Category Archives: Topic

The Art of Analysis – Part oe

Posted on by

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.

Active Chess

Posted on by 
From Sverre.Johnsen@dnv.com  Fri Nov 21 12:27:48 1997

Anyway these activities are very popular in Norway. When organizing
summer camps or larger team competitions we always try to find some
time for social/ physical activities like "relay-chess", "basket
chess" or "chat-team" competitions. A brief explanation:

RELAY-CHESS

This is a competition between two teams. It is basically an ordinary
game of chess where the teams have to run a bit to do their
moves. They can each have from 2 to app.12 players. It is not
necessary for the teams to have the same number of players.

Both teams are lined up some distance from the board. (10-50 m
depending on how long time they are given) They each get e.g. 10
minutes on the chess clock. The first player on team A (white) runs to
the board, makes his first move and presses the clock button. When he
has started team B's clock, the first player on team B runs to the
board, makes his move starts the clock. When he has pressed the button
the second player on team A may start running, but only if the first
player on the team has found his place at the end of the queue.

As in an ordinary game of chess you can either win on time or by
mating.  The longer running distance and the shorter time limits the
more important it is to run quickly. And the fewer players on each
team, the more exhausting it will be. The blunder rate often increases
considerably because of the time pressure and because the teams will
rarely have a consistent idea behind their moves.

Be sure that the rules are made clear before the game starts: Is it
allowed to shout advices to the player to move? What happens if there
is an illegal move? Do you have to stop your own clock to claim a win
on time?

BASKET CHESS

This too is a typical outdoor activity but between single players. The
idea is that if you captures a piece you have to throw it into a
basket before you can press your clock. If you misses you will have to
run some penalty rounds. If you misses with a pawn it will be just one
round, if you misses with a knight or a bishop it will be three, a
rook will be five and a queen will be ten (or nine if you prefer). You
can vary the running and throwing distances depending on how
"physical" you want the game to be.

Usually this kind of chess is also very entertaining for the
spectators.  In some time pressure situations you may see players
sacrificing their queen on g7 in the hope that their opponent will
miss the throwing and have to run the ten penalty rounds.

CHAT TEAMS

This really is multiple consultation games. Contrary to the outdoor
activities this may be very instructive in addition to being noisy and
entertaining. The basic model is four players on each team but the
match being played over five board. The teams are free to communicate
and to allocate their players as they want to.

Most usual is to give the strongest player two boards to start with
and the others one each. When a game is finished the players move over
to other to give advise or take over games from weaker teammates. But
I have also seen teams letting their strongest player play
simultaneously on all boards just leaving to his teammates to do
obvious recaptures and press the clocks.

If you want to give the match a twist you may set different time
limits on the different boards or you may let one of the games
(perhaps played on an outdoor set) be played for two points (one point
for a draw).

I often set one additional rule: After three warnings from the arbiter
for shouting or non-constructive criticism a point may be deducted
from the team's score.


Sverre Johnsen

Lessons from Lasker

Posted on by

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

General Middlegame Advice

Posted on by

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

Playing the Middlegame

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

— Alexander Alekhin

Attack and defence

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

Kasparov – Karpov, Linares, 1994

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

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

13… a4

[13… Bxa3]

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

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

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

Petrosian-Korchnoi 1963

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

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

1. Rxh6

  which was met by

1…f3!

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

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

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

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

 

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

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

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

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

    — Amazia AVNI

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

You and your opponent

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

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

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

Positional play

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

Planning

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

Strategical advice

General advice

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

Space and the centre

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

Advice about Kings and Queens

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

Advice about Rooks

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

Advice about minor pieces

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

Advice about Pawns

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

Advice on tactics

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

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

Kings and Queens

Posted on by

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.

 

Form and content

Posted on by

How form can affect your appreciation of content

From: Keith Gardner 
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 1997 03:41:00 -0400

Subject: HTML/WWW

 
You seem to be greatly opposed to browsers such as
Netscape and MS IE.  I would have to agree Im still waiting for them
to fix a few details with Java and HTML issues, which will probably
not come about until 5.0 (hopefully without taking over the operating
system). 

I would have to say that your website was unattractive, unnavigatable,
and unreadable with the way it was organized.  The only place you used
a table, you ruined it with the tacky borders.
 The blink tag, the most hated, was
also used by you.  LYNX is for 9600 bps modems and VT100 terminals.
Do people actually used these for surfing the web still?  Minimium
requirements for the web is usually HTML 3.2 for the present day.  At
one time about 2 years ago I was advent in designing web sites that
would be enhanced for all the browsers including AOL HTML.  Nowdays, I
am trying to figure out how to change the border setting for text
fields in the X11R6 stuff that Netscape scraped into their Java
Virtual Machine so that we can expand web-based client-server
applications to support those slow, unreliable Sun Sparc20s.

Anyway, dont look for a job in desktop publishing.  You might could
write man pages for UNiX, if you actually have the free time to learn
that cryptic markup language that I forgot the archaic cryptic thing
they called it (nroff or something). 

Anyway, looks like a lot of great content, too bad it didnt have form. 


  
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Keith Gardner * cabernet@mindspring.com * http://www.gt.ed.net/keith
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted in Ego

Openings in Black and White

Posted on by 
References: < 4e0avl$947@newsbf02.news.aol.com >

In article < 4e0avl$947@newsbf02.news.aol.com > mlkienholz@aol.com
 (Mlkienholz) writes:

>
>
>Hi netters,
>
>Does anyone have any advice for selecting an opening system? I have been
>told
>that this is my achilles heel. What I'm looking for is a black and white
>system that has similar objectives, like maybe the Sicilian and the
>English.
>But I'd also like to find something that is flexible, and useful against
>a wide variety of black/white responses. Anyone have some suggestions?


Sounds like you're half-way there:

Hypermodern with g3/g6 and c4/c5
================================
White:              English with g3
Black against 1.e4: Sicilian with ...g6
Black against 1.d4: Benoni

Hypermodern with g3/g6
======================
White:              King's Indian Attack
Black against 1.e4: Pirc/Modern
Black against 1.d4: King's Indian/Modern

Hypermodern with b3/b6
======================
White:              Nimzo-Larsen 1. b3
Black against 1.e4: Owen's Defence 1...b6
Black against 1.d4: English Defence 1...b6

Open game with piece play:
=========================
White:              Lopez with early d4, or Scotch Opening
Black against 1.e4: Two Knights', Open Morphy Lopez
Black against 1.d4: Budapest Gambit, Grunfeld


>I also understand the theory of strongpoint type openings fairly well. Are
>there
>any systems that fit in this framework?

"Flexible" and "strongpoint" seem to me to be a contradiction!

Strongpoint on d4/d5
====================
White:              Colle System or London System
Black against 1.e4: French or Gurgenidze (..g6/...c6)
Black against 1.d4: Slav or Orthodox QGD

Strongpoint on e4/e5
====================
White:              Bishop's Opening
Black against 1.e4: Philidor's Defence
Black against 1.d4: Old Indian, Old Benoni



All this for 2 cents...


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

D  _       
 / "()/~   Dave Regis  &8^D*         Exeter Chess Coaching Page etc.:
|| \_/|    = DrDave on BICS       http://www.ex.ac.uk/~dregis/DR/chess.html
~\   /                          "...what else exists in the world but chess?"
 _|||__SHEU ~/sheu.html            -- NABOKOV   "Contribute!" -- Doug Attig

Rook and Pawn endings – a spot of theory

Posted on by

Rook and Pawn endings – a spot of theory

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

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

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

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

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

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

56.Rxg3+ Kxg3 57.f5 g5]

56…Kxg4 57.Ke2 f5?

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

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

63.Re1

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Position 2: Lucena 1496

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

First, White can get the Pawn to the seventh:

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

Now what?

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

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

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

Position 3: Philidor’s position

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

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

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

[2.Ke6 Rb6+ 3.Kd5 Rb1]

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

Position 4: Rook’s Pawns

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

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

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

Position 5: Rook’s Pawns 2

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

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

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

Position 6: checking distance

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

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

Checking distance is three empty files.

Position 7: checking dist. (2)

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

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

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

Position 8: Aside: Queen vs. Rook

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

[1…Rh1 2.Qc8+ Kf7 3.Qb7+;

1…Ra6 2.Qc8+;

1…Rh2 2.Qd6+]

And if 1…Rh8 2.Kg6 Rg8+ 3.Kf6 1-0

Position 9: Study (Lasker)

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

1…Re1

[1…Rh6+ 2.e6 +-;

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

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

2.Ke6 Kf8

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

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

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

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

Position 10: Meanwhile…

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

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

Instead 63.Re1? f4! wins for Black:

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

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

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

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

Position 11: The rule of five

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

The Pawn is on the third rank = 3

The sum is = 6

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

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

Position 12: Lasker, 1890

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

10.Rxh2 ! 10…Rxh2 11.c8Q 1-0

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

Position 13: drawn RP+NP (same side)

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

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

Position 14: drawn RP+NP

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

[1…Kxg6?? 2.Rg8+]

1/2-1/2

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

Position 15: won RP+BP

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

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

1.Kd1 DIAGRAM

(1) break the blockade

(2) win the f-pawn

(3) win as we know how

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

this is the critical bit: zugzwang!

12…Ra5 13.Kf6 Ra1 14.Kxf5

nearly there now

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

Smyslov, V – Botvinnik, M [C17] 1954

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

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

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

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

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

53…a4 54.Kg2 Ra1 55.Kf3 a3 56.Kg2

(56.Kf4 a2 57.Kf3 Rf1+)

56…a2 57.Kh2 Kxg5 58.Kg2 Kf6 !

(58…f4? only draws)

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

which we should know how to win.

(58…f4? 59.gxf4+ Kg4 60.f5 f6 61.Ra5

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

My faithful analyst Fritz successfully embarked on:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

[54.Rxh6 Rxf2]

54…Rxf2 55.Rxc5 Rxf4

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

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

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

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

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

60.Kxf3 Rc5 61.Rh8

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

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

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

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

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

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

67.Rh7

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

67…Kxa6 68.h6 Rc7+ 1/2-1/2

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

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

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

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

1/2-1/2

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Here’s a successful defence.

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

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

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

Black is in a good defensive position.

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

And now a cute finish to draw.

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

1/2-1/2

Example games: more complex Rook Endings

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

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

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

52…Rf6 53.Rd4 Ra6 54.Ra4!

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

[59…Ra7 60.a6 Kb6 61.Kb4]

60.Kb3 Kc5

[60…Rxa5 61.Rxa5+ Kxa5 62.Kc4]

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

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

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

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

18…Re6
I tried to think of something after

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

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

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

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

[22.Re2 Rxc5=]

22…Rxc5 23.c3 d4 24.Kf1

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

24…dxc3 25.bxc3 Rxc3 26.Rxa7 Rc2

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

[38…Rf2!?]

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

[42.g5+ Ke5]

42…Ke6 43.a4

[43.Rf2 Rc3+ 44.Kf4 f6]

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

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

48…Rc3+ 49.Kg2 Rc4 50.h5 Rh4 1/2-1/2

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

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

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

[31.Ra1 Rb8 32.Ra3 Nd5]

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

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

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

[40.g4]

40…Rxh4 41.Kg2 e5 42.Kg3 Rd4 43.Ra5

[43.h4]

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

[47…Rd3+ idea 48.Kh4 Rf3]

48.Kg2

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

67.Kg1

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

67…Rd3

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

68.Ra8

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

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

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

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

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

0-1

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

28.hxg6 hxg6 29.Rh1 Kf8

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

30.Rh7

rook on the seventh 30…Rc6 31.g4

[31.Rd7 ? 31…Nc4 32.Rxd5 Ne3+]

31…Nc4 32.g5 Ne3+ 33.Kf3

33…Nf5

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

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

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

45…Kg8

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

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

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

1-0

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

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

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

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

Defend or counterattack? 45…Rf8

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

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

Selected games in play-through format

Five Sicilians in Club Play

Posted on by

by Bob Martin

Bob sent me these games with his own notes to illustrate both some
nice amateur games with the Sicilian Defence, but also to
illustrate what sorts of thinking and assessment goes on at club
level. Bob is about an {A} player, so if that’s where you want to
be, this is the level of judgement you should be capable of.
Thanks, Bob!

(28) Martin,R [B78]

  1997

1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4
g6

  (1) This initiates a dark-square game.

  Black will try to keep White’s center dark squares clear
of pawns and pieces.

5.Nc3 Bg7

  (2) With my king bishop on g7, I will do everything I can
to open the long diagonal h8-a1, and avoid exchanging the bishop
unless I can secure an overwhelming advantage with its loss.

  This bishop will be my second most powerful piece in this
type of opening.

6.Be3 Nf6 7.f3

  (3) This is a key move in the Yugoslav attack against the
Sicilian Dragon.

  I does three things for him: a) reinforces e4, b) keeps
the black knight off of g4 where it could challenge the Be3, c)
prepares g2-g4-g5 with a kingside pawn storm attack.

7…Qa5

  (4) An early queen move, but it does three things for me:
a) shifts the queen to the queenside where my attack will come
later, b) helps watch the kingside and center, c) to chase the
queen White will have to put the knight on b3 where it will be
subject to harassment by a later Black a7-a5-a4.

8.Bc4 0-0 9.Qd2 d6 10.0-0-0 Bd7

 

 

-------------------
|R+-+RK-+|
|PP+-QPPP|
|-+PB-N-+|
|+-+PNB+-|
|-+-+-+-q|
|+pn-pn+-|
|pbppb+pp|
|+kr-+-+r|
-------------------

11.h4

  (5) Too soon.

  White is not prepared for this early attack.

  He should get his king off the half-open “c” file with
Kb1 instead.

  Believe it or not my next move is a direct attack on his
king

  (an x-ray attack).

11…Rac8 12.h5

  (6) Better is Kb1 now.

12…Ne5

  (7) If instead Nxh5 White will play RxN and have an open
“h” file for a ready made attack; thus sayeth Fischer.

  Amen! Believe me, if you do it, it will come.

  Ne5 begins my queenside attack since I already have an
open file.

13.Bb3 Nc4 14.Bxc4 Rxc4 15.g4

 

 

-------------------
|R+-+RK-+|
|+-+-QPPP|
|-+PB-N-+|
|+P+PNr+-|
|P+-+-+-q|
|+pn-p-+-|
|pbppb+pp|
|+kr-+-+-|
-------------------

 

  (8) The last chance to get the king to b1 and off the hot
“c” file.

  My pieces now become too active.

15…Rxc3 16.Nb3

  (9) This move gives him more problems than it gives me,
better was QxR.

  But even then I’ll clean up on all his pawns: QxQ, Nxg4,
Bxg4, Bxc3, Bxh5.

  In the Sicilian, Black usually has the better endgame
pawn structure.

16…Rxc2+ 17.Qxc2 Qxa2 18.Kd2 Rc8

  (10) After this White will have no protection for his
king.

  Count the number of Black pieces that can attack the
white king: queen, rook, bishop

  (g7), knight, and bishop

  (d7) = five pieces, but I must be prepared for the coming
Ra1.

19.Ra1 Nxe4+

  (11) Opens the diagonal and brings down the curtain on
the White king.

  There are too many open lines into the White
position.

20.fxe4 Rxc2+ 21.Kxc2 Qxb2+ 0-1

 

 

(29) Martin,R [B73]

  1997

1.e4 c5

  (1) Black’s strategy will be to fight for the dark
squares, especially d4.

2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 g6

  (2) I will put the bishop on g7 and work to control the
a1-h8 diagonal.

  I won’t exchange this bishop without some sort of
advantage in return.

  In most cases, the bishop on g7 will be almost as
powerful as the queen.

5.Nc3

  (3) If White exchanges knights on c6 I will capture with
bxN and have more central influence with my pawns.

5…Bg7 6.Be3 d6

  (4) Getting control of e5 and vacating d7 for the
bishop.

  Also, if Nf6 instead of d6, then White can play NxN bxN,
e5 and my knight must return to g8.

  I don’t like the looks of that.

7.Be2 Nf6 8.0-0 0-0

 

 

-------------------
|-KR+Q+-R|
|PPPB+PPP|
|-+-B-N-+|
|+-+PN-+-|
|-+-+-+-+|
|+pn-pn+-|
|pbpp-+pp|
|+kr-qb+r|
-------------------

 

  (5) The plans for both sides are fairly simple: Black
will use the half-open “c” file for possible queenside expansion,
and White will use the “d” file and center for his attack.

  White must prepare his attack carefully so that his pawns
don’t become weak, and Black must watch that White doesn’t lock the
queenside.

9.a3

  (6) A waiting move and making preparations to stop Black
queenside tricks.

  This move is not as good as f4.

9…Bd7 10.Qd2 Rc8

  (7) Black has the classic Sicilian Dragon attacking
position.

  I need to decide how to start my attack.

  I should consider d5.

11.Rad1

  (8) If White had castled queenside

  (as in the last game) this rook would already be here and
he would be a move ahead.

  But with kingside castling he takes a more cautious
approach to the game since his king will not be worried about the
bishop on g7 and rook on c8.

11…Ne5 12.f4

  (9) Black must now play aggressively before the White
pawns get too far into his position.

  But this move brings with it a weakness: the e4 pawn is
only defended by the knight on c3, and the f4 pawn blocks the
bishop on e3.

12…Nc4

  (10) Forces an exchange of pieces

  (always good for the defender).

  I would now consider Ng4 instead of Nc4.

13.Bxc4 Rxc4

  (11) Black should have decided the rook’s ultimate fate
before the recapture on c4 since it will be subject to attack here
and to move it again will only help White’s coming attack.

14.f5

 

 

-------------------
|-KR+R+-+|
|PP+-QPP-|
|-+-B-N-P|
|+-+PNr+-|
|-+P+-+-+|
|+pn-p-+-|
|pbppb+pp|
|+kr-q-+-|
-------------------

14…Rxc3

  (12) This exchange sacrifice forces White to make a long
range decision: a) ruin his queenside pawns and subject them to
attack by Black’s queen on a5, and rook on c8 or b) recapture with
queen and wait for Black to attack with the bishop on g7, queen on
a5 and rook on c8.

  Either way he must be careful.

15.bxc3 Nxe4

  (13) The point of the rook sacrifice on c3.

  White’s pawns are an endgame nightmare.

  He must go for a middlegame win.

16.Qd3 d5

  (14) Look at the bishop on g7 and its potential on the
open long diagonal.

17.fxg6 hxg6 18.c4

  (15) This allows Black to establish two connected passed
pawns on open diagonals.

  Certainly nothing to sneeze at.

18…Nc5 19.Qe2 e5 20.Nb3

  (16) This repairs the doubled pawns, but Black’s center
pawns will become monsters.

20…Nxb3 21.cxb3 d4

 

 

-------------------
|-KR+R+-+|
|PP+Q+-+-|
|-+-B-+PP|
|+-+-pP+-|
|-+-p-+-+|
|+p+-+-+-|
|-bp+b+pp|
|+kr-q-+-|
-------------------

 

  (17) It’s been a dark-square game from the beginning;
where does he put the bishop: on f2 or d2 a rook gets blocked.

22.Bc1 Qb6 23.b4

  (18) This solves one problem, but doesn’t do anything
about the center.

23…d3+

 

 

-------------------
|-KR+RB-+|
|PP+Q+-+-|
|-+-+p+-P|
|+-+-+PP-|
|-+-p-+-+|
|+p+-+-q-|
|-bp+b+pp|
|+kr-+-+-|
-------------------

24.Qe3

  (19) The only move.

  Be3 doesn’t work.

24…Qxe3+ 25.Bxe3 e4

  (20) The real purpose behind Qb6.

  White thinks the bishop will blockade the pawns.

26.h3

  (21) Wastes time.

  White is worried about Bg4 and a future f5.

26…Ba4

  (22) The bishops have more freedom of movement than do
the two White rooks.

  Notice how White doesn’t have time to pick off the pawn
on a7.

27.Rd2 Bc3 28.Rdf2

  (23) He thinks he can tie the remaining Black rook to the
defense of f7, but the bishops show their stuff.

28…Bb3 29.c5

  (24) Now the bishop holds f7 and frees the rook for pile
driving duty.

29…Rd8 30.b5 d2

  (25) White loses material.

0-1

 

 

(30) Martin,R [B20]

  1997

1.e4 c5

  (1) Begins the fight for the dark squares, especially d4
2.Bc4

  (2) The only problem with this move is it allows Black to
play an early d5

  (knights before bishops).

  If I had played 1.

  e5 it would be okay.

2…e6 3.f4 Nc6 4.Nf3

  (3) Nc3 would strengthen his grip on d5 and prevent my
next move.

4…d5

 

 

-------------------
|R+-KQBNR|
|PP+-PPPP|
|-+N+-+-+|
|+-PP+B+-|
|-+-+pp-+|
|+-+p+n+-|
|ppp+-+pp|
|rnbkqb+r|
-------------------

 

  (4) Frees Black’s game and forces White to move the
bishop again.

5.exd5 exd5 6.Bb5 Bd7 7.0-0 Be7 8.Nc3 Nf6
9.d3

  (5) Maybe d4 would be better.

9…0-0 10.Bxc6

  (6) Three moves invested in the bishop and now he has
nothing to show for it.

10…Bxc6 11.Ne5 Rc8 12.b3

  (7) In view of a possible d4 this move is a waste of
time.

  The bishop should go to d2 not b2.

  The e3 square will become an outpost

  (a la Nimzowitsch) for four pieces! 12…Re8
13.Bb2 d4 14.Nxc6

  (8) Pretty much forced.

  White can’t leave the bishop on the open diagonal since
he has no way to oppose it.

14…Rxc6

 

 

-------------------
|-KR+Q+-R|
|PP+-+PBP|
|-+-+PNP+|
|+-P-p-+-|
|-+-+-p-+|
|+-n-+r+-|
|pppb-+pp|
|+k+rq-+-|
-------------------

 

  (9) The rook replaces the bishop and can swing to the
kingside if necessary.

  What replaced white’s knight and bishop? Nothing.

  White has nothing to show for the six moves invested in
those pieces.

15.Ne2

  (10) If instead Ne4 then Black still plays Nd5.

15…Nd5

  (11) Heading for e3 ever since 13 d4.

16.Bc1

  (12) Somehow White must try to hold e3.

  The early 3.

  f4 looks a bit silly now.

16…Bf6

  (13) To give e3 additional support from the Re8

  (overprotect) and prevent a possible c3 pawn break.

17.g3

  (14) Supports f4 but creates another open diagonal into
the king position.

  It’s difficult to find good moves for White now.

17…Ne3 18.Bxe3 Rxe3

  (15) Black replaces each piece traded with another.

  White on the other hand develops a piece then trades it
off.

19.Rb1

  (16) With the bishop of f6, White is afraid to leave the
rook on a1.

  White has no plan, he is simply reacting move by move to
Black’s threats.

  Black has been centering his play around the e3
square.

19…Rce6

  (17) Threatening the knight on e2, but actually
reinforcing his grip on e3.

  White’s position is rather sewn shut.

  Black must now focus on the weak kingside.

20.Rf2 Qe8 21.Kf1 Qc6

  (18) The real reason for Qe8.

  Black wants the h1-a8 diagonal that his bishop used to
own.

22.Kg1

  (19) White has given Black two free moves: Qe8 and
Qc6.

  The position is the same as on White’s 20.

  Rf2, except now Black’s queen has gone from d8 to c6!
22…h5

 

 

-------------------
|-K-+Q+R+|
|P-RN+P+P|
|-P-rP+P+|
|+-P-p-+-|
|p+-+-p-+|
|+-br+q+-|
|-pp+-+pp|
|+k+-+-+-|
-------------------

 

  (20) This pawn will probe the kingside.

23.Qd2 Rf3

  (21) To make e3 available to the other rook.

  If 24.

  RxR, then QxR with the rook going to e3 anyway.

24.f5 Ree3 25.Nf4 h4

  (22) White must prevent hxg.

  If 26.

  gxh, then Bxh4 with other problems, while h3 sets up
mating threats on g2 with the Black queen.

26.g4 Bg5

  (23) White must be extremely careful, the bishop attacks
the knight and threatens the White queen.

27.Ng2 h3 28.Ne1

  (24) If NxR, then dxe gets a free piece or the queen.

28…Rxe1+ 29.Qxe1 Be3

  (25) The fourth piece to use the e3 square.

30.Qxe3 dxe3 31.Re2 Rf2 0-1

 

 

(31) Martin,R [B20]

  1997

1.e4 c5 2.Bc4

  (1) Knights before bishops! At this point in the game
where is the best square for the bishop? It’s too early for the
bishop move here.

2…e6 3.Nf3 d5

  (2) Center pawn break, creates a pawn duo and forces the
bishop to move again.

4.exd5

  (2a) This gives Black the only center pawns.

4…exd5 5.Bb5+

  (3) What does check do for White? For Black it get
another piece in the game.

5…Bd7 6.a4

  (4) What does this do for his piece development?
6…Nf6 7.d3 Be7

 

 

-------------------
|R+-KQBNR|
|PPP-+PP-|
|-+N+P+-+|
|+-+-+-+P|
|-+-+ppB+|
|+-n-+-+-|
|pppbb+pp|
|r-+kq-nr|
-------------------

8.Bxd7+

  (5) White invested three moves in the bishop and now
removes it from the board and gets another Black piece in the
game.

8…Nbxd7

  (6) This also helps hold the White knight off e5.

9.h3

  (7) What does this move and a4 have in common? h3 weakens
the kingside pawn cover.

9…0-0 10.d4

  (8) White now has four pawn moves that do nothing to
further his development; d4 gives Black the e4 “outpost”.

10…Re8 11.0-0 Qc7 12.Qd3 Ne4 13.g3

  (9) After this, what protects h3? White’s kingside pawns
are very weak.

13…Ndf6 14.Bf4

  (10) e3 would have been a better squar at this point;
what is the bishop going to do here? 14…Bd6
15.Bxd6

  (11) Just like the king’s bishop, the queen’s bishop
suffers the same fate: two moves invested in the piece are now
gone.

15…Qxd6 16.Ne5 cxd4 17.f4

 

 

-------------------
|-KR+-+NR|
|+-+-+PP-|
|PP-+Q+-+|
|+-Pnp-+P|
|-+-Np+-+|
|+-n-q-+-|
|ppp+-+pp|
|+k+r+-+r|
-------------------

 

  (12) Now what is the fate of the knight? It was either
this or move the knight again.

17…Nh5

  (13) The Black knights begin to overwhelm the kingside
pawns.

18.Nd2 Nexg3

  (14) Black is basically finished.

19.Ndf3 Nxf4

  (15) The winning combinations begin to appear.

20.Nxf7 Re2

  (16) Does Black need his queen at this point?
0-1

 

(32) Martin,R [B21]

  1997

1.e4 c5 2.d4

  (1) White gambits a pawn.

  In exchange for material White will get open lines and a
lead in development.

2…cxd4

  (2) Black accepts the offered pawn.

  His strategy should be: a) rapid development and quick
castling, keep the extra pawn and go for an endgame advantage by
trading pieces, or b) develop his pieces, castle as soon as
possible and return the pawn to catch up in development.

3.c3

  (3) If Black declines this pawn White will have a center
pawn duo.

  By taking the pawn he aids White’s development.

3…dxc3 4.Nxc3 e6

 

 

-------------------
|rnbqkbnr|
|pp+p+ppp|
|-+-+p+-+|
|+-+-+-+-|
|-+-+P+-+|
|+-N-+-+-|
|PP-+-PPP|
|R-BQKBNR|
-------------------

 

  (4) Opens a diagonal for the bishop, but seriously
weakens d6.

  Better is d6.

5.Nf3 Nc6 6.Bc4

  (5) The most aggressive square for this bishop.

  The gambiteer must be aggressive.

6…a6

  (6) Prepares a later b5 to chase the bishop on c4, but
really prevents a knight excursion by: Nc3-Nb5-Nc7 along with a
White rook on c1.

7.0-0

  (7) White has an ideal position; he hs all the open
attacking lines.

  He needs to decide where to place the queen bishop and
queen.

  If Black allows an e5 push by White then d6 is
doomed.

7…Nge7

  (8) This does two things: allows the knight to go to g6
to hold back White’s coming e5, and might allow Black to get in d5
especially if the other knight can get to b4.

8.Bg5

  (9) Prevents Ng6 and d5.

  In order to chase the bishop Black must weaken a pawn
around the king.

  d6 is staring White is the face shouting “Use Me!!!” How
many pieces does Black have in play? How many moves is he from
castling? 8…b5

 

 

-------------------
|r+bqkb-r|
|+-+pnppp|
|p+n+p+-+|
|+p+-+-B-|
|-+B+P+-+|
|+-N-+N+-|
|PP-+-PPP|
|R-+Q+RK-|
-------------------

9.Bxb5

  (10) Is this really a threat? Examine the consequences in
your mind’s eye.

  Write down variations on paper to keep track of the
moves.

9…f6

  (11) Black saw the results of axBb5 and didn’t like the
knight on b5 after the recapture.

  Instead, he makes the weakening pawn move anticipated by
eighth move.

  At this point Black is too cramped, and White has too
many pieces in play for him to play timidly.

  White needs to open lines to the Black king even if he hs
to sacrifice additional material.

10.Bxc6 Nxc6

  (12) Better than dxB If dxB, then White could play:
12.

  Qe2 fxB, 13.

  Rfd1 Qc7?, 14.

  Nxg5 with a later Qf3, e5 and Nce4.

11.Bh4 Bc5

  (13) The wrong square for the bishop.

  Black needs to bolster his king position to ward off any
White attack.

  Better was Be7 which would prevent White’s next move.

12.e5

  (14) Vacates e4 for the knight, attacks f6 and puts
additional pressure on d6.

  White has several options: Ne4 with Rc1.

  A knight on e4 would also allow White to pressure f6.

  Notice that the e5 pawn is immune to capture because of
the pin on f6.

  g5 by Black would allow White’s queen in through the open
h5-e8 diagonal.

12…Be7

  (15) Too late for this now.

  Examine Black’s position if he had made this move instead
of Bc5 and White had pushed e5 anyway.

  Black could have responded with f5, forced a piece trade
and castled on his next move.

13.exf6

  (16) This forces the Black queen to a bad square and
brings another White piece into the vicinity of Black’s king.

13…Bxf6 14.Bxf6 Qxf6 15.Ne4

 

 

-------------------
|r+b+k+-r|
|+-+p+-pp|
|p+n+pq-+|
|+-+-+-+-|
|-+-+N+-+|
|+-+-+N+-|
|PP-+-PPP|
|R-+Q+RK-|
-------------------

 

  (17) The real point behind e5.

  With the Black king bishop gone, White can attack from
d6.

15…Qxb2

  (18) The last thing he should do is waste moves on white
pawns.

  Every pawn Black removes opens another possible attacking
option.

16.Nd6+ Ke7 17.Rb1

  (19) Rb1 gives White new ideas: Nb7 BxN, and RxB together
with the queen on d7.

17…Qa3 18.Nf5+

  (20) If Kf7, then Nd6+, NxB and Rb7; or Kd8, then Nxg7,
Nxe6+; or Kf8, then Rb6, Rxc6, and Qd8.

18…exf5 19.Re1+ Kf6 20.Rb3

  (21) This rook can go to g3, or d3 then d6.

20…Qxa2 21.Qd6+ Kf7 22.Ng5+ 1-0

Posted on by

[This review first appeared in Westward Ho!]

Book review: Attack with Mikhail Tal (179pp+index) Cadogan Press: London.

Mikhail Tal and Iakov Damsky. [[sterling]]11.99.
Mikhail Tal needs no introduction; the wizard who emerged in the late 1950s as a force to complement the science of Botvinnik. This is Mikhail Tal’s last word to the chess world, some of which was transcribed from tapes made within days of his death in 1994, and which he did not live to complete. Damsky tells us the planned title was Everything about attack, and rues the omission of a planned chapter on the Queen’s-side attack. The nine chapters completed are listed below.

Each chapter contains a number of examples, for instance, the chapter on the eighth rank contains 16 examples from games – some rather familiar (like Levitsky-Marshall) – with four test positions and an example complete game with the same back rank theme. I have another book – Test your Chess IQ by Livshits – which contains 32 such examples. What extra do you get from the Tal/Damsky book?

Livshits’ positions all have a concrete short-term solution (say, White to play and win in 5 moves), whereas the examples in this book are nearly all of the sort that Spielmann calls ‘real’ sacrifices – being genuinely unclear or at least requiring more judgement than calculation. The first example does resolve inside 7 moves, but the second only clears up only after 17 moves. This sort of thing is real chess drama, and is great fun to watch in action. Tal and Damsky also give some chatty annotation which is mostly illuminating and engaging. Lastly, the themes are strategic more than tactical – the back rank chapter is the only one with an explicitly tactical theme. But all the common sacrificial motifs are present:

Chapter typical sacrifices
1. The Main Indicator – the King in the Centre : Ng5xf7, Ng5 or Bc4xe6
2. Breakthrough in the centre: breaks e5 and d5
3. The assault ratio (ie. development advantage): “launching” in e.g. Nf3-g5 Ng3-h5
4. Invasion trajectories (ie. lines of approach): diagonals a1-h8 and b1-h7/a2-f7
5. Lines of communication (ie. interference): obstructive sacrifice e5-e6
6. Outposts: e.g. N on e5
7. Eliminating defenders: Rd1xNd7
8. At the Royal Court (ie. 7th and 8th ranks):
9. Destroying the Fortress walls: Be3xh6, Bc3xg7, Bd3xh7+

Let me say immediately: the book is warm and witty, and the examples are hugely enjoyable. So, if the material and ideas listed above are unfamiliar to you, then I’d grab it. Criticisms? It’s churlish to carp about such an enjoyable book, and since Tal’s death, a moving one, but I’ll mention one or two.

It was never going to be everything about attack. It is missing the concrete examples (for which see Livshits), and also the rather slow attacks with a closed centre that need not require a sacrificial outburst. It also lacks any reference to the various ‘natural histories’ of attack that have gone before (for example, the works of Vukovic), and so the examples may be hard to integrate in your mind. But alongside these works, AWMT has a place as a modern handbook of examples.

These are perhaps things that the authors would freely concede, because they never claimed more for their book. But they did say their “aim… of suggesting: where and on which paths in the dense forest of variations are concealed those …indicators … that will allow you … to switch … to an attack“. This is an enticing prospect: to accompany these master physicians in their diagnoses. How far is this aim realised? My view is that the book fails here. I got an early impression that these indicators include, firstly, a lead in development, and secondly, open lines or the capacity to open them, but after this, it is all rather post hoc. We meet often comments like:

“it turns out that now this is possible” (p.12)

“The correct evaluation of the position is only established by the typical attacking device carried out by the ex-world champion” (p.19)

So, although the examples are rich, the explanations are not very crisp. Tal says at one point (p.8) “we are talking here rather abstractly, rather in the spirit of Mikhail Moiseyevich” (Botvinnik), and while this book is full of Tal’s charm, it lacks Botvinnik’s science.

Lastly, the test positions I often found at once too hard and too easy. Let me give you an example:

t+-+jL-T
Xx+s+xX-
-DxXx+-X
+-+-P-N-
-+-P-P-+
+-P-+-+-
p+p+q+pP
R-B-+rK-

This is the first test position from the first chapter. It may take you half a second to spot the only sacrificial idea, namely Nxf7, it may take you forever to judge it properly. The game is actually
from Tal-Simagin (given below), and clearly his Grandmaster opponent misjudged the sacrifice. I don’t know if he missed Tal’s fifteenth move, but the game was not decided until move 45.

  Almost all the examples are, like this one, successful examples – a sacrificial opportunity arises and is discovered to be sound. Only by comparing cases where sacrifices succeed and where they fail will we start to develop the judgement, and start to identify the indicators, for ourselves.

  The whole game shows at once the strength an weaknesses of the book: a wonderfully dramatic attack, but could the reader emulate it?

  Tal – Simagin 1956: 1. e4 c6 2. d4 d6 3. Nc3 Nf6 4. f4 Qb6 5. Nf3 Bg4 6. Be2 Nbd7 7. e5 Nd5 8. O-O Nxc3 9. bxc3 e6 10. Ng5 Bxe2 11. Qxe2 h6 (DIAGRAM) 12. Nxf7 Kxf7 13. f5 dxe5 14. fxe6+ Kxe6
15. Rb1 (This cheeky move regains some material)15… Qxb1 16. Qc4+ Kd6 17. Ba3+ Kc7 18. Rxb1 Bxa3 19. Qb3 Be7 20. Qxb7+ Kd6 21. dxe5+ Nxe5 22. Rd1+ Ke6 23. Qb3+ Kf5 24. Rf1+ Ke4 25. Re1+ Kf5 26. g4+
Kf6 27. Rf1+ (White’s harrassment picks up a piece. Now Black must mobilise his rooks before White picks up all the pawns; sadly, he’s too late.) 27… Kg6 28. Qe6+ Kh7 29. Qxe5 Rhe8 30. Rf7 Bf8 31.
Qf5+ Kg8 32. Kf2 Bc5+ 33. Kg3 Re3+ 34. Kh4 Rae8 35. Rxg7+ Kxg7 36. Qxc5 R8e6 37. Qxa7+ Kg6 38. Qa8 Kf6 39. a4 Ke5 40. a5 Kd5 41. Qd8+ Ke4 42. a6 Kf3 43. a7 Re2 44. Qd3+ R6e3 45. Qxe3+ 1-0 Superb: Tal
kept the pot boiling throughout.