CHESS SOFTWARE - THE CC PLAYERS’ GOD,
DEVIL - OR JUST PLAIN SERVANT?

The subject of ”Software and correspondence (CC)” has been disputed at least for as
long as I have been involved in CC. The so-called optimists who claimed 15 years
ago that computers would have no influence on CC, have obviously been mistaken.
Chess programs quickly grew strong enough to influence CC and indeed they have done so.
In CC as in all other walks of life: the introduction of new technology cannot be stopped.
Even though there are surprisingly many exceptions out there, particularly among older
players without Internet access, a great majority of CC players today take advantage
of chess software of some kind. The two main results have been:
 

An improvement in general playing strength: fewer games, at all levels, are decided
by blunders or simple tactical oversights.
 

An equalising of playing strength in the sense that chess software improves the weaker
players more than they do the stronger players. ICCF has learnt its lesson from this
and sensibly enough has reduced the number of classes from five to two.
 

The pessimists who feared that chess programs would make CC players a dying
race and/or be collectively changed into computerised messengers, have also
been proved wrong. The biggest change is more due to Internet than to chess software:
CC has become all the more synonymous to email and server chess, a development
that both for time-saving as well as economical reasons in all probability will continue
until one day the postal authorities in a still distant future will be made superfluous.
The principle of CC, or "Fernschach” as our German-speaking friends prefer to call it,
is the same whether the moves are transferred by snail- or e-mail - and whether in our times
of “ideal chess with all available help allowed” a move is found with the help of opening books, game data bases, family, friends or software, does not make much difference, does it?
 

In practice the chess programs probably play a more important role behind the
drawn curtains in today’s CC than what the other help channels are able to,
but they are still no way decisive in games between Master players. It is interesting
to note that the top CC players of 20 years ago still are active and to a surprisingly
high degree hold their own today. Also of interest is the fact that top over-the-board (OTB) player Ulf Andersson immediately rose to the top of CC once he joined the CC community.
It can be argued that OTB play has been more influenced by computers than CC has.
Adjourned games have disappeared completely over a few years, fighting electronic
cheating is becoming an advanced science, and opening preparations have been the
subject of a technical revolution that often can decide games even on an international top level. In fact, it is not unthinkable that the future position of CC will be strengthened because
of the chess programs: the critical stage where the best chess programs are so much
better than the best humans that games between humans are uninteresting, will come
later in OTB with “normal” time limits than in blitz or speed games, and even much later in CC. This applies even to the hypothetical scenario where humans play without the help of
chess programs: the greatest asset of the programs is their ability to evaluate relatively
short and “hard” variations quickly and exactly, and the importance of that is
inversely proportional to the time limits in the game.
 

Undoubtedly there are players today, as there were 10-15 years ago, who in any
position blindly mail the chess programs’ first choice to their opponent, even though
I still do not understand what their meaning of life is. But I do not believe there
are more such players now than five years ago, or that they obtain better results
than they did five years ago. A computer administrator without any chess understanding or critical mind will still experience unpleasant surprises in games where the opponent has access to the same chess programs but in addition has a better chess understanding and a critical mind.
 

My own CC experience strengthens the impression that chess programs
can influence CC games, but very seldom decide them on their own. My use
of chess programs in CC tournaments has been constant: I have never used any.
I won my first Master group in 1993-94, and my second in 2001 - with several
mediocre and downright failures in-between. I have consequently on my own,
without the help of chess software, and definitely without any deep chess
understanding, qualified for a CC World Championship Semifinal. Over a decade
where chess programs claim to have undergone a revolutionary evolution, my
results without computer assistance have, if anything, slightly improved.
Why don’t I use Fritz during my CC games, since I received it as payment/fringe
benefit for writing a rules column some years ago? It is not for religious reasons,
but partly because I want to train my analysis skills, partly because so far I have
not played a CC tournament mainly for the result, and partly because I want to
celebrate my approximately two yearly wins with a pizza party without having to
invite the computer as honorary guest. Do I sometimes miss the company of Fritz in
critical CC positions? Of course, it happens, as in the following game from the match
Canada-Norway. I believed White obtained a positionally won game in the opening,
but it took me a whole year before I could come up with something tactically decisive -
and I suspect a strong chess program would have found it much earlier. When the
Canadian’s “I resign” somewhat surprisingly dumped down in my mail box I lost no
time in feeding my game into Fritz - and was very relieved that I hadn’t done it sooner…..

 

Hans Olav Lahlum (NOR) - Raymond Stone (CAN).
Friendly Match : Norway - Canada
Queen Gambit Accepted, with 3.e4.
 

Stone is a taciturn but nice and young air-plane mechanic who wanted to play
by traditional snail-mail, claiming he lived isolated with a fish tank but no computer.
When I start a new CC game I am only interested in new friendships and interesting
positions, so I don’t care if my opponent receives help from chess programs at home,
chess programs at work, other air-plane mechanics or his goldfish. Far more irritating
was the fact that he played the dead boring exchange variation in the French in his
white game - that yawn of a draw might have been avoided if he had used a chess
program with at least a iota of self respect.

1.d4 d5 2.c4 dxc4 3.e4
 

This ambitious central thrust has given me many advantages but very few points OTB.
Luckily, the problem in CC is usually the other way round….
 

3… e5
 

Most common, but 3…. c5 is a sound alternative. Switched off his opening library
Fritz blows his materialistic horn by trying to hold on to the pawn with 3….b5.
 

4.Nf3 exd4
 

The principal reply; 4….Bb4+ and 4…. Nf6 are wait-and-see alternatives
 

5.Bxc4!?
 

The sharpest move - White develops quickly and gets a nice view towards f7,
but he must be prepared to sacrifice a pawn in many variations. 5.Qxd4 Qxd4 5.Nxd4
is safer, but there is no advantage to White after exchanging Queens.
 

5…. Nc6!?
 

Possibly more playable in CC than OTB, but still very risky: White invariably
gets a strong initiative for the pawn. 5….c5? 6.Ne5! Be6 7.Bxe6 fxe6 8.Qh5+ is not
playable in CC (either). 5…. Bb4+ 6.Bd2 Bxd2+ 7.Nbxd2 Nc6 or 6.Nbd2 Nc6 7.O-O Nf6/Be6
is supposedly the slightly safer main variation of accepted opening theory.
 

6.O-O g6?!
 

We are entering a very open landscape, more akin to Guico Piano or Scotch than
Queen’s Gambit. That Black has to look after f7 is clearly seen in
6… Bg4? 7.Qb3 Qd7 8.Bxf7+! Qxf7 9.Qxb7 Rc8 10.Qxc6+ (Pytel - Castro, Dortmund 1977)
and 6…. Bc5? 7.Ng5 Nh6 8.Nxf7 Nxf7 9.Bxf7+ Kxf7 10.Qh5+ g6 11.Qxd5 (Stein - Kvyatosky, Ukraine, 1959), in both cases with a clear attacking advantage for White after he has reclaimed his pawn and Black has lost his castling rights. After the main variation 6…. Be6!? 7.Bxe6 fxe6 8..Qb3 Qd7 White can win back his pawn with 9.Qxb7 Rb8 10.Qa6 or 9.Ng5 O-O-O Nxe6,
but it is not quite clear who is best after this. The text move holds on to the pawn provided correct play on Black’s part, but White gets a strong and lasting initiative.
 

7.e5!/!?
 

Fritz cowardly refuses (for as long I cared to wait) to even check this
positionally critical pawn break and prefers 7. Bb5?! to regain the d4 pawn.
 

7…. Bg7 8.Qb3

Consistently following up with pressure on f7. Fritz nurtures no particular warm feelings
for the a2-g8 diagonal and once again prefers to hold on to the pawn with 8.Bb5?!
 

8…. Qe7?!
 

Surprisingly a TN and a clear improvement to accepted theory - but not clear enough
to save the variation. The only earlier known attempt with 6…. g6?! is Lehmann - Bellon,
Malaga 1970, where the later IGM lost decisive material after
8…. Qd7? 9.Ng5!  Nd8 10.Nxf7 Nxf7 11.e6. I give Fritz his first plus mark due to
his second choice as 8…. Be6!? 9.Qxb7?! (9…. Bxe6 is probably better, but even
if White regains his pawn on b7 or e6 the advantage is not obvious.)
Nge7 10.Bb5 O-O! 11.Bxc6 Rb8 12.Qxa7 Nxc6 actually gives compensation for
the pawn and is Black’s most active attempt to save the variation. On the other hand
Fritz does not believe in Black’s positional compensation after 12…. Nxc6
and therefore prefers - as Stone does - 8…. Qe7?!.
 

9…. Bg5
 

This rather obvious move is given by FIDE-IM Jakov Neistadt, in his spare time a leading theoretician on Queen’s Gambit Accepted - but now we left the Cape Farewell of the theory map. Fritz is afraid of losing the e5 pawn and prefers to give it extra support with Bf4 or Re1.
 

9…. Qd7
 

9…. Na5?? 10.Qb5+, in case anyone was wondering.

 

10.e6!?
 

It was difficult to assess the consequences of this second pawn sacrifice -
so difficult that I soon gave it up and instead simply concluded that the half-open e-file,
a wide open a2-g8 diagonal and in general active pieces should give first-class
compensation for two hanging central pawns: especially since it is difficult to see
where Black in the foreseeable future can hide his King. A good alternative was
10.Bd2 threatening 11.Ng5 Nh6 12.Nxf7! Nxf7 13.e6 - or to prepare the e6-break with
11.Re1. However, Black can then invite to move repetition by 11…. Qe7, which in some variations allows Black to counter e6 with f6/f5 if White deviates, or even to capture on e5. 11.Bd2 Qe7 12.Bg5 Qd7 13.e6!? would be obvious OTB, but in CC I preferred to take
the e6 path right away rather than paying a fee of 2 stamps at the toll plaza and taking a
detour. Fritz has no plans involving e6 and no misgivings in allowing Na5xc4, giving
11.Re1 and 11.Na3?! as equal alternatives with a small advantage in both cases.
 

11... fxe6 11.Bd2!
 

At first this felt like admitting not only the fact that White has no directly decisive
plan, but also admitting my, in the OTB community, well-known direction blindness.
What will become of Nb1 and Ra1 in life was also a source of worry here. However, it doesn’t look much better for Black’s Bc8 and Ra8, and he was ready to exchange one of his main problems with Na5 followed by Nxc4: 11.Re1? Na5! 12.Bxe6 (12.Rxe6? Qxe6 13.Qa4+/Qb5+ Bd7!) Nxb3 13.Bxd7+ Kxd7 14.axb3 and it is doubtful whether White has full compensation for
the pawn at the threshold to the end-game: Black’s exposed King is in far less danger
after the exchange of Queens, while the Bishop pair as well as the pawn structure will
be to his advantage in the long run. The text move weeds out Na5 (with an iron rake),
and threatens friendly, but determinedly  to increase the pressure on e6 with Re1 or Ng5,
in some variations even a tactical Bxe6. Fritz considers the variation played in the game,
but cannot find anything better than 14.Bf7+ - concluding with advantage for Black!
 

11…. Nge7 12.Ng5 Nd8
 

Probably not posted with a light heart, but against 12… e5?, 13.
Be6 followed by 14.Bxc8 and 15.Qf7+ is the simplest lock on the mailbox.
 

13.Re1 e5 14.f4!?
 

Fritz wants to play 14.Bf7? Kf8 (possibly to deny Black the right to castle, which
anyway is only hypothetical at the moment), but cannot find any better continuation
than 15.Bc4, whereupon Black threatens to win material by 15…. h6.  15.Qf3 is met
with Qf5, and 14.Nf7? Nxf7 15.Bxf7+ Kf8 and 16…  Nc6/Qf5 was even less tempting:
White has - without collecting an exchange fee - swapped the active Ng5 for its
passive counterpart at d8. Better then to park the pieces in their present active
positions, discretely awaiting how Black intends to develop his pieces - and threatening
less discretely to win back one of the pawns and/or to open the f-file as well.
 

14…. Nec6!
 

Planning Qe7 and developing Bc8 - the only good plan I can see in this position.
14…. a6?! might help black after 15.a4?!, but as pointed out by Fritz white can roll on with 15.fxe5 since 15... b5? 16.Bf7+ Kf8 17.Rf1 is a one way driven road to chess Hell. I rejected on principle opening the e-file with 14… exf4?!, since it doesn’t even win another pawn. Fritz at first flags clear advantage for Black after capturing on f4, but characteristically turns around to clear advantage for White when he eventually discovers some concrete tactics in the shape of
15.Bb5! c6 16.Bb4 Bf6 17.Nxh7! Rxh7 18.Qg8 mate.
 

15.fxe5
 

Winning back a pawn, threatening the reappearing 16.Nxf7 Nxf7 17.e6 theme.
Closing the e-file feels a little bit dubious, but it is very temporarily.
 

15…. Qe7
 

16.Ne4!
 

Sacrifices pawn number two for the second time - this time with the intent to open
both the e- and f-files against Black’s King, and also immediately threatening 17.Nf6+.
Possibly White has compensation for one pawn after 16.e6??, but that move is a grave
positional misunderstanding that allows Black to castle out of his biggest problems.
Black’s main problem is still the King, and White should rather give another pawn to open the e-file, than to close the a2-g8 diagonal and holding on to the pawn. Fritz impresses by actually finding 16.Ne4! Nxe5 17.Bg5 Qf8, but refuses to admit that White has an advantage afterwards.
 

16…. Nxe5?!
 

In a difficult position Black should concentrate on closing the a2-g8 diagonal
rather than opening a file to hang on to pawn number two.
16…. Be6 17.Nf6+ (17.Bg5?! Qb4) Kf8 or 16… Ne6 17.Nf6+ Kd8 are definitely not
pleasant but give slightly better chances of survival. After the text move the variations
are too numerous for my notebook, but I lacked the fantasy to imagine that Black
could survive for long with the e- and f-files as a double-barrelled gun aimed at him.
Ne5 never has time to capture on c4 due to discovered checks along the e-file and the
Knight is hanging loose itself. In defence of the text move it could be said that Black’s
position has become a 64-headed nightmare, in addition to the fact that 16… Qxe5? 17.Ng3
and 16…. Bxe5? 17.Bg5 threatening 18.Nf6+ immediately lose decisive material.
 

17.Bg5 Qf8 18.Nbd2!
 

I looked for a win after 18.Rf1 Bf5, but found none. With 6 black pieces crowding the
8th row I then prefer to develop my remaining light piece, delay Rf1 until Rae1 is available,
and launch Nf3 as a new critical possibility. I ask nothing more - for this move.
 

18…. d3?!
 

This was about the last legal move I expected: Black seems to settle down to the idea
that he has a lost position on his hands, and instead of trying to get his pieces into
play he dreams of swindles based on d2, Bd4+ and/or Qc5+ in a later variation. What I
actually expected at this stage I cannot really say. Opening the e-file for White’s Rook with
16…. Nxc4?? is just as suicidal as it looks: 16.Nf6++?! Kf7 20.Qxc4 Ne6 21.Rf1 wins,
but even simpler is 19.Qxc4! threatening several decisive discovered checks. Even in
the age of computers the threat is often stronger than its execution. Against the direct
18…. Bf5?! White can capture on d6 or b7, and after the quiet 19.Nf3 or 19.Bf4, Ne5 begins
to look unstable. Fritz admits to a clear advantage and gives in to the - at best - very
patiently 18…. a5? (White can capture on d8, or if he wants to be a sadist he can insert
19.a3 a4 20.Qg3, but after 19.Nf3 Black cannot play Qb4 because of the threatening an
avalanche in the e-file!) Instead he will then try to force a declaration from Bg5 with
18…. h6!?, possibly Black’s best try. Fritz once again underestimates White’s
compensation when he only gives a small advantage after 19.Bxd8 Kxd8 20.Rf1 Qe7 21.Rae1
and must eventually admit that 19.Bh4 g5 20.Bg3 Ndc6 21.Bb5/Bd5 quickly hurts in the e-file.

19.Rf1

Fritz’s 19.Nf3 d2 20.Re3 surely also wins, but White’s position becomes
completely overwhelming when Ra1 is transferred to the f-file.
 

19…. Bf5 20.Rae1
 

Or 20.g4 Nxg4 21.Rae1, but now White’s pieces have occupied nearly optimal
squares - and 21.g4 winning a piece is only one of several threats.

20…. Kd7!?
 

Under very difficult conditions the most creative try: the King leaves
the e-file and if he reaches c8 the game may be a long one.
 

21.Bxd8!
 

As a die-hard chess dogmatic I at first had principal objections against this move.
It should not be correct to exchange an active Bishop on g5 against a flattened
Knight on d8. However, Black’s position has reached the critical stage where the
position can be brought down by concrete computations, and with all of White’s
remaining pieces in good positions it is only logical to exchange a piece - even a
good one - for the active defender Nd8. Having moved his King to d7, Black
makes a Queen invasion on b7 look more tempting. The Bishop’s use of the key
square g5 is a story within the story of this game: Both 9.Bg5-d2 and 17.Bd2-g5 were
good moves increasing White’s advantage - and when the Bishop finally leaves
g5 the advantage becomes decisive.
 

21…. Rxd8?!
 

21…. Qxd8? 22.Nc5+ or 21… Kxd8 22.Qxb7 Rc8 23.Be6/Qd5+ doesn’t last long -
but the pin in the f-file can be utilised after the text move as well. Fritz points out an
opportunity to capture on c4 at last: 21…. Nxc4! 22.Nxc4 Rxd8 is possible since 23.g4? Bd4+ doesn’t win material, but as he admits, Black has decisive attack after the simple 23.Qxb7.
 

22.Be6+ 1-0
 

Fritz flags clear advantage after 22.Qb5+ Nc6 23.g4 Bd4+ 24.Kh1 Qb4 25.gxf5 or 22.Qxb7,
which also should win. Even though it was on a day nearly (but note: only nearly)
as beautiful as my ex-girlfriend, I was surprised when two weeks after the Bishop check
I found “My position in the A game is hopeless. Well done”, postmarked Canada,
in my mailbox. After quarrelling a bit with Fritz I concluded that the resignation was in place. 22…. Ke7?/Ke8? 23.Bxf5 gxf5 24.Ng5 wins material and/or mates in a few moves.
If Black gives up his Queen with 22…. Bxe6, 23.Qa4+! Kc8?! 24.Rxf8 Rhxf8 25.Nc5! Bd5 26.Qxa7 b6 27.Na6 is The Ultimate End. (23.Qb5+? also looks natural. After 23…. Nc6? White
must not play 24.Nc5+?? Qxc5! 25.Qxc5 Bd4+, suddenly giving Black jackpot for
18…. d3 - but 24.Rxf8 Bxf8 25.Nf6+ Ke7 26.Qg5 looks convincing. 23…. Kc8! 24.Rxf8 Rhxf8
25.Nc5 Bd5 is much less clear because a7 isn’t en prise anymore). Fritz first hinted
that Black should be perfectly happy with Rook, Bishop and two pawns for the
Queen after 23…. Nc6 24.Rxf8 Bxf8, but let himself relatively soon be convinced that
White still has a decisive advantage when 25.Nf6+! Ke7 26.Qf4 (with the idea 27.Qg5
or 27.Nfe4) Rd4 27.Qe3 Rd6 28.Nfe4 or 27…. Kxf6 28.Qxe6+ Kg7 29.Rf1 were banged
 (somewhat irritated) onto the keyboard. The conclusion of this line is no coincidence:
the Queen is more valuable when the opponent’s King is roaming the streets in the
centre and White’s pieces are still waiting on every corner with loaded guns.

The moral of this story is:

Fritz is, as its predecessors a clever tactical pathfinder, but as them far less trustworthy as
strategic advisor. You may hire it in a temporary position as secretary, but do not forget
that you yourself are the boss. Also, think critically over Fritz’s suggestions.

Fritz is more clever testing moves you serve him than suggesting move himself. You can
only (and then still only “maybe”) trust him if you are very active in suggesting
candidate moves, and also testing the final positions in the variations suggested by Fritz.

Fritz often underestimates initiative and attacking chances compared to material
balance until he sees the danger on the variation radar - but then it is often too late.
Evaluate critically his suggestions, particularly when you or your opponent has
sacrificed material to obtain positional compensation.

Fritz can still be a valuable advisor in your CC games, but if he decides them it is
still because of errors on your or your opponent’s side - and exaggerated beliefs in chess programs is probably the most frequent error committed in 21st century CC games….

 PS:  Three years after this article was first published in Norwegian, the author has
tested out Fritz as an advisor during the North Sea Team Tournament II. As the result
became his first IM-norm, the Lahlum without looking too depressed admits Fritz might be a very helpful advisor - but still upheld the rest of his conclusions from the Stone-game too...

Translated by  Per Lea

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Please also visit following page : http://home.online.no/~eirikgu/gausdal2004/