Let's Take A Look

Page 1 of 5

We invite you to submit games to be considered by Nigel in this column. For all games submitted, please provide the following information: (1) Names of both players; (2) Ratings of both players; (3) When and where the game was played; (4) The time control used in the game; and (5) Any other information you think would be helpful for us to know. Please submit the games (in PGN or CBV format if possible) to: nigeldavies@chesscafe.com. Who knows, perhaps you will see the game in an upcoming column, as Nigel says to you, "Let's take a look..."

Stay Active!
What is immobile must suffer violence. The light-winged bird will easily escape the huge dragon, but the firmly rooted big tree must remain where it is and may have to give up its leaves, fruit, perhaps even its life. Emanuel Lasker (Laskers Manual of Chess, Dover 1969) This was Laskers colourful way of depicting the danger of immobility; positions in which one of the players is badly tied down bear the seeds of defeat. Its often better to give up a pawn rather than have your entire army tied down to its defence and Andrew Soltis put it in a rather more straightforward way in The Art of Defence in Chess (George Allen & Unwin, 1980) One of the many trade-offs in a game of chess is this: If your pieces are all well placed for the protection of your weaknesses, they are probably incapable of exploiting your opponents. Given time, your opponent can shift his power to the weakest link in your chain of defence. This is why counterplay is the No. 1 priority of defence even at the expense of other values such as king safety, pawn structure, material and development. Modern chess reflects this very well; contemporary Grandmasters tend to avoid passive positions like the plague, knowing their odds are much better if they have some kind of activity. This can be seen in all stages of the game, from going active with a rook in the endgame to playing openings that offer prospects of counterplay. This wasnt always the case. In the early 20th century most players thought that when they played Black they had to create a strong-point in the centre (either d5 or e5) whilst avoiding any weakening of your kingside pawn structure. This led to them defending passive forms of the Spanish Opening (e.g. 1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 Bb5 d6 4 d4 Bd7 5 Nc3 Nge7 followed by 6Ng6) and the Queens Gambit Declined (e.g. 1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6 3 Nc3 Nf6 4 Bg5 Be7 5 e3 0-0 6 Nf3 b6 and 7 Bb7), both of which fulfil these criteria, but neither of which is very much fun. These days its different and we see an enormous variety of openings and defences, most of which would have been thought unsound by the stalwarts of the old classical school. The fianchetto of a kings bishop was thought to be a horrible weakening of the kingside, which would immediately rule out the Kings Indian and Gruenfeld Defences. And the failure to strongpoint e5 or d5 would leave the Nimzo and Queens Indian in the trash can too, not to mention the entire Sicilian Defence! Yet how wrong they were! The relative efficacy of active versus passive openings

Let's Take A Look...

Nigel Davies

file://C:\cafe\davies\davies.htm

4/16/2004

Let's Take A Look

Page 2 of 5

can be reasonably judged using the statistics function in Chessbase and from my database I get a despairing 35% for Black with the 5Nge7 Spanish and a miserable 42% with the 6b6 Queens Gambit. These results are rather typical for such passive defences, whilst in most of the modern openings Black does much better than this, scoring between 45% and 50%. So if active play is best by test, why do so many players play passively, especially when confronted with danger? One reason is related to a players personality - more timid types will instinctively want to cover up when threatened which leads their minds to considering nothing but passive moves. Others will have learned to play passively because of negative experiences a player who is less able tactically may tend to hide himself behind a wall of pawns so as to shield his weakness. Is it possible to grow beyond these limitations and enjoy the fruits of active play? Sometimes, yes. Ive found that younger players tend to respond reasonably well to solving tactical puzzles and weaning themselves onto more open positions. As their confidence grows the paranoia that causes defence en masse will tend to diminish. At this point they may be better able to approach Laskers defensive ideal. He stated that all the lines of resistance be equally strong, that the chain contain only joints of equal strength. In this months game Black doesnt lose because of the weak and immobile epawns he contracts on move ten, its his insistence on allowing them to immobilise his entire army! Even later on he had a chance to save the game by trying to get a source of counterplay in the form of a passed d-pawn, but this too fell by the wayside. Bibek (unrated) - Prashanna Muni Tamrakar (unrated) Philidor Defence C41 Sports Week Chess Tournament 2003 1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 d6 The Philidor is not a bad defence. These days people like to get it via 1 e4 d6 2 d4 Nf6 3 Nc3 e5 or 3...Nbd7 followed by ...e5. 3 Bc4 The standard move is 3 d4, but the text is also not bad. 3...Be6 A more solid way to play it is with 3...Nc6, for example 4 d4 exd4 5 Nxd4 g6 6 Nxc6 bxc6 7 0-0 Bg7 8 f4 Nf6 9 f5?! 0-0 10 fxg6 hxg6 11 Bg5 Qe7 12 Nc3 Qe5 gave Black a good game in Darnstaedt - Dreev, Berlin 1991. 4 Bb3 The critical line is 4 Bxe6 fxe6 5 d4 exd4 6 Nxd4, for example: 6...Nf6!? (the best chance as both 6...Qd7 7 Qh5+ g6 8 Qh3 e5 9 Ne6 - Van der Wiel - Cifuentes Parada, Novi Sad 1990 - and 6...e5 7 Ne6 Qe7 8 Qh5+ g6 9 Qh3 (Chandler - Large, Hastings 1986) are both unpleasant for Black; whilst 6...Qf6 7 Qh5+ g6 8 Qb5+ Nd7 9 Qxb7 Rb8 10 Qxa7 won a couple of pawns in Grob - Tartakower, Ostende 1937) 7 c3 (7.Nxe6? Qe7 gets the pawn back with a comfortable game) 7...e5 8 Ne6 Qd7 9 Qb3 c6 10 0-0 Nxe4 11 Re1 d5 12 Rxe4 dxe4 13 Be3 and White had strong pressure for the sacrificed exchange in Blatny - Barbero, Lazne Bohdanec 1995.

file://C:\cafe\davies\davies.htm

4/16/2004

Let's Take A Look

Page 3 of 5

4...Nf6 5 Nc3 Nbd7 6 d4 Be7 7 dxe5 This leaves Black with a weakened pawn structure and problems that persist into the endgame. But an even better way of doing this was with 7 Bxe6 fxe6 8 Ng5 after which 8...Nf8 9 dxe5 dxe5 10 Qe2 would have left Black struggling to survive the middlegame. 7...Nxe5 8 Nxe5 dxe5 9 Qxd8+ Rxd8 10 Bxe6 fxe6 11 0-0 0-0 12 a3?! a6 Too passive - Black needs to generate some activity before his structural defects operate against him. The right move was 12...Bc5, with pressure against f2. 13 b4?! Trying to prevent Black's bishop from coming to c5. But White should have secured his e4-pawn with 13 f3. 13...b6?! Here too Black is too passive. He could have played 13...c5! after which 14 bxc5 Bxc5 leaves White facing multiple threats. 14 Bb2?! White should probably get his e-pawn protected with 14 f3. Now Black has yet another chance to go active. 14...Nd7?! Missing it. He should play 14...Rd2 15 Rac1 c5 with good counterplay. 15 Rad1 Bf6 16 Na2 Kf7? Now Black gets into really serious trouble. He should have played 16...b5 17 Nc1 Nb6 intending 18...Nc4. 17 Nc1 h6 It's already too late for Black to regroup on the queenside as 17...b5 18 Nd3 hits the e5-pawn and thus ties the knight on d7 down. 18 Nd3 g5 19 c4 c5 20 Rd2 Kg6 21 Rfd1 h5? Probably missing White's reply. He had to unpin on the d-file and go for counter play against the c4-pawn. To this end he should have played either 21...Rc8 or 21...cxb4 22 axb4 Rc8. 22 Nxe5+ Nxe5 23 Rxd8 Rxd8 24 Rxd8 Bxd8 24...Nf3+ is an attempt to get a better version of the endgame by doubling White's pawns, but then 25 gxf3 Bxd8 26 bxc5 bxc5 27 Be5 Bf6 28 f4 would also be winning for White.

file://C:\cafe\davies\davies.htm

4/16/2004

Let's Take A Look

Page 4 of 5

25 Bxe5 Winning a pawn, and in theory the game. But were in for a few surprises yet 25g4 Or if 25...Be7 there follows 26 bxc5 Bxc5 27 a4. 26 bxc5 bxc5 27 f3 Bf6 28 Bd6?? A move that I don't understand. Why White didn't go straight into the pawn endgame with 28 Bxf6 Kxf6 29 fxg4 hxg4 30 Kf2. Now the win is actually in serious doubt! 28...Bd4+ 29 Kf1 e5 30 Ke2 Kg5 31 Be7+ Kg6 And not 31...Kf4 because of 32 g3 mate! 32 Bh4 Bb2 33 a4 Bd4 34 Bf2 Bxf2? Black should wait for White to exchange with 34...Kg5 as after 35 Bxd4 exd4 Black's protected passed pawn would stop White advancing his king (and not 35...cxd4?? as White's split pawns would be unstoppable after 36 fxg4 hxg4 37 h4+ gxh3 38 gxh3 etc.). Play might then continue 36 e5 Kf5 37 f4 Ke6 38 Kd3 Kf5 39 g3 Ke6 40 Ke4 Kf7 41 f5 Ke7 42 a5 Kf7 43 e6+ Kf6 44 Kf4 Ke7 and now White could make no further progress because 45 Ke5 d3 would get a queen. 35 Kxf2 a5 36 g3 gxf3 Not the most stubborn. Black could resist more tenaciously with 36...Kg5 after which White needs to find 37 Kg2 Kh6 38 h3 Kg5 39 hxg4 (39 Kg1 is also good) 39...hxg4 40 fxg4 Kxg4 41 Kf2 Kg5 42 Kg1 (And not 42 Kf3 Kh5 43 g4+? Kh4 etc.) 42...Kg6 43 Kg2 Kh5 (43...Kg5 44 Kh3 Kh5 45 g4+ Kg5 46 Kg3 is easier) 44 Kh3 Kg5 45 g4 Kf4 46 Kh4 Kxe4 47 g5 Kf5 48.Kh5 e4 49 g6 Kf6 50 Kh6 e3 51 g7 e2 52 g8Q e1Q 53 Qf8+ Ke5 54 Qe8+ winning Black's queen. 37 Kxf3 Kg5 38 h4+ Kf6 39 g4 hxg4+ 40 Kxg4 Kg6 41 h5+ Kh6 42 Kf5 Kxh5 43 Kxe5 Kg5 44 Kd5 Kf4 45 e5 Kf5 46 e6 Kf6 47 Kd6 Kf5 48 e7 Ke4 49 e8Q+ 1-0 Recommended Reading The Art of Defence in Chess by Andrew Soltis (George Allen & Unwin, 1980). Nice book on the subject by Soltis. Laskers Manual of Chess by Emanuel Lasker (Dover, 1969). Required reading for every chess player. The Art of War by Sun Tzu (Harper Collins, 1994). Ancient insights into strategy and warfare. Copyright 2004 Nigel Davies. All rights reserved.

file://C:\cafe\davies\davies.htm

4/16/2004

Let's Take A Look

Page 5 of 5

[ChessCafe Home Page] [Book Review] [Bulletin Board] [Columnists] [Endgame Study] [Skittles Room] [Archives] [Links] [Online Bookstore] [About ChessCafe] [Contact Us] Copyright 2004 CyberCafes, LLC. All Rights Reserved. "The Chess Cafe" is a registered trademark of Russell Enterprises, Inc.

file://C:\cafe\davies\davies.htm

4/16/2004