I played at the East Devon Chess Congress earlier this year alongside my
longstanding friend and team-mate Charlie Keen. During a break between
games, we went over one of his encounters, looking for tips for next
time. The critical position was this one:
We lost on board count to old rivals Teignmouth in the Peter Rooke Cup
at the end of January. One of the last games to finish involved a
simple-looking Rook endgame. Just as it was getting crucial, White,
short of time, found a time-saving blunder:
"When I am White I win because I am White, when I am Black I win
because I am Bogoljubow." - Efim Bogoljubow.
I'm still thinking about this, so bear with me, and comments
I pounced on Nunn's Chess Openings when it came out, and
found some things that I found puzzling. Openings like the
Dutch Stonewall, which I had always thought of as being
fundamentally flawed, were being shown as equal, while
the Classical Dutch - which I thought was a superior approach - was coming out as +=.
If you have an Isolated Queen's Pawn, you have outposts on c5 and e5, a half-open e-file, more space, more mobility, and more chances of attacking - on either side, I guess, but the e5 outpost suggests the King's-side. On a good day, it works like this:
A four-board match played away at Exmouth one Saturday:
The top board players each made a mistake on move 5: 1.c4 e5 2.g3 Nc6 3.Bg2 f5 4.Nc3 Nf6 now 5.e3(?) was possibly inaccurate, allowing 5...d5! (see Kosten’s book) but Black didn't play it, preferring 5...Be7.