Category Archives: Class C

Opposite-coloured Bishops in the endgame and the middle-game

Posted on by

by Phil Adams, Three Cs, Oldham (=Children’s Chess Club)

OCBs in the endgame

(1)

 

-------------------
|-+-r-+-k|
|+-+-+pp-|
|p+b+-+-p|
|+-+n+-+-|
|-+-B-+-+|
|+-N-+-+P|
|PP-R-PP+|
|+-+-+-K-|
-------------------

  Black is a pawn down. Should he keep pieces on and try to get counterplay, or bring about exchanges?

1…Nxc3! 2.Bxc3 [2.bxc3 would be better; White has better chances of using his extra pawn if he keeps rooks on.] 2…Rxd2! 3.Bxd2 Kg8

 

-------------------
|-+-+-+k+|
|+-+-+pp-|
|p+b+-+-p|
|+-+-+-+-|
|-+-+-+-+|
|+-+-+-+P|
|PP-B-PP+|
|+-+-+-K-|
-------------------

  In an opposite-coloured bishops ending, one pawn up is normally not enough to win, unless there are other advantages. Here Black can draw easily.

4.Bc3 f6 5.f3 Kf7 6.Kf2 Ke6 7.Ke3 Kd5 8.Bb4 g6 9.Bf8 h5 10.Be7 f5 11.Bd8 Bb5 12.h4 Bf1 13.g3 Bb5 14.b3 Ke5 15.Bc7+ Kd5 16.Kf4 Ke6 17.Kg5 Kf7 18.a4 Bc6 19.Kf4 Ke6 It has become clear that White cannot make progress.

(2)

 

-------------------
|-+-k-+-+|
|+-+-+-+-|
|-+-PP+-+|
|+-+K+-+-|
|-+-+-+-b|
|+-+B+-+-|
|-+-+-+-+|
|+-+-+-+-|
-------------------

  With a two pawn advantage in an opposite bishops ending, the winning chances are much better.

  When the two extra pawns are connected, the main points to remember are:

  a) to have any chance of a draw the weaker side’s king must be in front of the pawns;

  b) the pawns usually win if they can reach the sixth rank; with the pawns further back, the weaker side has good chances of a draw.

1.Bb5 Bf6 2.Ke4 The plan is simple; get the king to f7 and push the e-pawn. 2…Bg5 3.Kf5 Bh4 4.Kg6 Black is in zugzwang; the white king does not even have to get to f7 now. 4…Kc8 5.e7 +-

(3)

 

-------------------
|-+-+-+-+|
|+-+k+-+-|
|-+-+-+-+|
|+-+PP-+b|
|-+-K-+-+|
|+-+-+-+-|
|-+-B-+-+|
|+-+-+-+-|
-------------------

  To draw, Black must prevent the pawns from reaching the 6th. The only way is to prepare to give up his bishop for both pawns by Bg4 or Bf7; does it make any difference which Black chooses? 1…Bf7! is a simple draw. The e-pawn cannot advance to e6 without the support of the white king, but the king cannot leave the defence of the d5 pawn, so White can make no progress. All Black has to do is shuffle his bishop between f7 and g8.

  [Note that 1…Bg4? is weaker, since White can manoeuvre with his king and achieve the advance e6, e.g.. 2.Ke4 and now A) 2…Bh3 3.Kf4 Ke7 (3…Bg2 4.e6+ Kd6 5.Bb4+ Kxd5 6.e7+-) 4.Bb4+ Kd7 5.Kg5 Bg2 6.e6+; B) 2…Ke7 3.Bb4+ Kd7 4.Kf4 Bh3 5.Kg5]

(4)

 

-------------------
|-+-+-+-+|
|+-bB+-+-|
|-+P+-+-+|
|+-+-+-k-|
|-+-+K+-+|
|+-+-+P+-|
|-+-+-+-+|
|+-+-+-+-|
-------------------

  In an opposite coloured bishops ending, two split pawns up, the ideas to remember are:

  a) the further apart the pawns are, the greater the chance of winning;

  b) only one file apart, the pawns cannot win;

  c) to win, the stronger side’s king must be able to break through to support the advance of one of the pawns; the defending side must try to prevent this.

1.Kd5 Kf6! 2.Bg4 Bg3! [2…Ke7? 3.Ke4 Kd6 4.Bd7 Ke7 5.f4 Kf6 6.f5 Ke7 7.Kd5 Kf6 8.Kc5 Ke7 9.Kb5 Kf6 10.Ka6 Ke7 11.Kb7 Kd8 12.f6 Bd6 13.f7] 3.Kc5 Bc7! 4.Kb5 Ke7 5.Ka6 Kd8 6.Kb7 Bf4 White can make no progress. =

  We have now covered the basics of opposite coloured bishops in the endgame, which, as we have seen, can often present drawing chances to the weaker side.

(Main sources: Averbakh/Mednis)

In the middlegame it is a different story altogether. In the middlegame opposite coloured bishops favour the side with the initiative.

(5) King,D – Menzel [C15]

  Junior game, 1979

 

1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Bb4 Opposite coloured bishop middlegames are quite frequent in the Winawer French. 4.Nge2 An interesting way of avoiding main lines, favoured by Lasker.

 

-------------------
|rnbqk+nr|
|ppp-+ppp|
|-+-+p+-+|
|+-+p+-+-|
|-b-PP+-+|
|+-N-+-+-|
|PPP+NPPP|
|R-BQKB+R|
-------------------

4…dxe4 5.a3 Bxc3+ [5…Be7 6.Nxe4] 6.Nxc3 Nc6 7.Bb5 Nge7 8.Bg5! f6 9.Be3 0-0 10.Qd2 [White is happy to sacrifice the pawn for development and attacking chances. If 10.Nxe4? f5! (threat f5-f4.)] 10…f5 11.0-0-0 a6 12.Bxc6 Nxc6 13.Bf4

 

-------------------
|r+bq-rk+|
|+pp-+-pp|
|p+n+p+-+|
|+-+-+p+-|
|-+-PpB-+|
|P-N-+-+-|
|-PPQ-PPP|
|+-KR+-+R|
-------------------

  [A typical position in this line; Black has decided to hold his extra pawn with f7-f5; the price he pays is a weakness on the dark squares. White must open a file so that his heavy pieces can combine with his powerful unopposed bishop.] 13…Ne7 [13…b5 14.d5! Ne7 15.dxe6 Bxe6 16.Qxd8 Rfxd8 17.Bxc7+/- (King.)] 14.f3! exf3 15.gxf3 Ng6? 16.Bg5 Qd6 17.h4! [In positions with opposite-sides castling, whoever gains the initiative is likely to win; exactly the same is true of middle-games with opposite-coloured bishops. In this position, therefore, attack is more important than material.] 17…Rf7 [Black takes precautions against the coming attack against g7.] 18.h5 Nf8 19.Bf4 Qd8 20.Rdg1 Nd7 21.Rg3 Nf6 22.Be5 [White probes the Black defenses. He knows he wants to attack g7 but he is not yet sure of his best attacking formation.] 22…Nd7 23.Bf4! [White realises that it is important to keep his powerful dark squared bishop] 23…Nf6 [Black is on the defensive and is happy to repeat moves.] 24.Bg5 [White tries another tack.] 24…Bd7 [Notice that this bishop is helpless to defend the dark squares that will soon be threatened.] 25.Rhg1 Kh8 [How can White strengthen his attack?] 26.Ne2! [Since Black is on the defensive, White realises that the knight is not needed on the queenside for defense; instead it can join in the attack on the king-side.] 26…c5 27.Nf4 h6 [27…Rc8 28.Ng6+! hxg6 (28…Kg8 29.Ne5+-) 29.hxg6 Rf8 30.Rh3+ Kg8 31.Rgh1] 28.Ng6+ Kh7 [28…Kg8 29.Bxh6 Nxh5 30.Rh3 Nf6 31.Bg5 Rf8 32.Rh8+ Kf7 33.Rxf8++-] 29.Ne5 Re7 [29…Rf8 30.Bxh6!] 30.Bxf6 gxf6 31.Qg2! [31.Qg2 Qf8 (31…fxe5 32.Rg7+ Kh8 33.Qg6; 31…Qh8 32.Ng6) 32.Ng6 Qf7 33.Nxe7 Qxe7 34.Rg7+] 1-0

 

  A few years later, a remarkably similar game was played by Britain’s first Grandmaster, Tony Miles.

 

(6) Miles,A – Reefschlager,H [C15]

  Porz/Koln, 1981

 

1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.Nge2 dxe4 5.a3 Bxc3+ 6.Nxc3 Nc6 7.Bb5 Nge7 8.Bg5! f6 9.Be3 0-0 10.Qd2 [White is happy to sacrifice the pawn for development and attacking chances.] 10…a6 11.Bxc6 Nxc6 12.0-0-0 f5?! [This is probably too greedy. Black weakens his black squares, which is just what White wants, since it makes his bishop a very dangerous piece – it has no opponent!] [12…b6 13.Nxe4 Bb7 14.Qd3] 13.Bg5 Qe8 14.f3! [White opens lines to enable his rooks to fire at the Black king.] 14…exf3 15.gxf3 Nd8 16.Rhg1!

 

-------------------
|r+bnqrk+|
|+pp-+-pp|
|p+-+p+-+|
|+-+-+pB-|
|-+-P-+-+|
|P-N-+P+-|
|-PPQ-+-P|
|+-KR+-R-|
-------------------

  [Simple chess; White intends to double rooks on the g-file and then point his bishop at g7. Notice that the Black bishop is unable to help in the defence.] 16…c6 17.Rg3 Rf7 18.Rdg1 b5 19.Bf6! [Black is already in deep trouble.] 19…Raa7 [19…Rxf6 20.Rxg7+ Kh8 21.Qg5 Rg6 (21…Rf8 22.Rxh7+ Kxh7 23.Qh4+) 22.Rxg6 hxg6 23.Qh6++-] 20.Qh6 Qf8 21.Be5! [Withdrawing the powerful bishop to a safer firing point.] 21…Kh8 22.Rh3! Qg8 23.Ne2! [Bringing up the reserves; the plan is simply Ne2-f4-g6.] 23…f4 24.Rxg7! Rxg7 25.Nxf4 Nf7 26.Ng6#

 

-------------------
|-+b+-+qk|
|r-+-+nrp|
|p+p+p+NQ|
|+p+-B-+-|
|-+-P-+-+|
|P-+-+P+R|
|-PP+-+-P|
|+-K-+-+-|
-------------------

  A lovely finish! 1-0

Chess with Attitude

Posted on by

by

Phil Adams, CCC

“Games like this [Penrose-Botvinnik] (and there were plenty in this
tournament) impressed on me that ‘wanting to win’ was perhaps more
important than ‘playing good moves’.”

— KEENE, ‘Becoming a Grandmaster‘.

“At that age (ten), the odd piece here or there
often makes little difference. Rather, ingenuity and the will to
win may prove decisive.”

— ZAK, Improve your chess results.

1) Draw?

Success in chess, as in all sports, requires not only skill but
other qualities such as determination and a positive mental
attitude. I thoroughly recommend Simon Webb’s book Chess
for Tigers for help in developing the best attitudes for
competitive success.

  For many years, British players were regarded as a
“soft-touch” by foreign masters because they lacked
stamina and determination and were too eager to accept draws.
Obviously, if a draw is all you need to win the tournament, then it
would be silly to play all-out for a win, but in general, if you
want to succeed in chess you need to get into the habit of always
playing to win and always being prepared, mentally and physically,
to play long, hard games. Some quotations to inspire you:

  IM Simon Webb in Chess for Tigers:
“A game of chess is never drawn until it’s drawn. (…) All too
frequently players agree draws in level positions, without
realising that there are ways of winning these positions against a
careless opponent.“

  American GM Andrew Soltis in Confessions of a
Grandmaster: “A few years ago, John Fedorowicz was
described as having become ‘one of the deepest strategic thinkers
in American chess’. When I told ‘the Fed’ about that, he replied,
‘Yeah? Well, my new strategy is just to stop taking
draws.’“

  Soltis again, referring to the advice of American IM
Norman Weinstein: “‘You can’t expect to go through a tournament
without losing. Losing is part of the game, like hitting your clock
and writing down the moves. And you can’t expect to do well just by
offering draws when you think you’re in trouble or in an unknown
position.’ I realized that I had become more concerned with not
losing than with winning. I decided to stop worrying about norms
and ratings and the gnawing feeling you get when you lose, and see
what happened. It worked.“

  Canadian IM Lawrence Day writing recently in the top
American magazine Inside Chess: “Imagine two
guys, one who always draws and the other who alternates winning six
and losing six. After a year, they have the same number of points
and the same ratings. The difference is that the risk player has a
big pile of money, while the drawmaster made nothing.“

2) The will to win

From a discussion on the internet, plus some ideas gleaned from
Ariel Mengarini:

  Many people love chess but somehow when they sit down to
play a match or tournament game, they find it difficult to produce
their best effort. Somehow they find it difficult to stay focused
and to summon up the necessary concentration. It is as if the will
to win has drained away.

  Do this every time. Before you start play, think of these
3 things:

1) How much time and effort and money you have already spent on
chess.
I’d better win, otherwise that was all pretty stupid of
me
2) All the other things that you could be doing instead.
I’d better win, otherwise I am stupid right now for wasting
my time
3) How bad it feels to lose.
I’d better win, because I hate the feeling I get when I
lose!

NERVES

OK, you’ve decided to give it your best shot, you’ve worked on
building up your will to win. The problem is, you now feel nervous
and jittery, and now that is affecting your concentration! What
should you do?

  You have to be able to come to terms with an important
paradox:

 

a) you have decided to devote some hours of your life
every week to chess; your time is valuable, therefore it is worth
giving it your very best, so concentrate!

  b) yet, you must admit, in the “great scheme of
things“, in the “big picture“, the result of one game
of chess is utterly trivial, so RELAX!

So, the ideal is relaxed concentration.

Fear of losing

Everybody hates losing, but for good results it is important during
the game to play without any FEAR of losing. Negative emotions
affect your motivation and depress your level of brain efficiency.
A game of chess is a fight; you must learn to love the fight
itself, and play fearlessly.

  Best Wishes,
—
Phil Adams
Three Cs, Oldham, (=Children’s Chess Club)

Penrose Jonathan (ENG) – Botvinnik [A42] Hastings
(9), 1967

1.e4 g6 2.d4 Bg7 3.c4 d6 4.Nc3 c6 5.Nf3 a6 6.Be2
b5 7.a3 Bb7 8.0-0 Nd7 9. Be3 e6? 10.d5! [winning]
exd5 11.exd5 c5 12.cxb5 Ne7 13.bxa6
[13.Bf4!+-] 13…Bxa6 14. Bxa6 Rxa6 15.Qe2 Rb6
16.Bg5? h6 [16…f6? 17.Bh4 g5 18.Bg3 f5 19.Bxd6 Rxd6
20.Nb5 Nb6 21.Nxd6+ Qxd6 22.Rfe1 Nbxd5 23.Rad1 Kf7 24.Qc4 Rd8
25.b3? Bf6 26.Re2 g4 27.Ne1 Nc6 28.Red2 Nd4 29.b4 Qe6 30.bxc5 Nc3
0-1 Penrose Jonathan (ENG)-Botvinnik/Hastings 1966-67 is an
alternative version given on a database] 17.Bh4 g5 18.Bg3
f5 19.Bxd6? Rxd6 20.Nb5 Nb6 21.Nxd6+ Qxd6 22.Rfe1 Nbxd5 23.Rad1 Kf7
24.Qc4 Rd8 25.g3 Bf6 26.Re2 g4 27.Ne1 Nc6 28.Red2 Nd4 29.b4 Qe6
30.bxc5 Nc3 0-1 [even now 30… Nc3 31.Qxc3 Ne2+
32.Rxe2 Bxc3 33.Rxe6 Rxd1 34.Rxh6! is not completely lost]

What’s wrong with club players? An MOT for us all

Posted on by

Overprotection and prophylaxis are all very well, Dave, but what
about ordinary players, what do they need? I believe that we don’t
really know a lot about the chess thinking of ordinary players.
There are some things that have been done on amateur games over the
years (by de Groot, Euwe/Meiden, Webb, Heisman, Silman,
Rubin/Emms and Davies) and there are a set of common beliefs about
amateur play, but I think that amateurs are a lot more complex than
is often suggested.

Amateurs are more diverse than is given credit for – they often
have marked strengths and weaknesses, but these weakness and
stylistic preferences may be very different between players. I was
interested to look at this book which focuses on one particular
amateur chess player, and offers some Grandmaster comments upon a
game. [Steve Davis Plays Chess (Norwood/Davis), also published as
Grandmaster meets Chess Amateur]

Norwood,D (2500) – Davis,S (1605) [C90],
1994

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Bxc6 dxc6 5.0-0

I am not happy with my Pawn structure

5…Bg4

counterattack

6.h3 Bxf3?

I thought it wasn’t a good idea to get the Queen out at an
early stage “. (but here it can’t be harassed)

7.Qxf3


|r+.1kgn4|
|+p0.+p0p|
|p+p+.+.+|
|+.+.0.+.|
|.+.+P+.+|
|+.+.+Q+P|
|P)P).)P+|
|$NG.+RI.|
+-----------------+

DN: ” Where do your pieces belong?

SD: ” Nf6, Bd6/c5, Qe7, O-O-O

DN: ” Can’t find anything to fault there

7…Nf6 8.d3 Nd7

SD thought about:

[8…Be7 idea 9.Bg5 but… (9.Qg3! hence the chosen move)
9…Nd7!;

8…h6 ” to stop the pin “]

9.Nd2 Bd6 10.Nc4 0-0 11.Ne3 Qf6 12.Qg4

[12.Qg3 was analysed: 12…Qg6 13.Qxg6 hxg6]

12…Nc5 13.Nf5 Qg6


|r+.+.4k+|
|+p0.+p0p|
|p+pg.+q+|
|+.h.0N+.|
|.+.+P+Q+|
|+.+P+.+P|
|P)P+.)P+|
|$.G.+RI.|
+-----------------+

14.Be3

[14.Qxg6 analysed: 14…fxg6? x e5]

14…Rfe8 15.Nh4 Qxg4

[15…Qe6 overlooked]

16.hxg4

No Pawn breaks ” DN

16…Ne6 17.f3


|r+.+r+k+|
|+p0.+p0p|
|p+pgn+.+|
|+.+.0.+.|
|.+.+P+PH|
|+.+PGP+.|
|P)P+.+P+|
|$.+.+RI.|
+-----------------+

Maybe I should swap Bishops?

(Yes! see his own comment at move 8)

17…Nd4 18.Bxd4 exd4 19.f4

Oh hell

19…f6 20.g3 g5?


|r+.+r+k+|
|+p0.+.+p|
|p+pg.0.+|
|+.+.+N0.|
|.+.0P)P+|
|+.+P+.).|
|P)P+.+.+|
|$.+.+RI.|
+-----------------+

21.Nf5

and he can check me on h6

21…c5 22.Kg2

He’s going to double Rooks, I’ll get the King out of the
way

22…Kf7 23.fxg5 Re6?

[23…fxg5 24.Nxd6+]

24.gxf6 Rxf6 25.g5

From bad to worse

25…Rxf5

[cutting losses]

26.Rxf5+ Kg6 27.Rf6+ Kg7 28.Raf1 Be5 29.R6f5 Re8 30.Kh3
Re6 31.Rf7+ Kg6 32.Kg4 b6 33.Rd7 h6 34.gxh6 Kxh6 35.Rh1+ Kg6
36.Rdh7 Bd6? 37.R1h6# 1-0

This was the first time I had played Steve. During the
course of the game I made several observations about his chess
ability:

Reasonable grasp of strategy – understood
the importance of the centre and the need to have active pieces

Positional understanding less adequate –
did not appreciate the full importance of Pawns and Pawn structure.

Planning patchy – good at short-term
planning, but found it difficult to formulate a long-term plan.

Calculates well but prone to tactical
errors – poor sense of danger.

Little opening knowledge – did not know the
general strategy behind one of the main line openings.

Good at assessing positions – main weakness
here was a tendency to be over-pessimistic.

…These are among the most typical failings of the
club/occasional chess player who wants to improve their
game

— NORWOOD in NORWOOD/DAVIS, Steve Davis
plays Chess (a.k.a. Grandmaster Meets Chess
Amateur)

Now, assuming that at least some of these might apply to at
least some of us, let us review these comments one by one, and
suggest some therapy.

I’ve recommended some books. This is the easy bit. There are
lots of good books which will give you the ideas you need, rather
fewer that will allow you to check your understanding and help you
incorporate the ideas into your own play.

The best ways to improve in all respects are to study games,
your own and others’, and check out your conclusions. We don’t do a
lot of this in group coaching sessions, but that’s what you should
be doing.

Get hold of collected annotated games, or get some recommended
to you. Pick games which illustrate the theme you are working on,
pick openings which feature the theme, and pick games by players
who are noted for their facility with your theme. Play through the
games three times: once quickly to get a feel for the game and its
phases/turning points, once slowly, making your own notes, and once
comparing your notes to the annotator’s. Games by the old masters
like Tarrasch, Lasker and Capablanca, are all pretty useful,
perhaps also some by the moderns like Alekhin, Botvinnik, Fischer
and Nunn, but these are more complex. The older guys are useful for
all points of study below, in my view – you can look to Lasker for
his endgames, his tactical alertness, his preferred classical
openings, and his swindles and general fighting spirit.

Reasonable grasp of strategy – understood the importance
of the centre and the need to have active pieces

Comment (DR): I wonder if DN would say that
after playing more games with SD. My scan through the openings in
the Minor section at WECU suggest to me that at least some club
players don’t have a good understanding of the centre, in
particular how to defend when your opponent has closed the centre
(as in this game). Moreover, when asked to come up with some plans
in a minority attack position (A), participants at a session
recently came up with some rather passive plans (B) rather than
more active ones (C).

(A)


|.+.+.+.+|
|0p+.+p0p|
|.+p+.+.+|
|+.+p+.+.|
|.+.).+.+|
|+.+.).+.|
|P).+.)P)|
|+R+.$.+.|
+-----------------+

(B)


|.4r+.+.+|
|+p+.hp0p|
|p+p+.+.+|
|+.+p+.+.|
|.).).+.+|
|+.+.).+.|
|P+.+.)P)|
|+R+.$.+.|
+-----------------+

(C)


|r+.+r+.+|
|+.+.+p0p|
|.+pg.+.+|
|0p+p+.+.|
|.)n)n+.1|
|).+.).+.|
|.+.+.)P)|
|+R+.$.+.|
+-----------------+

What you can do to get better : We can play and
study openings where the centre and activity are important (say,
like the Scotch Game), we can study games by other players in our
chosen openings (Lautier and Kasparov have been important in the
recent theory of the Scotch, and earlier Penrose played the Gambit
line), and study players whose style is marked by central control
and/or piece activity (Tarrasch, Capa, Lasker, Alekhin, Tal).

Good further reading : Logical Chess (Chernev),
The Middle Game (Vol. II, Euwe/Kramer).

Little opening knowledge – did not know the general
strategy behind one of the main line openings.

Comment (DR): You would have thought with all
those openings books out there, we’d be better than this, but we
aren’t.

What you can do to get better : DN’s next step
was to advise SD to play the Modern Defence, which I think is
wholly mistaken. It is important to become an expert in your
openings systems, but there is too much to the Modern to get a hold
of for Minor players. What else, then? Pick something more
straightforward, less flexible, more classical, more clearly
characterised. You must also learn to combat the common ‘no-theory’
systems like the Stonewall.

This is potentially a huge topic, but Tony D’s repertoire might
run: Scotch, French or Petroff as Black, QGD Swiss as Black, with
against the half-open defences: Tarrasch French, Panov Caro-Kann,
Alapin Sicilian (three systems with overlapping Pawn structures),
Exchange Alekhin, Be3 Pirc. I (DR) recommend: Italian Game (Giuoco
Piano and related openings) as White, with against the half-open
defences either the King’s Indian Attack and/or a selection from
Classical French, Classical Caro-Kann, Bb5 Sicilian, Exchange
Alekhin, Be3 Pirc. As Black, as well as approving Tony’s ideas, I
would also look at the Semi-Slav or Stonewall Dutch.

The real point is to find a repertoire which suits you, which
you believe in, and which has some consistency of style about
it.

Good further reading : The Ideas Behind The
Chess Openings (Fine), Chess Openings for Juniors (Walker), The
Chessplayer’s Battle Manual (Davies)

Calculates well but prone to tactical errors – poor
sense of danger.

Comment (DR): This apparent contradiction is
commonly found. We see tactics once they start happening, but can
blunder terribly if the danger light is off

What you can do to get better : Tactics really
is something you can get your eye in for. Euwe says: study, learn
and revise all the basic ideas, then rehearse examples (in your
mind or at the board). I came up with the mnemonic:
J ust M ight F
ind a N eat P owerful
T actic for J umps
M ates F orks N
ets P ins and T ies. What we also
need is a book of tactics with a realistic proportion of false
leads and positions with no tactical solutions. No such book
exists, but there are lots of straightforward tactics books. On
developing a sense of danger: I’ve just done two sessions and
looked at 111 games on this recently, so a quick run through the
positions given there might give you a better sense of when the
trap detector should be turned up a level.

Also, Steve didn’t recognise real and apparent dangers – he was
afraid of a measly check by a lone Knight, but didn’t appreciate
the concessions he was making on the king’s-side.

Good further reading : Winning Chess
(Chernev/Reinfeld), Test Your Chess IQ (Livshitz), Danger in Chess
(Avni), Chess for Tigers (Webb). Games by Tarrasch, Lasker.

Good at assessing positions – main weakness here was a
tendency to be over-pessimistic.

Comment (DR): Again, I wonder whether DN would
still say this after playing many games with minor players. Club
players seem to me to have a fine capacity for missing the
positional point just as much as the tactical point. It’s not that
we are thinking about nothing, we are making some sense and
noticing some features of the position, but we are often missing
much more important features.

What you can do to get better : We need to
review and refresh our stock of ideas, and check them out. I came
up with the mnemonic To Know What Plan to
Follow Look Carefully , for
T actics, K
ing safety, W eak squares & weak Pawns,
P iece position, F orcing moves
(initiative, breakthroughs), L ine control,
C entre and space . Many books review the
positional elements, but in terms of books for self-assessment we
have a market of about one. So, we are back studying master games.
On pessimism: this is again mostly attitude, but you might work on
it by finding more resources in your old games, perhaps by playing
over master games whose players might have shown a more
forward-going attitude in similar positions.

Good further reading : The Most Instructive
Games of Chess Ever Played (Chernev), The Strategy of Chess
(Cafferty), My System (Nimzovitch), Think/Plan Like A Grandmaster
(Kotov), How to Reassess Your Chess (Silman), Test Your Positional
Play (Bellin/Ponzetto). Games by Capa and Botvinnik.

Positional understanding less adequate – did not
appreciate the full importance of Pawns and Pawn
structure.

Comment (DR): I think Pawns and Pawn Structures
are the easiest thing in chess to learn about (what’s hard is
linking the understanding to piece play).

What you can do to get better : Choose openings
for study and play which have characteristic Pawn formations:
Scotch Four Knights, French Defence, Caro-Kann Panov, Ruy Lopez
Exchange all have these features. (I’ll do a session on it if you
like.)

Good further reading : The Middle Game Vol. 1
(Euwe & Kramer), Pawn Structures (Baburin), Test Your
Positional Play (Bellin/Ponzetto). Games by Capa, Botvinnik.

Planning patchy – good at short-term planning, but found
it difficult to formulate a long-term plan.

Comment (DR): Not all positions require
long-term planning – watch for priorities. There are some positions
which have marked long-term features which can be easily
understood. In this game Black had a long-term headache on the
Queen’s-side and with the dark-squared Bishop, which he sort of
recognised but did nothing positive about. When I showed this game
without identifying the combatants a disdainful howl went up when
White provoked the exchange of Queens – “White’s just playing for a
draw”. No – this was part of White’s winning plan! Exchanges are
like other moves, they make a difference. In this case, White would
like to get to an endgame, so the exchange improves White’s
chances.

What you can do to get better : Play and study
some games with ‘long-term’ features – things like weak Pawns or
Bad Bishops, in openings like the French Tarrasch, QGD or Exchange
Ruy – and see how these features are reflected or superceded in the
following play. Planning comes down to: Ready, Aim, Fire!
Ready – Notice and assess the positional elements
(see below), Aim – form a realistic plan based on
an appraisal of the chances for each side, then
Fire! – pick the moves which best meet your
needs.

Good further reading : Think/Plan Like A
Grandmaster (Kotov), The Chess Struggle in Practice (Bronstein –
some of the best bits are quoted by Kotov), How to Reassess Your
Chess (Silman). Botvinnik games again.

Also:

The endgame

Comment (DR): It didn’t arise in the Davis
game, but club players are widely regarded as being poor at
endgames, and everything I’ve observed at the club reinforces
this!

What you can do to get better : (1) know your
onions – get to grips with the theory of basic endings and general
endgame principles, (2) study the play and writings of endgame
specialists like Capa, Smyslov, Mednis, Karpov, (3) play “endgame
openings” with an early exchange of Queens – Ruy Lopez Exchange,
and French Tarrasch for example.

Good further reading : Winning Endgames
(Kosten), Capablanca’s 60 Best Chess Endings (Chernev), Rate Your
Endgame (Mednis/Crouch).

Panic and Collapse

Comment (DR): You notice in the game SD
panicked when he was attacked and lashed out with the horrible
20…g5 , instead of looking for defensive
improvements like centralising Rooks or finding Queen’s-side
counterplay, and later he allowed mate in one. By the time it came
to cutting his losses it was already over. Quite often in club
chess games are won by the more determined as often as by the
stronger player.

What you can do to get better : Again, the
blunders sessions hold some clues – so often I was writing “from
the frying pan into the fire”, and “panic” or “bluff”. This is a
change of attitude as much as theory. Try looking at the games of
the great swindlers – Marshall, Lasker, Webb – and the great
defensive players – Steinitz, Petrosian, Karpov – and the
counter-punchers like Korchnoi.

Good further reading : Chess for Tigers (Webb),
The Chess Amateur (Silman).

Inconsistency: know all the words, but there is no
consistency or rigour.

Comment (DR): It takes a bit of time to spot
this, but listen out for it. DN didn’t particularly emphasise this
in his notes, but SD was in two minds about whether to get shot of
his dark-squared Bishop. Undoubtedly he should have done – he did
talk about it more than once, but never got around to it. I think
this lack of clarity is more characteristic of club players than
lack of knowledge. Chess positions are complex and often pretty
balanced, so it is often possible to talk for a long time about a
chess game without saying anything wrong, but without really
getting to grips with it.

What you can do to get better : This goes back
to the first point about studying games and checking out your
conclusions, and the study of guys like Botvinnik who have a
well-marked analytical prowess.

Good further reading : How to Reassess Your
Chess (Silman), The Amateur’s Mind (Silman) Test Your Positional
Play (Bellin/Ponzetto).

 

OK, get that lot sorted out and then get back to me!

Books with amateur games

DAVIES The Chessplayers Battle Manual

EUWE/MEIDEN Chess Master vs. Chess Amateur

HEISMAN The Improving Annotator

RUBIN/EMMS Chess for the Rank and File

SILMAN The Amateur’s Mind

WEBB Chess for Tigers

 

Useful books for club players

Don’t buy the lot – just one from each category
(opening/strategy/endgames) – start with the ones marked * first,
then **

AVNI Danger in Chess

BABURIN Pawn Structures

BELLIN/PONZETTO. Test Your Positional Play

BRONSTEIN The Chess Struggle in Practice (some of the best bits
are quoted by KOTOV),

CAFFERTY, The Strategy of Chess

*CHERNEV Capablanca’s 60 Best Chess Endings

**CHERNEV, The Most Instructive Games of Chess Ever Played

*CHERNEV, Logical Chess

*CHERNEV/REINFELD, Winning Chess

DAVIES The Chessplayer’s Battle Manual

**EUWE & KRAMER, The Middle Game Vols. I/II

FINE, The Ideas Behind The Chess Openings

**KOSTEN, Winning Endgames

KOTOV, Think/Plan Like A Grandmaster

**LIVSHITZ, Test Your Chess IQ, Vol I

MEDNIS/CROUCH. Rate Your Endgame

NIMZOVITCH, My System

**PACHMAN Modern Chess Strategy

**SILMAN. How to Reassess Your Chess

*WALKER Chess Openings for Juniors

 

General Middlegame Advice

Posted on by

This compilation has been made by going through all my beginner’s
books and making notes. I was after practical advice on
thinking rather than chess theory this
time; the most useful titles by a mile were Simon Webb’s
Chess for Tigers, Jeremy Silman’s The
Amateur’s Mind. Also running strongly were the old
Keres/Kotov title The Art of the Middle Game,
Kotov’s Think like a Grandmaster, Avni’s
Danger in Chess and Krogius’ Psychology in
Chess. In each of these books, the points they make are
illustrated by actual examples, which helps fix the point in your
mind. I won’t attempt to reproduce examples from these or other
books on this page (as if the lawyers would let me), but the points
below could all do with reference to a practical context – see if
you can identify examples from your own play. I have a stash of
games from our last simul. and some
recent club games which might be
helpful.

Playing the Middlegame

“During a chess competition a chessmaster should be
a combination of a beast of prey and a monk.“

— Alexander Alekhin

Attack and defence

You must think for both sides. I would guess that
the vast majority of decisive mistakes in club play are not
misjudgements (like, “I thought my attack would be faster than
yours“) but oversights (“Oops – missed that one.“).
Purdy says you will never overcome blunders by effort alone (what
you need is a trained eye), which is surely true, but you must
also put in the effort! If you never try to work out what
your opponent might be doing, you will never find out until it is
too late. Let’s clarify this with an example:

Kasparov – Karpov, Linares, 1994

t+l+jL-T
+xD-+xX-
-S-+xS-X
X-+-N-+-
-+-P-+-+
Pb+-+-+-
-P-+qPpP
R-B-K-Nr

1. e4 c6 2. d4 d5 3. Nd2 dxe4 4. Nxe4 Nd7 5. Bc4 Ngf6 6.
Ng5 e6 7. Qe2 Nb6 8. Bb3 h6 9. N5f3 a5 10. c3 c5 11. a3 Qc7 12. Ne5
cxd4 13. cxd4 DIAGRAM

13… a4

[13… Bxa3]

14. Bc2 Bd7 15. Nxd7 Nbxd7 16. Qd1 Bd6 17. Ne2
Nd5 …drawn

  I wouldn’t like to say there’s anything wrong with the
analytical abilities of either player – but neither is it an error
of judgement. My guess is, it’s a quiet position in a solid
opening, and neither player bothered to look hard enough.

Chess is a tense game. This tension may make you want to believe
things that aren’t really true, and comfort yourself with things
that mean you don’t have to think too hard any more. Not a bit of
it….

Petrosian-Korchnoi 1963

-+-+-T-+
X-+-+j+-
-X-P-+rX
+-X-X-+p
-+p+pXk+
+p+-+-+-
p+-+-+-+
+-+-+-+-

Black has a hopeless, passive position, just as he has had for the
last umpteen moves. Petrosian just went

1. Rxh6

  which was met by

1…f3!

  Hoping for 2. Kxf3 Kg7 discovered
check, winning the rook.

2. Kg5 Ke8 White resigns, unable to
catch the f-pawn.

  Afterwards, Petrosian explained that a move like …f3
just didn’t fit with “Black’s hopeless position“. But
where there’s life, there’s hope!

“For a long time I had regarded my position as a
winning one. Thus the whole opening phase of the struggle, when
Korchnoi was unable to get out of trouble, had psychologically
attuned me to the idea that the ending would be favourable to me
… and here comes the oversight 35 Rxh6?? I did
not even see the threat …f4-f3, possibly because it was in
contrast to Black’s hopeless position. Personally, I am of the view
that if a strong master does not see such a threat at once he will
not notice it, even if he analyses the position for twenty or
thirty minutes.” – PETROSIAN.

 

I have a whole book full of these types of disaster, when one
player just turned the alarm off. You should be on guard all the
time, with the alarm dial turned up to 11!

  Please note that Petrosian was also thinking less than
objectively about the game, and thinking only about his plans. Your
opponent also has a right to exist…

  • Remember:
    1. every position is capable of being ruined
    2. minor details can affect the outcome
    3. if there is only one way you can lose, make sure you secure
      against it
    4. if the position changes, re-assess your previous
      conclusions
    5. actively search for danger as a routine part of your choice of
      move
  • Danger signs – General things to watch out
    for:

    1. leaving the king without sufficient support from other
      pieces
    2. weakness of the eighth rank
    3. entering a lasting pin
    4. poisoned pawns
    5. placing pieces without escape routes

    — Amazia AVNI

  • You mustn’t ignore genuine threats, but don’t be panicked or
    distracted by them – especially when faced with a King’s-side
    attack [when you must pursue your own attack with extra vigour.].
    Don’t worry needlessly, resulting in panic and retreat – you need
    to keep active and keep counterplay.
  • Take nothing for granted. Don’t fret
    needlessly – analyse and find out if there is a win for your
    opponent. I often say, “Oh, Black’s only going to threaten
    mate    “, by which I mean, the best they can achieve is a one
    move threat that can be easily contained. When they make that
    threat, you do need to react, but don’t worry needlessly; carry on
    with your own plans. There are some “clockwork” attacks (like the
    h-file assault against the fianchettoed King, or the King’s Indian
    Attack) that will eventually produce checkmate if left alone, but
    usually the best recipe is to counterattack, even if you do have to
    stop from time to time to counter a mating threat.
  • In particular, don’t panic and refuse sacrificed material that
    you could have for free. Don’t decline “on principle”. This is
    declining from fear, not knowledge. Play the strongest move, which
    may well be to take the material and make your opponent prove their
    judgement was correct.
  • Neither be over-impressed by your own threats. An attack by one
    piece on another is meaningless in itself – it may distract an
    important defender. Equally, don’t assume that a stock combination
    or sacrifice works for you in the position you have today – small
    differences can make it fail. Don’t hope vainly – analyse
    and find out    .
  • Don’t allow counterplay, e.g. a Pawn race, a
    counterattack against the other wing, if you don’t have to.
    Defensive play is difficult, and playing the downside of a position
    without active chances of your own is doubly so. [Many of the best
    players are masters at snuffing out the opponent’s plans.]
  • [Read more about Rules for
    attack    , Attacking the King,
    Attacking the Queen’s-side or Attacking
    techniques    ]

You and your opponent

  • How do you react to pressure? Mental toughness and willpower
    are important in chess. The top boards often look calmer and more
    composed because they are; they are concentrating on the game and
    are not distracted by unexpected events on the board. [I have
    more than once played strong opponents who said afterwards they
    thought I was winning at one point, but I would never have guessed
    that from their expression during the game – they looked totally
    assured and confident!    ]
  • Patience is a virtue. Good nerves are
    essential    : this doesn’t mean you shouldn’t ever feel
    nervous during a game (boy, do I wish I could manage that!) but
    that you should not let your nervousness tempt you to poor
    decisions: e.g. make back away from a critical line, or make you
    try to force the issue too soon.
  • Don’t ever coast along. Keep coming up with ideas. Put your
    opponent under pressure. Force your will on your opponent – get
    them to react to you. If you think you see a win, go for it.
  • If you stand worse:
    • Fight, don’t just react to threats. Mednis calls passive play
      “awaiting the undertaker“! It is much harder for the
      attacker to keep their nerve if the defender has active play, and
      without counterplay your opponent will just keep building up their
      position. It used to be said of Alekhin that to beat him you had
      to win three games – once in the opening, once in the middlegame,
      and once in the endgame. Make the same be true for
      you.
    • Don’t stop looking for your own opportunities. Many games have
      been lost that could have been drawn or even won (don’t I know
      it!). But also, people resign with a saving move available on the
      board – they were just going through the motions until resigning,
      instead of planning their comeback.
    • Never give up. There is always hope if you
      fight      . Don’t play for one last cheap trap and then resign.
      Play the move that will make your opponent groan, the move you
      would hate to see if you had the advantage. Defend with endless
      determination.
    • If your best hope is for your opponent to fall into a trap,
      then you can play for a swindle, but only when you know you are
      losing. Otherwise, play good moves, not trappy ones.
  • Take your opponent seriously if they are lower-rated, but don’t
    be overawed if they outgrade you. [Don’t look at your opponent’s
    rating if it takes the edge off your attitude.]
  • Everyone is vulnerable. Play without fear. Play to win
    from the first move against every opponent    . That doesn’t
    mean, attack like a mad thing from move 1, but each move should be
    played accurately and seriously.

      When playing stronger players, don’t stick to the script!
    Make a nuisance of yourself. Don’t make concessions. Good players
    drop games to lesser lights every year – make sure it’s you that
    they drop them to. Many players when pitted against a stronger
    opponent try and swap everything off and get a draw in the endgame.
    They then get a worse game, and are ground steadily down by their
    opponent’s superior technique who is pleased to get a win without
    danger of losing. Every exchange made is going to be better for one
    side or the other, and every passive move makes your position less
    promising. The best way to get a draw is to play as well
    and actively as possible    , just the same as if you were
    trying to win!
    If your opponent is trying to win a level position, don’t get
    impatient and rush, and don’t get bored and go on the defensive,
    don’t be tempted into exchanges that give a little ground. Stay
    calm. Give the impression of great patience, that you aren’t going
    to blunder no matter how long they spin it out. And keep trying to
    play good and active moves, even if you think it’s only a draw.

  • When playing weaker players, don’t go for the throat, don’t try
    to bamboozle your opponent in a complex position (you might get
    lost too!); instead, play steadily and wait for a mistake – in
    fact, don’t try to jump all over their first mistake, you can wait
    for another mistake to turn up. If your opponent is only a bit
    weaker than you, you may need to mix things up a bit, but generally
    the message is ‘steady does it’.
  • Ignore your opponent’s time pressure. Take
    your own time to find the best moves as you normally would. Don’t
    try and rush your opponent – they are probably more used to playing
    quickly than you are and may outplay you, or set you a trap!
  • [Read more about You
    and your opponent    , Chess
    Psychology    ]

Positional play

  • If you have a space advantage (or any other long-term
    advantage, like the Bishop pair), don’t rush to attack.
    Milk your advantages – don’t feel obliged to cash
    in immediately. You should not try to force the issue, but rather
    maintain or increase your advantage while preventing counterplay.
    Don’t lash out justy becaiuse you feel there ought to be a winning
    combination by now. Avoid exchanges and build up your position so
    that when things do come to a head the situation is at its most
    favourable to you.
  • Preserve your options. Do what is required –
    whether a retreat or an attack – but don’t burn your bridges
    unnecessarily. Squeeze your opponent’s options – this is hard for
    them to sit still for, and they may lash out without heed for the
    dangers.
  • [Read more about Chess
    Strategy    ]

Planning

  • Good positions don’t win games – good moves
    do    . Silman says, “Make good things happen“. Play
    with a positive plan (although part of your plan might be
    prevention). The initiative goes to the side than can devise and
    (at least threaten to) put into action a realistic plan.
  • Create a plan right away or you may drift.
    There is always something to do, e.g. improve the position of your
    worst piece. Appraise the position honestly. Avoid
    vagueness     in assessment – don’t say “maybe I’ll get an
    attack on the Queen’s-side    “, but “in three moves I can get
    my Knight to c5 and my rook to b1 to attack b7 – can my opponent
    defend in that time, or create a distraction?    “
  • Your plan must be based on the actual features of the
    position    . Work out what each side should be up to. You can’t
    attack the King just because you want to. Play where you
    have some advantage    . Silman talks about the
    ‘pawn-pointing‘ rule: you have more space to attack where
    the Pawn-chains point. This is also true for blocked positions,
    like the French where opening a file with …c7-c5 will not leave
    you with a backward Pawn as does …f7-f6.
  • Don’t play a good-looking move in vague hopefulness: consider
    what your opponent’s reply might be. Don’t play a move with a
    one-move threat that can be easily stopped. Don’t hope that your
    opponent won’t see the threat – expect your opponent to
    play the best move    , and see if you still like your plan.
    [You cannot base your game around one-idea plans like a3 Bc2
    Qd3 Qxh7# – this may take four moves to threaten and one move
    (…g6) to defend    ]
  • “Play a move which improves your position no matter
    what.”     – SILMAN
  • Don’t play a quick move because you can’t really decide what is
    going on, or because you suddenly see a good-looking idea. Take the
    time to find a good move. I think 15-20 minutes to decide if a Pawn
    grab is safe is not unreasonable.
  • But don’t dither – decide what your basic choices are at the
    start – narrow it down to the two or three most likely – and
    decide. [If you know which plan you are following the moves can
    come fairly easily.] If you get it down to two moves which look
    equally good, find some other way of deciding between them (most
    centralising, least forcing for your opponent…). [You know
    the story of Buridan’s ass, which died of starvation between two
    equal-sized piles of hay because it never could choose which one to
    start on    ].
  • To summarise: anxiety, haste, vagueness, confusion and
    simple-mindedness are the enemies of good moves.
  • [Read more about Planning]

Strategical advice

General advice

  • Rules are meant to be broken (or, at least,
    checked to see if they apply in the actual position in front of
    you!)
  • Don’t seek or avoid exchanges without good reason.
    Exchanges are just moves, they make changes, and
    you must assess these changes. [It seems to me that many
    players exchange almost by reflex. I have a theory that when
    learning chess we may become anxious about leaving exchanges ‘on’,
    in case we leave the piece or pawn undefended later, and do not
    like the tension of unresolved exchange possibilities. A mark of
    maturity in a player is the capacity to manage tension in the
    position.    ]
  • Quiet positions demand patience. They are not to be abandoned
    as a draw or played carelessly – you must learn to concentrate and
    outplay your opponent in these positions as well as when it’s very
    tactical.
  • Accumulation theory: even if you have several
    advantages, don’t be too confident to pick up another.
  • Dynamic positions require energetic play. You must make the
    most of your own chances, and not just react to threats or coast
    along until you have to do something.
  • [Read more about Strategy]

Space and the centre

  • Always look to the centre, even if it is
    closed or has been quiet.
  • Decentralising is always suspicious,
    particularly for knights, but also for long-range pieces like
    Queens. This is a corollary of Stean’s assertion that the most
    important feature of any position is the activity of the
    pieces    , since pieces are most active in the centre.
  • A space advantage is meaningless without a potential
    breakthrough, or some other way to get behind enemy lines.
  • An attack on the wing is best met by play in the centre.
  • [Read more about Space and the
    centre    ]

Advice about Kings and Queens

  • KING: tuck it away during the opening, by castling as a rule to
    get the rook out as well. But in the endgame, the King becomes a
    strong attacking piece, and can make raids on the opponent’s Pawns,
    and guide your own Pawns through to be Queens. Because of course,
    with only a few pieces on the board, there is less danger of a
    middle-game attack, and then the King needn’t hide. Then the King
    becomes like any other piece, and should be moved into the centre
    of the board to attack or defend as necessary.
  • QUEEN: Not very useful right at the start, because it may be
    harassed, but always powerful. Place it near the centre in the
    opening, behind the minor pieces – e2,d2 or f2/c2 are good squares
    – ready to jump out to make a raid in combination with other
    pieces. After some pieces have been exchanged, or you have a clear
    advantage, you can move the Queen further towards the little centre
    (e4,d4,e5,d5).

Advice about Rooks

  • Rooks need open files.
  • ROOK: Rooks must have open lines. This may take some time to
    arrange, and because they can be chased by minor pieces they are
    best place in waiting (like the Queen) on the central e- and
    d-files. Later, they can move strongly up the board using these
    central files – for example, in the middle game, to e3 and then
    move over to g3 to help attack the Black King, or right up to the
    seventh rank on e7 or d7, where it can attack pawns right along the
    opponent’s second rank. This control of the seventh rank is very
    powerful, particularly in the endame if your opponent’s King is
    stuck on the last rank (a8-h8). Rooks work even better in pairs –
    for example, by putting them on e1 and e2 they can control the
    e-file and then often Black cannot swap off by playing their own
    Rook to e8. Even stronger is to control the seventh rank absolutely
    with eg. Rook on d7 and e7, where they can gobble up pawns and
    often Ks.
  • The furthest available square on an open or half-open file is a
    potential outpost or entry point.
  • Open files are precious. If there is one around, with Rooks on
    the board, you must seek to control or challenge it. Particularly
    in open positions, control of files is paramount.
  • Open files are useful only if there is an entry point, and in
    semi-open positions with many minor pieces an entry for a Rook may
    be lacking. In these cases you may be able to use a minor piece to
    make the first invasion, but sometimes the open file is not very
    useful.
  • Very often the first priority in the early middle game in
    closed positions is to see where you can open a file. (Like in
    the French defence: after 1. e4 e6 2. d4 d5 3. e5
    Black should immediately see about opening up space on the
    Queen’s-side with 3…c5.    )
  • Half-open files (in positions without an open file) can be used
    to create pressure against the exposed Pawn.
  • [Read more about Rooks]

Advice about minor pieces

  • BISHOP: like the Rook, also needs open lines. The long
    diagonals a1-h8 and h1-a8 are useful, but often it is more
    important to point them at your opponent’s King’s-side , for
    example, by putting them on c4 and e3. Two bishops side by side can
    be very powerful in attacking from a distance, for example on b2
    and c2.
  • Fianchettoed Bishops, at b2 or g2, need open diagonals.
  • Knights need to be near the centre and
    forward    ; they thrive on outposts (whether
    absolute = can’t be dislodged by a Pawn, or
    relative, like on f5, when a pawn move (…g6) would
    weaken the opponent’s position).
  • KNIGHT: The short-stepping Knight can get left behind if the
    battle moves away, so the best bet is to keep them in the centre.
    They are often best placed on c3 and f3 in the opening, although a
    Pawn on c3 may be needed to support d2-d4. Later, e5 and d5 are
    useful squares to occupy when they can threaten Pawns on c7/f7 and
    pinned Knights on c6/f6. They may be driven away from e5/d5 by
    pawns; best are squares where the opponent cannot – or dare not –
    chase them with pawns. If Black has moved his Pawns from c7 to c5
    and from e7 to e5 then a Knight on d5 can never be driven away,
    only exchanged for another piece. When this happens, you can try to
    recapture with another piece which also cannot be driven off. But
    another good square for a Knight, when pawns are on e4 and e5, is
    f5: here it threatens the pawn on g7, and if ever Black pushes it
    away with g6 then a hole appears on h6 for the Knight to hop into,
    perhaps giving check.
  • The struggle of Bishop(s) against Knight(s) is
    crucial    : the Bishops are not always better but in all
    positions you must strive to make your minor piece(s) better, or
    make the position suit them more.
  • Bishops are better than Knights in Pawn races, because they can
    influence each side of the board at once.
  • If you have the Bishop pair you must try to open up lines for
    them, and deny the opposing Knights any central posts.
  • [Read more about Bishops and
    Knights]

Advice about Pawns

  • PAWNS: You will have to move some to get your pieces out, and
    you can try to dominate the centre with pawns on e4 and d4 (
    perhaps with c4 and/or f4). But the pawns in front of your castled
    King form a solid wall on f2/g2/h2, and those on a2/b2/c2 are
    probably OK where they are too. So, oddly, pawns are often
    well-placed where they are at the start of the game. “Every
    pawn move loosens the position    “, says Tarrasch: if you move
    the pawn on g2 to g3, you immediately get holes at f3 and h3.
    Moving a pawn from f2 to f3 not only takes away the best square for
    your Knight, which is a good defender of the pawn on h2, but also
    opens up a check to your King from c5. When the endgame appears,
    one side or the other will have to win material to win – by
    queening a Pawn, or at least threatening to. Then Pawns can be
    moved more freely, to block opposing Pawns, to create and support
    extra or passed Pawns of their own side, and to keep out the
    opponent’s pieces – including their King.
  • If the pieces don’t suggest what plan you must adopt, the Pawns
    will.
  • Weak Pawns are only weak if they (or the squares near them) can
    be attacked.
  • Pawn structures usually have positive and negative
    features    , e.g. every doubled Pawn yields a (half)-open
    file.
  • Hanging Pawns are a typical example of an unbalanced dynamic
    situation, requiring vigorous action from both players.
  • [Read more about Pawns]

Advice on tactics

  • Combinations do not usually come out of nowhere – they are
    based on a superiority in position, and you can
    tell when a combination is likely to be around:

    1. Exposed or “stalemated” Kings are always
      vulnerable
    2. Undefended or ‘hanging’ pieces aften lead to
      trouble      .
    3. Pieces which are defended only as often as they are
      attacked can also lead to trouble, because their defenders are at
      least partly immobilised.      .
  • [Read more about Tactics]

Rook and Pawn endings – a spot of theory

Posted on by

Rook and Pawn endings – a spot of theory

All Rook Endings are Drawn… (except for those that aren’t!)

Here’s what got me started on this session. After an entertaining earlier struggle, Black is trying to win a Rook ending in a quickplay finish. I say “trying”: the first move made the spectators wince…

Position 1: Bartlett, S – Regis, D, Devon vs. Cornwall, 08.11.1997

50…Rb2+?
[50…h3+! would have helped! 51.Kf2 Rh1 52.Ra7 Rxh2+ 53.Ke3 g6u 54.Rxf7 Rg2 55.Rg7 Rxg3+ 56.Kf2 Kxf4 57.Rf7+ Kg4]

51.Kg1 g6 52.Rc3 hxg3 53.hxg3 Kh3 54.Kf1 Rg2 55.g4+ Rg3 56.Rc4

[56.Rc7 Rf3+ 57.Ke2 Rxf4; or

56.Rxg3+ Kxg3 57.f5 g5]

56…Kxg4 57.Ke2 f5?

[57…Rf3! 58.f5+ Rf4 PCL] 58.Rb4 Rf3?! [58…Rg2+!?] 59.Rb6 Kxf4 60.Rxg6 Rb3 [60…Rg3 61.Ra6 Kg4 62.Kf2 holds – PCL]

61.Re6 [61.Ra6= PCL] 61…Rb2+ 62.Kf1 Kf3 [DIAGRAM]

63.Re1

“Draw claimed; draw agreed” says my score sheet. Thereby hangs a tale: I was the last board to finish, with two minutes to his one, and White decided I was trying to win a drawn position just on time, and claimed a draw.

I was indeed trying to win, and the clock may have helped, but White has lots of ways to lose: his last move was actually the last chance to draw!

Quite exactly why we’ll see in a bit, but on the day a bit of discussion broke out amongst the audience (yertis notisnt yertis notisnt…) and we decided we’d had enough.

It’s certainly true that some very similar positions are drawn, and are maybe even claimable under the “two minute” rule, but not this one! The interesting thing is, nobody there knew it well enough to carry the day, and I’ve had positions like this lots of times. If my opponent knew how to draw it he would never have played Re1; Capablanca won two positions similar to this where his opponent did not know the drawing technique in one year, 1931 (one against Turover). Moral: know your onions!

Another thing that decided me on having another crack at a session on Rook endings is, well, a bit of a tease:

“…the number of positions that must be known exactly is relatively small. It is only in Rook endgames that it is essential to memorise thirty or forty concrete positions; in other types of endgame there are even fewer.”

Mark Dvoretsky in Dvoretsky & Yusupov, Technique for the Tournament Player

Forty sounds quite a few to me, but, OK Mark, which forty? He doesn’t say! I still don’t know, really, but here is my suggestion for some of them.

One way to work your way into this is to get a chessboard and a few pieces and see if you can work out some of the basic rules for yourself. You should quickly discover that, in common with many other endings, two passed Pawns pretty well always win, and so situations with a single Pawn are most critical. Also, if both Kings are distant, one Rook can’t force through a Pawn against another Rook (not like Queens, for instance).

So, we quickly get to our first two critical positions out of Dvoretsky’s forty, where the Kings are in range: Lucena’s position and Philidor’s position. Oh, and you need to know about Rook’s Pawns, and checking distance.

Position 2: Lucena 1496

White has control of the sixth/seventh with the King and the Black King is cut off: Lucena’s position is won for White is two ways…

First, White can get the Pawn to the seventh:

1…Kc7 2.Rc2+ Kb6 3.e6 Rd1 4.Ke8 Rg1 5.e7 Rf1

Now what?

6.Rc4 the critical manoeuvre: ‘BUILDING A BRIDGE’

[6.Rh2 although the ‘bridge’ manoeuvre is always emphasised in the books, there is also a win by getting the king out on the short side, e.g. 6…Kc7 7.Rh7 Rf2 8.Rf7 Rh2 9.Rf8 Rh7 (9…Re2 10.Kf7) 10.Rf1 Rh8+ 11.Kf7 Rh7+ 12.Kf8 Rh8+ 13.Kg7 Re8 14.Kf7 This is important because the bridge-building manoeuvre may not be available]

6…Rf2 7.Kd7 Rd2+ 8.Ke6 Re2+ 9.Kd6 Re3 10.Rb4+ Ka7 [10…Ka5 11.Rb8] 11.Rb5 Rd3+ 12.Ke6 Re3+ 13.Re5 1-0

Position 3: Philidor’s position

Black’s King holds the Queening square, and the Black Rook holds the sixth rank. This is Philidor’s position, which is drawn without too much trouble by Black.

Once the White Pawn goes to the sixth, Black runs back to the first rank:

1.Kf5 Rb1 2.e6 now there is no shelter on the board from the checks

[2.Ke6 Rb6+ 3.Kd5 Rb1]

2…Rf1+ 3.Ke5 Re1+ 4.Kd6 Rd1+ 5.Kc6 Re1 1/2-1/2

Position 4: Rook’s Pawns

Rook’s Pawns are a strong drawing factor.
So, here, even with the Black King distant, White can force nothing.

Oddly, Black must not try to approach with the King because of Ra8-h8; instead the Black King sticks to g7/h7, and the Rook checks the White King when it approaches.

1.Kf3 Ra4 2.Ke3 Kh7 3.Kd3 Kg7 4.Kc3 Kh7 5.Kb3 Ra1 6.Kb4 Kg7 7.Kc5 Rc1+ 8.Kb6 Rb1+ 9.Kc6 Ra1 10.Kb7 Rb1+ 11.Kc7 Ra1 1/2-1/2

Position 5: Rook’s Pawns 2

With the Pawn further back White can create trouble with the King because it can hide on e.g. a6 from check on the files (Tarrasch), but Black can then check along the ranks. Euwe and Alekhin struggled with one of these in their 1935 match. Although we can’t easily summarise the analysis of this type of position there is a summary of results possible.

If the White King is closer than the marked area, White wins: in the marked area, Black should draw.

Even further back, and we’re into a lot of ifs and buts…

Position 6: checking distance

You can draw without getting Philidor’s position, by checking along the ranks. With a central Pawn this is just possible as long as you take the furthest possible file: here the a-file.

1…Ra8+ 2.Kd7 Ra7+ 3.Kd6 Ra6+ 4.Kd5 Ra5+ 5.Kc6 Ra6+ 6.Kb7 Re6 1/2-1/2

Checking distance is three empty files.

Position 7: checking dist. (2)

The b-file (two empty files) fails by a whisker:

1…Rb8+ 2.Kd7 Rb7+ 3.Kd6 Rb8 4.Kc7 Ra8 5.Ra1! 1-0

It is popularly supposed that Q vs. R is difficult: it surely is difficult against an opponent who plays perfectly, like a computer (as GM Browne once discovered), but in actual play it may be easier. Black can be herded to the edge, when a Rook on the third (sixth) rank must keep out the White King. You can achieve positions like the following:

Position 8: Aside: Queen vs. Rook

1.Kg5
The Black Rook is shut out from the third rank, and is vulnerable to forks:

[1…Rh1 2.Qc8+ Kf7 3.Qb7+;

1…Ra6 2.Qc8+;

1…Rh2 2.Qd6+]

And if 1…Rh8 2.Kg6 Rg8+ 3.Kf6 1-0

Position 9: Study (Lasker)

Here is an instructive study: Black to move.
A tense position: on whose side will it resolve? 5-piece Rook endings (KRP/KR) all hinge around access of the sixth and seventh ranks in front of the P by the attacking King – if it can be kept out, the defence holds, but if not…

1…Re1

[1…Rh6+ 2.e6 +-;

1…Rd1+ 2.Ke6 Kf8 (2…Kd8 3.Ra8+ Kc7 4.Ke7 Rh1 5.e6) 3.Ra8+ Kg7 4.Ke7 Rd2 5.e6 +-;

1…Rh2 2.Ra8+ Kf7 3.e6+ Kf6 4.Rf8+ Kg7 5.e7 +-]

2.Ke6 Kf8

Critical – on the other side the Black King gets in the way of checks from the Black Rook, and the White King can make a little shelter for itself behind the Pawn. When the defending king ‘takes the short side’ there is no refuge for the White King.

3.Ra8+ Kg7 4.Re8 [4.Kd6 Kf7 =] 4…Ra1 5.Rd8

[5.Kd7 Ra7+ 6.Kc6 Ra6+ 7.Kb7 Ra1 =]

5…Re1 6.Re8 Ra1 = the White K is in, but has no escape from the checks! 1/2-1/2 Remember this type of draw, we’ll be meeting it later.

Position 10: Meanwhile…

Now, back in Liskeard, how do we compare? We can see that compared to the last few drawing ideas White is badly placed: the defending Rook is passive (no harassing checks) and the King threatened with mate. White must run for the short side with the King, and send the Rook away to draw:

[63.Kg1! f4 64.Re8 (64.Ra6) 64…Rb1+ 65.Kh2 Kf2 66.Ra8 f3 67.Ra2+ Ke1 68.Kg3;

Instead 63.Re1? f4! wins for Black:

A) 64.Kg1 Kg3 65.Rc1 (65.Kf1 Rh2 66.Re8 Rh1+ 67.Ke2 f3+ 68.Kd3 Rd1+ 69.Kc2 f2) 65…f3 66.Ra1 Rh2 67. Kg1 f2+;

B) 64.Ra1 64…Kg3 B1) 65.Kg1 f3 66.Rc1 (66.Kf1 Rh2) 66…Rg2+ 67.Kf1 Rh2; B2) 65.Ra8 65…Rb1+ 66.Ke2 f3+ 67.Ke3 Re1+ 68.Kd2 f2;

[63.Ke1? on the long side is an obvious no-no: 63…f4 64.Re8 Rb1+ 65.Kd2 Kf2 66.Rf8 f3 67.Kd3 Kf1 68.Ke3 Rb3+ 69.Kd2 f2 70.Rg8 Rb5]

For other positions it really depends who can get their King in first, or at all; if the side with the Pawn can keep out the defending King they can win. John Nunn has written a whole book about positions with just one Pawn on the board, so you will forgive me, I hope, if I say they are sometimes tricky. We have seen a hint of this when we looked at Rook’s Pawns above. There is, however, a guiding principle:

Position 11: The rule of five

If the sum of the number of the rank on which the Pawn stands and the number of files that separate the Black King from the Pawn is five or less, then it’s a draw; greater than five, it’s a win. (Dvoretsky)
Here the Black King is cut off by three files = 3

The Pawn is on the third rank = 3

The sum is = 6

6 > 5, so it should be a win. But how? White keeps out the Black King and advances the Pawn; Black defends with harassing checks, this time from the front. The White Rook would be even better placed on f7, cutting the Black King off from the last rank and ready to intervene on the other side.

OK, how are we doing? Could you bear another Pawn on the board? Positions with a Pawn on each side may readily simplify to some fairly obvious simpler state, but not always…

Position 12: Lasker, 1890

draw?
1… Rb2+ 2.Ka7 Rc2 3.Rh5+ Ka4 4.Kb6 Rb2+ 5.Ka6 Rc2 6.Rh4+ got the idea? we’ve gained another rank 6…Ka3 7.Kb6 Rb2+ 8.Ka5 Rc2 9.Rh3+ Ka2

10.Rxh2 ! 10…Rxh2 11.c8Q 1-0

What about another Pawn on the same side? I claimed above that two passed Pawns on the board pretty well always win, and so they do. The exceptions, as we might expect, involve Rooks Pawns.

Position 13: drawn RP+NP (same side)

This is an important blockade: White, oddly, can do nothing.

Consider the drawn position with just an a-Pawn above, and now add a Pawn:

Position 14: drawn RP+NP

1…Ra5 the a-pawn is nearly there, but with a distant White King everything can (just) be held

[1…Kxg6?? 2.Rg8+]

1/2-1/2

With the Pawns further back we have another realm of headaches: White is generally better placed to manoeuvre and Black less well.

Position 15: won RP+BP

This is quite different – with the other White Pawn further away from the short side there is a skewer opportunity. once you know you can steer for this one you can win from more complex positions 1.f6+ Kf7 2.Rh8 Rxa7 3.Rh7+ 1-0

Position 16: win with a – pawn + 2 f-pawns

1.Kd1 DIAGRAM

(1) break the blockade

(2) win the f-pawn

(3) win as we know how

1…Kh7 2.Kc1 Kg7 3.Kb1 Ra3 4.Kb2 Ra4 5.Kb3 Ra1 6.Kb4 Ra2 7.Kb5 Ra1 8.Kc6 Ra5 9.Kd6 Kh7 10.Ke7 Ra6 11.Kf7 Ra4 12.Ke6

this is the critical bit: zugzwang!

12…Ra5 13.Kf6 Ra1 14.Kxf5

nearly there now

14…Ra5+ 15.Ke4 Ra4+ 16.Kd3 Ra3+ 17.Kc2 Ra2+ 18.Kb3 Ra1 19.f5 1-0

Smyslov, V – Botvinnik, M [C17] 1954

1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.e5 c5 5.a3 Ba5 6.b4 cxd4 7.Nb5 Bc7 8.f4 Ne7 9.Nf3 Nbc6 10.Bd3 Bb8 11.Nbxd4 a6 12.Be3 Ba7 13.0-0 Nxd4 14.Bxd4 Bxd4+ 15.Nxd4 Qb6 16.Kh1 Bd7 17.c3 Rc8 18.Qe1 h6 19.a4 a5 20.Nb3 Qc7 21.Nc5 Bc6 22.Qf2 0-0 23.Nb3 Bd7 24.Qc5 Qxc5 25.Nxc5 Rc7 26.Nxd7 Rxd7 27.bxa5 Ra8 28.a6 bxa6 29.c4 dxc4 30.Bxc4 Rd4 31.Be2 Nd5 32.g3 Nc3 33.Bf3 Rb8 34.Ra3 Nb1 35.Ra2 Nd2 36.Rf2 Nc4 37.h4 g5 38.hxg5 hxg5 39.fxg5 Nxe5 40.Be2 Rb1+ 41.Kg2 a5 42.Rc2 Rb3 43.Rf4 Rd5 44.Re4 Kg7 45.Bh5 Ng6 46.Rg4 Re3 47.Bxg6 Kxg6 48.Rf2 Rf5 49.Rxf5 exf5 50.Rc4 Re4 51.Rc7 Rxa4 52.Ra7 Ra3

A relevant position has arisen. In the event Black won quickly:

53.Kh3? f4 54.Kh4 fxg3 55.Ra6+ Kf5 56.Rf6+ Ke4 57.Kh3 Rf3 58.Ra6 Rf5 0-1

But White did not pick the best defence! Let’s try another:

Position 17: analysis of Smyslov-Botvinnik (RP+BPs)
53.Kf2 (Euwe’s suggestion)

53…a4 54.Kg2 Ra1 55.Kf3 a3 56.Kg2

(56.Kf4 a2 57.Kf3 Rf1+)

56…a2 57.Kh2 Kxg5 58.Kg2 Kf6 !

(58…f4? only draws)

59.Ra5 Ke6 60.Kh2 f4 61.gxf4 f5

which we should know how to win.

(58…f4? 59.gxf4+ Kg4 60.f5 f6 61.Ra5

no zugzwang is now possible with the White Pawn on the 5th)

My faithful analyst Fritz successfully embarked on:

62.Kg2 Kd6 63.Kh2 Kc6 64.Kg2 Kb6 65.Ra8 Kc5 66.Ra4 Kb5 67.Ra8 Kc4 68.Kh2 Kd4 69.Ra4+ Kd3 70.Kg2 Ke3 71.Kh2 Kf3 72.Ra8 Kxf4

As you might expect, adding a Rook’s Pawn to a Rook’s Pawn doesn’t make it much more promising.

Karpov An – Yusupov A [A18] Linares 51/18, 1991

1.c4 e6 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.e4 d5 4.e5 d4 5.exf6 dxc3 6.bxc3 Qxf6 7.d4 e5 8.Nf3 exd4 9.Bg5 Qe6+ 10.Be2 Be7 11.cxd4 Bxg5 12.Nxg5 Qe7 13.Qd2 0-0 14.0-0 h6 15.Nf3 Bg4 16.Rfe1 Nc6 17.h3 Bxf3 18.Bxf3 Qf6 19.Re4 Rad8 20.Rd1 b6 21.Qe3 Na5 22.Rc1 Rd7 23.h4 Qd8 24.h5 Nc6 25.d5 Ne7 26.Rg4 f5 27.Rf4 Nc8 28.c5 bxc5 29.Qxc5 Nb6 30.Rd4 Rf6 31.a4 Rfd6 32.Rcd1 Re7 33.a5 Nd7 34.Qxa7 Ne5 35.Qc5 Nxf3+ 36.gxf3 Qe8 37.Rh4 Red7 38.Qc4 Qa8 39.Qc3 Rxd5 40.Rxd5 Qxd5

41.a6 Qa2 42.Qc4+ Qxc4 43.Rxc4 Rd1+ 44.Kg2 Ra1 45.Rc6 Kf8 46.f4 Ra3! 47.Kf1 Ra2 48.Ke1 Ke8 49.Kd1 Kd8! 50.Rg6 c5 51.Kc1

“There comes a point when you have to stop making your moves by common sense, and instead, after analysing a concrete path to a draw, you must force events.” – AY

51…Kc7! 52.Rxg7+ Kb6 53.Rg6+ Ka7 54.Rc6

[54.Rxh6 Rxf2]

54…Rxf2 55.Rxc5 Rxf4

[55…Kxa6 may be better, except that Black would have to keep thinking carefully how to draw with time running out.]

56.Rc6 Rg4 57.Kd2 Rg5 58.Rxh6 f4 59.Ke2

Position 18: Karpov-Yusupov 1991 (RP+RP)

59…f3+
“Black has absolutely no need for this Pawn, then try not to be distracted by non-essential details (like, a ‘non-essential’ Pawn)” – AY

Artur has confidence because he has studied this position. GM Gurevich actually managed to lose one of these in the US Championship in 1989 (and I don’t think he was the first). Miles wrote it up in NIC, commenting: “This ending is of course drawn, but the defence is not easy”. Dvoretsky interjects: “No, it is very easy” – if you know what to do!

60.Kxf3 Rc5 61.Rh8

(adjourned: the game could be given up here but Karpov saw no reason not to test Yusupov’s technique.)

White will attack the side away from the defending King with his own King. Black cannot touch the Pawn with the King here, but will keep the Rook away from the opposing King for checking distance: here the c-file is best so it can check from the seventh rank.

The White Rook is passively placed which is the downfall of his winning hopes. Black draws just as he would without the a-Pawn on the board.

(N.B. With the White Rook active and the Black Rook passive White can and should win by getting the King in.)

61…Rg5 62.Ke4 Rc5 63.Kf4 Rc4+ 64.Ke5 Rc5+ 65.Ke6 Rg5 66.Kf7 Rc5!

[66…Rd5? lacks checking distance and loses 67.h6 Rd6 68.h7 Rd7+ 69.Ke6]

67.Rh7

[67.h6 Rc7+! (67…Rh5? 68.Kg7) 68.Kf6 Rc6+]

67…Kxa6 68.h6 Rc7+ 1/2-1/2

Now, adding a Bishop’s Pawn on the same side as Rook’s Pawn is a real borderline case: theoretically drawn, but quite possible to lose it if you’re muddle-headed.

Marshall, F – Rubinstein, A [D32] San Sebastian (4), 1911

1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 c5 4.cxd5 exd5 5.Nf3 Nc6 6.Bg5 Be7 7.Bxe7 Ngxe7 8.e3 cxd4 9.Nxd4 Be6 10.Nxe6 fxe6 11.Qg4 Nf5 12.e4 d4 13.0-0-0 Qh4 14.Qxh4 Nxh4 15.Nb5 0-0-0 16.e5 Rhf8 17.Nd6+ Kb8 18.f4 g5 19.Bb5 gxf4 20.g3 Nf3 21.Bxc6 bxc6 22.Rhf1 fxg3 23.hxg3 Kc7 24.Ne4 Kb6 25.b4 Rf5 26.Nd6 Rff8 27.Ne4 Kb5 28.Nc5 Nxe5 29.Rxf8 Rxf8 30.Nxe6 Rf2 31.Rxd4 Rxa2 32.Nc7+ Kb6 33.Ne6 Rg2 34.Ng5 Rxg3 35.Nxh7 Kb5 36.Kc2 Nc4 37.Rd7 Ra3 38.Rb7+ Nb6 39.Nf6 Kxb4 40.Nd7 Kb5 41.Kb2 Ra4 42.Kb3 c5 43.Ne5 Rb4+ 44.Kc3 a5 45.Rb8 Ka4 46.Kc2 Nd5 47.Rc8 Kb5 48.Nd7 Rc4+ 49.Kb2 Nb6 50.Nxb6 Kxb6
Position 19: Marshall-Rubinstein 1911 (RP+BP)

This is the game that made this type of ending notorious; not the first time that it had occurred, but Rubinstein, such a master of endings and particularly Rook endings, may have fancied his chances here…
51.Kb3 Rb4+ 52.Kc3 Kb5 53.Rb8+ Ka4 54.Rc8 Rb3+ 55.Kc2 Rb5 56.Rh8 Kb4 57.Rh1 a4 58.Kb2 a3+ 59.Ka2 Ka4 60.Rc1 Ra5 61.Rb1 c4 62.Rb8 Rc5 63.Ra8+ Kb4 64.Rxa3 c3 65.Rb3+ Kc4 66.Rb8

1/2-1/2

Keres Paul GM (EST) – Sokolsky A [C71/14] Moskva Chigorin-mem (28.11.4, 1947

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 d6 5.c4 Bg4 6.d3 Nge7 7.h3 Bxf3 8.Qxf3 Ng6 9.Nc3 Be7 10.Be3 Bg5 11.0-0 0-0 12.Qg4 h6 13.Ne2 Bxe3 14.fxe3 Qg5 15.Qg3 Qxg3 16.Nxg3 Nge7 17.Kf2 g6 18.Ke2 Kg7 19.Kd2 h5 20.a3 h4 21.Ne2 f5 22.Nc3 fxe4 23.Nxe4 Rf5 24.Rg1 Raf8 25.Bd1 Rf1 26.Bf3 Rxa1 27.Rxa1 Nd8 28.b4 Ne6 29.Rb1 b6 30.a4 Rb8 31.Nc3 Ng5 32.Nd5 Nxf3+ 33.gxf3 Nxd5 34.cxd5 Ra8 35.Rc1 Ra7 36.e4 Kf6 37.Ke3 g5 38.d4 exd4+ 39.Kxd4 Ke7 40.e5 dxe5+ 41.Kxe5 Kd7 42.Rg1 Ra8 43.Rxg5 Re8+ 44.Kd4 Re1 45.Rg7+ Kd6 46.Rg6+ Kd7 47.Rg4 Kd6 48.Rg6+ Kd7 49.a5 Rb1 50.Kc4 Rc1+ 51.Kd3 Rd1+ 52.Ke3 Rxd5 53.axb6 cxb6 54.Rxb6 a5 55.Ke4 Rh5 56.Kf4 axb4 57.Rxb4 Ke6 58.Kg4 Rh8 59.Kg5 Rg8+ 60.Kxh4
Position 20: Keres-Sokolsky 1939 (RP+BP)

You can win these positions, by working your pieces right in and trying to achieve “Lucena” without allowing the “short side draw”. This cannot be forced. Black should resist the advance, get the King to the King’s-side and only once the Pawns are advanced send the Rook away to a1.
60…Kf5 61.Rg4 Rh8+ 62.Kg3 Ra8 63.h4 Ra1

Right square, wrong moment. White gets the Rook active behind the h-Pawn and threatens to run it with the King cut off.

64.h5 Ra6 65.Rh4 Rh6 66.Rf4+ Kg5 67.Rg4+ Kf5 68.Kh4 Rh8 69.Rg5+ Kf6 70.Kg4 Kf7 71.Rf5+ Kg7 72.Kg5 Rg8 73.Rf6 Kh7+

Well, the King has made it to h7 but the Black Rook now need to be on the far rank (a1-h1). White whips the King in to win.

74.Rg6 Ra8 75.f4 Ra1 76.Re6 Rg1+ 77.Kf6 Rf1 78.f5 Rf2 79.Re5 Rh2 80.Re7+ Kh6 81.Re8 Kh7 82.Ke6 Re2+ 83.Kf7 Ra2 84.f6 Ra6 85.Ke7 Ra7+ 86.Kf8 Ra6 87.f7 Ra7 88.Rc8 Ra1 89.Ke7 1-0

Here’s a successful defence.

Bondarevsky I – Keres Paul GM (EST) [D95/04] Leningrad-Moskva (25.01.39), 1939

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 d5 4.e3 Bg7 5.Qb3 c6 6.Nf3 0-0 7.Bd2 e6 8.Bd3 b6 9.0-0 Bb7 10.e4 c5 11.exd5 cxd4 12.Na4 e5 13.Nxe5 Nxd5 14.Nc5 Ne7 15.Nxb7 Qc7 16.Ng4 h5 17.Nd6 Qxd6 18.c5 bxc5 19.Nh6+ Bxh6 20.Bxh6 Rd8 21.Bc4 Kh7 22.Bd2 Nbc6 23.Bxf7 Rab8 24.Qh3 Ne5 25.Bf4 Rf8 26.Rae1 N7c6 27.Bxg6+ Qxg6 28.Bxe5 Rbe8 29.Bd6 Rxe1 30.Rxe1 Qxd6 31.Re6 Qd5 32.Qd3+ Qf5 33.Qxf5+ Rxf5 34.Rxc6 Re5 35.Kf1 d3 36.Rd6 c4 37.b3 Rb5 38.Ke1 cxb3 39.axb3 Rxb3 40.Kd2 Rb2+ 41.Ke3 Re2+ 42.Kf3 Rd2 43.Ra6 Rd1 44.Kg3 Kg7 45.Rxa7+ Kf6 46.Rd7 Kf5 47.Kf3 h4 48.h3 d2 49.Rd8 Kf6 50.Rd3 Kf5 51.Rd6 Ke5 52.Rd8 Kf6 53.Rd4 Kf5 54.Rd7 Ke6 55.Ke2 Rg1 56.Rxd2 Rxg2 57.Rd4 Kf5 58.Rxh4

58…Rg1 59.Kf3 Ra1 60.Rg4 Ra3+ 61.Kg2 Rb3 62.f3 Rb2+ 63.Kg3 Rb1 64.h4 Rg1+ 65.Kh3 Rb1 66.Kg2 Rb2+ 67.Kg3 Rb1 68.h5 Rb6 69.Rh4 Rh6 70.Ra4 Rb6 71.Ra5+ Kf6 72.Kg4 Rb1 73.Ra6+ Kg7 74.f4 Rg1+ 75.Kf5 Rh1 76.h6+ Kh7 77.Re6 Rb1 78.Ke5 Rb5+ 79.Ke4 Rb1 80.f5 Rb2 81.Kf4 Rg2 82.Ke5 Ra2 83.Rb6 Ra1 84.Kf4 Rg1

Black is in a good defensive position.

85.Ra6 Rg2 86.Rc6 Rg1 87.Rd6 Rg2 88.Ra6 Rg1 89.Re6 Rg2 90.Ke5 Ra2 91.Kd6 Ra5 92.f6 Kg6 93.Re8

And now a cute finish to draw.

93…Ra6+ 94.Ke7 Rxf6 95.Rg8+ Kh7 96.Rg7+ Kh8 97.Kxf6 stalemate

1/2-1/2

Example games: more complex Rook Endings

Alekhin, A – Capablanca, J [D51] Wch13-Buenos Aires (34), 1927: active Rook in attack

1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5 Nbd7 5.e3 c6 6.a3 Be7 7.Nf3 0-0 8.Bd3 dxc4 9.Bxc4 Nd5 10.Bxe7 Qxe7 11.Ne4 N5f6 12.Ng3 c5 13.0-0 Nb6 14.Ba2 cxd4 15.Nxd4 g6 16.Rc1 Bd7 17.Qe2 Rac8 18.e4 e5 19.Nf3 Kg7 20.h3 h6 21.Qd2 Be6 22.Bxe6 Qxe6 23.Qa5 Nc4 24.Qxa7 Nxb2 25.Rxc8 Rxc8 26.Qxb7 Nc4 27.Qb4 Ra8 28.Ra1 Qc6 29.a4 Nxe4 30.Nxe5 Qd6 31.Qxc4 Qxe5 32.Re1 Nd6 33.Qc1 Qf6 34.Ne4 Nxe4 35.Rxe4 Rb8 36.Re2 Ra8 37.Ra2 Ra5 38.Qc7 Qa6 39.Qc3+ Kh7 40.Rd2 Qb6 41.Rd7 Qb1+ 42.Kh2 Qb8+ 43.g3 Rf5 44.Qd4 Qf8 45.Rd5 Rf3 46.h4 Qh8 47.Qb6 Qa1 48.Kg2 Rf6

It’s all in the details. White swaps Queens when he can keep his Rook active. 49.Qd4 Qxd4 50.Rxd4 Kg7 51.a5 Ra6 52.Rd5

52…Rf6 53.Rd4 Ra6 54.Ra4!

That’s the one. Now White wants his King in. 54…Kf6 55.Kf3 Ke5 56.Ke3 h5 57.Kd3 Kd5 58.Kc3 Kc5 59.Ra2! (pass: Black decides to put the King on guard duty) 59…Kb5

[59…Ra7 60.a6 Kb6 61.Kb4]

60.Kb3 Kc5

[60…Rxa5 61.Rxa5+ Kxa5 62.Kc4]

61.Kc3 Kb5 62.Kd4! Rd6+ 63.Ke5 Re6+ 64.Kf4 Ka6 65.Kg5! Re5+ 66.Kh6 Rf5 67.f4

[67.Kg7 Rf3 White triangulates. 68.Kg8 Rf6 69.Kf8 Rf3 70.Kg7 Rf5 71.f4!]

67…Rc5! 68.Ra3 Rc7 69.Kg7 Rd7 70.f5! gxf5 71.Kh6 f4! Black’s doing his considerable best. 72.gxf4 Rd5 73.Kg7 Rf5 74.Ra4 Kb5 75.Re4! Ka6 76.Kh6 Rxa5 77.Re5 Ra1 78.Kxh5 Rg1 79.Rg5 Rh1 80.Rf5 Kb6 81.Rxf7 Kc6 82.Re7! 1-0

Bakulin – Dvoretsky,M, Moscow, 1974 (active Rook in defence)

18…Re6
I tried to think of something after

[18…Nc6 I became suspicioous of the endgame after 19.c4 d4 20.Nc5 b6 21.Nd3 Vaganian, a specialist in the French Defence, assessed this position as highly unfavourable to Black.]

19.Nc5 Rxe1+ 20.Rxe1 Another intriguing idea immediately occurred to me: 20…Rc8!

[20…Ng6 21.Nxb7 Rb8 22.Nc5 Rxb2 23.Re8+ Nf8 looks very dubious 24.g3 f6 25.Nd7 Kf7 26.Rxf8+ Ke7 27.Rb8]

21.Rxe7 Kf8 An eye for combinations is sometime essential even in ‘boring’ endgames! 22.Rxb7

[22.Re2 Rxc5=]

22…Rxc5 23.c3 d4 24.Kf1

[24.Rb3?? d3 25.Kf1 Re5]

24…dxc3 25.bxc3 Rxc3 26.Rxa7 Rc2

I knew for certain that this was a draw, and a fairly simple one at that, and so went for my combination without hesitation. 27.g3 g6 28.Kg2 Kg7 29.Kf3 h5 30.h4 Kf6 31.Ke3 Rc3+ 32.Ke4 Rc2 33.f3 Re2+ 34.Kf4 Rb2 35.Ra6+ Kg7 36.Ra3 Kf6 37.Ra6+ Kg7 38.Ra4 Kf6

[38…Rf2!?]

39.g4 hxg4 40.fxg4 Rf2+ 41.Kg3 Rc2 42.Rf4+

[42.g5+ Ke5]

42…Ke6 43.a4

[43.Rf2 Rc3+ 44.Kf4 f6]

43…f5 44.gxf5+ gxf5 45.Rf2 Rc4 46.Ra2 Rc3+ 47.Kf4 Rc4+ 48.Kg3

[48.Kg5 Rg4+ 49.Kh5 Kf6 50.a5?? Rg8]

48…Rc3+ 49.Kg2 Rc4 50.h5 Rh4 1/2-1/2

Duras, O – Capablanca, J [D37] rook ending: 4P/3P on same side (11), 1913

1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.c4 e6 4.Nc3 dxc4 5.e3 a6 6.Bxc4 b5 7.Bd3 Bb7 8.a4 b4 9.Nb1 c5 10.0-0 Nc6 11.dxc5 Bxc5 12.Qe2 Qd5 13.Rd1 Qh5 14.Nbd2 Na5 15.Nf1 0-0 16.Ng3 Qg4 17.e4 Nb3 18.Rb1 Rfd8 19.Be3 Nxe4 20.Bc2 Bxe3 21.Qxe3
[21.Bxb3 Bxf2+ 22.Kh1 Bxg3]

21…Nbc5 22.h3 Qg6 23.Nxe4 Rxd1+ 24.Rxd1 Bxe4 25.Bxe4 Nxe4 26.Qd4 h6 27.Qxb4 Nf6 28.Qb7 Qe4 29.Qxe4 Nxe4 30.b4 Nc3 31.Rd3

[31.Ra1 Rb8 32.Ra3 Nd5]

31…Nxa4 32.Ra3 Nb6 33.Ne5 Kf8 34.Nd3 Nd5 35.Ra4 Rb8 36.Rxa6 Nxb4 37.Nxb4 Rxb4

Capa’s play in this ending was so strong and convincing it took people a while to realise that this type of ending is probably a draw in theory

38.Ra7 h5 39.g3 h4 40.gxh4 ?

[40.g4]

40…Rxh4 41.Kg2 e5 42.Kg3 Rd4 43.Ra5

[43.h4]

43…f6 44.Ra7 Kg8 45.Rb7 Kh7 46.Ra7 Kg6 47.Re7 Rd3+

[47…Rd3+ idea 48.Kh4 Rf3]

48.Kg2

[48.f3 Kf5 49.Rxg7 e4 50.h4 Rxf3+;

48.Kg4 f5+ 49.Kh4 Kf6 50.Ra7 g5+ 51.Kh5 Rxh3#]

48…Rd5 49.Kg3 f5 50.Ra7 Rd3+ 51.Kg2 e4 52.Ra4 Kg5 53.Ra5 g6 54.Rb5 Kf4 55.Ra5 Rd2 56.Ra4 Kg5

[56…g5 the game from Chernev gives this move as the game continuation, and then… 57.Rb4 Ke5 58.Rb5+ Rd5 59.Rb8 f4 60.Rg8]

57.Kg1 Kf4 58.Kg2 g5 59.Rb4 Ke5 60.Rb5+ Rd5 61.Rb8 f4 62.Rg8

this is the same position as in Chernev ‘s book 62…Kd4

[62…Rd2 this also looks good: 63.Rxg5+ Kf6 64.Rg4 Kf5 65.Kf1 f3 66.Ke1 Re2+ 67.Kf1 Ra2 68.Ke1 Ra1+ 69.Kd2 Rf1 70.Ke3 Re1+ 71.Kd4 Re2 72.Rg8 Rd2+ 73.Ke3 Rd3#]

63.Kf1 Kd3 64.Ra8 e3 65.Ra3+ Ke4 66.fxe3 f3

[66…fxe3 this looks good, but fails: 67.Ra8 Rf5+ 68.Ke2 Rf2+ 69.Ke1 Kf3 70.Rf8+ Kg3 71.Re8 Rf3 72.Ke2]

67.Kg1

[67.Kf2 Rd2+ 68.Kg3 Rg2#]

67…Rd3

[67…Rd3 IDEA 68.Rxd3 Kxd3 69.Kf2 Ke4 70.Kf1 Kxe3 71.Kg1 Ke2]

68.Ra8

[68.Ra5 Kxe3 69.Re5+ Kf4 70.Ra5 g4 71.Ra4+ Ke3 72.Ra1 g3]

68…Kxe3 69.Re8+ Kf4 70.Rg8 Rd1+ 71.Kf2 Rd2+ 72.Kf1

[72.Kg1 g4 73.Rxg4+ Ke3 74.Rg8 having been lured to g4 there is no check for the rook on the e-file 74…Rd1+ 75.Kh2 f2 76.Re8+ Kd2 77.Rd8+ Kc2 78.Rxd1 else the Black K will run up the Q-side at the checking White rook 78…Kxd1 79.Kg2 Ke2]

72…Rh2 73.Kg1 Rxh3 74.Rg7 g4 75.Rg8 Kg3 …and White resigned. So impressive was Capa’s play that for years books suggested that this ending R+4P v. R+3P was a win, even with all the pawns on the same side of the board. Now, improvements for Duras are known.

[75…Kg3 76.Rf8 f2+ 77.Rxf2 Rh1+ 78.Kxh1 Kxf2 79.Kh2 g3+]

0-1

Capablanca, J – Kreymbourg, A [D02] 1910: a double Rook ending

1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Bf4 e6 4.e3 c5 5.c3 Nc6 6.Bd3 Bd6 7.Bxd6 Qxd6 8.Nbd2 e5 9.dxe5 Nxe5 10.Nxe5 Qxe5 11.Bb5+ Bd7 12.Qa4 Qc7 13.0-0-0 0-0 14.Bxd7 Nxd7 15.Nf3 Qc6 16.Qxc6 bxc6 17.Nd2 Ne5 18.Kc2 c4 19.Rhf1 f5 20.Nf3 Nxf3 21.gxf3 Rae8

Black appears to have better Rooks, but the Q-side pawns are advanced and vulnerable. This vulnerability costs Black the a-file, and that costs him the activity of his Rooks. 22.Rd4 Rf6 23.b3 cxb3+ 24.axb3 Kf7 25.Kd3 Re7 26.Ra1 Ke6 27.Ra6 Rc7 28.Rda4 g5 29.h4 g4 30.Ke2 gxf3+ 31.Kxf3 Rff7 32.Ke2 Kd6 33.b4 Rb7 34.h5

White is well placed to attack several Black pawns. 34…h6 35.f4 Rg7 36.Kd3 Rge7 37.Ra1 Rg7 38.Kd4 Rg2 39.R6a2 Rbg7 40.Kd3 Rxa2 41.Rxa2

We are now in a single-Rook ending. Black now gives up the open file. 41…Re7 42.Rg2 Re6 43.Rg7 Re7 44.Rg8 c5 45.Rg6+ Re6 46.bxc5+ Kd7 47.Rg7+ Kc6 48.Rxa7 Kxc5 49.Rf7 1-0

Capablanca, J – Tartakower, S [A80] NY, 1924

1.d4 f5 2.Nf3 e6 3.c4 Nf6 4.Bg5 Be7 5.Nc3 0-0 6.e3 b6 7.Bd3 Bb7 8.0-0 Qe8 9.Qe2 Ne4 10.Bxe7 Nxc3 11.bxc3 Qxe7 12.a4 Bxf3 13.Qxf3 Nc6 14.Rfb1 Rae8 15.Qh3 Rf6 16.f4 Na5 17.Qf3 d6 18.Re1 Qd7 19.e4 fxe4 20.Qxe4 g6 21.g3 Kf8 22.Kg2 Rf7
[22…Qc6 23.Qxc6 Nxc6 24.c5 Re7]

23.h4 d5 24.cxd5 exd5 25.Qxe8+ Qxe8 26.Rxe8+ Kxe8 27.h5 Rf6

[27…gxh5 28.Rh1 Kf8 29.Rxh5 Kg8 30.Rxd5]

28.hxg6 hxg6 29.Rh1 Kf8

[29…Ke7 30.Rh7+ Rf7 else 31.Rg7 31.Bxg6]

30.Rh7

rook on the seventh 30…Rc6 31.g4

[31.Rd7 ? 31…Nc4 32.Rxd5 Ne3+]

31…Nc4 32.g5 Ne3+ 33.Kf3

33…Nf5

[33…Nd1 this counterattack fails, because of White’s strong King and K-side pawns 34.Rh6 Kg7 35.f5 Nxc3 36.Kf4 Ne4 37.Bxe4 dxe4 38.f6+ Rxf6+ 39.gxf6+ Kxh6 40.Kxe4 Kh7 41.Kd5 Kg8 42.Kc6 g5 43.Kxc7 g4 44.d5 g3 45.d6 g2 46.d7 g1Q 47.d8Q+ Kh7 48.Qe7+ Kh6 49.Qg7+ Qxg7+ 50.fxg7 Kxg7 51.Kb7 Kf7 52.Kxa7 Ke7 53.Kxb6 Kd7 54.Kb7]

34.Bxf5 gxf5 35.Kg3 Rxc3+ 36.Kh4 Rf3 37.g6 Rxf4+ 38.Kg5 Re4

39.Kf6 using the f-pawn as cover 39…Kg8 40.Rg7+ Kh8 41.Rxc7 Re8 42.Kxf5 Re4 43.Kf6 Rf4+ 44.Ke5 Rg4 45.g7+

45…Kg8

[45…Rxg7 46.Rxg7 Kxg7 47.Kxd5 Kf7 48.Kd6 ! 48…Ke8 49.Kc7 Ke7 50.d5]

46.Rxa7 Rg1 47.Kxd5 Rc1 48.Kd6 Rc2 49.d5 Rc1 50.Rc7 Ra1 51.Kc6 Rxa4 52.d6

[52.d6 ! by declining the Kxb6 capture White’s K gets shelter 52…Rd4 53.d7 Rc4+ 54.Kb7 Rd4 55.Kc8]

1-0

Capablanca, J – Kupchik, A [C49] rook ending: various themes, 1913

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bb5 Bb4 5.0-0 0-0 6.Bxc6 bxc6 7.Nxe5 Qe8 8.Nd3 Bxc3 9.dxc3 Qxe4 10.Re1 Qh4 11.Qf3 Ba6 12.Bf4 Rac8 13.Be5 Bxd3 14.cxd3 Qg4 15.Bxf6 Qxf3 16.gxf3 gxf6

An early Rook ending: White is better not just because of the neater pawns but because he can immediately activate the Rook. 17.Re4 Rfe8 18.Rae1 Re6 19.R1e3 Rce8 20.Kf1 Kf8 21.Ke2 Ke7 22.Ra4 Ra8 23.Ra5 d5 24.c4 Kd6 25.c5+ Kd7 26.d4 f5 27.Rxe6 fxe6 28.f4 Clearing the third rank for the Rook. 28…Kc8 29.Kd2 Kb7 30.Ra3 Rg8 31.Rh3 Rg7 32.Ke2 Ka6 33.Rh6 Re7 34.Kd3 Kb7 35.h4 Kc8 36.Rh5 Kd7 37.Rg5 Rf7 38.Kc3 Kc8 39.Kb4 Rf6 40.Ka5 Kb7 41.a4 a6 42.h5 Rh6 43.b4 Rf6

White is poised on both fronts. 44.b5 The only break, which also allows Black to become active. 44…axb5 45.axb5

Defend or counterattack? 45…Rf8

[45…Rf7 46.h6 Re7 47.Rg7 is hopeless: so Black must counterattack.]

46.Rg7 Ra8+ 47.Kb4 cxb5 48.Kxb5 Ra2 49.c6+ Kb8 50.Rxh7 White has an h-pawn. Can the lone Black Rook do enough to compensate? 50…Rb2+ 51.Ka5 Ra2+ 52.Kb4 Rxf2 53.Re7 Rxf4 54.h6 Rxd4+ 55.Kb5 Rd1 56.h7 Rb1+ 57.Kc5 Rc1+ 58.Kd4 Rd1+ 59.Ke5 Re1+ 60.Kf6 Rh1 61.Re8+ Ka7 62.h8Q Rxh8 63.Rxh8 Kb6 64.Kxe6 Kxc6 65.Kxf5 Kc5 66.Ke5 c6 67.Rh6 Kb5 68.Kd4 1-0

Selected games in play-through format

Winning a drawn endgame

Posted on by

Two observations:

1.

When you look at the games of club players, you often see draws agreed in positions which are clearly better for one side, e.g.:

Blackmore – Isaac (116) (3), 1995

Black to move
Move chosen: draw agreed

Better move(s): 33…c4

Commentary:
Black has generally better pieces and two Bishops, while White has little play. If you look around the position there are lots of little ideas for Black (…Rb3, …Be2) and few for White. The pawn move suggested gives the Black Knight a superb post and releases the Bishop on e7. I don’t mean to pick on Mark, I’ve done the same myself (more than once!), but the point must be made.

2.

When you read books about Capablanca, you read comments like:

“Whether this advantage is decisive or not does not interest Capablanca. He simply wins the ending! That’s why he is Capablanca!” — EUWE

Can we become more like Capablanca?

Most people would say no, because Capa is a genius, with almost faultless insight into the theory of endgames. But you don’t need to be a genius to win drawn endgames. Have a look at this one from “Chess for Tigers”:

Miles,AJ – Webb,S (Birmingham) 1975
(wKg2,Qd4,Rb1,d1,Pa2,f2,g3,h2; bKg7,Qf5,Rc8,f7,Pa7,f6,g6,h7)

Webb was surprised and I guess a little peeved that Miles refused a draw in this position.
23… Rc2 24. a3 Qc5 25. Rb3 Qxd4?

Simplifying but going on the defensive – a needless concession.

[25… Re7]

[25… Rc7 26. Rf3 Qc6]

26. Rxd4 Re7 27. Ra4 Kf7 28. Ra6

White has contrived a little threat, which costs nothing, and Black might be careless…

28… Rce2 29. Rb4

[29. Rf3 R2e6]

29… Rd7 30. Rba4 Ree7 31. g4! h5?

Creating targets on the King’s-side – another concession. Holding tight would have allowed a weakened square on f6 but White has no way through.

[31… Kg7 32. h4 Kf7 33. g5 fxg5 34. hxg5 Kg7 35. Rf6]

32. gxh5 gxh5 33. R4a5 Kg6 34. h4

Now, this is probably still drawn, but Black has slipped a long way back since the first diagram.
34… Rc7? Careless.

[34… Rf7]

35. Rg5+ Kf7 36. Rxh5 Kg7

Now it’s lost. The technical phase may give White problems, but that’s not the point: Black should never have lost the Pawn.

37. Rf5 Rf7 38. Kg3 Rc3+ 39. f3 Rc1 40. Rfa5 Rcc7 41. Kg4 Rc4+ 42. f4 Rcc7 43. Kf5 Rb7 44. a4 Rbc7 45. h5 Rb7 46. h6+ Kxh6 47. Rxf6+ Kg7 48. Rxf7+ Kxf7 49. Ra6 Rc7 50. Kg5 Kg7 51. f5 Rd7 52. a5 Rc7 53. Rd6 Kf8 54. Rd8+ Ke7 55. Rh8 Kd6 56. Kg6 Rc1 57. Ra8 Ke5 58. Re8+ Kf4 59. f6 Rg1+ 60. Kf7 Ra1 61. Kg7 Kf5 62. f7 Rg1+ 63. Kf8 Kg6 64. Re6+ 1-0

What’s going on here? It’s not chess theory or insight, but psychology.

White was playing as though he was going to win. He kept trying to put pressure on the opponent, collecting little advantages, looking for opportunities.

Black was playing as thought he was trying to draw. In fact, he tried and failed. He kept solid, but passive, and kept making little concessions – and the biggest concession really was his attitude.

Black should have been playing much more assertively, not thinking about the result, but the position, trying to play the strongest and most active moves, making concessions only when forced to. In fact, it is said in truth that the best way to draw is to play for a win. Not in a reckless way that Tarrasch wryly termed “playing for the loss”, but rather like Miles did – keep playing actively – and not like Webb did – don’t give an inch that you aren’t forced to.

Once we have realised this, we can see it in other games:

Cooper – Hebden (Lutterworth) 1986
(wKg1,Qf4,Rf2,Pa2,b2,g2,h2; bKg8,Qe6,Rf8,Pa7,f7,g7,h6)

Completely drawn, but probably so is the starting position of a game of chess! You must play actively, make the most of your assets, and set your opponent problems. White has a Queen’s-side majority, which must be advanced. Black must advance his majority on the King’s-side.
1. b3 Rd8 2. Qf3 Rc8 3. g3 Rc1+ 4. Kg2 Re1 5. Qa8+ Kh7 6. Qf3

[6. Qxa7 Qe4+]

6… Kg6 7. Qd3+ f5 8. Qf3

White is just hacking about, perhaps thinking vaguely about perpetual check, waiting for the draw to turn up. These hopeful checks are actually time-wasters, and hope gradually fades…

8… Re3 9. Qb7 Kh7 10. Rf3 Re1 11. Rf2 h5 12. Qf3 g6 13. Qb7+ Kh6 14. Qf3

 

Black is making progress, White none. Compare the first diagram!
14… Re4 15. Qc3 g5 16. Qh8+ Kg6 17. Qc3 Qd5 18. Kg1 h4 19. Qd2 Rd4 20. Qe2 Rd1+ 21. Rf1 Qd4+

 

White is almost lost.
22. Kh1

[22. Qf2 Qxf2+ 23. Kxf2 Rd2+ loses a Pawn, but that may have been the best chance.]

22… Qd5+ 23. Kg1 Rd2

 

Winning? White must go for perpetual, Black must make a break for the Queen’s-side.
24. Qe8+ Kg7 25. Qe7+ Kh6 26. Qf6+ Kh5 27. Qh8+ Kg4 28. Rf4+ gxf4 29. Qxh4+ Kf3 30. Qxf4+ Ke2 31. Qf1+ Ke3 32. Qf4+ Kd3 0-1

And, if you will forgive the immodesty, once you have seen this done, you can even imitate it.

Wilcox, RJ (154) – Regis, D (168) (Paignton #3) 1996

I did have the advantage earlier, but was now struggling to draw.
40. b4 Re4

Time control, and I offered a draw. Declined! So, Black must fight like fury. Activity is everything, going passive is equivalent to resigning.

41. b5

[41. Rf1]

41… Qd3 42. Qa2

 

I had to seal a move here. While I was fiddling with envelopes, Peter overheard him say to a friend of his “I should win this one pretty quickly” (!). Black is genuinely in difficulty (once that Pawn takes another step, Black can start to worry!) But Black has the move.
42… Re2 (Sealed)

43. Qa8+?

This “hopeful check” actually just exposes the Rook.

43…Kh7 44. Rf1 Re7

White obviously hoped Rf1 was strong; he and his colleagues had overlooked Black’s best reply. This can be seen as a simple oversight, but also as reward for Black using his pieces as actively as possible.

45. Qf3 Qxb5 46. Qf6=

OK, we have have now a new phase. This is objectively a drawn position, I believe. I thought this at the time, but was happy to play on, knowing that White had to adjust his mood to suit the new situation. I had the example of the Miles-Webb game very much in my mind while playing.

46…Qe2 47. Ra1 Qe6! 48. Qd4

[48. Qxe6 fxe6 obtaining a passed Pawn is very much what I hoped for]

48… Qe5!? (bluff)

49. Qa4?

[49. Qxe5 Rxe5 50. Ra7= is absolutely level. Normally you try to keep pieces on when trying to draw, but while Black has an extra Pawn, with Pawns on only one side, it’s a draw. White should have known this.]

49… Qd5 50. Rf1?

Passive. [50. Rd1]

50… Re2 51. Rg1 Re3 52. Kh2 Qe5+ 53. Kh1

[53. g3 Re2+ 54. Rg2 Rxg2+ 55. Kxg2 Qe2+ 56. Kg1 Qf3 57. Kh2 Qf2+ 58. Kh1 Qxg3-+ ]

53… Qf5 54. Qa2 h4

Collecting another advantage (weak g-Pawn, maybe a passed f-Pawn if White exchanges g- for h-Pawn).

[54… Rc3 55. Qe2 Rc2]

55. Qd2?

Another do-nothing move, and this time it’s fatal. The position is still interesting and may be no more than drawn, but I hope you can see the same attitudes at work here.

55… Qe4 56. Qf2 Rxh3# 0-1

A couple from Capa: the first is the game about which Euwe made his remark.

Capablanca,Jose – Vidmar,Milan sr [New York ] (12) [C98] 1927

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Ba4 Nf6 5. O-O Be7 6. Re1 b5 7. Bb3 d6 8. c3 Na5 9. Bc2 c5 10. d4 Qc7 11. Nbd2 O-O 12. h3

These days played before d2-d4, otherwise a fairly typical Lopez position.
12… Nc6 13. d5 Nd8 14. a4

A typical undermining thrust in the Ruy Lopez; Black’s Pawns offer a target for White and counterplay for Black!

14… b4 15. Nc4 a5

 

16. Nfxe5! Ba6 17. Bb3 dxe5 18. d6 Bxd6 19. Qxd6 Qxd6 20. Nxd6 Nb7 21. Nxb7 Bxb7

White has the two Bishops and pressure against Black’s advanced but rather immobile Queen’s-side Pawns.
“Whether this advantage is decisive or not does not interest Capablanca. He simply wins the ending! That’s why he is Capablanca!” — EUWE

22. cxb4 cxb4 23. f3 Rfd8 24. Be3 h6 25. Red1 Bc6 26. Rac1 Be8 27. Kf2

KUFTE – “King Up For The Ending”!

27… Rxd1 28. Rxd1 Rc8

 

Poor Black’s Rook has no entry point, as the unmoved White Pawn on b2 secures the c3 square. This is a concrete example of Tarrasch’s statement that every Pawn move loosens the position.
29. g4 Bd7 30. Bb6

Decisive. Now there are a couple of exchanges, which leave only White’s best piece (Bb6) and Black’s worst piece (Nf6) on the board! 30… Be6

[30… Ra8 31. Bc7 snookering the Rook [31. Rc1 and Rc5]]

31. Bxe6 fxe6 32. Rd8+ Rxd8 33. Bxd8 Nd7 34. Bxa5 Nc5

 

35. b3 Nxb3 36. Bxb4 Nd4 37. a5 1-0
Capa seemed born with this facility at endgames.

Capablanca,Jose – Corzo y Principe,Juan (Havana m ) (09) [A83] 1901

1. d4
This is the ninth game of the match for the Cuban Championship, which Capa played at the age of 12. He took 24 minutes over this game.

1… f5 2. e4 fxe4 3. Nc3 Nf6 4. Bg5 c6 5. Bxf6 exf6 6. Nxe4 d5 7. Ng3 Qe7+ 8. Qe2 Qxe2+ 9. Bxe2 Bd6 10. Nf3 O-O 11. O-O Bg4 12. h3

Black could try to play for a win with the two Bishops, but instead exchanges apparently seeking a draw.

12… Bxf3 13. Bxf3 Bxg3 14. fxg3 Nd7 15. Rfe1 Rae8 16. Kf1 f5 17. Rxe8 Rxe8 18. Re1 Rxe1+ 19. Kxe1 Nf6

 

20. Kd2 (tempting…) Ne4+ 21. Ke3 Nd6
[21… Nxg3 22. Kf4 Ne4

[22… Nf1 23. Be2 Nd2 24. Kxf5]

23. Kxf5]

22. Be2 Kf7 23. Kf4 Kf6

Chernev comments “The position may look drawish, but it is to Capablanca’s liking; he often manages to squeeze a win out of a theoretical draw”. I haven’t seen a GM assessment of this position and Chernev (by no means a weak player) does not commit himself as to the ‘proper’ result of this endgame. Without wishing to enter the (possibly fruitless) debate about whether this position is in fact drawn, White does have the advantage of Bishop over Knight, with play on both sides of the board. If White can create tension in more than one area of the board, Black’s Knight will find itself over-committed. While all the Black Pawns are on the board and are all on light squares, White’s Bishop lacks scope, but if things open up a little, the Black Pawns may become vulnerable.

24. h4 g6

[24… h6 25. h5]

25. g4 h6 26. g5+ hxg5+ 27. hxg5+ Ke7 28. g4 fxg4 29. Bd3

 

Now the King’s-side has opened up the strength of the Bishop begins to show itself.
29… Nf5

concedes a passed Pawn

[29… Kf7 (Hooper) 30. Kxg4 Nb5 31. c3 Nc7 “with good drawing chances”; neither Bishop nor King have an obvious entry point.]

30. Kxg4 Nxd4

[30… Ke6 31. Bxf5+ gxf5+ 32. Kf4 and who has the most tempi to lose on the Queen’s-side? Chernev assumes Black will run out of moves, but it’s worth being sure! Perhaps..

32… a5

[32…b6 33. b4 a6

[33… a5 34. bxa5 bxa5 35. a4]

34. a4 a5 35. bxa5 bxa5 36. c3]

33. a4 b6 34. b3 b5 35. c3 b4 36. cxb4 axb4 37. a5]

31. Bxg6 c5 32. Kh5 Ne6 33. Kh6 Kf8 34. Bf5 Ng7

[34… Nd4 35. Bd7 Nxc2 36. g6 Kg8 37.

Be6+ Kh8 38. g7#]

35. Bc8 b6 36. g6 d4

 

Black’s only hope is to do something with the Queen’s-side Pawns, but they lack support.
37. b3 Kg8 38. a4 Kf8 39. Bg4 Ne8 40. Kh7 Ng7 41. Kh6 Ne8 42. Be2 Ng7 43. Bc4 Ne8

 

White begins a long King-march
44. Kg5 Ke7

[44… Kg7 45. Bb5 Nd6 46. Bd3 Ne8 47. Kf5]

45. Kf5 Ng7+ 46. Ke5 Nh5

[46… Kd7 47. Kf6 Ne8+ 48. Kf7 Nd6+ 49. Kf8]

47. Be2 Ng7 48. Kd5 Ne8

[48… Kd7 49. Bg4+]

49. Kc6 Ng7 50. Kb7 Kd6

 

White attacks the Pawn chain at the base!
51. Kxa7 Kc7 52. Ka6 Ne8 53. Bf3 Ng7 54. Bd5 Ne8

[54… Nf5 55. Be4 Ng7 56. Kb5 Ne8 57. a5 Nd6+ 58. Ka6 Nxe4 59. axb6+ Kb8 60. g7 Nf6 61. Kb5 Kb7 62. Kxc5 Ng8 63. Kxd4]

55. Bf7 Ng7 56. Kb5

Now the White King covers the break at a5, and the Pawns at b6 and d5. 56… Nf5

 

57. a5 Nd6+
[57… bxa5 58. Kxc5]

58. Ka6 bxa5

[58… Nf5 59. axb6+ Kb8 60. Kb5]

59. g7 1-0

 

Two last examples, which illustrate the same problem, although at rather different levels of the game…

Marshall-Capablanca, 1909

1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 c5 4.cxd5 exd5 5.Nf3 Nc6 6.g3 Be6 7.Bg2 Be7 8.O-O Nf6 9.Bg5 Ne4 10.Bxe7 Qxe7 11.Ne5 Nxd4 12.Nxe4 dxe4 13.e3 Nf3+ 14.Nxf3 exf3 15.Qxf3 O-O 16.Rfc1

“He should have advanced his K-side pawns at once to counterbalance the advance of Black on the Q-side. White’s inactivity on his stronger wing took away all the chances he had of drawing the game.” CAPABLANCA
16…Rab8 17.Qe4 Qc7 18.Rc3 b5 19.a3 c4 20.Bf3 Rfd8 21.Rd1 Rxd1+ 22.Bxd1 Rd8 23.Bf3 g6 24.Qc6 Qe5 25.Qe4 Qxe4 26.Bxe4 Rd1+ {!} 27.Kg2 a5 28.Rc2 b4 29.axb4 axb4 30.Bf3 Rb1 31.Be2 b3 32.Rd2 Rc1 33.Bd1 c3 34.bxc3 b2 35.Rxb2 Rxd1 36.Rc2 Bf5 37.Rb2 Rc1 38.Rb3 Be4+ 39.Kh3 Rc2 40.f4 h5 41.g4 hxg4+ 42.Kxg4 Rxh2 43.Rb4 f5+ 44.Kg3 Re2 45.Rc4 Rxe3+ 46.Kh4 Kg7 47.Rc7+ Kf6 48.Rd7 Bg2 49.Rd6+ Kg7 0-1

There are some bones to pick in the details of this game, but the flow of it is very convincing. I believe that it is helpful to play over the whole of games like this quite quickly to start with, and then go back over the moves more slowly. Knowing what happens later can help you unpick the thread of the game to the point where a mistake was made, although here Capa points his finger firmly at the move of the King’s Rook to defend the King’s-side.

 

Democrito – DrDave: EICS rated blitz game EICS, Aarhus, Denmark (-), 1997

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 Bc5 4. Nc3 Nf6 5. d3 O-O 6. O-O d6 7. Bg5 h6 8. Bxf6 Qxf6 9. Nd5 Qd8 10. c3 a6 11. Ba4 b5 12. Bc2 Ne7 13. Ne3 f5 14. exf5 Nxf5 15. Nxf5 Bxf5 16. d4 Bxc2 17. Qxc2 exd4 18. Nxd4 Qf6 19. Rad1 Rae8 20. Rfe1 d5 21. Qd2 Bd6 22. Nf3 c6 23. Qd4 Qxd4 24. Nxd4 Rxe1+ 25. Rxe1 c5 26. Nf3 Kf7 27. Ne5+ Bxe5 28. Rxe5 Rd8

Very much analogous, I think. Black can create a passed Pawn straight away, but I would advise White to try and create trouble or at least force some exchanges with f2-f4, Kg1-f2, g2-g4 and so on. Instead, my opponent plays “safe”, which is actually fatal!
29. Kf1?! Kf6 30. Re2?

That Rook was fine where it was.

30…d4 31. cxd4 cxd4 32. f3?

Again, merely solid, not active.

32…d3 33. Rd2 Ke5 34. Ke1 Kd4 35. Kd1 Rd5 36. g3 Ke3 37. f4 g5 38. fxg5 hxg5 39. h4 Rf5 40. Ke1 gxh4 41. gxh4 Rf1+ 42. Kxf1 Kxd2 43. h5 Kc1 44. h6 d2 45. h7 d1=Q+ 46. Kf2 Qh5 White resigned 0-1

The Chess Scene

Posted on by

Chess Scene – The Chess E-Zine for the Amateur<br /> Player

[painstakingly recreated by Dave Regis]

News, Views and Gossip

This section of Chess Scene is intended to provide a forum for news
about Chess Clubs around the world, amateur events and the progress
of us merely mortal chess players towards immortal heights!

  […]

Gene Thompson’s Search For Great Chess, Part V

[…]

“In Part V of his series Gene Thompson explores an
interesting hypothesis on why amateurs ‘Force The Issue’. It’s one
of his best articles which certainly rings true with me. Is there a
moral? Well, perhaps it is: play for a positional advantage and the
tactics will look after themselves. “
Alex
Bellinger.

 Hello from sunny Seattle!

 Things are going well here; the Sonics are cleaning up in
the NBA playoffs, the Mariners have slipped a little, but are still
doing great, and my chess is coming along slowly but surely! Yeah,
it’s a little cocky placing my talent along side their’s, but what
the heck, it’s my article! 🙂

 Today’s topic is … “Forcing The Issue.”

 I am involved with an e-mail chess match with a gentleman
who wrote me in response to these articles. Among the many things
we have discussed (long chained monomers, Polymer chemistry, and
chess sets), the most disheartening issue was our failure to play
as well as we feel we should.

 In his case, one of his regular opponents can beat him
despite having not studied chess at all. This opponent is an
intelligent individual, but so is my friend (he’s the Polymer
Chemist, not me!). My friend is studying the correct chess
literature: Nimzovitch, Evan’s and the like. But, he still finds it
difficult to hold his own! What could be his problem?!?

 My case is similar. I’ve been studying good(?) books:
Yasser Seirawan’s series, and Mike Basman’s openings book. But, I
find it difficult, actually impossible, to beat programs I once
did. What is going on here?

 Well, a couple of nights ago, it came to me. I had just
been beaten by CM3000 again, and was I in a nasty mood. My wife
asked if it was doing any good whining about the loss. No, but I
wanted to anyway. When I calmed down, I thought about how I played
the game. I didn’t. Once I got past the opening, I just started
moving pieces more or less randomly! I was looking for a position
that contained a tactical solution, but not really doing anything
to create one. The computer wasn’t forcing the issue, just beating
me with my own moves. Hmmm.

 Here is my hypothesis: My friend and I are both afflicted
with the same problem, FTI – Forcing The Issue. We have spent so
much effort learning tactics from setup positions, that once we are
in a real game, we try to apply our lessons to positions that don’t
warrant it. Subconsciously, we believe that every position has some
stunning combination in it that will allow us to win. When we look
for it, if it’s not there (most often the case), we try to force
one, causing a lost game.

 When I was in college, I loved to rockclimb. The school
was perfect for it. All the buildings were of rough-cut stone, so I
could practice anytime I wanted (well, almost). I got so used to
blowing through a few technical moves and finishing a “route,” that
when I got on real rock I was totally lost. The basics just weren’t
a part of my climbing. I could always (according to MY memory)
cruise through the crux (the hardest, most technical part of the
climb) but would usually blow it navigating the main route. I think
I’m seeing a connection here.

  Studying tactics in setup positions is a VERY necessary
part of learning chess, but, knowing when to apply tactical
knowledge is, at this point in my education, to me even more
important. My friend’s opponent instinctively makes “better” moves
because my friend is making weaker moves, and so am I. Given a
setup position, he would most likely find the solution much faster
than his opponent. In a general position, we would both likely find
a combination that wasn’t there.

 So, after all of this babble, what is the solution? Play
more chess, learn to read a position for tactical possibilities,
and let them happen (hopefully to your opponent). Easier said than
done, n’est-ce pas?

 Have a good one & GO SONICS!!!!

 Gene
gthompson@pin-corp.com

The Moller Attack

Posted on by 
From D.Regis@exeter.ac.uk  Mon Dec  2 13:33:20 1996
Subject: Re: Guioco Piano notes
To: lorda@boat.bt.com (Andrew Lord)
Date: Mon, 2 Dec 1996 13:33:18 +0000 (GMT)


Hi Andrew


> I've just got addicted to chess 

Sympathy: there is no cure...


> I'm stuck on a problem with a Guiuco Piano line. I got as far 
> as:
> 
> 1. e4 e5
> 2. Nf3 Nc6
> 3. Bc4 Bc5
> 4. c3 Nf6
> 5. d4 exd4
> 6. cxd4 Bb4+
> 7. Nc3 Nxe4
> 8. 0-0 BxN
> 9. d5
> 
> Then you say some black options don't work, including 9...Ne5
> You cite a progression:
> 
> 9. ... Ne5
> 10. bxc3 NxB
> 11. Qd4
> 
> You then have black playing 11. ... f5 to protect one of the 
> attacked Knights, allowing the white Queen to take the other 
> one. Instead why can't black simply play 11. ... Ncd6? I can't 
> see a way after this for white to win the piece back. 


Interesting - the verdict on 11...f5 I think has stood for 100 years,
until now! - but the best move probably isn't 11...Ncd6, or 11...f5,
but 11...0-0. 

Let's see: after 

9...Ne5 10.bxc3 Nxc4 11.Qd4

 Black can play instead of 11...f5:

 [A] 11...Ncd6(?) 

  White doesn't get the piece back but seems to get a strong attack through

  12.Qxg7 Qf6 13.Qxf6 Nxf6 14.Re1+ Kf8 15.Bh6+ Kg8 16.Re5 Nfe4
  17.Re7 as in Durao-Ferrera, 1994;

 [B] 11...0-0(!) 

  12.Qxc4

 (12.Qxe4 b5 13.a4 c6 14.axb5 cxb5 15.Qd4 Nb6 16.Be3 d6
  and White has nothing, as in a Dzindzhikashvili-Karpov rapid game)

  12...Nd6 

  And maybe White's best try is now 13.Qd3,
  according to Gufeld and Stesko.

  I'll make a note on the page.

Thanks for your prompt: if nothing else, I've discovered that these
old lines are far from played out! 


May your pieces harmonise with your Pawn structure and
your sacrifices be sound in all variations

D  _       
 / "()/~   Dave Regis  &8^D*  WWW: http://www.ex.ac.uk/~dreg../chess.html
|| \_/|    = DrDave on BICS 
~\   /                        "...what else exists in the world but chess?"
 _|||__SHEU: ~/sheu.html                                          -- NABOKOV

A planning test (Botvinnik-Kan)

Posted on by

White to play and win

Ruy Lopez, Exchange Variation: White wins

Posted on by

The Exchange Variation of the Ruy Lopez: examples of White wins

Introduction

You may know that after:

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Bxc6 dxc6

…White cannot win a pawn with 5. Nxe5 because of 5….Qd4.

What you may not know is that White can play this line to win, because in some sense, he is already a pawn up!

Let me explain.

If you have an extra pawn, you should:

  1. exchange off pieces, not pawns
  2. create a passed pawn
  3. advance the passed pawn and either:
    1. – force your opponent to give up material to stop it queening, or
    2. – force your way into the opponent’s position to take material yourself (usually pawns)

With this in mind, let’s look at the pawn formation after

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Bxc6 dxc6 5. d4 exd4 6. Qxd4 Qxd4 7. Nxd4

 

-+-+-+-+
XxX-+xXx
-+x+-+-+
+-+-+-+-
-+-+p+-+
+-+-+-+-
pPp+-PpP
+-+-+-+-

Now, if there were only Kings on the board, White could easily create a passed pawn with f4, e5 and f5 and e6.

But Black cannot do the same on the other side, unless White allows all the front pawns to come to a4,b4 and c4, when there is a trick with …b3! e.g. axb3, c3! bxc3 and …a3. As long as White avoids that trap, the passed pawn on the King’s side should win.

This is what I mean by already being a pawn up. You have an extra pawn on the King’s-side, and Black’s extra Queen’s-side pawn is useless.

Emanuel Lasker played this several times, and more recently, Bobby Fischer discovered that you could also play 5. O-O! with an awkward moment for Black, because now there really is a threat to the e5 pawn which is not easy to meet e.g. 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Bxc6 dxc6 5. O-O f6 6. d4 exd4 7. Nxd4 c5 8. Nb3 Qxd1 9. Rxd1 and compared to Lasker’s line, you are even further ahead in development. You do need to be prepared for other lines e.g. 5…Bg4.

I quote Lasker’s most famous successes with this line below; just in case you think this is all ancient history, here is an example from the German Bundeslige from recent years.

White’s plan, as ever, is to advance on the King’s-side to get a passed pawn or entry for attack.

Deffner,R – Brueggemann,J [C68], NRW

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Bxc6 dxc6 5. d4 exd4 6. Qxd4 Qxd4 7. Nxd4 Bd7 8. O-O O-O-O 9. Nc3 Bd6 10. Re1 f6 11. f4

 

-+jT-+sT
+xXl+-Xx
x+xL-X-+
+-+-+-+-
-+-NpP-+
+-N-+-+-
pPp+-+pP
R-B-R-K-

11… Bg4 12. Nf3 Nh6 13. h3 Bc5+ 14. Be3 Bxe3+ 15. Rxe3 Bxf3 16. Rxf3 Rd2 17. Rf2 Rhd8 18. Re1 b5 19. Rxd2 Rxd2 20. Re2 Rxe2 21. Nxe2

 

-+j+-+-+
+-X-+-Xx
x+x+-X-S
+x+-+-+-
-+-+pP-+
+-+-+-+p
pPp+n+p+
+-+-+-K-

21… c5 22. Kf2 Kd7 23. g4 Kd6 24. Ke3 c4 25. Nd4 c5 26. Nf3 Nf7 27. h4 a5 28. g5

 

-+-+-+-+
+-+-+sXx
-+-J-X-+
XxX-+-P-
-+x+pP-P
+-+-Kn+-
pPp+-+-+
+-+-+-+-

28… a4 29. Nh2 h5 30. gxf6 gxf6 31. Nf1 Nh8 32. f5

 

-+-+-+-S
+-+-+-+-
-+-J-X-+
+xX-+p+x
x+x+p+-P
+-+-K-+-
pPp+-+-+
+-+-+n+-

32… Ke5 33. Ng3 Nf7 34. Nxh5 Nd8 35. Ng3 b4 36. h5 b3

 

-+-S-+-+
+-+-+-+-
-+-+-X-+
+-X-Jp+p
x+x+p+-+
+x+-K-N-
pPp+-+-+
+-+-+-+-

37. cxb3 axb3 38. axb3 cxb3 39. h6 c4 40. Ne2 Nf7 41. h7 Nh8 42. Nf4 Nf7 43. Ng6+ Kd6 44. Kd4 1-0

 

 

Lasker,Emanuel – Steinitz,W, Moscow, 1896

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Bxc6 dxc6 5. Nc3 f6 6. d4 exd4 7. Qxd4 Bd6 8. Be3 Ne7 9. Nd2 c5 10. Qd3 b5 11. Qe2 c4 12. Qh5+ g6 13. Qh6 Kf7 14. f4 Qf8 15. Qh4 Nc6 16. Nd5 f5 17. Qf6+ Kg8

 

t+l+-DjT
+-X-+-+x
x+sL-Qx+
+x+n+x+-
-+x+pP-+
+-+-B-+-
pPpN-+pP
R-+-K-+r

18. Qxf8+ Bxf8 19. Nxc7 Rb8 20. O-O-O Kf7 21. Nf3 h6 22. e5 Be7 23. Nd5 Bd8 24. h4 Rg8 25. Rhe1 Be6 26. Bc5 b4 27. Ne3 Rb5 28. Bd6 c3 29. b3 a5 30. Rd3 a4 31. Nd4 Nxd4 32. Rxd4 Bxh4 33. Re2 axb3 34. cxb3 Be7 35. Nc2

 

-+-+-+t+
+-+-Lj+-
-+-Bl+xX
+t+-Px+-
-X-R-P-+
+pX-+-+-
p+n+r+p+
+-K-+-+-

35… g5 36. Bxe7 Kxe7

 

-+-+-+t+
+-+-J-+-
-+-+l+-X
+t+-PxX-
-X-R-P-+
+pX-+-+-
p+n+r+p+
+-K-+-+-

37. Nxb4 gxf4 38. Nc6+ Kf7 39. Rxf4 Rg4 40. Rd4 h5 41. Nd8+ Ke7 42. Nxe6 Kxe6 43. Rd6+ Ke7 44. Rh6 Re4 45. Rf2 Rbxe5 46. Rxh5 Ke6 47. Rh6+ Kd5 48. Rf6 Kd4 49. Rd6+ Kc5 50. Rd8 Re2 51. Rf3

 

-+-R-+-+
+-+-+-+-
-+-+-+-+
+-J-Tx+-
-+-+-+-+
+pX-+r+-
p+-+t+p+
+-K-+-+-

51… Rxa2 52. Rxc3+ Kb4 53. Rc2 Rxc2+ 54. Kxc2 Re2+ 55. Rd2 Re4 56. Rf2 Rg4 57. Kb2 Re4 58. g3 Re5 59. Rf4+ Kb5 60. Ka3 Rd5 61. Rf3 Ka5 62. b4+ Kb5 63. Kb3 Kb6 64. Kc4 Kc6 65. Rb3 Re5 66. b5+ Kb6 67. Kd4 Re4+ 68. Kd5 Re8 69. Kd6 Re1 70. Rf3 Kxb5 71. Rxf5+ Kc4 72. g4 Kd4 73. g5 Rg1 74. Ke6 Ke4 75. Kf6 Ra1 76. g6 Ra7 77. Re5+ Kf4 78. Re7 1-0

 

Lasker,Emanuel – Tarrasch,S, Duesseldorf, 1908

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Bxc6 dxc6 5. d4 exd4 6. Qxd4 Qxd4 7. Nxd4 c5 8. Ne2 Bd7 9. b3 Bc6 10. f3 Be7 11. Bb2 Bf6 12. Bxf6 Nxf6 13. Nd2 O-O-O 14. O-O-O Rd7 15. Nf4 Re8 16. Nc4 b6 17. a4 a5 18. Rxd7 Nxd7 19. Rd1 Ne5 20. Nxe5 Rxe5 21. c4

 

-+j+-+-+
+-X-+xXx
-Xl+-+-+
X-X-T-+-
p+p+pN-+
+p+-+p+-
-+-+-+pP
+-Kr+-+-

21… Re8 22. Nh5 Rg8 23. Rd3 f6 24. Kd2 Be8 25. Ng3 Bd7 26. Ke3 Re8 27. Nh5 Re7 28. g4 c6 29. h4 Kc7 30. g5 f5 31. Ng3 fxe4 32. Nxe4 Bf5 33. h5 Rd7 34. Rc3 Rd1 35. Kf4

 

-+-+-+-+
+-J-+-Xx
-Xx+-+-+
X-X-+lPp
p+p+nK-+
+pR-+p+-
-+-+-+-+
+-+t+-+-

35… Bd7 36. Re3 Rh1 37. Ng3 Rh4+ 38. Ke5 Rh3 39. f4 Kd8 40. f5 Rh4 41. f6

 

-+-J-+-+
+-+l+-Xx
-Xx+-P-+
X-X-K-Pp
p+p+-+-T
+p+-R-N-
-+-+-+-+
+-+-+-+-

41… gxf6+ 42. Kxf6 Be8 43. Nf5 Rf4 44. g6 hxg6 45. hxg6 Rg4 46. Rxe8+ Kxe8 47. g7 Kd7 48. Nh4 Rxg7 49. Kxg7 Ke6 50. Nf3 Kf5 51. Kf7 Ke4 52. Ke6 Kd3 53. Kd6 Kc3 54. Kxc6 Kxb3 55. Kb5 1-0

 

Lasker,Emanuel – Janowski,D, Paris, 1909

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Bxc6 dxc6 5. d4 exd4 6. Qxd4 Bg4 7. Nc3 Qxd4 8. Nxd4 O-O-O 9. Be3 Bb4 10. Nde2 Bxe2 11. Kxe2 Bxc3 12. bxc3

 

-+jT-+sT
+xX-+xXx
x+x+-+-+
+-+-+-+-
-+-+p+-+
+-P-B-+-
p+p+kPpP
R-+-+-+r

12… Nf6 13. f3 Nd7 14. Rad1 Ne5 15. Rd4 b6 16. f4 Nd7 17. Rhd1 c5 18. R4d3 Nb8 19. Kf3 Rde8

 

-Sj+t+-T
+-X-+xXx
xX-+-+-+
+-X-+-+-
-+-+pP-+
+-PrBk+-
p+p+-+pP
+-+r+-+-

20. f5 f6 21. g4 Re7 22. Bf4 Rhe8 23. Re3 Nc6 24. g5 Na5 25. h4 Nc4 26. Re2 Rf7 27. Rg1 Kd7 28. h5 Nd6 29. h6 fxg5 30. Rxg5

 

-+-+t+-+
+-Xj+tXx
xX-S-+-P
+-X-+pR-
-+-+pB-+
+-P-+k+-
p+p+r+-+
+-+-+-+-

30… g6 31. fxg6 hxg6 32. Rxg6 Ref8 33. Rg7

 

-+-+-T-+
+-Xj+tR-
xX-S-+-P
+-X-+-+-
-+-+pB-+
+-P-+k+-
p+p+r+-+
+-+-+-+-

33… Rxg7 34. hxg7 Rg8 35. Rg2 Ne8 36. Be5 Ke6 37. Kf4 Kf7 38. Kf5 1-0

 

Lasker – Capablanca, St.Petersburg, 1914

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Bxc6 dxc6 5. d4 exd4 6. Qxd4 Qxd4 7. Nxd4 Bd6 8. Nc3 Ne7 9. O-O O-O 10. f4 Re8 11. Nb3 f6

 

t+l+t+j+
+xX-S-Xx
x+xL-X-+
+-+-+-+-
-+-+pP-+
+nN-+-+-
pPp+-+pP
R-B-+rK-

12. f5 b6 13. Bf4 Bb7 14. Bxd6 cxd6 15. Nd4 Rad8 16. Ne6

 

-+-Tt+j+
+l+-S-Xx
xXxXnX-+
+-+-+p+-
-+-+p+-+
+-N-+-+-
pPp+-+pP
R-+-+rK-

16… Rd7 17. Rad1 Nc8 18. Rf2 b5 19. Rfd2 Rde7 20. b4 Kf7 21. a3 Ba8 22. Kf2 Ra7 23. g4 h6 24. Rd3 a5 25. h4

 

l+s+t+-+
T-+-+jX-
-+xXnX-X
Xx+-+p+-
-P-+p+pP
P-Nr+-+-
-+p+-K-+
+-+r+-+-

25… axb4 26. axb4 Rae7 27. Kf3 Rg8 28. Kf4 g6 29. Rg3 g5+ 30. Kf3 Nb6 31. hxg5 hxg5 32. Rh3 Rd7 33. Kg3 Ke8 34. Rdh1

 

l+-+j+t+
+-+t+-+-
-SxXnX-+
+x+-+pX-
-P-+p+p+
+-N-+-Kr
-+p+-+-+
+-+-+-+r

34… Bb7 35. e5 dxe5 36. Ne4 Nd5 37. N6c5 Bc8 38. Nxd7 Bxd7 39. Rh7 Rf8 40. Ra1 Kd8 41. Ra8+ Bc8 42. Nc5

 

r+lJ-T-+
+-+-+-+r
-+x+-X-+
+xNsXpX-
-P-+-+p+
+-+-+-K-
-+p+-+-+
+-+-+-+-

1-0