The round four game versus Kakageldyev was an exciting struggle. While Jude did not win, it was, nevertheless, an instructive game. The middlegame, particularly, was intense, peppered with many dramatic moments.
Jude played 2.e5!? which is an opening novelty he used many years ago in a 1978 telephone match, New Orleans v. New York, versus Andy Soltis. Jude was better throughout that game but it was eventually drawn. On another historical note, the first World Chess Champion Wilhelm Steinitz used an immediate 2.e5!? versus the French on several occasions. Jude’s repertoire book The Italian Gambit also showcases the early e5 move in the section on recommended approaches to the ‘Robatsch Defense.’ In the book he notes, “An all-purpose move versus Flank Fianchetto openings…” World chess opening chronicles can certainly refer to 2.e5!? as the Acers Variation.
The structural contours of Jude’s game, starting with exchanging the e-pawn, the bishop check, O-O, and Re1 had been seen in the earlier Soltis game. Although White doesn’t achieve any opening plus he does strive to coordinate his pieces with pressure against Black’s e7 pawn and the bishop’s microscopic pressure on the a2-g8 diagonal. However, a possible improvement might be 9.Bf1 or simply 9.Bd3 could be played in this position. Also, 11.a3 with c3 to follow is solid. Future tests in master games with this line will give us more opening theory to evaluate.
IM Kakageldyev was up to the task. His pawn structure e6, d6, a6, b5 had a more familiar Sicilian type feel to it, which included potential play on the c file and, ultimately, the a file. Apparently Kakageldyev is very comfortable in these dynamic positions although he did use a great deal of time wadding through the complications.
Black’s 12…bxa4 and 13…Nb6 began to wrestle the initiative from White. The pawn advance with a5, a4, a3 was an admirable way to rid Black of his potential liability. White’s 16.Ng5 creates tactical threats against Black’s e6 square but Black takes charge with 20…Qc6, 21…d5 and 22…Ra8 really pressures White’s position.
Black took up the challenge in the double edged complications by taking the pawn on f4 instead of the more reserved 25…Bg7 which would allow White to clamp down with 26. Nc5. Jude’s 27.Qf3!? kept the game intense. It seemed as if the game would turn. Kakageldyev used a considerable amount of time to keep things from getting out of control with his steadied 27…Qc7.
Jude was saddled with a hemmed-in, dark square bishop on a1 as Kakageldyev utilized the a-file for his rook infiltration with consummate mastery. Jude is a remarkably resilient player and, like Emanuel Lasker, he will play great defensive moves to tough it out and make his opponent really exert themselves to earn the point. But with the a1 bishop stuck and White material down, it was just a matter of time. The experienced Turkmenistan international master just played forceful, natural moves exploiting his material edge and perpetual threats to g2 and to the White king.
The round four game versus Kakageldyev was an exciting struggle. While Jude did not win, it was, nevertheless, an instructive game. The middlegame, particularly, was intense, peppered with many dramatic moments.
Jude played 2.e5!? which is an opening novelty he used many years ago in a 1978 telephone match, New Orleans v. New York, versus Andy Soltis. Jude was better throughout that game but it was eventually drawn. On another historical note, the first World Chess Champion Wilhelm Steinitz used an immediate 2.e5!? versus the French on several occasions. Jude’s repertoire book The Italian Gambit also showcases the early e5 move in the section on recommended approaches to the ‘Robatsch Defense.’ In the book he notes, “An all-purpose move versus Flank Fianchetto openings…” World chess opening chronicles can certainly refer to 2.e5!? as the Acers Variation.
The structural contours of Jude’s game, starting with exchanging the e-pawn, the bishop check, O-O, and Re1 had been seen in the earlier Soltis game. Although White doesn’t achieve any opening plus he does strive to coordinate his pieces with pressure against Black’s e7 pawn and the bishop’s microscopic pressure on the a2-g8 diagonal. However, a possible improvement might be 9.Bf1 or simply 9.Bd3 could be played in this position. Also, 11.a3 with c3 to follow is solid. Future tests in master games with this line will give us more opening theory to evaluate.
IM Kakageldyev was up to the task. His pawn structure e6, d6, a6, b5 had a more familiar Sicilian type feel to it, which included potential play on the c file and, ultimately, the a file. Apparently Kakageldyev is very comfortable in these dynamic positions although he did use a great deal of time wadding through the complications.
Black’s 12…bxa4 and 13…Nb6 began to wrestle the initiative from White. The pawn advance with a5, a4, a3 was an admirable way to rid Black of his potential liability. White’s 16.Ng5 creates tactical threats against Black’s e6 square but Black takes charge with 20…Qc6, 21…d5 and 22…Ra8 really pressures White’s position.
Black took up the challenge in the double edged complications by taking the pawn on f4 instead of the more reserved 25…Bg7 which would allow White to clamp down with 26. Nc5. Jude’s 27.Qf3!? kept the game intense. It seemed as if the game would turn. Kakageldyev used a considerable amount of time to keep things from getting out of control with his steadied 27…Qc7.
Jude was saddled with a hemmed-in, dark square bishop on a1 as Kakageldyev utilized the a-file for his rook infiltration with consummate mastery. Jude is a remarkably resilient player and, like Emanuel Lasker, he will play great defensive moves to tough it out and make his opponent really exert themselves to earn the point. But with the a1 bishop stuck and White material down, it was just a matter of time. The experienced Turkmenistan international master just played forceful, natural moves exploiting his material edge and perpetual threats to g2 and to the White king.