Chess Edinburgh lewischessmen2-75h 

Chandler Cornered

Cheating at Chess + Blackmar games


Chess journalist, John B Henderson starts off this weeks fun.

Those of you who missed John's column in the Scotsman on Saturday.
(21st Jan 2006) Here it is. (John Glendinning is J.B's Saturday name).



[Click here to replay the game]
Roesch - Schlage


1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.Qe2 b5 6.Bb3 Be7 7.c3 0-0 8.0-0 d5 9.exd5 Nxd5
10.Nxe5 Nf4 11.Qe4 Nxe5 12.Qxa8 Qd3 13.Bd1 Bh3 14.Qxa6 Bxg2 15.Re1 Qf3




It was played in Hamburg, 1910. and was the game used by
Kubrick in 2001 A Space Odyssey (D. Bowman v HAL).

I thought everyone knew what HAL stood for but only one
out of four punters I asked in Bells knew why it was called HAL.

When Arthur C. Clarke wrote 2001 the computer was an IBM.

The jist of the story revolves around the computer breaking
down and killing the crew. The boys at IBM did not like the
idea of one of their machines breaking down so insisted the
name was changed.

So Clarke moved all the letters from IBM back one. so..
I=H
B=A
M=L
HAL.

Now there is guy who drinks in Bells who is a dead ringer
for Arthur C. Clarke. So I asked him if this was true.
But he did not appear to know what on earth I was talking
about and told me to sod off.

So it may be true - it may not. A good game though.

JB. also sent me this game...
It was played in last round of the American open 2005.
Black needs to win to qualify for 2006 Championship.



[Click here to replay the game]
De Guzman - Kreiman

1.d4 Nf6 2.g3 d5 3.Bg2 g6 4.Nf3 Bg7 5.0-0 0-0 6.Nbd2 c6 7.c3 Na6 8.e3 Bf5 9.Re1 Qc8 10.Qe2 Re8 11.Nb3 Bg4 12.Bd2 Ne4 13.Rec1 Qf5 14.h3 Bxh3 15.Bxh3 Qxh3 16.Qf1 Qf5 17.Kg2 Bf6 18.Qh1 h5 19.Be1 c5 20.Qh3 Qxh3+ 21.Kxh3 c4 22.Nbd2 Nd6 23.b3 b5 24.Kg2 Nc7 25.bxc4 bxc4 26.Kf1 e6 27.Rab1 Rab8 28.Ng1 g5 29.f3 g4 30.f4 Be7 31.Ne2 Kg7 32.Rxb8 Rxb8




This game is the subject of a cheating accusation.
For a more detailed report see;
www.chessninja.com/dailydirt/archives/cheating_heart_attack.htm

It is claimed that White took a dive.
When you think about it this is quite a hard thing to prove.
How can you tell if someone has deliberately blundered?

The game (without the players names) was sent to various GM's
asking the approximate strength of White.
1400-1600 was the answer.

As JB states this is unkind on 1400-1600 players.
It's a generous resignation. the 1400-1600 players I know
would have played on. In fact many of them would not even
realise they were losing when white resigned.

I have done my bit and made this game and the situation known.

It does bring up an interesting point.
I am perfectly capable of playing absolute lousy chess.
What would happen if say me and Eddie Perry are paired in the
last round of some tourney and Eddie needs the point much
more than I do.

Although I have a higher grade, Eddie could quite easily
outplay me and make look like a duffer. Now I have tried
my best but the game was a very easy win for Eddie.
I could be accused of cheating.

It's hard to prove.

Fritz Cheats.

It does!!

It looks at it's opening RAM during a game.
Us humans are not allowed to consult opening books.
Fritz does. Fritz Cheats.

Michael Chisholm has had two bright wins featuring
the Blackmar Diemar Gambit.
(why does black not play 2...e6 and avoid all this stuff?)

The first game, played in the recent Edinburgh Lothian
Championship, ended up a simple piece of maths.
White's attackers outnumber the defenders. h7 falls.

The play leading to this position is a perfect example
of single minded chess. "I'm going to mate you on h7."

This opening is fairly successful down on the lower boards
and the ease in which white builds up his attack against
bog standard play is quite instructive.
Anyone thinking of adding this gambit to their repertoire
would do themselves no harm playing over this game a couple of times.



[Click here to replay the game]
M.Chisholm - G.Harold


1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3 exf3 5.Nxf3 e6 6.Bd3 c5 7.dxc5 Bxc5 8.Bg5 Nbd7 9.Qe2 0-0 10.0-0-0 Be7 11.Rhf1 Qa5 12.Kb1 a6 13.h4 b5 14.Bxf6 Nxf6 15.Ng5 Bb7 16.Rxf6 gxf6 17.Qh5




The second game in this line is from the
league match Edinburgh West 1 v Sandy Bells 1.

Kevin Mayo puts up stiffer resistance and even returns
the hot pawn in a bid for counter play. Mike's 19 Ne4!
is a good move leaving white with a commanding and
winning position. Note black's entombed Queen.
A fact well exploited by White.



[Click here to replay the game]
M.Chisholm - K.Mayo


1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3 exf3 5.Nxf3 Bg4 6.h3 Bh5 7.g4 Bg6 8.Ne5 Nbd7 9.Qf3 e6 10.Qxb7 Nxe5 11.dxe5 Nd7 12.Bb5 Qh4+ 13.Ke2 Rd8 14.Rd1 Bc5 15.Bxd7+ Ke7 16.Qf3 h5 17.Bf4 Bb6 18.Bc6 Bxc2 19.Ne4 Bxd1+ 20.Rxd1 f6 21.exf6+ gxf6 22.Bg5 Qxg5 23.Nxg5 fxg5 24.Rxd8 Rxd8 25.gxh5 Rf8 26.Qa3+ Kf6




This next game (Tiger Cubs 2 v Bells 3) Black castles without thinking.
(Castle because you must - not because you can).
So the Queen is skewered with the b7 pawn and consequently the a8 Rook.

Black come up with ingenious plan No.1 to save the a8 Rook.
Sac the Bishop on f2.

White comes up with ingenious plan No.2 to still get the a8 Rook.
Sac a Bishop and a Knight.

White now starts trading off pieces.
This is achieved with a fair amount of success.
White swaps his Queen for a Bishop.
This was not an ingenious plan, this was a blunder.

The loser is not the player who makes the most blunders.
It is the player who makes the last blunder.




[Click here to replay the game]
J. Scott - D. Goddard


1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Nf6 3.Nc3 Nxd5 4.Nxd5 Qxd5 5.Nf3 Bg4 6.Be2 e6 7.0-0 Bc5 8.h3 Bf5 9.Ng5 0-0 10.Bf3 Bxf2+ 11.Rxf2 Qb5 12.d3 Qb6 13.Be3 Qxe3 14.Bxb7 Qxg5 15.Bxa8 Bxh3 16.Kf1 Bg4 17.Bf3 Bf5 18.Qd2 Qd8 19.Re1 Nd7 20.g4 Bg6 21.Qe3 c5 22.d4 cxd4 23.Qxd4 Qc7 24.Rfe2 Nb6 25.Be4 Qf4+ 26.Rf2 Qxg4 27.Bxg6 Qxd4 28.c3 Qc4+ 29.Kg1 fxg6 30.Rxf8+ Kxf8




Back to Chandler Cornered


Creative web design and Search Engine Optimisation by Spiderwriting Web Design