AMB IT

Elements of Chess Strategy

Alexei Kosikov

Translated by John Sugden

AMBI1T

First published in the UK by Gambit Publications Ltd 2010

Copyright © Alexei Kosikov 2010 English-language translation © John Sugden 2010

The right of Alexei Kosikov to be identified as the author of this work has been asserted in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in or introduced into a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means (electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise), without prior permission of the publisher. In particular, no part of this publication may be scanned, transmitted via the Internet or uploaded to a website without the publisher's permission. Any person who does any unauthorized act in relation to this publication may be liable to criminal prosecution and civil claims for damage.

ISBN-13: 978-1-906454-24-1 ISBN-10: 1-906454-24-8

Distribution:

Worldwide (except USA): Central Books Ltd, 99 Wallis Rd, London E9 5LN, England.

Tel +44 (0)20 8986 4854 Fax +44 (0)20 8533 5821. E-mail: orders@Centralbooks.com

Gambit Publications Ltd, 99 Wallis Rd, London E9 5LN, England.

E-mail: info@gambitbooks.com

Website (regularly updated): www.gambitbooks.com

Edited by Graham Burgess

Typeset by Petra Nunn

Cover image by Wolff Morrow

Printed in Great Britain by the MPG Books Group, Bodmin and King's Lynn

10 987654321

Gambit Publications Ltd

Managing Director: Murray Chandler GM Chess Director: Dr John Nunn GM Editorial Director: Graham Burgess FM German Editor: Petra Nunn WFM Webmaster: Dr Helen Milligan WFM

Contents

Preface 5

Symbols 5

Introduction 6

1 Devising a Plan in a Game of Chess 9

Elements of Chess Strategy 9

Prophylactic Thinking and Anticipation of Events 13

The Principle of Two Weaknesses 14

Manoeuvring 17

The Principle of the 'Worst' Piece 20

Answers to Exercises for Chapter 1 22

2 'STOPS' - A System of Self-Discipline in Chess 43

Answer to Exercise for Chapter 2 50

3 The Advantage of the Bishop-Pair 51

Bishop or Knight? 51

Bishop Stronger than Knight 52

Knight Stronger than Bishop 57

Two Bishops in the Middlegame 60

Two Bishops in the Middlegame: Associated Factors 62

The 'Advantage of the Knight-Pair' 64

The Problem of Exchanging 68

Two Bishops in the Endgame 71

Two Bishops against Two Knights in the Endgame ' 76

Methods of Combating the Two Bishops in the Endgame 78

Transformation of the Advantage 81

The Passed Pawn 84

ELEMENTS OF CHESS STRATEGY

The 'Best Odds' Principle 87

Answers to Exercises for Chapter 3 90

4 Warning - Trap Ahead! 105

Answers to Exercises for Chapter 4 120

5 Opposite Bishops in the Middlegame 126

Bishop Power 126

The Initiative 130

Attacking the King 134

Attacking the King with Minimal Material 136

Open File and Passed Pawn 138

Prophylaxis 140

Piece Coordination 142

Defence 143

The Pawn-Structure 145

Answers to Exercises for Chapter 5 149

Preface

Nothing is more terrible than war. In it there are no victors - only the downtrodden, the wounded and the humiliated. Yet I dream that a time will come when battles will be fought solely on the black and white squares of the chessboard.

The book examines a question of great importance to chess-players of any level - how to study the strategy of the middlegame. It elucidates the problems of devising a plan in a game of chess. It gives practical advice and recommendations on this subject. It proposes a system of self-discipline for the competitive player, to be practised during preparation, in the course of play and after the end of a tournament game. Much other useful information is also given.

In a word - read on. You will not regret it!

The book is intended for chess-players of average and higher categories.

Symbols

Introduction

For anyone wishing to improve at chess, middlegame strategy is among the most important problems and those that demand the most work. But even in our computerized age, there is much here that remains unclear.

For the study of endgames, the methods are quite intelligible. Many books have been written on the subject, and their number continues to grow. Various computer programs also give help of considerable importance. But the main thing is that we know what to do, in what direction to proceed in order to achieve concrete results: Compile a stock of standard clear-cut positions. Study the technical devices and methods of combat - those which have general application as well as those characteristic of a particular endgame type (pawn endings, rook endings, minor-piece endings, etc.). In this way you will attain a certain level of mastery in the endgame. Here everything depends on your aptitude, will, persistence and time.

How to approach the opening is also clear. The time when players would work solely from encyclopaedias, opening handbooks, monographs and magazine articles is now past. These materials are valuable, but need to be supplemented with computer programs for both information and analysis. A computer will not only give you detailed information on the opening variations that you intend to play, but it will also suggest which of them appear most acceptable on a statistical basis (without, admittedly, taking into account your chess tastes, playing style, or whether a particular line has been refuted, thus rendering a statistical analysis irrelevant). Another very important point is that in preparing for a specific tournament game, a contestant with the aid of databases can obtain information on dozens or hundreds of games played by the opponent he is about to face.

Many players follow the line of least resistance in their chess development and spend large amounts of time just studying the openings. Of course, such work may bring distinct and immediate results (you study something today and surprise an opponent with it tomorrow). Yet these players fail to notice that their chess is developing one-sidedly. For there is also the middlegame! And its study is a good deal more complicated. Why?

Let me digress a little and give you a logical problem to solve. Take a box of matches and take six matches out.

Exercise: Make four equilateral triangles out of these six matches. You must abide by these conditions: the triangles must have equal sides, and every side must be the length of one match, which you are not allowed to break.

You will find the right answer if you stop looking for it on a flat surface. You must come out into open space! Make a pyramid, and you arrive at the solution.

So it is with the study of the middlegame - two dimensions are not enough here. You need to perfect your abilities in a large number of directions. There is the development of your combinative vision and the technique of calculating variations. There is the study of typical positions (Sicilian structures with a backward pawn, the blocked centre, the dynamic centre, opposite-wing pawn-storms, isolated queen's pawn and related structures, hedgehog structure, etc.), and the ways of handling them. There are situations involving defence, the initiative and the struggle for it, the need for restraint, and so forth. There are positions where the material balance has been disturbed. There are elements of chess strategy such as open files, weak points, the bishop-pair, etc. And much, much more. In each one of these areas there are a great many guidelines and principles that are useful to know, and it is even more important to understand how to apply them and when to ignore them completely.

Introduction

However, there is at present no unified methodology for studying the middlegame - and there is unlikely to be one in the near future. And this is a good thing for chess creativity, since otherwise, after reading the appropriate book, we would all become World Champions, and chess would be reduced to a game on the lines of tic-tac-toe.

Why, then, was the present book written?

The point is that progress in any branch of knowledge is not to be halted, whether we like it or not. In chess it is hard to invent anything fundamentally new - much has already been pre-empted. But there is nothing terrible in this. The process of self-improvement is endless, and painstaking analytical work is no less complex and fascinating than discovering new concepts. Believe me!

In many years of work as a coach I have assembled a well-ordered set of conclusions. One of these is that in the body of knowledge possessed by chess-players, there is not enough, system. Often, on receiving some piece of information, we 'swallow' it without digesting it or making sense of it. And then during a game, when we seek some prompting from our 'library' of knowledge, we use up too much time and energy finding the 'book' we need, or we fail to find it at all. Imagine you have acquired tens of thousands of books that have not been sorted into any kind of order. Would such a library be any use to you?

In the book before you now, abundant examples are collected, some classical, some little-known. The essential requirement was that they should be united by general themes and a system of knowledge. I have tried not to overburden the reader with too many analytical variations, but nor have I permitted any superficiality in the examination of the examples.

Chapter-by-Chapter Outline

The book comprises five independent chapters, each of which is of interest for studying a specific field of chess strategy.

The significance of being able to form a plan of action in a game of chess is something that no one needs to have explained to them. The capacity to resolve this question correctly is what constitutes supreme strategic mastery. This is the theme of the first chapter, which gives not only general recommendations but also practical advice on their implementation.

Getting ready for a tournament game, controlling the course of events in it, analysing its psychological content afterwards, drawing up practical guidelines for your subsequent duels - recommendations on these matters are furnished by the system devised by the author, to which the second chapter is devoted.

The 'advantage of the bishop-pair' is a familiar piece of chess jargon - but when is this term justified and when is it not? You may say that plenty of books and articles have been devoted to this question already. But if you study the third chapter you will not begrudge the time spent. For what you have before you is a systeml

'Warning - trap ahead!' What chess-player is not mesmerized by the word trmpl Who among us has not fallen victim to an opponent's cunning? But then again, we may recall our delight on seeing the opponent caught in a snare of our own. This is a most important tactical, strategic and psychological device; but how do we leam to utilize it properly? An algorithm for the setting of traps will be discussed in the fourth chapter.

Although the theme of 'opposite bishops in the middlegame' is not new, I have my own views on it. You will come to know them when you read the fifth chapter.

Methodology

When assembling material for the book, apart from traditional teaching tasks (processing of information, training in the technique of calculating variations, etc.), I set myself one other goal of the

Elements of Chess Strategy

first importance but not easily attained: that of helping the reader to learn to think logically. I therefore took special pleasure in bringing to the reader's attention those examples which require you not only to work out concrete variations accurately but also to detect and construct a logical chain of reasoning to solve the problem.

In preparing the book I wished to present the material without recourse to either stereotypes or 'dry' formulae. I therefore took the liberty of including some witticisms and literary digressions in the text. Hopefully the well-disposed reader will understand me and the severe critic will forgive me.

Note on Exercises

In the majority of cases, the examples are accompanied by exercises, usually with a diagram in the relevant place. Note that these are not in most cases clear-cut tactical positions, where precise analysis will lead to a firm conclusion about the 'right' and 'wrong' answer. In many of them, the question is more about the assessment of the position and its strategic elements. There may well be several valid continuations, or it may be a matter of taste how to proceed. At these points you should pause to weigh up the position and how you would proceed before reading on. If your answer agrees with mine - wonderful - but if it does not, and checking with a computer suggests you have not missed anything critical, then you have perhaps found a valid alternative that also suits your playing style. I have striven to consider valid alternatives where they exist, and to point out plausible but inferior lines, but chess is a rich game and it is impossible to anticipate every idea.

You will get by far the most benefit out of these exercises if you devote a good deal of effort to them before looking at the solutions. Rather than ask that you keep pieces of card handy to cover up the solution in these cases (and hope that somehow you avoid seeing a key part of the answer when doing so), the answers to the exercises have been placed at the end of the chapter. But note that the exercises are an integral part of the chapter, and a good deal of the primary discussion occurs in their solutions. Therefore you should tackle them and read the answers before continuing onto the next example. In all cases there are page references to the material that follows, so you should never become lost!

In the exercises, you are often asked to evaluate a position. It is suggested that you answer according to a five-point scheme, namely:

• White has a won position;

• White has the better position;

• the game is equal;

• Black has the better position;

• Black has a won position.

It is clear from the above scheme that you are not being set the task of defining how much better or worse the position is. (After all, during play we don't attach a percentage score to a situation; we merely register it emotionally - do we like it to a greater or lesser degree?) But distinguishing a won position from a merely superior one is something that a high-ranking player is obliged to do.

And one final word. When working with this book, what matters is not the quantity of material devoured, but the quality of its assimilation.

1 Devising a Plan in a Game of Chess

For every good piece of advice, another ten are needed on how to carry it out. Vladimir Levi

In my practice as a coach I have often happened to hear remarks like "Today go for the attack", "Be more careful", "Pay attention to the tactics", etc. And of course, "Play according to a plan". But by no means all players, even of a high calibre, are successful in devising a plan in the course of a game of chess.

The advice you are given for the opening is to arrange your pieces in accordance with the plan you have in mind. But on the other hand, your choice of plan depends on how the pieces are arranged. What are you to do first, then? Develop your pieces or devise your plan? In this connection I would like to remind you of the philosophical question, 'Which came first, the chicken or the egg?' The answer is well known: both appeared simultaneously! So it is in chess.

Imagine you have been given the task of devising a plan following the moves 1 e4 e5. The very question, of course, is in itself devoid of sense. For a plan to be conceived, the position needs to have matured. But in that case how do you arrange your pieces; what are the right places for bringing them out?

You are recommended to do this in such a way that the development of your pieces fits in with the greatest quantity of possible plans.

So after 1 e4 e5, the move 2 £}f3 occurs most often, although other continuations are possible too, such as 2 f4, 2 £ic3, 2 Lc4, etc.

With this in mind, at what point can you (or must you) begin to devise a concrete plan? This most often occurs when the development of the minor pieces is basically complete and the king has castled (or - in some openings such as the French and Sicilian Defences, etc. - when the position of the king has been determined). The major pieces are brought out only

at the second stage, since the placing of the rooks (with the queen, a 'smart' piece, things are simpler) should correspond to the chosen plan.

It is most important not to miss the right moment. As Lenin said, "Yesterday was too early but tomorrow will be too late. We will take the Winter Palace today, comrades!" The situation in chess is analogous. The plan cannot be born prematurely. But if you take too long to formulate it, the course of events on the board may escape your control.

Elements of Chess Strategy

What do you think defines a chess-player's strength? What distinguishes a grandmaster, shall we say, from a strong amateur? And what does a chess-player's understanding consist of?

Many answers can be given to these somewhat abstract questions. In my view, the answer lies in the ability to assign the right order of priority to the elements of strategy in a particular position, and to formulate a plan of play accordingly. There are large quantities of such strategic elements in chess; for instance, a weak point, a passed pawn, piece activity, peculiarities of the pawn-structure, and so on.

Just how many elements could be named in total, I shall not venture to say. One hundred, two hundred, or more? What I do know precisely is that in every position there are certain elements of greatest importance, and that by unravelling them we enable ourselves to formulate the right plan of action.

Let us examine this with some concrete examples (remember that you should read the solution to each before moving on to the next, and that the more effort and independent thought you put in, the more benefit you will derive).

ELEMENTS OF CHESS STRATEGY

I

■ A|

iAW&P* IP'

A;

Aronson - Tal

£/SS/? Oi, Moscow 7957

Khuzman - Kasparov

Simultaneous display, Tel-Aviv 1998

White has an extra pawn. Exercise 1:

1) Specify the chief strategic factors on which Black should base his plan of action.

2) Suggest a specific continuation for Black. (For the answer, see page 22.)

Exercise 3: Give your evaluation of the position.

(For the answer, see page 23.)

W

Nimzowitsch - H. Wolf

Karlsbad 1923

W

WkM+m m ■ ■£■1^4

A

"a"W"a"W'

ABU! S &'

Smyslov - Matanovic

Interzonal Tournament, Biel 1976

Exercise 2: Indicate the chief strategic ele Exercise 4: Indicate the main strategic fac-

ments in this position. tors that constitute White's advantage.

(For the answer, see page 22.) (For the answer, see page 23.)

Devising a plan in a Game of Chess

11

vMim, III

Hi w

A

A

m, m

AB^t up w w w.

Geller - Hort

Skopje/Ohrid 1968

W

Bareev - Shirov

Linares 1994

Exercise 5:

1) Evaluate the position.

Exercise 7:

1) Identify the chief strategic elements in

2) Indicate the strategic factors on which this position, your evaluation is based. 2) Suggest how to make use of them.

(For the answer, see page 24.) (For the answer, see page 24.)

w

Ivanchuk - Yudasin

Candidates match (game 1), Riga 1991

Wm Hi « i 'wm. mm.

A«*J

D. Gurevich - Seirawan

USA Ch, Seattle 2000

Exercise 6: Define the main strategic elements of the position and indicate the way to utilize them.

(For the answer, see page 24.)

Exercise 8:

1) Identify the chief strategic elements.

2) Give your evaluation of the position.

3) In Black's place, what would you play? (For the answer, see page 25.)

Elements of Chess Strategy

w

Botvinnik - Sorokin

USSR Ch, Moscow 1931

It is clear from a look at the position that the advantage lies with White.

Exercise 9: What would you play if you were in White's place?

(For the answer, see page 26.)

The problem of exchanging is a key question of chess strategy.

Botvinnik stated that "the process of a chess game (and probably of any game) consists of a generalized exchange". A correct approach to this problem sometimes enables you to avoid calculating a large number of variations. In support of this, I should like to give the following example; the comments in quotation marks are Tal's.

weakening of White's kingside gives Black distinct chances of an attack in the middle-game. White could now continue with 19 #d2, so as to occupy an important diagonal with his bishop after 20 JLf 4. In my vexation at not having obtained an attack, I decided that the position was virtually lost for White, and played the rest of the game with very little confidence."

19i.g5Be7

"I would like to quote a conversation that took place between Mikhail Botvinnik and myself after the end of the ninth game. When I started reeling off variations at machine-gun speed to demonstrate how comfortable Black's position was, Botvinnik said: 'At first I felt this position was more pleasant for White, but then I found the right plan: I had to exchange rooks but keep the queens on.'

"To begin with, this judgement on the position struck me as astonishingly abstract, but when I started reviewing that same mass of variations, I could only come to the conclusion that Botvinnik was absolutely right: without queens, White's well-configured pawn-chain, supported by his active bishop, would secure him a distinct plus. With queens on the board, Black could count on a powerful attack, thanks to the weakening of the g4-square. It was experience and knowledge that achieved victory in this game on the 58th move; victory in the match was won by youth."

W

Tal - Botvinnik

World Ch match (game 9), Moscow 1960

"With material equality (three pawns for a piece), White has quite good endgame prospects, seeing that in endings of this type a bishop is more active. On the other hand, the

A correct solution to the problem of exchanging pieces can sometimes enable us to steer the course of a game in the direction we require.

Bronstein - Petrosian

Candidates tournament, Amsterdam 1956

Devising a plan in a Game of Chess

13

Exercise 10: What would you play if you had Black here?

(For the answer, see page 28.)

W

Ivanchuk - Aronian

Morelia/Linares 2007

Exercise 11:

1) What is your evaluation of the position?

2) In White's place, what would you play? (For the answer, see page 28.)

Having tackled these exercises, we have satisfied ourselves that identifying the chief strategic elements is an essential basis for devising a plan. But this alone is not enough. What else is required in order to master the art of planning?

Prophylactic Thinking and Anticipation of Events

Modern competitive chess differs sharply from the chess of the relatively recent past. Let us recall an era that takes us back, say, twenty-Five years. The time-control was forty moves in two and a half hours for each player. After that the game would be adjourned. Days for resumption of adjourned games came after every two or three rounds. There were rest days into the bargain. Tournaments with fourteen participants would, as a rule, last three weeks. A 'plus four' result gave realistic chances of first place. And if your luck was out and you only scored 'plus two', it was still perfectly possible to reckon on a place in the prize list. It was not life but paradise!

Competitive chess today is arduous, gruelling work demanding total commitment. 'Open' tournaments have become the norm. There will be a hundred or more players taking part. The playing schedule is extremely tight. The time-control is punishing. Games are played daily, or quite often at a rate of two rounds a day. But even this is not the main thing. Chess professionals derive their basic means of subsistence from prizes gained in tournaments. Yet with so many participants in a contest lasting, say, for nine rounds, there can no longer be any question of winning prizes with a 'plus four' result. You need to score seven points, sometimes even more.

Very well. In the opening rounds, as a rule, the favourites are drawn to play against less experienced opponents. In these conditions you can presume to score close to 100% (though even this happens only if everything goes your way). But afterwards you get opponents with 'teeth', conceding nothing to you either in rating points or in their strength and experience of the practical struggle. And you need to pick up another 'plus two' or 'plus three' for a prize. Where from? How? Even a drawn game, against a very strong opponent too, can prove to be a negative result.

Exceedingly intensive work is required here! The burden - physical, intellectual and emotional - increases to the maximum. It is such that you don't see the chess pieces but just circles before your eyes. And yet you have to fight! Such, alas, is a competitor's life!

Time and again I have given attention to the mode of thought that tends to be adopted by a chess amateur. "I'll try to choose the best continuation in this situation", he will say to himself, "and after that it's up to my opponent to think. When he makes his reply, that's when I carry on with my search. What's this about me having to work and think for his side too? Have I got such an outsize head?"

Top-class chess-players have to behave like First-rate actors in a drama. Just as an actor must not only play the role created by the author but also get inside the personality of the character he is portraying, so a chess-player needs to experience the very thoughts, wishes and emotions of his opponent. Envisaging a possible continuation, idea or plan for his own side, he

Elements of Chess Strategy

must not stop there. He must continue his deliberations by, so to speak, turning the board through 180 degrees and seeking a response for his opponent no less energetically. But doing this is not easy, for two reasons. The first is psychological. It is very much against our wish that a refutation of our projects, or even a serious response to them, should be found.

The second reason is that this process requires an extra expenditure of energy, as we have to work not only for ourselves but also for the person opposite.

Yet prophylactic thinking is indispensable, because it is only in this way that we will be able to anticipate the course of the struggle ahead and channel it in the direction necessary and favourable to ourselves. And if, as the result of our prognosis, we come to the depressing but courageous and honest conclusion that events are going in the wrong direction for us, then it is essential to harness all our strength, knowledge, imagination and ingenuity for the sake of radically altering the character of the struggle.

By way of illustrating what has been said, let us take the following example.

Fischer - Spassky

Match (game 1), Sveti Stefan/Belgrade 1992

1 e4 e5 2 £sf3 £ic6 3 i.b5 a6 4 &a4 £if6 5 0-0 i.e7 6 Sel b5 7 &b3 d6 8 c3 0-0 9 h3 £)b8 10 d4 <£bd7 11 £tod2 &b7 12 i.c2 Ie8 13 £ifl i.f8 14 £ig3 g6 15 i.g5 h6 16 k.A2 ±g7 17 a4 c5 18 d5 c4 19 b4 £>h7 20 i.e3 h5 21 Wd2 Sf8 22 Sa3 ^df6 23 Seal Wd7 24 Sla2 Sfc8 25 Wcl i.f8 26 #al We8 (D)

W

l,A«j

ill a III < W 6 V I

■!■&■ BA

AHABAB ■

if B B^0A

Exercise 12:

1) Give your assessment of the position.

2) Identify the main strategic elements.

3) What would you play if you were in White's place?

(For the answer, see page 28.)

I am sure you found this a striking and convincing example of the power of prophylactic thinking. But let us return to the main theme of this chapter. Well, we have decided to formulate our plan in good time; the main strategic elements are correctly identified; our prophylactic thinking and anticipation of events are up to standard; vulnerable and critical points have been found in the opponent's camp.

Yet the question still remains - how are we to devise our plan, gentlemen?

The Principle of Two Weaknesses

The principle of two weaknesses is basic to forming a plan in a game of chess. The concept of a weakness in the broad strategic sense should be understood as a lasting threat. Examples are possession of an open file and the consequent threat to penetrate; a vulnerable king position; pawn weaknesses; a far-advanced passed pawn; and so on. Put more briefly, by the word weakness we understand something that compels the opponent to defend for quite a long time.

The implementation of a plan according to the principle of two weaknesses can be divided into five stages:

1) Create the first weakness.

2) Attack this weakness, though not in order to destroy it (that would of course be a good thing, but your forces are likely to be insufficient for it) but to compel the opponent's pieces to go over to the defence, thus depriving them of activity and mobility.

3) Create the second weakness.

4) Attack the second weakness.

5) Attack both weaknesses by turns; this should eventually produce a breach in the opponent's defence.

The principle of two weaknesses was conceived as long ago as the 19th century. But the precise, lucid explanation of this principle must be credited unreservedly to Aron Nimzowitsch:

Devising a plan in a Game of Chess

15

"The two weaknesses are in themselves perfectly defensible, but the attacker relies primarily on the territorial advantage at his disposal, the superior state of his lines of communication. The game is lost because at some point the defender proves unable to match his opponent in the swift regrouping of forces."

This last sentence of Nimzowitsch's explains the possibility of carrying out the fifth and final stage of a plan based on the principle of two weaknesses. Let us now examine this in the context of some concrete examples.

Botvinnik - Zagoriansky

Sverdlovsk 1943

1 £*3 d5 2 c4 e6 3 b3 Qt 6 4 .&,b2 ±.e7 5 e3 0-0 6 £>c3 c5 7 cxd5 £sxd5

Small inaccuracies at the start of the game will lead to serious problems for Black later on. He already had to make a decision - whether to take on d5 with his queen (after an exchange of knights) or to go into a position with an isolated pawn. In the latter case he should avoid exchanges that are not necessary (7...exd5! ?).

8 £ixd5 exd5?! 9 d4 cxd4 10 #xd4 M6 11 #d2 £sc6 12 ±e2 &e6?!

In a simplified form, the verdict on positions with an isolated pawn is that the advantage lies with the side holding the initiative. Black should therefore have preferred 12....&g4.

13 0-0 i.xb2 14 #xb2 Wa5 (D)

w

In terms of the principle of two weaknesses, which stage do you think the game has reached?

That's right, the second stage. The first weakness - the pawn on d5 - has already been formed. Consequently it needs to be attacked. For this purpose let us envisage the arrangement

of White's pieces. Rooks on the d-file (dl and d2). Bishop on f3. Queen - this is a 'smart' piece that can join in the attack at any moment. But what about the knight? If it is placed on a square where it attacks the d5-pawn (i.e. c3 or f4), White loses control of the d4-square, and the freeing break with ...d4 becomes more than a realistic prospect. Let us recall Nimzowitsch, who affirmed that the isolated pawn had to be blockaded, since it strives to advance even at the cost of sacrificing itself. Does the knight belong on d4, then? But in that case the knight itself will be shielding the d5-pawn from the white rooks' attack.

The modem attitude to the isolated pawn differs from that of Nimzowitsch; the isolated pawn must be not blockaded but destroyed! White would therefore like the knights to be exchanged off. After that, a white rook on d4 will not only blockade the black d5-pawn solidly but attack it at the same time.

In view of what has just been stated, the next phase of the game requires no commentary.

15 Bfdl Sfd8 16 fid2 Sd7 17 ladl Sad8 18 h3 h6 19 £ie5! £>xe5

Forced, as 19...Id6 fails to 20 £sc4!.

20#xe5l f c5 21i.f3b6

The threat was 22 e4.

22 #b2 fie8 23 We5 Sed8 24 Sd4 a5 (D)

w

Exercise 13: Suggest White's further plan of action.

(For the answer, see page 29.)

I would like to go more deeply into the concept of a 'weakness'. For this, let us look at the following example (see next diagram).

The second stage of the 'two weaknesses' strategy is over: the first object of attack (the

Elements of Chess Strategy

w

abi

W& HI

k.mm LwW A If A

JUL

i o in

^

SP Aff

Shirov - Kinsman

Paris 7990

b7-pawn) has been set up, and placed under pressure. What comes next seems clear - White must create a second weakness in another sector of the board.

30 h4 gxh4

30...^.f7 is no improvement in view of 31 hxg5 fxg5 3 2 JLe2!, with 3 3 f4 to follow - or 31 .&e2! at once.

31 gxh4 &f 7

It looks as if the third stage (creation of the second weakness) is completed - the g7-pawn is ready to be put under pressure. But that is not entirely true. Or to be more exact, it is entirely untrue! After 32 Sg2 "4>f8 33 Sbgl e5! Black manages to regroup in time, as a result of which his rooks, stationed on the second rank, will support the weaknesses on b7 and g7 without any strain. The point is that the weaknesses are both on the same rank.

32 e5!

Now the second weakness, on the kingside, does emerge. It comprises not only the g7-pawn but also the e6-pawn!

32...f5?!

A more stubborn defence lay in 32...fxe5, though in that case too Black's position would hardly be defensible. For instance, 33 dxe5 "Atf 8 34 Sg2 (with a view to 35 2bgl £g8 36 h5) 34...Se7 (the weak e6-point has to be maintained) 35 fidl! Icd7 36 Sd6 &g8 37 Sgd2 <4>e8 38 f4, followed by <4>f 3-g4-g5 and f 5. Incidentally, I would like to point out that in this variation, White exploits the emergence of one further weakness in the black camp - the open d-file; his penetration on that file ultimately decides the issue.

33 2g2 g6 34 Sbgl

The threat of an exchange sacrifice on g6 (after which the weakness on e6 will also collapse!) becomes unbearable, so Black plunges into tactical complications.

34...Hc8 35 Ixg6 f4+ 36 <4d3 Scd8 37 W6 fixd4+ 38 <4>c3 Sdl 39 Sg7 2cl+ 40 *b3 Ibl+ 41 *c2 1-0

After all that has been said above, it will be child's play for us to make sense of the next example.

W

m mm

u

a"«"i iff a mB

iii

w, mm

Vukic - Davcevski

Yugoslav Ch, Bjelovar 1979

You don't have to be a super-strong chessplayer to recognize that White has a won position. He is a pawn up, and the way to exploit his advantage is clear - provided of course that we have learnt to plan our play in accordance with the principle of two weaknesses. The first two stages are over. White has created a passed a-pawn - constituting Black's first 'weakness' -and pushed it sufficiently far. It is now time for the third stage - the formation of a second weakness on the opposite side of the board.

33 h3 *d8 34 g4 *c7 35 *f 2 &e8 36 2al Sa8 37 *e2 £>c8 38 &d2

There is no urgency in the position; Black has no counterplay at all. Therefore, true to the principle 'do not rush', White improves the placing of his pieces to the full.

38...£ia7

Now, in the words of the fable, the tail is freedbutthenoseis stuck. The passed pawn on a6 is solidly blockaded (for the present!), but the defence of the kingside is weakened.

39 gxf 5 exf 5 40 Sgl g6 41 b.4! £>c8

Devising a plan in a Game of Chess

17

The knight is obliged to jump back. It is beyond Black's power to defend both weaknesses at once, given the inferior mobility of his pieces.

42 h5 £se7 43 hxg6 £xg6 44 Shi! 2c8 45 £sxg6!

A typical transformation of the advantage, which involves the question of exchanging. White trades his superb knight for his opponent's atrocious bishop. But then, this misfit was the only black piece that still stood in the way of White's onslaught!

45...hxg6 46 Sh7 sfed7 47 a7!

Here it is - the fifth stage in implementing the principle of two weaknesses. The decisive word is spoken by the white a-pawn.

47...&e6

The endgame after 47...2a8 48 £kc6 <£>xc6 49 12xe7 requires no comment.

48 Sxe7+ 1-0

After 48...<4>xe7 49 &xc6+ <£>e6 50 £\b8 the a-pawn queens.

As mentioned earlier, the 'patent' for the principle of two weaknesses belongs to Nimzo-witsch. But this principle was, of course, also utilized by other strong players of his era.

shall be ably assisted in this by an extract from a game by the third World Champion.

W

Capablanca - Schroeder

New York 1916

Black's pieces (notably his queen) have been removed to the queenside, leaving the kingside undefended; consequently, despite his own un-castled king, White begins active operations against the enemy king.

19 £ig5 h6 20 Wh7+ <&f8

Exercise 15: Choose between the two candidate moves 21 #h8+ and 21 £>e4.

(For the answer, see page 31.)

w

Znosko-Borovsky - Alekhine

Paris 1933

Exercise 14:

1) Identify the main strategic elements in this position.

2) Evaluate the position. (For the answer, see page 30.)

Again I would like to define more precisely what we understand by the term weakness. We

All would now seem clear. How to formulate a plan, we know by now. But don't jump to conclusions. At the very first stage of implementing a plan based on the principle of two weaknesses, we often come up against obstacles that are hard to surmount. Suppose that your opponents these days are competent and recalcitrant; they don't want to give themselves any weaknesses - so there! Where, then, are the weaknesses going to come from?

Manoeuvring

This procedure has been compared to tacking, i.e. steering a vessel with frequent changes of direction to sail into the wind.

"In level positions the play assumes a particular character. As a rule it proceeds quietly - incautious actions can quickly spoil everything. The players will usually begin some lengthy manoeuvring, in the course of which they try to avoid weakening their own position

Elements of Chess Strategy

while provoking the formation of weaknesses in the opposite camp." (Karpov).

The manoeuvring may also have the object of regrouping the pieces.

W

42...£ic6 43 £>xa6 bxa644 &xc6 i.e6 45 g4 £f6

Now White can get to grips with the d4-pawn.

46 &d3 h5 47 £ixd4 &c8 48 £f3 hxg4 49 hxg4 &f7 50 b4 i.d8 51 a3 1-0

Nikolic- Sznapik

Dubai Olympiad 1986

That White has a won position is visible to the naked eye, what with the overwhelming activity of his pieces coupled with the large number of weaknesses in the black camp. Very soon, obviously, White will have little trouble surrounding and destroying the weak black pawn on d4. But then, there is no reason to hurry. To prepare, Nikolic carries out a regrouping.

40£>c7!

Threatening to win a pawn with either 41 .&xc6or41 <5}xa6.

40...<£>d8 41 &d5! ±e7 (D)

w

Tarrasch - Alekhine

Baden-Baden 1925

Exercise 16:

1) Evaluate the position.

2) In Black's place, how would you continue?

(For the answer, see page 31.)

Hi iiii

AH ■ H ■

A«A:

K,

A

42 &t 3!

In the space of just three moves, the activity of White's pieces has increased so much that Black is prepared to accept the material loss which he tried to avoid a moment ago.

Simagin - Taimanov

USSR Ch, Moscow 1952

Exercise 17:

1) Give your assessment of the position.

2) Suggest a plan for Black. (For the answer, see page 32.)

Devising a plan in a Game of Chess

19

w

n IIP inn

AlfiA

IAS

M

A

A

Karpov - Spassky

Candidates match (game 9), Moscow 1974

Exercise 18:

1) Evaluate the position.

2) Suggest a plan of action for White. (For the answer, see page 32.)

Tacking' to and fro is another term that was introduced into chess parlance by Nimzowitsch.

In the reference work Chess: An Encyclopaedic Dictionary (under Anatoly Karpov's general editorship), the following definition is given: "Tacking is a strategic device which involves manoeuvring the pieces with the aim of creating and utilizing weaknesses in the opponent's camp." Yet this formulation seems to me imprecise. In this connection let us examine the following examples.

Khalifman - Balashov

Zonal tournament play-off, Lvov 1990

"It was at this very moment, exploring the position during my opponent's thinking time, that I hit upon the ideal arrangement for my pieces. Anticipating, I shall say that within

literally six moves(!), this arrangement actually came about" (Khalifman).

Exercise 19: Try to decide what configuration of the pieces it was that White devised.

(For the answer, see page 33.)

Let's look at two more examples that are highly instructive.

w

Lobron - Spraggett

Wijk aan Zee 1985

Exercise 20: What would you play if you had White here?

(For the answer, see page 33.)

w

IBA

A

*AI

mm. wm •

^mmi S,

m mm,

A:

Sorin - Valerga

Buenos Aires 1997

Exercise 21:

1) Give your assessment of the position.

2) What would you play if you had White? (For the answer, see page 34.)

In the foregoing examples, the issue was decided by a manoeuvre that involved activating

Elements of Chess Strategy

pieces (in the last two cases it was rooks). Based on this, I would give the following definition.

Tacking, as a strategic device, means manoeuvring the pieces with the aim of activating them or utilizing weaknesses in the opponent's camp.

But there are situations where a successful manoeuvring phase is already over, weaknesses in the enemy camp have been created, a plan on the principle of two weaknesses has nearly been accomplished, yet you cannot find a continuation to finish off the struggle. In this case, what advice can be given?

w

ill

Mm, WW,, WW

AllAH

!A!

Aii

Fischer - Darga

West Germany - USA match, West Berlin 1960

The Principle of the 'Worst' Piece

Exercise 22: In White's place, what would you play?

(For the answer, see page 34.)

As a rule, this principle is applied when we are carrying out the final stage of a plan for exploiting two weaknesses.

The essence of the principle of the 'worst' piece is as follows. In positions that are close to being won, you often get the impression that something is missing - some trifling detail or other. Taking a look at the position from (so to speak) a detached, 'philosophical' point of view, you try to identify the least active piece - the 'worst' piece - in your own camp, and you look for a way to activate it. Improving the position of this piece may turn out to be the final drop that fills the cup of victory.

Incidentally, in our last three examples we already saw a partial implementation of the principle of the 'worst' piece. In Khalifman-Balashov it was the activation of an idle bishop that affected the outcome; in the other two cases it was the transfer of a rook to the principal battle zone.

Let us examine a few more examples.

Janowski - Rubinstein

Karlsbad 1907

Exercise 23:

1) According to the principle of two weaknesses, which stage has the game reached?

2) In Black's place, what would you play? (For the answer, see page 35.)

Devising a plan in a Game of Chess

21

W

Smyslov - Simagin

Moscow 1967

W

EWm 6

A lifts

m

A!

Nimzowitsch - Rubinstein

Dresden 1926

Exercise 24: What would you play if you had White here?

(For the answer, see page 35.)

Exercise 25:

1) Give your assessment of the position.

2) In White's place, what would you play? (For the answer, see page 36.)

Well then, we have decided how to formulate a plan. Theoretically, all would seem clear. The only trouble is that in practice, I assure you, nothing will be anywhere near so simple - seeing that "for every good piece of advice, another ten are needed on how to carry it out".

Elements of Chess Strategy

Answers to Exercises for Chapter 1

Exercise 1

A HP A HP A HP v/ 1m^1mfimm. f

m »

&m i

i

m

iff

1

White's main liabilities are his weakened king position and the poor coordination of his pieces. Tal sees a way to 'isolate' the a 1-rook.

26...&bl!!

Now that the white rook is temporarily shut out of the game, the weakness of the first and second ranks makes itself acutely felt.

27 &e5?!

Objectively, 27 fif4 is White's best attempt to survive, although 27...Sel+ 28 <£f2 Sfe8 29 #xg7+ Wxg7 30 ±\gJ 4>xg7 31 i.f3 h5 32 .&xh5 S8e5 is by no means pleasant for him.

27...£ie6

27...<£»f7 is also good.

28#d6

28 WaS may be more resilient, but 28...£)g5 29 I'M (or 29 Wei i.c2 threatening ...Sf5) 29.. JLe4 favours Black.

28...#f 5 29 M 4 £lg5 30 #b4 (D)

At last the rook is freed from its prison. But in the meantime the black knight has managed to gallop right into the thick of the action.

30...±e4 31 i.xe4 lxe4 32 If 1 Se2 33 Wd6 lxa2 34 WAS #c2 35 c5 ld8 36 ±d6 Se8 0-1

(Now return to page 10.)

Exercise 2

w

You are right if you pointed out that the main characteristic is the presence of opposite bishops in a middlegame situation. If you add to this the greater activity of White's pieces and his extra control of space, then his advantage becomes obvious. But is it enough to win? Let us follow how the game went.

33 Wg4 &f5 341^2 h6?!

An inaccuracy. Better is 34...JLd3, forcing 35 c5.

35 2g3 *h7 (D)

w

36 d5!

This is the whole point! Now the creation of a passed pawn will be one more thing (in addition to the defence of his king) to require Black's attention.

36...Sf7?

Devising a pian in a Game of Chess

23

A preferable line is 36...exd5 37 cxd5 g6 38 Sc3 #d8 39 d6 b5 because after 40 Sc7?! fixc7 41 dxc7 #d3, Black is not in danger of losing.

37 d6 g6 38 c5 #c8 39 Sc3 (D)

White's intention is obvious -to play 40 c6. Additional Exercise 2A: Assess Black's survival chances after 39...#c6 and 39...fid7. (For the answer, see page 37.)

Exercise 3

In this opposite-bishop position Black clearly has the advantage, but I don't think everyone would make so bold as to give a verdict of 'Black wins'. And yet it really is so. Despite the small number of actors on the board, the presence of queens gives the position the character of a sharp middlegame. Black's task is simple -to bring up his queen and have a 'heart-to-heart talk' with the white king.

See how elegantly Kasparov coped with this task.

39...We7! 40 *hl #e5 41 *h2 Wffi!

Threatening 42...#xh4.

42 &g2 Wb2+! 0-1

On 43 *fl Black plays 43...f r h2, while 43 <4>gl is met by 43...Ac5+ and 44...Wf2. If 43 ^hl, then 43...1T2 is decisive.

Black only made four moves (and all with his queen!), but this proved sufficient for victory. A stage with a solo performer!

(Now return to page 10.)

Exercise 4

w

AilXfliw

P ^ A 6 1 * 4

Control of greater space is an extremely important element of chess strategy. It enables you to transfer your forces quickly to any sector of the battlefield.

This holds true in the position before us -White's spatial advantage means his pieces are freer, more mobile and more active. The game continued:

12 a4 £if8?!

Conducting the defence (and that is precisely what Black had to attend to here) means doing what you can while you can, rather than what you would like to do. It was essential for Black to shore up his queenside defences with 12...a5, even though this would leave him without any possibility of counterplay.

13 a5! bxa5 14 #a4+ £>8d7 15 fxe5 dxe5 16 Wxa5

As a result, a new salient factor of the strategy has emerged: the weak pawns on a6, c5 and e5.

16...#xa5 17 lxa5 Sb8 18 Sa3

Aiming to meet 18...fib4 with 19 b3, followed by bringing the knight from f3 via el to d3.

18...&d619 £>el h5 20 h3 0-0 21 £sd3 £sb6 22 b3 £b7 23 i.e3 Sf c8 24 Sa5

By attacking the pawn weaknesses, White compels his opponent to go over to lifeless

Elements of Chess Strategy

defence without even the dream of creating any counterplay in the near future.

24...£>bd7 25 Sfal i.c7 26 S5a2 i.d6 27 i.f3 2c7 28 Sa5 &c8 29 i.dl g6 30 <4>g2 <&g7 31 Ila3 i.b7 32 g4!

"Having tied down the black pieces, White goes into action on the kingside. This is a typical example of play on both wings" (Smyslov).

32...hxg4 33 hxg4 £>h7 34 £>a4 fibc8 35 Sa2

Intending, if the case arises, to carry out b4 after a preliminary Sb2.

35.. Ael 36 Hb2 £M6 37 &f3 £>h7 38 *fl! f5?!

With less control of space and less active pieces, you should of course avoid sharp tactical clashes.

39 gxf5 gxf5 40 Sg2+!

You see! The spatial plus permits White to switch his rook quickly to a different sector of the board, while Black cannot do the same.

40...*f6 41i.h5fxe4

It was no good playing 41...f4 either, in view of 42 ±f2 £ig5 43 £h4 fig8 44 i.g4 followed by 45 i.xd7.

42£)f2i.f843£)xe4+l-0

The game was adjourned here, and Black resigned without resuming. He can't play 43...4f 5 due to 44 JLg6#, but if 43...£ , e7 then 44 d6+ wins.

(Now return to page 11.)

Exercise 5

AI

■■*m

A

"'■0%S0:'i\iu?,

mm, wm, w

A»l

■ A

m 43, 4////A

"The ending is very difficult, perhaps strategically lost for Black. White has a spatial plus, better-placed pieces, a superior pawn-structure and the possibility of a pawn offensive on the kingside. The position of the pawn on h5 plays

an important role here." (Mikhail Shereshev-sky).

The game continued:

24...1 r a5 25 a3 Wa4+ 26 *cl

Additional Exercise 5A: Choose between the candidate moves 26...4^7 and 26...Ae7.

(For the answer, see page 37.)

Exercise 6

w

White has an extra pawn, but that is the least of Black's troubles. His pieces have lost their coordination and, crucially, the black queen's mobility is severely limited. Once you realize this, it isn't hard to find the solution you are looking for:

27 i.h3!!

Depriving the queen of its last available square.

27...i.g7 28 #b5 1-0

There is no defence against 29 Ba7.

(Now return to page 11.)

Exercise 7

w

White is the exchange for a pawn up. Black's situation of course is bleak. However, the strong

Devising a plan in a Game of Chess

25

position of his knight would seem to leave him with some hope of salvation. From White's viewpoint, the exchange of a pairof rooks seems indicated, but after 31 Seal lc2 32 Sa8 2xa8 33 3Sxa8+ &hl there is still everything to play for. More direct play with 31 Be4 is less convincing: 31...1c2! 32 Hxf7 (32 &h2 lxf2; 32 fig4 g6 33 h4?? Wdl+) 32...Wcl+ 33 Sel lxel + will not be a trivial ending for White to win. An attempt to knock away the knight's support by f4-f5 gives Black extra counter-chances thanks to the weakening of White's own king position. Yet our previous example ought to give a clue to finding the right path.

In this case too we may single out the limited mobility of Black's seemingly active queen. This circumstance is excellently exploited by Evgeny Bareev.

31 ld4!!

The white queen takes up a superb position in the centre of the board! Centralization is one of the foundations of chess strategy.

White now threatens 32 Sxe6!.

31...Se8 32Se2!!

Unexpectedly, the queen on b3 is 'under arrest'. As a result, Black's pieces are totally paralysed. The rook is tied to the defence of the e6-pawn, while if the knight moves, the b4-pawn is lost (32...£tf6 33 He3 lc2 34 #xb4 £id5 35 lb5). On the other hand, if Black confines himself to a waiting policy (...'4>f8-g8), then after a preliminary '4 , h2 White throws his f-pawn forward with decisive effect (f4-f5). Black therefore hastens to create counterplay.

32...1c8 33 Sxe6 £ic3! ? 34 Sae7!

Technically the most precise solution, though White also has a won position after 34 Sxf7 £te2+ 35 Sxe2 2c 1+ 36 &h2 lxf7 37 lxb4. For example, 37...1c7+ 38 g3 (38 f4? fic4 39 lb3 lxf4+ 40 g3 lf7) 38...#c6 39 Sel. However, any complications in a won position are wholly unwelcome to the stronger side, especially in conditions of limited time and energy when the probability of mistakes in calculation increases.

A chess-player's technical mastery consists not in achieving his aim as quickly as possible but in denying his opponent any extra chances.

34...1xb2 35 Se8+ Sxe8 36 Ixe8+ &h7 37 ld3+ g6 38 lc4! lbl+

Or38...1a2 39lxb4.

39&h2lf5 40ld41-0

(Now return to page 11.)

Exercise 8

The position features an unconventional balance of forces: a queen against three minor pieces. Practice has shown that in such cases, the advantage most often belongs to the pieces, which prevail not by their strength but by their number. Only this presupposes that the pieces are coordinating their actions, which can definitely not be said of the position before us. In addition, the white king feels extremely insecure (should the black queen, for instance, land on f5). You might think it would only take White one or two moves to consolidate. But how can he find that time? Admittedly 48...1bl (or 48...1f 8) is met by 49 &xb6+ &e8 50 £>d4, with <£>ac6 and .&d8-g5-f4 to follow. Also in the event of 48...1a4 49 £k6+ 4>e8 50 <2ke5, White has (at the very least) put the worst behind him, even if he loses the pawn on b5.

The game, however, continued wholly unexpectedly with:

48...Se8!!

Piece coordination is also one of the most important elements of strategy.

After this move it turns out that White's pieces are unable to defend each other, and one of them is lost.

49 £ic6 lf8! 50 i.f6

White has to choose the least of the evils. He decides to give up his bishop in the interest of holding the position by constructing a fortress.

50...1xf6 51 £icd4

In situations of this type, the decisive factor is the degree of freedom of the stronger side's king.

Elements of Chess Strategy

w

theoretical position

Of course, it is well known that the ending of # vs 2<5i is in general drawn, if the king and knights are adequately coordinated and flexible. In the above position, the knights are rigidly placed, but as long as the black king remains firmly behind bars, White holds the draw with no particular trouble by manoeuvring his king round the knight on f3 (the key factor here is that Black cannot put his opponent in zug-zwang). But if Black could drive the white king to a8 and place his queen on c7, the hobbled knights would succumb to zugzwang.

In the game we are looking at, the presence of pawns on the board gives the stronger side the additional possibility of sacrificing the queen for both knights if appropriate, so as to reach a won king and pawn ending. The one important thing is not to fall for a knight fork. The plan is simple: Black will gradually bring his own king up to his opponent's, with the aim of disturbing the coordination of the white pieces and, eventually, winning material.

Bearing in mind what I have said so far, the conclusion of the game follows almost without commentary.

51...Wh8 52 <4>f4 *e7 53 g4 #f6+ 54 &e3 *d6 55 <£ic6 *c5 56 £scd4 *b4 57 g5 We7+ 58 *f4 We4+ 59 &g3 *a4 60 *f2 #g4 61 <&e3 &b4 62 *f 2 We4 63 <£e2 #e8 64 £sed4 <&c4

By threatening to advance his king further, Black compels White to resort to a pawn sacrifice.

65 h5

The remaining moves were:

65...gxh5 66 g6 *c5 67 g7 #g8?

67...#f7 is more accurate.

68 £tf 5 #h7 69 *e3 &xb5 70 £>3d4+ *a4 71 *f 3?

71 <£)c6 is a better try.

71...b5 72 &f4 b4 73 £>c6 b3 0-1

(Now return to page 12.)

Exercise 9

w

It is easy to perceive that the main strategic feature of the position is Black's backwardness in development. This is primarily bound up with the problem of his bishop on c8. Hence a move that suggests itself is 20 h3!?, leaving White with an appreciable plus; for example, 20...&d7 21 Sd6!? &xa4 22 £ixa4 £ixa4 23 Hxf6! gxf6 24 <£>h4, with a crushing attack. Evidently Black's best continuation would be the modest 20...Be8 (intending ...JLe6), but here again after 21 Hd6 White's position is superior.

However, Botvinnik had his own way of viewing the strategic features of a position. In what follows, the annotations in quotation marks are taken from his book Analytical and Critical Works.

20 We3U

"This move, not at all an obvious one, is the strongest. After the queen exchange, which cannot be avoided (20...It 7 21 £>xe5), the defects of Black's position will become more substantial. It will be even harder than before to oppose anything against White's pressure in the d-file; the e5-pawn will become weak and the point f 7 will also need protection. In the seven years I had been playing chess, this was probably the subtlest positional move I had made."

20...1'xe3 21 fxe3 &g4 22 a5 £ic8

"The knight heads for c6, where it will be protected and active. Transferring it to c5 would be worse; for example, 22...^bd7 23 h3 j!k,xf3

Devising a plan in a Game of Chess

27

24 gxf3 <£c5 (24...2fd8? 25 &d5!) 25 b4 £)e6 26 ±xe6 fxe6 27 £ia4! followed by 28 £ic5 with complete domination."

23 Scl £.xf3

"How else is the pawn on e5 to be saved? If 23...2e8, then 24h3 i.e6 (or 24...&h5 25 £>h4! threatening 26 g4) 25 .&xe6 2xe6 26 Sd8+."

24 gxf3 £ie7 25 £sd5 (D)

up wm Iff Al

"By inducing the exchange of one of Black's two knights, White ensures that entry squares on the seventh rank are freed from enemy control. On 25...£ifxd5, White would not play 26 exd5 £>f5 27 e4 on account of 27...£>d6, when the knight blockades the pawn. Instead he would continue 26 JLxd5 <£ixd5 27 2xd5, after which material gains are guaranteed."

However, I venture to disagree with this note. For a start I will take issue with the last variation, which breaks off after 27 Sxd5. In the event of 27...2ac8! I succeeded in detecting neither guaranteed material gains nor even the slightest tangible plus for White in either of the following variations: 28 fldc5 Sxc5 29 Sxc5 f6 30 Sc7 If 7 or 28 2xc8 Sxc8 29 2xe5 2c 1 + 30 &f2 2c2+31*g3 2xb2.

Nonetheless, Botvinnik's evaluation of the exchange on d5 is correct! It is just that after 25...£>fxd5 26 .&,xd5 £)xd5 White must take with the pawn: 27 exd5!. Here again it is true that if Black makes the strongest reply, 27...2ac8 28 Sdc2 2xc2 29 2xc2 2d8 30 e4 Sd7, there are no immediate material gains in sight. Yet clearly after 31 Sc8+ 4>h7 32 4>f2 Black will have to defend a very difficult rook ending.

Another dubious assumption is that 26 exd5 (in answer to 25...*2M"xd5) is unpromising. The point is that after 26...<£>f5? (26...2ac8 is necessary, as in the line above) White must not allow

his d-pawn to be blockaded (27 e4 *2kl6) but must throw it forward, opening his bishop's diagonal at the same time. It would be extremely dangerous for Black to take the pawn on e3; for instance, 27 d6! 2fd8 28 d7! (28 Sc7? £>xd6) 28...£ixe3?! 29 2c7 (or the immediate 29 i.bl!) 29...2ab8 30 ±bl! f5 31 4»f2 f4 32 &e4. After 27 d6 2fd8 28 d7 the least of the evils for Black is evidently 28...'4 , f8. But even then, after 29 2c7 2ab8 30 &bl! £te7 31 £e4, his position is scarcely defensible.

So we see that Botvinnik was right in his assessment of the position but wrong about the variations he gave.

But we shall now return to the game.

25...£ic6 26 £>xf6+ gxf6 27 2d7

At last! If now 27...£ixa5 then 28 2cc7, followed by the decisive 29 JLxf 7+. But the move Black plays doesn't stop White from penetrating to f 7 either.

27...2ab8 28 &f 2! (D)

i&a-Z _*_ M

^ m^ wm mm

Trouble unexpectedly creeps up on Black from a new direction. The threat is 29 2gl+ and 30 &xf 7.

28...£ixa5 29 2cc7 2bc8 30 2xf7

Or 30 ±xf7+ <4>h8 31 &d5, which leads to the same thing.

30...2xc7 31 2xc7+ *h8 32 &d5! b5

Otherwise material losses are unavoidable: 32...Sb8 33 2f7, or 32...£te6 33 2xb7. But now a possibility arises for 'stalemating' the knight.

33 b3 Sd8 34 *g3

After 34 2f7 2d6 Black could not play ...f5 to relieve his position, but on the other hand his knight could emerge to freedom. White prefers not to allow this.

Elements of Chess Strategy

Botvinnik now carried out the manoeuvre .&f7-g6 and 'i , xh6; he went on to win on the 55th move. Analysing how this game went, I should like to emphasize that the foundation for White's victory was laid by the unconventional exchanging move 20 #e3!!.

(Now return to page 12.)

Exercise 10

To the surprise of many spectators who were watching this duel, 'Iron Tigran' continued with:

17...i.xc3!

Not only is Black presenting his opponent with the advantage of the bishop-pair, but in so doing, he is parting with none other than that dark-squared bishop which true King's-Indian-ites treat with special affection and care. What were Petrosian's guiding considerations when he resolved on this far from obvious exchange?

White's main strategic threat in positions of this type is to prepare and carry out a break with g4. He would be furthering this end by first transferring his knights to f2 and e3, and his dark-squared bishop to the al-h8 diagonal. After 17....&xc3!, all this becomes impossible. In addition, the resulting pawn-structure significantly reduces the activity of White's bishops. The further course of the game confirmed the correctness of Petrosian's decision:

18 bxc3 £>f 6 19 a4 *h8 20 £>f 2 lg8 21 *hl ^e8 22 Igl Wg6 23 Wd2 £d7 24 g3 Sae8 25 a5 le7 26 labl &c8 27 Sg2 leg7 28 fibgl £>ce8 29 h3 h5 V2-V2

In the position that has now arisen, the initiative of course belongs to Black, but evidently considering the situation in the tournament, he agreed a draw.

(Now return to page 13.)

Exercise 11

w

Please don't be surprised at my own laconic answers to these questions. First - White of course is better, but that is all. Secondly - in the game, Ivanchuk played:

17Sccl

Additional Exercise 11 A: How would you continue, this time for the black side?

(For the answer, see page 38.)

Exercise 12

w

HP i% HP

piJLii

*■

1AB&B IA

&BABAB ■

I Ha;

las a

'"AH

'///, anT?/,

H Hi

White's advantage is obvious for two main reasons:

a) potential control of the a-file;

b) White's spatial plus (the pawn on d5 has more of a cramping effect than the one on c4).

True, an attempt to break through directly on the a-file achieves nothing (27 axb5 axb5 28 Sa7 lxa7 29 Sxa7 Sa8 30 #a5 Sxa7 31 Wxa7 #a8), but the threat to do so is constantly in the air and an irritation to Black.

Evidently guided by the principle of redeploying his 'worst piece' (I shall discuss this principle in a later section of this chapter), Fischer played:

Devising a plan in a Game of Chess

29

27 £ifl!?

(Admittedly White's bishop onc2 is not doing much either, but its moment has yet to come.)

Black responded with a neutral continuation:

27...±e7 28 £ild2 *g7 29 <£>bl!!

I should think it was only after this unexpected move that Spassky realized, to his horror, the error of his lethargic strategy. White threatens the lethal 30 axb5 axb5 31 Sa7 Hxa7 32 Sxa7 Ha8 33 Sxa8 Wxa8 34 #xa8 J,xa8 35 <£la3, winning.

In an attempt to confuse his opponent, Spas-sky resolved on a desperate and unsuccessful piece sacrifice:

29...£ixe4!? 30 i.xe4 f5 31 £c2 ±xd5

I give the concluding part of the game without commentary.

32 axb5 axb5 33 Sa7 £f 6 34 £)bd2 Ixa7 35 Hxa7 la8 36 g4 hxg4 37 hxg4 2xa7 38 #xa7 f4 39 Axf 4 exf4 40 £ih4 i.f 7 41 Wd4+ *e6 42 £if5 i.f8 43 #xf4 4>d7 44 £id4 #el+ 45 &g2 ±d5+ 46 ±e4 ±xe4+ 47 £ixe4 i.e7 48 £ixb5 £if8 49 £ibxd6 £ie6 50 #e5 1-0

In this game Fischer admirably sensed the most vulnerable point in Black's position (the pawn on b5) and exploited it brilliantly. The ability to spot the opponent's weakest link is a sign of the highest strategic mastery. And in this matter Fischer never ceased to astonish.

Exercise 13

m. m

'* 6 W k

KlW'K

A

Iff 9

r//ry% yXtW y/r^y/

yEgb . |H| %Hi

Saidy - Fischer

USA Team Ch, New York 1969

Additional Exercise 12A:

1) Evaluate the position.

2) In Black's place, what would you play? (For the answer, see page 39.)

w

i Wmmw

mm + i iP*fP

A

in&i

m wm

A

mm. m,

A

It isn'thardto see thatthe second stage of the 'two weakness' strategy is completed. White has attacked the pawn on d5 with as many pieces as possible but has not been able to destroy it. On the other hand, his opponent's pieces have been reduced to passivity, deprived of mobility and counterplay. To improve his position, White must proceed to the third stage -creation of a second weakness. But first he must decide where. There is no possibility on the queenside or in the centre. Consequently:

25 g4!

The second weakness is the black king! The weakening of White's own king position is immaterial - the black pieces are not trained on it, and their reach is limited.

25...«'c6 26 g5 hxg5 27 #xg5 f6

Taking measures against Bh4 and Wh5.

28Wg6±f7 29 #g3(£>)

ill W w w,.

A:

Al

mm,

Hi

I iMPA

'/ f 77777?// *=^« 77$7T?/s *—'

29...f5?

In the sector where his opponent is attacking, the defender is not advised to move his pawns without extreme necessity. Black's position now becomes strategically untenable.

Elements of Chess Strategy

30 Wg5 1^6 31 *hl We5 32 Sgl Sf8 33

Threatening both 34 Sh4 and 34 #xb6.

33...Sb8

33...fid6 34 fixg7+, and 33...g6 34 h4 followed by h5 are also hopeless for Black. 33...Bc8 is the most resilient defence.

34 Hh4 *f 8 35 #h8+ &g8 36 Sf4 2bb7 37 Sg5 Sf7 38 #h5 #al+ 39 &g2 g6 40 #xg6 i.h7 41 Wd6+ 2be7 42 Wd8+ 1-0

(Now return to page 15.)

Exercise 14

w

I!

I A iP IP A • A

nn wm. wm. m

AH

p ffp ft Iff

It may look as if White's control of the open d-file and Black's extra pawn-island make the white position preferable.

However, perhaps you have under-rated the role of the e5-pawn. It gives Black a spatial advantage, enabling his king to occupy a more centralized position. This is highly significant in the endgame.

Which factors are more important, then? And what is the verdict on the position as a whole? Rather than hurry with the answer, let us follow how the game went.

16 &h6 Sfd8 17 *fl?

White starts to play planlessly. Lulled by the harmlessness of the situation, Znosko-Borovsky clearly loses his sense of danger. After 17 f4! Black could hardly count on an advantage. For this reason the diagram position should be rated as equal.

17...f5 18 Sxd8+ Sxd8

The exchange of a pair of rooks is favourable to Black, as it lets his king feel very comfortable in the centre.

19 g3

Defending against a possible ...f4.

But let us come back to the principle of two weaknesses. Which stage of the plan is currently being pursued? That's right, the first stage! The first weakness, forcing White onto the defensive in order to guard it, has yet to be created. But now the g3-pawn becomes the 'hook' on which Black can later fasten in order to gain control of the open h-file (after ...h5-h4 and ...hxg3).

19...*f7 20 i.e3 h5 21 *e2 *e6 22 Sdl Sg8!

The question of exchanging arises again. The disappearance of the first pair of rooks made the position of Black's centralized king completely secure. Retention of the second pair will later enable Alekhine to breakthrough successfully into his opponent's camp.

23 f3 h4 24 Ml hxg3 25 hxg3 Ih8!

Now the first weakness has appeared! The threat to invade with the black rook on the h-file diverts White's attention.

26 &gl £d6 27 *fl Sg8 28 Li2

The time has now come to think about creating a second weakness (stage 3 of the plan).

28...b5!

Intending a subsequent pawn offensive on the queenside with ...a5, ...b4, etc.

29 b3?!

Extreme care must be exercised when making pawn moves on the wing where your opponent is stronger, as you may be giving him further objects to fasten onto.

29...a5 30 &g2 a4 31 Sd2

When defending, you must aim to remove any points of conflict. However, 31 b4 would merely defer the tactical confrontation, which would be renewed after the black rook's arrival at c4 (via the route g8-a8-a6-c6).

31...axb3 32 axb3

The second weakness has appeared: the open a-file on the queenside. According to the principle of two weaknesses, the fourth stage of Black's plan is being completed and the fifth is beginning.

32...Sa8 33 c4 Sa3! 34 c5 i.e7 35 Sb2 b4 36 g4

White's attempt to create counterplay clearly comes too late.

36...f4 37 *fl fial+ 38 *e2 Hcl 39 Sa2 fic3 40 Sa7 &d7 41 Sb7 Sxb3 42 Sb8 Sb2+ 43 &fl b3 44 *gl *c6 45 &fl *d5 46 Ib7 e4!

Devising a plan in a Game of Chess

31

Not the only continuation, but in won positions there is no need to draw up a full list of candidate moves. It is enough to single out a continuation you like, and work out its variations to the end.

47 fxe4+ *xe4 48 fixc7 *f3 49 Ixe7 fixf 2+ 50 &el b2 51 Hb7 Sc2 52 c6 *g3

But not 52...Scl+ 53 &d2 blW?! 54 Bxbl Sxbl?? (54...Hxc6 is still winning for Black) 55 c7, and this pawn queens.

53 c7 f 3 54 *dl fixc7 55 Sxb2 f 2 0-1

(Now return to page 17.)

Exercise 15

Let us consider this position from the standpoint of the principle of two weaknesses. We are struck by the ridiculous bunch of black pieces on the queenside, tied to the defence of the bishop on c5. This entanglement may be viewed as the first weakness. The game is decided by executing a second threat - on the kingside.

27 h4! f5

On 27...Sc7 White wins by 28 h5 lec8 29 h6 &d6 30 #xa5+ &xa5 31 flxc7 Ixc7 32 Ixc7 &xc7 33 f4 ±d8 34 g4 M 6 35 g5 i.h.8 36 e4 &b6 37 f 5 exf5 38 exf5 *c5 39 g6.

28 #g7! 2e7 29 WeS flc6 (D)

w

II

H i

II:

m. m.

A

;AI

m^mm

w, mm

A

m '"^p

A^

Black expected 21 £te4(!), which he intended to meet with 21...Bac8, banking on the trap 22 Wh8+?&e7 23 W xg7 £d4!!. However, 22 0-0! (or 22 , 4 , e2!) is strong, and indeed a rather clearer win than the move chosen, but both lines are good if followed up accurately.

To Schroeder's chagrin, Capablanca sidestepped the trap, although in a different way:

21 #h8+!? *e7 22 #xg7 hxg5 23 #xg5+ &d6 24 *e2!? Sac8 25 Sc4 &c6 26 fihcl &b6 (D)

w

ill mm\wB.

wm,, , wm> / mm, ma,

Ai

:A

A

w

30 Bxc5! 1-0

30...Sxc5ismetby31#d6+. (Now return to page 17.)

Exercise 16

As a result of his unsure play in the opening phase, Black now has some serious problems to solve.

ll_Wd8!

"The most difficult move in the whole game." (Alekhine).

Elements of Chess Strategy

Only a few moves earlier Black had played ..Mel, so we can understand how hard it was psychologically for Alekhine to resolve on this continuation at the present moment. But now some problems arise for White. One of the principal ones is to decide on a place for his bishop, which stands well on c4.

Additional Exercise 16A: What would you play if you had White?

(For the answer, see page 40.)

Exercise 17

bib ■#■

BAB BABA

IA fl Af|

SA^

;A

for*

Black is close to equality.

12...&e8!?

The main pride of White's position is the knight on e5, supported by the b2-bishop, but it is against these pieces that Black's schemes are directed first and foremost. Taimanov wishes to preserve his light-squared bishop, which, having no opposite number, can later become very active in both defence and attack. If White plays carelessly, he could even end up worse.

13 a5?! (D)

13 Sf3 is better.

AB BABA

A Jl «|AB

i&jm&Tk ■

The straightforward 13...£)d7 is probably a better way to seek equality.

14#e2?!

Black's idea was 14 If 3 £kl7 15 2g3 f6 16 #g4 Sg8, but White has a pleasant choice between 17 <2}g6+ Jtxg6 18 1 i f xg6, exchanging off the bishop after all, and 17 £tef 3 &f 7 18 e4 #c7 19 flh3, with some advantage either way.

14...£id7 (D)

w

■IllUi n

A ^P ^P A HP •

TAHWBAi

iA«Ai|'

15 c4?

Additional Exercise 17A: How would you continue in Black's place? (For the answer, see page 42.)

Exercise 18

w

I!

Al

gm%_, ■#im / ^ w///, 4X ||^ JiA

§W|lAiI a®

i ^« « ^pp?

13...<i>h8?!

Despite the apparent harmlessness of the position, White has a considerable plus. His pieces are more active, Black's kingside is weakened, and the coordination of the black pieces is disrupted. The correct plan for White is to prepare an attack on the kingside by bringing his knight there, along the path bl-d2-f3-g5. En route, Black's outwardly active pieces will be pushed back.

24 £ibl! Wbl 25 *h2!

Devising a plan in a Game of Chess

33

Removing the king from possible checks on the a7-gl diagonal, and depriving the black bishop of the g3-square.

25...&g7

Now or next move it would pay Black to exchange a pair of rooks, reducing the attacking potential of White's major pieces.

26 c3 £>a6 27 Se2! If 8 28 £>d2 &d8 29 £if3f6 30 2d2!

Now that Black's kingside has been weakened still further, White returns to dispute the open d-file.

30...i.e7 31 We6 fiad8 32 Sxd8 i.xd8

Or 32...Sxd8 33 £>xe5.

33 Idl £>b8 34 &c5 Sh8 35 fixd8 1-0

On 35...Sxd8 White has the decisive 36 i.e7.

(Now return to page 19.)

Exercise 19

Emmy, mmy,%\\\rt&z _A_ m mW, «sSW| mW A /M M W» /M W/ i

%w A i8P Ww UP 1

B 11^13 All

API if 9 P

'-* "' m

'///, „ far?/, '

rwm wm §p a wg

1A £>d3!

Forestalling 24...<£tf7, as White would then get in 25 e4 first.

24...#g5?!

The least evil was 24...Sfe8 followed by ...<2tf6, practically renouncing any counterplay. That would mean a significant plus for White.

25 Sfel Sfe8 26 i.g3!

"The ideal set-up is achieved. Black has no defence against the many positional threats (chiefly 27 e4 and 27 <2k5)" (Khalifman).

26..J&7 27 e4 fxe4 28 fxe4 £sb6 29 £sc5

After 29...<2ki7 White would have the pleasant choice between 30 d5 and 30 .&xd6 Wxd6 31 <£xb7 Wxd4+ 32 *hl 2b8 33 Sedl #a7 34 £ld6.

30 a5 £>c8 31 d5!

"The breakthrough in the centre is decisive. At this point I didn't even have to calculate variations; the placing of all White's pieces is too good" (Khalifman).

31...cxd5 32 exd5 e5 33 £>e6 Sd7 34 &xe5 £>xe5 35 Sxe5 £>d6 36 Seel Wf6 37 #d3 Sf 7 38 h3 h6 39 £>g5! #f2+ 40 <4>h2 hxg5 41 Sxe8+ £>xe8 42 fixe8+ Sf8 43 Sxf8+ Wxf 8 44 d6 1-0

After 44...fff4+ 45 g3 Wf2+ 46 &hl Wel + 47 ^2 the checks run out.

(Now return to page 19.)

Exercise 20

To answer this question, we turn again to Alexander Khalifman: "The main idea is not at all to advance with e4, which is only good for White in certain specific circumstances, but to activate the bishop before anything else."

In the game, there followed:

20...Sd8 21 Wb3 c6 22 £el We7 23 &f 2

Of course the straightforward 23 -&g3? would be bad on account of 23...f4.

23...&h8?!

Infighting for the initiative, you must be resolute and ready to take risks!

The right plan is to bring about the ...e5 advance as soon as possible: 23...£)f7 24 <£kl3 (24 <£c4 Wxb4 25 Wxb4 <£xb4 26 flbl <£d3 27 Sxb7 c5!) 24...e5 25 e4 fxe4 26 fxe4 £lf4. White would then have a minimal edge, due mainly to the poor position of the knight on f 7.

W

■ IS A Wk9i

Wm, • ^SK mm, • IMtfi *

mm, 4m.W4m. m&

wJBwm -mm

A'r

White has a very large advantage, owing primarily to the activity of his pieces directed against his opponent's king.

However, tactical thrusts like 39 Hf6? gxf6 40 Sxg8 &xg8 41 exf6 Sc6 or 39 Sxg7+? Sxg7 40 Sf6 Sc2! are clearly premature.

Elements of Chess Strategy

Believe it or not, White concluded the struggle in a mere four(!) moves.

39 Hb3! Sd8 40 Sb6 Wei 41 Sd6 (D)

41...fidd7?!

41.. .f6 can b e met by 42 Sdxf 6! gxf 6 43 exf6 and Black will have to give back the rook to avoid more serious trouble, leading to a very bad rook ending.

42 Hh5! 1-0

There is no satisfactory defence against 43 ldxh6+.

(Now return to page 19.)

Exercise 21

w

You were right if you decided that White has a won position and suggested bringing the rook over to the kingside, where the main concluding events should unfold.

31 Sal! Ae4 32 Sa5!

This move, aiming to switch the rook to g5, is even stronger than 32 .&a3.

32...Sdc7 33 b6 axb6 34 Sg5!

The result is that White's piece activity has become overwhelming. The remaining moves were:

34...i.g6 35 &xe6 fxe6 36 Sxg6 Sf7 37 J:e5 Scl+ 38 *h2 Wei 39 Sg5 Wdl 40 Sxh5 «U3 41 Hg5 Whl 42 £)g4 Sc4 43 i.xg7! 1-0

(Now return to page 19.)

Exercise 22

w

I

*■&!

&!

The basic strategic factor is Black's weakened king position, which is being unmistakably eyed by White's a 1-rook and his queen. The f 3-rook not only defends its own king, but is also ready to support its colleague in the attack when the moment comes - for instance after White plays f6.

But what is the bishop's role? Once this piece joins in the fight, the outcome of the game is settled at once.

27 k.c\\

Not only threatening 28 .&f4+ but also clearing the a-file for the rook.

21...Wel+

The retort 27 ...&e5 doesn't help: 28 JLf4 fie8 29 #b5.

28 Sfl #xc3 29 Af4+ 4>b7 (D)

w

30 Wb5! 1-0

(Now return to page 20.)

Devising a plan in a Game of Chess

35

Exercise 23

Exercise 24

WB.tSw^.mwB,

A:

White's space advantage compensates for Black's pressure against the weak f3-pawn and the loose white kingside. The game is roughly equal, and the main question is how to produce practical chances. From a two-weaknesses viewpoint, Black can seek a further target on the queenside. The black rooks have no better place than the f-file, so queen or pawn moves should be considered.

29...#d8!?

It looks as if Black is preparing to bring his queen to g5. Another idea is 29...h5, focusing attention more firmly on the kingside.

30 Wg4

30 b4!? prepares to meet SO...!^ with 31 c5, preferring to allow SC.WgS.

30...H>8!? (D)

w

31 &g2 #a7 32 Sf el Wc5 33 We4 #b4 By transferring to his queen to the queen-side, Black seeks to create a second weakness, which he achieved by advancing his a-pawn. White should still be able to maintain the balance, but he later went astray and lost. (Now return to page 21.)

W

"A picturesque position has come about, in which Black has no useful moves but White needs to free his queen in order to strike." (Smyslov). It is clear that Smyslov regards his queen as his 'worst'piece; indeed, not only is it inactive, but it is in danger of being trapped.

32 &bl!?

The attempt to improve White's position more quietly with 32 g3?! fxg3 33 4>g2 is met by 33...gxf2 34 2xf2 If4! 35 £te5 #xf2+ 36 <4>xf2 £tf6, when Black is OK.

While the text-move prepares a strong regrouping, 32 J.f5! is even more effective, as it keeps the bishop active and e6 under pressure.

32...i.h8

On 32...Sc4 White has 33 JLa2 followed by 34 i.xd5.

331^3^7

Or 33...1T7 34 &h4!.

34 #b3 (D)

The transfer of the queen to the queenside decides the game. It is not in Black's power to defend both sectors of the board.

34...Ib6

Elements of Chess Strategy

Or 34...b5 35 a4.

35 Wc3 Ig8 If35...1c6then36Wb4+.

36 #c8+ 1-0

(Now return to page 21.)

Exercise 25

w

I think the verdict is obvious: White is considerably better, in view of the greater activity of his pieces and Black's somewhat insecure king, which has no square to move to. Now that we know about the principle of the 'worst' piece, it isn't hard to see that what White must do first of all is improve the position of his knight.

18 £ihl!!

The knight i s heading for g5. It would not be so dangerous on that square if it could be expelled by ...h6. But that move would contain no threat, since if Black took the knight, the white queen would join the attack decisively via the h-file!

18...i.d7 19 £>f2 fiae8 20 Ifel fixe2 21 fixe2 £id8?!

It is no use playing 21.. .Se8 on account of 22 Wd5. Yet it was worth considering 21 ...g6! with the idea of meeting 22 £>h3? with 22...h6. Even then, though, by continuing 22 h4 (instead of 22 £>h3?) followed by h5, White would retain a noticeable plus.

22 £ih3 &c6

If 22...2e8 then 23 Sxe8+ &xe8 24 Wd5.

23 #h5 g6 24 Wh4 <*g7 25 Wf2! i.c5 25...Wb6 can be met by 26 Wei or 26 b4!?,

with 27 .&c3 to follow, when the d4-pawn cannot be held.

26 b4 Ab6?

26...£e7 is necessary. After 27 Wxd4+ ^Lf6 28 Wc5 b6 29 Wf 2 b5 30 ,&,b3 Se8 Black has

some positional compensation for the lost pawn, and at any rate better survival chances than he should have had after the text-move.

27 #h4?

The manoeuvres of White's queen make a powerful impression. Now that the dark-squared bishop cannot defend e7, the queen returns to its former post. However, Black is now able to put up resistance, whereas 27 Wei! wins in straightforward fashion, since the trick 27....&e4 does not hold the position together for long after 28 £>f2 intending JLb3.

27...Se8

He can't save himself by 27...fif6? in view of 28£>g5h6 29£ih7!.

28 fie5! £>f 7?

After 28...2xe5? 29 fxe5, the bishop on d2 joins in the attack with decisive effect. 28...Wd7 is essential, meeting 29 g4 with the solid 29...h6. White retains the initiative, but there is everything to play for. Note that the immediate 28...h6? is strongly met by 29 a4!, disrupting Black's coordination in lines like 29...iLxa4 30 b5! Wd7 31 We 1 Sxe5 32 fxe5, when all White's pieces are participating in the attack.

29 i.xf7 Wxf 7 30 £sg5 #g8 31lxe8 i.xe8?! 32 Wei! ±c6 33 We7+ <4>h8 (D)

w

kmx.wk m%\

yam. m wm, a f*i

m

IAJ

A

A

Again we shall have recourse to the principle of the 'worst' piece. In contrast to the superb placing of White's queen and knight, his bishop is idle. For that reason there followed:

34 b5!

White's advantage is so large that it should come as no surprise that there is an alternative solution: 34 £te6! (threatening 35 Wf6+) 34...h5 (34...h6 35 Wf6+ <i'h7 36 £)f8+) 35 Wf6+ &h7 36 g4!! and White wins.

34...1 f g7

Devising a plan in a Game of Chess

37

White also wins after 34...axb5 35 <5}e6 h5 (the only way to continue) 36 1^6+ &h7 37 £sg5+ 4>h6 38 i.b4, with 39 &f8+ to follow.

After 35 #xg7+ Black still tried to resist, but with a piece less, he naturally lost.

(Now return to page 21.)

Solutions to Additional Exercises Additional Exercise 2A

m

mm es mm ■

AlAl

I HI.

Iff P

l^wm iH ■si

39...#c6

This leads to a dismal endgame for Black, but he had no defence. 39...Sd7 40 c6 bxc6 offers no salvation, although you may have seen a glimmer of hope in 41 Ixc6?! Wb7 42 3c7? (42 Whl! is still good for White) 42...#xg2+ 43 <4>xg2 Sxc7 44 dxc7 k&\+\. However, 41 Sb3! intending 1 B f b2 wins by force; e.g., 41...fib7 42 Ixb7+ Wxb7 43 Wd2 Wd7 44 #b2 #c8 45 Wf2 Wd7 46 Wh4 threatening We7+.

40Wxc6bxc6 41h4*g8

Or41...Sb7 42lb3.

42 Sb3 fld7 43 fib8+ <&f 7 44 Sc8 i.e4 45 *g3 h5 (D)

If45...Ib7then46lc7+.

W

mm e=s m

Ai

mm es ^^ _a_ ^^g

""''mW&'WW ''Wi

^^ ^^ ^^

» »

46*f2

White's last piece joins in the fight, with decisive effect.

46...£d5 47 &e3 k%2 48 &d4 At 3 49 i.h8 e5+

Alas, this is forced. After 49...-&d5 50 &e5 M 3 51 ^.g7! (threatening 52 &h6 and 53 If8#) 51...<£>xg7 52 Sc7, White wins.

50 <&xe5 i.d5 51 At 6 i.f3 52 &g5 *g7 53 f5! ±g4

Or 53...gxf5 54 Sc7.

54 f6+ &f7 55 fixc6 1-0

(Now return to page 10.)

Additional Exercise 5A

m

mmm ■ *■

■#■ ■

n mi o JIA

26...*c7?

A typical mistake by a player on the defensive (there was another case of it in our foregoing example). Black does what he would like to do, not what he still has the opportunity to do. It was essential to keep his queen in an active position with 26....&e7!, preparing to sacrifice a pawn if appropriate in order to create counter-play: 27 #g4 (or 27 iff 4) 27...±g5.

In answer to 26.. JLe7 White's best option would be to aim not for material gains but for a kingside pawn advance with 27 f4! (intending f5) 27...&C7 28 g4.

27 «T4! #d7

After Tl..±el 28 #xf7 #xc4+ 29 <±>d2 1U5+ 30 *el Wh\+ 31 <4>e2 the checks come to an end.

28 b3! *d8 29 &c2 *e8 30 #e4 &e7 31 g4 Wc7 32 f4 &h4 33 *d3! b6 34 f 5 i.g3 35 fxe6 fxe6 36 #g6+ 4>f8 37 Wxe6 i.xe5 38 *e4 £h2 39 £f 5 &g3 40 &d2! i.h2 41 i.c3

Now the threat of 42 < i'g6 becomes lethal. Black played 41... 1 B , f7+ and then resigned,

Elements of Chess Strategy

since after the queen exchange and '4 , e4-d5, the bishop endgame is completely hopeless for him.

(Now return to page 11.)

Additional Exercise 11A

We shall now go more deeply into the evaluation of the position and elaborate the answers, which have to be linked to the problem of exchanging.

Let us take things in order. True to our system, we start by singling out the most salient strategic factor in the position before us. This, as we can see without difficulty, is Black's isolated pawn on d5 in a position approaching the endgame. And at this point we simply have to turn for help to our 'library' of knowledge (so much the better if it is well organized). What will it suggest to us?

We will find our bearings step by step (while looking at the position from the defender's side). All endgames are of course worse for Black. But what interests us is which ones are lost and which can be saved. Let us assume that the d4-square in front of the pawn will most likely be occupied by the white king, in which case the d5-pawn automatically becomes Black's 'first weakness'.

Well then, what about king and pawn endings? Win or draw? Our 'library' delivers this answer: pawn endings are specific and concrete, therefore only a precise analysis of the position will be able to help us.

What about minor-piece endings? We shall take knight endgames first. Here the draw should be attainable in most cases without undue effort, since even if the white king is on the blockading square d4, it won't be able to maintain

itself there for long (in view of a check from the enemy knight). It follows that even the opponent's first weakness cannot realistically be placed under an enduring attack.

And bishop endings? We are only interested in bishops of the same colour - specifically, light-squared ones. If a win is to be achieved here, then in addition to the d5-pawn, the stronger side needs to be able to exploit a second weakness (a black pawn fixed on a light square) in a different sector of the board.

Endings with 'good' knight against 'bad' bishop? Here too, the verdict depends crucially on whether a second weakness exists.

So much for minor-piece endings - the time has now come to talk about rook endings. What information on them does our 'library' give us? Answer: these are the most difficult for the defending side, though an important question is where the rooks are placed for the defence. The most unfavourable position is behind their pawn. Defending from the side (from c5 in the case of a d5-pawn) is better. Generally speaking, however, the most appropriate message is that when defending an isolated pawn, the rooks should simply be exchanged!

In this way it sometimes happens in chess that reflections of a general nature, which look completely abstract, will give the answers we are looking for. If you have been paying attention, everything should become clear. To Ivanchuk's brilliant attempt to keep the rooks on with 17 flccl!, it was imperative for Aronian to make an equally fitting reply, exchanging both pairs of rooks by 17...1xcl+! 18lxcl Sc8. After that, a draw would be the most likely outcome.

Perhaps Black simply didn't want to defend an ending with an isolated pawn and no chance at all of any counterplay. But playing a lost position instead is surely no better. In this context we cannot help recalling the words of the fourth World Champion, Alexander Alekhine: "In my opinion no chess-player should be afraid of simplifying in order to solve the problem of winning (or drawing). Playing to complicate the position is an extreme measure, to which a player should only resort when he fails to find a clear and logical plan!"

In the game, there followed:

17...Sfc8? 18 Idl! Ic2 19 i.b5! £>f8 20 Sabl!

Devising a pian in a Game of Chess

39

So White has managed to keep all the rooks on the board! Black has a grim defensive task ahead of him.

20...22c7 21 &a4 £se6 22 &b3 <&f 8 23 h3

Sc5 (D)

W

Additional Exercise 11B: How would you now continue for White?

(For the answer, see page 39.)

Additional Exercise 12A

II

m

m

vsM IP IP * Hi A

'WW..

:A«A:

%? **77tK:

A

I hope you weren't confused by White's extra pawn. In return for it, Black's pieces are much more actively placed. True, if Black fights for the only open file directly with 18...Hfe8?, then after 19 Jtd2 this merely leads to rook exchanges that are no use to him. The sooner we understand that the open file - such an important strategic factor in other cases - has no appreciable significance here, the sooner we will find the correct solution. It is essential to identify the most vulnerable point in White's camp. And this point is ... the pawn on b3. Once we see this, it isn't hard to find the continuation that occurred in the game:

18...Sa6! 19 i.d2?! Ib6!

Underlining Black's substantial plus.

But let us come back to the Fischer-Spassky game, after White's 27 £lfl (D).

When analysing what happened, I couldn't rid myself of the impression that Spassky had displayed weak prophylactic thinking and had only grasped his opponent's intention after 29 4bbl! occurred. But alas, by then it was too late.

Additional Exercise 12B: Try to correct Boris Spassky's mistake. How do you prevent Bobby Fischer's idea from being implemented as it was in the game, assuming that you discern it as soon as 27 £)fl is played?

(For the answer, see page 40.)

Additional Exercise 11B

w

By this time Black has been able to discover (albeit belatedly!) that exchanging even just one pair of rooks would bring him some relief. For that reason White played, of course, not 24 Bd2?2cl+,but:

24 *h2!

The game continued:

Elements of Chess Strategy

24...<£>e7 25 Id2 fib5 26 Aa2 Hbc5 27 £>el a5 28 Ibdl 2d8 29 <S?g3 Sb5 30 f 3 Sc8?

30...flc5 or 30...£>c5!? is better.

31 £>d3 d4 32 ±xe6 *xe6 33 £>f4+ *e7 34 Hxd4

Winning a pawn and, soon afterwards, the game.

(Now return to page 13.)

Additional Exercise 12B

By the time White's attack on the most vulnerable point (the b5-pawn) started, Black needed to be ready to parry it, and this requires e8 to be available to his knights.

27...1 f d8!

White has additional ideas of axb5 and Sa5 now that b5 is undefended, but these are less menacing than the plan that Black faced in the game. Against the £lbl idea, he now has the following defence:

28 £ld2 £ie8! 29 £ibl £ihf6! (D)

w

There can now follow:

30 axb5 axb5 31 fia7 Sxa7 32 Sxa7 Ha8 33 fixa8 #xa8 34 Wxa8 i.xa8 35 £ia3 £k7! 36 £b6 £ife8!

By a colossal effort in which every tempo counted, but just in time nonetheless, Black has succeeded in holding the critical point b5, completely neutralizing White's advantage.

But here again the 'worm of doubt' would not leave me in peace. As already noted, in the position we started from (before 27 <£lfl), White had an indisputable positional plus.

w

ill Affl

■ iBfi

in

■ i

aiiia

m^wm,

^B&

WW ft I

Additional Exercise 12C: In place of 27 <£lf 1, couldn't Fischer have played more strongly? (For the answer, see page 41.)

Additional Exercise 16A

w

On the one hand, White has to cope with the idea of 12...exd4 13 cxd4 d5, which would be a good reply to 12 <£lbd2, for instance (while the standard exchanging combination 12...exd4 13 cxd4 <£lxe4 is another possibility). For this reason White's best continuation at this juncture is 12 .&b3, after which the position should be recognized as approximately equal.

However, Black's last move, 1 l...#d8!, evidently came as a complete surprise to Tarrasch, and he replied:

12i.d3

Devising a pian in a Game of Chess

41

Voluntarily withdrawing pieces from active posts is in most cases unacceptable when a fight for the initiative is in progress.

12...Se8 13 £>bd2 £a7

An anticipatory measure. Black withdraws his bishop from a potential attack by White's knight.

14 #c2 exd4 15 £)xd4

Forced, for the sake of the light-squared bishop: if 15 cxd4 then 15...<£fo4.

15...£>e5 16.&fl

Insipid play by White and purposeful play by his opponent have brought about a significant improvement in Black's position. Consequently Alekhine proceeds with aggressive tactical operations. Nevertheless, White still has adequate resources; it is his negative frame of mind rather than his current position that dooms him.

16...d5! 17 Sadl c5 18 £>4b3 #c7 19 i.f4

19 exd5!? £)xd5 20 £lc4 £)xc4 is an alternative that White could consider, since he can play 21 i.f4! rather than 21 i.xc4?! £>xe3 22 Hxe3 Sxe3 23 fxe3 JLd7, when Black's advantage is obvious.

19...£>f3+ 20 £)xf3 #xf4 21 exd5?

21 e5 is a much better try.

21...i.f5 22 i.d3 i.xh.3! 23 gxb.3 ^xO

And Black soon achieved victory.

(Now return to page 18.)

Additional Exercise 12C

w

From the very posing of the question, the attentive reader may have deduced the answer. We observed that in playing 27 £}fl Fischer was most likely guided by the principle of the 'worst' piece. The splendid idea that he proceeded to execute could only be carried out

thanks to Black's inattentive reply 27....&e7?. Now suppose that he had conceived this idea before playing 27 <£sf 1, and had also discovered Black's defence (which, as we noticed, succeeds only just in time). Then the question arises: how is White to gain the extra tempo that he needs?

The answer isn't difficult to find. The execution of White's planned raid should have been started with the other knight: 27 £>d2! (D).

'■*■

wmm-m

WkS-wB, WW,*mW 9 m

i mm m m k ww

iilAi HA ft n a m ft m wm

if Q H

nak

To reach the required square a3, this knight will take that one vital tempo less. Here too, of course, White would need to look at the desperate sacrifice 27...<5}xe4, but it presents no danger to him, owing (for instance) to the variation 28 £>gxe4 f5 29 £lg5 f4 30 £>xh7 fxe3?? 31 <2}f6+. From this it becomes obvious that Spas-sky's earlier move 26...#e8? was the decisive mistake.

But this story can be extended still further. One more question occurred to me after performing the above analysis. After the moves 27 £}fl?! Wd8! (D), knowing his pugnacious character, surely Fischer would not have acquiesced in concluding the game peacefully?

W

Elements of Chess Strategy

Additional Exercise 12D: In Fischer's place, what would you have played after the moves in question (27 £rf 1 Wd&)l

(For the answer, see page 42.)

Additional Exercise 17A

A

iiiii «

kMmmkmk

iff A il

■All

AM Ai

'mm. A m

A

White's last move (15 c2-c4) reveals that he has lost control of events and with it his objectivity in assessing the position. (His system of self-discipline - 'STOPS', as described in the next chapter - is dislocated.) Taking into account Black's next move, White should have refrained from sharpening the play and preferred to exchange with 15 £)xd7!.

15...£ib8!!

The situation now before us is characterized by what in Mark Dvoretsky's terminology is called a 'superfluous piece'. We are not of course talking of an extra piece in the arithmetical sense, but of a case where several pieces on the same side would like to occupy one and the same square on the board. If one of them does occupy it, the others will suffer - that is, they will prove in a way 'superfluous', abandoned and forgotten.

There are two ways out of this kind of predicament:

1) For as long as possible, refrain from occupying the key square with any of the pieces that are 'interested' in it - until the course of events indicates more or less precisely which particular piece ought to go there; or

2) Reduce the number of 'superfluous' pieces by exchanges, thereby lessening the 'tension' around the key square.

With this in mind, it becomes clear that in the position before White's 15th move, the f3-square was in too great demand, while the two white knights, a rook and in some eventualities the white queen are 'superfluous'. This is why White should have exchanged his e5-knight on d7.

Now the action of the black pieces starts to remind you of a recoiling spring, dealing an extremely strong blow to the opponent.

16 cxd5 exd5 17 e4 f6! 18 £ief3 £>c6 19 £sh4 dxe4 20 dxe4 <£d4

Black has attained a noticeable plus thanks to White's offside knight on h4 and the opening of the position, which will allow his bishops to develop their full power.

Let us reconsider the course of this game. White played some moves that were 'good' in themselves (13 a5, 14 We2, 15 c4), except that they were not coordinated in their effects. Meanwhile Black, implementing a deeply thought-out regrouping of his pieces, prepared himself excellently for the ensuing tactical clash.

(Now return to page 19.)

Additional Exercise 12D

w

It seems to me that the idea of securing victory by force has to be abandoned (if only for a time), but the original advantages of White's position still remain. He needs to carry on manoeuvring positionally ('tacking'), for example with 28 £3d2 followed by 29 f 3. In that case Black would have to continue walking on hot coals.

(Now return to page 14.)

2 'STOPS'- A System of Self-Discipline in Chess

Murphy's law: pen, it will.'

'If anything unpleasant can hap-

Having been quite an active chess-player in my time, and afterwards a no less active coach, I have constantly come up against the question of the optimum way to prepare a contestant for a game. I have had to resort to improvisation, which is good and even necessary for a coach who is starting out, but an experienced pedagogue ought to have his own set of methods. The question therefore became pressing - what advice should I give my pupils to help them prepare for play, retain control over events during the game, and conduct a psychological investigation afterwards?

The system that I now wish to share with you emerged as the result of my thinking over a long period. The acronym which forms its name is an easy word to remember - STOPS. The letters stand for the components of the system.

S: self-control

What do we understand by this?

1) Control over the course of events in the game.

Unfortunately, it can happen that the course of events changes to our detriment. Then it is especially important that we objectively appraise and anticipate the direction the game is taking, and try to steer it into the channel we require.

2) Control of thinking time.

Getting into time-trouble is extremely undesirable -1 would even say impermissible. It often pays to take a decision that objectively is not the best, rather than use up half an hour finding the correct answer to some question of secondary importance (such as whether to station your

rooks on e 1 and d 1, or dl and c 1) and practically guaranteeing that you will slip into time-trouble - when the probability of errors significantly rises, even for strong and experienced players.

On the other hand, hasty, unreflecting and impulsive play is also a fault.

Judicious expenditure of the time allotted for the game is a sign of a player's practical strength, and this also needs to be learnt. How? For example, by recording the thinking times so that you can later analyse not only the quality and strength of the individual moves, but also the appropriateness of the amounts of time taken over them.

T: tactics

Even in simple situations, tactical peculiarities must always be taken into account. In very sharp or 'irrational' positions, our sense of danger needs to be particularly keen.

0: objective evaluation

The act of evaluating a position is of the essence of chess. Any variation that we calculate starts out from an evaluation, and culminates in one.

A lack of objectivity in evaluating the situation on the board is inadmissible. The consequence of overrating our position (for instance, by considering it superior when it is equal) is that, in our search for an imaginary advantage, the calculation of variations senselessly takes up large amounts of time and energy. All sorts of hallucinations tend to creep into our head, and the likelihood of mistaken decisions sharply increases.

Underrating our position (for instance, by believing it equal, when it is better) is also

Elements of Chess Strategy

highly undesirable. On working out a line and finding that it leads to equality, we may be satisfied with this and leave a stronger continuation unexamined.

P: prophylactic thinking

This term, introduced by Mark Dvoretsky, denotes the need, and the ability, to look at the position through the eyes of your opponent, thereby anticipating his intentions and steering the course of events to your own advantage.

It was above all thanks to this ability that Anatoly Karpov in his best years considerably surpassed his rivals. People said jokingly that he would parry a threat five moves before his opponent thought of it, and the joke was well-founded.

S: staying calm

This is another factor that ought to be under our control during a game. All competitors in sport are familiar with a surge of excitement before a contest. This is normal end even, if you like, essential. It is a different matter when the strain is so great as to make the table shake. The converse is absolute tranquillity, total inhibition - when the progress of the struggle in the game and tournament is a matter of near indifference. In such a state of mind, decisions are taken superficially, quickly and impulsively, which naturally affects the quality and result of the game.

The 'STOPS' system can be applied before and during a game and also, most importantly, after it. To assess the various aspects of a player's performance, I propose the following points system: 6 points - excellent; 5 - very good; 4 - good; 3 - satisfactory; 2 - mediocre; 1 - bad; 0 - very bad.

By conducting an analysis with reference to all five components of the system, we can draw a general conclusion about a finished game and prescribe any suitable corrective measures.

To discuss the application of the 'STOPS' system, we shall take the following two examples.

Kosikov - Kernazhitsky

Kiev Ch 2003

1 e4 c5 2 £>f 3 e6 3 c4 £ic6 4 £)c3 a6 5 £e2 #c7 6 0-0 £if 6 7 d3

White deliberately refrains from the thematic 7 d4. He doesn't aspire to a big opening advantage but puts the emphasis on the middlegame struggle.

7...&e7 8 £g5 0-0 9 Icl (D)

9...£>d4?!

Lulled by the passive conduct of the opening, Black takes a very committal decision. A change in the pawn-structure must always be extremely carefully weighed. In this case, the doubling of Black's pawns suits his opponent.

10£>xd4cxd4

Now the unprotected position of the g5-bishop comes into play. Mindful of this, I considered the variation 11 £>bl £>g4!? 12 Jtxg4 JLxg5 13 Bc2 but chose the following sequence instead:

11 &xf6 &xf6 12 £ibl ±g5 13 lc2 (D)

On the face of it, what difference is there between this line and the other one I considered?

'STOPS' - A System of Self-Discipune in Chess

45

None at all, you might say. The only thing is that White's bishop is on e2, not g4. Yet this very circumstance is what invites Black to go into action.

13...f5?

Hooray! He fell for it! In playing 'actively', Black is clearly not being objective in his assessment of the position. With his backward queenside development, he had no business complicating matters in the centre and on the kingside. True, even after the strongest response, 13...b6 14 g3 d6 15 f4 i.e7 16 £f3 $Lbl 17 £}d2, White would have a plus, but not such a big one as in the game.

14 exf5 lxf5 15 i.f 3Wd8?!

By neglecting his queenside development, Black is patently losing control of the situation on the board.

16 £>d2 i.xd2 17 Ixd2 #g5?

Replacing strategy with traps. Maybe White will blunder into 18...2xf3 19 #xf3 #xd2.

18 Sc2 lb8

At last Black has remembered about his queenside, but isn't it too late?

19 i.e4 If8 (D)

w

MM

if Ail A iH i

m mm

B BAB

AH

mm Mm n m

20 f4!

Here is the first punch on the jaw. If Black had foreseen this move, I imagine he would have refrained from the pseudo-active 17...#g5.

20...1 r c5?!

He can't play 20...2xf4? in view of 21 Sxf4 #xf4 22 #h5 g6 23 ±xg6 hxg6 24 #xg6+ <4>h8 25 Bf 2 #e3 26 #e8+ <4>h7 27 Wf 7+ <±>h8 28 Wf8+ "±>h7 29 <4>hl, and Black is crushed. However, the more modest 20...#e7 is preferable to the move played, although in that case too Black would emerge a pawn down in the end.

21 a3!?

Obviously expecting the following reply:

21...a5?!

Control over the course of events has passed completely out of Black's hands; his actions are dictated by his opponent.

22 b4!

Here is the second punch. It could also have been delivered a move earlier, but I felt like arranging everything in the most comfortable way possible, opening the a-file for myself as an extra luxury.

22...axb4 23 axb4 Wei

Black could hardly be happy with 23... 1 B r xb4 24 #h5 g6 25 J.xg6 hxg6 26 #xg6+ &h8 27 fie2, followed by Se5 or Sf3, with a winning attack.

24 Wh5! g6 25 #e5!

And this already is the knock-out! The pawn on d4 is lost, and with it all Black's chances of salvation. To my enjoyment, though, the struggle still continued.

25...Sa8 26 c5

Of course, White needs to take the d4-pawn for free; not 26 #xd4? #xb4.

26...%7 (D)

W

y// wXm

liAllA!

AlPAi

Wm."" ' W/,

A

w

W%, W%b WM c=? W%-

Y///////, ■7/7AOZ' Y/ZOjOy Tl iC*f~\

Caution! The position is technically won for White - so much is clear. But in these cases, precision and accuracy are always called for. The opponent has gone to ground: outwardly he is submitting, yet he doesn't resign. That means he is counting on a mistake, setting a trap, laying a mine that needs to be detected and defused in time.

White has a choice of ways to pick up the pawn on d4. He can do it either after a queen exchange - 27 #xg7+ <4>xg7 28 2c4 - or at once, with 27 flc4.

Elements of Chess Strategy

Exercise 26: Choose between those two continuations.

(For the answer, see page 50.)

Now let us return to the 'STOPS' system and analyse Black's performance first - even though of course it isn't easy forme to give an objective appraisal of my opponent's mental processes. Here we go:

S: self-control

The thinking time was under control (in this game there was no time-trouble for either Black or White). However, the course of events in the game was not under Black's control at all. Our verdict is: bad - 1 point.

T: tactics

We saw a fair number of gross tactical miscalculations and oversights (allowing the moves 20 f4, 22 b4, 24 #h5 and 25 #e5), which ultimately decided the outcome of the game. Verdict: bad, 1 point.

O: objective evaluation

What objectivity can we speak of? Black took some highly superficial, impulsive decisions (first he groundlessly brought about a change in the pawn-structure with 9...£ld4?!, then later, with his queenside undeveloped, he began a confrontation on the kingside and in the centre with 13.. .f5?), which clearly did not tally with an objective assessment of the position. Verdict: very bad, 0 points.

P: prophylactic thinking

Here too, everything is clear. Very bad, 0 points.

S: staying calm

This is where I cannot give you an accurate picture. During the game my opponent maintained an inscrutable air (which is how a professional ought to conduct himself in any situation), even though the events on the chessboard cannot have pleased him. I give a nominal verdict of 'fair' - 2 points.

Hence the result of the game - an ignominious defeat.

Yet conducting this analysis is only one half of the matter. On the basis of the work we have done, we need to make some practical recommendations. If I were the coach of the player who had Black, I would give him the following advice for his remaining tournament games:

• Try to attain the maximum objectivity in evaluating the position on the board.

• Only on that condition is it possible to control the course of events in the game and consequently reduce the likelihood of oversights.

• It is also essential to enhance the role of 'prophylactic thinking' in the course of the chess struggle. Then you will take many more correct decisions.

Let us now assess White's play.

S: self-control

As I have said, White was never in time-trouble. Control over the course of events in the game was achieved overall. Score: 5V2 points (you can always find imperfections in a game if you want to).

T: tactics

There were no tactical oversights in the game. Verdict: 6 points.

O: objective evaluation

Early in the game, I understood that White had practically no opening advantage. Subsequently too I was sufficiently accurate in assessing the nature of the changes that were taking place on the board. Verdict: 6 points.

P: prophylactic thinking

Verdict (based on the above annotations to the game): 6 points.

S: staying calm

It is here that I am not over-satisfied with myself. Calm did not set in until the final stage of the game, when I was already totally confident of its outcome. Verdict: adequate, 3 points.

The total score: 1 + 1+0 + 0 + 2 = 4 points, giving an average of 0.8 for the five components. This is lower than 'mediocre to bad'.

Total score: 5 x h + 6 + 6 + 6 + 3 = 26V2 points. Overall assessment: 26V2 + 5 = 5.3 points; very good, almost 'excellent'.

'STOPS' - A System of Self-Discipline in Chess

47

According to the 'STOPS' system, the result of the game was highly convincing - White deserved to win!

Now let us examine another piece of play.

Ai

IIBA

I mMwm mm

WB, WB, W&.

W§ frWB BBif

Kosikov - A.G. Panchenko

Kurass Memorial, Kiev 2003

In this tournament, up until the present game, I had not been doing badly. With 5 points out of 6,1 was sharing first and second places. I was content with both the quality of my play and my competitive results. You can therefore understand my satisfaction when the diagram position arose after the move 26 f5. White has a large positional plus, which will inevitably be converted into a material one. Realizing this, Black played:

26...Hxg3!?

I now immersed myself in thought, seeing that I had plenty of time on the clock. White has the pleasant choice between 27 hxg3 Sxf 5, giving him an endgame with the exchange for a pawn, and 27 fxg6, when he will be a pawn up in a rook ending. In either case he has quite a few technical difficulties to overcome, but the position is most likely a win.

I shall not undertake to prove which decision is better; the choice depends rather on a player's taste. I opted for the rook ending.

27 fxg6 Ixg6 28 Ixe7+ *d8 (D)

Again White is faced with a choice. Which pawn (b7 or h7) should he take? In either case Black can be expected to offer an exchange of rooks with 29...1d7.

I consider this to be the critical moment and, at least psychologically, a turning point of the game. The reason is not that White played a

w

weak move, but that I rejected the move that I felt instinctively was right.

First of all the variation 29 Sxh7 ld7 30 flxd7+ <S?xd7 31 h4! Sg4 32 Ihl Sxa4 33 h5 Sg4 34 h6 lg8 35 h7 flh8 attracted my attention, as the outside passed pawn is a potent force. I assessed 36 <4>cl(?) 4>e6 37 4>d2 <£f6 38 4>d3 4>g7 39 <4>c4 b6 40 c3 as offering White good winning chances (incorrectly, in fact, since 40...Sxh7! draws, as your computer will confirm to you). Despite my positive assessment of the line, / lost confidence in myself and chose to play safe by capturing the other pawn. In fact, capturing the h-pawn is strong, as White can play instead 36 &a2\, saving a tempo; e.g., 36..."4>e6 (36...4>e7 37 "4>b3 <4f6 38 <4>c4 b6 39 b4 *g7 40 b5 is winning for White) 37 *b3 &e5 (or 37...*d5 38 Sh6 b6 39 c4+) 38 *b4 and White should win.

29 2xb7

After this less forcing move, the position should still be won for White, but in my mind the 'worm of doubt' had been born, and my control of events in the game was lost.

29...fid7 30 2xd7+

30 JSb4 is a good four-rook ending for White. 30...*xd7 31 an?

After this lazy move, the ending becomes problematic. After 31 He5! Sh6 (the a-pawn cannot be saved as 31...&c7 32 Se7+ is hopeless for Black) 32 2a5 4>c7 33 Sxa7+ 4>b6 34 He7 4>a5 (34...Bxh2 35 b4) 35 b3 2xh2 36 Se6, White should win.

31...<4>e6 32 b3 Sh6 33 Sf8 a5

The variation 33...Sxh2? 34 Sa8 h5 35 Sxa7, with Bh7 to follow, would not of course suit Black.

34 la8 Sh5 35 Sa7 *d6 36 &b2 h6 37 h3 *e6 38 h4 *d6 39 If 7

Elements of Chess Strategy

Or 39 4c3 Sd5 40 4>c4 4e6. 39...4>c5 40 If4 Se5 41 4c3 Id5 42 Ic4+ 4b6 43 Sd4 If 5 44 4d3 Sf 3+ (D)

W

Am m m w

«A#1<4>#1I mm, kmm, mm,

^ wm<-± wm y mm y mm

Now some inexplicable happenings begin. Worn out by the constant problem of choices, I permitted myself to relax. This instantly led to loss of control over the situation on the board, the substitution of visual estimation for the precise calculation of variations, and, as a result, some gross oversights.

The logical continuation would now be 45 4c4 Sf2 46 c3 h5 47 b4 Sf3, when Black appears able to hold the draw with precise defence, but it would be easy for him to go wrong over the board. But to everyone's surprise (including my own), I played:

45 4e4?!

In astonishment, Panchenko replied:

45...Sc3

This move deprives White of any winning chances whatsoever. Yet he has dozens of safe ways to draw (the simplest is 46 4*5 Bxc2 47 4g6). At this moment it was essential for me to readjust and regain control of the situation on the board. For this I needed to make an accurate evaluation of the new state of affairs, calculate some variations (tactics), but this time in a more disciplined way - and take the optimum decision in the circumstances. But to begin with, I repeat, it was necessary to recover my self-control, which required an effort of willpower.

I did not succeed in doing this. There followed:

46 Hc4?

This already is a tactical oversight. I had worked out the variation 46...Hxc4+ 47 bxc4 4c5 48 "4*5 4xc4 49 4>g6 4>b4 50 4>xh6

4xa4 51 h5 4>b4 52 4>g6 a4 53 h6 a3 54 h7 a2 55 hSW, when White queens first and simultaneously covers the black pawn's queening square. But I was forgetting the advice that is given to chess-players of practically every standard: the consequences of going into a king-and-pawn ending must be calculated with extreme precision.

The game proceeded as follows:

46...Sxc4+ 47 bxc4 4c5 (D)

w

'///, v//////,

m, mm

WW, * I

&M&\

&\

wan w,

mm, mm,

By now I had seen the mistake in the foregoing variation. After 48 4*5??, Black is naturally not going to waste time on the superfluous move 48...4>xc4?? (when after 49 4g6, the best he can do is to scrape a draw by 49...4>c3 50 4xh64>xc251h5c5 524g6c4 53h6c3 54h7 4^1 55 h8# c2, as White can achieve no more than a drawn #+afl vs W ending). Instead after 48 4*5?? 4b4! 49 4>g6 4>xa4 504xh6 4b4 51 4^6 a4 5 2 h5 a3 it i s Black who promotes first. The queen endgame after 53 c3+ 4xc4 54 h6 a2 55 h7 alW 56 h8# WXC3 is winning for Black, albeit not without some difficulty.

In view of this, White played:

48 4d3??

The hallucinations continue. It still wasn't too late (though this was the last chance) to pause, recover my self-control, and calculate a variation that is not too involved and leads eventually to a draw: 48 h5! 4>b4 (not 48...4>xc4?! 49 4*5, when 49...4^3! 50 4g6 leads to the same draw as we saw above) 49 4d4 4>xa4 50 4c5 4'a3 51 4>xc6 4M 52 c5 a4 53 4b6 a3 54 c6 a2 55 c7 alW 56 c8W, etc.

I am showing the end of the game with some reluctance:

48...4b4 494d4h5!

'Elementary, my dear Watson!'

'STOPS' - A System of Self-Discipline in Chess

49

50 *e5 <4>xa4 51 4>d6 *b4 52 c5 a4 53 *xc6 a3 54 *d6 a2 55 c6 alW 56 c7 1U4+ 0-1

In the remaining two rounds of the tournament I picked up a mere half-point (even that was due to luck!), and as a result there was no question at all of a place in the prize list. A painful but deserved defeat.

There are no undeserved defeats. There are undeserved victories.

You will agree that Black's win doesn't look convincing. I must, of course, give my opponent his due - he showed tenacity and stubbornness in defending a very difficult position, he set me problems and eventually made me go wrong. But you cannot deny that Black had a large amount of luck. Whether White's defeat was fortuitous remains to be investigated. For this purpose, we will have recourse to the 'STOPS' system (applied to the losing side).

S: self-control

In the final part of the game this went completely astray, as you saw for yourselves. After the game, trying to make sense of what had happened, I told myself that my mind at that time had been running amok; it was a condition close to madness {chess madness, of course). My head thought what it wanted to think, and my hands did as they pleased, behaving at the same time as though they had never known each other. The verdict is a categorical 0 points - very bad.

T: tactics

How would you rate White's calculation of variations in this game? I give it 0 points - very bad.

O: objective evaluation

How can there be any question of objectivity, when there was no evaluation of the position at

all? The train simply went off the rails; 0 points, perhaps it should be even less, but 'STOPS' doesn't allow for that.

P: prophylactic thinking

Here I have fewer complaints against myself; overall, I understood much of what went on in the game. The only trouble was that my hands didn't obey my head. Verdict: fair, 2 points.

S: staying calm

In this game, after I achieved what was close to a won position (you will remember what the situation in the tournament was), I would describe my condition not as calm but as one where I had 'switched myself off'. I was no longer able to 'switch on' at the decisive moments of the struggle. Verdict: 0 points, very bad.

The conclusion is easily drawn: as I played very badly in this game, what result other than a loss did I deserve?

Now some concluding words about the 'STOPS' system. What do we gain from knowing this system (granted that knowledge and ability - as our last example made clear - are separate concepts)?

1) Before a game (even without the help of their coach), players can test their inward readiness for the struggle ahead.

2) Even during play, they can perform a test on themselves and possibly introduce corrections as the game goes on.

It would give me pleasure, dear readers, if the 'STOPS' system were to be absorbed and understood, and if the advice I have offered proved useful to you.

ELEMENTS OF CHESS STRATEGY

Answer to Exercise for Chapter 2

Exercise 26

w

Etfzzm jl. imiz Visa?, x ■mm Wf/ A IP A IP W£ A IP PP A PP A PI

i HP & Iff i

Let us try looking at the position through Black's eyes (prophylactic thinking). Yes, his situation is hopeless. Not only is he losing the d4-pawn, but for good measure his c8-bishop is pitifully undeveloped. This means he can save himself only with help from his opponent. To that end he has to make him commit an error -and in the present situation, a trap is the only way. The trap may not even save the game if it works, but it may complicate the position as a start - then the possibility of subsequent errors increases, and hence Black's saving chances improve.

I think it was by reasoning on these lines that I managed to anticipate the trap (or rather a pseudo-trap!). In the event of 27 #xg7+ "ii?xg7 28 Sc4 Sa2 29 fixd4, Black possibly intended to fish in troubled waters with 29...Sxf4?! 30 Sxf4

e5. However, even this is inadequate, as White has the decisive reply 31 J.xb7!, overloading the black bishop and winning at least a piece. Therefore he would need to try something like 29...b6, intending 30 cxb6 d5, when he has at least freed his bishop. So the answer to the exercise is that both moves are good, but if you intended 27 #xg7+, you needed to have anticipated Black's idea; moreover, the move chosen keeps a tighter grip on the game, and so is preferable.

27 lc4 Wxe5

A painful decision for Black to take, but it's hard to suggest any other reasonable move. He must make do with what he has.

28 fxe5 Sxfl+ 29 &xfl fia2 30 Ixd4 Ib2 31 <*el *f8 32 *dl <4>e7 33 *cl Ia2 34 <*bl Se2 35 b5 <£d8 36 Sa4 <£c7 37 Ia8 (D)

1-0

Black's decision to resign is fully understandable. Throughout his 36(!) moves in the game, Black not only made no move at all with his light-squared bishop, but it was not even physically possible for him to do so!

(Now return to page 46.)

3 The Advantage of the Bishop-Pair

One bishop is half a bishop; two bishops are three bishops.

It has been known for a long time now that apart from the value of individual pieces there is such a thing as the value of their interaction. Thus it is with the two bishops - their strength lies in the fact that their actions complement rather than duplicate each other.

It was the first World Champion, Wilhelm Steinitz, who first spoke about the advantage of the bishop-pair. The essence of his method for exploiting this advantage consists in a particular arrangement of the pawns, constricting the knight and depriving it of outposts. If the fight is being conducted against a knight and bishop, the latter is constricted simultaneously. The advance of the pawns, according to Steinitz, does not lead to weaknesses in your own camp, since the two bishops cover squares of both colours. In this way the conditions are gradually created for decisive operations.

On the other hand, in his book Chess Mid-dlegames: Strategy, the well-known Soviet theorist Peter Romanovsky maintained: "For the evaluation of a position, one player's possession of two bishops does not count as a specific form of advantage... An increase in the activity of the bishops is grounded in a complex of weak squares or other weaknesses in the position - it depends on the features of the specific situation as a whole."

Who is right, then? Steinitz or Romanov-sky?

It seems to me that Igor Bondarevsky came nearest to the truth in his book Attacking the King, when he stated: "Two bishops are stronger than a different combination of minor pieces in the majority of positions that arise in practice. With that proviso, which almost goes without saying, we may speak of the advantage of the bishop-pair."

Still, where exactly is that golden mean between the two opinions?

I shall try to answer this and many other questions in the present chapter.

Bishop or Knight?

Which of them is stronger? In chess this is one of the 'philosophical' questions that define the level of a player's strategic understanding.

From days of old it has been customary to divide chess-players into two groups: the 'Mor-phyites' (adherents of the style of Paul Morphy, who preferred playing with bishops) and the 'Chigorinists' (Mikhail Chigorin was reputed to be very fond of knights, but this may be based on some of his opening choices that led to specific 'knights vs bishops' scenarios rather than a general preference on his part). In modem chess it has long been no secret that these pieces, 'arithmetically' of equal worth, may prove stronger or weaker depending on the situation on the board. For a better grasp of this issue, let us investigate its strategic basis. Have you given attention to the way the value of the pieces, their worth in relation to each other, undergoes transformation?

Anyone beginning chess soon learns that the strength of a bishop or knight is approximately equal to three pawns, while a rook equals five pawns and a queen nine, and the king is invaluable (whatever the cost, we must protect our 'gracious monarch' from being checkmated).

To an experienced player, this 'school arithmetic' is no longer suitable and in the endgame it changes outright. Why is this?

King: If in the opening and middlegame the king is more timid than a hare (though let us not forget Steinitz's view that 'the king should defend itself!'), in the endgame his majesty becomes a powerful fighting unit with a value of roughly four pawns. (Imagine - stronger than a minor piece and only slightly surpassed by a rook!) Of course, it is impossible to be 'a king

Elements of Chess Strategy

up' in literal terms, but this can be seen as the difference in value between a highly active king and one that completely lacks mobility.

Pawn: Of course, in the middlegame the footsoldier is already dreaming of becoming a general. Only who will permit this, with such an abundance of officers on the board? In the endgame, the pawn is often the very hero who brings the drama to its denouement.

Rook: In the opening and often in the middlegame too, when there are few open lines and many 'barking dogs', the rook feels like a bear surrounded in its den. In the endgame, however, it is set free and can run wild. Conventionally, a rook in the ending is said to possess one-and-a-half times its earlier strength.

Queen: Theoretically the queen too is afraid of attacks by the opponent's pieces and pawns, but in comparison with the rook it is much more mobile. In the ending the queen also increases in strength, if only slightly, thanks to the greater number of open lines.

Bishop: A long-range piece, but if there are many pawn-barriers on the board, its power is often limited. In the ending, however, when the quantity of pawn-obstacles diminishes, this piece too gains in strength.

Knight: In this case, the question is more complicated. Bishop or knight? These pieces remind me of characters from Alexandre Dumas. The bishop is Portos - strong but direct and plain. The knight is Aramis - less powerful but wily and unpredictable. The knight's cunning is particularly dangerous in the middlegame, when less attention is paid to it.

In the middlegame, the knight is not bothered by bastions formed by pieces and pawns, while its combinative thrusts can prove lethal.

In the endgame, the knight's deviousness gives rise to more caution, there are less of the piece-and-pawn-barriers that enhance its significance, and its slowness of movement becomes more and more noticeable.

Thus in the endgame, while the other pieces receive a 'pay rise', the knight's value is appreciably hit by inflation. Accordingly the bishop's superiority over the knight in the final stage of the game was designated, most aptly and not without cause, as the 'minor exchange' by Capablanca.

Let us draw the conclusion from everything said above.

The knight is a combinative piece and therefore seeks middlegame complexities, whereas the bishop prefers endgame simplicity. Hence exchanges and simplification, reducing the tactics and bringing the endgame closer, are favourable to the side possessing the bishop-pair.

In the contest of bishop against knight, the basic question 'Which is stronger?' largely determines the players' strategy.

Bishop Stronger than Knight

w

II

ill

A:

Ai

"I A

f A]

Kotov - Florian

Budapest 1949

There is no doubt about White's advantage -he has the bishop-pair and a spatial plus which makes for greater piece activity. But as we know from Steinitz, the initiative has to be increased or there is a danger that it will disappear.

20 £k4 &a6?!

When defending, you should not be thinking of premature activity but primarily of erecting protective bulwarks. Black is clearly overrating his position and hence losing his sense of danger. A better move is 20...fifd8. Admittedly, after 21 i.g5 h6! 22 ±xf6 gxf6 this would lead to the complete shattering of Black's pawn-front. The pawns would then be virtually incapable of any successful offensive operations, but in defence they could form a sturdy fortress.

21 £}d6 lad8 Not21...£)c5?22lfcl.

22 <2tf5 Sd7 23 &g5 £>h5 24 Ifdl h6 25 £e3 Sf d8 (D)

The Advantage of the Bishop-Pair

53

w

Exercise 27: In White's place, what would you play?

(For the answer, see page 90.)

(Please remember that the exercises and their solutions are an integral part of the chapter; a good deal of the core content of the chapter is included in them. So please think about each exercise and read its solution before continuing to the subsequent material.)

"The future belongs to the player who has the bishops." (Siegbert Tarrasch)

"What constitutes the bishop's advantage over the knight? It is the fact that the bishop can influence the conflict from a distance, whereas the knight is effective only from the nearest squares. What is the best way to utilize the bishop's superiority? By driving the knight as far away as possible and then continually preventing it from making its way back into the game. Pawns are most suited to this end...

"Of course, pawn advances by no means always result in a good position... But if they lead to a weakening of the opponent's pawns, we may reckon the resulting position is easier to exploit with the bishop-pair than with the aid of knights." (Max Euwe, PracticalChess Lessons)

C. Bauer - Dorfman

France 1993

1 e4 c5 2 £\f3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 £>xd4 £>f6 5

£ic3 £\c6 6 i.e3 £\g4 7 i.b5 £\xe3 8 fxe3 J,d7 9 i.xc6?

A serious positional error. The only rational continuation was 9 0-0 <£se5 10 <S}f 3.

9„.bxc6 10 0-0 e5!

Without the exchange on c6, this move would be dubious in view of the weakness on d5.

"Exchanging bishop for knight can be justified only after the pawn position has crystallized." (Iosif Dorfman).

111T3

Nor is 11 <£sf5 dangerous for Black; he continues 11...JLe6, with ...g6 to follow.

Il„.f612 £\de2 J,e7 13 £>a4!? (D)

It isn't hard to guess that Black is aiming for ...d5, so White makes advance preparations to restrain him with c4.

13...#a5 14 b3 i.e6 15 £>g3 Not 15 c4? &xc4. 15...g6 16 Bad

Counting on meeting 16...0-0 with 17 c4. 16...d5 17exd5 1 txd5

For reasons we can now understand, Dorfman is trying to reach an ending. The combinative skirmishes initiated by 17...cxd5 18 c4 0-0 19 cxd5 JLxd5 20 #g4 would not suit Black at all.

18 #e2 0-0 19 c4 Wa5 20 Wf3 Iac8

Caution! Black senses danger! After the straightforward 20...Wc7?! 21 £te4, followed by <£sac5 (or <£lec5), the white knights would begin to show increasing aggression.

21 Ifdl f5! 22 £\e2 &a3!

Excellent strategic understanding of the essence of the position. White's knights, of course, are looking for a combinative clash. But by forcing off both pairs of rooks, Black considerably reduces the tactics and thereby brings the game closer to an ending in which the superiority of the bishops over the knights should be decisive.

23 Sc2

In the event of 23 2b 1 .&xc4 24 bxc4 Wxa4 25 fid7 Sfd8, White's little display of activity would not at all compensate for the pawn lost.

Elements of Chess Strategy

23...fifd8 24 £>ec3 Sxdl+ 25 Wxdl Hd8 26 Sd2 Sxd2 27 #xd2 &f 7 28 &f 2 <*e8 29 g3 0d8!

A type of strategic device which players half-jokingly call 'exchange speculation'. The point is that the stronger side, possessing a material plus or a solid positional advantage, offers the defender a patently unfavourable exchange, leaving him with an awkward choice: either to assent to this exchange which increases the active side's advantage, or to remove his piece to a less effective square, conceding a convenient foothold to his opponent.

30 #e2 h5!

It is now time for Black to launch a kingside pawn offensive aimed at seizing space and limiting the actions of the enemy knights.

31 £>dl?!

When defending, of course, you have to be psychologically prepared to make concessions. But this should only be done when there is no other way out; you should still be endeavouring to obey the order not to give an inch. At this point 31 c5 was better, trying to keep the light-squared bishop out of the game, if only temporarily. Thus, on 31...Wa5?! 32 £>bl i.xc5 33 Wc2 i.e7 34 Wxc6+ <4f7, White would obtain some chances of counterplay.

31...i.b4 32 £>db2 e4 33 <£dl #d2

At long last the queen exchange is guaranteed, and the advantage of the two bishops (in this case the term 'advantage' should arouse no doubts) secures victory for Black. However, he had a more tactical solution at his disposal: 33...f4! rips open the white king's defences, enabling the black queen and bishops to move in swiftly for the kill; for example, 34 gxf4 &g4 or 34 exf4 Wd4+ 35 £)e3 -&d2 intending ...i.g4.

34Wxd2i.xd2 35 4»e2

Here the attempt to shut the dark-squared bishop out of play by 35 £>ac3 *e7 36 *e2 Jtcl 37 <5}bl g5 would make a most naive impression.

35...i.b4 36 £>f 2 g5!

Paying attention to the opponent's designs (prophylactic thinking)! The simple 36...'A>e7?! 37 <5^h3 would give White distinct chances of constructing a fortress.

37<£ib2

Or 37 £)h3 &e7.

37...*e7 38 £sbdl £T6 39 £>b2 <*g6

Black's shortage of time explains all. 40 <£a4 *f6 41 <£b2 £d6 42 £ibdl h4 43 <£hl

The knight on h 1 looks ludicrous. But alas, the alternative is no better: 43 gxh4 g4. 43...i.f 7 44 £>df 2 i.h5+ 0-1

After 45 <4>d2 .&f3 White's pieces are in a picturesque state of paralysis.

In this game, the chief role in the winning process was played by Black's pawn superiority in the centre and on the kingside.

As we observed earlier, an advantage in space is of no small significance in chess. Even in closed positions, where it might seem that the bishops are up against pawn-barriers while the knights can easily jump over them, a spatial plus is immensely important.

W

m.

m

it

m&

ABA;

AI

Chigorin - Falk

Simultaneous, Moscow 1899

Exercise 28:

1) Identify the main strategic factors in this position.

2) Suggest a plan for White. (For the answer, see page 90.)

Let us return to the question of the confrontation between bishop and knight. "Given that diagonals are the 'work area' of the bishops, a conclusion automatically suggests itself: in order to activate the bishops and widen their sphere of influence, diagonals have to be freed from encumbering material. This method of proceeding, which often involves material sacrifices, is called 'diagonal clearance'." (Alexander Kochiev).

The Advantage of the Bishop-Pair

55

w

Gligoric - Larsen

Manila 1973

15 c5!

A move directed not only at giving the bishop on d3 greater influence ('diagonal clearance'), but also at weakening Black's castled position.

15...exd4 16 cxb6 dxc317 J.e3 g4 18 bxc7 #xc7?!

Now it is one-way traffic. After 18...fide8, Black at least retains some hope of counterplay.

19 lacl d5 20 Ixc3 gxf3 21 Wxf3 d4 22 WfS+ fld7 23 i.f4 #b6 24 Sxc6+ i.xc6 25 £ic5 (D)

White's bishops, especially the dark-squared one, are occupying dominant positions, and this guarantees a quick victory.

25...£ig4 26 gbl #a7 27 £ixd7 &xd7 28 Wc5+! 1-0

"Apart from 'diagonal clearance', another strategic device for enhancing the bishops' activity is an 'unbalanced exchange'. It amounts to a voluntary worsening of the balance of material forces. The aim of this kind of exchange is to alter the position in a manner that optimizes

the conditions for realizing the potential of the remaining pieces - in our case, the bishops.

"An unbalanced exchange is closely related to a positional sacrifice, and in many cases the two concepts coincide. The basic difference between them emerges when such an exchange, from the opponent's viewpoint, is not forced." (Kochiev)

W

Donchenko - Korsunsky

Baku 1976

Black has a slight material plus - the exchange for a pawn. But his king position is insecure. If you add to this Black's weakened dark squares when his opponent has a dark-squared bishop, then White's position looks the more promising.

20 i.b2 fif 8 21 #h4 #d6 22 Sel #d3 23 ^e5#d2

After 23...£>xe5 24 ±xb7 £sf3+ 25 ±xf3 Wxf3 26 JLa3, White has some advantage.

24 &xb7! W\el+ 25 &g2 £ixe5 26 i.xe5 (D)

II

if i

MAmm

fi&l

• A IP

PId?Pt

The bishop is immune (26...#xe5 27 .&c6#), while the threats persist. The only possibility of

Elements of Chess Strategy

resistance is for the king to plunge into the thick of it.

26...&d7 27 £f6!

An interesting position has come about: two bishops are dominating two rooks!

27...Iab8 28 &e4 a5 29 £xh7 #e2 30 #g5 Sbc8 31 a4 Sc7 32 h4 2b8? (D)

Now Black's pieces lose their coordination entirely. The right way to seek b-file counter-play is 32...JSfc8, intending ...Sb7, when the battle continues.

W

33 £e5 2xb3 34 ff4!

We can safely assume that Korsunsky overlooked this move, after which the fight is over. Defending everything is impossible.

34...Wh5 35 £xc7 Wxhl 36 Wd6+ <4>c8 37 Wc6 1-0

W

EWmwWm 6

A mm * ,„„ mm *

kmmmmm

imfmfm

WM wk&wk

Browne - Mecking

Interzonal tournament, Manila 1976

Exercise 29:

1) Give your assessment of the position.

2) In Black's place, what would you play? (For the answer, see page 91.)

W

WB. W.

m mm

w v/ wm y/ m%; y/ , »^

Alekhine - E. Spencer

Simultaneous, Liverpool 1923

36 Ixd6!

"Seizing the key to the position and thereby acquiring a decisive plus." (Alekhine).

36...^.xd6 37 #xd6 lbl+ 38 *h2 *h7 (D)

W

v//, mm

I WW, WW,

W Pi

W/, W//,

W/ W WW WB ft WB A i WB, Ww,&Wm,&

HIP SHIP HIP ''HP

ils mm, Wm,

By the definition that we laid down earlier, White's exchange sacrifice is a sacrifice only in a nominal, formal sense. Furthermore, the growing power of the bishops is becoming irresistible.

39 £d3?

This allows Black to put up considerable resistance by 39...2dl!, as the counterplay based on ...g4 remains potent in some critical lines. Instead, the more direct 39 .&d4! is overwhelming.

39...Sb7? 40 £d4 Wf 7 41 e5+ £>g6 42 e6! Mtl 43 WeSl *h6 44 i.xg6 *xg6 45 #e4+ &h6 46 ITS We8 47 h4 Wg8 48 e7 Hb8 49 i.e5! 1-0

Of course, you would have to be extremely dogmatic and lacking in objectivity to maintain that the bishop is always stronger than the knight

The Advantage of the Bishop-Pair

57

(especially in the middlegame). The truth is like a pendulum located somewhere midway between the outermost points of its swing.

Knight Stronger than Bishop

The most obvious case where the knight surpasses the bishop in strength is a middlegame of the closed type, with the bishops hemmed in by the pawn-chains.

Spassky - Fischer

World Ch match (game 5), Reykjavik 1972

1 d4 <Stf6 2 c4 e6 3 <Sk3 &b4 4 e3 c5 5 ±d3

£>c6 6 £tf3 &xc3+ 7 bxc3 d6 8 e4 e5 9 d5 £«7 10 £>h4 h6 (D)

w

11 f4?!

The first in a series of impulsive decisions. 11 f3 or 11 g3 is better.

Il...£ig6!

Of course, there is no need at all to fall in with White's wishes by accepting the piece sacrifice: 1 l...exf4?! 12 &xf4 g5? 13 e5! and White wins.

12 £ixg6 fxg6 13 fxe5?!

It is better to maintain the pawn-tension in the centre (in the hope that the game would later open up for the benefit of the bishops) by playing 13 0-0 0-0 14 h3.

13...dxe5 14 i.e3 b6 15 0-0 0-0 16 a4?

From the point of view of strategic understanding (or rather lack of it), this is an astonishing mistake by a reigning World Champion.

16...a5!

After this (as the further course of the struggle will show), the weakness of the black pawn

on b6 is much less significant than that of the white one on a4.

17fibl?!

With each move, White increasingly loses the thread of the game. (Incidentally, after going through it to the end, I advise the reader to analyse this game according to the 'STOPS' system.) It is better to be thinking already about constructing a defence with 17 Jte2 followed by 18 i.f3.

17...i.d718 fib2 fib8 19 Sbf 2 We7 20 ±c2 g5 21 i.d2 #e8! 22 £el #g6 23 Wd3 £>h5 24 Sxf8+ fixf8 25 Ixf8+ *xf8 26 &dl?

Total disorientation. It is essential to opt for

26 g3.

26...£>f4 27Wc2?

Now for the knockout! The correct move is

27 #bl, although even then, after 27...<£>e7 followed by ... < i > d8 and ... < & > c7, Black's increasing advantage leaves no room for doubt about the outcome of the game.

27...&xa4! 0-1

28 fxa4 is met by the decisive 28...#xe4.

Knights are particularly dangerous in the middlegame if they can use weak squares in the centre as outposts from which they cannot be expelled.

W

Anand - Gelfand

Dos Hermanas 1996

The verdict on the position is unambiguous: there can be no question of any advantage of the bishop-pair, since by seizing the outposts on d5 and e4, White's knights should secure him a considerable, possibly decisive, plus.

26 #e2! Wg6 27 f 3 MS 28 £ib4 Bc7 29 £ibd5 2cf7 30£ie4

Elements of Chess Strategy

The aim is achieved: the commanding heights are conquered.

30...i.g5

I am so glad / wasn't playing this position for Black! As I see it, that would be worse than walking blindfold across a minefield. At the present moment Black has little in the way of choice. Either he continues as in the game, condemning himself to passive defence without chances of counterplay, or he chooses a forcing line leading to an endgame, of which the result is also a foregone conclusion: 30...JLxe4 31 #xe4 #xe4 32 fxe4 and now 32...Sf2 33 Bfl lxfl+ 34 Sxfl Sxfl+ 35 *xfl &cl 36 £sb6 i.xb2 37 £>c4 &d4 38 £>xd6 b6 39 <&e2 &g8 40 4>d3 &f8 41 <&c4 <&e7 42 <&d5. The attempt to strengthen Black's play with 32...&g8 is hardly successful; White can simply continue with 33 b4 (parrying the idea of ...JLcl after an exchange of all the rooks - which appeared in the line we just looked at - in view of the reply b3). It is of course possible to seek other defensive ideas for Black, but it is akin to trying to knock a hole in a wall with your forehead, especially under playing conditions of limited time and energy!

There followed:

31 £idc3 i.e7 32 fld3 Sc8 33 Sadl Ic6 34 ^05 MS 35 Sc3 h5? (D)

A frequently-occurring mistake that is familiar to us. Black needs to make some luft of course, but he had to do it more modestly (35...h6), so as not to give his opponent any more holds on which to fasten. But Black would dearly love to do something even slightly active!

W

It is extremely dangerous for the defender to plunge unprepared into tactics, especially when in time-trouble.

40£>xd5l.xh3

Or 40...Ixc4 41 bxc4 £xh3 42 gxh3 Ixf3 43 £>ef6+.

41 gxh3 lxf3 42 £ief6+! 1-0

Black resigned in view of 42...Scxf6 43 £>xf6+ gxf6 44 Sg4+, or 42...gxf6 43 Sg4+.

Bishops are very active if they have open diagonals. Therefore one of the fundamental methods of fighting against the two bishops is to limit their mobility by erecting pawn-barriers.

W

■ BMlAB

riH 8 S (

36 *hl h4?! 37 h3 4>g8 38 Sc4! #h5 39 £«3 d5?!

Salov - Kamsky

Candidates match (game 6), Sanghi Nagar 1995

Despite his possession of the bishop-pair, White's position is dismal - both bishops are restricted in their actions. In addition, Black controls the strategically important b-file.

30 4>gl

Alas, it is hard to recommend an active plan. White therefore has to conduct a static, barren defence.

30...1b2 31 &d3 4>e6 32 h4 g5 33 hxg5 hxg5 34 &f 1 g4 35 i.c3 S2b3 36 ±e2 f 5 37 &el Ib2 38 &d3 S2b3 39 &e2 fib2

This type of repetition is a stock device to gain thinking time.

40 i.d3 Sh8

Concrete threats are now starting to emerge, such as 41...Hb7, followed by ...Hbh7.

41 Scbl Ibb8 42 fixb8?! Ixb8 43 lei Sb3 44 &c2 Ia3 45 e4 fxe4 46 i.dl 4f5 47 Ae2 Sa2 48 II Sa4

and White soon resigned.

The Advantage of the Bishop-Pair

59

Suba - Smyslov

Interzonal tournament, Las Palmas 1982

Here, as in the last example, White has no cause to speak of an 'advantage' of the bishop-pair. His dark-squared bishop is extremely passive, and prospects for activating it are not to be discerned. One other feature of the position is also important, namely the pawn weaknesses against which the knight is a very dangerous attacker, since, thanks to its merits that we have mentioned already, it can switch between attacking weak points on both light and dark squares.

28..Ad8 29 £dl c5 30 Ml *f8 31 We2?! #c6 32 Wc2?! d5!

White's planless, unreasoning play has allowed Black to start active operations.

33 Mi Wd7 34 cxd5 &xd5 35 i.e2?!

Aiming to preserve the 'advantage of the bishop-pair', White removes his bishop from attack, but in so doing he allows his opponent a dramatic increase in activity (you will recall the notion of 'exchange speculation').

38...£ie6 36 M3 <4>e7 37 Wd2 Wc6 38 Ml c4! 39 d4?

The lesser evil was probably 39 dxc4 ilxc4, although in that case, after the exchange of light-squared bishops (which White of course had avoided only a few moves ago), Black's advantage would be substantial, indeed close to decisive.

Incidentally, haven't you ever pondered the question of why the piece configuration 'queen and knight vs queen and bishop' is considered more promising for the side with the knight, whereas 'rook and knight vs rook and bishop' is thought to favour the bishop? To establish this opinion by means of variations is plainly

impossible. But let us try to do it by logic, relying on the concepts we already possess.

We decided that the knight in chess was a cunning piece, suited to combinations. Therefore an alliance between the queen's strength and the knight's cunning is more dangerous in the middlegame (and we are essentially in a middlegame as long as queens and at least some other pieces are on the board) than a union between the queen and a bishop, which, even if a strong piece, is an excessively simple one. On the other hand, the pairing of a rook with a knight or bishop, in the absence of other pieces, constitutes an endgame situation - which the knight fears 'as the devil fears incense'.

But let us return to the game. There followed:

39...a5 40 Wb2 £k7 41 i.cl £ib5 42 Wc2 &f 6 43 <4>gl Ae4 44 Wl 2 sfef 7

44...£>xc3?! 45 d5! allows White a lot more freedom, although objectively the advantage stays with Black.

45 Mil £id6 46 #h4 h6 47 *h5+ 4>g8 48 #g6 i.d5!

Not only freeing the e4-square for the knight or queen, but also preparing to give the black king a safe shelter on h7.

49 &el Ml 50 #g3 We4 51 Wh4 4>h7 52 Ml Mi5 53 Wd8 &b5 54 #xb6 £>xc3 55 Wxa5 £>e2+ 56 i.xe2

A time-trouble blunder, but 56 ^hl c3 is also hopeless for White.

56...Wxg2# (0-1)

And finally, knights are especially dangerous in a middlegame with combinative complexities.

■ 11 H#l

lii iiii

■***" - -

lAi

«a|

AHA

MiM

1 pi

Van Wely - Piket

Wijk aan Zee 1996

Elements of Chess Strategy

Exercise 30:

1) Give your assessment of the position.

2) Evaluate the sacrifice 25...<£ld4. (For the answer, see page 91.)

Two Bishops in the Middlegame

Now that we understand the mutual relations of bishop and knight, it will be easier to ascertain the conditions under which the bishop-pair in the middlegame can become an advantage.

The basis for answering this question is the need to prove a bishop's superiority over a knight. The rule which follows from this is very simple but incredibly important for an elucidation of the strategy:

In order to demonstrate the advantage of the bishop-pair, it is necessary above all to demonstrate the power of the bishop that has no opposite number on the same colour of squares.

Let us examine this in a series of concrete examples.

W

w

Short - Zilber

Hastings 1979/80

Exercise 31: Suggest a plan of action for White.

(For the answer, see page 92.)

Short was of course not the first to discover the strategic precept that he employed in the exercise that you have just tackled. It had already been seen repeatedly in one form or another.

Alekhine - Alexander

Nottingham 1936

16 Lh3!

After this neither 16...£>xd5 17 #xe4 nor 16...£xd5 17 Ixd5 £ixd5 18 #xe4 would be at all to Black's liking.

16...g6 17 f3 £>c5 18 #g5 Wg7

Not 18...£ixd5?19£ixg6!.

19 b4 <Skd7

After 19...£>a4 20 &al the black knight would be shut out of play for the long term.

20 e4!

The attacking force of White's dark-squared bishop starts to reveal itself. On 20.. .fxe4 White has21i.xd7.

20...£ixe4 21 Wcl! (D)

Declining to exchange pieces 'for something and nothing': 21 JLxg7 £>xg5 22 Jtxf8 £>xh3+ 23 <4>g2 fixf8 24 *xh3 £tf6.

21...£ief6 22 &xf5! *h8

Or 22...gxf 5 23 <SM5 #h8 24 £>h6+ *g7 25 #g5#.

23 iLe6 £a6

The situation is hopeless because Black has nothing with which to oppose the power of the

The Advantage of the Bishop-Pair

61

b2-bishop. White answers 23...Hbe8 with 24 g4, and 23...£te5 with 24 f4.

24 fif el £le5 25 f 4 <£d3 26 2xd3! &xd3 27 g41-0

There is no satisfactory defence against the g5 advance.

HI ilfflPllI is

HI WM^ WW, / Md:

a iili

9. '%&&: 'WW. '"" ''WW.

A

Svidler - Anand

Russia-World rapid play match, Moscow 2002

Opening theory prefers 6 JLe2. 6...a6

The preliminary 6...Ae7 may be more accurate.

7 £xc6 bxc6 8 c4?! (D)

8 £lb3 is better.

Exercise 32: In Black's place, what would you play?

(For the answer, see page 93.)

Black might seem to have everything in order: he has a splendid knight outpost on f5 and the possibility of seizing one of the open files.

And yet we can tell that Black's position is incredibly difficult because he will presently be helpless to oppose the might of White's light-squared bishop.

18...±d8 19 i.f 2 Ah4 20 £gl!

Exchanging the dark-squared bishops before the most appropriate moment is not in White's interest, since his dark-squared bishop beautifully complements the strength of the light-squared one. ('One bishop is half a bishop; two bishops are three bishops.')

20...1g8 21 i.f3 Sc8

21...1d8 is better.

22 *bl £ia5 23 <£e4 <5k4 24 b3 £ia3+ 25 *b2 £>b5 26 a4 £lc7 27 lei i.e7 28 £tf6+ J.xf6 29 exf6 *d7

Or 29...£>d6 30 Ac5 *d7 31 Shdl.

30 £xb7 2b8 31 &c6+ *d6 32 &a7 Sbd8 33 &b6 1-0

Agzamov - Kosikov

Orenburg 1972

Ie4e62d4d53£sd2£sc64£>gf3<£f6 5e5

<&d7 6 &b5

w

Rauzer - Riumin

Leningrad 1936

19 £>f5!

This is stronger than the exchange 19 <S}xe6 fxe6.

19...i.xf 5 20 exf 5 h6 21 £ie4 £)xe4 22 i.xe4 i.f6 23 ±e3 £)e7

White's pieces are ideally placed. His light-squared bishop makes a particularly powerful impression, far exceeding the strength of the black knight.

24 b4! c4 25 g3 Sd7 26 Ia7 #d8

It was worth considering 26.. .#xa7 27 Jtxa7 Sxa7, striving to alter the complexion of the

Elements of Chess Strategy

fight. Now the black position will be increasingly squeezed.

27 flxd7 #xd7 28 h4 *h8?! 29 g4 £\g8 Alas, 29...&xh4 30 #h3 £f6 fails to the reply 31 g5.

30 g5 JLe7 31 Idl Wc7 32 f6 &xf6 Practically forced; if 32...gxf6 then 33 1T5. 33 gxf6 £>xf6 34 i.c2 Sd8 35 i.xh6 Bxdl+ 36 i.xdl e4 37 i.f4 Wd8 38 #e2 £>d5 1-0

Black resigned without waiting for his opponent's move. There could have followed 39 #d2 #xh4 40 Ag5.

Two Bishops in the Middlegame: Associated Factors

Notwithstanding those last few examples, we must be extremely careful in speaking of the advantage of the two bishops in the middle-game. After all, as we have said more than once, the middlegame may contain a whole host of factors no less significant than the bishop-pair.

Planless Play

It often happens that we conduct one phase of the game with great success and achieve a very substantial plus, but then in our contentment we permit ourselves to relax - foolishly! As long as the clock is ticking and the fight continues, we have no right to do that. If we do, we run a very serious risk of losing control over the ongoing course of the struggle.

w

1AB«1

im A m' J mi

AS

The assessment of the position is not in any doubt. A spatial plus, the bishop-pair, the overall dominance of the white pieces, the dubious 'activity' of the knight on f 7 - what more does White want? The best continuation, as we understand by now, would be a strategy of enhancing the power of the dark-squared bishop by 24 #c3 followed by an advance of the g-pawn. Yet White did not resolve to move a pawn that was shielding his king's quarters. Simply content with the overall picture of the battle, he behaved in a patently dilatory way, forgetting that, as Steinitz said, the side possessing the initiative must attack.

24 *h2? Sbe8

It now turns out that White is under fire; rather than contemplate the position with his head in the clouds, he must come down to earth and think about defending his e-pawn.

25 #c3

Time to wake up?

25... 1 tc7!

Already it isn't so simple! The straightforward 26 g4? will be met by the counter-stroke 26...d5!.

26 &f3 &c6 27 #d3 #b7 28 <&gl Wa8 29 *f2 Wb7 30 Sle2 Wa8 31 <&el?! #b7 32 *d2 (D)

mm IH e '■■

iH IP*;

11 a BAB ■ m a s#8 h if a

Wi W2& ess p

Euwe - Alatortsev

Leningrad 1934

White has clearly lost the thread of the game; the 'STOPS' system (his objective positional judgement and, naturally, his focus on the unfolding events) is disrupted. Accordingly his actions lose their coherence.

32...b5! 33 *el

It emerges that the central andqueenside area is another 'burning house' for White's king. But then, returning to his 'hearth and home' will take time...

The Advantage of the Bishop-Pair

63

33...bxc4 34 bxc4 f5!

Opening the position and turning everything upside-down.

35 #c3 #b4 36 #xb4 cxb4 37 e5 &xf3 38 Ixf3 dxe5 39 Sfe3 e4

And Black has acquired a material plus.

w

SB

"14

MM

Ml IP A W% A

%&m

A;

AH

Muratov - Frumson

Moscow 1976

Exercise 33: Choose between the two candidate moves 19 g4 and 19 b4. (For the answer, see page 93.)

in

Ii.1

ABA

ill Hi

:AB

w, m&,

Forintos - Beliavsky

Moscow 1975

Exercise 34: Evaluate the position. (For the answer, see page 94.)

W

Azmaiparashvili - Yudasin

USSR Ch, Kiev 1986

Black could try to develop his dormant queen-side by removing his queen from b6, then playing ...a6 and ...Sb8, and finally ...b5 (or ...b6). But in an open position with tactical skirmishes about to break out, he can hardly find time for this. He must therefore seek to make the most of his active pieces, and any 'awkwardness' in his opponent's build-up, and complete his development when an opportune moment arises.

151^4 36!?

Yudasin stakes everything on a tactical dogfight. After the game he favoured the solid 15...£>c6; e.g., 16 fd2 a6 17 £>c3.

16 #d6 £>xc4

16...^c6?! is now risky because 17 £M5 exd5 18 J.xd5+ Sf7 19 i.xf7+ &xf7 20 fd5+ 4>e7 21 £ld6 £ld4 22 c5 fc6 23 *T7+ &d8 24 We8+ &c7 25 lacl gives White an attack.

17^xc4#xb5 18lfcl

Threatening 19 a4 #b3 20 fia3, but Black has a way to keep fighting.

18...a5! 19 fic2 2a6 20 #c7

Threatening 21 £k!6.

20...n>4 21 a3 #b3 22 lacl a4?

Azmaiparashvili gave the critical 22...d5! 23 ^xa5 as favouring White, missing 23...Wa4!; e.g., 24 £>xb7 (24 b4 fxa3) 24...Sa7 25 fxc8 Sxc8 26 Sxc8+ *f7 27 2lc7+ &g6 28 £>c5 with a likely draw.

23 Wb8\ d5 24 £>d2 Ml 25 Ic8! 1-0

A lead in development is a very important factor in the evaluation of a position, especially in the opening. A bishop-pair may help compensate for it, but the verdict will always hinge on concrete analysis.

Passed Pawn

This is a very important element of strategy in many positions, including those involving the bishop-pair. In the middlegame, a passed pawn can rarely be approached by the defender's king.

Elements of Chess Strategy

Where then can he find the superior quantity of pieces needed to attack and destroy it? Thus, a passed pawn in the middlegame, a redoubtable force for the active side, becomes the defender's 'first weakness'.

In the endgame, the king can often approach a passed pawn without any risk, and the latter, far from being a force, may prove a tasty morsel for the opponent. But here again, not everything is plain. If the passed pawn belongs to the side with the bishop-pair, it is very dangerous even in the endgame. On the one hand the bishops keep the enemy king away from the pawn; on the other hand they dislodge pieces from blockading positions, thus clearing the pawn's road to promotion.

The conclusion is evident: each position demands its own specific approach.

W

II

A iff a

%H fKWd.'""'i

A

&■!!

in

m

Hiibner - Smyslov Tilburg 1979

The white king's position has been weakened. But thanks to the general activity of his pieces, his bishop-pair and his dangerous passed pawn, White's game should be preferred.

19 i.flWh5 20 lfe2!

'Speculating' on an exchange. With the disappearance of the queens, the exposed position of White's king would cease to be a worry.

20...Wg6+ 21 ±g2 Sac8 22 d6!

The thrust by the passed pawn should decide the outcome of the duel.

22...£>c5 23 &xc5 Hxc5 24 d7!

In order to continue his attack, White is even willing to part with his dark-squared bishop.

24...Sd5 25 Hxd5 £)xd5 26 We4\

The aim is achieved. There is no avoiding the queen exchange.

26...£>xc3 27 #xg6 hxg6 28 lc7! £>e2+ 29 *f 1 £tf4 30 &d5! 1-0

I WXM w m ^ ^

Christiansen - Kasparov

Interzonal tournament, Moscow 1982

Exercise 35:

1) Evaluate the position.

2) What would you play if you had Black? (For the answer, see page 94.)

A. Kozlov - Dorfman

Odessa 1969

Exercise 36: What would you play if you were in Black's place?

(For the answer, see page 95.)

The 'Advantage of the Knight-Pair'

Of course, in chess terminology no such concept exists. Yet every joke contains a grain of

The Advantage of the Bishop-Pair

65

truth. There are some positions, especially in the middlegame, where the knights perform gyrations that make the opponent's head reel.

Foguelman - Smyslov

Leipzig Olympiad 1960

The undeveloped state of White's queenside and the great activity of Black's pieces allow us to evaluate the position as a win for Smyslov.

23....&e5!

Black isn't worried about exchanging a bishop for a knight in an open position.

24 £ixe5 <£>gxe5 25 f4 £>d4!

Off we go!

26 £dl £)d3 27 Efl £ib2! (D)

W

The cavalry gets through!

28<£id2

Managed it at last. Or so it seems...

28...<£>xdl 29 Efxdl £>e2+ 30 *h2 £>c3!

The decisive stab. The rest isn't interesting; White resigned eight moves later.

Often a knight's jump is so unpredictable that it induces errors from the opponent in what looks like the most harmless of situations.

%fmmti

■<&*/, -vmr/, W%>, <§H

i HP HP P Wm '"~WB. %H y 'W^.

1 liBfili

Psakhis - Speelman

Hastings 1987/8

The play has nearly entered the endgame stage, in which, as we shall soon discover, the bishop-pair is an indisputable advantage.

However, Black has three trumps at his disposal: possession of the only open file, the poor coordination of the white pieces, and... the 'advantage of the knight-pair'.

What is Black to play now?

White has good prospects after 21...£ki5?! 22 e3 followed by ^>e2 and Sdl, challenging the d-file. Objectively, Black should play the solid 21.. .£}a6, when there is everything to play for: Black keeps his grip on the d-file, while it is hard for White to engineer a truly effective pawn-break. However, in both cases White is in control of the game. Speelman found a highly creative, albeit unsound, alternative, which succeeded in unsettling an experienced grandmaster over the board.

21...£>a2?!!

The knight boldly steps into a corner from which it is unlikely ever to escape, but White must solve some very concrete problems.

22 Ic4

After22 &xc6£>xcl 23&a42dl! 24&xdl Sxd 1, all White's pieces are completely paralysed.

22...£>d4

22...£ie5 23Se4&f7 24Hh4(24Sal?!Bdl is OK for Black) 24...Sdl (24...<S?g7 25 Sal) 25 Sxh7+ <i?g8 26 Sxdl Sxdl leaves White with an extra pawn, but the situation remains complex.

23 b3?!

23 Sal! is critical. 23...£>b3 24 Sxa2 Sdl, and now:

Elements of Chess Strategy

a) 25 Sc2? Sbl (25...£\d2+ is simpler) 26 fce4! (26 e3? loses to 26...Sddl 27 Be2 £sd2+) 26...Sddl 27 4g2 Bxel 28 Sc3 flgl+ 29 *h3 a4 30 fcxbl Bxbl and a comical situation arises with an imprisoned rook on a2, offering White no saving chances whatever in spite of his extra exchange.

b) 25 Ie4+ *f8 26 f4! (after 26 e3 Sbl!, the threats of 27...Sddl and 27...<£icl are hard to meet) and it is not clear how Black is to continue.

23...£>b5! 24 fib2

After 24 lal Bd2! 25 fcxd2 Bxd2, Black's compensation for the exchange would not be in doubt.

24...£>ac3!

Not 24.. .£ibc3? 25 Bxa2 £sxa2 26 Bc2.

25 a4

The variations 25 fcxc3? £)xc3 26 Bxc3? Bdl# and 25 Bxc3 £sxc3 26 fcxc3 Bdl+ 27 fcel Bal, with ...Sddl to follow, are of course not at all to White's liking.

25...£sdl!

The raids by the black knights continue, and there is no telling how they will end. White could of course follow the line of least resistance with 26 Ba2 £ki4 27 Ba3, but the position would then acquire an irrational, unpredictable and uncontrollable streak, in which the 'advantage of the knight-pair' would become especially dangerous.

White therefore resolves to sacrifice the exchange, banking on the imprisonment of Black's surviving knight.

26 Bbl £>a3 27 Sccl!? After27Be4+*f7 28 Bel &b229Be3 Bdl

30 Bec3 the situation on the board remains extremely unclear.

27...£>xbl 28 Bxbl

Intending fce4-d3.

28...f5 29 fcb7

He now aims to bring the bishop round via a6.

29...g5! 30 fca6 f4! 31 fcd3?!

The question, as always, is how to evaluate the position. What is White playing for?

Although Black is the exchange up, it is fair to assess the situation as equal in view of the incarcerated knight. Therefore the most suitable course is waiting tactics, with something like

31 fcc4, assenting to a draw. White's last move

reveals that Psakhis is either overrating his possibilities or not weighing them up at all. 31...Bxd3! 32 exd3 Bxd3 33 *e2 Bd5!

Precision is always essential. 33...Bd4? is a mistake in view of 34 gxf4 gxf4 35 fcd2 <Sixf2 36i.c3Sd3 37.fcel.

34gxf4

Not, of course, 34 Bxdl?? f3+. Nor is 34 fcd2 <S}xf2 any good to White, but a possibility is 34 *f3 £>c3! 35 fcxc3 Bd3+ 36 *g4 Bxc3 37 &xg5, going into a drawn rook endgame.

34...gxf4 (D)

w

35 Bel?!

In time-trouble, White loses control of events (the 'STOPS' system breaks down!) and releases the knight from its prison. After the correct 35 &f3 Bd4 36 &e2 Bd5 37 *f3, a peaceful end to the struggle would be unavoidable.

35...£*2!

Hooray! Freedom!

36 fcc3 £sd3 37 Bgl?

This is the proverbial last straw that breaks the camel's back.

The drawing margin in chess is quite considerable! Notwithstanding the series of inaccuracies and errors that White had already committed, the position was still drawable. The correct course was 37 Bdl! < £)b4 (not 37...f3+? 38 *xf3) 38 Bxd5! (not 38 fcxb4?? f3+) 38...£>xd5 39 fce5 4e6 40 fcb8 *f5 41 ■4^3, and despite the pawn minus, White is saved by the 'minor exchange'. By attacking the pawns on b6 and f4 with his bishop, he prevents Black from regrouping effectively.

But evidently all that cavorting by the black knights had set Psakhis's head spinning so much that he totally lost his bearings.

37...£>b4 38 Bg7+

The Advantage of the Bishop-Pair

67

He also fails to save himself with 38 itxb4 axb4 39 Sg7+ <&d6 40 2xh7 f3+! 41 *e3 Sdl.

38...*f8 39 &b2

Or 39 fixh7 f 3+.

39...2d3 0-1

The 'advantage of the knight-pair' is especially palpable in the middlegame when the players start to trade combinative punches in the style of a boxing match.

W

Botvinnik - Romanovsky

Leningrad 1933

46 h5!

The sealed move. The white knights now set out on their hard-hitting raids.

46...gxh5 47 £rf5 le6 48 £ixd5 fid7 49 £\b6?!

49 £>f4 Se5 (49...Ie8 50 Wdl!) 50 £>g6! is good for White.

49...Sd8 50 d5 WeS?

If50...cxd5?then51Ic7.

However, Black missed his chance here, as after 50...Wh7!, there are too many pins for White to make any progress with his attack, and the outcome is likely to be a murky ending with few winning chances for White. This is the type of resource that a modern computer finds without batting an electronic eyelid, but can completely escape the attention of a future world champion given the irrational appearance of the position that it brings about.

5l£id4

The blows from the white knights are becoming unbearable.

51...1ed6 52 £ixc6 &xc6 53 Hxc6 Sxc6 54 lxc6 i.d6

Not 54...Wxc6 because of the zwischenzug 55 %6+.

551T5?

Such a pity. In time-trouble, the logical conclusion to the game is botched. After 55 £k8!! Sxc8 (55...1e5 56 Se6 Wf8 57 fie7) 56 Ixc8 Wxc% 57 #g6+, followed by Wxf6+ and Wxd6, the exploitation of White's extra material would have been a matter of fairly simple technique.

But then Botvinnik observed several times that the calculation of variations and combinative vision were not his strongest points.

55...*g7! 56 £>c8?! Ae5 57 <£b6?!

Now 57 Se6 comes too late due to 57...Wg6. However, 57 fic5 keeps some chances alive.

57...Sxd5

and the game soon ended in a draw.

Knights are also dangerous when they have outposts in the centre.

W

Anderssen - L. Paulsen

Vienna 1873

17 <&d2! &c6 18 £«4 f5?

A mistake we are well acquainted with already - pawn moves without good reason in a bad position. It is better to face up to the difficulty of the situation and settle for 18...itxd5!? 19 Wxd5 Wc7 (20 £ixd6?? Id8), going over to static defence.

19 £\ec3 Wd7 20 a3

You should never forget about creating some luft - provided of course there are not more urgent matters to attend to, and provided also that the pawn move does not constitute a serious weakening in itself.

20...1T7 21 h3! a6 22 g4! Ie8 23 f4 Ie6 24 g5 b5 25 h4 Se8 26 #d3

Elements of Chess Strategy

The defects of Black's 18th move begin to emerge.

26...Sb8 27 h5 a5 28 b4!

The weakening of the pawn shelter round White's king is insignificant; Black is in no position to launch an attack.

28...axb4 29 axb4 #xh5 30 Wxf5 W(7 31 Wd3

Threatening 32 Shi.

31...i.d7 32 £ie41T5

If32...1.f5then33^ef6+.

33 fihl Se8 34 £ief6+! gxf6 35 £M6+ <S?f7 36 Ixh7+ i.g7 37 2xg7+! *xg7 38 £>xe8+ *f 8 39 #xf 5+ &xf 5 40 £ixd6

and Black soon resigned.

The Problem of Exchanging

As already noted, the question of exchanging pieces is one of the keys to a chess-player's level of strategic understanding. And indeed, when we ask about the bishop-pair and whether it constitutes an advantage, the problem of exchanging is highly relevant. When we envisage an exchange, its appropriateness can by no means always be confirmed by variations and calculation. Knowledge and logic have to come to our aid here.

Queens - who benefits from exchanging them? We can readily understand the answer: the exchange favours the two bishops, since it reduces the tactics and leads towards the endgame, where the opposition of bishop and knight becomes the 'minor exchange'.

What about rooks?

Suppose that in a position with two bishops (against bishop and knight or two knights), each player also has two rooks. Now consider two questions before reading on:

1) Who benefits from exchanging one pair of rooks?

2) Who benefits from exchanging both pairs of rooks?

On the one hand, the rooks reinforce the power of the bishops. But...

The presence on the board of two pairs of rooks, capable of setting up mating threats or

conquering weak points by their own strength unaided by other pieces, imparts a middlegame character to the play. Hence the conclusion: in positions with the bishop-pair, the presence of two pairs of rooks is strategically favourable to the side possessing knights.

The expediency of exchanging the second pair of rooks depends on the specific situation.

zm mm

w

iff if

AI

s II

A

Gulko - Vasiukov

Moscow Ch 1983

There should be no special doubts about the verdict on this position. The growing power of the two bishops is indisputable. The only thing that may confuse the issue is the great activity of the black rooks and the danger that White may overlook some gyration performed by the black knights. In the absence of outposts in the centre, however, deploying the knights is not at all a simple matter.

23 i.a5!

A move leading to the exchange of a pair of rooks and thereby giving the position, definitively, the character of an endgame.

23...Sd7 24 fiadl Sxdl

Played with great reluctance, but there is nothing else.

25 Sxdl £>b5 26 £f 1 a6 27 Sd5 Bb8 28 *g2 £tf6 29 Sdl

The position has clearly assumed a settled character, with Black deprived of any serious counterplay. In such a situation, the main thing for White is not to fall for a knight fork. Therefore prophylactic thinking and the maxim 'Do not rush!' come to the fore. As for victory ... time itself will deliver it.

29„.£ie4 30 Sd5 £>f6 31 Sc5 £se4 32 Sc4 Se8

The Advantage of the Bishop-Pair

69

Again we come up against the problem of exchanges. The point is that Black must avoid exchanging the second pair of rooks, since in this case the ending with two bishops against two knights is hopeless for the weaker side. For that reason 32...£>bd6 33 Sb4! fixb4 34 J,xb4 £ib5 35 &f3 would be bad for Black.

33&d3£if6 34lc5

In such positions, when realizing your advantage it is most important not to give the opponent any extra counterchances. The hasty 34 Sc6? £>d4 35 2b6 £>d7! would present the black knights with chances to stir up a whirlpool.

34...1b8 35 ±c4!

There are of course other ways of exploiting the advantage of the bishop-pair (by this time the term applies without reservation), but Gulko chooses a path involving the transformation of the advantage.

35...£ia3! 36 Ic6 (D)

White is prepared to exchange a bishop for a knight, but in a manner that creates a passed pawn. In the event of 36 Jtxa6? Sxb3 37 Sc8+ ^117 38 Sf 8, the warfare would be confined to the kingside only, and after 38...£}c2! (threatening 39...fia3) Black would retain realistic drawing chances.

in^n

mm x m,

lit m 'mm, lm

m^wm.

m mm,

I A IP V if A

mm mm ffdbli I ^HH "iH '""''wok

36...£>xc4 37 bxc4 £id7?

Black displays weak prophylactic thinking and foresight, reckoning only on 38 Sxa6. In that event he would indeed draw comfortably after 38...Sc8 39 Sa7 £>e5.

White faces a more troublesome task after 37...Sa8. He preserves the advantage by 38 Sc7! *f8 39 Ab4+ <i?g8 40 i.a3 a5 41 c5 £id5 42 Sb7, but Black's defensive possibilities are not yet exhausted.

38 c5 fib5 39 Ic8+ *h7 40 c6 <£b6 41 l,xb6! 2xb6 42 *f 3

The rook endgame that has now come about is hopeless for Black, as he is playing 'a king down'.

42...a5 43 *e4 a4 44 *d5 1-0

The variation 44...Sa6 45 c7 Sa5+ 46 <&c6 a3 47 fid8 a2 48 c8# al# 49 2h8# is convincing enough.

W

m m

\mMk

m,

■An

&WB mm SAPI

ww, m

m^mm*

Orekhov - G. Akopian

Moscow 1973

In this case, the presence of a rook splendidly complements the bishop-pair.

31 Sel!

Of course 31 JLb5? would be a mistake in view of 31...Sxd6 32 Sel 2e6.

31...f632f4!

Once again it is no good playing 32 JLb5? Sd8 33 f4? £ixd6.

32...gxf4 33 &b5 Sd8

Counting on the trappy variation 34 Sxe5 fxe5 35 ±xe8. Then 35...Sxe8? is met by 36 Jth4, but instead after 35 ...Sxd6 the position is, to say the least, unclear.

34 £h4!!

The white bishops have simply gone wild. Now 35 Sxe5 is the threat.

34...£ixd6 35 &xf6 Sc8 36 Sxe5

He could also win with 36 JLa6.

36...2cl+ 37 &f 1! £ic4 38 2e8+! *f7 39 Sc8 b5 40 &g5 Sbl 41 &xf4 Ixb4 42 Sc7+ 1-0

Regarding the problem of exchanging, there is one more question to be clarified. If the material balance is two bishops and a knight versus

Elements of Chess Strategy

two knights and a bishop (with or without the addition of other pieces), who benefits from a knight exchange?

Two bishops in themselves can prove a formidable force. But if a 'spice' such as the cunning of a knight is added to them, a 'cordon bleu' dish may result. All the same, if the opponent's 'advantage of the knight-pair' starts to become a menace, the safer course for the side with the two bishops is to exchange knights at the first opportunity.

W

>H§ HI 4fi§ fH

A

7//, W///,. V/////A W//M

i

m

AHA;

arm

lA? 1

Suetin - Yuferov

USSR Team Ch, Moscow 1972

It is too early of course to pass judgement on the diagram position. However, Sicilian Defence specialists take the view that in the majority of cases the queen exchange favours Black. Add to this the fact that he has the bishop-pair, and his position may be considered the more acceptable. But let us see how the game proceeded.

10 Ae2 h5

Of course Black shouldn't allow 11 JLh5.

11 h4 &d7 12 a4?!

Any change in the pawn-structure demands extreme circumspection. Of course White would like to prevent ...b5, but is it worth doing this at the cost of weakening b4?

12...£sc6 13 £ib3

Leaving Black's 'spicy' piece where it is. But then every exchange brings you closer to the endgame, where the advantage of the bishop-pair becomes a real threat.

13...Sc8 14 a5 £ib4

Now the knight seriously begins adding its strength to that of the bishops.

15 0-0-0 e5!

With an advantage in the centre and the bishop-pair, Black launches a pawn offensive (in the Steinitz manner), without worrying too much about the weaknesses created in his own camp.

16 *bl f5! 17 i.f3 &e7 18 exf5 &xf5 19 Sd2 Bc7 20 &e4 £e6 21 g3 f 5 22 &.&S £>xd5

Here is the 'spice' in the dish.

23 <£xd5 Bc4 24 Bhdl M 8 25 Bd3 Bh6

There is no question of any 'advantage of the knight-pair' here. The knight may be beautifully placed on d5, but it isn't threatening Black with anything concrete. Furthermore, it may be eliminated at any time by the e6-bishop (whereas the knight itself has no exchanging options!).

26 £icl Bc5 (D)

W

27 b4?

Another example of a faulty assessment of the position. White is clearly overrating the importance of his knight on d5. Instead 27 <S^b3 was correct, tacitly asking the opponent: "Will you take a draw then, sir?"

27...fic4 28 £sa2 f4! 29 gxf4?!

The lesser evil was 29 <£}ac3 itf5! (but not, of course, 29...e4? 30 Bd4) 30 S3d2 fxg3 31 fxg3, though Black's advantage is obvious even then.

29...i.xd5!

A transformation of the advantage.

30 Sxd5 Sxf4 31 b5

What is White to do? Black's strategy is prevailing. White therefore tries to work up some initiative on the queenside at the cost of a pawn.

31...1xh4 32 c3 Bh7

Black has achieved a material plus, for which White doesn't have adequate compensation. Yuferov achieved victory on the 71 st move.

The Advantage of the Bishop-Pair

71

Blackburne - Em. Lasker

Match (game 7), London 1892

The outward activity of White's pieces is deceptive, as indeed the next few moves demonstrate.

15...a6 16 &d3 f5!

This is precisely a case where Black doesn't hurry to exchange his remaining knight but chooses a strategy of confining the enemy bishop with pawn-barriers.

17 £4c3 i.e6 18 *bl Sfd8 19 £if4 £f7 20 ±e2 £>c6 21 Ixd8+ Ixd8 22 fidl Ie8!

Here is Black's answer to the question of exchanging rooks. An exchange would suit White, who is now simply short of space. The threat is ...JLxc3, ...g5 and ...Sxe2.

23 £fl b5 24 £»d3 &d4! 25 £ie2 £b6

Transferring the bishop to a more promising diagonal.

26 b3 &g7

Until the tactical clashes begin, you have to think about activating your pieces to the full; in the endgame this includes centralizing the king.

27 c3 *f 6 28 *c2 £>e7 29 £iecl £>d5 30 &b2 b4! 31 £>xb4

There is no salvation in 31 cxb4 Ad4+ 32 &a3 £>e3 either.

31...£ie3 32 Bel £ic4+ 33 &xc4 Ixel

White's position is hopeless, and this would have been the right moment to cease resistance. Blackburne prolonged the fight, however:

34 i.xa6 Sgl 35 g3 Ig2+ 36 <&a3 2xh2 37 £>e2 Sg2 38 £>c2 g5 39 &d3 h5 40 *b4 &f 2 41 a4 c5+ 42 &b5 i.xb3 43 a5 c4 44 &xc4 ±xc2 45 a6 &dl 46 £id4 &xd4 47 cxd4 &xf 3 48 d5 Ac2 49 i.xe2 Sxe2 50 a7 la2 0-1

Two Bishops in the Endgame

In the final stage of the game, we can speak of the advantage of the bishop-pair with a good deal of conviction.

The power of the two bishops noticeably increases as the quantity of pawns and pieces on the board diminishes - in other words, as the endgame approaches.

As already noted, in the bishop's struggle against the knight, the latter's actions need to be restricted by pawns. "On the other hand the knight is better at utilizing an outpost square from which it cannot be dislodged. Therefore you need to advance your pawns in such a way as to give yourself as few weak squares as possible. To this end, the rook's pawns are best suited. A move with a rook's pawn weakens only one square (the one alongside the pawn), whereas any other pawn move weakens two squares." (Euwe).

W

WB. H

f AiH fli

Pi

M,

s&e^BAi

Richter - Tarrasch

Nuremberg 1896

Exercise 37:

1) Evaluate the position.

2) Suggest a plan of action for White. (For the answer, see page 95.)

In the diagram overleaf, Black's advantage, thanks to the two bishops, is obvious. Yet White's superior pawn-structure and lack of weaknesses allow him to count on a successful defence. To this end it is essential to play constructively, and above all to solve the problem

Elements of Chess Strategy

w

Michell - Tartakower

Marienbad 1925

of the knight by establishing strongpoints for it in the centre of the board.

40 &gl &g7 41 *fl?!

Unnecessary caution, as the more active 41 l i > f2! is playable. White does not have to fear 41..JLh4+, since after 42 ^gl, with the positional threats of 43 Sal and 43 <5}d4, Black has no more reasonable move than 42...iLf6, simply repeating the position.

41...i.c6

Exercise 38: Suggest a plan of defence for White.

(For the answer, see page 96.)

An ending where one side has the advantage of the bishop-pair has an interesting peculiarity when compared with other types of ending. In this case, reducing the number of pawns is not by any means always a way of saving the game, since the difference in strength between bishop and knight increases as the board empties.

w

11

m, !

m mm,

w, mm,

m mm

Ye Rongguang - Nunn

World Team Ch, Lucerne 1989

Despite the outward simplicity and seeming harmlessness of the situation, this endgame must be recognized as absolutely hopeless for Black. This is explained first and foremost by White's advantage of the bishop-pair.

The plan for realizing White's advantage is simple if he is guided by the principle of two weaknesses. Curtailing the black king's freedom of action by attacking the h-pawn, White endeavours to penetrate with his own king on the queenside. An important detail is that the knight will be cast in the role of Buridan's ass, torn between the two fronts - especially since the a-pawn and h-pawn are so far apart.

44 &f 4 £>c4 45 kxS *g7 46 h4

The tempo of the game is not critical, since Black has no counterplay whatever. Therefore, true to the 'Do not rush!' principle, White should utilize all possibilities for improving his position.

46...*g8?!

46...h6 is an improvement.

47 *g5 £te5 48 *f6

Note the difference in activity between the kings. According to the conventional endgame values of the pieces, White is virtually playing with an 'extra rook'. But this decisive disparity resulted from the advantage of the bishop-pair.

48...£>f3 49 i.f2 i.b3 50 i.g4 &d5 51 a4 £»d2 52 i.el £>f3 53 i.g3 £id2 54 a5 &c4 55 i.el £>b3 56 i.c3 <Sk5 57 *e5! (D)

WOiJ^W,

w.

m mm. mm wm

I g ■ i

^K

The time has now come for his majesty to prove his worth.

57...£ib3 58 *d6 *f7 59 i.h5+!

"Where do you think you're going? Get back in your place!"

59...*g8 60 *c6 *f8 61 £b4+ *g7 62 &b6*f6 63i.g4£>cl

The Advantage of the Bishop-Pair

73

On 63...<&g6 64 i.c8 <&h5 65 £.e7, Black's attempt at counterplay is easily dealt with - especially since after 65...&g6 66 Jtxa6 .&xa6 67 4>xa6 <£)xa5 68 4>xa5 White is left with the 'good' dark-squared bishop which controls h8 and thus guarantees victory.

64 &c8 £)d3 65 i.a3 1-0

W

Hf ^Hff i|P ^|§§ A

i *#l #n iH* ill iH^m «

fH Wm^Wm Hi

m ^« '"mm ''mm.

Minev - Wood

£/&4 1983

Notwithstanding his extra pawn and the advantage of the two bishops, it might seem impossible for White to win this endgame in view of the tiny quantity of pawns on the board. Furthermore, the events will basically take place on one flank, so that Black's knight (in contrast to the previous example) will feel much more self-assured. However, let us not jump to conclusions but follow how the game went.

Ih4!

The straightforward line 1 i.d3+?! <&g4 2 Axh7 <&h3 3 i.f5+ <&xh2 4 &e5 £>g5 leaves White with no more than minimal chances of victory.

Exercise 39: Four candidate moves suggest themselves - l...<£g6, l...i.b3, l...£rf8 and 1 ...h6. Which are you going to choose?

(For the answer, see page 97.)

In the following diagram, White has an extra pawn, but the two bishops plus an active position mean that Black has an undoubted advantage. The only question is whether it will be enough to win.

41...&C5+ 42 *g2

Not42*e2?i.b5+.

IP up 1 ytm,

Timoshchenko - Khalifman

USSR Armed Forces Ch, Tashkent 1987

42...iLc6 43i.dla4!

It's essential for Black to push the a-pawn as far he can. The hasty 43...^4? would allow White to get in first with 44 a4!. There could follow 44...i.e3 45 h5! <i?xh5 (45...&xg5 46 •if 2! is equal) 46 "&g3 ^.d5 47 .&c2, when a draw is the likely outcome.

44 h5

Passive defence loses quickly: 44 iLe2 a3 and 45...&d5.

44...a3 45 g6 hxg6

The careless 45...h6?? would even lead to a win for White after 46 g7 &d5 47 &b3.

46 hxg6 (D)

Exercise 40: Choose between the candidate moves 46...JLd4 and 46....&d5. (For the answer, see page 97.)

The advantage of the bishop-pair becomes especially palpable in an endgame with asymmetrical pawns, that is with passed pawns on opposite wings or the possibility of creating them.

Elements of Chess Strategy

w

Mikenas - Smyslov

USSR Ch, Moscow 1944

W

m

mlmm mm wm

IB AH

Gheorghiu - F. Olafsson

Zonal tournament, Athens 1969

White's position might seem perfectly acceptable. For one thing his king is nearer the centre, and then the black bishop on h7 is shut out of the game. But the point is that the forces are not yet in contact. White has no possibilities to use the assets of his position and intensify the conflict. And we shall see that Mikenas doesn't know how to oppose Black's advantage of the bishop-pair.

34 *f 1 if 8 35 i.c4 *e7 36 b3?!

In anticipation of Black's next move, it was worth considering 36 h4!?.

36...g5!

Fixing the kingside pawns on light squares and securing an inroad for the king on the squares of the other colour.

37 *e2 f 6 38 £>el i.g6 39 £>c2 i.gl 40 h3 *d6 41 i.g8 i.c5! 42 £>el *e5 43 £id3+ *d4 44 £>xc5 &xc5 45 *e3 b5

Preparing to create an outside passed pawn.

46 axb5

There is no improvement in 46 Ae6 bxa4 47 bxa4 *b4 48 f4 gxf4+ 49 *xf4 *xa4 50 e5 fxe5+ 51 &xe5 £>b4, winning for Black.

46...cxb5 47 f4 gxf4+ 48 4>xf4 *d4! 49 i.d5 a4 50 bxa4 bxa4 51 h4 a3 52 h5 ±xe4! 53 i.a2 &d5 54 ±bl *c3 0-1

By contrast with the last example, Black's position in the following diagram doesn't look so cheerless, since, notwithstanding the asymmetrical pawn position, he has an important outpost square on c4. Yet the advantage of the bishop-pair in the ending is still of great significance, which means that Black has no simple defensive task ahead of him.

21 f3 £»d6 22 i.c3

Here 22 e4? would be premature on account of22...f5!.

22...i.b7 23 g4! f5?!

White's last move has provoked Black into unwarranted activity. It would have been better to think about the eventual construction of a fortress and play 23.. .f6, when 24 e4 can be met by 24...<£>c4, preparing the blockading advance ...e5. The move played creates tension in the pawn position to Black's own detriment.

24 h3! £f7 25 £f2 ±d5 26 ±d3 ±b7 27 i.el!

Do you remember the rule? Possessing the advantage of the bishop-pair, you need to demonstrate the power of the bishop that has no opposite number. In this case it is the dark-squared one.

27...i.d5 28 *g2 i.c4?!

Conducting a planless, ill-considered and impulsive defence, Black completely loses control of events. He should bolster the f5-point by 28...g6 and subsequently try to create a fortress with ... l i'e7-d7 and ...<£sf7, covering the dark-square weaknesses as best he can.

29 i.c2 i.d5

Now 29...g6 allows White to carry out the e4 advance.

30 gxf5! exf5 31 ±g3 £ic4 32 *f 2 £>d2

If 32...g6 then 33 e4, strategically concluding the struggle by creating two connected passed pawns.

33 i.xf5 ±\f3 34 i.c8 i.d5 35 *e2 £ie4 36 i.e5 g5 37 i.xa6 i.c4+ 38 *f3 £)f6 39 Axf6!

The simplest solution.

The Advantage of the Bishop-Pair

75

39...&xf6 40 i.c8 &d5+ 41 e4 Ml 42 e5+ 1-0

But even with a symmetrical pawn-structure, the two bishops in the ending are a redoubtable force, especially in an open position.

After the exchange of dark-squared bishops, the helplessness of the knight becomes obvious. Black now threatens to break in on White's second rank with his rook.

32 i.xg5 hxg5 33 <£>e3 &f 6 34 h4 gxh4 35 gxh4 fie8+ 36 *f 2 Ixel 37 *xel *e5 (D)

w

Englisch - Steinitz

London 1883

16 c3 2fe8 17 £lb3 b6! 18 h3 i.e6 19 Sfdl?!

White mechanically plays the 'formally correct' moves without thinking of defending according to a plan. Considering that the strategic struggle in this position centres on the confrontation between the knight and the light-squared bishop, White ought to have preferred 19 <SM4!? &d7 20 a4.

19...C5!

Restricting White's bishop as well as his knight.

20 ±g5 f 6 21 M4 &f 7 22 f 3 g5 23 Sxd8 Bxd8 24 ile3 h6

Steinitz prepares to activate his dark-squared bishop; at the same time he plans an advance of his pawns to restrict the enemy bishop's action still further.

25 lei f5 26 f4?!

White understandably doesn't want to allow ...f4, but now some new centres of conflict arise.

26..^.f6 27 g3 a5!

Using the wing pawns to hem in the knight, in a way that we have seen before.

28 £scl a4 29 a3 ±c4 30 *f 2 gxf 4!

Black could also play 30...Sd5!?, preparing the advance ...b5-b4.

31 &xf4 i.g5!

w

38 £te2 &xe2!

The transition to a pawn endgame always demands precise calculation.

39 *xe2 *f4 40 c4 sfrg4 41 *e3 f4+! Not, of course, 41...<&xh4? 42 <±f4, when it

is White who wins.

42*e4f3 43*e3<£g3 0-l

w

Vasiukov - Sigurjonsson

Reykjavik 1968

Thanks to the advantage of the bishop-pair and the spatial preponderance, the verdict on the position is readily understandable: White has a very large advantage.

1 A(l *e8 2 *g2 *d8 3 f 4 *c7 4 *f 3 £)f6 5 g4 £id7 6 g5 &d8 7 Ml *c7 8 h4 &d8 9 M\3 &c7 10 <&el *d8 11 i.g4 4>c7 12 h.5 &d8 13 h6

Elements of Chess Strategy

The first stage in the plan of playing against two weaknesses is accomplished. But what next?

13...*c7 14 ±e3 <&d8 15 <4»d3 (D)

Exercise 41: Choose between the candidate moves 15...Jta5 and 15...Jtb2. (For the answer, see page 97.)

Two Bishops against Two Knights in the Endgame

In open positions, a bishop, as a rule, is stronger than a knight. But the superiority of two bishops over two knights is especially tangible in the ending.

Suttles - Tal

Hastings 1973/4

43...&e7! 44 h4 g6 45 £ife5 g5 46 hxg5 hxg5 47 £xg5 .&xg5

White has managed to reduce the number of pawns, but what matters more is that his fortress has been demolished and the bishops are

becoming especially dangerous. The decisive manoeuvre ...JLe7-d6 is threatened.

48 b4 &xd3+!

A transformation of the advantage.

49 £ixd3 &e7?!

49...Jtd8! retains excellent winning prospects.

50 b5 &d6 51 a5 &xg3 52 £ib4+ &c5 53 £ic6 a6 54 *d3 Ml 55 £ta7 axb5 56 a6 b4 57 £ib5?

57 <S^c8! draws if followed up precisely. 57...*b6 58 a7 *b7 59 £id6+ *xa7 60 £>xf 5 b3 61 £id6 *b6 62 £>c4+ *b5 0-1

But in closed endgame positions, the advantage of the bishop-pair may also prove decisive, particularly if the knights have no outpost squares in the centre.

Botvinnik - Furman

Training match (game 2), Moscow 1961

25...d5 26 i.a2

"In such a position, it is useful to keep the bishops at a certain distance from the knights." (Botvinnik).

26...*f8

An attempt to reduce the pawns by exchanging on the queenside would come to grief: 26...&c7 27 a4 a6? 28 a5! £>d7 29 bxa6.

27 a4 *e7 28 i.a3+ *d7 29 f3!

Opening a road for the king and creating new points of conflict.

29...£ic7 30 i.f 8 g6?!

Black should of course have repeated moves with 30...<£te6, although in the end this would probably have had no decisive bearing on the outcome of the fight.

31 <4>f 2 <A>e6 32 &g3 £id7 33 i.h6

The Advantage of the Bishop-Pair

77

Threatening 34 fxe4.

33...f5

Not 33...a6? 34 J.f4.

34 if4 foeS 35 fxe4 fxe4 36 <£h4 £>d6?!

36...<£lef6 37 < 4 , g6 fog% looks fairly miserable for Black, but does present White with the problem of how he is going to break through, and 38 h4 is met by 38...^f8, making ...h6+ a possibility.

37&xd6!

The simplest solution.

37...&xd6 38 4>g5 &e6 39 h3 fot6 40 4»h6 fohS

Or 40...&f7 41 g4.

4lAb3

White avoids the uncomplicated trap 41 <&xh7 £>f4.

41...£>g3

Not41...£lf4? 42 exf4 e3 43 ±dl.

42 <4>xh7 *f 5

Or42...£if 1 43 &xg6 £)xe3 44 g4! and Black loses.

43 £xd5 g5 Hoping for 44...^fl.

44 <£g7 g4 45 hxg4+ <£xg4 46 £e6+ 1-0

W

Pytel - Kostro

Polish Ch, Gdynia 1973

From Black's viewpoint, this position might seem a little easier, as he has an extra 'half-pawn'. Yet the trouble is the same as before -the knights have no outposts in the centre, and, most importantly, there are no prospects of creating any.

26 i.d4 fodl 27 b4 g6

27...f6 28 a4 <&f7 29 i.e2 g6 30 h3 is similarly dismal for Black.

28 a4 *f 8 29 &d3 4>g8 30 4>g2 *h7 31 h3! <4>g8 32 g4 hxg4 33 hxg4 <4g7 34 *f 2 4*6 35

*e3 £>a8 36 &c3 foci 37 <4>d4 *g7 38 £el 4>f8 39 Ah4 £ia8 40 f5 gxf5 41 gxf5 <4»g7

The lesser evil was 41... < 4>e8 42 fxe6! fxe6 43 £g6+ <&f8 44 Ld8 foW, 45 <±>e3 fodl 46 *f4 fob& 47 Ah5 fodl 48 4>g5 d4! 49 <&f4!.

42 &e7! 4»h6 43 Ae2 4»g7 44 &g4 fotS 45 £f6+ 4>g8 46 kcl foci 4,1 i.d6 foc% 48 &b8 fodl 49 Axa7 foci 50 fxe6 fxe6 51 &e2 £f7 52 a5 1-0

After 52...£)a8 53 axb6 £iaxb6 54 i.xb6 <£)xb6 55 ^5 the outcome is obvious.

Under certain circumstances, the advantage of the bishops may be decisive even in a heavily blocked position.

W

m

m MA

„-,, 'W, li

ABABA:

'W%. 'WB. WB.

§M

up w

Zuger - Schiffer

Wes? Germany 1979

The decisive factor, in addition to the advantage of the bishop-pair, is White's spatial plus, which makes the black knights completely helpless to act. An important role, as the actual course of events will show, is played by the weakness of Black's pawn on a6. Taking all this into account, it isn't difficult to devise a plan for exploiting White's advantage. According to the principle of two weaknesses, the threat to penetrate with the king on the kingside and the attack on the a6-pawn on the queenside ought to break down Black's defence.

1 &h3 *h7 2 *g4 g6

Passive defence also fails to save Black: 2...£>c7 3 <4>h5 foi% 4 a5 4»g8 5 £.a4 4»f7 6 £c6 <4>g8 7 Ab7 <4>f 7 8 i.c8 £>g8 (Black's king can't permit itself to head towards the queen-side on account of the sacrifice 9 Axh6) 9 g4

Elements of Chess Strategy

4>f7 10 g5 hxg5 11 hxg5 g6+ 12 *h6 gxf5 13 Jtxf5 fxg5 14 Axg5, and White wins.

3 fxg6+ <4>xg6 4 a5 £>c7 5 &f3 £>f8 6 g4 £>h7 7 Aa4 £tf 8

An attempt to construct a fortress by means of a piece sacrifice is interesting but unsuccessful: 7...£)g5+!? 8 hxg5 hxg5 9 Ad7 *f7 10 ±c8 *e7 11 *e2 *d8 12 i.b7 *d7 13 4>d3 *d8 14 *c2*d7 15 *b3 *d8 16 4>a4*d7 17 Jtxa6 £ixa6 18 "4^5 and White wins.

8 ±.e3 £>h7 9 &d7 *g7 10 &c8 <4>g6

There is no salvation in other lines either. For instance, 10...£rf8 11 g5! hxg5 12 hxg5 £sh7 13 <i?g4 ^xg5 14 i.xg5 fxg5 15 *xg5 *f7 16 <&f5 *g7 (or 16...*e7 17 4>g6 *d8 18 &b7 <£>e7 19 ±c6 *f8 20 4>f6, with zugzwang) 17 £.xa6! &xa6 18 *e6 *f8 19 4>xd6 4>e8 20 <4>c6<i?d8 21*b7.

11 &xc5 £sxd5

Or ll...dxc5 12 d6 £>e6 13 &xe6 £>f8 14 i.f5+! &f7 15 g5 hxg5 16 hxg5 fxg5 17 <&g4 ■£>f 6 18 d7 *e7 19 *xg5 ^xd7 20 l.xd7 *xd7 21 *f5.

12 cxd5 dxc5 13 i.xa6 £>f814 &b5 1-0

Methods of Combating the Two Bishops in the Endgame

We have seen that the advantage of two bishops in the ending can be sufficient in itself to win the game. Nonetheless, the defender needs to know how to conduct the defence even in positions like this. To that end he has to be familiar with the characteristic strategic devices and methods of combat.

Aside from tactical possibilities (like stalemate, a knight fork, etc.) there are two main strategic methods of defence - namely, reducing the number of pawns and constructing a fortress.

Reducing the Number of Pawns

Reducing the pawns is one of the fundamental strategic precepts for defence in the endgame, but against the advantage of the bishop-pair it is by no means always a magic wand that will save you. As already pointed out, with the pawn exchanges and the emptying of the board, the bishops acquire more scope and the value of the

'minor exchange' increases accordingly. This is nonetheless a means of defence that the defending side should not neglect.

m

.^^ Wi

V//, ~ 4^'/,

A|jl mk mk&wk

Milov - Van Wely

Biel 2000

Despite Black's obvious plus, it isn't easy to suggest a concrete way for him to exploit his advantage or even improve his position. The main reason for this is White's powerful knight bastion in the centre, allowing him to construct a fortress which Black can only breach at a considerable cost in pawn exchanges.

47...g4

Black can avoid exchanging pawns by playing 47..JLb4 48 <&d2 <&c5 49 <&c2, but it isn't clear what he is to do after that.

48 hxg4 fxg4 49 fxg4 i.xg4 50 J.xa5+! *xa5 51 £sc6+ *a4 52 £lxe7 *a3 53 <4>d2 *b2

After the immediate 53....&f 3, Wbite defends in a more conventional manner: 54 4^3 itxg2 55 £>f5 h3 56 <i?xc4.

54 £>d5 (D)

54...i.f3!

The Advantage of the Bishop-Pair

79

The last chance. The continuation 54...Jk.f5 55 £)c3 Mi 56 e4 i.fl 57 ^dl+! (but not 57 e5? &xg2 58 e6 h3) 57...<4>xa2 58 *c3! &xg2 59 £>f 2 leads to a draw.

55 gxf3 h3 56 £>c3! h2 57 £idl+ <£>xa2 58 £>f 2 <£>b2 59 £idl+ <&b3 60 £»f 2 *b2 V2-V2

W

ABA

Hi AH

%?

« IP A lif Iff

gg A «i

Arnason - Kasparov

World Junior Ch, Dortmund 1980

The position looks (and most likely is) strategically won for Black. This is due to the advantage of the bishop-pair, the asymmetrical pawns, the openness of the struggle and the possibility of very quickly centralizing the black king. Yet by no means everything is as simple in practice as it is on paper, even for players in the top category.

29 c3 *g7?!

Already Kasparov's actions start to show a certain illogicality. Why not 29 ...f5 (a move Black can't do without anyway), when the king reaches the centre more quickly via f 7?

30 a4!

White initiates the plan of pawn exchanges.

30...bxa4 31 i.xa4 f 5 32 g3 *f6 33 h4!?

Reasonably enough, White arranges his pawns in a chain, anticipating that Black's efforts to create a passed pawn on the kingside will lead to further pawn exchanges.

33..Ac834i.dlh6?!

Pursuing too direct a strategy without envisaging the subsequent events. In most endgames where time is not a critical factor, the right strategy for the stronger side is: activate your pieces to the full, restrict the scope of your opponent 's pieces, dislocate his defences as far as you can, and only afterwards advance your

pawns. On this reasoning, 34...&e5 is technically more correct.

35 i.e2 a5 36 £b5 *e5 37 £te4+ &d5 38 <£e3+ <&>c5?!

Still the same straightforward play. Black should go back to square one and prepare ...f4, but in a manner that retains the rest of the kingside pawns.

39 i.e8! g5 40 hxg5 hxg5 41 &g6! f4 42 gxf4gxf4 43£ig2!

At this point the direct strategy of reducing pawns with 43 b4+? would be mistaken in view of 43...axb4 44 cxb4+ &d4, when the immense activity of Black's pieces (the two bishops are a great force here) would make White's position barely defensible in spite of the minimal quantity of pawns remaining.

43...&C4!

From this moment on, when White is as close to the draw as he can get, Kasparov starts to play his characteristic active chess, constantly setting his opponent new problems.

44 £«f 4

Holding the endgame after 44 JLf 7+ &d3 45 £kf4+ <S>c2 46 b3 &xc3 would be far from easy.

44...*b3 45 &xe4 *xb2

Now all White needs to do to reach the draw is a mere trifle: to give up his knight, or even his bishop, for Black's last pawn. But Black's advantage of the bishop-pair means that this task is not so simple.

46 £c6 *xc3 47 *f 1 <4?d2! (D)

A well-known ploy of elbowing the opponent aside: the white king isn't allowed to approach the enemy passed pawn.

W

Exercise 42: What would you play if you had White here?

(For the answer, see page 98.)

Elements of Chess Strategy

Constructing a Fortress

The foregoing example clearly demonstrates that against the advantage of two bishops in the endgame, the method of defence by pawn exchanges - though resting on a definite positional basis - by no means always works.

The technical device known as 'constructing a fortress' can often be far more effective.

Gelfand - Seirawan

Tilburg 1990

Exercise 43: What would you play in Black's place?

(For the answer, see page 98.)

§, WW WW,

W

m

mmWm mm, £1

H mfr.

Sveshnikov - Psakhis

Zonal tournament, Erevan 1982

It looks as if the passed pawn on b3 is going to cost White a piece, leaving him with a rook against a queen. Should he resign, then?

Not in the least! As chess-players jokingly say, no one ever saved so much as half a point by resigning a game.

The point is that White can head for another type of ending - one with two bishops against the queen - where the bishops will defend their fortress most staunchly and successfully.

62 Sxc7! #xc7 63 ±xc7 b2 64 *h2 bl# 65 i.e5 (D)

W

VI. Sergeev - Abramovic

Bela Crkva 1990

Exercise 44: Suggest a plan of action for White.

(For the answer, see page 99.)

Examples of constructing a fortress in the endgame are met with frequently. Here is another one.

mm, wm., ww, y , ww,

■ ■ ■ Mi

an

^ v -^ v lip

IV

% -m wm ww ww,

The two bishops, so to speak, have cut the board in half. The black king can't penetrate the enemy camp via the queenside and will be shut out of g4 by the white king stationing itself on h3 at the requisite moment. Nor can Black achieve his aim by the pawn-break ...g5. White can exchange twice on g5 and withdraw his bishop to f4 - or else, as happened in the game, he can just take on g5 with the h-pawn and then calmly wait for the ...g4 advance. The game ended in a draw on the 88th move.

The Advantage of the Bishop-Pair

81

Yet even against the technical device of fortress-building, the active side has counter-measures. The chief of these is zugzwang.

W

Larsen - Sarapu

Interzonal tournament, Sousse 1967

Playing for zugzwang means restricting the activities of all your opponent's pieces as far as you can.

In the diagram position the knight is already under arrest. The black king is hampered by the need to guard the g6-pawn. There only remains the bishop on b7, but it too can take few steps in freedom.

53 £d7 &g7 54 £e8! -&a8 55 £d4+ *h7 56 &H i.b7 57 i.e6 i.c6 58 &c8 £b5 59 ±b7 ±c4 60 &c6 &g8

The only move. Not 60...JLb3? on account of 61 i.b5!.

6 Ii.e8*h7 62 ±f 7 (D)

White is already threatening 63 e4! fxe4 64 f5 gxf5 65 g6+, and this forces Black to make material concessions.

62...i.d3 63 i.xd5 ±e4 64 &c4 &b7 65 i.e6

The forcing line 65 e4 fxe4 66 f5 is good, since the apparently troublesome 66...e3 loses simply to 67 f6. But the position after the text-move can also be assessed as completely won for White.

65...i.e4 66 £c8 &d3 67 &b7 *g8 68 &d5+ &f 8 69 &c5+ &g7

There is no essential difference between this and 69...<& > e8; the black king is tied to the defence of g6 anyway. Now White brings his last reserve - his king - into the fray, and although this lets the knight out of its prison, we know that the king in the endgame is worth more.

70 <&f 3 £>h2+ 71 *f 2 i.e4 72 i.c4 i.b7 73 &b4 *h7 74 i.c3 £>g4+ 75 *e2 £>h2 76 e4!

The time has come!

76...£xe4

Or 76...fxe4 77 f5 gxf5 78 £f7.

77 &xa6 £tf3 78 &c8 £>xh4 79 a6 £ig2 80 JLeS h4 81 &b7 h3 82 &xe4 fxe4 83 a7 1-0

Another method of fighting against a fortress involves sacrifices to 'dynamite' it.

W

m m, wm

liiil 1

AWB IP k 1PJ M

iAgS*iI*iI£>

. y / _ §,* wm y

'wm. w.

if ilfl

Chiburdanidze - A. Marie

Belgrade (women) 1996

Exercise 45: In White's place, what would you play?

(For the answer, see page 99.)

Transformation of the Advantage

One method of exploiting the advantage of the two bishops is by transforming it - in particular,

Elements of Chess Strategy

by a timely exchange of one or both bishops in return for other material or positional assets. Chess-players have some reason for saying that an extra benefit of the two bishops is that you can always exchange one of them advantageously.

W W 9 si

y/ H * il H^ H

ii*ii!*ii h

0*0x0 s

P if Sf^Pl

Kovacevic - Ribli

Bugojno 1984

26...i.xf3!

The simplest way to exploit the extra pawn here. Black voluntarily renounces the advantage of the bishop-pair, but obtains two connected passed pawns in an opposite-bishop endgame.

27 i.xf 3 <£f 7 28 i.g4 <4>e7 29 h4 h6 30 h5 e5! 31 fxe5 fxe5 32 f4 exd4+ 33 4>xd4 4>d8 34 i.e6 <4>c7 35 i.f 7 ±e7 36 &e8 *b6! 0-1

After 37 *e3 i.f6 38 4>d2 c5 39 bxc5+ "4^5, Black creates two connected passed pawns by ...b4 or ...d4, and this settles the outcome of the fight.

W

White achieved the win by forcing means: 51 &xd7! 4>xd7 52 &f4! i.xf4 53 *xf4

<4>e7 54 £)f6! £)xf 6 55 gxf 6+ <4>xf 6 56 b4! cxb4

57 4>e3! b3 58 *d2 1-0

But of course you shouldn't by any means always relinquish the advantage of the two bishops by exchanging them at the first opportunity and thereby trading your superiority 'for a mess of pottage'. As a rule, before this transformation takes place, the player with the advantage seeks to improve his position to the maximum.

Dzhindzhikhashvili - Dementiev

Kaliningrad 1972

Vize - Yudovich Jr

Varna 1978

White threatens .&c6; after an exchange of queenside pawns, a drawn result would be assured.

Hence there followed:

l...i.e5! 2 £ic6 i.c3 3 £>a7

Reckoning on 3...iLxb4?! 4 Jlc6.

3...i.d4 4£sc6i.b6 5g3?

In his search for counterplay, White could have continued 5 £>e5?! k.e.2 6 £»xf7 l.c7 (threatening 7...JLc4) 7 £>g5 &d6 8 £se6+ <4f6 9 <£k;5 &e5, although even then, despite the pawn minus, Black would have quite good winning chances thanks to his bishop-pair and centralized king. 5 JLxf7! is a safer way to make use of the same tactic, as 5...Ae4 6 Ae8 ^8 7 jLdl gives Black nothing concrete, while the pawn-down ending after 5...4'xf7 6 ^e5+ ( 4e6 7 <£lxd3 "4^5 8 "if 1 is no more than a comfortable draw for Black.

5...f6 6 *g2 4f 8 7 £)a5 *e7 8 <2)b3 i.c4

The transformation of the advantage. As yet there was no hurry for it, seeing that Black

The Advantage of the Bishop-Pair

83

could have continued improving his position by 8...&d6 9i.b7f5!.

9 &xc4 bxc4 10 £>al £>d6 11 *f3 &d5 12 <Sk2c313*e2&c414f3.&a715g4g5!16b5 i.c5 17 £>al &xb5 18 &d3 *b4 19 <£c2+ <S?b3 20 £>al+ *b2 21 £k2 ±b6 22 £)b4 Ac7 23 £>c2 &e5 24 £ie3

Now the black king's penetration on the kingside will finally break White's defence.

24...*cl! 25 foci

Or 25 4>e2 Af 4.

25...s£>dl 26 £>e3+ s£el 27 £ic2+ *f2 28 *e4 *e2 29 foe3 i.d6 30 £>c2 *d2 0-1

Estevez - Karpov

Interzonal tournament, Leningrad 1973

Clearly if Black is to count on victory, he needs to get his passed b-pawn moving. But this has to be preceded by some complex and painstaking preparatory work.

35...£if6

Intending after 2>6...fotA to bring the knight toc3.

36 fo&l fo&\

We now see that ousting the blockading bishop is something that the black knight can also do from c7.

37f3£>c7 38i.e2&c2

Thwarting White's possible counterplay: 39 e4&f4!.

39 *f 2 &a4 40 fozS b5!

Off we go!

41 £id3?

Weak prophylactic thinking by White. In view of Black's next move, White needed to play 41 g4L

41...h4! 42 £ib2?!

When facing the two bishops in an ending, it is imperative to strive for counterplay. Planless, passive defence is equivalent to death. For this reason 42 e4! followed by &e3 is correct.

42...^.b4 43 £>bl Ab3

An amusing picture: the white knights are completely hobbled.

44 £d3 ±c4 45 e4 g5 46 exd5 &xd5 47 £idl &c6 48 £ibc3 i.d7 49 foe4 i.e7 50 £ic5? (D)

After this mistake Black wins a pawn by exchanging pieces on c5. An oversight in a difficult position tends to be natural rather than fortuitous.

50...&xc5! 51 dxc5 foe6 52 £>c3 b4 53 foe4 b3 54 £id2 £)xc5 55 £bl *f6 0-1

A subsequent raid on c3 or g3 by the black king settles everything.

W

III

m m

Ai

A:

1ABI

'WB.*m'Wb

Boleslavsky - Balendo

Minsk 1971

Exercise 46: How would you continue for White?

(For the answer, see page 100.)

Elements of Chess Strategy

The Passed Pawn

The presence of a passed pawn in the endgame is an essential factor both for exploiting an advantage and for creating counterplay. Endings with two bishops are no exception to this general principle.

W

|i|jTIff §P ^Wjji'K

IP k

ISA

i

m, axm>

•?/,

A:

Karpov - Seirawan

Brussels 1986

Black's extra pawn, which anyway is doubled, plays no significant role. Clearly White must create a passed pawn if he is to have any chance of realizing his advantage.

54 d5! £>xc5 55 i.b2+ *f8 56 dxc6 £)a6

56...<±>e8? is met by 57 JLg7.

57 £a3+ *e8 Not57...i.b4?58c7L

58 &e6 i.b4 59 khl M 8?

After 59...^f8? 60 i.c8! £>c7 61 Ae5 i.a5

62 iLxg3 White recovers his pawn while keeping all the advantages of his position.

Black had to play 59... JLd6!, when he is safe in lines like 60 AgJ *e7 61 i.d7 (61 ±f5?! £>b4+ 62 *b3 £)xc6) 61...£fo8 62 Axh6 £sxd7

63 cxd7 *xd7 64 .&xg5 (or 64 £.g7 <&e6 65 h6 <&f7) 64...&e6.

60 ±dl+ *d8 61 £e5 £>b4+ 62 &d2 £)d5 63 &e6 £>c7 64 i.f 7

It's zugzwang. One variation is 64...£}a6 65 Ae6 £>c7 66 J.f5 £>a6 67 *dl £>c7 68 jk.f6+ 4>e8 69 i.g6#.

64...£)e8 65 i.xe8!

Transforming the advantage.

65...&xe8 66 i.f6!

The result is that the actions of Black's pieces are totally paralysed.

66...g4 67 &c3 &d6 68 &g7 &f4 69 <&b4 *d8 70 *xb5 *c7 71 &c5 i.e3+ 72 *d5 i.f4 73i.f8

White could also win with 73 Ae5+ JLxe5 74 &xe5 followed by heading for h6. 73...*b6 74 i.d6 i.g5 75 i.xg3 1-0

"On account of their long range, bishops are excellent for supporting a passed pawn. Another key point is that they can control all the squares in the pawn's path. The player on the weaker side has great difficulty defending against the pawn's advance; the only chance is to blockade it on a square controlled by his own bishop, but the blockade is usually lifted with the aid of zugzwang." (Alexander Panchenko).

W

Portisch - Groszpeter

Hungarian Ch, Budapest 1981

43 *f3! g5 44 <£>e2 i.d7 45 *d3 £>e6 46 h4!

Opening up the full amount of space for the bishops. An attempt by Black to cross White's plan would only increase his own problems: 46...g4? 47 h5!, and additional objects of attack arise, namely the pawns on g4 and h7.

46...gxh4 47 gxh4 <£d6 48 <S?d4 i.g4 49 i.el h5 50 e5+ <&e6 51 &d5+ *f 5

Or51...<£e7 52i.b7.

52 &g3 £>d2 53 i.g8! £dl 54 e6 *f6 55 i.e5+ <£>e7 56 i.f4 £)c4 57 ±g5+ *f8 58 e7+ <£>e8 59 i.h7 £)d6 60 <&>e5 <4>d7 61 *f 6 i.b3 62 *g7 <4>e8 63 *f6 <4>d7 64 £g6

Threatening 65 &g7.

64...£)e8+ 65 *e5 i.dl 66 ±f 5+ <4>c6 67 J.e3 &f3 68 JLcS i.e2

If 68...a5? then 69 £g6 *d7 70 bxa5.

69 &f 4 i.c4 70 i.g6 *d7 71 *g5 1-0

The Advantage of the Bishop-Pair

85

An outside passed pawn is an advantage in many types of endgame. Endings with the bishop-pair are no exception to this either. And naturally, the further the passed pawn is from the centre, the harder it is for the weaker side to defend.

W

M W.

A wk v wk, y wk^

Taimanov - Smyslov

USSR Ch, Tbilisi 1966

In this position, the principle of two weaknesses will suggest to us White's strategy for exploiting his advantage: the threat to attack Black's weaknesses on the queenside will help to clear the path for the passed h-pawn.

42 f5!

Seizing some space. The hasty 42 if 3? is of course a mistake: 42...ixf3 43 &xf3 f5! with an obvious draw.

42„.£>e5 43 f6 £)g6 44 iel £)f8 45 ig3 *d7 46 MS* £>e6 47 ih3 idl 48 if4!

Preparing to bring this bishop to e7, where it will tie down the opponent's pieces still further.

48„.ih5 49 ih6 idl?!

Not even trying to hinder White's plans with 49...4>e8.

50i.f8i.h5 51i.e7a5

The attempt to create counterplay is practically forced. Against passive defence, White would decide the game by bringing his king to g3, followed by ig4 and the victorious advance of the outside passed h-pawn.

52 <4>f 2 idl 53 4>g3 a4 54 bxa4 ixa4 55 h5

The outside passed pawn's first step is taken.

55...ic2 56 h6 ig6 57 ig4

Threatening 58 ih5.

57...ih7 58 s£f 2

Now an invasion by the white king on the queenside should destroy Black's defence.

58...ibl 59 4>e3 ih7 60 4>d2 ibl 61 <4>c3 ie4 62 4>b3 d5

Alas, there is nothing else.

63 cxd5 ixd5+ 64 <4>c3 ie4 65 &c4 <S?e8

A trap. After the straightforward 66 4>b5? <£sd4+ 67 4'xb6 c4, Black would obtain distinct counter-chances.

66 if 3! b5+ 67 <4>c3

Not 67 *xb5?? ^d4+ and 68...^xf3.

67...£\g5 68 h7! 1-0

The Bishop-Pair in the Endgame - How Much is it Worth?

Everything in life has its value. So it is in chess - the two bishops in an ending are a boon, a plus. But how much is this endgame advantage worth? A pawn? More, less? The question of course is an abstract one. It all depends on the specific position.

Donner - Velimirovic

Capablanca Memorial, Havana 1971

Exercise 47: What would you play in Black's place?

(For the answer, see page 100.)

In the following position White evidently has good compensation for a pawn: the advantage of the bishop-pair, Black's extra pawn-island, and the greater activity of the white pieces (the black knight on d8 is particularly 'noteworthy').

Elements of Chess Strategy

w

m '*md'""' i mm ''im y/

fill

WB. W,

A

A

Lobron - Korchnoi

Hamburg 1998

22 Sell!

At this point, considering that Black has a difficult defence ahead of him, it was worth thinking about paying the price of the extra pawn in order to neutralize White's initiative by exchanges: after 22_.£tf7!? 23 Sd7 £se5 24 Sxa7 £sc4 25 Sb7 (25 ±f4 g5 and ...£d4) 25...£sxe3

26 fxe3, the opposite bishops should ensure Black a fairly simple draw following 26...fla8

27 Sxb6 Sxa2 28 lxe6, while 26...JLd2! even raises the question of who is the one seeking to hold a draw.

But Viktor Korchnoi would not be Viktor Korchnoi if he parted with his material so lightly.

22...i.f6!? 23 i»e4! fif 7

After 23...g5 24 &g6 £)f7 25 Sd7 £>e5 26 ±h7+ <&h8 27 Ixa7 £sc4 28 &e4 £\xe3 29 fxe3 Sd8, an opposite-bishop ending again arises, but this time in a version less favourable to Black.

24 i.g6 Sb7 25 i.f4

An alternative is 25 Scl '4f8 26 Sc8 &e7.

25...£>f7 26 flcl Id7 27 Sc8+ i.d8 28 Sa8?!

How many times have I come across examples of an assured, well thought-out and stubborn defence proving more effective than the attack? Not the least important role here is played by questions of psychology.

Yes, defending is difficult and unpleasant. It often means accommodating your actions to the will of your opponent over a long period, and being ready to make concessions while waiting for your hour to come (and then not missing it!), when you can go over from grim defence to a counter-attack.

And yet holding the initiative and attacking can be no less difficult. Imagine the situation. We have been conducting an offensive consistently, inventively and single-mindedly. One move, three moves, five, ten ... our attack continues. For ages, sitting at the board, we have been involuntarily rubbing our sweaty palms against our trousers in the expectation that our opponent will stop the clock at last, and the traditional handshake will take place. Yet he does not resign (such impudence!). Another move, five moves, ten moves... Furthermore, our opponent keeps on and on setting us fresh problems. In such situations the attacker often fails to understand what is ultimately happening in the game and completely loses his patience and his hold on events. Then the advice to give him is that there may come a time to acknowledge that the onslaught has not succeeded and he should be thinking about ways to hold his own position.

Up to this point in the game nothing has happened to frighten White, but from now on the assessment of the position starts to shift in Black's favour. Instead of decentralizing his rook, White should perhaps have considered a line such as the following (based on Korchnoi's analysis): 28 *g2!? e5 29 £e3 (29 £cl fic7) 29...£\d6 30 Sa8 (30 Bc6 £>b5!, followed by repetition with 31...Sc7 32 le6 Se7) 30..AC4 3l£cl < Af8(31...2dl 32±h5!Sxcl 33Sxd8+ ^hl 34 He8 leaves White with a minimal plus) 32 &c2 b5 33 Sb8 a6 34 Sa8 Sd6 35 Sa7, with compensation for the pawn.

28...<&f 8 29 ±c2

Here too, White should have preferred 29 4>g2! ? *e7 30 &c 1 &f6 31 i.c2 i.e7 32 £b2+ e5, followed by ....&c5-d4 with approximate equality.

29...g5 30 i.b8?!

It doesn't take a grandmaster's insight to call attention to the absurdity of the placing of White's rook and the bishop on b8. Of course he had to play 30 JLe3.

30...a5 31 Aa4 Bd2 32 i.b3

Seeing that the situation was turning in his opponent's favour, White had to look for a way to redirect the course of the fight - for instance by sacrificing another pawn. After 32 Sa7!? Sxa2 33 Ab3 lal+ 34 *g2 Sel 35 Sb7, White has distinct compensation for the lost material.

The Advantage of the Bishop-Pair

87

32...&e7 33 ±c4 *f6 34 Ea6?

This really is too much - going into such contortions with your own pieces! White should of course play 34 g4! followed by A.g3, retaining drawing chances - thanks first and foremost to the two bishops.

34...1c2 35 i.b3 fic8 36 &a7 2a8 (D)

w

n

a? m ;

WB, A W

:A

A:

The situation that has come about deserves a diagram. If we weren't familiar with the preceding course of events, we would be hard put to imagine how such a position could arise in a game between two well-known grandmasters. It rather bears the stamp of a beginners' game.

The remaining moves were:

37 M\A &e5 38 £b5

After 38 f4 gxf4 39 gxf4 <&d3 40 M£ £>b4 41 Axa8 <£)xa6 followed by ...Ml, the bishop on a7 would be locked up for life.

38...*f5 39 *g2 *e4 40 Ml &d5 41 a4 £k6 42 i.b5 £ib4 0-1

But the power of the bishop-pair in the ending is not always priced in terms of a pawn.

W

G. Siegel - Stef anova

Recklinghausen 1998

It's clear that White stands better, but Black doesn't seem to be faced with anything terrible. She threatens to equalize with ...<5}e4. On 21 JLf3, she neutralizes the advantage of the bishop-pair with 2\...M\5.

To Black's surprise, however, there followed:

21 flxf6 gxf6 22 i.f3

Despite the exchange minus, the white bishops step forward in all their splendour.

22...i.c8

Giving back extra material goes so much against the grain! Anyway, it isn't clear how this can be done conveniently. Black simply can't bear to give up the b7-pawn and leave White with an extremely dangerous passed c-pawn.

23 fidl a6 24 &f 2 *g7 25 i.f4 Sa7 26 i:b8 fla8 27 Ml Se7 28 i.d6 Se8 29 h4 Sa7 30 i.b8 fla8 31 Ml Se7 32 i.d6 Se8 33 h5 h6 34 fid4 Sd8 35 JM fia7 36 Sd3 Se8 37 Ml MS 38 fid4 Ml 39 Ml le7 40 M\% fle5 41 Sd6 *f8 42 i.xf6 Ie8 43 i.d4 i.e4 44 c6 Mf 3 45 gxf3 Haa8 46 cxb7 Sab8 47 lxh6 fixb7 48 i.f6! 1-0

The 'Best Odds' Principle

Anyone who knows how to play bridge should be familiar with the principle of the maximum odds. Its point is that the optimum result is attained not by the most plausible continuation but by an arithmetical comparison of all the possibilities.

Suppose that the declarer has worked out his plan for playing the hand, and finds (as often happens in bridge) that it will leave him one trick short. Let us say there are three possibilities for gaining this trick: finessing a king (a 50% chance of success); playing for a 3-3 split (when the declarer's side holds seven cards in a particular suit; we'll say this gives theoretically a 30% chance); or finessing the third queen (20%). The experienced bridge player will begin by trying out the last two options, which have the odds against them, but can be tried without risking anything. It is only if they fail that he will throw his best weapon - the king finesse - into the fray. If it works, he is victorious. If not - oh well, it was just not to be!

However strange it may seem, this kind of situation sometimes arises in chess too.

Elements of Chess Strategy

w.

% y mky ilwlli

Karpov - Ljubojevic

Montreal 1979

To begin our examination of this ending, we shall naturally evaluate it. White has the advantage of the bishop-pair, and there is an extra pawn-island on the black side. Yet these are all the advantages White has. Surely they cannot be enough to win the game or even offer any chances of playing to win it? After all, Black too has his trumps (albeit defensive ones). There are very few pawns left. The field of play is virtually limited to one half of the board, which means that in strength a knight is not far short of a long-range enemy bishop. And - most importantly - an endgame win is usually achieved by creating a passed pawn, yet in the present case this is practically out of the question, given the severe reduction of the pawn material.

Consequently White's last chance for a win rests on the advantage of the bishop-pair, flexible manoeuvring, and ... the principle of the 'best odds'.

Let us follow what Karpov does in this 'hopelessly drawn' ending.

41 ...&d4

The sealed move. The alternatives 41...JLal and 41..JLa5 make no significant difference, since the question of tempo is not critical for the time being.

I would ask you to take note of the present position. Running ahead, I shall say that we are going to come back to it more than once.

42ilh6

An attempt to shake Black's defence with an attack by white pieces from the rear.

42...£>g7 43 &g5+ *f 7 44 Sb7+

44 Sf3+ £if5 45 i.xf5 gxf5 46 2xf5+ *g6 47 Sf8 e4! 48 He8 &f5 only leads to a draw.

44...&g8 45 &e7 Sa6 46 i.d5+ *h7 47 Ag5 (D)

If47i.f8then47...Sa7.

I!

m

§ mm %m

■ Al

I Ml

ilP fry

''w& ''wm ''W^'X^m

HH w

47...Sd6 48 ±e4 *g8 49 Ib8+

Hoping for 49...*h7? 50 Sf8, just on the off chance (a probability of, say, 10%).

49...*f7! 50 Sc8 £>e6 51 &h6 &c5!

Threatening to exchange rooks by 52...Sd8 53 Sc6 3d6, with an inevitable draw.

52 Sa8 Sd8 53 Sa5 Sd6 54 i.bl

A second try. Karpov is attempting to regroup his offensive forces by bringing this bishop to the a2-g8 diagonal.

54...&d4 55 Sa8 &c5 56 &a2 *f6 57 Sc8 i.d4 58 Se8 Ha6 59 Jlc4 Sc6 60 i.d3 <&f 7 61 2a8 Sd6 62 &e4 &c5 (D)

w

! HP HP HP P 1 ■ ■#■

„ ■ B^HiB ! 1P Hi H IP A

''wm, ^m ''w&'X^'t

m mm mm,

We have returned again (with insignificant changes) to the position we started from. This last attempt (stationing the bishop on the a2-g8 diagonal) has again failed to give the desired results. Let us seek other chances.

63*fl

Why not have a try at bringing the white king into the fight?

63„.Sdl+ 64 *g2 fid6

The Advantage of the Bishop-Pair

89

This try too, an extremely simple one (with no more than a 1 % chance of success), has naturally led to nothing. On the other hand it has not spoilt anything either.

I am convinced that this position must have appeared on the board repeatedly during the adjournment analysis. In addition, I am sure Kar-pov understood that those previous winning attempts, very naive in places, were scarcely going to induce an error from his opponent. But...

Karpov will have noted his optimum chance - his 'king finesse' - in advance. He brings it into action only at the last moment.

65 &bl! (D)

mm y #jk

if lH 1

:m,km.

ml*

% wm mm

mm, mm, z.

W^'WZ,

On the face of it, Black has no cause for alarm. 'We've been through this before.'

65...&d4

An attempt at counter-attack with 65.. .fib6 66 JLa2 Sb2 costs Black the exchange after 67 Sa6 Sxf 2+ 68 *h3 lxa2 69 lxa2, when he has an exceedingly difficult endgame to defend. But

anyway, what is all this for? We have been sleeping so sweetly!

66 Ia3! <5k7 67 &a2+ *e8 68 Sf3 £te6 69 khV.

The picture of the battle has unexpectedly changed. The position has become sharp and tactical. White keeps on creating new threats, and Black already has to play with extreme accuracy to parry them.

69...<Sk5 70 Sf 8+ (D)

Exercise 48: Given Black's limited choice between 70...^e? and 70...^7, which move would you choose?

(For the answer, see page 101.)

We have concluded our examination of that very important theme of chess strategy, the 'advantage of the bishop-pair'. I hope this will help you to find your bearings in many middlegame positions. Questions of the confrontation between bishop and knight are a perennial problem in chess.

Elements of Chess Strategy

Answers to Exercises for Chapter 3

Exercise 28

Exercise 27

w

The main thorn in White's flesh is the knight on d3. Fighting against it directly is a very laborious business. But there is another way - incapacitating it, knocking away the support from under its feet, in other words depriving the knight of the c5-square, which was its last secure station.

26 £a4!!

"Moves like this are often more difficult to find than forced combinations many moves deep. But their effect is just as powerful as that of many a sacrifice." (Alexander Kotov)

26...b5

On 26...Sc7 White plays 27 Sd2 and 28 ladl.

27 £b3 £M4

White intends to step up the pressure on the d3-knight, after which cutting off its support by Jk.d5 will force Black backwards.

28 ld2 £>e6 29 Oadl b4 30 &d5!

In Black's camp there has been a sounding of the retreat for some time now. But there is nowhere to retreat to!

30„.£>dc5 31 £\d4!

Threatening both 32 <£sc6 and 32 <£lxe6 fxe6 33 l.xe6+.

31...£ixd4 32 !xd4 lb8 33 Ibl &d3 34 Sb3 Sc7?

This blunder merely hastens the fitting conclusion of the game.

35 Ibxd3 &xd3 36 ±f4! 1-0

(Now return to page 53.)

w

I

m, m%. mm

A

I ■a|JlS

VM&. '' W//A..W.W////,. /,y ///////

The main strategic factors are:

a) White's spatial plus;

b) the open h-file, which looks more likely to be seized by White than by Black;

c) if White succeeds in gaining control of the open file, the black king may come under a very strong attack, something which the white king evidently does not have to fear;

d) White has two bishops, which may become extremely dangerous if the position opens up. But even opening the game is not obligatory. The successful transfer of a bishop to a strategically important diagonal may decide everything quickly. Prospects for the black knights are not even to be dreamt of.

Once the main strategic elements have been defined, playing the white side is easy, just as if the opponent had placed his cards on the table.

28 Vd Wg8 29 Wb2 <4>g7 30 Ihl &T8

The king endeavours to flee from the dangerous sector. But Black's chief misfortune is the lack of coordination between his pieces. To the end of the game he will not succeed in remedying this, on account of his restricted space.

31 c3 <4>e8 32 Adl

Transferring this bishop to the a2-g8 diagonal, where its activity dramatically increases.

32„.£>f8

An attempt by the king to flee further is also unsuccessful: 32...<4>d8 33 £b3 Wg? 34 Ae3 c6 35 ±e6.

33 £b3 #g7 34 ±cl c6 35 lh5

Domination of the open h-file is secured for White; an important point is that when the invasion takes place, the rook will be in front of the queen.

The Advantage of the Bishop-Pair

91

35...fid8 36 1T2 <£c8 37 i.e3 b5 38 Whl b6?

When defending, pointless unforced pawn moves are especially foolish.

39 &e6 £ie7 40 &xb6 £ixe6 41 fxe6 £sg6 42 Sh7l r g 8 43 1 th5!l-0

The continuation 43...Ib8 44 Sh8! #xh8 45 #xg6+ leads to mate. (Now return to page 54.)

Exercise 29

Black's position might seem difficult, were it not for...

24...fixc7! 25 dxc7 #xc7

Well then... The dark-squared bishop and the queen are already attacking White's king position. Black's light-squared bishop has acquired freedom. The passed pawn on c4 will be supported from the rear by the major pieces. And all this has merely cost the exchange. But here again, let us try to state some useful generalizations.

In open positions where the knight has no outposts in the centre, the strength of two bishops and a pawn is no less (and tends to be greater) than that of a rook and knight.

From this it is clear that the diagram position must be recognized as favouring Black.

26#c2fic8 27f4

Or 27 g3 h5.

27...&d6 28 Wc3 &b5 29 e5

Weakening the a8-hl diagonal - but it isn't easy to recommend anything else, since the knight and rook are defending the f4-pawn while the queen guards the a5-pawn. That is to say that nearly all the white pieces are tied to defensive duties.

29...&C5 30 £ig3 £c6!

Of course Black must not allow the knight onto e4. But White can't exploit this circumstance to return the exchange, since 31 WxcA would be met not by 31... Jtb5 with a probable draw, but by 31...JLe3!. Then in view of the threatened 32...JLxg2+, it would be an immense task for White to secure a peaceful outcome. After 32 £se4 ±xcl 33 Sxcl #xa5, he is simply left a pawn down.

31 If el l r b7 32 Wc2 i.b4 33 fle2 i.d5 34 <£e4 &xe4 35 Wxe4

Black was preparing to answer 35 Sxe4 with 35...&d2. Then after 36 Sxc4 (if 36 2b 1, then 36...#d5 followed by ...c3) 36...Sxc4 37 iffxc4 i.xcl 38 #xcl #b4!, White loses a pawn.

SS.-.WdS 36 Wc2 Id8 37 h3 #c5 0-1

White overstepped the time-limit, but he no longer has a satisfactory defence, seeing that 38 #xc4? fails to 38...2dl+.

(Now return to page 56.)

Exercise 30

The situation is worrying for White, what with the tremendous activity of the black pieces, the weakened position of the white king and the apparent total inactivity of his 'loyal subjects'. All these considerations led to Black deciding it was time for decisive measures:

25...£id4!

After the less forceful 25...^ce7?!, the fairest verdict is that the position is at best (from Black's viewpoint) equal or probably somewhat better for White. So our verdict on the objective assessment of the position can only be made once we have analysed Black's more aggressive options.

26 exd4

Elements of Chess Strategy

Perhaps it is more testing to play 26 A,xd4. Then 26...exd4? 27 e4 #e5 (the only continuation given by Piket in his notes to the game) 28 exd5 fih6 is inadequate because after 29 #xc7! flxh2+ 30 ^gl, it is White who wins, not Black! However, Black does have a solution, namely the immediate 26...Sh6! 27 Sgl (forced) 27...exd4, when 28 e4? now loses to 28...1 r h3. White can try desperately to hang on with 28 #c5, but Black has a substantial advantage.

Given that the reply to either capture on d4 is .. .Sh6, one may ask if Black could not invert his move-order, and play 25...Sh6!?, keeping the ...<£k!4 idea in reserve. Indeed he can, since 26 bxc6? gets White mated after 26...£rf4!? 27 exf4 Wh3. As 26 Af\? fails to 26...£sd4!, White has nothing better than 26 Sgl, when 26...1'h3? 27 Bg2 £M4 28 exd4 is bad for Black, so it is high time for 26...<£id4, when play can transpose to the 25...<£sd4 lines, although Black's delay in sacrificing has given White a grim additional defence of 27 Wdl -Black is much better, but White is not instantly losing. Thus Black's actual choice of 25...<£sd4! is the most forcing, and best.

26...Sh6

Threatening ...Wltf.

27 Igl <Stf4 28 Sg4 (D)

Nor can he save himself with 28 Sg3 #115 29 *gl (29 h3 Wxltf-l-!? 30 Sxh3 Sxh3+ 31 *gl Id6) 29...1'xh2+ 30 *fl #hl+ 31 Igl #xgl+! 32 'i'xgl Bdd6 and Black mates.

Exercise 31

iAs

aha

A|

l#J

mwxM %

JJSFSr, »C3 "/////// c^^sa 0 ,/// // ^vt

mm. mm. 'wm.~

28... 1 th5 29 h4 #xh4+! 30 lxh4 fixh4+ 31 &gl fid6 0-1

The knight on f4 looks like a commander proudly surveying the victorious actions of his troops.

(Now return to page 60.)

W

ill

■ ABVBABA -A

White's advantage in this position rests principally on two strategic elements: his possession of the centre and the bishop-pair.

Short opts for a strategy of enhancing the role of his dark-squared bishop (which has no opposite number).

20 Wd3! f5

On 20...g6 White intended 21 d5! cxd5 (21...Jtf5 is also met by 22 #d4) 22 #d4! Wd8 23 cxd5 &xd5 24 fidl Se5 25 f4 Sh5 26 g4, winning.

21 g4! £ie7 22 i.b4! g6 23 i.c3!

The aim is achieved! The dark squares, primarily the al-h8 diagonal, are irreparably weakened. Black has no remedy for these defects of his position.

23..J6 24 g5! fxg5 25 d5! (D)

WB. a if

ill

ABJLllA

m

A

1*^*^

ABA;

w,<^wm

Ai

I

^mmwM. n

■ & IP if A P

White has been exceptionally consistent in pursuing his strategy. With a few moves recalling feints in football he has cleared the al-h8 diagonal, and now the way to the opponent's goal is open. Zilber tries to complicate White's task by sacrificing a piece, but all this does is somewhat prolong the struggle.

The Advantage of the Bishop-Pair

93

25...£sxd5 26 cxd5 #xd5 27 #e3 f4 28 #b6 c5 29 Sel #c6 30 #xc6 bxc6 31 i.f6 g4 32 ±g5 f3 33 gxf3 gxf3 34 Se3 ±f7 35 Hxe8+ i.xe8 36 i.e7

By now of course it.was high time to end the fight, but evidently out of inertia Black played on:

36...i.f7 37 &xc5 i.d5 38 *h2 <£g7 39 <4>g3 *f6 40 &d4+ <&g5 41 b4 h5 42 &e3+ £f 6 43 *h4 i.f7 44 &d4+ <4>e7 45 i.e4 Ae8 46 i.xf3 *d6 47 <£g5 *e6 48 i.e4 <£d6 49 f4 1-0

And only now, at last, Black remembered that a player may finish a game with the words 'I resign'.

(Now return to page 60.)

Exercise 32

8...dxc4!

The strategy is familiar to us - to demonstrate the strength of his light-squared bishop (traditionally the hopelessly 'bad' one in the French Defence), Black applies the device of 'diagonal clearance'.

9 #a4?!

Permitting Black to fulfil his strategic aims. It is better to play 9 <£)xc4, although after the reply 9...<£)b6 or 9...a5 White would already be the one with opening problems to solve.

9...£ib6! 10l f xc6+l.d7 11 #e4.&b5!

Unexpectedly the light-squared bishop starts behaving aggressively.

12 £sbl

Of course 12 0-0?! is no good for White on account of the obvious 12...c3.

12.Jtd5!

We have here an example of the successful application of one other strategic device -

'exchange speculation' (which we have come across before). White is faced with an unpleasant choice: either to exchange queens (thereby bringing the game closer to an ending, which the knight fears so much), in highly unfavourable conditions too - or else to concede to the black queen the very convenient aggressive bridgehead on d5.

13#e3

If White plays 13 fxd5 <£xd5 14 £>c3, then either 14...i.c6 or 14...£lxc3 15 bxc3 JLc6.

13...£ia4! 14 £>c3 £ixc3 15 bxc3 (D)

Additional Exercise 32A: Choose between these four candidate moves: 15...c5, 15...JLe7, 15....&c6 and 15...fib8 - and give the reasons for your decision.

(For the answer, see page 101.)

Exercise 33

w

With White's all-powerful knight on e5 and his considerable space advantage, the verdict on the position is easy to understand. White is better. The only question is where to develop his initiative - on the queenside or the king-side?

Elements of Chess Strategy

Opting for the queenside, of course, is less dangerous for the white king. And yet it is precisely in this case (after White carries out the plan of a pawn attack with b4, a4 and b5) that the black bishops will be able to participate in the game.

Not by chance, Muratov rightly gives preference to the alternative plan:

19 g4! h6?

Now White smashes through unopposed. The ugly-looking but necessary 19...g6 makes things more difficult.

20f5exf5 21gxf5g5 22f6!

The bl-h7 diagonal decides everything.

22...i.d6 23 &bl <&f8 24 #c2 ±xe5 25 dxe5 1-0

(Now return to page 63.)

Exercise 34

You would have to be an incorrigible pessimist not to believe in outright victory for Black. The main reason for this is White's catastrophic backwardness in development.

19...fifd8

19.. .flad8! ? is even better - see the next note.

20 &e2 if 5 21 e4?!

21 ±xf5?! Ixd2+ (21...f r xd2+? 22 &f 3) 22 *f3 (22 *fl? #c4+) 22...Wc6+ gives Black a decisive attack. The unlikely-looking 21 <£)e4 J.xe4 22 Axe4 Id2+ 23 *f3 is perhaps the most resilient defence, although Black retains a large advantage of course. With Black's rook on f8 instead of a8 (see the note to Black's 19th move), this would lose on the spot to 23 ...f5!.

21...±f4 22 Sdl £e6 23 g3 &a2! 24 Hb3 Or 24 #c2 #xc2 25 £.xc2 J,xd2 26 Sxd2 Ac4+.

24...1 f xb3 25 £sxb3 Lxbl

And Black converted his advantage into a win with no trouble.

(Now return to page 63.)

Exercise 35

"Black's positional plus is indisputable even though the struggle remains quite complex. This type of position requires a precise, concrete line of play aimed at exposing the defects of the opponent's set-up as quickly as possible. At this point it doesn't look a bad idea to play 18...£>xd5 19 Axd5 Ib8, or 18...Sb8 at once, but there is a more energetic continuation at Black's disposal." (Kasparov).

18...&a6! 19 £sxf6

If 19 &xa6 then 19...£>xd5 and 20...£>e3.

19...&xc4 20 £sh5 i.xfl 21 #g4 Wd7 22 Sxfl d3!

The start of the victorious offensive.

23 Wf3 d2 24 g4 Sac8 25 Wd3 Wa4 26 £tf 2 #d4! 27 Wxd4 exd4 (D)

w

With the queens exchanged, the black king's insecure position is no longer dangerous. "Outwardly the tripled pawns are not a pretty sight, but this is just the sort of case where the strength

The Advantage of the Bishop-Pair

95

of the pawns depends on how far advanced they are. The pawn on d2 is still playing the chief role." (Kasparov).

28 £tf4 Sfe8 29 £te6 lei 30 £idl &f6 31 *f 2 i.g5 32 <4>e2 lc5 33 <4>d3 He5 34 £>xg5 hxg5 35 If 2 2e4 36 h3 Se3+ 37 <S?xd4 fi8e4+ 38 <£d5 fie2 39 Bf3 Sel 40 f6 Sf4 0-1

(Now return to page 64.)

Exercise 36

"In the middlegame you should push a central passed pawn without any hesitation." (Bron-stein).

18...d4!19£ia4d3!20<£g2

Neither 20 £ic5? Wd4+ (but not 20...Ixf4? 21 £ixe6!)nor20lcl?Ixf4! 21 gxf4d2 is acceptable.

20...£id5!?

20... 1 B , d4 is also promising.

21 £xe6+?!

21 Se4 is a better try.

21...<4>h8 22 iLxd5 Wxd5+ 23 Wf3 (D)

(from Black's viewpoint) be evaluated as 'unclear' .

24 We4 Sad8 25 b3 Id4 26 We3 d2 27 Sedl #d5+ 28 &h2 £)xe5 29 £xe5 Wxe5 30 Wxe5 &xe5 0-1

(Now return to page 64.)

Exercise 37

w

23... 1 tb5

Not the straightforward 23...1'xf3+? 24 <&xf3 <£\d4+ 25 <&e4 £ic2 26 <A>xd3, which can at best

The evaluation of the position is of course gloomy for White. An endgame has almost been reached. Hence the two bishops are considerably stronger than the two knights.

But in chess, as is well known, there is a big difference between 'worse' and 'lost'.

In positions where knights are contending with bishops, the only chance is to build an effective defence by creating outposts for the knights.

Therefore the most acceptable defensive plan here consists in seizing and fortifying the c4-square as a knight outpost - by 20 a4! followed by <£sc4. Nor is it difficult to decide what to do afterwards with the other knight - it will be brought to d2, for instance along the route e2-cl-b3-d2.

In the game, however, White adopted a different plan:

20 £)g3

This move isn't bad in itself, but it is the start of a sequence of unthinking, planless moves by White.

20...h5!

This, as already noted, is the most effective way to restrict the knights - with the rook's pawns. However, if at this moment White had grasped the strategic issues correctly, he could have found a solution to his problem, though not quite the same as the one mentioned before:

Elements of Chess Strategy

21 h3! i.d7 22 a4! h4 23 £>gfl, followed by £>c4 and £>fd2.

21 f 3?! £d7 22 Se2?!

It was still not too late to play 22 a4, albeit in less favourable conditions than earlier.

22...b5?!

A consistent move, but showing an insufficient sense of danger and foresight. White's sole trump in this position is his possession of the open e-file, which Black ought to neutralize by exchanging a pair of rooks. It therefore looks more natural to continue 22...h4!? 23 Sael She8 24 <S}ge4 iLf 8, followed by preparing the advance ...f5.

White's position, of course, is noteasy. But a strong player, when defending, needs to know not only how to fight and hold on in difficult positions, but also how to look for a way out even when the situation is hopeless.

A question arises, however: how can you save a hopeless position if your opponent isn 't going to make any mistakes? There is just one way. Constantly, at every step, set him tasks, confront him with problems. In that way, force him to doubt his own powers and commit errors! In view of this, the technique for exploiting an advantage is a technique not for winning quickly but for letting your opponent set you as few questions as possible in what remains of the struggle.

23 2aeli.f8 24£>ge4Hg8

Preparing the advance ...f5.

25 £>b3 Sc8 26 £ted2 £d6 27 £se4 M 8 28 £>ed2 f 5 29 Se5 i.d6 (D)

Exercise 38

w

Additional Exercise 37A: White has little choice. Choose between the candidate moves 30 I5e2 and 30 fid5.

(For the answer, see page 102.)

w

The main thing is to decide on a position for the knight. The ideal place is in the centre. The most suitable continuation is therefore 42 c3 and 43 b4, securing the knight an excellent post ond4.

However, White allotted a different destiny to this piece.

42<£>gl?!g5 43£>f3h5!

Using the wing pawns to confine the knight.

44 Ae2?

White carries on conducting a planless defence, forfeiting any control over events.

44..Se4! 45 Ad3 Sf4! 46 <i»e2 g4 47 hxg4 hxg4 48 £>h2 g3 49 £>f3 d4 50 Sfl b4 51 £id2!

At last White shows some concern for active defence. Against a passive waiting strategy, Black would continue strengthening his position by bringing his king to the centre and his bishop to e3.

51...Ih4 52 £>f3?!

White still doesn't sense the danger. Otherwise he would have looked for ways to change the direction of the struggle. This could have been done by 52 Sf 3! iLxf 3+ (there is no point in declining the sacrifice; after 52... Jte5 53 Sf5 &b% 54 £)f3 fih2 55 <&f 1 the fortress is set up all the same, but at no material cost) 53 &xf3 Ae5 54 iLe4, followed by bringing the king to d3. It would then be extremely hard, if possible at all, for Black to breach the fortress.

52...Sh8 53 &d2?

A blunder, albeit in a difficult position. 53 Hal is preferable.

53...Ih2! 54 £ixh2 gxh2 55 Ihl i.e5 56 &fl &e4! 57 *dl *f6 58 &d2 *g5 59 &dl &g4 0-1

(Now return to page 72.)

The Advantage of the Bishop-Pair

97

Exercise 39

#1 HI A

w, v/m v ///////,

■ Pas m

WW. WW. jl. WW. x WW. ""W? WW%. O vWW/(SSfoWW/

''ww, ' "ww, "JC''ww,'"" / 'w,

w/m ww p

m iH w.

if S

Defending positions like this is reminiscent of the job of a bomb-disposal expert: any false move may be yourlast. Making the right choice in the present situation is not simple. Over the board, the correct decision may be suggested by a process of elimination. The point is that if there are several candidate moves but nearly all the lines lead to clear defeat, while just one of them offers some light at the end of the tunnel, then this is the one to go for. If it doesn't help, and we lose - well, hard luck! The decisive mistakes must have been made at an earlier stage. In exactly the same way, of course, a process of elimination may be applied to positions where we are looking for a path to victory.

So let us take the moves in turn:

l...&g6? 2 ±d3+ <i?h6 3 g4 £b3 4 &f3 -&d5+ 5 *g3 .&b3 6 lf6 and White wins.

1... JLb3? leads to a similar finale: 2 g4+ £>g6 3 i.d3+ *h6 4 *f 3.

I...£tf8! (the most stubborn continuation) 2 g4+ <4>g6 3 -&d3+ *f7!. Although even here, after 4 g5 or 4 h5, Black would have to conduct a most difficult defence, there would still be chances of salvation.

In the game Black missed the point, and played:

1...H6?

Additional Exercise 39A: What did Black miss?

(For the answer, see page 104.)

Exercise 40

When playing an endgame, you need to remember the clear-cut standard positions. The plausible 46...JLd4? is a mistake, allowing White to unpin his knight with 47 ^fl!. The

point is that 47.. Jbcf3 48 &xf3 *xf3 49 &el, folio wed by bringing the king to b 1, gives a theoretically drawn position.

46...i.d5! 47 *fl

White also loses with 47 g7 JLxa2 48 £tel M5+\ 49 ±f 3 &g8 50 <&d3+ *e3. His strongest line at this point is 47 <£>h2! Jtxa2 48 <£\d2 (threatening J.b3) 48...1.g8 49 &b3 a2 50 J.xa2 JLxa2. While this still allows Black a theoretical win, it would demand a good deal of effort.

47...i.xa2 48 &el &c4+ 49 ±e2 a2 50 £ic2 &b3 51 £>al &d5 52 &dl &d4 53 i.b3 &xb3 54 £>xb3 &e4 55 *e2 *d5 56 <£>d3 ±g7 57 &c2 *c4 0-1

After 58 £sa5+ £>b4 59 £>b3 <&a3 White succumbs to zugzwang.

(Now return to page 73.)

Exercise 41

B

in ifl£

n

m mm

ABA

■ m

" ' w.

&f

A typical situation in play (or in chess psychology). Up to here, Black's task, though a defensive one, has demanded no special effort or energy. Perhaps he has subconsciously satisfied himself that nothing dangerous is in store and that his opponent is only playing on out of spite. However, in such a frame of mind it isn't easy

Elements of Chess Strategy

to force yourself to wake up when concrete threats make their appearance in the game.

So it is here. Black hasn't realized that White's main threat consists in a pawn attack with e5. That being so, 15...iLb2 is the correct move. It does not of course guarantee Black a draw, but it is better than the game continuation.

15...£a5? 16 £d4! i.el 17 e5! dxe5

If 17...^.h4thenl8e6.

18 fxe5 e6

Or 18...£h4 19 e6 fxe6 20 dxed

19 dxe6 fxe6 20 i.xe6 i.h4 21 £d5

The advantage of the bishops is manifest. If 21...<& > c7, then 22 e6 breaks down Black's defence.

21...b6 22 b4! i.xg5 23 e6 ^Jf6 24 i.xb6+ *e8 25 £c4 &xh6 26 a4 £f8 27 b5 axb5 28 i.xb5+ *e7 29 i.c5+ *xe6 30 £xf8 £sd7 31 &b4h532a5h433*e2g534a6£ib635.&c6 1-0

(Now return to page 76.)

Exercise 42

w

Or 53 £>b4+ *c3 54 £ia2+ <ib2 55 £>b4 Ae7.

The correct solution is to centralize the knight quickly and prepare counterplay based on the advance of the passed f-pawn. 48 £)d5! gives White more than realistic chances of salvation: 48...&a6+ 49 4>g2 &c4 50 f4 or 48...^.f5 49 ^e3.

Not sensing the critical moment, however, White replied...

48 i.b5?! i.f5

...and only then played...

49 £>d5?

Right now this move is actually the decisive mistake.

49...i.d3+!! 50 i.xd3 *xd3 51 *el a4 52 *dl a3 53 "&cl (D)

53...&C4! 54 £ie3+ *b3 55 f4

Or 55 £>c2 &g5+.

5S..Ac7 56 <ibl a2+ 57 <S?al

A final trap. After 57...i.xf4? 58 £>c4! the game would end in a draw, thanks to the stalemate themes.

57...^.a5 58 £>d5 £d2 0-1

White resigned in view of the threatened ...i.cl-b2#.

(Now return to page 80.)

Exercise 43

§ iff ft W

AHA A

mt-^wm

mm

i

A;

Black is not guaranteed an easy life by either 42...£g3? 43 *g2 ^.xh4 44 £e5, with ±b8 to follow, or 42...f6? 43 &e4 *f7 44 h5!.

And yet he finds an astonishingly simple and convincing path to the draw:

42...g5! 43 hxg5 g6!

The fortress is built! As a result, the light-squared bishop (the very one that was supposed to prove its superiority over the knight) is nothing but a bystander.

44 *g2 <£f 8 45 i.e2 *e7 46 <4f 3 £>c7 V2-V2

(Now return to page 80.)

The Advantage of the Bishop-Pair

99

Exercise 44

Exercise 45

w

,Wm. mm mm. mm I* HI »*IH

White would lose with either 1 <£sb4? gxh3 2 gxh3 $g5, followed by ...iLe6 and ...f4, or 1 *el gxh3 2 gxh3 f4! 3 &f 1 f 3!. The only way he can save himself is by constructing a fortress:

1 hxg4! fxg4 2 g3!!

White isn't afraid of Black creating a far-advanced (and protected!) outside passed pawn.

2...h3 3 &gl

Missing the chance to end the game in a swift and most striking manner: 3 <2}a3! if5 4 £lxb5!! .&xb5 5 k.&\ !, and Black is powerless to breach the redoubts that White has set up. Forexample, 5..JLd7 6 *gl &e5 7 *h2 <£>d5 8 &gl 4>c5 9 *h2 &b5 10 *gl &a5 11 *h2 i.a4 12^.xg4^.c2 13±d7!.

But then the game continuation is also perfectly adequate to draw.

3...&e5 4 £>b4 &d6 5 st>h2 i.a5 6 i.dl i.c8

Or6...*c5 7£>a6+.

7 £>a2 *c5 8 &c2 i.f5 9 *gl b4 10 cxb4+ Axb4(D)

W

YMM. ' W

'%&& ^

iiiii

« H

Additional Exercise 44A: Evaluate the candidate moves 11 £lxb4 and 11 <£lc3. (For the answer, see page 104.)

W

^ <%m

i« ■«

W kw3 kwW k'm3 t\

m mi n

Black has built a fortress for her defence which White will not succeed in overcoming by simple 'therapeutic' treatment. Playing forzug-zwang is hardly a realistic prospect; a method of further restricting the mobility of Black's pieces is not to be seen. One last chance remains: a 'dynamiting' sacrifice, which White may carry out straight away or else after preparation.

During a game under conditions of restricted time and energy, it isn't simple to work out the variations infallibly to the end. In such a case you often have to trust your intuition.

The correct approach here is not to be hasty: 45 &c2! &a8 (45...&xh6 loses to 46 &dl ix6 47 &g5+ *h7 48 h6 followed by J.h5) 46 e4! (a 'dynamiting' pawn sacrifice, suggested by Adrian Mikhalchishin) 46...dxe4 (or 46...fxe4 47 £dl *xh6 48 &g4 i.c6 49 £g5+ *h7 50 i.xe6) 47 &b3 i.d5 48 £xd5 exd5 49 £d6! (a mistake would be 49 £g5? £sb8 50 *e5 £lc6+ 51 *xd5 £>xb4+, when 52 *e6 £)c6 53 d5 <SM4+ 54 *e5 £if3+ 55 *xf5 £)xg5 56 *xg5 e3 57 d6 e2 58 d7 elf 59 d8f is a drawn queen ending, while 52 ^6? <£>d3! is even losing for White) 49...'4'xh6 (other continuations also lose: 49...£tf6 50*xf5£ixh5 51 *g5! or49...e3 50 <£>xe3 <2tf6 51 *f4 £ie4 52 ±e5 *xh6 53 *xf5)

50 *xf5 *xh5 51 £f4! (not 51 &e6? *g4!) 51...£>f8 52 J.cl <2ig6 53 *f6! and White wins.

In the game, White's hunch was wrong. She impulsively went in for a different explosive sacrifice of a piece, which looks outwardly attractive.

45 ±xf5+?! exf5 46 *xf5 *xh6 47 £>e6 <&b8! 48 *d6 £\c6 49 <£c7 i.a8 50 &c5 <4>xh5

Elements of Chess Strategy

The black king comes to the rescue in the nick of time.

54 4>b6 £>xb4 V2-V2 (Now return to page 81.)

Exercise 46

w

White's spatial plus and bishop-pair on the threshold of the endgame constitute his advantage. Unexpectedly, however, there followed:

33i.xf5gxf5 34fie3

It now becomes clear that with opposite bishops on the board, the domination of the dark squares by the white pieces gives Black some problems to solve. The threat is 35 Hge2.

34...b6

Trying somehow or other to activate his bishop; e.g., 35 Sge2 Sd7 36 Se8?! .&a6.

35axb6axb6 36fib3?!

36Sa3! is good.

36...b5 37 Sxb5?! (D)

After 37 cxb5 Jtb7, Black has good chances to survive, but this gives White more practical chances than he ought to have had in the game continuation.

MM

mm mm

wmw'ym

«&KA :

A

■I

Threatening fie 1. 40...f4 41fib6fia6?

Forgetting that with opposite-coloured bishops, activity is paramount. Thus 41...fia2+ 42 <£>c3 Se8 43 JLxf4 Sf2 is appropriate, while 41...f3 42 flxd6 fie8 43 fif6+ *g7 is another possibility. In both lines Black's bishop can become active on the light squares, and he has enough counterplay to hold the draw - indeed, a draw by repetition is likely in the near future.

42 lxa6 £xa6 43 If 1 fib8 44 fixf 4+ <4>g8 45 &e7 fib4 46 4>c3 fibl 47 i.xd6 ficl+ 48 <£>b3 1-0

(Now return to page 84.)

Exercise 47

w §

AflJLflAflA

fAH

mm, m,

WB, W.

iH H Bap

37...fixf3 38 £.g5 fig8 39 h4 fia3 40 figl

Although White is a pawn down in the ending, he has at least enough compensation, and it is Black who must play carefully if he is to hold the position. For this there are three main reasons: the advantage of the bishop-pair, White's active king which has a clear route to penetrate to the queenside, and his passed pawn.

30...^.f5

Black plays actively, looking to generate threats against White's pawns. He could seek to construct a fortress with 30...itb5 and ...£>d7, but then he must prepare for a protracted defence.

31 4»e3 i.e4 32 &d4

32 £h4 £xd5 33 i.xf6 i.xa2 is drawn. 32..^.xg2 33 4>e5 4>g7 34 &d6 4>f8 35

&b3

After 35 i.h4 g5 36 &g3 £»e4+ 37 4>c7 £ic3 38 d6 JLc6, Black should hold the draw thanks to the time gained by the attack on White's a2-bishop.

35...g5 36 £g3 4e8?

The Advantage of the Bishop-Pair

101

36...£>e4+? 37 *c7 is good for White, while 36...h5?! 37 JLe5 offers Black no easy path to salvation. However, 36...<£>e8+ is correct, when 37 &d7 £>f6+ repeats, while 37 <±>c5 <&e7 38 4'b6 f5 gives Black strong counterplay.

37 £e5 £>d7 38 £a4 £h3 39 i.f6 h6 (D)

w

Black's pieces are totally paralysed despite his two extra pawns.

40 4>c7 MS 41 &xb7 *f 8? A blunder in a difficult position. 42 i.xd7 i.xd7 43 *xa6 1-0 (Now return to page 85.)

Exercise 48

We have reached that precise moment when Black failed to readjust in time. Although after the correct 70...<4>d7! 71 Sg8 e4 72 £f8 Sf6 73 £xc5 £xc5 74 £xe4 fixf2+ 75 *h3 £d6 Black has a very tough defensive task ahead of him, he retains distinct drawing chances (the '50%' of which we have spoken) on account of the opposite bishops and the fact that White's bishop is the 'wrong' one for his h-pawn. But in the game, there followed: 70...*e7? 71 Sg8 e4 72 &f8+ 1-0

If72...<4f7fhen73i.a2-i-.

White brilliantly exploited all the overt and concealed resources of the position. I have heard that Anatoly Karpov is an excellent bridge player. Evidently this also helps him in chess.

(Now return to page 89.)

Solutions to Additional Exercises Additional Exercise 32A

In a tournament game, after drawing up a list of candidate moves, we are sometimes struck by the thought that they are roughly equivalent - why on earth should we split hairs figuring out the difference in strength between them? It wouldn't be worth the time and energy spent on it.

Yet these are the reasonings of a dilettante (and a lazy one at that). A professional will try to decide which of the moves should be made at once and which can wait until a better moment.

Well then... the continuation 15...c5, ridding Black of his doubled pawns, looks inviting at first sight but is actually anti-positional, since (as the course of the game will confirm) Black's control of the b6-square will be very useful in the coming fight fortheonly open file, the b-file.

The alternative 15...iLe7 16 fibl will subsequently allow White, at the very least, to neutralize Black's pressure on this file.

Black can of course play 15...fib8 and consent, after 16 flbl Sb6, to a mere 'draw' in the contest for the b-file.

15„.i.c6!

It is such strategic 'trifles' that determine the final outcome of the battle. Now there is no point in 16 Sbl on account of 16...#e4, and the

Elements of Chess Strategy

open file is at Black's disposal after all (17 flb2? Aa3).

16 0-0 Sb8!

Precision in everything. The careless 16... JLe7 17 Sbl #e4 18 i.d2 would allow White to do at least something by way of disputing control of the b-file.

17lel

Feeling that he has lost the preceding phase of the contest, White prefers to switch to a waiting strategy. That is, he will make unobjectionable moves (like this one, which neutralizes the baneful threat of ...We4) and carry on playing by ear. If his opponent later makes a mistake (preferably an outright blunder), so much the better.

Defensive play is a very important part of chess. In this area there are plenty of common nostrums which you have to know and be capable of applying. But two of them are of special importance.

The first requirement is a 'sense of danger': the sooner we realize that our position is inferior or bad, or that events are beginning to turn round to our detriment, the easier it will be to take the sole possible measures in the hope of salvation.

Secondly: on perceiving the necessity for defence, we must do all in our power to bring about a radical change in the course of events on the board, even if this means resorting to dangerous, 'surgical'methods.

But let us return to the game. Instead of 17 Sel it would of course be senseless to play 17 a4? (aiming to exchange the dark-squared bishops with 18 .&a3) on account of 17...Sb3.

After 17 #g5 (Dolmatov) 17 ...h6 18 #g3 We4 19 lei #g6 20 #xg6 fxg6 21 &d2 i.d5, Black's advantage is not in doubt, but this may be better than passively awaiting events.

17...^.e718h4

Pawn moves on the wing where one is under attack often provide a useful target for the opponent. However, Black is going to advance on the kingside in any case, and only precise analysis will answer the question of whether this move is a useful way to frustrate Black's plans.

18...h5

Thanks to his mighty pair of storm troops (the queen on d5 and bishop on c6), Black can set up

counter-threats on the kingside. He now threatens 19...fih6 followed by ...flg6 and ...Sg4. 19 We2 (D)

Additional Exercise 32B: Assess the consequences of 19...g5.

(For the answer, see page 103.)

Additional Exercise 37A

w

I deliberately refrained from annotating the last two moves (so as not to give anything away to the reader). But now I wish to state that 28...f5? was played on impulse, failing to anticipate the impending events. The preparatory 28...Sg6 is correct, especially since White lacks any counterplay whatever.

Fortunately for Black, his opponent still didn't sense the danger of the situation. Otherwise White would have acted on this principle: 'If you want to and can't, but really want to -then you must!'

Honestly and objectively facing the fact that the scales were slowly but surely tipping in Black's favour, Richter was simply obliged to harness all his will-power, knowledge, ingenuity and imagination for the purpose of radically

The Advantage of the Bishop-Pair

103

altering the course oft he struggle. He had to resolve on a line which, though risky, was the sole valid remedy in this situation, involving a desperado of the kind we have seen before. It goes: 30 Id5! fig6 (30...fic6 31 £>xc5) 31 g4 2f6 (after 31...fxg4? 32 £>e4! White's cavalry would launch its raid) 32 gxf5 JLc6 33 Sxd6 Sxd6 34 <2W5 and the position has become unpredictable, since 34..JLxf3? 35 £>xf3 fixc5 36 £ixg5+ &g8? 37 QxA fie5 38 £sf6+ would not suit Black at all.

In the game, White played:

30 25e2?

Passive play against two bishops in the ending is unacceptable!

30...Ha8?!

An understandable move, of course - Black would like to continue restricting the freedom of the knight on b3, by advancing his a-pawn. However...

31 £>a5! (D)

Cavalry raids - 32 <2^b7 - begin to be a threat.

31...flab8 32 £>ab3 h4 33 &hl fig6 34 <S?gl

Intending on the one hand to reposition the king (...'4 , e7-d7), but also preparing to play ...c4 after a preliminary ...a6, ...Uc8 and ....&b8-a7. Here again, however, I should like to point out that Black's solution is technically imprecise. As before, the preparatory exchange of a pair of rooks by 34..JLe6 or 34...Se8 looks more convincing.

35 fif 2 fia8 36 Ife2?

This is the final mistake. Richter had no business to allow ...a5. True, he did not like 36 <5ia5 Jtc7, but he could then have continued 37 £*c6! ? or 37 £sb7 (again a desperado!) 37.. JLf4

(intending ..JLe3 or ...Sc8) 38 £lxc5! (the desperado in action) 38....&e3 39 c4!. Then after the plausible 39...bxc4 40 dxc4 Hc8 41 b4! 2c7 42 'i'fl £xf2 43 *xf2, White would retain chances of a successful defence.

36...a5! 37 £>bl a4 38 £>3d2 c4 39 £sfl 2c8 40 <S?hl c3 41 bxc3 dxc3 42 £>e3 b4

And White resigned on the 47th move.

(Now return to page 71.)

Additional Exercise 32B

19...g5?!

Black's strategy is directed towards increasing the power of his unopposed light-squared bishop. This thrust worked perfectly in the game, but objectively Black should play more quietly, emphasizing his b-file dominance.

20 i.xg5 Axg5 21 hxg5 h4

To be followed by ...h3.

22 2ebllb6 23lxb6

After 23 ttW! h3 24 g6 hxg2 25 g7 Sg8 26 #116 irxf3 27 Ixb6 cxb6 28 #h8 *d7 29 #xg8 #h5 30 f3 Black has no more than a draw by perpetual check.

23„.cxb6 24 £>el? h3 25 Wf3 hxg2! 26 Wxd5 i.xd5 27 £ixg2 fih3 28 Scl b5 (D)

w

Elements of Chess Strategy

o-i

A pawn up in an ending, White resigned, as his pieces are completely paralysed: he cannot move his king or knight. On 29 f4 Black plays 29...2g3; then after 30 Sc2 b4 31 cxb4 flxg2+ 32 Sxg2 .&xg2 33 <4>xg2 c3, the black pawn goes through to queen. Against passive waiting moves, ... < i , d7-c6 is followed by the victorious advance ...a5, ...b4, etc.

(Now return to page 61.)

Additional Exercise 39A

w

White unexpectedly replied...

2 i.h5!!

...and it became clear that owing to the mate threat, the black king would be severed from the defence of the h6-pawn, which would thus be doomed.

2...£>c5 3 g4+

Accuracy is always essential. After the tempting 3 4>d4 £ie4 4 &el Abl 5 &f3 £sd6, Black retains drawing chances.

3„.&e6 (D)

w

m mm.

m

m

M, w3,

4Ag6

Alternatively, 4 k.%1 £ie4 5 Ag6 (not 5 £xh6? £tf6) 5...£>f6 6 &f5+.

4...£id7

Or 4...h5 5 gxh5! <£d7 6 h6 £>f8 7 h5.

5 i.g7 ^f6 6 i.f 5+ &f 7 7 i.xh6 £>g8 8 i.f4 £if6 9.&.e5£ie810&f41-0

(Now return to page 73.)

Additional Exercise 44A

'///////, 'A

W

W

w IP i

m in in

mmtmti

i

ll£ic3

This is the simplest way to draw, but 11 £)xb4 also works, thanks to a stalemate trick: Il...'£'xb412 < 4>h2c3 13 bxc3+ &xc3 and now, e.g., 14 Aa4 <4>d2 15 Ac6 4>el 16 <4>gl h2+ 17 "4>xh2 '4 , xf2 18 itxe4! ^.xe4 stalemate.

Il...*d6

ll...£xc3 12 bxc3 &b5 13 &h2 4>a5 14 ■£>gl .&d7 15 ^.dl! is a drawn bishop ending.

12 *h2 i.a5 13 *gl *e5 14 *h2 &d8 15 <&gl M6 16 &h2 &g7 17 <£>gl &d6 (D)

w

m mm mm

Wa W//,

WB, if

k W> k %9 k IL,

mm pi

18 *h2 *c5 19 &gl *b4 20 £ia2+

Or 20 £)d5+, which is just as good. 20...&a5 21 £k3 V2-V2 (Now return to page 80.)

4 Warning - Trap Ahead!

Traps, pits along my path;

God placed them there, commanded me to go,

And, all-foreseeing, he abandoned me

And sits in judgement! He who would not save

me!

Omar Khayyam

What chess-player has not been familiar with this experience since childhood? You hit on an unexpected piece of play that could easily be missed, and set your opponent a trap. With bated breath, afraid of scaring him off, you wait impatiently to see if he will stumble into the snare you have laid for him. If he does, what a sense of triumph, often ill-concealed, what a feeling of self-satisfaction and elation this gives you! Conversely, what wretchedness, humiliation and outrage you feel if you fall into a trap yourself. The mental wounds that this inflicts can take such a long time to heal...

As defined by the encyclopaedic chess dictionary edited by Anatoly Karpov, "A trap is an attempt to provoke the opponent into an outwardly favourable continuation which in reality proves mistaken."

A trap arises when we have been carefully calculating variations and come across an unexpected coup. That is to say that setting a trap requires well-developed combinative vision. Yet exploiting it as a means to an end is a good deal more complicated than executing a combination.

In Botvinnik's formulation, "A combination is a forced variation involving a sacrifice." In executing it, we compel our opponent to go down a predetermined path and submit to our will. On devising a trap, on the other hand, we merely offer the opponent a tasty bait and can only await the results. Therefore, bringing off a trap successfully demands not only chess abilities in the strict sense, but sometimes psychological ones as well. But we shall come to that later.

We shall start with some exercises. Remember that, as in the previous chapters, you should tackle each exercise in turn, and examine its solution (which will often contain a good deal of general comments and advice) in full before reading on.

■#■ ■ i

H #11*111 m&

1 M9UB

w& wm m tt

Pirrot - Svidler

Rapidplay, Mainz 2002

White is threatening the unpleasant fork thc5. Despite this, Svidler played:

22...Shd8!

Exercise 49: What was Black's idea if White carries out his threat?

(For the answer, see page 120.)

W

w/// m HH CI W^.

Anand - Kasparov

World Ch match (game 11), New York 1995

Elements of Chess Strategy

In the game, Black played 27... JLe6, giving his opponent the choice between 28 £)xe7 and 28 b4.

Exercise 50: Choose between these two candidate moves.

(For the answer, see page 120.)

23... 1 te7 (D)

k MM Mi

up I^jlIPaIp

A

Romanovsky - Botvinnik

Moscow 1945

20...#g5!?

If Black wants to fight for the initiative, this is the only way! In the event of 20...bxc4 21 £>xc4 ±b5 22 Sfel Sc8 23 £>b6 Sc7 24i.xb5 axb5 25 a4 bxa4 26 Sxa4, the knight on b7 proves useless and White's major pieces cannot be prevented from invading the enemy camp.

21 f4

"Black reckoned that in the ensuing complications there would be a chance to utilize the unguarded state of the knight on d2 and the bishop on e2. No doubt White had equally high hopes of exploiting the knight on b7 and the bishop on d7." (Botvinnik).

21...exf4

Otherwise White plays 22 fxe5 dxe5 23 c5.

221^6!

"This move may not actually be best, but it deserves an exclamation mark because the bold raid with the queen is an interesting idea." (Botvinnik).

22...Sab8!

This move is only playable thanks to White's undefended minor pieces.

23 #xa6

On 23 c5 dxc5 24 bxc5 We7, White's pawn on c5 and bishop on e2 would both turn out to be en prise.

W

I A.

mm

mm m.

WW//, WKi W////.

IABABA1

^A^

WM WW, W/

■ m

m ww, i

WfW, 'Mm,

A

A:

w,

HaUr

Threatening 24...#e3 followed by 25...Sa8! 26 Wxbl Sa7, trapping the queen.

24 fiael

A continuation of equal worth is 24 Sfel #e3 25 £>f 1 Wf2 26 #a3 (after 26 Af3 Sa8 27 #xb7 Sa7 28 Se2 #d4 29 Hdl Wxdl 30Wxa7 Wxfl+ 31 #gl #xgl + 32 4>xgl bxc4, the advantage is probably with Black) 26...Sfe8 27 Wf3 #b6 (27...Wxf3 also leads to equality) 28 cxb5 Se4 29 a3 Sbe8, with a complex game in which the chances should be rated about even.

24...t r e3 25 £>f3 Sa8!

If25... 1 tc3then26a3.

26 #xb7 Sa7 (D)

w

"Black appears to have rid himself of his chief liability, the wretched knight on b7." (Botvinnik).

Exercise 51: Where should the white bishop go? To dl or d3?

(For the answer, see page 120.)

"Traps are a good thing only in hopeless situations, or when they do not make your position any worse." (Botvinnik).

Warning - Trap Ahead!

107

Boleslavsky - Bondarevsky

USSR Absolute Ch, Leningrad/Moscow 1941

Em. Lasker - Janowski

World Ch match (game 7), Paris 1909

The situation appears dangerous for Black. White's centralized knights are ready to harry Black's uncastled king. At the moment the threat is £>b6xd7 followed by £tf 5.

However, there followed:

25...£h6!

Obviously assuming that Black's move was a tactical oversight in a difficult position, Boleslavsky replied:

26 Sxh5?

To be fair it must be stated that even the best continuation, 26 #f2 #xf2 27 Sxf2 e6 28 £)f6+ <4>e7 29 £)xd7 JLe3, would leave Black with an undoubted plus.

The showdown was instantaneous:

26...Sg8!! 27 #d3 #gl+ 0-1

White resigned in view of 28 Bdl Bcl+!.

"Practice shows that traps most often work when the stronger side's advantage is becoming overwhelming. Psychologically this is perfectly explicable - the fate of the game seems settled; the opponent ought to be resigning any minute. For this very reason, in very difficult or hopeless positions, a trap should on no account be neglected as a last chance." (Dvoretsky).

In the following diagram, Black's position is lost, and Janowski resigned the game.

However, it is impossible to disagree with Tarrasch, who commented on this situation as follows: "Demoralized, Janowski laid down his arms too soon instead of making use of his last chance, by no means such a bad one. By continuing 63...c5 64 <£\d5?? (a tempting move, with a mate threat that looks unanswerable!) 64...Bxf3+!! 65 4>xf3 (on 65 <4>g4 Black has

the defence 65...Sf 7) 65...i.xe4+! 66 4>xe4, he might have brought about a pretty stalemate. Of course his opponent could avoid this with 64 Bb7. Yet conceivably he might have overlooked the stalemate in the heat of battle."

Even a perfectly uncomplicated trap may take the opponent unawares.

Ruderfer - Dvoretsky

Odessa 1972

Black's position is hopeless. In evident desperation, he played:

57...4>b7

He will have considered that 57...4>c7 58 Ixc8+ (but not 58 e7? JLd7) 58...*xc8 59 e7 also leads to a win for White.

After the move played, White could win by either 58 e7 Ad7 59 Sd8 or 58 Ml Sxg8 59 i.xg8 *c7 60 e7 4>d7 61 JLe6+.

However, Ruderfer simply and carelessly played as if there were no difference between Black's two possible king moves:

Elements of Chess Strategy

58Sxc8?

Exercise 52: What had White missed? (For the answer, see page 121.)

■mm e* mm mm m

kM ill *^pi wb,*bb/,

BB A WB A WBlfo.W BB, BB. W%,

A

WB. B.

'///, 07T7f/,

A;

Kots - Kosikov

Kiev 1977

Assessing the situation is not so simple. White's king position is weakened, and the black pieces are preparing to storm it. No small role is played in this by the pawn on g4, controlling the important square f3 and fixing the white h2-pawn. True, it must be said that the white king is in the company of its own pieces, which are ready to come to its aid in moments of danger. But all this amounts to a static judgement, and in a sharp position it needs to be supported by concrete calculation. Specifically, the g4-pawn is en prise. As already pointed out, this is a most important pawn, without which Black's attack is practically impossible. It can be defended by 19...£>e5, but in reply 20 JLf4 is unpleasant. Then 20... J.g7 is bad, as after 21 ■A>hl the knight perishes. Black also loses with 20...£d6 21 £>e4 £>f3+ 22 #xf3 gxf3 23 £ixd6+ &b8 24 £>xf7. After 20...£rf3+ 21 #xf3 gxf3 22 &xc7 i.c5+ 23 <4>hl "4>xc7 24 £>e4, with h4 to follow, Black will hardly succeed in saving his f3-pawn and with it the game. His best continuation seems to be 20...#b6+, but then after 21 *hl £>f3 22 h4, with threats of #d3 or £>e4-f 2, Black's position is critical.

Does this mean it's time for Black to resign? But there will always be time for that - do not rush! In the game there followed:

19...f5!!

A desperate gesture? White evidently decided that it was - he couldn't explain it in any

other way. Yet this move is very sly, and as we shall soon see, it was not at all played in desperation.

20 gxf6?!

If at this moment White had forced himself to figure out his opponent's intentions calmly, he would have found 20 ^.xa7! £>e5 21 £)a4!, after which Black's position remains critical. But luckily for Black, this did not happen, and his trap succeeded!

20...£ie5 21 i.f4?

White can still retain an advantage by 21 h4.

21...£>f3+ 22 Wxf3?? i.c5+!

It was only at this point that White understood everything. On 23 &fl, Black wins with 23...gxf3 24 JLxc7 Bxh2. In the main variation after 23 ihl, Black delivers mate with the spectacular 23...Ixh2+! 24 <4>xh2 #h7+! (this was the reason why Black cleared his second rank with 19...f5!!) 25 *g2 #h3#. In the game, White played:

23 We3 #b6 24 #xc5 Wxc5+

But this no longer affected the result. Black soon won.

Bouaziz - Miles

Interzonal tournament, Riga 1979

In this position, extremely difficult and barely defensible from Black's standpoint, the game was adjourned. White is the exchange up, the approaches to his king are securely guarded and his c-pawn is close to queening. I fancy all this served to convince White that the game would not be resumed...

But it was.

42...ficl 43 Sc2 Wbl 44 ldd2 fihl

Warning - Trap Ahead!

109

Desperation? White was, after all, threatening 45 Sxcl #xcl 46 Sc2. Wait, though. But for his complacency, White would have seen through the astonishingly pretty trap prepared by his opponent, and would not have played....

45 c7?

This was met by:

45...2xh3!!

How often the phenomenon of 'serial errors' occurs in chess! Let us picture a scenario which must surely have cropped up (and not just once, either) in your own playing career.

You are conducting an exceedingly difficult and tense struggle in a very important tournament game. By dint of supreme exertions you are starting to tip the scales in your favour. But how hard it all is for you at this moment - psychologically, intellectually, even just physically (merely lifting your hand to make your move can be an effort). You feel the desire (unconsciously, I dare say) to ease off and relax, if only for an instant. For the long-awaited goal is so near...

Then suddenly, like a tub of cold water over your head - a mistake happens! Your opponent makes a move you hadn't expected at all.

Of course there is no question of this being a dream. You wake up. The struggle goes on, and blows rain down on you from all sides. You cease to understand what on earth is actually happening. Mistakes follow one after the other, the evaluation of the position changes for the worse...

That is how the phenomenon of 'serial errors' comes about.

What should you do in these cases? How do you extricate yourself from such situations with minimum damage?

Of course, the best thing is not to get into such situations at all. As long as the clock is running and the fight continues - don't fall asleep! But we are all only human, so I should like to give you a set of practical recommendations for these cases.

Rule number one: 'Don't castigate yourself!'

You can say a couple of 'heated' words to yourself, but no more. Imagine that at this moment some pundit comes up to you and starts scolding you and lecturing you. And instead of

carrying on with the game, you meekly nod, silent and downcast, agreeing to put yourself down as a dolt, duffer and blockhead. 'Well-wishers' of that sort should be sent packing!

You have no right to treat yourself so sadistically. You made a mistake - who doesn't? The reasons for it will be analysed later - after the game, after the tournament. For the duration of the game, 'the inquest is over - forget it!' And as long as the tournament struggle goes on -fight, defend yourself to the last bullet!

Rule number two: 'Calm down!'

The sooner you manage this, the more chances there are of a positive outcome to the struggle. At this moment don't on any account act hastily. Don't try to prove to the onlookers (and possibly yourself) that it wasn't you who made a slip but your opponent who fell into a trap you had set for him. And therefore - do not rush. It is fast, unreflecting actions that are the chief cause of 'serial errors'.

Calm down! Try to regain your previous confidence in your powers.

How? For a start, try to 'switch off for a couple of minutes. To do this, it may help if you come equipped with some methods of your own devising. In the last resort, have a think about something pleasant: yesterday's brilliant football game won by your favourite team; the happy date you are looking forward to with your favourite girlfriend; beautiful weather... What the hell, just find some way to sustain your spirits!

Rule number three: Ascertain 'where you stand'.

It quite often happens that after missing our opponent's move we start panicking, we get agitated and fuss; but then it turns out that the whole thing isn't as bad as all that - if the evaluation of the position has changed, it has only changed slightly, and overall it is still in our favour. However, even if analysis establishes that the situation is now difficult or even hopeless, then imagine that this is a training session and your severe coach is forcing you to acquire defensive technique and skills for turning the game round.

Therefore, once you have managed to calm down, the first essential task is to reappraise the

Elements of Chess Strategy

situation on the board honestly and objectively. The main thing here is to rid yourself of any 'residual' emotions.

Rule number four: 'Start again from the beginning! '

Based on your new assessment of the position, you must draw up a new plan of action. And for this, as we know, you once again need to identify the main strategic elements, apply the principle of two weaknesses, etc.

To put it more succinctly - start again from scratch.

But let us return to the game, where Black had just played 45.. .2xh3!! (D).

mm mm Mm mm w

w

I ■*■

mt±m>.<

Wm^mm mm

After this hefty blow, I imagine Bouaziz was unable to recover and, most importantly, to grasp where he stood. Otherwise he would have preferred to salvage half a point with 46 1T1 3g3+ 47 4>f2 Sxf3+ 48 &xf3 #xfl+ 49 i^, when Black has no more than perpetual check.

In the game there occurred:

46 &xh3?? #hl+ 47 #h2 #xf3+ 48 *xh4 &e7+ 49 g5

And what next?

49...&xg5+!! 0-1

Despite his colossal material plus, White is mated: 50 <A>xg5 f6+ and now 51 ih4 g5# or 51 <4>g6 Wg4#.

We have seen that with 46 "A^ltf?? White made the decisive mistake. But before that, by playing the straightforward 45 c7?, he had let the win slip.

Exercise 53: Indicate a winning continuation for White (in place of 45 c7?).

(For the answer, see page 121.)

Play directed exclusively towards a trap, even a well-masked and ingenious one, cannot be a substitute for a positional continuation, especially if the trap is devised at a cost to our own position.

Alekhine - Levitsky

Match (game 2), St Petersburg 1913

Rather than recover his pawn by 8...£ixd5 9 0-0 JLe6 with a fully acceptable game, Levitsky tried to tempt Alekhine into a faulty move:

8...&h3?

Now if 9 <£)f4?!, defending the pawn and attacking the black bishop, there follows 9...2e8+ 10 *f2 ±f5 (not 10...£>g4+? 11 *g3 £rf2 12 #gl! and White wins), when Black has excellent chances.

But White replied 9 Ag5!, and after 9...±g2 10 Igl Jfc.xf311 #d2! he obtained an excellent attacking position.

Endgame knowledge may enable the defender to give his opponent chances to stumble.

W

m mm,

m mm mm, *

v//////, v//////, y

Averbakh - Bondarevsky

USSRCh, Moscow 1948

Warning - Trap Ahead!

Ill

The position looks desperate for White, but Averbakh foresaw a possible fortress:

58 fifxd3 Wxd3 59 Sxa4+ <4>d5 60 2xh4 *e6?

This allows White to achieve a theoretically drawn position. He must prevent White from planting his rook firmly on h3: 60...#g6+! 61 <&h2 (61 4>fl Wf5) 61...Wf5 (not 61...h5? 62 Sh3) 62 <±>g3 (or 62 <±>g2 Wg5+ 63 4>h3 fgl) 62...#e5+ 63 <4>h3 (63 *f3 #g5 64 Sg4 #f5+ 65 &g3 h5 66 Sh4 Wg5+ is similar) 63...h5 64 *g2 Wg5+ 65 4>h3 *e6 66 2e4+ <&f 5 67 Se3 Wgl 68 2f3+ *e4 69 Sf8 Wg4+ 70 4>h2 #g7 71 2a8 *f 3, winning.

6lSh3

White has achieved the drawing set-up, as Bondarevsky acknowledged 13 moves later.

Kosikov - A. Zubov

Independence Cup, Kiev 2003

1 e4 c5 2 £>f 3 d6 3 i.b5+ £sc6 4 0-0 &d7 5 c3 £sf6 6 lei a6 7 &a4 e5 8 h3

Not the premature 8 d4?! b5 9 Jic2 cxd4 10 cxd4 J.g4.

8...&e7 9 d4 b5 10 i.c2 exd4!? 11 cxd4 £>b4!? 12 £sc3 £>xc2 13 Wxc2 cxd4 14 £sxd4 b4?!

Instead 14...Sc8 looks more natural.

15 £id5 £sxd5 16 exd5 0-0 17 £sc6 &xc6 18 dxc6!?

A critical positional decision. The passed pawn which has appeared on c6 becomes the centre of attention for both sides. It ties down Black's pieces, but then again it may make a tasty meal for them.

In the fight for the initiative, risks must be taken!

18...&f6 19 £f4?!

Failing to grasp the strategic peculiarities of the position, White plays imprecisely. Better is 19 a3!, which on the one hand brings the rook on al into play and on the other hand exposes the weakness of the pawn on a6. In addition, as later events will show, the b2-pawn ought to be kept guarded.

19...£d4!

Threatening to play 20..JT6 or 20...i.c5, after which the 'tasty meal' will most likely be eaten.

20 &e3 AeS 21 a3?!

White should probably have refrained from this move. It was worth considering 21 fiedl Wf6 22 Sd2, with ladl and i.d4 to follow.

21...#b8! (D)

w

At this point I had an almost physical sensation of how the white position was slowly but steadily deteriorating. Thus for example in the event of 22 axb4 Wxb4 23 Se2 2fc8 24 Sa4 Wb5 25 flc4 £.xb2, a pawn is lost.

Exercise 54: What is White to do?

(For the answer, see page 121.)

Most often, the main reason for falling into a trap is inattention to the opponent's designs and weak prophylactic thinking.

W

0. Feuer - O'Kelly

Belgian Ch, Liege 1934

10 ±e3!

White finishes his development, 'sacrificing' a pawn as he does so.

10...2xb2?

This move is extremely naive! Do experienced chess-players give away material just like that?

Elements of Chess Strategy

Ildxe5dxe5?

It still wasn't too late to play 1 l...fxe5 12 £)xe5, returning the extra pawn. But 'on principle' Black was loath to reckon with his opponent's intentions. The consequence was:

12 #xd8+ *xd8 13 0-0-0+!

Giving check, and winning both rook and game.

Another thing conducive to falling into a trap is the fatigue that often sets in at an advanced stage of the game.

W

Kasparov - Karpov

World Ch match (game 11), Moscow 1985

The advantage is with White in view of the greater activity of his pieces. Kasparov attacked the rook on d7:

22 #g4!

The situation on the board presents no special danger to Black. True, after the passive 22...Sdc7?! 23 b4 he could come under positional pressure, but by continuing 22...JSd6!? he would have every reason to count on equalizing.

However, evidently fatigued by the way the struggle had been going, Karpov allowed himself to relax and play the 'natural' move:

22...Scd8??

For this, he was instantly punished:

23 #xd7! Sxd7 24 fie8+ *h7 25 i.e4+1-0 Black resigned in view of 25...g6 26 Sxd7

&a6 27 &xc6 #xc6 28 Sxf7#.

"Chess masters do not build their strategy on traps. Constructing a trap at the expense of stronger moves is an unpromising policy, both from the standpoint of improving our chess and

from that of competitive results (when playing at master level). It is a different matter when the trap is a by-product, or more exactly a parallel product of the strategy we are pursuing; in this case the logic of the struggle gives us a fair practical opportunity, and we ought to make use of it." (Viacheslav Dydyshko).

WW. '-Mb

1 BAB Hi

wm w///,

in

W, WW,

Pa

A WW a WW W% A w,

Bagirov - Kholmov

USSR Ch, Baku 1961

Black's advantage is not in doubt, given his outright control of the only open file - which could have been consolidated once and for all by 23...Weft

Kholmov played:

23...C5

Cheering up, Bagirov replied...

242fel

Exercise 55: With this attempt to reduce the aggressive force of his opponent's pieces by rook exchanges, what has White missed?

(For the answer, see page 122.)

W,

y wm y WW, / WW, y WW, l x/ ww, y Alp WW, y

i k'w3 kw3 "''Ws k i* wm*$m y ww,*

4m%-%3, ww, wk mm mm s

w^ wmA wkip ww,& nn ''ww. / 'ww'"" / 'ww. A

Vogt - Karner

Tallinn 1981

Warning - Trap Ahead!

113

In this rook endgame, the advantage, though slight, is with Black on account of his more active rook position and his superior pawn-structure. Karner underlines this by playing:

38„.h4!

Exercise 56: Choose between the candidate moves 39 &g4 and 39 *e3.

(For the answer, see page 123.)

ill • « iH

■ ■ HAHi

Exercise 57: What has White not seen? (For the answer, see page 123.)

"Quite a distinctive case is that fairly familiar situation which for brevity we may characterize as 'hunting the hunter'. This occurs when both players take delight in heading for the same position, since one of them has 'cast a net' while the other has noticed a hole in it." (Yakov Damsky).

Dziadyk - Kosikov

YSakharov Memorial, Kiev 2004

Black's advantage consists primarily in the isolated position of White's idle knight. As a result Black is playing with an extra piece in the principal war zone.

35...W15!

Improving the position of the queen, stopping the white knight from breaking free via c8 or d7, while also preparing a trap.

36 J.g3?

Dziadyk doesn't sense the danger. 36 h3 is an improvement.

36...#d3! 37 i.xd6 (D)

Falling into the trap.

■ ABA SJk lAB

s>m * wB,p> mi? wb,

/ ^^oy ort/vy v/ffiw 0\vs

In' W "''m^w,

w, iH

Fischer - Shocron

Mar del Plata 1969

Black's position is perfectly acceptable. At this point, after 38...#d7! 39 Sxc4?! #d3, with 40...SW to follow, he would have every chance of going over to the counter-attack. Shocron, however, decided to 'dig a pit' for his opponent - but fell into it himself:

38..:!?d8?39 Sxe6 (D)

A IP k #1*

9 k W, • has

/ '"" '' / -" / ' w -'"" / '

I if

fAlJA;

Hdbl

m mm,

39... 1 tc8

It's too late to back out: 39...fxe6 40 #xe6+ &f 8 41 #xe5 *f7 42 &c6 and 43 i.d5+ gives White a decisive attack.

Elements of Chess Strategy

w

Hi

A H k'W? ill

W WB Ws W> k m flm mm «f*

&■!!

A^

ABU

Bannik-Tal

USSR Ch, Moscow 1957

Provoking Tal into falling for a prepared trap, White played:

25 Sd2? e3 26 fxe3 l r xe3+ 27 Wf 2 £ixe2+

"It's worked! There's no way back for Black now," Bannik must have been thinking.

28 Sxe2 #xcl+ 29 lei

Is the fight all over? On 29...1dl White has 30 #xf6 2xel+ 31 &h2, winning. Wait, though. 'For every cunning goose there is another goose, only more cunning!'

The game continued:

29...i.xc3! 30 Sxcl i.d4

The material advantage is now with Black, and he made sure of converting it into a win.

P. Schmidt - Pirc

Noordwijk 1938

Although Black's position is rather cramped, the accurate continuation 29...Saa7 would enable him to maintain the balance; for example, 30 Sdd6 £)b8! 31 Sb6 Sxb6 32 lxb6 £ld7 33 Uc6 a5.

Black decided to rid himself of all his problems at one stroke, while setting his opponent a trap into the bargain:

29...Sb6?

Now 30 Sc7? presents no danger for Black after 30...Sd6 31 lxd6 <±>xd6, while on 30 Hxd7+ 'A , xd7 31 lxb6? *c7, the impetuous white rook is lost.

In the game, after 30 fixd7+! ixd?, the zwischenzug 31 £te5+! put everything in order - Black discovered to his dismay that the trap had snapped shut, but at his own expense.

W

Robatsch - Makarychev Lublin 1976

Exercise 58: What do you think of 10 £)d4 in this position?

The ability to work out variations accurately is a key indicator of a player's level of mastery. What is most important here is to calculate the variations to the end and not break off half-way.

(For the answer, see page 123.)

As already pointed out, between a combination and a trap there is an undoubted thematic connection. But whereas playing a combination means carefully working out the variations and then making your decision, pulling off a trap requires more than this. You need to be able to hide your intentions up until the right moment, so as not to warn your opponent and let him off the hook. This requires you to master not only purely technical but also psychological methods of chess warfare.

In his time, a great master of this type of play was Mikhail Botvinnik. We shall now examine three examples from his games. The notes in

Warning - Trap Ahead!

115

quotation marks (slightly abridged in places) are his own.

w

I

M^-WyC///,

m mMw, * HI

ABA

* $777?Z <^^ 1>7777V,

Botvinnik - Moiseev

Moscow 1951

White's advantage is obvious. Black's bishop is 'bad' and his passed pawn on c4 is firmly blockaded, which means that White is playing with an extra pawn in the centre and on the kingside. Yet exploiting the advantage is extremely difficult, since Black has constructed something in the nature of a fortress that is not simple to demolish.

'Wow or later, Black could push his h-pawn to h5, closing the position still further. In that case, in order to break through, White would have to play a preliminary f3; in a certain degree this all looked problematic."

31 & g 2 Sh8 32 Shi She8

"Black appears to be quite satisfied with his pawn-structure and makes no attempt to alter it. So much the better!"

33 fid2 He7 34 Se2 See8 3 5 *f 1

"Now White can bring his king unhindered to d2, where it will relieve the knight from blockading the c-pawn and may in some circumstances make it difficult for the black bishop to attack the a4-pawn."

35...Ih8 36 <&el She8 37 *d2 Se7 38 Seel

"Up to the moment of the pawn-break, both rooks need to be stationed on the first rank. Now all that remains is to secure control of the f4-square."

38...See8 39 £>e2 Sh8?! (D)

"Black neglects his last chance to play ...h5. Could he have supposed that White was not dreaming of accomplishing a breakthrough?"

W

40 g4! Shg8 41 fiegl fxg4?!

"This somewhat facilitates his opponent's task; it was better to allow the continuation 42 gxf5 gxf5 (but not 42...'4>xf5? 43 Ag4+) 43 ^g3."

42 &xg4 Sdf8?!

"Quite likely the losing move. It was imperative to activate the bishop with 42....&c8, since with this piece on b7 the opening of the game is catastrophic for Black."

43 &xe6 *xe6 44 £tf4+ (D)

44...*d6

"In the event of 44...if6 45 Sh3, the bishop would remain in its passive position. Then either White would win the g6-pawn (45...Sf7 46 Bf3), or else after 45...g5 the h-file would be opened and a white rook would invade the enemy camp. But in the present case too, the loss of a pawn is unavoidable."

45Sh2

"Defending the f-pawn and threatening 46 Sxg6+."

45...Sf646Shg2i.c8

"Alas, too late..."

47 Sxg6 Sgxg6 48 Sxg6 Hxg6 49 £\xg6 i.f5 50 £>e5 i.bl

Elements of Chess Strategy

"If White had not transferred his king to d2 in good time, Black could have played 50.. ..&c2 here, with an uncertain outcome."

51 &c3 &a2 52 e4! (D)

"This is the simplest way to cope with the enemy bishop's aggressive manoeuvre."

52...dxe4

"If 52....&b3 then 53 exd5, and resignation will be in order after either 53...'&xd5 54 £)d7 or 53...itxa4 54 <£>xc4+. But the pawn ending is also hopeless for Black."

53 £ixc4+ &xc4 54 *xc4 h5 55 d5 *e5 56 d6*xd6 57*d41-0

W

Sliwa - Botvinnik

Budapest 1952

In this position the game was adjourned. White sealed:

41 Iff 2

"Analysis showed that a straight fight to seize the open f-file would merely lead to exchanges of the major pieces.

"The only possibility of avoiding this lies in bringing a rook to f5. Then acceptance of the

sacrifice (exf5) opens up the a8-hl diagonal, while an exchange (a rook capturing on f5) allows Black to obtain an f-pawn and use it as a battering-ram.

"Since this operation needs to be carried out under favourable conditions, Black endeavours to conceal his intentions for the time being, so as to take his opponent unawares."

41...&g7 42 Wei Ih5 43 #e2 We7 44 Ifl

"One rook is already prepared for the jump to f5; Black's other major pieces have to be lined up on the h-file."

45 Iff 2 #g7 46 Sf 1 #h6 47 Iff 2 Ih7 "This rook needs to have the option of switching to the f-file. What now remains is to bring the bishops into position."

48 If 1 i.d7

"White moves up and down with one rook, with the evident aim of bringing home to his opponent the futility of his attempts to win a 'drawn' position. In playing my last move I was counting on this, since the black rook needs to go to f5 at a moment when the white rook is on f2. We shall later see why this is necessary. So..."

49 Iff 2 i.c8 50 If 1 i.e7

"The bishop only clears the rook's path at the last moment." (My emphasis - A.K.) 51 Iff 2 (D)

51...If5!!

"Just at the right moment! If White's rook were on fl, he would have the defensive resource 52 Igf 2. Now all replies lead to defeat.

"If 52 #xg4?, then 52...Ixf2 53 #xc8+ If8 54 We6+ &h8.

"In the event of 52 exf5? ±b7, the threat of 53...#xh2# is decisive.

Warning - Trap Ahead!

117

"Finally, 52 £tel is met by 52...1 r h5 53 exf5 (otherwise Black plays 53...Jtb7 anyway, then ...J,g5 and if appropriate ...JLe3 and ...2hf7; on exf5 he goes back with ...2h7) 53...i.b7 54 £sgf3 gxf3 55 £M3 gxf5, after which Black wins by advancing his centre pawns.

"In the game, Black won even more simply than in this last line. Such was the effect of surprise!"

52 Ifl? Ixfl 53 Wxfl 2f7 54 Wei

"Or 54 2f2 2xf2 55 #xf2 #cl! with irresistible threats."

54...1T 8 55 2e2 Ifl 56 Wd2 Wf3+ 57 2g2 Sdl

"Now White must choose between succumbing in the endgame after a queen exchange or trying for some activity before the curtain comes down."

58 Wh6 Wf6 59 2d2 &f8 60 Wxf8+ Wxf8 61 2xdl Wf 2 62 Qel Wb2 0-1

"Quite an amusing zugzwang has come about -63^g2#c2."

W

Tal - Botvinnik

World Ch match (game 20), Moscow 1961

"The general opinion was that the adjourned position was hopeless for Black. A sleepless night, the second in a row - and in the morning the chief and most obvious threat was rendered harmless by a surprising stalemate possibility." (Botvinnik).

White's main threat is to exchange the pawn on a6 for the one on f 5. This will compel Black to transfer his king to the kingside. Then according to the principle of two weaknesses, the white king penetrating on the queenside should break down Black's defence.

Let us follow what happened on resumption:

89 &a2 2b5 90 a7 2a5+

Forced. The pawn endgame after 90...&b7? 9l2b8+<4>xa7 922xb5cxb593<±>b3islostfor Black.

91 &b3 &b7 92 2f 8 2b5+!

Botvinnik's brilliant discovery. The aim of this seemingly 'pointless' check will only become clear after four more moves.

93 &a4?

The trap has worked! In playing this move, Tal as yet suspected nothing. Otherwise he would have abandoned any instant winning attempt and played 93 &c3. This would still have been an achievement for Black, even if only a psychological one.

"Less active play by White would leave Black with hopes of a draw." (Botvinnik).

93...&xa7 94 2xf5 2bl 95 2f6 (D)

At last White has seen through the trap. What looks like the winning line, 95 2f7+ &a6 96 2c7, would meet with the crafty retort 96...2b4+!!, when White's only choice is between assenting to stalemate and allowing all the pawns to be eliminated.

y '■!*■ V

fc Iff A fffl I § ill |

*m m m

III

After the move played, White's basic plan is impossible; the black rook is able to drive the white king away from the queenside.

95...&b7 96 f5 2al+ 97 &b4 2bl+ 98 &c3 2cl+ 99 &d2 2fl 100 *e3 &c7 101 2f7+ 4>d8 102 &e2 2f 4 103 *d3 2f 3+ 104 &d2 &c8 105 &e2 2f4

And it was only after 16 more moves that White acquiesced to the draw.

The best thing of all is when the trap involves a move that fits in with the plan you are pursuing.

Elements of Chess Strategy

mm ^m

The queen is caught in the net; there is no satisfactory defence against 15 JLb2. Black therefore resigned.

W

Simagin - Kholmov

Uzhgorod 1966

43...£tf6!

Black improves the position of his knight and at the same time sets a trap, into which his opponent falls.

44&xc7??

After the correct 44 J.e3 <£)e4 45 g4, the position would be about equal.

In the game, after...

44...£>g4+! 0-1

...White immediately had to acknowledge defeat.

w

'//////A v ///

'///,*™~ / ///W/,

■ J.

If A & Hi A IP A

11*11. m*m*

• Hi HH A lH HI

\m

w, ww^ tux-,, , ww,,

W ' WW/'"j<' WWb" ' 'wm'

a Ha ■*■&!!

MM W

G. Kuzmin - Kochiev

USSR Ch semi-final, Minsk 1976

32 d5!

"An excellent trap! Even after 32...exd5 33 #xd5 the advantage would remain with White: 33...«xa3 34 «d8+ Af8 35 #xc7, or 33...!te8 34 &d6 Sd7 35 &b5." (Dvoretsky).

Black, however, accepted the challenge:

32...Ic3?

To his surprise there followed:

33 dxe6!! (D)

ww ww, v wW/J>~>W 1m wm fflmrmwm

§A? ww ww, a 'W& a

Hi m lili

Nezhmetdinov - Konstantinov

Rostov-on-Don 1936

11 c3!

This move, which is positionally essential for White (he plans £)c2 and Ae3), sets a trap at the same time.

Il...±xc3+??

It worked!

12 bxc3 Wxc3+ 13 Wd2! Wxal 14 i.bl! 1-0

o ww, m

#1 i

A]

wm M

wm.

A

A

33...Sxd3

If33...1 r xa3then34l r d7!. 34exf7+*h835i.b2!l-0

"It sometimes happens that a trap arises automatically, simply as a result of the painstaking calculation of variations. Weighing up all the possibilities, we choose the line that promises the most chances of victory." (Dvoretsky).

Warning - Trap Ahead!

119

T. Reich - Dolmatov

Passau 1996

"The main sensitive spot in Black's position is his far-advanced passed pawn on e3. White threatens to attack it by moving his knight away from c3. There is also another way of assailing the pawn: 25 *2te6 .&xe6 26 Sxe3. Dolmatov's opponent is sure to have been banking on these threats above all else." (Dvoretsky).

With all this in mind, Dolmatov played:

24...g5!!

This move sets White a trap, but not sensing the danger, he played:

25 £>e6?

Admittedly, Black would also have the advantage after 25 ^h3 g4. However, after 25 £tfe2 or 25 <£ld3, the attack on the e3-pawn would subsequently have given White enough counterplay to level the chances.

In the game there followed:

25...i.xe6 26 Hxe3 £>g4!! 0-1

It emerges that 27 Hxe6 is met by 27...<£lf2+ 28 <4>gl £>xdl, and 27 fxg4 by 27...±xg4 28 fixe7 J.xdl 29 Sxe8 Sxe8, winning for Black in either case. White therefore resigned.

Stopkin - Kosikov

Independence Cup, Kiev 2003

1 £>f 3 £tf 6 2 g3 d5 3 Ag2 c6 4 c4 dxc4 5 Wc2 £>bd7

The thematic continuation is of course 5...b5, but at that moment I was 'not yet awake' (the last-round games were played in the morning), and was afraid of making some tactical slip. For that reason I was psychologically prepared to allow my opponent a slight plus in the opening and transfer the focus of the battle to the middlegame.

6#xc4e5 7 0-0i.d6 8d3!?

An opening strategy that surprised me (although, as we shall see, it isn't devoid of cunning) - White doesn't even attempt to utilize his lead in development, however slight. I had expected 8 d4.

8...0-0 9 £>bd2 #e7 10 b3 (D)

At this point I realized it was time to 'wake up' and anticipate where the game was going, before I stumbled into the abyss. It's obvious how White is going to finish his development: &b2, fiac 1, Sfd 1, #c2, £>c4, with £}xd6 to follow - or, if the dark-squared bishop leaves the a3-f8 diagonal, White plays iLa3.

Exercise 59: What is Black to do? Devise a game plan and the corresponding arrangement of the black pieces.

(For the answer, see page 123.)

To sum up the foregoing chapter, I would like to state this conclusion: A trap is a power-fid strategic weapon, and the correct handling of it can bring a player considerable dividends.

Elements of Chess Strategy

Answers to Exercises for Chapter 4

Exercise 49

w

White's combinative vision fell short:

23 £>c5? 1^5!?

Good enough, but 23...£>xf4! 24 gxf4 #b5 is a more accurate execution of the same idea.

24 Wxb5 £>c3+! 25 bxc3 5xdl+ 26 Sxdl Sxdl+ 27 <£>b2 axb5 28 £>d4?

28 £}xe6 puts up more resistance. 28...bxc3+ 29 &xc3 b4+! 0-1 A knight perishes for good measure. (Now return to page 105.)

Exercise 50

w

28 b4?

White falls into the trap. After 28 £>xe7! Se8 29 b4 axb4 30 axb4 Sc4 31 £kI5, the only question is whether Black can survive: 31....&xd5 (31...fia8 32 c3 Sc6 33 Sal gives White every chance of victory; 31...Sec8 32 c3 .&xd5 33 Sxd5 is the same as the next bracket) 32 2xd5

Sxb4+ (32...Sec8 33 c3!? Sxc3 34 Se2! is pleasant for White) and now Kasparov gave 33 4>cl f5 with equality, but 33 4>c3 Sc4+ 34 4>b3 is more testing.

28...axb4 29 axb4

Probably 29 £}xb4, consenting to peace negotiations, would have been more sensible.

29...Sc4 30 £>b6??

By now White has clearly lost his bearings. Instead, the four-rook ending after 30 £lxe7 S8c7! 31 £ki5 .&xd5 is most unpleasant for White, so 30 c3 was probably the best try.

30...Sxb4+ 31 *a3 Sxc2!!

... nine, ten. Out! All is now plain, and there is nothing more White can do about it.

32 Sxc2 Ib3+ 33 4>a2 Se3+ 0-1

(Now return to page 106.)

Exercise 51

w

In the game, there followed:

27 i.d3?

Evidently under fatigue from the foregoing course of the fight, White makes a mistake which decides the game. The right move is 27 &dl!, after which 27...Sxb7 28 Sxe3 fxe3 29 c5 dxc5 30 bxc5 Sc7 31 c6 £xc6 32 dxc6 Sxc6 33 ^.b3+ 4>h7 34 £)d4 Sd6 35 ^xb5 Sd2 gives approximate equality.

27...Sxb7 28 Sxe3

And now instead of 28...fxe3? 29 c5!, on which White had probably been counting, Black played:

28...bxc4!

"Black renounces the win of the exchange, but on the other hand he stops his opponent from obtaining two connected passed pawns." (Botvinnik).

29Se7

Warning - trap Ahead!

121

29 Jkxc4 f xe3 is also hopeless for White.

29...cxd3 30 £)el Sf7 31 2xf7 *xf7 32 £>xd3 i.b5 33 Sdl i.xd3 34 Sxd3 Sxb4 35 2dlfia4 36 2d2&f637h4

There is no salvation in 37 Se2 2Le4! 38 2xe4 fxe4 39 a4 &e5 40 a5 &x&5, as the black king is in the square of the a-pawn.

37...g6 38 *gl *e5 0-1

(Now return to page 106.)

Exercise 52

It was only after 58...Sg2+ that White realized, to his surprise and dismay, that the e-f ile was a minefield for his king because of a rook check: 59 &el?! Ixg6 60 e7?? Se6+ and 61...<4>xc8.

Therefore, in view of the repetition with 59 &c3 Sg3+ 60 < i'd2, a draw was immediately agreed.

(Now return to page 108.)

Exercise 53

w

One way is 45 Hd8!? Sxh3 (45...Scl 46 2xf8+ <4?xf8 47 #c5+ and 48 flxcl) 46 <£xh3 #hl+ 47 Wh2 Wxf3+ 48 &xh4 1T6+ 49 g5

Wxd8 and now White has a choice of moves that retain a decisive plus, of which 50 Wf4 is the most convincing. However, there are other approaches, most notably 45 g5!, which neutralizes Black's main idea, as after 45...Sxh3 46 ixhS, White's king has the g4-square at its disposal.

(Now return to page 110.)

Exercise 54

w

m HI « in nn y mm

aba

Wk W>

tassag m^ m& mm Tl fH O. £Sa

Honestly admitting to myself that my position could well be inferior, I started looking for a way out of the current situation. And I discovered a solution.

The game continued:

22 axb4

We should note that a number of other moves are possible here, such as 22 c7, when White may be able to play for an advantage.

22...#xb4

Attacking the b2-pawn, so a forced move follows:

23Se2

And further:

23...2f c8 24 Sa4 Wb5 25 2c4! (D)

Elements of Chess Strategy

'Wait,' you may be saying in astonishment. 'Didn't we just look at this line and reject it?'

Did we look at it? Yes! Did we reject it? No!

When earlier analysing the position that we now have before us, I had managed to unearth some hidden resources, imperceptible at first sight but associated with the defects of Black's game.

When the position arose, Zubov almost instantly reached for the bishop on e5 to deliver his blow. But something stopped him. He took his hand away and started thinking, probably wondering why things were proving so easy for him. Had I really blundered? Or perhaps I had just resigned myself to the loss of a pawn?

Not wishing to disturb him, or rather worrying that my agitation might 'scare him off', I walked away from the board and awaited my fate from a distance. Seven or eight minutes passed before my opponent made his move. Returning quickly to the board, I discovered with amazement, delight and suspicion (could I have missed something?) that he had played:

25...i.xb2??

We have already come across cases where the evaluation of the position abruptly changes in favour of one side or the other. And we said that even a transformation for the better can have an adverse effect if the player loses his objectivity.

So it is in the present situation - Black has decided that he virtually has a won game already. But this is wrong. White's preceding inaccuracies have merely enabled Black to obtain a more or less tenable game, no more than that.

After 25...Sab8 (25...a5 26 b3) 26 J.a7 Sa8 27 JLe3, the game could have ended in a draw by repetition (though White is not obliged to go in for this). At the present moment Black has allowed his effort to slacken, and as a result his sense of danger is dulled.

The unexpected continuation is lethal:

26 Sh4!

Psychologically, the reason why this move was unexpected was that, in a position where time is critical, the white rook has permitted itself the 'luxury' of three moves in a row, al -a4-c4-h4, two of which, moreover, were along the fourth rank.

The upshot is that 26 Sh4! proves to be a crafty dual attack - the bishop on b2 and the

pawn on h7 are en prise. Loss of either of these units is tantamount to defeat.

At this point, I should apologize for the dubious signs awarded to White's earlier play, such as his 19th and 21st moves. Objectively, these moves do not deserve such harsh criticism, but this was necessary to place the reader in a pessimistic state of mind, and so force you to try to assess the position objectively in spite of an unjustly negative prognosis.

Black chose:

26...i.e5 (D)

He would lose at once with 26...J.f6 27 #xh7+4>f8 28.&c5!.

W

27 Wxh7+ *f 8 28 lei Wxc6

The desperado pawn has met its end after all, but at what a cost to the opponent! The move played loses by force, but it is hard to suggest anything better.

29 Ag5 f6 30 &h6 gxh.6 31 Sg4 Wd5 32 fig7 1-0

(Now return to page 111.)

Exercise 55

n i

m

Hi

m iHH HA

H# HP S? HIP HP

There followed:

Warning - trap Ahead!

123

24...flxel+ 25 Sxel XXe2! 0-1

Faced with loss of material, White could only resign at once.

(Now return to page 112.)

Exercise 56

w

The correct choice was 39 i'eS followed by Sb3, attacking the pawn on b5 and retaining chances of equalizing.

In the game White played 39 ^g4?, and after 39...e5 40 &xh4 (40 <&f5 is answered by 40.. .Sxd4 41 lxd4 exd4 42 4f 4 f5 and the king and pawn ending is lost for White) 40...5Sxd4+ 41 2xd4 exd4 42 &g4 d3 43 4f3 d4! 0-1 he had to resign in view of the inescapable zug-zwang.

(Now return to page 113.)

Exercise 57

In the game, there followed: 37...£te2+ 38 <S?hl &c3! 0-1

Quite unexpectedly, the white queen turns out to be snared and perishes. White therefore immediately resigned.

(Now return to page 113.)

Exercise 58

w

Makarychev didn't believe his opponent's pawn sacrifice, and accepted it. The continuation was:

10 £sd4?! &xc4! 11 f4?

It wasn't too late to back out by playing 11 ±xc4 £>xc4 12 £k±>5 a6 13 #xc4 axb5 14 #xb5, though even then Black's position is preferable.

Il...^.xe2 12 fxe5 £xfl 13 exf6 Wxf6 14 £ie4 Well 15 *xfl ^.xd4 16 exd4 Sfe8 0-1

(Now return to page 114.)

Exercise 59

A line that might suggest itself is 10...Se8, followed by bringing the knight from d7 to f8. But what then? The queen's bishop has to be developed. Where to? To g4? But after that, what is Black to do with the knight on f8? In any case, White's strategic threat - #c2 and <£)c4, as already indicated - is looking much more dangerous. Black may of course play 10...Se8 and see what happens: if 11 #c2 then ll...£lb6, provisionally neutralizing White's threat (12 <Sic4 *Sixc4). But a strong player

Elements of Chess Strategy

should anticipate events, not submit to them! From the strategic viewpoint, it is becoming clear that Black's chief problem at this stage is his backwardness in development, associated above all with his undeveloped light-squared bishop.

The game continued: 10...£>b6 11 #c2 £g4 12 &b2 (D) Now have a careful think about what move you would play as Black.

There followed: 12...£>fd7!

It is only with this continuation that Black's piece arrangement and his plan of action become comprehensible. In the fight for the initiative, after appropriate preparation, you need to make contact with the opponent, and this should be done first of all by the pawns!

With this move, Black intends ...f5 and then ...fiae8 (we now see why 10...Se8, 'just to see what happens', would have been a planless move) and possibly ...WfT-hS. You get the feeling that it will soon be time to ask who actually stands better. When play is conducted according to plan, the devil himself holds no terrors!

13 £>c4 £>xc4 14 #xc4

If 14bxc4,thenl4...f5!.

14...i.e6 15 #cl?!

This move is directed against the exchange of dark-squared bishops (15 #c2 ^.a3), but it doesn't look altogether natural.

15...a5!?

Now why not try to exploit our chances on the queenside too?

16 £>d2 (D)

At this juncture, not without pleasure (by now I very much liked the position), I was working

Aflfe.

i mm. in

AHA

W»2 WW, WW, I

A

A>A

Ail!

#p» w.y

out some variations that could subsequently arise, and unexpectedly discovered an amusing trap over the distant horizon.

Of course, my opponent was not obliged to fall for it. It was a fair distance ahead, and on the way to it there were plenty of chances to deviate - but no matter. The main thing was that the trap looked perfectly natural and was consistent with Black's general plan.

So the game continued:

16...i.g4! 17 Sel a4 18 £«4

If White had played 18 <2k4 here, the trap could no longer have worked. Well, never mind. I would then have had to look for other ways of fighting for the initiative.

18...£b4!

It was essential to make this move with tempo, which was the point of inducing 17 Bel with 16...^.g4!.

19 &c3 axb3 20 axb3 &xc3 21 #xc3

About five minutes after making this move, White offered a draw (which isn't strictly correct practice in the opponent's thinking time), not even imagining that for quite a while I had been calling the tune. After double-checking that there were no 'holes' in the trap I was setting, I played:

21...Sxal

Full of 'righteous indignation', Stopkin instantly replied:

22 Ixal (D)

All his body language said that rejecting the draw was, to say the least, a rash decision on my part.

White should have played 22 Wxal instead, although even then, after 22...#b4 23 #c3 #xc3 24 £)xc3 Sa8, Black's advantage would be obvious in view of his control of the only open file.

Warning - trap Ahead!

125

Do you see what White has overlooked?

Believe it or not, I had analysed this very position when calculating the variations at move 16. Of course 22...JLxe2? (the trap White has been preparing) would be bad here in view of 23 f3! f5 24 <&f2 #c5? (24...f4 25 g4 e4 is necessary, but Black is fighting for equality rather than an advantage) 25 #d2, and the bishop perishes.

But unexpectedly for Stopkin, there followed:

22...f5!

Now after 23 £id2, Black can take the pawn: 23...&xe2 24 f3? #c5+ (or 24...Wd6!?).

However, White composed himself and quickly replied:

23 Wc4+?

And yet this is just the moment when he ought not to have rushed. After one oversight, further blunders may ensue - which is just what happens in this game. Fortunately, my opponent wasn't familiar with my theory of 'serial errors'.

The least of the various evils was 23 f3. Then after 23...fxe4 (23...JLh5 is also good) 24 fxg4 exd3 25 exd3 (25 #xd3 #c5+ 26 *hl <&f6) 25...1 f c5+ 26 #xc5 £>xc5, White would retain some saving chances.

23...*h8

White realized only now that on the planned reply 24 <2}c3, his queen would be caught by 2A...£hb6\. He had to resign himself to losing a pawn:

24 £>d2 &xe2 25 Sel &h5 26 d4?! Although White's position is hopeless and

'anything goes', he should nonetheless have refrained from this impulsive move.

26...Wd6! 27 £>f 3 &xf3 28 &xf3 e4

I could have picked up a second pawn by 28...#xd4 29 #xd4 exd4 30 He7 Id8, but with a material plus and a position that was definitely won, I wanted to play a little more safely - especially since after 30 JSdl (instead of 30 Se7) some distinct technical difficulties could arise for Black.

29 iL g 2 (D)

mm ww, mm »

i»B r ■ *

W>, WB%w%,

ifiii I

\ A m A m: A m:"'

Some elementary prophylactic thinking suggests that White's plans (especially considering his present emotional state) involve undermining the e4-pawn by f3.

This continuation didn't frighten me, far from it -1 wanted this pawn-break, which weakens White's king position, to be carried out.

For that reason, instead of 29.. .'Stf 6 (fortifying the e4-point), I played an 'inoffensive' move:

29...1d8 30 f3?! £)f6 31 fxe4 fxe4

Now (as at move 24), White perceived the truth too late: the intended 32 ^.xe4 is not met by 32...#xd4+ 33 #xd4 fixd4 34 J.g2 with drawing chances, but by 32...Be8! 33 #d3 tfe7, winning a piece.

So we see that a trap can be employed successfully in a won position too, provided of course that it fits in with the plan we are pursuing.

The remaining moves of the game were:

32 Hdl h6!? 33 Wf7 #b4 34 &h3

This attempt to work up some activity at any cost merely hastens the end.

34...1 r c3 35 Wc7 #e3+ 36 <&fl lf8 0-1

(Now return to page 119.)

5 Opposite Bishops in the Middlegame

Nothing is simpler than the game of chess. All you have to learn is how to solve the problem of the three 'W's' correctly: Which piece to place on Which square, and When.

When there are no pieces on the board other than opposite-coloured bishops and pawns, the weaker side should as a rule defend passively, seeking to construct a fortress on the colour squares that the enemy bishop cannot attack.

In the middlegame, in the majority of cases, the presence of opposite bishops makes the defender's task harder. This is because he lacks the chance to eliminate or exchange his opponent's bishop, which participates actively - together with other pieces - in the attack on the squares opposite to the defending bishop's colour.

In a middlegame with opposite bishops it is imperative to seize the initiative at almost any cost and compel your opponent to go over to defence.

It is important to observe that the advantage in an opposite-bishop middlegame is of a long-term static character, since the weaker side (as we have said) doesn't have the chance to exchange bishops. This is why even a stubborn defence will often prove susceptible to inaccuracies and errors.

Bishop Power

In a middlegame with opposite-coloured bishops, the chief factor determining the assessment of the position is the activity of the bishops. In most cases the advantage belongs to the player whose bishop is stronger.

In support of this, let us examine some examples of a standard type of position with a backward pawn.

Kasparov - Karpov

World Ch match (game 6), New York/Lyons 1990

Exercise 60: Choose between the candidate moves 36...f6 and 36...*g8. (For the answer, see page 149.)

W

■ ■ ■!■

« mm m m

A:

A:

Razuvaev - Sigurjonsson

Cienfuegos 1975

This position can be assessed as strategically won for White because, thanks to the opposite bishops, he has the more active pieces and practically an extra pawn.

28 *g2 Sb8 29 h5! Ag5 30 Wd3 Ib6

Opposite bishops in the Middlegame

127

30....&e7 is a more stubborn defence, although even then, after 31 #a6, White will gradually achieve the same set-up as in the game.

31 Sa5 fib8 32 Ia6 i.e7 33 W&S i.f8 34 Ia4Wd7 35Sa5 1 tb7(DJ

This loses, but 35...#c7 36 Sa6! Wd7 37 #a5 would have the same consequences.

W

whether the problem of activating the bishop can be solved.

36 Wxb7 Ixb7 37 i.d5 Sc7 38 Ib5 Sxc2 39 Sxb4 Ic7 40 Ib8 Ia7 41 b4 1-0

True, in positions of this kind the stronger side doesn't always achieve the win so easily.

In this game, in contrast to the two preceding positions, Black was able to draw quickly and easily.

Kapengut - Timoshchenko

USSR Ch First League, Ashkhabad 1978

Exercise 61: What helped him to do this? (For the answer, see page 149.)

In the 'middlegame with opposite bishops' category there are naturally many other positions where the fate of the game depends on

ill

m mm kW&'W ill

WB HP A HP A HP A

t v , m. p MX H *

Spassky - Simagin

USSR Ch, Moscow 1961

It may look as if White's position is quite acceptable: the protected passed pawn on d5 gives his light-squared bishop a secure post. This might indeed be the case, were it not for the main strategic factor in the position - opposite bishops in the middlegame. In fact, White's 'beautiful' bishop is completely useless. For this reason, once Black has solved the problem of activating his own bishop, the outcome of the game is a foregone conclusion.

36...i.d8!

Planning ....&c7 and ...cxb4.

37 bxc5 bxc5 38 Ibl?

A very superficial decision, based on a weak prognosis of how the game will go. The white rook may be on the only open file, but on the queenside there is nothing to do - everything has to be decided on the kingside.

38...i.c7 39 i.a4 e4! 40 dxe4 fxe4 41 Ixf 7+ Sxf7 42 i.dl

Simagin gives the variation 42 #xe4 #xg3 43 Wg2 We3 ! 44 Sgl <4>h8 (threatening 45 ...If 2) 45 Sfl flxf 1+ 46 #xfl *g7 47 Ad7 #d2! 48 Wgl #e2 and Black wins.

42...e3

The threat is 43...If2.

43 &f3 h4! 44 If 1

If 44 g4 or 44 gxh4, then 44...Sxf3.

44...hxg345 We2 We5 46 &g2 ±a5 47 Ibl *h6?!

The immediate 47...Ixf3! is more incisive, as Black wins after 48 *xf3 #f5+ or 48 #xf3 e2.

Elements of Chess Strategy

48 Sb3?!

White should try 48 d6, though his chances are hardly attractive, of course.

48...i.d2 49 Sb6 2xf3 50 Se6

If 50 *xf3 then 50...Wh5+, while 50 #xf3 loses to 50...e2 51 Wf8+ <S?g5 52 #d8+ &h5.

SO...!^ 51 dxe6Sf2+ 52 &xg3

Alternatively, 52 #xf2 gxf2 and now 53 <&f 1 <4>g7 or 53 e7 e2.

52...Sxe2 53 e7 fig2+! 54 *xg2 e2 55 e8W elW 56 #f8+ *h5 57 Wxc5+ JLgS 0-1

more enduring problems) 20...bxc4 21 bxc4 #xc4 22 i.xd6 #xa2 23 #c5 #d5 24 #a7! #xd6 25 Sbl would suit White perfectly.

20 c4

Not 20 #xa6?? 2a8.

20...bxc4 21 bxc4 #xc4 22 d5! i.xd5

22...cxd5 is met by 23 Scl.

23 Ie7+ *c8 24 i.xd6 Sd7 25 Wb2 flxe7 26 #b8+ 1-0

On 26...*d7 White plays 27 #c7+ &e6 28 #xe7+ *f5 29 #e5+ *g6 30 #xh8.

W

W kW W k Hi

■ • WWW

■

A

^ *,m^%3.^j*»w

Yudasin - Sagalchik

Kemerovo 1995

If Black's pawn were on c7 instead of c6, his chances would be no worse.

16 Wb4!

The difference in activity between the bishops already begins to tell. Now on 16...#b5 White would have the pleasant choice between going into an ending with an extra pawn (17 &xd6 #xb4 18 ±xb4, when 18...Sxd4?? is impossible due to 19 .&c3), and keeping the queens onwithl7#a3!?.

16..J*d5 17 b3 h5

White could answer 17...f5 with 18 f4, leaving the black bishop deprived of its support. An even stronger answer would be 18 c4! #xd4 19 HadlWc5 20Wd2

18 Sadl! b5

After 18...C5 19 dxc5 #xc5 20 #d2 White's advantage is near-decisive.

19 #a3 *c7

The variation 19...h4 20 c4! (20 #xa6+!? forces 20... < 4>d7, when 21 c4 bxc4 22 bxc4 #xc4 23 #37+ <4>e8 24 d5 may give White no more than a draw, but 21 JLe5!? poses Black

Of course, the terms 'good bishop' and 'bad bishop' are applicable to opposite-bishop mid-dlegames just as they are to other positions. Here, it is true, these concepts are endowed with a different sense.

"The main thing for the bishop is its prospect of participating in an attack. This factor often has a decisive bearing on the evaluation of the position." (Dvoretsky).

Prasad - Sax

Interzonal tournament, Subotica 1987

The difference in activity between the bishops is perceptible. This indeed decides the outcome.

25...f5! 26 Se2 Iac8!

Bringing his last reserves into play and preventing c5.

27 Sfl?!

White displays a weak sense of danger. His poor anticipation of events means that he loses control over them. He had to resolve on the radical continuation 27 g4.

27...Sf 8 28 #h6 lce8 29 Ifel #c7 30 #h3 S*?g7 31 i.bl #c5! 32 Wf3 #d4 33 Wd3 Wh4 34 g3 #h5 35 c5

Opposite bishops in the Middlegame

129

White's queenside initiative clearly lags behind; Black has already achieved too much on the kingside.

35...f4! 36 gxf4 Sxf4 37 Sg2 Sh4 38 2ee2 Axh2! 39 2xh2 lxe2 0-1

w

Kasparov - H. Olafsson

Dubai Olympiad 1986

From the standpoint of 'classical' criteria, Black's bishop in this position cannot be called 'bad'. Yet in the context of the opposite-bishop middlegame it is nothing but an idler. Furthermore, Black's pieces have completely lost their coordination, while they are faced with the maximum activity of all their white counterparts.

26 Wb&. Wei 27 lc6 Ae5 28 i.f3 Sb8 29 Wa5!

Attacking the a6-pawn.

29...i.c7 30 #c3

The coordination of Black's pieces is not improving!

30...Ib6 31 h4! g6 32 2c5 Ib8 33 h5 g5 34 Ic6 (D)

Black wasn't able to solve his problems with 34...Sb6 in view of the total paralysis of the rook on a7.

35 *g2 b4 36 #e5 Sc7 37 Sdd6 Bxc6 38 Sxc6l'd8 39i.g4Sb7

With 39...#d5+ 40 #xd5 exd5 41 lxh6 Black loses material without solving any of his problems.

40 Axc6 fxe6 41 #xe6+ 1-0

W

MM

HI

iABA

' / "' """'"mi ''<wz,

m,. iH

IA

34...&b6

Kamsky - Kasparov

Manila Olympiad 1992

Black's advantage is decisive on account of his more active bishop and the possibility of launching a mating attack against White's weakened king position. Add to this the fact that White's bishop cannot help in the defence of the dark squares, and Kasparov's attack is bound to succeed.

3lWe2

Or 31 b3 flc8 32 <4>c2 2xc4+ 33 bxc4 flb2+ and the attack breaks through.

31...f a7 32 Icl la8 33 b3

Now the dark squares in White's camp become hopelessly weak, but there was already no defence.

33...i.f4 34 *c2 He7 35 Wd3 WC5 36 Ibl He3 37 #d4 Ia2+ 38 *dl

Or 38 Sb2 Sxb2+ 39 Wxb2 £e5 40 Wa2 Sc3+.

38...Sxf3

An even stronger line is 38...fie8 39 Sd3 #b4 40 Wc3 #xc3 41 Ixc3 fid2+ 42 <4>cl Bel#, but this makes no difference to the result of the game.

39 #xf4 Ixf4 40 lxa2 Wgl+ 41 £>c2 #xh2+ 0-1

Elements of Chess Strategy

The Initiative

"In a middlegame with opposite bishops, it is most important to seize the initiative at any cost and compel the opponent to defend." (Dvor-etsky).

W

W

Yusupov - A. Sokolov

Candidates match (game 4), Riga 1986

With opposite bishops and Black's king exposed, White must seek to take the initiative immediately, while Black needs to evacuate his king or else secure a fair share of the initiative himself. As 20 If 3 £d4 21 ±bl Hc7 22 Sf e 1 + ■if 8 promises White no advantage, he sharpens the play, and an interesting battle ensues:

20 b4!? cxb4

The variation 20...Wxdl?! 21 fifxdl c4 22 b5 0-0 23 Sd7 is wholly to White's liking.

21 Sxc8+ #xc8 22 #d6 i.e7 23 #e5 #c3! 24 WbS+ &d8 25 i.c6+

On 25 Idl Black has 25...0-0!.

25...&e7!

Not 25...Wxc6? 26 We5+.

26 Idl *f6! 27 ±a4

If27fixd8then27...Wcl+.

27...&g7! 28 #xa7

Or 28 flxd8 Wel+ 29 *g2 We4+ 30 f3 We2+ 31 &h3 Wfl+ and now 32 &h4 Wc4+ repeats because White must avoid 33 g4? Sxd8

34 Wxd8 Wf4!. Note that after 32 <±>g4? h5+!, Black has all the winning chances.

28...#f6 29 #d4 ±e7 30 #xf6+ *xf6 31 Sd7 Sd8 32 Hb7 h5 33 h4 Sd2 34 i.b3 Se2

35 *fl Se5 36 Sc7 Sc5 37 Sd7 Se5 38 &d5 *g7 39 J.b3 *f8 40 Hb7 Se4 41 Sc7 V2-V2

AHA

m mm* mm

Boleslavsky - Sterner

Sweden - USSR match, Stockholm 1954

The considerable difference in the activity of the pieces, especially the opposite bishops, means that White's position is definitely preferable. The only question is whether his advantage is sufficient to win.

38 Idl i.c7 39 Wd7 Sf 8 40 e5 #b6?

In time-trouble, on the last move before the control, Black commits what the subsequent events will show to be a very significant error, leading to the loss of a most important tempo. After the correct 40...Wb8! 41 f4 £a5, followed by bringing the bishop via c3 to d4, Black should not lose.

41 f4 Wb8 42 h4!

To quote Boleslavsky: "With the participation of this modest pawn, the attack on the king becomes irresistible."

42...i.a5

Or 42...g6 43 e6 fxe6 44 f5! Sd8 (44...gxf5 45 Axe6+ *h8 46 Axf5 Bxf5 47 #xf5) 45 #xe6+ &g7 46 f6+ <4>h8 (46...&h6 47 Sxd8) 47 Sf 1!? (or 47 Sd7!) 47... Wb2 48 We7 #d4+ 49 If2 #al+ 50 JLfl Sg8 51 f7.

43h5&c3?!

The most stubborn line is 43...^4 44 e6, and now:

a) 44...fxe6 45 #xe6+ *h8 46 Wei Sb8 (46...Wb8 47 h6 i.c3 48 Sd7 i.d4+ 49 Sxd4)

47 h6 #c3 48 Sd7 Sbl+ (48...Wcl+ 49 ±fl) 49 *h2 Shi + 50 <±>xhl Wc\+ 51 *>h2 l r xf4+ 52 *gl #01-1-53 Afl and White wins.

b) 44...1 r xc4 45 e7 We6 46 exf8#+ <S?xf8 47 #a7! (better than 47 #xe6) 47...i.b6 (47...1 r b6

48 #a8+ 4>e7 49 Sal!) 48 #b8+ <4e7 49 Sbl Ad8 50 #a7+ and again White wins.

44 Sd6! #bl+

Opposite bishops in the Middlegame

131

"Or 44...h6 45 W5, with threats of 46 J.d3 or 46 Sxh6."

45 &h2 h6 46 #xf 7+! Sxf 7 47 fid8+ &h7 48 &xf7 1-0

This is bound to remind us that some people call chess 'a tragedy of one tempo'.

w

HI \

AH H #1A|I \

II

AHA

A!

Karpov - Tal

Bugojno 1980

Although the queens are no longer on the board, there are still plenty of pieces left, and the main point is that in these middlegame conditions, the presence of opposite bishops makes the black king's position most uncomfortable.

22 f 3 £lf 6 23 &d6+ *b6 24 c4! Sac8

It was worth considering 24...Sad8, aiming subsequently to reduce White's attacking potential by exchanges.

25 cxb5 axb5 26 a4! ficd8 27 axb5 Sd7 28 Sd4! Sed8 29 Sadl lc8

After 29...g5? 30 &e7! Sxd4 31 £xd8+ 4>c5 32 lxd4 4>xd4 33 &xf 6+, White wins.

30&e5fie7

The endgame after 30...2xd4 31 .&xd4+ 4>xb5 32 ±xf6 gxf6 33 2d7 is hopeless for Black.

31 Sd6+ *xb5 32 fibl+ *c4

Other moves also lose: 32...4>a5 33 Sd2 Sc4 34 2a2+ Ha4 35 &c3+ or 32...&c5 33 £id3+ &c4 34 Sb4#.

33 Id4+ &c5

Or 33...4>c3 34 Sd3+ 4>c2 35 Ib2+ *cl 36 £ie2#.

34 £)d3+ 1-0

The presence of major pieces on the board favours the stronger side.

W

III m mmm

m m iiiiiii

B2 ~ 0MT/,

ti'^mm *mtk ^'wz, /A

§1 A HP 6 Iff i^

A

Vikulov - Dvoretsky

Moscow 1971

Black's advantage lies in his superior pawn-structure and chances to seize the open file.

19 f 3 &b7 20 #c2 c5 21 ±c3 2d7 22 a4?!

With opposite bishops in the middlegame, it is most effective to play on the side of the board where the kings reside.

A better option is therefore 22 Sfdl Sad8 23 J2xd7 Wxd7, although in that case too Black's advantage is quite noticeable.

22...fiad8 23 a5 #g5 24 lael

Not 24 f4? fid2.

24...2d3 25 axb6 axb6 26 Wb2

26 JLd4? is strongly met by 26...S8xd4 27 exd4 Sd2.

26...i.a8 26...S8d7! is better.

27 h3 h5 28 #c2 &b7 29 Se2 S8d7 30 &hl Or 30 #b2 i.a6.

30...&a6 31 #a4

31 JLb2 can be answered with the simple 31...Ixe3.

31...2xc3 32 #xa6

Or 32 #xd7 i.xc4.

32...#d833t r al

A good answer to 33 4>h2 is 33...h4 followed by34...Idlor34...Id2.

33...Ixc4 34 2a2 #g5 35 2a8+ *h7 36 #bl+ %6 37 g4

If 37 #xb6, then 37...1c2 38 Sgl Idl.

37...hxg4 38 hxg4?!

Exchanging queens was more stubborn.

38...Bc2 39 *gl 2dd2 0-1

(Notes based on comments by Dvoretsky.)

In middlegame positions with opposite bishops, you must endeavour to seize the initiative

Elements of Chess Strategy

at all costs. Possession of the initiative in such positions is a serious asset. Hence the initiative is worth more than pawns!

W

Beliavsky - Cebalo

Slovenian Team Ch, Bled 1998

28...<i>xe6 29 Bd4 *e7 30 Sxc4 Wbl 31 IfclId7 32Hc81-0

W

m mm

wta. '///.

A

fe i'" / 'm£"" / 'm.^m

&«""!§

bat *

m i

Ghinda - Kindermann

Thessaloniki Olympiad 1984

White's advantage is obvious. But in order to develop an initiative, you have to attack your opponent's weaknesses. Where are they?

The first one is the pawn on d6.

24 Sd3 #b6

Perhaps 24...Sd8 first is better.

25 W&2 Id8 26 b4!

The initiative has to be paid for!

26...1xc4

Declining the pawn sacrifice also turns out badly: 26...fic6 27 c5 #b8 28 W&2+ *f8 29 We6 with a very strong attack.

27 Wa2 #c7 (D)

Black also loses with 27...#xb4 28 i.e2! d5 29 Bxd5.

W

Now on 28 Bd4? he was intending 28...d5. 28 Ae6+!!

But here is the second weakness, the second object of attack! It is the black king.

The evaluation of the position seems unclear at first, until you hit on the idea of a pawn sacrifice bringing the light-squared bishop to life.

37 d6!? 2xd6?!

Not 37...#xd6?? 38 #b7 g6 39 h6. Black's most resilient reply is 37...Bb8, simply preventing #b7 and challenging White to find another productive course of action.

38 #b7 e4

Or 38...#a7 39 Hxg7.

39 Bgxe4 #xh5

On 39...ii6? White has 40 1T7! (not 40 Se8? Bdl+!) 40...Sdd8 41 2e8, winning; if 39...Sdd8 then 40 h6.

40 *e7 Bdd8 41 Bh4

But not 41 Sxd4? Sde8 42 Bf4 Sg8!. 41...1T5

White wins after 41...Wc5? 42 Behl Bfl + 43 <4?a2 or 41...Wg6? 42 Sxd4 Bde8 43 #h4.

42 Behl Af6

42...flfe8? 43 Sxd4 or 42...Sde8? 43 Sxh7+ #xh7 44 Bxh7+ <4>xh7 45 #h4+ and #xd4.

43 Bxh7+ Wxhl 44 Bxh7+ 4>xh7 45 Wc5! (D)

After the exchange of two rooks for the queen, White's attack still continues.

In the middlegame (and a game still has strong middlegame characteristics if the queen has a minor piece on its side and there are two rooks and a minor piece opposing it), the queen nearly always proves stronger than two rooks, as it is more mobile.

Opposite bishops in the Middlegame

133

A

m %Bz

1 ■ fc

%? «?%%?

!A!

45...g6 46 Wxa5 Id4 47 #c7+ *h6 48 &a2 g5 49 &c4! g4 50 i.d3 &g7 51 #e7! Sf6 52 We3+

White could also play 52 I'd *g5 53 #e5+.

52...1df4 53 a5 Sf 8 54 We6+ fi8f6 55 Wg8 mi 56 a6 *g5 57 Wd8+ *h5 58 Wa5+ 1-0

w

Simagin - Chistiakov

Moscow 1946

"The position is so sharp that the black pawn is a triviality, and it isn't worth wasting time capturing it." (Vladimir Simagin).

261T2! c3!

The initiative is more important than a pawn!

27 &xc3 Ixa4 Attacking the f4-pawn.

28 #h4! (D) Intending 1T6+ or "4^3.

In chaotic situations your calculations should be conducted 'not in depth but in breadth'. That is, it is most important to check for all candidate moves and the likely responses to them, as the chance of missing a devastating blow is high in a wild position rife with paradoxical ideas and 'random' tactics. If you are sure you have

identified the truly critical lines, then by all means analyse them more deeply. And once you have done this, check if you have uncovered any useful ideas or tactical themes that may affect the evaluation of earlier branches of your tree of analysis or suggest completely new candidate moves.

m

Hall

AlIAi

m m

'///, y/?///,

li

Al

Ai

lAI

Exercise 62: What would you play for Black in this position?

(For the answer, see page 150.)

What is completely unacceptable is a case where we ourselves - in pursuit of material gains - offer our opponent the chance to seize the initiative in an opposite-bishop middlegame.

Klovans - Kosikov

Tbilisi 1974

1 e4 e6 2 d4 d5 3 £>c3 i.b4 4 e5 c5 5 a3 i.xc3+ 6 bxc3 £>e7 7 £tf 3 #c7 8 a4 £>bc6 9 &e2 cxd4 10 cxd4 £>b4 11 0-0 #xc2 12 Wei (D)

An opening line that made its first tournament appearance in the present game. And, as

Elements of Chess Strategy

so often, it was a case of 'if at first you don't succeed...'

Black's strategy may seem utterly anti-positional, a typical case of pawn-grabbing. The result of the game, in which Black is completely crushed, may look only too natural.

Yet I am firmly convinced that this is merely a one-sided, superficial view. The position is of the closed type, which means that a slight backwardness in development is not so significant. In return for it, Black's formation is very solid. And indeed the extra pawn, which can be used to bail Black out should the need arise, is not to be scorned.

This was in fact confirmed two years later, in a game that took place - as if specially ordered - between the same players, in the first round of the USSR Championship elimination tournament at Beltsy 1976. This time, from the diagram position, Black played correctly. With 12...a5! 13 ±a3 ±d7 14 ±dl lfc7 15 &xb4 axb416 1 B'xb41 immediately returned the pawn, thereby solving my basic opening problems. Having succeeded in equalizing the chances, I went on to achieve victory after a tense positional struggle.

In our first game it emerged that the opening novelty was still in a 'raw' state, and I suffered a defeat which, though painful, was highly instructive.

12...^d3?

I am now convinced that this move loses the game. At the time I felt that it was possible to suffer for a while in return for the pawn. I didn't reflect that I was entering a middlegame with opposite bishops, in which passivity is not tolerated...

13 &xd3 f xd3 14 &a3 £lc6 15 Wcl!

What can I say when there is nothing to be said? The overwhelming difference in the activity of the bishops, the advantage in space, the chronic 'incurable' malady of the black king, the supreme activity of the white pieces as against the passive uncoordinated state of their black counterparts - all this has cost White just one pawn. Of course it would still be possible to debate the strength of some of Black's moves in the remainder of the game. But these are vain arguments -the upshot is clear. I shall therefore give the fairly brief conclusion of the game without adding any notes.

15...f6 16 Sel *f7 17 exf6 gxf6 18 ff4 h6

19 3e3 1^7 20 £>e5+ £>xe5 21 dxe5 f5 22 Wh4 &e8 23 H5 lg8 24 ig3 1-0

Notably, Black has an extra pawn even in the final position. Only it was no use to him in the game.

Attacking the King

An attack on the opponent's king is the ideal form that the initiative can take.

W

Aronian - Rozentalis

FIDE Knockout, Las Vegas 1999

Exercise 63: What would you play in White's place?

(For the answer, see page 150.)

w

II

WM,±*.W,

a a

i

'MM

AS

Villamayor - Wang Lei

Quezon City 2000

Exercise 64: What would you play here for White?

(For the answer, see page 151.)

Opposite bishops in the Middlegame

135

"The correct strategy with opposite-coloured bishops is to attack the king. Material or positional gains are worth little if the king is in danger. Any opportunity to play for the attack must be taken." (Dvoretsky).

W

Klovans - Vitolins

Riga 1964

Exercise 65: Give your evaluation of the position.

(For the answer, see page 151.)

With queens on the board, the stronger side very often succeeds in working up an attack on the opponent's king. In these circumstances the position of the attacker's own king is of great importance.

W

Seirawan - Tal

Candidates tournament, Montpellier 1985

27 Wei! ie6 28 b3 c5 29 h3! b5 30 Wfl! b4 31ie5

Threatening Wf6.

31...Wd8 32 Wb5 Wc8 33 <4>h2 id5 34 id6 a6 35 Wa5!

The pawn won't run away, while the queens have to be retained. The continuation 35 Wxc5? Wxc5 36 ixc5 a5 37 ib6 a4 would lead immediately to a draw.

35...&f7 36 ixc5 Wc6 37 Wxb4 ie6 38 id4 h5 39 Wb8 *e7 40 We5 Wd5 41 Wf6+ 1-0

Then again, it is often essential to provoke the opponent into weakening his king position.

I! i

^ilvi kWk

m&m

'///, w////.

wmm m

Ai

™% 9

AH

Bobotsov - Keres

Beverwijk 1964

At the moment White is threatening ie6. Therefore:

21...Se8!? 22 g3?

Renewing the threat. However, the correct continuation was 22 ie6 Sde7! 23 ic4 Sel + 24lxel lxel-i-25i.fl Wbl 2 6 Wc4 (threatening Sd7) 26...ixb2 27 Sd7 Wf5 28 fixb7 with complete equality.

22...ig5! 23 f4

Either 23 ie6 lxe6 24 Ixd7 Se2! or 23 Id3fie224flfl if 6! would be bad for White.

23...id8! 24 Sadl ia5! 25 Id3

After 25 flc2 Ued8 White loses a piece.

25...Se2 26 if 3 ib6+ 27 Wxb6

If 27 *fl then 27...Wh3+ 28 &xe2 Wxh2+, mating; on 27 <A>hl Black plays 27...1xd3 28 Wxd3 (28 Sxd3 2el+ 29 <4>g2 Sgl#) 28...Sel + 2 9 &g2 fi g 1 + and wins.

27...Ixd3!

The less incisive 27...axb6 28 ixe2 leaves Black with a little more work to do.

28 Wd8+ 2xd8 29 Ixd8+ *g7 30 ixe2 We6 31 &fl Wxa2 32 Sd2 Wa5 33 *el Wc5 34 ifl a5 35 <&e2 b5 36 *dl a4 37 id3 b4 38 ibl Wgl+ 0-1

Elements of Chess Strategy

Attacking the King with Minimal Material

We shall not be speaking of endgames with opposite bishops and no other pieces. The addition of one or two other pieces, especially queens, to the opposite-coloured bishops on each side is enough to give the position the character of a middlegame; then everything we have said about opposite bishops will apply here too, even with the scant quantity of pieces and pawns. Here are a few examples on this theme.

w

Benjamin - A. Friedman

St Martin 1993

Despite the small quantity of pieces on the board, the position has the sharp, dynamic, combinative qualities of a middlegame, where the calculation of variations is at a premium.

50 Sh6!! &f7

Other continuations don't save him either: 50...dlW+ 51 4>e7; 50...±d3 51 <±>e7 khl 52 Bf6 £d3 53 f5! &xf5 (53...dlW 54 If8+ *h7

55 Sh8#) 54 Sf8+ *h7 55 fid8. 5l2f6+<4>g8 52 4>e7&h7 Or52...dlf r 53lh6.

53 If 7+

53 f5 also wins.

53...4>g6 54f5+exf5

Or 54..."4>g5 55 Sg7+ &xf5 56 Sf7+ <4>xe5 57lxfl.

55 Sf6+

This is the most straightforward, but White can also win by playing formate: 55 fig7+ ^6

56 -4*6 h4 57 &f4+ <4>h5 58 h3 dlW 59 2h7#. 55...&g5 56 Hd6 1-0

As already observed, the addition of queens to the opposite-coloured bishops dramatically increases the stronger side's chances of victory.

■ m

it, , iH,

Ivanchuk - Blatny

World Junior Ch, Sharjah 1985

White is two pawns up, but his king lacks the support of his pieces.

32...1 r n! 33 f 3 h3!! 34 <&xh3 i.xf 3 35 <4>g3

35 &Y\.4 is also inadequate to save White: 35...1 r xg2 36 #c8 (threatening ^5+; if instead 36 JLg3, Black also wins with 36...f6 37 g5 fxg5+ 38 &xg5 Wh3) 36...f 6! 37 #f5+ g6 38 Wdl+ &h6 and White will soon be mated.

35...#xg2+ 36 £f 4 #xg4+ 37 &e3 We4+ 38 <4>f2 We2+ 39 &g3 f6!? 40 i.d6 i.e4 41 #c71T3+ 42 *h4 i.f5 0-1

W

'Mb W,

i'""BAl

Sabinin - Tamarkin

Russian Correspondence Team Ch 1972-4

A familiar picture: the black king plays the role of an abandoned King Lear. 40 Wh6+!

Opposite bishops in the Middlegame

137

Not the hasty 40 £.g6? £g7 41 Wxh3 e5, which leads to an immediate draw after 42 We6 Wh4+ or gives Black counter-chances in the eventof42dxe6Wf6.

40...&g7

If 40...*g8 then 41 &h7+, while40...'4'e8 is met by 41 We6.

41 We6 Af6 The only move.

42 i.g6 &g7 43 Wf 7+ *h6 44 £.f 5 &g5 45 Wg6+ *f4 46 Wg4+ 4»e3 47 We4+ *f 2

Or47...&d2 48 Wd3+"4>el 49We3+&dl 50 £d3.

48 &g4 <&g3 49 Wf 3+ <S?h4 50 i.e6!

After 50 Wxh3+? "4>g5 51 Wh5+ "if4 52 Wf5+ "ieS! Black's king sneaks out of the net via d4, and White has no more than a draw.

50...<4>g5 51 Wf5+ *h6 52 &f7 *g7 53 Wg6+ &f8 54 Wg8# (1-0)

Hfl ^m A m.kwdi

W

mi

m m ci »A

SLmW,&w3, wW,&£

HI HH Hi 111

de la Paz - Ro. Perez

Santa C/ara 7996

Here again, the reason for Black's defeat is the same - his pieces are a long way from their king. True, if it were Black's move he would play l...JLe6 (simplest), putting all the dangers behind him. But it is White to play. There followed:

Ie6!f6

Orl...g5 2We5.

2 £xf6!

Not 2 e7? Ml. 2...gxf6

Alternatively, 2...Wa7 3 e7 or 2...g5 3 Wc7+ <£g6 4Wf7+ £f5 5 -&d4+ &e4 6 Wf3#.

3 Wc7+ *g6 The only move.

4 Wf 7+ *f5

He can't save himself with 4... < &g5 either: 5 g4! Wxc2+ 6 4g3 Wg6 7 h4#.

5 Wd7!! &b3

Other continuations also lose: 5...Wxc2 6 e7+ £e6 7 Wb5+; 5...Wa5 6 e7+ £.e6 7 Wd3+; 5...Wa6 6 e7+ Ae6 7 e4+! 4g5 (7...<&xe4 8 e8W) 8 Wd2+ and 9 e8W+; 5...We4 6 e7+ £e6 7 g4+!.

6 cxb3 Wxd7 7 exd7 a2 8 d8W alW 9 Wd5+! 4»g6 10 Wg8+ *f5 11 Wg4+ <&e5 12 Wd4+ 1-0

The stronger side's chances increase still further if a pair of rooks are added to the queens and opposite bishops.

w

2 ' WW.

W, III fit

as»K 2« ^^ Up §p IP Iff

Gheorghiu - Grigorov

Zonal tournament, Prague 1985

In spite of the small number of pawns on the board, the situation must be recognized as exceedingly difficult for Black. And the chief reason for this is the exposed position of his king. The addition of rooks enhances White's attacking potential all the more.

63 i.e4! Se8 64 Ic4 We5

Black still loses after 64...Wb2 65 Wg4 Bf8 66 Sc2 Wf6 67 £.d3! Se8 68 Sc7 Wg5 (68...Sf8 69 We4!) 69 Wd7 Sf8 (69...Sd8 70 Sc8!; 69...We5 70 Sc8! Sg8 71 Sxg8+! <4-xg8 72 £c4+ <4>h7 73 Wd3+! *h8 74 Wd8+ 4h7 75 Ad3+) 70 f4! Wf6 71 Wd5 2e8 72 fic6 Wb2+ 73 i.c2!.

65Wg4Wg5?

65...JLf8 is more resilient.

66 Wd7 If 8 67 Sc6 *g8 68 We6+ <4>h8 69 2c8 h5?! 70 Sxf8+ £.xf8 71 Wf7 Wh6 72 Ad5!Wg7 73Wxh5+l-0

Elements of Chess Strategy

Open File and Passed Pawn

We have repeatedly observed that for evaluating a middlegame position with opposite bishops, the key question is who possesses the initiative. Hence those elements of strategy which are relevant to this question will interest us first and foremost.

The initiative, however, is a temporary asset. It follows that in order to maintain it, you need to be constantly creating new threats. For this, it is imperative to be able to bring up fresh reserves to the strategically important sector of the board. In other words, the issue of communications comes to the fore. In chess this means the presence of open lines and control over them.

w

Aseev - Sturua

USSR Young Masters Ch, Lvov 1985

On the surface, the verdict on this situation is perfectly favourable to Black: in a closed position he controls the only open file. But let us try investigating this judgement a little more deeply. For this we shall apply our system of singling out the main strategic elements.

In the first place, this is a middlegame with opposite-coloured bishops. Here, as we know, the all-important factor is the activity of the bishops. But whereas 'job prospects' for the black bishop are not easy to fix up, the very next pair of moves will see the white one intervening forcefully in the struggle.

The second thing is the extremely awkward placing of the black knight on a5. (We recall what Tarrasch said: "For a chess-player, a knight on the edge of the board is a disgrace.")

Prospects for activating it are not to hand, since even the attempt to bring it to c5 (via b7) can be thwarted by playing b4.

Finally, there is the open c-file. Black's possession of it is his main trump. But Vladimir Vysotsky's song The Professionals comes to mind: "What was their chief trump a short while ago is no more a trump, but a trifle. And now their own weapon strikes them with rapid blows, just as hard as it hit others."

In the game, there followed:

23Ae3

Immediately stopping 23...Sec7.

23...£)b7 24 Ab6

Depriving the knight of the d8-square as well.

24...Se8 25 Seel! Se2 26 Sc7 Sxe4 27 £>g5 Sf4 28 g3 Sf6 29 b4! Sg6 30 £>f3 e4 31 £>h4 Sg5 32 £sg2!

It would be bad technique to play 32 fiacl JLxh3 33 Sxb7 Sxd5, leaving Black with some shadowy hopes of salvation.

32„.Ixd5 33 lacl ±e6 34 £sf4! Sd2 35 £>xe6 1-0

After 35...fxe6 36 Sxb7, White doubles on the seventh rank for good measure.

W

"'" / 'wi" '" ////A

i m liii m iiiii

I&MJlI

:A'H

Taimanov - Averbakh

Candidates tournament, Zurich 1953

23 Sedl Sd7 24 Sd6!

It is White who has seized the d-file!

24...Ab7 25 Sadl?!

An unnecessary loss of time; better is 25 e4 or 25 h4.

25...Sxd6

If Black defends passively, then after e4 White can play JSld3-h3 or transfer his bishop

Opposite bishops in the Middlegame

139

via cl to g5 and f6. Another plan for White involves the pawn advance f4-f5. 26 exd6f 6 (D)

w

Exercise 66: What would you play for White here?

(For the answer, see page 151.)

We have imperceptibly progressed from the theme of' the open file and the struggle for it' to that of 'the passed pawn', which is also an important element of strategy.

w

R. Sevecek - C. Hunter

Correspondence 1970-4

White is a pawn up, but without the knights the endgame would be dead drawn. How do things stand now? An important point of course is that the white pieces are much more active than the black ones. But the main, decisive factor contributing to White's advantage is the possibility of creating a passed pawn.

40f5!gxf5 41g5!

The only way! Not, of course, 41 gxf5? £le7!? (41..Ac6!? is also adequate) 42 £ixe7 <A>xe7 43 <^gl kil\, with an obvious draw.

41...&C6

If 41. ..<4>g8 then 42 g6, with $tf 6+ to follow. 42 g6+ *e8 43 £>f 6+ <£>d8 Or43...&e7 44g7. 44 &g5 <4>c7 45 g7 £se7 46 &f4+! Not 46 g8#? £sxg8+ 47 £)xg8 *d6 48 <£e7 ^.e4, with realistic drawing chances. 1-0 White answers 46...*c8 with 47 ^.d6.

W

m p

EWZ& _A_ Wf» .. ■»»

L 1 L

lM.ll

A:

A:

y//, wgk

Karpov - Timman

Euwe Memorial, Amsterdam 1991

21 d7!

The white passed pawn sacrifices itself to disrupt the coordination of Black's pieces.

21...2e7

Or 21...1d8 22 We3 h6 (22...t r b5 23 &c7 Wxd7 24 £xd8 Wxd8 25 Idl b6 26 Ixd5) 23 #e8+ &h7 24 b4 #b6 25 Icl M5 26 Jx7.

22 Scl Ixd7 23 Sc8+ Bd8

But now everything is decided by the weakness of Black's back rank and the overloading of his queen.

24 b4!

Not, however, 24 #c3? #b6 25 Wc5? Wxc5 26 Hxd8+ #f8.

24...1 f b6 25 &c7 Sxc8 26 ±xb6 axb6 27 #xd5 h6 28 Wxbl Scl+ 29 *h2 Sc2 30 #xb6 2xa2 31 fd4! 1-0

"With opposite bishops in the middlegame, a very important issue is who has the initiative, who is attacking. A blocked pawn on the same colour square as your bishop will drastically curtail your activity. That is a very serious positional failing in a middlegame of this type." (Dvoretsky).

Elements of Chess Strategy

Glushkov - Zakharov

USSR 1961

White has the advantage due to his superior pawn-structure and more active pieces.

21...Wf6?!

An interesting practical decision. White is offered the choice between exchanging his active queen for Black's hitherto inactive one, or else allowing the black queen to generate some play on the kingside. Both courses should give White the advantage, as the damage to Black's pawn-structure outweighs his increased mobility. But psychologically, this must have been a difficult choice for White, in a position where he seemed completely in charge of events.

21...#f7?! gives White a wider choice of plans, such as 22 £rf3 h6 23 e5 or 22 b4!?, but the best defence is 21...#d7, when continued careful play may well keep Black afloat.

22 e5! (D)

Black's pawns are now broken up, and the c5-pawn is doomed. After 22 #xf6!? gxf6 White retains his positional advantages, and can improve the position of his bishop by 23 JLf2!, with g3 to follow, seeing that 23...SM4? allows 24 Jth4! followed by exf5.

w

22...dxe5 23 fxe5 WgS

" The blockaded pawn (e5) on the same colour as the bishop promises nothing but trouble." (Simagin). However, Black has paid a high price for this, and in order to generate any threats, the bishop will need to leave its blockading post on e6, whereupon the white pawn may prove valuable indeed.

24 £)f 3 #g4 25 b3?

After 25 #xc5 f4 26 £f2 i.d5 27 b.3, Black's threats turn out to be hollow, and after 27...#f5 28 #c3 £xf3 29 #xf3 #xc2 30 e6 or 27...#h5 28 Wc3 Jbrf3 29 #xf3 #xf3 30 gxf3 Sd2 31 e6 White has a substantial advantage.

25...h5?

25...f4?! 26 JLf2 -&d5? is premature in view of 27 .&xc5 with e6 possibly to follow. However, Black should have taken the opportunity to liquidate his main weakness by 25...c4!.

26 &h4?

White forces an exchange of knights, but allows Black to bring his rooks into the heart of White's position. 26 #xc5 is again strong.

26...£ixh4 27 Sf4 VgS 28 Sxh4 Id2!

Now 29. ..JLd5 is threatened.

29 fif4 Iad8 30 WxcS

30 h4 is also possible. 30...h4! 31 Ixh4 Idl

Threatening 32...Sxel+ 33 £xel Idl. After 31...i.d5 32 e6! Ixg2+ 33 *fl #d2 34#xa7, White's counterplay is sufficient to draw.

32 Wb4?

This loses drastically to a cunning piece of tactics. After 32 *fl! #d2 33 Ixdl #xdl+ 34 ^.el Sd2 35 #e3 Ixc2 36 Sd4, White is OK.

32...1 f e3+ 33 i.f2 fi8d2!! 0-1

Prophylaxis

The term prophylaxis was introduced into chess parlance by Aron Nimzowitsch.

"What we call prophylaxis is the taking of measures aimed at forestalling some events that are undesirable from the positional viewpoint."

As the main tasks of prophylaxis, Nimzowitsch recognized in the first place the restriction of the opponent's possibilities, and secondly the over-protection of strategically important points. The modem conception of prophylaxis has been modified, deepened and broadened,

Opposite bishops in the Middlegame

141

thanks in part to the theoretical contributions of Mark Dvoretsky, who added the term prophylactic thinking to the fundamentals of contemporary chess strategy.

"By this term 1 understand the habit of constantly asking yourself what your opponent wants to undertake, how he would proceed if it were his move. Your ability to find the answer to this question, and to allow for it in the process of decision-making, is what defines the level of your prophylactic thinking." (Dvoretsky).

And again: "The principle of 'prophylactic thinking', which requires you to take your opponent's intentions into account when coming to a decision, does not at all mean that you must always be making prophylactic moves."

Thus, between Nimzowitsch's term 'prophylaxis' and Dvoretsky's principle of 'prophylactic thinking' there is much in common but also, of course, a substantial difference. To understand this better, let us examine some examples.

w

m,

i

W/, wk

A

a:

;Ai

Falkbeer - Anderssen

Berlin 1851

Black is threatening to bring his bishop into the attack against the white king by means of ...c6 and... JLc7. Another possibility is to utilize the active rook on White's second rank.

In spite of the obviousness of Black's intentions, the game went:

25 b4? c6 26 Be8 &c7 27 Sxd8+ Ixd8 28 *gl Wh2+ 29 &f2 &b6+ 30 *el Wg3+ 31 *e2 WeS+ 32 &e4 Wxe4# (0-1)

In the game White didn't apply even the most elementary prophylaxis. After the correct 25 fie7! (indicated by Yakov Neishtadt), Black can't play 25...c6 and White is threatening 26

Wxg7. Now on 25...1xb2? White wins with 26 Wd5! c6 27 flxb7+! 4>xb7 28 Wxc6+ <±>a6 29 fa4+ £a5 30 #c4+ fib5 (30...&b6 31 #c6#) 31 a4 (not 31 Sbl? Sdl+ 32 Sxdl ±c7!). Black's strongest continuation is 25...Sf2, and then:

a) 26 fifel?! (threatening 27 #d5) 26...a6! 27 M (27 #xg7 Sxf3) 27...&a7 28 Wf5!? intending 29 Wg4. If Black is to keep any advantage he must try 28...Sd3! 29 #xd3 (not 29 #g4?? fldxf3) 29.. .Sxg2, when 30 Wxa6+ bxa6 31 -&xg2 leads to a W vs 2H situation where the opposite bishops make White's defence quite arduous.

b) 26 Ixf2 #xf2 27 <4>h2 a6 and Black keeps a modest initiative as his king is more secure.

It must be observed that weak prophylaxis and inadequate prophylactic thinking both lead to the impossibility of anticipating events. As a result we lose control of the situation and feebly swim with the current without knowing where it will carry us.

Conversely, if we grasp our opponent's intentions in time and find ways of forestalling them, this will enable us to divert the flow of the struggle in a direction that suits us.

Koberl - Szabo

Hungarian Ch, Budapest 1951

Exercise 67: In Black's place, what would you play?

(For the answer, see page 152.)

Let's look at one more example of prophylactic thinking.

We shall quote from Botvinnik's own commentary.

Elements of Chess Strategy

w

mp a %%

w, mm

AHA

in a S

IK *H1

&n in n

iAi

A

Lilienthal - Botvinnik

USSR Absolute Ch, Leningrad/Moscow 1941

23 b3

23Wf3+ismetby23...Wf5.

23...g6 24 Sdl fid8 25 g3 *g7 26 Wf3

"The most natural plan for Black is the advance ...e5-e4. However, to carry this out he would need not only to defend the seventh rank but'also to play ...f5, weakening his king position. Meanwhile, White would seize the a-file, invade the enemy camp with his rook and obtain counterplay. Black must therefore try to accumulate some more advantages, aiming in the first place to gain control of the open file. Incidentally on his last move White could have played 26 Bal. He will not be given another chance like that."

26...i.e5 27 Wb7 fib8 28 #e4 &f6 29 *g2 Wa5

"So the a-file is in Black's hands. As White is avoiding a queen exchange (for no good reason actually, since with opposite bishops, as a rule, the winning chances are increased by additional pieces), he removes his queen from the hl-a8 diagonal."

30 We2 2a8 31 2d3 Wc5

"Black regroups, since the recommended formation is with the rook in front of the queen; as a rule the queen should only spearhead the attack when the moment comes for the decisive assault on the king's fortress."

32 We4 Sal 33 Sd2 Wa5 34 We2 Wa8+ 35 £>h3

Not 35 Wf3? Sgl+, but 35 f3 is a playable alternative.

35.„Sgl 36 f4 Wc8

Threatening 37...e5+.

37 i.a6 Wc5 38 i.d3 Wd5 39 Sdl?

Better is 39 ±e4 or 39 b4. 39...fig2! (D)

Wf& W/,

w

m wm,

m mm.

ASA

AS A ■ JL A

WW,

'i-tillWw Hi ^e« / WW

^■Jlf

HI

40*64

If 40 Wei then 40...flb2.

40...2xh2+ 41 <£>xh2 #h5+ 42 *g2 #xdl 43 £c4 h5

With a view to ...h4.

44 Wf3 Wxf3+ 45 <&xf3 k&l 46 *e4 i.c5 47 l.b5 &f6 48 ±e2 *e7 49 Ab5 AM 50 &xd4

Or 50 ^.c4 ±el 51 *f3 f5 52 ±b5 h4 53 gxh4 JLxh4.

50...1.el 51 *e4 &xg3 52 <4>f3 Ael 53 &c6 i.b4 54 &a4 &d6 55 &c6 f5 0-1

Piece Coordination

As we know, in a middlegame with opposite-coloured bishops, the advantage belongs to the side with the initiative. But to possess the initiative, coordination between the pieces must be achieved.

Tukmakov - Suba

Erevan 1980

Opposite bishops in the Middlegame

143

Evidently all the prerequisites for a drawn result are present - except for one thing: the actions of the white pieces are not coordinated, a circumstance that Black most skilfully exploits.

41...1 f c5!42l r b7

White's options are uniformly unpleasant: 42 #d7 i.b.4; 42 g3 ±d4; 42 i.e2 ±d4; 42 g4 £kl4 43 &g2 #cl + 44 <±>h2 £se2 45 h4 #gl + 46 <±>h3 Wxf2; or 42 &d3 £sd4 43 &e4 Wc\+ 44 &h2 <2te2.

42...£>d6

If42...i.h4then43l'b2-(-.

43 #a6 £se4 44 4-h2 #xf 2 45 #d3 Wf4+ 46*gl

Or 46 g3 £>xg3.

46...i.h4 47#f3i.f2+0-l

The conclusion would be 48 &hl <£>g3+ 49 <4>h2<£xfl+50<±>hll'h2#.

w

±1

II

**■

ill

■ Al

• Jfi ill llif ft iP Hi Iff ft fft 5

Yusupov - B. Kelly

Elista Olympiad 1998

Note the way all the black pieces are 'cooperating' . Then you will understand why White succeeded in finishing his opponent off in the space of four(!) moves.

28 i.b4!

Technically the best continuation. After the tempting 28 Jic3V. #b5! 29 &xg7 Se8!, the position is unclear.

28„.lb8 29 Ic7!

Again the strongest. After 29 Wd7?! h6 30 Sc8+?! *h7 31 &c3 Bbl!! Blackhas adequate counterplay.

29~ttT4

Or 29...W6 30 Wdl, with Sc8+ to follow.

30 g3 Wf6 31 #d7 1-0

Most often, poor coordination of the pieces reveals itself with particular clarity in sharp tactical situations.

w

^M^m*m*

"w.

AJlAlif 4m

Iff llNHrill ft

H HAH

if 'mf/,

Lilienthal - Aronin

USSR Ch, Moscow 1948

Exercise 68: What would you play in White's place?

(Forthe answer, seepage 152.)

W

all

AHA:

mm

Smyslov - Addison

Interzonal tournament, Palma de Mallorca 1970

Exercise 69: What would you play for White? (For the answer, see page 153.)

Defence

In middlegames with opposite bishops, it is sometimes your misfortune to have to defend. You therefore need to know what you must aim for when your opponent has a material or positional advantage.

ELEMENTS OF CHESS STRATEGY

In such situations, the defending side should strive to reach a 'pure' opposite-bishop position, that is, to exchange pieces and reach an endgame.

Korchnoi - Karpov

'World Ch match (game 15), Merano 1981

"The extra pawn does not promise victory here. The position would be utterly drawn if Black could exchange the rooks or (a slightly worse case) the queens, and blockade the d5-pawn with his bishop. However, since the position has middlegame characteristics, the matter is not so simple. White retains the hope that he can create an attack on the bl-h7 diagonal against the king, meeting ...g6 by exchanging one pawn (h4-h5xg6), placing his own king on g2 and then combining threats on the h-file with an advance of the passed pawn - assuming that the blockade can be lifted, if only briefly. This plan looks somewhat abstract, but even a slight inaccuracy may leave Black in a dangerous situation. It is instructive to follow the masterly way in which the World Champion takes prophylactic measures against distant threats, achieving a rook exchange and an absolutely harmless position within a mere four moves." (Makarychev).

25...g6 26 i.f3 *g7 27 2el 2d7 28 H4 2e7! (D)

White has pointlessly delayed implementing the plan of'4 , g2 and h4, which would have been quite good prophylaxis on his part. Instead, two useless moves (27 Sel and 28 #f4) have given Karpov some excellent objects of attack: the rook on el (menaced with exchange!), the white queen (exposed to tempo-gaining threats), and, quite unexpectedly, the pawn on g3. Afraid that

w

lip

r ^i A mm ^b ^ mm

AW& k ""iff "k Hi

iiAil

m.&wm. Hi

A

« mm

the position may become sharp, Korchnoi exchanges rooks, and thus forfeits any winning chances whatsoever.

29 Sxe7

White gains nothing with 29 2fl .&e5 30 #g4 in view of 30...#f6 or, even stronger, 30...2c7! followed by 31...Sc2.

Yet if White does want to get somewhere (he is a pawn up after all), he should definitely play 29 Sdl ±e5 30 #d2!, after which the capture on g3 is dangerous for Black: 30...Jtxg3?! 31 d6 Se6 (31...Sd7 32 £g4 f5 33 #c3+ and 34 #xg3) 32 d7 fid6 33 #b2+ &g8 and now 34 2c 1! leaves Black in serious trouble. Instead Black should probably choose the quiet 30...#f6 (followed by ...J.d6), when his position is very hard to breach.

29...i.xe7 30 s£>g2 a5 31 h4 h5 32 i.e21x5 33 &c4 #f6 34 Wd2 b6 35 a4 We5 (D)

W

m mm mm <■ **^ Wf HI Hi kW

, m /y , tit..,,,■ * m ABAtl r m v ,m

36 #d3 «T6 37 #d2 *e5 38 i.e2 We4+ 39 i.f3 We5 40 i.dl We4+ 41 f3 V2-V2

White's last move was sealed, and a draw was agreed.

In an opposite-bishop middlegame, the defender is often prepared to pay the price of one

Opposite bishops in the Middlegame

145

pawn or sometimes even two, in order to reach an endgame.

I

rl ■ABA

m"" wm>,

■&■

Timman - Salov

Candidates match (game 4), Saint John 1988

Exercise 70: In Black's place, what would you play?

(For the answer, see page 153.)

W

m.

fl#

■ A

A

i«aP ii

fc wm. m $m

m,<bww, i

m m

A

m,^wm,

Shirov - Pira

Para 7990

Or 25...2xfl 26 Sxfl £)c6 27 £lxc6 i.xc6 28 Ae5.

26 &c3 2e8 27 Sael £>a6 28 i.d6 2xel 29 Sxel 2e8 30 Sxe8+ &xe8 31 £le6 kXl 32 £>g5! <&xg7 33 *d4 &g8 34 h4 4f6 35 g4! &e6 36 &eS+ 4>e7 37 £>xe6 *xe6 38 h5 1-0

WIKf, !*=«<

'■i|

m * m

HI ft iP ft Hi if B

HI AW® HI 'ii £

mm. wm, '<%m m

Botvinnik - Smyslov

World Ch match (game 18), Moscow 1954

Exercise 71: What would you play for Black? (For the answer, see page 153.)

Of course there are also some cases where exchanges favour the stronger side in an opposite-bishop middlegame.

In the following diagram, White's advantage in development is evident. But the position of his king is not entirely secure, and this may give his opponent counterplay. In this case, the best remedy is to head for the ending.

22 e5! cxd5 23 exf6 Wg6+ 24 #xg6 hxg6 25 fxg7 &a4+

The Pawn-Structure

Since Philidor's time it has been established, and confirmed by practice, that the quality of the pawn-structure in most cases determines the evaluation of a position at the strategic level. The advantages and defects of the pawn-structure significantly affect the activity of the pieces. From this it clearly follows that in a middlegame with opposite bishops, where 'activity decides everything', the peculiarities of the pawn-position are of crucial importance. Any minor detail or 'trifle' may decisively affect the outcome of the game.

Yusupov - Spraggett

Candidates match (game 3), Quebec City 1989

1 d4 d5 2 £sf3 c5 3 c4 e6 4 cxd5 exd5 5 £ic3 £>c6 6 g3 £>f6 7 £g2 i.e7 8 0-0 0-0 9 kgS &e6 10 dxc5 &xc5 11 &xf6 Wxf6 12 £>xd5 #xb2 13 <£c7 2ad8 14 Wcl Wxcl 15 laxcl i.e7 16 £>xe6 fxe6 (D)

A position encountered hundreds of times in tournament practice. And even though the statistics clearly favour White, you will keep on meeting new optimists prepared to defend Black's

Elements of Chess Strategy

w

AW ■ AffGP

'stronghold'. What positional grounds do they have for this?

Black, to be sure, has an extra 'pawn-island'. But there are no queens on the board, so the endgame is not remote, and if it is reached, the opposite bishops virtually guarantee Black's safety. In addition, the possibility of creating an outside passed pawn on the queenside at some future time is an attraction.

Yet if we delve into the situation further, it becomes clear that, in the first place, an ending with only pawns and opposite bishops is still some way off; secondly, Black's pawn-weakness is going to reduce his pieces to passivity; and thirdly, since the initiative will be in White's hands, the opposite bishops will be a scourge for his opponent.

Let us see how the game went.

17 Sc4 &f6 (D)

w

Before this game, the main line for White was now considered to be 18 Sbl, whereupon Black solved his opening problems with comparative ease by playing either 18...fld6 or 18...fid7. The point of Black's last move comes across especially clearly in the variation 18 Sbl Sd7 19 h4£>d4!?. The conclusion

is not difficult: White needs to control the d4-square!

18 c3! Sd6 19 h4 h6 20 3e4 Sfd8 21 i.h3

Stepping up the pressure on e6.

21...*f7 22 *g2 Se8 23 Scl Se7 24 Sc2 (D)

In this position Spraggett played: 24...b6

Exercise 72: Give a positional evaluation of this move.

(For the answer, see page 154.)

In a 40-move game (which statistically is the average length), how many moves are particularly important, decisive, critical? Just 5 as a rule - 8 at most. True, the other 32-35 moves have significance and influence. But they are not so significant. Let us consider. The opening moves proceed on 'auto-pilot'. Open files have to be occupied, weaknesses have to be attacked, and so forth - and we do this automatically. In a position with an isolated pawn, where should we place the rooks (cl and dl, dl and el, or some other arrangement)? Of course this matters, but in most cases it cannot radically alter the evaluation of the position. On the other hand, the correctness of our response to the major strategic issues (tactics, the calculation of variations, is a separate matter) determines not only the verdict on the position but the course of the ensuing struggle and often the result of the game.

These important, decisive strategic issues include the problem of the pawn-structure and its transformation. In cases where the pawns are being fixed in a particular configuration for the long term, our decision needs to be weighed and thought out with exceptional care.

Opposite bishops in the Middlegame

147

Dorfman - Cifuentes

West Berlin 1989

With his last move White captured the black bishop on e6.

Exercise 73: What would you recapture with - queen or pawn?

(For the answer, see page 155.)

It's interesting to observe that an analogous strategic error had been committed in the World Championship match four years earlier.

W

Karpov - Kasparov

World Ch match (game 4), Moscow 1985

21 £ixe6!

An exchange we already understand.

21...fxe6?

And the strategic error that we understand too.

Kasparov was evidently reckoning on some straightforward reaction from his opponent, such as 22 Wg6? Wa5 or 22 Sfdl? #b4 23 a3 Wxd2. But the trouble is that White's advantage (the weakness of Black's king position) is of a static, long-term character. Naturally, therefore,

White is in no hurry to initiate tactical complexities.

22 l.g4! Sc4 23 h3 Wc6 24 Wd3 <&h8?!

This in addition shows poor anticipation of events, as we shall see from the further course of the struggle.

25 Ifdl a5 26 b3! (D)

Denying Black the chance to develop his queenside initiative further.

26...Ic3 27 We2 If8 28 i.h5! b5 29 i.g6!

Clearly illustrating the idea that with opposite bishops in the middlegame, an attack against the king is more important than the opponent's initiative on the other flank.

29...i.d8 30 £d3 b4 31 Wg4

Threatening 32 Wg6.

31...tfe8 (D)

w

mm i§A :

1 ■*■

v//, mw.

m&m/mm

A

m 'm?/,

32 e4!

It is only now, when the difference in activity between the two sides has become overwhelming, that White starts a tactical clash.

32...i.g5?!

Losing the strategic battle, Black tries to extricate himself from trouble by means of traps. Now 33 fie2?? will be met by 33...Sf4. But

Elements of Chess Strategy

placing the bishop on the a7-gl diagonal would have been more useful.

33 Sc2 Sxc2?

A major error. Exchanging queens rather than rooks would have been better. True, the simple 33...1T7?! leads nowhere in view of 34 Se2!, but the least o f the evils was 3 3.. Mc 8 34 exd5! exd5 (34...Sxc2? 35 #e4) 35 #xc8! Ifxc8 36 Se2 Scl 37 Ixcl Ixcl+ 38 4>h2 Sc8 39 J.g6 JLf6, with advantage to White.

34 i.xc2 lfc6 35 fe2 Wc5 36 Ifl «fc3 37 exd5 exd5 38 &bl Wd2 39 We5 Sd8?! (D)

A more stubborn defence was 39....&f6 40 Wf5 &g8.

w

IP A ^P ^P IP? A

m&W?, mm 111"

ft HI W& W§ ft el & §1 Hf O A fj

40 #15 *g8 41 #e6+ *h8

Or 41...&f8 42 ±g6 Wf4 43 Sel.

42 #g6 *g8 43 We6+ *h8 44 i.f5!

This is stronger than 44 Sel Sf8.

44...Wc3 45 fg6 *g8 46 i.e6+ *h8 47 i.f 5 *g8 48 g3! *f 8 49 *g2 Wf6 50 Wh7 Wf 7 51 h4 iLd2

Otherwise 52 Sel.

52 Idl i.c3 53 fid3 Sd6 54 If 3! (D)

Even the most clearly won positions demand accuracy: 54 fie3? g5! draws.

54...*e7

Or 54...Sf6 55 Se3 Sxf5 56 #h8+ #g8 57 Se8+.

55 #h8 d4 56 #c8 Sf6 57 #c5+ <&e8 58 If4 #b7+ 59 Ie4+ *f7 (D)

Or 59...1e6 60 #c4! Ixe4 61 Wg8+ &e7 62 Wxg7+.

W

60 Wc4+ *f 8 61 i.h7! Sf 7 62 #e6 #d7 63 WeS 1-0

We have been examining middlegame positions with opposite bishops. And the conclusion is indisputable. In the middlegame, opposite-coloured bishops are harbingers of war, not peace.

Opposite bishops in the Middlegame

149

Answers to Exercises for Chapter 5

Exercise 60

■7/////A y //>

WB, '-Mb,

m §n « m

£■

■ Al

iAS ' '''mm'

Although White is a pawn down, there is no doubting his superiority, which rests, in the first place, on the appreciable difference in activity between the opposite-coloured bishops.

In middlegame positions with opposite bishops, defending is a good deal more complicated than attacking.

It is essential for Black to try to construct a fortress, and this can be accomplished by playing 36...4>g8!. Then after 37 Sc3, the simplest way of parrying White's threat to invade the eighth rank is 37...#d8!. Also, in the line to be expected - 37 Ixf 7 Wxf7 38 £.xf7+ Sxf7 (intending 39...g6 and 40...4>g7) 39 #e6 g5! 40 %6+ &g7 41 #xd6 Ixf 2 - Black achieves his aim.

Probably 37 #b8!? sets the most problems, but even so, after 37...1 r c7 (not 37...g6?? 38 Sxf7 Wxf7 39 Wxa7) 38 Sxf7 (38 Axf7+ #xf7 39 fixf7 Sxf7 is similar to the previous line) 38...Wxb8 39 Sb7+ 4>h7 40 Hxb8 &e7, followed by 41...h5 and 42...g6, a draw would be the most likely result.

In the game, however, there followed:

36...f 6? 37 ^8 g6 38 2c3?!

An inaccuracy in mutual time-trouble; 38 g4! is technically more correct.

38...h5 39 g4 *h6!

The only move.

40 Sc8?

With his last move before the time-control, White lets the win slip for good. By playing 40

Wc8!! (with the threat of 41 gxh5 <4>xh5 42 %4+ 4>h6 43 Sg3 Wh7 44 &e6 and 45 Af 5) 40...h4 41 #b8 f5?! 42 exf5 gxf5 43 Sc8 (with a view to 44 Ie8 and 45 Se6+), he could have retained good chances of victory. 40...i.g7 (D)

w

m n

m mm.

v iHI, ill A H^A Hi ''w^, ''wz, //y %m, x 'wi

nn w.

41 gxh5 *xh5

Aiming for ...f5 and ...Wg5-f4+.

42 Ie8 V2-V2

The players agreed a draw without resuming the adjourned game. A possible variation is 42...Wd7! 43 Bd8 #c7. (Annotations based on those by Sergei Makarychev.)

(Now return to page 126.)

Exercise 61

m, ^

HP 1*~ <—* —

n§ Hif wb, m

A

w mfc wm mm

HH

1AI

IA

Timoshchenko was rescued by the fact that he could quickly solve the problem of activating his bishop.

27...£b6 28 Sdl 2fd8

Not, of course, 28....&c5?? losing a piece to 29 #xc5.

29 &c4 Ac5 30 g3 g6! 31 Sd3 <4>g7 32 2c6 #e7 33 If3 ttf 8 V2-V2

(Now return to page 127.)

Elements of Chess Strategy

Exercise 62

HP 6 W3ww3 S IP

AB I Bi

IB ■ BAB

^^ ^*^ ^^ A Wf& ~.

m r w y ftJAIlj

Alfl S3, M, 4

Black has several possibilities (candidate moves) - and one of them is 28...ILa3?. This looks tempting, since if the white bishop moves, Black replies 29_.fxg4+. On 29 Sacl?, Black has the pleasant choice between 29...b5 (threatening ...b4), the simple 29...Hg6, and the aggressive 29...fxg4+ 30 fxg4 h5!?. However, White has a clear refutation: 29 Wf6+! flg7, and instead of the unclear 30 fiadl? fxg4+ 31 <±>h4 i.d7!, he can play 30 i.b4! fxg4+ 31 *h4, when Black has no time to find an adequate reply to the threat of JLf 8.

Therefore we can conclude that Black's choice in the game was relatively best:

28...Hxf4 29 Wife Hg7 30 &g3 Ic4

30...Sa4 is also possible.

31 Hadl!? (D)

31...1.d7?!

Now Black's difficulties start to increase. Inserting 31...f4+ renders it harder for White to make inroads.

32 &d2!

Here is the possibility for White that his opponent failed to allow for. Black loses practically

all control over the course of the fight; his game tumbles downhill.

32„.*g8 33 &h6 Sg6?! 34 Ixd7! Sxf6 35 Hg7+ &h8 36 exf6 #b8+ 37 f4 flc3+ 38 &h4

Threatening 39 f 7.

38...#f8 39 Hxh7+ *xh7 40 £xf8 *g8 41 &e7 fxg4 42 Igl Sh3+ 43 &xg4 1-0

(Now return to page 133.)

Exercise 63

w

Removed to the queenside, the black pieces have deserted their own king. This, plus the presence of opposite bishops, allows White to carry out the concluding attack.

29 e5! i.xe5 30 Saf 1 &d6

Black also loses with either 30...S2d5 31 If 8+ Sxf 8 3 2 Sxf 8+ &h7 3 3 #e4+ g6 34 &h5! &g7 35 #xg6+ <±>xf8 36 #f7# or 30...i.f6 31 fllxf6gxf6 32#f4.

31 Ixg7!? We3 (D)

Or31...<4'xg7 32 2f7+.

w

IB' :

IIP k up

#1 * Ji

'wm. mm,

Jk

m"

I HI

32i.h5

Good enough, but 32 2h7+! <±>xh7 33 «T7+ <S?h8 34 #f6+ &h7 35 i.f5+ *g8 36 ±e6+ < i'h7 37 Sf3 wins more or less by force.

Opposite bishops in the Middlegame

151

32...If2 33 Ixf2 #xf2 34 flg6 #f5+ 35 <&g2! #xh5? 36 #d4+ We5 37 flxd6 l r xd4 38 Sxd4 Se8 39 Sd6! 1-0

(Now return to page 134.)

Exercise 64

w

The presence of opposite bishops on the board has enabled White to accumulate sufficient aggressive potential to conduct the final attack with success.

56 f5!! #g4

Or 56...exf5 57 e6 a2 58 Wal! (threatening flg7+) 58...Wxf6 59 #xf6 alW 60 Sg7+.

57l'b4Af7 58Sxf7!l-0

(Now return to page 134.)

Exercise 65

w

'" "'wm

W% ww Inf Wfr\

m mm « m?

A J flf

t3, m mm

iPtiUfiiP nn

■ Hal

White's attack, reinforced by the presence of opposite bishops, could become extremely dangerous. Black's main counterplay stems from White's difficulty in bringing his rooks into his attack without leaving his back rank exposed.

18 Wh4?!

After this slow move, Black can mobilize his rooks quickly enough to keep the game in the

balance. 18 Se3! saves time, as 18...1 f xd4? loses to 19 Sdl followed by JLf6. Then Black faces a more difficult defence.

18...i.b7 19 Se3 Wf5 20 flg3 £>h8 21 lei Iac8 22 h3 ±d5 23 flg4 lc2

Black's queenside play gradually makes progress, while White is regrouping his pieces to strike the decisive blow. Black must remain focused on his counterplay against White's back rank.

24fle3

24 Sf 4 #g6 25 Sg4 Wf 5 26 flf 4 is a draw by repetition.

24...2g8 25 If4?

25 Seg3 Wxf2+ 26 &h2 M 3! 27 i.e3! We2 ! 28 &h&. Axg4 29 JLxg7+ leads to perpetual check.

25..J*g6?

Black squanders a tempo with fatal consequences. 25...Scl+ 26 4>h2 Wbl gives Black very serious play against White's king.

26 *h2 flcl 27 Sg4 WtS 27...WW loses to 28 M6.

28 fleg3 #bl

Or 28...2cc8 29 Sf4.

29 &xcl 1-0

(Now return to page 135.)

Exercise 66

w

'i*m" m" ii

P BiPiffl

A

m cj w%,

WB, H

i m

m^-wm

21 dl

"A powerful move! The pawn advances to its own certain doom, but wrecks the coordination of the black pieces. While Black is looking for ways to combat the fearsome pawn, the white pieces will endeavour to occupy even more active positions." (Bronstein).

White now threatens 28 #xf8+ 4>xf8 29 JLxf6. If Black counters this with 27...flf7 28

Elements of Chess Strategy

Wh3! f5, there follows 29 #h6! Sxd7 30 Wgl+\ Sxg7 31 2xd8+, winning.

Additional Exercise 66A: Faced with this threat, what would you play for Black?

(For the answer, see page 155.)

Exercise 67

To answer this question correctly, it is essential to apply some prophylactic thinking. Let us mentally rotate the board by 180 degrees and decide what we would want to play in White's place. 'Enemy number one' is the black knight on c5, so White will of course be dreaming of exchanging it, or, failing that, expelling it from its active post. Hence it becomes clear that the threat is <£lcl-b3, completely levelling the game. Black must prevent this turn of events. So the necessary solution is found!

23...a5! 24 £>cl a4!

Good moves fit multiple strategic plans. New ideas crop up along the way - for instance the manoeuvre ...2[a6-b6, or ...a3 and ...Sa4.

25 <&f 2 (D)

Or 25 £sd3 Sd8 26 i.f 1 Sd4.

JH JfH W////,_ w/m\

HI k ■■ A ■ & ■ A> i*

i

m.

I ABA

¥&&,' ' 'W//?, ' '% '"

If27£>d3then27...£)a4.

27...Sd8 28 &fl £>a4 29 £>d3 £>c3+ 30 <4>e3 £sxa2! 31 £>xb2 £>b4 32 lei axb2 33 Sbl £>c2+ 34 *f4

Or 34 <4>e2 £la3 35 Sxb2 £>xc4.

34...g5+ 35 <4>e5 ld6! 36 c5 Be6+ 37 *f5 £se3# (0-1)

(Now return to page 141.)

Exercise 68

w

HP HP HPi^HP

%im A mimi

11 HI BA«

25 c5! #xc5 26 lei Wa5 27 i.xf6 Sxf6

He couldn't save himself with 27...gxf6 either: 28 Sc8+ 2d8 (or 28...±d8 29 #h5, and f7 cannot be defended, since 29...fid7 is met by 30 #g4+) 29 #h5! #xd5 30 exd5 lxc8 31 #g4+.

28 Hc8+ i.d8 29 #c3

An even stronger line is 29 #dl! <4>f8 30 &c6L

29...Wb6 (D)

W

25...a3 26 sfee2 &b2 27 Sc2

30 Wb2\ Wd6 31 f4! exf4

Or31...2xf4 32f r xe5.

32 e5 #d7 33 Wxb7! ^e8 34 Wb» Sd6 35 Wxd6 &b6+ 36 #xb6 Wxc8 37 e6 g5 38 e7 <4>g7 39 &c6 1-0

(Now return to page 143.)

Opposite bishops in the Middlegame

153

Exercise 69

w

AHA

■z mm?.

In this position, which on the face of it looks double-edged, the result is decided by Black's vulnerability on his back rank.

35 Wf7! »fl+ 36 &g4! #g2+ 37 &h5

An astonishing example of 'total war' in chess, where even the white king joins in the attack against the black one.

37...fig8 38 2a8 g6+

There was no salvation in the endgame either: 38...2xa8 39 ±xa8 g6+ 40 #xg6 #xg6+ 41 '4'xg6, and White wins by bringing his h-pawns to h7 and h6, his bishop to e4, and his king to c6 - placing Black in zugzwang.

39i.xg61-0

(Now return to page 143.)

Exercise 70

Black has the worse position. He therefore steers the game into a drawn ending by means of a pawn sacrifice.

31...bxa5 32 bxa5 c5! 33 fixc5 fixc5 34 2xc5 2xc5 35 Wxc5 Wxc5 36 i.xc5 a6 37 i.b6 Jld7 38 £d4 g6 39 *h4 i.e6 40 *g5 Ad7 41 *h6

In the event of 41 g4 fxg442 hxg4 ,£,c8 43 f5 gxf5 44 gxf5 JLd7, the black bishop can play waiting moves on the squares c8 and d7. White therefore has no possibility to exploit a zugzwang situation and will have nothing better than to play e6 at some point. After 45 e6+ JLxe6 46 fxe6+ 'A'xe6, the queening square of White's sole surviving pawn is in the comer not covered by his bishop, guaranteeing Black an easy draw.

41...&e6 42i.c5

And a draw was soon agreed.

(Now return to page 145.)

Exercise 71

Black's position looks critical. The point is not that he is a pawn down and unable to regain it (39...Sxg5? 40 £g4, with h4 to follow). The main thing, and a recurring feature of middle-games with opposite bishops, is that his king feels most insecure (this comes out in the variation 39...1.xg5? 401T3!, when there is no satisfactory defence to the threat of #g4). Add to this the fact that Black was playing with his flag dangling, and we can only say 'hats off' to the decision Smyslov took:

39...C4!!

Instead of playing to recover his pawn, Smyslov sacrifices another one. It must be stated that this is the only way to save the game!

40 bxc4 Wa3

Forcing a queen exchange, as Black does not risk losing the endgame even with two pawns less! This is guaranteed by his active rook and, crucially, by the opposite bishops.

41 Wxa3 &xa3 The sealed move.

Elements of Chess Strategy

Analysis has convinced Botvinnik that 'peaceful' methods promise White no chance of victory.

42„.gxf5 43 g6 £f8

The only move. Black loses with 43...Sh8? 44 g7 Sg8 45 h4 ±e7 (45...*e7 46 h5 &f 7 47 h6) 46 h5 M6 47 h6 4>e7 48 Sg6.

44 exf5 &g7 45 f6 i.xf6 46 g7 £xg7 47 lxg7 f 3!?

Another move adequate to draw is 47...e4.

48Sg4lh3!!49lg3

Equality similarly results from 4913e4 '4 > d7 (when White should avoid 50 Sxe5? Sh4), or 49 *gl *d7 50 lg7+ <&d6 51 Sg6+.

49...Bh4 50 Bxf3 5xc4 51 Ba3 4»d7 52 *g2 <A>d6 53 <4>g3 *xd5 54 h3!

The straightforward 54 h4?! would give Black some chances (albeit slim ones) of winning by bringing his king to h5.

54...*e6 55 *f 3 *f 5 56 *g3 &g5 57 *f 3 2f4+ 58 *g3 V2-V2

(Now return to page 145.)

Exercise 72

w

m

ikm'^wk

mk mk

AI

IfdbPl

Every move with a pawn must be extremely well thought out!

'Measure seven times, cut once!' is a popular Russian proverb. In support of this absolutely correct principle, I have an adage of my own, facetious though it may sound: every faulty pawn move in a game of chess is worse than an unhappy marriage.

Just consider. A girl has chosen a partner for herself, hurriedly and - as it later turns out - unwisely. Oh, what a calamity! She 'only' needs to get a divorce and choose a more suitable spouse. In chess, on the other hand - make a weak move with a pawn (which as we know doesn't go

backwards), and you must suffer for the rest of your life, that is, to the end of the game.

Of course this is a joke, but you can draw the conclusions yourself.

Black's mistaken pawn move 24...b6? is based on weak prophylactic thinking and a failure to envisage the coming events. In consequence he completely loses control of the situation on the board. He had to keep the c-file sealed and his knight supported.

25 2f4!

The result is that White already threatens 26 Sxc6 2xc6 27 £>e5+. On 25...<4>g8 he has the unpleasant 26 <5}d2!, threatening £ie4. His initiative begins to snowball.

25...<4»g6 26 g4!? Aal

Black could try 26...£te5, though after 27 g5 he should avoid the obvious 27...hxg5? 28 hxg5 £)d3 29 gxf6 £M4+ 30 exf4 gxf6 31 f5+, when White's advantage is close to decisive, and instead play 27...<5}d3, the point being that at the end of the analogous line, White will not have £ih4+ because his pawn is still on that square. White may do better with 27 fle4.

27 Bel &b2 28 Sc2 Aal 29 a4! (D)

The continuation 29 h5+?! 4>h7 30 g5 g6 leads only to a reduction of the pawns, which definitely favours the defending side. After 29 2fc4?! £ie5, the exchange of knights brings the 'pure' opposite-bishop position closer, so of course this too would suit Black.

29...£ie5?!

Here, however, the knight exchange allows both white rooks to attain maximum activity. If you add to this that we are still clearly in a middlegame position and that the black king is in danger, it is easy to assume that White's initiative will soon grow into an attack.

Opposite bishops in the Middlegame

155

30 £ixe5+ &xe5 31 lf8! Hdd7

31 ...&hl is better, though it is likely that the result of the game would no longer have been affected.

32f4lc7

Black loses at once with 32...1.c7? 33 f5+ exf5 34gxf5+<4>h7 35f6!.

33 ld2 i.c3 34 fld6 *h7 35 g5 hxg5 36 hxg5 ±M (D)

m m,m

w

i A m J wA

m m.

In the present situation a more critical factor is Black's weakened king position. The isolation of his d-pawn was counterbalanced by the threat to advance it with ...d4 and by the wealth of piece-play on the open c-file involving ...Jlac8-c3. Therefore the position after 20...#xe6 could rightly be acknowledged as approximately equal.

In the game, after 20...fxe6?, there followed:

21 #e2 lac8 22 Sfcl Sc6 23 g3 Sdc8 24 lxc6 #xc6 25 h4!

The black king has started to feel uncomfortable. Now in the event of 25...e5 26 e4 d4 27 h5 White would retain the initiative after either 27...gxh5 28 #xh5 #h6 29 Wg4 or 27...g5 28 #g4.

White went on to win the game.

(Now return to page 147.)

Solutions to Additional Exercises

Additional Exercise 72A: What is White's best continuation?

(For the answer, see page 156.)

Exercise 73

Additional Exercise 66A

In the game, Black missed the point. Concerned to fortify his weak pawn on d5, he played:

20...fxe6?

But in chess as in life, everything tends to be ambivalent, and the advantages of a particular decision are accompanied by its shortcomings. Indeed, chess understanding is defined by the need to weigh all the pros and cons - as if on a beam balance - in the process of selecting the most acceptable decision.

JtM&i

7//,*^ W////,

w

iH&ifl Ji

■ ■HI

m

A

&LSW

In the game, Black resolved on:

27...&C6

Parrying the threat of 28 #xf8-i- in view of 28...<±>xf8 29 &xf6 #xd7. However, White has other approaches, and as the game went, the struggle flared up with new vehemence.

Bronstein proposed 27...e5! as "a more radical solution to the problem of defending the whole diagonal". After 28 #h3 #e7 (intending ...Sd8, ...&c6 and ...Ixd7), 29 f4 looks necessary but it does no more than maintain equality, while after 28 h4 Sf7 29 h5 lxd7 30 Ixd7 #xd7 31 hxg6 hxg6 32 #xg6+ #g7 (as given by Bronstein) White should probably take an immediate draw by perpetual check. After 28

ELEMENTS OF CHESS STRATEGY

f4 Sf7, Bronstein gave 29 fxe5? Bxd7 30 Sf 1 2d 1, when Black wins, but 29 Wh3 or 29 ±xe5 should keep things fairly level. 28 h4 &xd7 29 h5 (D)

29...gxh5?!

On 29...g5 30 JLxf6, Black cannot contemplate 30...Wxf6 as 31 #xf6 Sxf6 32 2xd7 gives him a lost rook endgame, so he must try 30...Sxf6 31 #xg5+ &f7 32 h6. Then 32...e5? loses to 33 2d6, while 32...#e7? 33 Sxd7 isn't much more palatable. However, 32...'4 > e7! is a solid defence; e.g., 33 e4 *e8 34 Wg8+ Bf8 35 #xh7 #e7 36 Wg6+ Wf 1 37 #g3 Wf4.

30e4e5 31f4exf4?

White is better after 31.. McJ 32 fxe5 fxe5 33 &xe5 ±g4 34 2d5 or 31...2f7 32 #xh5 (or 32 2d3), but both are more resilient than the move played.

32 2d6 We8 33 Axf 6 Sf7? 34 2d5 1-0

(Now return to page 139.)

Additional Exercise 72A

w

In the game, he played 37 2dd8?!, which indeed is sufficient for victory. Yet a much more pleasing way is the striking and effective 37 g6+!, underlining the desperate position of the black king. Then either 37...4'xg6 38 JLf5+ or 37...<4>h6 38 JLf5! leads to mate.

The game continued:

37...4>g6

Instead 37...g6 would have prolonged the struggle.

38 *f 3 Sf 7 39 2h8 e5 40 ±g4

Or 40 JLe6, which also wins.

40...exf4 41 Sd5 fxe3+ 42 <4>g3 1-0

(Now return to page 146.)

Index of Players

Numbers refer to pages. When a player's name appears in bold, that player had White. Otherwise the FIRST-NAMED PLAYER had White.

Abramovic - Sergeev, VI. 80

ADDISON - Smyslov 143

AGZAMOV - Kosikov 61

AKOPIAN, G. - Orekhov 69

Alatortsev - Euwe 62

ALEKHINE - Alexander 60; Levitsky 110;

Spencer, E. 56; Tarrasch 18; Znosko-

Borovsky 17 ALEXANDER - Alekhine 60 ANAND - Gelfand 57; Kasparov 105; Svidler

61 ANDERSSEN - Falkbeer 141; Paulsen, L. 67 ARNASON - Kasparov 79 ARONIAN - Ivanchuk 13; Rozentalis 134 ARONIN - Lilienthal 143 ARONSON - Tal 10 ASEEV-Sturua 138 AVERBAKH - Bondarevsky 110; Taimanov

138 AZMAIPARASHVILI - Yudasin 63 BAGIROV - Kholmov 112 BALASHOV - Khalifman 19 Balendo - Boleslavsky 83 BANNIK-Tal 114 BAREEV - Shirov 11 Bauer, C. - Dorfman 53 BELIAVSKY - Cebalo 132; Forintos 63 BENJAMIN - Friedman, A. 136 BLACKBURNE - Lasker, Em. 71 BLATNY - Ivanchuk 136 BOBOTSOV - Keres 135 BOLESLAVSKY - Balendo 83; Bondarevsky

107; Sterner 130 BONDAREVSKY - Averbakh 1 10;

Boleslavsky 107 BOTVINNIK - Furman 76; Lilienthal 142;

Moiseev 115; Romanovsky 67;

Romanovsky 106; Sliwa 116; Smyslov

145; Sorokin 12; Tal 12, 117; Zagoriansky

15 BOUAZIZ - Miles 108

BRONSTEIN - Petrosian 12 BROWNE - Mecking 56 CAPABLANCA - Schroeder 17 Cebalo - Beliavsky 132 CHIBURDANIDZE - Marie, A. 81 CHIGORIN - Falk 54 CHISTIAKOV - Simagin 133 CHRISTIANSEN - Kasparov 64 ClFUENTES - Dorfman 147 DARGA - Fischer 20 Davcevski - Vukic 16 DE LA PAZ - Perez, Ro. 137 DEMENTIEV - Dzhindzhikhashvili 82 DOLMATOV - Reich, T. 119 DONCHENKO - Korsunsky 55 DONNER - Velimirovic 85 DORFMAN - Bauer, C. 53; Cifuentes 147;

Kozlov, A. 64 DVORETSKY - Ruderfer 107; Vikulov 131 Dzhindzhikhashvili - Dementiev 82 DZIADYK - Kosikov 113 ENGLISCH - Steinitz 75 ESTEVEZ - Karpov 83 EUWE - Alatortsev 62 Falk - Chigorin 54 FALKBEER - Anderssen 141 FEUER, O. - O'Kelly 111 FISCHER - Darga 20; Saidy 29; Shocron 113;

Spassky 14; Spassky 57 FLORlAN-Kotov52 FOGUELMAN - Smyslov 65 FORINTOS - Beliavsky 63 FRIEDMAN, A. - Benjamin 136 FRUMSON - Muratov 63 FURMAN - Botvinnik 76 GELFAND - Anand 57; Seirawan 80 GELLER - Hort 11

GHEORGHIU - Grigorov 137; Olafsson, F. 74 GHINDA - Kindermann 132 GLIGORIC - Larsen 55 GLUSHKOV - Zakharov 140

Elements of Chess Strategy

GRIGOROV - Gheorghiu 137

GROSZPETER - Portisch 84

GULKO - Vasiukov 68

GUREVICH, D. - Seirawan 11

HORT-Geller 11

HUBNER - Smyslov 64

HUNTER, C. - Sevecek, R. 139

IVANCHUK - Aronian 13; Blatny 136; Yudasin

11 JANOWSKI - Lasker, Em. 107; Rubinstein 20 KAMSKY - Kasparov 129; Salov 58 KAPENGUT - Timoshchenko 127 KARNER-Vogt 112 Karpov - Estevez 83; Kasparov 112, 126;

Kasparov 147; Korchnoi 144; Ljubojevic

88; Seirawan 84; Spassky 19; Tal 131;

Timman 139 Kasparov - Anand 105; Arnason 79;

Christiansen 64; Kamsky 129; Karpov

112, 126; Karpov 147; Khuzman 10;

Olafsson, H. 129 KELLY, B. - Yusupov 143 KERES - Bobotsov 135 Kernazhitsky - Kosikov 44 KHALIFMAN - Balashov 19; Timoshchenko

73 KHOLMOV - Bagirov 112; Simagin 118 KHUZMAN - Kasparov 10 KINDERMANN - Ghinda 1 32 KINSMAN - Shirov 16 KLOVANS - Kosikov 133; Vitolins 135 KOBERL-Szabo 141 KOCHIEV - Kuzmin, G. 11 8 KONSTANTINOV - Nezhmetdinov 118 KORCHNOI - Karpov 144; Lobron 86 KORSUNSKY - Donchenko 55 KOSIKOV - Agzamov 61; Dziadyk 113;

Kernazhitsky 44; Klovans 133; Kots 108;

Panchenko, A.G. 47; Stopkin 1 19;

Zubov, A. 111 KOSTRO - Pytel 77 KOTOV - Florian 52 KOTS - Kosikov 108 KOVACEVIC - Ribli 82 KOZLOV, A. - Dorfman 64 KUZMIN, G. - Kochiev 118 LARSEN - Gligoric 55; Sarapu 81 LASKER, EM. - Blackburne 71; Janowski 107 LEVITSKY - Alekhine 110 LILIENTHAL - Aronin 143; Botvinnik 142 Ljubojevic - Karpov 88

LOBRON - Korchnoi 86; Spraggett 19

Makarychev - Robatsch 114

MARIC, A. - Chiburdanidze 81

Matanovic - Smyslov 10

MECKING - Browne 56

MICHELL - Tartakower 72

MIKENAS - Smyslov 74

MILES - Bouaziz 108

MlLOV-VanWely78

MINEV - Wood 73

MOISEEV - Botvinnik 115

MURATOV - Frumson 63

NEZHMETDINOV - Konstantinov 118

NIKOLIC - Sznapik 18

NIMZOWITSCH - Rubinstein 21; Wolf, H. 10

NUNN - Ye Rongguang 72

0'KELLY-Feuer,0. Ill

Olafsson, F. - Gheorghiu 74

Olafsson, H. - Kasparov 129

OREKHOV - Akopian, G. 69

Panchenko, A.G. - Kosikov 47

Paulsen, L. - Anderssen 67

PEREZ, RO. - de la Paz 137

PETROSIAN - Bronstein 12

PIKET - Van Wely 59

PIRA- Shirov 145

PIRC - Schmidt, P. 1 14

PlRROr - Svidler 105

PORTISCH - Groszpeter 84

PRASAD-Sax 128

PSAKHIS - Speelman 65; Sveshnikov 80

PYTEL - Kostro 77

RAUZER-Riumin61

RAZUVAEV - Sigurjonsson 126

REICH, T. - Dolmatov 119

RIBLI - Kovacevic 82

RICHTER - Tarrasch 71

RIUMIN-Rauzer61

ROBATSCH - Makarychev 114

ROMANOVSKY - Botvinnik 67; Botvinnik

106 ROZENTALIS - Aronian 134 RUBINSTEIN - Janowski 20; Nimzowitsch 21 RUDERFER - Dvoretsky 107 SABININ - Tamarkin 136 Sagalchik - Yudasin 128 SAIDY - Fischer 29 SALOV - Kamsky 58; Timman 145 Sarapu -Larsen 81 Sax -Prasad 128 SCHIFFER - Ziiger 77

Index of players

159

Schmidt, P. - Pirc 114 SCHROEDER - Capablanca 17 Seirawan - Gelfand 80; Gurevich, D. 1 1;

Karpov84;Tall35 SERGEEV, VL. - Abramovic 80 SEVECEK, R. - Hunter, C. 139 SHIROV - Bareev 11; Kinsman 16; Pira 145 SHOCRON - Fischer 113 SHORT - Zilber 60 SlEGEL, G. - Stefanova 87 SlGURJONSSON - Razuvaev 126; Vasiukov 75 SlMAGIN - Chistiakov 133; Kholmov 118;

Smyslov 21; Spassky 127; Taimanov 18 SLIWA - Botvinnik 116 SMYSLOV - Addison 143; Botvinnik 145;

Foguelman 65; Hiibner 64; Matanovic 10;

Mikenas 74; Simagin 21; Suba 59;

Taimanov 85 SOKOLOV, A. - Yusupov 130 SORIN - Valerga 19 SOROKIN - Botvinnik 12 SPASSKY - Fischer 14; Fischer 57; Karpov

19; Simagin 127 Speelman - Psakhis 65 Spencer, E. - Alekhine 56 SPRAGGETT - Lobron 19; Yusupov 145 Stefanova - Siegel, G. 87 STEINITZ - Englisch 75 Sterner - Boleslavsky 130 STOPKIN - Kosikov 119 Sturua - Aseev 138 SUBA - Smyslov 59; Tukmakov 142 SUETIN - Yuferov 70 SUTTLES-Tal76 SVESHNIKOV - Psakhis 80 SviDLER - Anand 61; Pirrot 105 SZABO-Koberl 141 Sznapik - Nikolic 18

Taimanov - Averbakh 138; Simagin 18;

Smyslov 85 Tal - Aronson 10; Bannik 114; Botvinnik

12, 117; Karpov 131; Seirawan 135;

Suttles 76 Tamarkin - Sabinin 136 TARRASCH - Alekhine 18; Richter 71 Tartakower - Michell 72 TIMMAN - Karpov 1 39; Salov 145 TIMOSHCHENKO - Kapengut 127; Khalifman

73 TUKMAKOV - Suba 142 Valerga - Sorin 19 VAN WELY - Milov 78; Piket 59 VASIUKOV - Gulko 68; Sigurjonsson 75 VELIMIROVIC - Donner 85 VIKULOV - Dvoretsky 131 VILLAMAYOR - Wang Lei 134 VITOLINS-Klovans 135 VIZE - Yudovich Jr 82 VOGT-Karner 112 VUKIC - Davcevski 16 Wang Lei - Villamayor 134 Wolf, H. - Nimzowitsch 10 Wood - Minev 73 YE RONGGUANG - Nunn 72 YUDASIN - Azmaiparashvili 63; Ivanchuk

ll;Sagalchikl28 YUDOVICH JR - Vize 82 YUFEROV - Suetin 70 YUSUPOV - Kelly, B. 143; Sokolov, A. 130;

Spraggett 145 Zagoriansky - Botvinnik 1 5 Zakharov - Glushkov 140 ZILBER - Short 60 ZNOSKO-BOROVSKY - Alekhine 17 ZUBOV, A. - Kosikov 111 ZUGER - Schiffer 77

Play the Najdorf Sicilian

James Rizzitano

The legendary Najdorf is one of the great

chess openings - regarded by top

grandmasters as the best way for Black to

play for a win against 1 e4. In this superbly

researched guide, International Master James

Rizzitano distils important ideas and themes

from current practice.

144pages, 248x 172 mm; $22.95 / £13.99

Nunn's Chess Endings Volume 1

John Nunn

Renowned endgame theoretician John Nunn teaches the skills that are most important to success in practical endgames. Nunn shows that lack of familiarity with key ideas can cause important themes to be missed even by very strong players - and we discover that a staggering amount of previously published endgame analysis is wrong. This first volume covers pawn endings, queen endings and minor-piece endings. 320pages, 248 x 172 mm; $29.95 / £17.99

Play the Alekhine

Valentin Bogdanov

The Alekhine (l...£rf6) is arguably the most aggressive reply to 1 e4. Black immediately forces the pace and drags the game onto his own favoured territory. Bogdanov describes the unique positional and tactical themes, and presents a wealth of new ideas for both sides. 128 pages, 248 x 172 mm; $19.95 / £12.99

FCO: Fundamental Chess Openings

Paul van der Sterren

The perfect survival guide to the chess

openings. All openings are covered, with

detailed verbal explanations of plans for both

sides. The strategies explained will remain

valid as long as chess is played, and so the

time spent studying this book will be

rewarded many times over.

480 pages, 248x172 mm; $29.95 / £19.99

Mastering the Chess Openings Volume 4

John Watson

In this highly-acclaimed series, John Watson

explains not only the ideas and strategies

behind specific openings, but also the

interconnections of chess openings taken as a

whole. This final volume is packed with

original analysis, and covers a wide variety of

opening structures and variations not seen in

the earlier volumes.

320pages, 248x 172mm; $29.95/£17.99

A Killer Chess Opening Repertoire - new ed.

Aaron Summer scale & Sverre Johnsen Bored with the same old openings? Worried about having to learn too much theory? Then this book will come as a godsend. The queen's pawn repertoire for White is based on rapid piece development, and includes many lethal attacking ideas and traps. 192pages, 210x 145mm; $19.95 /£12.99

Understanding the Marshall Attack

David Vigorito

It is almost a century since Marshall invented

his gambit in the Ruy Lopez, but it is still

controversial and popular. Vigorito explains

how Black secures long-term attacking

chances and activity that can persist well into

the endgame, and provides cutting-edge

theoretical coverage of its main lines,

including the Anti-Marshalls.

192pages, 248x 172mm; $23.95 /£14.99

The Giant Chess Puzzle Book

Zenon Franco

This fun and challenging book begins with 120 relatively easy positions suitable for novices, and ends with a selection of extremely tough puzzles, which provide a mind-bending challenge even for grandmasters. There are 1001 puzzles in total, all with detailed solutions and verbal explanations of the instructive points. 288pages, 248x 172 mm; $26.95 /£16.99

About the Publisher: Gambit is a specialist chess publishing company, owned and run exclusively by chess masters and grandmasters. We are passionate about producing innovative and instructive chess books, suitable for all levels of player.

HAJMBIIT

www.gambitbooks.com

iGHMB I

www.gambitbooks.com

Forming a plan is the most important goal of logical chess thought. Without a good plan, we are reduced to tactical opportunism, rather than harnessing the power of our pieces to achieve specific tasks and make methodical progress towards victory.

However, few chess-players - even those fortunate enough to have a trainer -develop a disciplined approach to planning. In this book, one of the world's leading chess teachers provides step-by-step guidelines for identifying the features of a position onto which our strategy should be latched. He adopts a thoroughly modern approach, recognizing that the opponent will have his own plans and will be attempting to disrupt ours. The effectiveness of Kosikov's methods - in particular the STEPS algorithm - is shown by his pupils' over-the-board proficiency.

Having presented the basics of orderly strategic thinking, Kosikov shows them at work in a variety of middlegame and endgame situations, especially the strategic minefield of minor-piece play. Examples are taken from both classic games and modern grandmaster play, together with instructive moments from games by the author's pupils.

Alexei Kosikov is a chess master from Ukraine who has enjoyed an illustrious career as a chess trainer. He has nurtured a vast array of chess talents, including nine who have achieved grandmaster titles, perhaps most notably Vladimir Baklan and Dmitry Komarov. He has written extensively about chess -and combinations in particular - and was a frequent lecturer at the Yusupov/Dvoretsky elite chess school, to whose training manuals he also contributed.

THE

GIANT , CHESS PUZZLE , BOOK

H

Improve

Your

Chess

ISBN-13: T7fl-l-10bMS4-2M-l ISBN-ID: l-1Dt,454-24-8

-bylearning j from the i|_ champions

Lars Bo Hansen