![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.danamackenzie.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/12\/ho-me-1.jpg\")
FEN: r1bqr1k1\/pp3ppp\/2p2n2\/5p2\/1bpP4\/2N1P1P1\/PPQ1NPBP\/R2R2K1 b – – 0 12<\/p>\n\n\n\n
White has just played 12. Rfd1<\/strong>, hinting strongly at a desire to break open the position with d4-d5. The most natural response seems to be 12. \u2026 Be6 but I didn\u2019t like this, because 13. Nf4 renews the threat and after 13. \u2026 Nd5 now White gets excellent play with 14. Nxe6 fe 15. e4, when Black\u2019s pawn formation is a mess. <\/p>\n\n\n\n The computer thinks that several moves are about equally\ngood here, but its slight preference is 12. \u2026 Bxc3, a move I didn\u2019t seriously\nconsider because it trades off my \u201cgood\u201d bishop. But perhaps I should have\nasked: What is this bishop doing, anyway? By playing 12. \u2026 Bxc3 13. Nxc3 I do\naccomplish one good thing \u2013 I take the move Nf4 out of the picture, so now I\ncan play 13. \u2026 Be6. Now it will be very hard for White to win back his gambit\npawn. <\/p>\n\n\n\n But both 12. \u2026 Be6 and 12. \u2026 Bxc3 involve making concessions to White, and I saw a move I thought I could play without making concessions: 12. \u2026 Nd5? <\/strong>What did I overlook?<\/p>\n\n\n\n The main variation that I considered was 13. Nxd5 cd 14.\nNf4, when I had a surprise in mind for White: the Petrosian-esque exchange\nsacrifice 14. \u2026 Re4?! (diagram)<\/p>\n\n\n\n FEN: r1bq2k1\/pp3ppp\/8\/3p1p2\/1bpPrN2\/4P1P1\/PPQ2PBP\/R2R2K1 w – – 0 15<\/p>\n\n\n\n The computer is very skeptical of this and gives White a slight edge. I\u2019d be interested in readers\u2019 thoughts on what it takes to make a \u201cPetrosian sacrifice\u201d work. I thought that Black\u2019s two bishops, White\u2019s weak light squares and Black\u2019s impressive pawn center (transforming the weak, in-the-way f-pawn into a strong point on e4) were easily adequate compensation for the exchange sac.<\/p>\n\n\n\n But when I look at the position more objectively, I can see why the computer isn\u2019t so enthusiastic. First, White has a number of useful moves he can play before taking, like a3 or h4. But even if White takes straight away, 15. Bxe4 fe, is Black\u2019s game so good? After 16. Qe2, where does the light-squared bishop go? The problem, I think, is that White actually has the best minor piece on the board, the knight on f4, which hampers any efforts by Black to attack on the light squares. And Black\u2019s development is quite substandard. The Q, QR and QB have not moved yet, and the KB is out in no man\u2019s land, doing nothing. Usually it\u2019s not a very good idea to sacrifice material for an attack when you haven\u2019t developed anything yet.<\/p>\n\n\n\n But there\u2019s an even bigger flaw with 12. \u2026 Nd5? After 13. Nxd5 cd White can play 14. Qa4! and win his pawn back! The Black queen is overloaded, having to defend e8 and d5, and there is no time to deal with this problem because the bishop is also hanging on b4. All of Black’s self-inflicted weaknesses are coming home to roost. After 14. \u2026 a5 15. Bxd5 White recovers his pawn absolutely for free, and the c4 pawn is also critically weak for Black. Not to mention the b7 pawn.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Luckily, my mistake went unpunished. My opponent played 13. a4?<\/strong> instead, which is in itself an instructive mistake. This move shows that he is obsessed with preventing \u2026 b5, but it creates a permanent hole on b4 (which I made very good use of later in the game, bringing my knight to b4 and d3). White failed to realize the tactical opportunities created by Black\u2019s awkward and delayed development. After his 13. a4 I breathed a sigh of relief and played 13. \u2026 Be6<\/strong>, after which he never again had a serious chance to win back his gambit pawn.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Lesson learned: Finish your development, even if you do have\nto make some concessions. As Steinitz said, a pawn is worth a little trouble.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The win against Ho put me into a pretty good position in the\ntournament. Eric Steger continued to do his Bobby Fischer impersonation,\ndefeating Mike Splane to run his record to 5-0. So far it\u2019s been a dream\ntournament for him, as he has now defeated the #1, #2, and #3 seeds. This is\nlucky for me too, because he has taken out the three players who would (before\nthe tournament) have been considered my chief competitors.<\/p>\n\n\n\n I\u2019m in a three-way tie for second, with Paulo Santanna and\nShreesh Nanda, at 4-1. Because I\u2019m the highest-rated of the three, the logical\npairing for next round would have me playing against Steger and Santanna\nplaying against Nanda. If I can get the job done against Steger, then it could\nbe a very interesting last round with three people tied at 5-1. Steger would\nstill have very strong tiebreaks, so he would still have the inside track to\nwin the tournament, I think. But let\u2019s not worry about that yet. As athletes\nare fond of saying, let\u2019s just take one game at a time.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" First of all, I won the game. So don\u2019t get the wrong impression from the title of today\u2019s post. In round five of the Kolty Chess Club championship, I defeated Michael Ho with the Black pieces to improve my record to 4-1, still within striking distance of the leader. (More about that below.) However, I […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":80,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_et_pb_use_builder":"","_et_pb_old_content":"","_et_gb_content_width":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[37,1363,16,12],"tags":[995,4426,432,4082,1032,4425,1638,3366,4427,4428],"class_list":["post-6001","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-chess-clubs","category-current-news","category-positions","category-tournaments","tag-bobby-fischer","tag-concessions","tag-development","tag-eric-steger","tag-exchange-sacrifice","tag-michael-ho","tag-mike-splane","tag-overloaded-piece","tag-self-inflicted-weaknesses","tag-sigh-of-relief"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/danamackenzie.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6001","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/danamackenzie.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/danamackenzie.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/danamackenzie.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/80"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/danamackenzie.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=6001"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/danamackenzie.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6001\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":6005,"href":"https:\/\/danamackenzie.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6001\/revisions\/6005"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/danamackenzie.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=6001"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/danamackenzie.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=6001"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/danamackenzie.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=6001"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.danamackenzie.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/12\/ho-me-2.jpg\")