My games from 11 man Natl 2013

[Alex_Moiseyev]

The tournament is over, now it is time to relax and analyze ... otherwise it would be wasting time.

Rd. 1, G1. A. Moiseyev (off 11) vs H. Kelley (off 28)

[Event "USA Natl 11 man ballot, Rd.1, G1"]
[Date "Feb 16, 2013"]
[Black "A. Moiseyev"]
[White "H. Kelley"]
[Result "2-0"]
[Setup "Off 11,28"]
[FEN "B:W32,31,30,29,27,26,25,24,23,22,21:B12,10,9,8,7,6,5,4,3,2,1."]

1. 7-11 23-19 (A) 2. 11-16 (B) 26-23 3. 16-20 30-26 4. 8-11 32-28 5. 11-16 19-15 6. 10x19 24x15 7. 4-8 22-18 (C) 8. 9-14 18x9 9. 5x14 25-22 10. 16-19 23x16 11. 12x19 22-17 (D) 12. 14-18 17-14 (E) 13. 20-24 27x20 14. 18-23 26-22 15. 6-10 14x7 16. 2x25 29x22 17. 23-26 22-18 18. 26-30 RW

#1. Red to move. ................... #2. White to move
...

A) See opening position on diagram #1. No damage has been made to both sides and development looks natural. Red now has two major paths: fighting for center by 11-15 or 9-14, or play 11-16 trying to fight against weak center & trapping center" as happened in the game.

B) 11-15 and 9-14 also are good enough leading to different sort of formations.

C) Certainly not the best and allow red important trade 9-14 which ruins white center. 21-17 here was in spirit of position.

D) Or 2-23, 8-12, 23x16, 12x19, 31-27 (15-11, 20-24 Red better)2-7, 29-25, 14-18, 15-11, 7x16, 22x15, 3-8 etc Red better

E) Loses ! See diagram #2. A pretty complicated draw was still available after 29-25 13. 3-7 17-14 14. 7-11 21-17 15. 11-16 15-11 16. 8x15 14-10 17. 6-9 17-13 18. 9-14 25-21 19. 18-22 26x17 20. 14-18 17-14 etc Draw

Rd.1, G2. H. Kelley (off 11) vs A. Moiseyev (off 28)

[Event "USA Natl 11 man ballot, Rd.1, G2"]
[Date "Feb 16, 2013"]
[Black "H. Kelley"]
[White "A. Moiseyev"]
[Result "1-1"]
[Setup "Off 11,28"]
[FEN "B:W32,31,30,29,27,26,25,24,23,22,21:B12,10,9,8,7,6,5,4,3,2,1."]

1. 7-11 23-19 2. 11-16 26-23 3. 16-20 22-18 (A) 4. 9-14 18x9 5. 5x14 25-22 6. 8-11 22-18 7. 6-9 (B) 22-18 8. 11x18 21-17 9. 14x21 23x5 10. 4-8 29-25 11. 8-11 25-22 12. 2-6 27-23 13. 20x27 31x24 14. 6-9 24-20 15. 11-15 32-28 16. 15x24 28x19 17. 10-14 22-18 18. 14-17 19-15 19. 17-22 15-10 20. 22-26 23-19 21. 26-31 18-15 22. 31-27 10-6 23. 1x10 15x6 24. 9-14 6-2 25. 14-17 5-1 26. 17-22 1-6 27. 3-8 2-7 (C) Draw

#1. White to move


A) Vary from the first game and seems to be the best.

B) See diagram #1 before trade. I played here 18-15 but Kingsrow program recommends here 29-25 as best. Hence!, I am not a program to calculate and play crazy variations like ... (continue from diagram) 29-25 8. 4-8 25-22 9. 3-7 30-25 10. 1-6 32-28 11. 11-16 18-15 etc Draw ==> Maximum white can get there - pretty draw and raising adrenalin in the blood !

C) After trade both opponents made all right moves though position didn't allow too many chances for mistakes.

More coming ...

[Alex_Moiseyev]

Rd.2, G1. A. Moiseyev (off 7) vs J. Webster (off 25)

[Event "USA Natl 11 man ballot, Rd.2, G1"]
[Date "Feb 16, 2013"]
[Black "A. Moiseyev"]
[White "J. Webster"]
[Result "1-1"]
[Setup "Off 7,25"]
[FEN "B:W32,31,30,29,28,27,26,24,23,22,21:B12,11,10,9,8,6,5,4,3,2,1."]

1. 10-14 22-18 (A) 2. 11-15 18x11 3. 8x15 29-25 4. 4-8 24-19 5. 15x24 28x19 6. 8-11 25-22 7. 11-16 22-18 8. 6-10 27-24 9. 16-20 18-15 10. 20x27 15x6 11. 1x10 31x24 12. 2-7 26-22 13. 9-13 22-18 14. 7-11 18x9 15. 5x14 24-20 16. 11-15 32-28 17. 15x24 28x19 18. 3-7 20-16 19. 14-17 21x14 20. 10x17 23-18 21. 17-22 18-14 22. 13-17 14-9 23. 7-10 (B) Draw

#1. Red to move.


A) See opening position on diagram #1. Position looks better for white due to red holes on 7 and 10 but nothing significant in reality. After trade 11-15 as played in both games red can consolidate their pieces and organize proper coordination between both flanks.

B) Quite unevenful game where both opponents played it carefully keeping ambitious behind.

Rd.2, G2. J. Webster (off 7) vs A. Moiseyev (off 25)

[Event "USA Natl 11 man ballot, Rd.2, G2"]
[Date "Feb 16, 2013"]
[Black "A. Moiseyev"]
[White "J. Webster"]
[Result "2-0"]
[Setup "Off 7,25"]
[FEN "B:W32,31,30,29,28,27,26,24,23,22,21:B12,11,10,9,8,6,5,4,3,2,1."]

1. 10-14 22-18 2. 11-15 18x11 3. 8x15 24-20 (A) 4. 4-8 20-16 (B) 5. 12x19 23x16 6. 2-7 21-17 (C) 7. 14x21 30-25 8. 21x30 16-12 9. 30x23 27x4 10. 9-14 28-24 11. 14-17 24-19 (D) 12. 17-22 4-8 13. 5-9 19-16 14. 9-13 8-11 15. 7-10 32-27 16. 10-14 27-23 17. 13-17 23-19 (E) 18. 17-21 11-15 19. 21-25 16-11 20. 25-30 19-16 21. 22-26 31x22 22. 30-26 15-19 23. 26x17 (F) 11-8 24. 17-22 8-4 25. 22-18 4-8 26. 14-17 8-11 27. 17-22 19-15 (G) 28. 6-10 15x6 29. 1x10 11-7 30. 18-15 7x14 31. 15-11 16x7 32. 3x17 12-8 33. 17-21 8-3 34. 21-25 (H) RW

#1. White to move .................. #2. White to move .................. #3. White to move
... ...

A) Varies from previous game. I decided do not go to center and instead - control flanks and taken red center pieces in clintch. Not a bad decision though, but later I didn't play it accurately and was punished

B) In spirit of Elbert Lowder ! He also was a great fan of such formations and development.

C) See diagram #1 before big trade. I think (and John mentioned this after the game) it was my first strategic mistake. King on single corner doesn't help white much and red can comfortably break white small bridge keeping a serious advantage. 28-24 instead shot was correct with following complications after 8-11, 16-12 etc. Ironically, Kingsrow program also estimated this position incorrectly prefering the shot as best choice !

D) Probably 24-20 instead 24-19 could be easy for white keeping potential King trade in hands.

E) See diagram #2. During the game I was affraid to play here 11-15 due to trade 22-26, 31x13, 6-9. But in fact - it was the best choice and easy way out, because after trade white has a move which enough for draw even if red crowns all three Kings and white Keep King in double corner 32/28.

F) Loses! See diagram #3. Last resort for white Tactical 29-25* here saved the game but 11-8 as played, loses. I let you to study this position on your own and discover all white defenses against red various moves.

G) This loses immediately. Looking at position after the game, I thought that 19-24 can be a surviver, however the program still show a long technical win for red.

H) Anyone in long checker career was able to avoid 1st position loss ? Certainly not me !

This loss wake me up in tournament and I started my long winning strake. From 12 games I won 10 with 2 draws.

Dr. John Webster is a great player, one of the best in ACF in nowdays and losing game and round to him I never consider as unexpected surprise but more likely - lack of luck !

More coming ...

[Chexhero]

In game 2, I probably would have moved 15-18 on move 5 if I was in John's position, instead of 2-7. I would have tried to not to give you that shot. It BARELY keeps the king at bay! As you said, even kingsrow could not judge it accurately. So now I know how to beat you, just put you in positions that even the program can't judge correctly. Promising!

[Alex_Moiseyev]

Rd. 3, G1. W. Laverne (off 11) vs A. Moiseyev (off 24)

[Event "USA Natl 11 man ballot, Rd.3, G1"]
[Date "Feb 16, 2013"]
[Black "W. Laverne"]
[White "A. Moiseyev"]
[Result "0-2"]
[Setup "Off 11,24"]
[FEN "B:W32,31,30,29,28,27,26,25,23,22,21:B12,10,9,8,7,6,5,4,3,2,1."]

#1. Red to move ..................... #2. Red to move .................... #3 Red to move
... ...

1. 9-14 27-24 (A) 2. 8-11 22-18 3. 4-8 (B) 18x9 4. 5x14 25-22 5. 11-15 32-27 (C) 6. 8-11 30-25 (D) 7. 6-9 22-17 8. 1-5 17-13 9. 2-6 25-22 (E) 10. 14-18 23x14 11. 9x25 29x22 12. 12-16 (F) 26-23 13. 16-19 23x16 14. 11x20 24-19 15. 15x24 28x19 (G) 16. 7-11 22-18 17. 5-9 21-17 18. 3-8 27-24 19. 20x27 31x24 (H) WW

A) See opening position on diagram #1. Absolutely even position with good scope and allowing white and red various plans. Good cross-aboard position indeed, but it shouldn't be very hard to play it for both sides. I can't say that I was happy or unhappy with this opening, because I taught and disciplined myslef in 3 moves always treat all openings respectfully and evenly.

B) 4-8 is OK here due to coming 11-15 as happened in 1st game, however in the 2nd game I played 5-9 because didn't want to trade more pieces and simplify position + I didn't like a little bit weakeniung more my double corner.

C) 31-27 was an interesting and good posibility here with following 24-20, 28-24. I spent reasonable amount of time after finally choosing 32-27.

D) 22-17 is OK here but I wanted to keep pressure on position and didn't want allow him powerful 11-16.

E) See position on diagram #2. I calculated it when I looked for 32-27 and find it completely safe and secured for white. Open holes on the 1st row in red position on squares 1 and 2 eliminate most of red center stregnth.

F) Strange enough but already loses due to the next move and next note ! 10-14 here also was a losing move, but 5-9 and 11-16 are OK. Personally, I would prefer 11-16.

G) See diagram #3 after trade. Why this position is a complete loss for red ? Because there is no good trades + 10-14 can be well meet by 27-23*, 20-24, 22-17*, 6-10, 13-9* etc WW

H) Due to my loss to Dr. John Webster in second round, I badly needed a win in this game to recover my tournameet situation. However, this opening didn't give me much chances. My opponent made all right moves except one, and it wasn't my fault but his accomplishment ! One bad move ruined the game and during the game I just tried to do all my best and do not minimize his chances to make mistake !

Rd. 3, G2. A. Moiseyev (off 11) vs W. Laverne (off 24)

[Event "USA Natl 11 man ballot, Rd.3, G2"]
[Date "Feb 16, 2013"]
[Black "A. Moiseyev"]
[White "W. Laverne"]
[Result "2-0"]
[Setup "Off 11,24"]
[FEN "B:W32,31,30,29,28,27,26,25,23,22,21:B12,10,9,8,7,6,5,4,3,2,1."]

1. 9-14 27-24 2. 8-11 22-18 3. 5-9 (A) 24-19 (B) 4. 11-16 26-22 (C) 5. 7-11 (D) 22-17 (E) 6. 10-15 19x10 7. 6x22 25x18 8. 2-6 17x10 9. 6x22 28-24 (F) 10. 11-15 32-28 11. 16-19 23x16 12. 12x19 30-25 13. 22-26 31x22 14. 19-23 (G) 24-19 15. 15x24 28x19 16. 23-26 19-15 17. 26-31 15-10 18. 31-26 22-17 19. 26-30 17-13 20. 9-14 13-9 21. 14-17 21x14 22. 30x21 9-5 23. 21-17 29-25 24. 17-13 (H) RW

#1. White to move .................. #2. White to move .................. #3. White to move
... ...

A) Yes, I do certainly beleive that this move is best here giving red better chances and forcing white to play it accurately.

B) See diagram #1 before 24-19. I think this is first serious inaccuracy of my opponent. 24-20 here looks much better to me to avoid 11-16 and trapping white pieces in center.

C) 25-22 here with followng 22-17 is better and easy.

D) I spent some time here by choosing between text of game and 4-8, 22-17, 8-11, 28-24, 16-20, 17-13, 20x27, 31x24 etc. but finally decided to play more aggressive 7-11.

E) See position on diagram #2. It is an amazing fact that 22-17 here (as played in the game) is the only move allowing red powerful 10-15. However, it forced Kingsrow program to switch from losing 32-27 to 22-17 at 25 plies depth search ! During the game I didn't count everything to the rest but wanted to play 3-7 against 32-27.

Anything else rather than 22-17 loses. Continue from diagram: 32-27 (or 30-26 first), 3-7, 30-26, 1-5, 19-15, 10x19, 27-24, 4-8*, 24x8, 4-11 etc with following killing 11-16RW

F) Loses as played in game. See position on diagram #3. Draw was still available here after 30-25*, 22-26, 31x22, 11-15, 23-18*, 15-19, 22-17*, 9-13, 18-14 (or 18-15) and white just on time can build trading column 10/14/17 and break the bridge.

G) Beginning of the end.

H) Good cross aboard game which well demonstrate that usually (but not always) inaccuracies are coming one-by-one in order ! Each mistake make position just more and more miserable and more harder to survive.

More coming ... games with Michael Holmes from round 4 where I was lucky to score 4 points are on the way !

[Alex_Moiseyev]

Rd. 4, G1. A. Moiseyev (off 7) vs H. Kelley (off 21)

[Event "USA Natl 11 man ballot, Rd.4, G1"]
[Date "Feb 17, 2013"]
[Black "A. Moiseyev"]
[White "M. Holmes"]
[Result "2-0"]
[Setup "Off 7,21"]
[FEN "B:W32,31,30,29,28,27,26,25,24,23,22:B12,11,10,9,8,6,5,4,3,2,1."]

1. 10-15 24-20 (A) 2. 6-10 25-21 (B) 3. 3-7 (C) 22-17 4. 9-13 (D) 17-14 5. 10x17 21x14 6. 15-18 (E) 27-24 7. 18x27 32x23 8. 13-17 (F) 29-25 9. 1-6 25-21 (G) 10. 5-9 14x5 11. 6-9 21x14 12. 9x27 24-19 13. 27-32 (G) 19-15 14. 11x18 5-1 15. 8-11 1-5 16. 7-10 (H) 5-9 17. 11-15 (I) RW

#1. White to move .................. #2. White to move .................. #3. White to move
... ...

A) See opening position on diagram #1. Due to cronical permanent weaknesses in red position - holes on 7 and 10, some sort of dis-coordination between flanks and not strongly supported center pieces, I would estimate this position as critical for red. However, I decided to play it (and Michael backed my decision), because I didn't see how white really can break red position after closing the holes: 6-10, 1-6, 3-7 etc.

B) In the 2nd game I played 28-24 which I beleive is in spirit of position. Red are going to play soon 3-7 and 1-6 and build trading columns and this certainly must be avoided. Checkers like boxing - you have to make decision what is more important for you - take a close distance with opponent or better keep him away !

C) Order of moves is very important and crucial in such positions: 3-7 is more accurate than 1-6 because after 1-6, 22-17 red can't play now 9-13 due to 17-14, 10x17, 21x14 etc. WW

D) 15-19 is absolutely OK here for red, however I estimated position after 9-13 as complicated and even with chances. After trade 15-19 position has "forcing" structure where moves for both sides are limited and eventually leading to multiply trades and cleaning the board - certainly not what I wanted and dreaming for !

E) See position on diagram #2 after 15-18. Complications are coming. Michael played here 27-24 but Kingsrow program suggested 28-24 as best. Continue from diagram:

6. ... 28-24 7. 1-6 32-28 8. 6-10 29-25 9. 10x17 23x14 10. 17-22 25x18 11. 11-16 20x11 12. 8x22 26x17 13. 13x22 24-19 14. 4-8 27-23 15. 7-11* 23-18 (or 28-24, 11-16, 24-20, 8-11 etc Draw) 16. 11-16 19-15 17. 16-19 14-10 18. 12-16 15-11 19. 8x15 18x11 20. 16-20 11-8 21. 19-23 8-4 22. 23-27 31x24 23. 20x27 4-8 24. 5-9 etc Draw

F) Part of my original plan when I calculated 9-13.

G) This move seriously surprized me because I expected here 31-27 as best. Continue after 31-27 ... 6-9, 25-21, 9x18, 21-14, 2-6 and now white can play either 26-22, 24-19 or 23-19 - each move leads to eventual draw.

G) See position on diagram #3. Michael played here 19-15? which loses and sets an interesting gem. Instead 19-15, 5-1 should drew the game with care: 11-16, 20x11, 8x24, 28x19, 32-28 (or 7-10, 26-23, 32-28, 23-18, 28-24, 18-15 2-7 Draw), 26-23, 7-11, 23-18 etc Draw.

H) When I played here 7-10 I already saw a winning gem. However Kingsrow prefers another pretty, funny and instuctive win because it's immediately hits into 10 pieces ending dataase !

Continue: 19-23, 26x19, 11-16, 20x11, 7x23, 5-9, 12-16, 9-14, 16-20, 31-27, 23-26, 30-23, 2-6, 14-18, 6-10, 18-22, 10-15* and then develop 4-8-12 and win by 16-19 ! Wonderful ending idea.

I) Here Michael resigned - due to coming 19-23*, 26x19, 15-24, 28x19, 32-28 and red free the King and return back an extra man.

After the game Michael said that he earned something from this game, in particular - this "temporairly returning man back and free the King" trick.

More coming ...

Second game with Michael and both games with Tim Laverty will be annotated tomorrow

[Alex_Moiseyev]

Rd. 4, G2. M. Jolmes (off 7) vs A. Moiseyev (off 21)

[Event "USA Natl 11 man ballot, Rd.4, G2"]
[Date "Feb 16, 2013"]
[Black "M. Holmes"]
[White "A. Moiseyev"]
[Result "0-2"]
[Setup "Off 7,21"]
[FEN "B:W32,31,30,29,28,27,26,25,24,23,22:B12,11,10,9,8,6,5,4,3,2,1."]

1. 10-15 24-20 2. 6-10 28-24 3. 1-6 (A) 23-19 4. 3-7 22-17 (B) 5. 11-16 (C) 20x11 6. 7x23 26x19 (D) 7. 15-18 (E) 25-21 8. 9-13 17-14 9. 10x17 21x14 10. 2-7 (F) 29-25 11. 13-17 31-26 12. 6-10 27-23 13. 18x27 32x23 14. 8-11 25-22 (G) WW

#1. White to move .................. #2. White to move ................. #3. Red to move and draw
... ...

A) See position on diagram #1 before 23-19. I saw this position before 1st game started, when we judicated opening. I understood that nothing easy here for red but I was confident enough that red somehow, maybe mirically could survive - thats why I accepted this opening. Here which has two major paths: 23-19 as played in the game and 25-21, 3-7, 22-17, 15-19 etc White best Finally I prefered 23-19 which looked a bit more critical and responsible for red in my eyes.

B) Another interesting possibility:

4. ... 25-21 5. 9-14 26-23 6. 6-9 21-17* (see diagram #2) 7. 14x21 23-18 8. 9-14 18x9 9. 5x14 22-17 10. 15-18 19-15 11. 10x28 17x3 12. 11-16 20x11 13. 8x15 27-24 14. 18-22 24-20 15. 15-18 30-26 16. 21-25 26x17 17. 18-22 17-14 18. 25-30 14-9 19. 30-26 9-5 20. 26-23 5-1 21. 23-18 1-5 22. 18-14 Draw !

C) Or 15-18, 17-13, 9-14 (11-16 slowly loses after 20x11, 7x23, 26x19, 8-11, 24-20, 4-8, 25-21, 11-15, 19-16*, 12x19, 20-16 etc WW)26-23 (25-21, 11-16, 20x11, 7x23, 26x19, 5-9, 31-26, 18-23, 27x18, 14x23, 26-22, 2-7*, 29-25, 7-11*, 21-17, 9-14*, 25-21, 14-18* etc Draw WOW!)14-17, 23-14, 17-21 Draw with care.

D) See position on diagram #3. This is truly midgame masterpiece ! It is so complicated that it took me several hours study it intensively with Kingsrow program and 10 pieces ending database ! Here is my final verdict - red has extremely complicated draw with many star moves and many ways to lose it. I am giving you here just few lines which may help you to understand complexity of position.

1) 7. 9-14 17-13 8. 14-18, 30-26 9. 5-9 26-22 10. 8-11 (9-14?, 32-28, 14-17, 31-26* WW) 25-21 11. 18x25 29x22 12. 9-14 22-17 13. 4-8 31-26 14. 6-9 13x6 15. 2x9 26-22 16. 14-18 17-13 17. 18x25 13x6 18. 25-30 6-2 19. 15-18 24-20 20. 18-22 21-17 21. 30-25 32-28 22. 25-21 17-13 23. 21-17 27-24 24. 10-14 13-9 25. 14-18 9-5 26. 17-14 2-7 27. 22-26 7x16 28. 26-30 Draw

2) 7. 9-14 17-13 8. 8-11?, 27-23, 15-18, 32-27, 2-7, 30-26, 14-17, 23x14, 17-21, 25-22, 10x17, 22-18, 11-16, 27-23, 16-20, 18-14, 20x27 31x24 WW,

3) 7. 9-14 25-21 8. 5-9 27-23 9. 9-13 30-25 10. 13x22 25x9 11. 6x13 29-25 12. 8-11 25-22 13. 2-6 23-18 14. 6-9 31-27 15. 11-16 18x11 16. 16x23 27x18 17. 10-14 Draw

3) 8-11?, 27-23, 9-14, 17-13 etc WW

4) 7. 9-14 17-13 8. 15-18 (very weak) 31-26 9. 8-11 26-23 10. 4-8 25-22 11. 18x25 29x22 12. 11-16 24-20 13. 8-11 22-18 14. 14-17 18-15 15. 11x18 20x11 16. 18-22 11-8 17. 17-21 8-3 18. 22-25 23-18 19. 25-29 18-15 20. 29-25 15-11 21. 25-22 11-8 22. 10-14 8-4 23. 14-18 19-15 24. 22-17 4-8 25. 18-22 15-11 26. 22-25 11-7 27. 2x11 8x15 28. 25-29 3-7 29. 17-14 White strong

E) Loses immediately ! See diagram #3.

F) Agonia

G) Michael was seriously disappointed with what happened in the 1st game and this had serious influence on his play in the second game, scenario and outcome. He was unable to concentrate 100% on this critical for red position which requires full attemption and cold head.

[MostFamousDane]

Rd. 4, G1. A. Moiseyev (off 7) vs H. Kelley (off 21)

[Event "USA Natl 11 man ballot, Rd.4, G1"]
[Date "Feb 17, 2013"]
[Black "A. Moiseyev"]
[White "M. Holmes"]
[Result "2-0"]
[Setup "Off 7,21"]
[FEN "B:W32,31,30,29,28,27,26,25,24,23,22:B12,11,10,9,8,6,5,4,3,2,1."]

1. 10-15 24-20 (A) 2. 6-10 25-21 (B) 3. 3-7 (C) 22-17 4. 9-13 (D) 17-14 5. 10x17 21x14 6. 15-18 (E) 27-24 7. 18x27 32x23 8. 13-17 (F) 29-25 9. 1-6 25-21 (G) 10. 5-9 14x5 11. 6-9 21x14 12. 9x27 24-19 13. 27-32 (G) 19-15 14. 11x18 5-1 15. 8-11 1-5 16. 7-10 (H) 5-9 17. 11-15 (I) RW

<snip>
G) See position on diagram #3. Michael played here 19-15? which loses and sets an interesting gem. Instead 19-15, 5-1 should drew the game with care: 11-16, 20x11, 8x24, 28x19, 32-28 (or 7-10, 26-23, 32-28, 23-18, 28-24, 18-15 2-7 Draw), 26-23, 7-11, 23-18 etc Draw.

After 10-15 24-20 6-10 25-21 3-7 22-17 9-13 17-14 10-17 21-14 15-18 27-24 18-27 32-23 13-17 29-25 1-6 25-21 5-9 14-5 6-9 21-14 9-27 24-19 we have this position:

Which is a already a red win - 24-19 is the losing move

[Alex_Moiseyev]

Sune, many thanks for correction ! From your diagram: after 27-32, 5-1, 11-16, 20x11, 8x24, 28x19, 7-10, 26-23 I just missed in note G 4-8 RW. Good point.