Shankland, Sam - ChessAdmin
A84: Dutch Defence: 2 c4 Miscellaneous
[...] 1.c4 c6 2.¤f3 I was expecting a more committal follow-up such as e4. 2...d5 there seems no reason to delay this inevitable move 3.d4 now I could enter a mainline Slav with ...Nf6, but I choose to go for a Stonewall setup. 3...e6 4.£c2 f5 5.e3 ¤f6 6.¥d3 ¥d6 we now have the Modern Stonewall on the board, via a Slav move-order. I was happy with the opening and my prospects versus White's chosen setup. Among other things White's B+Q battery on the b1-h7 diagonal is blunted by the f5 pawn and Black's strong grip on e4. 7.O-O O-O again, I saw no reason to delay an essentially inevitable move. This is also a way to see what White will do before developing the queenside. 8.b3 White needs to develop the dark-squared bishop somehow, either to b2 or a3. 8...£e7 the standard response to b3. By controlling a3 it ensures White will have to spend another tempo with a4 if he wants to try and exchange the Bd6. Also, e7 is in general an excellent square for the queen. 9.cxd5 this was a surprise, as I had expected White to follow up with developing the bishop immediately, or playing a4 to prepare Ba3. 9...cxd5 there are only a couple of games in the database and Black wins them with either recapture. I decided to keep the pawn structure symmetrical and not offer to sacrifice the f-pawn, which however would give Black good compensation on the kingside.
9...exd5 10.¥b2 (10.¥xf5 ¥xf5 11.£xf5 ¤e4) 10...¤e4 11.¤e5 ¤d7 12.f3 ¤ec5 13.f4 ¤xd3 14.£xd3 ¤b8 15.¤d2 b6 16.¦f2 ¥a6 17.£c2 ¥b7 18.¤df3 c5 19.¥a3 a5 20.h3 ¤a6 21.g4 ¦ac8 22.£d2 ¤c7 23.¦c1 ¤b5 24.¥b2 ¥b8 25.dxc5 bxc5 26.£xa5 ¤d6 27.¦xc5 ¤c4 28.¦xc4 dxc4 29.¤xc4 ¦xc4 30.bxc4 £xe3 31.£c3 £xc3 32.¥xc3 fxg4 33.¤g5 0-1 (33) Zamfirescu,B (2108)-Posedaru,B (2318) Olanesti 201210.¤e5 now out of the database. This was again somewhat surprising to me, as White seems to neglect development on the queenside.
10.¤c3 ¤c6 11.a3 ¥d7 12.b4 ¦ac8 13.£b3 ¥e8 14.¤a4 ¥h5 15.¥e2 ¤e4 16.£d1 ¦f6 17.g3 ¥g4 18.¢g2 ¦h6 19.¤g1 ¦xh2 20.¢xh2 £h4 21.¢g2 ¤xg3 22.f4 ¤xe2 23.£e1 £h5 24.¦a2 ¤cxd4 25.exd4 ¦xc1 26.¦xe2 ¦xe1 27.¦exe1 £g6 28.¢h2 £h6 29.¢g3 g5 30.¤c5 ¥xf4 31.¦xf4 gxf4 32.¢g2 £h4 33.¢f1 f3 0-1 (33) Lazic,M (2220)-Shumiakina,T (2375) Ulcinj 199710...¤bd7 my instinct was to immediately challenge the Ne5, but this might not have been the best way to do it.
10...¥d7 Black would be perfectly happy if White exchanged his excellent knight for the "bad" light-square bishop. 11.¥b2 ¦c8 12.£d1 ¤c6
10...¤c6 is another pawn sacrifice with good compensation and the knight doesn't block d7. 11.¤xc6 bxc6 12.£xc6 ¥b7 13.£c2 ¦ac8 14.£d1 ¤e4 Black has a significant lead in piece development and the open c-file in exchange for the pawn.11.f4 bringing more symmetry to the pawn structure and reinforcing the Ne5, so it can't be exchanged off. 11...¤e4 I saw no reason to delay this knight jump, which is standard in the Stonewall and clears f6, potentially for the other knight. Also, Black can now exchange on e5, since the pawn recapture will no longer fork pieces on f6 and d6. 12.a4 this is a slight error which I can use to improve my position in the center. (12.¤d2 a6) 12...¤xe5 13.fxe5 ¥b4 of course this would not have been possible without White's move a4 having left the b4 square weak. 14.¥a3 no doubt the original intent behind a4. 14...¥xa3 The piece exchange effectively gives a tempo back to White. Instead, it would have been better to use it for development. (14...¥d7!?15.¥xb4 £xb4) 15.¤xa3 a6 I preferred this as a more permanent way of denying White the b5 square, although developing with ...Bd7 might be preferable. 16.¥xe4 White's light-square bishop has relatively little prospect and my Ne4 is well-placed, so the exchange makes sense. 16...fxe4 (16...dxe4?!17.¤c4±) 17.¦xf8 ¢xf8 this felt a little dangerous - one always hates to put their king on an open file - but it keeps the position equal. Withdrawing the queen would be the wrong choice, allowing White to penetrate to the 7th rank. (17...£xf8 18.£c7²) 18.£c5 ¥d7 finally developing the bishop. Just as importantly the rook is now freed on the back rank. 19.£xe7 I thought this was a little premature, so welcomed it. The exchange is a good practical choice by the grandmaster, however, as he knew his endgame technique would be far superior to mine and give him winning chances, even in a balanced position. 19...¢xe7 20.¦c1 ¦c8 this is fine, although given the problems I later get myself into on the queenside, perhaps simplifying things with a pawn exchange would be best at this point.
20...b5!?21.axb5 axb5 22.¦a1 ¦c8 23.b4 this sequence is essentially forced and leaves White with no threats.21.¦xc8 ¥xc8 22.a5 although the position is still dead even, White's more advanced pawns are a potential threat. 22...¥d7 23.¢f2 ¢f7 24.¢e1 ¢e7 25.¢d2 ¢d8 26.¢c3 ¢c7 27.¢b4 b6 28.¤b1 ¥b5 up to this point I have been successfully nullifying all of White's ideas. While the text move doesn't lose in itself, it does present a rather obvious target for White's knight. I would be better off playing a waiting move, since White cannot force a breakthrough. (28...g5) (28...¥e8) 29.¤c3 with the (limited) pressure now on, I go astray and commit to resolving the queenside pawn tension. This is a typical Class player mistake, prematurely exchanging in order to eliminate tension. 29...bxa5?? not seeing the rather obvious way that White will be able to win a pawn in the near future, after transferring his knight to c5.
29...¥e8 this (or another bishop retreat) is the best way to continue.30.¢xa5+− and just like that, White has a won game. 30...¥f1 31.g3 g5 (31...¢d7 does not improve anything 32.¤a4 ¢e7 33.¤c5+−) 32.¤a4 ¢d8 33.¤c5 ¢e7 34.¤xa6 h5 35.¤c5 h4 36.b4 hxg3 37.hxg3 ¢f7 38.b5 ¥xb5 39.¢xb5
39.¢xb5 ¢g6 40.g4 ¢f7 41.¢c6 ¢e7 42.¢c7 ¢e8 43.¢d6 ¢f8 44.¤xe6 ¢e8 45.¤c7 ¢f7 46.e6 ¢f6 47.e7 ¢g7 48.e8=£ ¢h6 49.¤e6 ¢h7 50.£d7 ¢h6 51.£g7#
Powered by Aquarium