Alexey Suetin & Ilya Odessky - Soviet Chess Strategy.pdf

Chess Classics

Soviet Chess Strategy By

Alexey Suetin

Quality Chess www.qualitychess.co. uk

Foreword by the UK Publisher One of the aims of Quality Chess is to publish books that we believe will enhance chess literature, rather than necessarily be best-sellers. The late Alexey Suetin's Soviet Chess Strategy fits perfectly into that category. It is a collection of Suetin's finest writing in what was a long and distinguished career. Suetin has much to teach the contemporary chess player. He was a strong Russian grandmaster who influenced generations of Soviet players through his writing, broadcasting and coaching. Suetin was regarded as one of the top Soviet coaches and, for example, guided Tigran Petrosian to the World Championship. Many other stars were also set on the path to greatness by Suetin, including Vassily Ivanchuk. As with our previous Soviet classic, Questions of Modern Chess Theory by Isaac Lipnitsky, the original editing in Russian was done by 1M lIya Odessky, before John Sugden skilfully translated the work into English, then the editors of Quality Chess made our contribution. Naturally, modern players and computers can quibble about some of the analysis, but that does not lessen the instructional value of Suetin's words. We have not "corrected" all the points where we disagree, preferring to reserve our red pencil for the points where we think a change or comment will add to the reader' s enjoyment or erudition. We hope the reader will benefit from becoming a pupil in the Soviet chess school. John Shaw and Jacob Aagaard G lasgow, May 20 1 0

Contents Key to symbols used & Bibliography

Chapter 1: General Questions of Strategy and Tactics Chapter

2: The Chess Game as a Unified Process of Struggle

The Results of Mobilization: Their Influence on the Character of the Middlegame Features of the Middlegame Struggle at the Start of the Game The Task o f Harmoniously Co-ordinating the Forces - its Role i n the Opening Transition from Opening t o Middlegame: Th e Principal Task Involved Transition to the Endgame Some Other Key Moments in the Chess Struggle

Chapter

3: Foundations o f Positional Play

Relative Values of the Pieces Open File for a Rook - Penetration to the Seventh Rank Th e Minor Pieces: Their Values Compared Diverse Material - Compensation for the Queen Compensation for a Rook Compensation for a Minor Piece

6 7 31

31 38 38 43 48 50 55

55 56 57 58 62 65

Rare Types o f Compensation for Queen o r Rook - Two Minor Pieces against Rook and One or Two Pawns

66

Chapter 4: The Centre - Typical Pawn Structures

69

Old and New Conceptions of the Centre

69 70 70 71 72 76 83 85 85 86 89

Typical Pawn Structures in the Centre The Open Centre Numerical Equality of Pawns in the Centre The Closed Centre Fixed Central Pawn Position with Open d-file or e-file Mobile Centre with Two Pawns on the Fourth Rank One Mobile Pawn in the Centre Th e "Hanging Pawn" Centre The Piece-and-Pawn Centre Pawn Weakness in the Centre (accepted in return for good piece-play)

Chapter 5: Th e Dynamics o f the Chess Struggle Some General Concepts: a Brief History Lesson Some Important Features of the Dynamic Approach The Relation of Logic to Imagination in Chess Co-ordination of the Forces The Initiative

99

99 100 107 116 132

Chapter 6: Modem Positional Play The Modern Understanding of Centralization Structures with Tension in the Centre Fluid Situation in the Centre The Centre and Space - Crossing the "Demarcation" Line The Centre and the Flanks Pawn Counter-stroke in the Centre Pawn Chains - Pawn Restraint Connected Wing Pawns versus a Central Pair: The Key Role of Blockading Pawn Sacrifices Weak Square Complexes

Chapter 7: The Attack - Affinity between Strategic and Tactical Methods General Concepts Dynamic Moments - Launching the Assault The Sudden Attacking Coup Transferring the Attack to the King

Chapter

8: Methods of Defence - Switching from Defence to Attack

Persistence Tenacity Defence and the Elements of Strategy Activity - the Main Theme of the Defence Interrelation between Methods of Attack and Defence Switching from Attack to Defence From Defence to Counterattack Strategic Aims of Tactical Operations The Art of Manoeuvring in Balanced Positions

Conclusion Appendix: From the Book "The Middlegame in Chess" The Initiative Transformation of Positional Factors The Concrete Approach to Evaluating a Position Middlegame Mastery: Ways of Working to Improve It

136 136 136 141 143 144 146 147 150 152 155 159 159 160 160 163 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 173 175 176 1 80 181

181 187 194 210

Dynamics should be Dynamic

227

Game Index

24 0

Key to symbols used t i ± + +-+

White is slightly better Black is slightly better White is better Black is better W hite has a decisive advantage Black has a decisive advantage equaliry

Cii

with compensation

�

with counterplay

CD

unclear a weak move

??

a blunder a good move

!! !? ?!

a move worth considering

#

mate

an excellent move a move of doubtful value

Chapter 1 General Questions of Strategy and Tactics The game of chess has many facets. Its attraction lies above all in the inner beauty of its ideas its aesthetics. At the same time the laws of logic are applicable to it - which is what constitutes its affinity with science. The development of creative thought in chess, especially since the Renaissance era, vividly demonstrates that chess is an inseparable part of world culture. By what process do the artistic ideas of chess arise? In what does the logic of chess find expression? This question, of no small importance, is what we shall illuminate first and foremost. In this connection let us ponder some widely familiar and basic chess truths. In a game ofchess the fundamental law ofdevelopment is struggle. After the first few moves which are needed to bring the two opponents' forces into contact, a battle is already unfolding, in which the active means of fighting (a move, a threat, an operation, a plan, etc.) are constantly opposed by various defensive and counter-aggressive measures. Among the principles on which the chess struggle is founded, we must include such elementary concepts as the scale of relative values of the pieces and pawns, and the fighting qualities and char­ acteristics of each piece type. Another important factor is the role of the king in the game. The material factor is inseparable from the various properties of the area where the battle takes place - the chessboard. Depending on its position on the board, and its interaction with other pieces - those on its own side as well as those of the opponent - the power of a fighting unit ( a piece or pawn) may noticeably change. Even an inexperienced player cannot help being struck by the fact that the outward contour of the position frequently influences the strength of a particular piece. Such positional elements as centralization, strong and weak squares, the character of the pawn structure and so on, are generally familiar. As we can easily see, it is in pursuit of the main aim of gaining positional and material assets that the battle is fought out. In this process (and here in fact is one of the key characteristics of the chess struggle) , all the elements I have mentioned are primarily weapons in the fight. Thus in a chess game the distinction between an object of attack and the forces in action is decidedly relative. In the course of play it may sometimes happen that an object of attack is instantly transformed into an active force. The following example is instructive.

8

Soviet Chess Strategy

Alexander Kotov - N. Novotelnov

8 7

Moscow 1947

6 5 4 3 2 1 a

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

An object of attack has arisen in the white camp, namely the isolated pawn on d4, against which Black has directed the pressure of his forces. The most logical move here was probably 23 . . . lD d5, blockading the weakness. However, Black chose a more straightforward plan.

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

27... c,!,>f6 28.�ce2 �f5 29.�f4 �g7 30.h4 ge7 31.gxe7 c,!,>xe7 32.ge1 t c,!,>d7 33.ge5 f6 34.ge2 gc8 35.gd2 a6 36.�de2 c,!,>e7 37.�c3 d4 38.gxd4

23...�e8 24.�c2 �d6? The threat of25 . . . lD f5 100ks most unpleasant. However, Black has overlooked that the d4-pawn is not only an object of attack but also a fighting unit in his opponent's hands. Grasping the opportunity, White rids himself of his weakness.

25.d5! The pawn sacrifices itself, but the pieces dramatically gain in activity.

25 ... exd5 26.Lg7 c,!,>xg7 27.�d4! Unlike Black, who forgot about the principle of blockade, White is firmly blocking the dangerous passed pawn on d5. It now becomes clear that Black's scattered pawns are coming under pressure. His position rapidly deteriorates.

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

White has regained his pawn while keeping a large positional plus, which he confidently proceeded to turn into a win. In the chess battle the distinction between engagedforces and reserves is also relative. Naturally, if there is a major disturbance in the balance of the position, the game ought to end in one player's favour. But then we also encounter positions where j ust the slightest advantage in the interplay of forces creates

9

General Questions o f S trategy and Tactics realistic conditions for victory. Of course there are also exceptions - such as standard endgames where a material plus proves insufficient to win, or the rare phenomenon of so-called "positional draws" where the stronger side is again unable to exploit its trumps.

Isaak Boleslavsky - Vassily Smyslov Leningrad 1948

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

7..J�a3! 8..ixe5 ga4t! 9.gc4 Simplifying Black's task. Mter 9 . me3 ficeS 1 OJ'!c2 Eia3t 1 1 . me2 White could still offer prolonged resistance.

9...fxe5t lO. i>d5 �ha2 1l.gg4 g5 White resigned.

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

There are few pieces left on the board, and the position looks drawish. On each wing the pawns are numerically balanced. But on careful analysis, Black's advantage stands out. His kingside pawn position is more elastic, and in this kind of situation the pairing of rook and knight works much better than that of rook and bishop. By bringing his king into play, Black strength­ ens his position and proceeds to exploit White's weaknesses.

1 ... gc5 The rook heads for as.

2J�b2 lLld7 3. i>d4 ga5 4.gc2 i>e6 5.gc6t \!;>f5 6.gc7lLle5 7.gc5 White seeks salvation in exchanges. The following powerful move dashes his hopes.

This example demonstrates the role of minute, sometimes barely perceptible, advantages in the chess struggle. A game of chess amounts to a process of struggle,

in which each move alters something more than the outward aspect of the position. All the material and positional elements already mentioned are in a state of motion. This is what defines the role of the move, the unit of time in chess. Time should also be counted among the basic factors of the struggle. If chess can be compared to a film, the frames of the film are like the positions that succeed each other with each move in the game. The concept of a chess position embraces the elements of space, time, the material correla­ tion of forces, and also the way the pieces are arranged - their mobility, co-ordination and so forth. This last factor undoubtedly plays a most important role in the game. Sometimes you can acquire an advantage in material, in time and in space, but still not win.

10

Soviet Chess Strategy

I will give a pair of examples.

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

g

h

White to move

a

b

c

d

e

f

White to move In the first position Black has an overwhelming material plus, but the co-ordination of his pieces is in disarray. After l .g7 he is forced to cease resistance. In the second position, after l .g7, Black is still unable to win: 1 . . . Wfxg7t 2. W xg7, and White proceeds to pick up one of the minor pieces.

The strategy of chess embraces questions about the general co-ordination of the fighting forces that are employed to achieve the key aims at a particular stage of the struggle. The basis of strategy is a plan - a purposeful method of action . As the art of chess develops, strategic plans are enriched by constanrly adopting new forms. Of course, many new plans later become accepted as "standard". A plan in a game of chess is always founded on an evaluation of the position from which the plan begins - an appraisal of the essential peculiarities of that position. The game plan is a guideline to be followed during the struggle. If the conditions of the struggle alter, so does the plan - since every change in the position, sometimes even just a minor one, demands new strategic decisions. Planning always accompanies a chess game from the first move to the last, as though illuminating its course. Sometimes the strategy of the game stands out in bold relief At other times it becomes, you might say, imperceptible. Planning recedes in to the background whenever tactics begin to play the key role. Tactics is the second integral component in the process of the struggle. If strategy gives a player principles for the general management of his forces, tactics de­ mands a concrete approach to the particular position, the closest possible attention to the specific details of the conflict. As Euwe point­ edly observed: "Strategy requires deliberation, tactics requires penetrating vision." Tactics in chess is the art of fighting. It takes account of the fighting qualities and peculiarities of the pieces, the various ways in which they act together. The plans a player has devised are implemented through tactical devices and operations.

***

A game of chess develops according to the principles of strategy and tactics.

The basis of a tactical operation is a threat (in the broad sense of the word) . Threats can differ sharply in character:

11

General Questions of Strategy and Tactics .:. :. .:.

a threat to the enemy king a threat to gain a material advantage a threat to gain space and restrict the mobility of the opponent's pieces a threat to exchange the opponent's attacking pieces in order to ease the defence and so on. This variety is one more reflection of the inexhaustible wealth of chess.

•

.:.

.:.

Let us look at some examples that illustrate tactical devices.

d4 after a few more moves. His knight is travelling along the route f3-g5-h3-f4-e2-d4 . The idea of this remarkable manoeuvre is that by means of a combinative attack against e4, White first wants to induce a weakening of Black's pawn position and thus gain control of the fS-square.

20...h6 20 . . . ttJ e5 is strongly answered by 2 1 . ib3! ifS 22. ia4t � f8 23. i c2! .

21.�h3 YlYe5 22J�c1 �g4 23.�f4! The knight continues on its way.

One of the effective tactical ploys is a manoeuvre. It is often fairly concise, consisting of two or three moves. But manoeuvres that are several moves long, outwardly striking and memorable, are not infrequent either. The following example is characteristic.

23... g5 24.h3 �gf6 25.�e2 �xd5 26..ixd5 YlYxd5

Alexander Alekhine - Siegbert Tarrasch Mannheim 1 9 1 4

8 7 6

a

5

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

27.�d4!

4

The manoeuvre is completed. The possibility of invading the kingside with the knight via fS decides the outcome of the game.

3 2 1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

20.�g5! There might seem to be more point in immediately directing the knight to d4 (where it will be very actively placed) but Alekhine is in no hurry to do so. He will only occupy

27...'�e5 28.�c4 30.�fxd6

YlYd5

29.�f5!

�f8

White soon won. Frequently a useful tactical ploy for improving your position is exchanging your opponent's important pieces. The following example is noteworthy.

12

Soviet Chess Strategy

Mikhail Botvinnik - N. Sorokin

28. c!>f2! �xa5 29J�ee7 gbe8 30J�xf7 gxe7 31.gxe7t c!>h8 32.i.d5!

Moscow 1 93 1

White won easily. Of course, among the range of tactical procedures, the most powerful and effective is a combination, which introduces an element of aesthetics and art into chess and lends it its peculiar attraction. The combination usually involves a sacrifice of material.

Efim Bogoljubow Alexander Alekhine -

Hastings 1 922

....

8 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

7

h

In this case it is simplification that enables White to improve his position further.

6

20.§'e3! §'xe3 21.fxe3 J.g4 22.a5 �e8 23J�c1 .ixf3 24.gxB �e7 25.�d5!

4

The exchanges increase White's superiority, making it easier for him to break through to the seventh rank with his rooks.

5

3 2 1 a

25...�e6 25 . . . tt:lfxd5 could be answered either by 26.exd5 or 26. hd5 tt:lxd5 27Jl:xd5.

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

Alekhine finds an exceptionally beautiful combination, drastically changing the course of the struggle to his own benefit.

29...b4! 30.gxa8 bxc3! 31.gxe8 e2!! 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

� a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

13

General Questions of Strategy and Tactics The point of the combination: the modest little pawn that recently stood on b5 unexpectedly becomes a queen.

32JhfSt c.!lh7 33.c!Llfl cl=Y!Yt 34.c!Llfl c!Llel! 35.gh2 Y!Yxc4 36.gbS .ib5 37J:txb5 Y!Yxb5 Black easily converted his material plus into a win. An attack on the enemy king, involving threats of mate, opens up especially wide scope for combinative creativity. It must be remembered that the king is constantly under a covert threat.

Aron Nimzowitsch - Akiba Rubinstein

29 J:txd1 30.f7t! c.!lhS 31.gxdl gdS ••

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

32.Y!Yg6!! Black resigned.

Berlin 1 928

Vdrtor Korchnoi - Efim Geller Kiev 1 954

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

White's pawn storm looks ineffective, but Black has to be alert and not lose his sense of danger. Yet his sense of danger is precisely what lets him down!

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

27 Y!YcS?

White crowned his attack on the king with a brilliant combinative stroke:

Black had to play 27 . . :'H!. e7, preserving every chance of equalizing.

25.hf
••.

2S.£5! fxe6 29.f6! Black had eviden tly overlooked the possibility of this breakthrough. The attack now sweeps forward like a tornado.

Whichever way Black takes the bishop, he is mated: 25 . . . W xf6 26. WIe6#, 25 . . . .!Llxf6 26J:l:xg7t W e8 27. WIf7# and 25 . . . gxf6 26. WIe6t W f8 27.l"�g8#.

14

Soviet Chess Strategy

Positional combinations. harmoniously uniting combinative and positional elements. have acquired immense significance in contemporary practice. Here is a fairly simple example on this theme:

supplemented and refined. All this could form the subject for more than one monograph. We will confine ourselves to a minimum of illustrations.

Ossip Bernstein - Jose Raul Capablanca

Mikhail Botvinnik - Paul Keres

Moscow 19 14

Moscow 1948

8 8

7

7

6

6

5

5

4

4

3

3

2

2

1

1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

White effectively uses combinative means to gain positional assets:

25J�hb6! cxb6 26.tLlc6 V!ic7 27.tLlxd8 V!ixd8 28.V!ic2!

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

Capablanca continued with:

26 J:!c5 ••

Luring White combination.

into

a

now

classic

Botvinnik soon achieved a decisive plus. Even the simplest combination consists of a set of inseparably interlinked elements. always sub­ ordinated to some particular combinative idea and theme. Among the very simple ideas that can be singled out are deflection. the enticing of a piece to a square. elimination of defenders. blockade. square clearance. and so on. At the same time we can distinguish several combinative themes such as the dual attack. the pin. discovered check and the like. The theory of combination. which has found some precise formulations in chess studies. is undergoing constant development. and many of its propositions are continually being

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 a 0-1

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

General Questions of Strategy an d Tactics The idea of deflection is combined with a dual attack. White cannot simultaneously protect his rook on c3 an d his queen on e2, which is tied to the defence of the back rank.

Alexander Alekhine S. Frieman -

New York (simultaneous) 1924

15

2 ....ifl 3.flYdl Now comes the point of the combination.

3 ...Ae2!

Black was also mating with 3 . . . .ie5t 4. '�g l %Y h3 , with the same thematic i dea.

4.flYxe2 Ad6t 5.
a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

White carried out the i dea of enticing a piece onto a square. There followed:

23J�e8t �f8 24.�h6t! flYxh6 25 JlKf8t!

�xftI 26. flYd8#

4 3 2 1 a

And here is an example of the idea of blocking:

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

The bad position of the black king is exploited by the decisive combination:

1 ..id6t! gxd6 2.gb7t! hb7 3.�c2t! �xc2 4.gb5#! 8 7

v////)'/. .......

6 5 4 a

b

c

1 . ..ih2t! 2.
d

e

f

2. Wxh2 ifl t wins the queen.

g

h

3 2 1

�� �I\

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

16

Soviet Chess Strategy

In practice, these very simple ideas are rarely encountered in a pure form. Most often they are tightly interwoven with each other; the unravelling of this tangle constitutes the essence of the combination. But then, the presence of such components as I have mentioned does not by any means always permit a combination to take place. Its implementation depends on numerous, sometimes scarcely perceptible, features - the combinative motifs - of the position. As an example, the idea of the combination carried out in the following example is of great interest.

Veresov Kukharev

In place of 1 . . . ttJ xb3 Black could have played: 1 . . . ttJ bc6 Then after 2 . .ic2! ttJ xb3 some fascinating combinative ideas could once again arise: '1W 3 . h6t! Drawing the king forward again. 3 ... � xh6 4J!h4t I!;g5 5 . f4t! � xh4 6.g3t � h3 7. ttJ de4! "Wc5t 8 7 6 5 4

-

3

Minsk 1 959

2

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

8 . � h l ! h6 9 . .id l ! Forcing Black to unguard the g5-square. 9 . . . ttJ xe5 1 0. fxe5 h5 1 1 . ttJ g5# Finally, if Black plays 1 . . . "Wa7, then after 2 . .ixg6! fxg6 White again gives mate: 8 7

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

In the diagram position Black accepted that his position was hopeless and thus accepted the rook sacrifice. 1... tLlxb3 This was met by a mating combination.

6 5 4 3 2

1 a

2."Wh6t!! �xh6 3J:!h4t �g5 4.f4t!! White sacrifices his last major piece to draw the black king forward.

4...�xh4 5.g3t �h3 6 .ifl#! •

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

3 . "Wh6t! I!;xh6 4J'�h3t I!;g5 5 . f4t! � xf4 6J'�f3t (exploiting the pin) 6 . . . � xe5 7. ttJ c4#!, or 6 . . . � g5 7. ttJ de4t � h6 8J'�h3t � g7 9J'hh7#.

17

General Questions of Strategy an d Tactics The next example excellently illustrates both how combinative motifs arise an d how to uti­ lize them.

21.dxc6 bxc6 22.�f5!

Anatoly Karpov - Dragoljub Velimirovic Skopje 1976

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

The start of an effective combination, deeply and precisely calculated, which wrecks Black's kingside fortifications. One of its important themes is the misplaced rook on d8. a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

In this position there seems to be no warning of a quick combinative storm. Black continued with:

19... gad8? A first inaccuracy. For tactical reasons, d8 is a bad square for the rook - as will soon become apparent. The right move was 19 . . . :1'1ae8 . Then a manoeuvring struggle could develop. To increase the pressure on Black's castled position, White should probably double rooks with 20.:1'1g2 :1'1e7 2 1 . :1'1cg l . With ttJe3-g4-h6t coming, his positional plus would be indisputable, but of course there would be a long hard fight ahead.

20.b3 c6? Another mistake, this time a serious one, and the refutation is not long in coming. It was not too late for 20 . . . :1'1de8, with similar play to the line just given.

22...gxf5 Black has no good choice. In the event of 22 . . . ixf5 23.exf5 g5 , White has the decisive 24. tLlxg5 ! fxg5 2 5 . Wfxg5 :1'1d7 26.f6 etc. On 22 . . . i e8, he simply plays 23. tLle7t and Black cannot avoid material loss.

23Jhg7t!
Necessary, as 24. . . 'it>h8 10ses to 2 5 . tLlg5 ! fxg5 26. Wfxg5 , when Black cannot play 26 . . . :1'1f7 on account of 27. Wfxd 8t. This is where the misplacement of the rook on d8 makes itself felt!

25. �h5t
Of course not 25 . . . <;iJe7 in view of 26.:1'1g7t 'it>e6 27. Wfxf5 #.

26.�xf5t
Mter 28 . . . 'it>e7 29.gg7t gf7 3 0 . :1'1xf7t 'it>xf7 3 1 . tLlg5t White's attack is irresistible.

18

Soviet Chess Strategy when he began his combination. Although Black has a rook and two minor pieces for the queen, his situation is very difficult if not hope­ less. The point is that his forces are not work­ ing harmoniously (his knights continue to play a pitiful role) . White, on the other hand, has at his disposal the "mercurial" h-pawn which will soon cost Black one of his pieces. The events thus lead ineluctably to an ending where the queen will be opposed by the rook and a single minor piece. a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

3U�g7! A remarkable move, both for its strength and its beauty. It was all the more difficult in that White had to foresee it when commencing the combination on move 2 2 .

36...l:!eS 37.h4 �c5 3S.h5 �e6 39.h6 �f8 40.b4 �cS 41.�d2 �e7 42.h7 �xh7 43.�xh7 �cS 44.�f8 �e7 45.a3 .teS 46.lLle6t �d7 47.�g7 �c7 4S.�f5 �d7

As before, the game proceeds on forced lines:

31..Jks

After 3 1 . . .l:!xg7 32. ctJxglt <j{f7 33. �xh7 Black is defenceless against the discovered check.

32Jhf7 �xf7 33.�g5t �e7 34.Wixhlt �dS 35.WihSt �c7 36.Wixf6 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

49.a4 The technical phase of exploitation has begun and White's task is to breach the final fortress. The organic weaknesses on a7 and c6 seal Black's doom.

49....tf7 50.�c3 .ta2 51.a5 �f7 52.Wih6 �d7 53.f4 exf4 54.Wixf4 �f7 55.Wih6 �d7 56.Wih2 .te6 57.Wih6 Lf5 On 57 . . . �a2 White could play 5 8 . ctJd4, when a defence against e4-e5 is hard to find. a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

This is the position White was aiming for

5S.exfS d5 59.�d4 �d6 6o.Wif4 �b7 61.Wie5 �f7 62.WieS �c7

19

General Questions o f Strategy an d Tactics

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

63.i'a8! White's queen manoeuvre, several moves long, concludes successfully. The queen now forces its way to c5, simultaneously taking aim at the pawns on a7 an d c6. This immediately settles the outcome of the struggle.

63...c;t>d6 64.i'fBt �c7 66.l'xa7t �c8 67.i'a6t

65.i'c5

�d6

Black resigned. The instructive features of this game, in addition to the attractive combination, are the subsequent struggle with diverse material, and the white queen's manoeuvre - extending over many moves - which completed the exploitation of the advantage. So far, the tactical devices encountered in practical play have proved very difficult to classify. Experience shows that strategic measures can be systematized more easily. Players are familiar with several typical metho ds that have been devised for conducting an attack on the king by utilizing weak points in the enemy camp, etc. Correspon dingly, methods of defence against these active plans have been worked out. A wealth of material in this area is supplied by the typical pawn structures in the centre, which we shall examine later. ***

The concepts of strategy and tactics can be regarded either in a purely practical sense (which is how the authors of chess manuals usually treat them) or in a wider sense of the words. By strategy, practical players often understand no more than the conduct of the game accord­ ing to a plan - the simple subordination of the effective factors to a particular design. In the broad sense, strategy signifies the totality of a player's views (or the views of a chess school) on the way the chess struggle as a whole should be pursued. Strategy embraces everything relating to ab­ stract chess thought. Thus, in contradistinc­ tion to the positional school of Steinitz which prevailed for a long period, modern strategy is characterized by an increasing use of combina­ tive means. At the same time the concept of tactics in chess literature often becomes a synonym for this or that combinative idea. For example in his book The Strategy and Tactics of Chess the Soviet master Lisitsin designates a discovered check, a discovered attack, and so on, as basic elements of tactics, whereas in essence they are elements of combination. In practice this is partly justified, as it is precisely in combination and its elements that tactics acquires its most vivid expression. Yet in the broader sense the concept of tactics embraces literally all actions on the chessboard, from the simplest element (a move) to the most complex combinations many moves deep. From this viewpoint a game represents a continuous chain of tactical activities, unified by the mutual strategic projects of the players. At times these projects dominate the action; in a phase of sharp play, they recede into the background. ***

In the relation between strategy and tactics, the leading role belongs to strategy. Conformity to a plan, and the purposes of the struggle, are what gives chess its great en during vitality and raises it to the level of science.

Soviet Chess Strategy

20

In accordance with the logicality of the chess struggle, the effective execution of a tactical operation must contribute to fulfilling a strategic plan. Tactical skill is by no means an end in itselfl The following finish is instructive.

Paul Keres - Tigran Petrosian

47.. J:�g3!! This forms the logical culmination of Black's plan and unexpectedly decides the result of the fight.

48.hxg3 hxg3 49.gfd2 V;Yh4! 50.i.e2 gh7 51.q"fl? 5 1 . iLh5 was the only way to prolong resistance.

Bled 1 959

8 7 6 5 4 3 2

L",,,j=Y.,,,,,,,,/,=,,,z

1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

a

h

In this complicated position White's plans are associated with play in the centre; Black has to seek counterplay on the kingside.

41.�d4 i.d7 42.a3 V;Ya8! 43.q"gl h5 44J�bl h4 45J:tbb2 gg4 46.gfl V;Yd8 47.b4? While carrying on straightforwardly, White overlooks the tactical stroke that Black has gradually been preparing: �

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

51...V;Yxf4t!! White resigned. Thus, if you implement a plan directly without regard for your opponent's combinative possibilities, this frequently results in the plan collapsing. If, on the other hand, you manage to divine your opponent's intentions in good time; if you pay strict attention to the tactical means at his disposal and the peculiarities of the position; then this substantially improves your chances and creates the essential conditions for carrying out your own plans and designs successfully. The end subordinates the means but must at the same time be compatible with them. When conceiving a strategic plan, a player has to form a clear picture of whether the in­ tended goal is realistic and corresponds to the distinctive features of the position. According to the logic of the struggle, if you strive after

General Questions of Strategy and Tactics a too-distant goal, o r pursue i t while d isre­ garding the true deman d s of the position, you will meet with a refutation in which tactical methods are likely to predominate. A strategic design o nly comes to fruition when it is well­ founded tactically. This proposltlon is illustrated by our next two examples. In the first of them, an unfounded strategic design is tactically refuted. In the second, an attack proves to be the correct solution to the position. A.

21

This move required a long line of calculation. In a formal sense Black is conceding the centre but in actual fact he is conquering it, by gaining control of the e4-square. The main variations arise from I 6. d 5 . Then I 6 . . . bxc3 is bad on account of I 7.dxe6 fxe6 I 8 . Axe6t � h8 I 9 . tLle 5 ! . Th e correct answer t o I 6.d5 is I 6 . . . e5!:

Sokolsky - Alexey Suetin Moscow 1950

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

After I 7. tLlxe5 tLlxe5 I 8 . Axe5 bxc3 I 9.d6 AfB 2o. Axc3 .ie4 White does not have compensation for the sacrificed piece.

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

In this position White played:

1 5J�fdl Preparing an attack in the centre with d4dS. This plan, however, failed to take account of the specific circumstances and realistic possibilities, and met with an unexpected tactical refutation. White probably ought to have played I 5 .dxc5 , simplifying the position in the centre.

1 5 ...b4!

He also does badly from I 7.d6 exf4, an d now I 8 .dxe7 Vf!xe7 or I 8 . .ixf7t � xf7 I 9. Vf!b3t � fB 20. tLlh4 tLle5 2 1 .exf4 tLlfg4. In all the variations Black's advantage is obvious. The game continued:

16.axb4 cxb4 17.�a4? I 7. tLle2 is somewhat better.

17 ... fi'a5 1 8ic7 fi'h5 19.�e5 gac8 20.�xd7 �xd7 2 1 ib l �f6 22.fi'd2 fi'b5 23.b3 ,td5 Black won easily. Here, on the other hand, is an example of an attack that does correspond to the demands of the position:

22

Soviet Chess Strategy

Johann Zukertort - Joseph Blackburne London 1 883

8 7

2S. 'i'b4!! gSe5 On 28 . . . �xb4, White forces mate with: 29 ..txe5t c;t> xh7 30.�h3t 'if;>g6 3 1 .�g3t c;t>h6 32.�f6t c;t> h5 33.�f5t c;t> h6 34 . .tf4t c;t>h7 3 5 .�h5#

29.gfSt!
6 5 4 3 2 L. a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

By exploiting the weakening of Black's kingside and concentrating his forces on that sector, White carries out a brilliant attack. His plan requires an especially far­ reaching calculation of the ensuing tactical complexities.

Black was evidently relying on this counterstroke. Yet White's calculations prove to have been deeper.

26.gxh7t
b

c

d

e

f

g

h

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

32 ..ig7t! Black resigned.

23.£5! tLle4 24..be4 dxe4 25.fxg6 ge2

1

a

It must be remembered that in practice, in answer to your opponent's tactical threats, you need to be constantly creating threats of your own. The efforts of the players are principally aimed at calculating variations, in other words at the intricate devices required for the concrete implementation of their chosen plans. We should note that in chess, strategy and tactics are intimately associated - hence the indissoluble bond between strategic and tactical methods of thought. When studying the strategic paths that a chess game follows, we must remember that they are often subject to the most radical adj ustment by tactics. Tactics will often lead the players far away from their original strategic designs! A tactical operation (a combination above all) is in itself the most effective means of gaining specific advantages, including the overriding

General Questions of Strategy and Tactics

23

Better was 3 . i'b l , when Black has at least enough compensation after 3 . . . gf3! 4.ga3 gxh3t 5 . lt>g2 gg3t with the idea 6. lt>h2 tLl e3!.

goal - checkmating the king. In the course of play you have to fight against your opponent's tactical schemes, irrespective of whether they are linked to his overall plan or possess no more than local significance (as with traps, for instance) . Tactical mastery is therefore an essential prerequisite for assimilating complex strategic ideas. When the struggle in a chess game enters the realm ofultra-sharp tactics, every move demands particular accuracy and resourcefulness.

3... tLlxe5! 4.�xf5

Here is a small example illustrating the effectiveness and independent power of tactical methods in the art of chess.

To work out all the consequences of a tactical operation is often very difficult (and practically impossible under tournament conditions with limited thinking time) , even for the strongest masters of combinative play.

Dementey - Sokolsky

Otherwise the threat is 4. . . tLl f3!.

4. . gxf5 5.dxe5 gO 6.gel gdd3 .

White resigned.

Alexander Alekhine - Frederick Yates Minsk 1958

Carlsbad 1923

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

The diagram position is taken from a game between two Belorussian players. Black played:

1. .\Wxd3!? •

Another possibility was 1 . . . tLl g3t! 2.fxg3 V9xfl t 3.gxfl gxb2 with a winning position, but the game continuation is a good deal more interesting.

2.i'xd3 gxf2 3..i c3?

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

White has intentionally been heading for this position. Alekhine has prepared a tactical operation which, on the face of it, should give him a decisive plus.

33.tLlg4 Simultaneously attacking the bishop on e5 and defending the h2-point. Now 33 . . . .if6 is met by 34. d6!, and 33 . . . .id6 by 34.e5 , to White's advantage in either case.

Soviet Chess Strategy

24

Mikhail Tal- Svetozar Gligoric

The continuation Black selects had also been taken into account by Alekhine.

33..J�xg4 34.fxg4 gxf1t 3S.c.t?g2 �xh2t 36.c.t?xf1 In his foregoing calculations, Alekhine had seen this position - where he remains the exchange up - and evaluated it in his own favour. But to the surprise of both players, it turned out that the operation was not finished at this point but was only just beginning. Black has at his disposal a forced variation, 15 moves long, which could not have been foreseen even by such a combinative genius as Alekhine.

36...�hIt 37.c.t?fl i.d4t 3S.c.t?g3 �gIt 39.c.t?h3 �flt 4O.gg2 �hIt 41.c.t?g3 �eIt 42.c.t?h3

Belgrade 1968

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

1;:;, a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

We have before us an extremely sharp combinative situation. White's next move may look crushing:

31.�hS? However, there followed:

8

31...�xc1t 32.c.t?h2 .id6t! 33.gxd6 �f4t 34.gg3 �xd6 3S.�f5 geel!

7 6 5

8

4

7

3

6

2

5

1

4 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

42...gS! 43.gc2 �flt 44.c.t?h2 �gl t 4S.c.t?h3 �hlt 46.c.t?g3 �dl! 47.gc3 �gl t 4S.c.t?h3 �fl t 49.c.t?g3 .iflt so.c.t?a i.gl t White resigned.

3 2 1

1;:;, a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

A tactical stroke of devastating force. It only now becomes clear that with his queen sortie on move 3 1 , even such a master of combination as Tal was already making an irreparable mistake.

25

General Questions of Strategy and Tactics We should note that the correct course was 31. tiJb3!!, which would have led to a winning attack after 3l. . . l!Nxb3 32. l!Nh5 !%xc1 t 33.'.t> h2 id6t 34. !%xd6I!Nb8 8 7 6

On the other hand, games where tactics acquire major independent importance are generally combinative in character. Here, mind-bending complications - the irrational, dynamic components of strategy - hold sway. In between these two basic poles there lies an inexhaustible wealth of varied chess modes. Thus the specific nature of chess is such that all forms of play, whether strategic or tactical, are inseparable from chess art. They find embodiment in the games of the top masters.

5 4 3 2

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

Here is an example of a purely positional conduct of the fight.

35.'�h6! and 36. �gxg6t!.

Paul Keres - Alexander Kotov

36.'ixf7t

Moscow 1947

The only move.

36...c,t.,xf7 37.�xd6t g;,e6 38.ggGt g;,d5 39.tDS gb7! 40.�e3t?! 40. l:!g5 would have prolonged the fight.

40... �xe3! 41.fxe3 ge7! It isn't hard to see that Black has a won position.

42. c,t.,g3 e4 43.g;,f4 c3 44.e4t g;,e4 45.ga6 e2 46.�al g;,d3 White resigned.

a ***

From the viewpoint ofthe interrelation between strategy and tactics, every game constitutes a blend of purely positional factors with combinative ones. The range of contrasts here is very great. The game acquires an emphatically positional character when a strategic contest is in progress for the consistent accumulation of small advantages. The nature of the struggle is then strictly rational, almost mathematical.

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

By playing:

18...e5? Kotov squares.

incautiously weakened his

light

19..tg4t! g;,b8

1 9 . . 'it> c7 2o. lLld7, with threats of lLlxe5 and .ib6t, is even worse for Black. .

20.�d7t .ixd7 21.gxd7 ge8 22..tb6! �e6

Soviet Chess Strategy

26

23.ic7t i>a8 24.i>c2 f6 25.i£5 h6 26.ie4 g5 27.b4!

And now for an example of sharp combinative play, again by Grandmaster Keres - an outstanding player who excelled in a whole range of strategic and tactical methods of combat.

Paul Keres - Alexander Tolush Moscow 1957

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

Having improved the placing of his pieces to the maximum, and totally fettered the opposing forces, Keres begins the decisive queenside offensive.

27...h5 28.a4 £5 Desperation, but there is no defence against the threat of b4-b 5 .

29.ixf5 !U8 30.ie4 gxflt

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

A sharp fight has developed in the very opening, leading to great complications. The following brilliant combinative move is a solution in keeping with the essence of the position.

20.�d5!! �xb3 20 . . . exd5 is bad in view of 2 1 . ixd5 lL\xb3 22. ixf7t, and White wins.

21.�c7t i>e7 22.ixb3 �xe5 23.�xf7t i>d6 24.�dxe6 �f6 25.gxf6 �el t 26.gfl �e3t 27.i>hl ixe6 28.�xe6 gac8 29.�xb7 Black resigned. ***

a

b

c

31.i>d3 White soon won.

d

e

f

g

h We conclude the chapter by touching on some questions about the classification of chess players.

27

General Questions of Strategy and Tactics When observing players in the process of improving their competitive skills, it is rather rare to find strategic thought and tactical thought developing together in harmony (and it is high-category players we are speaking of) . Most often, i n practice, you will meet players whose games show a predominance of either strategic elements or tactical ones. Players with tactical leanings have a delicate feel for the concrete features of a position. Their combinative vision develops rapidly. The following example is indicative of this type of thinking.

Georgy Lisitsin - Alexander Tolush Leningrad 1 938

...

8 7 6 5 4

But now it turns out that there is no satisfactory defence to the cunning tactical threat of 20 . . . ttJ g4.

20.h3 On 20.l':�e2 Black would play 20 . . . ttJ g4 2 1 .g3 Wih3 22. Eife l ttJ xh2! 23.Eixh2 � xg3t etc. Now with:

20 'ifg3! ...

Black could immediately.

have

decided

the

game

Quite often, however, tacticians will concentrate too exclusively on the concrete details; lacking a clear strategic guideline, they will base their play chiefly on traps. This can prevent them from grasping the strategic perspective in good time. The following example, in which profound strategy triumphed over pure tactics, is instructive.

Alexander Tolush - Mikhail Botvinnik

3

Leningrad 1 939

2

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

With his last move Wic3-a5, Lisitsin (incidentally a fervent partisan of strategic rationalism) attacked the c7 -pawn, at the same time setting up the unpleasant threat of Wia5g5. Black unexpectedly replied:

18 h6! ...

One has the impression that by giving up the c7-pawn he was choosing the greater of the two evils.

9.'ifd2

19.'ifxc7 tLlf5!

White has prepared a sly trap for his opponent. In answer to:

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

28

Soviet Chess Strategy

9 ... �xd5 IO ..ie7!? White was counting on gaining a big advantage after:

possibilities, those inescapable concomitants of any game of chess.

Alexey Suetin I. V1Stanetskis -

IO ..YlYxe7 1 1 .�xd5 .

Vilnius 1 953

Indeed in the event of 1 1 . . . YM d7 1 2J�d l e6 1 3 . lD c7! White's superiority is indisputable. Instead, however, there followed a surprising exchange sacrifice, which White will of course have seen but probably failed to evaluate deeply.

a

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

II .. Jhd5! It will soon become clear that Black has an irresistible attack on the queenside, since White has imprudently fallen behind in development.

12.YlYxd5 .ie6 13.YlYd2 �c6 14J�dl gd8 15.YlYcl YlYa5t 1 6.gd2 gd5! White loses his queenside pawns one by one.

17.�e2 gxe5 18.�c3 hc3 1 9.bxc3 gxc3 20.YlYb2 ga3 Black attained a decisive plus. Other players are quicker to discern the strategic elements. They prefer a plan that is geared to a lengthy manoeuvring game. AI; a rule they avoid a double-edged struggle and do not take account of "random" tactical

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

At first sight this is not a position where you would expect tactical complications. The initiative rather seems to be with Black, who controls the half-open file. White, however, counters Black's designs with a concealed operation that his opponent fails to discern in good time.

23.YlYfl! .ie6? Black should play 23 . . . b6, fortifying c5.

24.�f5! b6 25.axb6 cxb6 26.b4! 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

29

General Questions of Strategy and Tactics This is the point of White's play: Black cannot now support c5, but after 26 . . . cxb4 27.ixb4 he has no adequate defence against the threats of 28. ttJ e7t and 28. Wlxb6. A "random trait" of the position - the location of the king and queen in relation to each other - plays a decisive part at this j uncture.

26 ... b5 27.bxc5 a5 2S.Ac1 gaS 29.c3 b4 30.d4 bxc3 3 1 .d5 The white pawns advanced in dramatic style. On occasion there will be some veiled but highly dynamic plans behind the mask of the tactical operations. V. Alatortsev

-

Gregory Levenfish

the co-ordination of Black's pieces prior to an attack on both the queenside and the centre.

23.exd4 �d5 24..ic4 gdS 25.�b3 �f5 26.gg4 'i!?g7 27.hd5 gxd5 2s.gdl? A characteristic mistake. Black's threats affect his opponent's morale as well as his position. A more stubborn defence was 28 .1:!ag l .

2S. .Jha4! 29.�xa4 �xf3t 30.l:!gl gxb5 3 1 .'i!?gl The only way for White to retain drawing chances was 3 1 . Wlxb5 Wlxdl t 32.E:g l Wlxd4 33. Wlxb7 Wl d5t 34.l:!g2 Wl d l t 3 5 . E:g l WiSt 36.E:g2 h5 37. Wl b2t 'kfih7 3 8 . Wl d2 ttJ e5 39. Wl d4 (but not 39. Wl e3 Wl d l t 40. E:g l Wl d5t 4 1 . E:g2 ttJ S, and Black wins) . In practice this was very difficult to work out.

Leningrad 1 939

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

The events of this game provide an example of a large-scale unconventional strategy initiated by what looks like a purely tactical operation.

22 ... d4! It will soon become clear that this pawn sacrifice amounts to more than pure tactics. It is linked to an interesting plan to enhance

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

32 ... �xd4! 33.�d2 �e2t 34.'i!?f1 35.�b2? �g3t!

ge5

Black soon won. A player can only be called a truly great strategist if his skills are completed by tactical, especially combinative, mastery. It is precisely such strategists who pioneer new paths in chess.

Chapter 2 The Chess Gatne

as a

Unified

Process of Struggle Perhaps no phase of the game is undergoing so much development as the modern opening, which for a long time has represented a synthesis between piece mobilization and middlegame strategy. The progress of opening theory is inexorably tending towards an even closer merging of the two phases. Study of an opening implies simultaneous study of the middlegame that logically emerges from the opening formation. Let's consider the following factors .

The Results of Mobilization: Their Influence on the Character of the Middlegame The character of the middlegame struggle is in many ways defined by the results of the preceding mobilization phase. In numerous cases, when one side comes out of the opening with a definite plus, the result of the game is already predetermined. In such games the denouement is often hastened by a tactical blow.

Vassily Smyslov - Cenek Kottnauer Groningen 1946

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

32

Soviet Chess Strategy

Within a few moves White decides the game by exploiting the plus he has acquired from the opening (his space advantage and the poor placing of the b lack pieces) .

13.e5! ttJxe5 14.ixb7 gxb7 1 5.'!Wxa6 '!WbS 16.ttJe6! The events proceed on forced lines.

8 7 6 5 4 3

16 ... ttJxe6 17.'!Wxe6t ttJd7 lS.ttJe5!!

2 1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

As a result of some imprecise play by Black in the opening, White has managed to acquire a clear advantage in the centre. Although there are no concrete threats in sight as yet, Black's position is very difficult since he lacks active counterplay. White methodically increases the pressure.

16.tLle5! a

e

g

h

Not allowing the b lack knight onto g6.

The crowning combinative stroke. l S . . . Ek7 is met by 1 9. 'tJ xd7 gxd7 20.l''1a S , winning.

16 ...id6 17.ttJf1 19.ttJxd7 ttJxd7?

l S... dxe5 1 9.if4!

An inconspicuous b ut serious mistake; 1 9 . . . Wxd7, keeping the knight on its key defensive position, was better.

The point of the combination: on 1 9 . . . Wxf4, White had prepared 20. W cSt � e7 2 1 . Wxb7 W f6 22. gxd7 W g6 23.g3 W f5 24.E\a7 etc.

19 ...id6 2o.ixd6 gb6 2 1 .'!Wxd7t! Black resigned. Frequently an opening plus can only be consolidated by systematically increasing the assets of your position. Yuri Averbakh - Lev Aronin Moscow 195 1

'!We7

ls.ig3

ttJ6d7

2o.ixd6 '!Wxd6 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

6. a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

The Chess Game as a Uni fi e d Process of Struggle

21 J:la3 !

33

Efim Geller I. Vatnikov -

Giving White's initiative a significant boost. By bringing his rook into play and switching it (0 the kingside, White starts a powerful attack in that sector.

8

21 ... f6

7

Black's mistake in playing 1 9 . . . llJ xd7 makes itself felt. With his knight on f8 he could have continued with 2 1 . . .e5, which now simply fails to 22.dxe5.

6

22J�g3 llJf8 23.e5 fle7 24.exf6 flxf6 25.�e3 gad8 26.�g4 flf4 27.fle3 flxe3 28.fxe3 ttt h8 29J'Ul �e7 30.�e5 ebg8 3 1 .�g4 ebh8 32.�e5 ebg8

Kiev 1 950

5 4 3 2 1

D. a

c

b

d

f

e

h

g

White starts an energetic attack in the centre and on the kingside, utilizing the active placing of his pieces an d a number of tactical weaknesses in the black camp.

8 7 6 5

n .e5!

4

Only thus.

3 2

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

33.gf6! Forcing the win of a pawn while continuing the attack.

The other method of attack is a good deal less energetic: 1 1 . Y{f f3 .ib7 1 2.g4 In Padevsky - Botvinnik, Moscow 1 956, after: 1 2 . . .l'kB 1 3 .g5 Black sacrificed the exchange brilliantly.

33 ... �d7 34.�xd7 �dxd7 35.�xh6 e5 36.iS! White confidently converted his material plus into a win. In other quite frequent cases, the transition from opening to middlegame brings an obligation to attack some specific objects. Many an example of this can be found in the variolls lines of the Sicilian Defence.

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

34

Soviet Chess Strategy

1 3 . . . l:!xc3! Shattering White's pawn posItIon on the queens ide and in the centre, and seizing the initiative. That game continued: 1 4.bxc3 The lesser evil for White was undoubtedly 1 4.gxf6 l:!xe3 1 5 . Wxe3 .ixf6. 14 . . . lLl xe4 1 5 . Wg4 WcB! 1 6. l:!f3 lLl xb3 1 7.axb3 f5 I B . Wh4 e5 1 9.1:!h3 h6 20. W h5 Wxc3 Black was victorious after a few more moves. This example shows that at the transitional stage (from opening to middlegame) , attacking plans can be double-edged. But let us return to the game Geller Vatnikov.

1 1 . .. �e8 1 1 . . .dxe5 1 2. fxe5 lLl d7 is wholly bad on account of 1 3. l:!xf7!! , winning for White.

1 5.�d5! The decisive stroke. Black cannot play 1 5 . . . lLl xa l on account of 1 6. lLl dxe7t, when he loses his queen as a result of the tactical weakness of his back rank, where his pieces are obstructing each other. The way White conducted the attack is highly instructive. In cases where neither side acquires a plus in the opening, a complex struggle unfolds with roughly equal chances. It may assume a slow manoeuvring character, it may be double­ edged. The tendency to seek a struggle that transcends the bounds of formal logic is characteristic of modern strategy. As an example, the double-edged contest the following game is highly illuminating.

in

Viktor Korchnoi - Yori Sakharov

12.£5!! The only way! To achieve success, White has to open lines in the centre and on the kingside without delay. A very important point is that Black has no time to exchange off the light-squared bishop, as 12 . . . lLl xb3 is met by 1 3 . lLl c6! W c7 1 4. lLl xe7t Wxe7 1 5 .f6! gxf6 1 6.exf6 etc.

Chelyabinsk 1 959

8 7 6 5 4

12 ... dxe5 13.fxe6! f6 14.�£5! �xb3

3 8

2

7

1

6

a

5 4 3 2 1

� a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

At the end of the opening phase, an extremely complex position with approximately equal chances has come about. The ensuing play is very difficult for both sides. White links his plans to an assault on the kingside; Black envisages counterplay on the other wing.

The Chess Game as a Uni fi ed Process of Struggle

13J�gl b4 14.�ce2 dS l S.�xe6 .be6 16.eS �d7

8

Of course not 1 6 . . . %Vxe5 1 7 . .if4, trapping the queen.

7

17.£4 g5 18.�d4 gxf4 19 ..bf4 .ib7 20. � b l �c5 21 .%Ve3 0-0-0

5

In view of White's kingside threats Black is compelled to castle long, which naturally makes his counterplay a good deal more complicated to execute.

35

6

4 3 2 1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

White's threats are mounting. The black king comes under a very strong attack.

30 ... Yfe5 3 1 ..ig3! .idS 32.�f5 gd8 33.�e3 .ie7 34.�xdS gxdS 3SJ�xdS YfxdS 36.gdl Yfc6 37.YfeS Yfb7 38.Yff4 ghS 39.Yfxf'7 gdS 40.Yfxe6t gd7 4 1 .Yfxe4t Black resigned.

a

b

c

d

f

e

g

h

22 ..id3 .if8? In such situations the chief task lies in constantly devising threats and seeking ways to create counterplay. Natural-seeming defensive moves, at odds with the nature of the position, are essentially serious errors and can even (as in the present case) bring defeat in their wake. Instead of the passive move in the game, Black should have played 22 . . ttJ e4! followed by . . . i e7-c5 . He would then have retained his full share of the chances. .

23.g5 hxgS 24..ixgS ge8 2S.h4 �d7 26J�lgf1 �xeS 27.Yfe2 �e4 28 ..be4 dxe4 29.1f6 gh7 30 ..ieS

As is quite easy to see, it can be very hard and sometimes even impossible to alter the logical course of events predetermined by the opening. In selecting some particular opening scheme, a master is not of course counting on an obvious mistake from his opponent. He is however attempting to steer the game into a channel congenial to himself, which he has already tested in practice. Given a choice of continuations, a player tries as far as possible to reach positions at odds with his opponent's style. In modern openings - as we cannot help observing - the questions of choosing and evaluating this or that variation are a highly complex affair even for experienced masters. The possibility of an opening error, which may be hard to assess straight away, is very great. A slip that looks insignificant can often bring trouble for the rest of the game.

36

Soviet Chess Strategy

Mikhail Botvinnik Alexander Alekhine -

Amsterdam

1 938

a

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

Black carelessly continued with:

10 ... b6?! He should have played 1 O . . . lihc3 , and 1 1 . . .b6 afterward s. Instead the text move led to some highly unpleasant long-term consequences.

1 1 .tLlxd5! ad5 12 ..ib5 .id7 13.YlYa4 Exploiting his lead in development, White applies very strong pressure to Black's weakened queensi de. In this game, for all his ingenuity, Black coul d not succeed in altering the logical course of events which stems from his inconspicuous error in the opening.

13 ... tLlb8 A forced move. As Botvinnik has shown, 1 3 .. .:!:'k8 could be met by 14 . .id2 a6 1 5 . .ixc6 .ixc6 1 6. 'lWxa6, when Black has no compensation for the lost material.

14 ..if4 ,ixb5 1 5.YlYxb5 a6 16.YlYa4 .id6 17.,ixd6 YlYxd6 1 8J�acl ga7 19.YlYc2!

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

White has taken firm control ofthe important open c-file an d almost deprived the knight on b8 of any mobility. It only now becomes clear that Black's opening error has led him, almost by force, to a lost position.

1 9 ...ge7 20.gxe7 YlYxe7 2 1 .YlYc7 YlYxc7 22.gxc7 f6 23. � f1 ! gfl 24.gc8t gm 25.gc3! g5 26.tLlel h5 27.h4! tLld7 28.gc7 This same move woul d have been the reply to 27 . . .:!:l:e8. Black woul d then be literally unable to move a single piece! Despite the limited material, he is helpless.

28 ... gfl 29.tLl8 g4 30.tLlel f5 3 1 . tLld3 f4 32.8 gxB 33.gxB a5 34.a4! 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 a

b

c

d

e

White was soon victorious.

f

g

h

Th e Chess Game as a Uni fi e d Process of Struggle It is perfectly obvious that the study of many middlegame problems is inseparable from work on opening theory. This is particularly characteristic of modern openings, in which the amazingly precise investigation of many structures takes us all the way to complex middlegame positions an d sometimes even right into the en ding. In its purest form this occurs, for instance, in the "Poisoned Pawn" variation of the Sicilian Defence:

37

anything but passive. Analysis in dicates that Black has no easy time repelling the attack. Against natural moves such as 1 2 . . . Wc5 or 1 2 . . . ie7, the combinative stroke 1 3. ixe6! is highly effective. For this reason, the main variation lead ing to the diagram has undergone major revision. In answer to 7.f4, it is better for Black to play 7 h6 and only answer 8 .ih4 with 8 YlYb6. The point of this refinement emerges after: •••

•

•••

9.YlYd2 YlYxb2 10J:�bl YlYa3 n .e5 dxe5 1 2.fxe5 �fd7 13 .tc4 •

1.e4 c5 2.�f3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.�xd4 �f6 5.�c3 a6 6 ..ig5 e6 7.f4 YlYb6 8.YlYd2 YlYxb2 9J:lb l Wa3

1 0.e5 dxe5

n .fxe5 �fd7

12.ic4 8 7 6 5 4 3

a

2

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

Investigating critical positions such as this means studying some concrete and indeed vital middlegame problems. It requires knowledge of a whole range of similar positions, well established and already investigated , towards which the play may be directed . (This applies of course when the critical position cannot be exhausted by purely analytical means.) The viability of many opening variations depends on the assessment of these positions. Let us for instance return to the position in the last diagram - arising from a line that is

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

Now the move 1 3 ....ie7 gains consi derably in strength, for the white bishop on h4 is not only un defen ded but under the threat of capture with check! This frees Black from the strike against e6 an d enables him to castle at an opportune moment. It is now White who is d issatisfied with the new critical position. It is no accident that the recent efforts of theorists have been geared to exploring new paths involving 9 . W d3 (instead of 9 . W d2) or 9.a3. In these cases the resulting positions are still highly problematic.

Editor's Note: [In such a sharp line as the Poisoned Pawn Variation it is not surprising that opinions

38

Soviet Chess Strategy

have changed over the years about the merits of various moves, but it is fascinating how similar ideas to Suetin's are still being tried in the state-of-the-art lines of20 1 O. For example, at the end of the main line after 1 .e4 c5 2.�f3

d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.�xd4 �f6 5.�c3 a6 6 ..tg5 e6 7.f4 fi'b6 8.fi'dl fi'xb2 9.gb l fi'a3 lO.e5 dxe5 1 l .f:x:e5 �fd7 modern players have given up on 1 2 . .ic4, in particular due to 1 2 . . . � a5!. The circus has moved on to 12.�e4.

Features of the Middlegame Struggle at the Start of the Game Let us note that the character of the openin g struggle itself has become more dynamic. Contemporary theory focuses on the fact that there is more going on at the start of the game than the mere mobilization of the forces. It is no accident that even at an early stage, the search for the most effective path tends more and more to be conducted in tactical terms similar to middlegame procedures. Even in less forcing lines, the openin g struggle frequently unfolds at a very fast pace, notwithstanding the large quantity of material on the board, some of it not yet fully mobilized.

The Task of Harmoniously Co-ordinating the Forces Its Role in the Opening -

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

Now Suetin's point about the value of . . . h7 -h6 is key. In fact 1 2 . . . h6! is regarded as best, nudging the bishop to h4. (Instead 1 2 . . . �xa2 1 3 .l:!d 1 � d5 1 4. � e3 �xe5 1 5 . .ie2 ic5 is dangerous for Black after 1 6. 0-0! . For example, note that 1 6 . . . ltl c6? ? loses to 1 7. ltl xc5 . ) After 1 3 . .ih4 �xa2 1 4. l:!d 1 � d5 1 5 . � e3 �xe5 16 . .ie2 .ic5 we see one point of 1 2 . . . h6 - the white queen is now not defended, so castling is no longer an option for White - 1 7. 0-0? ltl c6! is a disaster. Instead the theoretical debate continues after 1 7 . .ig3 ixd4 1 8 . l:!xd4 � a5t 1 9.1:!d2 0-0 20 . .id6.] This briefexcursus into theory demonstrates the firmness of the bond between opening theory and many problems of the middlegame.

The general theme of co-ordination between the fighting forces is one that has to be studied from the very start of the game. It is in the opening that this co-ordination begins to take shape; in bringing your pieces out to active positions, you must aim for harmony in their actions right from the outset . A distinguishing feature of the struggle in the opening is the large quantity of pieces and pawns on the board. A matter of supreme importance is therefore the co-operation between pieces and pawns; they may be complementing each other's actions or, on the contrary, impeding them. Let's look at some cases where the pawns inhibit the actions of particular pieces and thereby disturb the overall co-ordination of the forces. This happens for instance when the pawns are fixed on one colour of squares, severely limiting the mobility of the bishop that operates on the same colour. Here is an instructive example:

The Chess Game as a Unified Process of Struggle

39

Carl Schlechter - W. John

Viktor Korchnoi - Stefan Szabo

Barmen 1 905

Bucharest 1 954

l.d4 d5 2.e4 e6 3.�c3 5 4.�f3 c6 5 ..6.£4 id6 6.d �f6 7 id3 fle7

l.e4 e5 2.�c3 �f6 3.g3 .ie5 4 ..igl 0-0 5.e3 ge8 6.�ge2 �e6 7.0-0 d6 8.d4 .ib6 9.h3 .i5 In trying to mobilize his p ieces as quickly as possible and avoiding pawn moves, Black has made a characteristic mistake.

8 7 6· 5 4 3 2

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

8.g3! As the pawns on c6, d5 , e6 and f5 are arranged on light squares, Schlechter methodically plays for the blockade of Black's light-squared bishop.

8 ... 0-0 9.0-0 �e4 1 0.flb3 � h8 1 U :�acl Lf4 12.exf4 flO 13.�e5 fle7 14..txe4 fxe4 1 5.f3 exf3 16.geel fle7 17.fla3! White has successfully implemented his strategic plan. The bishop on c8 is totally deprived of mobility, and this was soon to lead to a complete failure of co-ordination between the black forces. On the other hand, p ieces should on no account inhibit the movement o f the pawns. From the first moves of the game, pawns are a highly important factor in the fight to control more space.

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

It looks as i f he has solved the p roblem o f developing his pieces and kept a n elastic pawn chain; he would seem to have quite good p rospects in the transition to the middlegame. In reality, though, his position is very difficult and perhaps even lost. The point is that Black has completely deprived his own pawns of mobility. He is powerless against an attack by his opponent's pawn p halanx in the centre and on the kingside. White, by contrast, has solved the p roblem of co-ordinating his p ieces and pawns in excellent style.

1 0.d5 �b8 1 1 .g4! .id7 12.�g3 h6 13. � h2 a5 14.£4! exf4 1 5.exf4 �h7

Soviet Chess Strategy

40

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

16.g5! By now the attack is irresistible. There are a good many opening systems where one player allows his opponent's centre pawns to advance a long way and intends subsequently to attack them. The far-advanced pawns are conducive to a gain of space only if the pieces are supporting them. Otherwise the pawns constitute a serious positional weakness. This is the idea underlying many variations of Alekhine's Defence ( 1 .e4 tLl f6) , as well as the King's Indian line which goes 1 .d4 tLl f6 2.c4 g6 3. tLl c3 .ig7 4.e4 0-0 5.e5?! tLl e8, followed by . . . d7-d6.

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

Black's queenside pawn configuration has been weakened, and his pieces are rather cramped for space. Nonetheless, despite its apparent passivity, Black's position is fully viable. A very important role is played by his light-squared bishop, which does a good job of covering the slightly weakened squares in the centre and complements the action of the pawns in its own camp. Later, the pawn centre may be set in motion with powerful effect ( . . . d6-d5 or . . . f6-f5) .

7.Ad �e7 8.�c3 �g6 9.Yfd2 Ae7 1 0.0-0-0 Ae6 1 1 .h4 h5 12.dxe5 £Xe5 13.�g5 Black would answer 1 3 . .ig5 with 1 3 . . . .if6! .

Quite often, in order to achieve good co­ ordination between the pieces and the pawn chain in the opening phase of the game, a player allows pawn weaknesses to be formed or makes a spatial concession. Such cases demand a precise, specific appraisal of each pawn weakness, taking into account the positive factors that make up for it.

Boris Ivkov - Vassily Smyslov Belgrade 1 956

1 .e4 e5 2.�8 �c6 3.Ab5 a6 4 ..ia4 d6 5.,hc6t bxc6 6.d4 f6

13 ....ixg5 14 .ixg5 Yfb8! •

An important manoeuvre; Black is aiming for a counter-attack on the queenside. White, for his part, has not managed to find a good plan. He has not made any obvious mistakes but has still landed in a strategically lost position.

1 5.b3 Yfb4 16.8 a5 17.�a4 c5 1 8. � b2 0-0 19.Yfxb4 axb4 20.c3 �Ub8 2 1 .cxb4 �hb4 22.�c3

Th e Chess Game as a Uni fi e d Process of Struggle

41

His weaknesses on the queensi de are scarcely palpable and cannot in practice be exploited by his opponent.

8 7 6

7.cx:d5! exd5 S.J.d3 0-0 9.�e2 b6 10.0-0 .ta6 1 1 ..ba6 �xa6 12.a �bS 13.Yfd3

5

White consistently strengthens his control over e4; he is not afraid of . . . c5-c4, which would merely free him from worry about the defence of the d4-point.

4 3 2

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

22 . .c4 23.�d5 gb7! 24.�e7t �xe7 25.L:e7 .

c3t 26.�xc3 gxa2 27J�b l gxg2

13 ... geS 14.�g3 �c6 15 ..tb2 gc8 16.gael h6 17.e4! So the centre is set in motion; White's fighting forces are arranged most harmoniously.

And with precise play Black exploited his advantage. This kind of set-up is characteristic of modern openings in general. Take the popular Samisch System in the Nimzo-Indian Defence: l .d4 lLl f6 2.c4 e6 3 . tt:k3 ib4 4.a3 ixc3t 5 . bxc3 , followed by 6.e3 or even 6.£3 and 7.e4. By way of compensation for the weakening of his pawn structure, White has a numerical superiority in the centre. If circumstances permit, his bishops may become very active. These potential assets can later take effect in a decisive manner, as for example in the following game.

Alexander Kotov - Wolfgang Unzicker

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

17 ... cx:d4 1 S.cx:d4 dxe4 19.fxe4 �e5 20.Yfdl �c4 2 1 ..tc1 �h7 22.e5 ge6 23.ge4 �m 24.�f5! White has a decisive attack on the kingside.

Stockholm 1 952

l .d4 �f6 2.c4 e6 3.�c3 .tb4 4.e3 d5 5.a3 hc3t 6.bxc3 c5 In the ensuing play, White very accurately executes a plan that had fi rst been adopted by Botvinnik in his famous game with Capablanca (Amsterdam 1 938) . White releases the tension in the centre and then, utilizing his numerical superiority in that part of the board, he gradually organizes an attack.

In the opening you must strive for active co­ operation between all your forces. For example, a piece that is badly defended or isolated can often become a serious long-term obstacle to achieving harmonious co-ord ination. The following line of the Ruy Lopez, for instance, is rightly considered unsatisfactory from Black's viewpoint: l .e4 e5 2 . lLl £3 lLl c6 3 . i. b5 a6 4. i.a4 lLl f6 5 .0-0 ie7 6.!!e l b5 7. i. b3 d6 8.c3 lLl a5 9 . i. c2 c5 1 0 .d3 ig4? I l .h3 ih 5 ?

42

Soviet Chess Strategy

A mistaken i dea. 1 2. lLl b d2 0-0 1 3.g4! And so on. White shuts the light-squared bishop out of the game for a long time an d gains a clear middlegame advantage. A similar idea also crops up in some other opening systems that are held to be unfavourable for Black. An immense amount of attention is given to questions of co-ordination iIi the modern opening systems that involve a direct tactical contest. In many systems, mobilization does not proceed as quickly as the principles of development deman d . For this reason, a theme of new opening research is to test the co­ ordination of one si de's forces an d exploit any deficiency concealed in it. The point is that an aggressive plan in the opening may prove impracticable if mobilization has not been achieved - if the forces are not yet sufficiently active an d manoeuvrable to co-operate purposefully. In such cases the complex issue of achieving co-ord ination is being approached without d ue regard for the elementary opening tasks.

Black seems to have successfully solved the problem of queenside development - a d ifficult one for him in this system - and deployed his fighting forces actively. Nevertheless Black's scheme is still far from clear, since he has yet to start mobilizing his kingsi de an d has offen ded against the principle of harmonious piece development.

SJlel �c6 8 . . lLl f6 is somewhat better. .

9.�xc6 Y!lxc6 10.a4 b4 1 1 .�d5! This combinative stroke, already envisaged at move 8, exposes the disunity in Black's army. 8 7 6 5 4 3

Mikhail Tal - Aivars Gipslis

2

Riga 1 95 8

1

1 .e4 c5 2.c�� S e6 3.d4 cxd4 4.�xd4 a6 5.�c3 b5!? 6.Ad3 .tb7 7.0-0 Y!lc7 8 7

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

In view of his queensi de weaknesses an d the undeveloped state of his kingsi de, Black does not succeed in co-ord inating the actions of his forces.

1 1 . .. �f6

6

1 1 . . .a5 is very strongly answered by 1 2.c3!.

5

12..td2 �xd5 13.exd5 Y!lc5

4

Of course not 1 3 . . . Y!lxd 5 , on account of 1 4 . .ie4.

3 2 1

6. a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

14 ..ie4 f5 15.AS bd5

Th e Chess Game as a Uni fi e d Process of Struggle

43

9.e5 tOeS

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

16.ixb4! Lf'3 17.Yfxf3 White obtained a decisive attack. The struggle in the mo dern opening has made us much more deeply aware of the issues of piece co-ord ination at the beginning o f the game; it has given them a concrete tactical meaning. In modern opening variations, co­ ordination of the forces must not for one moment be forgotten. Let's look at an example which, though not complicated , is highly instructive.

Robert James Fischer - Samuel Reshevsky New York 1 95 8

1.e4 c5 2.tOS tOc6 3.d4 cx:d4 4.tOxd4 g6 sJk3 ig7 6 ..ie3 tOf6 7..ic4 0-0 8 ..tb3 A well-known variatio n of the Sicilian Defence. The bishop exerts strong pressure on the a2-g8 d iagonal, an d exchanging it offwoul d be very useful to Black. This consi deration, which seems entirely logical, may prompt Black to play an immed iate:

8 �a5? ...

However, at this moment White has the opportunity to co-ord inate the actions of his forces in a decisive manner. There followed :

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

10.Lf7t!!

Black is lost, as after either 10 ... c!> xf7 o r l O . . .lhf7, White replies with 1 1 . � e6! '

Transition from Opening to Middlegame The Principal Task Involved Analysing the examples has led us to conclude that on transition from the opening to the mi ddlegame, a player's chief task must be to elaborate a concrete plan for con d ucting the ensuing fight; but then this plan will already have been envisaged , even if only in the most general o utline, at an earlier stage of the opening. The contemporary approach to mobilization at the start of the game requires deep study of the opening structures an d their link to the mi ddlegame. In this way, a thought expressed by the great Russian player Mikhail Chigorin is increasingly confirmed : "In nearly all openings it is possible to fin d moves which are not inferior to the theoretical ones. Generally speaking, chess is much richer than you might suppose on the basis of existing theory, which strives to compress the game into narrow fixed forms." The general feature uniting the most varied forms of transition from opening to

44

Soviet Chess Strategy

middlegame is the fact that the strategic character of the main battle tends to be defined at this very point. And the development of theory constantly opens up a very rich choice of possibilities. Let's take for example the following position which forms the point of departure for the Chigorin System in the Ruy Lopez:

1 .e4 e5 2.c�� f3 �c6 3.i.b5 a6 4.i.a4 �f6 5.0-0 i.e7 6J!el b5 7.i.b3 d6 8.d 0-0 9.h3 8 7 6 5 4 3

9 . . . tiJ a5, 9 . . . h6, 9 . . .ib7, 9 . . . tiJ d7, 9 . . a5, 9 .. .'IW d7, or even the paradoxical retreat of a knight to its starting square with 9 . . . tiJ b8. These are all merely the rudiments of plans, albeit most serious and positionally well-founded ones. However, let us suppose the game continues with: .

9 ... �a5 10.i.c2 c5 1 l .d4 Yflc7 1 2.�bd2 �c6 13.d5 In many ways White's last move does lay down the terms for the coming struggle, although the players' plans are still far from clear. Mobilization is almost complete and the structure in the centre is fixed, yet it is only in the most general terms that this signifies the end of the opening phase. Still, the middlegame is no longer far off. fu; an example we will take the game Geller Mecking, Palma de Mallorca 1 970:

13 ... �a5 14.b3 i.d7 1 5.�f1 �b7 16.�g3 c4?! 17.b4

W//,'h', ;:::;-;;,;r;='/.,

2 1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

The basics of mobilization are completed, but can we say that the transition to the middlegame has begun? There is still a fair distance to go before the main battle is joined or the plans are even settled. For the present, both sides, as they say, are left to their own devices. In almost every case White intends to make the "obligatory" moves d2-d4 and tiJ b 1 -d2, but this by no means concludes his mobilization, which remains open to a wide range of options. In many lines (for instance the Smyslov System where Black plays 9 . . . h6 followed by 1 0 . . .l'�e8 and . . . j,e7-fS), White can choose between the manoeuvre tiJ d2-fl -g3 and a build-up with ib3-c2, b2-b4, ic 1 -b2 etc. For Black, the critical position offers an even greater choice of the most diverse continuations:

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

The chief zone of conflict for the middlegame is decided - it is the kingside, where White develops a lasting initiative.

17 .. J�fc8 1 8.�f5 i.m 1 9.�h2 a5 20J!e3 axb4 2 1 .cxb4 hf5? 22.ex5 c3 23.�g4! With a clear plus for White.

Th e Chess Game as a Uni fi e d Process of Struggle In this last example the transition from opening to middlegame passed almost imperceptibly; it was disguised by the regroupings of pieces in the respective camps. The players, so to speak, were sizing each other up and were in no hurry to engage in a heated skirmish. In numerous other cases, especially in gambit systems both old and new, the middlegame "matures" long before the development of the pieces is finished or the centre has been seriously "cleared up" . As an example, another Ruy Lopez line - the Schliemann Variation - will suffice:

1.e4 e5 vta �c6 3 ..lb5 f5 4.�c3 fxe4 5.�xe4 d5 6.�xe5 dxe4 7.�xc6 bxc6 8.ixOOt .ld7 9.Vh5t �e7 lO.Ve5t .le6 l l .ixas Vxa8

45

Such contrasts in the choice of plan at the onset of the middlegame are most noteworthy. The art of playing in these "delicate" positions was and remains a criterion of genuine mastery. It was no accident that when preparing for his worl d title match with Capablanca, Alekhine took special care to perfect his skill in this phase of the game. In so doing he gave particular attention to such intangible factors as the evaluation of a potential endgame, questions of technique, the possibilities of exploiting small advantages, and so forth. It must be stated that the modern dynamic approach to the transitional phase is distinguished by the breadth of its imaginative vision. It is far from obligatory to construct your plan on the outward positional factors and be gui ded by them alone. It is interesting to follow the evolution in the treatment of the following critical position, arising from one of the main lines of the Caro­ Kann Defence:

1 .e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.�c3 dxe4 4.�xe4 �f6 5 .�xf6t exf6 6 ..ic4 .id6 7.Ve2t J.e7 8.�a 0-0 9.0-0

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

A good half of the forces on both sides are standing totally idle. Nonetheless the opening stage has been swept away as if by a tornado. What remains is a characteristic middlegame conflict with disparate material, in which it is very hard to predict which way the scales will come down. The transition to the middlegame was most abrupt. The impulse for it was given by Black's 5 . . . d5, whereupon a six-move forcing operation followed, leading to the eccentric position in the diagram.

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

In his Manual of Chess, Lasker assesses this opening variation as follows: "White's plan is to exploit his queenside pawn majority while remaining passive on the kingsi de. Black will

46

Soviet Chess Strategy

try to force his opponent to move one of his kingside pawns, creating an object for his own pawns to play against." Since then the strategic horiwns of this position have considerably widened. The way the fight developed in the following game may serve as a striking illustration.

Here is another example from the 1 940s. In the Sicilian Defence (which at that time, incidentally, was comparatively little played) , after the moves l .e4 c5 2. tD f3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4. tD xd4 tD f6 5.f3 e5, Rabinovich's 6. tD b5 underwent a fair amount of study. Its idea is to try to exploit the rather weak d5-square.

Viacheslav Ragozin Isaak. Boleslavsky -

Sverdlovsk

1 943

9 ...1d6 10J�e1 .lg4 l 1 .Yfe4! .lh5 12.�h4 �d7 13.Yff5! By evaluating the position in concrete terms, White launches an unexpected and very energetic attack on the kingside; he is exploiting the limited mobility of his opponent's pawns in that area, as well as the position of the bishop on h5 which is somewhat dubious from a tactical viewpoint.

13 ... �b6 14.Yfxh5 �xc4 8 7 6 5 4 3

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

After the natural moves 6 . . . a6 7. tD 5c3 ie6 B . tD d5, White provokes an exchange on d5 and afterwards tries to utilize his queens ide pawn majority. That was how the theorists formulated White's plan, which at the time seemed highly promising. Since then, interestingly, 6. tD b5 has not been subjected to detailed analysis. The main reason why there was no need for it was the appearance of the Boleslavsky System: l .e4 c5 2. tD f3 tD c6 3.d4 cxd4 4. tD xd4 tD f6 5 . tD c3 d6 6. ie2 e5!?, which threw down a bold challenge to the old ideas about the weakness of central squares.

2 1

l:::. a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

1 5 ..ih6! Yfd7 White wins after I 5 . . . gxh6 1 6.b3 tD b6 1 7. tD f5 � hB I B . Wfxh6 ggB 1 9.geB!! and mate cannot be avoided in a reasonable way.

16.ixg7! xg7 1xh2t 19.hl Black resigned.

17.�f5t h8

1 8J�e4 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

The Chess Game as a Uni fi e d Process of Struggle

47

It now becomes clear even without any detailed analysis that in the variation 1 .e4 c5 2. tD f3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4 . lLl xd4 lLl f6 5 . £3 e5, White's 6. lLl b5 manoeuvre - which aimed to exploit the purely strategic assets of his position (the d5-square) - is little suited to the dynamics of modern opening play and scarcely expedient. Let us also note that at present, in many Sicilian variations where this kind of central pawn structure arises, it is Black who tries to provoke an exchange on d5 which considerably facilitates his own play in the centre. It has been established that White's queenside pawn majority in such positions cannot bring him substantial dividends; as a rule its significance in the ensuing struggle is purely theoretical.

Black has plenty of counterplay in the centre.

In the modern approach to studying the system with l .e4 c5 2. lLl £3 d6 3 . d4 cxd4 4. iihd4 tD f6 5 . £3 , the questions are posed in a fundamentally new way. According to the earlier view, the lines where White achieves the blockading move c2-c4 without hindrance are unsatisfactory for Black. But in recent years this notion has been revised. Practice shows that in numerous cases Black can fight successfully against White's blockading set­ up. In this respect the Accelerated Dragon Variation is characteristic: l .e4 c5 2. lLl £3 lLl c6 3.d4 cxd4 4. lLl xd4 g6 5 . c4 ig7

Subsequently he aims to obtain counterplay in the centre by undermining White's bastions with . . . d6-d5 .

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

Recently therefore, after 1 .e4 c5 2. lLl f3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4. lLl xd4 lLl f6 5 . £3 , Black has quite often been playing 5 . . . e6, allowing the blockading move 6.c4 .

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

Thus many earlier j udgements o n opening structures, being based on general positional considerations, are far from reflecting the true picture of the struggle. The genuine wealth of ideas goes far beyond the limits of that framework. To conclude this section we may note that the assessment of many a middlegame position can become more comprehensible if you give careful attention to the way it came about. The point is that the "complexion" of a game (the peculiarities of its middlegame strategy and tactics) begins to be formed as early as the opening stage. Hence a player studying some middlegame position or other will find it useful to trace the entire process of the foregoing struggle and acquaint himself with the opening formation from which the position arose.

48

Soviet Chess Strategy

Transition to the Endgame If the transition from opening to middlegame generally opens up full scope to the pieces' power of action, the transition to the endgame leads to a notable revision of middlegame values. Thus the kings, recently hidden away (under "seven seals") , acquire real active strength at long last, equal in many cases to that of a rook. And every unit of material, even the weakest, starts demanding careful attention. This applies especially to passed pawns. In the middlegame they possessed real power in rare cases; in the endgame they become genuine heroes, with a very high "price on their heads" . Clumsy in the cluttered space of the middlegame, the rooks in the endgame are ready to decimate the enemy's thinned-out rear, which lacks reserves. On the other hand, the knight's j umps and the bishop's long­ range shots - which recently, amidst a large complement of forces, made the top brass of the sixty-four squares "tremble" - tend to be less effective, given their geometric limitations. In the endgame the power of these pieces is often subject to purely mathematical analysis. Players have to take these factors seriously into account each time they go into an ending. Handbooks on the final phase of the game devote their main attention to purely technical problems, but in practice, at the point of transition to the ending, you are obliged to cope with a complex state of play, in which the ideas of the endgame and the middlegame are sometimes closely interwoven. What should we consider to be the moment of transition to the ending? In numerous cases it is the moment when the queens are

exchanged and the basic plan of attacking the king is simultaneously ruled out. An ending may also be brought about by an exchange of most of the other pieces - both pairs of rooks, all the bishops and knights. Thus the transition to an endgame involves simplification and, as a rule, the emancipation of the kings, which assume an active role on the stage. The principal difference between an attack on the king in the endgame and in the middlegame lies in the role played by the hero of the drama. If in the middlegame the monarch is generally compelled to sit in his fortress, in the endgame he stations himself close to the front line, and is ready not only to defend himself but also, on occasion, to take part in an offensive operation. Everyone knows that simplification and the resulting transition to an endgame are favourable to the side with a material plus. The ratio of the two sides' forces is, after all, significantly altered, and the opponent's counterplay with his pieces is "extinguished". Of course, the extremely rich material of contemporary practice supplies all kinds of examples of the opposite approach - when the exploitation of a material plus involves a middlegame attack, etc. Nonetheless the strategic precept of simplification to realize an advantage remains valid, and you cannot attain mastery without acquiring the technique of this procedure. Quite often the transition to an endgame is favoured by weaknesses in your opponent's pawn formation, the possibility of penetrating to his rear with a rook, and such positional factors. That is why, even in the heat of the fiercest middlegame battles, an experienced player never for one moment wants to lose sight of the contours of a potential endgame.

Th e Chess Game as a Uni fi e d Process of Struggle

Max Euwe - Reuben Fine Amsterdam

49

26. ic2 is very strongly answered by 26 . . . ix8 27.gx8 ixb2, when 28. ixg6 fails to 28 . . . �e l t 29. c;t> g2 id .

1 938

26 ... gdS 27.b3 .bf3 2S.grl3 hl4 29.
a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

At the moment, the passions of the middlegame hold sway on the board. White seems to have quite good prospects for an attack

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

on the kings ide. But Black has not only made good preparations for defence; he also has a favourable en dgame in view. This circumstance supplies the theme of his operations.

Despite the presence of opposite-coloured bishops, the game is lost for White. The decision is ultimately brought about by Black's king advancing to the queenside.

19.h4?

31 .
Objectively Black's chances are already preferable, but after 1 9.b3 White could still have organized a solid defence. His nervous attacking attempt has ruinous consequences.

White resigned.

19 ... h5 20JU4 geS! Not only parrying the threat of 2 1 .�xf6 'i!lxf6 22. YMc3 , but also forcing simplifications that favour Black.

2 1 .�xeS YlYxf4 22.�a gbS 23.YlYe4 Black was threatening 23 . . . .ie6. By this time White is the one seeking salvation in an ending, but now Black's chief trumps are laid on the table.

23 ...�xe4 26.,td3

24..be4

,tg4

25.gd2

geS

There are many modern opening lines that incorporate, from the very outset, some favourable endgame factors for one of the players. Apart from that, it frequently happens that one player will take the game from the opening into a complex ending in order to avoid a sharp combinative fight. Objectively such a method of playing may not promise any special dividends, but it is quite often employed by players who have a good command of the technique required for the final phase of the game.

50

Soviet Chess Strategy

We may state that in complex endgame positions arising out of the opening struggle, middlegame and endgame themes are likely to be closely interwoven. The task for each of the players is to utilize the assets of his position while simultaneously neutralizing his opponent's efforts to do likewise.

Some Other Key Moments in the Chess Struggle The two key moments in the struggle that we have so far examined - the transition from opening to middlegame, and from middlegame to ending - have a defining role in chess theory. In practice, however, these moments are far from being crucial and distinctive in every game. Other occasions in the struggle associated as a rule with tactical "outbursts" or the mounting of attacks - often prove far more important for the progress and outcome of a game. Time and again we come across games that are packed with adventures even though the moments of transition to and from the middlegame pass relatively quietly. This always has its own specific reason. The point is that the principles of the game and the objective demands of the position are not the only moving forces in chess; the game is played by living people whose will and desires have a major influence on its character. Are not the unforeseen upheavals in the following game fascinating?

Jose Raul Capablanca Alexander A1ekhine -

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

12.Ae2 The game has opened with the Cambridge Springs Defence to the Queen's Gambit. At the present time, the plan with 1 2.g3 is rightly considered more dangerous.

12 ... 0-0 Probably 1 2 . . . c5 was more energetic.

13.0-0 .td7 Again both sides play rather slowly. White had the restraining move b2-b4; Black could have freed his game successfully with . . . c6-c5.

14.b4 b6 15.Aa gac8 1 6.gfdl gfd8 17J�acl Ae8 1 8.g3 �d5 1 9.�b2 �b8 20.�d3 AgS 8 7 6 5 4

Buenos Aires ( 1 1 ) 1 927

3

l .d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.�c3 �f6 4ig5 �bd7 5.d c6 6.�a �a5 7.�d2 Ab4 8.�c2 dxc4 9 ..bf6 �xf6 10.�xc4 �c7 1 1 .a3 Ae7

2 1

6. a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

Th e Chess Game as a Unified Process of Struggle The players have entered a quiet middlegame of the purely manoeuvring type, where White maintains some pressure on Black's restricted position.

2U:!bl �b7 22.e4 �xc3 23.�xc3 Yfe7 A barely perceptible inaccuracy. As Alekhine has indicated, after 23 .. .i'k7 Black could fight successfully for equality: 24. i.g2 i f6 2 5 .e5 ie7 26J!:bc 1 V9c8 etc.

24.h4 .ih6 25 . .tle5 g6 26 . .tlg4

A mistake in return. The right move was 26. tik4!, trying to gain control of d6 after e4-e5. In that case Black should probably continue with 26 . . . ig7 27.e5 h 5 , meeting 28. til d6 with 28 .. J�xd6! 29.exd6 �xd6 when he has excellent drawing chances.

26...,tg7 27.e5 h5 2S.�e3 e5!

51

with simplifications and bishops of opposite colours.

30 exd5 3 1 . .tlxd5 Yfe6 32.�f6t? •.•

A major error. Better drawing chances would have been preserved by 32.�b7 ixe5 3 3 . V9a5, although even then Black's position would be preferable.

32 hf6 33.exf6 gxdl t 34J�xdl .ic6! 35J�el �f5 36.ge3 e4 37.a4 a5! •..

After 37 . . . .txa4? 3 8 . ie4! White's position is not worse.

3S.igl .hg2 39.c;!?xg2 �d5t 40.c;!?h2 �f5 4016 �e5 42JU4 c;!?h7 At this point Black had the strong manoeuvre 42 . . . V9 b6! at his disposal, after which White would be in a peculiar kind of positional zugzwang.

43j�M4 �e6? 44.�xa5 c3 45.�a7 c;!?gS

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

As often happens in practice, the mutual inaccuracies have merely led to a sharp intensification of the fight. Some fascinating tactical complications begin.

29.bxe5 bxe5 30.d5?! It still wasn't too late to take the game back into a peaceful channel: 30J!b7 �d7 31.�xd7 ixd7 32.d5 exd5 3 3 . lLl xd5 � e6 34. til f4 ixe5 3 5 . lLl xe6 ixc3 36.�xd7 fxe6,

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

So the ending that arose from moves 38-39 might seem to be technical and a trifle boring in character. However, the ensuing struggle and the numerous analytical controversies surrounding it reveal the truly fabulous inner content of the position.

46.�e7 Yfb6 47.�d7?

52

Soviet Chess Strategy

Taking the game to the brink of catastrophe again. The correct move was 47J'!d7!, for example: 47 . . . �xf2t 48. � h l ! � a2 49.1'!d8t 1'!xd8 50. �xd8t � h7 5 1 . � f8 , and Black has to give perpetual check.

59. � h2 YlYxf6 60.a5? Tipping the scales in Black's favour once again. After 60.1'!c2! 1'!e8 6 1 . � g2! the draw would have been unavoidable.

60 gd8 6 1 .a6 •••

47 YlYc5! 48J::l e4 YlYxflt 49. � h3 YlYfl t 50. � h2 YlYflt 5 1 . � h3 gf8 52.YlYc6 YlYfl t 53. � h2 YlYflt 54.�h3 YlYfl t 55. � h2 � h7 56.YlYc4 YlYflt 57. � h3 •••

This leads quickly to a crisis. White could have prolonged his resistance by 6 1 . � g2.

a a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

b

c

d

e

f

h

g

6 1 . YlYfl ! ••

The decisive manoeuvre.

57 YlYgl ! •••

This accurate move should lead to victory. Instead 57 . . . �xf6 would be inadequate in view of 5 8 .1'!f4 with 59.1'!f3 to follow.

58.ge2 On 5 8 .g4, Black gives mate with 58 . . . c2! 59. �xc2 1'!e8!! 60J'he8 hxg4#. Isn't that a triumph of combinative creativity? Yet it happens in a "purely technical ending". In truth there are no boring positions, there are just boring styles of play.

62.YlYe4 gd2 63.gxd2 cxd2 64.a7 d l =Yf 65.a8=YlY YlYgl t 66. � h3 YlYdfl t White resigned rather than allow his opponent to demonstrate the pretty mate 67. � g2 � h l # - on the board. 8 7 6 5 4

58 YlYfl t? •••

The win could be achieved by 58 . . . � h l t 59 J!h2 � f3!' White then has no satisfactory moves, seeing that on 60J"k2 Black has 60 . . . � f5t, while 60.1'!e2 or 60.1'!a2 would be met by 60 . . . �xf6 6 1 . � g2 1'!b8! etc.

3 2

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

The Chess Game as a Uni fi e d Process of Struggle It is hard to find a new angle on this game which has been thoroughly analysed by the most prominent specialists. At most we might resort to a fashionable device ofcontemporary research and draw a graph representing the strategic course of the play. Then the turning-points that we noted would stand out in bol d relieE We may observe that in each case the upheaval was preceded by errors. But this merely shows that to err is human. Errors in chess can only be eliminated in simple symmetrical positions, and even then on cond ition that you have no ambitions of victory. In complex positions full of dynamism, mistakes an d delusions are not to be avoided even by the strongest masters. Our ancient game is not at all harmed by this, but on the contrary enriched . The philosophical concept of error has been very little studied as yet. This complex question awaits its investigation. ***

In the first two chapters I have tried to present a panorama of the chess battle with its multiplicity of plans and its constant movemen t. In his customary practical thinking, a player only quite rarely operates with such general categories; he is above all confronting the tactical and strategic elements of this or that concrete position. There are certain elements that are well known to constitute the basis of positional play - a spatial advantage for instance, or the penetration of rooks to the seventh (or second) rank; problems of weak an d strong squares, open files and diagonals, are also relevant here. A large group of elements involves the relative values of the pieces, find ing an application in the matter of favourable (or unfavourable) exchanges. Modern practice gives a wealth of new forms to the device of a positional sacrifice of material, and thus broadens our notion of the relative values.

53

Before examining the complex questions of the middlegame, we shall consider the elements of positional play; a separate chapter will then be devoted to problems of the centre and its various structures.

Chapter 3 Foundations of Positional Play Relative Values of the Pieces For chess players, as we know, the start of the learning process is familiarization with the scale of relative values of the pieces. With your very first steps in chess you learn that the pawn is taken as the unit of measure. A minor piece - bishop or knight - is worth roughly three units, a rook is worth four and a half. The queen, the strongest piece, is equal to nine units; and so on. The king is a special case. Its significance in the opening and middlegame can hardly be translated into the language of figures. Yet in the endgame, when the king is rarely threatened with attack and becomes an actively engaged piece, its numerical equivalent is quite high roughly five units. In practice, a player very quickly concludes that the generally accepted scale of values is very much a conventional and fluid concept. This scale is nonetheless indispensable! It is what provides the rudimentary starting point for finding your bearings in any position. However, with experience a player gains more and more insight into the fact that any chess position is an indivisible complex made up of the actions of the fighting forces. In every position there are strong pieces operating in the forefront of the battle, and weak ones that are isolated or pointlessly reduplicating each other's functions. In short, the strength of every piece and pawn in a concrete warlike environment is relative, and varies with each move. Taken as a whole, this is what constantly destabilizes the general "rate of exchange" of the values on the chessboard. Genuine positional flair consists precisely in the ability to gauge the relative powers of the pieces correctly during the course of the fight. These powers are susceptible of the most subtle and innumerable fluctuations; there is still an untouched field of investigation here. Is it possible to generate a dynamic scale of values for the pieces in every specific instance? This is a question for the future. At present the delicate task of estimation has to be performed more or less accurately with the "naked eye" , and we can only indicate the points of departure for developing this abil­ ity. From an inexhaustible stock of examples, there is little point in trying to give a comprehensive collection of even the most typical cases. We will confine ourselves to individual illustrations, with a bias in favour of positions where the material on the two sides is dissimilar and the comparative value of the pieces stands out in sharper relief. However, let's start with the simplest elements.

56

Soviet Chess Strategy

Open FUe for a Rook - Penetration to the Seventh Rank

22.b4 .ie6 23 ..ib3 gxd2 24.'ifxd2 hb3 25.a:x:b3 'ife6 26.c4 .lf6 27.c5 �c8 28.'ifd7!

Secure possession of an open file for a rook is an important gauge of strategic success in the implementation of a plan. Other things being roughly equal, domination of the sole open file will usually promise you an enduring plus and sometimes guarantee victory. In particular, players frequently employ a strategy that uses the open file to penetrate with a rook into the opponent's camp (especially to the seventh rank) . I should like to recall a pronouncement by Nimzowitsch, delivered in his distinctive categorical manner: "The goal of all manoeuvres in an open file is ultimately to penetrate by way of this file to the seventh or eighth rank, that is, to the enemy's rear." In the following game, White executed such a plan in energetic style.

The aim is achieved. In the new phase which now begins, White exploits the advantage he has gained; this involves organizing an attack on the king.

Mikhail Botvinnik Isaak Boleslavsky -

Moscow

1 945

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

28 'ifxb3 29.'ifxb7 .igS 30.�xg5 hxg5 3 1 .'ifxa6 �e7 32.'ifb7 ge8 33.'ifd7 m 34.'ifd6 'ifxb4 35.�g4! •.•

White has a won game. 8

Quite often the open file serves as a springboard for switching the rook to another and more important highway, on which it can penetrate to the opponent's rear.

7 6 5

Alexey Suetin Evgeny Vasiukov -

4

Voroshilovgrad

3 2

8

1

7 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

White's firm occupation of the sole open file in the centre defines his positional advantage. His plan consists of invading the seventh or eighth rank. A preliminary measure is a queenside offensive with the aim of further constricting the black pieces.

1 955

6 5 4 3 2 1

6. a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

Foun d ations o f Positional Play With his next move White starts implementing a plan to exploit Black's pawn weaknesses on the queenside. To this end he switches his rook on d3 from the open d-file to the c-file.

57

The threat was 3 1 .a6! , immuring the bishop on a8 .

3 1 .lild3 �e7 32.gb4 ge7 33.lile5 .tc8 34.gb8! �d6 35.b4 �d5 36.�d3 g5 37.e4t �d6 38.ga8 g4 39.�xa6 .i5t

22.gc3! h5 23.gdl ged8 24.gxd8t gxd8 The exchange of one pair of rooks has only increased White's chances, as Black's possibilities for counterplay are even more limited.

7

25.�a6 1e8 26.lilb4 1b7 27.ge4

5

Of course not 27. ltJ xc6? !!c8 etc. But although Black succeeds in holding the c6point for the present, his position is devoid of prospects, seeing that his weaknesses on a7 an d c6 are incurable.

8

6

4 3 2 1 a

27... ge8 28 .�d2 f6

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

40.�e3 gb7 41 .gf8 1e6 42.gxf6 Black resigned.

The Minor Pieces: Their Values Compared

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

29.a4! The start of the decisive offensive. The forward march of the rook's pawn disorganizes Black's forces and creates new weaknesses.

29... e5 If 29 . . . a5 30. ltJ d3 White would organize decisive pressure against the as-pawn.

30.a5 a6

It is well known that the two minor pieces bishop and knight - are of "equal worth" . On examining these pieces more closely, however, several finer points are fairly easy to discern. Bishops are very powerful in their "long­ range" action. At the same time there are many positions where knights develop immense energy. This emerges especially clearly when battle is joined at close quarters. A knight's leaps are as dangerous as they are hard to foresee. So which minor piece is stronger? There is of course no straight answer. It all depen ds on the character of the position. The bishop possesses great power in open positions. The knight with its j umping gait is stronger in hand-to-hand fighting and in closed positions. We may point to a few further conditions which are useful to take into account when assessing the mutual strength of these pieces.

58

Soviet Chess Strategy

1) The bishop's strength is displayed with particular clarity in endgames with action on both wings. Here the knight with its short jumps is noticeably inferior to the bishop. Thus, a "good" bishop is that much stronger than a knight. 2} In closed positions with blocked pawns, especially when the bishop is impeded by pawns of its own colour, the knight's role is enhanced. A "bad" bishop is that much weaker than a knight, especially if the latter is occupying a secure position in the centre {blockading an isolated pawn, for instance} . 3} A centralized knight is equal in value to an active bishop. Finally, the subjective factor in these j udgements cannot be ignored. In many respects, a penchant for the bishop or the knight is a matter of style and taste. Thus, Steinitz and Tarrasch were fervent champions of the bishop; Chigorin and Nimwwitsch, by contrast, preferred knights. Among contemporary grandmasters too, the divergence is no less great. Thus, Spassky and Tal "like" bishops better, while knights are Petrosian's preference. An accepted notion is that opposite-coloured bishops make a draw likely. In the endgame they do indeed provide serious grounds for peace negotiations. Yet in the middlegame, especially when the king is being attacked, the reverse is the case; the opposite bishops, so to speak, "forget" about their close kinship and act like totally dissimilar pieces, either strengthening or weakening the attack or the defence.

Diverse Material: Compensation for the Queen A frequent occurrence, especially in the middlegame, is the sacrifice {or more exactly the exchange} of queen for rook, minor piece and pawn - and the initiative. In the Open Variation of the Ruy Lopez, the

system worked out by Grandmaster Keres has been the object of deep investigation:

1 .e4 e5 2.�f3 �c6 3.,ib5 a6 4 ..la4 �f6 5.0-0 �:x:e4 6.d4 b5 7.,ib3 d5 8.d:x:e5 .le6 9.'f!Ye2

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

Preparing 1 0.gd l , White aims for active pressure along the d-file against Black's most important central point - d5. At first, defending here by "usual" methods, Black failed to achieve a fully equal game. For example in Keres - Euwe, Moscow 1 948, after 9 ..ie7 10Jldl 0-0 l 1 .c4 bxc4 1 2. i.xc4 i.c5?! 1 3 . i.e3 i.xe3 1 4. %Yxe3 %Y b8 1 5 . .i b3 ttJ a5 1 6. ttJ bd2! ttJ xd2 1 7.gxd2 ttJ xb3 1 8 .axb3 gc8 1 9 .9c 1 c5 20.gxc5 gxc5 2 1 . %Yxc5 %Yxb3 22. ttJ d4, White controlled the central squares and quickly proceeded to a forthright attack on the kingside: 22 . . . %Y b7 23.h3 gd8 24. i> h2 g6 2 5 . f4! etc. Soon, however, Soviet researchers discovered some interesting defensive systems in which Black sacrifices his queen for a rook and bishop in the opening and obtains the initiative. One of these systems was devised by the Soviet Master Grechkin: 1 2 . . . dxc4?! (in place of 1 2 . . . .ic5 , as played by Euwe) 1 3 .gxd8 gfxd8. Practice showed, however, that by continuing 1 4. ttJ c3! White acquires a plus. ••

59

Foun d ations of Positional Play Yet the idea of the queen sacrifice, which was brought up for the first time in the line just mentioned, showed promise. It found application in the variation 10 ... �e5!?

a

e

f

g

The ensuing play in this variation abounds in combinative ideas. Events proceed on forced lines:

1 1 ..bd5 Axd5 12.�c3 .te4! 13J�xd8t lhd8 14.YlYe3 b4! 15.b3! .ie6 16.�e4 gdl t 17.�e1 �d4 1 8..tb2 �xe2 19.YlYe2 gxal 20 .bal �xa1 2 1 .�xe5 Axe5 •

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

What these last examples had in common was the characteristic exchanging operation of queen for rook, minor piece and pawn. An important issue, we should note, is whether the minor piece in the transaction is a bishop or a knight. As a rule, a bishop in this context is considerably stronger. If in addition there are two "healthy" extra pawns, then the queen is more than compensated for, and the side with rook plus bishop plus two pawns has a significant advantage. As we have seen, if the material balance is "queen versus rook, bishop and pawn {or the initiative)" , the chances are roughly equal. On the other hand in the case of "queen versus rook, knight and pawn" , the queen usually proves stronger. It must be said that until recently such exchanges were rather exceptional. The strength of the queen tended to be overrated. Players would exchange it for other material either when this brought unequivocal advantages or when they wanted to complicate the game in a difficult situation. In the modern dynamic struggle, with its general ten dency for dissimilar contingents of pieces to confront each other, the trade of a queen for equivalent material is by no means such a rarity. In these cases (and indeed generally in cases with dissimilar opposing forces - as we shall shortly see) , the balance of material is not precisely equal but is slightly weighted in one player's favour. In return (assuming of course that his position is viable) , the other player will possess more actively co-ordinated forces or the initiative. All this makes for a game not only sharply tactical but also positionally complex in character.

h

An interesting posltlon arises in which Black's chances are not at all worse than those he obtains with quiet continuations. Practice has shown that he has sufficient resources to sustain his counterplay.

***

The trade of a queen for two rooks occurs more commonly in positions that have already been simplified. Although the queen is the

60

Soviet Chess Strategy

equal of two rooks according to the scale of relative values of the pieces, practice shows that in general, especially in the endgame, the rooks are manifestly stronger than the queen. The chances of success for the rook "tandem" will increase if there is the possibility to create a passed pawn. In that case the strength of the rooks stands out very clearly. Whereas the rooks will almost always secure the pawn's promotion, the queen with a passed pawn wins only in exceptional cases. If the rooks succeed in doubling behind the enemy pawns, their effectiveness in defence is adequate even in a fight against the queen and two connected pawns. This presupposes, of course, that the pawns are not too far advanced and that the rooks have managed to cut off the enemy king. The following example is instructive.

Lajos Portisch - VassUy Smyslov Havana

1 964

pawn. Now White fails to reach his goal with 46.b5 �e5 47.a6 �bxb5 48.a7 �a5 49. Wl d8t tJi h7 50.a8=Wl �xa8 5 1 . Wlxa8 �e6, when Black constructs a fortress.

46.Wlb5 ge4 47.Yfb8t h7 48.b5 geb4 49.b6 gb5 50.Yfa7 5 A draw is inevitable. In the middlegame the opportunity fairly often arises to exchange the queen for two rooks or conversely to "win" it for that equiva­ lent. In this connection we should note that in a sharp and complex middlegame position, a mobile queen frequently proves stronger than the sluggish rooks - especially when attacking the king, if the latter is stripped of its cover and the rooks are condemned to passivity. As a rule, in this case the queen takes command of the situation.

Mikhail Chigorin - George Mackenzie Vienna

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

White's passed pawns seem to be advancing inexorably. But with some precise, well planned rook manoeuvres, Black places a solid barrier in their path.

45 J::l b 2!

a

b

c

d

1 882

e

f

g

h

White launches an energetic attack which has the aim of obtaining an active queen for his opponent's two rooks, which have little mobility.

••

It is important to put a brake on the back

17.�b5! c6 1 8.�xa7t c7 1 9.9xd5! adS

Foun d ations of Position al Play

2o.1b5 'i«e6 2 1 .'i«c3t ebb6 22J�el ebxa7 On 22 . . . �f5 White wins with: 23. � d4t

61

5.�c3 d6 6 ..lc4 e6 7.0-0 a6 S ..le3 .le7

9 .lb3 �a5 10.£4 0-0 1 1 .'i«f3 b5 •

23.gxe6 fxe6 24.'i«e3t ebaS 25.'i«a3t �a6 26.ha6 bxa6 27.'i«xa6t ebb8 28.'i«b6t chc8

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

1 2.e5 .lb7 13.exf6! .lxf3 14.fxe7 'i«xe7 15J:�xf3, with f4-f5! to follow. Or again: a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

l .d4 �f6 2.c4 g6 3.�c3 d5 4.�f3 .lg7 5.'i«b3 dxc4 6.'i«xc4 0-0 7.e4 b6?

29.b4! gheS 30.'i«a7! The aim is achieved. Black is helpless against the advance b4-b5-b6! It is much more rarely possible to obtain three minor pieces for the queen. When such an opportunity does arise, the pieces are stronger than the queen even though they represent no more than its equivalent on the numerical scale. In complex middlegame positions, the "three musketeers" offer a player much better fighting chances than the "Cardinal". The team of two bishops and a knight is especially dangerous, although two knights and a bishop, as a rule, are also stronger than a queen. In the transition stage from opening to middlegame, certain positions where the queen is helpless against the combined minor pieces are rightly considered unsatisfactory. For example:

1.e4 c5 2.c�f3 �c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.�xd4 �f6

a

S.e5 .le6 1 l .hc4

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

9.exf6! hc4 10.fxg7 ebxg7

In both these examples, in addition to a healthy material equivalent, White has a strong initiative giving him a notable advantage. But in such situations it is once again the concrete

62

Soviet Chess Strategy

factors that play the key role - as various exceptions to the general rules arise.

Compensation for a Rook Let's consider sacrificing a rook for some other piece. What often happens in practice is that the exchange is sacrificed for one or two pawns or the initiative. In the endgame, of course, there can be positions where a cohort of pawns supplies even more than enough compensation for the absence of a rook, but in the middle­ game this is virtually impossible. If a minor piece and a pawn are worth slightly less than a rook, a piece and two pawns are worth more. Thus there is never any exact material compensation for the exchange, and when taking the decision to sacrifice, you have to weigh up the other features of the position. In practice an exchange sacrifice, just like a pawn sacrifice, is a very common gambit device. Sometimes this device acquires paramount importance as early as the transitional phase from opening to middlegame. Thus in many lines of the Sicilian Defence an exchange sacrifice by Black on c3 is typical. For example:

1 2 ... l:!xc3! 13.bxc3 lLlxe4 At a small cost in material Black disrupts his opponent's pawn position on the queens ide and in the centre, and takes firm possession of the initiative. As a rule such sacrifices are in Black's favour. White has to be wary of them and avert them in good time. A problematic and most interesting struggle develops in one of the key variations of the Grunfeld Defence, where White sacrifices the exchange for the initiative, obtaining attacking chances and a powerful pawn centre:

1 .d4 lLlf6 2.c4 g6 3.lLlc3 d5 4.cxd5 lLlxd5 5.e4 lLlxc3 6.bxc3 c5 7.ic4 ig7 S.lLle2 cxd4 9.cxd4 0-0 10.ie3 lLlc6 1 1 .0-0 �g4 1 2.0 lLla5 13.id3 �e6 The critical position is reached.

1 .e4 c5 V�f3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.tihd4 lLlf6 5.lLlc3 a6 6.g3 b5 7.�g2 �b7 S.a3 e6 9.0-0 lLlbd7 10.f4 l:!cS 1 1 .£5 e5 12.lLlb3

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

At this point, to forestall his opponent's projected activity on the queenside and in the centre ( l 4 . . . j,c4 or 1 4 . . . lt:l c4) , White has a choice of distinctly uncompromising continuations, one of which involves an exchange sacrifice:

14.d5!? haI 1 5.�xal The other such continuation is the pawn sacrifice 1 4 .l"\c 1 j,xa2.

Foun d ations o f Positional Play By way of compensation for the material deficit, White preserves his strong pawn centre and obtains realistic chances o f an attack on his opponent's castled position. For a long time now the attention of researchers has been riveted to this extremely interesting position, in which the chances for either side can only be assessed by means of the most precise concrete analysis. An inconspicuous error can often lead to quick defeat, although when placed on the scales, the chances at present are balanced.

63

if7 1 7. ih6 l:!e8 1 8 . i b5 e5 1 9. ¥B f2 l:!e7. In Linares 2008 their game continued: 20. i d3 l:!c8 2 l .f4 lLl c4 22.fxe5 lLl xe5 23. ¥Bxf6 ixd5 24.exd5 lLl g4 2 5 . ¥Bf4 lLl xh6 26. ¥Bxh6 ¥B b6t 27. Q;;l h l ¥B e3 28. ¥B h4 l:!e5 29. ¥B f6 l:!ee8 30.ixg6 hxg6 3 1 . ¥Bxg6t Q;;l h8 32. ¥Bf6t It> h7 33. ¥B f7t Q;;l h8 34. lLl f4 1 -0.] I will state some further guidelines. In the vast majority of cases, a bishop is better than a knight at compensating for other material. But then this depends on the general state of the struggle. In the ending, for example, a rook is by no means inferior - and can be superior - to a knight and two pawns {unless o f course the position is of the closed type and the knight occupies a dominating post in the centre} . The following endgame can serve as a good example.

Efim Geller Isaak Boleslavsky -

Moscow 1 949

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

A noteworthy variation is:

15 f6 16 ..ih6 ge8! •••

But not 16 . . . ¥B b6t 1 7. Q;;l h l l:! fd8, on account of 1 8 .l:!b l ¥B c5 1 9. id2! with a very strong attack, as in Bronstein - Boleslavsky, Moscow 1 9 50.

17.�f4 .if7 1 8.e5 .hd5! 1 9.YlYb l ic4! 20.hg6 YlYb6t Black repels the assault. [Editors' note: Recent trends suggest that the exchange sacrifice is equal, but that it is considered impractical for Black, as he runs a great amount of risk, and cannot realistically hope for more than equality. Recently Topalov won two nice games against Shirov, diverting from the line given by Suetin with: 1 6. ¥B d4

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

6a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

For the sacrificed exchange Black would seem to have more than enough compensation, guaranteeing him a draw. But White finds an interesting plan - utilizing the unstable position of the knight, he starts an energetic offensive with his rook's pawn.

64

Soviet Chess Strategy

41 .a4! �:U5 42. � e2 h4 43.g4 ga

Isaak Boleslavsky Tigran Petrosian -

Otherwise a4-a5 is very strong.

Moscow 1 957

44.gxe4! gxh3 45.ge7 �d3 46.g5!

Better than 46J:kc7 lLl f4t 47. d2 'it> f6! 48Jl:xf7t g5, with good counter-chances for Black.

8 7 6

46 ... �f4t 47. � dl �h5 48.gc8 The threat of 49.l:%ee8 forces Black to incur a major material loss.

5 4 3

48 .. Jfa

t" ��h'h,//'h�'�'"

2 1

8

a

7

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

White begins by sacrificing two pawns in succession in order to sustain the initiative:

6 5

12.Ve2!? Vxc3 13.Adl Ve2 14.,id3 Va4 1 5.gfc1 �xd4 1 6.�xd4 Vxd4 17.,ib4

4 3 2 1

� a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

Black, however, had foreseen this turn of events, and now extinguishes White's attacking possibilities by a timely counter-sacrifice of the exchange.

49.gee8 �f6 50.gxf6t �xf6 5 1 . � e2 gf4 52.a5 bxa5 53J!k7 � g5 54.gxa7 White soon won. On the other hand, positional sacrifices of the exchange for a pawn are becoming a frequent defensive measure in contemporary practice. The sacrifice is fully appropriate if the defender succeeds in firmly establishing his knight on a central outpost. The following example is characteristic.

a

17 ...,id7! 20.Vxb5

b

c

d

e

18.Lf8 gxf8

f

g

h

1 9.,ib5 Axb5

A draw was agreed. With a secure post on dS for his knight, Black has nothing to fear.

Found ations o f Position al Play

65

Reuben Fine Paul Keres

Contemporary practice has made players look more deeply not only into the issue of pawns supplying an equivalent for the exchange, but also into the factor of initiative and attack, the significance of which has noticeably grown.

8

Compensation for a Minor Piece

7

The sacrifice of a minor piece for one, two or three pawns, especially at the point of transition from a modern opening to the middlegame, has become a typical means of developing an attack (primarily against the enemy king) , and consequently leans towards the realm of tactics and combination. This is a separate theme not directly connected with the aims of the present study. Let's just consider some general points to do with assessing the compensation for the sacrifice. It is well known that three pawns approximately compensate for a piece, and two are enough when you have a strong attack. On the other hand three pawns for a piece are virtually powerless if it is your opponent who starts attacking. The following purely positional consider­ ations are not to be ignored. In a placid end­ game situation (with no intruding tactical motifs), it is much harder for three pawns to contend with a bishop than with a knight. Other things being equal, the player making the sacrifice must of course try to obtain an elastic pawn chain. We should note that the sacrifice very often supplies a refined solution to strategic problems. Modern dynamic methods have given rise to several new forms of piece sacrifice. On the other hand it must be stated that the classic " Philidor" stratagem of sacrificing a piece for a mighty pawn mass is finding comparatively little application in contemporary practice. Nonetheless the danger of allowing a pawn "avalanche" must always be borne in mind. This is confirmed in convincing style by the following game.

6

-

Amsterdam

1 938

5 4 3 2 1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

24.�b5?! �b6 25.b3 �xd5! 26.�d4 �b4 27id2 27. ttJ xf5 i f6 leads to an end ing where Black is clearly better.

27 d5! •••

This is the key to Black's plan. Keres sacrifices the exchange but obtains two fearsome connected passed pawns which decide the result of the game.

28.Axb4 gxb4 29.�c6 dxc4! 30.�xb4 cxb3 3 1 .�d5 �d3! 32.gd2 b2 33.gdl c5 34.gb l c4 35.cJ7f1 .Ac5 36.cJ7e2 .ixfl 37.�e3 c3! 38.�c2 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

66

Soviet Chess Strategy

38 ... �el ! A study-like manoeuvre. Black loosens the blockade of his pawns, and this quickly allows him to attain his goal.

1 .e4 e5 2.�f3 d6 3.d4 �f6 4.�c3 �bd7 5.i.c4 J.e7 6.�g5? 0-0

39.�a3 Ac5 4O.cbxe1 ha3 41 .cbdl Ad6 42.cbc2 .ixh2 43J�hl i.e5 44J�xh7 cbf7 45J�hl g5 46J��e1 cbf6 47J�gl cbg6 48.ge1 Af6 49Jlgl 8 7 6 5

a

4

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

7.i.xf7t gxf7 8.�e6 'ilYe8 9.�xc7 'ilYd8 10.�xa8 exd4!

3

And so on. It is perfectly obvious that in a complex middlegame or an opening position, possibilities like this should be put aside.

2 1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

49 ... g4! 50.fxg4 f4! 5 1 .g5 i.d4 52J!fdl i.e3 53.cbxc3 Ael 54Jld6t 54. � c2 � xg5 is hopeless for White.

54 ... cbxg5 55J!fb6 f3 56.cbd3 cbf4 57J�b8 cbg3 White resigned. Rare Types of Compensation for Queen or

Rook - Two Minor Pieces against Rook and One or Two Pawns In the middlegame two minor pieces are usu­ ally stronger than a rook - even if the latter has two pawns to go with it, that is, more than enough in numerical terms. Exchanging the minor pieces in this way is therefore inadvis­ able, although opportunities for it arise quite frequently. Thus the following line of Philidor's Defence, which has long been familiar, is rightly considered bad for White:

Of course there are all sorts of exceptions. A transaction of this kind may have profitable consequences if: .:. the co-ordinated action of the opponent's minor pieces is disrupted .:. weaknesses arise in his position .:. his king's protection is inadequate, etc. Matters are different when this kind of deal arises in an endgame. Here the role of the rook increases dramatically, especially if passed pawns are created on different wings. Quite often the minor pieces prove quite helpless. A rarer case is the exchange of two rooks for three minor pieces. As a rule the team of pieces is a good deal stronger than the rook pair, which is considerably harder to turn into a co-ordinated tandem. Sometimes, in endgame positions, a queen and one or two pawns will be confronting a rook and two minor pieces. Other things be­ ing equal, the chances are always on the side

Foun d ations o f Positional Play of the combined pieces, although exploiting the advantage is usually a complicated, long drawn-out affair. In such cases, general advice is very hard to give. Much depends on the position of the kings, the presence of passed pawns and the co-ordination of the piece "trio" . A revealing example is the Karpov - Velimirovic game that we examined earlier. We may state a few brief rules that are relevant to a positional contest with diverse material. 1 ) A queen is slightly weaker than two rooks. 2) A queen is about equal to a rook, bishop and pawn, and slightly stronger than a rook, knight and pawn. 3) In the middlegame a queen is weaker than three minor pieces by a difference of roughly one to one-and-a-half material units. 4) A rook and two minor pieces are significantly stronger than a queen. 5) Three minor pieces are somewhat stronger than two rooks. 6) Two minor pieces are generally stronger in the middlegame, but weaker in the endgame, than a rook and two pawns. 7) In the endgame a rook is approximately equal to a bishop and two pawns, and slightly stronger than a knight and two pawns. In a situation with rook and two bishops versus two rooks and a knight, the chances, as a rule, are equal. 8) A solidly defended centralized knight or bishop, with an extra pawn, is a little weaker than a rook. 9) In endgame positions, a rook and an outside passed pawn are not in ferior to two minor pieces.

67

Chapter 4 The Centre ­ Typical Pawn Structures The problem of the centre takes us beyond the confines of the purely positional elements, even though in many ways it is closely associated with them. Even chess players with little experience know that any piece placed in the centre develops its maximum activity and can easily be transferred to any sector of the battle; in other words it has a high degree of manoeuvrability. Hence the significance of controlling the centre. Whatever game we examine, we can easily convince ourselves that the issue of the centre invariably has prime importance in any plan.

Old and New Conceptions of the Centre The classical understanding of the centre involved, above all, the acquisition of an ideal pawn couple (d4 and e4, or d5 and e5 for Black) , or at least the establishment of one fighting unit - say a pawn on e4 - enabling the player to seize some space or press forward dynamically with the support of the pieces and the adjacent wing pawn. Until Steinitz's theory came to the fore, the strategy of the centre was extremely straightforward. The attacker would typically strive to achieve a numerical superiority of pawns in the centre without shrinking from offering wing pawns as a sacrifice. The King's Gambit and Evans Gambit are examples of this. Since both sides would usually be pursuing the same goal, a blocked structure in the centre would rarely arise; it was in the centre that endless skirmishes would be fought or bridges would be hastily erected for attacks with pieces against the king. Such heated skirmishing in the middlegame tended to make an open arena of the centre. This merely intensified the tactical play but limited the strategic complexity of the players' plans. Many judgements, voiced in the distant past, about the benefits of possessing a pawn centre have not only proved durable but have undergone further development. As evidence of this, it will suffice to recall the Nimw-Indian system that we examined earlier. One of the important modern postulates is that the construction of a powerful pawn centre demands diligent and deeply planned preparatory work. In this connection, an integral part of strategic thought now consists in studying "the other side of the coin" - the opponent's possibilities for pressurizing the pawn centre with his pieces. When

70

Soviet Chess Strategy

subjected to an energetic attack, a pawn centre which is ideal in appearance may turn into a serious weakness, and the enemy pieces may found a strong centre on its ruins. Modern strategy is indeed characterized by its critical approach to the mechanical occupation of the centre with pawns, which in earlier times had seemed virtually an essential condition for achieving an advantage. That said, the concession of a numerical pawn superiority to your opponent is only ever permissible when you do have the possibility of adequate piece pressure against the centre. In My System, Nimzowitsch wrote: "Certainly, pawns, as being the most stable, are best suited to building a centre; nevertheless centrally posted pieces can perfectly well take their place." It is this that gives rise to the concept of dynamic equilibrium, in which the positional trumps of one side - such as possession of a pawn centre - are counterbalanced by pressure exerted against the centre by the harmonious action of the opponent's pieces.

The Open Centre According to an accepted view, an open centre is seriously infected with a "drawish" germ. But this view is most superficial and misleading. With the clearing of pawns from the centre you always have to take account of the scope opened up for piece play and all manner of tactical operations. Of course, the opening of the centre demands far-sighted and accurate calculation of all the peculiarities of the struggle. The position of the king is very significant here. Attacks with pieces after the centre is opened are especially dangerous when the object of the aggression is the king. The following example is instructive.

Alexander Kotov - Isaak Boleslavsky Moscow 1 945

Typical Pawn Structures in the Centre Practical experience and theoretical investigations have revealed a range of typical pawn structures in the centre which are largely determined by the outward contour of the position. There is no doubt that if you are familiar with the general character of the struggle that goes with this or that pawn structure, this makes it easier for you to find your bearings in any specific position. These typical structures, which often take shape right at the start of the game, leave their long­ lasting imprint on the development of the middlegame battle. Let's first look at certain types of game where the central pawn position is clearly defined.

12 ... d5! Exploiting White's poor development and the harmonious placing of his own forces, Black advantageously opens the game in the centre and starts a very strong attack against the enemy king.

1 3.dxe5 �xe5 14..tb5t cotES 1 5.exd5 cotg7 16.�e2 a6 17.ic4 geS I sJ:Ml .lh3!

The Centre - Typical Pawn Structures

71

without hindrance, and sometimes to prepare a liberating blow in the centre with . . . d7-d5. The way a tough opening struggle develops from the Moller Attack in the Giuoco Piano is characteristic:

1 .e4 e5 2.�f3 �c6 3 ..tc4 .tc5 4.c3 �f6 5.d4 exd4 6.cxd4 .tb4t 7.�c3 On 7. id2, Black achieves equality by: 7 . . . ixd2t 8 . llJ bxd2 d5!

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

7 ... �xe4 8.0-0 .txc3

A brilliant stroke, underlining the disunity of White's forces and setting him insoluble problems.

19.1t>f1 �xf3 20.tff4 �g4! 2 1 .tfxf3 �e3t 22.lt>el hg2 With a won position. Naturally, an open centre in the early stage of the game will most often arise from one of the numerous systems in the Open Games where White's aim is the rapid and direct seizure of the central squares. To this end, relying on the natural protection of the d4-square, White undermines the point e5 by playing d2-d4 (or first 2.f4) . This tendency vividly emerges in many variations of openings that are rarely used today, such as: .:. the Centre Game .:. the Two Knights Defence .:. the Vienna Game, Hungarian Defence, Giuoco Piano, Scotch Game, etc. In opening systems of this kind it is mainly by very fast and efficient piece development that a player achieves the harmonious interaction of his forces and resists his opponent's efforts to do the same. As the conflict proceeds, Black acquires the possibility to mobilize quickly and

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

9.d5! .tf6! 1 0J�el �e7 I I J�xe4 0-0 1 2.d6 cxd6 1 3.tfxd6 �f5 1 4.tfd5 �e7 With a forced draw. As we can see, if Black plays correctly and energetically, White's attempt to gain a central preponderance usually culminates in a clearing of the pawn position in the centre and leads to complete equality. At the slightest inaccuracy, the initiative may pass to Black. The point is that with an open centre a sharp conflict with pieces breaks out, demanding exceptional accuracy in the manoeuvres of both sides.

Numerical Equality of Pawns in the Centre In many opening systems a typical state of tension between the centre pawns arises from

Soviet Chess Strategy

72

the first few moves - for example white pawns on e4 and d4, black pawns on e5 and d6; or white pawns on e4 and d4, black pawns on e6 and d5. It often happens that this tension is liquidated within a short time, leading to a more stable pawn structure in the centre. The centre may be closed by the advance d4-d5 (or e4-e5), or the pawns may be fixed by an exchange with d4xe5 (or e4xd5) . In these cases the numerical equality of pawns in the centre is preserved, but the spatial balance is often disturbed.

An immobile, rigid central pawn chain in a complex middlegame is very frequently seen. Under these conditions the play is slow and of­ ten involves manoeuvring; the essential weight of the struggle tends to be transferred to the wings. Since in these cases the centre is diffi­ cult to open up, attacks with pieces lose much of their effectiveness. On the other hand, pawn storms on the wing, with the activity of the pieces in support, acquire great power. Sometimes it makes sense to leave the king in the centre where no great danger is threatening it. -

Buenos Aires 1 954

7 6 5 4 3 2 1

.6. d

e

f

14 ... 'llYd8 l S ..txc8 'llYxc8 16.�f3 .lm 8

6 5 4 3 2 1

.6. a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

17. � e2! In the present situation this is the most comfortable place for the king.

Seeing that 24 . . . exf4 fails to 25.gh4, we may ascertain that White has acquired a decisive plus.

8

c

It is very important to weaken the light squares in the opponent's camp.

17... gg7 18.gh4 �d7 19.hxg6 hxg6 20.'llYh l .te7 2 1 .gh8t � f7 22.'llYh6 �m 23.ghl gb8 24.hf4!

Yuri Averbakh Oscar Panno

b

lO.g4! �e8 1 1 .h4 f5 1 2.hS! f4 B .gS g f7 14 ..tg4!

7

The Closed Centre

a

Bearing in mind the closed nature of the centre, White did not castle and instead launched an energetic assault on the kingside.

g

h

Closure of the centre most often comes about through the advance e4-e5 or d4-d5 (analo­ gously, . . . e5-e4 or . . . d5-d4) . In this way a cer­ tain spatial plus is acquired. This circumstance must be taken into account when later pursu­ ing your operations on one of the flanks. Thus, with a pawn on e5, White obtains re­ alistic chances of effective operations on the kingside .

Th e Centre - Typ ical Pawn Structures

73

Let's examine each of these cases in more detail.

8 7 6 5 4 3 2

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

In this case Black must strive for active counterplay in the centre, combining it with operations on the queenside. With a pawn on d5, the flank operations gain in significance.

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

Given that White usually tries for a pawn storm on the queenside, the most effective plan for Black here consists of a kings ide coun­ ter-attack. One thing that must always be borne in mind is that the kingside offensive is more dangerous and effective in its results than the corresponding offensive on the queenside, although the latter is usually easier to organize.

1) A closed pawn chain with a vanguard post on d5 is especially characteristic of many formations in the King's Indian Defence, of which we may say that the technique for handling it has reached a very high level. The following sharp and ceaselessly topical King's Indian variation may serve as an example: 1 .d4 lLl f6 2.c4 g6 3 . lLl c3 ig7 4.e4 d6 5 . lLl f3 0-0 6. ie2 e5 7.0-0 lLl c6 With this last move Black challenges White to fix the position in the centre. The most thematic continuation is B.d5. Utilizing the tempo (from attacking the knight on c6) , White initiates active operations on the queenside, where he is guaranteed a spatial plus and has the possibility of rapidly concentrating his forces and carrying out an effective attack. On the other hand Black has a realistic opportunity to launch a counter-attack on the kingside. In a position where the plans have largely been settled, the heat of the battle intensifies with each move, and the tempo factor grows in significance. Exceptional accuracy of manoeuvring is demanded from both players. The difficulty of the tasks facing them is due to the necessity of combining attack with economical defence. You must on no account switch over to a defensive stance, yet some prophylactic defensive measures are indispensable. Of course, the closure of the centre with d4d5 in the King's Indian by no means always leads to flank assaults. In many variations the players' strategic plans are more flexible. In such situations the prophylactic measures are paramount. White tries to defuse Black's threats on the kingside, Black sets up lines of defence on the queenside with . . . a7-a5 , . . . lLl d7{a6)-c5 etc.

74

Soviet Chess Strategy

Then again, the players' plans in positions with the central dS wedge may sometimes be radically altered. Their choice of plan is crucially influenced by the way the fighting forces are co-ordinated. Thus you may come across several opening positions where in contrast to what we have said - White combines closure of the centre by d4-dS with an offensive on the kingside. This is often seen in the closed systems of the Ruy Lopez.

20.a5! ttlc8 21.'IWd2 ttlh7 22. ci!?h2 Ae7 23. ttl5! Ag5 24.�xg5 hxg5 25.g4 g6 26.�g3 f6 8 7 6 5 4 3

Robert James Fischer - Svetozar Gligoric

2

Zagreb 1 970

1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

8

27J�h l !

7

An important preparatory manoeuvre. White is aiming for a decisive strategic strike on the h-file. Black has no adequate defence.

6 5

27 .. J�� m 2S.ci!?g2 gf7 29.8 �m 30.h4 gxh4 3 1 .gxh4 gh7 32J�ah l gxh4 33.gxh4 g5 34.gh6 ci!?g7

4 3 2

8

1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

A typical closed pawn structure has arisen with a wedge on dS. The decision that White now takes is highly instructive. He shuts down the game on the queenside, transferring the weight of the attack to the opposite wing. This decision stems from the general character of the position. Black's pieces are ready to defend the queenside, but his kingside is significantly weakened. This is what enables the white pieces, concentrated on the kingside, to launch a powerful attack there (promoted by a knight invading on [5, followed by the advance g2-g4-gS) . The continuation was:

7 6 5 4 3 2 1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

35.gxf6! This concluding combinative blow decides the game at once. Black resigned. Thus, in a number of cases with this kind of pawn structure, Black must be ready

Th e Centre - Typical Pawn Structures for active defence on the kingside, where both players may later be focusing their attention. We should note that on occasion Black may respond with a counter-stroke here, and even obtain good chances of an initiative. 2) As we have said, a blocked pawn position with a forward post on e5 for White is, in a measure, favourable to his operations on the kingside. This is significant, for instance, in many branches of the French Defence. In this case Black usually endeavours to undermine White's central pawn bastion. Instead, any localized counter-operations on the queenside are generally fraught with woeful results - after all, the attack on the king is far more dangerous. Consequently, in planning his kingside attack White is obliged to watch carefully for possible counter-strokes in the centre; underestimating them can quickly bring grave consequences. Thus for a long time the attention of both players needs to be trained on the centre, even though the fundamental struggle may be unfolding on the flanks. A variation of the French Defence with an early closure of the centre is illuminating:

75

White has to deal with the weakness of the central d4-point, which in this position is critical. In order to defend this pawn, by answering 8 ... �f5 with 9 .ib2 .ib4t 1 O.c;t>fl , he has to arrange his pieces passively and renounce castling. Subsequently, by breaking with . . . £7 -f6, Black may liven up the play on the kingside and in the centre to his own benefit. Of course, the activity of White's pieces may increase significantly at the same time. The play in such cases tends to be double-edged. •

Such a struggle features in many variations of one of the key systems in the French:

1 .e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.�c3 .ib4 4.e5 c5 5.a3 .bc3t 6.bxc3 �e7 7.a4 �bc6 8.�f3 �a5 9 ..id2 c4

1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 c5 4.c3 �c6 5.�f3 �b6 6.!e2 cxd4 7.cxd4 �h6 8.b3 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

The position in the centre has assumed a closed character, although in some circumstances Black may liven up the play with . . . £7 -f6. In this connection the following game is of interest.

Vassily Smyslov Mikhail Botvinnik -

Moscow

1 944

1O.�g5 h6 1 1 .�h3 �g6! 12.�f3 .id7 13.�f4 �xf4 14.�xf4 �e7 1 5.h4 .ixa4

Soviet Chess Strategy

76

16.h5 YlYb5 17.<.t>dl gc8 18 .td gc6 19 .te2 ga6! 20. <.t>d2 •

•

Black was threatening 2o . . . ixc2t.

20 0-0 •••

The king is better left in the centre, although the advantage of this is very hard to determine in practice.

2 1 .g4

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

29 e5?! •••

Black in turn misses his chance to win with 29 . . . VB c7! 30.l::1 hfl � b4! followed by 3 1 . . . i e8, trapping the queen.

30.fxe5? This is already the decisive error. With 30.dxe5 White could have saved the game. a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

30 ... �xd4! 3 1 .ib4 YlYd8 32.YlYxa6 bxa6 33.cxd4 gb7!

21...f6!?

Black soon won.

From this moment the play becomes much more forcing, as the pieces on both sides gain substantially in activity.

Fixed Central Pawn Position with Open e-file or d-file

22.ex£6 gxf6 23.YlYc7 gO 24.YlYd8t <.t>h7 25.£4! YlYa5 25 . . . VB d7 was more circumspect.

26.YlYb8 �c6 27.YlYe8 ge7 28.YlYg6t? Not an obvious mistake, but a very serious one. White should play 28. VB f8! VBd8 (otherwise 29.g5 ! , threatening g5-g6t, is decisive) 29. VBxd8 � xd8 30.g5, obtaining excellent prospects on the kingside.

28 <.t>g8 29 .ta3 •.•

•

If the pawn tension in the centre is liquidated through an exchange of the d-pawns or e-pawns, one of the centre files is opened, and squares become available as central outposts for the pieces. A great deal of mobility between the flanks remains a feature of these positions; the players set great store by manoeuvring their pieces to gain control of central squares and files, subsequently aiming to transfer their activities to the flanks. When a flank attack is launched in these circumstances, it often takes the form of a combined assault with pieces and pawns. This happens especially often in various systems of the Ruy Lopez. The success of such a plan

The Centre - Typical Pawn Structures depends on j udiciously combining a pawn storm with piece manoeuvres on the centre squares. Take for example one of the main lines of the Chigorin System. After 1 .e4 e5 2.�a

�c6 3.J.b5 a6 4.J.a4 �f6 5.0-0 J.e7 6J�el b5 7.J.b3 d6 S.d 0-0 9.h3 �a5 10.J.c2 e5 1 1 .d4 'f!Ie7 12.�bd2 �c6 13.me5 me5, the resulting position is of a relatively closed nature, since the further opening of lines is difficult to accomplish.

77

h2-h3 and Black has not castled, but a pawn exchange on b5 has taken place. 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

l::,. a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

1 5.�f1 .le6 1 6.�e3 0-0 17.�g5 f:lfdS At that time the technique for playing this kin d of position had been little studied. A better move here was 1 7 . . g6, keeping White's knight out of f5 . .

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

Most often White will combine active operations on the kingside with piece pressure against the central square d5. Black will combine a queens ide pawn storm with piece pressure along the d-file aimed at bringing a knight to d3 . The following game serves as a splendid model of the kingside attack.

Vsevolod Rauzer - Nikolai Riumin Leningrad 1 936

1 .e4 e5 2.�a �c6 3.J.b5 a6 4.J.a4 �f6 5.0-0 ie7 6J�el d6 7.d b5 S.J.b3 �a5 9.J.c2 c5 10.d4 'f!Ie7 l 1 .�bd2 �c6 12.a4 f:lbS 1 3.axb5 axb5 14.me5 me5 We have reached a position analogous to the one in the last diagram. White has not played

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

19.�5! By in ducing an exchange on f5 , White significantly increases the activity of his bishop on c2. In addition, the transfer of his pawn from e4 to f5 facilitates the assault on Black's kingside.

Soviet Chess Strategy

78

19 . . . hf5 20.exf5 h6 2 1 .�e4 �xe4 22.,he4 .lf6 23 ..le3 �e7 24.M c4 25.g3

8

Deprived of any counterplay, Black is defenceless against the kingside attack.

7

25 .. J�d7 26J:la7 YfdS 27J:lxd7 Yfxd7 2S.h4 �hS

5

6

4 3

8

2

7

1

6

� a

5

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

16.�h2!? gadS 17.Yfa .ie6 1 S.�hg4

4

To enliven the play on the kingside and in the centre, White has recourse to some intricate manoeuvres which eventually enable him to achieve his purpose.

3 2 1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

IS ... �xg4 19.hxg4 Yfc6?!

Or 29 . . . .ixh4 10ses a piece after 30. %V h3 i f6 3 1 .g5 .

This barely perceptible mistake lands Black in very serious difficulties. He should have hastened to bring his knight into play with 1 9 . . . ttJ b7 followed by . . . c5-c4 and . . . ttJ b7-c5.

30.g5

20.Yfg3 f6 2 1 .g5! �hS 22.b3!

29.g4! �gS

White won after a few more moves. Subsequently there was a major growth in the technique for handling this kind of system.

Depriving the knight of the important square on c4.

22 ... gm

The modern version of a similar plan for White is well illustrated by our next example.

Isaak Boleslavsky Mikhail Tal -

Moscow 1 957

1 .e4 e5 2.�a �c6 3 ..lb5 a6 4 ..ia4 �f6 5.0-0 .ie7 6J::le1 b5 7 ..ib3 0-0 S.d d6 9.h3 �a5 10 ..ic2 c5 I I .d4 Yfc7 12.�bd2 .ld7 1 3.�f1 gfeS I4.�e3 g6 1 5.dxe5 dxe5 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

Th e Centre - Typical Pawn Structures

23.�d5!? An instructive manoeuvre. By sacrificing a pawn, White brings his bishop on c2 to life and exerts pressure all over the board (as in the Rauzer - Riumin game, where White acquired similar benefits with no sacrifice of material) . Also strong was 23.gxf6 and 24. � g4.

23 ...ixd5 24.exd5 Vxd5 25.gxf6 ixf6 26.ih6 �UeS 27.ie4 Ve6 2S.Va Ve7 29J!!Iadl ig7

We may state that in such positions both sides have to be ready for active operations on either wing.

Robert James Fischer - Ratmir Kholmov Havana 1 965

1 .e4 e5 2.�a �c6 3.ib5 a6 4.ia4 �f6 5.0-0 ie7 6J;el b5 7.ib3 0-0 S.d d6 9.h3 �a5 10 ..tc2 c5 1 1 .d4 Vc7 12.�bd2 �c6 13.dxc5 dxc5 14.�fl ie6 1 5.�e3 gadS 16.Ve2

a a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

30.ie3! By transferring the weight of his strategic onslaught to the queenside, White obtained a clear advantage. Comparatively speaking, Black more rarely succeeds in carrying out his active strategic plan for an offensive on the queenside. In such systems the chief struggle usually revolves round White's strategic designs, which we have j ust examined. But then the players' fundamental plans in the Chigorin System may also be utterly dif­ ferent from what we have so far seen. Quite often White will go into action on the queen­ side while Black organizes kingside counter­ play, bringing his knight from f6 via h5 to f4.

79

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

1 6 ... c4!? For a long time it was considered that Black had to defend here with 1 6 . . . g6 1 7. lD g5 ic8 1 8 .a4 c4. However, by continuing 1 9 .axb5 axb5 20.b3! lD a5 (20 . . . cxb3 2 1 . ixb3 opens the game up in White's favour) 2 1 .bxc4 bxc4 22. i a3 �fe8 23 . .txe7 �xe7 24.�ed 1 �ed7 25.�xd7 �xd7 26.�a4! ia6 27. 1M' fl ! ib5 28.�b4 1M' c5 29. 1M' b 1 �b7 30. i a4, White works up strong pressure on the queenside. This occurred in a game Suetin - Kamyshev, Tbilisi 1 9 5 1 .

17.�g5?! Subsequent practice was to show that a more solid line may be 1 7. lD f5 �fe8 1 8 . ig5 (or 1 8 . lD 3h4) , trying to create pressure with his pieces against the kingside.

80

Soviet Chess Strategy

17... h6! 1 8.�:x:e6 fre6

The following system in the Queen's Gambit is illuminating:

8

l .d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.�c3 �f6 4.c:x:d5 ad5

7

The tension has been released and the pawn structure in the centre is fixed. White has obtained the half-open c-file; Black for his part has the e-file at his disposal .

6 5 4

5 ..ig5 .ie7 6.e3 c6 7 ..id3 �bd7

3 2 1

6. a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

Here White played the imprudent:

19.M? Whereupon there followed:

19 ... �d4! With a very strong counter-attack in the centre. But then, finding a good plan for White is not easy. For instance in the event of 1 9.b3 ic5! 20.bxc4 b4! , Black again has excellent play. All these concrete variations strikingly demonstrate the role played in such positions by tactical "outbursts" in the centre. They also show how dynamically the play in the centre combines with operations on the flank. * * *

Quite often the pawn structure in the centre \'i> nl.td \D. tht Optn\D.g by "dD. tl.ch"dD.gt of tht flank pawn on c4 for the opponent's centre pawn on d5. In this way one side obtains the half-open c-file, while the other possesses the half-open e-file. The pawn configuration in the centre usually remains very stable for a long period.

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

Let's consider the possibilities for play in the centre. As we can see, enlivening the game is not easy for either side. An attempt by Black to undermine the d4-pawn with . . . c6-c5 can lead to the isolation of his own central d5-pawn. It is not easy for White to create play in the centre either, as the implementation of e3-e4 comes up against major difficulties. Nevertheless White has a wide choice of pos­ sibilities, on which the further course of the game depends. A well-tried plan in this po­ sition involves transferring the weight of the struggle to the flanks, leaving the centre un­ to'Uched fot the pte'l.eD.t. U\\det tn\.'I. 'l.cheme, utilizing the half-open c-file, White starts a pawn offensive on the queens ide (the so-called "minority attack"). This plan has long been known and remains topical to this day. For all that, there is still a wide field for investigation here. This structure

Th e Centre - Typ ical Pawn Structures truly belongs to those which have aroused theoretical controversies for ages. For instance, the course of events in the game Pillsbury Showalter, played as long ago as 1 898, is revealing: 8. tlJ £3 0-0 9. �c2 � e8 1 0.0-0 tlJ f8 l 1 . ttJ e5!? ttJ g4 1 2. ixe7 V!!xe7 1 3 . ttJ xg4 .ixg4 1 4,l':iae l V!! f6 1 5 .a4 �e7 1 6.b4 �ae8 1 7.b5!, and White exerted lasting and unpleasant pressure on the queenside. Since then the technical investigation of this position has advanced a long way, but in principle White's plan has remained the same. Practice has shown, however, that Black for his part should on no account confine himself to passive defence. He must endeavour to go into action on the kingside, using e4 as a strong outpost for his pieces.

to play 1 6 . .Axe4 dxe4 1 7 . .!LJ d2, neutralizing the kingside threats and retaining slightly the better chances.

16 1g4 17.�d2 �xd2 1 8.�xd2 �h4! •••

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

Mark Taimanov - Rashid Nezmetdinov Kiev

1 954

l.d4 dS 2.c4 e6 3.tlJc3 tlJf6 4.cxdS adS 5.igS 1e7 6.e3 c6 7.J.d3 �bd7 8.�a 0-0 9.'ifc2 ge8 10.0-0 �ffi 1 1 .gab l as 1 2.a3 �e4! A sharp struggle is under way on the flanks.

81

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

The threats of 1 9 . . . .!LJ f3t and 1 9 . . . i h3 are very strong, and White decided to give up a pawn with 1 9.£3, simply to have a fighting chance. He eventually held the game, but only through his opponent's generosity. It is essential to observe that the breadth of the modern strategic outlook has considerably expanded the old conceptions. In this system White sometimes strives to build up a mobile pawn centre. Such a plan can prove highly ef­ fective if Black fails to take timely measures to o rganize central counterplay.

Mikhail Botvinnik - Paul Keres Moscow

1 952

l .d4 dS 2.c4 e6 3.�c3 �f6 4.cxdS adS S .igS 1e7 6.e3 c6 7.1d3 �bd7 8.�ge2 0-0 9.0-0 ge8 10.gb l �ffi 1 l .�c2 .id6? •

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

1 3.1xe7 �xe7 14.b4 axb4 I S.axb4 �g6 16.b5? An instructive mistake. White doesn't sense the danger and comes under attack. He had

Black manoeuvres unsystematically, underrating White's pawn offensive in the centre. A better move was 1 1 . . . .ie6, so as to answer 1 2.f3 with the central b reak 1 2 . . . c5!.

82

Soviet Chess Strategy

29.llc3 gfS 30.ttlf5!

12.c.t>hl ttlg6 13.a!

With decisive threats. 8

In the next game, White carries out an original plan of attack in the centre and on the kingside.

7 6

Semyon Furman Alexander Konstantinopolsky

5

-

4

Moscow 1 948

3

l .d4 d5 2.c4 00 3.ttlc3 ttlf6 4 ..ig5 ttlbd7 5.e3 J.e7 6.ttla 0-0 7 ..td3 a6 S.ad5 exd5 9.�c2 geS 10.0-0 ttlfS l l .llacl c6 1 2JUe l !?

2 1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

Black proves to have no satisfactory antidote to White's plan of building a powerful pawn centre.

13 ....te7 14Jlbel ttld7? 1 5.he7 llxe7 16.ttlg3 ttlf6 17:�fl .too I S.ttlf5! hf5 19.hf5 �b6 20.e4 dxe4 2 1 .fxe4 lldS 22.e5!

White intends to open up the centre with e3-e4 in the right circumstances.

12 ... .tg4? 13.ttle5 J.h5 14.�b3! gbS 15.h3 ttl6d7 1 6.he7 �xe7 17.f4 With White's last few moves his plan of attacking the centre and kingside has taken shape.

17 ... ttlxe5 I S.dxe5 f6 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

Having b uilt his centre, White transfers the attack to the kingside. With the timely ad­ vance of his centre pawn he frees the e4-square for active operations with his pieces.

22 .. .tl�d5 23.ttle4! ttlfS 24.ttld6 �c7 25.J.e4 ttle6 26.�h4 g6 27.hd5 ad5 2S.llcl �d7

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

19.e4! fxe5 20.exd5 .if! 2 1 .c.t>hl ad5? 2 1 . . . 'lW h4! , with counterplay, was correct.

22.llxe5 �h4 23.ttlxd5! b5 24J�g5! White acquired a decisive advantage on the kingside.

The Centre - Typical Pawn Structures

Mobile Centre with Two Pawns on the Fourth Rank The old notion, that an "ideal" pawn centre (d- and e-pawns on the fourth rank) confers a positional advantage in itself, is received critically at the present time. The following theory is proposed in its place. A pawn centre represents a significant strength only when it is solidly defended and reinforced by the pieces, and when the opponent has insufficient means to create effective pressure against it. On the other hand, a pawn centre lacking adequate piece support constitutes a definite weakness, and can be demolished if the opponent succeeds in exerting co-ordinated pressure on it with his pieces and undermining it. Premature seizure of the centre with pawns is not only inexpedient but even dangerous. In such cases, as a rule, the centre pawns end up being blocked, and it is the opponent, pressurizing the centre with pieces, who remains with a real advantage. In contemporary strategy, positions where one side has a pawn centre tend to produce approximate equilibrium. One player's piece pressure against the central squares more or less counterbalances his opponent's occupation of them. In the ensuing tense struggle for the initiative, the side with the pawn centre tries to fortify it solidly and then gradually deprive the other side of counterplay. Conversely, the other side has the task of consistently increasing the pressure on the centre. Naturally, in all such cases the pawn centre has to be the chief focus of attention for both players. It is here that the strategic battle is generally fought out. In many cases, for the player fighting against the centre it pays to force an advance of one of the pawns in order to blockade it and increase the pressure. On the other hand

83

though, we should note that the player with the centre should not try at all costs to avoid pushing his pawns. We must remember that a timely advance of the centre pawns is essential since it procures space for the actions of the pieces. Of course, this kind of decision has to be weighed in a concrete manner.

Reuben Fine - Andor Lilienthal Moscow

a

b

c

d

1 937

e

f

g

h

In the diagram position White possesses a centre that guarantees him plenty of freedom to manoeuvre. Weighing up the concrete peculiarities of the position, Fine takes a decision which is highly committal yet in a profound sense correct.

14.e5! A bold advance in the centre. White considers, rightly, that the concession of the central d5-square to his opponent plays no substantial role in the current situation. What counts for much more is the possibility he acquires of manoeuvring his knight, via the vacated e4-square, to d6 or f6.

14... �b6 Otherwise ttJ c3-bS-d6 follows.

84

Soviet Chess Strategy

1 5.'ife2 f5 Black resorts to a weakening of his kingside pawn position. The passive continuation I 5 . . .id7 I 6. � e4 l:!adB may have been preferable.

16.exf6 �xf6 17.�e4 �f5 1 8ib4 �d5 19.�e5 �d8 I 9 . . . ixe5 20.dxe5 l:!xe5 2 1 . .id6, or 20 . . . VMxe5 2 1 . .ic3! , would be bad for Black.

Again 2 I . . . ixe5 22.dxe5 VMxe5 is no good, in view of 23 . .ie7! l:!eB 24. � f6t!.

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 b

c

d

e

7 6 5 4 3 2 1

20.�acl �d5 2 1 ia3 �e7

a

8

f

g

h

25.h4! Having achieved dominance in the centre, White decisively transfers the attack to his opponent's weakened kingside.

a

b

c

d

e

f

h

g

In this position, in my view, the only way to keep the initiative is 13.e5. White utilizes his gain of tempo without fearing a blockade of his pawn centre after 13 ... �b4 14.Ae4 �d5. Concrete analysis shows that he preserves a distinct plus with 1 5.'ifb3!, as Black cannot advantageously control the d5-point. I believe this is the only way White can punish Black for his slow manoeuvres in this line ( . . . � c6-a5-c6) . [Editors' note: Practice has been focussing on 1 3 . ib5 and 1 3 . ic2, both favouring White. However, recently a young Ukrainian star used 1 3.e5!? to win an important game against a young Vietnamese star: 1 3 . . . ie6 I 4 . VM b I l:!cB I 5 .l:!d I � a5 I 6. � f4 ig4 I 7.l:!e I VMd7 I B .h3 .i f5

A position arising from the following variation of the Griinfeld Defence is also instructive:

l .d4 �f6 2.c4 g6 3.�c3 d5 4.cxd5 �xd5 5.e4 �xc3 6.bxc3 Ag7 7 ic4 c5 8.�e2 �c6 9.Ae3 0-0 10.0-0 cxd4 l 1 .cxd4 �a5?! 12.Ad3 �c6 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

I 9 . .ixf5 gxf5 20. � h5 � c4 2 1 . VM b3 l:!c6

The Centre - Typical Pawn Structures 22J�ad 1 tLl xe3 23 -'Wxe3 .ih6 24. W B �g6 2S .dS .igS 26. tLl g3 f4 27. tLl e4 i. h4 28.d6 exd6 29.exd6 b6 30. i> h 1 fS 3 1 . Wxf4 i.d8 32. tLl g3 bS 33.�dS .igS 34. WeS f4 3 S . tLl fS B 36. tLl e7t 1-0 Korobov - Nguyen, Ngoc Truongson, Moscow 20 1 0.]

8S

actively placed pieces it can, however, be very strong and mobile. The lively contest in the following example is noteworthy.

Viacheslav Ragozin Igor Bondarevsky -

Moscow 1 946

One Mobile Pawn in the Centre It often comes about that one side possesses a mobile centre pawn (for example on e4 or d4) , while the other side has an extra pawn on one of the wings. The nature of the fight under such conditions is analogous to the positions with a central pawn couple which we have j ust examined. The main attention of both sides has to be fixed on the centre. The player with the centre pawn will attempt to use his pawns for an attack in this area. In addition to the centre pawn, an active role in the attack will be played by the adjacent flank pawn on the c or f-file. The other player will try to deprive his opponent's centre pawn of mobility and weaken it. Simplifications in such circumstances favour the side without the centre pawn, as they make it easier to exploit the pawn majority on the wing. Compared with a pawn couple (e4 + d4) , a single centre pawn does less to hamper the actions of the enemy pieces. However, with a large number of minor pieces present, the preponderance of pawns in the centre can make itself acutely felt and should not be underestimated.

The "Hanging Pawn" Centre Another formation that is just as frequently seen is a mobile centre consisting of a centre pawn and the adjacent bishop's pawn, the rwo forming a separate "island" . Such a centre generally carries less weight than a pawn couple on e4 and d4. With

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

1 5.b4! An interesting positional pawn sacrifice. White tries to gain control of d4, which in conj unction with the open c-file could give him a dangerous initiative. Thus in the event of l S . . . cxb4 1 6. Wc7 �ab8 1 7. ibS �fd8 1 8 .�ac 1 i> ffi 1 9. tLl d4 tLl f6 20. W aS, White acquires a significant plus.

1 5 ... d4! A central counterstroke typical of this kind of structure. Unexpectedly (and not without benefit to himself) , Black stirs up combinative complexities.

16.exd4 gae8! 17.dxc5 A forced decision; 1 7.�ae 1 could be met by 1 7 . . . .ixB, when 1 8 . .ixB fails to 1 8 . . . Wxe l .

1 7...'i9xe2 1 8.'i9xe2 gxe2 20.�d4 ge6 2 1 .�xe6 fxe6

1 9.c6!

hc6

86

Soviet Chess Strategy

A variation indicated by Grandmaster Ragozin is of interest: 29 . . . :B:h 1 t 30. 'tt> g3 llJ e4t 3 1 . cj;l f4 :B:f1 t 32. 'tt> e3 llJ d6 33.:B:axa7 llJ xb5 34.:B:xg7t 'tt> fS 3 5 .:B:ad7 .i c6 36.:B:de7 llJ d6 8 7 6 5 4 3

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

2

The complications have finally led by force to an ending where White has rook and pawn against his opponent's two minor pieces. The extra pawn on the queens ide, however, gives him realistic drawing chances.

22J!ac1 Ad5 23J!c7 �e5 24.b5 �U4 25J:le1 �d3 26J:le3! gb4 26 . . . llJ xf2 is dangerous in view of 27.:B:g3 g5 2S.:B:a3! .

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

37.g4! llJ fl 3S.:B:gxfl t! :B:xfl 39.:B:xe6 :B:e7 40.:B:xe7 'tt> xe7 4 1 .h4!, with a draw after the unavoidable exchange of Black's last pawn. [Editors' note - 3 1 . . . llJ d6! 32.:B:axa7 llJ f5 would be better, giving Black the advantage. 3 1 . 'tt> g4! is the right move, when White probably has enough counterplay.]

The Piece-and-Pawn Centre

27.h3 gbl t 2S.cbh2 �:dl

One of the most important problems in modern chess is that of the piece-and-pawn centre. A young player perfecting his skills must not remain ignorant of classic paradigms such as the following.

8 7 6 5

Mikhail Botvinnik - Andor Lilienthal

4

Moscow

3 2

1 936

1 .�f3 �f6 2.c4 b6 3.g3 .ib7 4.Ag2 c5 5.0-0

1

6a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

29.ga3! White has managed to retain enough counterplay to equalize the chances.

g6 6.d4 cxd4 7.�xd4 .bg2 s.cbxg2 .ig7 9.�c3 O-O? A stereotyped developing move. The correct course was 9 . . . Wfcs 1 O.b3 Wf b7t 1 1 .f3 d5, neutralizing White's central plus.

10.e4! �c6 1 1 ..ie3 tvcs

The Centre - Typical Pawn Structures

87

And here 1 1 . . . ttJ g4 was better, endeavouring to simplify the position.

12.b3 ft'b7 13.f3 gfd8 14.gc1 gac8 15.ft'd2

a6 8 7 6 5 a

4 3 2 l:J. a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

Exploiting Black's passive and planless play, White has built up a strong piece-and­ pawn centre. It's interesting to follow how he methodically disposes of his opponent's attempts to free himselfby . . . b6-b5 or . . . d7-d 5 , and gradually deprives him of counterplay.

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

A new and instructive stage of the struggle begins. Having deprived his opponent of counterplay in the centre, White intends to switch the attack to Black's kingside. Reckoning that passive defence offers little hope, Black makes a desperate attempt to free himself by breaking on the queenside, but this merely hastens his defeat.

23 ... b5? 24.cxb5 26.gxc3 bxa4

axb5

25.gdc1!

gxc3

Black had no defence against the invasion of the seventh rank.

16JUdl �xd4

Not 1 6 . . . b5 1 7.cxb5 ttJ xd4, because of 1 8.bxa6 winning a pawn.

27.gc7 ft'b5 28.bxa4 ft'e2t 29.ft'fl ft'xflt 30.c�xfl

17.ixd4 d6

White easily exploited his advantage in the endgame.

' Now 1 7 . . . b5 would be met by 1 8 . cxb5 axb5 1 9. ixf6 ixf6 20. ttJ d5 with the threat of e4-e5, s o that Black would be left with a weak isolated pawn at the very least. Black is therefore forced to protect his e7-pawn, giving White time to prevent the . . . b6-b5 break.

1 8.a4! �e8 1 9.�d5 gc6 On 1 9 . . . b5 White could play 20.cxb5 axb5 2 1 .a5!.

20.ixg7 �xg7 2 1 .h4 ge8 22.gc3 �h5 23.Wd4

Since that time much water has flowed under the bridge. The significance of a pawn-and­ piece centre of this type has been subject to revaluation. If previously it was considered that you must not allow your opponent to set up such a centre, the opposite attitude now prevails. Practice shows that in many cases it does pay if you let your opponent construct a pawn-and-piece centre but at the same time exert co-ordinated pressure against it and thus obtain adequate counterplay.

88

Soviet Chess Strategy

Paul Keres Vassily Smyslov -

Leningrad 1 947

l .e4 tlJf6 2.tlJc3 e5 3.ltla e6 4.g3 d5 5.cxd5 tlJxd5 G.i.g2 ltlc6 7.0-0 i.e7 S.b3 ltle7? 9.i.b2 e5? 10J3cl f6 8 7

4.cxd5 lLl xd5 5 . �g2 lLl c7 6. lLl c3 lLl c6 7.a3!? e5 8 . b4! (and now 8 . . . cxb4 9.axb4 �xb4 is bad on account of 1 0. lLl xe5 ! ) . Undermining Black's important central bastion on c5, White subsequently has a realistic basis for using his own "extra" pawn in the centre; in many lines he successfully implements the strike with d2d4, promising him a lasting initiative. Similar pawn breaks for the black side form a leitmotif of several variations of Taimanov's system in the Sicilian Defence. For instance:

6

l .e4 e5 2.ltla eG 3.d4 cxd4 4.�xd4 tlJe6 5.ltlb5 dG G.e4 ltlf6 7.ltl l c3 aG S.ltla3 i.e7 9.i.e2 0-0 10.0-0 i.d7 1 1 .i.e3 Wla5 12.Wlel gabS

5 4 3 2 1

1::,. a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

In constructing his centre Black has lost a valuable tempo ( . . . e7 -e6-e5 instead of . . . e7e5) . Utilizing his lead in development, White carries out a precise plan to undermine the central pawn position:

1 2 . . . E1fb8!? is also interesting; if then 1 3 .f3, Black has 13 . . . b5! 1 4. cxb5 axb5 1 5 . lLl axb5 lLl b4 with adequate counterplay, as in Geller ­ Boleslavsky, Moscow 1 967.

13.a gfdS 14.gcl i.eS 15.Wln

I l .ltla4! bG Better was 1 1 . . . lLl e6.

12.ltlh4 i.d7 If 1 2 . . . � b7 then 1 3 .b4!.

13.e3! 0-0 14.d4! exd4 1 5.exd4 geS I G.dxe5 b5 17.ltlc3 f5 I S.ge2! hl4 1 9.9d2 gO 20.gxh4 With a won position. We should also note that apart from the central pawn break with d2-d4, an undermining operation on the flank with f2-f4 or b2-b4 is frequently employed. A variation of the English Opening is a case in point: l .c4 c5 2. lLl f3 lLl f6 3.g3 d5

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

1 5 ... b5! I G.cxb5 axb5 17.�axb5 d5! Black has excellent prospects. Some other lines of the English noting: l .c4 c5 2. lLl c3 lLl f6 3.g3 lLl xd5 5 . �g2 lLl c7 6.d3 e5 7. lLl f3 �e7 9 . lLl d2 �d7 1 O. lLl c4 f6 1 l . f4!, has a strong initiative.

are worth d5 4.cxd5 lLl c6 8.0-0 and White

The Centre - Typical Pawn Structures Alternatively 7.f4!?, or first 7. tiJ h3!? with 8.f4 to follow.

Pawn Weakness in the Centre (Accepted in Return for Good Piece Play) An entire complex of problems in modern chess is associated with positions where one player incurs a weakness in his central pawn formation but endeavours in return to achieve a superior co-ordination of his pieces. This is directly connected wi th the concept of dynamic equilibrium (which we have mentioned before in this chapter) . The concept of dynamic equilibrium in the fight for the centre has truly revolutionized many notions about the strategic elements. Many formations where one side has a central pawn weakness have come to be viewed in a completely different light. There is no longer anything paradoxical about the fact that the "weakness" ceases to be real if jt is compensated in a suitable measure by superior piece co­ ordination. Let's look at the following example in which (he art of attack and defence proved to be up to standard.

Gideon Stahlberg - Isaak Boleslavsky

89

We have taken a typical middlegame position arising from a key system in the King's Indian Defence. White has a numerical and spatial superiority in the centre; in Black's camp there is what looks like a major weakness - the d6pawn. Practice shows, however, that Black has adequate counterplay. Note that at present White's pieces are tied to the defence of his frontiers, and that protecting his vanguard posts on e4 and c4 demands no less effort than Black's weak d6-point.

16.J.fl ttlb6 17 ..ifl .id7 l S.a3 Putting a firm stop to the undermining move . . . a4-a3, at the price of a certain loss of elasticity in White's queenside pawn structure.

lS .. J�adS 1 9. � h2 .ic8 20.ttla2 ttlbd7 2 1 ..ig2 ttlf6 22.ttlc3 gd7 23.ttla gde7 The regrouping of forces has preserved the dynamic equilibrium. White, as before, is trying to get at the d6-pawn, but he has had to transfer his knight from d4 to a modest position on g l . Black for his part has sufficient resources to counter-attack against c4.

24.ttlgl ttlfd7 25.J.d4 ttlb6 26 ..ixg7 �xg7 27.gxd6 ttlxc4 2S.gddl .ie6

Zurich 1 953

8 7 6 5 4 3 2

a

1

6. a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

At last a significant transformation has taken place in the centre. White's central e4-pawn is

90

Soviet Chess Strategy

free to advance; in return, Black has play on the queenside squares.

29.Vf2 f6 30.�f3 Af7 3 1 .e5�!

accordance with this. Here is a characteristic example from their creative duel.

Johann Zukertort -Wtlhelm Steinitz

White tries to strip away the black king's cover.

Saint Louis (7) 1 886

3 1 . .. fxe5 32.�xe5 �xe5 33J�xe5 �he5 34.fxe5 gxe5 And in the ensuing lively play the balance was maintained. * * *

Let's turn to some of the most characteristic problems in the dispute "for and against" a central pawn weakness. They include problems of the isolated pawn, the backward pawn, and finally doubled pawns in the centre. As a rule, a game with pawns like these is perfectly playable and can be very double-edged if the weaknesses are compensated by a generally harmonious and active deployment of the opposing forces. An isolated centre pawn constitutes both a strength and a weakness, seeing that on the one hand it facilitates the gaining of space but on the other hand it requires forces to be diverted to its defence. As a rule the player possessing such a pawn will try to attack on the wing (most often the kingside) or to open up the game, which is usually achieved by an advance of this same pawn (d4-d5) . The defender attempts to neutralize his opponent's initiative. To this end it is useful to bring about simplifications - to exchange off the opponent's active pieces. The counterplay is closely linked to organizing a blockade of the pawn and pressurizing it. This type of defensive plan has been evolving for a long time now, ever since the Steinitz Zukertort match. When playing Black, Steinitz would regularly give his opponent an isolated pawn in the centre and form his own plans in

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

Let's watch how skilfully Steinitz increases the pressure against the weakness in White's camp while simultaneously dealing with his opponent's varied tactical threats.

1 5 ...g6! The weakening is only apparent, since Black has a bishop securely covering the dark squares.

16.Ve2 Am 17.gedl .tg7 With his bishop manoeuvre Black has not only fortified his kingside but also intensified the pressure on d4.

1 8 ..tal �e7! Blockade!

1 9.Vdl Va6 Parrying the threat of ttJ c3-d5.

2o.AgS �f5 2 1 .g4� White wilts in the heat of the battle. A distinctly more stubborn line was 2 1 . ixf6 ixf6 22. ttJ e4 ig7 23 Jhc8 l!xc8, though Black's

The Centre - Typical Pawn Structures prospects would still be clearly superior. White had probably still not sensed the full peril of his situation.

91

Since that time, not only the defensive but also the active methods of fighting in such positions have been improved and elaborated. Practice has shown that if there are plenty of pieces on the board and the active side's forces are harmoniously deployed, the initiative becomes dangerous within a relatively short time. Mikhail Botvinnik made a large contribution to working out the methods of attack in the type of position we are examining.

Mikhail Botvinnik - Andrey Batuyev Leningrad

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

1 93 1

h

2 1 .. ,filxd4! 22.�xd4 e5 23.�d5 �xc1 24.YlYxc1 exd4 25.�xd4 �xd5 26.�xd5 �xd5 27.ixd5 YlYe2! 28.h3 h6 29.Ac4 ft'a Black's pieces dominate the board, while the weakness of White's kingside is irreparable.

30.YlYe3 ft'dl t 3 1 . � h2 .too 32 ..te7

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

Black has a perfectly acceptable position, and after 1 7 . . . lLl ed5 1 8 . lLl e4 :gc8 1 9 Jhc8 ,ixc8 the game would be about equal. However, Black felt safe and didn't notice the thickening storm-clouds around fl.

17 ... �c8 1 8.�xf7! �xf7 19.ft'xe6 ft'f8

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

32 . ..te5t! 33.f4 .

On 33. YlYxe5 Black has 33 . . . YlY h l t 34. 'it> g3 YNg2t 35. 'it> h4 YlYxf2t 36. Wfg3 g5t etc.

It turns out that 1 9 . . . lLl ed5 fails to 2o. lLl xd5 lLl xd5 2 1 . ,ixd5 ! ,ixd5 22.:gxc8 , and White wins.

20.�e4 �xc1 2 1 .gxc1 �fd5 Black's position is unsatisfactory. The threat was 22. Wfxflt Wfxfl 23. ,ixflt 'it> xfl 24. lLl d6t etc.

33 ...ixf4t! 34.ft'xf4 ft'hl t 35. � g3 Y1Ygl t White resigned.

22.�d6 .ta8

92

Soviet Chess Strategy In occupying this outpost, White sets up springboard for an attack on the kingside.

8 7

a

13 ...�c6 14J!adl �b4 1 5.�h3!

6

The queen actively joins in the attack, taking aim at two important points in the black camp - e6 and h7.

5 4 3

15 ...�d5 16.�xd5 �bxd5?

2 1

6. a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

23J!el ! Decisive. Th e objects o f attack o n e7 and f7 are indefensible.

23 ... g6 24.�xf7 �xf7 25.�xe7 Black resigned.

A serious error. Black should have played 1 6 . . . tt.l fXd5 , maintaining a defensible position. White's attack now becomes virtually irresistible.

17.f4 gc8 On 1 7 . . . tt.l e4 there follows 1 8. tt.l xf7!, and then 1 8 .. .l'hf7 1 9. '<Mfxe6 or 1 8 . . . @ xf7 1 9 .�de 1 ! .

1 8.£5 exf5 1 9J3xf5 �d6

Mikhail Botvinnik - Milan Vidmar Nottingham

1 936

8 7 6 5 4 3 a

2 1

6. a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

The diagram position is in many ways analogous to the foregoing example. Let's see how purposefully White exploits the assets of his position.

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

20.�xf7! gxf7 2 1 .hf6 hf6 22.gxd5 �c6 23.gd6 �e8 24.gd7 Black resigned. Another example features sharp counterplay in the modern style, compensating for a backward pawn in the centre.

Th e Centre - Typ ical Pawn Structures

Vladimir Peresypkin Evgeny Sveshnikov -

Kiev 1 973

The posltlon has arisen from a sharp and topical variation of the Sicilian Defence:

1.e4 c5 2,c�� a ltlc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.ltlxd4 ltlf6 5.�c3 e5 6.ltldb5 d6 7.AgS a6 8.ltla3 b5 9.hf6 gxf6 10.ltld5 f5

93

H .hb5!? axb5 1 2.ltlxb5 Black is threatened with the immediately crushing 1 3 . llJ bc7t. He has, however, an interesting defence which shows that his position contains not only abundant resources for counterplay but also considerable reserves of solidity.

1 2 .. J�a7 A forced sacrifice of the exchange. An original position with diverse material now arises, where a rook and two pawns on the white side are facing two black minor pieces. [Editors' Note: Modern practice shows that 1 2 . . J�a7!? is interesting but it is not forced, as Suetin claims. The wild 1 2 . . J�a4! is now most popular, giving Black at least equality.]

13.ltlxa7 ltlxa7

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

You can quite easily see that White holds a solid positional "deposit" in the shape of his opponent's weaknesses in the centre and notably exposed pawn position on the kingside. Practice demonstrates, however, that Black has a wealth of possibilities at his disposal for dynamic combat. In many lines he succeeds in working up strong counterplay on the dark squares ( . . . .i ffi -h6, . . . llJ c6-d4) . The unfortunate placing of the knight on a3 is also significant. Bringing it into active play will take a few tempos. All this makes for a very tense struggle in which there is no place for compromise. White's task is to co-ordinate his pieces as quickly as he can, utilizing his static advantages. Black endeavours to isolate the knight on d5 and instigate dynamic play. In the game White chose a tactical means of combat. He immediately sacrificed a piece.

From White's point of view there is nothing wrong with the material balance of forces. But in the ensuing middlegame, as we shall see, the black pieces operate harmoniously and it is White who is soon in the role of defender.

14.Yfa ltlc6 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

� a

c

e

f

h

1 5.0-0-0? Another crucial and very risky decision, after which Black's counterplay with his pieces acquires ample scope.

94

Soviet Chess Strategy

There is no denying that the position on the board is highly complex and, most importantly, unconventional. This is j ust where a player needs subtle positional flair, that special kind of imagination which Lasker considered a sign of supreme mastery. By this he understood the gift of intuitively anticipating events. White's chances can only lie in advancing his queenside pawns, and this on no account fits in with castling long. For this very reason Black would be set far more problems by 1 5 .c3 followed by 1 6.0-0. After castling short, the white king would not only be less vulnerable but Black would have to reckon with a queens ide pawn offensive: a2a4, b2-b4 etc.

doubling of his pawns in the centre or on the flank (most often on the c-file) . His reasoning is that the concentration of his pawns to control important points in the centre will sometimes enable him to seize these points with his pieces. Just as often, it will facilitate constructing a pawn centre. The following position can stand as an instructive example.

Mikhail Botvinnik Ilya Kan -

Leningrad 1 939

8 7 6

The game continuation was:

15 ... .th6t 1 6.<.t>b1 fxe4 17.Vxe4 0-0 1 8.g4 <.t>h8 19.9hgl f5 20.gxf5 .bf5 2 1 .Vc4 Ve8 22.�e3 .te6 23.Vh4 .if4 24.gxd6

5 4 3 2

8

1

7

� a

6 5 4 3 2 1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

24 . . . �d4! Black took over the initiative for good. There are plenty of cases where doubled pawns, constituting a separate pawn "island" for good measure, amount to a serious positional weakness. Despite this, in a number of opening systems one player will voluntarily allow the

c

e

g

A remarkable structure has arisen in the centre. In this situation White's doubled pawns on the c-file are not a weakness, but on the contrary a genuine strength. The point is that in Black's camp the d5-square is a palpable weakness. To take firm control of it, White needs to push his pawn from e3 to e4. Then the c3-pawn will be a trusty guardian of the d4-point, depriving Black of the chance to settle there. In the game there followed:

12 ..td3 h6 1 3.0-0 0-0 14.f4! The reader should pay special attention to this move. It might seem far simpler and more natural to go straight to work transferring

Th e Centre - Typical Pawn Structures the knight to d5, by 1 4.e4 tlJ c6 1 5 Jl:fd l ie6 1 6. tlJ fl l:!adB 1 7. tlJ e3. However, after 1 7... � e7! I B . tlJ d5? ixd5 ! 1 9. cxd5 tlJ cB! , followed by bringing this knight t o d6, the advantage could even turn out to be on Black's side. For the moment, therefore, White keeps his basic strategic design a secret, and plays out a different trump - his lead in development. It is in his interest to open the game as much as possible, and his last move serves this end.

14... �d7 1 4 . . . exf4 1 5 .exf4 would merely be furthering White's plans.

95

Lev Aronin- Alexey Suetin Saratov

1 953

8 7 6 5 4

LL,,,J��� .e:::i ;

3 2 1

15.5 �f6

a

Better was 1 5 . . . f6.

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

Black unexpectedly played:

16.tLle4!

16 'We6!? •••

The move looks antipositional; to add to his queenside pawn weaknesses, Black is incurring serious damage to his pawn position on the other wing. In doing this, however, I had given attention to the specific possibilities of counterplay with my pieces - especially the knight settling on the strong outpost on d4.

17.'Wxe6 fxe6 1 8.�c3 �b8!

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

Another subtle point, testifying to positional mastery of a high order. The knight exchange favours White, as afterwards his bishop firmly establishes itself on the critical d5-square.

16 ...'Wd8 17.�xf6t 'Wxf6 1 8.,te4 gb8 19J�adl b6 20.h3 ,ta6 2 1 .,td5 b5 22.cx:b5 gxb5 23.c4 With a clear plus. The following example is noteworthy.

Again a paradoxical move. In reality, however, this is an essential link in an important manoeuvre aimed at penetrating with the knight to d4.

19.�6 �c6 20.�d2 �d4 2 1 .gacl l:!f7 22.�c4 a5 23J�d2 a4 24.b3 .ta6 25.,te3 axb3 26.cx:b3 hc4 27.bxc4 c6! A picturesque position. Remove all the pieces from the board, and Black's pawn position is dismal; but in the conditions of complex "semi-middlegame" play, his pawn defects retreat into the background - rather the pawns are helping his pieces to control important points in the centre.

96

Soviet Chess Strategy problem arises: is it better to close the centre, or to fix the pawn structure while opening one central file? Black is faced with this kind of problem investigated for ages, but still to be solved in the Samisch System of the King's Indian Defence:

l .d4 lLlf6 2.c4 g6 3.lLlc3 .ig7 4.e4 d6 5.£3 0-0 6 ..ie3 e5 7.d5

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

2SJ!b2 :!Ua7 29.a4 .ic7 30J�al .ia5 3 1 .lLldl .ib4 32.i.xd4 exd4 33.gba2 d3! Otherwise ttJ d I -b2-d3.

34.a5 gdS 35.£3 gd4 36.lLle3 .ic3 37.gbl gxa5

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

Black has achieved a clear superiority in the ending.

What suits Black best? Should he close the game in the centre with 7 . . . c5 (giving White the cue for a kingside attacking plan with 8.g4) ? Should he leave the queenside untouched and strive for kingside counterplay of his own, with 7 . . . ttJ h5 8 . W d2 f5 9 .0-0-0 ttJ d7 etc. ? Or finally, should he open one of the queenside files with 7 . . . c6 8 . Wd2 cxd5 9.cxd5 a6, aiming to create active play on both wings as opportunities arise?

Essentially, then, the modern treatment of pawn weaknesses in the centre is dialectical. We may state that they are quite acceptable if compensated by factors that can be placed under one general heading - the dynamics of the position. In many games, on transition from the opening to the middlegame, an excruciating

The choice between these lines is a matter of taste, but the stabilized structure that results has long-term consequences - it largely compels both players to undertake certain actions and requires them to know the typical methods of play. [Editors' Note: Modern practice suggests that 7 . . . c5 is an inferior line, as 8.g4, among others,

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

Th e Centre - Typ ical Pawn Structures is too strong. One of the last GM supporters of 7 ... c5 was Wolfgang Uhlmann, but even he could only score 1 Yl/9 with Black.] Thus the emergence of a particular structure in the centre is determined by the inner content of the struggle. Our discussion of central pawn structures has merely been the preface to this very complex theme which we shall pursue in the following chapters of the book. For now, let us just note that in practice you will often come across various types of centre - whether stabilized, or in a state of tension - which we have not considered, and which would need more than a single volume of researches to classify them. General questions about the link between play in the centre and flank operations are also a very important issue. In what follows, we shall concentrate not so much on classifying all these themes as on studying the general methods employed in the struggle for the centre. Before turning to questions of the dynamics of positional play (without which it is impossible to "unlock the door" to the modern theory of the middlegame) , let us carry out a brief resume.

97

Our discussion of the elements of the positional struggle has quite often gone far outside its formal limits and steered into the deep channels of contemporary positional play. The fact is that at the heart of chess strategy there are intimate connections between the complex and the simple, the obvious and the paradoxical , etc. Turning to the practical side of the elements we have examined, let us state the conclusion that seems indicated: in positional play, other things being equal, it is enough to gain an advantage of a single material unit, or to obtain a clear plus in j ust one positional area (for example "good" knight against "bad" bishop) , in order to confront your opponent with serious difficulties. And the presence of two organic weaknesses without obvious compensation is almost certain to condemn a player to defeat. As we shall soon see, in the modern dynamic formations which are full of tactical ideas and characterized by the great mobility of the forces etc., other laws often operate. But once the game enters classical channels, the elements of positional play come fully into force.

Chapter 6 The Dynamics of the Chess Struggle Some General Concepts:

a

Brief History Lesson

From the time when the great players Morphy and Steinitz showed in practice how a chess game develops according to laws, and established the basic principles of strategy and tactics, the pOSitional school of chess (and correspondingly, the positional style of play) gained wide currency. Probably because of its critical clarity of logic, this style is often called classical. Thus according to the views of the positional school, the attainment of an advantage is prepared by logically executing a plan that derives from an appraisal of the real state of affairs on the chessboard; the path to this goal leads through a series of stages: • mobilizing on rational lines, that is, more expediently than your opponent • gradually striving to increase your minimal plus • exploiting the advantage you have accumulated The positional school teaches that an attack can be successful only if prepared by accumulating a number of "minor" advantages. Thus an attack represents one of the methods of exploiting a plus. Correspondingly, a tactical strike should, so to speak, crown a successfully executed plan. Hence the elements of tactical play are strictly subordinate to strategic designs. The positional style of play corresponded to the systematization of a set of ideas and plans (and this basically gave rise to the notion of typical positions) . The methods of defence were noticeably enriched; economy of forces was proposed as the most important defensive principle. Various means of exploiting an advantage, and methods of conducting the fight in so-called balanced positions, were cultivated. The positional school does not deny the role of contingency in the chess struggle, but you could say that it sharply separates the "contingent" from the "orderly" and sometimes opposes the one to the other. The views of the positional school were set out on repeated occasions, in a detailed and highly accessible form, in the widely familiar chess treatises of Tarrasch, Emanuel Lasker, Nimzowitsch, Reti and Euwe. In its essentials the theory of positional play is undoubtedly valid, as it is founded on the laws of logic and proceeds from evaluating the genuine conditions of the struggle. Yet its rigorous

100

Soviet Chess Strategy

application can curtail the richness of life on the chessboard. With this manner of conducting the fight, the whole process of the game is grounded principally on the outward contours of the positions that occur; the strategy and tactics arise out of the static elements of the position. The positional factors constitute the chief underlying method, the pivot of the contest. The remarkable Russian player Chigorin resolutely opposed the dogmatism of Steinitz's theory, demonstrating in his games the immense role of imagination in chess. The progress of theory is increasingly confirming the validity of Chigorin's views. The inexhaustible richness of chess cannot be confined within the framework of any immutable rules. Contemporary theory and practice are disclosing the boundless possibilities for obtaining complex positions abounding in potential combinations. The play in such positions is distinguished by the wealth and variety of ideas that exceed the bounds of formal logic. As a result, positional factors become an auxiliary resource; and sometimes the struggle to acquire them proceeds in ways which appear nowhere near as logical as those laid down by the positional school. From this it follows that the system of play which envisages the accumulation of small positional advantages has its limits, beyond which it ceases to operate. The positional principles are applicable mainly to those formations where slow manoeuvring and the gradual multiplication of assets are indeed the most expedient plan. And yet in numerous situations that can arise on the chessboard, guidance solely by general positional principles is inadequate. Consequently an ever-increasing role is played by the dynamic factors of the struggle, which distinctly enrich the strategy and tactics of chess.

Some Important Features of the Dynamic Approach Adherents of the dynamic approach start out from the fact that in many complex situations, apart from the external stable factors determined by the contours of the position, a major role is played by latent factors that are hi ghly volatile. These largely imponderable factors include for instance the co-ordination of the fighting forces, their disposition at a particular moment, and so on. Ultimately, the assessment of such positions relies heavily on the individual peculiarities that each of them contains. A strategy based on dynamics is distinguished by maximum closeness to the action; the plan does not try to subordinate the action at any cost but constantly adapts to it, absorbing the full wealth of ideas from the life on the chessboard. In this sense the struggle in the following game is illuminating.

Mikhail Tal - VassUy Smyslov Bled 1959

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

Acting on general positional considerations, Black played:

101

The Dynamics of the Chess Struggle

1l b5 •••

With the aim of driving back his opponent's active li ght-squared bishop and starting a counter-attack on the queenside. Probing deeply into the complexities of the position, White replied:

12.id2! Yfa6 This response is an unobtrusive but substantial error. AI; later analysis indicated, Black should have preferred 1 2 .. -'1!fa4, settling for somewhat the worse ending after 1 3.lLlxc8 �axc8 14 . .tb3 �xd4 1 5 .lLlxd4.

13.lLlf5!

As unexpected as it is brilliant! White launches a sharp tactical offensive against the king, based on some highly original ideas.

13."idS 14.Yfh4! White would have had the same answer to 13 . ic5 . . .

14".bxc4 1 5.YfgS

But not 1 6.�xh5 1 8 .�xf5 �xa2 etc.

lLlf6!

1 7.�g5 ixf5

16 ... ctt>h8 17.Yfxh5 Yfxa2? Black succumbs to the heat of the battle. A much more stubborn reply was 1 7 . . . if6, although analysis has shown that White should still win.

lS.J.c3 �f6 8

7

6 5 4 3 2 1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

19.Yfxf7!! Black had overlooked this.

19".Yfalt Accepting the sacrifice would lead to a smothered mate after 1 9 . . J'hf7 20J':i xd8t lLlg8 2 1 .lLlxf7#. An analogous finish is 1 9 . . . !!e8 20.�g8t! and 2 1 .lLlf7#.

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

15".lLlh5 Some beautiful variations arise from 15 .. lLle8, for instance 1 6.�xd8 �xa2 1 7.ic3! �ef6 1 8 .!!xd7! ixd7 1 9.1Llh6t cj;>h8 20.�xf6!, and White wins. .

20.ctt>d2 gxf7 2 1 .�xf7t ctt>gS 22.gxal ctt>xf7 23.�e5t ctt>e6 24.�xc6 �e4t 25.ctt>e3 .ib6t 26 .id4! •

Black resigned. Thus the dynamic element in the chess struggle greatly enhances the significance of tactics and, especially, combinative methods. In contemporary practice, for instance, a positional sacrifice of material to obtain dynamic advantages is seen very frequently.

102

Soviet Chess Strategy

This noteworthy feature of chess which Grandmaster Spielmann called the conversion of material into power significantly broadens the means of fighting for positional assets. The following example illustrates the effectiveness of combinative means in the positional struggle.

Black already has great difficulty holding the balance. For example, 1 3 . . . .td6 1 4.,ia3 VlJe7 is bad on account of 1 5 J�xd6! �xd6 1 6.tLlb5 tLlxe4 1 7.tLlxd6t tLlxd6 1 8 .�d l tLld4 1 9.tLlxd4 exd4 20.VlJb4 etc. In what follows, it is instructive to see how dynamically White's attack grows.

Isaak Boleslavsky - Grigory Ravinsky

13 ...l[}d4 14.l[}xd4 exd4 1 5.e5 l[}g4 16.l[}b5 .1c5 17 ..1a3 b6 18.l[}d6t 'itlfll

Leningrad 1949 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

From the diagram position, a lengthy positional struggle to accumulate an advantage appears likely. The manoeuvre tLl b l -d2-fl -e3 seems indicated, taking the important squares d5 and f5 under control. A purely positional treatment on these lines would give White somewhat the better prospects. A deeper, dynamic investi gation shows that despite the closed nature of the position, White has the possibility of a positional sacrifice to inject a good deal more life into the play. His advantage in development, scarcely palpable up to now, will then come very clearly to the fore.

8.M! aM 9.aM l[}xM 10.l[}c3 l[}f6 Il.tJb3 l[}c6 12.dxe5 dxe5 13J�dl! So the small sacrifice has proved a much more powerful means to attain positional assets than a slow regrouping of White's forces.

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

19.9xd4! This combination already decides the issue.

19 ....ixd4 20.l[}xf'7t .1c5 White would have a more complex task in the event of 20 . . . �e8, although even then, as analysis has shown, he should win after 2 1 .tLld6t �f8 22.VlJf3t tLlf6 23.�e l ! .

21..ixc5t bxc5 22.l[}xd8 tJxd8 23.tJf3t l[}f6 24J�dl Y!le7 25.exf6 gxf6 26J�bl White gradually conducted the game to victory. Undoubtedly one of the most effective tactical devices in the dynamic struggle is a positional combination. This concept has been considerably enriched in recent times. Here is one of the characteristic illustrations of the modern positional combination,

The Dynamics of the Chess Struggle demanding both long-range calculation and subtle evaluation of the resulting positions.

Mikhail TaI- Lev Polugaevsky Tbilisi 1959

103

20...YlYxflt Black takes the game into an ending by force, reckoning that if he tried to hold on to the material with 20 .. J�he8 he would be crushed by 2 1 .ixf6 ixf6 22.l%c7t 'i!ig8 23.l%xg7t!. We should note that when beginning the combination, White was obliged not only to calculate his attacking possibilities a long way ahead, but also to evaluate the probable transition to an endin g with equal material.

21 .q;,xfl �g4t 22.q;,gl �xe5 23.gxe5 ixg5 24.�xg5t q;,g6 25.�e6 White has emerged with a large positional plus in the endgame.

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

White embarks on a very interesting attack against the king, following a complex, many­ sided plan.

15.,he6! fxe6 16.�xe6 YlYxc2 17.YlYd4 q;,f7 lUkl YlYa2 19.e5! White would achieve nothing with: 1 9. tlJxg7 mxg7 20Jk7 Wfe6 2 1 ..ixf6t Wfxf6 22J�xe7t mg6

19... dxe5 20.YlYxe5

In the foregoin g examples the dynamic treatment enabled a player to exploit the hidden positional assets he had achieved. In this way an already existing advantage was brought into the open. We should also give attention to the way dynamic factors may function to the same extent even in so-called balanced positions. In these positions the scrupulous accumulation of an advantage is by no means always advisable. The path to success often leads through an intensification of the tactical contest. Our next example is highly indicative of the modern struggle to increase a player's advantage.

Mark Taimanov - Bukhuty Gurgenidze �

8 7

Tbilisi 1959 8

6

7

5

6

4

5

3

4

2

3 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

2 1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

6.

104

Soviet Chess Strategy

17.Ae5!

The following example is also characteristic.

This looks purely positional. Indeed, after the natural 1 7 . . . ¥Mb6 I B.ixd4 cxd4 1 9J3fe l , White achieves a blockade o f the black pawn centre, turning it into the object of an enduring siege. However, in making this move White also had to foresee the sharp combative line that occurs in the game.

17 ...,he5!? By sacrificing his queen and thereby dramatically intensifying the play, Black obtains the chance to fight actively for the ini tiative.

ISJlxdS gxdS 19.Y!!Ie3 Ad4 20.Y!!Ig5 Aa6 21 .b3 geS 22.h41 gadS 23.h5 gd7? The tension of the double-edged positional struggle proves too much for Black. He should have played 23 .. .'it)f7, and if 24.¥Mh6 then 24 . . J3hB! with a sound and active defence. Now with an unexpected tactical stroke White shatters Black's sturdy positional bastion on the queenside.

Mikhail Botvinnik Isaak Boleslavsky -

Moscow 1952 8

7 6 5 4 3 2 1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

The double-edged struggle in this position of dynamic equilibrium is highly instructive.

14.�f5! gx5 1 5.ex5 �e5 16.fxe6 ,he6 17.,hb7 � hSI A very subtle move. Black is prepared to give up the exchange to obtain counterplay on the light squares. The natural 1 7 . . . l3bB I B . .id5 l3xb4 1 9.ixe6t l3xe6 20.f4 would leave White with a clear plus.

I S.Ad5 Acceptance of the sacrifice would allow Black a dangerous attack after I B .ixaB ¥Mxa8 1 9.1tJd5 ¥Mc6!.

IS ....ig4 19.Y!!Ia4?! a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

24.b4! gg7 25.Aa4 gcs 26.h6! gf7 27.bxc5 ,hc5 2S.Ab5 ,hb5 29.cxb5 Ad4 30.gc1! White soon converted his advantage into a win.

An inconspicuous error. White should play 1 9.¥Mc2 with some initiative.

19 £5! 20.Y!!Ic2 Y!!If6 21 ..lg5! Y!!Ixg5 22.£4 Y!!Ih6 ..•

105

The Dynamics of the Chess Struggle

of time is only permissible in cases where it leads to secure control of vital points on the board." Some truly immortal models of this principle are preserved in his games.

l.d4 dS 2.�f3 cS 3.c4 cxd4 4.cxdS �f6 S.�xd4 a6? 8 7 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

23.fxeS?! The position is very complex. No wonder both opponents commit unobtrusive errors. White should have played 23.1Lxa8 , as Black could now have obtained a clear plus.

6

5

4 3 2 1

23 ...Yfe3t? With this move Black misses his chance for an advantage. The right move was 23 . . J:!ab8!.

24.'it>hl AxeS 2S .ixas gxa8 •

As a result of the lively struggle, equilibrium is re-established.

The dynamic treatment of the position has in many ways enriched our approach to the basic elements of the chess struggle - material, space and time - by linking them closely to concrete plans for acquiring specific positional assets. The time element, for instance, is evaluated not by the mechanical counting of moves, but in terms of concrete aims that tempos must be expended to attain. In this light, time represents a form of invisible positionalfoctor.

Alexander Alekhine - Heinrich Wolf Pistyan 1922 Roundly condemning any senseless losses of tempo in the opening, Alekhine wrote: "Loss

�.....==.����

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

Black is playing the opening poorly and has fallen behind in development - but how is his sluggishness to be exploited? Alekhine finds an effective solution based purely on middlegame methods (a very rare thing at such an early stage of the opening) .

6.e4! �xe4 7.Yfa4t! Ad7 Instead 7 . . . Yfd7 fails to 8.ib5!.

8.Yfb3 �cS 9.Yfe3! g6 lO.�f3!! �

8 7 6 5

4 3 2 1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

106

Soviet Chess Strategy

White seems to have offended against the principle of economy of tempo. Of the ten moves he has so far played, six were with his queen and knight. Nevertheless he has an overwhelming position - the game is virtually won for him. How could this come about? The point is that Alekhine has played in the only possible way to disorganize Black's development and prevent his king from escaping. Sure enough, after:

10 ... ec7 H.ed! gg8 12 ..ie3 b6 1 3.�bd2 .ig7 14 ..td4 .hd4 1 5.exd4 .ib5 16..txb5t axb5 17.0-0 ga4 18.b4 ed8 19.a3 �bd7 20.gfel f8 8

7

6

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

4.e4! �xe4 5.dxc5 �xc5 6.�f3 e6 7.�c3 exd5 8.exd5 ee7t 9..te3 �c6 1 0 ..ib5 .id7 1 1 .0-0 �e6 12.�e5! �xe5 13.exe5 .hb5 14.�xb5 a6 15.gadl gd8 16 ..ib6 gxdl 17.gxdl f6 1 8.ef5! g6 19.�c7t f7 20.ed5 Black laid down his arms. A crushing defeat!

5 4 3 2 1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

6.

21 .d6! White worked up a decisive attack against the black king stranded in the centre. In a way, this kind of method has become typical.

Lajos Portisch David Bronstein -

Monte Carlo 1969

l.d4 d5 2.c4 c5?! 3.cxd5 �f6 At an early stage of the game White begins a very energetic offensive in the centre.

The concepts of static and dynamic qualities in a position, j ust like the concepts of strategy and tactics, can be interpreted in two ways. In a straightforward sense of the word, the "static" elements of the position are the visible ones; in the professional sense, they are the principles of positional play founded on a regard for these visible factors. The concept of dynamic qualities can be taken to embrace the totality of moving forces in the position. Essentially, however, this concept implies studying the position's individual peculiarities and ascertaining the most important moving force in this or that concrete situation. In every case with this approach, the principles of the positional school undergo a form of revision. Only the dynamic approach to the struggle enables us to establish the profound dialectical relation between the individual and the general, the enduring and the transient, the orderly and the contingent in chess.

107

The Dynamics of the Chess Struggle

The Relation of Logic to Imagination in Chess It is completely incorrect to suppose that the positional and dynamic treatments are opposed to each other. Rather they complement one another. When speaking of the interrelation between positional and dynamic factors, we must not forget that the dynamic approach arose on positional foundations, even though it represented a protest on behalf of living chess thought against those dogmatic canons which dried up chess creativity. Naturally, concealed individual factors cannot by any means always play the primary role in the struggle. On the contrary, in practice you must be guided first and foremost by the external factors of the position. Like it or not, there is more stern prosaic logic in chess than elements of fantasy. As Tal aptly put it: chess

Black's advantage in development IS obvious, and White should have tried to finish developing his own kingside as soon as possible. After, for instance, 1 2.g3 0-0 1 3 .j,g2 :B:eS 1 4 .j,f3, with 0-0 to follow, his position is somewhat worse but probably defensible. Instead of this natural plan he begins an active but wholly unj ustified demonstration on the kingside, which meets with simple and highly instructive counter-measures from Black.

12.h4? 0-0 1 3J�bl 'lWd7 14J�h3 gfe8 1 5.gg3 lLlc4 16 . .ih6 g6 17.'lWc1

would otherwise be too beautiful a game!

Hence the attempt to "find something", particularly at the expense of a clear plan, quite often comes to grief. The following game may serve as a characteristic example.

Isaac Lipnitsky Vassily Smyslov -

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

17... lLld6! This simple retort pinpoints the artificiality of White's attacking plan.

Moscow 195 1

18.'lWf4 .ia6 Not however l S . . . l2lf5 on account of 1 9.:B:xb5! l2lxg3 20.fxg3 Wlxb5 2 1 .Wlf6, and Black is forced to give perpetual check with 2 1 . . .Wlb l t 22.cj;ld2 (22.cj;lf2 Wlf5t) 22 . . . Wlb2t 23. cj;le 1 Wlb 1 t etc. Now White's attack quickly peters out, and Black proceeds to the decisive assault himself.

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

19.e3 lLlfS 20 ..ha6 bxa6 2 1 .gb7 gab8! 22.gxc7 :B:blt 23. � e2 'lWa4! White resigned.

108

Soviet Chess Strategy

In this connection, an observation made by Alekhine in his notes to the following game is of interest.

Alexander Alekhine - Eugene Znosko-Borovsky Birmingham 1926

WIe7 16.WIa4 f5 1 7.WIc6 lLlf6 1 8.b4! a5 1 9J�a3! WId7 20.WIxd7 lLlxd7 2 1.bxa5 gxaS 22.gxaS bxaS 23.gbl gb8 24.gxb8t lLlxb8 A knight endgame has been reached. 8 7 6

5

4 3 2 1 a a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

Alekhine played:

12.'ll�d2! Here is what he writes: "This move has the aim of exchanging the light-squared bishops and then bringing about a further weakening of Black's queens ide pawn position, which was insecure anyway. Black cannot prevent this. Of course this plan cannot be said to guarantee White a decisive advantage, but he does obtain a comfortable game with winning chances - while saddling his opponent with the heavy obligation to fight for the draw. "1 am convinced that every chess master ought to take this kind of opportunity and try to solve the problem of winning without 'fear' of simplification. Playing to complicate the position is an extreme measure, to which a player should resort only when he cannot find a clear and logical plan."

12 eS 1 3.i.f3! .ixf3 14.lLlxf3 e4 I s.lLld2 ..•

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

�

In spite of the simplification White's advantage has increased, thanks to the threats against the a5-pawn and the potential thrust g2-g4. There now followed:

2s.c.t:?f1 lLld7 26.c;t>e2 lLlb6 27.c;t>dl a4 28.dS! lLld7 29.c;t>c2 lLleS 30.c;t>c3 lLlg4 31.c;t>b4 lLlxn 32.c;t>xa4 £4 33.exf4 e3 34.lLlf3 lLld3 3S.c;t>bS! And the pawn on a2 decided the outcome of the struggle. These examples vividly demonstrate that in a very large number of cases, positional principles have real force. The dynamic treatment of a position not only entails no rejection of the positional elements and principles evolved by long years of experience; on the contrary, in taking account of the most significant and vital features of the struggle, it deepens the understanding of the positional indicators.

The Dynamics of the Chess Struggle

1 09

What dynamics does indeed oppose is the routine stereotype. The basic method of dynamics is to inquire searchingly, to be daring , to penetrate the true depths of a position.

lengthy and purposeful ideological struggle by the creative innovators (Chigorin, Alekhine and others) against the narrowing of the horizons of chess art.

It would be a mistake to assert that dynamic ideas were lacking in the play of the founders and adherents of the positional school. The chess of a practical player is in a large measure intuitive. And in practice, of course, the outstanding masters of the game, endowed with natural gifts, are great artists above all else, whatever school they belong to. For this very reason, elements of dynamics do play a very large part in the games of Steinitz, Pillsbury, Tarrasch and other representatives of the positional school of chess. Where the necessity arose for a dynamic solution to the problems of the position, the intuition of these eminent masters successfully overcame the dogmatic limitations of their school. Possessing talent and a high level of thought, they had what we may call a feel for chess dynamics . And in this respect many of their games are highly instructive.

Both in practice and in theoretical investigations which subjected various aspects of dogmatism to rigorous criticism, a new direction in chess - the dynamism firmly established in the views of the Soviet school - gradually emerged.

Therefore we can only say that in games by representatives of the positional or the dynamic school, a particular force predominates. And this force is determined by the totality of a player's theoretical views on the conduct of the game. The adherents of the positional school had a feeling for the dynamic factors which emerged in the process of a game independently of their will. Yet the limited chess vision of that time meant that they could not consciously and methodically create positions in which the elements of dynamism predominated. Therefore their dynamics were in a way fortuitous and could not radically alter the direction their school was taking. The assertion of the new ideas required a

Essentially the dynamic approach discloses the profound dialectical nature of chess creativity, which fuses the elements of logic and imagination. The modern game has, so to speak, harmoniously absorbed everything that was best in the conflicting positional and romantic schools. This did not come about in any artificial manner but resulted from a lengthy historical process of chess development. The combinative art which flowered in the middle of the 1 9th century has been revived on a new positional basis. For the masters of the 1 7th and 1 8th centuries, combinations had chiefly been employed as the decisive stroke in an attack on the king; at the present time, when the strategic resources of the struggle have been immensely broadened, a style that closely unites the elements of logic and fantasy has been evolved. Modern dynamic positional play is undoubtedly more complex and refined than what preceded it. A contemporary master needs a perfect command of both the art of positional play and the skills of combination; he has to be ready for the most varied tests at the board in conditions of limited thinking time. In the following example a positional contest seems to be taking place, yet at the same time dynamic factors are of no small significance.

110

Soviet Chess Strategy

22.ctldl ge2 23.Adl gc3 24.c;!?f1 ctle5

Vassily Smyslov Mikhail Tal -

White aims to strengthen his position with 'i!?fl -e2, ie3-d4, ga 1 -b 1 etc., so Black decides on an exchange sacrifice to alter the course of the fight.

Bled 1959 8

7

25 .id4 gd3 26 ..ixe5 dxe5 27.c;!?e2 gxdlt 28.c;!?xd2 ctlxe4t 29. c;!? e2 •

6

Strategically White has won the battle, although it proved far from easy to turn his advantage into a win.

5 4 3 2 1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

!:J.

With the threat of . . . e5-e4, Black's position looks highly promising. The following remarkable move, however, abruptly alters this assessment.

15.Yfd3!! This unconventional idea demanded far­ reaching calculation, since the ensuing struggle in the ending hinges largely on which side will be able to activate its rooks more quickly. White voluntarily allows the doubling of his pawns on the d-file, relying on a more substantial weakness - the pawn on b7.

15 JUe8 16.gfc1 Yfxd3 .•

The threat of 1 7.c4 induces Black to go into the ending. A better chance may, however, have been the pawn sacrifice 1 6 . . . e4! ? 1 7 . .ixe4 lLlxe4 1 8 .Wxe4 .if6 etc.

It should also be noted that moments when dynamic factors can take effect are often easy to miss, and - most importantly - irrecoverable. Here is an example where one player missed a dynamic solution to the problems of the position.

AleIey Suetin - Alexander Kotov Riga 1958 8

7 6 5 4 3 2 1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

!:J.

17.cxd3 g6 1 8.gc3 gxc3 19.bxc3 ge8 20.e4 e4 21 .dxe4 gxe4

White has very good attacking possibilities on the kingside; his pieces are most harmoniously deployed.

The positional struggle proceeds in an extremely lively manner. Having activated his rook, Black might seem to have seized the initiative, but White's calculations are very deep.

Black's last move, . . . h7-h6, looks provocative. It was possible to punish it only by potent dynamic means, namely: 1 6.g6! fxg6 1 7.f5!, and White breaks the position open.

1 11

The Dynamics of the Chess Struggle

24.e5!

In the game, the continuation was:

16.gxh6? g6! 17.a3? .bh6 1 8.,te3 �a4 19.�xa4 bxa4 20.�a .lb7

As a result of White's flabby although outwardly unobjectionable play, the initiative has unexpectedly passed to Black.

Only thus. The right moment is all­ important!

24...dxe5 25 ..he5 .ld6 26.�a ga4 27..ib2 gf4 28.�e5 'i'a7 29.ge2 .le6 30.'i'c2 �f6 31..hb5 gc8 32.'i'dl Axe5 33.gxe5! ge4 34.ggS 'i'e7

Here on the other hand is an example of the timely utilization of dynamic assets.

Isaak Boleslavsky - Boris Goldenov Leningrad 1947

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

35.gxg7t! Black resigned. * * *

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

White's superiority is obvious. A positional plan to take possession of the weak d5-square might seem indicated. However, after 24.ltJf1 &iJc7 25 .ltJe3 ltJe6 26.i.b2 ltJc5 27.V!!c2 ltJxd3 28.Wfxd3 f6 Black manages to set up a robust defence. White finds a dynamic solution which is deeply thought out. He abandons any conventional attempts to exploit the backward pawn on d6; on the contrary, he rids his opponent of it. He is reckoning on the possibility of a sudden attack against the king, facilitated by the excellent placing of his pieces and the lack of co-ordination in his opponent's actions.

Of course in practice, and in conditions of limited thinking time, we often come across positions where it is hard to decide which way of fighting is more correct - the positional way, subject to logic alone, or the dynamic way which takes more account of subjective themes and leads to double-edged play. It can be said of such complex positions that they contain scope for logic and fantasy in equal measure and that the choice of means is a matter of the player's taste and style. The emergence of dynamic factors by no means constrains a player to one single style (except that the thinking of a true master has to be sufficiently developed to exclude stereotypes) . Many masters, even great ones, prefer a method ofsteering the struggle towards

1 12

Soviet Chess Strategy

positions where the elements of logic matter most. Others seek an involved double-edged struggle containing a multitude of diverse ideas, where the element of imagination and combinative creativity predominates. The latter ultra-dynamic tendency is especially noticeable in the games of Tal, Spassky and Korchnoi. The characteristic features of this strategy are, above all, the striving for a sharp tactical fight, the creation of positions where disparate material gives chances of initiative and so on. Here is an example.

�g8 1 7.ttJxf6t gxf6 1 8.�d3 V;Vf7!, when things clearly turn out in Black's favour. 8

7

6 5 4 3 2 1

Mikhail Tal - Atanas Kolarov

a

Reykjavik 1957

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

1 5 ...� g8?! Black's first inaccuracy; he is not aware of all the complexities of the position. He had nothing better than a draw by perpetual check after 1 5 . . . V;Va l t! 1 6 .�d2 V;Vxb2 1 7.e5 V;Vd4t 1 8 .'j{ c l V;Va l t.

8

7

6 5

16 .ixf6 gxf6?

4

.

The decisive error. The correct line was 1 6 . . . ttJxf6 1 7. ttJe7t @f7! 1 8 . ttJc6 @g8!, maintaining the balance.

3 2 1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

!:::.

17.gd3! VaI t 18.� d2 Vxb2 19.f4 b3 20.�e7t �h8 21.gxb3 Va2 22.Vd5 ga7

An exceedingly sharp position, which White deliberately strives to make even sharper. Placid methods are already impossible.

7

10.hoo!?

6

Later analysis established that 1 0.J.d5 !? was stronger. But the dynamic configurations are such that even that analysis could not exhaust the problems of the position!

10...&00 1 1.�xOO �f7 12.�xf8 gxf8 13.Vxd6 b4 14.�d5 Vxa2! 1 5.ghel! Th e best chance. Not 1 5 .i.xf6 ttJxf6 1 6.V;Ve7t

8

5

4 3 2 1 a

b

c

d

!:::. e

f

g

h

113

The Dynamics of the Chess Struggle

23.�g6t! � g7 If 23 . . . hxg6, then 24.E:h3t and 25 .YMxa2.

24.�xffi � xffi 25.e5! �xe5 26.Vc5t � g8 27.Vxc8t � f7 28.exe5 Va5t 29.Vc3 gd7t 30.�c1 Black resigned. If a preponderance of forces in the relevant sector was one of the requirements highlighted by the classical method of conducting an attack, the dynamic treatment gives most attention to the real strikingforce. Such attacks are distinguished by particular originality.

Boris Spassky - Vladimir Shishkin

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

A very sly defence. The natural 1 8 .fxe6t is met by 1 8 . . . .ixe6! 1 9.tiJxe6t i>g8!, and Black wins.

18.Vxe6t Vxe6 19.�xe6

Tallinn 1959

The game has entered a complex ending with unbalanced material, where dynamic and positional factors are tightly interwoven as before.

19... �c4? Not an obvious mistake, but a very serious one. The right move was 1 9 . . . .if6!, with good counterplay for Black.

20..tg5 gg8 21.gf4 .if6 22.gxg4 h6 23.dxc5 �e5 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

13.£5 gxf5 14.J.xf7t!? This attack and sacrifice may look like a bolt from the blue. White seems to have very few pieces participating in the assault. Yet an attacking force quickly springs up, as if at the wave of a magic wand.

14...�xf7 1 5.Vb3t e6 The only move. If 1 5 .. .'it>f8 or 1 5 . . . We8, then 1 6.tiJf4! is decisive.

16.ttJf4 Vd7 17.exf5 �a5!

8 7 6 5

4 3 2 1 a

b

c

d

e

6f

g

h

1 14

Soviet Chess Strategy

24.hf6!

3 'ilYh4t 4.
This quickly decides the game. In his calculations Black had probably only foreseen that he was emerging the exchange up; he failed to assess the resulting position.

Theory recommends 5 . . . ig4t 6.lLlf3 lLlc6! 7.lLlxc7t 'kt>d8 8.lLlxa8 lLle5! 9.We l ! lLlxf.3 1 O.Wxh4t lLlxh4t, j udging the position to be in Black's favour. To evade his opponent's preparation, Black opts for another objectively good line, but one that is positional in character.

•••

24... �xg4 25.J.d4! And, setting his kingside pawns in motion,

'\\lhlte soon aChleveo tne w·m. Representatives of the ultra-dynamic style aim the points of their spears especially often at those players who are under the powerful influence of the positional school. The latter, as a rule, are not keen to play a double­ edged position with a pronounced dynamic tendency. That is why, when facing them, ultra-dynamic players endeavour to steer the struggle towards formations where the laws of customary chess logic are not of primary significance. It is no accident that representatives of the young generation of Soviet grandmasters are trying increasingly often to resurrect old gambit systems. Of course, this type of play involves a good deal of risk. In this respect characteristic.

the

following

game

6.�f3 .ig4 7.d4 �c6 8.e5 O-O-O! 9..ixf4 �ge7 Black has played the opening excellently, but does that mean he has probed into the essence of the struggle? Spassky played:

10.c4!? And Furman, after a large expenditure of time and energy, failed to find the best continuation. In such situations this very often means losing the game.

is

Boris Spassky - Semyon Furman Tallinn 1959 Reckoning that his experienced opponent liked playing under the guidance of a positional compass, Boris Spassky was already working up dynamic complications in the opening.

1.e4 e5 2.£4 exf4 3.�c3!? The old and very risky Keres Gambit. This kind of play proved inimical to Furman. At this point he already took a long think.

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

10 ... �f5? 1 l.exd6 �fxd4t 12.
The Dynamics of the Chess Struggle Such are some of the general features of contemporary dynamics. In the following sections I shall specially focus the reader's attention on two more factors that play a large role in modern dynamic chess: new forms of co-ordination between the fighting forces, and a sudden swift increase in the initiative which often becomes a vigorous attack. In very many cases this involves flouting the usual notions about material and the positional sacrifice of it. At this point we will give j ust one example of the precise and opportune transformation of positional factors.

1 15

takes the game into a complex ending with bishops of opposite colours. But in so doing he seriously weakens his opponent's pawn structure and acquires a number of squares for invasion.

17.i.xf5! exf5 18.exf6 gxf6 19J�abl h6 20J�b5 .ie6 21.geb l gfF7 22.c��e l £4 23.8 g5 24.�d3! White makes opportune use of the weakness of the squares c5 and e5, which are a major defect of Black's position.

8

Vassily Smyslov - Rene Leteller

7

Venice 1950

6 5

8

4

6

2

3

7

1

5

a

4 3

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

27.�b4! �xb4 28.gxe6! This well-prepared combinative stroke settles the outcome of the game.

2 1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

There is no doubt that White's pieces are more actively placed. He has two mighty bishops, pressure on the dark squares and a spatial plus. But how is he to utilize these advantages? Black, for his part, is aiming to open the f-file and obtain distinct counterplay. The decision that Smyslov takes is most instructive. He abandons the famous advantage of the bishop pair. Furthermore he

28...gxe6 29.gxc8 �c6 30.a6! A very important move. Now at last White gets to the d5-pawn and obtains two connected passed pawns in the centre.

30...bxa6 3 l J�c7t c;t>g6 32.gd7 �e7 33 ..ib4 �f5 34Jhd5 �e3 35.gd8 �xg2 36.d5 White soon conducted his advantage to victory.

116

Soviet Chess Strategy

Co-ordination of the Forces The principles of strategy can be divided into

special and general types. Special principles, we may say, are directly linked to the precise character of the position and therefore have a localized concrete meaning. Among them, for instance, is the principle that the best antidote to a flank assault is often a counter-stroke in the centre. Or again - as a rule, there is no doubting the principle that in positions with blocked pawn chains it is useful to exchange off the bishop that reduplicates the work of your own pawns; and so on. As the reader has already had more than one chance to observe, the stock of special principles is constantly being increased by the fruits of practice and theory. But the validity of these principles applies only to positions of a particular type. Aside from these, there are principles of a more general order, stemming from the aims and rules of the chess struggle itself. They have more of a universal validity. In this category we may place activity, manoeuvrability and resilience in the deployment of the fighting forces. We should note straight away that there is an essential distinction between the elements of the strategic contest which we have so far systematically examined and principles of the universal type. The former require knowledge, or more exactly they require you to manage them, to know how to use them. A chess master has to command these elements of strategy with as much assurance as an engineer who rapidly makes sense of blueprints; when time is short he has to act almost automatically, like an experienced driver whose car is in trouble. The universal principles that always operate in a position (sometimes invisibly) are much less plainly defined. In each individual case, positional flair is required to assess the power and effectiveness of the co-operation, the

possible aCtiVity, the manoeuvrability, of a player's forces - and so on. Undoubtedly one of the most important principles of this type is the principle of harmony or co-ordination between the fighting forces. It is only if your pieces are acting in concert and purposefully that you can successfully execute tactical operations and a strategic plan. In essence, co-ordination of the forces is an inseparable attribute of a chess game. In practical play - which is a struggle between two camps - achieving full harmony, full co-ordination of your forces, is relatively difficult. The concept of the dispOSition of the forces, rather than harmony, is more applicable to a practical game. But this of course by no means lessens the significance of the harmony principle. Essentially this principle is always a concomitant of a game of chess (though not always an obvious one) . It should therefore be taken constantly into account. The principle of harmonious co-ordination is continually developing. Its evolution is directly linked to the general development of theoretical ideas. As long ago as the end of the 1 8th century, the great French player Philidor propounded a set of interesting strategic ideas on the co­ operation of pieces and pawns, according to which the pieces should advance under cover of the pawn chains. "General" principles (including that of co­ ordination) began developing with particular rapidity once the views of the positional school had been established. We will now look at how these views apply to the co-ordination principle. In the course of a positional struggle in which immobile objects (weak pawns and squares) are subjected to lasting pressure, the co-ordination of the fighting forces flows directly, so to speak, from the outward form of the position and takes shape gradually and logically.

117

The Dynamics of the Chess Struggle

Akiba Rubinstein Georg Salwe -

Lodz 1908 8

ordination of the black ones, tied to passive and thankless defence, is gradually deteriorating. This enables White to deal the decisive tactical blow.

7

6 5 4 3 2 1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

In Black's camp a long-term weakness has emerged - the backward pawn on c6. White's task is to deprive it of mobility (block it) and then methodically increase the pressure on it. The first stage of his plan therefore consists in organizing the concerted action of his pieces against the c5-point.

18.'i'd4 gee8 19 ..tfl This piece is not participating directly in the action against c5, but by helping to dislodge the black queen from its important defensive post, the bishop too makes a key contribution to co-ordinating White's forces.

a

b

21...'i'b6 22.e3 ge7 23.gfe2 gac8 24.h4!

e

f

g

h

White soon won. In this last example the positional concentra­ tion of White's forces against his opponent's weak points led to complete disharmony in the black ranks. This enabled White to acquire a large plus and subsequently decide the game by combinative means. The following example is also characteristic.

Viacheslav Ragozin Mikhail Botvinnik -

Leningrad 1940 8 7 6 5

Pawns also play an active role in the positional co-ordination of the forces. Now the threat of h4-b5 is very strong.

4

24...a6 25.ga5 gb8 26.a3 ga7

2

While the white forces are acting more harmoniously with every move, the co-

d

27J�xe6! 'i'xe6 28.'i'xa7 gaS 29.'I'e5

19... gec8 20.�e5 �xe5 21.gxe5 White has fixed the weak black pawn on c6. His next task is to co-ordinate the action of his fighting units against this point.

c

3 1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

6.

118

Soviet Chess Strategy

A concerted action by White's pieces (lLlc3, ih4) has taken shape, directed against a key object in the black camp: the d5-point. White's strategic task is to turn that point into an enduring weakness. Black for his part has to try to rid himself of White's pressure against the key square. White's next move, however, underlines the difficulty of the task his opponent faces.

13.tfb3! Not only increasing the pressure against d5 but also tying down Black's forces on the queenside. Interestingly, if Black now tries to free himself from the pressure with a move that looks tempting, 1 3 . . . lLle4, this fails to the tactical refutation 1 4.,txe7 Wixe7 1 5 .Wixb7 �b8 1 6.lLlxd5! Wid6 1 7.lLle7t! Wixe7 1 8.Wixe4 and White wins by force. What comes strikingly to the fore in this line is the combinative potential of the co­ operation between White's forces: 1 5 .Wixb7, 1 6.lLlxd5 and 1 7.lLle7t with 1 8 .Wixe4 to follow. The variation also shows that the black pieces are passively placed and lack possibilities for co-ordinated action of their own. Botvinnik had to play:

13...�b6 14.a4! �e4 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 a

b

c

d

e

6. f

g

h

1 5.he7 tfxe7 16.a5 �a8 17.tfa3! �xc3 18.bxc3 �c7 19.�e5 White achieved his aim. The examples I have given demonstrate that in the execution of a strategic plan, a paramount role is played by the co-ordination of the forces directed against some particular object. In a struggle conducted in positional style, the attainment of harmonious co-ordination is facilitated by the presence of a long-term weakness in the opponent's camp. Conversely, the defence of this weakness makes the opponent impair the co-ordination of his own forces in both its positional and combinative aspects. Such indeed - in broad terms - was the notion of co-ordination and its role that was implemented in games by the followers of Steinitz's positional school. They considered that it was weak immobile objects that could be most conveniently subjected to co-ordinated pressure. Naturally the practical results could not help being reflected in the works of theorists and chess educators. Thus in his book Common Sense in Chess, first published in 1 896, and a little later in his Manual of Chess, Emanuel Lasker was already drawing several methodologically valuable conclusions about the principle of co-ordination. The thrust of his argument is that pieces and pawns should complement each other's action and not duplicate it. He illustrates this proposition with a whole series of examples of co-ordination in various forms: co-operation between pieces and the pawn chain, or involving the two bishops - or two knights, bishop and pawn, or rook and passed pawn; or some combinative devices of co­ ordination. Generalizing from the various specific forms of co-ordination, Lasker propounds - as the core of this principle - the idea of a phalanx,

119

The Dynamics of the Chess Struggle which can be applied equally to the action of the pieces and that of the pawns. A phalanx, in Lasker's use of the term, is the strongest and most flexible form of deployment of the fighting forces. Lasker also examined some problems of the co-ordination principle that go beyond the confines of Steinitz's theory. One of his very interesting ideas is that the value of a number

of pieces is not equivalent to their mechanical total. In evaluating them, you need to take into account not only the factor of power but also the factor of co-ordinated play. From this Lasker concluded that there tends to be an element of extra tension in the position, which is far from simple to account for. Thus Lasker to some extent anticipated how the principle of harmonious co-ordination would be developed; he indicated its major independent role in the assessment of a position. The next significant contribution to developing this principle, both in practice and in explanatory writings, was made by Capablanca. Treating the co-ordination principle dynamically, he took a great step forward from the positional school. Capablanca regards the harmonious action of the pieces as the most important and at the same time the most difficult principle and element of the game. He expressed much more concretely the independent significance of co-ordination, elaborating a number of new strategic precepts - the expulsion of pieces from strong positions, the isolation of pieces from the rest of their force. The following example is characteristic.

Jose Raul Capablanca Efim Bogoljubow -

London 1922 8

7

6 5 4 3 2 1

������

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

�

White played:

2 1 .h3 Whereupon Black incautiously retreated with:

2 1 ...Ah5? This allowed Capablanca to shut the enemy bishop out of play for a long period and brilliantly execute an original strategic plan.

22.tiHdl Af6 23 ..bf6 'ifxf6 24.a4 Having cut a piece off on the kingside, White opens up the game in the opposite battle sector. For all Black's ingenuity, White is bound to have the advantage.

24... c4! 25.bxc4 �c5 26.'ife3 bxa4 27.£4 'ife7 28.g4 Ag6 29.5 Ah7 30.�g3 'ife5 3U�g2 gab8 32.gabl f6? A mistake, after which White acquires a decisive plus. A considerably better option was 32 . . .l:!b2 33.!!xb2 VMxb2, although even then White would consolidate his superiority with 34.!!e2!.

120

Soviet Chess Strategy So White has created a passed pawn on the d-file while his opponent's light-squared bishop still remains out of play. The fate of the game is decided.

8 7 6 5

45...�bl 46.gd3 a3 47.d6t � d8 48.�d4! gb6 49.�de6t .ixe6 50.&e6 gb8 5 1.e7t � e8 52.�xa6

4 3

Black resigned.

2 1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

6.

36.�d4! An instructive manoeuvre, underlining Black's powerlessness; essentially Black is playing with a piece less. If for instance he accepts the pawn sacrifice with 36 . . . VNxc4, then after 37.tLle6! �b8 38.tLlxc5 dxc5 39.�d2 �b3 40.VNf2 the passed pawn on d5 decides the issue.

36...ttxe3 37Jhe3 gb8 38.gc3 �f7 39.�f3 gb2 40.�ge2 .ig8 41.�e6! �b3 Here too, acceptance of the pawn sacrifice is fatal: after 4 1 . . .tLlxe4 42.'Jixe4 �xe2t 43.@d4 �d2t 44.�d3 �a2 45.c5! Black loses quickly on account of the bad position of his bishop.

42.c5! dxc5 43.�xc5 �d2t 44.�fl �e7 45.@e1

Practice keeps on supplying new examples confirming the strength of this noteworthy strategic ploy - that of cutting off a part of the opposing force.

Lev Polugaevsky - Tigran Petrosian Leningrad 1960 8 7 6 5

4 3 2 1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

6.

7

Exploiting the fact that his opponent's dark­ squared bishop is out of play, White executes an attractive strike against the kingside.

6

14.e4! �xd7 1 5.�g5 gad8 16..ixf7t

...

8

5

Undoubtedly the most forcing line.

4

16...gxf7 17.�e6

3

A pretty device making use of the pin on the d-file.

2 1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

17...ttc8 1 8.�xd8 .ta6

121

The Dynamics of the Chess Struggle A practical chance. If 1 8 . . . �xd8 then 1 9.e5! is quickly decisive, as there is no adequate defence against the threat of e5-e6. [Editors' note: Although this is true, it does not mean that 20.e6 wins the house. After 1 9 . . . �e8! 20.e6 �f6!

It is notable that White conducts the attack with very economical means. But this of course is facilitated by the fact that Black is essentially playing all the time without his dark-squared bishop, which is shut out of the game. 8 7 6 5

4 3 2 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

White is in trouble. Black is threatening ...�g6 and simply to keep the piece. And after 2 1 .exd7 �xe2 22.d8=�t �f8 and White has to play 23 . .ie3 to be able to fight for a draw, but even this is not necessarily successful. This does not mean that Suetin's positional points are irrelevant. White could have won with 1 6.�h5! ttJf6

1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

19.ft'e3! Simplest; 1 9.�xa6 �xa6 20.ttJxf7 is not so clear, although even then the white rooks are stronger than the enemy queen.

19..J�e7 20.ft'b3t c4 21.ft'a3 tt1c5 22..ie3 �xe4 23.,lxc5 ft'xc5 24.ft'f3 Black resigned. * * *

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

17.if4!! with a winning attack now the rooks are connected. The two main lines are 17 ... �xf4 1 8 .�xf7t! and 1 7 . . . �e7 1 8 . .ixf7t! Wh8 1 9.�h3.1

Modern theory is increasingly characterized by its recognition of the great independent role of the harmonious co-ordination of the forces. This has also significantly broadened our conception of the objects against which the co-ordinated forces are directed. Attention is being paid not only to the outward character of the co-ordination but also to its concealed tactical forms. This is one feature of the dynamiCS of the contemporary chess struggle for the control of positional assets. The following game, which went the rounds of the world's press, remains a superb example.

122

Soviet Chess Strategy

Frantisek lita David Bronstein

17 ..Jhal!! 18Jhal tLlxfl! 19Jie3

-

1 9.@xf2 is met by I 9 . . . ltJxb3!, while 1 9.'\Wxf2 loses to 1 9 . . . ltJd3!.

Prague 1956

19...ltJxh3t 20.cj;>h2ltJfl! 2UU3ltJcxe4 Black has achieved a won position.

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

White has a numerical preponderance, both in the centre and in overall control of space. In appearance Black's position is very constricted. From the standpoint of purely positional assets, the advantage seems to be with White. For the evaluation of this position, however, a more significant fact is that Black's forces are acting very harmoniously. White's pieces, on the other hand, though deployed in an outwardly active manner, are operating without unity.

In this case the harmonious co-ordination of Black's forces (a co-ordination owing much to its concealed tactical factors) more than compensated for his opponent's outward positional trumps. As a result, White's apparently sturdy centre proved devoid of true strength and became an object (a target!) for Black's aggressive actions. The following example is also most instructive.

1 5 ... axb3 16.axb3 tLlg4! 17.h3? White is unaware of the danger and does not sense the tactical factors inherent in the co-ordination of Black's forces. A decisive combination follows: �

8

7 6 5 4 3 2 1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

In the diagram position White appears to have gained some distinct positional advantages, as his pressure against the central point d5 is highly unpleasant. (Note the positional co­ ordination �h4+ltJc3+l'l:d 1 .) This was demonstrated, for example, in a game Mikenas - Botvinnik, Moscow 1 940, where the position first occurred. Mter 8 . . . 0-0 9.dxc5 �xc3 1 0.'\Wxc3 g5 1 1 .�g3 ltJe4 1 2.'\Wa3 �e6 1 3.f3 ltJxg3 1 4.hxg3 '\Wf6 1 5 .e3 l'l:c8 1 6.@b l ltJd7 1 7.ltJe2 l'l:xc5 1 8 .ltJd4 a6 1 9.�b5! Black had paid a high price for shaking off the pressure against the critical point d5.

The Dynamics of the Chess Struggle His kingside was seriously weakened, while in any case the d5-point still continued to be a lasting weakness in his camp. However, in that game Black made a very important though far from obvious mistake. Giving exclusive attention to the concerted positional action of White's pieces against the d5-point, he overrated its significance. Playing from general considerations, he fell in with his opponent's plan. Botvinnik rectified this mistake in a game with Keres. This time, in the critical diagram position, he found a very interesting plan of counterplay:

Paul Keres Mikhail Botvinnik -

Absolute USSR Championship 194 1

8....bc3! 9.�xc3 gS! lO.J.g3 cx:d4! 1 1.�xd4 �c6 12.�a4 J.f5!

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

White's king becomes the target of a very strong attack. It turns out that thanks to the wholly undeveloped state of his kingside, the co-ordination of his forces is decisively crippled. Black's forces, by contrast, are operating against the enemy king in a most harmonious fashion. His bishop wields immense power on the h7b I diagonal, cutting off the white king's path to shelter from the principal thrust in the c-file.

123

In this example, what proved more significant was not White's obvious-looking positional co-ordination of forces against the d5-point but the concealed tactical co­ ordination of the black forces against the enemy king. The latter factor had not yet taken shape in the position we started from, but came together in the dynamics of the struggle. Its chief prerequisites were White's undeveloped kings ide and the possibility of opening the game on the queenside where the white king had taken refuge. A most important circumstance (though outwardly not at all an obvious one!) was the opportunity to drive back the bishop on h4 by . . . g7-g5 ! at the requisite moment. Making use ofall these premises, Black carried out a very energetic operation (8 . . . ixc3!, 9 ... g5! and lO ... cxd4!) , co-ordinating the actions of his pieces at maximum speed and not caring about positional concessions and weaknesses. The example shows how effective some covert possibilities of co-ordination, emerging in the course of the fight, can be. It is therefore often necessary to take a highly critical view of the overt positional forms of co-ordination. The foregoing examples of the modern treatment, testifying to the great independent importance of co-ordinating the fighting forces, do not at all play down the question as to the object of the operation. Co-ordination cannot of course be an end in itself; it must be directed at some object, and its entire value often depends on what the significance of the object is. It is not out of place to recall the classic principle which states that an attack on the king often proceeds with greater difficulty than attacks on more minor objects, but in its consequences it is the most dangerous. Let's look at the following example.

Soviet Chess Strategy

1 24

Mark Taimanov - Miguel Najdorf Zurich 1953 8

7 6 5

4 3 2

a

vmw�'/nh,7�=�ff�yO�M�fi7,w

1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

White's pieces are aiming at the queenside in a highly co-ordinated manner. Black's hopes can only be pinned on a kingside counter­ attack. But at the moment his fighting forces are far from harmoniously arranged. Nevertheless the subsequent unfolding of events demonstrates that Black's counter­ attack is more effective than White's play on the queenside.

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

20.hxg3 fXg3 21..bg3 �hS 22..ih2 .ie7 23.�b1 .id7 24.Wel .igS 2S.�d2 .ie3t 26.� hl WgS! 27..ifl gaf8 28J�dl bS 29.a4 a6 30.axbS axbS 3 1 J�c7 gg7 32.�b3 �h4! Black's attack is already irresistible. In the next game White appears to accomplish the maximum possible on the queenside, yet with the white king coming under attack, Black is able to co-ordinate his own forces more effectively.

Ludek Pachman - Nikola Padevsky Dresden 1956

l SJlc1 gf7 Black transfers his rook to the seventh rank where it not only defends the key point c7 on the queenside, but also joins in the attack on the kingside. At the same time the fB­ square is freed for the important manoeuvre . . . ig7-fB .

16Jlc2 .if8 17.cxd6 cxd6 1 8.Wd2 g4 19.9fc1 g3! It is interesting to observe how quickly Black's fighting forces on the kingside achieve harmony; this is facilitated by White's king acting as a magnet.

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

�

l S.�bS a6! Black is not afraid of the piece sacrifice

125

The Dynamics of the Chess Struggle 1 6.cxd6 axb5 1 7.dxc7, on account of 1 7 . . . %Vd7 1 8 .ib4 ttJe8! 1 9.ixfB ixfB 20.%Vb3 id6, maintaining counterplay. Here 1 5 . . .l:'U7 would be a good deal weaker in view of 1 6.ia5 !, which induces the serious weakening . . . b7-b6.

At any moment, generally speaking, one particular form of co-ordination will play the paramount role in the position, while others are either j ust taking shape or, on the contrary, fading away.

David Bronstein - Anatoly Lutikov

16.�a3

Leningrad 1960

White should probably have sacrificed the piece all the same, as Black now determinedly wrests the initiative from him.

16 ...g4 17 ..iel g3! 18.hxg3 �h5 1 9.9d4 exf4 20 ..ic3 .bc3 2 lJ::l xc3 �g3 22.f!el YlYb4 23.cxd6 Yfhl t 24. � fl Yfh2 25.dxc7 �b4! 26.f!gl

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

In the diagram position White has set up the active co-ordination of his fighting units - %Vb3+l:!d 1 +id5+ttJd4 - directed against the queens ide where the opponent's forces are largely tied up. Wishing to free himself, Black played: a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

Here Black could have obtained a winning attack with the fine combination:

26 ... �xe4t! Instead Padevsky chose 26 . . . ih3.

27.fxe4 a! 28.Yfcl fxe2t 29.�xe2 �a! In the modern treatment of the co-ordination principle, the time factor is also of vital significance. From the examples we have j ust looked at, the reader can see that the nature of the co-ordination is constantly apt to change.

17 ... e5 Seemingly disrupting that co-ordination. But now, exploiting the deflection of Black's pieces from the kingside, White delivered a mighty blow to that part of the board.

18 ..ixf7t! The start of the winning combination. It is remarkable to watch how a harmonious co­ ordination of white forces comes about on the kingside, as if by a wave of a magic wand.

18 ... f!xf7 1 9.�xOO .boo If 1 9 . . . Wxc6, then 20.ttJg5.

126

Soviet Chess Strategy

20J3d8t i.f8 21.�xe5 bxc5 22.i.h6!

Yuri Sakharov -Viktor Korchnoi Leningrad 1960

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

The new and highly attractive co­ ordination of white forces has been formed 1Mfb3+!'1d8+�h6+ttJe5 - the object of which is the enemy king. The threat now is 23.!'1xf8#! . AI> a result, Black suffers a decisive loss of material.

22 c4 23.Wfxb7 gbxb7 24.�xf7 !'1xf7 25Jhc8 hg2 26.gg1 i.b7 27.gxf8t gxf8 28.i.xf8 @xf8 29.gg5 ••.

Black resigned. The reason for Black's quick defeat was that while fighting against the pressure on the queens ide, he left White's kingside prospects totally out of account. Of course the priority must be to fight against your opponent's most substantial concerted action at any given moment, but it pays just as much to take account of the overall dynamics of the struggle. This purpose would have been served by 1 7 . . e6!, not only easing the pressure on the queenside but also removing the danger to the kingside. In that case White would retain no more than a minimal plus. .

The following example is noteworthy.

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

Among the various cases of interaction between pieces in the diagram position, what strikes you above all is the active co-operation of White's rooks directed against f7. This is opposed by the co-operation of the black rooks, securely covering the critical point. Black's knight and bishop, for their part, are actively aiming at b2, which White has defended with his knight on d3 and his king. A deeper investigation into the position reveals that White's attack against f7 is in a blind alley and doomed to failure. Moreover, as a result of this, his rooks will be cut off for a long time from the main scene of the struggle, which is the queens ide. Black's threats here are very potent. At the moment the direct attack is being conducted by Black's minor pieces, harmoniously pressurizing the b2-point. But unlike White's attack on the kingside, which is not supported by the rest of his army, Black's attack against the king will receive powerful reinforcement. By a tactical method utilizing the co-ordination of his minor pieces, Black clears a path for his main forces to enter the attack:

127

The Dynamics of the Chess Struggle

31....txb2! 32.�xb2 �c3t 33.� al a4!

Viktor Korchnoi - Boris Ivkov Hastings 1955

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

This pawn is destined to deal the second fateful blow to White's position on the queens ide. Lines are now forced open for the invasion of the major pieces.

34.�cl YlYd4! 35J�h2 a3 36.�bd3 �dlt 37.� bl �c3t 38.� al �e2t 39.� bl �xcl 40.YlYxcl b3! With a winning attack. This example shows how much a particular co­ ordinated action gains in strength if it can be supported by the remaining pieces connecting with it. The true assessment of any co-ordinated action can be arrived at only by studying all its concrete peculiarities in the given position. In the Zita - Bronstein example, we saw a case of co-ordinated pressure by Black's pieces against White's centre. The measures Black took are highly typical of such positions. Yet with even just a slight alteration to the arrangement of the fighting units, White's centre could prove to be a real force and the black pieces could lose the co-ordination of their actions.

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

In its general outward contours this position resembles one from the Zita - Bronstein game, but in the present case White's pieces are much more actively placed. This enables White to begin a forthright offensive and utterly wreck the co-ordination of Black's pieces.

19.Ae3! YlYb4 20.YlYd2! It emerges that White has the threat of 2 1 .lLlc2 at his disposal (answering a queen move with 22.b4) . This places Black in insuperable difficulties.

20...YlYb6 21.b4 �cxe4 22.�xe4 �xe4 23.YlYd3 �xf2 24..txf2 YlYc7 25J��el Black soon resigned. Thus the co-ordination of the fighting forces is a very important factor in the assessment of a position. Co-ordination takes various specific forms, subordinated to the fundamental law of chess - the law of struggle. No doubt for this reason, appraising the co-ordination in both camps is the most difficult part of forming your assessment. Often a single minute detail in the arrangement of your opponent's forces

128

Soviet Chess Strategy

can totally alter the verdict of your overall co-ordination.

43.c;t>h3 c;t>h7 44 .tg6t c;t>gS 45.gg3 c;t>hS 46.c;t>h3 c;t>h7 47 .tg6t c;t>gS 4S.gg3 c;t>hS •

•

The threat was 49.Wlxe7 13xe7 5o.ixfS t.

Alexer Suetin - Vladimir Liberzon

49.h5 �c8 50.c;t>h4 �a7

Leningrad 1960 �

8

Black also loses with 50 . . . <j;lg8 5 1 .if7t! Wlxfl 52.13xg7t Wlxg7 53 .Wlxe6t . Now the issue is decided by a piece sacrifice.

7 6 5 4 3 2 1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

The co-ordination of White's pieces, directed at the kingside, looks very menacing. Black has no active counterplay. The move 34 .. .l:kg8, which looks inviting at first sight, proves to be bad on account of 3 5 .ixh7!, when Black loses at once. However, after the simple:

34 J!gdS ••

It turned out that White would need to abandon the harmonious co-ordination of his pieces, since there was no way of decisively increasing the attack. The only way to maintain a plus was to transfer active operations to the queenside. To do this, White dismantled the harmonious formation of his pieces on the other wing.

35.c;t>h2 �c8 36 .th5! gxg3 37.gxg3 ggS 3SJ:lc3! �a7 39.Wf6t gg7 •

39 . . . Wlxf6 40.exf6 would lose quickly.

4oJ�c2 c;t>gS 41.gc3 c;t>hS 42.h4 h6 Otherwise White wins by withdrawing his bishop to e2 and marching his h-pawn to h6.

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

5 1.Wxe7 gxe7 52.L5! exf5 53.gg6 �c8 54.gxh6t c;t>g7 55.gc6 geS 56.c;t>g5! And so on. Let's look at the following example.

noteworthy

Jan Timman - Ljubomir Ljubojevic Amsterdam 1975 �

8

7

6 5 4 3 2 1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

129

The Dynamics of the Chess Struggle The outward co-ordination of White's fighting forces looks most impressive. He has an ideal pawn centre and his pieces are unequivocally eyeing the kingside. However, Black has quite a few concealed resources for co-ordinated action, which are destined to play a major role.

ordination come about. We should first of all observe that the process cannot be artificial. It is determined by the specific aims of the struggle. Irrespective of the type of co-ordination in question, tactical devices tend to play a large part in achieving it - as the reader has repeatedly seen.

19..J3xe5! 2o.Vlf3? The right continuation was 20 . .ixeS YNxeS 2 1 .YN£3 b4 22J�ae l YNd4t 23.@h l , with double-edged play.

A notable case, for instance, is the kind of tactical device which brings a piece suddenly into active play.

Rudolf Spielmann - David Janowski

20..J&g5! A superb retort. Black responds to the attack on f6 with a counterstroke against g3 .

Carlsbad 1907

8 7 6 5

4 3 2

a

1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

22...�g4! Another of Black's latent combinative resources, turning the game dramatically in his favour. On 23.hxg4 he plays 23 . . . .bd4t 24.'it> h l .ixg4, and there is no defence against 2S .. J!hSt.

23.d6 hd4t 24.cJ7 hl Vlxd6 25.Vlxf7t cJ7 h8 White resigned. We will conclude this section by considering some questions as to how various types of co-

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

White's advantage lies in his powerfully placed rook on e7. Yet this rook's position cannot be considered secure, if only because Black is threatening to trap it with a knight move to eS. Of course if the rook retreats, the advantage may quickly evaporate. Hence White's task is to sustain the initiative by establishing intercommunication between the rook and his other pieces. This is achieved by a pawn sacrifice.

19.d6! By clearing the dS-square for his knight, White strengthens his position substantially.

130

Soviet Chess Strategy

Efim Geller Mark Taimanov

19... lLlxd6

-

Relatively best. After 1 9 . . . cxd6 20.lLld5!, followed by lLlf3-d4, ga l -e l and if appropriate £2-f4, Black loses quickly; while 1 9 . . . VMxd6 is refuted by 2o.lLlb5!.

2o.lLldS fU7 2 U :lel .id7 22.lLlh4 gaS 23.gxf'7 lLlxf'7 24.lLl5!

Leningrad 1960 8

7

6 5

8

4

7

3

6

2

5

1

4

a

3 2 1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

The knights are immune: 24 . . . ixf5 25 .VMe8t VMxe8 26.gxe8#, or 24 . . . gxd5 2 5 .lLle7t etc. The overall result of the combination is a major improvement in White's position.

24 lLleS 2S.lLlfe7t mh8 26.b4! gaS 27.f4 lLlg6 28.lLlxg6t hxg6 29.lLle7 Y«e8 30.Y«fl gS 31.fxg5 fxgS 32.Y«d2! bS 33.Y«xgS ga6 34.ge4 gh6 3s.lLl5! Y«g6 36.Y«d8t mh7 37.Y«xd7 ghS 38.gg4 ggS 39.gh4t

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

Black's king is in the danger wne. But at the moment White's forces are disunited, and it may seem that Black has time to defend. However, the unexpected continuation was:

23.cS! As it turns out, White does succeed - all at once - in co-ordinating his forces for the attack. Now 23 . . . lLlxc5 is bad in view of 24.gf1 t Q;>g8 25 .VMf3!, and the attack is decisive.

.••

Black resigned. Commenting on this game, Rudolf Spielmann, that remarkable master of the attack, wrote: "It is instructive to follow how the white pieces acquired scope for harmonious action thanks to the powerful position of the knight on d5." In the following game, events unfolded j ust as swiftly.

23...ge8 24.lLlxb6 lLlxb6 2S.cxb6 Axe4 26.J.a .txf3 27.Y«xf3t Y«5 8 7 6 5

4 3 2 1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

�

131

The Dynamics of the Chess Struggle

28J�xd6 White has acquired a winning material advantage. And now one more instructive example to conclude with.

Rudolf Spielmann - Oldrich Duras

also note that this kind of strike has become typical in analogous situations.

16 ... hxg6 17.hS! fxe4 Black cannot of course play 1 7 . . . gxh5 due to 1 8.exfS Ad7 1 9 .f6! etc.

1 8Jh:f7 Lf7 19.Axe4 dS 20 ..id3 'ifd7 2 1 ..id2 �f5 22.'ifgS �e7 23.�e2 �e6 24.'ifg2 gS 2S..ixg5 .ixhs 26 .if6! Axe2 27.'ifxe2 gf8 28 ..ieS gf'7 29.'ifhS

Ostend 1 907

•

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

Here White struck with:

16.g6!! In his book The Art of Sacrifice in Chess, Spielmann wrote about this move as follows. "White's attack acquires fresh forces, as the fighting power of the major pieces on the g-file is substantially increased. [ . . . J "White also had some other good moves at his disposal, such as 1 6.h5, but then after 16 . . . g6! 1 7. J.f4 d5! the g-file would remain closed, and White would need to switch his pieces to new squares in order to exert real aggressive pressure on his opponent's position. Given that the attack should be conducted economically, it is better to increase its efficacy by a small sacrifice than to undertake time­ consuming manoeuvres." So thanks to the sacrifice, White's forces acquire order and harmony in their actions. We should

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

White's pieces are harmoniously placed. The mate threat can be averted only at a great cost in material.

29 ... �f8 30.'ifh8t 32 ..bg8

�g8 3 1 ..ih7 � e8

Black resigned. The conclusion is evident: in the process of play it is imperative to try to act with your pieces and pawns in concert - to seek the shortest, that is the quickest, way to achieve co-ordination between your forces (and disrupt your opponent's co-ordination at the same time) , utilizing a well-stocked arsenal of tactical means. We should note that the effective co-ordination of the fighting forces is attainable only when it corresponds to the profound aims of the struggle.

Soviet Chess Strategy

1 32

The Initiative The initiative is an inalienable factor of the game. The fight for the initiative begins from the opening moves. The right of moving first (the so-called "advantage of the move") has a major influence on the course of the opening struggle. It grants White some initiative in the opening phase. This initiative means that White has rather more scope for choosing between various plans. The time factor in chess plays a crucial role in the progress of the game. Its unit is a tempo - a move made by one side. Other things being equal, a gain of time tends to be a major achievement in itself. Even j ust one extra tempo can drastically alter the course of events. This stands out with particular clarity in the most crucial moments of the game - when there are mutual pawn storms, combinative complexities and so forth. The importance of tempo can be observed in almost any game. We will confine ourselves to one small and widely known example.

Carlos Torre - Emanuel Lasker Moscow 1925 8 7 6 5

4 3 2 1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

�

It looks as if the scales are tipping in Black's favour. White has landed in an unpleasant pin along the fifth rank. But it is his move, and this drastically alters the whole complexion of the fight.

2S .if6!! •

The start of a brilliant combination. As it turns out, Black perishes for the very reason that his queen is on the same rank as White's - the confrontation he had deliberately been playing for. He thought he was pinning the white bishop, but comes under attack himself. Truly, "All they that take the sword shall perish with the sword."

2S VxhS 26.gxg7t hS 27.gxf7t gS 2SJlg7t hS 29.gxb7t gS 30Jlg7t hS 3 1 .ggSt h7 32.gxhS g6 33.gh3 xf6 34.gxh6t gS 3SJ�fh3 •••

White has acquired a decisive material advantage. How often it happens that you are j ust one tempo short! This very circumstance can decide the result of the game, it can determine the success of a tactical operation and an entire strategic plan. What looks like the most harmonious co-operation between your pieces can, if you lack one tempo, be very quickly disrupted and disorganized. The conflict of ideas and plans in a game of chess is incompatible with empty, insipid moves. It develops in accordance with the strictest regard for every unit of time. The initiative foctor is equivalent to the degree of preparedness for executing an active plan (or a particular operation) , and is of paramount importance in the dynamics of the chess struggle. It is easy to see that the initiative is closely associated with the time factor. Possession of the initiative often indeed depends on the availability of an extra tempo. The role of the initiative in a game of chess is very great. It is only if you possess it that you

133

The Dynamics of the Chess Struggle can realize your plans and make your opponent go over to passive defence. Theory and practice are revealing the significance of the initiative factor in ever­ greater depth. A highly characteristic point, for instance, is that in many cases the initiative has a propensity to develop, to grow. The development of the initiative in the following game is illuminating.

Vassily Smyslov - VIktor Liublinsky Moscow 1949

ig7 23.<.t>g2 ic6 24.�h l �e8 2 5 .YMh7t �fS 26.ic5t �e7 27.YMxh8t! ixh8 28.�xh8 t �g7 29.�xd8 �xd8 30.ixe7, White wins (analysis by Smyslov) . 8 7 6 5

4 3 2 1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

6.

2l .Ad5! In firm possession of the initiative, White strives to limit his opponent's counterplay. As before, the knight sacrifice cannot be accepted: 2 1 . .. hxg 5 22.hxg5 g6 23.gxf6!

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

White's position is noticeably more active, but it may seem that once the knight has been driven back to f3 or h3, Black will have the chance to deploy his forces and fully equalize. White is faced with the task of developing his initiative. It is interesting to watch how he succeeds.

18.Y!Yh5! Aiming to answer 1 8 . . . hxg5 with 1 9.hxg5 ie7 20.YMxg6, regaining the piece. Black is forced to withdraw his knight to a passive position.

18 ... /t)h8 19.dxe5 dxe5 20ie3 Y!Ye7 Once again it doesn't pay to take the knight. After 20 . . . hxg5 2 1 .hxg5 g6 22.YMh4

Nor is 2 1 . . .ic6 a good idea, as after 22.,ixc6 bxc6 Black's queenside pawn structure is severely weakened. Black is therefore compelled to occupy c6 with a pawn and deprive his bishop of this important square.

2 l . c6 22.Ab3 .td7 23J�� adl gad8 24.gdl Ac8 25.gedl gxdl 26.gxdl 'ffc7 27..tc5! ••

White's initiative is growin g and becoming very powerful. He will now answer 27 . . . hxg5 with 28.ixfS, while on 27 . . . ie7 there follows 28.ixe7 YMxe7 29.�f3 �e8 30.YMxe5! YMxe5 3 1 .�xe5 �xe5 32.�d8t �h7 33 .�xc8, and Black cannot take the e4-pawn because of 34.ic2. It is interesting to follow how White's threats increase in number with every move, while Black's defensive resources gradually diminish.

Soviet Chess Strategy

134

27.. J�dS 2SJhdSt AxdS The culminating moment in the growth of White's initiative - it turns into a sharp combinative attack.

White's position is considerably more active. The following manoeuvres increase his advantage.

26.'!Wn! '!Wa6 There is no improvement in 26 . . .l"1:d7 27.f5! gxf5 28 .�b6! �e5 29.exf5 , and White wins.

8 7

A more tenacious move was 26 . . . ltJc5, though even then White's advantage would be undeniable.

6 5

4

27 ..tb6! gd7 2S.e5 .te4

3 2

Another forced move. If 28 . . . �a8, then 29.f5 is decisive.

1

29.he4 '!Wxe4 30.e5! d5

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

29.tihf7! �xf7 30 . .tb6! '!Wd7 After 30 . . . �xb6 Black is mated one way or another: 3 1 .�xf7t 'it> h7 32.�g8t 'it> g6 33 .�e8t 'it> h7 (33 . . . 'it> f6 34.�f7#) 34.�g8t 'it> h8 3 5 .�f7t 'it> h7 36.�g8#

3 1 .AxdS @h7 32 ..txf7 '!WxdS 33 ..tg6t Black resigned. I will now give another instructive example.

Tigran Petrosian - Alexander Kotov

8 7 6 5

4 3 2 1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

3 1 .tLle4!

Moscow 195 1

All this is forced. Black has to give up the exchange in view of the threatened 32.ltJf6t or 32.ltJd6.

3 1 . .. dxe4 32.gxd7 Axe5 33.he5 �xe5 34.gd4 '!We6 35.'!We2! b6 36.gd6 '!WeS 37.'!We4 White has achieved both a material and a positional plus, which he soon confidently converted into a win.

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

The growth and development of the initiative is closely connected with improving the co-

1 35

The Dynamics of the Chess Struggle ordination in the actions ofyour fightin g forces, and, correspondingly, disorganizing the forces of your opponent. It is for this very purpose - often simply for the sake of the initiative that positional concessions and even material sacrifices are admissible. The basic task consists in rapidly achieving harmonious co-operation between your forces and compelling your opponent to submit to your active plans - to go over to the defence. In the next example this principle was implemented in a striking manner.

with diverse material, in which the balance of forces might seem to favour White. However, the fact that Black holds the initiative is very important for the assessment of this position. The next phase of the struggle, in which Black's harmoniously co-ordinated pieces restrict the white queen's mobility, is very instructive.

Miguel Najdorf -Viacheslav Ragozin Saltsjobaden 1948

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

20.i.d2 lLle4 2 1 .i.e3 �d6 22.gc1 �5 23.i.f4 i.d5 24.i.c4 .bc4 25.gxc4 e5! 26.i.g5? The decisive mistake. White would retain hopes of a draw after 26.1'!xc6! bxc6 27.ixe5, returning some material at once but simplifying the position. a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

With his last move, 'lWb3-a3, White has set up the tactical threat of tLlxe7t followed by a capture on d6, and has apparently obtained strong pressure on the d-file. Yet he has failed to allow for Black's ensuing combination involving a positional sacrifice of the queen.

17 ... lLlxe4! 18.lLlf6t

26 ... gdlf 27.�h2 h6 28.gc1 gd7 29.i.e3 e4! 30.�el gad8 3 1 .i.c5 i.e5t 32.g3 gd2 33.gc2

7

6 5

White is forced to accept the challenge, as otherwise he would simply be left a pawn down.

4

18 ... lLlxf6 19J::!xd8 �Uxd8

2

So Black has carried out his combination and the game has resolved itself into a contest

T

8

3 1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

136

Soviet Chess Strategy

33 .. .i.xg3t 34.
Black has achieved a decisive plus. A revealing fact is that throughout this engagement the white queen did not make a single move. As we can see, the problems of the initiative are intimately connected with the modern methods of attack and active defence. These issues will be specially examined in the next chapter, which will discuss certain complex forms of positional play.

Chapter 6 Modern Positional Play Having examined various elements and novel features of positional play, let us try to approach it afresh by focusing on some of its complex contemporary forms. From the material already examined we may conclude that in the modern positional game, both methods of play are equally indispensable: the classic positional method, and the dynamic one, which is linked to independent and sharp tactical procedures. The method depends wholly on the nature of the individual position. In numerous cases the problems of strategy can be solved only by applying the iron logic of the classical principles. At the same time, the progress of theory increasingly reveals the unlimited scope for obtaining complex positions replete with tactical possibilities. Here the play is highly dynamic and distinguished by the originality of ideas which exceed the bounds of formal logic. Only the dynamic method can enable you to overcome the narrow confines of dogmatism and embrace the full wealth of ideas in positions of this type. We can see from this that the modern treatment of strategic plans is remarkable for its creative breadth and demands a truly universal outlook. Dynamics is by no means opposed to strict positional play but goes hand in hand with it. At times strict logic sets the tone, at other times you must entrust yourself to the restless but fascinating waves of dynamics. Always be ready for a sudden change in the methods of struggle. In many ways this synthetic method has also deepened our conception of the basic factors of positional play. With this in mind, let's examine the following concrete problems.

The Modem Understanding of Centralization Structures with Tension in the Centre In present-day positional play, the problems of tension or fluidity in the centre play a prominent role. The modern closed openings tend to give rise either to a state of tension between the centre pawns or else to an elastic formation that lacks any sharp delineation. There is a marked difference between these two types of formation. A state of tension between pawns in the centre cannot as a rule be maintained for long; and on transition to the middlegame

138

Soviet Chess Strategy

(or already in the opening stage) , an exchange of pawns or the closure of the position will give firm contours to the central structure. In general, the active side possessing the initiative or greater space will not want to release the tension prematurely. In a number of cases, by the logic of the struggle, Black has to make certain concessions by being the first to resolve the tension and abandon his central strongpoint. Thus, in the old line of the Steinitz Defence to the Ruy Lopez, after l .e4 e5 2.iOf3 iOc6 3.ib5 d6 4.d4 id7 5 .iOc3 iOf6 6.0-0 i.e7 7J'Ie 1 , the time has come for Black to surrender the centre with 7 . . . exd4 8 .iOxd4 0-0. The attempt to maintain the e5-pawn entails serious consequences. The point is that after 7 . . . 0-0?

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

8 .i.xc6 i.xc6 9.dxe5 dxe5 1 O.�xd8 White wins by force: a) 1 O .. J�axd8 I l .iOxe5 ixe4 1 2.iOxe4 iOxe4 1 3 .iOd3 f5 1 4.f3 ic5t 1 5 .iOxc5 iOxc5 1 6 . .ig5! 1'!d5 1 7.ie7 1'!e8 1 8 .c4 b) 1 0 . . . 1'!fxd8 1 1 . iOxe 5 ixe4 1 2.iOxe4 iOxe4 1 3 .iOd3 f5 1 4.f3 i.c5 t 1 5 .'kf.1f1 1'!f8 1 6.@e2 Hence the surrender of the centre with 7 . . .exd4 is essential, although it does not

involve any major concession. With the typical central structure that emerges (pawn on e4 versus pawn on d6) , White has a certain spatial advantage, yet there are no vulnerable weaknesses in Black's camp, and the mobilization of his pieces is essentially complete. Practice shows that Black has sufficient resources for gradually equalizing the game. The liquidation of the central tension is always a crucial strategic decision for either side. For Black, as a rule, it is associated with freeing his game. For instance, the following line of the Vienna Game is characteristic:

1 .e4 e5 2.iOc3 �c6 3.ic4 �f6 4.d3 iM 5.�ge2

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

5 . . . d5! 6.exd5 iOxd5 Black has successfully solved his problems of development as well as the problem of fighting for the centre in the opening. Of course, the defending side's attempt to liquidate the central tension is by no means always successful. For example, take the position in the Dragon Variation of the Sicilian Defence after:

1 .e4 c5 2.�f3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.�xd4 �f6 5.�c3 g6 6.ie3 ig7 7.f3 �c6 8.�d2

Modern Positional Play

1 39

interests, White for his part cannot afford to leave Black's counterplay out of account. In order to forestall it, he is often forced to take a pragmatic decision - whether to uphold the tension or close the centre.

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

Here Black's attempt to free himself in the centre with 8 . . . d5? appears premature in view of the very strong reply 9.ib5!, landing Black in a difficult situation. Overall, the classical precept still remains in force: it pays the defending side to maintain a pawn outpost in the centre as long as this does not bring any clear disadvantages. Take the position after:

l .e4 e5 2.tl)f3 tl)c6 3.i.c4 i.e7 4.d4 8 7

Let's look at one fairly complex example, namely the Keres System in the Chigorin Defence to the Ruy Lopez: 1 .e4 e5 2.1L1f3 1L1c6 3.ib5 a6 4.ia4 1L1f6 5 . 0-0 ie7 6J.'l:e l b5 7.ib3 0-0 8.c3 d6 9.h3 lLla5 1 0 .ic2 c5 1 1 .d4 lLld7! ? With this "mysterious" manoeuvre Black is preparing to bring the central pawn position dramatically to life. This is illustrated in the following game.

Mikhail Tal - Paul Keres Curar;:ao 1962

l .e4 e5 2,c�:lf3 lLlc6 3.i.b5 a6 4.i.a4 tl)f6 5.0-0 i.e7 6J�el b5 7.i.b3 0-0 8.d d6 9.h3 lLla5 10.i.c2 c5 1 l .d4 lLld7!? 12.lLlbdl cxd4 13.cxd4 lLlc6 14.a3?! exd4! 1 5.lLlb3 lLlde5 16.lLlfxd4 i.f6 17.i.dl lLlxd4 1 8.lLlxd4 lLld3! 19.1Llc6 8

6

7

5

6

4

5

3

4

2

3

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

For the moment the judicious course for Black is to support the critical e5-point by playing 4 . . . d6, without fear of 5.dxe5 dxe5 6.\Wxd8t ixd8. While maintaining the tension in his own

2

1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

19 ... lLlxf2! 20.YMf3 lLlxh3t 2 1 .<j{h2 i.e5t! 22.lLlxe5 dxe5 23J!edl lLlf4! Black acquired a decisive material plus.

140

Soviet Chess Strategy

The cause of White's troubles was that he obviously neglected the possibility of Black's powerful counterplay based on freeing the position in the centre. Where did White go wrong? Should he have put a radical stop to Black's plan by fixing or closing the centre in good time? 8 7 6 5

Here we encounter one further positional element: the over-protection of critical points. Simultaneously with this, White clears the path for his bishop on c 1 , not shelving the problem of finishing his queenside development. In this case, incidentally, after a continuation such as 14 . . . aS 1 S .,id3 ,ia6, the advance 1 6.dS already looks much more appropriate, setting up long-term pressure on the queenside. Releasing the pawn tension at the right moment constitutes the theme of the great majority of modern (and indeed classical) systems in the closed openings.

4

* * *

3 2 1

������

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

6.

Well, practice shows that Black has no difficulties after either 1 2.dxcS dxcS 1 3 .liJbd2 f6! 1 4.liJf1 liJb6 1 S .%Ve2 l:!a7! 1 6.liJe3 i.e6 1 7.liJf5 l:!e8 as in Vasiukov - Gligoric, Hastings 1 966, or 1 2.liJbd2 cxd4 1 3 .cxd4 liJc6 1 4.dS liJb4 1 S . .ib 1 as 1 6.a3 liJa6 1 7.b4! liJb6 1 8 .%Vb3 i.d7 1 9.id3 liJc7 as in Suetin ­ Tal, Kiev 1 964. The line that sets Black the most difficult problems is one in which the tension is maintained after all: 1 2.liJbd2 cxd4 1 3 .cxd4 liJc6 1 4.liJb3!

Let's take a look at one principle of importance. A typical mistake consists in prematurely removing the tension from an unsecured centre with the short-term aim of pursuing operations on the flank. The following game may serve as an illustration.

VIktor Liublinsky Yori Averbakb -

Gorky 1940

1 .e4 e5 2.c�c3 t[}c6 3.Ac4 t[}f6 4.d3 Ac5 5.£4 d6 6.t[}f3 %Ve7

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

Here White committed a typical error: a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

Modern Positional Play

7.f5? Liublinsky's plans involve transferring the centre of graviry of the struggle to the kingside. But things will not come to that. Exploiting White's premature switch of attention away from the centre to operations on the flank, Black is the first to go into action in the centre and on the queenside.

141

Above all they are strong because, after a long time "dozing", the centre pawns can be set in motion at the opportune moment. Here's an example that has become a classic.

Richard Reti Akiba Rubinstein -

Carlsbad 1923

7 ... �d4! 8 ..1g5 c6 9JUl b5 10 .1b3 .tb7 1 1 .�xd4 .bd4 12.Ve2 h6 13 ..th4 a6 14.�d1 d5! 15.c3 .1b6 16.�e3 Vd6 17.0-0-0 0-0-0 1 8.
Black has a clear advantage. Here Nimzowitsch's aphorism seems appropriate: "The centre is the dominant principle, the flank is subordinate."

Fluid Situation in the Centre One of the notable tendencies in contemporary strategy is the creation of durable elastic pawn formations with no discernible "landmarks" . Such formations already take shape in the opening and can occur in any modern system. They are met with especially often in the English Opening, Reti's Opening, the Pirc Defence, etc. What characterizes these formations is that they allow great flexibiliry in the subsequent choice and implementation of a strategic plan. A striking thing about them is the tendency to avoid skirmishes in the centre and give preference to preliminary action with pieces on the flank. It often happens that the centre pawns remain unmoved for a long period or only advance to modest stations. As long ago as the 1 920s, Reti demonstrated the great potential strength of such positions.

8

7

6 5 4 3 2 1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

6.

Nowadays such positions have become rypical, and are rightly judged to be in White's favour thanks to his powerful pawn phalanx in the centre. The pawns commence their decisive advance after a preliminary increase of White's piece pressure in the centre and on the queenside.

1 5.Val! Following Reti's example, this manoeuvre has become characteristic of such positions. The pressure on the a 1 -h8 diagonal compels Black to seek simplification.

1 5 ... �e8 16 ..ixg7 �xg7 17.0-0 �e6 1 8.gb1 Ac6 19.d4! .te4 20J��d1 a5 21 .d5! �c5 22.�d4 Now White's knight obtains strong outposts on d4 and c6, giving him a clear ascendancy in the centre.

142

Soviet Chess Strategy with operations on the flank becomes an important issue. The strategic device of quickly transferring operations from one sector of the board to another is continually gaining ground. * * *

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

22 ...Lg2 23.�xg2 gfd8 24.�c6 gd6 25.ge3 ge8 26.'ilYe5 f6 27.'ilYb2 e5 28.'ilYb5! �f7 29.gbl �d7 30.8 gc8 3 1 .gd3! Preventing 3 1 . . .llJb8 on account of 32.c5!.

3 1 . .. e4 On 3 1 . . .llJc5 White would have the very strong 32.Wfxb6!, not shrinking from an exchange sacrifice.

32.fxe4 �e5

In a fluid position, choosing the right moment to set up a favourable structure in the centre becomes a key problem. There is no denying the wealth of strategic prospects that open up for White when, for instance, he posts a knight on d5 in front of a backward pawn on d6. Yet modern practice shows that this has genuine value only when the commanding post is under firm control. Otherwise the knight looks too presumptuous and will be expelled from its uninvited station, to the opponent's advantage. Take the position after:

1 .d4 �f6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 e6 4.�c3 ad5 8 7

6 5 4 3

2 1

I • .iJ �._ � � 'i%� 'i '_'i lfi" '� �1liJJ 1liJJ. ,�

1liJJ.8��!�t �� IliJJ ��7, �� . IliJJm 1liJJ� 1liJJ� IliJJW d" 1liJJ IliJJW " �W'" t;)Jl]�p ��Jt]%�Jlj � �if� ' Ltm � a

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

33.'ilYxb6! �xc6 34.c5! White achieved an overwhelming plus. In modern systems with a fluid central position, the blending of play in the centre

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

6

Here an elementary question arises. Why doesn't White (in master play, of course) take the seemingly favourable opportunity to settle a piece on d5? Why does he prefer to fix the central pawn structure immediately, with 5 . cxd5 d6 6.e4 etc.? The answer is simple. In this case the queen

143

Modern Positional Play in its lofty position feels like an uninvited guest rather than the owner of the house. After 5.ttJxd5?! ttJxd5 6.�xd5 ttJc6 7.ttJf3 d6, with 8 . . . .te6 to follow, Black quickly completes his development and can count on seizing the initiative.

Svetozar Gligoric - Wlodzimierz Schmidt Bath 1973

So the modern concept of centralization is based not on pawns formally taking over the centre, but on practical control of it. To this day a pronouncement by Nimzowitsch remains a striking motto: "The important thing is not just the occupation of the centre by pawns. The interrelation of the two sides' forces in the centre is much more important!"

The Centre and Space Crossing the "Demarcation" Line -

The line above the fourth rank, dividing the board in half, may be called the "demarcation line" . To cross this line with fighting units suitably reinforced is to gain more space than your opponent. And this, as a rule, means greater manoeuvring freedom for your pieces. A spatial preponderance is one of the elements of a positional advantage. We will now look at an example in which an imposing spatial plus is achieved in the centre. Earlier we illustrated in detail a typical structure with a pawn couple on d4 and e4. If this structure comes under sufficient pressure from pieces, positions of dynamic equilibrium arise. But suppose that some careless play from the defending side allows the centre pawns to advance to d5 and e5 . Then a crisis situation results.

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

Black's irresolute play has allowed White to arrange his pieces favourably and create the conditions for an effective advance of his pawn centre.

1 7.d5! b6 18 .ta6 gc7 19.Yfd3 �b7 20 .tf4 �d6 2 1 .e5 •

•

White's advantage assumes vivid contours. His central avalanche (and a spatial plus generally means problems for the opponent in the centre) irresistibly tears apart the defensive dam.

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

Black went in for a tactical line, but after:

144

Soviet Chess Strategy

21 ... J.f5 22.exd6 hd3 23.dxe7 1!!ixd5 24.hd3 1!!ixd3 25J:Ud l ! 1!!ixe2 26.gd8! e5 27 ..idl 1!!ia6 28 ..ib4 1!!ie4 29.J.xf8 1!!ixe7 30 ..ie7t!

The continuation in Gligoric - Petrosian, Bled 1 959, is noteworthy:

1 1 ... �be6 1 1 . . . .id7 is probably better.

He ended up in a hopeless position. Tarrasch once said that two connected passed pawns on the sixth rank were worth a rook. Practice shows that in many situations a pawn couple on d5 and e5 is also worth more than an insignificant material deficit. At the same time we should note that in a number of cases a hasty and unmotivated seizure of space can lead to unsatisfactory results.

The Centre and the Flanks As we have observed already, modern positional play attaches key importance to numerous subtleties bound up with the interconnections between flank operations and play in the centre. Sharp flank attacks begun in the very opening, abounding in powerful tactical ploys, account for a major part of this issue. How intently and constantly events in the centre need to be watched! A characteristic case, for instance, is the amazingly wild play arising from one of the fashionable lines of the French Defence:

1 2.�a �xe5 13 ..ig5! �5g6 At this point, in place of 1 4.he7 &iJxe7 1 5 .cxd4 id7 as played in the game, White could have increased the pressure with 1 4 . .if6! followed by h2-h4. Sometimes the long-term aim of a complex flank operation is not to acquire purely local gains but to weaken the opponent's influence in the centre in order to achieve superiority there. Take the position arising after:

1 .e4 e5 2.&iJa &iJc6 3.ib5 a6 4.ia4 &iJf6 5.0-0 ie7 6J�e1 b5 7.ib3 d6 8.e3 0-0 9.h3 &iJa5 1 0.J.e2 e5 1 l .d4 'Be7 1 2.&iJbdl g6?! 1 3.&iJfl ge8 1 4.&iJe3 �g7

1 .e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.�c3 J.b4 4.e5 e5 5.a3 J.xc3t 6.bxc3 1!!ie7 7.1!!ig4 f5 8.1!!ig3 �e7 9.1!!ixg7 gg8 10.1!!ixh7 cx:d4 l l . 'it> dl!? T

8

7

a

6

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

Here the correct approach is not at all a local offensive on the kingside with 1 5 .dxe5 dxe5 1 6.g4?, which is j ust what Black is well prepared for, but a surprising blow on the queenside with 1 5 .b4!. This enables White to start an effective attack on his opponent's central strong-points after 1 5 . . . cxb4 1 6.cxb4

5 4 3 2 1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

145

Modern Positional Play llJc6 1 7 . .ib2. This kind of plan has become typical of such situations.

In Geller Boleslavsky, Moscow 1 9 52, the continuation was:

Interrelations between centre and flanks occupy a special place in positions where the players have castled on opposite sides. The most interesting and problematic formations are those where mutual flank attacks and central play are combined. In these cases the pawn structure often remains fluid, with no predominance for either side. Although of course the ensuing play is bound to focus on efforts to attack on the flank, the players must also constantly reckon with a shift in the weight of the struggle towards the centre. With a fluid structure in the centre they have to take special care in watching for possible activity there.

12.�b3 YlYc7 13.dxe5! dxe5 14.c5! �f8 15.YlYd6 �e6 16.i.c4! i.f8 17.YlYxc7 �xc7 18.�a5 gb8

The progress of events in the following line of the King's Indian Defence may serve as an example:

l .d4 �f6 2.c4 g6 3.�c3 i.g7 4.e4 d6 5.6 0-0 6.i.e3 e5 7.�ge2 c6 8.YlYd2 �bd7 9.0-0-0 a6 1O. � bl YlYa5 1 1 .�c1 ge8

-

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

19.�a4! And by taking the game into a favourable ending, White attained an overwhelming plus in the centre and on the queenside. * * *

If the players castle on opposite wings with a closed pawn structure in the centre, the ensuing struggle assumes a different, less forcing, character. In such situations, quite often, sturdy defensive barriers will be erected and the battle on the flanks becomes a lengthy manoeuvring process.

Vladimir Makogonov Alexander Tolush -

Parnu 1947 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

In this position the most effective plan for White undoubtedly consists in active play in the centre. This is the best way for him to paralyse Black's counter-attack against his castled position.

l .d4 �f6 2.c4 g6 3.�c3 i.g7 4.e4 d6 5.6 0-0 6 ..ie3 e5 7.d5 �h5 8.YlYd2 f5 9.0-0-0 a6 10.�ge2 �d7 1 1 .�bl �df6 12.h3 A characteristic expedient: White provokes his opponent into the following advance, after which the game is closed on the kingside.

146

Soviet Chess Strategy

12 ... f4 Otherwise g2-g4!, with an attack on the kingside, is unpleasant.

Let's examine the following characteristic example.

Bolger Neergaard Vladimir Simagin -

13 ..tr.z .td7 14.c5!

Correspondence 1964 8

8

7

7

6

6

5

5

4 3 2

1

4

�"F"< , , , ,, ,/,, , , , , �,, �,,/ ,: , , , , "���

3 2

V////Y"// '"-"-'

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

This type of pawn break characterizes many closed formations where the players have castled on opposite wings. Utilizing his space advantage on the queenside, White begins an active advance in that sector.

14 ... ¥;Ye7 1 5.cx:d6 cx:d6 16.�c1 b5 17.b4! �g3 18J�gl a5 19 ..td3 axb4 20.�3e2 �Uc8? 21 .¥;Yxb4 �a4 22.¥;Yd2 b4 23.�b3 gca8 24.gc1 ¥;Ye8 25.gc2 ¥;Yb8 26J�gc1 �gh5? Better was 26 . . . llJxe2.

27J�b2 .tb5? The exchange of light-squared bishops merely plays into White's hands.

28.hb5 ¥;Yxb5 29.gc6 .if8 30.gb6! White has achieved an position on the queenside.

overwhelming

Pawn Counter-stroke in the Centre The classic strategic precept of a counter­ stroke with pawns in the centre in answer to a flank attack remains unshakable and is merely enriched by taking new forms.

1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

White has started a pawn offensive on the kingside, trusting in the solidity of his central fortifications. Black nevertheless finds an effective means of opening up the game with the aid of counter-blows with his pawns.

16 ... b5! 17.cx:b5 d5!! 18.exd5 e4! Black sacrifices three pawns one after the other, but obtains the chance to launch a very strong attack on the white king.

19.¥;Yxe4 Instead 1 9.fxe4 would be met by 1 9 . . . llJe5!.

19 ....ixg4 20.¥;Yf4 Black's threats are also dangerous after 20.YMxg4 �xe3 2 1 .@f2 .ic5 .

20 ....th5 2 1 . c;!? r.z �e5 22 ..tg2 .td6 23.¥;Ya4 gc8 24J�d2 ¥;Yf6

1 47

Modern Positional Play

8

8 7

7

6

6 5

5 4

4

3

3 2

2 1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

�

All Black's pieces are participating in the attack; White's position is hopeless.

1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

Utilizing his space advantage on the queens ide, White goes for an attack in that sector of the board.

2S.,tgS itS 26.�f4 La! 27.olh3 Or 27 . .ixf3 lLlxf3 28.lt>xB l3c3t 29.1t>f2 ic5 t 30.@fl l3Bt 3 1 .@g2 Wg4t 32.@h2 �g3#.

27...olg4 28. � g2 ge2! White resigned.

Pawn Chains - Pawn Restraint In both the opening and middlegame, pawn phalanxes are a most important aggressive force for gaining space. Their advance creates scope for the actions of the pieces, at the same time as restricting the mobility of the opponent's fighting forces. Indeed, in the majority of closed formations, how else can the fortifications be shattered? Let's examine one of the characteristic plans for a pawn offensive on the queenside.

Efim Geller - Igor Bondarevsky Leningrad 1963

1.e4 eS 2.�f3 �c6 3.olbS a6 4..ia4 d6 s.o-o old7 6.d4 �ge7 7.dS �b8 8.e4 �g6 9.ole3 ole7 10.�bd2 0-0

1 1 .b4 eS Black does not want to wait passively for White's breakthrough with c4-c5-c6. But now he incurs a weakness on the half-open b-file, while White's pawn on d5 becomes a protected passed pawn.

12.bxeS! dxeS 1 3.Ld7 �xd7 14.a4 as I S.gb l b6 16.gb3 �f6 17.itb l gb8 18.itb2 ite7 19J;bl �d7 20.ite2 h6 2 1 .�f1 �f4 22J�dl itd6 23.olcl g6 24.�e3 �h7 2S.g3 �hS 26.�g4 8 7 6 5

4 3 2 1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

1 48

Soviet Chess Strategy

It isn't hard to see that White has obtained a clear plus on both wings.

26,..5?! 27.tl:}xh6 f4 28.tl:}g4 gbe8 29. g;, gl .1d8 30 ..1b2 g5 3IJ:1bd3 g;, g6 32 . .1c3 tl:}hf6 33.tl:}xf6 .txf6 34.h3 gh8 35.Yfe2 J.g7 36Jlg1 fxg3 37.fxg3 tl:}f6 38.gfl White has increased his advantage and proceeded in confident style to convert it into a win. The conclusion that suggests itself is that against any active pawn unit on the enemy side, you should try to oppose one of your own. You mustn't allow your opponent to form a mighty pawn phalanx. Let's consider a few examples of positions with locked pawn chains, where mutual restraint is effected by the simplest of building materials - the pawns themselves. In these situations, a factor acquiring key significance is the attack against the base (or foundation) of the pawn chain, that is, the bottom link on which all the upper units, so to speak, are resting. Frequently the weight of the struggle shifts to the flanks, and this in turn is bound up with further efforts directed to more important objects. Here are some characteristic examples of a struggle involving pawn chains and the undermining of their base.

a

f

g

h

8 7 6 5 4 3 1

The strategic picture takes shape. Black's aim is to attack the base of White's chain on c3. White prepares to reciprocate by undermining Black's base - the e6-pawn - and attacking the kingside.

e

12.h4 bxc3 13.bxc3 cxd4 14.cxd4 tl:}b4 1 5 ..1b l Yfa4 16.Yfxa4t tl:}xa4 17.a3 tl:}c6

Skopje 1972

c5 6.c3 tl:}c6 7.tl:}df3 Yfa5 8. g;, fl b5 9.J.d3 b4

d

Not only a pointless weakening but also a waste of precious time. The right continuation is 1 1 . . .bxc3! 1 2.bxc3 ltJa4 as in Gutman - V. Zilberstein, Chelyabinsk 1 975, striving to create a direct threat against c3 without any delay.

2

l .d4 e6 2.e4 d5 3.tl:}d2 tl:}f6 4.e5 tl:}fd7 5.f4

c

1 0.tl:}e2 tl:}b6 1 1 .g4 g6?

Lajos Portisch Werner Hug -

b

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

1 8.h5! gxh5 19.9xh5 .ta6 20 ..txh7 g;, d7 21 ..tc2 gxh5 22.gxh5 tl:}b6 23.5! White's kingside operation has proved far more effective. In the following game Black undoubtedly showed far greater accuracy in his handling of an analogous situation.

14 9

Modern Positional Play

Aleksandar Matanovic - Lajos Portisch

dispel the thickening storm clouds. A major simplification followed:

Ljubljana 1973

20 .id7 2 1 .hd7t tLlxd7 22.'!Wxc5 hc5 23.tLlb4 tLlb6 24. 'it> e2 'it> d7 •••

1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.tLld2 tLlf6 4.e5 tLlfd7 5.f4 c5 6.c3 tLlc6 7.tLldf3 '!Wa5 8.tLle2 b5 9 .id2

With equality and a draw.

•

The problems of restraining the pawn chains, in modern practice especially, are closely connected with timely prophylactic measures. For it quite often happens that the formation of a pawn phalanx (or the destruction of an opposing one) comes about suddenly, by tactical means. In the following example White needs to take great care.

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

1 .e4 g6 2.d4 .ig7 3.f4 c5 4.d5 d6 5.tLlc3 tLlf6 6 .ie2 0-0 •

9 b4 10.ab4 tLlxb4 1 1 .tLlc3 c4! •••

An astute decision. Portisch appears to be easing White's game by releasing the pressure on d4. However, in the first place the d4-point has been somewhat weakened anyway by the removal of its base, and secondly Black's decision is linked to a specific plan for active queenside play. We should note incidentally that Portisch had thoroughly investigated this position as far as move 20.

12.a3 tLlc6 13.b3 ab3 14.'!Wxb3 gb8 1 5.'!Wc2 Wb6 It's easy to understand that by (temporarily) taking away the important d3-square from the white bishop, Black's . . . c5-c4 effectively deprived White of the chance of an effective kingside pawn storm. This means that Black's strategic idea has turned out very well.

16.gbl tLlxd4 17.tLlxd4 '!Wxd4 1 8.gxb8 �xb8 19.tLlxd5 '!Wc5 20.,tb5t! Only this tactical resource enables White to

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

The natural move 7.tLlf3 is met by a sharp counterstroke on the queens ide: 7 . . . b5!? Black's queenside pawns unexpectedly come to life and are energetically set in motion. It turns out that the variations 8 .tLlxb5 tLlxe4 and 8 . .ixb5 tLlxe4! 9.tLlxe4 �a5 t 1 0.tLlc3 .ixc3t 1 1 .bxc3 �xb5 are agreeable to Black, breaking up his opponent's centre. The alternative (if White doesn't want to force events) is that Black acquires a queenside pawn phalanx, which again is most welcome to him.

150

Soviet Chess Strategy

White's error consisted in not taking prophylactic measures against this counter­ offensive. Instead of 7.lLlf3?! he had to play 7.a4!, clamping down on . . . b7-b5 .

Since then, 9.\&g4 has not been seen any more in the games of serious chess players. White prefers the circumspect 9.\&f4, forestalling the plan that we have j ust seen.

You more rarely have occasion t o see a similar explosion on the kingside. For that reason the next example appears truly sensational.

Connected Wmg Pawns versw a Central Pair: the Key Role of Blockading

Yori Sakharov - Tigran Petrosian Kiev 1957

1 .e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.�c3 .ib4 4.e5 c5 5 ..id2 �e7 6.a3 .bc3 7 .bc3 cxd4 S.Vxd4 �f5 9.Vg4 •

8 7 6 5

A configuration with connected wing pawns against connected centre pawns occurs quite frequently in practice. Its evaluation depends on many factors - primarily, the mutual possibilities for blockading. In a simplified position or endgame situation, the pair of wing pawns, remote from the enemy king, is apt to be more dangerous than the pair in the centre. In a complex middlegame the matter is different. Here, as a rule, dynamic situations arise in which a mere grain is enough to tip the scales. Let's look at an example in which the flank blockade triumphed.

4

Svetozar Gligoric - Laszlo Szabo

3

Helsinki 1952

2 1

8

7

There would seem to be no sign of any danger to White. Yet all of a sudden there followed:

6

9 ... h5 10.Vf4 g5! 1 l . .ib5t �c6 12.Vd2 d4 13 ..ib4 Vd5

4

It turns out that Black's attack with his pawn avalanche has brought him splendid dividends: he dominates the centre and has clearly surpassed White in development. After:

14.Ve2 Vxg2 15.Va Vxa 16.�xa .id7 17.�xg5 �xe5 IS..ixd7t �xd7 19.0-0-0 a5 20 ..id2 ggS Black already had a won position.

5 3 2 1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

White seems to have had success with his queenside play. But as the result of a precisely calculated operation, his dangerous-looking pawns are subjected to a solid blockade.

151

Modern Positional Play

14.. J�b8 1 S .L3 •

Not 1 5 .b5 ixc5! 1 6.bxc6 �xb l 1 7.llJxb l I!Bb6 and Black has a strong attack.

8 7 6

I S .. .Ad7 16.0-0 Again 1 6.b5 llJa7! etc. is bad for White.

16 ... �a7! 17.�el �e8

5 4 3

2 1

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

6-

Thus the first part of Black's grand design is accomplished. The blockade has utterly shackled White's queenside play. All the same, a very tense struggle still lies ahead. The second and decisive stage of Black's all­ important central offensive now commences. a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

Having taken control of b5, Black prepares to occupy it securely. The need for over­ protection in cases like this was something that Nimzowitsch pointed out repeatedly in his writings. Hastening to occupy the blockade square with 17 . . . llJb5 would be incorrect on account of 1 8 .llJxb5 ixb5 1 9.1lJd4 followed by ig2-fl , driving the blocking pieces away.

18.Ac1 Af6 19.i.f4? By provoking Black's pawn centre into advancing, White is merely pouring oil on the flames. Better was 1 9 .f4.

19 eS 20.Adl d4 21 .�dS Ac6 22.�xf6t Wxf6 23.hc6 Wxc6 24.f4 f6 2S.Wb3t i> h8 26.�f1 �c7 27.Wc4 �abS •••

28.�bel h6 29.g4 �be8? A serious tactical slip, which could have reduced Black's previous efforts to nothing. The right move was 29 . . . �fe8, to be followed by . . . e5-e4 with an overwhelming plus. 8

7

6 5 4 3 2

6-

1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

30.S? After 30.fxe5 fxe5 3 1 .llJg3! White in turn could have blocked up the centre

1 52

Soviet Chess Strategy

and equalized the game. The point is that 3 1 . . J'!xfl t 32.�xfl e4? fails to 33.lLlxe4! �xe4 34.�f8t, with 3 5 .�f5t and 36.�xe4 to follow.

30 'ilYd5! 3 1 .'ilYc1 mh7 32.tt'lg3 e4 33 .tf4 e3 34.'ilYdl 'ilYc4 35.h4 tt'ld5 36.g5 d3 37.'ilYg4 gg8! •••

•

An essential defensive measure, parrying White's threats on the g-file.

38.tt'lh5 ge4! 39.g6t mh8 White resigned. This example, showing the triumph of a blockade that paralysed the white queenside pawns, vividly illustrates the benefits of that strategy. This is a suitable moment to recall the original maxims set forth by Nimzowitsch, which have retained their value to this day. Emphasizing the serious mission of the blockading piece, he observed that the blockading square becomes a weak point for the opponent; moreover he asserted that the very concept of a "weak point" arose out of the concept of blockaded squares. The blockade will often fetter an entire complex of enemy forces. They will first lose their freedom of manoeuvre in particular areas of the board, then the entire enemy position will become immobile. In this connection, here are Nimzowitsch's relevant assertions: 1) The blockading piece creates threats from where it stands. 2) If necessary it may abandon its post while retaining overall control of the key square. 3) The blockading activity is enhanced by the summoning of reserves to aid it; the reserves in turn must occupy secure positions. 4) A genuine strengthening of the blockade

means greater elasticity in the deployment of the pieces and an increase in the threats from the occupied point. Nimwwitsch also presented several examples of the fight against a blockading piece. The important thing above all is to reduce the number of pieces defending the blockade square. This is achieved by exchanges, by evicting the opponent's pieces from key points, by diverting them, and so on. The approved strategic method consists in transferring the attack from the blockading piece to its defenders. Undoubtedly our understanding of the blockading principle continues to grow, thanks both to new forms of blockade and to the corresponding theoretical tenets. Stratagems involving the positional sacrifice of material, playing on a weak square complex, etc., arose out of the principle of blockade. But the classic propositions I have cited form the basis of this principle.

Pawn Sacrifices In various dynamic situations the issues of tactics and strategy are linked particularly closely. In this respect, pawn sacrifices are characteristic; in many cases this tactical operation has profound implications. The specific aims and forms of positional pawn sacrifices are exceedingly diverse. Typical examples are sacrifices to open important lines, to gain space, to weaken the opponent's overall pawn structure, to gain control of key points, and so on. These objectives are usually closely interrelated, and often one will be replaced by another. Let's examine one characteristic modern device consisting of a positional pawn sacrifice to gain control of a strategic point in the centre.

153

Modern Positional Play

Hermann Pilnik E6m Geller

The presence of an extra pawn on the white side is not felt - on the contrary, the incipient avalanche of black pawns on the kingside is what will decide the game.

-

Gothenburg 1955 8

26J�df1 Yfh4 27.,tdl gf7 28.Yfc2 g5 29.Yfc3 gaf8 30.h3 h5 3 1 .,te2 g4! 32.gxf4 gxf4 33.gxf4 gxf4 34.g3 �f3t 35. � f.2 Yfxh3 36.gxf4

7 6 5

4

8

3

7

2

6

1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

5

h

Black has an excellent position in the centre and his queens ide forces are actively placed. At present White has no active counterplay. But what plan should Black adopt in order to develop his initiative? The following transformation, involving a pawn sacrifice to gain an important central strongpoint, is highly instructive.

22 ... e4! 23.hf6 Yfxf6 24.fxe4 f4! 25J:ifl �e5! 8 7 6 5

4 3 2 1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

�

The operation is concluded. Black has acquired a permanent post for his knight.

4 3 2 1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

36 ... g3t! 37. �xf3 g2t 38.�f.2 Yfh2! White resigned. In our day, pawn sacrifices for positional gains have become a mass phenomenon. Numerous stratagems which partly involve pawn sacrifices are employed to achieve a more active co­ operation of the pieces, to develop them quickly, to enhance their manoeuvrability in other words to gain dynamic objectives, or simply to obtain the initiative for executing some specific plan. Today dynamic gambits have become j ust as normal a concept as, let us say, the methods of exploiting pawn weaknesses which we examined earlier. Yet in the 1 930s, any unclear pawn sacrifice of this type was still viewed as something of a revelation. Here again, the service performed by Alekhine was invaluable. He opened up boundless possibilities for widening chess players' horiwns, by his use

1 54

Soviet Chess Strategy

of a strategic device which at that time was novel - a pawn sacrifice for the initiative and for switching a sudden attack from one part of the board to another. Like any initial steps in a complex field of activity, many of Alekhine's experiments may strike us today as dubious. Yet their practical success at that time is the best testimony to the power of the pawn sacrifice as a strategic device. Here is a paradigm which has become a classic.

Alekhine was later to recommend 20.l:!ad l !? followed by a2-a3 and .id3-b l -a2.

20 ...YlYb7 21 .a3 g6 22.�h6t i.xh6 23.i.xh6 �d4 24Jtcdl b4 25.f4! exf4 26.YlYxf4 Alekhine persistently looks for ways to pursue the initiative. At present, however, White can only reasonably hope to hold the balance. But Black still faces a wearisome defensive task, having to cope all the time with specific threats.

26 ... bxa3 27.bxa3 Ek3 28.YlYfl �e6?

Alexander Alekhine - Reuben Fine

The heat of battle proves too much for Black, and he starts on a rapid slide to disaster. After the correct 2B . . . ltJc6 29 . .ic l ltJe5 3o.if! , his position would be sound enough.

Hastings 1937

29.a4 gac8 30JUI g3c7 3 I J�bl YlYc6 32.a5! �c5? This already is the decisive mistake. The least of the evils was 32 . . . l:!aB .

33.i.c4 YlYd7 8 1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

6

7

6

In this position White has gone in for quite a risky pawn sacrifice to gain the initiative with his pieces.

1 5.�f5!? A quieter line is 1 5 .cxd4 exd4 1 6.ltJf5 �xc2 1 7.ltJxe7t @hB I B .ltJf5, as played in a later game Foltys - E. Richter, Trencianske Teplice 1 949.

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

34.YlYa2! �xe4 35.gxf7 YlYxf7 36 .ixf7t gxf7 37.YlYe6 •

15 ... dxc3 16.YlYxc3! �Uc8! 17.YlYg3 White would of course gain nothing from 1 7.ltJxe7t �xe7 I B .�xa5 l:!xc2 etc.

17 ... i.f8 1 8.i.d3 �c6 19.i.g5 �e8 20J�ac1

Black resigned. The following game was played nearly a quarter of a century later.

Modern Positional Play

David Bronstein - Paul Keres

1 55

8 7

Budapest 1950

1.e4 e5 2.�f3 �c6 3 ..ib5 a6 4.ia4 �f6 5.0-0 ie7 6.Ele1 b5 7.J.b3 0-0 8.d4 d6 9.c3 .ig4 At this point White took an original strategic decision:

10.h3?! La 1 1 .Yfxa

6 5 4 3 2 1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

24.£5! .id4 25.Yfg3 �c4 26 ..ih6 ig7? The lesser evil was 26 . . . liJxb2 27.ixf8 gxfB.

27.hg7 ci!>xg7 28.f6t ci!> h8 29.Yfg5 b3 30.axb3 Yfb4 3 1 .bxc4 Yfxa4 32.Elf4 Yfc2 33.Yfh6! Black resigned, a few moves before being mated: 33 . . . Wxb l t 34.'it?h2 ggB 3 5 .Wxh7t! <;t>xh7 36.gh4# a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

For the sake of the initiative and a wealth of piece play, White offers a pawn sacrifice which objectively is wholly unclear.

1 l ... exd4 1 2.Yfdl dxc3 14..ic2 Ele8

1 3.�xc3 �a5

It was later established that 14 . . . c5 would be better. After that, White hardly has sufficient compensation.

15.f4 b4 16.�d5 �xd5 17.Yfxd5 c6 1 8.Yfd3 g6 19. ci!> hl .if8 20.Elfl .ig7 It was worth considering 20 . . . Wb6 or 20 . . . c5. By acting irresolutely, Black helps his opponent's initiative to develop.

21 .id2 c5 22.ia4 �U8 23.Elabl Yfb6

And here an improvement was 23 . . . c4 with counterplay.

Don't the ideas of the Alekhine - Fine game overlap with those of this last example?

Weak Square Complexes In a number of previous examples we saw that the secure deployment and active operation of the fighting forces was helped by gaining firm control of weak points in the opponent's camp (for example outposts in front of a backward or isolated pawn, etc.) . A fairly common situation i s one that features a complex of weak squares of one colour. The emergence of such a complex depends not only on the character of the pawn chain but also on the presence and positioning of any minor pieces (and of the queens!). A particularly important question is whether there are bishops on the board, and where. Is there a defending bishop to cover the colour of the weak square complex? Is there an attacking

156

Soviet Chess Strategy

bishop, pressurizing this same object (which is rather unusual in being an "empty" one) ? Naturally the strength of the aggressive bishop greatly increases if it has no opposite number on the defending side. In that case the weak square complex is all the more keenly felt. In addition the weakness is especially palpable while queens are on the board, and, of course, when the king is threatened with attack. The game given below, in which a full-scale plan for playing on a weak square complex was broadcast loud and clear for the first time, appeared as a veritable strategic sensation.

Reuben Fine - Mikhail Botvinnik Amsterdam 1938

15.0-0 0-0 16 ..bc3 dxc3 17.\Wel a5 1 8.\Wxc3 J.a6 19.gfal .ib5

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

20.gd4! Refusing to be tempted by the unnecessary 20.l'!xa5 l'!xa5 2 1 .Wxa5 Wxa5 22.l'!xa5 l'!d8, when Black has put the worst behind him.

8 7 6

20 ...\We7 21 .gd6! a4 22.\We3 ga7 23.�d2 a3 24.c4 .ia4 25.exf6 \Wxf6 26.gxa3 ge8 27.h3 gaa8 28.�f3 \Wb2 29.�e5 \Wb I t 30.�h2 \WfS 3 1 .\Wg3!

5 4 3

Black resigned.

2

13 ....bc3t 14.J.d2 f6?

The final phase of the game was transformed into a powerful attack against the black king. The threat of l'!a3-f3, with l'!f7 to follow, was unanswerable. In this example White had no dark-squared bishop, but the weakness of the dark squares was underlined by the action of his other pieces, with the leading roles filled not only by the mighty knight on e5 or the queen, but also (quite a rare case!) by the rook that performed miracles with its manoeuvrability. The power of the blockade on Black's position is worthy of attention.

This already brings defeat in its wake. A more stubborn defence was 1 4 . . . a5 1 5 .i.xc3 dxc3 1 6.Wa l i.a6! 1 7J�xa5 Wc8 , with fair chances of survival.

The issue of utilizing a complex of squares was expounded, albeit in very general terms, as long ago as the end of the 1 920s, by Nimzowitsch

1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

12 ..bc6t bxc6 1 3J�a4! A remarkable manoeuvre. If it doesn't yet decide the outcome of the struggle, it does set the opponent some highly unpleasant strategic problems in connection with White's conquest of the dark-square complex. The white rook's outwardly risky but very effective journey to d4 and d6 is already prefigured!

157

Modern Positional Play in My System. By an irony of fate, Nimwwitsch himselfhad to experience all the unpleasantness of defending a weak square complex in the following well-known game.

7

Aron Nimzowitsch - Jose Raul Capablanca

5

New York 1927

8

6 4 3 2 1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

33 .. J:�e4! In our previous example (Fine - Botvinnik) we already saw what power a rook can exert on breaking through to the enemy rear. White can't prevent Black from further strengthening the position of his pieces. a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

White's position is very difficult in view of the irreparable weakness of the light squares and Black's resolute pressure with his pieces on the queenside. Although Black has no light­ squared bishop and is basically operating with his major pieces, his "white key" performance proceeds inexorabl�

30 ... �f5! 3 1 .�xf5t White can't avoid exchanging. After 3 1 .E!:ed2 ClJxd4 32.E!:xd4 E!:xd4 33.cxd4 Wfb5! 34.Wff3 E!:el Black would even more quickly penetrate to his opponent's rear.

31. .. gxf5 32.'ifa 32.Wfxh5 would lose at once to 32 . . . E!:h8 33.Wff3 E!:h4!.

32...i> g6 33J��ed2

34.�d4 �c4 35.'ifn 'ifb5 36. i> g3 �cxd4 37.cxd4 'ifc4 3S. i> g2 b5 39. i> gl b4! 4O.axb4 axb4 4 1 . i> g2 'ifc1 ! 42. i> g3 'ifhl ! 43.�d3 g e l 44.ga � d l 45.b3 8

7

6 5 4 3 2 1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

45 ... gc1 ! 46J:le3 �fl! White resigned. On 47.Wfe2 Black plays 47 . . . Wfg1 t 48.�h3 E!:fl (or even 48 . . . E!:e l ) . Th e scope o f this issue was immeasurably increased in the 1 940s and 50s, when such

158

Soviet Chess Strategy

openings as the French Defence, the Slav, the Nimzo-Indian, the Caro-Kann etc., began to undergo intensive development. A number of systems in these openings lead by a direct route to middlegame positions where the leitmotif is play on a weakened complex of squares. In our day several new and important maxims have been established. According to one of these, play on a weak square complex can sometimes more than compensate for the loss of one or two pawns or the exchange. In such cases, where a player utterly dominates one colour of squares, the result is a severe limitation of his opponent's play on the other colour too. This reveals a close affinity between the weak square theme and the principle of blockade. The exploitation of a weak square complex is, then, intimately linked to two characteristic and very important strategic plans: an attack on the opponent's king, and the gradual restriction of his play due to a tightening of the blockade on the critical squares.

Chapter 7 The Attack - Affinity between Strategic and Tactical Methods General Concepts Attack, together with defence, is undoubtedly the most universal of strategic concepts. The no­ tion of the attack is above all associated with such attractive qualities as unfettered boldness, imagination, resoluteness in action, breadth of scope, and, especially, tactical precision. At the moment of attack, the entire might of the blow is concentrated, so to speak, on a narrow spatial sector; the attacker is sometimes " burning his boats" that would have enabled him to retreat from his intended goal. In attack, the elements of strategy and tactics are extremely tightly interwoven . It is often hard to decide whether a particular attack (especially against the king) should come under the heading of a strategic plan or a purely tactical operation . Th e concept of attack should on no account be narrowed down t o include o n l y t h e k i n g a s its obj ect, which is what some chess teaching books do. An attack on other objects is equally pos­ sible. Its spearhead is often pointed at the centre, the queenside, mobile objects, and so on. Such attacks frequently demand j ust as much resolution, strategic risk and resourceful ness as an attack on the king. In Steinitz's positional theory, the attack was regarded primarily as a means to exploit an ad­ vantage. It was supposed to crown certain other offensive operations: pressure, initiative, siege, restriction of the mobility in the hostile camp, and so forth . Perhaps this was what gave rise to Steinitz's dictum that the player with the advantage is obliged to attack! At the present time, our understanding of the attack is much broader. In many cases it represents not the ultimate aim but an essential means of fighting for some particular positional trumps . Sometimes, rather than conclude the game, an attack will merely begin a new stage in the struggle for the advantage. In the modern view, the general aim of the attack is not the obligatory destruction of the enemy camp but the attainment of a tangible plus. We will j ust dwell on some dynamic contemporary methods of conducting the attack.

1 60

Soviet Chess Strategy

Dynamic Moments - Launching the Assault In many games the unleashing of the direct as­ sault is highly dynamic. Choosing the moment for it demands great skill. What hesitations afflict even the most experienced masters on sensing that such a moment has come! How difficult these moments sometimes are to de­ tect, and how irrecoverable they are! The psychological factors of mastery are a theme little investigated up to now. Let us j ust note that the taking of risks, in the face of a possible tactical refutation, is also a frequently effective weapon in the practical struggle.

The Sudden Attacking Coup

Objectively, Black has the better prospects. White, however, has a slight but unpleasant kingside initiative. Black has to defend very carefully. Probably 27 . . .1::k 6 was appropriate here, although after 28 .�d l �d8 29.�d3 it still would not be a simple matter to neutralize White's threats. Black failed to sense the danger, however, and allowed his opponent to concentrate his forces rapidly on the kingside.

27 .. J�d4 28.tlf6t � h8 29.Vxe6! 8

7

6

Such actions have come to characterize the modern conception of the attack, especially against the king. A sudden blow against the king results from a weakness in the latter's shelter or from the opponent's swift concentration of his attacking forces.

4 3 2 1 a

Boris Spassky - Robert James Fischer Siegen Olympiad 1970 �

8

5

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

An unpleasant surprise for sure, and Fischer's state of mind was evidently quite affected by it; his subsequent play was not a success.

29 .. J�d6!

7

The true power of White's threats is revealed after 29 . . .!'!d l ?! 30.YMf7!! �xe l t 3 1 .<j;lg2 liJe3t 32. c;ilf3 ! YMc6t 33.c;ilg3 �gl t 34.c;ilh4 �xg4t 35.hxg4 YMh l t 36.c;ilg5 and Black has to play 36 . . . liJxg4 giving up a piece for insufficient compensation to say in the game. After 36 . . . �c8 37.�e2 YMh3 38.5! wins, avoiding the draw with a check on c5 and sacrifice on 5 .

6 5

4 3 2 1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

A few moves earlier Fischer had quite reasonably accepted a pawn sacrifice.

30.Ve4 gflm

The right way is 30 .. J'!ad8! 3 1 .g5 �d2 when Black has no concerns.

161

The Attack - Affi n ity between Strategic and Tactical Methods

31 .g5 gd2 32.gefl Vc7?

39.gmt!

This leads to defeat. By now White's position is dearly better, but Black could still defend stubbornly, for instance with 32 .. .l:k8! with the idea 33.'1We7 Vlic7 with even chances. White can still push with 33.f5, but Black is not without counterplay.

33.gxd2! �xd2

Black resigned. Against a weakened structure round the castled king, a sudden attack is constantly lurking. As a rule this kind of attack involves powerful tactical measures. Thus in the following example the outcome of the fight was decided by a sudden attack on weakened squares in the castled position.

Alexey Suetin Vadim Faibisovich -

Kaliningrad 1972 �

8

7

6 5 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

4

h

3

34.Vd4! Fischer must have missed this manoeuvre. Now even after the best reply, 34 . . . Vlib6 35 .Vlixb6 axb6 36J:k l �c4 37.a4, Black is in a bad way.

34 gd8 35.�d5t 'it> g8 36.gfl! �c4 37.ge2 gd6 38.ge8t 'it> f7 •.•

2 1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

White rather seems to be eyeing the queenside, but an attack on the other wing is his chief underlying design. In answer to:

29 �c5 ••.

There followed:

8

7

30Jlxf8t gxf8 3 1 .Vd4 Ve5 32.Vc4t!

6 5 4 3 2 1 a

b

c

d

e

f

� g

h

And it became dear that 32 . . . Vlie6 would be met by the immediately decisive 33.i!a7!! i!O (33 . . . Vlixc4 34.i!g7t 'iii h 8 35.i!xg6t and mates) 34.i!a8t i!fB 3 5 .Vlid4 Vlie5 36.Vlixe5 dxe5 37.i!xfBt 'iii xfB 38 . .ia3 . Black therefore resigned. The possibility of quickly concentrating your forces on the vulnerable sector is what tends to stimulate a sudden attack on the king.

Soviet Chess Strategy

1 62

A sudden attack is possible not only against the king but against other objects. Here is an example of a sudden attack on the centre.

Mikhail Botvinnik - VassUr Smyslov

8 7 6 5 4

Moscow 1 954

l .d4 1L1f6 2.e4 g6 3.g3 .ig7 4 ..ig2 0-0 5.1L1c3 d6 6.1L1f3 lLlbd7 7.0-0 e5 S.e4 e6 9 .ie3 lLlg4 10.i.g5 'lWb6 •

3 2 1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

22 ...haS! 23.gxb2 lLlxg5t! 24. i> h2 lLlf3t 25. i> h3 hb2 26.'lWxa7 .ie4 27.a4 i> g7 2SJ�d1 .ie5 29.'lWe7 geS 30.a5 ge2 3 1 . i> g2 tLld4t 32. i> f1 .if3 33.gb1 lLle6 White resigned.

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

In answer to the natural:

Such impromptu attacks had also been seen in earlier games, but to execute them was not to employ a method; rather they were viewed as an outburst of creativity and intuition. Suffice it to recall the following remarkable game.

Jose Raul Capablanca - Alexander Alekhine

1 1 .h3

Buenos Aires 1927

Black began a sudden, sharp and risky attack on the centre.

1 l ... exd4! 12.tLla4 'lWa6 13.hxg4 b5 14.1L1xd4 bxa4 15.1L1xe6 'lWxe6 16.e5 'lWxe4 17.haS lLlxe5! 1sJk1 'lWb4 19.a3 'lWxb2 20.'lWxa4 i.b7! Better than 20 . . . il.xg4 2 1 .'lWxa7.

21.gbl? Such sudden attacks have a powerful effect on the defender's mental state. The right continuation is 2 1 .il.xb7 'lWxb7 22.!'k3 .!tJf3t 23.!'i:xf3 'lWxf3 24.il.e7 !'i:c8 25 .il.xd6, when a draw is the most likely result.

21 ... 1L1f3t 22. i> h1

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

Black has sacrificed a pawn but seems to have fettered White's kingside development.

1 63

The Attack - Affi n ity between Strategic and Tactical Methods However, Capablanca finds an effective plan which involves sacrificing the pawn back in order to attack the black king . The attack is very dangerous despite the small number of forces participating in it.

19.i.d3! Y!!ixgl 20.hln � f8 2l .i.e4 Y!!ih3 22.Y!!id2! i.e6 23.c4 a5 24J�gl ! Y!!ixh2 25.ghl Y!!ic7 26.Y!!ib 2! The threats are continuous and devastating. White now threatens 27.¥;Va3t Q1g8 28 .ih7t Wh8 29.i.f5t Q1g8 30J�dh4.

predominated in the examples we have j ust looked at, here the strategic aspect of similar plans is more ptonounced. At the same time this kind of attack does not arise spontane­ ously but results from the development of an offensive begun on other parts of the board. Very often this device amounts to the rightful transformation of a positional advantage; for instance, superiority in the centre is utilized in order to shift the weight of the assault onto the opponent's king.

Robert James Fischer - Svetozar Gligoric

26 Y!!ic5 27..id5! •••

Now the threat of 28.i.xe6 fxe6 29J'l:f4t Wg8 30.¥;Vc2 rears its head.

Havana 1964

1 .e4 e5 2.�f3 �oo 3 .ib5 a6 4 .hOO dxOO 5.0-0 f6 6.d4 i.g4 7.c3 exd4 8.cxd4 Y!!id7 9.h3 .le6 lO.�c3 0-0-0 1 l ..if4! •

27 J�a6 ••

A more stubborn defence was 27 . . Jl:ad8, though after 28 .i.xe6 White would still have every chance of winning.

•

White has acquired a pawn centre and plainly reveals his intentions for queenside action. Already in the event of 1 1 . . .g5 1 2.ig3 h5 1 3 .d5! cxd5 1 4Jk l ! , a very sharp attack on the enemy king could arise: 8

7

6 5

4 3

2 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

28J:ie4! gd6 29J�h7! � e7 30.Y!!ixg7 � d8 31 ..he6 fxe6 32.Y!!ixb7 White won.

Transferring the Attack to the King This strategic device, closely linked to the fore­ going one, is perhaps merely a more complex case of a sudden coup. If tactical factors clearly

a

b

c

The variations revealing:

d

e

given

f

by

g

h

Fischer

are

a) 14 . . . id6 1 5 .tLla4! Q1b8 1 6.tLlc5 ¥;Ve7 1 7.tLlxa6t! bxa6 1 8 .tLld4 i.d7 1 9.¥;Vb3t Q1a7 20J'hc7t!! ixc7 2 1 .ixc7 ib5 22.tLlc6t! ixc6 23 .¥;Vb6t Q1a8 24.¥;Vxa6# [Editors' note: 1 6 . . . i.xc5 is good for Black, so 1 6.e5! with an initiative is better.]

164

Soviet Chess Strategy

b) On 1 4 . . . dxe4 White wins the game in fantastic style with: 1 6J!xc7!! �xd l 1 7Jk8t!! �a7 ( l 7 ... �xc8 1 8 .lLlb6#) 1 8 .ib8t �a8 1 9.1Llb6#!

18 .. .J.xh3 19.e5! �xe5 20.dxe5 £Xe5 21 .�c5t �b8 22.gxh3 e4 23.�xe4 'ee7 24J�c3 b5 25.'ec2

1 l ... �e7

Sometimes such a transfer of the assault is facilitated by weaknesses in the pawn cover round the king that were created at an early stage in the game. Initially these weaknesses may not play a major role in the struggle, yet because of them the king's position is always to some extent uncomfortable. Of course, you may point to plenty of positions where this last factor had practically no influence on the fate of the game. Nonetheless this kind of strategic resource should not be forgotten. In the following example Black's "Achilles' heel" turned out to be the h6-point, which for a long time had been a wholly insignificant weakness.

1 1 . . . id6 is safer.

12J��c1 �g6 13.J.g3 J.d6 14.�a4! .ixg3 After this, White's outpost on c5 gains noticeably in strength. The correct course was 14 .. .'�b8 1 5 .lLlc5 �e7.

1 5.fxg3 �b8 White's attack, initially directed against the centre, is increasingly changing its character and switching to the enemy king. Thus, 1 5 . . . b6 is bad in view of 1 6.d5! .ifl 1 7.�e2 etc.

Black resigned.

16.�c5 'ed6 17.'ea4

Alexey Suetin - Vitaly Tseshkovsky Kislovodsk 1973 8 7 6 5 4 3

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

17 ... �a7? Leading to the denouement. After 1 7 . . . ic8 1 8 Jk3 lLlf8! Black could still defend stubbornly.

18.�xa6! The decisive stroke, demolishing the black king's cover.

2

V///" //'. . .-:-:-:"://.7>-'-;- ,

1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

For the moment the active operations are unfolding in the centre:

22.'ed2! J.e8 23.�d5 �xd5 24.'exd5t �h7 25.'exc5 But not 25.lLlxc5 27.lLlxb7 �c7 etc.

�a5t

26.�f1

ic6

The Attack - Affinity between Strategic and Tactical Methods

25 ...f1xc5 26.flxc5 hb2 27.fle6! Although the game has been transformed into a complex ending, Black's position is growing more and more difficult. His king comes under an unexpected and very sharp attack.

27 .. J�g8 Forced; after 27 . . '!,!f6 28.l2k7 l'!c8 29.tiJxe8! l'!xe8 30.l'!d7t cj;>h8 3 1 .l'!xb7, White has a won position. Of course 27 . . . l'!f7? is also unplayable owing to 28.tiJg5t.

28J�d5! .tf6 29J�lhl ! The only way. White keeps h 6 firmly i n his sights, whereas 29.l'!f4? would give Black some counter-chances after 29 . . ..ig6 with the idea of . . . .tf6-g5.

29 ....ig6 30J�d7t .ig7 3 1 .c5! �ab8 32 ..ic4 .ie8 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

33.�xg7t! Black resigns. After 33 . . . l'!xg7 34.tiJf8t cj;>h8 35 .l'!xh6t, he is mated.

1 65

Chapter 8 Methods of Defence - Switching from Defence to Attack In numerous cases at the end of an offensive which has brought material or positional gains, some initiative or attacking potential passes into the opponent's hands. As a rule, extinguishing the counterattack requires accurate defensive action. In short, the switch from attack to defence is a perfectly normal occurrence. According to the modern view of chess, an equally high level of skill in attack and defence is of paramount importance. Qualities needed for the defence are persistence, tenacity, meticulous precision in executing your plans, and, of course, activity. It would be wrong to suppose that defence requires less imagination than attack. Imagination here takes a specific form, which consists in divining your opponent's intentions in good time.

Samuel Reshevsky - Tigran Petrosian Zurich 1953

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

White has two bishops and a mobile pawn centre. He is threatening e5-e6. But Black takes a decision which completely upsets White's plans.

168

Soviet Chess Strategy

2S .. J�e6! An excellent idea. Pursuing his basic aim (a blockade on the light squares) , Black offers a positional exchange sacrifice - a concession which, in the present situation, is both minimal and highly opportune. White would probably do better to ignore the sacrifice and try to mount an attack on the kingside with E:g3, h2-h4 etc.

constantly have to face the prospect of your defensive resources diminishing step by step, while conversely your opponent's resources for active play are increasing. In this respect the following example is revealing.

Vladimir Bagirov Lev Polugaevsky -

Leningrad 1977

26.a4 �e7! But not 26 . . . b4 27.d5! E:xd5 28 .,ixe6 fxe6 29.Y!Yxc4, and the situation turns in White's favour.

27..he6 fxe6 2S.Vfl �dS

l .d4 �f6 2.c4 cS 3.�a ad4 4.�xd4 �c6 S.�c3 e6 6.e3 dS 7.adS exdS S.J.e2 Ad6 9.0-0 0-0 10.Aa AeS 1 1 .�xc6 l 1 .liJ de2 is better.

1 l bxc6 12.J.dl Vd6 1 3.g3 .th3 14 ..igl .ixg2 I S. 'Iflxgl cS

8

•••

7 6 5 4 3 2 1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

Black's pieces have come to life as if at the wave of a magic wand. White's material plus is purely academic. Black's chances are no worse. Let's examine the most important modern defensive principles.

Persistence Persistence and resilience are essential in many situations. Every master has to possess these qualities. With the modern strategic approach, however, instances of patient passive defence are fairly rare. In practice such defence is very difficult. In the absence of counterplay, you

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

16.f4? White commits a typical error, incautiously weakening the light squares in his own position. Black conducts the following phase of the game with the utmost precision.

16 ....ixc3 17 ..ixc3 �e4 I S.Va �UeS 19JUdl Vb6 20J:�acl gadS 21 .gc2 d4! Black creates a central passed pawn which ties down White's forces even more.

1 69

Methods of Defence - Switching fro m Defence to Attack

Championship in 1 9 53, and he was only j ust sixteen. Playing against experienced masters was not easy for him, but it was his exceptional tenacity in defence that stood out - perhaps more than his art of attack which was later ro become famous. As a rule, tenacity is inextricably bound up with an even more important quality ingenuity. Fischer too distinguished himself from the outset by outstanding defensive tenacity. a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

22.exd4 cxd4 23 ..te1 'ifa6 24.'ifb3 h5 25.'ifc4 'ifb7 26.'ifc6 'ife7 27 ..ta5 �d6 28.'ifc7 'ife6 29.'ifc4 �d5 30 ..tb4 a5 3 1 ..ta3

Robert James Fischer ESm Geller -

Curali=ao 1962 8 7

L .=co; P,"///·,

6 5

4 3 2 1 a a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

31 ... h4! 32.'ifc6 h3t 33.�gl d3 34.'ifxe6 �xe6 35.�c8t � h7 36.£5 �ee5 37.�c4 d2 38.b4 �c3! White resigned.

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

White's situation is unenviable. Black only needs to play 1 6 . . . a6! to make the position critical, in view of the threatened 1 7 . . . b 5 . But he hesitates and White saves himself.

16 ... �e8 17.�dl �g4? Tenacity

From my own observations I may say that tenacity in defence is j ust as good a "litmus test" for genuine chess talent (and for a chess fighter, of course!) as the ability to attack. I cannot help recalling the first time I met Mikhail Tal. It was at the USSR Team

Another mistake. It was essential to play 1 7 . . . llJe4. Now White goes over from defence to attack.

1 8.h3 'ifh4 19.�df1 .ixd4 20.'ifxd4 �ad8 21 .�xd5! .ixd5 22 ..ixd5 �f6 23.c4! �d7 24.�e3 �ed8 25.'ife5 h6 26 .ta •

With precise play White converted his advantage into a win.

Soviet Chess Strategy

1 70

The following game is a splendid model of ingenious defence.

Lothar Schmid Isaak Boleslavsky

32J�b7 .if5 33.�e2 gc8 34.gb8 gxb8 35.'ifxb8t c;f;I h7 Draw.

-

Defence and the Elements of Strategy

Hamburg 1960

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

It looks as if Black's position is hopeless, as there is no defence to the threats on the e- and f-files. From this moment on, however, Black finds some astonishing defensive resources.

17 d5! 1 8J��xe7 dxc4 19.'iffl .th3! .•.

Once more Black gains a tempo for the defence.

20.i.xf6 .ixfl 2 IJ�te5 'ifh3! 22.hd8 gxd8 23.ge7 gf8 24.gxb7 Black has fended off the direct attack on his king, but it now looks as if White has gained a decisive plus on the queens ide. Black's pieces, moreover, are thoroughly tied up on the other wing. And yet Black's ingenuity continues to work wonders.

24 ....ig2 25.gxa7 'ifxh2 26.b4 cxb3 27.axb3 'ifhlt 28. c;f;I b2 .ih3! 29.b4 'ifc6 30.'ifd4 'ifg2 3 1 .'ife5 'iffl! With amazing skill Black keeps on worrying his opponent with counter-threats.

The elements of strategy are the inseparable accompaniment to plans for attack and de­ fence. Take, say, the notion of simplification. In most cases simplification is unwelcome to the attacker, but it is a different matter if he is exchanging off his opponent's key defensive pieces. This is an important stage in the devel­ opment of the offensive. Let us recall, for in­ stance, the typical attack against Black's castled position on the kingside in the Dragon Varia­ tion of the Sicilian Defence. An integral part of White's plan is exchanging the bishop on g7. Without this, it is hard to imagine the attack succeeding. Conversely, although as a rule the interests of defence are served by simplifying, it is im­ portant to preserve some particular pieces from the general exchanges. Sometimes the whole defence is held together literally by one piece. Take that same Sicilian Dragon struc­ ture. In the interests of defence and counter­ attack Black sometimes needs to preserve his dark-squared bishop at any cost, even that of an exchange sacrifice. Or take the elements of the pawn forma­ tion. The attack almost inevitably requires pawn advances. Without them it is hard to open the lines that are essential for mounting the decisive assault. Conversely in defence it is very important to leave your pawn shield un­ touched for as long as you can. Even a slight weakening of the pawn position round your opponent's castled king creates conditions for striking the decisive blow. The methods of at­ tack against various weakened pawn structures have become standard. Under a broader conception of positional play, several valuable generalizations can be

Methods of Defence - Switching fro m Defence to Attack made about the principles o f defence. For the defending side, as a rule, a closed structure is more congenial, as it makes it harder for the at­ tacking forces to deploy their activity. But this only holds if the defender has enough space for manoeuvring! Otherwise a gradual paralysis of his own forces may set in.

171

19 .. J�a6 There is no future at all in 1 9 . . . �f6 20.�d l ! when White increases the pressure unhindered.

Activity the Main Theme of the Defence -

Defence is very active by nature; it comprises a wide range of precepts. To this day the following example offers an instructive model of active defence.

Max Euwe - Alexander Alekhine Holland 1937 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

20 ... ha5! 2 1 .b4 .ixb4! An amazing situation. White is unable to exploit Black's "hanging" pieces: 22.�xa6 tiJxa6 23.tiJxb4 tiJxb4 etc. But then he was not actually counting on an immediate win. His next move, however, seems to do irreparable damage to Black's pawn structure. a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

White comes up with an energetic thrust:

19.a5! We should note that the win of a pawn would give him nothing to speak of: 1 9.tiJxfS tiJb3 20J�b l g6 And now: 2 1 .tiJd4 tiJxd4 22.ed �d7, or 2 1 .tiJg3 �e7 22J�d l �c8 23.e4 tiJxc l 24.�bxc l �xc l 25 .�xc l id6! 26.exd5 �xb2 In all lines Black has adequate compensation in the shape of his better placed pieces.

22 ..ib2 �a5 23 ..ixg7 gg8 24..ie5 After 24.id4 �ag6! 2 5 .g3 ib6 Black has adequate play.

24 ... �b3 25.ga4 Other rook moves would not bring any real gains either. For example: 2 5 J:%ab l tiJd2 26J:%b8t id8 27.ic7 �d7, or 2 5 J!a3 tiJd2 26.�fa l tiJc4 27.�a4 �ag6 28.g3 ib6, and White has no significant advantage.

25 ... gag6 26 ..ig3 .ib6 27.gf4 h5 28.gh4

172

Soviet Chess Strategy White's followed:

last

move

was

e5-e6.

There

2 1 . . .'I11Yxe6 22.�d2 Lf3 23.gel gd8!!

A remarkable counterstroke, not only extinguishing the attack but taking over the initiative. Play proceeded:

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

24.gxe6t fxe6 25.i.g6t bxg6 26.�c3 i.e4 27.�e5 i.d5 28.�xg7 gf8 29.�xg6t c,!;> d7 30.�g7t i.e7 3 1 .a4 �c6 32.axb5 axb5 33.i.h4 gg8 34.�f7 ga8 35.gxa8 gxa8 36.h3 b4

h

28 ... a5! 29.gxh5 gc6 30.�a3 d4! 3 1 .exd4 �xd4 32.gelt c,!;> d7 33. c,!;> fl gc3 34.�bl gc2 35.gdl c,!;> c6 It isn't hard to see that Black's resourcefulness has brought definite results. By now the chances are even. Modern methods of active defence are extremely varied. The answer to a direct attack may, for instance, be a counter-attack against different objects in the opponent's camp. This device goes far beyond the bounds of tactics; in numerous cases it has a strategic content.

Karen Grigorian - Vladimir Tukmakov Baku 1972 ...

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 I a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

Black gradually advantage.

exploited

his

material

Thus, active defence is an effective way not only to equalize the chances but also, not infrequently, to achieve a plus. Defendin g can be one way of winning the game. The whole question is how to defend, and how to attack!

Interrelation between Methods of Attack and Defence In chess, as we saw from a number of foregoing examples, the initiative can often pass to and fro in the course of the same game. It frequently happens that after acquiring a specific gain of an enduring nature, the attacking side needs to go over temporarily to the defence (in order to preserve that gain) . The defence will often be a lengthy affair. As an instance of this, we may take the situations that arise from the Marshall Attack in the Ruy Lopez: l .e4 e5 2.lLlf3 lLlc6 3 .i.b5 a6 4.i.a4 lLlf6 5 . 0-0 i.e7 6.Ei:e l b5 7.i.b3 0-0 S .c3 d5 9.exd5 lLlxd5 1 0.lLlxe5 lLlxe5 1 1 .Ei:xe5 c6 etc. Here, as a rule, White finds himself in the role of defender in the very opening. In the modern dynamic struggle, the switch from attack to defence (and vice versa) tends to be a most delicate matter, demanding acute positional flair and deep calculation.

1 73

Methods of Defence - Switching from Defence to Attack Let's look at the following examples.

was 29 . . . �xh2 30.�c4 cbf7 3 1 .�b 5 , with double-edged play.

Switching from Attack to Defence

Ratmir Kholmov Mark Taimanov -

Tbilisi 1959

30.YlYc4 YlYf6 3 1 .�d5 YlYfl 32.glte5 g6 The threat was 33.E:xf5 ! .

33.h4 gd6 Not 33 . . . h5? 34.ltJe7t! �xe7 3 5 .!!xe6 �f7 36.E:xg6t etc.

34.h5 goo

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

Over a long period Black has held a strong initiative. At this point, however, it appears he should have contented himself with the minimum gain by exchanging queens and trying to exploit his superior queenside pawn structure. Stubbornly, he tries to achieve more.

21. f6 22.YlYe2 YlYd5 23.�bl �d4 24.YlYfl �oo 25.YlYe2 �d4 26.YlYg2! ••

At this point another strategic precept stands out very clearly - the switch from defence to attack (this will be discussed further on) . We should note that the two precepts are closely interrelated.

26 �e6 27.g5 f5 •••

It wasn't too late to find a way to compromise, by playing 27 . . . ltJxg5 28.ltJxg5 fxg5 29.VNxg5 E:f8 30.E:xe5 VNxf3 with a certain draw.

28.�c3 YlYd2 29.YlYf1 ! YlYxg5? This has lamentable consequences. Better

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

35.YlYh4! �fll 36.h:x:g6 YlYxg6 37.YlYe7t � g8 38.�f6t eb h8 39.glte6 YlYgl t 40. eb a2 Black resigned.

From Defence to Counterattack If switching from attack to defence is rather a gloomy necessity even in the most auspicious cases, the switch from defence to attack is always illuminated in rosy tones. Counterplay is the best way of fighting against your opponent's initiative and attack. If neutralizing the threats by purely defensive methods may eventually achieve static equilibrium, counterplay means contending for the advantage. In my view, in modern chess the art of counterattack is indeed the most widespread defensive resource. It would not be much of an exaggeration to say that this art is the only

174

Soviet Chess Strategy

thing that can genuinely widen your creative scope. In our examples of active defence we already saw what rich possibilities there were for going over to the offensive. And of course the most powerful means of asymmetrical defence - and counterplay - is counterattack, leading as a rule to an extremely sharp fight.

Eivind Poulsson - Ivan Farago Gausdal 1976

l .d4 e6 2.�a �f6 3.c4 dS 4.�c3 cS S.cx:dS �xdS 6.e3 �c6 7.i.c4 cx:d4 S.exd4 i.e7 9.0-0 0-0 10J:tel �xc3 1 l .bxc3 b6 12.i.d3 i.b7 13.YlYc2 g6 14.YlYd2 i.f6 IS.h4 gcs 16.hS

Black went on to win after:

IS.YlYxc3 hd4 19.YlYc2 .bal 20.i.a3 YlYgS! 21 .i.e4 gcs 22.YlYe2 he4 23.YlYxe4 i.g7 Counter-attack has become the leitmotif of many a contemporary opening system. Take this variation of the Sicilian Defence:

Albin Planinec - Dragoljub Mink Ljubljana 1973

1 .e4 cS 2.�a d6 3.d4 cx:d4 4.�xd4 �f6 S.�c3 a6 6.i.g5 e6 7.£4 �bd7 s.YlYa YlYc7 9.0-0-0 bS 10.eS i.b7 1 1 .YlYh3 dxeS 12.�xe6 fxe6 13.YlYxe6t i.e7 14.hbS axbS I S.�xbS YlYc6 16.�d6t c;f? dS 17.fxeS Only a few years ago hardly anyone would seriously have taken up Black's cause. His king is virtually under fire from the entire white army. And yet in view of some remarkable counter-attacking resources, Black's defence is by no means broken. The following game serves to confirm this.

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

This position represents the moment of transition from opening to middlegame. What seems to be very much a strategic struggle is in progress. At this stage Black's usual plan was to play "for points" on the queens ide, with 1 6 . llJa5 etc. White in turn would strive to work up an attack with his pieces against the king. But now a completely new treatment of the position, or more exactly a new solution to it, was revealed. Like a bolt from the blue, there followed: . .

16 ... �xd4!! 17.�xd4 gxc3!!

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

17 ... 'i�k7! To show the full seriousness of the problem of counter-attack, I should point out that this move is an improvement of Black's defence discovered during home analysis.

Methods of Defence - Switching from Defence to Attack Previously 1 7 . . .i':�e8 1 8 .exf6 gxf6 1 9.1Llxb7t had been played, with a slight advantage to White in Bronstein - Ciocaltea, Kislovodsk 1 968.

18.Yfxe7!? Perhaps White should have settled for equality with 1 8 .Axf6 gxf6 1 9.'lWxe7 l'!xa2 20.lLlxb7 l'!al t 2 1 .\tld2 'lWxg2t 22.\tlc3 'lWc6t etc.

18 .. J�xa2! 19J�d4? It was essential to play 1 9 .Axf6 gxf6 20 .lLlxb 7, reverting to the line in the last note.

19 .. Jlalt! The start of the decisive counter-attack.

8

7

6 5 4 3 2 1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

22 .. J�a4t!! 23.�xa4 .ic6t 24. � b4 White could not save himself with 24.lLlb5t either: 24 ... Axb5t 25.\tlxb5 'lWc6t 26.\tlb4 lLld5t

24..J�b8t 25. � c4 �d5 26.�e8t gxe8 27.Yfd6t �b7 28.gxd5 Yfxhl 29J!�a5 Yfe4t 30.�b3 gxe5 3 1 ..id8 Yff3t 32.c3 Yff7t 33.c4 ge3t 34.�b4 Yfm Black soon won.

175

Strategic Aims of Tactical Operations In a number of cases a strategic plan has its source, so to speak, in a purely tactical opera­ tion. For instance an exchange is undoubtedly one of the most widespread tactical devices. In most cases it takes place for eminently tactical reasons. Yet there are circumstances where the exchanging operation has profound strategic implications. Let's return to the issues of attack and defence that we have just examined. In the vast majority of cases the attacking side avoids simplification {unless of course it brings concrete dividends} , while the defender conversely looks for ways to exchange pieces. For the exploitation of a material advantage or a clear positional one, simplification can be the most rational method. After all, whenever pieces of equal status are exchanged, this in­ creases the relative disparity in value between the remaining forces. This principle is linked to some subtler tactical devices that have a strategic import. In particular, the threat of an exchange may be partly utilized to compel the opponent to abandon some strong outpost or other. In other words, by this device you pursue the strategic aim of improving the position of your own pieces {while that of your opponent's pieces is weakened} . Very often, then, positional themes are furthered by exchanges. Similar themes also underlie some other devices that might seem purely tactical. This applies primarily to the pin. Most often, of course, a pin makes a serious impact in moments of purely tactical conflict. Yet in numerous cases a pin in the opening phase will logically influence the way the play develops. The strategic significance of a pin is that sooner or later it induces the opponent to make moves which weaken his position in a way that affects the whole course of the game. As Nimzowitsch said, a pin doesn't have to last

176

Soviet Chess Strategy

for ages. A sporadic pin (or the threat of it) is in itself an important positional factor. How many issues of this kind are raised by the Ruy Lopez! Or by the Four Knights Game:

1 .e4 e5 2.�f3 �c6 3.�c3 �f6 4.J.b5 J.b4 5.0-0 0-0 6.d3 .ixc3 7.bxc3 d6 8.J.g5 Yffe7 9.�el

What is best for Black now? Should he drive the bishop away at once with 6 . . . h6 7 . .lh4 g5, or should he play 6 . . .J.g4 with a counter-pin? Should he parry the positional threat of 7.llJd5 with 6 . . . .le6, or should he ignore this threat by playing 6 . . . llJa5 or even castling? In all these cases he will, primarily, be giving attention to purely positional and strategic considerations.

The Art of Manoeuvring in Balanced Positions

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

9 ... �d8!? 1 0.d4 �e6 And so on. Or take the following example, from an already forgotten line of the Giuoco Piano:

In master play you often have to cope with "prosaic" situations - with playing balanced positions that are boring in appearance. As we observed before, balanced positions in modern play are not symmetrical in character and are by no means synonymous with a quick draw. Playing such positions demands great manoeuvring skill. Frequently one of the players will command a good deal more space. But if the constricted side has possibilities for flexible manoeuvring, such positions are not only defensible but viable in every sense.

Tigran Petrosian - Boris Spassky

1 .e4 e5 2.�f3 �c6 3.J.c4 J.c5 4.�c3 �f6 5.d3 d6 6.J.g5 The line perhaps merely presents us with a complex of characteristic ideas that always accompany the problem of pinning. 'Y

8 7

Moscow 1966 8 7 6 5 4

6

3

5

2

4

1

3

a

2

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

Black appears to be suffocating for lack of

1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

1 77

Methods of Defence - Switching from Defence to Attack space, but upon closer inspection he proves to have excellent scope for manoeuvring. Interestingly Spassky even rated his position as the pleasanter of the two. This is probably an over-optimistic j udgement, but the further course of the game demonstrates that Black does have a wealth of resources for counterplay.

41. 1Ye6t 42. <.t> g2 Ah6 43.tldl tlf8 44.tlb2 tld7 45J�df3 1Yg4 46.1Yc4t <.t> g7 47.tld3 geS 4SJ�bl •.

White misses the strongest continuation of the attack: 48 .ib2! The idea is to meet 48 . . . YMe6 with the decisive 49.itJxe5! itJxe5 50.YMxe6 l:he6 5 1 Jhf6! etc.

4S 1Ye6 49.1Yxe6 gxe6 50.b4 axM 5 1 .gxM ga7 52.gb2 .•.

56.ge2 Ad4 57. <.t> h3 gf8 5S.gel gaaS 59. <.t> g2 ggS Black could already have seized the initiative with 59 . . . g5!.

60.tle1 g5 61 .tla gxh4 62.tlxh4 gg4 63.tlfS gagS 64. <.t> h3 gSg5?! Black has been manoeuvring superbly, deploying the concealed mechanism of his cramped position with great skill. But here he fails to find an effective way to take the initiative: 64 . . . h4! 6 5 .gxh4 :B:f4 etc.

65.gb l gxe4 66.gxe4 gxrs 67.ge2 ga 6S. <.t> g2 gd3 69.gd2 ge3 70.ga2! fS 7 1 .Ae1 tlxc5 n.Ar.z 8

Better was 52.:B:n , to bring this rook to b 1 . The initiative is gradually passing to Black.

7

52 ... geS 53JUl <.t> f7 54.a5 <.t> e6

5

6 4 3 2 1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

n ... gb3

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

Move by move Spassky improves the placing of his pieces by finding secure posts for them. The position of his king on e6 is very comfortable.

55.Ab4 Ae3! After a long slumber, the bishop too starts to play an active role.

Now it is Black who needs to force the draw. If 72 . . . :B:d3?, then 73 .ixd4 :B:xd4 74.:B:xb7! itJxb7 75 .a6, and White wins. A rook exchange is therefore unavoidable.

73J�xb3 tlxb3 74.ga3 tlc5 75.Axd4 exd4 76.ga d3! 77. <.t> r.z Draw. We should note that on transition from the opening to the middlegame there are a good many restricted positions which nonetheless contain considerable potential, thanks to their convenient manoeuvring possibilities.

178

Soviet Chess Strategy

Take the position arising from this variation of the English Opening:

Anatoly Karpov - Lajos Portisch

l.c4 cS 2.c�� 6 �f6 3.�c3 dS 4.cxdS �xdS S.e4 �b4 6..tc4 �d3t 7.c;!?e2 �xc1 t SJ�xc1 e6 9.d4 cxd4 10.�xd4

Milan 1975

Better is l O.ibStL

T

8 7 6

10 ...�xd4 1 1 .�xd4 a6 12J::lhdl

5 4 3 2 1 a

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

Even though White is six tempos ahead in development and has noticeably more space, his advantage is very slight. The point is that Black has no weak spots, and this enables him to manoeuvre flexibly and complete his mobilization successfully. Of course, such life-sustaining resources are by no means available in every constricted position. The examples we have looked at should not be confused with that large group of cramped and forlorn positions to which Tarrasch's dictum applies: ''A constricted position contains the seeds of defeat!" Contemporary practice yields a finely differentiated scale to measure the most minute advantages in positions where the opponent has no possibilities for active counterplay.

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

It looks as if the resources for combat are very limited and the game must unavoidably end in a draw. However, White has a small plus in the shape of slightly greater space in the centre, and this permits him to work up a kingside initiative.

17 J::leS lSJUel ge6 19.c4 Ab7 20.6 gbeS .•

Black had to think about breakin g with . . . f7f5 to gain more space on the kingside. To this end it was worth considering 20 .. J�f8.

21 .�d2 .ic6 22.b3 �e7 23.�f4 gbS 24..ic3 f6 2S. c;!? fl �f7 26.h4 geeS?! A much more active move was 26 . . . hS. Black's trouble is that he puts off any active counter-measures and gradually ends up in a thoroughly cramped position.

27.g4 gb7 2S.gb2 gebS 29.geb l gffi 30.gg1 Ad7 3 1 .�e3 �e6 32.�d3 .ic6 33.b4 cxb4 34.axb4 .ieS 3SJ::ld2 gb6 36.�d4! Starting a resolute offensive.

36 ...�eS? This leads to the loss of a pawn. But in the

179

Methods of Defence - Switchin g from Defence to Attack event of 36 . . . Wfe7 37.g5! fxg5 38 .l'!xg5 , Black's game is still very difficult. 8 7 6 5 4 3

a

2 1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

37.ti'xb6 ti'h2t 38. g;, e1 ti'xd2t 39. g;,xd2 cx:b6 40J�al �f7 41.gxa6 gb8 42. g;, d3 h5 43.b5! hxg4 44.fxg4 gc8 45.ga4 �e6 46.g5 5 47.ex5 h5t 48. g;, d4 g;, f7 49.�b4 g;, e6 50.ga6 gb8 5 1 .h5 �g4 52.h6! gxh6 53.gxh6 i5 It isn't hard to see that the endgame is lost for Black.

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

54.id2 gg8 55.�f4! gb8 56.ga7 g;, f6 57.gg7 �e6 58.gc7 gh8 59.gc6 gg8 60.gxd6 g;, 5 61 .gxb6 gg4 62J�xe6 g;,xe6 63. g;, e4 ggl 64.b6 Black resigned. With this we conclude our examination of the objective factors in modern positional play.

Conclusion Th e examples discussed in this book show how dangerous it i s t o overrate the si gnificance of obvious-seeming advantages in a position. I have tried to demonstrate that in the vast majority of cases a most important role is played by covert and primarily tactical features of the struggle. They come to light only in the dynamics of the game. The concept of chess dynamics is constantly being elaborated and enriched. It is in consequence of this that such factors as the co-operation of the forces, the initiative, the transformation of positional advantages, and so forth, have acquired great importance. With the contemporary evolution of opening theory, the investi gation of many middlegame problems is intimately connected with the study of opening structures. The role of dynamics, immeasurably increased, has brought far more complexity into chess thought. In numerous cases where complicated positions arise, it is insufficient to be guided by general positional considerations and the variations that support and clarify them. The boundaries of concrete thought in chess have been immensely widened. Yet it must not be supposed that chess is becoming drier and more uninteresting as a result of this. Far from it - the concrete thinking of our time is directed against the canons of formal logic and is based, above all, on the elements of imagination in the art of chess; and this constantly enhances the subtlety and interest of the chess struggle. Hence the ever-increasing demands on a chess player's skill. Acquiring this skill means not j ust filling your baggage with knowledge and tricks of the trade. It also means being able to foresee the concrete development of the struggle for a long way - and this is aided by possession of a wide­ ranging arsenal of strategic and tactical ideas and of course a high-level technique for calculating variations. Exercising chess skill also means not being afraid to take a healthy risk, and knowing how to apply the principles of the chess struggle flexibly. All this shows that the game of chess, like all creativity, is fascinating and infinite.

Appendix From the Book "The Middlegame in Chess" The Initiative Modern strategy accords prime importance to sacrifices for the initiative, continuing the best traditions of such notable masters of the attack as Anderssen, Morphy, Chigorin, Charousek, Alekhine, Breyer, Reti and Spielmann. Here is a classic example of such a sacrifice.

Ernst Griinfeld - Rudolf Spielmann Sopron 1934 8

7

6 5 4 3 2 1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

Black has a lead in development, but how is he to exploit it in such a closed position? The following solution is of great interest.

12 ... e5! 13.fxe5 �xe5! Black sacrifices a piece, obtaining a strong initiative which threatens to grow into an attack. The specific aim of the sacrifice is to keep the enemy king in the centre. It will then become an object of attack for Black's developed and harmoniously-working pieces.

182

Soviet Chess Strategy

Of course, this operation required far­ reaching calculation. But no matter how it was performed, concrete calculation could not have exhausted this position. When embarking on the combination, Black was guided first and foremost by his faith in the initiative, and his confidence that it would grow. What the author of the combination himself said on this subject is noteworthy: "The correctness of the knight sacrifice cannot be proved analytically, and in a correspondence game it might have met with a refutation. Yet in an over-the-board game with thinking time limited to one hour for 1 8 moves, such sacrifices are almost bound to lead to victory." (Rudolf Spielmann, The Art of

Sacrifice in Chess)

14.dxe5 d4! 1 5.lLldl 1 5 .exd4 was a better choice - not fearing a queen check on h4, in view of 1 6.';t>d l and 1 7.@c2.

1 5 ....L:e5 16.e4 At the cost of another pawn White holds up the opening of lines.

16 ... .L:e4 19 ..ie2?

17.lLlfl

.id5

1 8.W1h3

W1e7

Not an obvious mistake, but already decisive. White should have played 1 9.�d l , when the position remains very double-edged.

19 ... d3! White had not foreseen this. His king is now stuck in the centre and comes under a devastating attack.

2o.lLlxd3 gfe8 21 .@f1

2 1 .0-0 loses to 2 1 . . .i.d4 t.

21. ..hb2! 22.gel W1f6t 23.lLlfl .id4 24.W1g3 ge4! 25.h4 On 25 .W1f3 Black wins with 25 . . . Ei:xe2! 26.WI'xe2 i.c4!.

25 ... gae8 26 ..ib5 gxel t 27..L:el ge3 28.W1g5 gxel t 29.@xel W1xf2t 30.@dl .ixg2 White resigned after a few more moves. We must observe that to assess the initiative factor correctly, it is imperative to take its stability and durability into account and to consider the active resources of the defending side. It should be borne in mind that in many cases one player will have conceded the initia­ tive to his opponent deliberately, in exchange for some positional or material factors of an enduring nature. He will be counting on the possibility of gradually neutralizing his op­ ponent's initiative and utilizing the positional trumps he has gained. The following example is characteristic.

Semyon Furman Alexey Suetin -

Kiev 1954 ...

8 7 6 5

4 3 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

2 1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

183

From the Book "The Middlegame in Chess" Black is the exchange up, but White holds the initiative. His threats are very dangerous.

17 J1k8! ••

Possibly the only move. Black gives up a pawn but takes urgent measures to obtain active counterplay. It would only take a single passive move, such as 1 7 . . . .id7, to incur an irresistible attack after 1 8 .e5.

18.YlYd4 .id7 19.'l!rxa7 �e4! a

8

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

40.f4?

7

The decisive though barely obvious mistake. White hastens to carry out his plan of attack in the centre but does so prematurely, giving Black the chance to activate his rooks to good effect and seize the initiative.

6 5 4 3

4O ge4! 41 .a3 gae8 42.ge3 gd4 43.mh2 mm

2

•••

1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

!:J.

Black is willing to give up another pawn to wrest the initiative from his opponent. After 20 ..ixc4 l:!xc4 2 1 .'l!rxb7 he would have a very active position; White would already have numerous threats to parry.

White is tied down defending the key points in the centre. He cannot prevent the further strengthening of Black's position.

44.h5 gxh5 45.e5 �e4 46.ge1 fxe5 47.fxe5

20.h4 �e5 2 1 .ib l .ib5 22J:�e1 ga8 23.'l!re3 'l!ra5 •

By means of various threats, Black thwarts White's basic plan of an offensive in the centre (8-f4 and e4-e5) . Over a long series of moves a fierce battle for the initiative is fought out, demanding rapid and accurate calculation.

24.�d4 gee8 25-"1g1 .id7 26.�b3 'l!ra7 27.'l!rel 'l!ra6 28 ..ie3 .ia4 29.�e5 'l!ra5 30.'l!rfl �e4 31 ..id4 b6 32.�e6 .id7 33.�f4 'l!rd2 34.�e2 .ia4 35 .ic3 'l!re3 36.'l!re1 .ib5 37 .ib4 �d6 38.�c3 'l!rxe1 39.gxel .id7 •

•

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

47 �xa3! 48.gfl t me8 49.e6 he6! 50.dxe6 gMt 5 1 .mgl gxb4 •••

Black soon won.

Soviet Chess Strategy

1 84

This example shows that to contend with the opponent's initiative in such situations, it is most important to strive to obtain counter­ play. Difficult situations with concealed possibilities of counterplay are handled with remarkable skill by Viktor Korchnoi.

8 7 6 5

Vtktor Korchnoi - Bogdan Sliwa

4

Bucharest 1954

3 2

8

1

7

a

6

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

6.

2U�xh3!

5

An unpleasant surprise. White seizes the initiative from his opponent and his centre becomes a formidable force.

4 3

2 1 . .txh3 22.0-0-0 hfI?

2 1

19.�bd2 �xh3 20.lYxc7 .tg4

••

22 . . . J.g4 23.!!e l !!ab8 was much stronger. ������

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

23.gxf1 lYd3 24.e4 gac8 25.lYf4 b5

On the white side of a Two Knights Defence, Korchnoi has gone into a difficult variation. He has won a pawn but conceded a dangerous initiative to his opponent. Some very instructive complications arise, in which White ingeniously finds resources for counterplay at the same time as preserving his material plus.

1 l e3!? •••

By sacrificing another pawn, Black opens lines for the attack.

12.he3 he3 1 3.fxe3 �e4 14.�f1 lYh4t 1 5.g3 lYf6 16.c3 .tf5 17.lYa �g5 1 8.lYf4 lYg6? Black has lost his way in the complexities. He had to play 1 8 . . . lDxh3, maintaining the initiative after 1 9.!!xh3 .lxh3 20.lYxf6 gxf6.

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

26.g;,dl! An astute move. The threat is 27.!!f3 and Black is forced into a serious weakening of his position. Essentially the game has been decided.

From the Book "The Middlegame in Chess"

26 £5 17.e5 bxc4 1 8.d6 Wd5 29.Wd4 We6 30.gel gf7 3 1 .b3 cxb3 32.axb3 a5 33.c4 gd7 34.ge3 gb7 35.Wd5! Wxd5 36.cxd5 •..

White easily exploited his advantage. At the beginning of the game Black is compelled (to some extent) to submit to White's initiative. His own plans are in a measure dependent on the particular intentions of the attacking side. This does not of course mean that Black is condemned to defence and deprived of activity. He j ust has more in the way of difficulties, and may have to take more responsibility for his actions. If a minor error on White's part usually leads to no more than loss of the initiative, there are plenty of cases where a similar error by Black can have much worse consequences. Naturally, in the opening stage White should endeavour to consolidate and increase his initiative. Black conversely will try to neutralize White's endeavours and, if the occasion offers, seize the initiative for himself In master play it is considered a distinct achievement if you manage to gain firm possession of the initiative, guaranteeing a small but lasting plus. In the modern opening, the initiative factor plays a most important role. This indeed is what constitutes the new approach to the role of time in chess, an approach which rejects the mechanical counting of tempos. The main thing is to consider the link between a tempo and a concrete idea, since it is only on this condition that a particular plan can be carried out successfully. Of course, the struggle for initiative in the opening most often revolves round possession of the centre squares. The methods of fighting for the initiative in the modern opening are continually being refined. Active methods (for playing with White) as well as defensive ones (for Black) are elaborated in detail, and this is what supplies

185

the driving impulse for the development of opening theory. The endeavour to organize consistent lon g­ term pressure on the central squares remains the fundamental modern opening strategy for White. It finds vivid expression in such currently popular openings as the Ruy Lopez and the Half-Open and Closed Games. Avoiding any rapid simplification of the game or premature liquidation of the pressure on the centre, White's chief task here is to prevent Black from developing freely - and gradually to deprive him of active play. Propounded ever since Steinitz's day, this strategy for White has undergone much modification and its content has been greatly enriched. At the present time it opens the way to a complex dynamic struggle rather than to the accumulation of small advantages (as we discussed earlier) . In the modern opening White conducts an extremely active fight for the initiative, and to this end he often boldly undertakes to sharpen the play. The changes to White's strategy in favour of aggression and dynamism have been induced to a large extent by the significant increase in activity by Black, who strives for counterplay at the very start of the game (this may be considered his basic contemporary strategy) . In this style of play Black doesn't confine himself to passive defence of the centre squares in the opening, but consistently tries to thwart White's plans, opposing them with plans of his own for counterplay in the centre. Given Black's aspirations to active counterplay in the opening, White is obliged to take concrete measures and not rely complacently on the advantage of the move. With routine play he is liable not only to lose the initiative quickly but also to land in severe difficulties. Let's look at the following example.

186

Soviet Chess Strategy

Mark Taimanov Lev Aronin

8

-

7

Tbilisi 195 1

6 5 4 3 2 1 a

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

Proceeding from general considerations, White selects what looks like the natural plan for a kingside pawn storm after castling long. This could have been a good plan if Black had not been able to organize active counterplay. In this case, however, Black very astutely exploits the peculiarities of the position (strong pressure on the hB-a l diagonal; the possibility of quickly opening the game in the centre and on the queenside) , and shows that White's stereotyped designs are unfounded. The game continued:

9.g4 Black would have found it much harder to organize counterplay after i.f1 -d3, tLlgl -e2 and 0-0.

9 ...ti'a5 10 ..th6 .th8 1 1 .h4 �e5! 12.h5 e6 13.0-0-0 exd5 14.exd5 .td7 1 5 ..tg5 .ta4! 16.�xa4 ti'xa4 17.
b

c

d

e

f

g

h

The strategy of counterplay predetermines Black's choice of opening system. At the present time we may state that many well-established defensive systems are being re-examined from the standpoint of searching for counterplay, and are being notably enriched with new content as a result of this treatment. In positions where Black has counterplay against White's bid for a lasting initiative, what is least of all permissible is the mechanical implementation of commonplace principles. In the struggle for the centre at the start of the game, both sides are already striving to disrupt the co-ordination of each other's forces with the concrete middlegame prospects in mind. As the fight for the initiative proceeds, complex positions arise involving rich and varied strategic plans. Approximate equality of the chances does not point towards simplification and an early draw. It merely emphasizes that both sides are fully entitled to their undertakings in the coming struggle. Summing up, we may conclude that counterplay is the best means offighting against the workings of the opponent's initiative at all stages of the game. If neutralization of the initiative by purely defensive and passive methods enables you, in the final reckoning, to achieve static equilibrium, counterplay means fighting for the advantage.

1 87

From the Book "The Middlegame in Chess" Hence a player should resort to passive defence only in a case of extreme necessity.

Transformation of Positional Factors In the struggle for mastety of the positional factors in the course of a game, there are successive changes of scene. We are not speaking of the minor and often insubstantial alterations to the position that are basically happening all the time, but of the crucial moments in the struggle which radically redirect its outward course. This means, in the first place, the moments of transformation from one phase to another (opening to middlegame - middlegame to endgame) ; major operations such as forced attacking lines or complex exchanging sequences; various types of combination (perhaps the most striking of these crucial scenarios) ; and so on. What happens in these cases is what chess writers tend to call a transformation of positional factors. It is by no means fortuitous, but on the contrary underlines the strict logic of the chess struggle. In these special moments the positional and material factors are transformed in accordance, so to speak, with the underlying strategic and tactical content of the particular game. How this comes about will be elucidated in our next example.

As the result of an opening error on his opponent's part, White has attained a clear preponderance in the centre. With his next few moves he strives to consolidate his advantage.

12.l1kl .ib7 13 ..ib5! In order to strengthen his centre, White has to set it in motion with d4-d 5 . The move he plays is essential preparation for this, seeing that the immediate 1 3 .d5 is bad on account of 1 3 . . . llJe5.

13 .. J�c8 14.fta4 otlaS 15.d5! So the centre has started moving, constricting Black's position still further. Black, therefore, must endeavour to undermine the centre at any cost, but at the moment 1 5 . . . e6? fails to 1 6.dxe6 fxe6 1 7.id7!.

1 5 ...ftd6 16 ..id2! Again preventing 1 6 . . . e6 in view of 1 7 . .ib4, and at the same time threatening to win a pawn with 1 7.ixa5.

Semyon Furman Vassily Smyslov -

Moscow 1949 8 7 6

a

5

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

A critical moment. In his search for counterplay, Black goes in for this risky break in the centre. It's interesting to note what would now happen if White attempted to maintain his pair of centre pawns {which up

4 3 2 1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

6-

188

Soviet Chess Strategy

to here have been his chief concern} at any price: after 1 8 .S? Black would obtain excellent counterplay by 1 8 . . . fxe4 1 9.fxe4 .ie5 20.h3 �f6. Therefore in order to retain his advantage, White has to submit to the underlying necessity of the position and radically alter his strategic plan. Bearing in mind the new conditions of the struggle {the kingside weakening which Black's . . . £1-5 conceded} , White now starts an attack with his pieces, utilizing their greater freedom of manoeuvre. He ignores Black's counterplay in the centre and allows his own pawn centre to be broken up, since this sector of the battle no longer fills the main, essential role.

18.i.d7! Ue5 19 .ic3! •

Proceeding to the decisive attack on the king. White's threats grow quickly and become irresistible.

19 ... Uxe4 20.J.e6t h8 21 .bg7t xg7 22.Ua3!

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

The threat of 23.�xe7t is very powerful. If now 22 .. .'it>f6, then 23.�c3t �e5 24.llJd4, and Black has no defence to the threat of 25 J'!e 1 . On 22 . . . �e8, White has 23.Ub2t h6 24.�c3 with a mating attack.

22 ... Uh4 23J:�c7 h8 24Jhe7 Uf6 25J�k7 .ia6 26.�f4 Ual t 27J:kl Ug7 28.gc3 gd8 29.Ub2 White wins, since there is no satisfactory defence against the threatened 30.llJxg6t. In this game Black's error in the opening gave White the chance to achieve superiority in the centre. Subsequently White implemented an active, aggressive plan ( l 5 .d5!) which cramped Black's pieces even more. With a view to obtaining counterplay, Black urgently needed to organize an undermining of the centre with 1 7 . . . 5. Acting on his concrete perception of the dynamics of the struggle, White abandoned the centre, and, ignoring Black's counterplay, started an energetic attack on the kingside with 1 8 . .id7! and 1 9 . .ic3!. The success of the attack was predetermined by the clearly superior placing of White's pieces as well as by his spatial advantage. The path White took was the only way to retain his advantage and subsequently increase it. His advance in the centre and his switching of the attack to the kingside were the basic stages in the transformation of the advantage in the above game. This example shows that there are moments in a game when the logical course of the struggle requires certain positional assets to be replaced by others {that is, transformed} . Usually this occurs when a player needs to alter his plan and carry out an effective tactical operation. These abrupt outward changes in the position are an inseparable feature of the dynamic chess struggle. The process of transforming the positional factors highlights the indissoluble bond that exists in chess between the positional and dynamic factors of the contest - with the dynamic ones having the leading, driving role. The most careful attention must be given to the tactical features of the struggle in these transitional moments. Often, for instance, after attaining some positional {or material}

189

From the Book "The Middlegame in Chess" advantages, you find that - according to the logic of the struggle in the particular situation - the initiative temporarily passes to your opponent (sometimes for a long period) . It is important in such cases to switch over to defence in time, and seriously attend to the prophylactic measures necessary to disarm your opponent's threats. You can only then count on exploiting your advantage successfully. In this connection, the progress of events in the following game is characteristic.

24 hfl 25.Bxg4 •••

A new phase of the struggle begins; in order to capitalize on his material plus, Black must now go over to flexible defence.

Tigran Petrosian - Vassily Smyslov Bled 1959 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

25 1c4! 26 .ixh6 g6 27 .ixc4 dxc4 28J:�d7 Ba6! •••

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

As the result of an interesting contest in the opening, Black has succeeded in acquiring a clear plus. He has not only won a pawn but has good attacking prospects. With the following energetic moves he increases his advantage.

19 �g4 20.g3 ic5! 2UM2 Ba7 22.fUl h6! 23.1f4 1a6 24.BfS •••

Black would meet 24.BxdS with 24 . . . 1xfl 2S. 'it> xfl l:!ad8!, not only winning the exchange but retaining the initiative. The move in the game is White's only possible attempt to sharpen the play. He manages temporarily to seize the initiative and create some threats against the black king.

•

•

Not only defending his pawn but also parrying the threat of a rook sacrifice on fl. In the event of 29 .l:!xfl 'it> xf7 30.YMd7t l:!e7 3 1 .lLlgst <j,Jg8 32.YMdSt 'it> h8 33.YMxcS YMf6 34.YMxc4 l:!d8 3 S .YMh4 l:! d l t 36. 'it> g2 YMc6t 37. 'it> h3 YMd7t 38. 'it> g2 YMdSt 39. 'it> h3 'it> g8, Black successfully nullifies his opponent's threats and has no trouble achieving the win analysis by G. Ravinsky.

29J:k7 YMd6 30.1f4 YMd5 3 U�d7 YMe6 32.Bxe6 �e6 After the queen exchange, Black's task is perfectly simple.

33.gc7 ib6 34.gb7 c3 35.bxc3 bxc3 36.'it>fl gd8 37.�g5 gf6 38.�xf7 gxf7 39.gxb6 gxf4! White resigned. In this last example the stronger side successfully coped with realizing a material plus despite the temporary loss of the initiative. But many a game concludes in a far less logical way. It often takes no more than a single inaccuracy

190

Soviet Chess Strategy

to imbue the opponent's threats, which looked easy to parry, with formidable strength.

Mikhail TaI - E6m Geller Riga 1958

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

At this point, evidently succumbing to the psychological stress of White's initiative, Black blundered with:

25 gxf6?? •••

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

With his last move Black tookoffan important pawn on b4 with tempo. In appearance he has not only secured the initiative but gained a clear positional plus. Realizing that moving his rook from e 1 offers no prospects, White takes the sole correct decision - he sacrifices the exchange for the initiative.

18Jlb l ! he1 19J�xb7 ge8 It was seriously worth considering the counter-sacrifice of a piece with 1 9 . . . �xd5! 20.�xd5 �xd5 2 1 .�xe l �c3!' White's initiative would be fully neutralized; the game would enter an ending that is very pleasant for Black.

20.d6! tvc8 21 .i.g5! ge2! Taking the second exchange sacrifice with 2 1 . . .�xb7 would be bad on account of 22 . .ixf6 gxf6 23.�g4t c;i>fB (23 . . . c;i>h8 24.�(5) 24 . .ixh7 J.xf2t 25 .c;i>h2 and mates.

22.gc7 tve6 23.�xe1 gxe1t 24.c;i>h2 gd8 25 .hf6 •

Which led to an immediate loss after:

A logical conclusion to this game could have been 25 . . . �xf6 26.�xf6 gxf6 27.d7 with a draw. White's strong passed pawn compensates for the material deficit. Naturally, in those moments when the positional factors are decisively transformed, the consequences of the change in the position need to be evaluated with special accuracy. Among such moments (and certainly among the most difficult of them) are the so-called transitions from one phase to another. We will now demonstrate some features of the transition from middlegame to endgame.

191

From the Book "The Middlegame in Chess"

Jose Raul Capablanca Frederick Yates -

By eventually converting his advantage into a material plus, Capablanca achieved the win.

New York 1924 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 a

b

c

d

e

f

bxa4 28.�3xa4 gc6 29.�b2!

g

h

6.

White executed an exceptionally precise operation involving a queen exchange and transition to a complex ending.

18.ixc4 dxc4 19.ti'd4! ti'c7 20.ti'c5! ti'xc5 21.�xc5 b6 22.�5a4 gb8 23.0-0-0 b5 24.�c5

In this last example, the transition to an ending was undoubtedly the most effective solution for White, and perhaps even the sole correct one. It was precisely in the endgame that the advantages of his position, acquired in the preceding struggle, could be exploited. Bringing about simplification in this way is particularly expedient when one side has a material plus. But of course this rule should not be dogmatized. The problems of chess are exceedingly diverse and flexible. And often the most natural method of realizin g a material plus - by simplification - may prove on closer inspection to be mistaken and merely forfeit the advantage. In a number of cases, choosing the correct path to exploit a plus is no easy matter even for the world's strongest players. This is confirmed by the following example.

Vassily Smyslov Mikhail Botvinnik -

8

Moscow 1954

7

8

6

7

5

6

4

5

3

4

2

3

1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

White has gained control of the only open file and induced a substantial weakening of his opponent's queenside. With some energetic strokes he breaks up Black's pawn chain.

24...gb6 25.a4! �h5 26.b3! cxb3 27.cxb3

2 1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

White has an extra piece. Black admittedly has three pawns for it, but considering that his pawns on the g-file are tripled, it is perfectly

192

Soviet Chess Strategy

obvious that the material balance is very much in White's favour. White's task therefore is to exploit this advantage. Being a very subtle endgame connoisseur, Smyslov chooses the seemingly simplest method of exploitation, taking the game into an ending.

27.ti'e6t ti'xe6 28J!xe6 However, in this position Black has an astonishing way to save himself, which even Smyslov had failed to foresee in the heat of the battle.

29.i::1 e5 would not attain White's goal either: 29 .. .l':1fe8! 30.�xd5 �e3! 3 1 ..ib 1 �e2, or 30.�fe 1 .ic7.

29 .. JUe8 30.gxe8 gxe8 3 1 .gxe8 This leads to a forced draw. But 3 1 .�d 1 would also have allowed Black adequate counter-chances in view of 3 1 . . .�e3 32. 'it?f2 �h3 .

3 1 ...'it?xe8 32 ..ic3 'it?d7 33.a5 .id8 34. .ib4 b6 35.a6 .if6! 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 b

c

8

7

6 5

28 ... 'it?f7 29J�fel

a

Returning to the position before 27.'We6t, we should note that the correct method of exploitation lay in an attack on the kingside. That was just where the extra piece could have played a decisive role. The following convincing vanation, recommended by Botvinnik, shows how quickly White could have achieved his aim: 27.'Wg2!

d

e

f

g

h

Black has constructed a fortress which White has no way of breaching. After a few more moves a draw was agreed.

4 3

2

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

27 . . . �fe8 28.h3 .ia5 29.�e5! with an irresistible attack. The above examples have illustrated various means of transforming an advantage already acquired; they have shown how an advantage undergoes a succession of changes before the game can be won. But in a wholly analogous way, the transformation of positional factors may be applied to balanced positions. They too, after all, are full of genuine fight. This is especially true of positions of dynamic equilibrium, where the advantages on one side are counterbalanced by the opponent's advantages of a different type. In the process of this fight, maintaining the balance is far from simple. To do so, however paradoxical this may seem, you often even have to sacrifice material! But ultimately, if both sides play purposefully and correctly, new positions of dynamic equilibrium are created. The following example is notable.

193

From the Book "The Middlegame in Chess"

Evgeny Vasiukov - Boris Spassky Tbilisi 1959

1 .e4 �f6 2.e5 �d5 3.c4 �b6 4.c5 �d5 5.ic4 e6 6.�c3 d6 7.�xd5 ad5 8.ixd5 c6 9.J.xf'7t
10 ...Yfe8! Best. The natural 1 O . . . ,ie6 would be worse in view of 1 1 .liJh3!.

with his two strong bishops and superior development.

17 ... ixd3 18.gdl! ixe2 19.d7 gd8 20.igS ixdl 21 .gxdl ie7! The final link in the combination that was essentially begun by 1 4 . . . liJxe5. It turns out that White cannot maintain his pawn on d7. The game enters a dead level ending, with a draw rapidly approaching.

22.ixe7
Mikhail Tal - Lev Aronin Moscow 1957

I 1 .Yff3t
a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

14... �xe5! A correct counter-sacrifice. The game now enters a very sharp tactical phase.

1 5.Yfxe5 ic4 16.Yfxe8 gxe8 17.d3! The only way. In the event of 1 7.d7 �d8 1 8 J�e l the ending would clearly favour Black,

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

In this game, as we can see from the diagram, the struggle has taken on an uncommonly sharp character. White has created some very strong threats on the kingside, but Black's threats, with a simultaneous attack on his opponent's queen and rook, look even more convincing. The further course of events shows, however, that in this position, with its

194

Soviet Chess Strategy

wealth of combinative themes, neither player can upset the equilibrium to his own benefit. In the following combinative complexities, the equilibrium merely changes its form.

26.hxg6! gxd3 Not 26 . . . hxg6, on account of 27.%YxdB! E:xdB 2B.E:xdB %YxdB 29.l:!hBt! 'tt> x hB 30.lDxf7t <;t> gB 3 1 . lDxdB, and the ending is clearly in White's favour.

27J�xd3 hxg6 28.gh7!

Every juncture where positional factors are transformed demands a fair degree of resoluteness from the player. It is often hard to renounce some outward merits of a position (such as a good centre, strong pieces and so forth) for the sake of some other prospects. But we should remember that a game of chess is a dynamic process. However attractive we may find this or that position in the process of the struggle, it will nonetheless have to be modified. More than that - the outward merits of the position are only real when they can be successfully transformed. A player has to bend his efforts to the timely utilization of these merits, or they may be lost for good. The transformation of positional factors is one of the most important principles of the chess struggle. To master this principle is to conquer various prej udices consisting in a range of dogmatic rules.

The Concrete Approach to Evaluating a Position

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

28 .. J1�c8! Only thus. White's main threat was 29.f3! ih5 30.l:!d7! or 29 ...ie6 30.E:d2! and 3 1 .E:dh2. Black would also lose with 2B ... E:dB 29.E:xdB %YxdB 30.E:hBt! etc.

29.a gc6! This move is Black's salvation. In the event of 30.fxg4 l:!xf6 3 1 .E:dh3 E:f2t 32.'tt> b 3 %Yd6, there could be winning chances only on his side.

30.gxf'7 Yfxf'7 3 1 .�xf'7 'tt>xf'7 32.fxg4 'tt>xf6 33.gd7 gb6 An equal rook endgame has been reached, which quickly ended in a draw.

Chess thought is not assimilated all at once. A player first has to absorb various principles, schemes, typical tactical and strategic devices. At the same time he starts acquiring the skills of combinative vision, as the prerequisite for the further development of his thought. This too is a complex process. To begin with, the player notices only simple threats, then he begins to see combinative strokes; finally he starts to appreciate that harmonious co­ ordination which is conducive to combination. It is only by following this learning course that he gains the essential foundation enabling him to utilize his knowledge and skills flexibly. He begins to be a thinker once he becomes aware of the internal connections between the various factors of the game, between the objective and subjective concepts. A chessplayer calls this the concrete approach to the position {in a broad sense of the term, you

195

From the Book "The Middlegame in Chess" understand} . To think concretely means, above all, to grasp the features of any given position in a comprehensive manner and to be able to relate them to general principles. Of course it is only through the concrete approach that you can penetrate to the essence of the struggle taking place in a position. The fundamental aim of the concrete approach is to investi gate the dynamics of the position and find the most effective path, as circumstances permit. In this process each individual move, in keeping with the general plan, must fulfil the most vital task that the position presents.

23.Wh7 a6! Driving the knight from its active post at a very opportune moment. Now 24.ltJa3 would be met by 24 . . . %Ve6, developing Black's queenside forces.

24.Wgst q"d7 25.%Vxg4t e6 26.ltJa3

Alexander Nikitin Semyon Furman -

Tbilisi 1959

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

26 WhS! •••

Having beaten off the attack, Black proceeds to a decisive counter-offensive of his own. It is instructive to follow how accurately he deals with the essential problems during the concluding stage of the game.

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

In this position Black's basic task is to fend off the pressure on the kingside, then deploy his forces and set about exploiting his material plus. The most urgent part of this plan is to neutralize White's threats along the g-file, and the best way to do so is by the bold move:

19 ig4! •••

Which required far-sighted calculation. The events develop almost on forced lines.

20.ixg4 hxg4 2UhhSt ixhs 22.Wh2 if6

27.%Vgl id4 2s.ixd4 %Vxd4 29Jf!fl We3t 30.q"b l �gS! 3 1 .%Vc2 After 3 1 . %VxgB %V d3 t , Black regains his material with interest.

3 1 . �gI 32.%Vdl %Ve4t 33.q"al �xfl 34.%Vxfl ltJd4 35.%Vfl %Vhl t 36.�b 1 Wgl ! ••

Winning the pawn o n f4 for good measure.

37.%Vdl %Ve3! 3S.%Vdl %Vxf4 39.�c3 Wfl 40.a3 WeI ! White resigned. In the course of the chess struggle, dependin g on your opponent's particular actions, it can be necessary to alter your strategic plan or the

196

Soviet Chess Strategy

tactical means to its accomplishment. Such changes in the course of the fight are something else which can only be handled by a concrete approach to the position. Among other things we should note that only concrete thought can rid a chessplayer of those oversights - occurring so frequently in practice - which invariably stem from conventionality, from assessing a position superficially by general criteria alone. It must be remembered that literally up until the final move, a game of chess abounds in tactical threats - so that accuracy is essential even in completely won positions. Every move in the game requires a concrete grounding . Here is one example of punishment for a non-concrete approach to the position.

The only line to keep some saving chances for White would be 37.l3b7 c2 38 .,ixc2 l3xc2 39.he5 �xe5 40.l3xg7. Wishing to avoid the penetration of White's rook to the seventh rank, Black relied on general considerations and played:

36 lLld6? •••

In this he was failing to take White's concrete threats into account. There followed:

37 .tb3t! @e4 •

Not 37 . . .'it>d4 38 .l3d l t lLld3 39 . .ic2 etc.

38J�e1 t @f5 39 .tc2t @e6 4O .tb3t @f5 41 ..tc2t @e6 •

•

Viktor Korchnoi Alexey Suetin -

Leningrad 1960

a

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

This position is clearly favourable to Black, who in effect has an extra passed pawn, and a powerful one, on the c-file. With 36 . . . lLla3! Black could, as a minimum, have won a piece for two pawns. The natural 37J::k l for instance, is wholly bad on account of37 . . . c2 38 . .ib2 lLld3! 39 . .if3t @c4 40 . .txa3 lLlxcl 4 1 ..txc l l3b8 42.,if4 l3b l t 43.@f2 a5! followed by 44 ... c l =Wf.

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

Black's punishment now immediately began, as White eliminated the c-pawn with:

42J��e3 And then exploited his advantage to win. All this shows that for advanced thinkin g , a chessplayer has to command a high level of technique in calculating variations and to possess a well-stocked arsenal of strategic and tactical ideas. A whole range of positions require inexhaustible fantasy and inventiveness to handle them, and for this you need to

197

From the Book "The Middlegame in Chess" cultivate a refined aesthetic chess flair. Finally, a player with advanced qualities of thought should never lose that "compass" which consists in mastery of the general principles of the struggle. There are complex positions, rich in ideas, which offer a number of ways of fighting objectively equal in worth, but varying in character. Here the choice of plan depends mainly on a player's style, his creative leanings. But concrete thinking is essential all the same - both when choosing any of these paths and, even more, in the subsequent conduct of the fight. Here are a few illustrations.

The subsequent play is ofan exclusively concrete (or, as chess players say, forced) nature.

17.£4! .be3t 18.cbhl .ixcl 1 9.fxg5!! White forces an opening of lines on the kingside in the quickest way, without shrinking from significant material sacrifices.

19 .bg5 20J::txf6 ! .••

8

7

6 5

Vladas Mikenas - B. Lebedev

4

Tbilisi 194 1

3 2

8

1

7

a

6

b

c

d

e

On 20 . . . ,ixf6 2 1 .%Yd3 immediately decisive.

5 4 3 2 1

D. a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

An advantage for White has taken shape on the kingside and in the centre. His forces are much more actively deployed, and in addition the pawn formation in front of Black's castled king has been somewhat weakened. Taking account of these factors, White carried out an unexpected and very sharp attack on the kingside, which above all required a high degree of imagination as well as long-range calculation.

f

g

the

h

attack

is

The profundity of White's plan and the extent of his calculations are strikingly illustrated by the following variation: 20 . . . %Yb5! Probably Black's best option. 2 1 .ltJg4 But not 2 1 .%Yc2 %Yxb I t! 22.%Yxb l i.xf6, when in return for the queen Black has two rooks and a solid position. 2 1 . . .i.xf6 22.ltJxf6t cbg7 23 .i.h4 %Yc4 24.i.e4 e5 25.ltJh5t But not 2 5 .%Ye l , in view of 25 ... ,ig4 26.ltJxg4 f5 . 2 5 . . . cbg8 26.%yf3 With an irresistible attack.

20 cbg7 2 1 .Y!Yd3! •••

The rook cannot be taken, as White gives

1 98

Soviet Chess Strategy

a check on g4. Now follows a beautiful combination.

21. .. h5 22.h4! mxf6

The right continuation was 1 5 .f4! lLled3 1 6.lLlxa4 lLlxa4 1 7.bxa4 lLlc5 1 8.lLlxc6!, as indicated by Botvinnik.

7

Black might now seem to be in a very difficult position owing to the strong threat of 1 6 .ixc5 . Yet he finds a remarkable concrete plan involving an unconventional piece sacrifice.

6

There followed:

8

5

1 5 axb3!!

4

•••

Such a move can only be made by a player endowed with outstanding creative imagination.

3 2 1

16.he5 lOxe4 17.ti'cl bxa2 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

23.lOg4f! hxg4 24..le5f! mxe5 25.�M4#

Alexander Kotov E6m Geller

An even more decisive line was 1 7 . . . b2! Bronstein.

I s.lOxa2 ti'a5 19.ti'xe4 .le6 20.ti'cl dxe5

-

8

Moscow 1949

7 6 5 4 3 2 1 a

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

White has achieved considerable positional superiority. However, failing to delve deeply into the peculiarities of the position and allowing himself to be guided mainly by general considerations, he played:

1 5.lOde2

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

Black has sacrificed a piece for two pawns but obtained a strong initiative. In practice the task of defending against the advance of Black's queenside pawn phalanx is very difficult.

21.lOac3 b5 22.lObl?! After this Black's mltlatlve develops unimpeded. White should have resolved on returning the piece with 22.f4 .ib3 23J'!d6 b4 24.e5 ! , obtaining counterplay.

1 99

From the Book "The Middlegame in Chess"

Abram Khasin Mikhail Tal

The attempt to preserve his material plus leads White quickly to defeat.

-

Leningrad 1956

22 h4 23.�f4 J.b3 24JM6 ..•

24.lt:ld2! ixd l better.

25 J%xd l was somewhat

8

7

24 ... c4 25Jhc6 c3 26.�d5 ixd5 27.exd5 Bxd5 28.f4 Bd4t 29.cbhl ga2 30.J.6 gb2 3 1 .£5 J.e5 32.Be1 gd8 33.J.e4 cbg7! A subtle idea. Black provokes f5-f6 to give tactical reinforcement to the g6-point.

34.f6t cbg8 35.ga6 h5 36.ga5 h4 37.ixg6

6 5 4 3 2 1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

It looks as if Black would benefit from exchanging the dark-squared bishops, as he would then remain with a strong knight against a bishop with little mobility, and would obtain strong pressure on the dark squares in the centre.

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

A pretty combination concludes the game:

37 gxh2t! 38.cbxh2 ixg3t 39.Bxg3 hxg3t 4O.cbh3 fxg6

However, concrete analysis shows that after 1 9 . . . ixd4 20.l%xd4 (of course not 2o.Bxf7t? cbh8 2 1 .l%xd4 l%fB) 20 ... lt:le5 2 1 .c3 l%e8 22.ic2 there is no clear way for Black to utilize his positional trumps, while White exerts mounting pressure on the kingside.

.•.

White resigned. In the foregoing examples the struggle was rich in combinative themes, and the concrete approach to the position flowed, so to speak, from the nature of the struggle. Now let's consider the following example where the play is mainly positional in character.

19 ...ge8! Black concerns himself with the initiative above all else, striving to go into action on the e-file.

20.c3 ge7 21 .J.c2 ixd4 At this point the exchange of dark-squared bishops is timely. Black is in secure possession of the open e-file and is well prepared to parry the threats on the kingside.

22.Bh4 �f8 23J�xd4 ge2 24.J.£5 �ke8 25.gb4 gd2 26.J.e4 Be7

Soviet Chess Strategy

200

8.0-0 or 8.ltJc3, Black carries out the important break ... f7-f5 with quite good counterplay.

8 7

White already has to search for the most effective plan that surpasses other possibilities. Concrete investigations reveal that he has at his disposal a highly effective method of play, giving him a lasting initiative:

6 5 4 3 2

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

27.�el ? �xd5! Black quickly turned his advantage into a win. In this game, featuring what looked like a purely positional struggle, the most important role was still played by the "concrete" approach to assessing the positions that arose. You need to think concretely at every stage in the progress of a game, starting with the opening. Although the strategic plans at the start of the game are extremely varied and flexible, they often acquire "concrete" substance from the very first moves. As more pieces are developed, the concrete tasks facing the players keep increasing in complexity. This applies especially to attacking systems.

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

8.g4! In this game 8.g4! occurred for the first time. After this, the complications arising in the main variation, 8 .. ,1,Wa5t 9.id2 Wfb6 10.g5!, turn out clearly in White's favour.

8...£6 Black ended up in grave difficulties after:

The following example is characteristic.

Alexey Suetin - Vladimir Simagin Tula 1950

1.e4 c5 2.�f3 �c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.�xd4 g6 5.c4 .ig7 6.�c2 d6 7..ie2 �h6!? 7.. .f5 and 7.. ltJf6 8.ltJc3 0-0 are quieter options. .

This is the Veresov-Simagin System. In answer to natural developing moves, such as

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

201

From the Book "The Middlegame in Chess"

9.h4! �f'7 10.h5 g5 1l.ie3 The struggle in one of the sharp variations of the Ruy Lopez is also instructive: 1.e4 e5 2.�a �c6 3.ib5 5 4.�c3 �f6

5.exf5 �d4

only effective plan can be one that hinders Black's development of his kingside initiative. With this in mind, it is worth considering the variation:

6.�xe5 ic5 7.0-0 0-0 8.�a c6 Up to here as in Tal - Spassky, and now:

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

If White now plays to hold his extra pawn in the centre, this promises him little, as was shown by two games from Moscow 1957: Boleslavsky - Tolush and Tal - Spassky. The former continued with 6.ia4 ic5 7.d3 0-0 8.0-0 d5 9.�xe5 hf5 1O.ig5 �d6 11.l'!e1 c6 12.ih4 l'!ae8. Black has a lasting initiative on the kingside which compensates for White's modest material plus. After 13.ig3 �d8 14.�e2 l'!xe5! 15.ixe5 ig4 16.�d2 llJxe2t 17.l'!xe2 ixe2 18.�xe2 llJe4! it took White a great deal of trouble to maintain the balance. In the second of the games mentioned, White continued 6.llJxe5 ic5 7.0-0 0-0 8.llJf3 c6 9.llJxd4?! ixd4 10.id3 d5 l1.llJe2 ie5 12.llJg3 llJe4! 13.ixe4 dxe4 14.d3 exd3 15.�xd3 �xd3 16.cxd3 hg3 17.hxg3 ixf5, which similarly led to complete equality. White should not try to maintain his extra central pawn at all costs. In our view, the

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

9.b4! �xf3t 10.�xf3 ixb4 11.id3! White has every reason to count on maintaining the important point f5, on which all Black's kingside counterplay founders. This analysis was performed in collaboration with Grandmaster Isaak Boleslavsky. [Russian Editor's Note: This later received confirmation in the game Shartner - Zhuravlev, USSR 1963, which went 11. ..d5 12.ib2llJe8 13.l'!ael �g5 14.llJxd5! cxd5 15.�xd5t @h8 16.�b5 ie7 17.f4, and Black resigned.] These examples testify to the fact that the struggle in the modern opening is highly dynamic. In many cases, within a very short space of moves, we arrive at complex positions rich in combinative possibilities, where it is not enough to be guided by general principles alone. This is where the need arises for a concrete approach to the application of opening principles - an approach that takes account of all the concealed tactical possibilities of this or that opening formation.

Soviet Chess Strategy

202

The following is another characteristic example.

executing his basic plan (a breakthrough with d4-d5!).

Isaak Boleslavsky Alexander Kotov

For that very reason he prefers this developing move to a different one - 12.l:!adl - which looks no less strong and natural. As concrete calculation shows, after 12J'3adl lDc6 White gains nothing from 13.d5 on account of 13... lDxd5 14. .ixd5 (14.lDxd5 ixg5!) 14... exd5 15.l:!xd5 VfJc7.

-

Zurich 1953

In the Queen's Gambit Accepted, after:

l.d4 d5 2.c4 dxc4 3.�6 �f6 4.e3 e6 5 .ixc4 c5 6.0-0 a6 7.YlYe2 cxd4 8.exd4 .te7 9.�c3 •

Black made the mistake of playing a premature:

9...b5? This was to involve him in serious difficulties, since owing to the undeveloped state of Black's queenside, White has the powerful tactical threat of d4-d5! at his disposal. It is instructive to watch how White utilizes the advantages of his position, combining specific threats with the further mobilization of his pieces.

10.J.b3 J.b7 1l.J.g5 0-0

Thus 12.l:!fel is essential as preparation for the d4-d5 break, as it sets up a genuine threat along the e-file.

12...�c6 13J�adl It now becomes clear that Black is helpless against the threatened d4-d5. On 13... lDb4 White plays 14.d5! regardless, and if Black takes on d5 he loses a piece. This is where the significance of 12.l:!fe I ! comes across. The game continued:

13...�a5 14.d5! �xb3 15.dxe6 YlYb6 16.axb3 fxe6 17.�d4 And Black emerged a pawn down. It's interesting to note that Black could only have defended against the tactical threat of d4d5 by playing 13...l:!e8.

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

12JUel! Th e accepted view i s that such developing moves are played from purely positional considerations. But in this case White is primarily responding to the concrete demands of the position when he concentrates on

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

Then 14.d5 achieves nothing in view of 14... exd5 15.lDxd5 lDxd5 16. .ixd5 .ixg5

From the Book "The Middlegame in Chess" 17.Wlxe8t Wlxe8 18J'he8t E:xe8 19.tLlxg5 tLld8, with an equal game. Therefore after 13... E:e8, in accordance with the concrete conditions of the struggle, White would need to alter his basic plan and play 14.tLle5!, threatening to exploit the weakening of Black's kingside by taking on f7. This would enable him to keep his opening advantage even against Black's best play: 14... tLlxe5! (14... tLlxd4? 15.Wle3 .ic5 16.Wlg3! is bad for Black) 15.dxe5 tLld7 16.if4 Wlc7 17. .ic2, and White has excellent prospects for attacking the king. In this case the concrete threats were entirely dependent on bringing the reserves into play. But as we have seen more than once already, there can also be the converse scenario - when out of concrete considerations it pays to execute some manoeuvre in the opening in apparent neglect of development. As the last few examples show, a feature of the opening fight is that the two sides' forces will often come into contact very quickly. Then, with mobilization still unfinished, the battle begins, and naturally the principles of the overall chess struggle, which we have examined before, will come into force. As a result, the specific opening tasks (mobilization and the fight to control the centre) will often be more or less relegated to the background. Chess thought is continually evolving. A characteristic of the modern chess style is the quest for a struggle that transcends the confines of normal logic. This tendency is associated with healthy risk and a particular dynamic quality of play. Under these conditions the fight often takes on such a "concrete" character that, as chess players say, everything rests on the calculation of variations. Adherents of this kind of play are fond of sacrificing material for the initiative. We should note that in many cases the correctness of such

203

sacrifices can hardly be proved analytically. But then, analytical correctness at all costs is not what players of the dynamic style are striving for. They are primarily counting on the practical difficulty of the tasks facing the opponent. This factor in chess thought is constantly growing in significance. It is a wholly natural phenomenon, seeing that in chess the objective and subjective forces are inextricably linked. Here is a characteristic example.

Mikhail Tal- Oscar Panno Portoroz 1958

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

Black played:

18... �xb3! To which White, after looking deeply into the position, replied:

19.�c6!? With this move he initiated exceptionally sharp complications.

some

What were White's guiding thoughts in evaluating and choosing this line of play? In the first place he was not satisfied with the natural continuation 19.Wlxb3 if6 20.tLlxc4 bxc4 21.Wlxc4t 'iifh8, after which Black obtains

Soviet Chess Strategy

204

powerful positional pressure for the sacrificed pawn. Secondly, such a notable master of combinative play as Tal will undoubtedly have seen a long way ahead into the complications which now ensue, and will have found them alluring. If his designs could have been refuted by precise analysis, he would not of course have embarked on them. But that was not the case, and Tal's extremely keen combinative flair will have hinted to him that he and his opponent were risking just as much here. Considering that Tal was going to be in his element, and this in a game with limited thinking time, his decision becomes perfectly easy to justifY.

19...�xal 20.�xdS .if5 21.YlYf3 gaxdS 22J!xe7 hbl 23..ixf4!

This very circumstance determined his choice in the position we started from. The attack against g7 forms the pivot of his following play.

23.. J!xd4 24.YlYg4! .ig6 25. YlYe6t .iO 26.YlYf5 �c2 On 26...i.g6 White had prepared the combination 27J:l:xg7t! i>xg7 28.i.h6t! i>xh6 29.�xf8t, followed by 30.�xc5t and 31.�xd4.

27.b3 .ig6 It may have been more judicious to play 27 .. .l'l:dl t 28.<;!;>h2 ttJd2, inviting White to go for simplification; after 29.i.xd2 gxd2 30.�xc5 the game is roughly equal.

2SJ!xg7t! i>xg7 29 .ih6t <;!;>xh6 30.YlYxf8t <;!;>g5 31.bxc4 bxc4 32.g3 .ie4 33.h4t i>g4 34.<;!;>h2 .if5! 35.YlYf6 h6 36.YlYe5 ge4 37.YlYg7t <;!;>f3 3S.YlYc3t �e3 •

8 7

The simplest way to draw was 38... <;!;>xf2 39.�xc2t i>f3, but Black gradually loses the thread.

6 5 4

39.i>gl .ig4 40.fxe3 h5 41.YlYel

3 2 1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

A mind-bending position to assess! Black's chances look clearly better, as he has two minor pieces and a rook for the queen. True, his knight on al is out of play for the moment, and his minor pieces are generally disunited in their actions. On the other hand the white bishop is pinned, which gives Black counterplay. Tal foresaw all this of course, but realized at the same time that he had the option of a combinative attack against the g7-point, which was hard for Black to defend.

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

41...gxe3? Black has not withstood the tension. After 41.. .l'l:e6 42.e4 c3 he could count on drawing

From the Book "The Middlegame in Chess" by constructing a fortress. But we must not forget what a storm Black had to live through in this game!

42.�fl t me4 43.�xc4t ma 44.�fl t me4 45.�xa6 md4 45...1hg3t was more stubborn.

46.�d6t

22.be7 This looks crushing. What is Black to do now? He cannot play 22...mxe7, on account of 23.�xg7t and mate. But Grandmaster Korchnoi, the virtuoso of counterplay, finds an ingenious resource, making it a good deal more complicated for his opponent to exploit the assets of his position.

White quickly conducted his advantage to victory.

22 .bg2t!

One other fact I would like to emphasize is that young practitioners of the dynamic treatment are anything but one-sided in their undertakings. They not only sacrifice material for the attack and the initiative. Far from it - in many cases, with just as much success, they deliberately incur an attack, counting on repulsing it and exploiting the material sacrificed by the opponent. It all depends on the requirements of the position.

23.mxg2 �f4t

Here is one example of inventiveness in unearthing resources for counterplay.

205

•••

The sole counter-chance.

The white king has no convenient moves.

24.gxf4 gxf4 25.gdl 25.mg3 could be met by 25...1�f5.

25...�c6t 26.mg3 �a4 27.c6t? White wilts under the heat of battle. Now his initiative is quickly extinguished by Black's counterplay. The right move was 27J�b1!, retaining the advantage.

27 bxc6 28.�:xg7 •••

Leonid Sbamkovicb - Vtktor Korcbnoi Leningrad 1960

8 7 6 5 4 3

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

2

28 gat!

1

This is the "point" of the position. Now, to his opponent's surprise, Black has at least a draw.

•••

6. a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

White's attack seems about to decide the game.

29.mxa �xdl t 30.me3 �c1t 31.md3?

Soviet Chess Strategy

206

No doubt shaken by the turn of events, White collapsed. He had to find the only move 31. Wf3! when Black has an easy perpetual, but no more than that.

31..:f!Yb l t 32.�e3 trg6!

highly complex, and Black still faces quite a few difficulties on the way to victory. In such cases you have to make use of any opportunity to gain the initiative. With this in mind, White played:

It turns out that if the queens are exchanged, White loses one of his pieces.

27J�h7

33.trb2 �xe7 34.trb7t �xd6 35.trxaS trgl t 36.�d3 trfl t 37.�c2 trc4t

27..JU8

Black confidently exploited his material advantage to win the queen endgame. Indeed I am bound to state that the "dynamists" do not lose hope of salvation even in the most difficult of positions, they literally make use of every chance, striving to wear down their opponent's strength as far as they can. This faith in the wealth of defensive methods, this psychological resilience, is undoubtedly a further enrichment of chess thought. The following example is characteristic.

Mikhail 1a1- Mikhail Botvinnik

Black replied with a wholly natural move.

Yet this very move proved to be a faulty decision. The correct response was 27... ic5!, followed by .. J'%d8-d7 and an offensive on the queenside. White now starts some ingenious counterplay:

28..if4 trd8 29..id3! gh8 30.gxh8 Of course not 30J'%xf7 �e8. But now, in ridding himself of the intrusive rook, Black for one moment removes his queen from the defence of his castled position.

30...trxh8 31.tra5! Surprisingly White turns out to have a wealth of counter-chances.

Moscow 1960

a a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

Black has achieved a clear advantage. He has an extra pawn for which White has essentially no compensation. But the position remains

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

Now 31...Wb7 is met by 32.ixb5!, and White saves himself Black's best winning try was 31... Wb8! 32. .ixfS trhlt 33.�a2 �xf3, but even then White can

From the Book "The Middlegame in Chess" draw with precise play. There are two drawing lines with a common theme - diverting the e7bishop to allow a perpetual check. 8 7 6 5 4 3

V'="",,,,,,,,,

2 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

The simple solution is 34.id2 gxf5 35.ib4! Lb4 36.1M'd8t Q;>b7 37.axb4. More stylish is 34.ih6 gxfS 35.ifB! ixfB 36.1M'd8t <;t>b7 37.1M'd7t Q;>b6 38.b4!. In either case the white queen's checks are unavoidable. Black was in time trouble and had little chance of working out all these variations.

31...'@Yhl t 32.c;t>a2 '@Yxf3 33.'@Ya6t c;t>b8 34.'@Yxc6 '@Y:x:f4 35.J.xb5 '@Yxe5 36.'@Ye8t c;t>b7 37.'@Yc6t c;t>b8 A draw was agreed. All these elements of chess thought, closely linked to the psychological struggle, are not something totally new but stand in a profound historical continuity. Thus, in the past, the sacrifice of material for the initiative was a favourite strategic device of such outstanding masters of the attack as Chigorin, Janowski, Alekhine, Spielmann, Breyer... By contrast, Lasker was fond of faCing an attack, defending with exceptional stubbornness in strategically the most difficult of positions. In an article published after the New York 1924 tournament, Grandmaster Richard Reti wrote:

207

"Here is what Lasker's secret consists o£ For him, the main thing in a game of chess is the war of nerves: he strives above all to break his opponent's psyche, to bring about that nervous collapse of his forces which follows from a weak move, and thereby to induce the decisive mistake. [ ... J "He tries to play not the objectively best moves, but those that are the most unpleasant for each of his opponents individually. He steers the game into what, to his opponent, is a foreign channel. In this way, often deliberately making weak moves, he takes the game right to the brink of the abyss. As a result, Lasker's opponent has no chance of keeping to positions that suit his style. Instead, in a superior {indeed objectively won} position, he is constantly faced with solving new problems which are difficult for him in particular. This makes him use up too much time, he is forced to move quickly in a difficult situation, he begins to get confused in the complications - and this is where Lasker starts playing with all his colossal, authentic strength. Then the opponent, who still stands better, suffers that nervous debility, that psychic catastrophe, which leads straight to catastrophe on the chessboard." Since Lasker's time, the psychological elements in the struggle have never been denied by anyone. With the rapid growth of knowledge and technique over the last few decades, it began to appear as if the objective positional factors were increasingly dominating the chess struggle, while subjective psychological elements were playing an ever-diminishing role. And yet the innovation of the young generation of Soviet players consists precisely in a revival of the psychological motifs in chess thought, within this context of immensely more advanced knowledge and technique. There is no doubt about the viability and promise of such a style. What recently seemed implausible, even to

208

Soviet Chess Strategy

the most distinguished chess thinkers, is now becoming a reality. The chess luminaries Lasker and Reti considered that the human brain was strictly limited in its capacity for calculating variations. Of course, no one envisages reducing the game to endless calculations in our own day either. Yet it is also indisputable that the horizons of concrete thinking in our time have been significantly widened. The vision attained by chess players is becoming ever sharper, with results of a veritable "X-ray" quality. Thus it is that thought based solely on general positional principles (as a method!) has become decidedly antiquated. The modern psychological style is above all bound up with faith in the immense wealth of concrete ideas in chess. Its cutting edge is directed first and foremost against conventionality, the routines of chess thinking. In opposition to these routines, young players place fantasy, long-range calculation, and the courage for healthy risk. All this significantly enriches the game of chess. Let us now turn to some practical questions relevant to evaluating a position. From the extreme wealth and diversity of the forms taken by the chess struggle, we must conclude that to point to a general criterion, applicable to assessing any position, is scarcely possible. There is an entire range of positions that are relatively easy to evaluate. Some of them can be wholly exhausted by analytical means (take for instance any chess problem or study) ; others can be assessed with comparative ease by using general positional considerations. At the same time, though, there is a whole class of positions of a complex critical nature. Suffice it to take some situations arising from problematic openings - for example, l.e4 c5 2.lLlf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.lLlxd4 lLlf6 5.lLlc3 a6 6.ig5 e6 7.f4 Vffb6!?, or 7...b5!? These kinds of position can

be exhausted neither by analytical calculation nor by an approximate assessment based on purely positional concepts. The difficulty of evaluating them is due to the fact that they contain a rich selection of tactical and strategic ideas, giving wide scope to a chess player's thought. But the systematic foundations on which the assessment of a position should be built have already been very deeply investigated. The assessment is based on objective factors that have been tested by the practice of centuries. Hence it is indispensable for a player to know the basic general norms and principles of chess which always operate in one form or another. In the chess struggle, apart from the most general principles, there are a whole range of special ones. Mastery of the latter depends to a large extent on a player's individual qualities. Of course, any chess player has his own experience and his views on how to conduct the game. Everyone also has his favourite positions that he understands best. One player, let us say, likes to go in for simplification, aiming to exploit his opponent's "bad" bishop. Another, by contrast, will strive to attack, counting chiefly on the more active placing of his pieces when the attack is launched. This is as much as to say that the former type of player believes above all in the principles of positional manoeuvring, and the latter in the principle of aggression. The methodical assessment of a posltlon is best begun by surveying its outward (static) features; specifically, this means considering the material balance of forces, the placing of the kings, the central structure, the presence of weak and strong squares, and so on. Experience shows that after the mutual possibilities are weighed in this manner, a deeper analysis of the position is easier to perform. Bear in mind that static advantages (meaning the control of positional elements)

From the Book "The Middlegame in Chess" are only important when they enhance the prospects for the dynamic struggle. It follows that the static evaluation represents, so to speak, the preliminary stage in the assessment of a position. Without studying the position in its dynamic aspect, it is hard to arrive at its true evaluation. Only a dynamic assessment allows you to take account of the various underlying features of the position. The assessment, of course, has more than just two stages. Something like the following rough account of those stages, from P.A. Romanovsky's book The Middlegame, undoubtedly comes closer to a chess player's actual thinking: .:. consider the material factors .:. consider the positional factors .:. consider the basic principles of strategy and tactics that operate in the given position .:. consider the combinative motifs. In plenty of cases in practice, this classification of stages proves distinctly arbitrary. It merely emphasizes that the position ought to be assessed according to a definite method, which must take account of the various combinative motifs as well as the material and positional factors. It is only on acquiring such a systematic approach that you can rid yourself of unthematic play in which moves are selected from casual motives. Of course, in practice a chess player's thinking by no means always proceeds from statics to dynamics. It very often happens that you are initially struck by some sharp variation or other, which "cuts the Gordian knot" in the position in question. It is only then, on analysing the resulting complexities, that you turn your attention to specific positional . considerations.

209

Semyon Furman Alex:ey Suetin -

Tallinn 1959

l.d4 dS 2.c4 dxc4 3.�f3 �f6 4.e3 e6 S ..bc4 cS 6.'tYe2 a6 7.dxcS .bcs 8.0-0 �c6 9.e4 bS 10.eS bxc4 11.exf6 gd6 12.'tYxc4 'tYb6 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

Black has deliberately allowed a sharpening of the play, mainly on the basis of concrete variations. His main idea is that on:

13.�c3 Which looks very dangerous in view of the threatened �c3-a4, he has the saving retort:

13...'tYb4! The complications arising from:

14.'tYe2 Were dealt with as follows:

14...J.e7! The threat was 15.ttJd5!'

IS.h3 To deprive the queen of the g4-square.

IS .J.b7 16.a3 'tYaS 17.J.f4 gg8 18.J.g3 'tYhS 19.9fel gd8 20.gadl gxdl 21.'tYxdl �d8! ••

210

Soviet Chess Strategy

8 7

V///W/"-

6 5 4 3 2 1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

The "point" of Black's strategic design. His pieces are now working very harmoniously. For the moment his knight is merely occupying a defensive position, but it too is going to play an active role.

22.�e4 ti'd5 23.ti'a4t ti'c6 24.ti'd4 e5 Setting Black's centre in motion and freeing the important e6-square for the knight.

25.ti'dl �e6 26.ihl

position, Black gave his initial attention to the concrete defensive ploy 13...ti'b4! 14.ti'e2 ie7!. It was only then that he turned to general considerations, correctly judging that the ending after 14.ti'xb4 ixb4 would turn out in his favour. He had two strong bishops, pressure on the g-file and a compact centre; with the queens off, his king would not be in any danger; and so on. It was these very circumstances of a general order that played a very important although unseen role in the events that followed. The point is that a queen exchange was favourable to Black in all cases. He could boldly head for a number of variations in which such simplifying possibilities arose. To White, conversely, a queen exchange on move 14 was decidedly inauspicious and later even more so - which significantly reduced his concrete options. In this case, then, the positional advantages were taken into account only after a concrete investigation into the dynamics of the fight. In practice this happens very often. Hence the advice to young players is that in a position which intrigues you mainly by its concrete tactical scope, your choice of line must still be checked by reference to general positional concepts. The "compass" must always be held firmly in your hands. However sharp a player's tactical vision may be, it needs to be grounded in the objective factors of the position. Thus it is that the evaluation of a position tests a player's entire equipment of knowledge, experience and abilities.

Middlegame Mastery: Ways of Working to Improve It a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

26 £5! 27.�xe5 ti'd5! •••

Black soon conducted his advantage to victory. Let's return to the critical posItIon after White's 13th move. In heading for this

In working to perfect their mastery, young players should give special attention to developing their abilities of concrete thinking. Among the basic features of concrete thought we should count, above all, the skills of combinative vision and the art of calculating

From the Book "The Middlegame in Chess" variations. These qualities are largely amenable to education and coaching. Thus for example the technique of calculation can be developed by regular and purposeful training. The basic means of training on these lines is analytical work, the forms of which can be highly diverse. We may say that the development of a player's analytical abilities is directly proportional to the strength of his concrete thinking. The following pronouncement by Botvinnik is not irrelevant here: "What does a chess master's art consist of? Basically, the ability to analyse chess positions. To be sure, a master sitting at the board has to be able to analyse fairly quickly and without moving the pieces about; but ultimately, the calculation of variations or the assessment of the position is what makes the art of analysis. ''Analysis carried out at home has its own peculiarities: the master is not limited for time and can move the pieces. Despite these differences between analysis and practical play, the two also have much in common. It is well known that nearly all outstanding chess players have also been superb analysts. The conclusion from this is self-evident: those who wish to distinguish themselves as players must also perfect themselves in the domain of analysis." For young players who want to raise the level of their game, it is essential to make home analysis an integral part of their training. The best positions to select for analysis are from complex middlegames abounding in tactical possibilities. Work on such positions improves both your combinative vision and your accuracy in calculation. Of course it quite often happens that despite all your efforts, these analyses fall a long way short of the truth. It is therefore useful to show the results of particular analytical labours to more experienced players or publish them in the chess press. This gives you the chance to

21 1

clarifY their true worth and receive objective criticism, helping you to rid your thinking of any specific defects. Let me recount an experience - not an entirely successful one, but instructive - in the field of chess analysis. In 1948 I became interested in a critical and at the same time topical position in the Meran Variation of the Semi-Slav Defence:

Botvinnik Euwe -

Moscow 1 948

l.d4 d5 2.�f3 �f6 3.c4 e6 4.�c3 c6 5.e3 �bd7 6 .id3 dxc4 7 .bc4 b5 S .1d3 a6 9.e4 c5 10.e5 cxd4 11.�xb5 nb5 12.exf6 '@Yb6 13.fxg7.ixg7 14.0-0 �c5 15 .1£4 .ib7 16J�el �MS 17.�kl :!:'!d5 IS..1e5 •

•

•

•

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

IS....be5? 19.:!:'!xe5 :!:'!xe5 20.�xe5 �xd3 21.'@Yxd3 f6 22.'@Yg3! With the powerful threat of'@Yg3-g7, he was quickly crushed. On the basis of this, some authorities suggested that in place of 18... .ixe5? Black could improve with 18. . 0-0, not fearing the various attacking tries on the kingside. Analysing the position after 18... 0-0 greatly .

21 2

Soviet Chess Strategy

interested me. Here are the main lines resulting from my analytical labours: 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

19.�xh7t Q;;>xh7 20J'!xc5!? And now: a) 20...l'!xc5 21.YMd3t f5 22.ci)g5t Q;;>g6 23.hg7 Q;;>xg7 24.YM g3 l'!gB 25.YMh4 l'!hB 26.YMxd4t e5 27.YMxc5! YMxc5 2B.ci)e6t and 29.ci)xc5. b) 20...YMxc5 21.YMd3t f5 22.ci)g5t Q;;>g6 23.hg7 YMb4 24.l'!xe6t Q;;>xg7 25.YMg3! etc. I sent my analysis to the editors of Chess in the USSR. Soon afterwards it was published, with minor cuts, in the pages of the magazine. About half a year passed, then suddenly in one of the theoretical surveys by Paul Keres, likewise published in Chess in the USSR, I saw the familiar position from the diagram once again. After thoroughly familiarizing himself with my analysis, Grandmaster Keres had discovered a fairly conspicuous "hole" in it. This was in the variation 19.ixh7t Q;;>xh7 20.l'!xc5 l'!xc5 21.YMd3t f5 22.ci)g5t Q;;>g6 23.�xg7 'i!?xg7 24.YMg3. Now instead of 24...l'!gB?, Keres and Igor Bondarevsky in collaboration found the ingenious 24...e5!, tipping the scales rather in Black's favour. However much I looked for attacking lines, however hard I tried to refute this advance of the centre pawn, nothing came of it. Later, I

succeeded in finding a major improvement for White in 20.b4! (instead of the exchange sacrifice). After this move, White really does have the better chances. Yet even this could not allay the bitter feeling from my original faulty analysis. A while after, when time had extinguished my immediate reaction to this "defeat" , I managed to place a different value on the work I had done. Yes, it had been less than infallible. But in the first place, my labours had not been for nothing; I began to analyse better all round, I freed myself to some extent from superficiality. Secondly, this analysis had opened my eyes to the full complexity and substance of contemporary opening theory. And finally, even that bitter feeling had not been an entirely bad one. If you are dissatisfied, it means you are searching, you are improving. This indeed is part of the charm of chess. Young players, I think, should be least of all afraid of such chagrin. The harder the learning course, the easier the play of the game. The best teacher is practice. But study takes place not only during play or in post-mortem analysis of a finished game. Work on adjourned positions can do much to develop our analytical skills. Some young players approach this work perfunctorily. They view adjourned positions as a kind of pointless chore on which extra time must be squandered. Such players shirk spending plenty of time analysing their adjourned games. Small wonder that on resuming play, surprises very often await them, costing them points. Yet home analysis of adjourned positions should not be regarded solely from the practical viewpoint of the game in question. By mastering this task, a player greatly enhances his concrete thinking. Every well-analysed position adds something to his skills. The following example is most instructive.

From the Book "The Middlegame in Chess"

Viacheslav Ragozin Mikhail Botvinnik -

213

41...ge3

Leningrad 1 930

a a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

The game was adjourned in an exceedingly sharp endgame position - which looks more promising for White, who has the possibility of quickly creating a passed pawn by b4-b5-b6. Black on the other hand has active counterplay, as he too acquires a passed pawn by picking up the pawn on f3. It should be observed that in such situations the struggle abounds in concrete points and therefore presents extremely rich material for analysis. It is no accident that players call such positions "analytical". At that time Botvinnik was still a very young master, with relatively little experience of chess battles. The seriousness with which he set about analysing this game is all the more noteworthy. Over the next twelve moves, Botvinnik is following his adjournment analysis!

3S.b5 Lf3 39.b6 ab6 40.ab6 gdSt! The only move. In the event of the natural 40...l'�e3 41.b7 l:!d8t 42.'it>c5 f3 43.tDc4!, Black would lose by force.

41.'it>c4 Not 41.'it>e5 !!xc3 42.'it>xf4 l:!c5! 43.b7 l:!b5 etc.

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

42.�c6?! The first inaccuracy - although outwardly the move looks strong. White is evidently overestimating his chances. Instead he ought to have forced events with 42.l:!a2! l:!c8t 43.'it>b4 l:!e6 44.'it>b5 l:!e5t 45.'it>b4 (45.'it>a6 l:!a8t) 45...l:!e6, drawing by repetition.

42 ge4t 43.�d4 •••

Not 43.'it>b3 !!xa4 44.'it>xa4 f3! 45.ttJxd8 f2 46.b7 fl=%V 47.b8=%V %Valt, and Black wins.

43 8 44.ga2 gc8t 45.'it>b4! •••

By now it is White who keeps having to play the only move. All other king moves are bad. On 45.'it>d3 or 45.'it>b3, Black has 45...l:!e7 46.ttJxf3l:!b7. If 45.'it>d5 !!e7 46.ttJxf3, then 46...l:!d7t! 47.<j;Je4l:!b7 is decisive. Finally in the event of 45.'it>b5, Black wins by 45...l:!e5t 46.'it>b4l:!b8!.

45 gel 46.c4 ge4 47.'it>c3 ge3t 4S.'it>b4 ge4 49.'it>c3 gdS! •••

Soviet Chess Strategy

214

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

A subtle idea which White fails to figure out. At this point his sole path to salvation was 50.llJb3 ge2 51.gal f2 52.gn gfB 53. b7 gb8 54.llJa5, when a draw is likely. In the game, there followed:

50.�c6? ge3t! 5U�b4 ge2 52.gal il! 53.�xd8 53.gn also fails to save him: 53... gfB 54. b7 gb2t!

53...gel 54.gaS f1 =ti' 55.�c6t mg7 Black easily realized his advantage. In his annotations to this game, Botvinnik wrote: "In the adjourned position after move 37, I carried out a very thorough analysis and 'polished up' the whole sequence of moves as far as the 48th. I found 49... gd8! over the board (after missing it at the adjournment) . All the same I was very pleased with this 'polished' line, since before that time I had been a good deal weaker in analysis." It was no accident that within some five or six years, Botvinnik was to grow from a young master into one of the strongest players in the world. It must be said that a methodology for analysing adjourned games has as yet been

only very inadequately worked out. In my view the significance of outside help ought not to be overrated. Analysis by a large number of "heads" quite often turns into analysis by "hands", which merely creates turmoil and weakens the effort. In the course of the practical game, especially in the fifth and last hour of the session, even the best tacticians sometimes fail to fathom the hidden tactical resources of a position. When analysing adjourned games you must always take this into consideration and seek out the concealed possibilities, even in the apparently simplest of variations. Perhaps the episode that most stands out in my memory is one that occurred in the last round of the 19th Soviet Championship. The outcome of the game Aronin - Smyslov was of exceptional importance. If he won, International Master Aronin would gain the right to play in the World Championship Interzonal Tournament. On the other hand if Smyslov won, he stood a chance of victory in the Championship of the USSR. Aronin had White, and the game was going his way. Up until the adjournment, no one doubted that he would win. Lev Aronin - Vassily Smyslov Moscow 1 95 1

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

6. a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

21 5

From the Book "The Middlegame in Chess" Aronin sealed. At this point 42.l:!xc6 could quickly have led to victory, but he wrote down a different move which objectively also wins easily:

The main line that he had in mind went as follows: 45.g4 @f7 46.'�e2 @ e6 47.@ d3 @d6 48.@c4 a5 49.f3 @d7 50.@c5 @c7 51.c3 bxc3 52.bxc3 @b7 53.@d6 @b6 54.c4 @b7 55.c5, and White wins.

42.gg8 I was assisting him during the adjournment, so naturally I was the first to know about his "secret" move. I confess that I didn't like 42.l:!g8, even though I couldn't see any concrete refutation of the variations associated with it. Aronin's intention, after the forced 42... @h7, was to go into the pawn ending which (at first sight) was a win for White. It was late in the evening when the game was adjourned. Resumption was fixed for the following day. We decided to analyse in the morning, but as things turned out, it wasn't at all simple to create a good working environment. Aronin had a large number of fans who were eager to congratulate him on his success, and of course they made it hard to concentrate. To them, the outcome of the game was clear!

45.g4 However, played:

here

Smyslov

unexpectedly

45...hxg3 46.fxg3 g4! In our analysis we hadn't examined this at all. It looks as if White, obtaining an outside pawn, should win easily:

8 7 6 5 4 3

42 @h7 •..

Aronin did not return to the original position with 43.l:!c8!, but instead entered the pawn endgame with:

2 1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

It was only here that Black's shrewd idea became clear. The natural 50.@c4 loses to 50... fS! 51.exfS e4!, when the white king is in a trap - it can only go forward, but then the black e-pawn advances to queen. If instead 51.@d3, then 51...f4 52.gxf4 exf4 53.@e2 c;f;>h5 54.e5 @g6, followed by 55... @fS and 56... @xe5 - and again Black wins.

8 7 6 5 4

An instructive case. White was forced to take a draw.

3 2 1

6. a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

50.c3 a5 5l.ab4 axb4 The final position is very pretty. It is notable

Soviet Chess Strategy

216

that Grandmaster Smyslov had already seen it on adjourning the game. The adjournment often comes at a moment when a tactical engagement is in full swing. Quite often, too, the logical course of the game will just have been overturned by a "feverish" time scramble. When adjourning the game, a player's impressions are frequently dominated by what had been the case a few moves earlier. In the USSR Team Championship, playing White against Isaac Lipnitsky, I ran into trouble in the opening and conducted a difficult defence all through the game; but by adjournment time, after some time-trouble vicissitudes, I managed to obtain quite good counterplay. In the diagram position I sealed my move.

Alexey Suetin Isaac Lipnitsky

Lipnitsky succeeded in finding an adequate antidote to this tactical stroke, but on resumption he discovered that I had sealed:

41. tLl g3 He was totally unprepared for this. He spent a long time thinking at the board, but couldn't find anything better than giving up a pawn.

41. e4 .•

8 7 6 5 4 3

-

2 Voroshilovgrad 1 955

1 a

8

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

42.tLlfSt! �xf5 43.i.xdl �c8 44.�xc8 tLlxc8 45.tLlc2 i.d6 46.tLla3

7 6

And so on.

5 4 3 2 1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

Lipnitsky left the board in the most radiant mood, reckoning the position was clearly in his favour; but while immersed in his analysis, he suddenly noticed a possibility that was unpleasant for him: 41.lZJd4!. As I discovered afterwards, he spent the whole night analysing this move, giving no attention at all to White's other continuations.

Analysing adjourned games is a traIning in objectivity. A chessplayer striving to master his art must not be obsessed by any one particular possibility, especially in the matter of his opponent's sealed move. Not infrequently, a player adjourning in a difficult position will write off his chances too soon, instead of making the effort to unearth methods of salvation. This is wrong if only because in the toughest of situations you ought to fight on to the end. You mustn't forget that your opponent too, being confident of victory, may relax too soon and fall into a hidden trap. In practice this happens all the time. But the main thing of course is to trust in the wealth of your defensive resources. In chess

From the Book "The Middlegame in Chess" a profound conflict of ideas often lies beneath outward simplicity. For this reason optimism is far from being a secondary factor in the analysis of adjourned games.

217

Here are the main variations discovered in analysis - 41..id4 �dS 42.ie3 a3 43.�xh7!, and now:

Alexey Suetin - David Bronstein Leningrad 1960

a

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

In this very difficult position the game was adjourned. I thought for a long time about which move to seal. At first I focused on 41.'it>g3, but then, after abundant (though not entirely clear) calculations, I settled for 41.id4. The first hours of analysis "at home" were enough to establish that after the simple 41...'it>dS it would be very hard for White to save himsel£ The point is that he doesn't succeed in keeping his bishop on the al-hS diagonal. For example, 42.if6 (other moves on the long diagonal are no better) 42...llJxfL 43J'hh 7 �xh3t! 44.�xh3 llJxg4t 4S.'it>g2 llJxf6, and White has no defence against the advance of his opponent's pawns. On the other hand if the bishop departs from the main highway, the black passed pawns will press forward quickly. These general considerations are convincing of course, but analysis is essential. I had to spend a great deal of time before finding some saving chances.

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

a) 43...b4 44.�a7 �b2 If Black plays 44..J3bl then after 4S.gS llJeS 46.�g2 'it>c4 47.h4 b3, White saves himself with 48.�a4t! all the same. 4S.gSllJeS 4S...llJxfL 46.�g3! or 4S...�e6 46.'it>g2!. 46.�aSt �e4 47.g6! llJf3t 47...llJxg6 48.icS 48.�g3 a2 49.�g4 b3 49...llJeSt SO.�hS SO.�a4t �d3 Sl.�xf3 And so on. b) 43...a2 44.�a7 �b2 4S.gS llJeS Or 4S...llJxfL 46.ixfL �xfLt 47.�g3 and White draws. 46.h4 b4 47.hS b3 48.g6 �b1 If Black plays 48...�xfLt!? 49.ixfL b2, White still escapes the worst by SO.g7 llJg4t Sl.'it>g2 llJh6 S2.�aSt �c4 S3.�xa2 bl=� S4.�a4t �dS SS.�g4!. 49.g7 llJf3t 49...llJg4t is no better: SO.�g2! llJf6 Sl..igS SO.�g2 �glt Sl.�xf3 b2 Or S1...�xg7 S2.�aSt! and S3..icl. S2.igS! White's chances are no worse.

Soviet Chess Strategy

218

Such, more or less, was the substance of my analysis in that brain-teaser of an adjournment position. But now the day for resumption came. Naturally enough, in answer to:

41..id4 Bronstein quickly played:

41...i>d5 42..ie3 But here he played:

42,..h4! a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

The only way! White has to conquer the d4square, from which his bishop can once again join in the fight against the black pawns.

46,..'>1ie6 On 46...'>1ic4 White captures the a4-pawn with check, gaining an important tempo.

47..id4 �c4 48..ih8 b2 49J�a6t i>f5 50..ixb2 �xb2 51.g6 �c8 52.h4 And White was able to draw the game. a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

Strange as it may seem, I hadn't analysed this move at all. I now had to labour with might and main at the board. Clearly 43.E\xa4 is bad in view of 43...E\a3! 44.E\xa3 bxa3, and the pawn queens by force. There was nothing for it but to play:

43J!xh7 �c3 Thus Bronstein was opting for a totally different plan - he was trying to queen the b-pawn rather than the a-pawn. The defence is far from easy. Nonetheless the analysis I had performed was not in vain: its ideas turned out to be applicable here too.

44.g5 �c6 45.�a7! b3 46.�a5t!

Interestingly, after the game Bronstein told me that he had given most attention to the position after 41.i>g3, against which he had found a very delicate forced win! This example further demonstrates that the basic aim of any analysis is to penetrate the depths of the position. Even if not all lines have been foreseen, it is much easier to cope with unexpected replies from your opponent if the fundamental ideas are understood. The examples we have examined testifY eloquently to the way in which home analysis leads to an overall refinement of a player's concrete thought, imparting the skills of combinative vision and the technique of calculating variations. Yet we should remember that for the practical player, analysis with the aid of the hands is not in itself sufficient as a training method - seeing

From the Book "The Middlegame in Chess" that over the board he has to work out the variations in his head, and moreover with the minimum expenditure of time. Young players should therefore try to make sure that their home preparation is as close as possible to the practical game. In this respect, the method of training proposed by Grandmaster Kotov is very much to the point. Under this training scheme, the player endeavours to calculate all possible variations deeply and accurately without moving the pieces on the board, while limiting his thinking time (that is, artificially creating the conditions of tournament play). The positions selected for this analysis are full of tactical conflict. In general, Kotov would take them from games by Chigorin. The "fruits" of the player's labour (the variations calculated) are then carefully checked by playing them on the board or comparing them with authoritative annotations. This mental analysis requires purposeful direction. Grandmaster Kotov quite rightly points to the following aims that you must try to achieve. (Essentially they apply just as much to analysis in any form.) .:. Try to go as deeply as possible into the subtleties of the position and examine the variations as many moves ahead as you can. •:. Try to be selective in the lines you analyse, and investigate the greatest possible number that have practical worth. .:. Work out the variations using as little time as possible. An elementary and indispensable condition of this work is to pursue the analysis of each variation to its logical culmination, where a judgement on it can be made. Undoubtedly such labour is far from easy. And yet it proves its worth. Having performed

219

it himself (and incidentally accomplished the phenomenal leap from first-category player to Grandmaster in a year!) , Alexander Kotov indicates that "by gradually perfecting your calculation you can achieve astonishing results". Here is one of the examples from his creative laboratory.

Mikhail Chigorin - Siegbert Tarrasch St Petersburg 1 893

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

Playing White in this extremely sharp position, Chigorin committed an inaccuracy in the attack. He continued with:

48.gxf6 After:

48 ixf6 49.YlYh3 a3 50.�xf6 YlYxf6 5U�g6 a2! 52J'��xf6t gxf6 •••

He suffered defeat. Subsequent analysis showed that the struggle could have taken a completely different course if instead of 48.gxf6 White had played 48.YlYh3 at once. Knowing about this basic idea, Kotov gradually unravelled the "tangle" and independently worked out the following variation, 24 moves long:

220

Soviet Chess Strategy

4B.Wlh3 a3 49.WlhB fxg5 The threat was 50.lLlh6. 50.f6! ixf6 51.lLlxg5 a2 52.lLlh7t 'i!ifl 53.lLlhxf6 lLlxf6 54.lLlh6t i>e6 55.E!:xf6t gxf6 56.WlgBt 'i!id7 57.E!:g7t Wle7 On 57...r;!;>c6 5B.WlaBt White forces mate. 5B.Wld5t 'i!icB If 5B...'i!ieB, then 59.E!:gBt WlfB 60.Wlflt. 59.WlaBt i>d7 60.Wlb7t E!:c7 61.E!:xe7t 'i!ixe7 62.Wlxc7t 'i!ie6 63.WlcBt! 'i!ie7 64.lLlf5t 'i!if7 65.Wld7t 'i!ig6 66.Wlg7t i>h5 67.Wlh6t i>g4 6B.Wlh4t 'i!if3 69.Wlg3t r;!;>e2 70.Wlg2t 'i!ixd3 71.Wlxb2 White wins. [Editor's Note: Modern computers can improve on parts of this analysis, but that in no way detracts from the general point about learning to improve one's calculation. In fact, in tactical positions computers can now be used to provide the "authoritative annotations" that Suetin suggests we compare our own efforts with. For those interested in the specific improve­ ments, after 4B.gxf6 ixf6 Chigorin could have played the winning 49.E!:al! stopping the a-pawn and with the idea if 49...E!:xb4 then 50.Wlh3 with the attack he intended during the game. Also, in Kotov's line, instead of 53.lLlhxf6 White has mate-in-5 with 53.lLlxe5t.J In working like this on the technique of calculation, it is most important to learn to fix the relevant positions in your mind. After every mental movement of a piece, you must try to compose a new diagram in your mind's eye. It is only with this kind of dedicated work that you can eliminate the optical illusions which are met with quite frequently in master play. The following is an instructive example of an optical illusion.

Peter Romanovsky Genrikh Kasparian -

Leningrad 1 938

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

In this position which clearly favours Black, the Soviet Master Kasparian, wishing to conclude the fight beautifully, "announced mate" in three moves with:

52 Wle1t 53.i>h2 gxh3t 54.hl3lLlf3#?? •.•

A terrible hallucination! Black forgot that his knight was pinned. Carried away by the notion of a pretty mate, he committed an utterly gross miscalculation. The tournament struggle involves high nervous tension, and in the heat of battle there is more potential for such oversights than in a quiet home environment. Yet for this very reason you must systematically develop the art of calculation and strengthen your associated skills. The solving of studies and exercises from diagrams (without moving the pieces about) can be of great use in perfecting your technique of calculation. This method of training is also attractive in that it hardly requires any special material conditions. Solving endgame studies is particularly useful. Who, for instance, would not be delighted at solving the following (far from simple) study by the self-same Genrikh Kasparian?

From the Book "The Middlegame in Chess"

22 1

Genrikh Kasparian 1958

8 7 6 5 4 3

a

2

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

4.cJ/h2!!

1

6. a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

1.c!£lxf/!

A stunning winner, but why is it the only move? The problem with 4.'it>g2 is 4... cJ/g8! 5.l:l:g7t \t>f8 when 6.lt'lg5 no longer works because after 6... l:l:xg7 the knight is pinned.

It seems as though White's pieces are stepping into trouble with a pin on the way.

4 cJ/g8

The obvious 1.lt'lb7 was not good enough due to 1...'it>e7 followed by ... 'it>f6 and the f5-pawn drops. Rook and knight versus rook should just be a draw.

Stepping the other way is no better, as after 4... 'it>eS 5.lt'lg5 l:l:xhlt 6.lt'lxh7 cJ/f7 7.cJ/g3 'it>g6 S.cJ/f4 'it>xh7 the white king arrives just in time to win the pawn ending, with any move to the fifth rank.

1. 'it>f8 2J:�h7

5J��g7t cJ/f8 6.c!£lg5!

••

The clumsy 2.f6 throws away the final pawn, and thus the win, after 2 .. Jk6.

2 J�c7 3.£6! ••

Despite the limited material, a mating theme appears just in time to save the knight.

3..JM7! The best try, forcing White to find an "only move" to win. Rather less testing was 3 .. Jl:xf7 4J:l:h8#.

•..

White escapes with his extra piece and the vital final pawn.

6 J:�xg7 7.c!£le6t cJ/f7 8.fxg7 ••

If you examine diagrammed posltlons from chess books without using a board, analyse positions "blindfold", and so on, this can serve as quite a good method of developing concrete thought. I would point out that chess masters, as a rule, are supremely good at reading chess literature without the aid of a board. As already indicated, in practical play you mainly have to contend against your opponent's tactical designs which take exceedingly varied forms. The special attention of young players should be drawn to the fact that many forced

Soviet Chess Strategy

222

operations are associated with so-called "quiet" moves or, for instance, intermediate moves. Such moves can be wholly unobtrusive in aspect. At first sight they don't fit in with any tactical idea, but in reality they frequently play a decisive role.

Carried away by his own active plans, a player will often fail to notice his opponent's very strong intervening moves.

Svein Johannessen - Rudolf Teschner Riga 1 959

Tigran Petrosian - Mark Taimanov �

8

Leningrad 1 960

7 �

6 5 4 3 2 1 a

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

Black played a move that looks natural and strong:

29 �e5

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

With his last move (I 6.fxe4) , attacking the knight on d5 and strengthening his centre with tempo, White would seem to be acquiring excellent prospects. Yet Black's brilliant intermediate move abruptly alters the complexion of the fight.

.•.

He now threatens ...llJe5-d3 with the initiative. But he has failed to take account of the following "quiet" reply which dashes all his hopes.

30.f3! It suddenly turns out that Black's active position is collapsing by force, since e4 and e5 are indefensible. In view of the threatened 31.fxe4 Black had to play:

30...e3 But after:

31.�xe3 �c6 32.�e4 �m 33.�g5 W£6 34.�xe6! White won easily.

16 W£6!! •..

Although both knights are en prise, neither can be taken. On 1 7.%Vxa5, Black decides the game with 17...%Vf3 18.:gg1 :gc2 19.id2 %VtLt 20.@dl llJe3t! 21.ixe3 %Vxe2#. After 1 7.exd5 he wins by 17...%VtLt 18.@dl .ia4t. In the game, there followed:

17.�f4 �xf4 18.gd4 %Vg6 19.We3 Wg2 20.�gl

From the Book "The Middlegame in Chess"

223

He seems to be winning the piece back. But a deeper study of the position reveals that White has a very strong intermediate move at his disposal - 14. b4!, which utterly refutes the entire variation.

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

20 J:lxc1t! 2IJ:lxcl Wxa2 ••

Black won with his material advantage. In practice such intermediate moves are encountered very often; they need to be anticipated in good time to forestall the unpleasant consequences. As an example I will give the following complex position arising from Alekhine's Defence:

1.e4 'Of6 2.e5 'Od5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 'Ob6 5.£4 dxe5 6.fxe5 'Oc6 7 .ie3 .if5 8.'Oc3 'OM 9J�'kl c5 lO.d5 e6 11.33 •

'Y

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

The continuation 11...exd5 12. axb4 d4 13.bxc5 ixc5 looks very tempting for Black.

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

Therefore, instead of 13... .ixc5, Black should find 13 . . . dxc3!, which turns the complications into his favour. In training, attention should be paid to such ploys, which raise the level of tactical skill. To this end it is useful to draw systematically on both your own experience and notable examples from master practice (that is, to compile a kind of album of diagrams) . After that, each position must be thoroughly examined, and the appropriate conclusions drawn. Of course you should not dwell excessively on the study of tactics. Young players wishing to improve should try to develop their abilities harmoniously, giving due attention to the strategy of chess. Methods of work on the strategic elements are a little different from the work on tactics that we have been conSidering. The main thing here is to enhance your feel for the position. Some young players adopt a formalistic attitude to such work. They think it wholly adequate to memorize various strategic principles such as "the player with the advantage is obliged to attack," or "avoid unnecessary pawn moves" and so forth.

224

Soviet Chess Strategy

Similar pieces of advice, which have become truisms, can easily be picked up from any chess book or magazine, and of course they stick vividly in the memory. I know quite a few first-category players who have copious extracts from teaching manuals at their expert fingertips, and apply them assiduously in practice. In fact, however, they quite often get everything mixed up; such memorization merely leads to stereotyped thinking. I cannot help recalling the following amusing case. One young player, who had conscientiously studied Alekhine's books, would endeavour to take the offensive in keeping with the latter's favourite strategy attacking on both wings. In one of his crucial games he managed to obtain a splendid position for attacking his opponent's king. By concentrating everything against the king, he could virtually have won the game by force. Yet instead of this straightforward and natural plan, he persisted in trying to strike on both wings at once, "a la Alekhine". Not surprisingly, as a result of this blind imitation, he eventually lost not only his advantage but the game. To master the strategic elements, it is not enough to know basic patterns and devices. This falls a long way short of genuine positional thinking. Let's just take the case of the attacking strategy on both wings. This was indeed one of Alekhine's favourite strategic precepts, and it constituted his contribution to the further development of middlegame theory. But of course such attacks were by no means fortuitous; they conformed above all to an objective assessment of the position. Alekhine at no time "tried to be clever"; he took the demands of the position as his starting point, although his strategic conceptions were extremely original and profound.

A very useful way of developing a player's positional flair is (for instance) the "sensation" method, which Nimwwitsch recommended in his day. In this respect, the assessment of the following position - for example - is characteristic.

Milan Vidmar Aron Nimzowitsch -

New York 1927

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

At first sight, White seems to be in quite good shape. His rooks have secured possession of the d-file. In time, Black's weakening of his own kingside by pawn advances may make itself felt. In actual fact, White's position is virtually lost. Essentially it is not White but Black who dominates the centre, keeping all the key squares firmly under control. This enables him to work up a winning attack on his opponent's king in no time. White proves to be helpless against this direct assault.

22...e4! 23.J.e1 Alas, there is nothing better.

23 ... exf3 24.J.c3 flYe7! 25J::� 6d3 fxg2 26.J.xg2 J.xg2 27.J.xf6

From the Book "The Middlegame in Chess"

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

27 :Be4! 28J:Ud2 .ih3 29..ic3 Wg4t . .

White resigned. There is no doubt that systematic exercises in evaluating such unconventional positions are very useful for chess players whose positional flair leaves something to be desired.

225

In Place of a Postscript Dynamics should be Dynamic Is this not so, my friends? Is this not so, my friends? Though hard to live with in this world, There is no life without her. Bulat Okudzhava The book is finished, the final page is turned over. But let us not be in a hurry to shut it. Let us take a look at how Suetin's ideas work in our own day.

l .d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.�f3 �f6 4.�c3 e6 5.e3 �bd7 6. .id3 dxc4 7 . .ixc4 b5 8. .id3 a6 9.e4 c5 10.e5 cxd4 11.�xb5 axb5 12.exf6 gd6 13.0-0 �b6 14.�e2 .ib7 15 ..ixb5 T

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

This position occurred twice in the World Championship match between Vladimir Kramnik and Viswanathan Anand (Bonn 2008) . Let us try to make sense of it, basing ourselves first on the static characteristics, then on the dynamic ones. There is equal material on the board. What about the position of the kings? It is hard to say anything definite. The white king is castled, the black one is more or less stuck in the centre. But this hardly means that the white king is more secure. Let us picture how Black intends

228

Soviet Chess Strategy

to conduct the attack. His bishop is already on b7, and a rook on g8 will shortly connect with it: together they will exert strong pressure on the g2-point. If White barricades the dangerous file with a bishop on g3, Black's f-pawn will advance like a battering ram; . . . f6f5 will probably be followed by ... if8-d6 and ... f5-f4. The bishop on g3 will be unstable, but there will be nothing else to shield the king. It follows that being castled does not guarantee the king's safety - which in turn means it does not necessarily bring any advantage. But then, the black king feels uncomfortable too. Its hopes are all vested in the e6-point, but this may be exploded by some sacrifice, whereupon prospects of mate may become a reality. What about the general development of the pieces? White is close to connecting his rooks - a sure sign that his development will be completed presently. To connect his rooks, Black will need to expend more tempos, and moreover he will probably have to leave his king on e7. Does this mean that White is (or will be) better developed? Again the answer is no. The rook on a8 has yet to make a single move, but it has already come into play. On the other hand White's rook on a I , even when united with his other one, is not participating in the game - and there is no telling when it wifl be. And the pawn structure? Here too, things are by no means unambiguous. The position of the white pawns is pleasing to the eye, whereas Black's "coiffure" on the kingside has been spoilt by the g7-pawn shifting to f6. Yet it is this very defect which - paradoxically! - enables Black to start an attack with his pieces against g2. If the attack is successful, the ugliness of Black's pawn structure will be counted as a plus for him. If the attack founders, it is perfectly possible that the shortcomings of the pawn structure will tell. And now, a further nuance. In the diagram

position, White has passed pawns on the queenside, Black in the centre. In an endgame, the passed pawns on the wing are considered more dangerous than central ones. But as the saying goes, there is still the need to survive until the endgame. We could take these general considerations further, but only with the same amount of "success". This position obviously cannot be solved in terms of statics. It is by dynamics that all will be resolved. Suetin's book abounds in theoretical antith­ eses. The author sets statics against dynamics, the positional struggle against the tactical, the stable factors of a position against the transi­ tional ones - and also, in a global sense, ste­ reotyped dogmatic thinking against thought which is unconventional and innovative. To this list of antitheses I would like to add one more item: the objectivity and subjectivity of the tasks confronting the players. A game of chess is not played in a vacuum. The players look for the best move - but not in friendly conversation, rather in conditions of fierce competitive struggle. They have to solve problems "here and now" , which means that to add to the objective difficulties there will inevitably be subjective ones: shortage of time; discomfort at being less well acquainted with the position than your opponent; physi­ cal fatigue towards the end of the game; and so on. Let us come back to the diagram position. The variation occurring in the game had been prepared by Anand at home. What does that mean, if we are talking about a match for the World Championship? Obviously a brigade of distinguished grandmasters and highly profes­ sional theorists will have been at work. Their analytical calculations will have been checked by computer and delivered to Anand's "desk". There will then have been a concerted effort of polishing, of painstakingly working out every detail. Finally the variation was ready for use.

Dynamics should be Dynamic The variation is on the board. At Anand's back, there are many hours of preparation. In front of Kramnik there are serious problems. Vladimir reacts creditably to his opponent's innovation, he conducts the game on the very highest level. But he uses up a vast amount of time and exhausts his strength. By about move 30 he has neither strength nor time left. Then his game tumbles downhill.

229

22...�g7! Anand takes the courageous decision to continue the game while keeping as much material as possible on the board. There are not that many pieces left, and White does have two extra pawns. Objectively, in some "ideal" analytical environment, this decision might be contested, but here and now, in the concrete situation of the game, it proves subjectively to be most unpleasant for White.

15....1d6 16.l'�dl �g8 17.g3 �g4 18..1f4 .ixf4 19.lthd4!?

23.�xg7 <.i?xg7 24.gxf4 �d8 25.�e2

White shows he does not intend to surrender the initiative. The restrained capture on d4 with the rook would lead to simplification and a probable draw.

A barely conspicuous but significant inaccuracy. The white king is going to have to flee to save itself, but the queen is depriving it of a square. A better move was 25.�b3.

19...h5 20.tLlxe6 fxe6 21.�xd7 <.i?f8 22.�d3

25... �h6 26.<.i?f1 �g8 27.a4 .1g2t 28.<.i?el .1h3

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

Just as we predicted, White has sacrificed a piece on e6 and opened up the enemy king. He now threatens to swing his queen across to h7. Mate is on the horizon. However, we ought not to over-dramatize the situation. Black has a combination at his disposal to "calm things down" - after 22...�xg3 23.hxg3 h4 the pawn on f2 is pinned, and there is the threat of a deadly capture on g3. In reply White would no doubt have to exchange queens on d6, with a draw.

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

29.�a3? A highly significant moment. From the static point of view, this move looks splendid. After being idle for ages, the rook finally comes into play. On a3 it supports a passed pawn, attacks the black bishop, covers all the points on the third rank.... It seems impossible to demand more of a single move! Yet the concrete variations show this move to be weak. The rook is ineffective on a3 and should have gone to d1. Why, then,

Soviet Chess Strategy

230

did Kramnik play this way? For one of two reasons - he had either no time, or no strength. In any event, the decision Anand took on move 22 has justified itself. He had a serious attack, and now it grows into a decisive one.

the scenes. General considerations seemed like empty patter; the outcome of the game hinged entirely on concrete variations. Yet all of a sud­ den, at the decisive moment of the game, what seemed to be a secondary static factor emerges into the foreground.

29... E:gl t 30.�d2 YMd4t 31.�c2 .ig4

Unfortunately, by now Kramnik had com­ pletely lost control of the position:

An over-refinement, an unnecessary zwischenzug. Checking on f5 at once would have been better. 8 7

32.f3? .ifSt 33..id3 .ih3 34.a5 E:g2 35.a6 E:xe2t 36.he2 .ifSt 37.�b3 YMe3t 38.�a2 YMxe2 39.a7 YMe4t 40.�al YMfl t 41.'if;1a2 .ib l t White resigned.

6

A few days later, when Kramnik had White again, the players continued their theoretical duel.

5 4 3

l.d4 d5 2.e4 e6 3.�f3 �f6 4.�c3 e6 5.e3 �bd7 6..id3 de 7.he4 b5 8..id3 a6 9.e4 e5 10.e5 cxd4 11.�xb5 nb5 12.exf6 gxf6 13.0-0 YMb6 14.YMe2 .ib7 15.hb5

2 1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

You recall that right at the start of our discussion we noted that the queenside passed pawns could become a real force in the endgame. At that stage this circumstance seemed of secondary importance - the endgame was such a long way away. Now, however, the passed pawn factor could have taken full effect if White had played 32.i'!d3!, and if 32...�f5 then 33.b3 �xd3 34.YMxd3. Black is the exchange up, but the pawns are very dangerous. The outcome of the fight would remain unclear. What does this tell us? It tells us that the static and dynamic characteristics of a posi­ tion are not in confrontation but are con­ stantly linked in a certain complex and elusive unity. In the present game, over a long stretch of moves, the static characteristics, or "sterile positional" ones, remained somewhere behind

At this point the earlier game saw 15...�d6. Obviously Kramnik and his team will have been working to refute this very line. But Anand is the first to deviate.

15...E:g8 16..if4 .id6 17..ig3 f5 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

6. a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

Dynamics should be Dynamic Black's attack develops according to the scenario we foresaw. The f5-pawn is used as a battering ram: its job is to dislodge the bishop from g3 and thus clear the path to g2. Here again I would like to return to the main body of this book. Suetin uses the phrase "harmonious co-ordination of the forces" as the chief term to explain the ascendancy of dynamics over statics. The position on the diagram could serve as a good illustration of the author's theoretical argument. In terms of statics, White's position looks very attractive. Black's, on the contrary, is "ugly". But in dynamic terms, the black pieces and pawns are in harmony whereas White's are not. The black pieces are attacking, and in a very natural manner too, with major forces. The two bishops, the rook on g8 and the pawn on f5 are the vanguard of this attack; the queen, the knight and the rook on a8 are a very close line of reserves, and the impression is that the attacking forces are about to unite. Black's next few moves are easy to predict: ... f5-f4, ...'it>e8e7, perhaps the rooks will double on the g-file (the rook on a8 might also be transferred along the fifth rank) , and the knight will be brought over towards the kingside. What White is to do is none too clear, for all the "beauty" of his position. The initiative belongs to Black. But does this mean that the advantage is on his side? Of course not. Between initiative and advantage there is not by any means an equals sign. White may beat off the attack, and then the defects of Black's pawn formation, coupled with his insecure king position, may tell. Let us once more give attention to that most important antithesis in modern chess: the objectivity and subjectivity of the problems to be solved. Perhaps those who follow in

23 1

Kramnik's footsteps will be able to demonstrate an advantage for White in the diagram position. For them it will be easier! They know how the theoretical duel between Kramnik and Anand turned out; they know what problems lie in wait for White in this variation. Furthermore the work of their analytical laboratories is not restricted by anything. Go ahead - analyse, consult with your computer, involve your colleagues in your work, check and re-check; the clock is not ticking! Kramnik on the other hand was forced to work it all out at the board. His opponent had excellent preparation, his opponent was playing his prepared line - while Kramnik had to find everything himself, here and now. And even if he found an acceptable solution, there would still be plenty of play in the position, and the effort and time expended could not be recovered.

1 8JUel f4 19 .ih4 .ie7 20.a4 .ixh4 21.�xh4 'it>e7 22J��a3 gac8 23.gxc8 gxc8 24J��al 'ilYc5 25.'ilYg4 'ilYe5 26.�f3 'ilYf6 27.gel gc5 28.b4 gc3 •

A fair number of moves have been played, and neither side has achieved a clear advantage. The position is in a state of unstable equilibrium, except that the Black side, as before, is a little easier to handle. For Kramnik, time shortage was making itself felt. He decided to force events, and began an exchanging combination. Alas, his combination met with an uncomplicated refutation.

29.�xd4? White could have maintained the tension with 29.%Vg8.

29 'ilYxd4 30.gdl �f6 31.gxd4 �xg4 32.gd7t 'it>f6 33.gxb7 gel t 34 .ifl •••

•

Soviet Chess Strategy

232

Veselin Topalov

-

Gata Kamsky

Sofia 2009

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

Here is one more excellent example of the link between statics and dynamics - and of the evident contrast between them. In static terms White is very well placed. He has two "self­ propelled" passed pawns (while Black has no passed pawns at all) , as well as the advantage of bishop against knight in an open position, and a rook on the seventh (the "glutton's rank") . But s o much for statics. I n dynamic terms White loses in elementary fashion, literally in two moves.

34 tOe3! 35.fxe3 fxe3 ••.

There is no defence against 36... e2, so Kramnik resigned. Let us leave the Anand - Kramnik match for a moment, to illustrate the "objective/subjective" antithesis by a different example.

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

28J�ed How are we to evaluate this move? Objectively it is weak, taking White's game to the brink of defeat. Subjectively it is brilliant, but to arrive at this verdict, the overall picture has to be precisely visualized. This was the seventh and penultimate game of the Candidates Match. The results from the preceding six were 3Y2- 2Y2 in Topalov's favour. But in the eighth and final game Kamsky would have the white pieces, and he would be striving to level the score. To Topalov, this meant it would be a good thing to finish off the contest straight away, by going two points up, that is out of his opponent's reach. That is one fact. Here is a second: during the events we are describing, Kamsky was in severe time trouble. And a point of some importance in contemporary chess is that the time control for this match did not allow for a 30-second increment after each move played. And now another fact: in the preceding phase of the struggle in this game, there were some occasions when Kamsky could have played more strongly. Instead he miscalculated some variations, used up a large amount of time and eventually made inferior choices. Topalov of

Dynamics should be Dynamic course will have sensed this insecurity on his opponent's part. One fact, a second, a third... And then again it must be borne in mind that a match is a chess contest of a special sort. During the time spent at the board - as has repeatedly been stressed - the opponents will so to speak penetrate each other's psyche and acquire the most refined mutual empathy. They will prove able to anticipate not only each other's moves but also each other's thoughts. There is no kind of mysticism here. If two chess players are sitting at a board, in other words practically in contact, for a long stretch of time day after day, then clearly at some moment they will develop a unified system of behaviour with a common "rhythm". One of them starts to play worse, the other at once starts to play better. One permits himself some laxity - the other, like a beast of prey, senses this straight away and strives to exploit it, relying less on the objective criteria of the position than on his opponent's psychological state. Incidentally after the game, when asked how he rated White's 28th move, Topalov candidly stated that against Anand he would never have played that way. Anand doesn't get into time trouble, Anand calculates variations superbly and fast.... In short, Anand would have been almost certain to punish Topalov for this bluff. Yet against Kamsky the risk paid off, bringing victory in the game and the match. Objectively, White should have played for a draw with 28.�xa3. Even then, as it happens, Black could still have gone wrong with 28... ,ic6? After 29.,if6! White threatens mate from all sides 29 .. J'he6 30J'ha8t, or 29... �xa3 30.%Vxe8t, or 29... ixd5 3o.ixg7t! c;t>xg7 31.�g3t. However, the simple 28... ,ib3 forces a draw: 29J'%xa8 �xa8 30.%Vxf5 %Vxd5 etc.

233

28...ie2! 29.Wd7 a2 30.d6 b5 So far Kamsky's play has been faultless. The connected passed pawns, supported by the queen and bishop, constitute a terrible force. But the fight is still far from over, and Black is going to need to play some accurate moves.

31.Wb7 geb8 The first mistake. The straightforward 3l... b4! 32.d7 �eb8 33.d8=%Vt �xd8 34.i.xd8 �xd8 would have done the trick. But when the seconds before your flag drops are numbered, your hands choose a move that you would never make in normal circumstances.

32.We7 The moment of truth arrives. 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

Black can no longer push his b-pawn, as he could have done a move earlier - his queen is under attack. However, the draw has not yet slipped away. After 32... ,id3!! 33.�xc4 bxc4, even with his extra queen, White is forced to "bail out" with 34.%Vxb8t �xb8 35.h4 �blt 36.i>h2 �xal 37.d7 �hlt! 38.i>g3! (but not 38.i>xhl al=%Vt 39.i>h2 %Ve5t and 40... %Vxe7) 38... h6 39.d8=%Vt i>h7 40. .if6! gxf6 41.%Ve7t and perpetual check. Needless to say, finding such a complicated line in time trouble would be inconceivable.

Soviet Chess Strategy

234

32..J'k8 33.Wxc4 �c4 34.d7 .ib l 35J;dl c1>g8 36.d8=Wt gxd8 37..ixd8 .ic2 38J;dcl b4 39.gxa2 b3 4O.gaS c1>f7 41.gb8 Black has come out of the time-scramble a rook down and without any compensation for it. After making a few more moves out of inertia, Kamsky acknowledged defeat in the game and match. Thus when we speak of the problems to be solved at the board in contemporary chess, the category of their objectivity or subjectivity comes into the foreground. Objectively weak or at least risky moves may nonetheless confront the opponent with such subjectively complex problems that solving them "here and now" will prove beyond him. Even if subsequent analysis casts doubt on an incorrect plan, the loser, as they say, has "missed the boat", so that the risk has been fully justified. But let us return to our basic theme - the opposition and interaction between statics and dynamics, the variable and the stable factors in a position. Again we will look at an example from the Anand-Kramnik match for the World Championship. 8

The Russian Grandmaster has the white pieces. A fashionable modern opening line has been played, but one that has a classical, even somewhat antiquated appearance. White has the advantage of the two bishops. There are pawn weaknesses on a7 and c6. The b and d-files are formally open (that is, completely clear of pawns) , but it is still too early to call the position an open one. Black is successfully maintaining a piece blockade on the b-file and as for the d-file, it is wholly unclear which player it will belong to. If the black bishop goes to e2, White will be forced to move off the file. But these are details. Overall, the impression is that we are going to see a heavy positional contest with a minimum of tactics. Statics will prevail over dynamics. Is this really the case? Yes and no. It would of course be a blatant exaggeration to say that this position contains as much in the way of dynamics as the sharp Meran Variation of the Slav Defence which we looked at before. The dynamic factor here is under cover. Yet it continues to play an important and ultimately crucial role. Kramnik played:

18.gel

7 6 5 4 3 2 1

6. a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

In the examples we have examined so far, dynamics undoubtedly predominated. This time it seems that the struggle will be conducted in a different key.

This was a novelty; previously only 18.ie3 and 18. .1f4 had been seen. Let us ask ourselves what the point of this move is. In what way is it stronger than the continuations tested earlier? We will then see clearly that this question cannot be answered within the framework of a general discussion operating solely with common notions about the position. I happened to read one expert's explanation, which stated something along the following lines: it is not yet certain whether the white bishop will be best placed on e3 or f4, whereas after the almost inevitable ... ic4-e2 the rook will have to move aside to e1 anyway. Kramnik therefore moves his rook in advance and

Dynamics should be D ynamic will afterwards decide what to do with his dark-squared bishop, depending on how his opponent continues. Such a fancy explanation will hardly satisfy the reader. It would be far more logical to make a different assumption, namely that as a result of deep analysis (which entails the calculation of concrete variations) Kramnik and his team had concluded that in terms of dynamics the rook move was stronger than a bishop move. What that analysis amounted to, only future publications and new games will reveal. Now another question. What does Black's counterplay consist of? He is not actually going to stand around in apathy, confining himself to prophylactic moves. Of course not. What ac­ tion does he have in mind, then? The key piece in the position is the black knight on b6. If White succeeds in shackling it, his advantage will increase and make itself felt. This means the knight must be given suitable "employment". The natural blockading square for it is c4, but a knight manoeuvre to d3 (via d7 or a4, then cS) , though less probable, is not entirely fanciful either. How, then, will Black manoeuvre? And against any of the plausible lines, how will White react - how will he counter his opponent's plans? Well, the answers to these questions lie in dynamics! This inevitably calls to mind a paradoxical thought of Efim Geller's. He maintained that positional play was nothing other than a chain of short variations with an obligatory tactical "filling". In other words, it would be a gross error to think that positional play was confined to a deep form of "reasoning" and constituted a large-scale rigid structure - something like a filing cabinet, the drawers of which are crammed with sets of rules and laws for compulsory memorization. Dynamics are always close to hand, and if the static factors in a position can be compared to a compass, the variable ones are like the needle.

235

18 c5 19.YlYa5 �Uc8 •••

Later, 19....ie2 20.if4 eS was tried. After 21..ixeS lLlc4 22.Wla6 WlxeS 23J�xe2 YlYxc3 24.!!eel, it became obvious that Black had not equalized, Ivanchuk - Grischuk, Linares 2009.

20 .ie3 .ie2 21..if4 e5 22 .ie3 .ig4 23.YlYa6 f6 24.a4 YlYf7 25..ifl .ie6 26J:�ab l •

•

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

Without making a single noticeable mistake, Black has driven himself into a difficult, perhaps already hopeless, position. The knight is unable to move in view of White's threat to penetrate to b7 with his rook. Black cannot initiate exchanges with 26 ...ic4 27.ixc4 Wlxc4, on account of 28.!!xb6! again we recall Geller, and we see that he was perfectly right. Finally, on 26 ...!!ab8 White increases the pressure with 27.!!bS. In an effort to escape White's grip, Anand makes an impulsive move and thereby only hastens his own defeat.

26 c4 27.a5 �a4 28.gb7 YlYe8 29.YlYd6 •••

With full material equality, Black resigned. On 29 ...1L1xc3 White wins with 30.!!e7, while 29 ...gd8 is met by 30.Wlb4 and the black pawns start falling one by one.

236

Soviet Chess Strategy

So by the example of three extracts from the Anand - Kramnik match, we have seen what complex, fluctuating interactions take place between statics and dynamics. It is a shame that this brings us no closer to an algorithm for seeking the best move in this or that situation on the board. We only acquaint ourselves with chess as a game and an art, we learn to see the underlying logic and beauty in it. But as another classic figure edifyingly said, "It isn't enough to be a good player - you also have to be able to play well!" Incidentally, on reading all sorts of verbiage concerning this "interaction" and such matters, lovers of chess start asking, "Which chess style is best?" The answer is, none at all. Or any style. For if chess is art, then - as everyone knows all genres are good except a boring one. And if chess is sport, the best style is the one that brings victory. The obvious question then arises, what style is best for bringing victory? What is a champion's style? In Soviet times, the most widely accepted theory was that of a cyclic process. The great masters of positional play are gradually ousted and replaced by great masters of combinative play. Later on, the cycle concludes and another one begins. The same thing happens on the summit of the chess Olympus. Tal, shall we say, is a champion playing in the combinative "key". Petrosian is an adherent of the positional playing style. Karpov is a "staticist". Kasparov is a "dynamist" - even, as Suetin might say, an "ultra-dynamist". And so on. In its most complete formulation, this hypothesis seems to echo the doctrine of Hegel, except that the triad "thesis, antithesis, synthesis" is replaced by the triad "positional player, combinative player, universal player" . After Tal and Petrosian (let us say) , the "universal" player Spassky ascends the chess throne. The combinative genius, Kasparov, supplants the titan of positional play, Karpov - and the triad

is completed by Kramnik, a player whose style approximates to the universal. As hypotheses go, this one is not at all worse than any comparable ones. The important thing, though, is not to set up these theoretical constructs as absolutes, but to understand that the life of the living is always more complex and multifaceted than any theoretical doctrine. In Soviet times too, by the way, this was perfectly well understood. Let us recall Tal's game with Smyslov (Moscow 1964) which made frequent appearances in chess lectures of the classical type, and afterwards in books of that era. In the opening of the game, White played just a little carelessly. Black put him under pressure and seized the initiative, which led ultimately to a bishop-versus-knight endgame with pawns on both wings. What then commenced was an astounding and intricate labour of exploiting Black's minimal plus. 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

32... �fB 33.�d2 �e7 34.�e1 a6 35.a4 a5 36.�c2 .ie8 37.�b3 .ic6 38.�a3 �f6 39.�b3 �g6 40.�a3 �h5 41.h3 �g6 42.�b3 �g7 43.�a3 �f6 44.�b3 .ie8 45.�g2 .ih5 46.�c2 .ie2 47.�el .ifl 48.�a .ixh3 49.�g5 .ig2 50.�xh7t �g7 51.�g5 �g6 52.�d2 .ic6 53.�cl .ig2 54.�d2 �h5 55.�e6 .ic6 56.�c7 �g4 57.�d5 �xg3 58.�e7 .id7 59.�d5 .ixa4 60.�xb6 .ie8 61.�d5 �a 62.�c7 .ic6 63.�e6 a4 64.�xc5

Dynamics should be Dynamic

a3 6S.�b3 a2 66.ciflc2 ciflxf4 67.ciflb2 cifle3 6S.�aS ies 69.eS £4 70.00 .hoo 71.�xOO a 72.�eS fl White resigned.

l.�a �f6 2.e4 e6 3.g3 dS 4.d4 de S.ig2 a6 6.�eS ib4t 7.�c3 �dS s.o-o 0-0 9.We2 bS 10.�xdS exdS l 1.b3 00 12.e4 f6 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

6. b

c

1 3.exdS!? £XeS 14.bxc4 exd4 I S.dxe6 ie6 16.cxbS d3 17.e7 Wd4 IS.Wa4 �d7 19.ie3 Wd6 20 ..ixa8 gnS 21.i£4 Wf8 22.b6 �eS 23 .heS wa 24.Wdl We4 2S.b7 gf8 26.eS=W idS 27.a •

A wonderful ending, but we should avoid any exaggerated rapture. Smyslov was famed at all times for his exemplary technique, and a good many endings like this are featured in his collected games. But this is where the lecturer (or book author) would pull a master trump from up his sleeve: the truth is that Tal was the one playing Black.... In contemporary practice too, there are plenty of such curiosities, such games with mixed-up roles. A great master must be able to do everything in chess - never mind that there are always certain preferences, certain types of position that one player is none too fond of, whereas another, who is ranked no higher, plays them with virtuosity. These are nuances. The main thing, I repeat, is that the great master needs to have the ability - not the wish or preference, but the ability when needed - to "play any tune" on the chessboard, in either a static or a dynamic key. In this connection, Morozevich's game with Kramnik from the World Championship Match­ Tournament (Mexico 2007) comes to mind.

a

237

d

e

f

g

h

Black resigned. I suspect that a detailed analysis of this game would fill all the space in the present book, with a contents table and reference aids for good measure. But the general impression from merely playing through the moves is unshakable: a tense struggle, abounding in tactics and extreme unconventionality - which is no surprise when the name of Morozevich appears at the head of the game score; a game certain to be less than faultless, but culminating in a Blitzkrieg. Mentally you start appending a conclusion at the bottom of the fairly short column of moves: Kramnik just couldn't cope with this "unconventional" play, he couldn't work out the variations. That's why he lost so quickly. But the whole point is that it was Kramnik playing White.... How can this be? After all, the man-in-the-street of the chess world views the Kramnik of the 21st century - since his match with Kasparov, that is - as the "dri­ est of the dry", as a player who in principle shuns the labour of calculation and endeavours to decide the game by exclusively technical means. But this is how it was: when Kramnik, as they say, was up against it, he managed to fetch out the tactical devices and skills from the back room of his arsenal. They had not rusted, they had just collected a little dust. It turned out that he had not yet forgotten how it was done: sacrificing a piece intuitively, calculating the most complex tactical lines at every move, keeping up the initiative. "Your hands remember things, your hands remember!" - as was said by Yuri Nikulin's character in the film When the Trees were Big.

Soviet Chess Strategy

238

Life is more complex than any philosophizing, richer than the most cunningly concocted theoretical hypotheses. There are no such things as winning styles, and the living process of cognition cannot be squeezed into the procrustean bed of cyclic development and schematics.

Viswanathan Anand

-

Lev Aroman

Linares 2009

8 7

minor piece sacrificed, Black is prepared to add a rook - 2B.ltJ e7t cj{hB 29.ltJxg6t fxg6 just so that the dynamic factors (in this case the activation of the other rook, on £8) should predominate. Anand refuses the new gift. He may quite possibly have been aiming for the variation 2B.Wc3 l'!eB 29.Wg3 Wh5 30.Wh4 Wf3 31.l'!d3 Wg2t 32.cj{e2 l'!g4 33.l'!g3!, at the end of which the dynamics are extinguished by the exchange of the main active pieces. And indeed, for some time Black seems to be walking in his opponent's leading strings...

2S.Wc3 geS 29.ti'g3 ti'h5 30.Wh4 ti'f3 31.gd3 ti'glt 32.cj{e2 exd4

6 5

At the last moment, however, he turns off the path intended for him!

4 3

8

2

7

1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

Black has a wretched position. His rook has gone astray on g6, his bishop is languishing on b7, there is nothing to cover the key square 5 . White has two beautiful bishops; he has the upper hand in the centre and on both wings. His position overall is a pleasure to behold. Its harmony is evident already, and when his rook on al and his bishop on c2 come fully into play, White's superiority will be total. Black does have an extra pawn, but this is small comfort. His pieces are disunited; some are idle, some are stymied by the white forces. In terms of statics, Black has lost the fight irredeemably. There remains the factor of dynamics!

25 ltlxg4!? 26.fxg4 ti'h4 27.ltl£5 ti'xg4!

6 5 4 3 2 1 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

33.gg3? Anand is a great champion, one of the strongest of all chess players living on our planet. And yet he is human, which means he is not free from errors and certain weaknesses. In this particular instance his sangfroid has let him down. He has not been able to readjust and continue the fight on the same level.

•••

In such positions Boris Spassky liked to recall the saying, ''A beggar fears no robbery." To the

White had to play 33.l'!xd4, although after 33... ltJ e5 Black could still fish for some

Dynamics should be Dynamic chances. Now the situation swings through 180 degrees.

33 gxg3 34.Wxg3 gxe4t! 35.
35.i.xe4 does not save White either after 35...�xe4t 36.
35 gg4 36.�xg2 gxg2 37.me2 c5 •••

White resigned. Chess as a game is finite. There is no doubt of that. But the process of gaining knowledge of chess is a process of systematically opening a large number of doors. There were quite enough such doors in Suetin's century. And there are enough in our century too. 1M Ilya Odessky, Winter 2009

239

Index of Games A1atortsev, V. 29 A1ekhine, Alexander I I , 12, 1 5 , 23, 36, 50,

l OS, 1 08, 1 54, 1 62, 1 7 1 Anand, Viswanathan 227, 230, 234, 238 Aronian, Lev 238 Aronin, Lev 32, 95, 1 86, 1 93, 2 1 4

Kolarov, Atanas 1 1 2

Schmidt, Wlodzimien 1 4 3

Konstantinopolsky, Alexander 82

Shamkovich, Leonid 2 0 5

Korchnoi, Viktor 1 3 , 34, 39, 1 26, 1 27,

Shartner 20 1

1 84 , 1 96, 205 Kotov, Alexander 8 , 2 5 , 4 1 , 70, 1 1 0, 1 34 , 1 98 , 202

Shishkin, Vladimir 1 1 3 Simagin, Vladimir 1 46, 200 Sliwa, Bogdan 1 84 Smyslov, Vassily 9 , 3 1 , 40, 60, 7 5 , 8 8 , 1 00,

Averbakh, Yuri 32, 72, 1 40

Kottnauer, Cenek 3 1

Bagirov, Vladimir 1 68

Kramnik, Vladimir 227, 230, 234, 237

\ 07, 1 1 0, 1 1 5 , 1 33, 1 62, 1 87, 1 89, 1 9 1 ,

Batuyev, Andrey 9 1

Kukharev 1 6

2 1 4, 236

Bernstein, Ossip 1 4

Lasker, Emanuel 1 32

Sokolsky, A. 2 1 , 23

Blackburne, Joseph 22

Lebedev, B. 1 97

Sorokin, N. 1 2

Bogoljubow, Efim 12, 1 1 9

Letelier, Rene 1 1 5

Spassky, Boris 1 1 3 , 1 1 4 , 1 60, 1 76, 1 93

Boleslavsky, Isaak 9 , 46, 56, 63, 64, 70, 78,

Levenfish, Gregory 29

Spielmann, Rudolf 1 29, 1 3 1 , 1 8 1

Liberzon, Vladimir 1 2 8

Stahlberg, Gideon 89

Bondarevsky, Igor 85, 1 47

Lilienthal, Andor 83, 86

Steinitz, Wilhelm 90

Znosko-Borovsky, Eugene 1 08

Lipnitsky, Isaac 1 07, 2 1 6

Suetin, A1exey 2 1 , 28, 56, 9 5 , 1 1 0, 1 28,

Botvinnik, Mikhail 1 2, 1 4 , 27, 36, 56, 7 5 ,

Lisitsin, Georgy 27

89, 1 02, 1 04, 1 1 0, 1 4 5 , 1 70, 202

1 6 1 , 1 64 , 1 82 , 1 96, 200, 209, 2 1 6, 2 1 7

8 1 , 86, 9 1 , 92, 94, 1 04, 1 1 7, 1 23, 1 56,

Liublinsky, Viktor 1 33 , 1 40

Sveshnikov, Evgeny 93

162, 1 9 1 , 206, 2 1 1 , 2 1 3

Lutikov, Anatoly 1 25

Szabo, Laszlo 1 50

Bronstein, David \ 06, 1 22, 1 2 5 , 1 5 5 , 2 1 7

Ljubojevic, Lj ubomir 1 28

Szabo, Stefan 39

Capablanca, Jose Raul 1 4 , 50, 1 1 9, 1 57,

Mackenzie, George 60

Tal, Mikhail 24, 42, 78, 1 00 , 1 03 , 1 1 0,

1 62, 1 9 1

Makogonov, Vladimir 1 4 5

1 1 2, 1 39, 1 90, 1 93, 1 99 , 203, 206, 236 Taimanov, Mark 8 1 , \ 03, 1 24, 1 30, 1 73,

Chigorin, Mikhail 60, 2 1 9

Matanovic, A1eksandar 1 49

Dementey 23

Minic, Dragoljub 1 74

Duras, Oldrich 1 3 1

Mikenas, Vladas 1 97

Tarrasch, Siegbert 1 1 , 2 1 9

Euwe, Max 49, 1 7 1 , 2 1 1

Morozevich, Alexander 237

Teschner, Rudolf 222

Faibisovich, Vadim 1 6 1

Najdorf, Miguel 1 24, 1 3 5

Timman, Jan 1 28

Farago, Ivan 1 74

Neergaard, Holger 1 46

Tolush, Alexander 26, 27, 27, 1 4 5

Fine, Reuben 49, 65, 83, 1 54, 1 56

Nezmetdinov, Rashid 8 1

Topalov, Veselin 232

Fischer, Robert James 43, 74, 79, 1 60, 1 63,

Nikitin, Alexander 1 9 5

Torre, Carlos 1 32

Nimwwitsch, Aron 1 3 , 1 57, 224

Tseshkovsky, Vitaly 1 64

Frieman, S. 1 5

Novotelnov, N. 8

Tukmakov, Vladimir 1 72

Furman, Semyon 82, 1 1 4 , 1 82, 1 87, 1 9 5 ,

Pachman, Ludek 1 24

Unzicker, Wolfgang 4 1

Padevsky, Nikola 1 24

Vasiukov, Evgeny 56, 1 93

1 69

209 Geller, Efim 1 3 , 33, 63, 1 30, 1 4 5 , 1 47, 1 53, 1 69, 1 90, 1 98 Gipslis, Aivars 42 Gligoric, Svetozar 24, 74, 1 43, I SO, 1 63

1 86, 222

Panno, Oscar 72, 203

Vatnikov, I. 33

Peresypkin, Vladimir 93

Velimirovic, Dragoljub 1 7

Petrosian, Tigran 20, 63, 1 20, 1 34, I SO,

Veresov 1 6

1 67, 1 76, 1 89, 222

Vidmar, Milan 92, 224

Goldenov, Boris 1 1 0

Pilnik, Hermann 1 5 3

Vistanetskis, I. 28

Grigorian, Karen 1 72

Planinec, Albin 1 74

Wolf, Heinrich 1 0 5

Griinfeld, Ernst 1 8 1

Polugaevsky, Lev 1 03, 1 20, 1 68

Yates, Frederick 2 3 , 1 9 1

Gurgenidze, Bukhuty 1 03

Portisch, Lajos 60, 1 06, 1 48 , 1 49, 1 78

Zhuravlev 20 1

Hug, Werner 1 4 8

Poulsson, Eivind 1 74

Zita, Frantisek 1 22

Ivkov, Boris 4 0 , 1 27

Ragozin, Viacheslav 46, 8 5 , 1 1 7, 1 3 5 , 2 1 3

Zukertort, Johann 22, 90

Janowski, David 1 29

Rauzer, Vsevolod 77

Johannessen, Svein 222

Ravinsky, Grigory 1 02

John, W 39

Reshevsky, Samuel 43, 1 67

Kamsky, Gata 232

Reti, Richard 1 4 1

Kan, lIya 94

Riumin, Nikolai 77

Karpov, Anatoly 1 7 , 1 78

Romanovsky, Peter 220

Kasparian, Gentikh 220

Rubinstein , Akiba 1 3, 1 1 7, 1 4 1

Keres, Paul 1 4 , 20, 2 5 , 26, 6 5 , 8 1 , 8 8 , 1 23,

Sakharov, Yuri 34, 1 26, 1 50

1 39, 1 5 5

Salwe, Georg 1 1 7

Khasin, Abram 1 99

Schlechter, Carl 39

Kholmov, Ratmir 79, 1 73

Schmid, Lothar 1 70