Gambitting Against the Nimzovich Defense

As I mentioned in my last post on his death, Hugh Myers once wrote a small piece for BDG WORLD. It's reprinted here, by request, from the July-August 1992 issue. I haven't checked Hugh's lines with the help of Rybka, but I imagine they'll stand up pretty well. At the end of this article Hugh announced the resurrection of his magazine, renamed The New Myers Openings Bulletin, which he continued until 1996. Gambitting Against the Nimzovich Defense By Hugh Myers I've had enough respect for the dangers of the BDG that I’ve advised 1.e4 Nc6 players to try to transpose away from it, for example with 1.d4 d5 2.e4 Nc6, or 1.d4 d5 2.Nc3 Nc6 3.e4 e6 (or 3...dxe4 4.d5 Ne5). But a determined gambit player can always can always find a way to play a gambit. An example of that is on p.33 of my book Nimzovich 's Defense to 1.e4, 1.e4 Nc6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.d5 Ne5 5.f3 That book, written in 1985 and published in early 1986, was revised by me in 1989, with expectation of 1990 printing. For various reasons the publisher had to postpone it. Recently I did more updating of portions of it, as the publisher was optimistic that it would he published this year. That's still uncertain. Anyway, here is a sample, the rewritten 5.f3 section: 1.e4 Nc6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.d5 Ne5 5.f3

We'll take separate looks at the gambit accepted and the gambit declined. (a) 5...exf3 This has been questioned since... 6.Nxf3 Nxf3+ 6...Ng6 7.Bc4 Nf6 8.0-0 Qd6 9.Be3 a6+/= +/=, Sherborne-Hutchinson, corres. 7.Qxf3 Nf6 8.Bf4 a6 9.h3 g6 10.g4 Bg7 11.0-0-0 +/- Milner-Barry - Mieses, Margate 1935 (1-0, 21). But accepting the gambit is not bad in the opinion of Lorenzo Buttari, who wrote the following analysis (there are minor additions by me) for the 10/87 issue of L'Italia Scacchistica. Moves are as in the main line above through 8.Bf4.

Then 8...Bg4 9.Bb5+ [9.Qd3 a6 then 10...Qd7 and 0-0-0;; 9.Qxg4 Nxg4 10.Bb5+ Qd7 11.Bxd7+ Kxd7; 9.Qg3 c6 and White's 0-0-0 has been delayed, but it's not clear, e.g. 10.Bg5 and I'm not sure if Bd7, Bh5, or Qd7 is best.] 9...c6 10.dxc6 [10.Qxg4 cxb5 11.Qf3 Qa5] 10...Bxf3 11.c7+ [11.cxb7+ Nd7] 11...Qd7 12.Bxd7+ Nxd7 13.gxf3 e5. Some of that might be questioned, but the main question is if White's position is worth a pawn. This is also pertinent to the variation 5.f4 exf3 ep. ( 1.e4 Nc6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.d5 Ne5 5.f3) b) 5...e6 6.Qd4 6.Bf4 Ng6 7.Bg3 exf3, Harding; 6.fxe4 exd5 (6...Nf6= Harding) 7.exd5 Bd6 8.Qd4 Qe7 9.Ne4 Ng4 10.Be2 Be5, J. Littlewood-G. Kenworthy, England 1981, 0-1. 31: (6.Bb5+ c6 (6...Bd7 7.dxe6 Bxb5 8.exf7+ Kxf7 9.Qxd8 Rxd8 10.Nxb5 exf3 11.Nxf3 Nxf3+ 12.gxf3 c6 13.Nc3 = /= +, Faxon) 7.Bf4! cxb5! (7...Bd7 8.Bxe5 and 8.dxc6 answers other moves), and for some bizarre action see the rest of this game, Martin-Faxon, below. 6..Bd6 6...Nc6!? 7.Bb5 (7.Qxc4 Nf6 =/= +) exd5 8.Bf4 Bd7 9.Bxc6 Bxc6 10.0-0-0 Nf6 -/+ Frost-Kenworthy, England 1981; that could very well be Black's best choice after 6.Qd4, especially considering the new preferred move. 8.Qa4+, below. 7.f4 7.fxe4 exd5 8.exd5 Qc7 =/+; 7.Bf4 Nxf3+ 8.gxf3 Bxf4 9.Qxg7 Qf6 10.Qxf6 Nxf6 11.fxe4 Be5 = +/-+ 7...c5 8.Qa4+ 8.Qxe4 Nf6 9.Qa4+ Bd7 1O.Bb5 Ng6 11.dxe6 fxe6 and Harding suggested 12..Nf3 0-0, unclear. 8...Bd7 9.Bb5 a6 10.Bxd7+ Nxd7 l1.dxe6 fxe6 12.Qxe4 e5 13.Qxb7 Ngf6 14.Nh3 0-0 15.0-0 Kh8 15...c4 16.Qf3 +/- Black gets some compensation for his sacrificed pawn, but the messy position doesn’t compare well with one in which he's a pawn ahead. That 8.Qa4+ line is from Damele-Berni, 1983 correspondence championship. Now here is the game Martin-Faxon, referred to above. Critical marks and notes were based on those by Faxon. Martin,R - Faxon,W Team Match, Boston 1987 1228 / Nimzovich Defense 1.e4 Nc6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.d5 Ne5 5.f3 e6 6.Bb5+ c6 7.Bf4! cxb5!

8.Bxe5 f6 8...a6 then b5-b4, Myers 9.Bg3 b4? 9...a6 10.fxe4 e5 Myers 10.Nb5 e5 11.d6 Kf7! 12.Nc7? 12.f4! 12...Rb8? 12...Qxd6! 13.Qd5+ Kg6 14.0-0-0 14.Rd1 14...Bd7 15.Qxe4+ 15.f4! 15...Kh5? 15...Bf5 16.Qxb4 Rc8 16.f4! Bxd6 17.Rxd6 Qxc7 18.f5? 18.fxe5 18...g5

19.fxg6 ep? 19.Bxe5! 19...Qxd6 20.g7 Nh6 21.gxh8Q Rxh8 22.Nf3 Bf5!? 23.Qe2! Bg4 24.h3 Bxf3 25.gxf3! Qa6! 26.Qd1 Qxa2 27.f4+ Kg6 28.Qd3+ Kg7 29.Rf1 e4! 30.Qd7+ Qf7 31.Rd1 Re8 32.Qa4 a6 33.Qxb4 Nf5 34.Rg1 Qd5 35.Be1+ Kf7 36.Bc3 Rd8 37.Qb6 Rd6 38.Qc7+ Ne7 39.Rg7+? Kxg7 40.Qxe7+ Kh6 41.Qf8+ Kh5 42.Qe8+ Kh4 0-1. The Myers Openings Bulletin hasn't been around since 1988 because of my heart condition and a consequent lack of funds for publishing. The situation has improved in all respects, and the largest MOB yet will be published no later than early September. It will consist mainly of original analysis of a good variety of unfashionable openings. Counting it as a double issue, I've decided on a price of $5.00 postpaid until November (prices of subscriptions or of later issues are not set). Copies will be sent to former subscribers after they let me know their current addresses. MOB back issues are all scarce, but most are available. Hugh Myers, 1605 E. 13 St., Davenport, IA 52803-3801

Hugh Edward Myers (1930-2008), RIP

Hugh E. Myers, a chess original if the term means anything at all, died three days before Christmas, only a month short of his seventy-ninth birthday. I'm surprised that he lived so long, for as I knew him in the 1980s he was invariably in poor health. I first became aware of Hugh and his unorthodox openings and original opinions (or was that original openings and unorthodox opinions) after I came across the original (1973) edition of his book, The Nimzovich Defense, which I found in, of all places, Rudi Schmaus's bookshop in Heidelberg. That would have been about 1978 or '79. Schmaus was the publisher of the Das Moderne Blackmar-Diemer Gambit series, which included a reprint of Diemer's original Vom Ersten Zug an auf Matt! as well as two books by Freidl and one by Studier. At the time Freidl's Band 2 was due out shortly, and I would drive over to Heidelberg now and then to check on it (or really just to browse through a collection of chess books). A few years ago I decided I was through with this foolish game and sold my copy of that book. Shortsighted, I know. But I digress. In his Nimzovich book Hugh included a game or two that transposed into a BDG. That was enough impetus for me to get in touch with him and subscribe to his The Myers Openings Bulletin. Later, when Charles Szasz and I started a little publication for Blackmar-Diemer Gambit aficionados, Hugh was very supportive, and over the years we kept in touch with an occasional letter or note. I never had the pleasure of meeting him face-to-face, but now and then he had a comment on something I published, and he wrote a short piece for at least one issue of BDG WORLD.

Hugh's best known game is his 1956 win over William Lombardy in the Manhattan Chess Club semifinals, which was annotated by Hans Kmoch in Chess Review, March 1957, p. 89. One of several things I like about this game is the sequence with the Knight sac at f6, leaving the White pawn there with Black defenseless on the black squares. It is a recurring theme in many BDG games. You can play through this game and several others at the Chessbase site here. Myers,Hugh Edward - Lombardy,William James [A11] Manhattan CC-ch sf-D 5657 New York (5), 1956 1.g3 Nf6 2.Bg2 d5 3.Nf3 Bf5 4.c4 c6 5.cxd5 cxd5 6.Qb3 Bc8 7.0-0 e6 8.Nc3 Nc6 9.d4 Bd6 10.Rd1 h6 11.a3 Na5 12.Qc2 Bd7 13.b4 Nc4 14.e4 dxe4 15.Nxe4 Rc8 16.Ne5 Bxe5 17.dxe5 Nd5 18.Qe2 0-0 19.Qh5 Qc7

20.Rxd5!! exd5 21.Nf6+ gxf6 22.exf6 Nd6 23.Bxh6 Bf5 24.Bxd5 Qc2 25.Bxf8 Rxf8 26.Qh6 Ne8 27.Re1 Bg6 28.Rxe8 Qd1+ 29.Kg2 Qxd5+ 30.f3 Qd2+ 31.Qxd2 Rxe8 32.Qh6

Myers: "It was hard to breathe; people were packed around our table, standing on chairs. My opponent sat and stared at this position for five minutes, until his flag fell. He left without saying anything. I call that resigns." You said it, Hugh. We'll miss you. More pages with additional info:

• Obituary in Quad City Times, with family information.
• ChessBase article: Hugh Myers (1930-2008), opening theoretician:
• Hugh Myers entry at Wikipedia