The London Chess Classic begins in Kensington, London on the 8th of December, 2009.

“The London Chess Classic 2009 will be the highest level tournament in London for 25 years and will be the first in a series of events designed to increase enthusiasm for chess in the UK and promote the game and its undoubted educational benefits in schools and communities.”

http://www.londonchessclassic.com/

A star studded event. Magnus Carlsen (2801), Vladimir Kramnik (2772), Hikaru Nakamura (2715), and Ni Hua (2665) will compete against England’s four leading grandmasters Nigel Short (2707), Michael Adams (2698), Luke McShane (2615) and David Howell (2597).

It was not all that long ago that England had no grandmasters at all.

Tony Miles (1955-2001) became England’s first grandmaster in 1976, narrowly beating Raymond Keene and William Hartston for the 5000 Pound prize on offer for this achievment.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tony_Miles

Miles was a phenomenon in English Chess. He fearlessly demonstrated that the (at the time) overwhelmingly dominant grandmasters of the Soviet School of Chess were no less subject to error and defeat than other mortals. He beat, for instance, Bronstein, Geller, Smyslov and Spassky.

More importantly, he brought about a paradigm shift in English chess culture from that of an introspective searching-for-truth-in-chess to one of an uncompromisingly pugnacious quest for victory.

Indicative of this transformation of English chess culture is the evolution of the name of a well known chess variation; the Byrne variation. Byrne was the first to play the very aggressive 6.Be3 against the Najdorf Variation of the Sicilian Defence and the variation was named after him. But so prolific were the successes of Miles’ Caissic descendents (Short et al) with this move it is now more widely known as The English Attack.

Here is Miles’ most famous game featuring what he named “The St. George Defence”. *

Anatoli Karpov – Anthony Miles [B00]

EU-chT, 1980

Notes by Tony Miles, edited by Ray Keene.

Engine Analysis Rybka 3(30s)

B00: Queen’s Fianchetto Defence, Nimzowitsch Defence

1.e4 a6!

After a few moments hesitation. I watched Karpov’s face as he returned to the board – there was no reaction at all. The audience, though, was another matter. Conditions for spectators were not wonderful so at first only a few noticed, but after some nudging and pointing a general hushed sniggering broke out. Mutters of “I thought the Skara Schools Championship was not until next week…” I tried to look serious. Miles is the only grandmaster to have espoused this weird defence in a serious game. This extraordinary move is hardly ever played since it does little to challenge White’s domination of the centre. Miles chose it primarily to sidestep the then world champion’s superior knowledge of opening theory.

2.d4

If White is prepared to admit taking this opening seriously than 2 c4 comes into consideration.

2…b5

Several atrocities have also been committed at this point. Whilst they may find their way into the general heading of 1…a6 they certainly do not qualify as the “Birmingham Defence”. However, since this is supposed to be a theoretical magazine, a brief survey:

(a) For historical interest 2…d5? 3 exd5 Qxd5 4 Nc3 Qa5 5 Nf3 e6 6

Bd3 c6 (it would seem more consistent to allow the queen to retreat via b6 to a7) 7 O-O +/- Rubinstein-Gunsberg, St. Petersburg 1914.

(b) 2…g6 3 g3 d5!? 4 Nc3 dxe4 5 Nxe4 Bg7 6 Be3 Nc6 7 c3 e5 8 d5 Nce7 with an excellent position for Black (a distinct improvement on Gunsberg’s play). Patterson + Williams – Keene + Eales, consultation game 1969, continued 9 d6 Nf5 10 Bc5 cxd6 11 Nxd6+ Nxd6 12 Bxd6 Ne7 13

Qa4+? Bd7 14 Qa3 Bc6 15 f3 Nf5 16 O-O–0 Bh6+ 17 Kb1 Bf8 18 c4 Nxd6 19

c5 Ne4! 20 Rxd8+ Rxd8 21 Nh3 Bxc5 22 b4 Be7 23 Bg2 Rd4 0–1.

Several games have continued with 2…d6 or 2…g6 leading to a Modern Defence, where 1…a6 has little more than psychological value. One of slight independent value: 2… d6 3 f4 g6 4 Nf3 Bg7 5 c3 d5 6 e5 h5 7

Qb3 Nh6 8 c4?! dxc4 9 Bxc4 b5 10 Bd5 c6 11 Be4 Be6 12 Qc2 Nf5 with a good position, Bellin-Keene, Norwich 1969. Oddly enough, when I consulted the relevant reference works after the game to discover the official refutation, I could discover no lines that conferred a tangible White advantage. The game Rubinstein-Gunsberg, St. Petersburg 1914, continued instead 2…d5 3 exd5 Qxd5 4 Nc3 Qa5 5 Nf3 e6 6 Bd3 c6

7 O-O with evidently better chances for White. The Miles strategem of expanding on the queenside is considerably more rational.

3.Nf3

As far as I know, the only person to play 1…a6 (or 1 d4 b5 2 e4 a6) with the same idea as myself is Michael Basman (not completely surprising as we both ‘invented’ the idea as an improvement on 1…b6). However, I only have the score of one game, Chandler-Basman, London 1979, which went 3 a4(?!) Bb7 4 axb5 axb5!? (simple and good is 4…Bxe4 5 bxa6 Bb7 or even 5…Nxa6) 5 Rxa8 Bxa8 6 Nd2 e6!? 7 Bxb5 f5 8 Qe2 (8 Qh5+ g6 9 Qe2 seems preferable) 8…Nf6 9 Bd3 c5 10 Ngf3 c4!

11 Bxc4 fxe4 12 Ne5 Bd6 with good compensation for the pawn. Black soon had an excellent position but later went astray. White could try

3 f3 when …Bb7 would reach a position which has seen before via the move order 1 d4 b5 2 e4 Bb7 3 f3 a6, e.g. 4 Be3 e6 (or 4…Nf6 5 Nh3

e6 6 Nd2 d5 7 e5 Nfd7 8 Bd3 c5 9 c3 Nc6 with a decent position, Tatai-Ljubojevic, Palma de Mallorca 1971) 5 Nd2 d5 6 Bd3 Nf6 7 e5 Nfd7

8 f4 += Portisch-Ljubojevic, Vrsac 1971. These games illustrate the possibility of transposing to a French type set-up, but if Black wishes, he might well defer …d5.

3…Bb7 4.Bd3

Murray Chandler has suggested the odd-looking 4 e5!? (gaining space and preventing …Nf6) 4…e6 5 c4 bxc4 (Basman would doubtless gambit this pawn) 6 Bxc4 Bb4+ 7 Nc3 striving for control of d5, though after 7…Ne7 Black’s position looks OK.

4…Nf6

Attacking e4 before White has the chance to defend with Re1. ECO mentions (by transposition) 4…e6 5 Nbd2 c5 6 dxc5 Bxc5 7 Nb3 Bb6 8

a4 += Spielmann-Hartingsvelt, 1914. Remarkably similar to the present game!

5.Qe2 e6 6.a4!?

Premature perhaps? Of course normal moves – O-O, Bg5, Nbd2 – are playable.

6…c5!?

A sharp reaction, but the natural 6…b4 is quite a reasonable alternative. Note that White was threatening to win a pawn by 7 e5.

The text still offers the pawn, but only in return for the bishop pair and an initiative. While playing …c5 I felt sure Karpov would avoid such tactical lines.

7.dxc5

After 5 minutes thought. If 7 axb5 axb5 8 Rxa8 Bxa8 9 e5 c4 and now:

(a) 10 exf6 cxd3 11 fxg7 Bxg7 12 Qxd3 when with such an open position the bishop pair, particularly the one lurking on a8, give excellent value for the pawn. Black might continue quietly with 12…Qb6, or maybe 12…Qa5+!?, for example 13 Bd2 Qa1 14 Qxb5!? Qxb1+ 15 Ke2 Bxf3+ 16 gxf3 Nc6! 17 Qxc6 Qxh1! and the black king runs to safety. (b) 10 Bxc4 bxc4 11 exf6 gxf6(!) and if 12 Qxc4 Rg8 with a fierce initiative. 7 c3 looks more vigorous.

7…Bxc5

[Rybka 3] 7…b4!?.

8.Nbd2

Again choosing the quietest path. 8 e5 was certainly worth considering. If 8…Nd5 just 9 axb5 and 8…Ng4 9 O-O leaves Black a bit out on a limb, e.g. 9…b4 10 h3 h5!? 11 Nbd2 followed by Ne4 or Be4. White reinforces his pawn on e4 which would be undefended after a series of captures on b5.

8…b4 9.e5

Less critical now as the knight can safely go to d5.

9…Nd5 10.Ne4 Be7 11.0–0

After this, yet another peaceful move, Black’s position is very comfortable. The last chance to try for an advantage was 11 Bg5. Then 11.. .f6?! 12 exf6 gxf6?? would lose disastrously to 13 Ne5! and

12…Nxf6 is also uncomfortable. I intended 11…O-O and if 12 Nd6 Bc6 when 13 Qe4 is met by … f5 and White must look after the N(d6).

Probably White is a little better, but Black has chances for counterplay based on the a8-h1 diagonal, the f4 square and the break …f6. More active is 11 Bg5.

11…Nc6!

Much more accurate than 11. ..O-O. Now if 12 Bg5 f6! 13 exf6 gxf6!

followed by …Qc7 and …O-O–0 with a tremendously active position and automatic kingside attack.

12.Bd2N

[Rybka 3] White has an active position [12.Bg5 f6 13.exf6 gxf6 14.Bh6

Qc7 15.g3 Rg8 16.Rfc1 Ne5 17.Nxe5 Qxe5 18.Nd2 Nf4 19.Bxf4 Qxf4 20.Bxh7

Rg5 21.Be4 d5 22.Bg2 Re5 23.Qd3 Qh6 24.Nf3 Re4 25.c4 Rc8 26.Nd2 Re5 Westerinen,H (2470) -Schulz,W/Hamburg 1980/MCL/1–0 (39); 12.Bg5 f6

13.Bh4 0–0 14.exf6 gxf6]

12…Qc7 13.c4

As expected, still playing quiet moves. The only alternative to defend the d-pawn was 13 Ng3 when Black could either challenge in the centre with …d6 (simplest) or …f6 (sharper), or as his king is still uncommitted, even consider …h5!?.

13…bxc3 14.Nxc3 Nxc3

[Rybka 3] 14…Ndb4 15.Be4=

15.Bxc3 Nb4!

Opening the long diagonal and putting the knight on its best circuit.

Black has comfortably equalised.

16.Bxb4

Understandably, White did not want to part with his light-squared bishop, and since 16 Bb1 is scarcely palatable, this was the only move. Karpov later regrets his decision to part with the bishop pair, but after 16 Be4 White would have no means of challenging the future impregnable establishment of a black knight on d5.

16…Bxb4

[Rybka 3]Black has the pair of bishops

17.Rac1

[Rybka 3]White threatens to win material: Rc1xc7

17…Qb6 18.Be4

To counteract Black’s powerful queen’s bishop.

[Rybka 3]18.Rfd1 Be7=

18…0–0!= 19.Ng5!?

After half an hour’s thought. 19 Bxh7+ was interesting – though again I was sure that Karpov wouldn’t play it! On 19…Kxh7 20 Ng5+ of course not 20…Kg8?? because of 21 Qh5, but 20…Kh6 also fails to 21 Rc4! threatening Rh4+ and if 21…g6 22 Qg4 and Black loses the B(b4).

Correct is 20…Kg6 and if 21 Qg4 either 21.. .f5 22 Qg3 (22 exf6

Kxf6) 22…Qd4!? to block on g4 (23 h3? Kh5! winning) or even 21…f6!?. Afterwards it was established that 19 Bxh7+ is quite dangerous but Miles was confident that Karpov would regard it as speculative and avoid it.

The commencement of an artificial manoeuvre which ultimately loses the game for White. The simple 19 Bxb7 Qxb7 20 Rfd1 is perfectly adequate for equality, whilst a further superior alternative to the text is the complicated attacking variation 19 Bxh7+ Kxh7 20 Ng5+ Kg6 21 Qg4 f5 22

Qg3 when Black’s king is in considerable danger.

NOTE: checking with the computer – 19. Bxh7+ Kxh7 20. Ng5+ Kg6 21. Qg4

f5 (21…f6 looks inferior, and 21. Qd3+ f5 22. Qg3 avoids it anyway) 22. Qg3 and now:

(a) 22…Kh5 is Fritz’s first choice (intending 23 Rc4 f4!), but give it White and it soon comes up with 23 Nh3! which looks to win, e.g.

23…Bd2 (only move) 24 Rc4 g5 25 Qd3 g4 26 Qxd2 gxh3 27 Qxd7 Kg6 28 Rc3, while 25…Bxg2!? (Fritz) 26 Kxg2 Qb7+ 27 Kg1 g4 28 Qxd2 gxh3 fails to 29 Rh4+!.

(b) Fritz’s second choice is 22…Rg8, but it then finds the very attractive 23 Rc7! Bc6 24 Nxe6+ Kf7 25 Qb3! and if 25…Ke7 26 Ng5

Qxc7 27 Qf7+ wins – capture Rg8 and Pg7, play Qf6+ …Ke8, Rd1 with the decisive threat Qf7+ …Kd8, Nf7+.

(c) Miles’ 22…Qd4 (Fritz’s fifth choice) probably deserves “!”.

White seems to have nothing better than 23 Nxe6+ (23 h3 f4! 24 Qg4 Kh6

25 Qh4+ Kg6 is a draw) 23…Qg4 24 Qxg4+ fxg4 25 Nxf8+ Bxf8 and Black is fine, e.g. 26 Rfd1 Bc6 27 e6 Ra7! 28 Re1 Kf6 29 Rc4 g5/Bd6.

19…h6 20.Bh7+ ?!

Distinctly artificial. I expected 20 Bxb7 Qxb7 21 Qe4 though Black is certainly not worse in the resulting ending. I suspect the text was rather due to the psychological effect of 1…a6. Karpov, having got nowhere from the opening, felt he should be doing something forceful.

This is too optimistic and White should prefer the simple 20 Bxb7.

20…Kh8 21.Bb1 Be7

Of course not 21. ..hxg5? 22 Qh5+..

22.Ne4

Or 22 Qd3 g6 =+.

[Rybka 3] 22.h4 g6 23.Nf3 Bxf3 24.Qxf3 Bxh4

22…Rac8 23.Qd3?

A ridiculous oversight, though Karpov played it very quickly. However, Black’s bishops already give him the edge. The battery looks dangerous, but it never gets the chance to operate. This looks dangerous since White is lining up his queen and bishop as a battery against the black king. However, Miles was never one to be scared of phantoms and he demonstrates that White’s threats are in fact hollow.

[Rybka 3] 23.Rcd1!? should not be overlooked 23…Rc7 24.Rd2=

23…Rxc1 24.Rxc1 Qxb2

Gullibly taking the pawn(s). White’s back rank weaknesses prevents any serious counterplay..

25.Re1?

This doesn’t help. On 25 Rc7 Black has a pleasant choice between …Rc8, …g6 and …Bc6, and on 25 Rd1 g6 26 Qxd7 is impossible because of 26…Rd8.

[Rybka 3] 25.Rd1 g6 26.Nd6

25…Qxe5–+

Pinning the knight against the rook. White has nothing to do but take back one pawn, but the game is over.

26.Qxd7

[Rybka 3] 26.Rd1 f5 27.Nd2 Qc5–+

26…Bb4 27.Re3

[Rybka 3] 27.f4 is not much help 27…Qxf4 28.Rf1 Qe3+ 29.Nf2 Qb6–+

27…Qd5

Simplest. It is obvious after this move that any vestiges of a white attack have totally evaporated and that the world champion faces a hopeless ending, where he is material down and his pieces lack coordination.

[Rybka 3] 27…Qb2 and Black wins 28.Qd1 Rc8–+

28.Qxd5 Bxd5

[Rybka 3] Inferior is 28…exd5 29.Ng3–+

29.Nc3 Rc8

The liquidation has left the world champion with a hopeless position.

He is a pawn down, his a-pawn remains weak, his opponent possesses the bishop pair in an open situation and, to cap it all, White has problems with his own back rank. The remainder of the game is a mere technical exercise for one of Miles’ strength.

30.Ne2 g5 31.h4

[Rybka 3] 31.Bd3 a5–+

31…Kg7

[Rybka 3] 31…gxh4 and Black can already relax 32.Rh3 Be7 33.Rc3–+

32.hxg5 hxg5 33.Bd3 a5 34.Rg3 Kf6 35.Rg4

[Rybka 3] 35.Bb5 Rc2 36.Kf1 Ra2–+

35…Bd6

[Rybka 3] 35…Rc5 seems even better 36.Bb5–+

36.Kf1 Be5 37.Ke1 Rh8 38.f4

[Rybka 3] 38.f3 Ke7 39.Rxg5 f5 40.Bxf5 exf5 41.Rxf5 Kd6–+

38…gxf4 39.Nxf4 Bc6

[Rybka 3] 39…Rh1+ makes it even easier for Black 40.Kf2 Bc6 41.Ne2–+

40.Ne2

[Rybka 3] 40.Bc2 Rh1+ 41.Ke2 Rg1–+

40…Rh1+ 41.Kd2

[Rybka 3] 41.Kf2 Ra1 42.Bc2 Bd5–+

41…Rh2

[Rybka 3] 41…Ke7 might be the shorter path 42.Nd4 Bxd4 43.Rxd4 Bxg2 44.Bb5–+

42.g3 Bf3

[Rybka 3] 42…Bd6 43.Bb5 Bxb5 44.axb5–+

43.Rg8 Rg2

[Rybka 3] 43…Bd6 44.Ke3 Bb7 45.Bb5–+

44.Ke1

[Rybka 3] 44.Ke3 Bd5–+

44…Bxe2

[Rybka 3] 44…Bd6 45.Bb5–+

45.Bxe2 Rxg3 46.Ra8 I now sealed

[Rybka 3] 46.Rxg3 Bxg3+ 47.Kd2 e5–+

46…Bc7 but Karpov resigned without resumption. 0–1

Reference to the St. George Defense – Wikipedia