Category Archives: Strategy

What are the odds?

Posted on by

We discussed odds-giving last Friday – that is, starting without one or more of your pieces.

I mentioned one of my favourite Lasker stories, where he teased a player who didn’t know hime, which I quote from Chernev (1948):

Lasker `I think the odds of a Knight is an advantage to the odds-giver. You can get your Queen Rook into play quickly, and work up a strong attack. Let me try to give you a Knight odds.’ Lasker’s adversary assured him that at Knight odds, he (Lasker) would not have a chance. They tried a game though, and Lasker won. `You see,’ said
Lasker, `that proves my statement. Now give me a Knight.’ They played again, and Lasker lost. Now Lasker gave the odds-and won. After a few more games where they alternated in giving up a Knight, with the result that the side without a knight always won, Lasker’s opponent, bewildered by the `proof,’ got up and said, `I guess you’re right after all. It does seem to be an advantage to give a Knight!'”

And here is a startling odds game: Potter starts without a Queen, plays six moves, then announces mate in eight! That is, his combination was longer than the game.

Middlegame gym

Posted on by

“Failing to plan, is like planning to fail.” ― Stephen McCranie

Test positions in PDF with comments about planning in general

Remember, this is more a guide of how to play positions where you have no idea what to do to start with; if you understand the opening systems you play better and better, that shouldn’t happen so often!

Suggested solutions

What are we going to do now?

Posted on by


The whole games follow:



Making it up as you go along

Posted on by

“I thought I would try something different.”

This doesn’t usually go well! Here are two examples:


After 1.e4, I expect Tomas has a fair idea about what to do and what
sort of position he is aiming for. After 1.d4, is that really still
true? It is definitely still true for Tomas’ opponent, who I expect
plays those first few moves in every game. Black didn’t really have to
think until move 7, when White was already losing at least a pawn.

The moves White played weren’t daft, but he didn’t seem to know what he
was doing or what the usual tricks are in those sorts of positions. The game
was a fairly easy win for Black and White didn’t really have any chances
at all to draw, let alone win.

Same thing in James’ game last time. I know I have given James a book
which says, play 1…e6 and 2…d5. James chose something else, not
anything daft, because he’s not daft, but he didn’t know what to do. He
ended up failing in all three of the very basic opening goals: get your
pieces out, get at least a stake in the centre, and get castled.

The Benoni is actually a reasonable defence to 1.d4, but Black didn’t
know that, and didn’t know what the right plans are in those sorts of
positions. And by the look of it, White had seen it all before, and knew
exactly what to do about it: put all the pieces in the middle and blast
through with e4-e5.

So, no more of this, please! Pick an opening, learn it, and stick to
it!

When you sit down to play, you really must have four systems in your head:
1. what to play as White as your main opening system
2. what to do if Black dodges
3. what to play as Black against 1.e4
4. what to play as Black against 1.d4

I think I’ve given you all a booklet with enough to get started on all
four systems (different systems for each of you). Please read! I’d
hate for it to feel like homework, but I also hate watching you suffer
in the opening against experienced players.

Now, you may always find an opponent who knows more about the opening
than you do. That doesn’t mean the best thing to do about it is to play
something different than usual, which you don’t know anything about!
This is especially true if you are playing an experienced player. They
may have been playing chess long enough to have played, or played
against, almost every opening there is, and will know much more about
what to do.

What you have to do is be an expert in your opening, so that even if you
do get a surprise, you have an idea about what sorts of things there are
to do for your side.

If you want to try something different:
1. Pick something different from a list of known systems
2. Read a bit about it
3. Try it out in friendly games first to get the hang of it
4. Then you can spring it on an opponent in a match!

When and where to attack

Posted on by

Steinitz became World Champion (more or less) in 1866 by beating Adolf Anderssen in a bloodthirsty match (+8 -6 =0).  His style was very much in the tradition of the Italian school, playing for attack from the word go.  He was awarded the brilliancy prize for this Rook sacrifice:

  • Romantic Steinitz (up to and including 1872) (304)
    • Steinitz W. – Mongredien A. [B01]

His play in the of 1872 was still in this style, but his play in the tournament of 1873 was in marked contrast, playing for small positional advantages in the opening and early middlegame, and converting to a win only later.  Converting to a win might still be a brilliant attack, but it was more likely to be scooping up a few pawns.

  • Scientific Steinitz (after 1973)
    • Steinitz – Fleissig [C00]

    (305)

Steinitz was World Champion for 20 years — because, he said, he was 20 years ahead of his time!  His theories diffused into the chess world through lots of little pieces in newspapers and magazines, as never produced a book or a summary of his theory during his life (he died before he completed The Modern Chess Instructor). Lasker undertook to explain Steinitz to the world after he died, and Tarrasch also wrote a lot about Steinitz’ theories.

  • Scientific Steinitz didn’t forget how to attack! (307)
    • Steinitz – tchigorin [C65]
Steinitz’ elements (after Lasker) Steinitz’ rules of attack
Permanent advantages

1. Material advantage
2. Bad king position
3. Passed pawns in the middlegame
4. Weak pawns for the opponent
5. Strong and weak squares
6. Pawn islands
7. Strong pawn centre
8. Control of a diagonal
9. Control of a file
10. Bishop pair
11. Control of a rank

Temporary advantages

12. Bad piece position
13. Inharmoniously placed pieces
14. Advantage in development
15. Concentration of pieces in the centre (centralization)
16. Space advantage

 ”

  1. At the beginning of the game the forces stand in equilibrium.
  2. Correct play on both sides maintains this equilibrium and leads to a drawn game.
  3. Therefore a player can win only as a consequence of an error made by the opponent. (There is no such thing as a winning move.)
  4. As long as the equilibrium is maintained, an attack, however skilful, cannot succeed against correct defence. Such a defence will eventually necessitate the withdrawal and regrouping of the attacking pieces and the attacker will then inevitably suffer disadvantage.
  5. Therefore a player should not attack until he already has an advantage, caused by the opponent’s error, that justifies the decision to attack.
  6. At the beginning of the game a player should not at once seek to attack. Instead, a player should seek to disturb the equilibrium in his favour by inducing the opponent to make an error – a preliminary before attacking.
  7. When a sufficient advantage has been obtained, a player must attack or the advantage will be dissipated.”

From David HOOPER, Steinitz’ Theory, British Chess Magazine Vol. 104, p.370, Sept 1984.

Now, where to attack may be obvious, but just in case not: you attack where you are strongest or where your opponent is weakest.

Here’s a quick example:

 Marshall = Kline

weak pawns: creating holes
1913

1. d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 Nf6 4. Bg5 Be7 5. Nf3 Nbd7 6. e3 O-O 7. Rc1 b6 8. cxd5 exd5 9. Qa4 Bb7 10. Ba6 Bxa6 11. Qxa6 c6 12. O-O Ne4 13. Bxe7 Qxe7

 

    • w – – 0 13 If we compare pieces and pawns, the inequalities are:

 

White’s plus points Black’s plus points
  • White’s Queen’s Rook on c1 is more active than Black’s Queen’s Rook on a8.
  • White’s Queen on a6 is more active than Black’s Queen on e7
  • Black has a weak pawn on c6 — in fact, Black has a few weak light squares around on the Queen’s-side.
  • Black’s Knight on e4 is more active than White’s Knight on e4

 

    • This all suggests that White can, should and even must attack on the Queen’s-side.

 

      • (306)
        • Marshall – Kline [D63]

      • The continuation is also a good example of Lasker’s famous maxim:

 

“No combination without a considerable plus, no considerable plus without a combination […]”
“In the beginning of the game ignore the search for combinations, abstain from violent moves, aim for small advantages, accumulate them, and only after having attained these ends search for the combination – and then with all the power and will of intellect, because the combination must exist, however deeply hidden.”
LASKER

On manoeuvres

Posted on by

The Art Of Winning Slowly

  I’m still working on this one myself, but by the time
I’ve read this, my word, I’ll know a thing or two.

  You know how to win endings – namely, slowly. This is an
ending where you have the advantage – but not yet won, and so if
you play your big guns first things may fizzle out. Instead,
nothing too hasty, do all your preparation first, try a little play
here, a little there, before trying to force the issue. Capablanca
was the supreme craftsman with this sort of game, and is our first
example, and there is another couple from Nimzo.

But if you have got the hang of that, you can try
the same approach to the middlegame – that is, middlegames which
are advantageous but not won. The key features for a position
suitable for manoeuvre are:

  • an advantage in space, and therefore,
    mobility
  • play on both sides of the board (or at least chances of
    a breakthrough)
  • no clear winning plan for you on either side of the
    board

The way to manoeuvre is:

  • keep control of the game, and keep the initiative –
    that is, keep the opponent passive and defensive, where all they
    can do is react to, or try to anticipate, your
    threats
  • try different attacking ideas in sequence, probably
    switching from side to side, or at least trying several different
    ways of besieging the same front
  • play with patience and don’t miss opportunities to
    tempt small weaknesses in your opponent’s game.

After that, the play may be more or less forcing and tense
depending on the position. Below several games are given, in
increasing order of tension, from Alekhin to Lasker. Lastly two
examples are given where Black is in difficulty although the game
is objectively equal, but in each case White demands that the
opponent steer safely to port. Fischer just makes it against
Petrosian, Cohn doesn’t. These last two games also put the
question: is manoeuvring done with an end in mind (if not in
sight), or is it just woodpushing? There is a saying attributed to
Tartakower, that tactics is what you do when there is somethinhg to
do, strategy is what you do when there is nothing to do. Perhaps
manoeuvring is what you do when there is no strategy to do! It is
the key to winning games when all you have is a space advantage and
your opponent is solid. Capa gives a textbook example of this
against Treybal.

  Lastly, I include a club game played with manoeuvre.

See also the material on Space in the Canon.

Examples from master
play

Manoeuvring in the
endgame

Manoeuvre: a classic endgame
setting

Capablanca,Jose – Kupchik,
Abraham [Havana ] (07) [C49] 1913

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Nc3 Nf6 4. Bb5 Bb4 5. O-O O-O 6.
Bxc6 bxc6 7. Nxe5 Qe8

 

t+l+dTj+
X-Xx+xXx
-+x+-S-+
+-+-N-+-
-L-+p+-+
+-N-+-+-
pPpP-PpP
R-Bq+rK-

8. Nd3 Bxc3 9. dxc3 Qxe4

[9… Nxe4 10. Re1]

10. Re1 Qh4 11. Qf3 Ba6 12. Bf4 Rac8 13.
Be5 (idea /\ Nc5) 13… Bxd3 14. cxd3 Qg4 15. Bxf6
Qxf3 16. gxf3 gxf6

 

-+t+-Tj+
X-Xx+x+x
-+x+-X-+
+-+-+-+-
-+-+-+-+
+-Pp+p+-
pP-+-P-P
R-+-R-K-

Assessment: +/-

  better Pawns, fewer Pawn islands, more active pieces.

  The weakest spot in the Black position is the isolated
a-Pawn, and it is here that an attack should be directed.

17. Re4

  First, Capablanca mobilises and centralises his pieces.
There is not usually any sense of rush when Capa plays an
ending.

17… Rfe8 18. Rae1 Re6 19. R1e3 Rce8 20. Kf1 Kf8
21. Ke2 Ke7

 

-+-+t+-+
X-XxJx+x
-+x+tX-+
+-+-+-+-
-+-+r+-+
+-PpRp+-
pP-+kP-P
+-+-+-+-

Now, White can attack the a-pawn.

22. Ra4 Ra8 23. Ra5

  restrains the Pawns

23… d5!?

  I can sympathise with the bid for space but this is not
forced and has the disadvantage of leaving the c-Pawns without
support.

24. c4! Kd6

[24… dxc4 leaves all Black’s Pawns isolated and
most of them doubled!]

[24… d4 25. Re4 Kd6 26. b4 Re5 27. Ra6 ‘hopeless’,
said Capa]

25. c5+ Kd7 26. d4

  Black’s pawns have become fixed, cutting off access to
the Queen’s-side. 26… f5

  Hoping to nip out to h6 with some play.

27. Rxe6! fxe6 28. f4 Kc8 29. Kd2
Kb7?!

 

t+-+-+-+
XjX-+-+x
-+x+x+-+
R-Px+x+-
-+-P-P-+
+-+-+-+-
pP-K-P-P
+-+-+-+-

Black has achieved a solid defence of the a-Pawn and Whiite can
achieve little else there. But White has access to both sides of
the board via the third rank. [29… Rb8!? 30. Kc3

[30. b3 blocks the third rank]

[30. Kc2 Rb4 31. Kc3 Rc4+ 32. Kd3 Rb4]

30… Rb7 may have been better]

30. Ra3 Rg8 31. Rh3 Rg7

  This defence from the side keeps the Black Rook more
active than moving it to defend from h8, but I’m sure Black also
considered …Rg1!?, giving up a Pawn to get the Rook active. It
looks a bit speculative here but is the right sort of idea to have
in mind.

32. Ke2 Ka6 33. Rh6 Re7 34. Kd3 Kb7 35. h4 Kc8
36. Rh5 Kd7 37. Rg5 Rf7

 

-+-+-+-+
X-Xj+t+x
-+x+x+-+
+-Px+xR-
-+-P-P-P
+-+k+-+-
pP-+-P-+
+-+-+-+-

Again, Black has achieved a solid, if passive, defence. White now
returns his attention to the Queen’s-side.

38. Kc3 Kc8 39. Kb4 Rf6 40. Ka5 Kb7 41. a4 a6 42.
h5 Rh6

 

-+-+-+-+
+jX-+-+x
x+x+x+-T
K-Px+xRp
p+-P-P-+
+-+-+-+-
-P-+-P-+
+-+-+-+-

White can improve the position of his pieces no further. It is time
to try and force the issue.

43. b4 Rf6 44. b5!?

[44. Rg7! Rh6 first would have been better, according
to Capa: 45. b5 axb5 46. axb5 cxb5

[46… Rxh5 47. b6]

47. Kxb5 e.g. 47… Rxh5 48. c6+ Kb8 49.
Ka6]

44… axb5 45. axb5 Rf8

  Off to sieze the a-file!

46. Rg7 Ra8+ 47. Kb4 cxb5 48. Kxb5
Ra2

 

-+-+-+-+
+jX-+-Rx
-+-+x+-+
+kPx+x+p
-+-P-P-+
+-+-+-+-
t+-+-P-+
+-+-+-+-

Black has gained some activity. Of course, White does not retreat
and defend with Rg2.

49. c6+ Kb8 50. Rxh7 Rb2+ 51. Ka5 Ra2+ 52. Kb4
Rxf2 53. Re7 Rxf4?!

  Natural, but not exact.

[53… Rh2? 54. Rxe6 Rxh5 55. Re5 Ka7 56.
Kc5]

[53… Rb2+!? 54. Kc3 Rh2 55. Rxe6 Ka7 56. h6 Kb6
which isn’t great but Black is also fighting with the King
now]

54. h6 Rxd4+ 55. Kb5 Rd1 56. h7

  A Pawn on the seventh seems worth three in the bush!
Black can only hope to harass the King with checks, but these are
soon exhausted.

56… Rb1+ 57. Kc5 Rc1+ 58. Kd4 Rd1+ 59. Ke5 Re1+
60. Kf6 Rh1 61. Re8+ Ka7 62. h8=Q Rxh8 63. Rxh8 Kb6 64. Kxe6 Kxc6
65. Kxf5 Kc5 66. Ke5 c6 67. Rh6 Kb5 68. Kd4 1-0

 

That was a fairly simple example, falling as much into the realm of
carrying out a strategical plan as manoeuvring without a clear
object. The next example is less direct, even though Black has an
extra Pawn to play with.

 

Manoeuvre in the endgame:
against weaknesses on both wings

Holzhausen W – Nimzowitsch Aaron
(Hannover) [B00] , 1926

1. e4 Nc6 2. Nf3 e6 3. d4 d5 4. exd5 exd5 5. Bg5 Be7 6.
Bxe7 Qxe7+ 7. Qe2 Bf5 8. c3 Be4 9. Nbd2 O-O-O 10. O-O-O Nh6 11. Ne5
Nxe5 12. dxe5 Bg6

 

-+jT-+-T
XxX-DxXx
-+-+-+lS
+-+xP-+-
-+-+-+-+
+-P-+-+-
pP-NqPpP
+-Kr+b+r

already planning a campaign against the e-pawn using the long
light-squared diagonal, especially the point e4

13. Nf3 Rhe8 14. Qe3 Kb8 15. Qf4 Be4 16. Re1 Qc5
17. Nd2 Bg6 18. Nb3 Qb6 19. Qd4 f6 20. f4 fxe5 21.
fxe5

[21. Rxe5 Rxe5 22. Qxe5 Re8]

21… Be4

[the e-pawn is doomed]

22. Nd2 c5 23. Qe3

[23. Qa4 Rxe5 24. Nxe4 dxe4 25. Rxe4 Qe6 26. Rxe5
Qxe5 with a winning attack]

23… Rxe5 24. Qg3 Qc7 25. Bd3 Rde8 26. Bxe4 dxe4
27. Nc4 R5e6 28. Qxc7+ Kxc7 29. Ne3

[the Knight is an excellent blockading piece, losing
no squares by its post]

29… Nf7 30. Kc2 Nd6 31. c4 Kc6 32.
Rhf1

 

-+-+t+-+
Xx+-+-Xx
-+jSt+-+
+-X-+-+-
-+p+x+-+
+-+-N-+-
pPk+-+pP
+-+-Rr+-

32… Rh6 !

  “A typical tacking manoeuvre” — EUWE/KRAMER

33. h3 Rg6 34. Re2 a6 35. Rf4 b5

[Black plays on both wings]

36. b3 Rg5 37. g4 Rge5 38. Kc3 a5

[Black will open a file on the Queen’s-side for his
Rooks]

39. Ref2 a4 40. bxa4 bxc4 !

[a temporary pawn sacrifice]

41. Rf8

[41. Nxc4 Nxc4 42. Kxc4 Ra8 and Black not only
regains the pawn, but White has lost the blockader]

41… R5e7

[White must not be allowed counterplay, particularly
not a Rook on the eighth]

42. Rxe8 Rxe8 43. Nxc4 Nxc4 44. Kxc4
Ra8

 

t+-+-+-+
+-+-+-Xx
-+j+-+-+
+-X-+-+-
p+k+x+p+
+-+-+-+p
p+-+-R-+
+-+-+-+-

The Black Rook now gets in on the Queen’s-side, to attack Pawns on
the King’s-side

45. Rf7 Rxa4+ 46. Kb3 Rb4+ 47. Kc3 Rb7 48. Rf5
Ra7 49. Kc4 Ra4+ 50. Kb3 Rd4 51. Re5 Kd6 52. Re8 Rd3+ 53. Kc4 Rxh3
54. Rxe4 Ra3

 

-+-+-+-+
+-+-+-Xx
-+-J-+-+
+-X-+-+-
-+k+r+p+
T-+-+-+-
p+-+-+-+
+-+-+-+-

White can no longer defend the two wings

55. Re2 Ra4+ 56. Kb5 Rxg4

[-/+]

57. a4 Rb4+ 58. Ka5 h5 59. Rd2+ Kc6 60. Re2 Rg4
61. Re6+ Kd5 62. Re8 h4 63. Rd8+ Kc4 64. Kb6 h3 65.
Rd1

[65. Rh8 Rg6+ 66. Kb7 Rh6]

65… Kb4 66. Rb1+ Kxa4 67. Kxc5 g5 68. Rh1 Rg3
69. Kd5 g4 70. Ke5 Rg2 71. Kf4 h2 0-1

 

 

The last type of ending in which we see manoeuvre as a strong theme
is a Queen ending. Again, Nimzo has an extra Pawn but Queen endings
are always difficult because of the number of candidate moves for
each side, and the risk of allowing perpetual to the defending
side.

 

Manoeuvre: in a Queen
ending,

Nimzowitsch Aaron – Antze,O
(Hannover) [E60] 1926

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. g3 Bg7 4. Bg2 O-O 5. f4 d6 6. Nf3 c6
7. O-O d5 8. cxd5 cxd5 9. Ne5 Qb6 10. Nc3 Rd8 11. b3 Na6 12. Ba3
Bf8 13. Na4 Qb5 14. Qd3 Qa5 15. Rfc1 Bf5 16. Qc3 Qb5 17. Bf1 Ne4
18. Qe1 Qe8 19. e3 b5 20. Nc6 Rdc8 21. Bxb5 Bd7 22. Bxa6 Rxc6 23.
Bb7 Rxc1 24. Rxc1 Rd8 25. Nc5 Bc8 26. Bxc8 Rxc8 27. Qa5 e6 28. Nxe4
dxe4 29. Rxc8 Qxc8 30. Bc5 Bxc5 31. Qxc5 Qa6 32. Qc2 Qa5 33. Kf2
Qh5 34. Qxe4 Qxh2+ 35. Qg2 Qh5 36. g4 Qa5 37. Kg3 h6 38. Qf2 Qc7
39. Kh3 f5 40. gxf5 gxf5 41. d5 exd5 42. Qg2+ Kf7 43. Qxd5+
Kf6

 

-+-+-+-+
X-D-+-+-
-+-+-J-X
+-+q+x+-
-+-+-P-+
+p+-P-+k
p+-+-+-+
+-+-+-+-

Here White’s Queen can change lines at d4, and also at e5 and f6;
the King may penetrate at h5. Black can hope for harassing checks,
and for the advance of the h-pawn.

44. Qd4+ Kg6 45. Qd2 Kf6 46. Qb2+ Kg6 47. b4 Qc4
48. Qd2 Kh5

[48… Qf1+ 49. Qg2+ [a CROSS-CHECK]]

49. a4 a6 50. Kg3 Qg8+ 51. Kh2 Qc4 52. Qb2 Qd3
53. Qg2 Qc4

[53… Qxe3 54. Qh3+]

54. Kg3 Qg8+

[54… Qxb4 55. Qe2+ Kg6 56. Qxa6+ and the a-pawn
will win]

55. Kh3 Qc4 56. Qf3+ Kg6 57. Kh4

[another step]

57… Kg7 58. Qb7+ Kg6 59. Qb6+ Kh7

 

-+-+-+-+
+-+-+-+j
xQ-+-+-X
+-+-+x+-
pPd+-P-K
+-+-P-+-
-+-+-+-+
+-+-+-+-

60. Qf6 !

  attacking both Pawns

60… Qd5

[the threat is …Qa1+ with a draw by
perpetual]

61. Kg3 Qg8+ 62. Kh2 Qa2+ 63. Kh3 Qd5 64.
Qe7+

[64. Qxa6 Qf3+ 65. Kh2 Qf2+ 66. Kh1 Qf3+
drawing]

64… Kg6 65. Qe8+ Kh7

[65… Kf6 66. Kg3 Qd3 67. a5 Qf1 68. Qe5+ Kg6 69.
Qe6+ Kg7 70. Qxf5 Qg1+ 71. Kf3 Qf1+ 72. Ke4 Qc4+ 73. Ke5 Qb5+ 74.
Ke6 +-]

66. Kg3 Qb3 67. a5 ! 67… Qb1

[losing touch with the a-pawn]

[67… Qd3 68. Qf7+ Kh8 69. Qf6+ Kh7 70. Qd4 ! 70…
Qf1

[70… Qb1 71. Qd7+ Kg6 72. Qc6+ Kg7 73. Qb7+ Kf8 74.
Qxa6 as in the game]

71. Qd7+ Kg6 72. Qe6+ Kg7 73. Qxf5 winning;]

68. Qd7+ Kg6 69. Qc6+ Kg7 70. Qb7+ Kf8 71.
Qxa6

 

-+-+-J-+
+-+-+-+-
q+-+-+-X
P-+-+x+-
-P-+-P-+
+-+-P-K-
-+-+-+-+
+d+-+-+-

winning…

71… Qe1+ 72. Kf3 Qd1+ 73. Qe2 Qd5+ 74. Kf2 Qd8
75. a6 Qh4+ 76. Kg2 Qe7 77. Qf3 Qc7 78. b5 Qg7+ 79. Kf2 Qb2+ 80.
Qe2 Qa1 81. b6 1-0

 

 

Having reminded ourselves of the ideas in endgame settings, let us
see the same approach in the middlegame.

 

Manoeuvre in the middlegame:
slowly, or dynamically and with threats

Manoeuvre: slow breakthrough
in closed position with lots of space

Capablanca – Treybal
(Karlsbad) [D30] 1929

1. d4 d5 2. c4 c6 3. Nf3 e6 4. Bg5 Be7 5. Bxe7 Qxe7 6. Nbd2
f5 7. e3 Nd7 8. Bd3 Nh6 9. O-O O-O 10. Qc2 g6 11. Rab1 Nf6 12. Ne5
Nf7 13. f4

 

t+l+-Tj+
Xx+-Ds+x
-+x+xSx+
+-+xNx+-
-+pP-P-+
+-+bP-+-
pPqN-+pP
+r+-+rK-

the Anti-Stonewall formation: White has a Queen’s-side initiative

13… Bd7 14. Ndf3 Rfd8 15. b4 Be8 16. Rfc1 a6
17. Qf2 Nxe5 18. Nxe5 Nd7

  seeking exchanges…

19. Nf3

  …but not finding them

19… Rdc8 20. c5 Nf6 21. a4 Ng4

  a gesture only

22. Qe1 Nh6

 

t+t+l+j+
+x+-D-+x
x+x+x+xS
+-Px+x+-
pP-P-P-+
+-+bPn+-
-+-+-+pP
+rR-Q-K-

Black is defending the Queen’s-side quite well: White switches
tack. This is the key to understanding space – although Black can
theoretically defend any one point, White can make the Black pieces
trip up in their rush to do so by moving from one point to another.

23. h3 Nf7 24. g4 Bd7 25. Rc2 Kh8 26. Rg2 Rg8 27.
g5 Qd8 28. h4 Kg7 29. h5

 

t+-D-+t+
+x+l+sJx
x+x+x+x+
+-Px+xPp
pP-P-P-+
+-+bPn+-
-+-+-+r+
+r+-Q-K-

White has the initiative on both sides of the board: Black’s
cramped and passive pieces will find it hard to cover everything

29… Rh8 30. Rh2 Qc7 31. Qc3 Qd8 32. Kf2 Qc7 33.
Rbh1 Rag8 34. Qa1 Rb8 35. Qa3 Rbg8

 

-+-+-+tT
+xDl+sJx
x+x+x+x+
+-Px+xPp
pP-P-P-+
Q-+bPn+-
-+-+-K-R
+-+-+-+r

Just when Black has had to cover the h-file…

36. b5

  …White opens a file on the Q-side. Black’s pieces have
to rush back, but get in a tangle because they have so few squares.
White gains complete control of the a-file, and seals the
King’s-side. Then, he arranges the final breakthrough on the
Queen’s-side, possible because of his enormous control of space
there.

36… axb5

[36… cxb5 37. h6+ Kf8 38. c6+]

37. h6+ Kf8 38. axb5 Ke7 39. b6 Qb8

 

-D-+-+tT
+x+lJs+x
-Px+x+xP
+-Px+xP-
-+-P-P-+
Q-+bPn+-
-+-+-K-R
+-+-+-+r

a sad decision: now Black won’t be able to oppose rooks on the
a-file. This is the concrete manifestation of what I described
earlier: White switching the focus of activity from side to side
until Black is wrong-footed.

40. Ra1 Rc8 41. Qb4 Rhd8 42. Ra7 Kf8 43. Rh1 Be8
44. Rha1 Kg8 45. R1a4 Kf8 46. Qa3 Kg8 47. Kg3 Bd7 48.
Kh4

  White spends a little time wondering where to put his
King; he has the luxury of seeing how it looks on a few different
squares before the final push. 48… Kh8 49. Qa1 Kg8 50.
Kg3 Kf8 51. Kg2 Be8

 

-DtTlJ-+
Rx+-+s+x
-Px+x+xP
+-Px+xP-
r+-P-P-+
+-+bPn+-
-+-+-+k+
Q-+-+-+-

the last ingredient for the breakthrough is the Knight

52. Nd2 Bd7 53. Nb3 Re8 54. Na5 Nd8

 

-DtStJ-+
Rx+l+-+x
-Px+x+xP
N-Px+xP-
r+-P-P-+
+-+bP-+-
-+-+-+k+
Q-+-+-+-

Ready or not, here we come

55. Ba6 bxa6 56. Rxd7 Re7

  else the a-pawn will simply go after Nb3

57. Rxd8+ Rxd8 58. Nxc6

 

-D-T-J-+
+-+-T-+x
xPn+x+xP
+-Px+xP-
r+-P-P-+
+-+-P-+-
-+-+-+k+
Q-+-+-+-

this ‘family’ fork is decisive

1-0

 

This is just the same approach as in the Kupchik endgame. Next up
is a game where Alekhin has an advantage not so much in space as
mobility. How can you have an advantage in mobility without having
one in space? You can if (1) your opponent is forced onto the
defensive on the side of the board where you have more space, or

  (2) the Pawn structure favours your pieces (especially
Bishops), or

  (3) if your pieces can get around more easily by using
outposts.

  In the game, Alekhin has all three going for him!

 

Manoeuvre: slow breakthrough
in half-open position

Thomas,G – Alekhin,Alexander
(Baden Baden) [B02] , 1925

1. e4 Nf6 2. d3 c5 3. f4 Nc6 4. Nf3 g6 5. Be2 Bg7 6. Nbd2
d5 7. O-O O-O 8. Kh1 b6 9. exd5 Qxd5 10. Qe1 Bb7 11. Nc4 Nd4 12.
Ne3 Qc6 13. Bd1 Nd5

 

t+-+-Tj+
Xl+-XxLx
-Xd+-+x+
+-Xs+-+-
-+-S-P-+
+-+pNn+-
pPp+-+pP
R-BbQr+k

14. Nxd4 ?

  exposes the c-pawn

14… cxd4 15. Nxd5 Qxd5 16. Bf3 Qd7 17. Bxb7
Qxb7 18. c4

[18. Rf2 Rac8 19. a4 Rc5 20. b3 Rfc8 21. Qd1 Qc7 22.
Ra2]

[18. Bd2 Rac8 19. c4 dxc3 20. Bxc3 Bxc3 21. bxc3 with
the same weak Pawns for White as in the game, but with Bishops off
White has got rid of a passive piece and has chances against the
Black King.]

18… dxc3 19. bxc3 Rac8 20. Bb2

[20. Bd2]

20… Rfd8 21. Rf3 Bf6 22. d4

[22. Qe2 Qa6 23. c4 again, White would have
benefitted from the exchange of Bishops]

  But there is no breakthrough yet, and so Alekhin begins
a patient siege. Alekhin is usually thought of as a demon
attacker, but there was nothing wrong with his technique…

22… Qd5 23. Qe3 Qb5 24. Qd2 Rd5

 

-+t+-+j+
X-+-Xx+x
-X-+-Lx+
+d+t+-+-
-+-P-P-+
+-P-+r+-
pB-Q-+pP
R-+-+-+k

This is clearly better for Black, because of White’s poor
dark-squared Bishop and backward c-pawn. Also, because the weight
of play moves over to the Queen’s-side, the c3 Pawn prevents
White’s pieces from nipping about as easily as Black’s. Black’s
fourth rank,. and the light squares c4 and d5, form staging posts
for Black’s manoeuvres.

25. h3 e6 26. Re1 Qa4

  Black seeks to force or tempt a2-a3

27. Ra1 b5 28. Qd1 Rc4 29. Qb3 Rd6 30. Kh2 Ra6
31. Rff1 Be7 32. Kh1 Rcc6 33. Rfe1 Bh4 !

  Black makes use of both sides of the board.

34. Rf1

[34. Re2 Qxb3 35. axb3 Rxa1+ 36. Bxa1 Ra6 37. Bb2
Ra2

[37… Bg3 ! Fritz 38. Bc1 Ra1]

38. Kh2 a5]

34… Qc4

  Black will recycle the Rooks to a4 and a6

35. Qxc4 Rxc4 36. a3

[else …b4]

36… Be7 37. Rfb1 Bd6

[no rush: Black chivvies another White pawn onto a
dark square]

38. g3 Kf8 39. Kg2 Ke7 40. Kf2 Kd7 41. Ke2
Kc6

[the Black King covers b5 and threatens
…Rca4]

42. Ra2 Rca4

  The Rooks quietly take up their places.

43. R1a1 Kd5 44. Kd3 R6a5 45. Bc1 a6 46.
Bb2

 

-+-+-+-+
+-+-+x+x
x+-Lx+x+
Tx+j+-+-
t+-P-P-+
P-Pk+-Pp
rB-+-+-+
R-+-+-+-

This is Black’s ideal position: is there a win?

46… h5 !

[threat …h4]

  Yes, by playing in the centre and King’s-side as well as
the Queen’s. 47. h4 f6 48. Bc1

 

-+-+-+-+
+-+-+-+-
x+-LxXx+
Tx+j+-+x
t+-P-P-P
P-Pk+-P-
r+-+-+-+
+-Br+-+-

And now the break:

48… e5 49. fxe5 fxe5 50. Bb2

[50. dxe5 Bxe5 51. Bf4 Bxf4 52. gxf4 Kc5 is
terminal]

50… exd4 51. cxd4 b4

[finally the a-pawn falls]

0-1

 

 

The next game also shows the infiltration theme, and changing front
– not from side to side as much as from one way of pressuring a
point to another.

Manoeuvre: gradual
infiltration, changing tack,

Tylor, Theodore – Lasker,
Emanuel (Nottingham) [C49] 1936

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Nc3 Nf6 4. Bb5 Bb4 5. O-O O-O 6. d3
d6 7. Bg5 Ne7 8. Nh4 c6 9. Bc4 Kh8 10. f4 exf4 11. Bxf6 gxf6 12.
Rxf4 Ng6 13. Nxg6+ fxg6

 

t+lD-T-J
Xx+-+-+x
-+xX-Xx+
+-+-+-+-
-Lb+pR-+
+-Np+-+-
pPp+-+pP
R-+q+-K-

14. Bb3 Qe7 15. Ne2 Ba5 16. c3 Bd7 17. Ng3

  not a great square but White would not enjoy a break with
…f5

17… Bc7 18. Rf2 Kg7 19. Qe2 Rae8 20. Raf1
Be6

 

-+-+tT-+
XxL-D-Jx
-+xXlXx+
+-+-+-+-
-+-+p+-+
+bPp+-N-
pP-+qRpP
+-+-+rK-

Black forces a weakening of e4, then leans on it.

21. Qc2 Bb6 22. d4 Bc7 23. Kh1 h5 ! 24. Re1 Qf7
25. Rfe2 Bxb3 26. axb3

[26. Qxb3 Qxb3 27. axb3 Re7 28. Kg1 Rfe8 29. Nf1 is
also a long slog]

26… Qd7 27. Nf1 Re7 28. Qd3 Rfe8 29.
Nd2

 

-+-+t+-+
XxLdT-J-
-+xX-Xx+
+-+-+-+x
-+-Pp+-+
+pPq+-+-
-P-Nr+pP
+-+-R-+k

The e-pawn has as many defenders as attackers. Black changes tack,
opening the position for the Bishop.

29… d5 30. exd5 Rxe2 31. Rxe2 Rxe2 32. Qxe2
Qxd5 33. Qe7+ Qf7 34. Qe4 Qd7 35. Nf3 Kf7 ! 36. c4

[36. Nh4 Qg4]

36… Qe6 37. Qd3

[37. Qxe6+ Kxe6 38. Kg1 Kf5 39. Kf2 Ke4 40. Ke2
g5]

37… Bf4 ! 38. g3

[38. Kg1 Qe3+ 39. Qxe3 Bxe3+ 40. Kf1 Bc1]

38… Qe3 ! 39. Qc3 Bh6

 

-+-+-+-+
Xx+-+j+-
-+x+-XxL
+-+-+-+x
-+pP-+-+
+pQ-DnP-
-P-+-+-P
+-+-+-+k

White denies the Queen entry only at a cost

40. c5 Qf2 41. Qc4+ Kg7 42. Qd3 Be3 43. Qd1
a5

 

-+-+-+-+
+x+-+-J-
-+x+-Xx+
X-P-+-+x
-+-P-+-+
+p+-LnP-
-P-+-D-P
+-+q+-+k

zugzwang!

44. b4 axb4 45. b3 Kh6 0-1

Alekhin was a dynamic player, and this dynamism also suffused his
manoeuvres. Here is a manouevring game based on pressure against
the King’s-side.

Manoeuvre: manoeuvring with
threats

Rubinstein,Akiba –
Alekhin,Alexander (Dresden) [A46], 1926

1. d4 Nf6 2. Nf3 e6 3. Bf4 b6 4. h3 Bb7 5. Nbd2 Bd6 6. Bxd6
cxd6 7. e3 O-O 8. Be2 d5 9. O-O Nc6 10. c3 Ne4 11. Nxe4 dxe4 12.
Nd2 f5 13. f4 g5 14. Nc4 d5 15. Ne5 Nxe5 16. dxe5 Kh8

 

t+-D-T-J
Xl+-+-+x
-X-+x+-+
+-+xPxX-
-+-+xP-+
+-P-P-+p
pP-+b+p+
R-+q+rK-

White appears better (with a better Bishop), but with hindsight
should have chosen the safer line:

17. a4

[17. g3 Rg8 18. Kh2]

17… Rg8 18. Qd2 gxf4 19. Rxf4

[19. exf4 Qh4 20. Kh1 Rxg2 21. Kxg2 Rg8+ 22.
Bg4]

19… Qg5 20. Bf1 Qg3 21. Kh1 Qg7 22. Qd4
Ba6

[the exchange of White’s good Bishop leaves Black
with all the trumps]

23. Rf2 Qg3 24. Rc2 Bxf1 25. Rxf1
Rac8

[“All the time Black operates with threats” — EUWE
and KRAMER]

26. b3 Rc7 27. Re2 Rcg7 28. Rf4 Rc7 29. Rc2 Rcg7
30. Re2

 

-+-+-+tJ
X-+-+-Tx
-X-+x+-+
+-+xPx+-
p+-QxR-+
+pP-P-Dp
-+-+r+p+
+-+-+-+k

Repetition is usually to gain time on the clock but can also serve
to steady your nerves, to change gear emotionally from defence to
attack, and to weary the opponent.

30… Rg6 !

[…Rg6-h6xh3+]

31. Qb4

[31. Qd1 Rh6 zugzwang! Alekhin 32. Rf1

[32. Qf1 Qg7 x e5]

[32. b4 Qg7 33. Qd4 Rxh3+]

[32. c4 d4 ! winning 33. Qe1 d3]

32… Qxe5]

31… Rh6 32. h4 Qg7

[Black has had his eye on the e-pawn for some
time]

33. c4 Rg6 34. Qd2 Rg3 !

  Now the Rook occupies the g3 square. We have seen no
change of front in this game (all on the King’s-side) but lots of
different arrangements of pieces.

35. Qe1

[35. Kg1 d4 36. exd4 e3 37. Qc2 Rh3 38. Qd3 Qg3 the
return of the Queen to g3 is crushing]

35… Rxg2 0-1

 

  This notion of changing front is easy to see: here is an
example where Lasker doesn’t change front as much as pester his
opponent with different threats.

Manoeuvre: keep finding
attacking ideas,

Lasker,Emanuel – Salwe,G
(St.Petersburg) [C62] 1909

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 d6 4. d4 Bd7 5. Nc3 Nf6 6. O-O
Be7 7. Bg5 exd4 8. Nxd4 O-O 9. Bxc6 bxc6 10. Qd3 Re8 11. Rae1 c5
12. Nb3 Ng4 13. Bxe7 Rxe7 14. f4 Rb8 15. h3 Nh6 16. f5

  active but weakens e5

[16. g4]

16… f6 17. Nd5 Re8 18. c4 Nf7 19. Qc3 Re5 20.
Nd2 c6 21. Nf4 Qb6 22. b3 Rbe8 23. Qg3 Kh8 24. Nh5 Rg8 25. Rf4 Qd8
26. Nf3 Re7

 

-+-D-+tJ
X-+lTsXx
-+xX-X-+
+-X-+p+n
-+p+pR-+
+p+-+nQp
p+-+-+p+
+-+-R-K-

Advantage to White:

  (1) the d-pawn is weak but so is the e-pawn

  (2) Black can cover the K-side attack

  (3) White retains a space and mobility advantage

27. Rh4

[27. Rg4 Qf8]

27… Qe8 28. Qf2

  tacking

[28. Nf4 Nh6]

28… Rf8 29. Qd2

  sets up Nf4, Nxh6; Qxd6

29… Qb8 30. Kh1 Rfe8 31. Rg4 Rg8

[31… Nh6 ? 32. Nxf6

[32. Rxg7 Rxg7 33. Qxh6 Rf7 34. Nxf6 Ref8 35.
Ng5]

32… Nxg4 33. Nxe8]

32. Rd1 Qb4

  seeking counterplay but is a bit of a lone wolf

[32… Qe8]

33. Qf2 Qc3 34. Qh4 Nh6 35. Rf4 Nf7 36. Kh2 Rge8
37. Qg3 Rg8

 

-+-+-+tJ
X-+lTsXx
-+xX-X-+
+-X-+p+n
-+p+pR-+
+pD-+nQp
p+-+-+pK
+-+r+-+-

since the last diagram Black has only managed to lose contact
between the Queen and d6

38. Rh4

[38. Rg4 Nh6 39. Rh4 d5 40. cxd5 cxd5 41. Rxd5
Bc6]

38… g5

[38… d5 39. cxd5 cxd5 40. Nf4]

39. fxg6

[39. Rg4 Be8]

39… Rxg6 40. Qf2 f5

[else Rf4]

41. Nf4 Rf6 42. Ne2 Qb2 43. Rd2 Qa1 44. Ng3
Kg8

[44… a5 45. exf5 Bxf5 46. Nxf5 Rxf5 47.
Rxh7+]

45. exf5 Bxf5

 

-+-+-+j+
X-+-Ts+x
-+xX-T-+
+-X-+l+-
-+p+-+-R
+p+-+nNp
p+-R-QpK
D-+-+-+-

46. Nd4 !

[46. Nxf5 is now not quite as good: 46… Rxf5 47.
Rxh7 Qf6]

46… cxd4 47. Nxf5 Kf8 48. Qxd4 Qxd4 49. Nxd4
Ne5 50. Rh5 Ref7 51. c5

 

-+-+-J-+
X-+-+t+x
-+xX-T-+
+-P-S-+r
-+-N-+-+
+p+-+-+p
p+-R-+pK
+-+-+-+-

The double-rook ending, far from holding chances of a draw, is
quickly won

51… dxc5 52. Rxe5 cxd4 53. Rxd4 Rf2 54. Rd8+
Kg7 55. Ra5 Rc2 56. a3 ! 56… c5 57. Rc8 Rb2 58. Rb5 Rff2 59. Rb7+
Kg6 60. Rc6+ Rf6 61. Rxc5 Ra6 62. a4 ! 62… Rf6

[62… Rxa4 63. Rc6+ Kf5 64. Rb5+ Ke4 65.
bxa4]

63. Rc3 a6 64. Rg3+ Kh6 65. Rgg7

 

-+-+-+-+
+r+-+-Rx
x+-+-T-J
+-+-+-+-
p+-+-+-+
+p+-+-+p
-T-+-+pK
+-+-+-+-

1-0

 

Manoeuvre: manoeuvring or
woodshifting?

Cohn,E – Nimzowitsch Aaron
(Karlsbad) [D30], 1911

1. d4 d5 2. Nf3 e6 3. c4 c5 4. e3 Nf6 5. Bd3 Bd6 6. O-O O-O
7. a3 cxd4 8. exd4 dxc4 9. Bxc4 Nc6 10. Nc3 b6 11. Bg5 Bb7 12. Qe2
h6 13. Be3 Ne7 14. Ne5 Ned5 15. Nxd5 Nxd5 16. Qh5 Bxe5 17. Qxe5 Nf6
18. Rfe1 Bd5 19. Bd3 Rc8 20. Rac1

 

-+tD-Tj+
X-+-+xX-
-X-+xS-X
+-+lQ-+-
-+-P-+-+
P-+bB-+-
-P-+-PpP
+-R-R-K-

20… Ng4 21. Qg3 Nxe3 22. fxe3 Qd7 23. Ba6 Rxc1 24. Rxc1
Qa4 25. Bf1 Qb3 26. Qf2 f5 27. Qd2 Rf7 28. Qc3 Qa4 29. g3 Kh7 30.
Bg2 Qb5

 

-+-+-+-+
X-+-+tXj
-X-+x+-X
+d+l+x+-
-+-P-+-+
P-Q-P-P-
-P-+-+bP
+-R-+-K-

After the coming exchange a long period of manoeuvring begins –
Euwe asks, quite reasonably, whether in fact the phase is really
manoeuvring or mere woodshifting.

31. Bxd5 exd5 32. Qd2 Qb3 33. Qc3 Qb5 34. Qd2 Qb3
35. Qc3 Qb5 36. Qd2 Re7 37. Qc2 Qd7 38. Qd3 Re4 39. Kf2 Qe6 40. Rf1
Qg6 41. Kg2 Qe6 42. Kf2 Qg6 43. Kg2 Qe6 44. Kf2 Kg6 45. Rc1 Kh7 46.
Rc2 Qg6 47. Kg2 Qg5 48. Rf2 Qg6 49. Qe2 Qe6 50. Qf3 Kg6 51. Re2 Kh7
52. Kf2 Qc8 53. Kg2 Qe6 54. Kf2 Qg6 55. Kg2 Qg5 56. Kf2 Qf6 57. Kg2
Qg5 58. Kf2 Qg6 59. Kg2 Qe6 60. Kf2 Qc8 61. Kg2 Qe6 62. Kf2 Qc8 63.
Kg2

 

-+d+-+-+
X-+-+-Xj
-X-+-+-X
+-+x+x+-
-+-Pt+-+
P-+-PqP-
-P-+r+kP
+-+-+-+-

Drawish? Yes, but White has enough difficulties that Black is
justified in playing on, says Nimzo

63… a5

  according to Nimzovitch, to make a7 available as a refuge
for the King! 64. h4 Kg6 65. Kh2 h5 66. Kg2 Kh6 67. Rf2
g6

[tomorrow will do]

68. Rf1 Kg7 69. Rf2 Kf7 70. Kh2 Ke7 71. Re2
Qc1

[“Black can do very much as he pleases, but for the
time being there is simply no serious threat to be made. This game
exemplifies the fact that manoeuvring amounts to a form of the
initiative.” EUWE]

72. Qf2 Kd7 73. Re1 Qc6 74. Kg2 Rg4

[Black has weaknesses to aim at on g3 and e3, and the
King is on the way to a7 which White cannot prevent]

75. Rf1

[75. Re2 Re4

[75… Kc7 76. Rc2]

76. Kh2 Qc1 77. Kg2 Qd1 78. Kh2 Qd3 enables
…Kc7]

75… Qc7 76. Qf3 Kc8 77. Qf2 Kb8 78. Kh3
Ka7

 

-+-+-+-+
J-D-+-+-
-X-+-+x+
X-+x+x+x
-+-P-+tP
P-+-P-Pk
-P-+-Q-+
+-+-+r+-

Black is making progress, although the two backward pawns e3/g3 are
close enough together to defend easily.

79. Rg1 Qd7 80. Kh2

[else …f4!]

80… Qd6 81. Kh3 Qc6 82. Re1 Qe6 83. Kh2
Qe4

[now threatening …g5 and …h4]

84. Kh3 Qe6 85. Kh2 Qe7 86. Kh3 Qe4 87. Rg1 Qe6
88. Kh2 Re4

 

-+-+-+-+
J-+-+-+-
-X-+d+x+
X-+x+x+x
-+-Pt+-P
P-+-P-P-
-P-+-Q-K
+-+-+-R-

89. Rc1 ?

[89. Re1 White feared: 89… g5 90. hxg5 h4 91. gxh4
f4 92. g6 f3 with attacking chances, but after 93. g7 the onus is
quite on Black]

89… Rxe3 90. Qf4 Re2+ 91. Kh3 Ka6 92. b4 axb4
93. axb4 Kb5

[Now the White Queen dare not move, the end is in
sight]

94. Rc7 Qe4

[forcing the exchange]

95. Qxe4 Rxe4 96. Rg7 Re6 97. Rd7 Kc4 98. Kg2
Kxd4 99. Kf3 Kc4 100. b5 d4 0-1

 

Manoeuvring: a modern
master,

Petrosian,T – Fischer,R [A16]
1958

1. c4 Nf6 2. Nc3 g6 3. g3 Bg7 4. Bg2 O-O 5. Nf3 d6 6. O-O
Nc6 7. d3 Nh5 8. d4 e5 9. d5 Ne7 10. e4 f5 11. exf5 gxf5 12. Nxe5
Nxg3 13. hxg3

  “Petrosian… plays for control of the centre squares.”
(Fischer).

13… Bxe5 14. f4 Bg7 15. Be3 Bd7 16.
Bd4

 

t+-D-Tj+
XxXlS-Lx
-+-X-+-+
+-+p+x+-
-+pB-P-+
+-N-+-P-
pP-+-+b+
R-+q+rK-

“Forcing the exchange of Black’s most active piece.”

16… Ng6 17. Re1 Rf7

[17… Bxd4+ 18. Qxd4 h5 and …h4 gets rid of the
isolated pawn.]

18. Bf3

 

t+-D-+j+
XxXl+tLx
-+-X-+s+
+-+p+x+-
-+pB-P-+
+-N-+bP-
pP-+-+-+
R-+qR-K-

“Black doesn’t get a second chance.”

18… Qf8 19. Kf2 Re8 20. Rxe8 Qxe8 21. Bxg7 Rxg7
22. Qd4 b6 23. Rh1

[23. b4 ! Fischer]

23… a5 24. Nd1 Qf8 25. Ne3

[25. Bh5]

25… Rf7 26. b3 Qg7 27. Qxg7+ Kxg7 28. a3 Rf8
29. Be2

 

-+-+-T-+
+-Xl+-Jx
-X-X-+s+
X-+p+x+-
-+p+-P-+
Pp+-N-P-
-+-+bK-+
+-+-+-+r

“White constantly finds ways to improve his position.”

[29. b4? axb4 30. axb4 Ra8]

29… Ne7 30. Bd3 h6 31. Rh5 Be8 32.
Rh2

[32. Nxf5+ Nxf5 33. Rxf5 Rh8!-+ /\ Bg6]

[32. Rxf5 Rh8!-+ ]

32… Bd7 33. Rh1 Rh8 34. Nc2

 

-+-+-+-T
+-XlS-J-
-X-X-+-X
X-+p+x+-
-+p+-P-+
Pp+b+-P-
-+n+-K-+
+-+-+-+r

“Heading for an even stronger outpost on d4. Each time Petrosian
achieved a good position, he managed to manoeuvre into a better
one.”

34… Kf6 35. Nd4 Kg7 36. Be2

 

-+-+-+-T
+-XlS-J-
-X-X-+-X
X-+p+x+-
-+pN-P-+
Pp+-+-P-
-+-+bK-+
+-+-+-+r

“Feigning an invasion with Bh5, Re1 and Ne6. White has two wings to
operate on…”

36… Ng8?

  “Panicking and giving him the opportunity to sneak in b4
when Black can’t react with …axb4 and …Ra8. Petrosian likes to
play cat-and-mouse, hoping his opponents will go wrong in the
absence of a direct threat..they usually do

[36… Ra8 37. Bh5 Rc8 38. Re1 Kf6 39. Ne6 c6=
]

37. b4 Nf6 38. Bd3

[38. bxa5 Ne4+ 39. Kg2 bxa5 40. Rb1 Nc5+/= ]

38… axb4

[38… Ne4+ 39. Bxe4 fxe4 40. bxa5 bxa5

[40… Ra8 41. axb6 cxb6 42. Rb1+- ]

41. Rb1+- /\ Rb7]

[38… Kg6 39. bxa5 bxa5 40. Rb1+- /\ Rb7]

39. axb4 Kg6 40. Ra1

 

-+-+-+-T
+-Xl+-+-
-X-X-SjX
+-+p+x+-
-PpN-P-+
+-+b+-P-
-+-+-K-+
R-+-+-+-

“White has finally achieved his ideal set-up, but Black’s game is
still tenable.”

40… Ng4+ 41. Ke2 Re8+ 42. Kd2 Nf6 43.
Ra6

[43. Ra7 Rc8]

43… Rb8 44. Ra7 Rc8 45. c5

 

-+t+-+-+
R-Xl+-+-
-X-X-SjX
+-Pp+x+-
-P-N-P-+
+-+b+-P-
-+-K-+-+
+-+-+-+-

“This Pawn sac caught me completely by surprise. It’s the only line
that gives Black any trouble.”

45… bxc5

[45… Nxd5? 46. c6+- ]

46. bxc5 dxc5 47. Nf3 Kf7

[47… Nxd5? 48. Ne5++- ]

48. Ne5+ Ke7 49. Nxd7 Nxd7 50. Bxf5 Rf8 51.
g4

[51. Bxd7 Kxd7 52. Ke3

[52. Ra6 Rg8]

52… Kd6 53. Ra6+ Kxd5 54. Rxh6 Re8+ 55. Kf3 c4=
]

51… Kd6 ?

[51… Nf6! 52. Be6 Nxd5! 53. Bxd5 Rxf4=

[53… Rd8= ]

]

52. Bxd7 Kxd7 53. Ke3 Re8+

[53… c4 54. Ra6-+ ]

54. Kf3

[54. Kd3 Rg8= ]

54… Kd6 55. Ra6+ Kxd5 56. Rxh6 c4 57.
Rh1

[57. Rh7+- Petrosian,T

57… c6

[57… c5 58. Rd7+ Ke6 59. Rd1 Rb8 60. g5?

[60. f5+! Ke5 61. Re1+ Kd4

[61… Kf6 62. Kf4 c3 63. g5+ Kg7 64. g6 c2 65. Kg5
Rb1 66. f6++- ]

62. g5 c3 63. f6 c2 64. Rc1!

[64. f7? Rb1!= ]

64… Ke5 65. Kg4!+- ]

60… c3 61. Kg4

[61. Rc1 Kf5 62. Rxc3 c4! 63. Rxc4 Rb3+= ]

61… Rb4 62. Re1+ Kf7 63. Kf5 c2 64. Rc1 Rc4 65. g6+
Kg7 66. Kg5 Rc3= ]

58. Rd7+ Kc5 59. Rd1 c3 60. g5 Kc4 61. g6 c2 62. Rc1
Kc3 63. f5 Rg8 64. Kf4 Kd2 65. Rxc2+ Kxc2 66. Kg5 c5 67. f6 c4 68.
f7 Rxg6+ 69. Kxg6 c3 70. f8=Q+- ]

[57. Rh7 wins]

57… c3 58. g5 c5 59. Rd1+

[59. g6 Rg8 60. f5 Ke5 61. Kg4 Kf6 62. Rc1 c4 63.
Rxc3 Rc8!= ]

[59. Kg4 Re2! 60. g6 Ke4! 61. Kg5 Rg2+ 62. Kf6 Kxf4=
]

59… Kc4 60. g6 c2 61. Rc1

[61. Rg1 Rd8 62. Rc1

[62. g7? Rg8!-+ /\ Txg7]

]

61… Kd3 62. f5 Rg8 63. Kf4 Kd2 64. Rxc2+ Kxc2
65. Kg5 c4 66. f6 c3 67. f7 1/2-1/2

[67. f7 Rxg6+

[67… Rc8 68. g7 Kb1 69. f8=Q Rxf8 70. gxf8=Q c2=
]

68. Kxg6 Kb1 69. f8=Q c2= ]

 

Examples from club
play

Note from DrDave: I apologise for the
huge quantity of me below. Apart from any egotism, there are some
reasons for this:

  • participants in the coaching sessions often complain about
    seeing nothing but master games, arguing it’s all very well for
    Capablanca to be able to do that, but is it relevant to
    us?
  • so, I’d like to include examples from club play wherever
    possible to show that club players can make use of ideas from
    master games
  • I have lots of examples of my own games but not very many from
    other people
  • Most of the examples I have from other people feature their
    brilliant King’s-side attacks, not their games of manoeuvre.
  • If you don’t like this, you know what to do!

But I do feel embarrassed about blowing my own
trumpet.

Manoeuvring in club play:
patience and preparatory moves

Regis,D (2840) – O’Grady,J
(1820) [C30] Spectrum #1 Torquay 1996

1. e4 e5 2. f4

 

tSlDjLsT
XxXx+xXx
-+-+-+-+
+-+-X-+-
-+-+pP-+
+-+-+-+-
pPpP-+pP
RnBqKbNr

2… d6

[2… Bc5]

3. Nf3 Nc6 4. Bc4 Be7 5. d3 Nf6 6. Nc3 O-O 7. O-O
Bg4 8. h3 Bxf3 9. Qxf3 Na5 10. f5 Nxc4 11. dxc4 c6

[11… Kh8]

12. Be3 a6 13. a4

 

t+-D-Tj+
+x+-LxXx
x+xX-S-+
+-+-Xp+-
p+p+p+-+
+-N-Bq+p
-Pp+-+p+
R-+-+rK-

13… Qd7?! [13… b6] 14.
a5!

  Typical of manoeuvre: make sure there is something to go
at on the Queen’s-side before committing on the King’s.

14… c5 [14… Kh8]
15. g4 h6 [15… Kh8] 16. h4 Nh7
17. Nd5 Qd8 18. Nxe7+ Qxe7 19. Qg3 f6 20. Rf2 Rf7 21. Rd1 Rd8 22.
Bd2 Qc7 23. Bc3 Rfd7 24. Rg2 Kf8 25. Bd2 Kf7

 

-+-T-+-+
+xDt+jXs
x+-X-X-X
P-X-Xp+-
-+p+p+pP
+-+-+-Q-
-PpB-+r+
+-+r+-K-

26. g5?!

  with hindsight, hasty

[26. Rf1 an extra strengthening move couldn’t have
hurt]

26… hxg5 27. hxg5 fxg5 28. Bxg5 Nxg5 29. Qxg5
Kf8 30. Rh2 Kg8 31. Qg6 Rf7 32. Kf2 Rf6 33. Qh7+ Kf7 34. Rg1 Rg8
35. Rhg2 Kf8

 

-+-+-Jt+
+xD-+-Xq
x+-X-T-+
P-X-Xp+-
-+p+p+-+
+-+-+-+-
-Pp+-Kr+
+-+-+-R-

The thing you need to manoeuvre or defend is pateince. Both players
now snatch at moves.

36. Rxg7?!

[36. Rg6!?]

36… Rxg7??

[After the sounder 36… Qxg7 37. Rxg7 Rxg7 38. Qh8+
Kf7

 

-+-+-+-Q
+x+-+jT-
x+-X-T-+
P-X-Xp+-
-+p+p+-+
+-+-+-+-
-Pp+-K-+
+-+-+-+-

An interesting Q/RR endgame arises in which White has chances
against the Queen’s-side pawns – remember move 13?

39. Qc8?!

[39. b3! the plan is to secure the King first and
stop Black coordinating Rooks 39… Rg8 40. Qh5+ Kg7 41. Ke2 Rh8
42. Qg5+ Kf7 43. Kd2 Rfh6 44. Kc3 Rh3+ 45. Kb2 R3h6 46. b4 cxb4 47.
Kb3 Rf6 48. Kxb4 Rh2 49. c3 Rb2+ 50. Ka3 Rh2 51. c5 dxc5 52. Qg3
Rc2 53. Qxe5 +-]

39… Rh6 40. Qxb7+ Kf6 41. Qxa6 Rh2+ 42. Kf1 Rh1+
43. Ke2 Rh2+ 44. Kf3 Rh3+ draws]

37. Qh8+ Ke7 38. Rxg7+ 1-0

 

Manoeuvring in club play: play
on both sides of the board

Regis,D (1960) – Richmond,RH
(2150) [A21] Cambridge Vs. NCI, 1986

1. c4 e5 2. Nc3 d6 3. g3 f5 4. d4 e4 5. Nh3 Nf6 6. Bg2 Be7
7. O-O O-O 8. Bg5 c6 9. f3

 

tSlD-Tj+
Xx+-L-Xx
-+xX-S-+
+-+-+xB-
-+pPx+-+
+-N-+pPn
pP-+p+bP
R-+q+rK-

Black’s centre is under pressure.

9… exf3 10. exf3 h6 11. Be3 Be6 12. Qd3 d5 13.
c5 Qd7 14. Nf4 Bf7 15. b4 g5 16. Nfe2 Kg7 17. Rab1 Bg6 18. f4
Ne4

 

tS-+-T-+
Xx+dL-J-
-+x+-+lX
+-Px+xX-
-P-PsP-+
+-NqB-P-
p+-+n+bP
+r+-+rK-

The position is by no means closed but the feature of slow build-up
of play on both sides brings this under the heading of manoeuvre.

19. b5 Qc7 20. fxg5 hxg5 21. Nxe4 fxe4 22. Qd2
Qd8

 

tS-D-T-+
Xx+-L-J-
-+x+-+l+
+pPx+-X-
-+-Px+-+
+-+-B-P-
p+-Qn+bP
+r+-+rK-

Bob thought exchanging rooks was better. The exchanges have left
Black facing pressure against Pawns on both sides of the board
(g5,b7)

23. Rxf8 Kxf8 24. bxc6 bxc6 25. Bh3

[25. Rb7 Nd7+/- ]

25… Na6 26. Bg4 Nc7 27. Rb7 Bf7 28. Qc1 Kg8 29.
Qf1 Nb5 30. Qh3

  The light squares are weaker than the dark.

[30. Bxg5 – lay unnoticed until 1992!]

30… Na3 31. Bf5

 

t+-D-+j+
Xr+-Ll+-
-+x+-+-+
+-Px+bX-
-+-Px+-+
S-+-B-Pq
p+-+n+-P
+-+-+-K-

31… Qa5 32. Qh7+ Kf8 33. Qh8+ Bg8 34. Qh6+ Ke8 35. Qxc6+
Kf8 36. Qh6+ Ke8 37. Rxe7+ Kxe7 38. Bxg5+ Ke8 39. Qc6+

[39. Qc6+ Kf8 40. Qd6+ Kg7 41. Qf6#]

1-0

 

Manoeuvring in club play: as a
phase in a half-open game.

Williams,SK (1990) – Regis,D.
(1935) [A36] East Devon #3, 1994

1. c4 g6 2. Nc3 Bg7 3. g3 c5 4. Bg2 Nc6 5. e4 d6 6. Nge2
Nf6 7. O-O O-O 8. d3 Ne8

[8… Bd7]

9. Be3 Nd4 10. Rb1 a5 11. a3 Nc7 12. b4 axb4 13.
axb4 Nxe2+ 14. Nxe2 Ne6 15. Qd2 Nd4 16. Nxd4 cxd4 17. Bh6 e5 18.
Bxg7 Kxg7 19. f4 f5

 

t+lD-T-+
+x+-+-Jx
-+-X-+x+
+-+-Xx+-
-PpXpP-+
+-+p+-P-
-+-Q-+bP
+r+-+rK-

A half-open position in which White has better Pawns and greater
piece activity. White tries to improve his prospects further on
each side before trying to decide the issue – like the Capa-Kupchik
game.

20. exf5 Rxf5 21. Be4 Rf6 22. fxe5 dxe5 23. Rxf6
Qxf6 24. Rf1 Qe7 25. Qg2 Ra6 26. Bd5

 

-+l+-+-+
+x+-D-Jx
t+-+-+x+
+-+bX-+-
-PpX-+-+
+-+p+-P-
-+-+-+qP
+-+-+rK-

White’s pawns on the Queen’s-side are more mobile than Black’s in
the centre – the game now stops being one of unforced manoeuvre and
reverts to the familiar pattern of competing plans. The finish is
still quite tricky, if you are interested.

26… Be6 27. c5 Bxd5 28. Qxd5 Ra3 29.
b5!?

[29. Rd1]

29… Rxd3 30. Ra1 Rc3 31. c6 bxc6 32.
bxc6

 

-+-+-+-+
+-+-D-Jx
-+p+-+x+
+-+qX-+-
-+-X-+-+
+-T-+-P-
-+-+-+-P
R-+-+-K-

32… Qg5

[32… d3? 33. Qd7 Qxd7 34. cxd7 d2 35. d8=Q Rc1+ 36.
Kf2 d1=Q 37. Qxd1+- ]

[32… Qc5!? 33. Qd7+ Kf6]

[32… Rc5! 33. Qd7 Qxd7 34. cxd7 Rd5 35. Ra5 Rxd7
36. Rxe5-+ ]

33. Rf1 Kh6

[33… Qe3+ 34. Rf2 Kh1 transposes to game]

34. Kh1 Rc1?

[34… Qe3! 35. Qd7 Qe4+ -+ ]

35. Qf7 e4 36. c7 Rxf1+ 37. Qxf1 Qc5 38. Qh3+
1-0

 

Manoeuvring in club play: with
extra space (I)

Regis,D. – Richard Dixon
(CORR_92/93) [B36] Devon vs. glos. CC, 1993

1. c4 g6 2. g3 Bg7 3. Bg2 Nf6 4. Nc3 O-O 5. e4

  ( new for me this season: I played the e3/Nge2/d4 plan
for years but recently fancied this, which looked more enterprising
)

5… d6 6. Nge2 c5 7. O-O Nc6 8. d3 Ne8 9. Be3
Nc7

  ( ?! in the books )

10. d4 ! cxd4 11. Nxd4 Ne6 12. Nde2
Ne5

 

t+lD-Tj+
Xx+-XxLx
-+-Xs+x+
+-+-S-+-
-+p+p+-+
+-N-B-P-
pP-+nPbP
R-+q+rK-

! TN – threatens c4 and e3 via g4

[12… Nc5 13. Rc1 Be6 14. b3 Qa5 15. Qd2 Rac8 16.
Nf4 +- and black is in trouble: Barcza-Szilagyi 1967]

13. b3 b6

  ( transposing to a hedgehog formation looks better than
Szilagyi’s setup )

14. h3 Bb7 15. Rc1 Nc5 16. f4

  ( now I thought I was on the right lines: turn that space
into attack, as in a Portisch game)

16… Ned7 17. g4 a5 18. Ng3 Bc6 19.
a4

  (what is black’s plan now ? the real challenge of course
is to find white’s plan! The wQ is badly tied to b3 and d3)

19… Rb8 20. Rf2

 

-T-D-Tj+
+-+sXxLx
-XlX-+x+
X-S-+-+-
p+p+pPp+
+pN-B-Np
-+-+-Rb+
+-Rq+-K-

20… Qc8 21. Nd5 Re8 22. g5 Qb7 23. f5 Bf8 24.
Bd4

( 24 f6 simply takes a good square away from the
knight. )

24… Ne5 25. Rc3 Bg7

 

-T-+t+j+
+d+-XxLx
-XlX-+x+
X-SnSpP-
p+pBp+-+
+pR-+-Np
-+-+-Rb+
+-+q+-K-

26. f6 Bf8 27. fxe7 Bxe7 28. h4 Bxd5 29. exd5 Bf8 30. Rf4
Bg7 31. Qf1

  ( both sides have consolidated after some white
initiative and I thought we’re now in for a phase of manoeuvring
)

31… Re7 32. Bxc5

[32. Rf6!!?? but declining leaves White
committed]

32… bxc5 33. Ne4

 

-T-+-+j+
+d+-TxLx
-+-X-+x+
X-XpS-P-
p+p+nR-P
+pR-+-+-
-+-+-+b+
+-+-+qK-

( This move cheered me up a little; I felt I had some chances for
the initiative )

33… Rd8 34. Nf6+ Bxf6!? 35. gxf6 Ree8 36. Re4
h5 37. Rce3 Kh7 38. Qf4

 

-+-Tt+-+
+d+-+x+j
-+-X-Px+
X-XpS-+x
p+p+rQ-P
+p+-R-+-
-+-+-+b+
+-+-+-K-

( I couldn’t see a way of winning after what I thought was the best
line, …Qb4, but I didn’t have to lose either. White can try to
contrive a lever with Bh3, Qg5 and now Bf5, but …Qb4 and …Rg8
(forces Kh1) slows or stops it)

38… Qc8 39. Bh3 Qb8

  ( if the knight moves don’t work this is probably best
)

40. Kh1 Qc7?! 41. Bf5 Qb8

  ( I immediately thought this was too resigned:
41…Rh8)

42. Qg5

  ( mates in six )

1-0

 

Manoeuvring in club play: with
extra space (II)

Regis,D – Tunks,D (1935) [B06]
Portsmouth Open #6, 1984

1. e4 g6 2. d4 Bg7 3. Nc3 d6 4. Nge2 Nd7 5. g3 e5

[too early]

6. Bg2 Ne7

[doesn’t look quite right here]

7. O-O O-O 8. Bg5 f6 9. Be3 Kh8 10. Qd2 Ng8 11.
f4 c6 12. Rf2

[12. a4]

12… Qe7 13. Raf1

 

t+l+-TsJ
Xx+sD-Lx
-+xX-Xx+
+-+-X-+-
-+-PpP-+
+-N-B-P-
pPpQnRbP
+-+-+rK-

Black has only defensive plans available – White tries to keep it
that way.

13… Nb6 14. b3 Be6 15. a4 Rad8 16. a5 Nc8 17.
d5 Bf7 18. Bh3 c5 19. f5 g5 20. Ra1 Be8 21. Na4

 

-+sTlTsJ
Xx+-D-Lx
-+-X-X-+
P-XpXpX-
n+-+p+-+
+p+-B-Pb
-+pQnR-P
R-+-+-K-

White probes on each side – the key manoeuvring idea.

21… Qc7 22. Bf1 h5 23. Nec3 a6 24. Ne2 Nh6 25.
h3 Rg8 26. b4 cxb4 27. Qxb4 Bb5 28. Nec3 Bxf1

[I’m not sure who this exchange favours – I thought
White at the time]

29. Kxf1 Rd7 30. Nb6 Nxb6 31. Bxb6 Qb8 32. Ra3
Bf8 33. Na4 Be7 34. Rc3 Kg7 35. Qc4 Bd8

 

-D-L-+t+
+x+t+-J-
xB-X-X-S
P-+pXpXx
n+q+p+-+
+-R-+-Pp
-+p+-R-+
+-+-+k+-

White doesn’t quite know what to do with the Queen’s side…

36. Qe2

  Tacking about from side to side is the hallmark of
manoeuvre

36… Rh8?!

  Black manfully gives up a Pawn but White has been looking
to get in on the light squares… the pattern of the game looks
like the infiltration of the Lasker-Tylor game rather than the
tacking about of Petrosian.

[36… g4! 37. Rb3!? / 37. Rh2!? when there is still
a lot of play left for both sides]

37. Qxh5 g4 38. Bxd8 Qxd8 39. Nb6
Rc7

[39… Rf7 40. Rc8]

40. Rxc7+ Qxc7 41. Qg6+ Kf8 42. Qxf6+ Nf7 43.
Qe6

 

-+-+-J-T
+xD-+s+-
xN-Xq+-+
P-+pXp+-
-+-+p+x+
+-+-+-Pp
-+p+-R-+
+-+-+k+-

1-0

  (Black said he was relieved when it all ended!)

  idea was 44 Nd7+ and 45 Qg6 mate;

  43 … Qe7; 44 h4!

[43. Qe6]

  43… Rh6

[43… Qe7 44. h4 Nd8 45. Nc8 Nxe6 46. fxe6+ Ke8 47.
Nxe7 Kxe7 48. Rf7+ Ke8 +-]

  44. Nd7+ Kg8 45. Qe8+ Kh7

[45… Kg7 46. f6+ Rxf6

[46… Kg6 47. Nf8+ Kh5 48. Rf5#]

47. Qf8+ Kh7 48. Nxf6+ Kg6 49. Qg8+ Kh6 50. Qh7+ Kg5
51. h4#]

  46. Qxf7+ Kh8 47. f6 Rxf6 48. Qxf6+ Kh7 49. Qf7+ Kh8 50.
Qh5+ Kg7 51. Rf7+ Kg8 52. Nf6#

  1-0

See also the material on
Space in the Canon

Co-ordination

Posted on by

Left over from the summer, some examples with light notes from a
session on Co-ordination

Click on the […] to see the list of games.

P.S. I had a couple of complaints about leaving out Tigran
Petrosian.  As soon as I manage to understand any of Petrosian’s
games, please be assured that I will include some examples by him too.

Queen sacrifices

Posted on by

Meanwhile, here are three games from Gandalf which explore the
wilder shores of compensation for a Queen (83,84,85)

Click […] for list of games

The initiative

Posted on by

20th_July_2010: Initiative

[Fixed 30 Apr 2020 – replaced PalView games with inline PGN]

Half a story

Some things in chess are very concrete and visible — checkmate, or
a
knight fork, perhaps, or as we get better, we can also see superior
development or pawn weaknesses.  There are more abstract features
of a chess game which are less easy to see, at least at a glance, and
you can appreciate best over a whole game or a part of a game. 
Annotators often talk about a player’s ‘feel for the initiative’, which is
at least a warning that this is not going to be an easy session.

Half a story

For a long while, I understood only half the story of chess. 
From the introduction to Michael Stean’s excellent little book Simple Chess:

“Don’t be deceived by the title–chess is
not a simple game–such a claim would be misleading to say the
least–but that does not mean that we must bear with the full brunt of
its difficulty. When faced with any problem too large to cope with as a
single entity, common sense tells us to break it down into smaller
fragments of manageable proportions. For example, the mathematical
problem of dividing one number by another is not one that can in
general be solved in one step, but primary school taught us to find the
answer by a series of simple division processes (namely long division).
So, how can we break down the ‘problem’ of playing chess?

“Give two of the uninitiated a chessboard, a set of chessmen, a list of
rules and a lot of time, and you may well observe the following
process: the brighter of the two will quickly understand the idea of
checkmate and win some games by 1. e4 2. Bc4 3. Qh5 4. Qxf7 mate. When
the less observant of our brethren learns how to defend his f7 square
in time, the games will grow longer and it will gradually occur to the
players that the side with more pieces will generally per se be
able to force an eventual checkmate. This is the first important
‘reduction’ in the problem of playing chess–the numerically superior
force will win. So now our two novices will no longer look to construct
direct mates, these threats are too easy to parry, but will begin to
learn the tricks of the trade for winning material (forks, skewers,
pins, etc.), confident that this smaller objective is sufficient. Time
passes and each player becomes sufficiently competent not to shed
material without reason. Now they begin to realize the importance of
developing quickly and harmoniously and of castling the king into
safety.”

“So what next? Where are their new objectives? How can the problem be
further reduced? If each player is capable of quick development,
castling and of not blundering any pieces away, what is there to
separate the two sides? This is the starting point of Simple Chess.
It
tries
to
reduce
the
problem
still
further
by
recommending
various
positional
goals
which
you can work toward, other things (i.e.,
material, development, security of king position) being equal. Just as
our two fictitious friends discovered that the one with more pieces can
expect to win if he avoids any mating traps, Simple Chess will
provide him with some equally elementary objectives which if attained
should eventually decide the game in his favor, subject to the
strengthened proviso that he neither allows any mating tricks, nor
loses any material en route. “

“Essentially, Simple Chess aims to give you some of the basic
ideas for forming a long-term campaign. It also shows you how to
recognize and accumulate small, sometimes almost insignificant-looking
advantages which may well have little or no short-term effect, but are permanent
features of the position. As the game progresses, the cumulative effect
begins to make itself felt more and more, leading eventually to more
tangible gains. Combinations and attacks are shelved for their proper
time and place as the culmination of an overall strategy. Given the
right kind of position it is not so difficult to overwhelm the
opposition with an avalanche of sacrifices. The real problem is how to
obtain such positions. This is the objective of Simple Chess.”

These permanent (or at least long-term) features of the position
that he discusses are things like open files, outposts, colour
complexes, space.  We might think about different levels of chess:
Scholar’s Mate (Level 1), tactics (Level 2), opening principles (Level
3), and now positional elements (Level 4).

With this firmly in mind, how can we explain Alekhin’s 9th move here?

Alekhin 
–
Poindle
[C67]
(simul.)
1936

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 Nf6 4.0-0 Nxe4
5.d4 Nd6 6.dxe5 Nxb5 7.a4 Nd6 8.exd6 Bxd6 9.Ng5

This move is not possible to understand in terms of the first four
levels of chess.  In fact, it directly contradicts the opening
principles that we have learned, like don’t
move
any
piece
twice
until
you
have
move
every
piece
once. 
Alekhin judges that straightforward
development (e.g. Re1+) would have allowed Black time to get sorted out
– this move
denies Black that time.  Threat follows threat, and Black can
never settle.

    EG:

  • Alekhin – poindle [C67]

Alekhin-Poindle

So, brace yourself for Level 5: dynamic chess.

The Initiative: definition and
description

The initiative is the capacity to
make threats.

“As the pieces are set on the board
both
sides have the same position and the same amount of material. White,
however, has the move, and the move is this case means ‘the
initiative’, and the initiative, other things being equal, is an
advantage. Now this advantage must be kept as long as possible, and
should only be given up if some other advantage, material or
positional, is obtained in its place. White, according to the
principles already laid down, develops his pieces as fast as possible,
but in so doing he also tries to hinder his opponent’s development, by
applying pressure wherever possible. He tries first of all to control
the center, and failing this to obtain some positional advantage that
will make it possible for him to keep on harassing the enemy. He only
relinquishes the initiative when he gets for it some material advantage
under such favorable conditions as to make him feel assured that he
will, in turn, be able to withstand his adversary’s thrust; and
finally, through his  superiority of material, once more resume
the initiative, which alone can give him the victory. This last
assertion is self-evident, since, in order to win the game, the
opposing King must be driven to a position where he is attacked without
having any way to escape. Once the pieces have been properly developed
the resulting positions may vary in character. It may be that a direct
attack against the King is in order; or that it is a case of improving
a position already advantageous; or, finally, that some material can be
gained at the cost of relinquishing the initiative for a more or less
prolonged period.”

— Capablanca in Chess Fundamentals, Chapter 4.

Examples: from initiative to attack

“The
main objective of initiative play is not so much to force the win but
rather to prevent your opponent from equalising.” — Colin
Crouch, Attacking Technique.

EG:
Akesson-Morozevich.

  • Akesson R. – Morozevich A. [D02]

EG: Tal-Simagin.

  • Tal – simagin [B07]

Quieter forms of the initiative

This is much less exciting, but Black
may also struggle to equalise in quieter positions

  • Hort V. – Polugaevsky L. [B22]

EG: Hort-Polugaevsky

Relinquishing initiative

I
haven’t found it so easy to find examples of this feature, which seems
so obvious.  Anyone?

EG: Winawer-Zukertort

  • Winawer S. – Zukertort J. [C49]

EG: Capa – allies

  • Capablanca – Salwe and allies [C83]

I know
a young nman who often loses the initiative, having got a winning
material advantage, and the consequences are sometimes painful to watch:

EG: Malam-Slade

  • Malam J. – Slade T. [C02]

The foundations of initiative
(activity, King safety, structure and space)

Initiative based on
superior piece Activity

We’ve seen Moro on the rampage, here’s a simpler one:

EG:

  • Kramer – Busek [D94]

Kramer-Busek

Initiative based on
opponent’s unsafe King

EG: Lasker-Pirc

  • Lasker – Pirc [B85]

Initiative based on superior
Structure

EG: NN-NN

Initiative based on Space

Another form of structural advantage, I guess.  Many games won
on the basis of space can be thought of as having an element of
initiative to them: the side with the extra space can organise threats
much more easily, even if they can’t at first break through.

EG:
Fischer-Gheorghiu

  • Fischer R. – Gheorghiu F. [C42]

Losing the initiative when you have more space is awful; you’re
defending a much longer line, that is well within reach of your
opponent.

EG:
Webb-Hartston

  • webb – hartston u. [A31]

You will notice that I have so far drawn example from master play;
club
games tend to be cluttered with so many errors in tactics and strategy
that the issue of the initiative is lost in the fog.   But
among the top county players you can see the pursuit of a persistent
initiative in
good style, and I watched one this year:

Mackle,D – Edgell,B [E18]

Devon vs Gloucestershire (1), 2009

1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3 e6 3.c4 b6 4.g3 Bb7 5.Bg2 Be7 6.Nc3 Ne4 7.Nxe4 Bxe4 8.0-0 0-0 9.Bh3 d6 10.Nd2 Bb7 11.e4 c5 12.d5 exd5 13.cxd5 Bf6 14.Re1 Nd7 15.Bf1 a6 16.a4 Ne5 17.f4 Ng6 18.Nc4 b5 19.axb5 axb5 20.Rxa8 Bxa8 21.Ne3 c4 22.b3 cxb3 23.Qxb3 Qa5 24.Re2 Rc8 25.Rc2 Rxc2 26.Nxc2 Bd8 27.Bxb5 Bb6+ 28.Kg2 Bb7 29.Qc4 Ne7 30.f5 Bc5 31.Qd3 f6 32.Bd2 Qa2 33.Bc4 Qb1 34.Ne3 Qb2 35.Nd1 Qa1 36.Bc3 Qc1 37.Bb2 Qg5 38.h4 Qh5 39.Qe2 Qxe2+ 40.Bxe2 Kf7 41.g4 h6 42.Nf2 Nc8 43.g5 hxg5 44.hxg5 fxg5 45.Bh5+ Kf8 46.Nh3 Ne7 47.Nxg5 Bc8 48.f6 gxf6 49.Bxf6 Bd7 50.Kf3 Nc8 51.Bg6 Ba3 52.Nh7+ Kg8 53.Bd4 Ba4 54.Nf6+ Kf8 55.Bf5 ½-½

The psychological initiative

Jonathan Rowson is always interesting to read, and he does not
disappoint in his chapter on the initiative (Chess for Zebras).  However,
he ends up folowing Suba in saying that the initiative is largely
psychological in nature.  I don’t deny that the initiative has
strongly psychological elements, but there is something on the board
too. 

Rowson (and I) find this easiest to see in those games where White
tries to attack Black’s position from the first move, say, in the sharp
main lines of the Najdorf.  Black can always find a defence after
the game, but during a game it’s not so easy.

The struggle for the initiative in
the opening

Alekhin’s
defence:
1.e4 Nf6 “White has
his initiative
to defend” — Tartakower.


The opening can be played to seek an
advantage in development, or space, or both, but some lines cannot be
understood except as a struggle for the initiative.  In many
modern variations this makes for very sharp play, and some ‘unnatural’
moves.  The main lines
of the Najdorf, an opening we looked at earlier, have this quality.

EG: Sicilian Najdorf

EG: Fischer-Tal

  • Fischer R. – Tal M. [C17]

The initiative can be more
important than general opening guidelines

EG: Alekhin-Wolf

  • Alekhin – wolf [D34]

The initiative
can be more important than material

Kasparov did some video interviews a while ago, and John Watson
commented in his review “Kasparov
also believes
that the new generation of the 90s plays a different kind of chess than
that of the 80s, believing that ‘initiative can be worth material’.”
This
comment
is
utterly
lacking
in
historical
subtlety. 
Alekhin’s
quest
for
the
initiative often took precedence over material, and I can
think of a few of Capablanca’s games where his initiative won out over
a lost pawn. More recently, Alexei Suetin’s book Modern Chess Opening Theory,
translated by our very own David Richards, gave many examples of
material sacrifice for the initiative.  Perhaps the top players of
the 1990s extended the range and daring of such sacrifices for the
initiative, but it is hardly a new insight. 

EG: Marshall-Capa

  • F.J. Marshall – J.R.C. [D64]

EG: Nimzo-Capa

  • Nimzowitsch A. – Capablanca J. [C62]

EG:

  • Modern Chess Opening Theory – NN [B34]

initiative in the
opening & a pawn sacrifice for White (Suetin)

EG:

  • Kasparov G. – Petursson M. [D15]

a pawn sacrifice for initiative in the
opening for White (Kasparov: Geller-Tolush gambit)

EG: a pawn sacrifice for initiative in the
opening for Black (Browne: Benko gambit)

  • Lorinczi P – Browne Walter S [A58]

EG: other sacrifices of material for
initiative (Bronstein: exchange sac in the Grunfeld)

  • Bronstein D. – Boleslavsky I. [D89]

EG: not enough initiative

  • Novopashin A. – Kortschnoj V. [B97]

(Korchnoi:
Poisoned pawn)

“I like to coax my opponents
into attacking, to let them taste the joy of the initiative, so they
may get carried away, become careless and sacrifice material.”
— Korchnoi

The
struggle for the initiative in the middlegame

EG: Spassky-Tal

  • Spassky B. – Tal M. [E31]

The initiative can be more
important than structure

A revealing moment:

EG: Fischer-Larsen

  • Fischer R. – Larsen B. [B77]

Defending against the initiative


Defence is another session or three, but to some extent it depends on
your style: do you prefer to defend in an active, enterprising,
opportunistic, counter-attacking style (Lasker, Kasparov, Korchnoi) or
is it more your style to be solid, gritty and patient? (Capablanca,
Petrosian, Karpov)  Of course, all the best players can play how
they like, and it’s hard to put the latest generation (Kramnik,
Topalov, Anand, Carlsen) into pigeonholes.

I mentioned last time Karpov’s tenacity in defence: strengthening his
position where he can, challenging and exchanging his opponent’s strong
pieces, making progress with his own ideas when given a chance; here’s
an example.

EG: Timman-Karpov

  • Timman J. – Karpov A. [E30]

Defensive sacrifices

I was very struck, following the first Karpov-Kasparov encounter, in
how many games Kasparov sacrificed a pawn.  We have seen an
example of him doing so when trying to win, but he also uses the same
device when trying to get enough counterplay to hold the balance.

EG:

  • Karpov A. – Kasparov G. [D87]

  • Karpov A. – Kasparov G. [D55]

Karpov-Kasparov 85

Turning points of a game


…may be seen in the transfer of the initiative.  John Watson in Secrets of Modern Chess Strategy

talks for a while about the ebb and flow of initiative in modern chess,
but without an example to support his highfalutin talk.  It is
difficult to find games where the initiative is exchanged as a result of good play based on
the features of the position, rather than losing the initiative because of a
second-rate move.  Anyhow, here is a game where we see an exchange
of the initiative; play it through and see if you can ‘feel’ who is
pressing.

EG:

  • Karpov A – Kasparov G [D97]

Karpov-Kasparov 87

At club level it’s even harder to find games where the initiative might
go back and
forth as a result of something other than errors, but try this one,
perhaps:   

EG: Regis-Littlejohns

  • Regis D. – Littlejohns D. [B14]


Further reading:

Dvoretsky in School of Chess
Excellence, vol.3, says something characteristically sniffy
along the lines of ‘annotators often
mention the initiative, so you can tell it’s important, but hardly
anybody
has written anything good about it…‘ and then offers a couple
of
chapters of his own.  But don’t start there!  His books
feature a
succession of very complicated examples which I expect are just the
thing that aspiring IMs should study if they want to be GMs, but are
generally hard to make use of if you aren’t that good yet. 

Nonetheless, I think an understanding of the initiative is useful
for
club players.  Fortunately, Dvoretsky is quite wrong to say that
there
is nothing worth reading on the subject; besides the references
mentioned above, Max Euwe
dealt very well with it in his Middlegame
books with Kramer, and Hansen’s more recent chapter in Improve your Positional Chess uses
very much the same framework.  I’ve also noticed (but not read) a
long chapter by Beim in How to Play
Dynamic Chess.  Suba talks a lot about initiative in Dynamic Chess Strategy, a book that
I have struggled to get much out of; again, the talk floats a little
too high above the evidence.

[…] for game list; click H8 for help