THE FIRST TWENTY MOVES.

PART 4.

THE KELSO OPENINGS

by:

Richard L. Fortman.

6th Dist. Open Champion. 1980.

As In Part 3, the initial move forms this historic opening; so named by John Drummond well over a century past, in his 1851 edition, and which has prevailed through the years,

Kelso is a small Scottish village nestled on the left bank of the river Tweed; once a stop-over on the ancient London to Edinburgh stage coach run. Drummond, who resided in Denny, perhaps had visited here during his early years, and titled the opening in respect to the local players...

Although passed over to a great extent in the practice of the old-time masters, it was often encountered in the games of August J, Heffner, who won with the defending side in his match with C.F. Barker for the American championship; only to lose a Whilter ending on a blunder, and also the match—1-2-47 drs.

With its forced introduction under the 2-move restriction in 1905, much analysis was given to the opening and its seven replies- & more so after 1930, with 3-move, with the critical, one-sided ballots such as the Octopus, the Skull-Cracker, and the Tyne(*)» which, at the time, offered virtually unlimited possibilities for cooks.

One might presume that after 50 years of practice and analysis, all of the so-called rough spots in these openings would have been smoothed out, but such is not the case. It is true that the masters of today are forced to delve deeper into the mid-games, or early endings to mine 'gold nuggets', but the possibilities are still there; often encountered in the fertile minds of the expert mail players where new play of value is almost a necessity in order to win against their peers.

And so, in closing; to paraphrase Willie Ryan: " through the following pages pass some of the most beautiful moves"——— in the kingdom of the Kelso.... We hope that you enjoy them.

OPENING NO 62. 10-15, 21-17, 6-10.

10-15 (A), 21-17 (B), 6-10(0, 17-14 (D.Var.l). 9-18, 23-14, 10-17, 22-13, 11-16 (E), 25-22 (F), 1-6 (G), 29-25, 7-10, 25-21, 3-7 (H), 22-17 (1), 16-20, 24-19 (J), 15-24, 28-19 (K)

FORMS DIAGRAM

A) Although directed toward the centre, this Is judged inferior to 11-15, as it exits from the double corner, rather then from the opposite side, resulting in more scope for White attacks.

B) Of the seven possible replies, this is the strongest; aimed toward the weakness.

C) Rarely encountered in two-move play, as it magnifies the slight deficiency of the initial move, and allows White to attack the double corner.

D) The direct assault, and perhaps the feared one, although 17-13 has its disciples. See Var. 1....

E) Of the three playable defences, we favour this as the most restrictive. 12-16 can be strongly met with both 25-21 or 24-20, and 1-6 instead is countered with the so-called 'Frazier attack* by 26-23, 7-10 and 25-22, although Willie Ryan gave play on this in 1934, in his "SCME"; later refined by Frazier. This was used by both Asa Long and Louis deBeam in their Rd. 6 pairing in the 10th A. Ty. at Flint in 1939,resulting in 2 draws.

F) The usual response, but the Lieber attack with 26-22 (as 24-20 permits the 15-19 exchange, heading for the DC Dyke draws- Fortman v. Skurcenski) is also strong then 1-6, 22-18, 15-22, 25-18, 8-11 etc; 2nd IM. G.201.

G) One out-of-order move in this development spells out certain danger, if not total disaster. For example; if 7-10 here. White works in 26-23, followed with the 24-19 exchange against 1-6 or 3-7. But against the text, 26-23 is ineffective after the 16-19 exchange...

H) The Walter Hellman defence. If 16-19, 22-17 (side-stepping 24-20, 5-9, 27-24, 9-14, 32-27, 8-11, 27-23, and 2-7 etc; a Case-RD Banks draw, and one of the key formations of this line.) 5-9, then the fine Tinsley cook with 26-231—still aimed at the Red weak side. Cont: 19-26, 31-22, 12-16, 27-23. 15-19 etc. 6-10, 13-6, 2-9, 17-13, 9-14, 22-17, 8-11, 13-9, 11-15, 28-24,16-20, 32-27-once thought a win, but finely salvaged by Walter Hellman after *4-8, 9-6. *15-19l, 23-16,and Red slips away with *10-15, 17-10 and 8-12 to draw...

I) Or 24-20, 15-18, 22-15, 10-19, 20-11, 8-15, 27-24, 7-10, 32-27, 4-8, 21-17, 5-9, 30-25, 9-14, 25-21 8-11, 27-23, 2-7, 23-16, 11-27, 31-24, 7-11 a draw by Andy Dossett, the sage of Lebanon, Ind.

J) 26-23, 8-11, 30-26, 11-16, 24-19, 15-24, 28-19, 6-9! 13-6, 2-9, 17-13, 9-14, 19-15, 10-19, 13-9, 7-11, 9-6, 5-9, 6-2, 9-13, 2-6, U-15, 6-9, then *14-17, 21-14 & 15-18 Draws, as shown by the former world mail titleist, A.G. Huggins; one of the game's great competitors...

K) Cont: 8-11, 27-23. *20-24, 32-28, I1-16, 23-18, 16-23, 28-19, 4-8, 17-14, 10-17, 21-14, *8-11, 19-15, 11-16, 26-19 16-23, 14-9. 5-14, 18-9 then 12-16 was left as a narrow draw by Walter Hellman in the 9th A. Ty. book. When examining this line in preparation for the 1962 N.Ty. Mr. Edwin Hunt sent 7-10 instead to the writer, then 15-11, 10-15, 11-7, 2-11, 9-2, 15-19, 2-6, 19-24, 6-10, and 23-27 etc, draws cleanly—EFH...

VARIATION 1 ( Off trk @ 4th )

17-13(L). 1-6(M), 22-18 (N), 15-22, 25-18. 10-15(0) 26-22 (P), 7-10, 23-19 (Q), 3-7, 29-25, 9-14 (R), 18-9, 5-14, 31-26 (S), 14-18, 26-23,11-16 etc. Drawn....

L) This indirect attack is also popular, and was featured in the Thompson-Huggins 1962 world mail match. If 25-21, then 1-6 transposes into a opening No 68 line.

M) The only sound reply, and was once named the "Albion"; an ancient Celt title for England. There is a time and place for the 9-14 advance, but not in this particular opening sequence, as after 22-18 etc; White inserts the 'thorn' with 13-9, and any Red draw is problematical..

N) 23-18 has lost many of its admirers in view of 12-16,24-20, 16-19, 25-21, ( if 27-24, 10-14, 20-16, 14-23, 24-20, then 23-27, 32-23 and 15-18 Red is best.) 8-12 (avoiding the complications of the 19-24 exchange) 27-24, 10-14 ( 3-8 gives White winning chances after 31-27, 12-167, 27-23, 9-14 etc; then *l3-9!, 6-13 and 22-18 etc. WW; the Matty Priest "Pulveriser" shot, won over the trapper himself, J.P. Reed.) 26-23, 19-26, 30-23, then the 14-17 slip, followed with 6-10 etc; to a draw.

O) An ancient Robertson Guide variation, favoured by both Basil Case and Edwin Hunt. The natural 11-15 exchange results in much fine play. See Huggins-Thompson play in the 6th Dist. Newsletter..

P) Marvin Rex has suggested 24-19, 15-22, 26-17, 7-10, 29-25 with the better White game. Cont: 11-16 ( instead of 11-15 in R.G.) 25-21, 8-11, 30-26,( 30-25 runs into same )3-7, 28-24, 16-20, 26-22, 4-8, 22-18, 9-14, 18-9, 5-14, 23-18, 14-23, 27-18, 20-27, 32-23, 11-16, 17-14, 10-17, 21-14, 16-20, 19-15 ( if 14-9, 20-24, 9-5, 24-28, 5-1, 7-10 etc.drs.) 7-10, 14-7, 2-11, 23-19, 20-24, 18-14, 11-18, and 19-15 etc. to draw. Analysis by Don Lafferty, 1980.....

Q) If 29-25, 9-14, 18-9, 5-14, 24-19? (23-19 back into Var.1) 15-24, 28-19, left by Basil Case as "not good"; presumably for Red, but after 14-17, 31-26, 3-7 it is White that is weak— a Weslow-Rex mail game.

R) The 11-16 break-up also draws, as in a Lafferty-EF Hunt practice game at Nashville in 1961.

S) Or 25-21, 15-18, 22-15, 11-18, 31-26, 8-11, 19-15, 10-19, 24-8, 4-11, 26-23, 18-22, 23-18. 14-23, 27-18, 6-9, 13-6, 2-9, 21-17, 7-10, 17-13, and 10-14 etc; a pp draw by Basil Case....

Supplementary Play:

10-15, 21-17, 6-10, 17-14, 9-18, 23-14,, 10-17, 22-13, then the controversial 1-6, 26-23, 7-10, 25-22, 3-7, 24-19, 15-24, 28-19, 11-16, 22-18 (T), 8-11, 30-26, 16-20 ( varies from Ryan's 10-14 draw in 'SCME',p.71,diagram) 26-22, 11-15, 18-11, 7-16, 29-25, 4-8, 22-18, 10-14, 18-9, 5-14, 25-22, 14-17, 22-18, 17-21, 19-15, 16-19, 23-16, 12-19, 27-23, 19-26, 31-22, and 6-9 etc. Drawn. L.T. deBearn vs. Asa Long, Rd. 6, G. 4 in the 10th ACA Nat. Ty at Flint, Mich; 1939......

T) 29-25, 8-11, 22-18, 16-20, 25-22, 11-15, 18-11, 7-16, 22-17, 4-8, 30-25, 8-11, 25-22, 5-9. 22-18, 11-15, 18-11, 9-14, 11-8, 14-21, 8-4, 21-25, 4-8, 25-30, 8-11, 30-25, 27-24, 20-27, 11-20, 25-22, 31-24, then 6-9 etc. and a pretty draw a piece down...Long v. de Beam, Rd 6, G.J in the 10th ACA Ty. A similar game from a different order of moves was shown in Ryan's 'SCME' credited to Ryan v. Bradford back in the 1930's.......

corrections

1. Note J. Instead of 30-26, White also has 30-25, as in Chamberlain –Huggins. See `CD` June 1981 issue

OPENING NO 63. 10-15, 21-17, 7-10.

10-15, 21-17, 7-10 (A), 17-14 (B), 10-17 (C), 22-13, 11-16 (D), 23-19 (E, Var. l), 16-23, 26-10, 6-15, 13-6, 1-10, 25-22 (F), 12-16 (G), 29-25 (H), 16-19 (1), 25-21 (J) 10-14 (K), 24-20 (L).

FORMS DIAGRAM

A) Back in 1928, Francis Teacheleit gave a paltry half column to this opening in his monumental 'Master-Play', remarking that "this well shows the error in early moving of the apex piece"...Little did he know at the time what a can of worms he was opening!

B) Forming Willie Ryan's famous "Octopus", which the late master devoted 27 pages to in his classic 'Modem Ency.'..Play developed in the 40 year period since then could easily double that presentation, so we must here dwell only on the high spots. In contrast to the previous opening, this is the only attack, as other moves permit transpositions into even positions.

C)Recent analysis by Mr. Sam Schonbach in Louis Van Devon's "Midwest Checkers" features the suspect 9-18 capture, but its soundness has yet to be tested in important play...

D) Into Ryan's "Battleground of the Analysts", permitting White to virtually destroy the opposing double corner, if he so chooses, evoking a comment from the talented Abe Mantell:" After this, Red's game is clouded with doubt"...Everett Fuller once observed that the master players of 100 years ago; faced with this position would undoubtedly avoid this break-up with the more conservative looking 9-14...Much more critical positions then this have been shown to draw, but after White flanks (and cramps) with 24-20 and 25-21. No sound draw has yet been discovered one of the many riddles of the 'mystic squares'!.....

E) Everything is good, but it is difficult to resist the text, which removes most of the Red double corner. For the alternate 24-20 and 24-19 attacks, see Variation I...

F) Once again, White has excellent options in both,27-23 and 30-26:......

1. 27-23, 8-11, 25-22, 11-16, 24-19 ( if 32-27. 3-7, 30-26, 5-9, 24-19, 15-24, 28-19, 9-13!, 22-18, 29-25 is now met with 10-14, 22-18, 14-17, 26-22, 17-26, 31-22, 7-10, 25-21, 2-6, 18-15, 4-8, 22-18, 16-20, 18-14, 10-17. 21-14. 13-17, 14-10, then 20-24, 27-2P. 8-11 etc. Draws-rlf-» 13-17, 26-22. 17-26, 31-22, 2-6, 22-17, 6-9, 17-13, 9-14, 18-9, and 7-11 to draw-M.Tinsley v. D. Oldbury, 1974 Fla. Open) 15-24, 28-19, 4-8.29-25, ( or 22-18,8-11. 29-25. 16-20, 30-26,11-16, 25-21. then 20-24, 26-22, 16-20, 31-26,5-9, 21-17,and 24-28, 17-14 etc drs; Coleman-Hanson- USA-GB mail)8-11,30-26, then *2-7 ( many have faltered here I) 22-18, *10-15 ( both Banks and Ryan tried 16-20 in important play, and both survived after wins were missed by their respective opponents; N. Wexler and Morris Krantz.) 19-10, 7-14, 18-9, 5-14, 25-22, *3-7, 22-18, 14-17, 18-14, 17-21, 14-9, 21-25, 9-6, 25-30, 6-1, *11-15 (if 16-207, 1-6, 11-15, then Asa Long, playing Derek Oldbury in the classic 1974 Fla. Open took 6-2?, 7-11, 2-6 after which 15-18 escaped to draw. Instead of 6-2, Marion Tinsley's *26-22, 15-19 etc. 22-18, 7-11, 6-10. 30-25, 10-14, 19-23, 14-17, 25-21, 17-22, 23-26, 18-14, 11-15 and 31-27 Wins for White.) 1-6, 7-11, 6-10, 15-19 10-7, 11-15, 7-10, 30-25, 10-14, 25-30, 14-17, 19-24, 32-28 and 15-18 a key draw by Walter Hellman.
2. 30-26 ( a fine cook by Marion Tinsley, first used in an unpublished game vs. Bob Cornell in an Ohio State ty; later against D.E. Oldbury in their 1958 match. The writer also defeated Newell Banks with this in the 1958 Beth. Nat. Ty.) 8-11, 26-23, 3-7, 25-22, 11-16, 23-18 ( or the 24-19 exchange which we played vs. Lloyd Taylor at Bethlehem) 7-11, 27-23, 16-20,24-19 ( if 32-27, *2-6, 29-25, 6-9, 24-19,etc 11-16 drs) 15-24, 28-19, 2-6, 22-17, 6-9, 17-13, 9-14 etc.drs. W.H.

G) Red must strike for square 19 at once, to gain any semblance of order. For example, 8-11 wastes precious time after 29-25, then if 12-16 ( or 4-8, 25-21, 3-7,27-23. 11-16, 23-18, 8-11, 21-17, 5-9, 30-26, 9-13, 32-27, 16-20 and 3S-23 WW- Hellman v.Long, 9th A.Ty)22-17. 16-19, 25-22, 2-6, 22-18 etc. to a WW by WF Ryan from a different order of moves. See his 'AC* G. 107.

H) If 24-20 ( as 27-23, 8-12 into Wote F ) Ryan's 16-19 is not forced, as the option with 15-191 20-11, 8-15, 29-25, 10-14, 25-21, 3-7, 22-17, 7-10. 30-26, 4-8,27-23 8-12, 23-16, 12-19, 31-27, 2-7, 27-24, 7-11, 32-27, 11-16, 17-13, 16-20, 13-9, 14-18, 9-6, then 18-22,2617 and 15-18 draws. M. Tinsley vs. Rev. R.T. Jones, 1975 So. States Ty......

I) Ryan's star in MEG seems well founded. The late Leonard Rosenfleld ventured his 'home-brewed' 2-6! cook against Marion Tinsley in the 1952 Lakeside Ty but came to grief after: 25-21, 5-9, 27-231 ( nodoubt unexpected by the Boston prodigy.) 15-19,24-15 10-26, 30-23, 6-10, 28-24. 10-15, 21-17, 8-12 ( the 16-19, 23-16, 15-18 shot loses, as does 9-13 by 3U.7)23-18, 3-8, 18-11, 8-15, 24-20, 16-19, 20-16, 9-13, 17-14, 4-8, 14-10, 13-17, 22-13, 15-18, 10-7, 8-11 and 32-27 WW-Rosenfield v. Tinsley...

J) 22-17; either here, or a move earlier, goes into a once cooked line by Walter Hellman. Cont: 5-9, 24-20, 8-11, 27-24, 4-8,17-13 ( or 25-21, 8-12, then 30-26; as 31-26 can be met with the 19-23 pitch, and 3-7 to draw. After 30-26, 9-14, 31-27, 2-6, 17-13, *12-16=not 3-7? 21-171, 14-21 26-22 WW= 26-22, *3-8, 13-9, 6-13 & 22-18 the Hellman draw) 2-6, 30-26, 8-12, 31-27, 9-14, 27-23, now the opposite tactics must be used. *3-7 draws, but 12-16 loses after 32-27...After 3-7, 23-16, 12-19, 25-21, 14-18, 20-16, 11-27, 32-16,10-14, 28-24, 6-10, 13-9, 14-17 etc 9-6 and the escape with 15-19, 24-15 and 7-10 to draw. R. Fortman v. S. Weslow in a Haye's mail ty 15 years ago...

K) Once again, 2-6 ( as in Note I) is doubtful after Bill Salot's *24-20, 8-11, 27-24, 10-14 ( if 4-8,31-26 WW) 22-17, 14-18, 17-14, 3-7, 21-17, 18-22, 17-13, 19-23 and 24-19 etc with a winning White ending...

L) A cook used by Walter Hellman with success vs. Asa Long in their 1962 match; Hellman later giving credit to Ed Markusic for calling his attention to this. The more usual attack was 22-17, then 2-7, 17-10, 7-14, 27-23, 19-26, 31-22, 3-7, 22-17, 7-10, 30-26, then 8-12 is forced, as 8-11 instead permits a winning ending after 17-13, 14-18, and the 26-23 exchange; Tinsley winning over Oldbury in the 1974 Fla.Open. After the key 8-12, cont: 17-13 ( if 26-23, Red gets the snap draw with 5-9, 17-13 and 12-16 etc.) 14-18, 32-27, *12-16, 26-23, 10-14, 13-9, 18-22, 9-6, 16-20, 6-2, 22-25, 2-6, 25-30, 6-9 *l4-l7, 21-14, then 4-8 appears to be the preferable way to draw, as in the Hellman-Long 1962 game...

Cont. after 24-20 in trunk: 5-9, 22-17 ( or 27-23, 19-26, 30-23 well met with Don Lafforty's 8-11,instead of Long's 9-13 v. Hellman) 2-7, 17-10, 7-14, then 27-24! ( a cook by the vicar of correspondence checkers, Richard Chamberlain, of Australia..If 20-16 instead then we once played 8-12, 16-11, and 19-23 etc. to a difficult draw v.Vic Monterio. In later checking this with Walter Hellman, he suggested the 8-11 exchange as easier, then 27-24, *4-8, 31-26, ((Don Lafferty tried 31-27, *9-13, 30-26, *13-17, 27-23, 8-12, 23-16, 12-19, 32-27, then 17-22, 26-17 and 14-18 to a pretty draw. D.L.)) *8-11, 26-23 x15-18, (.nd 23-19 etc. Draws. W. Hellman) 9-13 ( White wants 8-11, 31-26, 4-8, 32-27, 8-12, 27-23, 3-7, x then 26-23 19-26, 30-23, 15-18, 21-17 WW. Chamberlain. Marvin Rex scored with this in the 1980 ACF I-D mail ty; still unpublished at this writing.) 31-26, *8-l2 (if 3-7, 20-16, 15-18(a), 24-15, 8-11, 15-8, 4-20, then 26-23 x wins after 7-11, 30-25, 13-17, 23-19, 20-24 and 19-16 etc.) 20-16, 14-18, 16-11, and Red gets in *12-16, 11-7, 3-10, 24-20, 18-22, 26-17, 13-22, 20-11, and 10-14 to line up and draw.

(a) instead of 15-18 if 8-12? 16-11x 24-20 WW .Childers- Rex 1980 ID mail ty

VARIATION 1 ( Off trk. at Note E )

24-20 (M) 16-19, 23-16, 12-19,2 20-16 (N), 9-14 (0), 27-23 (P), 2-7, 25-22, 8-12, 31-27(Q), *l4-18. 23-14, 7-11 16-7, 3-17, 27-24, 4-8, 32-27, 6-10. 13-9, 5-14, 22-13, 8-11, 29-25, 1-5, 26-22. 11-16 (R), 24-20, 19-24, 20-11, 24-31, 25-21, 31-27, 11-8, 15-19. 8-3, 27-23, 22-17, 19-24, 28-19, 23-16, 30-26, 16-11, 26-22, 12-16, 13-9, then 10-15(S) Drawn.

M) This alternate attack against the single corner side is, at the present time, overshadowed by the trunk; still, it cannot be ignored. Against 24-19 instead. 9-14, 25-22, 8-11, 22-18, 3-7, 18-9, 5-14, 26-22, 14-17, 22-18, 17-22, 30-26, 7-10, 26-17, 10-15, 19-10, 6-22, 17-14, 16-20! (varying from the Crawford 2-7 defence, which produced the record-breaking 7and a half hour,149 move Tinsley-Oldbury 1958 match game.) 14-10, (if 23-18, 11-16, 32-28, 22-26, 31-22, 16-19, 18-15, and 2-7 draws.) 11-15, 32-28, 4-8, 23-18, 8-11, 10-7, 22-26, 31-22, and 15-19, to draw- R.Fortman vs Lloyd Taylor; 1958 N.Ty; a game praised by annotator Asa Long...

N) 25-22, 9-14, 20-16 ( if 29-25, 2-7. 25-21 14-18, 22-17,18-22, l7-14, 22-25, 27-24, 25-29, 21-17 &*8-12, 32-27, 4-8, 26-22, 7-11, 14-10, 5-9, 22-18etc 30-25 a Walter Hellman draw.) 14-18, 22-17 2-7, 16-12, 19-23, 26-10, 7-21, 28-24. Here pp gives 8-11 but Marion Tinsley introduced the more confining 18-221 v E. Lowder, 1979.

O) We prefer this over the immediate 2-7 ( as did the late Paul Thompson). Curiously enough, Edwin Hunt was prepared to use this also in the 1962 Peoria N. Ty; but when the position arose in the 3rd rd. vs. Milton Apel, he reached out and inadvertently moved 2-7 instead!

P) This drives the play back into Ryans MEC V. 20. 16-12 here was his objection to the early 9-14, buthis play is subject to improvement; once described by Derek Oldbury as a "fallen star!" See Maine vs.GH Whiting; 3rd USA-GB mail match..If 25-22 I instead of 16-12 ) then 14-18, 22-17, *2-7 ( 18-22? 30-25, 15-18, 16-11 etc. to a WW-Marshall-Oldbury-1950 ) 26-23, ( if 16-12, 19-23 into Note N) 19-26, 30-14, 8-12, 31-26, 12-19, 27-23, 4-8, 23-16, 8-12, 32-27, 12-19, 27-23, 3-8, 23-16, 8-12 and Red has the better ending- E. Scheldt to RLF, 12/74...

Q) If 29-25, *7-11, 16-7, 3-10, 23-16, 12-19, 32-27, 4-8, 25-21, 8-12, 27-24, then 14-18 (easier then 5-9 in MEC) 22-17, 18-23, 24-20, 15-18, 17-14 etc & 6-9 to draw- K. Todd v. H. Mischler, 1976 I-D mail ty.

R) This varies from Ryan's suggested 12-16 in MEC,p. 140, Note L, which may be an absolute loss after *13-9; instead of 30-26 shown there.Cont: 14-17, 22-13, 5-14, *24-20, 14-18, *27-24, 18-23, *25-22, 23-26,etc then *22-17 and Red has too many weak pieces to get through-M. Apel & J. Howe, Jr....

S) A fine draw sent to the writer by Paul Thompson many years ago; perhaps shown to him by M. Tinsley.

Supplementary Play: Off trunk. Note F, #2 30-26, 8-11, 26-23, 3-7, 25-22, 11-16, 23-13, 7-11, 24-20

(instead of Hellman's 27-23 ) *5-9, 27-23, 10-14, 29-25, 2-7, 25-21, 16-19, 23-16, *14-23, 31-27,1319

27-18, 7-10, 20-16, 11-20, 18-11, *10-15, 11-7,19-23, 7-2, 15-19, 2-6, 9-13, 6-10 then *4-8 Draws. Edwin F. Hunt, sent to the writer in 1961

OPENING NO 64. 10-15, 21-17, 9-13.

10-15, 21-17, 9-13 (A), 17-14 (B), 11-16 (0, 24-19 ( D,V.1.)15-24, 28-19, 6-9 (E), 22-18, 8-11(F), 25-22 (G),16-20 (H) 29-25 (1), 11-16 (J), 18-15 (K), 9-18, 23-14, 16-23, 26-19 (L)

FORMS DIAGRAM

A) This side move forms still another of the fighting openings unveiled with the advent of the 3-move restriction back in the 1930's.Unfortunately, it has remained nameless for the past half-century, although some unheralded scribe once titled it the "Tyne" (or Tine), which in ancient Celt dialect is translated "to lose", or "be lost" which fits its characteristics to a "T".....

B) With this one penetrating move, White opens up a veritable 'Pandora's box' of attacks. Anything else is strictly second-class.

C) Regarded as best, but this was not always so. Other ways are:

1. 6-10 was the original defence back in the early 1930's, as in Long-Banks, 1934, but after *23-18( not 25-21) 10-17, then 25-21, and the various defences fail to stand the pressure...
2. The 15-18 exchange is the so-called 'Frazier' defence, but a minority variation. Cont: 26-22 (24-19 is also powerful, but no forced wins have been shown) 12-16, 22-l5, 7-10, 14-7, 3-26, 30-23. 6-10, 25-22, (or 25-21, 1-6, 23-18, 8-12, 24-20, 16-19, 29-25, 4-8, then 18-14 etc; to a draw- Frazier-E, Hunt; 1962 N.TY) 1-6 to a pp draw by Frazier, but White has many good options in this mid-game.

D) Perhaps the natural attack. White has a number of strong lines at his command, such as the 23-19 break of Var. 1; also the 22-17 exchange, into opening No 69. Var. 2...The 24-20 and 22-18 variations are less popular, and well-covered in Ryan's MEC…

E) The key to this defence is to pack in on both flanks with 6-9 ( or 8-11 first) then 11-16 and 16-20; and to delay both 4-8 and 1-6 until mid-game. A POINT TO REMEMBER. It took several fine analysts; notably Abe Mantell, several years to work out all the ramifications, and as late as 1938, the well-posted Nathan Rubin was unaware of the correct way; going into a loss vs. Judge Dorsey at Cedar Point.See Note F..

F) For example, if the premature 1-6 here. White has 25-22, 6-10 ( now if 8-11, 29-25, 16-20, and one tempo ahead with 19-15, 11-16, 23-19. 16-23, 26-19, 4-8, 25-21, 7-10, 14-7, 3-10, 27-23, then 20-24 allows a WW with 15-11 etc; by Asa Long.) 29-25, 10-17, 25-21, 8-11, 21-14, and the 7-10 exchange was first thought to draw, until Judge Homer Dorsey, of Sandusky, waited with *32-28 vs. N. Rubin in the 1938 C.P. Ty. Although Rubin managed to draw, later analysis proved this 33-28,a winner. See MEC p. 86, Var. 4....

G) 25-21 also has merit. Cont: 16-20 ( once again, 1-6 is inferior after 29-25, 16-20, 19-15, 11-16, 23-19, 16-23, 26-19, 13-17 then Marion Tinsley's 31-26 idea, to improve 30-26, as in a Mantell-Davis mail game, but Red seems to draw as shown in Ryan's 'AC' G. 148)29-25, 11-16,25-22, then 1-6 and Note K, #2...

H) 1-6 must still be delayed; into Note F.

I) Although not mentioned in Ryans MEC, the writer has had good success with 30-25 here ( going into a Kelso-Cross line.) winning an important round in the 1950 II. State Ty. with it. It also caught Walter Hellman by surprise ( a rare occurance!) in the 1953 title match vs. Basil Case...30-25, 11-16, 25-21, 1-6, 19-15,*16-19, ( 7-10 was played in the ty. game mentioned above.) 23-16, 12-19, 32-28, *4-8 (Hellman went into a loss fter 3-8, but later managed a beautiful piece-down draw through use of the 'McCulloch Position',) 29-25 then 8-12,( here the 13-17 pitch is shown to draw in `Master-Play' p. 286, Var. D & E, but falls after 22-13, 7-10, 14-7, 3-10, then W.T. Jenkin's *25-22 will win instead of 26-22 as given.) 21-17, 3-8, 25-21, 7-11, 27-23, 2-7, 23-16, 12-19, 31-27, *8-12, 15-8, 7-11, 14-10, 6-15, 27-23, 11-16, 18-11 and 20-24 is in time to draw..PP.....

J) For the third time in succession, the defender has the opportunity to lose with 1-6!

K) Just one of several fine attacks. Others are:

1. 19-15, 16-19. 23-16, 12-19, 27-23 ( here 32-28 is into Mantell's key draw after 4-8, 15-10, 8-12,25-21, then *19-23, 26-19 and 2-6 will draw and save this opening from the discard pile.) 19-24, ( not 4-8, 23-16, 8-11, 15-8, 3-19 and left by Ryan as a "push-over" draw, but after Jeff Clayton's 18-15, 9-18 and 15-11, the defence tends to crumble.) 23-19, 4-8, 25-2l, then 24-271 ( a fine pitch by Walter Hellman .Against Leonard Hall's 8-12, White has both 30-25, or Ed Scheidt's 21-17, with a decided edge.) 32-23 (if 31-24, 7-11, *15-10, 11-15 etc.) 20-24, 14-10, 7-14, 22-17,13-22, 26-10. 9-14, 18-9, 5-14, 30-26, 24-28, 26-22,28-32, 22-17, 32-28, 10-6, 2-9, 17-10, 28-24, 19-16, 8-12, 16-11, then 24-20 ( Hellman's 9-14 can be met with 23-19 or 11-8, which seem to draw, but not as clear) 11-8, and 12-16 Draws. M. Tinsley...
2. 25-21, *1..6 ( Now correct, but 4-8 instead always seems inadequate in this opening. Here it loses time after *22-l7, 13-22, 26-17, 2-6. *30-26. 6-10, 32-28, l-6= or 8-11 to a long WW in MEC, V. 7 =17-l3, 10-17, 21-14, 6-10, 13-6, 10-17. 6-2, 7-10, 2-6, 10-14, 18-9, 5-14, 26-22, 17-26, 31-22,14-18, 22-15, 3-7, 6-9, 7-11, 9-14, 11-18, 19-15 and into Capt.Fishburne's famous "Crocodile ", so named because of the wicked tail-end snap. See Var. 1, Note V; an unusual example of the same ending occuring from two entirely different lines of the same openingl ) 19-15 ( nothing better, as 32-28, 6-10 is into opening No 69, Note G, and if 22-17 instead a std. draw in MEC) *7-11, 15-8, 4-11 23-19, 16-23. 26-19, 12-16, 19-12, 11-15, 18-11, 9-25, 11-8, 25-29, 8-4, 29-25, 4-8, 2-7, 31-26, *6-9 ( not 6-10?, given by Ryan, as Chamblee's correcting *26-22, 25-18 and 27-24 etc; is a winning W. ending) 32-28, 9-14, 27-23, then 14-18, 23-14 and 13-17 draws by AG Huggins....
3. 32-28, *4-8 ( now playable, after White has committed 32-28) 25-21, 7-10, 14-7, 3-10, 19-15, 10-19, 21-17! ( if 27-24, 20-27, 31-15. 9-14, 18-9, 5-14, 15-10, 16-19, 23-16, 12-19, 26-23 etc; then 8-11, instead of 8-12 or 1-5 in MEC. Cont; 10-7, 11-15, 7-3, 1-6, 23-19 x and 6-10, 19-16, 2-7 Draws. W. Hellman v. M. Loew; 1972 So. Ty.) 2-7, 17-14, 13-17, 22-6, 1-17, 27-24. 20-27, 31-15. 5-9, 23-19, 16-23. 26-19, *7-11 ( 17-22 lost; E. Fuller v. E. Markusic, 1972 N. Ty.) 15-10, 11-16, 19-15. 16-19, 10-7, 12-16, 7-3, 8-12, 3-7, then 19-24 ( or 17-22 Drawn; R. Comell v. LW Taylor; 1952 N. Ty) to a fine draw. M. Chamblee vs. Lee Munger; 1950 N. Ty. from a 10-15 Edinburgh.

L) Cont: 1-6 ( if 4-8, 22-18, 2-6.==. as 13-17, 31-26, 7-11. 25-22, 17-21, then Hellman's *15-10 to win== 25-21, 13-17. and 31-26 to a draw-DE Olbury v. Ed Markusic, 1976 N.Ty; however White has the option of the 27-24 exchanged instead of 31-26 ))as suggested to the writer by Paul Thompson) 31-26, 6-9, 26-23, 9-18. 23-14, 4-8 ( or Freyer's 7-10 etc. to draw) 22-18. *7-11, 25-22, 11-16. 14-10, 16-23, 15-11, 8-15, 18-11, then 12-16, 27-18 and 16-19—Red pitches out to draw—AC Huggins v. H. Freyer, 3rd USA-GB mail...

VARIATION 1 ( Off trk. @6th)

23-19 (M), 16-23, 26-10, 6-15, 27-23 (Var.2). *8-11(N) 32-27 (0), 4-8 (P), 22-18, 15-22, 25-18, 11-16 (Q), 29-25, 8-11(R), 25-21 (S), 16-20, 24-19, 11-16 (T), 30-25, 1-6 (U) 14-9. 5-14, 18-9. *13-17, 21-14, 6-13, 14-9, 13-17, 25-22, 17-26, 31-22. 7-10, 9-5, 10-14, 5-1, 3-8, 1-5, *2-6 (V), 22-18, *6-10, 18-9, 8-11, 9-6, 10-14, 19-15, 11-18, 28-24, 18-22. 5-9. 14-17, 9-14, 17-21, 14-17, 22-26, 17-22, 26-31, 23-18 and 16-19 etc. Draws.Walter Hellman vs. RL Fortman-practice game at the 1958 Beth. N. Ty...

.M) An excellent innovation developed back in the early1940's; by-passed in Ryans MEC. It first came to the writer's attention when played by Marion Tinsley vs. Maurice Chamblee in the initial game of the 1948 N.Ty finals, but known earlier, as Lee Hunger had mentioned it to Bob Cornell at the 3rd NCA Ty in 1946. Cornell then balloted this opening the next day vs. Walter Hellman, and adopted the cook; resulting in a pretty but unsound draw. See Note N.Cornell also put it to good use in the 1952 N.Ty; winning two games over A. White and Lloyd Taylor. Tom Colston has mentioned that this was played by Arthur Reisman vs. him in 1946 mail play; Reisman crediting Basil Case. It can arise, c.r. from 10-15, 24-20, 15-19 x 27-24, 7-10, 24-15, 10-19, 22-18?, 6-10 same....

N) The proper reply. Hellman vs. Cornell attempted to simplify ( perhaps caught unprepared) with 15-18? 22-15, 7-10. 15-6, 2-27. 32-23, 8-11, 25-22. 3-7, 30-26, ( Jeff Clayton later found a WW w/ *22-18, 7-10, 24-19. 5-9, 29-25, 1-5, 25-22, 11-16, 28-24, 16-20, 30-25, 20-27, 31-24, 9-14, 18-9, 5-14, 25-21, 4-8, & 22-18 WW) 7-10. 29-25, 5-9, 25-21, 4-8. 22-18, 1-5, 24-19 and a forced draw after *11-16, 28-24, *8-11, 24-20 and *10-14, 26-22, 11-15 etc.

0) This might be termed a "double" cook, as used by Tinsley, Colston, etc; varying from the Case/Reisman attack with 23-19, 7-10( the 2-6 exchange Is suspect; Colston should have lost to Reisman, and White did lose to Cornell.) 14-7, 3-10, 22-18, 15-22, 25-18, *5-9 ( 10-14 lost-Taylor-Cornell, 1952) 19-15, 10-19, 24-8, 4-11, 28-24, 2-6, 3l-26( varies from the Clayton draw after 24-19, given in Case's '3 Move Checkers')6-10, 29-25, 1-5, 24-19, 9-14, 18-9, 5-14, 26-22, 11-16. 25-21, 16-23, 22-18, 12-16, 18-9, 10-15 etc. Drawn. RL Fortman v. W. Edwards, 1979 USA-GB mail.

P) 11-16 goes awry—not by the 22-17 cut, but with the simple 30-26 waiter! WW.

Q) Colston considered this forced, and he was no.doubt correct. Chamblee cut off 7-10 v. Tinsley (also used later by Paul Thompson v. J. Latham 'in US-GB mail match) 14-7, 3-10, 29-25, 10-14 18-9, 5-14, 25-22 (here *23-19 seems to win-See US-GB mail match play in ACFB)2-7. 22-18 ( or 24-19 also to a draw-Thompson-Latham) 1-5, 18-9, 5-14, 24-20, 11-15, 27-24, 7-10, 31-26, 14-17, 20-16, x'etc. to a draw- Chamblee v. Tinsley.

R) 0ne of the main objectives of this White line is to coax the natural 13-17 here, which was once played by Sammy Cohen v. Colston in the 1956 Br. Mail ty. White has two attacks with Colston's 24-20 (or Thompson's inmediate 31-26, then if 17-21. 24-20, 16-19 x 27-24 2-6 24-15' 7-10 etc and 26-16;after which a red draw is rather remote) 8-11, 31-26, 17-21, 27-24, 1-6 to an eventual draw...

(S) or 31-26 now then *16-20, 25-21 *11-16. 30-25, 1-6,14-9' 5-14' 18-9' 7-10 ( Golston gave a draw with 13-17 also.) 9-5, ( not 25-22?, 10-14, 9-5, and 16-19 etc; Red won the ending. M. Tinsley v;D.Lafferty in a Practice game;1969.)10-14, 26-22, 3-7, 22-18, then 16-19 etc. to a nice draw by Paul Thompson, who did considerable work on this line.

T) 13-17 is still questionable after 31-26: to a WW-A. White v. P. Thompson..

U) This improves the 7-10 exchange which we used.vs Thompson in a 1957 ACF mail ty. game, given in the ACFB, Sept 1958.G66 As it may draw, as shown by Jeff Clayton. the endings are dangerous. See the Scheidt-Hellman game; 26th N. Ty.ACFB #107, G. 60.

V) At this stage, I mentioned to Walter that he might play 2-7, then get in the 14-18 pitch and squeeze.This produced a smile, and the remark: "Yes, and then you give me the business!"....2-7?, 5-9, 14-18, 22-15, 7-11, *9-14, 11-18, then 19-15, and again into the 'Crocodile'1—See trunk. Note K.».

VARIATION 2 ( Off Var. 1 @ 5th)

30-26 (W), 8-11, 26-23. 4-8, 24-19, 15-24, 27-20, 7-10 (X) 14-7, 3-10, 28-24, 10-14 (Y), 25-21, 1-6, 24-19, 6-10, 22-18, 2-7, 18-9, 5-14, 31-26, 14-17, 21-14, 10-17, 23-18, 17-22, 26-17, 13-22, 18-14, 22-26, 29-25, 26-30, 25-22, 30-25, 22-18, 25-21, 19-15, 21-17, 15-10, 17-22 etc Drn. W. Edwards v. J. Caldwell in mail play...

W) Another cook in this fine opening; this by Marion Tinsley vs. Don Lafferty in a 1969 practice game.

X) This was used by Mr. Edwards, the Internationalist, of Wales against both Mr. Caldwell and the writer; & earlier by E. Fuller v. Galdwell in the 1977 Lakeside Ty.Don Lafferty had taken 1-6 ( 2-6 was used to draw in the 1972 N« TY) v. Tinaley and lost, later resurrected to draw by Walter Hellman. Cont; 1-6, 22-18, *13-17t ( to improve 6-9, 32-27, 7-10, 14-7, 3-10, 25-22. 10-15, 23-19, 15-24, 28-19, 2-7, 29-25, 9-14, 18-9, 5-14, 27-23, 7-10, 22-18 etc; WW-Lafferty-Tinsley ) 25-21, *12-16!, 28-24 ( as 18-15 leaves Red better after 6-9—and if 32-27 instead, then *8-12= not 16-19? given in 'Potpourri' as after 23-16, 6-10, White has *16-12, 10-15, 28-24, 15-22, 24-19, 2-6 & 19-16 WW- Hellman= 28-24, 17-22, 24-19, 6-10, 21-17, then *10-15l 19-10 and *l6-19l, 23-16, 12-19, comes back into the same draw shown here.) 17-22, *21-17, 6-10, 24-19, 8-12. 32-27 ( if 32-28, 10-15, 19-10, 5-9, 14-5, 7-21, 28-24, 3-7, 24-19, 7-10. 5-1, 21-25 and the 18-14 shot, 10-17, 1-6, 2-9 and 31-26 etc; Draws. W.H.) now Red has the clever *10-15, 19-10 and *16-19, 23-16, 12-19 to draw. Cont: 10-6, 2-9, 27-23, 19-26, 17-13, 26-30, 13-6, 22-26, 31-22.30-26, 22-17, 26-22, 18-15 etc. Drawn. Walter Hellman at his best...

Y) Evidently as good as: 5-9, 24-19, 11-15, 19-16, 12-26, 22-17, 13-22, 25-4, 26-30, 4-8, 9-14, 8-11

14-18, 11-16, 10-14, 16-11, 18-22, 11-15, 22-26, 31-22 and 30-26 etc. Drawn. Fuller v. Caldwell...

OPENING NO 65. 10-15, 21-17, 11-16.

10-15, 21-17, 11-16 (A), 17-13 (B), 16-20 (C), 22-18 (D) 15-22, 25-18, 8-11, 29-25 (E), 9-14 (F), 18-9, 5-14, 25-21 (G), 7-10 (H), 26-22 (1), 3-7, 22-17 (J), 11-15 (K) 30-26 (L).

FORMS DIAGRAM

A) Since this holds the double corner intact, it was the favoured reply to this opening in the two-move era.

B) An unusual opening, in that White has 8 possible moves, and while none of them are bad, neither are any superior to the text. For the 17-14 exchange, see Open. #70, Var.l. On the early 22-18 here, then 16-20, 26-22, 7-10 ( as 9-13 is into Open. #65, Note D #3—See the Hellman-Taylor 1956 Galveston N. Ty. game.) 17-13, 8-11 etc; M. Tinsley v. M. Chamblee, 1947 match.

C) It is better to relinquish the centre, as the defender has sound back-up forces. The 16-19 exchange will draw, but seldom seen today.

D) 25-21 also has promise. Cont: 8-11, 23-18 ( or a Heffner-Freeman line after 24-19, 15-24, 28-19, 11-16, 22-18, 7-10, 26-22, 9-14, 18-9, 5-14, 22-18, 1-5 etc.) 7-10, 26-23, 4-8, 29-25, 9-14, 18-9, 5-14, and a position very similar to a Pioneer ( Reismans V. 24 at the diagram) with the exception that the piece on 25 is on 26. See the 11-16, 22-18, 16-20 opening for more play.

E) Or 24-19, 11-16, 29-25, 4-8, 26-22, ( also 25-21, 7-10. 26-22, 8-11, 30-26, 10-15 etc; a J.Bell draw) 7-10, 31-26, 3-7, 28-24, 9-14 ( 8-11 is perhaps best then 18-15, 11-18, 22-15, 9-14, *l5-ll, 14-18 etc; a Jordan-Ginsberg draw)18-9, 5-14, 22-18, 14-17, 25-21 ( 18-15 instead is a H. Morrall M.P. line ) 1-5, 21-14, 10-17, 18-15, 7-10, 23-18, 16-23, 26-19, then *2-7 will draw, but the natural 5-9? allows *27-23!, 20-27, 18-14 etc» the pretty shot that CF Barker won from C. Freeman. Marion Tinsley also snared Bobby Martin with this in a 1950 Chicago Ty,....

F) Red can safely delay this by waiting with Alfred Jordan's favourite 4-8, then 25-21, 11-16 and into the Bell draw mentioned in Note E... .

G) 26-22 was a prime favourite with the personable Ala. master, Maurice Chamblee, which he used vs. Walter Hellman in the 23rd game of their 1951 title match. At the time this game was played, Chamblee was trailing 1-3 and still in competition. With a win here (and one was on the board!) he would have been just one back but alas, he lost instead, and with his spirit broken, bowed to his great adversary 1-6 with 29 draws and was never quite the same again-meeting an untimely death at the young age of 31. on Feb.19 1958….thus checkers lost one of its brightest stars, and none has risen to replace him, but his games remain, along with a bit of his glow that will linger in the memory of his Peers that appreciated his unique talents... 26-22, 7-10 ( if 14-17, 31-26, 11-15, then Chamblee's 23-19. after which *l7-21 etc, a draw by Abe Bernstein vs. the writer in mail play.) 22-18, 14-17, 31-26, 3-7, 25-22 and Hellman soon was in deep trouble after 1-5 , and 23-19 instead Mar- ion Tinsley suggested 11-16 (before 1-5 ) then if 18-14, 4-8, 24-19, 8-11, 28-24, ( if 22-18,.10-15 ) 11-15, 23-18 etc. to a draw..

H) The piece on square 11 should remain until White declares his intentions; with the option of 11-16 v. 24-19, as in the next note.

I) If 24-19, 11-16, 26-22, 3-7, 22-18, 14-17, 21-14, 10-17, 19-15!. 7-10, 15-11, 17-22,11-7,.2-11, 28-24, 4-8 then 2 pieces short with 13-9! 6-13 and 24-19. Then 22-26, ( 13-17?. 18-15 etc. W, best. LW Taylor v.B. Case, 1958 Ala. Ty.) 31-22, and 1-5 to draw; as in a Pomeroy-Jordan game.

J) Sam Gonotsky once scored with 22-18 vs. Louis Ginsberg in the first the game of their 1925 match, but it is a two-edged blade after 14-17, 21-14, 10-17, 31-26, then 11-16? ( but 4-8 places White on the defensive) 18-14. 4-8 and 23-18-W. strong...

K) 4-8 is out of order after 24-19, 11-15. 23-18, 15-24, 18-9, 7-11 (8-11 pp WW in K.E.) 28-19, 10-14, 17-10 6-24 21-17, 11-16, *9-5, 2-6, 30-26, 8-11,( if 16-19. 27-23, 24-28, x 17-14 WW) 26-23, 6-10, 13-9, 10-15 and 32-28 WW- M. Tinsley.

L) Cont: 7-11, 24-19. 15-24, 28-19. 4-8,19-16 ( if 26-22, 11-15 a probable RW that can transpose into Ferrie's famous "Five Move Smother".'AC' G. 119) etc. 26-23, 11-15. and the 13-9 shot to a std draw.

OPENING NO 66. 10-15, 21-17, 15-18.

10-15, 21-17, 15-18 (A), 22-15, 11-18, 23-14, 9-18, 25-21(B), 8-11, 29-25 (C), 5-9, 17-13, 9-14, 26-23, 11-15, 30-26 (D), 7-10 (E), 24-20 (F), 4-8, 28-24 (G)...

FORMS DIAGRAM

A) A chameleon-like opening; often transposing into Denny lines. See Note B.

B) Either this or 17-13 ( which often reverts to trk) is the distinctive variation; used by both Hellman &Ryan in their 1949 title match. 24-19 or 24-20 go into Openings #56 and 61, shown in Pt. 3, while 17-14 is a W, Dyke line which will be covered in Pt. 5.

C) Hellman gambled with 24-19 v. Ryan in the 40th game of their stand-off match, but it is better de-layed since 4-8, 29-25, 11-16, 26-23, 6-9, 23-14, 9-18, 19-15, 5-9, 17-14, 9-13, 31-26, 1-5, 26-22, 2-6, 27-24, 16-19, 30-26, 8-11, 15-8, 18-23, 24-15, 23-30, then the fine shot with *21-17 to draw. We had the good fortune to witness this dramatic game, played in the gloomy halls of the Joliet Moose club*

D) Used by Marion Tinsley vs. the late Roy Hunt in a 1950 Chicago match game. Ryan had varied with 24-20 first v. Hellman, who transposed it into a 'Skull-Cracker' variation ( See Open. *71, V, 1, Note Q) after the 12-16 exchange. Instead, 4-8 is a draw by A. Harrhy. See Note G.

E) Or 4-8, 24-20, 8-11, 28-24, 7-10, 26-22, 3-8, 32-28, 1-5, 13-9, 6-13, 24-19 etc 28-19, 14-18, 23-14, 9-18, 19-15, 5-9, 15-10, 11-15, 10-7, 8-11, 27-24. *12-16, 7-3, 9-14, 3-7, *16-19, 7-23, 18-27 to a classy draw. Roy Hunt v.M. Tinsley...

F) If 26-22, 4-8, 24-20, 3-7, 22-17, 8-11, 28-24, 1-5, 31-26, 11-16 etc. a draw by Roy Hunt.

G) Cont; 3-7, 23-19, 8-11 ( here 1-5 was starred in 'WCC' P. 69 Note D, credited to Harrhy, but not forced) 26-23, then *6-9, 13-6, 2-9, and it is Red that presses!. Cont: 31-26, 9-13, 32-28, 13-17, 19-16, 12-19, 23-16, 1-6, 16-12, 6-9, then 27-23, 18-27, 25-22, 9-13 & 12-8 etc. draws; a mid-game also reached from several openings, including 10-14, 24-20, 7-10, and 9-13, 22-18, 11-15; the latter in the Case v. Oldbury 3rd USA-GB Int. mail match---ACFB #56, Jan. 1962,Var. 1.

OPENING NO 67. 10-15, 22-17, 6-10.

10-15, 22-17, 6-10, 17-14 (A), 10-17, 21-14, 9-18, 23-14, 1-6 (B), 25-21 (C), 11-16 (D), 29-25 (E), 16-19 (F),25-22, 6-9, 22-17, 9-18, 26-23, 19-26, 30-14 (G).

FORMS DIAGRAM

A) This potent double exchange removes the nucleus pieces( 6,9, and 10) from the Red double corner; after which the defender is hard pressed .Although 17-13 is effective from Open.#62, it is a minor variation here, as after 1-6, the 22-l8 exchange is not possible—so; 25-22, then either 15-19, as in the Oldbury-Fuller 1976 N.Ty game, or 15-18 etc; the latter transposing into Open.#66, Note E- R.Hunt v.M.Tinsley.

B) This would seem to compound the weakness, but experience ( the great teacher ) has proven there is nothing better; for example:.....

1. 12-16, 24-19 ( The Edwin Hunt attack used v.Asa Long. A later idea is 25-21, 16-19, then 26-22,which the writer analysed in 'CCC' G. 1554 seriously threatened this defence. Note that 29-25 instead,then 1-6, 21-17, 6-9, 25-21, 9-18, 26-23 etc; is similar to trunk, but here, with the piece on sq. 11, instead of 12, Red has the option of the 15-19 exchange, and the resulting endings, with a piece less aside, are not as difficult to defend. After 26-22, 2-6, 22-17, 6-10, 30-26, 1-6, 17-13 etc. then 8-12, 29-25, 12-16, 24-20, 4-8, 27-24, 7-10 x and 25-21 leaves a troublesome Red ending.) 16-23, 26-10, 2-6, 25-22 ( or 27-23-Long-Hunt, 1936 match) 6-15, 22-17, 15-18? (1-6 as in the Cohen-Oldbury 1955 match g 24 may be better) 29-25, 11-15, 30-26, 8-11, 25-21, 4-8 ( Red must sacrifice 5-9, 14-5, 18-22 either here or in the next few moves ) 28-24 ( varies from Joe Collin's 27-24 pp draw. Mr. Collins was a contestant in the 6th A. Ty; NYC, 1924, a resident of Pittsburgh, and a former Ohio champion in 1917.A11 of the players in this ty. have passed on, although Harry Lieberman and Asa Long, who participated in earlier tys. are still with us; the latter ready to challenge for the worLI title in May. 198H) 8-12, 24-20, 12-16, 32-28, 16-19, 27-24, 18-23, 26-22 and Red resigned, since 23-26 permits 22-18 etc; and 14-9, WW—John Caldwell won from Milton Loew, in a 1962 practice game at Nashville, prior to the Eau Claire N. Ty; won by Mr. Loew.....
2. 11-16, 25-22, 16-19, 22-18 ( if 30-25, 2-6, then the 14-9 shot to a draw- DE Oldbury v. A.Long in USA-GB mail play) 15-22. 26-17, 7-11, 24-15, 11-18, 28-24, 12-16, 17-13, 3-7, 29-25——here. Ron Johnson lost to Marion Tinaley after 8-12 in the 1974 N.Ty. We suggested 1-6 instead to draw, but still untested, and the line is best avoided

C) This carries the brunt of the White attack, as 25-22 lets in the 15-19 exchange, and less aggressive, as in Ryan-Rubin, 1st NCA N.Ty; also Hellman-Ryan, 9th A.Ty...

D) The 6-9 run-off was tried by Alex Cameron vs. WF Ryan in their 1951 Florida match ( Ryan's finalencounter of importance.), also by Newell Banks v. Ed Bruch in the 1958 N.Tu, but after 26-23, 9-18, 23-14, 2-6, 30-26, 12-16, then 29-25 goes into the Note B, #1 play—another line to avoid...

E) If 21-17, 16-19, 17-13 a transposition into an important variation from 10-15, 22-17, 11-16, 17-14 (Lieber-Moulding, 2nd IM G. 245 ) which will be shown under opening No 70, Var.l, Note Q after 8-11, 29-25 (if 24-20 Long Oldbury, mail play in Sq World ) same.

F) It is imperative to gain this key square to draw.

G) The defender is now faced with an uncomfortable ending, with White lined up to break through on the shattered double corner side. A similar idea arises in both 10-15, 22-17, 7-10, 17-14, and 11-16, 22-17, 7-11, 17-14 but there the piece is still on square 1, instead of 3, and more easily defended. The for mation here featured in the 1936 Hunt-Long match, and a year later at the 9th A. Ty. in Martins Ferry. Cont: 15-18. 27-23 (H) 18-27, 32-23, 8-11, 14-10 (1) 7-14, 17-10, 11-15, 21-17(J), 5-9, 17-13. 9-14 (K) 10- 6 (L),.2-9, 13-6, 15-18, 31-27 (M), 18-22. 6-2, 22-25, 2-6, 14-17, 6-10, 17-22, 10-14, 25-29,14-17, 22-25, 17-22, 25-30, 24-19, 30-25, 23-18,*4-8 (N), 27-24 (0), 8-11, 24-20, then *12-16, 19-12 and 11-15 draws nicely-E. Frazier-'NDW* G. 1047.....

H) ( Off Note G)—Walter Hellman took the early 14-10 exchange vs. Willie Ryan at Martins Ferry, but after 18-22, 21-17, 22-25, 17-13, Red works in 2-7, 10-6 and 29-25 to a less trying draw

I) Marion Tinsley introduced one of his many patented cooks with 24-19 here vs. Don Lafferty in the finals of the 1978 N.Ty. Since this ending entails much analysis, it will be presented later in the AGFB...

J) Or 23-19 first, used by Everett Fuller V.Walter Hellman in the llth ACA N.Ty at "Nashville, 1946, which goes into the Note M play..

K) Harrah B. Reynolds, in an attempt to avoid the ending shown in Note L, tried 2-7, 13-6, 7-14 v, AsaLong, then 24-19, 15-24, 28-19, 4-8 ( if 14-17, 19-16 etc. is a WW shown by A. Long) 6-2, 8-11, 2-6, 14-17, 6-10, 17-22, 10-14, 22-25, 14-18 then lost after crowning on square 30.Instead, Mr. Long suggested a draw with *11-16, 18-22, then 25-30, 31-27, 3-8, 19-15 and 16-19 etc; but the line has never been attempted in important play since that time...

L) Used with success by Mr. Reynolds, v. Asa Long in the first game of their 4th rd. heat in the 9th A.Ty; which varied from the latter's 24-19 exchange taken against Edwin Hunt at West Palm Beach, 1936.

M) If 23-19 ( as the 24-20 exchange lets Red off more easily, as in the Hellman-Atkinson, 1968 N.Ty.gane) 18-22, 6-2, 4-8 ( it is best to develop this piece, as if 22-25, White may get the Alex Cameron-Hellman win of the 1952 N.Ty.) 2-6, 8-11, 24-20 ( sooner or later.) 14-17, 6-10, ( or 31-27 now ) 17-21, 10-14, 21-25, 31-27, 25-30. 27-23, 30-26, 23-18, then 12-16! 19-12, and 26-23, 28-24, 22-25, 18-15, 11-18, 24-19, 23-16, and 20-11 to a draw by Basil Case, but there are many ramifications in this ending....

N) A nice idea by Eugene Frazier to clear up this ending. Asa Long crowned 25-30, instead against Reynolds, and later missed a piece-down draw. Walter Hellman then suggested 3-7, 28-24 and 7-10 to draw, but not as obvious as the text...

O) Or 28-24 ( not 22-26?, 12-16, 19-12, 3-7, 12-3 & 25-30 RW! 8-11, 24-20( also 19-15, 12-16 etc. to a draw- Case v. Long- 1954 N.TY) and again tee pitch with 12-16, 19-12, 11-15, 18-11, 25-18, 11-8. 18-15, 8-4, 15-11, 27-24, 29-25, 24-19, 25-22,19-16,11-7,4-8,22-17,16-11, 7-16, 20-11, 18-23 then 11-7, 3-10 and 8-11 to draw. E. Frazier.

OPENING NO 68. 10-15, 22-17, 7-10.

10-15, 22-17, 7-10 (A), 17-14 (B), 10-17, 21-14, 9-18, 23-14, 3-7(C ), 24-19 (D), 15-24, 28-19, 11-16 (E), 27-23 (F), 6-9, 23-18 (G), 16-23, 26-19, 1-6, 30-26 (H).

FORMS DIAGRAM

A) Although Willie Ryan once remarked that the removal of an apex piece ( 7 or 26 ) in the opening invariably results in a formational weakness, this is not always so; one example in Open.#79, Note B #2 as checkers is a game of 'exceptions'. The piece played from 7 here is much less hazardous than off 6 as in the previous opening.

B) 25-22 is also in favor, but hardly better, as Red has good replies in 3-7 ( or 11-16, as in the Tinsley-Lowder 1979 game.) instead of 9-14, 24-20 etc; into Open. #42 trunk. After 3-7, 29-25, 15-19 etc; then 22-18-Hellraan-Case-1963- is into a 11-16, 22-18, 7-11 line; MEX, p. 218, Var. 9....

C) The preferred defence. If 11-16, as given in ME® White can avoid the Note D play with 27-23; still another of Chamblee's cooks'; this used by Lloyd W.Taylor v. JD MacFarlane, in the 1954 N.Ty.Cont: 16-20 ( here 15-19, 24-15, 6-10 may draw, but untested. MacFarlane lost after 16-19, 23-16, 12-19, 26-22, 3-7, 22-18, 15-22. 25-18, 19-23, 29-25, 8-12 24-19, 4-8, 28-24, 6-10, 25-21 etc. WW) 32-27, 8-11, 25-22 ( Edwin Hunt cut off with 23-18 vs. Don Lafferty in the 1961 So. Ty at Murfreesboro to a draw. He was well aware of the strength of 25-22, but with a game up, only a draw was needed.) 6-9 ( if 4-8, 23-18) 29-25, 9-18, 23-14, 4-8, 22-17, 15-18, 26-23, 2-6, then 14-10, 6-15, 23-14. We once sent this to Marvin Rex, commenting that the position looked like a WW, He agreed, and sent back 15-18, 14-10, 12-16 ( if 11-15, 24-19 etc. wins, and if 11-16, 17-13. 8-11, *30-26, 18-23, 27-18, 20-27, 31-24, 16-20, 24-19, 11-16, 26-23, 20-24, 18-15, 24-27, 10-6 etc. WW) 17-13, 11-15, *31-26, 8-11, 25-21, 3-8, 10-7, 15-19, 24-15, 5-9, 13-6, 1-19, 7-3, 8-12, 3-8, 11-15, 30-25 WW- M. Rex...

D) 25-21 has been favoured, but after 11-16, 29-25, 16-19, 21-17, 6-9, 25-21, 9-18, 26-23 etc—the same as a std. line from opening 11-16, 22-17, 7-11, 17-14, which will be shown later, including the fine "Karl Albrecht defence"..See ACFB #161, p. 84, Var. 3.

E) 6-9 should be avoided after 26-23, 9-18, 23-14, I-6, 25-22, 11-16 ( if 6-10, 30-26 etc.7-10, 26-22, 11-15, 27-24, 8-11, and 32-28 to a WW- Bornstein v. Bullockus- WCP G. 1034-6) 27-23, 6-10, 30-26, 10-17, 22-13, 7-10, 26-22, 8-11?( 10-14 might be tried.) 22-17! ( improves K.E.) 5-9, 13-6, 2-9, 17-13, 9-14, 13-9, 16-20?( 4-8 seems to draw.M. Rex) then *29-25! and everything loses for Red. H. Looser won from M.Rex in the ACF 1979 I-D mail ty.

F) We once played 19-15 with a drawn result vs. Marion Tinsley in the 1949 6th Dist. Open at Joliet.Perhaps the simplest way to meet it is to cut off w/ 8-11(a), 15-8, 4-11, 25-22, 6-10, 29-25, 10-17, 22-13, 16-19, 25-22, 7-10, 22-18, 10-14, 18-9. 5-14, 27-23, 12-16, 23-18 ( if 32-28, 11-15, 30-25, 2-6, 25-22, 6-9, 13-16, 1-10, 31-27, then 16-20, 23-16 and 14-18 drs. M.T.) 14-23, 31-27, 2-6, 27-18, 6-10, 32-27, 10-15, 18-14, 16-20 Drawn. M. Tinsley v.E.Bruch, in the 1977 Fla. Open Ty...

(a) for other play see 1980 ID book.

G) 31-27, 9-18, 23-14, 16-23, 26-19, 8-11, 27-23 (or 25-22 as in Hellman-Tinsley, 1955 draw) ll-16, 25-22, 1-6, 29-25, 6-10, 30-26, 10-17, 22-13, 4-8, 26-22 then *7-10 ( corrects the 5-9 exchange to a WW in the 1952 N.Ty; also 'ABC* p. 17, Note F) 25-21, 8-11 draws, H. Looser v. L. Goans, 1979 I-D mail ty.

H) Cont: 8-11, 25-21 ( varies from Tinsley«s 25-22 v. Hellman in 1955, then 11-16, 26-23, 6-10, 31-26, 10-17, 22-6, 2-9, 29-25, 7-10, 26-22, 16-20, 18-15, 10-14, 32-27, 9-13, 25-21, 4-8, 15-10, 8-11, 10-6, 11-16, 6-2, then 13-17, 22-13 and 14-18 etc. Drawn.) 9-13 (probably best. White is after the natural 11-16? then 26-23,6-10, 29-25, 10-17, 21-14, 4-8, 25-21,16-20, 19-15, 7-11, 15-10, 11-16 then the fine *10-7! 2-11, 32-27, 9-13, and 31-26 WW- N. Stephen won from Ed Bruch in a Canadian Open Ty.) 26-23 ( or 32-27, 6-19, 19-15, 12-16 etc; a draw by ER Churchill in his vast 'Compilations') 6-9, 19-15, 12-16, 15-8, 4-11, 32-27, 16-19, 23-16, 11-20, 29-25, 7-11, 14-10, 9-14 etc. 10-7, 11-16, 7-3 and 2-7 Draws. H. Looser v. M. Rex, 1979 I-D;.mail ty...

OPENING NO 69. 10-15, 22-17, 9-13.

10-15, 22-17, 9-13, 17-14 (A), 11-16 (B,Var1). 23-18 (C, Var. 2), 15-22, 25-18, 6-9 (D), 27-23 (E), 8-11, 32-27 (F), 16-20, 29-25 (G), 11-16 (H), 25-22, 1-6, 22-17, 13-22, 26-17 (1)...

FORMS DIAGRAM

A) As in several of the previous Kelso's, this is the only viable attack, but more then sufficient to exert pressure.

B) Opinions are divided as to the respective merits of this as opposed to the 15-19 exchange given inVar. 1. We have always favoured the text, but this does not necessarily make it the best way.

C) White has two excellent alternatives in 21-17, shown in Var. 2, or the early 24-20. Cont: 8-11, ( the 16-19 exchange would be unwise after 21-17 etc. followed with 27-23) 23-18, ( if 25-22, then 16-19 etc and 30-25 is into a std. 12-16 Edinburgh line.) 15-22, 25-18, then 6-9 is the restrictive way, followed with 29-25, and into Note E play, If 29-25 is delayed with 28-24 first then 11-15, 18-11, 9-18, 26-23?, 18-22!, 23-18, 1-6, 32-28, 7-10, 18-14, 10-17, 21-14, 3-7, 30-25, 22-26, 31-22, 6-10 and White must scramble with *22-18, 10-17 *18-14, 17-21, 25-22, 21-25, 22-18, 25-30, and 27-23 etc. to draw, which the writer had with White vs. Paul Fondren in Haye's mail ty. play...

.D) This was Willie Ryan's preference ( who gave prior credit to Jim Ricca ) to slow down the White development by 29-25 and 25-22. Although 16-20 and 8-11 will also draw, it permits White additional attacking lines, See Tinsley-Oldbury, 1958 match, G. 33...

E) Also 29-25, 8-11, 24-20, 1-6, 28-24 ( if 27-24, as played by Asa Long v. M. Loew in the 1960 N.Ty; Red can work in the confining 13-17...White now has just one good move in the odd 26-22 exchange, as 25-22 lets in 11-15, and if the natural 32-27, the devastating *17-22! pitch; missed by Loew v. Long, who lost after 9-13, 25-22—a remarkable game indeed!; then 26-17, now 9-13, 25-22 and 6-9, after which White, a piece up, has no tenable defence!...After the correct 26-22, 17-26. 31-22, cont: 9-13, 30-26, 3-8, then 32-27!---which varies from Ryans 26-23, 11-15 draw. After 32-27, *6-10, 18-15 etc. 7-10, 14-7, 2-18, 20-11, 8-15, 26-23, 13-17, 23-14, 17-21,25-22, 21-25, 27-23, 25-30, 14-10, 30-26, 23-18, 26-17, 18-11, 12-16 which the writer drew with Red v. Paul Fondren in Haye's mail ty. play) 11-15, 18-11, 9-18 then an important waiting move w/ 32-28; since 26-23 instead is inadequate after 6-9 etc-White was in trouble, Lawrence Held v. Louis Ginsberg in the 1929 7th A. Ty. After 32-28, then 7-10 ( 6-10 also draws, but 3-8 is dangerous after 26-23 etc;Loew won from Long at Eau Claire.) 26-23, 10-14. 24-19 ( or 30-26, 3-7, 11-8, 4-11, 26-22, 11-15, 20-11, 7-16, and 24-19 etc. to a draw. J. Marshall v. M. Tinsley, in a 1957 British exhibition match.) 13-17 ( if 6-9 11-7! 2-11. 30-26, 13-17, 19-15, 18-22, 25-18, 16-19; 15-8, 4-11, 23-7, 14-30, 21-14, 3-17 then 27-23 etc. to a pretty draw. DE Oldbury v. D.Lafferty, 1964 N. Ty.) 30-26, 6-9,11-8,4-11, 26-22, 17-26, 31-8. 14-18, 20-11, 3-7, 23-14, 7-32. 14-10, 32-27, 8-4, 9-14, 25-22 or 4-8 draws....

F) White may hold bad 24-19 quite effectively in this variation. If played now, then 16-20, 29-25 ( as 32-27 is Note G play.) then Ryan's suggested break with 12-16, 19-12 and 11-15 seems easy enough.

G) lf 24-19 at this stage, then 11-16, 29-25, 1-6 (into a 10-15, 21-17, 9-13 line, Note K,#2) 25-22,( or 19-15, 7-11, 15-8, 4-11, 26-22, 2-7, 28-24, 6-10, 31-26 etc & 7-10 to a draw- Lw Taylor v- P. Davis, 1976 N.Ty) 6-10, 30-25, 10-17, 21-14, then *7-10 ( as 2-6? 19-15, 7-11 etc then 18-15 to win-Oldbury-Frazier 1964)14-7, 3-10, 25-21, 4-8, 18-15, 10-14, 22-18, and Red squeezes through with 13-17, 26-22, 17-26, 31-22, 9-13, 18-9, 5-14, 22-18, and 2-7. 18-9, 7-11 drs. W.F.Ryan..

H) If 1-6, to stop 25-22, White has either 24-19 or 23-19 ( the latter in Fortman-Skurcenski-"TNC" No.18) into the preceding Note G...

I) Cont: *9-13, 30-26, 13-22. 26-17, *7-10 ( 4-8 loses precious time after 17-13, 7-10 etc & 21-17 wins) 14-7, 3-10,17-14,21-14,4-8, 31-26 ( if 18-15, 2-7 and 23-18 is into an old Paisley ending.Cont: 16-19, 31-26, then the 19-23 pitch to draw; not 12-16? Which loses after the 15-10 shot.) 2-7, 26-22, 6-9, 24-19, *9-13, 18-15, 7-11, 15-10, 11-15; 28-24 then the double pitch w/ 5-9 and 13-17 etc to draw. as in the Jack Mourning v. F. Gallagher 5th USA-GB mail game.

Variation 1 ( Off trk. @ 5th)

15-19 (J), 24-15, 11-18, 26-22(K), 7-11 (L), 22-15, 11-18. 14-10 (M), 6-15, 23-14, 8-11 (N), 25-22 (0), 4-8, 28-24,12-16, 24-20, 2-7 (P), 27-23 (Q), 1-6 (R) 23-18, 8-12, 30-26, 6-9, 32-28, 7-10, 14-7, 3-10, 29-25, *9-14, 18-9, 5-14, 26-23, 15-19, 22-18 (S) Draw.

J) Favoured by a number of masters, both past and present, but also poses problems for the defender.

K) Or the Victor Davis attack with 28-24, 8-11, and24-20; similar in theme to a Skull-Cracker line a piece less aside. Cont: 11-15, 26-22, 6-10, 22-17, 13-22, 27-24, 10-17, 21-14, 18-27, 25-11, 7-16, 20-11, 3-7, 32-23, 7-16, In the Skull-Cracker, the extra pieces are off squares 1 and 30. Cont: 14-10, *5-9, (if 16-20 , case lost to Hellman in the 1946 11the ACA ty) 29-25, 9-14. 25-22, 16-20, 31-27 ( if 23-19, 20-27, 31-24. 4-8, 24-20, 8-11, 10-7, 1-6, 7-3. 6-10, 3-8, 11-15, 19-16, 12-19, 8-11, then 14-18—to a draw by Derek Oldbury.) 4-8, 30-25 ( if 24-19, 8-11, 10-7 I-6, 7-3, 6-10, 22-18, 2-7, 18-9 & 11-15 drs.)12-16, 25-21, 8-12, 22-17, 2-6, 10-7, 6-10, 7-2 then *1-5, 2-7 and *5-9 draws. M. Tinsley....

L) Abe Mantell had also analysed the break to draw 12-16, 22-15, 7-10, 14-7, 3-26, 30-23, 6-10, 28-24, 8-12, 25-22, 1-6, 24-19, 4-8, 29-25, 10-14, 22-18, 13-17, 18-9, 5-14, 23-18, 14-23, 21-14 and 8-11 etc; a Ford-Mantel1 mail game draw..

M) John B. Stiles once surprised Nathan Rubin witha different attacking idea in 23-19 ( note that 30-26, 8-11, 23-19 is the same, but if 28-24 Red can now get in 3-7, 23-19 and 6-10 to draw, thus avoiding the play here; as in NW Banks v. M. Tinsley; 1952 match; the latter not at all pleased with the order of moves used here!) then 8-11, 30-26, 11-16 ( after losing this game, Rubin in no way daunted, came back with the same attack and won after Stiles ventured the poor 4-8 here.) 26-23, *6-9( Rubin, at sea, tried 3-7?, but lost after a long game when 28-24 was taken, then 16-20, 19-15, 4-8 and the 15-10 pitch followed w/ 23-19 ) 28-24 3-8, 14-10, 2-6, etc; 1-6, 24-19, 8-11, 32-27, 13-17, 27-24, 9-13, 18-15! 11-18, 14-10, 6-15, 21-14 which about forces 12-16 to draw. Asa Long v- M* Tinsley in a 1947 practice game at at Toledo; but earlier in WCP G 810- Var.1...

N) The Alexander-Gonotsky 2nd IM variation also used by Asa Long v. NW Banks in their 1934 title match. Against the Victor Davis 12-16, White can work up 28-24, 16-20, 30-26, 8-11, then 26-22 or 26-23 with promising results.

O) Or 28-24, 4-8, 27-23 ( also 26-23, 12-16, 24-20, 2-7, 26-23, 8-12, 27-24, 1-6, 23-18 etc; to a draw-Asa Long v. Alf Huggins; 5th USA-GB mail match.) 12-16, 24-20, 2-7, 30-26, 7-10, 14-7, 3-10, 32-271-6, 27-24, 5-9, 21-17, 13-22, 25-18, 15-22, 26-17, 8-12 23-18, 10-15, 17-14, 15-22, 14-5, 6-10, 5-1, 10-15, 1-6, 15-18, 6-10, 18-23, 10-14, 23-27, 14-17, then 22-26, 31-22 and 28-32 draws. Fine play: perhaps by Victor Davis, the gifted analyst and expert from Ft. Dodge, Iowa, who passed away at the early age of 49, but his beautiful ideas live on..

P) As taken by Alexander v. Gonotsky. 16-19 instead would have been met with 30-25.

Q) Varies from Gonotsky's 30-26, and was rumoured to win for White.

R) If 8-12, 23-18, 7-10, 14-7, 3-10, 31-27, 5-9, 32-28, 1-5, 29-25, 9-14, 18-9, 5-14, 27-23; 13-17,22-13, 15-18, 13-9, 18-27 and 9-6 leaves White with a strong ending. M. Rex.

S) As played in a recent mail game. R. Bailey vs. M.Rex

Variation 2 ( Off trk. @ 6th)

21-17(T), 13-22, 25-11, 8-15, 24-19(U),15-24, 27-11, 7-16, 23-18(v),4-8, 29-25, 8-11, 32-27 (W),l6:20 (X) 26-23, 11-16, 25-21, 2-7, 30-26, *6-10(Y) 14-9,5-14, 18-9, 10-15, 21-17, 16-19 23-16 12-19, 17-14, 7-10, 14-7, 3-10, 9-6, 19-24, 28-19, 15-24, 26-22, 10-14, 6-2, 24-28, 2-7, 28-32, 27-23, then 20-24, 23-19 and 32-27 draws...quite efficiently. Mac Banks v. Marvin Rex, in mail play..

T) Also reached from 10-15, 21-17, 9-13, 17-14, 11-16, 22-17 etc...and the 10-15 Edinburgh...

U) If 29-25, the 16-19 exchange given in Ryane MEG is not necessarily forced, as 6-10 is also sound. then ;24-20, (if 25-21, 10-17, 21-14, now 16-19x 27-23, 1-6, 23-16, 6-10, 32-27, 10-17, 27-23, 15-18 23-14 & 7-10 etc. Draws. RLF v.S. Tribble, by mail.) 10-17, 20-11, 7-16, 25-21, then 17-22, 26-17 and the 16-19 exchange will draw... ( See Supplementary play)

V) Into a weak c.r. Dyke from an inferior line of opening No 91..See Ryans MEC, page 82, Var. 2..

W) This plays for a correction of MEC. 28-24 is perhaps more usual, but may be met with the restrictive 6-10 exchange ( rather then with 2-7 ), as in MEC p.83, Note J..Marion Tinsley has used this in a 1957 GB ex. match v. J. Marshall, and the writer also played it vs. the late John Scott in USA-GB mail play as published in the early issues of the ACFB, which are now collector's items.....

X) As given by Ryan. When we tried to get this on vs. Marshall, the former British champion deftly side-stepped to draw with the 6-10 exchange; 1956 USA-GB.

Y) This is now forced, with just enough time to get through. Ryan gave the 16-19 exchange, after which *18-15 will win, and correct his 21-17 or 27-23 to draw. This 18-15 cook was shown by Edwin Hunt to LWTaylor during the 1961 So. Ty. at Murfreesboro; later given by J. Nelson in BCP G. 4477; dated 10/66..Continue after 18-15, 6-9, 15-10, 9-18, 10-6, 1-10, 26-23. 19-26, 31-6, 7-10, 27-23, 10-15, 6-2, 3-8, 2-7, 8-12——At this stage, Mr. Nelson allowed a draw after 7-11?, 15-19 etc; also in CC, p. 964, V. 18. Instead of 7-11, White should place his king on the opposite side with *7-10, then 15-19, 23-16, 12-19, 21-17, 19-23, 17-13, 23-26 and 13-9 etc WW-EF Hunt,

Supplementary Play; Continue Note U at end: 16-19 x 30-26, 4-8, 27-23, 8-12, 23-16, 12-19, 32-27, 3-8, ( here 5-9! is easier, as W. does not have anything better then 17-13, after which 3-8, 13-6, 1-10, 21-17, 2-6, 27-24, and *8-11 drs. RLF v. M. Long, mail game) 17-14, 2-7 ( 8-12 also drs.) 26-22, 8-12, 21-17 (instead of 22-17 pp draw; Howe v. Short.) 1-6, 17-13, 6-10, 21-17, *19-24!, 28-19, 15-24, 27-20, 10-15, *31-27, *15-18, 27-24, 18-23, 24-19, 7-11, 13-9, 23-27, 9-6, *27-32, 6-2 and *32-28 a stand-off drawl. M.Long vs. the writer in mail play..

OPENING NO 70. 10-15, 22-17, 11-16.

10-15, 22-17, 11-16 A), 23-18 B.Var.l). 15-22, 25-18, 9-14 (C 18-9, 6-22, 26-17, 8-11, 29-25 (D), 4-8, 24-20 (E), 16-19, 25-22, 11-15, 17-14, 1-6 (F), 22-17 (G).

FORMS DIAGRAM

A) The most conservative reply, as in opening No 65, as it results in no further disturbance to the double corner side; the favoured reply in two-move restriction.

B) Striving for centre control; also by the 17-14 exchange in Var. 1..Other moves allow the first side the advantage.

C) Which Red promptly eliminates. If 16-20 ( or 9-13 first) 24-19, 9-13, 17-14 we have a 10-15, 21-17,9-13 variation; strong for White; permitted by Maurice Chamblee to Walter Hellman, in their 1951 match;`ABC` Game 93.

D) Here a matter of personal preference. 27-23 is also favoured, then 11-15, 24-19, 15-24, 28-19, 4-8, 29-25, 5-9( less complicated then 8-11, 25-22, 16-20, 22-18=better then 31-27, 11-16, 17-14, 1-6, 22-17 and the fine 7-11! cook by EF Hunt== 20-24, 18-14, 11-16, 14-10, 7-14, 17-10,5-9, 21-17 here Hellman played 16-20 v. Ryan in 1949, and just managed to survive by delaying 24-28 too long. Instead of 16-20, the writer played 24-28 v. Bobby Martin in the 1939 Trans- Miss. Ty at Davenport, la; then 17-13, 2-6, and 32-27 to a quick draw.) 17-13, 2-6, 25-22, 8-11, 22-18 (if 30-26, 7-10, 32-27, then 10-15 etc. drs. M. Tinsley) 7-10, 30-26, 10-15. 19-10, 6-22, 26-17, 11-15, 13-6, 1-10, 17-14, 10-17, 21-14, 16-19, 23-16, 12-19, 32-27, 3-7, 14-9, 7-11, 9-16 and 19-23 etc; a Kear-Jordan draw, repeated by M. Tinsley v. L. Rosenfield, in the 1952 Lakeside Ty; and later by Tinsley v. V. Ricuitti in the 1977 Fla. Open Ty.

E) Perhaps best, although White has other ways in 24-19 ( or 17-14, 1-6, 21-17, 6-9. 30-26, etc. a Gonotsky-Lieber 1928 draw; later by WF Ryan v. N. Rubin in the 1934 8th A. Ty.) 16-23, 27-18, 12-16, 28-24, 16-20 32-27 or 31-27 to pp draws.

F) Although 2-6 is not mentioned in the standard text books, it seems equally as good; as played by Derek Oldbury v. E. Frazier in their 1964 Parsons, Ks. match. Cont: 22-17, 8-11, 27-24, 6-10, 31-26, 1-6, 32-27 ( or 17-13, 10-17,21-14, 6-10, 14-9, 5-14 and 13-9 to an eventual draw. Oldbury-Frazier.) 6-9 17-13, 9-18 26-23 etc. 12-16, 13-9. 7-10. 14-7, 5-14, then 27-23 Is best to draw. DEO..

G) Cont: 15-18 (H) 27-24, 19-23 (1),14-10 (J), 6-15, 31-26, 7-10, 26-19, 18-23, 17-14, 10-17, 19-10, 17-22 and Red crowns under a bridge, but the White pieces are not sufficiently advanced to create any damage. Cont: 21-17, 22-26. 17-13, 26-31, 10-6. 2-9, 13-6, *31-26(K), 24-19(L), 8-11, 19-15, 11-18, 32:27 etc; a draw by T. Goldsboro v. S. Gonotsky, 2nd IM....

H) The preferred Heffner variation. Both Gonotsky vs. Ginsberg and Robt. Stewart vs. H. Henderson played 6-10 instead. Then 27-24, 8-11, 17-13 ( as 31-26 lead to a quick draw after 19-23, 26-19 and 11-16 etc. Ginsberg v. Gonotsky, 1925 match.) 10-17, 21-14, 19-23, 24-19, 15-24, 28-19, 2-6, 31-27, *23-26, 30-23, 6-10, 13-9, ( 14-9 was the Stewart-Henderson draw.) 10-17, 9-6...At this stage, Gonotsky displayed a rare example of end-play inexactitude by cutting off 11-15? 19-10, 7-14 and into a bad ending after 6-2. 17-22, 23-18 x 5-9, 2-6, 9-13, 6-10 and 24-20 after which the draw was exceedingly delicate after 109 moves and over 4 hrs of play. Instead of the 11-15 exchange, the late K. Todd chose a better way with 17-22 in a Woods mail Ty. game vs. the witer 50 years ago!..17-22, 6-2, 22-26, 19-15, 11-18, 23-14, then 7-10,14-7, 3-10, 27-24, 10-15 and 32-28 to draw

I) Mike Lieber's 7-10 exchange, as played vs. Sam Gonotsky (1928) seems sound if properly followed up; 7-10, 14-7, 3-10, 24-15, 10-19, 17-14, then the delay with 8-11, 31-26, 2-7, 32-27, 11-15, 20-16 ,6-9, 27-24, 9-13. 24-20 and 18-22 to draw. However, if the premature 18-22 is attempted ( instead of 8-11;as in the Ginsberg-Long 7th A. Ty. game, and later by Bobby Martin v. M. Tinsley in the 1974 Lakeside ty.) White attacks strongly with either 32-27 or 21-17

J) This was August Heffner's suggestion to improve 28-24, as in the R. Jordan-JF Horr 1st IM, 1905.

K) The exit must be taken the correct way, as if 31-27?,6-2, 8-11, 24-l9, 5-9, then the 19-15 shot to a WW. Lem Ellis v. S. Gonotsky, 6th A. Ty; 1924

L) Concedes the draw. as there is no attack left.

Variation 1 ( Off trk. @ Note B)

17-14 (M), 9-18, 23-14, 8-11, 21-17 (N), 6-10 (0), 25-21, 1-6, 29-25, 16-19,, 17-13 (P). 10-17, 21-l4 (Q), 12-16 ®, 24-20, 4-8, 25-21, 8-12 (S), 21-17 (T), 7-10 (U), 14-7, 3-10, 27-24 (V), 5-9, 30-25 (W), 19-23, 26-19, 16-23, 24-19, 15-24, 28-19, 9-14, 25-21, 11-15, 32-28, 15-24, 28-19,14-18 and 17-14 etc. Drawn. Don Lafferty, 1980.

M) This gains square 14, but here the defender is adequately manned.

N) Also from 10-15, 21-17, 11-16, 17-14 etc. but not the choice of today's experts.

O) If 6-9,26-23, 9-18, 23-14, 16-20, 25-21, 11-16, 29-25, 16-19? (the 4-8 0`Conner-Cohen variation is best to draw.) 25-22, 12-16, 30-26, 2-6, 17-13, 4-8, then the remarkable *27-23! cooked exchange wins almost at once; Ferrie losing to Liebennan in the 2nd IM, 1927; a win also reached from Open. #67. For a fascinating history of this cook, see Harry Lieberman's comments in the 2nd IM Game 97, Note E...

P) Also 25-22, 4-8, 24-20, *12-16 ( not 15-18? to a WW; Liebennan won from HB Reynolds; 3rd A. Ty.)27-24, then *19-23, 26-12 and 15-19 etc; a key draw credited to A. Jordan v. J. Dougherty; also from a Montrose Cross, c.r; see Tinsley-Long, 1954 N. Ty...

Q) This may be reached from Open.#67, trk; Note E.

R) Mike Lieber credits this excellent move to Jesse B. Hanson, who had played it vs. Willard E. Davis.

S) Or the 6-9 break, then 21-17 and 18-23 etc, as in the EF Hunt v. HB Mason 1962 N. Ty. game...

T) Harry Moulding varied here with 27-24 playing Lieber in the 2nd IM, and after 6-9 etc. 32-27, 19-23, 26-10, 7-14, White had the inferior position.

U) Suggested by Lieber with no play. The following continuation is by Don Morgan Lafferty, one of to-days few world class players...

V) If 27-23, 2-7 is proper, not 5-9, 32-27, 19-24, 28-19, 15-24, 23-18, 24-28, 27-23, 28-32 then 26-22and a strong White game. D.L.

W) Or 32-27, 19-23, 27-18, 15-22, 26,23, 9-14. 30-26 etc. to draw.D.L.

OPENING NO 71. 10-15, 22-17, 15-19.

10-15, 22-17, 15-19 (A), 24-15, 11-18, 23-14, 9-18, 26-23 (B Varl ), 6-9, 23-14, 9-18, 30-26 (C), 5-9 (D), 17-14 (E), 9-13 (F), 28-24 (G), 8-11(H), 26-23 (1), 1-5, 24-19 (J), 11-16 (K).....

FORMS DIAGRAM

A) The 'Skull-Cracker'; aptly named by the talented Lee Hunger, 12 time Indiana state champion. Although subjected to intense analysis over the past 45 years, it is still quite capable of giving experts headaches especially in the endings. The early exchanges, resulting in the exposed piece on square 18 is somewhat similar to the Denny exchange ( Open. #46 ) but here, with a piece less aside, the defence must weather more extensive attacks. The 8th A. Ty.( 1934) was the first important test of this opening, with little or no reliable pp then existing. The ty. winner, Edwin F. Hunt balloted it three times!—against Granfield, Jesse Hanson, and Louis deBearn...

B) As in the Denny, this is the direct attack against the double corner, as opposed to the indirect 17-13 shown in Var. I...

C) 31-26 also has merit, and was adopted by Eugene Frazier vs. Walter Hellman in their 1967 title match. Cont: *5-9, 26-23 ( in this variation, the only good attack, as with the piece off 31 White gains nothing with 17-14, 9-13, 26-23, 1-5, 28-24, 8-11, 24-19, & 11-16 etc.) 9-14. 17-10, 7-14, 25-22, 18-25, 29-22, 8-11, 28-24 (if 22-18, then 1-6 is thought forced, w / 1-5 instead losing by the later 23-18 exchange. However, Willie Ryan still claimed Red could draw with *12-16; instead of the 11-15 pitch which Edwin F.Hunt lost to HB Mason in the 1962 N.Ty…Be that as it may 1-6 is better, then 18-9, 6-13, 23-18, and the pitch is now necessary: *11-l5, 18-11, then *3-8.Both 27-23 or 11-7 are strong, but draws have been shown by E. Frazier and Walter Hellman- See ECB Game 6776, and the ACFB, 3/63 issue.) now *3-7,and White has three ways to apply pressure:

1) 22-18, 1-5 ( in contrast to the above, this is now proper, as 1-6, 18-9, 6-13, lets in 24-20.and stops 11-15 with the shot.) 18-9, 5-14, 23-18, 14-23, 27-18, 11-16, 21-17 ( if 18-14. 16-19. 24-15 & 7-10 etc a draw by Frazier.) 4-8, 17-14, 8-11, 30-26, 2-6, 32-28, 16-20, 24-19. and 20-24 etc. draws; as shown in the EDJ G. 127, 3/65.....

2) 30-26 ( or 30-25, *l-6, 22-18, 7-10 etc and 25-22 same. CCC G. 1720, 7/66)*1-6, 22-18, *7-10,x 26-22, then 4-8, which the writer played vs. the late EC Whiting, in the 4th USA-GB mail match, 3/59, which we consider easier then LL Hall's 11-16 draw. After 4-8, White has nothing stronger then 24-20, then 11-15, 27-24, 10-14, 32-28, 8-11, 24-19, 15-24, 28-19 followed with 13-17, 22-13 and 2-6 to a clean draw. This may also be arrived at from the 30-26 line and Note E..

3) 22-17, 7-10, 30-25, then Edwin Hunt's draw w/ 2-6 ( instead of 1-6) 25-22, 6-9, 17-13, 11-15, 13-6 and 15-18 etc; then 6-2, and 4-8 draws..

D) Nothing else will do. If 1-6 ( 2-6 amounts to the same thing after the run-off) 26-23, 6-9, 23-14 9-18, 31-26, 2-6. 17-13, 7-10 ( if 5-9. 26-23, 9-14,25-22, will win) 26-23, 10-14. 25-22, 18-25, 29-22, 3-7, (8-11 is no better after 22-17, 6-10, 28-24, 11-16, 13-9, 4-8, 17-13, 3-7, then 21-17, 14-21 and 24-20 to a W by the veteran Saul Weslow, of Boston, now in his 83rd year.) 22-17, 7-10, 28-24, 5-9, 24-19, 8-11, 23-18, 14-23, 27-18, 11-16 and 17-14 etc; W. LT deBearn v. EF Hunt; 8th A.Ty..

E) 26-23 ( if 28-24, *8-11, 17-14, 9-13 returns to the trunk play) also has been favoured, but presents less ending problems for the defence* Cont: 9-14, 17-10, 7-14, 25-22, 18-25, 29-22, 3-7, 22-18( for 22-17. see the ACFB #147, p. 93; also Huggins-Thompson, 6th Dist .Newsletter, 1/76.) 1-5 ( note that with the piece off 30 this draws, hit 1-6 is forced against the 31-26 attack. See Note C play. "A POINT TO REMEMBER I".....) 18-9, 5-14, 23-18, 14-23, 27-18. This position was arrived at in an important 9th rd.game of the 1950 Paxton N. Ty; Willie Ryan v. Alex Cameron. At this stage, *8-ll is forced?, as previously played by Jesse Hanson v. EF Hunt at Jamestown in 1934. But even the finest sometimes falter in top-drawer checkers, and if Ryan had ever seen this game he had forgotten it, as he tried 7-10 & was eliminated from this ty after 18-14, 10-17, 21-14, 2-6,(this was the loser, instead play 8-11, 14-9, 11-15, 9-5, 15-18, 31-26, 12-16, 28-24, 4-8, 5-1, 8-12, 32-27, 16-20, 1-5, 2-7, 5-9, *18-23, (not 7-11? 9-14, 18-23 etc as 18-15 WW)26-19, then 7-11, 9-14 & 11-16 to draw.) 28-24, 12-16, 32-27, 8-12, 27-23, 4-8, 24-19, 16-20, 19-15. 12-16, 23-18, 20-24, 31-26, 24-27,26-22, 8-12 and 22-17 WW. Although Mr. Cameron was later defeated in the finals of this ty. by Maurice Chamblee, the 65 year old Scots` play was indeed remarkable; winning over both Ryan and Tinsley in successive rounds. After the starred *8-11 ( instead of 7-10) then 18-14 ( if 21-17, now *7-10, 18-14 and both 10-15 and 11-15 will draw) 11-15, 14-9, 15-18, 21-17, 7-10, 17-13, 18-22, 9-6, 2-9, 13-6, 10-14, 6-2, 14-17, 2-7 then 4-8 etc. drew- Hanson v. Hunt.

F) This was played by Edwin Hunt v. Louis deBearn, although he went into a later loss, which was noted at a later post-mortem. This prompted a number of experts to analyse 1-5 instead to draw. Cont: 21-17, 9-13, 25-21, ( as 26-22, 7-11 etc. is not difficult. This 25-21 was found by J. Patterson, of Scotland, who passed it on to Ernest Tandy, the "Hermit" of Somerset, Ky; who in turn sent it to Edwin Hunt; then preparing for his 1936 title match v. Asa Long. An examination convinced the Nashville master the line was too risky to try in important play, and also prompted Ernest Churchill ( a few years later) to remark: "It should be consigned to the ash-can". ECB G. 4746, & thus a new title was born 8-The 'Ash-Can Line'; later favoured by E. Frazier, who drew a remarkable game with it vs. Walter Hellman in 1967.) 13-22, 26-17, 2-6, 29-25, 12-16, 28-24, *8-11 ( at one time, Hellman & others were convinced that 7-11 would draw, but after 31-26, 8-12, 17-13, 3-7 after which the fine Okla. analyst and expert, Jeff Clayton, of Marlowe came up with *24-20, 6-10, *32-28, 10-17, 21-14, 16-19, 25-21, 4-8, 27-24, 11-15, 20-16, 8-11, 24-20, 18-23, 26-22, 23-26, 22-17, 19-23, then *13-9!, 12-19, and 9-6 etc; to a winning White ending, which prompted Churchill's remark mentioned above.) 17-13, 4-8, 14-9, 5-14, 24-19, 16-23, 25-22, 18-25, 27-2, 8-12. 13-9, 7-10, 9-5, 25-30, 5-1—here 30-25 was the analysed play, until Frazier produced his unusual 10-15! v. Hellman.Cont: 1-6 then 30-25, 32-27, and *3-8, 21-17, 12-16, 17-13, 8-12, 27-24, 16-20, 13-9 etc. to a fine draw.

G) 26-22 was a 3rd IM ( 1973 ) line, but inferior when met with *7-11 etc. E. Fuller v. W. Edwards, dr. if 26-23 (instead of 26-22) then 1-5 & 28-24 (a) back into trunk after 8-11.

(a) 21-17 ( which works well here ,but not in the 9-13, 24-20, 6-9 opening. See WTC game 18 Tinsley –Lowder) 13-22, 14-9, 5-14, 27-24, 18-27, 25-9, 12-16, (or 8-11, 32-23, 11-169-5, 4-8, 29-25, 8-11, 25-22, 11-15, 5-1, 16-19 x 1-5 &19-23 etc. to draw by EF Hunt.)32-23, 26-20, 31-27 ( if 24-19, 20-24*, 29-25, 8-11, 25-22, 4-8, 22-18, 7-10, 9-5,8-12, 5-1, then 10-15,19-10 & 2-6 will draw. M Tinsley)7-10, 29-25, 10-14, 25-21, 2-6, 9-2, 3-7, 2-11, then 8-15 and left as a draw by bass v Mantell. E F Hunt had continued this with 23-19, 15-18, 19-16, 18-22, 16-11, 22-26, 24-19, 14-18, 19-16, 26-30, 16-12, 30-26, 12-8, 26-23, 8-3, 23-32, 11-7, 32-27, 7-2, 27-23, 2-7 and; "draws w / care" (EF Hunt`s mss)

H) The correct reply, as 1-5 should be delayed in view of the strong 21-17 exchange.•

I) 14-9 was played by Paul Thompson v. Alf Huggins in their 1963 world title mail match. Cont: 1-5 ( 11-15 is also sound, then 26-23, 1-5, 23-14, 7-10, 14-7, 5-14, 31-26, 2-11, 26-23, *3-7, 25-22, 4-8, 23-19; *15-18, 22-15, 11-18, 29-25, *7-10, 32-28 and *13-17 to a fine draw—EF Hunt & M. Loew analysis during the 1958 So. States Ty. at Nashville.)26-22, 5-14, 22-8, 4-11, 31-26, 2-6, 26-22, 6-9 then 27-23 is as good as White has; Lowder-KD Hanson, 1969 Fla. Open, but Thompson tried 24-20, expecting 3-8, and was surprised with the nice 7-10!, after which White has just enough time to escape. Cont: 27-23, 10-15, *32-28 ( not 32-27?.ll-16! 20-11, 15-19 etc. & White is finished.) 11-16, 20-11, 15-19 etc. then *22-18, 14-23 and 21-17 made it to dr.

J) Once again, White has several fine attacks: Colston;s 25-22, or deBearn's 24-20...

1) 25-22, 18-25, 29-22, *11-15 ( if 2-6?, 24-20, 6-9, then Tinsley's *23-18 to improve Colston's 22-18 and after 7-10 x 27-23, 10-14, 32-28 Red is into a difficult ending.) 23-19. *7-10 ( Wm. Edwards ventured 15-18, 22-15, and 7-10 etc. v. the writer in mail play and drew, but of questionable soundness.)14-7, 3-10 27-23, *4-8 ( not 2-6?, 32-28,4-8, 22-17, 13-22, 23-18 etc.WW- Lowder v. Lafferty-1979 So.Ty.) 21-17, 8-11, 17-14, 10-26, 31-22, then 12-16 ( or 5-9, 19-I0, 9-14, 22-18, 14-17, 24-20, *12-16, 10-7, 22-26, 7-3, *26-30, 32-28, *30-25, 18-14, 25-22 to draw, as sent by Don Lafferty to the writer.) 19-12, 5-9, 23-19, 9-14, 19-10, 11-15, 12-8, and 14-17 drs. EF Hunt;..

2) 24-20, *11-15, 21-17, 13-22, 27-24, 18-27, 25-11, 7-16, 32-23, *3-7 ( 3-8, 20-11, 8-15 presents more resistance then the pp by LL Hall indicates. Marion Tinsley has analysed *29-25 to a win, and also discovered that Walter Hellman's starred 14-10 permits a remarkable drawl) 20-11, 7-16——a beautiful mid-game,first reached by Asa Long v. LT deBeam in a practice game, and shown to Marion Tins ley at the 1946 Cedar Point Ty. ( not Newark, as mentioned in •ABC').At this stage, de Bearn followed with 14-10, 16-20, 29-25, x5-9, 25-22, 9-14, 24-20, 4-8, 22-18, 14-17 etc; and Long drew. Instead of 14-10, Tins ley was most impressed with the power of 29-25 instead* which he sent to Walter Hellman. The latter proceeded to analyse it and returned it to Tinsley several weeks later at the Newark N. Ty... And so another cook was born!....Continue after 29-25: *2-6 ( now 16-20 must be held back until Red reaches square 9—if played now, then *14-10 wins.) 25-22, *6-9, 14-10, now *l6-20 ( if 9-14?, 10-7, 16-20, *24-19, WW, as 5-9 is shut off by the 22-18 press, and the threat of the 3x2.) 10-6, 20-27, 31-24, *9-14, 6-2, 5-9, 2-7 ( or 24-20, 9-13, 23-19, 14-17, 22-18. 17-22, 2-7, 22-26, 7-10, *26-31, 18-14, *13-17, 10-15, *17-22, 14-10 which goes into the Long-Goldsboro ending in the 2nd IM G. 167; a basic root draw for many of these undeveloped single corner side endings,.) 9-13, 7-11, 14-17, 22-18, 17-22, 24-20, 22-26, 11-15, 26-31, 23-19, 13-17, 18-14, 17-21, 14-10, 21-25, 10-7, 25-30, 7-3, 30-26, 3-7, 26-22, 15-11, 22-17, 19-15, 31-27, 15-10, 27-23, 10-6 and the kings must be kept together with *17-22, 11-15, 23-18 and into a Denny ending, diagrammed in Master-Play, p.169, @ 6th. Cont: 15-11,( if 15-19, as in M.P, Red can get in the saving *4-8, instead of 18-14 as given there, and draw with the move in his favour. This point alone, saves the entire opening from the discard pile!.) 18-23, 6-2, 22-18, 2-6, 18-22, 6-10, 22-18, and White cannot make progress. Drawn. Lee Hunger vs. AP Stums in mail play...

K) Cont: 25-22, 18-25, 29-22, *16-20 ( not 4-8?, as *23-18, 16-23, and 14-10 etc. will win- Hunt v. de-Beam, although Hunt managed to draw through a later error.)and for the third time, White must choose his choice of weapons !

1) 22-18, *13-17, 14-9 ( as 19-15, 17-22, 21-17, 12-16, 17-13, allows the 16-19 shot to draw-Hellman v.Chamblee, 1951.) 5-14, 18-9, 17-22, 9-5, ( also via a 11-16, 24-20, 16-19 Bristol-Horr-Ginsberg, 2nd A, Ty, Game 59, c.r.) 22-25, 5-1, 25-30, 1-5, 30-25, 5-9, 25-22, 19-15, 7-11, 15-8, 4-11, 9-14, *3-7 ( Jeff Clayton first gave 12-16?, which loses.) 14-9,11-16, 32-28, 7-10, 9-5, 10-15, 31-26 Drs. H. Maine v. Matt Long in mail play...

2) 23-18 ( perhaps superior to 22-18) 2-6 ( th Bullockus defence. If 4-8, 27-23, 8-11, 19-15, 11-16, 14-9 etc. with a powerful ending.) 18-15 (stronger than 27-23, 6-9, 19-15, 3-8, 32-28, 7-11 or 8-11 to draw. Willie Ryan v. KD Hanson in ex. play.) 6-9, 22-18, 13-17, 15-10, 17-22, 10-6, 22-25, 6-1, then 9-13 lead into a long draw; E. Arnold v. Vie Davis in CCC G. 936. It might be better to crown 25-30 first, although White is strong, but a forced win unlikely, further play on this ending is given by M Tinsley in his WTC

Variation 1 ( Off trunk @ 8th )

17-13, *5-9, 21-17, 8-11, 25-21(L), *9-14 (M), 17-10, 7-14, 26-23 (N). 11-15, 30-26, 4-8, 28-24 (0), 8-11, 29-25, 3-7, 26-22, 11-16, 22-17, 6-10, 24-20, 1-6, 20-11, 7-16, 23-19, 16-23, 25-22. 18-25. 27-9, 15-19, 9-5, 19-23. 5-1, 25-29, 31-27, 23-26, 27-23, 29-25, 23-18 as analysed to a WW after 25-22, 17-14 etc...However, instead of 25-22, Marion Tinsley had discovered ( in 19461) a remarkable draw with the *6-9 sacrifice exchange!. Cont: 13-6, 2-9, 17-14, 10-17, 21-5, 25-22, 18-14, 22-18, 14-10, 18-14, 10-7, 14-10, 7-3, 26-31, 3-8, 31-26 etc. Drawn. The future world champion never had the opportunity to get this in in actual play, so in view of its beauty, decided to share it with some of his friends, including the late Tom 0' Grady, at the 1949 C.P. Ty, who remarked to the writer it was one of the finest forced draws he ever had the pleasure of witnessing.....

L) In the previously-mentioned Denny attack ( 'BC' Pt. 3, page 7, Var. 1) White has the promising 17-14 here, then 1-5, 26-23 and 6-10 etc. But here, after the 6-10, break, 25-22, 17-26, 30-14 ( or 31-8, 4-11, 28-24, 12-16, 30-26, 16-20, 24-19, 7-10, 19-16, 11-15, 16-11, 10-14 etc. Drawn. A. Mantell v. R.Cast, mail play) & here, with a piece less aside, the position is not as strong. Cont: 11-15 ( or the 7-10 exchange to a draw; W. Edwards v. E. Fuller, 3rd IM.) 29-25, 4-8, 28-24, 8-11, 25-22, 12-16, 32-28, 16-20, 24-19 x and 7-10 Drawn. K. Grover v. J. Sprague.

M) But now the advance to 14 must be prevented at all costs, as 4-8 ( or 11-15) 17-14, 1-5, 29-25, 11-15 & *27-24, 8-11, 26-22 with a broken Red position, discovered b'y Marion Tinsley when defending this in a 1948 mail game vs. the late Geo. W. Bass.....

N) If 28-24 first, then 3-7, 29-25, 4-8, 26-23, 11-15, 31-26, was reached by Cameron v. Ryan at Paxton in 1950. Cameron replied with 7-11? ( by-passing a good draw with *15-19, 24-15 and 6-9—CCC G. 1007) after which Ryan missed at least one win, and finally permitted a draw, which sent the 'Bronx Comet' home, from the final ty. of his long, illustrious career.

O) or 29-25,12-16, 28-24, 16-20, and into the hellman-ryan 39th game of their 1949 match ; "WCC,g.39.

OPENING NO 72. 10-15, 22-18, 15-22.

10-15, 22-18 (A), 15-22, 25-18, 9-13 (B), 29-25 (C) 11-15, 18-11, 8-15, 25-22 (D), 4-8, 23-18 (E), 8-11, 27-23 (F), 5-9, 21-17(G), 1-5(H), 30-25, 7-10 (l), 25-21(J)

FORMS DIAGRAM

A) One of the more evenly balanced of the Kelso's. but has led to many notable games. The first side is a bit inferior in comparison to the Single Corner, with square 10 open, instead of 11....

B) To stop the 21-17 advance, and as good as there is. Other variations are:

1. 11-15, 18-11, 8-15, now 21-17 works in; as a Flora Temple, c.r. Cont: 4-8 ( 9-13, 30-25 etc was afamous Gonotsky-JB Hanson game in the 7th A.Ty; at Chicago, 1929—Gonotsky's last loss in his final ty) 17-13, 9-14, 29-25, 6-10. 24-20, 1-6, 28-24, 15-19 x 27-23, 8-12, 23-16, 12-19, 20-16, 6-10, 25-22, 10-15, 31-27, 14-18, 30-25, *5-9, 13-6, 2-9, 16-12, 9-14, 27-23, 18-27, 32-16, then 14-18 to a pretty draw by the late Sam Levy, of Manchester, Eng...This multi-talented Jewish youth first came to the notice of the checker world by winning the 1935 Eng. Ty. At Leicester at the age of 21..He then captured the British Open title the following year at Dumfries, and then defeated Sam Cohen in 1937 for the 2-move world title, A proposed match with Asa Long for the 3-move title was in the negotiating stages when he became ill in 1938. An operation for a ruptured appendix, with later complications resulted in his untimely death on Oct. 8th, 1938, at the age of 24.......
2. 6-10, 29-25 ( or the 18-14 exchange, then 1-6, 29-25, 12-16, 26-23, 16-19, 24-15, 11-18, 28-24, 8-11, 24-19, 4-8, 19-15, 6-9-here the 7-10 3x3 draws easily, but Red wants more!—Cont: 23-19. 9-13 30-26, 13-17, 26-22, 17-26, 31-22, 2-6, 22-17, 7-10, 14-7, 3-10, 23-19, 11-20, 15-11, 8-15, 27-24, 20-27, 32-7, 15-19, 17-13, 19-24?-19-23 still draws-7-3, 5-9, 3-7, 24-27 now White gets in *25-21, 27-31, 21-17, 31-26, 7-11, 26-23, and 11-15 etc. to win. Don Lafferty won from Milton Loew in the finals of the 1960 Tenn.state ty. at SheIbyvilie.However, Milton reversed matters later that same year by winning the So. Ty. at Birmingham with Lafferty 2nd—and then on to his great victory over Asa Long at Eau Claire.)11-15, 18-11, 8-15, 25-22, 4-8, 21-17, 8-11, ( or the Stewart-Banks draw with 9-13, 23-18, 8-11, 26-23, 5-9, 30-25,1-5, 25-21, 9-14, 18-9, 5-14, 24-20, 12-16 etc; See the Banks-Tinsley match book, Gn 7, Note G)17-13, 1-6 (avoiding 9-14, 23-18 etc; Campbell-Banks, 2nd IM G. 253 ) 23-18, 9-14, 18-9, 5-14, 27-23, 3-8 etc; a draw by R.T. Ward....

C) White has better choices in this opening then does his opponent. For example: 24-19, 11-15, 18-11, 8-24, 28-19, 4-8, 29-25, 8-11, 25-22, 6-10, 22-18, 2-6, & 26-22—this also comes up from an Edinburgh; opening No 18. See Tinsley-Chamblee 1947 match. Game 4, Note C by W. Hellman——cont: 6-9, ( instead of the 13-17, x Dr. Schaeffer-R. Jordan 1st IM game) 27-24 ( if 31-26, 9-14 etc) 9-14 to a draw. M. Tinsley v. D. Lafferty; 1970 Nat. Ty..

D) Other moves may transpose into Open.#78, Note C.

E) 24-20 is inferior after 8-11, 28-24, 6-10, 23-19, 5-9, 27-23, 1-5, 32-28 9-14 into one of Willie Ryans 1930 'horse-radish' lines from Open.#l9—See 'SCME*page 29, Var. 3; a Lewia-Ryan draw..

F) If White should try 26-23 to coax the Stewart-Banks line, Red has the option of 7-10, as given byTom Colston in the 'NDW« G. 627...

G) This fine move was used by HB Reynolds v. Henrv Christie in the 2nd IM; also from a c.r. Wagram. See "BC" Ft. 1, page 66, Note C, #2.

H) This waiting move is the only satisfactory way, as played by Harry Lieberman v. JH Scott in the 2nd IM G. 441. If 7-10, 23-19 is powerful, as in Christie vs. Reynolds, and if 6-10 instead. White gets the notable Long-Hunt 1936 game; Mr. Long drawing only with exceptional end play.

I) 6-10 is again weak after 25-21 and similar play to the preceding note.

J) Cont: 9-14, 18-9, 5-14, 32-27, 3-7, 24-19, 15-24, 27-20 ( not 28-19?, 11-15 RW ) 11-15, 23-19, 15-24, 28-19, 7-11 and 20-16 etc; the Lieberman-Scott game; one of the key draws of this opening....,

OPENING NO 73. 10-15, 23-18, 6-10

10-15, 23-18(A), 6-10 (B), 18-14 (C), 9-18, 24-19, 15-24, 22-6, 1-10, 28-19 (D), 11-15 (E), 27-24 (F), 8-11 (G), 25-22 (H), 11-16 (1), 21-17 (J), 16-23, 26-19, 5-9 (K)...

FORMS DIAGRAM

A) This ranks second only to 21-17 in the seven Kelso replies; completely filling the long diagonal with perfect symmetry..

B) A handicap move; seldom, if ever seen in important 2 move play, as it permits White to break the opposing double corner.

C) As in several of these unbalanced Kelsos, White has but one attack of merit, as the further duplication with 27-23 ( if 26-23, 1-6, 23-19, 11-16 as in the Tinsley-Chamblee 1947 match, or 30-26, 15-19 etc; & the first aide equalises...) 1-6, 32-27, 15-19 ( or the 11-16 exchange as in Ryans MEC) etc. 21-17, 11-16 ( the 9-14 shot in MEC gives White the better ending) 18-14, 9-18, 22-15, 8-12, 25-22, 4-8, 29-25, 7-11, 17-14, 11-18, 22-15, 3-7, 26-22, 16-20, 30-26,12-16, 22-18. 8-12, 27-23, 6-10, 15-6, 2-9, 31-27, 7-11, 25-21 and 11-15 etc. Drawn. Asa Long v. EF Hunt, played in their 1932 Nashville match, testing a number of these weaker openings for approval in the new American restriction ( 3-move) as formulated in 1931. In view of the numerous protracted drawn rounds at the 7th A.Ty. 2 years earlier, in which there were 8-10 game heats; 1-16 game, and 2-20 game deadlocked rounds, it was felt that a new method was needed to complete the DKO Nat. Tys in less then 2 weeks time...

D) Although this allows a partial bind of the White double corner,it is equal to, and more favoured than the alternate capture, which removes this cramp, but also tends to weaken the White double corner: 27-20 (completely ignored by Ryan in his MECl) 11-16 (it has been proven that this is the better way, even though it might seem to be a mistake in removing the piece on 20. If 11-15 instead, then 21-17, 8-11,25-22, 5-9?= perhaps 11-15 is better= 17-13, 2-6, 29-25 4-8, 22-17, 9-14, 25-21, 15-18, 30-25, ll-l5, 28-24, 7-11, 31-27, 3-7, 26-23, WW- Rev. Dan Vestal v. Mac Banks in 1974 mail play.) 20-11, 8-15, 21-17, 4-8, 25-21, 12-16, 29-25, 16-19, 25-22, 8-12 ( if 5-9. 17-13, 2-6, 32-27, goes into a 2nd D.C( c.r.Oldbury-Tinsley, •74) 32-27, 10-14, 17-10, 7-14, 22-17, 2-7, 17-10, 7-14, 26-22, 12-16, 22-17, 14-18, 17-13, 3-7, 21-17, then *16-20 ( not 7-10?, 27-24, 16-20, 31-26 WW- TJ O'Grady v. M. Tinsley, 1950 Can. Open Ty.)27-24 draws.

E) The defender must get this in at once, as the dilly-dally tactics with 11-16 or 5-9 are doubtful, at best.

F) The only move to uphold the White edge. Willie Ryan ( playing out of character!) allowed Harrah B. Reynolds a marshmellow draw with 21-17, 15-24, 27-29, & 12-16 etc. in the 1934 8th A. Ty...

G) The natural development, and it has been observed that usually ( but not always I) the natural way isthe better one. One of the most perplexing problems in this mid-game is when to develop the isolated piece on 5...5-9 should only be played after 8-11 and 11-16 have been committed..." A POINT TO REMEMBER". If played now. White gets in 25-22, 8-11, then 22-17, 11-16 and 17-13 etc; with White powerful...... |However, Red does have a viable alternative here with l5-18, which Ryan, ( back in 1941 ) thought would eventually prove to be the favoured defence, but his prediction has not proven out...15-18, 21-27 ( if 26-22, 2-6, 22-15, 12-16 etc; and Red, with moderate care, secures a good draw.) 5-9 ( if 8-11, 21-171, and although draws have been shown on both 10-15 and 10-14 we are of the opinion Red is forced to take *18-23, 27-18, 10-14 etc; and the narrow draw given by Eugene Frazier in the 'NECB*; also in 'CC'.) 24-20, 10-14, 26-23, 9-13, 19-15 ( if the 25-22 exchange, as in MEC Red draws easily after 8-11.) *2-6 ( not 8-11, 15-8, 4-11, 25-22, 18-25, 29-22, 2-6, 22-18, 6-9 then 30-25 to a WW by EF Hunt.) 25-22, 18-25, 29-22, *7-10 (if 14-17, 21-14, 7-10 etc; as given by Prof. Fraser, in his excellent book"Inferno of Checkers" to draw, but a WW was later analyzed by Hunt. Lieberman, Cornell, and Ed Scheidt. See the Hellman-Frazier 1967 match book, G. 17, Note C.) 23-19, 14-18, 30-25, then *3-7 a draw by the writer, as sent to Mr. Hunt....

H) Or 21-17 at once, met with *11-16 ( again 5-9 is premature. See Note G, after 17-13, 11-16 etc. to a WW given in MEC) 26-23, then 16-20 is starred by WF Ryan. However, as mentioned earlier, with 11-16 having been played, 5-9 is now quite sound, although once *(See Supplementary play.) tagged as 'little better then a lemon!' by Willie! Cont: 17-13? ( Ryan's route, but actually weak for White!. This was angled for by Maurice Chamblee when playing Marion Tinsley at Cedar Point in 1947 but the latter avoided it with the proper 25-21 and into Note J play.) 16-20, 13-6, 20-27, 31-24, 2-9, 25-22 then Red has 7-11!—discovered by EF Hunt and Chamblee in 1945, prior to the llth ACA N.Ty ; and improves Ryan's 9-14...After 7-11 White must seek the draw with *29-25 ( as 22-17 loses by 9-14, 17-13, 15-18, 29-25, 18-27, 32-23 then *11-16 etc.) 3-8, 25-21 (or 30-26, 9-13, 25-21, 11-16 etc; J.J. Caldwell vs. Geo. W. Bass- ECB G. 8205 )11-16, then 24-20 finally draws, as shown in "Checkers & the Experts", page 56, Note C.

I) 5-9 is still out of kilter after 22-17 and Note G play...

J) White has other attacks of promise in 26-23 or 22-17 as shown below, but the 31-27 exchange lets Red off easily, as in the Ryan-Banks Tacoma blindfold match...

1. 26-23, 5-9, 22-17, 16-20, 31-27 and Red must use caution..Cont: *4-8 ( not 9-14, 17-13, 2-6, 29-25, 4-8, 25-22 and the 2x2 fails after Ryan's 30-26) 17-13, *8-11 ( the exchange must be allowed as 2-6'?, 29-25, 9-14, 25-22 is the same- loss shown above.) 13-6, 2-9, 29-25, *ll-l6 ( Red must be on guard against the deadly pitches. Even such a great cross-board artist as Newell Banks once faltered here with 9-147-letting in *21-17!. 14-21, and 25-22. He struggled on with 12-16, 19-12 and 10-14 but his position was broken. WW- Banks-Ryan) 21-17, ( to a better ending then 25-22, *7-11, 22-17, 9-14, 17-13 and the *14-l8 break- Walter Hellman v. RD Banks'at Chicago in 1934)*7-11, 17-13, 9-14, 13-9 and again the *14-18 break, but here the White man is further advanced) 23-7, 16-23, 27-18, 20-27, 32-23, 15-29, and 7-2...Red now has 3 ways to conduct this ending—11-16 as in HEC; also Hellman-Frazier— or 12-16 as in EF Hunt v. Hellman in the llth ACA—, and finally 11-15, as in the Hellman-Ryan game in the 2nd NCA N. Ty. We prefer the latter, then 2-6, 3-7! ( instead of 12-16 to a longer draw Hellman-Ryan) 6-2, 7-10, 2-7, and 12-16, 7-14, 15-18 by Bobby Martin..
2. 22-17, 16-23, 26-19, 5-9 ( with 11-16 having been exchanged, 4-8 loses time after 29-25.) 29-25 ( to tempt 4-8?, then 17-13, 2-6 and 21-17 WW.) *9-14, 17-13, *2-6 ( in contrast to the 8-11 exchange of #1 in this note.) 25-22, 12-16, 19-12, 25-18, 22-15, 10-28, 30-25 ( or 31-26, 4-8, 26-22, 8-11, 22-17, 7-10, 30-26, 14-18, 17-14 etc; and 11-16 to a draw by W. Hellman v. EF Hunt; 11th ACA) 4-8, 25-22, 8-11,( or 7-10 then if 31-27, 14-18 etc. to draw. D Lafferty). 22-17,( 31-27 stronger then if 7-10 27-24, 11-16, 24-19, 16-23 & 22-18 to a WW DML) 7-10, 31-27, 14-18, 17-14, 10-17, 21-14, 18-22 etc. a draw by the writer...

K) Cont: 17-13, *2-6, 29-25, 9-14 ( here the 2x2 can be taken, but the text is a good option which the writer used in a mail game v. R. Shaw many years ago, as given in LL Hall's "Checker Classics", and also played by Marion Tins ley vs. Derek Oldbury in the 1974 N. Ty; ACFB #148, page 100) 30-26! ( a deceptive cook by Oldbury, varying from the pp 25-21 and the 2x2, as in above note.) 7-11 ( Walter Hellman's suggestion to the writer, to ease Tinsley's 4-8, 26-23, 7-11? = overlooking the deadly pitch. Red must now take the 2x2, but with an inferior endings 13-9!, 6-13, 25-21, 3-7—here, Oldbury think-ing both ways would win, picked the wrong one with 32-28==instead of *31-26== after which 14-18 escaped.) 26-23, 3-8, 25-21, 15-18, 22-15, 11-27, 32-23, 8-11, 31-26, 11-15, 26-22 and now the 2x2 to draw. Walter Hellman, 1974...In his final letter to rif.

Supplementary Play:

10-15, 23-18, 6-10, 18-14, 9-18, 24-19, 15-24, 22-6, 1-10, 28-19, 11..15, 27-24, 15-18, 31-27, 8-11, 21-17, 18-23 ( See Note G, 2nd para.) 27-18, 10-14, 18-9, 5-21, 25-22, 11-16, 22-18, 16-23, 26-19, 7-11, 19-15, 3-8 ( left as a draw by Tom Wiswell, in Ryan's MEC.) 29-25, 12-16, 25-22, 16-19, 24-20, *2-6 (a), 22-17, *19-24 (b), 17-14, 8-12, 15-8, 4-11, 32-28, 24-27, 28-24, then 12-16 draws.E.Frazier.

a) Not 19-23?, 15-10, 11-15, 18-11, 8-15, 22-17, 4-8, 17-13, 15-19, then *13-9 etc.WW. J. Caldwell v. H.L.Cravens, in the 1967 So. Ty.

b) Again, not 19-23, as *17-13, 8-12 ( 6-10, 15-6, & 11-16 etc. is a losing bridge.) 15-8, 4-11, 18-14 WW. By placing the piece on 24, Red has the option of 24-28 against 17-13.

OPENING NO 74. 10-15, 23-18, 7-10.

10-15, 23-18, 7-10 (A), 27-23 (B), 3-7(C), 24-20 (D), 15-19 (E), 23-16, 12-19, 18-15, 11-18, 22-15, 7-11 (F) 32-27, 11-18, 26-23, 19-26, 30-7, 2-11, 21-17(G)..

FORMS DIAGRAM

A) Although 12-16 was generally favoured under the 2-move style, this is about as good; sometimes known as `Strickland's 7-11 Cross', adopted by James Searight in a historical game v. Robt. Stewart in the 1899 Sct. Ty; later used by Stewart in his 1922 world title match v. Newell Banks••••Stewart, the dour, taciturn Scottish coal-miner of Blairadam, virtually retired from the game ( except for exhibition play) after winning the title from Banks by a one game margin, then declined all offers to defend it. He passed away 19 years after this match from chronic heart disease on Aug. 11, 1941, just 20 days short of his 69th year, at 'Bridge House', where, with the exception of a few months, he had resided during his entire life.....

B) If White chooses to duplicate ( favoured by Edwin Hunt among others.) then 10-14, 23-19 ( or 24-19,x 11-16, 27-24, 16-20, 31-27, 8-11, 22-17, 11-16== or 4-8; Long-Hellman, 1948 match== etc; and 9-14 to dr; as in HB Reynolds v. EF Hunt, 1933 C.P. match; later by M. Tinsley v. M. Chamblee, 1948 N. Ty.) 14-23, 19-10, 6-15, 27-18, 3-7 ( 12-16 is the older way.) 21-17 ( also 30-26, 9-14, 18-9, 5-14, 24-19, 15-24, 28-19, 7-10. 26-23, 1-5, 32-28, 11-15, 22-18 etc. draw by Willie Ryan.) 7-10, 18-14, 9-18, 24-19, 15-24, 22-6, 1-10, 28-19, 11-15, 32-27, 15-24, 27-20, 5-9, 30-26, 12-16, 20-11, 8-15, 26-23, 4-8, 17-13, 8-11, 13-6, 2-9, 31-27, 10-14, 27-24, 11-16, and 24-20 to draw. WF Ryan v. LM Lewis.....

C) The only satisfactory reply, as 9-13 is a bad Edinburgh. See "B.C." Pt. 1, page 29, Note C...

D) Considered a point or two better then 32-27, which Stewart used v. Searight, and Newell Banks played v. the writer in the 1958 N. Ty; although against Stewart (a more formidable opponent) he switched to the trunk 24-20...On 32-27, 15-19 etc, 21-17 ( Banks varied with 27-24, which annotator B. Case termed the proper reply. Cont: 7-10, 24-15, 10-19, 31-27, 9-14, 18-9, 5-14, 27-23, 2-7 etc. to draw. Instead of 27-24, White has the 18-15 exchange, then 7-11, 27-24, 11-18, 24-15, 9-14, 28-24, 8-11 etc; Tinsley-Hellman, 1955dr.) 11-16—also reached from a 12-16, 23-18, 16-19 line. Cont: 18-15 ( as the 18-14(a) exchange is questionable; Hellman-Long, 1948 match, »WCC' with a WW missed in Note F.) 7-10, 17-13? (17-14 is the proper draw, but this 17-13 was taken by Stewart v. Searight in what proved to be one of the all-time classic crossboard fights.)10-14 (was this over-powering move missed by Stewart?) 25-21, 8-12 and White is in desperate shape. Cont: 21-17, 14-21, 15-11, 9-14, 13-9, 6-13, 22-17, 13-22, 26-10, 5-9, 10-7. 9-14, 7-3, 1-6, 27-24, 19-23, 24-20. 14-17, 3-7, 16-19, 7-3, 17-22, then 11-7! ( two pcs. short!"- the correct idea but the incorrect way, as *11-8 was later analysed to draw.) 2-11, 3-8, 11-16, 20-1, 6-9, 8-3, 12-16,11-8!, 4-11, 3-8, then *16-20, 8-24. 20-27, 31-24, 23-27, 24-19, 27-32, 19-15, 32-27, 15-10, 22-26, 30-23, 27-18, 10-7, 18-15, 7-2, *9-14, 28-24, 14-18, 24-20. 15-11, 2-6, 18-23, 6-10, 23-26, 10-14, 26-31 etc; RW wins by 1st Pos; which eliminated Stewart from this ty....

(a) if 27-23 instead of 18-15 or 18-14 exchange then 8-12, 31-27, and 16-20 etc to a draw r Fortman v J leopold, 1983 Fla open ty .

E) It is best to exchange at once, although Stewart waited with 9-13 v. Banks, as did Harry Lieberman v O'Conner in the 2nd HI, G. 237. Cont: 28-24, (or 32-27, 5-9, 18-14; not 27-24, Lieberman v. Scobbie; Red strong—9-18, 23-14, 10-17, 21-14, 15-19, 27-24, 19-23, 26-19, 11-16 etc 24-20, left by Lieberman in the 2nd IM book, as White strong, however. Bob Cornell's 6-10 draws, and better then 1-5.) 15-19 (from the Dundee, with the Red piece on 16, instead of 1-5, 5-9 can be played, but here it is stopped w/ 23-19.) 24-15, 10-19, 23-16, 12-19, 18-14 ( Banks' 21-17? asked for trouble after 5-9, 18-15 etc. then 7-11, 32-28 and 9-13 is powerful; instead of Stewart's 1-5) 6-10, then 22-18, instead of the tepid 32-27 in M.P. Cont: 10-17, 21-14, *1-6, 25-22, *6-9, 29-25, 11-15, 18-11, 8-15, 31-27, 9-18, and 27-23 etc; the Bass variation, given by the Colo. expert in his "12-16 Compilations"( a rarity today) with later improvements by Liebennan and Ed Scheldt in 1967.

F) Forcing the break-up is best. The 9-14 alternative was taken by Alex Cameron v, M Tinsley in the 10th rd, of the 1950 Paxton N. Ty. in a game that definitely changed the eventual result of this ty; and may have also effected the later world championship cycle, as the defending US champion was again headed for a show-down fight with Maurice Chamblee—until the derailment occurred !...9-14, 25-22, 7-11, 29-25, 11-18, 22-15, 5-9, 32-27, 9-13, 27-23, 8-12, 23-16 here *10-19 draws, but Cameron chose the other way w/ 12-19?, 20-16, 14-18, 16-12, 1-5, 12-8, 4-11, 15-8, 10-15, 31-27, 6-9 then crowning on 4 leaves Red nothing, but 8-3 instead was taken, allowing 2-7, 3-10, & 9-14 etc. to a RW....Certainly a bitter pill to swallow at the time, but it seems that things often work out for the best. Dropping out of the world title competition for a few years permitted the Ohio grand-master the time to secure his doctorate degree in maths from Ohio State University...

G) White now plays for an improvement of Master-Play with the text move the better way to go about it. The writer was aware of this when playing Banks at Bethlehem, but selected an inferior order of moves with 27-23, 6-10, 25-22; after which 9-13 can be played; instead of 9-14...After 9-13, 31-27 will draw, as in the M. Chamblee-M. Tins ley 1948 3'wood ty. game, but we played 23-19? instead and lost...Against the better 21-17 ( at Note G ) then 6-10, 25-21, which stops 9-13..Instead, 8-12 ( or 9-14 at once) 27-23, 4-8 ( White wants 9-14?, then *23-19, 11-15, 29-25, 15-24, 28-19, 4-8, and 19-15 etc; is a winning White ending—JB Hanson defeating EF Hunt, in their 1934 Louisville match, as shown in the 6th Dist. Newsletter.) 23-19, 11-15, 20-16, 15-24, 28-19, 9-13 ( or 9-14 now, 31-26, 14-18, 26-22, 18-25, 29-22, then 10-15 etc. to a draw.Leo Sanders v. M. Tinsley; Chicago. 1947.) 17-14, 10-17, 21-14, 13-17, 29-25, 17-21, 25-22, 1-6, 22-18 and the clearance with 8-11, 16-7, and 6-10 to draw. W. Hellman v. M. Tinsley,'55.

Supplementary Play;

The following was played almost 50 years ago by the writer v. EF Hunt (White) at the old Nashville YMCA: 10-15, 23-18, 7-10, 26-23, 10-14, 23-19x, 12-16, 21-17, 16-20, 32-27 (in hopes of 17-13.) 8-12 ( if 2-7, 25-21; Oldbury-Hellman, 1965) 30-26, 4-8? ( 9-13 to an untested draw in M.P.) 26-23, 1-6, 17-13, 3-7, 22-17, 15-22, 25-18, 11-16, 29-25, 7-10, 18-14, 9-18, 23-7, 2-11, 17-14, 16-19, 24-15, 11-18, 31-26, 8-11, 26-22, ll-i5, 14-10 WW-RLF vs. EFH; 1934

OPENING NO 75. 10-15,   23-18, 9-14

10-15, 23-18, 9-14 (A), 18-9, 5-14 (B), 22-17 (C;Var.l, 2), 7-10, 25-22 (D), 15-19 (E), 24-15, 11-25, 29-22, 8-11, 26-23 (F), 11-16 (G), 31-26 (H), 16-20 (l), 28-24 (J), 4-8, 24-19 (K).

FORMS DIAGRAM

A) Another opening distinctive to the 3-move style, as this early exchange, with the piece removed from square 10 weakens the double corner...

B) In the 1950 111. State Ty; the late Leo Sanders, (then living in Chicago) surprised the writer with the radical 6-13!; taken, as he remarked later "to stop any White cooks", but which we managed to win. See ECB page 2890..Sander's playing ability was accurately described by Don Lafferty in a capsule comment: " a hard man", which others who had met him across the board night well echo. He died 4 years after this ty of chronic asthma in a Denver veterans hospital at the age of 38...

C) White has a good selection of lines. See Var.l &2.

D) This has been exploited in several important games but again White has excellent options:

1. 24-20, 15-19, 27-24, 11-15, 25-22, 8-11,17-13 into a Kelso-Cross, as in M.P. p. 284, V.4) 3-7, 22-17, 4-8 ( not 14-18, 17-14 etc. to a WW- E.Scheidt v. M. Tinsley; 1970 So. Ty, See ACFB #148,p.107, Note F.)31-27 ( or 32-27, *12-16, 29-25, 8-12, 25-22, I-5, 27-23, 14-18, 23-14 and 19-23 etc; to a draw- which the writer had in mail v. M. Tinsley, 1948) 14-18, 26-23, 19-26, 30-14, 15-19, 24-15, 11-18, 29-25, 8-11, 27-23, 18-27, 32-23. 1-5, 14-9, 5-14, 25-22, 11-15, 23-19 etc. Drawn. WF Ryan...
2. 26-23, 11-16, 24-19 ( or 23-19 etc; to a draw; ET Rolader v. M. Tinsley, 1970 N. Ty.) 15-24, 28-19, 8-11, 25-22, 16-20, 30-26, 11-15 ( also from a Kelso-Cross variation by Newel 1 Banks ) 32-28, 15-24, 28-19, 4-8, 17-13, 8-11, 22-18, 1-5 etc; a draw which the writer had in mail v. GW Bass; 1947...
3. 17-13, which Willie Ryan used vs. Marion Tinsley in the 1946 Newark Ty. finals: Cont: 3-7, 25-22, 5-19, 24-15, 11-25, 29-22, 8-11, 27-23, 11-15, 31-27, 7-11 ( instead of Bradford's 14-17 in the 9th A. Ty. book) 28-24, 4-8, 24-20, 1-5, 20-16, 12-19, 23-7, 2-11,22-17, 11-16, 32-28, 16-20, 26-23, *8-12 ( Tinsley played 8-11? instead, after which 28-24 permitted the same draw, but White can win with the odd *30-25 instead, as later pointed out by Tom Wiswell.) 28-24, 12-16, 30-25, then 15-19 etc. Drawn..

E) The natural reply, but not forced, as 11-16 also draws; used by Edwin Hunt v. Kenneth Grover in the 11th ACA ty at Nashville in 1946. Cont: 24-19, 15-24, ( or 16-23 to a draw-Bobby Martin v. W. VanLeers '74 N. Ty; ACFB #148, p. 107, V.I) 28-19, 16-23, 27-9, 6-13, 17-14, 10-17, 21-14, 8-11, 22-18, 12-16, 29-25, ( if 31-27, as later suggested by Ryan in 'AC'G.181 Red may counter with M. Chamblee's 4-8, 29-25, 16-20, 32-28, 8-12, 25-22, 3-7, 28-24, 11-16. 26-23, 1-6, 30-25, 6-10, 14-9, 10-14, 25-21, 7-10, 9-5, then 2-7, 18-9, and 10-15 to draw. M.C.) 4-8, 25-22, 8-12, 22-17, 13-22, 26-17, 16-19, 17-13, 12-16, 30-26, 16-20, 32-28, 11-16, 18-15, 3-8, 14-10, 8-12, 26-22, 19-24 etc.to Draw. EF Hunt v. K. Grover...

F) If 28-24, Red has a convincing draw at hand after 11-15, 24-20, 4-8, 27-23, 15-19, 23-16, 12-19, 20-16, 2-7, 16-12, 8-11, 17-13, 11-15 etc; Leo Levitt vs.R. Hallett; 1950 Paxton N. Ty..

G) As played by Wlllie Ryan v. Jesse Hanson in a 1945 4 game exhibition match at Tacoma, Wash; later by Bob Cornell v. E. Frazier, in the 1964 N. Ty.If 11-15 instead, White secures a good ending with 23-18( as 31-26, 3-8, 23-18 etc. to an easy draw; Ryan v. Tinsley, 1946 Newark Ty.) 14-23, 27-11, 3-7, 22-18 ( or 28-24, as in Lafferty-Hellman, 1964 N.Ty) 7-16, 17-14, 10-17, 21-14, *16-19, then 31-27 ( as Ryan's 31-26 can be well met with 12-16 !, which the writer used vs. GW Bass)*12-16, 27-24, 19-23, 24-19, 16-20, 19-16, *2-7 ( not 1-5, 16-11 to a pretty WW; E. Scheldt v. M. Tinsley, 1974 So. Ty.) 16-12, 1-5, 18-15, 7-11, 15-8, 4-11,12-8, 6-9, 14-10, 11-15, 8-3, 15-18, 3-7, 9-14, 7-11, 23-27, 32-23, 18-27, 11-15, 27-31, 10-7, 31-27, 30-26 ( instead of 7-2, 27-23, 2-7, 23-19 tie Case-Hunt draw in the 1962 N. TY.)14-17, 15-18, 27-31, 18-22, 17-21, 26-23, 31-27, 23-18,27-23 18-14, 23-19, 7-3, and 20-24 etc. is in time to draw. M. Tinsley; shown to Ed Scheldt at the '74 So. Ty..

H) White has several ways, but this is as good as any

1. If 23-19. 16-23, 27-9, 6-13, 30-26, 10-15,17-14, 4-8, 28-24, 12-16, 24-20, 16-19, 20-16, 2-7, 16-12, 8-11, 32-27, 11-16, 14-10, 7-14, 22-17 etc. Drawn.Cornel1-Frazier...
2. If 17-13, Red steps safely aside with 16-20
3. If 22-18, the 6-9 exchange can be worked in.

I) Probably forced. Ryan tried 4-8 instead v. Hanson, but after 23-19 16-23 27-9, 6-13,-17-14, 10-17, 21-14, 12-16, 28-24, 8-11, 26-23, 16-20, 24-19, 20-24, 23-18, 24-28, then *14-10 ( instead of Hanson`s 14-9 to a close draw.) 2-7, 18-14, 11-15. and 19-16 etc; White should win. WFR....

J) White has nothing better. Ryan offered 17-13 (which the writer played in a 1979 practice game v. M. Tinsley in Springfield) then starred 3-7; seemingly in error, as Tinsley took the more aggressive 10-15!..Cont 23-18? ( White should now grasp the draw with *28-24, 15-18, 22-15, 6-9, 13-6, 1-28, then 26-22, 2-6 22-18, 6-9 and 30-25 to regain the piece. M.T.) 14-23, 27-11,...now with the White forces unbalanced, Red can attack with 3-7, 21-17, 7-16, 17-14, and the waiting moves 4-8, 22-18, and 8-11, Cont. 13-9 ( we lost after 26-23, 2-7, 32-27, 6-10. 14-9 10-15, 18-14, 15-18, 9-5, 11-15, 13-9., 16-19 etc. RW) 6-13, and 14-10 produces a fine position, shown by Tinsley after the game. Cont: 13-17, 26-23 ( if 10-7, 1-6, 7-3, 6-10, 18-14, then the devastating 17-21! shot, 14-7, 21-25, 30-21 and 20-24 RW) 17-22, 10-7, 1-6, 7-3, 6-10, 3-7, 10-15, 7-10, 15-19, 10-15, 19-26, 30-23, 22-26, 15-8, 26-30, 18-15, 30-26, 15-10, 26-19, 10-7, 2-11, 8-24, 20-27, 32-23 and 16-19 wins—all of this seen by the world champion back at the 13-9 pitch—without moving any pieces!.....

K) Cont: 8-11, 19-16 etc. 26-23, 6-9, 17-13, 11-15, 13-6 and 15-18 etc. Drawn. WF Ryan; 'AC' Game 181.

Variation 1 ( Off trk. @ Note C)

26-23(L), 15-18 (M), 22-15, 11-18, 21-17 (N), 14-21, 23-14, 6-10 (0), 31-26, 10-17, 24-19 (P), 8-11, 27-23, 7-10 (Q) 5-22, 11-15, 22-13, 15-24, 28-19, 4-8. 29-25, 8-11, 25-22 (R), 2-6 (S), 23-18, 3-8, 32-28 (T), 11-16, 22-17 (U) 16-23, 26-19, 8-11, 18-14, 10-15, 19-10, 6-15, 14-10 then 15-19 and Red draws w/ reasonable care—DE Oldbury v. J. Marshall...

L) One of the popular variations; also from 9-14, 22-18, 10-15, 18-9, 5-14, and 26-22.

M) As Ryan once remarked:" No expert worthy of the name would play anything else". If 7-10, 22-18 etc, ( also from 10-14, 22-17, 7-10, 26-22, 9-13?, 22-18) 24-19, 11-15, 28-24, 2-6, 29-25, 6-9, 25-22, 9-14, 23-18 etc. then 21-17, 4-8. 31-26 and *15-18 to a thin draw; H. Robertson v. T. Colston, in mail play.

N) Again the favored way, although Ryan often used 31-26, 8-11 and 24-20 in important play. See MEC,V.2

0) Walter Hellman played 12-16 in his 1935 match vs Steve Fairchild for the US junior title, but it ispractically an obsolete defence today.

P) The initial move of the delayed re-capture; aptly described as the "slow-steal" variation. If 25-22at once, Red has 12-16, 22-13 and 16-20, as in MEC trunk, with later improvements in the Hellman-Lafferty 1964 N. Ty. line.

Q) There is another way here with the 17-22 shot; as layed by Edwin Hunt v. Case in the 1962 N. Ty.Cont: 25-18, 12-16, 19-12. 3-8, 12-3, 6-31, 23-18, 4-8, ( The piece cannot be stopped with 1-6?, 18-14, 4-8, as 32-27 etc. WW; the writer won from Clem Crawford in the 1975 N. Car. Open.) 18-14, 8-12, 14-9 ( as played by WW Coleman v. H. Maine in the 5th USA-GB mail match, and a bit stronger then Case's 14-10 v Hunt.) 11-16, 28-24, 16-20, 24-19, 20-24, 19-15, 24-27, 32-23, 31-26, 23-18, 26-22, 18-14, 22-17(1-5 first is the better way. E. Scheidt.) 14-10 ( instead of Coleman's 15-10 then 1-5 drew ) 17-14, 9-6, 14-7, 6-2, 7-3, 15-10, 12-16 then 2-6 with ending chances. Don Lafferty.

R) Or 23-18, 2-6, 25-22 same.

S) 3-7, 22-18, then *1-6 will also draw, but the take is logical, and easily recalled.

T) If 26-23, 10-15, 19-10, 6-15, 18-14, 15-18 etc; clears up to draw.

U) Or 28-24, 16-23, 26-19, 8-11, 24-20, *l-5, 22-17, 5-9, 17-14, 10-17, 19-15, 9-14 etc; Red gets bothpieces through to draw. H. Freyer v. Bobby Martin.

Variation 2 ( Off trk. @ Note C)

22-18 (V). 14-23, 26-10, 7-14 (W), 24-19 (X), 3-7 (Y), 25-22, 7-10 (Z), 27-23, 11-15, 29-25 (ZZ), 15-24, 28-19, 8-11, 22-18, 4-8, 18-9, 6-13, 23-18, 11-16, 18-14, 10-17, 21-14, 16-23. 25-22, 8-11, 31-27, 23-26, 30-23, 11-15, 27-24, 12-16, 14-10, 1-5, 23-18, 13-17 drawn RL Fortraan v. M. Tinsley, 1979 practice game…

V) Asa Long has commented that Marion Tinsley showed him some good ideas with this back in 1947. It also evoked high praise from Willie Ryan in his fine-"BLC" Since it removes the apex pieces from both sides, it was once described by Louis deBearn ( in the 1934 8th A. Ty. book ) as "pointless"! But that is what makes checkers such an intriguing game.

W) 6-15 opens up the double corner, which White attacks with 21-17, and a doubtful draw—at best..

X) If 25-22, or 27-23, Red can still delay 11-15 (afer which White is strong. See 'BLC' p, 99 ) with 3-7 and 7-10, as in the Lafferty-Grant 1976 B. Ty, game; ACFB #157, G. 24...

Y) We consider this the preferred way, as used by the Nashville grand-master, Edwin Hunt v. FW Kitchell.in the 8th A. Ty, later by M. Tinsley v. Jim Ricca in the 1950 Paxton N. Ty. The writer played 6-10 instead v. Tinsley in a 1948 mail game, then 25-22, 11-15, 28-24, 8-11 ( if 3-7 at this late stage, White works in 22-17 and holds 27-23 back.)29-25, 2-6, 30-26, 6-9, 26-23, 1-5, 23-18, 14-23, 27-18, 3-8, 31-27, 9-13, 27-23, then 11-16 etc; White strong, but a narrow draw seems to exist...

Z) Or 6-10, 27-23 ( 22-17 might be played instead.) 11-15, 28-24, 1-6, 22-17? (30-25 will draw.) 7-11, 17-13, 11-16, 29-25, 16-20, 31-27, 6-9 RW- Tinsley v. Ricca.••••

ZZ) Now if White blocks with 28-24?, then 6-9, 30-25 ( or 22-17, 15-18, 17-13 etc. to a Rw-Fortman v. CO Beebe, in the 1970 111. 101 Ty.)8-ll, 32-28, 2-6, 22-17, 4-8, 25-22, 9-13, etc. RW- Hunt v. Kitchell.

OPENING NO 76. 10-15, 23-18, 11-16.

10-15, 23-18, 11-16 (A), 18-11, 8-15, 22-18 (B), 15-22, 25-18, 16-20 (0, 24-19 (D), 4-8, 29-25, 9-14 (E), 18-9, 5-14, 25-22 (F), 8-11 (G), 27-23 (H), 6-10, 22-18 (1).

FORMS DIAGRAM

A) A1though this exchange creates no radical weakness, it does give White the better centre, and was seldom, if ever, played in 2-move. This featured in the Hunt-Rubin finals in the 8th A, Ty, and was allotted 6 pages in Ryans MEC; as compared to 28 on the Octopus I

B) White has a good alternative in 26-23, then 16-20( or 16-19, 23-16, 12-19, 22-18, 15-22, 24-15, 4-8, 25-18, 9-14, 18-9, 5-14,29-25===or 27-23, 7-11, 32-27, 11-18, 28-24, 8-11, 24-19, 2-7, 29-25, 6-10, 31-26, 1-6, 21-17 etc 25-22, 7-10, 22-13, 11-15 etc. to dr. LW Taylor====7-11, 28-24, 11-18, 24-19, 2-7, 30-26, 6-9, 19-15, 1-6, 27-24, 9-13, *31-27, 14-17, 21-14, 7-10 etc. then 26-23 Drawn. John Caldwell v. HL Cravens, in the 1970 Texas State Ty.) 24-19, 15-24, 28-19, 9-14 ( or 4-8 and into a 11-15, 24-20, 12-16 line, which will be shown under that opening.) 22-18, 5-9, 25-22, 4-8, 19-15, 7-11, 22-17, then 11-16, 17-10 & 16-19 etc; a Chamblee idea; used by Walter Hellman v. Asa Long, 1962 match.

C) The sequence here may be transposed, but this must eventually be played. If 4-8, 29-25, 8-11?, then Wh. has 24-20, 7-10 and 27-24 and a bad Red game. JB Hanson lost to Willie Ryan.....

D) More aggressive then 29-25, 4-8, 25-22, 8-11, 22-17, 9-14 etc; 26-17, then 11-15, 24-19 to a draw, as in the Bill Link v. Tom Wiswell(Red) game. `AC` G. 179.

E) 6-10 can be played first, bat best delayed until White reveals his intentions..6-10, 25-22, 9-14 (not1-6?, 22-17, 9-13, & *26-22 knocked out a defective cooked defence- Rub in lost to Hunt in 8th A.TY)same.

F) The natural response, although 26-22 featured in the 1955 title match between Marion Tinsley & Walter Hellman. Cont: 8-11, 27-23, *7-10 ( not 6-10, 22-18 etc. WW-Cravens-Tins ley, 1978 N. Ty.) and White has several ways:

1. 22-18, 6-9, 25-22, 1-5, 28-24, 20-27, 31-24, 3-7, 32-27, 9-13, 18-9, 5-14, 22-18, 11-16, 18-9, 10-14, 9-6, 2-9, 24-20, 7-11,19-15 Drs.Lafferty v. Lowder; 1975 So. Ty.
2. 22-17, 3-8, 25-22, 11-16, 17-13, 8-11, 22-18, 1-5, 18-9. 5-14, 30-25, 20-24 ( or 2-7, 31-27, 11-1523-18 etc. Drawn.) 25-22, 11-15, *32-27, 16-20, then 22-17, 2-7 and 22-18 Draws. M. Tinsley.
3. 30-16, 10-15! (a counter-cook by Tinsley; instead of 6-9, 19-16 etc; which he had w/ Hellman) l9-10, 6-15, 22-17 ( if 23-19, 15-24, 28-19, 3-7, 26-23, 7-10, 22-18, 1-5, 18-9, 5-14, 25-22, 11-15. 32-28. 15-24, 28-19, 2-7, 31-27, 7-11, 22-18, 11-16, 18-9, 10-14 draws. M.T.) then 11-16, 17-10, 15-18, 23-14, and 20-24 etc. with an easy draw in view. M. Tinslev..

G) If 6-10 first. White has the option of 27-23, 8-11 and same—or, the Basil Case cook with 30-25. This is an Edinburgh transposition via: 9-13, 22-18, 12-16, 24-19, 8-12, 26-22, 4-8, 30-26, 16-20, 22-17, 13-22, 26-17, 10-14, 18-9, 5-14, 17-10, 7-14, 25-22, 6-10, then 29-25 same—as credited to Joe Duffy v. Preston Ketchum ( who was Case's Chicago coach in the late 1920's) in the latter's "How To Win", p. 64, trunk. Cont: 7-11 ( as 8-11 is met with 19-15) 26-23, 11-15, ( 11-16 was given by Duffy-Ketchum) 23-18, 15-24, 18-9 ( or 28-19 by CO Beebe, then 14-23, 27-18, after which 1-6 may be necessary ) *1-6, 28-19, 6-13, 32-28 *3-7, 22-18, 13-17 etc. Drawn. Case....

H) Again, White has room for good alternates in:

1. 26-23, 6-10, 22-17 ( if 22-18, 14-17 etc; to a draw; LW Taylor v. Eddie Gibson, in the 7th USA-GB mail match.) 2-6 ( White is after 11-15?, then 30-26, 15-24, 28-19, 7-11. 19-16 etc. 26-23, 11-15, 31-26, 10-15 then 13-9 to a WW. LW Taylor.) 17-13, 11-16, 31-26, 14-17, 21-14, 10-17, 23-18 etc. 17-22, 19-16, 12-19, 27-24 x, 1-5, 28-24, 6-10, 24-19, 10-14 x 13-9, 7-11 etc. Draws. LW Taylor..
2. 22-17, 7-10, 26-22, *3-8 ( as 11-15. 27-23 etc.to a WW in "CC") 30-26, ( as 27-23, 11-16 is back into the Tinsley-Hellman game, and if 17-13 instead, then 11-15, 27-23. 15-24, 28-19, 8-11, 30-26, 11-15, 32-28, x,20-24, 22-18, 6-9, x 18-15, 24-28 ,x 26-22, 28-32, 22-18, 32-28, 31-27, 28-32. 18-15, 9-13, 15-6, 14-18 drs.) 11-16, 27-23 ( not 26-23. 6-9, 17-13, 1-5 etc- RW) 8-11, *22-18 ( if 17-13, 11-15, 32-27, 15-24, 28-19 then 14-18 etc. is a winning Red ending) 20-24, 18-9, 6-22, 26-17, 16-20, 23-18, 10-15, 19-10, 2-6 Drs. (rlf)

I) The natural advance to the centre .If 22-17 ( as the 19-16 exchange; Stiles v. deBearn can be well met with 20-24, as in the K. Grover v. Ray Fields 3rd NCA Ty. game.) 11-15 ( or 11-16, 26-22, 20-24, 32-27, 16-20. 30-26, 7-11, 22-18, 1-6 etc. Draw-Don Lafferty v. Don Brattin; Mesch's 6th DHL, page 224) 19-16, ( not 30-25? etc. 20-24, 25-22, 7-11, 17-13, and 11-15 etc; RW-Ed Scheldt v. Les Balderson; in the 1979 Virginia St. Ty.) 12-19, 23-16, 2-6 ( or 1-5, 32-27, 5-9, 17-13, 15-18 is into the classic LS Head draw, shown in MEG, p. 188, diagram.) 32-27, 14-18, 17-13( if 28-24, or 16-12, then 18-22, 17-14, x 1-5, 26-17, 6-9 drs; W.H.) 15-19, 16-11, 7-16, & 26-23 etc then 3-10, *27-23 Draws. W. Hellman..

Continuing after 22-18 in trunk: *14-17 ( as the 1-5 exchange eventually strands the piece on 14, & a winning W. ending.)21-14, 10-17, 19-15 ( if 31-27 as played by Rubin v. Hunt, then Red has the Ryan improvement with l-6!==instead of Hunt's 11-16==18-15, 11-18, 23-14, 7-11, 19-16, 12-19, 27-24 etc; 2-11, 28-24, 6-10 x 26-22 drs. WFR.) *3-8, 15-10, ( or 32-27, 2-6, 28-24, 11-16, 24-19, 7-11, 26-22, 17-26, 31-22, *6-9, 30-25, 1-5, 22-17, then *9-14, 17-10, 5-9, 10-7 and 9-14 to a good draw by Walter Hellman) 7-14, 18-9, 1-5, 9-6, 2-9, 23-19, 20-24; a position once reached by Ed Scheidt v. Robt.'Preacher. -Jones in fee 1974 No. Car. Open, with Case's draw by 19-16 fully expected. But the Reverend casually moved 26-231? instead..Mr. Scheldt; scenting a mistake, rushed up with 17-22? ( instead,*24-27, 31-24, *9-14, 30-26, 11-16, 19-15, 17-21, and a bad White ending-E.S.) and soon saw the light after 32-27, 9-13, 27-20, 5-9, 30-26 etc. White won...

Against Case's 19-16, 11-20, 28-19, 9-13, 19-15, 17-22, 26-17, 13-22, 15-10, 5-9, 10-6, 9-13, 6-2, 13-17, 2-6, 17-21, 6-10 Draws

Supplementary Play:

Same as trunk play to last move. Note 1—22-18, 14-17, 21-14, 10-17, 19-15, 3-8, 28-24 ( instead of 32-27 or 15-10 given above) 20-27, 31-24, 12-16, 24-19, 16-20,19-16, 20-24, 16-12, 24-27, 12-3 a position reached by Willie Ryan in his MEC, page 188, Note E. He continues w/ 27-31? to 'give Red the edge' ( actually *1-5 first then 15-8 and *27-31 draws; per EF Hunt) but 15-8, 31-15 and 3-19 is a White Win instead! ..EFH...

OPENING NO 77. 10-15, 23-18, 12-16.

10-15, 23-18, 12-16 (A), 26-23 (B-Yar.l), 16-19 (C) 23-16, 11-20, 18-11, 8-15, 22-18 (D), 15-22, 25-18, 4-8 (E), 24-19, 8-11, 29-25 (F), 11-l5 (G), 18-11, 7-23, 27-18 (H).

FORMS DIAGRAM

A) The conventional reply, and when one speaks of the "Kelso-Cross" it is this that comes to mind.

B) And once again, the early movement of the apex piece is best, and disputes the Tescheleit theory. The duplicate 21-17, as in Var. 1 is perhaps more complicated ( Alexander's 'heavy' line) but not necessarily better....

C) Striving for at least a partial share of the centre, although 8-12 is quite playable. Cont: 30-26, 16-20, 21-17, then Newell Banks' 7-10 almost equalises...

D) Developing from the single comer side. The opposite wing exchange is rarely seen: 24-19, 15-24, 28-19, 4-8 ( 9-14 seems as good, if not better ) 22-18, 9-14, 18-9, 5-14, 25-22, 6-10 etc; but never really tested...

E) The natural follow-up, delaying both 6-10 and the 9-14 exchange.

F) 19-15 is an ill-timed advance after 3-8, 21-17, 9-13, 30..26, 13-22, 26-17, 5-9 etc; a Freyer-Krantz NYC game which White lost, although a later draw was shown*.

G) Featured in the Banks-Stewart 1922 match, and later in the 1927 2nd IM, to side-step the "Fox-Den". Against 9-14 ( if 6-10, White can vary from the M.P. 25-22, 11-15 etc; and 10-14 as in the Ed King-Asa Long game at Longview, 1980, with 27-23 instead. See Cameron-Ryan "BLC" p. 13, Note C) 18-9, 5-14, 25-22, 6-10, 30-26, 11-15, 26-23, 15-24, 28-19—and analysis has uncovered several ways:

1. 2-6, 22-17, *6-9 ( not the 10-15 exchange;Ginsberg losing to Lieberman ) 17-13, 3-8, 13-6 & 14-18 etc; a Hill-Lieberman draw; later by Jordan v. Ginsberg in the 6th A. Ty; 1924..
2. 1-6 ( or 1-5, 22-17, 5-9 ) 22-17, 6-9, 17-13, 7-11 13-6, 2-9, 19-16, 9-13 x& 14-18; Drawn.W. Scott
3. 7-11 ( hard on the trail of the fox!) 19-16, *3-8(a), 16-7, 2-11, 22-17 ( 22-18, 1-5 is the J. Jack draw) *8-12 ( not 11-15, 17-13, 1-6, 32-28, 8-11, 23-19, 15-24, 28-19, 11-15, 27-24 etc. WW) 23-18, x 10-15, 18-14, 15-19, 14-10, then 11-15 etc. will draw, as shown by Asa Long...

a) The only escape, as 2-7 ( or 2-6, 16-7, 14-18 etc 3-10, 22-18, 1-5, 21-17 WW- W. Leatherwood v. the writer in the 1975 111. 101 Open at Alton) is into trap, forming Bert Titus' famous "Phantom Fox Den", which agitated the analysts of two continents back 60 years ago; the Minneapolis expert claiming a piece-down draw for a $25 wager; eventually won by Phillip Brady, as published in the Pittsburg Dispatch, Aug; 1920....Cont: *3l-26! ( One of the all-time great cooks. This odd move was probably first discovered by C.P. Hill, a former Iowa champion, who then passed it on to Joe Duffy in 1915; this according to a letter from Geo. W. Bass to the writer.Duffy then mentioned the move to Newell Banks, prior to his 1917 match vs. Alf Jordan at San Franscisco. History has it that Newell at first ridiculed the move, but later reconsidered, and then used it to beat Jordan, and win the match 3-2,-35 drs; to claim the world 2-move title. Curiously enough, when Duffy got the cook on against Ray Gould in the 5th A. Ty; he proceeded to transpose his moves with 22-17? first, and actually lost with White!—after passing up a later draw.) 11-15, *32-28, 1-5 ( Jordan surrendered tamely with 1-6, 22-17, 15-18, 17-13, 10-15, 28-24, 3-8, 16-12, 8-11, 12-8, 11-16, 8-3 WW-Jordan v.Banks) 22-17, then 20-24, 27-20, 15-18, 23-19, 18-22, 26-23, 22-26, 16-11 x 26-31, 23-19, 31-26, *28-24, 26-22, 17-13, 14-18, *20-16, 18-23 ( if 22-26, 16-11, 26-23, 19-16, 10-14, 13-9, 18-22, 24-19, 22-26, 19-15, 23-19, 15-10 19-15, 9-6, 15-8 and 10-7 to a WW by the redoubtable Capt. Fishburne.) 16-11, 10-14, *19-15, 22-18, 13-9, 23-27, *15-10, 18-15, 9-6, 15-8, 10-7 etc. WW- the Brady win....

H) Cont: 6-10, 30-26, 1-6(instead of 3-7 Banks-Stewart) 25-22, 10-14, 26-23, 6-10, 31-26, 3-7 ( easier than 2-7,18-15 x 9-13, 16-12- B. Case v. WF Ryan ) 18-15. x *7-10 ( 7-11?, 22-17 WW- Campbell-Banks, 2nd IM ) 22-17, *14-18 ( missed by Campbell!) Draws as shown by AJ Heffner.

Variation 1 ( Off trk. @ Note B)

21-17(1), 9-13, 24-20, 16-19, 17-14, 6-9, 27-24 (J), 8-12(K), 25-21(L), 12-16 (M), 26-23 (N), 19-26, 30-23, 13-17, 22-6, 1-17, 21-14, 15-22, 23-18, 7-10, 14-7, 3-10, 18-15, 10-19, 24-8, 4-11, 31-26, 22-31 and 32-27 a draw by the talented Harry Jacob of London, Eng..

I) In using this two-edged variation without prior knowledge, the amateur often finds himself floundering beyond his depth( see Note K) with even the expert being 'twisted* on occasion,..

J) 27-23 is also favoured, then 11-16 ( or 8-12, x 32-27, 3-8, 27-23, and 11-16 etc; a Buchanan-Barker1st IM draw; 1905) 20-11, 7-16, 18-11, 9-27, 31-15, 13-17, 22-13, 5-9, 13-6, 1-19, 25-22, 8-15, 22-17, 2-6, 29-25, 4-8- 25-22, 8-12 then 17-13..Now *6-10 will draw, as in the Banks-Jordan 19-17 match game, but if the natural 3-7? instead. White attacks with 22-17, 15-18 ( as 7-10, 32-27, 16-20, 27-23, 20-24, 23-16, 12-19, 17-14 WW-Liebennan-Reynolds, 2ad A.TY) 17-14, 6-10, 14-9, 10-14, 9-6, 7-11, 6-2, 18-23, 2-7, 14-17, 7-3, 16-20 then 32-27 WW- A. Jordan won from Asa Long in an exhibition game played after the 5th A. Ty; something he was unable to accomplish in thety.

K) John Bradford once titled this the "Herman Zink" attack, in respect to the young Boston expert, whose one brief bid for fame occurred in the 1st A. Ty. In 1907, where, after 6 draws with CF Barker, had the master in a loss in Game 7; only to lose instead! See the final opening in this book for that game. Instead of 8-12, the more usual reply is 1-6, then 32-27, 8-12, 25-21, and Red gets in 12-16 first; daring White to duplicate!. Cont: *27-23 (as 21-17 now loses, with 1-6 having been played. Cont: 7-10, x 26-23,x 9-14, x 24-19 x 11-15, 23-18, 15-19, 18-15 and now 21-25, 15-11, 10-15 steals the piece to win) 7-10 ( but now the roles are reversed. If the duplication with 6-10, White has the last move and the block win with 21-17, 4-8, 29-25, 8-12, 25-21, 3-8, 30-25, 2-6 31-27)14-7, 3-10, *22-17, 13-22, 26-17, *19-26, 30-23, 15-22, 24-19, 9-14, 19-12, 11-15, 28-24, 6-9, 17-13, 15-18 etc. another draw by H. Jacob...

L) This is best. Red's objective is to coax 32-27,to get in 12-16.Here 25-21 draws, as in Note M, but White, seeking to gain the piece, cuts off 26-23? 19-26, 30-23...But "beware of Greeks bearing gifts", as he is now in the Zink cook!.Cont: *16-19!( improves the M.P. 2-6 draw.) 23-16, 1-6, 24-19, 15-24 28-19, 6-10, 25-21 ( all others also fail) 10-26, 31-22, *7-10, 16-7, 2-11, 27-23, 10-14, 19-16, then 11 15, 18-11 and 14-17 etc; with a winning Red ending.

M) Now if 1-6, then White gets in 21-17 first!. Cont: *7-10 ( 3-8 doesn't make it after *29-25, 11-16 (if6-10, 31-27 WW) 20-11, 7-16, 18-11, 9-18, 24-15, 6-10, 15-6, 2-9, 22-15, 13-29, 11-7 etc. WW- Hugh Henderson lost this to Julius D'Orio in their 1911 match; also Sam Grover to AJ Heffner.) 14-7, 3-10, 20-16,( note that the Zink idea with 17-14; c.r. is not in order here, as Red is one move advanced; with the piece on 12, instead of 8 ( 11-27, 18-11, 10-15, 31-24, 6-10, 29-25, 9-14, 25-21, 12-16, 26-23 etc, then 16-19, x and 14-18 to a draw by WJ Wray...

N) White now has two other sound continuations:

1. 21-17 ( In this position, with the Red piece back on square 1, instead of on 6, as in Note K, this will draw ) 7-10, 14-7, 3-10, 26-23, 19-26, 30-23, 9-14, 18-9, 5-21, 24-19, 15-24, 28-12, 11-15-, 23-18, 15-19, 18-15, and Red must give leeway with 10-14, and a draw after 15-11 etc
2. 32-27, 4-8 (or 1-6, as in Note K) then *21-17 saves the White game. The key points in this line is knowing when, and when not, to play 12-16 and 21-17. If 27-23 instead of 21-17, Red gets in still another win by Zink after 7-10, 14-7, 3-10, 22-17, 13-22, 26-17, 19-26, 31-22, 9-14, 18-9, 5-14, 17-13, 1-5, 30-25, 8-12, 13-9, 14-18, 22-17, 5-14, 17-13, 18-23 RW-Zink over the Internationalist, Wills G. Hill...., Going back to the forced 21-17, then 7-10, 14-7, 3-10, *29-25, 9-14, 18-9, 5-21, then the pretty 26-23 shot, followed with 24-19 to draw...

The late Stewart S. Bell ( also known as 'Sure-Shot') was a great wit, newspaper columnist, and expert player. After an exhibition in Chicago, a spectator approached him to say:" That was quite impressive, Mr. Bell, but isn't checkers largely a matter of luck?"_____"It certainly is, my friend" replied Bell." but I have a ten- spot here that says I'm luckier then you are!".....

OPENING NO 78. 10-15, 23-19, 6-10

10-15, 23-19 (A), 6-10 (B), 21-17 (C), 1-6(D), 25-2l (E) 11-16 (F), 29-25 (G), 16-23, 26-19 (H). 8-11 (1), 17-13 (J) 11-16 (K), 24-20, 16-23, 27-11, 7-16, 20-11, 3-7, 22-18 (L)

FORMS DIAGRAM

A) Since this poses no dire threat, providing Red declines any exchanges, the opening may be classified in the "about even" category,

B) A partial weakening of the double corner, but since White has no immediate attack against it in view of his opening move, it is quite safe. Once condemned on theory, rather then actual practice; the play of both Wyllie & R. Jordan reversed that opinion; featured in both Kears Ency. & Master-Play.....

C) White has nothing stronger then this aggressive move used by Newell Banks v. Jesse Hanson in the 4th A.Ty; later by both M. Tins ley & W. Hellman. Other ways are:

1. 22-17, 1-6 ( Wyllie used 9-14 v. Yates, but it is not popular after 25-22, 11-16, 17-13 etc; then 13-9) 25-22 and the return to trunk.
2. 22-18 (27-23 is well met with 11-16, 22-18, x 16-20, 32-27, 10-14, 29-25 then Mike Lieber's 8-11leaves White at a slight disadvantage.) 15-22, 25-18, 11-15, 18-11, 8-15, 29-25, 4-8, 25-22, 8-11, 27-23, 9-13, 24-20, 15-24, 28-19, 5-9, 22-18, 2-6, 26-22, then 10-15, 19-10, 6-15 is a familiar mid-game landing from several openings, including the Cross-Choice and a Double Corner, Open. #44, c.r...See "Basic Checkers", Pt. 2, page 59, top for a full treatment of this position; also a recent idea by James Keene in "MWC", 10/80, page 107.

D) The proper reply. The purpose of White's previous move is to coax 9-13 here (which would be less attractive against 22-17) and follow with the 5-9 bind, However, this plan is thwarted with the 'doctor* idea in *17,14, 10-17, 19-10, 7-14, and 25-21. In the Blk. Doctor, the piece is on Square 6, and off 4 ( also in the W. Doctor; c.r.) but here, with both squares 6 & 7 empty, White stands much the best, with the double threat of regaining the piece plus control of the centre. This has not been tested in important play to date, although M.P. gives a few superficial variations.

E) Permitting the return to the std. variation. White has an option here with 17-13, then 11-16, and 25-21; again back to trunk. Instead of 25-21, there have been two important games played on the alternatives:

1. 26-23, 8-11! (an excellent reply taken by the late Bob Cornell v. Marion Tinsley in the 1947 Ohio St. ty. at Carey. If 16-20, as in M.P. then White is allowed 22-17, 9-14, 25-22, 14-21, 22-17, 15-18 etc and stands best. See Roy Hunt v.M. Tinsley, 6th Dist ty 1949 at Joliet; given in "ccc" G- 553...) 24-20, 15-24, 28-19, 11-15, 20-11, 15-24, 27-20, 7-16, 20-11, 3-7 and Red is at least equal, if not better. Cont: 25-21, 7-16, 23-18, 10-14? ( here 4-8* 22-17, 8-11 is stronger . M.T) 18-15, 14-17, 21-14, 9-25, 29-22, 4-8, 22-18, 5-9, 30-26, 2-7, 26-22, 16-19, 32-27!, 19-23, 27-24, *7-10 (as 23-26 loses by 24-20, and 23-27 by 15-11!, 7-16, and 24-20 WW. M.T.) 15-11, 8-15, 18-11, 10-15; 22-17 (to stop the 6-10 slip) 12-16, 11-7, 16-19. 24-20, 23-27, 31-24, 19-28, 7-2, 28-32, 2-7, 15-19, 7-11, 32-27, & 20-16 ( the white king is stymied!) 27-23, 16-12, 19-24, 12-8, 24-27, 8-3, 27-31, is draw agreed, as White cannot attack this ending. Tinsley noted this ( in 1947 ) as one of the most beautiful crossboard games I have ever seen".,,..
2. 27-23 ( a Hellman cook, used to defeat Everett Fuller in the 3rd NCA N- Ty; l946) 16-20, 32-27, 8-11, 22-18, l5-22, 25-18,' *11-16 ( the key is to hold back the 9-14 exchange—Cont: 19-16 x 23-19. 11-15 19-16, 15-18, 29-25, 14-17, 28-24, l0-l5, 25-21, 3-8, 21-14, 8-12, 14-10, etc- ww' Fuller Hellman.)29-25 ( if 26-22? *7-11, 29-25, *3-8. then the 11-15 exchange wins against anything.LW Taylor.) *4-8. 26-22 ( and if 25-22?, *7-ll, 30-25, *10-14, 25-21, 6-10, 13-6, 2-9, 25-21 & 3-7, RW M- chamblee) 8-11, 25-21, now 9:14, 18-9 5-14 which forces 21-17, 14-21 and 22-18-but Red has both 11-15 or the 6-9 exchange, and the better ending.

F) The centre exchange with 15-18 must be shunned, as white dominates the position after 17-14 etc.

G) Or 17-13 first, and same.

H) To maintain the cramp. 27-11 is inferior after 8-15, 17-13, 4-8, 24-19 x 8-11, 22-18, 9-14 etc.

I) As played by Sam Cohen v. Sam Gonotsky in the 2nd IM; the Londoner's only draw in this 4 game encounter! 7-11 instead was then more usual, followed with 17-13, 11-16, 22-17, 16-23, 27-11, 8-15, 24-19, 15-24, 28-19, 4-8, 25-22 ( or 30-26, 8-11, 26-23. 3-7 and 31-26; a draw also reached from a 10-14, 23-18 opening. See "B.C." Pt. 3, page 30, Note F) 8-11. 31-26, ( since the 22-18 advance is well met with 12-16, 19-12 & 10-15 and Red is best.) 3-8 ( but now, Red must wait with this or 3-7, since 9-14? instead, allows 26-23, 3-7, 30-26, 12-16, 19-12, 11-15, 23-19, 15-24 and 12-8 etc. WW- A. Jordan over Mike Lieber, in their 1924 match at Detroit.) 2-281 ( cat & mouse tactics!— as 22-18 or 26-23 is again out of order after 9-14. X 30-25»=or 32-27, 11-15, 27-24, 8-11, 26-23, 15-{8 RW; Buchanan beat Horr in 1st IM, 1905==11-15 32-28 x 8-11 19-15, 11-18, 26-22, 18-23, 22-18, and 6-9 etc; Red Wins. Derek Oldbury over Hugh Burton, in the `74 N. Ty.)9-14 ( there are other ways now with 11-15,.30-25 or 11-16, 22-18 etc. drawn) 26-23, *11-16, then 19-15 is the J. Lees draw—not 22-18?, 8-11, 18-9, 5-14, 30-26, 16-20 and once again, White is embarrassed!...

J) Don Lafferty and the writer once looked at 17-14?! 9-18, 21:17, *6-9, 17-13,2-6* 24-20, 15-24. 22-8, 4-11, 28-19, 11-15, 27-24, 9-14, 25-22, 7-11, 32-27, 3-8, 31-26, 5-9, 30-25, 14-17, 25-21, then 9-14 RW: perhaps unpublished....

K) Again the Glasgow idea, as in Note E, #1, but here, White has a better formation with the piece on 28, 3-8 instead leads into "Thirkell's Folly" after 22-17, 11-16, 25-22, 16-23, 27-11, 7-16, 10-15? ( *8-11, then *24-20, 16-19, 27-23 etc. drs. S. Cohen.) loses by the 22-18 shot etc. 31-26, but incredibly missed by both Thirkell and Tescheleit in M.P p. 299, Var. 1.

L) Cont: 7-16, 28-24, 4-8, 30-26, 9-14, 18-9, 5-14 then 31-27 ( perhaps easier then Gonotsky's 24-20 v.

Cohen, after which 16-19, 25-22, 8-11, 32-27,( or 22-17, 2-7,32-27 is into MP) and both 19-24 or Heffner's 6-9 etc; favor Red.) 16-20 ( as 10-15 allows the 21-17 shot) 26-23, 8-11, then 23-18 etc. Drawn. N. Rub in v. Saul Weslow; 7th A. Ty, 1929, in one of the 20 game drawn heats mentioned elsewhere in this book..,.,

OPENING NO 79. 10-15, 23-19, 7-10

10-15, 23-19, 7-10 (A), 22-18 (B), 15-22, 25-18, 9-14 (C) 18-9, 5-14, 27-23 (D), 11-15 (E), 24-20 (F), 15-24, 28-19, 8-11(G), 19-16 (H), 12-19, 23-7, 2-11, 29-25 (1).

FORMS DIAGRAM

A) The favoured reply in the two-move era; in search of the well-analysed Whilter or Alma lines.

B) Although Lees Guide titles this the "Whilter Exchange", we think this a misnomer, as technically, both the Whilter and Alma are 5 move openings, and will be shown in Pt. 5 of these books. The text is perhaps the most restrictive; favoured by many masters. Other ways are:

1. 22-17, 11-16 ( 3-7 is the Alma, See. Pt. 5) 26-23, 8-11 ( dubbed the "Dodger" to by-pass the Whilter or Alma lines in 9-14 or 3-7. When played by Sam Gonotsky v. Sammy Cohen in the 2nd IM, the young English champion seemed completely befuddled) *17-14 ( White must break now, or suffer the consequences.17-13 is soon tied up after 16-20, and if 31-26 instead. then 9-14, 25-22, 6-9, 17-13 then 3-8 etc;RW. Gonotsky v. Cohen—one of the shortest master games on record!) 9-18, 23-7, 3-10 ( or 16-23 etc; the A.Anderson variation-see Ferrie v. O'Grady 2nd IM G 385) 25-22, 16-23, 27-18, 4-8 ( or 12-16, 21-17, 6-9, 17-13, 16-20 etc; a draw by the Internationalist, August Schaeffer, the Brooklyn medic, who was a class-mate of Robert D. Yates in medical school.) 30-26, 15-19, 24-15, 10-19, 32-27, 11-16, 18-15, 5-9, 22-17, 2-7, 29-25. 7-10, 17-13, 10-14, 27-24, 16-20, 26-22 etc t0 draw- M Tinsley v. Alf Huggins, in a 1957 exhibition match in Bristol, England...
2. 26-23, 9-14 ( or 3-7, 21-17, 11-16, 25-21 again the Alma, a favourite with the late Walter Hellman; also employed by Leo Levitt, in his free-style title match v. Derek Oldbury.

C) There is nothing better. For example:

1. 9-13 is into the 7-11 Wisp. See 'BC' Pt. 5.
2. 11-15, 18-11, 8-15 allows the strong 21=17;similar in idea to Open. #72, Note B.
3. 11-16, 27-23, 16-20, 32-27, 10-14, 29-25, 8-11, 19-16 etc 28-24 ( better then 18-15 in K.E.) 6-10 24-19, 9-13 x 19-16 then *2-7 may draw, but 11-15, 16-11 etc.to a WW- Leatherwood- Fortman- 1977 Ill101 Open Ty.

D) In preparation for the 24-20 exchange and the following 19-16 break. 29-25 is inferior after11-15 25-22, 6-9, 27-23, 8-11, 24-20, x 11-15, 32-28, x 4-8, 22-18, 3-7, 31-27, 8-11 then the 21-17 2x2 seems to draw, but if 27-24?, 11-16, 20-11, 7-16, 24-20, and the 2-6 shot to win—Newell Banks defeating Jim Lester, in a Springfield exhibition back in the late 1930's.... Mr. Lester, a school-teacher by profession, once accomplished the 'hat trick' in Illinois checkers, by winning 3 state tys in a row—1937-38-and 1939...

E) Always to the centre in these symmetrical positions. If 11-16, 29-25, 16-20, 32-27, 3-7 ( if 8-11, then 19-16 etc wins) 25-22, 8-11, and 19-16 etc. shown to win for White by Basil Case. Mr. Case now 72 years of age, still resides in northern Ala; and although does not participate in competitive play, still is interested in the game, and does analyse play for his friends....

F) The proper follow-up to the early 27-23. To de lay now with 29-25 allows Red the better position w/ 8-11, 24-20 x 11-15, 32-28 x 6-9 and into Note D..

G) It is better to permit the break, as if 2-7, 29-25, 8-11, 25-22, now 11-15 is stopped with 20-16, so Red must try the 10-15 exchange to draw..

H)Also proper to remove the king-row piece, as Red must then take time to re-group.

I) Cont: 4-8, 25-22 ( if 26-23 first, than the quick draw with 8-12, 25-22, 11-15, 22-17, 6-9, 17-13, & 3-7 etc; Adamson-Martins) 14-18! ( although this is not forced, it does clear in good fashion. 6-9 is more usual, then 26-23, 8-12, 22-18, 1-5, 30-26, 9-13 x 26-22, 11-15 and a c.r. Glasgow draw with 23-19, 15-24, 32-28, 3-7, 28-19, 7-11, 20-16, 11-20, 31-27, 12-16, 19-12, 13-17, 22-13 and 14-18; as in the Cohen-Levy 1937 match game) 22-15, 11-18, 20-16, 10-14 ( better then 6-9, as in Ray Fields v. Tom Watson; 3rd IM; previously analysed by AJ Mantell, in the Roseville Citizen, Game 319) 32-27, now 6-9, 27-24, 9-13, 24-19, 18-23, 26-22 and 14-17 etc. to a draw. M. Tinsley v. Don Lafferty, 1975 practice.

OPENING NO 80. 10-15, 24-19, 15-24.

10-15, 24-19 (A), 15-24, 28-19, 6-10-(B.Var.l), 22-17 (C) 9-14 (D), 25-22 (E), 11-15, 27-24 (F), 8-11 (G), 23-18 (H) 14-23, 17-14, 10-17, 21-14, 7-10 (1), 14-7, 3-10, 31-27 (J)

FORMS DIAGRAM

A) As in the 2nd D.C.( Open.#101 ) this cedes the advantage to the first side, but here to a lesser degreewith the piece still on square II...

B) Red has other favourable lines in 9-14 or 11-16, as given in Var. I..*

C) Although Willie Ryan had a fondness for the centre advance with 22-18, in this instance it is inferiorafter the 11-15 exchange. The late NYC grand-master once found himself in deep trouble playing Ed Wylie, of Vancouver, in the 2nd NCA N. Ty at Tacome, in '39. Cont: 4-8, 25-22, 8-11, 29-25, 9-13, 22-18, 5-9,25-22? ( 23-19 will draw) 10-15, 32-28, 15-19, 23-16, 12-19, 26-23, 19-26, 30-23, 7-10, and 28-24——At this stage, Walter Hellman ( playing John Stiles on an adjoining board) once remarked to the writer that he expected Wylie to spot the quick win with 2-7, 24-19, 10-15,etc 31-27, 1-5, 27-24 and 11-15...However, Wylie tried 3-8 instead, which will also win, but finally let Ryan escape with a draw, then go on to win the heat and later the championship.. As we once observed: "It is not sufficient to get a master into a losing position One must then proceed to beat him"..

D) Almost universally played, although Asa Long once varied with 1-6 playing Geo. Tanner, of Chicago, in the 5th A. Ty; after which White has the 17-14 exchange. Tanner was no doubt the strongest black plaver the game has ever known, and without the deep racial discriminations of the 1920's, would probably have been an active member of the 1927 2nd IM USA team, instead of a non-playing substitute; after which he disappeared from the world of checkers...

E) 26-22 is an awkward reply, soon penalised after 11-15, 22-18, 15-24, 18-9, 5-14, 27-20, 8-11, 31-27, 3-8, 25-22 and 11-15; a bad proposition for White.

F) Here 32-28 may also draw, as mentioned in M.P. after 15-24, 28-19, 8-11, 22-18, 4-8, 18-9, 5-14, 29-25, 11-15, 25-22 etc; but Red has other good options, & the text is the better bargain...

G) 5-9 was also one of Ryan's great favourites (also used by Marion Tinsley on occasion) with an in-dication to fight; played by the late master against Lieber, Gonotsky, Case, Young, Chamblee, and Tinsley, See ACFB #163, p. 99, Var. 1- AA..Red's main objective, after 17-13, and 2-6, is 30-25 (z), 7-11,22-18, 15-22, 25-18, 11-15, 18-11, 8-15, then 29-25 is best, but the natural 32-28 allows 15-18, 31-27, and the 18-22 pitch. Ryan beat Chamblee with this at the 1946 Newark Ty, and should have won from Charlie Young, even though White can still draw..

z) ( Off Note G) White can avoid complications, if he so desires, with 32-28, then 7-11, 22-18, 15-22, 26-17, 11-15, 24-20, x 8-11, 30-26, 11-15, 19-16, x 15-19, 16-11, 1-5 ( as 19-24 allows 26-23) *29-25(as if 11-7, 14-18)*14-18, then 26-23 etc. and the 25-22 advance to 15 to exchange and draw..

H) Known as the "Crookston gambit" in respect to the Edinburgh, Set. analyst; perhaps better known as the coach, confidant, and travelling companion of the late Richard Jordan, undefeated world champion. White has a sound ( but seldom seen ) alternative in 32-28, 11-16, then 22-18, 15-22, and 19-15 etc; which Bobby Martin once used vs. the writer in the '39 Trans-Missty at Davenport, la...

I) The correct way to retain a slim edge. Other's are weak:

1. 23-27, 19-10, 2-6, 32-23, 6-15, 29-25, 4-8 then 23-18 leaves White strong.
2. 11-16 ( or 4-8 first) 19-10, 4-8, 26-19,16-23, 31-26, then *23-27, 32-23 and 12-16 has been given to draw..
3. 5-9?, 14-5, 7-10, then *29-25 will beat anything; a trappy, but unsound variation.

J) Cont: 5-9 ( although 2-6, 27-18, 6-9 is more usual, it permits both 32-28 and 29-25; the latter to a good draw after 9-14 x 25-21, *11-16, 22-17, x 4-8, 17-13, and 1-6 is best,then 30-25, 8-11, 25-22, 11-16, 22-17, 16-23 and 32-28 to a forced draw.) 27-18, 1-5, 32-28 ( but now if 29-25?, Red has 9-14 ,18-9, 5-14, and White must walk the tight-rope with *26-23, then 2-6, *25-21, 6-9, *32-28, 9-13, *24-20 x 11-15 & *30-25, 15-24 22-18 to a close draw; once reached by Freyer v. Long, c.r.from a Denny. See 'BC' Pt, 3, page 53, Note K) 9-14, 18-9, 5-14, 26-23, 2-6, 30-26, 6-9, 24-20, 15-24, 28-19, 11-15, 19-16, 12-19, 23-16, 14-18 (K), *16-11 ( not 29-25?, 10-14, 16-11, 9-13, 11-7, 14-17 etc; to a RW which has snared many!-See ACFB #149, G. 67) 18-25, 29-22, 15-19, 11-7, 9-14, 7-3, 10-15, 3-7, 4-8, 7-11, 14-18 etc. Drawn. Newcombe v. Jordan....

K) ( Off Note J ) Or 9-13, 16-11 ( if 26-23, 4-8.! Then *16-12 draws; not the careless 16-11?, as 15-19 etc; steals the piece; Jackson lost to Henderson, and Ginsberg lost to Reynolds)14-17, 11-7, 10-14, 7-2, 15-19 then the 19-23 exchange to draw, as in Tanner-Long, but LM Lewis, playing rapidly vs. Alf Jordan in the 5th A. Ty. went 17-21 instead, after which 29-25, 21-30, 6-9, 30-23, and 9-27...Lewis, his face flushing deeply, took one look, and resigned in disgust, as White has the move.. Jordan ( after accepting the win ) then proceeded to demonstrate that it was not 1st Pos. w/ 19-24, 27-23, 4-8, 20-16, 8-12, 23-19, 24-28, 16-11, 28-32, 11-7, 32-27, 7-2, 27-31 and 12-17 to draw...No one can deny that Lawrence Lewis had a great talnt for the game, but his volatile temperament proved to be a great handicap in many of his matches; notably against Ryan and Lieber....

Variation 1 ( Off trk. @ Note B)

9-14 (L), 22-18 (M), 5-9 (N), 25-22 (0), 7-10 (P). 19-15, 10-19, 23-7, 14-23 (Q), 27-18 (R), 3-10, 21-17 (S), 10-15 (T), 18-11, 8-15. 26-23, 15-19 (U), 23-16, 12-19, 29-25, 4-8, 17-14, 9-18, 22-15, 2-7, 30-26, 7-10, 31-27, 6-9 etc. Drawn. Joe Duffy v. JT Bradford, in their 1926 elimination match for a place on the 2nd IM team. Although this match ended in a draw with 3 wins each, Bradford received all 10 votes from his team members, with Duffy none. Teetzel remarked in his ACM:" What influenced this one-sided vote has not yet been revealed".....but Duffy's predilection for sour-mash and late hours was no great secret at the time. He then retired after this, with Mike Lieber- gaining the 12th spot on the US team...

L) For 11-16 see `WTC` pt 2 g 13.

M) Any attempt to create complications with the 19-15 exchange is adequately countered with James Ferrie's sly 12-16! ( noted with Tescheleit's pun as a 'Fery good move') 23-18, 14-23, 26-12, and 7-10 etc...

N) This back-up is best, as the 7-10 exchange goes into a secondary 2nd D.C. line, mentioned in Pt. 5.

O) Experience tends to make the majority shy away from the early 2x2's, into the confines of 5 or 28, but there have been exceptions; notable fry Newell Banks v. Robt. Stewart, and Kenneth Grover v. Maurice Chamblee..18-15 ( if 26-22, 7-10; again into 2ndD.C. line.) 11-18,21-17, 14-21, 23-5, 8-11, 25-22,7-B 22-18 ( if 26-23, 11-15, 27-24?==32-28 probably better; Chamblee-JB Hanson, 1948 N.TY==6-9, 22-17, then*9-13, instead of Stewart's 4-8 v. Banks, which resulted later in trouble for the Scottish champion. Cont; after 9-13, 17-14, 10-17, 19-10, *17-22, 23-18, 12-16, 18-15, 16-19, 24-20 then Abe Bernstein's *4-8 to win, and improve Cox's 19-23 v. Grover in the '74 Nt. Ty. After 4-8, 20-16, 8-12, 16-11, 12-16 and Wh. has no tenable defence.) after 22-18, M.P, gives 4-8 however, Chamblee had concocted a cook ( one of many produced by this man of many talents) with 3-8 here, then 27-24, 11-16, 29-25, 16-23, 26-19, 8-11, 25-22, 21-25 ( Chamblee later indicated 11-16, 31-26 etc; and 6.9, but the text is strong) 30-21, 11-16, 22-17, 16-23, 17-14 x 12-16, 24-19, 16-20, 19-16 and at this stage, 2-7 was played to a draw after 16-12. Instead of 2-7, the late Tony Gursky suggested 20-24! to the writer. Cont: 16-11? ( here *14-9, 6-13 & 32-28 may draw) 24-28, 18-15, 6-9, 14-10, 9-14, 31-27, 23-26, 27-24, 26-31, 24-20, 31-26, 20-16, *14-18, 16-12, 18-23, 12-8, then *2-7, 10-3, and 23-27 to a pretty RW.,Mr. Gursky, of Johnson City, was most artistic player, but health problems cut short a most promising career...

P) Considered best. Banks tried 11-16 v. Stewart ( if 6-10, 22-17, 11-15 etc; a favourite with Mike Lieber. See Lieber-Ferrie; 2nd IM G. 339) then White attacked with 18-15, 7-10, 22-18, 8-11 ( improves Banks' 16-20, 29-25, 1-5, 25-22, 3-7 and the tie-up w/ 32-28 to win) 15-8, 4-11, 18-15 ( instead of 32-28 or 26-22 in M.P) 11-18, 21-17, 14-21, 23-5, 16-23, 26-19..With the Wh. piece on 29 advanced one square, if .would be a std. D.C. line. See 'BC' Pt. 2, page 41, Note H, #1. One might compare this favourable White position with Note 0, where the early 2x2 was taken by Banks. Cont: 3-7, 29-25, 7-11, 25-22, 11-16?( 11-15 has been shwn * (See supp. play) to draw by Asa Long.) 27-23, 3-7, then 31-27, as in the Fuller-Tinsley 1970 ty. game, or 22-17, as played by Walter Hellman v. Milt Apel, in a 10 game match played in Chicago back in 1933. Walter had just won the Ind. state ty. at the age of 17, and then met several of the strong Chicago experts. Apel was 20 at this time; a protege of the late Sen. John Denvir. Although Hellman won this match 2-0-7 draws, Apel finished ahead of him one year later, in the 8th A. Ty. at Jamestown, NY, tying for 6th-7th, as opposed to Hellman1s 10th place.

Q) 3-10 is not as good when met with 26-23, 12-16, 22-17, 8-11, 17-13, 16-20, 32-28, 11-16? ( here 4-8 is better then 28-24, 8-12, 24-19, and 10-15 etc; a Gonotsky-Ryan draw.)28-24, 16-19, 24-15, 10-26, 30-23, 4-8, 27-24,20-27, 31-24, 8-11, 24-19, then 6-10 will draw, but 11-15?, 18-11, 1-5, 11-7, 2-11, and the over-looked 21-17!, 14-21 then 23-18 to a WW- Mike Lieber won from Willie Ryan in their 1926 Detroit match...Lieber was 22 years of age when this match was played; 3 years older then Ryan, and also superior in strength; winning 4-1-with 23 draws. But he met an early death 3 years later, while Ryan went on to eventually challenge for the world title.

R) 26-19 is also sound, as played in the 2nd IM, but less favoured.

S) As played by Ryan v. Weslow in 1925, and anchors a good draw, in comparison to the M.P. 29-25 line.

T) Red nay as well concede the draw with 1-5, 17-14 etc; as in the Banks-Tinsley 1952 match.

U) Weslow v, Ryan tried the dubious 6-10?, after which White applied pressure with 23-18, 15-19, 30-26 ,9-13, 29-25, 4-8, 25-21, 8-11 and 17-14 etc; to a WW...

Supplementary play:

10-15, 24-19, 15-24, 28-19, 9-14, 22-18, 5-9, 18-15, 11-18, 21-17, 14-21, 23-5, 8-11, 25-22, 7-10, 22-18, 4-8 ( instead of Chamblee's 3-8) 27-23, 11-16 ( IIP gives 10-15x)29-25, 6-9, 18-15?, 10-14, 15-10, 14-18,xx32-27, 2-6, 27-24, x 12-16, 24-20, 8-11, 10-6, 1-10, 5-1, 10-15, 31-26, 16-19, 1-6, 18-23, 6-10, 23-27, 26-22, 27-31, 10-14, 31-26, 30-7,3-26 & Red Wins.N, Rubin v. JA Drouillard, in 1933 Los Angeles match-'Mercury' Game 107,...

OPENING NO 81. 10-15, 24-20, 6-10.

10-15, 24-20 (A), 6-10 (B), 28-24 (C), 1-6(D), 23-18 (E) 12-16 (F), 32-28 (G), 10-14 (H), 27-23 (1), 15-19, 24-15, 9-13, 18-9, 11-27, 31-24, 5-14, 20-11, 8-15, 24-19, 15-24, 28-19 (J).

FORMS DIAGRAM

A) An inefficient side move that allows the first side to attack square 19 with the playing edge.

B) Although the direct 15-19 was favoured in 2-move, both this and 7-10 were occasionally played, without sacrificing the advantage.

C) The proper defence, along the Aryshire Lassie idea. Both 21-17 ( or 22-17, 15-19 etc.) magnify the White weaknesses after 9-14, 17-13, and 15-19 etc; as shown by Willie Ryan, in his excellent "A.C.";Vol. 1, G. 9

D) The logical follow-up, still directed toward square 19. Anything else nullifys the advantage.

E) A defence advocated by Basil Case, who backed up his judgement by using it vs. Hellman in their 1953 title match. Prior to that, the Lassie theme with 23-19 was widely used, and still in favour with a number of experts. Cont: 15-18 ( here the only presentable attack. With the piece off square 1, Red lacks the mobility of the Aryshire Lassie lines; for example, the 12-16 2x2 here; although quite propitious in the A.L( can be strongly met with 25-22, 11-15, 21-17, 7-10, 17-13, 9-14, 29-25. 8-11, 25-21, 4-8, then 13-9!,6-13 and 26-23 to a WW by WF Rya".) 22-15, 11-18, 26-22( cutting down the pieces, and probably better then 32-28, 10-14, 25-22, 18-25, 29-22, 7-11, 30-25, 9-13, 19-15, 11-18, 22-15, 3-7, 24-19, 8-11, 15-8, 4-11, 20-16' ll-20, 25-22, 14-18, 22-15, 13-17, 21-14 and 7-10 etc. to draw, but Red has other excellent ways after 32-28.) 7-11, 22-15, 11-18, now 32-28 (as 30-26 can be met with 8-11, and the threat of 11-15 next, with Red strong.) 3-7, 30-26. 7-11, 25-22, x 10-14, 22-17, 14-18, 17-13, 2-7, 19-16 x 18-22, 26-17, 11-18. then 20-16, 8-12 & 27-23 to a nice draw. Bobby Martin v. Nathan Rubin;1936 C.P. Ty

F) Given by Case, and also used by the writer vs. NW Banks in the 1958 N. Ty; which plays for a bad order of moves. The 15-19 exchange also has merit. Cont: 21-17, 9-13 ( or 11-15, 18-11. 8-15, 17-13, 4-8, 25-21, 7-10, 22-17, 8-11, 17-14 etc. and 27-23 to a draw. NW Banks v. KL Fortman; '58 N.Ty) 17-14 ( if 18-15cby Ryan in 'BLC«, Red has 7-10, 32-28, 3-7, 29-25, then both 7-11 or 5-9 favour Red, and better then 8-11 as given.) 6-9 ( or 19-23, 26-19, 6-10, 31-26 10-17, 20-16, 11-20, 25-21, 7-11, 21-14, then the 20-24 shot etc; 13-17 x and 11-16 drs. WF Ryan) 26-23, 19-26, 30-23, 2-6, 25-21, 6-10, 31-26, 10-17, 21-14 and 7-10 etc; Draws. B. Case.

G) The correct defence, but Banks, moving rapidly v. the writer, took the doubtful 27-237 instead, afterwhich Red works in 8-12, 32-28, and 3-8.The former US champion, realising he was in trouble, took the only playable move—22-17, 15-22, 25-18, then the 16-19 double exchange. Surveying this bleak position, Banks, with his face flushed, made a motion as if to sweep the pieces aside, but then recovered, and played 26-22. This looked like an easy? win with 19-23? ( *9-l3 does win) but 17-13, 11-16? 20-11, 8-15, 22-15, 7-16, 22-18, 16-20, then 31-26, 23-27 & 18-15 etc. to an eventual draw. Winning this game would have given us the round 2-1-3 drs. As it was Banks went on to win 2-1-5 draws. See comment on page 64, Note C in this book...

H) One of the selling points of this White defence is that Red now has just one good move:

1) 16-19 allows 27-23, then either 8-12 or 11-16are bad..

2) 8-12, *26-23, 3-8, now ( with the piece still on 27) the 24-19 exchange, stopping 11-15 with the loss of a piece.

3) 9-14.18-9, 5-14, 22-17. 16-19, 25-22, 8-12, 26-23 etc; White best, although a draw shown by WFR.

I)Forcing the reply; not the 22-17 shot, leaving a tattered White position.

J) then several ways:

1. 6-10, 19-15, 10-19, 26-23 etc; the Case draw.
2. 7-11 ( 3-8 runs similarly; Elders-RLF, 1966 Sq. World mail ty) 26-23, 6-9, 22-17, x 4-8, 29-25, 2-7, 25-22, 7-10, 22-17, 9-13, 18-9, 13-22, 9-6, 22-26, 23-18, 26-31, 6-2, 31-27, 21-17 Draws.M. Tinsley v. Ed Scheldt; 1974 So. Ty.
3. 4-8, 26-23, 8-11, 22-17 x 29-25, 7-10, 23-18, 2-6, 18-14 etc and 6-10 drs. J. Caldwell.

OPENING NO 82. 10-15, 24-20, 7-10.

10-15, 24-20, 7-10 (A), 28-24 (B), 3-7(C), 23-18 (D), 9-1 4 (E), 18-9, 5-14, 22-17, 12-16 (F), 26-23 (G), l6-19 (H) 23-16, 8-12, 32-28, 12-19, 30-26, 14-18, 25-22. 18-25, 29-22(I).

FORMS DIAGRAM

A) This was also seen in the older restriction; in search of the favourable 3-3 Aryshire Lassie.

B) White has other ways, bit none are better:

1. 27-24, 3-7, 23-19 and a variation of Willie's pet "Old Paraffin"—sometimes known as the "Beeswax"which Ryan used in exhibition play to bewitch the innocents! One game of note was EF Hunt v. Bob Cornell, in the 1962 N. Ty. For other play, consult Ryan's 'SCME', page 97......
2. 23-18, then 3-7 ( or 9-14, x into Open.#75,Note D play) then 28-24, and back to trunk, or 27-23, and into Open .# 74 trunk.
3. 22-17, 3-7, 17-13 ( as 25-22 is met strongly w/ *9-13; 'AC' G. 158, and if the 17-14 exchange instead, Red attacks w/ 6-9, 26-23 etc and 1-6, as in 'AC' G. 153) 9-14, ( if 11-16 now, White may counter with the 23-18 exchange) 25-22, ( as 28-24, 5-9, then 23-19 is back into the 3/8 Ary. Lassie.See Pt. 5)11-16, 20-11, 7-16, 29-25, 16-19, 23-16, 12-19, 27-23 ( or 22-17, 8-12, 27-24, 4-8, 32-27, 2-7, 25-22, 5-9, 26-23 etc. to a draw; M.Tinsley v. M. Charablee; 1952 NYC exhibition match—perhaps their final encounter across the board.) 8-12, 23-16, 12-19, 31-27, 4-8, 22-17, 8-12, 27-24 and into a position from the 11-8 pitch line of the Glasgow by Jack Cox. Cont: 5-9 ( as the inviting? 12-16 is ham-strung after *26-22!) then *26-23 etc. aad 15-19 draws.

C) the natural follow-up; into the 3-8 Lassie.

D) 23-19 is the older way, and will be shown in Pt. 2 note E of this series . The text is a defensive cook by M.Chamblee( most of his innovations were attacks) which he had analysed for his 1951 title match v. Walter Hellman. With no opportunity to use it there, it was later "exchanged" after the match.

E) The proper reply. In direct contrast to the previous opening, 12-16 here is bad, and the major objective of this White line. 12-16, *27-23, 8-12, 32-28—now with 3-7 played, Red has nothing better then 9-13 after which *21-17, 16-19, 23-16, 12-19, 25-21, 6-9, 17-14, 10-17, 21-14, 1-6, 30-25, 6-10 then 22-17 wins against either capture. Elzy Langdon losing to Don Lafferty in the 1975 6th Dist Open Ty.

F) With the White piece on 23 removed, this is safe.

G) Probably first taken in important play by Ken Hanson v. Don Lafferty in the 1975 So. ty; and seems equal in merit to the pp 32-28 ( or 17-13, 16-19,32-28, 8-12, 27-23, 4-8, 23-16, 12-19, 25-22, 14-18, 21-17 etc.to draw..M. Tinsley v.Tom Wiswell, in a 1953 exhibition by the latter in Columbus, Ohio.) 8-12, 25-22, then 16-19— a position also reached from Open.#75. Cont: 27-23 ( or Chanblee's 29-25 to draw; as given in the ACFB #165, p. 122, Var. 8-B, but the 26-23 exchange is unwise after 1-5, 29-25, 6-9, 17-13, then 14-18 etc. RW; Oldbury v. Markusic; 30th US N. Ty) 4-8, 23-16, 12-19, 31-27, *14-18, 17-13, x and 15-18 etc. followed with 26-23 to draw. M. Tinsley v. W. Hellman; 1955 match...

H) It would seem that these moves could be interchanged—8-12, 32-28, then 16-19...

I) Cont: 4-8, 17-14, 10-17, 22-13. 1-5, 27-23, 8-12, 23-16, 12-19, 21-17, 5-9, 31-27 ( or 26-22, 7-10, 22-18 etc. draws. Lafferty-Hanson) 11-16, 20-11, 7-16, 24-20, then 6-10 etc. and 19-23 draws. Ed Markustc V. Don Lafferty; 1976 N. Ty.

Supplementary Play:

10-15, 24-20, 7-10, 28-24, 3-7, 23-18, 9-14, 18-9, 5-14, 22-17, 11-16?( instead of the better 12-16 at Note F. Maurice Chamblee had analysed 11-16 to lose.) 20-11, 7-16, 24-20, l5-19 (here Chamblee's play went: 16-19, 17-13, 8-11, 25-22, 1-5, then either 22-17 or 30-25 to win) 20-11, 8-15, 25-22, 4-8, 17-13, 8-11, 27-23, 2-7, 23-16, 12-19 ( if 11-20, 30-25; as the 21-17 shot only draws.LWT) 32-27, 1-5, 22-17, 11-16, 27-23, 5-9, 31-27, 15-18,*27-24, 19-28, 23-19, 16-23, 26-19, 18-23, 19-15, 10-19, 17-1 and White wins the ending. Harvey Kelley v. LW Taylor,in the 1980 Sequoyah, Ala. Open Ty.

OPENING NO 83. 10-15, 24-20, 15-19

10-15, 24-20, 15-19 (A), 23-16, 12-19, 27-24 (BVar.l). 7-10 (C ), 24-15, 10-19 (D), 21-17 (E), 11-15 (F), 32-27 (G) 6-10 (H), 17-14 (1),9-18 (J), 26-23, 19-26, 30-7, 3-10 (K) 20-l6 (L).

FORMS DIAGRAM

A) With square 24 vacant, this attacks the opposing double corner, and the favoured 2-move reply.

B) Analysis has proven this best, as the first side must exchange to benefit, which quickly resolves into a 6x6 late mid-game position.

C) 11-15 is certainly sound, but generally avoided in expert practice as it cuts out the play mentioned inNote B.Cont: 22-18, 15-22, 24-15, 7-10, 25-18, 10-19. 32-27, 6-10, 27-24, 1-6, 24-15, 10-19, 21-17, then 3-7; left as a draw in M.P....However, draws left in many texts are not always conceded in cross-board play. Cont: 29-25, 7-11? ( here 8-11, 18-14, 9-18, 26-23 etc. drs. N.Rubin) 25-22, 11-15, 18-11, 8-15, 17-13, 6-10, 13-6, 2-9, 20-16, 9-14, 16-11, 5-9, 26-23 etc 9-13, 28-24, 14-17, and 23-19 WW. Ray Cast v. N. Rubin, in the 7th A. Ty; Cedar Point, 1929....

D) Here again, the preferred way, as the extra capture with 11-18 ( as in the Long-Horr 1923 match game)22-15, 10-19 transposes into: 11-15, 24-20, 15-18, 22-15, 10-19, 23-16, 12-19, 27-24, and 7-10 etc. same; followed with 32-27— a good White variation often used by Walter Hellman; to be shown in Pt. 5...

E) Here 22-18, 6-10 is into a strong Open. #64,Var. 1 line, c.r and if White continues the run-off with32-27, Red has now the option of 9-14 to maintain the advantage. However, Maurice Chamblee adopted it in the final ty. of his career.Cont: after 9-14, 27-23, 2-7, 23-16, 8-12, 22-17, 12-19, 17-10, 6-15, 21-17, 5-9, then 25-21 Chamblee's improvement of 17-13;the Stewart-Holmes Set. ty. line) 4-8, 31-27, 7-10, 17-14, 9-18, 26-23, 19-26, 30-7, 3-10, 27-23, 10-14, 28-24, 15-18, 23-19, 18-23, 19-16, 11-15, 16-12, 8-11, 12-8, 23-27, 8-3, and 27-32 Drawn. Brad Gambrell v. Maurice Chamblee; 1957 Ala. State Ty.

F) The 11-16 exchange was one of Ryan's potent 'horse-radish' lines; as given in his first opus "It's Your Move". It may also be arrived at from a Dundee: via 12-16, 23-18, 16-19 x 27-24, 7-10, x 21-17, 11-15 x same; also in a game Marion Tins ley v. D. McRitchie, in the 1950 Canadian Open ty; White winning on a later error. This was published in one of the Canadian columns, but we seem to have misplaced it..*.

G) Now with 21-17 played, this is correct, with Red holding a strong double corner. 22-18 can never beplayed effectively in this opening. If taken here, then the first side builds up strongly after the 9-14 exchange, then 8-11, 5-9 and 11-15....

H) It is curious that a world-class player of Alfred Jordan's experience would not perceive the weakness of 9-14?, 17-10, 19-24, 28-19, 15-24, after 20-16, 6-15, 27-20, 8-12, 16-11, 3-8, then 11-7, 2-11, 26-23 and Red's position is in disarray WW- Jordan losing to Sam Grover in the 1st IM, 1905, G. 384...

I) This breaks the position, with anything else; such as 27-24, dubious at best...

J) Walter Hellman used to call moves like 10-17 "sub-human!".....

K) The better way, to encourage 20-16. The alternative 2-11 capture is best remembered as the John Dougherty- John F. Horr game, in the prelims of the 4th A. Ty at Cedar Point, in 1920, which the Kansas champion won, and almost relegated the future ty. winner to the minors'...After 2-11, 27-23, 1-6, 25-21 ( here 22-17, & the 11-16 shot to a quick draw) 8-12, 31-27, 4-8, 27-24, 3-7, and here the 24-19 exchange draws, but Horr took 23-18, 12-16, 24-19, 16-23, then 20-16 etc; missing a later draw before losing; certainly not up to his usual high quality play.

L) Cont:8-11, with which Asa Long won 2 important games with in the 2nd IM. 8-12 instead concedes the draw after 27-24, 12-19 and 22-18 etc; and if 10-14 instead, 16-12, 8-11, then White resists the temptation to crown, and plays 27-23 to an easy draw... Cont; after 8-11, 16-7, 2-11, 27-23, 4-3, 22-18, x 5-9, 31-27,1-5, 29-25, 8-12,( if 11-16, 27-24 drs; Ginsberg-Lewis, & later by Levitt v. Lafferty; 1974 N.Ty) 27-24, 10-14 ( if 9-13, 23-19, 10-14 x *25-22, 11-16 and the nice draw with *24-20-B. Case v. JOK Smith) 25-21, 9-13 x then *24-20 ( instead of Goldsboro's 24-19 loss to Long) 13-17, 28-24, 17-22, 24-19, 22-25, *21-17 x 23-18 Drs.

Variation 1 ( Off trk.@ Note B)

22-18(M), 6-10 (N), 25-22, 10-14, 29-25, 14-23, 27-18, 9-14 (0), 18-9, 5-14, 22-17, 7-10, 25-22 (P), 8-12 (Q) 17-13, 2-6, 32-27, 4-8, 22-17, 11-15, 27-24, 8-11, *31-27 (R), 3-8, *26-22, 12-16, *30-26, 1-5, 27-23, 5-9 then 22-18 etc. to a draw by Sam Levy....

M) An attempt for partial control of the centre.

N) But rebuffed by this reply; avoiding the 9-14 exchange and into a familiar Bristol; shown in Pt. 6.

O) Just one of three excellent attacks. Others are:

1. 11-15, 18-11, 8-15, 21-17, 4-8, 17-13 ( 32-27 is perhaps better, then 7-10, 20-16, 2-7, 17-13, 1-6, 25-21, then *10-14 drs; ( 8-12 stronger as played by E Markusic in the 1978 A ty) not 9-14, *27-24 to a WW, that Ryan won from Lee Hunger in the 1933 C.P. finals) 9-14, 25-21. 8-11, 32-27, 7-10, 27-24, 14-18—here, the21-17 exchange draws, but 'Stonewall' Barker once allowed his defences to crumble with the questionable 22-17 v. Zink in the 1st A. Ty. Zink replied with 18-23, which should win, although annotator Heffner gave a quicker route with 1-6, 17-14 x 2-7, 30-25, then 18-23 to win...After Zink's early 18-23, then 17-14 x and the young Boston expert faltered with 2-6?, after which 14-10, 23-27, 26-22 and Barker won the game, the round, and eventually, the ty. Instead of 2-6, the other way w/ *2-7, 26-22, 1-6, 22-17 and the 7-10 exchange to a long Red win.
2. 9-13, 21-17 ( as the 18-15 exchange is doubtful. See the EF Hunt-WH Patterson 1932 So. Ty. game to a RW in 'MWC') 1-6, *17-14, 6-9, 32-27, 11-15, x 14-10, 7-14, 27-23, 3-8, 23-16, 8-12, 16-11, 12-16, 31-27, 14-18, 26-23, 9-14, 28-24, 5-9, 30-26, 14-17!, 23-5, 17-21, 27-23, 21-30. 23-19. 30-23, 19-10, 23-26, 22-18, then 4-8!, 11-4. and 26-23 etc. to a fine draw by M. Schliefer v. Willie Ryan, NYC ty, 1933.

P) As given by Levy; also played by Don Lafforty v. W. Hellman in the 1964 N. Ty. However, Marion Tinsley has mentioned to the writer that this may be delayed with 17-13 instead, then 2-6, 32-27, 8-12, 27-23, 3-7 x & 31-27 nor draws without stress. M.T. 1980

Q) The Levy cook to improve the M.P. 11-15 draw.

R) The only escape. Lafferty lost w/ 26-23 x instead.