Nakamura-Sasikiran and Junk Openings
The chess world was abuzz today due to Hikaru Nakamura's unusual opening choice against Indian GM Krishnan Sasikiran: 1.e4 e5 2.Qh5!? Black won, but White's experiment was a success, as he achieved a significant advantage out of the opening.
Black attempted to meet Nakamura's idea in a "respectful" manner, but I wonder if he should have. Take a look at the previous post, Responding to Junk Openings, then take a careful look at the position after White's second move. Is 2.Qh5 a joke? If so - and maybe even if it isn't - then 2...Nf6 may be the psychologically correct response. What would you do?
Nakamura,Hikaru (2657) - Sasikiran,Krishnan (2642) [C20]
13th Sigeman & Co Copenhagen/Malmoe DEN (7), 22.04.2005
1.e4 e5 2.Qh5
What? Does Nakamura expect to mate his opponent on move 4?? No, not at all - and not because he's hoping for 2...Ke7?? 3.Qxe5#, either. But then what IS the point? For starters, I wouldn't rule out purely psychological motives: Sasikiran is a strong GM, and it would be embarrassing to be known as a player who lost to what we might call the Scholar's Mate Attack - a factor that might put some pressure on him during the game. Second, it might be a bit of showing off, a way of not-so-humbly announcing to the world that "I can play anything and still win". I suspect both motives are at work, but I don't think Nakamura would have played it unless he had some confidence in the move's possibilities. The White queen will end up on g3 or h4, depending on Black's reaction, and both are pretty common squares for a White queen in some middlegames (in Sicilians and French Defenses, for example). What makes the idea unusual is that it seems to get things backward: usually a player stakes out certain squares with pawns, then brings out the minor pieces (knights before bishops, according to textbook wisdom) to help in the battle for the center and to get the king castled, and only then to worry about the queen, rooks and whatever pawn breaks are needed to make further progress. 2.Qh5 might seem less flexible than the normal 2.Nf3, but it forces Black to make committal decisions as well; in particular, Black is more or less forced to fianchetto the king's bishop, and while it isn't horrible there, it's not as active as it would be on the a7-g1 diagonal. 2...Nc6 And now, what ought Black to do? Should he view 2.Qh5 as a junk opening, as a provocation deserving to be one-upped? [2...Nf6!? is the move I always play when facing this in blitz, and it might even be sound! The following is a first attempt at some serious, computer-aided analysis, and surprisingly enough, Black seems to be doing pretty well. 3.Qxe5+ (3.Qh4 Be7 4.Nf3 d5 5.exd5 Nxd5 6.Qe4 Nf6 7.Qxe5 0-0 8.Be2 Nc6 9.Qf4 Nb4 10.Na3 Re8-/+) 3...Be7 4.Nc3 (4.d3 Nc6 5.Qf4 0-0=/+) 4...Nc6 5.Qf4 Nb4 (5...d5 6.e5 Nh5 7.Qf3 Nd4 8.Qxh5 Nxc2+ 9.Kd1 Nxa1 10.d4 Be6 11.Bd3 Qd7 12.h3 0-0-0 13.b3 f6 14.Bb2 fxe5 15.Qxe5 Bd6 16.Qe2 favors White.; 5...0-0 6.e5 Ne8 7.d4 d5 8.Nf3 f6 9.Qg3 Nb4 10.Bd3 Nxd3+ 11.cxd3 Bf5 12.0-0 c6 is approximately equal.) 6.Kd1 d5 (6...0-0 7.a3 Nc6 8.e5 Ne8 9.Qe4 d6 10.f4 g6 11.Nf3 Bf5=/+) 7.a3 (7.e5 Ng4 (7...Ne4 8.Nxe4 dxe4 9.Qxe4 Be6 10.c3 Nc6 11.d4 Qd7 12.Nf3 Bf5 13.Qf4+/=) 8.Bb5+ (8.d4 f6 9.e6 Bxe6 10.a3 Nc6-/+) 8...c6 9.Be2 g5 10.Qg3 Nh6 11.f4 g4-/+) 7...d4 8.axb4 dxc3 9.bxc3 0-0 leaves Black good compensation for the pawns.] 3.Bc4 g6 4.Qf3 Nf6 5.Ne2 Bg7 6.Nbc3 d6 7.d3 Bg4
[We're in virgin territory, as far as I can tell with my databases, and it looks like Black has equalized with all normal, natural moves.] 8.Qg3 Qd7 [8...Nb4 9.Bb3 Be6 might at first seem to win a pawn (or force White to either give up castling with 10.Kd1 or recapture with the c-pawn after 10.O-O Bxb3 11.cxb3), but White can save it with 10.Ba4+ followed by a timely a3.] 9.f3 Be6 10.Bg5 Nh5 11.Qh4 h6 12.Be3
[But now White seems to have an edge! The players' pieces are about equally active, but White is better organized for f4 or d4 than Black is to play d5 or f5.] 12...Na5 13.Bb3 [13.Bxe6 looks even better. It's not so much that Black gains the two bishops after White's choice, as that Black's knights are misplaced and White will gain time while Black returns them to better squares. Further, Black has to recapture with the pawn, which leaves g6 a little weak as well: 13...fxe6 (13...Qxe6 14.Nd5 Qd7 15.g4 c6 16.gxh5 cxd5 17.hxg6+-) 14.0-0-0 Nc6 15.Rhf1 Nf6 16.Qg3 Qf7 17.f4+/-] 13...Nxb3 14.axb3 a6 15.d4 Qe7 16.Qf2 exd4 17.Bxd4 Nf6 [17...0-0 18.Bxg7 Kxg7 19.0-0-0 Qg5++/=] 18.0-0-0 [18.0-0] 18...0-0-0 19.Nf4 Rhg8 20.Rhe1 Kb8 21.Kb1+/- g5 22.Nfe2 [22.Nfd5 Bxd5 23.exd5 Qd7 24.g4+/-] 22...Rge8? [22...c5 23.Be3 Nd7 24.Nd5 Bxd5 25.Rxd5+/-] 23.g4? [23.e5 wins! If the knight moves to a square that doesn't protect the Bg7, then 24.exd6 wins a pawn. 23...Nh5 runs into 24.g4 followed by exd6 (24...dxe5 25.Ba7+); finally, 23...dxe5 24.Ba7+ Ka8 25.Bc5+- wins the exchange.] 23...Qf8 24.Ng3 [24.h4+/=] 24...Nd7 25.Be3 Qh8!=
At this point Sasikiran has (at least) equalized the chances, due to his strong control over the central dark squares and the long diagonal in general. Nevertheless, despite Black's eventual victory in this game, White's experiment was a success: he created an interesting, imbalanced position he had undoubtedly thought about more than his opponent (who researches 2.Qh5?), and it resulted in a clear White advantage. The question now is whether we'll ever see it again at the GM level. 26.Nge2 Be5 27.h4 Qg7 28.Rh1 Nf6 29.Bd4 Nd7 30.Qe3 Qf6 31.hxg5 hxg5 32.Bxe5 Qxe5 33.Rh5 Rg8 34.Nd5 Rde8 35.Qc1 Qg7 36.Ne3 Nf6 37.Rh2 Rh8 38.Rg2 Nd7 39.Nd4 Rh3 40.c4 Qf6 41.Rf2 Reh8 42.b4 Qe5 43.c5 dxc5 44.bxc5 Nxc5 45.Qc3 f6 46.Rc2 Na4 47.Qb4 Bd7-/+ 48.Nb3 Rh1 49.Rxh1 Rxh1+ 50.Ka2 Nb6 51.Qf8+ Qe8 52.Qxe8+ Bxe8 53.Nc5 Nd7 54.Nxd7+ Bxd7 55.Kb3 Re1 56.Rc3 Be6+-+ 57.Kc2 Re2+ 58.Kc1 a5 59.Nc2 Rf2 60.Nd4 Bd7 61.Rc5 b6 62.Rd5 Kc8 63.e5 fxe5 64.Rxe5 c5 65.Nb3 Rf1+ [65...Rxf3? 66.Nxc5! bxc5 67.Rxc5+ Kb7 68.Rxa5 Bxg4 69.Rxg5=] 66.Kd2 a4 67.Nxc5 bxc5 68.Rxc5+ Kb7 69.Rxg5 Rxf3 70.Rd5 Be6 71.Rd3
71...Rf1 [71...Rxd3+?? only draws. 72.Kxd3 Bxg4 (72...Kb6 73.Kc3 Kc5 74.g5 Bf7 75.g6 Bc4 76.g7 Bg8 77.Kc2 Kb4 78.Kb1 Kb3 79.Ka1 just makes the inevitable take longer, but gives Black no more winning chances than before.) 73.Kc2 Kc6 74.b3 a3 75.Kb1 Kb5 76.Ka2 Kb4 77.Ka1 Kxb3 is a well-known theoretical draw: because the bishop is of the wrong color relative to the pawn (this only applies to rook's pawns), there is no way to force mate or promotion - Black's powers do not extend beyond the ability to force stalemate.] 72.Rg3 Rf2+ 73.Kc3 Kb6 74.Kb4 Rf4+ 75.Ka3 Kb5 76.Re3 Bd5 77.Rd3 Bc4 78.Re3 Rd4 79.g5 Rd1 80.b3 [80.Re5+ Bd5 and the threat of 81...Ra1# forces White to give up material.] 80...axb3 81.Re8 Ra1+ 82.Kb2 Ra2+ 83.Kc3 Rc2+ 84.Kd4 b2 85.Rb8+ Ka4 86.g6 Bb5 87.g7 b1Q [87...b1Q 88.g8Q Qd1+ 89.Ke5 Re2+ 90.Kf6 Qf1+ 91.Kg7 Rg2+ 92.Kh8 Qa1+ 93.Kh7 Qh1#] 0-1
Black attempted to meet Nakamura's idea in a "respectful" manner, but I wonder if he should have. Take a look at the previous post, Responding to Junk Openings, then take a careful look at the position after White's second move. Is 2.Qh5 a joke? If so - and maybe even if it isn't - then 2...Nf6 may be the psychologically correct response. What would you do?
Nakamura,Hikaru (2657) - Sasikiran,Krishnan (2642) [C20]
13th Sigeman & Co Copenhagen/Malmoe DEN (7), 22.04.2005
1.e4 e5 2.Qh5
What? Does Nakamura expect to mate his opponent on move 4?? No, not at all - and not because he's hoping for 2...Ke7?? 3.Qxe5#, either. But then what IS the point? For starters, I wouldn't rule out purely psychological motives: Sasikiran is a strong GM, and it would be embarrassing to be known as a player who lost to what we might call the Scholar's Mate Attack - a factor that might put some pressure on him during the game. Second, it might be a bit of showing off, a way of not-so-humbly announcing to the world that "I can play anything and still win". I suspect both motives are at work, but I don't think Nakamura would have played it unless he had some confidence in the move's possibilities. The White queen will end up on g3 or h4, depending on Black's reaction, and both are pretty common squares for a White queen in some middlegames (in Sicilians and French Defenses, for example). What makes the idea unusual is that it seems to get things backward: usually a player stakes out certain squares with pawns, then brings out the minor pieces (knights before bishops, according to textbook wisdom) to help in the battle for the center and to get the king castled, and only then to worry about the queen, rooks and whatever pawn breaks are needed to make further progress. 2.Qh5 might seem less flexible than the normal 2.Nf3, but it forces Black to make committal decisions as well; in particular, Black is more or less forced to fianchetto the king's bishop, and while it isn't horrible there, it's not as active as it would be on the a7-g1 diagonal. 2...Nc6 And now, what ought Black to do? Should he view 2.Qh5 as a junk opening, as a provocation deserving to be one-upped? [2...Nf6!? is the move I always play when facing this in blitz, and it might even be sound! The following is a first attempt at some serious, computer-aided analysis, and surprisingly enough, Black seems to be doing pretty well. 3.Qxe5+ (3.Qh4 Be7 4.Nf3 d5 5.exd5 Nxd5 6.Qe4 Nf6 7.Qxe5 0-0 8.Be2 Nc6 9.Qf4 Nb4 10.Na3 Re8-/+) 3...Be7 4.Nc3 (4.d3 Nc6 5.Qf4 0-0=/+) 4...Nc6 5.Qf4 Nb4 (5...d5 6.e5 Nh5 7.Qf3 Nd4 8.Qxh5 Nxc2+ 9.Kd1 Nxa1 10.d4 Be6 11.Bd3 Qd7 12.h3 0-0-0 13.b3 f6 14.Bb2 fxe5 15.Qxe5 Bd6 16.Qe2 favors White.; 5...0-0 6.e5 Ne8 7.d4 d5 8.Nf3 f6 9.Qg3 Nb4 10.Bd3 Nxd3+ 11.cxd3 Bf5 12.0-0 c6 is approximately equal.) 6.Kd1 d5 (6...0-0 7.a3 Nc6 8.e5 Ne8 9.Qe4 d6 10.f4 g6 11.Nf3 Bf5=/+) 7.a3 (7.e5 Ng4 (7...Ne4 8.Nxe4 dxe4 9.Qxe4 Be6 10.c3 Nc6 11.d4 Qd7 12.Nf3 Bf5 13.Qf4+/=) 8.Bb5+ (8.d4 f6 9.e6 Bxe6 10.a3 Nc6-/+) 8...c6 9.Be2 g5 10.Qg3 Nh6 11.f4 g4-/+) 7...d4 8.axb4 dxc3 9.bxc3 0-0 leaves Black good compensation for the pawns.] 3.Bc4 g6 4.Qf3 Nf6 5.Ne2 Bg7 6.Nbc3 d6 7.d3 Bg4
[We're in virgin territory, as far as I can tell with my databases, and it looks like Black has equalized with all normal, natural moves.] 8.Qg3 Qd7 [8...Nb4 9.Bb3 Be6 might at first seem to win a pawn (or force White to either give up castling with 10.Kd1 or recapture with the c-pawn after 10.O-O Bxb3 11.cxb3), but White can save it with 10.Ba4+ followed by a timely a3.] 9.f3 Be6 10.Bg5 Nh5 11.Qh4 h6 12.Be3
[But now White seems to have an edge! The players' pieces are about equally active, but White is better organized for f4 or d4 than Black is to play d5 or f5.] 12...Na5 13.Bb3 [13.Bxe6 looks even better. It's not so much that Black gains the two bishops after White's choice, as that Black's knights are misplaced and White will gain time while Black returns them to better squares. Further, Black has to recapture with the pawn, which leaves g6 a little weak as well: 13...fxe6 (13...Qxe6 14.Nd5 Qd7 15.g4 c6 16.gxh5 cxd5 17.hxg6+-) 14.0-0-0 Nc6 15.Rhf1 Nf6 16.Qg3 Qf7 17.f4+/-] 13...Nxb3 14.axb3 a6 15.d4 Qe7 16.Qf2 exd4 17.Bxd4 Nf6 [17...0-0 18.Bxg7 Kxg7 19.0-0-0 Qg5++/=] 18.0-0-0 [18.0-0] 18...0-0-0 19.Nf4 Rhg8 20.Rhe1 Kb8 21.Kb1+/- g5 22.Nfe2 [22.Nfd5 Bxd5 23.exd5 Qd7 24.g4+/-] 22...Rge8? [22...c5 23.Be3 Nd7 24.Nd5 Bxd5 25.Rxd5+/-] 23.g4? [23.e5 wins! If the knight moves to a square that doesn't protect the Bg7, then 24.exd6 wins a pawn. 23...Nh5 runs into 24.g4 followed by exd6 (24...dxe5 25.Ba7+); finally, 23...dxe5 24.Ba7+ Ka8 25.Bc5+- wins the exchange.] 23...Qf8 24.Ng3 [24.h4+/=] 24...Nd7 25.Be3 Qh8!=
At this point Sasikiran has (at least) equalized the chances, due to his strong control over the central dark squares and the long diagonal in general. Nevertheless, despite Black's eventual victory in this game, White's experiment was a success: he created an interesting, imbalanced position he had undoubtedly thought about more than his opponent (who researches 2.Qh5?), and it resulted in a clear White advantage. The question now is whether we'll ever see it again at the GM level. 26.Nge2 Be5 27.h4 Qg7 28.Rh1 Nf6 29.Bd4 Nd7 30.Qe3 Qf6 31.hxg5 hxg5 32.Bxe5 Qxe5 33.Rh5 Rg8 34.Nd5 Rde8 35.Qc1 Qg7 36.Ne3 Nf6 37.Rh2 Rh8 38.Rg2 Nd7 39.Nd4 Rh3 40.c4 Qf6 41.Rf2 Reh8 42.b4 Qe5 43.c5 dxc5 44.bxc5 Nxc5 45.Qc3 f6 46.Rc2 Na4 47.Qb4 Bd7-/+ 48.Nb3 Rh1 49.Rxh1 Rxh1+ 50.Ka2 Nb6 51.Qf8+ Qe8 52.Qxe8+ Bxe8 53.Nc5 Nd7 54.Nxd7+ Bxd7 55.Kb3 Re1 56.Rc3 Be6+-+ 57.Kc2 Re2+ 58.Kc1 a5 59.Nc2 Rf2 60.Nd4 Bd7 61.Rc5 b6 62.Rd5 Kc8 63.e5 fxe5 64.Rxe5 c5 65.Nb3 Rf1+ [65...Rxf3? 66.Nxc5! bxc5 67.Rxc5+ Kb7 68.Rxa5 Bxg4 69.Rxg5=] 66.Kd2 a4 67.Nxc5 bxc5 68.Rxc5+ Kb7 69.Rxg5 Rxf3 70.Rd5 Be6 71.Rd3
71...Rf1 [71...Rxd3+?? only draws. 72.Kxd3 Bxg4 (72...Kb6 73.Kc3 Kc5 74.g5 Bf7 75.g6 Bc4 76.g7 Bg8 77.Kc2 Kb4 78.Kb1 Kb3 79.Ka1 just makes the inevitable take longer, but gives Black no more winning chances than before.) 73.Kc2 Kc6 74.b3 a3 75.Kb1 Kb5 76.Ka2 Kb4 77.Ka1 Kxb3 is a well-known theoretical draw: because the bishop is of the wrong color relative to the pawn (this only applies to rook's pawns), there is no way to force mate or promotion - Black's powers do not extend beyond the ability to force stalemate.] 72.Rg3 Rf2+ 73.Kc3 Kb6 74.Kb4 Rf4+ 75.Ka3 Kb5 76.Re3 Bd5 77.Rd3 Bc4 78.Re3 Rd4 79.g5 Rd1 80.b3 [80.Re5+ Bd5 and the threat of 81...Ra1# forces White to give up material.] 80...axb3 81.Re8 Ra1+ 82.Kb2 Ra2+ 83.Kc3 Rc2+ 84.Kd4 b2 85.Rb8+ Ka4 86.g6 Bb5 87.g7 b1Q [87...b1Q 88.g8Q Qd1+ 89.Ke5 Re2+ 90.Kf6 Qf1+ 91.Kg7 Rg2+ 92.Kh8 Qa1+ 93.Kh7 Qh1#] 0-1
Posted by chessmind on
Saturday April 23, 2005 at 12:47am