Monthly Archives: May 2009

Chess Strategy and Chess Tactics: Balancing Act?

5
Filed under Attacking tactics, Chess Opening, Chess Strategy, Chess lessons, Chess tactics
Tagged as ,

Many may continue on the same path for a distance, but you never know where they will end ultimately! We are talking of chess games.

This divergence becomes more prominent when one game is controlled by a player who follows the dictates of chess strategy (should we say sanity?) and the other by one who could not care less, a maverick who cannot let go of any opportunity to shock his opponent (and the world at large)!

Before we open the ‘show’, here is a brief introduction to the ‘actors’ in the ‘plays’.

The first game was played in 1961 between Bobby Fischer and Sam Reshevsky, the second one in 1962 between Rashid Nezhmetdinov and Oleg Chernikov.

Bobby Fischer (1943-2008) certainly does not need any introduction. The World Champion in 1972, he was a master in all areas of chess games – be it chess strategy, chess openings, chess tactics in attack and defense and chess endgames.

Sam Reshevsky (1911-1992) is a well-known Grandmaster who started as a child prodigy in Poland where he was born. He later moved to USA and won US Chess Championship no less than eight times. He was a superb positional player but also capable of brilliant chess tactics.

I presume you have already gone through the “Importance of Chess Strategy” and know about Rashid Nezhmetdinov and his playing style.

Oleg Chernikov (1936- ) was a Soviet National Master when this game was played, but went on to become a Grandmaster in year 2000.

The opening in these games follows the Accelerated Fianchetto variation of Sicilian Defense with Black’s 8. … Ng4 introduced by Reshevsky during the fourth game of his match with Fischer in 1961 (the present diagram was taken from the 6th game of that series).

Al Horowitz remarked in his book on Chess Openings: “This move (8. … Ng4) gained popularity as after this move, White can hardly avoid the exchange of minor pieces which eases Black’s game considerably”. The result of the first game vindicates Reshevsky, but you be the judge how easy it made for Chernikov in the second game!

In the second game, both players followed the same theoretical lines and subsequent variations in the footsteps of players in the first game. It is possible that Nezhmetdinov did not like the way the first game ended after Fischer’s response to Black’s 11th move and decided to chart his own path thereafter in the only way he knew, the way of a sacrifice!

Position after 11. … Bf6:

start on same footing

Can you guess what Nezhmetdinov saw in this position that Fischer did not? Was it a sudden intuition/imagination or a speculation or a pre-calculated move?

This is how the games proceeded.

  12. Qg4 d6   12. Qxf6 Ne2+ White starts on his new path with a Queen sacrifice!
  13. Qd1 Nc6   13. Nxe2 exf6  
  14. Qd3 b6   14. Nc3 Re8  
  15. Qd2 Ba6   15. Nd5 Re6  
  16. Rfd1 Bxc3   16. Bd4 Kg7  
  17. bxc3 Ne5   17. Rad1 d6  
  18. Bd4 Nc6   18. Rd3 Bd7  
  19. Qh6 Nxd4   19. Rf3 Bb5  
  20. cxd4 Rac8   20. Bc3 Qd8  

 

In game 2, Black has the materials, White has all the space and moves. What follows will make you understand Averbakh’s warning about Nezhmetdinov in “Importance of Chess Strategy”.

Positions after 20 moves just for comparison of the two games and to show that Nezhmetdinov was not yet done with sacrifices!

the position mid-way

  21. Re1 e5   21. Nxf6 Be2 For 21. … Bxf1 22. Ng4+ Kg8 23. Bxe6 Qg5 24. Bxf7+ Kf8 25. Bxg6+ Ke7 26. Bf6+ Qxf6 27. Nxf6 hxg6 28. Kxf1, White wins back everything and then some
 
  22. dxe5 Qxe5   22. Nxh7+ Kg8 22. … Kxh7 23. Rxf7+ Kh6 24. Bxe6 Bxf1 25. Bd2+ g5 26. Bf5 Qh8 27. h4 wins for White
  23. Rad1 Bc4   23. Rh3 Re5  
  24. Qd2 Bxb3   24. f4 Bxf1  
  25. cxb3 Rc6 Drawn 25. Kxf1 Rc8  
    26. Bd4 b5  
    27. Ng5 Rc7  
    28. Bxf7+ Rxf7  
    29. Rh8+ Kxh8  
    30. Nxf7+ Kh7  
    31. Nxd8 Rxe4  
    32. Nc6 Rxf4+  
    33. Ke2 Resigns  

 

Importance of chess strategy – Part 2

6
Filed under Attacking tactics, Chess Strategy, Chess lessons, Chess tactics
Tagged as ,

In Importance of chess strategy – Part 1, you were introduced to Nezhmetdinov, a player who had outstanding skills in chess tactics. Here we show his most renowned game played in 1958 against Lev Polugaevsky (1934-1995) who was also an International Master at that time. Nezhmetdinov, who at 46 was almost twice as old as his opponent, plays with Black pieces. His 24th move offering a stunning Queen sacrifice should find a place among the most brilliant moves played over a chessboard, and together with the 26th move, make this game one of the best chess games ever.

Position after White played 24. Rh1

preparing for a Queen sacrifice

The game continued:

24. Rxf4   The celebrated move allowing Queen sacrifice!
 
25. Rxh2 Rf3+   Black now starts hounding the White King in a way that will remind you of Attacking chess tactics
 
26. Kd4 Bg7   A great move that looks quiet but threatens 27…b5! and 28…Nec6#
The other possibility is 27. … c5+ 28. dxc6 bxc6 followed by 29. … c5
27. a4 c5+  
28. dxc6 bxc6  
29. Bd3 Nexd3+  
30. Kc4 d5+  
31. exd5 cxd5+  
32. Kb5 Rb8+  
33. Ka5 Nc6+  
34. Resigns  

 

After this game, Polugaevsky offered this compliment: “I must have beaten Rashid a dozen times. But that one loss was so good I would have traded them all to be on the other side of the board.”

In Importance of chess strategy – Part 1, you have seen how quickly Nezhmetdinov demolished Mikenas, a player who became International Master four years before Nezhmetdinov. In the present game, once he started his attack, he never retreats and continues at it even playing moves most players would consider risky to bring down his more famous opponent! You have to remember that his opponent became a Grandmaster in another four years’ time. Doesn’t it make you wonder why he was never able to obtain the grandmaster title despite his extraordinary talent?

The answer lies hidden in Polugayevsky’s compliment. Against this brilliant win, Nezhmetdinov suffered many defeats at the hand of Polugayevsky, indicating that he was very inconsistent. This inconsistency was the result of his chess tactics that, while producing some brilliant combinations, were the result of sudden inspiration rather than flowing out of a sound chess strategy.

Grandmaster Yuri Averbakh (1922- ), a strong positional and endgame player (implying strength in chess strategy), was ten years junior to Nezhmetdinov but became Grandmaster in 1952, two years before Nezhmetdinov became International Master! He probably provided the best explanation of this anomaly when he said about Nezhmetdinov (the italics are mine):

“… if he had the attack, could kill anybody, including Tal. But my score against him was something like 8.5–0.5 because I did not give him any possibility for an active game. In such cases he would immediately start to spoil his position because he was looking for complications.”

Averbakh’s comment shows that while he adopted a strategy to contain his opponent, Nehzmetdinov did not! A player with a sound sense of strategy would never self-destruct the way Averbakh remarked about Nezhmetdinov’s style of play! In the third paragraph of Importance of chess strategy – Part 1, I compared him with that ‘Magician from Riga’ Mikhail Tal in terms of their attacking talents. So it is interesting to observe that in spite of his enormous talent for attack, Tal became World Champion only for a year (1960) after defeating Mikhail Botvinnik only to lose the title to the same player in 1961. This was what Botvinnik had to say about Tal on the 1961 rematch (the italics are mine):

“I realized that you cannot tackle him if the pieces are mobile and active. I played closed positions in which Tal could gain no advantage. Tal had no positional understanding for closed games.

Bobby Fischer also said something similar though both the players appreciated each other’s talents.

You must have noted the similarity in the comments of two Grandmasters on the playing style of two brilliant players who reveled in attacking chess tactics, and the chess strategy they adopted to block those attacks.

Though Tal was not devoid of a sense of chess strategy, he probably did not have the patience for it in his eagerness to launch an attack, most likely with a piece sacrifice. He has probably the largest fan following among grandmasters, but the very reasons for such reverence stood in his way for a result that could look much better in chess records!

Tal himself admitted this weakness by saying: “… Usually, I prefer not to study chess but to play it. For me chess is more an art than a science. It’s been said that Alekhine and I played similar chess, except that he studied more. Yes, perhaps, but I have to say that he played, too.”

Unless you are a Tal in the making, and even then, it will be a good ‘strategy’ to brush up on chess strategies while nurturing your attacking flair! Then go ahead and play through the games of Tal (and Nezhmetdinov) for your enjoyment!

 

Importance of chess strategy – Part 1

5
Filed under Attacking tactics, Chess Strategy, Chess lessons, Chess tactics
Tagged as ,

Aim to be a good chess tactician, but don’t neglect to develop a sense of chess strategy. That is the message we tried to convey in “What is chess strategy?”. While explaining the differences between chess strategy and chess tactics, we showed how they interplay in a game, with a concluding surmise on how inadequate/incorrect chess strategy might have cost a landmark match for a World Champion.

For those who approach a chess game with thoughts only in terms of chess tactics, possibly because they are good at it and won games against some senior players, we will now show how brilliant chess tacticians prevail in their games! We will make our point after you have appreciated the talents in attacking chess tactics displayed in the game.

Unless you are a real chess enthusiast, you may not have come across the name of Rashid Gibiatovich Nezhmetdinov (1912-1974) of former USSR. But you are not likely to forget him when, discounting that ‘mouthful’ name, you play some of his games and find why those proved to be quite a ‘handful’ for many better-known top players of his time! He was capable of defeating any player by his imaginative and fierce attacks and this way he may remind you of Mikhail Tal who was 24 years his junior!

Nezhmetdinov came from a poor family and lost his parents early in life. He learnt chess by watching others play and he had a natural talent for chess (which can only be for chess tactics, because chess strategy needs study and development of perspective which cannot come naturally)! This enabled him to win some local tournaments but his further progress got hampered when he joined the army during the Second World War. His chess career could start only from 1946 when he was 34 years old and this may be the reason he lagged in chess strategy!

Vladas Mikenas (1910-1992), his opponent in the following game, earned the title of International Master in 1950, the very year it was introduced. Nezhmetdinov earned it 4 years later in 1954 on the strength of his performance at Bucharest, the only time he played outside USSR.

All this is to put a perspective on the game that follows, where he played as White against Mikenas in 1948. The game is not considered among his great games because of its many flaws, but glimpses of his attacking propensity come through nonetheless. I chose it because it appeared as a very strange and amusing game to me and I hope you will share in my feelings when you go through the opening moves!

1. e4 Nf6   No Knight probably faced what this one did!
2. e5 Nd5  
3. c4 Nb6  
4. c5 Nd5  
5. Bc4 e6  
6. Nc3 Nxc3   Black probably had enough of moving around that Knight, otherwise he could try 6. … Nf4 and then 7. … Nxg2 or Ng6 or Qh4
7. dxc3 Qh4  
8. Qe2 Bxc5  
9. Nh3 f6  
10. exf6 Qxf6  
11. Qh5+ Qg6  

 

Position after 11. … Qg6

tactics make a quick job

12. Qxc5 Qxg2  
13. Rg1 Qxh3  
14. Rxg7 Nc6  
15. Be2 e5  
16. Bg4 Qh4  
17. Qd5 Resigns   White threatens 18. Bxd7+ Bxd7 19. Qxd7+ Kf8 20. Qf7#
If 17. … Ne7 then 18. Qf7+ Kd8 19. Bg5 with threat of 20. Qxe7#.
If in response to above line 19. … Re8 then 20. Qxe7+ Rxe7 21. Rg8#

 

While accepting that White has totally outplayed Black with his attacking chess tactics, you must be wondering why we showed a pure tactical win when we apparently wanted to establish the importance of chess strategy that seems to be totally absent in the above game!

Please have your patience. We just wanted you to be aware of the strength of a player capable of brilliant chess tactics. The above game is only an introduction, but in Importance of chess strategy – Part 2, we will see how Nezhmetdinov makes a short shrift of a well-known Grandmaster and chess theoretician and then continue with our leitmotif!