Category Archives: Thinking

Going back in time

Posted on by

This page happened
because I wanted a place to store these positions,
but my
well-behaved chess databases refuse to do things like
accept a
position without a King (see below).

For example, I have had trouble entering this one on a database:

---N--R-
pp---p--
---K--p-
--------
--p-----
---pp--p
---P-pB-
-Q----BR

Mate in ONE (Fischer [not that one]).

[HINT] [SOLUTION]

Proof games

rnbqkb-r
ppp-pppp
--------
---p----
--------
--------
PPPPPPPP
RNBQKB-R

What is the shortest series of legal moves leading to this position?

[HINT] [SOLUTION]

Retrograde puzzles

http://www.janko.at/Retros/

B-KRN---
PP------
--QK-R--
--------
--------
--------
--------
--------

Colour the pieces. What was the last move?
(Husserl, 66/71)

[HINT] [SOLUTION]

Logic puzzles

--------
--------
--------
-r-b----
B-------
--------
--------
---k----

Where is the White King?
Raymond Smullyan 1957

[HINT] [SOLUTION]

That’s an old puzzle of his, but it’s reproduced in The Chess
Mysteries of the Arabian Knights (sic) as well as many
anthologies. To pack so much into such a small space is art.

r-b-k--r
p-p-p-p-
-p---p-p
--------
--------
P-------
-PPPPPPP
--BQKB--

Black to move. Can Black castle short here? (1…O-O)
Raymond Smullyan 1957

[HINT] [SOLUTION]

k-K-----
----Q---
--------
--B-P---
---P----
-------P
--------
-------B

Checkmate! But which square is a1 and which h8?
Raymond Smullyan 1957

[HINT] [SOLUTION]

The Chess Mysteries of Sherlock Holmes

The solutions to Smullyan’s most fiendish problems run to many pages.

If you like these, you might also like his book of logic puzzles,

What is the name of this book? But this is hard to ask for in
a shop…

__________________________________________________________

[HINT]

If you find it difficult to solve looking at the diagram,
try setting up the position on a board.

[HINT]

It’s natural to assume that a piece that appears to be on its
original square is indeed on its original square.

[HINT]

Only one King can be in check, and whichever is the Black King is at the
moment in double check. And double checks have to be discoveries…

[HINT]

White’s last move must have been with the King, and White’s King must
have been the victim and the deliverer of a discovered check

[HINT]

What was White’s last move?
And before that?
So what were Black’s possible last moves?

[HINT]

White’s last move seems obvious, but what was Black’s last move?

__________________________________________________________

[SOLUTION]

Seriously, set it up on a board.

[SOLUTION]

1.Nf3 Nf6 2.Ne5 d5 3.Nc6 Nd7 4.Nxb8 Nxb8

[SOLUTION]

Double checks have to be discoveries, and you can’t discover a contact
check from a Queen, so it seems that:
the Q on c6 is White,
and the wK is on d6,
so the N on e8 is White,
and the R on d8 is White,
the bK is on c8, and
so the discovery is 1.c7xd8/R check
and the Pb7 is Black,
so the Ba8 is White (by promotion a7-a8/B)
and the Pa7 is also White.

[SOLUTION]

With wPc2 and bPb4, the last moves must have been
1…Bd5+
2. c2-c4 b4xc3 en passant
3.Kxc3+

[SOLUTION]

Suppose Black can castle.
That means, Black’s last move was with a Bishop or a Pawn.
White’s last move was a2-a3, but what about the one before that?
Whatever piece White moved then, it was captured by Black on Black’s last move.
Black could not have made their last move by capturing with a Pawn
because there is no square that this Pawn could have come from.
Black could not have made their last move by capturing with the Bishop,
because the only piece that could be on c8 is a Knight, and where could
it have come from? Only d6, and that must have meant that Black’s King
stood still while the Knight checked it from d6. That’s not possible.
So Black didn’t make their last move with a Pawn or Bishop.
So Black did make their last move with a King or a Rook.
Not the Ra8, as the Knight could not have reached a8 from b6 or c7.
So Black made their last move with a King or Rh8. (e.g. 1.Nd6-e8 Kd8xe8 or 1.Ng6-h8 Rg8xh8)
So Black cannot castle king’s-side now (yet maybe it’s legal to castle long later).

[SOLUTION]

Assuming the lower left hand corner is a1, e4-e5 discovered check and mate seems like a solution.
But Black has no legal last move with the King.
So Black must have last moved a different piece.
Which White must have captured last move.
But the “e5” pawn would have come from “f4”, so…
The “h1” Bishop must be (a) newly promoted, and (b) the capturing piece.
So Black’s last move was e.g. …R”h1″ (actually …Ra8)
And White’s last move was Pb7xa8/B#
So the lower left hand corner is h8.

Fix this first

Posted on by

From Dalton Perrine: https://chesschatter.substack.com/p/common-chess-mistakes-by-rating

Training PriorityUnder 15001500 to 18001800 to 20002000+
Fix firstBlunder checkingBlunder checking;
time management		Prophylaxis;
calculation depth		Consistency;
the mental game
High payoffShallow calculation;
king safety		Wrong-moment trades;
passive defending		Endgame technique;
emotional control		Endgame precision;
calculation depth
Matters, slowerPassive defendingPawn breaks;
prophylaxis;
calculation		Misjudging positions;
pawn breaks		Fine-tuning prophylaxis
Mostly fixes itselfWeak pawns;
piece placement		Piece placement;
targeting weaknesses		Wrong-moment trades;
time management		Positional polish
Low payoff to train nowEndgame theory;
positional study		Deep opening theoryBlunder checking;
king safety		Basic safety,
already solved

Towards conscious competence

Posted on by
  • UNCONSCIOUS INCOMPETENCE
    • You don’t do a blunder check (or some other part of the process)
  • CONSCIOUS INCOMPETENCE
    • You do a blunder check but it’s slow and you still miss stuff
  • CONSCIOUS COMPETENCE
    • You do a blunder check and do it well
  • UNCONSCIOUS COMPETENCE
    • You do a blunder check out of habit and it (usually) works

The Art of Analysis – part 2

Posted on by

You aren’t allowed to read on until you have had a go at
analysing the games yourself!

Click […] for list of games

Blumenfeld’s rule

Posted on by

Just done a quick whizz through the site to patch up all mentions of Blumenfeld’s advice (which was passed on by Kotov and Webb in their best known books).  The advice is:

Blumenfeld’s rule:

“It often happens that a player carries out a deep and complicated calculation, but fails to spot something elementary right at the first move. In order to avoid such gross blunders, the Soviet master B. Blumenfeld made this recommendation:-
When you have finished your calculations, write down the move you have decided upon on the score sheet. Then examine the position for a short time ‘through the eyes of a patzer’. Ask whether you have left a mate in one on, or left a piece or a pawn to be taken. Only when you have convinced yourself that there is no immediate catastrophe for you should you make the planned move.“

— KOTOV
However, in the last FIDE revision of the rules, this practice is now considered note-taking, and is forbidden.  I don’t know how many players are complaining about it, nor how many controllers coming down on it (after all, this is a habit of some years’ standing for many players)… but it is illegal.  So what can we do instead?
Well, the idea is, to take a fresh look.  As long as you can make that last-minute check without the aid of props, you should do so.  Ways of producing a physical prompt or routine that don’t require pen and paper include:

  • shut your eyes for a second or two
  • walk around your chair
  • look at the board next to you then look back
  • go and stand behind your opponent and see how it looks from their side
  • slap yourself firmly (it works for TVs, right?)
  • visit your private toilet facility

I wish everyone a happy and blunder-free New Year, although yesterday I managed to get the order of moves reversed, with dire consequences… Physician, heal thyself!

P.S.

Contemporaneous comments from DrDave:

“You’ve all seen people do this. I’ve also seen people do it badly. The idea is to snap yourself out of the trance of analysis and take a fresh look. there are two basic ways of mishandling the method:

  I have seen players write down a losing move while nodding and smirking, look over the board again still nodding, and then play the move. Useless – just going through the motions. I guess they were just revising their latest thoughts on the position. You must jump! snap! start! your thinking again, to see if you have overlooked anything at the start of your thinking. You are not checking conclusions – you are checking assumptions. [If they had genuinely re-started their thinking there would have been a change in body language – not a smooth progression from choosing to writing to blundering, nodding all the while.]

 The second useless way of implementing Blumenfeld’s rule is to carry on thinking about the position. You see players with two, three, maybe four moves written down and crossed out over the course of fifteen minutes. This is hopeless indecision. You write the move down once you have decided on it. You then check it in case it is a blunder – not to see if you prefer another move. If there is nothing obvious tactically wrong with it, you must play it or you will run out of time. If you use the time to think about other moves you are not only wasting time, you are not even safeguarding yourself against blunders!”

The Art of Analysis, Part 1

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.

Click […] for list of games

Our analysis: https://devonjuniorchess.co.uk/wp/drdaveexeter/2026/09/21/the-art-of-analysis-part-2-2/

“To take is a mistake”

Posted on by

I’ve heard this a lot recently — is it true?
(SPOILER: often but not always)

Clarity and anxiety in junior chess

I see this played quite a lot in the Scotch Game at the junior club:

White’s Queen occupies a fine central square and cannot be bothered by
Black’s minor pieces.

Why do juniors swap so readily? I think the tension gets to them. They
have learned that an unresolved tension (Nd4-Nc6) might be overlooked
later on (Qf3?? Nxd4 or Nc3 d6; Bc4 b6??; Nxc6+ or Bc5 Be3 Nge7?? Nxc6).
But swapping can also be a mistake. I think 4…Nxd4? just gives White
better chances, but I also think 3…exd4 is more or less forced. So,
how do you judge when to keep, and when to release, the tension? When
do you seek to swap, and when to hold steady?

The ability to create and to control the tension of battle is perhaps
the principal attainment of the great player. — Savielly Tartakower

To take is a mistake – definitely!

Opposed Rooks

Swapping a developed piece

Remember the start of the Opera Box Game?

Assessing exchanges

Some related examples from recent junior matches:




Don’t simplify against Capablanca!,

… I keep telling them at the office. (CHERNEV)

If Black hopes to swap their way to a draw in the Ruy Lopez exchange variation, they are mistaken! Every swap brings White closer to a won Pawn endgame.

Capa was master of the advantageous exchange, allowing the opponent to
weaken their position with every tempting swap.

To take is a mistake – well, sometimes!

Exchanging to victory:




Another tense formation (NID):

Many top-level opening choices have some sort of unresolved tension like
this. In fact, following Carlsen, the aim of the opening may not be a
fruitless search for an advantage as White or equality as Black, but
a position which gives you chances to outplay your opponent.

The whole concept has changed! Now the main concept is “to get a

layable position and maintain the tension”. – Sergey Karjakin

‘Release and strike’

Compare, exhibit A, getting into trouble in the Slav:

And Exhibit B, a modern main line:

Similarly:


And lastly:


Compare this
equalising line in the Queen’s Gambit Declined, Orthodox Variation:

You see exchanges used brilliantly in so many of Capablanca’s games,
either to consolidate a plus or to step aside neatly out of pressure.
It’s easy to appreciate, hard to do!

Never make a good move too soon – James Mason

The threat is stronger than its execution. Nimzowitsch

Sometimes the hardest thing to do in a pressure situation is to allow
the tension to persist. The temptation is to make a decision, any
decision, even if it is an inferior choice. — Garry Kasparov

A swap is rarely neutral – it will favour one side or the other.
So make sure it’s you! — Me

Coaching Zone at East Devon Congress 2026

Posted on by

Thanks to all those who attended, shared games, contributed comments and heckled; I hope you got something out of taking part.

LINK to Lichess study for Saturday game analysis: https://lichess.org/study/6WyVNXpv/

LINK to Lichess study for Sunday game analysis: https://lichess.org/study/QIirDybT

Short talks

Not all the talks actually happened but here are the intended slides; the slides were designed to support a talk and not to stand alone.

AnalyseYourGamesDownload
BoardsightVisualisationDownload
Blunder-proofingDownload
CandidateMovesDownload
ElementsEvaluationDownload
EndgamesTipsResourcesDownload
MistakesMinorDownload
MistakesMajorDownload
PlanningDownload
OpeningsQ&ADownload
UsingComputersDownload

Best puzzle books (training day)

Posted on by

While we were talking to the U14/U18 squads, the ChessDojo folks were discussing the best puzzle books for improvement.  Their recommendations are:

The Dojo List!
1. Perfect Your Chess, Grabinsky/Volokitin https://amzn.to/43gqYI6
2. 5334 Problems, L Polgar https://amzn.to/43HyJH4
3. Think like a Super-GM, Adams/Hertado https://amzn.to/3qkFzDP
4. Mastering Chess Strategy Hellsten https://amzn.to/43jk9ph
5. Combinative Motifs, Blokh https://amzn.to/3WPbLLB
6. Winning Exercises for Kids, Coakley https://amzn.to/3OPFwu1
7. Encyclopedia of Chess Endings, Kalinichenko https://amzn.to/45GOHTn
8. Practical Chess Exercises, Cheng https://amzn.to/3MRydiP
9. Domination, Kasparyan https://amzn.to/3CdlT7D
10. Positional Play, Aagaard https://amzn.to/3WK9XUl

Ben’s List
1. Winning Exercises for Kids, Coakley https://amzn.to/3OPFwu1
2. Practical Chess Exercises, Cheng https://amzn.to/3MRydiP
3. 5334 Problems, L Polgar https://amzn.to/43HyJH4
4. Think like a Super-GM, Adams/Hertado https://amzn.to/3qkFzDP
5. Chess Tactics from Scratch, Weteschnik https://amzn.to/43mHMNN
6. Perfect Your Chess, Grabinsky/Volokitin https://amzn.to/43gqYI6
7. Forcing Chess Moves, Hertan https://amzn.to/3MGvjNK
8. Mastering Chess Strategy Hellsten https://amzn.to/43jk9ph
9. Chess Steps, Brunia https://amzn.to/43HZkU3
10. 300 Chess Positions, Alburt https://amzn.to/3WMZmrC

Kraai’s List
1. Encyclopedia of Chess Endings, Kalinichenko https://amzn.to/45GOHTn
2. 5334 Problems, L Polgar https://amzn.to/43HyJH4
3. Perfect Your Chess, Grabinsky/Volokitin https://amzn.to/43gqYI6
4. The Best Move, Jansa/Hort https://amzn.to/3ITUQSo
5. Think like a Super-GM, Adams/Hertado https://amzn.to/3qkFzDP
6. Endgame Tactics, Van Perlo https://amzn.to/3WQ3XJu
7. Domination, Kasparyan https://amzn.to/3CdlT7D
8. Encyclopedia of Chess Combinations https://amzn.to/42gvh4Y
9. Positional Play, Aagaard https://amzn.to/3WK9XUl
10. Calculation, Aagaard https://amzn.to/3oCCtuB

Kostya’s List
1. Combinative Motifs, Blokh https://amzn.to/3WPbLLB
2. Perfect Your Chess, Grabinsky/Volokitin https://amzn.to/43gqYI6
3. Mastering Chess Strategy, Hellsten https://amzn.to/43jk9ph
4. Woodpecker Method, Smith/Tikkanen https://amzn.to/45IzelS
5. Recognizing Your Opponent’s Resources, Dvoretsky https://amzn.to/3Ccbjxw
6. Manual of Chess Combinations, Ivaschenko https://amzn.to/3NaEcR2
7. Imagination in Chess, Gaprindashvili https://amzn.to/3C7z0ai
8. Positional Play, Aagaard https://amzn.to/3WK9XUl
9. Domination, Kasparyan https://amzn.to/3CdlT7D
10. 5334 Problems, L Polgar https://amzn.to/43HyJH4

Watch or listen to the discussion: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3sTixjqhmB0

It’s happened… Nullius in vebsites

Posted on by

I was updating my series on the world Champions, following Ding Liren’s accession to the throne, and did a bit of digging around the Internet, as I’m a little out of touch these days.

I came across what looked like a helpful summary on a website which gave a not-very-interesting career summary and cited a few games.

To my shame, I didn’t recognise any of the games at all.

But penny dropped: two of the three the games do not, I believe, exist as described.

And I further believe, the reason these bogus games were cited with such colourful and plausible commentary is because the whole page was cobbled together by a chat AI bot.

Just to check:

Immortal Games: 3 Most Famous Games by Ding Liren Ding Liren has played countless memorable games throughout his career, showcasing his exceptional talent and unique style. Here are three of his most famous games that have left a lasting impression on the chess world: 1. Ding Liren vs. Wesley So (2015 Tata Steel Masters): This game is a prime example of Liren’s superb endgame skills. In a seemingly equal position, Liren managed to outplay his highly-rated opponent, Wesley So, by expertly maneuvering his pieces and exploiting small inaccuracies. The game ended in a beautiful checkmate, demonstrating Liren’s ability to create winning chances even in seemingly drawn positions.

Closest game I could find is nothing like that:

https://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1782804

Next:

1. Ding Liren vs. Levon Aronian (2017 FIDE World Cup): In this highly-anticipated game, Liren faced off against the experienced and talented Levon Aronian. Liren displayed his strategic prowess by obtaining a slight advantage in a complex middlegame, which he then converted into a winning endgame. This victory not only secured Liren’s place in the World Cup semifinals but also further cemented his reputation as a top-tier player.

Chessgames tell me instead:

On way to the final, Levon Aronian knocked out Daniel J Cawdery in Round 1, Yifan Hou in Round 2, Maxim Matlakov in Round 3, Daniil Dubov in Round 4, Vassily Ivanchuk in the quarterfinal and Maxime Vachier-Lagrave in the semifinal. Ding Liren beat Mohamed Amine Haddouche in Round 1, Martyn Kravtsiv in Round 2, Vidit Santosh Gujrathi in Round 3, Wang Hao in Round 4, Richard Rapport in the quarterfinal, and Wesley So in the semifinal. The final match started on 23 September. After 2-2 in the Classical games, Aronian won both Rapid games. Aronian and Ding Liren both qualified for the World Championship Candidates (2018) tournament.

               Elo   1 2 3 4  1 2
Levon Aronian  2799  ½ ½ ½ ½  1 1  4
Ding Liren     2777  ½ ½ ½ ½  0 0  2

Nearest I could get:

https://www.chessgames.com/perl/chess.pl?tid=97026

Lastly:

2. Ding Liren vs. Magnus Carlsen (2019 Sinquefield Cup): In this thrilling encounter, Liren took on the reigning World Champion, Magnus Carlsen. Despite playing with the black pieces, Liren managed to create an imbalanced position that put Carlsen under significant pressure. Although the game ultimately ended in a draw, it showcased Liren’s ability to hold his own against the world’s best and further highlighted his immense talent.

The two players did at least meet in this tournament, and the result was indeed a draw. However, at no time did White appear under significant pressure (see attached PDF),unless it was to show an advantage.

“Fact-checked by Marc Cressen”, my bottom.

P.S. Is ‘imbalanced’ really a word? There is nothing wrong with ‘unbalanced’.

https://www.chessgames.com/perl/chess.pl?tid=97026&pid=52629 https://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1971755

I fear this is going to happen more and more often, at least for a while.

Exhibit B: https://devonjuniorchess.co.uk/content/advice-chatgpt

Exhibit C: [hmm can’t find it, but bogus papers cited by referee’s report to paper submitted to science journal]