Chess Thoughts

Annotated Games I have read

Logical Chess Move by Move Chernev 30

Most Instructive Games of Chess Ever Played Chernev 50

Chess Master vs. Chess Amateur Euwe and Meiden 27

Chess: The Art of Logical Thinking McDonald 30

Art of Planning McDonald 28

50 Essential Chess Lessons Giddins 50

Understanding Chess Move by Move Nunn 13

Marshall’s My 50 Years in Chess Marshall 47

Pawn chains Crouch 15

Chess area 81

Capablanca’s Best Games Golombek 4

Spassky - Master of Initiative Raetsky & Chetverik 2

Pawn Structure Chess Soltis 34

Petrosian the Powerful Smith 6

Winning Chess Brilliancies Sierawan 12

Memorized 24

QGD Sadler 1

English Explained Zenon 1

For a total of ......... 455

Me me me me ... (kamu)

So, I end up playing the against White's Fianchetto in a recent King's Indian game. I played a line suggested by Gallagher, essentially a6, Rb8, c5, b5 storming the Quuenside. I ended up with the following position ...

My thoughts ... Kamu (White) had just move his Bishop from f4 to g5. My thoughts:

1. Gee, he just wasted a tempo

2. My Knight is pinned so I should put the question to the Bishop. If he takes, I win the Bishop pair.

3. He can't back up to h4 or he loses the Bishop to g5.

Some things I should have considered:

1. With my Knight pinned, I was no longer defending the d5 square.

2. That provides a splendid opportunity for the Knight to pop, attacking my Queen.

3. I never considered that he could leave the Bishop en prise.

4. I never thought about the tactical shot: Nd5 Qd8, Nxf6 Bxf6, Bxh6 - owwww - down a pawn

So h6 was flawed. The right move was Qf8 with an equal game. Of course, I was grossly underutilizing my clock.

Next up, I was in a losing game and wanted to make things difficult for White. I there moved Qf2, earning a ?? from Hiarcs. My thought was that I was tying up the Rook (which has to move to g1 to prevent checkmate). The problem is that I am still in rough waters, outnumber 5 to 2 re the pawns!

Hiarcs found the right path, Rxg2 - an exchange sacrifice which give Black perpetual check and a draw. Sometimes it's hard to accept that a draw is worth going for. I was also blind to the fact that I could check forever - the White Rook on the back rank made me think the White King could hide at h1. Ridiculous as the Queen could check at f3. And yes, I was not using enough time.

Finally, to crown things off, a stupid blunder (the game was lost but the blunder was uncalled for).

Here, I decided to get tricky, taking the g3 pawn. Of course, he responded Bd5+ (oww, that square again), winning my Queen. Of course I saw the tactic right after my move (meaning I neglected to look for kanu's checks, captures and threats BEFORE my move).

But of course, that was the whole problem, I continuing focused on MY plans and MY ideas, ignoring, to my peril and eventual demise, my OPPONENT'S plans and ideas.

Lessons learned?

1. Me me me me. A dangerous way of thinking.

2. Use you time. Why play an opponent with the same skill level, giving him twice the amount of time. Stupid.

3. Keep at those simple tactics.

4. Look for all checks, captures and threats.

My memorized games list

1. Anderssen vs Dufresne - Berlin "Evergreen" 1852 (1-0) - great combo - game 5

2. Capablanca vs Marshall - New York 1918 (Ruy Lopez - Marshall attack) (1-0) - great defense - game 51

3. Petrosian vs Korchnoi - Curaco 1962 (English) (1-0) - crushing win Anderssen vs Kieseritsky - London "Immortal" 1851 (1-0) - great combo - game 52

4. Byrne vs Fischer (0-1) - Fischer was 13 - amazing Queen sacrifice, great King hunt

5. Botvinnik vs Tartakower - Nottingham, 1936 (1-0) - game 59 - English d6

6. Anderssen vs Kierseritky (1851) (1 0) - Immortal Game - game 52 - King's Gambit - crushing combo

7. Botvinnik vs Portisch (1968) (1 0) - Game 57 - Reversed Sicilian, Exchange sacrifice

8. Mayet vs Anderssen (1851) (0 1) - Game 1 - C64 - short and sweet

9. Kasparov vs Topalov (1999) (1 0) - Be3 Pirc - amazing King hunt

September 25, 2006  marker

10. McNab vs Adams (1993) (0 1) - English

11. Polgar vs Mamedy (2002) (1 0) - Open Ruy Lopez

12. Steinitz vs von Baedeleban (1895) (1 0) - Guico Piano

13. Grunfeld vs Alekhine (1923) (0 1) -

14. Bogoljubow vs Alekhine (1922) (0 1) - Dutch

15. Shirov vs Polgar (1994) (0 1) - Open Sicilian, Judit's punchy pawns

16. Lasker vs Bauer (1889) (1 0) - Bird's Opening, first double Bishop sacrifice

17. Hort vs Petrosian (1970) (0 1) - French Winawer, slow central crush

18. Korchnoi vs Kasparov (1991) (0 1) - King's Indian classic, crushing Kingside pawn rollwe

19. Abramovic vs Kovacevic (1989) (0 1) - French Nc3 Nf6

Osmosis versus memorization

I read through a bunch of games collections:

1. Chernev's "Logical Chess Move by Move"

2. Chernev's "Most Instructive Games"

3. Euwe's "Chess Master vs Chess Amatuer:

4. McDonald's "Chess Move by Move"

5. Seirawen's "Winning Chess Brillancies"

6. Lots of Marshall's Best Games

7. Lots of Steve's 50 Essential Chess Games

8. Lots of McDonald's Openings

but wonder how much value this produces - i.e. in one ear, out the other. This makes me wonder whether I would be better off reading fewer games but reading them more thoroughly. In GM RAM, the concept is to memorize deeply a number of key positions/games. Seirawen made a similar suggestion. So, I've started doing that. Amazingly it's not that hard.

8 simple rules for creating a chess brilliancy

... for your opponent.

I should have realized the early game chatter was an omen ...

• somecanadian: "Hi there"
• sean: "Hi - lets have a good game."
• somecanadian: "Actually I was hoping that you would give me a quick win."
• sean:  "I guess I could try."
• somecanadian: "You can do it if you try. I believe in you."

Well - here are the rules. Enjoy!

1. Rule 1 - Play a 20 10 time control. You see, this time control is way too fast to work on your thinking process or store long term chess "knowledge". And, if  your time is so limited, you would be better off playing a few 2 5 games instead where you can at least get exposure to all sorts of opening variations. So, selecting an ineffective time control is a good start.

2. Rule 2 - Create a weak colour complex. Have a look at the board. This came about after 1.c4 e5 2.g3 Nf6 3.Bg2 d5 4.cxd5 Nxd5 5.Nc3 Nxc3 6.Bc5. Something like Qb3 would have made sense. Instead I opted for e4, creating very weak white squares. My goal was to make the Bishop bite granite, ultimately playing d4. Not a terrible idea if it wasn't for those poor little white squares.

3. Rule 3. Lack of follow-through. Play then went: 0 0 8 Ne3 Bf5. Look at that:

I seemed to have forgotten my plan of d4 and now I had was getting a free pawn. Dan crinnged. I could almost visualize him putting out his hand to block me from taking the pawn, screaming "Nooooooooooo".

Did you notice that nasty Bishop on f5, dominating my lovely white squares. But my mind was still on Fantasy Island. Actually, even Hiarcs didn't seem to mind.

4. Grab, grab, grab. So I took the pawn and my friend naturally moved the Knight to d7. Hurray, more material - I was about to win the exchange. Oh yeah, and lose my key defender of White squares. My opponent must have been smiling when I grabbed the Rook. He of course recaptured with the Queen.

5. Rule 5 - Make a bad move quickly. Did I mention that I decided to capture the Rook in 13 seconds. Yup, to really play poorly, it's critical to ignore critical positions. But is this really a critical position? Hmmm - If I was aheadthe exchange and a pawn and Black had no compensation, I should have a won game. So this capture could give me a won game. That sounds kind of critical. Of course if I could prove thar this was the best move, then Trigger 1 would justify my haste. Given that this was a very bad move (retreating the Bishop would have been best), I should have used Trigger 2 and spent a few minutes doing some hard thinking.

6. Rule 6 - Ignore the rules of symmetry - I was way ahead in material but in a positional quagmire. That type of balance is not what I should have been after. A small advantage in one area (material, for example) but even posiitonally would have been much better.

Let's see, where are we? 10. Bxa8 Qxa8 11.Rg1 Nf6 12.d4 (too little, to late) exd4 13.Nxd4 Be4. Here's a picture.

Yup, I'm feeling pretty cramped. So, I figure I should at least trade of the black square Bishops. 14.a4 h5 15.Ba3 Bxa3 16.Rxa3 Ng4. Hey, now is a good time for overlooking basic tactics! I think we need another picture ...

7. Rule 7 - Lose before you are lost

I played h3 here. What!!!!! f3 was begging to be played and would actually have gotten me back into the game. Ugh 17.h3 Nh2 18.Qxh5 Qb7 19.Qd1 c5 Ouch!

20.Rb3 Qd5 21.Rb5 cute - I'm actually eating up my clock and playing decent moves. Too bad I'm lost.

Have a look at the board of a desperate man.

The rest was simple. 21 ... a6 22.Ra5 Rb8 23.Nc2 Nf3+ Ke2 Qc4+ Qd3 Qxd3#

Can you sense the irony. The Queen, Bishop and Knight are all on white squares!

Wait a second! What about Rule 8?

8. Rule 8 - Rely on a computer to do a human's job - i.e. be your chess coach. It's easy to think your chess analysis software has all the answers. And meaybe it does - if you are a computer. But I'm not. When I looked at the analysis provided by Hiarcs it was far from clear what the real problems were. Thankfully ,there is an alternative, i.e. Dan. Carbon beats silicon. Hurray!

To download the game, Download somecanadian.pgn

or play through the game here

Winning won games

Heisman recommends the following approach to winning won games:

1. Think defense first!

2. Keep things simple.

3. Trade pieces (but not pawns).

4. Get your pieces active.

5. Don't worry about the small stuff.

6. Don't lose on time - you don't need to find the best move to win.

White to move

In this position White is clearly winning but there is a back rank mate. Though it may seem counterintuitive, the right move is Qxe6. Yes, you trade a Queen for Rook but you eliminate the complication of any bck rank mate and your ratio has changed very little (from 21:12 to 12:7) - an overwhelming win.

There are seven moves in the bottom right hand corner than protect against the back rank. h3 is not the move. Instead, Kf1, bringing the King into the action. In the endgame, you don't want to keep you King on the sidelines. That's like not using a piece (a King is worth 4 in the endgame).

Great advice but here is a position where I was ahead but didn't see how to keep that advantage.

White to move:

Sometime you just have to dream. The best move is Nxf4, threatening a family fork at g6 and letting the Queen capture the intrusive Knight.

Unfortunately I moved h5, letting Black capture my Rook on h1. Still won the game but I had to work at it (and get a little help from my opponent).

White to move

This time my oversite didn't really affect the result - just slowed down the win. The right move if c7. If ... Rxc7 Rd8#! I didn't notice this.

I wasn't so smart and moved b4 to support the pawn.

If you want to see the full game,

Download icc233w.pgn

Embarassing moments

Justifying a bad oversight because it was in a 2 5 game \, then seeing the identical oversight in a 25  20 game-ouch!

the two triggers. There are only two cnditions

unecessary a3

Patience Iago, patience

I was White to move and saw the move d5, winning the e4 pawn. Without hesitation I made the move and the game ended up drawn. Later, I realized that the winning move was e7, forcing the Black King to abandon the e5 pawn and assuring White an easy win. Just a few for seconds of thought.

The moral: "When you see a good move, look for a better one."

Here is the complete game. Download patience.pgn

Thanksgiving Blunders

Thankgiving follies ...

A game in which we tried to share the spirit of Thanksgiving by "passing" on crushing moves.

In the first example, I offered the gift, passing on Qxd6! which wins the Rook because the Rook on d1 is pinned. Need to keep in mind that a pinned piece is pinned. Instead I was much more focussed on capturing opportunities and bank rank mates.

In the second example, my opponent returned the gift. He probably saw Qg8+ and realized my King would capture the Knight on f6. But he kindly refrained from considering the follow-up Qh8 which would skewer my King and win the Queen. Ouch!

Ironically, this position arose three times. Yes, three-fold repetition. When I pointed this out, My opponent's response was simple - "no". OK - play on.

Ironic? Yes, later in the game I decided to trade Queens and go for an endgame I thought favoured me (Fritz disagreed but what does he know). Anyway, my opponent then gave away his Knight and the game.

Here is the game ... Download icc86b.pgn

Lessons learned?

1. Remember that a pinned piece is a poor defender.

2. When you think all the action is done - look a little further (i.e. make sure there is quiessence).

Happy Thanksgiving.

Fear Chess (deGroot A)

DeGroot ("Thought and Choice in Chess")

This week Dan (www.danheisman.com) gave me the deGroot exercise. You look at a position, then record all of your thoughts as you contemplate your move. I thought for about 12 minutes. It's amazing what I missed:

The obvious win of the Bishop pair by Nxc6. Ironically this has really been on my mind when playing ever since Dan mentioned the Bishop pair is worth 1/2 pawn (and people seem so willing to give this up). Dan said that only 5% of his students see this. Weird.

I explored a fairly complex variation in an attempt to get my Knight on d7, forking the Queen and Rook. I therefore considered removing the defenders (the two Knights, I think I actually missed the Bishop at c6 as a defender!!!).

Anyway, while exploring this line, I looked at Knight takes d5 but only considered a very fuzzy response. I realized the pawn and Bishop could recapture but missed the other Knight. I considering the Bishop recapture, I missed that my Knight would no longer be guarding the Bishop on a2. And, if the pawn recaptured, I missed that the Bishop would still be guarding d7 anyway. Ugh - a perfect example of hope chess (or hopeless chess).

Hope Chess

Dan has coined the term Hope Chess. This is when you make a move without considering all of your opponents replies, especially checks, captures and threats. I did lots of this:

Qd2. I was wary of the K4e with multiple threats but thought I was safe because my Knight of c3 could recapture. Totally missed the removal of the guard that was available to Black, i.e. Kxc3. Yikes.

[An interesting corollary popped into my head when thinking about Hope Chess. "Hope Dieting". Like chess, not playing for "real" for every move is like eating a huge piece of chocolate cake when on a diet. You can still achieve your goal - dropping some weight - but, like Hope Chess, you made it a lot harder to achieve the goal.]

Fear chess (aka Worrying about Phantom Threats)

I also showed lots of signs of "Fear Chess" (a subset of Hope chess I guess) - a term I am coining which refers to unreasonable concerns that result in incorrect of passive play. Some examples:

I worried about Bb5 threatening my Q and Rook. I was oblivious to the fact that I could simply capture the Bishop (because I didn't see that my Knight on c3 covered b5.

I worried about my pawn on b2 (which is valid) but should have explored my potential captures versus solely worrying about defending the pawn.

As a potential defense for the b2 pawn, I considered b4, then worried that if even if Black captured the two pawns (for a piece), that my position would be very "open" on the Queenside. I was totally aware that I would be up a "pawn" but this still concerned me, even though the White pawns are nowhere in sight. So, my assessment of the resulting position was totally off. And, of course, Black would never consider losing a piece to make the capture in the first place.

Lessons learned

Look for forcing sequences - these drive the game and limit your opponents possibilities, i.e. it helps you maintain the initiative (or at least not hand it to your opponent).

I never even considered moves like Bxd5 (which I believe Max Euwe selected when doign this exercise).

Look for all of Black's recaptures. In general, always look for your opponent's "best" response.

Play "King of the Hill". In other words, systematically evaluate candidate moves and keep track of your best candidate, repalcing this as you find better moves. Perhaps worded another way - if you find a good move, look for a better one. Same advice I recently read in a book on creativity ("Whack on the Side of the Head").

I spent relatively little time thinking about the move I actually made (Qd2). Yet this is the most important move because I have to live with it. At least do a solid "sanity check" before making the move.

Anything good?

Well, I did evaluate the position at the start (compare material, King safety - noticing the dark square weakness arounf Black's King). And I tried not to play hope chess. The real good will hopefully come from applying the "Lessons learned".