1 # Shogi Game 28 (professional, full annotation).
3 # Please find below Game 4 of the 48th Meijin Title Match (1990) with full
4 # comment by Tanigawa Koji (Meijin).
6 # John Kenney <kenney@embl-heidelberg.de>
7 # Submitted 5-th May 1992.
8 # Pieter Stouten <stouten@embl-heidelberg.de>
9 # Archived 11-th May 1992.
11 # -------------------------------------------------------------------------
13 # 48th Meijin Title Match - Game 4 by Tanigawa Koji, Meijin
15 # Written by Tanigawa Koji. Translated by David Murphy.
16 # Typed by John Kenney. Checked by John Kenney and Pieter Stouten.
18 # In this match so far the play has been passable. Even the game which I
19 # lost from a won position. From the opening I expected to use a lot of
20 # time and effort in building up an advantagous position so that during
21 # the game I had no time for disappointment. But, when I got home and once
22 # again was watching satellite TV, etc., the quiet anger of "gyakuten"
23 # (turn-around) sunk in. Still, I came to this game with the resolve to
24 # play it as comfortably as possible, feeling that I'd been putting too
25 # much into it so far. Yet, not too easy going, because losing this game
26 # would be quite serious, but...
28 # 48th Meijin, Game 4, 21 and 22 May 1990 (players have 9 hours each)
29 # Black: Tanigawa Koji, Meijin. White: Nakahara Makoto, Kisei.
40 [ Since I used the Bishop exchange as Black in Game 2, I thought to play
41 a Fortress this time. However, if I did that, it was 100% certain that
42 Nakahara would adopt the system he played in this game, so I had the
43 problem of finding a counter to it. I'd already lost as Black against
44 this system to both Nakahara in a quick play game and Habu (Ryu-o) in
45 Game 3 of the All-Japan Pro, so it would have been poor to play this
46 without anything prepared. Therefore, though it is slightly
47 contradictory, I was in fact undecided as to whether to play a Fortress
48 or a Bishop exchange opening right up to directly before the game.
50 The result of my preparation effort was to hit upon P6f. Though it is
51 not that unusual a move in itself, I thought it was better than 3 S7g
52 against the "Nakahara style" system. The explanation is really for
53 experts, but one counter measure is to retreat the silver at 7g to 6h, and
54 play B7g. So, if one is going for this line, it must be better to leave the
55 silver on 6h. Because of this Nakahara played 9 P8e to force my silver
56 to 7g early on. For my part, by keeping S7g back I forced him to play
57 P8e. The timing of this move is delicate. I feel that it could have
58 been held back just a little. ]
69 [ Playing 3 P6f was one idea I had, a second was 14 B7i. When the
70 "Nakahara style" system began to be played, I felt that White would
71 have great trouble making his attack a success in view of his weak King
72 position. Though he has seized the strategic initiative a severe counter
73 attack would follow in the wake of his attack, I thought. But, after
74 having faced it in practice I found the going tough, with no counter
75 play, and was forced to revise my opinion of its validity. So, in the
76 Kisei tournament on April 20th I played the "Nakahara style" for the
77 first time with White against Takahshi 9-Dan, thinking I ought to
78 consider playing White's side, since Black has no counter to it. In
79 that game, Takahashi countered by exchanging off his rook pawn with his
80 pawn and then playing B7i/B6h. So I thought that if I retreated B7i
81 first and exchanged off my 2-file pawn with the Bishop I'd gain a
82 strategic victory. For clearly it is a one tempo gain over
91 [ Exchanging off the 2nd file pawn with the rook is safe, but doing it with
92 the Bishop is slightly dangerous. The reason is that after 17 B6h White
93 has the move 17 ... N7c. However, after 18 S5g P6e 19 S5f White can't
94 launch a successful attack, as was established in the post-mortem.
95 Naturally, Nakahara, too, had read out this sequence. In any event he
96 gave up the idea and played the quiet 17 S5d. To tell the truth, I was
97 a little relieved. For now I have definitely gained a clear tempo. That
98 the attack with 17 ... N7c 18 ... P6e does not work owes a lot to the
99 move 9 ... P8e. Had he played another move in place of this it would
100 have made a big difference. 20 ... G5h instead of 20 ... R5b would be
101 usual, but since Black is a tempo up compared to the normal position,
102 he judged that is would be poor to follow along the same lines. ]
108 [ On the last move White had a difficult choice. 21 ... G7b was the
109 alternative, but it has a drawback. For then the attack P3f and P3e
110 works. Against P3f White can play opposing silvers by S5d-4e. However,
111 with the Gold on 7b, a nasty silver stab at 6a is created after the
112 silver exchange. But, on the other hand, after 21 ... G6b as in the
113 game, 22 R2e! works. The threat is simply 23 Rx8e, but it is
114 suprisingly hard to meet. 22 ... N7c would be normal, but then 23 P7e S6c
115 24 Px7d Sx7d 25 P'7e S6c 26 K8h with the outpost on the 7th file Black
116 has a clear advantage. So Nakahara in reply played 22 ... P'5e. For my
117 part I wanted to force this pawn drop to bring about a "semeai" (mutual
118 fight). The following sequence was forced. If he recaptures on 5e
119 without playing 23 ... N3c, then I exchange Silvers and play P'5f, to
120 be followed by Rx8e. ]
122 25. Sx5e(75) Sx5e(50)
125 [ I spent an hour and a quarter over 25 Sx5e. I could have played 25 P'5f
126 Sx4f 26 Bx4f, but I was going deeply into all the ramifications of the
127 game sequence rather than that during this time.
129 White's reply became the sealed move. I had been expecting 25 ... Sx5e. I,
130 therefore, planned to think about the 25 ... Rx5e possiblity. In that case,
131 26 P'5f R5a 27 K8h leads to another game entirely. However, Nakahara chose
132 25 ... Sx5e because he was worried about 26 S'8b in reply to 25 ... Rx5e.
133 26 S'8b isn't my style and I don't think I'd have played it, but going for
134 some material gain like this may be the best move.
136 Returning to the game, 26 S'2a was my idea! If in reply 26 ... G3a
137 27 P'2d Px2d 28 P'2c Gx2a 29 Px2b+ Gx2b, gaining a Bishop for a Silver,
138 then not unnaturally I would be better. However, White has S5f, an
139 unpleasant move for Black, so this was a variation I was a little
140 worried about. 26 ... P1d on the other hand does prepare to meet 27
141 Sx3b+ Kx3b 28 P'2d Px2d 29 P'2c with 29 ... B1c! But, I was not expecting
144 27. P'5f(17) Sx5f(53)
147 [ After finding 27 P'5f I thought I was clearly winning! If White
148 retreats 27 ... S4d I have no quick win, but after 28 Sx3b+ Kx3b 29 K8h
149 White's position is in disarray. Having said that I was expecting 27
150 ... S4d. However, Nakahara took the pawn with 27 ... Sx5f. This bad
151 move was a surprise. At this stage it was still only about 10:20am on
152 the second day of the game. To be honest I thought the game would be over
153 in the morning. I spent 17 minutes on 27 P'5f, analysing the mating
154 lines, and 24 more minutes checking them one more time before playing
155 Gx5f. However, this was a serious error. If move order was 28 Sx3b+ Kx3b
156 then 29 Gx5f was correct. This would have been clear cut. I didn't think
157 about which to play here, Sx3b+ or Gx5f. I thought not unnaturally that
158 28 ... Rx5f was his only reply to 28 Gx5f ... ]
167 [ If he had played 28 ... Rx5f, I intended 29 Sx3b+ Kx3b 30 P'2d Px2d 31
168 S'2c! Kx2c 32 Rx2d K3b 33 G'4b Kx4b 34 Rx2b+. If then 34 ... S'3b 35
169 B'3a K4a 36 Bx6d+, threatening both 37 +R3a, etc. mating and 37 +B4f,
170 wins. Or if 34 ... G'3b 35 B'3a K4a 36 +Rx3b Kx3b 37 G'4b K2a 38 P'2c
171 G'1b 39 B6h-1c+ and White can not prevent mate. In truth the game
172 would probably have been over before noon. However, Nakahara played
173 ... G3a! Had I played 28 Sx3b+ first this could not have happened.
174 When he played it I not only regretted getting the move order wrong,
175 but I was also a little impatient. After 28 ... G3a! it became a bit
176 dangerous. Being now in an unstable psychological state too, there was
177 danger of a "gyakuten" (turn-around). If 31 ... R5b, intead of
178 Nakahara's 31 ... R5a, then 32 +Rx3d G3b 33 P'2d S'2e 34 +Rx6d S'6c 35
179 P'5c Gx5c 36 +Rx5c Rx5c 37 P'5d R5b 38 G'5c. This must still be slightly
180 better for Black, we decided in the postmortem, but the truth is I was
181 uneasy about it, having given him a rook in hand, and ... P'6g! in the
182 air. But because he retreated the rook all the way to 5a, 32 B3e hit
183 the loose Gold. Even so, I was still uneasy. ]
186 34. P'5c(24) G5b4b(3)
190 [ Here I was more worried about the defense 33 ... P'5c. If in reply 34
191 P'5d S'2c 35 Px5c+ Gx5c 36 Bx5c+ Sx3d 37 P'5b, then 37 ... B1c! and 38
192 P4f if, 38 ... Rx5b 39 +Bx5b K3a, suprisingly a position in which White
193 is hard to mate. If I can't do it, then with the opponent having rook and
194 silver in hand would spell trouble. I had been calculating this endgame
195 specifically, and then along the way I noticed 37 ... B1c! Frankly I had
196 lost my vigilence. With the memory of Game 3 in mind, I was predicting
197 a gloomy outcome. However, Nakahara went 33 ... G5b. Then after 34 ...
198 G5b-4b there was no longer any danger of losing my rook so I had nothing
199 to fear. 36 K8h was the decisive move. After that all my worries were over. ]
212 # (Time taken: Black, 5:51; White, 6:29)
214 # So I won with Black, but I haven't been able to win with White. That is
215 # the crux of the matter. Nakahara will probably play "Aigahari" in Game 5.
216 # Though I lost both Games 1 and 3 my strategy was overall a success regarding
217 # the positions reached. So it will be interesting to see what Nakahara comes
218 # up with next time...