National Open

A Stamnov - I Ivanov

(2) Stamnov,A - Ivanov,I [B22]
National Open (3),
[Ivanov, I]

1.e4 c5 2.c3 e6 3.d4 d5 4.exd5 exd5 5.Nf3 [In the late seventies in Moldavia I made the acquaintance of David Bronstein. We drank a fair amount of excellent Moldavian red wine. "Roshe de Purkar" every day and played in a strong and interesting chess tournament. GM G. Kuzmin, who is about my age, comfortable fifties, and whose pupil Ruslan Ponamariov is the current FIDE World Champion had the black pieces against David Ionovich Bronstein. This variation follows that game which took place in 1976 if my memory is reliable. 5.Be3 cxd4 (5...c4 G. Kasparov once tried this and obtained a good game.) 6.Bxd4 Nf6 this is a Pawn sacrifice but it is difficult for Black to continue his development without it. 7.Bxf6 Qxf6 8.Qxd5 Be7 a few moves later the game was agreed drawn. I say go figure. Later at dinner GM D. Bronstein explained to me that Black had excellent compensation for the Pawn and a very strong initiative. I'm still waiting to try that Pawn sacrifice some day.] 5...Nf6 [5...Nc6 is perhaps more prudent, but then I'm not an opening specialist.] 6.Bb5+ Bd7 [6...Nbd7 is possible but more complicated.] 7.Bxd7+ [7.Qe2+ Qe7 leads to an endgame with good chances for a draw for both while after (7...Be7 8.dxc5 Black is at least temporarily a Pawn down.) ] 7...Nbxd7 8.0-0 Be7 9.dxc5 Nxc5 I remember a game I played many years ago against Pal Benko in New York. I won with Black from an almost identical position. Gena Sosonko, my old friend from Sankt Petersburg, who lives in Holland now was also playing in New York. He asked me to send that game with my comments to Amsterdam for publication in the "New in Chess" magazine. I made my comments but the game was never published. Some time later Gena explained to me that the comments were too light. Here is the game I played against Pal Benko in 1984 in New York. 1.e4 c5 2.c3 e6 3.d4 d5 4.exd5 exd5 5.Nf3 Nf6 6.Bb5+ Bd7 7.Qe2+ Be7 8.O-O O-O 9.Bxd7 Nbxd7 10.Be3 Re8 11. dxc5 Bxc5 12.Nd4 Qb6 13.Rd1 Rac8 14.a4 a6 15.a5 Qc7 16.h3 Ne4 17.Na3 Ba7 18.Nac2 Bb8 19.Nf3 Ne5 20.Rxd5 Nc4 21.Rb1 Nxb2 22.Rxb2 Nxc3 23.Qd3 Nxd5 24. Qxd5 Red8 25.Qxb7 Qxc2 26.g3 Qc4 27.Rb6 Bxg3 28.Qxa6 Bf4 29.Qxc4 Rxc4 30. Bxf4 Rxf4 31.Ne5 f6 32.Nc6 Rd1+ 33.Kg2 Rd2 34.a6 Rdxf2+ 35.Kg1 Ra2 36.a7 Rc4 0-1 10.Nd4 Qd7 11.Qf3 g6 that may look risky but on 12. Bh6 there is Ng4 and 11.. 0-0 12. Nf5 is certainly no better. 12.Na3 a dubious move. 12. Bg5 or 12. Nbd2 would be better. 12...0-0 13.Bh6 Rfe8 14.h3 Nfe4 15.Rad1 A very natural move, isn't it. Yet after Black's reply White is lost. 15...Na4 Problems all of a sudden.








16.Bc1 loses a Pawn but at least White can hope to profit from the weakness of the dark squares around the Black King 16...Bxa3 17.bxa3 Rac8 positively a weakness, one of style if you please. I love to get all my pieces in play. 18.Ne2 Naxc3 19.Nxc3 Nxc3 20.Rde1 [I expected 20.Rd2 then 20...d4 21.Bb2 Qc6 and Black should win.] 20...d4 there would be no threats on the long diagonal. 21.Bh6 f5 opens the King but I liked my position. Black has firm control over the light squares. 22.Qd3 Qd5 23.Kh1 avoiding possible checks on e2 in some variations. 23...Kf7 24.Rxe8 Rxe8 25.Rc1 Rc8 26.f3 [26.Be3 loses immediately after 26...dxe3 27.Qxd5+ Nxd5 28.Rxc8 exf2 29.Rc1 Ne3] 26...Rc6 Better protect the Rook just in case 27.Bg5 Qe5 this is a very important move, for a long time Black has dominated the light squares, but it was not enough to win so it is necessary to take control of the dark squares as well. This strategy was explained by Gary Kasparov in comments to one of his games some 25 years ago. 28.Qd2 Ne2 the decisive invasion, you see 26. f3 covered e4 but weakened g3 29.Rb1 b6 30.Bh4 Qe3 31.Qb4 Rc1+ 32.Rxc1 Qxc1+ 33.Be1 a5 I followed this win in round three with three draws and did not qualify for the 2003 US Championship, tough 0-1