Black to move
How should Black deal with the fork?
9 Winning Tips From Kasparov
1 day ago
Showing posts with label Tarrasch. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Tarrasch. Show all posts
14 October 2021
Lasker's Originality
I am watching chess videos that are part of the Fritz Trainer DVD, Master Class, vol. 5: Emanuel Lasker (2015). Mihail Marin makes the argument that Emanuel Lasker was an original strategic player who sought to bring new ideas into familiar openings. In the fourth game of his World Championship match with Siegbert Tarrasch, Lasker brought his rook to the fifth rank, then transferred in to the fourth, where tactical complications ensued. Tarrasch made a few small errors, leading to this position.
06 April 2021
Capablanca -- Lasker, Game 9
The ninth game of the World Championship Match between José Raúl Capablanca and Emanuel Lasker was played in a single sitting on 6 April 1921. It brought the eighth draw of the match. This post is part 15 in a series recognizing the centennial of this match. Each post is timed to correspond to the anniversary of the featured game or related event. The index tag WCC Havana 1921 links the entire series.
In his exceptional biography of Capablanca, Miguel A. Sánchez has annotations to games 1, 2, and 5, then offers: "After the fifth game there were four draws, and then" [he annotates game ten] (247).* Earlier in the text, he described criticism of the many draws in the 1909 match between Capablanca and Frank Marshall, criticism that included a cartoon published in The Chess Weekly (Brooklyn, NY) on 26 June 1909 after the match had ended. Edward Winter appends the same cartoon to the top of "Chess Draws," Chess Notes (updated 14 August 2020).
At the time, according to Sánchez, Lasker addressed the complaints with a defense of draws:
Capablanca,José Raúl -- Lasker,Emanuel [D34]
World Championship 12th Havana (9), 06.04.1921
[Capablanca/Lasker]
1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 e6 3.c4 c5
"This, too, from Dr. Tarrasch strongly recommended, is playable. Of course, Black has to accept the isolation of his queen's pawn." (Lasker)
4.cxd5 exd5 5.Nc3 Nc6 6.g3 Nf6 7.Bg2
Capablanca 1:55 - Lasker 1:37
*Miguel A. Sánchez, José Raúl Capablanca: A Chess Biography (Jefferson, NC: McFarland, 2015).
In his exceptional biography of Capablanca, Miguel A. Sánchez has annotations to games 1, 2, and 5, then offers: "After the fifth game there were four draws, and then" [he annotates game ten] (247).* Earlier in the text, he described criticism of the many draws in the 1909 match between Capablanca and Frank Marshall, criticism that included a cartoon published in The Chess Weekly (Brooklyn, NY) on 26 June 1909 after the match had ended. Edward Winter appends the same cartoon to the top of "Chess Draws," Chess Notes (updated 14 August 2020).
At the time, according to Sánchez, Lasker addressed the complaints with a defense of draws:
From Europe, where the match and the criticism of the repeated draws were well known, Lasker wrote that although the public pays to see a chess master play, it has no right to coerce him to do it poorly. Each master plays as he knows and can. Capablanca was playing excellent chess. That's the most he could be asked to do, emphasized Lasker. (119)I opined in my notes to game 7 that the process of making small changes in the opening is of vital importance in a match of many games. What looks to spectators as an easy draw is often carefully crafted intelligence gathering.
Capablanca,José Raúl -- Lasker,Emanuel [D34]
World Championship 12th Havana (9), 06.04.1921
[Capablanca/Lasker]
1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 e6 3.c4 c5
"This, too, from Dr. Tarrasch strongly recommended, is playable. Of course, Black has to accept the isolation of his queen's pawn." (Lasker)
4.cxd5 exd5 5.Nc3 Nc6 6.g3 Nf6 7.Bg2
Black to move
7...Be6
A more common move order that reaches a position similar to the game continues 7...Be7 8.O-O O-O 9.dxc5 Bxc5 10.Bg5 d4. Here, I think, having castled may be more useful to Black than having a bishop on e6.
8.0-0 Be7 9.dxc5 Bxc5 10.Bg5 d4
"The idea for this fine move, or at least the further development of the idea, is due to Dr. Tarrasch." (Lasker)
And so, Lasker presents Capablanca with a small problem. There have been 21 games reaching this position of sufficient quality to merit inclusion in PowerBook 2020. These split almost evenly between the two options that Capablanca considered.
A more common move order that reaches a position similar to the game continues 7...Be7 8.O-O O-O 9.dxc5 Bxc5 10.Bg5 d4. Here, I think, having castled may be more useful to Black than having a bishop on e6.
8.0-0 Be7 9.dxc5 Bxc5 10.Bg5 d4
"The idea for this fine move, or at least the further development of the idea, is due to Dr. Tarrasch." (Lasker)
And so, Lasker presents Capablanca with a small problem. There have been 21 games reaching this position of sufficient quality to merit inclusion in PowerBook 2020. These split almost evenly between the two options that Capablanca considered.
White to move
11.Ne4
"I had never seen this variation before and I therefore thought for a long time in order to make up my mind as to whether I should play 11.Bxf6 or 11.Ne4. I finally decided upon the latter move as the safest course." (Capablanca)
11...Be7 12.Nxf6+
"The continuation of the Bilguer is 12.Bxf6 Bxf6 13.Qa4 Bd5 14.Nxf6+ Qxf6 15.Rfd1 0-0-0 16.Rac1 Kb8 I believe that Black can hold the position." (Lasker)
Lasker's "the Bilguer" must be a reference to Handbuch des Schachspiels, the standard opening reference of the day, edited in early editions by Paul Rudolf von Bilguer.
12...Bxf6 13.Bxf6 Qxf6
"I had never seen this variation before and I therefore thought for a long time in order to make up my mind as to whether I should play 11.Bxf6 or 11.Ne4. I finally decided upon the latter move as the safest course." (Capablanca)
11...Be7 12.Nxf6+
"The continuation of the Bilguer is 12.Bxf6 Bxf6 13.Qa4 Bd5 14.Nxf6+ Qxf6 15.Rfd1 0-0-0 16.Rac1 Kb8 I believe that Black can hold the position." (Lasker)
Lasker's "the Bilguer" must be a reference to Handbuch des Schachspiels, the standard opening reference of the day, edited in early editions by Paul Rudolf von Bilguer.
12...Bxf6 13.Bxf6 Qxf6
White to move
"It is my impression that this position is not good for Black, though perhaps there may be no way to force a win." (Capalanca)
14.Qa4 0-0
"This seemed better to me than Be6-d5. Black is now quite good. The queen's pawn has been threatened, but Black has counter threats." (Lasker)
15.Qb5
"Threatening not only 16.Qxb7 but also 16.Qg5 exchanging Queens." (Capablanca)
Both 15.Rfd1 and 15.Nd2 have been played in the three games to reach this position in Mega 2020.
15...Rab8 16.Rfd1 h6
"Secures the important Be6 against the white knight." (Lasker)
White did get an advantage in Mamoshin,V. -- Olenin,N., Tula 2004, one of the games with 15.Rfd1, continuing 15...d3 16.exd3 Qxb2 17.Ng5 Rad8 18.Qe4 g6 19.Nxe6 fxe6 and White eventually won.
17.Ne1 Rfe8
14.Qa4 0-0
"This seemed better to me than Be6-d5. Black is now quite good. The queen's pawn has been threatened, but Black has counter threats." (Lasker)
15.Qb5
"Threatening not only 16.Qxb7 but also 16.Qg5 exchanging Queens." (Capablanca)
Both 15.Rfd1 and 15.Nd2 have been played in the three games to reach this position in Mega 2020.
15...Rab8 16.Rfd1 h6
"Secures the important Be6 against the white knight." (Lasker)
White did get an advantage in Mamoshin,V. -- Olenin,N., Tula 2004, one of the games with 15.Rfd1, continuing 15...d3 16.exd3 Qxb2 17.Ng5 Rad8 18.Qe4 g6 19.Nxe6 fxe6 and White eventually won.
17.Ne1 Rfe8
White to move
18.Rd2
"Of course 18.Bxc6 is inadequate, as the Be6 would then come into its own." (Lasker)
18...Bg4 19.Rc1 Re5 20.Qd3
"If 20.Rc5 Qg5 with a winning game." (Capablanca)
20...Rbe8 21.Bf3
"If 21.Bxc6, then 21...Bxe2 with advantage." (Lasker)
21...Bxf3
"Black could have tried to keep up the attack by playing 21...h5 The text move simplifies matters and easily leads to a draw." (Capablanca)
22.Nxf3 Re4 23.Rc4
"Of course 18.Bxc6 is inadequate, as the Be6 would then come into its own." (Lasker)
18...Bg4 19.Rc1 Re5 20.Qd3
"If 20.Rc5 Qg5 with a winning game." (Capablanca)
20...Rbe8 21.Bf3
"If 21.Bxc6, then 21...Bxe2 with advantage." (Lasker)
21...Bxf3
"Black could have tried to keep up the attack by playing 21...h5 The text move simplifies matters and easily leads to a draw." (Capablanca)
22.Nxf3 Re4 23.Rc4
Black to move
23...Qe6
"Pity! Black still had a lot of time to draw. With 23...Qg6 Black would have posed a problem for the opponent, since then Re4xe2 threatened. For example 24.Kf1 Qg4 25.Kg2 Qe6 26.Nxd4 Qd5." (Lasker)
24.Nxd4 Nxd4 ½-½
"The game was simply clear here. 24...Qd6 would be bad because of 25.Qc3." (Lasker)
"Pity! Black still had a lot of time to draw. With 23...Qg6 Black would have posed a problem for the opponent, since then Re4xe2 threatened. For example 24.Kf1 Qg4 25.Kg2 Qe6 26.Nxd4 Qd5." (Lasker)
24.Nxd4 Nxd4 ½-½
"The game was simply clear here. 24...Qd6 would be bad because of 25.Qc3." (Lasker)
Capablanca 1:55 - Lasker 1:37
*Miguel A. Sánchez, José Raúl Capablanca: A Chess Biography (Jefferson, NC: McFarland, 2015).
22 March 2021
The Tarrasch Trap
I mentioned the "Tarrasch Trap" in annotations to Capablanca -- Lasker, game 3 in the World Championship match in Havana, March-April 1921. This possibility was noted by American Chess Bulletin as something that Lasker had to avoid in that game. There are, in fact, two Tarrasch Traps in the Spanish opening. The one that is our concern here is sometimes called the Dresden Trap because Siegbert Tarrasch played it against Georg Marco there in a tournament in summer 1892.
In Tarrasch's annotations to this game in Dreihundert Schachpartien (1896), he noted, "it is an exact copy of the analysis given by me in the February edition of the Schachzeitung" (248).* The referenced analysis was in the form of an annotation on the second game of the 1891 World Championship match between Isidor Gunsberg and Wilhelm Steinitz. This was published as "Partieen aus dem Wettkampf Gunsberg-Steinitz", Deutsches Schachzeitung 46, no. 2 (February 1891), 41-56.
Gunsberg,Isidor -- Steinitz,William [C60]
World Championship, New York (2), 11.12.1890
[Tarrasch]
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 d6
The Spanish game is, theoretically at least, difficult to defend, because in most variants White has the advantage that his king's bishop is better than Black's. Steinitz currently considers the present defense to be the best; However, it gives the player a rather cramped and pressed game, which is why I prefer the usual move Nf6.
4.c3
A stronger attack is 4.d2-d4; if Black takes the pawn, attractive play develops after Nd4: with Nc3, O-O and Bb2!, which gives White an excellent game (cf. the game Tarrasch - Blackburne, Schachzeitung, November 1890). It is best to omit the exchange on c6 completely in order not to remove the tension, but can also (exceptionally) take advantage of the king's bishop, because in this type of game the knights will prove to be very strong--occasionally one gets to f5 and from there already threatens the position of the Black king, which is also threatened by the open line of the queen's bishop.
But if Black avoids the pawn swap in the fourth move, then, according to Steinitz, the following swap itself leads to a position that is advantageous for White: 4...Bd7 5.Nc3 Nf6 6.0-0 Be7 7.Bxc6.
This variant can be made even more compelling 7.Re1! 0-0 8.Bxc6 Bxc6 9.dxe5 dxe5 10.Qxd8 Raxd8 11.Nxe5 Bxe4 12.Nxe4 Nxe4 13.Nd3 f5 14.f3 Bc5+ 15.Nxc5! Nxc5 16.Bg5 and White wins the exchange through the threat Be7.
Also through 16...Rd5 nothing is to be changed because of 17.Be7 -- with the idea 18.c4. Tarrasch offers detailed analysis after 15.Kf1 instead of 15.Nxc5: 15...Bb6 16.fxe4 (16.Nf4 Nd2+) 16...fxe4+ 17.Nf4 g5 18.Rxe4 gxf4 19.Ke2 (19.Bxf4 Rd2; 19.Rxf4 Rd1+ 20.Ke2 Rxf4 21.Kxd1 Rf2 and Black is better) 19...Rfe8 20.Rxe8+ Rxe8+ 21.Kf3 Re1 22. -- threatening Be3.
The rest of Gunsberg -- Steinitz is not our present interest. Nor are Tarrasch's annotations to the rest of this game, which are detailed.
7...Bxc6 8.dxe5 dxe5 9.Qxd8+ Rxd8 10.Nxe5 Bxe4 11.Nxe4 Nxe4 12.Re1] 4...Bd7 5.0-0 Nge7 6.d4 Ng6 7.d5 Nb8 8.Bxd7+ Nxd7 9.Na3 Be7 10.Nc2 Nc5 11.Qe2 Qd7 12.b4 Na4 13.Bd2 0-0 14.c4 f5 15.exf5 Qxf5 16.Rac1 Rae8 17.Nfe1 Bg5 18.g3 Nc3 19.Bxc3 Bxc1 20.Ng2 Qf3 21.Qxf3 Rxf3 22.Nge3 Bxe3 23.Nxe3 Ref8 24.Kg2 c6 25.Bb2 cxd5 26.Nxd5 Rd3 27.Bc1 b5 28.Ne3 bxc4 29.Nxc4 Rd4 30.Ne3 Rxb4 31.Rd1 Rb1 32.Ba3 Rxd1 33.Nxd1 Rd8 34.f3 d5 35.Nc3 d4 36.Ne4 Rb8 37.h4 h5 38.Kf2 Rb1 39.Bd6 Rb2+ 0-1
We now look more closely at the annotations in Deutsches Schachzeitung through Tarrasch -- Marco, Dresden 1892, a game played eighteen months after the analysis was published. This game followed the main line of Tarrasch's 1891 annotations, and he later reproduced the variations mentioned in 1891 in Dreihundert Schachpartien.
Tarrasch,Siegbert -- Marco,Georg [C66]
DSB Kongress-07 Meisterturnier Dresden (7.3), 22.07.1892
[Tarrasch]
Annotations are from Dreihundert Schachpartien, except two references to Chess Informant's Encyclopedia of Chess Miniatures.
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 d6 4.d4 Bd7 5.Nc3 Be7 6.0-0 Nf6 7.Re1
7...0-0
After this move Black is lost. Better is 7...exd4 but it is not good enough to equalize. Annotations of this game in Encyclopedia of Chess Miniatures (2015) continues: 8.Nxd4 0-0 9.Nxc6 bxc6 10.Bf1with a slight advantage for White.
8.Bxc6 Bxc6
8...bxc6 Black loses a pawn.
9.dxe5 dxe5 10.Qxd8 Raxd8
10...Rfxd8 11.Nxe5 Bxe4 12.Nxe4 Nxe4 13.Nd3 f5 14.f3 Bc5+ 15.Kf1 White would have a plus (see below at annotations to move 15). Encyclopedia of Chess Miniatures offers this line as concluding with a decisive advantage for White.
11.Nxe5 Bxe4 12.Nxe4 Nxe4
13.Nd3 f5 14.f3 Bc5+
15.Nxc5
15.Kf1 would yield no advantage because of 15...Bb6 16.fxe4 (Or 16.Nf4 Nd2+) 16...fxe4+ 17.Nf4 g5 18.Rxe4 gxf4
19.Ke2 (19.Bxf4 Rd2; 19.Rxf4 Rd1+ 20.Ke2 Rxf4 21.Kxd1 Rf2) 19...Rfe8 20.Rxe8+ Rxe8+.
15...Nxc5
In Tarrasch's annotations to this game in Dreihundert Schachpartien (1896), he noted, "it is an exact copy of the analysis given by me in the February edition of the Schachzeitung" (248).* The referenced analysis was in the form of an annotation on the second game of the 1891 World Championship match between Isidor Gunsberg and Wilhelm Steinitz. This was published as "Partieen aus dem Wettkampf Gunsberg-Steinitz", Deutsches Schachzeitung 46, no. 2 (February 1891), 41-56.
Gunsberg,Isidor -- Steinitz,William [C60]
World Championship, New York (2), 11.12.1890
[Tarrasch]
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 d6
The Spanish game is, theoretically at least, difficult to defend, because in most variants White has the advantage that his king's bishop is better than Black's. Steinitz currently considers the present defense to be the best; However, it gives the player a rather cramped and pressed game, which is why I prefer the usual move Nf6.
4.c3
A stronger attack is 4.d2-d4; if Black takes the pawn, attractive play develops after Nd4: with Nc3, O-O and Bb2!, which gives White an excellent game (cf. the game Tarrasch - Blackburne, Schachzeitung, November 1890). It is best to omit the exchange on c6 completely in order not to remove the tension, but can also (exceptionally) take advantage of the king's bishop, because in this type of game the knights will prove to be very strong--occasionally one gets to f5 and from there already threatens the position of the Black king, which is also threatened by the open line of the queen's bishop.
But if Black avoids the pawn swap in the fourth move, then, according to Steinitz, the following swap itself leads to a position that is advantageous for White: 4...Bd7 5.Nc3 Nf6 6.0-0 Be7 7.Bxc6.
This variant can be made even more compelling 7.Re1! 0-0 8.Bxc6 Bxc6 9.dxe5 dxe5 10.Qxd8 Raxd8 11.Nxe5 Bxe4 12.Nxe4 Nxe4 13.Nd3 f5 14.f3 Bc5+ 15.Nxc5! Nxc5 16.Bg5 and White wins the exchange through the threat Be7.
Also through 16...Rd5 nothing is to be changed because of 17.Be7 -- with the idea 18.c4. Tarrasch offers detailed analysis after 15.Kf1 instead of 15.Nxc5: 15...Bb6 16.fxe4 (16.Nf4 Nd2+) 16...fxe4+ 17.Nf4 g5 18.Rxe4 gxf4 19.Ke2 (19.Bxf4 Rd2; 19.Rxf4 Rd1+ 20.Ke2 Rxf4 21.Kxd1 Rf2 and Black is better) 19...Rfe8 20.Rxe8+ Rxe8+ 21.Kf3 Re1 22. -- threatening Be3.
The rest of Gunsberg -- Steinitz is not our present interest. Nor are Tarrasch's annotations to the rest of this game, which are detailed.
7...Bxc6 8.dxe5 dxe5 9.Qxd8+ Rxd8 10.Nxe5 Bxe4 11.Nxe4 Nxe4 12.Re1] 4...Bd7 5.0-0 Nge7 6.d4 Ng6 7.d5 Nb8 8.Bxd7+ Nxd7 9.Na3 Be7 10.Nc2 Nc5 11.Qe2 Qd7 12.b4 Na4 13.Bd2 0-0 14.c4 f5 15.exf5 Qxf5 16.Rac1 Rae8 17.Nfe1 Bg5 18.g3 Nc3 19.Bxc3 Bxc1 20.Ng2 Qf3 21.Qxf3 Rxf3 22.Nge3 Bxe3 23.Nxe3 Ref8 24.Kg2 c6 25.Bb2 cxd5 26.Nxd5 Rd3 27.Bc1 b5 28.Ne3 bxc4 29.Nxc4 Rd4 30.Ne3 Rxb4 31.Rd1 Rb1 32.Ba3 Rxd1 33.Nxd1 Rd8 34.f3 d5 35.Nc3 d4 36.Ne4 Rb8 37.h4 h5 38.Kf2 Rb1 39.Bd6 Rb2+ 0-1
We now look more closely at the annotations in Deutsches Schachzeitung through Tarrasch -- Marco, Dresden 1892, a game played eighteen months after the analysis was published. This game followed the main line of Tarrasch's 1891 annotations, and he later reproduced the variations mentioned in 1891 in Dreihundert Schachpartien.
Tarrasch,Siegbert -- Marco,Georg [C66]
DSB Kongress-07 Meisterturnier Dresden (7.3), 22.07.1892
[Tarrasch]
Annotations are from Dreihundert Schachpartien, except two references to Chess Informant's Encyclopedia of Chess Miniatures.
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 d6 4.d4 Bd7 5.Nc3 Be7 6.0-0 Nf6 7.Re1
Black to move
7...0-0
After this move Black is lost. Better is 7...exd4 but it is not good enough to equalize. Annotations of this game in Encyclopedia of Chess Miniatures (2015) continues: 8.Nxd4 0-0 9.Nxc6 bxc6 10.Bf1with a slight advantage for White.
8.Bxc6 Bxc6
8...bxc6 Black loses a pawn.
9.dxe5 dxe5 10.Qxd8 Raxd8
10...Rfxd8 11.Nxe5 Bxe4 12.Nxe4 Nxe4 13.Nd3 f5 14.f3 Bc5+ 15.Kf1 White would have a plus (see below at annotations to move 15). Encyclopedia of Chess Miniatures offers this line as concluding with a decisive advantage for White.
11.Nxe5 Bxe4 12.Nxe4 Nxe4
White to move
13.Nd3 f5 14.f3 Bc5+
White to move
15.Nxc5
15.Kf1 would yield no advantage because of 15...Bb6 16.fxe4 (Or 16.Nf4 Nd2+) 16...fxe4+ 17.Nf4 g5 18.Rxe4 gxf4
 |
| Analysis diagram |
19.Ke2 (19.Bxf4 Rd2; 19.Rxf4 Rd1+ 20.Ke2 Rxf4 21.Kxd1 Rf2) 19...Rfe8 20.Rxe8+ Rxe8+.
15...Nxc5
White to move
16.Bg5 Rd5 17.Be7
Not 17.c4 at once because of 17...Rd7 18.Be7 Nd3
1-0 Black resigned here as on 17...Re8 (or 17...Rf7) White wins the exchange by 18.c4. This game is an important contribution to the refutation of Steinitz's 3...d6. It is an exact copy of the analysis given by me in the February edition of the Schachzeitung.
As noted in Friday's post, other books offer annotations of this game. There was also a lively discussion several years ago at chessgames.com.
*Siegbert Tarrasch, Three Hundred Chess Games (Dreihundert Schachpartien), trans. Sol Schwarz (1999).
Not 17.c4 at once because of 17...Rd7 18.Be7 Nd3
1-0 Black resigned here as on 17...Re8 (or 17...Rf7) White wins the exchange by 18.c4. This game is an important contribution to the refutation of Steinitz's 3...d6. It is an exact copy of the analysis given by me in the February edition of the Schachzeitung.
As noted in Friday's post, other books offer annotations of this game. There was also a lively discussion several years ago at chessgames.com.
*Siegbert Tarrasch, Three Hundred Chess Games (Dreihundert Schachpartien), trans. Sol Schwarz (1999).
19 March 2021
Capablanca -- Lasker, Game 3
Part 7 of a series recognizing the Centennial of Capablanca -- Lasker, World Chess Championship, Havana 1921.
At first glance, I was not certain what to make of this game. The Four Knights Opening transposed into a Steinitz Defense in the Spanish and it was hard for me to see much opportunity for either player. The middlegame seemed to show a lot of fruitless maneuvering. But, as I spent more time playing through the game and reading annotations, tactical threats and positional nuances became evident.
I started with annotations by both players, and then looked at those in British Chess Magazine by George A. Thomas and the unsigned annotations in American Chess Bulletin. I have the Dover reprint of Capablanca's book on the match, but rely on two ChessBase training DVDs (Master Class vols, 4 and 5) for Lasker's notes. These are in German, which I do not read well.
At one time, I had a decent shelf of German language books, including an excellent dictionary and a couple of grammars. I had two years of high school German, and another year in graduate school. These books were in a box in a closet where a cat's water dish overflowed, ruining the books. Hence, I must rely on Google Translate for unfamiliar words, of which there are plenty.
Game three was played over three days at the Marianao Casino in Havana, mostly on Saturday and Sunday, March 19-20, and then concluded Tuesday, March 22. Monday was a rest day that Lasker ordinarily used to fulfill some journalistic commitments in the Netherlands.
Capablanca,Jose Raul -- Lasker,Emanuel [C66]
World Championship 12th Havana (3), 19.03.1921
[Capablanca/Lasker/Stripes]
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Nc3
In both the Spanish and the Italian, I'd rather put a pawn on c3. As a consequence, I don't think I've played the White side of the Four Knights in this century, except perhaps in a training game with a student. Youth players seem to favor the opening, especially the Italian Four Knights, which FM Jim Maki calls the Spokane Scholastic Opening.
3...Nf6 4.Bb5 d6
4...Nd4 According to I.A. Horowitz, Chess Openings: Theory and Practice (1964), the Rubinstein variation "drove the Four Knights into disrepute" (20). Nonetheless, "there are some finesses to know and some problems not to be underestimated" (13).
Spielmann had credited the Rubinstein variation as, "the main reason why the Four Knights is now played so rarely" (as quoted in Donaldson and Minev, Akiba Rubinstein: Uncrowned King [1994], 195). Donaldson and Minev go on to credit Nigel Short and John Nunn with reviving the opening with new ideas for White.
5.d4 Bd7 6.O-O Be7 7.Re1
7...exd4
American Chess Bulletin points out that 7...0-0 allows White to spring the "Tarrasch Trap", an instructive sequence of exchanges that appeared in Tarrasch -- Marco, Dresden 1892. The game is annotated in Tarrasch, 300 Games of Chess; Tartakower and DuMont, 500 Master Games of Chess; and Reti, Masters of the Chessboard. All of these books are on my shelf, and the annotations are reproduced in ChessBase Mega 2020. Perhaps, I'll create a separate post on the game.
That game continued 8.Bxc6 Bxc6 9.dxe5 dxe5 10.Qxd8 Raxd8 11.Nxe5 Bxe4 12.Nxe4 Nxe4 13.Nd3 f5 14.f3 Bc5+ 15.Nxc5 Nxc5 16.Bg5 Rd5 17.Be7 and Marco resigned. The entire sequence has appeared several times in master play since with a scoring percentage for White near 90%.
8.Nxd4
Lasker had this position twice in his World Championship match with Tarrasch in 1908. He also had it against Janowski in a match a year later that was not an official World Championship match.
8...O-O
8...Nxd4 9.Qxd4 Bxb5 10.Nxb5 0-0 11.Bg5 h6 12.Bh4 Re8 13.Rad1 0-1 (41) Tarrasch,S -- Lasker,E, Duesseldorf & Munich 1908.
9.Bxc6
9.Nxc6 Bxc6 10.Bxc6 bxc6 11.Ne2 Qd7 12.Ng3 Rfe8 13.b3 Rad8 14.Bb2 Ng4 0-1 (41) Tarrasch,S -- Lasker,E, Duesseldorf & Munich 1908.
9...bxc6
10.Bg5
More popular today are 10.Qf3 and 10.Bf4.
10...h6 11.Bh4 Re8 12.Qd3 Nh7 13.Bxe7
An old move, generally played by all the masters. I believe, however, that 13.Bg3 is the best continuation (Capablanca).
13.Bg3 was played against Capablanca two years prior to this match. 13...Nf8 14.Rad1 Bf6 15.Rd2 Qb8 16.f4 Bxd4+ 17.Qxd4 Qxb2 18.Rb1 Qa3 19.Rb3 Qa5 0-1 (32) Cole,H -- Capablanca,J Hastings 1919.
13...Rxe7
14.Re3
14.Qc4 will come up in game six.
14...Qb8
This move gives the game its character. Qxb2 is not threatened directly because Ra1-b1, Qb2-a3, Nc3-d5 would then lead to material superiority, but the move provokes b2-b3 and loosens White's position (Lasker).
15.b3
Unnecessary at this point, since Black cannot take the pawn (Capablanca).
15.Rae1 Qxb2? 16.Rb1 Qa3 17.Nd5 White wins material.
15...Qb6 16.Rae1 Rae8 17.Nf3
White wants to proceed with e4-e5 in order to weaken the point c5 (Lasker).
A nice point about the two ChessBase training DVDs is effective use of the software's capabilities for highlighting squares.
17...Qa5 18.Qd2
Now Nc3-d5 is threatened (Lasker).
18...Ng5
A very good move, which gives Black the better position (Capablanca).
The mutual respect that Capablanca and Lasker had for one another often reveals itself in their annotations.
19.Nxg5
19.Nd5 no longer works 19...Nxf3+ 20.gxf3 Qxd2; 19.Qd3 Nxf3+ 20.Rxf3.
19.Nd4 might have been worth considering.
19...hxg5 20.h3
I would have preferred to try to use the h-file.
This move is necessary because otherwise Black would paralyze the white pawns with g5-g4 (Lasker).
20...Re5 21.Rd1
21...Bc8
Admittedly the energetic 21...f5 is bad, not because of 22.exf5 (But White would not do the Black the favor of exchanging. And after 22.f3 the g5 pawn would be weak. For example 22...d5 [or 22...f4 23.Rd3 and now White occasionally threatens h4, and Black is more on the defensive] 23.Rd3) 22...Rxe3 23.fxe3 Bxf5 where the weakness of c2 and e3, even after 24.e4 Bg6 Black gives good prospects (Lasker).
Now 21...g4 was the stronger continuation. For example 22.hxg4 Bxg4 23.f3 Bc8 24.Qd4 Qb6 25.Red3 f5 (Lasker).
21...f5 22.f3 (22.exf5 Rxe3 23.fxe3 Bxf5) 22...g4 (22...d5 23.Rd3; 22...f4 23.Rd3) (Lasker).
21...g4 22.hxg4 Bxg4 23.f3 Bc8 24.Qd4 Qb6 25.Red3 f5 (Lasker).
22.Rd3 Qb6 23.Kh2 R8e6 24.Rg3
White wants to open lines for the rooks with f2-f4, Black prevents the maneuver by counterattacking f2 (Lasker).
24...Rf6
Artifice and no end! (Lasker).
Why not 24...f6 If White then answers 25.f4, he is at a disadvantage after 25...gxf4 26.Qxf4 Rh5. (Lasker).
25.Kg1
25.f3 would have been answered by 25...Qc5 (Lasker).
25...Kf8 26.Na4 Qa5 27.Qxa5 Rxa5
After exchanging queens, Black has no chance of winning, provided that White goes his straight way without fear or illusion. There is no question that Capablanca is the right man to do this (Lasker).
28.Rc3
Played under the impression that Black would have to play 28...Bd7. Since Black can play the text move, it would have been better for White to have played 28.c4 (Capablanca).
28...Bb7 29.f3 Re6 30.Rcd3 Ba6 31.Rd4 f6
32.Rc1
Perhaps this was the adjourned position. My sources do not indicate the point where the game was adjourned at 1:00 am Sunday morning to be resumed at 9:00 pm.
32.c4 would be an error, as Thomas noted in British Chess Magazine. 32...c5, rook moves, and Bxc4.
32...c5 33.Rd2 Bb5 34.Nc3 Bc6 35.a4
White now threatens to lock up Black's rook with Rc1-a1. If then Ra5-a6 then a4-a5 (Lasker).
35...Ra6 36.Kf2 Rb6 37.Nd1 Kf7
38.Ne3 Rb8 39.Rh1 Ree8 40.Rdd1 Rh8 41.g4 Bd7 42.Nd5 Rb7 43.Kg3 Rh4 44.Rd3 Be6 45.c4
White purposely makes weak pawns on b3 and h3 in order to prevent the advance of c5 and g5 just in case. With that he blocks the position and reaches a draw (Lasker).
The rest of the game seems almost futile. However, perhaps such maneuvering against lesser players could provoke frustration and error.
45...Rh8 46.Rc1 Ke8
47.Ne3
47.f4 would be a blunder 47...c6 48.Re3 (48.Ne3 gxf4+ 49.Kxf4 Rxh3 50.g5 (50.Rxd6 g5#) 50...fxg5+ 51.Kxg5) 48...Kd7 (48...cxd5 49.exd5) 49.fxg5 (49.Nc3 gxf4+ 50.Kxf4 Rxb3) 49...fxg5 50.Nc3 Rxb3.
47...Kd7
White has slightly more space, but the backward pawns are targets. Black's bishop guards against intrusions by the knight.
48.Ng2 Rbb8 49.Re1 Kc6 50.Ne3 Rbe8 51.Rb1 Rh7 52.Rd2 Rb8 53.Rd3 Rbh8
54.Rh1 Kb6 55.Rh2 Kc6 56.Rh1 Rb8 57.Rh2 Rf8 58.Rh1 Kd7 59.Rh2 Bf7 60.Nf5 Rfh8 61.Ne3 Ke6 62.Nd5 Rc8
Here, the game was adjourned a second time.
63.Ne3 ½-½
Lasker had the initiative for much of the game, but could not provoke a decisive error by Capablanca.
At first glance, I was not certain what to make of this game. The Four Knights Opening transposed into a Steinitz Defense in the Spanish and it was hard for me to see much opportunity for either player. The middlegame seemed to show a lot of fruitless maneuvering. But, as I spent more time playing through the game and reading annotations, tactical threats and positional nuances became evident.
I started with annotations by both players, and then looked at those in British Chess Magazine by George A. Thomas and the unsigned annotations in American Chess Bulletin. I have the Dover reprint of Capablanca's book on the match, but rely on two ChessBase training DVDs (Master Class vols, 4 and 5) for Lasker's notes. These are in German, which I do not read well.
At one time, I had a decent shelf of German language books, including an excellent dictionary and a couple of grammars. I had two years of high school German, and another year in graduate school. These books were in a box in a closet where a cat's water dish overflowed, ruining the books. Hence, I must rely on Google Translate for unfamiliar words, of which there are plenty.
Game three was played over three days at the Marianao Casino in Havana, mostly on Saturday and Sunday, March 19-20, and then concluded Tuesday, March 22. Monday was a rest day that Lasker ordinarily used to fulfill some journalistic commitments in the Netherlands.
Capablanca,Jose Raul -- Lasker,Emanuel [C66]
World Championship 12th Havana (3), 19.03.1921
[Capablanca/Lasker/Stripes]
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Nc3
In both the Spanish and the Italian, I'd rather put a pawn on c3. As a consequence, I don't think I've played the White side of the Four Knights in this century, except perhaps in a training game with a student. Youth players seem to favor the opening, especially the Italian Four Knights, which FM Jim Maki calls the Spokane Scholastic Opening.
3...Nf6 4.Bb5 d6
4...Nd4 According to I.A. Horowitz, Chess Openings: Theory and Practice (1964), the Rubinstein variation "drove the Four Knights into disrepute" (20). Nonetheless, "there are some finesses to know and some problems not to be underestimated" (13).
Spielmann had credited the Rubinstein variation as, "the main reason why the Four Knights is now played so rarely" (as quoted in Donaldson and Minev, Akiba Rubinstein: Uncrowned King [1994], 195). Donaldson and Minev go on to credit Nigel Short and John Nunn with reviving the opening with new ideas for White.
5.d4 Bd7 6.O-O Be7 7.Re1
Black to move
7...exd4
American Chess Bulletin points out that 7...0-0 allows White to spring the "Tarrasch Trap", an instructive sequence of exchanges that appeared in Tarrasch -- Marco, Dresden 1892. The game is annotated in Tarrasch, 300 Games of Chess; Tartakower and DuMont, 500 Master Games of Chess; and Reti, Masters of the Chessboard. All of these books are on my shelf, and the annotations are reproduced in ChessBase Mega 2020. Perhaps, I'll create a separate post on the game.
That game continued 8.Bxc6 Bxc6 9.dxe5 dxe5 10.Qxd8 Raxd8 11.Nxe5 Bxe4 12.Nxe4 Nxe4 13.Nd3 f5 14.f3 Bc5+ 15.Nxc5 Nxc5 16.Bg5 Rd5 17.Be7 and Marco resigned. The entire sequence has appeared several times in master play since with a scoring percentage for White near 90%.
8.Nxd4
Lasker had this position twice in his World Championship match with Tarrasch in 1908. He also had it against Janowski in a match a year later that was not an official World Championship match.
8...O-O
8...Nxd4 9.Qxd4 Bxb5 10.Nxb5 0-0 11.Bg5 h6 12.Bh4 Re8 13.Rad1 0-1 (41) Tarrasch,S -- Lasker,E, Duesseldorf & Munich 1908.
9.Bxc6
9.Nxc6 Bxc6 10.Bxc6 bxc6 11.Ne2 Qd7 12.Ng3 Rfe8 13.b3 Rad8 14.Bb2 Ng4 0-1 (41) Tarrasch,S -- Lasker,E, Duesseldorf & Munich 1908.
9...bxc6
White to move
10.Bg5
More popular today are 10.Qf3 and 10.Bf4.
10...h6 11.Bh4 Re8 12.Qd3 Nh7 13.Bxe7
An old move, generally played by all the masters. I believe, however, that 13.Bg3 is the best continuation (Capablanca).
13.Bg3 was played against Capablanca two years prior to this match. 13...Nf8 14.Rad1 Bf6 15.Rd2 Qb8 16.f4 Bxd4+ 17.Qxd4 Qxb2 18.Rb1 Qa3 19.Rb3 Qa5 0-1 (32) Cole,H -- Capablanca,J Hastings 1919.
13...Rxe7
White to move
14.Re3
14.Qc4 will come up in game six.
14...Qb8
This move gives the game its character. Qxb2 is not threatened directly because Ra1-b1, Qb2-a3, Nc3-d5 would then lead to material superiority, but the move provokes b2-b3 and loosens White's position (Lasker).
15.b3
Unnecessary at this point, since Black cannot take the pawn (Capablanca).
15.Rae1 Qxb2? 16.Rb1 Qa3 17.Nd5 White wins material.
15...Qb6 16.Rae1 Rae8 17.Nf3
White wants to proceed with e4-e5 in order to weaken the point c5 (Lasker).
A nice point about the two ChessBase training DVDs is effective use of the software's capabilities for highlighting squares.
Black to move
17...Qa5 18.Qd2
Now Nc3-d5 is threatened (Lasker).
Black to move
18...Ng5
A very good move, which gives Black the better position (Capablanca).
The mutual respect that Capablanca and Lasker had for one another often reveals itself in their annotations.
19.Nxg5
19.Nd5 no longer works 19...Nxf3+ 20.gxf3 Qxd2; 19.Qd3 Nxf3+ 20.Rxf3.
19.Nd4 might have been worth considering.
19...hxg5 20.h3
I would have preferred to try to use the h-file.
This move is necessary because otherwise Black would paralyze the white pawns with g5-g4 (Lasker).
20...Re5 21.Rd1
Black to move
21...Bc8
Admittedly the energetic 21...f5 is bad, not because of 22.exf5 (But White would not do the Black the favor of exchanging. And after 22.f3 the g5 pawn would be weak. For example 22...d5 [or 22...f4 23.Rd3 and now White occasionally threatens h4, and Black is more on the defensive] 23.Rd3) 22...Rxe3 23.fxe3 Bxf5 where the weakness of c2 and e3, even after 24.e4 Bg6 Black gives good prospects (Lasker).
Now 21...g4 was the stronger continuation. For example 22.hxg4 Bxg4 23.f3 Bc8 24.Qd4 Qb6 25.Red3 f5 (Lasker).
21...f5 22.f3 (22.exf5 Rxe3 23.fxe3 Bxf5) 22...g4 (22...d5 23.Rd3; 22...f4 23.Rd3) (Lasker).
21...g4 22.hxg4 Bxg4 23.f3 Bc8 24.Qd4 Qb6 25.Red3 f5 (Lasker).
22.Rd3 Qb6 23.Kh2 R8e6 24.Rg3
White wants to open lines for the rooks with f2-f4, Black prevents the maneuver by counterattacking f2 (Lasker).
24...Rf6
Artifice and no end! (Lasker).
Why not 24...f6 If White then answers 25.f4, he is at a disadvantage after 25...gxf4 26.Qxf4 Rh5. (Lasker).
White to move
25.Kg1
25.f3 would have been answered by 25...Qc5 (Lasker).
25...Kf8 26.Na4 Qa5 27.Qxa5 Rxa5
After exchanging queens, Black has no chance of winning, provided that White goes his straight way without fear or illusion. There is no question that Capablanca is the right man to do this (Lasker).
28.Rc3
Played under the impression that Black would have to play 28...Bd7. Since Black can play the text move, it would have been better for White to have played 28.c4 (Capablanca).
28...Bb7 29.f3 Re6 30.Rcd3 Ba6 31.Rd4 f6
White to move
32.Rc1
Perhaps this was the adjourned position. My sources do not indicate the point where the game was adjourned at 1:00 am Sunday morning to be resumed at 9:00 pm.
32.c4 would be an error, as Thomas noted in British Chess Magazine. 32...c5, rook moves, and Bxc4.
32...c5 33.Rd2 Bb5 34.Nc3 Bc6 35.a4
White now threatens to lock up Black's rook with Rc1-a1. If then Ra5-a6 then a4-a5 (Lasker).
35...Ra6 36.Kf2 Rb6 37.Nd1 Kf7
White to move
38.Ne3 Rb8 39.Rh1 Ree8 40.Rdd1 Rh8 41.g4 Bd7 42.Nd5 Rb7 43.Kg3 Rh4 44.Rd3 Be6 45.c4
Black to move
White purposely makes weak pawns on b3 and h3 in order to prevent the advance of c5 and g5 just in case. With that he blocks the position and reaches a draw (Lasker).
The rest of the game seems almost futile. However, perhaps such maneuvering against lesser players could provoke frustration and error.
45...Rh8 46.Rc1 Ke8
White to move
47.Ne3
47.f4 would be a blunder 47...c6 48.Re3 (48.Ne3 gxf4+ 49.Kxf4 Rxh3 50.g5 (50.Rxd6 g5#) 50...fxg5+ 51.Kxg5) 48...Kd7 (48...cxd5 49.exd5) 49.fxg5 (49.Nc3 gxf4+ 50.Kxf4 Rxb3) 49...fxg5 50.Nc3 Rxb3.
47...Kd7
White has slightly more space, but the backward pawns are targets. Black's bishop guards against intrusions by the knight.
48.Ng2 Rbb8 49.Re1 Kc6 50.Ne3 Rbe8 51.Rb1 Rh7 52.Rd2 Rb8 53.Rd3 Rbh8
White to move
54.Rh1 Kb6 55.Rh2 Kc6 56.Rh1 Rb8 57.Rh2 Rf8 58.Rh1 Kd7 59.Rh2 Bf7 60.Nf5 Rfh8 61.Ne3 Ke6 62.Nd5 Rc8
White to move
Here, the game was adjourned a second time.
63.Ne3 ½-½
Lasker had the initiative for much of the game, but could not provoke a decisive error by Capablanca.
30 August 2020
Howard Staunton
On the Origin of Good Moves Reading Log*
In The Chess-Player's Handbook (1847), Howard Staunton asserts, "in chess, as in modern warfare, one of the most important strategems is the art of gaining time upon the enemy" (48-49). This assertion could well be considered central to the foundation of the articulation of positional chess, but Staunton does not get such credit.
Time served as a "factor" in Siegbert Tarrasch's articulation of what many have taken to be a continuation of William Steinitz's modern theory. He stated, "Force, Space and Time work together at every move" (The Game of Chess [1935], 231). Later, pawn structure was added to Tarrasch's formulation, and these became the essence of "development" (see "Principle of Development: Early History"). These were the factors that I learned in my youth, and then found anew as I was returning to chess after about a decade of minimal play, and read some of Yasser Seirawan's exceptional "Winning" series published by Microsoft Press in the 1990s. I recall Wesley So telling Seirawan during one of the Wijk aan Zee broadcasts that these texts gave him his foundation.
Time remains vital to Dan Heisman's nearly iconoclastic Elements of Positional Evaluation, rev. ed. (1999), where he lists mobility, flexibility, vulnerability, center control, piece coordination, time, and speed. Heisman considers notions of space, pawn structure, and development as "pseudo-elements". In Heisman's brief synopsis of the history of positional theory, he claims that after Andre Danican Philidor, the next contribution to theory was the play of Paul Morphy, skipping over Staunton.
Who mentions time prior to Staunton? Research might reveal that it was Giaochino Greco, although I cannot point to a passage in his manuscripts where this is the case. I do vaguely recall the concept articulated in some annotations by William Lewis, and Staunton was certainly familiar with the works of Lewis. Following this assertion concerning time, Staunton suggests the relevance of the art of warfare for chess with reference to Traité de Grand Tactique (1805) by Antoine-Henri Jomini, who served under Napoleon as well as other leadership capacities elsewhere in Europe. Staunton's lessons from Jomini, the art of war:
...consisted in the proper application of three combinations--first, the art of disposing the lines of operation in the most advantageous manner; secondly, in a skillful concentration of the forces with the greatest possible rapidity upon the most important point of the enemy's line of operations; and thirdly, that of combining the simultaneous employment of this accumulated force upon the position in which it is directed. (49)Staunton implies that the application of these principles of war to the game of chess ought to be self-explanatory. Perhaps this failure of elaboration is what excludes him from narratives of the development of chess theory. But, if so, why does Steinitz get so much credit? The Modern Chess Instructor (1889) is even more paltry in its elaboration of principles of positional play.
Willy Hendriks, On the Origin of Good Moves (2020) does not elevate Staunton's reputation as a theorist in his short chapter, which concentrates on the second match between Staunton and Pierre de Saint-Amant (76-88). He does, however, claim that Staunton's contribution to the development of chess skill among those who followed him were manifested in three ways. The first is the role of newspaper columns.
In the quiz that begins the chapter, Hendriks presents this position and an intriguing question.
White to move
Saint-Amant asserted that Black has an attack and a clearly superior position. Staunton disagreed. Staunton did lose the game, but Hendriks suggests that his loss was due to a subsequent tactical adventure that led no where.
Edward Winter wrote about the controversy in "Staunton v. Saint-Amant", Chess Notes 5709 (10 August 2008). This article forms the source for annotations to this game in ChessBase Mega2020. Hendriks develops his narrative of the word wars through the work of Nick Pope at Chess Archaeology. The emergence of chess columns in newspapers, and then specialized chess magazines, in the first half of the nineteenth century, Hendriks asserts, began to improve the level of chess skill. Staunton's Chess Player's Chronicle is prominent among them, as was Le Palamède. Staunton's second contribution is found in his books. Then, in 1851, Staunton organized the first international chess tournament.
Hendriks core argument in the chapter disputes an assertion of Harry Golombek that the quality of play in the Staunton -- Saint-Amant matches was "much superior" to the McDonnell -- De Labourdonnais matches (77). Hendriks shows that there was an abundance of errors in the latter, as there had been the previous decade when the top French player met the top British player.
Hendriks' exercises at the start of the chapter and his analysis of the games from which they were derived sent me into the databases to play through with some rapidity all 27 games from the two matches. To be honest, I found that exercise to be a chore. Aside from a few interesting endgames, the play of neither gentleman inspired me. On the Origin of Good Moves extracts the most interesting moments. My criticism of the chapter is that Hendriks only vaguely references the fact that the match he focused on was the second between the two men. His assertions that Staunton was clearly the superior player should not overlook Saint-Amant's victory in the much shorter first match.
*See "On the Origin: Reading Journal".
14 July 2020
Improve the Defense
A passing reference to Three Hundred Chess Games in On the Origin of Good Moves sent me back into Siegbert Tarrasch's terrific collection of his games. Although Tarrasch's suggested improvement for his opponent in one game seems reasonable, I was not convinced that Black was already lost at that early point in the game. An hour with the game in question led me to an improvement, and then some time with Komodo revealed an even better idea.
I'm happy that I found the critical position without engine assistance, but even after that point, Black could have given White a tougher task proving the advantage.
Tarrasch,Siegbert -- Mendelsohn,Jozsef [C51]
Breslau, 1879
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.b4 Bxb4 5.c3 Bc5 6.0–0 d6 7.d4 exd4 8.cxd4 Bb6 9.d5 Na5 10.Bb2 Ne7 11.Bd3 0–0 12.Nc3 Ng6 13.Ne2 c5 14.Kh1 Rb8 15.Ne1 Bc7 16.f4
16...b5
Tarrasch recommends 16...f6. Komodo would have played the text move.
17.f5 Ne5 18.f6 gxf6
I took a look at 18...g6, but could not find a defense to White's obvious attack. 19.Qd2 Kh8 20.Qh6 Rg8 21.Bxe5 dxe5 22.Nf3 +-.
19.Qc1
19...Kg7?
19...f5!? 20.exf5 f6
There was still time for Tarrasch's antidote. Here 21.Qh6 offers White no prospects of victory, but 21.Nf4 maintains an advantage.
Komodo's line, however, shows that Black still had an abundance of resources.
19...c4! 20.Qh6 cxd3 21.Rxf6 dxe2 22.Nf3 Re8 (22...Qxf6 23.Qxf6 Nac4 24.Bxe5 dxe5 and White can force a draw) 23.Ng5
23...Qxf6! 24.Qxf6 Bd8 25.Qh6 Nac4 and Black is slightly better.
20.Ng3 Rg8 21.Nh5+ Kh8 22.Nxf6 Rg6 23.Qf4 c4
23...Rxf6 24.Qxf6 Qxf6 25.Rxf6 Kg7
White is better, but the win is not elementary.
24.Be2 b4 25.Qh4
25...Rg7?
25...Rxf6 is more stubborn.
26.Bc1+-
Only now does White have a clear and decisive advantage.
26...Bg4 27.Bxg4 Nxg4 28.Bg5 h6 29.Bxh6 Nxf6 30.Bxg7+ Kxg7 31.Qg5+ Kf8 32.Rxf6 b3 33.axb3 cxb3 34.Nd3 b2 35.Raf1 Qe7 36.Qg6 b1Q 37.Rxf7+ Ke8 38.Rf8+ Kd7 39.Qf5+ 1–0
I'm happy that I found the critical position without engine assistance, but even after that point, Black could have given White a tougher task proving the advantage.
Tarrasch,Siegbert -- Mendelsohn,Jozsef [C51]
Breslau, 1879
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.b4 Bxb4 5.c3 Bc5 6.0–0 d6 7.d4 exd4 8.cxd4 Bb6 9.d5 Na5 10.Bb2 Ne7 11.Bd3 0–0 12.Nc3 Ng6 13.Ne2 c5 14.Kh1 Rb8 15.Ne1 Bc7 16.f4
Black to move
16...b5
Tarrasch recommends 16...f6. Komodo would have played the text move.
17.f5 Ne5 18.f6 gxf6
I took a look at 18...g6, but could not find a defense to White's obvious attack. 19.Qd2 Kh8 20.Qh6 Rg8 21.Bxe5 dxe5 22.Nf3 +-.
19.Qc1
Black to move
19...Kg7?
19...f5!? 20.exf5 f6
There was still time for Tarrasch's antidote. Here 21.Qh6 offers White no prospects of victory, but 21.Nf4 maintains an advantage.
Komodo's line, however, shows that Black still had an abundance of resources.
19...c4! 20.Qh6 cxd3 21.Rxf6 dxe2 22.Nf3 Re8 (22...Qxf6 23.Qxf6 Nac4 24.Bxe5 dxe5 and White can force a draw) 23.Ng5
Black to move
 |
| Analysis Diagram |
20.Ng3 Rg8 21.Nh5+ Kh8 22.Nxf6 Rg6 23.Qf4 c4
23...Rxf6 24.Qxf6 Qxf6 25.Rxf6 Kg7
White to move
 |
| Analysis Diagram |
24.Be2 b4 25.Qh4
Black to move
25...Rg7?
25...Rxf6 is more stubborn.
26.Bc1+-
Only now does White have a clear and decisive advantage.
26...Bg4 27.Bxg4 Nxg4 28.Bg5 h6 29.Bxh6 Nxf6 30.Bxg7+ Kxg7 31.Qg5+ Kf8 32.Rxf6 b3 33.axb3 cxb3 34.Nd3 b2 35.Raf1 Qe7 36.Qg6 b1Q 37.Rxf7+ Ke8 38.Rf8+ Kd7 39.Qf5+ 1–0
17 August 2019
An Exercise
This week's lessons with my chess students have focused on queenside pawn majorities. We look at a couple of games played by Mikhail Botvinnik, an endgame that Seigbert Tarrasch blew against Emanuel Lasker, and this position that I created.
We start with the pawn exercise, and I do not initially tell the student who is to move, nor our theme concerning queenside pawn majorities. If the student thinks the position is equal, I play White. If they think one side is winning, they get that side and get to move first.
Try it against a friend or your computer.
Then, Lasker -- Tarrasch, St. Petersburg 1914.
We play it out. I take White.
Then we look at Botvinnik -- Kmoch, Leningrad 1934 and Botvinnik -- Konstantinopolsky, Sverdlovsk 1943. If enough time remains, we go over a game that I played a few years ago (see "Excelling at Technical Chess").
The lesson and much of its content was inspired by Max Euwe, Judgement and Planning in Chess (1953).
White to move
We start with the pawn exercise, and I do not initially tell the student who is to move, nor our theme concerning queenside pawn majorities. If the student thinks the position is equal, I play White. If they think one side is winning, they get that side and get to move first.
Try it against a friend or your computer.
Then, Lasker -- Tarrasch, St. Petersburg 1914.
Black to move
We play it out. I take White.
Then we look at Botvinnik -- Kmoch, Leningrad 1934 and Botvinnik -- Konstantinopolsky, Sverdlovsk 1943. If enough time remains, we go over a game that I played a few years ago (see "Excelling at Technical Chess").
The lesson and much of its content was inspired by Max Euwe, Judgement and Planning in Chess (1953).
14 May 2019
Exchanging into Pawn Ending?
This position arose in Lasker -- Tarrasch, St. Petersburg 1914, the source for Van Perlo 7 (see "Endgame Tactics").
The game continued 37...Bxg7 38.Bxf5 Kxf5 39.Kxg7 a5, reaching the position where Van Perlo celebrates Lasker's "amazing escape" (Van Perlo's Endgame Tactics, 21).
Did Black have something better?
Black to move
The game continued 37...Bxg7 38.Bxf5 Kxf5 39.Kxg7 a5, reaching the position where Van Perlo celebrates Lasker's "amazing escape" (Van Perlo's Endgame Tactics, 21).
White to move
 |
| White has a drawing combination |
03 November 2016
Tarrasch -- Schlechter 1894
[T]his game becomes an instructive example of how a minor advantage can be nursed and finally converted into a win.Seigbert Tarrasch's first game against then twenty year old Carl Schlechter is an instructive positional game in which White uses greater space to build an attack against the king. He annotated the game for the final chapter of his Three Hundred Chess Games, originally published as Driehundert Schachpartien (1895). White's systematic destruction of all Black counter-play is the theme of a lesson that Jeremy Silman developed for the chess software Chess Mentor, and which is now available on Chess.com. Silman's lesson expands upon his discussion of this game in How to Reassess Your Chess, 3rd ed. (1993), 139-141.
Siegbert Tarrasch, Three Hundred Chess Games (1999 [1895])
Sabina Foisor also has created a YouTube video of the game, although her game score differs from that of the ChessBase database, Three Hundred Chess Games, and Silman. Nonetheless, her fifteen minute video is a good introduction to the players and to the main themes in this game.
Tarrasch,Siegbert -- Schlechter,Carl [C66]
DSB–09.Kongress Leipzig (1), 1894
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 d6 4.d4 Bd7 5.Nc3 Nf6 6.0–0 Be7 7.Re1 Nxd4 8.Nxd4 exd4 9.Bxd7+
Black to move
9...Qxd7
9...Nxd7 Silman, How to Reassess Your Chess, and Foisor both point out that this move is now considered a better effort for Black to achieve equality.
10.Qxd4 0–0 11.b3 Rfe8 12.Bb2 Bf8 13.Rad1 Qc6 14.Rd3 Re6 15.Rde3 Rae8
White to move
The beginning of Silman's Chess Mentor lesson.
"Black has completed his development and the positions are almost symmetrical. White's attack seems to have reached a dead point. It is hard to see how White is going to increase his minor advantage" (Tarrasch, 348).
16.h3
Taking away g4 from Black's knight.
16...Qb6 17.Qd3 c6 18.Na4 Qc7 19.c4
The point of moving the knight to the rim was to secure d5 with this pawn push.
19...Nd7
19...a6 with the idea of b7-b5 would have been better (Foisor).
20.Kh1
Prepares to use the g-file for the heavy pieces and also steps away from any tactics along the a7-g1 diagonal.
This and the subsequent six moves are somewhat of a riddle to Black. White has a very specific plan, ... White must not allow Black to break out of the steadily increasing blockade by playing for access to c5. ... White's attacking plan is play the knight to f5 via c3-e2-d4, but to execute this plan he has to overcome a lot of difficulties.
Tarrasch, 349
Black to move
20...f6 21.Qc2
21.Qb1 was better.
21...Ne5 22.Nc3 Nf7
White to move
23.g4?
"The only bad move that White makes in this game" (Jeremy Silman, Chess Mentor).
23.Qb1 is Silman's recommendation.
23.Ne2 allows 23...f5, according to Tarrasch.
Silman's Chess Mentor course offers a separate lesson looking at this position from the Black side.
Black to move
23...Qa5
Tarrasch gives the line 23...d5 24.exd5 Rxe3 25.Rxe3 Rxe3 26.fxe3 Qg3, which is the solution to Silman's exercise. However, Tarrasch suggests that the king's presence on h1 takes the sting out of this little combination. Silman, on the other hand, claims that Black equalizes.
24.Rd1 Qb6 25.h4!
25.Ne2 Ng5 "will attack the e-pawn and thus force the knight to return" (Tarrasch, 349).
25...Ne5 26.Rg3 Nf7 27.f3
"Before the knight can complete its journey, the e-pawn must be guarded. Now there is no way for Black to keep the knight from reaching its destination" (Tarrasch, 349).
27...Nh8 28.Ne2
White has plenty of time because Black's counterplay is dead.
Black to move
28...Qc7
28...Qf2?? 29.Bd4.
29.Rdg1
Here Foisor goes astray in her account of the game with Rgg1.
29...Qf7 30.Nd4 R6e7
"The Black pieces are crowded together like a flock of sheep with the wolf standing at the door ready to break inside" (Tarrasch, 349).
31.g5 fxg5 32.Rxg5 g6 33.Nf5
Black to move
33...Re5
33...Re6 34.Qc3 Re5 35.f4 Tarrasch.
34.f4 Rxf5 35.exf5 Bg7 36.fxg6 1–0
08 August 2015
Thinking about Development
Ever since reading Elements of Positional Evaluation, rev. ed. (1999) by Dan Heisman fifteen years ago, I have thought a little differently about development.* Before reading this book, I had been content to get my pieces out, hopefully to good squares. I did not think deeply about which rook to move first, nor when to delay deploying a bishop because I was uncertain of its best square, nor what exactly is meant by the term development.
Heisman calls development a pseudo-element.
A position that I recently faced in a correspondence game provoked further considerations of development, and surprisingly, perhaps, found me relying on something I read in Siegbert Tarrasch, The Game of Chess (1935). Tarrasch employs the concept of development throughout this book. However, he breaks it down into three factors: time, material, and space.
It was my move in this position. My first impulse was to play 10.Nxf6+, but then I remembered Tarrasch's sage advice in his section on time, "every care must be taken not to develop one's opponent, for by so doing one presents him with one or more tempi" (227). There was no rush as this was a correspondence game with seven days to move. I spent a leisurely 45 minutes or so contemplating and researching this position.
It seemed clear to me that White had an advantage. Tarrasch would note White's occupation of four ranks while Black's pieces occupied three (space). Counting tempi in the manner that Tarrasch suggests yields 5-4 in favor of White because a knight on the fourth rank is worth two tempi (229). Capturing the knight on f6 would restore the balance of tempi, something obviously not in White's best interests.
Heisman's elements were also helpful. White's pieces struck me as slightly better coordinated than Black's. The old pseudo-element (Heisman's term) of space helps. In particular, White's pieces are well coordinated to generate pressure against h7 and start an attack on the castled king. Despite seemingly adequate protection, Black's king could prove vulnerable if White could build an attack.
I looked at several lines designed to create a checkmate threat on h7. Inevitably, Black was forced to play g6, but then Black's bishop became well-posted on g7 or f6. As pieces were exchanged, White's initiative failed to expose the king and began to dissipate.
Exploring my database, I found that this position had occurred in at least fourteen prior games with thirteen White wins and one draw. One of the wins, however, came as a consequence of a long endgame with one knight and five pawns each. Black was outplayed in what looked to me like an equal position. In those fourteen games, White had played ten different moves.
Before looking at the move that I played and the subsequent course of the game, it may be of interest to see how this position came about.
Stripes,J (2175) -- Internet Opponent (1919) [C04]
www.ChessWorld.net, 31.05.2015
1.d4 e6 2.e4 d5 3.Nd2 Nc6
The Guimard variation has long had a reputation for being weaker than 3...c5 and 3...Nf6, as well as the flexible 3...Be7 that is recommended in several recent books on the French. Even so, John Watson offers a chapter on it in Dangerous Weapons: The French (2007).
4.Ngf3 Be7
4...Nf6 is nearly always played and is the only move discussed in Watson's Dangerous Weapons. Other moves that can be found in ECO are 4...g6, 4...Nh6, and 4...dxe4. The last transposes to a obscure variation of the Rubinstein French.
5.c3 has been played in over half of the small number of games reaching this position. White's score of 84% is impressive, but the sample is too small and most of the games are between players below Candidate Master.
5.e5 f5 (5...Nh6 6.c3 Bd7 7.Bd3 Nf5 8.Nf1 Na5 9.Ng3 Nxg3 10.hxg3 h6 11.g4 a6 12.g5 h5 13.g6 Bb5 14.g4 h4 15.gxf7+ Kxf7 16.g5 Ke8 17.Bxb5+ axb5 18.Qd3 c6 19.Nxh4 Nb3 20.Rb1 Nxc1 21.Qg6+ Kd7 22.f4 Qf8 23.f5 Nd3+ 24.Kd2 Nf4 25.fxe6+ Nxe6 26.Rbf1 Bxg5+ 27.Kc2 Qe8 28.Rf7+ Be7 29.Nf5 Rxh1 30.Nxg7 Rh6 31.Qf5 Qxf7 32.Qxf7 Rf8 0–1 Fernandez Romero,E (2383)--Pons Boscana,G, Mallorca 2000) 6.c4 Nh6 7.cxd5 exd5 8.Nb3 Nf7 9.Bd3 a5 10.0–0 a4 11.Nbd2 g5 12.Bb5 Ra5 13.Bxa4 g4 14.Bxc6+ bxc6 15.Nb3 Ra7 16.Ne1 Ba6 17.Nd3 Qa8 18.Re1 Bb5 19.a3 Ba4 20.Bd2 c5 21.dxc5 d4 22.e6 Nd8 23.Nf4 Bxc5 24.Qc2 Bd6 25.Qxf5 Bxb3 26.Qh5+ Kf8 27.Ng6+ Kg8 28.e7 Ne6 29.Nxh8 Bxe7 30.Qf7+ Kxh8 31.Qxe7 Ra6 32.Bh6 1–0 Rogers,I (2574)--Buecker,S (2341), Hertogenbosch 1999.
5...dxe4 6.Nxe4 Nf6
With Black's move the game transposes into a slightly larger data set, perhaps the seventy games are sufficient for justifying some optimism for White in the 92% score.
7.Bd3
A thematic move against the French.
7...b6
7...Qd5 8.Qe2 0–0 9.Bf4 Nxe4 10.Bxe4 Qa5 11.0–0 Bd6 12.Ne5 Bxe5 13.Bxe5 Bd7 14.a4 Nxe5 15.dxe5 Rab8 16.b4 Qa6 17.b5 Qb6 18.Qd3 Rfd8 19.Bxh7+ Kf8 20.Be4 c6 21.c4 Qc5 22.Qa3 Qxa3 23.Rxa3 Be8 24.Rd3 Rxd3 25.Bxd3 Rd8 26.Rd1 cxb5 27.axb5 a6 28.bxa6 bxa6 29.Be2 Rxd1+ 30.Bxd1 a5 31.f4 f6 32.Kf2 Bc6 33.g3 a4 34.Ke3 a3 35.Bb3 fxe5 36.fxe5 Kf7 37.Kd4 Kg6 38.Kc5 Be4 39.Ba2 Kf5 40.Kd6 g5 41.h4 gxh4 42.gxh4 Bf3 43.h5 Bxh5 44.c5 1–0 Mortensen,E (2440)--Crawley,G (2345), Copenhagen 1987.
7...0–0 is the most popular move in the position.
8.0–0
8.Qa4 has been played by the strongest players who reached this position 8...Bb7 9.0–0 (9.Bb5 Qd5=).
8...Bb7 9.Qe2 0–0
And we have reached the diagram position at the top of this post. Notice that it emerged from the Tarrasch variation of the French.
Fourteen games in the ChessBase database have reached this position. White has tried ten different moves. One game was drawn and White won all the others.
10.Re1!N
Moving my rook to the semi-open file strengthens my grip on the center, prepares for an eventual rook lift if I can generate an attack on Black's king, leaves d1 available for the other rook, and defers development of my dark-squared bishop. Even more important, it makes no concrete threats that guide Black's choices. I am developing with a very slight increase in pressure. I have increased the mobility of my rook (Tarrasch would count the rook's placement on e1 as a tempo because there is no White pawn blocking it). My pieces remain well-coordinated as others join in the battle. I continue to eye potential vulnerabilites in Black's position. I am not wasting time, nor am I helping my opponent gain time through exchanges.
Whether my move is better than others that have been played in this position is unclear. It seems that almost everything has led to success.
Indeed, I like this position for training because it is not the move, but rather the rationale that is most telling. Although I will likely never see it again, and my students are not likely to ever play it, it could be a useful position for asking students to articulate their thinking. The concepts and principles that a player brings to this position may help identify what one still needs to learn concerning positional play in the later phases of the opening.
10.Qc2 was played on move 11 in a fifteenth game. 10...Nxe4 11.Bxe4 f5 12.Bd3 Bf6 13.Bc4 Bc8 14.Re1 Qd6 15.Qxf5 Bxd4 16.Qe4 Bf6 17.Bf4 Qc5 18.b4 Qh5 19.Bxe6+ Kh8 20.Qxc6 1–0 Jovanovic,Z (2541)--Patarcic,D (2157), Bosnjaci CRO 2015.
10.Nxf6+ Bxf6 11.Qe4 g6 12.Bh6 Re8 13.Qf4 Qe7 14.Bg5 Bxg5 15.Nxg5 e5 16.dxe5 Nxe5 17.Be4 Bxe4 18.Nxe4 Nd3 19.Nf6+ Kh8 20.Qh4 h5 21.Qg5 Qf8 22.Nxe8 Rxe8 23.Qb5 Nc5 24.Rfe1 Ne6 25.f4 Rd8 26.Qe5+ Kg8 27.f5 Qc5+ 28.Qxc5 Nxc5 29.Re7 Na4 30.Rxc7 Nxb2 31.fxg6 fxg6 32.Rxa7 Nd1 33.Rb1 Nxc3 34.Rxb6 Rd1+ 35.Kf2 Rd2+ 36.Ke3 1–0 Mirabile,T (2203)--Stenzel,H (2077), Nassau 1999.
10...Qd7
10...Nxe4 helps White 11.Qxe4 g6 12.Bh6 Re8 13.Bb5 Bf8 (13...Na5 14.Qf4) 14.Bg5 Be7 15.Bxc6 Bxc6 16.Qxc6 Bxg5 17.d5 with an attack.
11.Bg5
This move becomes Stockfish's second choice after several minutes, although it does not make the top six through the first minute or so. It does not make it into Komodo's nor Hiarcs's top eight even after five minutes. The moves that appear favored by more than one engine are 11.Nfg5, 11.b4, and 11.Bd2. 11.Nxf6+ is an early choice that drops after the engine has a few minutes of thinking time.
11...Rac8??
This move fails to address the needs of the position. White's forces are well-deployed for action against the king.
11...Nd5 is the top choice of every engine that I checked. 12.Bd2+/=. Perhaps 11...Nd5 was the only move with all others giving White an explicit advantage.
12.Nxf6+
The time is now! Black's position is collapsing.
12...Bxf6
12...gxf6 was the only try 13.Qe4 f5 14.Qh4+/-.
13.Qe4 g6
I was surprised to see that this move was Stockfish's top choice. I considered it tantamount to surrender.
13...Rfd8 or Rfe8 struck me as the only reasonable try. Both moves drop two pawns and leave White with kingside pressure. 14.Qxh7+ Kf8 15.Qh8+ Ke7 16.Qxg7+-.
14.Bxf6 1–0
Black resigned.
I was preparing for a longer struggle. By slowly building pressure and forcing my opponent to make critical decisions in a seemingly quiet position, I gave him the opportunity to self-destruct.
*The fourth edition came out in 2010 and is much expanded over the edition that I read fifteen years ago.
Heisman calls development a pseudo-element.
Development theory yields more contradictions than any other single positional theory, and if noting else comes out of this work, it is hoped that the overused "development" will be exposed for what it really is: a vague catch-all which confuses more than it clarifies. For a definition, we finds such indefinite generalizations as "getting your pieces into play," "moving a piece from its original square," and "putting your pieces on squares where they are well placed for the middlegame."I have sought to employ Heisman's seven elements--mobility, flexibility, center control, vulnerability, piece coordination, time, and speed--in my teaching of juniors and in my own play. I have sought through my reading and rereading of classic works to understand the historic evolution of the concept of development. Chess writers before Steinitz concerned with positional play used the term time before development became a catch phrase.
Heisman, Elements, 28.
A position that I recently faced in a correspondence game provoked further considerations of development, and surprisingly, perhaps, found me relying on something I read in Siegbert Tarrasch, The Game of Chess (1935). Tarrasch employs the concept of development throughout this book. However, he breaks it down into three factors: time, material, and space.
White to move
It was my move in this position. My first impulse was to play 10.Nxf6+, but then I remembered Tarrasch's sage advice in his section on time, "every care must be taken not to develop one's opponent, for by so doing one presents him with one or more tempi" (227). There was no rush as this was a correspondence game with seven days to move. I spent a leisurely 45 minutes or so contemplating and researching this position.
It seemed clear to me that White had an advantage. Tarrasch would note White's occupation of four ranks while Black's pieces occupied three (space). Counting tempi in the manner that Tarrasch suggests yields 5-4 in favor of White because a knight on the fourth rank is worth two tempi (229). Capturing the knight on f6 would restore the balance of tempi, something obviously not in White's best interests.
Heisman's elements were also helpful. White's pieces struck me as slightly better coordinated than Black's. The old pseudo-element (Heisman's term) of space helps. In particular, White's pieces are well coordinated to generate pressure against h7 and start an attack on the castled king. Despite seemingly adequate protection, Black's king could prove vulnerable if White could build an attack.
I looked at several lines designed to create a checkmate threat on h7. Inevitably, Black was forced to play g6, but then Black's bishop became well-posted on g7 or f6. As pieces were exchanged, White's initiative failed to expose the king and began to dissipate.
Exploring my database, I found that this position had occurred in at least fourteen prior games with thirteen White wins and one draw. One of the wins, however, came as a consequence of a long endgame with one knight and five pawns each. Black was outplayed in what looked to me like an equal position. In those fourteen games, White had played ten different moves.
Before looking at the move that I played and the subsequent course of the game, it may be of interest to see how this position came about.
Stripes,J (2175) -- Internet Opponent (1919) [C04]
www.ChessWorld.net, 31.05.2015
1.d4 e6 2.e4 d5 3.Nd2 Nc6
The Guimard variation has long had a reputation for being weaker than 3...c5 and 3...Nf6, as well as the flexible 3...Be7 that is recommended in several recent books on the French. Even so, John Watson offers a chapter on it in Dangerous Weapons: The French (2007).
4.Ngf3 Be7
4...Nf6 is nearly always played and is the only move discussed in Watson's Dangerous Weapons. Other moves that can be found in ECO are 4...g6, 4...Nh6, and 4...dxe4. The last transposes to a obscure variation of the Rubinstein French.
5.c3 has been played in over half of the small number of games reaching this position. White's score of 84% is impressive, but the sample is too small and most of the games are between players below Candidate Master.
5.e5 f5 (5...Nh6 6.c3 Bd7 7.Bd3 Nf5 8.Nf1 Na5 9.Ng3 Nxg3 10.hxg3 h6 11.g4 a6 12.g5 h5 13.g6 Bb5 14.g4 h4 15.gxf7+ Kxf7 16.g5 Ke8 17.Bxb5+ axb5 18.Qd3 c6 19.Nxh4 Nb3 20.Rb1 Nxc1 21.Qg6+ Kd7 22.f4 Qf8 23.f5 Nd3+ 24.Kd2 Nf4 25.fxe6+ Nxe6 26.Rbf1 Bxg5+ 27.Kc2 Qe8 28.Rf7+ Be7 29.Nf5 Rxh1 30.Nxg7 Rh6 31.Qf5 Qxf7 32.Qxf7 Rf8 0–1 Fernandez Romero,E (2383)--Pons Boscana,G, Mallorca 2000) 6.c4 Nh6 7.cxd5 exd5 8.Nb3 Nf7 9.Bd3 a5 10.0–0 a4 11.Nbd2 g5 12.Bb5 Ra5 13.Bxa4 g4 14.Bxc6+ bxc6 15.Nb3 Ra7 16.Ne1 Ba6 17.Nd3 Qa8 18.Re1 Bb5 19.a3 Ba4 20.Bd2 c5 21.dxc5 d4 22.e6 Nd8 23.Nf4 Bxc5 24.Qc2 Bd6 25.Qxf5 Bxb3 26.Qh5+ Kf8 27.Ng6+ Kg8 28.e7 Ne6 29.Nxh8 Bxe7 30.Qf7+ Kxh8 31.Qxe7 Ra6 32.Bh6 1–0 Rogers,I (2574)--Buecker,S (2341), Hertogenbosch 1999.
5...dxe4 6.Nxe4 Nf6
White to move
With Black's move the game transposes into a slightly larger data set, perhaps the seventy games are sufficient for justifying some optimism for White in the 92% score.
7.Bd3
A thematic move against the French.
7...b6
7...Qd5 8.Qe2 0–0 9.Bf4 Nxe4 10.Bxe4 Qa5 11.0–0 Bd6 12.Ne5 Bxe5 13.Bxe5 Bd7 14.a4 Nxe5 15.dxe5 Rab8 16.b4 Qa6 17.b5 Qb6 18.Qd3 Rfd8 19.Bxh7+ Kf8 20.Be4 c6 21.c4 Qc5 22.Qa3 Qxa3 23.Rxa3 Be8 24.Rd3 Rxd3 25.Bxd3 Rd8 26.Rd1 cxb5 27.axb5 a6 28.bxa6 bxa6 29.Be2 Rxd1+ 30.Bxd1 a5 31.f4 f6 32.Kf2 Bc6 33.g3 a4 34.Ke3 a3 35.Bb3 fxe5 36.fxe5 Kf7 37.Kd4 Kg6 38.Kc5 Be4 39.Ba2 Kf5 40.Kd6 g5 41.h4 gxh4 42.gxh4 Bf3 43.h5 Bxh5 44.c5 1–0 Mortensen,E (2440)--Crawley,G (2345), Copenhagen 1987.
7...0–0 is the most popular move in the position.
8.0–0
8.Qa4 has been played by the strongest players who reached this position 8...Bb7 9.0–0 (9.Bb5 Qd5=).
8...Bb7 9.Qe2 0–0
And we have reached the diagram position at the top of this post. Notice that it emerged from the Tarrasch variation of the French.
Fourteen games in the ChessBase database have reached this position. White has tried ten different moves. One game was drawn and White won all the others.
10.Re1!N
Moving my rook to the semi-open file strengthens my grip on the center, prepares for an eventual rook lift if I can generate an attack on Black's king, leaves d1 available for the other rook, and defers development of my dark-squared bishop. Even more important, it makes no concrete threats that guide Black's choices. I am developing with a very slight increase in pressure. I have increased the mobility of my rook (Tarrasch would count the rook's placement on e1 as a tempo because there is no White pawn blocking it). My pieces remain well-coordinated as others join in the battle. I continue to eye potential vulnerabilites in Black's position. I am not wasting time, nor am I helping my opponent gain time through exchanges.
Whether my move is better than others that have been played in this position is unclear. It seems that almost everything has led to success.
Indeed, I like this position for training because it is not the move, but rather the rationale that is most telling. Although I will likely never see it again, and my students are not likely to ever play it, it could be a useful position for asking students to articulate their thinking. The concepts and principles that a player brings to this position may help identify what one still needs to learn concerning positional play in the later phases of the opening.
10.Qc2 was played on move 11 in a fifteenth game. 10...Nxe4 11.Bxe4 f5 12.Bd3 Bf6 13.Bc4 Bc8 14.Re1 Qd6 15.Qxf5 Bxd4 16.Qe4 Bf6 17.Bf4 Qc5 18.b4 Qh5 19.Bxe6+ Kh8 20.Qxc6 1–0 Jovanovic,Z (2541)--Patarcic,D (2157), Bosnjaci CRO 2015.
10.Nxf6+ Bxf6 11.Qe4 g6 12.Bh6 Re8 13.Qf4 Qe7 14.Bg5 Bxg5 15.Nxg5 e5 16.dxe5 Nxe5 17.Be4 Bxe4 18.Nxe4 Nd3 19.Nf6+ Kh8 20.Qh4 h5 21.Qg5 Qf8 22.Nxe8 Rxe8 23.Qb5 Nc5 24.Rfe1 Ne6 25.f4 Rd8 26.Qe5+ Kg8 27.f5 Qc5+ 28.Qxc5 Nxc5 29.Re7 Na4 30.Rxc7 Nxb2 31.fxg6 fxg6 32.Rxa7 Nd1 33.Rb1 Nxc3 34.Rxb6 Rd1+ 35.Kf2 Rd2+ 36.Ke3 1–0 Mirabile,T (2203)--Stenzel,H (2077), Nassau 1999.
10...Qd7
10...Nxe4 helps White 11.Qxe4 g6 12.Bh6 Re8 13.Bb5 Bf8 (13...Na5 14.Qf4) 14.Bg5 Be7 15.Bxc6 Bxc6 16.Qxc6 Bxg5 17.d5 with an attack.
11.Bg5
This move becomes Stockfish's second choice after several minutes, although it does not make the top six through the first minute or so. It does not make it into Komodo's nor Hiarcs's top eight even after five minutes. The moves that appear favored by more than one engine are 11.Nfg5, 11.b4, and 11.Bd2. 11.Nxf6+ is an early choice that drops after the engine has a few minutes of thinking time.
Black to move
11...Rac8??
This move fails to address the needs of the position. White's forces are well-deployed for action against the king.
11...Nd5 is the top choice of every engine that I checked. 12.Bd2+/=. Perhaps 11...Nd5 was the only move with all others giving White an explicit advantage.
12.Nxf6+
The time is now! Black's position is collapsing.
12...Bxf6
12...gxf6 was the only try 13.Qe4 f5 14.Qh4+/-.
13.Qe4 g6
I was surprised to see that this move was Stockfish's top choice. I considered it tantamount to surrender.
13...Rfd8 or Rfe8 struck me as the only reasonable try. Both moves drop two pawns and leave White with kingside pressure. 14.Qxh7+ Kf8 15.Qh8+ Ke7 16.Qxg7+-.
14.Bxf6 1–0
Black resigned.
I was preparing for a longer struggle. By slowly building pressure and forcing my opponent to make critical decisions in a seemingly quiet position, I gave him the opportunity to self-destruct.
*The fourth edition came out in 2010 and is much expanded over the edition that I read fifteen years ago.
21 July 2015
Counting Tempi
During a lesson with one of my top students last week, he observed that a particular candidate move lost a tempo. I opined that tempi did not seem as vital in this variation of the Pirc Defense as in certain open positions. The conversation brought to my recollection something that I had read in John Watson's Secrets of Modern Chess Strategy (1998) more than a dozen years ago.
Later in the week, I pulled Modern Chess Strategy off the shelf to revisit the half-remembered passage. Watson's book drove me back into Aron Nimzowitsch, My System (1930). After spending idle moments of three days rereading Modern Chess Strategy and My System, I started digging through other books on the shelf. William Steinitz. The Modern Chess Instructor (1889) did not offer anything to my inquiry, although he mentions a move "losing time" as early as 1873 in The Field.* Seigbert Tarrasch, The Game of Chess (1935) was published after My System, even though it seems to precede Nimzowitsch theoretically.
In order to illustrate his point concerning tempi, Nimzowitsch presents a curious position that has arisen in very few games. Watson carries the position further through logical moves as a critique of Nimzowitsch.
1.e4 e5 2.d4 exd4 3.c3 Nf6
Black's third move does not appear in the Encyclopedia of Chess Openings (ECO). My database does have three instances of this position prior to publication of My System. All three games were played in 1839 by William Davies Evans, inventor of the Evans Gambit. Evans had White against three different opponents, the best known of which was Pierre Charles Fournier de Saint-Amant. One of these games reached this position by transposition (1.e4 e5 2.c3 Nf6 3.d4 exd4).
Concerning this unusual 3...Nf6, Nimzowitsch states, "Black lets what will happen, and this is what every beginner should do in order to gain experience of the consequences of an advance in the center" (12).
4.e5 Ne4
"The knight can maintain himself here, for Bd3 will be answered by a developing move of full value, namely d5" (Nimzowitsch, 12-13). Nimzowitsch suggests that after 5.Bd3, Nc5 would be an error because the continuation 6.cxd4 Nxd3+ 7.Qxd3 "would yield an advantage of four tempi to White" (13). The resulting position appears once in my database--a seventeen move draw, perhaps one of those notorious arranged draws that plays out an obscure line from a book for a few moves.
Watson states concerning this advantage of tempi in Nimzowitsch's line:
Watson describes as "egregious", Nimzowitsch's assessment after 1.e4 e5 2.d4 exd4 3.c3 Nf6 4.e5 Nd5.
Nimzowitsch offers the continuation: 5.Qxd4 c6 6.Bc4 Nb6 7.Nf3. He states, "White has here six tempi as against two or one and a half, for the knight is not better placed at b6 than at f6, and the pawn at c6 is not really a whole tempo, since no move of a central pawn is here in question" (13).
Watson asks, what has become of those valuable tempi after the logical 7...Nxc4 8.Qxc4 d5? Again, Black has the two bishops and is about to catch up in the number of minor pieces developed. He asserts that White is struggling for equality (15).
Tarrasch
For his part, Siegbert Tarrasch claims that counting tempi originated with Semion Alapin and him.
From his discussion of earlier positions, we learn that center pawns that have cleared out of the way of the pieces can be counted even if they have been captured. In this position, however, he does not count the pawns because both players have advanced both center pawns, making matters equal.
He explains further that a queen that has moved off the back rank counts as one tempo, regardless of how many times it has moved or where it stands. A rook is counted only if it has some space to move. Both of White's rooks have squares in front of them, and so count. Black's rook on g8 has moved, but is blocked and so does not count. Tarrasch does not count the rook on a8 because it has not moved, although perhaps he might consider it developed if the a-pawn were advancing against some target. Knights are more valuable when further advanced. The knight on c3 is one tempo. A knight on the fourth or fifth rank would count as two tempi, and Tarrasch counts three tempi for the knight on e6. Each bishop counts as one tempo when developed no matter how many moves were required to reach its present post.
Tarrasch thus finds that in this diagram, White has nine tempi to Black's five.
Most useful in Tarrasch's discussion, however, is the relationship of Time to Force and Space. "By good play tempi once gained are never lost," he asserts, "but rather are ultimately transformed into a gain in Space or Force" (231).
He is worth quoting at length.
*See Sid Pickard, The Collected Works of William Steinitz (2003), CD for Steinitz's magazine annotations.
Later in the week, I pulled Modern Chess Strategy off the shelf to revisit the half-remembered passage. Watson's book drove me back into Aron Nimzowitsch, My System (1930). After spending idle moments of three days rereading Modern Chess Strategy and My System, I started digging through other books on the shelf. William Steinitz. The Modern Chess Instructor (1889) did not offer anything to my inquiry, although he mentions a move "losing time" as early as 1873 in The Field.* Seigbert Tarrasch, The Game of Chess (1935) was published after My System, even though it seems to precede Nimzowitsch theoretically.
In order to illustrate his point concerning tempi, Nimzowitsch presents a curious position that has arisen in very few games. Watson carries the position further through logical moves as a critique of Nimzowitsch.
1.e4 e5 2.d4 exd4 3.c3 Nf6
Black's third move does not appear in the Encyclopedia of Chess Openings (ECO). My database does have three instances of this position prior to publication of My System. All three games were played in 1839 by William Davies Evans, inventor of the Evans Gambit. Evans had White against three different opponents, the best known of which was Pierre Charles Fournier de Saint-Amant. One of these games reached this position by transposition (1.e4 e5 2.c3 Nf6 3.d4 exd4).
Concerning this unusual 3...Nf6, Nimzowitsch states, "Black lets what will happen, and this is what every beginner should do in order to gain experience of the consequences of an advance in the center" (12).
4.e5 Ne4
White to move
"The knight can maintain himself here, for Bd3 will be answered by a developing move of full value, namely d5" (Nimzowitsch, 12-13). Nimzowitsch suggests that after 5.Bd3, Nc5 would be an error because the continuation 6.cxd4 Nxd3+ 7.Qxd3 "would yield an advantage of four tempi to White" (13). The resulting position appears once in my database--a seventeen move draw, perhaps one of those notorious arranged draws that plays out an obscure line from a book for a few moves.
Watson states concerning this advantage of tempi in Nimzowitsch's line:
Four tempi or not, 7...d5! leaves Black with two bishops and a healthy share of the centre (and it is White's 'good' bishop which has just been devoured). Most players would be quite content here as Black. (14)After 4.e5, Captain Evans faced 4...Ne4 against George Perigal, 4...Qe7 against Saint-Amant, and 4...Nd5 against F.L. Slous.
Watson describes as "egregious", Nimzowitsch's assessment after 1.e4 e5 2.d4 exd4 3.c3 Nf6 4.e5 Nd5.
White to move
Nimzowitsch offers the continuation: 5.Qxd4 c6 6.Bc4 Nb6 7.Nf3. He states, "White has here six tempi as against two or one and a half, for the knight is not better placed at b6 than at f6, and the pawn at c6 is not really a whole tempo, since no move of a central pawn is here in question" (13).
Black to move
Watson asks, what has become of those valuable tempi after the logical 7...Nxc4 8.Qxc4 d5? Again, Black has the two bishops and is about to catch up in the number of minor pieces developed. He asserts that White is struggling for equality (15).
Tarrasch
For his part, Siegbert Tarrasch claims that counting tempi originated with Semion Alapin and him.
It is a very good thing, from time to time at least, to balance an account of the tempi visible on the board. This tempi reckoning originated with Alapin and myself. To be sure Alapin, as indeed is quite correct, included in his reckoning such moves as a4/a5, whilst I include only the developing moves and ignore the others--a system which, in my opinion based on my experience, gives results of greater practical value.Tarrasch offers a diagram to illustrate.
The Game of Chess, 228-229
From his discussion of earlier positions, we learn that center pawns that have cleared out of the way of the pieces can be counted even if they have been captured. In this position, however, he does not count the pawns because both players have advanced both center pawns, making matters equal.
He explains further that a queen that has moved off the back rank counts as one tempo, regardless of how many times it has moved or where it stands. A rook is counted only if it has some space to move. Both of White's rooks have squares in front of them, and so count. Black's rook on g8 has moved, but is blocked and so does not count. Tarrasch does not count the rook on a8 because it has not moved, although perhaps he might consider it developed if the a-pawn were advancing against some target. Knights are more valuable when further advanced. The knight on c3 is one tempo. A knight on the fourth or fifth rank would count as two tempi, and Tarrasch counts three tempi for the knight on e6. Each bishop counts as one tempo when developed no matter how many moves were required to reach its present post.
Tarrasch thus finds that in this diagram, White has nine tempi to Black's five.
Most useful in Tarrasch's discussion, however, is the relationship of Time to Force and Space. "By good play tempi once gained are never lost," he asserts, "but rather are ultimately transformed into a gain in Space or Force" (231).
He is worth quoting at length.
These three factors of Force, Space and Time work together at every move. The whole art of the Opening consists in bringing into action pieces which are first shut in, in freeing pieces by a very few pawn moves, and in getting them to favourable positions and that as quickly as possible. Each tempo must be fully utilised for development, and one must advance one's game. (231)Although Tarrasch is considered the dogmatist among classical chess theorists, I see the beginnings of modern dynamic chess in his discussion of the balancing of tempi with material and board control.
*See Sid Pickard, The Collected Works of William Steinitz (2003), CD for Steinitz's magazine annotations.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
