` Chess Games by Peter P. Wakker

My Best Games in Chess

ABBREVIATIONS:

+: check
!: good move
?: bad move

+-: white wins
±: very good for white
+=: white is better
=: equal position
=+: black is better
¡: very good for black
-+: black wins

1. My Most Beautiful Game

Peter P. Wakker - Peter de Roode (1-0)
(March 29, 1975; Dutch National championship for youth up to age 18)

1.e4 g6. 2.d4 Bg7. 3.Nc3 d6. 4.Bg5 a6. 5.Nf3 b5. 6.a3 Nf6. 7.e5 Nfd7. 8.Be2 h6?
8...de5? 9.de5 Ne5. 10.Qd8 Kd8. 11.0-0-0 and Rhe1 ±; 8...0-0. 9.0-0 +=; 8...Nc6 +=

9.Bf4 0-0. 10.Qd2 Kh7. 11.0-0-0 Nc6. 12.Qe3 Nb6. 13.h4 f6!
This move, seemingly ugly, is the only defense against h4-h5 (if g6-g5 then Bg5), and makes white's task as difficult as possible. 13...b4 is sharper but I think that 14.h5 gives white an immediate (though complex) win. An example: 14...bc3. 15.hg6+ fg6. 16.Bh6 cb2+. 17.Kb2 Rh8! 18.Ng5+ Kg8. 19.Bg7 Kg7. 20.Qf3 Qe8. 21 Rh8 Kh8.

14.e6 +-.
14.h5?, winning a pawn, is in fact weak, revealing the force of black's position. Black plays 14... g5, and now:
15.Qe4+ f5. 16.Qc6 Bd7! 17.Qb7 Bc8. 18. Qc6 Bd7. 19. Qb7 Bc8 (=) 20.Kng5+? hg5. 21.Qf3 gf4 ¡
Or 15.Bg5: 15...hg5? 16.Qe4+ (16.h6!?) f5. 17.Kng5+! (17.Qc6? g4 18.Kng5+ Kh6. 19.f4 Bd7. 20.Qb7 Bc8 =) 17...Kh6. 18.Qf4! is probably winning for white.
However, after 15...fg5! 16.Qe4+ Kg8. 17.Qc6 d5!? the white queen is in trouble, for example 18.Bd3 e6. 19.Bg6 Bd7. 20.Qc5? Rf3 and Bf8, or 18.Kng5 Bd7. 19.Qg6 Bf5. 20.Qc6 Bd7. 21.Qc5 e6! (21...hg5. 22.h6)

14...d5. 15.Bd3 Nc4. 16.Qe2!
By threatening 17.h5, white forces black to play f5.

16...f5. 17.Bc4 bc4. 18.Qe3! Rf6.
The critical move. After other moves, white wins slowly and easily.

19.Ng5+ Kg8. 20.Nf7 Rf7!
Black's play was original, though not sound, in the opening. With this move he hopes to survive white's king attack by giving up some material, and then to get attacking chances against the white king, especially if Bg7 can be activated with a future c7-c5. Now white must play energetically. After the passive 20...Qe8 white wins with 21.Nd5 Re6. 22.Ne5.

21.ef7+ Kh7.
21...Kf7. 22.Bh6 +-

22.h5 g5. 23.Be5 Ne5. 24.de5 e6.
24...Be6. 25.Qc5 Rb8. 26.Nd5 Rb5. 27.Nf6 +-

25.g4! f4. 26.Qe4+ Kh8. 27.Qg6
27.Qc4 is less convincing. I, obviously, preferred the following combination.

27...Qe7.
27...Qf8. 28.Nd5! ed5. 29.e6 c6. 30.e7 +- or 29...Qe7. 30.Rd5 +-

28.Rd5!! Bb7.
28...ed5. 29.Nd5 Qe5. (29...Qf8. 30.Nf6 and e6) 30.f8Q! and 31.Nf6; not 30.Nf6? Bf5!

29.Ne4 Qf8!
Now white has to make some accurate moves. Easy for white is 29...Bd5. 30.Nf6 Be4. 31.Qe4

30.Ng5! hg5. 31.h6 Be5. 32.Re5 Bh1. 33.Rg5
Black resigns. I like this game, for one reason, because my opponent played energetically. 8...h6? is the only clear mistake, as far as I can judge.

2. A Beauty Prize

Peter P. Wakker - Joop Houtman (1-0)
(April 4, 1975; Dutch National championship for youth up to the age of 18.)

This game was awarded the beauty prize of the tournament. I had made up my mind, long before this tournament, that this tournament would decide on my chess future. After my loss in the preceding round, it was no more possible for me to reach a top rank and, therefore, I would not pursue a professional chess career. During the 24 hours preceding this game, I started adjusting to a life without a chess career, and this was the first game after. I decided, prior to the game, to seek for spectacular positions and the beauty prize, not for correctness. In view of this background, I was happy that this first game from my “after-life,” in agreement with prior hopes, won the prize. For this reason, I did not propose my game with Peter de Roode for the prize.

1.d4 d5. 2.Nc3 Nf6. 3.Bg5 e6. 4.e4 de4. 5.Ne4 Nbd7. 6.Nf3 Be7. 7.Bf6 Nf6. 8.Bd3 0-0. 9.Qe2
Prevents 9...b6 due to 10.Nf6 and 11.Qe4

9...c6. 10.h4 Qa5+. 11.c3 Qc7. 12.Nf6+ Bf6. 13.0-0-0 c5. 14.Qe4 g6. 15.h5
More solid are 15.Rhe1 or 15.dc5, but I wanted complications.

15...cd4. 16.hg6 fg6.
16...dc3? 17.g7

17.Rh6
By objective criteria, 17.Nd4 is better, but white seeks for complications.

17...dc3. 18.Rdh1 cb2+?
18...Bg7! 19.Rh7 Qf4+. 20.Kb1 and white has compensation for the pawn.

19.Kb1 Rf7. 20.Rh7! Rg7.
Best move, defending g6. 20...Rh7. 21.Qg6+ planning Qe8+ and Bh7+ and white wins immediately.

21.Rh8+ Kf7. 22.Qb4
Threatens Qf8.

22...Qe7.
23...Be7. 23.Ng5+ Kf6. 24.Qe4 (threatens Qf3+ Kg5. 26, Rh5 and mate) Bd6 (24...e5. 25.Qf3+; 24...Bd8. 25.Rf8+ and Qb4). 25.Nh7+ and the white queen enters and decides.

23.Qc4
After the game, Cor van Wijgerden pointed out that 23.Qf4! Qc5. 25.Bg6+! wins more quickly. This line is, obviously (apparently), hard to find overboard. The winning plan that I chose takes more moves but is conceptually simpler. White transfers the rook to d1, with a nice interaction between the white queen on the fourth rank and the black king on the seventh rank.

23...Qd7.
23...Qd6. 24.Rd1 is the same.

24.Rd1 Qc6. 25.Qf4 Ke7?
25...Qc5 is more stubborn but also loses. I planned 26.Bc2!, which threatens R1d8; 26...e5. 27.Ng5+ and Qf6+ +-; 26...g5. 27.Qg4 +-

26.Qb4+ Qd6. 27.Re8+
Black resigns.

During five more years, I played chess tournaments as a hobby. Then I stopped playing tournaments. Here are some games from that period.

3. My Biggest Succes

E.H. Kuiper - Peter P. Wakker (0-1) (January 2, 1979, OSBO-championship)

My biggest success in chess was when I became the champion of the OSBO (Eastern Dutch chess-federation, comprising the provinces Gelderland and part of Overijsel) in 1979. The following game is from this tournament. White's opening play is weak, but black refutes it in a clean manner, with a nice minority mate at the end.

1.e4 e6. 2.d4 d5. 3.Pc3 Bb4. 4.ed5 ed5. 5.a3 Bc3+. 6.bc3 Ne7. 7.Nf3 0-0. 8.Be2 Bf5. 9.c4 N8d7. 10.cd5
10.0-0 Nb6 =

10...Nd5. 11.Bd2?
11.0-0 Nc3 =

11...Qe7! ¡
11...Re8? 12.0-0! Bc2? 13.Qc2 Re2. 14.Qc4 +-

12.c4
12.0-0 Bc2 -+

12...Re8. 13.cd5?
13.Ra2 is better, although 13...N5b6 is still good for black. Sharper is 13...Bb1. 14.Rb2 Bd3. 15.Bg5 Qa3. 16.cd5 Qb2. 17.Qd3

13...Bc2! -+ 14.Bg5 Bd1. 15.Be7 Be2. 16.Ke2 Re7+. 17.Kd3 Nb6. 18.Rfb1 Rad8. 19.a4 a5. 20.Rb5 Rd5. 21.Rd5 Nd5. 22.Kc4 Nb4. 23.Kb5 b6. 24.Rd1 Re2. 25.d5 Rc2 and mate on c5. White resigns.

4. An Honorable Loss against Jan Timman

Jan Timman - Peter P. Wakker (1-0)
(February 10, 1979, Rapidgame, Rabo Tournament, Nijmegen, 25 minutes per player.)

1.c4 Nf6. 2.Nc3 g6. 3.e4 d6. 4.d4 Bg7. 5.f3 0-0. 6.Be3 c5. 7.dc5 dc5. 8.Qd8 Rd8. 9.Bc5 Nc6. 10.Nd5 Nd5. 11.cd5 b6. 12.Ba3 Nd4. 13.0-0-0 e6. 14.d6
The theory in those days was based on a game Karpov - von Barle, and gave 14.Ne2 Nb5 as better for white. I had prepared that trades on e2 and d5, instead of Nb5, give black equality. After the game I asked Timman why he did not play the theoretical 14.Ne2. He immediately replied that the trades on e2 and d5 give equality.

14...Bd7. 15.Kb1!
In my home analysis, I had concluded that black always gains pawn d6 without difficulties. I had, however, overlooked this clever waiting move 15.Kb1. My analyses of this opening, as of many other openings, and in general many other dear things, were lost on September 20/21, 1990. I then moved from the US to Holland, and a bag of mine was lost and never recovered in an international flight.

14...e5. 16.Bd3 Bb5. 17.Bb5 Nb5. 18.Ne2
18.Bb4 a5!

18...Rd7?
In retrospect, this seems to be too passive (because of 22.Re5, see later). Against my famous opponent, I thought the risky 18...Bf8 must be wrong. After the game I came to conclude that it is fine for black, that the sharp 19.d7 is OK for black. After other reactions to 18...Bf8 black has no problems, e.g. 19.Rd5 Na3+. 20.ba3 Rd6. 21.Re5 Rd2. As far as I can tell now, 18...Bf8 seems to be OK for black.

19.Bb4 Bf8.
If I remember right, I saw a problem after 19...R8d8 that was not there after 18...Bf8. As far as I can judge now, 20.R1d5 Nd6. 21.R1d1 Bf8 leads to the same position as the text.

20.Rd5 Nd6. 21.Rhd1
21.Re5? Nc4! 22.Rb5 a6.

21...Rad8. 22.Nc3
Apparently neither Timman nor I considered 22.Re5 worthwhile (my notes of the game of 1979 do not mention this possibility). I do not know why at present (Jan. 2002). As far as I can judge now, 22.Re5 seems to be winning, for instance 21...Nc4. 22.Rd7 Rd7. 23.Re8. It is hard to believe that Timman would miss something as elementary as this, and maybe there is a black escape?

22...f6. 23.Ba3
23.Nb5? Nb5. 24.Rd7 Rd7. 25.Rd7 Bb4 ¡

23...Kf7. 24.Nb5 Ke6. 25.Bd6 Bd6. 26.f4!
Although the position continues to be drawish, this move was the turning point of the game. Up to here I thought that I had not made mistakes and that everything was under control. (I was not bothered by 22.Re5 for reasons unknown to me today.) 26.f4 I had not anticipated, though, and it took me by surprise. I had used up most of my time, thinking I would soon trade rook(s) and have a slightly worse ending of bishop against stronger knight. I used to feel well at ease in such endings and expected no problems in cashing in a clean draw against this famous opponent. After 26.f4! the position is still drawish, but black has to continue playing carefully. With the little time left, I knew I was in trouble. Indeed, in what follows, black will worsen his position by a series of inaccuracies. 26...ef4? 27.Nd4+ Kf7. 28.Nc6 Ke6. 29.Nd8 ±

26...Bb8. 27.f5+ Ke7.
27...gf5.

28.Nc3 Rd5?!
28...gf5.

29.Nd5+ Kf7. 30.Rf1!
Now white pieces can take on f5 and black's pawn f6 remains weak.

30...Rd6. 31.g4 gf5?! 32.Rf5 h6. 33.Kc2 a6. 34.h4 Kg6.
34...Kg7.

35.Rf3 Rc6+.
35...h5.

36.Kd2 b5??
After 36...Kg7! black's position is difficult but I don't know if it is lost.

37.Ne7+
Black resigns. I was honored to be defeated by Timman in this way. I felt that I was close to a draw.

5. The Strongest Opponent I Ever Defeated

Peter P. Wakker - John van der Wiel
(February 10, 1979, Rapidgame, Rabo Tournament, Nijmegen, 25 minutes per player;)
Published in Schakend Nederland 1979, April

1.c4 g6. 2.e4 Bg7. 3.d4 d6. 4.Nc3 Nf6. 5.Nf3 0-0. 6.Be2 e5. 7.de5
My speciality.

7...de5. 8.Qd8 Rd8. 9.Bg5 Re8. 10.Nd5 Nd5. 11.cd5 c5?
The correct move is 11...c6. John deliberately did not play this move so as to avoid drawish positions.

12.Rc1 b6(?)
12...Nd7. 13.a4!

13.Nd2 h6. 14.Be3 Bf8. 15.a4 Kg7. 16.f3 Ba6. 17.Bc4! ±
The trade of the light-squared bishops, for which black had no sensible alternative, is a positional success for white. Still, white does not trade on a6, but plays for the maximal advantage, and forces black to either lose a tempo by trading on c4 or have his pieces Ba6, Nb8, and then Ra8, paralized at the queenside. The black position is depressing. It seemed to me, however, that white's big positional advantage on the board did not outweigh black's advantage in ELO-points. Indeed, some months before John had become the European champion for youth under 18, and he was alredy in the top-10 of Holland. In other words, my subjective probability of gaining here was smaller than my subjective probability of losing. I, therefore, tried my luck and offered a draw. John judged the situation the same as I did and declined my offer. In spite of my good position, I decided to continue playing boldly, as is optimal under unfavorable conditions. I never seeked to consolidate my advantages but played for the maximal future advantage.

17...f5. 18.Ke2 Bd6. 19.Rc3 f4. 20.Bf2 Rd8. 21.Ra1 g5. 22.g4 fg3. 23.hg3 g4? 24.Ba6! +-
24.fg4? Bc8!

24...gf3+. 25.Rf3 Na6. 26.Nc4 Rd7. 27.Be3 Nb4. 28.Raf1
The black problem in the variation with 7.de5 is the passive dark-squared bishop. Here and throughout the sequel of the game, my principle aim was to restrain this bishop and maximize my pressure, rather than to gain material such as after 28.Bh6 which would liberate the black pieces.

28...Nc2. 29.Rf6 Ne3. 30.Ke3 Bc7. 31.Re6 Kh7. 32.R1f6 Rg7. 33.Kf3 h5. 34.d6! Bd8. 35.Rh6+ Kg8. 36.Re8+ Kf7. 37.Rhh8 h4. 38.gh4 Rh7. 39.Ne5+ Kg7. 40.Rhg8+ Kf6. 41.Rg6 checkmate.

6. The Strongest Game I ever Played

Wim Vriend - Peter P. Wakker (0-1)
(KNSB 1st league competition; April 28, 1979)

I consider the following game the strongest one I ever played. It was in the last round of the national Dutch competition (KNSB, 1st league) of SMB, my Nijmegean team, against Philidor Leiden, the Leiden team that I was going to join next year. I like the game because it is good at every stage: (a) It has a clear and new opening plan, solving an opening problem that I had had for a long time; (b) black plays energetically in the middle game; (c) the final combination, while simple, is appealing.

1.e4 e6. 2.d4 d5. 3.Nd2 Nf6. 4.e5 Nfd7. 5.f4 c5. 6.c3 Nc6. 7.N2f3 f5.
I always played this line with f5. I was happy if white would not take on f6. Then I would play as in the Leningrad variation, so cd4, a5, Nb6, Bd7, Rc8, with play on the queenside, but with f5 instead of h5. I had problems with white taking on f6. Although, objectively, black's position then seems to be OK because of active pieces, I did not like the structural weakness with the backward pawn on e6. So far, I had always played 7...Be7 first and only then f5. In this game, I applied a new idea. With the immediate 7...f5, after white's taking on f6 a check will be delivered on the a5-e1 diagonal. For an efficient reaction to this check, white lacks exactly one developing tempo. This solved my long-standing opening problem (at least in my perception; I expect that none of these ideas will survive a critical analysis by any grandmaster), and I was happy that I could apply the idea in a game for the first time.

8.ef6 Nf6. 9.Bd3 cd4. 10.cd4?!
10.Nd4 Nd4. 11.cd4 Qa5+. 12.Bd2 Qb6. 13.Bc3 Bd6 =+

10...Ne4! 11.a3?
Better is 11.Ne2 Bb4+. 12.Bd2 Nd2. 13.Nd2 Qh4+. 14.g3 Qh3 =+

11...Qa5+. 12.Kf1
White had overlooked that after 12.Bd2? Nd2. 13.Qd2? black has 13...Bb4.

12...Bd6. 13.Ne2 0-0. 14.Be3
14.g3 e5! 15.Kg2? Bh3! Here, after 14.Be3, was the only time in the game that I thought for more than a few minutes. Black has to decide on how to develop Bc8. Can be through Bd7 (starting with Qb6) with good play on the queenside. What I played is sharper.

14...g5!? 15.fg5 e5. 16.Kg1 Bg4. 17.Ne5?
Better is 17.de5, although black has a big advantage after 17...Bc5. 18.Qc1 Bf3. 19.gf3 Rf3. 20.Bc5 Qc5+. 21.Qc5 Nc5 ¡

17...Ne5. 18.de5
18.Be4 Nc5

18...Bc5. 19.Qc1 Qe1+.
Simple but nice.

20.Qe1 Be3+. 21.Qf2 Nf2?
I saw that black wins three (!) pieces (22.h3 Nd3+. 23.Kh2 Be2), and played the move instantaneously. My opponent, my future team-mate, immediately resigned. My team-mate of that moment, Ronald de Bruyn, however, walked up to me and said “Why didn't you mate him in two, with 21...Bf2+ and 22...Nd2?” Then I realized, sadly, that this game can never compete for beauty prizes.

My Best Ending

“@”