Clock control

Posted on February 22, 1998 by DrDave

Or, The Thirty-Third
Piece

A. Introduction

Chess is played not with 32 pieces, but 33: the handling of the
extra piece, the clock, sometimes being the deciding factor.

Time trouble is the most obvious manifestation of clock
difficulties but there are other symptoms: I remember Brian Hewson
being irritated just on principle that I had played an automatic
move in a tense position – after the game it became clear that I
had missed a mate in three at that point.

So, below I’ll talk around time trouble but also time
management in general, and what you might want to do about it.
Often, simply diagnosing a problem is to start curing it.

A. Introduction
B. Time trouble

B1. Causes of time trouble
B2. Effects of time trouble
B3. Treatment of time trouble

C. Time management

C1. Regis, Hampton, 1993 (Game 2)<h2><a name=”RTFToC2″ id=”RTFToC2″>Or, The Thirty-Third
Piece</a></h2>

<hr />

<H1><a name=”RTFToC3″ id=”RTFToC3″>A. Introduction</a></h1>

Chess is played not with 32 pieces, but 33: the handling of the

extra piece, the clock, sometimes being the deciding factor.

  Time trouble is the most obvious manifestation of clock

difficulties but there are other symptoms: I remember Brian Hewson

being irritated just on principle that I had played an automatic

move in a tense position – after the game it became clear that I

had missed a mate in three at that point.

  So, below I’ll talk around time trouble but also time

management in general, and what you might want to do about it.

Often, simply diagnosing a problem is to start curing it.

<ul>

<li><a href=”#RTFToC3″>A. Introduction</a></li>

<li><a href=”#RTFToC4″>B. Time trouble</a></li>

</ul>

<ul>

<li><a href=”#RTFToC5″>B1. Causes of time trouble</a>

<ul>

<li><a href=”#RTFToC6″>Inadequate theoretical preparation</a></li>

<li><a href=”#RTFToC7″>Inadequate practical preparation</a></li>

<li><a href=”#RTFToC8″>A genuinely complicated game</a></li>

<li><a href=”#RTFToC9″>Conscious entry into time trouble</a></li>

<li><a href=”#RTFToC10″>Doubts concerning analysis</a></li>

<li><a href=”#RTFToC11″>Doubts linked to own style</a></li>

<li><a href=”#RTFToC12″>Doubts linked to opponent’s style</a></li>

<li><a href=”#RTFToC13″>Doubts linked to importance of the

game</a></li>

<li><a href=”#RTFToC14″>Doubts linked to previous course of the

game</a></li>

<li><a href=”#RTFToC15″>Doubts linked to own experience</a></li>

</ul>

</li>

<li><a href=”#RTFToC16″>B2. Effects of time trouble</a>

<ul>

<li><a href=”#RTFToC17″>Failure to react to changes in the

position</a></li>

<li><a href=”#RTFToC18″>Inclination towards obvious moves</a></li>

<li><a href=”#RTFToC19″>Seeking exchanges</a></li>

<li><a href=”#RTFToC20″>Postponing decisions</a></li>

<li><a href=”#RTFToC21″>Playing safe and solid moves</a></li>

<li><a href=”#RTFToC22″>Reliance on constant elements of the

position</a></li>

<li><a href=”#RTFToC23″>Less strategy, more tactics</a></li>

<li><a href=”#RTFToC24″>Temptation to blitz the time-troubled

opponent</a></li>

</ul>

</li>

<li><a href=”#RTFToC25″>B3. Treatment of time trouble</a></li>

</ul>

<ul>

<li><a href=”#RTFToC26″>C. Time management</a></li>

</ul>

<ul>

<li><a href=”#RTFToC27″>C1. Regis, Hampton, 1993 (Game 2)</a></li>

<li><a href=”#RTFToC28″>C2. Tal-Bronstein 1960 (Game 6)</a></li>

<li><a href=”#RTFToC29″>C3. Botvinnik-Tal 1960 (Game 7)</a></li>

<li><a href=”#RTFToC30″>D. References</a>

<div class=”c1″>

<ul>

<li><a href=”#RTFToC31″>Game 1: (59) Korchnoi – Suetin [C83] Moscow

(XXVII USSR Ch.), 1960</a></li>

<li><a href=”#RTFToC32″>Game 2: Regis,D (1935) – Hampton,M (1900)

[E91]</a></li>

<li><a href=”#RTFToC33″>Game 3: Botvinnik ,M – Tal ,M [E10]: Match,

Moscow (Russia) Match, Moscow (Russia) (8), 1960</a></li>

<li><a href=”#RTFToC34″>Game 4: Gligoric,S – Tal,M [A78] Yugoslavia

ct Yugoslavia ct (4), 1959</a></li>

<li><a href=”#RTFToC35″>Game 5: Blackstock,L – Webb,S [C09]

Borehamwood, 1977</a></li>

<li><a href=”#RTFToC36″>Game 6: Tal, Mikhail, Bronstein, David,

Baku ch-SU, 1961</a></li>

<li><a href=”#RTFToC37″>Game 7: Botvinnik,M (2500) – Tal,M [E69] WM

Moskau, 1960</a></li>

</ul>

</div>

<hr />

<H1><a name=”RTFToC4″ id=”RTFToC4″>B. Time trouble</a></h1>

Time trouble is time pressure that you cannot bear or want to be

rid of: different players have different views about what is

tolerable. The Grandmaster and psychologist Krogius gives a horror

show of time trouble examples in his book on chess psychology. He

classifies the examples as follows:

<hr />

<h2><a name=”RTFToC5″ id=”RTFToC5″>B1. Causes of time

trouble</a></h2>

<hr />

<h3><a name=”RTFToC6″ id=”RTFToC6″>Inadequate theoretical

preparation</a></h3>

Cures: better theoretical preparation (duh) but also

improved experience: with more experience of different types of

position you will have improved general assessment/intuition. It is

an unrealistic goal to set yourself to be able to play any type of

position, but if you have a weakness, work on it.

  On the other hand it is not a complete cure: Bronstein

has encyclopaedic knowledge, wonderful intuition… and a marked

time trouble habit.

<hr />

<h3><a name=”RTFToC7″ id=”RTFToC7″>Inadequate practical

preparation</a></h3>

Cures: more practice, practice at speed chess

<hr />

<h3><a name=”RTFToC8″ id=”RTFToC8″>A genuinely complicated

game</a></h3>

“This is ‘normal’ time trouble and I have no intention of

giving it up.” – Botvinnik.

  There is no doubt that some good players are prepared to

put in a good half-hour or so in the early middlegame in the belief

that the position deserves it and the expectation that it will be

rewarded by an easier – maybe winning – game later.

  I remember when Kramnik beat Kasparov on the Black side

of a Semi-Slav he criticised Kasparov for making a move after only

quarter of an hour or so. He said that this was too fast, and that

he would have taken what the position deserved – “maybe one

hour”(!).

<hr />

<h3><a name=”RTFToC9″ id=”RTFToC9″>Conscious entry into time

trouble</a></h3>

In order to upset the normal run of events. – See Game 1.

<hr />

<h3><a name=”RTFToC10″ id=”RTFToC10”>Doubts concerning

analysis</a></h3>

“Do not search for objectively the best move because frequently

there is no such move. In most cases it is simply a matter of taste

– simply look for a good move!” – Spielmann

  In a complex position, do not always try to resolve it

tactically, but maybe just play a good positional move.

(Nimzovitch)

Cure: Have confidence in your own judgement and

ability, at least the courage to learn from any mistake you might

be making.

<hr />

<h3><a name=”RTFToC11″ id=”RTFToC11″>Doubts linked to own

style</a></h3>

In World Championship matches Botvinnik very often fell into time

trouble in complex, dynamic positions conjured up by those wizards

of the chessboard, Bronstein and Tal. Bronstein’s time trouble, by

contrast, was in relatively simple positions where Botvinnik had a

small – maybe insignificant – positional advantage.

Cure: Go for positions you feel at home in; study

positions you need to feel at home in.

<hr />

<h3><a name=”RTFToC12″ id=”RTFToC12″>Doubts linked to opponent’s

style</a></h3>

e.g. against opponent who has a large plus score against you.

Cure: win a game…!

<hr />

<h3><a name=”RTFToC13″ id=”RTFToC13″>Doubts linked to importance of

the game</a></h3>

e.g. this move is too important, I must be 110% sure…

Cure: put such thoughts aside if you can; play the

board.

<hr />

<h3><a name=”RTFToC14″ id=”RTFToC14″>Doubts linked to previous

course of the game</a></h3>

e.g. I should have won earlier: see Game 2

Cure: think about the position in front of

you!

<hr />

<h3><a name=”RTFToC15″ id=”RTFToC15″>Doubts linked to own

experience</a></h3>

e.g. a little knowledge dangerously distracting you from your own

judgement

Cure: Have confidence in your own judgement and

ability, at least the courage to learn from any mistake you might

be making.

<hr />

<h2><a name=”RTFToC16″ id=”RTFToC16″>B2. Effects of time

trouble</a></h2>

<hr />

<h3><a name=”RTFToC17″ id=”RTFToC17″>Failure to react to changes in

the position</a> 

<a name=”RTFToC18″ id=”RTFToC18″>Inclination towards obvious

moves</a></h3>

Cure: Think if you can for a moment longer, try not to get

in a rut of thinking.

<hr />

<h3><a name=”RTFToC19″ id=”RTFToC19″>Seeking exchanges</a> 

<a name=”RTFToC20″ id=”RTFToC20″>Postponing decisions</a> 

<a name=”RTFToC21″ id=”RTFToC21″>Playing safe and solid

moves</a> 

<a name=”RTFToC22″ id=”RTFToC22″>Reliance on constant elements of

the position</a></h3>

e.g grabbing back material too soon

Cure: To combat all of these tendencies, try to

play the move that you think best meets the requirements of the

position, not the requirements of your nerves.

<hr />

<h3><a name=”RTFToC23″ id=”RTFToC23″>Less strategy, more

tactics</a></h3>

Cure: You do need to check for concrete traps, but as Nimzo

says, you can sometimes short-circuit analysis of variations by a

good positional move. This is appropriate even in quickplay

finishes where you do not want to prolong the game.

<hr />

<h3><a name=”RTFToC24″ id=”RTFToC24″>Temptation to blitz the

time-troubled opponent</a></h3>

Game 3: “I made the last move instantaneously – as if seized by

the time pressure of my opponent. I had formerly seen that I would

win the exchange, but I had but to think a little; then I would

have come up with the absolutely correct idea: the other Rook must

go to c8 (winning the exchange but keeping the b7 Pawn.)” –

TAL

  [“Here it is: the hypnotic power of ‘natural’

moves!” – Krogius]

  “It could be noticed from my opponent’s expression

that he had been rather surprised by the unexpected turn of events,

but in spite of intense time pressure he successfully responded to

the reversal of the conditions and immediately found the best

continuation.” – Tal

Cure:

  “Instead, thoroughly analyse a plan several moves

deep and play the moves rapidly” – Krogius

  “Set a trap and play the moves rapidly.” –

Webb

  It is even possible to use your opponent’s propensity to

time trouble: see Games 4 and 5

<hr />

<h2><a name=”RTFToC25″ id=”RTFToC25″>B3. Treatment of time

trouble</a></h2>

“Time trouble is a completely surmountable difficulty… not

only (through) training in chess technique, but chiefly with

psychological training.” – Krogius

  Self-control is often a key to success in chess.

  Follow the principal rules about chess thinking: what is

my opponent’s idea?

  Diagnose your own causes of time trouble, and make a

conscious attempt to develop your decisions and resilience in those

circumstances.

  Use your opponent’s time: work out a provisional reply

for each move, and use your opponent’s time for looking at the

clock

  Botvinnik recommends playing training games where what

you are trying to improve is use of time – making it more even or

at least more appropriate to the position. He says that 90% of time

trouble addicts can be cured using this method, although Averbakh

adds “if so, then it seems I am among the remaining 10%… and

perhaps so is the author of the method…”

<hr />

<H1><a name=”RTFToC26″ id=”RTFToC26”>C. Time management</a></h1>

You do see a variety of strategies for the use of time in club

play: players who routinely use too much or too little time,

players who have a marked “stop-go” cycle, and players who seem to

be just haphazard in their use of time.

  Undoubtedly you can’t comment on this without respect to

the position, but it is worth reflecting on your own patterns of

chess play. I have routinely marked the times taken by myself and

my opponent for years – a minor additional distraction and I have

found it valuable food for thought. I believe it has led to me

making better use of the clock, which is to say, to use time when I

need to use it, and get on with it when I don’t.

  There are marked differences in the way people use the

clock, but I might be permitted a general observation or two:

Better players use more of their time than

worse ones. Moral: chess is hard, and the longer you

think the better, provided you have something to think with – that

is, you have an understanding of that type of position and have

ideas about the issues at stake.

Better players think when they are supposed

to: that is, when there is something to think about –

as opposed to just dithering in a level position. They are better

at judging the critical moments and turning points of a game, so

that when they are short of time later, the moves may be easy to

find because the game is decided by that point.

  Here are a few natural histories of the chess clock:

<hr />

<h2><a name=”RTFToC27″ id=”RTFToC27″>C1. Regis, Hampton, 1993 (Game

2)</a></h2>

<img alt=”[Graph of Clock Times (1)]” src=”/wp/chessx/clock1.gif” />

  White’s total elapsed time is shown above, and Black’s

below; control at 40 moves in 100 minutes. White lost on time at

move 39.

  This is the only game I have ever lost on time, and some

of the reasons are to be found in the notes. It was quite in

Krogius’ class of doubts linked to the earlier course

of the game.

 

  But on the graph you can also see some interesting

features of the use of time: Black having some periods of slow

play, followed by fast play, whereas White’s use is much more even

– however, White was unable to speed up at the end of the game when

approaching the time control. It may be the ideal style is more

even than Black’s and less even than White’s!

<hr />

<h2><a name=”RTFToC28″ id=”RTFToC28″>C2. Tal-Bronstein 1960 (Game

6)</a></h2>

<img alt=”[Graph of Clock Times (2)]” src=”/wp/chessx/clock2.gif” />

This chart shows the time taken for each move rather

than total time, and is taken from the Furstenburg/Bronstein title

“The Sorcerer’s Apprentice”. White above the line

and Black below. Who won?

”…Tal played the first seven moves with great

confidence, accepting my Pawn sacrifice. With his next five moves

he tried to justify his decision.”

”With hindsight one can see that from moves 18 to 24

Tal used a lot of time, trying to reduce the pressure of the Black

pieces, but it was in vain. It would have been better to use this

amount of time, about one hour, to play the opening more

carefully.”

”This is only one example and the reader who is

interested in this aspect of chess should start recording times; it

might well be that his chess improves immediately.”

 

<hr />

<h2><a name=”RTFToC29″ id=”RTFToC29″>C3. Botvinnik-Tal 1960 (Game

7)</a></h2>

<img alt=”[Graph of Clock Times (3)]” src=”/wp/chessx/clock3.gif” />

  Move by move, with notes by Tal:

  W13: “The text move is the most precise, but the time

spent in thinking about it proved that Botvinnik had not played

competitively for some time. Why was it necessary to waste ten

minutes out of an allotted two and one-half hours to play the most

evident and surely the strongest continuation of the previous

move?”

 

  B14: “Black took a long time to choose which plan he

would use in the middle game.”

  B18: “A rather long think for this move – sixteen

minutes. Black was calculating whether or not he should temporarily

pass on his idea and carry it our later.”

  B23: “It is interesting that Black spent fifteen minutes

thinking about the move that immediately followed the piece

sacrifice. … This is but a confirmation, if it can be

expressed this way, of an intuitive sacrifice, a confirmation of

the fact that Black did not calculate all of the variations

beginning with the sacrifice and ending with mate.”

  B28: “(After disturbance by spectators) I consciously

chose the less strong but safer continuation.”

  B36: “Beginning with the 26th move, Black has been

playing lightning chess.”

  B41: “Forty moves had been made but the opponents

remained in their places. Obviously, Botvinnik considered that

since Black was playing at such a rapid speed, he must have made a

mistake somewhere, and as for me, I was still full of energy.”

<hr />

<h2><a name=”RTFToC30″ id=”RTFToC30″>D. References</a></h2>

FURSTENBURG/BRONSTEIN – The Sorcerer’s Apprentice.

  KROGIUS – Psychology in Chess.

  TAL – Tal-Botvinnik 1960: Match for the World

Championship 1960.

  WEBB – Chess For Tigers.

<hr />

<h5><a name=”RTFToC31″ id=”RTFToC31″>Game 1: (59) Korchnoi – Suetin

[C83] Moscow (XXVII USSR Ch.), 1960</a></h5>

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.0-0 Nxe4 6.d4 b5

7.Bb3 d5 8.dxe5 Be6 9.Qe2 Be7 10.c3 0-0 11.Nd4 Qd7 12.f3 Nc5 13.Bc2

f6 14.exf6 Bxf6 15.Nxe6 Qxe6 16.Qxe6+ Nxe6 17.Bb3 Rad8 18.Rd1 Ne7

19.Nd2 Kf7 20.Rf1 c5u

<img alt=”+—————–+” src=”/wp/chessx/tx.gif” /> 

<img alt=”|” src=”/wp/chessx/lx.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=

“/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=

“/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”4″ src=”/wp/chessx/brd.gif” /><img alt=”.”

src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”4″ src=”/wp/chessx/brd.gif” /><img alt=”.”

src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”|”

src=”/wp/chessx/rx.gif” /> 

<img alt=”|” src=”/wp/chessx/lx.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=

“/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=

“/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”h” src=

“/wp/chessx/bnd.gif” /><img alt=”k” src=”/wp/chessx/bkl.gif” /><img alt=”0″

src=”/wp/chessx/bpd.gif” /><img alt=”p” src=”/wp/chessx/bpl.gif” /><img alt=

“|” src=”/wp/chessx/rx.gif” /> 

<img alt=”|” src=”/wp/chessx/lx.gif” /><img alt=”p” src=

“/wp/chessx/bpl.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.”

src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”n”

src=”/wp/chessx/bnl.gif” /><img alt=”g” src=”/wp/chessx/bbd.gif” /><img alt=

“.” src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=

“|” src=”/wp/chessx/rx.gif” /> 

<img alt=”|” src=”/wp/chessx/lx.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=

“/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”p” src=”/wp/chessx/bpl.gif” /><img alt=”0″

src=”/wp/chessx/bpd.gif” /><img alt=”p” src=”/wp/chessx/bpl.gif” /><img alt=

“+” src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=

“+” src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=

“|” src=”/wp/chessx/rx.gif” /> 

<img alt=”|” src=”/wp/chessx/lx.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=

“/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=

“/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=

“/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=

“/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”|” src=

“/wp/chessx/rx.gif” /> 

<img alt=”|” src=”/wp/chessx/lx.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=

“/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”B” src=”/wp/chessx/wbl.gif” /><img alt=”)”

src=”/wp/chessx/wpd.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”+”

src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”P” src=”/wp/chessx/wpl.gif” /><img alt=”+”

src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”|”

src=”/wp/chessx/rx.gif” /> 

<img alt=”|” src=”/wp/chessx/lx.gif” /><img alt=”P” src=

“/wp/chessx/wpl.gif” /><img alt=”)” src=”/wp/chessx/wpd.gif” /><img alt=”.”

src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”H” src=”/wp/chessx/wnd.gif” /><img alt=”.”

src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”P”

src=”/wp/chessx/wpl.gif” /><img alt=”)” src=”/wp/chessx/wpd.gif” /><img alt=

“|” src=”/wp/chessx/rx.gif” /> 

<img alt=”|” src=”/wp/chessx/lx.gif” /><img alt=”$” src=

“/wp/chessx/wrd.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”G”

src=”/wp/chessx/wbd.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”+”

src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”R” src=”/wp/chessx/wrl.gif” /><img alt=”I”

src=”/wp/chessx/wkd.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”|”

src=”/wp/chessx/rx.gif” /> 

<img alt=”+—————–+” src=”/wp/chessx/bx.gif” />

Suetin has gained the advantage and steadily increases the

pressure. Korchnoi was able to divert his opponent from the

measured tempo if his play only by provoking his own time

trouble.

21.f4 c4 22.Bd1 Nc6 23.Nf3 d4 24.Ng5+ Bxg5

25.fxg5+ Ke7 26.Re1 Kd6 27.cxd4 Nexd4 28.Bd2 Rde8 29.Rc1 Kd5 30.b3

Rxe1+ 31.Bxe1 Ne5 32.bxc4+ bxc4 33.Rb1 Rc8 34.Bc3 Nb5 35.Ba1 c3

36.a4 Nd6 37.Bb3+ Ke4 38.Re1+ Kf5 39.Bc2+ Ke6 40.Bb3+ Kf5 41.Bc2+

Ke6 42.Re3 Ndc4 43.Rxc3 Rd8 44.h3 g6 45.Bb3 Kf5 46.Kh2 Rc8 47.Rc2

Rc6 48.Re2 Rb6 49.Bc2+ Ke6 50.Bd4 Rd6 51.Bc3 Rb6 52.Kg3 Kd5 53.Kf4

Nc6 54.Re1 Rb7 55.Be4+ Kc5 56.Rc1 Rb3 57.Bg7 Nb4 58.Bf8+ Kd4

59.Rd1+ Nd3+ 60.Rxd3+ Rxd3 61.Bg7+ 1-0

  Suetin incorrectly believed that he had the chance of an

early win, began to hurry, committed some serious errors and

lost.This game decided first place in the championship.

<hr />

<h5><a name=”RTFToC32″ id=”RTFToC32″>Game 2: Regis,D (1935) –

Hampton,M (1900) [E91]</a></h5>

Clock control: Devon vs. Wilts devon vs. wilts, 1993

1.e4 0m 1…g6 0m 2.d4 1m 2…Bg7 0m 3.c4

1m

  Black was visibly upset by this move.

  I know from playing the Modern myself that few 1. e4

players will transfer to a Queen’s-side opening, but that’s always

been where my heart is.

3…d6 1m 4.Nc3 1m

4…Nf6 2mThe game is now more or less a King’s

Indian… [4…Nc6 Keeps in independent ‘Modern’

lines.]

5.Be2 2m 5…0-0 2m

6.Nf3 2m 6…c5 6m

  …or a Benoni. [6…e5 is the King’s

Indian]

7.d5 5m 7…Bg4 10m

8.Nd2 6mOver-eager.In any event, Black now starts

a phase of thinking for a long while over his moves.

[8.Ng1 Bxe2 9.Ngxe2]

8…Bxe2 14m 9.Qxe2 8m

9…Nfd7 14m 10.0-0 10m

10…Na6 15m 11.f4 11m

11…Qa5 30m 12.Nf3 15m

  I was feeling quite pleased here: that I had both a chess

and a psychological initiative out of the opening. I don’t think I

have played Benonis any more often than my opponent but have looked

at this type of position and felt at ease with it.

12…Nc7 36m

[12…Bxc3 13.bxc3 Qxc3 14.Bb2 Qa5 15.e5]

13.e5 20m 13…a6 44m

14.Bd2 23m 14…Qb6 45m

15.e6 29m looks good but perhaps I was not

sufficiently developed for this…

[15.b3]

15…fxe6 46m 16.dxe6

29m 16…Nf6 47m

  Black now has another long thinking phase, which leaves

him in time trouble for the rest of the game.

17.Ng5 35m

[17.Rae1 or 17 b3 17…Qxb2 18.Rb1 Qc2 19.Rxb7 Nfe8

20.Rc1 Qf5 21.Nd5]

17…d5 51m 18.cxd5 35m

18…Nfxd5 53m 19.Qf3 42m

19…Nxc3 68m 20.Bxc3 43m

20…Bxc3 75m 21.bxc3 46m

[21.Qxc3 Rf6 22.Qh3 h5 23.f5 c4+ 24.Kh1 Raf8 25.Nf7]

21…c4+ 83m 22.Kh1 46m

22…h6 84m 23.Nf7 56m

23…Nxe6 87m [23…Kg7 24.f5]

24.Nxh6+ 58m 24…Kh7 88m

25.f5 63m

  [25.Qh3 Nxf4 26.Rxf4 Rxf4 27.Nf7+ (27.Re1 Kg7 28.Ng4

Rf7 29.Qh6+ Kg8-+;

27.Nf5+ Kg8 28.Nxe7+ Kg7 29.Nd5 Qb2 30.Rd1u)

27…Kg8 28.Qh8+ Kxf7[[threesuperior]] 29.Qxa8]

25…Kxh6 91m 26.Qh3+

64m 26…Kg7 91m 27.fxe6 ?m saves

the pawn but now Black has a strong initiative.

  White now starts to consume time in great forkfuls: I

remember finding it very hard to forget the earlier part of the

game where I thought I had done enough to win, and couldn’t get on

and defend.

27…Rxf1+ m 28.Rxf1 ?m

28…Rf8 m 29.Rg1 79m [29.Re1

Qf2] 29…Rf2 93m 30.Qh4 81m

30…Qc5 95m 31.a4 83m

31…b5 96m 32.a5 84m which made

me think …b5 was wrong 32…Re2 97m

33.Re1 91m 33…Rf2 m

34.h3 93m 34…Rf6 m

35.Qe4 96m 35…Qf2 m

36.Rg1 ?m [36.Qe5 Qf5]

36…Qf5 m 37.Qb7 ?m

37…Rxe6 m 38.Rd1 ?m

38…Qe5 m 39.Qd7 ?m

39…Qe2 m White lost on time; I

had even put 36…Qf5 down as a White move and was one out!

[39…Qe2 40.Qd4+] 0-1

<hr />

<h5><a name=”RTFToC33″ id=”RTFToC33″>Game 3: Botvinnik ,M – Tal ,M

[E10]: Match, Moscow (Russia) Match, Moscow (Russia) (8),

1960</a></h5>

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nf3 c5 4.d5 exd5 5.cxd5 g6 6.Nc3 Bg7

7.Bg5 0-0 8.e3 Re8 9.Nd2 d6 10.Be2 a6 11.a4 Nbd7 12.0-0 Qc7 13.Qc2

Nb6 14.Bf3 c4 15.Bxf6 Bxf6 16.a5 Nd7 17.Nce4 Be5 18.Qxc4 Qd8 19.Qa2

f5 20.Nc3 g5 21.Nc4 g4 22.Be2 Qf6 23.Na4 Kh8 24.g3 h5 25.f4 Bd4

26.Qa3 Rb8 27.Nab6 h4 28.Rad1 Bxb6 29.axb6 Nc5 30.gxh4 Bd7 31.Qc3

Qxc3 32.bxc3 Bb5 33.Rfe1 Ne4

<img alt=”+—————–+” src=”/wp/chessx/tx.gif” /> 

<img alt=”|” src=”/wp/chessx/lx.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=

“/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”4″ src=”/wp/chessx/brd.gif” /><img alt=”.”

src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”r”

src=”/wp/chessx/brl.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.”

src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”i” src=”/wp/chessx/bkd.gif” /><img alt=”|”

src=”/wp/chessx/rx.gif” /> 

<img alt=”|” src=”/wp/chessx/lx.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=

“/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”p” src=”/wp/chessx/bpl.gif” /><img alt=”+”

src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”+”

src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”+”

src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”|”

src=”/wp/chessx/rx.gif” /> 

<img alt=”|” src=”/wp/chessx/lx.gif” /><img alt=”p” src=

“/wp/chessx/bpl.gif” /><img alt=”)” src=”/wp/chessx/wpd.gif” /><img alt=”.”

src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”0″ src=”/wp/chessx/bpd.gif” /><img alt=”.”

src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.”

src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”|”

src=”/wp/chessx/rx.gif” /> 

<img alt=”|” src=”/wp/chessx/lx.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=

“/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”b” src=”/wp/chessx/bbl.gif” /><img alt=”+”

src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”P” src=”/wp/chessx/wpl.gif” /><img alt=”+”

src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”p” src=”/wp/chessx/bpl.gif” /><img alt=”+”

src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”|”

src=”/wp/chessx/rx.gif” /> 

<img alt=”|” src=”/wp/chessx/lx.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=

“/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”N” src=

“/wp/chessx/wnl.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”n”

src=”/wp/chessx/bnl.gif” /><img alt=”)” src=”/wp/chessx/wpd.gif” /><img alt=

“p” src=”/wp/chessx/bpl.gif” /><img alt=”)” src=

“/wp/chessx/wpd.gif” /><img alt=”|” src=”/wp/chessx/rx.gif” /> 

<img alt=”|” src=”/wp/chessx/lx.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=

“/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”)” src=

“/wp/chessx/wpd.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”)”

src=”/wp/chessx/wpd.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”+”

src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”|”

src=”/wp/chessx/rx.gif” /> 

<img alt=”|” src=”/wp/chessx/lx.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=

“/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=

“/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”B” src=

“/wp/chessx/wbl.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.”

src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”)” src=”/wp/chessx/wpd.gif” /><img alt=”|”

src=”/wp/chessx/rx.gif” /> 

<img alt=”|” src=”/wp/chessx/lx.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=

“/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=

“/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”R” src=”/wp/chessx/wrl.gif” /><img alt=”$”

src=”/wp/chessx/wrd.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”I”

src=”/wp/chessx/wkd.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”|”

src=”/wp/chessx/rx.gif” /> 

<img alt=”+—————–+” src=”/wp/chessx/bx.gif” />

34.Rc1 Rbc8?? “I made the last move

instantaneously – as if seized by the time pressure of my opponent.

I had formerly seen that I would win the exchange, but I had but to

think a little; then I would have come up with the absolutely

correct idea: the other Rook must go to c8 (winning the exchange

but keeping the b7 Pawn).” – TAL

  [“Here it is: the hypnotic power of ‘natural’ moves!” –

Krogius]

[34…Rec8]

35.Na5 Bxe2 36.Rxe2 Nxc3 “It could

be noticed from my opponent’s expression that he had been rather

surprised by the unexpected turn of events, but in spite of intense

time pressure he successfully responded to the reversal of the

conditions and immediately found the best continuation.” – Tal

37.Rxc3!

[37.Ree1 Ne2+]

37…Rxc3 38.Nxb7 “Black decided he

still had chances to win…” – Tal

38…Rcxe3

[38…Rexe3 is given in some sources]

39.Rxe3 Rxe3 40.Nxd6 Rd3?

<img alt=”+—————–+” src=”/wp/chessx/tx.gif” /> 

<img alt=”|” src=”/wp/chessx/lx.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=

“/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=

“/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=

“/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=

“/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”i” src=”/wp/chessx/bkd.gif” /><img alt=”|”

src=”/wp/chessx/rx.gif” /> 

<img alt=”|” src=”/wp/chessx/lx.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=

“/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=

“/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=

“/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=

“/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”|” src=

“/wp/chessx/rx.gif” /> 

<img alt=”|” src=”/wp/chessx/lx.gif” /><img alt=”p” src=

“/wp/chessx/bpl.gif” /><img alt=”)” src=”/wp/chessx/wpd.gif” /><img alt=”.”

src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”H” src=”/wp/chessx/wnd.gif” /><img alt=”.”

src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.”

src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”|”

src=”/wp/chessx/rx.gif” /> 

<img alt=”|” src=”/wp/chessx/lx.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=

“/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=

“/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”P” src=”/wp/chessx/wpl.gif” /><img alt=”+”

src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”p” src=”/wp/chessx/bpl.gif” /><img alt=”+”

src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”|”

src=”/wp/chessx/rx.gif” /> 

<img alt=”|” src=”/wp/chessx/lx.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=

“/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=

“/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=

“/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”)” src=”/wp/chessx/wpd.gif” /><img alt=”p”

src=”/wp/chessx/bpl.gif” /><img alt=”)” src=”/wp/chessx/wpd.gif” /><img alt=

“|” src=”/wp/chessx/rx.gif” /> 

<img alt=”|” src=”/wp/chessx/lx.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=

“/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=

“/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”r” src=”/wp/chessx/brl.gif” /><img alt=”+”

src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”+”

src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”|”

src=”/wp/chessx/rx.gif” /> 

<img alt=”|” src=”/wp/chessx/lx.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=

“/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=

“/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=

“/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=

“/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”)” src=”/wp/chessx/wpd.gif” /><img alt=”|”

src=”/wp/chessx/rx.gif” /> 

<img alt=”|” src=”/wp/chessx/lx.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=

“/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=

“/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=

“/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”I” src=

“/wp/chessx/wkd.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”|”

src=”/wp/chessx/rx.gif” /> 

<img alt=”+—————–+” src=”/wp/chessx/bx.gif” />

“Adjourned. At first I was extremely optimistic…” –

Tal

  [40…Kg8 “was better, but Black was under the

erroneous impression that all was in order”]

41.Nf7+ (sealed) “I immediately

resigned.” 1-0

  [41.b7 “during the game I was convinced that this

guaranteed a win for Black” 41…Rb3 42.Nf7+ Kh7! 43.Nd8 a5

44.d6 a4 45.d7 a3 46.Ne6 a2-+;

  41.Nf7+! Kg7 but now (41…Kh7? 42.d6!) 42.b7

Rb3 43.Nd8 a5 44.d6 a4 45.d7 a3 46.Ne6+!+- “Upon returning home

my trainer and I had only to investigate the subtleties of this

rather simple analysis. We began to play through the game and in

the process of analysis we simultaneously we discovered that Black

could have forced his win on his 34th move. There was nothing to

say and we didn’t sleep a wink the whole night.”]

<hr />

<h5><a name=”RTFToC34″ id=”RTFToC34″>Game 4: Gligoric,S – Tal,M

[A78] Yugoslavia ct Yugoslavia ct (4), 1959</a></h5>

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 e6 4.Nc3 exd5 5.cxd5 d6 6.e4 g6 7.Nf3

Bg7 8.Be2 0-0 9.0-0 Re8 10.Nd2 Na6 11.Rb1 Bd7 12.Re1 Rb8 13.b3 b5

14.Bb2 Nc7 15.Qc2 Qe7 16.Nd1 Bh6 17.f3 Nh5 18.Nf1 Nxd5 19.exd5 Bf5

20.Qc3 Bg7 21.Qc1 Bxb1 22.Bxg7 Kxg7 23.Qxb1 Nf4 24.Nfe3

Qe5

<img alt=”+—————–+” src=”/wp/chessx/tx.gif” /> 

<img alt=”|” src=”/wp/chessx/lx.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=

“/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”4″ src=”/wp/chessx/brd.gif” /><img alt=”.”

src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”r”

src=”/wp/chessx/brl.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.”

src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”|”

src=”/wp/chessx/rx.gif” /> 

<img alt=”|” src=”/wp/chessx/lx.gif” /><img alt=”0″ src=

“/wp/chessx/bpd.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”+”

src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”+”

src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”p” src=”/wp/chessx/bpl.gif” /><img alt=”i”

src=”/wp/chessx/bkd.gif” /><img alt=”p” src=”/wp/chessx/bpl.gif” /><img alt=

“|” src=”/wp/chessx/rx.gif” /> 

<img alt=”|” src=”/wp/chessx/lx.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=

“/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=

“/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”0″ src=”/wp/chessx/bpd.gif” /><img alt=”.”

src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”p”

src=”/wp/chessx/bpl.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”|”

src=”/wp/chessx/rx.gif” /> 

<img alt=”|” src=”/wp/chessx/lx.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=

“/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”p” src=”/wp/chessx/bpl.gif” /><img alt=”0″

src=”/wp/chessx/bpd.gif” /><img alt=”P” src=”/wp/chessx/wpl.gif” /><img alt=

“1” src=”/wp/chessx/bqd.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=

“/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=

“/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”|” src=”/wp/chessx/rx.gif” /> 

<img alt=”|” src=”/wp/chessx/lx.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=

“/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=

“/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=

“/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”h” src=”/wp/chessx/bnd.gif” /><img alt=”.”

src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”|”

src=”/wp/chessx/rx.gif” /> 

<img alt=”|” src=”/wp/chessx/lx.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=

“/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”P” src=”/wp/chessx/wpl.gif” /><img alt=”+”

src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”H”

src=”/wp/chessx/wnd.gif” /><img alt=”P” src=”/wp/chessx/wpl.gif” /><img alt=

“+” src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=

“|” src=”/wp/chessx/rx.gif” /> 

<img alt=”|” src=”/wp/chessx/lx.gif” /><img alt=”P” src=

“/wp/chessx/wpl.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.”

src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”B”

src=”/wp/chessx/wbl.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”P”

src=”/wp/chessx/wpl.gif” /><img alt=”)” src=”/wp/chessx/wpd.gif” /><img alt=

“|” src=”/wp/chessx/rx.gif” /> 

<img alt=”|” src=”/wp/chessx/lx.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=

“/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”Q” src=”/wp/chessx/wql.gif” /><img alt=”+”

src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”N” src=”/wp/chessx/wnl.gif” /><img alt=”$”

src=”/wp/chessx/wrd.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”I”

src=”/wp/chessx/wkd.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”|”

src=”/wp/chessx/rx.gif” /> 

<img alt=”+—————–+” src=”/wp/chessx/bx.gif” />

Black has a small advantage, difficult to exploit with regular

means against an opponent with such a clear logical head.

25.Bxb5 Rxb5 26.Nf5+ gxf5!? Tal chooses a sharp

hazardous continuation, probably not the strongest but Gligoric

became confused, thought for a long while, got into time trouble,

made serious mistakes and lost.

[26…Qxf5 27.Qxf5 gxf5 28.Rxe8

Nxd5[[threesuperior]]]

27.Rxe5 Rxe5 28.g3 Ne2+ 29.Kf2 Kg8

30.Ne3?

[30.f4! Re8 31.Qxf5]

30…Nd4 31.f4 Re4 32.g4!? Rxf4+ 33.Kg2 fxg4-+

34.Nc4 Nf3 35.Qc1 Rf6 36.Qe3 Kf8 37.Qe4 Rb8 38.Qxh7 Re8 39.Qh8+ Ke7

40.Qg7 Nh4+ 41.Kg1 Nf3+ 42.Kg2 Rg6 43.Qc3 Nd4 44.b4 Kf8 45.Ne3 g3

46.h3 Rf6 0-1

<hr />

<h5><a name=”RTFToC35″ id=”RTFToC35″>Game 5: Blackstock,L – Webb,S

[C09] Borehamwood, 1977</a></h5>

1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nd2 c5 4.exd5 exd5 5.Ngf3 Nc6 6.Bb5 Bd6

7.dxc5 Bxc5 8.0-0 Nge7 9.Nb3 Bb6 10.Re1 0-0 11.Be3 Bf5 12.c3

Be4

<img alt=”+—————–+” src=”/wp/chessx/tx.gif” /> 

<img alt=”|” src=”/wp/chessx/lx.gif” /><img alt=”r” src=

“/wp/chessx/brl.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.”

src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”1″ src=”/wp/chessx/bqd.gif” /><img alt=”.”

src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”4″ src=”/wp/chessx/brd.gif” /><img alt=”k”

src=”/wp/chessx/bkl.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”|”

src=”/wp/chessx/rx.gif” /> 

<img alt=”|” src=”/wp/chessx/lx.gif” /><img alt=”0″ src=

“/wp/chessx/bpd.gif” /><img alt=”p” src=”/wp/chessx/bpl.gif” /><img alt=”+”

src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”h”

src=”/wp/chessx/bnd.gif” /><img alt=”p” src=”/wp/chessx/bpl.gif” /><img alt=

“0” src=”/wp/chessx/bpd.gif” /><img alt=”p” src=

“/wp/chessx/bpl.gif” /><img alt=”|” src=”/wp/chessx/rx.gif” /> 

<img alt=”|” src=”/wp/chessx/lx.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=

“/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”g” src=”/wp/chessx/bbd.gif” /><img alt=”n”

src=”/wp/chessx/bnl.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.”

src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.”

src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”|”

src=”/wp/chessx/rx.gif” /> 

<img alt=”|” src=”/wp/chessx/lx.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=

“/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”B” src=”/wp/chessx/wbl.gif” /><img alt=”+”

src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”p” src=”/wp/chessx/bpl.gif” /><img alt=”+”

src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”+”

src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”|”

src=”/wp/chessx/rx.gif” /> 

<img alt=”|” src=”/wp/chessx/lx.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=

“/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=

“/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”b” src=

“/wp/chessx/bbl.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.”

src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”|”

src=”/wp/chessx/rx.gif” /> 

<img alt=”|” src=”/wp/chessx/lx.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=

“/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”N” src=”/wp/chessx/wnl.gif” /><img alt=”)”

src=”/wp/chessx/wpd.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”G”

src=”/wp/chessx/wbd.gif” /><img alt=”N” src=”/wp/chessx/wnl.gif” /><img alt=

“+” src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=

“|” src=”/wp/chessx/rx.gif” /> 

<img alt=”|” src=”/wp/chessx/lx.gif” /><img alt=”P” src=

“/wp/chessx/wpl.gif” /><img alt=”)” src=”/wp/chessx/wpd.gif” /><img alt=”.”

src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.”

src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”)” src=”/wp/chessx/wpd.gif” /><img alt=”P”

src=”/wp/chessx/wpl.gif” /><img alt=”)” src=”/wp/chessx/wpd.gif” /><img alt=

“|” src=”/wp/chessx/rx.gif” /> 

<img alt=”|” src=”/wp/chessx/lx.gif” /><img alt=”$” src=

“/wp/chessx/wrd.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”+”

src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”Q” src=”/wp/chessx/wql.gif” /><img alt=”$”

src=”/wp/chessx/wrd.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”I”

src=”/wp/chessx/wkd.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”|”

src=”/wp/chessx/rx.gif” /> 

<img alt=”+—————–+” src=”/wp/chessx/bx.gif” />

“A non-forcing position: there is little to choose between several

moves, and Black has such a wide choice of moves that it’s

impossible to analyse definite lines.”

  “White thought for about half-an-hour here”.

13.Bxb6 Qxb6 14.Nfd4

  “Again this took him a while – re-thinking what he’d

thought about on the previous move.”

14…Nxd4 15.Nxd4 Nc6

[15…a6 16.f3]

16.Bxc6= bxc6 17.Qb3 Qc7

  “It’s better to keep the Queens on anyway, but this is

also leaves White without a clear plan.”

  “White has used about on hour of his 1 hour 45 to reach

move 48″.

18.Qa3 c5 19.Nb3 Rac8 20.Re2

<img alt=”+—————–+” src=”/wp/chessx/tx.gif” /> 

<img alt=”|” src=”/wp/chessx/lx.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=

“/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”r” src=

“/wp/chessx/brl.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.”

src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”4″ src=”/wp/chessx/brd.gif” /><img alt=”k”

src=”/wp/chessx/bkl.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”|”

src=”/wp/chessx/rx.gif” /> 

<img alt=”|” src=”/wp/chessx/lx.gif” /><img alt=”0″ src=

“/wp/chessx/bpd.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”1″

src=”/wp/chessx/bqd.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”+”

src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”p” src=”/wp/chessx/bpl.gif” /><img alt=”0″

src=”/wp/chessx/bpd.gif” /><img alt=”p” src=”/wp/chessx/bpl.gif” /><img alt=

“|” src=”/wp/chessx/rx.gif” /> 

<img alt=”|” src=”/wp/chessx/lx.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=

“/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=

“/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=

“/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=

“/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”|” src=

“/wp/chessx/rx.gif” /> 

<img alt=”|” src=”/wp/chessx/lx.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=

“/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”0″ src=

“/wp/chessx/bpd.gif” /><img alt=”p” src=”/wp/chessx/bpl.gif” /><img alt=”+”

src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”+”

src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”|”

src=”/wp/chessx/rx.gif” /> 

<img alt=”|” src=”/wp/chessx/lx.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=

“/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=

“/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”b” src=

“/wp/chessx/bbl.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.”

src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”|”

src=”/wp/chessx/rx.gif” /> 

<img alt=”|” src=”/wp/chessx/lx.gif” /><img alt=”!” src=

“/wp/chessx/wqd.gif” /><img alt=”N” src=”/wp/chessx/wnl.gif” /><img alt=”)”

src=”/wp/chessx/wpd.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”+”

src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”+”

src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”|”

src=”/wp/chessx/rx.gif” /> 

<img alt=”|” src=”/wp/chessx/lx.gif” /><img alt=”P” src=

“/wp/chessx/wpl.gif” /><img alt=”)” src=”/wp/chessx/wpd.gif” /><img alt=”.”

src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”R”

src=”/wp/chessx/wrl.gif” /><img alt=”)” src=”/wp/chessx/wpd.gif” /><img alt=

“P” src=”/wp/chessx/wpl.gif” /><img alt=”)” src=

“/wp/chessx/wpd.gif” /><img alt=”|” src=”/wp/chessx/rx.gif” /> 

<img alt=”|” src=”/wp/chessx/lx.gif” /><img alt=”$” src=

“/wp/chessx/wrd.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”+”

src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”+”

src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”I”

src=”/wp/chessx/wkd.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”|”

src=”/wp/chessx/rx.gif” /> 

<img alt=”+—————–+” src=”/wp/chessx/bx.gif” />

“It’s still very difficult for White to decide what he should be

doing, e.g. which file for which Rook? There’s not much to choose

between them, but it gives him a nice harmless way of using up

time.”

20…Bf5! 21.Rae1 Be6

  “Good all round: securing the d-Pawn and prolonging the

position where White can’t decide what to do.”

22.Rd2 h6!

  “Continuing to do nothing until he gets really short of

time… but a move like …Kh8 would have been a bit obvious!”

23.Red1 Rfd8 24.h3

  “Les now has about 1 minute left for 24 moves, is

concentrating hard, and is ready to meet ‘nothing’ moves with

‘nothing’ replies – so now is the time to start doing

something.”

24…Rd6 25.Qa4 Rb6 26.Nc1 Qb7

<img alt=”+—————–+” src=”/wp/chessx/tx.gif” /> 

<img alt=”|” src=”/wp/chessx/lx.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=

“/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”r” src=

“/wp/chessx/brl.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.”

src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”k”

src=”/wp/chessx/bkl.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”|”

src=”/wp/chessx/rx.gif” /> 

<img alt=”|” src=”/wp/chessx/lx.gif” /><img alt=”0″ src=

“/wp/chessx/bpd.gif” /><img alt=”q” src=”/wp/chessx/bql.gif” /><img alt=”+”

src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”+”

src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”p” src=”/wp/chessx/bpl.gif” /><img alt=”0″

src=”/wp/chessx/bpd.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”|”

src=”/wp/chessx/rx.gif” /> 

<img alt=”|” src=”/wp/chessx/lx.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=

“/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”4″ src=”/wp/chessx/brd.gif” /><img alt=”.”

src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”b”

src=”/wp/chessx/bbl.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.”

src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”0″ src=”/wp/chessx/bpd.gif” /><img alt=”|”

src=”/wp/chessx/rx.gif” /> 

<img alt=”|” src=”/wp/chessx/lx.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=

“/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”0″ src=

“/wp/chessx/bpd.gif” /><img alt=”p” src=”/wp/chessx/bpl.gif” /><img alt=”+”

src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”+”

src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”|”

src=”/wp/chessx/rx.gif” /> 

<img alt=”|” src=”/wp/chessx/lx.gif” /><img alt=”Q” src=

“/wp/chessx/wql.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.”

src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.”

src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.”

src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”|”

src=”/wp/chessx/rx.gif” /> 

<img alt=”|” src=”/wp/chessx/lx.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=

“/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”)” src=

“/wp/chessx/wpd.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”+”

src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”+”

src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”P” src=”/wp/chessx/wpl.gif” /><img alt=”|”

src=”/wp/chessx/rx.gif” /> 

<img alt=”|” src=”/wp/chessx/lx.gif” /><img alt=”P” src=

“/wp/chessx/wpl.gif” /><img alt=”)” src=”/wp/chessx/wpd.gif” /><img alt=”.”

src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”$” src=”/wp/chessx/wrd.gif” /><img alt=”.”

src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”)” src=”/wp/chessx/wpd.gif” /><img alt=”P”

src=”/wp/chessx/wpl.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”|”

src=”/wp/chessx/rx.gif” /> 

<img alt=”|” src=”/wp/chessx/lx.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=

“/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”H” src=

“/wp/chessx/wnd.gif” /><img alt=”R” src=”/wp/chessx/wrl.gif” /><img alt=”+”

src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”I”

src=”/wp/chessx/wkd.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”|”

src=”/wp/chessx/rx.gif” /> 

<img alt=”+—————–+” src=”/wp/chessx/bx.gif” />

27.b3? d4! 28.cxd4?

  With more time White might have found a better move. But

if he had played a better move here, Black had planned 28…Bxh3!

“which is impossible to meet with less than a minute for 20

moves”.

[28.b4!? dxc3 29.Rd8+ Rxd8 30.Rxd8+ Kh7 31.Qc2+ g6

32.Qxc3;

28.Qa3!?]

28…Ra6 0-1

<hr />

<h5><a name=”RTFToC36″ id=”RTFToC36″>Game 6: Tal, Mikhail,

Bronstein, David, Baku ch-SU, 1961</a></h5>

1.e4{0m}d5{2m}2.exd5{0m}Nf6{0m}3.c4

{3m}c6{2m}4.d4{0m}cxd5{0m}5.Nc3

{0m}g6{10m}6.Qb3{2m}Bg7{1m}7.cxd5

{0m}O-O{2m}8.Nf3{11m}Nbd7{3m}9.Bg5

{1m}Nb6{3m}10.Bc4{4m}Bf5{5m}11.Rd1

{10m} Ne4! {16m} 12. O-O {11m}

Nxc3 {22m} 13. bxc3

{0m}Rc8{2m}14.Bb5{4m}h6!{8m}15.Bh4

{8m}g5!{5m}16.Bg3{0m}Qxd5{1m}17.Qb4

{0m}Bg4{4m}18.Rfe1{19m}Bxf3{5m}19.gxf3

{0m} e6! {2m

  “Probably the winning move” – DB}

 

20.Bd3{6m}Qxf3{4m}21.Rd2{28m}Rfd8{10m}22.Re3{18m}Qc6{1m}23.Bb5{0m}Qd5{1m}24.

Rde2 {15m} Nc4 {10m} 25.

Bxc4 {0m} Rxc4 {0m} 26.

Qb2{0m}Rdc8{2m}27.Be5{3m}Bxe5{2m}28.Rxe5

{0m}Qc6{1m}29.R2e3{5m}b6{5m}30.Qa3

{1m}Rxc3{1m}31.Qxa7{0m}Rxe3{2m}32.Rxe3

{0m}Ra8{2m}33.Rc3{0m}Qe4{0m}34.Qc7

{0m}Rxa2{1m}35.Rc1{0m}Qxd4{1m}36.Qg3

{0m}Kg7{2m}37.h4{0m}Qxh4{5m}38.Qc3+

{0m}Kg6{1m}39.Qd3+{0m}Kh5{0m}40.Qe3

{0m} Ra4 {4m} 0-1

<hr />

<h5><a name=”RTFToC37″ id=”RTFToC37″>Game 7: Botvinnik,M (2500) –

Tal,M [E69] WM Moskau, 1960</a></h5>

1.c4 (0h:00) 1…Nf6 (0h:02)

2.Nf3 (0h:03) 2…g6 (0h:03)

3.g3 (0h:06) 3…Bg7 (0h:03)

4.Bg2 (0h:06)4…0-0 (0h:04)

5.d4 (0h:08) 5…d6 (0h:04)

6.Nc3 (0h:09) 6…Nbd7 (0h:04)

7.0-0 (0h:10) 7…e5 (0h:05)

8.e4 (0h:10) 8…c6 (0h:05)

9.h3 (0h:11)9…Qb6 (0h:06)

10.d5 (0h:15) 10…cxd5 (0h:08)

11.cxd5 (0h:16) 11…Nc5 (0h:09)

12.Ne1 (0h:20) 12…Bd7 (0h:13)

13.Nd3 (0h:30) 13…Nxd3 (0h:16)

14.Qxd3 (0h:30) 14…Rfc8 (0h:32)

15.Rb1 (0h:50) 15…Nh5 (0h:41)

16.Be3 (0h:53) 16…Qb4 (0h:41)

17.Qe2 (0h:59) 17…Rc4 (0h:50)

18.Rfc1 (1h:08) 18…Rac8 (1h:06)

19.Kh2 (1h:14) 19…f5 (1h:17)

20.exf5 (1h:16) 20…Bxf5 (1h:18)

21.Ra1 (1h:17) 21…Nf4 (1h:23)

<img alt=”+—————–+” src=”/wp/chessx/tx.gif” /> 

<img alt=”|” src=”/wp/chessx/lx.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=

“/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”r” src=

“/wp/chessx/brl.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.”

src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”k”

src=”/wp/chessx/bkl.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”|”

src=”/wp/chessx/rx.gif” /> 

<img alt=”|” src=”/wp/chessx/lx.gif” /><img alt=”0″ src=

“/wp/chessx/bpd.gif” /><img alt=”p” src=”/wp/chessx/bpl.gif” /><img alt=”+”

src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”+”

src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”g”

src=”/wp/chessx/bbd.gif” /><img alt=”p” src=”/wp/chessx/bpl.gif” /><img alt=

“|” src=”/wp/chessx/rx.gif” /> 

<img alt=”|” src=”/wp/chessx/lx.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=

“/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=

“/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”0″ src=”/wp/chessx/bpd.gif” /><img alt=”.”

src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”p”

src=”/wp/chessx/bpl.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”|”

src=”/wp/chessx/rx.gif” /> 

<img alt=”|” src=”/wp/chessx/lx.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=

“/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=

“/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”P” src=”/wp/chessx/wpl.gif” /><img alt=”0″

src=”/wp/chessx/bpd.gif” /><img alt=”b” src=”/wp/chessx/bbl.gif” /><img alt=

“+” src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=

“|” src=”/wp/chessx/rx.gif” /> 

<img alt=”|” src=”/wp/chessx/lx.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=

“/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”1″ src=”/wp/chessx/bqd.gif” /><img alt=”r”

src=”/wp/chessx/brl.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.”

src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”h” src=”/wp/chessx/bnd.gif” /><img alt=”.”

src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”|”

src=”/wp/chessx/rx.gif” /> 

<img alt=”|” src=”/wp/chessx/lx.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=

“/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”H” src=

“/wp/chessx/wnd.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”G”

src=”/wp/chessx/wbd.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”)”

src=”/wp/chessx/wpd.gif” /><img alt=”P” src=”/wp/chessx/wpl.gif” /><img alt=

“|” src=”/wp/chessx/rx.gif” /> 

<img alt=”|” src=”/wp/chessx/lx.gif” /><img alt=”P” src=

“/wp/chessx/wpl.gif” /><img alt=”)” src=”/wp/chessx/wpd.gif” /><img alt=”.”

src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”+” src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”Q”

src=”/wp/chessx/wql.gif” /><img alt=”)” src=”/wp/chessx/wpd.gif” /><img alt=

“B” src=”/wp/chessx/wbl.gif” /><img alt=”I” src=

“/wp/chessx/wkd.gif” /><img alt=”|” src=”/wp/chessx/rx.gif” /> 

<img alt=”|” src=”/wp/chessx/lx.gif” /><img alt=”$” src=

“/wp/chessx/wrd.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”$”

src=”/wp/chessx/wrd.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”+”

src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”+”

src=”/wp/chessx/b.gif” /><img alt=”.” src=”/wp/chessx/w.gif” /><img alt=”|”

src=”/wp/chessx/rx.gif” /> 

<img alt=”+—————–+” src=”/wp/chessx/bx.gif” />

22.gxf4 (1h:26) 22…exf4 (1h:23)

23.Bd2 (1h:36)23…Qxb2 (1h:37)

24.Rab1 (1h:40) 24…f3 (1h:41)

25.Rxb2 (2h:01) 25…fxe2 (1h:41)

26.Rb3 (2h:02) 26…Rd4 (1h:43)

27.Be1 (2h:08) 27…Be5+ (1h:45)

28.Kg1 (2h:08) 28…Bf4 (1h:46)

29.Nxe2 (2h:14) 29…Rxc1 (1h:46)

30.Nxd4 (2h:17) 30…Rxe1+

(1h:46) 31.Bf1 (2h:17) 31…Be4

(1h:49) 32.Ne2 (2h:21) 32…Be5

(1h:51) 33.f4 (2h:22) 33…Bf6

(1h:53) 34.Rxb7 (2h:24) 34…Bxd5

(1h:53) 35.Rc7 (2h:24) 35…Bxa2

(1h:54) 36.Rxa7 (2h:26) 36…Bc4

(1h:55) 37.Ra8+ (2h:27) 37…Kf7

(1h:56) 38.Ra7+ (2h:28) 38…Ke6

(1h:56) 39.Ra3 (2h:29) 39…d5

(2h:05) 40.Kf2 (2h:29) 40…Bh4+

(2h:06) 41.Kg2 (2h:29) 41…Kd6

(2h:07) 42.Ng3 (2h:35) 42…Bxg3

(2h:07) 43.Bxc4 (2h:36) 43…dxc4

(2h:07) 44.Kxg3 (2h:36) 44…Kd5

(2h:08) 45.Ra7 (2h:40) 45…c3

(2h:12) 46.Rc7 (2h:42) 46…Kd4

(2h:13) 0-1</li></ul>
C2. Tal-Bronstein 1960 (Game 6)
C3. Botvinnik-Tal 1960 (Game 7)
D. References
B. Time trouble

Time trouble is time pressure that you cannot bear or want to be
rid of: different players have different views about what is
tolerable. The Grandmaster and psychologist Krogius gives a horror
show of time trouble examples in his book on chess psychology. He
classifies the examples as follows:

B1. Causes of time
trouble

Inadequate theoretical
preparation

Cures: better theoretical preparation (duh) but also
improved experience: with more experience of different types of
position you will have improved general assessment/intuition. It is
an unrealistic goal to set yourself to be able to play any type of
position, but if you have a weakness, work on it.

On the other hand it is not a complete cure: Bronstein
has encyclopaedic knowledge, wonderful intuition… and a marked
time trouble habit.

Inadequate practical
preparation

Cures: more practice, practice at speed chess

A genuinely complicated
game

“This is ‘normal’ time trouble and I have no intention of
giving it up.” – Botvinnik.

There is no doubt that some good players are prepared to
put in a good half-hour or so in the early middlegame in the belief
that the position deserves it and the expectation that it will be
rewarded by an easier – maybe winning – game later.

I remember when Kramnik beat Kasparov on the Black side
of a Semi-Slav he criticised Kasparov for making a move after only
quarter of an hour or so. He said that this was too fast, and that
he would have taken what the position deserved – “maybe one
hour“(!).

Conscious entry into time
trouble

In order to upset the normal run of events. – See Game 1.

Doubts concerning
analysis

“Do not search for objectively the best move because frequently
there is no such move. In most cases it is simply a matter of taste
– simply look for a good move!” – Spielmann

In a complex position, do not always try to resolve it
tactically, but maybe just play a good positional move.
(Nimzovitch)

Cure: Have confidence in your own judgement and
ability, at least the courage to learn from any mistake you might
be making.

Doubts linked to own
style

In World Championship matches Botvinnik very often fell into time
trouble in complex, dynamic positions conjured up by those wizards
of the chessboard, Bronstein and Tal. Bronstein’s time trouble, by
contrast, was in relatively simple positions where Botvinnik had a
small – maybe insignificant – positional advantage.

Cure: Go for positions you feel at home in; study
positions you need to feel at home in.

Doubts linked to opponent’s
style

e.g. against opponent who has a large plus score against you.

Cure: win a game…!

Doubts linked to importance of
the game

e.g. this move is too important, I must be 110% sure…

Cure: put such thoughts aside if you can; play the
board.

Doubts linked to previous
course of the game

e.g. I should have won earlier: see Game 2

Cure: think about the position in front of
you!

Doubts linked to own
experience

e.g. a little knowledge dangerously distracting you from your own
judgement

Cure: Have confidence in your own judgement and
ability, at least the courage to learn from any mistake you might
be making.

B2. Effects of time
trouble

Failure to react to changes in
the position
Inclination towards obvious
moves

Cure: Think if you can for a moment longer, try not to get
in a rut of thinking.

Seeking exchanges
Postponing decisions
Playing safe and solid
moves
Reliance on constant elements of
the position

e.g grabbing back material too soon

Cure: To combat all of these tendencies, try to
play the move that you think best meets the requirements of the
position, not the requirements of your nerves.

Less strategy, more
tactics

Cure: You do need to check for concrete traps, but as Nimzo
says, you can sometimes short-circuit analysis of variations by a
good positional move. This is appropriate even in quickplay
finishes where you do not want to prolong the game.

Temptation to blitz the
time-troubled opponent

Game 3: “I made the last move instantaneously – as if seized by
the time pressure of my opponent. I had formerly seen that I would
win the exchange, but I had but to think a little; then I would
have come up with the absolutely correct idea: the other Rook must
go to c8 (winning the exchange but keeping the b7 Pawn.)” –
TAL

[“Here it is: the hypnotic power of ‘natural’
moves!” – Krogius]

“It could be noticed from my opponent’s expression
that he had been rather surprised by the unexpected turn of events,
but in spite of intense time pressure he successfully responded to
the reversal of the conditions and immediately found the best
continuation.” – Tal

Cure:

“Instead, thoroughly analyse a plan several moves
deep and play the moves rapidly” – Krogius

“Set a trap and play the moves rapidly.” –
Webb

It is even possible to use your opponent’s propensity to
time trouble: see Games 4 and 5

B3. Treatment of time
trouble

“Time trouble is a completely surmountable difficulty… not
only (through) training in chess technique, but chiefly with
psychological training.” – Krogius

Self-control is often a key to success in chess.

Follow the principal rules about chess thinking: what is
my opponent’s idea?

Diagnose your own causes of time trouble, and make a
conscious attempt to develop your decisions and resilience in those
circumstances.

Use your opponent’s time: work out a provisional reply
for each move, and use your opponent’s time for looking at the
clock

Botvinnik recommends playing training games where what
you are trying to improve is use of time – making it more even or
at least more appropriate to the position. He says that 90% of time
trouble addicts can be cured using this method, although Averbakh
adds “if so, then it seems I am among the remaining 10%… and
perhaps so is the author of the method…”

C. Time management

You do see a variety of strategies for the use of time in club
play: players who routinely use too much or too little time,
players who have a marked “stop-go” cycle, and players who seem to
be just haphazard in their use of time.

Undoubtedly you can’t comment on this without respect to
the position, but it is worth reflecting on your own patterns of
chess play. I have routinely marked the times taken by myself and
my opponent for years – a minor additional distraction and I have
found it valuable food for thought. I believe it has led to me
making better use of the clock, which is to say, to use time when I
need to use it, and get on with it when I don’t.

There are marked differences in the way people use the
clock, but I might be permitted a general observation or two:

Better players use more of their time than
worse ones. Moral: chess is hard, and the longer you
think the better, provided you have something to think with – that
is, you have an understanding of that type of position and have
ideas about the issues at stake.

Better players think when they are supposed
to: that is, when there is something to think about –
as opposed to just dithering in a level position. They are better
at judging the critical moments and turning points of a game, so
that when they are short of time later, the moves may be easy to
find because the game is decided by that point.

Here are a few natural histories of the chess clock:

C1. Regis, Hampton, 1993 (Game
2)

White’s total elapsed time is shown above, and Black’s
below; control at 40 moves in 100 minutes. White lost on time at
move 39.

This is the only game I have ever lost on time, and some
of the reasons are to be found in the notes. It was quite in
Krogius’ class of doubts linked to the earlier course
of the game.

But on the graph you can also see some interesting
features of the use of time: Black having some periods of slow
play, followed by fast play, whereas White’s use is much more even
– however, White was unable to speed up at the end of the game when
approaching the time control. It may be the ideal style is more
even than Black’s and less even than White’s!

C2. Tal-Bronstein 1960 (Game
6)

This chart shows the time taken for each move rather
than total time, and is taken from the Furstenburg/Bronstein title
“The Sorcerer’s Apprentice“. White above the line
and Black below. Who won?

“…Tal played the first seven moves with great
confidence, accepting my Pawn sacrifice. With his next five moves
he tried to justify his decision.”

“With hindsight one can see that from moves 18 to 24
Tal used a lot of time, trying to reduce the pressure of the Black
pieces, but it was in vain. It would have been better to use this
amount of time, about one hour, to play the opening more
carefully.”

“This is only one example and the reader who is
interested in this aspect of chess should start recording times; it
might well be that his chess improves immediately.”

C3. Botvinnik-Tal 1960 (Game
7)

Move by move, with notes by Tal:

W13: “The text move is the most precise, but the time
spent in thinking about it proved that Botvinnik had not played
competitively for some time. Why was it necessary to waste ten
minutes out of an allotted two and one-half hours to play the most
evident and surely the strongest continuation of the previous
move?”

B14: “Black took a long time to choose which plan he
would use in the middle game.”

B18: “A rather long think for this move – sixteen
minutes. Black was calculating whether or not he should temporarily
pass on his idea and carry it our later.”

B23: “It is interesting that Black spent fifteen minutes
thinking about the move that immediately followed the piece
sacrifice. … This is but a confirmation, if it can be
expressed this way, of an intuitive sacrifice, a confirmation of
the fact that Black did not calculate all of the variations
beginning with the sacrifice and ending with mate.”

B28: “(After disturbance by spectators) I consciously
chose the less strong but safer continuation.”

B36: “Beginning with the 26th move, Black has been
playing lightning chess.”

B41: “Forty moves had been made but the opponents
remained in their places. Obviously, Botvinnik considered that
since Black was playing at such a rapid speed, he must have made a
mistake somewhere, and as for me, I was still full of energy.”

D. References

FURSTENBURG/BRONSTEIN – The Sorcerer’s Apprentice.

KROGIUS – Psychology in Chess.

TAL – Tal-Botvinnik 1960: Match for the World
Championship 1960.

WEBB – Chess For Tigers.

Game 1: (59) Korchnoi – Suetin
[C83] Moscow (XXVII USSR Ch.), 1960

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.0-0 Nxe4 6.d4 b5
7.Bb3 d5 8.dxe5 Be6 9.Qe2 Be7 10.c3 0-0 11.Nd4 Qd7 12.f3 Nc5 13.Bc2
f6 14.exf6 Bxf6 15.Nxe6 Qxe6 16.Qxe6+ Nxe6 17.Bb3 Rad8 18.Rd1 Ne7
19.Nd2 Kf7 20.Rf1 c5u

Suetin has gained the advantage and steadily increases the
pressure. Korchnoi was able to divert his opponent from the
measured tempo if his play only by provoking his own time
trouble.

21.f4 c4 22.Bd1 Nc6 23.Nf3 d4 24.Ng5+ Bxg5
25.fxg5+ Ke7 26.Re1 Kd6 27.cxd4 Nexd4 28.Bd2 Rde8 29.Rc1 Kd5 30.b3
Rxe1+ 31.Bxe1 Ne5 32.bxc4+ bxc4 33.Rb1 Rc8 34.Bc3 Nb5 35.Ba1 c3
36.a4 Nd6 37.Bb3+ Ke4 38.Re1+ Kf5 39.Bc2+ Ke6 40.Bb3+ Kf5 41.Bc2+
Ke6 42.Re3 Ndc4 43.Rxc3 Rd8 44.h3 g6 45.Bb3 Kf5 46.Kh2 Rc8 47.Rc2
Rc6 48.Re2 Rb6 49.Bc2+ Ke6 50.Bd4 Rd6 51.Bc3 Rb6 52.Kg3 Kd5 53.Kf4
Nc6 54.Re1 Rb7 55.Be4+ Kc5 56.Rc1 Rb3 57.Bg7 Nb4 58.Bf8+ Kd4
59.Rd1+ Nd3+ 60.Rxd3+ Rxd3 61.Bg7+ 1-0

Suetin incorrectly believed that he had the chance of an
early win, began to hurry, committed some serious errors and
lost.This game decided first place in the championship.

Game 2: Regis,D (1935) –
Hampton,M (1900) [E91]

Clock control: Devon vs. Wilts devon vs. wilts, 1993

1.e4 0m 1…g6 0m 2.d4 1m 2…Bg7 0m 3.c4
1m

Black was visibly upset by this move.

I know from playing the Modern myself that few 1. e4
players will transfer to a Queen’s-side opening, but that’s always
been where my heart is.

3…d6 1m 4.Nc3 1m
4…Nf6 2mThe game is now more or less a King’s
Indian… [4…Nc6 Keeps in independent ‘Modern’
lines.]

5.Be2 2m 5…0-0 2m
6.Nf3 2m 6…c5 6m

…or a Benoni. [6…e5 is the King’s
Indian]

7.d5 5m 7…Bg4 10m
8.Nd2 6mOver-eager.In any event, Black now starts
a phase of thinking for a long while over his moves.

[8.Ng1 Bxe2 9.Ngxe2]

8…Bxe2 14m 9.Qxe2 8m
9…Nfd7 14m 10.0-0 10m
10…Na6 15m 11.f4 11m
11…Qa5 30m 12.Nf3 15m

I was feeling quite pleased here: that I had both a chess
and a psychological initiative out of the opening. I don’t think I
have played Benonis any more often than my opponent but have looked
at this type of position and felt at ease with it.
12…Nc7 36m

[12…Bxc3 13.bxc3 Qxc3 14.Bb2 Qa5 15.e5]

13.e5 20m 13…a6 44m
14.Bd2 23m 14…Qb6 45m
15.e6 29m looks good but perhaps I was not
sufficiently developed for this…

[15.b3]

15…fxe6 46m 16.dxe6
29m 16…Nf6 47m

Black now has another long thinking phase, which leaves
him in time trouble for the rest of the game.
17.Ng5 35m

[17.Rae1 or 17 b3 17…Qxb2 18.Rb1 Qc2 19.Rxb7 Nfe8
20.Rc1 Qf5 21.Nd5]

17…d5 51m 18.cxd5 35m
18…Nfxd5 53m 19.Qf3 42m
19…Nxc3 68m 20.Bxc3 43m
20…Bxc3 75m 21.bxc3 46m
[21.Qxc3 Rf6 22.Qh3 h5 23.f5 c4+ 24.Kh1 Raf8 25.Nf7]
21…c4+ 83m 22.Kh1 46m
22…h6 84m 23.Nf7 56m
23…Nxe6 87m [23…Kg7 24.f5]
24.Nxh6+ 58m 24…Kh7 88m
25.f5 63m

[25.Qh3 Nxf4 26.Rxf4 Rxf4 27.Nf7+ (27.Re1 Kg7 28.Ng4
Rf7 29.Qh6+ Kg8-+;

27.Nf5+ Kg8 28.Nxe7+ Kg7 29.Nd5 Qb2 30.Rd1u)
27…Kg8 28.Qh8+ Kxf7[[threesuperior]] 29.Qxa8]

25…Kxh6 91m 26.Qh3+
64m 26…Kg7 91m 27.fxe6 ?m saves
the pawn but now Black has a strong initiative.

White now starts to consume time in great forkfuls: I
remember finding it very hard to forget the earlier part of the
game where I thought I had done enough to win, and couldn’t get on
and defend.

27…Rxf1+ m 28.Rxf1 ?m
28…Rf8 m 29.Rg1 79m [29.Re1
Qf2] 29…Rf2 93m 30.Qh4 81m
30…Qc5 95m 31.a4 83m
31…b5 96m 32.a5 84m which made
me think …b5 was wrong 32…Re2 97m
33.Re1 91m 33…Rf2 m
34.h3 93m 34…Rf6 m
35.Qe4 96m 35…Qf2 m
36.Rg1 ?m [36.Qe5 Qf5]
36…Qf5 m 37.Qb7 ?m
37…Rxe6 m 38.Rd1 ?m
38…Qe5 m 39.Qd7 ?m
39…Qe2 m White lost on time; I
had even put 36…Qf5 down as a White move and was one out!
[39…Qe2 40.Qd4+] 0-1

Game 3: Botvinnik ,M – Tal ,M
[E10]: Match, Moscow (Russia) Match, Moscow (Russia) (8),
1960

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nf3 c5 4.d5 exd5 5.cxd5 g6 6.Nc3 Bg7
7.Bg5 0-0 8.e3 Re8 9.Nd2 d6 10.Be2 a6 11.a4 Nbd7 12.0-0 Qc7 13.Qc2
Nb6 14.Bf3 c4 15.Bxf6 Bxf6 16.a5 Nd7 17.Nce4 Be5 18.Qxc4 Qd8 19.Qa2
f5 20.Nc3 g5 21.Nc4 g4 22.Be2 Qf6 23.Na4 Kh8 24.g3 h5 25.f4 Bd4
26.Qa3 Rb8 27.Nab6 h4 28.Rad1 Bxb6 29.axb6 Nc5 30.gxh4 Bd7 31.Qc3
Qxc3 32.bxc3 Bb5 33.Rfe1 Ne4

34.Rc1 Rbc8?? “I made the last move
instantaneously – as if seized by the time pressure of my opponent.
I had formerly seen that I would win the exchange, but I had but to
think a little; then I would have come up with the absolutely
correct idea: the other Rook must go to c8 (winning the exchange
but keeping the b7 Pawn).” – TAL

[“Here it is: the hypnotic power of ‘natural’ moves!” –
Krogius]

[34…Rec8]

35.Na5 Bxe2 36.Rxe2 Nxc3 “It could
be noticed from my opponent’s expression that he had been rather
surprised by the unexpected turn of events, but in spite of intense
time pressure he successfully responded to the reversal of the
conditions and immediately found the best continuation.” – Tal
37.Rxc3!

[37.Ree1 Ne2+]

37…Rxc3 38.Nxb7 “Black decided he
still had chances to win…” – Tal
38…Rcxe3

[38…Rexe3 is given in some sources]

39.Rxe3 Rxe3 40.Nxd6 Rd3?

“Adjourned. At first I was extremely optimistic…” –
Tal

[40…Kg8 “was better, but Black was under the
erroneous impression that all was in order“]

41.Nf7+ (sealed) “I immediately
resigned.” 1-0

[41.b7 “during the game I was convinced that this
guaranteed a win for Black” 41…Rb3 42.Nf7+ Kh7! 43.Nd8 a5
44.d6 a4 45.d7 a3 46.Ne6 a2-+;

41.Nf7+! Kg7 but now (41…Kh7? 42.d6!) 42.b7
Rb3 43.Nd8 a5 44.d6 a4 45.d7 a3 46.Ne6+!+- “Upon returning home
my trainer and I had only to investigate the subtleties of this
rather simple analysis. We began to play through the game and in
the process of analysis we simultaneously we discovered that Black
could have forced his win on his 34th move. There was nothing to
say and we didn’t sleep a wink the whole night.”]

Game 4: Gligoric,S – Tal,M
[A78] Yugoslavia ct Yugoslavia ct (4), 1959

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 e6 4.Nc3 exd5 5.cxd5 d6 6.e4 g6 7.Nf3
Bg7 8.Be2 0-0 9.0-0 Re8 10.Nd2 Na6 11.Rb1 Bd7 12.Re1 Rb8 13.b3 b5
14.Bb2 Nc7 15.Qc2 Qe7 16.Nd1 Bh6 17.f3 Nh5 18.Nf1 Nxd5 19.exd5 Bf5
20.Qc3 Bg7 21.Qc1 Bxb1 22.Bxg7 Kxg7 23.Qxb1 Nf4 24.Nfe3
Qe5

Black has a small advantage, difficult to exploit with regular
means against an opponent with such a clear logical head.
25.Bxb5 Rxb5 26.Nf5+ gxf5!? Tal chooses a sharp
hazardous continuation, probably not the strongest but Gligoric
became confused, thought for a long while, got into time trouble,
made serious mistakes and lost.

[26…Qxf5 27.Qxf5 gxf5 28.Rxe8
Nxd5[[threesuperior]]]

27.Rxe5 Rxe5 28.g3 Ne2+ 29.Kf2 Kg8
30.Ne3?

[30.f4! Re8 31.Qxf5]

30…Nd4 31.f4 Re4 32.g4!? Rxf4+ 33.Kg2 fxg4-+
34.Nc4 Nf3 35.Qc1 Rf6 36.Qe3 Kf8 37.Qe4 Rb8 38.Qxh7 Re8 39.Qh8+ Ke7
40.Qg7 Nh4+ 41.Kg1 Nf3+ 42.Kg2 Rg6 43.Qc3 Nd4 44.b4 Kf8 45.Ne3 g3
46.h3 Rf6 0-1

Game 5: Blackstock,L – Webb,S
[C09] Borehamwood, 1977

1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nd2 c5 4.exd5 exd5 5.Ngf3 Nc6 6.Bb5 Bd6
7.dxc5 Bxc5 8.0-0 Nge7 9.Nb3 Bb6 10.Re1 0-0 11.Be3 Bf5 12.c3
Be4

“A non-forcing position: there is little to choose between several
moves, and Black has such a wide choice of moves that it’s
impossible to analyse definite lines.”

“White thought for about half-an-hour here”.

13.Bxb6 Qxb6 14.Nfd4

“Again this took him a while – re-thinking what he’d
thought about on the previous move.”

14…Nxd4 15.Nxd4 Nc6

[15…a6 16.f3]

16.Bxc6= bxc6 17.Qb3 Qc7

“It’s better to keep the Queens on anyway, but this is
also leaves White without a clear plan.”

“White has used about on hour of his 1 hour 45 to reach
move 48”.

18.Qa3 c5 19.Nb3 Rac8 20.Re2

“It’s still very difficult for White to decide what he should be
doing, e.g. which file for which Rook? There’s not much to choose
between them, but it gives him a nice harmless way of using up
time.”

20…Bf5! 21.Rae1 Be6

“Good all round: securing the d-Pawn and prolonging the
position where White can’t decide what to do.”

22.Rd2 h6!

“Continuing to do nothing until he gets really short of
time… but a move like …Kh8 would have been a bit obvious!”

23.Red1 Rfd8 24.h3

“Les now has about 1 minute left for 24 moves, is
concentrating hard, and is ready to meet ‘nothing’ moves with
‘nothing’ replies – so now is the time to start doing
something.”

24…Rd6 25.Qa4 Rb6 26.Nc1 Qb7

27.b3? d4! 28.cxd4?

With more time White might have found a better move. But
if he had played a better move here, Black had planned 28…Bxh3!
“which is impossible to meet with less than a minute for 20
moves”.

[28.b4!? dxc3 29.Rd8+ Rxd8 30.Rxd8+ Kh7 31.Qc2+ g6
32.Qxc3;

28.Qa3!?]

28…Ra6 0-1

Game 6: Tal, Mikhail,
Bronstein, David, Baku ch-SU, 1961

1.e4{0m}d5{2m}2.exd5{0m}Nf6{0m}3.c4
{3m}c6{2m}4.d4{0m}cxd5{0m}5.Nc3
{0m}g6{10m}6.Qb3{2m}Bg7{1m}7.cxd5
{0m}O-O{2m}8.Nf3{11m}Nbd7{3m}9.Bg5
{1m}Nb6{3m}10.Bc4{4m}Bf5{5m}11.Rd1
{10m} Ne4! {16m} 12. O-O {11m}
Nxc3 {22m} 13. bxc3
{0m}Rc8{2m}14.Bb5{4m}h6!{8m}15.Bh4
{8m}g5!{5m}16.Bg3{0m}Qxd5{1m}17.Qb4
{0m}Bg4{4m}18.Rfe1{19m}Bxf3{5m}19.gxf3
{0m} e6! {2m

“Probably the winning move” – DB}

20.Bd3{6m}Qxf3{4m}21.Rd2{28m}Rfd8{10m}22.Re3{18m}Qc6{1m}23.Bb5{0m}Qd5{1m}24.
Rde2 {15m} Nc4 {10m} 25.
Bxc4 {0m} Rxc4 {0m} 26.
Qb2{0m}Rdc8{2m}27.Be5{3m}Bxe5{2m}28.Rxe5
{0m}Qc6{1m}29.R2e3{5m}b6{5m}30.Qa3
{1m}Rxc3{1m}31.Qxa7{0m}Rxe3{2m}32.Rxe3
{0m}Ra8{2m}33.Rc3{0m}Qe4{0m}34.Qc7
{0m}Rxa2{1m}35.Rc1{0m}Qxd4{1m}36.Qg3
{0m}Kg7{2m}37.h4{0m}Qxh4{5m}38.Qc3+
{0m}Kg6{1m}39.Qd3+{0m}Kh5{0m}40.Qe3
{0m} Ra4 {4m} 0-1

Game 7: Botvinnik,M (2500) –
Tal,M [E69] WM Moskau, 1960

1.c4 (0h:00) 1…Nf6 (0h:02)
2.Nf3 (0h:03) 2…g6 (0h:03)
3.g3 (0h:06) 3…Bg7 (0h:03)
4.Bg2 (0h:06)4…0-0 (0h:04)
5.d4 (0h:08) 5…d6 (0h:04)
6.Nc3 (0h:09) 6…Nbd7 (0h:04)
7.0-0 (0h:10) 7…e5 (0h:05)
8.e4 (0h:10) 8…c6 (0h:05)
9.h3 (0h:11)9…Qb6 (0h:06)
10.d5 (0h:15) 10…cxd5 (0h:08)
11.cxd5 (0h:16) 11…Nc5 (0h:09)
12.Ne1 (0h:20) 12…Bd7 (0h:13)
13.Nd3 (0h:30) 13…Nxd3 (0h:16)
14.Qxd3 (0h:30) 14…Rfc8 (0h:32)
15.Rb1 (0h:50) 15…Nh5 (0h:41)
16.Be3 (0h:53) 16…Qb4 (0h:41)
17.Qe2 (0h:59) 17…Rc4 (0h:50)
18.Rfc1 (1h:08) 18…Rac8 (1h:06)
19.Kh2 (1h:14) 19…f5 (1h:17)
20.exf5 (1h:16) 20…Bxf5 (1h:18)
21.Ra1 (1h:17) 21…Nf4 (1h:23)

22.gxf4 (1h:26) 22…exf4 (1h:23)
23.Bd2 (1h:36)23…Qxb2 (1h:37)
24.Rab1 (1h:40) 24…f3 (1h:41)
25.Rxb2 (2h:01) 25…fxe2 (1h:41)
26.Rb3 (2h:02) 26…Rd4 (1h:43)
27.Be1 (2h:08) 27…Be5+ (1h:45)
28.Kg1 (2h:08) 28…Bf4 (1h:46)
29.Nxe2 (2h:14) 29…Rxc1 (1h:46)
30.Nxd4 (2h:17) 30…Rxe1+
(1h:46) 31.Bf1 (2h:17) 31…Be4
(1h:49) 32.Ne2 (2h:21) 32…Be5
(1h:51) 33.f4 (2h:22) 33…Bf6
(1h:53) 34.Rxb7 (2h:24) 34…Bxd5
(1h:53) 35.Rc7 (2h:24) 35…Bxa2
(1h:54) 36.Rxa7 (2h:26) 36…Bc4
(1h:55) 37.Ra8+ (2h:27) 37…Kf7
(1h:56) 38.Ra7+ (2h:28) 38…Ke6
(1h:56) 39.Ra3 (2h:29) 39…d5
(2h:05) 40.Kf2 (2h:29) 40…Bh4+
(2h:06) 41.Kg2 (2h:29) 41…Kd6
(2h:07) 42.Ng3 (2h:35) 42…Bxg3
(2h:07) 43.Bxc4 (2h:36) 43…dxc4
(2h:07) 44.Kxg3 (2h:36) 44…Kd5
(2h:08) 45.Ra7 (2h:40) 45…c3
(2h:12) 46.Rc7 (2h:42) 46…Kd4
(2h:13) 0-1

Simple Chess

Posted on February 11, 1998 by DrDave

by Mark Blackmore

The aim of this session is to suggest some simple rules for how to get from 100 grade to the dizzy heights of 150. If applied firmly, I am convinced they will lead to better results without any extra study.

This first game is more or less the opposite of how you ought to model your play: an unattainable standard of mayhem…

Ivanchuk,V – Yusupov,A [E67] (cm 1/4), 1991 [MB]

1.c4 e5 2.g3 d6 3.Bg2 g6 4.d4 Nd7 5.Nc3 Bg7 6.Nf3 Ngf6 7.0-0 0-0 8.Qc2 Re8 9.Rd1 c6 10.b3 Qe7 11.Ba3 e4 12.Ng5 e3 13.f4

+-----------------+

13…Nf8 14.b4 Bf5 15.Qb3 h6 16.Nf3 Ng4 17.b5 g5 18.bxc6 bxc6 19.Ne5 gxf4 20.Nxc6 Qg5 21.Bxd6 Ng6 22.Nd5 Qh5 23.h4 Nxh4 24.gxh4 Qxh4 25.Nde7+ Kh8 26.Nxf5 Qh2+

+-----------------+

That’s the first move I’ve expected so far!

27.Kf1 Re6 28.Qb7 Rg6 29.Qxa8+

[29.Bxf4 Qxf4+ 30.Kg1 Qh2+ 31.Kf1 Qh1+ 32.Bxh1 Nh2+ 33.Ke1 Rg1#]

29…Kh7 30.Qg8+ Kxg8 31.Nce7+ Kh7 32.Nxg6 fxg6 33.Nxg7 Nf2 34.Bxf4 Qxf4 35.Ne6 Qh2 36.Rdb1 Nh3 37.Rb7+ Kh8 38.Rb8+ Qxb8 39.Bxh3 Qg3 0-1

Wonderful, exciting chess – but not, I believe, the way to get results. In fact, not even Yusupov believes this is the way to get results – this was actually a quickplay tie-break where nerves count as much as chess. Normally, Yusupov prefers the bear-hug.

Fischer, although very sharp, was also a very strong positional player, achieving good results with apparently straightforward means. As an example, we can cite:

Fischer – Panno, 1970

1.c4, Black resigns

After a solid opening by White, Black found he was unable to organise a defence. This illustrates how you needn’t do anything very complicated to win games, just applying good sense may be enough.

Let’s see that approach at work in a slightly longer game.

Fischer – Spassky WCh [D59] (we (6), 1972 [MB]

1.c4 e6 2.Nf3 d5 3.d4 Nf6 4.Nc3 Be7 5.Bg5 0-0 6.e3 h6 7.Bh4 b6 8.cxd5 Nxd5 9.Bxe7 Qxe7 10.Nxd5 exd5 11.Rc1 Be6 12.Qa4 c5 13.Qa3 Rc8 14.Bb5 a6 15.dxc5 bxc5 16.0-0 Ra7 17.Be2 Nd7 18.Nd4 Qf8

+-----------------+

19.Nxe6 fxe6 20.e4! d4 21.f4 Qe7 22.e5 Rb8 23.Bc4 Kh8 24.Qh3 Nf8 25.b3 a5 26.f5 exf5 27.Rxf5 Nh7 28.Rcf1 Qd8 29.Qg3 Re7 30.h4 Rbb7 31.e6 Rbc7 32.Qe5 Qe8 33.a4 Qd8 34.R1f2 Qe8 35.R2f3 Qd8 36.Bd3 Qe8 37.Qe4 Nf6 38.Rxf6 gxf6 39.Rxf6 Kg8 40.Bc4 Kh8 41.Qf4 1-0

This game makes chess seem so smooth, so easy – even so attainable.

If nothing else it should reinforce the importance of positional sense. Why did Gary Lane beat us all in the Simul., without seeming to do anything remarkable? I think one of the biggest obstacles to good positional play is muddy thinking – and I think there are three rules to avoid muddiness and improve your game.

Blackmore,M – Lane,P [C02] (Exeter Club Ch’p (6)), 1997 [MB]

The three rules of good positional play:

(1) respect your opponent (don’t play for cheapos)

(2) ask yourself: what will the reply be?

(3) think about a move before you make it – not after (Taimanov).

From Game 1 we can add Rule (0): don’t hack!

1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 c5 4.c3 Nc6 5.Nf3 Bd7 6.Bd3 Rc8 7.a3 f6 8.0-0 fxe5 9.Nxe5 Nf6

Illustrating the importance of rules (1) and (2). Peter was never going to miss the cheapo, so what else would he play?

[9…cxd4 10.cxd4 Nxd4 11.Qh5+]

10.Bg5 c4 11.Bxf6 Qxf6

Rules (1) and (3): White sees an opportunity to prevent Black from castling.

12.Nxd7 Kxd7 13.Bc2 Bd6 14.f4

Rule (2).

14…Kc7

The Black King is perfectly OK here.

15.a4 Rule (2) again:

15…Rcf8 If White was hoping for …a5 he was disappointed.

16.Na3 Rule (2) again: what one-move threat does this move make, and what one-move reply is at least adequate?

16…a6 17.b4 Rule (2): White again is hopeful (…cxb3 e.p.)

17…Bxf4 18.Qg4 Rule (2): does this move really embarrass Black?

18…Be3+ 0-1

Of course, you can argue that I was always going to lose to Pete, but I think my point stands. If I’d followed my own rules, I would at least have put up a better fight.

Ayress – Blackmore,M [C02] (5), 1997

The way to improve, I believe, is to do simple things well. Solid, harmonious moves, emphasising good piece play and good defence, provides the best basis for attacking and can win games just on its own merits. The ability to do this is, I am convinced, the main difference between a 100-grade and a 150-grade player.

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.c3 Nf6 4.d3 Be7 5.Be2 0-0 6.0-0 d6 7.Nbd2 Bg4 8.h3 Bh5 9.Nh2 Bxe2 10.Qxe2 d5 11.a3 dxe4 12.Nxe4 Nxe4 13.dxe4 Bc5 14.Be3 Qe7 15.Rad1 Rad8 16.Nf3 Kh8 17.Rd2 Rxd2 18.Nxd2 Rd8 19.Kh2 Bxe3 20.Qxe3 Qd7 21.Nb3

+-----------------+

Without trying at all hard, Black has been gained a nice juicy open file. 21…b6 22.f3 a5 23.Rf2 Qd1 24.Nc1 f6 25.Re2 a4 26.Re1 Qd7 27.Re2 Na5 Adding to his collection of advantages. 28.Qf2 h6 29.Qe3 Nc4 30.Qf2 Qd1 31.Na2 c5 32.Rc2 Rd7 33.Kg3

+-----------------+

33…Rd2 34.Rxd2 Nxd2 winning because of the embarrassed White Knight. But it gets better: 35.Kg4 Nxe4 36.Qe3 Qd7+ 37.Kh4 g5+ 38.Kh5 Ng3+ 0-1

Now here I obeyed all the rules and the game fell into my lap. Do the same, along with plenty of practice and you’ll find you’ve picked up a lot of the basic positional stuff Dave keeps banging on about.

I’m convinced your results will improve.

The ideas behind the Modern Defence

Posted on February 6, 1998 by DrDave

+-----------------+

References:

BOTTERILL/KEENE The Modern Defence
(Batsford)

DAVIES The Modern Defence (British
Internet Chess Server, Warwick)

HORT The Modern Defence
(RHM)

NORWOOD Winning with the Modern
(Batsford)

NUNN The Pirc for the Tournament Player
(Batsford)

NUNN The Complete Pirc (Batsford)

NUNN New Ideas in the Pirc
(Batsford)

SOLTIS Black to play and win with 1…g6
(Chess Digest)

The basic idea
behind the Modern Defence:

First Black allows White to set up a Pawn centre.

+-----------------+
(This is the simplest kind of Pawn centre that White can set
up.)

Then Black hits back at it.

+-----------------+

Black’s pieces are all on good squares and Black even has a share
of the centre. White can try and grab more of the centre than this,
but the more White tries to grab, the bigger target you have
got!

This is quite a fun idea and often leads to more
unbalanced battles than boring old 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3.
Bc4 Bc5…

[I must add that there are lots of ways to unbalance
the old Italian game (4. c3, 4. b4) and you can always try
something else at move 3 (3. Bb5, 3. d4)]

Good points for Black about the Modern
Defence:

It is unusual and White may not have a clue how to behave
It is difficult and unbalanced and so is a good system to play
for a win with.

Good points for White in the Modern
Defence:

White is given a free hand to set up the centre just as they
like.
White holds the centre so it is much easier for White to get
pieces from one side to the other.
White can use the big centre to attack down the middle of the
board with e4-e5 or f4-f5
Black has weakened the King’s-side and White has a little start
towards a King’s-side attack down the h-file.

Bad points about the Modern Defence:

The Modern Defence is one of the most difficult and awkward
defences played by Grandmasters, and you can often lose games
without ever understanding why you lost.

Juniors and amateurs may have much more fun, and learn
much more about the basics of chess, when playing the familiar open
games beginning 1. e4 e5. One more caution:

Non-governmental
health warning

One of the first times I ever saw the Modern Defence played was in
1980 at the Cambridge Open. Local expert Erik Teichmann had the
Black pieces against an opponent, who, while a strong County
player, was graded far below Erik.

Game 1: Charity,A – Teichmann,E [B09]
(Cambridge Open), 05.1980

1.e4 g6 2.d4 Bg7 3.Nc3 d6 4.f4 Nf6 5.Nf3 0-0

+-----------------+

White plays a direct attacking line against Black’s hypermodern
opening.

6.Bd3 Nc6

White breaks in the centre.

7.e5 dxe5 8.dxe5 Nd5 9.Bd2 Nb6 10.0-0
f6

Black shouldn’t open lines on the King’s-side, that’s
just what White wants!

11.exf6 Bxf6 12.Ng5 e6

+-----------------+

White plays a temporary sacrifice: White’s centralised pieces can
attack Black’s King while the Black Queen’s-side pieces cannot get
back to defend.

13.Nxh7! Kxh7 14.Qh5+ (at this point
Erik ceremoniously tore up his score sheet) 14…Kg8
15.Qxg6+ Bg7 16.Qh7+ Kf7 17.Bg6+ Ke7 18.Qxg7+ Kd6 19.Ne4+ Kd5
20.Qc3 Qe7 21.Qb3+ Nc4 22.Qb5+ Kd4 23.Bc3+ (Resigns)

[23.Bc3+ Ke3 24.Rae1#]

1-0

Rather an abrupt game. Now, most of your opponents can’t
play as well as Alec Charity, but if Erik can be blown away using
this defence so can you. What went wrong here? Well, if you think
about it, White’s most basic plan in the opening is:

1. Develop quickly and grab as much of the centre
as you can

2. Use your development and space advantage to
attack the opponent’s King

3. Attack by opening up lines for your better
pieces.

Now, in the Modern Defence Black seems to help White do
all these things! All right, it isn’t quite that simple, but if
White is determined to attack Black it is very difficult to stop it
happening, and there are several sharp White systems which come
very close to delivering mate almost by force. All you need is one
little mistake and Black is finished.

In playing the Modern Defence you are playing a very
risky, dangerous system with rules all of its own. To rub this
point in, I give below a few master games where strong Black
players just get smashed right out of the opening (Hue-Donner,
Hessmer-Haefner, Fischer-Udovcic). You must be aware that this
can happen to you, and what the do’s and don’ts are of these
positions.

Here’s Steve Haataja:

Good lines, in some sense, are ones that your usual
opponents cannot refute. If you are having trouble dealing with
early queen sorties, then your opponents are playing “good lines”
by bringing out the queen early. If handling this situation gives
you trouble, I suggest playing more offhand games against players
who do this, and trying it out some yourself. You will learn how to
deal with such situations by a combination of observing others
handle it and good old trial and error.

Here is a personal example. When I began playing the
Modern Defence, things went pretty well at first. But then I ran
into a fellow at the club who would quickly castle Queen’s-side,
play h2-h4, then h5. The h-file would open up and he’d checkmate me
in maybe fifteen more moves. These were five-minute games, BTW. He
did this to me several times that first night.

It became terribly frustrating. Nobody else attacked
as savagely as he did, and I did fine against less violent
variations. He went so far as to play 1.e4 g6 2.h4 (a slap in the
face) a couple times, with great success. But after about four
weeks of beatings, I finally timed the counter-punch in the centre
correctly (the general principle: counter a flank attack with play
in the centre). His attack lost steam and I won. He soon stopped
single-mindedly playing for checkmate down the h-file as I was
winning every such game. That was one of the best chess lessons I
ever learned. Quickly hitting back in the centre became an
instinctive reaction to the dreaded h2-h4. You can read the
principle 100 times in books, but until you actually experience it
firsthand, it’s just somebody else’s theory. — Steve
Haataja

White Pawn
centres

Classical centre

+-----------------+
This is the most modest centre that White can build up. Black can
easily get a share of the centre with …e7-e5 but that doesn’t do
the Bg7 any good, so Black must also be careful to keep White’s
pieces under control and look for any active play that is going.
It’s actually quite an annoying system to play against! (See
the games Cramling-Yrjola, and Kauranen-Richardson)

Geller
system

+-----------------+
This is another quiet system – White does not bite off more than
can be chewed, and supports the d-Pawn against any pressure from
the Bg7. Black can play …c7-c5 and/or …e7-e5 which may open up
the long dark diagonal again. (See Filip-Bronstein).

Three-Pawn
centre

+-----------------+
This centre takes a little while to set up but is quite solid and
can be dangerous once White gets some pieces behind it. Black must
hit back with moves like …c7- c5 and …e7-e5. (See the games
Stein-Suttles and Byrne-Donner below.)

Pseudo-Austrian
centre

+-----------------+
This is one of the most dangerous systems for White (as we saw
in Charity-Teichmann), and many Black players try to move into
a solid Hippopotamus or Gurgenidze system in response (Games:
Hippopotamus: Barczay-Ivkov, Keres-Navarovsky, Engedal-Davies,
Gurgenidze: Herrera-Garcia)

Pseudo-Samisch
centre

+-----------------+
White can play quietly behind this centre but can also use it to
launch a King’s-side Pawn storm with moves like g2-g4 and h2-h4.
Black must try to keep this storm under control while hitting back
in the centre or on the Queen’s-side.

Averbakh
centre

+-----------------+
White can transfer the weight of the attack to the Queens’-side by
playing c1- c4 before developing the Queen’s Knight. This can be
very like – even become – lines of the King’s Indian Defence
(Games: Korchnoi-Fischer).

Ideas for
Black

Dark square strategy

+-----------------+

This is the most common sort of central counter-attack. Black must
be careful to get the King out of the way before opening up lines
in the centre. (Games: Kauranen-Richardson,
Cramling-Yrjola)

Light square
blockade (Gurgenidze)

+-----------------+

This is a very solid system which Black players often play against
dangerous White systems like the Pseudo-Austrian. Black should aim
to hold things tight on the King’s-side and gradually move into
White’s Queen’s-side.

This is almost a separate opening, and can actually arise
commonly from the Caro-Kann Defence. Below I give several whole
games to give you a feel for this way of playing, and if you want
to take up this strategy, I recommend you play over all of them
(as notes to Herrera-Garcia).

Queen’s-side
attack

+-----------------+

Black hopes to make trouble on the Queen’s-side – either opening a
file or nudging the Knight away from the defence of e4. Black must
be careful though, because White can also try to make use of open
lines there if White has not castled Queen’s-side. But if the White
King is to be found there, the Black Bg7 is already pointing
straight at him!

(Games: Crawley-Hodgson, Nunn-Shirov,
Polajzer-Davies)

Hippopotamus
strategy

+-----------------+

Black can set this arrangement up against more or less any White
system. It is not a strategy in itself, just a way of waiting. It
is very flexible and Black can try to make a break at any point on
the board, but Black can get stuck without any active play because
Black cannot get enough pieces to any one spot on the board. White
can then pick a time and place to break through. So Black cannot
just curl up, but should aim to break up White’s centre with moves
like …c7-c5 (Games: Barczay-Ivkov, Keres-Navarovsky,
Engedal-Davies).

Variations of
the Modern and Pirc Defences

Byrne variation: 1. e4 g6 2. d4 Bg7 3. Nc3
d6 4. Bg5

White can play with pieces or follow up with f2-f4.

System with Be3: 1. e4 g6 2. d4 Bg7 3. Nc3
d6 4. Be3

Usually White plays Qd2, maybe with a Samisch-style centre, maybe
not.

System with h3: 1. e4 g6 2. d4 Bg7 3. Nc3 d6
4. Nf3 Nf6 5. h3 O-O 6. Be37

One idea is to play a sort of classical variation with Bc4.

Classical variation: 1. e4 g6 2. d4 Bg7 3.
Nc3 d6 4. Nf3 Nf6 5. Be2

A modest system aiming for quick development and a small edge.

Austrian Attack: 1. e4 g6 2. d4 Bg7 3. Nc3
d6 4. f4

An aggressive line grabbing space in the centre and King’s-side.

Gurgenidze system: 1. e4 g6 2. d4 Bg7 3. Nc3
c6 4. f4 d5

A blockading line, useful against the Austrian Attack.

Monkey’s Bum: 1. e4 g6 2. d4 Bg7 3. Nc3 c6
4. Bc4 d6 5. Qf3

An anti-Gurgenidze idea: “If that works, then I’m a Monkey’s
Bum!” (Nunn-Shirov)

System with Bc4: 1. e4 g6 2. d4 Bg7 3. Nc3
(or 3. Nf3) 3…d6 4. Bc4 Nf6 5. Qe2

White often follows with e4-e5; with early Nf3 White may play
quietly with c3

Geller’s system: 1. e4 g6 2. d4 Bg7 3. c3 d6
4. Nf3

Another modest system hoping to blot out the Bg7

King Fianchetto variation: 1. e4 g6 2. d4
Bg7 3. Nc3 d6 4. Nge2 Nf6 5. g3

A quiet line with slow play: Black can play standard moves.

Three Pawns attack: 1. e4 g6 2. d4 Bg7 3. c3
d6 4. f4

Another space-grabbing line, but not very good on piece
development.

Variations with an early Be2: 1. e4 g6 2. d4
Bg7 3. Nc3 d6 4. Be2

White intends to follow up with h2-h4 or g2-g4, hoping for an
attack.

Averbakh Variation: 1. e4 g6 2. d4 Bg7 3. c4
d6

A move towards Queen’s-side openings like the King’s Indian or
Benoni

P.S. The Modern
Defence and related openings.

The Modern Defence is just the fianchetto of the King’s Bishop
while delaying the development of the King’s Knight. If the King’s
Knight is played to f6 early on, we may have transposed into one of
two other openings: the Pirc Defence or the King’s Indian Defence.

The Pirc Defence is usually played with
the move order 1. e4 d6 2. d4 Nf6 3. Nc3, which
stops White moving into a Queen’s-side opening with c2-c4. With a
Modern Defence move order White can play something like 1.
e4 g6 2. d4 Bg7 3. c4 when a later …Nf6 will transpose
into the King’s Indian Defence. This is a good
fighting defence to the Queen’s-side openings, which many
Grandmasters like to play, and usually begins 1. d4 Nf6 2.
c4 g6 3. Nc3 Bg7 4. e4 (see
Korchnoi-Fischer).

If you don’t like playing the King’s Indian Defence (it
is very complicated – whole books have been written about single
variations of the Defence!) but still want to play the Modern
Defence, you don’t have to play …Nf6 and instead you can find
some other move after 1. e4 g6 2. d4 Bg7 3. c4 d6 4.
Nc3, like 4…Nc6, 4…Nd7 or even 4…f5. On the other
hand, Black’s side in these various lines of the Averbakh Variation
can be tricky to handle.

One clever move order is 1. e4 g6 2. d4 d6 3.
c4 when 3…e5 is the idea. If White now
pushes on here with 4. d5 you can play 4…f5, and
if White plays 4. dxe5 dxe5 5. Qxd1+ Kxd1 then
your King’s Bishop can come out to c5 instead of being stuck on g7.
If you don’t want to White to be able to move over to a
Queen’s-side opening at all, you can always play the Pirc Defence
with an early …Nf6 and Nb1-c3.

Example games:

White’s King’s-side attack

Game 2: Liu Wen Hue – Donner H [B07] Buenos
Aires ol. FS, 1978

1.e4 d6 2.d4 Nf6 3.Nc3 g6 4.Be2 Bg7 5.g4 h6?

Weakening the King’s-side even more; 5…c6 6. g5
Nfd7 is better, or 5…Na6 planning …c5.

Oddly, in reply to 5. h4, Black
can reply 5…h5, because it is difficult
for White to open a file without creating weaknesses in White’s own
position. 5…c5, hitting back in the
centre, is also a good reply.

6.h3 c5 7.d5 0-0?

Having weakened the King’s-side so much, that’s the last
place Black should put his King! Perhaps Jan thought that White had
given up the idea of a King’s-side attack after 6.h3, but…

8.h4! e6

+-----------------+

9.g5 hxg5 10.hxg5 Ne8 11.Qd3 exd5 12.Nxd5 Nc6 13.Qg3 Be6
14.Qh4

+-----------------+

14…f5 15.Qh7+ Kf7 16.Qxg6+! Kxg6 17.Bh5+ Kh7 18.Bf7+
Bh6 19.g6+ Kg7 20.Bxh6+

[20.Bxh6+ Kh8 21.Bxf8+ Qh4 22.Rxh4#]

1-0

Game 3: (75) Hessmer – Haefner Th. [B09]
Corr., 1986

1.e4 d6 2.d4 Nf6 3.Nc3 g6 4.f4 Bg7 5.Nf3 0-0 6.e5 Nfd7 7.h4
c5 8.h5 cxd4 9.hxg6

+-----------------+

9…dxc3 10.gxf7+ Rxf7 11.e6 cxb2 This may win
by force but Black is taking an awful risk playing this way. This
game was played by correspondence, so he may have thought he could
find his way out of any trouble, or he may just have trusted his
books…

[11…Rf6 12.exd7 Bxd7 13.Bd3 h6 14.bxc3
Nc6[[threesuperior]]]

12.exf7+ Kf8 13.Bxb2 Bxb2 14.Bc4 Qa5+ 15.Kf1 Nf6
16.Rb1 Qc3 17.Bb3!?

[17.Ne5 Bf5; 17.Bd3 Bg4]

17…Bg4 “with great advantage to
Black” – Botterill & Keene. 18.Ng5!
Bxd1

[18…Qxb3 “better, but still winning for White”
– Nunn]

19.Rxh7 Nbd7 20.Ne6# 1-0

Game 4: (77) Fischer,R – Udovcic,M [B06]
Rovinj/Zagreb Rd: 12, 1970

1.e4 g6 2.d4 Bg7 3.Nc3 d6 4.f4 Nc6 5.Be3 Nf6 6.h3 0-0
7.g4

+-----------------+

An enormously bold – even arrogant – way of playing. White
intends to swamp the Black King’s-side.

The first rule of these positions is:

Hit back in the centre!

7…e5! 8.dxe5 dxe5 9.f5 gxf5 10.gxf5 Nd4

Exchanging Queens first was safer! 11.Nf3 c5
12.Bg5 Qb6 13.Bxf6 Qxf6 14.Nd5 Nxf3+ 15.Qxf3 Qh4+ 16.Ke2 Be6 17.Ne3
Rad8 18.Rg1

+-----------------+

Black has some ideas for counterplay, but is in too much trouble
on the open g-file. 18…Kh8 19.fxe6 fxe6 20.Qg3 Qf6
21.Qxg7+ Qxg7 22.Rxg7 Kxg7 23.Ng4 Rf4 24.Ke3 Rdf8 25.Be2 h5 26.Nxe5
Rh4 27.Rg1+ Kh7 28.Rh1 Rhf4 29.Nd3 R4f7 30.Nxc5 Rc8 31.Nxe6 1-0

Black’s dark-square strategy

Game 5: Kovacevic,V – Seirawan,Y [B07] Wijk,
1980

1.d4 g6 2.e4 d6 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.Be2 Nf6 5.g4 c6 6.g5 Nfd7 7.h4
b5 8.h5 Rg8 9.hxg6 hxg6 10.Nf3 b4 11.Nb1 a5 12.a4 c5 13.d5 Nb6
14.c4 Kd7 15.Nbd2 Rh8 16.Rg1 Kc7 17.Rb1 Rh3 18.b3 Qh8

+-----------------+

Black’s control of the dark squares is complete. 19.Nf1
N8d7 20.Bf4 Ne5 21.Nxe5 Bxe5 22.Bxe5 Qxe5

+-----------------+

The disappearance of Black’s monster Bishop has not saved White,
the dark squares still belong to Black. 23.f3 Bd7 24.Qc2
Qd4 25.Rg2 Rh1 26.Rf2 Qh8 27.f4 Qh4 28.Rd1 f6 29.gxf6 exf6 30.e5
fxe5 31.fxe5 Rf8 32.exd6+ Kb7 33.Bd3 Re8+ 34.Be2 Rxf1+ 35.Kxf1 Qh1#
0-1

Game 6: Cramling,D – Yrjola,J [B08]
It shv., 1984

1.e4 g6 2.d4 Bg7 3.Nc3 d6 4.Nf3 Nf6 5.Be2

[5.h3 0-0 6.Be3 a6 7.a4 b6 (7…Nc6; 7…d5!?)
]

5…0-0 6.0-0 Bg4

[6…c6]

7.Be3 Nc6 8.Qd2 e5

+-----------------+

This standard position has been largely abandoned by White,
while bored Blacks have been experimenting with an early …c6.
9.dxe5

[9.d5 Ne7 10.Rad1 Bd7 11.Ne1 b5! 12.a3 (12.Bxb5
Nxe4) 12…a5 13.Nd3 c6 14.dxc6 Bxc6 15.Bh6 b4 16.Bxg7 Kxg7
17.axb4 axb4 18.Nb1 Qb6 19.Kh1 Rab8 Barlov-Jansa, Bor 1985: Black
is at least equal, according to John Nunn]

9…dxe5 10.Rad1 Qc8 11.Qc1 Rd8 12.Rxd8+
Qxd8

[12…Nxd8!?]

13.Rd1 Qf8 14.h3 Bxf3 15.Bxf3

+-----------------+

15…h5!? with the idea of exchanging the B on
h6. 16.Nb5 Rc8 17.c3

[17.Nxa7 Nxa7 18.Bxa7 b6 and the Bishop is buried ]

17…Kh7 18.Na3 Bh6 19.Bxh6 Qxh6 20.Qxh6+ Kxh6
21.h4 Kg7 22.Nc4 a5 23.Kf1 Kf8

+-----------------+

This is quite OK for Black. 24.Ke2 Ke7 25.Ke3 b5 26.Na3
Na7 27.Be2 c6 28.Nb1 Ne8 29.Nd2 Nd6 30.g3 Rd8 31.f4 exf4+ 32.gxf4
Nac8 33.Nf3? Nc4+ 34.Kf2 Rxd1 35.Bxd1 Nxb2 36.Be2 Na4 37.c4 b4
38.Nd4 Kd7 0-1

Knocking out White’s big centre

Game 7: Stein ,L – Suttles,D [B06] Sousse
Tunisia, 1967

1.e4 g6 2.d4 Bg7 3.c3 d6 4.f4 c5

+-----------------+

A bold but hopefully temporary Pawn sacrifice. 5.dxc5
Nf6!? 6.cxd6 exd6 7.e5

[7.Nf3 0-0 8.Bd3 Black can exploit the act that he has
already castled: 8…Nxe4! 9.Bxe4 Re8]

7…dxe5 8.Qxd8+ Kxd8 9.fxe5 Re8
10.Nf3

+-----------------+

Duncan Suttles may have chosen wrongly here:
10…Nc6?

[10…Ng4!? (Botterill/Keene) 11.Bg5+ f6 12.Bh4
(12.Bf4 fxe5 13.Bg5+ Kc7) 12…Nxe5 e.g. 13.Nxe5 Rxe5+
14.Kf2 Rf5+! with easy equality, since White has no good square for
his King.]

11.Bb5 Bd7 12.Bxc6 Bxc6 13.0-0 Ng4 14.Bg5+ Kc8
15.Nbd2 h6 16.Bf4 g5 17.Bg3 Ne3 18.Rf2 Nf5 19.Nc4 Bd5 20.Nfd2 Nxg3
21.Nd6+ Kd7 22.Nxe8 Rxe8 23.hxg3 Bxe5 24.Rd1 Kc6 25.Nb3 b6 26.Nd4+
Kc5 27.g4 Bf4 28.Nf5 Re5 29.g3 Rxf5 30.gxf5 Bxg3 31.Rfd2 Bf3 32.Rf1
Bf4 33.Rxf3 Bxd2 34.Rd3 Bf4 35.Rh3 Kd5 36.Rxh6 Ke5 37.Rh7 f6
38.Rxa7 Kxf5 39.Kf2 Bd6 40.Rb7 Bc5+ 41.Kg2 1-0

Game 8: Byrne ,R
– Donner ,J [B07] San Juan Puerto Rico, 1969

1.e4 g6 2.d4 Bg7 3.c3 d6 4.f4 Nf6 5.Bd3 e5 6.Nf3 exf4
7.Bxf4 0-0 8.0-0 c5 9.Nbd2 cxd4 10.cxd4 Nc6

+-----------------+

White still has his centre but none of the advantages that can
go with it. Black has good development and an equal game.
11.Qb3 d5 12.e5 Ne4 13.Nxe4 dxe4 14.Bxe4 Nxd4 15.Qe3 Ne6
16.Bg3 Qb6 17.Qxb6 axb6 18.b4 b5 19.Rf2 Re8 20.Rc2
1/2../strong>

Game 9: Filip,M
– Bronstein,D [B07] Moskva, 1967

1.Nf3 g6 2.d4 Bg7 3.e4 d6 4.c3 Nf6 5.Nbd2 0-0 6.Be2
b6

+-----------------+

Preparing …c5 7.0-0 e6 8.Re1 Bb7 9.Bd3 c5 10.dxc5 bxc5
11.e5 dxe5 12.Nxe5 Nc6 13.Ndc4 Nxe5 14.Nxe5 Qc7 15.Qe2
Rab8

+-----------------+

Black’s split Pawns are not weak because White is not organised
to attack them – in fact, the half-open b-file gives Black a little
initiative. 16.Bd2 Ba8 17.Nc4 Nh5 18.Be4 Bd5 19.b3 Rfd8
20.Rad1 Nf6 21.Bc2 Qb7 22.Na5 Qb6 23.Nc4 Qa6 24.Ne3 Qxe2 25.Rxe2
Bc6 26.f3 a5 27.Be1 Rxd1 28.Nxd1 a4 29.bxa4 Ra8 30.Bf2 c4 31.Bd4
Nd5 32.Bxg7 Kxg7 33.Be4 Rxa4 34.Bxd5 Bxd5 35.Ne3 Bc6 36.Rc2 Kf6
37.Kf2 Ke7 38.Ke1 Kd6 39.Kd2 Kc5 40.Kc1 Ra8 41.Rd2 f5 42.Rd4 Ra4
43.Kb2 e5 44.Rd8 Ra8 45.Rxa8 Bxa8 46.Nd1 Bc6 47.Kc1 g5 48.Kd2 Bd7
49.Ke2 f4 50.Nb2 h5 51.Kf2 g4 52.g3 Bc6 53.fxg4 hxg4 54.gxf4 exf4
55.Kg1 Bf3 56.Kf2 Be4 57.Kg1 Bc2 58.Kf2 Bb1 59.a3 Bc2 60.Ke1 Kd5
61.Kf1 Bd3+ 62.Kf2 Bg6 63.Nd1 Be8 64.Nb2 Bb5 65.Ke2 Ke4 66.Kf2 Kf5
67.Kg1 Kg5 68.Nd1 Kh4 69.Kg2 Ba4 70.Nf2 g3 71.hxg3+ fxg3 72.Kg1 Bc2
73.Kf1 gxf2 74.Kxf2 Kg5 75.Ke3 Kf6 76.Kd4 Bb3 77.Kc5 Ke7 78.a4 Kd7
79.a5 Kc7 80.Kb5 Kb7 81.Kc5 Ka6 82.Kb4 Ba2 83.Ka4 Bb1 84.Kb4 Bd3
85.Ka4 Bc2+ 0-1

Black’s Queen’s-side play

Game 10: Nunn John D M,J – Shirov Alexei,A
[B06] Bundesliga, 1996

1.e4 g6 2.d4 Bg7 3.Nc3 c6 4.Bc4 d6 5.Qf3 e6 6.Nge2 b5 7.Bb3
a5 8.a3 Ba6 9.0-0 Nd7 10.Bf4 Qe7 11.Rad1 e5 12.Bg5 Ngf6

+-----------------+

Black insists on a share of the centre as well as a
counter-attack on the Queen’s-side. 13.d5 c5 14.a4 b4
15.Nb5 Nb6 16.Qd3 c4 17.Bxc4 Nxa4 18.Ra1 Nxb2 19.Qb3 Nxc4 20.Qxc4
Rc8 21.Qd3 Qd8 22.c4 0-0 23.Ra2

+-----------------+

A tense position where all the play is on the Queen’s-side, and
Black must be pleased with the two connected passed Pawns. Black
sacrifices the exchange to remove White’s last Queen’s-side Pawn…
23…Rxc4 24.Bxf6 Bxf6 25.Qxc4 Qb6 26.Qc7 Qxb5 27.Qxd6 Kg7
28.Rc1 Rd8 29.Qc6 b3 30.Rb2 Qd3 31.Rcb1 Rc8 32.Qa4 Rc2 33.Rxb3 Qxe2
34.Rf3 Bd3 35.Qd7 Bxe4 36.Rxf6 Kxf6 37.Qd6+ Kf5 38.Rf1 Bd3 39.Qd7+
Kf6

+-----------------+

Black has nibbled in a circle all the way around the board to
finish off the White King! 0-1

Game 11: Crawley
,G – Hodgson,J [B07] 1989

1.e4 d6 2.d4 Nf6 3.Nc3 c6 4.g3 g6 5.Bg2 Bg7 6.a4 0-0 7.h3
b6 8.Nge2 Bb7 9.0-0 Nbd7 10.Bg5 a6 11.Re1

+-----------------+

An unusual opening by White: Black starts his Queen’s-side play
as usual.

11…b5 12.Qd2 b4 13.Nd1 a5 14.Bh6 e5 15.Bxg7
Kxg7 16.Ne3 c5 17.d5 Ba6 18.c4 bxc3 19.Nxc3 c4 20.Nb5 Nc5 21.Qc2
Rb8 22.Nxc4 Bxb5 23.axb5 Rxb5 24.Bf1 Nb3 25.Ra3 Nd4 26.Qc3
Qb8

+-----------------+

Black has a comfortable initiative on the Queen’s-side.

27.Kg2 Rc8 28.Rxa5 Rb3 29.Qc1 Qb4 30.Ra6 Rxb2
31.Qxb2 Qxe1 32.f3 Nxf3 33.Ra1 Qxe4 34.Nxd6 Rc2+ 0-1

Black’s light-square blockade

Game 12: Herrera C – Garcia G [B15] Ch Cuba,
1989

1.e4 c6

[1…g6 2.d4 Bg7 3.Nc3 c6 4.f4 (4.Bc4!? when 4…d6
may be best) 4…d5 5.e5 h5 is the Modern Defence move
order.]

2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 g6 4.e5 Bg7 5.f4 h5 6.Nf3
Nh6 (6…Bg4!?)

cuuuuuuuuC

(rhb1kDw4}

70pDw0pgw}

6wDpDwDph}

5DwDp)wDp}

&wDw)w)wD}

3DwHwDNDw}

2P)PDwDP)}

%$wGQIBDR}

+-----------------+
7.Be3 Qb6

[7…Bg4 is more usual: 8.Be2 (8.h3!?)

A) 8…e6 9.Qd2

(9.Bf2 Nf5 10.g3 Bf8 11.Qd3 Nd7 12.h3 Bxf3 13.Bxf3 c5
14.Ne2 Qb6 15.b3 Nxd4 16.Nxd4 cxd4 17.c3 Rc8 18.Bxd4 Bc5 19.0-0 Nb8
20.Rf2 Bxd4 21.cxd4 Nc6 22.Rd1 Kd7 23.Kg2 Ne7 24.g4 hxg4 25.hxg4
Rc6 26.Qe3 Qb4 27.Qd2 Qb6 28.Qe1 a6 29.Rfd2 Qb4 30.Qf2 Rc3 31.Rc2
Rxc2 32.Qxc2 Rc8 33.Qd2 Qxd2+ 34.Rxd2 Rc3 35.Kf2 Kc6 36.Be2 Kb6
37.Rd3 Rc2 38.a3 Ra2 39.b4 Kc7 40.Ke3 Kd7 41.Rc3 Nc6 42.b5
Nxd4 0-1 Aseev Konstantin N-Titov German/Kostroma Russia
1985)

9…Nd7 10.g3 Nf5 11.Bf2 Bf8 12.h3 Bxf3 13.Bxf3 Bb4!

(13…h4!? 14.g4 Ng3!? with counterplay for the
Pawn that will be lost on g3. 15.Rg1 Qb6 16.0-0-0 Qa6 17.Qd3
Qxd3 18.Rxd3 c5 19.Nb5 c4 20.Rdd1 Rc8 21.Bxg3 hxg3 22.Rxg3 a6
23.Nc3 b5 24.Rh1 Rh4 25.Ne2 Nb6 26.g5 c3 27.b3 a5 28.Bg4 Bb4 29.Ng1
a4 30.Rh2 Ke7 31.Kd1 Ra8 32.Nf3 Rhh8 33.Ne1 Nd7 34.Nd3 axb3 35.cxb3
Ba5 36.Nc1 Nb8 37.a3 Bb6 38.Ra2 Rc8 39.Rd3 Nc6 40.Rxc3 Bxd4 41.Rd3
Bb6 42.b4 Nxb4 43.axb4 Rxc1+ 44.Kxc1 Rxa2 0-1 Arnason Jon
L-Christiansen Larry M/It open 1986)

14.a3 Qa5! 15.g4 hxg4 16.hxg4 Rxh1+ 17.Bxh1 Ne7 18.Bh4
Nb6 at least equal if not better for Black: Pasman-Ciocaltea,
1982;

B) 8…Nd7;

C) 8…Nf5 9.Qd2 e6 10.Nd1 Nd7 11.0-0
Bh6 12.Nf2? Bxf3 13.Bxf3 Nxe5 14.dxe5 d4 15.Bxd4 Qxd4 16.Qxd4 Nxd4
17.Nd3 Nxc2 18.Rac1 Nd4 19.Kf2 0-0-0 20.Rfd1 Nxf3 21.Kxf3 Rd4 22.g3
Rhd8 23.Nf2 Bf8 24.Rxd4 Rxd4 25.Rc2 Kc7 26.Ke3 Rd5 27.Ne4 Be7
28.Rc1 a5 29.b3 b5 30.h3 a4 31.g4 h4 32.bxa4 b4 33.Rb1 Ra5 34.Nd6
Rxa4 35.Nxf7 Rxa2 36.Nh8 Bc5+ 37.Kd3 Ra3+ 38.Ke2 Re3+ 39.Kd2 Rxh3
40.Nxg6 Rg3 0-1 Morris-Norwood, 1990]

8.Rb1!? Bg4 9.Be2 e6 10.b4 Nf5 11.Bf2
Bf8

+-----------------+

“Black has done everything right.” – Norwood. 12.0-0 Nd7
13.Na4 Qc7 14.c3 Be7 15.Nb2 a5 16.a3 Kf8 17.Ng5 Bxe2 18.Qxe2 Kg7
19.g3 Qd8 20.Qd2 axb4 21.axb4 Ra2 22.Kg2 Nb6!

+-----------------+

This is good for Black, White has no real idea what he can do next.
23.Qc1 Bxg5 24.fxg5 Nc4 25.h4 Qd7 26.Kh3 Re8 27.g4 hxg4+
28.Kxg4 Rh8 29.Rh1 Qd8 30.Rh3 Qg8 31.Nxc4 dxc4 32.Rb2 Rxb2 33.Qxb2
Qh7 34.Kf4 Qh5 35.Qd2 Ra8 36.Rh1 Ra3 37.Be1 Ne7 38.Kg3 Ra1 39.Rh2
Rd1 40.Qf2 Nf5+ 41.Kf4 Rd3 42.Qe2 Ne7 43.Qxh5 gxh5 44.Ke4 Nd5
45.Bd2 Kg6 0-1

The Hippopotamus

Game 13: Barczay Laszlo – Ivkov Borislav
[B06] Sousse Tunisia, 1967

1.e4 g6 2.d4 Bg7 3.Nf3 d6 4.Bc4 a6 5.0-0 e6 6.Bg5?!
Ne7 (Black was going to do this anyway) 7.Qd2 h6
8.Be3 Nd7 9.Nc3 b6 10.Rfe1 Bb7 11.a4

+-----------------+

Black may be crouching but his position is solid. White, having
achieved more or less complete development, just decides to try and
hack through straight away, but it all goes wrong …
11…Nf6 12.e5 Nfd5 13.Bf4 Nxc3 14.Qxc3

[14.bxc3]

14…0-0 15.exd6 cxd6 16.Qa3

+-----------------+

White’s attack has produced a threat to the d-Pawn, but Black is
ready to counterattack. 16…Nf5 17.c3?

[17.Rad1]

17…Bxf3 18.gxf3 e5! 19.Bg3

[19.dxe5 dxe5 20.Bxe5 Bxe5 21.Rxe5 Qg5+ 22.Kh1 Qf4]

19…h5 20.dxe5 dxe5 21.Kh1 Qg5

[21…Qg5 22.Rg1 (22.Bxe5 Bxe5 23.Rxe5 Qf4)
22…h4 23.Bxe5 Qh5]

0-1

Game 14: Keres,P
– Navarovsky [B06] Luhacovice (13), 1969

1.e4 g6 2.d4 Bg7 3.Nc3 d6 4.Nf3 a6 5.Bc4 e6 6.Bg5 Ne7 7.0-0
h6 8.Be3 Nd7 9.a4 b6 10.Re1 Bb7 11.Ra3

+-----------------+

Paul Keres was one of the greatest attacking players of the
game, but grinds to a halt against the Hippopotamus… 11…Nf6
12.Bd3 0-0 13.h3 c5 14.dxc5 bxc5 15.e5 dxe5 16.Nxe5 Nfd5 17.Bxc5
Nxc3 18.Rxc3

+-----------------+

A confused position where both sides have loose pieces.
18…Qd5 19.Bf1 Qxd1 20.Rxd1 Bd5 21.Bxe7 Rfe8 22.Rc5 Bb7
23.Rc7 Bd5 1/2../strong>

Game 15: (80)
Barczay Laszlo – Suttles Duncan [B06] Izt., 1967

1.e4 g6 2.d4 Bg7 3.Nf3 d6 4.Bc4 c6 5.Nc3 b5 6.Bb3 b4 7.Ne2
a5 8.c3 Nf6 9.e5 dxe5 10.Nxe5 0-0 11.0-0 Nfd7 12.Ng4?! a4! 13.Bc2
c5 14.Bh6 a3!

+-----------------+

Black is determined to open up the long dark diagonal!
Nimzovitch always used to say that a Pawn chain should be attacked
at its base, which in this case is b2. 15.Bxg7 axb2
16.Rb1

[16.Bxf8 bxa1Q 17.Qxa1 Nxf8 18.Nh6+ Kg7 19.cxb4 Kxh6
20.dxc5 Wade says this is better for Black.]

16…Kxg7 17.cxb4 Nb6 18.Ne5 cxd4 19.Bb3? f6
20.Nd3 e5 21.Rxb2 Nc6 22.a4 Qd6 23.Qc2 Bf5 24.Ng3 Bxd3 25.Qxd3 Nxb4
26.Qb5 Rfb8 27.Ne4 Qe7 28.a5 Nd7 29.Qc4 f5 30.Ng5 Qxg5 31.Qf7+ Kh6
32.Qxd7 Nd3 33.Rbb1 Nc5 34.Qd5 Rxa5 35.Bc4 Rxb1 36.Rxb1 Qe7 37.Bf1
Ra7 38.Re1 Rd7 39.Qg8 e4 40.Bc4 0-1

Black’s active pieces

Game 17: Povah Nigel – Nunn John [B08]
1977

1.e4 d6 2.d4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.Bc4 Nc6!?

[4…Nf6 is a normal Pirc]

5.Nf3 Nf6 6.h3 0-0 7.Qe2 e5 8.dxe5 dxe5 9.0-0 Nd4
10.Qd3 Nd7 11.a4?! Nc5 12.Qd1 c6 13.b3 Nce6 14.Nb1 Qf6 15.Nh2 Nf4
16.c3 Nde6 17.Ng4 Qh4 18.Nd2 Ng5 19.f3

+-----------------+

19…Ngxh3+

[19…Ngxh3+ 20.gxh3 Qg3+ 21.Kh1 Qg2#]

0-1

Black’s King’s-side attack

Game 18: Kauranen,R – Richardson,K [B08] CC
WM 10,F FS 1978

This game was played in the world correspondence championship.

1.e4 g6 2.d4 Bg7 3.Nf3 d6 4.Be2 Nf6 5.Nc3 0-0
6.0-0 Bg4 7.Be3 Nc6 8.Qd3 e5 9.d5 Ne7 10.Rad1 Bd7

+-----------------+

Black wants to keep the ‘good’ light-squared Bishop on the
board. It’s not quite a King’s Indian but in this game Black
eventually fires off a classic KI-style King’s-side attack.
(Compare Korchnoi-Fischer 1970) 11.Nd2 Nh5 12.g3 a6 13.Bf3
b5 14.a3 Qe8 15.Qe2 Nf6 16.b4 h5 17.Nb3 Ng4 18.Nb1 f5 19.exf5
gxf5

+-----------------+

Recapturing with a Pawn leaves Black in control of lots of
central squares, and gives him the g-file to attack down.
20.Bg5 Bf6 21.Bxf6 Nxf6 22.Bg2 Qf7 23.Qd2 Kh7 24.Na5 Rg8
25.c4 bxc4 26.Nc3 h4 27.Kh1 Qh5 28.Qe2

+-----------------+

28…Ng4 29.Bf3 Qh6 30.Bxg4 Rxg4 31.f3 Rg7 32.gxh4 Rag8
33.Nxc4 Qxh4 34.Ne3 f4 35.Ng4 Nf5 0-1

Game 19:
Kortchnoi,V – Fischer,R [E97] 1970

This exciting game was played in a blitz tournament.

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.e4 d6 5.Be2 0-0
6.Nf3 e5 7.0-0 Nc6 8.d5 Ne7 9.Nd2 c5

+-----------------+

Black blocks the Queen’s-side so it is harder for White to
attack there. 10.a3 Ne8 The Knight gets out of the
way of the f-Pawn. 11.b4 b6 12.Rb1 f5 13.f3 f4 14.a4
g5

+-----------------+

In this typical King’s Indian position with a blocked centre,
it’s as if each side has their own private arena for action.
15.a5 Rf6 16.bxc5 bxc5 17.Nb3 Rg6 18.Bd2 Nf6 19.Kh1 g4
20.fxg4 Nxg4 21.Rf3 Rh6 22.h3 Ng6 23.Kg1 Nf6

+-----------------+

24.Be1 Nh8 The real Grandmaster touch.
25.Rd3 Nf7 26.Bf3 Ng5 27.Qe2 Rg6 28.Kf1 Nxh3 29.gxh3 Bxh3+
30.Kf2 Ng4+ 31.Bxg4 Bxg4 It’s easy to see the appeal of
the KID after such a game. 0-1

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

Posted on January 15, 1998 by DrDave

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]

   [Event "Friendly"]  [Site "?"]  [Date "1994.??.??"]  [Round "?"]  [White "Norwood, David"]  [Black "Davis, Steve"]  [Result "1-0"]  [Annotator "Training Game"]  [ECO "C68"]  [WhiteElo "2500"]  [BlackElo "1600"]  [PlyCount "73"]  [EventDate "1994.??.??"]   1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Bxc6 dxc6 5. O-O {"I am not happy with my Pawn structure"} 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 {#0/0 "DN: " Where do your pieces belong?" SD: " Nf6, Bd6/ c5, Qe7, O-O-O DN: " Can't find anything to fault there"} 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 O-O 11. Ne3 Qf6 12. Qg4 (12. Qg3 {"was analysed:"} Qg6 13. Qxg6 hxg6) 12... Nc5 13. Nf5 Qg6 {#} 14. Be3 (14. Qxg6 {"analysed:"} fxg6 {"x e5"}) 14... Rfe8 15. Nh4 {# 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.} Qxg4 (15... Qe6 {"overlooked"}) 16. hxg4 {"No Pawn breaks " DN} Ne6 17. f3 {#0/0 "Maybe I should swap Bishops?" (Yes! see his own comment at move 8)} Nd4 18. Bxd4 exd4 19. f4 {"Oh hell"} f6 20. g3 g5 {#} 21. Nf5 {"and he can check me on h6"} c5 22. Kg2 {"He's going to double Rooks, I'll get the King out of the way"} Kf7 23. fxg5 Re6 (23... fxg5 24. Nxd6+) 24. gxf6 Rxf6 25. g5 {"From bad to worse"} 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

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

+-----------------+

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

+-----------------+

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

+-----------------+

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?

+-----------------+

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)

+-----------------+

(B)

+-----------------+

(C)

+-----------------+

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

My adventures with the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit

Posted on December 12, 1997 by DrDave

Exeter Chess Club: My adventures with the Blackmar-Diemer
Gambit

Introduction

If you haven’t met this spendid opening before, do check out Tom
Purser’s BDG
World magazine for games, variations, stories and a chance to
meet the characters of the BDG community.

The opening is named for Blackmar, who described
the gambit 1. d4 d5 2. e4 dxe4 3. f3 , and for
Diemer, who improved the line by avoiding the defence
3…e5, suggesting and practicing instead 3. Nc3
Nf6 4. f3 [4…e5 e.g. 5. d5].

I have a book and a
database on the BDG, and in each White scores about 80%! This
must be too good to be true, I thought (and it is), but certainly
worth a look. So, I entered Tom Purser’s BDG
e-mail theme tournament to find out more about this opening,
which survives despite the scepticism. Here are my games in a
preliminary section (BDG-P01, 1997) [where, for the record I used
Andres Valverde’s cracking little ECTOOL programme to keep track
of the games.].

One key line I didn’t get to try was the Teichmann Defence,
5…Bg4. During the tournament I played the BDG in blitz against an
IM, and guess what he came straight back with? Anyhow, here’s how
the games went. I won’t get into the opening theory too much, apart
from noting known or speculative alternatives, and will concentrate
on what I thought were the critical moments of the games. When he
knew I was planning this session, Pete Lane e-mailed me the
following quote:

‘It should also be noted that there are openings
where I feel the chances for theoretical rebirth are extremely
poor. An obvious example is the Blackmar-Diemar Gambit: 1.d4 d5
2.e4. Sacrificing a prime central pawn for a tempo in the face of a
healthy, solid Black position cannot be sound.’ —
MEDNIS

There is of course, LOMBARDY’S Defence to Mednis’ System:

“At amateur level, all openings are
sound.”

I remain like Mednis a sceptic about the theoretical status of the
line, but no player from a country where also lives Mike Basman can
possibly dismiss the practical chances afforded by unorthodox
lines.

Anyhow, I enjoyed the games, and I learned not just about
the BDG but some general lessons as well. Check out the games from
the links above.

Summary of lessons:

play with a plan: plausible or visually appealing moves are not
good enough, OTB or CC
Playing by analogy is OK but notice the differences.
you can accept a gambit Pawn and win
“Don’t believe all you read” and
“Look before you leap!”
Play good moves, not good-looking ones.
Don’t drift, waiting for your opponent to build up: hit back
when you can!
Don’t panic! You must search for an answer to your opponent’s
threats. Juniors are sometimes very worried by opponent’s
king’s-side attacks, and go into a hedgehog posture, and it’s the
posture that kills them. I sometimes say, oh, don’t worry about
that, they’re only threatening mate.
Fight back! You must not drift when you are worse, you must
fight a way to create problems, and think seriously about our
opponent’s counters.
“Don’t believe what you read!” (again)
Passive play is difficult; Mednis calls it “awaiting the
undertaker”
Maybe it’s really true, the only way to refute a gambit is to
accept it!
Long aside…
Don’t hope, don’t fear: analyse and find out!

Dave Regis 0-1 Unes Hassim

My first game did not proceed quite the way it goes in the Books.
White’s attack doesn’t get started and the counterattack was rapid
and lethal.

BDG Vienna Defence

1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3 Bf5

Black aims to pick up the Pe4 without developing the
Ng1.

5.fxe4

[5.g4!? I tried in my other match with this defence.
Several of the games rapidly slid out of the gambit accepted (which
surprised me, as this must be the real test of the line) so I
played the text move which turns the game back into a gambit
again!]

5…Nxe4 6.Qf3 Nxc3 7.bxc3 Qc8 8.Bc4

[8.Bd3! 1-0 Leisebein P-Kneipp G/DDR/M\927 1989 (20
moves) “very good for White” – Theo. Hommeles.;

8.Rb1 1-0 Dahlen-Alfredson/Stockholm 1963 (16);

8.Ba3 1/2-1/2
Evers,L-Cramling,Pia/Essen-Simultanveranstaltung (+24,=6,-5) 1987
(55);

8.Bb5+ 1/2-1/2 Cody P-Burk D/corr ESMT 1988/9 (01) 1989
(25)]

8…e6

[8…c6 1-0 Zechiel David-Brodersen BF/corr Golden
Knights SFs 1982 (41);

8…g6 1-0 Schmidt H-Wolfram R/corres-GT 118 1983
(19);

8…Bg6 1-0 Peilen M-Koons C/ESMT prelim 1988 (21)]

9.Nh3

[9.Ne2!? untested 9…Be7 (9…c6 10.0-0 Nd7 11.h4
Nb6? 12.Bd../em> Lane 12…Qd7 13.Bxf5 exf5 14.Qxf5 Qxf5
15.Rxf5 Bd6=) 10.Ng3 Bxc2 (10…Bg6) ;

9.Rb1 As played by Diemer himself in two short wins e.g.
1-0 Diemer Emil-Stehle/Schwenningen 1937 (18). It seemed to me the
Rook would be better placed immediately on the King’s-side without
exposing itself to later discomfort after …Bxc2, but what do I
know.;

9.g4 0-1 Laengl-Varga Z/Nuernberg (3-6) 1989 (28)]

9…Bd6

[9…Nd7 1-0 Sammet-Bachmann/Biel cc 1952 (24);

9…Be7 1/2-1/2 Voelker James-Echert Doug/Crestwood March
Rapids 1992 (32) 10.Qg3]

10.0-0

[10.g4 Bxc2 (10…Bg6 11.Ng5 h6) 11.0-0 0-0
12.Ng5 Bg6 13.d5 e5]

10…0-0

[Now this next one was encouraging: 10…Nd7 11.Ng5 0-0
(11…h6? 12.Nxf7) 12.g4 Bg6 13.h4 Nf6 14.h5 Bxc2 15.h6
Be7 16.hxg7 Kxg7 17.Bd3 Bxd3 18.Qxd3 Rh8 19.Qf3 Qg8 20.Ba3 Nd5
21.Bxe7 Nxe7 22.Nxe6+ 1-0 Diemer Emil-Synave H/SMX Ghent 1956:
after Ng5 White’s position looked great!]

CRITICAL POSITION: White needs to come up
with an attacking plan.

11.Ng5?!

In this position, rather an aimless swing. Playing by
analogy is OK but notice the differences.

[11.g4!? Bxc2 (11…Bg6) ;

11.d5!? c6! 12.Ng5 cxd5 13.Bxd5 Bxc2 (13…Bg6)
;

11.Nf4?! Bxc2 12.Nh5]

11…h6! 12.g4 Bg6

[12…Bxc2?! rather invites 13.Nxf7 ;

the apparently awkward defence 13…Bg6 fails to 14.Nxd6
cxd6 15.Bxe6+ Qxe6 16.Qxf8+ Kh7;

12…hxg5? 13.gxf5 exf5 (13…e5 14.f6 g4
15.Qe3) 14.Qxf5 Qxf5 15.Rxf5]

I played the obvious reply without much thought:

13.Ne4

Now I think this is rather good for Black; the Knight is almost in
the way here.

13…Nd7 14.h4 Nb6

Best, I thought. In fact I had the dubious merit of
predicting almost all of my opponent’s remaining moves, without
seeming to break out of the spell!

[14…f5 15.Bxe6+; 14…Kh8; 14…Bxe4 15.Qxe4]

15.Bd3?!

I realised Black’s reply would be very strong here but I
didn’t know what else to play!

[15.Bb3 a5 16.a4 Be7 (16…Bxe4 17.Qxe4 c5 may
be awkward) 17.g5 looks unconvincing]

15…f5!

[15…e5 16.h5]

16.Nxd6

[16.gxf5 looked the right one to analyse first. I became
discouraged after 16…Bxf5! and Black should be able to cover
everything. (17.Rb1; 17.h5; 17.Qg2 Kh8 18.Be3
Qd8)]

16…cxd6 17.Bd2

[17.Ba3? Qxc3 18.Bxd6?? Qxd4+;

17.h5? Qxc3]

17…Nc4! 18.Bxc4

[18.Rad1 Nxd2 19.Rxd2 Qxc3]

18…Qxc4 19.h5

[19.Qxb7 fxg4 20.Qe7 leaves Black completely in
control.]

19…Be8 20.g5

[20.gxf5 Bc6]

20…hxg5 21.Bxg5 Rc8

White is still down by his gambit Pawn and the counterattack is
starting to boil over. Black always has …Bc6 available.

22.Rae1

[22.Be7 Rf7 23.Bxd6 Qxc3; 22.Bf4]

22…Qxc3

[22…Qxa2; or 22…Bc6 23.Qg3 Qd5 24.h6 Qh1+ 25.Kf2-
+]

23.Rxe6 Hoping for a blunder more than
anything else

[23.Qxc3 If White heads immediately for the exchange of
Queens 23…Rxc3 24.Be7 Rf7 25.Bxd6 Rxc2 26.Rf2 Rxf2 27.Kxf2 Bd7 he
soon runs out of counterplay]

23…Qxd4+!

[But if Black goes for the endgame 23…Qxf3 24.Rxf3 Bxh5
25.Ra3 a6 26.Rxd6 White may be escaping]

24.Be3 Qh4 25.Rxd6

[25.h6 Rxc2; 25.Rf2?? Bc6]

25…Rc4 Black is taking over.
Everything wins…

[25…Rxc2; 25…Bxh5]

26.Bf4 Bc6 0-1

Lessons:

play with a plan: plausible or visually appealing moves
are not good enough, OTB or CC

Playing by analogy is OK but notice the differences.

you can accept a gambit Pawn and win

Dave Regis 1-0 Volker Drueke

An abrupt end; in a slightly uncommon line White moves pieces
across to the King’s-side until a combinational break can be
launched.

All according to plan, but for a moment White’s edifice
may have proved vulnerable to a Black central break.

BDG Bogolyubov Defence

1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3 exf3 5.Nxf3 g6 6.Bc4 Bg7
7.0-0 0-0 8.Qe1 Bg4 9.Qh4 Bxf3

[9…Nc6 often transposes]

10.Rxf3 Nc6

This is a very well-known type of position for the BDG fraternity,
although the combination of an immediate …Bxf3 and …Nc6 is not
so common. Conventional attacking approaches risked playing into my
opponent’s hands, so I resolved to play a less commonly-tried
approach.

11.Ne2 Qd7

[11…Nd5 has been tried a few times, e.g. 1-0 Schuh H
FM-Kohler/Baden Team CS 1982 (23);

11…e5 12.Bg5+/-]

12.Bg5

[12.Rh3? Qg4-+;

12.Bh6? Qg4]

12…Ng4

[12…Rad8 13.c3 Na5 14.Bd3 Rfe8 15.Raf1 Qc6 16.b4 Nc4
17.Kh1 Nb6 18.Rh3 h5 19.Rhf3 Nbd7 20.b5 Qe6 21.h3 Nf8 22.R1f2 Qd7
23.Bc4 Ne6 24.Nf4 Nxf4 25.Rxf4 Rf8 26.Qg3 c6? 27.Bxf6 Bxf6 28.Qxg6+
Kh8 29.Qxh5+ Kg8 30.Rg4+ 1-0 Hall A-Wells PK/London 1977;

12…h6 I was quite worried by this move during the game,
perhaps needlessly e.g. 13.Bxh6 Nxd4 14.Nxd4 Bxh6 15.Rd3 Bg7
16.Ne6!]

13.c3

[13.Rh3?! h6 (13…Bxd4+ 14.Nxd4 Qxd4+ 15.Be3 Qxe3+
16.Rxe3 Nx../em> 14.c3 transposes below.;

13.h3? Bxd4+;

13.d5? Nce5]

13…h6

CRITICAL POSITION: Quite right! Now what is
White to do?

I knew 14.Bf4 had a precedent but I thought I had
to be sure before playing it… but in fact, I’m still not
sure!

14.Bf4!?

Alternatives:

[14.Raf1?! hxg5 15.Qxg5 Nge5 (15…Nf6 16.Qxg6 Nd8
17.Rg3 Ne8 18.Rh3 Nf6 19.Rxf6 Qxh3 20.gxh3 exf6 21.Nf4)
16.dxe5 Nxe5 17.Rh3 Qg4! (17…Nxc4 may also be good
enough) 18.Qxg4 Nxg4 19.Rg3 (19.Nf4 Ne5 20.Bb3-+)
19…Ne5 20.Bb3 Rad8 21.Nf4 e6 22.h4 Bh6 23.h5 Kg7 24.hxg6 Bxf4
25.Rxf4 Nxg6 26.Rb4 b6 27.Rc4 c5 28.Ra4 a5 29.Bc4 Rd1+ 30.Bf1 Rfd8
31.b4 cxb4 0-1 Mondragon-Gu Muller/corres ch we BDG 1975;

14.Rg3!? cf. Mondragon above 14…hxg5! 15.Qxg5
(15.Qxg4 Qxg4 16.Rxg4 Bf6 17.Ng3 e5 18.d5 Na5 19.Bd3 Be7)
15…Nge5 16.dxe5 Nxe5 17.Bb3 Bf6-+;

14.Rh3-+ e5! 15.Rd1]

14…h5!?

[14…g5!? was the line to check: 15.Bxg5 hxg5 16.Qxg5
Nf6 (16…Nh6 17.Raf1 Kh8 18.Rh3 Qd6 19.Bxf7 Rad8 20.Rg3 Rg8
21.Bxg8 Rxg8 22.Qh5+/-) 17.Rg3 Ne8 18.Nf4!? (idea Nh5)

A) 18…e6!? Opening up the second rank
to defend g7 looks the toughest defence; the Black Knights prove
very awkward for White. 19.Nh5 f6! 20.Qh6 Rf7 21.Rxg7+ (21.Re1
Nd8) 21…Nxg7 22.Nxf6+ Rxf6 23.Qxf6 Rf8;

B) 18…Nxd4?! 19.Nd5 Nc6 20.Re1]

So I might have been quite wrong to offer the Bishop, and
Volker was wrong to trust me (or Sneiders).

15.Raf1?!

Just to be different, but without immediate threats. Shades of the
last game, I fear: a good-looking move rather than a good one.
Black has a window of opportunity…

[15.Qg3? e5 16.dxe5 Ncxe5-+;

[15.Qg5? e5-+]

[Sneiders, to whom credit or blame for the idea of
sacrificing the Bishop is due, had played a game with: 15.h3!? Nf6
16.Qg3 e6 (16…Kh7) 17.Re1 (17.Raf1 Ne4 18.Qh4 Ne7
19.g4&=) 17…Ne4 18.Qh2 This position didn’t appeal to me
at all. 18…Rae8 19.Bb5 e5 20.dxe5 Qd5 21.Bxc6

A) 21…bxc6 1/2-1/2 Sneiders
E-Frings/corres I.BDG Weltt 1968. Although a draw was agreed here I
quite like White’s position. 22.Re3 f6 (22…Bxe5 23.Bxe5 Rxe5
24.Nf4+/-) 23.Ng3+= But:

B) 21…Qxc6! seemed better to me 22.Re3
(22.Nd4 Qd5 23.Rfe3 Bxe5 24.Bxe5 Rxe5 25.Nf3 Re7) 22…Qb6
23.Nd4 f5 24.exf6 Nxf6 25.Bxc7 Rxe3 26.Rxe3 (26.Bxb6 Rxe1+
27.Kf2 Ng4+) 26…Qxb2-+]

15…Na5

Decentralising but not bad, I think.

[15…e5? 16.Bg5 intending Be7 with an attack on f7
(16.h3 e4) 16…exd4 (16…Nd8 17.Be7 Re8 18.Bxd8 Qxd8
19.Qxd8 Rexd8 20.Rxf7 Ne3 21.Rxc7+ Nxc4 22.Rxc4 Rd7 23.dxe5
Bxe5) 17.Rxf7 Rxf7 18.Rxf7 Qxf7 19.Bxf7+ Kxf7 20.h3 dxc3
21.Nxc3 Bd4+ 22.Kf1;

15…Rad8;

15…Nf6 16.Qg5 Kh8;

15…Rac8!? looking after c7 also looked OK to me, when
White still has it all to prove. However, I was most afraid of the
text move.]

16.Bd3 b6?!

[The move that I was anxious about at the time was
16…e5!?

17.dxe5 (17.Bg5 Rae8; 17.Bg3 exd4) 17…Nxe5
18.Bxe5 Bxe5 when I could see nothing very convincing for White;
Black needs to avoid to obvious knockouts however and on second
glance may not find it easy to do so.

19.Qg5 Rfe8 (19…Nc6 20.Bc4!; 19…Rae8 20.Bxg6!
fxg6 21.Rxf8+ Rxf8 22.Rxf8+ Kxf8 23.Qxe5) 20.Rxf7 Qxd3 21.Qh6
Qe3+ 22.Qxe3 Bxh2+ 23.Kxh2 (23.Kf2 Rxe3 24.Kxe3)
23…Rxe3]

After Black has declined (or missed) this oppportunity,
White is allowed to build up a powerful attack.

17.h3

Back to the Sneiders game, more or less.

17…Nf6

[17…e5 obviously now fails to 18.hxg4 exf4
19.gxh5+-;

17…Nh6 looked interesting but unnatural]

18.Ng3

[18.Be5 first could have been tried, or 18.Qg3]

18…c5

looks the right strategy, trying to break up White’s
centre and get some active play, because there seems no immediate
prospect of Black achieving exchanges.

[18…Nc6 19.Bg5 was another critical line. I didn’t
analyse it much at the time, waiting for Volker’s actual choice to
arrive.

A) 19…e5?? 20.Bxf6;

B) 19…Nh7 20.Nxh5 gxh5
(20…Nxd4) 21.Bxh7+ Kxh7 22.Qxh5+ Kg8 23.Bh6;

C) 19…Rad8 20.Bxf6 exf6 21.Nxh5 Nxd4
22.Nxf6+ Bxf6 23.Rxf6 Ne6]

19.Be5

[19.dxc5; 19.Bg5]

19…cxd4

[19…Nc6 now meets the same reply.]

20.Bxf6 1-0

This move provoked Black (who perhaps anticipated the
immediate recapture on d4) into resigning(!). Black is certainly
beset with threats but can hope to steer out into a simplified if
inferior position. The variations are I guess quite thematic for
the BDG but I’m not confident that I haven’t missed something
familiar to readers.

But let us look at what might have happened:

20…exf6!

White now has a choice of sacrificial lines:

[20…Bxf6?! 21.Rxf6

A) 21…dxc3 22.R6f3 Rac8 23.Nf5 f6
24.Rg3 c2 25.Qxh5 Kf7 (25…e5 26.Nh6+) 26.Qxg6+ Ke6
27.Re3+ Kd5;

B) 21…exf6 22.Nxh5 gxh5 23.Qg3+ Kh8
24.Rxf6]

21.Bf5!?

getting the Bd3 out of the way of the Qd7

[21.Rxf6? is not the right one at all: 21…Bxf6 22.Qxf6
Qe6;

21.Nxh5!? was the one I looked at first and longest
21…dxc3! exposing the Bd3 (21…Nc6 22.Nxg7 Kxg7 23.Qxf6+ Kg8
24.Bc4 Nd8 25.Qxg6+ Kh8 26.Qh6+ Kg8 27.Rg3+;

21…gxh5 22.Qxh5 Rfe8 23.Qh7+ Kf8 24.Rg3 Ke7 25.Rxg7
Qe6 26.Bg6 Rf8 27.cxd4 Ke8 28.Bxf7+ Rxf7 29.Qg8+ Ke7 30.Rxf7+ Qxf7
31.Re1+;

21…Qd6!? covering g3 and f6, not to mention
d4, but allowing White to capture on f6 with gain of time.
22.Nxf6+ Bxf6 23.Rxf6 Qe5 24.Bxg6)

Now 22. Qxf6 is an idea, or 22.Nxg7 Kxg7
23.Qxf6+ Kg8 24.Rf4 Qc6 (24…Qe6 25.Qxe6 fxe6 26.bxc3)
25.bxc3 is worse for Black but not losing. So White should think
again:(25.Rh4 Qxf6 26.Rxf6 cxb2;

25.Qxc6 Nxc6 26.Be4 Rac8) ]

21…Qd6!

covering d4, g3 and f6 again, and without being exposed
to Rxf6. White has to spend a while organising a threat on the
g-file.

[21…gxf5? 22.Nxf5 dxc3 (22…Rfe8 23.Qg3)
23.Nxg7;

21…Qa4? 22.Nxh5 gxh5 23.Qxh5 Rfe8 24.Qh7+ Kf8 25.Rg3
Ke7 26.Qxg7! (26.Rxg7 Qxa2) 26…Qxa2 27.Re1+ Kd6
28.Qxf6+]

22.Nxh5 gxh5 23.Rg3

[23.Qxh5 Rfd8]

23…Rfd8

[23…Nc6 24.Rff3 Ne5 25.Rxg7+ Kxg7 26.Qg3+ Kh8 27.Qf4
Ng6 28.Qh6+ Kg8 29.Bxg6 fxg6 30.Qxg6+ Kh8 31.Rf5 Qe7 32.Rxh5+ Qh7
33.Rxh7#]

24.Rff3 Kf8

[24…dxc3 25.Qxh5 Kf8 26.Qh7 Qc5+ 27.Kh2 cxb2 28.Qxg7+
Ke8 29.Qxf6 Qd6 30.Re3+]

25.Qxh5

Does White really win in all variations from here?

25…dxc3 26.Qh7

which looks very risky for Black, e.g.

26…Qc5+ 27.Kh2 Nc4

[27…c2 28.Re3]

28.Qxg7+ Ke7 29.Bg6 Rf8 30.Qxf6+ Kd7 31.Bf5+
Kc7 32.Rxc3…

Lessons:

“Don’t believe all you read” and

“Look before you leap!”

Play good moves, not good-looking ones.

Don’t drift, waiting for your opponent to build up: hit
back when you can!

Dave Regis 1-0 Kevin Kent

This was a fairly smooth game where for once I saw the problem
coming and successfully avoided it.

BDG Vienna Defence

1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3 Bf5 5.g4 Bg6 6.g5 Nd5
7.Nxe4

Here I ran to the databases for some guidance. White has
no Pawn deficit but needs a plan. The model game is Tartakower’s,
but Black can improve.

[7.Nxe4 e6 8.c4

A) 8…Bb4+ 9.Ke2 (9.Kf2? Nb6 10.c5
Bxe4 11.fxe4 Bxc5-+) 9…Nb6 10.c5 Nd5 11.a3 Ba5 12.Qa4+ Nc6
13.Qc4 Bxe4 14.fxe4 Nde7 15.Be3 1-0 Gedult #-Gorfinkel/Vittel
1973;

B) 8…Nb6 9.Be3 Nc6 (9…N8d7
10.h4) 10.a3 (10.h4) ;

C) 8…Ne7 9.Ng3 (9.Bg2 1-0
Sneiders E-Vashegyi E/corres ICCF/m 1969 (27)) 9…Nbc6
10.Be3 Nf5 11.Nxf5 Bxf5 12.Bh3 Bxh3 13.Nxh3

C1) 13…Ne7! Muller 14.Qd2 Nf5 15.Bf2
a5

C1a) 16.c5 b6 17.Rd1 (17.Nf4)
;

C1b) 16.a3 ;

C2) 13…Be7?! 14.Qa4 Bb4+ 15.Kf2 0-0
16.Rad1 (16.c5 e5) 16…Bd6 17.c5 Be7 18.Rhg1 Rb8 19.Rg4
Qd5 20.Nf4 Qf5 21.Ne2 Rbd8 22.b4 a6 23.Nc3 Rd7 24.h4 Rfd8 25.Kg2
Bf8 26.Qb3 Ne7 27.Re4 Nd5 28.Ne2 Nxe3+ 29.Qxe3 Qd5 30.Nc3 Qf5
31.Rd2 Qg6 32.Ne2 Qf5 33.Rb2 Qd5 34.Nc3 Qc6 35.a4 b5 36.axb5
axb5

Black is being strangled. I love to play this way as White, even
more perhaps than winning by a Queen sacrifice! Tartakower now gets
in through the a-file while Black is too cramped to oppose it.

37.Qd3 Rb8 38.Ra2 Qb7 39.Re1 c6 40.Rea1 Rbd8 41.Ra7 Qb8
42.Rxd7 Rxd7 43.Qe4 g6 44.Ra6 Qd8 45.Ne2 Rd5 46.Rxc6 Bg7 47.Ra6 Bf8
48.Rb6 h6 49.f4 hxg5 50.hxg5 Bg7 51.Kg3 Bxd4 52.Nxd4 Rxd4 53.Qe5!
Rd3+ 54.Kh4 Qe8 55.c6 Rd8 56.c7 Rc8 57.Qd6 Kh7 58.Rb8 Kg7 59.Qd8
1-0, Tartakower-Simonovitch, Paris 1954]

7…e6 8.c4 Nb6 9.Be3 Nc6

… This reminds me of an Alekhin’s Defence: Black has no central
foothold but White’s centre is loose and may be undermined.

10.h4 Bb4+ 11.Kf2

[11.Ke2 0-0 12.c5 Nd5 13.a3]

11…0-0 12.Rc1

[12.c5 Nd5 13.a3 Ba5 14.b4 f5 15.gxf6 Bxe4

A) 16.fxe4 Qxf6+ 17.Nf3 (17.Kg2
Nxe3+;

17.Ke2 Nc3+) 17…Nc3 18.Qe1 Qxf3+;

B) 16.fxg7 16…Rxf3+ 17.Nxf3 Nxe3
18.Kxe3 Bxf3 19.Kxf3 (19.Qxf3 Qxd4+ 20.Ke2 Qxa1) 19…Qd5+
20.Kg3 Qxh1]

…all looked fine for Black. Since then I hear from
Jyrki
Heikkinen that he can improve with 12.c5 Nd5 13.a3 Ba5
14.Qd3…

12…Bxe4

[12…e5 13.d5]

13.fxe4 f5

[13…f6]

14.exf5

[14.gxf6 e5 (14…Qxf6+ 15.Nf3 e5 16.Bg5 Qg6
17.c5) 15.c5 Qxf6+ 16.Nf3;

14.c5 fxe4+;

14.e5]

14…exf5

[14…Rxf5+ 15.Nf3 e5 16.Bd3 (16.Bh3 Rf8 17.Kg2)
]

15.Nf3

[15.c5 f4]

15…f4

[15…g6 16.d5 Ne7 17.a3; 15…Qe7; 15…Qe8; 15…Be7
16.d5 Nb4]

16.Bd2 Qe7

[16…Bxd2 17.Qxd2 Qe7 18.Bh3 Qe3+ 19.Qxe3 fxe3+ 20.Ke2
(20.Kxe3 Rae8+ 21.Ne5 Nxe5 22.dxe5 Rxe5+ 23.Kd4 Rfe8=+)
20…Rae8 21.d5 Ne5 22.Nxe5 Rxe5 23.Be6+ Kh8 24.Rhf1;

16…Be7 17.Bc3+=]

Now the position reminds me of a King’s Gambit!

CRITICAL POSITION: Black has an advanced
protected passed Pawn, but needs to find a way of making use of it
– or else he will be driven back. I spent a long time analysing
this move, because if a planned finesse at move 21 doesn’t work,
this is the place to repair it.

17.Bh3

[17.d5 Ne5 18.Bxb4 (18.Nxe5 Qxe5 19.Bxb4 Qe3+ 20.Kg2
Qg3#) 18…Qxb4 19.Nxe5 Qxb2+ -+]

17…Bxd2

[17…Rae8 18.Re1 Qf7 (18…Qd6 19.Rxe8 Rxe8
20.c5) 19.Bxb4 Nxb4 is also critical;

White may still be able to claim an edge because of the
unstable Black Knights. 20.a3]

18.Qxd2 Qe3+ Tempting but probably
mistaken.

[18…Rae8 19.Rhe1 Qf7 20.d5 Rxe1 (20…Nd8)
21.Qxe1 Nd8 22.Ne5 (22.b3 Re8 23.Qa5 a6;

22.Qd2 Re8 23.b3) 22…Qe8 23.b3 Kh8 24.Rd1 Nf7
25.Nxf7+ (25.Be6 Nxe5 26.Qxe5 Qh5 27.Rh1 c6) 25…Qxf7
26.Be6 Qh5]

19.Qxe3 fxe3+ 20.Ke2

[20.Kxe3 Rae8+ didn’t detain me long, so White must
concede the Pawn another step forward. I think Black must have
mis-assessed this line with Ke2, or surely he would have chosen
something else earlier.]

20…Rae8

Now Black has a little opportunity to play …Rxf3 and
…Nd4+, so White must anticipate this by enabling Be6+ interfering
with the line of the Re8.

21.d5!?

[21.b3 Rxf3 22.Kxf3 Nxd4+ 23.Kg2 e2 24.Kf2 h5 25.gxh6 gxh6]

21…Ne5

[21…Rxf3!? looked alarming but 22.Kxf3 (22.dxc6
Rf2+) 22…Nd4+ 23.Kg2 e2 (else Rd1) 24.Be6+ and I think White
comfortably survives to win.]

22.Nxe5 Rxe5

[22…Rf2+ 23.Kxe3 Rxb2 24.Be6+]

23.Be6+ Kh8 24.Rhf1

Now it’s all over: White will consume the e-Pawn and the poor
Knight still has nowhere to go. Black has rather drifted into this
lost position without having a definite plan for counterplay. Don’t
drift, but fight back!

24…Rd8

[24…Rf2+ 25.Rxf2 exf2+ 26.Kxf2 Re4 27.Kg3! (27.c5
Na4 28.b3 Nb2 29.Rf1) 27…Rxc4 (27…Nxc4 28.Rf1 Re3+
29.Kg2;

27…h6 28.g6 Re3+ 29.Kg2 Re2+ 30.Kg1)
28.Rf1]

25.Rf3 g6

[25…c6?? 26.Rcf1 h5 27.g6 Nd7 28.Bxd7]

26.Rcf1

[26.Rxe3 Rxe3+ 27.Kxe3 Kg7 (27…c6 28.Ke4 Kg7)
28.b3 (28.Ke4 Rf8) 28…Re8 29.Kd4 Rf8 30.c5 Nc8 31.Ke5
Ne7]

26…h5

[26…Nxc4 27.Rf8+ Rxf8 28.Rxf8+ Kg7 29.Rg8#;

26…c6 27.Rf8+ Rxf8 28.Rxf8+ Kg7 29.Rg8#]

27.Rf8+

[27.b3 c6 28.Rxe3 Rxe3+ 29.Kxe3 cxd5 30.cxd5 Nxd5+
31.Bxd5 Rxd5 32.Rf7]

27…Rxf8 28.Rxf8+ Kg7 29.Rf7+ Kh8 30.Rxc7+-
Re4

[30…Na4]

31.b3 Rxh4 32.Kxe3 Rh2 33.c5 Nxd5+

[33…Rxa2 34.cxb6 axb6 35.d6 Rg2 36.d7]

34.Bxd5 Rxa2 35.Rxb7 Rc2 36.c6 1-0

Lessons:

Don’t panic! You must search for an answer to your
opponent’s threats. Juniors are sometimes very worried by
opponent’s king’s-side attacks, and go into a hedgehog posture, and
it’s the posture that kills them. I sometimes say, oh, don’t worry
about that, they’re only threatening mate.

Fight back! You must not drift when you are worse, you
must fight a way to create problems, and think seriously about our
opponent’s counters.

Volker Drueke 0-1 Dave Regis

The lure of a good example. White follows the precedent of a
dramatic win by Sneiders, but unfortunately ends up playing, not
some hacker from Exeter, but GM Joe Gallagher.

BDG Euwe Defence

1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3 exf3 5.Nxf3 e6 6.Bg5 Be7
7.Bd3

A less common approach.

7…c5

As played by Diemer as Black!

[7…Nc6;

7…Nbd7 8.0-0 (8.Qd2/ JG 8…c5
9.0-0-0) 8…c5 9.dxc5 Bxc5+ 10.Kh1 h6 11.Bh4 0-0 12.Qe2 =
Liesebein, -+ Gallagher 12…Be7 13.Rad1 Qa5 14.Ne4 Qxa2 15.g4 Qxb2
16.g5 hxg5 17.Nfxg5 e5 18.Nxf6+ Nxf6 19.Rxf6 Be6 20.Qh5 Bd5+ 21.Kg1
Qd4+ 22.Bf2 1-0 Leisebein P-Friedrich G/DDR-corr-Meisterklasse
1990]

8.dxc5

[8.Qd2 cxd4 (8…Nc6 9.dxc5 Bxc5 10.0-0-0 0-0 11.Rhf1
Be7 12.Qf4 Nd5 13.Nxd5 Bxg5 14.Nxg5 f6 15.Bxh7+ Kh8 16.Qh4 fxg5
17.Qh5 1-0 Bent Scott-Neumeier Michael/Cincinnati, Annual Gold
Cup Benefit O 1991) 9.Nxd4 Bd7 10.0-0-0 Nc6 11.Nf3 Qa5
12.Bc4 0-0-0 13.Qe2 h6 14.Bd2 Bb4 15.a3 Bxc3 16.Bxc3 Qc7 17.Ne5
Nxe5 18.Bxe5 Qa5 19.Rd3 Bc6 20.b4 Qb6 21.Rc3 a6 22.Rf1 Rhf8 23.g4
Rd7 24.Rf4 Nd5 25.Bxd5 Rxd5 26.Bxg7 Rfd8 27.Rxf7 a5 28.Bf8 Rd1+
29.Kb2 axb4 30.Bxb4 Kb8 31.Qxe6 Re8 32.Qxh6 Ree1 33.Qf4+ Ka7 34.Rc5
Re4 35.Ra5+ Qxa5 36.Bxa5 Rxf4 37.Rxf4 Rh1 38.Bc7 Rxh2 39.Rf5 1-0
Roos-Soller/corres ch we BDG 1975]

8…Qa5

[8…Bxc5 9.Qe2 (9.Ne4 Be7 10.Bxf6 Bxf6 11.Bb5+ Nd7
12.Nd6+ Ke7 13.Qd2 a6 14.Qb4 a5 15.Nxc8+ 1-0 Merkl
K-Riesen/unknown 1955) 9…Be7 10.0-0-0 Nd5 11.Bb5+ Bd7
12.Rxd5 exd5 13.Nxd5 f6 14.Nxf6+ gxf6 15.Bxf6 Bxb5 16.Qxb5+ Kf7
17.Qh5+ Kxf6 18.Qh6+ Kf7 19.Ne5+ Kg8 20.Qe6+ Kg7 21.Qf7+ Kh6
22.Ng4+ Kg5 23.h4+ 1-0 Diemer Emil-Terzi/Rastatt BDG 1953;

8…Nc6 9.0-0 Bxc5+ 10.Kh1 h6 11.Bh4 g5 12.Nxg5 hxg5
13.Bxg5 Nh5 0-1 Penk-Diemer Emil/corr [Fp 1955]

9.0-0 Qxc5+ 10.Kh1 Nbd7

[10…h6]

11.Qe1 a6

CRITICAL POSITION 1: That’s a funny little
move by Black: can you see what the idea is?

12.Qh4 Qb4!

Ha! Now White has to exchange Queens or throw in another
Pawn.

13.Nd4

[13.Ne4]

13…Qxb2 14.Nce2 Ne5 15.a4 Qb6

CRITICAL POSITION 2: You’re nearly on your
own here: there is only one recorded game, where White won in
twenty moves after 16. Rxf6. What do you do?

16.Rxf6?

Nearly on your own, but not quite. I fear Volker hasn’t
seen Joe Gallagher’s “Beating the Anti-Indians“, which
analyses this move. In fact, he assesses White’s position as simply
lost even before this move! So White has to bale out before
somewhere earlier, or, if you don’t believe JG, then find an
improvement here.

[16.Be3; 16.Rab1 Qd8;

16.Bxf6!? Drueke 16…gxf6 17.Rab1 Qc7 which still has
some play in it, however White cannot preserve the Bd3 by 18.Be4?
f5!]

16…gxf6!

[16…gxf6! White now assessed his chances as zero and
resigned, which may be appropriate if Gallagher
was playing all the rest of my moves, but I’d have to start
thinking for myself soon! I had to check all the lines before and
after this point, of course, or I might fall into the very trap
that I hoped Volker was making – of trusting the books.

16…Nxd3? 17.Rff1 f6 18.Be3 Nc5? (18…Ne5)
19.Nb3 Qc6 20.Bxc5 Bxc5 21.Qh5+ 1-0 Sneiders E-Breunig O/corr 1BDGW
1970/71 (02) 1971 I guess Volker was hoping to go all the way down
the line following this game.]

Possible continuation:
17.Bxf6

[17.Be3 there might be some nibbles in this line still:
17…Nxd3 18.cxd3 Bd7 19.Nf5 Qd8 20.Ng7+ Kf8 21.Qh6
(21.Bh6) 21…Kg8 22.Rf1 Qf8]

17…Qd8! 18.Rf1 (“what else?”,
asks JG)

[18.Bxe7 Qxe7 19.Qg3 Nxd3 20.cxd3 Bd7 e.g. 21.Qc7 Bc6
22.Qb6 Rc8 23.Rc1 Bxg2+ 24.Kxg2 Rxc1 25.Nxc1 Qg5+ 26.Kf2 Qxc1
27.Nxe6 Qd2+ 28.Kf3 Qxd3+ 29.Kf4 Qd2+ 30.Kf5 Qd5+]

18…Bxf6 19.Rxf6 Ng4!-+
20.Nxe6

[20.Qxg4 Qxf6 21.Ng3 (21.Nf4 Qxd4) 21…Bd7
22.Nh5 Qe5]

20…Qxf6 21.Nc7+ Kd8 0-1

Lessons:

“Don’t believe what you read!” (again)

Unes Hassim 1/2-1/2 Dave Regis

Black wimps out of accepting the BDG to try a solid defence and the
hope of gaining some small positional pluses later. Just when Black
starts to feel more confident the Queen discovers she cannot
settle, and the game ends in a draw by repetition.

BDG Langeheinecke Defence

1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3 e3 5.Bxe3 e6

[I had played my first ever BDG against my esteemed
Exeter clubmate Richard Towers. Rich seems to have made a move from
gambit play to anti-theoretical and solid chess, hoping to outplay
his opponent in the middlegame, and so I made a determined effort
to play very actively against him by playing 1. e4, which of course
met with his Scandinavian 1…d5, “sucking all the life out of
the position” as someone once said. Now 2.d4: I assumed Rich
knows no more about the Caro or French than I do, but that need not
be true. 2…dxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3 e3 5.Bxe3 c6 Still playing the
Scandinavian! 6.Bd3 (6.Bc4) 6…Nbd7 7.Nge2 e6
(7…e5?!) 8.0-0 Nd5 To develop the Bc8, but shedding
another tempo. (8…Nb6; 8…Bd6 9.Ne4 Bc7 10.c4; 8…Be7)
9.Nxd5 exd5 10.Re1 Be7 11.Ng3 0-0 12.Nf5 (12.Qe2; 12.c4)
12…Bf6 13.Qd2 Nb6 14.b3!?

CRITICAL POSITION: Should Black go solid or
try to force the issue here?

[On 14…c5!? I had resolved to play 15.dxc5 Bxa1 16.cxb6 Bf6
(16…Qf6?! 17.Nd4 Bb2 18.c3 Ba3 19.bxa7 Be6?? 20.Bg5)
17.bxa7 when I though White had good compensation and has succeeded
in unbalancing the game]

14…Be6 15.c3 Nc8 (15…Qd7 16.Qc2) 16.Re2 Ne7
17.Ng3 g6 18.Rae1 Qd7 19.Bg5 Bg7 (19…Bxg5 20.Qxg5)
20.Qf4 Rae8

I’ve seen Richard win happily from dozens of these
passive-but-solid positions.

21.Bf6 (This took me 20 minutes!) Another

CRITICAL POSITION: can you find a way to
hold the line?

21…Kh8??

(21…Nf5; 21…Bxf6; 21…a5!? “Pass”.;
21…Nc8! (idea Qd6/Qe7))

22.Nh5 It took me ages to realise (a) that Nh5 was a
useful candidate (it was useless before), and (b) that it won,
although the first move I though of was Qh6!

22…gxh5 23.Qh6 1-0

Richard might well have battled on after e.g. 21…Nc8!
but White has an easy game to play; the way to play for a result is
with moves like 14…c5!

Lessons:

Passive play is difficult; Mednis calls it “awaiting
the undertaker”

Back at the main game: 6.Bd3 Be7

[6…Nbd7 1-0 Fuller RA-Dilworth V/British CS OA/ 1965
(38);

6…Bb4 Richter_Mendau J-Roos B/5/23 cr 1BDGW fnl 1972/74
(03) 1974/1-0 (65);

6…Nd5 1-0 Schuh H FM-Treffert/BndLiga 1984 (22);

6…Nc6]

7.Nge2 Nbd7 8.0-0 0-0

[8…c5 9.f4 cxd4 10.Nxd4 Nc5 11.Be2 Nd5]

9.Bf2

[9.Qe1 is more normal:

A) 9…c5 is analysed at BDG world:
10.Rd1 cxd4 11.Bxd4 Qc7 12.Qh4 Bc5 13.Ne4 Nxe4 14.Qxe4 Nf6 15.Qh4
e5 16.Bxc5 Qxc5+ 17.Kh1 Be6 18.Nc3 h6 19.a3 Rad8 20.f4

A1) 20…exf4 21.Qxf4 (21.Rxf4
Nd5) 21…Qg5 (21…Nd5 22.Qe4 g6 23.Qh4+=) 22.Qxg5
hxg5=;

A2) 20…Rd4?! 21.Ne2 Rd7 22.b4 Qc7
23.fxe5 Qxe5 24.Nf4 Bg4 25.Rde1 Qg5 26.Qf2 b6?? (26…Bf5 27.h4
Qg4 28.Be2 Ne4) 27.h4 1-0 Hommeles-Ligterinck, NDR 1992;

B) 9…Nd5 0-1 Bachl E-Bocki/Germany?
1978 (34)]

9…c5 10.Qe1

[10.Qe1 cxd4 11.Nxd4 (11.Bxd4 Bc5 12.Qf2 Bxd4 13.Qxd4
e5 14.Qd6 Re8) 11…Nc5 (11…e5 12.Nf5 Bc5 13.Bxc5 Nxc5
14.Qxe5);

10.Be1; 10.Ne4; 10.dxc5]

10…cxd4 11.Nxd4

[11.Bxd4]

11…a6

[11…Nc5; 11…e5?! 12.Nf5; 11…Bc5? 12.Na4; 11…b6?
12.Nc6; 11…Qa5!?]

12.Rd1 Qc7+=

White’s active pieces give him a small edge, but Black has no
weaknesses and can work towards equality.

13.Kh1

[13.Ne4]

13…Nc5

[13…Ne5; 13…Bc5; 13…Qe5 14.Qd2; 13…b5!?]

14.Bg3

[14.Bh4; 14.Bc4]

14…Qb6

[14…Nxd3 15.Bxc7 Nxe1 16.Rfxe1 Bb4 17.Be5 Bxc3
18.bxc3+=;

14…Qd8 15.Qe3 Qb6 16.Nb3 Na4 17.Qxb6 Nxb6+=]

15.Nb3 Nxd3 (two Bishops!)

[15…Nxb3 16.cxb3 Rd8 17.Bf2]

16.Rxd3 Rd8

[16…Bd7 17.Qe5 Rac8 18.f4 Bc6 19.f5]

Black is holding the line, and the game grinds to a
halt.

17.Rxd8+ [17.Bf2 Qc7 18.Bg3]
17…Bxd8 [17…Qxd8] 18.Bf2
[18.Qe2] 18…Qc7 19.Qe3 Bd7 [19…b5 20.Nc5]
20.Rd1 Bc6

I felt confident that Black had equalised and was start to think
about playing for a win with the two Bishops, but…

21.Bg3

[21.Nd4 Be7]

21…Qb6 22.Qe1 Be7 23.Bf2

[23.Bd6]

23…Qc7 24.Bg3

[24.Nd4]

24…Qb6 It is difficult for White to
play for a win and the Black Queen has no comfortable hiding place;
if the c5 point is conceded Black may find himself worse.
1/2../strong>

Lessons:

Maybe it’s really true, the only way to refute a gambit
is to accept it!

Long aside…

…Steinitz said, The best way to refute a gambit is to
accept it, and Lasker added, especially centre Pawns. But I
sometimes imagine that accepting a gambit is the best way to fall
into the main idea of something nasty that your opponent knows all
about. That may still be true, but I’m starting to think that
Steinitz is absolutely right. That is, if you want only equality,
decline by all means, but if only who dares wins.
There are one or two gambit lines which I am seeing in junior
matches that I cannot see a good way to play for a win against by
declining, which seem relevant here.

I was looking at the Max Lange attack and was struck by
Black’s fundamental choice at move 5:

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.d4 exd4 5.0-0: now: 5…Bc5
or 5…Nxe4 ?

5…Bc5 just seems a glorious mess, just the sort of
thing to be avoided, but I couldn’t see a way for Black to play for
a win after 5…Nxe4

e.g. 5…Nxe4 6.Re1 d5 7.Nc3 dxc3 [7…dxc4 8.Rxe4+
Be7 9.Nxd4 f5 10.Rf4 0-0 11.Nxc6 Qxd1+ 12.Nxd1 bxc6 13.Rxc4 Bd6
14.Nc3 = Botvinnik] 8.Bxd5 Be6 [or 8…Bf5 9.Bxe4 Bxe4
10.Rxe4+ Be7] 9.Bxe4 Bb4 10.b3 Qxd1 11.Rxd1 Rd8 12.Be3 a6:
Black has an extra pawn which is hard to keep and hard to make use
of.

Also after 1.e4 e5!? 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 exd4 4.c3 The Goring
Gambit. Black can readily equalise with 4…d5 but cannot hope for
a win. The moral is once again, that the best way to refute a
gambit may be to accept it.

Kevin Kent (0-1) Dave Regis

This was a good scrap; White was always one move short of landing
the final blow and Black wriggles out into a better endgame. This
is I guess how you are supposed to play with Black; easier in
correspondence than OTB! It also confirms my prejudices about the
line: in my games Black scored 2/3 in the gambit accepted!

BDG Bogolyubov Defence

1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3 exf3 5.Nxf3 g6 6.Bc4 Bg7
7.0-0 0-0 8.Qe1 Nbd7

This is a well-known position, and both sides have tried several
alternatives. I was heading for a position which Harding assesses
as =+ but White is by no means obliged to comply.

9.Qh4 Nb6

[9…c5 looks the only realistic alternative here.]

10.Bb3 a5 11.a4 Nbd5

This is the first CRITICAL POSITION. White
has an apparent opportunity to win back the Pawn, but Harding
thinks this gives Black slightly the better position.

12.Nxd5 Nxd5 13.Bxd5 (13.c4) 13…Qxd5 14.Qxe7 Qc6
(14…Bxd4+ 15.Nxd4 Qxd4+ 16.Be3 Qd7;

14…Qd7) 15.c3 Be6 16.Bf4 Rac8 17.Ne5 Qd5 =
Lane, =+ Harding

I hoped White would try and win the e-Pawn, but instead
he goes for a slow build-up in the familiar manner. All the books
give only 12. Nxd5, but White actually has lots of
alternatives:

(12.Bg5; 12.Bh6; 12.Ne5 Be6 13.Bh6 c6; 12.h3; 12.Ng5
h6)

12.h3

An interesting move, the motivation of which it is worth
pondering. Black often has trouble developing the Bishop on c8, and
in the BDG it is often useful to send this Queen’s-side piece out
to g4 and exchange it for the dangerous Knight on f3.

I probably wouldn’t have gone for …Bg4: I don’t really
approve of giving up the two Bishops like this and the offer to
bring the Rf1 into play on f3 also seems unnecessarily helpful.

12…c6

[12…Qd6 13.Nxd5 Nxd5 14.c4 Nf6 15.Bf4 Qb6;

12…Be6 13.Ng5 Ra6?? 14.Nxd5 Bxd5 15.Rxf6]

13.Bh6

[13.Ng5 h6]

13…Nxc3

Black has many alternatives here but this looked
clearest.

14.bxc3

[14.Ng5 Ne2+ 15.Kh1 Qxd4]

Another CRITICAL POSITION: White has a
straightforward plan of Ng5, Bxg7, Rxf6 and Qxh7 against routine
tries by Black. So Black must both avoid this idea and make sure
nothing worse awaits him.

14…Nh5

It was hard to see much else. I looked at a long forcing
line here which White played straight down the middle of. Black can
and should have confidence in the position to face attacks like
this, look them in the eye, and find the way to safety. Neither
hope nor fear are friends to the chess player, only judgement and
analysis!

15.Bxg7

With hindsight White should have preferred:

[15.Bg5 or; 15.Be3, when it’s still a fight]

15…Kxg7 16.Ng5

[16.g4 Nf6 17.Ng5 h6 18.Nxf7 Rxf7 19.Bxf7 g5 20.Qg3 Kxf7
when Black might make something out of the material imbalance.
21.Rab1]

16…e6

provocative! – but importantly pins the Knight to the
Queen

17.g4

[17.Nxe6+ Bxe6]

17…h6 18.Nxe6+

[18.Nf3 Qxh4 19.Nxh4 Nf6;

18.gxh5 hxg5 (18…Qxg5+ 19.Qxg5 hxg5 20.hxg6
Kxg6) 19.h6+ Kh7 20.Qe4 f5 (20…Qd6 21.Rf3) 21.Qe3
Qf6 22.Rae1 Bd7 23.Bxe6 Rae8]

18…Bxe6 19.Qxd8 Raxd8 20.Bxe6 Ng3! 21.Rf3 Ne2+
22.Kf2 Nxc3 23.Rxc3

[23.Bb3 Ne4+ 24.Ke3 Ng5 (24…f5 25.gxf5 gxf5 26.Rg1+
Kf6 27.Rgf1 Nd6 28.c4 Rde8+ 29.Kd3) 25.Rg3 Rfe8+ 26.Kd3 Ne4
27.Rf3 Nc5+ 28.Kc4 Nxb3 29.Rxb3 is rather like the game
continuation in the end!]

23…fxe6+

… and Black has wangled his extra pawn back. If I had been
frightened of the attack at move 14-18 I might have had to back out
of the whole line, but I couldn’t see a way through, and wanted to
prove the point. This is easier in correspondence than OTB, I
admit, but you must have this attitude. Even if you are wrong and
are proved wrong about the variations, your attitude is still
right.

24.Ke3 e5! 25.dxe5 Rd5 26.Rb1

Probably best?

[26.Ke4; 26.Rb3]

26…Rxe5+ 27.Kd4 Rd5+ 28.Kc4??

throwing away another Pawn because of the loose Rb1.
White seemed to lose heart here but some of the Rook endgames could
have been awkward for Black.

[28.Ke4! and Black has to decide if he is going to go
passive or try for activity. Although the books say in general you
should go for activity I think uncoiling from a stonewall is
Black’s best hope here. 28…Re8+ 29.Kf3 Re7 30.Rcb3 Rdd7 Now Black
can transfer the King to c8 and get a Rook free to harass White’s
loose Pawns.]

28…Rf4+ 29.Kb3 Rb4+

[29…b5 30.Rxc6 (30.axb5 cxb5) 30…Rxa4 31.Re1
looked less in control]

30.Ka2 Rxa4+ 31.Kb2 Rb4+ 32.Ka2

[32.Rb3; 32.Kc1]

32…Rdb5

forcing an exchange and on Black’s terms.

33.Rxb4

[33.Rd1 Ra4+ 34.Ra3 Rxa3+ 35.Kxa3 Kf6]

33…Rxb4 34.Rd3

[34.Rc5 Rb5 35.Rc4 Kf6]

34…Kf6

Just in time. The Queen’s-side Pawns are all little monsters; White
cannot stop them without bringing the Rook back, and if he brings
the Rook back, the Black King will nibble the King’s-side Pawns.

35.c3 Rc4 36.Kb3 b5 37.Kb2 a4 38.Ka3 Ke5 39.Kb2
h5 40.gxh5 gxh5 41.Ka3? Ke4 42. Rg3 h4 0-1

Lessons:

Don’t hope, don’t fear: analyse and find
out!

The Great BICS Internet Chess Match

Posted on November 28, 1997 by DrDave

Warwick University Chess Club vs. Exeter
Chess Club

Match results (Exeter players named
first)
ExeterPlayerA – WarwickPlayerA
WarwickPlayerB – ExeterPlayerB
(1880)
ExeterPlayerD – WarwickPlayerE
WarwickPlayerD – ExeterPlayerE
warwickg – ExeterPlayerF
WarwickPlayerH – ExeterPlayerG
(1605)
ExeterPlayerH – Varl (1660)

Match results (Exeter players named
first)

Time control: whole game in 75 minutes each

1a Peter Lane (174) 1/2-1/2 Matt Fletcher
(156)

2b Andrew Pickering (172) 0-1 Richard Maclannan
(88)

3d Ian Ashford (115) 0-1 Simon Gardner
(111)

4e Keith Atkins (112) 1/2-1/2 Joe Sansom
(96)

5f Stuart Cooke (113) 1-0 Tim
(ungraded)

6g Tom Stephenson (100) 1-0 James Humpherson
(ungraded)

7h Alan Maynard (89) 0-1 (time) – Adrian Varley
(ungraded)

Exeter 3 – Warwick 4

ExeterPlayerA – WarwickPlayerA

bics rated standard game bics, University of Warwick, England
(, 1997

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 d5 4. Bf4 Bg7 5. e3 O-O
6. Nf3 c5 7. Be2 Nc6 8. O-O cxd4 9. exd4 a6 10. Ne5
Be6

11. Nxc6 bxc6 12. Qa4 dxc4 13. Bxc4 Nd5 14. Nxd5 cxd5 15.
Bb3 Bd7

16. Qb4 a5 17. Qd2 Bf5 18. Rac1 Rc8 19. Rxc8 Bxc8 20. Rc1
Qb6

21. Rc5 e6 22. Be3 Bd7 23. Qxa5 Qxa5 24. Rxa5 Rc8 25. Ra7
Bb5

26. a4 Bxd4 27. Rb7 Bxe3 28. fxe3 Bd3 29. Kf2 h5 30. Rb4
Kg7 31. Rd4 Be4 32. a5 Rb8 33. Ba4 Rxb2+ 34. Ke1 e5 35. Rd2
Rxd2

36. Kxd2 d4 37. exd4 Kf6 38. dxe5+ Kxe5 39. g3 f5 40. Bd7
g5

41. h4 gxh4 42. gxh4 Kf4 43. Bc8 Ke5 44. Bd7 f4 45. Be8
Bf3

46. a6 Kd6 47. a7 Kc7 48. Bxh5 Bb7 49. Ke2 Kb6 50. Bf3
Ba6+

51. Kf2 Kxa7 52. Bd5 Bd3 53. Kf3 Kb6 54. Be4 Bc4 55. h5
Kc7

56. Kxf4 Kd6 57. h6 Bg8 58. Kg5 Ke7 59. Kg6 Kf8 60. Bd5
Bxd5 Game drawn by mutual agreement Q

WarwickPlayerB – ExeterPlayerB
(1880)

bics rated standard game bics, University of Warwick, England
(, 1997

1. e4 c6 2. d4 d5 3. Nc3 dxe4 4. Nxe4 Nf6 5.
Nxf6+ gxf6 6. Be3 Bf5 7. Bd3 Bg6 8. h4 Qc7 9. Qd2 Nd7 10. Nf3
O-O-O

11. O-O-O Kb8 12. Bxg6 hxg6 13. Bf4 e5 14. dxe5 fxe5 15.
Bxe5 Nxe5

16. Qxd8+ Qxd8 17. Rxd8+ Kc7 18. Nxe5 Bh6+ 19. Rd2 Black
resigned 1-0

ExeterPlayerD – WarwickPlayerE

bics rated standard game, bics, University of W, 1997

1. d4 d5 2. c4 dxc4 3. Nc3 g6 4. e3 b6 5. Bxc4
Bb7 6. Nf3 e6 7. Qc2 Nf6 8. Bd3 Nc6 9. a3 Ne7 10. Ne4
Nxe4

11. Bxe4 Bxe4 12. Qxe4 Qd5 13. Qxd5 Nxd5 14. Bd2 c5 15.
dxc5 Bxc5

16. e4 Nf6 17. Bc3 Be7 18. Nd2 O-O 19. O-O Nd7 20. f4
Nc5

21. f5 Bg5 22. Nf3 Be3+ 23. Kh1 Nxe4 24. Bb4 Rfe8 25. fxg6
hxg6

26. Rae1 Nf2+ 27. Kg1 Ng4+ 28. Kh1 Bh6 29. Ne5 Nxe5 30.
Rxe5 Bg7

31. Re2 Rac8 32. Ref2 a5 33. Bd6 f5 34. Bg3 e5 35. Rd2
e4

36. Rd6 Kh7 37. Rd7 Rc2 38. Bf2 e3 39. Be1 e2 40. Rg1
Rc1

41. g3 Kg8 42. Rd2 Rd1 43. Rc2 Bd4 White resigned
0-1

WarwickPlayerD – ExeterPlayerE

bics rated standard game, bics, University of W, 1997

1. e4 e6 2. d4 d5 3. exd5 exd5 4. Nc3 Bb4 5. a3
Bxc3+ 6. bxc3 Nf6 7. c4 c6 8. Bg5 O-O 9. cxd5 cxd5 10. Nf3
Re8+

11. Be2 Nc6 12. O-O Bg4 13. h3 Rxe2 14. Qxe2 Nxd4 15. Qd3
Nxf3+

16. gxf3 Bxh3 17. Rfe1 Qd6 18. f4 Bd7 19. Bxf6 Qxf6 20. Qg3
Bf5

21. c3 Rd8 22. Re5 d4 23. cxd4 h6 24. Rae1 Rxd4 25. Kh2
Be6

26. R5e4 Rd5 27. Re5 Rd4 28. R5e4 Rd5 29. Re5 Game drawn by
mutual

agreement Q

warwickg – ExeterPlayerF

bics unrated standard game, bics, University of, 1997

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. Bc4 e6 4. Nc3 Nc6 5. d3 a6
6. a3 b5 7. Bb3 Nf6 8. Bg5 Be7 9. O-O O-O 10. Re1 Bb7

11. d4 cxd4 12. Nxd4 Qc7 13. Bxe6 Nxd4 14. Bd5 Nxd5 15.
Nxd5 Bxd5

16. Bxe7 Qxe7 17. exd5 Qf6 18. Re4 Nf5 19. Qf3 Nh6 20. Qe3
Qxb2

21. Re1 Rac8 22. Re8 Qxc2 23. Qe7 Rcxe8 24. Qxe8 Ng4 25.
Re2 Qc1+

26. Re1 Qxa3 27. Qc6 Ne5 28. Qc7 Nd3 29. Rf1 Qc5 White
resigned 0-1

WarwickPlayerH – ExeterPlayerG
(1605)

bics unrated standard game, bics, University of, 1997

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nf6 3. Nxe5 d6 4. Nf3 Nxe4 5. Qe2
Qe7 6. d3 Nf6 7. Qxe7+ Bxe7 8. Bg5 Be6 9. Nc3 Nc6 10. d4
Nb4

11. O-O-O Nbd5 12. Nxd5 Nxd5 13. Bxe7 Kxe7 14. Bc4 Nb6 15.
Bxe6 fxe6

16. Rhe1 h6 17. Re2 Rhf8 18. Rde1 Rf6 19. b3 Nd5 20. c4
Nf4

21. Re4 Nd3+ 22. Kd2 Nxe1 23. Rxe1 Raf8 24. d5 Kd7 25.
dxe6+ Rxe6

26. Rd1 g5 27. Rf1 Ref6 28. Ke2 g4 29. Ng1 Re6+ 30. Kd3
Rfe8

31. f3 gxf3 32. Rxf3 Re1 33. Nh3 R1e2 34. Rf7+ Kc6 35. Nf4
Rf2 36. Kd4 h5 37. a4 h4 38. b4 b6 39. g3 hxg3 40. hxg3
Rg8

41. Re7 Rxg3 42. Nd5 Rd2+ 43. Ke4 Rxd5 44. cxd5+ Kb7 45.
Kf5 Ra3

46. a5 bxa5 47. bxa5 Rxa5 48. Ke6 Rc5 49. Rh7 a5 50. Rh1
a4

51. Rb1+ Kc8 52. Ra1 Ra5 53. Kf5 a3 54. Ke4 a2 55. Kd3
Kb7

56. Kc2 Kb6 57. Kb2 Kc5 58. Rxa2 Rxa2+ 59. Kxa2 Kxd5 White
resigned 0-1

ExeterPlayerH – Varl (1660)

bics rated standard game, bics, University of W, 1997

1. e4 d6 2. g3 Nf6 3. d3 g6 4. Bg2 Bg7 5. Nf3 Nc6
6. O-O O-O 7. Nbd2 Bg4 8. h3 Bd7 9. Re1 Re8 10. Nf1 e6

11. c3 Ne7 12. e5 Nfd5 13. exd6 cxd6 14. d4 Nf6 15. Bd2
Bc6

16. Qc1 Rc8 17. Bh6 Nf5 18. Bxg7 Kxg7 19. N1h2 Qc7 20. h4
Nd7

21. h5 e5 22. hxg6 fxg6 23. Qg5 exd4 24. cxd4 Nf6 25. Ng4
Nxg4 26. Qxg4 Qd7 27. Rad1 Rxe1+ 28. Rxe1 Re8 29. Rxe8 Qxe8 30. Ng5
Bxg2

31. Kxg2 Qe7 32. d5 h5 33. Qf4 b6 34. Ne6+ Kh7 35. g4
hxg4

36. Qxg4 Qf6 37. Kh3 Ne7 38. Ng5+ Kg7 39. f3 Qf5 40. Ne6+
Kf6

41. Kg3 Qxg4+ 42. Kxg4 Nxd5 43. Nd4 Nb4 44. a3 Nd3 White
ran out of time

0-1

The Art of Analysis – Part oe

Posted on November 25, 1997 by DrDave

Let us begin with a mistake – what we might call
positional mistake:

“Positional sense should free you from the slavery
of `variations’.” – Nimzovitch

Statements like this, and one or two other factors, led me to
neglect the analysis of variations – instead preferring to develop
positional assessments – for many years. It is possible to consider
positional judgement and planning as somehow a higher calling,
which avoids the need for grubby heavy analysis. This, however, was
a mistake on my part.

Here is some treatment for people suffering from the same
condition:

“What is the essence of the chess master’s art?
Fundamentally it consists of the ability to analyse chess
positions.

“Home analysis has specific features of its own: you are
not restricted by time, and you can move the men freely. Despite
this difference between home analysis and practical play, there is
much in common between them. It is a well-known fact that almost
all the outstanding chess-players have been first-class analysts.
(…)

“It is useful to publish your individual analytical work.
Then you are subject to objective criticism.” – Botvinnik, 100
SELECTED GAMES.

“So I began to analyse games…” – Timman, THE ART OF
CHESS ANALYSIS

“I got to know Mark (Dvoretsky) at the very beginning of my chess
career, at one of the sessions of Botvinnik’s chess school in 1974;
in those days, Dvoretsky was Botvinnik’s assistant. (…)

“We are adherents of the same, analytical, way, and we
believe in the triumph of analytical penetration into the secrets
of a position” – Kasparov, Preface to Dvoretsky’s SECRETS OF CHESS
TRAINING (FIRST PUBLISHED IN RUSSIA AS “THE ART OF ANALYSIS”).

“I selected from tournament books those games in which the greatest
complications had arisen. (Then) set myself the task of thinking
long and hard so as to analyse all the possible variations. I would
sometimes … write down the variations I had examined and then I
would compare them with those of the annotator. (…)

“Great help can be got from solving studies from a
diagram without setting up the position on the board.” – Kotov,
THINK LIKE A GRANDMASTER

“Analysis, if it is really carried out with a complete
concentration of his powers, forms and completes a chess
player.” – Polugayevsky

“Many players, even of a high calibre, will assert,
half jokingly and half seriously, that a difficult labour of
analysis can be replaced by intuition. ‘I played this move in a
flash – it was obvious it couldn’t be bad‘ is the sort of
thing we often hear in a post-mortem.
“Criticising such a policy is not simple – not after it has just
been successful! <…> Instead of appraising the state of struggle
on the basis of precise calculation, Black makes a move, which on
general considerations, is wholly in the spirit of the position – a
flank attack is countered by a break in the centre. Yet in chess
there are no axioms.”

— ZAK, Improve your chess results.

Two sorts of games should hold a special place in your own study:
(a) Analysis of master games, and (b) analysis of your own games
(especially losses). So, I have an exercise which involves
neither…

I have been privileged to obtain a copy of the six games
from the first match of the Exeter `A’ team this season. I propose
to analyse each game with the coaching group during a session in
the New Year, but I would like you to have a go at analysing them
first. Then we can compare notes…

How do you analyse a chess game?

If it’s someone else’s:
(1) Play through the whole game fairly quickly, seeing what ebb and
flow the game had.
(2) Divide the game up into episodes, even if they are only opening
middlegame and endgame, and try to describe what happened and who
if anyone had the advantage.
(3) Try and find the critical steps, where one or other side made
an important choice (even if it was only to overlook
something!).
(4) Put your account aside for a few days and have a fresh look
later. What other ideas now occur to you? Did you make a too-smooth
moral fable out of a more fluctuating scrap?

If it’s your own:
(1) write down as much as you can remember about what you thought
about at the time, and
(2) any thought your opponent shared during a Post Mortem.
(3) Leave it for a few days and come back fresh, then analyse it as
you would somebody else’s. Be particularly wary of self-serving
interpretations, especially of the “I was winning all the way
through” variety. What did you miss?

Below, Round numbers are board numbers. The Exeter players
(White on even boards) hold BCF grades this year between 171 and
156; Teignmouth between 180 and 130. These are roughly between 2000
and 1600 ELO.

N.B. Games 2 and 5 feature an early loss of material; to
analyse past this point, in Game 5 at least, may not be very
profitable.

   [Event "Exeter vs. Teignmouth"]  [Date "1997.11.01"]  [Round "1"]  [White "Hodge, D."]  [Black "Lane, P."]  [Result "1/2-1/2"]  [Variant "Standard"]  [ECO "C07"]  [Opening "French Defense: Tarrasch Variation, Chistyakov Defense, Modern Line"]  [StudyName "Sandbox"]  [ChapterName "Hodge, D. - Lane, P."]  [ChapterURL "https://lichess.org/study/7gaGOfWj/dShCh4NS"]  [Annotator "https://lichess.org/@/DrDaveExeter"]   1. e4 e6 2. d4 d5 3. Nd2 c5 4. exd5 Qxd5 5. Ngf3 cxd4 6. Bc4 Qd6 7. O-O Nf6 8. Nb3 Nc6 9. Nbxd4 Nxd4 10. Nxd4 a6 11. Be3 Qc7 12. Bb3 Bd6 13. h3 O-O 14. a4 Bd7 15. Qe2 Bh2+ 16. Kh1 Bf4 17. Rfe1 Bxe3 18. Qxe3 Bc6 19. Qe5 Qxe5 20. Rxe5 Bd5 21. c3 Bxb3 22. Nxb3 Rfd8 23. a5 Rac8 24. Ra4 Rd1+ 25. Kh2 Rb1 26. Re2 Nd5 27. Nd4 g6 28. Kg3 Kg7 29. c4 Nf6 30. Rb4 Rd1 31. Nf3 Rc7 32. Ne5 Ra1 33. Ng4 Nxg4 34. hxg4 Rxa5 35. Rd2 Rac5 36. b3 b5 37. Ra2 bxc4 38. bxc4 Ra7 39. Kf3 Kf6 40. Ke3 a5 41. Rb5 Rxc4 42. Raxa5 Rxa5 43. g5+ Kg7 44. Rxa5 h6 45. gxh6+ Kxh6 46. f3 Rb4 47. Re5 Rb3+ 48. Kf4 Rb2 49. g4 g5+ 50. Ke3 Kg6 51. Ra5 Rb3+ 52. Ke2 f5 53. gxf5+ exf5 54. Kf2 f4 55. Ra2 Kh5 56. Kg2 Kh4 57. Rc2 Ra3 1/2-1/2   [Event "Exeter vs. Teignmouth"]  [Date "1997.11.01"]  [Round "2"]  [White "Pickering, A."]  [Black "Brusey, A."]  [Result "0-1"]  [Annotator "DR, RS, Fritz5"]  [Variant "Standard"]  [ECO "C05"]  [Opening "French Defense: Tarrasch Variation, Closed Variation"]  [StudyName "Sandbox"]  [ChapterName "Pickering, A. - Brusey, A."]  [ChapterURL "https://lichess.org/study/7gaGOfWj/zqRESGHH"]   1. e4 e6 2. d4 d5 3. Nd2 Nf6 4. e5 Ne4 5. Bd3 Nxd2 6. Bxd2 c5 7. c3 Nc6 8. Be3 Qb6 9. b3 cxd4 10. cxd4 Bb4+ 11. Kf1 Bc3 12. Nf3 Bxa1 13. Qxa1 Bd7 14. g3 Nb4 15. Bb1 Rc8 16. Kg2 Nc2 17. Qb2 Nxe3+ 18. fxe3 Qb4 19. Ng5 h6 20. Nf3 Bb5 21. Rc1 Rxc1 22. Qxc1 Kd7 23. a4 Be2 24. Nd2 Rc8 25. Qe1 Bh5 26. e4 Qxd4 27. exd5 Qxd5+ 28. Be4 Qd4 29. Nc4 b6 30. Kh3 Qd1 31. Qe3 Bg4+ 32. Kg2 Qe2+ 33. Kg1 Qxe3+ 34. Nxe3 Rc1+ 35. Kf2 Bd1 36. Nxd1 Rxd1 37. Ke3 f6 38. Kf4 f5 39. Bf3 Rb1 40. g4 g5+ 41. Kg3 f4+ 42. Kf2 Rxb3 0-1   [Event "Exeter vs. Teignmouth"]  [Date "1997.11.01"]  [Round "3"]  [White "Halmkin, PE."]  [Black "Bellers, CJ."]  [Result "1/2-1/2"]  [WhiteElo "2500"]  [Variant "Standard"]  [ECO "B25"]  [Opening "Sicilian Defense: Closed, Botvinnik Defense, with Nge2"]  [StudyName "Sandbox"]  [ChapterName "Halmkin, PE. - Bellers, CJ."]  [ChapterURL "https://lichess.org/study/7gaGOfWj/CoKM6Xn5"]  [Annotator "https://lichess.org/@/DrDaveExeter"]   1. e4 c5 2. Nc3 g6 3. g3 Bg7 4. Bg2 Nc6 5. Nge2 d6 6. d3 e5 7. O-O Nge7 8. Kh1 h5 9. f4 exf4 10. Bxf4 Bg4 11. Nb5 Be5 12. c3 a6 13. Na3 Rb8 14. h3 Bxf4 15. Rxf4 Bxe2 16. Qxe2 O-O 17. Raf1 b5 18. g4 hxg4 19. Qxg4 Ne5 20. Qg3 b4 21. Nc4 bxc3 22. bxc3 Nxc4 23. dxc4 Nc6 24. e5 Nxe5 25. Bd5 Kg7 26. h4 f5 27. h5 Qf6 28. Rxf5 Qxf5 29. Rxf5 Rxf5 30. hxg6 Rb1+ 31. Kg2 Rb2+ 32. Kg1 Rb1+ 1/2-1/2   [Event "Exeter vs. Teignmouth"]  [Date "1997.11.??"]  [Round "4"]  [White "Rudall, D."]  [Black "Hill, D."]  [Result "0-1"]  [Variant "Standard"]  [ECO "B07"]  [Opening "Modern Defense: Geller's System"]  [StudyName "Sandbox"]  [ChapterName "Rudall, D. - Hill, D."]  [ChapterURL "https://lichess.org/study/7gaGOfWj/9i14NnmC"]  [Annotator "https://lichess.org/@/DrDaveExeter"]   1. e4 g6 2. d4 Bg7 3. Nf3 d6 4. c3 c6 5. Bd3 Nd7 6. Nbd2 Qc7 7. Qb3 Ngf6 8. Bc4 O-O 9. Ng5 d5 10. exd5 cxd5 11. Bxd5 Nxd5 12. Qxd5 Nf6 13. Qc4 Qb6 14. O-O Bd7 15. Qb3 Qa5 16. Nge4 Nxe4 17. Nxe4 Bc6 18. Ng3 e5 19. Be3 exd4 20. cxd4 Rfd8 21. Qc3 Qd5 22. f3 Bxd4 23. Bxd4 Qxd4+ 24. Qxd4 Rxd4 25. a3 h5 26. Rfd1 Rad8 27. Rxd4 Rxd4 28. b4 Kg7 29. Ne2 Rd2 30. Nc3 Rc2 31. Nd1 Kf6 32. Ne3 Rc3 33. Kf2 a6 34. Ra2 Ke5 35. g3 Kd4 36. Rd2+ Rd3 37. Re2 Kc3 38. f4 Kb3 39. Nc2 Kc3 40. Ne3 Rd2 41. Rxd2 Kxd2 42. f5 Kc3 43. fxg6 fxg6 44. g4 Kb3 45. Kg3 Kxa3 46. gxh5 gxh5 47. Kh4 Be8 48. Nd5 Bf7 49. Nf4 Kxb4 50. Nd3+ Kb5 51. Kg3 a5 52. Kf3 a4 0-1   [Event "Exeter vs. Teignmouth"]  [Date "1997.11.??"]  [Round "5"]  [White "Lee, RJ."]  [Black "Gorodi, J."]  [Result "1-0"]  [Variant "Standard"]  [ECO "E20"]  [Opening "Nimzo-Indian Defense: Kmoch Variation"]  [StudyName "Sandbox"]  [ChapterName "Lee, RJ. - Gorodi, J."]  [ChapterURL "https://lichess.org/study/7gaGOfWj/iiw9qFfk"]  [Annotator "https://lichess.org/@/DrDaveExeter"]   1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 Bb4 4. f3 d5 5. a3 Bxc3+ 6. bxc3 c5 7. e3 O-O 8. Bd3 b6 9. cxd5 exd5 10. Ne2 Re8 11. O-O Nc6 12. Ng3 Be6 13. Bb2 Rc8 14. Qd2 Qd7 15. Rae1 Red8 16. Qf2 Ne7 17. e4 Ng6 18. e5 Nf4 19. Bc2 Ne8 20. Qd2 g5 21. Ne2 Bf5 22. Nxf4 Bxc2 23. Nh3 h6 24. Qxc2 cxd4 25. Qd2 dxc3 26. Bxc3 Ng7 27. Nf2 h5 28. Rc1 Ne6 29. Bb2 Rc4 30. Rxc4 dxc4 31. Qxd7 Rxd7 32. Rd1 Rc7 33. Ne4 Kg7 34. Bc3 Kg6 35. Kf2 Kg7 36. g3 Kg6 37. Ke3 a5 38. Rd6 Rb7 39. a4 b5 40. axb5 Rxb5 41. Rc6 a4 42. Rxc4 a3 43. Ra4 Nc7 44. Rxa3 Nd5+ 45. Kd4 Nxc3 46. Rxc3 g4 47. Rc6+ Kg7 48. fxg4 hxg4 49. Nf6 Kg6 50. Nxg4+ Kg5 51. h3 Rb4+ 52. Ke3 Rb3+ 53. Kf2 Rb2+ 54. Kf3 Rb3+ 55. Ne3 Rb5 56. h4+ Kh5 57. Rf6 Rb7 58. Kf4 Rb4+ 59. Kf5 Rb7 60. Nd5 1-0   [Event "Exeter vs. Teignmouth"]  [Date "1997.11.??"]  [Round "6"]  [White "Blackmore, M."]  [Black "Ingham, Bill"]  [Result "1-0"]  [Variant "Standard"]  [ECO "B12"]  [Opening "Caro-Kann Defense: Advance Variation, Short Variation"]  [StudyName "Sandbox"]  [ChapterName "Blackmore, M. - Ingham, Bill"]  [ChapterURL "https://lichess.org/study/7gaGOfWj/vJzuiXov"]  [Annotator "https://lichess.org/@/DrDaveExeter"]   1. e4 c6 2. d4 d5 3. e5 Bf5 4. Nf3 e6 5. Bd3 Bxd3 6. Qxd3 c5 7. O-O Nc6 8. c3 Qb6 9. Nbd2 Rc8 10. dxc5 Bxc5 11. Nb3 Bf8 12. Bf4 Nge7 13. h4 Ng6 14. Qd2 Nxf4 15. Qxf4 Be7 16. h5 h6 17. Qg3 O-O 18. Nh2 f6 19. Ng4 Nxe5 20. Nxh6+ Kh8 21. Ng4 Nxg4 22. Qxg4 f5 23. Qd4 Qxd4 24. Nxd4 e5 25. Rfe1 e4 26. Rad1 Rf6 27. Ne2 Rb6 28. Nf4 Bg5 29. Ng6+ Kh7 30. Rxd5 Rxb2 31. Rxf5 Bf6 32. Rxe4 Rxc3 33. Nf8+ Kg8 34. Nd7 Rc1+ 35. Kh2 Rc6 36. Rg4 Kh7 37. a4 Rd6 38. Nf8+ Kg8 39. h6 Be5+ 40. Rxe5 Rxh6+ 41. Kg3 Rb3+ 42. f3 Kxf8 43. Reg5 Rh7 44. Rc5 a6 45. Rc7 b5 46. Rd4 Ke8 47. Ra7 bxa4 48. Rxa4 Rh6 49. Rxg7 Rbb6 50. Ra2 Rhg6+ 51. Rxg6 Rxg6+ 52. Kf4 Rb6 53. g4 Kf7 54. Ra5 Kf6 55. g5+ Kg6 56. Kg4 Rb4+ 57. f4 Rb6 58. f5+ Kf7 59. Rc5 Rb4+ 60. Kh5 Rb1 61. Rc7+ Kg8 62. Kg6 Rb6+ 63. f6 Rb8 64. Re7 Kh8 65. Rh7+ 1-0

Lessons from Lasker

Posted on October 30, 1997 by DrDave

Peter Lane, 30 October 1997

Dr. Emanuel Lasker was not only World Champion for 27 years from 1894 to 1921, but was also one of the great thinkers of the game. He introduced and regularly used many strategical concepts decades before Nimzowitsch’s formulations in `My System’ and `Chess Praxis’. He is known as one of the great fighters, and, in his games, we see no attachment to dogma or `correctness’; the point of a game is to win. I imagine Simon Webb of `Chess for Tigers’ learnt a lot from Lasker.

In particular, club players can learn from Lasker’s approach to each individual move. Often Lasker seemed less concerned with the objective evaluation of a move, and more with the competitive edge it would give him. His skill in defense is reflected in the attitude: `a position can never be so bad as not to offer some means of defense’. Further, he stressed the importance of success in the final rounds in a tournament, when the prizes are decided.

How does Lasker win games? If his opponent made bad opening mistakes, he would gain an advantage and move over to the attack. If a weakness was created, he would fix a hold on that weakness, create a second weakness, and then force a breakthrough. Against passive play, he would work out a blockade of his opponent’s aggressive possibilities, and then force his own attack through. With strong players he would create an ever-widening front of conflict, encouraging his opponent to think of winning, but also opening the possibility that the point could go either way. These four `winning strategems’ are demonstrated in the four games below.

The games here are taken from Fred Reinfeld and Reuben Fine `Lasker’s Greatest Chess Games : 1889-1914′. I initially found the games heavy going, intricate in their strategy. Of help is Nimzowitsch’s `Chess Praxis’, which explains in detail many of the strategic themes.

1. Attack from Strength

2. Accumulating Advantages

3. Taking Control

4. When Only a Win Will Do

   [Event "London"]  [Site "London"]  [Date "1899.07.05"]  [Round "27"]  [White "Steinitz, William"]  [Black "Lasker, Emanuel"]  [Result "0-1"]  [ECO "C29"]  [Annotator "Lessons from Lasker (PCRL)"]  [PlyCount "60"]  [EventDate "1899.??.??"]   {'1. Attack from Strength `The player who has the advantage must willy-nilly  go over to the attack. ... when you have an advantage, you must of necessity  attack.' STEINITZ In this game against Steinitz, we see Lasker build up a  superior position due to opening errors by his opponent. From this position of  strength, according to Steinitz, an attack must be made; and Lasker dutifully  does so.'} 1. e4 e5 2. Nc3 Nf6 3. f4 d5 4. d3 Nc6 {'Steinitz liked this line  (4.d3), but did badly with it in later years. The most common response was 4:..  .d4.'} 5. fxe5 Nxe5 6. d4 Ng6 7. exd5 Nxd5 8. Nxd5 {'?' 'This wastes time: 7.  e5 Ne4 8.Bd3 Nxc3 9.bxc3 or 8.Bc4 Nxc3 9.bxc3 Qh4+ 10.g3 Qe4+ 11.Qe2 are both  fairly even.'} Qxd5 9. Nf3 Bg4 10. Be2 O-O-O 11. c3 {'?' '11.O-O Bxf3 12.Rxf3!  preserved the balance'} Bd6 12. O-O Rhe8 {'Black has a model development, and  white now has problems on the queen-side. For example, if 13.c4 Qe6 14.Bd3 Nf4  15.Bxf4 Bxf4 leaves the centre weak. White now tries to force back the black  pieces and gain some initiative on the king-side, based on the f-file, but his  lack of development and central control give Lasker the chance for a surprise  combination.'} 13. h3 Bd7 14. Ng5 Nh4 {'!'} 15. Nf3 {'For a moment white's  prospects brightened, but if 15.Rf2 Bg3, or 15.Bf3 Nxf3+ 16.Nxf3 Bb5 17.Re1  Bg3; 16.Qxf3 Qxf3 17.Rxf3 Re1+ 18.Rf1 Rde8 19.Bd2 Rxa1 20.Rxa1 Re2 21.Rd1 Bc6  22.Nf3 f6 with advantage to black because of his two bishops and piece  pressure. This last line is a good illustration of the possibilities a  centralised development can make available. But now white has wasted several  moves and weakened his king-side, which allows Lasker a decisive combination:'}  Nxg2 {'!'} 16. Kxg2 Bxh3+ {'!!'} 17. Kf2 (17. Kxh3 {allows} Qf5+ 18. Kg2 Qg4+  19. Kh1 Qh3+ 20. Kg1 Qg3+ 21. Kh1 Re4 22. Bg5 Rg4 23. Rg1 Qh3+ 24. Nh2 Qxh2#)  17... f6 {'!!' 'Not content with taking the rook, Lasker threatens to simply  move some pawns up the king-side. This calm approach to winning is very  frustrating for the opponent: `whatever you do, I'm going to get you'.'} 18.  Rg1 g5 19. Bxg5 fxg5 20. Rxg5 Qe6 {'White has returned his extra material, but  the Black position is still centralised, and the white king position is unsafe.  '} 21. Qd3 Bf4 22. Rh1 {'If instead 22.Rh5 Qg4; 22.Rg7 Bf5 23.Qb5 Qe3+ 24.Ke1  Qxf3 etc.'} Bxg5 23. Nxg5 Qf6+ 24. Bf3 Bf5 25. Nxh7 Qg6 26. Qb5 {'A last-ditch  attempt at complications, but such `attacks' (from a worse position) are  doomed to failure even by Steinitz's theories.'} c6 27. Qa5 Re7 {'!'} 28. Rh5 {  'If 28.Qxa7 Rg8 29.Qa8+ Kc7 30.Qa5+ Kb8 and wins.'} Bg4 29. Rg5 Qc2+ 30. Kg3  Bxf3 {'An attractive game, showing the effect simple development has against  opening errors. The combination followed simply from superior coordination.  Noteworthy is Lasker's willingness to maintain his positional edge based on a  centralised development.'} 0-1   [Event "Paris"]  [Site "Paris"]  [Date "1900.05.22"]  [Round "4"]  [White "Burn, Amos"]  [Black "Lasker, Emanuel"]  [Result "0-1"]  [ECO "D41"]  [Annotator "Lessons from Lasker (PCRL)"]  [PlyCount "88"]  [EventDate "1900.??.??"]  [EventType "tourn"]   {'2. Accumulating Advantages This game shows how to exploit a single weakness  in the opponent's position.'} 1. d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 Nf6 4. Nf3 c5 5. cxd5  cxd4 {'We call this Tarrasch's Defense now, 5:...Nxd5 6.e4 Nxc3 7.bxc3 cxd4 8.  cxd4 is the semi-Tarrasch; or 6.Nxd5 Qxd5 7.Be3! Na6 8.g3 cxd4 was equal in  Kashdan-Alekhin (Folkestone, 1933).'} 6. Qxd4 {'Instead 6.Qa4+ Bd7 (Qd7 7.dxe6)  7.Qxd4 exd5 8.Nxd5 wins a pawn for white. This is the Tarrasch Gambit,  dangerous against weak defenders, as black gains a strong development edge.'}  Nxd5 7. e4 Nxc3 8. Qxd8+ Kxd8 9. bxc3 Bc5 {'Burn was obviously playing for a  draw, and was therefore happy to exchange queens, even at the cost of his  Q-side pawn structure. Instead, 7.Nxd5 Qxd5 8.Qxd5 exd5 9.Be3 allows white to  gang up on the isolated queen pawn. In order to gain half a point, it is  usually the case that you have to first play for the full point!'} 10. Ne5 Ke7  {'!' 'Black avoids 10:...Ke8 11.Bb5+ Nd7 12.Ke2 a6 13.Bxd7+ Bxd7 14.Nxd7 Kxd7  15.Be3! either removing the bishops, when a draw is likely, or posting the  bishop well for attack and defense. This typical precision from Lasker prompts  white to further entangle himself. Instead, more secure was, 10.Nd4 Ke7 11.Be3  etc.'} 11. Nd3 Bb6 12. Ba3+ Ke8 13. Ne5 Nd7 14. Bb5 (14. Nc4 Bc5 15. Nd6+ Ke7  16. Bxc5 Nxc5 17. e5 Bd7 {when black's pawns are still better, though the Nd6  prevents Rc8. White prefers to look for further exchanges.}) 14... Bc7 {'!'}  15. Nd3 {'The difference is in the bishops. If instead 15.Bxd7+ Bxd7 16.Nxd7  Kxd7-c6 and black has much the better ending. (White's pieces are now pushed  away.'} a6 16. Ba4 b5 17. Bb3 Bb7 18. f3 Rc8 {'!'} 19. Kd2 {'Impossible is 19.  c4 bxc4 20.Bxc4 Ba5+, and so c3 is fixed as a weakness.'} a5 20. Rab1 Bc6 21.  Bc2 {'White retreats voluntarily before the planned ...Nb6...a4...Nc4+, but  thereby allows black to organise his king-side attack.'} f6 22. g3 {'?' 'To  develop the king's rook, but this is a further weakening. Best is 22.Nc5 Nb6  23.Bd3 or 22:...Nxc5 23.Bxc5 Bf4+ 24.Ke2 Bxe4 25.Bxe4 Rxc5 26.Rxb5! level.'}  Kf7 23. Ke2 g5 {'!'} 24. g4 h5 {'!' 'One weakness leads to another. The h-pawn  is again weak, but 24:...g4 had to be stopped. Now Lasker will open the  king-side at his leisure, meanwhile uncovering Q-side threats. Lasker is  therefore playing according to the principle of two weaknesses.'} 25. h3 Bb8  26. Bb2 Nb6 27. Nc5 Be8 28. Nb3 Nc4 {'!'} 29. Bc1 {'White is forced backwards  off the board, if 29.Ba1 Na3 30.Rc1 hxg4 31.fxg4 Bf4 32.Nd2 Bc6 and white runs  out of moves.'} hxg4 30. fxg4 Be5 {'!' 'The first direct attack on the c3-pawn;  it can only be defended indirectly.'} 31. Nd4 Bxd4 32. cxd4 Na3 {'!' 'Lasker  forces two extra Q-side pawns - the opposite colour bishops not being a  problem with the help of the rooks.'} 33. Bxa3 Rxc2+ 34. Kd3 Rxa2 35. Bd6 b4  36. Rbc1 Bb5+ 37. Ke3 Kg6 {'!' 'Leaves white with nothing. 37:...Rxh3 38.Rxh3  Ra3+ 39.Kf2 Rxh3 40.Rc7+ Kg6 41.Bf8 Rh7 42.Rxh7 Kxh7 is less clear, though  still a win.'} 38. Rc5 Ra3+ 39. Kf2 Bd3 40. Re1 Rxh3 41. Rc7 Ra2+ 42. Kg1 Rh4  43. e5 Rxg4+ 44. Kh1 Be4+ {'A beautifully played endgame by Lasker, patiently  and methodically exploiting his opponent's errors: 6.Qxd4 and 10.Ne5 were tame,  and 22.g3? weakening, but black's position looked harmless enough. It was only  as Lasker uncoiled that the lack of scope in white's position became evident.  In particular, c3 always looked the lame point in white's position, but the  one time Lasker attacked the pawn, it managed to jump to the d-file! Lasker  built his position up gradually, starting with Burn's weak opening play, and  he employed prophylaxis against c4, to paralyse white's Q-side. Added to this,  he opened the h-file, enabling the use of the principle of two weaknesses.  After exploiting pressure against c3 to break through, he curtailed any  counterplay with 37:...Kg6, and concluded with an attack on the king!'} 0-1   [Event "London"]  [Site "London"]  [Date "1899.06.20"]  [Round "16"]  [White "Blackburne, Joseph Henry"]  [Black "Lasker, Emanuel"]  [Result "0-1"]  [ECO "D05"]  [Annotator "Lessons from Lasker (PCRL)"]  [PlyCount "84"]  [EventDate "1899.??.??"]   {'3. Taking Control One of the more important lessons to learn when playing  competitive chess is how to improve your prospects in a level position. A good  player will understand which are the key squares in a position, bring his  pieces into connection with them, and, if his opponent cannot counter this  reorganisation, will thereby gain the advantage. In this game, the opening  finishes fairly level, but Blackburne plays without a concrete plan, and  Lasker can tie up the queen-side in a restriction operation later to become  classic. Having thwarted his opponent's activity, Lasker can walk down the  other side of the board.'} 1. d4 d5 2. Nf3 Nf6 3. e3 e6 4. Bd3 Nbd7 5. Nbd2 Bd6  6. e4 dxe4 7. Nxe4 b6 8. O-O Bb7 9. Nxd6+ cxd6 {'This position is as level as  they come: two bishops for white, the extra central pawn for black. White  should perhaps try c4,b3,Bb2 to give his second bishop a good diagonal. Black  might play e5 and for c-file pressure. But the position is still a little  fluid, and it is very easy to drift into an inferior position.'} 10. Re1 O-O  11. Bg5 Qc7 12. c3 Rfe8 13. Bb5 Bc6 {'!' 'To avoid the doubling of the f-pawns  after Bxf6, but striking in that he should allow the exchange of this bishop.  Blackburne has managed to drift and the Bg5 seems wasted, unless exchanged on  f6 the bishop reaches a bad diagonal, but perhaps he didn't expect Lasker to  exchange his own lovely bishop?! Lasker had already foreseen the weakness of  the light squares d5,c4,b5, (therefore the bishop exchange) which allows him  to blockade the Q-side and make the Bg5 of little effect. The following  sequence of moves, binding up the Q-side, should be studied carefully (and  more may be found on the subject in `Chess Praxis').'} 14. Bxc6 Qxc6 15. Qd3 h6  16. Bh4 {'?' '16.Bxf6 was indicated - this bishop is now useless.'} Rac8 17.  Rad1 Nd5 {'!' 'A hypermodern move - piece occupation of the centre, and not  pawn to d5. Note that pieces, especially knights, have an impact forward of an  outpost, whereas the pawn can only sit tight.'} 18. Bg3 b5 19. Nd2 N7b6 20. a3  a5 21. Rc1 a4 {'Nimzowitsch would have been proud. The Q-side blockade allows  Lasker the freedom to advance his majority on the other wing. White has been a  bystander in the game - not comprehending, and so unable to counter, his  opponent's strategy.'} 22. h4 {'A woefully late try to hold back the deluge,  but the pawn merely becomes a target.'} f5 {'!'} 23. Bh2 Qd7 24. Qg3 f4 25. Qd3  e5 26. c4 {'?' 'Cannot be good, giving up e4-control. But what else? White is  practically a piece down.'} bxc4 27. Nxc4 e4 {'!'} 28. Qf1 {'Black wins after  28.Rxe4 Rxe4 29.Qxe4 Qb5 and 28.Nxb6 Rxc1 29.Rxc1 exd3 30.Nxd7 d2!'} Nxc4 29.  Rxc4 Rb8 30. Rc2 Kh8 {'!' 'These last two moves of Lasker's form a vital part  of the winning strategy. White had ideas of playing against e4 or d5 after a  rook exchange, so Lasker gains a move by forcing defense of b2, then moves his  king off the critical diagonal. Qc4 is now met by Rec8.'} 31. Rec1 Qg4 {'!'}  32. f3 Qxh4 33. fxe4 Rxe4 34. Rc8+ Rxc8 35. Rxc8+ Kh7 36. Qb1 Nf6 37. d5 {  'Obviously carefully calculated by Lasker. If 37.Re8 d5 ... Ng4 won, but now  Re8 is threatened.'} g6 38. Rc7+ Kh8 {'!' 'Precision chess - if 38:...Kg8? the  rook could not move, because of Qxg6+.'} 39. Rc1 {'Or 39.Rc8+ Kg7 40.Rc7+ Kf8  and a walk to the d-file.'} Re2 40. Kh1 Ng4 41. Rc8+ Kg7 42. Rc7+ Kf6 {'When I  first played through this game, I knew it was good, but I didn't really  understand it. The Q-side restraining operation is clear, I might even  recognise it as an option before it turns up, and I could manage the K-side  attack at the end, perhaps also cope with the white counterplay, but ... how  to move from the one to the other? As I played through the game a few more  times, I began to understand the `bridging' passage from moves 26-30. It  reminds me of the modulation between keys in a piece of music; without the  bridge, the change falls flat. Note the calmness of the strategical player.  Having transformed the restrained Q-side into a central preponderance, Lasker  takes time to rearrange his pieces, counter threats, and hit at the fresh  targets. If you wonder how great players preserve a slight initiative and turn  it into a crushing attack, it's because they find moves like 29...Rb8 and 30...  Kh8.'} 0-1   [Event "St Petersburg final"]  [Site "St Petersburg"]  [Date "1914.05.17"]  [Round "6"]  [White "Alekhine, Alexander"]  [Black "Lasker, Emanuel"]  [Result "0-1"]  [ECO "C68"]  [Annotator "Lessons from Lasker (PCRL)"]  [PlyCount "178"]  [EventDate "1914.05.11"]  [EventType "tourn"]  [EventRounds "8"]  [EventCountry "RUS"]   1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Bxc6 dxc6 5. Nc3 f6 6. d4 exd4 7. Qxd4 Qxd4 8.  Nxd4 Bd6 9. Be3 Ne7 10. O-O-O O-O 11. Nb3 Ng6 12. Bc5 Bf4+ 13. Kb1 Re8 14. Rhe1  b6 15. Be3 Be5 16. Bd4 Nh4 17. Rg1 Be6 18. f4 Bd6 19. Bf2 Ng6 20. f5 Bxb3 21.  axb3 Nf8 22. Bxb6 Bxh2 23. Rh1 cxb6 24. Rxh2 b5 25. Re1 Nd7 26. Nd1 a5 27. Rh3  b4 28. Nf2 Nc5 29. Rhe3 a4 30. bxa4 Nxa4 31. e5 fxe5 32. Rxe5 Reb8 33. Ne4 b3  34. Re2 Nb6 35. cxb3 Nd5 36. g4 h6 37. g5 hxg5 38. Nxg5 Nf6 39. Re7 Rxb3 40.  Rg2 Nd5 41. Rd7 Rd3 42. Rxd5 Rxd5 43. Ne6 Kf7 44. Rxg7+ Kf6 45. Rc7 Rd6 46. Nc5  Kxf5 47. Rf7+ Ke5 48. Kc2 Rh6 49. Nd3+ Kd6 50. Rf5 Rb8 51. Kc3 Kc7 52. Rf7+ Kb6  53. Rd7 Rh3 54. Rd4 Rbh8 55. Rb4+ Kc7 56. Kc2 R8h4 57. Rb3 Rh2+ 58. Kc3 R4h3  59. Rb4 Rh5 60. Rg4 R2h3 61. Kc2 Rd5 62. Nf4 Rc5+ 63. Kb1 Rh1+ 64. Ka2 Ra5+ 65.  Kb3 Rb5+ 66. Kc3 Kb6 67. Nd3 Rh3 68. Kc2 Rd5 69. Rb4+ Kc7 70. Rb3 Rh2+ 71. Kc3  Kd6 72. Ra3 Rg2 73. Ra1 Rg3 74. Rd1 Kc7 75. Rd2 Kb6 76. Rd1 Kb5 77. Kc2 Kc4 78.  b3+ Kb5 79. Rd2 Rh3 80. Rd1 Rh2+ 81. Kc3 Rd8 82. Rg1 Rh3 83. Rd1 Rdh8 84. Rg1  R8h5 85. Kc2 Rd5 86. Rd1 Rg5 87. Rd2 Rhg3 88. Nc1 Rg2 89. Ne2 Kb6 0-1

General Middlegame Advice

Posted on September 28, 1997 by DrDave

Playing the Middlegame
Planning
Strategical advice

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

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

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]

Kings and Queens

Posted on September 26, 1997 by DrDave

Now, each of the pieces we have considered so far – pawns, knights, bishops and rooks – have peculiarities which make certain positions more or less suitable for them to operate. Kings and Queens move in each direction with equal ease, and so have no such rules – although Queens do like a bit of space to get into their stride.

Their flexibility gives them value, and because they are so valuable they are often the subject of tricks and traps in the opening. Here’s some illustrations: forgive me using my own but they don’t put many cheapos in master game collections.

   [Event "Cambridge Open"]  [Site "?"]  [Date "1980.??.??"]  [Round "?"]  [White "Regis, D."]  [Black "Langosz, G."]  [Result "1-0"]  [ECO "A37"]  [WhiteElo "1800"]  [BlackElo "1700"]  [Annotator "king: wandering in the middlegame"]  [PlyCount "49"]  [EventDate "1980.??.??"]  [EventType "game"]   {[%mdl 2048]} 1. c4 g6 2. g3 Bg7 3. Bg2 d6 4. Nc3 c5 5. Nf3 Nc6 6. O-O Nf6 7.  d4 cxd4 8. Nxd4 Bd7 9. Bg5 O-O 10. Rc1 a6 11. b3 Qc7 12. Nxc6 (12. Nd5 Nxd5 13.  cxd5 Bxd4 14. dxc6 Bxf2+ 15. Rxf2 Bxc6 16. Bh6 Rfc8 17. Bd5) 12... bxc6 13. Qd2  Rfc8 14. Na4 Rab8 15. Rfd1 c5 16. Nc3 Qa7 {[#] White can now force a weakening  of the Pawns. Black thinks he can avoid it...} 17. Bxf6 Bxf6 18. Nd5 Kg7 19.  Nxf6 Kxf6 $2 20. Qc3+ {[#] oops} Kg5 21. Qg7 {I pinched this idea from  Petrosian!} (21. Rd5+ Bf5 22. e4 e6 23. Rxd6 {is also winning}) 21... Be6 (  21... Bc6 22. f4+ Kg4 23. h3+ Kxg3 24. Qh6 Bxg2 25. Rd3+ Bf3 26. Rxf3#) 22. h4+  Kg4 23. Kh2 Rh8 24. Bf3+ Kf5 25. e4# 1-0   [Event "County match"]  [Site "?"]  [Date "1993.??.??"]  [Round "?"]  [White "Regis, D."]  [Black "Smith, A."]  [Result "1-0"]  [ECO "B02"]  [WhiteElo "1935"]  [BlackElo "1820"]  [Annotator "strategy: queen"]  [PlyCount "93"]  [EventDate "1993.??.??"]  [EventType "tourn"]   1. e4 Nf6 2. e5 Nd5 3. c4 Nb6 4. d4 d6 5. exd6 cxd6 6. Nc3 (6. Be3 g6 7. h4 h5)  6... g6 7. Be3 Bg7 8. Bd3 Nc6 9. Nge2 O-O 10. O-O f5 (10... Bg4) 11. c5 (11. a3  {or Qd2}) 11... dxc5 12. dxc5 Nd7 13. Bc4+ Kh8 14. Nf4 Nf6 15. Ne6 Bxe6 16.  Bxe6 Ng4 17. Nd5 Qa5 18. Qc2 (18. Qc1 Nxe3 19. fxe3) 18... Nxe3 19. fxe3 Nd8  20. Bd7 e5 (20... e6 21. Nf4 e5 {( I analysed 21...Rf6; 22 Qc4 idea b4 )} 22.  Nd5 Nc6 23. a3 e4 24. Bxc6 bxc6 25. Nf4 Rfe8 {(fritz fancied ...Rad8 when b4  to stop ...Rd7 allows ...Bxa1 )} 26. b4 Qa6 27. Ra2 Rad8 28. Rd1 Rxd1+ 29. Qxd1  Qc4) 21. b4 {[#] You can tell Black is going to suffer. There are hundreds of  trapped queen miniatures (see Tactics examples)} Qa3 22. Rab1 Rb8 23. Ba4 (23.  Bb5 a6 24. Rb3 Qxb3 25. Qxb3 axb5 26. Nb6 Rf7 27. Rd1 Rc7 28. Rd6) 23... e4 (  23... Rc8 24. Nc3) 24. Bb5 Nc6 25. Rb3 Nxb4 26. Rxb4 Rfd8 27. Ra4 Qb2 28. Qxb2  Bxb2 29. Bc4 Rdc8 30. Rb1 Bg7 31. Rxa7 Rxc5 32. Raxb7 Rxb7 33. Rxb7 Rxc4 34.  Rb8+ Bf8 35. Rxf8+ Kg7 36. Ra8 Rc1+ 37. Kf2 Rc2+ 38. Kg3 g5 39. Ra7+ Kg6 40.  Ra6+ Kg7 41. a4 Rc5 42. Rd6 Ra5 43. Nb6 Ra6 44. h4 h6 45. h5 Ra5 (45... Kh7 46.  Kf2 Kg7 47. g3 Kh7 48. Ke2 Kg7 49. Kd2 Kh7 50. Kc3 Kg7 51. Kb4) 46. Rd5 Ra6 47.  Rb5 1-0   [Event "Olympiad"]  [Site "?"]  [Date "1962.??.??"]  [Round "?"]  [White "Duckstein, A."]  [Black "Petrosian, Tigran Vartanovich"]  [Result "0-1"]  [ECO "B30"]  [Annotator "king: active even with Qs on"]  [PlyCount "80"]  [EventDate "1962.??.??"]  [EventType "swiss"]   1. e4 c6 2. d4 d5 3. Nc3 dxe4 4. Nxe4 Bf5 5. Ng3 Bg6 6. Nf3 Nd7 7. Bd3 e6 8.  O-O Qc7 9. c4 O-O-O 10. Bxg6 hxg6 11. Qa4 Kb8 12. b4 Nh6 13. Qb3 Nf5 14. a4 e5  15. dxe5 Nxe5 16. Nxe5 Qxe5 17. Bb2 Qc7 18. c5 a5 19. Rad1 Rxd1 20. Rxd1 Rh4  21. bxa5 Bxc5 22. a6 b6 23. Re1 Ka7 24. Be5 Qd7 25. Ne4 Bd4 26. g3 Bxe5 27.  gxh4 Nd4 28. Qd1 Qd5 29. Re3 Nf5 30. Re1 Nd4 31. Qd3 f5 32. Ng5 c5 33. Re3 c4  34. Qd1 {[#]} Kxa6 35. Ra3 Bf6 36. h3 f4 37. Qg4 Ka5 38. Nf3 Kb4 39. Nxd4 Kxa3  40. Nc2+ Kxa4 {0-1} 0-1   [Event "URS-ch23 Final"]  [Site "Leningrad"]  [Date "1956.01.28"]  [Round "11"]  [White "Tal, M."]  [Black "Lisitsin, GM."]  [Result "1-0"]  [ECO "B71"]  [Annotator "endgame: KUFTE"]  [PlyCount "121"]  [EventDate "1956.01.10"]  [EventType "tourn"]  [EventRounds "17"]  [EventCountry "URS"]  [SourceTitle "URS-ch"]  [Source "ChessBase"]  [SourceDate "1999.07.01"]  [SourceVersion "1"]  [SourceVersionDate "1999.07.01"]  [SourceQuality "1"]   1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 g6 6. f4 Nc6 7. Nxc6 bxc6 8.  e5 Nd7 9. exd6 exd6 10. Be3 Be7 11. Qf3 d5 12. O-O-O Bf6 13. Bd4 O-O 14. h4 Rb8  15. Qf2 Rb4 16. Bxf6 Nxf6 17. a3 Qb6 18. Qxb6 Rxb6 19. Na4 Rb7 20. Bd3 Nh5 21.  Rhf1 Re7 {[#] How to save the f-pawn?} 22. f5 {! Can't be done, but Tal gives  it up for a high price - scrambled pawns.} gxf5 (22... Bxf5 23. Bxf5 gxf5 24.  Rxf5) 23. Rfe1 (23. Bxf5 Ng3) 23... Rfe8 24. Rxe7 Rxe7 25. Kd2 {[#] In Exeter  we say "KUFTE!" (King Up For The Endgame!)} Ng3 26. Kc3 f4 27. Kd4 Bf5 {  [#] And there it is, nicely posted in the middle of a lot of weak Black pawns.}  28. Rd2 Re6 29. Nc5 Rh6 30. Ke5 {!} Bxd3 31. cxd3 Rxh4 32. Kd6 Rh6+ 33. Kc7 Nf5  34. Kb7 Nd4 35. Rf2 a5 36. Rxf4 Ne6 37. Rg4+ Kf8 {[#]} 38. Kxc6 {!} Nxc5+ 39.  Kxc5 Re6 40. Kxd5 Rb6 41. b4 axb4 42. axb4 Ke7 {Too late} 43. Kc5 Rf6 44. Rd4  Rf5+ 45. Kb6 Rf6+ 46. Kc7 Rf5 47. Re4+ Kf6 48. Kc6 Rf2 49. g4 h5 50. gxh5 Kg5  51. b5 f5 52. Rb4 f4 53. b6 f3 54. b7 {1-0} Rc2+ 55. Kd5 f2 56. b8=Q f1=Q 57.  Qg3+ Kf6 (57... Kxh5 58. Rh4#) (57... Kh6 58. Qg6#) 58. Qe5+ Kf7 59. Rb7+ Rc7 (  59... Kg8 60. Qg7#) (59... Kf8 60. Qh8#) 60. Rxc7+ Kf8 61. Qh8# 1-0   [Event "Goteborg SSK 40th Anniversary Group A"]  [Site "Gothenburg"]  [Date "1920.08.18"]  [Round "12"]  [White "Rubinstein, A."]  [Black "Maroczy, G."]  [Result "1-0"]  [ECO "D63"]  [Annotator "strategy: queen"]  [PlyCount "75"]  [EventDate "1920.08.02"]  [EventType "tourn"]  [EventRounds "13"]  [EventCountry "SWE"]  [SourceTitle "HCL"]  [Source "ChessBase"]  [SourceDate "1999.07.01"]  [SourceVersion "2"]  [SourceVersionDate "1999.07.01"]  [SourceQuality "1"]   1. d4 Nf6 2. Nf3 d5 3. c4 e6 4. Bg5 Be7 5. e3 Nbd7 6. Nc3 O-O 7. Rc1 Re8 8. Qc2  {The Queen makes a modest first move.} dxc4 9. Bxc4 c5 10. O-O cxd4 11. Nxd4 a6  12. Rfd1 Qa5 13. Bh4 Ne5 14. Be2 Ng6 15. Bg3 e5 16. Nb3 Qc7 17. Qb1 {A retreat  to threaten the Black Queen, which retreats. !} Qb8 18. Bf3 Qa7 19. Na5 {!} Bb4  20. Nc4 Bd7 21. Nd5 Nxd5 22. Bxd5 Be6 23. Qe4 {[#] ! The Queen enters the fray,  reinforcing several points of attack at once. The Black pieces are not easily  able to harass her.} Bxd5 24. Rxd5 Rac8 25. Rcd1 Bf8 26. b3 b5 27. Nd6 Bxd6 28.  Rxd6 Rc7 29. h4 {!} f6 30. Qd5+ Kh8 31. h5 Nf8 32. h6 Ng6 {[#] The Queen now  makes the decisive invasion.} (32... gxh6 33. Rxf6) 33. Qe6 Rf8 34. Rd7 gxh6  35. Bh4 Nxh4 36. Qe7 Rxd7 37. Rxd7 Qxd7 38. Qxf8# 1-0   [Event "Manhattan CC v Marshall CC"]  [Site "New York, NY USA"]  [Date "1932.??.??"]  [Round "?"]  [White "Marshall, Frank James"]  [Black "Gladstone, David"]  [Result "1-0"]  [ECO "D64"]  [Annotator "strategy: queen activity"]  [PlyCount "57"]  [EventDate "1932.??.??"]  [EventType "tourn"]   1. d4 {Notes by Frank Marshall. Facing up to a tricky and puzzling attack  still remains a man-sized job over the board, even though the subsequent  annotations may demonstrate the task an easy one.} d5 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 Nf6 4.  Bg5 Be7 5. e3 Nbd7 6. Rc1 c6 7. Nf3 O-O 8. Qc2 h6 9. Bh4 a6 10. a3 dxc4 {  Giving up the fight for the tempo. 10...b5 leads to a totally different type  of game.} 11. Bxc4 b5 12. Ba2 c5 13. Ne4 {The book line is 13 dxc5 Nxc5 14 Bb1  Re8. The text is no better in an objective sense, but being a novelty, it  gives my opponent more to think about.} Qa5+ 14. Nfd2 cxd4 15. O-O {!? As will  be seen, the acceptance of the speculative pawn sacrifice is playable; but the  return of the pawn with 15...d3 is simpler.} dxe3 16. fxe3 Qb6 17. Nxf6+ Bxf6 {  ? This plausible move loses, whereas 17...Nxf6! would have left him with a  satisfactory defence. After the text, White's attack crashes through to  victory.} 18. Bb1 Rd8 19. Qh7+ Kf8 20. Qh8+ {!} Ke7 21. Qxg7 {! The move that  Black overlooked. With Black's king wandering in the middle of the board, and  with most of his pieces not functioning, the result is a foregone conclusion.}  Qxe3+ 22. Kh1 Bxh4 {He has to take the bishop for better or worse, for if 22...  Qd4 (or ...Qe5) 23 Ne4 wins rapidly.} 23. Qxf7+ Kd6 24. Ne4+ Kd5 {Or 24...Ke5  25 Qg7+ winning.} 25. Qh5+ Bg5 {Amusing would be 25...e5 26 Qf7+ and wins or  25...Ne5 26 Rfd1+ etc.} 26. Qd1+ {!} Qd4 27. Qb3+ Ke5 28. Qg3+ Kd5 29. Qd6# {  The last five moves give a good idea of the queen's power.} 1-0   [Event "Leningrad-Moscow"]  [Site "Leningrad URS"]  [Date "1962.11.05"]  [Round "2"]  [White "Bronstein, DI."]  [Black "Korchnoi, Viktor"]  [Result "1-0"]  [ECO "C83"]  [Annotator "strategy: queen activity"]  [PlyCount "77"]  [EventDate "1962.??.??"]  [EventType "tourn"]   1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Ba4 Nf6 5. O-O Nxe4 6. d4 b5 7. Bb3 d5 8. dxe5  Be6 9. c3 Be7 10. Bc2 O-O 11. Qe2 f5 12. exf6 Bxf6 13. Nbd2 Bf5 14. Nxe4 Bxe4  15. Bxe4 dxe4 16. Qxe4 Qd7 17. Bf4 Rae8 18. Qc2 Bh4 19. Bg3 Bxg3 20. hxg3 Ne5  21. Nxe5 Rxe5 22. Rfe1 Rd5 23. Rad1 c5 24. a4 Rd8 25. Rxd5 Qxd5 26. axb5 axb5  27. Qe2 b4 28. cxb4 cxb4 29. Qg4 b3 30. Kh2 Qf7 31. Qg5 Rd7 32. f3 h6 33. Qe3  Rd8 34. g4 Kh8 35. Qb6 Rd2 36. Qb8+ Kh7 {[#]} 37. Re8 Qxf3 38. Rh8+ Kg6 {[#]}  39. Rxh6+ (39. Rxh6+ Kf7 (39... Kxh6 40. Qh8+ Kg5 (40... Kg6 41. Qh5+ Kf6 42.  g5+) 41. Qh5+ Kf6 42. g5+) (39... gxh6 40. Qg8+ Kf6 41. Qf8+)) 1-0   [Event "AlphaZero - Stockfish"]  [Site "London ENG"]  [Date "2017.12.04"]  [Round "?"]  [White "AlphaZero"]  [Black "Stockfish (Computer)"]  [Result "1-0"]  [ECO "E17"]  [Annotator "queen: mobility"]  [PlyCount "111"]  [EventDate "2017.??.??"]   1. Nf3 Nf6 2. d4 e6 3. c4 b6 4. g3 Bb7 5. Bg2 Be7 6. O-O O-O 7. d5 exd5 8. Nh4  c6 9. cxd5 Nxd5 10. Nf5 {Regis,Dave: 'A well-known gambit line of the Queen's  Indian Defence'} Nc7 11. e4 d5 12. exd5 Nxd5 13. Nc3 Nxc3 14. Qg4 {[%cal Gd1g4]  Regis,Dave: 'White plays an in-between move threatening mate: The Queen enters  the fight!'} g6 15. Nh6+ Kg7 16. bxc3 Bc8 17. Qf4 {[%cal Gg4f4] Regis,Dave:  'The Queen dodges the Bishop's attack'} Qd6 18. Qa4 {[%cal Gf4a4] Regis,Dave:  'A remarkable move: the Queen attacks what looks like an unimportant pawn on  c6. Black chooses to keep the pawn by not developing the Knight.'} g5 {Regis,  Dave: 'White's next move is really striking: allowing the King to take the  Knight when White has only one (undeveloped) piece aiming at the King's-side!'}  19. Re1 Kxh6 20. h4 f6 21. Be3 Bf5 22. Rad1 Qa3 23. Qc4 {[%cal Ga4c4] Regis,  Dave: 'White avoids the exchange of Queens, of course.'} b5 24. hxg5+ fxg5 {  [%cal Gc4h4]} 25. Qh4+ {Regis,Dave: 'The Queen takes advantage of a pin to  re-enter the King's-side.'} Kg6 26. Qh1 {[%cal Gh4h1] Regis,Dave: 'Another  counter-intuitive move, back on the c6 pawn.'} Kg7 27. Be4 Bg6 28. Bxg6 hxg6  29. Qh3 {[%cal Gh1h3] Regis,Dave: 'Eyeing the weak light squares.'} Bf6 30. Kg2  Qxa2 31. Rh1 Qg8 32. c4 Re8 33. Bd4 Bxd4 34. Rxd4 Rd8 35. Rxd8 Qxd8 {[%cal  Gh3e6]} 36. Qe6 {[%cal Gd1g4,Gg4f4,Gf4a4,Ya4c4,Yc4h4,Yh4h1,Rh1h3,Rh3e6] Regis,  Dave: 'With only two pieces left, White invades, but of course Black is  defending with only one! So Black finally develops the Queen's Knight.'} Nd7  37. Rd1 Nc5 38. Rxd8 Nxe6 39. Rxa8 {Regis,Dave: 'The result of the attack is  an ending with an exchange for pawns.'} Kf6 40. cxb5 cxb5 41. Kf3 Nd4+ 42. Ke4  Nc6 43. Rc8 Ne7 44. Rb8 Nf5 45. g4 Nh6 46. f3 Nf7 47. Ra8 Nd6+ 48. Kd5 Nc4 49.  Rxa7 Ne3+ 50. Ke4 Nc4 51. Ra6+ Kg7 52. Rc6 Kf7 53. Rc5 Ke6 54. Rxg5 Kf6 55. Rc5  g5 56. Kd4 1-0

Or, The Thirty-Third Piece

A. Introduction

B. Time trouble

B1. Causes of time trouble

Inadequate theoretical preparation

Inadequate practical preparation

A genuinely complicated game

Conscious entry into time trouble

Doubts concerning analysis

Doubts linked to own style

Doubts linked to opponent’s style

Doubts linked to importance of the game

Doubts linked to previous course of the game

Doubts linked to own experience

B2. Effects of time trouble

Failure to react to changes in the position Inclination towards obvious moves

Seeking exchanges Postponing decisions Playing safe and solid moves Reliance on constant elements of the position

Less strategy, more tactics

Temptation to blitz the time-troubled opponent

B3. Treatment of time trouble

C. Time management

C1. Regis, Hampton, 1993 (Game 2)

C2. Tal-Bronstein 1960 (Game 6)

C3. Botvinnik-Tal 1960 (Game 7)

D. References

Game 1: (59) Korchnoi – Suetin [C83] Moscow (XXVII USSR Ch.), 1960

Game 2: Regis,D (1935) – Hampton,M (1900) [E91]

Game 3: Botvinnik ,M – Tal ,M [E10]: Match, Moscow (Russia) Match, Moscow (Russia) (8), 1960

Game 4: Gligoric,S – Tal,M [A78] Yugoslavia ct Yugoslavia ct (4), 1959

Game 5: Blackstock,L – Webb,S [C09] Borehamwood, 1977

Game 6: Tal, Mikhail, Bronstein, David, Baku ch-SU, 1961

Game 7: Botvinnik,M (2500) – Tal,M [E69] WM Moskau, 1960

by Mark Blackmore

White’s King’s-side attack

Game 4: (77) Fischer,R – Udovcic,M [B06] Rovinj/Zagreb Rd: 12, 1970

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

Exeter Chess Club: My adventures with the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit

Warwick University Chess Club vs. Exeter Chess Club

Match results (Exeter players named first)

ExeterPlayerA – WarwickPlayerA

WarwickPlayerB – ExeterPlayerB (1880)

ExeterPlayerD – WarwickPlayerE

WarwickPlayerD – ExeterPlayerE

warwickg – ExeterPlayerF

WarwickPlayerH – ExeterPlayerG (1605)

ExeterPlayerH – Varl (1660)

Or, The Thirty-Third
Piece

B1. Causes of time
trouble

Inadequate theoretical
preparation

Inadequate practical
preparation

A genuinely complicated
game

Conscious entry into time
trouble

Doubts concerning
analysis

Doubts linked to own
style

Doubts linked to opponent’s
style

Doubts linked to importance of
the game

Doubts linked to previous
course of the game

Doubts linked to own
experience

B2. Effects of time
trouble

Failure to react to changes in
the position
Inclination towards obvious
moves

Seeking exchanges
Postponing decisions
Playing safe and solid
moves
Reliance on constant elements of
the position

Less strategy, more
tactics

Temptation to blitz the
time-troubled opponent

B3. Treatment of time
trouble

C1. Regis, Hampton, 1993 (Game
2)

C2. Tal-Bronstein 1960 (Game
6)

C3. Botvinnik-Tal 1960 (Game
7)

Game 1: (59) Korchnoi – Suetin
[C83] Moscow (XXVII USSR Ch.), 1960

Game 2: Regis,D (1935) –
Hampton,M (1900) [E91]

Game 3: Botvinnik ,M – Tal ,M
[E10]: Match, Moscow (Russia) Match, Moscow (Russia) (8),
1960

Game 4: Gligoric,S – Tal,M
[A78] Yugoslavia ct Yugoslavia ct (4), 1959

Game 5: Blackstock,L – Webb,S
[C09] Borehamwood, 1977

Game 6: Tal, Mikhail,
Bronstein, David, Baku ch-SU, 1961

Game 7: Botvinnik,M (2500) –
Tal,M [E69] WM Moskau, 1960

Game 4: (77) Fischer,R – Udovcic,M [B06]
Rovinj/Zagreb Rd: 12, 1970

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

Exeter Chess Club: My adventures with the Blackmar-Diemer
Gambit

Warwick University Chess Club vs. Exeter
Chess Club

Match results (Exeter players named
first)

WarwickPlayerB – ExeterPlayerB
(1880)

WarwickPlayerH – ExeterPlayerG
(1605)