Banner Breakout Samb - Ba

Damkunst

Samb - Ba

Author: Ronald Schalley
15-03-2025

For an interview with Ndiaga Samb and a selection of his games from 1991-1998, I can wholeheartedly refer to Dammen 131/132 by Ton Sijbrands. However, I would like to take a moment to revisit this period, as Senegal had three golden assets at the time.

The first of these, Bassirou Ba, participated four times in the renowned Suikertoernooi between 1973 and 1976. In his first appearance, he won the B-group and would go on to compete in the main group in the following years, demonstrating his talent.

After that, he disappeared from the scene for a while.

Between 1980 and 1982, Ba made a brief return. He secured an impressive second place in the prestigious Bamako tournament—although at a considerable distance from the winner, Ton Sijbrands—finishing on equal points with Malian player Mamina N’Diaye, who at the time was regarded as the strongest player on the African continent. A similar scenario unfolded at the Jubileumtoernooi in IJmuiden in 1980: this time, he finished just one point behind Sijbrands, sharing second place with Jeroen Sterel.

However, his greatest success came in the summer of that year. In Dakar, he crowned himself the first African champion, finishing three points ahead of Ivorian Issa Traore and his compatriot Ameth Diaw. His performance at the World Championship in Bamako, however, was somewhat disappointing. As African champion, he only managed to reach somewhere in the middle of the pack. He would not appear again in the 1980s, except in 1982, when he won bronze at the African Championship.

For those who want to know the full story, I recommend the interview with him in Dammen 77/78.

The ‘void’ left in the 1980s was filled by several compatriots, but Macodou N’Diaye was clearly the strongest among them. In 1985, he immediately secured second place at the African Championship, and then went on to win the next four (!) editions. A new African heavyweight had emerged, but this was not yet reflected in the World Championships of the 1980s. In 1986, he had to settle for a modest position near the bottom of the rankings, and at the 1988 World Championship, plagued by malaria, he had to withdraw after 10 rounds (with 11 points). The story of ‘Mac’ can also be found in Dammen, specifically in issue 61.

Samb’s first digital ‘recording’ in Toernooibase also dates back to the 1980s. In 1989, he won bronze at the National Championship, where N’Diaye’s struggles stood out—he only managed seventh place.

By 1990, our three heroes were back in the arena. At the National Championship, Samb claimed the title, finishing two points ahead of Ba and three ahead of N’Diaye. From that moment on, they made waves abroad. The names Ba, N’Diaye, and Samb commanded admiration and respect.

N’Diaye was clearly at his peak and achieved an impressive fourth place at the 1990 World Championship, a feat he would repeat in 1994. The same tournament in 1994 saw another outstanding performance: Ba finished sixth, finally breaking into the world’s elite.

And Samb? He showcased his talents in the 1990s by winning several prestigious tournaments: Brunssum 1991, Dakar 1991 (ahead of Schwarzman and Sijbrands!). However, he struggled in title tournaments. He only managed to win the African Championship for the first time in 2016, and his best World Championship performance came in 2005, when he secured a remarkable fifth place in an incredibly strong field.

Could this be related to his playing style? One might say he was a rough diamond that only truly developed one or two decades later.

Of the three golden players, Ba perhaps had the calmest style. He mastered both the classical approach and the attacking game exceptionally well and was razor-sharp in punishing his opponent’s mistakes.

Macodou N’Diaye quickly adapted to a more European style, making him difficult to beat, but against opponents he wanted to defeat, he adopted a slightly more aggressive approach.

Samb, however, had the African style running through his veins. It’s a bit like the story of the scorpion and the frog. When I spoke to him in 2007 after a clock loss against Yuri Lagoda, he told me that on multiple occasions, he had avoided drawish exchanges because he was determined to win, which caused him to use up too much time in an attempt to put his opponent under maximum pressure. It was also difficult for him not to take on challenges, even when he knew there was a fair chance he would go under—especially against the absolute top grandmasters. The other two were much more pragmatic in this regard, keeping their emotions in check, particularly in title tournaments.

And what about their mutual encounters? Samb and N’Diaye seemed to have a peace pact. All their recorded games in Turbo Dambase ended in bloodless draws—except for one game, where N’Diaye had to work for the draw.

The duels between Ba and Samb, however, were far less uneventful. Of the 31 encounters in Turbo Dambase, ten ended decisively: Samb won six, while Ba won four. Their 1998 match at the tournament in The Hague stands out, with Samb securing a victory in the classical style—an area where his opponent was known to be particularly strong.

Bord omdraaien Bord kleur Exporteren naar pdn Download als afbeelding

Ndiaga Samb - Bassirou Ba (19-07-1998)

This 11x11 classical position has appeared on the board before, specifically in the game Helmond-Van Velzen at the Culemborg youth tournament in 1993, although with reversed colors. While analysis programs would have us believe that the positions are completely equal, it is primarily Black who faces a few problematic positional characteristics: the inactive piece on square 15 and, if White manages to reduce the position to a 10x10 setting with the exchange 34-29x39, a slight lead in development. This means that while the position may not be lost, it might still be slightly less equal for Black than for White (George Orwell). 38....17-21!Black could also have considered 38...23-29?!39.34x2318x29after which White, if still harboring winning ambitions, has an important decision to make: A)40.27-22?Black can respond with a combination: 19-23!41.30x812x342.28x1017x50=B)40.44-39?17-21!
White suddenly finds themselves in a problematic position and must now play very precisely to secure a draw. Those who want to learn more about this position should look up the game Desmet-Schalley E., LIM-damdag 2021 in Toernooibase, paying special attention to the accompanying commentary.
C)40.44-40!Just like the previous line of play, I have thoroughly analyzed this position—which has never occurred in practice—in the context of Barteling’s position, where this is one of the possible deviations. Now, it is Black who must demonstrate the necessary precision to secure a draw: 13-18!
This position appeared in the games Van de Weteringh - Van den Hoek (2005) and Spaans - Leimena (2011). Alleen zo! Niet goed zijn 40...17-21??41.28-23!19x3942.30x1721x1243.40-3429x4044.35x33en 40...15-20?41.27-21!16x2742.32x2113-1843.28-2319x3944.30x1041.28-23!19x3942.30x1015x443.37-31!In both games, however, the continuation was 43.40-34?leading to a draw not long after. 26x2844.40-3429x4045.35x13
45....17-2146.38-3221-26
With Black to move, this position would be lost. However, it is White's turn, which places piece 25 on a vulnerable path. 47.25-2016-2148.27x1612-18*After 48...26-31?, the following elegant win is possible: 49.32-27!31x2250.16-1122-2751.11-627-3252.6-112-1753.1-2932-3754.29-4717-2255.13-822-2856.8-328-3357.47x24!37-41
58.20-14!!41-46*59.24-19!!4-960.3-8!9x2061.19-5!
49.13x2226-31The position on the board is a highly promising endgame, yet the database indicates that with precise play from Black, it cannot be won. A particularly troublesome moment arises in this position, where the move 4-10! poses a serious obstacle. Consequently, White has two possible plans: one involving the piece on square 15 and another in which White leaves the piece hanging. This complete endgame can be found in Hoofdlijn 228 (pp. 5, starting from diagram 43). Here, I will suffice with a brief variant: 50.20-1531-3651.16-1136-4152.11-741-4653.32-2746-1954.7-219-35!55.22-184-9!56.27-219-14!
39.34-29!23x3440.30x39...
Besides the aforementioned game, this position also appeared in 1947 in the game Krikke - Van Daalhuizen, again with reversed colors. In all three games, the players with Black continued with: 40....12-17?!Once again, one could debate whether this is the most effective continuation. For those who enjoy theory, the position after 40...18-23!?41.44-4012-18!42.40-3415-20!43.34-30
is well known. After 43....23-29!44.28-23!19x2845.32x12!21x3446.30x1029x3847.25x14, Kingsrow evaluates it as a draw, but White can still make significant progress after 47....38-4348.10-413-1949.14x2343-4950.35-30!34x2551.12-725-3052.7-130-3453.1-649-35*54.6-5034-4055.4-3640-4556.37-32and Black still has to secure the draw.
41.44-4017-22Because now 41...18-23?42.40-34!proves to be unsustainable (as evidenced by numerous practical examples, the oldest being Delhom-Sjawel, European Championship 1977, with reversed colors), not even after 13-1843.28-22!17x2844.33x1319x845.27-22!and so on. 42.28x1721x1243.33-28...
A position that frequently appears in practice, making it important to understand its true value. The practical examples confirm this as well: out of 20 games, only 2(!) ended in a draw. 43....18-23(?) Even if this does not turn out to be the decisive mistake, Black must already switch to 43...15-20!, a move that was not played in any of the 23 practical examples I have at my disposal. After 44.38-33or also 44.39-3318-23!45.40-3423-29!46.34x2313-18=18-2345.40-34, the double sacrifice 45....23-29!46.34x2316-21!47.27x1613-18is the safest path to a draw: 48.32-2718x38This position has appeared through a different route in two games. After 49.16-1112-1750.11x2224-2951.35-3029-3452.39-3338x2953.30x3920-24Black escapes with a draw. (Keizer-Kloosterman, club competition 1993, with reversed colors) 44.40-34!...This deprives Black of access to square 29. 44....12-17After 44...12-18?45.38-3315-2046.34-3023-2947.28-22!29x3848.32x43Black falls victim to the arrow lock. And the line 44...13-18?45.34-30!12-1746.38-3317-2147.39-34has been covered earlier. 45.34-30...
The key moment of the game. Black has managed to equalize the tempo balance but is still struggling with the inactive piece on square 15. 45....13-18?Only now does Black make the decisive mistake, but securing a draw was already far from straightforward. Thus, after the sacrifice 45...16-21?46.27x1613-1847.38-33!, Black can offer little resistance (although I once managed to escape with a draw in a blitz game...). However, a not-so-simple draw can still be found in the line 45...17-2146.27-2215-2047.39-3323-2948.37-3126x3749.32x41
, but only through the sacrifice 49....21-27!50.22x3113-18!as the Italian Laporta almost demonstrated against former world champion Shchegolev at the 1966 World Championship qualification tournament. Almost, because after 51.41-3716-21!52.37-32
52....19-23!53.28x1021-26!54.30x1926x3955.25x1439-4456.10-444-49!57.4x36things still went wrong for Black: 57....49x16?Which mortal immediately sees that 57...49x21!still leads to a draw after 58.14-1029-33!59.10-521-3!60.36-2733-39!61.27-493-8!62.19-148-2!58.14-10!16-2and Black lost due to the finesse However, also 58...29-3359.10-5!16-4960.36-47!loses. 59.10-5!2x2460.5-2329x1861.36x30
46.38-33!26-31What else? After 46...17-2147.39-3415-2014-2048.25x1419x1049.30x1923x14loses a piece after 50.28-22!48.34-2923x3449.30x3918-2350.39-34!Black is completely locked in, and other lines have either already been covered or lose quickly. 47.27x3617-2148.37-3114-2049.25x1419x1050.30x1923x1451.33-2915-2052.39-3421-2653.31-2726-3154.28-22...And Ba resigned.

Click here to return to the overview.
Have you seen a (spelling) mistake? Mail to [email protected].