|
|
|
THE FIRST TWENTY MOVES Part 3. The Denny Openings by: Richard L. Fortman ACF Games Editor 1980 The title was conferred on this single opening move by John Drummond, in honor of the Scottish village in which he had resided for many years. Generally avoided in free-style play in the past century, it is occasionally encountered in the practice of James Wyllie and Richard Jordan; commonly met with the 22-18 centre advance, a secondary attack in this opening. With the advent of the two-move forced restriction in the early 1900's, much analysis was devoted to the opening and the six White replies, proving that 24-19, 23-19 and 22-17 lead to the more sustaining attacks. The Drummond title has remained throughout the years, with other whimsies such as the "New 14th", the "Juno", "Dee" and the "Volunteer" long faded into obscurity. The opening has played a prominent role in many world title matches, including Robt Yates much-publicized win over James Wyllie in the final (50th) game of their 1876 match; also 'Stonewall' Barker's famous 'come-from-behind' win over Richard Jordan in 1900.. Newell Banks used a cook ( perhaps from the shopof August Heffner) to defeat Robt. Stewart in their 1922 title match; Asa Long's two wins vs. Banks in 1934; Walter Hellman's tie-breaking victory over Asa Long in 1948. Others that come to mind include Willie Ryan's smashing triumph in the 38th game of his 1949 match against Hellman; the latter's win over Maurice Chamblee with the "Nemesis" in 1951; Marion Tinsley's wins over both Hellman and Oldbury, and lastly, Walter Hellman's cooks against Case in 1963, over Oldbury in 1965, and against Frazier in 1967...
OPENING NO 45. 10-14, 22-17, 7-10. 10-14 (A), 22-17 (B), 7-10 (C), 17-13 (D), 3-7(E), 25-22 (F),14-17 (G), 21-14, 9-25, 29-22, 11-15 (H), 23-19 (1), 5-9, 26-23 (J). 9-14, 30-25 (K) , 15-18 (L), 22-15, 7-11, 31-26,11-18, (M) FORMS DIAGRAM
A) Of the seven opening moves, this is generally ranked 5th; behind 11-15, 9-14, 11-16, and 10-15, but ahead of both 12-16 and 9-13.....Slanted away from the centre, White gains the advantage with 22-17, 23-19, and 24-19, but only equal, or inferior, with the others. B) One of the favourable replies, pressing against the piece, to force an early weak exchange, or the apex piece back-up. C) Usually taken in the two-move era, although 6-10 is not markedly inferior——found in the present ballot from 9-14, 22-17, 6-9...See "Basic Checkers" Part 2, Opening No 26.. D) White has a wide choice of playable moves here, but analysis has proven that there is nothing stronger, as Red intends to work in 9-13—if permitted. This also holds the main White position intact; forcing the opponent to commit an inferior reply... E) This partially weakens the single corner, but about necessary, as White strongly attacks the options:
F) Now a matter of personal preference between this and 24-20, which indirectly attacks the single corner. Cont: 14-18 ( or the 11-16 exchange, favoured by former US champion Everett Fuller; see the 1972 N.Ty.games.) 23-14, 9-18, 26-23,( if 21-17, then 10-15 cuts down the White range.) 10-14, 28-24, 11-15, 30-26, (if 31-26, 7-11, 23-19, 5-9 etc; and White must be cautious) 8-11, 32-28,( not 26-22, *4-8; into a winning "Maid-of the-Mill", see Master-Play page 391, Var. W.) 6-10, 25-22 ( 13-9 tempts 1-6 and the 26-22 shot, but after *18-22 instead, Red is powerful—the trapper trapped! EF Hunt v. WF Ryan, 8th A.Ty.) 18-25, 29-22, *14-17, 21-14, 10-17, 23-19, 7-10, 27-23, 17-21 ( or 4-8,19-16 etc. then 13-9 draws.) 19-16, 12-19, 23-7, 2-11. 26-23 21-25 ( eases the M.P.end ing after 4-8, 23-19, 8-12 &19-16 etc.) 23-19, 25-30, 19-16, *10-14, 16-7, then 15-19, 24-15 and 5-9 draws nicely..Joe Duffy.... G) The sequel to the previous 3-7; Red now breaks to gain breathing room. H) Although there are other sound ways in 5-9, 10-14, or 10-15, none offer a better prospect then the text, which is favoured by Marion Tinsley. Definite progress can be made by the student if he bases his opening lines on those laid down by the proven master- and stays with them until the ideas behind them are understood... I) 24-20 ( if 23-18, then 5-9 is an easy-going Long-Horr 1923 match draw.) 7-11, 23-18, then 12-16 restricts the play for both after 27-23, 15-19, 30-25, 10-15, and either 32-27 ( or 25-21, 5-9, 32-27, 6-10 etc; a Gonotsky-Jordan 6th A. Ty. draw.) 6-10, 25-21, 1-6, 13-9 etc; as in the 1928 Gonotsky-Lieber drawn match... J) Commonly known as the Barker-Jordan variation. If 27-23, 7-11, 32-27, 9-14, 24-20, 15-24, 28-19, then Bobby Martin's 11-16 etc. vs Kewell Banks in the 1958 Nat. Ty seems preferable to 11-15, 20-16 as in Martins-Hynd Master-Play draw. K.) White must now wait, as the 24-20 exchange allows 8-11 and a probable Red win. L) 7-11,( if 14-17, 25-21, 17-26, 31-22,*7-11 drs.) then 23-18 etc and 6-9 draws. Barker-Jordan. M) Cont: *24-20 ( not 26-22, 10-15 etc. to a Red win; M.Tinsley v. H. Rudolph' 1948 C.P. Ty.) and the nice draw with 18-22! 25-9, 2-7 by Andy Dossett.
OPENING NO 46. 10-14, 22-17, 14-18. 10-14, 22-17, 14-18 (A), 23-14, 9-18, 26-23 (B,Var.l), 6-9, 23-14, 9-18, 30-26 (C ), 5-9 (D), 17-14 (E), 9-13 (F) 26-23(G), 11-15 (H), 23-19 (1), 7-10, 14-7, 3-10, 25-22 (J) 18-25, 29-22 (K) FORMS DIAGRAM
A) One of the dozen or so definitely "one-sided" openings contained the the three-move deck, but after over 45 years of analysis, the term "critical" might be dropped, as most of the rough edges have been smoothed. Willie Ryan's comment that "advancing a lone piece into enemy territory on square 18 at the outset of the game is invariably a dangerous liability" also holds true from the "Skull-Cracker" with a piece less a side; but to a lesser degree in the Double Corner, Opening No 37, also the Denny's shown later-#52 & 56. One curious note on this opening. It has never been played in any of the 3-move world title matches commencing with Long v. Banks, in 1934 and through Tinsley v. Lowder in 1979 and Tinsley v Long 1981 fourteen in number !… B) One of the two major attacks, with 17-13 being shown in Var. l.. The text continues the destruction of the Red double corner. The control of square 14 by White is one of the game's general theories, but in this particular opening, with the Red piece on 18,it is inferior: 17-14, 12-16, 21-17, then 8-12 is a mild Kelso from 10-15, 22-17, 11-16, 17-14, 9-18,23-14, 8-11, 21-17 and 15-18.... C) The proper follow-up to sustain the attack. 31-26 here is quite good in the "Skull-Cracker", but in this Denny with the piece still on square 15, it poses few problems after 5-9, 26-23, 9-14, 17-10, 7-14, 25-22, 18-25, 29-22, as 11-15 can now be played, blunting the White attack. D) 2-6 was the accepted defence back in the 1930's &c 1940's, followed with 26-23 ( or 17-13, 7-10, 26-23, 10-14, 25-22, 18-25, 29-22, then 14-17, 21-14 and 6-9 etc. Drawn. WF Ryan vs. the writer, in a 1953 Decatur Ill. exhibition; our last meeting with this great master.) 6-9, 23-14, 9-18, and 31-26 to a not difficult draw. But after the cooked 25-22 exchange,(instead of 31-26 ) White throws the full force of his position against the weakened Red double corner, and the backward single corner. After Marion Tinsley had mentioned this move to the writer in 1952, we later used this vs. Tom Colston, of Glasgow, Set. in the 2nd USA-GB Mail match in 1956, which caused the Scottish expert "great concern" ( as he put it ) but managed an excellent draw....So, although 2-6 stands soundly, we prefer the 5-9 defence, which was featured in Ryans MEC..... E) Following up the attacking sequence, and strongest. Other ways are:
F) We consider this forced. Although 1-5 is given to draw in Ryans MEC, White may have two ways to beat it; with 21-17 as shown there, or with 24-19.Cont: 11-16,19-15, 8-11, 15-8, 4-11, *21-17 ( to improve 28-24 in Denvir's "3-Move Guide".) 9-13, ( if 11-15, 25-21, 18-22?…. instead of 18-22 Jim Keene suggests 15-19 to draw…. 14-10 etc; WW.) 25-21, 13-22, 26-17, 2-6, 28-24, 18-22, 27-23, 16-20, 24-19, 11-16. 23-18, 16-23, 14-10, 6-15,18-2, 23-26, 2-6, 26-30, *6-10, 22-26, 31-22, 30-25, 22-18, 25-22, 18-14, 22-13, then 21-17, 13-22, 14-9 etc is a winning White ending. L. Woodcock v. H. Richter, in mail play. G) 24-19 is also a favourable attack, conjured up by M.Chamblee, and forces the defender's replies. Continue:11-16, 26-23, *8-11 ( it is necessary to play a piece short, as Red can never work in 1-5 in this opening; in contrast to the Kelso "Skull-Cracker" where the Red piece is absent from square 11.) 28-24 ( 25-22 tends to simplify matters after 18-25, 29-22, 16-20, 22-18, j then *13-17, 31-26, and the 12-16 shot draws. Maine v. I Coleman, in the 5th USA-GB mail match.) 16-20, 14-9, then *11-16. 23-14. 16-23, 27-18, 20-27, 32-23, 12-16, 18-15(instead of 9-5 or 9-6 with quick draws.) *1-6 (Red must now regain his piece.) 21-17 ( if 23-18, then 7-10 drew. Long vs. Huggins, in USA-GB mail play.) 13-22 25-18, 6-13, 14-10, 7-14, 18-9, 4-8 ( 3-7 is doubtful after 23-18, 16-19, 9-5, *7-11, 15-8, 4-11. 5-1, 19-24, 1-5, 11-16, 5-9, 16-20, 9-14, and 24-27 x 18-15, 2-7, 29-25, 27-32, 25-21, 32-27, 14-18, 27-32, 18-23 etc W.W by J Merrick), 15-10 ( if 23-18, then 2-7 draws, and if 9-5, 16-19 ) 8-12, 10-6, now the 16-19 exchange gets away. Fortman vs. EC Whiting; 5th USA-GB mail match... H) Once again the saving move. As mentioned earlier, the 1-5 idea fails in this opening, although' once given as sound in Ryans MEC. 1-5, 24-19, 11-16, 28-24, 16-20, 25-22, 18-25, 29-22, 8-11, 22-18, 7-10, 14-7, 3-10, then *18-15 leads into the famous win by Marion Tinsley. See Cases "3-Move Checkers"; also the 1972 Nat. Ty. games in ACFB, eventually going into a problem win by AJ Heffner. See Bolands "Masterpieces", p. 92, #3. I) Ryan gives 14-9 but the draw is not difficult after 1-5, 23-14, 7-10, 14-7, 5-14, 25-22( there are other moves, but none better for White.) 3-10, 27-23, 2-7, 23-19 ( or 24-19, 15-24, 28-19, 8-11 or 14-17 drs.) 14-18, 21-17, 18-25, 29-22,7-11, 32-27, 11-16, 27-23, 16-20, 23-18, 20-27, 31-24,8-11. 18-14, 11-16 etc.Drs. in mail play....J. Caldwell v. Rev. Vestal, J) Wood's Checker Player* (then "Our Checker Player")May 1937, Game 20, Var. 1 (Hammond v. Olson ) exchanges 24-20 here, but it is best delayed.. K) Cont: ( 8-11, 27-23, *1-6, which the writer played vs. Ivan Stewart in mail back in 1956. 2-6 instead leads into a bad ending as shown in ECB G. 5921, and 1-5 instead loses after 24-20, 15-24, 28-19, 11-15, 32-28, 15-24, 28-19, 4-8, ( instead of this 4-8 Red has 2-6* to draw, as in Bruch-Long 1980 a TY) 22-18, now Red is unable to get in 2-7...so, 10-14, 18-9, 5-14, 19-15, 13-17, 31-26, 2-7, 20-16, etc; a WW by E.Frazier.) After 1-6, 24-20 ( 31-26 goes back into the same play.) 15-24, 28-19, *11-15 ( as 4-8 lets in 21-17 to win.) 32-28, 15-24, 28-19, 4-8, 31-26 ( if 31-27, *8-11, 22-18, *2-7 draws- Fortman vs. Stewart; and if 22-18 instead, then *2-7 draws, and the reason behind the earlier 1-6 move.) 8-11, 22-18, *6-9, 19-15, 10-19. 23-7, 2-11, 26-22, 12-16, 21-17, 16-19,17-14, 19-23, 14-5, 23-26, 5-1, 26-30, 1-6, 30-26, 6-10, 26-19, 18-14, then 11-15 draws; which we worked on back in 1953....... VARIATION 1 ( off trk. 36th.) 17-13(L), 5-9(M), 21-17(N), 11-15(0), 17-14 (P), 1-5, 26-23 (Q), 6-10 (R), 13-6, 10-17. 23-14, 2-18, 25-22,17-26, 30-14 (S) L) This also applies pressure on the square 18 outpost with a more subtle approach; an analogous attack in the 'Skull-Cracker'..... M) PP stamps this as forced, and rightly so. If 6-10 or 7-10, then 21-17, and the Red position soon collapses. N) The potent follow-up to an attack which Walter Hellman at one time thought to be the most powerful available in this opening. The writer once suggested the 24-20 waiting move to several mail players in search of something new, and it was used by Keith Todd, in the ACF 1979 I-D mail ty. Red seems to have several sound replies, but perhaps the most interesting is 11-15, as once suggested by Walter Hellmam to Maurice Chamblee, at the 1953 So. Ty. Cont: 20-16, 12-19, 26-23, 19-26, 30-5 then 15-19 is a "Fife" line shown by Ryan in'AC' G. 93. O) Again the only way. Former world champion Richard Jordan once tried 12-16 in a crossboard game vs. J. Wyllie back in the 1890's, but after *25-21 ( instead of Wyllie's 24-20) the-defender's position is critical; perhaps a loss, as in I-1EC p. 112, V.7.... P) White has a number of plausible moves here, but none more sustaining then the text, which was curiously omitted by Ryan in his MEG!.....
Q) This is vital to continue the pressure. If 24-19,15-24, 28-19, 8-11, 26-23 ( 26-22 lost; 3rd NCA Ty.) 11-16, 19-15 with Red preferred. W. Hellman. R) And the first side may now effect a partial clearance, but there is considerable play remaining. S) There are two sound ways to continue, but both require care:
Supplementary Play; 10-14, 22-17, 14-18, 23-14, 9-18, 17-13, 5-9, 21-17, 11-15, 26-23(A), 1-5(B), 23-14, 9-18, 24-19 (C), 15-24, 28-19, 8-11, 25-22 (D), 18-25, 30-21, 7-10, 29-25. 4-8 25-22, 11-15, 32-28, 15-24, 28-19, 8-11, 22-18, 11-16, 27-23, 3-7, 17-14, 10-17, 21-14, 6-10, 14-9, 5-14, 18-9, 7-11, 9-6, 2-9, 13-6, 11-15, 6-2, 15-24, 23-18 Drawn. Paul Thompson vs. John Scott; 4th USA-GB mail match, 1959-60... A) Plays for the 9-14 exchange, but inferior to other moves shown above. B) Correctly met, as square 18 is well protected.Instead, 9-14 is questionable after 17-10, 7-14, 24-20 8-11, 28-24, 4-8, 25-21, 3-7, 30-26, 7-10, 23-19, 6-9, 13-6, 2-9, 26,23, 9-13, 29-25, 13-17, 31-26, 1-5, and 32-28 WW-^CP_ G. 564-WT Dailey. C) Varies from WCP G 466-Fortman v Goff D) Perhaps an improvement over 17-14 or 30-26.
OPENING NO 47. 10-14, 22-18, 6-10. 10-14, 22-18 (A), 6-10 (B), 25-22 (c), 12-16 (D. Var.1), 22-17(E), 16-20 (F), 17-13 (G), 1-6, 24-19 (H), 11-15 (1), 18-11, 8-24, 28-19, 4-8, 19-15 (J), 10-19, 23-16, 8-12 (K) 27-23, 12-19, 23-16 (L). FORMS DIAGRAM
A) This centre advance against the Denny is strong only if the piece is left undisturbed, but if exchanged with 11-15 (as in Open .#48 ) the White advantage is only minimal.... B) Properly avoided in two-move play, as this gives White time to consolidate with centre control. C) Necessary to retain the White attack. Other moves such as 24-20, 24-19, or 26-22 can all be countered with 11-15, and shown under later openings in this book. D) This was formerly side-stepped by the majority of American Masters, (with the exception of Edwin Hunt*) fearing 24-20, and the complications of the White Doctor. However, with the addition of Opening No 49-A, which forces the formation, this defence has again found favour. The other playable ( and also favoured ) option is the 11-15 exchange, shown in Var. 1... E) The White Doctor with 24-20 will be shown under the later Opening No 49-A. The text is a potent alternative, and came into prominence when used by Asa Long vs. E.F.Hunt, in their 1936 world title match at West Palm Beach. F) Forced, as 8-12 loses time after 17-13, 1-6; a losing line from 9-14, 22-17, 5-9, 17-13, 1-5, 25-22, then 11-16? 22-18, 8-11, See "C.C.* p. 313, col. 6... G) White has other ways, but this is the more forceful:
H) As played in the Hunt-Long match. White has a good vary with 29-25 instead, then 11-15, 18-11, 8-15, then 24-19 ( or 23-19, 4-8, 26-22, *8-12, 22-17, 7-11, 30-26 *3-8 27-23 etc. to a draw- A. Long vs. Walter Hellman; 1948 match.)15-24, 28-19...note that with the two single exchanges here, White is one move ahead of the trunk position when the double exchange was used, but not necessarily an advantage in this instance. Cont: 4-8, 19-15 (White's only attack but an excellent one, as 19-16 instead is well met with 8-12, as in the Ebert-Cornell 1950 Paxton Nat. Ty. game.)10-19 23-16 *8-12 (8-11 gets entangled after *26-22, 11-15, 22-17, 14-18, *30-26, 15-19, 32-28, 7-10, 17-14,10-17, 21-14 etc. WW; Mclntire v. Fortman, in a 1948 mail ty; improving a mail game with GW Bass earlier, where this win was missed.) 27-23, 12-19, 23-16, then the 14-17 exchange is necessary. Cont: 21-14, 9-18, 31-27, 6-10 16-12 (or the EF Hunt draw with 25-21, 10-14, 13-9, 7-10, 16-12, 10-15, 30-25, 15-19, 27-23, 18-27, 32-16 20-24, 26-22, 24-27, 22-17, 27-31, etc. Drawn.) 2-6, 26-23, 10-14, 32-28, 6-10, 28-24 (if 13-9, then the Mantell shot with 3-8!, 12-3, 14-17, 23-14, 17-22, 25-18, 10-17, 3-10, and 5-32 to draw; once described by Basil Case as "very rare!".) *10-15 ( 7-11 loses after 30-26, 10-15, *25-21, 11-16, 13-9, 18-22, 26-10 5-14 then 10-7, 3-10 12-8 etc WW- A.G. Huggins.) 13-9, now 7-11, 9-6, 11-16, 6-2, 14-17, 23-14, and 16-19 to a long draw. Chamberlain v. Huggins, 1975 world title mail match. I) The first side cannot afford to dally with 8-12,allowing 29-25 and 25-22, with a winning position. J) White has two other routes of merit:
K) We consider this the preferable defence, as played by Derek Oldbury vs. Don Lafferty in the 1964 Nat.Ty at Rockford, 111. On other ways:
L) Continue: *14-18 ( if 14-17, 21-14, 9-18, 31-27,6-10, 29-25, 2-6, 26-23, 10-15, 23-14, 7-11, 16-7, 3-17, 25-21, 17-22, 30-26 WW.) 29-25, 9-14, 31-27, *6-10 ( if 6-9, 13-6, 2-9, White simply waits with 32-28 to win.) 26-23 ( or 16-12, 10-15, 26-22, 7-11, 22-17, 2-7 17-10, 7-14, 21-17, 14-21, 27-24 etc; a fine draw by Oldburv v. Lafferty.) 10-15, 16-12, 2-6 ( or Case's 20-24 etc; then 5-9 to draw.) 32-28, 7-11, 28-24, 11-16, 30-26, 5-9, 26-22, 6-10, 13-6, 15-19 etc. Drawn, as in a Maine v. Bass mail game... VARIATION 1 (Off trunk @5th.) 11-15 (M), 18-11, 8-15, 29-25 (N), 1-6 (O), 23-18 (P), 14-23, 27-11, 7-16, 22-18 (Q), 4-8 (R), 24-20, (R1) 8-11 (S) 28-24, 3-7, 25-22, 9-14 (T), 18-9, *5-14, 26-23 (U), 10-15, 32-28 (V) FORMS DIAGRAM
M) Once labelled as an "uncertain" defence by the late Nathan Rubin, but that was over 40 years ago, and analysis has changed many ideas over that period of time. N) All other playable moves such as 22-17 or 23-18 are too early and relieve the pressure on the Red position.( See the 1972 N.Ty-ACFB #132, G. 38, and V.I) O) Virtually a forced waiting move. If:
P) 24-20 also presses the Red position, but to a lesser extent, as if the one major point is known (shown below ) the defender has fewer problems. Cont: 7-11, 22-17, 9-13, 25-22, 3-7, 28-24 (if 27-24, Red has two ways in the 14-18 pitch, or 6-9; the latter a good draw by Dr. Shuffett vs. B.Case.) then *14-18 (as 23-19 must be stopped.) 23-14, *4-8, as 6-9 instead is a probable loss, although once given by the writer to draw. After 4-8, White has several ways, but it is best to return the piece with 24-19, 15-24, and 26-23.Then*6-9 ( if 24-28, 22-18, 13-22, 27-24 runs into the later play.) 22-18, 13-22, 23-19, 10-17, 21-14..A deceptive position that has fooled the best. *2-6 is vital (as 24-28 loses after *27-24, now 2-6 is too late after the *19-16 exchange; a WW shown in WCP G. 934; later in the Long"-Hellman 1962 match, but a draw was permitted with some 'incredible` (to use Hellman's word in a letter to Edwin Hunt.) end-play; Long then escaping with a drawn match.) now 19-16 is stopped, so 19-15, and *24-28 will now draw after 27-23, 12-16, 31-27, 22-26, 27-24, 26-31, 24-19, 31-26 etc. JB Stiles v. Bobby Martin..... Q) 24-20, 16-19 (the 3-8 exchange will draw, but is not forced, and permits White more attacking space.) 22-18, 10-14, 18-15, 3-8, ( Walter Hellman once thought 9-13 forced; given in Ryans "A.C." G. 220, also in LW Taylor vs. Hellman,in the 1968 Medora Nat.Ty. The easier text was found after publication in Ryan's magazine.) 20-16 (varies from Hellman's 25-22, ((Instead of Lafferty`s 20-16, or Hellman`s 25-22.. noting "nothing better" White has 32-27, as played by vern Dowsey v Fortman in Mail play.))14-18, 22-17, 9-13, 17-14, 18-22, 26-17, 13-22, 14-10, 6-9, 10-6, 22-25, 6-1, 9-13, 15-10, 25-29, and 10-6 etc. to draw. W.H.) 2-7, 25-22, 8-11, 15-8, 4-20, 22-17, 7-10, 26-22, 9-13, 30-26, 12-16, 32-27, 6-9, 27-24, 20-27, 31-6, 14-18, 22-15, 13-31 Drawn. R. Fortman vs. Don Lafferty 1970 mail game. R) The text is the recognised draw, although 10-14 may also go through, as given by Willie Ryan in "CCC" Game 1185. Other replies have been shown to lose. R1) instead of 24-20, White has an excellent option in the 18-15 exchange A Huggins v Prof Fraser…or: 25-22, 8-11, 26-23, 10-15, (3-7 into a Gonotsky Ginsberg Cross, c.r.)31-26 etc to draw, as in the taylor-Hallett, 1980 A Ty S) Red cannot advance to square 19 in this line of play; either now or earlier; shown to lose in A.C. G. 220. T) Once again the only way. If 10-15 ( or 9-13, 32-28, 6-9, 26-23, 10-15, 24-19, 15-24, 28-19, 7-10, 30-26, 3-7, 22-17, 13-22, 26-17, 9-14, 18-9, 5-14, then 19-15 etc. White Wins. John Sweeney.) 21-17, 7-10 (or 9-13 to a win in "B.L.C." ) 17-14, 10-17, 22-13, 15-22, 26-17, 2-7, 30-25, 7-10, 25-21, 9-14. *31-27 (not 31-26? 14-18 drew. Maine v. Brown ) 14-18, 17-14 WW... U) Another move of merit is 32-28, to stop 10-15.This rightfully belongs to LaVerne Dibble, although given by Cap Howe in his notes to a Huggins-Long mail game (ACFB 3/65 ) crediting "pp"?..Cont: 11-15, 20-11, 7-16, 22-17, 16-20, 24-19, 15-24, 28-19, 14-18, 31-27, 18-22, 26-23, then 22-25 would seem correct, although *12-16, was starred by Howe, then 19-12 and left as a draw after 22-26. But White may follow with 23-19, 26-31, 27-23, 31-27, 23-18, and since 27-23 cannot be made in view of 19-15, it is not too clear how Red recovers his piece to draw...After 22-25, then 17-14 (or 23-18 first.) 10-17, 21-14, 25-29, 23-18, then the 6-10 exchange gets home scot free.... V) Cont: *7-10, ( as 6-10 fails after Edwin Hunt's excellent 21-17 pitch, then 23-18 to a WW. . Instead of Hunt`s 21-17 pitch, White may also win with Mantell`s 31-26 in WCP; also Freyer v Long in the 10th A Ty) 31-26, 6-9, 30-25, *2-6 ( 9-13 was given to draw by Walter Hellman in "AC" G. 220, then 24-19, 15-24, 28-19, 11-15, 20-11, 15-24, 22-18, 24-27, 18-9, 27-31, 26-22, 12-16, 9-5, 10-14 then *23-19! a devastating pitch by Ivan L.Stewart to correct Hellman's 5-1 draw, with which he defeated GW Bass in a 1951 mail game. After seeing this, we proceeded to work on 2-6 to save this entire defence.) 24-19, 15-24, 28-19, 11-15, 20-11, 15-24, 23-19, 9-13, 11-8, 24-27, 8-3, 27-31. 26-23, 31-27, 3-7, 27-18, 22-15, 12-16, 19-12, 10-19, 7-11, 19-23, 11-15, 23-26, 12-8, 26-30, 8-3, 13-17, 3-7, 6-9. 7-10 9-13, 10-6, then 14-18, 21-14, 30-21, 15-22 and 21-17 to draw---as published by the writer in "CCC"Game 901, Var. 3, Hay 1952 issue, and played one month later by Milton Loew v. Walter Hellman in the 1952 Nat.Ty. at Ocean City. Md. Supplementary play; 9-13, 23-18, 6-9, 27-23, 11-15, 18-11, 8-15, 22-17, 13-22, 25-11, 7-16, 29-25, 4-8, 25-22, 1-6, 32-27, 8-11, 22-18, 9-14, 18-9, 5-14, 24-20 10-15, 26-22, 3-7, 27-24, then *7-10 draws; same as Note V at first, but 6-10 instead lost; Freyer vs. Long, 10th ACA Nat. Ty; Flint, 1939. See "World Championship Checkers" page 154, Note I; Tinsley's referral to this game..
OPENING NO 47-A 10-14, 22-18, 7-10. 10-14, 22-18, 7-10 (A), 25-22 (B), 11-16 (C), 18-15 (D), 10-19, 24-15, 14-18 (E), 23-14, 9-25, 29-22, 3-7 (F), 22-18, 7-10, 27-24, 10-19, 24-15, 16-19, 21-17(G). FORMS DIAGRAM
A) One of the newer openings introduced into the official ACF ballot in 1970, but the White attacks are somewhat stilted. The late Prof. W.R. Fraser, of Montreal, Canada used this twice in free-style play vs. Tom Wiswell, in their 1960 title match. Since he was 'scorched' twice with it, he entitled it "Eraser's Inferno", but it is hardly that hot!... B) The only move to secure new play, as 24-20, 24-19 or 26-22 transpose into openings shown later in this book. C) One of the key moves to sustain the soundness of this opening. The natural 3-7 follow-up (as in Opening No 45 ) does not work in this case after White's *29-25, and all replies have been shown to lose in 'Master-Play'.. D) This middle exchange opens the position to some extent, and has been played by Marion Tinsley on occasion. There are two additional major choices:
E) Generally favoured, and no doubt best, although the 16-19 exchange may also be sound, as played by Rev.Vestal vs. the writer, in the ACF 200 club mail ty. As White's best attack against it goes into a variation of Opening No 50-B ( 10-14, 23-19, 7-10 ) it will be shown there. F) We prefer this as the more restrictive way, although 5-9 seems sound also, then 22-18, 3-7 ( or 9-13 first then 27-24; instead of 26-22- Langdon v. Tinsley, 1975 Lakeside; after 27-24, #3-7, 26-22, *8-11, 15-8, 4-11, 30-26, 6-10, 32-27, 16-20, 26-23, 1-5, 24-19, 2-6, 31-26, 6-9, 19-16 etc. Drawn. R. Chamberlain v. R. Romphf, in the world mail title play-offs.) 27-24, 9-13, 26-22, 8-11,5-8, 4-11, now White has the strong 24-20; instead of 30-26; a Vestal-Rex 1978 I-D mail game, to an eventual draw.... G) Cont: 2-7.( not 5-9, 17-13, 1-5, than 15-10 etc; to a White win- Williams vs. Rex, 1975 I-D mail ty.) 31-27, 12-16, 17-13 ( White has nothing with 27-23 after 8-12. 16-20, 27-24, 20-27, 32-16, 8-11, 15-8, 4-20, 30-25, (if 26-23, 6-9 etc. draws. Rex v. Looser, 1978 I-D mail ty.) 6-10, 25-21, 10-14, 18-9, 5-14, 26-23, 7-11, 13-9, 11-15 and 23-19 etc. Drawn. Lloyd Hills vs. R. Fortman, 1977 6th vs. 7th Dist. mail match, and excellently played by the many-times Nebraska state champion Supplementary play; 10-14, 22-18, 7-10, 25-22, 11-16, 29-25, 8-11, 18-15, 11-18, 22-15, 10-19, 24-15, 3-7, 26-22, 9-13, 31-26, 7-10(passing up the key *l6-19-see above.) 15-11, 10-15, 27-24, 5-9, 23-19, 16-23, 26-10, 6-15, & 24-19 etc. White Wins. E. Lowder vs. E. Bruch, 1979 Lakeside Ty.... Corrections Trunk at note F .5-9 ( instead of 3-7) is no doubt best. Trunk @ 15th move 7-10 as given loses ;instead 5-9 still draws Trunk note G instead of 31-27 to draw, White has Tinsley`s 32-27* to winfor White, over the Editor in practice.See the 1980 ID mail booklet. Note D var 2 . Instead of the 14-17 exchange Red has two good alternatives in 14-18 ( Fortman v M Long in mail play) or 7-10! As in Childers v m Long also in mail play. Note F @ 3rd move. M Tinsley mentioned to the Editor that the 8-11 exchange ( instead of 3-7 ) is also sound after 26-23 and 6-10. Note F @ 13th move.Instead of 30-26, White also has 24-20, as played in the 1980 Id mail ty
OPENING NO 48. 10-14, 22-18, 11-15. 10-14, 22-18, 11-15 (A), 18-11, 8-15, 24-20 (B), 6-10 (C), 28-24 (D), 1-6 (E), 23-19 (F), 9-13 (G), 25-22 (H), 6-9 (1), 29-25 (J), 4-8 (K), 26-23, 14-18 (L), 23-14, 10-26, 19-10, 7-14, 31-22, (M). FORMS DIAGRAM
A) The two-move experts of an earlier era correctly tagged this as the more favourable reply, removing the White central piece, with just a slight disadvantage, due to White having the first option of replies.. B) Just one of several excellent moves; this similar to the famous "Flora Temple" attack in the Single Corner, with reversed colours. Others are:
C) The best reply, and also reached from Opening No 57 (10-14, 24-20, 6-10, 22-18, 11-15 etc.)...Although 4-8 is featured in both Kears Ency. and Master-Play, the first side loses one important development tempo, in comparison to 6-10...After 4-8, 28-24, 8-11, 23-19, 6-10, 25-22,*14-18 ( now 9-13 is too late after 27-23, and all replies are bad; a position also from 9-13, 22-18, 6-9, 25-22, 11-15, 18-11, 8-15, 24-20, 4-8, 28-24, then 1-6 is correct, but if 8-11?, 23-19, 9-14, 27-23 same; in which several experts have become entangled.) 29-25, then *9-14 ( If 2-6, 26-23, 9-13 has been shown to draw, but White has *21-l7==instead of 26-23== then 9-14, 17-13, 5-9, 26-23, 1-5, and 31-26 WW-Lowder-Taylor, in the 1961 So. Ty....) 26-23, 2-6, 30-26, ( or 31-26, 6-9, 32-28, *1-6, 19-16, 12-19, 23-16, 9-13, then 16-12 is a Henderson-Buchanan draw, but if 26-23? instead, Red has the 14-17 etc. shot to win; Harold Freyer overlooking this, and losing to Ed Scheldt, in the 1976 Dist. 4 Open Ty at Sanford, N.C.) now *6-9 is correct, with 5-9 setting off some fireworks after:20-16!, 11-20, 19-16!, 12-28, then 21-17, 14-30, 23-5, 30-23, and 27-2 a double-action shot with a winning ending, shown by H. Henderson and J. Hynd...After 6-9, 32-28, *1-6, (both 3-8 and 9-13 lose.) 19-16, 12-19, 23-16, and *18-23, 26-19, *9-13, 16-12, 6-9, 19-16, 14-17, 21-14, 10-26, 31-22, 9-14. 27-23, 14-17, then 23-19 to a draw by Alfred Jordan. It is doubtful if the majority could survive this mid-game with Red without a previous knowledge of the drawing route... D) The only move to retain the small White advantage. Willie Ryan tried 25-22 playing Nathan Rubin in the 7th A. Ty. at Cedar Point in 1929, but after 14-18, 23-14, 9-25, 29-22, 1-6 White is on the defensive. Cont: 22-17 ( or 27-23-Weslow-Hammar, 7th A. Ty.G.118) 4-8, 28-24, 8-11, 27-23, 5-9, 17-13, 9-14, 26-22——here Rubin took 14-17 etc. to a draw, but 14-18 instead was suggested by annotator Asa Long as stronger. E) One of the major points in this variation is to keep away from 4-8, in view of Note C, and to work in9-13 followed with 6-9 as soon as possible. As mentioned in Part 1, the game of checkers cannot be played with success against experts through intuition or theory. Lacking knowledge of the proper move, then logical reasoning must be applied; first, to eliminate the obviously bad, and then the questionable. What remains can then be fudged; based on the individual's experience, and aptitude for the game to be the correct response.. F) White has nothing else, but this still holds the edge; still coaxing the inopportune 4-8.. G) Which a great world champion once attempted in important play, even though he possessed the experience, and certainly the aptitude, but this makes checkers the great game that it is..4-8?, 25-22, 8-11, ( as 9-13 is into the Edinburgh loss; Note C ) then the fine waiter with *29-25, 11-16 ( 3-8 falls after *22-17, 9-13, 25-22, 6-9, 26-23 etc; WW.) 20-11, 7-23, 27-11 and a hopeless game. J. Ferrie losing to R. Jordan. H) As good as White has. Louis Ginsberg once tried 26-22 vs. A. Jordan, but it is only a mirage after: 15-18, 22-15, 12-16. 19-12, 10-28, 25-22 ( 20-16 may draw, as given by E. Fuller in notes to the '76 Kat.ty. games.) then 6-10 is the proper order of moves. If 4-8 instead, White gets in 30-26, 6-10 and 22-17 etc; stopping the 10-15 exchange with the 21-17 shot. With 6-10 first, 30-26 can be met with the 14-17 exchange, and if 31-26 instead, then 4-8, 29-25, 8-11, 22-18 etc; 11-16 finally won- Jordan-Ginsberg.... I) And once again, 4-8 is held back until the text is committed; preparing for the 14-17 or 14-18 exchanges. J) White now waits, but there is nothing better. IF:
K) At long last, this is permissable. 14-18 here is highly unusual, but evidently sound. Cont: 21-17, 9-14, 20-16, 14-21, 24-20, 15-24, ?2-6, 2-9, 32-28, 12-19, 27-23, 4-8, 23-16,24-27, 31-24, 7-10, 24-19, 9-14, 25-22, 5-9, 28-24, 14-17, 22-18 and 8-12 to a nice draw. John Howe, Jr. vs. GW Bass mail game; BCP G. 1645-1- 11/54. L) 14-17, 21-14 then both ways have been published to draw, but the text is more favoured.( See suppl. play.) M) Continue: , 3-7 ( best, as 8-11 lets in 24-19 and the following 19-15 exchange, with White holding possible ending chances.) 24-19, 7-10, 27-23 ( now White must be careful, as 32-28? *2-7==which corrects Ginsberg's 8-11 vs. Alexander in the 2nd I.M. Game 188==27-24, 14-17, 21-14, 10-26, 30-23, *7-11, 23-18, *13-17, 19-15, 17-21 to a Red win..Derek Oldbury v. Percy Crabbe, in the 1949 Eng. Ty; but previously shown by F.F. Smith—8/25/33.) 8-11, 22-18, 13-17, 20-16, 11-20, 18-15, 12-16, 15-6, 14-18 etc; Drawn. Long-Hunt, 1936 match, and others..... Supplementary Play: 10-14, 22-18, 11-15, 18-11, 8-15, 24-20, 6-10, 28-24, 1-6, 23-19, 9-13, 25-22, 6-9. 29-25, 4-8, 26-23, 14-17 ( The D'Orio variation.) 21-14, 9-18, 23-14, 10-26, 31-22 ( it is better to -jump all the men; 19-10, 7-14 and both 30-23 or 31-22 draw. D'0rio.) 7-10, 25-21(N), 8-11, 27-23, 5-9, 23-18, *l2-l6 (0), 19-12,and 10-14, 20-16 (P), 14-23. 16-7, 2-11, 21-17, 11-16,24-20, 16-19, 20-16, 23-26 etc; Red Wins- M. Boyle defeating Sammy Cohen in the 1930 Set. Ty... N) Natural, but White loses a move.Instead,*30-26, 8-11 and 26-23 will draw... 0) An idea that arises often, and often overlooked until too late; throwing an opponent's piece to the side with resulting bad endings after the squeeze. | P) Chas. Jolley was also trapped by Sam Gonotsky, in a 1923 handicap stake match; trying 32-28 and the 24-19 exchange, but the ending was also bad. Jolley came over to the USA from Holland at the age of 14, and aston ished the checker world by winning the New Jersey state title two years later in 1922; repeating in 1923. He last played in the 1946 Newark Kat.Ty, then drifted out of the game, as so many have before him.....
OPENING NO 49. 10-14, 22-18, 11-16. 10-14, 22-18, 11-16 (A), 25-22 (B), 16-20 (0, 24-19 (D),8-11, 22-17 (E), 9-13 (F), 18-9, 13-22. 26-17, 6-22, 30-26 (G) 5-9 (H), 26-17, 9-13 (1), 17-14, 4-8 (J), 29-25 (K)...... FORMS DIAGRAM
A) As this develops a front-row piece, instead of a second row, the opening ranks ahead of both #47 and #47-A,and was commonly seen under the two-move restriction... B) Highly favoured in the above mentioned era ( 1905-1930); also in early three-move ( Banks-Long 1934 & Hunt-Long, 1936 ) but the modern experts lean toward the early movement of the apex piece with 26-22. As this is the only attack of merit from the 11-16, 23-18, 10-14 opening, (26-23) it will be shown there. Other moves such as 24-20, 16-19 into Bristol play, or 24-19, 8-11 and old Paisley trails, or 18-15, 16-20, 26-22; from Opening No 51, Note B; Tinsley-Hellman, 1955 match... C) The easiest approach. If 8-11, 24-20 forces the "White Doctor" as in the next opening. D) A natural development. The early 22-17 can be played, but other moves transfer the advantage to Red;
E) White has nothing better then this colours reversed Glasgow idea. If 19-15 ( as 29-25, 4-8, 18-15, 11-18, 22-15 7-10 about forces the 27-24 break-up to draw.) 4-8, 22-17, 9-13, 17-10, 7-14, 18-9, 5-14, 30-25 (the 23-18 exchange favours Red after 12-16, but 29-25 instead is also good, as in Kears Ency. The text plays for a shot which doesn't win, but is apt to be upsetting!.) 11-18, 26-22, 3-7, 22-15, 7-11 ( 7-10 also draws then 23-19, and 1-5, but if 2-7,White has 19-16!10-19,27-23, 19-26, 31-22, 12-19 and 22-17 etc. Fuller had this with Tinsley in the 1946 Newark Kat.Ty, but the latter drew the ending.) 23-18 etc. Drawn. Hellman v. Chamblee, llth ACA Nat. Ty; Nashville, 1946..... F) The Glasgow idea response, and best. Other ways are less desirable, as if 7-10 ( or 11-16, 17-10, 6-24, 28-19, 7-10, then Chamblee's 29-25, to improve 18-14 as in Styles-Taylor, ll th.-.N. Ty. After 29-25, 4-8,25-22, 8-11, then 19-15, 10-19, 32-28 White is strong. ;S.C.)30-25, 11-16, 28-24, 4-8 is into a Bristol/Cross after 32-28, *9-l3 etc; Red draws with care.. G) 30-25 is seldom played, as Red may remove both the middle king-row pieces. The late Sam Levy once played this but with 4-8 out and 16-20 held back: 30-25, 22-26, 31-22, 2-6, 22-18, 4-8, 25-22, 7-10, 28-24, 5-9, 29-25, 11-16, 18-15, 9-13, 22-18, 3-7, 25-22, 7-11, then the pretty "Brooklyn" with *22-17, 13-22, 18-14, 10-17, 21-14, 15-22 and 14-10 etc; Alfred Jordan once missed this shot playing JP Reed in a late 1890's match; Reed later demonstrating it to his opponent and the gallery! H) In contrast, the 22-25 pitch-back is playable, but White obtains the better centre after 29-22, 5-9, 22-18, 11-16, 26-22, 4-8, 19-15, 16-19, 23-16, 12-19, 22-17, 9-13, 17-14, 1-5, 15-10, then *20-24, 27-20, and 19-23 to a long draw by Hugh Henderson.... l) An important point arises here. With 16-20 committed ( as in this opening) the text is necessary. But, in other openings ( such as the Paisley, where 4-8 has been played, and 16-20 held back, then both 9-13 and the 9-14 , exchange will draw, but here, 9-14 loses, and has been the downfall of many experts, including Newell Banks; playing Asa Long, in their 1934 title match. Instead of attempting trying to memorise which way is correct, and which way is not, if the idea is known, and the reason explained, then the student does not have to rely on memory alone..Cont: 17-10, 7-14, 29-25, 3-7, 25-22, 7-10, 31-26...Now with the piece still on 16, this move doesn't work because of the 11-15 squeeze, but here it wins. Cont: 11-15 ( if 4-8, 19-16 etc; and 26-23, 1-6, 22-17, 11-15. 28-24, 15-18,. 24-19, 8-12, 17-13, 18-22, 23-18 etc. WW- Banks-Long.) 19-l6, l2-19, 23-16, 14-18, 22-17, 18-22, 17-14, etc. is a winning White ending. Jewitt v. Gardner,in Kears Ency. J) The defender has three key moves to clear this ending- 11-16, 4-8 and the 7-10 exchange, but here again, as in many other examples, the correct order must be observed. For example:
K) The correct reply. On the surface, 23-18 might seem desirable, with a good centre, but not so, and exactly what Red is after with the innocent 4-8!..Whenever possible, one should select lines that give opponents the room, or the opportunity, to make poor moves. 11-16 first prevents 23-13, but 4-8 allows it. Cont: *13-17, 31-26, and a position similar to the 'Donaldson' win from the Glasgow, c.r. with the White piece still on 29, instead of 25.Cont: 11-15! 19-10 (if 18-4, 3-8 wins) 8-11, and White, a piece up, has no satisfactory defence.See Lees Guide & the P.P.P. for play from the Glasgow. ; After 29-25 in trunk, then 11-16 is now in order, (as the 7-10 exchange still permits 23-18.) followed with 25-22, 7-10, 14-7, 3-10, 22-18, then 2-7 (L) , 18-14, 10-17, 21-14, 8-11, 14-9, 13-17, 19-15, 11-18, 23-14, 17-22, 28-24, 22-25, 24-19, 16-23, 27-18, 12-16,18-15, 16-19, 15-10, 7-11, 9-6, 11-15, 6-2, 15-18, 2-7, then 19-24, 14-9 and 18-23 Drawn. Hellman v.Chamblee, llth ACA Nat. Ty, 1946...... L) ( Off note K ) 8-1.1 would seem quite playable, and it was given to draw by Willie Ryan in "W.C.C." page 130, Note B; also taken by Marion Tinsley vs. Ed King, in the 1974 So. Ty. But even Homer nods at times! This turns out to be a pp loss by Walter Hellman after *'28-24 (improving both 31-26 and 18-15 shown by Ryan to draw ) 1-5 ( 2-7 is now too late after 31-26, 13-17 etc;19-15, 16-19 etc and 15-8, steals the piece to win.) *18-14, 10-17, 21-14, 2-7, *31-26 ( here King relented with 23-18, 16-23, and 14-10 etc. to a draw v. Tinsley.) 13-17, 32-28, 17-21, 26-22, 21-25, then *19-15 etc; is a winning," White ending, shown by Hellman in the 2nd KCA Ty. book; Page 170, Note F.......
OPENING NO 49-A. 10-14, 22-18, 12-16. 10-14, 22-18, 12-16(A), 24-20(B), *16-19(C), 23-16, 14-23, 26-19(D), 8-12(E), 31-26(F-Var.1). 6-10, 27-23(G) 11-15(H), 16-11(1), 7-16, 20-11, 15-24, 28-19, 3-8, 19-16(J)... FORMS DIAGRAM
A) Barred for many years, as White, by delaying 25-22 can force new play at Note F, which was once thought to win..... B) Into a variation of the historic "White Doctor" opening, which the three-move restriction restored from the ashes, along with many other beautiful (but discarded) opening lines of play. Anything else here would permit Red to enter square 20, and later 8-12, into familiar drawing lines... C) Forced to play a piece short, but the cramp on Whites right side is just strong enough to survive the many attacks. Other moves, such as 6-10, 7-10, or 8-12 are all met with 27-24, and White wins; shown in Robertson's Guide, back in the past century... D) If White declines the gambit piece with 27-18 instead, then 8-12 recovers and assumes the offensive.. E) The proper follow-up to prevent 16-12... F) This, plus the next few moves, is the new line of play referred to in Note A, and has been subjected to much analysis over the past 10 years. 25-22, 6-10 is into the older lines; more common to Opening No 47. See Variation 1.... G) Again, 25-22 goes into lines shown in Var. 1.. H) Vital !..9-14 is a Lees Guide line, then 25-22, 5-9 but corrected to win by the noted analyst J. Atkinson almost 100 years ago; "DPWM'.' 8/21/86... I) This was the main objection to admittance of this opening, as 25-22 again returns to the older play. J) White has no other attack of merit, but this is quite strong, and forces the defender to step softly. If 11-7? ( which featured in the 1979 I-D ty.) then 2-11, 25-22, and*9-13 ( not 11-16, 22-18, 8-11,29-25, 4-8, 25-22, 9-13, then *21-17 corrects 18-14, shown to draw-Mesch-Mendez,"CC" p. 684M, col.l.Cont: 5-9, 30-25, 1-5, *19-15!,10-19, 32-27 wins a piece short) leaves White with no tenable defence after 32-28, 5-9, 29-25, 10-14, 22-18, 11-16 25-22, 8-11 R.W..Dowsey vs. Todd, 1978 I-D mail ty..... Continue after 19-16 in trunk: *8-15, (the necessary capture. If 12-19 instead, then 23-16, 8-15, 16-11, 15-19, 26-23, 19-26, 30-23, 10-15, 25-22, 1-6, 29-25, 9-13, 32-28, 6-10, 21-17,5-9, 28-24, 9-14, 25-21, 2-6, then 24-19, 15-24 and 22-18 etc; WW. S. Weslow v. J. Howe, Jr; 1970 Hayes mail ty.) 32-27, ( but now if 16-11, Red avoids the 15-19 exchange with 10-14 instead, then 25-22, 14-18 etc.12-16, 26-23, 1-6, 22-17, 5-9, 17-13, 9-14, 30-26, 15-19, 32-27, 6-10, 13-9, 10-15, 9-5, 15-18, 5-1, then 2-6! 1-17, and 18-22 draws, rif.) 12-19, 23-16, 1-6, 16-11, 15-19, 26-22 ( the 26-23 exchange is now out of order after 10-15, 25-22, and 6-10, but 25-22 is a good vary met with *10-15, 21-17==or 29-25, 6-10, 21-17, and the 2x2 19-23, 27-18, 9-14 etc; a draw by M. Tinsley===now the saving shot with 15-18, 22-15 and 2-7 etc.Draws.) and Red must be wary! The piece must go to square 15 to draw. as both 10-14 or 9-14 lose. 10-14, 27-23,19-26, 30-23, 6-10, 23-19, 9-13, 22-17 x then 29-25, 14-18 & 21-17 is in time to steal the man on square 10.. JE Nelson lost to R. Fortman, in ACF 200 club ty prelims...After the proper 10-15, then 27-23,19-26, 30-23, *6-10, 22-17, 9-13, 25-22, 5-9, 23-18, 15-19, 18-15, 2-6,11-7, 4-8, 7-3, 19-23, 3-12, 10-19, 12-16, 6-10, 16-11,19-24, 11-7, 10-15 etc. Draws; as shown by E. Frazier.... VARIATION 1 ( Off trunk @10th ) 25-22(K), 6-10(L), 31-26(M), 11-15, 27-23(N), 15-24, 28-19, 4-8, 29-25(0), 8-11, 23-18(P), *9-14(Q), 18-9,5-14, 22-17, *14-18(R), 17-14, 10-17, 21-14(3)... K) White can also delay this with 30-26, then 6-10, 27-23, 9-13, (avoiding 11-15, 16-11 etc.) 25-22, 2-6, 29-25, 5-9, 32-27, 4-8, 19-15, 12-19 (or 10-19- a Rex-Chamberlain draw.) 23-16, 10-19, 27-24, 19-23, 26-19, 6-10, 19-15, 10-19, 24-15, 11-18, 22-15 and 8-11 etc; a McKelvie-Dallas draw in tie "D.R." 3/30..... L) Now into a highly-analyzed variation of this opening, which several analysts ( including Bert Titus, of Minneapolis; of 'Phantom Fox Den" fame) have attempted to prove unsound—but all failed in the end...As there have been entire books devoted to this opening, we have the space only to skim the surface.... M) White has many ways:
N) If 28-24, then 10-14, 19-10, 12-28, 20-16, 9-13, 26-23, 4-8, 16-12, 13-17, 22-13, and 2-6 draws. W. Martin v. E.King, 1971 mail game. See also the 1976 I-D mail ty. book. There is much excellent play in these annual ACF publications on this and other openings. O) If 22-17, Red presses at once with *9-13 (as 8-11, 17-13, 1-6, *29-25, 11-15, 32-28 x 3-8, 25-22, 9-14, 22-18, 8-11 then *30-25 is a WW.) then 17-14, 10-17, 21-14, 1-6, 29-25, 6-10, 25-21, 10-17, 21-14, 13-17, 23-18, 8-11, 32-27, 2-6, 27-23, 6-10 30-25, 10-15, xx and 5-9 etc. Draws.. P) The powerful Atkinson attack, as in Lees Guide. Here 22-17 is also strong. See Long-Hunt 1936 match. Q) All other moves lose. See Robertson's Guide,p.101 R) Once again, the only way.11-15 is also a pp loss. S) Cont: *11-15, 19-10, 12-19, 20-l6( or the Atkinson 26-22, 18-23, 22-18, 19-24, 20-16,24-27, 16-12, 7-11 'etc; Red draws under a bridge ending.) *2-6 (not 19-24, 16-12, 7-11, 25-22 etc.WW) 32-27, 6-15, 14-9, then the fine *3-8 saves the day!- A tricky draw credited to the brilliant Scot analyst, Tom Colston, of Glasgow...
OPENING No 50. 10-14, 23-18,14-23.
10-14, 23-18 (A), 14-23, 27-18 (B), 12-16 (C), 32-27 (D), 16-20 (E), 26-23, 11-15 (F), 18-11, 8-15, 30-26 (G),4-8 (H) 22-18 (1), 15-22, 25-18, 7-10 (J), 29-25, 10-14, 24-19 (K).. FORMS DIAGRAM
A) One of the four so-called original 'barred openings' (11-16 and 12-16, 23-19—9-14 and 10-14, 23-18 ) which were abandoned after the 6th A. Ty. in NYC, 1924.After the advent of the 3-move style 8 years later, two of these were revived, and remain in the ballot at the present time. This is considered the least dangerous, and easier to defend then its 'Double-Cross' companion. See 'Basic Checkers; Part 2, Opening No 34...,. B) Although 26-19 offers more resistance here then in the D.C. opening, it is shunned in master practice, as Red has two troublesome attacks:
C) In contrast to Opening No 34, this is the only attack of merit; demonstrating once again the respective strengths of the opening move 9-14, as opposed to 10-14... D) The initial move of the consolidation to repair the weakened double corner, and perhaps the only tenable defence. 26-23 first permits further damage to White's vulnerable right flank after 16-19, 24-15, 9-14, 18-9, 11-27, 32-23, 5-14, 22-18, 6-9, 25-22. Through ignorance of pp, the writer once had this with White playing Stan Morey in the 1933 Cedar Point ty. and managed to draw, but no doubt stronger play was missed by the Michigan expert... E) Customary, as it virtually forces the White reply. If the 11-15 exchange is taken, White can exchange back with 22-18, and delay 26-23 with a respectable game. F) If 6-10, 30-26, 11-15, 18-11, 8-15, 23-18, 7-11, (or 9-14, 18-11, 7-16, 26-23, 4-8, 22-18, 5-9, 24-19, 8-12, 25-22 then 2-7 is the Edwin Hunt v.W.Hellman llth ACA ty. draw, or 3-7, as in the Fortman-Tinsley 6th Dist.open Ty. 1949 draw.See 'ABC' Game 66.) now White can pick up a tempo ( with 6-10 played) and again hold the 26-23 move back with the 22-17 exchange, as played by John Horr vs. Asa Long, in their 1923 match... G) White now has a choice, proving that this opening is not on the critical list. 22-18, 15-22, 25-18, which the writer used vs. the late Paul Thompson, in our 1963 mail match for the US title. Much additional play may be found in "Top-Notch Checkers',' Game 15 & 16.... H) If 6-10, 23-18 is into Note F, and if 9-14 instead, then 22-18, 15-22, 25-9, 5-14, 29-25. 4-8, 25-22 6-10, 24-19, 8-11, 19-16, 1-5, 22-17, 5-9, 17-13, 10-15, 13-6, 2-9 26-22, 15-19 ( or the 15-18 shot to draw; E. Wylie v. LL Hall.) 31-26, 11-15, then the White escape with *16-11, 7-16,and 22-17, per LL Hall... I) With 6-10 held back, 23-18 is best left alone, as both 8-11 and 7-11 are powerful; also shown in "TNC", p.34. We prefer 8-11, then if 26-23 (18-14 also has its prolems.) 6-10, 24-19, 15-24, 28-19, 9-14, 18-9, 5-14, 22-18 ( varies from 19-16, 1-5, 22-17, 10-15 etc; R.W. Tinsley vs. Prof. Fraser, in their 1952 Montreal match.) 1-5, 18-9, 5-14. 25-22, 11-15, 19-16, 14-18, 23-14, 10-26, 31-22, 15-19, 22-17 ( 16-12 also loses after 7-10, 21-17, 19-24, 27-23, 24-27, 23-19, 27-31, 29-25, 31-26, 25-21, 26-23, 19-16, 10-15, 17-13, 23-18. 22-17, 2-6 R.W.) 7-10, 29-25, 10-15, 25-22, 2-7 R.W; Fortman vs. ET Rolader,in 1965 Hayes mail ty. J) The 9-14 exchange can be met without undue difficulty by White. Cont: 18-9, 5-14, 29-25. 6-10, 24-19, 8-11, 25-22, 11-15, 19-16, 2-6, 22-17 ( varies from the draw with 23-19; Ferrie-Smlth, :"D.W."G. 2054 ) 15-18, 23-19, 10-15 etc. then 16-11, 1-6, 27-24, 20-27, 31-24, 6-9, 24-19 etc. Drawn. Rolader v. Fortman, 1965 Haves ty. K) Neceassary, as both 25-22 or 18-15 result in the Horr-Long win. Cont: 6-10, now 18-15, 1-6 and *19-16 etc. is the Heffner draw. See "TNC-'page 35 .Note G.. Corrections Note F. After the 22-17 exchange, Red may use the overlooked 10-15! As in a Jordan-Tanner 6th A ty game;later improved for use by m Tinsley v A Long; 1981 match. See WTC g 36
OPENING NO 50-A 10-14, 23-19, 6-10. 10-14, 23-19 (A), 6-10 (B), 19-15 (c), 10-19 (D), 24-15, 11-18, 22-15, 7-11(E), 26-22, 11-18, 22-15, 14-17(F), 21-14, 9-18, 28-24 (G), 12-16, 24-20 (H), 16-19, 20-16 (1).. FORMS DIAGRAM
A) Although this mirrors Red's opening move. White holds the advantage for two reasons. First, because the centre has been abandoned, and secondly, because the first side must commit himself with his second reply... B) This was one of the openings cast aside in 1932, on the assumption that White's next move was powerful enough to win. But the proof of the pudding lies in cold figures, rather then assumptions, and in the past 10 years since this opening was reinstated, its soundness remains unchallenged.. C) Attacking the soft, underbelly of the Red formation, with ample protection for the advanced piece. Other replies permit the return to less drastic published lines. D) There is an option here with 11-18 that further tends to weaken the Red double corner, but on which we have yet to see a forced WW. It was first used in important play by Bobby Martin vs. Marion Tinsley, in the strong 1974 Phil. Nat. Ty,( ACFB M44, Game 40,) and although Martin lost, a draw was shown by annotator Eugene Fraz ier. It was also tried by the writer vs. Mac Banks, in the 1976 ACF 200 club mail ty. as a "goat-getter", to paraphrase Derek Oldbury, since our opponent selectedthis opening...11-18, 22-6, 1-10, 25-22. 8-11, 22-17.(or 27-23 11-15, 24-19 etc-Martin-Tinsley.) 9-13, 30-25, 13-22, 25-9, 5-14, 26-22, 11-15 unfinished, due to Mr. Banks` illness. One continuation might run: 24-19,15-24, 28-19, 4-8, 29-25, 8-11, 22-17, 11-15. 32-28, 15-24, 28-19, 7-11, 25-22, 11-15, 27-23, 15-24, 22-18, 12-16, 18-9, 10-15, 17-13, 3-8,. 9-6 etc.and 8-12 Drawn. Rev. Dan Vestal v. K. Todd, 1978 I-D ty. mail game. E) The initial move of the "Lafferty defence", used by the Kentucky master against world champion Marion Tinsley in the critical 7th round of the 1970 Nat. Ty. At Houston, to a fine draw.(ACFB #124, G. 81)..Red, if he so desires, can exchange 8-11, 15-8, 4-11, 25-22. Then 7-10 is into the following opening, but other replies, such as 12-16 or 14-18 are too difficult for crossboard play under tournament time pressure. F) The proper follow-up, placing the Red piece in the centre in conjunction with White, with the Red weakness lying in the absence of his piece on square 6. Once again,12-16 must be viewed with skepticism after 25-22,16-19, 22-17 14-18, 17-13 ( instead of 17-14-Bass v.Elsenhower pp draw ) 19-23, 13-6, 1-19, 27-24, 3-7, 24-15, 2-6, 31-26, 7-11, 26-19, 18-23, 29-25, 11-18, 19-16, 6-9, 16-12, 8-1112-8, 11-16, 8-3, 9-14, and 3-7 White Wins. E. Fuller v. M. Tinsley, 1976 Fla. Open Ty... G) White has other ways in:
H) 25-21 might be played first, but 16-19, 24-20 goes into the next note. I) Once again, White has good options in
OPENING NO 50-B. 10-14, 23-19, 7-10. 10-14, 23-19, 7-10 (A), 19-15 (B), 10-19, 24-15, 11-18, 22-15, 8-11 (C, Var. l, 2) 15-8, 4-11, 25-22, 6-10, 28-24 (Q) 3-7, 24-20 (R), 9-13, 27-23, 1-6, 32-27 (S)... FORMS DIAGRAM
A) During the past 10 years, many hundreds of mail games have been contested on this opening; labelled the "Diabolical Denny", and other less complimentary titles. The best defence has been a subject of much controversy, with claims of hidden wins against both 8-11 and 14-18, but at the present writing, we have seen none established in print, and even a third option in the radical 3-7! May also stand. See Var. I... B) Notes B and C of the previous opening also apply here. C) Removing the unwelcome invader, but many problems still remain, with White in control of the centre. Other ways are with 3-7 and 14-18; Variation 1...3-7(D). 25-22(E), 7-10, 27-24, 10-19, 24-15, 8-11, 15-8, 4-11, 28-24, 6-10, 24-20 (F), *1-6 (G), 32-27 *10-15, 22-18, 14-32, 31-27 etc. Drawn. Karl Albrecht.. D) A defence analysed by Karl Albrecht, and shown to D.E. Oldbury at the 1974 Nat. Ty. As the latter was unprepared ( without prior analysis ) to use it at that time, he tried 12-16 instead, and lost to Don Lafferty (ACFB 144, page 60, V.I) But two years later at Sanford, the British master adopted it vs. Earl Ingram with a drawn result;ACFB 160, G. 44. E) 28-24 cuts down some of the attacking scope after 7-11, 26-22, 11-18, 22-15, 8-11, 15-8, 4-11, 25-22, 6-10, then 27-23 is into Note F... * F) If 26-23, 2-7, 22-18, 9-13, 18-9, 5-14, 29-25, 11-15 is the Oldbury-Ingram line, where the Florida veteran permitted a quick draw with 25-22, 14-18 etc. Annotator E. Fuller gives alternatives in 31-27 or 31-26 to draw, but does not mention the subtle 32-27; after which *1-6 transposes into a K. Grover v. JB Hanson game played back in the '30's from 9-13, 23-19, 6-9, 19-15, 10-19, 24-15, 11-18, 22-15, 7-11, 26-22, 11-18, 22-15, 3-7, 28-24,1-6, 25-22, 8-11, 15-8, 4-11, 22-18, 6-10, 29-25, 9-14, 18-9, 5-14, 27-23, 11-15, 32-27 then 2-6 same...Cont: 24-20, 14-17, 21-14, 10-17, 31-26, 7-11 ( Willie Ryan's idea to ease Grover's thin draw after 1-6.) 25-22, 17-21, 27-24, then the fine 21-25, 30-21, 12-16, 21-17, 6-9, 23-18, 16-19, 17-14, x 13-17 to draw. G) Albrecht's fine waiting move which seems to save this variation from the scrap-bin. But we suspect that the final word has not yet been said on this defence... Variation 2... 14-18 (H), 21-17, 12-16, 28-24 (1), 16-19, 24-20, 9-13, 17-14, 2-7, 25-21, *18-22, 26-17, 13-22, 30-26, 6-9, 26-17, 9-18, 15-10, 7-14, 17-10, 18-22, 20-16, 5-9, 16-120), 8-11, 21-17, 11-16, 17-13, 9-14, 32-28, 14-17, 13-9, 17-21, 9-6, 21-25, 6-2, 25-30, 27-24 (K), 19-23, 24-20, 16-19, 20-16 (L), *30-25 (M), 10-7 (N), 3-10, 2-6 (0), *10-15 (P), 6-10, 23-26, 10-14, 26-30, 14-18, 25-21, 18-11, and 19-23 Drawn. J. Caldwell v. Rev.Vestal 1976 mail game... H) Eugene Frazier has stated in the ACFB that both this and 3-7 lose. If so, his play has yet to be revealed!.. I) 17-13, 16-19, 25-21, 9-14, 29-25 is the same as an Opening No 47-A line from 10-14, 22-18, 7-10, 25-22, 11-16, 18-15, 10-19, 24-15, 16-19!, 23-16, 12-19, 22-17, 14-18, 17-13, 9-14, 29-25 as played by Rev. Vestal vs. the writer in the ACF 200 club mail ty. Cont: 5-9 ( if 2-7? The White side has the shot with 21-17, 14-21, 26-23 x etc and 14-9) here, failing to discover any profit in 26-22, we conceded the draw with 27-23 etc... J) Or the original Tinsley attack with 21-17, 9-14, 17-13, 8-12, 16-11, 14-17, 13-9, 17-21, 9-6, 21-25, 6-2, 25-30, 32-28 ( or 10-7, 3-10, 2-7, *10-15, 7-10, *22-26, 31-22, 30-26, 22-17 and *19-23 etc. Draws. EF Hunt.) 12-16, 2-6, 16-20, 11-7, then the saving *22-26, 31-22, 30-25, 22-17, 25-21. 17-13, 4-8, 7-2, 8-12, 2-7, 3-8 etc. Draws. The text was later suggested by John Caldwell, and seriously threatened this variation... K) If 2-6, 30-25 drs L) A deceptive line used by Rev. Vestal with success in the 1976 I-D mail ty. 2-7 instead was the usual way, then again a pitch saves the line—*22-26, 31-22, 30-25 as found by Johnie Mitchell. White may follow with either 22-17 or 22-18, but no forced wins have been shown. See the 1978 I-D mail ty. book. M) But now the pitch seems bad after 31-22, 30-25, 22-17, 25-22, 17-13, 22-18, 2-6. 23-27, 6-9, and *18-15-to a win shown by Wm. Subkow, in the ACFB 4/77; also Note K N) If 16-11, 25-21, 10-7, 3-10, 2-6, *10-15, 6-10, 23-26, 11-7, 26-30, 7-2 *21-17 10-7, 17-14, 12-8 etc. to a draw;by M. Rex...See Todd v. Vestal, 1976 I-D ty... O) If 2-7, 10-14 is sound, then 7-11 ( if 7-10,25-21 drs) 26-23, 11-15, 19-23, 15-18, 23-27. 18-9, 1-5 Drs.M.Rex. P) But now, 10-14 leads to disaster after 6-9, 14-17, 9-14, 17-21, 14-18, 23-26, 18-23, 26-30, 16-11, 19-26, 12-8, 1-6, 8-3, 6-10, 3-7, 10-15, 11-8, 4-11, 7-16, 15-18, 16-19, 18-23, 19-24, 23-27, 24-19. 27-32, and 19-23 to a beautiful win. M. Long v.Rev. Vestal, 1976 I-D ty. Q (Off trunk) There are other excellent ways that the first side must have a knowledge of when playing this defence. IT IS OF VITAL IMPORTANCE TO GAIN SQUARE 15 AS SOON AS POSSIBLE—with one notable exception!...
R) But against 26-23 now ( with 28-24 played) Red must not be too impulsive with 10-15 ( 1-6 instead, then if 29-25, 11-15 seems to draw.) as *22-17, 14-18, 23-14, 9-18, now White can get in *24-20 and the Case-Hellman win mentioned above. What is good for the goose, iNote Q, #2, is not necessarily good for the gander.. S) A splendid move by Marion Tinsley, to improve earlier pp by Eugene Frazier who gave 31-27 here in the ACFB. After 32-27, continue : 6-9, 29-25, 2-6, 23-19, 11-15, 19-16!, 12-19 and 20-16——still another widely debated position in this quirky opening...After much analysis, and many mail games, it would seem that the 19-24 return pitch is easiest, then 27-20, and 15-19, 16-11, (if 16-12, Red works in 7-11, 12-8, 11-15, 8-3, and 19-23 etc; to a pp draw by Frazier.) 19-24, 22-18, 14-23, 26-19, 24-28, 11-7, and 28-32. There is play remaining, but the defence seems sound... corrections Note C Var. 1 @ 14th .Instead of Albrecht`s 32-27, Wh has still another idea from the fertile brain of m Tinsley with 32-28, applying added pressure on the defender. Note F @ move 13. Instead of 32-27, white also has 30-26, as played by E Fuller v V Montero, in the 1979 Fla. Open ty. Note M @ 6th move. Instead of 22-18, play has been shown on 23-26* instead to draw.
OPENING NO 50-C. 10-14, 23-19,11-15. 10-14, 23-19, 11-15( A), 19-10, 6-15, 26-23 (B,Var.1). 8-11, 22-18,( C ) 15-22, 25-18, 7-10 (D), 29-25, 11-16 (E), 31-26 (F), 1-6 (G), 18-15, 10-19, 24-15, 4-8, 26-22 (H)... FORMS DIAGRAM
A) Another of the 1931 banned openings. This has ( or soon will be ) been admitted to the official three-move ballot for use in the 1982 Nat. Ty. Similar to a 10-14, 23-18, opening, c.r. with a move in hand, which eliminates many tempos. This was sometimes seen in the free-style days from 11-15, 23-19, 10-14 x, known as the "Virginia" in the NECP (1876) also Janvier's Anderson*.. B) White has several other lines of importance. 22-18, (as in Var. 1) or: 22-17, 14-18, 17-14 (if 17-13, 9-14, 26-23? 8-11, 24-19, 15-24, 28-19, 11-16. 25-22, 18-25, 29-22, 4-8, 22-18, 7-10, 18-9, 5-14, 30-25, 3-7, 25-22, 14-17 etc. then 7-10, 27-24, 16-20 and 23-18 to a draw. Fortman v. GW Miller, 1977 Dist. 6 v. Dist.7 mail match.) 8-11, 24-19, 15-24, 28-19, 11-16, 19-15, 4-8, 21-17, 16-20, 17-13, *12-16 ( not 1-6, *26-22 WW) 13-6, 1-19, *26-22 ( not 26-23 etc. as 2-6 RW-Lee Hunger.)19-24, 22-15, 7-10, 14-7, 2-18, 30-26, 16-19, 26-22, then 18-23, 27-18 and 19-23 Draws. J. Caldwell v.K. Todd, 1979 I-D. C) This single corner exchange seems stronger then the opposite wing trade with 24-19 15-24, 28-19, 7-10, 22-18, 9-13, 18-9, 5-14, 25-22, 11-15, 30-26 etc. to draw.Dan McGrath v. M. Banks 1975 I-D mail ty. D) As played in many mail games, although 11-16 instead may also draw. E) We consider this preferable to 3-7 which can be met with 25-22, 1-6, 31-26, 4-8, 24-20, 9-13, 18-9; 5-14, 28-24 ( or the promising 23-18 exchange at once.) 14-17, 21-14, 10-17, then 23-18 ( instead of 24-19, 7-10 to a neat draw- Vestal v. Dowsey, 1976 I-D ty.) 7-10, and 18-14 is a probable WW... F) As played by the writer vs GW Miller, and transposes into a Reynolds-Rub in line played in the 7th A. Ty.(C.P.) from: 10-14, 22-18, 11-15, 18-11, 8-15, 26-22, 7-11, 22-18, 15-22, 25-18, 6-10, 29-25,here Reynolds lost after 9-13, with 11-16 instead offered to draw by annotator EF Hunt, followed with 31-26 and same position. If 25-22 ( instead of 31-26 ) then *1-6, 31-26, 4-8, 24-20, 16-19, 23-16, 12-19, 20-16 etc. a draw by M. Rex;..(*24-20, 8-11, 28-24, 4-8, 32-28,*12-16 into Old 14th.) G) Mr. Hunt's continuation. However. Mr. Miller passed this up with 16-20 instead, then: 18-15, 10-19, 24-15, 9-13, 25-22, 4-8, 22-18 ( White had the option of 15-11, 8-15 and 23-18 with an unclear position.) 1-6, 18-9,5-14, 23-18, 14-23, 27-18, 2-7, 26-22, 7-10, 15-11, 8-15, 18-11 *10-15, 32-27, *12-16, 27-23, 15-19, 22-18 etc. Draw... H) Cont: 16-19, 23-16, 12-19, 22-17, 14-18, 17-13, 9-14, 30-26, 6-9, 13-6, 2-9, 27-24 Drawn. EF Hunt... Variation I... 22-18 (l), 15-22, 26-10, 7-14, 25-22 (J), 8-11, 24-19 ( K) , 11-16 (L), 27-23, 4-8, 22-18, 9-13, 18-9, 5-14, 29-25, 3-7 (M), 25-22, 7-10, 30-26, 1-5, 19-15, 10-19, 32-27! (N), *14-18 (0), 23-14, 8-11, 27-23, 11-15, 31-27, 16-20, 23-16, 12-19, 27-23, 2-6, 23-16, 6-9, 14-10 then 9-14 is fine analysis to draw by Lee Hunger... I) Virtually eliminating the Red centre, as used by Don Lafferty vs. the writer in mail play. J) Or 24-19 first, but the text produces more options. K) One being 27-23, 11-16, 24-20, 16-19, 23-16, 12-19, 30-26, 4-8, 32-27. 2-7, 22-17, 14-18, 27-23, 18-27, 31-15, 9-13, 17-14 ( if 26-22, 7-11, 15-10, 5-9 draws.) then 1-6 and an agreed draw. Fortman v. Lafferty... L) If 1-6?, 22-17 ( improves 27-23, 6-10, 22-18, 3-8 etc to an easy draw-M. Banks v. D. McGrath, 1975 mail game.) 14-18, 28-24, 3-7. 19-15, 4-8, 17-14, 11-16, 24-20.16-19, 29-25, 9-13, 30-26 WW- Todd v.Caldwell, 1979 I-D mail ty M) Abandoned as a draw in Master-Play, but there is fine play still remaining in this position. N) A nice touch by Dan McGrath, the veteran Bethlehem, Pa.. expert, and good enough to defeat one of the top ranking mail players. 0) 8-11?, 27-24, 11-15, 24-20, 2-6, 20-11, 6-10, 23-16, 12-19, 11-8, 14-18, 22-17, 13-22, 26-17, 18-22, 8-3 and Red is too late to get through..WW- M. Rex v. D.McGrath1979 I-D mail ty.... Success in checkers is based primarily on the use of methodical knowledge. The authorities have given us much specific knowledge, but very little method, which accounts for the student's struggle to gain over-all understanding of the game......Maurice Chamblee .... Corrections Var 1. Instead of 16-20, D Oldbury sent 2-7! 23-18, 7-11, 21-17, 16-20, 27-23, & 11-16! x 20-24, 14-10, 24-27 as a possible Red win.
OPENING NO 51. 10-14, 23-19, 11-16. 10-14, 23-19, 11-16 (A), 26-23 (B), 6-10 (C), 30-26 (D),1-6 (E), 19-15 (F), 10-19, 24-15, 16-19 (G), 23-16, 12-19, 22-17 (H), 14-18, 17-13 (1), 7-10 (J), 25-22, 18-25, 29-22 (K)... FORMS DIAGRAM
A) The customary reply is two-move, moving a first rank piece. Although it surrenders the centre there is nothing better... B) Although this was played much earlier, it is generally known as the Stewart-Banks variation, which gave the late American master his only win in this historic 1922 Glasgow, Set. title match. Other ways are:
C) The first side has other ways in 16-20, or 9-13, and into Opening No 16, playing for the tourist trap after 24-20, 14-17 etc; but the text is preferred; also an Opening No 36 line... D) 22-18 ( as 24-20 permits Red to open the position with 9-13, 20-11, 8-24, 28-19, then 14-17 etc; a Freeman vs. Heffner draw in M.P. ) 9-13, 18-9, 5-14, 24-20 ( 25-22 is out of order after the 14-17 break and the 7-10 grip) I-5 ( best, as the 8-11 delay lets in 28-24, 1-5, 31-26, 11-15 etc and 26-22 .) 20-11, 8-24, 28-19, 4-8 ( or 7-11, 25-22, 11-15, 32-28 etc;Bradford-Christie 2ndIM draw.) 25-22, 14-17 ( also. 8-11. 22-18, 11-15, 18-9. 15-24, 27-20 5-14. 29-25, 3-7, 25-22, 14-17 etc; a draw by Mike Lieber:) 21-14, 10:26. 31-22, 8-11, 29-25. 7-10, 22-18 3-7 25-22 ( as played by Bobby Martin vs. the writer in the finals of the 1951 111. State ty, instead of the 27-24 Wendemuth, or 25-21.Cohen-0'Conner draws.) 11-15, 18-11. 7-16, 22-18, 13-17, 18-14 then *17-22 etc. drew——not 2-7? 27-24. 16-20. then 30-26, 20-27 and 19-15 etc steals the piece on 7—White Wins. E) The proper reply against the threatened 19-15 exchange. Play has been shown on both 16-20 and 9-13 in the •Draughts Review', but White is powerful after the 19-15 trade.And the odd 7-11 was taken by AJ Heffner v. AB Scott, in the 2nd IM, with a drawn result.G. 164. F) This centre exchange, directed against the weakened Red double corner is the correct way. 24-20 again is secondary after 9-13, 20-11, 8-24, 28-19, 14-17 etc; a M. Krantz y. H. Freyer 1937 NYC ty. game... G) It is not difficult to see that this protective coverup is necessary, or all is lost. H) Continuing the press against the opposing double corner. 27-24 instead is a poor move, met with 14-18, 32-27, 9-13 then 24-20 may draw, but 21-17 allows the "Comet"shot with 18-23, 27-18, 6-10, 15-6, 2-9, 24-15, and 9-14 etc. Red Wins. Willie Ryan over Jim Lester in exhibition play at Alton, 1939... I) In this particular case, 17-14 relinquishes the White attack after 9-13, and White has nothing but 27-23 etc; to a quick draw... J) Once again, Red must protect his weak double corner,as 8-12 (if 9-14, 26-22 WW ) 21-17, 4-8 ( 7-10 is now too late- the Ferrie-Bradford 2nd IM shot with 17-14, 10-17 and 15-10 etc. WW ) 25-21, 12-16, 29-25, 16-20, 26-22, 19-23, 17-14 etc; to a long WW by Heffner... K) Continue: 3-7 ( or 2-7, 27-24, 7-11, 22-17 etc. to a draw- NW Banks v. Asa Long, 1934 world title match.) 22-17, then 8-12.....to here, the famous Stewart-Banks game, where the Scottish master used 7-11 instead, as shown in Master-Play; later played by Willie Ryan vs.N. Rubin in the 8th A. Ty; 1934. With no comments by annotator Rubin!. After 7-11, Banks took 27-23 (with Rubin conceding the quick draw by 27-24 etc. and 26-23) then 11-27, 32-16; an ending that doesn't appear too dangerous. Cont: 8-12 ( here Ed Bruch drew vs. Ed Scheldt in the 1976 Fla. Open with 10-15, 16-12, 8-11, 12-8, then 11-16, 8-3, 16-19, 26-23 etc. which seems quite convincing.) 16-11, 10-15, 28-24, 12-16, 24-20, 16-1920-16, 19-24, 16-12, 15-18, 12-8, 18-22 ( 24-28 also draws.) 26-23, 24-28, 8-3, 28-32, 23-19, 32-28, 11-8, 4-11, 3-8, 11-16, 19-12, 28-24, 8-11, 24-19, 12-8, 19-23, 8-3——At this stage, Stewart had intended to play 23-18, 3-8 then the 6-10 exchange and draw.However, as his 5 minute time period was running out, he saw, to his dismay, that Banks could play *3-7 ( instead of 3-8 ) and win. So, having to play something, or forfeit on time, he took the losing 6-10, where *23-19 would still have resulted in a draw. After 6-10, Banks won with 13-6, 2-9, 17-13, 9-14, 3-7, 22-25, 7-2, 14-18, 2-7, 10-15, 7-10, 23-19. 10-14, 18-22 White Wins. This was the 29th game; Banks pulling up within one game of a tie; later missing a win on a Defiance in the 37th game; losing the match 1-2, with 37 draws.... Returning to the J.C. Brown line with 8-12 ( instead of 7-11 ) which plays for a trap. Cont: 27-24, (not 27-23?, which has caught several experts, including Sam Cohen and NW Banks, after 4-8, 23-16, then 10-19,and White eventually loses this piece on sq. 16 ) 4-8, 32-27, 7-11, 27-23, 11-27, 24-15, 10-19, 31-15, 12-16, 26-23, 2-7, ( not 16-20, 23-18, 2-7, 17-14, 8-12, 21-17, 12-16, 15-11 WW ) 15-10 ( or the Brown draw with 28-24) 6-15, 13-6, 8-12, 6-2, 7-11, 2-6, 15-19, 23-18, 19-24 etc. Drawn. Sam Cohen v. G. Davies.... Supplementary Play.. Case v. Ryan; 1929 Chicago match: 10-14, 23-19, 11-16, 27-23, 16-20, 32-27, 8-11, 19-16,12-19, 24-8, 4-11, 23-19, 6-10, 26-23. 9-13, 22-17, 13-22, 25-9, 5-14, 29-25, 11-15, 25-22, 15-24, 28-19, 7-11, 19-16, 2-6, 16-7. 14-18, 23-14, 10-26, 31-22, 3-10, 21-17, 6-9! (both 10-14 & 10-15 draw) 17-13, 10-l5? ( both missed *9-14, 13-9, *1-5 to draw !) 13-6, 1-10, 27-23, 20-24, 23-18, 15-19, 18-15, 10-14, 15-10, 24-27, 10-6, 27-31, 6-1, 19-23, 1-6, 31-27, 30-25, 23-26, 25-21 WW ( Ryan).
OPENING NO 52. 10-14, 23-19,14-18. 10-14, 23-19, 14-18 (A), 22-15, 11-18, 21-17 (B, Var.1 ), 8-11 (C), 17-13 (D), 9-14 (E), 26-23 (F), 11-16 (G), 31-26 (H) 16-20 (1), 25-21, 4-8 (J), 29-25, 7-10, 26-22 (K), 2-7 (L) 22-15, 7-11 (M)... FORMS DIAGRAM
A) A companion to Opening No 37 (9-14, 23-19, 14-18).The piece remaining here on square 9 ( instead of 10 ) offers a better support to the outpost man on square 18, and the resulting attacks, although varied, are not critical. Another of the famous games of the world title 2-move matches was contested on this opening; Chas. Barker's come from behind win to tie Richard Jordan in their 1900 Boston meeting; Jordan using 14-18 to dodge a possible Boston cook, but getting into one after all!... B) The popular attack, as used by Barker, but 26-22, as in Var. 1 has its staunch proponents. Both serve the same purpose in different ways; to pressure the vulnerable square 18. Other moves are less significant; 19-15, 12-16, 24-20, 16-19 into a 10-14 Bristol, and if 26-23 instead then 9-14 is a secondary Opening No 37 line... C) Best. Louis Ginsberg once played 9-13 vs. Sam Gonotsky in their 1925 match, hoping for the complications of the 'Laird & Lady' after 17-14, but it was rightly (declined with the powerful 26-23 ( 26-22 is also good ) then 13-22, 23-14, 6-10, 25-18, 10-17, 31-26, 8-11, 29-25, 17-21 and 18-14 with White best. Rumors have persisted for many years that White missed a win, but to date, we have not seen the evidence!... D) If 17-14, Red still has the 'Mixed Opening' with 9-13 if he so desires this particular style of play. If not, then 4-8 is available, 24-20 and the 11-15 exchange, into ancient play by A. Anderson... E) This can be delayed with 4-8, as played by Jordan v. Barker. Cont: 24-20, then Jordan tried 9-14?, and was soon in a losing variation similar to an 'Old 14th' after *25-21, 6-10 ( if 7-10 or 11-15 into losing OId 14th) 29-25, 1-6, 26-23, 11-15, 28-24, 6-9. 13-6, 2-9, 31-26, 9-13, 26-22, 8-11, 32-28, 3-8. and 21-17 etc. WW...9-14 should be held back with 7-10 instead, then 25-21,10-14, |29-25,*2-7, 28-24, 7-10 and now into a sound 'Old 14th'; a McKerrow-Martins game, as in Rears Ency. Var. 18 ... F) As in other Denny`s, White has the privilege of many options, but in this case, mainly inferior ones:24-20, 11-16, 20-11, 7-23, 26-19, 4-8, 28-24, 3-7, 24-20 then the Parrow-Heffner 7-11 draw, or 14-17 instead, as in EF Hunt v. JB Hanson, Game 1, 1934 match.19-15, and Red reverses matters, attacking with 4-8, 24-19, 7-10, 25-21, 18-22, 26-17, 11-18, 29-25,5-9, 27-24, 18-22 ( older pp gave 2-7 to draw ) 25-18, 14-23, 19-15, 10-19, 24-15, 3-7, 31-26, 7-11, 26-19, 11-18, 17-14, 8-11, 14-5, 6-10, 21-17, 11-16, 17-14, 16-23, etc; to a Red win. DE Oldbury v. A. Huggins; 1961 match... 25-21, 11-16, 19-15, 16-20, 24-19, 4-8 ( also from 12-16, 23-18, 16-20, 24-19, 10-14, 18-15! 11-18, 22-15, 8-12, 25-22, 4-8, 22-17, 14-18, 17-13, 9-14 same.)29-25, 7-11, 26-22? (duplicating once too often *28-24 drs.)11-16, 22-17, 16-23, 17-10, 5-9, 21-17 ( or 28-24, 2-7, 24-19, 7-16, 19-16, 12-19, 15-10 shot etc; but a man shy!~ Red Wins. Dr. Schaefer v. H. Morrall, 1st IM,`05) 9-14, 25-21, 12-16, 30-25, 16-19, 15-l1, 8-15, 25-22, 18-25, 27-11, 6-15, 17-10, 25-29 etc. RW- B. Case over E.Lowder, 1962 Nat. Ty.... G) The Fricker defence with 6-10 ( not 3-8? 31-26 WW;3rd IM 1973 ) is sound, but Red must step carefully: 24-20, *1..6 ( not 11-15, 28-24, 4-8, 25-21 back into the Jordan- Barker win.) 28-24, *14...17, 23-14, l7-21 ,and 27-23 ( not 14-9, as Red is better.) 10-17, 32-28, 3-8, 31-26, 11-16, 20-11, 7-16, 24-20, 8-11, 28-24, 4-8,then 19-15 etc. Drawn... H) 24-20 (not 25-21?, 18-22, 30-26, 14-18, 26-17,18-22, 24-20, 7-10, 20-11, 22-26 RW- J. Spence.) is the easier Scott~Jordan draw after 3-8 etc... I) The text is well protected, as the premature 26-22, 7-10, 22-15, 12-16 etc; and a free king. Instead, James Keene published an unusual piece-down defence with 7-10 here, then 25-21, 18-22!, 26-17, 3-8, 29-25, 5-9, 25-22 8-11, 24-20, 11-15, 20-11, 15-31, 32- 27, 31-24, 28-19, as published in Ebert`s "Master Checkers"3/ 74, page 18.After 10-15, 19-10, 6-15, 17-10, 9-14, 22-17, 2-6, 11-7, 15-18, then 7-2 with a strong White ending... J) 7-11 was used with success (the element of surprise) by R. Hallett v. A. Bernstein, in the 1950 Paxton Nat but may lose after *29-25(instead of the immediate 19-16) 4-8, then 19-16, 12-19, 23-7, 2-11, *24-19, 11-15, 19-10, 6-15, 13-9 etc; to a WW by L.W. Taylor; `CCC` G.1275... K) 19-16 is a deceptive variation first published by D.E. Oldbury in his `Game of Draughts`~ Game 29,V. I, which the writer has used to good effect in mail play. Cont: 12-19, 24-15, 10-19, 23-16, 2-7, 16-12, 8-11( 6-9 was the Oldbury line ) *26-22 ( 26-23 loses after *11-15, 28-24, 7-11, 23-19, *14-17 etc.) but now *11-16 is necessary, as 11-15 loses- Mac Banks vs. the writer in the ACF 200 club mail ty, followed with 30-26, 7-11, 28-24, 5-9 C E. Frazier gave the 6-9 exchange to draw in the `Keystone Review- but *22-17, 11-16, *26.23, 5-9 then K. Todd`s *12-8 pitch, followed with 17-13 wins, and corrects the proposed Frazier draw.) 26-23, 11-16, 22-17, 6-10, 13-6, 15-19 etc. WW....Going back to the forced 11-16 ( instead of 11-15 ) then 22-15, 6- 9, 13-6, 1-19, 25-22 and 7-10 ( if 5-9, again the 12-8 pitch and 22-17) 22-17, then 10-15, 17-10 19-24 etc. to a draw by Walter Hellman, Bent to C.O. Beebe in 1970... L) Red must be cautious in regaining his piece, as 3-7? 22-15, 7-11, loses after 30-26, 11-18, and 19-16 etc; to a long WW- J. Marshall v. P. Thompson, in lisa-GB mail match play... M) Cont: 13-9, 6-13, 15-6, 1-10, 30-26, 11-15, 26-22, then *14-18 ( as 8-11 leads into a losing ending after the 23-18 exchanges. by P. Doran; later, H. Burton v.P. Davis, 30th ACF Nat. Ty.) 23-7, 3-10, 27-23 ( or 19-16, 12-19, 22-18, 15-29, 24-6, 29-25, 6-2, 25-22, 2-7, 22-26, 7-3, 8-12, 3-7, 26-22, 7-10, 22-26, 10-15, 26-22, 28-24, now 22-26 will draw, but if 12-16? instead, White has the 24-19 exchange; Lee Munger winning from Rudy Hunzinger in mail play, by similar play to the Dean Position, as in Bolands `Famous Positions` page 50) 20-27, 23-18, 15-24, 28-19, 27- 31, 32-27, 31-15, 18-4, 10-15 etc; the Doran draw, also by A. Long v. W. Hellman, 1948 title match, `WCC` Game 93... Variation 1 ( off trunk @6th)-26- 22 (N), 7-11, 22-15, 11-18, 21-17 (0), 8-11 (P), 24-20 (Q), 4-8 (R), 17-13 (S), 9-14, 25-21, 11-15 (T), 19-10, 6-15, 30-26, 8-11, 29-25, 12-16, 26-23, 3-8, 27-24, 18-27, 32-23, 8-12, 25-22, then *l..6 ( not 2-6? *24-19 WW- LW Taylor v.M. Tinsley, 1975 So. Ty.) 22-17, and *6-10 draws. M. Tinsley... N) Many of the modern day players consider this at least equal ( and perhaps superior ) to the trunk 21-17 0) 30-26 is inefficient after 8-11, 19-15, 4-8, 21-17, then *11-16 favours Red ( see the 1978 I-D book)—not 9-13?, 26-23 etc; shot, WW... P) If 9-13, 17-14, 8-11, 24-20 goes into Note R... Q) It is better to delay 17-14 until 9-13 has been committed.. ' R) The Hellman-Long (1948 ) continuation, tempting weak replies. 9-13 is also sound, then 17-14, 4-8, *25-2l (avoiding 19-15-see Note S ) 11-15 etc; the Hanson-Hunt 1934 match line, as published in 6th Dist. Newsletter, S) Either this or 25-21 are the two good replies. There are also two questionable ones in 19-15 and 17-14:
T) 6-10 will also draw after: 29-25, 3-7, 31-26, 11-15, 28-24, 1-6, 26-23, 6-9, 13-6, 2-9, 30-26, 9-13 26-22, 8-11, 32-28, 5-9, 21-17 etc; arrived at from several openings. LW Taylor... Corrections Note D @ 2nd. Instead of 9-13, Red has a good vary with 11-16,as played by the editor v R Good in the 1982 Ill. `101` open ty. see `MWC` page 232, 12/82 issue Note E. Against 10-14 as shown cont: 29-25, 2-7, now 26-23* ( instead of 28-24) to a WW by KD Albrecht in the 1980 A ty Note F. Var. 3. Instead of 14-18 as given, Red has the better 7-11.See Pt 7 under the Dundee Opening No 135. Note F. Var. 3. Instead of 24-19, Heffner gave the 27-24 exchange to draw, but after 18-22! ( a fine improvement by Paul Fondren of Heffner`s 23-27, 15-10 draw) 25-18, 3-7, 24-20, and 7-11 red wins. For additional play, see `MWC` page 260. Note K .After the *12-8 pitch 17-13 given to win, but drawn in the 1980 ID mail ty. Note T. Should be credited to EA Harrhy ( instead of LW Taylor) See `WCC` page 69 note D.
OPENING NO 53. 10-14, 24-19, 6-10. 10-14, 24-19 (A), 6-10 (B), 22-17 (C), 9-13 (D), 28-24 (E), 13-22, 25-9, 5-14, 26-22 (F Var. 1), 11-15, 22-17 (L), 8-11 (M) 29-25, 3-8 (N), 25-22 (0), 1-6 (P), 32-28 (Q), 11-16, 22-18, 15-22, (R ) FORMS DIAGRAM
A) The strongest reply to the Denny opening, directed toward the centre, with the first side unable to exchange the piece, as in Opening No 48. Another of the classic wins in world title match play arose from this ballot; Stewart winning from Banks in their 1922 Glasgow Sct. match... ! B) The approved response in 2-move play, hoping for Note C and a share of the centre... C) But White correctly attacks the weak spot. Other moves hold less punch:
D) This was the older defence, later replaced to some extent by Ward's 11-15 around the time of the 2nd IM, but the cycle seems to have swung back to the text. Against 11-15, White has several promising attacks: ''
E) The only move to retain the White edge. 27-24 ( or 25-22, 11-15, 30-25 etc; into Open.#2 lines, See 'B.C.' page 3, Pt. 1 ) leads into even Defiance lines F) The Banks-Stewart attack, but we have used 29-25 on many occasions—sometimes with success Variation 1; 29-25, 11-15, 25-22 (G), 7-11 (H), 23-18 (1), x 11-16, 18-11, 16-23, 26-19, 8-15, 30-26, 4-8 (J), 26-23, 8-11, 21-17, *1-5 (K), 31-27 ( or 17-13, *5-9, 13-6, 2-9, 23-18, 9-13, 18-14, 10-26, 31-22, 12-16, 19-10, 11-15, 10-6, 16-19 etc. Drawn. Don Lafferty.) 5-9, 17-13, 11-16, 13-6, 2-9, 22-17, 9-13, 17-14 the Geo.O'Conner draw.. - G) 26-22, 7-11, 23-18, 14-23, 27-18, 11-16, 18-11, 8-15, 31-27, 16-23, 27-11, 3-8, 11-7, 2-11, 22-17—here 12-16 ran into trouble in several games of the 2nd IM match, but 10-15 instead, then 17-14, 11-16, 14-10, 16-20,10-7 etc. Draws... I H) 8-11 is also sound, then 22-17, 3-8, 26-22, 1-6, 17-13, *15-18 ( as 11-16? lets in the 21-17 pitch, & 22-17 etc. to a WW ) 22-15, 11-18, 31-26, 8-11, 24-20, and Red waits with 4-8, 30-25, then 11-15, 19-16,12-19, 23-16, 15-19, 16-12, *6-9, 12-3 and 18-23 etc. to a draw by AJ Heffner.. I) If 22-17, 11-16, 23-18, (against 17-13, 3-7 is proper, and Red assumes the advantage. Note that 2-6 is correct from the 26-22 attack, as in Note M, but here, with the piece remaining on 26, White has the powerful 24-20, as in the Liebennan-Scobble 2nd IM game... A POINT TO REMEMBER.) 14-23, 27-11, 16-23, 26-19, 8-15, 17-14 etc; then the 2-6 exchange eases this line, and preferred over the 15-18 Grover-Ferrie 1st IM game. J) If 2-6, 26-23, 6-9, 21-17, *9-14, 17-13, 1-6, 32-28 then 4-8 loses after the 24-20 exchange. Red must play a piece short with *l5-l8, 22-15. 12-16, 19-12, 10-26, 31-22, and 4-8, as noted by LL Hall.Cont: 24-19, 8-11, 28-24, 11-16, 22-18, 14-23, 24-20, 23-27, 20-11, 27-31, 19-15, 31-27, 12-8, 3-12, 11-7, 27-23 Drawn. Don Lafferty v. W. Hellman, 1972 Lakeside Ty. K) The only draw, but many experts have faltered here!f 2-6 ( or 11-16, then *24-20 improves Moulding's 31-27 vs. Tom O'Grady in the 2nd IM.Cont: 15-24, 20-11,24-28, 23-19, 2-6, 17-13, 10-15, 19-10, 6-15 then *l3-9 wins, by LL Hall, and corrects tie Alexander draw with 22-17 in Kears Ency. See Rolader v. Lafforty;30th N.TY.) *31-27, 11-16, ( if 6-9, 17-13, 9-14, 13-9, 1-5, 9-6, 5-9, 6-2, 9-13, 2-17 etc WW- Ryan v. Rubin, 1935 match) 17-13, 1-5, 22-17, 5-9, then 17-14, 9-18, 23-7, 3-10, 27-23, 16-20, and 32-27 is the pretty Mike Lieber win,which the writer once scored with v. Rudy Munzinger in Ill. state ty. play. L) 29-25 goes into Note G. M) Or 7-11, as played by Banks v. Stewart.Cont: 29-25, 11-16 ( or 3-7, going back into trunk.) 17-13, ( 31-26 is tricky but weak when met with 8-11, 17-13, then the stop with *2-6. But if 3-7? instead, 13-9, 15-18, 26-22, 11-15, and the shot with 9—6, 2-9 and 21-17 etc; the `Bosun' losing to A. Jordan. "D.R." G. 545..After the correct 2-6, 25-22, 16-20, and White must play a piece short with 21-17, 14-21, 22-17, 4-8, 26-22, 3-7, 23-18, 1-5, 17-14, 10-26, and *19-1 shown to draw by NW Banks in ECB weekly, Jan. 1, 1945.) now *2-6 is proper here, in contrast to Note I.Cont: 30-26 ( as the 24-20 ex-change now favours Red after 4-8, 31-27, 15-19, 23-16, 12-19, 20-16, 8-12, 16-11, 10-15, 25-22, 12-16, 22-17, 15-18 etc; as in Cox v. Ryan, 1931 NYC ty.) *l6-20, ( Banks lost after 8-11?, overlooking the fine sacrifice *24-20!, 15-24, 25-22, 1-5, 32-28. 3-8, 28-19,11-15, then 22-18 etc. and Stewart won both the game, and eventually the match.) 32-28, 3-7, 25-22, 8-11, 19-16, x 14-17, 21-14, 10-17, 26-23 ( best, as 16-12 allows 7-10 and Red is better.) 17-26, 31-22, 7-10 etc; a draw by A. Inglis. It is said that the Boston club analysts, headed by Heffner, were receiving the games shortly after they were played, and experienced difficulty in finding a sound Red draw after Stewart`s 30-26 cook... N) No doubt the only good way. 15-18 turns out badly after 30-26, 2-6, 32-28, 11-15, 26-22. 4-8 and 24-20 etc;also, 11-16 is very weak after the 24-20 exchange. 0) 17-13, 1-6, 25-22, 15-18 etc. is Note H... P) If 11-16 first, then 22-18, 15-22, 19-15, *10-26, 17-3, 1-6, 30-23 and White is strong, but a probable draw. Q) 17-13 again reverts to Note H. The text is still another of the notable games contested on this opening-the Heffner-Searight 1st IM 1905, resulting in the American master's only loss in this international encounter. R) Cont: 19-15, 10-26, 17-1,( if 17-3, 6-10, 30-23 then 10-14, 31-26 etc. draws; not 10-15?, 31-26 etc.WW-Ferrie-Buchanan, 1906 Set. Ty.) 8-11, 30-23, 4-8 ( no doubt the best replay, but Heffner considered it a bad move in his notes to this game!) 23-18, 22-25, 1-5, 7-10, 24-20, 10-15, 18-14, 16-19, 14-9, then the 19-23 exchange will draw, however, Heffner tried 25-29? instead, and finally lost after *3l-26, 2-7, 27-24 7-10, 5-1, 29-25, 1-6, 25-30 and 26-22 etc.. Supplementary Play: 10-14, 24-19, 6-10. 22-17, 9-13, 28-24, 13-22. 25-9, 5-14, 29-25, 11-15, 25-22. 7-11, 22-17, 11-16, 17-13, (inferior See Note I) 3-7, *13-9, 8-11, *9-5, 15-18, (or 4-8 Red strong .) 24-20, 2-6, 27-24? X (*19-15. 10-19, 30-25 shown to draw) 14-18 etc. 6-9, 30-26, 9-18, 19-15, 4-8, 31-27, 18-22 x 24-19. 18-22, 19-15, 22-26, 17-14, 7-11. 15-10, 26-31, 27-24, 31-27, 10-7. 11-15, 7-3, 27-23. 14-10, 8-11, 3-8, 23-19 a good win. Walter Hellman over Ken Grover; 1938 Miami match.. Corrections Var 1. Instead of 23-18, Victor davis gave 21-17 in `CCC` g 771, 9/51 issue. Var 1. Instead of 5-9, after (31-27) Bass v Stums varied with 11-16, 17-13, 16-20, 13-9,x 23-18 x to draw.
OPENING NO 54. 10-14, 24-19,7-10. 10-14, 24-19, 7-10 (A), 28-24 (B) 11-16 (C), 32-28 (D), 16-20 (E), 22-17 (F), 9-13, 25-22, 5-9 (G), 19-15 (H), 10-19, 24-15, 6-10 (1), 15-6, 1-10, 23-19 (J), 8-11, 30-25 (K)... FORMS DIAGRAM
A) This was generally avoided in top-level play under the 2-move style, as several variations now analysed as sound were then considered bad... B) White has more attacking lines in this opening, as compared to the companion #55...Others are:
C) With the stronger 28-24 played (instead of 27-24) the centre advance now with 11-15 is very questionable after the 22-18 exchange. Cont: 15-22, 25-18, 8-11, *24-20, 4-8 (varies from Newell Banks' 2-7, 26-22,10-15, 19-10, 6-15, 27-24, then both 12-16 or 4-8 seem to lose) 27-24 ( 30-25 may also win after 9-13, 18-9, 5-14, 26-22, 11-15, 27-24, 8-11, 22-17, 13-22, 25-9, 6-13, 29-25, 2-6, 25-22, 6-9, 31-27, 1-5, 23-18, 9-14, 18-9, 5-14, 27-23, 3-7 then *32-27==to improve 32-28 to a draw- E. Fuller vs. LW Taylor; 1977 So. Ty.= 12-16, 19-12, 14-18, 23-14, 10-26, 27-23, 7-10, 12-8, 27-31, 8-3, 31-16, and 24-19, 15-24, 3-7 etc; WW- LW Taylor.) 9-13, 18-9, 5-14, 29-25, 11-15, 25-22, 8-11, 31-27, 6-9, 20-16 etc. and 23-18 to a winning White ending. LW Taylor. D) Known as the Basil Case attack, but it was played long before his time. If 22-18 instead. Red gets in 16-20, then 32-28, 8-11, 19-15 etc; then 18-15, 11-18, 26-22, 2-7, 22-15, 3-8, 30-26, 12-16, 25-22, 7-10, and 22-17 etc; to draw. LW Taylor v. M. Apel, 1960 Nat. Ty E) It is now best to go in. If 3-7 ( or 9-13 first ,then 24-20 and 3-7 ) 24-20, 9-13, 20-11, 7-16 ( if 8 -24, 28-19, 7-11, 27-24. 4-8, 22-18, 11-16, 18-9, 5-14, 24-20, 8-11, 26-22, 11-15, 20-11, 15-24, then 11-17, 2-11 and 22-17 to a WW- B.Case.) a position that once caught Maurice Chamblee (vs. Arza Fogle in the 1947 Central States Ty.) but both 27-24 and 22-17 are powerful for White, and this defence is no longer seen in important play... F) Perhaps the strongest follow-up, although Willie Ryan cut down 19-15 at-once, playing R. Hallett in the 1950 Paxton Nat. Ty. Cont: 10-19, 24-15, 8-11 ( no doubt 12-16 was wanted, then White is strong after 22-17.See the 6th Dist. Newsletter; 11/78 issue.) 15-8, 4-11, 22-17, 6-10, 26-22, 11-15, 22-18, 15-22, 25-18, 12-16,28-24, 3-8, 29-25, 8-12, 25-22, 9-13 etc. Drawn. G) This saves the entire variation, and first brought into prominence in the 1946 Newark Ty. In the 1905 1st IM, John Denvir reached this playing Robt.Stewart, and was soon in deep trouble after 8-11?, 19-16, 12-19, 23-7, 2-11, *26-23, 5-9, 24-19, 4-8, ( or 11-15, 30-26 etc;WW Apel-Taylor, 1960 N. Ty.) 19-16, 11-15, 16-11, 8-12 and 23-19 etc.; White missing a later win... H) This was the original attack used in the Newark Ty; but 3 years later, Willie Ryan unveiled his "Cook of the Century"! with 19-16 here v. Walter Hellman in the 38th game of their 1949 match, scoring finely, to tie.Cont: 19-16, 12-19, 24-15, 10-19, 17-10, 6-15. 23-16Hellman, caught by surprise, tried 1-6? and finally lost. Instead, 2-7 ( or Ryan's suggested 8-12 ) 30-25 (if 26-23, 8-11, 30-26?»=23-18 is correct, then 1-5, 30-25, 15-19, 18-14, 9-18, 22-8, 3-12, 16-11, 7-16, & 27-24 etc. Draws. M. Tinsley.=- 4-8, 23-19, 15-24, 28-19, 8-12, 22-18, 1-6, 26-23 once thought a WW by M. Chamblee until Tinsley, in a 1948 practice game, pitched *20-24l, 27-20, then 6-10 etc. RW.) 8-11, 16-12? ( 22-18, 15-22, 26-17, 13-22, 25-18. 7-10, 16-7, 10-14, 18-15 etc. and 27-24 draws.) 7-10, 26-23, 10-14 ( If 1-5, 27-24, 20-27, 31-24, 11-16, 22-17, 13-22, 25-11, 10-14, 21-17, 14-21, and 24-19; an agreed draw; Don Lafferty v. Paul Davis, 1975 So. Ty.) 28-24 ( if 22-18, 15-22, 25-18, 13-17, 31-26, 1-6 etc. RW.) 13-17 and Red is best. M. Tinsley , 1948 analysis sent to the writer... I) Forced. Although it destroys the double corner, and later isolates the piece on square 9, it still retains the clamp for a time. Other moves such as 8-11, 2-7 or 12-16 have all been shown to lose. J) The 22-18 exchange is premature. Although it releases the grip, Red draws easily after 12-16, 28-24 and 8-12 etc... K) Cont: 11-15, 27-23, 15-24, 28-19, 4-8, 19-15, 10-19, 23-16, 12-19, 17-10.White has broken the single-comer cramp, and now commences to work on the exposed piece on square 9, which has no place to got..Cont: 19-24, 10-6, 24-27, 31-24, 20-27, 6-1 ( or the crafty 22-18—27-31 allows the shot after 6-1, 31-15 and 21-17—and if 27-32, White simply picks up the piece with 6-1, 32-27 and 1-5—So: 3-7= 8-11 may also draw= 6-l, 7-10, 1-5, 10-14, 18-15, 8-12, 15-11, 27-32 or 27-31 to a draw-A. Huggins v. W. Van Leer, in the 7th US-GB mail match.) 27-31, 1-5 ( or 1-6, 8-12, 6-1, 12-16, 1-5, 9-14, 5-9 and Red draws a piece short after 14-17, 21-14, 16-19, 25-21, 3-8, 14-10, 31-27, 22-18, 27-23 etc;WF Ryan v. M. Tinsley, 1946 Newark Ty.) *3-7 ( not 2-7!?, 5-14, 7-10, 14-7, 3-10, 22-181 shot WW- J. Cox v. M. Tinsley, 1950 NYC exhibition match.) 5-14, 7-10, 14-7, 2-11, 26-23, 8-12, 23-18, then *31-26, 18-15, *11-18, 22-15, 26-23, 15-10, 12-16, 10-7, 16-20. 7-2, 20-24, to a long draw. M. Tinsley v. D.E. Oldbury, '58 match. Corrections Trunk @ note D. Instead of 32-28, White has 24-20 (A), then 3-7 (or 9-13, as played by both L. Levitt & D. Lafferty in 1982 A ty.) etc to draw. (A) or 22-17, 9-13, 26-22, 5-9, 32-28, 16-20, 30-26, 8-11! 19-16 etc; 4-8, 19-16, 11-15, 16-11, 8-12, 11-7, 1-5, 27-23, 14-18 etc;7-2, 12-16,x 31-27, then 16-19 or 3-8 etc; the famous G. O`Connor cook shown after the 1927 2nd IM. Note K. Instead of the 6-1 shot ( which only draws.) White has the stronger 18-15, 31-22, 25-18.
OPENING NO 55 10-14, 24-19, 11-16. 10-14, 24-19, 11-16 (A), 28-24 (B), 16-20 (C), 19-15 (D),7-10 (E), 24-19, 9-13 (F), 22-17 (G), 13-22, 25-9, 5-14, 29-25, 3-7 (H), 25-22 (1), 20-24 (J), 27-20, 7-11, 22-18 (K). FORMS DIAGRAM
A) The defender has a few more options in this opening, than in the previous one, with the piece on 7 committed at an early stage... B) The best attack, as 22-18, 8-11 results in fairly even Paisley lines. White also has 22-17, 7-10 ( if 14-18, 23-14, 9-18, 19-15—sometimes seen from 10-14, 22-17, 14-18, 23-14, 9-18, 24-19, 11-16; as in Chamblee-Tinsley.1946 Newark Ty; best met with 16-19-See E.C. Whiting v. R.L. Fortman, 5th USA-GB mail match, ACFB 7/65) then 28-24 etc; into the previous opening.•• C) 7-10 is perhaps more usual, and again into the previous opening, with the one defence applying to both ballots, however, the text is sound, and shown here to avoid duplication.. D) Striking into the centre. Other ways are less agressive:
E) Proper, and perhaps the only sound way. Other moves lead into this:
F) Now in order, as the cavity on sq. 10 has been filled. Not 3-7, 22-18, 9-13 ( as 7-11, 21-17, 14-21 and 19-16 etc; WW—an idea often arising.) 18-9, 5-14, 25-22, then 20-24 employs the trunk idea, but a failure here with the extra pieces on the board. Cont: 27-20, 7-11, 22-18, 1-5, 18-9, 11-27, 32-23, 5-14 then *26-22 to White wins.. G) Continuing the attack. The student might well question this, as the centre advance with 22-18 would seem to be the logical reply. But the more experienced player has learned the hard way that with all 12 pieces remaining on the board, these early mid-game blocks are usually best avoided for the side whose turn it is to move. After 22-18, 5-9, the White double corner pieces are stymied with the 12-16 threat, leaving only 25-22 (as 26-22, 2-7 wins) and Red has more waiting moves; in contrast to Opening No 54, Note B-l..After 25-22, 2-7, 29-25 ( if 22-17 etc; 12-16 wins) 1-5 and White must play a piece short with 19-16, 12-19, 23-16, 10-19 and 18-15 etc; as in a H. Morrall v. SS Bell game, shown in Banks' "Morris-Systems Checker ist" G. 403... H) L.S. Head reached this position playing J. Searight ( an excellent name for a checker player) in the 1st IM 1905, but picked a sour lemon with 1-5? instead; into a pp loss from a B/C line: 11-16, 23-18, 16-20, 24-19, 10-14, 18-15, 7-10, 22-17, 9-13, 27-23, 13-22, 25-9, 5-14, 29-25, then 1-5( 3-7 correct) 32-27 same.Cont: 8-11 ( both 2-7 and 3-7 lose after 25-22) 15-8, 4-11, 19-16, 12-19, 23-7, 2-11, 25-22, 10-15, 26-23, 6-10, 22-17, 11-16, 17-13, 15-19, 30-26. 10-15 and 13-9 WW. I) But if 32-28 now ( again into a B/C line, but now a sound one) Red has the opportunity to use the 7-11 press 26-22 etc; and the 8-11 exchange to a std. pp draw... J) The B/C idea, although White is stronger here, with a better king row formation. This is forced, as the 7-11 press now is bad after *30-25, 11-18, 22-15, and all moves are failures. Cont: 8-11 ( if 1-5, then 26-22 wins, and if 2-7, then 25-22 wins) 15-8, 4-11, 19-16, 12-19, 23-7, 2-11, 26-23, 6-9, *23-19, 11-15, 25-22, 15-24, and 32-28 WW- W. Hellman... K) Cont; 1-5, 18-9, 11-27, 32-23, *6-13 ( not 5-14, 26-22, 8-11, 22-18, 4-8, 18-9, 6-13, 23-18, 2-6, 18-14 etc; one must look before leaping—to the centre is not always correct !) 21-17, ( if 23-18,then 10-15 is better then Freyer's 10-14 exchange v.A. Long in the 10th A. Ty. Cont: 19-10, 12-16 etc 21-17, *4-8, 17-13, then 5-9 draws; as in Hellman-deBeann, 8th A.Ty; not 8-l2?10- 6 etc 12-16,WW by the "Shuttle Pos." 'CCC* G. 1115) 13-22, 26-17, *5-9, 31-26, 9-14, 17-13, *14-18, 23-7, 2-11, 19-15, 11-18, 13-9,*12-16, 20-11, 8-15 will draw-rlf.
OPENING No 56. 10-14, 24-19, 14-18. 10-14, 24-19, 14-18 (A), 23-14, 9-18, 22-15, 11-18, 21-17 (B), 8-11 (C), 17-13 (D), 7-10 (E), 26-23 (F-Var.1) 10-14, 3l-26 (P), 4-8(Q), 28-24, 6-10, 25-21, 11-16, 21-17 (R)... FORMS DIAGRAM
A) With this double exchange, instead of the single, as in Openings #47 and #52, the White attacks against the exposed piece are somewhat blunted. This was not too uncommon in 2-move play; as in the Tinsley-Banks 1952 match, and earlier by Richard Jordan v. CF Barker in their 1900 encounter... B) The distinctive, and proper attack in these openings. Although the 26-22 run-off first, then 21-17 is effective in the openings mentioned in Note A, here ( with the extra piece removed) it is inferior after 7-11, 22-15, 11-18, 21-17, 8-11, 28-24, 4-8, (a good waiting move. Instead of 11-16 ) 19-15, 5-9, 17-14, ( if 25-21, 18-22, 30-25, 11-18, 17-14, 22-26, 31-15, 9-18, 24-19, 3-7, 25-22, 18-25, 29-22, 7-11, 22-18, 11-16, 27-23, 2-7, 21-17, 7-11, 17-14. 1-5, 14-10, 6-9, 10-7, 9-14 etc. Red Wins. E. Bruch v. K. Albrecht. in the 1977 So. Ty.) 9-13, 24-20, 13-17, 31-26, 17-21, 26-23, 2-7. 23-19, 1-5, 27-24, 18-23, 15-10, 6-15, 19-10 then 23-26 etc; to a long Red win, going into the Boland-Mantell ending in "Masterpieces" p.156 #7- W. Hellman winning from Paul Davis in the 1972 Fla. Open Ty. See Mesch's '6th Dist.Newsletter' II/72... C) 5-9 is a handicap line after the 3x2..See LM Lewis v. WF Ryan, "New Checkergram" Game 6—3/33 issue... D) The sequel.. to White's previous move, and applies moderate pressure to the square 18 piece. Other ways are less trying:
E) The proper supporting move. Alternatives are suspicious, at best:
F) The highly favoured Jordan-Barker attack. White has an excellent vary with 25-21, to get in an early 29-25. Variation 1 25-21, 10-14 (G), 29-25, 4-8 (H), 26-23, 11-16 (1),28-24(J), 16-20, 30-26 (K), 2-7 (L), 32-28 (M), 5-9 (N) 26-22 (0), 7-10, 22-15, 12-16, 19-12, 10-26, 31-22, 6-10, 13-6 and 14-18 etc. Draws. Edwin F. Hunt... G) Or 11-16 ( 4-8 was once thought bad, but after 26-23, 10-14, 29-25, 3-7, 28-24. 6-10, 32-28, 1-6, 24-20, then *11-15 draws; into Note I ) 26-23, 10-14, 29-25, 4-8 etc. and back into Var. I... H) 2-7 was one of Derek Oldbury's 'swindles', as played vs. Vie Monteiro in the 1964 N. Ty; but questionable—IF CORRECTLY MET!— which is the key to all weak moves; otherwise the kitten sometimes turns into a tiger. Meeting these properly crossboard, without prior analysis, seperates the master from the expert. I) 3-7 is restrictive, as played by M, Chamblee vs .S. Weslow in the 1946 Newark Ty, and can also be used from the 10-14, 24-20, 14-18 opening. Cont: 28-24, 6-10, 24-20, 11-15, 32-28, 15-24, 28-19, 1-6, 31-26 ( also 30-26, 7-11, 19-15, 10-19, 23-7, 2-11, 26-22, 11-15, 27-24. 18-23, 22-17, 6-10, 13-9, 23-27, 9-6, 27-32, 6-2, 8-11, 2-6, 12-16, 31-27, 32-23, 24-19, 15-24, 6-8, 14-18, 20-11 and 23-26 Draws, rlf.) 8-11, 19-16,12-19, 23-16, *10-15, 26-22 ( or the deceptive 16-12, 15-19, 12-8, then *11-16 draws, as played by M. Tins ley vs. Roy Hunt in their 1950 Chicago match, but 19-24 instead allows the Ryan "funeral" trap with 25-222 18-25 and 8-3. See D. Oldbury v. R. Johnson, 1974 Nat. Ty.) 6-10, 16-12, 11-16, 20-11, 7-16, 12-8, 16-19, 8-3, 19-23, 27-24, 23-26 draws, as analysed by Will Dailey; also by Chamblee v. Weslow..... J) 31-26 is also frequently played, then 3-7, 28-24, 6-10, 13-9 ( not 24-20, 8-11, 27-24, 18-27, 32-23, & 14-18 etc; RW- Cohen v. McGill; 1965 Ens. Ty.) 8-11, 26-22, 11-15, 9-6, 2-9. 24-20, 15-31, 22-6, 1-10, 20-2, 10-15. 2-6, 9-13, 6-9 (or 25-22, 15-19, 23-16, 12-19, 6-10, 19.23, 10-17, 5-9, 32-28, 31-27, 30-25, 23-26, 17-14 etc. Drawn. WF Ryan v. M. Tinsley, 1946 Newark) 15-18, 25-22, 18-25, 9-18, 12-16, 18-15,13-17, 21-14 and 31-27 etc. Drawn. W. Ryan v. K. Grover, 9th A.Ty. K) Now if 31-26, 2-7 ( or 8-11, 26-22, 3-8, 22-15, 11-18, 30-26, 2-7, 32-28, 5-9, 19-16, 12-19, 24-15,7-10, 15-11, 8-15, 28-24, 1-5, 23-19, 18-23 etc. to a draw. Freyer v. Ryan; also Freyer v. Chamblee,'50)32-28, 8-11, 19-16, 12-19, 24-8, 3-12, 23-19..Here 7-11 is the pp Hellman-Banks draw in the 2nd NCA Ty; but Marion Tinsley once mentioned to the writer that Red has an easier draw with 20-24!, 27-20, then 18-23. White has nothing better then 19-15, 23-27. 15-11, 7-16, 20-11. 27-31, 26-22, then 14-17, 21-14, 6-9 etc and 31-26 Draws••• L) Or 3-7 ( 8-11 also draws after 26-22, 3-8, 22-15, 11-18, 32-28, 2-7, 31-26, 5-9, 26-22 then the fine*l-5 as in Rubin v. Ryan, shown later in this note ,'to improve the 7-11?, 22-15, 11-18, 19-15, 12-16, 24-19, 8-12, 28-24 WW-H. Clifton v. EF Hunt in practice at Nashville, 1935.) 26-22. ( if 32-28 first, then *5-9 26-22 returns to Rubin v. Ryan, and if 19-15 instead, *7-10, 24-19, 2-7, 26-22, *20-24S etc. and 7-11,22-17 Draws. EF Hunt.) 7-11, 22-15, 11-18, 32-28, 2-7, 31-26 then *5-9, 26-22, and *1-5 draws, followed with 22-15, 14-18, 23-14, 9-18, 21-17, 7-11, 15-10, 6-15, 19-10, 11-15, 10-7, 8-11, 25-21, 11-16, 7-3, 16-19, 3-7,1923, 7-10, and 23-32 Drawn. N.Rubin v. WF Ryan, 1st NCA Ty; Providence, 1937... M) Not 26-22, as Red scores quickly with 7-10, 22-15 and the 12-16 shot- WF Ryan.. N) 7-10,is too early after 19-16, 12-19, 23-16, 8-12 (if 10-15, 16-11, 8-12, 26-23 WW ) 13-9. 12-19, 9-2, 10-15, 26-23 WW.EF Hunt.. 0) If 19-15, the draw is secured with 7-10, 24-19, 3-7, 26-22, then *20-24 etc. the EF Hunt draw of Note L.. P) (Off trunk) 28-24, 11-16, 31-26, 6-10 ( as 2-7 is the difficult Jordan-Barker draw, but Red might play a gambit line with 16-20 Instead, then 26-22, 14-17, 22-15, 12-16 etc and 6-9 as in the K. Groverv. JB Hamson 1953 match game.)13-9 ( 26-22 permits a fast draw after 1-6, 22-15 and 14-18 etc; mentioned by Ryan, also M. Tinsley v. Prof. Fraser, 1952 match) 3-7 ( Ryan recommended 1-6 in MEC, but White has other attacks then shown there. Cont: 26-22 =instead of 24-20, 6-13, 22-6, 2-9; here MEC gives 25-21 or 25-22,but White has a fine substitute with 19-15!, 16-19, 23-16, 12-28. 15-10, 4-8, 10-6, 8-11, 6-2, 11-15, 2-6, 3-8, 5-22, 14-17, 6-10, 17-26, 30-23, 15-19, 23-16 and 9-14 etc .to draw; as sent to the writer by Paul H. Thompson. Many have carried on a life-long love affair with the game of checkers, but none have courted her more ardently then the late Missouri master.)2622, 14-17, 22-6, 5-14-, 25-21, 1-10, 29-25, 4-8, 24-20, 8-11, 27-24, 11-15, 20-11, 7-16, 24-20, 15-24, 20-11, 10-15, 11-8, 15-18, 8-3 etc. Drawn. J.T. Denvir... Q) To avoid the Jordan-Barker play mentioned in Note P. Red has another piece-down idea here with 11-16, 26-22, 16-20, 22-15, 12-16 etc and 6-9 as in the E. Ebert v.N. Rub in 1935 Mich ty. game... R) Here 29-25 goes into the Note J play...Continue after 21-17, 14-21, 23-7, 16-23, 27-18, 3-10, 29-25, 8-11, 25-22, 2-6, 24-19 ( or 22-17, 5-9, 17-14, 10-17, 24-20,12-16, 32-27, 17-22 etc; as in the MEC draw.) 5-9, 32-28 ( or 32-27 10-15 etc; the Tinsley-Banks 1952 match draw.) then 10-15 is the easier draw, instead of 11-16 as in Goldsboro v. Collingwood... Supplementary Play; 10-14, 24-19, 14-18, 23-14, 9-18, 22-15, 11-18, 21-17, 8-11, 17-13, 7-10, 25-21, 10-14, 29-25, 4-8, 26-23, 11-15!?( 11-16 or 3-7 pp drs.) 19-10, 6-15, 28-24, 8-11, 30-26, 2-6, 26-22, 3-8, 32-28, 5-9, 24-20, 12-16, *22-17 (NOT 28-24, 6-10, 13-6, 15-19, 24-15, 10-26, 22-15, 1-19, 31-22 and 8-12 RW! seen by both players.) 15-19, 17-10, 6-15, *23-5, 19-23,27-18, 15-29, 21-17, 29-25, 17-14, 16-19, 14-10, 19-23, 10-7, 8-12, 7-3, 25-22 then 28-24' WW- E.Lowder v.D.Lafferty; 1971 Lakeside Ty Corrections Note O. Instead of 3-7, Red has 1-5*, 26-22, 12-16, x 26-30, 15-10* x 15-18 ( or 14-17 x Howe –Dibble,ECB g 6888) 6-2, 5-9, 2-6, 9-13 x and 13-17etc to draw by CO Beebe. Note O. Instead of 26-22, White can avoid this draw with 28-24* to a WW in ECB page 5795, 10/63 issue.
OPENING No 57. 10-14, 24-20, 6-10. 10-14, 24-20 (A), 6-10 (B), 22-17 (C), 11-15 (D), 17-13, 1-6, 28-24 (E), 8-11, 23-19, 15-18 (F), 26-23 (G),14-17 (H) 23-14, 9-18, 21-14, 10-17, 25-21 (1), 17-22(J), 30-26 (K). FORMS DIAGRAM
A) As witnessed in earlier openings, this side move surrenders a considerable share of the inherent White advantage in the Denny, with the exceptions of Openings #58 and 61 where it is met inconsistently... B) Here, with 24-20 played ( instead of 24-19 ) this is not Inferior, as 11-15 follows without the break-up of Opening No 53... C) 22-18 is a shade better, but, as 11-15 then goes into the previous play shown in Opening No 48, the text is used to avoid duplication... D) With two inferior moves in succession. White has surrendered the initiative, and the first side takescommand with the text move... E) Although 25-22 may draw, it is usually avoided after 14-18, 23-14, 9-25, 29-22 then 15-19 etc; andRed is situated very nicely... F) The distinctive move of this variation. Both 4-8 and 3-8 transpose into Aryshire Lassie lines which will be shown in a later series... G) Forced. The beginner often stumbles here with 25-22 ( or 26-22 11-16 ) 18-25, 29-22, then the 14-17 break, followed with the 11-16 shot.R.W.... H) And the favoured follow-up in this line, again by-passing the Aryshire Lassie variations. See Hellman-Tinsley, "ABC" Game 26... l) The proper defence. Other ways are best avoided:
J) This fine move was introduced into important play by Marion Tinsley v. Walter Hellman in their 1955 match, catching the Gary grandmaster completely by surprise, and after missing a later draw, lost with White; breaking a 24 game scoreless deadlock. The 6-10 exchange had been customary here, as played by Hellman v. Ryan ( also with success!) 6 years prior to this match...6-10, 21-14, 10-17, now 19-15 is in order, followed with 4-8 ( as 18-22 etc can be met with Kaiser's 30-26 cook»;as shown in the "Cross-Board News. Game 30.) &4-19, 18-22, 30-25,( not 13-9 either here or at the next move, which has been shown to lose for White;Cohen over Boyle.)ll-18,and *25-21. 2-6, 21-14, 7-10, 14-7, 3-10, 32-28( 27-23 also draws;Collingswood v.Goldsboro; later in the Loew-Link 1954 Nat. Ty. game.) 5-9, then *27-23 still draws, but the natural 27-24 lost after 18-23, 19-15 etc; 9-14, 28-24, 14-18, 24-19, 22-25 etc; R.W. K) The outpost piece is cause for great concern in the enemy camp, and must be removed at once. Cont: 11-16, 26-17, 16-23, 29-25, 4-8, 24-19 ( Hellman had first considered this in analysis crossboard, but later missed the important *25-2l waiter. Writing it off as a loss, he decided to play into the troubled 17-14, 8-11, 14-9, 5-14, 25-22, etc; but the later ending was too strong. R.W.) 6-10, 17-14, 10-17,21-14, 7-10, 14-7, 3-10 then the saving *25-21, 8-11, 21-17, 11-15, 27-24, 23-26 etc. Draws. M. Tinsley..
OPENING NO 58. 10-14, 24-20, 7-10. 10-14, 24-20, 7-10 (A), 22-18 (B), 11-16 (C) 20-11, 8-22 25-18, 4-8, 28-24 (D), 8-11, 24-19 (E), 9-13 (F), 18-9, 5-14, 29-25 (G), 3-7 (H), 25-22, 1-5 (1) .... FORMS DIAGRAM
A) Forming an opening that once gave the analysts great concern back In the 1930's and early 1940's in establishing the proper drawing defence. Its main weakness ( in contrast to the previous opening ) lies in the fact that after 22-18, Red must surrender the centre, as 11-15 cannot be played B) The best attack. However, after it was severely ` pounded` for a number of years, several experts turned to the less-analysed 28-24 in search of wins: 28-24, ( as 27-24 is inferior after 10-15 ) now the important 11-15 can be played.Cont: 23-19 ( or 22-17, 8-11, 17-13, 4-8, 23-19 and 2-7 into Aryshire Lassie lines.) 8-11, 22-17 ( if 26-23, then Red has the better 3-7, instead of Frazier's 9-13 v. Hellman in their 1967 match.) here 9-13 is into Ryan's MEC, but Red again has a better way with 15-18, as first played by Hellman v. Frazier in 1967. Cont: 17-13, then another outpost piece is planted with 18-231 27-18, 14-23, 25-22 then 9-14 or 10-14 and Red is strong. See the Hellman-Frazier match book. Game 21... C) This had been tried in mail play after the 3-move restriction was first incorporated, but later condemned as a loss. It remained for the late Victor Davis to produce the proper drawing combination about 35 years ago, as shown in Ryan;s "AC" G. 140. Mr. Davis had worked on this as far back as 1933, but it was never published. Until that time, the 9-13 exchange was relied on as the only draw, but the numerous White attacks against it required considerable knowledge to draw. See MEC for much fine play on this variation; also Church ills Compilations, which uses it as the preferred Red defensive line... D) 27-24 has its points, but with less range; also, if 29-25, 8-11. 28-24, 10-15, 25-22, 6-10, 24-20, 3-7, 27-24 and 1-6 into an easy Double Comer..After 27-24, 8-11, 24-19 ( if 24-20, 9-13, 18-9, 5-14, 29-25 and Edwin Hunt's 10-15 equalizer; again into D.C. play- See Hunt v. Case, 1962 Nat. Ty.) 9-13, 18-9, 5-14, 29-25, 3-7. 25-22, 1-5,31-27, 6-9, 22-18, 13-17, &19-15 goes into a c.r. Aryshire Lassie, as in the R. Jordan-AJ Heffner 1st IM; later by Asa Long v.V. Townsend; 5th A.Ty.Cont: 10-19, 23-16, 14-23, then 27-18 is best followed with 11-20, 21-14, 7-10, 14-7, 2-11, 32-27 ( or 18-14, 9-18, 28-24 draw) etc; M. Tinsley v. R. Fortman, 1955 practice game. See 'CCC/ G.1221 for further play...Also. Don Lafferty vs. Walter Hellman; 1972 Lakeside Ty... E) If 24-20, there are two lines of defence with the 9-13 exchange, or 10-15. We prefer the last, then 20-16 ( not 26-22, 6-10 RW) 15-22, 16-7, 3-10, 26-17,or 9-13, 30-26, 13-22, 26-17, *10-15 ( as 6-9, 29-25 & White is strong.) 17-10, 15-19 etc. Draws... F) Other ways have been shown to lose:
G) The natural, and perhaps the most popular attack, but White is not confined to just this alone;
H) Again forced. Much analysis had been given to 11-15 *19-16, 12-19, 23-16, 2-7 but *27-23 beats this line, as given in MEC... I) An excellent waiting move by Victor Davis that firms up the 11-16 defence. After all these years it seems so simple now, but the finest analysts in the world missed idea, including Ryan, Mantell, Case, etc. Instead, the 14-17 exchange was thought sound until destroyed by Ryan's *23-18 ( to correct Case's 27-24 vs.Cameron in the 1941 So. Ty.) and everything falls a bit short. See MEC, page 201, Note B... Continue after the starred 1-5: after which the attacker has 5 ways...
OPENING NO 59. 10-14, 24-20, 11-15. 10-14, 24-20, 11-15 (A), 22-18 (B), 15-22, 25-18 (C), 7-10 (D), 26-22 (E), 8-11, 27-24 (F), 10-15, 24-19 (G), 15-24, 28-19. 3-7 (H), 19-15 (1), 7-10, 15-8, 4-11, 29-25 (J) FORMS DIAGRAM
A) The natural response in two-move play, with the first side gaining his share of the centre... B) The best reply, as 22-17, 6-10 goes into the previous Opening No 57, and if 28-24, then 8-11 is a favourable Aryshire Lassie line.. C) 26-10 opens up considerable play for both sides; and avoids the single corner cramp. Cont: 6-15, 21-17, 8-11, 28-24, 15-18 ( or 4-8, 17-13, 9-14, 32-28,15-19, 24-15, 11-18, 23-19, 14-17. 25-22, 18-25, 30-14, 8-11, 27-23, 1-6, 29-25, 6-9 etc. Drawn. EF Hunt v. LW Taylor, in the 1961 So. Ty. finals.) 23-14. 9-18 which transposes into an Edinburgh variation favored by NW Banks from: 9-13, 23-18, 5-9, 18-15 etc. 7-10, 27-24, 10-19, 24-15, 12-16, 25-22 same. Cont: 30-26, 5-9! 26-23, 9-13, 23-14, 13-22, 25-18, 3-8, 27-23, 11-16, 20-11, 8-22, 32-27, 4-8, 24-19, 8-11, 23-18, 2-6, 27-24, 6-10, 24-20, 10-17, 19-15, *1-6, 15-8, 6-9, 18-15, 7-11, 15-10, 9-13 etc; a finely contested draw; M. Chamblee v. M. Tinsley, in the 1948 Nat. Ty... D) An early movement of the apex piece, but favoured,as White's best reply is to duplicate it. 6-10 also produces fine play, and retains the single corner cramp. Cont: 26-22 ( otherwise, if 28-24, 12-16 etc and 9-13 ) 8-11, ( if 1-6!, 27-24= NOT 30-26?,12-16 20-11, 7-16 RW== then 8-11, 24-19, 3-8, 32-28 or 32-27 and back into pp) 27-24, 3-8, 24-19, 1-6,32-27 (again, not 30-26?, 11-16, 20-11, 8-24, 28-19,7-11, 32-27, 11-16, 27-24, 16-20, 31-27, 4-8, 18-15, 9-13, 22-18, 5-9, 26-22, 2-7. 15-11, 7-16, 18-15, 14-18 R.W.— R. Stewart over R. Holmes, in the 1901 Set. Ty.) 11-15, 18-11, 8-24, 28-19, 7-11, 22-18, 9-13 etc; a draw by A. Jordan v. J. Drouillard... E) Preferable to 28-24, 12-16, 20-11, 8-22, 26-17, 9-13, 30-25, 13-22. 25-9, 5-14, 24-19, 2-7, 29-25, 14-17, 21-14, 10-17, 25-22 etc; Drawn. Mike Lieber vs. WG Hill, in the 1923 Cedar Point Ty.. F) 29-25? ( if 28-24, 10-15, 31-26, 12-16, 29-25, 2-7, R.W.} looks auspicious after 10-15, but *27-24 3-8, 23-19 14-23, 19-10. 6-15, 31-26, 23-27, 32-23; 15-18 etc.20-16. 12-19. 24-15. 8-11 to a draw: R. Fortman v.WH Amos, in the ACF 200 club mail ty. prelims... G) 0r the seldom-used Schoenfeld-Rub in draw ( 1935 c P Ty.) with 23-19, 14-23. 19-10, 6-15, 31-26, 23-27, 32-23 and 3-8, with Red holding a modest advantage... ' H) The RJ Alien cooked line; a subtle move varying from the usual 6-10 or 3-8 drawing variations; introduced by Allen in the 1933 Set. Ty with success, and later used by E. Gibson to defeat Sam Levy in the 1934 Br Ty later adopted by Levy to win over E. Ransome, in the 1935 Eng Ty. Thls gains a few points ln favour of 7-10 at Note D (instead of 6-10 ) as both lines can be employed from this order of moves...Against the older 6-10 then 32-28 ( again 30-26 is bad after *1-6, 32-27 and *3-7, shown in both Kears Ency. and Master-Play a win once missed by Victor Townsend vs.-Asa Long In the 8th game of their.scoreless 22 draw deadlock in the 5th A.Ty at Boston in 1922 - which could have conceivably changed the eventual outcome of this tourney ,and also checker history.) then 3-8 is the usual draw:.However. Red still has 1-6 ( instead of 3-8 ) as played by W. Roberts v. Sam Gonotsky in the 6th A.Ty;again coaxing the losing 30.26.But the future US champion was not to be deceived, using the correct 29-25 wait ing move. and the tables are now turned, with Red having to use discretion. Robert's 3-7? lost after 28-24,with *3-8 instead proper, then 30-26, 11-16 etc. to a draw. as in J. Marshall v. B. Case- USA,GB mail match. I) Bobby Martin's suggested 32-28 is also sound after 7-10, *31-26, 10-15) 19-10, 6-15, then 20-16 etc; but other replies are razor-thin:
J) At this point, the natural 22-17 deceived several of the experts mentioned in Note H, and the prime objective of the cook. Cont: 9-13, 18-9, 13-22, 30-25, 6-13, 25-18, then 10-15, puts the White piece in jeopardy after 18-14, 2-7, 29-25, 15-19, 23-16, 12-19, 25-22 ( or 31-26, 1-6, 32-27, 19-24, 27-23, 24-27 RW) 11-15, 32-27, 1-6, 31-26 and 6-9 finishes matters . Analysts then turned to 31-27 as the proper defence, as played by Schoenfeld v. Rubin, in the 1935 |C.P. Ty; but after 10-15, 27-24,the first side has two excellent moves in 6-10, or the 9-13 exchange, as played by M. Tinsley v. E. Martin in the 1952 Canadian Open Ty. Martin lost after 30-25? 1-5 etc; into a win shown by the writer from a different order in WCP Game 310; also won by M. Chamblee over S. Weslow in the 1946 Newark Ty. Instead of 30-25, White has 23-19 instead, which leads into the following pretty play: Cont: 6-10, *29-25, 1-5, 32-27, 5-9, 27-23, 2-6, 30-26, 13-17, 22-13, 15-18 and White has just enough moves to escape with 26-22, 18-27, *20-l6, 11-20, 22-17, 27-31, *25-22, 20-27, 19-15, 10-19, 17-1, 9-14 and 1-6—as in a practice game. M. Tinsley v. Paul Thompson, I960... Instead of 31-27, Edwin Hunt then introduced the sly 29-25! as in trunk, at the 1962 Nat. Ty. vs.B. Case, This had been previously taken by the talented Milton Loew against him in a practice session prior to the 1960 Nat. Ty. Continue after 29-25, 9-13 ( the 10-15 bind first strikes the eye, but only an illusion after 21-17!, 14-21, 23-19, 15-24, and 18-14 etc; and Red is disheartened.) 18-9, 5-14, 22-18, 6-9, 25-22, 10-15, *22-17 ( Loew lost with White after 31-27, 13-17, 22-6, 15-22, 23-10, 1-10 27-24, 2-7, 32-28, 11-15, 20-16, 15-18, 19-15, 10-19, 24-15, 12-19, 15-10, 7-11, 10-7, 11-16. 7-3, 22-26,etc; R.W.) 13-22, 3026, 22-25, 32-28, 15-22, 26-10,11-15, 23-19 etc. Drawn, as in the EF Hunt analysis- also Case-Hunt, 1962 Nat. Ty Supplementary Play: Cont: after 29-25 at Note J-9-13 18-9 5-14 22-18 6-9 32-28? ( 25-22 better)10-l5 25-22 2-7 31-26 13-17 22-6 15-31 6-2 31-27 23-19, 27-23 19-15 11-18 2-11 23-19 28-24 19-28 11-15 18-22, 15-10, 14-18, 10-14, 18-23, 14-18, 22-26, 18-27, 26-31 to a long Red win. Don Lafferty v.Bill Leatherwood; 6th Dist; Martinsville, Ind. 1975..
OPENING NO 60. 10-14, 24-20, 11-16. 10-14, 24-20, 11-16 (A), 20-11, 8-15, 22-18 (B, Var.1). 15-22, 25-18 (H), 4-8 (1), 28-24, 8-11, 29-25(J), 6-10, 25-22, 1-6 (K), 24-20 (L), 11-16 (M), 20-11, 7-16 (N)... FORMS DIAGRAM
A) A sister opening to 9-14, 24-20, 11-16, where, in each case, the inefficient White piece on square 20 is removed, allowing White a modest mid-game edge... B) To the centre at once. The delay with 28-24 is also popular: VARIATION 1—28-24, 6-10, 24-20 (C),1-6, 22-18, 15-22, 25-18, 3-8, 26-22, 9-13, 18-9, 5-14, 31-26 (D), 7-l1(E), 29-25 (F), 6-9, 27-24, 11-15, 23-19,14-18, 32-27, 9-14, 26-23, 2-7, 21-17, 14-21, 23-14, 10-26, 30-23, 21-30, 19-3 and left as a draw by Ryan, but there is still play remaining here: Cont: 30-26, 23-19. 13-17, 3-7, 17-21,27-23, 21-25, 23-18, 26-31, 18-15, 31-27, 15-11, 8-15, 19-10, then 12-16 etc; to a draw. W. Hellman v. E. Fuller, 1972 Nat. Ty... C) 22-17 is less aggresive after 4-8, 17-13, 1-6, 23-19, 15-18, 24-20 ( White can avoid the following with the better 26-23 here, then 8-11, 31-26, 11-15, 26-22 and 3-8 etc; into an Aryshire Lassie, as in the LW Taylor v. M. Apel 1960 N. Ty game from 9-14, 24-20, 11-16.) then the outpost idea again with the 18-23 exchange which presses White. Cont: 25-22, 8-11, 31-27 ( this was given by 0. Mauro, in Ryans "AC" G. 160 as better then22-18 as taken by Hellman v. Tinsley;'ABC'G.29, but we are inclined to disagree.) 10-14, 27-18,14-23, 22-17, 7-10, 29-25. At this stage, Mr. Mauro gave3-7, 25-22, 11-15, then 20-16 etc to draw. However, Walter Hellman once mentioned to Edwin Hunt that *3-8 can be played, instead of 3-7, and Red may win, but his continuation was not shown. In later, analysis, Mr.Hunt produced the following fine play,sent to the writer: 3-8, *26-22 (note that the 25-22 idea does notwork after 11-15, 20-16 etc; as the path is now open with 2-7 to gain the piece.) 11-15, 32-28, 15-24,28-19, 23-27, 22-18,27-31, 17-14,10-17, 21-14, 31-27,*30-26. 27-3K if 8-11, *26-23. 27-31, 19-15 etc;Drs.) 25-22, 31-27, 19-15, 27-24, 26-23, 24-27, 23-19, 2-7, then *19-l6!, 12-19, 15-10, 6-15 and 13-6 to a unusual drawing theme by one of America's greatest masters; Edwin F. Hunt, now in retirement... D) Although previously published in MEG. this was used by Marion Tinsley to defeat Walter Hellman in their 1955 world title match. The latter had expected 22-18 instead, then 6-9, 30-25, *7-11, 25-22, 10-15, 32-28 and the Mantell draw with *l3-17 etc... E) As given in MEC. Hellman cut off 12-16 which is also sound, and had been analyzed by Ryan and sent to C.O. Beebe, but unpublished at the time. See 'ABC' G. 30. This was the defending world champion's second loss in two days, and virtually sealed his eventual defeat... F) Or 27-24 as in MEC, then; 11-15(G), 23-18, 14-23, 26-19, 2-7, then Ryan's then unpublished 32-28 (instead of 32-27 ) which Tinsley had intended to use. Cont: 7-11, 30-26, 15-18, 22-15, 11-18, 26-22, 18-25, 29-22, 10-14, 20-16, 6-10, 24-20, 10-15, 19-10, 12-19, 20-16, 19-23, 16-12, 23-26, 12-3, 26-30, 10-6, and 30-25 to a fine draw. Later taken in Game 2 of the Freyer-Tinsley 1959 practice match in NYC... G) ( Off Note F ) 11-16, 20-11, 8-15, 32-28, 4-8,24-19, 15-24, 28-19, 2-7, 29-25, 14-17, 21-14, 10-17, 19-16! (varies from Ryan's 19-15 in "BLC" ) 12-19, 23-16, 8-12,16-11,7-16, 25-21, 16-19, 21-14, *12-16, 26-23,19-26, 30-23, 16-20, 23-19, 20-24, 19-15. 24-27, 14-9, 27-31, 9-2, 31-26, 22-18, 26-23, 19-15, 23-14, 15-10 etc; and Red draws with the move. Willie Stacey v. Asa Long in a practice game at Toledo... H) (Off trunk) Or the unexpected 26-10!, used by W. Hellman v. Derek Oldbury in their 1965 match, transposing into 9-13, 23-19, 11-15, 22-17. 13-22, 25-11, then 7-23, colours reversed. Cont: 6-15 ( here 7-14 may be as good or better, then 25-22, 6-10, 28-24, 4-8, 22-18, 8-11, 29-25, 3-7, 25-22, 1-6, 24-19, 11-16 etc; to a draw. Rev.Vestal v. M. Rex, 1978 I-D mail ty.) 28-24, 4-8 ( Oldbury lost after 15-18, but 12-16, as played by Rex v. Vestal seems to be the easier way.) 25-22. 7-10, 22-17, 9-14, 29-25, 8-11, and 25-22, which Hellman had planned; into a strong line of the 9-14, 23-18 opening. C.R. See the Huggins-Weslow match book. I) Although 12-16 may draw. White has excellent attacking opportunities after 28-24, 16-20, 24-19, 4-8.and Ryan's suggested 26-22 (instead of the Mantell-Dailey29-25 draw in MEC ) 6-10, and left after 22-17 by Ryan as a 'troublesome ending'...Continue: 8-11,17-13, 2-6?( 1-6 may be better.) 19-16, 14-17, 21-14, 10-17, 23-19, 17-21, 29-25, 3-8, 25-22, 8-12, 32-28, 7-10, 16-7, 10-14, 27-23, White Wins. Roy Hunt v. Clayton 0 Beebe.. 5(59... J) If 24-19, 6-10, 26-22, then 11-15 etc; is a staid Defiance line, c.r; welcomed by the defender. And if26-22 instead, then 6-10, 22-17, 10-15, 17-10, 7-14, 30-26, 15-22, 26-10, 2-7, 29-25. 7-14, 25-22, 1-6, 22-18, 6-10, 31-26, 10-15, 26-22, 9-13 (or 12-16 -Long –Hellman, `WCC`G. 100 ) etc. to draw M. Tinsley vs. Harold Freyer, 1958 NYC match.. K) Or the early 9-13 exchange, met with 23-18, 14-23, 27-18, 12-16, 26-23 ( if 18-14 etc; going into 2nd DC play See ACFB #133, p. 48) 16-20, 24-19, 20-24 ( or 2-6, 30-26, 6-9, 22-17, 13-22, 26-17, 9-13, 17-14 etc; a pp draw by M. Tinsley.) 30-26, 2-6, 32-28, 6-9, 22-17 13-22, 26-17, 9-13, 17-14, 10-17, 21-14, 7-10, 14-7, 3-10, 31-26, 24-27, 19-15 etc and 27-31 to a good draw; C.0. Beebe v. Roy Runt, 5/59-previously shown by E. Frazier, from a different order of moves... L) If 24-19, 11-16, 27-24, 16-20, 32-28, 20-27, 31-24, 9-13, 18-9, 5-14, 24-20 , 14-17 C or 3-8, 22-18, then *13-17 etc. draws; Hellman-Case, 1963 match) 21-14, 10-17, 23-18, 7-11 (instead of 6-10 first, as in the Martin-Sanders 1947 Ill. ty. game.) 18-14, now 6-10, 14-7, 3-10, 26-23 etc. Drawn. DE Oldbury v. K.Albrecht 1964 Nat. Ty.. M) Preferred over 9-13, 18-9, 5-14, 23-18, 14-23, 27-18,6-9 then the 30-25 "Deep Valley" line, with White best; See Ryans. "AC" G. 136, and the 7th USA..GB mail match. N) Continue: 27-24, 16-19 etc 18-15, 14-18, 22-17, 9-13 17-14, 2-7, 15-11, 7-16, 26-23, 19-26, 31-15, 6-9, 14-10, 16-19, 10-6, 19-23, 15-11, 23-27, and 13-17 etc; to draw. John Howe, Jr. v. H. Steel in the 4th USA97GB mail match; later by Walter Hellman v. Don Lafferty, in the 1972 Lakeside Ty....
OPENING NO 61. 10-14, 24-20, 14-18. 10-14, 24-20, 14-18 (A), 23-14, 9-18, 22-15, 11-18, 21-17 (B), 8-11(C), 17-13 (D), 7-10 (E), 25-21 (F), 10-14, 28-24, 4-8 (G), 29-25, 3-7, 24-19, 6-10, 26-23 (H) FORMS DIAGRAM
A) In this particular opening, with the White piece on square 20, instead of 19, the weakness of this exchange can be exploited to a higher degree then in Opening No 56 where the 11-16 press is available. An example of conflicting principals , but it must be remembered that principles can only be approximations of the truth, and work only when applied in a common-sense manner. B) Again, with the double exchange played, Instead of the single (Opening No 46) 26-23 is much easier to meet after: 6-9, 23-14, 9-18, 21-17, 8-11, 30-26, 5-9, 26-23 as 9-13 can now be made, then 23-14, 13-22, 25-18, 3-8, 27-23, 11-16 etc; and the White attack has evaporated. C) Red has a variety of defences here, but the text s standard, and certainly best: 1) 7-10 is the Frazier line, but White may counter with Walter Hellman's 25-21 cook. Cont: 3-7, 27-24 (or 28-24, 8-11, 24-19, 11-16 etc. and 10-14 throws it into a 9-14, 23-19, 14-18 line—See 'Basic Checkers' Pt.2, page 39, Note H-2) 8-ll, 29-25, 10-15 ( if 6-9, 26-22, 9-13, 22-8, 13-29, 8-3, 29-25, 20-16 and White is powerful-W.H.) 17-14, *6-9, 26-22, *4-8 ( Not 12-16, 22-17, 9-13, 25-22 etc and 14-9 WW ) 32-27 ( White also has the unpublished 22-17.) *9-13. ( again, if 12-16, 27-23, 18-27, 31-26, 9-18, and 24-19 WW ) 30-26, 1-6, 26-23, then *7-10, 14-7, 6-10 is the same as 'Master-Play' p. 181, diagram, with the White piece on 25 instead of 21,continued to a draw.. 2) The 12-16 exchange was used by both Hellman and Ryan in their 1949 match, but has since faded from sight, as White has too many possibilities after 28-24. 3) If 6-9, 17-13, 1-6 ( 9-14 may draw ) *26-22, 7-11 ( 7-10 was shown to lose in WCP G. 786 by Eugene Winter.) 22-15, 11-18, 28-24, 8-11, 24-19, 3-7, 19-15, 4-8, *30-26 ( instead of the pp 27-24 or 31-26) 7-10, 25-21, 10-19, 27-23, 18-27, 32-7, 2-11, then 21-17 W.W. M. Tinsley... D) If 28-24 ( as 17-14 goes into a White Dyke line, and will be shown under the 10-15, 21-17, 15-18 etc 17-14 opening in a later series.) Red can use the once-condemned 11-15 defence ( instead of 5-9 or 6-9) then 17-14. 4-8, 26-23, *6-10. 25-21. 10-17, 21-14, 1-6, 29-25, 6-10, 31-26, 10-17, 23-14, *l7-2l, 27-23 (or 26-22, 8-11, 27-23, 2-6 etc. draws.) *2-6, 23-19, 15-18, 32-27, 6-10, 14-9, 5-14, 26-22, then 10-15, 19-10 and 14-17 etc. Drawn. H. Freyer v. W. Hellman; 1971 Lakeside Ty. For other fine play on this line, see the Case-Hunt 1962 Nat. Ty; and Case-Hellman,l963 match games... E) Not 5-9, 20-16 etc; into the Lewis-Ryan win shown in the previous Opening No 56. F) 26-23 ( if 28-24, as played by Freyer v.Hellman in the 1971 Lakeside ty; Red has 11-15, going back into pp, instead of 10-l4? by Hellman, after which White gets in 24-19, 4-8, 26-23, 6-10, 30-26, 2-7 and the winning 26-22-See Mesch's 6th Dist. Newsletter.)10-14, 31-26 ( Or: 28-24, then 11-15 is quite safe. Cont:25-21, 3-7, 30-26, 4-8, 23-19! (instead of 29-25, 6-10, 13-9, 7-11, 26-22, 1-6, 32-28, 6-13, 24-19 etc.Roy Hunt vs. M. Tinsley from a different run-up to draw) now both 6-10 or 7-10 lose, so *7-11, 19-10, 6-15, 29-25, 5-9, 13-6, 2-9, 32-28, 1-5, 26-22, 12-16, 22-17, 16-19, 17-10, and 18-23 etc; a fine draw. Walter Hellman vs. Jim Grant, in the 1973 3rd IM; Hellman's final competitive game of his 40 year career.) 4-8, 25-21, 3-7, 29-25, 6-10, 28-24, 11-15, 23-19, then *5-9 ( not 1-6, 20-16, 6-9, 13-6, 2-9, 25-22 etc; WW.Vic Monteiro vs. Paul Davis, 1972 Nat. Ty.) 13-6, 2-9, 26-23, 9-13, 30-26, 13-17, 32-28, 1-5, 26-22 ( or 19-16 etc; Case vs. Oldbury draw in USA-GB mail match from a 11-15 Edinburgh.) 17-26, 21-17 etc. Drawn. J. Cox v. T. Wiswell, 3/1/53 match game. G) Or 3-7 first, then 4-8.But the innocent appearing 11-15 should be avoided until White commits 26-23; to avoid the bind— an important point to remember in this opening. After 11-15, 29-25, 3-7, 32-28, 4-8 then the E. Winter *26-22 cramp. Cont: 7-11, 30-26, 2-7, 24-19, 15-24, *28-19, 5-9, 22-15. 11-18, 26-23, 7-10, 21-17, 14-30, 23-7, 30-25, 7-2, 25-22. 27-23, 22-17, 19-15, 17-22, *31-27, 22-26 (if 23-19,27-24) 23-19, 26-22, and 27-23 to an eventual WW by W. Hellman. H) Cont; 11-15, 32-28 etc and 1-6 into Op.#56 at 8th. corrections 1. Note G. Last line after 27-23. See `Churchill`s Compilations` o 847, col 10 & P 856, col 6
|
