The Cutting Edge

Nataliya Igorivna Buksa – Piotr Sabuk
January “Lviv Tradition”; Lviv, February 1, 2015
Spanish Game C92

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Ba4 Nf6 5. 0-0 Be7 6. Re1 b5 7. Bb3 d6 8. c3 0-0 9. h3 Bb7 10. d4 Re8 11. Nbd2 Bf8 12. d5 Ne7 13. Nf1 h6 14. Ng3 Nd7. For 14. ... c6 15. dxc6 Bxc6 16. Qc2 Qc7 17. a4 Qb7 take a look at Ageichenko – Butnorius, Klaipėda 1979. 15. Bc2 Nb6 16. b3 c6 17. dxc6 Bxc6 18. Ba3 Ng6 19. Nf5 Ra7 20. Ne3 Nf4 21. c4 bxc4 22. bxc4 Qd7 23. Rb1 Na4 24. Qd2 Ne6 25. Bxa4 Bxa4 26. Nf5 Rd8 27. Qa5 Bc6 28. Rbd1 Qb7? Here Sabuk appears to have miscalculated. After 28. ... Qc7 29. Qxc7 Rxc7 30. Bxd6 Bxd6 31. Rxd6 Rxd6 32. Nxd6 Rd7 it’s hard to say whether Black has enough for the Pawn, but this, surely, would have been a lesser evil. 29. Bxd6? But Buksa misses the stronger continuation: 29. Nxe5! Bxe4 30. Nxf7! Kxf7 31. f3! which leaves Black facing insurmountable problems. 29. ... Bxe4 30. Qxe5!? Bold play. 30. N3h4 deserved consideration as a safer course. 30. ... Bxf3 31. gxf3 Qxf3 32. Rd5? Buksa, being confident in her own tactical skill, decides to speculate on the time scramble thrilling, at the cost of seriously worsening her position. On the other hand, after 32. Nd4 Qxh3 Black would just stand better.

32. ... Rxd6! 33. Rxd6 Bxd6? There must have been severe time pressure on here; otherwise Sabuk probably would not have missed 33. ... Nf4! 34. Nh4 Nxh3+ 35. Kh2 Ng5 winning easily. 34. Qxd6 Nf4?? A terrible blunder in time trouble. Correct was 34. ... Kh7! neutralizing Buksa’s trick. 35. Re8+ Kh7 36. Rh8+! Sabut simply overlooked this trivial check! 1 : 0. For after 36. ... Kxh8 37. Qf8+ mate follows next move.

Nataliya Igorivna Buksa vs. Piotr Sabuk. Photo: Olexandr Prohorov.

Nataliya Igorivna Buksa. Photos: grandcoach.com.