https://pikwizard.com/s/photo/chess/
https://www.pexels.com/search/chess/
https://unsplash.com/s/photos/commercial-use-chess
https://pixabay.com/images/search/chess/
Unfree https://stock.adobe.com/
Author Archives: DrDave
Protected: Lucian HD MOT
Evaluation and planning in a difficult position
Hello again Shivani
In this position, it is black to move and I believe black is better. White has a safer king as black’s king is more exposed but I am finding difficulty on how to bring it to a safe position. King to F8 is risky because of the dark squared bishop. White has a better pawn structure than black however black has better attacking chances on the king side. Black seems to have more piece activity than white. I am very keen to move my pawn to c4, blocking the light squared bishop to the queen side and I can also do a fork with pawn to g3. I really want my knight at the e4 square but it’s difficult because white can do a knight trade with knight to f2. This is a type of position where I am getting confused seeing which is the best move in a game. That (rook) at f1 is also a potential threat.
I think you’re absolutely right that the safety of your King is a key question in this position. However, checkmate is the aim of the game, and so if your King safety isn’t any good, then the position isn’t going to be good for you, and I think that is what is going on here. I don’t think White has a mating attack yet, but White can use the poor position of your King to make trouble.
I agree with you that White’s King position is better than yours, so what is it about Black’s position that made you think you have the advantage?
If I was going to do a full positional assessment of the position, I might do it like this:
I agree with you that White’s King position is better than yours, so what is it about Black’s position that made you think you have the advantage?
If I was going to do a full positional assessment of the position, I might do it like this:
- Development: White needs 1 move to connect Rooks, Black needs 2
- King safety: White’s King is safer, Black’s is stuck in the centre
- Weaknesses: g5 and e4 are weak; f7, c3 and a3 might become weak
- Piece activity: about equal
- Forcing moves and initiative: White has e4-e5, Black has …g5-g4
- Lines: No fully open files, but Black’s Rg8 looks positive and White’s Bishops have good scope.
- Centre and space: White has a better centre although Black has enough space for their pieces.
So, nothing that suggests this position is better for Black.
Did you think that the position was better for you because of your attack down the g-file? I do like that about your position, but I think at the moment you are attacking with R+N and you might be able to get B or Q into the action as well. But White has KNRBQ all able to defend the King’s-side, and you will have to get past White’s better centre to get at the white King. if you count up how many moves it takes you to make a real threat against white’s King it might be g4 gxf3 Nh7 Qf6 Qg8, so 5 moves to threaten mate, which can be met by Bxf3 by White on the second move and you have to think of something new. For White to make a threat, I think Re1 and exd5 is enough. So I think your King is in more trouble than White’s.
Let’s try other ideas:
Let’s try other ideas:
- Your g-pawn is under threat, although you have a counter-threat against e4.
- So you can play …Nh7 to protect your g-pawn, or …g5-g4 to get it to a square where you aren’t losing it for nothing.
- Alternatively, you say that White can have that g-pawn if you can have the e-pawn, and play instead …dxe4.
- Yet another idea is to threaten to win the d-pawn by pinning the c-pawn against the Queen: …Qc7 or …Qc8 or …Rc8 threatens …cxd4 when White can’t take back.
All those are pretty reasonable ideas and would all be OK… if it wasn’t for your King. The plan to play against a King stuck in the middle is to open up lines to attack it with Queen, Rook and Bishops, and checkmate or a win of material will follow. And the trouble with all of those plans I just listed is that they open up lines in the centre of the board, or allow White to do so, which helps them attack your King.
One example line is:
1…dxe4 2.Bxg5 Qc7 3.Bb5 and White is threatening to win a piece, helped by your King in the centre.
Another example:
1…g4 2.Ng5 cxd4 3.e5 Nxe5 4.cxd4 Nc4 5.fxe4 and White is better able to use the open f-file than you are.
You can try other ideas, or other moves, but I believe this position is running against Black.
And I think that might be where your confusion arises: you think this position is better for Black, and _all you need to do is to get your King into safety_. I think the position is actually better for White, _because you cannot get your King into safety_. So when you analyse different ideas, they don’t look appealing, but that doesn’t match your initial assessment of the position as better for Black. You either haven’t hit on the right idea yet — which is what your message was asking — or your evaluation of the position was not right — which is what I am trying to persuade you of.
Lastly: _the first and most important question to ask of a chess position when it’s your move, before any fancy positional assessments, is_: *does my opponent have an immediate threat? *And I think the answer to that is yes!
White threatens 1.e5, and your Knight is more or less trapped. It can be taken on any square it moves to apart from h5, and after 1.e5 Nh5, White has 2.Qh7, forking R and N.
So, whichever move you pick in this position, it had better have a defence to this idea. This is why 1…dxe4 might be favourite: it removes the e-pawn from the board.
If you want to work on your skill in evaluation, there is a nice old book with lots of puzzles and in many of the puzzles the first task is to evaluate the position:
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Chess-Exam-Training-Guide-Exams/dp/0975476122
And there is a much more recent book which is only about evaluations:
evalgm.com/
You can get a free sample of that book from their website.
I think at your level, you’re going to find both books quite tough, but if you work your way through them, I hope you will get a feel for how to balance the different positional elements.
Another popular book that tackles similar themes is:
https://www.amazon.co.uk/How-Reassess-Your-Chess-Imbalances/dp/1890085138
I don’t care much for Silman’s style, but everyone else in the chess world reckons it’s great, so I expect I am wrong about this…
www.perpetualchesspod.com/new-blog/2019/12/20/bonus-pod-discussing-reassess-your-chess-with-todd-kennedy-chess-books-recaptured-series
One example line is:
1…dxe4 2.Bxg5 Qc7 3.Bb5 and White is threatening to win a piece, helped by your King in the centre.
Another example:
1…g4 2.Ng5 cxd4 3.e5 Nxe5 4.cxd4 Nc4 5.fxe4 and White is better able to use the open f-file than you are.
You can try other ideas, or other moves, but I believe this position is running against Black.
And I think that might be where your confusion arises: you think this position is better for Black, and _all you need to do is to get your King into safety_. I think the position is actually better for White, _because you cannot get your King into safety_. So when you analyse different ideas, they don’t look appealing, but that doesn’t match your initial assessment of the position as better for Black. You either haven’t hit on the right idea yet — which is what your message was asking — or your evaluation of the position was not right — which is what I am trying to persuade you of.
Lastly: _the first and most important question to ask of a chess position when it’s your move, before any fancy positional assessments, is_: *does my opponent have an immediate threat? *And I think the answer to that is yes!
White threatens 1.e5, and your Knight is more or less trapped. It can be taken on any square it moves to apart from h5, and after 1.e5 Nh5, White has 2.Qh7, forking R and N.
So, whichever move you pick in this position, it had better have a defence to this idea. This is why 1…dxe4 might be favourite: it removes the e-pawn from the board.
If you want to work on your skill in evaluation, there is a nice old book with lots of puzzles and in many of the puzzles the first task is to evaluate the position:
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Chess-Exam-Training-Guide-Exams/dp/0975476122
And there is a much more recent book which is only about evaluations:
evalgm.com/
You can get a free sample of that book from their website.
I think at your level, you’re going to find both books quite tough, but if you work your way through them, I hope you will get a feel for how to balance the different positional elements.
Another popular book that tackles similar themes is:
https://www.amazon.co.uk/How-Reassess-Your-Chess-Imbalances/dp/1890085138
I don’t care much for Silman’s style, but everyone else in the chess world reckons it’s great, so I expect I am wrong about this…
www.perpetualchesspod.com/new-blog/2019/12/20/bonus-pod-discussing-reassess-your-chess-with-todd-kennedy-chess-books-recaptured-series
P.S.
One of the easiest ways to check a position is to throw it into a Lichess study:
lichess.org/study/k71OlCk1/0MpZ1Zzd
Then turn on Stockfish…
This will give you the engine evaluation in pawn’s-worth and the best move (or the best 4-5 moves in order)
If you leave Stockfish turned on, it might change its mind about exactly what the evaluation is, or which of the 4 moves is a bit better than the others, but it should give you a broad idea about the position.
If I do that to your position, it comes up with +2.3, which is to say, although material is equal, White has an advantage in position which is worth more than 2 extra pawns.
If I look at the 4-5 best moves for Black, it lists them as …dxe4, …g4, …cxd4, ….Qc8, and …Qc7, and they’re all about as good as each other. I didn’t think of …cxd4 and I don’t know the idea behind it. That is the disadvantage of computer analysis — you can see the evaluation and the moves but you don’t get any explanation. +2.3 might mean that White’s position is better but not why… or that Stockfish sees that in 10 moves’ time White can win 2 pawns… or win a Knight for a pawn.
But the computer is a good check on your assessment and analysis. The best way to use it is the way things happened here: you committed yourself to an evaluation, and then checked it. And that process is the key to improvement.
bw
D
Lessons from Boris Spassky
Boris Spassky became World Champion on the second attempt, defeating Petrosian in 1969 and losing his title to Fischer in 1972. He had something of a reputation of having a ‘universal’ style, able to play all positions well, but that is true of anyone who holds the crown of chess, and he has a marked facility with dynamic and attacking play.
Opening lessons
I got a lot out of thinking about Spassky’s opening repertoire. He practised all the major systems of his day, of course, but there were some examples of “positions that are surprisingly hard to play for Black” — the Closed Sicilian being an early example, and the dxc5 variation of the Queen’s Gambit Accepted for another — not regarded highly by theory, but in practise would score well. (I am reminded, as so often, by Tartakower: “Any opening is good if its reputation is bad enough”.)
Click […] to see game list
He also specialised in some systems, like the King’s Gambit, that hardly anyone else would touch, and not as a surprise weapon, but a thoroughly studied system which he knows well and can show many subtleties.
Click […] to see game list
Middlegame lessons
Click […] to see game list
I’m always interested in moves that are hard to spot, and how to spot them. Spassky shows a couple of examples, although how he spotted them, is still unknown to me.
Click […] to see game list
Endgame lessons
Spassky’s dynamic style means little attention has been given to his endgame technique, and few examples have become well-known.
Click […] to see game list
Protected: BM review
Opening choices (U18 training day)
Thank you for filling in the opening questionnaires online, and I’m sorry we didn’t get time to look at your responses on Saturday. But here is what I might have said:
Systems for White
Scotch Game (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4)
My main recommendation for a first opening system, leading to an open game with chances to attack. Good stuff, just the style you should use when you start playing chess.
Colle System (1.d4 with Nf3/e3 and without c4)
A good first opening system — develop and attack!
London System (1.d4 with Bf4 and without c4)
Not a bad first opening system. The good thing about it is, you can play the same moves against everything, but that’s also the bad thing about it — you can plod through the opening moves without thinking and without adjusting to what’s happening on the board. For example, in the London System White usually plays, in some order, d4 Nf3 Bf4 e3 c3 Nbd2 and Bd3. Nothing wrong with that, but c3 is useful only as a reply to …c5 or …Nc6. If your opponent doesn’t play …c5, you can save a move. So, play it with thought, and notice what might be different about the position in front of you today.
Queen’s Gambit (1.d4 d5 2.c4)
A fine opening — maybe not for your first opening system, but surely for your second, once you know how to attack.
Facing Black dodges: quite a few ‘play the same moves as I usually do‘ replies there — and you really need to play a different way to get your pieces out. For example, 1.e4 2.Nf3 and 3.Bc4 is fine against 1…e5, but against the Sicilian 1…c5 it can walk into 2….e6 and 3…d5, upsetting your plans. ‘I play the main lines’ — perfect.
Most of you are playing 1.d4, it seems — which was a bit of a surprise. It’s more solid than 1.e4 but less exciting and not so good for practising the things most people need to practise — development, open lines, tactics and attacking play.
Systems for Black
Facing 1.e4
Not too many named systems in there!
Four Knights’ Game (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Nc3 Nf6)
that’s White’s choice not yours! I recommend after 4.Bb5 you play 4…Nd4.
Two Knights’/Giuoco Piano (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 with 3…Nf6 or 3…Bc5)
both fine and just the sort of style you should be playing. (Usually you choose one or the other.)
French Defence (1.e4 e6)
very good, solid and with chances to attack, not easy to play against.
Sicilian Defence (1.e4 c5)
an excellent though difficult defence, which will last you for life.
Caro-Kann (1.e4 c6)
a fine and even fashionable defence, but you don’t usually get chances to attack, so wouldn’t be my recommendation.
Facing 1.d4
The only things with a name I see are:
Dutch Defence (1.d4 f5)
An excellent unbalancing and dynamic defence. It’s likely to work well against a player that has started playing 1.d4 too early in their development.
Queen’s Gambit Declined, Orthodox Defence (1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6)
A good first defence to 1.d4, solid and logical, and might last you all your life.
I suspect the rest of you are making it up as you go, which is likely to lead to trouble against the Queen’s Gambit (1.d4 d5 2.c4). Pick a system — the most common are the Slav Defence (2…c6) and the Orthodox Defence (2…e6, of which the Swiss Defence (7…a6) and All-Purpose Defence (…b6) are variations), and stick to it. You can usually play the moves of a defence to the Queen’s Gambit against everything apart from 1.e4.
I’m happier for you to pick a solid style as Black — it’s a dangerous world out there when you are Black, and a solid approach can give you confidence.
Here are your replies (rows) with my individual comments:
| Main White Opening e.g. Scotch Game | DR comments | What do you do when Black dodges*? | DR comments | Defence as Black against 1.e4 e.g. French Defence | DR comments | Defence as Black against 1.d4/2.c4 e.g. Swiss Defence | DR comments |
| Scotch Game | Great | I play the same moves as I normally do | That’s not going to work against everything, maybe not against anything! | French Defence | Great | Make it up | Do learn a proper system with a name |
| London system | Fine to start with you might need something chewier later | I play the same moves as I normally do | Probably OK | Caro-kann defence | Great | The Dutch defence | Great |
| London system | Fine to start with you might need something chewier later | I play the main lines | Probably OK | e5 | OK | c3 | Not sure what you mean? |
| london system | Fine to start with you might need something chewier later | I play the main lines | Probably OK | have not decided on one opening as I tend to try different ones | Hmm – pick a system and stick to it is my advice! | have not decided on one opening as I tend to try different ones | Hmm – pick a system and stick to it is my advice! |
| The Queen’s Gambit | Great | ? | c5 | Great | c5 | Fits | |
| 1.e2e4,2.f1d3 and g1f3 | Bf1d3 won’t do you any favours unless you play d2d4 first | I play the same moves as I normally do | That’s not going to work against everything, maybe not against anything! | unknown | Needs a look! | unkown | Needs a look! |
| Queens gambit | Great | I play the same moves as I normally do | Not bad, but might need some care against eg. Nimzo-Indian | Four nights | OK | Slav defence | Fine |
| London | Fine to start with you might need something chewier later | I do something else (please tick then describe below) | ? | 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 | OK | Queens Gambit Declined or Slav Defence | Fine |
| Queen’s Gambit | Great | I play the main lines | Grear | Two knights defence or Guiccio Piano game | Giuoco! But all good | Slav defence or Caro-kann | Also good |
| Queens Gambit | Great | I play the main lines | Great | Im trying to learn karo-kann | Good | If c4 i play e5 and d4 i play d5 | Fine |
| Attempting the Colle | Great | I play the same moves as I normally do | Probably OK | depends | Hmm – pick a system and stick to it is my advice! | depends | Hmm – pick a system and stick to it is my advice! |
Protected: Yuan Li MOT
Reflections 2023
I haven’t played serious chess for a while and doubt I will again. The chess achievement I am proudest of is winning the Exeter Chess Club Championship six times. However, I think I have never been the best player in the club, certainly not the highest-rated, on any of these occasions. So how come? In a Swiss, you have to win all or most of your games, and there’s usually one crucial game against the favourite. Evaluations and ?! mostly by Stockfish and me.
2003-2004: graham bolt – The briar patch
This was before Graham’s Hedghog period, and he rather helpfully played into a line that I knew fairly well and which I think is not dangerous to Black. Graham of course is highly dangerous, but seemed content to wait for me to lose rather than press strongly for his own cause.
2004-2005: Brian Hewson – the patriarch
Brian is a very experienced and practical player but allowed himself to covet a pawn, which gave me a sustained initiative that was wearisome to defend against, resulting in a slip.
2006-2007: Simon Waters – the centre
Simon is a big old-fashioned centre-forward of a player, who has got the better of me more than once in complications. Lots of elementary errors after his pawn sac.
2012-2013: Pablo Medina – the briar patch 2
Pablo’s forthright style made a big impression on us all but chose in this last-round play-off game to avoid any possible preparation by discarding his favourite 1.e4 for 1.d4 and a Dutch. I had to be more familiar with this than Pablo but I didn’t especially outplay him, he just lost his way late in the game.
2013-2014: Tim Paulden – the briar patch 3
In a rather loud echo of the last game, Tim sought to avoid any of my prep by… playing into my main defensive system, so I always felt comfortable and got on top.
2014-2015: Tim Paulden – A waltz on the clifftop
We both prepped for this — Tim’s favourite at the time was the Nimzo-Larsen, which I believed then and now can be handled with a sensible move order, but I very quickly grabbed a hot pawn and soon regretted it. Yet I found a little wrinkle at the end of a forcing line and Tim followed me down the garden path.
2014-2015: LAURENTZ Hartmann – a tale of two bishops
Laurentz and I both played this Botvinnik system, and on the day he thoroughly outplayed me in the opening and got an equal game at least. I kept a straight face and kept going, and gradually took over the light squares.
Book recommendations
I was recently asked for some book recommendations, and thought easy-peasy, I’ll point them to something online. Then I looked at some lists, and thought I’d write my own… Just books, not videos or Chessable courses. Lots of really great books
omitted. The ChessDojo list isn’t too bad.
| Openings | Tactics | Strategy | Endgames | Praxis | Bonus | |
| Beginner | HERTAN. Basic Chess Openings for Kids | GILLAM Simple Chess Tactics and Checkmates | CHERNEV The Most Instructive Games of Chess Ever Played(*) |
KOSTEN Winning Endgames | del GIOCONDO A first book of Morphy | WEBB Chess for Tigers |
| D | EMMS Discovering Chess Openings | CHERNEV/REINFELD Winning Chess(*) | STEAM Simple Chess(*) EMMS Simple Chess |
CHERNEV Capablanca’s 60 Best Chess Endgames | HARTSTON Kings of Chess RETI Masters of the Chessboard(*) |
|
| C | One-volume basic opening repertoire e.g. COLLINS Simple Chess Repertoire MacDONALD Starting Out: French AAGAARD/LUND Meeting 1.d4 (Tarrasch Defence) |
SEIRAWAN Winning Chess Tactics VUKOVIC The Art of Attack |
EMMS More Simple Chess SEIRAWAN/SILMAN Winning Chess Strategy |
SEIRAWAN Winning Chess Endgames | FISCHER My 60 Memorable Games | TAL Life and Games |
| B | Picking a style e.g. EMMS Attacking with 1.e4 WATSON A Strategic Opening Repertoire for White GALLAGHER Play the King’s Indian EMMS Easy Guide to the Nimzo-Indian WATSON Play the French GOLUBEV Easy Guide to the Dragon |
BURGESS Instructive Chess Puzzles | SILMAN Reassess Your Chess HANSEN Improve your Positional Chess |
SILMAN Complete Endgame Course (first few chapters) |
BOTVINNIK My Best Chess Games 1940-67 | ROWSON The Seven Deadly Chess Sins |
| A | WATSON Mastering the Chess Openings 1-4 | JACOBS Analyse to Win | WATSON Chess Strategy in Action | van PERLO Endgame Tactics | NUNN Secrets of Grandmaster Play | ROWSON Chess for Zebras |
| CM | AAGAARD Grandmaster Preparation: Calculation | AAGAARD Grandmaster Preparation: Positional play |
AAGAARD Grandmaster Preparation: Endgames | STOHL Modern Chess Masterpieces | KASPAROV My Great Predecessors 1-5 |
(*) Originally in Descriptive but Algebraic available
Juniors: start with my books with Tim Onions, then graduate to the Gambit books ‘for Kids’, apart from their Opening one, which is a boring catalogue.
P.S. Compilers of chess book lists: do split your list by level, and don’t recommend books available only in Descriptive, or My System. I know, My System is a great book, but there are better books to learn that stuff from now. When I was a boy, it was literally in a class by itself, but not now. See also: Bobby Fischer Teaches Chess, Chess Fundamentals, Ideas behind the chess openings etc etc
Why chess books don’t work
Nate Solon has just provoked with a blog on Lichess:
Why Chess Books Don’t Work
He has some point — I mean, if books made you a better chess player, I should be world champion by now…
But I commented, crossly:
To the extent that Chessable has a theory of learning, it’s a very impoverished one.
I believe Pillsbury was once challenged to remember a list of obscure words, starting Antiphlogistine, Madjesoomalops etc
Spaced repetition/recall seems perfect for this task where any meaning in the content is irrelevant.A book will have, as you suggest, an implicit theory of learning, but I suspect will be richer than you give it credit for, perhaps having several on one page. I don’t know if you know the book Winning Chess by Chernev and Reinfeld — I suspect both authors would struggle to articulate a ‘theory of learning’ of the sort you seem to think is required, but what a great pair of teachers.
I know many books from Everyman which use the Socratic method, of presenting a question before giving an explanation.
Others engage with wit, colourful language, striking examples, slogans, scaffolded exercises etc. Implicit maybe but Ford save us all from learning opening lines by rote.Good-quality verbal explanations in books can unlock a whole opening system for you, as can a good example.
The right book at the right time can produce a step-wise improvement — I can remember two or three from my early playing days (Winning Chess Chernev/Reinfeld, Middle Game I & II Euwe/Kramer, Secrets of Practical Chess Nunn).
Perhaps the reason most books don’t ‘work’ is because most books are not good books — or not good for you at the time.
I can remember acquiring, on Silman’s recommendation, the book on Combinations by Znosko-Borovsky. I learned nothing from it, as Chernev/Reinfeld had done their job well. I also learned next to nothing from Fine’s Basic Chess Endings — it was far too advanced for me when I picked it up.