In chess, there are two basic principles that must be respected: 1.Without blunders, only the attacker can win the game. A game is always won by an attack. As long as your opponent is attacking you are occupied by parrying that attack. 2.Only the player with the initiative can successfully attack! The player that does not have the initiative can often bring forth a sortie, but in order to gin up a successful attack the player must have the initiative.
Couple this thinking with the fact that white has an initiative by virtue of the first move. Thus, white is favored to win. He will win if he can hold the initiative. He can lose if he loses the initiative. In many games the initiative changes hands, sometimes it changes often: perhaps because it is not respected; or because both players value it and fight for it.
Statistically, White wins 54% of games decided, Black wins 46% of those games. It seems clear that White has an 8% advantage due to the first move! This is the initiative with which White begins the game. There are two ways that White can lose the initiative: First, he can voluntarily trade a unit of time (tempo) for a unit of power (pawn or piece). We see this in gambits, and sometimes in sacrifices. Second, he can make unnecessary moves that allow Black to gain tempo. We usually see this when white makes unnecessary “preventive” moves, the most common being a3 or h3 denying b4 or g4 to Blacks’ pieces, when it is not clear that black wants to place his pieces on those squares. In other words, making moves that require no specific response by Black.
This works both ways, Black can also give up valuable tempo with unnecessary “preventive” moves. If, however, the move is made at the right time, no tempo is lost. That is; if Black waits for White to pin his Knight on f6 with the bishop, and then plays h6, that pawn move now requires a responding move by White, and no tempo is lost. The most common “good” preventive move I see is a6 by Black in the Morra gambit. In this case, denying White the b5 square is prudent and often essential. Still, if it is premature, White can collect a penalty.
With these thoughts, I believe that any plan in the play of the game must include either maintaining an initiative, or seizing the initiative.
The initiative is a result of tempo. If we can gain tempo in a game we can seize or buttress an initiative. Although our opponent can voluntarily yield the initiative, he will do so less frequently as his playing strength increases. However, it is common to trade one element for another: a player can trade any of the following three elements, which are at play in a game of chess: a)Force/power. Force can often be directly related to power. We can discuss the concept of force and power in a later piece, but the player with the greater force has an advantage. Power is the material advantage; Force is the kinetic application of power. b)Space. The player that controls the most space has a distinct advantage. Space depends on holding lines and squares. We can look into this concept in a subsequent piece. c)The principle of Time: This is the key to improving most games. Time is conserved by moving pieces to their best square on the initial move of the piece, or as early as possible in the game, and then making moves which carry a threat causing our opponent to defend. Remember, only the attacker can win, if we play with threat, our opponent is occupied with meeting that threat and cannot easily gain the initiative.
We refer to a unit of time as a tempo. We can lose tempo if we move the same piece twice in the opening. Or by making an unnecessary move. We can gain tempo by achieving two or more objectives on the same move.
A solid initial plan in any game is to own the initiative, forcing the opponent to respond to threats and allowing the optimum positioning of our force. With White we want to hold the initiative, and to prevent our opponent from seizing the initiative. With Black we want to wrest the initiative from White. Although this concept itself is simple, in play it can be quite difficult. If we play a gambit, and our opponent accepts that gambit, he will use a move to capture that could have been used to improve his position. That gives us tempo. He has traded a unit of power for a unit of time. He will have an extra pawn or piece, but he will have given us time by the capture.
If our opponent uses two moves to get a piece to the best square, he has donated a tempo to us. When playing black, it makes sense to play openings that give the opponent a strong opportunity to yield a tempo.
My own games are more often won by Time than by material! I am often behind in material when I mate or my opponent resigns. Think of it this way: A street lamp can use 200 watts to light a circle on the ground directly below that is usually less than eight meters in diameter. An automobile headlamp uses about 40 watts to light the roadway 50 meters ahead. The difference is focus, creation of a beam aimed on an objective. In chess, Force is focused. (Power is static, Force is kinetic). It takes time (tempo) to bring power into an attack and become translated, through focus, into Force. Concentrated Force wins!
Although the opportunity to gain tempo exists throughout the game, the easiest way to see it is by looking at openings. Let’s first look at a few gambits played by white. Here are three common gambits: The oldest is probably the Kings Gambit: 1. e4 e5, 2. f4 exf4. Here we have the kings gambit accepted. Black has lost one tempo. White has a center pawn, black has none. White has given up a pawn (Power) for the opportunity to make an extra move (Tempo). Then, look at the Danish gambit: 1. e4 e5, 2. d4 exd4, 3. c3 dxc3, etc. White has again yielded material in order to gain tempo (and, in both cases, Space as well). In some cases, the tempo is gained by black. In the Semi-Slav, the white bishop often moves twice in the opening in order to reach a good square: 1. d4 d5, 2. c4 e6, 3. Nc3 c6, 4. e3 Nd2, 5. Nf3 Nf6, 6. Bd3 dxc4! Now, after 7. Bxc4 b5!
White must retreat the bishop to d3, giving black a tempo, having moved the bishop three times. Add to this the easy development of Black’s queen bishop on the queenside, nullifying the block on e6, and Black has taken away the initiative with which White began the game. Black may gain a successful queenside attack without exceptional moves. Still, Black has kingside opportunities as well and a solid defensive position until the attack can be generated.
The Two Knights defense is an attack in disguise. Black often comes out of the opening with an initiative. In a similar sense; the Berlin defense appears passive/defensive, but is like a coiled spring. The Berlin pawn structure hampers White, and Black has the bishop pair with which to utilize the initiative, once gained. When I was young I liked the Sicilian Dragon for the ‘coiled spring’ effect against an impatient opponent. The French can work the same way, but requires the patience of a Saint or a Steinitz!
As an example of seizing the initiative with Black, I offer the following game. This game was played in 2007. I played Black. I have not asked the other player to reveal his identity.
White alfredjwood 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Nf6
The Two Knights defense is a favorite of mine because I believe that it gives Black an early opportunity to seize the initiative. This is a decisive point for White. He can play to gain a pawn by 4. Ng5, or he can play to hold the initiative with 4. e4. Both moves are good. If he goes for the pawn (Ng5), however, he can yield the initiative!
4. Ng5 d5 5. exd5 Na5 6. Bb5+ c6 (Bd7 is also good) 7. dxc6 bxc6 8. Qf3 Rb8 The pawn can be protected by Qc7 or Bd7, or a counter-attack can be made by h6. I believe the White knight will return to f3 without disrupting the kingside pawns and the initiative is more likely to come to Black by getting the rook onto an open file.
9. Bxc6+ Nxc6 10. Qxc6+ Nd7 11. d3 Be7.
The initiative has passed to Black, at a cost of two pawns. I continue with the game to show use of the initiative. In many of my games it takes 15 moves or more before the initiative is seized.
12. Nf3 0-0 The moves by the white knight and the quest for a pawn have resulted in a position where white has succeeded in gaining two pawns, but at a terrible price: All of Black’s pieces are mobilized, White has four pieces still requiring development, and has the White Queen afield.
23. Nc3 … Not a good move. It develops the knight to it’s natural square but allows it to be pinned, and neglects the queen which can come under attack by four (!) Black pieces. Withdrawing the queen may have been more prudent.
13. … Rb4 This allows Bb7 without blocking the rook. At this post, the rook takes away three escape squares from the White Queen, and holds the b-file. The Queen hunt is on!
14. Nd5 Bb7 15. Nxe7+ Qxe7 16. Qc3 … The Queen retreats to the only available square.
16. … Rc8 17. Qd2 … There is no choice. The c1 bishop is blocked, locking in the a1 rook. Black is gaining space from his initiative.
17. … e4 Black plays to open the board for the attack.
18. Qe2 Rxc2 19. Qe3 … Obviously, White cannot take the invading rook, but the e5 pawn remains pinned.
19. … Nf6 Black protects the pawn a fourth time, and positions the knight to attack the White Queen.
20. Nd2 Nd5 21. Qxe4 Strange as it seems, the Queen must give herself up. There is no better move. With five marauding pieces, a protected king, and the attacking e-pawn, Black has a won game.
The remainder of the game is simple mechanics, and of little interest.
If you are just beginning to play chess, I urge you to use the opening to get each piece to its’ ideal square in one move. Your opponent, if he is a beginner, will squander a move or two early in the game. A player at 1500 elo will give up the equivalent of a pawn in the first fifteen moves. Early attempts at mate work with beginners, but as your skill grows you will find that you are playing opponents who know how to turn your early attempts into tempo for themselves. The Fool’s Mate, the Shepherd’s Mate, the Fegatello attack, even the Fried Liver, are all easily rebuffed by an experienced player and result in his acquisition of tempo, and consequently, the initiative.
When you don’t know the ideal square, move the pieces where best placement is known. The placement of Knights are generally known first, then one or both of the bishops. By this time perhaps the placement of a rook or the queen may be known. Let your opponent move his pieces while you calmly configure the board.
Still, you must respect each move. Think of the move not as putting a piece, think instead of improving the board in your favor. Do not surrender the initiative, and play to seize the initiative if you do not hold it.
There are three major skills in chess. If we possess one of the three we can play chess. If we possess two of the three we can play chess well. If we possess all three, to a high degree, we will become expert at the game. These, like all other skills, are honed with practice or ‘calisthenics’. Let’s look at each of the three, briefly.
First is memory. Playing mental games often hones memory, but few of us will use more than a tenth of this ability in our lifetime. In chess, the openings require memory. What is important is not memorizing the moves, but in memorizing the position arrived at by the moves. Let’s look at an example: A few months ago one of my students wrote and told me that he wanted to play the Semi-slave with Black; but his opponents were taking him out of the opening. He pointed to a game where the moves were: 1. d4 d5, 2. Nf3. He was looking for the move 2. c4, to which he would have responded 2. … e6. Because he was looking at the moves and not at the positions, he could be shunted aside by an unexpected move.
I wrote back, explaining that the ‘starting’ position of the Semi-slav could be arrived at by NINE DIFFERENT PATHS! In other words, if he had looked forward to the position, and not looked at the moves, he could have arrived at the desired position without distraction. Try it yourself. Here are the moves that lead to the desired position: 1.d4 d5, 2. c4 e6, 3. Nc3 c6, 4Nf3 Nf6. There are eight other move orders that will reach this position. Can you find them? The key move is the timing of White’s Nf3. On that move, black must play Nf6. The sequence can be picked up after Nf6. Here is that position: Set up the desired position, then when you see an opponent move “out of order”, you can visualize the desired position rather than memorizing a series of moves.p
The only way to excel at end-games is to memorize the position. The same endgame can occur from a multitude of openings! Memorizing moves is almost useless. Even in the simplest endings, errors are made because one of the players does not recognize the position. Here is the most basic example:
With white to move, he must simply keep the opposition with 1. Kc3. Then, if 1. … kb4, 2. Kb3, kc4, Ka4. The position desired is:
If we simply can picture the end in our memory, the moves are simple. Here are the rules of the moves: a) The white king must control the square directly in front of the pawn, so that the black king cannot control it. b) The first move of the pawn can be to the third rank or the fourth rank, depending on favorable opposition. Just play it through a few times, and you will see the pattern and know the winning and losing positions when they appear on the board. Black can prevent the pawn from queening if he attains vertical opposition at the instant that white’s king is on the square in front of the pawn. The black king then may simply stay in front of either the king or the pawn and the pawn cannot queen.
Use your memory to memorize the board, not the moves. Your game can improve dramatically. Let’s look at a variation of the Noah’s Ark in the Spanish Game: White has just captured the pawn: Nxd4. It is Black’s move. The winning move is simply 1. … Nxd4, 2. Qxd4, 2. Pc5, followed by Pc4 winning the bishop. If White had simply committed the Noah’s Ark to his memory, he would have played differently. It is not the moves, it is the position that must be known.
Next is Reason and Logic: This is the ability to solve puzzles, to calculate a series of moves, to determine what the opponent has in mind. It is a vital part of the game. A world champion once said that the opening required reason and logic, but the middle game required observation. Picture a game in which you have a rook and your opponent has two knights and a bishop. Reasoning will tell you that you have a draw if you simply exchange the rook for the bishop. Two knights cannot mate and the game is a draw. Now you must see the way to make the exchange. If your opponent interposes the bishop to block check, you have your draw. If your opponent allows a skewer, where the bishop is behind the king on the same rank or file on which you can check, the king must move, and you exchange for the bishop or simply take the bishop. You can decide whether you want an open game or a closed game by your choice of opening, the choice depends on your reasoning. You can decide whether to accept or decline a gambit; that’s logic and reasoning. Here is a little example of logic to gain a win: Use logic and your power of reasoning: White to move. Which is the better move for white, 1. Rg6, or 1. Ng6?
The third ability is perception through observation. I believe that improving observation is the quickest way to improve the player’s game. Opponents often tell me: “I missed your move.” When a blunder occurs, is it because of some reason other than failure to see it? Do you see you’re your own blunders before you make them? I watch players depend on mistakes by their opponents, at the same time that the opponent is depending on a mistake by his opponent! That may work up until elo 1700, but after that the game of He Who Depends On Blunders is compromised. With good perception, you can see the potentials and possibilities being missed by your opponent! You can see what is normally overlooked! You can relate the normally unrelated.
The difficulty is that the eyes of the beginning player are not tuned to the board, they are tuned to the piece. He moves pieces; he should be using the move to improve the board in his favor. To do that he needs to see the board, not the piece. Unfortunately, when we study chess we do so from game scores rather than from pictures of the board. Thus, Be4 draws our eyes to the bishop. Our eyes should be drawn to e4! When a young player’s hand hovers over a piece, I know he has not yet seen the board. Many years ago I removed blunders from my game by following four simple steps: After my opponent moves, I ask myself: 1.What lines on the board just opened as a result of that move? How does this affect the position?. 2.What lines on the board have closed as a result of that move?. How does this affect the position? 3.What squares is that piece now aimed at that were not aimed at by the piece prior to the move? How does this affect the position? 4.What squares have been released by that move? How does that affect the position. Students resist this discipline. They believe that they already see everything. They also believe that it takes too much time during the game. I usually try to teach it during analysis.
The fact is that it only takes time when you first start doing it. Any new behavior takes time. As a player does this, the time required speeds up! I have no difficulty performing this on every move and still make time controls. At first, I needed more time. I believe that blitz chess requires good memory, sound reasoning, and thorough observation. I cannot do it in blitz chess, so I do not play blitz. I do not want to build a habit that will hurt my normal games.
How often does a player go wrong intuitively? Things are not always what they seem. Here is a sample of observation by a great master. The game is Taimanov-Kusminich, 1950. White to move. If you are distracted by the pieces, you can miss the squares, files, and diagonals! Watch as open lines magically appear! Here is the game from this point: 1. N-g6 N-h7, 2. Rxe6 Pxe6, 3. Qxd8+ QxQ, 4. Bxe6++ Did you visualize this mating position? At each move, did you see the changes to the board?
Train yourself to become an observer, not just a spectator. It is worth the effort if you intend to increase your elo. It is the thing that can break a plateau, a ceiling, that a chessplayer has reached.
I discussed many ideas in the previous article; if any of those ideas don’t seem clear, take your time, work through them. There is no reason to rush through this course. If I talk about a position, set it up on your chess board; Look at it on the screen. Take your time and make sure you understand the idea of my plan. Remember, in general, when you are studying chess, if your brain hurts, if you are pushing yourself, you’re stretching your mind, then you are learning. If you are just playing through variations, if you don’t strain to try to understand subtleties of the position, then you are not going to be learning. Basically, you are going to get out of chess as much as you put into it.
One of my teammates has asked me some questions related to my first piece. Here is his message:
I am curious to find out how you determine a plan. I know that the opening is the main factor in determining a plan, but after each side has done their best possible moves how do you determine a plan after you’ve developed your opening? It seems that it is hard to make a plan that remains consistent throughout the game, which brings me to the basic question, what types of attacks are there and how can you recognize an attack like queenside attack based on early to mid game positions? I ask these questions in a game where there are no immediate advantages or obvious gains. An example opening that I have difficulty with is the four knights game which is exactly even. I am able to recognize attacks based on weak positions but I find it hard to maintain that plan when the best move is employed by my opponent. What type of plan would you go with on this type of opening? I sometimes find myself just trading off pieces with no endgame objective and a mess of pawns to clean up. How can I overcome these problems? Thanks.
I found that the answers could be of much help to other players on chessmaniac.com, so please read it patiently. If you have any comments, feel free to share with me…
It will be easier if you think of a plan as a wish, something that you want to happen. As an example, in the Morra Gambit (1.e4 c5 2.d4 cxd4 3.c3 dxc3 4.Nxc3), white's initial plan is to quickly develop all of the pieces. Then Black's d-pawn should be backward. It is on d6 and cannot be defended with another pawn because the c-pawn has been exchanged and the e-pawn will be on e5. This is the resulting position in the main line of the Morra Gambit; it appears after (4…Nc6 5.Nf3 d6 6.Bc4 e6 7.0-0 Be7 8.Qe2 Nf6 9.Rd1 e5 10.Be3 0-0 11.Rac1).
Note that black cannot force an exchange of the knight vs. bishop by playing 11…Na5 because of 12.Nxe5! Black cannot capture the knight by the d-pawn because it is pinned to his queen.
Therefore, white's logical plan is: Hold d5 square so black's weak pawn cannot advance, keep pressure on the d-file with the h-rook on d1. Use the d5 square as an outpost. When the attack comes, use it to transfer forces to the side of the board where they will be needed. Force black to defend this weak d-pawn, tying up his forces; not capturing the pawn until it is tactically favorable to do so. The normal attack from this position is Queenside, using b5 as well as d5 for positioning of the minor pieces.
The decision to attack kingside or queenside is made by either pawn position, piece position or both. In an unbalanced pawn front, as occurs in many opening where one side (we will say White) has three pawns on each side of the board and the other side (we will say Black) has two pawns on one side and four on the other, it will be natural for either players to attack on the side with the pawn majority. This is always an attempt to force a passed pawn, although it sometimes leads to a mating attack when it occurs on the kingside.
Although, the minority attack is often used, this is to restrain the majority and make it more difficult to establish a passed pawn. The overall plan in this case deals with gaining or preventing a passed pawn.
Most of the gambits are played with the plan of developing quickly and attacking the kingside. The f-pawn is a usual target. Look at a typical King's Gambit and White's plan is very clear: Attack f7 before Black can get the king to safety. It depends on development and tempo.
Some themes for plans are: a. Opening the board or closing the board. This depends on several factors: First, which side do open lines favor? Second, which side does time favor? Third, is the player Steinitzian or Morphian? Which does the player prefer, a tactical game or a positional game? b. The passed pawn. Gaining a passed pawn is a huge step toward winning. c. The two bishops. The two bishops on an open board are much more powerful than any other minor piece combination. d. Attack on the king; Bringing about a position that enables a successful attack on the King's position. e. Weakening the pawn structure; Creating doubled or isolated pawns, opening lines to the opposing king.
I base my plan primarily on pawn structure, when faced with an equal adversary. When faced with a weaker adversary I base the plan on rapid development, and continuous attack.
Here is what I look for in pawn structure: 1. Opening lines. I want open files for my rooks. The opening determines which pawns will exchange and therefore the square on which I should place a rook. It's easy in gambits: Kings Gambit, the f-file will open, so my h-rook goes quickly to f1. In the Morra gambit, the c-file and the d-file will open, so my rooks jump to d1 and c1 quickly. In closed games, I pick the file I want to open, this becomes my PLAN. Once the file is open, I want to do two things: first, get both rooks on a file or adjacent open files. Second, transfer the rooks to the seventh or eighth files. That becomes my plan. I want open diagonals for my bishop(s). If I have one bishop and my opponent has a bishop of the opposite color, I want to use my pawns to trap it or to block it. I prefer blocking an opposing bishop with his own pawns, where possible. Where I have the bishop pair and my opponent does not, I want to trade off the entire center pawns to open up the board for the bishops. This becomes my plan.
2. If there is a weakness in the opponent's position, wear it down. An example is the backward pawn.
Here is a less obvious example from the Rossolimo variation of the Sicilian defense: (I played this game few years ago in a local rapid tournament, I was white) 1.e4 c5 2.Nc3 Nc6 3.Bb5 g6 4.Bxc6 bxc6 5.d3 Bg7
The Black bishop enjoys a fine diagonal and it is the only piece Black has developed. The plan now is to restrict this bishop: 6.f4! White must now strengthen his center, leaving his knight on g2. This interferes with early castling. 6...e6? (a strategic suicide! d6 is better because it somehow prevents e5 by white). 7.e5 Our plan has succeeded, the bishop is restrained. Now we can consolidate the position and attack on the queenside! The Black kingside knight and bishop are out of the action and the Black king remains in the center. Black's center pawns block his pieces. 7...d5 8.Nf3 a5?! (a dubious move; black is ignoring his development by trying to get space on the queenside. Much better was 8...Ne7 preparing short castle.) 9. Na4! (This is the most direct way to punish black for his immature play. Nimzowitch says: "First restrain, then blockade, finally destroy." Black has totally lost the strategic battle, so it is time to bust him up. ) 9... Qe7 10.c4 Ba6 11.b3 h6
It is very interesting that only after making 11 moves, black is now in huge trouble! White to move, can you find the best move here?
Note that black's c5 pawn is very weak. It is defended only by his queen and cannot be defended once again right away. It is also attacked by my knight on a4; so if I can add another attacker to it, I will win it. You found the right move? Yes, 12.Ba3 with a winning position. My opponent resigned after a few moves.
3. A strong pawn center can provide a winning plan. Here is such a plan developed on move #16:
(This is from Sakaev vs. Belov, Krasnoyarsk 2003.)
16.f5!! Brilliant; White gives the knight in order to consolidate his center pawns! 16...exd4, 17.cxd4 Now, the center is imposing! 17. ... Rfe8, 18. f6 Bf8, Qc1!
Now, white plans: Bh6, Bxf8, Qh6, Qg7#.
4. Restricting an opponent is a good plan. Here is a position seen in a match of Carlsen vs. Malakhov, 2005:
Here it is Black to move. The position appears peaceful, but black must achieve the c6-c5 advance in order to prevent a bind on the queenside.
10...Nbd7, This appears to be a reasonable move, but the c-pawn requires Black's attention. Even a sacrifice by c5 immediately is only a temporary sacrifice and frees up Blacks' position. 11.e4 Nb6 12.Bf4 Be6 13.Qc2 Bc4 14.Rfd1 Rc8 15.Rac1 Bxe2 16.Qxe2
White's options include: 1. Pressure along the c-file, attack the backward c-pawn with doubled rooks and Ne5, Exploit the hole on c5 by putting a knight on it. Notice that we cannot do both of the latter two. We must choose. 2. Pawn advance in the center: e4-e5 would drive the knight from f6, strengthening a white king-side attack, clear the way for Ne4 and Nc5 to exploit c5, lessen the scope of the bishop on g7. 3. Direct attack on the kingside: advance h4-h5 to open the h file and undermine g6, challenge the defensive bishop with Bh6, maneuver the queen to h4 and play Ng5.
Carlsen decides that the way to set Black most problems is with e4-e5, Ne4 and Nc5; seizing c5 and a kingside attack.
Very mature play by the young grandmaster, and the plan is well on the way to fruition.
5. Exploiting a positional weakness: This is the highest level of planning, what to do when the position offers you no obvious path forward; such as attacking the king, turning a pawn majority into a passed pawn, or picking up a weak pawn. Exploiting intangible positional weaknesses is an indicator of a strong player. In master play, you rarely see obvious blunders; instead, the one who better exploit tiny little weaknesses in opponent's position will prevail.
Here we will look at exploiting a hole; this is a match of Cheparinov vs. Ivanchuk 2005: 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 b5 (The Benko Gambit; interesting but risky opening) 4.cxb5 a6 5.b6 (Declining the gambit is a sound strategy against black's opening preparation!) d6 6.Nc3 Nbd7 7.a4 a5 8.e4 g6 9.Nf3 Bg7 10.Be2 0-0 11.0-0 Qxb6
White sees a weak square on b5. His plan is, therefore, to place a knight there and support it. This will deprive Black of counterplay against b2 and also keep him from attacking the center with e7-e6. This will secure my queenside and keep my space advantage in the center, so I can start a kingside attack based on f2-f4 without being disturbed.
Let's see how it works out: 12.Nd2! Ba6 13.Nb5 Rfb8 14.Qc2 Qd8 15.Nc4! Nb6 16.Nca3! (All aiming for b5-square) Ne8 17.Rb1 Nc7 18.b3 Bxb5 19.Nxb5
White is not winning yet, but his strategy is dominating. You can find these games that I reference here on chessbase.
Finally I would like to give you some clues on how to plan the game in “The four knights game”.
Start with reaching the following position: 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bb5 Bb4 5.O-O O-O 6.Bxc6 dxc6 7.d3 Bd6 8.Bg5 h6 9.Bh4 c5 10.Nd5 g5 11.Nxf6+ Qxf6 12.Bg3
Black to play: you can select your plan from each one of these three options. It depends on how you would like to continue your game.
Plan A: Take advantage of the Bishop Pair.
I think the most significant strategic element in this position is possession of the Bishop pair against Bishop & Knight. To get the most from this advantage I must try to open up the game and free my Bishop on d6 which is currently trapped by Pawns. I would also like to get rid of my doubled Pawns on the c-file. I therefore decide to play 12...Be6 with the intention of continuing ...Rad8 preparing the advance ...c4. The idea is to give the position a more dynamic character (opening of the d-file and the a3-f8 diagonal) so as to take full advantage of the Bishop pair. If, to thwart this plan, White decides to play c4, this would seriously weaken his d-Pawn and give me an excellent objective.
Plan B: Attack on the Kingside.
In contrast to Plan A, I think I have to keep the center closed as this element allows me to organize an attack on the Kingside using the Pawns of my castled position which are in any case well on the way up the board. However, White’s King is solidly protected and there are no breakthrough points. So I decide to play ...Bg4 with the intention of profiting from the pin on the Knight on f3 so as to organize the opening of the f-file, e.g. by ...Qg7 and ...f5. To prevent this plan, White will probably answer with 13.h3 on which I intend to continue 13...Be6 having achieved the goal of weakening my opponent’s King’s position to create a breakthrough point (h3). My idea then is to prepare the thrust ...g4 by ...Kh7 and ...Rg8.
Plan C: Trap the Bishop on g3.
The unhappy position of the Bishop on g3, which is stymied by my Pawns, suggests that I can engineer a simplification favorable to me. As in Plan B, I play 12...Bg4 but after the likely ...13.h3 I intend to continue 13...Bxf3 and if White retakes with the Queen I will also exchange Queens. In the ending arising out of this simplification, the Bishop on g3 will be completely immobile because on h4 I can maintain the Pawn vice by ...f6. Thus for the rest of the game I would virtually have an extra piece. To free his Bishop, White would have to give up a Pawn and waste precious time.
So, in conclusion: I choose my openings partly because of the type of endgames they produce. Sicilian setups, for instance, are typical for attacking players because they offer chances at directly attacking the opponent's King. But usually something alters my original plans. Then I often picture myself a realistic setup of where I want to be in 15 or 20 moves. I look at what I need to do to get there and start executing the “plan.” My choice is often based on weaknesses in the opponent's position. Is his Kingside a fortress? Then I focus for example on queening a Pawn, if not, the other way around. If I don’t see a clear path, I focus on where my own strengths lie in the position and then try to reinforce that strength. I do (try) keep it simple and realistic... where things become too complicated I try to simplify. Another important issue is checking statistics on an opening and/or position. The perfect website to do this is http://www.chesslive.de/ You can enter the position and see for yourself what kind of results it produced.
Alfred J. Wood and Alex Dion Play free online chess at ChessManiac.com
In Online Chess You Must Plan Your Play And Play your Plan!
The primary factor that holds players below 2000 elo is, in my opinion, planning. I know that this will be disputed by many players, but it is my firm opinion.
Players do not plan to fail, they simply fail to plan.
Let’s start with how a player approaches planning. When he first learns chess he plans at that level. As he progresses he plans at increasingly higher levels. Finally, he is drained of ideas. Here is how it may go:
1. I plan to attack and checkmate quickly. 2. I plan to develop, to get my pieces into play quickly. 3. I plan to occupy/control the center. 4. I plan to play my favorite opening for the first few moves, and then take advantage of whatever appears. 5. I plan to get to an endgame where I have more material.
These are all important and often effective plans, but they are temporary in nature, they soon dissipate as the game moves ahead. Sometimes we have a bad plan, mere wishful thinking: "I plan to watch my moves and wait for my opponent to make a mistake." - Your opponent may have the same plan! "I plan to get ahead and trade down.” You may not get ahead.
As we face stronger opponents, we can end up in a middle game wondering what to do next. One of the most important reasons for limiting a repertoire is to know the opening well enough so that the actions in the middle game become obvious. Players that depend on data bases and opening books, (and we all should use these tools without dependence), run out of steam when the line runs out in the book! I hit this group of players between 1600-1900 elo. We would enter the middle game on even footing, and then they simply did not know what to do. They did not blunder, they wandered. They had no goal. They sought tactical opportunities that did not appear. At first, I watched their games collapse in amazement. How could they play so well for fifteen moves and then collapse? They were following Anand, he changed trains at the last location. They zigged when he zagged. They were not thinking like Anand, they were imitating him until he left the scene.
If you are an expert at your opening, this does not happen to you. You always know what to do next. You may not get the opportunity to do it, but you know what it is you must do.
You must have a plan at all times. You can seldom plan everything for the entire game, so your opening, which is a plan, takes you to some point. At that point you are in the middle game, whether you like it or not. If your opponent is still in the opening, he still has his plan. You must have yours.
Your plan should evolve from the position on the board. There are three elements which must be considered: Power, Time, and Space.
Power: 1. Is the material even? Do I have a material advantage? The player with a material advantage can plan to trade off and enter the endgame with that advantage. 2. Is the material unbalanced? Knight vs. Bishop, Rook vs. two minor pieces, Queen versus two rooks or rook and minor piece. If an imbalance exists, how can I limit the force of his piece(s) and maximize the force of my piece(s)? Perhaps the most important piece imbalance on the board is Knight vs. Bishop. 3. Is my pawn structure more powerful, or is his? Can a pawn be Queened? Can I strengthen my structure? Can I weaken his structure? Can I take advantage of holes and outposts? Can I keep one of his pawns backward? Is there an isolated pawn? A passed pawn? Doubled pawns?
Time: 1. Who has the initiative? If I have it, how can I maintain it (or lose) it? If he has it, how can I seize it? The initiative is temporary; use it while you have it. 2. Who is better developed? (Simply looking at the back rank often answers this question.) If I have a lead in development, how can I capitalize? A lead in development is temporary, and unless acted on early this advantage disappears.
Space: 1. Who controls the most space? What is the force of each piece and the potential force of each piece in this position? Are my knights and bishops properly placed, are any of his misplaced? Are my rooks on the right files? Are his? (The placement of the rooks is most often determined by the opening, but there is always an obvious placement). Do I have a good bishop? Does he? Do I have a bad bishop? Does he? 2. Are there open lines, or lines to be opened? Most important are files, since files are opened when only one pawn is misplaced; but ranks and diagonals can be closed by other pawns. In other words, files are the key lines requiring planning. 3. Are there pivot points, outposts, ‘homes’ available or that can be made available to either side?
If these things are simply observed, a plan emerges. Look at these features when your opening is done. The longer your opening lasts, the simpler the board becomes and the features easier to observe and to apply.
Take pencil and paper and write down your observations in these areas the next time you run into the middle game. Look at all of your current games and write your observations in each of these areas. Train yourself to see these three things in these eight aspects.
Your observations will determine the plan. You may plan to improve your pawn structure, to prepare a passed pawn, to connect pawns, to disconnect opposing pawns, to clear lines, to close lines, to trade down, etc. Your plan will emerge from your observations.
Take these components, and simply look for a way (plan) to put these things to work, simultaneously or sequentially. Along the way, the position will change. Consider each change as your plan evolves.
CAVEAT: When developing a plan, never think of moves! Think of the position! See the board! If you think of a move, you have already abandoned thinking of a plan. Observe. Do not calculate! There are two common flaws in planning. The first flaw is performing critical analysis before gathering full information. The second is in performing creative analysis too early. The first step is always to see things as they truly are, in all aspects, taking nothing for granted.
When a position appears I can always tell the weak players: They begin looking for the next move!! You cannot possibly know the best next move unless you know the position thoroughly. See the Board, not the pieces! This is not a time for calculation, reasoning, or logic. It is a time of research, observation. Become Sherlock Holmes! See things your opponent does not see; or seeing, does not consider.
The moves will only come when you have your plan. Your plan determines the moves and the move order. Each move is nothing more nor less than a positional change. You simply want to change the position to your advantage.
Along the way, you need to discard certain practices. When you calculate moves, you may not play as if the opposing player will always play the best moves. You may play wishful chess rather than winning chess. True, at a low level your opponent will not play the best moves; but you should plan on moving to a higher level quickly and you should always play as if your opponent will play the best move. Play according to the position, as if you were playing against yourself, at every level; and soon you will be playing as if you were playing against an expert, or a Master.
You must look at your opponent’s position and determine what his plan may be. If you know his plan, you know how much time you have to execute yours! Your plan may have many components, but you can probably only achieve a few. Go after those that are perishable, the opportunities that will not last. Consider your opponents likely play to deprive you of these opportunities. The chess game has two sides, see both.
If you want to be a Player and you want to be as good as you can be, if you want to reach your true potential, it will take CHANGE. Change in the way you see things. Change is always the most difficult activity. You must re-train yourself to see differently. If you do what you’ve always done, you’ll get what you’ve always gotten – Coonradt
Remember: There is no ‘universal plan’ that can be applied to all positions. Each position demands its own plan.
There are some openings that are played to gain an initial spatial advantage. The Morra Gambit is one of these openings. But there are many closed games played that often entail a long struggle for space. Among these is the French Defense. This is from a game where GM Bareev, playing Black, plays his favorite French Defense.
(the following note is by Niel McDonald): "Imagine if the two players now ignore what their opponent is doing, and satisfy themselves with the quiet development of their pieces on their own half of the board. "If white is left in peace he can build up his game with moves like 0-0, Bf4, c2-c4, Qd2, Rad1, Rfe1. His pieces would have effortlessly found squares of maximum efficiency. They would be ready to take part in any maneuver that White chose in the middlegame. Meanwhile, Black could also develop with Be7, 0-0, b6, and Bb7; but his pieces would have less activity -indeed, what does he do with his rooks?"
In other words, at this point, Black should see that White will have a great spatial advantage after 'routine' development. White already has a spatial advantage in that his d4 pawn is further up the board than Blacks e6 pawn. White can bring his rook to d1 where it is both mobile and exerting force, while Black's rook on e8 would be shut in behind his own pawn.
Thus, Black sees that simply continuing his development will lead to a strong spatial disadvantage. (An advantage in space means more potential scope for the pieces).
Seeing this, Black doesn't want White to achieve a strategic advantage, and so he plays:
6...c5!
White cannot continue his buildup behind and around the d4 pawn, because the pawn will now disappear, pieces will be exchanged, and Black's congestion will be lessened.
We can now follow the game understanding Black's Plan: Break up the center, exchange pieces, gain more space!
7. 0-0 Nxe4 8. Bxe4 Nf6 9. Bg5 cxd4 10. Nxd4
This, then, is what we expect should happen from this plan in this position:
The Black bishop will go to e7, White may play his bishop to f3, then Black will castle 0-0, and will have completed kingside development. The board will be open and Black's plan has gained space. Black may not win, but his opportunity is greater now than when his space was becoming severely limited.
The problem with following an opening without knowing the plan, as we do by following a data base, is that when we are left (in this case on Move 10), we simply look for a 'good' move; instead of asking: "Why did he do that, what was his plan?".
If we know the plan, the play is easier and more accurate in every case. When we develop the plan, we know it!! Our opponent may not figure it out! In this case, Bareev's plan was simple; it begins with need for space and entails the means to acquire that space: breakup the center and exchange pieces. Nothing complex or complicated. A plan is simply thinking ahead.
Here is a position I reached in one of my games on ChessManiac.com. My opponent was a very strong chess player, a master candidate.
I was playing with white pieces. The game started in the Sicilian defense and after “1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 a6 6. Be3 e6 7. Bd3 b5 8. O-O Bb7 9. f4 Nbd7 10. a4 b4 11. Na2 Nc5” we reached this position:
White to move. The position looks quite complicated. Take your time in observing everything on the board; you may see many possibilities, but how could you produce an aggregate plan for the rest of the game?
The first step is to observe the position: We are still in the opening. Black may know several more book moves in this variation. White is almost fully developed, black has delayed his development; and white currently has the initiative. Black’s b4 pawn is en prise. e4-pawn is attacked 3 times and defended only once, pushing it forward will open a magnificent diagonal for the black b7 bishop. The c-file is half open. White has a queenside pawn majority. White’s d3 bishop is attacked, but it is unlikely to be immediately captured because the exchange would fortify the white center and block the line of the b2 bishop.
The second step is to find the opponent’s probable plan: At this moment, it appears that Black is focused on e4. However, we must believe that he is looking further ahead. He will probably attack on the kingside, expecting White to attack on the queenside with his pawn majority. He must develop his f8 bishop, and would like it to strike the white kingside. He may delay castling, in order to strike before white can strike. He will capture the e4 pawn with a knight and once the pawn falls will look to gain the two bishops by exchanging a knight for the bishop. Once mobilized, he will attack the kingside.
The third step is to make our plan: White must attack on the queenside, preferably before Black is totally mobilized. First, White has a current perishable tactical opportunity; black’s b4 pawn is temporarily vulnerable on this move and capturing it will get the knight off of the edge of the board and will also attack a6, holding the a8 rook from seizing the c-file. This will not cost a tempo and the initiative is retained, White will thus increase his queenside majority, and improve the position of the knight. The queenside majority will deter black from trading pieces because the pawn endgame will favor white. If white neutralizes the b7 bishop the most dangerous piece will be taken from Black’s attack. Our plan is: First capture Nxb4, gaining the pawn majority; attack on the queenside, as quickly as possible; and then, neutralize the b7 bishop, if necessary. As a contingency, the d4 knight can return to f3 to thwart the bishop by blocking.
Now we can enact our plan: (White move notes will be in brackets). Meanwhile, I know that if my opponent plays something I did not expect, I must pause and adjust the plan as necessary. As we look at the following moves, keep in mind that White will always play to attack on the queenside.
12. Nxb4 Nfxe4 (Increasing the white queenside majority). Black’s move is the obvious retort by Black, who holds his c-knight to exchange for the bishop, and clears the bishop path to the kingside, while taking back the pawn. Material is then still even. 13. Be2… (White wants to retain the bishop; if he allows the exchange he will have an isolated pawn. Perhaps, because it is forced, black will not see that this could be the beginning of a possible transfer to f3, to neutralize b2.) 13… g6. The bishop must be brought into play, and is more useful on g7 than on e7, so another tempo must be yielded by black. The bishop will strike through d4 to b7 and a8. Of course, this move weakens the dark squares on the black kingside, but the bishop is expected to cover these squares. 14. a5 (Restraining the a pawn.) 14…Bg7 The bishop comes to its prepared position, as anticipated. It is a powerful post. But, it costs two tempi.
15. c4 0-0 (It’s time to get the queenside rolling. This opens the diagonal for the queen to a4, this pawn move gives up b3 and d3, but the queen, bishop and knights hold these squares.) Black brings his king to the safety. 16. Nd3 (A multi-purpose move, what a tempo saver! The knight repositions: he attacks the black knight on c5, which is keeping the queen from a4. It frees b4 for the b-pawn and will protect the white pawn when it arrives there unless it is exchanged!) 16… Qe7 Black develops his queen and connects his rooks. Although this move develops the queen, he has not completed his development yet, and the rooks also cannot yet safely move. White maintains the initiative. 17. Rc1 Rfe8 (Black threatens e5. This tactical threat is all that black seems to have, but it activates the rook and gives white pause.) Black is threatening e5. 18. b4 The pawn avalanche begins.
The planned queenside attack continues. Where is the black knight to go? Moving the knight gives white another attacking tempo. If the knight exchanges for the white knight on d3, recapture by the white’s queen drives the second knight away to its only escape, blocking the fianchettoed bishop, or forcing him playing e5 and again the fianchettoed bishop is blocked.
Although black needed not have played these moves, White’s plan to attack on the queenside is very much likely to succeed. Although the plan will succeed, it does not mean that white will win. It simply means that every move by white supported his plan.
Almost a month after the passing of Robert(Bobby) Fischer the main stream media continues to discuss this controversial figure. A recent article on the New York Times website has a great video of Fischer's appearance on the Tonight Show hosted by Dick Cavett in 1971. The article is appropriately titled "Was It Only a Game?" Dick Cavett discusses the Bobby he knew. A well written and wonderful article that everyone should read.
A Filipina woman who claims Bobby Fischer is the father of her child is demanding a share of his $1.8 million estate. Read more..
In 2005 when ChessManiac.com was a very young site I sent an email message to Bobby Fischer inviting him to play chess. Then I would check my logs to see if anyone from Iceland had visited the site. Sure enough there were a few visitors from Iceland shortly after I sent out the email. I feel honored that Bobby Fischer may have played or at least checked out the site at one point in time.
Bobby Fischer, considered the greatest chess player in the world, dies at the age of 64. Fischer led a very inspiring life. He was the the only United States world champion. In 1972 he beat Boris Spassky to take the world title away from the Soviet Union. It was described as "The Match of the Century."
Bobby Fischer. This enigmatic genius elevated the game to hitherto unimaginable heights, reaching the front pages of the world's newspapers and more than doubling the number of registered players in the Western World. Fischer's popularization of the game he loved had a pronounced effect on chess literature. Since December 1970his successful journey on the road to the World Championship title, more chess magazines were born, more newspapers published chess columns, and many more chess books appeared on the market than ever before over the same time span. It surprises me that only a small handful of these books have been about Fischer.
We must thank Bobby Fischer for being Bobby Fischer. The beauty of his games, the clarity of his play, and the brilliance of his ideas have made him an artist of the same stature as Brahms, Rembrandt, and Shakespeare.
There can be no doubt that Bobby Fischer was the most superlative chess player that ever lived. His results up to the time that he defeated Spassky in Reykjavik indicate that his playing strength had already surpassed zeniths reached by Alekhine, Botvinnik, Capablanca and Lasker who had all occupied the World Champion's throne before him. Fischer was a more controversial figure than Alekhine or Staunton. He was more dedicated to the game than were Capablanca and Steinitz. He was the most prolifically biographed player in the history of chess.
From his results we can safely conclude that Robert James Fischer was the strongest chess player the world had ever known. From the diversity of openings that he played with a profound understanding, it is clear that in that area of the game his knowledge has never before been equaled. The precision with which he played the endgame is almost frightening. Even strong Grandmasters cannot treat a "book draw" too lightly. His impeccable and often original handling of all types of middle game positions leaves nothing lacking.
The chess world mourns Bobby Fischer (March 9, 1943 – January 17, 2008)
There is an extensive scientific literature on chess psychology. Alfred Binet and others showed that knowledge and verbal, rather than visuospatial, ability lies at the core of expertise. Adriaan de Groot, in his doctoral thesis, showed that chess masters can rapidly perceive the key features of a position. According to de Groot, this perception, made possible by years of practice and study, is more important than the sheer ability to anticipate moves. De Groot also showed that chess masters can memorize positions shown for a few seconds almost perfectly. Memorization ability alone does not account for this skill, since masters and novices, when faced with random arrangements of chess pieces, had equivalent recall (about half a dozen positions in each case). Rather, it is the ability to recognize patterns, which are then memorized, which distinguished the skilled players from the novices. When the positions of the pieces were taken from an actual game, the masters had almost total positional recall.
More recent research has focused on the respective roles of knowledge and look-ahead search; brain imaging studies of chess masters and novices; blindfold chess; the role of personality and intelligence in chess skill, gender differences, and computational models of chess expertise. In addition, the role of practice and talent in the development of chess and other domains of expertise has led to a lot of research recently. Ericsson and colleagues have argued that deliberate practice is sufficient for reaching high levels of expertise, like master in chess. However, more recent research indicates that factors other than practice are important. For example, Gobet and colleagues have shown that stronger players start playing chess earlier, that they are more likely to be left-handed, and that they are more likely to be born in late winter and early spring. source
In chess, there are two basic principles that must be respected:
Bobby Fischer, considered the greatest chess player in the world, dies at the age of 64. Fischer led a very inspiring life. He was the the only United States world champion. In 1972 he beat Boris Spassky to take the world title away from the Soviet Union. It was described as "The Match of the Century." 
![[xml feed]](/images/xml.gif "Chess Maniac News xml feed"){kind=small}
![[rss feed]](/images/rss.gif "Chess Maniac News rss feed"){kind=small}
