Flaw in solution to problem in CL July 2011

All Things Chess
1

There appears to be a flaw in the solution given (on page 79) to problem IV on page 13 of Chess Life July 2011. After the solution key move 1. … Nd4!, only two White replies are considered: 2. Qa4 (leading to black mating in two), and 2. Rxd5 (leading to Black having an overwhelming material advantage).

The natural 2. Qxd5+ is not considered, but this move appears to lead to a complicated but drawish endgame, although perhaps Black has winning chances. This outcome fails to meet the challenge presented with the group of problems: “Your task is to find the fastest winning line of play, usually the forced win of a decisive amount of material.”

After 2. Qxd5+ Rxd5 3. Rxd5, 3. … Rxd1+ seems forced. After 4. Kf2, Black has a slight (not decisive) material advantage: rook, knight, and three pawns vs. rook and five pawns. All White’s pawns have structural weaknesses of isolation and doubling, and White’s king can’t move without loss of material. One Black’s pawn is isolated , and the Black knight is pinned, limited mobility of Black’s knight and rook.

Black can force/invite a simplification to a roughly even king and pawn ending, but White seems to have some winning chances. For example: 4. … Kf7 (to gain a tempo), 5. Rd6 Rd2+ 7. Ke3 Nxf3 8. Rxd2 Nxd2 9. Kxd2 Ke6 10. Kd3 Kd5 11. h4 h5 12. b3 g6, 13. b4 and White wins.

Therefore Black must avoid this simplification, and it is likely that Black must therefore give up the knight to try to win a rook and pawns vs. rook and pawns endgame. Here is an example of the difficulty of Black achieving this: 7. … Rxh2 8. Rxd4 (8. Kxd4 Rd2+ 9. Ke5 Rxd5 10. Kxe5 h5 wins) 8. … Rxb2, 9.Rd5 g6 (9. … Ke3 10. Re4+ Kd6 (10. … Kf6 Rd5 repeats) 11. Ke4 g6 12. Rd5+ Ke6 13. Re6+ , then 13. … Kd6 or Kf6 14. Rd5 Ke6 repeats) 10. f5 g5 (10. … gxf 11. Kxf draws) 11. f6 Kxf6 12. Rd6+ Kf5 13. Rxb6 h4 14. Rb8 h5 15. b6 h6 16. b7 h7 17. Rh8 draws.

After several days of analysis, I am unable to find any forced Black win. My 1941 edition of Basic Chess Endings by Reuben Fine includes no discussion of rook, knight, and pawns vs. rook and pawns. I would be very interested to see how Black can force a win in this variation. Perhaps a reader can find one, possibly with computer assistance.

I would also very much like to see the complete score of the game from which the problem is based: Samuel Reshevsky vs. Sidney Bernstein, U.S. Championship 1936. If a reader has access to a copy of New York 1936: The first modern United States chess championship by John Samuel Hilbert, and Peter P Lahde, I would much appreciate their posting this game score.

2

This should be moved to “Chess Life Articles” forum.

3

I’ve posted a reply to this under the CLA forum, in the “Chess Life Magazines Column” thread.

4

Moderator Mode: On

In principle, you are right about that, but…

The article forum is a different format than all the others. The only people that can start a thread in that forum are the system administrators. A regular forum member cannot and we moderators cannot start a thread in that forum.

Also, we moderators cannot move threads into that forum either. It also seems that the only articles discussed on that forum are ones that are on the front page/internet-wise.

So with this in mind, the All Things Chess Forum is a good one for this thread.

5

[Event “USA Ch”]
[Site “New York USA”]
[Date “1936.??.??”]
[EventDate “1936.??.??”]
[Round “3”]
[Result “0-1”]
[White “Samuel Reshevsky”]
[Black “Sidney Norman Bernstein”]
[ECO “E22”]
[WhiteElo “?”]
[BlackElo “?”]
[PlyCount “82”]

  1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 Bb4 4. Qb3 Nc6 5. e3 a5 6. a3 a4
  2. Qc2 Bxc3+ 8. Qxc3 Na5 9. Bd3 d5 10. c5 O-O 11. Ne2 b6
  3. cxb6 cxb6 13. Qc2 Nb3 14. Rb1 Ba6 15. Bxa6 Rxa6 16. Bd2
    Qd7 17. Qd3 Ra7 18. f3 Rc8 19. Bc3 Ne8 20. Bb4 Rac7 21. O-O f5
  4. e4 Nd6 23. exd5 exd5 24. Nc3 Rc4 25. Rbd1 Rxb4 26. axb4
    Nc4 27. Rf2 Re8 28. Re2 f4 29. b5 Ne3 30. Rde1 Ra8 31. Nxa4
    Rxa4 32. Qxb3 Rxd4 33. g3 h6 34. gxf4 Nf5 35. Re5 Rd2 36. Rd1
    Nd4 37. Rxd5 Rxd1+ 38. Qxd1 Qxd5 39. Kg2 Qc5 40. Qe1 Qc2+
  5. Kg3 Qxh2+ 0-1
6

3…Nxf3+ is a draw by perpetual. But you’re right that 3…Rxd1+ is the only winning try.

Seems to me that this should be a straightforward win: as you note, White’s five pawns are barely worth more than Black’s three pawns.

Black’s only issue is breaking the annoying d-file pin. 3…Rd3! is a very handy move, as it keeps the Kf2 from bothering the Rd3. (Give White three or four moves in a row: what’s White going to do?)

EDIT: Boyd Reed came up with the gamescore and the same move in the other thread. But you’re absolutely right that this was worth a mention.

7

In April of this year, the cessation of publishing articles from Chess Life magazine and from Chess Life for Kids as pages in the web site effectively withdrew support from several major design elements of the web site, which date back to 2006 and 2007.

This is a natural evolutionary process that occurs for any kind of thing that stops being cared for. We all probably understand what happens to automobiles that stop being maintained regularly, or at all. With web sites, the effects take two main forms, one of this is dramatic: sudden failures of one or many features. The less dramatic but no less harmful effect is akin to what happens to homes which cease ever to be cleaned: more and more of the activity takes place on the home page itself, and in perhaps a few additional places, and the rest of the place falls into disuse. Terms like “cobwebs” and “site rot” refer to this.

This is the first topic of discussion of an article from Chess Life started outside the Chess Life Articles forum, and Ron Suarez accurately describes why from the moderators’ perspective. It may well be the first of many, because the system that encouraged such discussion has been abandoned.

The USCF web site has not had a checkup technically or organizationally for a number of years now, and has no internal staff capable of and responsible for this.

For those who imagine that, out of site, these things are being addressed, it would be wise to obtain evidence that this is so, and which stands up to scrutiny by professionals with experience in the field. I frankly doubt that what goes on out of site in this area actually amounts to very much at all.

For those exploring and deciding the future paths of USCF this week in Orlando, please consider that what happened here on this web site in April marks a major step in the eventually cessation of USCF’s print publications, and the eventual consolidation of all USCF news and information publishing under what is now known as Chess Life Online. It is a natural step in a process that was started when a dynamic and highly skilled young chess journalist was brought on to create a new department. Now we are at one of those points in the process at which those in charge ought to do a checkup on where this process is, where it is headed, and to make sure it is headed where they mean it to end up.

8

Thanks Bill. I appreciate the score and the analysis.