New in Chess Magazine 1994. (nem teljes évfolyam) [antikvár]

Chess players writeBalashov-ShirevDear Sir,In NIC 93/7 Shirov accused me of stealing his annotations. I would like to draw attention to a few things:1)Mr. Shirov seems to have forgotten that I was also in the tournament in which the game Bal-ashov-Shirov was played, and since Balashov and I are close friends we analyzed the adjourned game very seriously together, finding many variations ourselves.2)Mr. Shirov had analyzed the position excellently (very regrettably for him only after the game) and in my article I have referred to his analysis. The only possible objection could have come from the magazine 64, which published Shirov's analysis, something which 1 did not mention.However, I talked with Mr. Alexander Roshal, editor of 64, with whom I work a lot, and he assured me that he did not mind me using part of Shirov's analysis from his magazine.With great respect, Adrian Mikhalchishin, RussiaPostscript PublisherMr Mikhalchishin was correct in asking the editor-in-chief of 64, Mr Roshal, for permission to quote from Mr Shirov's article. However, as it is good New in Chess practice to give author's name and source wherever relevant, we regret that this did not happen in this case.Winning with Hie NajderfDear Sir,I would like to make a few comments on René Olthofs review of my book Winning with the Naj-dorf (NIC 93/5). I am sorry it has taken me so long to respond. Mr Olthofs main criticism of the book is its historical inaccuracy, and he cites two 'grave' examples: (1) that Rico-Najdorf 1949 was the first Najdorf variation by Miguel Najdorf himself; and (2) that Lok-venc-Opocensky Prague 1943 was the first real Najdorf Perhaps I can answer these points by explaining what I was trying to achieve in the introduction.As the opening I was examining was the 'Najdorf, it seemed reasonable to me to establish exactly what Miguel Najdorfs contribution to the opening was, namely, that he recognised the viability of the structure with e5, which I went on to discuss in more detail in the introduction, and indeed throughout the book. On this basis, I stand by my assertion that Rico-Najdorf, 1949 was the first proper'Najdorf by'Najdorf himself, as it is the first that I have been able to find where he combined 5 a6 with e5. I am well aware of games prior to this where Najdorf played 5 a6, but he only ever used it as a way of getting into a Scheveningen system (i.e. systems where Black moves the pawn to e6). For instance, in the Mar del Plata tournament of 1947 he used the following move orderittiiv. a'Jain^l I'ilnik and Luckis: l.c4 c5 2.i^f3 d6 3.d4 cd4 4.iLid4 afe 5.ac3 a6 6.i.e2 e6; or in the Buenos Aires tournament of the same year where he played it against Euwe. It is interesting to see that in the bulletin to the last mentioned tournament, Senor Ellerman comments that instead of 6 e6, 6 e5 is an 'old move that has been revived by the Soviets and Slavs', and he refers to an article in the magazine Caissa by Kottnauer discussing the idea. Which brings me back to the argument that I followed in the book that it was a group of Czech players (Opocensky and Kottnauer among others) who first developed what we nowadays call the 'Najdorf - i.e. systems with 5 a6 where Black follows up with e5 rather than e6. From this starting point, a tide of opinion grew up in the forties that it was a viable idea to play the Sicilian with e5, and Najdorf caught the crest of that wave at the end of the decade. I hope Mr Olthof will not be too disappointed to learn that I am also aware of the 1930s games he quotes which featured the position after l.e4 c5 l.thQ d6 3.d4 cd4 4.^d4 i^fe 5.ihc3 a6 6.i.g5 e6 (via whatever move order). To me, they are not evidence of a new system as Black played with e6 - in other words the Scheveningen type pawn structure. I know it is impossible for Black to play e5 in this position anyway, but that's not the point!As 1 said in the book's introduction (which Mr Olthof actually quotes) '5 a6 had often been played, but only as a method of getting into a Scheveningen (e6) or a Dragon System (g6).'