Damkunst | Analyse

The game I want to analyse was played in spring 1989 in Cannes and is historic in more ways than one. At that time, the Netherlands-Soviet Union interland was still played every year, and the Netherlands had never won. The so-called Coupe du Monde, a kind of world championship for continental teams, was held in Cannes. The USSR and the Netherlands were considered continents. The first edition of that tournament was held in 1985 in Valkenburg and was won my the USSR (Gantvarg, Korenievski, Shchegolev) followed by the Netherlands (Wiersma, Sijbrands, Clerc), Africa, America and Europe A and B.
Until then, the only Dutch team success was in 1978 in Tbilisi at the European Championship for national teams. In that tournament, entering the final round, it was sufficient for the Netherlands to play a draw (3-3). After quick draws by Wiersma (26 moves against Gantvarg) and Sijbrands (24 moves against Mistchanski), I was fortunate that Shchegolev, in a whim of insanity, gave away a piece and lost.
In Cannes, the Netherlands (Clerc, Van der Wal, G.Jansen, Wesselink) led with a score of 100 per cent going into the final round. Of course, the Soviet Union (Chizhov, Gantvarg, Baliakin, Valneris) was on the programme in the final round. The Soviet Union had surprisingly lost a point against America by four draws, Baliakin's against Birnman being miraculous. Also present then were America and Europe A, B and C. Conspicuously absent from Cannes 1989 was Africa. To my knowledge, the Coupe du Monde was never again held.
During my time as national coach (2008-2020), the World Cup of Nations teams was never even held. Unfortunately, Russia was absent from both Turkey (2022) and Portugal in May 2024. The only World Cup national teams I experienced was in 2012 in Lille, but that was a rapid tournament.
In that all-decisive final round in Cannes, Jannes van der Wal played a draw against Gantvarg, despite a big advantage. Gérard Jansen defeated Baliakin on the third board. The Huissen native had become European champion in Moscow in 1987 with the fabulous score of 23 out of 13! On the fourth board, Wieger Wesselink played an eventful draw against Valneris.
I want to analyse the game on the first board. My opponent had just become world champion for the first time in Paramaribo in the autumn of 1988.
Turbo Dambase lists 30 games between Chizhov and me. Of those 30 games, 25 ended in a draw. They are not all equally interesting, but there are plenty of games in which the battle was at the cutting edge. Among them are also games with shorter time controls. Of the games with classical time control, we both won two. Chizhov's third victory was with shorter time control. After the 1996 world championship in Ivory Coast, the necessary barrage for the title in the spring of 1997 in Groningen ended in six draws, after which a game with shorter time control brought the decision.

1.32-28 19-23 2.28x19 14x23 3.37-32 10-14 4.41-37 5-10 5.46-41 14-19

The continuation 5...17-21 had been played at the highest level since 1983, but became really popular later.

6.35-30 20-25

In his analysis of this game, Jannes van der Wal wrote in Het Vrije Volk at the time after this move: „Against Chizhov, you have to play flank play, because he doesn't know it: he prefers to play classical."

7.40-35 15-20 8.44-40 20-24 9.50-44 17-21 10.31-26 21-27 11.32x21 16x27 12.33-28 23x32 13.37x28 11-17

14.28-23 19x28 15.30x19 13x24 16.34-30 25x34 17.40x20 7-11 18.20-15 1-7

19.45-40

At a training event on 28-5-1989, I played position with white against Mike Voskamp:

19.44-40 8-13 20.40-34 2-8 21.34-30 10-14 22.45-40 17-22 23.41-37 18-23 24.40-34 14-19 25.30-25 11-17 26.34-29 23x34 27.39x30 19-23 28.43-39

9-14?? 29.39-33! +.

19...10-14 20.40-34

So far it's all opening theory. My next move is based on preventing 41-37. Absolutely logical.

8-13!

21.42-37?

Chizhov regretted this move after the game. It is indeed a hefty concession. Better are waiting moves on the right wing until 41-37 becomes possible. Moreover, the text move seems to foreshadow a 48-42 setup, and I will come back to the playing up of the golden piece later.

To illustrate the white possibilities if 42-37 is not played, have a look at the game between Pieter Steijlen-Wim van der Kooij (Ereklasse 2007): 21.38-33 17-22 22.44-40 11-17 23.34-29 6-11 24.40-34 13-19 25.35-30 19-23 26.41-37

2-8? 27.42-38! 11-16 28.30-24! In the game 17-21

followed, but even after 28...8-13 it was immediately won for white by 29.38-32! 27x38 30.43x32! 16-21* 31.36-31! +.

29.26x17 12x21 30.34-30! 23x25 31.24-19 14x23 32.33-29 23x34 33.39x30 25x34 34.38-32 27x38 35.43x1 +.

Here there is nothing to criticise about the white game, but the black game all the more. Also illustrative is the following game from the 1984 World Cup Baljakin-Dubois, although 44 was still on 45, 13 on 8 and 34 on 40. Game:

[Click here to go to Baliakin-Dubois 1984.]

21...17-22

This is the most logical but also the best move.

The wait-and-see 21...2-8 is less accurate: 22.48-42

17-22?

A big exchange is possible by 22...27-32 23.38x27 11-16 24.34-29 or? And now black can simplify with first 18-23 25.29x18 13x31 26.36x27 and only then 28-33 27.39x28 17-21 28.26x17 12x23

23.34-29! and black has the problem that 11-17? just loses a piece: 24.38-32! 27x38 25.43x23 13-19 26.29-24! + and 23...18-23 can obviously not be black's intention.

22.48-42 11-17 23.34-30 6-11 24.30-25

Black strengthened his attack with healthy moves and I felt more than comfortable here.

2-8! 25.38-32

What else should white do? Moving the outpost to square 29 is logical, but from this moment on, black targets white's short wing.

27x38 26.43x23 18x29 27.37-32 13-18

For the next ten moves, black plays everything to the left except for an mandatory move. The intent of an attack against the hostile short wing is clear.

28.41-37 8-13 29.42-38 13-19 30.37-31 18-23 31.44-40

A serious alternative for white is 31.32-27 and black has many options like 19-24 and 23-28 or immediately 23-28, but the most logical one still seems to me to be 22-28 32.27-21 and after 28-33 33.39x28 23x43 34.49x38 19-24 35.44-39 black should break the formation 3/9/14...

31...19-24

32.49-43 14-20!undefined

The actual beginning of the attack against the white right wing! Obviously with thanks to the golden piece. In this context, I allow myself a side-step in honour of the golden piece!
Here is an interlude with two diagrams reflecting the power of the golden piece.

[Click here to go to "Cross of Keller".]

33.25x14 9x20 34.40-34 29x40 35.35x44 20-25 36.31-27 22x31 37.26x37

23-29!

Puts the finger on the sore spot. It is clear that white has to worry about defending its right wing.

38.44-40

In his column in Het Vrije Volk, Jannes wrote: „This move was accompanied by Chizhov's offer of a draw. But both players had noted that Wesselink on the fourth board had run into trouble against Valneris, and this fact was enough to continue fiercely in this favourable position." Anno 2024, of course, I don't remember anything about a draw offer by Chizhov. I would say: if you don't play for a win here, when will you?

12-18

Of course not 38...24-30 39.40-35 29-34 40.35x24 34-40 41.39-34! nor 39...30-34x34 41.32-28! and the black position is split (41...12-18 43.28-23).

39.39-33 25-30 40.43-39 7-12

41.36-31

The alternative 41.39-34 30x28 42.32x34 24-29! 43.34x23 18x29 does not look right for white. A human now concludes to big advantage for black. The Kingsrow programme, however, 'simply' concludes to a draw. The value of this computer valuation is however next to nil for human beings in practical situation

30-35 42.31-26 35x44 43.39x50 29-34

The attack is gaining speed! A breakthrough is coming in the long run. Black not only has a strong outpost, but also piece 15 is getting weaker.

44.47-42 3-9 45.32-27

9-13

In the game, I hardly looked at any alternatives. This is the most logical move, because the manoeuvre with 4-10 and 13-19 remains intact. Of course, in analysis I looked to see if there is a better move and the computer does come up with the alternative of immediately launching the attack against the white right wing: 45...24-30! 46.38-32 and now: 30-35

Even more curious is 46...34-40 47.32-28 40-45 48.33-29 30-35 49.42-38 9-14 50.38-33 14-19 51.37-32 35-40

also 51...11-16 52.26-21 17x26 53.28-22 will be a draw.

52.27-21 Black almost has a king, but whatever he does, there is no definite win and that is a minor miracle. We distinguish the following variants:

52...11-16 53.29-24 =.
52...40-44 53.50x39 45-50 54.21-16! =.
18-22! 53.21-16 12-18 54.16x7 17-21 55.26x17 22x2 56.32-27 40-44 57.50x39 45-50 58.27-21 50-45 59.15-10 45x16 60.10-5 19-24 This looks very promising for black for a human, but the computer's defence is convincing:

61.5-41! 16-49 or? 62.33-28! 24-30 63.41-47! 30-35 64.47-29=

These are obviously nauseating computer variants that are still draw. According to Kingsrow, it is almost always still a draw. To repeat: the practical value is nil.

However, these variants do almost argue that 45..24-30 is more promising than the game continuation, but then the game sequence would have been withheld from us...

47.32-28 34-40 48.42-38 40-45 49.28-23 18x29 50.33x24 35-40 51.27-21! 11-16

51...40-44 52.50x39 45-50 53.38-32 50x20 54.15x24=

52.37-32 16x27 53.32x21 9-14 54.38-33 40-44 55.50x39 45-50 This is unlikely to be a draw, yet it is:

56.21-16 14-20

56...50-45 57.39-34 45x47 58.26-21=

57.24-19 20-25 58.26-21 17x26 59.16-11=

46.33-28 34-39!

In the game, I was convinced that I was winning and of course I saw the game variation coming. Once again Kingsrow puts an end to all illusions: the diagram position is analytically a draw!!

47.37-32??

White has a surprising save: 47.15-10!! Only this way! Curiously, black cannot win now. Of course, nobody saw this sacrifice during or after the game. 4x15 48.37-32 11-16

48...13-19 49.42-37 18-23 50.50-44!=

48...24-29 49.42-37 and now 29-34 38-33! = or 29-33 38x29 39-43 50-44! =.

49.42-37 16-21 50.27x16 18-22 51.28-23

51.38-33? 39-44! 52.50x39 24-29! 53.33x24 22x44-+

51...13-18 52.37-31 18x29 53.32-27 22-28 54.27-22 28-33 55.22x11 33x42

56.11-6 12-17 57.16-11 39-43 58.11x22 43-48 59.6-1 29-33 60.26-21 42-47 61.21-16 48x26 62.16-11 and black cannot win again. An unlikely save.
Such a computer draw is of course nice for the objective value of the position, but obviously has no practical meaning. I do think it is true that more and more top players are convinced by Kingsrow: even if i have a position that is worse it is always still a draw...

47...4-10! 48.15x4 13-19 49.4x22 19-23 50.28x30 17x48 51.30-25 11-16

White gives up.
After the 6-2 win in the final round, the victory in this Coupe du Monde was celebrated into the early morning of the morning!

Chizhov-Clerc