Monthly Archives: June 2022

Facing the English (book resources)

Posted on by

From left to right, as White faces them:

1…b6: English Defence

White’s most testing reply of course is 2.d4 but this is not compulsory

Odessky’s English Defence (2007) has a chapter on the English Opening

1…Nc6: (it takes two to Tango)

This is mostly a transpositional move: after 2.d4 we have the Black Knights’ Tango, while after 2.Nc3 e5 we have the Reversed Sicilian

Keene/Jacobs (1996) Complete Repertoire for Black uses 1…Nc6

1…c6: Slav style

The move …c6 creates a concrete threat to capture on c4 and keep it with …b5. and can give White some move-order headaches

It is hard for White to avoid positions with a Slav character after 2…d5; 2.Nf3 d5 3.b3 is a Reti opening, when Black can used 3…Nf6 and then either 4…Bf5 (Lasker) or 4…Bg4 (Capablanca), with equality

I don’t know of a book looking at this for Black, but I believe Shankland’s Chessable course on the Slav talks about the Catalan: This may help too: https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=YjunF7O2Bmk

1…c5: Benoni style

With …Nf6 & …d5: Rubinstein

I can’t recall a book recommending this approach, but it’s perfectly sound and I imagine you can pick out most of what you need from Hansen’s 2000 book on the Symmetrical English (although of course unless you play the English yourself, most of your investment will be wasted)

STOP PRESS: “Delchev’s Grunfeld Reloaded has a chapter on the Rubinstein Symmetrical English” (2019) https://www.chesspub.com/cgi-bin/chess/YaBB.pl?num=1609278173

With …e6: Hedgehog

Suba’s Dynamic Chess Strategy is a hymn of praise to the Hedgehog, but for an opening book there is a choice:

Palkovi Hedgehog System Against The English Opening. Caissa Chess Books, 1997.

Lysyj, Igor; Ovetchkin, Roman (2017). The Hedgehog vs. the English/Reti. Chess Stars.

Suba, Mihai (2000). The Hedgehog. Batsford.

With …g6: Symmetrical Variation

Palliser’s Beating Unusual Chess Openings (2007) which uses the Symmetrical Variation (might suit a Benoni player but he does lean on the Botvinnik system with …e5 too) as does Burgess’ Idiot-Proof Opening repertoire

I don’t know of a book that recommends Fischer’s preferred setup with g6/c5/Nc6/Bg7/e6 with which he beat Smyslov and Petrosian in 1970, but again you can pick it out of the books that aren’t from Black’s point of view or use https://shop.chessbase.com/en/products/bologan_english_1c4_c5_for_black

1…d6: (the universal pancreas)

With …g6: King’s Indian Style

Most KID books seem to collapse in exhaustion after going through everything after 1.d4 and omit the English, but Dembo’s Fighting the Anti-King’s-Indians (2008) covers 1.c4 and I think is very good: nice balance of words and moves

1…e6: French style

Combined with …Nf6, see below; with …b6, see above; it’s independent only with …d5

Kaufman (2012) has offered 1…e6 and 2…d5, inviting a transposition to the Queen’s Gambit, which might be White’s best bet (Pritchett describes it as ‘unavoidable’)

Similarly, Kotronias: Fight 1.d4 with the Tarrasch (2019) should get you there, although he does not address 1.c4

Eingorn (2012) Rock-solid opening repertoire for Black discusses the pros and cons of 1.c4 e6

1…e5: Reversed Sicilian and after 2.Nc3:

With 2…Nf6 and 3…c6: (I suspect 2.g3 is awkward)

Delchev/Semkov (2016) Attacking the English/Reti

With 2…Nf6 and 3…d5: Reversed Open Sicilian

The gold standard for a book to combat the English Opening is probably something like Kotronias’ Beating the Flank Openings (1996) which recommends the Reversed Sicilian (would suit a 1.e4 player)

No other book comes to mind but you can consult https://www.modern-chess.com/reversed-sicilian-avrukhs-antidote-to-1-c4-part-1 & https://www.modern-chess.com/reversed-sicilian-avrukhs-antidote-to-1-c4-part-2

With 2…Nc6: Reversed Closed Sicilian

I’m happy to recommend Dempsey, T.; English Opening: A Line for Black; The Chess Player 1985 but best of luck finding a copy!

No other book comes to mind but I imagine you can find a playable set of lines in Hansen (2019) The Full English, but it’s a shame that most of your investment will be wasted, so maybe use https://shop.chessbase.com/en/products/bologan_english_c4_e5_for_black

With 2…Bb4

Mikhalevski 2016 Beating Minor Openings

With 2…d6: Smyslov system

This is to be found in several books: the second edition of Keene/Levy’s Attacking Repertoire, Yrjola/Tella’s Explosive Chess Opening Repertoire, and I expect several others

1…Nf6: Indian style

With ….e6: Nimzo/Queen’s Indian style

This has the drawback of allowing 1.c4 Nf6 2.Nc3 e6 3.e4, the Flohr-Mikenas Attack.

With …g6: King’s Indian Style

See above

1…f5: Dutch style

With …e6 and …d6: Classical

Williams: Play the Classical Dutch (2003)

With ….e6 and …d5: Stonewall

Johnsen, Bern, Agdestein: Win with the Stonewall Dutch (2009)

With …g6: Leningrad

[Same problem as the KID books: the ones I know cover only 1.d4 … but you’re likely to end up in the Reversed Closed Sicilian anyway after …e5]

Honorable exception: Demuth’s Modernized Dutch (2019) https://britishchessnews.com/2020/01/05/the-modernised-dutch-defense/

1….g6: Modern style

Fischer used this move order, which gives Black much flexibility; ….c5 was a common partner, in which case, see above

1…g5: Grob style

I think this can be recommended only to free spirits…

Basman (1989) The Killer Grob

“To take is a mistake”

Posted on by

My young friend and former student Theo Slade quoted this to me a while ago.

“To take is a mistake”

In some circumstances, it’s easy to see why:

A capture by either side gives up the d-file and invites Rd7/Rd2, so both sides need to find something else to do.

There is a YouTube lecture by Smirnov on this subject, which has been made into a Lichess study, which makes the point thoroughly: https://lichess.org/study/MJ9ZFfKI

Another quote, from a current student:

“I’m a bit nervous about tension.”

OK, I get that. If you respond to a threat by defending the attacked piece, the threat remains in the air, and if you overlook it later, it can bite you. This is Smirnov’s first example:

So 1.Nxg4 Bxg4=, but 1.Nf3+/-

But of course, if control of h2 remains disputed, the N cannot move away from f3. But 1.Nf3! is still the best move and should be played!

A slight digression: The Ruy Lopez

“why is the Ruy Lopez … so difficult for Black to combat? (Nunn and Griffiths)

Good question. Let’s have a look:

Michael Stean comments here:

“The first and most primitive idea behind 3. Bb5 is to lay siege to Black’s e-Pawn, which will subsequently be liquidated by d4, thereby opening the floodgates for the White Pawn centre to scatter the enemy forces with the allied pieces following up to rout the broken army — no prisoners taken. Black cannot however be forced to surrender the centre. By keeping his own e-Pawn firmly defended Black can thwart all White’s aspirations of conquest in the centre, but this will lead to a rather cramped position. So the offspring of White’s plan is an advantage in space due to the necessity for his opponent to maintain a firm central barricade. This spatial plus however is not very big and the only way to maintain it is by avoiding any exchange of pieces. Black’s position (Diagram 73) has sufficient ‘capacity’ for three minor pieces, but not clearly enough for all four of them. This explains why White is willing to invest so much time early in the game (Bb5, Ba4, Bb3, Bc2, h3) purely to avoid exchanges. If his spatial strategy is to succeed he must leave Black with four minor pieces. These closed Ruy Lopez positions are some of the most subtle and complex in the whole opening repertoire. It is probably no coincidence that nearly all the great players of recent times have been deadly exponents of the Ruy Lopez. In the hands of Fischer or Karpov 3. Bb5 sometimes appears to win by force. For example, Karpov-Westerinen, Nice 1974. 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 …

The clarity and popularity of Stean’s book has led to this being a leading interpretation of White’s chances in the Closed Morphy Defence. But there is more to it than that. Let us continue with the whole of that quote from Nunn and Griffiths:

“But already this opening has certain puzzling aspects. Why should White consistently maintain his initiative, both in the variations we have looked at and in those to come? Why should Black’s position be so awkward? The question really boils down to a more basic one: why is the Ruy Lopez (which this opening has virtually become) so difficult for Black to combat? Look at the present position: Black’s pieces are sensibly developed; he has as much space as White; his pawns are strong. Yet he has problems.
“The answer seems to be that in this type of Ruy Lopez position Black can easily get caught in a situation where his game cannot unfold. Here for instance, White has his plans of Ng3-f5 and later d4, but it is less easy for Black to find something profitable to do without weakening himself or making some serious concession. His pieces may look reasonably placed, but they cannot readily achieve anything constructive or relevant. I should make it clear that this does not have to happen in a Lopez; it is far from being a bad opening for him. But in practice one error (6…Qe7) can leave him in misery. And so, if a player seems to have a respectable game (in a Ruy Lopez or any other opening for that matter), yet still loses, his misfortune may often be traced back to this lack of life in his position.”
— NUNN AND GRIFFITHS

Trying to go beyond the Good Doctor’s commentary is surely lese-majeste, but let me have a go anyway. Euwe and Kramer call this type of structure the Tension Form, and there we have another secret of the position. There is unresolved tension. The central pawns, White and Black, can take each other, be captured, recapture in different ways, or White can shut down the tension by d4-d5. Now, exactly where you want your pieces may be a different, depending on the central structure. If White takes on e5, the outpost on d5 may become tempting for a Knight (Stean is very good on this too), and so Black might want to keep a wary eye on that possibility, and be able to respond in the best way. If White plays d4-d5, that possibility vanishes, but other ideas appear. Operating under this tension and flexibility and uncertainty is difficult for Black, who has that constraint on their manoeuvres presented by the d6 pawn.

So the next question arises: why on earth would Black want to subject themselves to this sort of unpleasantness? Perhaps it is for lack of alternatives, but there is something else… Operating under this tension and flexibility and uncertainty is difficult for White too! Perhaps a little less so than for Black, but the positions are actually tricky for both sides, and not easy to simplify.
So Black might willingly take on a slightly squashed position — in the Lopez, in the Hedgehog, or in the Hippopotamus — in the hope that the opponent with more space will still face difficulties in finding the right piece placements and the right plans in a tense, changeable position. As Suba pointed out, once you have your pieces arranged prettily after the opening, you still have to play chess… So, learn to love tension!