United States Blind Chess Association. Blind people play chess too. USBCA logo

The Challenger, July, 2025

Our Mission

The mission of the USBCA is to promote the game of chess among the blind community.

Website: https://usblindchess.org

Note: The views expressed in the Challenger do not necessarily reflect the policies or views of the USBCA or those of the editor.

Editor’s Note

By Rita Crawford

“Change is inevitable. Growth is optional.” John Maxwell.

The President’s Message details how the United States Blind Chess Association (USBCA) is embracing both change and growth. As you will read, the USBCA has begun offering many different activities to members in good standing. This includes different training seminars for all levels of playing skills. The newest training session being offered is taught by the USBCA President, Glenn Crawford. He will be focusing on anyone new who wants to learn the fundamentals of the game.

We have some new members to celebrate and welcome those who have recently joined!

Marilyn Bland attended the IBCA Olympiad in Serbia and just recently returned. Her observations offer a unique and interesting perspective of the event. Marilyn is also featured in the fast and fun Challenger column ‘Getting to Know…”.

This month’s player Spotlight features USBCA member Richard Turner. Richard’s story is one well worth reading, from the information on how he lost his vision to how he continued to embrace life.

John Denny has written a humorous account regarding attending Caveman Kevin Bachler’s class (also a USBCA consultant) and while there playing a simul with GM Gregory Kaidonov.

Bruce Leverett has written an engaging article about former USBCA member Al Sandrin who had quite an illustrious career in blind chess.

We round out The Challenger with two favorites, chess puzzles submitted by Jim Homme and Paul Benson contributed an engrossing annotated game initially published in the May 2022 UK Gazette.

Growth without change is not possible, but change without growth is. The USBCA is working very hard to be successful at both. New member’s often mean growth on many levels for the USBCA. With that growth we must make sure we strive to offer positive changes every step of the way.

 ## The President’s Message

Hello everyone,

We have made it. The United States Blind Chess Association has an Inc in its name. Our nonprofit charitable status is here. We are now the United States Blind Chess Association, Inc. also doing business as U.S. Blind Chess. We now have the ability to solicit donations and provide receipts for those who wish to give and use that donation on their tax returns. We do have legal responsibilities that go with our new status but opportunity goes hand in hand with that responsibility. With our new status and help and support from our members, a bright future is ahead of us.

Not only have we put in place seminars for our members for those at all levels of competence in chess but we now offer training for those wanting to learn the game and are members in good standing. I hold weekly Zoom training sessions available to anyone who joins our organization and wants to learn to play chess.

We are currently working out details for a USBCA-UKBCA showdown. We hope to put together a team representing the USBCA to play in a two-round correspondence match with a team representing the United Kingdom Braille Chess Association. More details will be forthcoming. Anyone interested in participating, please contact me at usblindchess@outlook.com.

With the reinstatement of membership dues, certain activities and rights have been linked to those who are in good standing. Attendance at seminars and participation in our correspondence tournaments and USBCA Summer Swiss Tournament are not the only activities offered to our dues paying members. Board elections will be held this December. Only those in good standing are eligible to run for office and vote in these elections.

I cannot emphasize too strongly how important it is that all our members obtain the good standing status. The funds not only go toward a growing list of bills the USBCA incurs on a monthly and yearly basis but will be needed for future planned activities such as providing chess equipment to those not able to afford it or providing financial assistance to those wanting to represent the USBCA at such events as the U. S. Blind Open Chess Championship and the IBCA European tournaments.

Individual responsibility to support this organization should be considered automatic. To help your chess group grow and be able to offer not only activities but help to our members and potential members should be a point of pride and desire. Help us continue on this new path to higher and better possibilities in chess.

Glenn Crawford
President, USBCA

Let’s all welcome the newest members to join the USBCA

Different Places, Same Problems

By Marilyn Bland

Money, funding, collaboration – or a dearth of these – greatly affect every aspect of our lives. Chess is no exception. In addition, the attitude towards female chess players, outreach for chess to the youth and newly blinded or visually impaired have also to be factored into the spectrum of problems being faced. Despite all of this, we find ways to optimize the resources we have and strive creatively to expand and grow, both as a chess community and as individuals. Sometimes this growth includes reevaluating, rethinking, and rebuilding. Serbia stands as an example.

After the breakup of Yugoslavia in 1991, Serbia formed a union with Montenegro. This union was peacefully dissolved in 2006, restoring Serbia’s independence and sovereignty. The work of building and rebuilding got underway, and yes, this included chess.

Serbia has a number of highly rated players – both sighted and visually impaired – who have won gold, silver, and bronze medals in various tournaments. Vladan Petrovic was elected as president for the blind and visually impaired chess last year. He acknowledges the challenges he and his new board have of strengthening and growing chess. His focus since taking office though, has been the organizing of the 17th IBCA Chess Olympiad for the blind and visually impaired, held in the city of Vrnjacka Banja, a 3-hour bus ride from the capital Belgrade. I had to practice a great deal to eventually be able to pronounce that name, and I still have to say it very slowly so as not to mangle it.

Many participants had arrived at the airport more or less at the same time, hence the bus ride. The bus was a double decker, reminding me of my last ride in such a bus at the age of 12. By the time we finally arrived at the Fontana hotel it was after 10 PM, but the staff were welcoming, check-in went smoothly and they had dinner waiting for us.

The Olympiad is a Swiss-style, 9 round team tournament with a time control of 120 minutes plus a 30 second increment per move per player. While there were 21 countries participating, players from 7 countries were unable to obtain visas. As the host country, Serbia was eligible to enter 2 teams, thus 22 teams competed from 16-26 June. Games were played at 3 PM local time each day, so players had the morning to rest, prepare, check standings, and identify their next opponents.

On Tuesday morning after rollcall and the technical meeting, the opening ceremony took place with speeches by dignitaries, the playing and singing of traditional Serbian folk songs by a group of female vocalists, and one of the special guests making the opening move on board 1. The tournament had begun.

Stepping out of the hotel, one crosses a narrow street into an enormous park with wide, meandering walkways lined with trees. In certain areas of the park people linger at souvenir stalls and coffee shops as children splash in the fountain or chase each other across the lawns. On one side of the park one crosses a bridge, the Bridge of Love. At intervals all the way across are posts to which couples attach locks, declaring their love for each other. I have never seen such a multitude of locks in such a range of sizes. On the grass along one of the paths is an enormous chess board with pieces standing about 24” tall. Another attraction of the city is the thermal pool with mineral spring water of 32C in which you can soak and relax.

Back at the hotel the talk was all chess – who lost, who won, who drew, who gave away a queen, which opening to play, what would be the best strategy if… At the end of round 5 on Saturday, 21 June, Poland was in 1st place, followed by Ukraine and Venezuela. Serbia held places 9 and 13. With only 4 rounds remaining, the excitement was mounting. By the end of the last round, Poland had maintained their position to take gold, while Venezuela clinched silver and Spain claimed bronze.

While I was caught up in the enthusiasm and spirit of the competitors, I am deeply disappointed that of all the 88 players (22 teams of 4 and a number of reserves), only 3 were women. Yes, I am delighted that at least there are female players participating at that level, but that number should not be so low. This is one of the problems Vladan and his board will be addressing once the tournament tasks have been wrapped up. They will also be reaching out to the school for the blind and the school for students with low vision - both near Belgrade – once the new academic year commences in September. They are furthermore hoping that having hosted this international event, government and private organizers will make more funding and sponsorships available for chess for the blind, not only for future events, but for coaching and travel expenditure, amongst other things.

Neither problems nor solutions manifest in isolation; they are connected, they dovetail. As we consider the chess organizations in our respective countries, we should not despair at what we do not have or may not yet have achieved. Rather, we should take heart knowing that we are not alone in dealing with the difficulties we face. Other groups face the same realities. Connecting with each other, supporting each other, and learning from each other are potent ways of ensuring success. Whatever joy success gives us individually, we can equally delight in the success of others. Regardless of which team won gold, host country Serbia and players alike celebrated a successful tournament. IBCA member countries around the world are taking a stand for engagement and growth of our chess community: Serbia in June, Poland in August, Colombia in October. Way to go IBCA!

Player’s Spotlight

Richard Turner

By Glenn Crawford

Richard Turner has been an active member of the USBCA since 2022. He lives in Oregon with his wife, Carol. They have been married for more than thirty Years.

Richard was born in Los Angeles, California in 1954. From an early age, he and his brother who is four years older would often spend time with their father camping, fishing, hiking, and generally enjoying the world away from the hustle and bustle of everyday life. “My dad liked to go up into the Sierras to go fishing and camping. And, so, starting from about age four, we often went up into the mountains or down to the coast.” When Richard’s father was able to get away for the weekend, “We’d have packed up the stuff the night before in the camper or just the back of the pickup or whatever and we’d take off and pitch our tents around eleven or twelve at night up in the Sierras and get up at the crack of dawn and start fishing.” Richard continued, “I could see then so, you know, I have very vivid memories of all these outdoor things we did all over l. A. and all over California.”

In 1965 when Richard was about ten years old, he combined his love of the outdoors with learning the fundamentals of work by taking on a job along with his brother at a ranch of a family friend collecting fir cones. “They had 1500 acres, I think, and a lot of it was wooded up in the higher elevations and they had lots of fir trees. And, she got a contract with Manning Seed Company to harvest fir cones and harvest the seeds. And, so my brother and I spent several days, you know, hiking around, picking up fir cones, putting them in a bag.” And, “Made like twenty-five bucks fir a huge burlap bag of fir cones.”

Richard lost his sight due to a tragic accident. “In the fall of ’66, I lost my sight due to an explosion of flash powder that was in a glass mug.” His brother got the powder from their cousin’s house after helping to clear out the cousin’s home. At this time, Richard was twelve and his brother was sixteen. They were in their backyard when the accident occurred. “He [Richard’s brother] was taking bits of the flash powder out of the mug and drawing designs on wood and lighting them on fire and they would just burn the design in the wood. It was quite, you know, pretty creative. One time, the match broke and fell into the container. And, so, he grabbed it to try and toss it, you know, reflexively and it blew up in his hand and the glass fragments hit me in the eyes and side of the head and got him. His left arm took 400 stitches to be repaired, and he got a lot of glass in his chest.” Their neighbor was a med tech who knew first aid. “So, she and her husband came over and she, you know, wrapped us up in towels and kept us alive basically.”

Due to this accident, Richard lost his eyesight, leaving him with no vision at all, no light perception. “They had to remove my irises because of the glass damage. And, so, I’ve had prosthetic shells that cover the eyes.” Richard said that although his face received many glass fragments, it healed well. But, he said, up until thirty years after the accident, small pieces of glass would work their way to the surface of his face.

Richard then began attending the California School for the Blind. He boarded at the school which was several hundred miles from his home and was taught with materials two years behind his actual grade level. “One thing I did get good at in the first semester I was there was braille and mobility, cane travel.” He attended this school for that semester and another full year before he returned home to be mainstreamed in a high school in the Santa Monica school system. Richard was able to keep up with his studies at this school and graduated with an eye on a college education. So, he began attending Willamette University in Salem, Oregon.

At Willamette, “I started off with political science because I thought I wanted to be a lawyer.” But he later decided to become a biblical studies major. “By my senior year, I realized that I really liked being able to talk to people and helping them through, you know, emotional issues or relationships.” Richard’s change to a major in biblical studies eventually led him to his future wife.

Carol was also a student at Willamette. “She had broken her ankle and we were in this class together.” Their class was on the fourth floor and the building had no elevator. “She broke her ankle and was on crutches and I heard her struggling with her crutches and I offered to help so I would take one of her crutches and her bag, and, you know, follow her up the stairs and go into class.” However, after college, Carol went to seminary. She and Richard would see each other two or three times a year with a group of friends, but it would be another fifteen years before they would wed.

After college, “I got a job at the local crisis line, a 24-hour suicide hot line. I was volunteering there.” He soon gained fulltime employment, eventually becoming the program director for the crisis center. He did this work for fifteen years. “I had a workshop conference thing in the Seattle area where she [Carol] had moved. That was where her churches were. Her church was in Seattle.” After seminary, Carol became a minister. Fifteen years later, she and Richard ended up in the same location. They were married in 1992.

After Richard and Carol married, he went back to school and obtained a masters in social work. He then was employed at Columbia Pastoral Counseling Center as a counselor in Vancouver for the next five years. His time was spent there doing individual, family, and couples therapy.

Richard left employment as a counselor and moved with his wife to Lake Oswego, Oregon where Carol became the minister at a church there. While being between jobs in Oregon, Richard became interested in HTML code, teaching himself this language. He learned to design websites. He then became employed at the Commission for the Blind in Oregon in 2003 as the braille and adaptive device instructor. He did this work for ten years, then was promoted to program manager. After this promotion, Richard switched to a different program working with older adults and assessing them for needs and providing them with basic introduction to devices like smart phones and computers. Richard retired from active employment in 2020.

Richard first learned chess from his brother just prior to his vision loss. While in the hospital recovering from the accident with the flash powder, he received an adaptive chess set and began playing chess with family members, including his uncle, whom he describes as a good chess player. His uncle taught him the proper rules of the game and proceeded to win about 100 games before Richard was finally able to beat him. From that point, he would win about one in every three games.

Richard learned algebraic notation as he played computer chess, then began a relationship with a friend who was also blind, playing correspondence chess through email with him. This relationship continued until this friend passed away about ten years later.

Richard began playing competitive tournament chess after discovering the USBCA in 2022. He now has a satisfying and rewarding hobby as he enjoys his retirement years. His skill at the royal game has allowed him to fight his way to the top of the USBCA ladder where he proudly sits having the pleasure of winning the June ladder prize, holding his 100-dollar bill in one hand and waving to those competitors below with the other as he prepares to defend his position against his next challenger.

Getting to Know USBCA Member…

Marilyn Bland

Chess Rookie vs. Top GM

By John Denny

At the end of first grade, I took my oldest son to WisChess which was a chess camp held in Wisconsin. There were approximately 150 kids in camp from ages 7 to 18. There were several instructors including multiple GMs, IMs, and Masters. Each day began with a tournament game. Students then went to outside tables and instructors played over their games and pointed out errors and offered better moves. Then came lunch. Classes began in the afternoon. Evenings were filled with bughouse tournaments, simuls, a trip to Lake Geneva where the kids played a blitz tournament on a boat ride. I learned that you must keep 150 kids busy every second of the day and evening if you want to keep them out of trouble.

This all seemed like such a good learning experience that I not only signed up my son the following year, but I signed up myself! I was assigned to Caveman Kevin Bachler’s class; he was an excellent instructor. I was such a neophyte at chess, I had a lot to learn.

One of the experiences I enjoyed was a simul with GM Gregory Kaidonov, who in 2000 was rated number 6 in the world with a rating of 2725. And I was going to play against him! My rating was 880. (I can hear you laughing. Hey, I would, too.) What is just as funny is by simple chance I ended up sitting at board 1. There were 20 players on my row and 20 in a row facing us.

GM Kaidonov moved e4 on my board to kick off the simul. He moved d4 on board 2 and c4 on board 3. It took a bit of time for him to come around again. On board 40, he had his back to me. As he turned, I made my move e6 in front of him. He answered in an instant and moved on.

I figured I may get mated in 20 moves or less and my goal was to last at least 20 moves. I was pleased to pass the 20-move mark. The first couple of players had been mated by now. The game moved onward to moves 25, then 30. I was elated, but my position had begun to deteriorate. The GM placed his pieces on strong, active squares where I could not attack them. Finally, he separated my kingside from getting any help from my queenside pieces. He had a passed pawn protecting a bishop deep in the center of my board. I felt the bone in my throat. The end was nearing and I knew it. I played the best defense left to me. Finally, I was mated on move 43.

I could barely believe I lasted 43 moves. There were only 10 players left. As my pulse and blood pressure slowly returned to normal, I realized the following. Of the 43 moves, GM Kaidonov took only 1 second to move on 38 of the moves. He took a maximum 3 seconds on 4 moves. And on one move, when I really had him confused, he took 8 seconds. (I am sure he was calculating and not confused at all.) Adding up the seconds, GM Kaidonov only used about 58 seconds to checkmate me!! At the time, I had no idea someone could play chess this rapidly. My short-lived euphoria turned to humility as I realized I had been mated in 58 seconds.

But, hey, how lucky was a patzer like me, to be able to play a number 6 rated GM in a game of chess? I was never so pleased to be checkmated.

Getting To Know Al Sandrin

By Bruce Leverett

I met Al Sandrin when I was guiding and coaching the U.S. team at the Olympiad for the Blind in Noordwijkerhout, the Netherlands, in 1980. Other members of the team were Mack Garner, Jim Slagle, Ted Bullockus, and (alternate) E. Schuyler Jackson. There were other coaches and guides: Stephen Matzner (a master), Denis Barry (who did the fund raising), and Denis’s wife Doris and daughter Bridget. Most of the above-named people are no longer with us, except possibly Mack Garner and Bridget Barry, although I long ago lost touch with them.

Jackson was quite old (born in 1897). During his heyday, he was a strong master. By 1980, he had lost a lot of vision.

Slagle was a computer scientist (as I am). His name will be familiar to some of you as he was still involved in online chess until he died a few years ago.

I do not remember much about the backgrounds of Bullockus and Garner. Bullockus was from California, Garner from (I think) Tennessee. The team as a whole was quite strong – all USCF ratings above 1800. Sandrin was a master, Garner was an expert. Sandrin and Slagle were completely blind; the others had some usable vision.

Denis Barry much later served as president of the USCF.

Sandrin was born in 1923, and died in 2004. I’ll quote a few things from the Wikipedia article about him. He lived in Chicago. He had pigmentary degeneration of the retina. He won the U.S. Open in 1949 in Omaha, at a time when he was already nearly blind. In 1951, he finished second in the same tournament, in Fort Worth. He won the U.S.B.C.A. championship, which became the U.S. Blind, in 1974, 1982, and 1986. (That last year was given wrongly as 1984 in the Wikipedia article, which copied it from a website of the U.S.B.C.A., but the correct date is given in the USCF’s list of championships.) Earlier in his career, he had won events like the Illinois state championship and the Chicago championship, which were quite strong, in the 1940’s.

He represented the U.S. in the World Blind Championships of 1970 and 1982, and played first board on the U.S. team in the Olympiads of 1968, 1972, and 1980. He also played second board (behind Al Mannetta) in 1976.

When I met him, he was entirely blind, and used a braille set, but he did not spend much time with his hands on the pieces. He spent most of the time just thinking, as I would do, and only occasionally took a glance at the board to check that he hadn’t gotten something wrong earlier. Of course, he was well past his prime as a player, but I enjoyed discussing with him an endgame he had played, because he understood it well.

I ran across him again at the 1989 U.S. Open in Chicago. By then his rating was “only” in the 2100’s. We played a game in the second round, which I won. I will present the game to this email group later, after I have written some notes to it.

In the 1968 Olympiad his game with Sean Loftus of Ireland won the Best Game prize. I will present that game to this group later.

I’ll take this opportunity to correct one old story. Some online biographies of Sandrin say that he lost his vision by staring too much at the sun. I think that is a silly story that he told to some naive blogger who interviewed him, by way of pulling the guy’s leg. Pigmentary degeneration of the retina was what appeared in a story about him in the Chicago Tribune in 1949, and I’d go with that one.

Al had a brother, Angelo, who was also a strong chess player. If you look through the games in chessgames.com credited to Al Sandrin, the ones from the 1982 Midwest Masters tournament were actually played by Angelo.

Puzzles

Contributed by Jim Hohme

Hi Puzzlers,

Below is a compilation of mate in 2 problems, some of which are quite tricky and it’s easy to think you’ve solved the mate when sometimes the side being mated can find an extra move and it’s no longer a mate in 2 and you haven’t solved the puzzle!

The solutions are placed under the problem setup so you’ll have to be careful how you view the file otherwise you’ll spoil the problem for yourself.

Lary Evans Problems - mates in 2 originally compiled on the blind-chess group.

Problem 13:

r1b2k1r/ 1p2bppp/ p1B2q2/ 8/ 8/ 8/ PPPQ1P1P/ 2KRR3

Points 3 White to mate in two.

Solution:

  1. Qd8+ Bxd8
  2. Re8#

Principle:

The King is in a classic back rank mate position where a Queen or Rook on the back rank can mate him.- Square e8 is good as it is protected by the bishop. Always looking at every check or capture in order to limit Black’s possible responses, White comes up with an always flashy Queen sacrifice!- The Queen checks at d8 forcing the bishop to capture opening up the door for the Rook to mate.

Problem 14:

1r1n1rk1/ ppq2p2/ 2b2bp1/ 2pB3p/ 2P4P/ 4P3/ PBQ2PP1/ 1R3RK1

Points 3 White to mate in two.

Solution:

  1. Qxg6+ Kh8
  2. Bxf6# if 1… Bg7
  3. Qxg7#

Principle:

First, look at every check or capture. And here realize that since the F-Pawn is pinned, the Pawn does not protect the G-Pawn.- So White captures the G-Pawn checking the Black King.- The King is either forced to the corner or the bishop can interpose, both fail.

Ex-Champing at The Bit 06

This article was initially published in the May 2022 UK BCA Gazette.

P. Benson (Eng) - D. Baretic (IBCA Executive, 2295), 5th IBCA World Individual, Hastings 1982.

| That curious “IBCA Executive” status occurred because there was an uneven number of entrants so a member of the IBCA Executive was invited to enter to avoid byes, Baretic is actually from Yugoslavia. This time we have a perfonal “David Versus Goliath” battle, white estimated Elo 1880, black Elo 2295. This is Round 11, the final round. Is this of importance? It could be. No adjournments, play starts just after breakfast and continues unbroken until completion of the game. ||

1. d4 c5

| Ouch!, black shows immediate fighting spirit. Any thoughts of a quick draw and set about preparing for departure on the following day are smashed, this is a battle to the death. ||

2. d5 Nf6 3. Nc3 d6 4. e4 g6

| Recommendations on how “Mismatched Gladiators” should approach the early stages of the game were given in the previous Ex-Champing article. White, some 400+ Elo points lower, should seek activity without fear of giving up material to grab the initiative. ||

5. f4 Bg7 6. Be2 a6 7. Nf3 O-O 8. O-O Qc7 9. e5

| This might be active but most likely too early, perhaps more preparation is required for such a committal move? However factors other than the actual position are in play. Black has had a much tougher set of opponents and could be double the age of white, maybe tiredness might influence matters? ||

9. ... Ne8 10. e6

| Having started the hand-to-hand fighting white must just keep punching until open lines are created for pieces to invade. Often easier said than done. ||

10. ... fxe6 11. dxe6 Bxe6 12. Ng5

| White has cleared the central light squares, it is vital for the e2 bishop to find activity to justify the pawn sacrifice. ||

12. ... Qd7 13. Bf3

| With the serious threat of 14. Nxe6 Qxe6 15. Bd5 pinning and winning the black queen, easily prevented, but it will consume a defensive tempo. ||

13. ... Bf7 14. Nxf7 Rxf7 15. Bg4 e6 16. Re1 Nc7

| It seems that black is holding onto the pawn while blocking out the white g4 light square bishop. Inspiration required here by white, test of “Tactical Event Horizons” now placed on both players. ||

17. Nd5 Qd8

| Probably the best of the retreats, capturing is poor: (A). 17. … exd5 18. Bxd7 Rxd7 and black only has a bishop, knight, pawn for the queen, this must strongly favour white. (B). 17. … Nxd5 18. Bxe6 Qc7 19. Qxd5 Nc6 20. Bxf7+ Qxf7 21. Qxd6 black is an exchange plus pawn down for no compensation. ||

  18. Nxc7 Rxc7

| Clearly 18. … Qxc7 19. Bxe6 regaining the pawn plus winning an exchange on f7 was not going to happen for white. ||

19. Bxe6+ Kh8 20. f5

| White has regained the pawn with the bonus of a kingside light square initiative. Surely a success for the Chess For Tigers recommendations for “Mismatched Gladiators” as given in the previous Ex-Champing article? ||

20. ... gxf5 21. Qh5 Nc6 22. Bxf5 Qg8

| Preventing mate on h7, white cannot increase the pressure without reinforcements. ||

23. c3 Be5 24. Bh6 Qf7 25. Qxf7 Rxf7 26. Rf1 Bg7 27. Bxg7+ Kxg7

| Mutual desire that the middlegame should not continue is the reason for the recent liquidation. White has the slightest of plusses, a bishop versus a knight with a pawn structure imbalance across the board. Nowhere good enough to win by force, but as it stands presently black needs to be a little more careful than white. ||

28. g4

| At last, white in a position which needs good judgement makes a mistake. This advance of the g-pawn only helps to create a target, though this is not at all obvious at the moment. Instead 28. Rad1 was both good and easy to find. Lesson: Play simple positions simply.

Now black shows how an Elo 2295 player earns their rating points. Observe how the forthcoming coordination of the remaining units maximises their potential. White in contrast just shuffles until a serious problem emerges. ||

28. ... Re8 29. Rad1 Rd8 30. Rf2 Ne7 31. Be6 Rxf2 32. Kxf2 d5 33. Kg3 Kf6 `34. Re1 Rd6

| Setting white a test, which arriving in self-imposed time-trouble, becomes a critical moment in the game. ||

35. Bf5

| White must lose a pawn somewhere but perhaps this is the worse option? Instead 35. g5+ Kxg5 36. Bh3 keeps the minor pieces on which would give white better chances of salvaging something from the game. ||

35. ... Nxf5+ 36. gxf5 Kxf5 37. Kf3 d4 38. cxd4 cxd4 39. Rd1 Ke5 `40. Ke2 Rh6

| Time-control reached, no adjournment, 16 moves per hour to the end of the game without external expert advice on how to play. Black is a central passed pawn up which when combined with every piece being better than the white equivalent must surely mean black is winning? If so then white can only drag matters out by making it difficult for black to progress. ||

41. Rh1 Ke4

| There must be several ways for black to handle this position. A different approach is to squeeze white with 41. … Rh3 which keeps the h1 rook inactive, a much easier game to play.

Black then places a pawn on h4 followed by marching the king towards g2 dislodging the white h1 rook. After the white h2 pawn falls the black h4 pawn will quickly cost white a rook. White can stop all this by immediately marching the king to g2, but black then has Rd3 with Rd2+ to be neutralised. ||

42. Kd2 d3 43. h4 Rc6

| With the chance to squeeze the kingside gone, black instead tries for activity with the rook. Fine, but in turn the white rook now gets activity as well, threats at both ends of the board must be calculated by each player, hard work ahead now. ||

44. Re1+ Kd4 45. Re7 Rc2+ 46. Kd1 Rxb2 47. Rxh7 b5 48. a3 Rh2

| Significant changes have occurred. White has an active 7th rank rook plus an outside passed h-pawn, fine, but this has virtually zero chance of promotion. Black can walk the king to capture the white a-pawn at the cost of the d-pawn creating connected passed pawns, very favourable. How should each player proceed? White needs to get the h-pawn as far as possible up the board, this is to tie down the black rook to defensive duties. Black should get the king in front of the queenside pawns to find shelter from persistent checks by the white 7th rank rook. Conclusion: Fritz and friends could casually crunch this to either a draw or a black win. Humans can analyse so far and then must rely on judgement based on knowledge plus experience to reach a decision. Your annotator classifies this as an “Optimists’ Draw/Black Win”, which translates to: If I am white there might be a grovel-out line, it just requires perspiration plus inspiration to find it. If I am black the same work ethos will bring in the full point. Both “Optimists” opinions cannot be correct, someone is going to be disappointed. ||

49. h5 a5 50. h6 Kc3

 | Creating a back-rank mate threat, white has no choice but to concede material. ||

51. Rc7+

| Defensive shuffling fails as after 51. Ke1 d2+ 52. Kd1 Rh1+ 53. Ke2 d1=Q+ black wins. ||

51. ... Kb3 52. h7 Kxa3 53. Rc3+ Kb4 54. Rxd3 Rxh7

| Black is now winning by force, it just requires the correct technique, not easy to invent at the board and remember this game must be about 6.5 hours old. White can only make it awkward for black to advance the queenside pawns and hope black makes a mistake. ||

55. Kc1 a4

| Right idea. It is the edge pawn that should be advanced first, this gives a square of shelter for the king on the edge file to the side of the inner pawn. ||

56. Kb1 Rh1+ 57. Ka2 Rh2+ 58. Ka1 Kc4 59. Rg3 Rd2

| Strongly hinting black knows how to force the win. The attack plan is to place pawns on a3 and b3 which threatens a back rank mate. Having the rook on the d-file means any defensive rook checks along the ranks can be blocked by the attacking rook. There needs to be some dancing around with the attacking king and rook to win, the overall aim is to force a trade of rooks on the defensive back rank. This requires some precise knowledge, it is extremely unlikely to be invented at the board. Sometimes you need to call on home study to achieve the aim. Same old story: “Fail To Prepare, Prepare To Fail.” ||

60. Rh3 b4 61. Rg3 a3 62. Rg8

| Not the best way to defend, but as previously stated, this is a forced win for the attack, all the defence can do is be annoying. And since the attacking king is to be hit from the rear, it needs to block the annoyances with the rook, fairly easy. next play pawn b3 setting up a back rank mate threat which forces the white rook back into a passive posture. ||

62. ... Kb3 63. Rg3+ Kc2 64. Ka2 Rd3 65. Rg2+ Kc3 66. Rg8 Rd2+ 67. Ka1 b3 68. Rc8+ Kd3 69. Rd8+ Kc2 70. Rc8+ Kd1 71. Rc3 1/2-1/2

| After about 7.5 hours unbroken play it seems tiredness might have come to the rescue of white. Both players believe white has snatched a draw, the analysis runs: (A). 71. … Rb2 if white had no rook this would be stalemate 72. Rc1+ Kxc1 stalemate should not happen, the black king must not capture under any circumstances. (B). 71. … Rb2 72. Rc1+ Kd2 the black king runs away but 73. Rd1+ Kc3 74. Rd3+ Kc4 75. Rd4+ Kc5 76. Rc4+ and white just keeps giving checks across the width of the 4th rank. (C). 71. … Rb2 72. Rc1+ Ke2 73. Re1+ Kf3 74. Re3+ Kg2 75. Rg3+ Kh1 76. Rg1+ Kh2 77. Rh1+ and so on. A different approach from black is clearly required. (D). 71. … b2+ 72. Kb1 and black is losing the a-pawn which clearly both tired players assessed as drawn. Incorrect judgement, black has 72. … a2+ 73. Kxa2 Rc2 and white dare not trade rooks, so 74. Rb3 Kc1 which crushes white. If now 75. Rb8 keeping a double-control on the b1 promotion square, there comes 75. … b1=Q+ which is a double check so 76. Ka3 Ra2+ mate is the shock line both tired players missed. ||

Questions

If you have questions, comments, or feedback, please send them to the USBCA Secretary, Marilyn Bland, at tinkerbelltx@hotmail.com