Monthly Archives: November 2011

Playing for a win

Posted on by

Jonathan had a frustrating game recently, where his hopes of an interesting game with chances to win came to nothing. Have a play through this one and have see what you think.

Murray-Waley, 2011 (see games appended)

With hindsight, the various exchanges and the symmetrical pawn formation with likely further exchanges of Rooks were strong drawing factors. So we can suggest:

  • finding an opening formation which retains more tension
  • the tactical sequence at move 12 should have been avoided
  • more patience and perhaps more subtlety was needed later to build up an advantage, but perhaps by then it was already too late to avoid the oncoming draw

We can see the same double-whammy of symmetrical pawns, two open central files and imminent Queen exchanges in this encounter:

Waters-Paulden, 2011

So, how to play next time? Alexander Alekhin showed a game with this theme in the very first issue of chess magazine in 1935:

Forder-Alekhin, 1935

The whole magazine can be downloaded from http://www.ukgamesshop.com/Merchant2/merchant.mvc?Screen=PROD&Product_Co…

It’s not impossible to play for a win from unpromising symmetrical material, but you need a bit of grandmasterly technique, and perhaps grandmasterly grit as well:

Miles-Webb, 1975

Lastly, the player who I associate more than anyone with making something out of nothing is the great Cuban champion:

Capablanca-Vidmar, 1924

Examination of a game

Posted on by

“The unexamined life is not worth living” – Socrates
“The unexamined game is not worth playing” – Dr.Dave

Warming up 1

Play through this game and see what you think. I have omitted the final
moves, which are left as an exercise for the reader.

Warming up 2 – examples

A critical decision, which affected the whole course of the rest of the
game, was 12…g5.

To help us understand this move, let us look at some other positions
where Black throws in …g5, and see what we think.

Here are the other examples:

#2

#3

#4

#5

#6

#7

#8

Warming up 3 – comments

I think if you had to put them in some sort of order of merit, they might go:

Best – 6 4 3 2 8 5 7 – Worst

#7 is a rank blunder (1…g5?? 2.Nxg5). “Why did you play it, then?” I
guess I thought that it was a quiet, stodgy position, and so I didn’t
have to look out for my opponent’s tactics. I am here to inform you,
ladies and gentlemen, there is no such position…

6 and 4 very thematic tries (!), nibbling away on the long diagonal with
hope of using some pawn ‘levers’ to open lines, thanks to White’s
earlier pawn moves. 4 in fact reproduces the famous plan from
Fischer-Andersson, 1970. [Examples 4 and 6 also arose from this same
line of the English opening as our game.]

#2 is a poor move: there is no reason why Black should be entitled to
attack White’s solid and well-developed position with the Queen’s-side
still asleep. White immediately blew up the centre, and won with… a
King’s-side attack!

#5 looks simply weakening to me; the Knight gratefully hops into f5, and
after an exchange (or even a pawn sacrifice) on f5, White will own the
32 light squares.

#8 is a try for some play in a poor position; Black’s set-up is not
inspiring, but if left alone White is going to take apart the
Queen’s-side with d4-d5 and/or c4-c5 (options White doesn’t have in
#6). [This also arose from the same line of the English.]

#3 is a French Defence, and a good example of a modern chess opening
variation; the tension in the centre has spread to the wings. With a
closed centre, Black’s King is safe enough for now, and …g5 is both a
simple threat to win a pawn (which can be simply dealt with) and also a
bid for King’s-side concessions, which is not so easily rebuffed. I
think the verdict on this move is currently += and so !? at best (even
?!), but a while ago it was !? and ~, and it might become ~, = or even
=+ if someone comes up with a good idea for Black.

And finally:

The game with comments: