5 e5 37.fxe5 fxe5 38.c3+-]
35.Kc5 f6 [35...Bb7 36.b4 Kd8 37.b5 Kc8 38.b6 Kd8 39.Bb5+-] 36.Bc6
Bxc6 37.Kxc6 fxe5 [37...g5 38.exf6+ Kxf6 39.b4+-] 38.fxe5 Ke8 39.Kd6
Kf7 40.b4 h4 41.b5 d4 42.b6 hxg3 43.hxg3 Kg6 44.b7 Kf5 45.b8Q Kg5
46.Kxe6 Kg6 47.Qb5 Kh6 48.Qd3 Kg5 49.Qxd4 Kg6 50.Qg4+ Kh7 51.Kf7
Kh8 52.Qh4# 1-0
94 - Hyde Steinitz 7.Be3 Qb6
Here I won a French Defence in the Steinitz Variation 4.e5 line. It seems to
me that this 7.Be3 Qb6 line is one of the most common continuations.
My opponent used the handle “Hyde” which became inactive. I do not know
if this was the correspondence player Kevin Hyde or someone else
completely different. I know “Hyde” drew our other game with his Torre
Attack against my Gruenfeld Defence.
The key feature of this game is that both kings got into trouble in the
opening. Neither king could castle.
Black grabbed the poisoned pawn on b2. The natural follow up was the
sacrifice of the rook on a8. Black attacked.
The wide open White king looked to be in trouble, however there were
adequate defenses. White slipped on move 21, but Black missed his chance to
draw.
Then the tables turned. White attacked. This time the Black king was under
assault. He could hardly run at all and he did not hide.
Sawyer - Hyde, ICC r 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 26.11.1997 begins 1.d4 Nf6
2.Nc3 e6 3.e4 d5 4.e5 Nfd7 5.f4 c5 6.Nf3 Nc6 7.Be3 Qb6 8.dxc5 [White
often plays 8.Na4 Qa5+ 9.c3 cxd4 10.b4 Nxb4 11.cxb4 Bxb4+ 12.Bd2
Bxd2+ 13.Nxd2= when Black has three pawns for his sacrificed knight.]
8...Qxb2 [8...Bxc5 9.Bxc5=] 9.Nb5 Qb4+ 10.Bd2 Qxc5 11.Nc7+ Kd8
12.Nxa8 Nb4 [12...h6 13.a4+/-] 13.Bxb4 [13.c3! Nc6 14.Qa4 a6 15.c4 dxc4
16.Qxc4 Qxc4 17.Bxc4 b5 18.Bb3 h6 19.Be3+-] 13...Qxb4+ 14.Qd2?
[14.Kf2+/-] 14...Qe4+ [14...Qb2 15.Qc1 Qc3+ 16.Kf2 Ba3 17.Qe1 Qxc2+
18.Kg3+/=] 15.Be2 Bc5 16.Kf1 [16.Ng5 Qxg2 17.Nxf7+ Ke7 18.Rf1 Rf8
19.Ng5+-] 16...f6 17.exf6 gxf6 18.Bd3 Qa4 19.Ke2 [19.g3 b6 20.Kg2 Bb7
21.Rhe1+-] 19...e5 [19...Rg8 20.Ke1+/=] 20.fxe5 fxe5 21.Nxe5?
[21.Qg5+!+-] 21...Nxe5 [Black could save the game with 21...Re8! 22.Qg5+
Re7 23.Qg8+ Re8= when White must repeat moves or accept an inferior
position.] 22.Qg5+ Be7 23.Qxe5 Bg4+ [Or 23...Qg4+ 24.Kd2 Qg5+ 25.Qxg5
Bxg5+ 26.Kd1 Bg4+ 27.Be2+-] 24.Kd2 Qb4+ 25.c3 Qb2+ 26.Bc2 Rf8
27.Qxd5+ Ke8 28.Nc7# 1-0
3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5
The bishop move is the most natural method of development.
95 - Bridge Burned French BDG
When I feel like playing the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit, half the time Black
avoids it. The most common avoidance set-ups are the Dutch, the Pirc, the
Benoni, the Caro-Kann and the French.
With the Caro-Kann Defence 1.e4 c6 2.d4 and French Defence 1.e4 e6 2.d4,
the normal continuation is 2...d5. There is a real possibility Black will capture
d5xe4 allowing a BDG-type gambit of f2-f3 attacking the resulting e4 Black
pawn.
The bridge from the French Defence to the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit is very
easy to cross. For example 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 is either the Rubinstein
Variation (3...dxe4 4.f3 exf3 5.Nxf3 Nf6 6.Bg5 - BDG Euwe) or the Burn
Variation (3...Nf6 4.Bg5 dxe4 5.f3 exf3 6.Nxf3). Both of these lines reach the
same position as 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3 exf3 5.Nxf3 e6 6.Bg5.
In my game vs Terrigood, White attempted to reach a BDG via a French

Burn Variation. Black burned that bridge with 5…Nc6!
Sawyer – Terrigood, ICC r 3 3 Internet Chess Club, 8.10.2011 begins 1.d4

Nf6 2.Nc3 e6 3.e4 d5 4.Bg5 dxe4 5.f3!? [Often I recapture 5.Nxe4, but my
3289 blitz rated computer opponent would doubtless outplay me is such a
line. Maybe I could catch it in a BDG. It's been known to happen to
computers before!] 5...Nc6! [Burned by the Burn Variation. I had only faced
5...Nc6 move seven times in 40 years, but it sure seems good.] 6.Bb5 [I hate
to play this move. I want this bishop at Bd3.] 6...exf3 7.Nxf3 Be7 8.0-0
[8.Bxf6 Bxf6 (8...gxf6 9.d5 a6 10.Ba4 b5 11.Nxb5 axb5 12.Bxb5) 9.Ne4 Bd7
10.c3!? with 90% compensation for the gambit pawn in both cases, but using
a tempo to exchange off a piece in a gambit is usually incorrect.] 8...0-0
9.Qd2 Rb8 10.a3 h6 11.Be3 [I was dreaming of a Bxh6 sacrifice for a
mating attack or perpetual check if I can get an extra move or two.] 11...Ng4
12.Bf4 e5 13.Bxc6 exf4 14.Be4 Ne3 15.Rfe1 Bg4 16.Nd1 f5 17.Bd3 Bxf3
18.gxf3 Qxd4 19.Kh1 Bg5 20.c3 Qc5 21.Nf2 Rbd8 22.Qe2 Bh4 23.Rg1
Bxf2 White resigns 0-1
96 - Missed by a Frog Hair
Dr. John Anderson had a wealth of experience from his Kentucky roots. Doc
taught the ancient Greek language at Bryan College in Dayton, Tennessee. I
cite three of his colorful sayings.
"Scarce as hen's teeth": Doc's phrase for something very rare you might never
see. This is like playing 5.f3 vs a Burn French.
"Riding a Greek horse too far": Dr. Anderson taught us usage determines
meaning in language. Trying to stubbornly focus too much on the ancient
origin of a word can lead one to miss the obvious truth. Below I try too hard
to make a French into a BDG.
"Missed by a frog hair": Doc used this quip when we almost got an answer
correct but just barely missed it. Going from a French Burn to a BDG almost
worked until "Chess-Dream" found 5...c5.
I was in a rural Florida town on business. When I opened my car door to go

to work in the morning, a little frog quickly jump in and disappeared up
under the pedals. Off to work we went. The frog stayed hidden when we went
out to lunch. After work I drove to town to get some food. While waiting at a
traffic light, out hopped the little green guy (about one inch long) onto the
floor of the passenger's side. I grabbed an extra napkin and snared the little
fella sending him on his way to frog heaven.
Sawyer - Chess-Dream, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 23.05.2012 begins

1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d5 3.e4 e6 4.Bg5 dxe4 5.f3!? [5.Nxe4 is correct.] 5...c5
6.dxc5 Qxd1+ 7.Rxd1 exf3 8.Nxf3 Bxc5 9.Bxf6 [9.Nb5! Na6 (9...Bb6
10.Ne5 0-0 11.Nc4=) 10.a3 h6 11.Bh4 0-0 12.b4 Bb6 13.Bxf6 gxf6 14.Nd6
Nc7 15.c4 a5 16.c5 Ba7 17.Bc4 with queenside threats to offset Black's extra
kingside pawns.] 9...gxf6 10.Ne4 Be7 11.Nd6+ Bxd6 12.Rxd6 Ke7 13.Rd2
Nc6 14.c3 b6 15.g3 Bb7 16.Bg2 Rad8 [At this point Black has the better
game.] 17.0-0 Rxd2 18.Nxd2 Na5 19.Bxb7 Nxb7 20.Ne4 f5 21.Ng5 h6
22.Nf3 Rd8 23.Rf2 Nc5 24.Rd2 Rxd2 25.Nxd2 Na4 [The endgame clearly
favors Black.] 26.Kf2 Nxb2 27.Ke3 Na4 28.Kd4 Nc5 29.Nc4 f6 30.Na3 a6
31.Nc4 Nd7 32.a4 h5 33.h4 e5+ 34.Kd5 f4 35.gxf4 exf4 36.Nd2 Ne5
37.Ne4 f3 38.c4 Ng4 39.Kc6 f5 40.Ng3 f4 41.Nf1 Ne3 42.Kxb6 Nxf1
43.Kxa6 Ne3 44.c5 f2 45.c6 f1Q+ 0-1
97 - Brummer MacCutcheon
How do you evaluate the Big Mac in chess? The French Defence
MacCutcheon comes right back at you. If White can pin a knight with a
bishop with 4.Bg5, then Black can do it too with 4…Bb4!?
In 1962 Bobby Fischer took on Tigran Petrosian. Their contest started as a

flashy Fischer against a passive Petrosian.
But Black was a tiger after 5.e5 h6. With cat like moves he dodged Bobby's
bishop and clawed his way back into the fight.
Fischer's five bishop moves in a row 6.Bd2, 7.Bxc3, 8.Ba5, 9.Bd3 and
10.Bc3 ended when Tigran Petrosian chopped one off by 10...Nxc3. Petrosian
defeated Fischer in this game. It is found in the book “How to Beat Bobby
Fischer” by Edmar Mednis.
This 1962 candidate's tournament determined the challenger to the World

Champion Mikhail Botvinnik. Spoiler alert: Petrosian became the next world
champion!
Bobby Fischer's time was not in 1962 but in 1972 vs the man who eventually
beat Petrosian. That was Boris Spassky.
Big MacCutcheon was more easily handled by David Brummer vs Viktors

Pupols. In 1975 Brummer chose the French Defence MacCutcheon Exchange
with 5.exd5.
In recent years this theoretical idea has been recommended in books by

Dzindzichashvili and Lakdawala. Below a natural knight move (16...Nd5)
fails to a bold rook sacrifice (17.Rxb7+)!
Brummer - Pupols, Arizona 1975 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5
Bb4 5.exd5 [5.e5 h6=] 5...Qxd5 6.Bxf6 [6.Nf3 Houdini] 6...gxf6 [6...Bxc3+
7.bxc3 gxf6 8.Qd2 Nc6 9.Qf4= Stockfish] 7.Nge2 Nc6 8.Qd2 Qa5
[8...Bxc3!? 9.Nxc3 Qxd4 10.Qxd4 Nxd4 11.0-0-0 c5 12.Ne4=] 9.g3 Bd7
10.Bg2 0-0-0 11.0-0 Qg5 [11...h5=] 12.Qd3 Qg6 13.Qc4 Be7 14.b4 Kb8
15.Ne4 Nxb4 16.Rfb1 Nd5? [16...Bc6 17.N2c3 Bd5=] 17.Rxb7+ Kxb7
18.Rb1+?! [18.Nf4! Nxf4 19.Nd6+ and mate in two.] 18...Ka8 19.Nf4 Nxf4?
20.Qxc7 Rb8 21.Nd6+ Nxg2 22.Rb7 1-0
98 - Avoid BDG with French
This was the first time in any tournament situation that I had a chance to
reach a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit as Black. Up until 1978 no one had ever
tried to play the BDG against me. I entered a seven player postal chess
section in the Tennessee Chess Association. I was assigned three games with
each color.
Richard Searles as White began with 1.d4. I played 1…Nf6 to prevent him
from playing 2.e4. We continued 2.Nc3 d5. I figured that d5 pawn will keep
White from playing 3.e4. But then Searles played 3.e4 anyway! That guy
must be crazy! Or a dangerous attacker. Let me look this up in Modern Chess
Openings.
I was afraid to play 3...Nxe4 4.Nxe4 dxe4 (Huebsch Gambit). Trying to

defend my kingside without my knight seems risky. Worse may be 3...dxe4
4.f3 exf3 (Blackmar-Diemer Gambit).
I had never played against that opening in my life. Searles must know it
pretty well. Yikes! I know what I’ll do. I will transpose into the French
Defence (though I never play it). What a fool I was!
Ten years later when I played the BDG myself as White, I faced the French
Defence all the time! It was just another room in my opening house. I am at
home and comfortable in either opening.
Searles (1900) - Sawyer (1900), corr TCA 1978 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d5
3.e4 e6 4.Bg5 Bb4 5.e5 h6 6.Be3!? [Later I would play 6.Be3 myself. The
main line is 6.Bd2 Bxc3 7.bxc3 Ne4 8.Qg4=] 6...Ne4 7.Qg4 g6 8.a3 Bxc3+
9.bxc3 c5 10.Bd3 h5 11.Qf3 Qa5!? [11...Nxc3 12.dxc5=] 12.Ne2 cxd4
13.Bxd4 Nc6 14.0-0 Nc5?! [14...0-0 15.Bxe4 dxe4 16.Qxe4+/=] 15.Qf6 Rg8
16.Be3?! [16.Rfd1+/=] 16...Nd7 17.Qg5 Ndxe5 18.Qh6 Bd7 [18...Ng4
19.Qh7 Nf6 20.Qh6 Ng4= repeats moves] 19.Rfb1 [19.h3=] 19...0-0-0
20.Rb5?! [20.h3] 20...Qa4 [20...Ng4 21.Rxa5 Nxh6=/+] 21.Rab1 b6
[21...Ng4=/+] 22.R1b3 [22.Bxb6 axb6 23.Qe3 Nxd3 24.cxd3 Kc7 25.Qxb6+
Kd6 26.Qc5+ Ke5-/+ when the Black king will hide around his kingside
pawns.] 22...Nxd3 23.cxd3 Nd4 24.R5b4 Nxe2+ 25.Kf1 Qa6 [25...Qc6-/+]
26.Kxe2 Ba4 27.Rb2 b5? [I missed my chances. White's attack springs to
life. Better was 27...e5 28.Bxb6 e4=/+] 28.Qf4 Rd7 29.c4! dxc4 30.Rxc4+
Kd8 31.Rxa4 Qxa4 32.Qxa4 bxa4 33.Rb8+ 1-0
99 - Paetzold MacCutcheon
I once had a friend from Germany named Ortwin. During the year that we
were together, his wife gave birth to a baby boy. They named him “Tim”.
Both of us moved on with our lives and relocated our families. Still we kept
in touch for several years.
About that time I met another Ortwin in an email tournament. My new

opponent was Ortwin Paetzold of Germany.
We played our game in IECG (International Email Chess Group). Ortwin

Paetzold was one of the IECG founders.
IECG transferred its activities into the Lechenicher SchachServer (LSS).

Ortwin Paetzold managed LSS after that change over.
I was interested in playing a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit. Black could have

challenged me to do so with 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d5. Instead he settled for a
French Defence after 2...e6 3.e4 d5.
Ortwin Paetzold chose the sharp unbalanced MacCutcheon Variation 4.Bg5

Bb4. In 1996 I stuck with the main line after 5.e5 g6 6.Bd2. We attacked and
defended threats from the opponent.
Email was new. My eyes were bigger than my stomach. I put too many
games on my plate. I chose to ease my pain with draws. My Paetzold game
was unbalanced. It was also about even. One chess engine evaluates the final
position as very equal at 0.00.
Sawyer - Paetzold, IECG 05.01.1996 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 e6 3.e4 d5

4.Bg5 Bb4 5.e5 h6 6.Bd2 [6.Be3 Ne4 (6...Bxc3+ 7.bxc3 Ne4 and 1/2-1/2 in
59 moves. Sawyer - Mogno, Internet Chess Club 1998. I should have played
8.Ne2+/=) 7.Qg4 g6 8.a3 Bxc3+ 9.bxc3 c5 10.Bd3=] 6...Bxc3 7.bxc3
[7.Bxc3 Ne4 8.Bb4 c5 9.Bxc5 Nxc5 10.dxc5 Qc7 11.Nf3=] 7...Ne4 8.Qg4
[8.Bd3 Nxd2 9.Qxd2 c5 10.Nf3 c4 11.Be2=] 8...g6 [8...Kf8 9.Qf4 c5
10.Nf3=] 9.Bd3 [9.Bc1 c5 10.Bd3 Nxc3 11.dxc5=] 9...Nxd2 10.Kxd2 c5
11.h4 [11.f4 Qa5 12.Nf3 Nc6 13.h4 cxd4-/+ and 0-1 in 24 moves. Sawyer -
blik, Internet Chess Club 2012] 11...Nc6 12.Rh3 [12.Nf3 Bd7 and 0-1 in 29
moves. Sawyer - Rookie, Internet Chess Club 2008 13.Qf4=] 12...cxd4
13.cxd4 Qb6 14.Nf3 Bd7 15.Rhh1 Qc7 16.Ke3 Rc8 17.Rab1 b6 18.Ba6
1/2-1/2
100 - Fawbush Knight Flight
The famed postal chess master George E. Fawbush was always looking for
way to take his opponents out of the opening book. In a French Defence,
G.E.F. chose 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5 Be7 5.e5 Ng8. Why does Black play such a
move? Usually he plays 5…Nfd7. It would appear the plan is to relocate to e7
instead of d7.
Flexibility is a great strategy in chess. After 5.e5 the d7 square is a key pass
through point for half the Black army. Think about it. Black could play either
knight, a bishop, a queen or a king to d7. Whatever goes there will clog up
the lines for everyone else.
The problem with the undeveloping knight move is that it is a long gallop to
the center from g8. This became popular for a few years. This move can only
be playable in a closed position.
Sawyer (2000) - Fawbush (2200), corr APCT 1985 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e4 e6
3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5 Be7 5.e5 Ng8!? [This takes White out of familiar territory.
Black accepts a slightly inferior game with the intention of slowly
rearranging his pieces. Normal is 5...Nfd7] 6.Be3 b6 7.h4!?[7.Qg4 g6
8.Nf3+/-] 7...h5 8.Be2 g6 9.Nf3 Ba6 10.Qd2 Bxe2 11.Nxe2 Nc6 12.0-0 Qd7
13.a3 [13.c3 Bf8 14.Rac1 Nge7 15.Bg5+/-] 13...Na5 14.b3 Kf8 15.Bg5 Kg7
16.Be3 [16.Qf4!?+/=] 16...Qd8 17.Bg5 c5 18.Bxe7 [This seems to ease
Black's game. White could simply play 18.Rfd1+/=] 18...Nxe7 19.Qd3?!
[19.Qf4] 19...c4 20.Qc3 cxb3 21.cxb3 Rc8 22.Qd3 Nf5 23.g3 Qc7 24.Rfc1
Qe7 25.b4?! [25.Ng5 Rhe8 26.Rc2 Rxc2 27.Qxc2 Qd7 28.Kg2 Rc8 29.Qd3
Qe7=] 25...Nc4 26.Nd2 b5 27.Nb3? g5 28.hxg5 Qxg5 29.f4? [This leaves a
fatal weakness on g3. White should try 29.Qf3 Rh6=/+ and hope to survive.]
29...Qg4 30.Rc3 Rcg8?! [It is amazing how often this happens. One side is
winning easily. Then in one move for a brief moment they give the other side
a chance. The losing side misses the moment and goes on to lose like they
never had a chance. Here Black would continue to win easily after 30...Nce3!
31.Qxe3 Nxe3 32.Rxe3 Rc2-+] 31.Rf1 [White can keep the material equality
for a while with 31.Qf3! a6-/+ Black is better, but he is not crushing, at least
not yet.] 31...Kf8 [Better is 31...Nce3! 32.Qxe3 Nxe3 33.Rxe3 h4-+ when
Black has a queen for two knights.] 32.Rf3? [32.Qf3 h4 33.Qxg4 Rxg4
34.Rff3 hxg3 35.Nxg3 Nxa3-+] 32...Qh3 [32...h4!-+] 33.Kf2 h4 0-1
101 - Lucky You! French 6.h4
I had Chess.com do a computer analysis of one of my Blackmar-Diemer
Gambit wins. In a certain position the computer chess engine spit out the
following comment:
"BLUNDER - Lucky you! Your opponent blundered! The best move was..."
I screwed up another opening in a French Defence Classical 6.h4 Alekhine

Gambit. After the game I analyzed the opening to look for at least one new
move. If I ever get here again, etc.
In this French Defence variation after 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5 Be7
5.e5 Nfd7 I almost always play the main line 6.Bxe7 as White. Here I tried
6.h4!? I figured that I would just play it in blitz games whenever it came up
and see what happens.
So what did I learn? In my three minute game with “gdesportes” play went
6.h4 c5, I opted for 7.dxc5?! Clearly that was not right.
I see now that the best continuation for White is 7.Bxe7! Kxe7 (or 7...Qxe7
8.Nb5 0-0 9.Nc7+/=) 8.Qg4 Kf8 9.Nf3+/=. I tried to find a perpetual or
maybe more. It appears I got lucky and won at the end! I’m sure that
Chess.com computer would say "Lucky you!"
Sawyer (2034) - gdesportes (1835), Live Chess Chess.com, 26.08.2012

begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 e6 3.e4 d5 4.Bg5 Be7 5.e5 Nfd7 6.h4 c5 7.dxc5?! [I
see now that the best continuation for White is 7.Bxe7! Kxe7 (or 7...Qxe7
8.Nb5 0-0 9.Nc7+/=) 8.Qg4 Kf8 9.Nf3+/=] 7...Nc6 8.Qg4 Ndxe5 9.Qg3?
[White still has 9.Bxe7!=] 9...Bxg5 [9...f6!=/+] 10.hxg5 Ng6 [10...Qa5]
11.Nf3 [11.Nb5!+/=] 11...Bd7 12.0-0-0 [The move 12.Nb5!+/- was not
registering with me.] 12...Qa5 13.Kb1 0-0-0 14.Bd3 [14.Nb5!+- threatens to
check on d6 and fork on f7 with discovered check.] 14...Qxc5 15.Bxg6 hxg6
16.Rxh8 Rxh8 17.a3 Rh5 18.Ne5 Nxe5 19.Qxe5 Qxf2 20.Qxg7 Rxg5
21.Qf8+ Kc7 22.Qc5+? [We were playing quickly and I just looked for
check. I had a draw here with 22.Ne4! Qe2 23.Qd6+ Kc8 24.Qf8+ Kc7=]
22...Bc6? [Black naturally blocks the check. Stronger would have been to
grab the free queen with 22...Qxc5-+ I was contemplating the power of
23.Nb5! when I found the simple...] 23.Qxf2 1-0
102 - French Chatard Attack
Any BDG player and practically any 1.e4 player has to deal with the
venerable French Defence. I have tried just about everything against it.
Generally I score very well vs the French, but there are always those
annoying losses from time to time.
As I recall Mednis wrote that Bobby Fischer did not handle French Defense
positions as well as he did other openings. Wasn't the game Mednis beat
Fischer a French Defense? I lost to Mednis myself but that was as Black in
my Alekhine Defence.
Since White usually sets up in the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit with 1.d4, 2.e4
and 3.Nc3, it makes sense to play these variations vs the French. And there
are the transpositions to the French via 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 e6 and 1.d4
Nf6 2.Nc3 e6 3.e4 d5. This last line leads to the French Classical where
White has two good variations of approximately equal value: 4.e5 and 4.Bg5,
both of which I have played many times.
When I am in the BDG-mode, I prefer 4.Bg5 when for example 4...dxe4

5.f3!? exf3 6.Nxf3 transposes to the Euwe variation. Normal play is 4.Bg5
Be7 5.e5 Nfd7 6.Bxe7 giving White a good position. However it is so
common that those who play Black usually know it well. Even lower rated
players blitz these moves out and with confidence.
This brings me to the Chatard-Alekhine variation 6.h4!? This line is in

contrary to the more popular 6.Bxe7. White offers a pawn for open lines,
rapid development and a kingside attack. Here is a bullet game (2 minute
game) from the past where the position was all closed up on the kingside.
Eventually I managed to breakthrough just in time.
Sawyer (2100) - OpenFile (1700), ICC r 2 0 Internet Chess Club, 1997

begins 1.d4 d5 2.Nc3 e6 3.e4 Nf6 4.Bg5 Be7 5.e5 Nfd7 6.h4 h6 7.Bxe7
[7.Be3!] 7...Qxe7 8.Qd2 b6 9.f4 c6 10.g4 Bb7 11.Nf3 0-0 12.g5 h5 13.Bd3
g6 14.0-0-0 Rc8 15.Kb1 Ba6 16.Bxa6 Nxa6 17.Nh2 c5 18.Ne2 c4 19.c3 Nc7
20.Ng3 Rcb8 21.Qe2 a5? [21...b5 22.Nxh5 b4] 22.Nxh5 gxh5 23.Qxh5 Qf8
24.Ng4 b5 25.Nf6+ Nxf6 26.gxf6 b4 27.Rdg1+ Qg7 28.Rxg7+ Kf8
29.Qh8# 1-0
103 - Irvin Classical 7.Nb5!?
The French Defence Classical Variation is a well-worn beaten path 4.Bg5
Be7 5.e5 Nfd7 6.Bxe7 Qxe7. Everyone plays 7.f4.
Okay, not everyone all the time. Usually I play 7.f4. Here I tried to find
something new in the knight sortie 7.Nb5!? Both sides lose a little time. The
knight could relocate via Na3-Nc2-Ne3.
Black swapped off queens to keep White from castling. White wanted to have
the better bishop for an endgame. But Black chose a tactical middlegame that
led to a different endgame.
In the 1990s Jimmy E. Irvin was an active correspondence chess player.

Many of his games were played by email. ICCF listed Jimmy Irvin with a
rating of 2324 after a total of 54 games.
Jimmy Irvin and I played twice in APCT email sections. This game was a
French Defence. In our other game Irvin played White in an English
Opening.
This game featured an Exchange sacrifice by Black beginning 24…Rxf3+.

There followed by a long series of captures to 31…cxb3. The resulting
position left Black with two connected passed pawns and a bishop for the
White rook. A draw was agreed in an equal but unbalanced endgame.
Sawyer (1960) - Irvin (2200), corr APCT EMQ-2, 30.07.1996 begins 1.d4
Nf6 2.Nc3 d5 3.e4 e6 4.Bg5 Be7 5.e5 Nfd7 6.Bxe7 Qxe7 7.Nb5!? [7.f4]
7...Qd8 [7...Nb6 8.c3 a6 9.Na3 c5 10.f4=] 8.c3 [8.c4 dxc4 9.Bxc4 a6 10.Nc3
c5 11.dxc5 0-0 12.Nf3 Nxc5 13.0-0=] 8...a6 9.Na3 c5 10.f4 cxd4 [10...Nc6
11.Nf3 Qb6 12.Qd2 0-0 13.b3=] 11.cxd4 Qa5+ 12.Qd2 Qxd2+ 13.Kxd2
Nc6 14.Nf3 0-0 15.Nc2 Nb6 16.b3 Bd7 17.Bd3 a5 18.a4 Rac8 19.Rac1 f6
20.Ke3 Be8 21.g4 fxe5 22.fxe5 h6 23.h4 Rf7 24.Na3 Rxf3+ 25.Kxf3 Nxd4+
26.Ke3 Rxc1 27.Rxc1 Nxb3 28.Rb1 Bxa4 29.Bc2 Nc4+ 30.Nxc4 dxc4
31.Bxb3 [Despite the fireworks the position has remained equal for a long
time. White could try 31.h5=] 31...cxb3 [Or 31...Bxb3=] 32.Kd4 b6 33.Kc3
Kh7 34.Rd1 b2 35.Rb1 Kg6 36.Rxb2 b5 37.Rf2 Bd1 38.Rf4 Be2 39.Kd2
Bc4 40.Kc3 Bd5 41.Kc2 Bc6 1/2-1/2
104 - BDG Sacrifice on e4!?
I tried to play a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit in a tournament game. I was White
and paired against Adam Kutikoff, a young man who was probably in his late
teens. He had been rated over 2000. Adam was listed in the tournament
ratings as an expert. Many younger players get very nervous having to defend
unfamiliar gambits. Also after the game Kutikoff revealed that Aldo Lopez
warned him not to get into an endgame with me.
Our contest began 1.d4 d5 2.e4!? Now my opponent went into a very long
think. Later Adam told me that he had never seen 2.e4 before. Kutikoff had
played in 239 USCF rated events!
After the game we were in the skittles room doing post-mortem. At one point
I said something about the French noting, "When I was young..." Another
old-timer at a neighboring table looked at me and said, "When you were
young, the French was the Gaul!"
I chose 6.Bxe7 Qxe7 7.f4. An opportunity presented itself to play a big

sacrifice on e4: 13.Ne4!?? I loved playing this move! I felt that the sacrifice
gave me good winning chances at that moment.
Jeffrey Haskel was the master who won this tournament. Haskel suggested
Black could play for a win by gradually unravelling his pieces and slowly
pushing White back. I thought so too.
Sawyer - Kutikoff, FL State Championship Naples FL (3), 04.09.2011

begins 1.d4 d5 2.e4 e6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5 Be7 5.e5 Nfd7 6.Bxe7 [6.h4 h6
7.Be3+/=] 6...Qxe7 7.f4 a6 8.Nf3 c5 9.Qd2 Nc6 10.dxc5 Qxc5 11.0-0-0 b5
[This move leaves the Nc6 less protected.] 12.Nd4 Bb7 [This leaves the Nd7
less protected.] 13.Ne4!? [This was my most creative move of the entire
tournament. 13.Nxc6 Qxc6 14.Ne2 0-0 15.Nd4=] 13...dxe4? [13...Qxd4!
14.Nd6+ Ke7 15.Qxd4 Nxd4-/+] 14.Nxe6 Qe7 15.Nc7+ [15.Nxg7+! Kd8
(15...Kf8 16.Nf5 Qe6 17.Qxd7 Qxd7 18.Rxd7+-) 16.Nf5 Qe6 17.Nd6 Rb8
18.c4+/-] 15...Kd8 16.Nxa8 [16.Nd5 Qe6 17.Nb6 In the post-mortem
Kutikoff and I both thought this won for White, now I see that Black can
reply with moving the king. 17...Kc7 18.f5 Qxa2 19.Nxa8+ Kb8=/+]
16...Bxa8 17.g3 Kc7 18.Bh3 Rd8 19.Qe3 Nc5 20.Rxd8 Nxd8 21.Rd1 Bc6
22.Qd4 Ndb7 1/2-1/2
105 - Clinton Young Friend
At the 2009 Space Coast Open, most of my opponents were up and coming
masters. One player was from my own generation.
Clinton Young is a few years younger than me, but he is close enough to my
age that I can easily relate to him. In fact we have quite a bit in common. I
really enjoyed playing Mr. Young. That night I made a new friend.
After our French Defence game, we retired to the skittles room. We talked for
a long time. Clinton Young had some great stories. We played a handful of
blitz games. Later I remembered the first 20 moves in four blitz games where
I scored 3.5-0.5.
In our tournament game, my idea in the Classical Variation with 11.cxd3

(instead of the dynamic 11.Qxd3) was to saddle Black with a bad light
squared bishop. As an old timer, I had a lot of experience playing endgames.
I felt like I could win the knight vs bishop ending that night vs that opponent.
And in the end, I managed to do just that.
Sawyer (1964) - Young (1815), Space Coast Open (3), 09.05.2009 begins
1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5 Be7 5.e5 Nfd7 6.Bxe7 Qxe7 7.f4 a6 8.Nf3
c5 9.dxc5 Nxc5 10.Bd3 Nxd3+ [More common is 10...Nc6 11.Qd2 b5=]
11.cxd3 Nc6 12.d4 Bd7 13.0-0 0-0 14.Qd2 Na7 15.Rfc1 [White could press
for an immediate attack with 15.f5! since 15...exf5? 16.Nxd5+/-] 15...Nb5
16.Nxb5 Bxb5 17.Rc2 Rfc8 18.Rac1 Bc6 19.Ne1 Qd8 20.g3 [20.Nd3+/=]
20...Bd7 21.Rxc8 Rxc8 22.Rxc8 Qxc8 23.Qc2 Qc4 24.Qxc4 dxc4 25.Kf2
Bc6 26.Nc2 Kf8 27.Ne3 b5 28.Ke2 Ke7 29.Kd2 Kd7 30.Kc3 a5? [This
loses a pawn, and eventually, the game. If 30...Kc7! Houdini gives the critical
line as 31.a4 Kb6 32.axb5 axb5 33.Kb4 Bf3 34.Nc2 Bc6 35.Na3 Be8 36.Nb1
Bc6 37.Nc3+/=] 31.a4 b4+ 32.Kxc4 Bxa4 33.b3 Bc6 34.Kc5 Kc7 35.Nc4 a4
36.Kxb4 [More accurate is 36.bxa4 Bxa4 37.Kxb4 Bc6 38.Kc5+-] 36...axb3
37.Kxb3 Bd5 38.Kb4 Be4 39.Nd6 Bg6 40.Kc5 Kd7 41.Kb6 [Houdini likes
41.g4! Bd3 42.Nxf7+-] 41...f6 42.Nb7 fxe5 43.fxe5 h5 44.Nc5+ Ke7 45.Kc7
Bb1 46.Nb7 Be4 47.Nd8 Bd5 48.Nc6+ Ke8 49.Kd6 Ba2 50.Nb4 Bc4 51.d5
exd5 52.Nxd5 Be2 53.e6 1-0
106 - Tregidga in Classical
Many of my French Defence games that reached the position after 3.Nc3 Nf6
4.Bg5 began with the move 1.d4. Here I played a straight 1.e4 opening, but
got a French anyway.
Email was new. In those days I used AOL (America Online). With every
chess move I heard its notification “You’ve got mail!”
John Tregidga and I contested the French Defence Classical line 7.f4 0-0
8.Nf3 c5. Against Clinton Young in the previous game I played 9.dxc5.
Against John Tregidga I chose 9.Qd2.
We quickly exchanged off all the minor pieces. After 26.cxd5 Rcxd5, the
pawn structure was symmetrical. White controlled the c-file and had more
space. Black controlled the d-file and avoided further exchanges. After 10
more moves of countering threats, the players agreed to draw.
In the notes I added a French Defence game which I played vs Jeff Andersen
about that same time. There Black chose 8…a6.
Sawyer (1969) - Tregidga (1940), corr APCT EMQ-1, 11.1995 begins 1.e4
e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5 Be7 5.e5 Nfd7 6.Bxe7 Qxe7 7.f4 0-0 8.Nf3 c5
[8...a6 9.Qd2 (9.Bd3=) 9...c5 10.dxc5 Qxc5 (10...Nxc5=) 11.Bd3 b5 12.Qf2
Qxf2+ 13.Kxf2 Nc6 14.Rhc1 Bb7 15.Ne2 f6 16.exf6 gxf6 (16...Rxf6!?=)
17.c3 Nc5 18.Bc2 Ne4+ 19.Bxe4 dxe4 20.Nfd4 Nxd4 1/2-1/2 Sawyer -
Andersen, Jeff, corr USCF 1995] 9.Qd2 [9.dxc5 breaks the symmetry. This is
more dynamic if White wants to play for a win.] 9...Nc6 10.0-0-0 [10.dxc5 is
still playable.] 10...Nb6 [10...a6=] 11.Qe3 [Last chance for 11.dxc5]
11...cxd4 12.Nxd4 Nxd4 13.Qxd4 [13.Rxd4 Bd7 14.h4=] 13...Bd7 14.Nb5?!
[14.Kb1 Rfc8=] 14...Bxb5 15.Bxb5 Rfc8 16.Bd3 Nc4 17.b3?! [17.Kb1]
17...Na5 18.Kb2 Nc6 19.Qe3 Nb4 [19...a5=/+] 20.c3 Nxd3+ 21.Qxd3
[21.Rxd3=] 21...Rc7 [21...Rc5 22.Rc1 Rac8 23.Rhf1 b5=/+] 22.Rc1 Rac8
23.Rc2 [23.Rhf1!?] 23...f5 [Black stakes out territory on the kingside and in
the center. Another idea is to pressure the c-file and expand the queenside
after 23...Rc5=/+] 24.Rhc1 Rc5 25.c4 Rd8 26.cxd5 Rcxd5 27.Qc3 b6 28.g3
Rd3 29.Qc7 R3d7 30.Qc3 Qf8 31.Rg2 Kh8 32.Rcc2 Rd3 33.Qc4 Qe7
34.Rc3 R3d4 35.Qc7 R4d7 36.Qc6 Kg8 37.Qc4 1/2-1/2
Book 3 – Chapter 6 – Winawer Variation
3.Nc3 Bb4
Black pins the knight that protects e4. How will White respond?
107 - Rasa-Studier Pattern
I am a pattern player. I work on chess patterns every day. My favorite method
is “Chessimo” by Grandmaster Gilberto Milos. He provides six modules of
720 tactics positions; three modules of 480 endgames; and three modules of
240 strategy positions. That's 6480 chess patterns taken from grandmaster
games.
These exercises help me learn tactics from all openings. The process builds
on recognizable patterns. Early exercises show the final two moves, three
moves, five moves, seven moves, etc. I recognize the patterns. At one point I
finished five tactical modules, one endgame module and all three strategy
modules. That's 4800 positions Chessimo had me do 7 to 10 times each!
The French Defence Rasa-Studier Gambit is 4.Be3!? I offered a pawn vs

"PatternPlayer". I forgot 8.fxe4 Nxe4 9.Qg4 and got into big trouble. In blitz
I kept playing, avoided checkmate and hoped. When Black got into time
trouble, I found a mating pattern.
Sawyer (2065) - PatternPlayer (2087), ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club,

10.11.2012 begins 1.e4 e6 2.Nc3 d5 3.d4 Bb4 4.Be3 dxe4 5.f3 Nf6 6.a3
Bxc3+ 7.bxc3 c5 8.Qd2 [Correct is 8.fxe4 Nxe4 9.Qg4= Instead I drift into a
lost position.] 8...cxd4 9.cxd4 Nc6 10.c3 Qa5 11.Bc4 exf3 12.Nxf3 Ne4
13.Qd3 Qxc3+ 14.Qxc3 Nxc3 15.0-0 0-0 16.Bd3 Nd5 17.Bg5 f6 18.Bd2
Bd7 19.Rab1 b6 20.Rfe1 g6 21.Bh6 Rfe8 22.Bd2 Kf7 23.h3 Nce7 24.g4 h6
25.Kf2 g5 26.Kg3 Ng6 27.h4 Ngf4 28.Be4 Rac8 29.hxg5 hxg5 30.Rh1 Rh8
31.Rxh8 Rxh8 32.Bxd5 Nxd5 33.Bb4 Nxb4 34.axb4 a5 35.bxa5 bxa5
36.Rb7 Ke7 37.Ra7 a4 38.d5? e5? [38...exd5-+] 39.Nd2 Rb8 40.Ne4 Rb3+
41.Kf2 Kd8= [This throws away the advantage. Black is still winning after
41...Rb5 42.d6+ Ke6 43.Nxf6 Kxf6 44.Rxd7 Rb4-/+] 42.Nxf6 Bb5 43.d6
Rc3 44.Rb7 [44.Rg7=] 44...Bc6? [44...Rf3+ 45.Kg2 Rxf6 46.Rxb5=]
45.Rb8# Black is checkmated. 1-0
108 - Penullar French to BDG
Once again our friend Peter Mcgerald Penullar figures out another method to
attack the French Defence.
Penullar used ideas that he borrowed from the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit.
Usually the French is reached after 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5.

Here both the players reverse their first two moves.
We all know that the French Defence is a good and solid opening.
However, like with its cousin, the BDG Euwe, the French defender can easily
slip into passive and losing play.
Penullar - kucukturank, OMER TCP v ASIA & - Boa Chess.com,

15.01.2012 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e4 e6 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.Be3!? dxe4 5.f3 Nf6
6.Bc4!? [The ideal square of Bd3 is not available. So White develops quickly
intending to play Bd3 later if Black castles kingside.] 6...Bxc3+ [There is no
need to capture on c3 until White plays a3. Instead Junior 12 slightly prefers
Black after 6...0-0=/+] 7.bxc3 Nbd7 8.fxe4 0-0 [8...Nxe4 might transpose.]
9.Bd3 Nxe4 10.Nf3 Nxc3 11.Bxh7+ Kxh7 12.Qd3+ Kg8 13.Ng5!? [It is
hard to resist making a mate threat.] 13...Nf6 14.Qxc3 b6 [14...Qd5!?
15.Qxc7 Bd7 16.0-0 Rac8=/+] 15.0-0 Bb7 16.Qd3 [White threatens mate in
two but eliminating the Nf6 and playing Qh7 mate.] 16...Re8?+- [A logical
and losing blunder. Proper defence is the counter-attack of 16...Qd5!
threatening mate in one. Now 17.Rf2 allows the fork 17...Ne4 exchanging
toward the endgame with Black up a pawn.] 17.Rxf6 Qxf6 18.Qh7+ Kf8
19.Rf1 Qxf1+ 20.Kxf1 Bd5 21.Qh8+ Ke7 22.Qxg7 Kd8 23.Nxf7+ 1-0
3.Nc3 Bb4 4.a3
White offers Black the opportunity to capture the pawn on e4.
109 - Hopping Happy Knights
The closed nature of the French Defence tends to favor knights over bishops.
That can even be true if the bishops stay on the board for a few extra moves.
In the first 16 moves of my offhand club game against Bob Muir, Black
moved his knights only once each. Then in the next 17 moves he moved them
11 times. There were checks and forks threatened all over the place.
In this Winawer variation Black has the opportunity to capture the e-pawn.
The critical line is 4.a3 Bxc3+ 5.bxc3 dxe4. At that point White can choose
between 6.Qg4 and 6.f3!?
My friend Bob chose the bishop retreat with 4.a3 Ba5 5.b4 Bb6. White had a
clamp on the position after 6.e5. Black countered with the thematic but risky
6…c5? It lost a pawn, but I took it the wrong way. White’s extra doubled c-
pawn was a big advantage, but I missed several knockout punches. Black
fought back and could have equalized. Eventually he ran out of steam.
Sawyer (2010) - Muir (1800), Williamsport, PA 04.05.1999 begins 1.d4 d5

2.e4 e6 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.a3 Ba5 5.b4 Bb6 6.e5 c5? [This drops a pawn. Better is
6...Ne7 7.Nf3 0-0 8.Bd3+/=] 7.bxc5 [7.dxc5! Bc7 8.f4+/-] 7...Bc7 [7...Ba5
8.Bd2+/-] 8.Nb5 Nc6 9.Qg4 [9.Nd6+! Bxd6 10.cxd6+-] 9...Kf8 10.Bd3!?
[10.Bd2+-] 10...Nge7?! [10...Ba5+ 11.Bd2+/-] 11.Bg5 [11.Ne2+/-] 11...h6
12.Bxe7+ Qxe7 13.f4?! [13.Ne2+/-] 13...a6? [Black should keep his bishop
with a check after 13...Ba5+ 14.Kf2 a6=/+] 14.Nxc7 Qxc7 15.Nf3 [15.Ne2+/-
] 15...Qa5+ 16.Kf2 Qc3 17.Ke3 [17.Qh4+/-] 17...Na5 18.Rhf1 Nc4+ 19.Ke2
Nxa3 20.Rfc1 Nb5? [20...Bd7 21.f5+/=] 21.Ke3? [21.Bxb5!+- wins the
knight.] 21...Na3 22.Qg3? [22.Kf2+/=] 22...Nc4+ [22...Nxc2+! 23.Ke2
Nxd4+ 24.Nxd4 Qxd4-/+] 23.Ke2 Bd7 24.Qe1 Qxe1+ 25.Kxe1 Ne3?
[25...Bc6=] 26.Kf2 Ng4+ 27.Ke2 h5 28.h3 Nh6 29.Rcb1 Bc6 [29...Ra7
30.c4+/-] 30.Rb6 a5 31.Bb5 Nf5? [31...Ke7 32.Bxc6 bxc6 33.Rxc6+/-]
32.Bxc6 bxc6 33.Rxc6 Ng3+ 34.Kd3 g6 35.Rc7 Ke8 36.Ng5 Rf8 37.Rb7 f5
38.Nxe6 1-0
110 - Fighting French Bishops
Tactics. No question about it that tactics are king. Tactics are the key to chess
success. This game reminds me that I need to work more diligently on my
own tactical skills.
If I was a grandmaster in my prime, playing an expert would be like a day

off. Instead I am a former expert hoping to regain my former status. After
losing the first round to an expert rated 2140, I get some relief by facing an
expert rated "only" 2115.
In 2005 I played Aldo Lopez the first time in the 2005 Florida State
Championship where I was 3-3. Lopez won a pawn in his French Defence
and outplayed me all the way into an endgame where he won. The other two
games I lost were to kids who were on their way to becoming the
grandmasters.
Our 2011 game began 1.d4 e6 2.e4 d5. Lopez said everyone thinks experts
know all their openings deeply but they don't. I agree with him. We were
both on our own after only 4 moves.
We reached an ending where Black had a bishop and an extra pawn vs my

knight on d4. I handled it well, win back the pawn and force a draw in a K+P
ending where his king had more of the center. After the game Lopez was
showing a friend how powerful my knight was vs the bishop in an open
endgame position.
Sawyer - Lopez, FL State Championship Naples FL (2), 03.09.2011 begins

1.d4 e6 2.e4 d5 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.a3 Ba5 [4...Bxc3+ 5.bxc3 dxe4 6.f3] 5.b4 Bb6
6.e5 [6.Nf3] 6...Ne7 7.Nf3 a5 8.Be3 axb4 9.axb4 Rxa1 10.Qxa1 0-0 11.Na4
Nd7 12.Nc5 [12.Bd3+/=] 12...Bxc5 13.dxc5 Nf5 14.Bd3 Nxe3 15.fxe3 f6
16.0-0 fxe5 17.Nxe5 Rxf1+ 18.Bxf1 Qg5 [18...Qf6 19.Qa8 Qxe5 20.Qxc8+
Nf8=/+] 19.Nf3 Qxe3+ 20.Kh1 Qf4 21.Bd3 e5 22.Qa8 Qf8 23.Bf5 e4?
[23...Nb6 24.cxb6 Qxf5 25.bxc7 Lopez did not want to allow a pawn on c7.
25...e4=/+] 24.Nd4? [I messed up the move order tactically. 24.Be6+! Kh8
25.Bxd7 Lopez 25...exf3 26.Kg1+-] 24...g6 25.Be6+ Kg7 26.Kg1 e3 27.Nf3
Qf6 28.Bxd7 Bxd7 29.Qa3 Qf4 30.Qc3+ Kg8 [30...Kh6 Aldo Lopez
wondered about this move.] 31.Qd4 Qxd4 32.Nxd4 Kf7 33.Kf1 Bg4 34.h3
Bd1 35.Ke1 e2 36.c3 c6 37.Nxe2 Bxe2 38.Kxe2 Ke6 39.h4 Ke5 40.Ke3 h6
41.g4 Ke6 42.Ke2 Kf6 43.Kf2 Ke6 44.Ke2 1/2-1/2
111 - IM-Killer French Duggan
In the Southern Open 2012 I played John Edward Duggan who was USCF
rated 2331. When John told me he was from England, I pointed out he was
missing the London Olympics. Duggan noted he was missing the traffic! I
thanked him for coming to Florida on vacation. Orlando is an awesome
place!
Our game began 1.d4 e6. Rather than play my London System or 2.c4
inviting a Classical Dutch, I boldly pushed 2.e4 into a French. After 2...d5
3.Nc3. This time it was not an Alapin 3.Be3!? Duggan stepped into the
Winawer with 3...Bb4.
I figured Duggan would play critical lines. It seemed like a fine afternoon for
adventure! We continued 4.a3 Bxc3+ 5.bxc3 dxe4. Now I chose 6.f3!? This
is the Winckelmann-Reimer Gambit which author Tim Harding called the
"IM-Killer". Bobby Fischer played 6.Qg4 a handful of times. White usually
scores better with 6.f3!? I play both moves but I was in the gambit mood. It
seemed like my best shot at a 2300. With his 6...Bd7 I was on my own.
Duggan thought I might win because in many variations I was just one tempo
from finding checkmate. I did not find it, but it sure was fun trying to win.
This was an enjoyable tournament game with a nice post-mortem to follow.
The game gave me another foreign FIDE opponent.
Sawyer - Duggan, Southern Open Orlando FL (2), 28.07.2012 begins 1.d4

e6 2.e4 d5 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.a3 Bxc3+ 5.bxc3 dxe4 6.f3 Bd7 7.Bf4 [The main
line is 7.Nh3 Bc6 8.fxe4 Bxe4 9.Ng5 with good compensation for the pawn.]
7...Bc6 [If 7...exf3 both 8.Qxf3 and 8.Nxf3 are good for White.] 8.fxe4 Bxe4
9.Nf3 Nf6 10.Bd3 Nbd7 11.0-0 0-0 12.Qe1 [A common BDG continuation.]
12...Bxd3 13.cxd3 Re8 14.Bg5!? c5 15.Qh4 [Junior likes 15.Ne5!+/=]
15...Qc7 16.Ne5 [Interesting is 16.Bxf6 Nxf6 17.Ng5 h6 18.Rxf6 gxf6
19.Ne4 f5 20.Nf6+ Kg7 21.Rf1=] 16...Nxe5 17.dxe5 Nd5 18.Rae1 Ne7
19.Bf6? [Better is 19.Qg4! intending to push h4. Duggan suggested 19.Rf3!?]
19...Ng6 20.Qg5 gxf6 21.exf6 [Taking with the pawn comes close but does
not work. Duggan thought I would do better with 21.Rxf6 when Ref1 would
pressure f7.] 21...Kh8 22.Re4 Rg8 23.Rf3 Nf8 24.Qh5 Rd8 25.Rh4 Rd5
26.Qh6 Qe5 27.Kf2 Qg5 28.g3 Qxh6 0-1
112 - Winckelmann-Reimer
The French Defence is a good opening that has survived the test of time. It
maintains a certain popularity. Many new books and videos have hit the
market done by famous titled players.
White seems to be able to play anything vs the French, but nothing wins by
force. Black always finds a playable line.
Peter Mcgerald Penullar played the French Defence Winawer 4.a3 gambit
line. With 6.f3 Penullar went into the Winckelmann-Reimer Gambit.
This has the look and feel of the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit. The WRG has
been the subject of some debate over the years.
Sometimes it is faster to win with a Winckelmann-Reimer Gambit than say

the name. There are lines completely losing for Black while other lines might
favor Black.
One thing is known: taking the gambit pawn immediately with 6.f3 exf3 is
bad for Black. I had over 400 games in my collection where Black captured
with 6...exf3. White won 88%!
Of course White still has to play well. Below is an example where Penullar
does just that. Nice win!
Penullar - jaruta, Live Chess Chess.com, 24.07.2012 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e4 e6

3.Nc3 Bb4 4.a3 Bxc3+ 5.bxc3 dxe4 6.f3 exf3 [The most popular move is
6...c5. After that move White has tried 15 different replies. I do not know
which one is the best. Of those that have been played at least 50 times, the
two that score the best are 7.Rb1 and 7.Bf4] 7.Nxf3 Nf6 8.Bd3 h6 9.0-0 b6
10.Be3 [A new move. White has done well with 10.Qe1!+/- a few times
before.] 10...Bb7 11.Qe1 0-0 12.Qh4! [Or 12.Qg3!? Nh5 13.Qh3 Nf6
14.Bxh6 gxh6 15.Qxh6+- with a winning attack.] 12...Nd5 13.Bg5! hxg5
14.Nxg5 [Faster is 14.Qh7#!] 14...Re8 15.Qh7+ Kf8 16.Rxf7# 1-0
113 - Winawer WR Gambit
Want to see something unusual? This game began with 1.e4 d5 and
transposed into the French Defence some moves later. That does not happen
very often.
The Winckelmann-Reimer Gambit of the French Defence Winawer follows

4.a3 with a later 6.f3!?
This exact position can be reached by many move orders by the Blackmar-
Diemer Gambit player, especially if Black follows it up with exf3 and Nf6.
The main French Defence move order is 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.a3
Bxc3+ 5.bxc3 dxe4 6.f3. One interesting line is 6...Nf6 7.fxe4.
This same position can be reached by transposition via 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4
3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3 e6 5.fxe4 Bb4 6.a3 Bxc3+ 7.bxc3. Then play can continue
7...Nxe4 8.Qg4!
In the blitz game below I missed an unusual chance to trap the queen.
Fortunately for me, Black could not handle the pressure against his king.
Sawyer - promesa, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 02.01.2013 begins 1.e4 d5

2.d4 dxe4 3.Nc3 e6 4.f3 Bb4 5.a3 Bxc3+ 6.bxc3 exf3 7.Nxf3 Nf6 8.Bd3 0-0
9.0-0 c6 [9...b6 10.Bg5 Bb7 11.Ne5 Qd5 12.Qd2+/-] 10.Bg5 Nbd7 11.Qe1
Qa5 12.Qh4 Qxc3 13.Rad1 [I missed an unusual but effective tactic of
trapping the queen here. 13.Bd2! Qb2 14.Rfb1+-] 13...Qa5 14.Ne5 b5?
15.Nxd7 Nxd7? 16.Qxh7# Black checkmated 1-0
114 - BDG vs French Winawer
Some like to play the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit as White. Maybe they also
play the French Defence Winawer Variation as Black. What happens when
these two systems collide?
One natural option is the Winckelmann-Reimer Gambit which can transpose

into a BDG Euwe Variation. The standard move order for the WRG is 1.e4
e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Bb4 (transposing to the game below) 4.a3 Bxc3+ 5.bxc3
dxe4 and now 6.f3!?
Most books on the French recommend that Black not accept the gambit.
There are many playable 6th move tries.
This game is a quickie where Black captures the WRG f3-pawn. My

opponent is Manny Bernal. I never saw him play a BDG.
This is one of 40 skittles games I played at Borders bookstore in Orlando,

Florida from 2003-2005. I began with a favorite move of mine at the time:
1.Nc3.
In the Queens Knight Attack I almost always follow that up with e4 or d4,
depending on what I feel like playing.
My opponent played 1...e6 signaling that we would head toward a French

Defence or Dutch Defence, or some less common Queen Pawn Game.
Sawyer - Bernal, Orlando, FL, 06.11.2003 begins 1.Nc3 e6 2.d4 Bb4 3.e4
[3.Nf3 is a very playable option for 1.Nc3 players who wish to avoid the
more well-known lines.] 3...d5 [Transposing to the French Defence Winawer
Variation] 4.a3 Bxc3+ 5.bxc3 dxe4 6.f3!? [Another valid approach. 6.Qg4
where play usually follows 6...Nf6 7.Qxg7 Rg8 8.Qh6=] 6...exf3 7.Nxf3
[7.Qxf3!? Nf6 8.Bd3 0-0 9.Ne2=] 7...Nf6 8.Bd3 0-0 [8...c5! 9.0-0 0-0
10.Qe1! Nbd7 (10...Qd5 11.Qg3 Nbd7 12.Ne5 Nxe5 13.dxe5+/-) 11.Qh4 b5
12.Ng5 h6 13.Ne4+/=] 9.0-0 [White has excellent attacking prospects on the
kingside.] 9...Qd6 [9...Qd5 10.c4 Qd8 11.Qe1 Nc6 12.Qh4+/-; 9...b6 10.Bg5
Bb7 11.Ne5 Qd5 12.Qd2+/-] 10.Qe1 c5 11.Qh4 cxd4 12.Bg5 e5? [Hastens
the end.] 13.Bxf6 Qxf6 14.Qxh7# 1-0
3.Nc3 Bb4 4.e5
White advances the pawn to protect it and cramp Black.
115 - Travis Corter 4.e5 Bxc3+
A little knowledge is a dangerous thing. So they say. However we all start
with no knowledge. You make progress when you gain a little knowledge.
Then you move on from there.
At the chess club in Williamsport, Pennsylvania I sometimes played a young

Travis Corter. I like the name “Travis”. It was popular in Texas and popular
with the Red Sox in 2016.
Travis was learning. We headed toward the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit with

1.d5 d5 2.e4. He avoided the gambit move 2…dxe4. Later Travis would
allow me to play the BDG a few times.
This time Corter played the French Defence with 2…e6. Earlier that same
year I won a couple Alapin-Diemer French Gambits against his father James
Corter after 3.Be3.
Here we entered the famous Winawer Variation after 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.e5. Travis
probably knew this a little bit from watching his dad.
Black prematurely exchanged off his bishop on c3. Usually plays 4…c5 and
waits for White to waste a tempo with 5.a3 Bxc3+. Our game continued 4…
Bxc3+ 5.bxc3.
Then Black pushed the pawn to 5…f6. That is a good strategy for attacking
the pawn center. The alternative is …c5.
This 5…f6 move was tactically dangerous for Black. You do not want to
open the center when you have less space and fewer pieces in action. I forced
sharp play until White won two pawns.
Sawyer (2010) - Corter (1400), Williamsport, PA, 22.06.1999 begins 1.d4

d5 2.e4 e6 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.e5 Bxc3+ 5.bxc3 f6?! [5...Ne7 6.Qg4 0-0 7.Nf3+/=]
6.Bd3 fxe5? [6...Qd7 7.Nf3+/-] 7.Qh5+ Kf8 8.Qxe5 Nc6 9.Qf4+ Qf6
[9...Nf6 10.Nf3+-] 10.Qxc7 e5 11.dxe5 [11.Ba3+! Nge7 12.Bb5+-] 11...Nxe5
12.Ne2 Nxd3+ 13.cxd3 Qg6 14.Nf4 [14.Ba3+ Ke8 15.0-0+-] 14...Qe8+
15.Kd2 b6 16.Ba3+ Ne7 17.Rhe1 g5 18.Bxe7+ Qxe7 19.Qxe7+ 1-0
116 - Muir 4.e5 c5 5.Nge2!?
When I was growing up, sometimes we ate red flannel hash. It is an acquired
taste. Not everyone likes it, but sometimes I do.
We took a family trip to Seattle, Washington. At one restaurant I ordered red

flannel hash for breakfast. No one else in my family did. They all laughed
and looked at me strangely.
Most of my chess career I reached the French Defence from the White side of
the board. Once in a while I have a taste for the Black side of the board. It’s
rare and strange, but it happens.
Here I found myself on the Black side of a French Defence vs Robert Muir. I
chose the Winawer Variation.
When I had Black after 4.e5 c5, almost everyone played 5.a3 against me. A
few brave souls ventured 5.Bd2 or 5.Qg4.
Bob Muir did not take long to get me out of the book. His choice of 4.e5 c5
5.Nge2 marked the only time I ever faced this.
If you are looking for something new, this move 5.Nge2 is really not all that
bad. It is equal and different. White misplayed the complications. His mistake
on move eight dropped a pawn.
The middlegame left Black with a bad light squared bishop. The extra pawn
allotted me freedom to expand in the center. More exchanges led to a rook
endgame. Black returned the extra pawn in exchange for a checkmate.
Muir (1800) - Sawyer (2010), Williamsport, PA 1997 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4

d5 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.e5 c5 5.Nge2!? [5.a3 in the main line] 5...cxd4 [5...Ne7!?=]
6.Qxd4 [6.Nxd4 Qc7=] 6...Nc6 7.Qg4 Nge7 [7...Bf8=] 8.Bg5?! [8.Qxg7
Ng6=] 8...Bxc3+ [8...Qc7=/+] 9.Nxc3 Nxe5 10.Bxe7 Nxg4 11.Bxd8 Kxd8
12.Be2 Nf6 13.f3 Bd7 14.g4 Bc6 15.Kf2 Rc8 16.Rhd1 Ke7 17.Kg3 Rhd8
18.g5 [18.Bd3 g5-/+] 18...Ne8 19.Bd3 g6 20.Ne2 e5 21.c3 f5 22.Re1 e4
23.Nd4 Kf7 24.Bc2 Nd6 25.h4 Nb5 26.Nxb5 Bxb5 27.fxe4 dxe4 28.Bb3+
Bc4 29.Rad1 Bxb3 30.axb3 Ke7 31.Kf4 [31.b4 Rxd1 32.Rxd1 Rd8-+]
31...Rxd1 32.Rxd1 Rd8 33.Ra1 Ke6 34.Rxa7 Rd3 0-1
117 - Waldrep Tries 5.a3 cxd4
Carl Waldrep played the French Defence Winawer Variation against me in
1994. This game was in the first round of an open event which served as the
APCT championship.
If memory serves me correctly I think this was one of the final postal chess
events that I played in. Shortly after this I switched from playing by postcard
to playing by email for 1995 and 1996.
By 1997 I had pretty much given up correspondence chess for the thrill of
blitz. I joined the Internet Chess Club at that time.
Carl E. Waldrep Jr of Jacksonville, Florida passed away in 2012. He was a

retired bank executive. His chess playing was primarily by correspondence.
Waldrep played 97 games in ICCF with a peak rating of 2344 in 1996.
Waldrep was a creative player. Carl Jr. sought complications in the French in
those days before strong computer chess engines.
I trotted down the main line of the Winawer Variation with 4.e4 c5 5.a3.
Then all of a sudden he sidetracked me with 5…cxd4!?
This line tempts White to go pawn chasing on the kingside. If that happens,
Black will go pawn chasing on the queenside.
In theory White has adequate defenses. In practice without a computer

database or chess engine, the position is tricky. White must find the best way
to sacrifice his queenside rook. I failed.
Sawyer (1973) - Waldrep (2241), corr APCT 94R-28, 1994 begins 1.e4 e6
2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.e5 c5 5.a3 cxd4 6.axb4 dxc3 7.Qg4 cxb2 8.Bxb2 Qe7
9.Ba3 [9.Nf3+/=] 9...Qc7 10.Qxg7 Qc3+ 11.Ke2? [11.Kd1 Qxa1+ 12.Bc1
Nc6 13.Qxh8+/=] 11...Qxc2+ [11...Qxa1 12.Qxh8 Kf8-+] 12.Ke3 Qc3+
13.Bd3 Qxa1 14.Nf3 [14.Qxh8 Kf8-/+] 14...Qxh1 15.b5 [15.Qxh8 Qxg2-+]
15...Nd7 16.Bxh7 [16.Qxh8 Qxg2-+] 16...Qa1 17.Bd6 Qc1+ 18.Ke2 Qb2+
[18...Ne7-+] 19.Ke1 Ne7 20.Qxh8+ Nf8 21.Qg7 Qc3+ 22.Kd1 Qb3+
23.Ke1 Bd7 24.Ng5 Qc3+ 25.Kd1 Qa1+ 26.Kd2 Qd4+ 27.Ke1 Qf4 28.Bg8
Qc1+ 29.Ke2 Bxb5+ 30.Kf3 Qd1+ 0-1
118 - Parsons 4.a3 to 4.e5
David Parsons was the ultimate club player. Dave knew his pet lines by
experience rather than by memorized exact knowledge. Second rate familiar
moves score better than accurate unfamiliar moves. Club players perform
better in comfortable positions.
Parsons played a French Defence Winawer Variation. I avoided the main line
4.e5 with 4.a3 Bxc3+ 5.bxc3. Dave did not accept the gambit with 5…dxe4.
Instead Parsons played the 4.a3 line as if it were 4.e5. David chose the
thematic 5...c5. We transposed back to 4.e5 after my move 6.e5.
The most common move order is 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.e5 c5 5.a3
Bxc3+ 6.bxc3. At this point most players continue 6…Ne7. Some choose 6…
Qc7 or 6…Qa5. Dave chose 6…Nc6. Statistically this choice has scored a
little less, but 6…Nc6 was still a thematic and reasonable move.
My games with Dave almost always reached a phase where pieces were
flying all over the place. This was no exception.
He swapped queens to draw my king out with 10.Kxd2. Then we build up for
a major tactical assault.
Parsons opened the center with 16…e5. Suddenly 10 of my next 11 moves

were captures. Most of his were too.
The difference was that I picked off a few pawns. When the dust cleared after
move 27, we were both in a knight endgame. Black had no pawns. White had
three untouched kingside pawns.

d5 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.a3 Bxc3+ 5.bxc3 c5 6.e5 Nc6 7.Be3 [7.Qg4+/=] 7...cxd4
8.cxd4 Qa5+ 9.Qd2 Qxd2+ 10.Kxd2 f6 11.Nf3 Bd7 12.Bd3 Rc8 13.Rab1
Rc7 [13...b6=] 14.Rhc1 [14.exf6 Nxf6 15.Bf4+/-] 14...Nge7 [14...f5=]
15.exf6 gxf6 16.c4 [16.Bf4+-] 16...e5 [16...dxc4 17.Bxc4=] 17.cxd5 Nxd5
18.dxe5 fxe5 19.Bxa7 Nxa7 [19...Be6 20.Ng5+/-] 20.Rxc7 Nxc7 21.Rxb7
Nab5 [21...e4 22.Bxe4+-] 22.Rb8+ Ke7 23.Rxh8 Nxa3 24.Rxh7+ Kd6
25.Nxe5 Bb5 26.Rxc7 Kxc7 27.Bxb5 Nxb5 28.Ke3 Kd6 29.Nd3 Ke6 30.g4
Nd6 31.f4 1-0
119 - Michael Damey Winawer
In the 2007 Central Florida Class Championship my opponents were all rated
2000 or higher. This was the only game were I actually had White. In the
third round I had gotten a forfeit win as White due to the luck of pairings. I
had already arranged to have a 5th round 1/2-point bye due to my work
schedule. Since I had lost my two games as Black, I wanted at least a draw
here.
I had prepared to play White in the Sicilian Defence, though my preparation

was not in depth. Suddenly I had a "Who cares" moment: "1.d4 Charge!"
Against Michael Damey, I began 1.d4. Damey ducked the BDG, and we
played a French Defence. Afterwards we had a nice time talking and going
over games.
Sawyer - Damey, Central Florida Class Ch (4), 07.01.2007 begins 1.d4 d5

2.e4 e6 [Keith Hayward said that one faces a lot of French Defences when
playing this way.] 3.Nc3 [The last time I had this position in a tournament
was 1991. I played the Alapin French 3.Be3 and won.] 3...Bb4 4.e5 c5 5.a3 [I
toyed with 5.Bd2 on which GM Eugene Perelshteyn had done two videos for
ICC. Since I only watching them once and did not really know the lines, I
chose 5.a3. Damey told me he plays 5.Bd2!] 5...Bxc3+ 6.bxc3 Qa5!? [This
was the first time I faced this in a recorded game. My opponent played his
first 10 moves at blitz speed.] 7.Bd2 Qa4 [This reminded me of a
continuation given in Fine's Practical Chess Openings. Botvinnik used this
idea after the moves Ne7 / Nf3.] 8.Qb1!? [The best continuation, used by
Fischer and recommended by Khalifman, is to play 8.Qg4! and after 8...g6 or
8...Kf8 to retreat with 9.Qd1!+/=. I considered the Qg4 advance, but not the
retreat. I did not want to sacrifice c2 at this time.] 8...c4 9.f4 [9.Nf3 seemed
more dynamic, but I wanted a solid position.] 9...Ne7 10.Nf3 Nbc6 11.Be2
h6 12.0-0 b6 13.Ra2 [The Rook frees up my Queen. This possibility did not
occur to me when I first played Qb1.] 13...Bd7 14.Qe1 0-0-0 15.g3 [I was
marking time and pondering bringing the Knight to b2 via h4-g2-e3.]
15...Rdg8 16.h4 Kc7 17.Kg2 [The queenside did not look to promising for
attack by either player. My plan was to use my kingside space advantage. If
he gives me weak points to target, I will be all over them.] 17...g6 [I figured
he was open to a draw. If he was determined to play for a win, I would expect
17...f6.] 18.Rh1 h5 19.Ng5 Be8 20.Kh2 Nf5 21.Nf3 1/2-1/2
120 - Rimlinger Moral Victory
Peter Rimlinger was a postal chess master in APCT in 1985. We met in a
French Defence Winawer. I played the Black pieces. Our game lasted about a
year.
In the olden days, the point of 7.a4 was to allow Ba3. White aimed into the
heart of the enemy camp on the dark diagonal. We reached a drawn ending if
we had kept playing. Drawing a master was a moral victory, but that was not
the whole story.
At the time I struggled with personal issues. During the week I worked in a
big busy corporate insurance office. They paid well. Outside of work I went
to church, raised my kids, loved my wife, and tried to recover from the loss
of a child.
By 1986 I did not want to spend more money on chess. This was in fact the
only game that I wished I could have continued. I was correctly forfeited
when I did not renew my APCT membership.
As I had done before, I quit playing chess for a while. I returned to fun and
serious chess play in 1988 after I had changed jobs.
Rimlinger (2233) - Sawyer (2000), corr APCT 1985 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5
3.Nc3 Bb4 4.e5 c5 5.a3 Bxc3+ 6.bxc3 Ne7 7.a4 Nbc6 8.Nf3 Qa5 9.Qd2
Bd7 10.Be2 f6 [10...Rc8=] 11.exf6 gxf6 12.dxc5 0-0-0 [12...e5 13.0-0 0-0-0
14.c4 Qxd2 15.Nxd2 Rhg8=] 13.0-0 [13.Nd4+/=] 13...e5 14.Ba3 h5 15.Rfb1
Be6 16.Bb4 Qc7 17.a5 a6 18.Ne1 Ng6 19.Qd1 [19.Ra4=] 19...Rdg8
20.Ra3? Nf4 21.Qd2 Nxg2 22.Nxg2 Rxg2+ 23.Kxg2 Rg8+ 24.Kh1 Qg7
25.Bf3 e4 26.Qe1 Bh3 27.Qg1 exf3 [27...Qh7-+] 28.Qxg7 Rxg7 29.Rab3
[29.Rd1 Rg2=] 29...Ne5 [29...Rg2=/+] 30.Ba3 [30.c6 Nxc6=] 30...Ng4
31.Kg1 Ne3+ [31...f5-+] 32.Kh1 Rg2 33.fxe3 Rg5 34.Rg1 [34.Rxb7=]
34...f2 35.Rbb1 Rxg1+ 36.Rxg1 Kd7 37.Rd1 Ke6 38.e4 [38.c6 bxc6=/+]
38...dxe4 39.Bc1 f5 40.Be3 f1Q+ 41.Rxf1 Bxf1 42.Kg1 Bb5 43.Kf2 Ba4
44.Kg3 Bxc2 45.c6 bxc6 46.Kf4 Kd5 47.Kxf5 Kc4 48.Kf4 Kxc3 49.h4 Kc4
50.Kg3 Kb5 51.Bd2 e3 [51...c5-/+] 52.Bxe3 Kxa5 53.Kf2 Kb4 54.Bd2+
Kb3 55.Ba5 c5 56.Ke2 Ka4 57.Bc3 a5 58.Kd2 Bf5 59.Kc1 Kb5 60.Kb2 a4
61.Be5 Kc4 62.Ka3 Bd7 63.Bf6 Kd3 64.Be5 Kc2 65.Bd6 c4 66.Kb4 Bb5
[66...c3=/+] 67.Kxb5 Kb3 68.Bb4 c3 [=] 1-0 [Forfeit]
121 - Quick Draw McGraw
When Johnny Owens and I were kids, there was a cartoon on TV called
“Quick Draw McGraw”. It ran from 1959-1962. This lovable character
appeared in other Hanna-Barbera cartoons as well.
Quick Draw McGraw was a horse who walked on two legs. He worked as a
sheriff in the Old West. His trusty sidekick deputy was the Mexican burro
Baba Looey.
Baba Looey was the smarter of the two. But when Baba Looey offered a
suggestion, Quick Draw McGraw always would remind him, “I’ll do the
thin’in around here! And don’t you for-git it!”
Johnny Owens played the French Defence Winawer Variation against me in a

postal game. What line should we try? I’ll let him do the thinking around
here.
Once Owens picked a line, I reckoned then I would figure it out. We didn’t
play the most popular line.
Black sent his queen on an adventure. She went from d8 to a5 to b6 to b2 all

in the first 10 moves.
Either of us could have avoided the line we chose. Apparently he was going
to let me to the thinking around here.
I couldn’t just let his queen break into my house and get away. But I couldn’t
catch her either.
We needed help from a sheriff like Quick Draw McGraw. Since he wasn’t
around, we ducked into a quick draw by repetition.
Sawyer (1973) - Owens (2000), corr APCT 94R-29, 1994 begins 1.e4 e6
2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.e5 c5 5.a3 Bxc3+ 6.bxc3 Ne7 7.Qg4 0-0 8.h4!? [8.Bd3
is the most common move.] 8...Qa5!? [8...Qc7!=/+] 9.Bd2 Qb6!? 10.dxc5
[10.Nf3 Qb2 11.Rc1 Nbc6 12.Bd3 Nf5 13.0-0=] 10...Qb2 11.Qd1 Nd7 12.f4
[12.Nf3=] 12...Nxc5 [If Black wants to play on, he can try 12...Nf5=/+ ]
13.Rb1 Qxa3 14.Ra1 Qb2 15.Rb1 1/2-1/2
122 - Buxon vs Beloungie
In the fifth round of the Maine State Closed tournament in 2012, Lance
Beloungie played Jon C Buxon.
The opening was a French Defence. On the tenth move, White varied from
the main line with 10.Rb1. This leads to only an equal and unbalanced game.
Black started to handle it well, but then he lost his grip. This time White
made the less important mistakes and won.
One curious fact about this game was that both players were listed with
exactly the same rating.
Buxon - Beloungie, Maine State Closed (5), 24.04.2012 begins 1.e4 e6 2.d4
d5 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.e5 Ne7 5.a3 Bxc3+ 6.bxc3 c5 7.Qg4 Qc7 8.Qxg7 Rg8
9.Qxh7 cxd4 10.Rb1!? [The standard book continuation is 10.Ne2 Nbc6
11.f4 Bd7 12.Qd3 dxc3] 10...Qxe5+ 11.Be2 [11.Ne2 dxc3 leads to an
unbalanced position with equal chances. One possibility is 12.Bf4 Qf6 13.h4
Nbc6!? 14.Bg5 Qe5 15.Bf4!? Qf6 with a draw by repetition] 11...dxc3
12.Nf3 Qc7? [Black would do better to stay on the kingside with 12...Qf5
13.Qxf5 Nxf5; or 12...Qf6] 13.Ng5 Nbc6 [13...Rf8] 14.Qxf7+ Kd8 15.Bf4?!
[White gives Black another chance. Best is 15.Qf6!+-] 15...e5 16.Bc1 Bd7
[16...Nd4!=] 17.Qf6 Kc8 18.Nf7 Rg6 19.Qh8+ Rg8 20.Qh6 Rg6?
[20...Nf5!] 21.Qf8+ Nd8 22.Qxe7 Ne6? 23.Nd6+ 1-0
Aikins – 2
Alapin – 21
Allensworth – 15
anxat – 46
Avalos – 16
Bachler – 52
Baffo – 51, 70
Bajoni – 45
Ballard – 81
Beloungie – 1, 6-8, 17, 49, 91, 122
Benner – 76
Bernal – 114
BethO – 93
Bies – 62
blik – 80
Bond – 4 31
Brummer – 97
Bryan – 1
Burke – 65
Buxon – 122
Catania – 22
Certon – 4
Chandler – 11, 30
Chess-Dream – 96
Collemer – 49
Corter, J – 78
Corter, T – 115
Cotter – 28
Damey – 119
Debaets – 36
Diebert – 29
Diemer – 13
Donohue – 19
Doty – 26
Douglas – 88
Duggan – 111
Dyba – 24
Etienne – 66
Fawbush – 100
Finiseur – 40
gdesportes – 101
Gelgolan – 11
Gill – 58
Guezennec – 45
Hagerty – 69
Haines – 5-8, 17, 91
Harabor – 64
Hathaway – 60-61
Heidenfeld – 33
Heisman – 32
Huber – 72
Hyde – 94
Irvin – 103
jaruta – 112
Johnson – 77
Jones – 47
Kaletsky – 14
Kasa – 71
Katz – 41
Keres – 27
Klein – 63
kucukturank – 108
Kutikoff – 104
LeviRook – 9
Lopez – 92, 110
MaMi98 – 30
Martin, J – 57
Martin, S – 13
Martinez – 87
Mastin – 53
Moore – 39
Muir – 38, 73, 109, 116
niccion – 84
Niehoff – 29
NightKnight – 48
NimzoMal – 44
OpenFile – 102
Oriero – 10
Ousley – 68
Owens – 121
Paetzold – 99
Parsons – 75, 85, 118
PatternPlayer – 107
Payne – 54
Penullar – 90, 108, 112
Pfeiffer – 67
promesa – 113
Pupols – 97
rafa47 – 5
Rawlings – 55
Renders – 44
Rimlinger – 120
Rookie – 50
Rookmagier – 35
Rowe – 25
samo66 – 86
Sawyer – 2-3, 9-10, 14-16, 18-20, 22-25, 28, 32, 34-38, 40-43, 46-48, 50-83,
85-89, 92-96, 98-107, 109-111, 113-121
Searles – 98
Serota – 26
Shannon – 56
Sheppards – 12
Spigel – 82
Squash – 3
superdave99 – 43
Surak – 59
Szasz – 12
Taylor – 89
Terrigood – 95
TIGEROFCHESS – 34
Tobias – 18
Tregidga – 106
Tremblay – 31
Urgena – 74
Van Valkenburg – 37
Veigar – 23
Verbac – 27
Waldrep – 117
Webster – 39
Werner – 79
Whitaker – 33
Woodland – 20
wttyoung913 – 90
xsf – 43
Young – 105
ZEPFAN4EVER – 83
Zerg – 84
Zinkl – 21
Book 4: Caro-Kann
1.e4 c6 in Chess Openings
By Tim Sawyer
Introduction to Caro-Kann
Welcome to the Caro-Kann Defence chess opening. Play to win after 1.e4 c6.
Tim Sawyer analyzes 120 games. This expanded version matches the 2016
paperback edition. It includes updated commentary, and an Index of Names
to Games. The author tells stories and explains the chess opening strategy and
tactics.
Win in the Caro-Kann Defence. Be active! Punish your opponent. Play an
opening used by every world champion for the past 100 years from one side
or the other. Grandmasters in the past who played this as Black pieces
include Capablanca, Botvinnik, Smyslov, Bronstein, Petrosian, Karpov,
Kasparov and Anand.
you typical examples in this proven defence. Follow ideas to surprise your
opponent and win.
This book covers all the main variations after 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5. That includes
the 3.Nc3 Classical, 3.exd5 Exchange and Panov, 3.e5 Advance and the 3.f3
Fantasy Variation. Also included is the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit O’Kelly
variation.
The games tell stories about fascinating chess players. Examine a huge
variety of openings from main lines to gambits. Find creative ideas and ways
to improve. Have fun playing chess. Enjoy this book!
Book 4 – Chapter 1 – Rare Lines
1.e4 c6
Instead of the obvious second move 2.d4, White can also try lesser known
variations such as 2.Ne2 or 2.Nc3.
1 - Lakdawala on 2.Ne2!?
I purchased the book "The Caro-Kann: Move by Move" by Cyrus Lakdawala
published by Everyman Chess. Like all of his books, this one is excellent! I
have played the Caro-Kann Defence about once every 10 days for the past 45
years, though not so much recently. It is my number three defense to 1.e4.
First is 1.e4 e5 Open Game, and second is 1.e4 Nf6 Alekhine Defence.
After I got the book I briefly glanced at the last chapter "King's Indian Attack
and 2 Ne2". I wanted to read what Lakdawala said about the KIA, whether he
went with the standard 3...e5 or the old 3...g6. But what's this 2.Ne2? He
implied it was dangerous. I figured someday I would check it out, but right
then? No. A quick glance at my own games shows that I had faced 2.Ne2
only four times, winning all of them against weaker players.
Then I played the Caro-Kann Defence in a 3 minute blitz game on the

Internet Chess Club. My opponent "OutsideTheGate" was rated 2212; I was
rated four points lower at 2208. Both of us good; neither of us superstars.
What to my wondering eyes would appear but 2.Ne2!?
"Times change, but chess players don't. This is another attempt to confuse us
decent hard-working Caro folk. I would take this line seriously." Lakdawala.
Turns out I followed the line I was "most likely to encounter" for 11 moves,
before my opponent deviated from the book that I did not know.
There is no time to refer to a book during a 3 0 game. You play moves every
1-2 seconds based on memory, intuition, pattern recognition, experience and
the clock! Here is my game along with some comments. Junior 12 was my
post game analyzing partner for most of this particular contest.
OutsideTheGate - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 07.03.2012 begins
1.e4 c6 2.Ne2 d5 3.e5 ["This tricky line is very popular on the Internet Chess
Club." Schandorff] 3...Bf5 4.Ng3 Bg6 5.h4 h6 6.h5 Bh7 7.e6 [I am used to
this, having played the Alekhine Defence even more than the Caro-Kann.]
7...fxe6 [7...Qd6 8.exf7+ Kxf7 9.d4 e5 10.Bd3 e4 feels like a Latvian
Gambit.] 8.d4 e5! ["A key move to remember. We deny White his brilliant
blockade sac by returning the pawn to seal e5 with a cork." Lakdawala. Also
interesting is 8...c5!? 9.dxc5 e5] 9.dxe5 e6 [9...Nd7!? 10.f4 Qb6 11.Bd3
Bxd3 12.Qxd3 0-0-0=] 10.Bd3 Bxd3 11.Qxd3 Qd7 12.Nd2!? [Lakdawala
gives 12.0-0 Bc5 13.Be3 Na6 where he shows that Black gets good
compensation for a pawn he sacrifices.] 12...Bc5 13.Nf3 [13.Nb3! Bb6
14.Be3 Na6 15.0-0-0 0-0-0 16.Qc3+/= and White has a somewhat better
position.] 13...Na6 14.c3 Ne7 15.Be3 Bxe3 16.Qxe3 0-0= [Why not castle
kingside?] 17.Rh4 Nf5 18.Nxf5 Rxf5 19.0-0-0 Qe7 [Simple tactics for a 3 0
blitz game: threat ...Rxf3/...Qxh4.] 20.Rh3 Qc5?+/- [Missing White's
response. I should have played 20...Qf7!] 21.Nd4! [Threatening f5/e6.]
21...Rf7 22.Rg3 Kh8 23.Nxe6 Qxe3+ 24.fxe3 Re8 25.Nf4 Nc5 26.Rf1
[26.Rf3!+/-] 26...Ne4? [26...Kh7!=/+ and Black has a good game.] 27.Ng6+
Kg8 28.Rxf7 [28.Rgf3!+/-] 28...Kxf7 29.Rf3+ Kg8 [29...Ke6!?] 30.e6=
[30.g4! gives White good winning chances.] 30...Ng5 [After this White's e6-
pawn falls and the endgame is completely equal. I am ahead in time.
Eventually White forces the draw.] 31.Rf5 Nxe6 32.Re5 Nc7 33.Rxe8+
Nxe8 34.Kd2 Kf7 35.Nf4 Nf6 36.Kd3 b6 37.b4 Nd7 38.Kd4 Kf6 39.e4
dxe4 40.Kxe4 Nf8 41.g4 Ne6 42.a4 Nxf4 43.Kxf4 b5 44.a5 a6 45.Kf3 Kf7
46.Ke4 Ke6 47.Kd4 Kd6 48.c4 bxc4 49.Kxc4 Kd7 50.Kc5 Kc7 51.Kd4
Kd6 52.Ke4 Ke6 53.Kf4 Kf6 54.Ke4 Ke6 55.Kd4 Kd6 56.Ke4 Ke6 Drawn
by repetition 1/2-1/2
2 - Why Change Strategy?
Strategy is a plan with a purpose. We make plans involving the next 2-4
moves based on strategy and tactical considerations.
In the opening five distinct issues determine your plans:

1. The safety of all the pieces on the board.
2. The fight for control of key central squares.
3. The activity of all the pieces on the board.
4. The safety of each of the kings.
5. The co-ordination and power of each army.
In the middlegame we judge based on pawn structure.

6. The tactics indicated by patterns on the board.
7. The value of space advantage for maneuvers.
8. The likely long term value of each piece.
9. The decision of which pieces to exchange.
10. The choice of playing for a mate or the endgame.
In this Caro-Kann Defence game, Black initially played to hold the center.
When White did not move forward, Black jumped into the void. The pawn
structure indicated that White would have chances on the kingside and Black
on the queenside. At a key point Black moved from queenside expansion to a
direct kingside mating attack. This would have been impossible had White
focused more on attacking my kingside.
vicnice01 - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 09.04.2013 begins 1.e4 c6

2.Nc3 d5 3.f3 [A very rare move. More common are 3.Nf3 or 3.d4] 3...Nf6
4.Nge2 d4 5.Nb1 e5 6.Ng3 c5 7.Bc4 g6 [7...Nc6] 8.d3 Bg7 9.Bd2 0-0
10.Qc1 Qe7 11.Bh6 Be6 12.Bxg7 Kxg7 13.Bb3 b5 14.Nd2 Nbd7 15.0-0
Nb6 16.a3? [I expected 16.Bxe6=] 16...c4 17.Ba2 a5 18.h3 Rfc8 19.Qd1 b4
20.f4 c3 21.bxc3 bxc3? [21...Bxa2 22.Rxa2 dxc3=/+] 22.Nb1? [White has
the in-between move 22.fxe5!+/-] 22...Bxa2 23.Rxa2 Na4 24.Qc1 Nb2
[24...Rab8!-+] 25.Ra1 Rab8 26.a4 Rb4 27.fxe5 Qxe5 [27...Nd7-/+] 28.Rf3
[28.Nf5+!=] 28...Rc6 [28...Ne8-+] 29.Na3 [White misses the bold 29.Nf5+
gxf5 30.Qg5+ Kh8 31.Rg3=] 29...Rxa4 30.Nc4? Nxc4 [Black switches
direction and aims at a kingside mating attack. Strong is 30...Rxa1! 31.Qxa1
Nxc4 32.dxc4 Rxc4-/+] 31.Rxa4 Nd2 32.Rxf6 Rxf6 33.Kh2 h5 34.h4 Nf1+
35.Kg1 Qxg3 36.Qxf1 Qe3+ White resigns 0-1
3 - Odd Chess Challenger
In 1993 I played a game vs the computer Chess Challenger in a rare variation
of the Caro-Kann Defence.
I do not remember the occasion of this game, but I have always enjoyed
playing the odd game vs weaker computers and chess engines to see that
curious mix of awesome and awful.
I am guessing it was set to play at about a 1400 level at some rather faster
speed, moving every few seconds.
Most of the moves in our game were reasonable, but my opponent made one
big blunder in the game (14.Ng3?).
Players rated 1400 do that from time to time. I was rated in the 1400s briefly
when Fischer beat Spassky in 1972.
Daily study and regular play led to my early rating increases. Back then I was
young and energetic.
We all make mistakes. Many of my opponents have blundered in similar

fashion to this game ever since.
Chess Challenger (1400) - Sawyer (2011), Bellefonte, PA 1993 begins 1.e4

c6 2.Nc3 d5 3.Qf3 [More common is 3.Nf3] 3...dxe4 [3...d4] 4.Qxe4 Nf6
5.Qd3?! [This blocks harmonious development. Better would be a move like
5.Qf4=] 5...Qxd3 6.Bxd3 Nbd7 7.Nge2 [7.Nf3=] 7...Ne5 [7...Nc5! 8.Bc4
b5=/+] 8.0-0?! [8.Be4 Nxe4 9.Nxe4= and Black has the two bishops.]
8...Nxd3 9.cxd3 e5 [9...Bf5!-/+] 10.f4 [10.d4=] 10...Bc5+ 11.Kh1 exf4
12.Rxf4 [12.Nxf4 0-0-/+] 12...Be6 13.b4 Bd6 14.Ng3? [14.Rf1 0-0-/+]
14...Bxf4 15.Nge2 Bd6 16.Ba3?! a5 17.Rb1 0-0 18.Nd4 Nd5 19.Nxd5 Bxd5
20.Nf5 Bxb4 21.Bxb4 axb4 22.Rxb4 Rxa2 23.Ne7+ Kh8 24.Rxb7? Ra1+
25.Rb1 Rxb1# 0-1
4 - Peter Webster on Kampars
Peter Webster sent me this story of Nikolajs Kampars. It tells his journey
from Latvia to Wisconsin to the editor of BDG Magazine.
"This information comes from two visits to Nikolajs Kampars at his home
and one with his family after his death. When I met Mr. Kampars, he was
living with his wife and sister in the lower portion of a Victorian-era home in
Milwaukee. A brother lived nearby; I do not know if there were other living
relatives. He had heart trouble and had retired from his work in a bakery.
"In Latvia he had been a member of the judicial system. I was not able to
work out which position in the United States would have been most
comparable to the one he held. His father had been a police chief in Russia
during the Czarist regime. One of the few things which the family had
brought with them when they escaped from Latvia was an oil painting of their
father in dress uniform; this was hanging on the dining room wall. He told me
that once he and his brother entered the police station and found the entire
staff asleep. It was the custom in those days to have waxed mustaches with
the ends curling upwards, and the two boys were unable to resist the
temptation to clip the ends off those mustaches!
"When Soviet troops entered the Baltic States, thousands of people fled. For
the Kampars family this was a life-or-death decision; the Soviets were under
orders to eliminate anyone who might be antagonistic to the Communist
regime (I have read an estimate that eleven thousand Latvians were murdered
and thousands more deported to Siberia), and as the family of a Czarist police
official they would have been on this list even though their father had died
between the World Wars. Some Estonians were able to enter Finland, with
which there was then a common border, but Lithuanians and Latvians had
nowhere to go but German-controlled territory. The family was fortunate to
reach a camp in Austria, which was not overrun by the Soviet armies.
"All I learned of his chess life in Latvia is that he and his brother were given
lessons by Aaron Nimzovich and that at one point he was the librarian for the
national organization. The book Alekhine in Europe and Asia (Donaldson,
Minev, and Seirawan) includes a simul loss by Alekhine in Riga, Latvia,
against "Kampar" (see p. 98); no initial, and the final "s" is missing, but this
may well have been Nick. Games from a tournament held in the Austrian DP
camp indicate that he was a conservative player with a classical style and
opening repertoire; the gambit ideas for which he became known when he
published Opening Adventures were not typical of his cross board play. He
became one of the best in Wisconsin using this classical style; before I began
to play tournament chess he drew against a very young Bobby Fischer as
Black in a Caro-Kann, (he also lost one to Fischer) and my records show that
in the 1958 North Central Open in Milwaukee (Pal Benko headed a field of
88) he was the top Wisconsin player (4-1,2) and repeated this in the 1959
Western Open (4-1,3) (Benko again, 112 players) and 1959 North Central
Open (4-0,3) (master Curt Brasket of Minnesota won ahead of future world
correspondence champion Hans Berliner, 90 players, Kampars 5th). I don't
know whether he ever competed outside Milwaukee. His USCF rating was
Expert.
"I do not know how Mr. Kampars became aware of the German master Emil
J. Diemer. The family participated in European chess life to some extent. His
sister told me that GM Savielly Tartakower wrote a poem for her! He would
occasionally send the aging Diemer a little money when he could spare it; he
showed me a strange letter which seemed to indicate that Mr. Diemer had
some sort of mental glitch, although he noted that other letters gave no
indication of problems.
"Although I did not see a pet in the home, copies of the bulletin of the
Milwaukee Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals were on the
sideboard. Appropriate reading material for a gentle man and gentleman.
"Peter Webster"
Thank you for that wonderful piece! USCF Master Peter Webster is a long
time BDG player. I mentioned him in the Introduction to my BDG books.
Kampars drew Bobby Fischer in a Caro-Kann.
Robert J Fischer - Nikolajs Kampars, Milwaukee WI 1957 begins 1.e4 c6

2.Nc3 d5 3.Nf3 Bg4 4.h3 Bxf3 [4...Bh5!?] 5.Qxf3 e6 6.d4 [6.d3 d4=]
6...Nd7 7.Bd3 dxe4 8.Nxe4 Ngf6 9.0-0 Nxe4 10.Qxe4 Nf6 11.Qe3 Nd5
[11...Bd6!?] 12.Qf3 Qf6 13.Qxf6 Nxf6 14.Rd1 0-0-0 15.Be3 Nd5 16.Bg5
Be7 17.Bxe7 Nxe7 18.Be4 Nd5 19.g3 Nf6 20.Bf3 Kc7 21.Kf1 Rhe8 22.Be2
e5 23.dxe5 Rxe5 24.Bc4 Rxd1+ 25.Rxd1 Re7 26.Bb3 Ne4 27.Rd4 Nd6
28.c3 f6 29.Bc2 h6 30.Bd3 Nf7 31.f4 Rd7 32.Rxd7+ Kxd7 33.Kf2 Nd6!
34.Kf3 f5 35.Ke3 c5 [White's king is denied entry points.] 36.Be2 Ke6
37.Bd3 1/2-1/2
5 - Diemer-Duhm Gambit
What do you do when you go through a stretch where you are scoring lower
than usual? After playing dozens of practice blitz games on the same day, I
was doing rather poorly. I decided to see what lines had my best lifetime
performance ratings and play those for a bit. Thus I won my last eight games
of the day.
This Caro-Kann game was not just any old variation. It was a cousin of the
Diemer-Duhm Gambit which normally is reached by 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.c4
dxe4 4.Nc3 intending 5.f3 with play similar to a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit.
Earlier that same day my 1500 rated opponent had played a BDG Teichmann
as White.
The Caro-Kann Defence game, OracleMcSnacker - Sawyer, began 1.e4 c6.

Now White thought for 11 seconds, but White played the next five moves
using a total of five seconds.
After move 11 I thought to myself, “Wow! This 1506 rated opponent is

playing aggressive and fast!?”
Then I played some inaccuracies on moves 12 and 13. This led to more
trouble. I played for exchanges with the hope that it would relief some
pressure with my move 13…Nd5!?
White responded with 14.Bxe7. Okay my strategy worked. I was fortunate

that White missed 14.Ne4 or 14.Rh3! with advantage.
The game continued 14...Qxe7 15.Qh6 Nxc3 16.bxc3 f5. Black fought back.
Eventually I won a piece and the game.
OracleMcSnacker (1506) - Sawyer, ICC 5 0 Internet Chess Club,

23.09.2011 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.c4 dxe4 4.Nc3 Nf6 5.f3 exf3 6.Nxf3
Bg4 7.Be3 e6 8.Bd3 Nbd7 9.0-0 Be7 10.Qe1 0-0 11.Qh4 Bxf3 12.Rxf3 g6?
[12...e5!? or 12...c5!=] 13.Bg5 Nd5!? 14.Bxe7= [14.Rh3! h5 15.Bxe7 Nxe7
16.g4 Kg7 17.gxh5 Nf5 18.Qf2 Rg8 19.Bxf5 gxf5 20.Qf4 Qf6+/=] 14...Qxe7
15.Qh6 Nxc3 16.bxc3 f5 17.Re1 e5 18.dxe5-/+ [18.c5 Qg7 19.Qh4 e4=/+]
18...Nxe5 19.Rfe3?-+ [19.Kh1 Qf6 20.Rh3 Rf7-/+] 19...Qc5 20.Kh1-+ Ng4
21.Qg5?-+ [If 21.Qf4 Nxe3 22.Rxe3 Rfe8-+] 21...Nf2+ 22.Kg1 Nxd3 White
resigns 0-1
2.d4 d5 3.f3
Alexey Bezgodov has made 3.f3 more popular with his book published in
2014.
6 - You Need a Plan of Attack
From the movie "The Avengers":
Steve Rogers: "Stark, we need a plan of attack!"
Tony Stark: "I have a plan: attack!"
In the three minute chess blitz game below, my original plan of attack is to
transpose into a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit after 3.e4 dxe4 4.Nc3.
However after 3.e4 c6 4.Nc3 e6, that is not going to happen. After I complete
my development, I need a plan of attack.
After move 15 I decide to just attack! I combine my pawns and pieces to

open up the defenses around Black's king.
My attack was not deeply thought out, nor was it played accurately. However
an attack by itself threatens stuff.
An attack puts pressure on the opponent. By the end, White had an easy win
in a BDG Avoided opening.
Sawyer - idledim, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 16.05.2012 begins 1.d4 Nf6
2.f3 d5 3.e4 c6 4.Nc3 e6 [4...dxe4 5.Bc4 exf3 6.Nxf3] 5.Bg5 [White can play
a standard Steinitz Variation of the Classical French Defence with 5.e5 Nfd7
6.f4 c5 7.Nf3 Nc6 8.Be3 where both sides have lost one tempo.] 5...Be7
6.Bd3?! [Better is 6.e5 Nfd7 7.Bxe7 Qxe7 8.f4 c5 9.Nb5+/=] 6...h6?!
[6...dxe4! 7.fxe4 Qxd4=/+] 7.Be3 Nbd7 8.Qd2 [8.e5!+/=] 8...g5 9.e5 Nh5
10.Nge2 c5 11.g4 Ng7 12.dxc5 Nxc5 [12...Nxe5!=] 13.Bb5+ Bd7 14.Nd4 0-
0 15.Bxd7 Qxd7 16.h4! Rac8 17.hxg5 hxg5 18.Bxg5 Rfd8? 19.Bf6! Bxf6
20.exf6 e5 21.Qg5 [Winning, but sloppy. Fastest is 21.Rh8+! Kxh8 22.Qh6+
Kg8 23.Qxg7#] 21...Nce6 22.Nxe6 Black resigns [22.Qh6!+-] 1-0
7 - Hou Yifan 3.f3 Ruck
Hou Yifan is a female chess prodigy from China. At 20 years old, she was the
Women's World Chess Champion. Hou Yifan was rated 2673, two points
below Judit Polgar at 2675, another "lady grandmaster" who plays the Caro-
Kann Defence 3.f3. We cannot say "fellow GM" because these ladies are
girls and not guys.
I saw the style of my female opponents such as Rachel Crotto, Irene Aronoff,
Simone Sobel - twice, Sanja Petronic, Barbara Koks, Jaquelline Oriero and
Donna Marie Woodland. Also, I have written about Vera Menchik, Martha
Fierro Baquero, Eva Maria Zickelbein, Tatiana Khlichkova, Maya
Chiburdanidze, Fiona Mutesi, and Carissa Yip.
When one of the best players in the world repeats an opening, you know it is
a good line. The World Champion Vassily Smyslov played 3.f3 on select
occasions. Hou Yifan liked the Caro-Kann Defence 3.f3 Fantasy variation.
She played it often. Here she defeated Hungarian GM Robert Ruck (2577) in
France. Ruck chose the rare queen move 3...Qb6. She continued 4.Nc3. Both
sides had chances in sharp play, but Hou Yifan won in the end.
Hou Yifan (2673) - Ruck (2568), Corsican Circuit Final 2014 Bastia FRA
(3.4), 20.10.2014 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.f3 Qb6 4.Nc3 dxe4 5.fxe4 e5
6.Nf3 [6.dxe5 Be6 7.Nf3 Nd7 8.Ng5=] 6...exd4 7.Nxd4 [7.Qxd4 Qxd4
8.Nxd4=] 7...Nd7 [7...Nf6 8.e5 Ng4 9.e6 Bxe6 10.Bc4 Bxc4 11.Qxg4=]
8.Be2 [8.Ndb5!? cxb5 9.Nd5 Qa5+ 10.Bd2 Qa4 11.Nc7+ Kd8 12.Nxa8+/=]
8...Ne5 [8...Ngf6=] 9.Bf4 Ng6 10.Be3 Qxb2 11.Na4 [11.Ndb5! Bb4 12.0-0
Bxc3 (12...Nf6 13.Rb1+-) 13.Nc7+ Ke7 14.Bc5#] 11...Qb4+ 12.c3 Qa5 13.0-
0 Nf6 14.Rb1 Be7 15.Nf5 0-0 16.Nxe7+ Nxe7 17.Bc5 Qc7 [17...Re8-/+]
18.Bd6 Qd8 19.Nc5 [19.e5+/=] 19...b6 20.e5 Nfd5 21.Ne4 Ne3 22.Qd3
Nxf1 23.Rxf1 Ng6 24.Qg3 Be6 25.Ng5 Bd5 [25...Bxa2-/+] 26.c4 h6 27.cxd5
Qxg5 28.dxc6 Qxg3 29.hxg3 Rfe8 30.Ba6 [30.c7+/-] 30...Nxe5 31.c7 f6
32.Rd1 Nf7 [32...Kf7!=] 33.Bf4 [33.Bb4+/=] 33...Ne5 [33...g5! 34.Bc1
Kg7=] 34.Bb7 Re7 35.Bxa8 Rxc7 36.Bd5+ Kf8 37.Bb3 Rc5 38.Rd8+ Ke7
39.Rd1 [39.Rg8+-] 39...a5 40.Be3 Rc6 41.Ba4 Rc4 42.Bb3 Rc6 43.Rd5 Rc3
44.Bxb6 Ng4 45.Rd1 Rxg3 46.Bc7 Rc3 47.Bxa5 Rc6 48.Bb4+ Ke8 49.Ba4
Ne5 50.Bxc6+ Nxc6 51.Bc3 1-0
8 - Juergen Bendix Bold 3.f3
In a club game Juergen Bendix surprised me with a Caro-Kann Defence 3.f3
variation. It was not unheard of, but I rarely faced it.
His last published rating was 1370 from 1990, though probably Juergen
Bendix had been a stronger player in his younger years. He died in 1996 at
age 79.
I played the higher rated players at the club, but sometimes they were busy or
absent. This was my only recorded game vs Mr. Bendix.
Juergen Bendix was 63 years old for our North Penn Chess Club game in
Lansdale, Pennsylvania. He had moved to the United States from somewhere
in Europe.
About that time my USCF tournament rating reached the 1900s. My postal
chess rating at that time was already well over 2000 and over 2100 by the
next year. I played postal chess every day. I played in live chess tournaments
only a few times a year.
My initial choice vs the Caro-Kann 3.f3 was to select the solid 3...e6 which
threatens to win a pawn. As it turned out, White was very eager to sacrifice a
pawn although 4.Nc3 would have been a better continuation in Blackmar-
Diemer Gambit style.
We ended up with a BDG Ryder Gambit type position after his 6.Qxf3. We
both castled queenside and I outplayed him. We swapped queens and later I
won a bishop in a combination.
Bendix (1370) - Sawyer, Lansdale, PA 05.06.1981 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5

3.f3 e6 4.c3 [If 4.Nc3 Bb4 White can choose between 5.Bf4, 5.Nge2 or
5.Bd2] 4...dxe4 5.Nh3 exf3 6.Qxf3 Qd5 7.Be2 Qxf3 8.Bxf3 Bd6 9.Bf4 Bxf4
10.Nxf4 Nf6 11.Nd2 Nd5 12.Nxd5 exd5 13.h3 Nd7 14.0-0-0 Nf6 15.Rde1+
Be6 16.b3 0-0-0 17.g4 h6 18.Kb2 Rhe8 19.a4 Bd7 20.Re5 Kc7 21.g5 Rxe5
22.dxe5 Ng8 23.h4 Re8 24.Re1 Ne7 25.c4 dxc4 26.Nxc4 Ng6 27.gxh6 gxh6
28.Bh5 [28.h5 Nf4-/+] 28...Nf4 29.Be2 b5 30.axb5 cxb5 31.Nd6 [31.Nd2
Rxe5-+] 31...Rxe5 32.Nxf7 Rxe2+ 33.Rxe2 Nxe2 34.Nxh6 Be6 35.b4 Kd6
36.Kc2 Kd5 37.Kd2 Nf4 0-1
9 - Smyslov Caro-Kann Alapin
GM Smyslov lived 89 years as a deeply religious man. He was a musician
who believed God could be seen in chess. He said:
"Chess as an art has a divine origin, while chess as a sport (when victory
counts at all costs sacrificing the beauty of the game), springs from [the]
Devil."
"If every action was faultless, it would be of no interest to others. First of all,
chess players are human beings dependent on their emotions. They are not
insured against mistakes, they even must make them. Chess reflects the
essence of human nature, including human ideas, creativity and illusions. The
emotional side plays a considerable role. When we read: “If it had not been
for… I would have…”, this is impossible because there are no “if’s”! It is not
so easy to become a World Champion."
GM Alexey Bezgodov wrote: "The 22-year old Vassily Vasilievich Smyslov

already had a highly-developed technique and a rare degree of positional
understanding. However, this did not stop him from sacrificing a pawn in the
opening, if in return he could obtain the initiative, or even hopes of it!"
Smyslov - Kan, Sverdlovsk (11), 1943 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.f3 e6 4.Be3
dxe4 5.Nd2 exf3 6.Ngxf3 Nf6 7.Nc4 [An alternative is 7.Bd3 Nd5 8.Qe2=,
but Bezgodov writes: "An important maneuver. Whilst heading for e5, the
knight also gives the bishop on e3 greater freedom of movement."] 7...Nbd7
8.Bd3 Nd5 9.Bg5 Qc7 10.0-0 h6 11.Bd2 Be7 12.Nce5 N5f6 13.Qe1 Nxe5
14.Nxe5 Bd7 15.Qg3 g5 16.Qh3 Rf8 17.Nxf7 [Bezgodov: "Understanding
that the extra exchange will win the game, Smyslov does not bother looking
for other moves. A player with a sharper style might have preferred 17.Qxh6
Qd6 18.c3 Ng8 19.Qg7+-"] 17...Rxf7 18.Bg6 Qd6 19.Kh1 0-0-0 20.Bxf7 e5
21.Qxh6 Ne4 22.Qxd6 Bxd6 23.Be1 exd4 24.Bg6 Nc5 25.Bg3 Bxg3
26.hxg3 Rh8+ 27.Kg1 Na4 28.b4 Nc3 29.a3 b6 30.Rae1 Kc7 31.Re5 g4
32.Bd3 Kd6 33.Rg5 Be6 34.Re1 Nd5 [If 34...Rh6 35.Be2+/-] 35.Re4 c5
36.Bc4 Nc7 37.bxc5+ bxc5 38.Rg6 Re8 39.Rexg4 Re7 40.Re4 Kd7
41.Bxe6+ Rxe6 [Or 41...Nxe6 42.g4+-] 42.Rgxe6 Nxe6 43.Rxe6 Kxe6
44.Kf2 Kf5 45.Kf3 c4 46.g4+ Kg5 47.Ke4 1-0
10 - French Masters 3.f3 e5
When I mentioned the Alexey Bezgodov book on Caro-Kann 3.f3, our friend
Francesco Cavicchi wrote: "but there's that fearsome 3...e5."
Bezgodov called 3...e5 "The Abordage Variation", with this description:

"There will be a battle without rules, not any less intense than in the classical
King's Gambit in the far off 19th century!"
In response here I present a clash in the Caro-Kann Defence 3.f3 between

two masters played in France. FIDE Master Benjamin Le Corre had the
White pieces vs young Vianney Domenech. This time experience won out
over youth.
GM Bezgodov writes that after "many sleepless nights" his conclusion about
the 3...e5 line is this: "White's game is easier and, not surprisingly, more
pleasant."
Let us look at one line after 9.Qd4! which the grandmaster considers the most
reliable for White.
Le Corre (2266) - Domenech (2238), ch-FRA Accession 2014 Nimes FRA

(4.15), 20.08.2014 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.f3 e5 4.dxe5 Bc5 [4...Qc7 5.Bf4
Qb6 6.b3 dxe4 7.fxe4 Bc5 8.Qf3 Bxg1 9.Bc4 Be6 10.Bxe6 fxe6 11.Nd2= but
1-0 in 27 in Scandinavian-Sawyer, Internet Chess Club 1998] 5.Nc3 Qb6
[5...Ne7 6.Qd2 0-0 7.f4=] 6.Na4 Qa5+ 7.c3 Bxg1 8.Rxg1 dxe4 9.Qd4!
[9.Bf4!?; 9.f4!?] 9...Ne7 10.Bg5 Ng6 [10...Nd7 11.Bxe7 Kxe7 12.f4+/=]
11.b4 [11.Nc5 0-0 12.Nxe4+/-] 11...Qc7 12.0-0-0 0-0 13.Qd6 Qd7
[13...Qxd6 14.exd6 exf3 15.gxf3+/=] 14.Nc5 Qf5? [14...Qe8 15.Nxe4+/-]
15.f4 h5 [Everything goes downhill for Black. 15...Qg4 16.Qd2 Nd7 17.h3+-]
16.h3 h4 17.Be2 b6 18.Bg4 bxc5 19.Bxf5 Bxf5 20.g4 hxg3 21.Rxg3 cxb4
22.h4 Re8 23.h5 Nf8 24.Bh6 g6 25.Qf6 Ne6 26.hxg6 Bxg6 27.Rxg6+ fxg6
28.Qxg6+ Kh8 29.Rh1 1-0
3.f3 dxe4
Black capture the central pawn and plans to follow-up with 4…e5.
11 - Bezgodov Extreme Caro
I like the book by GM Alexey Bezgodov entitled "The Extreme Caro-Kann:
Attacking Black with 3.f3".
"The Extreme Caro-Kann" book by the Russian grandmaster is published by

New In Chess in 2014 with 272 pages.
The back cover reads:

"This strange looking move was already played by former greats Gena
Maroczy and World Champion Vassily Smyslov, but the idea has come to
fruition in the hands of modern world-class players like Vassily Ivanchuk,
Alexander Morozevich and Judit Polgar."
This system is an aggressive attempt to hinder the development of Black's

light squared bishop, which is so key in this opening.
The Fantasy Variation provides White an approach against the Caro-Kann

Defence using the move 3.f3 in a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit style.
I was surprised by the move 3.f3 from "blik" in one of our games Internet
Chess Club blitz games. I got into trouble combining the natural and logical
moves 5...Bg4 with6...Nf6.
Our game demonstrates one idea that can lead White to a quick tactical
victory with a bishop sacrifice.

begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.f3 dxe4 4.fxe4 e5 5.Nf3 Bg4 6.Bc4 [If 6.c3 Nd7
White has 7.Bd3 by Hou Yifan or 7.Be2 by Houdini] 6...Nf6? [6...Nd7=]
7.Bxf7+! Kxf7 8.Nxe5+ Kg8 9.Nxg4 Nxg4 10.Qxg4 Qd7 11.Qxd7 Nxd7
12.e5 Be7 13.0-0 Rf8 14.Rxf8+ Nxf8 15.Be3 Ne6 16.Nc3 a6 17.Ne4 Kf7
18.Rf1+ Ke8 19.c4 Rf8 20.Rxf8+ Kxf8 21.d5 Black resigns 1-0
12 - Tactical Timofeev 3.f3
What is the most important chess skill? Tactical ability. Grandmasters and
computers are great in tactics.
GM Artyom Timofeev of Russia sacrifices his queen in the middle of the

board which demonstrates his boldness, imagination and clever eye for a
pretty combination. This move ends the game on move 21.
According to his Wikipedia page, in April of 2009, GM Arty Timofeev was

rated 2677 and ranked number 53 in the world.
This opening is the Caro-Kann Defence 3.f3. Playing the Black pieces in this
game is the young FIDE Master Pavel Bublei.
In my database, GM Timofeev has faced the Caro-Kann Defence 25 times.

He played the 3.f3 line 17 of those times or two-thirds of the time.
Both players play well in a sharp variation. Bublei deviates from my

5...Bg4with his 5...exd4.
The evaluation hovers on the edge between a slight White advantage and
equal chances.
Then comes the winning shot 21.Qxd5! The GM outplayed the FM.
Timofeev (2598) - Bublei (2339), Chigorin Memorial 2014 St Petersburg

RUS (7.27), 24.10.2014 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.f3 dxe4 4.fxe4 e5 5.Nf3
exd4 6.Bc4 Nf6 7.0-0 Nbd7 8.e5 [Houdini likes 8.Qe1!? Nb6 9.Bb3 Bc5
10.Ng5 0-0 11.Bxf7+ Rxf7 12.Nxf7+/=] 8...Nd5 9.Bxd5 cxd5 10.Nbd2
[10.Kh1!?] 10...Be7 11.Nb3 0-0 12.Nbxd4 [12.Qxd4=] 12...Nc5 13.Be3 Bg4
14.h3 Bd7 15.Nb3 Nxb3 16.axb3 Bb5 [16...Be6=] 17.Rf2 a6 18.Nd4 Bd7
19.Qd3 [19.Qf3+/=] 19...Qc7 20.Nf5 Qxe5? [20...Bxf5 21.Qxf5 Rae8=]
21.Qxd5! 1-0
13 - Caro-Kann Pythagoras
This Caro-Kann Defence game in the 3.f3 Fantasy variation is a sharp and
critical line from a three minute Internet Chess Club game. I played the Black
pieces.
We attempted simultaneous king hunts. At a likely two seconds per move we

missed some tactical shots on both attack and defense. I won in 16 moves.
Improvements for both sides are suggested in the notes.
My opponent in today's game is "Pythagoras" whose handle likely comes

from the famous Greek mathematician from the 500s BC known for his
opinions on music, science, philosophy and religion, as well as notable
thoughts about women and food.
Like me, "Pythagoras" is often rated around 2000 in blitz (he had peaked at
2256). When this game was play, we were both going through phases where
our ratings had dipped. A few weeks later we had both raised our ratings over
100 points.
Because of the high volume and speed of games played, ICC ratings rise
sharply and fall dramatically. You have to take many rating snapshots to get
an accurate picture of a player’s strength.
Pythagoras - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 05.10.2014 begins 1.e4

c6 2.d4 d5 3.f3 dxe4 4.fxe4 e5 5.Nf3 exd4 6.Bc4 Nd7 [Komodo likes this
move, while Houdini prefers 6...Nf6=] 7.Ng5?! [Black is borrowing an idea
from a Two Knights Defence. Normal here is 7.0-0 Ngf6= when White has
tried many options.] 7...Ne5 8.Bxf7+? [8.0-0 Nh6-/+] 8...Nxf7 9.Nxf7 Kxf7
[9...Qh4+! would have been a great shot.] 10.0-0+ Ke8? [10...Nf6 11.e5 Qd5
12.exf6 gxf6=/+] 11.Qf3? [11.Qh5+! Kd7 12.Qf5+ Kc7 13.Qxf8+- and
White's creativity would have been rewarded.] 11...Qf6 12.Qg3 Qg6
13.Qe5+ Be7 14.Qxd4 Nf6 15.e5 Ne4 16.Nc3 Bc5! White resigns 0-1
3.e5
White grabs space and denies Black the move …Nf6.
14 - Attack King in Center
The move 3.e5 line is one of the sharpest methods against the Caro-Kann
Defence 1.e4 c6. This Advance Variation is about as popular as the
traditional 3.Nc3 main lines. In an effort to re-learn my SuperSolid set of
openings, I tried to play at least one blitz game per day. After each game, I
looked up the opening.
Against my opponent "barano" I had a good start. Then I missed a couple

things. White developed an attack against my uncastled king. My opponent
sacrificed a piece for two advanced passed pawns. That was all she wrote. It
was a nice attack, even though I was on the wrong side of it.
barano (2005) - Sawyer (2239), ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 14.03.2012

begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 Bf5 4.c3 e6 5.Ne2!? Nd7 [Or 5...c5!] 6.Nf4 Ne7
7.g4 Be4 8.f3 Bg6 9.h4 h6 [Almost always in these Advance Caro lines,
9...h5!= is the correct move.] 10.Nxg6 Nxg6 11.h5 Ne7 [11...Nh4!?] 12.Bd3
c5 13.Be3 cxd4 [13...Nc6 Development is better than breaking open the
position.] 14.cxd4 Nc6 15.Bc2?! Qa5+ [15...Qb6!=/+] 16.Nc3 Nb4?+/- [I
missed the tactic 16...Ndxe5! 17.dxe5 d4 18.Bxd4 0-0-0-/+ winning back the
bishop with advantage.] 17.Ba4 Rc8 18.0-0 a6 [Now I am in trouble. White's
good moves are very easy to see.] 19.Bxd7+ Kxd7 20.f4 Be7 21.f5 Nc6
22.fxe6+ fxe6 23.Rf7 Rhg8 24.a3 [24.Na4!+/-] 24...Rcf8 25.Qf3?! Qd8
[25...Nd8= is a good idea.] 26.Na4 Rxf7? [Necessary is 26...Qe8 27.Rxf8
Rxf8=] 27.Qxf7 Qe8 28.Nc5+ Kc7 [There is no good defense. The rest of the
game is ridiculous.] 29.Nxe6+ Kb8 30.Qxe8+ Rxe8 31.Nxg7 Rg8 32.Bxh6
Bf8 33.g5 Bxg7 34.Bxg7 Rxg7 35.g6 [There is no stopping these pawns.
White played well and deserved the win.] 35...Nxd4 36.Rf1 Ne2+ 37.Kh2 d4
38.Rf7 Rg8 39.g7 Ka7 40.h6 d3 41.h7 Rxg7 42.Rxg7 d2 43.Rd7 Ng1
44.h8Q Nf3+ 45.Kg3 Nxe5 46.Qxe5 d1Q 47.Rxd1 a5 48.Qxa5+ 1-0
15 - Hugged Your Pawn?
Have you hugged your child tonight? In chess, keeping your material safe is a
lot like protecting your children.
As a parent you might not be looking at each kid every moment, but often a
good parent can sense when a child might be in trouble.
A good chess player can often sense when any piece might be in trouble. My
friend Dan Heisman developed the Seeds of Tactical Destruction to help a
player sense trouble.
In this Caro-Kann Defence game, Black has weak points at c6 (pawn) and f5
(bishop and pawn). White has weak points at e5 (pawn) and e1 (king).
Play was pretty even in this three minute ICC blitz game vs "doc7099" until
White tried to force the issue with 21.c4!?
His continuation was 22.bxc4? This dropped his e5-pawn. The game was still
alive because Black’s extra pawn was a doubled f-pawn.
Moments later, however, White forgot about the weakness on e1. In the face
of checkmate in one, White disconnected and forfeited. It was an
understandable reaction.
doc7099 - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 18.03.2013 begins 1.e4 c6

2.d4 d5 3.e5 Bf5 4.Nf3 e6 5.c3 c5 [5...Nd7=] 6.Bb5+ Nc6 7.Bxc6+ bxc6 8.0-
0 cxd4 [8...c4!?=] 9.Nxd4 Ne7 10.Bg5 Qc7 11.Bxe7 Bxe7 12.Nxf5 exf5
13.Re1 0-0 14.Nd2 Rab8 15.b3 g6 16.Nf3 Rfe8 17.Rb1 Bf8 18.Qd4 Qb6
19.Qh4 Bg7 20.Qf4 Qc7 21.c4!? dxc4 22.bxc4? [This drops a pawn. White
should play 22.Qxc4 Bxe5 23.Nxe5 Rxe5 24.Rxe5 Qxe5 25.Qxc6 Qe2=]
22...Rxb1 23.Rxb1 Bxe5 24.Nxe5 Qxe5 25.Qf3? [White misses the mate
threat. Better is 25.Qxe5 Rxe5 26.Kf1 Kg7=/+] 25...Qe1+ White
disconnected and forfeits 0-1
16 - Slow Steady Advance
At every skill level the Caro-Kann Defence might be met by an Advance
Variation with3.e5. My favorite response as Black is to play 3...Bf5, getting
the light squared bishop outside my pawn chain.
My 3…Bf5 is followed by 4...e6 and eventually c6-c5, attacking White's d4

pawn. Here White played the solid 4.Nf3 line along with a sharp counter
attack of 7.c4 attacking my d5 pawn.
Mostly I play online blitz games. Once in a while I have a slow go with an
opponent like "SlowBo". For this game the time control was a 25 minute
game with 10 second increments.
For a blitz player like me, the game seemed to last an eternity. I outplayed
this computer chess engine in a good rook endgame.
SlowBo (1905) - Sawyer (2181), ICC 25 10 Internet Chess Club, 07.07.2007

begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 Bf5 4.Nf3 e6 5.Be2 Ne7 6.0-0 c5 7.c4 Nbc6
8.dxc5 d4 9.Qa4 Ng6 10.Qb5? [10.Rd1=] 10...Qd7 11.Rd1 Ngxe5 12.Nxe5
Nxe5 13.Qxd7+ Nxd7 14.c6 bxc6 15.Rxd4 Bc5 16.Rd1 0-0-0 17.g4 Bg6
[17...Bc2=/+] 18.Bg5 f6 19.Bh4 Ne5 20.Nc3 Rxd1+!? 21.Nxd1 [21.Rxd1
Rd8=/+] 21...Rd8 22.Kf1 Bd3 23.g5 Be7 24.gxf6 Bxf6 25.Bxf6 gxf6
26.Bxd3 Rxd3 27.b3 Ng4 28.Kg2 f5 29.b4 Rd2 30.a4 a6 31.b5 cxb5
32.axb5 axb5 33.cxb5 Kb7 34.h3 Nf6 35.Kf3 Nd5 36.h4 Rd3+ 37.Ne3
Nxe3 38.fxe3 Rb3 39.Rg1 Rxb5 40.Rg7+ Kc6 41.Rxh7 Rb4 42.h5 Rh4
43.Rh8 Kd5 44.h6 Ke5 45.h7 Rh6 46.Ke2 Ke4 47.Kf2 e5 48.Rc8 [Correct
is 48.Kg3! Kxe3 49.Re8 f4+ 50.Kg4 Rxh7 51.Rxe5+ Kd4 52.Kxf4 Rf7+
53.Rf5 Rxf5+ 54.Kxf5 with only two naked kings left on the board.]
48...Rxh7 49.Rc4+ Kd5 50.Rb4 Rh2+ 51.Kg3 Rc2 52.Ra4 Rc4 53.Ra3
[53.Ra2 Ke4=/+] 53...Ke4 54.Kf2 Rc2+ 55.Ke1 Rb2 [55...Kf3!-+] 56.Rc3?
[56.Ra5! Rc2=/+] 56...Kf3 57.Kd1 e4 58.Ra3 Re2 59.Ra5 Kxe3 60.Rxf5
Rf2?! [60...Rd2+! 61.Ke1 Ra2-+] 61.Rb5? [Now the win is easy. White
could make things more difficult with 61.Re5 Rf1+ 62.Kc2 Rg1=/+]
61...Rf1+ 62.Kc2 Ke2 63.Kc3 Rf8 64.Re5 e3 65.Kc2 Rc8+ 66.Kb2 Kf2
67.Rh5 e2 68.Rf5+ Ke1 69.Rf7 Rc5 70.Rd7 Kf2 71.Rf7+ Ke3 72.Re7+
Kd3 73.Re6 Rc4 74.Rxe2 Kxe2 75.Ka2 Kd3 76.Kb3 Rd4 77.Kb2 Rb4+
78.Ka2 Kc2 79.Ka3 Rc4 80.Ka2 Ra4# 0-1
17 - Pelle Lingsell Bishop Retreat
This Caro-Kann Defence game is vs Pelle Lingsell of Sweden. I chose the
Advance Variation with 3.e5 Bf5 4.Bd3.
94% of the time Black captures on move four with 4...Bxd3 to exchange his
bad bishop for White's good one.
Black's choice to retreat to 4...Bg6 may have been an attempt to complicate

matters or to take White out of the book. Whatever the reason, it worked in
this game when I missed a tactic.
In 2012 I had defeated Pelle Lingsell in the Four Knights Game and also in a
Blackmar-Diemer Gambit Bogoljubow variation. It seems fair that I show
this game where he won.
The past couple years I have experimented with many different openings for
fun. I planned to make a push to raise my rating back up. That would require
a lot of games vs higher rated players.
In 2015, I also planned to revise my Blackmar-Diemer Gambit Keybook.

That project could not be done instantly or overnight, but as Dr. Irving Jensen
of Bryan College taught us, the key is to write a little bit every day.
As of 2014, Goodreads lists 69 Irving L. Jensen books and only had four Tim
Sawyer books. With my blog, that is a lot of writing in my spare time!
All those plans changed when my work friend Ronnie Taylor died. His loss
changed my employment situation for the worse. I retired early to write more
books. This is one of them.
Sawyer (1962) - Lingsell (2053), ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 17.11.2012

begins 1.d4 c6 2.e4 d5 3.e5 Bf5 4.Bd3 Bg6 5.f4 [5.e6!+/-] 5...e6 6.Nf3 Ne7
7.Nh4!? [7.0-0=] 7...c5 8.c3 Nbc6 9.Be3?! [9.dxc5=] 9...Qb6 10.Nxg6 hxg6
11.b3 Nf5 12.Bxf5 gxf5 13.Qd2? [13.0-0 Rc8=/+] 13...cxd4 14.Bxd4 Nxd4
15.Qxd4 Bc5 16.Qd2? Be3! 17.Qd3 Bxf4 18.g3 Bxe5 19.Nd2 Rc8 20.Rc1
Qa6 21.Qxa6 bxa6 22.c4 dxc4 [For one move Black misses 22...Bxg3+!-+]
23.Nxc4 Bxg3+ White resigns 0-1
3.e5 Bf5 4.Bd3 Bxd3
It is natural for Black to swap off his “bad” bishop, but he is also exchanging
his only developed piece by 4…Bxd3.
18 - Easy Caro-Kann vs Amort
J.R. Capablanca taught me a deep respect for endgames. Thus I preferred
openings like the Caro-Kann Defence where I could build up positional
advantages. This game is in the 3.e5 Advance Variation where White chose
the simple 4.Bd3, a move popular at the club level. Generally it implies a lack
of ambition to push for an opening advantage. More theoretically challenging
approaches involve developing either knight on move four.
By 1981 my chess activity and rating were on a rapid rise. In October that
year I played in a match for the Chaturanga Chess Club vs a team visiting
from another club. Team events can be a lot of fun. You gather your friends
to take on a team with someone else's friends. My opponent was Anthony
Amort. At the time he was rated slightly above me. Both our ratings were
headed higher, and mine was about to pass his.
Safety is job one. Weaker players lose material to tactics. Tony Amort and I
were careful players. Activity is job two. My strategy gave me a more active
bishop, rooks and king. White exchanged into the wrong endgame, so this
contest became an easy win.
Amort (1909) - Sawyer, Hatboro, PA team match, 27.10.1981 begins 1.e4 c6

2.d4 d5 3.e5 Bf5 4.Bd3 [Stronger players prefer 4.Nf3; 4.Nc3 or 4.h4]
4...Bxd3 5.Qxd3 e6 6.b3 c5 7.c3 cxd4 8.cxd4 Qa5+ 9.Bd2 Qa6 10.Qxa6
Nxa6 11.a3 Ne7 12.Nc3 Nc6 13.Nge2 Nc7 14.0-0 Be7 15.b4 a6 16.Na4 b5
17.Rfc1 bxa4 18.Rxc6 Nb5 19.Be3 Kd7 20.Rc2 Rhc8 21.Rca2 Rc4 22.Kf1
Rac8 23.Ke1 Nc3 24.Nxc3 Rxc3 25.Kd2 R3c4 26.Kd1 Kc6 27.Rc2 Kb5
28.Rxc4 Rxc4 29.Kd2 a5 30.bxa5 Kxa5 31.Kd3 Ka6 32.Bc1 f6 33.f4 Bd8
34.Bd2 f5 35.h3 h5 36.Rb1 Be7 37.Bb4? [Wrong endgame. White needs to
swap rooks and keep his "bad" bishop on the board. 37.Rc1 Rxc1 38.Bxc1=]
37...Bxb4 38.Rxb4 [Headed for a pawn ending, but a rook ending is also lost
for White. 38.axb4 Kb5 39.Ra1 Rxb4 40.Rc1 a3-+] 38...Rxb4 39.axb4 Kb5
40.Kc3 h4! 41.Kb2 Kxb4 42.Kc2 0-1
19 - Ray Alexis in Caro-Kann
The joy of playing correspondence chess was meeting players from all over
the world. Here it is Ray Alexis in APCT.
One of my Jeffrey Baffo post detailed my correspondence career of 1085

games. Ray Alexis has a master ICCF rating of 2275 and a USCF
correspondence rating of 2216.
Ray Alexis was reported to be a friend of Anatoly Karpov and the editor of
CHESS'N Stuff and of a periodical on chess stamps.
American Postal Chess Tournaments run by Helen Warren and Jim Warren
named most of their events after chess pieces. Each type of event was
different.
My game with Ray Alexis in 1993 was in Knight 328. This was a one round
tournament where nine players faced the other eight simultaneously, four as
White and four as Black.
Our opening was a Caro-Kann Defence. In 1989-90, I won a lot of Latvian

Gambit games. By 1991-1992, I was facing stronger opposition and losing
with the Latvian.
So I decided to return to the Caro-Kann Defence in the Advance Variation.

Ray chose 3.e5 Bf5 4.Bd3 which seem tame. But calculation and pattern
recognition skills far out trump opening theory when it comes to results.
I chose the queen swapping maneuver 7...Qa6 from Atkins - Capablanca,

London 1922. Alas, later I made a tactical blunder.
Alexis (2133) - Sawyer (2003), N-328 corr APCT (5), 06.1993 begins 1.e4
c6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 Bf5 4.Bd3 Bxd3 5.Qxd3 e6 6.f4 Qa5+ [6...c5=] 7.c3 Qa6
8.Qh3 Ne7 9.Nd2 Nd7 10.Ne2 0-0-0 11.b4 h5 12.Nf3 Qd3?! [12...Nf5=]
13.Ng5! Qg6 14.0-0 Nb6 15.a4 Kd7? [15...Rd7 16.g4+/=] 16.g4!? [16.f5!+-
breaks open the position in White favor.] 16...f5 17.exf6 Qxf6? [A fatal
blunder. Black had to play 17...gxf6 18.Nxe6 Re8 19.g5 Qf5= when the
position appears defensible.] 18.Ng3 g6 19.Re1 1-0
20 - Why Trade Queens
The Caro-Kann Defence proves to be a solid defense vs White opening
attacks, but Black plays for much more than stopping an onslaught. A key
strategy for winning chess is to minimize White's pluses and maximize
Black's pluses.
In this game after a queen swap on move seven, White had exchanged two of
his best attacking pieces.
Black's knights and good dark squared bishop were left with excellent posts
for operation.
Good tactics are required for victory. Your chances improve with a good
positional play such as a favorable pawn structure and effective squares for
your pieces.
Chess club players may choose normal developing moves that take you out of
your prepared book. Beware of transpositions.
In a Caro-Kann Defence my late friend Bob Muir answered 1.e4 c6 with

2.Nf3. However after 2...d5 3.e5 Bf5 4.d4 e6 5.Bd3 we reached the 3.e5 Bf5
4.Bd3 line by transposition.
Bob Muir was a mainstay of the club at Lycoming College during the years I
lived in Williamsport, Pennsylvania. There we just played games for fun.
Black exchanged White's active pieces: a queen, a rook, a bishop and a

knight. The game ended with a bishop fork check that picks up a knight.
Muir (1800) - Sawyer (2010), Williamsport PA 1997 begins 1.e4 c6 2.Nf3

d5 3.e5 Bf5 4.d4 e6 5.Bd3 Bxd3 6.Qxd3 Qa5+ 7.Qd2!? [7.Bd2 Qa6=]
7...Qxd2+ 8.Nbxd2 c5 9.c3 Nc6 10.0-0 cxd4 11.cxd4 Nge7 12.Nb3 Ng6
13.Bd2 Be7 14.Ne1 0-0 15.f4 Nh4 16.Nf3 Nxf3+ 17.Rxf3 g6 18.g4 Rfc8
19.a3 a5 20.Rc1? [20.a4=] 20...a4 21.Nc5? b6?! [Missing 21...Nxd4 22.Rfc3
Ne2+! with a winning fork.] 22.Nd7 Nxd4 23.Rf2 [23.Rxc8+ Rxc8-/+]
23...Nb3 24.Rxc8+ Rxc8 25.Bc3 Nc5 [25...d4! 26.Nxb6 Rc6 27.Bxd4 Nxd4-
+] 26.Nxb6 [26.Bb4! Nxd7 27.Bxe7 Rc4-/+] 26...Rc6 27.Ba5 Ne4 28.Re2
Bc5+ 0-1
21 - Harry Foesig Caro Trains
In April of 1981, I played Harry Foesig in a train of three Caro-Kann Defence
games at the North Penn Chess Club. There were two men named Harry
Foesig in that area at that time. I believe they were father and son, Senior
(1897-2003) and Junior (1925-2001). One of them wrote books about
railroads and trolleys in the Philadelphia area. My guess is that Foesig, Sr.
was the author and that Foesig, Jr. was my chess opponent.
At that time I worked for Bamberger’s at the Montgomeryville Mall in the

nearby North Wales area. I sold candy with pictures of four different stores,
one on each side of the box. One side had Bamberger’s, and one had Macy's,
which was our parent company. I do not remember the other two.
Five years later Macy's rebranded its stores, eliminating all the other names.
Macy's owned Bloomingdale's and all together Macy's became the largest
U.S. department store at the time.
Tracking my games I played Harry Foesig four times. I was White in a Slav
Defence. The others were Caro-Kann Defence games with 3.Nc3.
Here I deal with the issue of an early c2-c4 move in the Advance Variation. I
did not allow White to take on d5. Instead I played 8.c4 dxc4. Black castled
queenside, a rare idea after 3.e5, but I liked to castle on opposite sides. Both
sides attacked the king when White dropped his queen to a tactical
combination.
Foesig (1600) - Sawyer (1887), Lansdale, PA 29.04.1981 begins 1.e4 c6

2.d4 d5 3.e5 Bf5 4.Bd3 Bxd3 5.Qxd3 e6 6.Nf3 Nd7 [6...c5!?] 7.Bg5 Qc7
8.c4 dxc4 9.Qxc4 h6 10.Bf4 Nb6 11.Qe2 0-0-0 12.0-0 g5 13.Be3 Ne7
14.g4?! [Opening lines to the wrong king! 14.a4=] 14...Ng6 15.Rc1?!
[15.Nc3 Kb8=/+] 15...Be7 16.a4 Nd5 17.Nc3 Ndf4 18.Bxf4 Nxf4 19.Qf1?
[Centralizing the queen might better deal with the coming attack. 19.Qe4 h5-
/+] 19...h5 20.Nb5 Qd7 21.Nxa7+ Kb8 22.Qe1 [If 22.Nxc6+ bxc6 23.Qa6
Qb7-+] 22...hxg4 23.Nxc6+ bxc6 24.Nxg5 Bxg5 25.Qb4+ Qb7 26.Qc5 [Or
26.Rc4 Qxb4 27.Rxb4+ Kc7-+] 26...Rxd4 27.a5 Rd5 28.Qxc6 Rd1+
29.Rxd1 Qxc6 0-1
22 - Art Keiser Challenge
Flashback to 1982: I played Art Keiser of Pennsylvania four APCT postal
games on the same postcards. Two were Bird's Openings and two Caro-Kann
Defences. Below is an Advance 4.Bd3 Variation which allows Black to swap
off his bad bishop.
I believe this was the same Arthur W. Keiser who died at the age of 92. The
Bucks County Courier Times described him as being born on a farm and
raised with a deep Christian faith and love of the earth.
Art Keiser was devoted to church and family, who "remember him for his
love of gardening, photography, chess, tennis, racquetball, model airplanes,
and Spanish."
In his final tournament at age 71 in 1993, Art Keiser ended up 41st out of 50
players in Hatboro. Art Keiser finished behind my friends Greg Nolan, Alan
Lindy, Eric Tobias, Victor Snapstys and ahead of Robert Lovenstein. All
were players that I faced myself.
In this game White had the right idea, but, at the wrong time. White fell for a
tactic that left White down the Exchange and a pawn. I was fortunate enough
to win all my games vs Keiser.
Keiser (1856) - Sawyer (2100), corr APCT 1982 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.e5
Bf5 4.Bd3 Bxd3 5.Qxd3 e6 6.Nf3 Nd7 7.0-0 Qc7 [7...Ne7=] 8.a3 Ne7 9.b4
a5 10.Bd2 a4 11.b5 c5 12.c4 cxd4 13.cxd5 Nxe5 [13...Nxd5!=/+] 14.Nxe5
Qxe5 15.dxe6 fxe6 16.Re1 Qd5 17.f4? [Correct is 17.Re4 e5 18.f4=]
17...g6?! [17...Rc8!-/+] 18.Re5? [White should play 18.Bb4= now!] 18...Qd7
19.Bb4 Bg7 20.Re4 [20.Nd2 Nd5-/+] 20...Nd5 21.Bc5? Rd8 [More accurate
is 21...Rc8! 22.Bb4 Rc1+ 23.Kf2 Ne3-+] 22.Nd2 b6 23.Bxd4? [23.Bb4 Nxb4
24.axb4 0-0 25.Rxa4 Rc8-/+] 23...Nxf4 24.Rxf4 Bxd4+ 25.Rxd4 Qxd4+
26.Qxd4 Rxd4 27.Nf3 Rd3 28.Kf2 Rb3 29.Nd4 0-0+ 30.Kg1 Rb2 31.h4
Rff2 32.Nxe6 Rxg2+ 33.Kh1 Rh2+ 0-1
3.e5 Bf5 4.Nc3 e6
With the move 4.Nc3, White signals that he has no intention of a slow build
up with c2-c3. For better or worse, the Nc3 is ready for action.
23 - Tim Barnes on 7/7/77
Starting on 7/7/77 I received my first APCT event pairings. The American
Postal Chess Tournaments was well run by Helen Warren of Illinois.
I played hundreds of games with APCT over a 20 year period. This game was
from my first APCT section.
The Rook was the annual club championship. The Rook was an Open event
for players of all levels.
The first round was played in seven player sections. Each player had three
games as White and three as Black in a round robin.
Winners advanced to the next round and played other winners. Some first
round games led to easy wins by the higher players.
Typically the games with the fewer moves finished earlier. They were usually
vs the weaker opponents. All six games were in progress at the same time.
Against Tim Barnes I played the Caro-Kann Defence which was my standard
defence at the time. White first playe 2.Nc3 but then transposed into the
Advance Variation 3.e5.
There is not much to say beyond the fact that my fifth move may have been a
little risky. By the 10th move, I had won a pawn and a knight.
Barnes - Sawyer, corr APCT 77R-11 (1), 08.1977 begins 1.e4 c6 2.Nc3 d5
3.e5 Bf5 4.d4 e6 5.Nf3 Qb6 6.Be3 [6.Nh4+=] 6...Qxb2 7.Qb1 Ba3 8.Na4
Qxb1+ 9.Rxb1 Bxc2 10.Rxb7 Bxa4 11.Bd3 a6 12.0-0 Bb5 13.Rb1 Nd7
14.Rb3 Be7 15.Bxb5 axb5 16.Rb2 Bd8 17.h3 Nb6 18.Ng5 Ne7 19.g4 Nc4
0-1
24 - Oldest Chess Player
I don't know who was the oldest chess player I faced. Certainly my opponent
in this game had to be near that upper end. Edgar V. Trull was a long time
postal chess player competing from at least the 1940s to the 1980s. Trull was
a former US Army Sergeant who lived the latter part of his life in Texas. I
think his military background helped his chess play.
Edgar Valentine Trull was born in upper New York State on September 3,
1896. My guess is that he was the son of a medical doctor with the exact
same name who was born around 1854 and who himself lived in Bennington,
Vermont (near upper New York state). The chess playing Edgar V. Trull
passed away on December 6, 1990 at the age of 94. He was buried at the Fort
Sam Houston National Cemetery, San Antonio, Texas.
From the games in my database Edgar Trull was a consistent 1.e4 e5 player
from either side of the board. We only played once, when he was 82-83 years
old. He was rated around 1788.
My game with Trull began as a Caro-Kann Defence. White chose the

Advance Variation. Although this can be a positional line, it is known for the
sharp tactics possible when Black counter-attacks with pawns to f6 and / or to
c5. It is most common for Black to develop his light squared bishop
immediately with 3…Bf5.
Trull (1788) - Sawyer, corr APCT Q-36, 1978 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.e5
Bf5 4.Nf3 e6 5.Nc3 Nd7 6.Be2 Qc7 [Now White's knight leaves the
protection of his e5/d4 pawns and goes after my bishop.] 7.Nh4 Bg6 8.0-0 a6
[The point of this move is to play c5 without allowing Nb5 attacking the
Qc7.] 9.b3 c5 10.Nxg6 [Maybe better is 10.Bb2=] 10...hxg6 11.Bf4 cxd4
12.Qxd4 Bc5 13.Qd3 Nxe5 [Black has won a pawn. Black's center pawns
advance on White. I win the skirmish.]14.Qg3 Bd6-+ 15.h3 Nf6 16.Na4 Ne4
17.Qe3 b5 18.Nb2 Bc5 19.Bxe5? Qxe5 20.Nd3 Bxe3 21.Nxe5 Bd4 22.Nf3
Bxa1 23.Rxa1 0-0 24.Nd4 e5 25.Nf3 Nc3 26.Bf1 f6 27.Nh4 g5 28.Nf5 g6
29.Ne3 f5 30.Nd1 Nxd1 31.Rxd1 Rfd8 32.g3 Kf7 33.Bg2 Ke6 34.f4 e4
35.fxg5 Rac8 36.Rd2 Rc3 37.g4 Rdc8 38.gxf5+ gxf5 39.a4 bxa4 40.bxa4
Rxc2 41.Rxc2 Rxc2 42.Bf1? d4 43.Bxa6 d3 44.Kf1 Rc1+ 45.Kf2 f4 46.h4
d2 0-1
25 - ATtheGreat Attacks
In 2006 I played a blitz game vs my chess friend “ATtheGreat” on the
Internet Chess Club. He pushed my Caro-Kann Defence with the aggressive
3.e5 Bf5 4.Nc3 e6 5.g4 attack.
His bold play in this variation threatened to overrun my kingside. When

facing such tactics, you must not allow your opponent to walk all over your
position.
Don’t become a punching bag. Fight back! Black must aim directly at the
White pawns, such as g4, e5, d4 or c2.
This game is an example of the Black pieces getting around and through the
pawn to destroy the White position. An opening like the Caro-Kann Defence
normally leads to a slower beginning with a methodical approach.
There was no time for a slow set-up here. If Black attacked slowly White
would catch up in development and crush Black.
This time the tables were turned on White's early assault. Black won this
short quick contest.
ATtheGreat (1500) - Sawyer (2407), ICC 2 12 u Internet Chess Club,

01.09.2006 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 Bf5 4.Nc3 e6 5.g4 Bg6 6.Nge2 Ne7
[6...c5 7.h4 h5=] 7.f4 h5 8.Ng3? [8.f5 exf5 9.g5=] 8...hxg4 9.Qxg4 Nf5!?
[9...Bxc2!-+] 10.Bg2 [10.Nxf5 Bxf5-+] 10...Nxg3?! [10...Nxd4-+] 11.Qxg3
[11.hxg3 Rxh1+ 12.Bxh1 Bxc2-/+] 11...Bxc2 12.Bd2 Qh4 [12...Qb6!-+]
13.0-0 Qxg3 [13...Qh7!-+] 14.hxg3 g6 15.Rac1 Bd3 16.Rf2 Nd7 17.Nd1 c5
18.Bc3 Rc8 19.Ne3 cxd4 0-1
26 - Niemi Pushes Pawns
Greg Niemi demonstrates how to beat the Caro-Kann Defence with the
aggressive Advance Variation. His approach included several key pawn
pushes on odd numbered moves such as 3.e5, 5.f4, 7.h4, 9.f4, and 11.f5. I
failed to stop the pawns or to fight back accurately.
While 3.e5 does lead to a temporary closed center, White opened up the
position and caught my king in the middle. It was a nice crushing win for
Greg Niemi. He was an active USCF rated Expert from Las Vegas, Nevada.
This was our only game.
In my correspondence games from the late 1990s, I thought I could play

email chess as I had played postal chess for 20 years. That was a serious flaw
that cost me hundreds of rating points. They were both correspondence, but
there was a big difference.
In postal chess, an active player would have 30-50 games in progress at one
time. That translates to 6-8 tournament moves per day. If you spent 15-30
minutes per move, which included writing out the postcards, which was a
couple hours per day.
With email, transmission time was instant. I was presented with 30-50 moves
per day. At the speed in which I had played postal that could take me all day
to analyze those games. To squeeze them all into just a couple hours of
available chess time, I played email much faster than my normal postal play.
Most of my opponents knew better than to foolishly overcommit like I had. It

was like I was playing a simul and they were playing tournament speed. I lost
a lot of games to good players in 1996 and 1997. They played very well vs
me. Here is an example.
Niemi (2000) - Sawyer (1897), EMQ-4 corr APCT, 15.04.1997 begins 1.e4
c6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 Bf5 4.Nc3 e6 5.g4 Bg6 6.Nge2 c5 7.h4 cxd4!? [7...h5!=]
8.Nxd4 h5 9.f4 hxg4 10.Bb5+ Nd7 11.f5 Rxh4 12.Rf1 Rh5 [It appears
White has the advantage after 12...exf5 13.e6 fxe6 14.Qe2 Qe7 15.Bg5+/-]
13.fxg6 Qh4+ 14.Ke2 Rxe5+ 15.Be3 f5? [15...0-0-0 16.Qd2+/=] 16.Nxe6!
Rxe6 [Or 16...g3 17.Nxd5 Qh2+ 18.Kf3 Qh5+ 19.Kxg3+-] 17.Bxd7+ Kxd7
18.Qxd5+ Bd6 19.Qxb7+ 1-0
27 - Joseph Byrnes Clash
Joseph J. Byrnes challenged my Caro-Kann Defence. White played the
critical line 3.e5 Bf5 4.Nc3. This was played in 1996 when email was
becoming popular.
My game vs Byrnes is typical of the 4.Nc3 e6 5.g4 line in the Caro-Kann

Advance. Being from email, it was a fast approach to the slow process of
correspondence play.
This ended up being an unbalanced wild and crazy game. We both were
winning at various points in the game. Finally we agreed to a draw.
Byrnes (1900) - Sawyer (1960), EMQ-2 corr APCT, 05.12.1996 begins 1.e4
c6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 Bf5 4.Nc3 e6 5.g4 Bg6 6.Nge2 c5 7.h4 h5 8.Nf4 Nc6
[8...Bh7=] 9.Nxg6 fxg6 10.Ne2 Nge7!? [10...Qc7=] 11.c3!? cxd4 12.cxd4?
[12.Nxd4=] 12...hxg4 13.Nf4 Kd7 [13...Qb6!=/+] 14.Qxg4 Nxd4 15.Be3
[15.Bb5+!?] 15...Nc2+ 16.Kd2 Nxa1 17.Bb5+ Nc6? [17...Kc8 18.Qxe6+
Kb8=] 18.Nxe6 Qa5+ [18...Bb4+ 19.Ke2+-] 19.Kd1 Kc8 20.Nc5+?! [White
should grab the free bishop with 20.Nxf8+! Kb8 21.Bc5+-] 20...Kb8 21.e6?
[This gives Black a chance. Correct is 21.Qd7+-] 21...a6? [21...Bd6-+ and
Black is winning.] 22.Nd7+ [Even better is 22.Qg3+! Kc8 23.Bxc6 bxc6
24.e7!+- with a crushing attack.] 22...Kc7 23.Bb6+ Qxb6 24.Nxb6 Kxb6
25.Bxc6 bxc6 26.Qxg6 Rh6 27.Qf7 [27.Qg4+/-] 27...Rf6 28.Qd7 Ra7
29.Qd8+ Kc5 [29...Rc7 30.Re1+/=] 30.Qa5+ Kd6 31.Re1 Re7 32.Qxa6
[Best is 32.b4! Rfxe6 33.Qd8+ Rd7 34.Qxf8+!+- winning the bishop.]
32...Rexe6 33.Rxe6+ Rxe6 34.Qa3+ c5 1/2-1/2
Book 4 – Chapter 3 – Exchange & Panov
3.exd5 cxd5
White often takes the pawn on d5 at the first opportunity.
28 - Exchange vs Moyer
Club players answer the Caro-Kann Defence with the natural play 3.exd5
known as the Exchange Variation. In this game White played 1.e4 c6 2.Nf3.
It is a line that transposes easily.
Black played 2...d5. Now after 3.exd5 cxd5 4.d4 we reached a position that
could arise after 2.d4, 3.exd5 and 4.Nf3.
Central square battles followed. Black had better chances on the queenside
and White on the kingside, but tactics trump strategy.
As I recall Phil Moyer was a regular at the North Penn Chess Club at that
time. Here Moyer attacked my Black army.
I stopped his plans to win material or checkmate me. After the attack ended
and Black had won two pawns, White resigned.
The club met in Lansdale, Pennsylvania, a few miles northwest of

Philadelphia. This is my only recorded game with Moyer.
At that time I was playing a lot of postal chess. I worked full time and took
classes toward a master’s degree (not in chess).
Moyer - Sawyer, Lansdale, PA 15.04.1981 begins 1.e4 c6 2.Nf3 d5 3.exd5

cxd5 4.d4 Bf5!? [4...Nc6=] 5.Be2 Nf6 6.0-0 e6 7.Bg5 Be7 8.Bb5+ Nc6
9.Ne5 [9.Bd3=] 9...Qc7 10.Nc3 0-0 11.Bxf6 Bxf6 12.f4 a6 13.Be2? [13.Bxc6
bxc6=] 13...Bxe5 [13...Qb6!-+] 14.fxe5 Qb6 15.Nxd5 Qxb2 16.c3 [16.Rxf5
exf5-/+] 16...exd5 17.Rxf5 Qxc3 18.Rf4 Qe3+ 19.Rf2 Nxd4 20.Bg4 Qxe5
21.Qf1 Ne6 22.Re1 Qd6 23.Rf5 f6 [23...g6!-+] 24.Rxd5 Qb6+ 25.Kh1 Ng5
26.Rd7 Rad8 27.Qc4+ Kh8 28.Bf5 [28.Rde7 Qf2-/+] 28...Rxd7 29.Bxd7
Qd6 30.Bc8 b5 31.Qg4 Rd8 32.h4 Nf7 33.Qd7 Qxd7 [33...Qf8!-+] 34.Bxd7
Ne5 35.Bh3 h5 36.Kg1 Ng4 0-1
29 - How to Win Easy Blitz
Winning is not always hard. Winning can be very easy. This is illustrated in a
three minute game I played. White chose to play the Caro-Kann Defence
Exchange Variation with an early Nf3.
My approach was to use General Principles.

Consider these:
1. Play faster than your opponent in blitz chess. That was a challenge in this
game because my opponent did play very fast.
2. Develop faster than your opponent. After 12 moves I had played all my
pieces except my Ra8, which was already on a good square since advancing
my a-pawn was a likely scenario.
3. Swap off your weakest pieces. 13...Bxf3 was a good example.
4. Grab open files (Rfc8), diagonals (Bd6) and outposts (Nc4/Ne4) for active
play.
5. Attack your opponent's weak points: a4, c3.
6. Keep your king safe: 9...0-0; 22...h6.
7. Threaten undefended material and look for a tactical finish. As it usually
happens, this game was decided by a tactical blunder.
hapster - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 29.03.2012 begins 1.e4 c6

2.Nf3 [Many of blitz players intend to answer both 1.e4 e5 and 1.e4 c5 with
2.Nf3. After they play 1.e4, the mouse has already clicked on 2.Nf3 when
they see my move. It is not a blunder, but it limits White's choices.] 2...d5
3.exd5 cxd5 4.d4 Nc6 [4...Nf6 is more popular.] 5.Be2 Bg4 [Black gets to
swap off his bad bishop.] 6.Nbd2 e6 7.c3 Nf6= [Black has equalized.] 8.Qc2
Bd6 9.a3 0-0 10.b4 Qc7 [Black has just about completed his development.
White has three weak points: A. Ke1; B. Bc1; C. Pc3.] 11.b5 Na5 12.Rb1
Rfc8 13.Bb2 Bxf3 14.Nxf3 Nc4 15.Bxc4 Qxc4 16.a4 a6 17.Qe2 [White
decides he wants to castle, but my queen hits f1. So he offers a queen swap.]
17...Ne4 [Black brings in more reinforcements, but he can just pick off the
pawn now: 17...Qxa4-+] 18.Qxc4 Rxc4 19.bxa6 bxa6 20.0-0 Rxa4 [Black
wins a pawn almost without effort.] 21.Rfc1 Rc4 22.Ba1 h6 [White is not
going anywhere. Black takes a moment to eliminate the possibility of a back
rank mate.] 23.h3 Bf4 24.Rc2 Rac8 25.Rb3 a5 26.Ra3 a4 27.g3 Bd6
[Retreat and attack at the same time. White only sees the retreat.] 28.Kg2?
[White was forced to play 28.Raa2 Nxc3-+ and Black has won another
pawn.] 28...Bxa3 0-1
30 - Dest in 2.Nf3 Exchange
If you play the Caro-Kann Defence at the club level, there are natural lines
that you will see very often. One is 1.e4 c6 2.Nf3.
This can easily transpose to the Exchange Variation after 2...d5 3.exd5 cxd5
4.d4. What is the difference between this move order and the normal move
order 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 cxd5 4.Nf3?
They reach the same position, but White had better options instead of 4.Nf3
in the second line. White could attack the d5 pawn with 4.c4. White could
also hinder the development of the Black bishop with 4.Bd3.
Via the move order 2.Nf3, the move 4.Nf3 does neither. Black is left to attack
d4 with 4...Nc6 and pin the Nf3 with 5...Bg4.
At the Williamsport chess club at Lycoming College Mike Dest and I played
an unrated offhand game. I do not remember if we used a clock or not.
Probably it was not a blitz game.
Most of our games were slow enough so that I could write down the moves.
That would be Game 30 or without a clock at all.
Black was allowed to freely attack in this variation. He picked off one White
pawn after another as pieces were exchanged. The players entered a double
rook and pawn endgame.
The White king was flushed out of the pocket like a quarterback. Within a
few moves the king was sacked in the center of the board and checkmated on
e5 by a pawn.
Dest - Sawyer, Williamsport, PA 1997 begins 1.e4 c6 2.Nf3 d5 3.exd5 cxd5

4.d4 Nc6 [or 4...Nf6] 5.Nc3 Bg4 6.Be2 e6 7.Bg5 [7.h3=] 7...Qb6 [7...Be7=]
8.b3 [8.0-0=] 8...Bxf3 [8...Bb4!-+] 9.Bxf3 Qxd4 10.Qxd4 Nxd4 11.0-0
Nxf3+ 12.gxf3 a6 [12...Rc8!-+] 13.Rfe1 Be7 14.Bf4 [14.Bxe7 Nxe7-/+]
14...Rc8 15.Na4 Rxc2 [15...b5!-+] 16.Be5? Bf6 17.Bxf6 Nxf6 18.Nb6 Nd7
[18...Rc6!-+] 19.Nxd7 Kxd7 20.Re5 Rhc8 21.Ree1 Rb2 22.Kg2 Rcc2 23.a4
Rxf2+ 24.Kg3 Rg2+ 25.Kf4 Rxb3 26.Rg1 g5+ 27.Ke5 Ke7 28.Rab1 Re2+
29.Kd4 Rd2+ 30.Ke5 f6# 0-1
31 - Taormina Bb5 Exchange
The Caro-Kann Exchange Variation is played by people of all skill levels and
experience. Some grandmasters love it.
Players at the club level sometimes just stubble into it. After the opening
moves 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5, the pawn on e4 is under attack.
What does White do when in danger of dropping a pawn? White captures a

pawn. Take that! Or on second thought, I’ll take that!
One night at the Williamsport chess club, I found myself playing Daniel
Taormina. I don’t remember much about him. I imagine that work or family
kept him busy, but he did seem to enjoy playing chess when he could make it
to the club.
Daniel exchanged pawns on move three. He avoided the normal 4.Bd3.

Instead he played an early 2.Nf3. After 4.d4 came 5.Bb5.
Our game here proceeded normally until the White pieces got a little loose.
Instead of protecting his pieces, White started attacking the Black pieces.
Then White committed a counting error when pieces were being exchanged.
Black picked up a two for one and won a piece.
Many Caro-Kann Defense games last a long time. This had to be one of my
shorter Black wins with this defence.
Taormina - Sawyer, Williamsport, PA 1995 begins 1.e4 c6 2.Nf3 d5 3.exd5

cxd5 4.d4 Nc6 5.Bb5 Bg4 6.Bxc6+ bxc6 7.h3 Bf5 [7...Bxf3 8.Qxf3 e6=] 8.0-
0 e6 9.Bf4 Bd6 10.Ne5 [10.Bxd6 Qxd6 11.Nbd2=] 10...Qc7 11.Nd2?
[11.Qd2=] 11...f6 12.g4 fxe5 [12...Be4!-+] 13.Bxe5 [13.dxe5 Bxe5 14.Bxe5
Qxe5=/+] 13...Bxe5 14.dxe5 Bg6 0-1
32 - Numerical Notation
How did players which different languages from many countries conduct
postal chess games?
If they did not speak the same language, how then could they communicate
their chess moves?
The International Correspondence Chess Federation (ICCF) play was

conducted on written postcards or in letters.
Sometimes I used air grams. These I bought at the post office. They were one
sheet of paper cut to fold into an envelope with prepaid postage. The moves
were written by me on the inside.
ICCF used numerical notation made up of four digit codes. It was similar to
long algebraic notation.
The numerical board is a grid with a1 being 11, a8 being 18, and h8 being 88.
Thus e2-e4 is 5254; Ngf6 is 7866, etc.
One opponent in my first attempt at an ICCF event was Rainer Fuchs. I think
he was from West Germany.
Back then the country of Germany was split into East and West. This nation
was literally separated by a wall.
Postal chess was very popular on both sides of Germany. Those two
Germanys were ranked #1 and #2 in total number of postal players. I think
the USSR and USA were ranked #3 and #4.
Our game transposed to an unorthodox Caro-Kann Defence 3.exd5 line

where White played an early Nc3.
Neither side got a serious advantage out of the opening. At the time I
withdrew from the event, our position was equal.
Fuchs - Sawyer, corr ICCF 1978 begins 1.e4 c6 2.Nc3 d5 3.exd5 cxd5 4.d4
Bf5 5.Nf3 e6 6.Bb5+ Nc6 7.0-0 [7.Ne5] 7...a6 [7...Bd6] 8.Ba4 Be7 9.Re1
Nf6 10.Ne5 Rc8 11.Qe2 Qb6 12.Bxc6+ bxc6 13.Na4 Qb5 14.b3 Qxe2
15.Rxe2 c5 16.c3 cxd4 17.cxd4= 1-0
33 - Bryan vs Haines
My wife asked, "Do you remember when the Patriots were terrible?" Oh yes.
They were in Boston. Later they became the New England Patriots. "New
England" is the region of six states in the northeast corner of the USA, all
east of New York State.
Jarod Bryan is a FIDE master from Maine. Playing Black was my longtime
friend Ray Haines.
Bryan (2215) - Haines (1953), Orono ME (3), 17.10.1987 begins 1.e4 c6

2.d4 d5 3.exd5 cxd5 4.Bd3 [The solid Exchange Variation. More aggressive
is 4.c4 the Panov Variation.] 4...g6 [The most common line is 4...Nc6 5.c3
Nf6 (5...Qc7 GM Schandorff) 6.Bf4 Bg4 7.Qb3 Qc8 (7...e5!? is a rare trick
play that might work well.) 8.Nd2 e6 9.Ngf3 Be7 10.0-0 0-0=] 5.c3 Nf6
6.Nf3 Bg7 7.0-0 0-0 8.h3 Nc6 9.Re1 Qc7 10.Bg5 a6 11.a4 b6 12.Qe2 Ra7
13.Nbd2 [13.Qe3 with the idea to exchange of dark squared bishops.]
13...Nh5 14.Qe3 f6 15.Bh4?! [Fourth down and White punts the ball away.
He could have plunged ahead with 15.Bh6 or even gone for it big time with
15.g4!? fxg5 16.gxh5 with chances for both sides.] 15...e5 16.dxe5 [16.c4!]
16...fxe5 17.Bf1 e4 18.Nd4 Nxd4 19.cxd4 Qc2?! [Black needs to move the
queen so his Ra7 can add to the pressure on White's position. A good move is
19...Qd6-/+] 20.Qc3? [This is a mistake that gives Black the lead for the rest
of the game. A master does not want to draw with an A player, but he could
have a draw with 20.Rec1 Qxb2 21.Nb3= because the Black queen is trapped
on b2; White can force a repetition by attacking it with rooks. Another try to
keep the game alive is 20.a5!?=] 20...Qxc3 21.bxc3 Rc7 [21...Bh6!-+
attacking the undefended knight and could prove inconvenient for White.]
22.Nb1 h6 23.g4 Nf4 24.Ra2 g5 25.Bg3 Rc6 26.Re3 [26.f3!?] 26...h5
27.gxh5 Nxh3+ 28.Kh2 Nf4 29.Be2 Rh6 30.Rb2 Nxe2 31.Rexe2 Bg4
32.Re3 Rxh5+ [Black has won a pawn, but even more important is his strong
attack on the vulnerable White king.] 33.Kg1 Bf3 34.Bh2 Rf6 35.Nd2 g4
36.Nf1 Bh6 37.Re1 Bf4! [The bishop clears h6 for a rook and attacks the
poor Bh2.] 38.Ng3 Rh3 39.Reb1 Bc7 40.c4 Rfh6 41.Rxb6 [White throws a
"Hail Mary" pass.] 41...Bxb6 [Intercepted.] 42.Rxb6 Rxb6 [White resigns.
42...Rxg3+ Black could run it back for a touchdown with 43.fxg3 Rxb6
44.Kf2 Rb3 45.cxd5 e3+ 46.Ke1 Rb1# mate] 0-1
34 - Play Aggressive Chess
Ray Haines shows that it is not the piece placement nor pawn structure that
matters most.
What matters most is how you use what you have in order to play aggressive
chess.
In this game Ray attacks as Black in the Caro-Kann Defence 3.exd5

Exchange Variation.
His opponent with the White pieces was Bill Ellison.
Ellison - Haines, Orono 1986 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 cxd5 4.Bd3 g6
5.Bf4 Bg7 [Two other ...g6 ideas employ ...Nh6 as seen in Chess Openings
for White, Explained combining the Lev Alburt name and fame with the
Roman Dzindzichasvili the opening repertoire: 5...Nc6 6.c3 Nh6 7.Nf3 Bg7
(or 7...Bf5) 8.0-0 0-0 9.Re1 f6] 6.c3 Nf6 7.Nf3 Nc6 8.0-0 0-0 9.Nbd2 a6
[9...Nh5!?] 10.a4 b6 11.Re1 Nh5 12.Be3 Rb8 13.Nf1 f6 14.h3 e5 15.dxe5
fxe5 [Black is on the attack.] 16.Bg5 Qc7 17.Be2 Qf7 18.Be3 h6 19.Qd2
Kh7 20.g4 Nf4 21.Bxf4 exf4 22.Bd3 Qf6 23.Qe2 d4 24.c4 Bb7 25.h4 Nb4
26.g5 Qd6 27.h5?! [27.gxh6 Bf6=/+] 27...Nxd3 28.Qxd3 Rf5=/+ [First
chopping off the knight makes the rook lift stronger. 28...Bxf3! 29.Qxf3
Rf5!-/+] 29.N1h2 Qc6?+/- [29...hxg5=/+] 30.Re7 Kh8 31.gxh6 Bf6
32.hxg6?-+ [32.Rxb7 Rxb7 33.hxg6 Rh5 34.Re1=] 32...Rg5+ 33.Kf1 Bxe7
34.Ne5? [Hanging a piece and exposing the White king.] 34...Qh1+ 35.Ke2
Rxe5+ 36.Kd2 Bb4+?-+ [36...Qxa1-+ leads to a faster win.] 37.Kc2 Qxh2
[37...Qxa1-+] 38.Qxd4 Be4+ 39.Kb3 Qh3+ 40.Ka2 Qe6 41.Rd1 Bxg6
42.Rg1 Re8 43.Qxf4? Re4 44.Qc7 Re7 [44...Bf7!-+ Turns the mate threats
in the opposite direction.] 45.Qb8+ Kh7 46.Qg3 Qxc4+ 47.Qb3 Qxb3+
48.Kxb3 a5 49.Rd1 Bf7+ 50.Kc2 Re2+ 51.Kd3 White resigns in the face of
mate in three. 0-1
3.exd5 cxd5 4.Bd3 Nc6 5.c3
This is the main line of the Caro-Kann Exchange variation.
35 - Home Run vs Tretter
Knight takes bishop on g6. That's normal in a Caro-Kann Defence. White
gets the bishop pair. Black swaps off his bad bishop. Everybody is happy.
What could go wrong?
When the internet was young, I defended a Caro-Kann against Terry Tretter.
This reminded me of a girl’s softball game.
White played the Exchange Variation 3.exd5 cxd5 4.Bd3 Nc6 5.c3. I
countered with 5...Qc7 (Play ball! Girl gets in the batter's box). Black is a
tempo down from where White is in a Queens Gambit Declined Exchange
Variation.
Terry Tretter played reasonably well, but after 14.Nxg6 hxg6, I was able to
castle queenside. Since I had recaptured with the h-pawn, I had an open h-
file.
In this game the Black queen "ran the bases" tactically. Black scored an
inside the board home run starting with: 11...Qxd6 (first base), 19...Qb6+
(second base), 20...Qxb2 (third base), and 21...Qxh2# checkmate (home
plate). Black has scored the winning run.
Tretter - Sawyer, corr Internet 1995 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 cxd5
4.Bd3 Nc6 5.c3 Qc7 [5...Nf6 6.Bf4=] 6.Ne2 [6.Nf3=] 6...Bg4 [6...e6=] 7.f3
[7.0-0=] 7...Bh5 [7...Bd7 8.Bf4 e5! Lakdawala] 8.Bf4 Qd7 9.Nd2 e6 10.0-0
Bd6 11.Bxd6 Qxd6 12.g3 Nge7 13.Nf4 Bg6 14.Nxg6 hxg6 15.f4 Nf5
16.Bxf5 [16.Qe2=] 16...gxf5 17.Nf3 0-0-0 18.Ne5 [18.Qe2=] 18...Nxe5
19.dxe5? [19.fxe5 Qa6=/+] 19...Qb6+ 20.Qd4 Qxb2 21.Qxa7 Qxh2# 0-1
36 - Nicholas Rosenthal Caro
I drew Nicholas Rosenthal at the Florida State Championship in Naples.
Below was our rematch. This was his 20th USCF event since then. His rating
was up about 100 points since we last met.
This game was the closest I came to a FIDE rated win in a long time. I was an
old man playing against the higher rated talented kid. I asked if he was in
high school and he said he was. I must have been at least 40 years older than
my opponent.
White attacked kingside. I surprised Rosenthal with 19...Nxe5! He chose to

sacrifice the Exchange and play for a win. Nicholas managed to draw. This
was both wonderful and annoying for me.
Rosenthal - Sawyer, Space Coast Open Cocoa Beach FL (2), 28.04.2012

begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 [Nicholas usually plays 2.Nf3, maybe for 2...d5 3.exd5
cxd5 4.Ne5] 2...d5 3.exd5 cxd5 4.Bd3 Nc6 5.c3 Nf6 6.Nf3 [I trained to play
was 6.Bf4 Bg4 7.Qb3 Qc8 8.Nd2 e6 9.Ngf3 Be7 10.0-0 0-0 11.Ne5 Bh5=]
6...Bg4 7.Bf4 e6 8.Nbd2 Bd6 9.Bg3 [I prepared 9.Bxd6 Qxd6 10.0-0 0-0=]
9...0-0 10.0-0 Rb8 [Black plays a Queens Gambit Exchange Variation
Reversed. The rook supports a minority attack.] 11.Qe1 [White intends to
play for a kingside attack.] 11...Bxg3 [I wanted to play 11...b5 but 12.Ne5+/=
forces me to part with either one of my bishops for the Ne5.] 12.hxg3 b5
13.Ne5 Nxe5 14.dxe5 Nd7 15.Qe3 [White activates his queen.] 15...Bh5
[Black has an equal game with either 15...b4 or 15...Qb6. Now White
threatens a strong attack.] 16.Nb3 Qb6 17.Nd4 a6 [I did not like 17...b4
18.cxb4 Qxb4 19.Nc6+/-] 18.g4!? Bg6 [Rosenthal had done a lot of analysis
on 18...Bxg4 19.Qg5 h5 but I thought it was too risky.] 19.Rae1 [19.Bxg6
hxg6 20.Rae1+/=] 19...Nxe5! [or 19...Bxd3 20.Qxd3 Rfc8=] 20.Be2?! [White
was pretty much forced to play 20.Bxg6 Nxg6 21.f4 Rfe8 22.f5 Nf8 23.f6
with compensation for the sacrificed pawn.] 20...Nc4 [Black is better on the
board. I offered a draw here.] 21.Qh3 [If 21.Bxc4 bxc4-/+] 21...Nd2 [Also
strong is 21...Nxb2-+ but I wanted to win the Exchange and get one of his
rooks off the board.] 22.f4 Nxf1 23.Rxf1 Be4 24.Kf2 f6 25.Ke1 e5 26.Nf5
Bxf5 27.gxf5 Qd6 28.Rh1 h6 29.Qg4 Kh8 30.Qg6 exf4? [This blunder
throws the win away. White now offers a draw since it is forced. Correct was
30...Qe7! 31.fxe5 fxe5-+ and Black is winning.] 1/2-1/2
37 - Folkman 7.Qb3 Na5
Why did I play for a draw in a game against a lower rated player when I
should be playing for a win? Frankly, I don’t know.
It is too simplistic to say that the Caro-Kann Defence is drawish. That fact is
that each opening and each variation stands on its own. As long as there are
imbalances, dynamic play is possible. The Exchange Variation after 1.e4 c6
2.d5 d5 3.exd5 cxd5 avoids a symmetrical pawn structure. It gives Black the
better knight squares and White the better bishop squares.
Frank Folkman was rated a couple hundred points below me. The California
Chess Journal shows he won the San Francisco Class B Championship 4-0 in
1987. After that the USCF listed that Frank Folkman was rated 1839 at some
point.
Folkman did not make any mistakes in our game below. My question is,
“Why did I play to swap queens with my moves 7…Na5 and 11…Qb3 if I
wanted to win as Black?
Although the rook ending was equal in the final position, White had the
better king position. If I tried to avoid a draw, White would have the better
chances to win.
I had already lost to Ray Alexis in this same APCT postal chess event.
Perhaps that led to my lack of energy.
The year 1993 was busy for me outside of chess. I had several personal,
family and employment issues. In November 1993 we moved when I found a
more exciting and better paying job.
Folkman (1767) - Sawyer (2003), corr APCT N-328, 06.1993 begins 1.e4 c6
2.d4 d5 3.exd5 cxd5 4.Bd3 Nc6 5.c3 Nf6 6.Bf4 Bg4 7.Qb3 Na5 8.Qa4+
[8.Qc2 e6 9.Nd2 Bd6 10.Bxd6 Qxd6 11.Ngf3=] 8...Bd7 9.Qc2 Qb6 [9...Nh5
10.Be3=] 10.Nf3 e6 11.a4 [11.Qe2!?] 11...Qb3 [11...Rc8=] 12.0-0
[12.Qe2+/=] 12...Qxc2 13.Bxc2 Rc8 14.Ne5 Nc4 15.Nxc4 dxc4 16.Nd2 Be7
17.Bd1 a6 18.Be2 b5 19.axb5 axb5 20.Ra2 Bc6 21.Bf3 Bxf3 22.Nxf3 Nd5
23.Bd2 0-0 24.Rfa1 Bf6 25.g3 h6 26.Ra5 Rb8 27.Ne5 Bxe5 28.dxe5 Rfc8
29.Kf1 b4 30.cxb4 Nxb4 31.Bxb4 Rxb4 32.Ra8 Rxa8 1/2-1/2
38 - Tempske Queen Tactics
Castle early, castle often. Sure thing. I’ll get right to it. Except that sometimes
I delay it too long.
I played the Caro-Kann to avoid wild tactics. That was foolish. Openings do
not play the complicated tactics. Players do!
Anthony Tempske was a master at correspondence. His APCT rating was

2200. His ICCF rating is 2231.
When a master chose the Exchange Variation, I should have known he

planned to attack. That is what masters do.
The proper plan was to play a solid opening, develop quickly and castle
safely. It started well.
I decided to waste two moves to offer a queen swap. Instead of taking my

queen, White lined up his queen on my king. We traded off a couple minor
pieces, but I wasn’t any safer after 15 moves. Since I had not castled, he
attacked e6 with 16.d5.
There was no time to duck and cover. I missed my chances and picked off a
couple queenside pawns. He moved in on my king.
I was ahead two pawns but hopelessly lost when he played his final move
24.Ne4. White threatened to win my king, my queen, both my rooks, my
bishop and all my pawns.
I could save any one of them temporarily, but eventually they would all fall. I
resigned.
Tempske (2200) - Sawyer (2003), corr APCT Q-139, 07.1993 begins 1.e4 c6
2.d4 d5 3.exd5 cxd5 4.Bd3 Nc6 5.c3 Nf6 6.Bf4 Bg4 7.Qb3 Na5 8.Qa4+
[8.Qc2 e6 9.Nd2 Bd6 10.Bxd6 Qxd6=] 8...Bd7 9.Qc2 Qb6 [9...Nh5
10.Be3=] 10.a4 [10.Nf3+/=] 10...Qb3 [10...Rc8=] 11.Qe2 [11.Nd2=] 11...e6
[11...a6 12.Ra3 Qb6 13.Nf3=] 12.Nf3 Rc8 [12...Nc4 13.Bc1+/=] 13.Ne5 Nc4
14.Bxc4 dxc4 15.Nxd7 [15.0-0+/=] 15...Nxd7 16.d5 Nc5 17.0-0 Nd3 18.Be3
Qxb2 [18...Bc5=] 19.Nd2 Qxc3 [19...Bc5 20.dxe6 0-0 21.exf7+ Rxf7
22.Qg4=] 20.dxe6 fxe6 21.Qh5+ g6 22.Qb5+ Kf7? [22...Kd8 23.Qxb7+/-]
23.Qd7+ Be7 24.Ne4 1-0
39 - Mann 7.Qb3 Qc8
FIDE lists Richard Mann with a rating of 2205. He has earned a FIDE
Candidate Master title. The USCF lists Richard J. Mann as having earned a
National Master Title with a rating of 2200 from back in the year 1990.
I played Richard Mann in a 1985 APCT postal chess section. Many times
over the board masters had lower postal chess ratings. Those two types of
play have slightly different skill sets, as do both blitz and tournament play.
The Caro-Kann Defence in the Exchange Variation is a good way for White
to play for a win at minimal risk. A player at the level of Richard Mann was
not likely to make any big mistakes.
The question was, “Would Black make any notable mistakes that White
could exploit?” As Black I chose 7…Qc8 instead of the 7…Na5 that I
previously played. This line seemed to lead to total equality in theory.
Both players focused on the center. White opened the c-file for his rooks.
Black had the fortunate knight fork move 20…Nd6. That forced the exchange
of White’s remaining bishop.
White had a weak isolated queen pawn on d4. Black had it blockaded.
As the endgame approached, the d4 pawn could potentially cost White the
game. Optically it did not look like White had much, although a6 and f7
could have become weak for Black.
My guess is that Mann offered me a draw since the final move was 26.Qc6.
Not all Caro-Kann draws were bad for me.
Mann (2150) - Sawyer (2000), corr APCT 1985 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5
3.exd5 cxd5 4.Bd3 Nc6 5.c3 Nf6 6.Bf4 Bg4 7.Qb3 Qc8 [7...e5!?=] 8.Nd2 e6
9.h3 Bh5 10.Ngf3 Be7 11.0-0 0-0 12.Rfe1 Bg6 13.Bxg6 hxg6 14.Rac1 Na5
[14...a6=] 15.Qb5 b6 [15...Nc6 16.Qd3+/=] 16.Ne5 Nb7 17.Nc6 Qd7
18.Nxe7+ Qxe7 19.c4 dxc4 20.Rxc4 [20.Nxc4 Rac8=] 20...Nd6 21.Bxd6
Qxd6 22.Nf3 Rfc8 23.Rec1 Qd8 24.Ne5 Rxc4 25.Qxc4 Qd5 26.Qc6 1/2-1/2
40 - Harimau Caro Exchange
The Caro-Kann Defence Exchange Variation 4.Bd3 can be reached via other
openings.
One such Caro-Kann Defence line that I sometimes played was in the
London System.
Usually in the London I play White. In the Caro-Kann I usually play Black.
It is in fact the exact same position. Therefore it is helpful to know both sides
of the board.
After 1.d4 d5 2.Bf4 c5 3.e3 Nc6 4.c3 cxd4 5.exd4 Nf6 6.Bd3, we reached the
position after 6.Bf4 in the game below.
The thing about this game is that more often in the Caro-Kann Defence I
played the Black pieces.
Here I am on the White side. My high rated computer opponent played the
same 7…Qc8 that I had played in the previous game.
After 8.Nd2 e6, I played 9.Ngf3 directly instead of the move 9.h3 that Mann
had played.
White play okay, but then I messed up with my 20th move.
Things went downhill from there.
Sawyer - Harimau, ICC 5 0 Internet Chess Club, 30.12.2012 begins 1.e4 c6

2.d4 d5 3.exd5 cxd5 4.Bd3 Nc6 5.c3 Nf6 6.Bf4 Bg4 7.Qb3 Qc8 8.Nd2 e6
9.Ngf3 Be7 10.0-0 0-0 11.Ne5 Bh5 12.Rae1 Bd6 13.Bg3 [13.h3!?; 13.Nxc6
Qxc6 14.Bxd6 Qxd6 15.Re3] 13...Qc7 14.f4 Bg6 15.f5 Bxf5 16.Bxf5 exf5
17.Rxf5 Rae8 18.Ndf3 Re6 19.Ng5 Re7 20.Rff1? [20.Ngf3] 20...Nxe5
21.dxe5 Bxe5 22.Bxe5 Rxe5 23.Rxe5 Qxe5 24.Nf3 Qe3+ 25.Kh1 Rb8
26.Re1 Qc5 27.Nd4 a6 28.Qd1 Ne4 29.Qe2 Re8 30.Kg1 g6 31.Qe3 Qa5
32.a3 Nd6 33.Qf2 Rxe1+ 34.Qxe1 Qd8 35.h3 Nc4 36.Qc1 Qe7 37.a4 Qe4
38.b3 Nd6 39.Qc2 [39.Qd2 Kg7 40.Nc2 Nf5-/+] 39...Qe1+ 40.Kh2 Ne4
41.c4 Qg3+ 42.Kg1 Qe3 0-1
41 - Frumkin Attack
Ed Frumkin was the strongest of six opponents in my first APCT postal chess
tournament. That section started for me on 7/7/77.
Tim Barnes was another of these six players. In both games I was Black in a
Caro-Kann Defence. Frumkin won all his six games in that 1977 event.
Edward Frumkin became an APCT master and later a USCF National Master.
Back in 1977 Frumkin played 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3. My game with him in
that section was my only loss. I finished 5-1.
In 1985 Frumkin tried a different variation. While Frumkin was beating me in

this APCT contest, I was drawing Richard Mann in the same Caro-Kann
Defence Exchange Variation.
Again we follow the 7.Qb3 Qc8 line. The game continued 8.Nd2 e6 9.Ngf3
Be7 10.0-0 0-0 11.Ne5 Nxe5.
Years later Harimau would play 11…Bh5 against me. See previous game.
After 11…Nxe5 12.fxe5 White signals his intention to attack my king.
This game illustrates well how to attack a loose opponent’s king. Frumkin
mounted a strong attack in the center. I failed to find the correct defense on
moves 13, 16 and 17.
My last good choice would have been 17…Kh8. I doubt I gave this move
much consideration. I tried to hold my central pawns, but White ripped open
the position for a beautiful tactical finish.
Frumkin (2274) - Sawyer (2000), corr APCT 1985 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5
3.exd5 cxd5 4.Bd3 Nc6 5.c3 Nf6 6.Bf4 Bg4 7.Qb3 Qc8 [7...Na5 8.Qa4+
Bd7 9.Qc2=] 8.Nd2 [8.h3+/=] 8...e6 9.Ngf3 Be7 [9...Nh5=] 10.0-0 0-0
11.Ne5 Nxe5 12.dxe5 [12.Bxe5=] 12...Nd7 13.Qc2 g6 [13...h6=] 14.h3 Bf5
15.Bxf5 gxf5 16.Bh6 Re8 [16...Rd8=] 17.Nf3 f6?! [17...Kh8=] 18.Qe2 fxe5
19.Nxe5 Nxe5? [19...Bf6 20.Nd3+/=] 20.Qxe5 Bf8 21.Bxf8 Rxf8 22.Rae1
Kf7 23.Re3 Qd7 24.g4 Rg8 25.Kh2 fxg4 26.hxg4 Rae8 [26...Rg6 27.f4 Rd8
28.f5 exf5 29.Rxf5+ Kg8 30.Qd4+/-] 27.f4 Rg6 28.f5 Rf6 [28...Rh6+
29.Kg2+/-] 29.Qxf6+ 1-0
3.exd5 cxd5 4.c4
The continuation 4.c4 is the Panov-Botvinnik Attack.
42 - Long Castle Short Game
David Parsons attacked. He played aggressively. Dave brought his pieces out
quickly. He opened up the position with the Panov Attack 4.c4 against my
Caro-Kann Defence.
All this sounds nice. Maybe he thought he was safe with queens gone off the
board.
A game plan involves two sides. As Black I also opened up the position.
There was no quiet 5...e6 line for me. Instead I chose the sharp 5...Nc6 line.
By move eight I had developed both my knights and a bishop. By move 13

there were no center pawns left for either side on the c, d or e-files.
What was the main difference in the position? Black had castled. White had
not. I'm sure David Parsons intended to castle soon, but he was busy doing
important things.
Why castle early? Because if you don't, when the middlegame tactics start
flying, your king is a target for double attacks or checkmate. By then, there is
no time to stop in the middle of a combination and castle.
Dave Parsons loved to talk chess and teach chess. He would be the first to tell
you that you need to castle early. It costs him in this short game.
Parsons (1682) - Sawyer (2011), Williamsport, PA 1994 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4

d5 3.exd5 cxd5 4.c4 Nf6 5.Nf3 Nc6 6.Qa4!? [The normal continuation is
6.Nc3 Bg4=] 6...Qa5+!? 7.Nc3 Qxa4 8.Nxa4 Bg4 9.cxd5 Bxf3 10.dxc6
Bxc6 11.Nc5 [11.Nc3=] 11...e5 12.Be3 [12.dxe5 Bxc5 13.exf6 0-0=/+]
12...exd4 13.Bxd4 0-0-0 14.Nb3 [14.Bxf6 gxf6-/+] 14...Bb4+ 15.Bc3
[15.Ke2 Rhe8+ 16.Be3 Nd5-+] 15...Rhe8+ 16.Be2 Nd5 [16...Bxc3+! 17.bxc3
Bb5-+] 17.Bxb4 Nxb4 18.Rc1 Nd3+ 0-1
43 - Openings from Prison
Chess is a social game that attracts all kinds of people: male and female,
young and old, good and bad. When I was young, I went to a tournament
with my friend. This same friend about a year later ended up in prison. While
at that tournament, my friend and I met the infamous International Master
Norman T. Whitaker. Later I heard that Whitaker had been in prison in the
past.
I spent many years working in prison. My job was to interview inmates. Most
go to prison because of bad morals. They had the choice of right or wrong.
They chose to do wrong and got caught.
Some prisoners like to play chess. They can play for hours every day. They
don't have a lot of training nor books. The level of play is quite low. The first
move might be 1.a4 or 1.Nh3. I remember one prison where their star player
was rated in the 1700s. He asked me if I was the Rev. Tim Sawyer who wrote
a book that was for sale in his USCF chess catalog. Yes. I wrote that book.
When postal chess was at its height, most clubs allowed inmates to compete
in correspondence events. Mail was stamped noting that the letter or postcard
came from prison. APCT's Helen Warren did a lot to help inmates play in
postal tournaments.
My opponent here was Marv Hauber. He was in a California prison during

our game. Hauber told me that he was a member of MENSA, which means
he had a high IQ. I believed him. A high IQ means that mentally he can go a
long way. Bad morals means he can go in the wrong direction. Maybe my
opponent went a long way in the wrong direction and ended up in prison. His
postal chess rating was about 1720. That’s not bad.
Our game began as a Scandinavian Defence (or the Center Counter Defence).
We transposed into the Panov Attack of the Caro-Kann Defence and later the
Queen's Gambit Accepted.
White developed all his pieces. Black needed more time to bring out his
queenside pieces. I did some breaking and entering of my own as I broke the
position open with 14.d5! Then White won a pawn. The rest of the game is
the process of advancing that extra pawn. It ends with a nice tactical
combination.
Sawyer - Hauber, corr APCT, 1978 begins 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Nf6 3.c4 c6 4.d4
cxd5 5.Nc3 dxc4 6.Bxc4 e6 7.Nf3 Be7 8.0-0 0-0 9.Qe2 a6 10.Rd1 b5
11.Bb3 Bb7 12.Bg5 Qc7? [12...Re8=] 13.Rac1 Qd6 14.d5 e5 15.Qxe5
Nbd7 16.Qd4 Nc5 17.Bf4 Nxb3 18.Bxd6 [18.axb3+-] 18...Nxd4 19.Bxe7
Nxf3+ [19...Nxd5 20.Bxf8 Nxc3 21.Nxd4 Nxd1 22.Ba3+/=] 20.gxf3 Rfc8
21.Bxf6 gxf6 22.Ne4 [22.d6+/-] 22...Kf8? [22...Rxc1 23.Rxc1+/=] 23.Rxc8+
[23.Nc5!+-] 23...Bxc8 [23...Rxc8 24.Nd6+/-] 24.Nc5 Bh3 25.d6 Kg7 26.d7
Rd8 27.Rd4 Kg6 [27...Kf8 28.b4 Ke7 29.Re4+ Kf8 30.Re8+ Rxe8
31.dxe8Q+ Kxe8 32.Nxa6+/=] 28.Re4 Be6? 29.Rxe6 fxe6 30.Nxe6 Rxd7
31.Nf8+ 1-0
44 - Ken McDonald Panov
In 2012 I got back in the tournament saddle. Then I fell off the horse. After
that, I got run over. This game is a sharp tactical affair with a beautiful finish.
Alas I am on the wrong side of the board! My fourth round opponent was
Kenneth E. Mc Donald rated 2169. He and a friend were visiting from
Baltimore. His friend mentioned how strong the players were here. Yes
indeed. We were in Cocoa Beach, a small town of 12,000 people, Right then
there were 30 players rated over 2000, some in the 2600s.
Kenneth McDonald ("Mc Donald" in USCF) earned a National Master

Certificate in 1993 and a Candidate Master norm. He used to be rated in the
2300s. Ken told me that he does not study openings. He just plays a lot of
blitz chess, which he said hurts his tournament play. Thus he is rated in the
2100s. Maybe I should have his problem and play a lot of blitz. I shall
ponder.
My Caro-Kann preparations included 5...e6 lines with 6.Bg5 and with 6.Nf3
Bb4 7.cxd5 and 7.Bd3. With 7.Bg5, I am totally on my own. After the game
Ken said bluntly, “You made a big mistake!” “It happens,” I replied. Ken
said, “Tell me about it.” Then he added, “It happened to me in my last game.”
McDonald - Sawyer, Space Coast Open Cocoa Beach FL (4), 29.04.2012

begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 cxd5 4.c4 Nf6 5.Nc3 e6 6.Nf3 Bb4 7.Bg5 0-0
8.Bd3 dxc4 9.Bxc4 Nbd7 10.0-0 Nb6?! [Too slow. Correct is 10...h6 11.Bh4
Qa5 12.Rc1 Bxc3 13.Rxc3 b5 14.Bb3 and now 14...Bb7 or 14...b4] 11.Bb3
Be7?! 12.Rc1 Nbd5? [Maybe Black should try 12...Bd7 13.Ne5 Bc6
14.Qd3+/=] 13.Re1 Nxc3 14.bxc3 Nd5? [Black is losing. If 14...h6 15.Bxf6
Bxf6 16.Ne5 Qc7 17.Bc2 Rd8 18.Qd3 g6 19.Qf3+/=] 15.Bxe7 Nxe7 16.c4 b6
17.d5 exd5 18.cxd5 Nf5 19.Ne5+/- [Also good is 19.Nd4!+/-] 19...Nd6
20.Qc2?! [White could play 20.Qf3 Bb7 21.Nc6 and if 21...Bxc6? 22.dxc6+-]
20...Bf5 21.Qc7 Qxc7 [21...Re8! 22.Qxd8 Raxd8 23.Nc6 Rxe1+ 24.Rxe1
Ra8 and Black has some hope.] 22.Rxc7 Rfc8? [22...Rfe8 23.Re3+/=]
23.Rxc8+ [In my dreams 23.Rec1? Rxc7 24.Rxc7 Rc8 25.Rxc8+ Bxc8 and
Black has endgame chances.] 23...Rxc8 24.g4! Bc2? [I thought about
24...Be4! 25.f3 but I missed the saving move 25...Re8!=] 25.Nc6! [Beautiful.
I completely missed this too. Not my finest hour.] 25...Bxb3 26.Ne7+ Kf8
27.Nxc8 1-0
45 - Finding Fortunate Fork
My opponent "malulo" was rated about 2257. We got a Caro-Kann Defence
Panov Attack. I chose the 5...Nc6 line. White tried to punish me for inexact
play but ended up losing material.
I took on the mantle of Capablanca by swapping into a won endgame. The

win jumped my ICC rating up to 2231.
malulo - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 10.03.2012 begins 1.e4 c6

2.d4 d5 3.exd5 cxd5 4.c4 Nf6 5.Nc3 Nc6 6.Nf3 Bg4 7.Be2 e6 8.0-0 dxc4 [I
spent a lot of time playing the Queen's Gambit Accepted in practice blitz
games in the past year. White has already played Be2, so it costs another
tempo to take on c4. 8...Be7 is the alternative that also leads to equality.]
9.Qa4 Be7 10.Ne5 Bxe2 11.Nxc6 [Or 11.Nxe2 Rc8 12.Rd1 0-0 13.Nxc4
Nb4=/+] 11...bxc6? [I played the natural recapture, but Black has a nice
tactical shot 11...Qd7!-/+] 12.Qxc6+ Nd7 13.Nxe2 Rc8 14.Qa4 Qc7 15.Bf4
Qb7 16.Rac1 0-0 17.Rxc4? [White walks right into a fork. I am fortunate
that my bishop covers b4.] 17...Nb6 18.Rb4 Bxb4 19.Qxb4 Qe4 20.Qd2
Nc4 21.Qd1 Nxb2 22.Qd2 Nc4 23.Qd1 Nb6 24.Be3 Qc2 [I want to swap off
queen, rook and a minor piece to get to an easily won ending where I am up
the Exchange.] 25.Qa1 Nd5?! [I was so intent on forcing exchanges that I
missed the free knight 25...Qxe2-+] 26.Ng3 Nxe3 27.fxe3 Qc3 28.Qe1 Qxe1
29.Rxe1 Rc2 30.Ra1 Rfc8 31.Ne4 Rc1+ 32.Rxc1 Rxc1+ [Targeted endgame
acquired.] 33.Kf2 Rc2+ 34.Kf3 Rxa2 35.Nc5 a5 36.h4 a4 37.g4 a3 38.Nb3
Rb2 39.Nc1 a2 [Black can queen with exact rook moves: 39...Rc2! 40.Nb3
Rc3 41.Na1 a2 42.Ke4 Rc1 43.Nb3 Rb1-+] 40.Nxa2 Rxa2 41.e4 Ra3+
42.Kf4 f6 43.d5 e5+ 44.Kf5 Kf7 45.g5 Rf3+ [There was a creative subtle
mate in 4 that I missed here at blitz speed. 45...Rg3 46.gxf6 gxf6 47.d6 h5
48.d7 Rf3#] 46.Kg4 Rf4+ 47.Kg3 Rxe4 48.gxf6 gxf6 49.d6 Rd4 50.d7
Rxd7 51.h5 Rd4 52.h6 f5 53.Kf3 Rd3+ 54.Ke2 Ra3 55.Kd2 Kg6 56.Ke2
Kxh6 [Generally taking this pawn would be a waste of one tempo. However,
in a blitz game, eliminating all your opponent's material eliminates his
possible win on time. I was ahead on the clock, but it seemed worth one
second to do so.] 57.Kf2 Kg5 58.Ke2 Kf4 59.Kd2 Ra2+ 60.Kc3 e4 61.Kd4
Rd2+ 62.Kc3 Rd8 63.Kc4 e3 64.Kc5 e2 65.Kc6 e1Q 66.Kc7 Rd2 67.Kb7
Qc1 68.Kb6 Rb2+ 69.Ka5 Qa1# 0-1
46 - Swindle vs Marshall
To pull off a swindle in a slow tournament game is rare, but that is what I did
in 2007 at the Southern Open. Mario Marshall had moved to South Florida
from Jamaica.
I wish I could describe the look on my opponent's face, but I did not dare
look at him for fear that I would burst out laughing. That would be rude and
very bad form.
In a previous tournament, I myself was swindled in a winning position by an

Expert. Not very funny.
This opening was a Caro-Kann Defence which I played since 1974, but this
was only my third tournament game with it in 15 years, always getting a bad
game and then always getting lucky with two wins and a draw!
Mario Marshall told me after the game that he does not know the theory here.
He said he just wanted to attack. That was obvious!
I got into deep trouble in this opening. This I was lost in the middlegame.
A few days after this game, I asked Dan Heisman for tips on swindling when
you are losing. He said the basic idea was to complicate. This is exactly what
I did!
Despite poor opening theory and middlegame strategy, once again a tactical
idea decided the game. I did not play any FIDE rated games until I was well
past my prime and over 50 years old, so this was a memorable win for me.
Marshall was very kind to me after the game. We had a good time going over
it and probably joked about the Jamaican Olympic Bobsled team.
Marshall (2038) - Sawyer (1946), Southern Open (2), 28.07.2007 begins

1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 cxd5 4.c4 Nf6 5.Nc3 Nc6 [In the 1970s I played
5...g6 in Gruenfeld style.] 6.cxd5 [The main line is 6.Nf3 Bg4=] 6...Nxd5
7.Bc4 Nb6 [Attacking the isolated pawn on d4 and the bishop on c4, but
7...Be6 is better.] 8.Bb5 a6 9.Bxc6+ bxc6 10.Nf3 Bg4 11.h3 Bxf3 12.Qxf3
Nd5 [The knight feels good on d5, but my opponent told me after the game
that every move I did not develop my kingside, he was happy.] 13.Bg5 Qd6
[intending to answer Ne4 with ...Qb4 attacking b2 and d4.] 14.0-0 e6
[Consolidates d5.] 15.Rac1 Be7 16.Ne4 Qb4 17.Bxe7 Kxe7 [17...Qxe7!?
18.Rxc6 0-0+/-] 18.Ng5 Nf6 [Plan B. My original intention was 18...f6 but
here I saw that White was easily winning after 19.Nxe6!+- Ugh!] 19.Rxc6
Rhc8 20.Rfc1 Rxc6 21.Qxc6 [Even more powerful was 21.Rxc6!+-]
21...Ra7 22.Qc5+ Qxc5 23.dxc5 Nd5 24.Kf1 [24.Nxh7?! f6=] 24...Rc7 [We
both had about an hour left. Clocks were: White 0:56; Black 1:22.] 25.a3
[Several people were now watching our game figuring that it would be over
soon.] 25...a5 [Indeed, the game would end in less than one minute. Current
times on the clock were: White 0:49; Black 1:19.] 26.Rc4 [Played after about
a half minute's thought. Since he had not thought much, it felt like a good
time to spring a cheapo. I had seen this combination earlier, but now with the
rook on c4, it had a better chance.] 26...Nb6?! [Almost immediately I played
for a swindle.] 27.cxb6?? [White lets the win slip away. He took about 15
seconds thought choosing to sacrifice his rook to get a queen, "thinking" I
had blundered. White should try 27.Rf4+-] 27...Rxc4=/+ [I captured his rook
while slightly faking disgust. My heart was beating very rapidly all of a
sudden!] 28.b7?? [Instantly he advanced the pawn to glory, expecting that
this move would be the coup de grace. But just as quickly I make my own
crushing move.] 28...Rc1+!-+ [Everyone was shocked! What a rush!! Now he
saw he was lost and resigned. Final clock times: White 0:48; Black 1:18. If
29.Ke2 Rc2+ 30.Ke3 Rxb2-+ and as soon as his new queen appears, she
disappears.] 0-1
47 - Dr. Walter Wittmann
You are bound to meet famous opponents in a long career. Who have you
played? Local champs? Title Players?
Dr. Walter Wittmann of Austria is a FIDE International Master. Wittmann

played hundreds of well-known players in a 40 year career.
He likes a wide variety of interesting openings. Wittmann is named in

countless opening books that I have read.
Dr. Wittmann played 2282 ICCF games with a peak rating of 2293 in 1993.
We met 10 years earlier in a postal game.
Wittmann attacked my Caro-Kann Defence with the 4.c4 Panov Variation.

We reached the 5...Nc6 main line by transposition.
Grandmaster Lars Schandorff calls this "The Endgame Line" in the 15th
chapter of his Quality Chess book "The Caro-Kann". That book was
published in 2010.
Of course that particular book was not available to us back in 1983. I "left the
book" with 18...Rc8+!? Schandorff recommended the move 18...Bb4.
Lengthy accurate endgame play leads to draws. Postal play between Austria
and the United States was slow and expensive.
We reached an equal position and a point in time where we were not going to
win the tournament. Then we agreed to a draw.
Wittmann - Sawyer, corr ICCF 1983 begins 1.e4 c6 2.c4 d5 3.exd5 cxd5
4.cxd5 Nf6 5.Nc3 Nxd5 6.Nf3 [6.Bb5+ Bd7=] 6...Nc6 7.d4 [This transposes
to a main line of the Panov Attack. 7.Bb5=] 7...Bg4 8.Qb3 Bxf3 9.gxf3 e6
10.Qxb7 Nxd4 11.Bb5+ Nxb5 12.Qc6+ Ke7 13.Qxb5 Qd7 14.Nxd5+ Qxd5
15.Bg5+ [15.Qxd5 exd5 16.0-0=] 15...f6 16.Qxd5 exd5 17.Be3 Ke6 18.0-0-0
Rc8+ [18...Rd8 19.Rhe1 Kf7=] 19.Kb1 Bc5 20.Rhe1 Kd6 21.Rd3 [21.Bf4+
Kc6 22.Re6+ Kd7 23.Re2 g5=] 21...Rhd8 22.Red1 Ke6 23.Rc1 Bxe3 1/2-
1/2
48 - Dr. Kuperman with 7.c5
When you play the Caro-Kann Defence 4.c4 Panov Variation, tension results.
The White c4 and Black d5 pawns constantly threat to capture each other.
Usually cxd5 or dxc4 occurs fairly quickly to relieve the tension.
White has the option of pushing the c-pawn to c5 giving each player a pawn
majority, White's on the queenside is immediately further advanced.
The pawn push can happen on move 5 or any time after that.
Each moment with pawn possibilities has its own issues.
Dr. Baruch Kuperman is the only opponent I recall playing in postal chess
who lived in Israel at the time we played.
White gave me chances, but I got in trouble.
After my 10th and 11th moves my position collapsed.
In 2001 Dr. Kuperman earned the Senior International Correspondence Chess

Master title from the ICCF.
His peak rating was 2407. My ICCF rating is 2157.
Kuperman - Sawyer, corr ICCF 1982 begins 1.e4 c6 2.c4 d5 3.exd5 cxd5
4.d4 Nf6 5.Nc3 e6 6.Nf3 Be7 7.c5 [7.cxd5] 7...0-0 8.Bd3 b6 9.b4 [9.cxb6
Qxb6 10.Na4 Qc6 11.0-0=] 9...a5 10.Na4 Nfd7?! [10...Nbd7=] 11.h4 [11.b5
bxc5 12.Nxc5+/=] 11...f5? [11...h6!=/+] 12.Ng5 Qe8 13.Bb5 Ba6 14.Bxa6
Nxa6 15.b5 Nc7 16.c6 [16.Qe2+/=] 16...Nf6 17.Qe2 Rb8? [17...Bd6
18.Nf3+/=] 18.Bf4 Bd8 19.Nxe6 Nxe6 20.Bxb8 1-0
49 - Semi-Tarrasch 8.Bb5+
Simple is not easy. In this postal game Tim Sawyer vs Edward Sawyer we
reached a Queens Gambit from Caro-Kann Defence.
In my early years I tried out many different variations. As White I chose the
Panov Variation 1.e4 c6 2.d4 3.exd5 cxd5 4.c4.
This line leads to wide open positions. They can become sharp and tactical.
Black simplified our position after 7…Nxd5 in a way that would make
Capablanca happy. It may be simple, but finding the right plan and the best
squares for pieces is hard.
This same position after seven moves can be reached via the Queen's Gambit
Declined Semi-Tarrasch after 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Nf3 c5 5.cxd5
Nxd5 6.e3 cxd4 7.exd4 Be7.
One thing that surprised me in this game was Black’s 13...Be8. It never
occurred to me that Black might back up his bishop. My experience was
geared to moving pieces ahead aggressively and rapidly. I had planned to
take his bishop. I figured that could wait one more move. It disappeared! I
took his knight instead.
I found myself caught by indecision. Should I attack his king? My pieces

were not set up for attack. He had no weak points.
Black was able to coordinate his pieces against me queenside. My attempts

on the kingside produced nothing. When my last queenside pawn fell, I
resigned.
Sawyer, Timothy E - Sawyer, Edward G, corr 1976 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5

3.exd5 cxd5 4.c4 Nf6 5.Nc3 e6 6.Nf3 Be7 7.cxd5 Nxd5 8.Bb5+ [8.Bd3 Nc6
9.0-0 0-0 10.Re1 Nf6 11.Bg5 h6 12.Bh4 b6 13.a3 Bb7=] 8...Nc6 [8...Bd7
9.Bc4 Nxc3 10.bxc3 Qc7 11.Qd3 0-0 12.Bb3 Bc6 13.0-0 Nd7=] 9.Ne5!?
[The main continuation of this line is 9.0-0 0-0 10.Re1=] 9...Bd7 10.Bxc6
bxc6 [10...Bxc6=] 11.Qf3 [11.Qg4!+/=] 11...0-0 12.0-0 Nxc3 [12...f6
13.Nxd7 Qxd7=] 13.Qxc3 [13.bxc3=] 13...Be8 14.Nxc6 Bxc6 15.Qxc6 Qxd4
16.Rb1 Rfc8 17.Qf3 Rab8 18.Be3?! [18.b3=] 18...Qa4 19.a3 Bf6 20.h3?
[20.Qd1 Qxd1 21.Rfxd1 Rxb2 22.Bxa7 Ra2 23.Rb3=] 20...Bxb2 21.Bc1 Bf6
22.Bh6 Bb2 [22...Be5-/+] 23.Qg3? Qxa3 0-1
50 - Schoppmeyer 8.Bd3
Herbert Schoppmeyer of Germany had an ICCF rating of 2137. His name
appeared in many gambit opening chess books.
I was familiar with his name. Schoppmeyer played postal chess for 40 years.
I have almost 100 of his games in my database.
Schoppmeyer played a wide variety of openings. It appears that he tried

everything from main lines to unorthodox variations.
In the 1950s he lost two games as Black to the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit.

Back then I still didn’t know anything about the BDG.
Many of his games seem to be thematic events. Herbert played the King’s
Gambit Falkbeer Counter Gambit and Latvian Gambit.
Herbert Schoppmeyer is listed as having been born in 1940, but I don’t know
if that is accurate. The earliest Schoppmeyer games in my database are from
1955. His peak years of tournament success were 1959 to 1973. He stopped
playing around 1992.
We played a Caro-Kann Defence Panov Attack. It transposed to Queens

Gambit Semi-Tarrasch from that Caro-Kann move order. The Queen's
Gambit Declined Semi-Tarrasch move order would be 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3
Nf6 4.Nf3 c5 5.cxd5 Nxd5 6.e3 cxd4 7.exd4 Be7. The Schoppmeyer move
8.Bd3 was better than my choice of 8.Bb5 against Edward Sawyer (see
previous game).
Schoppmeyer - Sawyer, corr ICCF 1982 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5

cxd5 4.c4 Nf6 5.Nc3 e6 6.Nf3 Be7 7.cxd5 Nxd5 8.Bd3 [8.Bc4 Nc6 9.0-0 0-0
10.Re1 Bf6 11.Ne4 b6=] 8...Nc6 9.0-0 0-0 10.Re1 Bf6 11.Be4 Qd6
[11...Nce7 12.Ne5 Bd7 13.Qh5 g6 14.Qf3 Bg7=] 12.Bxd5!? [12.Bc2 Qb4
13.a3+/=] 12...exd5 13.Nb5 Qd8 14.Bf4 Bg4 15.Bd6?! [15.h3 Bxf3 16.Qxf3
a6 17.Nc7 Rc8 18.Qxd5=] 15...Bxf3 16.Qxf3 Nxd4? [The only move is
16...a6! 17.Bxf8 axb5 18.Bc5 b6=/+] 17.Qd3 Nxb5 18.Bxf8 Bxb2 19.Rab1
Bc3 20.Re3 Qxf8 21.Rxb5 d4 22.Rh3 g6 23.Rxb7 Re8 24.g4 Re1+ 25.Kg2
a5 26.Rf3 Re7 27.Rb6 [27.Qb5+/-] 27...Kg7 28.Qc4 Qa8 29.Rc6 Ra7?
[29...Qb8 30.Qd5+/=] 30.Qd5 Qe8 31.Rd6 Re7 32.g5 [Or 32.Rd8!+-]
32...Rc7 [Black is completely busted. 33.Rd8 wins.] 1-0
3.exd5 cxd5 4.c4 Nf6 5.Nc3 g6
The Panov-Botvinnik Attack 5…g6 line resembles a Gruenfeld.
51 - Lucas at US Junior Open
The eight rounds for the 1974 US Junior Open tournament in Lancaster,
Pennsylvania were played Monday night, afternoons and evenings Tuesday
through Thursday, and Friday morning.
This gave us mornings free. A family from Clio, Michigan befriended me and
Rachel Crotto. They took us on morning trips.
I remember one day visiting the Amish country. This was an area that I
would years later visit many times with my wife.
The Caro-Kann Panov Attack 4.c4 is a sharp way to play against this solid
opening. After the standard 4.c4 Nf6 5.Nc3, Black has three good defensive
set-ups.
a. 5...e6 - intending a strategical Nimzo-Indian type defence with 6...Bb4.

b. 5...Nc6 - with sharper central play, one line being a long forced ending.
c. 5...g6 - a Gruenfeld type gambit line where Black sacrifices the d5 pawn.
I played all three. In my early days, I was particularly favorable to the gambit
5...g6.
It was interesting to note that when things got wide open and tactical, I
tended to perform better. I did not put down my opponent's first name. I just
listed him as "J. Lucas".
Lucas - Sawyer, US Junior Open US (2), 06.08.1974 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5

3.exd5 cxd5 4.c4 Nf6 5.Bd3 g6 6.Nc3 Bg7 7.Be3 0-0 8.Qd2 Nbd7 9.c5
[White is hoping to avoid tactics with this move, but instead he walks right
into a combination.] 9...Nxc5! 10.dxc5 d4 11.Nge2 dxe3 12.Qxe3 Nd5
13.Qd2 Nxc3 14.Nxc3 Qd4 15.c6 bxc6 16.0-0? [Relatively best is 16.Be4
Qc4-+] 16...Bf5 17.Rad1 Rad8 18.Ne2? Qxd3 19.Qxd3 Bxd3 20.Rd2 Bxe2
21.Rxe2 e6 22.b3 Rd6 0-1
52 – Dr. Dennis Kiick 5…g6
The Caro-Kann Defence leads to solid play. White can open up the position
by 3.exd5 with a Panov Attack 4.c4 where tactical skill is rewarded.
Chess is fun as a hobby. Some find glory while others achieve more notable
accomplishments beyond chess.
White below is Dennis Kiick whom USCF lists as living in Tennessee. I

assume he is Dr. Dennis Kiick, the learned professor at Lincoln Memorial
University who is an expert in health and history. We played two APCT
postal games simultaneously.
As White I won a Queen's Gambit Declined, but in both games he played

logical moves throughout. Here I chose my favorite 5…g6 against the Panov
Attack.
Kiick (1700) - Sawyer (2100), corr APCT 1981 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5
3.exd5 cxd5 4.c4 Nf6 5.Nc3 g6 6.cxd5 Bg7 7.Nf3 [7.Qb3 0-0 8.Be2=] 7...0-0
[7...Nxd5 8.Qb3=] 8.Bc4 Nbd7 9.0-0 Nb6 10.Bb3 Nfxd5 11.Nxd5 [11.a4=]
11...Nxd5 12.Bd2 Qd6 13.Bxd5?! [13.Re1=] 13...Qxd5 14.Bc3 Bg4
15.Qd3?! e5 16.Qe3 Bxf3 17.Qxf3 Qxf3 18.gxf3 exd4 19.Bb4 Rfe8
20.Rad1 Re2 21.Rd2 Rxd2 22.Bxd2 Rc8 23.Re1 h5 24.Bb4 Rc2 25.Ba3
[25.Re8+ Kh7 26.Re7 Rxb2-+] 25...d3 26.Re8+ Kh7 27.Re7 d2 28.Rd7
Rc1+ 29.Kg2 d1Q 30.Rxd1 Rxd1 31.Kg3 Bd4 0-1
53 - Fawbush Crushes 5…g6
George Fawbush was known for his sharp uncompromising play. His choice
of opening variation always held some surprise for his opponents. Fawbush
demonstrated the value of original attacks in standard chess openings.
By 1979 I had made significant progress in my game. I was still playing too
passive in an attempt to play solid chess.
Throughout most of the 1970s I chose the Caro-Kann Defence. When

Fawbush played the 4.c4 Panov, I responded with 5…g6.
This was my attempt to mix it up with the master. The idea is that if White
attacks d5, Black will defend and later attack d4.
Fawbush preferred wide open play. Clearly George analyzed more deeply
that I did in our postal games.
These were the days before we had chess engines. His play was not always
accurate. George Fawbush played at a master level, not a grandmaster level.
Fawbush was always aggressive. It seemed to me he was far more tactical

than strategical. And he would take risks to avoid any drawish position. He
played to win.
Another quirk about Fawbush was his propensity to send long strings of “IF”
moves that were five or more moves long. This made the game move very
fast.
The cost of a stamped postcard was 10 cents. As I recall, “GEF” won this 19
move game and spent a total of about one US dollar in postage. In this game
Fawbush outplayed me quickly.
Fawbush (2200) - Sawyer (2000), corr APCT 1979 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5
3.exd5 cxd5 4.c4 Nf6 5.Nc3 g6 6.cxd5 Nxd5 7.Qb3 Nb6 [7...e6=] 8.Bb5+
Bd7 9.Nf3 Bg7 10.Bxd7+ N8xd7?! [10...Qxd7!=] 11.a4 Qb8? [11...a5 12.0-
0 0-0 13.Re1+/=] 12.a5 Nc8 13.0-0 0-0 14.g3 [14.Nd5!+-] 14...Nf6 15.Bf4
Nd6 16.Nb5 a6 17.Nxd6 exd6 18.Rfe1 [18.Rac1+/=] 18...Rd8? [18...Qc7!
19.Ra4 Rfe8=] 19.Re7 1-0
54 - Ray Haines vs Snyder
Ray Haines outplays Todd Snyder in a Caro-Kann Defence during the second
round of the Potato Blossom Festival in Fort Fairfield, Maine. This town is
on the Canadian border in the northeast corner of the US.
After the initial moves 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5, White chose to play the Exchange
Variation 3.exd5 cxd5 4.c4 known as the Panov-Botvinnik Attack.
Ray Haines chose the fianchetto defence with 4...Nf6 5.Nc3 g6. While the
fight was still going on, White lost the game on time.
When I visited the New England Eatery and Pub in Melbourne Beach,
Florida, I could enjoy food that I could have eaten when I was a child.
I had whole belly fried clams (most places just have clam strips), Boston
baked beans and of course a baked potato (which reminded me of Fort
Fairfield, back in the day).
To give European readers an idea, the distance and difference between

Melbourne Beach and Fort Fairfield is about the same as Rome, Italy to
Stockholm, Sweden.
Chess is usually played indoors, but on a beautiful day in July, you can play
outdoors up in Maine.
Snyder (1974) - Haines (1803), Potato Blossom Festival Ft Fairfield ME (2),

12.07.2014 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 cxd5 4.c4 Nf6 5.Nf3 g6 6.Nc3
Bg7 7.Bf4 a6!? [This risks falling behind in development. 7...0-0 8.Be2 Nc6
9.0-0 Bg4=] 8.Be2 [Other ideas are 8.c5 or 8.Qb3] 8...0-0 9.Qd2 dxc4
10.Bxc4 b5 11.Bb3 [11.Be2=] 11...Bb7 12.Qe2 Nc6 13.Rd1 Nb4
[13...Na5=/+] 14.0-0 Nbd5 15.Bd2 e6 16.Rfe1 Qb6 17.h3 Rad8 18.Be3
[18.Nxd5=] 18...Nxe3 19.fxe3 Ne4 20.Nd2 Ng3 21.Qf2 Nf5 22.Nf3 Bxf3
23.Qxf3 Nxe3 24.Rxe3 Bxd4 25.Rde1 [White could have two minor pieces
for a rook and two pawns with 25.Rxd4 Qxd4=/+] 25...Bxe3+ 26.Qxe3
Qxe3+ 27.Rxe3 Rd2 28.Ne4 Rxb2 29.a4 bxa4 30.Bxa4 [White forfeits on
time] 0-1
55 - Skip Hansen in Maine
This is a battle of future Blackmar-Diemer Gambit players before either of us
were famous for the BDG!
In the third round of the 1977 Maine State Championship I was paired as
Black vs Johan Skip Hansen.
Ten years later in 1987, Skip Hansen won this same Maine state
championship.
Skip was a friendly middle-aged man who worked in the shipyard. Hansen
had moved to Maine as a USCF Expert.
As I recall, Skip mentioned how hard it was to keep his rating up. Players in
Maine were pretty much a closed group in those days.
Most of us started as weak players. We studied and gradually made

significant improvements. But since we just kept playing each other, we just
swapped rating points back and forth.
When we did play people from other states, we gained a lot of rating points.
Few of us were masters, but many of us became experts.
In this game Skip plays 1.e4 and we get an open Caro-Kann 4.c4 Panov
Botvinnik. There are three popular Black choices after 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5
cxd5 4.c4 Nf6 5.Nc3:
5...g6 Gruenfeld where Black gambits the d5 pawn.

5...e6 Nimzo-Indian as recommended by Lakdawala
5...Nc6 Sharp line as recommended by Schandorff
I chose the first line as given in Tim Harding's book on Counter Gambits. We
got a middlegame where Hansen had two bishops vs my two knights. That
did not yield him enough, so he went into a double rook ending where I had
some winning chances.
Skip kept trying to avoid the draw. Hansen was the higher rated player. I was
some little known young Tim Sawyer. After a long fight, the game was
drawn.
Hansen - Sawyer, Maine Champ Maine (3), 16.04.1977 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4
d5 3.exd5 [I imagine that Skip later tried to reach a BDG via 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.f3
or 4.Bc4] 3...cxd5 4.c4 Nf6 5.Nc3 g6 [Panov-Botvinnik Variation. This
Gruenfeld-like 5...g6 was a favorite of mine. Alternatives are 5...e6 or
5...Nc6] 6.Nf3 Bg7 7.Qb3 [The most popular continuation is 7.cxd5 Nxd5
8.Bc4 Nb6 9.Bb3 0-0 10.0-0 Nc6 11.d5 Na5 12.Re1 Bg4 13.h3 and now a lot
of material gets chopped off. 13...Bxf3 14.Qxf3 Nxb3 15.axb3 Re8 16.Be3
Bxc3 17.Bxb6 Qxb6 18.bxc3 Qxb3=] 7...0-0 8.cxd5 Nbd7 9.Be2 [9.Bg5 is
also critical.] 9...Nb6 10.0-0 Nfxd5 11.Ne4 Bg4 [11...Be6=/+] 12.a4 Bxf3?!
13.Bxf3 e6 [13...a5=] 14.Bg5 Ne7 15.Nf6+ [15.Nc5!+/- winning the b7
pawn.] 15...Bxf6 16.Bxf6 Qd7 [The middlegame proceeds with White's two
bishops vs Black's two knights.] 17.Rfe1 Nbd5 18.Bg5 Rac8 19.Rad1 Rc7
20.Be4 [White could immediately give back the bishops, but it does not lead
to an advantage. 20.Bxe7 Nxe7 21.d5 Nxd5 22.Bxd5 exd5 23.Rxd5 Re8!=]
20...Rfc8 21.Bd3 Qd6 22.g3 Qb4 [One can see that I loved endgames.]
23.Qxb4 Nxb4 24.Bxe7 Nxd3 25.Rxd3 Rxe7 26.d5 Rd7 27.d6 [Is the pawn
on d6 strong or weak?] 27...Rcd8 28.Red1 e5 29.a5?! [One way to keep the
d6-pawn is to challenge the e5-pawn. 29.f4 exf4 30.gxf4 Kg7=] 29...f6
30.Kf1? Kf7 31.Ke2 Ke6 32.Rb3 Rc8! 33.f4 e4?! [33...Rc2+! wins a pawn.]
34.Ke3 f5 35.Rb5 Rxd6 36.Rxd6+ Kxd6 37.Rxb7 Rc7 38.Rb3 Kc6 [Or
38...Rc2 39.Rb7 Rxh2 40.Rxa7 Rxb2 41.Rxh7 Rb3+ 42.Kd4 Rd3+ 43.Kc4
Rxg3 44.a6=] 39.a6 Rd7 40.h3 h5 41.h4?! [41.Ke2!] 41...Kc7 42.Ke2 Kc6
[42...Kc8! 43.Rb5 Rd6 44.Rb7 Rxa6 45.Rg7 Kd8=/+] 43.Rb8 Kc7 44.Rb4
Kc6 45.Rb8 Kc7 46.Rb4 Kc6 47.b3 [47.Rb8= Drawn by repetition.]
47...Rd3! 48.Rb7 Rxg3 49.b4 Rh3? [49...Rg2+! 50.Ke3 Ra2 51.Rg7 Kb5
52.Rxg6 Ra3+ 53.Kd4 Kxb4 54.Rg2 Kb3!-+] 50.b5+ Kc5 51.Rxa7 Kxb5
52.Rg7 Kxa6 [After this it is a draw in all lines. Black's last try for a win is
52...Rxh4 53.Rxg6 Rh2+ 54.Ke3 Rh3+ 55.Kd4 Rd3+ 56.Ke5 e3 57.Rg2
Kxa6 58.Re2 Rd8 59.Kxf5 Re8 60.Kg5 Kb5 61.Kxh5 Kc4 62.Kg5 Kd3
63.Re1 e2 64.f5 Kd2 65.Rxe2+ Kxe2 66.f6 but Black will be forced to give
up his rook for the final pawn leaving only the two kings on the board.]
53.Rxg6+ Kb7 54.Rg5 Rxh4 55.Rxf5 Kc6 56.Ke3 Kd6 57.Kxe4 Rh1
58.Rf6+ Ke7 59.Kf5 h4 60.Rh6 h3 61.Rh7+ Kd6 62.Kg4 Ke6 63.Rh6+
Kd5 64.Rxh3 Rxh3 65.Kxh3 Ke6 66.Kg4 Kf6 67.f5 Kf7 68.Kg5 Kg7 1/2-
1/2
56 - Know the Time Control
In 1992 I mostly played just correspondence chess. But one day I got up on a
Saturday morning and drove to Altoona to play in a one day four round event
at the Station Mall. Altoona is mountain railroad community located in the
middle of rural Pennsylvania.
My first round opponent was John Allman, Jr. At 1821, John had one of the
lower ratings in the Open Section. Unfortunately, John was not in his best
form that day. Mr. Allman finished last scoring four straight losses. But
against me, he could have done better.
Allman began with 1.e4. I returned to my Caro-Kann Defence. I equalized

easily but missed moves that would have given me an advantage. At the end
we reached a very drawish position. He could have mishandled the kingside
pawns if he tried too hard to win with 41.g5, but it seemed unlikely that he
would lose.
After move 40 my opponent left the room. Eventually his flag fell. I claimed
a win on time. John returned and objected saying that they always play a 40
move time control. Tournament Director David Axinn confirmed that time
control was at move 45. It was clearly posted in writing. Thus the game was a
forfeit win for me.
Allman - Sawyer, Altoona, PA (1), 02.05.1992 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5

3.exd5 cxd5 4.c4 Nf6 5.Nc3 g6 6.Qb3 Bg7 7.Nf3 [The main line is 7.cxd5 0-
0 8.Be2 Nbd7 9.Bf3 Nb6= with equal chances.] 7...0-0 8.Be2 dxc4 9.Bxc4
Nbd7 [9...Nc6!=/+] 10.Na4 e6 11.0-0 Nb6 12.Nxb6 Qxb6 13.Qxb6 axb6
14.Bd2 Bd7 15.a3 Rfc8 16.Ne5 Be8 [I missed the sharp continuation
16...Ne4!-/+ 17.Nxd7?! Nxd2 18.Nxb6 Rxc4 19.Nxa8 Nxf1 20.Kxf1 Bxd4-+]
17.Rac1 Nd7?! [17...Nd5=] 18.f4 Nf6 19.Rfe1 Bf8?! 20.g3 Kg7 21.Rc2 Rc7
22.Rec1 Rac8 23.Bd3 Rxc2 24.Rxc2 Rxc2 25.Bxc2 Bd6 26.Kf2 Nd5
27.Be4 Bb5 28.Nd3 Kf6 29.Nb4 Nxb4 30.axb4 Bc6 31.Ke3 Ke7 32.Bc3?
[Equality can be maintained with 32.Bd3 b5=] 32...Kd7 [Black is given
opportunities to swap into a superior endgame with a much better bishop.
Black's king could dominate the board at d5. White would be under pressure.
Correct is 32...Bxe4! 33.Kxe4 f5+ 34.Kd3 b5-/+] 33.b5 [33.Bd3!=] 33...Bd5
[33...Bxb5 34.Bxb7 Bc6 35.Bxc6+ Kxc6-/+ with a better ending.] 34.Be1
Ke7 35.g4 Bc7 36.Bh4+ Kd7 37.h3 Bd6 38.Bf6 Be7 39.Bxe7 Kxe7 40.Bxd5
exd5 White forfeits on Time 0-1
57 - Kohut in Tactical Panov
Timothy D. Harding wrote a classic book in 1973 entitled "Counter Gambits:
Black to Play and Win". This book had a profound and long lasting impact on
my view of chess.
One gambit came from the Caro-Kann Defence variation after the moves
3.exd5 cxd5 4.c4 Nf6 5.Nc3 g6.
About the only theoretical books on the Caro-Kann Defence I had back then
were a monograph by Ken Smith, "Practical Chess Openings" by Fine, and
the classic tome "Chess Openings: Theory and Practice" by I.A. Horowitz.
Beyond that, I had game collections by Capablanca, Alekhine, Fischer,

Botvinnik, Lasker, Keres and Morphy.
In postal chess everyone could use books for research, so all those books
were very important!
One of the books, I think Ken Smith's monograph, had a line where Black
could trap the White queen. Somehow we reached that position or a similar
one in my APCT 77 Rook 11 game vs Gregory Kohut.
He and I enjoyed playing so much, that we soon added another four game
rated postal match.
All the games could be played on the same postcard, one move in each game
per week.
This 5...g6 line gambits the d5 pawn. Play gets very tactical.
Kohut - Sawyer, corr APCT 77R-11 (5), 08.1977 begins 1.e4 c6 2.c4 d5
3.exd5 cxd5 4.d4 Nf6 5.Nc3 g6 6.Qb3 Bg7 7.cxd5 0-0 8.Nge2 [The main
line is 8.Be2 Nbd7 9.Bf3 Nb6 10.Nge2=] 8...Re8 [8...Nbd7=] 9.g3 e6
10.dxe6 Bxe6 11.Qxb7 Nbd7 12.Bg2 Rb8 13.Qxa7 Bc4 14.Bf3 Nd5
15.Nxd5? [15.0-0 Ra8 16.Qb7 Rb8=] 15...Rxe2+ 16.Bxe2 Bxd5 17.0-0 Ra8
[The queen is trapped.] 18.Qxa8 Qxa8 19.Be3 Qe8 20.Bd3 Nf6 21.b4 Qe6
22.Rfc1 h5 23.a4 h4 24.Re1 hxg3 25.fxg3 Ng4 26.Bf2 Qf6 27.Rf1 Qf3 0-1
58 - Fawbush Mood to Fight
A fighting spirit gives you a higher rating. Your opponent’s do not all resign
quickly just because you show up. You need to make good moves. Just let the
result happen. Don't cut it short.
Before my rating surged past 2000 I was timid when playing stronger players.
Once I learned to not offer draws, my rating went up.
George E. Fawbush had a fighting spirit and almost never agreed to draws.
GEF won frequently. Fawbush lost sometimes. He always fought hard.
In my Caro-Kann Defence in the 4.c4 Panov Variation vs George Fawbush I

got a good position with the 5...g6 Gruenfeld type line.
White chose the sharp 6.Qb3 idea but he went wrong ten moves later.
Probably I offered the draw. I imagine Fawbush agreed because he stood
worse.
The other issue was that this came from a Tennessee Chess Association event
where he may have determined that he was not going to win.
Five years later I beat Fawbush in a game analyzed by Arthur Bisguier, but
this was played in my early years of postal chess.
Fawbush (2200) - Sawyer, corr TCA 1977 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5
cxd5 4.c4 Nf6 5.Nc3 g6 6.Qb3 Bg7 7.cxd5 0-0 8.Be2 Nbd7 9.Bf3 Nb6
10.Bg5 a5 11.Bxf6 [11.Nge2 a4 12.Qb5 Bd7=] 11...exf6 12.Nge2 Bf5
13.Qb5 Re8 14.0-0 Qd6 15.g4 Bd7 16.Qd3? [16.Qc5 Nc8 17.Ne4 Qb8=]
16...f5 17.h3 fxg4 18.hxg4 f5 [18...Rac8=/+] 19.Kg2 [19.Nb5 Bxb5 20.Qxb5
fxg4 21.Bxg4 Nxd5=/+] 19...fxg4 20.Bxg4 [20.Be4 Rac8-/+] 20...Bxg4
21.Qb5 Qf6 [Black stood better when a draw was agreed.] 1/2-1/2
59 - Dr. Noonan d6 Danger
Dr. Thomas R. Noonan upset my Caro-Kann Defence research. My favorite
5…g6 gambit line against the 4.c4 Panov Variation had served me well.
Chess opening books were not widely available in 1977. Authors

recommended the same few lines of theory. Postal players like myself who
did research could repeat the same few main lines.
There is a back story to this game. Dr. Thomas Noonan played the same line
against me in the same event at the same time as did George Fawbush. They
copied each other for 10 moves.
There must have been a slight difference in transmission time. Fawbush

moved quickly but he lived near St. Louis, Missouri. Dr. Noonan lived only
50 miles from me in Oak Ridge, Tennessee.
The city of Oak Ridge is located just west of Knoxville along I-40. It is
famous for scientific research. Oak Ridge is known as the birthplace of the
atomic bomb.
Noonan demonstrated that I had a serious danger on the d-file. My target was
his d5 pawn sitting in front of his d4 pawn.
The problem was I had not yet blockaded the pawn with a piece on d6.
Noonan’s move 13.d6 exploded onto the board like an atomic bomb. My
position blew up. It left me shook up.
I played my 5…g6 line intending to regain the gambit pawn on d5. Now all
of a sudden I had to remain down a pawn and losing.
Noonan - Sawyer, corr TCA 1977 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 cxd5 4.c4
Nf6 5.Nc3 g6 6.Qb3 Bg7 7.cxd5 0-0 8.Be2 Nbd7 9.Bf3 Nb6 10.Bg5
[10.Nge2 Bg4 11.Bxg4 Nxg4 12.a4=] 10...a5 [10...Re8! 11.Nge2 Bg4=]
11.Nge2 Bf5?! 12.0-0 Bd3 13.d6! Qxd6 14.Bxb7 Ra7 15.Bf3 e6? [15...Bc4
16.Qc2+/=] 16.Qd1 Bxe2 [16...Ba6 17.Rc1+/=] 17.Qxe2 Rd7 18.Nb5 Qb4
19.Bc6 Rxd4 20.Nxd4 Qxd4 21.Be3 Qe5 22.Qb5 Nbd5 23.Bxd5 Ng4 24.g3
Nxe3 25.fxe3 Rb8 [25...exd5 26.Rae1+/-] 26.Qd7 exd5 27.Qxf7+ Kh8
28.Qf4 Rxb2 29.Rab1 Qc3 30.Rbc1 1-0
Book 4 – Chapter 4 – Main Line
3.Nc3
We begin with games where Black does not capture the e-pawn on move
three.
60 - Do you play chess?
Once I encountered a man from Moscow, Russia. He now lives in the United
States. At one point the subject of chess came up. He asked me if I was a
good chess player. I answered, "Yes." Here is what he told me he likes to do.
The man said sometimes when he sees people enjoying a game of chess, they
ask the normal question, "Do you play chess?"
He replies, "I know how to move the pieces." (This implies that he is barely a
beginner and easy to beat.) When they invite him to play a game, he surprises
them by winning. Then he told me, "I have been playing since age 4."
I myself have played in many simultaneous exhibitions. I might be the

opponent playing against a grandmaster, master or expert, called a Candidate
Master. Sometimes I give the simul myself. There I play against lower club
players and novices.
In 1996 I gave a simultaneous chess exhibition at Penn College in

Williamsport, Pennsylvania. I played 30 games in a couple hours. That
sounds like more than it really was. I played 6-8 boards at time with rotating
players. When one player would finish, another took his place.
Two of my opponents were club players. Most opponents just knew how to
move the pieces. They played chess for fun now and then. This is a very short
game against novice player that I call “NN” (No Name available). It came
from that simul event.
Sawyer - NN, simul Williamsport PA 1996 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e4 c6 3.Nc3 b5

4.exd5 cxd5? [If Black is going to play this line, it seem best to continue 4…
b4 5.Ne4 cxd5 6.Nc5+=] 5.Bxb5+ 1-0
61 - Nutter Fine Caro-Kann
In the Caro-Kann Defence 3.Nc3 variation, Black is supposed to play
3...dxe4. But what if he just plays 3...Nf6?
This position has been reached about 400 times in my database. It includes
some old games by World Champions.
Play continues 4.e5 Nfd7 (on 4...Ne4 5.Bd3 Tal-Strelkov, Latvia 1950, 1-0 in
19) 5.e6!? fxe6 6.Bd3 (6.f4 c5 7.dxc5 Nf6 Krause - Emanuel Lasker,
Naestved 1919, 0-1 in 22; 6.Nf3 Nf6 7.Bf4 Nbd7 Eikstroem - Alekhine, Riga
0-1 in 24) 6...Nf6 7.Nf3 g6 8.h4 with a strong attack in the famous game Tal -
Campomanes, Leipzig 1960, 1-0 in 27. I first saw that game 40 years ago.
"Nutter" was one of my favorite opponents in ICC 3 minute blitz games.
We had played half a dozen games at this point and my score of 5-1 pretty
much reflected our rating difference.
In this crazy game we reached the Caro-Kann 3.Nc3 Nf6 position from a
completely different move order.
This time I avoided the pawn sacrifice 5.e6!? Instead I chose the solid 5.Bd3
move.
However, I soon head for a less sound sacrifice of material. This happened to
work in this 3 0 game.
In my 2 seconds per move haste, I missed a mate in one when I saw a mate in
four?!
Sawyer - Nutter, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 30.12.2012 begins 1.d4 Nf6
2.Nc3 c6 3.e4 d5 4.e5 Nfd7 5.Bd3 e6 6.f4 Na6 [More common is 6...c5
7.Nf3] 7.f5? [7.Nf3] 7...Be7? [7...Qh4+! 8.g3 Qxd4=/+ and Black has won a
pawn with a solid position.] 8.fxe6 fxe6 9.Qh5+ Kf8 10.Bxh7!? [10.Nh3!+-
is even better.] 10...Rxh7 [10...Qe8] 11.Qxh7 Bg5 12.Nh3 Bxc1 13.Rxc1
Nb4 14.0-0+ Ke7 15.Qxg7+ Ke8 16.Qg6+ [16.Qf7#] 16...Ke7 17.Rf7+ Ke8
18.Qg8+ Nf8 19.Qxf8# Black checkmated 1-0
62 - Zoltan Sarosy draw 3…g6
So close I came to beating Zoltan Sarosy, one of the strongest masters I ever
played in my life. Sarosy dodged. He weaved. He wiggled. He jiggled. He
made me work hard. In the end I missed the best move 48. Zoltan the
magnificent pulled off a draw. Darn.
At the time International Correspondence Chess Master Zoltan Sarosy of

Canada was near his peak rating of 2435 (in 1992) when more than 80 years
old! How old is too old for chess?
In 1987, under Hans-Werner von Massow the ICCF added the Elo rating
system. Before that they used only class titles. By then Sarosy was already in
his 80s; he might have had a much higher rating in his younger days. He won
a Master Class tournament in Hungary in 1943. According to his biography
in the Canadian Chess Hall of Fame, Zoltan Sarosy "Reached age 100 in
2006 while still playing chess by e-mail; in 2007, became longest lived
Canadian chess player ever".
The opening was a crossover between the Caro-Kann Defence (1.e4 c6 with
d5) and the Modern Defence (1.e4 g6 with Bg7) which can be reached via
either move order. White usually plays 1.e4, 2.d4, 3.Nc3 and then either 4.h3
and 5.Nf3 as I did, or 4.e5 and 5.f4. Black plans a slow build up in an
unbalanced position.
Sarosy liked to play original little known positions that made his opponents
think on their own. It is dangerous for weaker players to try a slow build up,
because they have not yet developed the tactical, strategical and analytical
skills to make it work effectively. They get crushed without improving.
Weaker players need to play openings that lead to quick contact development
so they can learn quickly. They do not have to play main lines, just anything
that brings all pieces out for action.
When the armies clash, they will learn what works and what to avoid in the
future. Sarosy already knew what works. He was a proven dangerous player
waiting to pounce and crush experts and masters due to his deep analysis.
Because I developed rapidly with control of the center, I was able to prevent
disaster and even obtain a winning position.
Picking off his pawn with 48.Nxg6 seemed like a good idea. Alas, it failed to
his brilliant defense. This draw got me to 2.5 points in the event. I won this
Master Class tournament with 4.5 out of 6.
Sawyer (2157) - Sarosy (2401), corr ICCF 1995 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5
3.Nc3 g6 4.h3 Bg7 5.Nf3 Nh6 6.Bf4 0-0 7.Qd2 dxe4 8.Nxe4 Nf5 9.c3 Nd7
10.Bc4 Nb6 11.Bb3 Nd6 12.Nc5 Nd5 13.Be5 b6 14.Nd3 f6 15.Bh2 Be6
16.0-0 Qd7 17.Qe2 Bf7 18.Rfe1 Rfe8 19.Nde5 fxe5 20.dxe5 Nc7 21.e6
Nxe6 22.Bxe6 Qxe6 23.Qxe6 Bxe6 24.Rxe6 Rad8 25.Rae1 Kf8 26.Bf4 c5
27.Ne5 Nf7 28.Nc6 Rd7 29.a4 Bf6 30.a5 Ng5 [30...Rc8 31.Kh2 b5
32.a6=] 31.Bxg5 Bxg5 32.Ne5 Rd6 33.Rxd6 exd6 34.Nd7+ Kf7 35.Rxe8
Kxe8 36.axb6 axb6 37.Nxb6 Kf7 38.Nd5 Bc1 39.b3 Ke6 40.c4 Ke5 41.g3
Kd4 [Maybe better is 41...Ke4 42.Kg2 Kd3 43.Kf1 g5 44.Nf6 h6 45.Nd5
Bb2 46.f4 Ke4 47.Kf2 Bd4+ 48.Kg2 Ba1 49.fxg5 hxg5 50.h4 gxh4
51.gxh4+=] 42.f4 Kd3 [Or 42...Bb2 43.Kf2 Ke4 44.Ke2 Bg7 45.Nc7 Bf8
46.Nb5+/-] 43.Kf2 Kc2 [If 43...Bd2 44.Kf3 Ba5 45.g4+-] 44.Ke2 Kxb3
45.Kd3 h5 46.Ne7 [Winning is 46.g4! hxg4 47.hxg4 Ka3 48.f5 gxf5 49.gxf5
Bh6 50.f6+-] 46...h4 47.gxh4 Bxf4 48.Nxg6? [White is winning after 48.Ke4
g5 49.h5 Kxc4 50.h6 Bc1 51.Nd5 Bb2 52.Ne3+ Kb4 53.Kd5+-] 48...Bg3
49.Ke2 [49.Ke4 Kxc4 50.h5 d5+ 51.Kf3 Be1 52.h6 Bc3 53.Kg4 Kb5 54.h7
c4 with a likely draw] 49...d5 50.cxd5 c4 51.Ne7 Bxh4 1/2-1/2
3.Nc3 dxe4
Gambit players avoid the recapture and continue with either 4.Bc4, 4.f3 or
both.
63 - Delpire Sacrifice to Win
Jason Delpire posted a Caro-Kann Defence and commented:
"Kind of a "helpmate game". This is the first game with time controls of 5/0
in well over a year for me (meaning: my rating is not a reliable gauge of my
playing strength). Tim Sawyer, is 4.Bc4 correct, or should I play 4.f3 first?"
I answered, "Theory seems to slightly favor 4.f3 over 4.Bc4, although if you
play both in the same game, positions often transpose. Black may play Nf6,
e5 or b5 on move four or five, and each brings its own issues. I note Black
here avoided Nf6. Maybe I will use this game for my blog this coming
week."
Jason Delpire replied, "That would be great if you used my game! I usually
play 4.Bc4, and have yet [to have] someone try anything other than
protecting e4. I know I was happy when I saw 7...Nd7, as it blocks the Q
from attacking the d-pawn which can be quite weak and distracting,
especially with the hole on f2. The questionable sac 9.Nxe6 was fun, and it's
a shame I missed a Queen sac for mate."
Key in Jason's choices is that Black did not play ...Nf6.
jtdelpire (1864) - gonchar (1219), FICS, 08.04.2015 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5

3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Bc4!? Bf5 5.f3 exf3 6.Nxf3 e6 7.0-0 Nd7 8.Ng5 Nh6 9.Nxe6!?
[This could be fun in a blitz game. White could play 9.a4 if he does not want
to back up to sacrifice on e6.] 9...fxe6 10.Bxh6 gxh6 11.Rxf5 [11.Bxe6 Bg6
12.Qg4 h5 13.Rae1 Be7 (13...hxg4? 14.Bf7!#) 14.Qh3 Nf6-/+] 11...Bg7?
[Another critical line is 11...exf5 12.Qh5+ Ke7 13.Ne4 Qa5-/+] 12.Qh5+
Ke7 13.Rf7+ Kd6 14.Rxg7 Qb6 15.Ne4+ [Jason Delpire writes: "Grr,
missed mate in two." 15.Qe5+! Nxe5 16.Ne4#! Yes, that is pretty. Your
move also leads to mate, just not quite as quickly.] 15...Kc7 16.Qe5+ Kd8
17.Rxd7+ Kxd7 18.Nf6+ Ke7 19.Qxe6+ Kd8 20.Qd7# 1-0
64 - Von Hennig vs Curtis
There are three very common Blackmar-Diemer Gambit type set-ups that
White can impose vs the solid Caro-Kann Defence after 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5: (I)
Fantasy Variation with 3.f3. (II) Milner-Barry with 3.Nc3 dxd4 4.f3. (III)
Von Hennig with 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Bc4 as played in one of three of my postal
games vs Warren Curtis.
We transposed into the Caro-Kann Defence main line normally reached by

1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4. After 4.Bc4 Nd7, I headed toward a Blackmar-
Diemer Gambit type position with 5.f3 exf3 6.Nxf3 Ngf6.
This becomes a BDG Ziegler where Black played 6...Nbd7 which blocks
Black's light squared bishop from playing 6...Bf5. After 7.0-0 e6 the game
took on the flavor of a BDG Euwe variation.
We continued with the typical moves 8.Bg5 Be7 9.Qe1 0-0 10.Bd3 h6
11.Qh4 when White had major threats against the Black king. There were lots
of options discussed in the notes. White broke through in the center for a
winning position. Then play ceased in all our games.
Sawyer (2016) - Curtis (1632), corr, 1991 begins 1.d4 c6 2.e4 d5 3.Nc3
dxe4 4.Bc4 Nd7 [More common is 4...Nf6 5.f3 BDG O'Kelly 4...c6 5.Bc4, or
even 5...exf3 6.Nxf3 BDG Ziegler] 5.f3 [5.Nxe4 is a well-known Caro-Kann
Defence.] 5...exf3 [5...e5 6.dxe5 Nxe5 7.Qxd8+ Kxd8 8.Bb3 exf3 9.Nxf3
Nxf3+ 10.gxf3 Be6 11.Bg5+ Nf6 12.0-0-0+ and White has some
compensation for the pawn.] 6.Nxf3 Ngf6 7.0-0 e6 8.Bg5 [8.Bf4!?= Houdini
4] 8...Be7 9.Qe1 0-0 10.Bd3 h6 [10...c5 11.Qh4 transposes to a popular BDG
Euwe line where both sides have used one more move than normal.] 11.Qh4
Nd5 [If Black grabs the bishop, White gets a very strong attack. 11...hxg5
12.Nxg5 Qb6 13.Rxf6 Nxf6 14.Bh7+ Kh8 15.Bg6+ Kg8 16.Nce4 Qxd4+
17.Kh1+- and Black has to give up the queen to avoid immediate mate.
Correct is 11...Re8! 12.Ne4 Nxe4 13.Bxe7 Qxe7 14.Qxe4 f5 15.Qe3 Nf6
16.Ne5=] 12.Qe4? [12.Nxd5! Bxg5 13.Nxg5 Qxg5 14.Qxg5 hxg5 15.Ne7+
Kh8 16.Rae1 g6 17.Bxg6 fxg6 18.Nxg6+ Kg7 19.Nxf8 Nxf8= and White has
a rook and h-pawn for Black's bishop and knight.] 12...f5? [I was fortunate
Black missed 12...N7f6!-/+] 13.Qxe6+ Kh8 14.Bxe7 Nxe7 15.Rae1 Re8
16.Qf7!? 1-0
65 - Martin Three Chess Wishes
I imagine our chess friend Andrew Martin surfing the internet. He finds a
beautiful beach on which sits a lantern.
Andrew picks up the lantern and dusts it off. Out pops a chess genie ready to
grant him three gambit wishes.
The genie says, "All three gambits will be in the same game, and you as
Black can only choose one way to play in this game."
IM Andrew Martin played Black against "SugarMagnolia" in an Internet

Chess Club five minute blitz game. Martin approached the opening by
backing into a Caro-Kann Defence after 1.d4 d5 2.Nc3 c6 3.e4 dxe4.
In view of the move order, Andrew Martin likely suspected the Blackmar-
Diemer Gambit is on the horizon. This is an opening Martin is well aware of
from either side of the board.
Now after 4.f3, we have the Caro-Kann Defence. The main line would have
been 4.Nxe4.
With this 4.f3 move, International Master Andrew Martin was given three
gambit wishes by the chess genie.
How might Martin respond?
#1 Gambit Wish:
4.f3 exf3 5.Nxf3 Nf6 transposes to the BDG Accepted Ziegler.
#2 Gambit Wish:
4.f3 Nf6 transposes to the BDG Declined O'Kelly variation.
#3 Gambit Wish: 4.f3 e5 chooses the recommended reply to the Milner-Barry

Gambit.
Martin chooses #3. This is the Sir Stuart Milner-Barry Gambit.

Our BDG hero "SugarMagnolia" kept up the pressure but alas missed a few
chances. IM Andrew Martin, being the fighter he is, picked off the e5-pawn
and won in the endgame. At any rate, the clash of styles led to entertaining
chess!
SugarMagnolia (2219) – AndrewMartinIM (2302), ICC 5 0 Internet Chess

Club, 17.08.2012 begins 1.d4 d5 2.Nc3 c6 3.e4 dxe4 4.f3 e5 5.dxe5 [5.Be3!?
is somewhat more common among BDGers.] 5...Qxd1+ 6.Nxd1 [The
position is harder for White to play after 6.Kxd1?!] 6...exf3 [6...Nd7! is the
most critical line. White has 7.fxe4 (or 7.f4!? f6 8.Nf2=) 7...Nxe5 8.Nf3=]
7.Nxf3 Bc5 8.Be3 Nd7 9.Bc4 Ne7 10.Bxc5 [I like 10.0-0!+/= aiming at f7
and e6.] 10...Nxc5 11.Nc3 Be6 12.Bxe6 Nxe6 13.Ne4 0-0 14.0-0-0 Rfd8
15.Nd6 Rd7 16.Nd4 [16.g3!?] 16...Nxd4 17.Rxd4 Ng6 18.Rhd1 h6 19.Nc4
Rxd4 20.Rxd4 Re8 21.Nd6 Rd8 22.Re4 [22.Ra4] 22...b6 23.a4 Rd7 24.b4
Kf8 25.Nc4 Ke7 26.c3 Ke6 [At this point it seems the e-pawn is lost, and
with it, the game.] 27.Kc2 Rd5 28.a5 b5 29.Nb2 Rxe5 30.Kd3 f5 31.Rxe5+
Kxe5 32.c4 [Black is winning with the extra pawn, even after 32.g3 Ne7-+]
32...Nf4+ 33.Kc3 Nxg2 34.Nd3+ Ke4 35.Nc5+ Ke3 36.Ne6 f4 37.Nxg7 f3
38.Nf5+ Kf4 39.Ng3 f2 40.cxb5 cxb5 41.Kd4 h5 42.Nxh5+ Kf3 43.Ng3
Ne3 44.Kc5 [A funny sideline is 44.Ne4 Nc2+ 45.Ke5 Nxb4 46.Nxf2 Kxf2
47.h4 Nc6+ 48.Kd6 b4 49.h5 b3 50.h6 b2 51.h7 Ne5 52.Kxe5 b1Q 53.h8Q
Qb2+ wins the queen] 44...Nf5 45.Nxf5 f1Q 46.Nd4+ Ke4 47.Nxb5 Qf5+
48.Kc6 Qd5+ 49.Kc7 Qxb5 0-1
66 - Five Related Caro Gambits
There are five closely related gambits in the Caro-Kann Defence using the f3
and / or Bc4 idea. It is easy to confuse them. They can transpose. Using a
blitz game where I mated my opponent on the 14th move with the Caro-Kann
4.f3 Milner-Barry Gambit, I will break down the subtle differences of these
lines.
The Caro-Kann Defence is a good solid opening played on both sides by

chess world champions and by me. The main line is 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3
dxe4 when Black can play 4.Nxe4 Bf5 (Schandorff), 4.Nxe4 Nd7
(Lakdawala) or 4.Nxe4 Nf6 (Silman).
Here is a breakdown of the five related gambit lines:

A. 3.f3 – The Fantasy Variation which can transpose below if 3...dxe4 4.Nc3
exf3, although White often plays 4.fxe4 e5. The most common reply is 3...e6
which is really a threat to win a pawn, say after 4.Be3, with 4...dxe4 5.fxe4
Qh4+ and 6...Qxe4.
B. 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Bc4 - Von Hennig Gambit. Play might continue 4...Nf6 (or
4...Bf5) 5.f3 Bf5 where Black plays to hold e4. Or 5...exf3 6.Nxf3 it
transposes to the Ziegler.
C. 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.f3 - Milner-Barry Gambit. This has two key options: 4...e5
where 5.dxe5 does not attack an Nf6; or simply 4...exf3 without an Nf6. If
4...Nf6, see O'Kelly.
D. 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.f3 Nf6 - O'Kelly Variation. This is also a Blackmar-Diemer
Gambit Declined after 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3 c6. Two typical
continuations are 5.fxe4 e5 or 5.Bc4 b5 or 5...Bf5. 5.Nxe4 and 5.Be3 are also
favorites.
E. 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.f3 exf3 5.Nxf3 Nf6 - Ziegler Variation. This is a Blackmar-
Diemer Gambit Accepted after 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3 exf3 5.Nxf3
c6. Some prefer 6.Bd3, but 6.Bc4 Bf5 is the BDG Ziegler. White has the
choice between 7.Bg5 e6 8.0-0, 7.Ne5 e6 8.g4 or 7.0-0 e6 and then 8.Ne5 or
8.Ng5.
I hope that helps you keep these clear in your own mind. All of them can
reach the BDG Ziegler. In my blitz game vs TBricker1, the alternative to my
5.Be3 was 5.dxe5.
Sawyer - TBricker1, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 23.06.2012 begins 1.d4

c6 2.e4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.f3 e5 5.Be3 Bf5 6.Nxe4 Bxe4 7.fxe4 Nd7 8.Nf3 f6
9.Bc4 Bb4+ 10.c3 Ba5 11.Qb3 b5 12.Bxg8 Ke7 13.Qe6+ Kf8 14.Qf7#
Black checkmated 1-0
67 - Berthelsen Punishes f7
In September 2013 I was very happy to receive a game from long time
BDGer Roald Berthelsen:
“Hi Tim! The following game was played in a Swedish open club tournament
2008. The game [Roald Berthelsen – Leif Anderberg] has never been publish
before. Best regards, Roald Berthelsen”
This Caro-Kann Defence 4.f3 e5, Milner-Barry Gambit, Black's 6...Be6

(without Nf6) was new to me. It was not in my database.
The basic question in the main line is whether White's isolated e4 pawn is
strong or weak. Black played to win the two bishops with Nb8-d7-c5xd3.
However this allowed White to recapture 11.cxd3 leaving him with a central
pawn duo.
Berthelsen advanced these pawns with great effect. A key tactic was 17.e6!
This attacked the queen.
Black's f7 pawn could not take on e6 without dropping the Ng6. White's
moves 16-22 were very accurately executed. Nice game.
Berthelsen - Anderberg, Swedish club open 2008 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5

3.Nc3 dxe4 4.f3 e5 5.Be3 exd4 6.Bxd4 Be6!? [6...Nf6 7.fxe4 Bb4 8.a3
Bxc3+ 9.Bxc3=] 7.fxe4 [Or 7.Nxe4=] 7...Nd7 8.Nf3 h6 9.Bd3 [9.Qd2!?]
9...Nc5 10.0-0 Nxd3 11.cxd3 Bg4? [Here was Black's last chance to get an
equal game with 11...Nf6=] 12.Bf2 [Or 12.Ne2+/-] 12...Qd7 13.d4 [If 13.Ne5
Bxd1 14.Nxd7 Kxd7 15.Raxd1+/- White's pieces are better placed, but the
position is less complicated.] 13...Ne7 14.Qd3 Ng6 15.Rfe1 Bd6 16.e5 Bc7?
[16...Be7=] 17.e6! Qc8? [17...Bxe6 18.Rxe6+ fxe6 19.Qxg6+ Qf7 20.Qxf7+
Kxf7 21.Ne4+/=] 18.d5 [Or 18.exf7+ Kxf7 19.Bg3+-] 18...Nf4 19.Qd4 0-0
20.d6! Bxf3? [It is difficult to defend this position. 20...fxe6 21.dxc7 Bxf3
22.gxf3 Qxc7 23.Bg3+/-] 21.d7! Nxe6 22.dxc8Q 1-0
3.Nc3 dxe4 4.f3 Nf6
This is the O’Kelly Variation of the Caro-Kann Defence.
68 - BDG O'Kelly 4...c6
I spent a disappointing day of blitz chess. I constantly lost by rescuing defeat
from the jaws of victory. Or I won games in such an ugly fashion that I could
not bear to look at them again.
Then finally I pulled off this nice win. The opening backed into a Caro-Kann
Defence with 1.d4 d5 2.e4 c6.
I thought about playing 3.e5. It was one of my most successful choices as far
as performance rating at that time. My opponent was a Class B player. My
rule of thumb is that these players rated in the 1600s and 1700s are the easiest
to beat with the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit. I went with 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.f3 Nf6.
We have the BDG Declined O'Kelly variation normally reached after 1.d4 d5
2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3 c6. Many 5th moves are playable; I went with the
common line 5.Bc4.
Black replied with 5…Nd5? This cannot be good. Black returned the material
and gave White a central pawn duo. So, Black spent three of the first six
moves to swap off its only developed piece.
I built up a kingside attack. I missed a couple moves that would have given
me a larger advantage, but I was still winning.
At the end I decided to exchange pieces to an ending where I obtained an

overwhelming material advantage.
Sawyer - InaOm, ICC 5 0 Internet Chess Club, 23.09.2011 begins 1.d4 d5

2.e4 c6 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.f3 Nf6 5.Bc4 Nd5? 6.fxe4 Nxc3 7.bxc3 Qa5 8.Bd2 [Or
8.Qf3+/-] 8…h5 9.Nf3 Bg4 10.0-0 e6 11.Qe1!? [11.h3! Bxf3 12.Qxf3+-]
11...Bxf3 12.Rxf3 Be7 13.e5 [13.Qg3!+-] 13...Nd7 14.Qf2 0-0 15.Bd3 Qd8
[15...c5 16.Rf1+/-] 16.Rf1 f5 17.exf6 [17.Bc4!+-] 17...Bxf6 18.Qe2 Qe7
19.Qe4 g5 20.Qg6+ Qg7 21.Qxh5 e5 22.Bc4+ Rf7 23.Qxf7+ [23.Bxg5!+-]
23...Qxf7 24.Bxf7+ Kxf7 25.Bxg5 Rg8 26.Bxf6 Nxf6 27.Rxf6+ Black
resigns 1-0
69 - Martin Simons vs Elwin
When I posted a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit, Neil Graham wrote:
“Good Morning
“I see that you have included the Martin Simons - Richard Pert game today.
All except one of Martin's White games in the British Championship started
with some variant of the BDGs - all the games are on the British
Championship website...”
Great! Martin Simons is a good player who handled the BDG well. The game
vs Pert was his only BDG loss. Adrian Elwin played a Caro-Kann Defence
with 1.e4 c6 2.Nc3 d5 3.d4 dxe4. Rather than play the routine and good
recapture 4.Nxe4, Martin Simons transposed into a BDG O'Kelly with 4.Bc4
Nf6 5.f3.
The game features Black returning the gambit pawn with 5...e3. Such
positions in the opening favor White or are even. Later this middlegame
clearly favored White up to move 18, but it drifted toward equality. Black
missed a win when both players messed up move 43. In the end they had a
hard fought draw.
Simons (2087) - Elwin (1974), 101st ch-GBR 2014 Aberystwyth WLS

(3.29), 21.07.2014 begins 1.e4 c6 2.Nc3 d5 3.d4 dxe4 4.Bc4 Nf6 5.f3 e3
[Another idea is 5...Bf5 6.g4 Bg6 7.g5] 6.Bxe3 e6 7.Nge2 Bd6 8.Qd2 Nbd7
9.0-0 Qc7 10.Bf4 Nb6 11.Bb3 Nbd5 12.Bxd6 Qxd6 13.Ne4 Qe7 14.c4 Nb6
15.Qg5!? [Or 15.Nxf6+ Qxf6 16.Ng3 0-0 17.Ne4+/-] 15...Nxe4 16.Qxe7+
Kxe7 17.fxe4 Rd8 18.c5 [18.e5+/=; 18.Rf3+/=] 18...Nd7 19.Rf3 b6! 20.cxb6
axb6 21.Raf1 Rf8 22.Nc3 Ra5 23.Bc4 Ba6 24.Bxa6 Rxa6 25.b4 f6 26.Rc1
Ra7 27.Rf2 Rfa8 28.Rfc2 Ra3 29.Rb1 e5 30.d5 cxd5 [30...c5!?] 31.Nxd5+
Kd8 32.Rd1 Rxa2 33.Rxa2 Rxa2 34.Nxb6 Ra7 35.Kf2 Rb7 36.Rxd7+
Rxd7 37.Nxd7 Kxd7 38.Ke3 h5 39.h3? [39.Kd3 Kd6 40.Kc4 g6 41.g3 f5
42.exf5 gxf5 43.b5 e4 44.Kd4 Kc7 45.h3 Kb6 46.g4 fxg4 47.hxg4 hxg4
48.Kxe4 Kxb5 49.Kf4 Kc4 50.Kxg4= and only the two kings are left.] 39...h4
[39...Kc6 40.Kd3 Kb5 41.Kc3 h4-+] 40.Kf3 Kc6 41.Kg4 Kb5 42.Kxh4
Kxb4 43.Kh5? [43.Kg4 g6 44.h4 Kc5 45.Kf3 Kd6 46.g4 Ke7 47.h5 Kf7
48.Ke3 Kg7 49.hxg6 Kxg6 50.Kf3 Kg5 51.Kg3=] 43...Kc4 [Here 43...f5!
44.exf5 e4-+ wins for Black.] 44.Kg6 Kd4 45.Kxg7 Kxe4 46.h4 Kf4 47.h5
e4 48.h6 e3 49.h7 e2 50.h8Q e1Q 51.Qh6+ Kg3 52.Qh3+ Kf4 53.Qf3+ Kg5
54.Qxf6+ Kg4 55.Qf3+ Kg5 56.Qd5+ Kg4 57.Qf3+ 1/2-1/2
70 - Botvinnik, Cullen, Baby
World Champion Mikhail Botvinnik once reached a Blackmar-Diemer
Declined position in a simul in Stockholm.
Playing the Black pieces, Botvinnik defended with 4...c6, the Caro-Kann
Defence BDG O'Kelly Variation.
The gambit player Th. Dahlen continued with the standard 5.Bc4. Botvinnik
chose 5...e5 to keep White from castling, instead of the normal 5...Bf5.
After some exchanges, a double rook ending was reached. The players agreed
to a draw on move 23. In this line White seemed to have the better chances.
My opponent Peter Cullen followed Botvinnik's line in the O'Kelly variation

during our 1990 postal chess game in the 10th US Correspondence Chess
Championship. Like T. Dahlen, I failed to find the strongest line.
Just as the position got more difficult for me, so did Peter's life. Cullen
informed me that he was short of time with a new baby.
We had raised our children, so I knew that life became busier with a new
baby.
Agreeing to a draw against me allowed Peter Cullen to focus his more limited
free time on other chess games where he did well.
Sawyer (2059) - Cullen (2104), corr USCCC 10P05, 04.10.1990 begins 1.d4
Nf6 2.f3 d5 3.e4 dxe4 4.Nc3 c6 5.Bc4 e5 6.dxe5 Qxd1+ 7.Kxd1 exf3 8.Nxf3
Ng4 9.Ke2 Nd7 10.Bf4 Nc5 [10...Nb6 11.Bb3 Be6 12.Bxe6 fxe6 13.Ng5
Nd5 Dahlen-Botvinnik 14.Kf3!+/- Christoph Scheerer points out this would
have won a pawn for White.] 11.h3 Be6 12.Bxe6 Nxe6 13.Bd2 Nh6 14.g4 0-
0-0= 15.Rad1 Be7 16.Ne4 Rhe8 17.Be3 Kc7 18.Kf2 [18.Rxd8 Rxd8 19.Rd1
Rxd1 20.Kxd1+/=] 18...Ng8 19.Neg5 [19.Rhf1] 19...Nxg5 20.Nxg5 Rxd1
21.Rxd1 [Cullen wrote: 21.Rxd1 "I think I might be slightly better after
21...Bxg5 22.Bxg5 Ne7 23.Bxe7 Rxe7 24.Re1 but only minimal plus. With a
new baby I'm short of time."] 1/2-1/2
71 - Felber in Jego's Book
I reviewed Eric Jego's book on the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit. One of my
games in that book was against Robert J Felber. There are two players named
“Felber” who played in the BDG thematic correspondence tournaments in the
1990s. I played them a total of 10 games.
From 1995-1997 I played Josef M. Felber three times. Black won every
game. The first game I was White in an Alekhine Defence. Yes, I usually
played Black. But since I played 1.e4 thousands of times, there were games
where I faced my beloved Alekhine as White. The last two games were
BDGs. We both won as Black.
Against Robert J. Felber, I played seven BDGs during the same time period,
1996-1997. I was White twice and Black five times. I won one as Black and
all the other games were drawn. This game was the longest of the batch.
Black kept his king in the center while my bishops were actively placed on
Bc4 and Bg5. When Black pushed his queenside pawns, I broke up his
kingside pawns. The notes in this game vs Robert Felber are mine.
Sawyer - Felber, corr Internet 1996 beginsv1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6
4.f3 c6 [O'Kelly is often reached via the Caro-Kann Defence.] 5.Bc4 [This
bishop development is standard and can easily transpose as noted. Other lines
are also playable such as: 5.Nxe4; 5.fxe4; 5.Be3] 5...b5 6.Bb3 exf3 [If Black
does not want to accept the f-pawn, he can play 6...e6] 7.Nxf3 [We have
reached a line in the BDG Ziegler Variation (5.Nxf3 c6)] 7...Nbd7 8.0-0 e6
9.Bg5 a5 10.Qe2 Nb6 [10...Be7!=/+] 11.Bxf6 gxf6 12.a3 f5 13.Qe3 Rg8
[White grabs the open g-file for attack.] 14.Ne5 Qg5?! 15.Qf3 Bb7 16.Nxb5
Rc8 17.Nc3 Nd5 18.Rf2 Bg7 19.Rd1 Bxe5 20.dxe5 Rc7 21.Bxd5 exd5
22.Qxf5 Qxf5 23.Rxf5 Bc8 24.Rf6 Be6 25.Rh6 Bf5 26.Rd2 Rg5 27.h4 Rg4
28.Ne2 Bg6 29.Nd4 [29.h5 Rh4 30.Nd4 Rxh5 31.Rxh5 Bxh5=] 29...Kf8
30.h5 Kg7 31.hxg6 Kxh6 32.gxf7 Rxf7 33.Nxc6 Rb7 34.b3 Rb5 35.e6 Re4
36.Nd4 Rb6 37.Kf2 Kg6 38.Re2 [38.Rd3+/=] 38...Rxe2+ 39.Kxe2 Kf6
40.Ke3 Rb7 41.Kf4 Rc7 42.g4 h6 43.Ke3 Rc3+ 44.Kf4 a4 45.e7 Kxe7
46.Ke5 Kf7 47.Kxd5 Rxc2 48.bxa4 Rc3 49.Nb5 Rg3 50.Nd6+ Kf8 1/2-1/2
72 - Glickman in Caro-Kann
This game first transposed into a Caro-Kann. Then with our fourth moves
4.f3 Nf6 we transposed into a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit Declined O'Kelly
Defence.
My 1989 USCF Golden Squires Postal Chess Tournament game vs Stuart

Glickman continued 5.Bc4 Bf5 6.g4 Bg6 7.g5.
Black responded to my advancing g-pawn with the knight retreat 7...Ng8.

This was not covered by Christoph Scheerer in his BDG book.
To me this line feels like the BDG Vienna 4.f3 Bf5 5.g4 Bg6 6.g5 variation.
The difference is the placement of Black’s knight.
White would stand better in our game if I had continued correctly. But I did
not.
I missed the key move 10.Bd3. That would have allowed me to keep the
advantage.
Then I missed another chance to equalize on move 16. From there, things
went downhill for me.
Stuart Glickman played well. He just kept coming after me until my army
could no longer survive.
Sawyer (2002) - Glickman (1971), corr USCF 89SS90, 09.10.1991 begins

1.d4 d5 2.e4 c6 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Bc4 Nf6 5.f3 Bf5 6.g4 Bg6 7.g5 Ng8 [7...Nd5
8.Nxe4 (8.fxe4 Scheerer) 8...e6 9.Ne2 Be7=] 8.fxe4 e6 9.h4 Bb4 10.e5?!
[10.Bd3!+/- The threat 11.h5 gives White time to develop a knight and
protect d4 with a big space advantage.] 10...Be4 11.Rh3 [White's in trouble,
but better is 11.Rh2 Bxc3+ 12.bxc3 Ne7=/+] 11...Nd7 [11...Bxc2! 12.Qxc2
Qxd4-/+] 12.Bd2 Bf5 13.Rg3 Qc7 [13...Nb6-/+] 14.Nf3 0-0-0 15.Bb3 Ne7
16.Kf2? [16.Qe2!=] 16...Bxc3 17.bxc3 Rhg8 18.c4 f6 19.Bf4 [19.exf6 gxf6-
/+] 19...Ng6 20.Be3 fxe5 21.h5 Nf4 22.Bxf4 exf4 23.Rg1 Rge8 24.Nh4
[24.Re1 Nc5-+] 24...Ne5 25.Qd2 Ng4+ 26.Ke1 f3 27.Nxf3 e5 28.d5 e4
29.Nd4 e3 30.Qe2 Qa5+ 31.Kf1 Rf8 32.Kg2 Bd7 [32...Qc7!-+ is crushing.]
33.Rgf1 Qc7 34.Kg1 Rf2 0-1
73 - David Tom in Caro-Kann
What do you do if Black does not accept your Blackmar-Diemer Gambit?
One option is to play the main line of whatever opening Black is headed
toward.
Another option is to search for some distinctly BDG type position. This is
often possible in the BDG Declined variations.
The first rounds of the 1989 Golden Knights began of course in 1989. The
better players qualified for more rounds later.
By 1992 I was facing many strong players simultaneously. This game is

against a USCF postal master from the Semi-Finals.
My opponent in this game was David Tom. He lived at the same address as
Joe Tom. I played them both about the same time.
We reached a standard Caro-Kann Defence. The only difference was that we

played our first two moves in reverse order to the normal 1.e4 c6.
The main line continues with the good move 4.Nxe4. I chose the speculative
moves 4.Bc4 and 5.f3. This line transposed to the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit
Declined O'Kelly. It could have arisen after 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3 c6
5.Bc4.
I played a risky 8th move in 8.fxe4!? It had the feel of the BDG Vienna 4.f3
Bf5 5.g4 Bg6 6.g5 Nd5 7.fxe4 called the Kampars Gambit. I got a good
position. Then I missed the correct move 20.Rh1 which could have given me
a slight advantage.
Sawyer (1988) - Tom (2215), corr USCF 89NS53, 10.04.1992 begins 1.d4
d5 2.e4 c6 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Bc4 [4.Nxe4] 4...Nf6 5.f3 Bf5 6.g4 Bg6 7.g5 Nd5
8.fxe4 [Houdini, Fritz and Stockfish all prefer 8.Nxe4!=] 8...Nxc3 9.bxc3
Bxe4 10.Nf3 e6 11.0-0 Bg6 12.Ne5 [12.Qe2 looks like a playable
alternative.] 12...Bd6 13.Nxg6 hxg6 14.Qf3 Bxh2+ 15.Kg2 Qc7 16.Ba3 b5
17.Bd3 a5 18.Rae1 b4 19.Bc1 Bd6 20.Bxg6? [I missed 20.Rh1 Rxh1
21.Rxh1 Nd7 22.c4+=] 20...fxg6 21.Rxe6+ Kd8 22.Qe4 Qd7 23.Qxg6 Bc7
24.Bf4Qd5+ 25.Kg3 Bxf4+ 26.Rxf4 Qh1 27.Rd6+ Kc8 28.Qxg7 Rh3+
29.Kg4 Rh4+ 0-1
74 - Kees Van Oirschot 5.Nxe4
Years ago I tried to back into a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit in a postal chess. I
was new to the BDG.
Usually I only played against opponents from the United States. The postage
costs were less expensive.
This game was played in the International Correspondence Chess Federation.
My opponent was Kees Van Oirschot from the Netherlands.
Kees van Oirschot was a few years older than me. He must have been good at
research and writing.
In 1986 Kees wrote an article for New In Chess magazine on the Ruy Lopez
Marshall Attack RL 17.
I think is the same player listed as Cornelis van Oirschot. His last ICCF rating
was 2349 from the year 1998.
We ended up with a BDG / Caro-Kann Defence hybrid called the O'Kelly

Variation. White usually chose sharp lines such as 5.Bc4 or 5.fxe4.
I wanted to avoid common continuations. My 5th move 5.Nxe4 was fully

sound, albeit rather boring.
After our 6th moves, White's awkward f3 pawn is compensated for by

Black's doubled f-pawns.
The position was very equal throughout. After 13 moves in a very even
position, we agreed to a draw.
The alternative was to play out this game at the rather slow and expensive
snail mail pace of international post at the time.
Sawyer - Van Oirschot, corr ICCF 1985 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.f3 d5 3.e4 dxe4
4.Nc3 c6 5.Nxe4 Bf5 6.Nxf6+ gxf6 [6...exf6 7.Bd3=] 7.c3 e6 8.Bf4 [8.Ne2!?
=] 8...Bd6 9.Bxd6 Qxd6 10.Bd3 Bg6 11.Ne2 Nd7 12.Qd2 0-0-0 13.0-0-0
Rhg8 1/2-1/2
75 - Tom Elliott in Caro-Kann
The O'Kelly Variation is a good defense to decline the Blackmar-Diemer
Gambit after 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3 c6. The line appears in the
Caro-Kann Defence as well after 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d4 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.f3 Nf6. Many
other move orders also work, including the one in the game below.
White has two sharp choices 5.Bc4 and 5.fxe4, and one solid choice 5.Nxe4.
The sharper choices are more enterprising, but if you are uncomfortable with
them, then taking with the knight is completely sound.
Years ago America On Line (AOL) used the phrase "You've got mail!" when
you logged into your e-mail. Tom Hanks and Meg Ryan appeared in a movie
with that name. It pitted two bookstore owners against each other.
Meg Ryan's character owed a little family store like the one where I bought
my first chess books around 1971. Tom Hanks' character owned a superstore
similar to the ones that sold the chess books I later wrote. Online chatting led
the two movie characters to love and romance, living happily ever after.
Two years before that movie, I faced a strong correspondence player in Tom
Elliott from APCT. Tom Elliott gradually and consistently outplayed me.
Eleven years earlier Kees van Oirschot had recaptured with 6...gxf6. Tom
Elliott chose the sharper 6...exf6, which caused me trouble finding safety for
my king. Eventually I played 18.Kf2, but it was ten moves too late.
Sawyer (1969) - Elliott (2144), corr APCT EMQ-1, 30.01.1996 begins 1.d4
Nf6 2.Nc3 d5 3.e4 dxe4 4.f3 c6 5.Nxe4 Bf5 6.Nxf6+ exf6 7.Bc4 Qe7+
[7...Bd6=] 8.Be2? [8.Kf2!=] 8...Nd7 [8...Na6 9.c3 Nc7=/+] 9.c3 Qe6
[9...Nb6=/+] 10.Bf4 [10.h4] 10...Bd6 11.Bxd6 Qxd6 12.Bd3 Bxd3 13.Qxd3
0-0 14.Ne2 [14.0-0-0 Rae8=/+] 14...Rfe8 15.Rd1 Rad8 16.b3 Qa3 17.Qd2
Qe7 18.Kf2 Qd6 19.g3 Nf8 20.Rhe1 c5 21.d5 b5 22.c4 bxc4 23.bxc4 Qa6
24.Qc2 Nd7 25.Nc1 Nb6 26.Nb3 Nxc4 27.Nxc5 Qb5 28.Rd4? [28.Nd7
Rxe1 29.Rxe1 Rc8-/+] 28...Rxe1 29.Kxe1 Ne5 0-1
76 - Lykke Defeats Offenborn
ICCF play in the modern era has the advantage that players use computer
chess engine programs to assist in move selection. Years ago when I played
most of my ICCF games, computers were weak. Robin Smith has written
about how the combination of human and machine produces the best possible
results.
In this critical game Hans Chr. Lykke (Denmark) plays a BDG vs Heinz
Offenborn (Germany). Black chose the BDG O'Kelly 4.f3 c6 which could
also be reached via a Caro-Kann Defence. White's main options included
5.Bc4, 5.fxe4 and 5.Nxe4.
Taking with the knight 5.Nxe4 is solid and dependable from a theoretical
standpoint, although not in keeping with the typical BDG style. Computers
do not care about style, just good moves.
Correspondence players may start out to play a sharp line, but stronger
players adjust as needed to the realities of the position. They produce the best
result. That may feature mating attack, tactical combination, positional
strategy, or endgame technique.
Lykke vs Offenborn was a high level test of the 5.Nxe4 Nxe4 line. Chances
were even until Black misplayed the ending on move 38. The subtle
difference between Black's rook move options (38...Rc8? or first 38...Rc2!
and then 39...Rc8) was not easy to pick up by the typical chess engine at that
time.
Lykke (2465) - Offenborn (2374), WC26-SF10 ICCF Email, 01.09.2002

begins 1.d4 d5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.e4 dxe4 4.f3 c6 5.Nxe4 Nxe4 6.fxe4 e5 7.Nf3
exd4 8.Qxd4 Qxd4 9.Nxd4 Nd7 [9...Bc5 10.Be3 0-0 11.Be2!? Nd7 12.0-0-0
Re8 13.Bf3 Ne5=] 10.Bf4 Nc5 [10...Bc5!? 11.Nf5 0-0 12.0-0-0 Re8=]
11.Bc4 Be7 12.e5 0-0 13.Rf1 Bh4+ 14.Kd2 b5 15.Bd3 Bd7 16.Bf5 Rad8
17.Ke2 Rfe8 18.Rad1 Ne6 19.Be3 Nxd4+ 20.Rxd4 Bxf5 21.Rxf5 Rxd4
22.Bxd4 Be7 23.Kf3 Rd8 24.Ke4 c5 25.Be3 Rd1 26.b3 Re1 27.g3 g6
28.Rf3 Ra1 29.Kd5 Rxa2 30.Rf2 a5 31.Bxc5 Bxc5 32.Kxc5 a4 33.b4 a3
34.Kxb5 Rb2 35.Rf1 a2 36.Ra1 Rxc2 37.Ka6 Rc4 38.Ka5 Rc8? [Black's
best chance for a draw is with the subtle 38...Rc2! 39.b5 and then 39...Rc8=]
39.Ka4 Rc2 40.Kb3 Re2 41.Rxa2 Rxe5 42.Kc4 Kf8 43.b5 Ke7 44.Rd2 Re1
45.b6 Rb1 46.Kc5 f5 47.Kc6 Rc1+ 48.Kb7 g5 49.Ra2 1-0
77 - Hauser Beats Ratislav Bury
The Blackberry name game: Chuck Berry, Dave Barry and Ratislav Bury all
sound very similar in English.
This game features a short chess opening win for White in a critical BDG
line.
In this 2006 ICCF correspondence chess game, Jack Hauser beats or buries
Ratislav Bury who played Black in the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit.
Bury was buried after he declined the BDG 4.f3 gambit with 4...c6.
These opening moves transposed into a Caro-Kann Defence.
The same variation could have also been reached after 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3
dxe4 4.f3 Nf6.
Earlier I wrote about a successful critical game in the O'Kelly 4.f3 c6 5.Nxe4
Nxe4 line.
In that game after 6.fxe4 e5 7.Nf3 exd4 White played the natural recapture
8.Qxd4.
Here Jack Hauser played 8.Bc4. White went all out for an attack.
Note that Ratislav Bury had played 30 games in ICCF.
I listed the most current rating I could find, but Bury was no longer active in
ICCF play at the time I analyzed this game.
Hauser (2100) - Bury (1858), WS/H/063 ICCF, 07.10.2006 begins 1.d4 d5

2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3 c6 5.Nxe4 Nxe4 6.fxe4 e5 7.Nf3 exd4 8.Bc4 Qa5+
9.Bd2 Qc5 10.Qe2 Nd7 [10...Bg4 11.b4 Qh5 12.0-0 Nd7 13.h3 Bxf3
14.Rxf3 f6 15.Qf2=; 10...a5 11.e5 Be7 12.0-0-0 b5 13.Bd3 Be6 14.Qe4 Qd5
15.Qxd5 Bxd5 16.Nxd4=] 11.b4 Qb6 12.Qf2 f6 13.0-0 Bxb4 14.e5 Bxd2
15.Qxd2 fxe5 [Better is 15...Qc5 16.exf6 Nxf6 17.Rae1+ Kd8 18.Nxd4+/=
although White has a more active position.] 16.Nxe5 Nxe5 17.Rae1 1-0
78 - 5.fxe4 vs Darryl Liddy
In my early days of learning the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit, I sometimes tried
it out in club games.
I played at the Chaturanga Chess Club that met in Hatboro, Pennsylvania.
There was a U.S. Naval Air Base where they tested military items in nearby
Willow Grove.
I did my testing on the chess board, but some of my opponents worked on the
base.
First I played at the Chaturanga in 1981-82.
Later I played there again from 1985-1989 after I returned to Pennsylvania

from Houston, Texas.
Below is the only recorded game I have vs Darryl Liddy; I do not know how
strong he was. I estimated his rating at about 1500.
We transposed into the Caro-Kann Defence. This variation is also known as

the BDG O'Kelly4.f3 c6.
Besides the move 5.fxe4 that I chose, White had two other options.
I could have tried 5.Bc4 (offering again to gambit a pawn) or 5.Nxe4

(regaining the gambit pawn).
In this short contest I lined up my pieces in BDG Euwe style Nf3, Bd3, 0-0,
Bg5, and Qe1-Qh4.
The goal was to checkmate the Black king by direct assault.
Sawyer - Liddy, Hatboro, PA 1988 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e4 c6 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.f3
Nf6 5.fxe4 Nbd7 [5...e5=] 6.Nf3 e6 7.Bg5 [7.e5 Nd5 8.Nxd5+/-] 7...h6 8.Be3
Bb4 9.Bd3 0-0 10.0-0 Bxc3 [10...Ng4=] 11.bxc3 b6 12.Qe1 Bb7 13.Qh4
Re8 14.e5 Nd5 15.Bg5 hxg5 [15...Qc7 16.Bxh6 gxh6 17.Qxh6+-] 16.Nxg5
c5 17.Qh7+ Kf8 18.Rxf7# 1-0
79 - Shredder vs Caro-Kann
When testing Blackmar-Diemer Gambit variations and other openings in blitz
games, often I placed myself on the Black side.
Often I would have some strong computer chess engine play the White
pieces.
Against Shredder, I played the Alekhine Defence.
After 1.e4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d5 (2…e5 is a Vienna Game), White transposed into
the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit with 3.d4 dxe4.
After 4.f3, here I opted for the Caro-Kann Defence line 4…c6. This is known
as the BDG Declined O'Kelly variation.
This game continued with the typical 5.fxe4 e5! Black counter attacked d4
and threatened to leave White with an isolated e-pawn.
Often White defended the d-pawn with 6.Nf3, but my chess engine opponent
simply chopped off my e-pawn.
This allowed Black to exchange queens.
Chances were equal, but our ratings and skill levels were not.
White's active bishop and well posted knight kept Black from a coordinated
defense.
I resigned after I lost material.
Shredder (3362) - Sawyer (2000), Florida, 24.03.2006 1.e4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d5

3.d4 dxe4 4.f3 c6 5.fxe4 e5 6.dxe5 Qxd1+ 7.Nxd1 [Also playable is 7.Kxd1
Ng4 8.Ke1 Nxe5 9.Nf3 Nbd7 10.Be3=] 7...Nxe4 8.Nf3 Bb4+ [Deep Rybka
and Deep Fritz indicate 8...Be6 9.Bd3 Nc5 10.Be2 Nbd7 11.Nc3 Be7
12.Bf4=] 9.c3 Bc5 [9...Be7 10.Bd3=] 10.Be3 [Or 10.Bd3 f5 11.exf6 Nxf6
12.Be3=] 10...0-0?! [10...Bb6 11.Bd3 Nc5 12.Bc2=] 11.Bd3 Bxe3 12.Nxe3
Nc5 13.Bc2 Be6 14.Ng5 h6 15.Nxe6 Nxe6 16.0-0-0 Rd8 17.Rxd8+ Nxd8
18.Rd1 Ne6 19.Nc4 Na6 20.Nd6 b6 21.Be4 Rd8 22.Bxc6 1-0
80 - McGrew in Caro-Kann
Every once in a while God brings someone into your life at just the right
time. In the late 1990's I met Tim McGrew.
McGrew and I played and chatted a lot on ICC in those days. Tim was a great
help in getting me to write an updated edition to my keybook.
In February 1999 Tim McGrew wrote the Forward to my Blackmar-Diemer

Gambit Keybook II. His creative work on the BDG has appeared online at
various sites.
Three BDG writers all have similar first names. Each one has a six letter last
name: Tim McGrew, Tim Sawyer and Tom Purser.
In this game, the two named “Tim” are playing in a BDG thematic
correspondence event. I do not remember if it was by e-mail or by postcard.
We transposed into a Caro-Kann Defence with his 4...c6. This line is called
the BDG O'Kelly variation. It is an excellent way to decline the gambit.
Volker Hergert wrote "Die O'Kelly-Verteidigung im Blackmar-Diemer-

Gambit" in 1993, a 65 page book published by Mandfred Madler in German.
Hergert provided deep analysis from thematic correspondence games
covering about 70 games in detail.
Theoretical chances are equal. At one point I noted that I had faced the BDG
O'Kelly 95 times and scored 56%. But prior to 1996 when Tim McGrew
played it against me, I had faced it only three times: Van Oirschot in 1985,
Liddy in 1988 and Cullen in 1990. Frankly, I had no clue as to which line
was best for White.
Sawyer - McGrew, corr BDG thematic, 1996 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4
3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3 c6 5.fxe4 e5 6.Nf3 [6.dxe5=] 6...exd4 7.Nxd4 [7.Qxd4 Qxd4
8.Nxd4=] 7...Bb4 8.Bc4 Bg4 [8...0-0 9.0-0 Bc5 10.Nce2 Nbd7-/+] 9.Qd3 0-0
10.h3 Nbd7 11.Bf4 Nc5 12.Qe3 Ncxe4 13.hxg4 Re8 14.0-0 Nxc3 15.Qd3
Ncd5 16.Bg5 Qb6 17.c3 Ne4 18.Bf4 Bc5 19.Rae1 Qxb2 20.Rxe4 Rxe4
21.Qxe4 Qxc3 22.Bxd5 Qxd4+ 23.Qxd4 Bxd4+ 0-1
81 - Black Dragon in O'Kelly
Much of the time when I played the Black Dragon chess engine on ICC we
reached lines in the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit Gunderam.
As I recall, many of the BlackDragon games were at 2 0 minute bullet speed.
I don’t play that fast anymore, but I did back in the 1990s.
Below we have an interesting BDG O'Kelly variation that I played in the line
5.fxe4 e5!
The critical line as presented in the notes seemed to follow 10.a3! Once I
missed that I was in trouble.
If you don't like the opening after 5.fxe4, then you might wish to examine the
alternatives 5.Nxe4 or 5.Bc4.
In theory, all of them are playable.
Your fifth move choice is more a matter of taste.
And finally, the last part of this game was a good example of a strong
computer outplaying a human at about two seconds per move.
Sawyer - BlackDragon, Internet Chess Club 17.03.1998 begins 1.d4 Nf6

2.f3 d5 3.e4 dxe4 4.Nc3 c6 5.fxe4 e5 6.Nf3 exd4 7.Qxd4 Qxd4 8.Nxd4 Bb4
9.e5 [This may be better than the more popular 9.Bd3 0-0=/+ which seems to
give a very slight edge to Black.] 9...Ne4 10.Bd2? [10.a3! Bxc3+ 11.bxc3
Nxc3 12.Bd3 Nd7 13.e6=] 10...Nxd2 11.Kxd2 0-0 12.a3 Rd8 13.axb4
Rxd4+ 14.Bd3 Rxb4 15.g3 [15.Ne4 Bf5=/+] 15...Nd7 16.Rhe1 Rxb2
17.Na4 Rb4 18.Kc3 a5 19.h4 [19.e6 fxe6 20.Rxe6 Nf6-/+] 19...Rg4 [19...b5
20.Nb2 Rg4-+] 20.Re3 b5 21.Nb2 Nc5 22.Be2 Rxg3 23.Rxg3 Ne4+ 24.Kd4
Nxg3 25.Bf3 Nf5+ 26.Kc5 Bd7 27.h5 a4 28.Nd3 Ne3 29.c3 Rc8 30.Rg1
Nc4 31.h6 g6 32.Nf4 Nxe5 33.Nh5 Nxf3 34.Rg3 Nd2 35.Nf6+ Kh8 36.Rd3
Nb3+ 37.Kb4 Be6 38.Rd6 g5 39.Rd3 c5+ 40.Kxb5 a3 41.Rg3 a2 42.Rxg5
a1Q 43.Rg7 Qa5# 0-1
3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Nf6
White makes the natural recapture 4.Nxe4. Black in turn plays to attack the
knight. In this chapter we consider 4…Nf6.
82 - Simple Move Vs Caro
What do you do when your opponent plays a move new to you? First, if that
move gives you an advantage, try to find the best move and punish him for
his weaker theoretical choice. Second, if your opponent's move leaves the
position basically even, you could just play a safe move, even if it only
maintains equality. Instead of trying to outplay him using opening theory,
you can use your tactics, strategy and calculation ability.
Consider the Caro-Kann Defence 4.Nxe4 Nf6 line in the Reti-Tartakower,

Vienna 1910. In those days many took 5.Nxf6+; others backed off with
5.Ng3 to which the standard move was 5...e5 (now 5...h5 or 5...g6). Reti
played the simple new move 5.Qd3!? This "is to say the least of doubtful
value, but not so bad that it can be thus summarily refuted" [Watts &
Hereford]. Black tried to refute the idea with 5...e5 and got outplayed
famously.
In 1981 I faced 5.Qd3 twice. In ICCF World Cup V against M. Costa

Rodrigues, I chose 5...Nxe4 6.Qxe4 Qd5!? We agreed to a draw in a
materially even rook and pawn ending. Later against the lower rated Archer, I
played 5...Qc7 and I was able to win.
Rodrigues - Sawyer, corr ICCF 1981 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4
4.Nxe4 Nf6 5.Qd3 Nxe4 [5...e5 6.dxe5 Qa5+ 7.Bd2 Qxe5 8.0-0-0 Nxe4??
"Homer nods! or was he only obstinate in carrying through his (faulty) idea,
based on his 5th move? White mates in 3 moves." (Watts & Hereford)
9.Qd8+ Kxd8 10.Bg5+ Kc7 (10...Ke8 11.Rd8#) 11.Bd8# 1-0 Reti -
Tartakower, Vienna 1910] 6.Qxe4 Qd5 [6...Nd7= headed for Nf6 makes
sense.] 7.Qe3 Bf5 8.c4 Qe4 9.Nf3 Na6 10.a3 g6 11.Be2 Bg7 12.0-0 0-0
13.Rd1 Rfd8 14.Bd3 Bxd4 15.Bxe4 [Maybe 15.Qxe4 Bxe4 16.Bxe4 Bxf2+
17.Kxf2 Rxd1 18.Bc2+/= White would have two active bishops vs Black's
extra rook and two pawns.] 15...Bxe3 16.Bxe3 Bxe4 17.Rxd8+ Rxd8
18.Bxa7 Bxf3 19.gxf3 Rd2 20.Rb1 Nc7 21.Bb8 Ne6 22.Be5 Nd4 23.Bxd4
Rxd4 24.Rc1 Draw agreed. 1/2-1/2
83 - Endgame vs Champion
To be a champion you have to beat a champion. In my ICCF Master Class
tournament I defeated William R. Champion in the 5...exf6 Caro-Kann
Defence.
Viktor Korchnoi only played it a handful of times. It is named after him

because he drew with it vs the world champion Karpov.
I was trying to beat a Champion! The variation begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3
dxe4 4.Nxe4 Nf6 encouraging White to capture 5.Nxf6+. In other games
Champion chose 5...gxf6 or 4...Nd7.
The point after 5...exf6 is Black has open lines in the center and an extra
pawn to attack kingside. The pawn structure a very predictable problem for
Black in the endgame.
White's three kingside pawns can block Black's four pawns, but on the
queenside White can establish a passed pawn. The extra pawn may be
blockaded, but in reality White often wins directly with it or trades that pawn
for a win elsewhere on the board.
William Champion was an active player whose rating was near 2200. It
dipped lower at the end of his career. This win helped me to win this Master
Class tournament.
Sawyer (2157) - Champion (2100), corr ICCF 1994 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5
3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Nf6 5.Nxf6+ exf6 [I often played 5...gxf6 myself.] 6.Bc4
[The alternative 6.c3 has a higher winning percentage, but both have about
the same performance rating.] 6...Qe7+ 7.Qe2 Be6 8.Bxe6 Qxe6 9.Bf4
Qxe2+ 10.Nxe2 Na6 [I was amazed Black allowed me to enter an ending
with a 4-3 pawn advantage on the queenside.] 11.c3 0-0-0 12.0-0-0 Bd6
13.Bxd6 Rxd6 14.Rhe1 Re8 15.Nf4 Rxe1 16.Rxe1 g6 17.Re7 Rd7 18.Rxd7
Kxd7 19.Kd2 Nc7 20.c4 Ne6 21.Ke3 b6 22.d5 Nxf4 23.Kxf4 cxd5 24.cxd5
Kd6 25.Ke4 f5+ 26.Kd4 g5 27.Kc4 a6 28.a4 f4 [28...Kc7 29.Kd4+=]
29.Kd4 f5 [29...h6 30.f3 b5 31.axb5 axb5 32.Ke4+/-] 30.f3 h5 31.h4 gxh4
32.Kc4 [Another way to win is 32.a5! bxa5 33.b3 h3 34.gxh3 h4 35.Kc4 Ke7
36.Kc5 Kd7 37.d6 a4 38.bxa4 a5 39.Kd5 Kd8 40.Ke6 Ke8 41.Kxf5+-]
32...b5+ [Or 32...Kd7 33.a5 bxa5 34.Kc5 a4 35.d6+-] 33.axb5 axb5+
34.Kd4 1-0
84 - Korchnoi in Caro-Kann
Viktor L. Korchnoi was a grandmaster for 60 years from 1956 until his death
in 2016 at age 85. GM Korchnoi was one of the strongest players in history to
not become the world champion.
He played for the championship three times in 1974, 1978 and 1981. Each
time Korchnoi lost to Karpov by a small margin.
Korchnoi was famous as a counter attacker. I studied hundreds of his games.

He was more dangerous as Black than White.
One of the openings that Korchnoi and I both played as Black was the Caro-
Kann Defence. My database has over 100 of his Caro-Kann games. He
played all the variations, 80% of the time as Black. He preferred the classical
main line 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Bf5. Korchnoi also played 4...Nd7 and 4...Nf6
many times.
What I remember from the 1970s was his play with 4…Nf6 5.Nxf6+ exf6.
True, Korchnoi played 5…gxf6 as well, but what amazed me was that he
played 5…exf6 at all!
In my thinking, the line gives Black a likely lost endgame. Indeed I have won
many endgames as White. Korchnoi accomplished his own successful
middlegame attacks as Black with 5…exf6.
This made 5…exf6 more playable in his hands. Here is his win vs Eugenio
Torre in the Caro-Kann Defence 5.Nxf6+ exf6 line.
Torre (2490) - Korchnoi (2665), Buenos Aires olm 1978 begins 1.e4 c6
2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Nf6 5.Nxf6+ exf6 6.Nf3 Bd6 7.Be2 [Or 7.Bd3 0-
0 8.0-0 Bg4=] 7...Na6 8.0-0 Nc7 9.c4 0-0 10.Be3 Re8 11.Qd2 [11.Qc2 g6
12.Rfe1 Bf5=] 11...Bf5 12.Rad1 Be4 13.Qc1 h6 14.Nd2 Bh7 15.Bf3 f5
16.Nb3 g5 17.Na5 g4 18.Be2 Bb4 19.Nxb7 Qc8 20.Nc5 f4 21.Bxg4 [White
could get three pawns for a piece with 21.Nd3! Bxd3 22.Bxd3 fxe3 23.fxe3
Be7 24.Bf5 Qd8 25.Bxg4=] 21...Qxg4 22.Bxf4 Ne6 23.Be3 Rad8 24.Nd3
[24.Nxe6 Rxe6 25.Bxh6 Rxd4=/+] 24...Bd6 25.Ne5 Bxe5 26.dxe5 Bd3 27.f3
Qxc4 28.Qxc4 Bxc4 29.Rxd8 Nxd8 30.Rd1 Bxa2 31.Bxa7 [31.Rd6 f6
32.Rxf6 Rxe5-/+] 31...Bd5 32.f4 Ne6 33.Be3 h5 [33...Rb8!-+] 34.h3 Rb8
35.Rd2 Rb3 36.Kf2 h4 37.Rc2 Bxg2 0-1
85 - Jeff Baffo Quick Queen
Jeffrey Baffo ignored theory in a Caro-Kann Defence which tells us not to
bring out the queen too early. How early is too early?
Jeff Baffo played a Bronstein-Larsen line. It began 4.Nxe4 Nf6 5.Nxf6+

gxf6. Black intended to use the open g-file for tactics.
Black started with doubled f-pawns in the opening and ended with two
passed f-pawns in the endgame.
Black played an early 6...Qd5!? His queen was such an imposing presence
that that I sent my own girl out to meet her with 7.Qb3.
This led to my own doubled b-pawns. Black's aggressive a-pawn tried its
version of "walk on by".
In the exchanges of moves 17-19, White dropped a pawn in hope of trapping

Black's Rg2.
White gave up too much to get the rook. By the end White had a rook and
three pawns vs Black's two bishops and four pawns.
Bottom line: Jeffrey Baffo creatively outplayed me...again.
c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Nf6 5.Nxf6+ gxf6 6.c3 Qd5!? [Black is
looking for less popular choices. Otherwise, 6...Bf5 7.Nf3+/=] 7.Qb3
[7.Be3+/=] 7...Qxb3 8.axb3 Be6 9.b4 [9.Bc4!?+/=] 9...Nd7 10.Nf3 a6
11.Bf4 Rg8 12.Be2 Bd5 13.Rg1 Nb6 14.0-0-0 [Rather than castle, since the
queens are off the board, White might do better with 14.Kd2= and leave the
rooks where they are.] 14...a5 15.b5 a4 16.Kd2 a3 17.bxa3 Rxa3 18.Ra1
Rxa1 19.Rxa1 Rxg2 20.Bg3 Bh6+ 21.Kc2 Bg5 22.bxc6 bxc6 23.Rb1
[23.Nxg5!? fxg5 24.Ra6=] 23...Be4+ 24.Bd3 Bxf3 25.Rxb6 Kf8 26.Bxh7
Be3 27.Bf5?! [A better way to play this endgame seems to be 27.Kd3! Bxf2
28.Bxf2 Rxf2 29.Ke3 Rxh2 30.Kxf3 Rxh7 31.Rxc6=] 27...Bxf2 28.Bh3?
[Here I just lose it. 28.Bxf2 Rxf2+ 29.Kd3 Bh5 30.Be4 f5 31.Bxc6 f4=/+
would at least give me a passed c-pawn, although I would have to deal with
Black's two passed f-pawns soon.] 28...Be4+ 29.Kd2? Bxg3+ 30.Bxg2 Bf4+
0-1
86 - 6.Be2 von Wurttemberg
When I see the Olympics, I remember that I played in the chess
correspondence Olympics many 31 years ago. Many of my international
opponents were very strong. Some opponents were not master level strength.
This international game was not from the Olympics.
It was from in an Open tournament with players of all skill levels. As I recall
it was the ICCF World Cup V. There were 9 players (8 games) in the first
round. The winner advanced to the next round. My score was 4 wins, 3
draws, 1 loss (5.5 of 8). I did not win the event and I did not advance.
This game was a Caro-Kann Defence game where my opponent Adolf von
Wurttemberg made a few major blunders. Probably two of them were due to
setting the board up wrong.
In the end I was way ahead in material with a kingside mating attack that
targeted exchanges on g3.
von Wurttemberg - Sawyer, corr ICCF, 1981 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3
dxe4 4.Nxe4 Nf6 5.Nxf6+ gxf6 6.Be2 [The main line is 6.c3 Bf5 7.Nf3 and
now in addition to the obvious moves (Qc7/Nd7/e6), Black has the
interesting 7...Qd5!?=] 6...Bf5 7.Nf3 Qc7 8.Bd3 Bg6 9.0-0 Nd7 10.Be3 e6
11.Bf5? [Apparently White thought my bishop was still on f5 instead of g6.]
11...exf5 12.Qd3 f4 13.Qe4+? [Once again White misses that Black has a
bishop on g6.] 13...Bxe4 14.Bd2 0-0-0 15.Ne1 f3 16.g3 Bd6 17.b4 Rhg8
18.a3 h5 19.Rd1 h4 0-1
87 - Bruce Davis in Allentown
Bruce Davis was already an active member of the Allentown, Pennsylvania
chess scene when we met in round 3 of a tournament. By 1981 I was an
expert in postal chess, but I only played live at the Lansdale chess club near
Philadelphia.
Davis and I were about the same age. He was more experienced in
tournament play. Since he had White and the higher rating, Davis had every
reason to fight for a win. I hung around long enough to win the ending. I had
studied lots of endgame books.
In 1978, I got a chess tape cassette by Raymond Keene on the aggressive

Bronstein-Larsen 4...Nf6 and 5...gxf6. In 1978 I lost a postal game as White.
By 1979, I had taken it up as Black. I won one and drew two. In 1981 I won
all six games I played with 5...gxf6, five postal games and this Bruce Davis
game.
By 1982, I played it vs stronger postal competition and started losing with it.
That was no fun. By 1983, I had quit playing it until a lost to John Blood Sr.
as Black in 1992. I lost with it again as White in 1994 vs Jeffrey Baffo. I still
play it once in a while.
Davis (1970) - Sawyer, Allentown, PA (3), 13.06.1981 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4

d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Nf6 5.Nxf6+ gxf6 6.Bc4 [The main line is 6.c3 Bf5
7.Nf3+/=] 6...Bf5 7.Bf4 [More often White plays 7.Nf3 or 7.Ne2] 7...e6
8.Qd2 Nd7 9.Nf3 Nb6 10.Bb3 Bd6 11.0-0-0 Be4 12.Qe3 Bd5 13.Bxd6
Qxd6 14.g3 Bxb3 15.Qxb3 Qd5 16.Qxd5 cxd5 17.Rhe1 [17.Ne1 Nc4
18.Nd3 Nd6=] 17...Rc8 18.Nh4 Kf8 19.f4 f5 20.Nf3 Nd7 21.Kb1 Ke7
22.Rc1 Rc6 23.c3 b5 24.Re2 Rhc8 25.Rec2 h6 26.Ne1 R8c7 27.Nd3 Rc8
28.b3 R6c7 29.b4 Nb6 30.Nc5 Rc6 31.Re2 Rg8 32.Kc2 Rgc8 33.Kb3 R8c7
34.Rg1 h5 35.h3 Rc8 36.g4 hxg4 37.hxg4 fxg4 38.Rxg4 Kf6 39.Rg5 Rh8
40.Reg2 [40.Rge5=. I do not remember if either of us offered a draw in this
game. Clearly White wanted to win. This led him to take risks that led to his
loss.] 40...Rcc8 41.R2g3 Rh4 42.Nd3 Na4 43.Nc5 Rxf4 44.Nxa4 bxa4+
45.Kxa4 Rxc3 46.Rxc3 Kxg5 47.Rd3 [White is lost after this. He might
have better defensive chances after 47.Rc7 f5 48.Rxa7 Rxd4 49.Kb3 f4=/+]
47...f5 48.Kb5 Rh4 49.Kc5 f4 50.Kd6 Kf5 51.Rd1 f3 52.a4 Ke4 53.a5 f2
54.b5 Kf3 55.Rf1 Rxd4 56.Kxe6 Rb4 0-1
88 - Peterson vs Ray Haines
Ray Haines played in a four round chess tournament in Houlton, Maine in
2012 at Game/75. In the third round Ray played Black in a Caro-Kann
Defence 4.Nxe4 Nf6 defense vs Roger Peterson. He knew this opponent well.
Ray Haines wrote:
"This is the first time that I have been able to play this line in it though as
most people seem to wish to play the exchange lines. I played a bishop move
because it looked good, but he missed a knight move [9.Ng5] which would
have made things harder for me. We both missed chances for better play
early. I like to sac pawns for play, and he knows this, so he did not try to take
my krp [h-pawn]. He has gotten into trouble doing take before when playing
me. He thought that he would have the better endgame but that did not work
out for him. I have learned from this game and will not make the same
mistakes."
Ray Haines and I played a lot in 1974 when I began playing the Caro-Kann
myself as one of my five top defenses vs 1.e4 over the past 45 years. It is
quite likely that Ray influenced my choice for 1...c6. I played it almost
exclusively until about 1980. Then I added sharper openings to my repertoire
and did well with them.
Peterson - Haines, Houlton, ME (3), 26.05.2012 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5

3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Nf6 5.Nxf6+ gxf6 6.Nf3 [The most common set-up is
6.c3 Bf5 7.Nf3 e6 8.g3] 6...Qc7 [6...Bg4 7.Be2 Qc7 8.0-0 Nd7 and in some
scenarios, usually after ...0-0-0, Black could play ...e5 in one move.] 7.Bc4
Rg8!?N [Usually Black develops a bishop with 7...Bf5 or 7...Bg4] 8.0-0
Bh3?! 9.Nh4 [9.Ng5! fxg5 10.Qh5 Rg7 11.Qxh3+/=] 9...Bg4 10.Be2
[10.Qd3! Rh8 11.Qb3+/-] 10...Be6 11.c4 [11.Qd3+/-] 11...Na6 12.Qd3 0-0-0
13.Be3 Qd7 14.a3 Bg4 15.Bxg4 Qxg4 16.Qf5+ [White might be able to pick
off the h-pawn with 16.Qxh7 e6 17.h3+/-] 16...Qxf5 17.Nxf5 e6 18.Ng3 f5
19.b4 Bd6 [19...f4! 20.Bxf4 Rxd4=/+] 20.f4 Nc7 21.Rac1 Rg4 22.Rc3 Rdg8
23.Rf2 Be7 24.d5 Bf6 25.Rcc2 exd5 26.Bxa7 [26.Nxf5+/=] 26...Bh4
27.Rfd2 dxc4 [Black misses 27...Bxg3! 28.hxg3 dxc4 29.Rxc4 Rxg3=/+]
28.Nxf5 Nb5 29.Bb6 [29.Be3!+/=] 29...Nxa3 30.Nd6+? [30.Rc1=] 30...Kb8
31.Ra2 c3 32.Rd1? c2 33.Rxc2 Nxc2 34.Rd2 Nxb4 35.Rb2 Nd3 36.Ra2
Ne1 37.g3 Bxg3 38.Ra7 Bxf4+ 39.Kf2 Bxd6 40.Kxe1 Rg2 0-1
89 - Schmid in Sharp Caro
The Caro-Kann Defence 4.Nxe4 Nf6 is noted as a sharp line of play,
especially after 5.Nxf6 gxf6.
Back in the 1970s this was a favorite line by Bent Larsen. At the time I only
played 4...Bf5 or 4...Nd7 as Black.
My game vs Walter Schmid made me take the 5...gxf6 line more seriously. I
played 5...gxf6 myself frequently as Black 1979-1983.
Korchnoi at the time liked to play 4...Nf6 5.Nxf6+ exf6 trying to use the open
lines for attack with his bishops.
I distrust the 5...exf6 line; in my own practice I have several times won as
White with the 4-3 queenside pawn advantage.
Walter Schmid had a peak ICCF rating of 2350 from 1995-1996. In recent
years his rating has fallen to 2189.
I was unrated at the time of the game below. Eventually I would be rated over
2000.
These days I am not active in ICCF; my last rating was 2157.
In the game below, I ended up losing on time. Time control was 30 days for
every 10 moves.
I do not remember why I exceeded the time limit.
Sawyer - Schmid, corr ICCF 1978 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 [One thing I liked
about playing 4...Nf6 is that it can also be played vs the Two Knights
Variation move order after 2.Nc3 d5 3.Nf3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Nf6 5.Nxf6+ gxf6
6.d4] 2...d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Nf6 5.Nxf6+ gxf6 6.Nf3 Bf5 [6...Bg4 7.Be2
Qc7 or 7...e6] 7.Bd3 [The main line is 7.c3 e6 8.g3] 7...Bg6 8.0-0 Nd7 [More
popular is 8...e6 but playing Nd7 threatens a possible ...e5 in one move.]
9.Bf4 Qa5 [9...e6] 10.c4 0-0-0 11.Qe2 e6 [11...e5! 12.dxe5 fxe5=] 12.a3 Bg7
13.Rfd1 Rhe8 14.Bd2 Qc7 15.Bc3 e5 16.Bxg6 [Here I did not dare go for
16.dxe5!+/=] 16...exd4 17.Qc2 fxg6 18.Bxd4 Nb6?! [18...Bh6=] 19.a4
White lost on time. 0-1
90 - Blood in Caro-Kann
After missing a chance to defeat John Blood Sr. with my Latvian Gambit, a
year later I chose to defend against his 1.e4 with the Caro-Kann Defence.
Normally after 4.Nxe4, I played the classical 4...Bf5. Sometimes I have

preferred the sharper and riskier 4...Nf6 line, intending 5.Nxf6+ gxf6.
Jeremy Silman wrote a book on this line called "The Dynamic Caro-Kann:
The Bronstein Larsen and the Original Caro Systems" a couple years before
this game was played.
To be aggressive, I tried a throwback to those thrilling days of yesteryear.

The bishop still went to Bf5, but Black also had use of the open g-file.
Black's plan in this line was to castle queenside. I was too slow to castle. That
caused me trouble. I prematurely attacked along the g-file as a base of
operations. This was my original plan, but this time the execution failed
badly.
White found more effective play on the b-file than Black did on the g-file.
John Blood won which reversed my earlier success against him.
Blood - Sawyer, corr USCF 1992 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4
Nf6 5.Nxf6+ gxf6 6.Nf3 Bf5 7.Be2 e6 8.0-0 Qc7 9.c4 Nd7 10.d5 Rg8
[10...0-0-0! 11.Nd4 Be4=] 11.Nh4 Bg6 [11...Be4=] 12.Nxg6 hxg6 13.dxc6
Qxc6 14.Bf4 Ne5 15.Qc2 0-0-0 16.Rad1 Be7 17.Qc3 [17.a3+/-] 17...Nd7!?
[17...Rxd1 18.Rxd1 Qe4=] 18.Bf3 Qc5? 19.b4 Qf5 20.Bxb7+ Kxb7 21.Qf3+
Kb6 22.c5+ Nxc5 23.bxc5+ Bxc5 24.Rb1+ 1-0
91 - Rabeler vs Larsen idea
Following the opening adventures of Bent Larsen, the great Danish
grandmaster, I found myself frequently drawn to his unique theoretical
inventions.
One such idea comes from the Caro-Kann Defence 4.Nxe4 Nf6 5.Nxf6+ gxf6
variation.
This variation was played by both Aron Nimzowitsch (100 years ago) and
Bent Larsen (40 years ago).
A problem occurs for Black when White plays Bf4 early.
Black usually plays Nbd7 and Bd6, however the knight interferes with the
queen's protection of the Bd6.
Larsen had an idea to answer an early Bf4 with 8...Na6!? The knight is
headed toward an eventual Nd5.
This rare move was played in Tal-Larsen, Riga Interzonal 1979. Probably I
saw it in a Chess Informant in 1980 and was happy to give it a try.
In the 1981 ICCF World Cup V postal chess event, I decided to follow
Larsen's idea.
My opponent was E. Rabeler.
I continued my pressure on the kingside, even though White castled

queenside.
I switched focus to the king, won material and White resigned.
Rabeler - Sawyer, corr ICCF 1981 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4
4.Nxe4 Nf6 5.Nxf6+ gxf6 6.Nf3 Bf5 7.Bc4 e6 8.Bf4 Na6!? 9.Bb3 Rg8
10.Qe2 Bd6 11.Bg3 Bg4 12.c3 Nc7 13.0-0-0 Qe7 14.Qe3 0-0-0 15.Rde1
Nd5 16.Bxd5 cxd5 17.Nd2 Bf5 18.f4? [White's position seems very
defensible after 18.Nf3=] 18...Qc7 19.Nb3 [19.Rhf1 Qa5 20.a3 Qa4
threatening mate in 1] 19...a5 20.Nc5 b6 21.Nd3 Qc4 22.Kd2 Qxa2 23.Ra1
Qc4 24.Rhc1 Kd7 0-1
3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Nd7
Black prepares so that the Nf6 can be recaptured if necessary by a knight.
92 - Nixon Resigns - I Draw!
On Thursday night August 8, 1974, President Richard Nixon came on
national television to say that effective the next day, he would resign the
presidency of the United States.
Many of us wanted to watch the announcement, but we were playing in a

chess game. It was the seventh round of the 1974 US Junior Open at Franklin
& Marshall College in Lancaster, Pennsylvania.
In the 5th round on the night before I had been playing Frank Teuton on a
board next to Meeks Vaughan, Jr. who watched me win a nice game in the
same Caro-Kann Defence variation.
In this tournament I scored 3.5 out of 4 as Black in the Caro-Kann picking up

a lot of rating points.
Meeks Vaughan Jr became a USCF Expert and Correspondence Master. I

thought I saw Vaughan visit a tournament in Maine in the early 1970s, but I
would not swear to it. Vaughan has not been active in over-the-board
tournaments since 1991.
Vaughan was rated at least a hundred points above me, but neither of us felt
like playing in this round. Meeks set up an opening trap. When I did not fall
for it, a draw was offered.
Vaughan - Sawyer, US Junior Open (7), 08.08.1974 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5

3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Nd7 5.Qe2 [This is a trap by Max Euwe and others.
Black has two good moves and one lemon.] 5...e6 [Black plays this good
move 40% of the time, including against Euwe. 5...Ndf6 is the most
recommended move allowing a possible 6...Bf5. It is played 50% of the time.
The real lemon is 5...Ngf6?? It has been played 18 times in my database.
Only 14 of those times did White respond with the immediate 6.Nd6# Paul
Keres won one of those games as White.] 6.g3 1/2-1/2
93 - Opening to Endgame
Some variations naturally lead to multiple exchanges so that an ending is
reached shortly after the opening finishes.
That is not to say the game is drawish. If both sides head down the same path,
one or both is probably hoping for victory.
PII233Crafty and I played 29 games with the Caro-Kann Defence 4…Nd7

variation. I drew 5, won this game, and lost the rest.
I learned a lot about 4…Nd7. It is called the Karpov Variation or Smyslov

Variation, depending on what generation you are from.
This game can and did lead to so many exchanges that by move 30 we were
in a level King and Pawn endgame.
On move 34, Black made a seemingly simple pawn exchange that changed
the structure and gave White an easy win.
Black's blunder allowed the White king to invade via the h-file while the
Black king was tied down to holding White's c-pawn.
Sawyer (2405) - PII233Crafty (2853), Internet Chess Club 1998 began 1.d4
d5 2.e4 c6 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 [When I am in a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit
mood, I play 4...f3.] 4...Nd7 5.Bc4 Ngf6 6.Ng5 e6 7.Qe2 Nb6 8.Bd3 [If
8.Bb3 h6 9.N5f3 a5 is the theoretically correct.] 8...h6 9.N5f3 c5 10.dxc5
Bxc5 [This variation has some visual similarities to the Queen's Gambit
Accepted.] 11.Ne5 Nbd7 12.Ngf3 0-0 [Black usually plays 12...Qc7 or
12...Nxe5] 13.0-0 b6 14.Nxd7 Bxd7 15.Ne5 Bd6 16.Nxd7 Qxd7 17.c3 Rad8
18.Bc2 Qc7 19.h3 Bh2+ 20.Kh1 Bf4 21.Bxf4 Qxf4 22.Rad1 Rfe8 23.Rxd8
Rxd8 24.Rd1 Rxd1+ 25.Qxd1 Ne4 26.Bxe4 Qxe4 27.Kg1 Kh7 28.a3 Kg6
29.Qg4+ Qxg4 30.hxg4 f5 31.gxf5+ exf5 32.c4 Kf6 33.f4 g5 34.g3 gxf4?
[Normal play might follow 34...a5 35.b4 Ke6 36.Kf2 Kd6 37.Ke3= when the
two kings are tied to the center or the opponent's pawn majority side.]
35.gxf4 a5 36.b4 Ke6 37.Kg2 b5 38.c5 Kd5 39.Kg3 Kc6 40.Kh4 Kd5
41.Kh5 Kc6 42.Kxh6 axb4 43.axb4 Kd5 44.Kg5 Ke6 45.Kg6 Kd7 46.Kxf5
Ke7 47.Ke5 Kd7 48.f5 Kc6 49.f6 Kd7 50.c6+ Kd8 51.Ke6 Kc7 52.f7 Kxc6
53.f8Q Kc7 54.Qc5+ Kb7 55.Qd6 Ka7 56.Qc6 Kb8 1-0
94 - Kohut Knight Sacrifice
Gregory Kohut and I played several postal chess games in 1977. The first one
was a Caro-Kann Defence Panov Botvinnik Attack.
That game was played in APCT. According to my records, all the other
games were played in Ron’s Postal Chess Club (RPCC).
Greg Kohut and I had five interesting games with no draws.
I chose the Caro-Kann Defence 4…Nd7 variation. That was relatively rare
for me since I usually played 4…Bf5.
I set up a solid defense. All my pieces were developed by move 12.
My intention was to attack queenside and in the center.
Then Gregory Kohut boldly made a daring but unnecessary knight sacrifice
with 19.Nxe6?!
This gave Black good winning chances if he defended correctly.
Ten moves later White resigned.
Kohut (1700) - Sawyer, corr RPCC 1977 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4
4.Nxe4 Nd7 5.Nf3 Ngf6 6.Ng3 e6 7.Bc4 [7.Bd3] 7...Nb6 8.Bb3 [8.Bd3]
8...c5 9.c3 Qc7 [9...cxd4 10.Nxd4 Be7=] 10.dxc5 [White could gain a tempo
is he delayed the capture of c5 for a move and played 10.0-0 Be7
11.dxc5+/=] 10...Bxc5 11.0-0 0-0 12.Qe2 Bd7 13.Bg5 Be7 14.Rad1 Ba4
15.Bxa4 Nxa4 16.Nd4 a6 17.Rfe1 Rad8?! [17...b5 18.Bxf6 Bxf6=] 18.Bc1
[White has a nice shot with 18.Ndf5! exf5 19.Nxf5 Rxd1 20.Nxe7+ Kh8
21.Qxd1 Nxb2 22.Qd4+/-] 18...b5 19.Nxe6?! [This is an unnecessary
sacrifice. Chances were equal after 19.Bg5=] 19...fxe6 20.Qxe6+ Kh8
21.Qxa6 [21.Rxd8 Bxd8 22.Qxa6 Qd7-/+ when Black has a knight for two
pawns.] 21...Bc5 [Better was 21...Rb8-+] 22.Qxb5 [22.Rxd8! Qxd8 23.Qxb5
Ng4 24.Be3 Bxe3 25.fxe3 Qh4 26.Qh5 Qxh5 27.Nxh5 Nxb2-/+ when White
has three isolated pawns against Black's extra knight.] 22...Bxf2+ 23.Kh1
Bxe1 24.Rxe1 Nc5 25.Qe2 Nd3 26.Rf1 Ng4 27.Bg5 Rxf1+ 28.Nxf1 Rf8
29.g3 Ndf2+ 0-1
95 - Teuton Mate in Four
L. Frank Teuton was rated higher at 1910 than most of the 201 players at the
US Junior Open in 1974. It was held in Lancaster, Pennsylvania. In those
days, there were few scholastic events. Most players were rated between
1100 and 2000. Now you find scholastic players rated well over 2000 or well
below 1000.
In 1974 Teuton lived in Maryland. This was near to Lancaster. Some years
ago I enjoyed chatting with him on the Internet Chess Club. As I recall, at
that time he used the ICC handle "FightNFrank". As a young man Teuton
moved to Canada. In New Hampshire in the 1990s Frank played in a couple
tournaments where he posted a USCF master rating.
Teuton was the highest rated player I defeated in the 1970s. Of course, I only
played a few rated tournaments in 1972, 1973, 1974 and 1977. Our Caro-
Kann Defence game was one of the best games I played in my early days. At
the end I announced mate in four. Announced checkmates were common in
the old chess books I read. However, I did not realize that in an actual
tournament, that is considered bad form. I was young and excited. Nowadays
I would just let my moves speak for me.
Teuton (1910) - Sawyer, US Junior Open (5), 07.08.1974 begins 1.e4 c6

2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Nd7 5.Nf3 [The other two lines are 5.Bc4 and
5.Ng5] 5...Ngf6 6.Ng3 e6 7.Bd3 c5 8.c3 b6 9.0-0 Be7 10.Ne5 Bb7 11.Bb5 0-
0 [Black has equalized.] 12.Nc6 Bxc6 13.Bxc6 Rc8 14.Bb5 [14.Bb7 Rc7=]
14...cxd4 15.cxd4 Nd5 16.Re1 Qc7 [Black is better developed. White
decides to attack kingside.] 17.Nh5 N7f6 18.a3 g6 19.Ng3?! [19.Nxf6+
Bxf6=] 19...Rfd8 20.Bg5 Qc2 21.Qf3!? [The position favored Black. White
made a calculated choice to attack rather than head to an inferior ending. Alas
for White, Black defended and counterattacked well for the rest of the game.]
21...Qxb2 22.Ba6 Rc3 23.Be3 Nxe3 24.fxe3 Rxa3 25.Rab1 Qc3 26.Qb7
Rd7 27.Qb8+ Kg7 28.Rbc1 Qb4 29.Bc8 Rd8 30.Qb7 Rc3 31.Bxe6 Rxc1
32.Rxc1 fxe6 33.Rc7 Kf8 34.h3 Nd5 35.Rc6 Qe1+ 36.Nf1 Nxe3 37.Rxe6
Qxf1+ 38.Kh2 [I repeat moves while I work out the checkmate details.]
38...Qf4+ 39.Kh1 Qf1+ 40.Kh2 Qf4+ 41.Kh1 Bd6 42.g3 [Here I announced
a mate in four.] 42...Qf1+ 43.Kh2 Qf2+ 44.Kh1 Qe1+ 45.Kh2 Bxg3# 0-1
96 - Solid Chaney Game
Ron Chaney and I played a lot of games over a 20 year period in American
Postal Chess Tournaments (APCT).
I won more of the early games played by postcard. Chaney won more of the
later games played by email.
Two of our games were in the Caro-Kann Defence. In this game Ronald
Chaney had the Black pieces.
In the first of those games I had Black. There I played 4…Bf5. That game
was played in 1978. It is covered later in this book.
The second Caro-Kann game is given below. Ron Chaney had Black and
chose the solid 4…Nd7.
This was one of the rare games where neither one of us made any serious
mistakes. White attacked with the 5.Ng5 line.
Black found a lesser known line with 7…Be7 that equalized. Black had the
advantage of the two bishops. This changed to a bishop for a knight in the
middlegame.
White had a pawn majority on the queenside. Black had one on the kingside.
The rooks were set to possibly come off the board very soon when a draw
was agreed.
Sawyer (1944) - Chaney (1972), EMQ-3 corr APCT, 08.01.1997 begins 1.e4
c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Nd7 5.Ng5 Ngf6 6.Bd3 e6 7.N1f3 Be7 [The
main line is 7...Bd6=] 8.Qe2 h6 9.Ne4 Nxe4 10.Qxe4 c5 11.0-0 cxd4
12.Qxd4 Bf6 [12...0-0=] 13.Qd6 [13.Qa4 a6 14.c3+/=] 13...Qe7 14.Qxe7+
[White could probe the position further with 14.Qg3!? Nc5 15.Bf4 Nxd3
16.cxd3 Bd7= but not 16...Bxb2? 17.Bd6 Qd8 18.Rab1 Bf6 19.Nd2+/=]
14...Kxe7 15.c3 Nc5 16.Bc2 b6 17.Be3 Ba6 18.Rfe1 Nd3 19.Bxd3 Bxd3
20.Bd4 [20.Rad1=] 20...Bxd4 [20...Rhd8=] 21.Nxd4 Rac8 [21...Ba6!?=]
22.Re3 [22.Rad1=] 22...Ba6 23.Nf5+ Kf6 24.Nd6 Rc7 25.Rd1 g6
[25...Rd8=] 26.Ne4+ [26.Rf3+ Kg7 27.c4 Ra8=] 26...Ke7 27.f3 f5 28.Nf2
Kf6 [28...Rc6=] 29.Ree1 Rhh7 1/2-1/2
97 - Caro-Kann King Caught
I love online chess. I have played on the Internet Chess Club for 20 years.
Most games were set to the faster blitz time controls. Every once in a while I
play a slow game.
My Caro-Kann Defence game vs Beth0 was played at the slow time control
of 45 45. This is far less popular than the 3 0 speed.
We played the main line 4…Nd7 variation that continued 5.Ng5 Ngf6 6.Bd3
e6 7.N1f3 Bd6 8.Qe2 h6 9.Ne4 Nxe4 10.Qxe4. White had more central
control. Black would be okay as long as he completed his development and
castled. Here Black played for an attack with his king was still sitting in the
middle. That was not likely to work out well. Fleeing to the open file proved
to be fatal.
Sawyer (2197) - BethO (1786), ICC 45 45 Internet Chess Club, 17.09.2007

begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Nd7 5.Ng5 Ngf6 6.Bd3 e6
7.N1f3 Bd6 8.Qe2 h6 9.Ne4 Nxe4 10.Qxe4 c5?! [10...Nf6=] 11.0-0 Qf6?!
[11...Nf6 12.Qh4+/=] 12.Re1 [12.Be3+/-] 12...cxd4 13.Nxd4 Bc5? [13...Nc5
14.Bb5+ Kf8 15.Qe3+/=] 14.c3 [14.Be3+/-] 14...Bb6 15.Be3 Nc5 16.Bb5+
Kd8? [Fleeing to the open file is fatal. 16...Kf8 17.Qc2+/-] 17.Qc2 [Or
17.Nxe6+! fxe6 18.Rad1+ Ke7 19.Qc4+-] 17...e5 18.Nb3 [18.Rad1+-]
18...Bd7 19.Rad1 Kc7 20.Bxd7 [20.Bxc5 Bxb5 21.Bd6+ Kc8 22.Bxe5+-]
20...Nxd7 21.Qe4 Rad8 22.h3 Bxe3 23.Qxe3 Kb8 24.Nc5 [24.Rd5+/-]
24...Nxc5 25.Qxc5 Rxd1 26.Rxd1 Rc8 27.Qd5 Rc7 [27...a6 28.a4 g5
29.c4+/=] 28.Re1 Qf5 [28...Qg5 29.h4 Qxh4 30.Qxe5+/-] 29.Rxe5 Qb1+?
[With this check Black loses a rook. He would only be a pawn down if he
played 29...Qd7 30.Qe4+/-] 30.Kh2 a6 31.Qd6 [White had a mate in 10
beginning with 31.Re8+ Rc8 32.Qe5+ Ka7 33.Rxc8 Qg6 34.Qb8+ Kb6
35.Qc7+ Ka7 36.Qd8 Qd6+ 37.Qxd6 a5 38.Qc7 Ka6 39.Ra8+ Kb5
40.Rxa5#] 31...Qxb2 32.Re8+ Ka7 33.Qxc7 Qxf2 34.Re7 [White had a mate
in eleven beginning with 34.Qb8+ Kb6 35.Re7 Qc5 36.Rxb7+ Kc6 37.Rc7+
Kd5 38.Qa8+ Kd6 39.Qd8+ Ke6 40.Rxc5 f5 41.Rc6+ Kf7 42.Qc8 g6
43.Qb7+ Kg8 44.Rc8#] 34...Qb6 35.Qxb6+ Kxb6 36.Rxf7 g5 37.Rf6+ Ka5
38.Rxh6 Kb5 39.Rh5 Kc4 40.Rxg5 Kxc3 41.h4 b5 42.h5 Kb2 43.h6 Kxa2
44.h7 Kb3 45.h8Q Kc4 46.Rg3 a5 47.Qh4+ Kd5 48.Rg5+ Kc6 49.Qh6+
Kd7 50.Rg7+ Ke8 51.Qh8# 1-0
98 - Baffo vs Sawyer 4...Nd7
My correspondence adventures with Jeffrey Baffo continue with a game from
the solid Caro-Kann Defence 4...Nd7 variation. Typically all the pieces
remain on the board while both sides complete their development. This
allows the better players flexibility in combining tactics and strategy to
choose where to attack, what pawns to push, which pieces to exchange and
whether or not to play for a middlegame or endgame win.
The line has been called the Flohr Variation, Smyslov Variation or Petrosian
Variation. Each of those grandmasters played it as Black about 20 times in
known games.
Anatoly Karpov played it at least 120 times adding new ideas, making it the
Karpov Variation. In his “The Caro-Kann, Move by Move” book, Cyrus
Lakdawala recommends this variation.
In the 1974 US Junior Open, I won a nice game with 4...Nd7 where I
announced mate in four as Black vs Frank Teuton. The next night just after I
finished yet another game in this same line, Richard Nixon announced his
resignation, but the President was not playing chess.
Nowadays I spend more time looking for attacking lines against the Caro-
Kann Defence as White. In my early years I preferred Black. In this game,
Jeff tried the trendy 5.Ng5 which had been well known for about a decade at
that time. We both castled queenside and reached an even pawn ending when
a draw was agreed.
c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Nd7 5.Ng5 [Other popular lines include
5.Bc4 Ngf6 6.Ng5 e6 7.Qe2 Nb6= and 5.Nf3 Ngf6 6.Nxf6+ Nxf6 7.Bc4
Bf5=] 5...Ngf6 6.Bd3 [6.Bc4 e6 7.Qe2 Nb6=] 6...e6 7.N1f3 Bd6 8.Qe2 h6
9.Ne4 Nxe4 10.Qxe4 Nf6 11.Qe2 Qc7 12.Bd2 b6 13.0-0-0 Bb7 14.Rhe1
[14.Ne5 c5 15.Bb5+ Ke7=] 14...0-0-0 [14...0-0= is also good.] 15.Ba6 b5
16.Bxb7+ Kxb7 17.Kb1 Ka8 18.Ne5 [White usually plays 18.Rc1 or
18.Bc1] 18...Bxe5 19.dxe5 Nd7 [19...Nd5] 20.f4 Nb6 21.Ba5 Rxd1+
22.Rxd1 Rd8 23.Rd3 Rxd3 24.Qxd3 Qd7 25.Bxb6 Qxd3 26.cxd3 axb6
27.Kc2 Kb7 28.Kc3= 1/2-1/2
Book 4 – Chapter 5 – Classical 4.Nxe4 Bf5
Various Alternatives
Black develops the bishop and attacks the central knight.
99 - Castling Opposite Sides
In August of 1974 the US Junior Open was held at Franklin & Marshall
College in Lancaster, Pennsylvania. The night before I finished a tournament
in Harrisburg scoring about 2-3. I think that was the only time I had a losing
record in my early days.
Monday morning I walked to the bus station in Harrisburg, only to find that
there was also a passenger train going from Harrisburg to Lancaster. This was
new to me. In Maine where I grew up, trains were for freight, not people. But
the cost of the train was much cheaper than the bus, so... all aboard! Once in
Lancaster, I walked to Franklin & Marshall College. There I stayed in a dorm
room. It was Spartan, but we were young and it was cheap.
The US Junior Open was a Swiss event with only one section of 201 players.
I was paired down in the first round and expected to win vs Paul Eggert.
Later I moved to Pennsylvania. I think I met Paul in the early 1980s at a
chess event, although we did not face each other. I played a classical Caro-
Kann Defence 4.Nxe4 Bf5. Then I castled opposite sides and attacked. It
worked nicely.
Eggert - Sawyer, US Junior Open (1), 05.08.1974 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5

3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Bf5 5.Bd3 Nd7!? [Black can take the d-pawn 5...Qxd4!
and White does not have enough.] 6.Nf3 Ngf6 7.Nxf6+ Nxf6 8.Bxf5 Qa5+
9.Bd2 Qxf5 10.0-0 e6 11.c3 Bd6 [I decided to attack the kingside.] 12.h3
Nd5 13.b3 h5 14.c4 Nf4 15.Bxf4 Bxf4 16.Qe2 g5 17.g3 Bc7 [Today I would
play 17...Qxh3 18.gxf4 gxf4-+] 18.Kg2 g4 19.Ng1 [Better is 19.hxg4 hxg4
20.Ne5 Bxe5 21.dxe5 0-0-0=/+] 19...0-0-0 20.Rad1 gxh3+ 21.Nxh3 Rdg8
22.Qf3 Qc2 23.Kg1 Rg7!? [Black attack continues with 23...Qg6! 24.Kg2
h4-+] 24.a4? [Now Black is lost. White could try to make something happen
with 24.d5 exd5 25.cxd5] 24...Rhg8 25.Rc1 Qb2 26.Rc3 h4 27.Kh2? hxg3+
28.Qxg3 Bxg3+ 29.Rxg3 Rxg3 0-1
100 - 5.Nc5 vs PII233Crafty
Bobby Fischer wrote that he played 5.Nc5 several times in simuls in the
1960s. Sometimes I try that line myself. White gets no advantage, except it
might be a surprise weapon vs humans.
I faced the Caro-Kann Defence from PII233Crafty in 1998. Then I was rated
in the 2400s in blitz on the Internet Chess Club. Here is a sample of some of
my draws vs the high rated PII233Crafty chess engine. Later I also drew
duckbreath in the same line.
Sawyer (2412) - PII233Crafty (2726), ICC 5 0 Internet Chess Club,

13.11.1998 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e4 c6 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Bf5 5.Nc5 b6 [The
main alternative was played vs me by Jack Clauser. After 5...e5 6.Nxb7 Qe7
(This was the old move. Nowadays almost everyone plays 6...Qb6=) 7.Na5
exd4+ 8.Be2 Qb4+ 9.Bd2 Qxb2 10.Bd3 (10.Rc1+/=) 10...Bxd3 11.cxd3+/=
1-0 in 22. Sawyer - Clauser, corr 1994] 6.Nb3 Nf6 [Another good line for
Black is 6...e6 7.Nf3 Nd7 (7...Bd6=) 8.Be3 Qc7 9.Bd3 Bxd3 10.Qxd3 Ngf6
11.0-0 c5 12.dxc5 Nxc5 13.Nxc5 Bxc5 14.Bxc5 Qxc5 15.Rad1 0-0=. The
game position was equal, but I was outplayed. I blundered on move 33. Then
I dragged the game out until mate. I am not proud of the way I handled it. 1-0
in 69. Pekelder - Sawyer, corr APCT 1978] 7.Nf3 e6 8.Bd3 Bb4+ 9.c3 Bxd3
[I drew three other games that continued 9...Bd6 10.Bxf5 exf5 11.0-0 0-0
12.Bg5 h6 13.Bxf6 Qxf6 14.Re1+/= White has a better pawn structure, but
Black has kingside attack chances. Game drawn by repetition 1/2-1/2 in 91.
Sawyer - PII233Crafty, Internet Chess Club 1998] 10.Qxd3 Bd6 11.0-0
[11.Bg5 Nbd7 12.Nbd2 Qc7 13.0-0 0-0 14.Rad1=] 11...0-0 12.Re1 Nbd7
13.Bg5 Qc7 14.Bh4 Rae8 15.Bg3 [15.Nbd2 e5 16.Bxf6 Nxf6 17.dxe5 Bxe5
18.Nc4=] 15...Bxg3 16.hxg3 e5 17.dxe5 Nxe5 18.Nxe5 Rxe5 19.Rxe5 Qxe5
20.Rd1 Re8 21.Nd4 Qd5 22.c4 Qd6 23.Nf3 Qxd3 24.Rxd3 Kf8 25.Kf1 c5
26.b3 g6 27.Nd2 Re6 28.f3 Ke7 29.Kf2 h5 30.Re3 Nd7 31.Rxe6+ Kxe6
32.Ke3 Nb8 33.Ne4 Nc6 34.Nc3 Ke5 35.Nd5 Nd4 36.Ne7 Nf5+ 37.Nxf5
Kxf5 38.Kf2!? a6 [This is a wasted tempo when you may be trying to
achieve zugzwang. 38...Ke5 39.Ke3 g5-/+] 39.a3 [This costs a tempo. White
should try 39.Ke3 g5 40.Kd3 Ke5 41.Ke3=] 39...Ke6 40.Ke3 Ke5 41.Kd3 f6
[41...g5-/+] 42.Ke3 Kf5 43.Kf2 Ke6 44.Ke3 Ke5 45.Kd3 a5 46.Ke3 Kf5
47.Ke2 Ke5 48.Ke3 Kf5 49.Ke2 Ke5 50.Ke3 Game drawn by repetition 1/2-
1/2
101 - Bob Davis Caro-Kann
I played a Caro-Kann Defence against Bob Davis in our four game postal
chess match in Ron's Postal Chess Club.
As I recall, Bob Davis lived somewhere in New England. I lived in Dayton,

Tennessee, the home town of Tom Purser of BDG fame.
Back in the 1970s, I had never heard of Tom Purser, and I had never faced a
The game below was officially the second game of the match. After I won
two games, we agreed to draws in the other games to save postage, all games
being simultaneously played on the same postcard.
After several exchanges, this Classical Caro-Kann game was pretty drawish
anyway with its bishops of opposite color.
Our other games consisted of a Vienna Game, a Benko Gambit, and an Albin
Counter Gambit.
That last one was published by Anders Tejler in his Gambiteer column of the
monthly APCT News Bulletin.
Back then I was just beginning to get a taste for gambits, but mostly I was too
chicken to sacrifice anything.
Davis (1600) - Sawyer, corr RPCC (2), 24.06.1977 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5
3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Bf5 5.Ng3 Bg6 6.Nh3 e6 7.Nf4 Bd6 [7...Qc7=] 8.Nxg6
[8.Ngh5!?] 8...hxg6 9.Be3 Qc7 10.Qf3 Nf6 11.0-0-0 Nbd7 12.Ne4 Nxe4
13.Qxe4 Nf6 14.Qf3 Nd5 15.Bc4 Nxe3 16.fxe3 Rxh2 [16...0-0-0=] 17.e4
[17.Rxh2! Bxh2 18.Rf1 Bd6 19.e4+/=] 17...Bf4+ 18.Kb1 Rxh1 19.Rxh1
Bh6 [19...0-0-0 20.c3 Bh6=/+] 20.Rf1 Qe7 21.Qg3 [21.d5! 0-0-0 22.dxc6
bxc6 23.Qb3 Kc7=] 21...0-0-0 22.Qc3 Qg5 [22...Kb8=/+] 23.g3 [23.d5!=]
23...Qe3 24.Qxe3 Bxe3 25.Rxf7 Rxd4 26.Bxe6+ Kd8 27.a3 Rxe4 28.Bh3
Re7 29.Rf8+ Re8 30.Rf7 1/2-1/2
102 - Risky Play vs Pirtle
Many years ago I played a Caro-Kann Defence in postal chess vs Ralph
Booney Pirtle (1924-2003) of Cordova, Alaska. Pirtle spent most of his life in
that small town far away, but as long as there was mail, there was
correspondence chess.
The USCF listed an obituary of Ralph Pirtle. They noted that he grew up in
Arizona and California. Ralph joined the US Navy at age 17 and fought in the
Philippines in World War II.
Ralph Pirtle earned a degree in Montana. He worked for the Idaho Fish and
Game Department. In 1959 Pirtle took a job with the Alaska Department of
Fish and Game as a biologist.
At that time I played the Caro-Kann Defence to attack kingside. Often White
castled kingside, so that meant I castled queenside. Generally it was much
safer for Black to castle kingside.
Ralph Pirtle was a very friendly opponent. He was getting ready to retire in
1980. Maybe that influenced his willingness to draw.
Pirtle (1962) - Sawyer (2000), corr APCT 1979 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5
3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Bf5 5.Ng3 Bg6 6.Nf3 Nd7 7.Bg5!? h6 8.Bf4 e6 [Or
8...Qa5+ 9.c3 Ngf6 10.Bd3 Bxd3 11.Qxd3 e6 12.0-0 Be7=] 9.Bd3 Bxd3
10.Qxd3 Ngf6 11.0-0 Nd5!? [This fit in with my strategy to play Qc7 and 0-
0-0 as Black. Certainly playable was 11...Be7=] 12.Bd2 Qc7 13.Rfe1 Be7
14.c4 N5f6 15.Qe3 [15.Qc2 Rc8=] 15...0-0-0 [It would be much safer for
Black to play 15...0-0 16.Rad1=] 16.b4 g5?! 17.d5 [17.Qe2 Kb8 18.Bc3+/=]
17...g4?! [At least Black is consistent. White also stands better after 17...cxd5
18.cxd5 Nxd5 19.Qxa7 Bxb4 20.Rac1 Bc5 21.Qa8+ Qb8 22.Qa4+/-] 18.dxe6
gxf3 19.exd7+ Rxd7 20.gxf3 [White misses his best shot. 20.Bc3 Rhd8
21.Be5 Qb6 22.Qxf3+-] 20...Rhd8 21.Bc3 Ng8?! [Now White will be up two
pawns. Black might have been wiser to mix things up with 21...Rd3 22.Qxe7
Qxe7 23.Rxe7 Rxc3 24.Rxf7 Nd7 25.f4 Rxc4 26.a3+/=] 22.Qxa7 Rd3
23.Be5 Bd6 24.Bxd6 Qxd6 25.Ne4 Qb8 26.Qc5 [Or 26.Qa4+-] 26...Qc7
27.Qf5+ [The attack would be very difficult to defend after 27.b5 cxb5
28.Qxb5 Rxf3 29.Rad1 Rfd3 30.Rxd3 Rxd3 31.c5 Rd5 32.Nd6+ Qxd6
33.Re8+ Qd8 34.Rxd8+ Rxd8 35.c6+-] 27...Qd7+- Draw agreed. 1/2-1/2
103 - Breaking French Wall
Throughout the 1970s, I played the Caro-Kann Defence almost exclusively vs
1.e4. It was Round 3 of a chess tournament at Crossville, Tennessee on July
16, 1977.
I played the Classical Caro-Kann Defence variation vs French Wall who was
rated about 300 points below me. In fact there were only two players in this
event who were rated above me.
Both got knocked off by lower rated players in the first 3 rounds. So, after
this game I was 3-0.
This was the first time my wife had attended a chess tournament. She pointed
out that I acted nervous. She said I fidgeted during the games.
Well, in my younger years, I was nervous! Nowadays, I am calmer when I

play. I do not have the energy to wiggle at all.
I win less frequently in my old age, but now that is also because my
opponents are much stronger.
Wall - Sawyer, Crossville, TN (3), 16.07.1977 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3

dxe4 4.Nxe4 Bf5 5.Ng3 Bg6 6.Nf3 Nd7 7.Bf4 [The main line is 7.h4 h6 8.h5
Bh7 9.Bd3 Bxd3 10.Qxd3] 7...e6 8.Bd3 Ngf6 9.0-0 Be7 10.Re1 0-0 11.Bxg6
hxg6 12.Qd2 [12.c4 is more aggressive.] 12...Qb6 13.c3 Rfd8 14.Qc2 c5
15.Rad1 cxd4 16.Nxd4 [16.Rxd4=] 16...Nd5 17.Be3?! Nxe3 18.Rxe3 Nf6
19.Nge2 Rac8 20.Nf3? [White goes from a little trouble after 20.h3 Bc5=/+
to a lot of trouble.] 20...Ng4 21.Rxd8+ Rxd8 22.Rd3 Rxd3 23.Qxd3 Qxf2+
24.Kh1 Qf1+ 0-1
104 - First Smoking Room
In the winter of 1973-74, I found the Caro-Kann Defence. I was reading the
books by I.A. Horowitz and Chess Digest. The whole opening made sense to
me. I could bypass the 1.e4 e5 fireworks and go to the endgame which I
loved.
In those days, chess players smoked cigarettes at tournaments. Most did not
want to play in a smoke-filled room. Tournaments were either "NS" (No
Smoking) or "LS" (Limited smoking). This tournament was played in
Lewiston or Waterville, Maine. It had too rooms. The crowded room was No
Smoking. Neither I nor my opponent smoked. We chose to play in the
Smoking room to enjoy the quiet atmosphere. Hardly anyone in there was
actually smoking anyway. My opponent was a Mr. D. Nelson. I think he was
in his 30s or 40s. His first name was probably either Dennis, Donald or
David, but it might have been something else. His rating was about 1650.
Here I got my first Caro-Kann win.
Nelson - Sawyer, Lewiston, ME (4), 10.02.1974 begins 1.e4 c6 [Caro-Kann

Defence.] 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 [Main Line.] 3...dxe4 4.Nxe4 Bf5 [Later in the year
1974, I would add to my repertoire 4...Nd7 which is the old Smyslov
Variation.] 5.Ng3 Bg6 6.Nf3 [This normal development move has always
been popular. The sharper main line is 6.h4 h6 7.Nf3 Nd7 8.h5 Bh7 9.Bd3
Bxd3 10.Qxd3 but that was not so well known by club players back in 1974.]
6...Nd7 7.Bd3 Bxd3 8.Qxd3 Qc7 9.0-0 e6 10.Re1 0-0-0 11.Ne4 Nc5
12.Qc4?! [A possible improvement is 12.Nxc5 Bxc5 13.Bd2 Nf6 14.b4 Be7
15.c4+/=] 12...Nxe4 13.Rxe4 Nf6 14.Bf4 [White uses the temporary location
of the Re4 to activate his bishop.] 14...Bd6 15.Bxd6 Rxd6 16.Re2 h6 17.Ne5
g5 [The outpost Ne5 is very good against the Caro-Kann. Black cannot
exchange knights with 17...Nd7? due to 18.Nxf7 forking the rooks.
Therefore, since we castled opposite sides, I started pushing my kingside
pawns.] 18.c3 h5 19.a4 Ng4 20.b4 Nxe5 21.Rxe5 Rd5 [Protecting g5 via x-
ray.] 22.Rae1 Rhd8 23.g3 a5 24.Rxd5 cxd5 [24...Rxd5=] 25.Qxc7+ [White
hopes to outplay me in an equal endgame. If he wanted to play for more, he
could try 25.Qb3+/=] 25...Kxc7 26.b5? [26.bxa5 Rd6=] 26...Kd6 27.Ra1
Rc8 28.Kg2? [White forgot that he left c3 en prise. If 28.Ra3 e5-/+]
28...Rxc3 29.Kf1 Rc4 30.Ke2 Rxd4 31.Ke3 e5 32.f3 f5 33.h3 b6 34.Ra2
Kc5 35.Ra3 Kb4 36.Ra1 Kb3 0-1
105 - Caro-Kann Albin Attack
Confidence is a tricky thing. Andrew Carnegie commissioned Napoleon Hill
to interview the most successful people in the world to develop a philosophy
of success. Hill proved this truth. The way you think will greatly determine
your success in life.
That truth applies to chess on two levels. On the lower level your thought
process will determine whether you find good moves or miss them.
On the higher level your belief in your ability to win will influence how hard
you work to make your efforts succeed. Your attitude determines your
altitude.
Players who give up on an opening, or give up playing for a win, or give up

studying the game, or give up playing at all will not be winners in chess and
maybe not in life either.
I believed in the Caro-Kann Defence. Why? I believed I could win games by

castling opposite sides and assaulting my opponent’s king. I believed this to
be true, no matter how solid the opening.
I demonstrated this against a young Harvey C. Roys. Later Roys became a

strong correspondence master, but we were young.
White chose a good and solid approach to castle kingside. Thus my belief in
opposite side castling led me to go queenside and attack. Against Harvey
Roys, Black obtained a winning attack that somewhat resembled a successful
Albin-Counter Gambit. Later I learned that there were easier ways to attack
than 1…c6.
Roys - Sawyer, corr APCT 77SC-11, 11.1977 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3
dxe4 4.Nxe4 Bf5 5.Ng3 Bg6 6.Nf3 Nd7 7.Bd3 e6 8.0-0 [8.Bf4 Qa5+ 9.c3
Ngf6=] 8...Ngf6 9.Re1 [9.Bxg6 hxg6 10.c4=] 9...Bd6 10.Bg5 [10.Nf5 Bxf5
11.Bxf5 0-0 12.Bd3 c5 13.c3=] 10...Qc7 [10...0-0= is a good and solid
approach.] 11.Nf1 0-0-0 12.h3 Bxd3 13.Qxd3 h6 14.Be3 g5 15.g3 [15.N1d2
Rhg8 16.Nc4 g4 17.hxg4 Nxg4 18.Nxd6+ Qxd6=] 15...g4 16.hxg4 Nxg4
17.N3h2 [17.Bd2!=] 17...Nxh2!? [17...Nxe3=/+] 18.Nxh2? Rhg8!? [More
logical is 18...Rdg8!-/+] 19.Nf1 [19.Kh1 Nc5-/+] 19...h5! 0-1
106 - Acor Wins vs Caro-Kann
I met Corey Acor in the final round of the 2009 Southern Open. Corey Acor
is a master who twice beat my London System with his King’s Indian
Defence. This time Acor defeated my Caro-Kann Defence after I missed a
good shot.
White delayed the h4 pawn push for a few moves to line up on e6 with Bc4
and Qe2. Corey was outplaying me when all of a sudden there appeared the
opportunity for me to play a brilliant sacrificial attack.
The problem was that I lost the confidence that I once had 30 years ago when
I played Harvey Roys. I glanced at the sacrifice and told myself, “That won’t
work.” I did not look deep enough at the combination against Acor. I was
discouraged about the trend of the game. This was a final round game and I
was physically tired.
Pretty much I gave up on my chances. I stopped trying. My attitude cost me a

chance at brilliance with 20…Nxc2! The lesson is one must stay focused to
achieve the best results.
Acor (2350) - Sawyer (1943), Southern Open (5), 02.08.2009 begins 1.e4 c6
2.d4 d5 3.Nd2 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Bf5 5.Ng3 Bg6 6.Nf3 Nd7 7.Bc4 e6 8.h4 h6
9.Qe2 Ngf6 [9...Bd6=] 10.Ne5 Nxe5 11.dxe5 Nd5 12.a3 Be7 13.h5 Bh7
14.Qg4 Rg8 15.Bb3 Qc7 16.f4 0-0-0 17.Bd2 Qb6 18.Qf3 Bc5 19.0-0-0 Ne3
20.Rde1 Nf5 [20...Nxc2! 21.Bxc2 Bxc2 22.Kxc2 Rxd2+ 23.Kxd2 Qxb2+
24.Kd3 Rd8+ 25.Kc4 (25.Qd5 Rxd5+ 26.Kc4 b5#) 25...Rd4+ 26.Kxc5 Qb6#]
21.Nxf5 Bxf5 22.g4 Bh7 23.f5 Rge8 24.Rh2 Kb8 25.f6 g5 26.hxg6 Bxg6
27.Rxh6 Rd4 28.Rxg6 Rxd2 [28...fxg6 29.f7+-] 29.Kxd2 fxg6 30.f7 Rd8+
31.Kc1 Bf2 32.f8Q Bxe1 33.Q8f4 Qg1 34.Qf1 1-0
5.Ng3 Bg6 6.h4
The point of 6.h4 is to limit the expansion of Black kingside pawn majority.
107 - Andreu 6.h4 without h5
The main line Caro-Kann Defence typically continues 4.Nxe4 Bf5 5.Ng3
Bg6 6.h4 h6. Usually White plays h4-h5 on move 7 or 8.
The resulting pawn structure limits Black’s endgame possibilities. The

problem is h5 can also be difficult for White to defend. Half a center ago
Bobby Fischer tried 6.h4 without pushing to h5 in his US Championship
game vs Steinmeyer.
If White plays 6.h4 h6 7.Nh3 (or 7.Ne2), then he gains time with 8.Nf4 due
to the threat of 9.Nxg6. Black would not want to play 9…fxg6 so he retreats
with 8…Bh7. Mikhail Tal developed a sacrificial idea of Nf4, Bc4 and Nxe6.
Javier Andreu followed Tal - Botvinnik in our APCT postal game. I found an
innovation over Botvinnik with 12…Bxg3. I may have found this idea in a
book somewhere. Black captured the bishop with 17…Nxe4. If White
recaptures, Black has a perpetual check.
Andreu (2100) - Sawyer (2003), corr APCT Q-171 08.1993 begins 1.e4 c6
2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Bf5 5.Ng3 Bg6 6.h4 h6 7.Nh3 [7.Nf3 Nd7
8.Bd3 Bxd3 9.Qxd3 e6 10.Bd2 Ngf6 11.c4 Qc7 12.0-0-0 0-0-0 13.Bc3 Qf4+
14.Kb1 Nc5 15.Qc2 Nce4 16.Ne5 Nxf2 17.Rdf1 1-0 Fischer - Steinmeyer,
US Championship 1963] 7...Nf6 [7...e6 8.Nf4 Bh7 9.Bc4 Nf6 transposes]
8.Nf4 Bh7 9.Bc4 e6 10.0-0 [An early example of this line was 10.Qe2 Bd6
11.0-0 0-0 12.c3 1/2-1/2 in 31. Tartakower - Flohr, Folkestone ol 1933]
10...Bd6 11.Nxe6 [Tal played this sacrifice in the 1960 World Championship
match.] 11...fxe6 12.Bxe6 Bxg3 [12...Qc7 13.Nh5 (13.Re1 Nbd7 14.Bg8+
Kf8 15.Bxh7 Rxh7 16.Nf5 g6 17.Bxh6+ Kg8 18.Nxd6 Qxd6 19.Bg5= Tal -
Botvinnik, World Championship 1960. Botvinnik as Black won this game,
but Tal won the match.) 13...Rf8 14.c4 Bg6 15.Ng3 Nbd7 16.c5 Bxg3
17.fxg3 Nd5 18.Re1 0-0-0 19.Qg4 1/2-1/2 in 56. Tal - Vukic, Bugojno 1978]
13.fxg3 Qe7 14.Re1 Be4 15.Bf5 0-0 16.g4 Qf7 17.Bxe4 Nxe4 1/2-1/2
108 - Jeffrey Baffo 4.Nxe4 Bf5
I have played the Caro-Kann Defence as Black off and on for over 40 years.
Usually I prefer to defend with the Classical 4.Nxe4 Bf5 line.
In 1996 Jeffrey Baffo played this same line against me. How do you meet
your own opening when it is played against you? Often I struggle to find any
real advantage as White vs the Caro-Kann Defence.
My choice has been one of three different approaches as White.
First is 4.f3 or 4.Bc4 to gambit a pawn Blackmar-Diemer Gambit style.
Second is 3.exd5 cxd5 4.Bd3 Nc6 5.c3 Nf6 6.Bf4 like a London System.
Third is 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 hoping to outplay my opponent in Main Lines.
Below I chose this third idea and followed the Boris Spassky 6.h4 attack with
the strategy of restricting Black's kingside by 8.h5. The old set-up for Black
is to castle queenside.
Jeffrey Baffo played the more dynamic castling opposite sides favored by
Bent Larsen and others. As Black I have played them both many times, but
often chose the old school 10...Qc7 with ...0-0-0 because it was more
comfortable for me.
c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Bf5 5.Ng3 Bg6 6.h4 [6.Nf3] 6...h6 7.Nf3 Nf6
8.h5 Bh7 9.Bd3 Bxd3 10.Qxd3 e6 11.Bd2 Be7 12.0-0-0 0-0 13.Kb1 Nbd7
14.Ne4 Nxe4 15.Qxe4 Nf6 16.Qe2 Qd5 17.Qe5 Rfd8 18.Be3 Bd6 19.Qxd5
Nxd5 20.Bc1 Nf6 21.Ng1 [Another option is 21.Ne5 Bxe5 22.dxe5 Ng4=]
21...c5 [Maybe 21...Bc7] 22.f3 [22.Ne2! cxd4 23.Rxd4 Rac8 24.f3 e5=]
22...cxd4 [22...Be5=+] 23.Rxd4 e5 24.Rd3 Bc5 25.Ne2 Rxd3 26.cxd3 Rd8
27.Kc2 Nd5 28.a3 Be3 29.g4 Bf2 30.Nc3 a6 [Or 30...Rc8=] 31.Nxd5 Rxd5
32.Bd2 f6 33.Bc3 Kf7 34.Rf1 Be3 35.Re1 Bc5 36.Re4 g5 37.b4 Bd4 1/2-1/2
109 - Heung Classical Caro
My opponent was 11 year old Christopher Heung. His rating at the time of
this game was 1864. A few weeks later Christopher raised his rating another
150 points to an Expert. He made very consistent progress. Soon Heung
became a USCF rated master.
Christopher Heung was a solid player who had many draws vs higher rated
players. Once Christopher told me that he would be the top player in the state
of Florida for his age if it were not for Ray Robson (who was the World
Under-12 champion at age 10).
Later Heung won the National 6th Grade Championship. Robson had won the
5th Grade Championship the previous year, but Ray Robson chose not play in
the 6th grade event.
Our final position looked drawn to me. I was tired. This was the fourth round
in the first event I had played in eight months. I will need to have more
energy to compete with all these kids. My age was the same as all four of my
opponents put together!
Heung - Sawyer, FL State Championship (4), 03.09.2006 begins 1.e4 c6 [In

1974, I won my first tournament Caro-Kann Defence beating several players
rated above me, usually in an endgame. When I began playing it, my rated
jumped quickly from about 1620 to 1820.] 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Bf5 [I
had wins with this Classical Variation and with both 4...Nd7 and 4...Nf6 in
tournament play from the old days.] 5.Ng3 Bg6 6.h4 h6 7.Nf3 Nd7 8.h5 Bh7
9.Bd3 Bxd3 10.Qxd3 e6 [10...Qc7 has always been my choice in tournament
play in the past. Chris' mother spoke to me about this line after the game,
saying that she thought 10...Qc7 was more solid and 10...e6 more dynamic.
She is right of course. Now there is a chess mother.] 11.Bf4 Ngf6 12.0-0-0
Be7 [So far so book.] 13.c4 0-0 [13...b5! The recommended line is to gambit
this pawn.] 14.Ne4 Nxe4 15.Qxe4 Nf6 16.Qe2 Re8 17.Ne5 Rc8 [17...Qa5!?]
18.Kb1 c5 19.dxc5 Qa5 20.g4 Qxc5 21.g5 hxg5 22.Bxg5 Ng4!? [I love to
find tactical solutions this days. Why in the world am I playing the Caro-
Kann? Force of habit, I guess.] 23.Bxe7 Qxe5 24.Qxg4 Rxe7 25.Rd4
[Christopher thought about 25.h6!? but said he could not find any concrete
advantage.] 25...Qf5+ 26.Qxf5 exf5 27.Rhd1 Kh7 28.Rf4 Kh6 29.Rxf5
Rxc4 1/2-1/2
110 - Battle vs Buckingham
William A. Buckingham of Pennsylvania played correspondence chess for
over 30 years.
As I recall he lived in a small town area in north central Pennsylvania just

south of the New York state line.
He played the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit from either side of the board in the
early 1960s. Some of those games appear in books.
The name William Buckingham is popular and sometimes famous in history.

Others with that name have also played chess.
I played Bill Buckingham a few times in both postal and email chess. He was
a very friendly player.
Here we played a Caro-Kann Defence. We both seemed to be too eager to

exchange queens and rush toward an endgame.
I appeared to be tired and I probably was. I think I should have tried harder to
win as White. Alas this game was from 1996, the year I most severely
overbooked my email chess load.
In 1997 I switched to blitz chess. I have played about 50,000 blitz games in
the past 20 years.
Sawyer (1960) - Buckingham (1900), EMQ-2 corr APCT 13.08.1996 begins

1.d4 c6 2.e4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Bf5 5.Ng3 Bg6 6.h4 h6 7.Nf3 Nd7 8.h5
Bh7 9.Bd3 Bxd3 10.Qxd3 e6 11.Bf4 Ngf6 12.0-0-0 Be7 13.Ne5 [13.Kb1 0-
0=] 13...Nxe5 [13...0-0 14.Kb1 Nxe5=] 14.Bxe5 [14.dxe5 Qxd3 15.Rxd3
Nd5 16.Bd2 0-0-0=] 14...Qd5 15.Qb3 [15.Kb1 0-0=, but not 15...Qxg2?
16.f3!+-] 15...Qxb3 16.axb3 0-0 17.Bxf6 Bxf6 18.Ne4 Be7 19.c3 Rfd8 20.f3
Rd5 21.g4 Rad8 22.Nf2 c5 23.dxc5 Rxd1+ 24.Rxd1 Rxd1+ 25.Kxd1 Bxc5
26.Nd3 Bd6 27.c4 Kf8 28.b4 Ke8 29.b5 b6 30.b4 Ke7 31.Kd2 Kf6 32.Ke3
g6 33.hxg6 fxg6 34.c5 bxc5 [Another possible draw is to sit tight for a
moment and then push pawns with 34...Bc7 35.f4 h5 36.Kf3 bxc5 37.bxc5
e5=] 35.bxc5 Bc7 36.Nb4 Bh2 37.Nd3 [37.Ke4 Bg1 38.Nd3+/=] 37...Bc7
38.Nb4 1/2-1/2
111 - Shafkat Simple Caro
"Shafkat" is a rare name in the USA. Probably the best known is the
aerospace engineer Shafkat Chowdhury who worked on software projects for
the American space industry.
I had the privilege of touring two major NASA facilities: the Johnson Space
Center in Houston, Texas and the Kennedy Space Center in Cape Canaveral,
Florida.
My ICC opponent "Shafkat" below probably has no connection to the space

industry. Who knows?
White played the main line of Caro-Kann Defence 10.Qxd3 Qc7. Nowadays
10.Qxd3 e6 is very common. I play that too.
However, I have played 10.Qxd3 Qc7 since 1974, so I am more comfortable

there. The point of 10...Qc7 is to prevent 11.Bf4 and prepare ...0-0-0.
Simple classical development gives Black equality. White has to do most of

the creative thinking. In a 3 0 blitz game, White can go quickly down in time
or overplay the position.
Here White blundered the Exchange with 19.g3? Then Black just swapped
into a won ending.
Shafkat - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 19.03.2013 begins 1.e4 c6

2.d4 d5 3.Nd2 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Bf5 5.Ng3 Bg6 6.Nf3 Nd7 7.h4 h6 8.h5 Bh7
9.Bd3 Bxd3 10.Qxd3 Qc7 11.c3!? [11.Bd2] 11...e6 12.Bd2 Ngf6 13.0-0-0
Bd6 14.Ne4 Nxe4 15.Qxe4 0-0-0 16.Rhe1 c5 17.dxc5 Nxc5 18.Qc2 Be7
[18...Bf4=] 19.g3? [19.Be3 Bf6=] 19...Nd3+ 20.Kb1 Nxe1 21.Rxe1 Bf6
22.Bf4 Qd7 23.Ne5 Bxe5 24.Bxe5 f6 25.Bd4 e5 26.Bxa7 Qd3 27.Qxd3
Rxd3 28.Be3 Rhd8 29.a4 [29.Kc2 R3d6=/+] 29...Rd1+ 30.Rxd1 Rxd1+
31.Kc2 Rh1 32.g4 Rg1 33.f3 Rg3 34.Bc5 Rxf3 35.Bf8 Rf4 36.Bxg7 Rxg4
37.Bxf6 e4 38.Kd2 Rg2+ [38...Kd7-+] 39.Ke3 Rxb2 40.Kxe4 [40.Bg7 Rh2
41.Bxh6 Rxh5-/+] 40...Rh2 41.c4 Rxh5 42.a5 Rxa5 43.Kd4 Kd7 44.c5 h5
45.Be5 Kc6 46.Bd6 b5 47.Kc3 h4 48.Kb4 Ra4+ 49.Kb3 h3 50.Kc3 Ra2
51.Kb4 h2 52.Bxh2 Rxh2 White resigns 0-1
112 - Muchamedschanow
For the first 35+ years of my life, the United States and USSR (Union of
Soviet Socialist Republics) were involved in a Cold War: Capitalism vs
Communism. Americans just wanted to live their life in peace. I suspect that
was the wish of Russians too.
From the American viewpoint, we believed that socialism robbed people of

freedom. In the 1970s we would not elect an openly socialist president of the
United States to give the government a strong control over people's lives. We
understood the dangers. We knew people who fled such countries and came
to America.
My first USSR opponent was W. Ch. Muchamedschanow. We did not chat

much on our postcards. We just sent the moves. I imagine we were on some
watch list since numerical chess notation could look to the suspicious like
secret codes. This was six years after Fischer-Spassky 1972. I did not find
anybody with my opponent's exact name in the rating list. ICCF does have a
Flur Sabitovich Mukhamechanov (rated 2157 - the same as me).
The opening I studied most in 1978 was the Classical Caro-Kann Defence. I
looked at many games in this line. The line was too dull for me. I only beat
weaker players. Usually I fell asleep mentally and missed opportunities when
they arrived.
Muchamedschanow played the sharp 11.Rh4 variation. I made a blunder on

move 23 and lost. We did not have databases. Now I find the game Bellon -
Pomar which had the same blunder in 1976. GM Pomar played on for a while
before giving up.
Muchamedschanow - Sawyer, corr ICCF 1978 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5

3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Bf5 5.Ng3 Bg6 6.h4 h6 7.Nf3 Nd7 8.h5 Bh7 9.Bd3
Bxd3 10.Qxd3 Qc7 [The Black queen takes control of the h2-b8 diagonal.
10...e6 is more popular nowadays.] 11.Rh4 [I did not handle this tricky line
well. This was my first experience with it. The famous Geller lines goes
11.Bd2 e6 12.0-0-0 Ngf6 13.Ne4 0-0-0 14.g3=] 11...e6 12.Bf4 Bd6
[12...Qa5+!?] 13.Bxd6 Qxd6 14.Ne4 Qe7 15.Qa3 Qxa3 16.bxa3 Ke7
17.Rb1 Rb8 18.Nc5 Nxc5 19.dxc5 a5 [Maybe better is 19...Nf6 20.Rhb4 b5
21.Ne5 Rhc8] 20.Ne5 Nf6 21.Rd4 Rhc8 22.g4 Rc7 23.f3 Rd8 [23...Nd7
24.Nd3+/-] 24.Rxb7! 1-0
113 - How Slow Can You Go?
Being from New England in the Northern USA, it took me a little time for
my ears to understand the Southern language.
In 1977 I was driving through Knoxville, Tennessee when I had a car

problem.
I pulled into Midas Muffler. Out walked a friendly guy who asked, "Can I
hape ya?" I wasn't sure I wanted to be "haped" but he did fix my old car.
I love the South! I have lived 40 years in the North and 20 years in the South
in three different states.
One thing I noticed right off what that things moved more slowly in the
South. Apparently that slow speed could sometimes apply to chess too.
Here is a game played in northern Alabama, in Huntsville, which is home to a

large NASA space operation.
In the Caro-Kann Defence 4.Nxe4 Bf5 variation, my opponent Trevor Cook

was just down one pawn. Admittedly his position was difficult.
At that point he let his clock run out. This gave me a forfeit win on time.
Maybe he thought that his position was hopeless.
Cook - Sawyer, Huntsville, AL (2), 20.08.1977 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5

3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Bf5 5.Ng3 Bg6 6.Nf3 Nd7 7.h4 h6 8.h5 Bh7 9.Bd3
Bxd3 10.Qxd3 Qc7 11.Bd2 Ngf6 [Usually I play 11...e6] 12.c4 e6 13.Bc3
[13.0-0-0=] 13...0-0-0 14.0-0-0 Bd6 15.Nf1 Nc5 16.Qc2 Nce4 17.Ne3 Bf4
18.Rde1 c5 [18...Ng4!=/+] 19.g3 Bxe3+ 20.Rxe3 Nxc3 21.Qxc3 cxd4
22.Nxd4 a6 23.Rh4 Rd7 24.Nf3 Rhd8 25.Rd4? [White makes a big blunder,
but Black misses the point. Better would have been 25.Ne5=] 25...Nxh5?!
[Black big material with 25...Rxd4! 26.Nxd4 Qd6!-+ and Black wins the
knight.] 26.Rxd7 Qxd7 27.Re1 f6 28.Qe3 e5 29.Nd2 Qc6 0-1
114 - Instructive Performance
I played in a match between Glen Cove Bible College and the University of
Maine "B Team". I played Board 1 for Glen Cove against Jim Charette. I
ended up with White. What did Charette play? My own Caro-Kann! APCT
columnist Jim Davies wrote: “APCTer Tim Sawyer turns in an instructive
performance.”
Sawyer - Charette, Orono, ME 27.04.1976 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3

dxe4 4.Nxe4 Bf5 5.Ng3 Bg6 6.Nf3 Nd7 7.h4 h6 8.h5 Bh7 9.Bd3 Bxd3
10.Qxd3 Ngf6 11.Bd2 e6 12.0-0-0 Qc7 13.c4 0-0-0 14.Ne4 Ng4 15.Qe2 f5
16.Nc3 Bb4 17.a3 Bxc3 18.Bxc3 Rhe8 19.Ne5 Ndf6 20.f3 Nxe5 21.dxe5
Nd7 22.Rd6 Nc5 23.Rhd1 Na4 24.Kc2 Nxc3 25.Kxc3 Qb6 26.Qd3 a5 [In
this position, White has an obvious advantage, with an outpost on d6 and
more space in general. But winning major piece endings depends on
possession of open lines, and the only open file is well contested. Given
enough time, Black may show aggressive intentions with ...a4, threatening
...Qb3+. Yet White can force an easily won K & P ending.] 27.Rxd8+! Rxd8
28.Qxd8+ Qxd8 29.Rxd8+ Kxd8 30.c5! [The following features of the
position make it winnable: 1) The presence of the White pawns on the fifth
rank give White more space to maneuver. Since the Black king cannot
maneuver to b6, d6, f6, or g6, he has limited squares from which to defend
his e-pawn and c-pawn. 2) Black has no counter play on the K-side which can
produce a passed pawn. 3) The Black king cannot reach his exposed a-pawn.
So when he is eventually forced to play ...b6, the resulting pawn trade will
leave his pawns split, allowing White to create an outside passed pawn.]
30...Kc7 31.f4! [This is an important tempo to drive the Black king back.
After 31.Kb3? Black draws with 31...b5 32.cxb6+ Kxb6 and the White king
is in the way; 33.Ka4 c5 and White cannot penetrate.] 31...Kd7 [After the
text, a try by Black such as 31...b5 32.cxb6+ Kxb6 33.b4 either transposes to
the game, or wins after 33...a4 34.Kc4 Kb7 35.Kc5 Kc7 36.b5 and White
picks up the a-pawn.] 32.Kb3 Kc7 33.Ka4 b6 34.cxb6+ Kxb6 35.b4 axb4
36.Kxb4 [An outside passed pawn is the key to winning such endings. When
the Q-side pawns are traded, White's king will be closer to the K-side. The
conclusion would be: 36.Kxb4 c5+ 37.Kc4 Kc6 38.a4 Kb6 39.a5+ Kc6 40.a6
Kb6 41.a7 Kxa7 42.Kxc5 and White can win all the Black pawns if he
wishes.] 1-0 [Game Notes by Jim Davies]
115 - Geller 14.g3 vs Shredder
Grandmaster Efim Geller employed an idea in the main line of the Caro-Kann
Defence based on the move 14.g3 to control f4. Some move orders reach the
same position with 15.g3.
This move delay often occurs with a queen and bishop stutter step. Instead of
11.Bd3 Qc7 we see 11.Bf4 Qa5+ 12.Bd2 Qc7.
Geller played the line 10 times as White in my database against the likes of
Foguelman, Petrosian, Vukic, Kasparov, Campora (twice), Saidy and others.
Geller scored 5.5 - 4.5.
I chose this same line when I played a Caro-Kann Defence vs Shredder in a

test blitz game. I think I was playing the same variation repeatedly from both
sides of the board against this strong chess engine. I’m sure I lost a lot of
games.
This game was a miracle. Somehow its wires got crossed. The computer
walked into a lost pawn endgame. I am guessing that program needed to look
about 25 ply ahead to see the possible win for White. Probably at blitz speed
it was running low on time and did not calculate deep enough. In any case, it
was nice to get a rare win vs the computer. The rating is what it gave itself.
Sawyer - Shredder (3314), Florida 17.03.2006 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3

dxe4 4.Nxe4 Bf5 5.Ng3 Bg6 6.h4 h6 7.Nf3 Nd7 8.h5 Bh7 9.Bd3 Bxd3
10.Qxd3 Ngf6 11.Bd2 Qc7 12.0-0-0 e6 13.Ne4 0-0-0 14.g3 Nxe4 15.Qxe4
Nf6 16.Qe2 Bd6 17.Kb1 Rhe8 18.c4 c5 19.dxc5 [19.Bc3 cxd4 20.Nxd4 a6
21.b4+/=] 19...Qxc5 20.Be3 Qf5+ 21.Ka1 Bc5 [21...a6=] 22.Bxc5 Qxc5
23.Ne5 Qe7 24.Rxd8+ Rxd8 25.Rd1 Nd7 26.Nxd7 Rxd7 27.Kb1 Rxd1+
28.Qxd1 Qf6 29.Qe2 Kd7 30.Kc2 Qf5+ 31.Qd3+ Ke7 [31...Qxd3+ 32.Kxd3
Kd6=] 32.Qxf5 exf5 33.Kd3 f4 [33...Ke6 34.Kd4 b6 35.b4+/-] 34.g4 Kf6
[34...Kd6 35.Kd4+/-] 35.Ke4 Kg5 [Another idea that fails is 35...f3 36.b4
Ke6 37.Kxf3] 36.f3 [36.b4!+- looks simpler] 36...a6 [36...a5! 37.c5! f5+
38.gxf5 Kxh5 39.a4! (39.Kxf4 Kh4 40.b3 h5 41.a3 Kh3 42.b4 axb4 43.axb4
h4 44.b5 Kg2 45.c6 bxc6 46.bxc6 h3 47.c7 h2 48.c8Q h1Q= when both sides
queen.) 39...Kh4 40.c6 bxc6 41.b4 axb4 42.a5+-] 37.b4 Kf6 38.Kxf4 Ke6
39.Ke4 Kd6 40.a4 Ke6 [40...Kc6 41.Ke5+-] 41.c5 Ke7 42.Ke5 g6 43.b5 1-0
116 - Frumkin Knight on Rim
For 10 years I studied the latest issues for Chess Informant faithfully, playing
through all the games and looking for new ideas and opening novelties in
popular variations.
I fell in love with the 14...Nb6 line of the Classical Caro-Kann Defence.
Earlier I had played 14...Nxe5 against the International Master Norman
Weinstein in 1974.
Edward Frumkin earned a National Master Certificate in 1992. Frumkin

wrote an ongoing column in the APCT News Bulletin entitled "Knight on the
Rim." Ed was usually an over-the-board Expert who became a master in
postal chess back before computers were any good.
When Ed stopped playing, some of his games were rated as losses. Do not let
his final correspondence rating fool you. Frumkin was regularly rated at least
2200 in postal chess.
Below I got a good position with the solid Caro-Kann Defence. Ed Frumkin
benefits from my penchant to launch an unsound attack where no immediate
attack was needed. It was an honor to play Frumkin. He scored 6-0 in this 77
Rook 11. I went 5-1.
Frumkin - Sawyer, corr APCT 77R-11 (6), 08.1977 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5
3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Bf5 5.Ng3 Bg6 6.Nf3 Nd7 7.h4 h6 8.h5 Bh7 9.Bd3
Bxd3 10.Qxd3 Qc7 [10...e6 has completely surpassed 10...Qc7 in the past
twenty years.] 11.Bd2 e6 12.Qe2 Ngf6 13.0-0-0 0-0-0 14.Ne5 Nb6
[14...Nxe5 was played in 1966 by Petrosian, Botvinnik and Pachman.]
15.Rh4 [The main line is 15.Ba5 Rd5 16.Bxb6 axb6 17.c4 Ra5 which I
reached in other games.] 15...c5 16.Ba5 Kb8!N [I invent a good move. It
became popular 20 years later.] 17.Kb1 Bd6 18.dxc5 Bxc5 19.Nd3 Be7
20.Rc1 Rd5 [The position is equal.] 21.Bb4 Rhd8 22.Nf1 Bxb4 23.Nxb4
Rd4 24.Rxd4 Rxd4 25.Nd3 Nbd5 [25...Nc4=/+] 26.Ng3 Qc4 27.Qe5+ Ka8?
[The losing move. I was trying to move my knight forward for an attack
when backward for defense was appropriate. The position was equal after
27...Nc7=] 28.b3 Nc3+ 29.Kb2 Na4+ 30.bxa4 Nd5 31.Ne2 Re4 32.Qxg7
[The back rank checkmate threat prevents Black from regaining the piece.]
32...a5 33.Ng3 Rd4 34.Qf8+ Ka7 35.Qc5+ 1-0
117 - Caro-Kann vs Chaney
Future world champion Gary Kasparov played the Caro-Kann Defence until
he got his rating over 2500. During 1977 and 1978 Kasparov won about 10
games with it and drew many others.
In 1976 chess coach Aleksander Shakarov became the coach of Gary

Kasparov. They worked together until 2005. They wrote a book on the
Classical Caro-Kann around 1984.
GM Gary Kasparov switched to the more complicated Sicilian Defence as his

rating approached 2700. The Caro-Kann taught him how to study and win in
the opening against masters.
One of my own favorite wins as Black in the Caro-Kann was against Ronald
L Chaney. Later we would play many times.
This game was in the 4…Bf5 main variation in the 14…Nb6 line. Like me,
Chaney did a lot of research. He played openings well.
For this game I found the idea of 23…g5! The game was equal until White
blundered on move 31. The next game saw Nardacci play this line more
accurately.
Chaney - Sawyer, corr APCT 78R-2, 01.1978 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3
dxe4 4.Nxe4 Bf5 5.Ng3 Bg6 6.Nf3 Nd7 7.h4 h6 8.h5 Bh7 9.Bd3 Bxd3
10.Qxd3 Qc7 11.Bd2 e6 12.Qe2 Ngf6 13.0-0-0 0-0-0 14.Ne5 Nb6 15.Ba5
[15.c4 Rxd4 16.Be3 Rxd1+ 17.Rxd1 Rg8=] 15...Rd5 [15...c5!?] 16.Bxb6
axb6 17.c4 Rd8 [17...Ra5 18.Kb1 Bd6 19.f4 Kb8=] 18.Ne4 Nxe4 19.Qxe4
Bd6 20.f4 f5?! [20...c5! 21.dxc5 bxc5 22.b3 f5=] 21.Qe3 Bxe5 22.Qxe5
Qxe5 23.dxe5 g5! [I think I found this move in Chess Informant analysis to
this Martin - Pomar game. 23...Rhg8 24.Rxd8+ Kxd8 25.Rd1+ Kc7 26.Rd6
g5 27.g3 gxf4 28.gxf4 1-0 in 46. Martin Gonzalez - Pomar Salamanca, Las
Palmas 1977] 24.fxg5 [24.hxg6 Rdg8 25.g3 Rxg6 26.Rh3=] 24...hxg5
25.Rxd8+ Kxd8 26.Kd2 Ke7 27.Ke3 Kf7 28.Kf3 Rd8 29.Ke3 f4+ 30.Ke2
Rd4 31.Rd1? [This is a losing mistake. Black picks off the h5 in a pawn
endgame. White can reach a drawn rook and pawn ending with 31.h6! Kg8
32.Kf3 Kh7 33.Kg4 f3+ 34.Kxf3 Rf4+ 35.Ke3 Rxc4 36.Rf1 Kxh6 37.Rf6+
Kg7 38.Rxe6 Kf7=] 31...Rxd1 32.Kxd1 Kg7 0-1
118 - Nardacci Snow Storm
Snow storms in New England remind me of a postal game I played when the
big blizzard hit Rhode Island. Vincent Nardacci and I played a Caro-Kann
Defence. We began November 1977 at a pace of one move per week.
By February 1978 we were into the middlegame. All of a sudden I stopped

hearing from him. I lived in Tennessee. He lived in Rhode Island. In
February 1978 his area was hit with 27.6 inches (70 cm) of snow that killed
about 100 people.
The mail was not delivered for several days. I know the old saying, "the mail
must go through", but there are times when it cannot. His obituary notes
Vincent Nardacci was instrumental in running chess tournaments at Rhode
Island College. He is not listed in the USCF, but this was APCT. I take time
to remember him with our lone contest which he won.
After I began postal chess in 1977, I faced players from all 50 states in the
USA and 30 countries around the world. In this early game, we were
relatively young with lower ratings but higher anticipation of success. Four
years later my rating had gone up 300 points and his up 100 points. I
sacrificed a pawn expecting Nardacci to blunder, which was foolish of me.
Instead, Vincent buried me in an avalanche of snow White pawns.
Nardacci (1720) - Sawyer (1850), corr APCT 77SC-11 (5), 11.1977 begins
1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Bf5 5.Ng3 Bg6 6.h4 h6 7.Nf3 Nd7 8.h5
Bh7 9.Bd3 Bxd3 10.Qxd3 Qc7 [10...e6] 11.Bd2 e6 12.Qe2 Ngf6 13.0-0-0 0-
0-0 14.Ne5 Nb6 15.Ba5 Rd5 [15...c5!=] 16.Bxb6 axb6 17.c4 Rd8 18.Ne4
Nxe4 19.Qxe4 Bd6 20.f4 f5 21.Qe2 Bxe5 22.Qxe5 Qxe5 23.dxe5 g5
24.hxg6 Rdg8 25.Rd3 Rxg6 26.g3 Rhg8 27.Rh3 c5 28.Kd2 Kc7 29.a3 b5
30.cxb5 Kb6 31.a4 Ka5 [The correct path to equality is 31...c4 32.Rc3 (or
32.Rd6+ Ka5 33.Kc3 Kxa4 34.Kxc4 Rc8+ 35.Kd3 Kxb5=) 32...Ka5 33.Rxc4
Rxg3 34.Rxg3 Rxg3=] 32.b3 [32.Kc3+/-] 32...Kb4 33.Kc2 Rc8 34.Kb2 Rc7
[34...b6 35.Rd6+/=] 35.Rc3 [35.Rh1+/-] 35...c4 [35...b6 36.Rd3+/=] 36.Rh1
Rgg7 37.Rhc1 h5 [37...Ka5 38.bxc4+/-] 38.Rxc4+ Rxc4 39.Rxc4+ Ka5
40.Rc3 Rh7 41.Ka3 h4 42.gxh4 Rxh4 43.Rc4 Rh7 44.Rd4 Kb6 45.Kb4
Kc7 46.a5 Rh3 47.b6+ 1-0
119 - Norman Weinstein Caro
Notable author and historian Bill Wall wrote about famous players named
"Weinstein" in chess. First is Garrik Weinstein. He took his mother's name
and became World Champion Garry Kasparov, one of the greatest chess
players of all-time.
Second there is Raymond Allen Weinstein. Raymond was two grades ahead
of Bobby Fischer at Erasmus Hall High School. They played four times in the
US Championship from 1958-63.
Bobby Fischer played 1.e4 every time. Weinstein drew with a Caro-Kann,
but lost a Sicilian, a French, and a Ruy Lopez. Later apparently Raymond
Weinstein went crazy. He killed someone, and spent the rest of his life in an
insane asylum.
The third chess Weinstein is Norman Weinstein. I played him in this game.
Bill Wall compiled this biographical information:
"Norman Stephen Weinstein was born on October 4, 1950 in New York. In

1968 he won the U.S. Junior Open in New York. Norman attended Brandeis
University and got a Master’s degree in mathematics. In 1972 Norman won
the Atlantic Open. In 1972, Norman Weinstein's rating was 2416, number 20
in the U.S. In 1973 he won the U.S. Open in Chicago. In 1974 Norman took
9th place at the U.S. Championship in Chicago. He defeated Reshevsky in
this event. In 1975 he took 3rd place at Lone Pine and did well enough in the
1975 Cleveland International to gain the International Master norm (playing
at Grandmaster pace). In 1975 he took 2nd place at an international
tournament in Portimaio, Portugal. Larry Evans took 1st place. This was the
first time Americans took 1st and 2nd place at an international tournament. In
1976 he won the Quebec Open. In 1978 he wrote a book on the Reti Opening
(1.Nf3 d5 2.c4).In 1978 Norman tied for 5th-7th in the U.S. Championship in
Pasadena, California. He scored 1 win (against Kim Commons) and 13
draws, with no losses, the only player not to lose a game. Norman Weinstein
has the highest percentage of draws (77.1 percent) of any player participating
in a U.S. Championship. He was recruited by Bankers Trust, who was
looking for chess masters, and Norman became a very successful and wealthy
currency trader. He has been mentioned in Forbes magazine."
During the second weekend of February 1974 four chess friends and I
travelled from northern Maine 200 miles south to a college in central Maine.
I thought it was Bates College in Lewiston. Ray Haines listed this as being
located at Colby College in Waterville, Maine. I rode there in the back seat. I
was in the dark.
Norman Weinstein played a 53-board simultaneous exhibition on Friday

night before a weekend tournament. Weinstein won the 1973 US Open. Rows
of tables were arranged in a rectangle. We waited with anticipation for
Weinstein to arrive. He was coming up from Boston. The guy to my right
talked about how exciting it was to play a master. There were no masters in
Maine.
IM Norman Weinstein was 23 years old with shoulder length dark hair. Most
of us had long hair back in the early 1970s. Weinstein was friendly and
greeted us all as he began each game with 1.e4. While I trotted out my very
first Caro-Kann Defence.
The guy sitting next to me played the Center Counter Defence, what we now
call the Scandinavian Defence. His game went 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Qxd5 3.Nc3
Qc6? 4.Bb5 and Black resigns. Norman Weinstein beat almost all of us. We
were impressed! My friend Ray Haines drew him as Black defending the Ruy
Lopez.
Weinstein - Sawyer, Lewiston, Maine (simul) 08.02.1974 begins 1.e4 c6

2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Bf5 5.Ng3 Bg6 6.Nf3 Nd7 7.h4 h6 8.h5 Bh7
9.Bd3 Bxd3 10.Qxd3 Qc7 [This is the old main line. Black's ideas are to
castle queenside while taking the f4-c7 diagonal away from White. Later
10...e6 would become popular with kingside castling.] 11.Bd2 Ngf6 12.0-0-0
0-0-0 13.Qe2 [The queen move is Spassky's idea. The Geller line is 13.Ne4
e6 14.g3 Nxe4 15.Qxe4] 13...e6 14.Ne5 Nxe5 [Years later 14...Nb6 15.Ba5
Rd5= would become popular.] 15.dxe5 Nd7 [15...Nd5 was the alternative.]
16.f4 Be7 17.Ne4 Nc5 18.Nc3 b6?! [Foolishly I create a weakness in front of
my king. Correct is 18...f6! 19.exf6 Bxf6= Spassky-Petrosian, World
Championship 1966.] 19.Be3 g5? [This will cost Black a pawn.] 20.hxg6
fxg6 21.Qg4 Kb7 22.Kb1 g5 23.Bxc5 Bxc5 24.fxg5 Rxd1+ 25.Nxd1 Qxe5
26.gxh6 Rh7 27.Qg6 Qf5 28.Qg8 Be7 29.Ne3 Qe4 30.Rd1 Bf6? [White was
willing to part with his passed h-pawn 30...Rxh6 to potentially trap my king
with 31.a4!+-] 31.Nc4! Qxc4 32.Qxh7+ Ka6 33.Qd3 1-0
120 - Jim Warren Caro-Kann
Playing openings popular at the grandmaster level was a simple process in
postal chess 35 years ago. There were no big databases or strong chess
engines to deal with.
We had chess books. That was it. Some used Modern Chess Openings or
Encyclopedia of Chess Openings.
Other correspondence players added specialized monographs on their favorite

openings. A few of us collected large chess libraries with thousands of books.
It was because of this that many of the best researched books on chess
openings were written by correspondence players.
Since Jim Warren sold chess products for APCT, I knew that he had access to
just about every opening book. In fact I bought some from him myself!
What surprised me was that Jim played my own pet line against me! He
chose the Caro-Kann Defence in the old Classical Variation where we both
castled queenside.
Black equalized in a typical fashion and we gradually worked toward an

endgame.
Fortunately for me, Jim Warren blundered like I did vs Norman Weinstein
and Vincent Nardacci.
Sawyer (2050) - Warren (2100), corr APCT 1980 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5
3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Bf5 5.Ng3 Bg6 6.h4 h6 7.Nf3 Nd7 8.h5 Bh7 9.Bd3
Bxd3 10.Qxd3 Qc7 [10...e6 11.Bf4 Qa5+ 12.Bd2 Bb4=] 11.Bd2 e6
12.Qe2!? [12.0-0-0] 12...Ngf6 13.0-0-0 0-0-0 14.Ne5 Nxe5 [14...Nb6]
15.dxe5 Nd7 [15...Nd5 16.f4 or 16.c4] 16.f4 Be7 17.Ne4 Nc5 18.Nc3 f6
19.exf6 [19.Rhe1] 19...Bxf6 20.Qc4 Qb6 21.b4 Na6 22.Ne4 Nc7 23.Nxf6
gxf6 24.Bc3 Qe3+ 25.Kb2 Rxd1 26.Rxd1 Nd5 27.Re1 Qxf4 28.Qxf4 Nxf4
29.Bxf6 Rg8 30.g4 Nd5 31.Bc3 Kd7 32.Re4 Ke7 33.Bd4 b6 34.Kb3 Nf6
35.Bxf6+ Kxf6 36.Rd4 Rg5 37.c4 a5 38.Rd6 axb4 [38...Rxg4=] 39.Rxc6
Rc5 [39...Rxg4 40.Rxb6+/=] 40.Rxb6 Rxc4? [40...Ra5 41.Rxb4+-] 41.Kxc4
1-0
Acor – 106
Alexis – 19
Allman – 56
Amort – 18
Anderberg – 67
Andreu – 107
ATtheGreat – 25
Baffo – 85, 98, 108
barano – 14
Barnes – 23
Bendix – 8
Berthelsen – 67
BethO – 97
BlackDragon – 81
blik – 11
Blood – 90
Bryan – 33
Bublei – 12
Buckingham – 110
Bury – 77
Byrnes – 27
Champion – 83
Chaney – 96, 117
Charette – 114
Chess Challenger – 3
Cook – 113
Cullen – 70
Curtis – 64
Davis, Bob – 101
Davis, Bruce – 87
Delpire – 63
Dest – 30
doc7099 – 15
Domenech – 10
Eggert – 99
Elliott – 75
Ellison – 34
Elwin – 69
Fawbush – 53, 58
Felber – 71
Fischer – 4
Foesig – 21
Folkman – 37
Frumkin – 41, 116
Fuchs – 32
Glickman – 72
gonchar – 63
Haines – 33-34, 54, 88
Hansen – 55
hapster – 29
Harimau – 40
Hauber – 43
Hauser – 77
Heung – 109
Hou Yifan – 7
idledim – 6
InaOm – 68
Kampars – 4
Kan – 9
Keiser – 22
Kiick – 52
Kohut – 57, 94
Korchnoi – 84
Kuperman – 48
Le Corre – 10
Liddy – 78
Lingsell – 17
Lucas – 51
Lykke – 76
Malulo – 45
Mann – 39
Marshall – 46
Martin – 65
McDonald – 44
McGrew – 80
Moyer – 28
Muchamedschanow – 112
Muir – 20
Nardacci – 118
Nelson – 104
Niemi – 26
NN – 60
Noonan 59
Nutter – 61
Offenborn – 76
OracleMcSnacker – 5
OutsideTheGate – 1
Parsons – 42
Peterson – 88
PII233Crafty – 93, 100
Pirtle – 102
Pythagoras – 13
Rabeler – 91
Rodrigues – 82
Rosenthal – 36
Roys – 105
Ruck – 7
Sarosy – 62
Sawyer, E – 49
Sawyer, T – 1-3, 5-6, 8, 11, 13-32, 35-53, 55-62, 64, 66, 68, 70-75, 77-83,
85-87, 89-120
Schmid – 89
Schoppmeyer – 50
Shafkat – 111
Shredder – 79, 115
Simons – 69
SlowBo – 16
Smyslov – 9
Snyder – 54
SugarMagnolia – 65
Taormina – 31
TBricker1 – 66
Tempske – 38
Teuton – 95
Timofeev – 12
Tom – 73
Torre – 84
Tretter – 35
Trull – 24
Van Oirschot – 74
Vaughan – 92
vicnice01 – 2
von Wurttemberg – 86
Wall – 103
Warren – 120
Weinstein – 119
Wittmann – 47
Book 5: Alekhine & Pirc
1.e4 Semi-Open Chess Openings
By Tim Sawyer
Introduction to Alekhine & Pirc
Welcome to the Alekhine & Pirc: 1.e4 Semi-Open Games in Chess Openings.
Tim Sawyer analyzes 113 games. This expanded version matches the 2016
paperback edition with updated commentary, and an Index of Names to
Games. The author describes his own adventures in these openings.
In addition to the Alekhine Defence and the Pirc Defence, the author covers
Scandinavian Center Counter Defence, Modern Defence, the Queens Knight
Defence and some rare lines after 1.e4 in the Semi-Open chess openings.
you typical examples in these defences. Follow ideas to surprise your
opponent and win.
Have fun playing chess. Enjoy this book! Learn to beat these offbeat
defenses. Or play the unorthodox openings yourself. Take your opponent out
of his prepared book.
Tim includes games vs authors Edmar Mednis, Andrew Martin and Macon
Shibut. He played these openings from both sides of the board. Tim Sawyer
previously wrote his Alekhine Defense Playbook which provides a specific
detailed repertoire for Black.
The Alekhine Defence founded by world champion Alexander Alekhine has
long been a favorite of the author. Many players like the Pirc Defense,
Ufimtsev, Yugoslav, or Modern Defence. The Center Counter Defence or
Scandinavian challenges White immediately. Nimzowitsch played the
Queens Knight Defence 1.e4 Nc6. Discover creative ideas in strategy and
tactics. Try it!
Book 5 – Chapter 1 – Semi Opens
1.e4
To begin we consider rare Black moves after 1.e4.
1 - Zilbermints Duras Gambit
Can you play a Dutch Defence against the King Pawn opening? Well, yes
and no. You can play 1.e4 f5 as Black, but it won't be a Dutch. That is, not
unless White wants to play a Dutch Staunton. Enterprising players play this
opening for fun in blitz or against very weak opponents. Or weak players
might play it themselves. In the notes below, I cite two early games from 100
years ago.
The Czech master Oldrich Duras played it several times against strong
competition in Prague in the 1930s. The opening is called the Duras Gambit.
Lev Zilbermints won with “the Fred” as this is also called. After 1.e4 f5, here
are the main possibilities:
2.d4 is a Dutch Defence Staunton Gambit 1.d4 f5 2.e4.
2.Nf3 is a Lisitzin Gambit usually reached by 1.Nf3 f5 2.e4.
2.exf5 is the Duras Gambit. Black usually plays 2…Nf6 or 2…Kf7. Other
common moves are 2…d5 and 2…e5. Zilbermints plays them all. In this
game Lev chose 2…Nh6. His opponent “duarni” is listed as a Women’s
International Master.
duarni (1957) - Zilbermints (2041), 5 0 Internet Chess Club, 10.06.2016

begins 1.e4 f5 2.exf5 Nh6 [2...Kf7 3.d4 d5 4.Qh5+ g6 5.fxg6+ Kg7 6.Bd3
Nf6 7.Bh6+ Kg8 8.gxh7+ Nxh7 9.Qg6+ Bg7 10.Qxg7# 1-0 Pillsbury -
Magana, Germany 1902; 2...Nf6 3.d4 (3.g4!+/-) 3...d5 4.Bd3 c5 5.dxc5 e5
6.Bb5+ Nc6 7.Nf3 Bxc5 8.Nxe5 0-0 9.Bxc6 bxc6 10.0-0 Bxf5 11.Nxc6 Qd6
12.Nd4 Ng4 13.Nf3 Bxc2 14.Qxc2 Rxf3 15.g3 Rxg3+ 16.Kh1 Rg1+ 17.Kxg1
Qxh2# 0-1 Schwartze - Hartlaub, Hamburg 1905] 3.g4!? [White played this
like a King's Gambit reversed. 3.Qh5+! Nf7 4.Nf3 e6 5.Ne5+/-] 3...e6 4.fxe6
d5 5.d4 Qh4 6.Nf3 [6.Nc3+/-] 6...Qxg4 7.Rg1 [7.Ng5+/=] 7...Qxe6+ 8.Be2
Nf5 9.Nc3 Nc6 10.Bf4 Bd6 [10...Bb4=] 11.Bxd6 [11.Ng5!+/=] 11...Qxd6
12.Qd2 0-0 13.0-0-0 a6 14.Rg5 Bd7 15.Rdg1 Rae8 16.Bd3 Re7 17.h4 Kh8
18.h5 Ncxd4 19.Nxd4 Nxd4 20.Bxh7? [Chances were equal after 20.Rxd5
Qh2 21.Re1 Nf3 22.Rxe7 Nxd2 23.Rdxd7 Qf4=] 20...Nf3 21.Qxd5 Qf4+
22.Kb1 Nxg5 White resigns 0-1
2 - Borg Bishop Sac 1.e4 g5
Odd flank openings like the Grob Attack (1.g4) and the Macho Grob, also
called the Borg, (1.e4 g5 or first 1.d4 h6) feel like they should be swiftly and
tactically crushed.
Grob players combine bishop control of the long diagonal with a kingside
pawn attack.
A good idea is to challenge the g-pawn with your own h-pawn, as Bob Muir
did.
But then he sacrificed a bishop 8.Bxf7+? which failed tactically.
I ended up fianchettoing my king on g7 where it is open but safer than

White's king.
Even after White castled, Black was able to threaten checkmate.
David Alan Zimbeck asked, “Are you sure Kg7 was played? White has Qh5
with mate.”
Yes, at least that is what is in my notation. It looks like I got away with one. I
saw the mate on g6, but not on f7. Nice catch.
This may have been a blitz game that I tried to record from memory.
Often Bob Muir and I played 30 minute games. Then I wrote down the moves
during play.
Muir (1800) - Sawyer (2010), Williamsport, PA 1996 begins 1.d4 h6 2.e4

g5 3.h4 gxh4 4.Nf3 Nf6 5.Nc3 d5 6.exd5 Nxd5 7.Bc4 Nxc3 8.Bxf7+? [This
is too much. Simply 8.bxc3+/- leaves White with good kingside targets.]
8...Kxf7 9.Ne5+ Kg7 [? The correct move is 9...Kg8!-+. I do not remember
what I played, but according to my records I played Kg7.] 10.Qd3 Qd6
11.Qxc3 Nc6 12.Nf3 Qb4 13.Bd2 Qxc3 [Very powerful is 13...e5!-+]
14.Bxc3 e5 15.dxe5 [15.d5 Nb4-/+] 15...Bb4 16.Bxb4 Nxb4 17.0-0-0 Bg4
[The a2-pawn is pretty much free: 17...Nxa2+! 18.Kb1 Nb4-+] 18.Rxh4 h5
19.a3 Nc6 20.Rd3 Rad8 21.Re3 Rhe8 22.Nh2? [If 22.Rh1 Bxf3 23.Rxf3
Rxe5-+] 22...Rd1# 0-1
3 - Morphy vs Pot Head
Rev. John Owen played a universal defense twice against Paul Morphy in
1858. Sometimes it is known as Owen's Defence after 1.e4 b6 2.d4 Bb7
3.Bd3 e6.
Morphy won the first game and Owen won the second. Sergeant presents two
additional blindfold games where Morphy reached the same position.
One was a draw in Paris vs the sculptor Eugene Lequesne in 1858 and the
other a Morphy win in Philadelphia vs Samuel Lewis in 1859.
Each time Paul Morphy played 4.Nh3.
Against the Queens Fianchetto in an Internet Chess Club blitz game below vs
"pothead", I chose a Semi-Morphy idea.
Often I play 3.Bd3, but this time I went with 3.Nc3. After 4.f3 I played
5.Nh3.
With the Black bishop on b7, there is no danger of ...Bc8xh3. However,

Black went for 6...Qh4+ when I chose to cover up with 7.Nf2.
Black kept his king in the center which gave me more targets. In the end his
king was chased to the h-file and mated.
Sawyer - pothead, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 20.02.2013 begins 1.d4 e6

2.e4 b6 3.Nc3 Bb7 4.f3 Bb4 5.Nh3 Bxc3+ 6.bxc3 Qh4+ 7.Nf2 Ba6 8.Bxa6
Nxa6 9.g3 Qh5 10.Be3 c5 11.Qe2 Nc7 12.0-0 [12.dxc5 bxc5 13.0-0+- would
give White an open b-file to invade, but I was planning to rip open the center
where Black has left his king.] 12...a6 13.Rae1 b5 14.Bf4 Rc8 15.g4 Qg6
16.Bg3 c4 17.Nh3 f6 18.Nf4 Qf7 19.d5 g5 20.dxe6 Nxe6 21.Nxe6 Qxe6
22.e5 f5 23.gxf5 Qxf5 24.Qe4?! [White lets his advantage slip. 24.e6!+- is
correct.] 24...Ne7 [24...Qxe4 25.Rxe4 Ne7=] 25.f4 g4 26.Qb7 Kf7 [Black's
last chance for survival is 26...0-0 27.Rd1+/-] 27.Bh4 [More accurate is
27.e6+! Kf8 28.Bh4 Qc5+ 29.Rf2+-] 27...Rb8 28.e6+ Kg6 29.Qxd7 Qc5+
30.Bf2 Qd5 31.Qxe7 Rbe8 32.Qf7+ Kh6 33.f5 Qxf5 34.Be3+ Qf4 35.Bxf4#
Black is checkmated 1-0
4 - Split Pawn Soup
Once in a while you face a player who begins with the Queens Fianchetto
(1...b6). This was originally named after Rev. John Owen who played it
against Paul Morphy over 150 years ago.
I have tried many different things against 1...b6. It can resemble a type of
French Defence. Here is a three minute blitz game I played on the Internet
Chess Club.
This time I got mixed up in my ideas and get nothing special out of the
opening. I had a couple shots at an advantage but missed them both.
In the ending, I blundered and was losing for a moment. My opponent

returned the favor. Both sides would have split pawns but had to decide
which pawns they would go with.
Both sides made many mistakes. In the end, Black had b & d pawns. White
had a & g pawns. The race was on, but Black wasted one tempo in time
pressure and lost.
Sawyer - vladdfallavenna, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 23.05.2012 begins

1.d4 b6 2.e4 Bb7 3.Nc3 e6 4.Bd3 Bb4 5.Nf3 [White could try 5.Nge2 Nf6
6.0-0+/-] 5...Nf6 6.e5 [6.Qe2 d5=] 6...Ne4 7.Bd2 [7.Bxe4] 7...Nxc3 8.bxc3
Be7 9.0-0 0-0 10.Qe2 d5 11.Qe3 c5 12.Ng5 Bxg5 13.Qxg5 Qxg5 14.Bxg5
Ba6 15.Bxa6 [15.dxc5=] 15...Nxa6 16.Rab1 f6 17.exf6 gxf6 18.Bf4 c4?!
[Black is better with 18...cxd4 19.cxd4 Rfc8=/+] 19.Rfe1 Rfe8 20.Re2 Kf7
21.Rbe1 Rac8 22.Bd6 [I am playing quickly, but I am not playing good
moves. 22.f3+/=] 22...Nc7 23.Bxc7?! Rxc7 24.f4 b5 25.a3 Rce7 26.Kf2 e5
27.dxe5 fxe5 28.fxe5 Kg6 [28...Ke6=] 29.e6?! [29.Kg3+/=] 29...Kf6 30.g3
Rxe6 31.Rxe6+ Rxe6 32.Rxe6+ Kxe6 33.Ke3 Ke5 34.Kf3? [34.g4!=]
34...a5? [34...d4!-+ wins for Black.] 35.Ke3 h6? [35...h5!=] 36.h3?
[36.g4!+- wins] 36...h5 37.g4 hxg4? [37...h4!=] 38.hxg4 b4 39.cxb4 axb4
40.a4? [Too cute. The win is easy after 40.axb4+-] 40...d4+ 41.Kd2 b3
42.cxb3 cxb3 43.a5 b2 44.Kc2 Ke4 45.Kxb2 Ke3 46.a6 Ke2? [By now I
realized that the game was a draw on the board, though I believe I was ahead
on time. I was surprised to see him waste the tempo allowing me to win.
46...d3!=] 47.a7 d3 48.a8Q d2 49.Qe4+ 1-0
1.e4 Nc6
Black plays the unique Queen’s Knight Defence.
5 - Bentrup & Retirement
I read that at one point, Vladimir Kramnik, Gata Kamsky and Gary Kasparov
all planned to retire shortly after age 40 or 41. Why? It is hard to perform at a
level that brings enjoyment.
Chess players improve in our younger years, then level off for years, and
finally gradually decline in our later years. When I was age 39, I retired from
tournament chess. I had hit my peak and was too busy with work and life and
family to compete seriously.
Well into my 50s, I came out of retirement a few times to play in the Florida
State Championships. In 2011 it was held in Naples. My first opponent was
Ben Bentrup, a law student who seemed to be in his chess prime. Ben had a
very good tournament. After beating me, he then defeated the highest rated
master in the event. He beat another master in round three and drew against
another master later. Bentrup tied for 7th.
White lost a tempo in our opening. Bentrup realized this and told me he
decided to treat it as if he was playing Black. Bentrup told me he thought I
should have attacked queenside. That certainly was a valid option. This 150
Attack with colors reversed is played with an idea to attack kingside or in the
center. He outplayed me and won with ease. Ben Bentrup told me that I won
the opening. Then everything went downhill after that.
Bentrup - Sawyer, FL State Championship Naples FL (1), 03.09.2011

begins 1.e4 Nc6 [I prepared to play 1...Nc6.] 2.Nc3 e6 [Wisnewski suggested
the French here. Often I transpose to the Vienna Game with 2...e5. Bentrup
expected that.] 3.Nge2 d5 4.d3 [Whoa! White is daring Black to take over the
center. Okay.] 4…d4 5.Nb1 e5 6.g3 Bg4 7.Nd2 Qd7 8.f3 [8.f4? exf4 9.gxf4
Be7! with advantage to Black according to Bentrup] 8...Be6 9.f4 f6 10.Nf3
Bd6 [10...0-0-0 11.Bg2 Nh6=/+] 11.Bg2 0-0-0 12.0-0 h6 [12...Nge7=/+]
13.a3 g5 14.Qe1 Nge7 15.f5 Bf7 16.b4 Rdg8 [16...a6=] 17.c4 dxc3 18.Qxc3
Kb8 19.Be3 Nc8 [19...a6=] 20.b5 N6e7 21.a4 h5 22.d4 g4 23.Nxe5 fxe5
24.dxe5 Bxe5 25.Qxe5 Qd3 26.Bf4 Nd6 27.Qxe7 Qxe2 28.Bxd6 1-0
6 - Goran Markovic Speed
Goran Markovic is an incredible blitz player. His skill is obvious to anyone
who has seen him play. And indeed if you have seen him play, you cannot
miss his blitz skill. Every time Markovic enters a blitz tournament, he
finishes near the top.
I asked him if he was still playing on ICC and he said he was. I do not
remember what handle he was using. He told me his ICC rating was 2700. I
said I never get above the 2400s.
Markovic plays tournament games as if they were 15 minute games. Goran

plays sharp main line complicated aggressive openings instantly. Goran will
do his thinking on your time.
Before my game with Markovic, someone suggested that I play slowly to try
to bother him in some way. I said, "But I am a blitz player. I am him. It
would bother me as much as him!" Of course I am 30 years older than Goran,
so I am slower with age.
He tried to break through tactically in the endgame, but I made sure I had the
better bishop (my pawns on the light squares) and rook control of the open
file. I blitzed many moves and took only about half an hour more than Goran
did. Our potential four hour game plus port-mortem was over in two hours. I
loved that!
Markovic - Sawyer, FL State Championship Naples FL (4), 04.09.2011

begins 1.e4 Nc6 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Nc3 [3.e5 is more challenging but Markovic
just wants rapid development.] 3...d5 4.exd5 Nxd5 [We have now arrived at
a variation I know well as a long time Alekhine Defence player.] 5.Bb5 Nxc3
6.bxc3 Qd5 7.Qe2 Bg4 8.d4 e6 9.0-0 Bd6 [Goran told me later he had not
seen this move. All of a sudden he realizes that I have possible kingside
attack.] 10.h3 Bxf3 11.Bxc6+ Qxc6 12.Qxf3 Qxf3 13.gxf3 Kd7 [My king
needs to stay near vulnerable points.] 14.Rb1 b6 15.Rd1 Rhc8 16.Kf1 Ke7
17.c4 c6 18.Ke2 Rab8 19.Be3 a6 20.Rb3 b5 21.c5 Bc7 22.Kd3 Rd8
23.Rdb1 Ra8 24.c4 bxc4+ 25.Kxc4 Rdb8 26.Rb7 Kd8 27.a4 Kc8 28.R7b3
[Not 28.Rxc7+ Kxc7 29.Bf4+ Kc8 30.Bxb8 Rxb8 31.Rb6 Rxb6 32.cxb6 a5
33.Kc5 Kb7 34.Kd6 Kxb6 35.Ke7 c5-+] 28...Rxb3 29.Rxb3 Rb8 30.Rc3
Ba5 31.Rc1 Bc7 32.Ra1 Kd7 33.Bd2 Ke7 34.Bc3 Kd7 35.Re1 g6 36.Bb4
Rb7 37.Bc3 Rb8 38.Bb4 Rb7 39.Rh1 Rb8 40.Bc3 Rb7 1/2-1/2
7 - Florida Daniel Ludwig
In round one of my first Florida tournament, I was paired against Daniel
Ludwig, the highest rated master in the event. He was on his way to
grandmaster. Ludwig was rated 2324; I was rated 2010. Daniel Ludwig
appeared very polite to me. Ludwig did not do well in this event; as I recall
he was suffering from a cold.
After I moved to Florida I expected most of my chess opponents to be old

retired men close to my age. Instead I found Florida was flooded with many
talented young kids rated over 2000! Ludwig was 15 years old rated over
2300. I asked Daniel Ludwig if he was the Florida high school champion. He
answered, "Yes." Shortly after this he won the US Masters in Nashville, TN.
In 2006 he became the 11th Grade National Champion.
Ludwig - Sawyer, FL State Championship (1), 03.09.2005 begins 1.e4 Nc6

[For three years I had been trying to learn the Nimzowitsch Defence 1…Nc6
as Black.] 2.Nf3 d6 [I declined the invitation to return to Open Game lines
with 2...e5 although I do play that sometimes from this move order.] 3.Bb5!?
[Ludwig has a tremendous memory. He must know the Ruy Lopez Steinitz
variation well. Most of my practice games I had played in this line continued
3.d4.] 3...Bd7?! [I had a hard time concentrating. My first response to a non-
book move is dubious. Better was 3...Nf6. Daniel thought I might play 3...e5
transposing to what he called "old stuff."] 4.d4 Ne5?? [Stupid play.
Alternatives include: 4...Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Be2 e6 7.0-0+/=; 4...e5 transposes to
the Old Steinitz Defence.] 5.Nxe5! [I lost a pawn due to my very weak
analysis. I missed his piece sacrifice only two moves deep.] 5...Bxb5? [Better
is 5...dxe5 6.Bxd7+ Qxd7 7.dxe5 Qxd1+ 8.Kxd1 e6 when at least his extra
pawn is doubled.] 6.Nxf7!+- [Darn! At this point, I know that I am lost. That
didn't take long!] 6...Kxf7 7.Qh5+ g6 8.Qxb5 Qc8 [Okay, so I'm busted. I
chose to just play on past move 30. That way I could get some practice just
making moves and punching the manual clock. Even so, there were a few
times where I forgot to push my clock and had to be reminded.] 9.Nc3 c6
10.Qe2 e6 11.0-0 Bg7 12.Qf3+ Ke8 13.Qg3 Kd7 14.d5 [Ludwig's play is
aggressive and impressive.] 14...cxd5 15.exd5 Bxc3 16.dxe6+ Kxe6 17.bxc3
Qc6 18.Re1+ Kd7 19.Qg4+ Kc7 20.Qd4 Nf6 21.Qxf6 Raf8 22.Qd4 Kb8
23.Be3 b6 24.a4 Qc5 25.Qd3 Qf5 26.Qxd6+ Kb7 27.a5 Rf7 28.axb6 a6
29.Bd4 Rd7 30.Qa3 Rf8 31.Qxa6+ Kc6 32.b7+ mate in 2. 1-0
8 - GM Ray Robson at 10
My first game vs GM Ray Robson. “So kid, how old are you?” “10”. Ray
was a cute kid from a nice family. He became an FIDE Master in 2005
winning the Pan-American Youth Championship. I liked Ray Robson
immediately. During our game, he wore a 2004 Boston Red Sox world
championship baseball cap.
Grandmaster Ray Robson was born on my birthday. Robson was rated 100
points above me, but I outweighed him by 100 pounds. Since then both his
rating and my weight have gone up!
Robson said I played that first game so terribly that he figured he would just
copy Daniel Ludwig. So Ray Robson played 3.Bb5. I improved on the
Ludwig game with 3...a6 to clarify the position.
My friend Vic Rislow had been after me for many years to return to
tournament play. The set and clock I used for this event were gifts from him.
Sadly, Vic passed away from cancer three months after this tournament. The
good news is that I won some prize money in this event, tying for 3rd and 4th
among non-masters.
Robson - Sawyer, FL State Championship (6), 05.09.2005 begins 1.e4 Nc6

2.Nf3 d6 [A favorite move of GM Tony Miles.] 3.Bb5 a6 [This time I do
much better. 3...Nf6 is also playable.] 4.Bxc6+ bxc6 5.d4 Bg4 6.0-0 Nf6
7.Nc3 e6 8.h3 Bh5 9.Qe2 Be7 10.Bf4 0-0 11.Rad1 Re8 [I don't like this
move. Generally, Black plays on the b-file or for a d6-d5 French position.]
12.Rfe1 [I did not know Robson at all prior to this game, but he was a young
Karpov in style. One difference is that the young Karpov played fast. Ray
played very slowly, taking a lot of time for most of his early moves in a
game, even if he knows the position very well.] 12...d5 [This is a thematic
move, but I am getting a little loose on h5 and c6. I almost played 12...Bg6!
After the game Robson told me he had intended to play 13.Nh4 but that move
probably needs more preparation. 13...Bxe4! 14.Nxe4 Nxe4 15.Qxe4 d5
16.Qe5 Bxh4 17.Qxc7 Qxc7 18.Bxc7 Be7=] 13.g4 Bg6 14.Ne5 Nxe4!?
15.Nxg6 hxg6 16.Nxe4 dxe4 17.Qxe4 Qd5?! [Robson suggested afterwards
that I play 17...Bd6+/=] 18.Bxc7 Qxa2?! [Fishing for trouble.] 19.b3 c5? [I
was worn out and I finished up with two serious tactical errors. A couple
older masters watching us rightly criticized me for not playing better.]
20.dxc5 Bxc5? 21.Ra1 Qb2 22.Be5 f5 23.Qd3 1-0
9 - Creative Elijah Williams
One of the leading players in England during the mid-1800s in the Howard
Staunton era was Elijah Williams. Opening theory was not well developed
and many players went their own way. Almost everyone played 1.e4 e5.
Williams was known to play strategically sound openings that we might call
offbeat.
Long before Aron Nimzowitsch played 1.e4 Nc6, Williams tried it in the
earliest recorded game of the Nimzowitsch Defence in 1845. His handling of
it was amazingly modern. Masters often play 2.Nf3 willing to allow Black to
play an Open Game by 2...e5.
The Williams idea is to play ...Bg4 combined with Nf6, e6 and Be7. Black's
central pawns will likely advance to d5 and/or e5 depending on later
developments. It's not super aggressive, but it takes away White's fun. Other
players who added this to their repertoire included Rainer Knaak, Hugh
Myers and Tony Miles.
This game reaches a common position after 1.e4 Nc6 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 Nf6
4.Nc3 Bg4. White has the choice of many fifth moves. Four options are
popular: 5.Be3, 5.Be2, 5.d5 and my opponent's choice in this game 5.Bb5. It
led to an interesting struggle with the computer chess engine “blik”.
blik - Sawyer, ICC 5 0 Internet Chess Club, 28.06.2010 begins 1.e4 Nc6
2.Nf3 d6 [The Williams Variation, played by Elijah Williams in 1845. His
idea, which has been followed by many others, is to develop the Bg4. This is
normally combined with Nf6, e6 and Be7 keeping the center pawns back at
first.] 3.d4 Nf6 4.Nc3 Bg4 5.Bb5 [Threatening d5 win by pin the knight.]
5...a6 6.Bxc6+ bxc6 7.h3 Bh5 [Usually Black retreats.] 8.Qd3 e6 9.Bg5 Be7
10.0-0-0 0-0 11.g4 Bg6 12.Bxf6 Bxf6 13.h4 d5 14.Kb1 dxe4 15.Nxe4 Bxe4
16.Qxe4 Qd5 17.Qd3 c5 [Swapping off the doubled pawn.] 18.Ng5
[Threatening mate.] 18...g6 19.dxc5 Qxc5 20.Ne4 Qe5 [Threatening mate.]
21.Nxf6+ Qxf6 22.Qd4 Qxd4 23.Rxd4 Rfd8 24.Rhd1 Rxd4 25.Rxd4 Kf8
26.Kc1 Ke7 27.Rc4 Kd6 28.g5 Rb8 29.b4 Rb5 30.a4 Rd5 31.f4 c5 32.c3
cxb4 33.cxb4 e5 34.Kc2 exf4 35.Rxf4 Rf5 36.Rxf5 gxf5 37.Kd3 Kd5
38.Kc3 f4 39.Kd3 f3 40.Ke3 Kc4 41.Kxf3 Kxb4 42.Kg4 Kxa4 43.Kh5 Kb5
44.Kh6 a5 45.Kxh7 a4 46.h5 a3 47.g6 fxg6 48.hxg6 a2 49.g7 a1Q 50.g8Q
Qh1+ Game drawn by mutual agreement 1/2-1/2
1.e4 Nc6 2.d4
White’s first two moves can be played in either order. He sets up a big pawn
center.
10 - Florida Chopping Wood
Most major tournaments in Florida had an Under-2000 or Under-2100
section. You could only play up one section, so the Open section often had no
one below 1800 or 1900.
The State Championship was different. They gave everyone a chance to play
for the title. Thus my opponent Daryn Wood boldly decided to play for the
championship which was played in 2005 in Altamonte Springs, a few miles
north of Orlando, Florida.
Daryn was rated 1764. He was the lowest rated player I faced in any Florida
tournament. I chose the Queen's Knight Defence 1.e4 Nc6 (Nimzowitsch
Defence). After 2.d4 e5 (Mikenas), White turned down the chance to play a
Scotch Game with 3.Nf3 and played 3.d5. The game featured a blockade in
the nature of that set forth in "My System" by Aron Nimzowitsch. I made two
piece sacrifices, each of which netted me a pawn.
Wood - Sawyer, FL State Championship (4), 04.09.2005 begins 1.e4 Nc6

2.d4 e5 [I play both and 2…d5 interchangeably.] 3.d5 [3.Nf3 Scotch Game]
3...Nce7 4.Nf3 Ng6 [Van Geet Advanced Variation Reversed.] 5.c4 Bb4+
6.Nc3 Bxc3+ [Exchanging off the bad bishop.] 7.bxc3 d6 8.Be2 Nf6 9.Qc2
0-0 10.0-0 b6 [My idea is to hinder c4-c5 and allow my bishop to move away
from c8 without leaving the b-pawn hanging on b7. More dynamic is to play
for ...c7-c6 (instead of ...b7-b6), but here I decided to play for a kingside
attack and ignore the queenside. Alternatives are 10...Qe7!? or 10...Nf4!?]
11.h3 Nd7 12.a4 a5 [12...Nc5=] 13.Be3 Nh4!? 14.Nd2 Ng6 15.Nf3 Nc5!
16.Ne1 f5 17.f3 fxe4 [17...Qh4!-/+] 18.fxe4 Rxf1+ 19.Bxf1 Qh4 20.Bxc5
dxc5 [20...bxc5! 21.Nf3 Qh5-/+] 21.Nf3 Qf6 22.Bd3? Bxh3! 23.Rf1 Bd7
24.Qd1 [White could play 24.Nd4 when Black has 24...Qg5-+] 24...Rf8
25.Bc2 Ne7 [25...Nf4!-+] 26.Rf2 Nc8 27.Qf1 Qe7 28.Qe2 Nd6 [I learned to
blockade the pawn with the knight from Nimzowitsch when I was young.
White is tied down to defending e4/c4.] 29.Kf1 Bg4 30.Ke1 Bxf3 31.gxf3
Qg5 32.Kd1 g6 33.Bd3 Kg7 34.Kc2 h5! 35.Qf1 Qe3! 36.Be2? Nxe4!
37.Bd3 Qxf2+ 0-1
11 - Leko vs Bacrot 1…Nc6
Do grandmasters play your favorite openings?
Peter Leko and Etienne Bacrot are super grandmasters whose ratings often
exceed 2700.
I was pleased to discover their Queen's Knight game from 2014.
After 1.Nf3 Nc6 transposed to the Queen's Knight after 2.e4 d5 3.exd5 Qxd5
4.d4 e5.
Slightly more popular is 4...Bg4, but both moves completely equalize.
In his “Play 1...Nc6!” book author Christoph Wisnewski calls 4...e5 "the
more solid option" but he likes 4...Bg4 when playing for a win.
Bacrot won the Exchange with a combination.
For a long time Leko defended well and made it difficult for Black to win.
But in the end Black's h-pawn could not be stopped without the loss of a
bishop.
Leko (2723) - Bacrot (2718), SportAccord Blitz 2014 Beijing CHN (18.2),
13.12.2014 begins 1.Nf3 Nc6 2.e4 d5 3.exd5 Qxd5 4.d4 e5 [4...Bg4=] 5.Nc3
Bb4 6.a3 Bxc3+ 7.bxc3 e4 8.Nd2 Nf6 9.Nc4 Bg4 10.Qd2 Bh5 [10...Be6=]
11.Qg5 [11.Rb1+/=] 11...Qxg5 12.Bxg5 Nd5 13.Bd2 0-0-0 14.Ne3 Nb6
15.Rb1 Rhe8 16.g4 Bg6 17.h4 f6 18.g5 Bf7 19.gxf6 gxf6 20.Rb5 Ne7
21.Rg1 a6 22.Ra5 Rg8 23.Rxg8 Rxg8 24.Bh3+ [24.Nf5 Rg1 25.Nxe7+ Kd7
26.Nf5 Nc4=/+] 24...Kd8 25.Rc5 Na4 [25...Rg1+ 26.Ke2 Ng6-/+] 26.Ra5
Nb2 27.d5 Rg1+ 28.Bf1 b6 29.Rxa6 Nxd5 30.Ra8+ Kd7 31.Rf8 [31.Bc1
Nxe3 32.fxe3 Bc4-/+] 31...Nxe3 32.Rxf7+ Ke8 33.Bxe3 Kxf7 34.Ke2 Nc4
35.Bf4 c6 36.a4 Nb2 37.Bh3 Nxa4 38.Bd2 Nb2 [38...Nc5-+] 39.Bf5 Nc4
40.Bf4 h5 41.Bxe4 Rg4 42.Kf3 Rxh4 43.Kg3 Rg4+ 44.Kf3 Ne5+ 45.Ke3
h4 46.Bf5 Rg1 47.Ke2 c5 48.Bh2 Rh1 49.Bf4 h3 50.Be4 [50.Bg3 c4-+]
50...Rg1 51.Bh2 Rc1 52.Kd2 Rb1 53.Bg3 Ng4 54.Bd5+ Kg7 0-1
12 - Redeploy Queen's Knight
How often do you undevelop a knight and return it to its original square?
The Closed Ruy Lopez Breyer Variation sees Black play 9...Nb8 to shift the
knight from c6 to d7.
In the Queen's Knight Defence line 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.d5 Nb8! is best.
Bogoljubow, Deppe, Van Geet and Larsen all played this move 4…Nb8 in
the early years.
Note this variation can arise from the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit after 1.d4 d5
2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 Nc6 4.d5 Nb8.
Most of the time players choose 4...Ne5 or the weaker 4...Nb4.
In the game FM Viacheslav Malyi against GM Vladimir Okhotnik players

castled opposite sides.
Black obtained constant pressure along the long dark diagonal.
The grandmaster returned material to reach a won pawn ending.
Malyi (2316) - Okhotnik (2391), Mukachevo UKR (8.3), 05.05.2013 begins

1.e4 Nc6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.d5 Nb8 5.Bf4 Nf6 6.Bc4 a6 7.Qe2 [7.Bb3=]
7...g6 [7...Bf5=/+] 8.Nxe4 Nxe4 9.Qxe4 Bg7 10.0-0-0 Bf5 11.Qe3 0-0 12.f3
b5 13.Bd3? [13.Bb3+/=] 13...Qxd5 14.Bxf5 Qxf5 15.Ne2 Nc6 16.Qe4 Qf6
17.c3 e5 18.Be3 Rfd8 19.h4 Qe6 20.Kb1 f5 21.Qc2 b4 22.cxb4 Nxb4
23.Qa4 Nd5 24.Bc5 Rab8 25.b3 [25.Qc2 a5-/+] 25...e4 26.fxe4 Qe5
[26...Rb5-+] 27.Rd4 [27.Qd4 fxe4-/+] 27...fxe4 28.Qxa6 Nc3+ 29.Nxc3
Rxd4 30.Bxd4 Qxd4 31.Rc1 e3 32.Qe6+ Kh8 33.Qd5 Qxh4 34.Qe4 Qf2
35.Nd1 Qf6 36.Nc3 c5 37.Qxe3 c4 38.Qf3 Qxf3 39.gxf3 cxb3 40.a3
[40.Ne4 bxa2+ 41.Kxa2 h5-/+] 40...Rf8 [40...b2-+] 41.Kb2 Rxf3 42.Kxb3
h5 43.a4 Rxc3+ 0-1
13 - Rosenthal Nimzowitsch
The Florida Championship is a six round tournament played on Labor Day
weekend each year. In 2011 I arranged to take a half point bye in the sixth
round, so I knew that the fifth round was my last of this event.
My final opponent was Nicholas Rosenthal. He was a 15 year old who won
the 2011 Florida Super State, the K-12 Open section run by the Florida
Scholastic Chess League. Nicholas already had a FIDE rating of 2019. He
had been rated slightly higher.
Sid Pickard who published my 3rd and 4th books was an expert in 1...Nc6 as
Black. I made a comment once to Pickard that I don't like to block my c-
pawn with the knight. He pointed out that the knight does not have to stay on
c6!
Rosenthal answered 1.e4 Nc6 with 2.f4!? I asked him why he did not play
2.Nf3. He said it was because he does not play those 2...e5 lines. He plays the
Bishop's Opening after 1.e4 e5 2.Bc4. After my opportunities faded,
Rosenthal offered a draw.
Rosenthal - Sawyer, FL State Championship Naples FL (5), 05.09.2011

begins 1.e4 Nc6 2.f4 d5 3.e5 f6 [3...d4! 4.Nf3 Qd5! Wisnewski] 4.d4 Nh6
5.Nf3 Bf5 6.c3 Qd7 [Wisnewski gives 6...e6, 7...Be4, 8...f5 and 9...Qd7. I
played all these moves in a slightly different order.] 7.h3 [Not in the book.]
7...Be4 8.Nbd2 f5 [8...Nf5!? to make use of the hole on g3.] 9.Nb3 [The Nc5
threat is always an issue in the Nimzovich, just as ...Nc4 is in the 150 Pirc or
the Dragon Sicilian.] 9...e6 10.Be3 g6 [A waiting move. Where are the two
kings going? More consistent is 10...Nf7.] 11.Rc1 [White plan to rip open the
c-file and I am potentially in trouble.] 11...Kf7 12.c4 Nd8 13.cxd5 exd5
14.Ng5+ Kg7 15.Rg1 c6 16.g4 Bb4+ 17.Kf2 Ne6 18.Nxe4 dxe4 19.g5
[Nicholas thought I would play 19...Ng8, but then my knight is trapped. If a
later ...Ne7, my Bb4 has no retreat from a2-a3. Instead of 19.g5, Junior 12 see
good attacking chances for White with 19.d5+/-.] 19...Nf7 20.Bc4 Rhd8
21.Qc2 Nc7 22.Rgd1 Nd5 23.a3 Be7 24.Nc5 Bxc5 25.dxc5 Qe6 26.Qb3
Rd7 27.Rd2=/+ [27.h4+/-] 27...a6?+/- [27...Nxg5! 28.Bxd5 cxd5 29.fxg5 f4
30.Bd4 e3+-/+] 28.Bxd5 cxd5 29.Qb6 Nd8 30.Rcd1 Kf7 31.Qb3-/+
[31.Qb4=] 31...d4 32.Qxe6+ Nxe6 33.Bxd4 Rad8?!= [33...Nxf4-+] 34.Ke3
Rd5 35.b4 R8d7 36.a4 Ke8 37.h4 1/2-1/2
14 - Queen's Knight Advance
Do you prefer to develop a piece, open up the center, or grab a space
advantage on move three?
In the Queen's Knight Defence after 1.e4 Nc6 2.d4 d5 White can choose
between 3.Nc3, 3.exd5 or 3.e5.
The Queen's Knight Advance 3.e5 Bf5 looks just like the Caro-Kann
Advance Variation 3.e5 Bf5 except for what Black piece is on c6.
The difference is perspective. The c6 pawn protects d5 while the Nc6 attacks
e5.
Black must determine on which side to castle.
In a game between young rapidly improving Catalin-Lucian Patrascu against

WGM Suzana Maksimovic, Black castled kingside and attacked kingside.
This works in part because White's e5 pawn blocks some of his own attacking
prospects.
Maksimovic found a nice checkmate to finish.
Patrascu (2069) - Maksimovic (2238), 25th Seacoast Trophy 2015 Eforie

Nord ROU (8.5), 30.06.2015 begins 1.e4 Nc6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 Bf5 4.Ne2 e6
5.Ng3 Bg6 6.h4 f6!? [6...h5 7.Be2 Nb4 8.Na3 c5 9.c3 Nc6=/+] 7.Bb5 Qd7
8.0-0 a6 9.Ba4 fxe5 10.dxe5 b5 11.Bb3 Bc5 12.h5 Bf7 13.Bf4 Nge7
[13...g6!?] 14.c3 Nf5 15.Nxf5 exf5 16.Re1 Be6 17.Nd2 0-0 18.h6 Rad8
19.Nf3 g6 20.Nd4 Be7 21.Qd2 Na5 22.Bg5 c5 [22...Bxg5 23.Qxg5+/=]
23.Nf3 [23.Nxe6 Qxe6 24.Bxe7+-] 23...Nc4 24.Bxc4 bxc4 25.Bxe7 Qxe7
26.b4 d4 27.bxc5 dxc3 28.Qxc3 Rd3 29.Qa5 Bd5 30.Qxa6 Rxf3 31.gxf3
[31.Qd6!=] 31...Qg5+ 32.Kf1 Bxf3 [32...Qh5-/+] 33.Qxc4+ Kh8 34.Red1
[34.Re3!+-] 34...Qxh6 35.Ke1 Qh1+ 36.Kd2 [36.Qf1!=] 36...Rd8+ 37.Ke3
Bxd1 38.Qf4 Qe1# 0-1
1.e4 d5 2.exd5
This is the Scandinavian Defence or Center Counter Defence.
15 - Scandinavian Danish
Francesco Cavicchi asked what to play as Black against 1.e4.
"But Tim, please, what to play blitz against 1e4? Here's the punctum dolens
for black. Scandinavian Qd6 is my main defense to 1e4 but I don't
recommend it for blitz games. Because of its solid, but not immediate nature
it's quite difficult to find rapidly a plan at blitz with the Qd6 variation. I've
tried the Latvian gambit (Fraser variation with Nc6, I don't like the main line
with Qf6) with good results when I was young, but nowadays my memory
tends to betray me, so no more Latvian. Elephant gambit looks to me simply
unsound. Regarding the Alekhine defense. mmmh, there is that unpleasant
2.Nc3."
Cavicchi's question is specific about blitz openings. The Latvian and

Elephant are best in blitz if you play them all the time vs players who rarely
see them. If you play the same opponent dozens of games in the same line,
the surprise value diminishes. I enjoy facing 2.Nc3 in the Alekhine Defence
when I play Black.
Tactical tricky gambits will catch a lot of fish. It helps if you know lines by
heart. Francesco plays the Scandinavian 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Qxd5 3.Nc3 Qd6 as
his "main defense". That is sound. He takes a break from it with the counter
gambit 2...e5. Cavicchi plays with energy and creativity. This is an
impressive and fun game!
NN - Cavicchi, Italy blitz, 2014 begins 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 e5 3.Bc4 [3.dxe6

Bxe6 4.d4+/= seems good for White; 3.Nf3 is an Elephant Gambit; 3.Nc3
Nf6 4.Bc4] 3...c6 [The choice of Deep Fritz here.] 4.dxc6 Bc5 [More normal
would be 4...Nxc6 5.d3+/=] 5.cxb7 [5.Bxf7+! turns the tables after 5...Kxf7
6.Qf3+ Qf6 7.Qd5+ Be6 8.Qxc5 Nxc6 9.Nf3+/- and White is up two pawns.]
5...Bxb7 6.Bb5+ [Another wild line is 6.Qh5 Bxf2+ 7.Kf1 Qf6 8.Qxf7+ Qxf7
9.Bxf7+ Kxf7 10.Kxf2+/- when Black has compensation for a pawn but is
down two pawns.] 6...Nc6 7.Nf3 Nge7 8.Nxe5?! [8.0-0+/- is correct.] 8...0-0
9.Nxc6 Nxc6 10.0-0 Nd4 11.Bc4 [11.Qh5 Nxb5 12.Qxc5 Nd4=/+] 11...Nf3+!
[Or 11...Qg5!-+] 12.gxf3 Qg5+ 13.Kh1 Qf4 0-1
16 - 1700 Rating Challenge
Back in 1974 I was already in my 20s with a goal to reach a 1700 rating. I
ended up rated 1687. I quit chess for years to focus on college. When I
returned to chess my rating surged much higher.
A 1700 rating is about the middle of players at a big tournament. The average
rating of all players is well below 1700. But higher rated players show up
more often to tournaments.
This tournament was played in Waterville or Lewiston, Maine. In the first

round as Black I beat Evelyn Cunningham with 1.e4 e5. The 2nd round game
was a Scandinavian Defence against Mike Kaplan rated 1700. He doubled
some scary rooks on the 7th rank. We both had chances but the game ended
in a draw.
Sawyer - Kaplan, Lewiston, ME (2), 09.02.1974 begins 1.e4 d5 2.exd5

[Years later I would boldly play 2.d4 and head toward a Blackmar-Diemer
Gambit.] 2...Nf6 3.d4 Nxd5 4.c3 [A rather timid move. The typical
continuation is 4.c4 Nb6 5.Nf3 g6 6.Nc3 Bg7 7.h3 0-0 8.Be3 Nc6 9.Qd2 e5
10.d5+/= and White has a more active position.] 4...Bf5 5.Nf3 f6?! [Black
shows aggressive intentions. One would expect 5...e6] 6.Qb3 Nb6 7.a4 Nc6
8.Bf4?! [More consistent is 8.a5 Qd5 9.Nbd2 Qxb3 10.Nxb3 Nd5 11.Nc5+/-]
8...Qd5 9.Nbd2 Qxb3 10.Nxb3 Nd5 11.Bg3 0-0-0 12.Bc4 a6 13.0-0 Nb6
14.Bf7 g5 [14...e5 15.dxe5+/-] 15.Nc5=/+ [The best line is 15.a5! Nd5 16.c4
Nf4 17.Bxf4 gxf4 18.d5 Nb4 19.Nfd4+/-] 15...h5+/= [Black is attacking the
kingside with the hope to win material. 15...e5 16.Be6+ Bxe6 17.Nxe6 Re8=]
16.h4= [16.a5! Na8 17.Be6+ Bxe6 18.Nxe6+/=] 16...g4 17.Nd2 e5 18.Be6+
Bxe6 19.Nxe6 Re8 20.Nxf8 Rhxf8 21.dxe5 Nxe5 22.Bxe5 Rxe5 23.a5 Rd8
24.axb6 Rxd2 25.b4 Ree2= [25...cxb6 26.Rad1 Rc2 27.Rd6 Rf5-+]
26.Rad1?-+ [Out of fear I played to exchange a set of rooks when more
aggressive action was required. I should have looked more closely at the h-
pawns and played 26.Ra5! g3 27.Rxh5 gxf2+ 28.Kh2 Re1 29.Rh8+ Kd7
30.Rh7+ Kc8=] 26...cxb6 27.g3 Rxf2 28.Rxd2 Rxd2 29.Rf5 Rd3 30.Kg2
Rxc3 31.Rxh5 Rc2+ 32.Kg1 Rc4 33.Rf5 Rxb4 34.h5 Re4 35.Rxf6 Re8
36.h6 Rh8 37.Rxb6 a5 38.Rg6 b5 39.Rb6 b4 40.Ra6 b3= [Premature. Black
should first play 40...Kb7! 41.Rxa5 Rxh6-/+ and it would be difficult for
White to save the game.] 41.Rxa5 Rxh6 42.Rb5 Re6 43.Rxb3 Re4 44.Kf2
Kd7 45.Re3 Re6 46.Rxe6 Kxe6 47.Ke2 Kd6 1/2-1/2
17 - Rocky Tops Gambit Lover
"RockyTop" found an interesting endgame win in an Internet Chess Club
blitz game against "Gambit-Lover". I watched the game live.
In this pawn ending was that White started the ending a pawn down. He
managed to win through a better king position.
The opening was a Scandinavian Defence Portuguese Variation with 2.exd5

Nf6 3.d4 Bg4. White can choose 4.f3, 4.Nf3 or even 4.Bb5+!? Here
"RockyTop" played the natural 4.Be2. Eventually "Gambit-Lover" got the
better position, but "RockyTop" fought back and won. I enjoyed the battle of
ideas in this endgame.
RockyTop (1400) - Gambit-Lover (1541), ICC 0 8 u Internet Chess Club,

25.07.2013 begins 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Nf6 3.d4 Bg4 4.Be2 [A trap can be set
with 4.Bb5+ c6 5.dxc6 Bxd1? (5...Nxc6 6.Nf3+/=) 6.c7+ Nc6 7.cxd8Q+
Rxd8 8.Kxd1+- and White has won a piece.] 4...Bxe2 5.Qxe2 Qxd5 6.Nf3
Nc6 7.c4 Qe4 8.Nc3 Qxe2+ 9.Kxe2 e6 10.h3 0-0-0 11.Be3 Bb4 12.Rac1
Bxc3 13.Rxc3 h6 14.Ra3 a6 15.Rc1 g5 16.Rcc3 [White could try 16.b4!?
Nxb4 17.Ne5 Rhf8 18.Ra4 Nc6 19.Nxc6 bxc6 20.Rxa6=] 16...g4 17.hxg4
Nxg4 18.Rcb3 Nxe3 19.fxe3 Rhg8 20.Kf2 f6 21.Rd3 Rg4 22.Nh2 Re4
23.d5 [23.g4=] 23...Ne5 24.Rdc3 Rxc4 [24...Nxc4 25.Ra4 exd5-+] 25.dxe6
Rxc3 26.Rxc3 Re8 27.Nf3 Rxe6 28.Nxe5 Rxe5 29.Rc4 Kd7 30.Rh4 h5
31.Kf3 c6 32.Rb4 Rb5 33.Rxb5 axb5 34.Kg3 Ke6 [Black gets sidetracked
by White's kingside activity and drifts that way. Black has five chances in a
row to play the winning 34...b4-+] 35.Kh4 Kf5 36.Kxh5 c5 37.g4+ Ke5
38.Kg6? [38.a3!= draws] 38...c4 [This is Black's last chance to win with
38...b4 39.b3 b5 40.Kf7 c4-+ queening the c-pawn.] 39.a3 b6? [The losing
move. There is a draw with 39...Ke6 40.Kg7 Ke7 when Black holds the
opposition.] 40.Kf7 b4 41.axb4 b5 42.Kg6 [White has more than one way to
win: 42.Ke7 f5 43.gxf5 Kxf5 44.Kd6 Ke4 45.Kc5 Kxe3 46.Kxb5+-] 42...Ke6
43.Kg7 Ke5 44.Kf7 f5 45.g5 Ke4 46.g6 Kxe3 47.g7 f4 48.g8Q f3 49.Qg3
Ke2 50.Qe5+ [Another winning idea is 50.Qg4 Ke3 51.Ke6 f2 52.Qd1+-]
50...Kf1 51.Qe3 [Since White's win requires pushing the b-pawn, more
efficient is 51.Qxb5!+- quickly winning all three pawns.] 51...f2 52.Ke6 c3
53.bxc3 Kg1 54.Kd5 Kh1 55.Qf3+ Kg1 56.Qxf2+ Kxf2 57.c4 bxc4
58.Kxc4 Ke3 59.b5 Black resigns 1-0
18 - Niven Center Counter
The Scandinavian Defence used to be called the Center Counter Defence
after 1.e4 d5.
Years ago it was considered a weak opening that few masters would play.
Over the past 40 years it has gradually become more and more popular at the
grandmaster level.
If White wants a theoretical advantage 2.exd5 is preferred. But alas I have

had a fondness for my other passions with 2.Nc3 (Queen's Knight Attack)
and 2.e4!? (Blackmar-Diemer Gambit).
After 2.exd5, Black has two ways to recapture. The most popular variations
are: (A) 2...Qxd5 3.Nc3 Qa5; (B) 2...Qxd5 3.Nc3 Qd6; or (C) 2...Nf6 3.d4
Bg4.
Once in a while (about 6% of the time), I play this opening as Black. In the
1989 USCF Golden Squires Finals, I chose the Scandinavian Defence vs
John Niven.
We avoided the critical lines, even though in postal chess we could use
books. Play was inaccurate before the game was simplified with all queens
and center pawns exchanged.
It turned out to be a final round short draw. Our ratings were only 2 points
apart - so, no rating change.
Niven (1959) - Sawyer (1961), corr USCF 89SF10, 28.07.1992 begins 1.e4
d5 2.exd5 Qxd5 3.Nf3 [3.Nc3] 3...Bg4 4.Nc3 Qa5 5.Be2 [5.h3+/=] 5...Nc6
6.d4 e5 [6...0-0-0!=] 7.Bd2 0-0-0 [Black should try the wild line 7...Bxf3
8.Bxf3 Nxd4 9.Bxb7 Rb8=] 8.dxe5 [Now the tension fizzles out. White
should win a pawn with 8.Nxe5 Nxe5 9.Bxg4+ Nxg4 10.Qxg4+ with little
compensation for Black.] 8...Nxe5 9.Nxe5 Qxe5 10.h3 Bxe2 11.Qxe2 Qxe2+
12.Nxe2 Bc5 1/2-1/2
19 - Wolff vs Herb Hickman
In the Scandinavian Defence, White must decide whether or not to play d2-d4
on moves 2-6.
After this natural push the pawn may become a target on d4, therefore some
players prefer to play only to d3.
In many other openings White advances this pawn slowly.
Take for example the Bishops Opening 2.Bc4 Nf6 3.d3, or the Ruy Lopez
3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.d3, or the Giuoco Pianissimo 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.d3. In all
these openings White develops is light squared bishop classically with Bc4 or
Bb5.
The Scandinavian Defence, also known as the Center Counter Defence,

allows for the same type of set-up after 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Qxd5 3.Nc3 Qa5.
Here is a game between two masters. Stephen Wolff took on Herbert W.

Hickman. These were former opponents of mine.
White played the more conservative continuation 4.Bc4 Nf6 5.d3 and still
mounts a strong attack.
The game ends in checkmate on move 28. I ponder playing the Scandinavian
Defence. I give it a try from time to time.
Daniel Quinones provided me with a lot of his detailed research. Often I

avoided 2.exd5 with 2.d4 for a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit.
At any rate, the game below is a pretty example of a successful kingside

assault.
Wolff - Hickman, CCLA North Am ch corr, 1995 begins 1.e4 d5 2.exd5

Qxd5 3.Nc3 Qa5 4.Bc4 Nf6 5.d3 [The main line is 5.d4] 5...c6 [5...e6]
6.Nge2 [6.Bd2+/=] 6...e5 7.0-0 Bg4 [7...Be7 8.Ng3+/=] 8.f3 Bh5 9.Ng3
Bc5+ 10.Kh1 0-0 11.Nxh5 Nxh5 12.f4 Nxf4 13.Bxf4 exf4 14.Rxf4 Nd7
15.Rf5!? [15.Qh5+/-] 15...Qc7 16.Ne4 Be7 17.Qf3 Kh8 18.Rxf7 Rxf7
19.Qxf7 Qe5 20.Be6 Qxb2 [20...Nf6 21.Qxe7+/-] 21.Re1 Bb4 22.c3 Bxc3
[22...Rf8 23.Qxd7+-] 23.Ng5 Ne5 24.Qf5 Ng6 25.Nf7+ Kg8 26.Ne5+ Kh8
27.Nxg6+ hxg6 28.Qh3# 1-0
20 - David Parsons Attacks
David Parsons invited me to join the chess club in Williamsport,
Pennsylvania back in 1994.
Dave was fun to play. He was fond of all attacks and counter attacks.
Parsons had many pet lines where he would play for his familiar patented
attacks.
His openings worked against most club players.
Here in a Scandinavian Defence, I chose the main line 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 rather
than my usual 2.d4 (which heads toward a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit).
In the game below I castled kingside and David attacked.
Taking aim at h2 through my g3, he hit me directly with Bd6, Qc7, Ng4 and
h5-h4.
Black's prospects looked reasonable until he overdid it.
The one mistake that actually cost Black the game was his bold sacrifice of a
whole piece.
If his king had been reasonably safe, his attack might have worked.
Unfortunately for Black, his king was undefended and it still sat on his
original square.
White opened the center. Suddenly Black was helpless.
Sawyer (2011) - Parsons (1682), Williamsport, PA 1994 begins 1.e4 d5

2.exd5 Qxd5 3.Nc3 Qa5 4.d4 c6 5.Nf3 Bg4 [5...Nf6] 6.Be2 Bxf3 7.Bxf3 Nf6
8.0-0 e6 9.a3 [9.Bf4+/=] 9...Nbd7 10.Be3 Bd6 11.b4 Qc7 12.g3 h5 13.Ne4
Nxe4 14.Bxe4 Nf6 15.Bg2 Ng4 16.Qe2 f5 [Black can equalize with
16...Nxe3 17.Qxe3 h4=] 17.c4 h4 18.c5 [18.Bg5+/=] 18...Nxh2? [Bold but
reckless. Better is 18...Be7 19.Bf4 Qd7 20.Rad1+/=] 19.cxd6 Qxd6 20.Bf4
Qxd4 21.Qxe6+ 1-0
21 - Muir Queen Sacrifice
Sometimes I play the Center Counter Scandinavian Defence. I know. It’s rare
that I play Black here, but sometimes I do. Against Bob Muir, I won a pawn
and then the Exchange. But White played on.
There appeared to be potential technical problems forcing an endgame that

would win for Black anytime soon. However there were tactical possibilities.
As I probed for weak points, I found a queen sacrifice.
If Bob took my queen, I mated his king. If he ran away, I'd be up a rook. This
left White was up a creek without a paddle. Time to turn the board around
and play a new game.
Muir (1800) - Sawyer (2010), Williamsport, PA 11.1998 begins 1.e4 d5

2.exd5 Qxd5 3.Nc3 Qa5 4.d4 Nf6 5.a3!? [This seems like a waste of time.
Most popular is 5.Nf3] 5...c6 6.Nf3 Bf5 7.Bd3 Bxd3 8.Qxd3 e6 9.0-0 Nbd7
10.Bf4 Be7 11.b4 Qd8 12.Rad1 0-0 13.Na4 Nd5 14.Bg3 b5 15.Nb2
[Running away is not the solution. Better is 15.Nc5+/=] 15...a5 16.c4 bxc4
17.Nxc4 axb4 18.axb4 Nxb4 19.Qe4 Nd5 20.Nfe5 Nc3 21.Qxc6 [Better is to
be down just a pawn with 21.Qc2 Nxe5 22.Qxc3 Nxc4 23.Qxc4 Qd5-/+]
21...Nxe5 22.Bxe5 Rc8 23.Qa6 Nxd1 24.Rxd1 Bf6 25.Nb6 [25.Nd6 Rc2-/+]
25...Rc6 26.Bxf6 gxf6 27.Rb1 Qxd4 28.Qb7 Qb2! 0-1
22 - Conlon in Scandinavian
The Scandinavian Defence always has had its supporters as it is easy to play
and very logical.
Early computer programs would play this Center Counter Defence vs me in

the 1970s.
Of course back then the computer programs were very weak by today's
standards.
This opening has been far more popular in the past 20 years among
grandmasters than it was 30 or 40 years ago.
Here in the first APCT email Queen Section, I took a break from my normal
Blackmar-Diemer Gambit with 2.d4!?
I played the standard 2.exd5.
My game vs Greg Conlon saw him defend quite well.
We reached a drawish double rook endgame where it was difficult for either
side to make any progress.
Sawyer (1969) - Conlon (1709), corr APCT EMQ-1, 11.1995 begins 1.e4 d5
2.exd5 Qxd5 3.Nc3 Qa5 4.d4 Nf6 5.Nf3 Bf5 6.Bc4 e6 7.0-0 c6 8.Re1 Bb4
[More common is 8...Nbd7] 9.Bd2 0-0 10.a3 Bxc3 11.Bxc3 Qc7 12.h3
[12.Ne5 Nbd7=] 12...Nbd7 13.Bd3 Bxd3 14.Qxd3 Rfd8 15.Qe2 c5 16.dxc5
Qxc5 17.Bb4 [White could try 17.Rad1 or 17.Bd4] 17...Qc6 18.Rec1 a5
19.Bd2 Nc5 [19...h6=] 20.Ne5 Qe4 21.Qxe4 Nfxe4 22.Be3 Nd7 23.Nxd7
Rxd7 24.Kf1 b5 [24...Nd2+ 25.Bxd2 Rxd2 26.Ke1=] 25.c4 [With 25.Rd1+/=
White might have a slight advantage with a bishop vs knight and pawns on
both sides of the board.] 25...bxc4 26.Rxc4 Nd2+ 27.Bxd2 Rxd2 28.b4 axb4
29.Rxb4 Kf8 30.Re4 Rc8 31.Re2 Rd5 32.a4 Ra5 33.Rea2 [Or 33.f3=]
33...Rc4 34.Ra3 1/2-1/2
Book 5 – Chapter 2 – Alekhine Defence
1.e4 Nf6
The Alekhine Defence has been one of my favorite openings from either side
of the board. I begin with the games where White does not play 2.e5 or
2.Nc3.
23 - Omega Gambit Alekhine
The risky Omega Gambit sees White sacrifice the e4 pawn for open lines
after 1.d4 Nf6 2.e4 Nxe4. This gambit can be successful, but it cannot be
recommended. The risk does not match the reward.
At one point I had faced this as Black 13 times in the Alekhine Defence after
1.e4 Nf6 2.d4 Nxe4. This reaches the same position as 1.d4 Nf6 2.e4 Nxe4.
Usually from the Alekhine Defence 1.e4 Nf6 move order, the pawn push 2.d4
comes as a blitz pre-move.
Francesco Cavicchi wrote that he was "not particularly happy" with this
gambit. If White plays this on purpose, he is a fast player who wins on time
or entices Black to blunder in blitz.
In my database of 300 Omega Gambits, White's average rating was 2219

scoring 40% with a performance of 2172. My score as Black was +11 =1 -1.
This game was played at bullet speed.
guest - Sawyer (2000), ICC 0 1 u, Internet Chess Club, 1999.03.24 begins

1.e4 Nf6 2.d4 Nxe4 3.Bd3 [3.Nc3 Nxc3 4.bxc3 d5-/+] 3...Nf6 4.Nf3 d5 5.O-
O Bg4 6.h3 Bxf3 7.Qxf3 c6 8.c4 Nbd7 9.Nc3 e6 10.Bg5 [10.c5 e5!=]
10...Be7 [10...dxc4=+] 11.Rfe1 dxc4 12.Bxc4 O-O 13.Rac1 Qa5 [13...Nb6!-
/+] 14.Bb3? [14.Bd2 Qb6 =+] 14...Qxg5 [Unregistered player White
disconnected and forfeits] 0-1
24 - Foust 3.Bxf7+ Sacrifice
In the 1989 USCF Golden Knights Postal Tournament Semi-Final round
another opponent was Michael Foust.
For this USCF postal game, it was an Alekhine Defence 2.Bc4 Nxe4 3.Bxf7+
variation.
We played two previous APCT games with both of us winning one.
One of those games was in the Bird's Opening.
The other was a most awesome Blackmar-Diemer Gambit.
I have had a lifetime of chess.
From the years 1992 to 2000, four of my books were published.
For the years 2011-2016, I wrote a blog at the pace of one post per day.
I could not do thousands of games in a year, so it took many years to cover

my favorite games from 45 years of play.
Hopefully there remains plenty of life in me to write for years to come!
Foust (1900) - Sawyer (2041), corr USCF 89NS48, 24.05.1991 begins 1.e4
Nf6 2.Bc4 Nxe4 3.Bxf7+ Kxf7 4.Qh5+ Kg8 5.Qd5+ e6 6.Qxe4 d5 7.Qe2
Nc6 8.Nf3 Qf6!? [White forfeited the game at this point. Jeff Caveney posted
the following comment on April 7, 2005: "Back in the mid-1990s on one of
the Usenet chess groups Max Burkett shared an amazing line for Black
discovered by Fritz in this variation: 8...e5 and if 9.Nxe5 Nd4! 10.Qd3
(10.Qd1 Qg5-+; 10.Qh5 g6 11.Nxg6 hxg6 12.Qxg6+ Bg7 and the piece
should crush the three pawns here.) 10...Bc5 11.0-0 (11.Qc3 Qg5!-+; 11.Na3
Qg5-+) 11...Bf5-+." All very interesting. Looks good. A possible
continuation after my 8...Qf6!? is 9.0-0 e5 10.Nc3 e4 11.Nxd5 Qf7 12.Qxe4
Bf5 13.Qc4 Be6-+] 0-1
25 - Leo Schirber vs 2.d3
We reach the 8th round of the US Junior Open. Leo Schirber was a friend of
Spencer Lucas, the only USCF rated master as I recall in the 1974 event.
Both players had travelled to Lancaster, Pennsylvania from the southwestern
part of the USA.
Leo Schirber has not been active in tournament play recently for many years,
but his last USCF published rating was 2265. He was about 1900 and rapidly
rising when I played him in 1974.
I responded to his Alekhine Defence with 1.e4 Nf6 2.d3 intending a King's
Indian Attack.
On move three I changed my mind. Forget the KIA. Attack! It was my final
chance in the final round vs a higher rated player.
The move 2.d3 is fine, although rather passive. As Black I have faced 2.d3
110 times and I scored 76%, a great percentage for Black. Anyway, after
wasting a move 2.d3 only to play 5.d4. Yep, that didn't work well.
Attack or don't, but do not just attack half-heartedly. I have this same view of
military action. Either fight to win, or stay home.
In chess, like in military action, just hanging around the battlefield without
going all out just gets your own guys killed. That does not accomplish
anything positive. My hesitation lost the battle.
Schirber defended well. My troops were mortally wounded. My KIA went

from Kings Indian Attack to KIA as Killed In Action.
Sawyer - Schirber, US Junior Open (8), 09.08.1974 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.d3 d5
3.e5?! Nfd7 4.e6?! fxe6 5.d4 e5 [5...c5!?] 6.dxe5 Nxe5 7.Qh5+?! Nf7 [It is
ridiculous to play move that count on your opponent's poor play, especially if
your opponent is a good player. I was hoping for 7...Ng6? 8.Bd3] 8.Bd3 g6
9.Qh4 e5 10.Qa4+ Nc6 11.Nc3 Be6 12.Bd2 Bg7 [Black controls the center,
is well developed and up a pawn. White is lost.] 13.f3 a6 14.b4 Qh4+ 15.g3
Qxb4 16.Qxb4 Nxb4 17.Rb1 Nxd3+ 18.cxd3 0-0-0 19.Na4 b6 20.Ne2 Bf5
21.Rb3 e4 [Good moves for Black are obvious and powerful. He never
makes a mistake. Well played.] 22.fxe4 dxe4 23.dxe4 Bxe4 24.Rf1 Ne5
25.Nf4 0-1
2.Nc3 d5 3.exd5
This line is both a Scandinavian and Alekhine Defence.
26 - Boomerang Trap
Josef M Felber falls for an Alekhine Defence trap only to come out smelling
like a rose. Turns out it is a boomerang trap where Tim the Trapper gets
caught! I reached into the rose bush and grabbed the thorns.
What began as a Scandinavian Defence quickly transposed to an Alekhine as

our moves 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Nf6 3.Nc3 reached the same position as 1.e4 Nf6
2.Nc3 d5 3.exd5.
Usually I play the Black pieces in this position and continue 3...Nxd5 4.Bc4
Nb6. Josef Felber chose 4...e6.
In unfamiliar territory as White I thought that I saw a way to win a pawn. My

creativity was a bad idea.
Valentin Bogdanov writes, "White can try to grab a pawn by 5.Bxd5?! exd5
6.Qe2+, but this is a highly dubious venture."
This game proves him right. Twenty years later, I know better.
I do not think Jozef Felber meant to set a trap, but it worked like a charm.
Sawyer (2100) - Felber (2025), CM.1995.0.00005 IECG, 1995 begins 1.e4

d5 2.exd5 Nf6 3.Nc3 Nxd5 4.Bc4!? e6 5.Bxd5 [Played with the idea of
winning a pawn, but this is too risky. Better would be 5.Nf3= with a small
lead in development.] 5...exd5 6.Qe2+?! [6.d4 is a French Defence Exchange
Variation.] 6...Be6 7.Qb5+?! [7.d4] 7...Nc6 8.Qxb7 Nb4 9.Qb5+ Qd7 [A
good idea is 9...c6! 10.Qa4 Bd7 (Bogdanov) 11.a3 c5 12.Nb5 Nxc2+
13.Qxc2 Bxb5-/+] 10.Qxd7+ Kxd7 11.Kd1 d4 12.a3 Nc6 13.Ne4?! [White
has 13.Nce2! d3 14.Nf4 dxc2+ 15.Kxc2 Bf5+ 16.d3 Nd4+ 17.Kc3 c5
18.Be3=] 13...d3 [More accurate would be 13...Bd5! 14.f3 d3-/+] 14.cxd3?
[A fatal mistake. White may survive with 14.Nf3 Re8=/+] 14...Nd4! 15.Rb1
Bb3+ 16.Ke1 Bc2 17.Nc3 Re8+ 18.Kf1 Bxd3+ 19.Nge2 Nxe2 20.Nxe2
Rxe2 0-1
27 - Chandler to Attack!
This game features Bill Chandler playing a nice attack in the Scandinavian
Defence.
The variation 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Nf6 3.Nc3 transposes into the Alekhine
Defence.
That Alekhine move order would be 1.e4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d5 3.exd5.
Chandler has won a game in the same line that I had seen before.
Here Bill Chandler as Black played using the handle Attaqarax.
His opponent with the White pieces used the handle Bekychess.
White swapped knights on move four which brought the Black queen out to
the center of the board as a commanding presence.
Bekychess - Attaqarax, Internet Chess Club, 2012 begins 1.e4 d5

[Scandinavian Defence.] 2.exd5 Nf6 3.Nc3 [Transposing to the Alekhine
Defence.] 3...Nxd5 4.Nxd5 Qxd5 5.Nf3 Bg4 6.Be2 Nc6 7.0-0 e6 8.c4 [White
might do better to play 8.d4 0-0-0 9.c3 Bd6 10.h3+/=] 8...Qf5 9.d4 0-0-0
10.Be3 h5 [An amazingly good move is 10...Bc5!=/+] 11.h3 Be7 12.a3 Bxh3
13.gxh3 Qxh3 14.Bf4? [14.Qd3 Qg4+ 15.Kh1 Nxd4 16.Nxd4 Qh3+ 17.Kg1
Bd6 18.f4 Qg3+ 19.Kh1 with a draw.] 14...Rh6! 15.Bxh6 gxh6 16.Ng5 Bxg5
[The best line seems to be 16...Rg8! 17.f4 Bxg5-+] 17.Qd3 Be3 18.Qh7?
[Somewhat better is 18.Qxe3 Rg8+ 19.Qg3 Rxg3+ 20.fxg3 Qxg3+ 21.Kh1
Nxd4-+] 18...Nxd4 19.Bd1 Qg3+? [Missing a mate in three: 19...Bf4 20.Re1
Qh2+ 21.Kf1 Qh1#] 20.Kh1 Qh4+? [20...Bxf2 21.Rxf2 Qxf2-+ and Black
has a dominating position.] 21.Kg2 Qg5+ 22.Kh3? Rg8?-+ 23.Qxg8+ Qxg8
24.fxe3 Nf5 25.Kh2?-+ Qg3+ 26.Kh1 Qh3+ 27.Kg1 Nxe3?-+ 28.Rf2?
Qg3+ 29.Kh1 Qxf2 0-1
28 - Alston Attacks Alekhine
I employed the provocative Alekhine Defence as Black to dare opponents to
attack me. One early Alekhine tournament game was vs Al Alston played in
1981 at Hatboro near Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Years later an Al Alston
was a notable community organizer in Philly. It might be the same guy. Two
million people live in the greater Philadelphia area, so there might be more
than one person with this same name. The only other "Alston" I ever heard of
was Walter Alston. He was the major league baseball manager for the old
Brooklyn and Los Angeles Dodgers for 23 years. I doubt that Walter and Al
were related.
This Scandinavian Variation of the Alekhine Defence was discussed in my

review of the book by Lakdawala. The most challenging way to attack the
Alekhine Defence is by 2.e5!
Some avoid critical theory and play 2.Nc3. Black can avoid the Alekhine by
2...e5 which is a Vienna or by 2...d6 which becomes a Pirc. There is no need
for Black to learn these other openings.
After 2...d5 White chose the simple swap 3.exd5 instead of the space gaining
3.e5, or 3.d4!? Blackmar-Diemer Gambit. Here I took too many risks, but I
managed to outplay White in the end.
Alston (1708) - Sawyer, Hatboro, PA (3), 18.07.1981 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.Nc3
d5 3.exd5 Nxd5 4.Nxd5 [4.Bc4 is sharper.] 4...Qxd5 5.d4 Bf5 6.Nf3 Qe4+
[6...Nc6=] 7.Be3 Qxc2 8.Qxc2 Bxc2 9.Rc1 Be4 10.Rxc7 Bc6? [10...f6!=.
Black gets carried away.] 11.Bf4 [11.Ne5!+- would have punished me.]
11...Nd7 12.Bc4 [12.d5! Bxd5 13.Bb5 Bc6 14.Bxc6 bxc6 15.Rxc6+/=]
12...e6 13.Ne5? [Too late. White could play 13.Ke2=] 13...Bd6 14.Nxc6
Bxc7 15.Bxc7 Rc8 16.Bf4 Rxc6 17.Bd3 Ke7 18.0-0 Nf6 19.Bg5 [19.Bd2
Rhc8-/+] 19...Rd8 20.Be4 Rb6 21.Bxf6+ [Or 21.Bc2 Rxb2 22.Bb3 Re2-+]
21...Kxf6 22.b3 Rxd4 23.Bf3 Rd2 24.Ra1 Rb2 25.Bd1 Rd6 26.Bf3 b6
27.Be4 Rxa2 28.Re1 Rb2 29.h3 Rxb3 30.Kh2 Rd2 31.f4 Rbb2 32.Rc1 Rb4
33.Re1 a5 34.Bc6 a4 35.Ra1 b5 36.Ra3 Rb3 37.Ra1 a3 38.Bxb5 Rxb5
39.Rxa3 Rbb2 40.Rg3 Rxg2+ [Black gives up a rook to reach a winning
pawn ending, but of course 40...g6-+ and White is lost.] 41.Rxg2 Rxg2+
42.Kxg2 Kf5 43.Kf3 f6 44.h4 h5 45.Kg3 g5 46.fxg5 fxg5 47.hxg5 Kxg5
48.Kh3 Kf4 49.Kh4 e5 50.Kxh5 e4 51.Kh4 e3 52.Kh3 e2 53.Kg2 e1Q
54.Kh2 Kf3 0-1
29 - Chandler Scandinavian
Once again Bill Chandler wins a short blitz game played on the Internet
Chess Club. It illustrates a variation that is never played by masters but very
popular at the club level.
The game begins as a Scandinavian Defence and as an Alekhine Defence.

Both openings have a logical move order that meet in this common variation.
The same position could also be reached via the less popular Queen's Knight
Attack. Here is how:
Scandinavian Defence: 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Nf6 3.Nc3

Alekhine Defence: 1.e4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d5 3.exd5
Queen’s Knight: 1.Nc3 d5 (1...Nf6 2.e4 d5) 2.e4 Nf6 3.exd5
I spent one full chapter (of 10 chapters) in my Alekhine Defense Playbook

(published by Pickard & Son, 2000) covering 3.exd5 which reaches the game
position. 132 times I faced 4.Nxd5?! My average opponent was rated 1727.
Bill Chandler is playing Black with the handle "ProjectAlpha". I do not know
his opponent "Marlborito."
Marlborito - ProjectAlpha, ICC 5 0, 05.02.2012 begins 1.e4 d5

[Scandinavian Defence.] 2.exd5 Nf6 [Or 2...Qxd5 which Bauer
recommended in "Play the Scandinavian" After 3.Nc3 Black plays 3...Qa5 or
3...Qd6] 3.Nc3 [We have reached the Alekhine Defence. Bill Chandler asked
about 3.d4 Nxd5 4.c4 Nb4 but White is simply better after 5.a3! with a nice
space advantage.] 3...Nxd5 4.Nxd5?! [This knight exchange is common.]
4...Qxd5 5.d4 [White boldly occupies the center.] 5...Nc6 [Black applies
pressure to d4.] 6.Nf3 Bg4 7.c4 [7.Be2 0-0-0 8.c3 e5 and we have reached a
standard position in this popular sub-variation. This line has led to a lot of
short Black wins.] 7...Qf5 [7...Qd6!?] 8.Be2 0-0-0 9.d5? [Junior 12 prefers
9.Be3 Bxf3 10.Bxf3 Nxd4 11.Bg4 Nc2+ 12.Qxc2 Qxg4 13.0-0 e6 although
White has insufficient compensation for the pawn.] 9...e6 10.Nd4? [10.0-0
exd5 11.cxd5 Rxd5=/+ and Black has won a pawn.] 10...Nxd4 [Or
10...Bb4+! 11.Kf1 Bxe2+ and White is in deep trouble.] 11.Qxd4 [If 11.Bxg4
Qe4+ 12.Kf1 h5 Black has a strong attack.] 11...Bxe2 12.Kxe2 exd5 13.cxd5
Rxd5 14.Qxa7 [White wins back his pawn and gets promptly mated.]
14...Qd3+ 15.Ke1 Qd1# White is checkmated 0-1
30 - Lakdawala Book Review
The Alekhine Defence: move by move book by Cyrus Lakdawala is an
excellent and unique presentation on this opening. I have read 40 books on
the Alekhine Defence over the past 45 years. I even wrote one myself that
sold out. No book covers this aggressive counter attacking defense the same
way that International Master Cyrus Lakdawala does. Lakdawala is
informative, humorous and articulate, which makes him fun to read.
This book published by Everyman Chess in 2014 has their "move by move"
series approach. It has 57 deeply annotated games in 464 pages with
questions posed that typical chess students ask their teachers. There are
exercises where students can make a critical decision or search for a
combination.
Lakdawala presents a repertoire for Black with a couple of basic options. You
can choose either chapter one or two, or either chapter three or four. You
need everything in chapters five through nine.
Here is a summary of the nine chapter contents after 1.e4 Nf6:

1. Main Line Classical 2.e5 Nd5 3.d4 d6 4.Nf3 dxe5 5.Nxe5 c6
2. Westerinen's Anti-Main Line 3.d4 Nb6 intending 4.Nf3 d5
3. Symmetrical Exchange 3.c4 Nb6 4.d4 d6 5.exd6 exd6
4. Asymmetrical Exchange 3.c4 Nb6 4.d4 d6 5.exd6 cxd6
5. Four Pawns Attack 3.c4 Nb6 4.d4 d6 5.f4 g6 (not 5...dxe5)
6. Chase Variation 3.c4 Nb6 4.c5 Nd5 5.Bc4 e6 6.Nc3 Nxc3
7. 3.Nc3 Lines and Minor Variations 3.Nc3 Nxc3 4.dxc3 d6
8. 2.Nc3 Default Line 2.Nc3 d5 3.e5 Nfd7 4.d4 c5
9. Odds and Ends 2.d3 d5 3.Nd2 e5
Cyrus Lakdawala has two pet lines that are out of the ordinary for this
opening. First is 3.d4 Nb6 though he also covers the Main Line 3...d6 4.Nf3
dxe5. Second is 5.f4 g6 in the Four Pawns Attack (rather than 5...dxe5 6.fxe5
Nc6 7.Be3 Bf5 which he does not cover). Against the Exchange Variation he
plays both the solid 5...exd6 and the sharp 5...cxd6, depending on how badly
he needs a win in that game.
I enjoy Lakdawala as an author. A few reviewers complain about Lakdawala
and his occasional reference to issues in religion or politics when comparing
a chess concept, strategy or position.
His opinions do not bother me. I like religion, politics and chess openings. If
your preferences or passions in any of those three differ from mine, that is
fine with me.
I know why I am passionate about what I believe. I am happy and content

with my life and my viewpoints. Sometimes I agree with Lakdawala, but
always I like him.
Lakdawala has played this opening for decades. ICC has over 1000 of his
Alekhine's in their database; ICC has just over 200 of mine but my opponents
are not usually rated over 2300.
I have played about 3000 games with the Alekhine Defence. That includes
any games I played either as White or as Black.
They were club games, correspondence games, tournament games,

simultaneous games and blitz games.
Below is the game Sawyer vs Dunadan. I added two Lakdawala quotes from
his Game 51 vs Barquin to my game.
My personal score as Black vs 4.Nxd5 is 78% in 145 games.
Dunadan (1800) - Sawyer (2003), ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 24.05.2014

begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d5 3.exd5 Nxd5 4.Nxd5?! [Lakdawala: "I have had
this passive move played against me by lower rated players who hope to
swap their way to a draw."] 4...Qxd5 [Lakdawala: "Black gets a dream
Scandinavian and I already prefer my position."] 5.d4 Nc6 6.Nf3 Bg4 7.Be2
e5 [7...0-0-0 8.0-0 Nxd4 9.Nxd4 Bxe2 10.Qxe2 Qxd4 11.Bg5=] 8.0-0 [8.dxe5
Bxf3 9.Bxf3 Qxe5+ 10.Qe2 Qxe2+ 11.Bxe2 Bc5=] 8...0-0-0 [Cautious when
8...e4!=/+ is better for Black.] 9.c3 [Cautious when 9.c4!+/= is better for
White.] 9...exd4 10.Nxd4 [10.cxd4=] 10...Bxe2 11.Qxe2 Nxd4 12.cxd4
Qxd4 [12...Bd6=/+] 13.Be3 [13.Bg5!+/-] 13...Qe4 14.Rac1 Bd6 15.Rc4 Qd5
16.Rd1? [Black falls for my trap. 16.Bxa7=] 16...Bxh2+ 17.Kxh2 Qxd1
[White resigns] 0-1
2.Nc3 d5 3.e5
White plays the challenging 3.e5 to kick the Black knight.
31 - CraftyWiz 3.e5 d4
During the years 2003 to 2006 I played the Queen's Knight Attack practically
all the time with 1.Nc3.
Sometimes I would face the flexible 1...Nf6. Against the high rated
CraftyWiz, I continued 2.e4 d5. This line gave me the choice to transpose
into a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit with 3.d4 or to transpose into a
Scandinavian Defence with 3.exd5.
Instead I chose 3.e5 which is an Alekhine Defence. It felt weird. Why?

Because I was on the White side of a line that I usually play as Black.
In this position, Black has three third moves according to taste. I played
3...Ne4 90% of the time. Sometimes I tried 3...Nfd7 like a French Defence.
Other times I played as my opponent here with 3...d4. This last one might be
theoretically the best move.
The downside to the variation chosen is that Black is saddled with three pawn
islands. These can be difficult to defend in the endgame. But to offset this,
Black has active piece play in the middlegame. Thus the specifics of any
potential future ending are far from clear. The better player usually wins. This
Crafty is a Whiz. When it was done with me, I became a Was.

16.06.2004 begins 1.Nc3 Nf6 2.e4 d5 3.e5 d4 4.exf6 dxc3 5.fxg7 cxd2+
6.Qxd2 [6.Bxd2 Bxg7 7.c3 Nc6=] 6...Qxd2+ 7.Bxd2 Bxg7 8.0-0-0 Nc6
9.Bb5 [9.Bc4 Ne5=; 9.Nf3 Be6] 9...Bd7 [9...Bg4!?=] 10.Nf3 e6 [10...0-0-0
11.Rhe1] 11.Rhe1 [11.Kb1=] 11...a6 12.Bd3 h6 13.c3 0-0-0 14.Be3 f5
15.Bc4 Na5 16.Bf1 e5 17.Bc5 Be6 18.Kb1 Rxd1+ 19.Rxd1 Rd8 20.Rxd8+
Kxd8 21.g3 Kd7 22.Nd2 b5 23.Bg2 c6 24.b3 Nb7 25.Be3 Kd6 26.Kc2 Nc5
27.Nf3 Nd7 28.Ne1 c5 29.Bb7 a5 30.Nd3 [30.Ba6! b4 31.c4 e4 32.Ng2=]
30...c4 31.Nc1 Nc5 32.Bxc5+? [32.Bg2! cxb3+ 33.Nxb3 Nxb3 34.axb3 e4
35.Bf1 Kc6 36.Kb2=] 32...Kxc5 33.Bf3 cxb3+ 34.axb3 a4 35.b4+ Kb6
36.Be2 a3 37.Na2? [37.Bh5 Bd5 38.Bg6 f4-/+] 37...Bxa2 White resigns 0-1
32 - Matthews Mating Attack
The Alekhine Defence always brings a certain amount of risk to each side.
The active Black pieces are a danger to White. The White kingside space
advantage is a danger to Black.
In this contest vs Dawud Matthews, I got so excited achieving a strategic,

positional, tactical and material victory on the queenside that I ignored my
kingside.
I fell to a mating attack. I avoided checkmate on move 32 by resigning on

move 31. I won 10 Williamsport club games vs Dawud Matthews. This
crushing assault was his lone win.
We began with an Alekhine Defence 2.Nc3 d5 3.e5 Nfd7 variation. I prefer

3...Ne4 but sometimes play 3...d4. Here I choose 3...Nfd7 in French Defence
style.
I avoided closing in my bishop with 4...e6. Instead I swung my knight out of

the way to 4...Nb6!? to develop 5...Bf5. My pieces and pawns swarmed the
queenside to obtain a big advantage.
Then came the counterattack. His pawns started slowly with 3.e5 and 6.g4.
Then came a big finish with 18.h4, 23.f4, 25.h5, and 27.hxg6. Combine that
with checks like 29.Qxe6+and the rook sacrifice 31.Rh8+ and it was over.
Nice finish by Dawud Matthews.
Matthews - Sawyer (2010), Williamsport PA 1996 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.Nc3

d5 3.e5 Nfd7 4.d4 Nb6!? [4...e6 French Defence; 4...Nc6 Queens Knight
Defence] 5.b3?! [5.f4 Nc6 6.Nf3 Bg4=] 5...Bf5 6.g4 Bg6 7.Bd3 Bxd3
8.Qxd3 e6 9.Nf3 a6 10.a3 c5 11.b4 cxb4 12.axb4 Bxb4 13.Rb1 Nc6 14.Bg5
[14.0-0 Bxc3 15.Qxc3 Rb8=/+] 14...Qc7 15.0-0 Nc4 16.Rb3 [16.Nd1 h6!?-
/+] 16...b5 17.Ra1 0-0 [17...Bxc3 18.Qxc3 Qb6-+] 18.h4 Be7 [18...Bxc3
19.Qxc3 b4-+] 19.Kg2 Rfc8 20.Ne2 N6a5 [20...Nb4!-+] 21.Bxe7 Qxe7
22.Ng5 g6 23.f4 Nxb3 24.cxb3 Nb6 25.h5 Nd7 [Correct is 25...f6! 26.exf6
Qxf6 27.Rh1 Nd7-/+] 26.Rh1 h6 [26...Nf8 27.hxg6 fxg6 28.Rxh7 Qxg5!
29.fxg5 Kxh7=] 27.hxg6 fxg6 [If 27...f5 28.Rxh6 Qg7 29.Rh7 Qxg6
30.Rxd7+-] 28.Qxg6+ Qg7 29.Qxe6+ Kf8 30.Rxh6 Re8 31.Rh8+ 1-0
33 - Endgame Quack Up
In 1998 my Internet Chess Club ratings for standard, blitz and bullet were all
over 2200. I played the Alekhine Defence as Black and the Blackmar-Diemer
Gambit as White over and over again. For me to excel at my age, the
healthiest approach is to play a limited opening repertoire. Often I do not
make healthy choices.
When I play many different openings, my rating suffers severely. A broad

approach was fine for postal chess, because I could just look up the theory in
books. Nowadays I cannot remember at blitz speed, which richly rewards
repeated pattern recognition. I play whatever I feel like and my rating goes
wherever it goes.
One high rated computer that I faced in 1998 was "duckbreath". That leads
me to wonder about why it had that handle. It may be connected to a comedy
troupe "Duck's Breath Mystery Theatre" on National Public Radio, or to
Daffy Duck or Donald Duck.
In our Alekhine Defence 2.Nc3 d5 3.e5 Ne4 game, I hung around until we
reached a pawn ending that was won for me. Computers were notoriously
poor at endgames. The process of queening a pawn might take 20 moves or
more and 40 ply was beyond their horizon at blitz speed.
I was able to defeat many high rated opponents from time to time, because I
was a good endgame player. I could tell which endgames are winnable. This
15-minute game was unrated.
duckbreath - Sawyer, ICC u 15 0 Internet Chess Club, 29.12.1998 begins

1.e4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d5 3.e5 Ne4 4.d4 Nxc3 5.bxc3 c5 6.f4 [6.Nf3 Nc6=] 6...Nc6
7.Nf3 Bg4 8.Be2 e6 9.0-0 Be7 10.Rb1 [10.Be3 Qa5=] 10...Rb8 11.Bb5 0-0
12.Bxc6 bxc6 13.Rxb8 Qxb8 14.Ba3 Qb6 15.h3 Bxf3 16.Rxf3 Qa5 17.Qc1
Rb8 18.Kh2 Bf8 19.Rg3 cxd4 [19...g6-/+] 20.cxd4 [20.Bxf8! Kxf8 21.cxd4
c5 22.f5 exf5 23.Qg5 g6 24.e6=] 20...Bxa3 21.Qxa3 Qxa3 22.Rxa3 Rb7
23.Rb3 Rxb3 24.axb3 Kf8 25.Kg3 Ke7 26.Kf3 Kd7 27.g4 Kc7 28.Ke3 Kb6
29.f5 Kb5 30.h4 Kb4 31.Kd2 a5 32.Kd3? [32.h5! a4 33.bxa4 g6=] 32...a4
33.bxa4 Kxa4 34.c4 [Black also wins after 34.Kc3 g6!-+] 34...Kb3 35.c5 [Or
35.cxd5 cxd5 36.h5 g6-+] 35...Kb4 36.f6 g6 37.g5 Kb3 38.Kd2 Kc4 39.Ke3
Kc3 40.Kf3 Kxd4 41.Ke2 0-1
34 - Muir Closed Advance
Bob Muir loved to play Advance Variations in most semi-open positions such
as the French Defence, Caro-Kann Defence, Sicilian Defence or the Alekhine
Defence.
More space allowed him more freedom of piece movement. The flip side is
that a pawn on e5 can be a liability. The advanced pawn chain must be
defended. It limits White's dark squared bishop.
In the game below, all the heavy pieces were swapped off except the rooks.
Black was able to double his rooks to force the win of material.
Since this was likely an unrated skittles game played at a club, there was no
advantage playing it out. Once it became clear that Black would be up an
extra passed pawn or two, White resigned.
Muir (1800) - Sawyer (2011), Williamsport, PA 1995 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.Nc3
d5 3.e5 Ne4 4.d4 Nxc3 5.bxc3 c5 6.Nf3 Bg4 7.Bb5+ Nc6 8.Qd3 Bxf3
9.Qxf3 cxd4 10.Bxc6+ bxc6 11.cxd4 e6 12.0-0 Be7 13.c4 0-0 14.cxd5 cxd5
15.Qg3 Re8 16.Bh6 Bf8 17.a3 g6 [17...Qb6=/+] 18.Bd2 Qb6 19.Qd3 Rec8
20.Rfb1 Qc6 21.Bb4 Qc4 22.Qxc4 [22.Qe3=] 22...Rxc4 23.Bxf8 Kxf8
24.Rd1 Rb8 25.Kf1 Rb3 26.a4 a5 27.Ra2 Rbb4 0-1
35 - Dunworth and Taylor
FM Chris Dunworth first caught my attention with his 1988 annotation of
100 games in his booklet entitled "Developments in the Alekhine Defence
1985-1987".
In the olden days, databases were rare. Thus thematic opening monographs
were helpful. They were generally more focused and a lot cheaper than
buying every copy of Chess Informant.
Later Chris Dunworth did one of the Foxy Videos on the Alekhine Defence.
All of us who write books on the Alekhine Defense have our own approach.
The Dunworth approach is very good.
On page 51 of his Developments booklet, Dunworth writes of 1.e4 Nf6 2.Nc3

in part:
"With 2...e5 Black may transpose into the Vienna Game, but 2...d5 is more in
keeping with the spirit of the Alekhine... After 3.e5 Black... can play 3...Ne4
entering less well-trodden paths, with greater scope for innovative play."
In an Alekhine Defence Foxy video, Christopher Dunworth recommended

Black to play 2.Nc3 d5 3.e5 Ne4. This had long been my favorite.
Allen V. Taylor Jr tried a unique idea 4.Nxe4 dxe4 5.Qe2!? This threatened
both e4 and a check on b5.
The queens came off quickly. I mounted pressure on his center. A tactical
shot ended the contest.
The next year Allen Taylor played a Najdorf Sicilian Defence vs me in a

simultaneous exhibition where I scored +35 =1 -1; Allen was the only one
who beat me.
Taylor (1514) - Sawyer (2011), Williamsport PA 1995 begins 1.e4 Nf6

2.Nc3 d5 3.e5 Ne4 4.Nxe4 dxe4 5.Qe2!? Qd5 6.Qb5+ c6 7.Qxd5 cxd5 8.d3
Bf5 9.Be2 Nc6 10.g4 Bg6 11.Bf4 exd3 12.cxd3 Nb4 13.Rc1 Bxd3 14.Kd2
Bxe2 15.Nxe2 Nc6 16.a3 [16.h4 e6=/+] 16...e6 17.Bg3 Be7 18.h4 Kd7 19.f4
Rhc8 20.h5 Na5 21.Rxc8 Rxc8 22.b4 [If 22.Kd3 Nc4-+] 22...Nc4+ 23.Kc3
Nxa3+ 24.Kb3 Nb5 25.Rc1 Nd4+! 0-1
36 - Phillips Attacks Alekhine
After years with the Latvian Gambit in the late 1980s, I decided to try
something else in the early 1990s. I returned to the Alekhine Defence in my
later rounds of the 1989 USCF Golden Knights Postal Tournament. My game
with Martin Phillips was a good example of how to avoid 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 as
White.
White chooses 2.Nc3 often at the club level if he wishes to avoid the theory
of known positions after the immediate 2.e5. Black increased the pressure on
e4 with 1…Nf6 and 2…d5. White could not stand it any longer. He pushed
the pawn with 3.e5 in the game below.
By the way, White also has two additional transpositional options on move
three. First, White could angle for the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit with 3.d4!?
dxe4 4.f3. Second, he could opt for the Scandinavian Defence with 3.exd5.
That second option would reach the same position as 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Nf6
3.Nc3. White missed a good line on move 8 and soon got into trouble.
Phillips - Sawyer, corr USCF 1991 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d5 3.e5 Ne4
[Another popular line is 3...d4 4.exf6 dxc3 5.fxg7 cxd2+] 4.Nxe4 dxe4 5.d4
exd3 6.Bxd3 Nc6 7.Bf4 Qd4! [Attacking Bf4 and pawns on b2 and e5]
8.Bg3 [8.Ne2! Qc5= (risky is 8...Qxb2 9.0-0+/= when White has a huge lead
in development for the pawn.)] 8...Qxb2 9.Nf3 [9.Ne2] 9...Qc3+ 10.Nd2
Nxe5 11.Rb1 Nxd3+ 12.cxd3 Qxd3 13.Rb3 Qa6 [Or 13...Qd5-+] 14.Bxc7
Be6 15.Rb2 Bxa2 16.Qf3 Qe6+ 17.Kd1 Bd5 18.Qg3 f6 19.Re1 Qd7 20.Re3
e6 21.Rd3 b6 22.Nb1 Rc8 23.Bf4 Qa4+ 0-1
37 - Crafty Endgame Play
When I was writing my Alekhine Defense Playbook published by Pickard &
Son in 2000, I took every opportunity to play the Alekhine Defence. Here in
the 2.Nc3 d5 3.e5 Ne4 line, we quickly swapped queens and set of knights.
Another pair of minor pieces disappeared on move 10 and yet another pair on
move 13. Thus we rushed to an endgame. Back then, computers were not
quite so good in openings and endings due to their limited horizons.
Often I was able to draw higher rated silicon opponents by getting past the
middlegame as quickly as possible. This allowed my rating to get very close
to 2500 a few times. As I recall, I stayed over 2200 in ICC blitz for about five
years.
YucoII was a Crafty chess engine computer program that was steadily
improving when I played it on the Internet Chess Club in 1988. As noted
below, it was rated 2716 at that time. When it last disconnected Monday,
October 19, 1998, it had a blitz rating of 2821, had peaked at 3021, and its
bullet rating peaked at 3003.
Such computers were not easy to beat, but I had a chance. Alas I missed it on
move 49. Probably I was short of time.
YucoII (2716) - Sawyer (2316), ICC 4 0 Internet Chess Club, 01.04.1998

begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d5 3.e5 Ne4 4.Nxe4 dxe4 5.d4 exd3 6.Qxd3 Qxd3
7.Bxd3 Nc6 8.Bf4 [8.f4 g6=] 8...Bg4 [8...g5!? 9.Bxg5 Nxe5=] 9.Be4 0-0-0
10.Bxc6 bxc6 11.Ne2 e6 12.Ng3 Bf5 13.Nxf5 exf5 14.0-0 Bc5 15.Rae1
Rhe8 16.c3 Rd3 17.h4 g6 [17...h6!?=] 18.g3 Bf8 19.Rd1 Red8 20.Rxd3
Rxd3 21.Re1 Kd7 22.Kf1 Ke6 23.Be3 c5 24.c4 Bg7 25.b3 Bf8 26.Ke2 Rd7
27.Bf4 c6 28.Ke3 Bg7 29.Kf3 Rd3+ 30.Ke2 Rd7 31.Kf1 Bf8 32.Kg1 Bg7
33.Kg2 Bf8 34.h5 Rd8 35.h6 Rd7 36.Bg5 Rd3 37.Kf1 Rd4 38.f3 Rd3
39.Kf2 Rd4 40.Ke2 Rd7 41.Ke3 Rd4 42.f4 Rd7 43.Re2 Rd4 44.Rd2 Rxd2
45.Kxd2 Be7 46.Bxe7 Kxe7 47.Ke3 [47.Kc3=] 47...f6 48.exf6+ Kxf6
49.Kf2 [White can draw with 49.a3 a5 50.Kd3 g5 51.Ke3 Kg6 52.Kf2 Kxh6
53.Kg2 Kh5 54.Kh3 h6 55.a4 Kg6 56.Kg2= and Black has no way to
penetrate.] 49...Ke6 [Here I missed a win with 49...g5! 50.Ke3 Kg6-+]
50.Kg2 Kf6 51.Kf2 Ke6 [51...g5!-+] 52.Kf3 Kf6 53.Kf2 [Drawn by
repetition] 1/2-1/2
38 - Grifter with 3.e5 Ne4
Here is a critical opening variation where I got a draw vs a 2896 rated
opponent. Usually I am on the Black side of the Alekhine Defence, but here
is a game that transposed into this opening from a Queens Knight Attack.
After 1.Nc3 d5 2.e4, Black played 2...Nf6 instead of a Van Geet Variation
with 2...d4. The same position after two moves can be reached from a
Scandinavian Defence after 1.e4 d5 2.Nc3 Nf6.
More common is the Alekhine move order 1.e4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d5, which allows
for a possible transposition to the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit after 3.d4!? dxe4
4.f3.
I chose the Alekhine move 3.e5. The idea behind 4.Nce2 was to play 5.d4
and trap the e4 knight with 6.f3.
Back in 2003 I was still playing some good chess. My opponent was
"Grifter". This handle is no longer active on ICC. I do not remember if it was
a chess engine or a human player.
That handle made me think of the 1990 movie "The Grifters", staring
Anjelica Huston, John Cusack and Annette Bening.
The term "Grifter" refers to someone who is tricky and pulls off swindles.
Somehow Black swindled himself and walked into an inferior line.
To escape feared danger, my opponent chose to take a quick draw by

repetition.
Sawyer (2401) - Grifter (2896), ICC 3 0 u Internet Chess Club, 22.07.2003

begins 1.Nc3 d5 2.e4 Nf6 3.e5 Ne4 4.Nce2 d4 [4...f6=] 5.c3 Nc6 6.cxd4
[6.Nxd4+/-] 6...Ng5 7.f4 Ne6 8.Nf3 g6 9.d3 [9.d5! Qxd5 10.d4+/-] 9...Ncxd4
10.Nexd4 Nxd4 11.Nxd4 [11.Qa4+ Nc6 12.Be3=] 11...Qxd4 12.Qe2 Qb4+
13.Qd2 Qb6 14.Qf2 Qb4+ 15.Qd2 Qb6 16.Qf2 Qb4+ 17.Qd2 Game drawn
by repetition 1/2-1/2
39 - Alekhine and BDG
Each Thanksgiving I am thankful for family and friends that bring me joy
each year. In chess I am thankful for the openings like the Blackmar-Diemer
Gambit and the Alekhine Defence.
All four of my original published chess opening books sold out all printed
copies. For that I say "Thank you" to my readers of the past 25 years. Your
encouragement keeps me writing.
I am not sure why the Alekhine Defence scored well for me. My performance
rating as Black after 1.e4 Nf6 rivals my good results with 1.e4 e5.
Both openings brought me more wins than I could expect with anything else,
even though other lines are just as good in theory.
Here is the 2.Nc3 d5 3.e5 Ne4 variation that I played vs my old blitz friend
"blik". In the 4.Nce2 line White tries to trap Black's centrally located knight.
Usually I chose 4...d4, but FM Chris Dunworth recommends 4...f6 as a better
choice for Black.
"blik" and its cousin "Rookie" were strong chess engines that usually made
me look like a turkey with the stuffing knocked out of it. Here I outplayed
"blik" and won in the bishop ending.

begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d5 3.e5 Ne4 4.Nce2 d4 5.c3 dxc3 [5...Nc6 6.Nxd4
Nxd4 7.Qa4+ c6 8.Qxd4 Qxd4 9.cxd4 Ng5 10.Bc4+/=] 6.Nxc3 Nxc3 7.bxc3
e6 8.Nf3 c5 9.Bc4 Be7 10.0-0 0-0 11.Bb2 b6 12.Qe2 Bb7 13.d4 cxd4
14.Rad1 Nc6 15.cxd4 Nb4 16.a3 Nd5 17.Qe4 Qd7 18.Rc1 Rac8 19.Bd3 g6
20.Rxc8 Rxc8 21.Rc1 [21.h3 Nb4 22.Qe3 Nxd3 23.Qxd3 a5-/+] 21...Rxc1+
22.Bxc1 Qc6 23.Bb2 [23.Qe1 Qa4-/+] 23...Nb4 [23...Qa4 24.Bc2 Qb5
25.Bc1 Ba6-+] 24.Qxc6 Nxc6 25.Nd2 Kf8 26.Ne4 h5 27.Nd6 [27.f3 Ke8
28.Kf2=] 27...Bxd6 28.exd6 Ke8 29.Bc1 Kd7 30.Bf4 Nd8 31.Bb5+ Bc6
32.Ba6 f5 33.Kf1 Nf7 34.Kg1 Nxd6 35.Bd3 Be4 36.Ba6 Kc6 37.a4 [37.f3
Bd5=/+] 37...Kd5 [37...Bc2-+] 38.f3 Bc2 39.a5 bxa5 40.Be5 Ba4 [40...a4-+]
41.f4 Nc4 [41...Bc2 42.Kf2 a4-+] 42.h4 Nxe5 43.dxe5 Bb3 44.Bd3 a4
45.Kh1 a3 46.Bb1 a2 47.Bxa2 Bxa2 48.Kg1 Ke4 49.Kf2 Kxf4 50.Ke2
Kxe5 51.g3 Bc4+ 52.Kf3 a5 0-1
2.e5 Nd5
The line 2.e5 Nd5 is the normal beginning of the Alekhine Defence.
40 - Martin 3.Na3 Attack
Our chess friend Andrew Martin loves offbeat lines that place unexpected
challenges to his opponents.
Anyone playing the Alekhine Defence knows that White almost always takes
the game into new territory.
In a Sicilian Defence or Ruy Lopez one can expect White to follow known
theory for 8-12 moves
But in the Alekhine Defence players are on their own fairly early.
In the 1990s when I was doing research for my Alekhine Defense Playbook, I
played 1.e4 Nf6 constantly as Black.
I plan to reexamine the game from my original repertoire Playbook.

Hopefully I will get to it at some point in 2016 or 2017.
Here I enjoyed a quick three minute game vs International Master Andrew

Martin, notable author and teacher.
Martin went his own way quickly with 3.Na3.
That’s a rare line. It’s not a line you see very often.
The opening was equal, but he demonstrated superior skill to win this game.
Martin - Sawyer, ICC r 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 20.04.1998 begins 1.e4 Nf6
2.e5 Nd5 3.Na3 d6 4.Nf3 g6 [4...dxe5! 5.Nxe5 g6=] 5.Nc4 Bg7 6.d4 0-0
7.h4 Nb6 8.h5 Nxc4?! [This only helps White. Better is 8...Nc6 9.e6 Nxc4
10.exf7+ Rxf7 11.Bxc4 d5 12.Bb3 Bg4= with a playable and sharp position.]
9.Bxc4 d5 10.Be2 Bg4? [10...c5 11.dxc5 Nc6 12.c3+/=] 11.hxg6 hxg6
12.Ng5! Bxe2 13.Qxe2 e6 [Or 13...Qd7 14.Qf3+/-] 14.Qg4 f5 15.Qh3 Re8
16.Qh7+ Kf8 17.Qxg6 Qd7 18.Nh7+ Ke7 19.Bg5+ 1-0
41 - Delayed d4 Dick Zdun
Early in Alekhine Defence games, White pushes pawns while Black develops
pieces. However, there are a few lines where White delays pawn play and
makes tactical threats with pieces, especially vs the vulnerable f7 square.
The Alekhine Defence is designed for Black to aggressively counter attack,

but it is easy to get carried away. Here White set a trap and I fell for it when I
got too frisky with my undefended bishop. When you play the same club
player over and over again, you have certain expectations.
Dick Zdun was an older player against whom I had the Black pieces 75 times.
I lost only two, drew seven, and won all the rest.
I expected Dick Zdun to play solid openings and then either make a tactical
mistake in the middlegame or to head for a lost endgame. This pattern
repeated itself frequently.
In most chess games, White pushes his d-pawn, often to d4, on move one,
two or three. In this Williamsport club game at Lycoming College vs the
Alekhine Defence my friend Dick Zdun held back d2-d4 until move
seventeen!
Both of us hang a bishop in this game. My blunder came first in an opening I

played thousands of times. It illustrate the Grandmaster Dr. John Nunn
saying, “Loose Pieces Drop Off”.
Zdun (1634) - Sawyer (2010), Williamsport PA, 01.1998 begins 1.e4 Nf6
2.e5 Nd5 3.Bc4 Nb6 4.Bb3 d6 5.Nf3 Bg4? [5...Nc6=] 6.Bxf7+! Kd7 7.h3
Bxf3 8.Qxf3 [Or 8.e6+ Kc8 9.Qxf3+-] 8...c6 9.Qf5+ Kc7 10.0-0 g6 11.Qf4
N8d7 12.exd6+ [12.d4!+-] 12...exd6 13.Bb3 Bg7 14.Nc3 Rf8 15.Qg4 Ne5
16.Qd1 [16.Qg3+/-] 16...d5 17.d4 Ned7 18.Bf4+? [Hanging a bishop.
18.Qg4+/-] 18...Rxf4 19.Ne2 Rf7 20.c3 Qh4 21.Qd3 Raf8 22.f3 Bh6 23.c4
[Or 23.Rad1 Re7-+] 23...dxc4 24.Bxc4 Nxc4 25.Qxc4 Nb6 26.Qd3 Re7
27.b4 Rfe8 28.Rae1 Re3 29.Qc2 Nd5 30.b5 Nf4 31.bxc6 Nd3 32.cxb7+
Kb8 0-1
42 - Story of the c-pawn
There once was a poor Black c-pawn that dreamed of glory far away.
The little c-pawn loved many chess openings: the Benoni Defence, the Caro-
Kann Defence and especially the Sicilian Defence.
One day the c-pawn was part of a new chess game.
White began 1.e4. The little c-pawn, expected soon to begin the Black
charge. He called out "Play me! Play me!"
But the player of the Black pieces began 1...Nf6, the Alekhine Defence. This
blitz game rapidly continued 2.e4 Nd5 3.Bc4 Nb6 4.Bb3.
At just the right moment when the c-pawn expected his d-pawn brother to be
nudged ahead one or two squares, the c-pawn was ordered: "It’s your turn.
Go! Go!" So with glee 4...c5 was played.
Without awaiting further instructions, after the normal 5.c3, the Black c-pawn
surged ahead with 5...c4.
Over the next several moves, the two armies fought over the e5 and f3
squares.
When White played 14.d4 in an attempt to bring up queenside

reinforcements, the little c-pawn captured en passant 14...c4xd3. Now it had
becoming the d-pawn.
All White's attempts to wiggle free came to a screeching halt when the pawn
played 18...d2, winning a piece or more.
White lost on time while staring at our little hero on d2.
silverwolf - Sawyer, ICC 1 3 Internet Chess Club, 18.05.2012 begins 1.e4

Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.Bc4 Nb6 4.Bb3 c5 5.c3 [5.d3 Nc6] 5...c4 6.Bc2 Nc6 7.f4?!
[More common is 7.Nf3 Qc7 8.Qe2 g5=] 7...d6 8.Nf3 Bg4 9.0-0 dxe5
10.fxe5 Nxe5 11.Be4 Nxf3+ 12.Bxf3 Bxf3 13.Qxf3 Qd5 14.d4? cxd3
15.Be3 Qxf3 16.Rxf3 Nc4 17.Bc1 Rd8 18.b3 d2-+ White forfeits on time 0-
1
43 - Hank Ross vs my Paint
A chess opening is like paint on a house.
If a building has a firm foundation with solid construction in a good location,

then it is a good building. Period. Paint just makes it look nicer.
If your chess ability has a firm strategical foundation with solid tactical
training, then you are a good player.
If not, all the pretty paint in the world will not hide your flaws in any
opening.
If skills are lacking, you need to repair your game. Study tactics.
After I visited the Grand Canyon, I drove from Flagstaff through Winslow,
Arizona. This small town was such a fine place to be with a girl and a flatbed
Ford.
I came to the Painted Desert near Petrified Forest National Park.
I travelled Route 66 (I-40) through Albuquerque, New Mexico, home town of

veteran postal chess club player Hank Ross.
When you write to the same address on postcards once a week for years, you
remember that city.
One of my early Alekhine Defence games was vs Hank Ross.
We played eight APCT games during the period 1978-81, and I won them all
in 30 moves or less.
A feature of this game is that White delayed d2-d4 until move five.
Ross (1709) - Sawyer (2100), corr APCT 1981 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5
3.Nf3 d6 4.Bc4 e6 [4...Nb6 5.Bb3 Nc6=] 5.d4 Nc6?! [5...Be7 6.0-0 0-0=]
6.0-0 Nb6 7.Bb5 Bd7 8.Nc3 Be7 9.exd6 [9.a3+/=] 9...cxd6 10.Bf4 0-0
11.Qd3 a6 12.Bxc6 Bxc6 13.Ne4? [13.Rfe1 Rc8=] 13...Bb5 14.Bg5? Bxd3
15.cxd3 f5 16.Ned2 [16.Bxe7 Qxe7 17.Nc3 Qf6-+] 16...Bxg5 17.Nc4 Nd5
18.Rfe1 b5 19.Nxd6 Qxd6 20.Nxg5 h6 21.Nxe6 Rfe8 0-1
44 - Nichter Bishop Sacrifice
Would you sacrifice a bishop to keep your opponent's king from castling?
Generally a bishop is not worth just a couple checks unless there is much
more.
The temptation to sacrifice is stronger if you get some material, some checks
and some mate threats in return.
In my game vs Ralph Nichter, I was on the receiving side of such a sacrifice.
The opening was an Alekhine Defence where White refrained from an early
d2-d4.
After Nf3 and Bc4, there was the possibility of Bxf7+ followed by Ng5+ and
bringing out the queen to Qh5, Qg4 or Qf3, depending on what Black did.
In this case White was able to nab a rook for a second piece, but in that
process Black castled by hand.
White had a lot of fun for the first 10 moves. Then the enjoyment gradually
switched sides.
Nichter (1753) - Sawyer (2003), corr USCF 89SS90, 27.12.1991 begins 1.e4
Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.Nf3 d6 4.Bc4 Nb6 5.Bxf7+?! [The standard continuation
when White wants to hold back an early d4 is 5.Bb3 Nc6=] 5...Kxf7 6.Ng5+
Kg8 7.Qf3 Qe8 8.e6 g6 9.Nf7 Bxe6 10.Nxh8 Kxh8 11.Nc3 [11.Qxb7? Bd5!-
+ and White's queen is lost.] 11...Bg7 12.d3 Nc6 13.Be3 Qd7 14.Qe2 Rf8
15.0-0 Ne5 [15...Nd5!-+ swaps another piece.] 16.f3 c5 17.Kh1 Nc6 18.Nd1
Nd5 19.Bg1 [19.c4 Nxe3 20.Nxe3 Nd4-+] 19...Nf4 20.Qe1 Nb4 21.Rf2
Nbxd3 [Black heads for an ending up two pawns, but he still has a good
middlegame with 21...Bd5!-+] 22.cxd3 Nxd3 23.Qe2 Nxf2+ 24.Nxf2 Bd5
25.a3 b5 26.Rd1 Qb7 27.Ne4 Bxe4 28.fxe4 Be5 29.Qc2 Rf4 30.Re1 Bd4
31.Qc1 [This drops a third pawn. 31.Qe2 e5-+] 31...Rxe4 32.Bxd4+ cxd4
33.Rf1 Kg7 [Or 33...Re2!-+] 34.Rf3 Qc6 35.Qf1 Qc4 0-1
45 - Original by Bob Muir
Do you like to play unique opening positions? Alekhine Defence may be
good for you. It has been a great opening for me!
A common feature of Alekhine Defense is White rarely follows book moves.

In the Najdorf Sicilian or Ruy Lopez a club player may quickly reel off the
first 8-10 moves. After 1.e4 Nf6 White may be on his own quickly.
One of my club games vs Bob Muir was in the Alekhine Defence. There
White initially held back d2-d4 until move seven.
Black had two big strategic decisions: where to develop the dark squared
bishop and where to place the d-pawn. My Bg7 and d5 led to equal play.
White let his kingside knight get trapped.
Muir (1800) - Sawyer (2010), Williamsport PA, 03.1998 begins 1.e4 Nf6
2.e5 Nd5 3.Nf3 d6 4.Bc4 Nb6 5.Bb3 g6 [5...Nc6!] 6.Ng5 [6.a4+/=] 6...e6
7.d4 d5?! [This releases the tension and gives White an easy space
advantage. Better is 7...Bg7=] 8.0-0 c5 9.Qf3 Qc7 10.Qf6 Rg8 11.c3 c4
12.Bc2 Rg7 13.Nh3 Qe7 14.Bh6? [14.Qf3 Rg8 15.Bg5+-] 14...Qxf6 15.exf6
Rg8 16.Bxf8 Rxf8 17.g4 e5 18.dxe5 Bxg4 19.Ng5 [19.Kg2 Nc6 20.f4 d4
21.Be4 0-0-0=] 19...h6 20.f3 Bc8 21.Nh7 Rh8 22.Na3 a6 23.b3 Rxh7
[23...cxb3! 24.axb3 Rxh7-+] 24.bxc4 Nxc4 25.Nxc4 dxc4 26.Be4 [If 26.Rfd1
Rh8-+] 26...Nc6 27.f4 Be6 28.Rab1 0-0-0 29.Rb6 Bd5 30.Bh1 Bxh1
31.Kxh1 Rhh8 32.Rfb1 Rd7 33.Kg2 Rhd8 34.Kg3 Rd2 35.h4 R8d3+
36.Kg4 Rg2# 0-1
2.e5 Nd5 3.Nc3
With the move 3.Nc3 the knights attack each other. White is willing to allow
doubled pawns in exchange for open lines.
46 - Wrong Way Race
David Parsons had a passion for playing attacking chess using offbeat lines.
As far as I know, he was not related to Parson Brown from the song "Winter
Wonderland"; I still remember how nervous I was when I had to sing that
song at Christmas in 1967.
David had a slight resemblance to the famous NASCAR driver Benny

Parsons, but again no known relation. Speaking of racing, when we reached
an ending and our kings became involved in a race, David got off track. He
missed the "Wrong Way" sign and drove the long way around on the
kingside. This momentary lapse in judgment gave me a win from a short cut
on the queenside. In hindsight, David should have settled for a draw.
Our game was an Alekhine Defence 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5. The normal
continuation is 3.d4, but David Parsons chose 3.Nc3. This immediately
challenged Black's lone developed piece. Once exchanged by 3...Nxc3, White
had a space advantage with pawns. David opted for 4.bxc3 so as to set up the
solid pawn chain protecting e5 with 5.Nf3 and 6.d4. Chances in our game
was very even until the endgame where he was outplayed.
Parsons (1721) - Sawyer (2011), Williamsport, PA, 14.09.1999 begins 1.e4

Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.Nc3 Nxc3 4.bxc3 [4.dxc3] 4...d5 [More dynamic is 4...d6
5.f4 g6 6.d4 Bg7 7.Nf3 0-0=] 5.Nf3 c5 6.d4 Bg4 [6...Qa5=] 7.Be3 e6 8.Be2
cxd4 9.cxd4 Bxf3 10.Bxf3 Qa5+ [10...Bb4+] 11.Bd2 Bb4 12.Bxb4 Qxb4+
13.Qd2 Qxd2+ 14.Kxd2 Nc6 15.c3 Kd7 16.Rhb1 Na5 17.Be2 Rhc8 18.Rb5
b6 19.Rab1 Rc7 20.f4 Rac8 21.Rc1 Nc4+ 22.Bxc4 Rxc4 23.Rb4 Rxb4
24.cxb4 a5 25.Rxc8 Kxc8 26.bxa5 bxa5 27.Kc3 [27.a4 completely cuts the
queenside off for the kings and makes a draw very likely unless someone
blunders horribly on the kingside.] 27...Kc7 28.g4 Kc6 29.h4 Kb5 30.f5?
[White is racing on the kingside, but the prize is on the queenside. 30.Kb3=
blocks off a4-c4 and leads to a drawish position.] 30...Ka4 31.h5 Ka3 32.g5
g6 33.hxg6 hxg6 34.fxg6 fxg6 35.Kc2 Kxa2 36.Kc1 Kb3 37.Kb1 Kc3
38.Ka2 Kxd4 39.Ka3 Kxe5 0-1
47 - Pawn Arrow to Attack
I continue my Alekhine Defence presentations after 2.e5 Nd5. Here is another
example of 3.Nc3 Nxc3 4.bxc3.
I treated this position as somewhat similar to an Advance Variation of the

Caro-Kann Defence by playing a Bf5
I put my pawns on d5, c5 and e6.
Blocked pawns in the center give each side what is called a Pawn Arrow.
This line points in the direction where success is most likely to occur if you
take action there.
White's arrow went from c3-d4-e5 pointing toward an attack on the Black
king.
The Black arrow went from f7-e6-d5-c4 pointing to action on the queenside.
Against my ICC opponent WetDog, I was able to carry out my strategy on

the queenside.
This kept White so busy that he never seriously threatened the Black king.
WetDog (1704) - Sawyer (2412), ICC 5 7 u Internet Chess Club, 20.12.1999

begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.Nc3 Nxc3 4.bxc3 [4.dxc3] 4...d5 [4...d6] 5.d4 c5
6.Nf3 Nc6 7.h3 [7.Be2=] 7...Bf5 8.Bd3 Bxd3 9.Qxd3 [Or 9.cxd3 cxd4
10.Nxd4 Nxe5=] 9...e6 10.0-0 c4 11.Qe2 Be7 12.a4 Qa5 13.Qd2 b5 14.Ba3
Bxa3 15.Rxa3 b4 16.cxb4 Qxb4 17.Qxb4 Nxb4 18.c3 [18.Rb1=] 18...Nc6
19.a5?! [19.Rb1 0-0=] 19...Ke7 20.Rb1 Rhb8 21.Rxb8 [If 21.Rc1 Rb2
22.Kf1 Rab8-/+] 21...Rxb8 22.Kf1 Rb3 23.Rxb3 cxb3 24.Nd2 Nxa5 25.Ke1
b2 26.Kd1 Nc4 27.Nb1 [White resigns as Black can simply push his a-pawn
to force a win.] 0-1
48 - PII233Crafty Keres Line
At the peak of my blitz playing skills, I was playing the Alekhine Defence
frequently. The line 3.Nc3 was played sometimes by the famous grandmaster
Paul Keres.
One of my favorite chess books years ago was an annotated collection of

Keres games. He was one of the strongest players of the 20th century who did
not become world champion.
By 1947 there was no reigning champion. Alekhine, Capablanca and Lasker

had all died. Botvinnik won the event. In the 20 round 1948 World Chess
Championship tournament Keres went 1-4 vs Botvinnik, where a 3-2 score
would have made Keres world champion. Both were great. Keres said he was
unlucky. Vs Fischer, Keres scored +3 =3 -4.
In my database I have four Alekhine Defence games where Paul Keres played
Black and 20 games where he played the White pieces. He had no favorite
lines, though about half the time he played the main line 2.e4 Nd5 3.d4 d6
4.Nf3.
Several times he played the Four Pawns Attack with 4.c4 Nb6 5.f4. He also
played 3.Nf3 and 3.Nc3 (as below) and sometimes even 2.Nc3.
Against such a player, there is no way to prepare specifically. You just have
to know your opening and respond to whatever your opponent throws at you.
When I played the Alekhine vs PII233Crafty, I scored +0, =8, -61. In the
endgame, I could have played for more with 120...Rb8 and the idea of
doubling rooks on the a-file to pick off his a6 pawn after my Kb6.
In this five minute game, I was down to 36 seconds left total. I was down to
20 seconds when we drew by repetition.
It was tempting to try to win on time, but these computers often pick up
speed at the very end and play many moves per second. In ICC I once beat
Over-Rated (3501) on time after 16 moves while still in the book. Someone
must have accidentally unplugged it on the other end of the internet.
PII233Crafty (2688) - Sawyer (2442), ICC 5 0 Internet Chess Club,

25.09.1998 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.Nc3 Nxc3 4.dxc3 d5 [4...d6. Now
White wastes time by making three moves in a row with his "good" bishop to
exchange his only developed piece.] 5.Bd3 c5 6.Bb5+ Bd7 7.Bxd7+ Qxd7
8.Bf4 Nc6 9.Qf3 e6 10.0-0-0 c4 11.Qg4 Qc7 12.Nf3 0-0-0 13.Kb1 g6
14.Bg5 Be7 15.Bf6 Bxf6 16.exf6 Ne5 17.Qf4 Nxf3 18.Qxf3 Qc6 19.h4 h5
20.Rhe1 Qc5 21.Qf4 Qc7 22.Qd4 b6 23.Rd2 Qc5 24.Qxc5+ bxc5 25.Kc1
Kc7 26.b3 cxb3 27.cxb3 Kc6 28.Kc2 Rd7 29.Red1 Rhd8 30.Re2 a5 31.Re5
Rd6 32.g3 R6d7 33.Rd2 Rd6 34.Rd3 R6d7 35.Rd1 Rd6 36.Rd2 R6d7
37.Kb1 Rd6 38.Rd1 R6d7 39.Rg5 Rd6 40.Kc2 R6d7 41.Rd2 [41.Re5=]
41...Rd6 [41...a4 42.Rd1 axb3+ 43.axb3 Ra7=+] 42.Re2 R6d7 43.Kd3 Rh8
44.Rge5 Rhd8 45.Rc2 Rb8 46.Rg5 Rh8 47.Re2 Rdd8 48.Ke3 Rd7 49.Rd2
Rdd8 50.Kf4 Rd7 51.Re5 Rhd8 52.Rd3 Rh8 53.Re1 Rhd8 54.Ke5 Rd6
55.Red1 R6d7 56.R1d2 Rd6 57.f4 R6d7 58.Rd1 Rd6 59.R3d2 R6d7
60.Rc2 Rd6 61.b4 axb4 62.cxb4 c4 63.a4 R6d7 64.Kd4 Ra8 65.a5 Rb7
66.Kc3 Rb5 67.Rcd2 Ra6 68.Rd4 Ra8 69.Ra1 Ra6 70.Ra2 Kd6 71.Re2
Kc6 72.Red2 Ra8 73.Rb2 Ra6 74.Re2 Ra8 75.Rdd2 Ra6 76.Re1 Ra8
77.Rb2 Ra6 78.Rbe2 Ra8 79.Rd1 Ra6 80.Re3 Ra8 81.Rd2 Ra6 82.Re5
Ra8 83.Rb2 Ra6 84.Rc2 Ra8 85.Re3 Ra6 86.Rce2 Ra8 87.Ra2 Ra6 88.Rc2
Ra8 89.Re1 Ra6 90.Rh2 Ra7 91.Rd1 Ra6 92.Re2 Ra8 93.Rf2 Ra7 94.Rg2
Ra6 95.Rd4 Ra7 96.Rc2 Ra8 97.Rdd2 Ra7 98.Rc1 Ra8 99.Rb2 Ra7
100.Re2 Ra8 101.Rce1 Ra7? [101...Rab8=] 102.Rg1? [White missed
102.Rxe6+! fxe6 103.Rxe6+ Kb7 104.f7 Ra8 105.Re7+ Kc6 106.Re8+-]
102...Ra8 103.Rc1 Ra7 104.Ree1 Ra8 105.Rb1 Ra7 106.Red1 Ra8
107.Ra1 Ra7 108.Rac1 Ra8 109.Rb1 Ra7 110.Rdc1 Ra8 111.Ra1 Ra7
112.Ra4 Ra8 113.a6 Ra7 114.Kd4 Kb6 115.Rca1 Kc6 116.R1a2 Kb6
117.Kc3 Kc6 118.R4a3 Kb6 119.Ra1 Kc6 120.R3a2 Kb6 [120...Rb8=+]
121.Ra4 Kc6 122.Rc1 Kb6 123.Rca1 Kc6 124.R1a3 Kb6 125.Kd4 Kc6
126.Ra2 Kb6 127.Ke3 Kc6 128.Ra1 Kb6 129.R1a3 Kc6 130.Kd4 Kb6
131.Ke5 Kc6 132.Ra1 Rb6 133.Rb1 Rb5 134.Rb2 Kd7 135.Rba2 Kc6
136.Kd4 [Game drawn by repetition. Clocks: 0:20-0:23] 1/2-1/2
49 - Author Macon Shibut
Back in 1997 I had the privilege of playing Macon Shibut for nine blitz
games on the Internet Chess Club.
Shibut was a tournament master rated in the 2300s by USCF.
My ICC blitz rating was above 2300 for many years. Shibut was clearly the
better player, but I won five of these nine games. Apparently I got hot at the
right moment.
Macon Shibut published the highly recommended book "Paul Morphy and
the Evolution of Chess Theory" in 1993, the year after I published my
original "Blackmar-Diemer Gambit Keybook". I love books about Paul
Morphy.
The Alekhine Defence was my defense of choice for this game. Twice Shibut
chose the Keres line 3.Nc3 vs me. Below both of us were attacking.
Fortunately for me, when we made it to the endgame, he made the last
mistake.
Shibut - Sawyer, ICC u 3 0, 26.11.1997 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.Nc3
Nxc3 [In another game vs Shibut, I tried 3...Nb6 here and won on move 60.]
4.dxc3 d5 5.Nf3 Bg4 6.h3 Bxf3 7.Qxf3 e6 8.Bd3 c5 9.Bb5+ Nc6 10.Bxc6+
bxc6 11.Bf4 Qb6 12.b3 g6 13.g4 Bg7 14.0-0 Qc7 15.Rae1 0-0 16.h4 a5
17.a4 c4 18.bxc4 dxc4 19.h5 h6 20.Qe3 g5 21.Bxg5!? [The sacrifice is a
reasonable idea in blitz chess, but better is 21.Bg3 Rab8 22.f4+/=] 21...hxg5
22.Qxg5 f6 23.exf6 Rxf6 24.Rd1 [24.Re4 Raf8 25.Kg2 Rf4 26.Rxf4 Qxf4
27.Qxf4 Rxf4 28.Kg3 Be5-/+] 24...Raf8 25.Rd4 Kh7 [Even better is
25...Qg3+!-+] 26.Rxc4 Bh6 [I had a forced mate with 26...Qg3+! 27.Kh1
Rxf2 28.Rxf2 Rxf2 29.Qg6+ Kh8 30.Qe8+ Bf8 31.Qxf8+ Rxf8 32.Rf4 Rxf4
33.h6 Rf1#] 27.Qc5 Rf3 28.Qxc6 Rg3+ 29.fxg3 Qxg3+ 30.Qg2 Be3+
31.Rf2 Bxf2+ 32.Kh1 Qxg2+ 33.Kxg2 Be1 34.g5 Rf2+ 35.Kh3 Rf3+
36.Kg4 Rxc3 37.Re4 Bd2 38.Rxe6 Rxc2 39.Re7+ Kg8 40.h6 Rc3 41.g6
[White had a good chance of surviving after 41.h7+ Kh8 42.g6=] 41...Rc4+
42.Kh5 Rc5+ 43.Kg4 Bxh6 44.Re8+ Bf8 45.Ra8 Kg7 46.Ra6 Be7?
[46...Rd5-+] 47.Kf3 [47.Ra7!=] 47...Bf6 48.Ke4 Kxg6 49.Kd3 Rh5 50.Kc2
Rh2+ 51.Kb3 Rh3+ 0-1
50 - David Brummer Draws
David Brummer met my Alekhine Defence with a 3.Nc3 Keres variation. As
a young master, David Brummer had played in the famous Lone Pine 1976
tournament against such players as Walter Browne, James Sherwin and
Leonid Shamkovich.
Now David Brummer was a veteran player. We had never met but he knew
who I was.
Florida State Championships were held Labor Day weekend each September.
There were two scheduled games each day for three days Saturday, Sunday
and Monday.
This 2007 tournament played at Daytona Beach was won by GM Julio

Becerra. Tied for second place were Blas Lugo, Ray Robson, Andrew
Boekhoff, and Troy Daly.
David Brummer is a former Florida State Champion. We met in the first

round, neither of us were worn out yet, except by the trip to the event.
Alekhine Defence presented each side with key choices on move four that
determined the pawn structure. After that, there was not much theory. We just
played chess. We fought to a draw.
Brummer (2157) - Sawyer (1959), Florida State Championship (1),

01.09.2007 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.Nc3 Nxc3 4.dxc3 [Also common is
the other recapture with 4.bxc3 when again Black has 4...g6=; 4...d5; or
4...d6!?=] 4...d6 [4...g6=; or 4...d5!?] 5.Nf3 Bg4 [5...Nc6=] 6.Bf4 d5 7.h3
Bxf3 8.Qxf3 e6 9.c4 c6 10.cxd5 Qxd5 11.Be2 Qxf3 12.Bxf3 Nd7 [With
queens of the board, it will be difficult for my opponent to win.] 13.0-0-0 Be7
14.Bh2 0-0-0 15.Be2 Nb6 16.Bd3 Nd5 17.Kb1 Nb4 18.Be4 Rxd1+ 19.Rxd1
Rd8 20.Rf1 [White's original intention was 20.Rxd8+ Kxd8 21.Bxh7 but the
bishop gets trapped. 21...g6 22.Bf4 Ke8=] 20...g6 21.Bf4 Nd5 22.Bh6 Bf8
23.Bc1 Be7 24.c4 Nb4 25.Be3 Kb8 26.f4 Na6 27.b3 Bc5 28.Bc1 Bd4 29.g4
Kc7 30.a3 c5 31.f5 Bxe5 32.fxg6 fxg6 33.Rf7+ Rd7 34.Rxd7+ Kxd7
35.Bxb7 Nb8 36.Be4 Nc6 37.h4 Ne7 [My goal with this move is to eliminate
all White's kingside pawns.] 38.Bh6 Bg3 39.Bg5 h5 40.gxh5 gxh5 41.Bf3
Nf5 42.Bxh5 Nxh4 43.Bxh4 [Bishops of opposite colors is a draw here.] 1/2-
1/2
51 - Bondar Crushes Alekhine
My ICCF postal chess game vs V.N. Bondar was in the Alekhine Defence.
White rapidly developed his queenside knight with 3.Nc3.
Black held his corresponding knight back until move 10 and suffered for it.
The Black knight must enter the fray much earlier to stem the tide of White's
attack.
At that time I was still learning the Alekhine Defence which I had only been
playing for a few years.
Years later I wrote a book on it.
I am not really sure the exact identity of my opponent.
There are a few players named “Bondar” that fit the bill, but none are
precisely the name that I copied down 30 years ago.
We met in an ICCF Master Class tournament, so suffice it to say that he was

a good player.
This year 1983 was the same year that I was playing at times 100 postal
games at once.
There were some gems, but more often, they were wins by my higher rated
opponents or draws vs lower rateds.
Bondar - Sawyer, corr ICCF, 1983 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.Nc3 Nxc3
4.dxc3 d6 5.Nf3 Bg4 [5...Nc6=] 6.h3 Bxf3? [6...Bh5 7.exd6 Qxd6 8.Bd3+/=
Stockfish] 7.Qxf3 c6 [7...Nc6 8.Be3+/-] 8.exd6 Qxd6 9.Bc4 e6 [9...Qf6
10.Qg3+/-] 10.Be3 Nd7 11.Rd1 Qc7 12.Bf4 Qb6 13.Rxd7 Kxd7 14.Be3 c5?
[14...Qd8 15.Qxf7+ Qe7 16.Bxe6+ Kc7 17.Qf4+ Qd6 18.Qf5+/-] 15.Qxf7+
1-0
3.c4 Nb6 4.c5
This is the Two Pawns Attack known as the Chase Variation.
52 - Baffo Two Pawns Attack
In this game Jeffrey Baffo began with 1.e4. I defended with the Alekhine
Defence, one of my most successful defenses. Baffo chose the Two Pawns
Attack with 2.e5 and 4.c5. It is favored by many attacking players who prefer
White in the Sicilian Defence Alapin variation that begins 1.e4 c5 2.c3 Nf6
3.e5 Nd5. Some Sicilian lines transpose to some of the Alekhine Two Pawns,
although either side can avoid the transpositions.
Two Pawns is called the Chase Variation. Transpositions to Sicilians come

from challenging advanced White pawns with 6...d6. The move 6...b6 stays
strictly in the Alekhine.
This tricky maze of Sicilians can reach the same position as the Alekhine one
move quicker. The numbers are off. For example, after 1.e4 c5 2.c3 Nf6 3.e5
Nd5 4.d4 cxd4 5.cxd4 d6 6.Nf3 e6 7.Nc3 Nxc3 8.bxc3 Qc7 we reach the
9...Qc7 position in our game. GM Evgeny Sveshnikov (famous for a Black
Sicilian line) plays this position as White against both opening move orders.
Sveshnikov prefers the move 9.Bd2 (via Sicilian) or 10.Bd2 (via Alekhine).
In 2012, This grandmaster played Baffo's 10.Qb3!? He followed 12.Bxe5
Nxe5 13.Nxe5 Bd6 14.Bb5+ and 1-0 in 37 moves (Sveshnikov - Degraeve,
28th Cappelle Open, 2012).
In our own USCF correspondence game, we exchanged into a roughly equal

bishop ending. Baffo and I agreed to a draw.
Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.c4 Nb6 4.c5 Nd5 5.Nc3 [5.Bc4 e6=] 5...e6 6.d4 d6 7.cxd6
cxd6 8.Nf3 Nxc3 9.bxc3 Qc7 10.Qb3!? [10.Bd2= is the normal book move.]
10...Nd7 11.Bf4 dxe5 12.Nxe5 [12.Bxe5 Sveshnikov] 12...Bd6 13.Bg3 Nxe5
14.dxe5 Be7 15.Bb5+ Bd7 16.Bxd7+ Qxd7 17.0-0 0-0 18.Rab1 b6 19.Rfd1
Qc7 20.Rd3 Rfd8 21.Rbd1 Rxd3 22.Rxd3 Rd8 23.Qd1 Kf8 [If I wanted to
try for more, Houdini suggests 23...Rxd3 24.Qxd3 g5=/+ but I had no energy
for that in 1996.] 24.Rd4 Rxd4 25.Qxd4 Qd826.Qxd8+ Bxd8 27.Kf1= 1/2-
1/2
53 - Chapaev Chases Knights
The Chase Variation of the Alekhine Defence is very logical. White directly
attacks the Black knights on moves 2, 3, 4, and 5.
This is one of the more popular lines if White avoids 3.d4 or a transposition
back to those lines with 4.d4.
In the Chase Variation White kicks the Nf6 with 2.e5, and the Nd5 with 3.c4.
Then 4.c5 leaves a large hole on d5 for the Black knight to return where it is
free from future pawn harassment.
My 1999 Internet Chess Club game vs “chapaev” is very typical. White

usually attacks the knight again with a piece by 5.Bc4 or 5.Nc3.
Black can protect the knight with 5...e6 or 5...c6 and later challenge the c5
pawn with 6...d6 (which can transpose into an Alapin Sicilian 2.c3 after
certain exchanges) or 6...b6 (a uniquely Alekhine move).
Obviously the Bc8 cannot easily be develop classically to Bf5 or Bg4 with
pawns at d7 and e6. However after 6...b6, Bb7 and Ba6 are available.
Another thematic idea after 6...b6 is that after 7.cxb6 axb6, Black has a half-
open a-file for his rook or rooks. That was important in this game.
chapaev (2030) - Sawyer (2424), ICC 2 12 Internet Chess Club, 25.02.1999

begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.c4 Nb6 4.c5 Nd5 5.Nc3 e6 6.d4 b6 [Black can
walk into an Alapin Sicilian with 6...d6 7.cxd6 cxd6 8.Nf3=] 7.cxb6 [A
critical line is 7.Nxd5 exd5 8.Be3 bxc5 9.dxc5 c6 10.b4 Na6 11.a3 Nc7
12.Nf3 a5=] 7...axb6 8.Bd3 Ba6 9.Nf3 Bb4 10.Qc2 h6 11.a3 Nxc3 12.bxc3
Be7 13.0-0 Nc6 14.Qe2 Bxd3 15.Qxd3 d5 16.c4?! [16.exd6=] 16...dxc4
17.Qxc4 Na5 18.Qb5+ Qd7 19.Qxd7+ [Or 19.a4 Qxb5 20.axb5 Kd7=/+]
19...Kxd7 20.Nd2 Ra7 21.f4 Rha8 22.f5 Nc6 23.fxe6+ fxe6 24.Rf7 Nxd4
25.Rxg7 Ne2+ 26.Kh1 Nxc1 27.Rxc1 Rxa3 28.Ne4 Ra1 29.Rg1 Ke8
30.Rg8+ [30.Nf6+ Bxf6 31.exf6 c5=/+] 30...Bf8 31.h3 Rxg1+ 32.Kxg1 Kf7
33.Rg3 c5 34.Rf3+ Ke8 35.Rf6 Kd7 36.Rf7+ Kc6 37.Rf6 Kd5 0-1
54 - Lau Chase Variation
As I recall, David Lau was the youngest member of our chess club about 20
years ago.
His USCF rating the last time David S. Lau played was 1738 from the year
2003.
Usually he was a rather aggressive player with relatively little opening book
knowledge.
Lau just came after my pieces.
The Alekhine Defence Chase Variation is a good example.
White kicks around the Black knight with pawns for three moves in a row
and later exchanges off the same knight on move seven.
At that point Black has no pieces developed and White as weak pawns on c5
and e5.
David Lau sometimes missed tactics as in this game. That kept his rating
from going way up.
Many players drift toward passive play. Such an approach rarely leads to high
rating gain.
But David had the right attitude.
This was evident from the Chase Variation.
He attacked!
Lau (1564) - Sawyer (2011), Williamsport PA 1995 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5
Nd5 3.c4 Nb6 4.c5 Nd5 5.Bc4 e6 6.d4 d6 [6...b6!=] 7.Bxd5 exd5 8.Be3?!
[8.cxd6 cxd6 9.Nf3=] 8...Nc6?! [8...dxe5! 9.dxe5 Na6=/+] 9.Nc3 dxe5
10.dxe5? [This drops a piece. Better is 10.Nge2 exd4=/+] 10...d4 11.Nb5
dxe3 12.Qxd8+ Kxd8 13.fxe3 Bxc5 14.Rd1+ Bd7 15.Nf3 Bxe3 16.Rd3 Bf4
17.0-0 Re8 18.Rfd1 Re7 19.g3 Bxe5 20.Ng5 h6 21.Nh7 [Of course if 21.Nf3
Bxb2-+ Black is completely busted as well.] 21...Ke8 22.Rd5 Rc8 23.a4 Bf5
24.b4 Bxh7 0-1
55 - Micah Alekhine 3.c4
In the Alekhine Defence Chase Variation, generally Black does not quickly
push both his center pawns.
His play was simple, but the cramped nature of the position can made
communication between Rh8 and Ra8 difficult.
My ICC game vs Micah started well.
Then a tactical mistake on move 23 gave White a winning position.
Beware of Black’s weak points on the kingside.
The pawns were not easy to defend. Moving the pawns leaves holes where
White could invade as in the game below.
Fortunately for me in a two minute bullet game my opponent Micah also

overlooked some good moves.
Micah - Sawyer, ICC r 2 0 Internet Chess Club 1997 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5
Nd5 3.c4 Nb6 4.c5 Nd5 5.Bc4 e6 6.Nc3 Nxc3 7.bxc3 [7.dxc3 Nc6=]
7...Bxc5 8.d4 Be7 [Deep Rybka 4 likes 8...d5!? 9.Qg4 Bf8 10.Bd3=] 9.Qg4
g6 10.Bh6 c5 [Or 10...d5=] 11.Nf3 cxd4 12.Qxd4 Nc6 13.Qf4 d5 14.Bd3
Qa5 15.0-0 Bd7 16.Ng5 Bxg5 17.Bxg5 Qxc3 18.Bf6 Rf8 19.Rfd1 Qd4!?
[19...h5] 20.Qg3 Qb6 21.Rab1 Qc7 22.Qh4 h5 23.Qg5 Nxe5? [This
blunders a piece and should lose. Black is still in the game after 23...a6+/=]
24.Bxe5 Qd8 25.Bf6 Qc7 26.Rdc1 Qd6? 27.Rb3 [27.Rxb7+-] 27...Bc6
28.Bxg6 fxg6 29.Qxg6+ Kd7 30.Qg7+ Ke8 31.Qg6+ [White has a beautiful
mate in 15 moves: 31.Rxc6! Rf7 32.Qh8+ Qf8 33.Rxe6+ Kd7 34.Qxh5!
Kxe6 35.Qe5+ Kd7 36.Qxd5+ Kc8 37.Qe6+ Kb8 38.Be5+ Rc7 39.Bxc7+
Kxc7 40.Rc3+ Kd8 41.Rd3+ Kc7 42.Rd7+ Kc8 43.Re7+ Kb8 44.Qe5+ Kc8
45.Qc7#] 31...Kd7 32.Qxh5? [32.Qh7+! Ke8 33.Rxc6 bxc6 34.Qg6+ Rf7
35.Rb7+- wins for White!] 32...Rxf6 33.Rg3 Qe7 34.Qh4 Raf8 35.f3 Rf4 0-
1
56 - Data in Critical Chase
Against the computer chess engine "Data" rated 2849 I played the old critical
line in the Alekhine Defence Chase Variation with the book move 9...g5!
Today the theoretical evaluation of this variation is even better understood
than it was twenty years.
The basic opening theory of the Alekhine Defence in the 1990s came from
Vladamir Bagirov, Lev Alburt and Graham Burgess. In my own book the
Alekhine Defense Playbook published by Pickard & Son in 2000 of the move
12...Nxe5 I wrote:
"The knight sacrifice is too much for the f-pawn to handle. He will have to
drop something." That was from Lepre - Bertola, corr 1988. There White
deviated from my game below with 14.Qh5 and Black won.
My game vs Data was played about two months after I hit my peak Internet
Chess Club blitz rating of 2492 on October 1, 1998. We reached a position
after 23 moves where I had the choice between an even middlegame and a
drawish ending. I went for the draw vs an opponent rated 400+ points above
me. The computer was unlikely to lose on time.
Data (2849) - Sawyer (2436), ICC 5 0, 26.11.1998 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5
3.c4 Nb6 4.c5 Nd5 5.Bc4 e6 6.Nc3 Nxc3 7.dxc3 Nc6 8.Bf4 [If 8.Qh5 Bxc5
9.Nf3 g6=] 8...Bxc5 9.Qg4 g5! 10.Bxg5 Rg8 11.Nh3 [11.Bxd8 Rxg4 12.Be2
Rxg2 13.Bxc7 Rxf2=] 11...Be7 12.f4 Nxe5 [The old move, and good enough
for equality. Now however we know that Black seems a little better with
simply 12...Bxg5! 13.fxg5 Nxe5 14.Qe2 Nxc4 15.Qxc4 h6!? 16.gxh6 Qf6=/+
Houdini] 13.fxe5 Bxg5 14.Qe4 Rg7 15.Rf1 d5 16.exd6 cxd6 17.Bb5+ Kf8
18.Rf2 Bh6 19.Nf4 Bxf4 20.Qxf4 d5 21.Bd3 [White may do better with
21.Qd4 f5 22.g4!? Qb6 23.Qxb6 axb6 24.gxf5 Rg1+ 25.Rf1 Rxf1+ 26.Bxf1
exf5=] 21...Bd7 22.Qb4+ Kg8 23.Qxb7 Qc8 [Black could play for more
with 23...a5 24.Bb5 Bxb5 25.Qxb5 Qc7= but getting the queens off the board
made victory more difficult for my computer opponent.] 24.Qxc8+ Rxc8
25.Kd2 Rb8 26.Ke3 Bb5 27.Bxb5 Rxb5 28.Kd3 Kf8 29.Rg1 Ke7 30.Rgf1
f5 31.Re2 Kd6 32.Rf4 Rg4 33.g3 Rxf4 34.gxf4 Rb7 35.Ke3 Rg7 36.b3 Kc5
37.Kd3 Kd6 38.Ke3 Kc5 39.Kd3 Kd6 40.Ke3 [Game drawn by repetition]
1/2-1/2
3.d4 d6 4.c4 Nb6
This is the Exchange Variation.
57 - Flying Pieces Exchange
Active pieces is the goal for Black in the Alekhine Defence. Tactical
combinations crop up all over the place, even in the symmetrical Exchange
Variation 5.exd6 exd6.
I have played this opening thousands of times as Black. So far I have scored
slightly better with 5...cxd6 than 5...exd6, but I play both with equal
frequency. Each time I just pick one.
I used to play this Exchange line as White to avoid tactics. But then I got
tactically outplayed by a high rated correspondence player. I realized that any
opening with very active pieces is going to allow for tactical complications.
Here is a three minute blitz game where Black's knights go to the queenside
Nb6/Nc6 and his bishops go to the kingside Bf6/Bg4 (although Bf6/Bf5 is
more common).
I note that the famous GM Roman Dzindzichashvili recommends in his

repertoire that White play the moves 6.Nc3 Be7 7.Bd3. When my opponent
played 6.Nf3, I thought maybe ...Bg4 would be better than ...Bf5.
In such a fast time control, the pieces started flying. In the end I picked off a
queen.
pawnstar3 - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 21.05.2012 begins 1.e4

Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.c4 Nb6 4.d4 d6 5.exd6 exd6 6.Nf3 Be7 7.Nc3 0-0 8.b3 [The
main line from here goes: 8.h3 Bf5 9.Be2 Nc6 10.0-0 Bf6 11.Be3 Re8 12.b3
h6=] 8...Bf6 9.Bb2 Bg4 [9...Nc6=] 10.Be2 Nc6 11.0-0 Re8 [11...d5 12.c5
Nc8=] 12.Re1 [12.d5 Rxe2! 13.Qxe2 Nd4 14.Qe3 Bxf3 15.gxf3 Nc2=]
12...Qd7? 13.d5 Nb4 [13...Ne5? 14.Nxe5 Rxe5 15.Qd2+/=] 14.a3 Na6
15.Nd4 Bxe2 16.Ndxe2 Nc5 17.b4? Ne4 [17...Nxc4-/+] 18.Rb1 Nxc4
[18...Nxc3! 19.Bxc3 Rxe2 20.Rxe2 Bxc3-/+] 19.Qd3? [19.Nxe4 Rxe4
20.Bxf6 gxf6=] 19...Nxb2 20.Nxe4? [White drops the queen, but at any rate
he has lost a piece with 20.Rxb2 Nxc3-+] 20...Nxd3 21.Nxf6+ gxf6 0-1
58 - Wharry Alburt Variation
Correspondence chess allows players to test out critical opening lines that the
big boys play without having to remember moves. The use of chess books
was allowed.
Nowadays we have chess engines and databases, but there was not much of
that over 20 years ago.
Postal chess masters tended to collect a lot of written theoretical analysis in

notebooks.
That is why many correspondence masters, myself included, have written

books on chess openings.
Stephen Wharry and I contested an Alekhine Defence in what was known as

the Lev Alburt variation (4.Nf3 g6).
GM Alburt had won the US championship playing this opening. White will
likely choose between 5.c4 and 5.Bc4.
The 5.c4 line with 6.exd6 cxd6 is a cousin to the Exchange Variation 4.c4
Nb6 5.exd6 cxd6. However, in the Alburt line White has already committed
to Nf3.
We followed the main line for 15 moves. Then we were on our own. Both of
us missed winning chances and agreed to a draw when I stood better.
Wharry (2014) - Sawyer (1978), corr USCF 89SS90, 09.10.1991 begins

1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.d4 d6 4.Nf3 g6 5.c4 Nb6 6.exd6 cxd6 7.Be2 Bg7 8.0-0
0-0 9.h3 Nc6 10.Nc3 Bf5 11.Be3 d5 12.c5 Nc4 13.Bxc4 dxc4 14.Qa4 e5
15.d5 Nd4 16.Nd2 [16.Qxc4 Nxf3+ 17.gxf3 Bxh3 18.Rfd1=] 16...Bd3
17.Rfc1 b5!? 18.Nxb5 Ne2+ [18...Nxb5=/+] 19.Kh1 a6? 20.Nd6 [20.Nc3
Nxc1 21.Rxc1+/=] 20...Nxc1 21.Rxc1 f5 22.N2xc4 f4 23.Bd2 Qh4 24.f3 e4
[24...Qf2! 25.Be1 Qxc5 26.Qd7+/=] 25.Qd7 [25.Qd1+/-] 25...exf3 [Black
should first play 25...Bxc4 26.Nxc4 exf3=] 26.Qe6+ Kh8 27.Ne5 fxg2+
28.Kg1 h6 29.Nxd3?? [White is winning after 29.Be1!+] 29...Bd4+ 30.Kxg2
Qg3+ 31.Kh1 Qf3+ [31...Rf5!-+ threatens ...Qxh3 mate!] 32.Kh2 Qg3+
33.Kh1 Qf3+ [33...Rf5!-+] 34.Kh2 Qg3+ 35.Kh1 [-+] 1/2-1/2
59 - Sawyer vs Mike Eldridge
In sporting news the city of Lewiston, Maine was famous for a quick
knockout from what was called the "Phantom Punch." It was the rematch
between Sonny Liston and Cassius Clay (who had just changed his name to
Mohammed Ali). The fight was the only heavyweight boxing championship
ever held in Maine.
Nine years later, I played in a weekend chess tournament in that area where I
had a fight of my own. For years I thought it was in Lewiston, but the chess
might have been played in Waterville.
My opponent for the third round on Saturday night was Michael Eldridge, the
state high champion. Mike was rated about 1800 at that time. It might have
been an Under-1800 section. Mike was younger than I was, better than I was,
and on his way up.
Our opening was an aggressive Alekhine Defence (1.e4 Nf6). Later in my

career I would add it to my own repertoire as Black. At the time I was just
trying to avoid complications.
I played the Exchange Variation. Michael Eldridge kept his king in the center
too long and I managed to land a knockout punch of my own: checkmate on
move 20.
Sawyer - Eldridge, Lewiston, ME (3), 09.02.1974 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5
3.c4 [The main line is 3.d4 d6 4.Nf3] 3...Nb6 4.d4 d6 5.exd6 [The Exchange
Variation. Sharper is 5.f4 the Four Pawns Attack.] 5...cxd6 [Very common is
5...exd6 leading to more sound positions.] 6.Nc3 g6 7.Be3 Bg7 8.Nf3 [The
main line these days is 8.Rc1 0-0 9.b3 with a positional edge to White.]
8...Bg4 [Safer and sounder is to get the king out of the center by 8...0-0 9.h3
Nc6 with equal chances.] 9.Rc1 Nc6 10.Be2 [Both sides have developed all
their minor pieces quickly. White has added Rc1 which will prove to be very
important.] 10...Bxf3 [10...d5!?] 11.Bxf3 Nxc4 12.Bxc6+ bxc6 13.Qa4 Nxb2
14.Qxc6+ Kf8 [Black wins a pawn at the risk of a bad king position. The
threat is ...Nd3+.] 15.0-0 Rc8 [The critical line is 15...Nd3 16.Rb1 Rc8
17.Qa6 Rxc3 18.Bd2+/=] 16.Qa6 Qd7 17.Nd5! [Maybe even better is
17.Na4!] 17...Rb8 18.Rc7 Qb5? [The final error, but Black is in trouble
anyway. 18...Qa4 19.Rc8+ Rxc8 20.Qxc8+ Qe8 21.Qb7+-] 19.Qxb5 Rxb5
20.Rc8# 1-0
60 - Harimau Training Match
Leading up to New Year’s Day 2013, I decided to play a short training match
against the computer program Harimau.
It was rated 3002 for this game and slightly lower for the other two games.
At that high rating level, I am not expecting to defeat it. The tactics of a 3000
rated computer are nearly flawless.
The reason I played it was because I wanted to see how it handled various
lines I might played.
The Alekhine Defense is one of my favorite openings from either side. I have
played it thousands of times trying every variation.
In the Alekhine Defence game below, Harimau followed the lines given for
White by GM Roman Dzindzichasvili until the computer found an
improvement with 15...b6!
This led to equal play. Only the queens were off the board.
There were many open lines and possibilities for all the rest of the pieces.
That is a perfect scenario for most grandmasters.
Using Houdini I found some improvements for White over my play which I
noted below.
Sawyer - Harimau, ICC 5 0 Internet Chess Club, 29.12.2012 begins 1.e4

Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 Nb6 5.exd6 cxd6 6.Nc3 g6 7.Be3 Bg7 8.Rc1 0-0
9.b3 e5 [Not 8...N8d7 because of 9.c5!+- winning.] 10.dxe5 dxe5 11.Qxd8
Rxd8 12.c5 N6d7 13.Bc4 Nc6 14.Nf3 Na5 15.Be2 b6! 16.cxb6 [16.0-0 bxc5
17.Ne4 Bb7 18.Nxc5 Nxc5 19.Rxc5 Nc6 20.Bc4=; 16.Na4 Nxc5 17.Nxc5
bxc5 18.Rxc5 Bf8 19.Rxe5 Nc6 20.Re4 Nb4 21.0-0 Bb7 22.Rd4 Nxa2=]
16...Nxb6 17.0-0 Bb7 18.Rfd1 Rxd1+ 19.Bxd1 [19.Rxd1 Rc8! (19...h6
20.Bf1 Bc6 21.Nd2+/=) 20.Nb5 Nd5 21.Bxa7 Rc2 22.Bf1 Rxa2 23.b4=]
19...Rc8 20.Ne2 Nc6 21.Nc3 Nb4 22.a3 Nd3 23.Rc2 e4 24.Nd4 Rd8
25.Nde2 f5 26.g3 Ba6 27.Nc1 [27.Rd2 Kf7+/=] 27...Nxc1 28.Rxc1 Bxc3
29.Rxc3 Rxd1+ 30.Kg2 Bf1+ 31.Kg1 Bh3# White checkmated 0-1
4.c4 Nb6 5.f4
This is the Four Pawns Attack.
61 - Experiment in 6...c5
Here is a game from the 1981 ICCF World Cup V. This was an international
open postal chess tournament with 9 players in our section.
About that time I began to play the Alekhine Defence as Black. Early
attempts were inconsistent but helpful to my learning.
The Alekhine Defence Four Pawns Attack with 5.f4 is a key thematic
variation. It is not very popular in actual practice.
The Four Pawns is easier to play in postal chess. That is because these lines
can be complicated and tactical.
In correspondence chess players can look up opening theory in books. In blitz

or tournament play, White almost always leaves the book early in the
Alekhine Defence. Play usually continues 5.f4 dxe4 6.fxe5 Nc6.
I experimented with a topical line6...c5!? This was seen in the famous game
Bronstein-Ljubojevic, Petropolis Interzonal 1973. In that game White won in
44 moves.
My opponent for this game was Janusz Szklarczyk. When ICCF started
publishing ratings later (in 1991) he was rated 2295.
Szklarczyk - Sawyer, ICCF, 1981 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.d4 d6 4.c4
Nb6 5.f4 dxe5 6.fxe5 c5 [The main line of the Four Pawns Attack is 6...Nc6
7.Be3 Bf5 8.Nc3 e6 9.Nf3 when Black has several options.] 7.d5 e6 8.Nc3
exd5 9.cxd5 c4 10.Nf3 [If White thinks he can take 10.Bxc4? to regain the
piece with a Qa4+ and capture, he will be crossed up with Black's own check
and capture after 10...Qh4+!-+] 10...Bg4 [10...Bb4!?] 11.Qd4 Bxf3 12.gxf3
Bb4 13.Bxc4 0-0 14.Rg1 g6 15.Bg5 Qc7 16.Bb3 [16.Rg4! Nxc4 17.Qxc4
Qxe5+] 16...Bc5 17.Qf4 Bxg1 18.d6 Qc5 19.0-0-0 [19.Ne4=] 19...Be3+?!
[19...Nc6!-+] 20.Qxe3 Qxe3+ 21.Bxe3 N8d7 22.e6 [22.f4+/-] 22...fxe6
23.Bxe6+ Kg7 24.Bd4+ Kh6 25.Be3+ Kg7 26.Bd4+ 1/2-1/2
62 - Bishop vs Lawyer Times
Tim Bishop sent me games that brought back memories:
“Hi Tim, I trust you’re doing well. I thought these chess games might interest
you. A local master plays his own variation of the Alekhine’s Defense where,
in the four-pawn attack, he plays an early c5 for black. I had winning chances
in both games, but couldn’t convert. Have you ever seen this variation
before? I can’t find much of anything on it. On a happier note, I had a recent
game I’ll treasure for many years to come. And I was surprised to see it
published in the Saturday Boston Globe...”
Masters such as Lawyer Times specialize in their openings to be familiar with

tactics. Bishop boldly played two sharp attacking games. He pushed the fight
to Black. The notes and annotations are by Bishop except as noted by
Sawyer.
Bishop (2048) - Times (2273), Groundhog Day Swiss Metrowest Chess

Club, Natick, (3), 25.02.2014 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.c4 Nb6 4.d4 d6
5.f4 dxe5 6.fxe5 c5 7.d5 g6 8.Nc3 Bg7 9.Bf4 0-0 10.Bd3 [Note by Sawyer:
Popular chess engines prefer White after 10.Qd2 e6 11.0-0-0 exd5
12.cxd5+/= Komodo, Deep Rybka, Deep Fritz, Houdini, Critter.] 10...e6
11.d6 Nc6 12.Nf3 f6 [Note by Sawyer: Black improved in the second game
with 12...Nd7! 13.Qe2 Nd4 14.Nxd4 (Another interesting try is 14.Qe3!?
Nxf3+ 15.gxf3 Qh4+ 16.Kd2 with chances for both sides.) 14...cxd4 15.Nb5
Qa5+ with equal chances although 0-1 in 37. Bishop-Times, Metrowest CC
Natick Mass 2014] 13.Ne4N [Note by Sawyer: Houdini likes the line
13.exf6! Bxf6 14.Ne4 Bxb2 15.Bg5+/=] 13...Nd7 14.exf6 Nxf6 15.Bg5
Qa5+ 16.Bd2 Qb6 17.Nxf6+ Bxf6 18.0-0 Nd4 19.Bh6 Bg7? 20.Bxg7 Kxg7
21.Ng5 [21.Nxd4! cxd4 22.Rxf8 Kxf8 23.Qf3+ Ke8 24.Qf4 Kd7 25.c5 Qxc5
26.Rc1 Qxd6 27.Qf7+ Kd8 28.Qg8+ Kd7 29.Qxh7+ Kd8 30.Qg8+ Kd7
31.Qf7+ Kd8 32.Bxg6 and mate or significant loss of material to follow.]
21...Qxd6 22.Rxf8 [22.Qg4! offers some good attacking chances] 22...Qxf8
23.Nxh7?? [23.Qg4 instead, threatening Nxh7] 23...Qf4 24.Qa4 [time
pressure; game is over; perhaps 24.Qf1 followed by exchange of queens and
Rf8 tying up bishop and rook; even though down a piece, it is difficult for
him to develop because of Be4.] 24...b5 25.Qa5 Bd7 26.cxb5 [26.Rf1 may
be better try] 26...Qe3+ 27.Kh1 Qxd3 28.Qc7 Nxb5 29.Qb7 Qd5 White
loses on time. 0-1
63 - Boston Strong Alekhine
Tragedy struck with the bombing at the Boston Marathon by two boys who
were from southern Russia. Law enforcement was able to find these young
men and thus lessen the immediate danger to America.
Almost everyone in United States wishes for the pursuit of happiness. This
follows when we love our family, worship God, work our jobs and play our
games (like chess!). I have had many friends from Russia.
Thankfully, most of us do not want to hurt other people. We just want to

enjoy our lives and have fun.
Those who read my blog come from many countries.

Here are the Top 10:
1. United States (America the Beautiful - home of Blackmar)
2. Germany (Home of Diemer and correspondence players)
3. United Kingdom (We share a similar language: English)
4. Russia (We share a love of chess. Thank you!)
5. France (Home of Gedult and our friend Eric Jego)
6. Belgium (Home of BDG theoretician Guido De Bouver)
7. Norway (Can you say Grandmaster Magnus Carlsen?)
8. Philippines (Hello to Peter Mcgerald Penullar)
9. Canada (Bonjour Mr. Jocelyn Bond of Ryder Gambit fame)
10. Netherlands (Home of tall people and the Dutch Defence!)
Alexander Alekhine was a great tactical world chess champion who came
from Russia. He has always been one of my favorites.
I played an Alekhine Defence vs "MarshKnight" (1836). Here the White

queen went to the unfortunate square d3.
In blitz, White missed the tactical danger aimed at her majesty.
MarshKnight - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 19.04.2013 begins

1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 Nb6 5.f4 dxe5 6.fxe5 Nc6 7.Nf3 Bg4 8.Be3
Bxf3 [8...e6 9.Nc3 Qd7= might be better.] 9.gxf3 [9.Qxf3 Nxd4 10.Qe4 c5=]
9...e6 10.Nc3 Qh4+ 11.Bf2 Qf4 12.Qd3? [12.c5 Nd7=] 12...0-0-0 13.Nb5?
Nxe5 14.Bg3? Nxd3+ White resigns 0-1
64 - Four Pawn Targets Attack
The most principled variation in the Alekhine Defence is the Four Pawns
Attack (5.f4).
White plays as many central pawns as possible to grab space.
When I wrote my “Alekhine Defense Playbook” (2000), I called this

variation the “Four Targets Attack”.
Why?
Because Black has many ways to attack these central pawns.
Here is a short example of how things can go back for White.
My ICC blitz opponent was "creditordebit".
The winning idea included a cross pin, a tactic used by Alekhine himself in
other openings.
creditordebit - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 09.05.2012 begins

1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.c4 Nb6 4.d4 d6 5.f4 [Four Pawns Attack.] 5...dxe5
6.fxe5 Nc6 7.Nf3 [The main line is 7.Be3 Bf5 8.Nc3 e6 9.Nf3 when Black
usually chooses 9...Be7, 9...Bg4 or 9...Qd7] 7...Bg4 8.Be3 e6 9.Nc3 Be7
10.h3 [White has to play. 10.Be2] 10...Bxf3 11.gxf3 [I have been here before.
In Bruha - Sawyer, ICC 1997 White played 11.Qxf3 Nxd4 12.Bxd4 Qxd4
Black had won a pawn and went on to win the game.] 11...Bh4+ 12.Bf2
Qxd4 [I love this cross pin idea, but even stronger is 12...Bxf2+! 13.Kxf2
Qh4+ 14.Kg2 0-0-0 and White will likely be three pawns down in the
middlegame.] 13.Qxd4 Nxd4 14.Bxh4 Nxf3+ 15.Kf2 Nxh4 White resigns
since he has lost two pawns for nothing and traded into a lost endgame. 0-1
65 - Revenge on Costigan
Okay, "Revenge" is too strong. There was no animosity between us. Costigan
was friendly, encouraging and a good sport. It was just that Thomas Costigan
beat me in the 1974 US Junior Open. I simply wanted to return the favor.
Thomas Costigan had a twin brother Richard. They both rapidly increased
their ratings in the 1970s. Around 1981 or so I seem to remember they were
twin masters rated 2308 and 2309.
This game was played eight years after our first encounter. Thomas was rated
2359. He visited the Chaturanga Chess Club to play a simultaneous
exhibition. I was one of 15 opponents or so. Unlike many simuls, Costigan
allowed us to choose our color. Naturally I chose to play the White pieces.
Nice guy!
Once again we played the Alekhine Defence with 1.e4 Nf6. In our early game
I played the timid King's Indian Attack. After 2.d3 d6 3.Nf3 c5 4.g3 g6 5.Bg2
Bg7 6.0-0 0-0 7.Nbd2 Nc6 8.c3 Rb8. Black expanded on the queenside. He
broke through and won material before I did anything serious on the kingside.
In this game I play more aggressively. After move 25 I was winning. I missed
a quicker win with 34.c7! At the end I was up two rooks when he gave up
trying to get a perpetual check.
In this simul game I learned that I play better in open positions with active
piece play. Also, I play better when I aggressively try to push my opponent
around. Tim should not play Timidly.
Sawyer - Costigan, Hatboro, PA simul 08.07.1982 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5
3.d4 d6 4.c4 Nb6 5.f4 dxe5 6.fxe5 Bf5 7.Nc3 e6 8.Be3 Nc6 9.Nf3 Bb4 [I
play 9...Be7 as Black.] 10.Be2 [10.a3!? Bxc3+ 11.bxc3 Qd7 12.Be2] 10...0-0
11.0-0 Na5 12.Nd2 Bg6 13.Rc1 c5 14.dxc5 Bxc3 15.Rxc3 Nd7 16.Nf3 Nc6
17.a3 a5 18.Bg5 Qc7 19.Qd6 Rfc8 20.Bf4 a4 21.Rd1 Nf8 22.h3 Qa5
23.Bg5 [23.Nd4! Nxd4 24.Qxd4] 23...h6 [23...Rd8!] 24.Bh4 Bf5+/=
[24...Rd8!] 25.Nd4 Nxd4 26.Qxd4 Rxc5 27.g4 Rxe5 28.Bf3 Bh7 29.c5 f6
30.Bg3 Ng6 31.Bxe5 Nxe5 32.Bxb7 Rb8 33.c6 Bc2 34.Rd2 [34.c7!]
34...Qc7 35.Rdxc2 Rd8 36.Qxd8+ Qxd8 37.c7 Qd4+ 38.Kg2 Ng6 39.c8Q+
Kh7 40.Qc4 Nh4+ 41.Kg3 Qg1+ 42.Bg2 Qe1+ 43.Kh2 Qe5+ 44.Rg3 1-0
66 - Four Pawns Repeat
Attacking the Alekhine Defence with a bold Four Pawns Attack is a two
edged sword.
Alekhine games can be rather short and disastrous.
In the early 1980s I played several Alekhines about 20 years before I wrote a
book on that opening.
The APCT postal opponent Pete Bramante threw his pawns and pieces at me
in a very aggressive manner.
My army fought back and a sharp battle involving queen moves ensued.
Each week I go food shopping with my well organized wife. My job is to

push the grocery cart.
She starts down the aisle in one direction. Then she turns around to pick up
what she forgot and turns around again.
Her loss of time does not matter when buying food, especially if I throw
something yummy in the cart when she's not looking. But the loss of time on
the chess board can be fatal for the female.
In this game Pete Bramante had trouble with beautiful queen.
First she moves 17.Qd3.
Then she turned around and went back with 21.Qd1.
This allowed Black to get a powerful mating attack.
Bramante (1700) - Sawyer (2100), corr APCT 1981 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5
Nd5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 Nb6 5.f4 dxe5 6.fxe5 Nc6 7.Be3 Bf5 8.Nc3 e6 9.Nf3 Be7
10.Be2 0-0 11.0-0 f6 12.Nh4 [The main line is 12.exf6 Bxf6=] 12...fxe5
13.Nxf5 exf5 [Also very good is 13...Rxf5=] 14.d5 [14.dxe5 Qxd1 15.Raxd1
Nxe5=] 14...Nd4 15.Bxd4 exd4 16.Qxd4 Nd7 17.Qd3 [17.Kh1 Bc5=]
17...Bc5+ 18.Kh1 Qg5 [18...Qf6=/+] 19.Nb5 Rae8 20.Nxc7 Re3 21.Qd1
[21.Ne6! Qh6=/+] 21...Bd6 [Even better was 21...Qh4! 22.d6 Rf6-+] 22.Ne6
[22.Nb5! Be5=/+] 22...Qh4 0-1
67 - Sharp Four Pawns Attack
The Alekhine Defence has interested me since the 1972 Spassky - Fischer
match. There Bobby played it a couple times. Overall my database has 15
games were Bobby Fischer played the Alekhine Defence: 8 as White and 7 as
Black.
My oldest recorded game playing the Alekhine in a tournament was against

Mike Eldridge from 1974. It was a memorable win for me as White, because
Mike was higher rated than me.
Here I played Black against the computer Rookie in a wild Four Pawns
Attack blitz game. Black has four targets to aim at in the center, so in my
2000 book the “Alekhine Defense Playbook” I wrote: “We could call this
variation the Four Targets Attack.”
Rookie chose the aggressive 10.d5 line where White sacrificed a rook on h1
to get a pawn to e7. Black made threats against the White king and the
advanced e-pawn. All the while Black offered to exchange material leading to
a winning endgame.
Rookie - Sawyer, Internet Chess Club 5 0, 2007 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5
3.d4 d6 4.c4 Nb6 5.f4 dxe5 6.fxe5 Nc6 7.Be3 Bf5 [Rapid development is
essential for Black.] 8.Nc3 e6 9.Nf3 Be7 [The traditional main line, but there
are several alternatives. 9...Bg4; 9...Bb4; 9...Nb4; 9...Qd7] 10.d5 [10.Be2 0-0
11.0-0 f6 12.exf6 Bxf6 is the alternative line.] 10...exd5 11.cxd5 Nb4 12.Nd4
Bd7 13.e6 fxe6 14.dxe6 Bc6 15.Qg4 Bh4+ 16.g3 Bxh1 17.gxh4 0-0
18.Qg5? [The losing move. Black cannot let White carry out the threatened
19.e7. Undoubling the h-pawns is not a good enough reason to swap queens.
Correct is 18.0-0-0 Qf6.] 18...Qxg5 19.hxg5 c5 20.0-0-0 cxd4 21.Bxd4 N4d5
22.e7 Rfe8 23.Bxb6? Nxb6 24.g6 hxg6 25.Bh3 Bc6 26.Be6+ Kh7 27.Re1
Bd7 [27...Rxe7 28.Bg8+ Kxg8 29.Rxe7 Nd5 30.Nxd5 Bxd5-+ Black is up a
piece.] 28.Bxd7 Nxd7 29.Ne4 Rec8+ 30.Kb1 Nf6 31.Nd6 Rcb8 32.Re3 Ne8
33.Ne4 Nf6 34.Nd6 Ne8 35.Nf7 Kg8 36.Ne5 Nf6 37.Nxg6 Kf7 38.Ne5+
Kxe7 39.Nc6+ Kd6 40.Nxb8 Rxb8 41.Ra3 a6 42.Rg3 Rg8 43.a4 g5 44.Rb3
Kc7 45.Rg3 g4 46.Rc3+ Kb8 47.Rc4 g3 48.hxg3 Rxg3 49.Ka2 Nd5 50.Rd4
Ne7 51.Re4 Nc6 52.b4 Rd3 53.b5 axb5 54.axb5 Rd4 55.Re8+ Rd8 56.Re4
Nd4 57.b6 Kc8 58.Re3 Kd7 59.Rc3 Kd6 60.Kb1 Kd5 61.Rc7 Rb8 62.Rc1
Nc6 63.Rc2 Re8 64.Kb2 Re4 65.Ka3 Rb4 66.Rxc6? [Desperation.]
66...Kxc6 0-1
68 - Ron Evans Four Pawns
The Alekhine Defence tempts White to advance pawns and kick the Black
knight around the board from the king's knight file (Ng8) to the queen's
knight file (Nb6). In theory White gets a strong pawn center and Black gets
active pieces.
The Four Pawns Attack is the sharpest line White can choose. The first nine
moves are the basic set-up for both sides. Black has several options. My
favorite has been 9...Be7.
At move 10, White has to decide whether to continue good development with
10.Be2 or whether to pounce immediately with 10.d5 before Black has
castled. This 10.d5 line is like grabbing a tiger by the tail. You may grab far
more than you bargained for. White often gives up the Exchange and Black is
forced to endure a strong attack.
There is a lot to remember, but in postal chess both sides use books. Thus
choosing good lines become more important than memory. I played Ron
Evans in the 1989 USCF Golden Knights. I ventured the Alekhine Defence.
It became one of my favorites.
This game is a good example of me getting a good opening position, and then
being outplayed in the ensuing middlegame. Every opening has a learning
curve. This was one of my lessons. My opening was good, but Ron Evans
played better.
Evans - Sawyer, corr USCF 1991 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.d4 d6 4.c4
Nb6 5.f4 dxe5 6.fxe5 Nc6 7.Be3 Bf5 8.Nc3 e6 9.Nf3 Be7 10.d5 exd5
11.cxd5 Nb4 12.Nd4 Bd7 13.e6 fxe6 14.dxe6 Bc6 15.Qg4 Bh4+ 16.g3 Bxh1
17.0-0-0 Qf6 18.gxh4 0-0 19.Be2 Bd5 20.Bg5 Qe5 21.Rg1 [The natural
21.e7 is usually met by 21...Rf2-/+] 21...Nxa2+ [Another good idea is
21...h5! 22.Qxh5 Qxd4 23.Rg4 Nxa2+ 24.Nxa2 Qe5-+] 22.Nxa2 Bxa2
23.Bh6 g6 24.Bd3 Rf6 25.h5 Bxe6 26.Nxe6 Qxe6 27.Qg5 Re8 28.hxg6
Qc6+ 29.Kb1 hxg6 30.h4 [Black maintains a pawn advantage after 30.Bxg6
Rxg6 31.Qxg6+ Qxg6+ 32.Rxg6+ Kh7 33.Rf6 Nd5 34.Rf5 Kxh6 35.Rxd5
Re7=/+] 30...Qd6 [30...Ree6-+] 31.Bc2 [31.Bxg6 Rxg6 32.Qxg6+ Qxg6+
33.Rxg6+ Kh7=/+] 31...Qe5?! [31...Re5-/+] 32.Qg2 Qh5 33.Bb3+ Kh7
34.Bg5 Re2? [Black's last chance was 34...Rf3 35.Bd1 Ref8=/+] 35.Qxb7
Qf3 36.Qxc7+ Kh8 37.Bxf6+ Qxf6 38.Qc1 1-0
69 - Michael France 4 Pawns
Alekhine Defence players like to face the Four Pawns Attack as Black.
The tactics in the sharpest line are difficult for either side to handle
flawlessly.
Since Black typically plays the Alekhine Defence more often than White
does, Black tends to be more familiar with the lines.
Those who regularly play Black usually score well. However everyone has to
start somewhere.
In my 1989 USCF Golden Knights Postal Tournament game vs Michael

France, I was still fairly new to this opening.
As Black I managed to get an advantage. Then I blundered on move 29.
Five moves later it was over. Michael France outplayed me and deserved the
win because of it.
A few years after this game, I started playing this opening much more often.
In 2000, Sid Pickard and Son published my book on it entitled “The Alekhine
Defense Playbook”. The book sold out.
On page 127 after the move 19.Be2, I recommended the improvement

19...Qe5! to counterattack the undefended Be3. This idea follows the postal
chess game Antin - Van Beurden, correspondence 1992. There White
resigned after move 27.
France - Sawyer, corr USCF 1991 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.d4 d6 4.c4
Nb6 5.f4 dxe5 6.fxe5 Nc6 7.Be3 Bf5 8.Nc3 e6 9.Nf3 Be7 10.d5 [The
alternative is 10.Be2 0-0 11.0-0 f6 12.exf6 Bxf6=] 10...exd5 11.cxd5 Nb4
12.Nd4 Bd7 13.e6 fxe6 14.dxe6 Bc6 15.Qg4 Bh4+ 16.g3 Bxh1 17.0-0-0 Qf6
18.gxh4 0-0 19.Be2 Bd5 [19...Qe5!-/+] 20.Bg5 Qe5 21.a3 [21.e7 Rf2-/+]
21...Na2+ [21...Nc6 22.Nxd5 Nxd5=/+] 22.Nxa2 Bxa2 23.e7 Rfe8 24.Bd3
Nd5 25.Nf3 Qd6 26.Qe4 g6 27.Bc2 Nf6 28.Qxb7 Qxe7 29.h5? [29.Qa6=]
29...Qf7? [29...Rab8!-/+] 30.hxg6 hxg6 31.Ne5 Qe6 [31...Rxe5 32.Qxa8+
Ne8 33.Bd2+/-] 32.Nxg6 Ne4? 33.Ne7+ Rxe7 34.Qxa8+ 1-0
4.Nf3
This old move 4.Nf3 is called the Modern Variation.
70 - Red Bank Chess Simul
In the 1980s I gave simultaneous exhibitions against several players at once.
Mostly I played postal chess. I lived in a small town without a chess club. I
contacted a chess club in Red Bank, just north of Chattanooga, Tennessee
and arranged to play a simultaneous exhibition against their club. I think it
was in a school. I was rated about 1900.
The game was an Alekhine Defence against a scholastic player by the name
of Gorton. He is probably no relation to the seafood people. I played actively
but almost too carefully in this game, waiting for a mistake from Black.
Playing a simul, I did not want to spend much time in deep calculation or
planning. Eventually Black dropped a pawn, but the game continued. Later
he trapped a bishop outside his wall of pawns and the game was over.
Sawyer - Gorton, Red Bank, TN simul 07.02.1980 begins 1.e4 Nf6 [About
this time I had added the Alekhine Defence as Black to my own repertoire.]
2.e5 Nd5 3.d4 d6 4.Nf3 [I was under the influence of the World Champion
Anatoly Karpov who in 1980 was playing 4.Nf3. At other times I have played
the four pawns attack with 4.c4 Nb6 5.f4 with a wide open sharp game.]
4...g6 [Alburt Variation] 5.Bc4 [More common is 5.c4 Nb6 6.exd6] 5...c6
6.0-0 Bg7 7.h3 [7.exd6+/=] 7...0-0 8.Qe2 Nb6 9.Bb3 d5 10.c3 [Just a solid
waiting move. Remember I am playing several games at once. I did not want
to spend time thinking. Play safe and step to the next board.] 10...Na6
11.Rd1 c5 12.Be3 cxd4 13.cxd4 Bf5 14.Nbd2 [14.Nc3 makes more sense to
me today.] 14...Rc8 15.Rac1 Nb4 16.Rxc8 Qxc8 17.Nf1 a5 18.a3 Nc6
[18...a4 19.Rc1+/=] 19.Qb5 Qd8 20.Bg5 [Now is the time for 20.Ng3+/=]
20...h6 21.Bd2 a4 22.Bxa4 Nxa4 [Here Black has a tactical resource that he
misses. Probably at this point some of the other games were done and I was
coming back to this board more quickly. 22...Bd7! 23.Bc2 Nxd4 24.Qd3
Nxf3+ 25.Qxf3=] 23.Qxa4 Qb6 [23...Be4!=] 24.Bc3 Rc8 25.Ne3 Be4
[25...Be6 26.Ne1 h5 27.Nd3+/-] 26.Ne1 [Much better is 26.Nd2!+/-] 26...e6?
[26...h5 27.f3 Bh6 28.fxe4+/=] 27.f3 [The Be4 is trapped.] 27...Bf5 28.g4 1-0
71 - Browne vs Bobby Fischer
Walter Browne faced Bobby Fischer in a tournament. Browne almost won as
White. Fischer played the Alekhine Defence as Black Leading to his world
championship run.
Bobby Fischer games in the Alekhine from the period 1968-1971 were not
well known. Several commentators on the 1972 World Championship match
were surprised Fischer played the Alekhine Defence. I doubt Spassky was
surprised. Fischer stood better in the opening against Browne until Fischer’s
f-pawn plan bombed.
Browne - Fischer, Rovinj / Zagreb (15), 03.05.1970 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5
Nd5 3.d4 d6 4.Nf3 g6 5.Be2 Bg7 6.c4 Nb6 7.exd6 cxd6 8.Nc3 [8.0-0 0-0
9.Nc3 transposes.] 8...0-0 9.0-0 [9.h3= would prevent the pin.] 9...Nc6
10.Be3 Bg4 11.b3 d5! 12.c5 [12.Nxd5 Nxd5 13.cxd5 Qxd5= saddles White
with an isolated d-pawn.] 12...Nc8 13.h3 Bxf3 14.Bxf3 e6 15.Qd2 [15.b4 a6
16.Ne2=] 15...N8e7 16.Nb5?! Nf5 17.Bg4 a6 18.Bxf5 axb5 19.Bc2 Ra3
20.b4 [20.Qd3 Qh4-/+] 20...f5 [20...Qh4!?] 21.Bb3 Qf6 22.Qd3 f4 [22...Ra7
23.Rad1 f4=/+] 23.Bc1 Ra6 24.Bb2 f3 25.g3 Qf5 26.Qxf5 gxf5 27.Rad1
Nxb4 28.Rfe1 f4?! [This bold attack should lose. Correct is 28...Kf7!= when
Black is fine.] 29.a3 Nc6 30.Rxe6 fxg3 31.Bxd5 gxf2+ 32.Kxf2 Kh8 33.Re3
b4 34.axb4 Nxb4 35.Bxf3 Ra2 36.Rb3 Nc6 37.Kg3 Rg8 38.Kf4 Rf8+
[38...Na5!?] 39.Ke4 Rf7 40.Bg4 Re7+ 41.Kd3 [Houdini and Stockfish prefer
41.Kd5+-] 41...Ra4 42.Ra1 Rxd4+ 43.Bxd4 Bxd4 44.Ra8+ Kg7 45.Rb5
Bf2 46.Bf5 Ne5+ 47.Kc3 Be1+ 48.Kd4 Nc6+ 49.Kc4 Bh4 50.Bc8 Nd8
51.Ra2 Rc7 52.Bg4 Be7 53.Kd5 Nc6 54.Rab2 Nd8 55.Rb1 Bf8 56.R1b2
[56.Rg1+-] 56...Be7 57.Rg2 Kh8 58.Ra2 Kg7 59.Ra8 Bh4 60.Rb8 Rf7
61.Rb2 Kh6 62.Rb6+ Kg7 63.Rb3 h5 64.Bc8 Be7 65.Rb5 [65.Rg3+ Kh7
66.Rg2+-] 65...Rf3 66.Bxb7 Rxh3 67.c6 Rc3 68.Ra8 h4 69.Ra4 h3 70.Rc4
h2 71.Rb1 Rxc4 72.Kxc4 Bd6 73.Kd5 Bg3 74.Bc8 Kf7 75.Bh3 Ke7 76.Rc1
Kf6 77.Ra1 Ke7 78.Rf1 Nf7 79.Bg2 Ng5 80.Kc5 Ne6+ 81.Kb6 Bc7+
82.Kb7 Bd6 83.Bd5 Nc5+ 84.Kb6 Na4+ 85.Ka5 Nc5 86.Kb5 Kd8 87.Rf7
Kc8 88.c7 [Now Black is able to reach a drawn ending. At this critical point
88.Rh7!+- seems to give White winning chances since the Black bishop is
overworked covering c5, c7, and h2.] 88...Nd7 89.Kc6 h1Q 90.Bxh1 Ne5+
91.Kb6 Bc5+ 92.Kxc5 Nxf7 93.Kb6 Nd6 94.Bd5 Kd7 95.Bc6+ Kc8 96.Bd5
Kd7 97.Bb3 Nc8+ 98.Kb7 Ne7 1/2-1/2
72 - Taking Blitz Chess Break
It was a Saturday in January. We had some outdoor plans. The Florida
weather was beautiful. Alas someone got sick and we were unable to go. I
watched a few movies, went out to eat at a restaurant, wrote some additional
blog posts and played through dozens of BDG games by chess friend Peter
Mcgerald Penullar.
Eventually I just felt like playing a few blitz games. I got on the Internet
Chess Club and played my old computer buddy "blik" for eight games. My
goal was to relax and to sharpen my tactics.
“blik” was rated between 2383 and 2419. My rating was between 2111 and
2156. My record for the eight games was +1 =3 -4. We alternated colors. I
had White in the first game. This was Game 4 in the 1.e4 Nf6 Alekhine
Defence.
blik - Sawyer, ICC 5 0 Internet Chess Club, 21.01.2012 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5
Nd5 3.d4 d6 4.Nf3 dxe5 5.Nxe5 Nd7 6.Nf3 [White backs off from the wild
and pretty much forced line of 6.Nxf7!? Kxf7 7.Qh5+ Ke6 8.c4 N5f6 9.d5+
Kd6 10.Qf7 Ne5 11.Bf4 c5 12.Nc3 a6 when most computers like Black and
most humans like White.] 6...c6 7.Be2 N7f6 8.0-0 Bg4 9.c4 Nb6 10.Nbd2 e6
11.Qb3 Qc7 12.h3 Bh5 13.a4 Be7 14.a5 Nbd7 15.a6 b6 16.Re1 0-0 [I have
castled with a solid position.] 17.Bd3 Rfe8 18.g4 Bg6 19.Bxg6 hxg6 20.Ne4
Nxe4 21.Rxe4 c5 22.Bf4 Bd6 23.Bxd6 Qxd6 24.g5 Rac8 25.Rd1 Qc7
26.Qb5 cxd4 27.Rexd4 Nf8 28.Ne5 [I have drifted into a position where
White's queenside pawn majority is a problem for me. 28.Qe5!+/-] 28...Red8
29.f4 Rxd4 30.Rxd4 Rd8 31.Qc6! [White is much better here. I decided to
try my luck in an endgame.] 31...Qxc6 32.Nxc6 Rxd4 33.Nxd4 Nd7 34.b4
Nb8 35.b5 Kf8 36.c5 bxc5 37.b6 Nxa6 38.bxa7 Nc7 39.Nb5 Na8 [Better my
knight on a8 than his pawn!] 40.Nd6 Ke7 41.Nb7 c4 42.Kf2 Kd7 43.Na5 c3
44.Ke3 Kc7 45.Nc4 Kb7 [My king has rescued my knight.] 46.Nd6+ Kxa7
47.h4? [Losing. Correct is 47.Kd3! Nc7 48.Kxc3 Nd5+ 49.Kd4 Nxf4
50.Nxf7 Nxh3 Drawn when all remaining pawns will be captured. But not
47.Nxf7? Nc7 48.Kd3 Nd5 49.Nd8 Nxf4+ 50.Kxc3 Kb6 and Black might
have some chances as his king gets closer.] 47...Nb6 48.Nb5+ Kb7 49.Nxc3
Kc6 50.Kf3 Nd5 51.Ne4 Ne7 52.Kg2 Nf5 53.Kh3 Kd5 54.Nf2 Kd4 55.Ng4
Ke4 56.Ne5 Nd6?!= 57.Kg3 Kd5 Game drawn by mutual agreement in an
equal position. 1/2-1/2
73 - Beware of d5 Pawn Break
The Alekhine Defence leads to sharp positions where Black takes on some
risk in an effort to make things difficult for White.
Here is the 3 minute blitz game jubajeba - Sawyer where White plays the
strongest move 4.Nf3.
Black has many good fourth move ideas.
Nowadays most recommend 4...dxe5, such as Tim Taylor does in his book.
For some reason for several years I did better with 4...g6, 4...Nc6 and 4...Bg4
than I did with 4...dxe5.
My early results had little to do with the value of the move.
In this case a player rated below me came up to bite me.
It was a wild game with a nice checkmate at the end.
jubajeba - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 04.09.2012 begins 1.e4

Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.d4 d6 4.Nf3 dxe5 [Usually I play 4...Bg4 which I gave in my
Alekhine Defense Playbook.] 5.Nxe5 c6 6.Be2 Bf5 7.0-0 e6 8.c4 Nf6 9.Nc3
Nbd7 10.Bg5 Be7 [10...Nxe5! 11.dxe5 Qxd1 12.Raxd1 Nd7=] 11.Nxd7
Qxd7 12.d5 cxd5 13.cxd5 Nxd5? [13...0-0 14.dxe6 Qxe6=] 14.Bxe7
[14.Bb5!+-] 14...Kxe7 [14...Nxc3!-/+] 15.Qb3 Nxc3 16.bxc3 a6? [Black
should be able to defend with 16...Kf6 17.Rad1 Qc7 18.g4 Bg6 19.Qb4 Qe5
20.h4 h6=] 17.Rfd1 Qc7 18.Qb4+ Kf6 19.g4 Bg6? [19...Qe5 20.gxf5+/-]
20.Rd4? [White has a forced mate in 6: 20.g5+ Kxg5 21.Qg4+ Kf6 22.Qh4+
Ke5 23.f4+ Ke4 24.Rd4+ Kf5 25.Bd3#] 20...e5? [Here is Black's last good
chance. 20...a5!=] 21.Rd6+ Kg5 22.h4+ Kxh4 23.g5+ Kxg5 24.Qg4+ Kh6
25.Qh4# Black is checkmated 1-0
4.Nf3 Bg4
This is the Modern Defence Traditional Main Line.
74 - Adam Miller Exchange
Adam R. Miller was my fourth round opponent in the 2009 Space Coast
Open. Miller's rating was on a rapid rise until he reached 2083 a few months
after this game. As of the 2012 National K-12 Championship, Adam Miller
was rated 2058.
In our game I chose the Alekhine Defence on which I had written a book. I
had not played it much since about 2000.
Adam Miller mixed his variations somewhat with 4.Nf3 and 5.exd6 which
allows Black easy equality. My response to his Exchange Variation was
5...exd6.
My position was solid but too passive requiring much patience and care. As
pointed out, I missed several better defensive choices, including some that
could have led to my advantage.
Unfortunately I gave White the chance to mess up my kingside pawn

structure. Two more inaccuracies and I was toast. Adam Miller simply
outplayed me.
Miller (1998) - Sawyer (1964), Space Coast Open (4), 10.05.2009 begins
1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.d4 d6 4.Nf3 Bg4 5.exd6 exd6 6.Be2 Be7 7.0-0 0-0 8.c4
Nb6 9.Be3 Bf6 10.Nbd2 Re8 11.Rc1 Nc6 12.b3 d5 [12...a5=] 13.c5 Nd7
14.a3 Ne7 [14...Nf8] 15.h3 Bxf3 16.Nxf3 c6 [16...Nf5!=] 17.Bd3 Ng6
18.Nh2 Bg5 19.Qf3 Qf6 20.Qh5 [20.Qxf6 Bxf6 21.g3+/=] 20...Bxe3
[Houdini recommends that I sacrifice the Exchange here with 20...Rxe3!
21.fxe3 Bxe3+ 22.Kh1 Qxd4 23.Rce1 Qxd3 24.Qf3 f6 25.Rxe3 Qc2 26.b4
Nde5-/+] 21.fxe3 Qe7 22.Ng4 Nf6? [22...Ndf8=] 23.Rxf6 gxf6 24.Rf1 Kg7
25.Kh1 f5 26.Qh6+ Kg8? [Wrong square. After this the game is lost. Better
was 26...Kh8 27.Rxf5 Qf8 28.Qh5 Qg7 29.Nh6 Rf8 30.Rf1+/- and although
White is better, he still has to find a final breakthrough that works.] 27.Rxf5
f6 28.Nxf6+ Kh8 29.Rh5 Nf8 30.Re5 [30.Rg5!+- mates faster.] 30...Qf7
31.Nxe8 Rxe8 32.Rxe8 Qxe8 33.Bf5 Qf7 34.g4 Ng6 35.Kg2 1-0
75 - ATtheGreat Wins
My chess friend “ATtheGreat” sent me a message on ICC:
“I played a brilliancy against an FM in the Alekhine's Defense in a 45 30

simul. I know you wrote a book on the Alekhine's Defense and figured you
may want to add this game to further additions to your book.”
His opponent “clalauquen” listed himself as FM Diego Mussanti. His finger

notes read in part:
“Hi! My name is Diego Mussanti, FIDE Master. I have been amongst the
most active ICC vendors for many years.”
I looked at this Alekhine Defence 4.Nf3 Bg4 game. It really was pretty good.
In the Alekhine Defence, it is White that usually gets a big pawns center.
However by move 21 here, it was Black who had the big pawn center.
Nice turnaround for ATtheGreat! Games in this opening involve a lot of

heavy piece play with tactics always lurking.
Alekhine games tend to end suddenly. This was the case here. Black seized
the momentary opportunity for a knight fork.
clalauquen (2375) - ATtheGreat (1994), ICC 45 30 u Internet Chess Club

(1), 22.08.2012 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.d4 d6 4.Nf3 Bg4 5.Be2 e6 [This
5...e6 is the most popular move. In my Alekhine Defense Playbook, I
recommend 5...c6. Both moves are about equal in theory. 5...c6] 6.h3 [The
main line is 6.0-0 Be7 7.c4 Nb6 8.Nc3 0-0 9.Be3 which has been played
thousands of times in my database. A critical continuation is 9...Nc6 10.exd6
cxd6 11.d5 exd5 12.Nxd5 Nxd5 13.Qxd5 Bf6 with play for both sides.]
6...Bxf3 7.Bxf3 Nc6 8.0-0 Be7 9.c4 Nb6 10.exd6 cxd6 11.b3 d5 12.c5 Nc8
13.a3 Bf6 14.Bb2 N8e7 15.b4 Nf5 16.Nd2 Bxd4 17.Qb3 Bxb2 18.Qxb2 0-0
19.b5 Ncd4 20.Bd1 e5 21.Re1 f6 22.Nb3 Nxb3 23.Bxb3 Kh8 24.Qa2 d4
25.c6? [White is understandably eager to push the c-pawn, but this is
premature. Better would be 25.Be6 Ne7=] 25...bxc6 26.bxc6 Ne7 27.Rac1
Rc8 28.Ba4 Qa5 29.Qe6 d3 30.Red1 Nd5 31.Rxd3? [If 31.Rc4 Nc3
32.Rxd3 Nxa4 and Black is up a piece.] 31...Nf4 White resigns 0-1
76 - Mednis vs Sawyer
One cold November Saturday, I went to Lansdale, Pennsylvania to play the
notable author Edmar J. Mednis in a simul.
I got him to autograph my copy of his book “How to Beat Bobby Fischer.” I
apologized for only buying the paperback edition instead of the hardcover.
Edmar Mednis said not to worry. The paperback edition was his best-selling
book.
As I recall, Mednis played about 20-30 of us. Edmar Mednis was rated 2484
at the time.
Edmar Mednis turned his French Defence win against Fischer into great book
ideas. His explanations of what was happening in grandmaster games
increased my understanding.
Mednis was awarded the title of Grandmaster in 1980. It was fun to play a
famous author!
What was it like to have Bobby Fischer resign? I always liked Mednis'
explanation:
“I have been asked innumerable times how it felt to receive Fischer's

handshake. Well, it sure felt great to defeat Fischer, but I must admit that I
didn't get Bobby's handshake nor, for that matter, any other direct
communication from him. What happened was the following: Next time we
were together was for Round 4, and before the games for that round started,
Fischer went up to the referee, Hans Kmoch, and told him that he was
resigning. Mr. Kmoch then came over to me and informed me, ‘Mr. Fischer
has resigned.’”
For our game, I decided to venture the Alekhine Defence with 1.e4 Nf6. I had
dabbled in this opening from time to time. Fifteen years later it would
become my number one defense to 1.e4 for the next 15 years.
In the game below we follow for a while one of the Spassky-Fischer games
from 1972.
Eventually I got my pawns and pieces tangled up and got crushed by

Grandmaster Mednis.
Mednis - Sawyer, Lansdale, PA 07.11.1981 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.d4
d6 4.Nf3! [This "Modern Variation" is the strongest move in theory. Black
has to work harder to equalize than with 4.c4 Nb6 5.exd6, the Exchange
Variation; or 5.f4, Four Pawns Attack] 4...Bg4 [I have played this opening
over 2000 times and analyzed many lines deeply with computers. Still it is
not clear to me which is the best 4th move for Black. In this game I chose the
historically most popular. I have played them all, including 4...g6 Lev Alburt;
4...dxe5 Most popular nowadays; and 4...Nc6 Less popular, but playable.]
5.Be2 e6 [This is the traditional continuation after 4...Bg4. In my repertoire
Playbook I chose the Flohr Variation with 5...c6] 6.0-0 Be7 7.h3 [To play h3
or not is an interesting question. Sometimes it matters and other times it does
not. More common here is not to play h3 and just continue 7.c4 Nb6 8.Nc3 0-
0 9.Be3] 7...Bh5 8.c4 Nb6 9.Nc3 0-0 10.Be3 d5 11.b3 [Now I am on my
own. The main line goes 11.c5 Bxf3 12.gxf3 Nc8 13.f4 when Black choose
between 13...Bh4 or 13...Nc6] 11...Nc6 [11...a5 Black could fight for more
space with 12.c5 N6d7 13.a3+/=] 12.c5 Nc8 13.b4 b6? [A better arrangement
is 13...a6 14.Qb3 f6+/=] 14.a3 f6? [14...Bxf3 15.Bxf3 bxc5 16.bxc5 Bg5
17.Rb1 Bxe3 18.fxe3 N8e7 19.Qd3+/=] 15.exf6 Bxf6 16.Re1 [Mednis plays
active and safe. More committal is 16.g4 Bg6 17.g5 Be7 18.b5 Na5]
16...Qd7? [16...Bxf3 17.Bxf3 bxc5 18.bxc5 N8e7+/-] 17.Ne5!? [If White
was not playing a couple dozen other players at once, he might have chosen
17.b5! (or first 17.g4) leading to a serious of exchanges that requires exact
calculation to prove a winning advantage.] 17...Nxe5 18.Bxh5 Ng6? [Wrong
way. Black could occupy a thematic Alekhine Defence square with 18...Nc4!
19.Bg4 Ne7 20.Bg5 Threat to win queen with Bxe6+ 20...Nf5 21.Bxf6
Rxf6+/= White is better, but Black might survive.] 19.Bg4 Rf7? [Black
should protect d5 with 19...Nce7] 20.Nxd5! Nce7 [If 20...Qxd5 21.Bf3+- and
White picks off the Ra8.] 21.Nxf6+ gxf6 22.Qb3 [The weak focal point is
e6.] 22...f5 23.Bf3 Rc8 24.Rad1 Nd5 25.Bg5 b5 26.Rxe6! [Crashing
through.] 26...Qxe6 27.Bxd5 Qe8 28.Bxf7+ Qxf7 29.d5 c6 30.Qf3 Black has
lost two pawns and has no counter play. 1-0
77 – Good Night Bad Knight
In 1985 I played in team competition for the Chaturanga Chess Club in the
Philadelphia area. They used me for the road team when others did not travel.
Here we played at home in Hatboro.
My opponent was this night was Gary Maks. Like many young men our age,
we hoped to improve. You can only really do that by playing. So we did. By
his comments I judged Gary to be a man who valued faith and family. His
rating was on the rise. Later Gary Maks and I became USCF experts rated
over 2000.
I find the Alekhine Defence to be a wonderfully restless opening. I have to be

busy. If I sit around to do nothing, I lose. I began playing the Alekhine
Defence as Black in 1980. Throughout the next decade I studied books by
Vladimir Bagirov and Lev Alburt. They both played the Alekhine hundreds
of games each.
I did not play much in 1985. That night Maks played the Alekhine Defence
against me. How great is that? We chose 4.Nf3 Bg4 5.Be2 e6. I call this the
Bagirov line. Also Lev Alburt played it many times when he took a break
from his own 4.Nf3 g6 line.
My approach was to control the center, keep my pieces active, maintain the
tension, and probe for a weakness. I found it in his undefended Nb6 after
move 23. White won a piece for several pawns. I checkmated Black's king in
the middle of the board.
Sawyer (1981) - Maks (1720), Hatboro, PA 21.03.1985 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5
Nd5 3.d4 d6 4.Nf3 [I have 4.c4 more often than 4.Nf3 as White.] 4...Bg4
5.Be2 e6 6.0-0 Be7 7.c4 Nb6 8.Nc3 N8d7!? [8...0-0 9.Be3+/=] 9.exd6 cxd6
10.b3 0-0 11.h3 Bh5 12.Ba3 Nf6 13.Qc2 Rc8 14.Rac1 a6 15.g4?!
[15.Rfe1+/=] 15...Bg6 16.Bd3 Qd7?! [16...Bxd3 17.Qxd3=] 17.Bxg6 hxg6
18.Qe2 Nh7 19.Rce1?! [19.Rfe1+/=] 19...Ng5 20.Bc1 Nxf3+ 21.Qxf3 Rc7
22.Qe3 Bf6 23.Ne4 Qd8? [Black maintains a solid defense with 23...Be7=]
24.Nxf6+!? [Stronger was 24.d5!+-] 24...Qxf6 [24...gxf6 25.d5+/=] 25.d5
Nxd5 [25...Nc8 26.dxe6+/-] 26.cxd5 Rc3 27.Qf4 Qh4 28.Re3 Rxe3 29.Qxe3
exd5 30.Kg2 Rc8 31.Bb2 Rc2 32.Qd4 Qf6 33.Qxf6 gxf6 34.Bxf6 Rxa2
35.Rc1 Kh7 36.Rc8 [White missed a mate in five beginning with 36.h4!+-]
36...g5 37.Bxg5 Kg7 38.Rb8 b5 39.Be3 f6 40.Rb7+ Kg6 41.h4 f5 42.h5+
Kf6 43.g5+ Ke5 44.Re7# 1-0
78 - Jonathan Schroer Simul
I played a simultaneous exhibition game vs Jonathan Schroer on the Internet
Chess Club. Schroer earned an International Master FIDE title in 1984. He
was a skilled attacking player. IM Schroer was a great blitz player who
played many online simuls.
This was played at a pace of 35 35 (that was 35 minutes plus 35 seconds

increment added after each move is played. When this game was played,
Jonathan Schroer had an ICC rating of 2708. My rating was 2232. I do not
know how many other boards Schroer was playing at once. I chose the
Alekhine Defence.
Schroer - Sawyer, ICC 35 35 u Internet Chess Club, 26.11.2002 begins 1.e4

Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.d4 d6 4.Nf3 Bg4 5.Be2 c6 6.c4 Nb6 7.Nbd2 dxe5 8.Nxe5
Bf5! [Up to this point Schroer was playing rapidly. In my “Alekhine Defense
Playbook” I gave this move. White seemed to be surprised by it. He used
about 30 minutes for his next two moves. In his book on the Alekhine
Defence, Nigel Davies only considered 8...Bxe2 9.Qxe2 Qxd4 10.Ndf3 when
White has a strong attack.] 9.c5N [The line given in my book continues:
9.Nb3 e6 10.0-0 Be7 11.a4 N6d7 Usually it is in Black's interest to challenge
any White piece on e5 and swap it off if possible. 12.f4 Nxe5 13.fxe5 Bg6=
0-1/30. Popovych - Szmetan, World Open 1999] 9...Nd5 [I happily return to
the hole White created on d5. Since White spent so long on this 9th move, he
must have been prepared for the obvious 9...Qxd4 10.Nxf7 Kxf7 11.cxb6
Qxb6 when White has compensation for the sacrificed pawn. The Black
weaknesses of his e-pawn and king cannot be covered up quickly.] 10.Ndf3
Nd7 11.Nc4 e6!? [This is a risky continuation because it leaves a big hole on
d6. I decided to risk it so as to complete my development. At least this way
my bishop covers d6.] 12.0-0 Be7 13.Re1 0-0 14.Bd2 Qb8!? [14...b6! seems
to be the most aggressive continuation. I considered it, but decided not to mix
it up with an IM whose tactical skills exceed mine. I decided that I would
force White to come up with a plan and a combination while his clock was
ticking. 14...Qc7 is the most natural move.] 15.Rc1 Bg4 16.h3 Bxf3 17.Bxf3
Re8 18.Qb3 Qc7 19.Red1 [White waits for Black to force the issue and
create a weakness that he can attack without deep thought. We both decide to
wait for a mistake and repeat the position three times.] 19...Rac8 20.Re1 Ra8
21.Rcd1 Rac8 22.Rc1 Ra8 Game drawn by repetition 1/2-1/2
79 - Knight Trapped in Corner
I returned for the 4th round of the 5th Turkey Bowl Open sufficiently rested
from the day before.
Christopher Goldthrope was the lowest rated player allowed in our section at
1800.
He was a notable coach of scholastic players in South Florida. We were

playing in Boca Raton, Florida.
Christopher Heung's mom told me Goldthrope is an excellent coach for

beginners.
About half the time in tournament play in the old days, I played the Caro-
Kann Defence.
Many times I played the Sicilian Defence or the Open Game. Later I added
1...Nc6.
Thirty five years ago I added the Alekhine Defense which I have played
thousands of times as Black.
I wanted a win here. As of 2006, I had always won with it in tournaments.
This game is remembered by me for White's move 47.Na1. I found this

position humorous.
I am sure Christopher Goldthrope teaches his students that knights belong in

the center, not in a corner.
Grandmaster Julio Becerra, who won this tournament, stopped by for a

moment, notice the trapped knight, glanced at me and moved on. So I finally
win a game.
The fifth round game was a half point bye arranged before the tournament so
as to travel back to Central Florida and back to work the next day.
My final score 2.5-2.5 in the Open Section. This was one of my better results
after age 50.
Goldthrope - Sawyer, 5th Turkey Bowl Boca Raton, FL (4), 19.11.2006

begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.d4 d6 4.Nf3 Bg4 [The main line which I play
about half the time.] 5.Be2 c6 6.0-0 Bxf3 7.Bxf3 dxe5 8.dxe5 [My had
opponent blitzed all his moves up to this point very quickly. Most
tournaments have a five second delay per move. Higher rated opponents
normally play known opening positions in 10-15 seconds per move. This guy
was playing in 1-2 seconds per move, so his clock was not moving. Not yet.
During the last half of the game, he used almost all his allotted two hours
thinking time.] 8...e6 [Prevents intrusion on d5.] 9.c4!? [This line makes it
difficult for White to defend e5. With the queens off the board, the Black
King is in no trouble. Better are 9.Re1; 9.Qe2; or 9.Nd2 potentially heading
for d6.] 9...Ne7 10.Qxd8+ Kxd8 11.Rd1+ [I played 11.Bd2 Nd7 12.Ba5+ b6
13.Bc3 and 1-0 in 30. Sawyer - Bullockus, corr APCT 1978] 11...Nd7
12.Nc3 [12.Bh5!? g6 13.Be2+/=] 12...Ng6 [=] 13.Be3 Ngxe5 14.Be2 Kc7
15.Ne4 f6 [Covers g5] 16.f4 Nf7 17.a3 [This looks slow. 17.Rd3 to double
rooks makes more sense, although 17...Rd8=] 17...Nd6 18.Nc3 Nf5 19.Bf2
e5 20.Bg4 g6 [Secures f5+h5] 21.Bxf5 gxf5 22.Ne2 Bh6 23.b4 Rhe8 24.Ng3
Bxf4 25.Nxf5 e4 26.Bg3 [26.g3!? Rg8 27.Ra2=/+] 26...Bxg3 27.Nxg3 Re5
28.Rf1 [28.Rd4 f5-/+] 28...Rae8 [28...a5 29.Rae1 axb4 30.axb4-/+] 29.Rae1
Nb6 30.Rxf6 [30.Rc1 R5e6-/+] 30...Nxc4 31.Nf5 [I expected 31.Rf7+!?
R8e7 32.Rxe7+ Rxe7 and now 33.Rxe4 Rxe4 34.Nxe4 Nxa3 35.g4 Nc2-/+
reaching the game continuation with an extra tempo for White if one ignores
the position of the Black King in the initial pawn race.] 31...Nxa3-+ 32.Rf7+
Kb8 33.Nd6 R8e7 34.Rxe7 Rxe7 35.Rxe4 Rxe4 36.Nxe4 Nc2 37.g4 [37.b5-
+] 37...Nxb4 38.g5 [38.Kf2 otherwise it's curtains at once 38...a5 39.Ke3-+]
38...a5 39.h4 Nd5 [39...a4!? seems even better 40.h5 a3 41.Nc5-+] 40.h5 Nf4
41.h6 [41.Kf2 Nxh5 42.Ke3 Kc7-+; 41.g6 Nxg6 42.hxg6 hxg6 and Black
wins with four pawns vs the Knight.] 41...a4 42.Kf1 [42.Nc3 does not help
much 42...b5 43.Kf2 Nh3+ 44.Ke3 Nxg5-+] 42...a3 43.Nc5 b5 44.Nb3 a2
45.Ke1 [45.Kf2 is the last straw 45...c5! a convincing end 46.Ke3-+] 45...c5!
[A fitting end to a beautiful game] 46.Kd2 [46.Nxc5 Deflection from a1
46...a1Q+] 46...c4 47.Na1 b4 48.Kc2 b3+ 49.Kc3 Kc7 50.Kb2 Kd6 51.Kc3
Ke6 52.Kb2 Kf5 53.g6 Kxg6 54.Kc3 Kxh6 [I was in no hurry. White is
going nowhere on the queenside. 54...Nd3 secures the win.] 55.Nxb3 [If
55.Kb2 I was considering winning with 55...Nd3+ 56.Ka3 Kg5 57.Ka4 b2-+]
55...cxb3 56.Kb2 Kg5 0-1
80 - Ted Bullockus Alekhine
The International Correspondence Chess Federation (ICCF) awarded Ted
Bullockus the title International Arbiter in 1982. His peak ICCF rating was
around 2300.
Dr. Ted Bullockus and I were USA 10th Olympiade Chess Team members in
1982-84. I was on Board 4 and Bullockus on Board 6. Alex Dunne of USCF
Chess Life fame played Board 5.
Bullockus told me he had hundreds of pages of notes on the Alekhine

Defence based on his years of play and analysis. Our game began 1.e4 Nf6
2.e5 Nd5 3.d4 d6 4.Nf3.
This was played Anatoly Karpov style. He was world champion at the time
we played this game. I did well following Karpov lines.
After move eight we reached the basic starting point for this line. I made it
the main line of the whole opening in my Alekhine Defense Playbook. There
are many White set-ups from this point. The key question: Is the pawn on e5
strong or weak? As White I swapped queens and play for better piece co-
ordination.
This game I think was annotated by the former Georgia State Chess
Champion Thomas Morris for the APCT News Bulletin. Alas I no longer
have a copy of that article.
Sawyer - Dr. Bullockus, corr APCT Q-36, 1978 begins 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5
3.d4 d6 4.Nf3 [Two other common variations are the Exchange Variation
4.exd6 and the Four Pawns Attack with 4.c4 Nb6 5.f4.] 4…Bg4 [In the 1972
Spassky-Fischer match, Bobby played 4...Bg4 in one game and 4...g6 in
another. Later 4...dxe4 became more common.] 5.Be2 c6 [Flohr Variation;
Fischer played 5...e6.] 6.0-0 Bxf3 7.Bxf3 dxe5 8.dxe5 e6 9.c4 Ne7 10.Qxd8+
Kxd8 11.Bd2!? [This idea came from the Caro-Kann Defence where the
bishop starts on d2 and goes to c3 or a5.] 11…Nd7 12.Ba5+ b6 [A weakness.
In my Alekhine Defense Playbook I gave 12...Kc8 13.Bc3 g5!? 14.Nd2 Ng6
15.Rfe1 Bg7 with equal chances.] 13.Bc3 Kc7 14.b4?! Rd8 [14...g5!=/+]
15.a4 Ng6 16.Re1 Nh4 17.Be4 g5 18.Nd2 Bg7 19.Nf3 Nxf3+ 20.Bxf3 h5
21.a5 g4 22.axb6+ axb6 23.Ra7+ Kb8 24.Rea1 Nxe5 25.c5 bxc5 26.bxc5
Kc8 27.Ra8+ [27.Be2!+-] 27...Kd7 28.R1a7+ Ke8 29.Bxe5 gxf3 30.Bxg7
Black resigns 1-0
81 - Cherner Plays 9.Qe2
Dr. Ted Bullockus (previous game) had a tremendous impact on my chess
life. Shortly after our game I began also playing the Alekhine Defence as
Black, including the Flohr Variation 5…c6. While I remained a universal
openings player, the Alekhine was one of my most common choices.
One of the best and worst qualities of this opening is that White usually
leaves the known book fairly quickly. Black has to make a lot of decisions.
Creativity and tactics matter!
Lyle Cherner and I met 15 times in several different openings. Here he chose
a very good line against my Alekhine Defence.
I got into trouble as Black in this game because my king was not safe. White
was unable to put me away. We moved on to a long middlegame with
frequent tactical threats on the queenside.
At the end of this game I could have kept the queens on the board with
43...Qc3-+, but I was confident that I could win with two extra pawns in a
bishops of opposite color endgame against this opponent. Apparently he
thought so too. White resigned.
Cherner (1750) - Sawyer (1960), corr APCT EMQ-2, 30.07.1996 begins

1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.d4 d6 4.Nf3 Bg4 5.Be2 c6 6.0-0 Bxf3 7.Bxf3 dxe5
8.dxe5 e6 9.Qe2 Nd7 10.Re1 Qc7 11.Nd2 Bc5 [11...Be7=] 12.Nb3 Bb6
13.Bg5 h6 14.Bd2 a5 15.c4 Nb4 [15...Ne7=] 16.Bc3 Na6 17.Rad1 a4
18.Nd2 Nac5 19.Ne4 Nxe4 20.Qxe4 Bc5 21.Qg4 Bf8?! [White has won the
opening. Now on to the middlegame. Maybe Black could survive after 21...0-
0 22.Be4+/-] 22.Rd2 Nb6 23.b3 [23.Red1!+-] 23...Qe7 [23...g6 24.Red1+/-]
24.Bd4 [A good move is 24.Red1!+- ] 24...Qb4 [24...h5 25.Qe4+/-] 25.Rdd1
[Still powerful is 25.Red1!+-] 25...axb3 26.axb3 g6 27.Bxb6? [This allows
Black to equalize. White could continue the attack with 27.Re3+/-] 27...Qxb6
28.Qd4?! Bc5 29.Qd7+ [This drives the Black king to safety. 29.Qb2 0-
0=/+] 29...Kf8 30.Qd2 Kg7 31.Qc2 Ra3 32.Rb1 Qb4 33.Red1 Rha8
34.Rd2 Ra1 35.Rf1 R8a3 36.Be2 Rxf1+!? [Or 36...R1a2 37.Qxa2 Rxa2
38.Rxa2 Qxb3-+] 37.Bxf1 Rxb3 38.h3 [38.g3 Rc3 39.Qb2 Qxb2 40.Rxb2
Bd4-/+] 38...Rb1 39.Re2 Bd4 40.Qd3 Bc5 [40...c5-+] 41.Qc2 Re1 42.Rxe1
Qxe1 43.Qe2 Qxe2!? [Or 43...Qc3-+] 44.Bxe2 Bd4 0-1
Book 5 – Chapter 3 – Modern Defence
1.e4 g6
This is the Modern Defence with 1…g6.
82 - Queen Trapped Quickly
Francesco Cavicchi showed us his win vs a female master:
"Hi Tim, as we all know, every BDG player has to deal -more often than we'd
desire- with the (in)famous Pirc-Modern complex. My suggestion to unleash
the fury against it in pure "keep the flame alive"-style is the Bronstein
variation of the Austrian attack, combining f4 with h4 (see Bronstein-
Palmiotto, Munich 1958; David's fireworks are definitely worth a look). In
the following example the victim is, one more time, a top female player:
WGM M.Fierro Baquero (Elo 2338). It's amazing to see how often they're
totally unprepared to face sound, poisonous sidelines: the surprise effect fully
works and after 20 moves it's all over."
Martha Fierro Baquero of Ecuador holds titles as an International Master and

a Woman Grandmaster. Cavicchi played an inspired game with a beautiful
mating attack that made blitz a lot of fun!
Cavicchi (1915) - Fierro Baquero (2367 fide blitz), Fsi Arena 5 min,
24.06.2014 begins 1.d4 g6 2.e4 Bg7 3.c3 [Bronstein played 3.Nc3, but I
prefer c3, sustaining the centre against ...c5 in French Advance-style with
Nf6 still to come, there's no immediate danger on e4.] 3...d6 4.f4 Nf6 5.e5
Nd5 6.Nf3 0-0 7.h4 Bg4 8.Be2 c5 9.Qb3 [double pressure on d5 and b7]
9...Nb6 10.Be3 cxd4 11.cxd4 Be6 12.Qd1 Nd5 13.Bd2 Nc6 14.Nc3 Nxc3
15.bxc3 dxe5 16.fxe5 Rc8 17.h5 Na5 18.hxg6 hxg6 19.Qc1 Nc4? [Stockfish
recommends 19...Qc7; after 19...Nc4? White launches a classic, automatic-
pilot attack against Black fianchetto. See how weak the dark squares are.
White moves are so natural.] 20.Bh6 Bh8 [20...Bxh6 21.Qxh6 and White
mates in 3] 21.Bxf8 Qxf8 22.Ng5 [pressure on e6 and h7] 22...Bf5 23.Qf4 f6
24.Rxh8+! Kxh8 [If 24...Kg7 25.Rxf8 fxg5 26.Qxf5 gxf5 27.Rxc8 wins]
25.Qh4+ [Black resigns. After 25...Qh6 26.Qh6 Kg8 27.Qh7 Kf8 28.Qf7
mate] 1-0 [Cavicchi]
83 - Common Error 1...g6
The Modern Defence is reached by 1.e4 g6. White usually plays 2.d4.
Naturally 1.d4 g6 2.e4 transposes. After 1.d4 Nf6, the Blackmar-Diemer
Gambit player will play either 2.f3 or 2.Nc3. Either one can transpose to the
BDG after 2...d5 3.e4. When Black avoids 2...d5 with 2.Nc3 g6, there is a
common error made by Black which I have faced myself dozens of times in
blitz. White plays the expected 3.e4 when unthinking King's Indian players
play 3...Bg7. This is not a Pirc. It is a. Modern Defence where Black has
"prematurely" played Nf6 on move 1.
My opponent "Tarantoga" was rated 1908, proving that it is not just weak
players who do this. I have met it about 40 times. Ironically later in the same
day that I played this game with "Tarantoga", another player did the same
thing. White can play almost anything, but 4.e5! is the correct move, gaining
both space and time. What I learned by annotating this game is that 5.Nf3! is
better than my usual 5.f4?!
Sawyer - Tarantoga, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 09.12.2012 begins 1.d4

Nf6 2.Nc3 g6 3.e4 Bg7? 4.e5! Ng8 5.f4?! [Closing the position does not help
White make the best use of his development lead. Houdini, Fritz and Rybka
all prefer 5.Nf3! Nc6 6.Bf4+/-] 5...d5! 6.Nf3 e6 7.h4 Ne7 8.h5 Bd7 9.hxg6?!
[9.g4! to maintain the tension will likely favor White more.] 9...hxg6
10.Rxh8+ Bxh8 11.Be3 Nf5 12.Bf2 Qe7 13.Qd2 c5!? 14.0-0-0 [14.dxc5!+-
is good for White, but in a practical matter, it may help Black for me to
loosen my center.] 14...c4 [14...Nxd4 15.Nxd4 cxd4 16.Nb5 Bxb5 17.Bxb5+
Nc6 18.Qxd4+/-] 15.g4 Ng7 16.Bh3 Nc6 17.Nh4 0-0-0 18.f5 gxf5 19.gxf5
Nxf5 20.Nxf5 exf5 21.Nxd5 Qe6 22.Ne3 Qh6 23.Nxc4 Qxd2+ 24.Rxd2
Nb4 25.Nd6+ Kb8 26.a3 Nd5 27.Bxf5 Bxf5 28.Nxf5 Nf4 29.Bh4 Rg8 30.b3
Rg1+ 31.Kb2 Rg4 32.Be7 Nd5 33.Bd6+ Kc8 34.Ne7+ [34.Rh2!+-]
34...Nxe7 35.Bxe7 Kd7 36.Bb4 f6 37.exf6 Bxf6 38.Bc3 Kc6? [The clocks
read: 1:26-0:32, so I was expecting to win on time in about 20 more moves. I
just wanted to make sure that I did not throw away the win on the board. If
38...Kd6 39.Bb4+ Kd5 40.c4+ Kc6 41.Bc3+/-] 39.d5+ Kd7 40.Bxf6 b5
41.Rd4 Rg2 42.Be5 a6 43.a4 Re2 44.Bf4 Rf2 45.Be3 Re2 46.Bd2 bxa4
47.bxa4 Kd6 48.c4 Kd7 49.Kb3 Rh2 50.c5 Rh3+ 51.Kc4 Ra3 52.Kb4 Ra1
53.Ka5 Kc7 54.Bb4 Kb7 55.c6+ Black forfeits on time 1-0
84 - Crotto and Rohde
The 1974 United States Junior Chess Open played at Franklin & Marshall
College in Lancaster, Pennsylvania was about my 12th chess tournament. I
finished 4.5-3.5.
After this, the only USCF rated tournaments I played prior to 1981 were
events in Maine, Tennessee and Alabama in 1977. To improve faster, you
should play more than I did.
I never played chess as a child. I had voted in the 1972 US Presidential

Election and was still playing as a "Junior" in 1974! I was one of the oldest
players in the 1974 US Junior Open. I just met the age requirement by a few
weeks. I had the privilege of playing future masters and experts: Bob Bayus,
Frank Teuton, Thomas Costigan, Meeks Vaughan Jr, and Leo Schirber.
I played two other significant players: future grandmaster Michael A. Rohde

and Rachel Crotto. Both were younger than I. I played Michael Rohde in the
blitz championship. He met my Caro-Kann 4.Nxe4 Nd7 with 6.Ng3, keeping
pieces on the board. When ready, Rohde mounted a successful kingside
attack.
Rachel Crotto and I played several blitz games for fun. We met on the first
day and spent a lot of time together in between rounds. I was a country
bumpkin and she was a city girl rated 300 points above me. Rachel Crotto
went on to earn a USCF National Master Certificate and become a Women's
International Master. Like most from our generation, she has long since
retired from active play. Below is the only game I recorded that we played, a
very rare (for me) Pirc Defence as Black.
Crotto - Sawyer, Lancaster, PA 09.08.1974 begins 1.e4 d6 2.d4 g6 3.Nc3

Bg7 4.Nf3 Nd7 5.Bc4 Ngf6? [If you want to play an early ...Nd7, then it
makes sense to bring out the other knight via e7: 5...e6 6.0-0 Ne7] 6.e5 dxe5
7.dxe5 Ng8 8.e6 [Even stronger is 8.Bxf7+! Kxf7 9.Ng5+ Ke8 10.Ne6 with
smothered mate to the queen.] 8...fxe6 9.Ng5 Ne5 10.Qxd8+ Kxd8 11.Bxe6
h6 12.Bxc8 Kxc8 13.Ne6 Bf6 14.Nd5 c6 15.Ndc7 Rb8 16.Bf4 h5 17.0-0-0
Nd7 18.Rd3 [White has a mate in four: 18.Rxd7! Kxd7 19.Rd1+ Bd4
20.Rxd4+ Kc8 21.Rd8#] 18...g5 19.Rhd1 Nh6 20.Rxd7 Nf7 21.Na6 Be5
22.Bxe5 intending 23.Rc7 mate. A very nice game for White. 1-0
85 - Danger of Autopilot
Blitz games are notorious for entertainment and blunders. Here is a little 3-
minute game I played on ICC against a Women's International Master (WIM)
Sanja Petronic.
For this game I chose initially to aim for a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit which
could be reached after 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d5. My opponent avoided this with
2...Bg7. Maybe she expected 3.Bg5 for a Veresov. However, as a BDGer, I
played 3.e4.
The normal response is a Pirc Defence with 3...d6. Alas she played 3...Bg7.
After 4.e5 the knight was embarrassed. We end up with an unusual Modern
Defence. How does this happened?
Black plays on autopilot without accounting for White's actual moves.

Suddenly the position gets ugly and Black gets run over. Black resigned in
the face of an unstoppable mate.
In 3 minute blitz (both players having a total of three minutes each for the
entire game), it was very easy to get washed away and drown in the wave of
unforeseen initiative.
Attacking moves become very obvious. The defender falls behind in precious
time. That happens to all of us.
This was part of eight games in a batch that I had played about the same time.
I won 6 of the 8, but my two losses were just as ugly as the losses of any
other players.
Since her rating was just a little bit below mine, I am sure that "SanjaP"
usually played a lot better than this.
Sawyer - SanjaP, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 01.05.2012 begins 1.d4 Nf6
2.Nc3 g6 3.e4 Bg7? [Black is playing on autopilot and flies into a problem.
Normal is 3...d6 Pirc Defence.] 4.e5! Ng8 5.f4 d5 6.Nf3 h5 7.Be3 Nh6 8.Bd3
Nc6 9.Qd2 Nb4 10.Be2 Nf5 11.Bf2 c6 12.a3 Na6 13.h3 Nc7 14.0-0-0 e6
15.g4 hxg4 16.hxg4 Rxh1 17.Rxh1 Ne7 18.Bh4 b6 19.Bf6 Bxf6 20.exf6
Ng8 21.g5 Bb7 22.Ne5 [Another good way to play is 22.Rh8 Kd7 23.Ne5+
Kc8 24.Nxf7+- Instead, I played for a mating net.] 22...c5 23.Rh8 Kf8
24.Bb5 Nxb5 25.Qh2 1-0
86 - Zoltan Sarosy draw 3…g6
So close I came to beating Zoltan Sarosy, one of the strongest masters I ever
played in my life. Sarosy dodged. He weaved. He wiggled. He jiggled. He
made me work hard. In the end I missed the best move 48. Zoltan the
magnificent pulled off a draw. Darn.
At the time International Correspondence Chess Master Zoltan Sarosy of

Canada was near his peak rating of 2435 (in 1992) when more than 80 years
old! How old is too old for chess?
In 1987, under Hans-Werner von Massow the ICCF added the Elo rating
system. Before that they used only class titles. By then Sarosy was already in
his 80s; he might have had a much higher rating in his younger days. He won
a Master Class tournament in Hungary in 1943. According to his biography
in the Canadian Chess Hall of Fame, Zoltan Sarosy "Reached age 100 in
2006 while still playing chess by e-mail; in 2007, became longest lived
Canadian chess player ever".
The opening was a crossover between the Caro-Kann Defence (1.e4 c6 with
d5) and the Modern Defence (1.e4 g6 with Bg7) which can be reached via
either move order. White usually plays 1.e4, 2.d4, 3.Nc3 and then either 4.h3
and 5.Nf3 as I did, or 4.e5 and 5.f4. Black plans a slow build up in an
unbalanced position.
Sarosy liked to play original little known positions that made his opponents
think on their own. It is dangerous for weaker players to try a slow build up,
because they have not yet developed the tactical, strategical and analytical
skills to make it work effectively. They get crushed without improving.
Weaker players need to play openings that lead to quick contact development
so they can learn quickly. They do not have to play main lines, just anything
that brings all pieces out for action.
When the armies clash, they will learn what works and what to avoid in the
future. Sarosy already knew what works. He was a proven dangerous player
waiting to pounce and crush experts and masters due to his deep analysis.
Because I developed rapidly with control of the center, I was able to prevent
disaster and even obtain a winning position.
Picking off his pawn with 48.Nxg6 seemed like a good idea. Alas, it failed to
his brilliant defense. This draw got me to 2.5 points in the event. I won this
Master Class tournament with 4.5 out of 6.
Note: The Modern Defence and Caro-Kann Defence is very often reached by
the moves 1.e4 g6 2.d4 Bg7 3.Nc3 c6 4.Nf3 d5 5.h3.
Sawyer (2157) - Sarosy (2401), corr ICCF 1995 begins 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5
3.Nc3 g6 4.h3 Bg7 5.Nf3 Nh6 6.Bf4 0-0 7.Qd2 dxe4 8.Nxe4 Nf5 9.c3 Nd7
10.Bc4 Nb6 11.Bb3 Nd6 12.Nc5 Nd5 13.Be5 b6 14.Nd3 f6 15.Bh2 Be6
16.0-0 Qd7 17.Qe2 Bf7 18.Rfe1 Rfe8 19.Nde5 fxe5 20.dxe5 Nc7 21.e6
Nxe6 22.Bxe6 Qxe6 23.Qxe6 Bxe6 24.Rxe6 Rad8 25.Rae1 Kf8 26.Bf4 c5
27.Ne5 Nf7 28.Nc6 Rd7 29.a4 Bf6 30.a5 Ng5 [30...Rc8 31.Kh2 b5
32.a6=] 31.Bxg5 Bxg5 32.Ne5 Rd6 33.Rxd6 exd6 34.Nd7+ Kf7 35.Rxe8
Kxe8 36.axb6 axb6 37.Nxb6 Kf7 38.Nd5 Bc1 39.b3 Ke6 40.c4 Ke5 41.g3
Kd4 [Maybe better is 41...Ke4 42.Kg2 Kd3 43.Kf1 g5 44.Nf6 h6 45.Nd5
Bb2 46.f4 Ke4 47.Kf2 Bd4+ 48.Kg2 Ba1 49.fxg5 hxg5 50.h4 gxh4
51.gxh4+=] 42.f4 Kd3 [Or 42...Bb2 43.Kf2 Ke4 44.Ke2 Bg7 45.Nc7 Bf8
46.Nb5+/-] 43.Kf2 Kc2 [If 43...Bd2 44.Kf3 Ba5 45.g4+-] 44.Ke2 Kxb3
45.Kd3 h5 46.Ne7 [Winning is 46.g4! hxg4 47.hxg4 Ka3 48.f5 gxf5 49.gxf5
Bh6 50.f6+-] 46...h4 47.gxh4 Bxf4 48.Nxg6? [White is winning after 48.Ke4
g5 49.h5 Kxc4 50.h6 Bc1 51.Nd5 Bb2 52.Ne3+ Kb4 53.Kd5+-] 48...Bg3
49.Ke2 [49.Ke4 Kxc4 50.h5 d5+ 51.Kf3 Be1 52.h6 Bc3 53.Kg4 Kb5 54.h7
c4 with a likely draw] 49...d5 50.cxd5 c4 51.Ne7 Bxh4 1/2-1/2
87 - Hershey Caro-Kann & Modern
Some days everything seems to go right. This was one of those days. I was
playing in a four round Game 30 Action tournament. After a game with
White and another with Black, it's time to be White again. Since I kept
winning, I kept facing stronger players.
This opponent John Ferranti was rated in the 1800s. He was very kind to me
after the game. John greatly encouraged me in my Blackmar-Diemer Gambit
efforts.
I got carried away trying to force a BDG-type position from the well-known
Caro-Kann Modern Defence hybrid sometimes credited as the Gurgenidze
System.
In a faster tournament time limit, the psychological power of the threat was
very real. Players did not have as much time to work out a good defence.
Twenty years ago, hardly anything was published on the BDG in English.
And if it was, very few people actually read it.
This became Game 33 in my original Blackmar-Diemer Gambit Keybook

published by Thinkers' Press in 1992.
Sawyer - Ferranti, Hershey, PA 1990 begins 1.d4 g6 2.e4 Bg7 [Modern

Defence] 3.Be3 c6 4.Qd2 d5 [Caro-Kann Defence]5.Nc3 Nf6 6.f3 dxe4
7.Bc4!? [White tries to sacrifice a pawn for open lines and a couple of tempi.
Certainly 7.fxe4 is playable, too.] 7...Nd5! 8.Bxd5! [Not 8.Bh6 e3! 9.Bxe3
Nxe3 wins the d-pawn.] 8...cxd5 9.fxe4 dxe4 10.Nxe4 0-0 11.Nf3 Bg4 12.0-0
Bxf3 13.Rxf3 Nd7 [More logical is 13...Nc6 intending 14...e5!? 14.Rd1=]
14.Bh6! Nf6? [This gives Black a lost ending.] 15.Nxf6+ exf6 16.c3?!
[Good, but slow. [Better is 16.Rh3! f5 17.Bxg7 Kxg7 18.Qh6+-] 16...g5?
[This gives Black a lost middlegame.] 17.Bxg7 Kxg7 18.Raf1 Qd6 [Black
could try 18...Rc8 intending 19.Qf2 (White could of course play 19.Rxf6
Qxf6 20.Rxf6 Kxf6 21.h4+-) 19...Rc6 20.h4+/-] 19.Qf2 Rae8 20.Rxf6 Re6
21.Rxf7+ Rxf7 22.Qxf7+ Kh8 23.Rf5 [23.Qf8+ leads to a won ending, but I
prefer to threaten mate. 23...Qxf8 24.Rxf8+ Kg7 25.Rd8+-] 23...Rh6?
24.Qe8+ [Mate in 4. After the game Black asked, "Is there a book on this
opening?" There is now John, and you are in it!] 1-0
88 - Play 4.Be3 vs 1...g6
At the time of this game, I tried to play the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit as
White and 1...Nc6 as Black. I reached the BDG in about half of my games
with the White pieces.
That meant that in the other half as White I met a lot of BDG Avoided
opening variations. My ICC opponent “Dbronstein06” chose the 1…g6
Modern Defence by transposition.
Chess Openings Essentials, Vol 1 says this about the Modern Defence:
"Black almost ignores what White does and develops on his own account
with a wide number of plans to choose from. This makes the Modern an ideal
defence for those among you that don't want a system for which you need to
learn a lot of established theory. .... usually Black does proceed with ...d6
(which can also be played on the first move) and ...Bg7."
In 10 moves Black pushed six pawns ahead just one square in a hedgehog
style. Then he played four minor pieces to only the second rank. If White
played actively and opened the position up for attack, White was likely to
find a "target rich environment". Black would be too loose to protect against
sharp tactics.
After 11.h4 White was ready for attack. Then Black dangerously opened up
the position himself. Sure, there were some threats that the second player
could make. He could try to trap the Bc4. But once that threat was met, things
turned ugly for Black.
Sawyer (1952) - Dbronstein06 (1604), ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club,

19.08.2011 begins 1.d4 d6 2.e4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.Be3 h6 5.Qd2 e6 6.Bc4!?
[This bishop becomes a target in battle. Better is 6.0-0-0 letting Black further
display his intentions.] 6...Ne7 [Consistent. But where is the knight going
from here?] 7.f3 [With the idea to set up the d4-e4-f3-g4-h4 pawn formation.
7.f4 or 7.Nf3 are both excellent options for White.] 7…Nd7 8.Nge2 b6 9.0-0-
0 Bb7 10.g4 a6 11.h4 b5 12.Bb3 c6 13.d5 exd5 14.exd5 c5 15.a4 c4 16.Ba2
b4 17.Ne4 c3 18.bxc3 [18.Nxd6+] 18...bxc3 19.N2xc3 [19.Nxd6+] 19...Ne5
20.Rhf1 [20.Qd4] 20...0-0 21.Bxh6 Rc8 22.Bxg7 Kxg7 23.Qd4 f5 24.Ng5
Qa5 25.Ne6+ Kf7 26.Nxf8 Kxf8 27.f4 Rxc3 28.fxe5 Ra3 29.Bb3 Qc7
30.Kb2 Rxb3+ 31.cxb3 Bxd5 32.exd6 Qb7 33.dxe7+ Kxe7 34.Qxd5 Qxd5
35.Rxd5 Ke6 36.gxf5+ Black resigns 1-0
Book 5 – Chapter 4 – Pirc Defence
1.e4 d6 2.d4 Nf6
This defensive set-up is known as the Pirc Defence.
89 - Queen Trapped Quickly
In 2014 I trapped another queen in a Pirc Defence winning in 11 moves. In
2015 I suddenly trapped a queen and won by move 13 in an irregular
opening. The queen is a danger to both sides.
The queen is a powerful piece. When she moves aggressively, everyone has
to take her seriously. Note that White was able to attack her by developing all
his minor pieces.
What is this opening called? 1.e4 d6 2.d4 Nf6 3.Nc3 e6. Actually I began
1.d4, but we reach the same position.
First it looks like a Pirc with a French twist, and later a delayed Philidor with
4...Nc6 thrown in.
The Internet Chess Club allows visitors to play unrated games with the
temporary guest handle such as guest123, etc.
Paying members can play unrated games anonymously to try out various
openings or to use computers with the handle "anon".
My unknown (to me) opponent below swings his knight swings to Ne7 after
having lost a tempo. That costs him a pawn and more.
In 2014 I experimenting with questionable lines that ran along the edge of
soundness, or openings I did not know well. In 2015 and 2016 I worked on
good moves rather than just fun moves.
Sawyer (2052) - anon3, ICC 5 0 u Internet Chess Club, 07.02.2015 begins

1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d6 3.e4 e6 4.f4 Nc6 5.Nf3 h6 6.Bd3 e5? [It is a mistake for
Black to open the center too soon. 6...Be7 7.0-0+/=] 7.d5 Ne7? [7...Nb8
8.fxe5 dxe5 9.Nxe5+/-] 8.fxe5 dxe5 9.Nxe5 Qd6 10.Nc4 Qc5? [The queen is
trapped, but Black was in trouble anyway. 10...Qd8 11.Qf3+-] 11.Be3 Qb4
12.a3 Bg4 13.Qc1! Black resigns 1-0
90 - 4.Bg5 Assault on Blacula
The Pirc Defence lends itself to being attacked by virtue of the pawn on g6.
My White army weaved it way through and past the Black fortress.
White's pieces and pawns carved a path like a hot knife through melted
butter. Black's defensive set-up began with the pawn on g6, the bishop on g7
and the king on g8. But things went wrong.
White got a pawn on g6 and advanced to g7 with an unstoppable threat of

g8=Q. Black's original Pirc Defence plans fell far short.
Often the choices White has revolve around what he does with his own f-
pawn. White could aggressively grab space with the advance 4.f4. That was
how I had trapped a queen.
Or White could play 4.f3 (or first 4.Be3) and the 150 Attack with g4 and h4
to storm the kingside. Finally, he could leave the pawn on f2, play 4.Nf3 and
0-0 focus on the center.
Against Blacula I played 4.Bg5 and after 4...h6, I retreated with 5.Be3 and
opted for a 150 Attack set-up. The pawn on h6 became a target. Once I
played 10.g5, I forced open lines.
His rook pawn advance to 15...a4 never amounted to much. My rook pawn
advance to 19.h5 continued my assault on the Blacula king because of the
target on g6.
White won material and the game when my g-pawn made it to 26.g7 with
27.Rh8 forcing a new queen. Previously I had defeated Blacula in a Sicilian
Dragon as Black.
Sawyer (1924) - Blacula (1515), ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 07.08.2014

begins 1.e4 d6 2.d4 Nf6 3.Nc3 g6 4.Bg5 h6 5.Be3 Bg7 6.f3 0-0 7.Qd2 Kh7
8.0-0-0 c6 9.g4 [White could also try 9.h4 h5 10.Kb1+/= and then attack.]
9...b5 10.g5 [10.h4+/=] 10...hxg5 11.Bxg5 Rh8 [11...Nbd7=] 12.h4 Nh5
[12...Nbd7=; 12...Kg8=] 13.Nce2 a5 14.Nh3 Bxh3 15.Bxh3 a4 16.Bg4! Kg8
17.Bxh5 Rxh5 18.Nf4 Rh7 19.h5 Qa5 20.Qxa5 Rxa5 21.hxg6 [21.Bxe7!+-
may leave White up two pawns instead of one.] 21...Rxh1 22.Rxh1 f6
23.Bh6 e5 24.Ne6 [Or 24.Bxg7!+-] 24...Bxh6+ 25.Rxh6 Nd7 26.g7 Kf7
27.Rh8 Black resigns 1-0
91 - Jocelyn Bond Champion
Here is the final Jocelyn Bond game from the Jonquiere championship in
Canada. Thank you Mr. Bond for graciously providing your games,
comments and notes!
"It's done. In obtaining 1½ in 2 games against Risto Heinoo, I won the title of
Jonquiere chess championship. 12 games won, and 2 draws, but it was not
easy. I recall the cadence, it was 30 minutes to do mate. In the past years
Michael Dufour was the champion, but this year it is different. Last week I
won 1½ to ½ our match and this is that game that made the difference."
"In the second game [vs Risto Heinoo], I played 1.Nc3 may be I was inspired
by Tim Sawyer game that I saw in this blog earlier this year. In reality the last
time I played 1.Nc3 was some 3 years sooner when I lost in 30 moves facing
Bator Sambuev, a Grand master of Montreal."
Note by Sawyer: Queens Knight Attack 1.Nc3 Nf6 is flexible.

2.e4 e5 is a Vienna Game.
2.e4 d6 3.d4 g6 transposes to the Pirc Defence.
2.e4 d5 3.e5 is an Alekhine Defence.
2.e4 d5 3.exd5 is a Scandinavian Defence.
2.e4 d5 3.d4!? dxe4 4.f3 is the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit.
2.e4 d5 3.d4!? e6 is a French Defence.
Jocelyn Bond (1957) - Risto Heinoo (1500), Jonquiere chess ch (14),

09.08.2012 begins 1.Nc3 Nf6 2.d4 [2.e4 a Vienna game, not my choice
today] 2...g6 3.e4 [Yes, that'll be a Pirc defense] 3...d6 4.Bg5 [Byrne
variation - an underrated system] 4...Bg7 5.f4 [5.Qd2] 5...c6 6.Nf3 [I had to
get 1/2 point to be champion. I decided to play zero risk] 6...Na6 7.Bxa6
bxa6 8.0-0! 0-0 9.e5 Nd5 10.Qd2 [Not sure. 10.Nxd5 making the Bc8 a bad
bishop was interesting] 10...Be6! 11.Ne4 Qb6 12.c4 Nb4?? [Loses the
game.] 13.a3 d5 [13...Bxc4] 14.Nc5 f6 15.Nxe6 fxg5 16.Qxb4 [16.Nxf8! is
better but a won game is a won game] 16...Qxb4 17.axb4 Rf5 18.g4 Rf7
19.Nfxg5 dxc4 20.Rxa6 Bh6 21.Nxf7 Kxf7 22.Nc7 Rb8 23.g5 Bf8 24.Rxa7
[24.Ra4 was a safe move but it does not matter here] 24...Rxb4 25.f5! [The
idea] 25...Rxb2 [25...gxf5 26.Rxf5+ Kg8 27.Ra8+-] 26.fxg6+ Kxg6 27.Rxf8
c3 28.Ra1 c2 29.Rff1 Kxg5 30.Rac1 1-0 [Notes by Bond/Fritz]
92 - Diemer's Bayonet Attack
There are many ways for White to attack the Pirc Defence.
One of the least known is the Bayonet Attack preferred by Emil Josef
Diemer, of Blackmar-Diemer Gambit fame.
The standard Pirc Defence position is reached via 1.e4 d6 2.d4 Nf6 3.Nc3 g6.
The German master Diemer would play the move order 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 g6
3.e4 d6.
The Bayonet Attack idea with 4.Be2 Bg7 looked like quite an unassuming
move.
Black might have reasonably expected 5.Nf3 to reach a Classical Variation.
Diemer's point was to play 5.g4! Now if 5...0-0 6.g5!
White had the makings of a kingside attack.
My early games in this line had been very successful.
Here was an example from the Internet Chess Club.
Sawyer - MarkusP, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 27.06.2012 begins 1.d4

Nf6 2.Nc3 g6 3.e4 d6 4.Be2 [Diemer's move.] 4...Bg7 5.g4 [This is the point
of 4.Be2.] 5...0-0 6.g5 Nfd7 7.f4 [7.h4! has been the most popular choice
here.] 7...e5 8.Nf3 exf4 9.Bxf4 f6 10.gxf6 [10.Qd2!+/-] 10...Nxf6 11.Qd2
Re8 12.0-0-0 Nxe4 13.Nxe4 Rxe4 14.Ng5 Re7 15.Bf3 Nc6 16.c3
[Preventing counter play vs d4. Another direct approach is 16.Bd5+ Kh8
17.h4+/-] 16...Bf5 17.h4 Bf6 18.h5 Rg7 19.hxg6 hxg6 20.Bd5+ Kf8
21.Nh7+ [Even stronger is 21.Rh8+! winning lots of material.] 21...Ke7
22.Nxf6 Black resigns, as taking the knight leads to mate in one. 1-0
93 - Diemer vs Pirc Defence
The King's Indian set-up is playable against any opening and any defence.
Against the standard 1.e4 openings, that formation is the Pirc Defence or the
Modern Defence.
The Blackmar-Diemer Gambit move order that gives White the most options
vs the Pirc is 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 g6 3.e4 d6. Usually Black continues 4...Bg7.
The Modern omits an early Nf6 or d6.
The famous lines vs the Pirc are the Austrian Attack 4.f4 Bg7 5.Nf3, the
Classical 4.Nf3 Bg7 5.Be2 or the 150 Attack 4.Be3 Bg7 5.Qd2. My most
common choice has been 4.f3 since that could be reached vs 1.d4 Nf6 2.f3!?
Many other lines exist, including lines with 4.Bg5, 4.g3 or 4.Bc4. Since
Black keeps playing the Pirc, obviously in theory Black either gets equality
or comes close with perfect play.
Diemer played a variety of lines vs the Pirc/Modern set-up. One idea he

preferred was a sort of Bayonet Attack with 4.Be2 and an early 5.g4. I
decided to give a whirl. I got a great position out of the opening, but then on
move 18 I blundered a full piece on g4. Being a 3 0 blitz game I played on...
quickly!
The kings had castled opposite sides. I missed a couple chances to re-
established equality. I went instead for a kingside attack. Being a piece down
and missing things, Black's attack became more promising. Just as he was
about to exert real pressure, Black saw my king was hiding behind a wall of
three pawns. He sacrificed a queen to go for a back rank mate, only to later
realize that one of the three pawns was a different color. I avoided mate by
capturing that pawn and the game was over.
Sawyer (1946) - Dunadan (1684), ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 17.07.2011

begins 1.d4 d6 2.e4 Nf6 3.Nc3 g6 4.Be2 Bg7 5.g4 0-0 6.g5 [6.Be3] 6...Ne8
7.f4 Nd7 8.h4 e5 9.dxe5 dxe5 10.f5 c6 11.f6 Bh8 12.Be3 b5 13.Bg4 Qc7
14.Qd2 Nd6 15.0-0-0 Nc4 16.Qe2 Nxe3 17.Qxe3 Nb6 18.Nf3 [18.Bxc8]
18...Bxg4 19.Rdg1 Bxf3 20.Qxf3 Rad8 21.h5 Nc4 22.Rh2 b4 23.Rgh1 bxc3
24.hxg6 [24.Qxc3] 24...cxb2+ 25.Kb1 fxg6 26.Qb3 h5 27.gxh6 Bxf6 28.h7+
Kh8 29.Qxc4 Qd6 30.Rh3 Qd1+?? [30...Qd4] 31.Rxd1 Rxd1+ 32.Kxb2 1-
0
94 - Byrne 4.Bg5 vs Dunn
Robert Byrne competed in the World Championship cycle in 1974. Eight
players fought to see who would challenge Bobby Fischer in 1975. As it
turned out, the challenger would be the champion because Fischer quit. You
have to keep playing to keep winning championships. Quitters cannot be
champs.
Byrne and his brother Donald were among the top American players from in
the 1950s and 1960s. Robert Byrne placed third in the Leningrad Interzonal
in 1973. Grandmaster Byrne was a chess columnist for the New York Times
from 1972 to 2006.
Two years after losing his title Boris Spassky was still a force to be reckoned
with. Robert Byrne was the US Champion. Spassky won their match with
three wins and three draws. Anatoly Karpov beat Spassky 4-1 with six draws.
Then Karpov won about every tournament and every match against
everybody for ten years. Fischer and Karpov talked a few times, but Bobby
did not play.
Back to Byrne. He played many openings. He was famous for 6.Be3 in the
Najdorf Sicilian and 5.f3 c6 6.Be3 a6 in the King’s Indian Defence. Against
the Pirc, Byrne played 4.Bg5 Bg7 5.f4.
When Carl Dunn played the Pirc Defence against me, I chose the Byrne
4.Bg5 to avoid the popular lines. Then I went my own way with 5.Qd2 c6
6.Nf3. Fischer played 5.Qd2 a few times in the 1950s. I might have known
that information back in 1979.
My speculative attack continued with 8.Bh6!? Later others also won with this
bishop move. In the late 1970s I won a lot of postal games. By 1980 I was
playing many more experts and masters.
Sawyer (2000) - Dunn (1772), corr APCT 1979 begins 1.e4 d6 2.d4 Nf6
3.Nc3 g6 4.Bg5 Bg7 5.Qd2 c6 6.Nf3 b5 7.Bd3 Bg4 8.Bh6!? [8.Ng1+/=]
8...0-0 9.Bxg7 Kxg7 10.Qf4 Bxf3 11.Qxf3 Nbd7 12.0-0-0 [12.0-0=]
12...Qb6 13.g4 a5 [13...Qxd4 14.Bxb5 Qb6=/+] 14.g5 Ne8 [14...Nh5=] 15.h4
Qxd4 [15...h5 16.gxh6+ Kh8 17.Ne2+/-] 16.h5 [16.Qh3+-] 16...Ne5
[16...Qc5 17.Kb1+/=] 17.Qh3 Rh8 [17...gxh5 18.Bxb5 Qc5 19.Qxh5+-]
18.f4 Nc4 19.Bxc4 Qxc4 20.hxg6 fxg6 21.Qh6+ [21.f5+-] 21...Kf7? [Or
21...Kg8 22.f5+-] 22.f5 Ng7 23.Rdf1 gxf5 24.exf5 a4 25.g6+ Kg8 26.f6 1-0
95 - Poke and Provoke Pirc
Will it be the same as the Saemisch? Can I poke the Pirc and provoke a
weakness? Will I win with a wild pawn assault?
Chess openings were fascinating in the 1970s. There were no personal

computers, no databases, and no chess engines.
To help us find opening moves, we relied on published games and

philosophical B.S. (Bobby & Spassky). If Bobby Fischer or some other world
champion played an opening variation, then it must be good. But what if we
did not want to follow the crowd?
In the late 1970s and 1980s Fred Botti played correspondence chess in the
American Postal Chess Tournaments. This APCT club was run by Helen and
Jim Warren of Illinois.
When I played Fred Botti, he chose the Pirc Defence. Fischer had played the
Pirc as Black in 1972. Boris Spassky continued 4.f4. That did not appeal to
me. It could make life too easy on my lower rated opponent. I wanted him to
think on his own.
Previously in 1979 I had faced Pete Melissakis and Carl Dunn. At first I
played it safe vs Melissakis with the Classical 4.Nf3. But vs Dunn I ventured
the rare Byrne Variation with 4.Bg5.
My Byrne Attack against the Botti Pirc provoked a pawn push that provided
me pleasure. We castled opposite sides. I stripped away Black’s kingside
pawns. His naked king was defenseless.
Sawyer (2000) - Botti (1688), corr APCT 1979 begins 1.e4 d6 2.d4 g6 3.Nc3
Nf6 4.Bg5 h6?! [4...Bg7] 5.Be3 Bg7 6.f3 0-0 7.Qd2 Kh7 [7...h5 8.Bc4 c6
9.Nge2 Nbd7 10.0-0 b5 11.Bb3+/=] 8.0-0-0 c6 9.g4 Nfd7 10.h4 e5 [10...Qa5
11.Kb1+/=] 11.Nge2 [11.dxe5 Nxe5 12.g5 h5 13.Bc5+/-] 11...b5 12.Ng3
exd4 13.Bxd4 Ne5 14.Be2 Be6 [14...Qa5 15.h5+/-] 15.f4 Nxg4?! [15...Qa5
16.h5 g5 17.fxg5 hxg5 18.Nf5+-] 16.f5 h5 [16...Ne5 17.fxe6 fxe6 18.Be3+-]
17.Bxg7 Kxg7 18.fxe6 Ne5 [If 18...b4 19.Bxg4 bxc3 20.Qxc3+ Qf6
21.Qxf6+ Kxf6 22.Bh3+- White remains up a bishop.] 19.Bxh5 [Even better
seems to be 19.Nxh5+ Kh7 20.Nf4+-] 19...fxe6 20.Be2 d5 21.exd5 exd5
22.h5 Nbd7 23.hxg6 Kxg6 24.Qh6+ Kf7 25.Rhf1+ Ke8 26.Bh5+ 1-0
3.Nc3 g6 4.Nf3
This is the Classical Variation. The White focus is on simple development
with moves like e4, d4, Nc3, Nf3, etc.
96 - Classical Checkmate
I am a classical guy. I like the classics. As a rule the classics are durable and
dependable.
When I go to a restaurant I order the classic turkey sandwich or classic

hamburger.
My old beater of a car has the word “Classic” on the back. True, the interior
is beat up. It rattles, but it runs. I found that young girls are not impressed
with my car. It’s not flashy nor romantic. But it’s paid for.
When I come to a chess opening, I am immediately interested in anything

that is classical.
Early in my career I studied Jose R. Capablanca. I fell in love with his

classical style of chess.
I play a lot of romantic openings that the chess playing public enjoys. But
when people aren’t looking I go classical.
After players castled opposite sides, this Pirc Defence led to a classical back
rank checkmate with a little twist:
Black had a fianchettoed bishop sitting on g7 in front of his king. My

opponent “bjerky” resigned in the face of mate in one.
Sawyer - bjerky, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 30.11.2012 begins 1.d4 Nf6
2.Nc3 g6 3.e4 d6 4.Nf3 Bg7 5.Bg5 [5.Be2+/=] 5...0-0 6.Qd2 Re8 7.Bh6 Bh8
8.h3 c6 9.0-0-0 Nbd7 10.g4 b5 11.Bd3 Qa5 12.Kb1 b4 13.Ne2 c5 14.e5
Nd5 15.Be4 e6 16.Bxd5 exd5 17.exd6 c4 18.Nf4!? [18.Rhe1+/-] 18...Ba6
19.Rhe1 c3 20.Qc1 Bc4? [20...cxb2 21.Qxb2 Nb6=] 21.b3 Bb5 22.Nd3 [I
missed 22.Nxd5+-] 22...Bxd3 23.Rxd3 Nb6 [23...Qa6 24.Rxe8+ Rxe8
25.Re3+/-] 24.Rde3 Rxe3 25.Qxe3 Bg7 [25...Qb5 26.Qe7+-] 26.Qe8+ Rxe8
[If 26...Bf8 27.Qxa8! Nxa8 28.Re8+- with mate to follow.] 27.Rxe8+ Black
resigns 1-0
97 - Knight vs Melissakis
Pete Melissakis was my first. He was the first one to play the Pirc Defence
against me in a recorded game. I’m sure that in my younger years I faced the
Pirc. I remember that some kid in Washburn, Maine used to play the Pirc and
Benko against me. Ray Haines might remember him from 1974. I forgot his
name.
“Game score” is a funny chess term. The general meaning and the technical
meaning differ. The word score implies results. Did you win, lose or draw?
How did you score in the tournament? Technically, “game score” means the
recording of the moves played in the game. Often this was a hand written list
of moves. Forty years ago I started keeping better records. Like many of us,
my game scores from my early years were lost long ago.
Against Melissakis I chose the safe Classical Variation. It was made popular
by the then World Champion Anatoly Karpov. He played 4.Nf3 and 5.Be2 to
beat Smejkal, Hort, Pfleger, Keene and Adorjan. Later Karpov would defeat
Spassky, Nunn and others with it. But Timman and Korchnoi managed draws
vs him.
My approach in this line was safe solid development. I wanted to focus on the
center and keep my pieces active. I dreamed of the Karpov approach. Take
away all my opponent’s good options. Leave my opponent with only
blunders to choose from.
My king’s knight went on an adventure against Pete Melissakis. The horse

started on g1 and galloped to 4.Nf3, 11.Nd4, 16.Nb3, 32.Na5, 35.Nc6 and
finished the game with 36.Nxe7+ 1-0.
Sawyer (2000) - Melissakis (1728), corr APCT 1979 begins 1.e4 d6 2.d4
Nf6 3.Nc3 g6 4.Nf3 Bg7 5.Be2 0-0 6.0-0 Nc6 7.d5 [7.h3 or 7.Be3] 7...Nb8
8.h3 [Karpov had won with 8.Re1] 8...c6 9.a4 cxd5 [9...Nbd7=] 10.exd5 b6
11.Nd4 Bb7 12.Bf3 Qd7 13.Re1 a6 14.Bf4 Ra7 15.Qd2 Rc8 16.Nb3 Ba8
17.Bg5 Rac7 18.Re3 h6 19.Bh4 Rc4 [19...Qd8=] 20.Bg3 Qa7 21.Rae1 Bf8
22.Be2 R4c7 23.f4 [23.Bf3+/=] 23...Nbd7 [23...Rxc3=] 24.Bf2 Bb7
[24...Rxc3 25.Rxc3=] 25.g4 [25.f5+/-] 25...Nh7 26.Bf3 Bg7 [26...Qa8
27.Nd4+/=] 27.Bg2 Bf6 28.h4 [28.Nd4+-] 28...Ndf8 [28...Qa8 29.Nd4+/=]
29.Rh3 Bg7 30.a5 Qb8 31.axb6 Rd7 32.Na5 Re8 33.g5 h5 [33...Ba8
34.gxh6 Bxh6 35.h5+-] 34.Rhe3 f6 35.Nc6 Qa8 36.Nxe7+ 1-0
3.Nc3 g6 4.f4
The Yugoslav Variation.
98 - Wild Passed Pawn End

In this game I played a Pirc Defence 4.f4 variation as White.
It turned into chaos against a slightly higher rated opponent.
After I won, my opponent “stin” was rated one point above me.
Black chose a double fianchetto idea with 6...b6.
I kept missing the pawn stab e4-e5! on moves 6, 7, and 8.
Even so, I got his king caught in the middle before missing a mate in three in
a three minute blitz game.
I lost material. Then Black missed some chances at my king.
I managed to get all the material back that I had “sacrificed”.
Suddenly we were in an ending where my passed pawn could not be stopped.
Sawyer - stin, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 02.11.2012 begins 1.d4 Nf6
2.Nc3 d6 3.e4 g6 4.f4 Bg7 5.Nf3 Nbd7 6.Bd3 [6.e5+/=] 6...b6 7.0-0 [7.e5+/-
] 7...Bb7 8.Qe2 [8.e5+/-] 8...Nh5 9.g4 Nhf6 10.f5 gxf5 11.exf5?! Nxg4
12.h3 Ngf6 13.Bg5 Rg8 14.Kh2 Bh8 15.Rae1 [15.Rg1=] 15...c5 [15...Bxf3!-
+] 16.dxc5 bxc5 17.Bxf6 Bxf6 18.Bb5 [18.Rg1=] 18...Qb6 19.a4 a6
20.Bxd7+ Kxd7 21.Rf2 Rg7 22.Ne4 Bxb2? [22...Qxb2-+] 23.f6 Rg6 24.fxe7
[24.c4+/=] 24...Rag8? [24...Re6-/+] 25.c3? [25.Nf6+!+-] 25...Bxe4?
26.Qxe4 Bxc3? 27.Ree2? [I saw the too late 27.e8Q+ Rxe8 28.Qxe8+ Kc7
29.Re7 mate!] 27...Re6 28.Qxh7 Re8 29.Rxe6-+ fxe6 30.Ng5 Rxe7 31.Rf7?
Qd8? [31...Qb2+ 32.Kg3 Be1+!-+] 32.h4 Be5+ 33.Kh3 c4 [33...Bf6-+]
34.Qg6 Rxf7 35.Qxe6+ Kc6 36.Qxc4+ Kb7 37.Nxf7 Qd7+ 38.Kg2 Qc6+?
+- [38...Bf6 39.Qd5+ Ka7 40.Nxd6= and a draw is likely.] 39.Qxc6+ Kxc6
40.Nxe5+ dxe5 41.h5 Kd6 42.h6 Black resigns 1-0
99 - Trap of Queen in Pirc
We have known the Pirc Defence is a good opening since Bobby Fischer
played it as Black vs Boris Spassky in the World Championship.
Below my opponent played the first eight moves accurately, but then he
decided to attack and capture my undefended pawn. It seemed like a good
idea, but he was falling into my trap.
The b2 pawn was poisoned. Black's queen bit off more than she could chew.
Then with one move 11.Nb5! Black realized it was over.
The knight threatens 12.Nc7+ and 13.Nxa8 picking off the rook. This must be
dealt with by something like 11...Kd8, but then 12.Rfb1 and the Black lady is
without an escape route since the Nb5 covers both c3 and a3.
White has many Pirc choices. I like the 150 Attack 4.f3, 5.Be3 and 6.Qd2 set-
up after 1d4 Nf6 2.f3 in my games when I am headed toward a Blackmar-
Diemer Gambit.
Here I chose the Yugoslav 4.f4. Take note: I completed my development by

move 10: both knights, both bishops, the queen, and castled, connecting the
rooks for six developing moves. Black made only four in the first 10 moves;
he never made it to move 11.
We see a nice trap that could occur in many openings. My opponent

"iAttack" was polite enough to resign at the right moment making this game a
good illustration of the trap.
Sawyer (1909) - iAttack (1488), ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 19.06.2014

begins 1.Nc3 d6 2.e4 Nf6 3.d4 g6 [The Pirc Defence] 4.f4 Bg7 5.Nf3 c5
6.dxc5 Qa5 7.Bd3 Qxc5 8.Qe2 Nc6 [Or 8...0-0 9.Be3 Qa5 10.0-0] 9.Be3
Qb4?! [This is a waste of time since b2 is poisoned. Better is 9...Qa5 10.0-
0=] 10.0-0 Qxb2 [Black should play 10...0-0 11.a3 but not 11...Qxb2? which
loses to 12.Na4+-] 11.Nb5! [Black resigns as he sees his queen is trapped.] 1-
0
3.Nc3 g6 4.f3
This Pirc 4.f3 is similar to the King’s Indian Defence Saemisch Variation. I
often reach this via 1.d4 Nf6 2.f3 g6 3.e4 d6 4.Nc3.
100 - James Regan Pirc 4.f3
James Regan played in multiple section of correspondence events in 1989-90.
This may have just been a side game, but I think it was a USCF rated
tournament game.
Usually I recorded carefully in my records the exact section number, but

sometimes I would just list it was "USCF corr".
Here is a draw from one of those unknown sections.
I used the opening designation Pirc Defence by transposition. Here Black

played an early 5...Nc6.
I experimented with what turned out to be a flawed strategy in playing my

bishop to Bb5 and doubling Black's pawn with 8.Bxc6.
The problem was by 8...bxc6 I gave Black an open file to attack me?!
James Regan was up to the task.
Soon we agreed to a truce.
Sawyer - Regan, corr USCF 1989 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.f3 d6 3.e4 g6 4.Be3
Bg7 5.Nc3 Nc6 6.Qd2 e5 7.Bb5?! [This move does not lose, but it is the
wrong idea. Better are either 7.d5 or 7.Nge2] 7...0-0 8.Bxc6?! [Consistent but
bad. White is going to castle queenside. Opening up the b-file gives Black
good attacking chances. 8.Nge2] 8...bxc6 9.0-0-0 [9.dxe5 dxe5=] 9...Qe8
10.Nge2 Nd7 11.g4 [11.Bh6=] 11...exd4 12.Nxd4 Ne5 13.Rdf1? [13.Bh6]
13...Ba6 14.Rf2 c5 15.Nde2 Nc4 16.Qd3 Qc6 17.b3 Nxe3 18.Qxe3 Rfe8
19.Qd2?! [19.Rd1 Bxe2 20.Rxe2 Qa6=/+] 19...Rab8 [A great way to
continue the attack is 19...c4!-+] 20.Qd5?! 1/2-1/2 [Draw agreed]
101 - Don't Make Last Blunder
Mistakes happen in chess. We rarely play perfectly. In the rough and tumble
of an actual game, the advantage may swing back and forth. Stay focused on
the game. Protect your vulnerable areas. Keep making threats, and you have a
good chance to win.
My opponent for today's game is Jerry Xayavong. We played at the old

Borders bookstore in Orlando, Florida.
I was at the end of a long day of work playing chess against mostly younger
guys. I was willing to face anyone available.
My opponent opted for a Pirc Defence. Black sacrificed or lost a pawn, but
then he played actively. We both missed his blunder on move 15 which hung
a piece. After that Black played well.
The fight was on. The queens came off the board quickly. We had castled
opposite sides, so the game became imbalanced.
In the middlegame, Black came after my undefended kingside. We reached

an even position when I missed chances. I broke through on the queenside
before he got through on the kingside.
Sawyer - Xayavong, Orlando, FL, 13.11.2003 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 g6

[2...d5 3.e4 dxe4 4.f3 Blackmar-Diemer Gambit] 3.e4 d6 4.f3 Nc6 5.Be3 Bg7
6.Qd2 0-0 7.0-0-0 e5 8.d5 Ne7 9.Bh6!? [Seems premature. 9.h4!+/- White
can build up a kingside attack quicker than Black can do so on the
queenside.] 9...c6!? [9...Bxh6 10.Qxh6 c6=] 10.Bxg7 Kxg7 11.dxc6 bxc6
[11...Nxc6 12.Qxd6 Qxd6 13.Rxd6 Be6 14.Rd1 Rfd8 15.Rxd8 Rxd8 16.Bb5
Nd4 17.Nge2] 12.Qxd6 Qxd6 13.Rxd6 [White has won a pawn.] 13...Ne8
14.Rd8 f5 15.Bc4 Bb7? 16.Rxa8? [Here I missed the tactical shot 16.Rd7!+-
] 16...Bxa8 17.Nge2 Nd6 18.Bd3 c5 19.exf5 Nexf5 20.Bxf5 Nxf5 21.Rd1
Ne3 22.Rd7+? [Letting the advantage slip. 22.Rg1+/-] 22...Rf7 23.Rxf7+
Kxf7 24.Ng3? [24.Ne4=] 24...Nxg2 25.Nge4 h5? [25...Nh4! 26.Nxc5 Nxf3-
/+] 26.Kd2 Kg7 27.Nxc5? [27.Nb5!+/=] 27...Bxf3 [27...Nh4!=/+] 28.b4 g5
29.b5 g4 30.N3e4 Nf4 [30...h4!=/+] 31.c4 h4 32.a4 Ne2 33.Ke3 Nd4 34.a5
Be2 35.Ne6+ Nxe6 36.Kxe2 Nd4+ 37.Kd3 Kg6 38.a6 Kf5 39.b6 axb6?
[39...Nc6 40.bxa7 Nxa7 41.Ke3+/=] 40.a7 Nf3 41.Ng3+?! [41.a8Q+-]
41...hxg3 42.hxg3 e4+ 43.Ke3 1-0
102 - Master Jon Lenchner
In the final round of this one day Penn State tournament I got paired with
USCF master Jonathan Lenchner. We both failed to win all our games. We
just wanted to finish well. Earlier I won two quick games. Then I misplayed a
Here we get the ever popular 1.d4 Nf6 situation. This leaves me with many
options. I chose 2.f3!? The continuation 2.f3 d5 3.e4 dxe4 4.Nc3 would
transpose to the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit. Both 2...e6 and 2...c5 are the real
theoretical issues.
The Pirc Defence after 2.f3 g6 3.e4 d6 4.Nc3 is no problem for White. This
transposes to lines in the 150 Attack. But I might play 4.c4 for a King’s
Indian Saemisch. I played 4...Be3 to keep Black guessing for one more move.
Lenchner delayed castling to push for an early attack. I also chose not to
castle. Thus I avoided the sharpest positions. Neither side could coordinate
pieces well with the kings stuck in the middle. We both missed good 23rd
move options. By move 30 the position was my two knights vs his rook and
pawn. By move 40 they had all disappeared. We arrived at a drawn rook
ending with all the pawns on the kingside.
Sawyer - Lenchner, State College PA 1990 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.f3 g6 3.e4 d6
4.Be3 Bg7 5.Nc3 [5.c4 is a Saemisch King's Indian Defence after 5...0-0
6.Nc3.] 5...c6 [Theory recommends that Black delay castling in this line and
immediately start an attack vs the queenside. Weaker players will normally
play 5...0-0 6.Qd2 with typical castling opposite sides play.] 6.Qd2 Qa5
7.Nge2 Nbd7 8.g4 h5 9.g5 Ng8 10.h4 b5 11.Ng3 b4 12.Nce2 c5 13.c3!?
bxc3 14.bxc3 [14.Nxc3+/= is the way to play to win.] 14...Rb8 15.Bh3 cxd4
16.cxd4 Qxd2+ 17.Bxd2 e6?! [Black heads toward a fairly even pawn
structure where White has the more active pieces. 17...e5! 18.Be3+/= when
White's position is only slightly better, but a master might have outplayed
me. It's been known to happen.] 18.Kf2 Ne7 19.Rab1 Nc6 20.d5 exd5
21.exd5 Rxb1 22.Bxd7+ Bxd7 23.dxc6? [23.Rxb1! Ne5 24.Ne4+/-]
23...Rb2 [23...Rxh1! 24.cxd7+ Kxd7 25.Nxh1 Rc8-/+] 24.cxd7+ Kxd7
25.Rd1 Rxa2 26.Bb4 Be5 27.Ne4 Rb8 28.Bxd6 Bxd6 29.Rxd6+ Ke7
30.Rd3 a5 31.N4c3 Rc2 32.Kg3 Kf8 33.Nf4 Rb3 34.Rd8+ Ke7 35.Ra8
Rcxc3 36.Nd5+ Ke6 37.Nxc3 Rxc3 38.Rxa5 Rc6 39.Rb5 Rc2 40.Ra5 Draw
agreed. Neither side can make progress. 1/2-1/2
103 - Randy Miller Plays Pirc
In high school I played four sports: baseball, basketball, ping pong and chess.
I loved them all. The first two were team sports, so credit and blame for wins
and losses were shared.
I loved ping pong (table tennis) because I had good hand-eye co-ordination.
My height was good for a 30 inch table. The ball bounced at the right level
for me to have a good comfortable strong repeatable swing.
Chess was more of a problem. We didn't know all the rules and we didn't
have anyone strong to play against. There was just a half dozen beginners
playing each other at lunch time.
What I found was that one mistake in chess was very serious. In ping pong
where the score goes to 21, I could make a dozen mistakes and still win the
game easily.
Not so with chess. In the my Pirc Defence game vs Randy Miller in the 1989
USCF Golden Squires Postal Chess Tournament, my good effort for many
months of correspondence play was thrown away with one sudden careless
blunder on move 35.
I turned an endgame advantage into a losing position. It was disappointing

here, but thus we find one of the greatest aspects of chess: Hope for a
comeback during a chess game.
Don't give up! You might win a losing battle!
Sawyer (1981) - Miller (1894), corr USCF 89SS66, 28.04.1991 begins 1.d4
Nf6 2.f3 g6 3.e4 Bg7 4.Nc3 d6 5.Be3 c6 6.Qd2 b5 7.Bh6!? Bxh6 8.Qxh6
Nbd7 9.Bd3 Qb6 10.Nce2 [10.Nge2= is more natural.] 10...e5 [10...c5=/+]
11.c3 d5 12.Nh3 exd4 13.Nxd4 [13.cxd4!+/=] 13...c5 14.Nc2 c4 15.Be2 Nc5
16.e5 Bxh3 17.Qxh3 Nfd7 18.f4 Ne4 19.Rf1 a5 20.Qe3 [20.Ne3=] 20...Qb7
[20...Ndc5-/+] 21.Bf3 [21.Qd4!=] 21...b4 22.Bxe4 dxe4 23.Qd4 0-0 24.cxb4
axb4 25.Qxc4? [25.Rd1 Nb6=/+] 25...Ra5?! [25...Rfc8!-/+] 26.Nxb4 Rc8
27.Qd4 Rac5 28.a3 Rc4 29.Qe3 Nc5 30.Rf2 Rxb4 31.axb4 Nd3+ 32.Kf1
Nxf2 33.Qxf2 Qxb4 34.Re1 Qb3 35.Rxe4?? [I got greedy and missed the
combination with the Black rook pinning my queen to my king. 35.Qe3 Qxb2
36.Qxe4+/=] 35...Qd3+! 0-1
104 - 150 Attack vs Ashby
The most popular chess post on my blog “How to Win with the 150 Attack”.
That game is found near the end of this book.
This game against Stephen Ashby was in the same Pirc Defence 4.f3
variation.
Back in 1990 this variation with 4.f3 and 5.Be3 was rare.
Sometimes White reverses the move order with 4.Be3 and 5.f3.
In theory it is more risky for Black to castle too early.
Opening books often recommend that Black play 5...c6.
This game is broken off early.
I am not sure whether it had been a resignation or forfeit.
In any case in 2011 my chess engine program Junior 10 evaluated the

position as strongly favoring White.
This victory over Stephen Ashby (1848) brought me to my peak USCF

correspondence rating of 2211.
After this game I won about five more games in a row.
The USCF refused to give me any rating points for any of those wins.
At least the USCF did send me another USCF Postal Master certificate.
Sawyer (2211) - Ashby (1848), corr USCF 89N280, 14.05.1990 begins 1.d4
d6 2.e4 Nf6 3.Nc3 g6 4.f3 Bg7 5.Be3 c6 6.Qd2 Nbd7 7.0-0-0 b5 8.Bh6 0-0
9.h4 Qc7 10.h5 Bxh6 11.Qxh6 b4 12.Nce2 Qa5 13.hxg6 fxg6 14.Kb1 [This
game brought me to my peak USCF correspondence rating of 2211.] 1-0
105 - Defending Against Claret
Against the Pirc Defence I have played every move order possible to reach
the positions after 4.f3 / 5.Be3 / 6.Qd2.
My ICC blitz opponent "Claret" was rated in the 2100s.
I figured that Black would play the 5...c6 line once I displayed my set-up.
As expected, the quality of the first 20 moves were good and the speed of
play was fast.
I had chosen to castle on the queenside for three reasons:
1. The castling kingside did not look reasonable.
2. The center did not look safe for my king.
3. Black had no open files on the queenside.
A lot of time was spent trying to find a mate, but everything was covered.
Black sacrificed a knight for some White pawns.
My opponent spent a lot of time thinking from move 22 to the end. Black was
in danger of losing on time.
In the end White was up a knight when Black resigned.
Sawyer - claret, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 13.10.2012 begins 1.d4 Nf6
2.Nc3 g6 3.e4 d6 4.Be3 Bg7 5.f3 c6 6.Qd2 Nbd7 7.g4 b5 8.h4 b4 9.Nce2 a5
10.Ng3 [10.h5!] 10...Ba6 11.Bxa6 Rxa6 12.Bh6 Bxh6 13.Qxh6 Qb6 14.0-0-
0 a4 15.N1e2 [15.g5!? Nh5 16.Nxh5 gxh5 17.Ne2+/-] 15...b3 16.cxb3 a3
17.Qd2 axb2+ 18.Qxb2 c5 [18...0-0] 19.dxc5 Qxc5+ 20.Kb1 0-0 21.h5
[21.g5!+/-] 21...Rfa8 [Clocks: 2:05-2:02] 22.Nc1 Qe3 23.hxg6 fxg6 24.Qe2
Qf4 25.Nf1 Nc5 26.Ne3 Nfxe4? [26...e6 27.Nc2+/-] 27.fxe4 Qxe4+ 28.Nc2
Qxe2 29.Nxe2 Rxa2 30.Nc1 Ne4? [Clocks: 1:23-0:19] 31.Rd3?! [31.Nxa2+-
might have prompted a faster resignation.] 31...Rxc2 32.Kxc2 Nf2 33.Rhh3
1-0
4.f3 Bg7 5.Be3 0-0
This is the most common line in the Argentine Variation.
106 - Kmoch Pawn Power
Something I learned from the classic Hans Kmoch book "Pawn Power in
Chess" 40 years ago was a tactical idea that often works against the Black
fianchetto pawn structures such as the King's Indian, Benoni or Pirc.
The idea is angle for an Nf5 sacrifice. From the f5 square the knight may
attack the Bg7. If the knight is captured with gxf5, Black's king position
becomes dangerously open.
In this game vs James Regan, Black is headed toward a King's Indian

Defence. My attempt to transpose to a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit led me to
the Pirc Defence.
The Pirc Defence 4.Be3 / 5.f3 variation is a major branch of this defence.
These two moves can be played in reverse order. Play somewhat resembles
an English Attack in the Sicilian Defence. When everything goes according
to plan, White may play the kingside pawns to the squares e4-f3-g4-h4-h5.
The alternative 4.Be3 is more flexible, as it could be combined with Nf3 and
h3. The attacking plan in the Pirc Defence 6.Qd2 variation is for White to
play moves like 7.0-0-0 and a later Bh6.
In this postal game vs James Regan I got to play what Kmoch calls the
Benoni Jump 14.Nf5!? This time it worked well.
Sawyer (2043) - Regan (2229), corr USCF 89N286, 20.12.1990 begins 1.d4
Nf6 2.f3 d6 3.e4 g6 4.Be3 Bg7 5.Nc3 0-0 6.Qd2 Be6 [6...c6 7.0-0-0; or 6...e5
7.Nge2] 7.0-0-0 c6 8.Bh6 Qa5 9.Nge2 [Better is 9.Bxg7 Kxg7 10.d5+/=]
9...Bc4 [9...Bxa2!=] 10.g4 Rd8 11.Kb1 Nbd7 12.Ng3 Ba6 [12...Nb6
13.Bd3+/=] 13.Rg1 Nf8 14.Nf5!? gxf5 15.gxf5 Ng6 16.fxg6 hxg6 17.Bxa6
Qxa6 18.Qg5 [Very strong is 18.Bxg7 Kxg7 19.f4!+-] 18...b6 19.h4 Qc8
20.Ne2 Nh7 21.Qf4 e5 22.Qe3 c5 23.dxc5 [23.Bxg7!+-] 23...dxc5 24.Rxd8+
Qxd8 25.Bxg7 Kxg7 26.h5 Qd6 27.Ng3 Kh8 1-0
107 - Popular Premature Push
There is a famous gambit in the King's Indian Defence Saemisch Variation
where Black plays after 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.e4 d6 5.f3 0-0 6.Be3
c5!?
Possibly the earliest game played at the grandmaster level was Lev
Polugaevsky - Roman Dzindzichashvili. Many other GMs have followed suit.
In my database this line scored exactly 50%.
In the closely related Pirc Defence Argentine Variation the move 6...c5?! is
an unsound gambit. White has the pawn on c2 instead of c4. This makes his
position more solid with an extra pawn.
The 1989 USCF Golden Knights Semi-Final Postal Tournament was still in
progress in 1991 as I had advanced to the next round. My opponent was
William G. Schreiber.
Black tried the gambit 6…c5?! Personally I have faced this gambit many
times. I love playing White in this line.
Black has some counter play, but I do not think it is near enough. Note that it
is very easy for a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit player to reach the position after
6.Qd2.
Sawyer (2017) - Schreiber (2034), corr USCF 89NS20, 15.04.1991 begins

1.d4 Nf6 2.f3 g6 3.e4 d6 4.Be3 Bg7 5.Nc3 0-0 6.Qd2 c5?! 7.dxc5 dxc5
8.Qxd8 Rxd8 9.Bxc5 e6 10.Be3 a6 11.Rd1 Rxd1+ 12.Kxd1 [White need not
fear a middle game attack with the queens and a set of rooks off the board.
The king will guide the c-pawn on its journey toward c8.] 12...b5 13.Kc1
Bb7 14.Bd3 Nc6 15.Nge2 Ne5 16.Rd1 Rc8 17.Kb1 Nc6 [17...Nfd7
18.Nc1+/=] 18.Nd4 [18.Nc1+/-] 18...Ne5 [18...Ng4! 19.fxg4+/=] 19.Nb3
Ned7 [19...Nxd3 20.Rxd3+/- could at least leave Black with two bishops.]
20.a4 bxa4 21.Nxa4 Bf8 22.Nb6 [22.Na5!+- looks very promising.] 22...Rc7
23.Na5 Bc5 24.Nxd7 Nxd7 25.Bxc5 Nxc5 26.Nxb7 Nxd3 27.Rxd3 Rxb7
28.Rd6 Ra7 29.c4 Kf8 30.Kc2 Ke7 31.c5 Rc7 32.b4 Rb7 [If 32...a5 33.e5
axb4 34.c6 Ra7 35.Kb3+- and White is winning.] 33.Kc3 a5 34.bxa5 Rb5
35.Kc4 Rxa5 36.Rd2 h5 37.Kb4 [White could very well push the pawn
immediately. 37.c6+-] 37...Ra8 38.Kb5 Rb8+ 39.Kc6 Rc8+ 40.Kb6 Rb8+
41.Kc7 Rb5 42.c6 Rb1 43.Kc8 Rb6 44.c7 Rb4 45.Ra2 Rb1 46.Ra7 1-0
108 - Mate a Naked King
When player castle opposite sides in chess, there is a race to see who could
strip away the defenses of the opponent the fastest. Typically this is done by
pushing pawns to swap off the pawns that cover up the other king.
Combine that with the invasion of one's bigger pieces, and the defence will
be quickly overwhelmed. Checkmate follows.
Here I had a clear plan that I carried out to mate. I brought in not only my
bishops and knights but also my rooks and queen. My opponent tried to
attack my king. It was too little too late.
The opening was a Pirc Defence, 150 Attack. Black wanted to post a knight
on d4, but it did not accomplish much.
Better would have been to prepare a ...b7-b5 pawn push with 7...a6 or 7...c6.
This games demonstrated an ideal set-up for White in the 150 Attack. Black
was ready to check the White king, but he had been too deliberate in his
development.
I played the thematic Benoni Jump sacrifice 19.Nf5. Then Black's defenses
crumbled. White's entire army suddenly came crashing in.
White was winning easily in all lines. The mate followed quickly after a
series of exchanges.
Sawyer (1937) - gnice (1608), ICC 5 0 Internet Chess Club, 10.09.2011

begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 g6 3.e4 d6 4.Be3 Bg7 5.Qd2 0-0 [Castling is very
common here, but another good move is 5...c6.] 6.f3 Re8 7.0-0-0 Nc6 8.g4
Nd7 9.h4 e5 10.d5 Nd4 11.Bh6 Bh8 [Black is holding onto the dark-squared
bishop in case someday the long diagonal gets opened up. The position might
stay closed with the blocked pawn on e5.] 12.h5 Nf8 [Now I want a knight on
g3 to penetrate on f5 or h5.] 13.Nce2 a6 14.c3 Nxe2+ 15.Nxe2 Bd7 16.Ng3
b5 17.Bd3 Rc8 18.Rdg1 c6 19.Nf5 Bxf5 20.gxf5 cxd5 21.hxg6 fxg6 22.exd5
[22.fxg6 hxg6 23.Bxf8+-] 22...b4 23.fxg6 hxg6 24.Bxf8 bxc3 25.Rxg6+
Kxf8 26.Rxh8+ Kf7 27.Rh7+ Kf8 28.Qh6# 1-0
109 - Play near Washington
In May 1990 our family went to Washington D.C. for a week. I attended a
conference held at the Washington Hilton Hotel.
Nine years earlier this had been the site of an assassination attempt on
President Ronald Reagan shortly after he took office in 1981. Reagan
survived but some others did not. Since then the Hilton had made changes to
prevent another such tragedy.
Nobody should want to see a President killed. It is a terrible thing for the
United States, no matter which political party one is in. If you love the
President, you will miss him. If you do not, his death would make him a hero.
Everybody loses.
In 1990 there was an active chess club that met in the Arlington suburb for
quad tournaments every Friday. Arlington, Virginia is directly across the
Potomac River from Washington D.C.
I played in a Quad Event with three rounds. My first round was against
William Starosta. He declined my efforts at a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit by
going into what became a Pirc Defence.
Sawyer - Starosta, Arlington, VA (1), 25.05.1990 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.f3 d6

3.e4 g6 4.Be3 Bg7 5.Nc3 c6 [When White commits to the f3 set-up, it is
common for Black to hold off on castling and focus on an immediate
queenside attack. The choice between 5...c6 and 5...0-0 are about 50-50.]
6.Qd2 0-0 [Black switches strategies to the early castle option.] 7.0-0-0 Re8
8.Bh6 [White would like to also push g4 & h4 very fast, and maybe play Ng-
e2-g3 and h5.] 8...Bh8 [Retreating this bishop is standard when Black has
moved away the Rf8. It can work well when Black is prying open the long
diagonal toward the White king.] 9.h4 Nbd7 10.h5! Nf8 [Taking the h-pawn
would allow a glorious and quick finish. 10...Nxh5 11.Rxh5 gxh5 12.Qg5+
Bg7 13.Qxg7#] 11.hxg6 Nxg6 12.Nge2 [Or 12.g4!+-] 12...e5? [Dropping a
pawn.] 13.dxe5 Rxe5 14.Qxd6 Qxd6 15.Rxd6 Be6? [Another tactical
mistake. Now White f3 pawn is eager to fork two pieces on f5.] 16.f4 [You
will note that Black has done nothing to attack White's queenside. Now
follows multiple exchanges.] 16...Nxf4 17.Nxf4 Nxe4 18.Nxe4 Rxe4
19.Nxe6 fxe6 20.Rd7 Rb4 21.c3 Ra4 22.Bd3 Rxa2 [Not much can be done.
Another try is 22...Be5 23.Bxh7+ Kh8 24.Bf5 exf5 25.Bg7+ Kg8 26.Rh8#]
23.Bxh7# 1-0
110 - Patient Pirc Defence
After 1.d4 Nf6 2.f3 g6 my chess games often continue 3.e4 Bg7 4.Nc3 d6
5.Be3 0-0 6.Qd2 which is a Pirc Defence.
Black can play 5...c6 and delay castling. White can play 4.c4 d6 5.Nc3 which
is a King's Indian Defence Saemisch Variation.
In my 2014 game vs "widowmaker" I had the typical attacking advantage in

this line.
Black defended well enough to avoid immediate disaster, but I noticed that
Black played slowly.
This was a three minute game, which generally requires a pace of 20 moves
per minute to avoid a loss on time.
Black's slow defense was evident after 20 moves when I had a 40 second lead
on the clock.
At this point I focused on winning on time.
By move 33 Black had only 13 seconds left.
Then it was too late to speed up.
Sawyer (1950) - widowmaker (1938), ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club,

20.09.2014 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.f3 g6 3.e4 Bg7 4.Nc3 d6 5.Be3 0-0 6.Qd2 e5
7.0-0-0 Nc6 8.d5 Ne7 9.g4 a6 10.Bh6 b5 11.h4 Bxg4? 12.fxg4 [Here I
missed my opportunity to grab an immediate advantage with 12.Bxg7! Kxg7
13.fxg4 Nxg4 14.h5+-] 12...Nxg4 13.Bxg7 Kxg7 14.Bh3 [14.h5+-] 14...Nf6
15.h5!? [15.Qe3+-] 15...Nxh5 16.Nf3 Nf4 17.Ne2 Nxe2+ 18.Qxe2 Ng8
19.Kb1 h5 20.Rhg1 [20.Rdg1+-] 20...Nh6 [Black was playing slowly, so I
just focused on winning on time. Clocks 2:01-1:20] 21.Ng5 Qe7 22.Rdf1
Rab8 23.Qf3 a5 24.b3 b4 25.Qf2 a4 26.Kb2 axb3 27.axb3 Ra8 28.Ra1 [If I
was not just trying to run out the clock, I might have found 28.Qg2!+-]
28...Rxa1 29.Kxa1 Ra8+ 30.Kb2 Qf6 31.Qxf6+ Kxf6 32.Nf3 Kg7 33.Ne1
Ra6 [Clocks 1:37-0:13] 34.Nd3 c5 35.dxc6 Rxc6 36.Nxb4 Rb6 37.Nd5 Rb7
38.Ra1 Ng4 [38...g5 39.Bc8+/=] 39.Bxg4 hxg4 40.Rg1 f5 41.exf5 gxf5
42.c4 Kg6 43.Kc3 Kg5 44.Ne3 [Black forfeits on time. Clocks 1:18-0:00] 1-
0
111 - Pythagoras Ponders
The Pirc Defence can be reached by transposition when Black avoids the
Blackmar-Diemer Gambit after 1.d4 Nf6 2.f3 g6. Here 2...d5 3.e4 dxe4 4.Nc3
is a BDG.
This Pirc Defence reached the 150 Attack set-up with moves like f3, Be3,
Qd2 and 0-0-0. The strategy is to push pawns like g4, h4-h5 and open up the
Black king for tactics or checkmate like in a Sicilian Dragon.
In another game vs "Pythagoras" when I had Black. This time we focus on

the center and then Black got queenside pawns going before I did kingside
pawns.
I built up a winning position, and then he lost on time. My rule of thumb for
the clock in a three minute game is that you must play 70 moves to avoid
frequent losses on time.
If my opponent gets in deep time trouble with 10 seconds left, then I stop
looking for winning moves on the board and start looking for safe fast moves
and safe pre-moves. When possible I play forcing moves with a check or
capture. I try not to allow my opponent to check me in any meaningful way.
Here it worked.
Sawyer - Pythagoras (1887), ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 05.10.2014

begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.f3 g6 3.e4 d6 4.Nc3 Bg7 5.Be3 0-0 6.Qd2 e5 7.0-0-0
[Usually White chooses 7.Nge2 or 7.d5] 7...exd4 8.Bxd4 Nc6 9.Be3 a6
10.Bc4 b5 11.Bd5 Nxd5 12.Nxd5 Be6 13.Ne2 Bxd5 14.Qxd5 Na5 15.b3
Qe7 16.Bg5 Qe5 17.Qxe5 dxe5 18.Nc3 f6 19.Be3 Rfd8 20.Nd5 c6 21.Ne7+
[Better seems to be 21.Nc7! Rac8 22.Ne6 Rxd1+ 23.Rxd1 Bf8 24.Rd7+-]
21...Kf7 22.Rxd8 Rxd8 23.Bb6 Kxe7 24.Bxa5 Rd7 25.Bb4+ Ke6 26.Bd2
Bf8 27.c3 c5 28.Kc2 c4 29.bxc4 bxc4 30.Rb1 Bc5 31.Rb8 Rd6 32.Bc1 Rd3
33.Ra8 Be3 34.Rxa6+ Ke7 35.Bxe3 Rxe3 36.Ra7+ Ke6 37.Rxh7 Re2+
38.Kb1 Rxg2 39.h4 Rf2 40.a4 Rxf3 41.Kb2 Rf2+ 42.Ka3 Rf1 43.Kb4 Re1
44.a5 Rxe4 45.a6 Re1 46.a7 Ra1 47.Kxc4 e4 48.h5 gxh5 49.Kd4 f5
[49...h4!=] 50.Rh6+ Kf7 51.Rxh5? [51.Rh8!+-] 51...Rxa7? [51...Kg6!-/+]
52.Rh7+ Kg6 53.Rxa7 Kg5 54.Ke3 f4+ 55.Kf2 Kg4 56.Rg7+ Kf5 57.Rf7+
Ke5 58.Rh7 e3+ 59.Kf3 Black forfeits on time 1-0
112 - How to Win 150 Attack
Every 1.e4 player and every Blackmar-Diemer Gambit player has to have a
plan to win against the King's Indian Defence type set-up. This involves at
least four moves by Black: 1...Nf6, 2...d6, 3...g6, 4...Bg7 played in almost
any order. Unless interrupted, Black can pretty much ignore what White does
until move 5.
If White wants to face an actual King's Indian Defence, then he will play 1.d4
Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.e4 d6. The Pirc Defence follows 1.e4 d6 2.d4 Nf6
(Attacking e4) 3.Nc3 g6 followed by 4...Bg7. Because White has not used a
tempo to play c2-c4, he reaches the crossroads on move four. The main
choices are 4.f4 / 5.Nf3; 4.Nf3 / 5.Be2; 4.Bc4 / 5.Qe2; and 4.Be3 / 5.f3.
This last option is the 150 Attack, named for the British rating level (about
1800 Elo) where that choice was particularly popular. Nowadays that move is
played at every level.
The move f2-f3 can be played at any point up to move 7. White's intentions
are to follow with Qd2/0-0-0/g4/h4/h5/Bh6. Almost the exact same idea can
be found in the Saemisch Variation of the King's Indian Defence, the English
Attack of the Najdorf Sicilian Defence (though without the Bh6) and the
Yugoslav Attack against the Dragon Sicilian Defence.
For a second I forgot about the chronic hole on c4 which Black could now
use for the first time. I blundered with 13.Nce2? I got away with it when
Black failed to play 13...Nc4! After the exchanges that followed, White's
attack was much faster.
Sawyer - lhj, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 31.08.2011 begins 1.d4 g6 2.e4
Bg7 3.Nc3 d6 4.Be3 Nf6 [Pirc Defence] 5.f3 0-0 6.Qd2 Nbd7 7.0-0-0 a6
[Planning a queenside expansion.] 8.g4 b5 9.h4 Bb7 [The bishop is not
effective here.] 10.Bh6 Rc8 11.h5 c5 12.d5 Ne5 13.Nce2 [13.Bxg7! is the
correct way to reach the game continuation.] 13…a5 [Black also playing fast
uses good strategy but bad tactics. 13...Nc4! attacks my queen while she is
protecting my Bh6.] 14.Bxg7 Kxg7 15.hxg6 fxg6 16.Qh6+ Kg8 17.Ng3 c4
18.g5 Nh5 19.Nxh5 gxh5 20.Rxh5 Rf7 21.Bh3 Rg7 22.Be6+ Kf8 23.Rh4 c3
24.Rf4+ Nf7 25.Rxf7+ Black resigns 1-0
113 - Perfect Attack vs Pirc
I played in a tournament on May 2, 1992 at the Station Mall in Altoona,
Pennsylvania. There I finished in second place in the Open Section.
In my first round I won on time as Black in the Caro-Kann Panov. My second

round was a loss to Master Rodion Rubenchik in the Albin-Counter Gambit.
Here in round three my opponent was John C. Caliguire, Jr. Although we had
never personally met before, I knew his name.
My book Blackmar-Diemer Gambit Keybook had been published by

Thinkers' Press in 1992 about nine weeks before this game. Caliguire played
Game 500 in that book.
Against me in Altoona, John Caliguire rated 1916 played a Pirc Defence.
I had won a lot of games with the 4.f3 / 5.Be3 line when Black avoided the
BDG.
According to Junior 12, my play in this game was nearly perfect. That
doesn’t happen very often. There is usually some better move that I could
have played.
Sawyer - Caliguire, Altoona, PA (3), 02.05.1992 begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.f3 g6

[2...d5 3.e4 dxe4 4.Nc3 transposes to the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit.] 3.e4 d6
4.Nc3 [4.c4 Bg7 5.Nc3 KID Saemisch] 4...Bg7 5.Be3 0-0 [Some players
prefer to play 5...c6 and begin queenside operations while the Black king is
still in the center.] 6.Qd2 Nbd7 [6...c6 is more common. At this point, White
must choose between six moves: 7.0-0-0, Bh6, h4, g4, Nge2, or Bc4. White
would like to play all six moves at once, but of course must just pick one at a
time.] 7.0-0-0 c6 8.Bh6 a5? [Too slow. 8...b5!= with roughly equal chances.]
9.h4 b5 10.h5 Nb6 [A big mistake would be 10...Nxh5?? 11.Rxh5 gxh5
12.Qg5 with mate next move.] 11.hxg6 fxg6 12.Bxg7 Kxg7 13.Qh6+ Kg8
14.e5 Nh5 15.g4 b4 16.gxh5 Bf5 17.hxg6 Bxg6 18.Bd3 bxc3 [Black was
losing anyway. This just allows a forced checkmate.] 19.Bxg6 cxb2+ 20.Kb1
[White captures on h7 with queen or bishop next move, depending on what
Black does.] 1-0
Alston – 28
anon3 – 89
Ashby – 104
ATtheGreat – 75
Bacrot – 11
Baffo – 52
Bekychess – 27
Bentrup – 5
Bishop – 62
bjerky – 96
Blacula – 90
blik – 9, 39, 72
Bond – 91
Bondar – 51
Botti – 95
Bramante – 66
Browne – 71
Brummer – 50
Bullockus – 80
Caliguire – 113
Cavicchi – 15, 82
Chandler – 27, 29
chapaev – 53
Cherner – 81
claret – 105
Conlon – 22
Costigan – 65
CraftyWiz – 31
creditordebit – 64
Crotto – 84
Data – 56
Dbronstein06 – 88
duarni – 1
duckbreath – 33
Dunadan – 30, 93
Dunn – 94
Eldridge – 59
Evans – 68
Felber – 26
Ferranti – 87
Fierro Baquero – 82
Fischer – 71
Foust – 24
France – 69
Gambit-Lover – 17
gnice – 108
Goldthrope – 79
Gorton – 70
Grifter – 38
guest – 23
Harimau – 60
Hickman – 19
iAttack – 99
jubajeba – 73
Kaplan – 16
Lau – 54
Leko – 11
Lenchner – 102
lhj – 112
Ludwig – 7
Maks – 77
Maksimovic – 14
Malyi – 12
Markovic – 6
MarkusP – 92
Marlborito – 29
MarshKnight – 63
Martin – 40
Matthews – 32
Mednis – 76
Melissakis – 97
Micah – 55
Miller, A – 74
Miller, R – 103
Muir – 2, 21, 34, 45
Mussanti – 75
Nichter – 44
Niven – 18
NN – 15
Okhotnik – 12
Parsons – 20, 46
Patrascu – 14
pawnstar3 – 57
Phillips – 36
PII233Crafty – 48
pothead – 3
Pythagoras – 111
Regan – 100, 106
Risto Heinoo – 91
Robson – 8
RockyTop – 17
Rookie – 67
Rosenthal – 13
Ross – 43
SanjaP – 85
Sarosy – 86
Sawyer – 2-10, 13, 16, 18, 20-26, 28, 30-61, 63-70, 72-74, 76-81, 83-90, 92-
113
Schirber – 25
Schreiber – 107
Schroer – 78
Shibut – 49
silverwolf – 42
Starosta – 109
stin – 98
Szklarczyk – 61
Tarantoga – 83
Taylor – 35
Times – 62
vladdfallavenna – 4
WetDog – 47
Wharry – 58
widowmaker – 110
Wolff – 19
Wood – 10
Xayavong – 101
YucoII – 37
Zdun – 41
Zilbermints – 1
Before You Go
If you like this book, please leave a review.
Chess Training Repertoire

frequently play or an unorthodox opening. As a chess openings coach I
provide you with one set of lines for White and another for Black. You
receive a basic suggested repertoire for each side for that one line. Each week
a different opening is covered. Enjoy it for free. Try it!
Tim Sawyer chess books

Blackmar-Diemer Games 1: Accepted
Blackmar-Diemer Games 2: Declined
Blackmar-Diemer Theory 3: Accepted
Blackmar-Diemer Theory 4: Declined
Blackmar-Diemer Puzzles: 200 Easy Positions
Blackmar-Diemer Playbook 6: 200 Opening Positions White
Blackmar-Diemer Playbook 7: 200 Opening Positions White
Queen Pawn: 1.d4 d5 Closed Games
King Pawn: 1.e4 e5 Open Games
Sicilian Defence: 1.e4 c5
French Defence: 1.e4 e6
Caro-Kann: 1.e4 c6
Alekhine & Pirc: 1.e4 Semi-Open
Queen’s Knight: 1.Nc3 & 1…Nc6
Indian Defences: 1.d4 Nf6
Bird & Dutch: 1.f4 and 1…f5
Rare First Moves: Flank Openings
Chess Training Repertoire 1: 50 Openings
King Pawn Puzzles: 200 Easy Opening Checkmates
Sicilian Defence Puzzles: 200 Easy Opening Checkmates
French & Caro Puzzles: 200 Easy Opening Checkmates
Queen Pawn Puzzles: 200 Easy Opening Checkmates
Indian Defence Puzzles: 200 Easy Opening Checkmates
Flank Opening Puzzles: 200 Easy Opening Checkmates
French 3.Be3 Playbook: 200 Opening Positions for White
Philidor 2.Nf3 Playbook: 200 Opening Positions for White
Italian 2.Bc4 Playbook: 200 Positions Bishop Opening White
Kings Gambit Playbook: 200 Opening Positions for White
London 2.Bf4 Playbook: 200 Opening Positions for White
Caro-Kann Playbook: 200 Opening Positions for Black
Slav Defence Playbook: 200 Opening Positions for Black
Blackmar-Diemer Series: Books 1-4 (box set bundle)
Chess Games 1.e4 Series: 5 Books in 1 (over 600 Games)
Chess Games 1.d4 Series: 5 Books in 1 (over 500 Games)
amazon.com/author/timsawyer

Chess Games 1.e4 Series - 5 Book - Tim Sawyer PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Chess Games 1.e4 Series - 5 Book - Tim Sawyer PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Chess Games 1.

Adherence to all applicable laws and regulations, including international,

Any perceived slight of any individual or organization is purely

Book 1: “King Pawn: 1.e4 e5 Open Games in Chess Openings” is a

Book 2: “Sicilian Defence: 1.e4 c5 in Chess Openings” is a collection of 112

Book 3: “French Defence: 1.e4 e6 in Chess Openings” is a collection of 122

Book 4: “Caro-Kann Defence: 1.e4 c6 in Chess Openings” is a collection of

Book 5: “Alekhine & Pirc: 1.e4 in Semi-Open Chess Openings” is a

This is a game collection rather than an instruction book.

“Counting is the process of determining whether any sequences of captures

When I saw this move in my postal chess games, I wondered if it was a

Of course there is always the fantasy idea of transposing to a Blackmar

The USCF lists Michael DeLa'O of Texas with a correspondence rating of

De La'O (1758) - Sawyer (2107), corr USCF 89N275 10.08.1990 begins

In 1987, I worked for an insurance company in a large office building. That

Sawyer (1981) - Winter, Horsham PA 1987 begins 1.d4 d5 2.e4 e5 3.dxe5

Sawyer - BeSomeone, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 24.05.2012 begins 1.d4

I have played in many simultaneous exhibitions. Sometimes I was the

In 1996 I gave a simultaneous chess exhibition at Penn College in

Sawyer - NN, simul Williamsport PA 1996 begins 1.d4 e5 2.e4 [Transposing

Sawyer - BeSomeone, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 21.11.2012 begins 1.d4

Below I get to it by transposition after 1.d4 e5 2.e4. Of course White could

Naturally in blitz it can be a promising gambit. I played it in postal chess vs

In my database the Calabrese as scored 53% for Black. The performance

Strockyj (1685) - Sawyer (2085), corr USCF 89N215 15.08.1989 begins

Dhoom2 - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 06.10.2012 begins 1.e4 e5

Reinhardt Ludwig Straszacker was a very friendly opponent. He was a

Sawyer - Straszacker, corr APCT-SACCA 1978 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Nf6

In a blitz contest, my opponent misplayed some exchanges and found himself

In the end Black was in a bind and could hardly move.

Sawyer (2084) - guest5420, ICC 5 0 u Internet Chess Club, 05.05.2015

Sawyer - Puckett, Crossville, TN (2), 16.07.1977 begins 1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Bc5

In the game below vs C. Stanley McMahon, I played the Bishops Opening

My opponent's ICC handle "Talkeres" honors some great chess players.

I knew he wanted to play Bxf7 to win material or play checkmate. I figured

Talkeres - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 10.11.2012 begins 1.e4 e5

Eventually I would play 1000 correspondence games, win an ICCF Master

In his excellent book on the Petroff repertoire grandmaster Konstantin

In trying to castle by hand, I miss the power of Qf3+ attacking d5 at a couple

alain - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 02.06.2012 begins 1.e4 e5

Normally as White I played my favorite 4.Qh5. That line sometimes sees

I quit my 1978 ICCF section. In future years I returned to ICCF and

I hit Bob Davis with my Bishops Opening. That transposed to a Vienna

White threatens mate on moves 4, 7 and 8. After ten moves in the

Analyzing my game vs "realityczech" becomes a reality check. Obviously

Sawyer - realityczech, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 19.12.2012 1.f4 e5 2.e4

challanger100 - Sawyer, ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 29.12.2012 begins

This King's Gambit Declined variation 2.e4 Nc6 3.Nf3 f5 is one of my

Vasiukov (2215) - Zilbermints (2184), ICC 5 0 Internet Chess Club,

Sawyer (2010) - Corter (1603), Williamsport, PA 22.06.1999 begins 1.e4 e5

Shaw writes: "Incidentally, choosing Fischer - Wade to illustrate the 3.fxe5

Sawyer (2226) - duckbreath (2520), ICC 15 0 u Internet Chess Club,

Friendly chit-chat or banter was common on postcards during games. A week

I heard an old tale of a postal player in Connecticut who died without

Cooper taught me to love chess books. He was a great student of openings.

I learned three things from Graham Cooper about chess books.

Graham Cooper became a USCF Life Master.

Cooper (1900) - Sawyer (1450), UMO ch Orono, Maine (2), 09.12.1972

Once in a while I enjoyed a nice gift. They were as treasured as a wrapped

Callahan (1868) - Sawyer (1969), corr APCT EMN-A-1, 28.12.1996 begins

As I recall, we had an enjoyable year of conversation on our weekly

Watt (1584) - Sawyer (1981), Hatboro, PA 1988 begins 1.e4 e5 2.f4 d5

Sawyer (2368) - SharpShooter (2929), ICC 3 2 u Internet Chess Club,