Time to check (GULP!)...

----

Other times, we will mechanically work through captures, threats and checks and the answer will pop out of one of those lines. So we might find the answer by looking at ways to give check (Ne7+) or threaten the black queen (10. b4).

In other situations, we spot an interesting motif and then look to see if we can create it. In today's puzzle, there are at least two tempters - Ne7+ looks like half a fork and the exposed black queen at c5 is nearly trapped.

In part, this comes down to your own thinking style. I am a basically disorganised creative type, so I tend to look for abstract patterns first and then try to find ways to create them. So I approached this by looking for ways to embarrass the black Qc5,which my fuzzy thinking had identified as the chief black weaknesses.

Others with a more ordered thinking style might follow a set procedure for finding a solution - eg threats, captures, checks.

And those with activist/ pragmatist tendencies might dive in by analysing promising looking moves.

This time I didn't look at the players' names, or count the material. Instead, I noticed that it was only move 10, yet it seemed that a lot had already happened. Then I tried to guess what opening had been played. I thought it could have been a Center Counter Game, since the queen was out in the middle of the board, with few of Black's other pieces developed. So, my focus was immediately on giving the Dame a hard time.

First, same as others, I looked at ways to attack the black king - but could not find promising moves.

Then the black Queen got my attention. Checked her escape squares and could only find c6. Tried to trap the Q with 10. Ne4 to attack her with b4 subsequently. But it did not work out - black could create new escape spaces with f.e. 10. ...Re8.

Move 7 for White (Rybka 3):

click for larger view

Josef Emil Krejcik - Richard Reti [D06]
Vienna, 1922
[A.J.G.]

This is the "Chess Games" daily puzzle or "Problem of The Day" for Tuesday; September 15th, 2009.

White to play, (move # 10. '?').

1.d4 d5; 2.c4 Nf6!?;
This move is not very reliable, 2...e6 or 2...c6 was better.

Now White could play 3.cxd5, and then 4.e4, grabbing space in the center, with a gain of time as well.

3.Nc3 e5!?; (Bad judgment.)

Sometimes Reti's creativity could get the better of him, this is a completely unsound pawn sack. (This move is very bad, today it would rate AT LEAST one full question mark. As this game was probably an experiment, and it was played in 1922, I am being lenient in my "grading" here.)

It looks like Reti was trying to play/invent a new variant of the Budapest Gambit. [ See (NN vs R Vassilev, 2009, yesterday's game or Opening Explorer) for more details on that particular opening.]

[It would have been correct to play: 3...e6; here - which would transpose to a Queen's Gambit Declined.]

4.dxe5 Ng4T; (The only decent move.) 5.Nf3,
This is a good, solid move for White - Black is now forced to exert himself to try and regain his lost pawn(s) ... especially the one on e5.

[ Better was 5.Qxd5 Qxd5; 6.cxd5, " " - Fritz 11. ]

5...Bb4!?;
To me, this is a natural move, which threatens to degrade White's Pawn structure with BxN/c3. (I must point out that the box does not like it, White's advantage nearly doubles.)

[Fritz prefers the following continuation for Black: >/= 5...Bc5; 6.e3 Nd7; 7.cxd5 Ngxe5; "<=>" (counterplay) however White remains a solid pawn ahead. (8.Be2, '±'). ]

6.Bd2 , White plays it safe. (I really cannot blame him.)

[RR 6.h3 d4; (with some play) - Fritz 11. ]

6...Qe7?; (Better was: 6...Bc5; or 6...d4.)
This is a standard move in the (normal!?!) Budapest Gambit. However, this is not a "normal" position of that line, the big difference is that White's Bishop is on d2 - meaning that the WN on c3 is free to move.

Of course, this was a really bad move for Black ... ... ... and the machine sees it that way as well. (The evaluations nearly TRIPLE in favor of White! The Black Queen just turned into a clay duck.)

[Black had to play something like the following line: >/= 6...d4; 7.Nb5 Bxd2+; 8.Qxd2 Nc6; 9.Rd1± Qe7. (White retains a big advantage, he should remain a Pawn ahead -- no matter what branch Black should choose from here.) ]

7.Nxd5 Bxd2+;
At first glance, this looks forced. (The tricky 7...Bc5 kept pieces on the board.)

8.Qxd2 Qc5!?;
This looks agressive ... for all of one ply. [But just until White plays the simple move of P/e2-e3. The Black Queen was probably a lttle safer on the d8-square. Reti - of course - knew this, but was probably motivated to play "actively" ... (only) because he was two pawns down.]

[Or if 8...Qd8; then 9.Rd1, " " and White is way ahead. (Fritz shows White with over a four point advantage here!) ]

9.e3 0-0?; (Maybe even - '??')
Normally you castle as quickly as possible, but here Reti hangs his Queen out on a line (with the laundry), where it is left to rot. (To me, it looks like Black had to play 9...a5[].)

While its easy to brand this move as a mistake for Reti, finding good moves (for Black) is a much more difficult proposition! [The various engines already show that Black's game is beyond repair here.]

10.b4, " " Black Resigns.

The BQ is lost. If 10...Qc6; then White simply plays 11.Ne7+, with a vicious Knight fork.

For more analysis and discussion of this particular chess game, please see the following CG web page: J Krejcik vs Reti, 1922. (To me, it is not completely clear if this was a tournament game, or simply a casual encounter.)

I just made the first video analysis of this dude: