Find the Right Plan with Anatoly Karpov E-Book

Anatoly Karpov

• Herausgeber: Batsford
• Kategorie: Lebensstil
• Sprache: Englisch

Seitenzahl: 383

Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2013

Beschreibung

• One of the world's greatest chess players reveals the secrets of how he plans his play • Packed with invaluable information on how to mobilise your forces, avoid threats and win the game • Illustrated with a wealth of annotated examples from the author's own games The legendary Anatoly Karpov has won over 250 Grandmaster tournaments, many more than any other player in chess history, and his games are characterised by his gradually and patiently pushing an opponent back to the wall, before finally finishing him off with a deadly blow. In this unique book, aimed at ordinary club players, Karpov gives a wealth of tips on how to incorporate this dramatic style of play into your own repertoire, through careful planning and evaluation of positions: looking at the fire-power of your forces, being aware of threats to your own king and how to safeguard it, and careful control of open lines. As he says himself: 'Finding the right plan is the key to success'. Warmily and accessibly written, but with Karpov's usual air of authority, this book makes you feel like you are spending an evening with the man himself, and will help you to absorb a little bit of the Karpov magic.

Leseprobe

First published in the United Kingdom in 2008 by

Batsford Old West London Magistrates Court 10 Southcombe Street London W14 ORA

An imprint of Anova Books Company Ltd

Copyright © B T Batsford 2008

Text copyright © Anatoly Karpov, Anatoly Matsukevich

Translation copyright © Sarah Hurst

The moral right of the authors has been asserted.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior written permission of the copyright owner.

First eBook publication 2013 eBook ISBN: 9781849941006

Also available in paperback Paperback ISBN: 9781906388683

A CIP catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library.

10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

Reproduction by Spectrum Colour Ltd, Ipswich

Printed and bound by Bell & Bain Ltd, Glasgow

This book can be ordered direct from the publisher at the website: www.anovabooks.com

Or try your local bookshop

Contents

A correct plan is the route to success

Chapter One. With the sources

Chapter Two. Evaluating a position. Reference points

Chapter Three. The attractiveness of a concrete goal

Chapter Four. Reference point – Open lines

Breakthrough in the centre

Between the centre and the flank

Attack on the edge of the board

Dangerous diagonals

Chapter Five. Pawn structure. Weak and strong squares

Chapter Six. The centre and space

Closed centre

Mobile centre

Open centre

Static centre

Dynamic centre

Chapter Seven. The most important law of chess

Seven bases for restriction

A lasso for the knight

‘Club-12’

‘A golden dozen of studies’

The bishop hunt

‘Club-12’

‘A golden dozen of studies’

How difficult it is to be a rook

‘Club-12’

‘A golden dozen of studies’

The queen: thorns and roses

‘Club-12’

‘A golden dozen of studies’

The obstinate pawn

‘Club-12’

‘A golden dozen of studies’

Kings under arrest

‘Club-12’

‘A golden dozen of studies’

Zugzwang

A page of studies

Solutions

A lasso for the knight

The bishop hunt

How difficult it is to be a rook

The queen: thorns and roses

The obstinate pawn

Kings under arrest

A correct plan is the route to success

In chess, as in life, a plan is a general concept that unifies a series of moves and actions directed towards achieving the main aim. As Emanuel Lasker justifiably remarked, it’s better to play according to a flawed plan than with no plan at all.

At the dawn of the development of chess theory the first great masters believed in only one principle of battle – a direct attack on the king. Attacks on a castled position were the bread and butter of games in those days. Only with the arrival of Wilhelm Steinitz were clear laws established, according to which the creation of a plan was exclusively based on an objective evaluation of the position. A robust plan must take into consideration the opportunities for both sides. An optimistic overestimation of your own position leads to the creation of headlong attacking plans that are doomed to failure from the very outset.

How can you find your way in every situation, even those that are completely unfamiliar, and how can you choose the correct order of actions to accomplish the main task? How can you learn to distinguish important features from secondary ones, and if you’ve managed to do this, what do you do next? Our book is about all of this.

How the book is organised.

The first chapter is history. The story of how human thought gradually progressed from one landmark to the next, becoming acquainted with the positions that arose on the chess board under the fingers of the great masters.

The second chapter is the key. In it we lay out seven basic principles that will enable you to evaluate any position. This chapter and the subsequent ones are generously illustrated with examples from practical play by top grandmasters.

Chapters three through six interpret these principles in detail. Careful study of them will help you to re-examine your usual plans and learn to find new opportunities in positions that previously seemed dull and uninteresting.

The seventh and last chapter defines what, in our opinion, is the most important rule in chess – the rule of domination, the superiority of your pieces over your opponent’s, and, as a natural consequence of that, the rule of restraining the enemy pieces.

A game that is played on a deeply strategic basis will bring great pleasure to the chess player and will impress the experts far more than a win as a result of a beautiful combination that arose by accident.

We hope that for every reader, even the most demanding ones, this book will bring pleasure and help you to understand our ancient game more deeply.

Anatoly Karpov

Anatoly Matsukevich

Chapter One

With the sources

*The novice’s reflex – a strategy for centuries * Wandering in the fog * Philidor – 100 years ahead of his time * Comet Morphy * The great Steinitz – link through the ages*

Half an hour is enough to explain the rules of chess to anyone, teach them to set up the pieces on the board, describe how those pieces move, and what check and checkmate are in chess. If you suggest to the novice that you play a game after this preparation, then nine times out of ten they’ll immediately move their bishop out to c4, their queen to f3 and try to dispose of you with the help of Scholar’s Mate.

However, a few days will pass, perhaps a week, then two or three months, and while associating with you, your pupil will start to understand that it isn’t all that simple and that such primitive methods won’t achieve their goals.

It took centuries for chess players all over the world to understand this truth at the dawn of the development of chess …

By the 13th century, according to the historical literature, chess had entered the list of the seven knightly virtues along with riding, archery, fencing, hunting, swimming, hawking and writing poetry.

Chaturanga, chatrang, shatranj …

A slow, hypnotic game. The rook was the strongest piece. The queen moved diagonally only to adjoining squares, and the bishop a little further, two squares away. There was no castling.

The opening was very uninteresting. The players manoeuvred for almost 20 moves in their own camps. To speed up the game the masters of shatranj developed opening positions – tabiyat with equal chances for the players. They then started from these.

‘Double Mujannah’ – the most popular tabiya

Chess reforms (at the end of the 15th century) led to the enlivening of the game and a flourishing of romantic tendencies. The games of that era were full of sharp sacrifices and attacks, subtle traps and bold ideas. Sacrificing and accepting sacrifices was considered a matter of chess honour.

The masters of the Italian school always saw only the enemy king clearly. It was as if the entire remainder of the board was in a fog for them. That’s why the majority of tactical operations more often than not weren’t positionally prepared, and impressive wins were the result of a weak defence.

Choosing open piece play as their weapon, the masters of the Italian school looked at each concrete position on the board only through the prism of forced variations. We can’t claim that positional methods were completely unknown to them, but these methods were used purely intuitively and accidentally.

The plans that the chess romantics created were chaotic, disjointed and almost never adhered to a unified logical theme. But the early Italian school accomplished its task in the history of chess.

The fantastic combinational inspiration of Leonardo, Domenico, Polerio, Salvio and especially Greco brought to light the dynamism of the chess pieces, demonstrated a huge variety of tactical ideas, and provided examples of the most effective mating attacks.

Gioachino Greco (1600-1634) was born in Calabria in southern Italy. At the age of 25 he produced his wonderful manuscript collections, which waited a long time for their moment (they were published in England only in 1656) and then were disseminated in almost all the European languages.

Greco’s own contemporaries commented that the games he collected were “rich in subtly-placed traps and, despite the sparseness of the notes, include a multitude of easily-understood sharp combinations”. Instead of taking these contemporaries’ word for it, let’s have a look at the book by the famous Calabrian.

1 e4 e5 2 f3 c6 3 c4 c5 4 c3 f6

In his notes Greco gives this continuation: 4 … e7 5 0-0 d6 6 d4 b6 7 g5 f6 8 h4 g5 9 xg5 fg 10 h5+ d7 11 xg5 g7 12 e6+ xe6 13 e8+ ge7 14 d5 mate.

5 d4 ed 6 cd b4+ 7 c3 xe4 8 0-0 xc3 9 bc xc3 10 b3 xd4 11 xf7+ f8 12 g5 f6 13 ae1 e7 14 h5 g6 15 e5 xe5 16 xe5 g6 17 h6+ g7 18 f5+ e7 19 e1+ e5 20 1xe5+ d6 21 d5 mate.

A typical game, an extremely typical ending!

Another hundred years would be needed until people started playing chess differently. The father of the new movement in chess was the prominent French player François-André Danican Philidor (1726-1795). Philidor occupies a special place in the history of chess not only as the strongest player in Europe in the 18th century, but primarily as the creator of a fundamentally new, scientific approach to chess, relying on the objective logic of a position.

Philidor used positional theory to oppose the Italian chess players who professed the cult of the combination. He expounded on his views in his work Analysis of the Game of Chess (first edition – London, 1749) – a book with an extremely happy fate. Analysis was translated into almost all the European languages and in 200 years it went through almost 100 editions. In the 18th century alone the book by the great French master was reprinted 42 times!

“My chief intention,” Philidor wrote in the foreword, “is to recommend myself to the public, by a novelty no one has thought of, or perhaps understood well; I mean how to play the pawns. They are the very life of this game. They alone form the attack and the defence; on their good or bad situation depends the gain or loss of each party.”

This was an unexpected and bold idea. Before this the pawns had been treated with overt carelessness. They were blithely carried off to the sacrifice for the benefit of short-lived attacks. Philidor stood up in defence of the pawns, the most loyal adherents to the chess oath, capable only of advancing.

Philidor’s strategy wasn’t based on accidental attacks and tactical blows, born out of sudden inspiration or an opponent’s weak play, but on a strict evaluation of stable indicators of the position (the pawn configuration), and also the security of the home front and bases for attacking. The French master readily shifted the battle to the queenside, not shying from exchanges or simplification for the sake of an advantageous endgame. Since games played according to this method rarely ended with a direct attack on the king, the goal of Philidor’s idea came down to getting the pawns to reach promotion squares and exploit an advantage.

Of course, chess players were perfectly capable of turning pawns into queens long before Philidor. Both Pietro Carrera (The Game of Chess, 1616) and Gioachino Greco (Paris Notebook, 1623) analysed the endgame, at least because without pawn promotion it was impossible to increase the material potential and consequently achieve victory. But it was only Philidor who turned the entire game from the opening to the endgame into a single unified plan, making the movement of pieces and pawns rational, and subordinating tactics to strategy. In the opinion of Richard Réti, Philidor was “the greatest chess thinker who ever lived.”

Here is one of the games cited by Philidor in Analysis of the Game of Chess. To the modern reader many of his rules probably look obvious and sometimes sound naïve, but for those times they were a revelation, they became important reference points in the evaluation of the most varied positions and they have retained their practical usefulness to this day.

So, over to Philidor.

1 e4 e5 2 c4 c5 3 c3 f6 4 d4

This pawn is pushed two steps, for two reasons: the first, to hinder your adversary’s King’s Bishop from attacking your King’s Bishop’s Pawn (f2); the second, to bring the strength of your Pawns into the centre of the chess-board.

4 … ed 5 cd

When you find your game in the present situation, viz. two Pawns in a front line, you must take care not to push either of them, before your adversary proposes to change one for the other: which you will then avoid, by pushing forwards the attacked Pawn.

5 … b6

If, instead of being withdrawn, this Bishop gives check, you are to cover the check with the Bishop; and, in case he takes your Bishop, you must retake the Bishop with your Knight, who will then defend your King’s Pawn.

6 c3 0-0 7 ge2

Great care must be taken not to play the Knight to his Bishop’s third square (f3), before the Bishop’s Pawn (f2) has been pushed two steps; because, otherwise, the Knight would prove an hindrance to the motion of the Pawn. N.B. The black, on that move, could take the white King’s Pawn (e4); and afterwards push the Queen’s Pawn two steps (d7-d5), which would break the centre of the white.

7 … c6 8 d3

The Bishop retires, to avoid being attacked by the adversary’s Queen’s Pawn (d7-d5), because you would then be forced to take his Pawn with yours, which would separate your Pawns.

8 … d5 9 e5 e8 10 e3 f6

He plays this Pawn to give an opening to the Rook; and this cannot be hindered, either he or you take.

11 d2

You should not take the Pawn which is offered you, because your King’s Pawn would then lose its column; whereas, leaving yours to be taken, you supply its place by the Pawn of your Queen, and sustain it afterwards with your King’s Bishop’s Pawn: these two Pawns united will undoubtedly win the game.

11 … fe 12 de e6

He plays this Bishop, to enable him to push afterwards his Queen’s Bishop’s Pawn.

13 f4 e7 14 xb6

It is always dangerous to let the adversary’s King’s Bishop stand on the direct line, which attacks your King’s Bishop’s Pawn; and, when your Queen’s (d) Pawn cannot close that direction, it is necessary to oppose him by your Queen’s Bishop, and take his Bishop for every other piece, as soon as an occasion offers.

14 … ab 15 0-0

You castle on that side, in order to sustain and strengthen your King’s Bishop’s (f) Pawn, which you will advance two steps (to f4) as soon as your King’s Pawn (e5) is attacked.

15 … d7 16 xe6 xe6 17 f4 c7 18 ae1 g6

He is forced to push this Pawn, to hinder you from playing your King’s Bishop’s (f) Pawn upon his Queen, which would give you two Pawns in a front line upon his ground.

19 h3

This Pawn is played to enable you to push your King’s Knight’s (g) Pawn two steps.

19 … d4 20 e4 h6

He plays this Pawn to hinder your Knight entering into his game, and forcing his Queen to remove, which would immediately make an open field for your Pawns.

21 b3 b5 22 g4 d5 23 g3

You play this Knight to enable yourself to push your King’s Bishop’s Pawn next, which will be then supported by three pieces, the Rook, the Bishop, and the Knight.

23 … e3

He plays this Knight, in order to cut off the communication between your pieces, and break the strength of your Pawns; which he would undoubtedly do, by pushing his King’s Knight’s Pawn (g6-g5); but you prevent his design, by sacrificing your Rook.

24 xe3 de 25 xe3 xa2 26 e1

You play that Rook to support your King’s Pawn, which would be left in the lurch, were you to push your King’s Bishop’s (f) Pawn.

26 … xb3 27 e4 e6 28 f5 gf 29 gf d5

The Queen offers to be exchanged with the other Queen, in order to break the scheme of a check-mate, by the Bishop and the adversary’s Queen.

30 xd5 cd 31 xb5 b6 32 f6

You are to observe, that when your Bishop runs upon the white squares, you must put your Pawns upon the black ones; or, if your Bishop runs upon the black, you must have your Pawns upon the white; because, then, your Bishop may prevent the adversary’s pieces getting between your Pawns. This rule is hardly ever to be dispensed with, in case you attack, and have some Pawns advanced; but in case of a defence, the rule must be reversed, and the Pawns set upon the Bishop’s colour.

32 … b2 33 d3 f7 34 f5

Here is an example of the above-mentioned note: if your Bishop was black, your adversary’s King might get in between your two Pawns.

34 … c4 35 h5 g8+ 36 g4 d2 37 e6+ g6 38 f7 a8 39 f4+ g7 40 h5

Black plays anywhere: the white pushes (e6) to Q.

If we acknowledge the great Steinitz as the founder of the modern positional game, then unquestionably it came into being in the work of Philidor. For a whole century – right up to Morphy – there was no one who had a greater influence on the progress of chess thought than Philidor.

Paul Morphy appeared on the European chess scene in June 1858 His sensational performances continued for about 10 months in all, but in that time he was able to defeat virtually all the masters in the Old World.

Philidor and Morphy … What could they have in common? At first glance only their place in chess history, where the names of these prominent players will always remain side-by-side, and also, most likely, the fact that their contemporaries couldn’t understand the reason for their wins and left the solving of this mystery to later generations.

Reflecting on the phenomenon of Morphy, future world champion Alexander Alekhine wrote in 1913: “His strength … consisted of deeply thought-out positional play, chiefly of an aggressive character.”

At a time when the majority of commentators were impressed by the superficial tricks that were abundant in Morphy’s games, Alekhine precisely pointed out the fundamental feature in the creativity of the famous American, he was able to dig down into the real reasons for his victories.

Positional play requires a deeply thought-out plan and precise placement of pieces and pawns. Moreover, in the implementation of his ideas Morphy had a very good sense of the time factor. The pawn chain – a formidable weapon, Philidor’s discovery – in Morphy’s games acquired a new quality: speed.

Morphy – Boden

London, 1858

21 h4 b6 22 f4 g7

The key moment. Here 23 f5 suggests itself, excluding the bishop from play forever. (These methods will be studied in detail in the last chapter of the book.) Yes, after 23 f5 White certainly must win, preparing an opening-up of play on the queenside. However, in that case the battle would drag on, and Morphy makes a different decision.

23 xg6! fg 24 e5

Black must perish due to the weakness of the g6 pawn. No help, for example, is 24 … de 25 fe xd5 due to 26 ef+ f7 27 xg6+. So Black tries to block the position.

24 … e8 25 b1! f7 26 e6+ g7 27 d3 f5 28 gf f6 29 fg xb2 30 f5 f6 31 e7

The last stroke. On 31 … xe7 decisive is 32 xe7+ xe7 33 f6+.

31 … c4 32 g3 c3 33 e6 d4+ 34 f2 xd5 35 f6+

Black resigned.

Morphy had a keen awareness of tempo. He considered the principle of fastest development an immutable rule of the game in the opening: every move in the game must bring in a new piece! Today this rule seems like a truism, but someone had to come up with it first. That person was Morphy.

Outstripping his opponent in the mobilisation of forces, the American master boldly sent pawns into the fray to open up the game and breach the enemy fortifications. For good reason the well-known wit Savielly Tartakower remarked ironically:

“Pawns! According to Morphy they’re the main instrument of victory.”

Hungarian grandmaster Géza Maróczy, the author of the best book about Morphy, had the same opinion:

“One of the characteristic features of his work is the timely advancing of pawns in preparation for an attack by the pieces.”

Generalising, we can say that Morphy wasn’t the best at combinations of his contemporaries, but he was the best at preparing combinations. The principle of speedy development was also known before Morphy, but only he brought it to a stable form. And before Morphy many people sacrificed pawns to open lines, but Morphy did this only if calculation or intuition promised him a material advantage (in other words, success!) in that part of the battle.

Falkbeer Counter Gambit

Schulten – Morphy

New York, 1857

1 e4 e5 2 f4 d5 3 ed e4 4 c3 f6 5 d3 b4 6 d2

6 … e3!

By sacrificing a second pawn, Black opens a central file. This blow was subsequently included in all the opening books.

7 xe3 0-0 8 d2 xc3 9 bc e8+ 10 e2 g4 11 c4

A carefree life. It was time to think about freeing himself from the pin – 11 f2.

11 … c6

Philidor also recommended this kind of undermining move.

12 dc xc6 13 f1 xe2! 14 xe2 d4 15 b1 xe2+ 16 f2 g4+ 17 g1

Now – mate in seven moves.

17 … f3+ 18 gf d4+ 19 g2 f2+ 20 h3 xf3+ 21 h4 e3 22 g1 f5+ 23 g5 h5 mate.

Dazzled by the combinations, Morphy’s contemporaries couldn’t see the essence of the American champion’s deep positional play. But Morphy was viewed by later generations as a great strategist of open positions.

Mikhail Botvinnik: “To this day Morphy is the unsurpassed master of open games. We can see just how hugely significant he is from the fact that nothing substantially new in this field has been created since Morphy.”

Four Knights Opening

Paulsen – Morphy

New York, 1857

1 e4 e5 2 f3 c6 3 c3 f6 4 b5 c5 5 0-0 0-0 6 xe5 e8 7 xc6

Stronger is 7 f3, but this became clear only after several decades had passed.

7 … dc 8 c4 b5

Losing, of course, is 8 … xe4 because of 9 xe4 xe4 10 xf7+.

9 e2 xe4 10 xe4 xe4 11 f3 e6 12 c3

The pawn structure decides the fate of the game – Philidor’s fundamental idea. White has carelessly weakened his pawn chain (correct was 12 d3), and his opponent’s queen immediately strives to enter the resulting breach.

12 … d3!

It’s important not only to bring out his own pieces, but at the same time also to restrain the development of the enemy forces. White’s queenside is temporarily paralysed.

13 b4 b6 14 a4 ba 15 xa4 d7 16 a2 ae8 17 a6

17 … xf3!!

For many people at the time this sacrifice seemed to be the main element of an impressive game. And only the most sagacious of his contemporaries and of later generations were able to evaluate the precise preparatory work that Morphy had done.

José Raúl Capablanca (referring to Morphy’s matches with Anderssen and Harrwitz): “Contrary to the general belief, which is the result of ignorance, Morphy’s main strength was not his combinative power but his positional play and his general style. The truth is that combinations can be made only when the position permits it. The majority of the games in these two matches were won by Morphy in direct and simple fashion and it is this simple and logical procedure which is the basis of true beauty in chess, from the point of view of the great masters.”

18 gf g6+ 19 h1 h3 20 d1 g2+ 21 g1 xf3+ 22 f1 g2+ 23 g1

Later it was found that on the previous move 22 … g2 led to mate in four, but now the shortest route to mate was 23 … e4+ 24 f1 f5 25 e2 h3+ 26 e1 g1 mate.

23 … h3+ 24 h1 xf2 25 f1 xf1 26 xf1 a2 27 a1 h6 28 d4 e3

White resigned. After 29 xe3 he faced 29 … hxh2+ 30 g1 eg2 mate.

In his actions at the chess board, Morphy superbly planned his play and foresaw the course of events a long way ahead. A different fate lay in store for his plans in life …

When Morphy unexpectedly gave up chess, its leadership again transferred for a time to Anderssen, who won the second London International Tournament of 1862.

But at the same tournament sixth place was taken by the 26-year-old Wilhelm Steinitz, the future first world champion and leading chess thinker, with whom a new era in chess art began.

Four years later Steinitz defeated Anderssen 8:6 in a match and in practice became the strongest chess player in the world from that moment on. Here is one of the games from that uncompromising duel (there wasn’t a single draw in it!) with the characteristic notes of Emanuel Lasker.

Ruy Lopez

Anderssen – Steinitz

London, 1866

1 e4 e5 2 f3 c6 3 b5 f6 4 d3 d6 5 xc6+

White here without necessity abandons a small advantage: the pinning of a Knight (c6) by a mobile Bishop (b5). By the exchange Black’s QR (a8) and QB (c8) gain in mobility, presenting Black with another small advantage.

5 … bc 6 h3

Loss of time incurred in order to prevent B-Kt5 (c8-g4). Anderssen seems to have considered the Knight stronger than the Bishop, a valuation for which no motive can be adduced. The Pawn move weakens the phalanx of the White King’s side Pawns as will be explained shortly. Perhaps this game was the historical event which caused Steinitz to conceive his theory of the phalanx.

6 … g6

Preparation for an assault by a mass of Pawns as taught by Philidor. For this purpose it is essential to maintain many obstructions in the centre. The Bishop which aids the centre from Kt2 (f8-g7) is there well placed (to put pressure on d4).

7 c3 g7 8 0-0 0-0 9 g5 h6 10 e3 c5

To prevent P-Q4 (d4) which would open the centre and give White a fighting chance.

11 b1

White has certainly no advantage on any part of the board, yet he resolves upon an attack. That was the style of the time. Anderssen should have tried to anticipate Black’s attack and to take up a firm position, to retire the somewhat exposed Knight B3 (f3) to KR2 (h2) and possibly to KB1 (f1) and to await developments.

11 … e8 12 b4 cb 13 xb4 c5 14 a4 d7 15 a3 f5

The phalanx marches.

16 b1 h8 17 b7 a5 18 b1 a4

There are no more targets in sight. White’s troops are wholly disarranged.

19 d5 c8 20 b6 a7

Now Black is opening the attack in earnest. He threatens P x P (21 … fe) followed by B x P (d7xh3).

21 h2 f4 22 d2 g5 23 c4 d8 24 b1 f6 25 g1 h7

The KtP (g5) having been protected (giving Black the opportunity to move the h pawn), the phalanx can set itself again into motion.

26 f1 h5 27 g1 g4 28 hg hg 29 f3 h4 30 d1 g5

The pieces post themselves behind the phalanx menacingly. Soon the lines will be opened, which will allow the major pieces to approach the White King.

31 e1 h2 32 d4

Desperation! The Rook on R3 (a3) shall be thrown into the fight even at the expense of an important Pawn. But it is too late. Black is not to be deterred by a trifle like this.

32 … gf 33 gf h3 34 f2 xg1 35 dc h3+ 36 e1 xf3+ 37 xf3 xf3 and Black won easily.

Steinitz went down in chess history as the creator of a new doctrine of positional play, the essence of which was the following: any plan in a chess game must have a justification; it should be sought not in the personality or desires of the player who is able to find the correct move or direction of attack in some kind of flash of inspiration, but in the actual position on the board, in its evaluation.

Consequently, a plan must have its own positional premise, and any attack must be justified. That’s why it can’t be predicated on a mistake by the opponent. Thus, a plan must always be based on a concrete and realistic evaluation of the position. What are the reference points for such an evaluation, then?

When forces are materially equal, according to Steinitz the most important thing is to accumulate slight advantages. Steinitz determined the following indicators:

1) advantage in development and control of the centre, which enables the mobility of the pieces;

2) possession of supporting points and open lines;

3) material superiority (even if temporary), forcing your opponent to lose tempi to achieve equivalent compensation (in this time you must try to seize the initiative or obtain some kind of advantage in the position);

4) an advantageous pawn configuration;

5) the presence of weaknesses in your opponent’s camp, creating a target for an attack.

Only at the point when the equality of forces has been upset can the side which has obtained a positional advantage take active measures. And not only can, but must immediately look for energetic attacking routes. Otherwise the acquisition of an advantage will reverse itself and become an advantage for your opponent.

Emanuel Lasker: “[Steinitz] was a thinker worthy of a seat in the halls of a university. A player, as the world believed he was, he was not; his studious temperament made that impossible; and thus he was conquered by a player and in the end, little valued by the world, he died.”

Chapter Two

Evaluating a position: reference points

*Seven timeless reference points * Chess accounting * A threat on every move * Deflect in order to save * Big consequences of small manoeuvres*

Steinitz found the method. He divided the position into its elements, compared them and made a diagnosis – he evaluated this position. Depending on that he also chose the further plan of play.

Generations of chess players working in the 20th century have improved on and corrected the first world champion’s method and have gradually established seven basic principles, or reference points, according to which the study of any position should be undertaken.

1 Material relationship between the forces.

2 Presence of direct threats.

3 Position of the kings, their safety.

4 Possession of open lines.

5 Pawn structure, weak and strong squares.

6 The centre and space.

7 Development and the position of pieces.

As a result of comparing these elements the chess player makes a statistical evaluation of the position, selects a plan of action and begins searching for specific moves and calculating variations.

Stage one – comparing reference points.

Anand – Karpov

4th Match Game, Lausanne, 1998

Comparative analysis.

1 There is material equality on the board.

2 There are no dangerous threats.

3 The position of the kings doesn’t yet have serious significance for the evaluation, as there are no opportunities for creating an attack on either of them. True, from the point of view of the initiative it’s a little more feasible for White on the kingside.

4 There is only one open line in the position, the c-file. No one controls it yet. White has obtained pressure on the half-open e-file.

5 White has the isolated d4 pawn, which traditionally hands the point d5 to the opponent, giving away the e5 square and some initiative on the kingside.

6 Influence in the centre and possession of space are approximately the same.

7 The players’ pieces are harmoniously placed. Their location doesn’t yet give either of the players an advantage.

General conclusion

The position is roughly equal. White has a slight advantage, as he can start an attack on the kingside sooner.

12 h4!?

The purpose of this move becomes clear in the aggressive variation 12 … d7 13 d3 h6 14 g5!? g6 15 f3 g7 16 h5 g5 17 xg5!! hg 18 xg5 with an attack.

12 … f5!? 13 d3

Counting on 13 … g6 14 h5 with the initiative.

13 … xc3 14 bc h6 15 h5 d6

By exchanging the dangerous bishop Black weakens his opponent’s attack.

16 e5 xe4 17 xe4 xe5 18 de f5!

19 e2?!

Overestimating his chances. It was time to play for equality – 19 ef xf6 20 d4.

19 … d7 20 d1 b5! 21 f3 e8 22 f4 c8 23 d4 c4 24 ad1 f7!?

With the idea of 25 … fc8.

25 xc4 xc4 26 a3 c8

Black has exploited his chances in the best way possible. He has precise targets for his attack and complete justification to look to the future with optimism. White has no counterplay, and the pawn weaknesses at a3, c3 and h5 make their defence extremely unpleasant.

27 d4 h7 28 d2 d5 29 h3 b5 30 a4 ba 31 xa4 c4! 32 xc4 xc4 33 h4 b5 34 c4 e8 35 c5 d7 36 c3 d3 37 d4 xd4 38 xd4 a5

Despite the opposite-coloured bishops, the endgame is very difficult for White, and he couldn’t hold it.

39 c6?!

He could have put up more stubborn resistance by 39 c3 a4 40 b4, although with 40 … xh5! 41 c6 e2 42 c7 a6 Black still has excellent chances for success.

39 … xc6 40 f3 f4! 41 b2 e8 42 c1 a4 43 xf4 a3 44 e3 xh5 45 f2 e8 46 d4 c6 47 c3 a2 48 g3 h5! 49 g4 h4!

White resigned.

Capablanca – Alekhine

21st Match Game

Buenos Aires, 1927

Comparative analysis.

1 There is material equality on the board.

2 There are no concrete threats.

3 The kings are well covered after castling short, their position doesn’t yet influence the evaluation of the position.4 The two open lines are under the players’ mutual control.

5 The pawns are positioned symmetrically, which enables equal possession of the strong points. White has d4 and c5, and Black has d5 and c4.

6 In the centre the players’ chances are about equal.

7 The major pieces are positioned symmetrically. White’s knights are slightly more active, as are Black’s bishops.

General conclusion.

The position gives the players equal opportunities in the battle. Any attempt at reinforcement is associated with occupying the important c5 and c4 squares. Black is already prepared for the manoeuvre d7-b6-c4, but White should also prepare equivalent counter-chances.

16 g3

Reflects only one of the possible knight manoeuvres. Both routes would neutralise the countermanoeuvre d4-b3-a5.

16 … b6 17 queb01b3 fd5

Everything is thrown into the battle for the c4 square. After the exchange 18 xd5 xd5 the bishop also gets the chance to attack the important square. Moreover, the positional threat 18 … xc3 19 xc3 d5 20 b2 xc3 21 xc3 a8 has been created and then 22 … c8, seizing the long diagonal and the c-file.

18 f3 c4!

By comparison with the initial position much has changed in Black’s favour. His pieces have occupied the strong points and an exchange on d5 would allow him to quickly occupy the c-file. Now, evidently, it made sense to return the bishop to e2.

19 e4 c8 20 xc4

And this is already a concrete mistake. The struggle for the file would continue after 20 b2.

20 … xc4 21 c1 a8!

Threatening 22 … xb4 or 22 … dxe3.

22 c3 c8 23 xd5 xd5 24 xd5 xd5

Black’s advantage reveals itself even more clearly. The threat is 25 … e5, expanding his space.

25 a4 f6 26 f3 b2!

For a concrete evaluation of this position the insecure position of the white king has important significance – he has no ‘window’ h2-h3 like his opponent has. That’s why on 27 b1 possible is 27 … a3!, and in the event of 27 d1 follows 27 … ba 28 xa4 b6 29 xd5 xa4 30 d1 c3 31 e1 c4, taking a pawn.

27 e1 d8 28 ab ab 29 h3 e5 30 b1 e4 31 d4 xd4 32 d1 xe3 White resigned.

These examples demonstrate that even when top-class opponents play each other the more correct evaluation of the position is one of the deciding factors in success.

Stage two – choosing a plan.

The choice of an attacking or defensive plan in any situation is determined by an objective evaluation of the position. And although these positions are different in terms of their specific features, for each of them there are defined rules about the methods of battle in better (1), worse (2) and equal (3) positions.

1 In better positions – with an advantage in development – you should try to prevent your opponent from completing the mobilization of his forces. To achieve this you should choose, as the opportunity arises, moves that present concrete threats, forcing your opponent to waste time and energy deflecting them. Often such moves are associated with tactical blows that help you to open up the game and get to the enemy king more quickly.

Kramnik – Leko

14th Match Game for the World Championship, Brissago, 2004

Comparative analysis.

1 There is material equality on the board.

2 At first glance it appears that all of White’s threats have been successfully rendered harmless.

3 The white king is ideally placed, the black king should preferably be on e7 or move away to the flank after it has castled.

4 White is exerting pressure along the c- and g-files, but without additional efforts this doesn’t promise anything.

5 Neither side’s pawn chain has obvious defects. However, White has an opportunity for a pawn attack on the queenside that isn’t immediately obvious.

6 The centre is firmly blocked.

7 White’s pieces are excellently placed, but the position of Black’s pieces requires improvement.

General conclusion.

White has a clear advantage, but additional efforts are needed in order to exploit it

22 a4!

This pawn sacrifice throws Black’s incomplete defensive line into confusion.

22 … d8

If he takes the pawn then the rook penetrates to the seventh rank. An approximate variation for the development of events is: 22 … xa4 23 c7 c6 24 g5 0-0 25 e3 with the threat of 26 e2.

23 g5 e8 24 b5 f4

More stubborn is 24 … ab 25 xb5!? b6. Then again, here too after 26 xe8 xe8 27 xf7+ d7 28 d6 Black’s position gives cause for alarm.

25 b6!

Black’s position is now hopeless. In order to win White only has to organise a breach on the kingside and adds the b6 pawn to the reserve forces breaking through.

25 … xd3 26 xd3 c8 27 xc8+ xc8 28 c1+ c6 29 xf7 xh4 30 d6+ d8 31 g1 h3+ 32 e2 a3 33 xg7 xa4 34 f4! a2+ 35 f3 a3+ 36 g4 d3 37 f5 xd4+ 38 g5 ef 39 f6 g4 40 c7 h4 41 f7+

The king didn’t have much longer to live: 41 … e8 42 c8+ d7 43 d8 mate. Black resigned.

Smyslov – Kottnauer

Groningen, 1946

Opening mistakes have led to Black being two tempi behind in development: e7 and 0-0. If he can manage to make these two moves without any particular concessions, the position will become much more equal. That’s why White starts a tempo battle, trying to create a concrete threat.

13 e5! xe5 14 xb7 xb7 15 xa6 b8 16 c6! xc6 17 xc6+ d7 18 c5!! dc

On 18 … a7 would have followed 19 xd7 xd7 20 a8.

19 f4! d6

Or 19 … xf4 20 c8+ e7 21 xb7 f6 22 xd7 with a win.

20 xd6 b6 21 xd7+!

Black resigned. He never did manage to complete his development.

Averbakh – Hug

Palma de Majorca, 1972

Comparative analysis.

1 There is material equality on the board.

2 White has only one chance to play for a win – sacrificing the bishop on h5. But this sacrifice has to be prepared.

3 As yet the position of the kings doesn’t have any particular significance for the evaluation of the battle.

4 White is exerting pressure along the half-open g-file, but without additional efforts this doesn’t in itself promise anything.

5 Neither side’s pawn chain has obvious defects. White has retained the possibility of infiltrating with his king to the opponent’s camp via the dark squares on the queenside.

6 The centre is firmly blocked. Despite the passed pawn on e5, the players’ have equal opportunities in the centre.

7 The placement of both players’ pieces requires improvement. However, White only needs one king move to prepare the blow xh5, while Black needs two moves to prevent it: f8 and e8.

General conclusion.

White has an indisputable advantage, but he can only exploit it if he acts boldly and strictly according to a plan.

51 d2

Losing immediately was 51 xh5? due to 51 … gh 52 xf5 g6.

51 … e6 52 xh5! gh 53 xf5 g6 54 f8 g7 55 c8 f7 56 c1

Black has managed to stop the f4 pawn, and White’s last reserve is coming into the game – his king.

56 … h6 57 g5

Suggesting that he should play 57 … f5?, against which 58 h8+ g7 59 hxh5 wins.

57 … h7 58 b2 f5 59 g1

An exchange of pieces is favourable to the defender. That’s why White immediately pulls back.

59 … f7 60 g5 f5 61 c7+ g8 62 g1 f8 63 a3 f7 64 b4

64 … e8

Apparently more stubborn is 64 … e8, but then 65 c5 f7 66 xf7+ xf7 67 f5 h6 68 f6 g6 69 xg6 xg6 70 d6 f7 71 a3!, and Black is in zugzwang.

65 c5 d8 66 a7

Of course, 66 xc6 was also winning.

66 … g6 67 a3 c8 68 g7 e8 69 h7 f8 70 gg7 b8 71 b7+ a8 72 a7+ b8 73 hb7+ c8 74 b6

Threatening 75 a8+ c7 76 ab8.

74 … g6 75 f5!? xf5 76 a8+ c7 77 ab8

Black resigned.

2 The main task of the game in worse positions is to slow down your opponent’s attack. The best method for this is to simplify the position with the help of exchanges of the attacking pieces. Moreover, you should always remember that attack is the best form of defence. That’s why, when you’ve beaten off the first wave of the attack, you should prepare a counter-attack at the first opportunity.

Tal – Botvinnik

3rd Match Game

Moscow, 1960

Black is a pawn up, for which White has virtually no compensation. The correct plan for Black is to develop the initiative in the centre and on the queenside with the help of c5, then b6 and a pawn advance.

White constructs a defensive plan based on kingside counter-play so as to distract his opponent from carrying out his plan.

27 h7 f8

Better is 27 … c5 and 28 … d7.

28 f4 d8 29 d3 h8 30 xh8

Impossible, of course, is 30 xf7 because of 30 … e8.

30 … xh8 31 a5!

Black’s queen has gone off to the kingside and so White urgently organises counterplay on the queenside. Now on 31 … b7 follows 32 xb5! cb 33 xb5+ c7 34 a5+ c8 35 xa7 with real counter-chances.

31 … h1+ 32 a2 xf3 33 a6+ b8 34 xc6! xf4 35 xb5 xe5 36 e8+ b7 37 c6+

Half a point saved: White has secured a perpetual check.

Taimanov – Uhlmann

Belgrade, 1970

White has just played 19 g3. Black can’t avoid losing a pawn.

19 … d8 20 de xe5 21 d5 e7 22 xf7+ xf7 23 xf7+ xf7 24 xe5 b7 25 f4 e8 26 f3

Intending to consolidate his advantage after 27 e4.

26 … c4!

Looks like a desperate move. Now it seems that White can win this pawn with impunity, as after 27 d4 bad is 27 … b5 due to 28 ab ab, and White seizes the edge file.