I keep having to look things up…
Category Archives: Class A
The secret about dangerous openings
<p>The secret is: they’re all dangerous!</p>
<p>The great (really great) Garry Kasparov just lost in 7 moves:</p>
<p>From Leonard Barden in the Guardian:</p>
<p>
</p>
Material imbalance: Queen for Two Rooks
I have to say, if this is the aspect of your game most in need of fixing, then count yourself lucky, but there are some general lessons to be learned.
Example games:
Ish follows some theory:
Ramdewar I. – Edney R. [B76]
Kramnik wins with the Rooks:
Leko P. – Kramnik V. [C42]
Fischer wins with the Queen:
Portisch L. – Fischer R. [E45]
The Queen on the attack:
Janowsky – Lasker
The Rooks make a team:
Euwe – Rubinstein [D05]
So, what features favour the Rooks, which the Queen?
Yusupov loses to the Queen:
Jussupow A. – Shaked T. [E81]
Yusupov has another go with the Rooks:
Jussupow A. – Marjanovic S. [D34]
Chernin finds an improvement:
Chernin A. – Marjanovic S. [D34]
Ish’s game in hindsight:
Ramdewar I. – Edney R. [B76]
Click on […] to see games list.
Space and potential (mud, mud, glorious mud)
How do you play against the Hippo? It’s all about Space and
Potential. At risk of sounding like an estate agent, I propose to
describe my limited understanding of these issues…
Space
All else being equal, it’s an advantage to have more space. More
space means you can get about the board more easily, organise an attack
more easily, and sometimes all your opponent can do is sit tight while
you work out how to win:
Giving up the centre — Nimzowitsch again
What’s going on here?
We have two very different cases: more space with a fixed pawn
centre, and more space with a fluid centre. When things are not fixed,
the side with more space may have to watch out for counterplay right
across the board. There are half-open files, sort-of outposts, and the
possibility of a break on the side you take your eye off! These days,
the half-open centre is often contested in the Scotch, Caro-Kann and
sometimes the French Defences.
Half-open centres
- …e5xd4, Nxd4 in the Scotch Game
- …d5xe4, Nxe4 in the French and Caro-Kann
- …c5xd4, Nxd4 in the Sicilian
White has more space, and, while Black has counterplay, sometimes
that’s what decides the game. White can organise an attack, and if
things break open, can occupy key squares and lines more easily. White can add importantly to the space advantage with f2-f4 or c2-c4.
On the other hand, as Tarrasch said, “Chess is a terrible game. If you have no center, your opponent has a freer position. If you do have a center, then you really have something to worry about!”
We’ll have one more advertisement for the centre before considering its burdens.
The Maroczy Bind: c4 and …c5xd4
Black’s counterplay in the Sicilian often comes from a Queen’s-side
push with …b5 (minority attack) or a well-timed counterblow in the
centre with …d5. Why doesn’t White stop both of these ideas with
c2-c4? (The Maroczy Bind). It can be crushing…
Ah, if only life was always so simple. In most lines of the
Sicilian, White is not allowed time to get in this c2-c4 move at all. In
others, White has time for c2-c4, but Black has time for development and
counterplay. In only one or two lines of the Sicilian has the Maroczy
proved to be a lasting test of Black’s resources, and even there Black
can play with hopes of equality or even turning around the game.
The Accelerated Dragon is the most common place where we see Binds, and
Black can hope to restrain the White structure, swap off all White’s
best pieces, and go for a QN vs QB endgame. That happens perhaps more often in Black’s head than on the board, but this might do as an exanmple:
Maroczy Bind with g3 and …g6
We often see this line arising from English Opening lines, mainly
the Symmetrical Variation. White has long been thought to have good
chances of an advantage, and I have enjoyed playing it as White:
It’s mate in 6…
I’ve often had Black knights crawling all over the dark squares on the Queen’s-side, but still won the game, because Black lacked the capacity to follow through with anything meaningful.
The Hedgehog: Maroczy Bind with g3 and …e6
“Playing against the Hedgehog requires forthright planning —
grabbing space and then doing something with it.” says Mark Ginsburg
Hedgehog with Bb7 and Nc6
I had the privilege of watching the following game. I have a feeling
that …Nc6 is a bit in the way. but there’s more going on here than I
can follow…
Hedgehog with Bb7 and Nbd7
Mihai Suba wrote an amusing book about the Hedgehog, Dynamic
Chess Strategy. He suggests that White can easily and quickly adopt
‘perfect’ but unimprovable position, and, while Black may be cramped,
can always find ways to improve things. It’s a psychological problem as
much as a chess one, but it is a problem, and no more clearly seen than
in this game from Chess for Tigers:
Much the same point is made by Sielecki in
recommending the Hedgehog [ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_YARzPWgDSQ ]
(or ‘headshock’) against the London: Black can find ways to improve and
expand more easily than White.
Double fianchetto hedgehog
It exists, but you don’t meet it very often, as it’s something of an
extravagance. d5 is very inviting for a Knight, and if chased off with …e6, the Black dark-squared Bishop cannot cover d6, f6 and h6 all at
once.
I had some ideas of probing the dark squares with Ng4 which may have made my illustrious opponent nervous, but Stockfish is unimpressed.
The Hippopotamus: double fianchetto with a full board
The Hippopotamus is often used in this formation:
[chessboard]
r2qk2r/1bpnnpb1/pp1pp1pp/8
[/chessboard]
Black has the entire second rank covered, has no obvious weaknesses and can probe with any pawn at any point.
Double fianchetto systems are as old as chess, but the Hippo looks
and feels a bit fishy to many when adopted by Black and with the
half-smothered Knights.
Yet, there are many great players who have tried
it as Black and even more great players who have made no progress
against it as White. Keene and Botterill give as evidence a game of
Keres who drew against Navarovsky’s Hippo (1/2-1/2, 27 moves) and
Petrosian’s two draws against Spassky’s beasts.
Spassky had a game with the Hippo against that great hypermodern innovator Ujtekly, which, although he won, may have given him some respect for its resilience — enough to try it in the greatest arena of chess.
Potential
“Never mud-wrestle with a pig. You both get filthy and the pig enjoys it!
The Hippopotamus is one of chess’s dirty little secrets. In a
repertoire book by White, you will rarely (never?) see a recommendation
of how to play against the Hippo — for example, it failed to make even the chapter
titled ‘Garbage’ in Sam Collins’ 2004 book — but players at all levels wheel
it out and survive and even thrive with it. Black’s position is ‘cramped
but not compromised’, in the words of Keene and Botterill, and White can
easily over-stretch, just as against the the Hedgehog. Every advance by White loosens the position, and Black may be well-placed to take advantage of new opportunities.
Jonathan Rowson
wondered aloud if the Hippo has now just about made it onto the
‘respectable’ list, where Black’s potential is compensation for White’s
space or initiative (Chess for Zebras, page 237) — the argument here is
similar to Suba’s point about the Hedgehog. As Tartakower once remarked, White has their initiative to defend!
So far, so general. It’s probably better to look at some specific formations.
The two-pawn centre hippopotamus
[chessboard]
r2qk2r/1bpnnpb1/pp1pp1pp/8/3PP3/2N2N2
[/chessboard]
With Black having full pawn control of the fourth rank, it’s almost
certain that White will have to break through with a pawn move. However,
e4-e5 can be readily met by …d6-d5, getting into a sort of French
Defence centre with White’s pieces in front of the c- and f-pawns, which
they might want to move. Black can quickly follow up with ….c7-c5 and perhaps …f7-f6, and
White may regret pushing the e-pawn!
Similarly, after d4-d5, Black can reply …e6-e5, getting a King’s
Indian sort of centre where …f5 is easy for Black to achieve, while
c2-c4-c5 may be a long way off for White.
White can hope that Black’s weaknesses on the wing where White gets
more space (King’s-side in the French, Queen’s-side in the King’s
Indian) are enough to override any inconvenience from advancing a pawn.
Whizzing through a number of 2500-level White wins in the Hippo, this
seems the most common way of winning.
Transfer to King’s Indian formation
Transfer to French formation
Black keeps the tension after a White advance
This maintenance of tension gives White the chance to swap an advanced pawn for a Bishop’s pawn — not usually a good idea, but might allow access to lines or squares.
White gets in with a break
White can try and arrange some other sort of breakthrough, perhaps
using some other pawn. Sometimes the breaks work, sometimes they don’t;
sometimes one or other side gets in on the wing, even while the central
situation is unresolved:
Black successfully anticipates a break:
White holds the tension
There is a long and interesting lecture about this game by the winner, available on Youtube
White hesitates and is lost:
If White just sits on their pretty development and does nothing with it,
Black can undermine the White centre with flank blows like …c5, and
even advance and take over the centre in Hypermodern style.
Black succeeds with wing play:
Black may be tempted or obliged to advance a pawn to the fourth rank
on the wing. …b5 is a common idea in the Modern, and more typical of
the Hippo is …g5 with the idea of …Ne7-g6-f4.
White succeeds with wing play:
Obliged or tempted Black may be, but once such an
advance has happened, White has something to aim at. …g5 invites the f2-f4 break, …b5 invites a2-a4, and …h5 invites g2-g4.
The main line?
Tiger’s Modern gives best play against White’s best set-up as notes to this game:
The three-pawn centres against the Hippo
With the adjustment of a Knight and the advance of the c- or f-pawn,
we have a three-pawn centre hippopotamus, and now Black needs to take
notice, as the White centre is much more solid. Black can hope that
while White is arranging all this, Black can sort out some way of
meeting it, or provokes White into advancing before they are quite ready
by some wing advance of their own.
Some of the most critical lines against Hippo structures start by
White aiming at a three-pawn centre from the very start.
def centre against the Hippo
I would have guessed this was risky for Black. Nigel Davies has made
a good case for it but Tiger Hillarp Persson doesn’t recommend it in his
book on the Modern, preferring to expand while possible with …b5, and
only permitting the luxury of the Hippo once White has committed to
blocking both Bishop’s pawns.
cde centre against the Hippo
This can arise from the English Defence
Miles and Short have both dabbled in it, pointing at White’s slow
3.a3 as justification.
In Danny King’s book on the English Defence, he suggests an early h2-h4 can critically restrict Black’s chances to expand, as shown in a couple of Milov-Miles games.
Nakamura rather provocatively tried it against Kramnik when White
had wasted no time at all… In a King’s Indian formation, the typical advance c4-c5 arrived
with lightning speed.
Move orders
People that know me won’t be surprised that I wonder if the Hippo can be move-ordered. I haven’t hit on anything yet, but there are some specific move orders that Black is well-advised to avoid:
Click [. . .] to list games
Dr.Dave’s Adventures at East Devon 2016
Friday night:
My entry to our local congress is sometimes deranged by family visits,
but an expectedly free weekend allowed another excursion in Exeter’s
St.George’s Hall, now renamed the Corn Exchange.
[It’s about as big a hall as a corn exchange would be, but Exeter is a
wool town, not a grain one, and this unhistoric renaming of a post-war
building rather makes me wince. Not as much as the chess, though…]
I have played less this season, quite deliberately; I’ve been finding
evening chess very hard, and in October even lost to a club member graded
50 points below me, when our grades suggest I should win every single
game. But in the daylight, I was hoping for better things.
Click on […] to see games list.
1. Black vs de Piro (141) – win.
Well, the first one is of course an evening game, after a week at work
and an abbreviated encounter with the Junior Club.
Tristram joined the Exeter club for a year or so recently, and in many
friendly games I couldn’t rememeber him playing much theory, so I
chanced my arm with the main line, but found, to my horror, that he knew
it all backwards. I scrambled together some reasonable moves from bits
of half-remembered theory and analogy with the …Qb6 lines that I have
always played before, but got to a position which used to be the main
line, yet has since fallen from favour. Characteristically, Tristram
went for the attack, but soon had to give away a piece to save his
Queen. I wonder how easy the endgame would be; I liked the passed pawn,
but in the post mortem I couldn’t make progress.
2. White vs. Kazanov (210?) – loss.
What an unforgiving game chess is. After being handed a space advantage,
I didn’t find a plan to make use of it and was brought back to focus by
my opponent breaking on the King’s side. It was not clear whose King
was the most exposed, but after some swaps we arrived at an endgame.
Under pressure to reach move 40 in time, I chose an active, forcing move
which made life more difficult for me, even impossible, when a calmer,
stabilising move would probably draw. But my real irritation is not
making more of the good position from the opening. (Maybe h2-h4? But
that’s not my style.)
3. Black vs. Jepps (150) – win.
On the four previous occasions we have met, Gerry has walked off with
the whole point each time. He is my Kryptonite: he loves gambit play, I
hate it; he attacks very well, I defend very badly … I thought I’d
play a straight bat against 1.e4 and my opponent, rather than playing
some evil underground gambit, went down a main line of theory, hoping to
play the Alekhin-Chatard Attack. Finding himself in the unfamiliar
MacCutcheon, he found most of the right moves in the opening, but
mistakenly judged his Bishop worse than mine (fearing …c4), and
swapped it off, losing time, when I think Black must have at least
equality. The standard attack down the c-file seemed to work smoothly
enough, and Gerry’s attacking verve and tactical opportunism didn’t
surface.
4. White vs. Wilson (155) – win.
I got a nice game the last time I played Matt with White, and hoped
to repeat the same line, or something like it. But my opponent bashed
out a completely different line that I rarely see, and a search of the
memory banks returned a familiar result: 404 Page Not Found. Black
seemed to equalise very easily, and while I had the Bishop pair it
seemed both of them were bad! I couldn’t see what else to do but
instigate a minority attack and hope Matt faltered on the other wing. My
attack flowed well enough, yielding a pawn, then poor Matt missed a
sequence of cheap forks around the time control.
[I have something of a reputation as a theory hound, but this is clearly
quite unfounded: I read fairly widely, but my knowledge is as shallow as
a gnat’s bidet.]
5. White vs. Helbig (194) – draw.
I have drawn and even won against Paul Helbig, a strong South West
player, but the most common (and expected) result has been a loss. My
single win came about from this line of the Pirc, with which I’ve had
some good results. However, once again my opponent bashed out what seems
to be a simple equalising line with little hesitation … which I should
have expected, as that’s exactly what he did last time! I was beginning
to find my position sinking into rigidity, even the rigor of death, but
a good-looking Queen manoeuvre by Black was met by an even stronger one
by White. Black had to concede a pawn, but, as always with classy
players, found the most awkward way of doing so, and I could only retain
the pawn by swapping off into an opposite-coloured Bishop endgame with
slender hopes of a win.
Overall: This unremarkable performance won me the upper grading prize,
remarkably enough (AKA the ‘not bad for an old duffer’ prize). I came
away happier with the result than the games; I got caught out in the
opening too often, and was in moderate time trouble in nearly every
game. But I can’t complain, that’s my best tournament result for a
while.
Dr.Dave’s Adventures at East Devon, 2014
I still don’t understand why anyone plays the Exchange, except that I
keep getting worse positions against it! Giles has been working on his
chess and is now a serious danger to anyone… I was lucky to find the
cheapo on move 32.
Another much-improved player, Oliver had embarrassed me by winning with
the French Exchange in a previous event, so I was out for revenge. On
the day, he stranded a piece and it was easy enough.
I’m sure I could have defended better but I was set problems throughout
that were beyond my powers of anticipation or solution.
An interesting encounter! I won a piece but Theo made it as awkward as
he could for me… I guess it was fitting that our only OTB encounter
ends in a draw. Next time, I don’t think I will be so lucky!
I have the same experience as I do playing against the French Exchange;
I have no respect for my opponent’s opening system, but he takes his
task seriously, creates problems, takes his chances, and shows how
simple it is to beat me with the right approach.
Dr.Dave’s further adventures at East Devon, 2007-2012
East Devon Congress, Open Section, 2007
Four games and no wins is so-so, but the blunder count was reassuringly
low, and I had a good attempt at winning a couple of games, including
the one against Helbig, who was the strongest player I faced. So,
progress of sorts.
{Wretchedly got a bye in the first round. }
Click on […] to see games list.
East Devon Congress, 2008
I think Harry and Laura were down again.
East Devon Congress, Open Section, 2009
A much better score, even though this may prove nothing more than the
workings of chance. The first game did feature an absolutely wretched
series of oversights, but the rest was quite heartening. In reality, I
don’t know that I was playing that much better; I was just present at
the scene when Ponter had a brainfart and Helbig was visibly impatient
to get the game over, with the usual consequence.
Click on […] to see games list.
East Devon Congress, 2010
I think Harry and Laura were down again.
East Devon Congress, 2011
Young Theo Slade was staying with me, and I didn’t want to be playing
when he was ready to go home.
East Devon Congress, Open Section, 2012
Young Theo Slade was staying with me again, and I didn’t want to miss
the chance of playing again!
http://www.chessdevon.co.uk/P1000141.jpg
As usual, only one splash of colour in the room, and it’s me…
I had a good season last year and this one has been going better; I
expect my weekly sessions trying to keep up with Theo have something to
do with it. So, no longer content to draw with 160+ players, I made a
good start, but that was the best of it. Woodruff’s improvised opening
wasn’t hard to cope with, but I didn’t make much of it, and although I
played OK for the first part of the game against Mackle, the rest was
pretty lame. The Wensley game was awful, and although I had some ideas
against Stephens, I just missed the chance to pick up material and
immediately blew up, thrashing around trying to make something happen.
It all felt unbalanced and chaotic; bleah
Click on […] to see games list.
On manoeuvres
The Art Of Winning Slowly
I’m still working on this one myself, but by the time
I’ve read this, my word, I’ll know a thing or two.
You know how to win endings – namely, slowly. This is an
ending where you have the advantage – but not yet won, and so if
you play your big guns first things may fizzle out. Instead,
nothing too hasty, do all your preparation first, try a little play
here, a little there, before trying to force the issue. Capablanca
was the supreme craftsman with this sort of game, and is our first
example, and there is another couple from Nimzo.
But if you have got the hang of that, you can try
the same approach to the middlegame – that is, middlegames which
are advantageous but not won. The key features for a position
suitable for manoeuvre are:
- an advantage in space, and therefore,
mobility - play on both sides of the board (or at least chances of
a breakthrough) - no clear winning plan for you on either side of the
board
The way to manoeuvre is:
- keep control of the game, and keep the initiative –
that is, keep the opponent passive and defensive, where all they
can do is react to, or try to anticipate, your
threats - try different attacking ideas in sequence, probably
switching from side to side, or at least trying several different
ways of besieging the same front - play with patience and don’t miss opportunities to
tempt small weaknesses in your opponent’s game.
After that, the play may be more or less forcing and tense
depending on the position. Below several games are given, in
increasing order of tension, from Alekhin to Lasker. Lastly two
examples are given where Black is in difficulty although the game
is objectively equal, but in each case White demands that the
opponent steer safely to port. Fischer just makes it against
Petrosian, Cohn doesn’t. These last two games also put the
question: is manoeuvring done with an end in mind (if not in
sight), or is it just woodpushing? There is a saying attributed to
Tartakower, that tactics is what you do when there is somethinhg to
do, strategy is what you do when there is nothing to do. Perhaps
manoeuvring is what you do when there is no strategy to do! It is
the key to winning games when all you have is a space advantage and
your opponent is solid. Capa gives a textbook example of this
against Treybal.
Lastly, I include a club game played with manoeuvre.
See also the material on Space in the Canon.
Examples from master
play
Manoeuvring in the
endgame
Manoeuvre: a classic endgame
setting
Capablanca,Jose – Kupchik,
Abraham [Havana ] (07) [C49] 1913
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Nc3 Nf6 4. Bb5 Bb4 5. O-O O-O 6.
Bxc6 bxc6 7. Nxe5 Qe8
8. Nd3 Bxc3 9. dxc3 Qxe4
[9… Nxe4 10. Re1]
10. Re1 Qh4 11. Qf3 Ba6 12. Bf4 Rac8 13.
Be5 (idea /\ Nc5) 13… Bxd3 14. cxd3 Qg4 15. Bxf6
Qxf3 16. gxf3 gxf6
Assessment: +/-
better Pawns, fewer Pawn islands, more active pieces.
The weakest spot in the Black position is the isolated
a-Pawn, and it is here that an attack should be directed.
17. Re4
First, Capablanca mobilises and centralises his pieces.
There is not usually any sense of rush when Capa plays an
ending.
17… Rfe8 18. Rae1 Re6 19. R1e3 Rce8 20. Kf1 Kf8
21. Ke2 Ke7
Now, White can attack the a-pawn.
22. Ra4 Ra8 23. Ra5
restrains the Pawns
23… d5!?
I can sympathise with the bid for space but this is not
forced and has the disadvantage of leaving the c-Pawns without
support.
24. c4! Kd6
[24… dxc4 leaves all Black’s Pawns isolated and
most of them doubled!]
[24… d4 25. Re4 Kd6 26. b4 Re5 27. Ra6 ‘hopeless’,
said Capa]
25. c5+ Kd7 26. d4
Black’s pawns have become fixed, cutting off access to
the Queen’s-side. 26… f5
Hoping to nip out to h6 with some play.
27. Rxe6! fxe6 28. f4 Kc8 29. Kd2
Kb7?!
Black has achieved a solid defence of the a-Pawn and Whiite can
achieve little else there. But White has access to both sides of
the board via the third rank. [29… Rb8!? 30. Kc3
[30. b3 blocks the third rank]
[30. Kc2 Rb4 31. Kc3 Rc4+ 32. Kd3 Rb4]
30… Rb7 may have been better]
30. Ra3 Rg8 31. Rh3 Rg7
This defence from the side keeps the Black Rook more
active than moving it to defend from h8, but I’m sure Black also
considered …Rg1!?, giving up a Pawn to get the Rook active. It
looks a bit speculative here but is the right sort of idea to have
in mind.
32. Ke2 Ka6 33. Rh6 Re7 34. Kd3 Kb7 35. h4 Kc8
36. Rh5 Kd7 37. Rg5 Rf7
Again, Black has achieved a solid, if passive, defence. White now
returns his attention to the Queen’s-side.
38. Kc3 Kc8 39. Kb4 Rf6 40. Ka5 Kb7 41. a4 a6 42.
h5 Rh6
White can improve the position of his pieces no further. It is time
to try and force the issue.
43. b4 Rf6 44. b5!?
[44. Rg7! Rh6 first would have been better, according
to Capa: 45. b5 axb5 46. axb5 cxb5
[46… Rxh5 47. b6]
47. Kxb5 e.g. 47… Rxh5 48. c6+ Kb8 49.
Ka6]
44… axb5 45. axb5 Rf8
Off to sieze the a-file!
46. Rg7 Ra8+ 47. Kb4 cxb5 48. Kxb5
Ra2
Black has gained some activity. Of course, White does not retreat
and defend with Rg2.
49. c6+ Kb8 50. Rxh7 Rb2+ 51. Ka5 Ra2+ 52. Kb4
Rxf2 53. Re7 Rxf4?!
Natural, but not exact.
[53… Rh2? 54. Rxe6 Rxh5 55. Re5 Ka7 56.
Kc5]
[53… Rb2+!? 54. Kc3 Rh2 55. Rxe6 Ka7 56. h6 Kb6
which isn’t great but Black is also fighting with the King
now]
54. h6 Rxd4+ 55. Kb5 Rd1 56. h7
A Pawn on the seventh seems worth three in the bush!
Black can only hope to harass the King with checks, but these are
soon exhausted.
56… Rb1+ 57. Kc5 Rc1+ 58. Kd4 Rd1+ 59. Ke5 Re1+
60. Kf6 Rh1 61. Re8+ Ka7 62. h8=Q Rxh8 63. Rxh8 Kb6 64. Kxe6 Kxc6
65. Kxf5 Kc5 66. Ke5 c6 67. Rh6 Kb5 68. Kd4 1-0
That was a fairly simple example, falling as much into the realm of
carrying out a strategical plan as manoeuvring without a clear
object. The next example is less direct, even though Black has an
extra Pawn to play with.
Manoeuvre in the endgame:
against weaknesses on both wings
Holzhausen W – Nimzowitsch Aaron
(Hannover) [B00] , 1926
1. e4 Nc6 2. Nf3 e6 3. d4 d5 4. exd5 exd5 5. Bg5 Be7 6.
Bxe7 Qxe7+ 7. Qe2 Bf5 8. c3 Be4 9. Nbd2 O-O-O 10. O-O-O Nh6 11. Ne5
Nxe5 12. dxe5 Bg6
already planning a campaign against the e-pawn using the long
light-squared diagonal, especially the point e4
13. Nf3 Rhe8 14. Qe3 Kb8 15. Qf4 Be4 16. Re1 Qc5
17. Nd2 Bg6 18. Nb3 Qb6 19. Qd4 f6 20. f4 fxe5 21.
fxe5
[21. Rxe5 Rxe5 22. Qxe5 Re8]
21… Be4
[the e-pawn is doomed]
22. Nd2 c5 23. Qe3
[23. Qa4 Rxe5 24. Nxe4 dxe4 25. Rxe4 Qe6 26. Rxe5
Qxe5 with a winning attack]
23… Rxe5 24. Qg3 Qc7 25. Bd3 Rde8 26. Bxe4 dxe4
27. Nc4 R5e6 28. Qxc7+ Kxc7 29. Ne3
[the Knight is an excellent blockading piece, losing
no squares by its post]
29… Nf7 30. Kc2 Nd6 31. c4 Kc6 32.
Rhf1
32… Rh6 !
“A typical tacking manoeuvre” — EUWE/KRAMER
33. h3 Rg6 34. Re2 a6 35. Rf4 b5
[Black plays on both wings]
36. b3 Rg5 37. g4 Rge5 38. Kc3 a5
[Black will open a file on the Queen’s-side for his
Rooks]
39. Ref2 a4 40. bxa4 bxc4 !
[a temporary pawn sacrifice]
41. Rf8
[41. Nxc4 Nxc4 42. Kxc4 Ra8 and Black not only
regains the pawn, but White has lost the blockader]
41… R5e7
[White must not be allowed counterplay, particularly
not a Rook on the eighth]
42. Rxe8 Rxe8 43. Nxc4 Nxc4 44. Kxc4
Ra8
The Black Rook now gets in on the Queen’s-side, to attack Pawns on
the King’s-side
45. Rf7 Rxa4+ 46. Kb3 Rb4+ 47. Kc3 Rb7 48. Rf5
Ra7 49. Kc4 Ra4+ 50. Kb3 Rd4 51. Re5 Kd6 52. Re8 Rd3+ 53. Kc4 Rxh3
54. Rxe4 Ra3
White can no longer defend the two wings
55. Re2 Ra4+ 56. Kb5 Rxg4
[-/+]
57. a4 Rb4+ 58. Ka5 h5 59. Rd2+ Kc6 60. Re2 Rg4
61. Re6+ Kd5 62. Re8 h4 63. Rd8+ Kc4 64. Kb6 h3 65.
Rd1
[65. Rh8 Rg6+ 66. Kb7 Rh6]
65… Kb4 66. Rb1+ Kxa4 67. Kxc5 g5 68. Rh1 Rg3
69. Kd5 g4 70. Ke5 Rg2 71. Kf4 h2 0-1
The last type of ending in which we see manoeuvre as a strong theme
is a Queen ending. Again, Nimzo has an extra Pawn but Queen endings
are always difficult because of the number of candidate moves for
each side, and the risk of allowing perpetual to the defending
side.
Manoeuvre: in a Queen
ending,
Nimzowitsch Aaron – Antze,O
(Hannover) [E60] 1926
1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. g3 Bg7 4. Bg2 O-O 5. f4 d6 6. Nf3 c6
7. O-O d5 8. cxd5 cxd5 9. Ne5 Qb6 10. Nc3 Rd8 11. b3 Na6 12. Ba3
Bf8 13. Na4 Qb5 14. Qd3 Qa5 15. Rfc1 Bf5 16. Qc3 Qb5 17. Bf1 Ne4
18. Qe1 Qe8 19. e3 b5 20. Nc6 Rdc8 21. Bxb5 Bd7 22. Bxa6 Rxc6 23.
Bb7 Rxc1 24. Rxc1 Rd8 25. Nc5 Bc8 26. Bxc8 Rxc8 27. Qa5 e6 28. Nxe4
dxe4 29. Rxc8 Qxc8 30. Bc5 Bxc5 31. Qxc5 Qa6 32. Qc2 Qa5 33. Kf2
Qh5 34. Qxe4 Qxh2+ 35. Qg2 Qh5 36. g4 Qa5 37. Kg3 h6 38. Qf2 Qc7
39. Kh3 f5 40. gxf5 gxf5 41. d5 exd5 42. Qg2+ Kf7 43. Qxd5+
Kf6
Here White’s Queen can change lines at d4, and also at e5 and f6;
the King may penetrate at h5. Black can hope for harassing checks,
and for the advance of the h-pawn.
44. Qd4+ Kg6 45. Qd2 Kf6 46. Qb2+ Kg6 47. b4 Qc4
48. Qd2 Kh5
[48… Qf1+ 49. Qg2+ [a CROSS-CHECK]]
49. a4 a6 50. Kg3 Qg8+ 51. Kh2 Qc4 52. Qb2 Qd3
53. Qg2 Qc4
[53… Qxe3 54. Qh3+]
54. Kg3 Qg8+
[54… Qxb4 55. Qe2+ Kg6 56. Qxa6+ and the a-pawn
will win]
55. Kh3 Qc4 56. Qf3+ Kg6 57. Kh4
[another step]
57… Kg7 58. Qb7+ Kg6 59. Qb6+ Kh7
60. Qf6 !
attacking both Pawns
60… Qd5
[the threat is …Qa1+ with a draw by
perpetual]
61. Kg3 Qg8+ 62. Kh2 Qa2+ 63. Kh3 Qd5 64.
Qe7+
[64. Qxa6 Qf3+ 65. Kh2 Qf2+ 66. Kh1 Qf3+
drawing]
64… Kg6 65. Qe8+ Kh7
[65… Kf6 66. Kg3 Qd3 67. a5 Qf1 68. Qe5+ Kg6 69.
Qe6+ Kg7 70. Qxf5 Qg1+ 71. Kf3 Qf1+ 72. Ke4 Qc4+ 73. Ke5 Qb5+ 74.
Ke6 +-]
66. Kg3 Qb3 67. a5 ! 67… Qb1
[losing touch with the a-pawn]
[67… Qd3 68. Qf7+ Kh8 69. Qf6+ Kh7 70. Qd4 ! 70…
Qf1
[70… Qb1 71. Qd7+ Kg6 72. Qc6+ Kg7 73. Qb7+ Kf8 74.
Qxa6 as in the game]
71. Qd7+ Kg6 72. Qe6+ Kg7 73. Qxf5 winning;]
68. Qd7+ Kg6 69. Qc6+ Kg7 70. Qb7+ Kf8 71.
Qxa6
winning…
71… Qe1+ 72. Kf3 Qd1+ 73. Qe2 Qd5+ 74. Kf2 Qd8
75. a6 Qh4+ 76. Kg2 Qe7 77. Qf3 Qc7 78. b5 Qg7+ 79. Kf2 Qb2+ 80.
Qe2 Qa1 81. b6 1-0
Having reminded ourselves of the ideas in endgame settings, let us
see the same approach in the middlegame.
Manoeuvre in the middlegame:
slowly, or dynamically and with threats
Manoeuvre: slow breakthrough
in closed position with lots of space
Capablanca – Treybal
(Karlsbad) [D30] 1929
1. d4 d5 2. c4 c6 3. Nf3 e6 4. Bg5 Be7 5. Bxe7 Qxe7 6. Nbd2
f5 7. e3 Nd7 8. Bd3 Nh6 9. O-O O-O 10. Qc2 g6 11. Rab1 Nf6 12. Ne5
Nf7 13. f4
the Anti-Stonewall formation: White has a Queen’s-side initiative
13… Bd7 14. Ndf3 Rfd8 15. b4 Be8 16. Rfc1 a6
17. Qf2 Nxe5 18. Nxe5 Nd7
seeking exchanges…
19. Nf3
…but not finding them
19… Rdc8 20. c5 Nf6 21. a4 Ng4
a gesture only
22. Qe1 Nh6
Black is defending the Queen’s-side quite well: White switches
tack. This is the key to understanding space – although Black can
theoretically defend any one point, White can make the Black pieces
trip up in their rush to do so by moving from one point to another.
23. h3 Nf7 24. g4 Bd7 25. Rc2 Kh8 26. Rg2 Rg8 27.
g5 Qd8 28. h4 Kg7 29. h5
White has the initiative on both sides of the board: Black’s
cramped and passive pieces will find it hard to cover everything
29… Rh8 30. Rh2 Qc7 31. Qc3 Qd8 32. Kf2 Qc7 33.
Rbh1 Rag8 34. Qa1 Rb8 35. Qa3 Rbg8
Just when Black has had to cover the h-file…
36. b5
…White opens a file on the Q-side. Black’s pieces have
to rush back, but get in a tangle because they have so few squares.
White gains complete control of the a-file, and seals the
King’s-side. Then, he arranges the final breakthrough on the
Queen’s-side, possible because of his enormous control of space
there.
36… axb5
[36… cxb5 37. h6+ Kf8 38. c6+]
37. h6+ Kf8 38. axb5 Ke7 39. b6 Qb8
a sad decision: now Black won’t be able to oppose rooks on the
a-file. This is the concrete manifestation of what I described
earlier: White switching the focus of activity from side to side
until Black is wrong-footed.
40. Ra1 Rc8 41. Qb4 Rhd8 42. Ra7 Kf8 43. Rh1 Be8
44. Rha1 Kg8 45. R1a4 Kf8 46. Qa3 Kg8 47. Kg3 Bd7 48.
Kh4
White spends a little time wondering where to put his
King; he has the luxury of seeing how it looks on a few different
squares before the final push. 48… Kh8 49. Qa1 Kg8 50.
Kg3 Kf8 51. Kg2 Be8
the last ingredient for the breakthrough is the Knight
52. Nd2 Bd7 53. Nb3 Re8 54. Na5 Nd8
Ready or not, here we come
55. Ba6 bxa6 56. Rxd7 Re7
else the a-pawn will simply go after Nb3
57. Rxd8+ Rxd8 58. Nxc6
this ‘family’ fork is decisive
1-0
This is just the same approach as in the Kupchik endgame. Next up
is a game where Alekhin has an advantage not so much in space as
mobility. How can you have an advantage in mobility without having
one in space? You can if (1) your opponent is forced onto the
defensive on the side of the board where you have more space, or
(2) the Pawn structure favours your pieces (especially
Bishops), or
(3) if your pieces can get around more easily by using
outposts.
In the game, Alekhin has all three going for him!
Manoeuvre: slow breakthrough
in half-open position
Thomas,G – Alekhin,Alexander
(Baden Baden) [B02] , 1925
1. e4 Nf6 2. d3 c5 3. f4 Nc6 4. Nf3 g6 5. Be2 Bg7 6. Nbd2
d5 7. O-O O-O 8. Kh1 b6 9. exd5 Qxd5 10. Qe1 Bb7 11. Nc4 Nd4 12.
Ne3 Qc6 13. Bd1 Nd5
14. Nxd4 ?
exposes the c-pawn
14… cxd4 15. Nxd5 Qxd5 16. Bf3 Qd7 17. Bxb7
Qxb7 18. c4
[18. Rf2 Rac8 19. a4 Rc5 20. b3 Rfc8 21. Qd1 Qc7 22.
Ra2]
[18. Bd2 Rac8 19. c4 dxc3 20. Bxc3 Bxc3 21. bxc3 with
the same weak Pawns for White as in the game, but with Bishops off
White has got rid of a passive piece and has chances against the
Black King.]
18… dxc3 19. bxc3 Rac8 20. Bb2
[20. Bd2]
20… Rfd8 21. Rf3 Bf6 22. d4
[22. Qe2 Qa6 23. c4 again, White would have
benefitted from the exchange of Bishops]
But there is no breakthrough yet, and so Alekhin begins
a patient siege. Alekhin is usually thought of as a demon
attacker, but there was nothing wrong with his technique…
22… Qd5 23. Qe3 Qb5 24. Qd2 Rd5
This is clearly better for Black, because of White’s poor
dark-squared Bishop and backward c-pawn. Also, because the weight
of play moves over to the Queen’s-side, the c3 Pawn prevents
White’s pieces from nipping about as easily as Black’s. Black’s
fourth rank,. and the light squares c4 and d5, form staging posts
for Black’s manoeuvres.
25. h3 e6 26. Re1 Qa4
Black seeks to force or tempt a2-a3
27. Ra1 b5 28. Qd1 Rc4 29. Qb3 Rd6 30. Kh2 Ra6
31. Rff1 Be7 32. Kh1 Rcc6 33. Rfe1 Bh4 !
Black makes use of both sides of the board.
34. Rf1
[34. Re2 Qxb3 35. axb3 Rxa1+ 36. Bxa1 Ra6 37. Bb2
Ra2
[37… Bg3 ! Fritz 38. Bc1 Ra1]
38. Kh2 a5]
34… Qc4
Black will recycle the Rooks to a4 and a6
35. Qxc4 Rxc4 36. a3
[else …b4]
36… Be7 37. Rfb1 Bd6
[no rush: Black chivvies another White pawn onto a
dark square]
38. g3 Kf8 39. Kg2 Ke7 40. Kf2 Kd7 41. Ke2
Kc6
[the Black King covers b5 and threatens
…Rca4]
42. Ra2 Rca4
The Rooks quietly take up their places.
43. R1a1 Kd5 44. Kd3 R6a5 45. Bc1 a6 46.
Bb2
This is Black’s ideal position: is there a win?
46… h5 !
[threat …h4]
Yes, by playing in the centre and King’s-side as well as
the Queen’s. 47. h4 f6 48. Bc1
And now the break:
48… e5 49. fxe5 fxe5 50. Bb2
[50. dxe5 Bxe5 51. Bf4 Bxf4 52. gxf4 Kc5 is
terminal]
50… exd4 51. cxd4 b4
[finally the a-pawn falls]
0-1
The next game also shows the infiltration theme, and changing front
– not from side to side as much as from one way of pressuring a
point to another.
Manoeuvre: gradual
infiltration, changing tack,
Tylor, Theodore – Lasker,
Emanuel (Nottingham) [C49] 1936
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Nc3 Nf6 4. Bb5 Bb4 5. O-O O-O 6. d3
d6 7. Bg5 Ne7 8. Nh4 c6 9. Bc4 Kh8 10. f4 exf4 11. Bxf6 gxf6 12.
Rxf4 Ng6 13. Nxg6+ fxg6
14. Bb3 Qe7 15. Ne2 Ba5 16. c3 Bd7 17. Ng3
not a great square but White would not enjoy a break with
…f5
17… Bc7 18. Rf2 Kg7 19. Qe2 Rae8 20. Raf1
Be6
Black forces a weakening of e4, then leans on it.
21. Qc2 Bb6 22. d4 Bc7 23. Kh1 h5 ! 24. Re1 Qf7
25. Rfe2 Bxb3 26. axb3
[26. Qxb3 Qxb3 27. axb3 Re7 28. Kg1 Rfe8 29. Nf1 is
also a long slog]
26… Qd7 27. Nf1 Re7 28. Qd3 Rfe8 29.
Nd2
The e-pawn has as many defenders as attackers. Black changes tack,
opening the position for the Bishop.
29… d5 30. exd5 Rxe2 31. Rxe2 Rxe2 32. Qxe2
Qxd5 33. Qe7+ Qf7 34. Qe4 Qd7 35. Nf3 Kf7 ! 36. c4
[36. Nh4 Qg4]
36… Qe6 37. Qd3
[37. Qxe6+ Kxe6 38. Kg1 Kf5 39. Kf2 Ke4 40. Ke2
g5]
37… Bf4 ! 38. g3
[38. Kg1 Qe3+ 39. Qxe3 Bxe3+ 40. Kf1 Bc1]
38… Qe3 ! 39. Qc3 Bh6
White denies the Queen entry only at a cost
40. c5 Qf2 41. Qc4+ Kg7 42. Qd3 Be3 43. Qd1
a5
zugzwang!
44. b4 axb4 45. b3 Kh6 0-1
Alekhin was a dynamic player, and this dynamism also suffused his
manoeuvres. Here is a manouevring game based on pressure against
the King’s-side.
Manoeuvre: manoeuvring with
threats
Rubinstein,Akiba –
Alekhin,Alexander (Dresden) [A46], 1926
1. d4 Nf6 2. Nf3 e6 3. Bf4 b6 4. h3 Bb7 5. Nbd2 Bd6 6. Bxd6
cxd6 7. e3 O-O 8. Be2 d5 9. O-O Nc6 10. c3 Ne4 11. Nxe4 dxe4 12.
Nd2 f5 13. f4 g5 14. Nc4 d5 15. Ne5 Nxe5 16. dxe5 Kh8
White appears better (with a better Bishop), but with hindsight
should have chosen the safer line:
17. a4
[17. g3 Rg8 18. Kh2]
17… Rg8 18. Qd2 gxf4 19. Rxf4
[19. exf4 Qh4 20. Kh1 Rxg2 21. Kxg2 Rg8+ 22.
Bg4]
19… Qg5 20. Bf1 Qg3 21. Kh1 Qg7 22. Qd4
Ba6
[the exchange of White’s good Bishop leaves Black
with all the trumps]
23. Rf2 Qg3 24. Rc2 Bxf1 25. Rxf1
Rac8
[“All the time Black operates with threats” — EUWE
and KRAMER]
26. b3 Rc7 27. Re2 Rcg7 28. Rf4 Rc7 29. Rc2 Rcg7
30. Re2
Repetition is usually to gain time on the clock but can also serve
to steady your nerves, to change gear emotionally from defence to
attack, and to weary the opponent.
30… Rg6 !
[…Rg6-h6xh3+]
31. Qb4
[31. Qd1 Rh6 zugzwang! Alekhin 32. Rf1
[32. Qf1 Qg7 x e5]
[32. b4 Qg7 33. Qd4 Rxh3+]
[32. c4 d4 ! winning 33. Qe1 d3]
32… Qxe5]
31… Rh6 32. h4 Qg7
[Black has had his eye on the e-pawn for some
time]
33. c4 Rg6 34. Qd2 Rg3 !
Now the Rook occupies the g3 square. We have seen no
change of front in this game (all on the King’s-side) but lots of
different arrangements of pieces.
35. Qe1
[35. Kg1 d4 36. exd4 e3 37. Qc2 Rh3 38. Qd3 Qg3 the
return of the Queen to g3 is crushing]
35… Rxg2 0-1
This notion of changing front is easy to see: here is an
example where Lasker doesn’t change front as much as pester his
opponent with different threats.
Manoeuvre: keep finding
attacking ideas,
Lasker,Emanuel – Salwe,G
(St.Petersburg) [C62] 1909
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 d6 4. d4 Bd7 5. Nc3 Nf6 6. O-O
Be7 7. Bg5 exd4 8. Nxd4 O-O 9. Bxc6 bxc6 10. Qd3 Re8 11. Rae1 c5
12. Nb3 Ng4 13. Bxe7 Rxe7 14. f4 Rb8 15. h3 Nh6 16. f5
active but weakens e5
[16. g4]
16… f6 17. Nd5 Re8 18. c4 Nf7 19. Qc3 Re5 20.
Nd2 c6 21. Nf4 Qb6 22. b3 Rbe8 23. Qg3 Kh8 24. Nh5 Rg8 25. Rf4 Qd8
26. Nf3 Re7
Advantage to White:
(1) the d-pawn is weak but so is the e-pawn
(2) Black can cover the K-side attack
(3) White retains a space and mobility advantage
27. Rh4
[27. Rg4 Qf8]
27… Qe8 28. Qf2
tacking
[28. Nf4 Nh6]
28… Rf8 29. Qd2
sets up Nf4, Nxh6; Qxd6
29… Qb8 30. Kh1 Rfe8 31. Rg4 Rg8
[31… Nh6 ? 32. Nxf6
[32. Rxg7 Rxg7 33. Qxh6 Rf7 34. Nxf6 Ref8 35.
Ng5]
32… Nxg4 33. Nxe8]
32. Rd1 Qb4
seeking counterplay but is a bit of a lone wolf
[32… Qe8]
33. Qf2 Qc3 34. Qh4 Nh6 35. Rf4 Nf7 36. Kh2 Rge8
37. Qg3 Rg8
since the last diagram Black has only managed to lose contact
between the Queen and d6
38. Rh4
[38. Rg4 Nh6 39. Rh4 d5 40. cxd5 cxd5 41. Rxd5
Bc6]
38… g5
[38… d5 39. cxd5 cxd5 40. Nf4]
39. fxg6
[39. Rg4 Be8]
39… Rxg6 40. Qf2 f5
[else Rf4]
41. Nf4 Rf6 42. Ne2 Qb2 43. Rd2 Qa1 44. Ng3
Kg8
[44… a5 45. exf5 Bxf5 46. Nxf5 Rxf5 47.
Rxh7+]
45. exf5 Bxf5
46. Nd4 !
[46. Nxf5 is now not quite as good: 46… Rxf5 47.
Rxh7 Qf6]
46… cxd4 47. Nxf5 Kf8 48. Qxd4 Qxd4 49. Nxd4
Ne5 50. Rh5 Ref7 51. c5
The double-rook ending, far from holding chances of a draw, is
quickly won
51… dxc5 52. Rxe5 cxd4 53. Rxd4 Rf2 54. Rd8+
Kg7 55. Ra5 Rc2 56. a3 ! 56… c5 57. Rc8 Rb2 58. Rb5 Rff2 59. Rb7+
Kg6 60. Rc6+ Rf6 61. Rxc5 Ra6 62. a4 ! 62… Rf6
[62… Rxa4 63. Rc6+ Kf5 64. Rb5+ Ke4 65.
bxa4]
63. Rc3 a6 64. Rg3+ Kh6 65. Rgg7
1-0
Manoeuvre: manoeuvring or
woodshifting?
Cohn,E – Nimzowitsch Aaron
(Karlsbad) [D30], 1911
1. d4 d5 2. Nf3 e6 3. c4 c5 4. e3 Nf6 5. Bd3 Bd6 6. O-O O-O
7. a3 cxd4 8. exd4 dxc4 9. Bxc4 Nc6 10. Nc3 b6 11. Bg5 Bb7 12. Qe2
h6 13. Be3 Ne7 14. Ne5 Ned5 15. Nxd5 Nxd5 16. Qh5 Bxe5 17. Qxe5 Nf6
18. Rfe1 Bd5 19. Bd3 Rc8 20. Rac1
20… Ng4 21. Qg3 Nxe3 22. fxe3 Qd7 23. Ba6 Rxc1 24. Rxc1
Qa4 25. Bf1 Qb3 26. Qf2 f5 27. Qd2 Rf7 28. Qc3 Qa4 29. g3 Kh7 30.
Bg2 Qb5
After the coming exchange a long period of manoeuvring begins –
Euwe asks, quite reasonably, whether in fact the phase is really
manoeuvring or mere woodshifting.
31. Bxd5 exd5 32. Qd2 Qb3 33. Qc3 Qb5 34. Qd2 Qb3
35. Qc3 Qb5 36. Qd2 Re7 37. Qc2 Qd7 38. Qd3 Re4 39. Kf2 Qe6 40. Rf1
Qg6 41. Kg2 Qe6 42. Kf2 Qg6 43. Kg2 Qe6 44. Kf2 Kg6 45. Rc1 Kh7 46.
Rc2 Qg6 47. Kg2 Qg5 48. Rf2 Qg6 49. Qe2 Qe6 50. Qf3 Kg6 51. Re2 Kh7
52. Kf2 Qc8 53. Kg2 Qe6 54. Kf2 Qg6 55. Kg2 Qg5 56. Kf2 Qf6 57. Kg2
Qg5 58. Kf2 Qg6 59. Kg2 Qe6 60. Kf2 Qc8 61. Kg2 Qe6 62. Kf2 Qc8 63.
Kg2
Drawish? Yes, but White has enough difficulties that Black is
justified in playing on, says Nimzo
63… a5
according to Nimzovitch, to make a7 available as a refuge
for the King! 64. h4 Kg6 65. Kh2 h5 66. Kg2 Kh6 67. Rf2
g6
[tomorrow will do]
68. Rf1 Kg7 69. Rf2 Kf7 70. Kh2 Ke7 71. Re2
Qc1
[“Black can do very much as he pleases, but for the
time being there is simply no serious threat to be made. This game
exemplifies the fact that manoeuvring amounts to a form of the
initiative.” EUWE]
72. Qf2 Kd7 73. Re1 Qc6 74. Kg2 Rg4
[Black has weaknesses to aim at on g3 and e3, and the
King is on the way to a7 which White cannot prevent]
75. Rf1
[75. Re2 Re4
[75… Kc7 76. Rc2]
76. Kh2 Qc1 77. Kg2 Qd1 78. Kh2 Qd3 enables
…Kc7]
75… Qc7 76. Qf3 Kc8 77. Qf2 Kb8 78. Kh3
Ka7
Black is making progress, although the two backward pawns e3/g3 are
close enough together to defend easily.
79. Rg1 Qd7 80. Kh2
[else …f4!]
80… Qd6 81. Kh3 Qc6 82. Re1 Qe6 83. Kh2
Qe4
[now threatening …g5 and …h4]
84. Kh3 Qe6 85. Kh2 Qe7 86. Kh3 Qe4 87. Rg1 Qe6
88. Kh2 Re4
89. Rc1 ?
[89. Re1 White feared: 89… g5 90. hxg5 h4 91. gxh4
f4 92. g6 f3 with attacking chances, but after 93. g7 the onus is
quite on Black]
89… Rxe3 90. Qf4 Re2+ 91. Kh3 Ka6 92. b4 axb4
93. axb4 Kb5
[Now the White Queen dare not move, the end is in
sight]
94. Rc7 Qe4
[forcing the exchange]
95. Qxe4 Rxe4 96. Rg7 Re6 97. Rd7 Kc4 98. Kg2
Kxd4 99. Kf3 Kc4 100. b5 d4 0-1
Manoeuvring: a modern
master,
Petrosian,T – Fischer,R [A16]
1958
1. c4 Nf6 2. Nc3 g6 3. g3 Bg7 4. Bg2 O-O 5. Nf3 d6 6. O-O
Nc6 7. d3 Nh5 8. d4 e5 9. d5 Ne7 10. e4 f5 11. exf5 gxf5 12. Nxe5
Nxg3 13. hxg3
“Petrosian… plays for control of the centre squares.”
(Fischer).
13… Bxe5 14. f4 Bg7 15. Be3 Bd7 16.
Bd4
“Forcing the exchange of Black’s most active piece.”
16… Ng6 17. Re1 Rf7
[17… Bxd4+ 18. Qxd4 h5 and …h4 gets rid of the
isolated pawn.]
18. Bf3
“Black doesn’t get a second chance.”
18… Qf8 19. Kf2 Re8 20. Rxe8 Qxe8 21. Bxg7 Rxg7
22. Qd4 b6 23. Rh1
[23. b4 ! Fischer]
23… a5 24. Nd1 Qf8 25. Ne3
[25. Bh5]
25… Rf7 26. b3 Qg7 27. Qxg7+ Kxg7 28. a3 Rf8
29. Be2
“White constantly finds ways to improve his position.”
[29. b4? axb4 30. axb4 Ra8]
29… Ne7 30. Bd3 h6 31. Rh5 Be8 32.
Rh2
[32. Nxf5+ Nxf5 33. Rxf5 Rh8!-+ /\ Bg6]
[32. Rxf5 Rh8!-+ ]
32… Bd7 33. Rh1 Rh8 34. Nc2
“Heading for an even stronger outpost on d4. Each time Petrosian
achieved a good position, he managed to manoeuvre into a better
one.”
34… Kf6 35. Nd4 Kg7 36. Be2
“Feigning an invasion with Bh5, Re1 and Ne6. White has two wings to
operate on…”
36… Ng8?
“Panicking and giving him the opportunity to sneak in b4
when Black can’t react with …axb4 and …Ra8. Petrosian likes to
play cat-and-mouse, hoping his opponents will go wrong in the
absence of a direct threat..they usually do
[36… Ra8 37. Bh5 Rc8 38. Re1 Kf6 39. Ne6 c6=
]
37. b4 Nf6 38. Bd3
[38. bxa5 Ne4+ 39. Kg2 bxa5 40. Rb1 Nc5+/= ]
38… axb4
[38… Ne4+ 39. Bxe4 fxe4 40. bxa5 bxa5
[40… Ra8 41. axb6 cxb6 42. Rb1+- ]
41. Rb1+- /\ Rb7]
[38… Kg6 39. bxa5 bxa5 40. Rb1+- /\ Rb7]
39. axb4 Kg6 40. Ra1
“White has finally achieved his ideal set-up, but Black’s game is
still tenable.”
40… Ng4+ 41. Ke2 Re8+ 42. Kd2 Nf6 43.
Ra6
[43. Ra7 Rc8]
43… Rb8 44. Ra7 Rc8 45. c5
“This Pawn sac caught me completely by surprise. It’s the only line
that gives Black any trouble.”
45… bxc5
[45… Nxd5? 46. c6+- ]
46. bxc5 dxc5 47. Nf3 Kf7
[47… Nxd5? 48. Ne5++- ]
48. Ne5+ Ke7 49. Nxd7 Nxd7 50. Bxf5 Rf8 51.
g4
[51. Bxd7 Kxd7 52. Ke3
[52. Ra6 Rg8]
52… Kd6 53. Ra6+ Kxd5 54. Rxh6 Re8+ 55. Kf3 c4=
]
51… Kd6 ?
[51… Nf6! 52. Be6 Nxd5! 53. Bxd5 Rxf4=
[53… Rd8= ]
]
52. Bxd7 Kxd7 53. Ke3 Re8+
[53… c4 54. Ra6-+ ]
54. Kf3
[54. Kd3 Rg8= ]
54… Kd6 55. Ra6+ Kxd5 56. Rxh6 c4 57.
Rh1
[57. Rh7+- Petrosian,T
57… c6
[57… c5 58. Rd7+ Ke6 59. Rd1 Rb8 60. g5?
[60. f5+! Ke5 61. Re1+ Kd4
[61… Kf6 62. Kf4 c3 63. g5+ Kg7 64. g6 c2 65. Kg5
Rb1 66. f6++- ]
62. g5 c3 63. f6 c2 64. Rc1!
[64. f7? Rb1!= ]
64… Ke5 65. Kg4!+- ]
60… c3 61. Kg4
[61. Rc1 Kf5 62. Rxc3 c4! 63. Rxc4 Rb3+= ]
61… Rb4 62. Re1+ Kf7 63. Kf5 c2 64. Rc1 Rc4 65. g6+
Kg7 66. Kg5 Rc3= ]
58. Rd7+ Kc5 59. Rd1 c3 60. g5 Kc4 61. g6 c2 62. Rc1
Kc3 63. f5 Rg8 64. Kf4 Kd2 65. Rxc2+ Kxc2 66. Kg5 c5 67. f6 c4 68.
f7 Rxg6+ 69. Kxg6 c3 70. f8=Q+- ]
[57. Rh7 wins]
57… c3 58. g5 c5 59. Rd1+
[59. g6 Rg8 60. f5 Ke5 61. Kg4 Kf6 62. Rc1 c4 63.
Rxc3 Rc8!= ]
[59. Kg4 Re2! 60. g6 Ke4! 61. Kg5 Rg2+ 62. Kf6 Kxf4=
]
59… Kc4 60. g6 c2 61. Rc1
[61. Rg1 Rd8 62. Rc1
[62. g7? Rg8!-+ /\ Txg7]
]
61… Kd3 62. f5 Rg8 63. Kf4 Kd2 64. Rxc2+ Kxc2
65. Kg5 c4 66. f6 c3 67. f7 1/2-1/2
[67. f7 Rxg6+
[67… Rc8 68. g7 Kb1 69. f8=Q Rxf8 70. gxf8=Q c2=
]
68. Kxg6 Kb1 69. f8=Q c2= ]
Examples from club
play
Note from DrDave: I apologise for the
huge quantity of me below. Apart from any egotism, there are some
reasons for this:
- participants in the coaching sessions often complain about
seeing nothing but master games, arguing it’s all very well for
Capablanca to be able to do that, but is it relevant to
us?- so, I’d like to include examples from club play wherever
possible to show that club players can make use of ideas from
master games- I have lots of examples of my own games but not very many from
other people- Most of the examples I have from other people feature their
brilliant King’s-side attacks, not their games of manoeuvre.- If you don’t like this, you know what to do!
But I do feel embarrassed about blowing my own
trumpet.
Manoeuvring in club play:
patience and preparatory moves
Regis,D (2840) – O’Grady,J
(1820) [C30] Spectrum #1 Torquay 1996
1. e4 e5 2. f4
2… d6
[2… Bc5]
3. Nf3 Nc6 4. Bc4 Be7 5. d3 Nf6 6. Nc3 O-O 7. O-O
Bg4 8. h3 Bxf3 9. Qxf3 Na5 10. f5 Nxc4 11. dxc4 c6
[11… Kh8]
12. Be3 a6 13. a4
13… Qd7?! [13… b6] 14.
a5!
Typical of manoeuvre: make sure there is something to go
at on the Queen’s-side before committing on the King’s.
14… c5 [14… Kh8]
15. g4 h6 [15… Kh8] 16. h4 Nh7
17. Nd5 Qd8 18. Nxe7+ Qxe7 19. Qg3 f6 20. Rf2 Rf7 21. Rd1 Rd8 22.
Bd2 Qc7 23. Bc3 Rfd7 24. Rg2 Kf8 25. Bd2 Kf7
26. g5?!
with hindsight, hasty
[26. Rf1 an extra strengthening move couldn’t have
hurt]
26… hxg5 27. hxg5 fxg5 28. Bxg5 Nxg5 29. Qxg5
Kf8 30. Rh2 Kg8 31. Qg6 Rf7 32. Kf2 Rf6 33. Qh7+ Kf7 34. Rg1 Rg8
35. Rhg2 Kf8
The thing you need to manoeuvre or defend is pateince. Both players
now snatch at moves.
36. Rxg7?!
[36. Rg6!?]
36… Rxg7??
[After the sounder 36… Qxg7 37. Rxg7 Rxg7 38. Qh8+
Kf7
An interesting Q/RR endgame arises in which White has chances
against the Queen’s-side pawns – remember move 13?
39. Qc8?!
[39. b3! the plan is to secure the King first and
stop Black coordinating Rooks 39… Rg8 40. Qh5+ Kg7 41. Ke2 Rh8
42. Qg5+ Kf7 43. Kd2 Rfh6 44. Kc3 Rh3+ 45. Kb2 R3h6 46. b4 cxb4 47.
Kb3 Rf6 48. Kxb4 Rh2 49. c3 Rb2+ 50. Ka3 Rh2 51. c5 dxc5 52. Qg3
Rc2 53. Qxe5 +-]
39… Rh6 40. Qxb7+ Kf6 41. Qxa6 Rh2+ 42. Kf1 Rh1+
43. Ke2 Rh2+ 44. Kf3 Rh3+ draws]
37. Qh8+ Ke7 38. Rxg7+ 1-0
Manoeuvring in club play: play
on both sides of the board
Regis,D (1960) – Richmond,RH
(2150) [A21] Cambridge Vs. NCI, 1986
1. c4 e5 2. Nc3 d6 3. g3 f5 4. d4 e4 5. Nh3 Nf6 6. Bg2 Be7
7. O-O O-O 8. Bg5 c6 9. f3
Black’s centre is under pressure.
9… exf3 10. exf3 h6 11. Be3 Be6 12. Qd3 d5 13.
c5 Qd7 14. Nf4 Bf7 15. b4 g5 16. Nfe2 Kg7 17. Rab1 Bg6 18. f4
Ne4
The position is by no means closed but the feature of slow build-up
of play on both sides brings this under the heading of manoeuvre.
19. b5 Qc7 20. fxg5 hxg5 21. Nxe4 fxe4 22. Qd2
Qd8
Bob thought exchanging rooks was better. The exchanges have left
Black facing pressure against Pawns on both sides of the board
(g5,b7)
23. Rxf8 Kxf8 24. bxc6 bxc6 25. Bh3
[25. Rb7 Nd7+/- ]
25… Na6 26. Bg4 Nc7 27. Rb7 Bf7 28. Qc1 Kg8 29.
Qf1 Nb5 30. Qh3
The light squares are weaker than the dark.
[30. Bxg5 – lay unnoticed until 1992!]
30… Na3 31. Bf5
31… Qa5 32. Qh7+ Kf8 33. Qh8+ Bg8 34. Qh6+ Ke8 35. Qxc6+
Kf8 36. Qh6+ Ke8 37. Rxe7+ Kxe7 38. Bxg5+ Ke8 39. Qc6+
[39. Qc6+ Kf8 40. Qd6+ Kg7 41. Qf6#]
1-0
Manoeuvring in club play: as a
phase in a half-open game.
Williams,SK (1990) – Regis,D.
(1935) [A36] East Devon #3, 1994
1. c4 g6 2. Nc3 Bg7 3. g3 c5 4. Bg2 Nc6 5. e4 d6 6. Nge2
Nf6 7. O-O O-O 8. d3 Ne8
[8… Bd7]
9. Be3 Nd4 10. Rb1 a5 11. a3 Nc7 12. b4 axb4 13.
axb4 Nxe2+ 14. Nxe2 Ne6 15. Qd2 Nd4 16. Nxd4 cxd4 17. Bh6 e5 18.
Bxg7 Kxg7 19. f4 f5
A half-open position in which White has better Pawns and greater
piece activity. White tries to improve his prospects further on
each side before trying to decide the issue – like the Capa-Kupchik
game.
20. exf5 Rxf5 21. Be4 Rf6 22. fxe5 dxe5 23. Rxf6
Qxf6 24. Rf1 Qe7 25. Qg2 Ra6 26. Bd5
White’s pawns on the Queen’s-side are more mobile than Black’s in
the centre – the game now stops being one of unforced manoeuvre and
reverts to the familiar pattern of competing plans. The finish is
still quite tricky, if you are interested.
26… Be6 27. c5 Bxd5 28. Qxd5 Ra3 29.
b5!?
[29. Rd1]
29… Rxd3 30. Ra1 Rc3 31. c6 bxc6 32.
bxc6
32… Qg5
[32… d3? 33. Qd7 Qxd7 34. cxd7 d2 35. d8=Q Rc1+ 36.
Kf2 d1=Q 37. Qxd1+- ]
[32… Qc5!? 33. Qd7+ Kf6]
[32… Rc5! 33. Qd7 Qxd7 34. cxd7 Rd5 35. Ra5 Rxd7
36. Rxe5-+ ]
33. Rf1 Kh6
[33… Qe3+ 34. Rf2 Kh1 transposes to game]
34. Kh1 Rc1?
[34… Qe3! 35. Qd7 Qe4+ -+ ]
35. Qf7 e4 36. c7 Rxf1+ 37. Qxf1 Qc5 38. Qh3+
1-0
Manoeuvring in club play: with
extra space (I)
Regis,D. – Richard Dixon
(CORR_92/93) [B36] Devon vs. glos. CC, 1993
1. c4 g6 2. g3 Bg7 3. Bg2 Nf6 4. Nc3 O-O 5. e4
( new for me this season: I played the e3/Nge2/d4 plan
for years but recently fancied this, which looked more enterprising
)
5… d6 6. Nge2 c5 7. O-O Nc6 8. d3 Ne8 9. Be3
Nc7
( ?! in the books )
10. d4 ! cxd4 11. Nxd4 Ne6 12. Nde2
Ne5
! TN – threatens c4 and e3 via g4
[12… Nc5 13. Rc1 Be6 14. b3 Qa5 15. Qd2 Rac8 16.
Nf4 +- and black is in trouble: Barcza-Szilagyi 1967]
13. b3 b6
( transposing to a hedgehog formation looks better than
Szilagyi’s setup )
14. h3 Bb7 15. Rc1 Nc5 16. f4
( now I thought I was on the right lines: turn that space
into attack, as in a Portisch game)
16… Ned7 17. g4 a5 18. Ng3 Bc6 19.
a4
(what is black’s plan now ? the real challenge of course
is to find white’s plan! The wQ is badly tied to b3 and d3)
19… Rb8 20. Rf2
20… Qc8 21. Nd5 Re8 22. g5 Qb7 23. f5 Bf8 24.
Bd4
( 24 f6 simply takes a good square away from the
knight. )
24… Ne5 25. Rc3 Bg7
26. f6 Bf8 27. fxe7 Bxe7 28. h4 Bxd5 29. exd5 Bf8 30. Rf4
Bg7 31. Qf1
( both sides have consolidated after some white
initiative and I thought we’re now in for a phase of manoeuvring
)
31… Re7 32. Bxc5
[32. Rf6!!?? but declining leaves White
committed]
32… bxc5 33. Ne4
( This move cheered me up a little; I felt I had some chances for
the initiative )
33… Rd8 34. Nf6+ Bxf6!? 35. gxf6 Ree8 36. Re4
h5 37. Rce3 Kh7 38. Qf4
( I couldn’t see a way of winning after what I thought was the best
line, …Qb4, but I didn’t have to lose either. White can try to
contrive a lever with Bh3, Qg5 and now Bf5, but …Qb4 and …Rg8
(forces Kh1) slows or stops it)
38… Qc8 39. Bh3 Qb8
( if the knight moves don’t work this is probably best
)
40. Kh1 Qc7?! 41. Bf5 Qb8
( I immediately thought this was too resigned:
41…Rh8)
42. Qg5
( mates in six )
1-0
Manoeuvring in club play: with
extra space (II)
Regis,D – Tunks,D (1935) [B06]
Portsmouth Open #6, 1984
1. e4 g6 2. d4 Bg7 3. Nc3 d6 4. Nge2 Nd7 5. g3 e5
[too early]
6. Bg2 Ne7
[doesn’t look quite right here]
7. O-O O-O 8. Bg5 f6 9. Be3 Kh8 10. Qd2 Ng8 11.
f4 c6 12. Rf2
[12. a4]
12… Qe7 13. Raf1
Black has only defensive plans available – White tries to keep it
that way.
13… Nb6 14. b3 Be6 15. a4 Rad8 16. a5 Nc8 17.
d5 Bf7 18. Bh3 c5 19. f5 g5 20. Ra1 Be8 21. Na4
White probes on each side – the key manoeuvring idea.
21… Qc7 22. Bf1 h5 23. Nec3 a6 24. Ne2 Nh6 25.
h3 Rg8 26. b4 cxb4 27. Qxb4 Bb5 28. Nec3 Bxf1
[I’m not sure who this exchange favours – I thought
White at the time]
29. Kxf1 Rd7 30. Nb6 Nxb6 31. Bxb6 Qb8 32. Ra3
Bf8 33. Na4 Be7 34. Rc3 Kg7 35. Qc4 Bd8
White doesn’t quite know what to do with the Queen’s side…
36. Qe2
Tacking about from side to side is the hallmark of
manoeuvre
36… Rh8?!
Black manfully gives up a Pawn but White has been looking
to get in on the light squares… the pattern of the game looks
like the infiltration of the Lasker-Tylor game rather than the
tacking about of Petrosian.
[36… g4! 37. Rb3!? / 37. Rh2!? when there is still
a lot of play left for both sides]
37. Qxh5 g4 38. Bxd8 Qxd8 39. Nb6
Rc7
[39… Rf7 40. Rc8]
40. Rxc7+ Qxc7 41. Qg6+ Kf8 42. Qxf6+ Nf7 43.
Qe6
1-0
(Black said he was relieved when it all ended!)
idea was 44 Nd7+ and 45 Qg6 mate;
43 … Qe7; 44 h4!
[43. Qe6]
43… Rh6
[43… Qe7 44. h4 Nd8 45. Nc8 Nxe6 46. fxe6+ Ke8 47.
Nxe7 Kxe7 48. Rf7+ Ke8 +-]
44. Nd7+ Kg8 45. Qe8+ Kh7
[45… Kg7 46. f6+ Rxf6
[46… Kg6 47. Nf8+ Kh5 48. Rf5#]
47. Qf8+ Kh7 48. Nxf6+ Kg6 49. Qg8+ Kh6 50. Qh7+ Kg5
51. h4#]
46. Qxf7+ Kh8 47. f6 Rxf6 48. Qxf6+ Kh7 49. Qf7+ Kh8 50.
Qh5+ Kg7 51. Rf7+ Kg8 52. Nf6#
1-0
Choosing an opening repertoire
The Bottom Line {D}
![[cool cat says:]](https://exeterchessclub.org.uk/chessx/cool_cat.gif)
“A knowledge of tactics is the foundation of positional play. This is a rule which has stood its test in chess history and one which we cannot impress forcibly enough upon the young chess player.
“A beginner should avoid the Queen’s Gambit and French Defence and play open games instead! While he may not win as many games at first, he will in the long run be amply compensated by acquiring a thorough knowledge of the game”
– RICHARD RETI, Masters of the Chessboard
See also a recent post.
Comments on openings {C}
(following ECO codes)
- A: Irregular openings
- – 1. Lines without 1. e4, 1. d4;
- – 1. d4 Lines without 1 …d5, 1… Nf6;
- – 1. d4 Nf6 2. Lines without 2. c4;
- – 1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 Lines without 2… e6, 2… g6
Dr.Dave’s advice: Leave these alone except to work out what to do if someone played them against you. Mostly these are good for surprise value, but you can only surprise me once, and next time I’ll be ready for you. The main lines are the main lines because they are the strongest openings. Avoid theory, sure, but don’t handicap yourself.
The honorable exception to this among these openings are the lines of the Reti/English complex (1.Nf3/1.c4), which are slow but deep and strong. I’d still leave them alone until you are sure you know what you are doing. Be prepared to defend against them as Black: I recommend using a Dutch formation. - B: Semi-open games
- – 1. e4 Lines without 1… c5, 1… e6, 1… e5
- – 1. e4 c5
Dr.Dave’s advice: Play these second after you have got the hang of C: Open Games. This section includes some of the most exciting and important openings in chess, like the Sicilian, but they are not IMHO for beginners. - C: Open Games (and French Defence)
- – 1. e4 e6
- – 1. e4 e5
Dr.Dave’s advice: Play these first – this is what Reti advises above. The anomaly is the French – a half-open defence that ECO groups under C. Despite Reti’s admonition, I would not object to a relative beginner playing the French – it is a solid defence in which most of the ideas are easy to understand, and Black’s pieces often come to similar squares in each line. - D: Closed Games (and Grunfeld Defence, a semi-closed line)
- – 1. d4 d5
- – 1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 + d7-d5
Dr.Dave’s advice: Play these last of all; they are among the most demanding of openings. They are slow, which may lead you to think they are safer, but things can go horribly wrong for the novice and there is no point trying these until you are sure you know what you are doing – say, that you are familiar with the material in the ‘Strategy’ section of the canon. There are one or two ‘open’ lines that start 1.d4, like the Colle System. - E: Semi-Closed Games
- – 1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6
- – 1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 ‘ d7-d5
Dr.Dave’s advice: Play these third; they are, like the semi-open defences, very tasty, but rather strong meat for inexperienced players. You will need to know what to play against 1.d4 as Black, particularly as you improve, and my recommendation is to adopt a counter-attacking line like the Budapest Gambit or the Stonewall Variation of the Dutch Defence
Putting together a repertoire of variations {B}
What do you hope for when you play 1.e4? Which opening you choose after 1…e5 will depend on what sort of player you are. What I’d like to do below is suggest how you might proceed if Black doesn’t reply 1…e5. First you need to choose a basic plan of campaign:
- Fast attacking game with pieces
- Slower attacking game with f4
- King’s Indian Attack with g3
- Fast attacking game with pieces
- Giuoco Piano (my main recommendation for junior players) or
- Scotch Game
- Slower attacking game with f4
- Vienna Gambit or
- King’s Gambit)
- King’s Indian Attack with g3
- KIA with (1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. g3 or
- in the Vienna (1. e4 e5 2. Nc3 Nc6 3. g3)
Which sort of player are you? Larry Evans used to say, The Crunch or the Crouch? Hopefully, one of these set-ups appeals to you more than the others: the brisk, the direct, or the more flexible?
[Sadly, the KIA lines haven’t a lot of force and are not very good lines to adopt against 1…e5.]
But the point is, how well does your chosen repertoire fit together? Once I used to play the following lines, together with the King’s Gambit:
- Alekhin (1. e4 Nf6)
- Chase variation (1. e4 Nf6 2. e5 Nd5 3. c4 Nb6 4. c5 Nd5 5. Bc4 e6 6. Nc3)
- Caro-Kann (1. e4 c6)
- Panov-Botvinnik Attack (1. e4 c6 2. d4 d5 3. exd5 cxd5 4. c4)
- French (1. e4 e6)
- Advance Variation (1. e4 e6 2. d4 d5 3. e5)
- Pirc/Modern (1. e4 …d6/…g6)
- King’s Indian Attack (1. e4 d6 2. d4 Nf6 3. Nc3 g6 4. Nge2 and 5. g3, 6. Bg2)
- Sicilian (1. e4 c5)
- Chamaeleon Variation (1. e4 c5 2. Nc3 … 3. Nge2)
This was an awful lot to keep track of, but more importantly, it didn’t really combine well. Against the Alekhin I played fast, against the Caro I played medium, against the French and Pirc I played slow; the Panov line is main-line established theory with lots to learn and keep track of, the Chamaeleon is a new and obscure line where you have to think at the board.
Now, I’m sure a better idea, and the right idea, is to play similarly against each opening. For example, if you like gambits and play the Danish Gambit against 1…e5, try and find a gambit against the lot….
- Alekhin (1. e4 Nf6)
- (1. e4 Nf6 2. Bc4 Nxe4 3. Bxf7+ Kxf7 4. Qh5+ g6 5. Qd5+)
or Blackmar-Diemer (1. e4 Nf6 2. Nc3 d5 3. d4 dxe4 4. f3) - Caro-Kann (1. e4 c6)
- Fantasie Variation (1. e4 c6 2. d4 d5 3. f3 e5 4. Nf3 exd4 5. Bc4)
- French (1. e4 e6)
- Variation, Milner Barry Gambit (1. e4 e6 2. d4 d5 3. e5 c5 4. c3 Nc6 5. Nf3 Qb6 6. Bd3 cxd4 7. cxd4 Bd7 8. O-O Nxd4 9.Nxd4/9.Ng5!?)
- Pirc/Modern (1. e4 …d6/…g6)
- I don’t know any gambits for White in the Pirc but against the Modern you can try… the Monkey’s Bum! (1. e4 g6 2. Bc4 Bg7 3. Qf3 e6 4. d4 Bg7 5. Nc3 Bxd4) [An invention of Streatham Chess Club, who showed it to one member who said “Well, if that works, I’m a monkey’s bum!”]
- Sicilian (1. e4 c5)
- Morra Gambit: (1. e4 c5 2. d4 cxd4 3. c3 dxc3 4. Nxc3 or 3. … Nf6 4. e5 Nd5 5. Bc4 Qc7 6. Qe2)
I don’t think the Monkey’s Bum is really any good (2…d6), but at least we’re thinking along the right lines, even if this isn’t the repertoire we settle on.
“ A 1500 player will lose a pawn anyway about every 15 moves, so you might as well invest a pawn to sharpen your tactics.“
— Tim Sawyer
Here’s a repertoire based on pawn advances and space advantages:
- Alekhin (1. e4 Nf6)
- Four pawns variation (1. e4 Nf6 2. e5 Nd5 3. c4 Nb6 4. d4 d6 5. f4 )
- Caro-Kann (1. e4 c6)
- Advance Variation (1. e4 c6 2. d4 d5 3. e5)
- French (1. e4 e6)
- Advance Variation (1. e4 e6 2. d4 d5 3. e5)
- Pirc/Modern (1. e4 … …d6/…g6)
- Three Pawns Attack (1. e4 d6 2. d4 Nf6 3. c3 g6 4. f4)
- Sicilian (1. e4 c5)
- Big Clamp Variation (1. e4 c5 2. d3 (…) 3. f4)
Now, what sort of player are you? Whether you like lively piece attacks, slow pawn advances that you can use to force open lines or more flexible systems, there is a repertoire here for you.
Note: I simply haven’t the courage to take on a repertoire which includes the Open Sicilian , and my experience of playing the Black side of the Sicilian is that not many White club players have either! So I’ll leave those lines to you and any time you have to do your own research. I have a feeling it’s something you come to study as your chess improves. Mine has yet to improve enough…
Let’s have a look at some variations that fit together.
Piece attack
- Alekhin (1. e4 Nf6) (1. e4 Nf6 2. Nc3 d5 3.exd5 Nxd5 4. Bc4)
- Caro-Kann (1. e4 c6)
- Main line with 7.Nh3 (1. e4 c6 2. d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4. Nxe4 Bf5 5. Ng3 Bg6 6. h4 h6 7. Nh3)
- French (1. e4 e6)
- Alekhin-Chatard Attack (1. e4 e6 2. d4 d5 3.Nc3 Nf6 4. Bg5 Be7 5. e5 Nfd7 6. h4
- Pirc/Modern (1. e4 …d6/…g6)
- Austrian Attack (1. e4 d6 2. d4 Nf6 3.Nc3 g6 4. f4)
- Sicilian (1. e4 c5) Closed: without d4
- Rossolimo Variation (1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 and 3.Be2 (idea 4. c3) or 3. Bb5(+))
Slow attack with f4
- Alekhin (1. e4 Nf6)
- (Irregular) (1. e4 Nf6 2. d3 and 3.f4 (sadly, this line has no real force and is not a very good line to adopt)
- Caro-Kann (1. e4 c6)
- (Irregular) (1. e4 c6 2. Nc3 d5 3.f4 (a line of the Dunst opening, (1.Nc3)
- French (1. e4 e6)
- (Irregular) (1. e4 e6 2. Nc3 d5 3.f4 (a line of the Dunst opening, (1.Nc3)
- Pirc/Modern (1. e4 …d6/…g6)
- (1. e4 d6 2. d4 Nf6 3.Nc3 g6 4. f4 (Austrian Attack)
- Sicilian (1. e4 c5) Closed: without d4
- (1. e4 c5 2. f4 (Grand Prix Attack) or
- (1. e4 c5 2. Nc3 Nc6 3. g3 with 4. Bg2, 5. d3, 6. f4 (Closed Variation)
King’s Indian Attack
- Alekhin (1. e4 Nf6)
- KIA vs. Alekhin (1. e4 Nf6 2. d3 and 3.g3/Bg2 (sadly, this line has no real force and is not a very good line to adopt)
- Caro-Kann (1. e4 c6)
- KIA vs. Caro-Kann (1. e4 c6 2. d3 d5 3.Nd2)
- French (1. e4 e6)
- KIA vs. French(1. e4 e6 2. d3 d5 3.Nd2)
- Pirc/Modern (1. e4 …d6/…g6)
- King Fianchetto Variation(1. e4 d6 2. d4 Nf6 3.Nc3 g6 4. Nge2 and 5. g3, 6. Bg2)
- Sicilian (1. e4 c5) Closed: without d4
- KIA vs. Sicilian(1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 and 3.g3)
There are some wrinkles to be ironed out of these suggestions, but I hope they set you thinking in the right way.
Playing Black and White {A}
It makes a lot of sense for your Black repertoire to be in keeping with your White one.
The easy way out is to play Black openings in reverse, of which the commonest and best of these is probably the King’s Indian Attack. But psychologically it’s not the same and practically it’s not as effective. (See remarks on the Stonewall Dutch ).
The right idea I think is to play openings which have the same ideas – either the same structure or at least the same attitude. So if you play the English with g3, a line which is structurally similar is the Hyper-Accelerated Fianchetto variation of the Sicilian (1. e4 c5, 2. Nf3 g6), and against 1.d4 the same ‘square game’ can be had in the Nimzo-Indian, although this is structurally very different. There are king’s fianchetto lines in most openings, and strongpoint lines too.
Some suggestions if you are…
- An attacking player who plays 1. e4, try:
- Against 1.d4: Budapest Gambit, Benoni, Grunfeld
- Against 1.e4: Open Lopez, Petroff, Sicilian Dragon (with …g6)
- An attacking player who plays 1. d4/2.c4, try:
- Against 1.d4: King’s Indian, Dutch
- Against 1.e4: French Winawer, Closed Lopez,
- An attacking player who plays the Colle System, try:
- Against 1.d4: Semi-Slav Defence or Cambridge Springs (same structure as Colle)
- Against 1.e4: Sicilian Paulsen (with …e6)
- A solid player who plays 1. e4, try:
- Against 1.d4: Nimzo-Indian, QGD, Tarrasch Defence, Old Indian
- Against 1.e4: Petroff, Philidor (structure like Old Indian)
- A solid player who plays 1. d4, try:
- Against 1.d4: Slav, Queen’s Gambit Orthodox Defence.
- Against 1.e4: Caro-Kann, Classical French
I would be interested to know about other’s preferences. I stuck to the same opening repertoire for the best part of ten years: English Opening with g3 as White, Sicilian and English Defence as Black – all aiming to hit at an opponent’s centre, and of course with a strong structural link between the English and Sicilian. The English Defence “feels” more like the English Opening to me than the Queen’s-side defence which is structurally most similar, the Benoni.
I think my current recommendation for myself [which must also be true for you 🙂 ], is two fold:
- Be prepared to play any sort of position. To be prepared to play any sort of position [if not any opening] for either colour is the ideal; you may always have strengths and weaknesses, but avoiding certain sorts of positions altogether seems unhealthy. Try them out in friendly and blitz games, and see if the rest of your game improves.
- Be prepared to play main lines. They are the main lines because they are the best moves, and you may be surprised to find how many players will avoid a main line ‘on principle’ – perhaps choosing a playable alternative, but often an inferior one.
I find that the combination of the two is quite liberating, at least in friendly games, and I’m sure I’m a more rounded player for it. I haven’t quite had the courage (or foolhardiness) to walk into my opponent’s main lines when titles are at stake, you are going to get my favourite defence, but it’s quite satisfying to invite the club gambiteer to play a gambit and then outplay them in their own game.
New starting formations (Tabi’at)
Introduction: Tabi’at
The old game of chess
Modern (Western) chess originated from the Persian game
of shatranj , itself a derivation of the very similar
Hindu game of chaturanga . The rules of shatranj
(no double Pawn moves or castling, weaker Queen ( firzan )
and Bishop ( fil
made it a slow game with a deferred clash of forces. This
encouraged the development of tabi’a (starting
formations), a recognised arrangement of forces which could be
aimed for almost regardless of the opponent’s play. You will find
written tabi’a tabia and tabiya , the
plural is tabi’at.
Hooper and Whyld in their excellent Oxford Companion
to Chess give a selection of tabi’at.
mujannah (=”flank opening”)
N.B. the pieces on c1 and f1 are fils , the
piece on d1 a firzan
sayyal (=”torrent”)
A King’s-side attacking formation.
Muwashshah (=”richly girdled”)
In practice, say H&W, the opponent would never allow the
completion of this strong attacking formation.
Some players have tried to interpret old tabi’at
in modern chess, for example the mujannah can arise from
Bird’s opening. This is unnecessary, for modern chess has its own
tabi’at . The Soviet literature is quite rich in uses of
the term in modern chess.
Modern
Tabi’at
Old Stodge
I am uncomfortably aware that for some players,
especially juniors, this is a tabi’a . I wouldn’t mind so
much if I though they had the slightest idea what to do when they
got this far.
King’s Indian
There are strong arguments for supposing this to be a
modern tabi’a . Both sides set up their formations without
any great account being taken of the moves of their opponent, and
from here a great many alternative plans are available to each
player.
Sicilian Taimanov
The veteran Russian GM Mark Taimanov is just one author
who uses the term in his writings.
“This is one of the typical tabias (
sic ) of the Taimanov system. As in many similar variations,
this position is assessed as favourable for White.
“White has an advantage in the centre, harmonious
development, pressure along the d-file and a wide choice of plans
to gain the initiative. Black is slightly restricted (at least in
the centre), and he has to spend time (at least three tempi) on
development.
“Nevertheless, many practical examples show that
Black’s position is quite viable. What is the secret?
“First of all, Black’s position is invulnerable as
yet, because his pieces control the whole defensive region, so it
is difficult to approach his position (the only worrying aspect is
the weakened d6 square). Besides, Black has good opportunities of
his own in prospect. For instance, if he manages to arrange his
pieces freely according to the scheme …Qc7, …Rfd8, …Bb7,
…Rac8, then he can count on promising counterplay on the
Queen’s-side connected with …Nc6-a5-c4, and, in some cases, on
pressure along the a8-h1 diagonal. That is why the theoretical
debate concerned with this variation has already been going on for
several decades, deepening the understanding of the position for
both sides, but not coming to a final conclusion.
“Obviously, White’s attempts to gain the initiative
can be linked either to the weak d6 square (12. Bf4), or to active
play in the centre and King’s-side (11.f4 or 11.Rad1,
etc.).”
The book gives two games:
11.Rad1 [ or 11.f4 Bb7 12.e5!? Na5!?
13.Bd3 Rc8 14.Ne2 Nc4 15.Bxc4 Rxc4 16.Rad1 Qc8 (Black is better)
17.c3 b4!? 18.Rc1 0-0 19.b3 bxc3 20.Nxc3 Rc6 21.Na4 Ba3 22.Rxc6
Qxc6 23.Nb6 d6!? 24.exd6 Bxd6 25.Rc1 Qe4 26.Rc4 Qb1+ 27.Rc1 Qg6
28.Qc2 Be4 29.Qf2 Rd8!? 30.Rd1 Bc7 31.Rxd8+ Bxd8 32.Nc4 Bd5 33.Nd2
h6 34.h3 a5 35.Nf3 Bc7 36.Nd4 Qb1+ 37.Kh2 g5!? 38.Nb5 Bxf4+ 39.Bxf4
gxf4 40.Nc3 Qf5… Unzicker,W-Taimanov,M/Wijk aan Zee 1981/0-1
(53)] 11…0-0 12.Bf4 Qa5!? 13.a3 Rd8 14.Bd6 Bb7
15.Bxe7 Nxe7 16.Qg5!? f6 17.Qc5 Nc6 18.Rd6 Rac8 19.Rfd1 Nb8 20.Qe3
Rc6 21.R6d4 Qb6 22.Qh3 Qc5 23.Nd5!! exd5 24.exd5 Rd6 25.c4! bxc4
26.Rxc4 Qa5 27.Rh4! h6 28.Rxh6! Rxd5 29.Rh8+ Kf7 30.Bc4 Ke7 31.Bxd5
Bxd5 32.Rxd8 Nc6 33.Re8+! 1-0 Sznapik,A – Donchev,D [ or B46]
Prague (11), 1985
French Tarrasch
There are two parallel but over-lapping variations of the
main line 3…Nf6 French Tarrasch.
1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nd2 Nf6 4.e5 Nfd7 5.Bd3 c5 6.c3
Nc6 7.Ne2 cxd4 8.cxd4 f6 9.exf6 Nxf6 10. Nf3 Bd6
1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nd2 Nf6 4.e5 Nfd7 5.Bd3 c5 6.c3
Nc6 7.Ne2 cxd4 8.cxd4 Qb6 9.Nf3 f6 10.exf6 Nxf6 11.0-0
Bd6
Tony D strongly recommends having this type of position
in your repertoire, and being able to play it for both sides. The
point is, there are some very common Pawn formations to be mastered
here, and you can read a lot of the plans right off the Pawn
structure. However, the Pawn structure is not fixed.
A French root and some branches
The classic French structure arises after the Pawn
moves:
e4 d4 e5
…e6 …d5
As both sides contest the centre, this fundamental
structure is altered.
The basic French centre
There are some themes here that re-appear in many
variations below.
Black has a poor light-squared Bishop, at least for the
moment. Black would like to exchange light-squared Bishops, White
would like to exchange dark-squared Bishops.
White has more space and a potential King’s-side
attacking position.
Black, who has the move, will attempt to attack the chain
with Pawn moves like:
…c5 …f6 …cxd4 …fxe5 …f5
Black will continue to put pressure on d4 and can extend
the scope of the attack to c3 by advancing the b-Pawn. Nimzovitch,
who studied the Advance Variation, always recommended the attack on
the base of the Pawn chain. Since Nimzo, and since the development
of the Tarrasch variation, we see much more virtue in attacking the
head. In fact, we see a lot more …f6s in the Advance these
days.
White will defend or change the centre with Pawn moves
like:
c3 f4 dxc4 exf6
White must try to make the space or the attack tell
without allowing Black to destroy the centre and without getting in
a tangle. Black will use obvious piece moves like …Nc6 and …Qb6
to put pressure on the Pawn centre. The immediate Pawn attack,
around which Black’s development in this line revolves, is:
…c5
[ or Black can try and do without this move in other
lines of the French (Guimard).]
c3
French tension centre
White usually tries to hold the centre initially with
c2-c3.
After an exchange of Pawns:
…cxd4, cxd4
French centre with open c-file
The exchange relieves a certain amount of central
pressure, but brings the base of White’s Pawn chain a little nearer
Black’s pieces.
The open c-file allows a variety of new possibilities for
Black, most notably use of the b4 square (…Bb4+, …Nb4).
…f6, exf6 Nxf6
Two weaknesses
This is the key formation we will discuss in more detail
below. The two Pawn weaknesses alluded to are Pe6 and Pd4; the Pe6
is weaker, being exposed on a half-open file, and White has the
advantage of being able to play on e5 as well as e6. However, Black
can attack d4 just as easily as White can attack e6, and can even
hope to get in the dynamic …e6-e5:
After an exchange of Pawns (White naturally does not want
to allow …e5-e4) we develop the:
IPQP centre
Isolated passed Queen Pawn.
White should behave the same as in an IQP centre,
blockading the Pawn and holding Black to its defence, looking for
second weaknesses; Black should look for attacking chances on the
open lines, and chances to advance the passed Pawn.
dxc5
French strongpoint centre.
White gives up d4, the better to hang on to the single
point e5. Also, this exchange may wrong-foot Black by requiring a
recapture on c5.
Black will typically try to destroy this centre with
…f6
With the head of the White Pawn chain so close to hand
and under such pressure, it is hard for White to defend it and we
normally see an exchange.
This leads to the next central formation:
Isolated Pawn couple
This is quite a stable formation which can dominate
planning in the early middle game. Black has a concrete weakness on
e6 and a weak square on e5. This is why White is so happy to
exchange: a lot of the cramp exerted by the previous structure
still persists and White now has open lines against plain
targets.
Black would ideally like to achieve …e6-e5, dominating
the centre. White, not unnaturally, would prefer to restrain this,
and so moves like Re1, Ne5, Bf4 and so on are all key. White would
perhaps also like to achieve f2-f4, but may need to move the Nf3 to
do so.
You very often get a similar centre with f4 from the main
line of the Classical Variation:
French very tense centre.
From the Tarrasc with 5.f4:
This centre could resolve into almost any other
formation! In fact the tension may be enhanced by a Black
…g7-g5.
Some specifics
We’ll look in detail at the “Two weaknesses” formation as
seen in the …Nf6 French Tarrasch.
The ideas and the moves
This French Tarrasch tabi’a is a complex formation with a
nearly full complement of pieces and Pawns and a wide variety of
plans available to each side. We can see in each of the games below
a rich interplay of desirable strategic ideas tempered by tactical
realities. It is even impossible to generalise on which wing each
player will attack: Black has several King’s-side attacking ideas
like …Ng4, …Bxh2 and …Rxf3
To look at specifics, I’ll choose the less common …Qb6
line.
This is because:
- The more common Qc7 line is a jungle (although we can
transpose) - The more common line Qc7 can be avoided by the murky 8.Nf4
variation, winning the exchange. - This less common Qb6 line has a superb how-to-play guide in
John Watson’s book.
MacDonald and Harley note that the Qb6 often comes back
to Qc7, helping protect the King. But this is no waste of time
because typically White has had to spend time coping with the
attacks on b2 and d4, and may have settled for the passive Be3.
They also note that Farago always plays …Qb6 and is never in any
trouble!
This is the position after Black’s move 11, with White to
move.
The Black Queen attacks Pawns on b2 and d4, restricting
White’s development. If the Bc1 moves, the b2 Pawn is hanging. If
either Knight moves, the d4 Pawn isn’t really hanging, because
after …Nxd4; Nxd4 Qxd4, the Bd3 can play away with check, winning
the Qd4. But the Ne2 really will move one day, and the Black King
may not always be on a checkable square. In fact, one common idea
is for Black to play …Kh8, threatening the d-Pawn. After
castling, Black’s Rook has occupied the half-open f-file, with new
ideas like …Rf8xf3 or xf2. Black’s pieces are all quite active
and White has yet to untangle; White is no position yet to exploit
the static weakness of the Pe6 and the temporarily poor Bc8. Black
has some unobvious moves like …Nb4 (hitting d3/c2) and …Ng4
(hitting ../e5), or manoeuvring either Knight to f5
(…Nc6-e7-f5/ …Nf6-g4-h6-f5) to keep White from settling into a
sound attacking position, and some enterprising ideas like
…Bc8-d7-e8-h5 to activate the Bishop.
What are White’s choices here? Almost every legal move
has been played!
- 12.Rb1 – idea: protect the b-Pawn and play Bf4
- 12.Ng3 – idea: control ../h5, block …Bd6xh2
- 12.Bg5?! – ideas: gambit b-Pawn, play Bg5-h4-g3 to swap
dark-squared Bishops - 12.a3 – ideas: advance b-Pawn to b4, harass Nc6, occupy c5;
prevent …Nb4 (maybe organise Bc2/Qd3) (development lagging
though) - 12.Re1 – idea: pressure on e5/Pe6/Ke8, but weakens f2; often
transposes below - 12.Qd2 – idea: Qg5
- 12.Bf4 – ideas: exchange Bd6, gambit Pb2; there is sometimes
the trick …Bxf4; Nxf4, Nxd4!; Nxd4, e5! - 12.b3 – ideas: protect b-Pawn, move Bc1 to f4 (or b2)
- 12.Nf4 – idea: hit e6. A critical try although Black can gambit
the Pe6 - 12.Bd2 – idea: to c3 securing b2 and d4; slow
- 12.Nc3 – the flexible main line, committing White to nothing
(although giving up Bf4). It adds some new ideas like Nc3-b5, or,
after …a6, Nc3-a4-b6
This actually doesn’t exhaust the ideas, just the moves!
One more idea is Ra1-c1xc6, undermining e5.
How might the game go after 12. Nc3?
Tseitlin,M-Beake,B/Hastings Challengers 1990/EXP
21/1-0 (57)
This key game was given in John Watson’s book, although
he safeguards the Black pieces to a B Becke. This continues a fine
tradition of mis-attributing key games by Exeter players, after BCO
gave a critical Petroff variation played by HV Mallison (against
Hugh Alexander) as being essayed by Mattison, the Latvian
problemist.
[We spent some time looking at the variations in Watson’s
book]
I find all this detail daunting, but Tony D says the
detail is not so important as the ideas – there are a lot of games,
but not so much theory! The idea being that Black can solve
problems over the board. On the other hand, Watson says “Theory has
exploded!”. Perhaps the real answer is, ideas first, theory second.
There are lots of ideas in “non-theoretical” openings which are not
widely known, and players get by in blissful ignorance because
their opponents don’t know the theory either! For examples, look at
the Beating the
Anti-Indians document.
Your comments and experiences are welcome!
P.S. Other French centres
If White avoids e4-e5 we get other centres; while the
Pawn is on e4 either White or Black can exchange, which lead to
very different types of game.
Bibliography:
Hooper, David & Whyld, Ken. Oxford Companion
to Chess (2nd edition). O.U.P.
Taimanov, Mark. The Sicilian Taimanov
System . Batsford
Watson, John. Play the French (revised
third edition). Cadogan.
MacDonald, Neil & Harley, Andrew. Mastering
the French . Batsford.