Remembering The Editor in Chief - David Moody

 

David Moody - Always on the job as the Editor of the MI Chess Mag

This game was played at the Cadillac Open in early November of 1996. It was published in the Michigan Chess magazine in December of that year. The game was annotated by state chess legend and Michigan Chess Hall of Fame member David Moody.

Mr. Moody tirelessly and selfishly work as the Editor for Michigan Chess for many years and spent countless hours going over games played at every Michigan tournament and tournaments groups of Michigan players attended – such as a US Open or Midwest Class Championship.

David always did a great job commentating and analyzing the games – all without the aid of chess software I have to cheat with today. I miss his great writing style to this day. I had the thrill of having him annotate and publish a little over a half dozen of my games. They were mostly losses - but at least he deemed them print worthy, and that was a compliment in itself I felt.

I will let Mr. Moody take over the commentary on this game. Any comments I add will be in [brackets]. Enjoy.

“With a rating difference in the 700-800 point range, you wouldn’t expect much out of the games in round 1 or a Swiss Open tournament. There were some moments of interest in this one however:

Mike Nikitin (1528)  vs Eric Ronneberg (2252) – Grunfeld Defense – D93

1.      d4   Nf6

2.      c4   g6

3.      Nc3   Bg7

4.      Nf3    O-O

5.      Bf4    d5

6.      e3    c5

7.      Nb5   Na6

Forcing the Black knight to a bad square, but not really a move in the spirit of the position, as it releases a lot of pressure on Black’s somewhat rickity center. And of course there are the usual clichés about not moving a piece twice in the opening.

8.      a3    Bg4

9.      Be2    dxc4

10.  Bxc4    cxd4

11.  Nbxd4    Nd5

With pressure on the long diagonal [a1-h8], not to mention the threatened advance of the e-pawn.

12.  Bg3    e5[?] 

White to move......and blunder on lucky #13.

[The position was (-.3) but is now EVEN. Igor3000 says 12…..Rc8! 13. Rc1, Bxf3 14.gxf3 is better for Black (-.9). But White blunders right back. 13. Nb5, e4  14. Qxd5, exf3  15. O-O  fxg2 16. Qxg2 was the correct way to relieve the pin. Instead of (=) it’s now Black (-2) after the next move.

  13.  Qb3?    Nc5

  [The game is slipping away from White.]

  14.  Qa2    exd4

  15.  Bxd5    Nd3+

  16.  Kf1     Rc8

  Threatening 17. ….Nc1, driving
   the queen away from supporting
   the bishop.[(-3)]

   17.  Bxb7   Nc1?

   [Black is getting cute, but will get away with it. The simple 17. …Be6 continues to build Black’s advantage (to -5.2). But the Master correctly predicts White will try and trap the knight.]

18.  Bxc8?   Qxc8!

For White, not all that bad was 18. Qd5 [(-3)]. He apparently hopes to trap the knight after 18….Nxa2 19. Bxg4, but Black has something better. [(-9.3)]

19.  Qd5     Qa6!+

Whaddya know. It’s our old friend; the smothered mate – after 20. Kg1, Ne2+ 21.Kf1, Nxg3+ 22. Kg1, Qf1+! 23. Rxf1, Ne2++. Now tell the truth – did you see that coming?

[Of course 20. Ke1, Qe2++]

            White Resigns

The Swiss System has various functions, outside of the obvious one of allowing a tournament to accommodate a large group of players in a small number of rounds.

Journalists who must decipher score sheets for publication have long noted that a Swiss System always seems to pair ‘good handwriting’ players together and ‘bad handwriting’ players together, ensuring that we never get to see all of the good games – only half.

Another traditional function of the Swiss System seems to take players that traveled together a long distance to attend the tournament - and play each other frequently at home – and pair them in the 1^st round. The farther away you live from the tournament site, the more likely it is that this will happen.”

[I miss your talented writing sir.]