ArcaMax

Every once in a while, you get to play over a miniature game that you just enjoy because of all its possibilities. I’ve spent some time annotating those possibilities in this game, Gerbec-Weil, Vienna, 1933. Both sides make errors and the king hunts are fascinating. I hope you play over them.

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Ba4 Nf6 5. O-O ...

A truly delightful finish arose in Nadel-Margulies, Berlin, 1932. Mate in three!

Alertness in chess is very important. This game gives one reason why. Kienenger-MRoss, Munich, 1941:1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.g3 b5 7.Bg2 Bb7 [Opposing bishops like this always requires special alertness.]8.0–0 Nbd7 9.Re1 e6? [Black needed to bite the bullet with 9...e5 10.Nf5 Qc7]10.e5! Bxg2 11.exf6 [That's right! White...

The great attacking grandmaster, Paul Keres, in his youth played a good many correspondence games where he used gambits. Here, his opponent didn’t pay attention to development and tried to get material. Bad idea!

The Anti-Max Lange Attack (5…Nxe4 instead of 5…Bc5)leads to active piece play, and this game goes that way for a while. Then, a whole bunch of aimless pawn moves erupt around the board, and that is never good in an open position. It went this way: 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Nf6 4. d4 exd4 5. O-O Nxe4 6. Re1 d5 7. Bxd5 Qxd5 8.Nc3 Qf5 9. Nxe4 ...

Everyone who plays either side of the Scandinavian (Center Counter) Defense should know the idea presented in this position, a game won by Canal in the 1930s. It started out 1. e4 d5 2. exd5 Qxd5 3. Nc3 Qa5 4. d4 c6 5. Nf3 Bg4 6. Bf4 e6 7. h3 Bxf3 8.Qxf3 Bb4 9. Be2 Nd7 10. a3 O-O-O (Black’s better choice was 10... Bxc3+ 11. bxc3 Qd5 [11... O-O...

We haven’t done a composed problem in a while. This one’s a mate in three and pretty easy for a Monday morning.

This opening sacrifice is often tried in 5-minute chess, but has a serious flaw as noted after move 6. However, the game Noordijk-Landau took a different course: 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.Nf3 d6 4.Bc4 Nb6 5.Bxf7+ Kxf7 6.Ng5+ Kg6 [6...Kg8!] 7.Qf3 Kxg5 (See Diagram) Now, White has a mating net. Can you see it all the way out to the end?

GM David Bronstein played both sides of the King’s Gambit. Here, he’s Black: 1. e4 e5 2. f4 exf4 3. Nf3 Nf6 4. e5 Nh5 5. Nc3 d6 6. Bc4 dxe5 7. Nxe5 Qh4+ 8.Kf1 Be6 9. Bxe6 Ng3+ 10. Kg1 (10. hxg3 Qxh1+ 11. Ke2 Qxd1+ 12. Kxd1 fxe6) and now see diagram to figure out the finish…

Here’s a position from a not surprisingly wild King’s Gambit. It was battled in Chicago in 1942 between Nietsche (White) and Faktor (Black): 1. e4 e5 2. f4 exf4 3. Bc4 Qh4+ 4. Kf1 g5 5.Nf3 Qh5 6. h4 d5 7. Bxd5 Nf6 8. Nc3 Nc6 9. Bxc6+ bxc6 10. d4 Ba6+ 11. Kg1 g4 12. Ne5 Black sees that White can consolidate with Bxf4, so he plays…(see ...

Greed in chess can be very dangerous. In this game Black gobbled up two offered rooks by White and paid the price: Brask-Gustafson, 1943:

1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.Bd3 Nf6 5.Bg5 dxe4 6.Bxe4 c5 7.Nf3 cxd4 8.Nxd4 Qa5 9.Bxf6 Bxc3+ 10.bxc3 Qxc3+ 11.Qd2 Qxa1+ Better was equality with 11...Qxd2+ 12.Kxd2 gxf6 13.Nb5 Na6 14.Nd6+ Ke7 15.Nxc8+ Raxc8 16...

A game between two unknowns turned a solid French Defense into a disaster: 1. e4 e6 2. d4 d5 3. Nc3 Nf6 4. Bg5 Be7 5. e5 Nfd7 6. Bxe7 Qxe7 7. Nb5 Qd8 8.Bd3 c6? 9. Nd6+ Ke7 10. Qh5 g6 11. Qh4+ f6 12. Nh3! Na6 13. Nf4 g5 See Diagram And now Black is punished for his sins.

A game contested between Frink and Lecount in Brooklyn, 1923, ended abruptly when White missed a winning defensive move. The game started out 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d6 3.Nf3 Bf5 4.Nh4 Bg6 5.Nxg6 hxg6 6.e4 Nbd7 7.Bc4 e5 8.0–0 c6 9.a4 exd4 10.Qxd4 Ng4 11.h3 Nde5 12.hxg4 See Diagram. The question is—what should White have played on his 12th move and ...

Khloyber-Nagy, Budapest, 1942 went like this: 1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 d6 6. Bg5 a6 7. Qd2 Nd7 8. Be2 g6 9. Nd5 f6 10. Ne6 Qa5 11. Ndc7+ Kf7 12.Nd8+ (taking advantage of the black Nc6 needing to defend the queen) Kg7 and now there are two ways to mate in five: See Diagram

This game between Herman Helms and Oscar Tenner was played in 1942 at 10 seconds a move. You have ten seconds to figure out the solution.

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Bc5 4. b4 Bb6 5. a4 a6 6. a5 Ba7 7. b5 axb5 8. Bxb5 Nf6 9. Ba3 Nxe4 10. Qe2 Nxf2 (Much better was 10... Bxf2+ 11. Kd1 f5) 11. Nxe5 Nd4 (See Diagram)

Today, you have a choice between the spectacular and prosaic way of finishing off this game won by Mieses in a simultaneous exhibition in 1900: 1. e4 e5 2. Nc3 Nf6 3. Bc4 Nxe4 4. Qh5 Nd6 5. Bb3 Be7 6. d3 O-O 7. Nf3 Nc6 8.Ng5 h6 9. h4 Ne8 (What he would have done if Black played 9... Nd4 on this or the next move is unclear.) 10. Nd5 Nf6 See Diagram

A correspondence game ended with a surprise move: 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Nc3 Nc6 4.Bb5 Nd4 5.Ba4 Bc5 6.Nxe5 0–0 7.Nf3 [7.Nd3 is better] 7...d5 8.Nxd4 Bxd4 9.e5 Ng4 [Not 9...Bxe5 10.d4] 10.0–0 Qh4 11.h3 Nxf2 12.Rxf2 Qxf2+ 13.Kh2 See Diagram as White Resigned after Black’s next move.

This game was a twist on a pattern most chess players know: Won by Potter a long time ago: 1. e4 e5 2. d4 exd4 3. Bc4 c5 4. Nf3 d6 5. O-O Nc6 6. c3 d3 7. Re1 Bg4 8. e5 Nxe5 and now you might see the first move, but how about all the rest?(See Diagram)

There’s a tricky opening that is often played at amateur levels. It’s important to know how to meet it, and we’ll see that here, too. The game Schroder-Illgen, Dresden, 1926, went: 1. e4 e5 2. Bc4 Nf6 3. Nf3 Nc6 4. d4 exd4 5. Ng5 d5 6. exd5 Nxd5 (The best defense is: 6... Qe7+ 7. Be2 Nxd5 8. O-O h6 9. Nf3 Qc5 10. Re1 Be7) 7. O-O Be6 8. Re1...

Masters giving simultaneous exhibitions like to end games quickly. Back in 1932, Dr. Ossip Bernstein did just that in this game after 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 d6 4. O-O Nge7 5. Ng5 f6 6. Bf7+ Kd7 7. Qg4+ f5 8.exf5 h5 (See Diagram)