|
|
|
THE FIRST TWENTY MOVES Part I. the Edinburghs By Richard L. Fortman Illinois Champion (10/77)
OPENING NO 1. 9-13, 21-17, 5-9 9-13 (A), 21-17(B), 5-9 (C), 25-21(D), 11-15 (E), 29-25 (F), 9-14 (G), *23-18 (H), 14-23, 27-11, 8-15, 17-14 (I), 10-17, 21-14, 4-8 (J), 26-23 (K), 8-11, 25-21(L), 11-16, 24-19, 15-24, 28-19(M), FORMS DIAGRAM
A) Of the seven Red opening moves this, entitled the Edinburgh, is the weakest. First, because it totally abandons the centre, and secondly, as its future maneuverability (in 13-17) is just half that allotted to the remaining six moves. B) Since White answers with his weakest choice, the relative strength of this opening hinges on the next follow-up reply. C) This maintains the cramp, and is superior to all but 11-15, which (along with 10-15, 11-16 and 12-16) are balloted from their respective first moves to avoid duplications. D) To fill in an undesirable hole and the initial move in the sequence to break the afore-mentioned cramp, by the later 17-14 exchange, to gain breathing room in the centre. E) Strongest, to retain the bind on the White left side. If 9-14 instead, White breaks with the 22-18 exchanges, followed with 30-26, to regain the piece, with equality F) Looks dangerous, as it forms an elbow (comprising the three pieces on 17, 22 and 25) but here quite the best, as the first side is unable to attack with 15-18, in contrast to Opening No. 2. 30-25 here is also sound, then 9-14(as 8-11 permits the desired relief with 17-14), 24-19, (here the student must observe that the cramp cannot be broken with 22-18,as Red captures both first and last, with 6-22,gaining material: a practice in the art of visualization, in which a sequence of moves or exchanges is mentally played through, with pieces shifted or removed, in the minds eye, while remaining in their original positions; at which proficiency is usually gained through crossboard practice.) then 15-24, 28-19, 6-9, (otherwise 22-18, etc.), and into Opening No2. G) Holding the bind for one additional move. As one needs to make 30 to 32 moves in the average game, it is vital that each should be the best available. Fortunately, due to mans limitations, this ideal situation is seldom achieved, which makes the game of checkers so fascinating, and a life-long hobby that is forever fresh. Here Red also has the favorable 15-19 dyke, which will be covered in a later opening. Opening 107, pt 6 page 8, note c.... H) Quite necessary. If 30-25 had been played at the previous move, then the 24-19 exchange is sound, with 22-18 next in mind. But here, 24-19, 15-24, 28-19, then 8-11 is a losing White formation, as the 23-18 exchange permits 11-15, etc and 6-9. I) At long last the elbow can be released, with the backup pieces on 25 and 30. This might be considered the climax of this formation, and the commencement of the mid-game; a vast field which we will not attempt to enter in this series. J) The natural single corner development, although 12-16 is also favored, and best met with 24-20 (not 24-19, X), 16-19 and 32-27. K) The proper order of moves must be observed.25-21 must temporarily wait, in view of the 3x2 15-19 shot, and the 24-19 exchange is premature after 8-11,22-18, then 11-16. L) Now correct, with the absence of the Red shot threat. M) White now has gained his share of the centre, with control of the 14 and 19 squares. A continuation might run: 7-11, (or 16-20 first, then 32-27, 7-11, 22-18, 13-17), 22-18, 16-20, 19-15, 11-16, 15- 11, 13-17, 30- 26, 1-5, 11-8, 16-19, etc: then 32-27, 3-12 and 26-23 to draw. R. Stewart vs. R. Jordan.
OPENING NO 2. 9-13, 21-17, 6-9. 9-13, 21-17, 6-9, 25-21(A) 11-15, 30-25(B) 9-14(C), 24-19(D), 15-24, 28-19, 5-9(E), 32-28(F), 7-11(G), 19-15(H), *10-19(1), *17-10(J) *2-7(K), 23-16, *11-20(L), 27-23, 7-14(M). FORMS DIAGRAM
A) Again, as in Opening No1, this undesirable hole must be filled, to later effect a 17-14 break or a centre advance with 24-19. B) Designated as a "6-9 Switcher", Red has little more than an even game. When two weak opening moves (here 9-13 and 6-9) are met with a weak White move (as the cramping 21-17 in this case) the resulting opening has little scope for attack on either side. Note that 29-25 here (although quite proper in #l), is now out of order, as the 15-18 break is backed up, securing the quick king. The student must exercise common sense caution in opening play, and attempt to look at least one move ahead, as memorization alone is insufficient. C) To prevent the favorable 17-14 exchange, which 8-11 allows. D) Best. In Opening No1, with the piece on square 6 instead of 5, the 22-18 break up loses a piece. But here it is sound, but inferior. As an aid to visualization, the tyro might learn to mentally "count off"---"22-l8, he jumps one with 15-22---I jump 2 with 25-9---he jumps one (for a total of two) with 13-22---I jump one (for a total of three) with 26-17---he jumps one (for a total of three) with 5-14 ---with Red better after 29-25, 8-11, 25-22, and 11-15, as shown in "Tescheleit’s Masterplay of the Draughtsboard". E) Now necessary, with the Red piece removed from square 15, as 22-18 is intended, with the last capture. The position is now identical with Opening No1, Note C-a transposition or switching from one opening to another by a slightly different sequence, or order of moves, sometimes with piece color reversed. F) A quiet reply, which does not materially damage the White position, and may be termed a waiting move, in contrast to the direct release with 22-18, 13-22, 26-17, after which 7-11, 17-13, and 11-15 give the first side a favourable mid-game. This position may also arise from 10-14, 24-19, 6-10, 22-17, 9-13, 25-22, 11-15, 30-25, 15-24, 28-19, 5-9, 32-28. Same. G) Although once condemned, this is now considered best. On the older 2-6 (Ferrie-Stewart) 22-18, 13-22, 26-17, 8-11, 25-22, 12-16, (termed a pitch or sacrifice, employed in various guises and disguises!, to achieve drawing or winning advantages. In this instance, to attack against the horizontal three-piece chain, instead of the diagonal three-piece elbow), 19-12, 11-16, then the return pitch with 12-8 is proper, as the greedy 27-24 is unwise after 16-19, 23-16, 14-23, etc. After 12-8 continue 4-11, 27-24,16-20, 24-19, 10-15, 19-10, 6-15, 17-10, 7-14, 28-24, 20-27, 31-24, 1-5, 29-25, 14-17, drawn. H) At one time thought to be the winning move, but it will be noted that now both sides must be wary I) The correct sequence, as 11-18 instead 22-6, 1-10, 27-24, 13-22, 25-18, 8-11,24-19, 3-8, then 29-25 was the one-time published win. J) Here 23-7 allows 3-10, maintaining the single corner tie-up, and a Red win. K) Again forced, as 11-15, 23-16, 12-19, then *27-24 to a White win, as in Wood`s Checker Player, Game 1204. L) As 12-19 leads to disaster after 27-23 and 7-14 is hopeless after 16-7, 2-11,and 27-23, etc; a win scored in the 1958 U.S. National Tourney. M) After successfully navigating the hidden reefs, Red holds a slight advantage. This, followed with 22-17, 13-22, 26-10 is the easier way, then; 12-16, 23-18, 9-13, (if 16-19, 21-17, 9-13, 10-6, 1-10, 18-15 draws at once; Ryan-Hellman 1949 title match.), 18-15, 8-12, 15-11, 16-19, 21-17, 13-22, 25-18, 19-23, 11-7, 23-27, 31-24, etc., draws. Basil Case. We sometimes forget that every good thing worth possessing must be paid for in strokes of daily effort William James. Never make the same mistake twice- there are plenty of new ways to make them Clayton 0. Beebe.
OPENING NO 3. 9-13, 22-17, 13-22 9-13, 22-17, 13-22, 25-18(A), 11-15(B), 18-11, 8-15, 21-17(C), 4-8(D), 23-19(E), 5-9(F), 17-13(G), 9-14, 29-25, 8-11, 27-23(H), 15-18(I), 19-15(J), 18-27, 15-8, 12-16, 30-23, 3-12(K). FORMS DIAGRAM
A) 9-13 is the weakest of the initial Red moves. First, it totally relinquishes all centre control, (consisting of squares 10, 11, 14, 15, 18 and 19) both directly and indirectly. Secondly, its maneuverability is diminished exactly in half: in contrast to the other six opening moves. In the opening considered here, Whites first move eliminates this weak piece, resulting in a virtually even position. It must be emphasized that the strength or weakness of an opening formation can be evaluated only in terms of the strongest immediate reply. B) The logical advance from the single corner diagonal. While other replies are sound, (such as 6-9, transposing into a 6-10 Kelso Exchange) one should always bear in mind a maxim once given by Tom Wiswell--- "Moves that disturb your position the least, disturb your opponent the most!" C) Either this, or the 29-25 development. Against the latter, 4-8, 25-22, 5-9, (or 6-9), 23-18, 8-11, 26-23, 10-14, 24-19, 15-24, 28-19, then 7-10, and again, almost an even game. The 24-19 exchange is here premature, as Red works in the 4-8, 8-11 and 5-9 combination; a reversed color line from 9-14, 24-20, 11-16, 8-15, 22-18-here with Red having better centre control. D) To afford protection for the intended dyke in 15-19, and a hold on the important square 19-if White so permits. E) Which is rightfully declined. Although both 29-25 and 17-13 will draw, the first side gains a slight edge with the 15-19 exchange. F) As 8-11, 29-25 and the strong "Glasgow" idea with 11-16 cannot here be utilized, due to the absence of the square 4 piece. G) Not 29-25, as 9-13 applies a serious cramp, or a broken White single corner. However, White can delay with 27-23 first, then 9-14, 17-13, 8-11, same. H.) 25-21 also has merit and virtually forces 14-18, 26-23, 18-22, 21-17, 6-9, 13-6, 2-9, 17-13, 1-6, (best, as 9-14 can be met with 24-20, instead of 13-9, and White strong.), 24-20, 15-24, 28-19, 11-15, 27-24, *7-11, (to protect against 20-16) 30-26, (or 32-28, 9-14, 30-26, 15-18 etc., then 19-16 is the Barker-Reed 1890 draw.), 9-14, 26-17, 14-21, 31-26, 21-25, 32-28, and the saving sacrifice with *12-16 (not 3-7, 26-22, W.W.), 19-12, then 25-30 is the A. Jordan draw. In addition to 27-23 and 25-21 White also has 26-22, as played by EF Hunt vs. Asa Long 1936 WCM. Cont: 3-8(1), 31-26, 15-18, 22-15, 11-18, 25-21(2) 7-11(3), 24-20, 11-15, 28-24, 8-11, 32-28, l-5*(4), then 19-l6 etc; and 21-17 to draw. N. Tinsley v. CH Hollow; 1949 C.P. Ty......
I) Best, although at first glance the student would probably dismiss it, as allowing a White king. But upon consideration, this proves just a mirage. The Jordan-Banks 11-16 variation also draws after 15-24, 20-11, 7-16, 28-19, then 10-15, followed the 16-19 exchanges, and a defendable position. J) Here 31-27 was an inferior innovation (commonly termed a "cook" to denote new play introduced for the first time in important play; in contrast to chess, where the word is used to denote a problem flaw) by. W. Hellman vs. M. Chamblee in their 1951 world title match. Cont: 11-15, 19-16, 12-19, 23-16, 15-19, 24-15, 10-19 and White has nothing better than to permit the 19-23 shot after 16-12, as the 27-23 exchange lost after *14-18, 23-14, 1-5, 16-12, then 6-9, etc., to a Red win Chamblee over Hellman. K) Continue: 25-22, (or 24-20, 10-15, 20-11,7-16, 25-22,* 16-19,etc, draws-Hugh Henderson), 16-19, 24-15, 10-19, 23-16, 12-19, 31-27, 7-11, 27-23, 11-16, 22-18, (if the piece was on 5 instead of 6, the following draw could not be gained, and the 2X2 with 28-24 and 23-18 forced--Tinsley vs. Albrecht, 1977 Fla. Open.), 14-17, *18-14, (not 18-15, 17-22, shot, R.W.), 17-22, 26-17, 19-26, 30-23, 1-5, *14-10 (not 23-18, 16-20, 18-15, 2-7, R.W.), 6-15, then 28-24 to a classic draw by A. Jordan.
OPENING NO 4. 9-13, 22-18, 6-9. Part 1 9-13, 22-18, 6-9(A), 25-22(B), 11-15(C), 18-11, 8-15, 24-20(D), 4-8(E), 28-24, 1-6(F), 23-19(G), 9-14(H), 26-23, 15-18(I), 22-15, 7-11, 30-25(J), 11-18, 32-28(K). FORMS DIAGRAM
A) The Dreaded Edinburgh, one of the most critical in the three-move deck. Red has made two of the weakest moves possible, in succession, totally abandoning the centre; whereas White (in contrast to the first three Openings treated, where the reply was either self-cramping or exchanging off the weak piece with 22-17.), has here countered with the powerful centre advance; similar; to 11-15 with opposite colors, then 24-20 and 27-24; a move off the weak "Old Paraffin" B) One of three major attacks. 18-14 is covered in Part 2, and 26-22 will be later shown under Opening No. 9, via 9-13, 23-18, 6-9, 26-23, same. C) One of just two recognized sound defences. The other, 1-6, is also favored, but less restrictive, as the attacker has three powerhouse lines in 24-19, 24-20, and 30-25; also two secondary ones in 29-25 and 23-19---all requiring detailed knowledge, and constant review to retain it. D) In contrast to Note C, White`s scope has been narrowed to this, or 23-18. The 24-19 exchange gets an easy reversed Defiance formation, and 30-25 here is less effective (with 1-6 delayed) after 7-11--against 23-18, Red must accept the cramp with 7-11, 26-23, (as 24-20 is now met with 3-7), 4-8, 24-20, and proven analysis has shown that the Red position is sound after the 9-14 exchange. E) It is extremely doubtful if this position could be handled successfully without prior knowledge. The natural 1-6 is off-key after *23-18, 7-11, (or 3-8, 20-11, 8-15, then *30-25 is a W.W. by H. Henderson), and followed with the 28-24 and 26-23 bind, to a probable White win. F) But now forced, as White has committed 28-24. Against 8-11, White goes the other way with *23-19, and all replies are bad; both 9-14 and 1-6 losing after 27-23;also the 10-14, 14-17 slip is a published play loss. G) Into the historic " Kirk" attack, named after the noted Scottish expert and analyst from Muirkirk; Hugh Henderson`s friend and confidente. If 23-18, as played by Walter Hellman vs. Derek Oldbury (1965 match) Red has *8-11, (Oldbury lost with 7-11, previously shown by P.H.Ketchum, 26-23, then *9-14, etc; shown. in the latter`s valuable "Handy Manual". although Hellman had an optional attack in mind. H) Again, perhaps forced. Kear`s Ency. has shown 7-11 to draw by R.T. Ward, but when met with *30-25 as in WCP G.467,var1 ( (in place of Ward`s 32-28),the defence may not survive. Cont; 12-16, (if 15-18, 22-15, 11-18, 26-22, 3-7, 22-15, 7-11, 31-26, 11-18, 26-22, 2-7, 22-15, 7-11, 25-22, etc., W.W., M.C.), 19-12, 15-18, 22-15, 10-28, *26-22, 6-10, 27-23, 9-14, 31-27, 2-7, 22-17, etc., then the 23-18 exchange results in a losing Red ending.M.C. 1954. I) The vital pitch that saves the entire 11-15 defence originated at Note C. If 8-11, instead, then *31-26 is a p.p. loss from a Denny variation, followed with 6-9, *29-25, 14-18, 23-14, 9-18, 26-23 to a W.W. J) White is certainly not limited to this, as there are several excellent options in 29-25 or 23-18, but the text is thought strongest. K) After which 13-17 has been thought necessary for many years, but Bob Flood has unpublished analysis to prove 3-7 also draws. On 13-17, 31-26, *17-22, 26-17, 6-9, 17-13, 3-7, 13-6, 2-9, then the 25-22 exchange, with a delicate ending.*7-11 is now required, as the natural 9-13 falls after the 21-17 pitch; also the original Kirk 8-11 loses by *22-17, 9-13, *19-15, 11-18, 23-19, 13-22 and 19-16, etc. W.W. After the starred 7-1, 22-17, 9-13, 19-15, 10-26, 17-10, with fine end-play to draw by W. Hellman, in the NCA "Checker News", Game 1. OPENING NO 4. 9-13, 22-18, 6-9. (Part 2). 9-13, 22-18, 6-9, 18-14(A), 9-18, 23-14, 10-17, 21-14, 12-16(B), 26-22(C), 11-15(D), 22-18(E) 15-22, 25-18, 1-6(F), 29-25, 6-10, 25-21, 10-17, 21-14(G). FORMS DIAGRAM
A) A powerful dyke thrust against the weakened double corner; bearing directly against the hole on square 6. B) Necessary to prevent 24-19 and 25-22, and with the possibility of later getting the 16-19 exchange. The advance with 11-15 cannot be maintained, as white achieves total domination with 25-22, 8-11, 29-25, 4-8, and 24-19, etc. C) The preferred attack. Others are perhaps less trying, as in; 1. 26-23, 16-19, 23-16, 11-20, 24-19, 8-11, 27-23, 4-8, then 23-18 or 25-21. 2. 24-20, 16-19, (1-6 equally good),25-22, 11-15, 29-25, then *2-6 is a sound variation from Opening No.12;as in Hellman-Oldbury 1965 match, Game 4.. 3. 25-21, 16-19, 24-15, 11-18, 28-24,8-11, 24-19, and 1-6 gains equality. D) Now the correct follow-up, as 12-16 has been played first. 16-20 here is out of tempo, as White gets in the powerful 24-19 and a probable W.W. E) The older attack went 24-20, 7-11, with three promising branches in 30-26, 27-24, or 28-24; a discouraging future for the defender. However, with the apex piece on 26 removed, the first side can safely advance with the more restrictive 16-19; although once considered an outright loss by one of the world`s finest in Richard Jordan, and not deemed worthy of mention in either Master-Play or Ryan`s Ency! Continue:27-24,(as the 22-18 exchange lets in *7-11, 27-24, then 19-23 to a draw by Walter Hellman, in WCP Game 78.), *19-23! (a beautiful early opening advance into the White mid-section, playable due to the vacancy of squares 26 and 27. It must be remembered that any attacking opening move vacates a square of equal, or even superior strength; in contrast to "pool" checkers, where the square may be regained through backward exchanges), 24-19, (as other moves shift the attack to the first side, as shown by Hellman and A.Fogle analysis.), 15-24, 28-19, *1-6,, and the 22-17 exchange is the best available, but shown to draw in p.p. Richard Jordan had given 25-21 instead to win, followed with 8-11, which sent this 16-19 defence to the scrap heap for many years. Instead of 8-11, Red has *8-12, then 22-18, *6-9, 29-25 and *3-8 to a sound draw, as shown by W. Hellman in NECB Game 17; also WCP Game 176. F) Here opinions have differed widely, but we consider this the better way, and more easily remembered, as used by W. Hellman vs. M. Tinsley; ABC Game 31. Other defences, such as 13-17 and 16-20 are covered in masterly fashion in the Tinsley-Chamblee 1947 Cedar Point match book. G) Again, as in Part 1 of this opening, 1 the first side must combat trying endings. But there is no easy way, and the title bestowed on this opening is well deserved. At this stage there are two ways, in 2-6 or 16-20. We prefer the first, on the chance of securing the quick draw after 24-19, 16-23 and 14-9,etc. Instead 27-23 is best, then *13-17, (to improve 16-19, 23-16, 6-10, 24-20,10-17, 31-26 to a W.W.-Hellman-Tinsley1955 match), 24-19, 8-12, (or 16-20, 18-15, 17-22, 23-18, 8-11 is the difficult Gregg draw from a Single Corner line, shown in Master-play, Var. 26-B), 31-26,(if 18-15, then *6-9 will draw; not 16-20, 23-18, 3-8, and into the Tinsley-Chamblee 1947 match game, where the former`s suggested *30-26 seems to win---and if 32-27 instead, then 17-21 is the Thompson-Huggins 1963 world mail title game, see 6th. DNL, 9/76), 4-8, 18-15, 7-10,14-7, 3-10, 23-18, 16-23, 26-19,5-9, 28-24, 10-14, 24-20, (or 32-28, 14-23, 15-11, draw. L.W. Taylor-B. Gibson, 7th.U.S.-G.B. mail match in ACFB), 14-23, 20-16, 9-14, 16-11, 14-18, 11-4, 6-9, 4-8, 9-14, 8-11, 23-27, etc., to a drawn ending by L.W. Taylor in notes to the 7th. mail games.
There is no short-cut to proficiency in checkers, just as there is no royal road to learning. Advice will not keep the novice from missing the win in First Position. There the patient may minister unto himself! Edwin F. Hunt.
OPENING NO 5. 9-13, 22-18, 10-15. 9-13, 22-18, 10-15(A), 25-22(B), 6-10(C), 23-19(D), 11-16(E), 18-11, 16-23(F), 27-18, 8-15(G), 18-11, 7-16, 22-18(H), 4-8(I), 18-15(J), 10-19, 24-15, 3-7(K), 30-25(L). FORMS DIAGRAM
A) As half a loaf is preferable to none, Red gains partial central control, thereby superior to both 6-9 and 11-15, and almost equal to 12-16, which found favor in the later two-move era. B) White is limited to just two major attacks, with 18-14 more common to the 10-15, 22-17, 9-13, 17-14 opening, and will be shown under that ballot in a later series. C) Necessary to prevent the build-up with 29-25 (which both 7-10 and 5-9 permit) and the later 18-14 exchanges, leading to White wins. D) Grips the centre, and the distinctive attack in this opening. 24-20 is also a meritable flank attack, then 5-9, 28-24, 10-14, 22-17 break-up, 30-26, and 2-7 to draw. See Opening No. 21, Note D, for a continuation. E) The defender can ill-afford to wait with 5-9, as 26-23, 1-5, 30-25, 11-16, 18-11, 8-15, 22-17, 13-22, 25-11, 16-20,31-26, 7-16, and 19-15 to a probable draw. F) With the weak side of these 10-15 Edinburghs (also Opening No. 10, Note B) it is advisable to capture all available pieces. If 8-15, then 24-20, 16-23, 27-11, 7-16, 20-11, 3-7, 22-18, 7-16 and 18-14 to a p.p. W.W. by J. Robertson. G) Again, if 7-16, then the 18-14 exchange has been shown to win. H) The natural advance. If 32-27, Red can shore up with 4-8, 22-18, and 3-7. Then if 29-25, 8-11, 18-14, etc., 1-6,26-23,and 16-20 to a draw by H. F. Shearer. I) An important developing move to gain square 11, if permitted. 16-20 instead allows White additional power with 24-19, 4-8, 29-25, 8-11, (3-7 may draw), 18-14, 10-17,21-14, 1-6, *26-22, 3-8, (if 3-7, then *22-18, going into a W.W. shown by Lambert and Oakley, page 144, Var. 251, and mentioned in ACFB #56, Jan., 1962), *25-21, 6-9, 14-10, 9-14, *31-27, 11-15,19-16, etc: then 10-7 and 27-24 secures a long White ending win; Fortman over John Scott in the 3rd. USA-GB mt. mail match--one of the writer`s better efforts. J) White has two additional lines of perhaps lesser strength in 29-25, 8-11, 18-14, 10-17, 21-14, 3-7, and into Note H play. Or; 26-23, 1-6, 24-19, 8-11, 29-25, 6-9, 25-22,16-20, 30-26, 2-7, 32-27, 10-14, 22-17, etc;31-26, 11-16, 26-22, 3-7, 22-17, and 7-11, 17-10, 9-14 etc., draws cleanly-R. Fortman vs. I. Stewart. 1950 ACF mail tourney. But the exchange as given in trunk, carries the threat of the potent 30-25 to follow. K) Best, as 5-9, 30-25, 9-14, 28-24, 16-19, 32-28, 14-18, then 25-22, with a powerful White game, once considered a forced White win, but recently shown to draw in the Huggins-Chamberlain world title mail match from an Opening No. 10 transposition. L) here, if 29-25 instead, then 1-6, 28-24, 16-20, 31-27, 7-10, 24-19, *5-9, 26-23, *9-14, 23-18, 14-23, 27-18, *20-24,25-22, 2-7, 21-17, 7-11, 30-26, *24-28, 26-23 and 12-16 to a fine draw by Hugh Henderson, who pioneered much play on this opening. After 30-25 in the trunk, Red can now cut off the aggravating piece with 7-10, 15-6, 1-10, 25-22, 8-11, (Ed Scheidt has suggested 10-15 to the writer, which seems quite sound, and perhaps unpublished), 32-27, 11-15, 27-24, 16-20, 26-23, 20-27, 31-24, 2-7, 21-17, 5-9, 29-25, 7-11, 24-20, 9-14, 25-21, then *11-16 saves the flight, after 20-11, 12-16, 11-7, and 15-19 to a draw-a classical lesson in timing by H. Lieberman vs. Charles Hefter over sixty years ago.
OPENING NO 6. 9-13, 22-18, 11-15 (Part 1) 9-13, 22-18, 11-15A), 18-11, 8-15, 21-17(B), 13-22, 25-11, 7-16, 24-20(C), 3-8, 20-11, 8-15, 28-24(D), 4-8, 24-20, 8-11, 29-25(E), 5-9, 25-21(F) FORMS DIAGRAM
A) The most critical of the Edinburghs, as the traitorous Red piece on 13 permits near total destruction of the defending left side, with tremendous attacking scope. B) The direct attack. 24-20, as in Part 2, presses indirectly, by forcing a 7-11 cramp, and resulting in later awkward endings after 4-8 is committed. Other moves are less effective, such as 25-22, 4-8, (here 6-9 transposes into Opening No. 4, Part 1, but it is not necessary here), then 23-19, (as 23-18 allows the 15-19 exchange), 9-14, 27-23, 8-11 is an easy Red line; also from Opening No. 13, Note B. C) The natural follow-up. However, powerful attacking moves of this nature enable even the average strength player to defend in proper fashion, as he has no plausible options. But in this particular opening, this applies only to the first half of the game; defending accurately in the concluding half is not that easy. White has other moves of merit here in both 29-25 and 24-19. Against the former, 5-9, 23-18, 16-20, 24-19, 4-8 25-21, 10-14, 27-23, 3-7, 26-22, 7-10, 18-15, 9-13, 22-18, 1-75, 18-9, 5-14, 31-27, then *2-7 is a standard draw by A.J. Mantell. And against 24-19, Red may counter with 4-8, 28-24, 16-20, 32-28, 10-14, 29-25, 5-9, 25-22, 9-13, 30-25,3-7, 25-21, 6-10, 19-16, 12-19, 24-6, 1-10, 22-17, 13-22, 26-17, 8-12, 23-19, 14-18, 17-13, then 10-14 to a published draw by former world champion Walter Hellman. D) Continuing the theme. If 29-25, 4-8,26-22, 5-9, 31-26, 9-13, 25-21, 8-11, 27-24, 11-16, 24-19, 15-24, 28-19, 6-9, 22-18, 1-5, 18-15, 13-17, 15-6, 9-13, 21-14, 2-27, 32-23 and 16-20 to a draw...M. Tinsley vs. Roy E. Hunt, 1950 Chicago match. E) Or the Oldbury `delayed` cook with 27-24, 5-9, 23-19, 9-14, (avoiding the natural 9-13, then 29-25, 6-9, 25-21, 9-14,32-28,1-6, 26-23, 15-18, then 19-15 to a strong White attack; which is bypassed in Note F with 10-14), 26-23, 6-9, 29-25, (here White also has 32-28 to stop 14-17 for one move, then 1-5, 29-25, 14-17, 31-26, 17-21, 19-16, 12-19, 23-7, 2-11, 26-23, 10-14, 23-19, 15-18, 19-15, 14-17,15-8, and 17-22 to draw: analysis by D.E. Oldbury, 1967), then Red gets in the key14-17, (still avoiding 9-13), to a clear draw after 25-21, 17-22, 23-18, 1-5, 20-16, 11-27, 18-11, etc., N. Tinsley-D.E. Oldbury, in the 1974 national tourney. F) The fine Paul Thompson cook, as played by Thompson vs. Marion Tinsley in a 1960 practice game. The usual way had been 25-22 instead, (or 26-22, 9-13, 25-21, 6-9, 27-24, 9-14, 30-26, 1-5, 23-19, and the valuable Burrow`s draw after *14-18, 22-17, 13-22, 26-17, 18-22, 17-14, 10-17, 21-14, 22-25, 19-10, then 11-15, 31-26, and 25-30 etc., to a draw), *9-13, 23-18, 6-9, (or 1-5, 27-23, 5-9, 20-16, etc., and the `Jacobson Draw` as given in N.E.C page 23, Var. 14), 32-28, 1-6, 27-23, 13-17, 22-13, 15-22, 26-17, 9-14, 23-19, 14-21, 31-26, 6-9, 13-6, 2-9, 26-22, 9-14,28-24, 11-15, 20-16, 14-17, 22-13, and 10-14 to draw--D.E. Oldbury vs. B. Case 3rd. U.S.A.-G.B. mail match, see ACFB #56 ---as mentioned in Note C, the late mid-game and ending play is most delicate, and literally held together by `gossamer threads`, but the combined efforts of the finest players and analysts over the past 40 years have failed to destroy this beautiful opening. See ACFB No. 75 for trunk continuation-Tinsley-Thompson.
Those who cannot remember the past, are doomed to repeat it....Geo. Santayana.
OPENING NO 6. 9-13, 22-18,11-15 (Part 2). 9-13, 22-18, 11-15, 18-11, 8-15(A), 24-20(B), 7-11(C) 28-24(D), 5-9, 26-22, 4-8(E), 32-28(F), 3-7, 22-18, 15-22, 25-18, 10-14(G), 29-25, 13-17, 30-26H). FORMS DIAGRAM
A) The student might question the direction of this exchange, which results in the multi-faced White attacks. But 7-16 is anti-positional after 25-22, 2-7 (as other moves are without hope), then 22-18, (instead of Earl Arnold`s 24-19) which attacks both wings, with a sound draw extremely unlikely upon analysis. B) As in Part 1, this also attacks the weakened single corner, but in a more indirect and subtle fashion. Since it retains more pieces on the board, it is per haps more difficult to defend against, especially in the first half; in contrast to the 21-17 attack, and requires both knowledge and technique. C) Unfortunately, Red must accept this cramp, which proves a hindrance throughout the game. 3-8 is destroyed by the 20-16 exchange and 5-9 instead loses after 21-17, etc. D) Or 25-22, 5-9, 23-18, (as 28-24 may well be met with 9-14-Huggins-Weslow mail match), 4-8, 26-23, 10-14, 23-19, (if 27-24, 6-10, 24-19, 15-24, then *2-6 will draw.), 15-24, 28-19, 14-23, 27-18, 6-10, 31-27, *2-6, 29-25, *1O-15, 19-10, 6-15, 21-17, 3-7, (also 12-16, 30-26, 9-14, 18-9, 16-19, 9-6 to a draw by W. Hellman and Lee Munger), 30-26, 7-10, 26-23, 1-5, 18-14 etc.; then 15-18 will draw-Win. Lemler-E.C. Whiting, 1st. U.S.-G.B. mt. mail match. E) Results in a `hanging`2 single corner, with pieces on 8, 11 and 12, and frequently see in these Edinburgh formations. Here it is forced, as 3-7 instead (or 9-14, then *22-17 has been shown to win by Basil Case), 23-19, 9-14, 27-23, 6-9, 31-27, 1-5, 23-18, 14-23, 27-18, 11-16, *18-11, 16-23, then 24-19 leads into a difficult White win, as first shown by M. Chamblee from a different run-up; see Ryan`s A.C., Game219. As the continuation is most attractive, we are reproducing it, including an unusual flaw by the late master. After 24-19, then 7-16, 20-11, 10-14, 22-18, (W. Hellman had analyzed 22-17 to also win), 13-17, 19-15, 12-16, 11-8, 4-11, 15-8, 16-19, 8-3, 19-24, 3-8, 24-27, 8-11, 27-31, 11-15, 2-6, (the king cannot move to 2-7 because of the 25-22, 17-26, 21-17, 14-21, 18-14 shot), *25-22, (a brilliant sacrifice, which arose in a G.W. Bass-V. Davis mail game), 17-26, 29-25, 31-27, (if 23-27, 30-23, 31-26, 15-11, 26-19, 32-16, 14-23, *21-17, W.W.) --Here *25-22 will win, but Chamblee gave the shot 21-17, 14-21 and 18-14 to win; overlooking that Red has the later 23-26 exchange to draw! F) A Walter Hellman cook to improve on the P.P. 31-26 (or 22-18 as in the 19th. A.T.), 9-14, 23-19, then 15-18 to a draw shown by B. Case. G) The natural 10-15 is wanted, but hazardous after *24-19. Se 6th. Dist. Newsletter, 9/75, page 7. H) Red now proceeds to draw by the pretty combination sent by W.Hellman to the writer; 6-10, 25-22, 9-13, 18-9, 10-15,21-14, 15-19, 24-15, 11-25, 23-18, 8-11, (as 25-30 is a grievous mistake following 27-24 and 24-19), 26-23, 25-30, 27-24, 30-25, 24-19, then *11-16, etc. to draw, by Walter Hellman.
OPENING NO 7. 9-13, 22-18, 12-16. 9-13, 22-18, 12-16(A), 24-20(B), 8-12(C), 25-22(D), 10-15(E), 18-14(F), 16-19(G), 23-16, 12-19, 14-10(H), 7-14, 27-23, 14-18(I) 23-7, 18-25, 29-22, 2-11, 26-23(J). FORMS DIAGRAM
A) One might mistakenly judge this inferior to 10-15, as it permits the left-side cramp, but when the pitfalls of the opening and early mid-game are overcome, the resulting endings clear in better fashion, as opposed to 10-15-the main reason the erudite Alfred Jordan switched defences (in two-move play) during his late career, although it cost him the coveted American title. B) The strongest attack. Other ways,such as 24-19, 8-12 go into Opening No. 20, and if 25-22 instead, then 16-20, 29-25, 8-12, 18-14, etc., then 6-10 draws. And the fourth option in the 18-14 exchange is well met with *16-19, 23-16, 11-20, 24-19, 8-11, 27-23, 6-10, Dr. C) Essential. Red is an all-important move ahead of a `Snake Switcher` formation, c.r. and must avoid the winning cramp that both 5-9 and 10-15 allow after 28-24. D) One of three major attacks. Marion Tinsley has favored 28-24, *4-8, (as 10-15 still allows the winning 32-28 bind) 18-14, (as 24-19 is a c.r. 5-9 Switcher theme after the 10-15 break, then 16-19, with Red equalizing; Jordan-Gonotsky, 6th. Am. Ty.), 10-17, 21-14, 16-19, 24-15, 11-18, 26-22, 7-11, etc., then 14-10 or 23-19, White best, but the draws have been well probed. The other attack of merit is 27-24, *3-8, (as 4-8 gets 18-15, W.W.) then 24-19 and the 11-15 release. Again White has the advantage inherited from this opening, but the defender has sound drawing routes. E) With 25-22 committed, Red must now work this in, as the exchange is not available. As will be seen, other moves lose precious time, such as;
F) 21-17 has had a run in popularity in recent years, due to Walter Hellman’s fine correction of the Richard Jordan draw, and after 6-9, (avoiding the 16-19 Jordan exchange), 17-14, (or 29-25, 1-6, 25-21, 6-10, 27-24, 3-8, 31-27 or 23-19; a draw by Sam Cohen in Kear`s Ency.), 1-6 27-24, 16-19, 23-16, 12-19, 32-27, 3-8,30-25, (or 27-23, 11-16 draws; as in Levy-Cohen), 8-12, 25-21, then 11-16, etc,, draws, Sam Levy. G). Once again, the defender has just one saving move. If either 6-10 or 4-8, then 30-25, W.W. H) But now if 30-25, Red has *6-9, 14-10, 7-14, 27-23, and 2-7 can be played; followed by the 14-17 exchange to draw. I) The pitfalls mentioned in Note A still lurk. In contrast to Note H, 2-7 cannot be taken here, as Jordan once discovered to his dismay vs. Gonotsky. Cont: 23-16, 6-10, then *30-25, 4-8, (as 14-18, 16-12,and the 26-23 exchange next, forces the shots), *16-12, and everything is bad. If 14-17, (as 15-19, 32-27 wins the piece) 21-14,10-17, 25-21, 1-6, 21-14, 6-9, (or6-10, 22-17, W.W.-Jordan-Gonotsky), 29-25, 9-18, then 28-24 and Red is into the losing shots once again. J) Continue: 4-8, 23-19, (as 28-24 is well met with either 6-9 or 8-12, and 23-18 instead allows a draw after 8-12, 18-14, 6-9, 14-10, 9-14, 30-26, 14-18 draws) 15-24, 28-19, 11-15, (easier than 8-12,22-18, 6-10, 31-26, *10-14, etc., Cohen-Coleman draw) , 19-10, 6-15, 20-16, (or30-26, 5-9, 20-16, 8-12, 16-11, 12-16, 32-27, 16-20, 27-23, 1-5, 21-17, 20-24,23-19,24-28, 19-10, then 9-14 draws; Gonotsky vs. J. Hanson; 7th. Chicago Nat.Ty.), 8-12, 16-11, 12-16, 21-17, 5-9, 31-27, 16-19, 27-23, 19-26, 30-23, 1-5, 32-28, 15-18, etc., draws. G.W. Bass.
Checker remains a game, instead of a stifled, intellectual exercise only when there are winning possibilities, which are created by errors, as a result of human frailties, which the contestants seek to exploit. It is within the realm of possibilities that errorless checkers may, in the future, be achieved by advanced computer programs, but forever defying total mastery by the genus " Homo Sapiens".
OPENING NO 8. 9-13, 23-18, 5-9. 9-13, 23-18, 5-9(A), 26-23(B), 10-14(C), 24-19(D), 11-16, 30-26(E), 8-11, 28-24(F), 16-20, 18-15(G) 11-18, 22-15, 7-10, 32-28, 4-8(H), 19-16(I), 12-19, 23-16(J) 10-19, 24-15. FORMS DIAGRAM
A) Not playable against 22-18, but here it almost equalizes, as the flank idea with 10-14 and 11-16 remove much of the sting from the White attack. B) Admittedly unimpressive, but as good as there is. Against the 18-15 double exchange, Red has 7-10, 27-24, 10-19, 24-15, 3-7, 28-24, (or 32-27, 8-11, etc; Jordan-Banks, 3rd. A.T., draw), 7-11, 26-22, 11-18, 22-15, 9-14, 30-26, then 8-11, etc. a Lewis-Brown draw; also from 9-13, 23-19, 5-9, 19-15. And if 27-23 instead of 26-23-B, Red has 11-16, 21-17, (if 32-27, 10-14, 18-15, 7-10 to an equal position), 1-5, 25-21, 16-19 etc; then 17-14 and 7-11 is best a Sam Levy line from an 11-16, 21-17, 9-13 opening. C) Or 11-16 can be played first, followed with 10-14 against 24-19 or 30-26, and in to the same formation. It should be pointed out that this flank defence is doubtful against the next opening, with the piece removed from square 6, instead of 5. D) Against 30-26, Red has 11-16, 22-17, 13-22, 26-10, 6-22, 25-18, 9-13, then 18-14 is a colours reversed Glasgow formation; frequently encountered at free-style play. E) 28-24 first would force 16-20, but then there is nothing better than 30-26, and back into trunk play. The White scope for attack is severely limited in this particular ballot. F) Again the 22-17 exchange runs into Note D. G) 19-15 presents few problems after 7-10, (4-8 is also sound), 15-8, 4-11, 24-19, 12-16, (a useful pitch idea from other mid-game formations), 19-12, 10-15, 22-17, 13-22, 26-10, 15-22, 25-18, 6-22, 23-18, 1-5, (or 11-16), 21-17, then 9-13, and White would be wise in accepting the draw with 27-24, as 27-23 instead lets in the powerful 20-24, as shown in the 1927 2nd. I.M. Game 412. A well-conducted defence may, on occasion, produce a sword as well as a shield. Judgement in not over-playing a position, especially with the strong side, is a self-taught art, that comes with experience and discipline H) This move may be interchanged with 2-7 first, then the 19-16 break and 4-8 is best. If 7-11, (instead of 4-8), 16-7, 3-19, 27-24, 20-27, 31-15, 4-8, 28-24, *14-18, 24-20, 9-14, then White has the 20-16 option (instead of 26-22, as in the trunk), with the better ending, although drawable. It is the little points such as these that sometimes accumulate, and result in difficult, or even losing, endings-a point that world champion Tinsley has emphasized both in his play and annotations; one must exercise mature judgement at all stages. I) White has no attack with 25-22, 2-7,29-25, 1-5, 19-16, 12-19, 23-16, 12-19, 24-15, 7-11, 16-7, 3-19, then 27-24, etc. and 14-17 to a Heffner-Barker draw. J) Continue, 2-7, 25-22,(if 16-12, 14-18, 25-22, 18-25, 29-22, 9-14, 22-17, etc; a Ferrie-Jordan draw), 7-11, (if 14-18, *16-12, 18-25, 29-22, and 9-14 almost forces the same Ferrie- Jordan play), 16-7, 3-19, 27-24, 20-27, 31-15, 14-18, and White must fill up with *29-25, 9-14, and the pretty draw after 28-24, 13-17, 22-13, 6-9, etc, then 26-22. Campbell-Christie draw, one of the more familiar in the entire game.
OPENING NO 9. 9-13, 23-18, 6-9. 9-13, 23-18, 6-9(A), 26-23(B), 1-6(C), 30-26(D), 11-16(E), 18-14(F), 10-17, 21-14, 9-18, 23-14, 8-11(G) 25-21, 6-9, 14-10(G), 7-14, 22-17, 13-22, 26-10(I). FORMS DIAGRAM
A) As in Opening No. 4, this removes a vital segment of the weakened double corner, but here less critical, as 23-18 is secondary to 22-18 in opening play. See Note D. B) White has a wide choice, but the text is perhaps the strongest, with 18-15 or 24-20 shown in later openings. The secondary attack is in 27-23, then 11-16, (if 10-14 first, White has the fine option in 22-17, etc; then 25-22, 11-16, 30-25, 2-6, 24-19, 8-11, 22-17, 4-8, 17-10, then *6-24 is necessary, with the natural 6-22 losing after 25-18, 3-7, *29-25, correcting W. Hellman’s 21-17 in Wood`s Checker Studies. Then 7-10, 25-22, 10-19, 32-27, W.W., Fortman over H. Maine which won the 7 year ACF Nat. mail ty1955-62) , 32-27, 10-14, 18-15, *16-20, 23-19, *7-11, 26-23, 11-18, 22-15, 14-18, (or 8-11 etc, Subkow-Rubin:MSA g. 2488, var. 9:1935), 23-14, 9-18, 30-26, 3-7, 26-23, *8-11, 15-8, 4-11, 23-14, 11-16,19-15, 7-10, 15-6, 2-18, 25-22, 18-25, and 1-5 to a fine draw, as analyzed by W. Hellman and Don Lafferty; en route to St. Petersburg, for the Hellman-Long title match in 1962. C) Red marks time. If the flank defence (as in Opening No. 8) is tried, then 24-19, (if 30-26, then 7-10! draws, Lowder Cox, 1974 Nat. Ty; also Lowder-Caldwell, `77 So. Ty.), 11-16, *28-24, 7-10, (if 16-20, 18-15, W.W., 3rd. NCA Ty.), 18-15, 16-20, 15-6, 1-10, now 30-26 fits in; White powerful, and a probable win-E.J. Markusic.. .and if the 11-15 exchange, (in place of 10-14) then 22-17, etc; followed with 24-20, 3-8, 20-11, 8-15 and *21-17, (to improve 29-25), 9-14, 17-13, 1-6, 29-25, 4-8, *23-19 etc., 8-11 and 27-23; again White powerful; a prepared line by M. Chamblee, mentioned in Ryan`s American Checkerist, Game 219-B. D) With the piece off square 26 (instead of 25, as in Opening No. 4), 24-19 now is well met with 11-15, 18-11, 8-24, 28-19,4-8, 22-18, then 9-14 (instead of Ryan`s 8-11 in M.E.C.) equalizes-see M. Tinsley’s. R. Johnson, 1974 Nat. Ty. And if 24-20 instead, Red may work in 10-14, 30-26,7-10, 27-24, 3-7, 32-27; into a 10-14, 24-20, 7-10 variation, as in M.E.C., Note C: after which 14-17 draws. E). Once again, opinions vary here, but we consider the text more restrictive than 11-15,and strongly advocated by the late Roy B. Hunt. Against 11-15, 18-11, 8-15, 22-17, 13-22, 25-11, 7-16, then both 29-25 and 24-20 lead into a variety of strong attacks. See M.E.C., page 4. F) White has no other procedure of merit, as 24-19 lets in 8-11, 28-24, 16-20, 32-28, 11-16, 19-15, 10-19, 24-15, 7-10, (instead of Ryan`s 16-19 in M.E.C., page 18, Note B), 15-11, 16-19, 23-16, 12-19, after which White has nothing better than the easy 11-7, 2-11, 27-24 draw credited to Paul Thompson. Also if 18-15 (instead of 24-19), 10-19, 24-15, 7-10, 27-24, 10-19, 24-15, 16-19, 23-16, 12-19, 32-27, 3-7, 27-24-at this stage Ryan gives 7-11 in his M.E.C. , but Vic Monteiro’s 7-10 vs. the writer is better; nullifying any White attack. G) 6-10 reduces the pieces (Roy Hunt vs. Fortman in the 1941 0VCA Ty.), but the endings are troublesome after 25-21, 10-17, 21-14, 16-19, 24-15, 7-10, 15-6, 2-25, 29-22, 3-7, 28-24, 12-16, then 22-17 was claimed to win by R.F. Ryan. However a technical draw was later discovered by W. Hellman, going into Boland`s`Masterpieces`, page 121, #2. H) If 29-25, 9-18, 22-8, 4-11, 25-22, (or 27-23, 11-15, 32-27-a Jeff Clayton line also shown by J. McGill , in notes to G232 `Eng draughts Journal` to draw) 11-15, 27-23, 16-19, 23-16, 12-19, 32-27,5-9, (not 3-8, 24-20, 8-12 and White is powerful after 20-16) , 27-23, now 3-8, 23-16, 15-19, 24-15 and 7-11 to a clean draw. I) Continue: 4-8, (if 9-l4, 29-25, 4-8,then Clayton`s 31-26 improves Ryan`s 24-20 in M.E.C.), 10-6, ( or 27-23, 16-20 ,24-19, 9-14 29-25,11-15 , 25-22 etc; as in a P.Davis v E Zuber 1982 Ky .Open game) now 9-14, 6-1, 16-19, 24-15, 11-18, 29-25, 8-11, 31-26, 11-15, 26-22, 3-8, 28-24, *12-16, 24-20, 7-11, 32-28, 16-19, 27-24, 18-23, 22-17, 14-18, 17-13, 23-26, 1-6, 2-9, 13-6, *19-23, 6-2, 18-22, 25-18, 15-22, 24-19, *26-31, 28-24, *23-27, 2-7, 27-32, 7-16, then 32-28 to a Red draw as analyzed by Joe `Chief` Bassett.
OPENING NO 10. 9-13, 23-18, 10-15 9-13, 23-18, 10-15(A), 27-23(B), 6-10(C), 32-27(D), 1-6(E), 18-14(F), 10-17, 21-14, 15-18(G), 22-15, 11-18, 26-22(H), 12-16(I), 22-15, 7-10, 14-7, 3-26, 30-23(J). FORMS DIAGRAM
A) With pieces removed from squares 9 and 10, this opening can be ranked alongside and only slightly inferior in attacking capabilities to Opening No. 5. With 23 having been committed, instead of 22, the defensive mid-games have a bit more leeway. B) The favored attack. Several reputable authorities have counseled against the early shift of the `apex` pieces (7 and 26), but it will be observed that it does not apply in all cases; checkers being a game of `exceptions`, and therefore difficult to lay down precise teaching ground rules. Here 26-23 is also strong, (again akin to Opening No.5) then *6-10, (Red must close immediately against the threatened 23-19. For example 7-10=or 5-9=, 23-19, 5-9, 5-9, 27-23, l0-14, 19-10, 6-15, 30-26, 2-6, 32-27, 6-10, then 24-19, 15-24, *27-20, followed with 28-24, W.W.), 23-19, *11-16, 18-11, 16-23, 27-18, then proper to capture all pieces with 8-15, 18-11, 7-16, 22-18, *3-7, 25-22-Chamblee-Hellman, A.B.C., Game 107; or30-26, 4-8, 18-15, etc.; and 7-10 back into Opening No. 5. Or; 24-20, Hellman Long 1962 title match and Thompson-Huggins mail match; 6th.D.N.L., Jan.,1976. C) If 5-9, then 32-27 and 6-10 is Note E. Other moves are hazardous, such as 1-5, (or 7-10,18-14, probable W.W.), 23-19, then 11-16, etc.; and the 2-6 shot analyzed by Walter Hellman, from an Opening No. 4 run-up-See 6th. D.N.L., Nov. 1976. D) Although this removes one of the supporting double corner pieces, it is here correct to fill the hole, and to prepare for the future 18-14 exchange. If 24-20 Red has 5-9, 28-24 and 10-14, with a sound formation; Tinsley-Scheidt, 1976 Fla. Open-and if 21-17 instead, the defence may develop with 11-16, 18-11, 8-15, 24-20, 16-19, and the White attack is stilled. E). The majority of the top masters have favored this over 5-9, and the student will improve by following in their footsteps. 5-9 also allows the double corner attack, but in a different fashion. Cant 18-14 etc., then *12-16, (as the 15-18 exchange here gets 26-23, 1-5, 24-19, a W.W. shown by M. Tinsley), 22-18, (or 24-20, now *15-18 is sound, with White still on the attack, as shown in the 9th A.T., 1937), 15-22, 25-18, 16-20, 24-19, then the Gene Winter unlikely defence with *1-6! May save this variation. See Ryan`s A.C., Game 227-B, and earlier play in W.C.P., Game 921, and A.C., Game 196 F) White correctly continues his plan to attack the weakened double corner and control of square 14... 24-20 instead is inferior, forming identical positions, which enables the darker colored forces to paraphrase a famous Civil War general, and "get there fustest with the mostest" by 15-19, etc.; an adage that can be well applied to the game of checkers! G) The obvious, and necessary reply to stop the 14-9 or 14-10 shots. H) Again as in Note F, White must press ahead at once to retain the advantage, as 23-19, (or 24-19, 8-11, 19-15, then 4-8 and Red may win), 8-11, 25-21, (or 19-15,4-8, 26-22, 12-16, again a probable Red win), then *18-22 rips the once favored White position-Red wins; W. Hellman vs. R. Cornell, in the 1952 Am. Ty. I) The 7-11 exchange is a mistake, as it lets in the 14-10 swap, then 3-7, 25-22, with the threat of the winning 22-17, 13-22, 31-26 shot, as shown by E.F. Hunt. J) This to coax the unfortunate 13-17, after which 25-21, 17-22, 31-26 and the 24-20 shot wins. After 30-23, the touchy defence is 6-10, 25-21, (as 10-14 can be worked in against 25-22), 16-20, 24-19, (Or 29-25, *8-11, 24-19, 4-8, 19-16, 8-12 etc. to draw, in analysis by W. Hellman; and again if 29-25, 8-11, 25-22, 4-8, 24-19, then *8-12 draws; not 5-9, as in ABC, page 77-C, which loses by *22-18-see Huggins-Chamberlain1 page 23), then *8-12, 23-18, *10-14 draws, as in MEC, Var. 3, and Hellman-Case 1953 match.
OPENING NO 11. 9-13, 23-18, 11-15. 9-13, 23-18, 11-15(A), 18-11, 8-15, 22-17(B), 13-22, 25-11, 7-16, 29-25(C), 4-8(D), 25-22(E), 8-11, 24-20(F), 16-19, 22-17(G), 2-7(H), 27-24, 11-15, 31-27(I). FORMS DIAGRAM
A) Although White retains the advantage due to the initial move of this opening, and a choice of lines, it is far less critical than Opening No. 6, in view of notes B and C. B) The 22-18 exchange is ineffective after 12-16, 29-25, 16-20 and 24-19 into a reversed color Wagram line. However, 24-20 (as in Opening No. 6) is a respected attack, but here it may be couirtered with the preferable 3-8 (instead of 7-11) as the 20-16 exchange is not available. Cont: 27-23, (or 22-17, 13-22, 25-11, 8-15, 29-25, 4-8, 25-22, 8-11, 28-24, 5-9, 21-17, 9-14, 17-13, 1-5, 27-23, 14-18, 23-14, 10-17, 31-27, 7-10, 27-23, 5-9, then 23-18: instead of 32-28 by M. Chamblee, in Ryan`s A.C., Game 228-D; and into a 9-14, 23-18 variation, c.r..: see Cohen-Burroughs, U.S.-G.B. mail matches), 8-11, 28-24, 4-8, 23-18, 5-9, 32-28, 1-5, 24-19 etc., and 9-14 to a draw by Walter Hellman, in A.C., Game 228. C) Again, in contrast to Opening No.6, 24-20 here is well met with 16-19, instead of the forced 3-8 exchange in above mentioned opening, then 29-25, 10-15, 25 22, and 4-8 is best; usually reverting to trunk play. D) 16-20 should be delayed, as 24-19, 4-8, 25-22, 5-9, (if 8-11, 21-17, 2-7, and White is strong with 17-13), then 22-18 transposes into a favorable attack from Opening No. 6, Part 1, Note C. Each move played should have a reason behind it. With the inexperienced, the reason may be faulty, but at least he is thinking, and not playing moves simply because they are available. E) Or 21-17, (if 24-20, 16-19 goes into trunk), 5-9, 17-13, 16-20, 24-19, 9-14, 25-22, 8-11, 27-23, 11-16, 22-18, 14-17 and a position reached many years ago by John Alexander, in Kear`s Ency. Continue; 18-15, 3-8, 23-18, 16-23, 26-19, 17-22, 28-24, 20-27, 31-24, 2-7, 24-20, *7-11,, (this improves and perhaps corrects the Kear Ency. in 1-5, 20-16, 5-9, and 32-28 is left as `White best`, but an examination will show that the Red draw is doubtful) , 13-9, 6-13, 15-6, 1-10, 32-28, 13-17, 18-14, then *10-15, 19-10 and 11-15 gives a convincing draw. F) White now has nothing better, as 16-20 has been correctly held back. If 22-18 now, then 16-20 equalizes, or better. And if 21-17 instead, then 5-9, 17-13, and once again the 16-20 move quiets any attack. G) 27-23 may be met with 11-15,23-16,12-19, 20-16 2-7, 32-27, 5-9, 22-17(G1) (if 27-24, 9-14, 22-17, 14-18, 17-14 etc., and 7-11 draws), 9-13, 17-14, 10-17,21-14, 7-11, 16-7, 3-17, 27-23, 19-24, 28-10, 6-15 draws. Bass-Fortman, over 40 years ago; one of the many interesting games we were fortunate to have contested with the Colorado master. G1) or 21-17! By EF Hunt, then 9-13*, 27-24, 6-9,( if 1-5, 16-11 x 24-20, 3-7 x) 31-27, 1-5, 22-18, and 13-31* to draw D. Lafferty H) Not necessarily forced, as 11-15 first may return to same after 27-24, 5-9, 20-16, 2-7, and it is doubtful if White has a better way. I) or the also strong 32-27, forcing *9-13, (as 3-8, 17-14, 9-18, 16-11, 7-16, and White can win after 26-23), 16-11, 7-16, 24-20, 13-22, 26-17, and the defender must be wary. Conts 15-18, 20-11, 19-23, 27-24, *12-16, 24-20, 16-19, 17-13, *10-14, 20-16, (as 30-25 is well met with *23-27, 31-15, and 6-9 draws. Case-Hellman 1953 match), then the draw is fashioned with 18-22 etc; as shown by W. Hellman in WCP, Game 729. After 31-27 (instead of 32-27 at first), then 5-9, 17-13, *10-14, 27-23, (if the shot by 21-17, 14-21, 30-25, 21-20, 20-16, etc; then 19-23, 16-11, and *12-16 will draw, as shown by M. Tinsley in ECB, page 834) , now *1-5, 23-16, 12-19, 20-16, 15-18, 24-15, 7-11, 15-8, 3-19,28-24 19-28, 30-25, and 18-23, 26-19, *14-18 is a solid draw by Marion Tinsley, whose fine analysis and play have graced the game`s literature for many years.
OPENING NO 12. 9-13, 23-18, 12-16. 9-13, 23-18, 12-16(A), 18-14(B), 10-17, 21-14, 6-10(C), 24-20(D), 10-17, 25-21, 16-19(E), 21-14, 11-15(F), 29-25, *2-6(G), 25-21, 8-11(H), 14-10(I), 7-14, 27-23(J). FORMS DIAGRAM
A) Here again, with 23 played instead of 22,the White attacks are blunted in contrast to Opening No. 7. B) Against 24-20, the defender has three! Sound defences, which verifies the previous note---5-9; 10-15; or 16-19; the last being the most restrictive, and easiest to recall: 16-19, 18-14, (if 27-23, 8-12, 23-16, 12-19, then 18-14 is a 10-15, 24-20, 15-19 line; about even), 10-17, 21-14, then 6-10, (not 6-9, 27-24-LeClair-Tinsley, 1954 Nat. Ty.), 25-21, etc; into trunk at Note F. This is also useful from Opening No. 5: 9-13, 22-18, 10-15, 25-22, 6-10, 24-20, 15-19 etc, 18-14 same. C) Red now presses for the equalizing clearance after 25-21 etc; then 16-19; which side side-steps with Note D. 6-9 here fails in that respect, and is markedly inferior after 26-23, 9-18, 23-14-into Opening No. 4, Part 2-White powerful D) One of the two major variations. The other is a delayed action press with 27-23, 10-17, 24-19, 8-12, (as 17-21 leads into undesirable complications-see Long-Grover: 9th. Am. Ty.), 25-21, 1-6, 21-14, and the break with 13-17, 22-13, and 6-9 etc; after which only moderate care is needed. See Master-Play or Kear`s Ency. for the continuations. E) Opinions may differ here, but we consider this the easiest way; also from Note B, and favored by Walter Hellman... the alternate defence in 1-6, 21-14, 6-9,29- 25, (or the puzzling two for two in 14-10, 7-14, and 22-18 etc. A White piece on square 12; or conversely, a Red piece on square 21, is often inadvisable, serving both as a `back-up` for squares 16 and 19, and also a handicap in numerous endings. Here it is quite playable, as in Ryan-Hellman, W.C.C. game 5), 9-18, 22-15, 11-18, 20-11, 8-15, 26-23, 4-8,23-14, then 2-6 is best; into a standard Scobbie-Henderson draw shown in Master Play F) Essential, as 1-6 loses precious time after 29-25, 6-9, 27-24, 9-18, 24-15, and the White bind is commanding. If 2-6, 31-27, 7-10, 27-24, 10-19, 24-15, 3-7, 28-24, 7-10, then 20-16! W.W.- C.0. Beebe v R Fortman; MSA Game 3236...After 11-15 is played (at Note F), White may also use 27-23 (instead of 29-25), then 8-12, 23-16, 12-19, 25-21, (or 31-27, as in Master-Play), 6-10, then 20-16, (not 30-25, 10-17, 21-14, 1-6, 25-21, 6-10, 31-27, 10-17, 21-14, then 7-10 etc; and Red wins by the Dr. Schaeffer gem, shown in Boland`s Famous Positions, page 178), 10-17, 21-14, 7-11, etc., followed with 31-27 to a draw. Walter Hellman vs. Derek Oldbury, 1965 match. G) This is the key move to stabilize the defence played here. Note that the natural 1-6 instead results in disaster following 25-21, 6-9, (if 6-10, 30-25 W.W.), 14-10, 7-14, 22-17, 13-22, 26-10, 9-14,20-16, 8-12, 16-11, 5-9 10-6, 3-7, 27-24, 7-15-at this stage Master-Play gives24-20 to a draw, but former American champion Edwin F. Hunt has pointed out that White simply waits with *6-1, after which there is no defence. A quiet move such as this often proves the key factor in forcing both wins and draws. H) The sequel to 2-6. Not 8-12, 27-24, 4-8, *14-10, 7-14 and 22-17 into a pp WW. I) Best, as 27-24 is countered with *4-8, 14-10, 7-14, 22-17, 13-22, 26-10 and now15-18 is available, 24-15, 18-22 etc., to a draw. J) This idea also arises in an Opening No. 7 variation. Cont: 14-18, 23-7, (as 23-14 lets in 6-9, 14-10 and 9-14), 18-25, 7-2, 4-8, 2-9, 5-14, 20-16, 15-19, 32-27, 1-6, 27-24, 8-12, 24-15, 12-19,15-11, then 6-10, 31-27, (not 11-7, 14-17!), 10-15, 27-23, 15-18, 23-16, 13-17,16-12, 25-29, 11-8, 29-25, 8-4 and 25-22 etc; the classic Jordan-Smith draw in Master-Play, with the White advantage only a mirage.
OPENING NO 13. 9-13, 23-19, 5-9 . 9-13, 23-19, 5-9(A), 27-23(B), 11-15(C), 22-18(D), 15-22, 25-18, 8-11(E), 19-15(F), 10-19, 24-8, 4-11, 32-27(G), 6-10(H) 18-14(I), 9-18, 23-14, 10-17, 21-14(J). FORMS DIAGRAM
A) As White’s second move slants away from the centre, this family of openings (No. 13 through 16) is only slightly inferior for the first side. B) The centre advance with 22-18 is also highly favored (including world champion Marion Tinsley). It may either be chopped off with 11-15, (or Walter Hellman` s famous `Paxton` defence with 10-14, 27-23, 6-10, 25-22, and 1-5;available from several openings; see No. 18-A), 18-11, 8-15, (or 7-23 to pp draws; see the 8th. Am Ty.), 26-22, (here the only attack of merit, as 25-22 is into Opening No. 6) 9-14, (if 1-5, 27-23, 9-14, 22-17 etc; then *29-25 may win, improving A.B. Scott’s 24-20 vs. S. Gonotsky, in the 1927 2nd. IM. , from a 10-14, 22-18, 11-15 opening) 22-17, 13-22, 25-9, 6-13, 27-23, 1-5, (or 2-6, 29-25, 6-9, 25-22, then 9-14 to a draw-R. Fortman vs. M. Tinsley, 1948 mail game) 29-25, 5-9, 25-22, 9-14, etc; See W. Hellman vs. B. Scheidt, 1972 Nat. Ty.: ACFB #130, Game 12...And if 19-15, (or 26-23, 11-15, 22-18 etc; then 10-14, into `Wisp` Lines) at first move, see Opening No. 8, Note B. C) Anything else asks for trouble, such as 9-14, 22-18, 6-9, 25-22, 11-15, 18-11, 8-15, 24-20, 15-24, 28-19, 4-8, 22-18, 8-11, 29-25, 1-5, 25-22, 11-16, 20-11, 7-16 then the fine *21-17, 14-21 and 18-15 to a W.W. from several openings; a c.r. Ayrshire Lassie line. Also if 11-16, 22-18, 16-20, 32-27, 10-14, 18-15 and an unsound Red position, W.W.-Jordan-Ferrie, from Opening No. 20, Note B. D) Best, as 23-18, 1-5, etc., transposes into Opening No. 19, Note D. E) 10-14 is also sound, but less favored; into a 5-9 `Wisp` line, given in Lees`s Guide; more difficult to play than the text. F) Other moves (such as 32-27, 11-16, 29-25, then 16-20 is into a `Flora Temple variation of the Single Corner) surrender the initiative. G) An excellent idea, introduced by Nathan Rubin vs. W. Ryan in the 8th. Am. Ty.,1934. The latter met this cook correctly (see Note J) but on a second occurrence against the same opponent a year later, varied (fearing an improvements) and lost as in Note H. This is a direct attack against the opposing double corner with the follow-up exchange, in contrast to; 28-24, (or 29-25) 6-10, 29-25, 10-15, 25-22, then 12-16.White`s best is to follow with 31-27, (as 24-20, 7-10, 32-gets 15-19! (G1) then 7-10, 21-17, 1-5, 17-14, 10-17 and 23-19 etc; a standard Bass-Davis mail game draw. G1). Instead of 15-19, red also has 1-5, 28-24, 3-8, 23-19, x 9-14, x 19-16*, 8-12,x 30-26, 14-18, 22-17, x 12-16,17-13 16-19, 13-9, x & 9-6 to draw D Walker v A Huggins in mail play H) Angles for the premature 1-5, then 29-25 and 9-14 is a published loss; Ryan-Rubin 1935 match. Instead, 6-10 may do, after 18-14, (or Chamblee`s 27-24) etc; and 11-15, 27-24, 15-18, 24-20, (White also has 26-22) 13-17, 25-22 etc; then 2-6, draw: J.B. Hanson vs. R. Fortman, 1948 N.T I) The sequel to White`s previous move, bearing against the opponents always vulnerable right side. J) Cont: 11-15, 29-25, 12-16, 25-22, then the key waiter with *1-5, (as 16-20 is at of tempo after 26-23, and the 15-19 3x3 loss-Richards-Chamblee-11th. A.C.A. Ty.) 26-23, (if 30-25, 16-20(J1) then 26-23, 2-6==not 15-19!= 23-18, 15-19 to draw; Rubin-Ryan 1934) then the 16-19 3x3 draws; a point to remember---the 16-19 shot is OK: the 15-19 loses!-Asa Long vs. A. Cameron, 1952 Nat.Ty. J1) or the 7-10 exchange to draw as in Tinsley-long 81 match
When in the course of a game, two or more alternative moves of equal strategic and tactical power are under consideration, the move which exhibits the higher degree of complexity should invariably be adopted; the sole exception being when the player has a forced win in hand, upon which the simplest method available is desired---D. E. Oldbury.
OPENING NO 14. (9-13, 23-19, 6-9) 9-13, 23-19, 6-9(A), 22-18(B), 11-15(C), 18-11, 7-23(D), 27-18(E), 8-11, 25-22, 3-7(F), 32-27, 10-15(G), 27-23(H), 7-10, 23-19, 9-14, 18-9, 5-14, 26-23(I). FORMS DIAGRAM
A) A shade below the preceding ballot in playing strength, as the piece removed from 6 (as shown in other Edinburghs) is more damaging than off square 5-See Note D. B) White now has a choice of three promising attacks; trunk, 27-23 and the 19-15 thrust.
C) The 9-14 exchange needs care after 25-22, 11-15, 30-25, (C1) (the Chamblee attack, improving 27-23, *7-11, into Note B-i)*1-5, 22-17, 13-22, 25-9,(or 26-17 a P Thompson cook) 5-14, 26-22,*8-11, 29-25, *4-8, 22-17, 15-18, then 19-15, etc, and *12-16, draw-Ray Gould vs. L.W. Taylor, 1950 Nat. Ty. C1). Instead of 30-25 white also has the 22-17 exchange, 8-11, then 30-26 into the famous Tinsley Albrecht game in the 1976 Fla open from the 9-14, 22-17, 6-9 opening. See `CTTW` page 36, note c. D lafferty D) In the preceding opening, the single capture is sound, but here it fails after 8-15, *19-16, 12-19, then the 21-17 break-up, after which 28-24, 16-20, 24-19, and 29-25, White dominates-M. Tinsley over K. Grover, 1974 A. Ty. E) 26-19 may be met with 8-11, 25-22, 9-14, 27-23, 11-15, 30-25, then 3-8 with about an even position, J.B. Hanson vs.P. McKay; 8th. A.Ty. F) Here the 9-14 exchange is committed a bit early, (see Notes G & H) then either 26-23 or 30-25-and if 12-16 instead, then 29-25, 4-8, 18-15, with White strong; E.Lowder vs. M. Tinsley, 1976 Fla. Open. G) We would rate this the preferred continuation, although the 9-14 exchange now, with 3-7 played, is also sound after 24-20, 4-8, 27-23, 11-15, 30-25, 8-11, 22-17 etc, then 1-5 to a draw-D.Lafferty vs. M Tinsley-see 6th. DNL, Sept. 1975, page 12. The prime objective in this White line is to tempt 1-6 (instead of 9-14 or 10-15) then White gets in 27-24 with a powerful attack-see Huggins-Thompson 1963 mail match, as given in the 6th. DNL, Sept. 76, page 37. H) If 26-23, the 9-14 trade is excellent, followed with 30-25, 1-5, 22-18 etc; D.E. Oldbury-M. Tinsley draw, in the 1974 A.T. I) Continue; 1-6, (note that 1-5 is now necessary: the text provides backing for the later 15-18 exchange) 30-26, (if 30-25, 6-9, 22-18, etc, 13-17 draws) 4-8, 24-20, 15-24, 28-19,11-15, 19-16, 12-19, 23-16, then 15-18 draws; R. Chamberlain vs. A. Huggins, 1975 world title mail match.
OPENING NO 15. (9-13, 23-19, 10-14) 9-13, 23-19, 10-14(A), 19-15-B 11-18, 22-15, 7-11(C), 26-22, 11-18, 22-15, 3-7, 25-22, 7-11(D), 29-25, 11-18, 22-15, 2-7, 24-19(E), 7-11, 31-26(F). FORMS DIAGRAM
A) Although White retains a minimal advantage, due to Red’s initial move, this opening is not difficult, as 23-19 has prevented the strong 22-18 development. B) The preferred attack: placing a protected piece in the Red mid-section. other replies in 26-23 or 27-23 may be met with 11-16 and into Opening No.16, and if 22-17 instead, then 13-22, 25-9, 5-14, 29-25, 7-10, 27-23, 11-15, 25-22, then 8-11 etc; a standard line from the Definace opening. C) Although 14-18 is also favored, the text, as given in Shearer`s Handbook, is much less complicated, and easier to recall. On 14-18, then 24-19, 5-9, 26-23, 9-14, 28-24, 7-10, then 24-20 transposes into a variation from Opening No.24. D) Once committed to the run-off, it seems best to continue, although the writer once used 14-18 vs. the late Paul Thompson in a 1962 mail match for the U.S. title-see Topnotch Checkers, Game 9, for the unfortunate conclusion. E) Or 31-26, 7-11, 26-22, abandoned as a draw in Shearer`s Handbook. F) Cont; 11-18, 26-22, 5-9, 22-15, 8-11, 15-8, 4-11, 28-24, 11-15, 19-10, 6-15, 27-23, 15-18, 24-20, 18-27, 32-23, 1-5, 23-19, 14-17 to a draw-Thompson-Fortman.
OPENING NO 16. 9-13, 23-19, 11-16 9-13, 23-19, 11-16(A), 27-23(B), 10-14(C), 22-17(D), 13-22, 25-9, 5-14, 29-25(E), 16-20(F), 32-27, 8-11, 19-16, 12-19, 24-8, 4-11, 23-19, (or 25-22 first) 6-10, (Oldbury played 7-10 V Lafferty in 1981 So Ty) 25-22(G) FORMS DIAGRAM
A) White holds only a modest advantage, as one of the supporting double-corner backup pieces must be committed to retain this slight edge. B) 26-23 is also favored, then again 10-14, (useful via the previous opening) 22-18, (as 24-20 is an ancient snare that has trapped numerous amateurs after 14-17-jumping out of 31, and the kingrow shot... However 22-17 instead is quite sound, and a Lieberman-Banks draw shown in Master Play) 6-10, 18-9, 5-14, 24-20, 1-5, 20-11, 8-24, 28-19, 4-8, 25-22, then 14-17 to an even position, a pp draw. The third variation in the 19-15 exchange is seldom seen as Red has several ways to equalize. Perhaps the most forcing is 16-20, 26-23, 12-16, 23-18, 16-19, 30-26, 6-9, 27-24, 20-27,32-16, 8-11, 15-8, 3-19, 21-17, 1-6,17-14, 4-8, 25-21, 8-11, 29-25, 11-16,31-27, and 16-20, into an old Anderson `Dyke` draw after 27-23, 7-11, 23-7, 2-11, 21-17, 11-15, etc. C) Applicable to the remarks in Note B. If 16-20 first, then 32-27, 8-il, 19-16, 12-19, 24-8, 4-11, and White has good attacks in both 23-18 and 22-18. D) The better way. If 19-15 instead, (not 24-20, 6-9, etc. and the 14-17 break into the White double corner) Red avoids the 3x3 with 16-20 instead, then 24-19, 7-10, and into a familiar variation of the Bristol-Cross opening. E) Or the easy 24-20, 6-10, 20-11, 8-24,28-19, 4-8, 29-25, 8-11, 25-22, 11-15, 32-28, 15-24, 28-19, 7-11, 22-18, 1-5,18-9, 5-14, 26-22, 11-15, 30-25, 15-24, 22-18, 12-16, 18-9, 16-20, to a pp draw. F) The proper time to commit this, as White now intends 24-20. G) Cont. 11-15, 26-23, (if 19-16, 1-5,22-17, 5-9, 17-13, 15-18, 13-6, 2-9, 30-25, 9-13, 26-22, 10-15, 28-24, then the clever L.S. Head draw by 14-17, 21-14, 13-17, 21-14, 7-11, 16-7, 3-17, 25-21,17-22, 13-9, 22-26, 31-22, 18-25, 9-6, 25-30, 6-2, 30-26, 2-7, 15-18 And Red regains the piece) 15-24, 28-19, 7-11, 19-16, 3-8, 16-7, 2-11, 22-18, 1-5, etc., Case-Long 1952 A.T. draw.
When the enthusiast first takes up the game, he finds advance is not difficult in the early stages, but he does not then realize the vast study necessary to make further progress, nor the ignorance and indifference displayed by the average editor, which may mar that advance, damp his ardour, if not destroy it. It should be the purpose of every author to place at the student`s command the strongest attack and defence, but no work bears the hall-mark entirely....M. Francis Tescheleit.
OPENING NO 17. 9-13, 24-19, 5-9 9-13, 24-19, 5-9(A), 22-18(B), 11-15(C), 18-11, 8-24, 28-19, 9-14(D), 25-22, 4-8, 22-18(E), 1-5(F) 18-9, 5-14, 23-18(G), 14-23, 27-18, 8-11, 26-23(H) FORMS DIAGRAM
A) Since 24-19 is a stronger opening move than 23-19, (9-14, as opposed to 10-14, c.r.) it follows that this is somewhat weaker than the companion 9-13, 23-19, 5-9 ballot, as here White is permitted two major attacks. B) Or the delayed 28-24 variation, which also gains the centre. Cont. 11-5, (as 11-16 is ill-advised after 22-18, 16-20,32-28, 10-14, then the spearhead with *18-15 and a pp win against all efforts; one notable occasion in N.W. Banks-A. Long 1934 match) 22-18, (the inferior 23-18, 1-5, etc. transposes into Opening No.19) 15-22, 25-18, then *1-5, (10-14 might appear to be the more natural cover-up, but after 29-25, 8-11, 24-20, 4-8, *27-24, 6-10, 32-28, 2-6, 25-22, and Red runs out of playable moves) 29-25, (if 32-28, 8-11, 19-15, etc., 29-25, 6-10, 27-24,10-15, 25-22 and 7-10 into a sound formation) 8-11, 24-20, (against 25-22, 11-16 fits in, then 24-20 and 3-8, etc., 4-8 to a draw) *3-8, 19-16, 12-19, 23-16, 8-12, 27-23, etc., then 10-14, 25-22 was the Hellman cook vs. Ryan in 1949 match `W.C.C.`, Game 24---and if 26-23 instead, then 6-10, 25-22, 14-17, etc., 7-10, 16-7 2-11, 23-19, 9-14, 18-9, 5-14, 32-28, 11-15, 20-16,15-24, 28-19 and *4-8, 30-26,8-12, 16-11, 12-16, 19-12 and 10-15 to a clear draw. C) To the centre, and not the side with 11-16, as 28-24 is into the win of Note B. D) Here again, expert opinion is divided as to the merits of 9-14, as opposed to 4-8; both in this and the following opening. The text may be more restrictive, as 4-8 allows wide scope with 25-22, 26-22 or the 21-17 Krantz exchange attack. E). 29-25, 8-11, 22-18, 1-5, 18-9, 5-14, 25-22, 11-15, then 23-18, (or 32-28, 15-24, 28-19, 14-17 etc., 23-18 and 6-10 draws) 14-23, etc., *3-7, 22-18, 7-11, etc; a key draw from 10-14, 24-20, 7-10, 22-18, 11-16-see Cameron-Tinsley, 1954 Nat.Ty. F) Introduced by Walter Hellman vs. Marion Tinsley in the 1956 Nat. Ty; to ease the defensive position. 14-17 had been considered forced, then 18-15, 7-11, 29-25, 11-18, 23-14, 8-11, 25-22, 11-16, 27-23, or 14-10-White best as shown in Ryan`s It`s Your Move from a Double Corner variation. G). This was the main objection to the 1-5 exchange, as 27-24 instead, then 8-11, 24-20, 11-15, 19-16 etc., is a pp draw from 9-13, 22-18, 6-9, 25-22, 1-6, 24-19,11-15. H) Cont; 6-9, 29-25, *10-15, 19-10, 7-14,32-27, 3-7, 27-24, 7-10, 25-22, 12-16, 24-19, 16-20, 31-27, 2-7, 30-25, then the excellent drawing idea with 11-16, 19-12,7-11, 12-8, 11-16, 8-3, 16-19 etc.-- Hellman-Tinsley. Supplementary Play: 9-13, 24-19, 5-9, 28-24, 9-14-A, 22-17-B, 13-22, 25-9, 6-13, 29-25,11-16, 25-22, 16-20, 32-28, 1-6, *30-25-C, 8-11, 19-15, 10-19, 24-8, 4-11, *21-17-D, 11-15, (as 7-10, 23-18, 10-15,25-21, 2-7, 18-14, 7-10, 17-14 etc., W.W.) 23-18, 6-10, 18-11, 7-16, 17-14, 10-17, 25-21, 2-6, 21-14, 3-7, 26-23, 6-10, 14-9, 10-14, 9-6, 14-17, 22-18, 17-22, 6-2,7-11, 2-7 White Wins, E.F. Hunt to Fortman, 1967. A.The Gregg defence, once suggested by Asa Long as best, back in the early days of the new restriction-1934. With the hope that this opening be drawn in the 1936 world title match, Mr. Hunt cooked up the following to beat it. B.With this, instead of the Gregg 22-18, 6-9, 26-22, 11-15 etc., to draw. C. Many years ago (MSA game 2685) we suggested 23-18! to win, missing *10-15, a probable Red win. D. Mr. Hunt`s later improvement of his original 23-18, then 6-10, 18-15 and *10-19, (per Gene Frazier) corrects Hunt`s 11-18 and draws. See A.C., Game 223-March, 1950
OPENING NO 18. 9-13, 24-19, 6-9. 9-13, 24-19, 6-9(A), 22-18(B), 11-15(C), 18-11, 8-24, 28-19, 9-14(D), 25-22(E), 4-8, 29-25(F), 8-11, 22-18, 1-6(G), 18-9, 5-14, 25-22, 11-15, 23-18-H. FORMS DIAGRAM
A) Although White has just one strong attack, the defence requires meticulous attention. B) 28-24 here is lacking in strength, in comparison to the previous opening, as the defender need not cover up the right side after 11-15, and into Opening No. 19. C) It is quite correct to take these early exchanges, as in previous openings nos. 13, 14 and 17, to develop the single corner side. D) As in the previous opening, the merits of this (instead of 4-8) are debatable. 4-8, 21-17, 13-22, 25-18, 8-11 29-25, (or the Krantz 27-24) 9-13 or 9-14 are pp todraw. See Tinsley-Chamblee 1947 match,Game 4. E) 27-24 also has its good points, and must be met with 4-8, 24-20, 8-11, 25-22, then *11-16, (not 11-15, 19-16 to pp White wins) 20-11, 7-16, 22-18, 3-7, 18-9, 5-14, 29-25, *7-11, 25-22 and *2-7 into a 9-13, 22-18, 12-16 Freeman-Barker variation, as shown in Master-Play, page 22, Var. E. F) 27-24 is into Note E, and if 22-18 first, then 8-11 etc., 29-25, and the 1-6 waiter, into trunk. G) An idea often employed in Defiance-like positions, in order to work in 11-15 at the next move. This has now been transposed into 9-13, 22-18, 6-9, 25-22, 1-6, 24-19, 11-15, etc., 4-8, 22-18, 8-11, 29-25 same. H) Other replies are no better:
Continue trunk; 14-23, 27-11, 16-23, 26-19, 3-7, 30-26, 7-11, 26-23, 11-16, 22-18, 16-20, 32-27, 2-7, 18-15, 12-16, etc., drawn. Chamblee-Tinsley 1947 match, Game 3 Supplementary play: 9-13, 24-19, 6-9, 22-18, 11-15, 18-11, 8-24, 28-19, 4-8, 25-22,8-11, 22-18, 9-14, 18-9, 5-14, 29-25, 11-15-A, 19-16, 12-19, 23-16, 1-6-A1, 27-23, 7-11,16-7, 2-11, 25-22, 3-8, 32-27-B, 8-12,27-24, 11-16, 24-20, 16-19, 23-16, 12-19,22-17, 13-22, 26-17, 14-18, 20-16, 18-23,16-11, *6-9, 17-13, 9-14, 11-8, 23-27, 31-24, 19-28, 8-3, 15-19, 3-7, 10-15, 7-11,14-18, 30-26-C, *28-32-D, 11-16, 19-24,13-9, 24-28, 9-5, 32-27, 26-23, 28-32, 23-14, 15-19-a splendid draw-R.D. Banks vs. G.W. Bass, 1940. A.Instead of 1-6 at Note F above. A1. Instead of 1-6 ,Freyer v Zuber in 1981 Fla Open played 14-18 ; into Banks-Hellman, 2nd NCA TY B. Here 31-27 is usual, then 8-12, 27-24, 11-16, 24-19, 15-24, 23-19, 16-23, 26-19, 13-17, 22-13, 14-18, 30-26, etc., drawn. Credited to Denvir and Bradford. The text would seem to be a fine vary, used by the late Colorado master on mail play. C. Forms a fine problem to arise in play-Red to move and draw. D. If 19-24 first, the White king does not have to move and may gain time with 13-9.
Although this opening came into prominence after the advent of the three-move restriction in 1933, it was used voluntarily by the late A.B. Scott of Govan, (Glasgow) Scotland, playing Tom 0`Grady in the 1927 2nd. I.M. (Game 355)....Mr. Scott, four-time Scottish champion, was infatuated with the bizarre and unusual, and will be long remembered for his Snake Switcher play in this historic contest.
When all is said, superior knowledge is the mightiest weapon of the masters. One does blunder, perhaps must blunder on occasion, but prepared analysis, classical or contemporary, is nonetheless one`s chief asset in the larger struggles Prof. W. R. Fraser.
OPENING NO 18-A 9-13, 24-19, 10-14 9-13, 24-19, 10-14(A), 22-18(B), 5-9(C), 25-22(D), 6-10, 28-24(E), 11-15(F) 18-11, 8-15, 32-28(G), 1-5, 30-25(H), 7-11, 22-18,15-22, 25-18, 3-7(I), 18-15(J). FORMS DIAGRAM
A) Although unjustly barred for almost 40 years, this opening has at last proven to be less critical than several long-recognized ballots. B) This centre-gaining move was thought powerful enough to eliminate this opening. C) But strangely enough, the defender has he luxury of three sound variations; the others :
D) If 28-24 first, the reply is the same, then White has the option of 26-22, (instead of 25-22) 11-15, 18-11, 8-15, 22-17, 13-22, 25-11, 7-16, 29-25, 16-20, 32-28, 4-s, 31-26, 8-11, 19-16 etc. to draw-as analyzed by PA. Tinsley and Don Lafferty, 1970. E) 29-25 is also favorable, forcing *2-6,(not 11-16, 18-15) then 18-15, 11-18, 22-15, *7-11, (as 12-16 first produces doubtful Red endings) 23-18, (now if 26-22, then the 12-16 bust, and 1-5 will draw) 14-23, 27-18, *12-16, (both 10-14 and 11-16 run out of moves after 26-23, etc.) 19-12, 10-19, 32-27, (since 25-22 lets in 6-10) 11-16, 18-14, 9-18, 26-23 etc., Red draws; again, analysis by Tinsley and Lafferty. If 27-24 (instead of 28-24 or 29-25) then *1-5, (here is one of the few exceptions where the single corner exchange fails after 11-15, 18-11, 8-15,*24-20, 15-24, 28-19, 4-8, 22-18, 8-11, 29-25, 1-5, 25-22, 11-16, 20-11, 7-16, then the fine *21-17 pitch and 18-15, 2-6, 15-11, etc., forces a win, which may also arise from a c.r. Ayrshire Lassie) and now into the valuable "Paxton Defence"; also from Opening No. 13, Note B. White has several attacks at hand; 32-27, as in above trunk, or 19-15, etc. See the 1975 I.D. book. F) 1-5 loses by the winning *22-17 exchange; as noted by both Don Lafferty and La-Verne Dibble to the writer....Continue: 13-22, 26-17, 11-15, 18-11, 8-15, 17-3, 2-6 ( if 4-8, 13-6, 2-9, 29-25, 8-11, 30-26, 9-13, and 32-28 is a WW by Ed Scheidt, sent to Don Lafferty, with both 14-17 or 13-17 leading to losses.) 29-25, 1-5, then *31-26 ( given by Basil Case, to improve 30-26- AE Baker v. WP Nesbitt, 18th A. Ty; Game 17, Var. 1.) 8-11, (if 7-11, 25-22,12-16 19-12, 15-18, 22-15, 10-28, 23-18 WW- B.C.) 26-22, 12-16, 19-12 WW-B. Case. G) Or 22-17, (as both 30-25 or 32-28 are back into the Paxton line) 13-22, 26-17, *9-13, 30-25, 13-22, 25-9, 1-5, and White has scope with either 9-6 or 29-25-see 1975 ACF I-D book.
H) 29-25 again transposes into a c.r. Lassie line. Cont: 4-8, 24-20, 15-24, 28-19, 8-11, 22-18, 12-16, (a useful `pitch and press` idea against the vertical elbow) 19-12, and 10-15, 27-24, 15-29, 12-8, 3-12, 30-25 etc., pp draw. See Opening No. 23, Note F paragraph. I) The key move to sustain the soundness of Hellman`s fine defence, as 13-17 loses after *19-15 etc., and 3-8 fails after *18-15 J) Cont: 11-18, 19-16, 12-19, 24-6, *14.17, 21-14, 18-22, 26-17, 9-18, 23-14, 2-18, then 17-14 and 18-22 draws. W. Hellman in Tribute to Paxton , 1950.
OPENING NO 19. 9-13, 24-19, 11-15 9-13, 24-19, 11-15(A), 28-24(B), 6-9(C), 22-18(D), 15-22, 25-18, 8-11(E), 29-25,9-14, 18-9, 5-14, 24-20(F), 11-15(G), 19-16(H), 12-19, 23-16, 1-6(I), 25-22(J). FORMS DIAGRAM
A) Under the two-move restriction, this was the preferred reply, and rightly so; directed toward the all-important centre B). Best, as the counter exchange by 22-18 here is ineffective; with Red having the option of 15-22, 25-18, then 8-11; preparing for 10-15 next. If White covers up with 26-22, then 11-16, 29-25, 4-8 and a favorable line of the Single Corner. C). Knowledge is often more important than intuitive play, as the text prepares for the later 9-14 exchange. The beginner would be more apt to play 8-11, but when met with *23-18, he is in trouble-faced with the immediate threat of a winning cramp with 26-23 against both 6-9 or 4-8. Therefore he must break with 11-16, and surrender the centre after 18-11, 16-23, 27-18, 7-16, then 18-14 etc., a doubtful draw at best D). 23-18 is also favored, tempting 8-11, then *26-23, W.W., as in Note C. But here, with 8-11 not committed, he has *1-6 in hand, then 18-11, 7-23, (best, as the single capture permits earlier Edinburgh ideas with the 32-28 waiter) 26-19, (as 27-18 opens the double corner after 12-16) 8-11, 32-28, 11-16, 19-15 etc., then 3-7 removes the troublesome White piece after 30-26, 7-11 etc., a standard Jordan-Barker draw. E). This could be interchanged with the 9-14 trade first, then 8-11, same. However against 9-14, White has the additional variation in the 23-18 exchange; favored by Marion Tinsley. Cont; 8-11, 29-25, (for 18-14, see supp. play) 11-15 etc., 4-8, with an open game, although White`s chances are better. See Hellman-Banks, 2nd. NCA; Bingham-Tinsley, 1948 Nat. Ty.; and Fuller-Tinsley, 1970 National Tourney F). Or 25-22, 11-15, then 23-18 etc; a placid Horr-Long 1923 match game draw. Instead of 25-22,white may play 23-18 x 26-19,4-8, 22-18, 3-7, 32-27, 13-17 x 27-23,17-22, 24-20, 1-6, 18-14 etc to draw, EF Hunt v. NW Banks, 1933 Nashville exhibition play.... G). In this instance, the 4-8 waiting move is best avoided after 25-22, 11-15, 23-18, 15-24, 18-9, 1-5, 26-23, 5-14, and 22-18 with White standing better. H). The correct procedure here, as White has the supporting piece on square 20. The 32-28 exchange allows an easy `Wisp` line after 4-8, and 8-11. I). But here a waiting move fits in very nicely, forcing White to commit himself. If 15-18, (or the spectacular 15-19 sacrifice variation, Ginsberg-Gonotsky 1925 match) 26-22, 1-6, (the 10-15 fill-in allows several subtle attacks) 22-15, 10-19, 25-22, 6-10, 22-18 etc. and 13-17 is old pp to draw, as given in the standard texta. J). If 27-23, Red pushes in with 15-18, 23-19, and the 14-17 exchange to an equal game, as in Grover-Freyer, 10th. ACA Ty. Continue after 25-22: 14-18, 22-17, (as the 30-25 block allows the *7-11 trade with Red best; Chamblee over Grover in 1950 N.T.) 13-22, 26-17, 15-19, (or 18-22, 17-14, etc., 22-26, 31-22, 7-11, etc a sound Rubin-Oman published draw) 16-11, 7-16, 20-11, 18-22, 17-14, 10-17; 21-14, 3-8, 30-26, draw. Supplementary play: 9-13, 24-19, 11-15, 28-24, 6-9, 22-18, 15-22, 25-18, 9-14, 18-9, 5-14, 23-18, 14-23, 27-18, 8-11, 18-14, (29-25 is Note E above) 10-17, 21-14 -this exchange taken by Harland Richards vs. Basil Case in the prelims of the 1941 So. Ty. at Asheville, N.C. Case, a game ahead was playing only to draw, and became careless... 11-16, 26-23, (instead of 31-27, Ferrie-Hanson, 2nd. I.M., Game 145) 16-20, 23-18, 20-27, 32-23, 4-8, 29-25, 8-11, 25-22, 11-16, 14-10, etc., 16-20, 31-27, 1-5,22-18 etc., 13-17, 23-18, 17-22, 9-5, 3-8, 18-15, 2-7, 5-1, 7-11, 1-6, 11-18, 6-10 8-11, 10-14, 11-16, 14-23, 22-26, 19-15, 26-31, 27-24, etc., 16-19, 15-11, 19-23,11-7, 3l-26-a drawn ending, but Case, moving rapidly, later misplayed, Richards missing the win. M.S.A. Game 3492.
OPENING NO 20. (9-13, 24-19, 11-16). 9-13, 24-19, 11-16A), 22-18, 8-11(B), 18-14(C), 10-17, 21-14, 6-9(D), 26-22(E), 9-18,22-8, 4-11, 25-22(F), 7-10(G), 29-25(H), 3-7(I), 22-18(J), 10-14(K), 18-9, 5-14(L). FORMS DIAGRAM
A) Slants away from the important square 15, thereby offering White more winning opportunities than in the previous Opening No. 19. B) Into Opening No. 7; here Whites` strongest, there perhaps secondary. If5-9 instead, 28-24, 16-20, 32-28, 1O-14, *18-15,a key pp White win. W.C.C.P. Game 890-also from Opening No. 13, Note C. Also Banks-Long 1934,G.32` C) Or the natural and also strong 25-22, 5-9, (as favored by Walter Hellman, and somewhat more restrictive than 16-20, 29-25, 11-16, 18-14 etc; Barker-Jordan draw) 29-25, 10-14, 28-24, (or 18-15 first, then 1-5, 26-22, 16-20 to a draw-Hellman-oldbury 1965 match) 16-20, 18-15, 11-18, 22-15, 7-10, 32-28, 2-7, 19-16 etc., and 7-11; Gardner-Horr, 1st. IM, draw, and similar in theme to Opening No. 8. D) Red must strike at once, as 16-20 (or 4-8, 28-24, 16-20, 23-18) allows the second side centre domination with 23-18,11-16, 27-23, 6-9, 25-21, 4-8, 29-25,a losing formation from the barred 9-13, 22-18, 11-16, 18-14 opening. Also the 6-10 runoff fails after 25-21, 10-17, 21-14, as the double corner is broken. It should always be kept in mind that the defender is better equipped to withstand an attack against his single corner, rather than his double corner, due to the configuration of the board; the latter permitting more entrance and exit squares...Cont; 1-6, 29-25, 6-10, 25-21, 10-17, 21-14, 2-6, *27-24; with the threat of 24-20 against 6-10, and 23-18 against 6-9 or 16-20. Red, beleaguered on all fronts must soon resign. E) 28-24 is also featured, although it in turn weakens the attacker`s right side. Cont; 9-18, 23-14, 16-23, 27-18, 1-6, (or 12-16, 26-23, 16-20, 32-27, 4-8, 25-22,8-12, 29-25, 1-6, 14-9, etc., then Oldbury`s fine 11-15 vs. Hellman in 1965, improves the older, more difficult 6-10 draw) 26-23, 6-9, 23-19, then the Heffner-recommended 7-10 exchange is best. See Tinsley-Hellman, 1956 Nat. Ty; also Freyer-Fraser, 1958 Nat. Ty. F) If 28-24, forcing 16-20, then 32-28 and Red may avoid the once thought forced 1-6 with 7-10 instead. Cont; 23-18, 11-16,19-15,then 2-7 equalizes-the Nelson Lieber draw.Cont: 18-14 ( or 25-22, 1-6,18-14,7-10) then 7-lO,x 27-24 draws.) G) Preparing for the 10-14 exchange against 22-18-here or later. 16-20 instead loses tempo after 22-18, then if 11-16, (or 7-10, 18-15, etc.) 19-15, 7-10, 15-6, 1-10, 28-24 and White is in command. H) A bit more subtle than the immediate 22-18 commitment, after which Red may wait one move with 3-7, then 29-25, 10-14, same as trunk. I) Here 2-6 must be shunned in view of*31-26,5-9, (if 11-15, 28-24, W.W.) then the forceful *27-24, 16-20, 22-18, 20-27,18-15, 11-18, 23-7, 3-10, 32-23, into a winning White ending. J) White has several excellent choices:
K) The essential point; to exchange at once when 22-18 is played. If 1-6 instead then 25-22, (or 28-24, 16-20, 31-26 also wins; B. Frazier) 6-9, then *30-26 will win-missed by B. Case vs. W. Hellman in 1963 match, which would have gained a tie. L) Then 28-24, (or 25-22, 7-10, 22-18,1-5, etc., draw) 16-20, 32-28, 11-16(1), 19-15, 7-10, 15-6, 1-10, 25-22, 10-15,(not 14-17, 31-26, 3-7, 23-18, to a W.W. Cohen-O`Connor) 30-26, *13-17, 22-13, 2-6, 26-22, 16-19-a pretty draw by O`Connor 1) Instead of 11-16, Red has 2-6, 30-26, 11-16, 19-15, 14-18* x (not 6-1O x 25-22, 14-17, 23-18 WW) 6-10 x 25-22, 17-21 draws... The Cohen-0`Conner match book gives the draw continuation
OPENING NO 21. (9-13, 24-20, 5-9) 9-13, 24-20, 5-9(A), 22-18(B), 10-14(C), 27-24(D), 6-10(E), 25-22(F) 10-15(G), 22-17, 13-22, 26-10, 7-14, 30-26, 15-22, 26-10, 2-7, 31-26(H), 7-14, 24-19(I). FORMS DIAGRAM
A) As the first 2 moves offset each other this third move designates the comparative weakness of this 9-13, 24-20 family of openings. B) Since White is permitted centre control, (in contrast to Openings 24 and 25) he again is dominant, with sustaining attacks. C) As this is virtually forced from Opening 23, it is practical to employ it here. The student may well be counseled to consolidate defences whenever practical, to cut down the tremendous scope of the three-move style of restriction...10-15 here is also favored, but less restrictive. Cont. 25-22, (the optional 18-14 exchange also has merit) then 6-10 returns to trunk play. But here (with 25-22 committed) 7-10 is also sound, as in Chamblee-Tinsley, 1950 Paxton Nat. Ty. A third alternative to 10-14 in the11-16 exchange(often used by the uninformed to reduce the pieces) is hazardous after 25-18, *12-16, (not 4-8, 29-25, 12-16, 28-24, 16-20, 24-19, 10-14, *26-22, 6-10, 18-15; a W.W. by W. Hellman) 28-24,16-20, 24-19, 4-8, 29-25, 1-5, 25-22, 8-11, then 32-28, (a cook by Basil Case, to improve Hellman92s 19-15 draw) 9-14,18-9, 5-14, 22-18, 13-17, (as 14-17 eventually loses after 18-14) etc; 19-15, 11-18, 23-14, 7-10, 14-7, then Case shows a W.W. after 3-10, and 2-11 was shown to lose by Ed Scheidt in Hall`s " Checker Classics" D) Played to coax 7-10...if 25-22 instead, then 6-10, 28-24, (as 27-24 is trunk) 10-15, 22-17, 13-22, 26-10, 7-14, 30-26, 15-22, 26-10, 2-7, 29-25, (or 10-6, 1-10, then 23-19 is Opening 23---and if 21-17, to bait 9-13, Red has the easier 10-14 exchange to draw. It is wise to look before leaping, as the expert does not usually offer pieces gratis!) 7-14, 25-22, 1-5, 22-17, (for 24-19 see Opening No. 23-G) 4-18, 23-14, 9-18, 27-23, 18-27, 32-23, 11-15, 17-14, *3-7, 21-17, 15-18, 24-19, 18-27, 31-24, 8-11, 17-13, 4-8 13-9, 7-10 to a classic draw...W. Gardner vs. Sam Cohen, WCP Game 163. E) If 7-10, White delays 25-22 with the early 24-19, then 11-15, (if 3-7, *28-24) 18-11, 8-24, 28-19, 4-8, 25-22, 2-7, 30-25, 8-11, 22-18 to a W.W. by Roy B. Hunt. Also, the once-favored 1-5 is now obsolete after *31-27 (instead of the 23-19 slip and 19-16 draw) and the defender has nothing better than the 14-17 exchange--a remarkable White win, Case winning from Hellman in their 1963 Match ---Note; this applies to Note G. F) But here 24-19, 11-15, etc; then 1-5 and the White attack is stilled. G) Red must permit the break-up and the ensuing strong attacks, as 1-5, *31.27 is the win mentioned in Note B, and the 11-15 exchange also fails after 24-19, 15-24, 28-19, 1-5, 22-18, 4-8, 29-25, 8-11,25-22, 11-16, etc; then the *2117 pitch to win, as in Opening No. 13, Note C. H) The play has been forced to this stage White again has the 10-6 pitch option, then 1-10, 23-19, (and if 21-17 the 10-14 exchange draws) *10-15,19-10, 7-14, 24-19, 9-13, (better than the 11-16 exchange with a difficult ending-R.E. Hunt vs. M. Tinsley, 6th. District Ty. Joliet, 1949) 32-27, 13-17, 29-25 and 14-18, 21-14, 18-23, 27-18, 11-16, etc., draw. M. Tinsley vs. Leo Levitt, 1950 National Tourney. I) Cont: 3-7, (here 1-5 is bad by 19-16 etc., then 20-16, 8-12, 16-11, 12-16 and*32-27. also, the 11-16 exchange leads again into dubious endings) 32-27, 1-5, 19-16, (or 29-25, 14-17 etc., then 7-10 and 11-16 to draw-D. Lafferty vs. Walter Hellman, 1972 Lakeside Ty.) 12-19, 23-16, 8-12, 27-23, 12-19, 23-16, then both 14-17 and have been shown to draw.
OPENING NO 22. 9-13, 24-20, 6-9 9-13, 24-20, 6-9(A), 22-18(B), 10-15(C), 18-14(D) 9-18, 23-14, 1-6(E), 27-23(F), 15-19(G) 23-16, 12-19, 25-22, 7-10(H), 14-7, 3-10, 32-27(I), 8-12, 30-25(J). FORMS DIAGRAM
A) Although White can again command the enter, as in the preceding opening, the defence is less trying than in Opening no. 4, due to the early 24-20—reversed B) The natural advance and usually played with 28-24 secondary, permitting 11-15, then 23-18, 8-11, 27-23 etc., along Ayrshire Lassie lines-See Long-Hunt 1936 match. And if 23-18 instead, then 10-14, 18-15, etc., and 7-11, to a sound formation-Long-Banks, 1934. C) The recognized defence. Other moves are held suspicious:
D) A point to be noted. In the preceding opening, 25-22 here is quite strong, as the 15-19 exchange then can be met with 29-25. But here, if 25-22, then 15-19 is solid as 29-25 in reply is out of order by the 9-14 exchange. Therefore, White has nothing better than 27-24, and the attack is curtailed with 9-14, and the following exchanges. In view of this, the White attack is limited to the sole 18-14 variation. E) Further weakening the double corner, but in this instance there is nothing better and also useful from: 9-13, 24-20, 5-9, 22-18, 10-15, 18-14, etc., then 1-5 is the same. Here 15-18 is also sound, with perhaps more complications after 28-24, (or 26-23, 11-15, 30-26, 15-19, 23-16 12-19, 27-23, 18-27, 32-16, 8-12, 16-11,7-16, 20-11, 3-7, 11-8, 4-11, 25-22, 13-17, 22-13, then 1-6 and 6-9 draws. M.Tinsley vs. G.W. Bass, 1948 practice) 11-15, 26-23, 8-11, 23-19(1) 2-6, 19-10, 6-15, 32-28, (or 30-26, 18-22, etc., Hellman-Long, 1962 match draw) 4-8, 30-26, 12-16, 26-23, 8-12, 25-22, 18-25, 29-22, then16-19, etc; and 22-18 to a draw. L. Rosenfield-W. Ryan.
F) White is blessed with other excellent attacks in 28-24 and 25-22:
G) Avoiding 15-18, 32-27, with the later threat of the 25-22 exchange. The two trades shown here were the art-work of the late Geo. W. Bass, and forwarded to Edwin Hunt prior to the 11th. ACA Nat. Ty. in 1946. H) The sequel to the 15-19 exchange at Note C. The Red defence is based on the fact that 22-18 is ineffective, either here or later. I) If 30-25 first, then 2-7 fits in, followed with 32-27 (since 22-18 allows the 11-16 shot) and return to trunk play. Also if 22-18 instead, Red again has the 11-16, 2-7, and 4-8 shot to an easy draw. J) Or 27-24, 4-8, 24-15, 11-25, 29-22, 8-11, 26-23, 10-14, 30-26, 6-10, 23-19, 11-15, 20-16, etc., then 14-17 to draw-E. Fuller vs. N. Tinsley, 1970 So. Ty. Continue after 30-25 in trunk: *2-7, 27-24, 4-8, 24-15, 11-18, 22-15, 10-19, 31-27, (or 21-17, etc: then 8-11 and 18-15 to a draw M.Chamblee vs. N. Tinsley, 1947 match) 5-9, 27-24, 7-11, 24-15, 11-18, 25-22, etc., then 8-11, 26-23, 11-15, 23-19, 15-24, 28-19, 9-14, 20-16, 6-10, 16-11, then 12-16, 19-12 and 10-15 to a draw; a beautiful example of defensive timing by C. W. Bass.
We sometimes forget that every good thing worth possessing must be paid for in strokes of daily effort ---- Wm. James.
OPENING NO 23. 9-13, 24-20, 10-14 9-13, 24-20, 10-14(A), 28-24(B), 5-9(C), 22-18(D), 6-10(E) 25-22, 10-15(F), 22-17, 13-22, 26-10, 7-14, 30-26, 15-22, 26-10, 2-7, 10-6(G), 1-10, 29-25(H). FORMS DIAGRAM
A) Similar to Opening No. 21, as the defender must commit 5-9 against the centre press. B) Or the direct advance with 22-18, virtually forcing 5-9 (as the additional weakening of the double corner cannot be tolerated with the 18-9 exchange) and into Opening No. 21. The 22-17 exchange here is less effective and usually transposes into a 9-14, 24-20, 10-15, 22-18 formation. 28-24, as given in trunk, is perhaps a more subtle way of approaching this opening, giving the defence more leeway for questionable opening moves. C) Unquestionably correct, as played by M. Tinsley vs. M. Chamblee in the 1950 Paxton Nat. Ty.. Against other replies:
D) White now has nothing stronger, as 22-13-22, 26-10, (not 25-18, 7-10 to a Red win -Master-Play, page 145-C) 7-14, 25-22, and a familiar Double Corner line from 9-14, 24-20, 5-9, 22-18, 10-15, etc., as in Master-Play trunk. E) As in a number of previous openings, 7-10 here is suspicious after 25-22, 10-15, (if 3-7, 32-28, 1-5, 24-19, W.W., from Opening No. 22, Note C) 23-19, 14-23, 19-10, 6-15, 26-10, 2-6, 10-7, 3-10,then both 9-14 and 10-14 fail against 27-23 at previous move, as shown by Basil Case in 21st. Nat. Ty, Game 20, from 9-13, 24-20, 5-9. F) Best, and into Opening No. 21, Note D...1-5 is also playable, then 32-28, (not 29-25, as 10-15, 23-19 and the defender attacks!--Bryant-B.F. Hunt, 1946 ACA Ty; and later by W. Hellman vs. B. Frazier, 1967 match) 11-15, 18-11, 8-15, 24-19, 15-24, 28-19, 4-8, 22-18, 8-11, 27-24, (if 29-25, Red has the excellent 12-16 pitch, then 19-12, 10-15, 27-24, 15-29, 12-8, 3-12, 30-25 to an easy draw M. Tinsley vs. Asa Long in the 1952 National Tourney. G) 29-25, 7-14, 25-22, 1-5, 24-19, (for 22-17, see Opening No. 21) 14-18, 22-15,11-18, 23-14, 9-18, 27-23, 18-27, 32-23,5-9, 21-17, 9-13, 17-14, then *3-7, (not 13-17, as 19-16 led to a winning White combination-B. Fuller vs. M. Chamblee, 1946 Newark Nat. Ty.) 31-26, 13-17, draws; crowning on 30, then 7-11. H) For 21-17, see Opening No. 21. Continue after 29-25: 10-14, (if 10-15, 23-19, then the only hope lies in 9-13, as 15-18 instead, 19-15, 12-16, 31-26, 16-19, 21-17, 19-28, 17-14, 9-13 and 26-22-a fine cooked win by. M. Chamblee over Lee Munger in the 1950 Nat. Ty. Red now has nothing better than 7-10, 15-6, 18-23, 27-18, 13-17, 22-13 and 11-16, etc., but the resulting ending fails after 6-2, 29-25, 2-6, 25-22 and 14-10 to a W.W.) 25-22, 7-10, 32-28, 11-15, 24-19, 15-24,28-19, 8-11, 20-16, 11-20, 22-18, then 4-8 (Levitt-Tinsley, 1950 Nat. Ty.) or 3-8 (Frazier-Heilman, 1967) will draw with careful play.
OPENING NO 24. 9-13, 24-20, 10-15 9-13, 24-20, 10-15(A), 28-24(B), 5-9(C), 23-18(D), 1-5(E), 27-23(F), 6-10, 23-19(G), 11-16(H), 20-11, 7-23, 18-11, 8-15, 26-19, 3-7, 30-26(I), 7-11(J), 22-18(K). FORMS DIAGRAM
A) This slant towards the centre stops 22-18, with White holding only a modest advantage; in contrast to the previous 24-20 Edinburghs. B) The best attack. This opening is of the `cat and mouse` variety, with both sides attempting to coax the other into a premature or out of order tempo move, such as 21-17 here, then 7-10 (although bad at Note C) here is strong after 25-21, 6-9, 23-18, 1-6, 17-14, etc., then the 13-17 exchange, with Red best, as left here by W.F. Ryan, see Tinsley-Lowder continuation below. Also, if 23-18 at 4th. Move, then 5-9 again is proper, (as 12-16, with the intention of a Kelso-Cross line may be countered with 26-23, (or 18-14, then 16-19?, 14-10, 7-14, 27-23 is in the Oldbury-Scheidt 1982 A. Ty to a WW, but a draw has been suggested by DEO..) 8-12, 30-26, and White is best) followed with 21-17, (or 28-24, 1-5, 27-23, 6-10 and into trunk play) 7-10, (or 1-5 first, then 28-24, 7-10, 17-14, 10-17, 27-23--Hellman-Oldbury draw-See Note D) 25-21, 1-5, 17-14, 10-17, 21-14, 13-17, 22-13, 15-22, 26-17, 9-18 and same as first part of this note...Cont: 30-26, 3-7, 26-23, 18-22, 23-18, 11-16, 20-11, 8-15, 18-11, 7-16, 8-24,4-8, 27-23, 16-20, 24-19, 8-11, 23-18, 6-10, 32-27, 2-6, 19-16, 12-19, 18-14, 10-15, 14-10, 19-24, 10-1, then 22-26, etc. to a draw--M. Tinsley vs. E. Lowder, 1977 Fla. Open Ty. C) But now 7-10 is anti-positional, allowing the 23-19 bind, then 6-9, (12-16 19-12, 15-18 x then 26-23, 5-9, 25-22 9-14 as yet untested play by Derek Oldbury) 26-23, 9-14, and the 23-18 exchange Dell....Long 9th. Am. Ty: and Previously by Apel - Ryan, 8th. A.T., to a WW....... instead, 6-10 is sound, then 23-18, (or 23-19, 1-6,27-23, then *6-9...not 11-16 first, White best, Oldbury-Tinsley, 1958 match==23-18 reverts to trunk) 5-9, then with 6-10 committed, 21-17 is now in order and continued with; 1-5, 25-21, 12-16, 27-23 8-12, 32-28, 9-14, 18-9, 5-14, 22-18,15-22, 30-25, 14-18, 23-14, 10-15, etc; White best, but a sound draw--Hellman Long, 1948 match. D) If 23-19, (as 21-17, 7-10, 23-18, 1-5 here is Note B, but White has the better option of 17-14, 10-17, 27-23, 17-21, 23-19, 6-10, 32-28, 2-6, 26-23, 13-17, etc., then 11-16 and a Hellman-oldbury 1965 match draw) then 6-10 is more restrictive than the 15-18 exchange, as in Ginsberg-Gonotsky, 1925, and Long-Hellman, 1948. After 6-10, White has 27-23, 1-5, 23-18, 11-16, etc., and 3-7 is into trunk play once again. E) This waits on White`s procedure. Other moves are 12-16, which is strongly met with Chamblee`s 26-23, as in Oldbury vs. Hellman, 1965. Or 7-10, which again gets 21-17, 1-5, 17-14, 10-17, and 27-23--the Hellman-Oldbury line of Note D. And lastly, 6-10 is also met with 21-17, then 1-5, 25-21, and 12-16 into the Hellman-Long draw of Note C. F) Or 26-23, (if 21-17, either 6-10 or 7-10, as in Note E) 6-10, 23-19, 10-14, etc., an H.B. Reynolds-A. Jordan ancient line, contested in the 1st. IM. , 1905. G) 32-28, 10-14, 23-19, etc., then the14-18 and 25-22 exchanges, 8-11, 19-16, (not 30-26, 4-8, 21-17?, 2-7, Red wins-R. Cornell-E. Frazier, 1964 Nat. Ty.) Etc., to an easy draw, as in Tinsley Chamblee 1947 match. H) Better than the 10-14 break, then 19-15 and the 8-11 exchanges, 25-22, 14-17, etc., 29-22, 3-7, 32-27, 7-10, 27-23, and White is better--M. Chamblee. I) Or the Cornell cook with 21-17, 9-14, (if 7-11, 17-14, 9-18, 24-20, 15-24, 22-6, 2-9, 32-28, 24-27, 31-24, 12-16, 25-22, 9-14, 22-18--Albrecht-Cornell draw, in 1962 N.T.---but if 2-6? instead of 7-11, White gets in Tinsley`s *31-27 to a W.W.) 25-21, 7-11, 30-26, 2-6, 26-23, 15-18, 22-8, 4-11, 23-18, 14-23, 17-14, draw, Robert Cornell. J) Not 9-14, 22-17, etc., 29-25, 4-8, 26-22, 7-11, 31-27, 14-18, 21-17, 2-6, then W.W. after 27-23, etc; Markusic-Grover, 1974 Nat. Ty. K) Cont. 15-22, 25-18, 9-14, 18-9, 5-14, 29-25, 11-15, 25-22, 14-18, 22-17 etc., then 18-23, 17-13, 4-8, 21-17, 8-11, 13-9, 23-26, 31-22, 11-16 draws-Chamblee-Tinsley, 1947
OPENING NO 25. 9-13, 24-20, 11-15 9-13, 24-20, 11-15(A), 22-17(B), 13-22, 25-11, 8-15, 21-17C)-Var. 1, 5-9-D, 17-13, 4-8-B, 29-25, 8-11, 28-24-F, 9-14-G, 25-22, 3-8-H, 23-18-I, 14-23, 27-18-J. FORMS DIAGRAM
A) The final Edinburgh and the most balanced, as Red gets in 11-15 first; familiar in the two-move restriction as the "Wagram" --honoring Napoleon`s greatest triumph. B) White has nothing better, as Banks` favored 28-24 (or 23-18, 8-11, 27-23, 5-9, 28-24, 10-14, 23-19 favors the first side) is met with 8-11, 23-18, 6-9, then 32-28 into a strong Ayrshire Lassie line as in Kear`s Ency., page 195, Var. 26. C) Opinion is equally divided between text and 29-25---Var. 1. Cont. 4-8, 25-22, 8-11, 23-18, 6-9(1), 28-24,12-16(2), 32-28(3), 3-8, 26-23, 8-12, 24-19, 15-24, 28-19, 1-6, 30-26, 9-14,18-9, 6-13,(if 5-14? 22-18 etc WW97 Albrecht v. Taylor; 1980 A.TY) etc., Drawn, Scott-Lieberman, c.r., 2nd. IM Game 441. 1. Preferred over 5-9, 27-24, 10-14,26-23, 7-10, 30-26, (or 31-26, 1-5 and into a c.r.`Wisp`,-Stiles-Rubin, 8th.A.T.) then both 3-8 (Hellman-Ryan, `38 C.P. Ty.) or 9-13, 18-9, 1-5 draw; Ginsberg-Long, 7th. A.C.A. Ty. 2. Into a 10-15, 22-18 variation, colors reversed-A fine move by Reynolds vs. Christie, 2nd. 1.1W., Game 275. 3. Other ways are treacherous-27-23, 3-8, 22-17, (as 32-28, 8-12, R.W.) 15-22, 17-13, 2-6, 26-17, 10-15, and Red is powerful--E.F. Hunt vs. Asa Long, c.r. 1936 match. And if 26-23 at first, then 10-14, 22-17, 15-22, 17-10, 7-14, 24-19, 22-25, 19-12, then 25-29 (Reynolds-Christie) or 11-15 are published Red wins. D) Forcing the piece into 13; either here or at the next move. E) Or 9-14, 29-25, 15-18, as used by A.B. Scott in the 2nd. IM, but strongly met with 23-19, (if 28-24, 4-8, 24-19, 8-11, then 13-9, 6-13, 26-22, is best and the Lieber-Gonotsky 1928 match draw) 4-8, then 27-24, White strong, as in B.D.J., Game 173. F) If 25-22, Red has the option of 9-14, returning to trunk, or D`Orio`s 3-8-which coaxes 23-18, (but the 23-19 exchange is better-Rubin-Ryan, 7th. A.T. draw) after which 15-19 is strong. Cont: 27-23, (not 30-25, 10-14, 18-15, etc., then 7-11 to a Red win, Jordan-Ginsberg) 10-14, 23-16, 12-19, 31-27, 14-23, 27-18, 9-14, 18-9, 1-5, *26-23 is vital to draw-not the natural 32-27, 5-14 and everything loses. R. Wins. G) 3-8 is now in error, as White gets in the 23-19 cramp, then 15-18, 26-23 and both 1-5 and 9-14 have been shown to lose-see Master-Play, page 78, Var. 8-A. H) Or 14-18, (not 14-17, 23-19, 17-21,26-23, 6-9, 13-6, 2-9, *32-28, 9-13, and 23-18, W.W.) 23-14, 10-17, 27-23, 7-10, 23-18, 1-5, 31-27, 3-7, 27-23, 17-21, 32-28, 5-9, then the 24-19 and 11-16 exchanges to a pp draw. I) In contrast to Note C, 23-19 here is a White error, as the 15-18 exchange is now available, then 32-28, *7-11, 19-15, etc. and 6-9 etc., pp, Red wins. J) Cont: 10-14, 18-9, 15-19, (7-10 is a handicap line when met with 24-19, 15-24, 26-23 or 22-18) 24-15, 11-25, 30-21, 1-5, 26-22, 5-14, 31-27, 7-10, and 22-18, etc. the oft-played J. Swan draw.
The way of the superior man is three-fold, but I am not equal to it. Virtuous, he is free from anxieties; wise, he is free from perplexities; bold, he is free from fear. Confucious.
During the course of the 7th. ACA Ty. at Cedar Point in 1929, a committee of five masters (A.J. Heffner, L.C. Ginsberg, J.F. Horr, A. Long, H.B. Reynolds) was appointed to explore the possibility of an added (three-move) restriction; the `American`. This committee reported in 1931 that there were 245 possible openings; 59 of which were either duplications or outright losses; 36 placed in the doubtful category by a majority vote and 150 considered sound. In late 1933, these latter were again reconsidered, due to play produced by the 1931 C.P. tourney, and the 1932 Long-Hunt practice match, and 12 of the 150 were cast aside, with one additional (10-15, 22-17, 9-14) later barred in 1936. After some 30 years, these were again reviewed, and 5 restored as sound for use in the 1970 Nat. Ty; with 2 additional now being tested in mailplay for future use in Nat. Ty. practice. The evolution of the game over the past century and a half---who knows what the future holds!
|
