Nilsson,Harald (2078) - Johansson,T (2329) [A40]

MAS ELO (7), 05.03.2001

[TJ]
updated 2/6-02
Here's another opening with a Swedish origin, The Englund gambit. Probably not one of
the 10 best answers to 1.d4. However, I was sure my opponent had prepared something
himself and with only 2 hours each it's certainly better to surprise than be surprised!
Besides, I wanted to test a relatively new idea that I'd seen in some magazine, probably
it was in Kaissiber, but I don't remember exactly.
1.d4 e5 2.dxe5
[2.e4 exd4 3.Nf3 is most likely to transpose to the Scotch, a nice oldie that has currently
become a theoretical minefield since The Great Gonzo started using it occasionally...]
2...Nc6 3.Nf3
[White can try to hold on to the pawn with 3.f4 but it does entail some risk as can be
seen below: 3...f6 (3...d6!? 4.Nf3 Bg4 5.h3 Bxf3 6.gxf3 Qd7 7.exd6 Bxd6 8.f5 0-0-0
9.Bg5 Bb4+ 10.c3 Qxd1+ 11.Kf2 Bc5+ 12.Kg2 Qe1 13.Kh2 Qf2+ 14.Bg2 Bd6+ 15.f4
Bxf4+ 16.Bxf4 Qxf4+ 17.Kg1 Rd1+ 18.Bf1 Qg3# 0-1 LiveObject-Cvb/VOGChess 0
(18))
4.e4
a)4.exf6 Nxf6 5.Nf3 Bc5
(a)5...d5 6.e3 Be7 7.Bb5 0-0 8.Bxc6 bxc6 9.0-0 Bg4 10.c4 Bc5 11.h3 Qe8 12.Re1 Qh5
13.cxd5 Rae8 14.dxc6 Kh8 15.Nc3 Bxh3 16.gxh3 Qxh3 17.Ng5 Qg3+ 18.Kh1 Ng4
19.Qe2 Nf2+ 0-1 Sheffield,E-Betancourt,D/California 1988 (19))
6.Nc3 0-0 7.e4 d6 8.Bc4+ Kh8 9.Qe2 Bg4 10.Be3 Bb4 11.h3 Bxc3+ 12.bxc3 Nxe4
13.hxg4 Ng3 14.Rxh7+ Kxh7 15.Qd3+ g6 16.Kf2 Ne5 17.Nxe5 Qh4 18.Qxg6+ Kh8
19.Nf7+ Rxf7 20.Bd4+ Rf6 21.Bxf6+ 1-0 Alaam Midhat-Sloan Sam/Abu Dhabi
(United Arab Emirat 1987 (21);
b)4.Nf3 fxe5 5.fxe5 Qe7 6.Qd5 Qb4+ 7.c3 Qg4 8.Nbd2 Nge7 9.Qc4 h5 10.Ne4 Ng6
11.h3 Qe6 12.Qxe6+ dxe6 13.Nd4 Bd7 14.Ng5 Nd8 15.e4 Nxe5 16.Be2 Nef7 17.Bc4
Nxg5 18.Bxg5 Be7 19.Bxe7 1/2-1/2 Rundqvist,P-Herrstrm,T/SM Lidkoping - M.Elit l. 1996 (19);
4...fxe5 5.Bc4
(5.Nf3 exf4 6.Bc4 Nf6 7.0-0 Bc5+ 8.Kh1 Nxe4 9.Qd5 Qe7 10.Re1 Nf2+ 11.Kg1 Nd3+
12.Qxc5 Qxe1+ 13.Nxe1 Nxc5 14.Bxf4 d6 15.Nc3 Bf5 16.Nd5 Kd7 17.Ne3 Be6 18.Be2
Rhf8 19.Bg3 Rae8 20.Bf3 Nd4 21.Bd1 Ne4 22.c3 Nf5 23.Nxf5 Bxf5 24.Nf3 Nxg3
25.hxg3 Bd3 26.Bb3 Re2 27.Rd1 Bc2 28.Ne5+ Ke7 29.Bxc2 Rxc2 30.Nd3 Rf5 31.Re1+
Kd7 32.a3 Rd2 33.Re3 Rd1+ 34.Ne1 Re5 35.Rxe5 dxe5 36.Kf2 Rd2+ 37.Kf3 Rxb2

38.Nd3 Rc2 39.Nxe5+ Ke6 0-1 Gomez Vasquez E-Sloan Sam/Mexico City (MEX) 1988
(39))
5...Nf6 6.f5 d5 7.Bxd5 Nxd5 8.Qh5+ g6 9.fxg6 Nf6 10.g7+ Nxh5 11.gxh8Q Qh4+
12.Kf1 Be6 13.Nf3 Bc4+ 14.Kg1 0-0-0 15.g3 Qh3 16.Kf2 Bc5+ 0-1 KastenholzHolstein/BL-SW 7576 Ludwigsha 1976 (16)]
3...Nge7!? Diagram

The new idea mentioned above. I had saved this for an appropriate game, for at least a
year. The statistics in my database was 100% wins for black of 5 or 6 games. Later, I
found a few other, less favourable games at Eric Schiller's site, where some guy called
Zilbermints seemed to claim the variation should have his name...
Anyway, I doubted that he really was first and Herr Zilbermintz himself removed all
doubts in a couple of peculiar messages to me and my guestbook within an hour on June
1st 2002. He's claiming to be the "INVENTOR" [yes, small letters weren't enough] of
this 3.-Nge7 gambit.
But he admits he was neither the first to play nor to analyze it! And to invent something
means to create something new that did not exist prior to its invention...
Obviously Mr Zilbermintz has done a lot of research on this variation, since he knows
that: "The first person to play it (unfortunately game scores are lost to history) was
Samuel Leigh Stadelman, 1881-1959?, a Philadelphia chess player. His analyses were
published in Philadelphia Inquirer?? in 1939?? , but were virtually forgotten, until
republished in a Canadian Chess magazine in 1965."
So obviously it should be named the Stadelman gambit for historic reasons! Perhaps in
time, chess history will add the name of Mr Zilbermints, like so many other openings
that have had a name change. But I do resent that the biggest mouth should claim and
get all the credit.
Especially since this renaming is mainly an american (or english speaking)
phenomenon, in the US, The Volga gambit suddenly becomes The Benko gambit; The

Morra gambit becomes the Smith-Morra, The Scandinavian becomes The Center
Counter and so on. English writers also seem eager to rename variations, though usually
not after themselves, but rather after their compatriots and friends. (A quick look in any
opening book in english will usually show that all books referred to are in english,
except ECO and Informator.)
Even if for example Zukertort's 1.Nf3 became Reti's Opening, I can't imagine that Reti
himself claimed the name should be changed, probably it was a (FIDE?) tribute to a
great player whom died at the age of only 40 years.
And now, finally, back to the Englund gambit, where my opponent came up with a
novelty: 4.b3!? Diagram

A novelty that looks quite logical. The long black diagonal should be a good home for
white's blackfielder.
[Here are some earlier tries:
4.Bg5 h6 5.Bh4 g5 6.Bg3 Ng6 7.e4 Bg7 8.Bc4 g4 9.Nd4 Nxd4 10.Qxd4 h5 11.f4 h4
12.f5 hxg3 13.fxg6 gxh2 14.Bxf7+ Kf8 15.g3 Qg5 16.Nc3 Bxe5 17.Qf2 Rh3 18.Be6+
Qf6 19.Qxf6+ Bxf6 20.Bxg4 Rxg3 21.Bf5 Be5 22.Kf2 d6 23.Rxh2 Bxf5 24.exf5 Rxc3
25.g7+ Kf7 26.g8Q+ Kxg8 27.Rg2+ Rg3 28.Rxg3+ Bxg3+ 29.Kxg3 Re8 30.Rg1 Kf7
31.Rh1 Kg7 32.Rh2 Re4 33.b3 b5 34.Kf3 d5 35.Re2 Rxe2 36.Kxe2 Kf6 37.Kd3 c5
38.a4 bxa4 0-1 Conchello Lobo-Gayobart/cr ch E vr gr 1 1983 (38);
4.e3 Ng6 5.e6 fxe6 6.Bd3 Qf6 7.Nc3 d5 8.0-0 Bd6 9.Nb5 0-0 10.Nxd6 cxd6 11.c3 Nce5
12.Nxe5 Nxe5 13.Be2 Bd7 14.f4 Ng6 15.Qd4 Bc6 16.Bf3 Nh4 17.Qxf6 Nxf3+ 18.Rxf3
Rxf6 19.Rf2 e5 20.Bd2 Raf8 21.g3 h5 22.Be1 Bb5 23.Rd1 h4 24.fxe5 dxe5 25.Rxf6
Rxf6 26.Bf2 Bc6 27.gxh4 Kf7 28.Bg3 Ke6 29.Rf1 Rg6 30.Rf2 Rg4 31.Kf1 Re4 32.Ke2
a5 33.Kd2 a4 34.a3 g6 35.Rf8 Ke7 36.Rf2 Bd7 37.Rf1 Bh3 38.Rf2 Bg4 39.Kd3 Bf5
40.Kd2 Ke6 41.Rf3 Rc4 42.Rf2 Rc6 43.Kd1 Rb6 44.Kc1 Rb3 45.Rd2 Be4 46.Rf2 b5
47.Rd2 b4 48.cxb4 Rxe3 49.Bf2 Rf3 50.Bg3 Rf1+ 51.Rd1 Rf8 52.Rd2 d4 53.Rf2 Rc8+
54.Kd1 Bf5 55.Kd2 e4 56.Rf4 Kd5 57.h5 e3+ 58.Ke2 Re8 59.hxg6 d3+ 60.Kd1 Bxg6
61.Be1 Bh5+ 62.Kc1 Rc8+ 0-1 Chapman,P-Saqui,D/Hanham op 1994 (62);

4.Nc3 Ng6 5.Bg5 Be7 6.Bxe7 Qxe7 7.Nd5 Qd8 8.Qd2 h6 9.Nd4 Nxd4 10.Qxd4 c6
11.Nc3 Qb6 12.0-0-0 Qxd4 13.Rxd4 Nxe5 14.e4 (14.Re4?! f6! 15.f4 d5 16.Re3 d4
17.Rg3 Nf7 (17...Ng4?! 18.Nd1!; 17...dxc3!? 18.fxe5 cxb2+ 19.Kxb2 0-0 20.exf6 Rxf6
21.e4=) ) 14...Ke7 15.f4 Ng6 (15...Ng4 16.h3 Ne3 17.Rd3 Nxf1 18.Rxf1+/=) 16.g3
(16.e5!+/-) 16...d6 17.Be2 Bh3 18.Rhd1 Rad8 19.Bf3 h5 20.Ra4 a6 21.Rad4 h4 22.a4
Bc8 23.a5 hxg3 24.hxg3 Rh3 25.Ne2 Nh4 26.gxh4 Rxf3 27.e5 d5 28.Rg1 g6 29.Rg3
Rf2 30.Kd2 Rh8 31.Ke3 Rh2 32.c4 dxc4 33.Rxc4 R8xh4 34.Rb4 Rh1 35.Nc3 R4h2
36.Kd4 Ra1 37.Kc5 Rxa5+ 38.Kb6 Ra1 39.Kc7 Rh8 40.Ne4 b5 41.Rd3 Bf5 42.Rd6
Rc8+ 43.Kb7 c5 44.Rb3 c4 45.Re3 b4 46.Nf6 c3 47.bxc3 b3 48.Rb6 Be6 49.c4 Rxc4
50.f5 Bxf5 51.Nd5+ Kf8 52.Rexb3 Be4 53.Rd6 Rc5 54.Rd8+ Kg7 55.Rh3 Rxd5 0-1
Boesveld Marco (NED)-De Zeeuw Maarten/Ch Netherlands (team), Nether 1995/[TJ]
(55)]
I suppose a white player with a sense of humour could try to transpose to the Budapest
gambit with 4.c4 Ng6 5.Nc3 Ngxe5 6.Nxe5 Nxe5 7.e3 etc
4...Ng6 5.Bb2 Bb4+ 6.Nbd2 Qe7 7.a3 Bxd2+ 8.Qxd2 0-0 9.g3 Ngxe5 10.Nxe5 Nxe5
11.Bg2 d6 12.0-0 Rb8! white already has a nice little advantage, and black needs some
kind of plan for counter play.
13.Qd4 [13.Rae1!?] 13...c5 and here it is!

Block out white's powerful diagonal and advance on the queenside. 14.Qc3 f6 15.Rad1
Bf5 16.Rd2 b5 17.Rfd1 Rb6= 18.h3 Re8 19.Qe3 Qf8 [19...Qd7!?]
20.Qf4 Bc8 21.Qh4 a5 22.g4 f5 23.gxf5 Bxf5 24.Qg3 Kh8 25.Bxe5?! dxe5 26.Kh2?!
[26.Qe3=] 26...b4 27.axb4 axb4 28.Qe3 Rh6=/+ 29.Rd5 Bxc2 30.Rc1?(+) [30.R1d2
Bf5 31.Rxc5 (31.Rxe5 Rxe5 32.Qxe5 Bxh3) ] 30...Bxb3! 31.Rdxc5 [31.Qxb3 Qf4+]
31...Ba2 32.Bd5 b3 33.Rg1 Rd6 Diagram

34.Bc4
[
34.Rc7 Rxd5 35.Rgxg7 Qxg7 36.Rxg7 Kxg7 37.Qg5+ Kf7-+;
34.Bxb3?? Bxb3 35.Qxb3 Qxf2+ 36.Rg2 Qxc5;
White's best seems to be something like this, (which is not easy to find even in time
trouble ;): 34.Rb5 Rxd5 tempting, but not best. (34...Rf6 35.Rg2 Rb8 36.Rxb8 Qxb8
37.Qc3 keeps an advantage for black.)
35.Rxd5 b2 36.Rb5 Rb8 37.Qf3 Qg8 38.Rxg7 Rxb5 39.Rxg8+ (39.Ra7 Qd8 40.Qf5
b1Q 41.Rxh7+ Kg8-+) 39...Kxg8 40.Qg4+ Kf7 41.Qd7+ Kf6 42.Qc6+ Kg5 43.Qg2+
with a perpetual.]
34...Rd4?! Tempting in time trouble, and as it turned out practically, though not
objectively, winning.

[Best is to continue with the pressure strategy: 34...Rf6 35.Rxe5 (35.f3 e4) 35...Rxf2+
36.Kh1 Rxe5 37.Qxe5 h6 and black keeps a clear edge thanks to the b3-pawn.]
35.Rc7?? failing to deal with black's main threat.

[White had the nice saving counter stroke: 35.Rxe5! (with the point: 35...Qd6 36.Qxd4!
(not 36.f4? Rf8 37.Qg3 g6 38.Bxb3 Bxb3 39.Qxb3 Rdxf4-/+) 36...Qxe5+ 37.Qxe5 Rxe5
38.Rg3 Re8 39.Bxb3 Rxe2=) 35.-Rxe5 36.Qxd4 Rf5 =/+]
35...Rxc4 36.Rxc4 b2 0-1