Not your average upset by Canadian Master John Upper

[Larry Bevand]

Not Your Average Upset

Last weekend's Gatineau Open attracted 64 players, with more than half in the strong top section which included 15 experts, five masters, and three FIDE-titled players. The event was won by IM Aman Hambleton and Elias Oussedik (4½/5). Strangely, neither the winners nor any of the three titled players faced each other. That's because while Aman was winning his games, the other two dropped points in round 2: last year's winner FM Robert Hamilton took a bye and IM Jean Hébert was upset by 15-year old expert Agastya Kalra.

What sort of game do you expect when you hear: “young expert defeats veteran IM”?
a) a tactical error by the IM?
b) a sharp opening where the youngster's memory and up-to-date preparation catches out the veteran?
c) a long game marred by serious time trouble errors?

In this case the correct answer is: none of the above:
• there are no major tactical errors by either player;
• the youngster did not have the better preparation: Agastya was out of his book first in an opening his opponent started playing 25 years before Agastya was born;
• when given the chance, the younger player transposed into an advantageous pawn-down ending which he played well enough to put the IM away.

Not your average upset.

NOTE: I don't play the Modern for either side (yet). So I reviewed all of Hébert's published games in the Modern and put the most interesting ones in the long note at move move 5. What struck me is how different all those games are: there are pawn storms with opposite side castling, White playing for a safe space advantage, Black destroying White's pawn center and catching the King in the middle, White sacrificing pawns for central piece play... the games in the note at move 5 illustrate all of these.

John Upper
March 9, 2013.

For the game and commentary go to:

http://www.chesstalk.info/forum_atta...ineau_2013.pdf

and

http://www.chesstalk.info/forum_atta...ineau_Open.cbv

This material can not be used without the written permission of the author and Chess'n Math

[John Upper]

"Not your average upset" PGN

Chesstalk does not seem to support replayable games --(I tried posting using the ChessFlash player Michael Yip uses on his site, but Chesstalk doesn't accept its HTML)-- so here's a cut-and-pasteable PGN for those of you who can't use the Chessbase CBV.

Warning: PGN doesn't support all the Chessbase symbols, so some of this might look silly. :(

[Event "Tournoi Ouvert de Gatineau (Open)"]
[Site "Gatineau"]
[Date "2013.03.02"]
[Round "2"]
[White "Kalra, Agastya"]
[Black "Hébert, Jean"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "B06"]
[WhiteElo "2101"]
[BlackElo "2451"]
[Annotator "John Upper"]
[PlyCount "91"]
[EventDate "2013.03.02"]

1. e4 g6 2. d4 d6 3. Nc3 c6 4. Be3 Bg7 {A big attraction of playing the Modern
against a weaker opponent -- and since Jean Hébert is one of Canada's top
players almost all of his Canadian opponents are weaker than him -- is that
postponing the central pawn conflicts until after the players have developed
gives both White and Black more strategically difficult choices about how to
develop and which pawn breaks to aim for and avoid. That difference will
benefit the stronger player. There are 40-years-worth of Hébert games from
this position in Hugh Brodie's Canbase, with Hébert as Black scoring a
fantastic +8 =3 -0. The rather longish note that follows shows some of his
most interesting games, including one early loss as White.} 5. f4 (5. Bd3 Nd7
6. Nce2 $6 Ngf6 7. h3 O-O 8. Qd2 {Now Black exploits White's slow h3 and Nce2
to give a lesson in the power of central pawn breaks.} e5 $1 9. c3 (9. dxe5
Nxe5 $5 $36 10. f4 $140 $2 Nxe4 $3 11. Bxe4 Nc4 12. Qd3 Nxb2 13. Qb3 Re8 $19 {
Black has two pawns and a collosal attack for the N.}) 9... d5 $1 10. exd5 (10.
dxe5 Nxe5 11. exd5 Re8 $1 12. O-O-O $140 Nxd3+ 13. Qxd3 Bf5 $19 {Black has a
development advantage, much safer King, the Bishop pair, and a ready-made
Queenside attack.}) 10... Nxd5 11. Bh6 Qe7 12. O-O-O e4 $1 13. Bxg7 Kxg7 14.
Bb1 b5 $1 $17 15. Nf4 N7b6 16. Nxd5 cxd5 17. Qe2 Nc4 18. Nf3 b4 $19 {0-1 (34)
Vallieres,M-Hébert,J Montreal CAN 1990}) (5. Be2 b5 6. a3 Nd7 7. f4 Nb6 8. Nf3
Nf6 9. Nd2 O-O 10. O-O e5 11. fxe5 dxe5 12. d5 $2 (12. dxe5 $142 Nfd7 13. e6
$14) 12... cxd5 13. exd5 Nfxd5 14. Nxd5 Nxd5 15. Bc5 Bb7 $1 16. Bxb5 (16. Bxf8
Ne3 17. Qc1 Bxf8 $19 {For the exchange Black already has a pawn, the bishop
pair and a dark square attack.}) 16... Nf4 $1 17. Nf3 (17. Bxf8 Qg5 $19) 17...
e4 $1 18. Qxd8 Rfxd8 19. Ng5 Rd5 {White got all his minors on active squares,
and Black is ready to take them all; 0-1 Filion,C (1992)-Hébert,J (2473)
Montreal CAN 1994}) (5. a4 {stunting Black's Queenside expansion.} Nf6 6. h3
O-O 7. Nf3 Nbd7 8. a5 Qc7 9. Be2 a6 10. O-O c5 11. d5 {Transposing to a Schmid
Benoni where Black is marginally worse. In Qin,Z (2279)-Hébert,J (2434)
Trois-Rivieres CAN 2012, White played solidly and drew (1/2-1/2 24).}) (5. Qd2
b5 {Diagram [#]I think this is the sort of unbalanced position a higher-rated
player who wants to win with Black should be happy with. White has lots of
options, and Hébert has faced all of them.} 6. h4 (6. f3 Nd7 7. Nh3 Nb6 8. Nf2
h5 9. Be2 Nf6 10. g4 hxg4 11. fxg4 Rb8 12. O-O-O Nc4 13. Bxc4 bxc4 14. Rdg1 Qa5
15. Kb1 c5 16. dxc5 (16. d5 Nxd5 $19) 16... Nxg4 $1 $19 17. Bd4 Ne5 18. cxd6
Nf3 19. Qf4 Rxb2+ $3 20. Kxb2 Qb4+ 21. Kc1 Bh6 22. Qxh6 Rxh6 23. Bg7 Nxg1 {0-1
Kraiouchkine,N (2247)-Hébert,J (2428) Sherbrooke CAN 2008}) (6. a3 Nd7 7. d5 c5
8. Bxb5 Rb8 9. Rb1 Qa5 10. Bxd7+ Bxd7 11. Nge2 Nf6 12. f3 h5 13. O-O O-O 14.
Bh6 (14. b4 $1 $36 {and White can fight for the d4 square and the initiative
on the Queenside.}) 14... Rb7 15. Bxg7 Kxg7 16. Qe3 Rfb8 17. Nd1 Bb5 {Black
has nagging Benko Gambit-like compensation and went on to win in Mai,L (2173)
-Hébert,J (2399) Montreal CAN 2009 (0-1 52)}) (6. Bd3 Nd7 7. f4 Ngf6 8. Nf3 Nb6
9. e5 Nfd5 10. Nxd5 Nxd5 11. O-O-O Rb8 12. f5 $1 Nxe3 13. Qxe3 gxf5 14. Qg5 $36
O-O 15. g4 $5 (15. Qh5 $142 $1 {(/\g4)} h6 (15... e6 16. g4 $40) 16. Bxf5 e6
17. g4 $3 $40) 15... h6 16. Qh5 fxg4 17. Nh4 e6 $1 18. Rhg1 Qg5+ $8 19. Qxg5
hxg5 20. Rxg4 $13 {0-1 (51) Predescu,S (2234)-Hébert,J (2405) Montreal CAN 2005
}) 6... h5 7. f3 Nd7 8. Nh3 Nb6 9. a4 Nc4 10. Bxc4 bxc4 11. Nd1 Rb8 12. Qc3 d5
13. Nf4 Nh6 14. b3 dxe4 $1 15. fxe4 Ng4 $36 16. e5 c5 $1 $17 {White's center
falls apart and his K is stuck in the middle} 17. Qxc4 cxd4 18. Bxd4 Nxe5 19.
Bxe5 Bxe5 20. Rb1 Qd6 21. Nd3 Bd4 $19 {0-1 (34) Hébert,J-Day,L Ottawa CAN 1974;
I wonder if studying this early loss as White taught Hébert more than any
books could about the power of Black's central counter-attack. If so, this
lesson has repaid itself more than once.}) 5... Qb6 6. Qd2 (6. a3 $5 {saves
the Pb2 (6...Qxb2?? 7.Na4 wins the Q) and tries to prove that the Qb6 is
misplaced.}) 6... Qxb2 7. Rb1 Qa3 {Diagram [#] There are 41 games in my
database from here: Black=52% but Elo-60} 8. e5 $146 {Surprisingly, this
natural move is a novelty, though not a prepared one: Agastya told me he'd
been out of book for the last few moves, and felt he had to "do" something
here. I suppose most White players think it's better to not let Black know
whether f6 or f5 will be available. As far as I can tell, the game move is no
worse than the alternatives, and it did have the advantage of causing Black to
stop for a long think.} (8. Nf3 Nd7 9. Be2 Ngf6 10. e5 Ng4 11. Bg1 dxe5 12.
dxe5 Bh6 $5 {(threat ...Bxf4)} 13. Bd4 $1 (13. Rb3 Qa5 $13) 13... f6 14. exf6
Ngxf6 15. Ng5 Nb6 16. Qe3 O-O 17. Bc5 Qa5 18. O-O (18. Bxe7 $4 Nfd5 $19 {and
one of White's loose pieces drops off.}) 18... Bg7 19. Rb3 Nfd5 20. Nxd5 Nxd5
21. Bc4 $1 h6 22. Bxd5+ cxd5 23. Ne6 Bxe6 24. Qxe6+ {1/2-1/2 Skripchenko,A
(2498)-Volokitin,A (2586) Saint Vincent 2002}) 8... Nh6 9. Nf3 O-O 10. Bd3 Qa5
(10... Ng4 $1 11. Qc1 Qxc1+ 12. Bxc1 b6 13. h3 Nh6 {White has more space and
development, but Black has no weaknesses, and an extra pawn. Fritz prefers
White, Houdini and Stockfish rate Black as a bit better.}) 11. O-O f6 $5 12. f5
$5 {A second pawn sac for activity.} Nxf5 13. Bxf5 Bxf5 (13... gxf5 14. exd6
exd6 15. Nh4 $36) 14. Rxb7 $13 Nd7 {Diagram [#]} 15. d5 $6 {White increases
the tension in the center again, but this gives Black an opportunity for a
favourable liquidation, though with so many possible exchanges it is no wonder
that neither player found the best way through.} (15. exd6 $1 exd6 16. d5 $11)
15... Qa6 (15... fxe5 $142 16. dxc6 (16. Nh4 Nc5 $1) 16... Nb6 $1 17. Rxe7 (17.
Nh4 e4) 17... Nc4 18. Qe1 (18. Qd5+ $2 Qxd5 19. Nxd5 Be4 $19) 18... d5 $17 {
Black has the ideal center and his pawns are about to push White back.}) 16.
dxc6 Qxc6 17. Qd5+ $1 {I doubt Black missed this. More likely, he gambled that
his young opponent would avoid the endgame and keep the Qs on.} Qxd5 18. Nxd5
$36 {White is temporarily down a pawn, but has tremendous activity.} Nxe5 $6 (
18... Rfe8 {is not the kind of move any human wants to play, but it seems to
be the best.} 19. e6 (19. Nc7 $2 Reb8 $1 20. Rfb1 $140 Bxc2 $1 $17) 19... Nc5 (
19... Bxe6 20. Nc7 Bg4 21. Nxe8 Rxe8 22. Rxa7 {White has an exchange for a
pawn, and the Pa2 looks scary, but Black has the two Bishops and his central
pawns should not be underestimated. Computers rate White as clearly better,
but I think it's so unbalanced that in a tournament game the better player
will win.}) 20. Nxe7+ Kh8 21. Bxc5 Be4 $8 22. Rc7 dxc5 $13 {/\...Bf8}) 19.
Nxe7+ Kh8 20. Nxf5 gxf5 21. Nd4 $16 {Diagram [#] Black has five isolated pawns
and a terrible Bg7. Both sides have strongly posted central Ns, but all five
of White's other pieces (Kings included) are better than their Black
counterparts. If Carlsen was White everybody would just say "the rest is a
matter of technique".} Nc4 22. Bf4 Rfe8 23. Nxf5 Bf8 24. Ng3 d5 25. Nh5 Re6 26.
Rfb1 Bc5+ 27. Kf1 Bb6 28. Re1 $1 Rxe1+ 29. Kxe1 Re8+ 30. Kf1 Bd4 $1 {Black has
to defend f6} (30... Rf8 $2 31. Bh6 $18) (30... Na3 $2 31. Nxf6 Rf8 32. Rxh7#)
31. Bh6 $1 f5 32. Bg7+ Bxg7 33. Nxg7 Rf8 34. Kf2 (34. Rxa7 Ne3+ 35. Kf2 Nxc2
36. a4 d4 37. Ke2 Ne3 38. g3 $16) 34... a5 35. Ne6 Rc8 36. Rc7 Rxc7 37. Nxc7
Kg7 38. Nxd5 Kf7 {Diagram [#]} 39. Ne3 $1 {obviously Black can't go into the
pawn ending.} Na3 (39... Nd6 {would make it more difficult.}) 40. Kf3 {Black's
N is out of play on a3 and White keeps improving. By the time White lets the
Black Na3 off the edge it will be too late.} (40. g3 {stopping ...f4, then
bringing the K to the Queenside is also strong.}) 40... Ke6 41. Kf4 a4 42. c4
Kd6 43. Kxf5 Kc5 44. Kg5 (44. g4 Kd4 45. g5 $18 (45. Nd1 $1 {also wins}) 45...
Kxe3 46. c5 $18 Nb5 47. h4 Kd4 48. h5 Kxc5 49. g6 hxg6+ 50. Kxg6 $8 $18) 44...
Nb1 45. Nd5 a3 (45... Kxc4 46. Nb6+ Kb5 47. Nxa4 Kxa4 48. Kh6 $18 (48. g4 $2
Nd2 $14)) 46. Ne3 $8 {Agastya tells me that Black flagged here, but White is
clearly winning: as in the above variations, White can trade the N for the Pa3
and win with the g and h pawns vs Black's N. A big win for Agastya, who went
on to draw his last three games against a 2200 and two 2300s, and finished
with a TPR of 2412 and a gain of 118 rating points!} 1-0

[Felix Dumont]

Re : "Not your average upset" PGN

Nice analysis. The game (and the opening) was very interesting, especially with the Chessbase format.
It's true though that a PGN viewer would be awesome.
I guess it might be possible to use the CMA website for that. A simple htm page would do the job.

I tried to copy/paste the game with the first PGN viewer I found and it gave a pretty good result :

http://echecsmontreal.ca/game.htm

[Gilles G. Jobin]

Re: Not your average upset by Canadian Master John Upper

Please note that in his
HÉBERT PARLE ÉCHECS, vol 6 no. 5, IM Jean Hébert commented all his games from the Gatineau Open.

[John Upper]

Re: Not your average upset by Canadian Master John Upper

Please note that in his
HÉBERT PARLE ÉCHECS, vol 6 no. 5, IM Jean Hébert commented all his games from the Gatineau Open.

I don't subscribe (yet).

Is it possible to post his analysis here (with his permission) so we could compare them?

[John Upper]

Re: Re : "Not your average upset" PGN

Nice analysis. The game (and the opening) was very interesting, especially with the Chessbase format.

Thanks. :D

I tried to copy/paste the game with the first PGN viewer I found and it gave a pretty good result :
http://echecsmontreal.ca/game.htm

I tried that on Chesstalk and it didn't work. I also tried it on the pbworks site that hosts the RA Chess Club, and it didn't work there either (stupid pbworks )
BTW if you click the "Advanced Publishing Options" in ChessFlash and tick the "Variations Tab" it will make it much easier to select the variations, which can be confusing in such a densely annotated game.

It definitely works on your site. Thanks for posting it... but you should probably get an "OK" from Larry, since he's paying for it.

[Gordon Ritchie]

Re: Not your average upset by Canadian Master John Upper

Great piece, John. Nice analysis.
And hats off to Agastya who really had a great tournament. I remember when I first played him back in 2006. He was so tiny that his head barely emerged above the board and in those days he wore huge glasses that gave him the look of a baby owl. He already played pretty creditable chess and nearly took me down until blundering in a rook ending.
He seems to really be coming into his own as a mature player. His ending against master Hebert was quite impressive.

[Larry Bevand]

Re: Not your average upset by Canadian Master John Upper

I don't subscribe (yet).

Is it possible to post his analysis here (with his permission) so we could compare them?

You can subscribe by going to: http://hebertparleechecs.com/

[Larry Bevand]

Re: Re : "Not your average upset" PGN

Nice analysis. The game (and the opening) was very interesting, especially with the Chessbase format.
It's true though that a PGN viewer would be awesome.
I guess it might be possible to use the CMA website for that. A simple htm page would do the job.

I tried to copy/paste the game with the first PGN viewer I found and it gave a pretty good result :

http://echecsmontreal.ca/game.htm

Felix,

I appreciate the help. Could you put the source and a link to our site.

Thanks

Larry

[Felix Dumont]

Re : Not your average upset by Canadian Master John Upper

The only way to access the page is from this thread (or if someone already has the URL), but I added the logo and URL of Chesstalk, just in case :)

John : You are right, the variation tab makes it much easier to go through the game!

[Alan Baljeu]

Re: "Not your average upset" PGN

A big attraction of playing the Modern
against a weaker opponent -- and since Jean Hébert is one of Canada's top
players almost all of his Canadian opponents are weaker than him -- is that
postponing the central pawn conflicts until after the players have developed
gives both White and Black more strategically difficult choices about how to
develop and which pawn breaks to aim for and avoid. That difference will
benefit the stronger player.

My experience with the Modern vs a weaker white player is the opposite. The weaker player will play conservatively, and I end up with an almost-equal but cramped position and no weaknesses to exploit on either side. 40 moves later the position opens up and I discover my opponent doesn't see basic tactics. Two more moves and it's over, but if I'd just played a more active opening I could have won so much quicker. Maybe I'm doing it wrong.

[Kevin Pacey]

Re: Not your average upset by Canadian Master John Upper

For decades I pretty much trusted ECO and other books' apparent conclusion that the Modern (aka Rat, whether vs. 1.e4 or other first moves) should give White at least a slight edge, whereas the Pirc or KID does not clearly concede that. At least in the Pirc or KID the N/g8 comes to f6 early on, applying more pressure to White's centre right away than is the case in the Rat - this may also at times facilitate faster Black victories than in the Rat.

The advent of databases and engines allowed me to more confidently look again at the various testing lines by White against the Rat, and now I have at least some ideas for Black, should I play the Rat with great frequency again, as I did when I was younger.