Chess Skills

Can White Win?

2013-05-23T07:22:00.004-07:00

Can White win this position? Black appears to be near zugzwang, but how does White make progress?

White to move

Checkmate with Two Queens

2013-05-22T21:25:00.001-07:00

I challenged a group of students to find a position with two queens against a lone king that took me more than three moves to deliver checkmate. After several failed efforts, they came up with the key idea: place White's king where it interferes with the mobility of both queens. I could not find checkmate in less than four moves. Checking with an engine verifies that it is indeed checkmate in four.

White to move

Does a position exist where more than four moves are needed?

Tactics, Tactics, Tactics

2013-05-18T09:22:00.000-07:00

During a blitz marathon, a player misses things. After many games, some strong moves will have been played as well. I offer the positions below as evidence either than there is much to learn from blitz, or as evidence that too much blitz is deleterious to the improvement of chess skills. I cannot decide which.

Things Missed

In these positions, I missed the correct move.

White to move

I won this game, but not as quickly as I should have. A position from earlier in the game appears in the "strong moves" diagrams below.

Black to move

After missing some easy knockouts, I won this game on time in a dead drawn position. The next diagram is from the same game, as is an early position in the "strong moves" positions below.

Black to move

White to move

I won this game, despite making a move here that transferred the advantage to my opponent.

Black to move

Often I reach a nice position, but then offer a howler that turns the tables. Such was the case here.

Strong Moves

In these positions, I played the correct move.

White to move

I observed a weakness in counting pieces during Chess Tempo training a year ago. That weakness is not always evident in actual play.

Black to move

After finding the correct move here, I missed many subsequent opportunities.

Black to move

Black is worse after the best move. A few moves later, my opponent blundered and I reached a clearly won game only to lose on time.

White to move

After the best move, which I played, Black maintains the edge unless he blunders, as he did.

White to move

The tactic here stems from a well-known error in the King's Indian Defense. My opponent made this error in the first round of the 2009 Washington Open, but I failed to manage more than a draw. My highest rated victory in correspondence chess on Chess.com was a result of an engine user making this error before seeking help. It is shocking how often I get such a position in blitz.

Misleading Review

2013-05-15T13:41:00.000-07:00

Flaws in a Review of Chess Quest

Chess Quest has been among my principal sources for tactics training through the past three months. I have solved nearly half of its 1200 problems, including all of levels 1 and 2, and slightly more than half of level 3. The problems have ranged from simple thematic checkmates that build pattern recognition to clever defensive resources that maintain drawing possibilities in slightly worse positions. The problem selection includes a reasonable number of essential endgame positions, while maintaining a focus on tactical ideas in middlegame positions.

Not everyone who has tested Chess Quest shares my enthusiasm for the iPad/iPhone app. C. K. Sample III, for example, identifies "flaws" in some of the problems. Of the twenty-four problems he solved in the basic level before writing his review, he found two where "no checkmate was achieved and [he] can see multiple moves that can be taken by the other player to effectively recoup the game" ("Review: Chess Quest," Sample the Web, 12 September 2009). He offers screenshots of problem 24 to illustrate this "flaw". Problem 17 appears to be the other that he has in mind (see screenshot). Sample concludes that he cannot recommend the app because of these two problems with incorrect solutions, and notes: "If it keeps that 1 in 12 ratio, that means that rather than 1200 puzzles for $2.99,* you’re only really getting 1100 puzzles and 100 duds."

Problem 17, Basic Level

Had he continued solving in levels above basic, Sample would have found a far higher ratio of problems that do not end in checkmate. This ratio should not come as a surprise for Sample's "flaw" is the norm in tactics training. A significant percentage of the problems in Fred Reinfeld's classic 1001 Winning Chess Sacrifices and Combinations (1955) do not end in checkmate. That proportion is even greater in the modern Anthology of Chess Combinations, 3rd edition (2005). Sample reveals not so much problems with the Chess Quest app, as his own qualifications for assessing tactics training resources. His review resembles in one aspect the many five star reviews of the Social Chess app by users whose only point of comparison is Chess with Friends (see "Social Chess iPad/iPhone App: Review"). Such reviews are misleading and offer disservice to readers.

Beginning Tactics: Instruction

C. K. Sample's criticism reveals that there is a market for developers of iPad/iPhone apps aimed at beginning chess players. While collections of carefully selected instructive tactics positions serve those serious about tactics training, elementary instruction is needed, too. Chessimo is one such app (see "Chess Tactics Training on the iPad"). Most Chessimo problems end in checkmate, at least among the 3000+ that I have solved. Nonetheless, that feature alone does not satisfy the need of explaining what constitutes a decisive advantage.

As chess players grow in strength, they learn an abundance of patterns and techniques. They begin to recognize an advantage. They develop the skills to convert an advantage into victory. It was clear to me that winning the bishop was a sufficient solution in problem 24 in the basic level of Chess Quest. But, Sample needs more explanation. This need prompted him to give Chess Quest a misleading negative review.

Sample correctly identifies one element that could be incorporated into tactics training apps: a chess engine. In order to demonstrate that problem 24 in Chess Quest's basic level is not flawed, I played the position against HIARCS on my iPad.

Checkmating the engine took me 42 moves from the problem position. Along the way, there were several positions where learned themes from prior training rendered my moves nearly automatic. The entire battle required less than ten minutes. A stronger player could have concluded the battle more rapidly, and in fewer moves.

White to move

James Stripes -- HIARCS
14.05.2013

1.Qb8

Chess Quest ends the problem after this move has been found. Pinning the bishop wins it.

1...Qa5

Black avoids exchanging queens, and makes two threats. The vulnerable a-pawn is attacked, and the queen threatens to fork White's bishop and king with 2...Qe1+.

2.Qxb7+ Kf6 3.Qc6 Qxa3 4.Qc3+ Kf7 5.Qc7+

Black to move

5...Qe7

It seems to me that Black could protract the struggle with 5...Kf6. Nonetheless, the engine considers its move best unless it thinks longer that was permitted in a five-minute game.

6.Qxe7+ Kxe7 7.Kg1

Black will have a passed pawn on the a-file that must be stopped in addition to the isolated and passed e-pawn. The bishop cannot stop both. As the most powerful piece left on the board, White's king must become active.

7...Kd6 8.Kf2

8.b4 is better, fixing the a-pawn.

8...a5 9.Ke3 Kc5 10.Kd3 a4 11.bxa4 bxa4

White to move

At the heart of this position is an elementary idea that Jeremy Silman calls "the fox in the chicken coop."

12.Kc3

12.Bg6 would have reduced Black's counterplay.

12...g5 13.Kb2 Kd4 14.Bf3 e5 15.Ka3 Kc3 16.Be4 Kd4 17.Bd3 e4

After a few suboptimal moves, I found myself in a position where only one move maintains the win. Fortunately, this one move had been central to my plan leading up to this position. I meant to sacrifice my bishop to eliminate Black's last viable threat.

White to move

18.Bxe4! 18...Kxe4 19.Kxa4

Material equality had been restored for one-half move, but the pawn ending is an elementary win for White. If Black goes after the c-pawn, the White king will get Black's remaining pawns. The alternative, chosen by HIARCS, is to temporarily go a pawn ahead but let the c-pawn promote.

19...Ke5 20.Kb4

20.c4! is better.

20...h5 21.Kc4 Kf4 22.Kd4 Kg3

White to move

Once again, White has only one winning move, but it is the move that has been prepared. This pawn race has been carefully calculated.

23.c4 Kxg2 24.c5 Kxh3 25.c6 h4 26.c7 Kg3 27.c8Q h3 28.Ke3 h2

White to move

29.Qc1

29.Qf5 is objectively superior, but White opts for a standard technique to prevent promotion of the h-pawn. It is worth noting that Chess Quest or Chessimo (perhaps both) offer positions solved with the technique evident in the continuation 29.Qf5 h1Q 30.Qxg5+ Kh3 31.Qh5+ Kg2 32.Qg4+ Kh2 33.Kf2!

29...Kg2 30.Qd2+ Kh3 31.Qe1 Kg4

White to move

32.Qh1

32.Ke4 is much better, leading to checkmate in three fewer moves.

32...Kf5 33.Qxh2 Kf6 34.Ke4 Ke6 35.Qh5 g4 36.Qxg4+ Kd6

White to move

One hopes that Sample would not consider a problem flawed if it ended here. And yet, beginners need problems that begin here.

37.Qc8

37.Kd4 is the other optimal move. I teach young players to place the queen a knight's throw from the defending king and deliver no check until checkmate. Hence, I exercise that technique here.

37...Ke7 38.Ke5 Kf7 39.Kf5 Kg7 40.Qe8 Kh7 41.Kf6 Kh6 42.Qh8# 1–0

*The current price is $4.99 "on sale for a limited time."

Alternate Solutions

2013-05-11T15:30:00.000-07:00

When I get something wrong, I must know why. Many of my tactics training resources offer limited explanation, which helps force me to study the problem in more detail. If I am stumped after careful examination, I must set up the problem in ChessBase 11 (or in a similar resource that enables engine analysis). With the Anthology of Chess Combinations, that process is made easier because the disc containing the electronic version and "solver's kit" also contained a PGN file of the anthology.

Black to move

A queen sacrifice was the obvious place to begin with problem number 192 in the Anthology. After the second check, the position becomes more complicated if the White king steps towards the center. I found the pawn sacrifice and dance of my knights.

As I executed my solution, the software told me that one move was incorrect. I quickly found an alternate move that covered the same two critical squares. Try as I might, I could not discover what was wrong with my solution. Opening the problem in ChessBase allowed Stockfish to clarify that my move, as well as the published solution, lead to checkmate in the same number of moves.

Shifting Targets

2013-05-09T06:47:00.000-07:00

For five minutes, I looked for ways to break through to the Black king. Alas, Black's defense of h6 appeared to be more than I could overcome. Suddenly, I saw another target.

This problem is number 182 in the Anthology of Chess Combinations.

White to move

Yep, the Gift is There

2013-05-07T06:46:00.000-07:00

I had this nice position in my fourth or fifth (and therefore last) blitz game this morning.

White to move

Training Log: April 2013

2013-05-02T18:45:00.000-07:00

Fighting Addiction

My progress towards my training goals in April ran aground of my need to play. In particular, I went on blitz binge, decided to temper it with new discipline, and then played 320 bullet games over a twenty-seven hour period. I posted my training goals as New Year's Resolutions on the last day of 2012.

1. In 2013, I will solve correctly 300 tactics problems each month.

I met this goal, completing 329 problems in the month. In April, my time for tactics training was spent playing chess online. However, I spent enough time on training that I met my tactics target. I am working through Level 3 on Chess Quest, and have done a few problems in Level 4.

I ignored Chessimo until near the end of the month. Although I have solved 3269 problems on Chessimo, I count towards the month's total only those problems solved six times. In April, I completed 60 problems for the sixth time each.

My web-based training (Chess Tempo and Chess.com) remains light with one Chess.com session and a few short Chess Tempo sessions. I resumed use of the Anthology of Chess Combinations late in April after neglecting it in March.

2. In 2013, I will study whole games and whole books.

I looked through a few of the games of Wilhelm Steinitz for my scholastic lessons, and started going through his annotations of the games of others. Nonetheless, my study of whole games was swamped by my play of blitz, bullet, and a handful of fifteen minute games.

3. In 2013, I will finish my Pawn Endgame Flash Card project.

I am continuing to use these flash cards in elementary classrooms while teaching beginners chess. Nonetheless, progress studying Dvoretsky's Endgame Manual and mastering the blue diagram positions must be rated lackluster.

4. In 2013, I will lose fifteen pounds.

I remain at my winter weight due to inconsistent exercise and too many fast food meals.

Better than Checkmate

2013-05-01T07:01:00.002-07:00

While I was struggling for an advantage in a must-win game, my opponent became cooperative. He played 26.Kh1?? from the diagram position.

White to move

This error made possible the combination of my fantasies. 26.Nxe4 keeps the struggle alive.

26...Qg5!

I spent some time working out some possibilities:

If 27.g4 Qh4 28.Kg2 Rxg4+! 29.hxg4 Qxg4+

White to move

30...Nd2 will follow either 30.Kg2 or 30.Kg1, and White must lose the queen to avoid checkmate.

If 27.g3 Nxg3+! 28.fxg3 Qxg2 29.Qc2 Qxh3+ 30.Qh2 Rxe3 with plenty to show for the knight.

White to move

My opponent deprived me of the opportunity for playing these strong moves.

27.Rg1 Nxf2+ 28.Kh2 Qg3#

Checkmate, in this case, was a disappointing end to the game.

Drawing Combination

2013-04-28T05:00:00.000-07:00

In my round two game in the Inland Empire Open, I chose the wrong way to build up pressure on f7. I thought that I had chances to win back the lost pawn, but wanted to circumvent a bishop's blocking defense. I failed to see the forced draw.

White to move

Blunders

2013-04-27T21:04:00.002-07:00

My play the first day of the Inland Empire Open revealed my capacity for error. Generosity from my opponents saved me. I made errors early, but they returned the favor when it mattered most. In the first game, I dropped a piece through miscalculation. The error gave me an attack and drove my opponent's king into the center. He missed several key moves and let me back into the game.

His last chance to maintain an advantage passed when he played 34.Kd5?? here.

White to move

In round two, I played a few inaccurate moves that gave my opponent clear initiative and an extra pawn. He weakened the squares around his king in response to smoke and mirrors (phantom threats along the f-file). He then threw the game my way with 39...Bxb2??

Black to move

Aaaarrrgh!

2013-04-27T04:30:00.000-07:00

Now that my bullet binge has run its course, and I've elevated my bullet rating a few points higher than when it began, it is time for chess that is a little more deliberate. In game 15, players have time to think. Combinations are possible.

Yesterday morning, I defended well against my opponent's threats and finally reached a position with a slight edge. My king needed to march into the center of the board where he could fend for himself. Instead I sent him into a corner where he was swiftly executed.

Black to move

After 43...Ke6, Black has a slight edge. I played 43...Kg8, walking into a checkmate in two. My opponent had a few seconds left. I had a few minutes left on the clock.

A few games later, my opponent crushed me but then let me have a tactic.

Black to move

I played 27...Nf4+, which leads no where unless White plays 28.gxf4?? He did.

In chess, players win because their opponents err. Some errors are so bad that a player wants to scream. These often stem from a moment of relaxation after the complicated period has ended.

Persistence

2013-04-25T04:00:00.000-07:00

Blitz is full of blunders. Play on and hope, and sometimes you are rewarded with a win.

Stripes, J (1858) - Internet Opponent (1928) [A40]
Live Chess Chess.com, 24.04.2013

1.d4 g6 2.Nf3 Bg7 3.e3 c5 4.c3 cxd4 5.cxd4 d6 6.Bc4 Nf6 7.Ng5 0–0 8.0–0 Nc6 9.Nd2 e5 10.dxe5 dxe5 11.a3 Bg4 12.Qb3 Qe7 13.Nde4 Na5 14.Qc3 Nxc4 15.Qxc4 Rac8=

16.Nxf6+ Bxf6 17.Qxg4 Bxg5 18.e4 Bxc1 19.Raxc1 Rxc1 20.Rxc1 Qd6 21.h4?! Qd2 22.Rc8??–+ Qxb2

Black wins easily with 22...Qe1+ 23.Kh2 Qxf2

23.h5 Qxa3 24.h6 f5 25.Rxf8+ Qxf8??

25...Kxf8 maintains a winning advantage

26.exf5-/= Qxf5 27.Qc4+= Kf8 28.Qc5+ Ke8

29.Qxa7?

29.Qb5+ Ke7 30.Qb4+ Ke6 31.Qb3+ Kf6 32.Qxb7 g5 33.Qa6+ Qe6 34.Qxa7 Qf5 35.f3=

29...Qc8 30.Qa4+ Qc6 31.Qa8+ Ke7 32.Qh8 Qc1+ -/+ 33.Kh2 Qxh6+ 34.Kg1 Qc1+ 35.Kh2 Qf4+ 36.Kg1 h5 37.Qg7+ Qf7 38.Qxe5+ Kd7 39.Qd4+ Kc7 40.Qc5+ Kb8 41.Qe5+ Qc7 42.Qe8+ Ka7

43.Qxg6

43.Qa4+=

43...Qc5 44.Qe4 b5 45.g3 b4 46.Qh7+ -/+ Ka6 47.Qd7 Ka5 48.Kg2–+

48...b3 49.Qd2+ Ka4 50.Qd7+ Qb5 51.Qd4+ Ka5 52.Qa7+ Kb4 53.Qd4+ Qc4 54.Qd6+ Kc3 55.Qf6+ Kc2 56.Qf5+ Qd3 57.Qxh5 b2 58.Qc5+ Kd2 59.Qg5+ Ke1 60.Qe5+

60...Kd1??+-

The final blunder.

60...Qe2-+ wins

61.Qxb2 Qe4+ 62.Kh3 Qh7+ 63.Kg2 Qe4+ 64.Kh3 Qf5+ 65.Kg2 Qe4+ 66.Kh2 Qh7+ 67.Kg1 Qe4 68.Qb3+ Ke2 69.Qe3+ Qxe3 70.fxe3 Kxe3

We reach an instructive pawn ending. My opponent had less than fifteen seconds left to my minute, but with the clock times reversed, I would still have winning chances. No thought is needed to play this ending thanks to many hours of practice.

71.Kg2 Ke4 72.Kh3 Kf5 73.Kh4 Kg6 74.Kg4 Kh6 75.Kf5 Kh5 76.g4+ Kh6 77.Kf6 Kh7 78.g5 Kh8 79.Kf7 Kh7 80.g6+ Kh6 81.g7 Kg5 82.g8Q+ Kf4 83.Qe8 Kf3 84.Kf6 Kf2 85.Kf5 Kf1 86.Kf4 Kf2 87.Qe3+ 1–0

Beating the Bird

2013-04-24T18:38:00.002-07:00

Before criticizing my opponent's errors, it must be noted that the game was played at bullet time control and that he might have been using premove.

Internet Opponent - Stripes, J [A02]
Live Chess Chess.com, 22.04.2013

1.f4 e5

The From Gambit is one of the lines I employ in over the board and correspondence play, too. It is not only for bullet.

2.fxe5 d6 3.exd6 Bxd6 4.Nf3 g5!?

This is the "take no prisoners" line of the From.

White to move

5.e4?! g4 6.e5??

6.d4 was necessary

6...gxf3 7.exd6 Qh4+ 8.g3

Black to move

8...Qe4+ 9.Kf2

9.Be2 fxe2 10.Qxe2 Qxe2+ 11.Kxe2 cxd6–+

9...Qd4+ 10.Ke1

10.Kxf3 Bg4+ 11.Kg2 Qd5+ 12.Kf2 Bxd1 13.Bg2 Qf5+–+

10...f2+ 11.Ke2 Bg4# 0–1

Lesson of the Week

2013-04-17T08:45:00.003-07:00

This week ends the scholastic chess season for most of those whom I teach and coach, as the Washington State Elementary Chess Championship is Saturday. Those who receive their instruction as part of a class, rather than a club, will continue for another month or a few weeks more. The clubs end this week.

Our problem position comes from the game that provided last week's lesson. Then, we looked at Louis Paulsen's opening errors and the waltz of Wilhelm Steinitz's king. This week, we look at the combination that concludes the game. Steinitz chose the second best continuation from the diagram. We examine both, and any others that young players suggest as looking promising for White.

Steinitz,William -- Paulsen,Louis [C25]
Baden-Baden 30.07.1870

1.e4 e5 2.Nc3 Nc6 3.f4 exf4 4.d4 Qh4+ 5.Ke2 d6 6.Nf3 Bg4 7.Bxf4 0–0–0 8.Ke3 Qh5 9.Be2 Qa5? 10.a3 Bxf3 11.Kxf3± Qh5+ 12.Ke3 Qh4 13.b4? g5? 14.Bg3 Qh6 15.b5 Nce7 16.Rf1 Nf6 17.Kf2 Ng6 18.Kg1+- Qg7 19.Qd2 h6 20.a4 Rg8 21.b6! axb6 22.Rxf6! Qxf6 23.Bg4+ Kb8 24.Nd5 Qg7 25.a5 f5 26.axb6 cxb6 27.Nxb6 Ne7 28.exf5 Qf7

White to move

29.f6

Even better was 29.Ra8+ Kc7 30.Qa5 Nc6 31.Nd5+ Kd7 32.Qc7+ Ke8 33.Bh5+-

29...Nc6 30.c4 Na7 31.Qa2 Nb5 32.Nd5 Qxd5 33.cxd5 Nxd4 34.Qa7+ Kc7 35.Rc1+ Nc6 36.Rxc6# 1–0

Should be Elementary

2013-04-16T06:38:00.000-07:00

Speed kills.

Through the past week, I have been playing less blitz. More importantly, I have been analyzing my games after playing them. It is humbling to observe elementary mistakes.

After botching the opening (the Black side of an English), I was let back into the game through my opponent's errors. I reached a clearly won position.

Black to move

Over the course of the next three moves, I repeatedly failed to make the winning move. Then, my position became worse and I lost.

Missing the same correct move three moves in a row suggests there was an oversight that might be addressed through training. Perhaps I can work some tactics exercises that incorporate this pattern.

A Small Library

2013-04-15T18:24:00.000-07:00

In an important text that is not pictured here, Max Euwe opined:

The development of a chess player runs parallel with that of chess itself; a study of the history of playing methods therefore has great practical value.
The Development of Chess Style (1968), n.p.

Euwe's notion that growth in individual chess skill follows a pattern that parallels historic development often occupies my thoughts. It forms part of my rationale for favoring nineteenth and early-twentieth century games as a principal source for the lessons I develop for young players. It keeps me going back to the classics for my own skill development.

Culled from a much larger collection of chess books, these ten books as a body emphasize the development and practice of positional chess at the beginning of what came to be called the Modern School or Steinitz School. Several of them have been among my principal study and teaching aids through the past seven months.

Paul Morphy's play precedes the Modern School, but Valeri Beim argues in Paul Morphy: A Modern Perspective (2005) that Morphy understood the principles that others would articulate, principles that would revolutionize chess. Beim's text is the first one on the left in the image. It has great value for contributing to an understanding of Morphy's positional knowledge, but it falls short as historical scholarship (see "Footnote to Morphy's Mate").

Irving Chernev's texts draw from the era of Wilhelm Steinitz and Emanuel Lasker, contain several games by Akiba Rubinstein, and also include games by the likes of Jose R. Capablanca and Alexander Alekhine, and even players who were active at the time Chernev was writing. As works of history, his texts are worse than useless: he makes up stories that cannot be verified through reference to primary texts. "My First Chess Book" was Chernev's The 1000 Best Short Games of Chess (1955), which makes frequent claims of checkmate being announced over the board before a forced sequence was played. There should be no doubt that such conversations have taken place in the annuls of chess history, but Chernev's claims are often suspect.

Nonetheless, The Most Instructive Games of Chess Ever Played (1965) and Logical Chess: Move by Move (1998 [1957]) have tremendous instructive value. Sometimes the value of his writing stems from the efforts of readers who fill in the gaps in his analysis (see "Chernev's Errors"). Chernev's assessment of the contribution of Steinitz offers a kernel of wisdom.

[I]t is from Steinitz and his queer moves that we learn so much about game-winning strategy. It is from Steinitz, whose play might have horrified La Bourdonnais and Morphy, that we discover the fundamentals of position play.
Most Instructive Games, 166

Morphy would more likely have been appreciative of Steinitz's play, but Chernev can be forgiven for adopting a view that is commonly shared by many. It was from Chernev's Most Instructive Games that I found the inspiration and analysis that led me to begin the 2012-2013 school year with lessons from the games of Akiba Rubinstein (see "Lesson of the Week" [18 September 2012]).

Lessons from Rubinstein

As the nineteenth century gave way to the twentieth, positional play became the focus of top chess players. The elements of positional understanding were first articulated by Wilhelm Steinitz, followed by Siegbert Tarrasch, and others.
James Stripes, "Positional Play: Lessons from Akiba Rubinstein"

After studying a few of Rubinstein's games in Chernev's Most Instructive Games and Logical Chess, I ordered a copy of John Donaldson and Nikolay Minev, Akiba Rubinstein: Uncrowned King (1994). This book, a chess set, and my puppies were my companions in Eden while my wife attended a retreat there. Through the next two months, as a warm fall gave way to winter, Rubinstein's games occupied the bulk of my study time.

Donaldson and Minev did extensive historical research for Akiba Rubinstein: Uncrowned King and The Life & Games of Akiva Rubinstein, Volume 2: The Later Years, 2nd edition (2011). These books resemble anthogies in the way that they present the annotations to Rubinstein's games. These annotations of many earlier works by several authors are integrated into the game scores with initials identifying sources that are listed at the end of the book. Unlike the vast majority of chess books published today, Donaldson and Minev's comments are sourced and verifiable. Although their documentation does not quite meet the rigor expected of professional historians, they set a standard that other chess books should emulate (see "Rubinstein's Rook Endings").

Having spent so much time with Uncrowned King in late 2012, I was certain to pack my copy of the book along in February for John Donaldson's annual simul on the eve of the Dave Collyer Memorial Chess Tournament. Donaldson graciously agreed to autograph the book upon my request. It was then a pleasant surprise during the tournament itself, that among the books he brought for sale (Donaldson always brings books) was the new edition of his second volume on Rubinstein. I bought the text and asked for another autograph.

In the Introduction to this second edition, the authors present a rationale for studying these old games. Referring to Rubinstein -- Salwe, Lodz 1908, which is also found as Game 20 in Logical Chess, Donaldson and Minev note its significance.

Akiva's play against the Tarrasch variation of the Queen's Gambit, in which he gives Black hanging pawns and blockades the d4- and c5-squares, is part of the technical knowledge of every master today. Knowing what happened to Salwe, modern players will take radical action rather than acquiesce to a static disadvantage. Rubinstein's games, in which the great master was often given carte blanche to implement long-term plans, are still models for students wishing to learn positional chess.
Life & Games of Akiva Rubinstein (2011), 7

Yesterday, in a blitz game, I had this game in mind as I sacrificed pawns to lock Black's light-squared bishop out of the action. My efforts nearly succeeded until, in time pressure, I missed the winning idea and then even blew a technical draw. In contrast to this game, Viswanathan Anand scored a brilliant victory over Levon Aronian in the recent Tata Steel Grandmaster Tournament by sacrificing material to release this bishop. In the En Passant interview after the game, Anand mentioned Rotlewi -- Rubinstein as the inspiration for his play. The authors of Uncrowned King call Anand's inspiration "Rubinstein's Immortal Game" (95).

Steinitz, Lasker, Tarrasch

In spite of his youth [Rubinstein] has acquired the set and sound style (suitable of his temperament) of Dr. Tarrasch. As a matter of fact he acknowledges his indebtedness to the latter, whose book of 300 games he has thoroughly studied.
C.T. Blanchard, Western Daily Mercury (29 June 1907)*

Garry Kasparov calls Rubinstein the "brightest" of the "new generation of followers of the Steinitz School" that emerged on the competitive chess scene in the early years of the twentieth century (My Great Predecessors, Part 1 [2003], 187). Kasparov's comment led me to consider the so-called Steinitz School in more detail following two months of focus on Rubinstein.

Lasker's Manual of Chess (1960 [1932]) has been in my personal library for many years. It is a remarkable text offering instruction in all phases of the chess game--opening, ending, middlegame strategy, combinations. It also offers Lasker's inimitable views of the ancient and modern history of the game. His writing sometimes seems ponderous as he struggles to elevate ideas concerning chess up to a level of life philosophy. Some of his remarks concerning the contribution of Steinitz illustrate this tendency.

Principles, though dwelling in the realm of thought, are rooted in Life. There are so many thoughts which have no roots and these are more glittering and more seductive than the sound ones. Therefore, in order to distinguish between the true and the false principles, Steinitz had to dig deep to lay bare the roots of art possessed by Morphy. ...
The world did not listen but mocked at him. How should this insignificant-looking person have discovered anything great?
So the world spoke and acted accordingly, but the world was entirely mistaken. The world would have benefited if it had given Steinitz a chance. He was a thinker worthy of a seat in the halls of a University.
Lasker's Manual of Chess, 187

Perhaps ten years ago, I pored through some portions of Lasker's Manual that had a lasting impact on me. In particular, I was impressed by his honesty and objectivity in annotating a loss to Harry Nelson Pillsbury. Many times while playing in tournaments, Lasker's words, "Black wants to set White a task" (247), have echoed in my head. An object in competition is to offer one's opponent problems to solve. If he or she solves them correctly, play may result in neither player gaining an advantage. In this game, Lasker criticizes his own loss of time in his manner of bringing his pieces into play through the first few moves. As a chess coach teaching choldren, I designed my first lessons concerning positional chess on the basis of Lasker's annotations.

Lasker's Common Sense in Chess (1965 [1917]) is the print version of a series of lectures that he presented in London shortly after he became World Chess Champion. The book offers a brief and useful primer in the basic principles of chess strategy. Lasker's lectures were, perhaps, one of the earliest expressions of the rule that one should deploy knights before bishops in the opening.

Lasker is sometimes undervalued in discussions concerning the development of the modern school. Although he calls himself a "player" and favored psychological play against his opponent over objective consideration of the board, when he expressed tenets of positional play, he was very much a student of Steinitz, or an ally in advocacy of Modern Chess.

Wilhelm Steinitz, The Modern Chess Instructor (1895) is an essential text for the chess historian. The Preface offers a précis of the tenets of the Modern School, as well as many practical ideas for individual chess improvement (see "Principles of Chess Training"). The bulk of the book, however, offers an opening manual that must be regarded as terribly out of date. Indeed, Steinitz sometimes opted to ignore his own recommendations in practical play (see "Steinitz Defense").

The most systematic expression of the principles of chess strategy as they were understood by those of the Modern School should find articulation, one would expect, in Seigbert Tarrasch, The Game of Chess (1987 [1935]). That, at least, was the reason I bought the text. But, I have spent far more time going through Tarrasch, Three Hundred Chess Games (1999), a translation of the now classic Dreihundert Schachpartien (1896), which reputedly served the great Rubinstein so well in his quest for chess excellence.

In these ten books are enough of value to serve well during a lifetime of study.

*As quoted in John Donaldson, and Nikolay Minev, Akiba Rubinstein: Uncrowned King (Seattle: International Chess Enterprises, 1994), 56.

Smith-Morra Gambit Prehistory

2013-04-14T14:02:00.000-07:00

When Johann Jacob Löwenthal took over editorship of The Chess Player's Magazine in 1865, he expressed his intent to "devote considerable space" to opening theory.

While endeavouring to systematize as far as possible those openings which have already been brought before the public, I shall submit to a searching analysis several others which have not yet found their way into print. The analysis of new methods of attack and defense will probably engage the attention of Chess players for an unlimited period. The Chess Player's Magazine (1865), 2-3

The first game presented offers an early version of what would come to be called the Smith-Morra Gambit, albeit with a slightly different move order. The game does not appear in the ChessBase database.

The player of the White pieces is presented as Mr. Calthorp (errata in the front of the volume notes the correct spelling should be Calthrop). Is he Samuel Robert Calthrop who played in the First American Chess Congress? Louis Paulsen eliminated Calthrop in the first round of that event, and these three games are the only games by any player named Calthrop in the ChessBase database. Perhaps it is notable that Calthrop played an early version of the Grand Prix Attack (also ECO B 21) in the third game of the match with Paulsen.

Samuel Robert Calthrop ran a boy's school in Bridgeport, Connecticut, and was originally from England. It is possible that he might have made a trip back to the mother country and played a few games of chess while there. On the other hand, perhaps he had a relative who was also a chess player with a knack for offbeat lines against the Sicilian Defense.

Here is the game with Löwenthal's annotations. I have converted English descriptive to algebraic, but otherwise reproduced the annotations as they appear in The Chess Player's Magazine (1865), 9-11.

Calthrop, [Samuel Robert?] -- Kennedy, Hugh Alexander [B21]
1864?
[ Löwenthal]

The following Sicilian Opening, adopted by so accomplished a veteran as Captain H. A. Kennedy, constitutes a good specimen of this début.

1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Bc4

The move generally played here is 4.Nxd4.

4...e6 5.c3

This move, which contributes so important and interesting a variation in the Scotch Gambit, and which may be safely adopted in that opening, is not so good in this début, as Black may, without disadvantage, take the Pawn with Pawn. White would gain no advantage by bringing his Queen's Knight into play, as Black's Pawns form a perfectly safe entrenchment against any attack.

5...dxc3 6.Nxc3 Bc5 7.0–0 d6 8.Be3 Nf6

Exchanging Bishops would have considerably weakened the Queen's Pawn, which could not be maintained against the attacking forces White could bring to bear.

9.Bxc5

9.e5 appears to be more attacking, and leads to some interesting variations.

9...dxc5 10.Qc2 0–0 11.e5 Ng4 12.Rad1 Qe7 13.Rfe1 a6 14.h3 Nh6 15.Ne4 b5 16.Nfg5

Threatening Mate in two moves by playing Nf6+, &c.

16...Nf5 17.Bd3 Nxe5 18.f4 Nxd3 19.Qxd3 c4 20.Qc2 g6 21.g4 Ng7 22.Qf2 h6 23.Qh4

An interesting position (see Diagram).

23...h5

It is obvious that taking the proffered Knight would have involved the immediate loss of the game.

24.gxh5 Nxh5 25.Ng3 Qc5+

The correct move, by which Black is enabled to escape danger.

26.Kf1

The only move, for if 26.Kh1 Bb7+ and wins, or 26.Kh2 Qf2+ and wins.

26...Nxg3+ 27.Qxg3 Kg7 28.Qc3+ Kg8

Had Blck interposed the Pawn, White would have taken e-pawn with Rook.

29.Ne4 b4

Very well played, forcing White to abandon the diagonal, commanded by his Queen.

30.Nf6+ Kh8 31.Qg3 Kg7 32.Re5 Qe7 33.Nh5+ Kh6 34.f5

White has exhausted all his resources.

34. Rd5, an apparently good move, would not have led to any advantage; Black would have replied with f5, rendering his game perfectly safe.

34...gxh5 35.h4 Qf6 36.Qf4+ Kh7 37.Rd2 exf5 38.Rg2 Rg8 39.Rxg8 Kxg8 40.Re8+ Kg7 41.Qg3+ Kh7 42.Qf3 Qxh4 43.Qxa8

White might, perhaps, have done better to take Rxc8, but even in that case Black would have won by numerical superiority of the Pawns.

43...Qf4+ 44.Kg1 Qc1+ 45.Kf2 Qxb2+ 46.Re2 Qd4+ 47.Kf1 Qd1+ 48.Re1 Qd3+ 49.Re2 Be6 50.Qxa6 f4 51.Qc6 f3 52.Qe4+ Bf5 53.Qxd3 Bxd3 0–1

Lesson of the Week

2013-04-11T06:24:00.001-07:00

I varied the procedure this week. As usual, there was a chess position on the demonstration board. A few players offered suggestions for Black (the player to move). "Is the best move ____," students would ask. My reply, "I do not know." At the appointed time, we went through the first eighteen moves of the game leading to the position on the demonstration board.

Steinitz,William -- Paulsen,Louis [C25]
Baden-Baden 30.07.1870

1.e4 e5 2.Nc3 Nc6 3.f4 exf4 4.d4

White opts for what came to be known as the Steinitz Gambit. Subjected to checks, his king takes a walk. We should expect Black to gain an advantage, but aside from the first check, what does Black gain from so many queen moves?

"Do not try this at home. Steinitz was a trained professional," I told the students regarding the march of the White king to the center of the board in the opening.

4.Nf3 would have been safe and sensible.

4...Qh4+ 5.Ke2 d6 6.Nf3

Attacking the queen.

6...Bg4

Defending the queen with a pin.

White to move

7.Bxf4 0–0–0 8.Ke3

Breaking the pin on the knight.

8...Qh5 9.Be2

Black to move

9...Qa5?

In 1987, Arthur Bisguier found the correct move: 9...f5 striking at White's center while the king is vulnerable. Bisguier went on to win his game.

10.a3 Bxf3

Black should have played 10...Nf6=

11.Kxf3±

11.Bxf3? allows 11...g5 exploiting the weakness of d4 12.Bg3 Bg7

11...Qh5+ 12.Ke3 Qh4 13.b4?

13.g3 is better 13...Qe7 14.Kf2±

Black to move

13...g5?

Here also, 13...f5 is the correct move 14.g3 Qe7=

14.Bg3 Qh6 15.b5 Nce7 16.Rf1 Nf6

16...f5 is still worth playing

17.Kf2 Ng6 18.Kg1+-

Black to move

We reach the position that confronted the students at the start. White has a clear advantage. White's king took a stroll into danger, but Black made as as many queen moves as White did king moves. Checks and threats with the queen proved insufficient. Black needed to rip open White's center while the king was there.

Now, the plans for both sides are clear: White will continue to advance the queenside pawns and use his pieces in attack against the Black king. Black will try to advance on White's king with his queen and knights.

White's pieces are better coordinated for the attack, and consequently create problems for Black's monarch much faster than Black's efforts at counterplay.

Next week, we will look at Steinitz's combination at the end of this game.

Solve This

2013-04-09T04:00:00.000-07:00

Black to move

Click on the label, "Solve This," below and solve all of the problems.

Black wins a Pawn

2013-04-08T07:00:00.000-07:00

Sometimes in the French Defense, White blunders away a pawn to a simple tactic. I have had Black in the first diagram position no less than 54 times in online play, winning 33 games. In the most recent game, I lost on time in a rook ending in which I still had a one pawn advantage.

Black to move

This tactic may present itself in other openings, too. A strange Sicilian led to the next position on Saturday.

Black to move

The third position occurred in a tournament two months ago. It is the most complicated, as it appears at first glance that White can recover the pawn.

Black to move

Correct Play

2013-04-07T10:25:00.000-07:00

Is there a correct way to play every conceivable chess position? We know from tablebases that many endings have more than one "most efficient" route to checkmate. Does the same hold true for positions in the early middle game?

Consider Rubinstein's instructive victory over Georg Salwe in 1908.

Rubinstein,Akiba - Salwe,Georg [D33]
Lodz, 1908

1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 c5 3.c4 e6 4.cxd5 exd5 5.Nc3 Nf6 6.g3 Nc6 7.Bg2 cxd4 8.Nxd4 Qb6 9.Nxc6 bxc6 10.0–0 Be7

White to move

11.Na4 Qb5 12.Be3 0–0 13.Rc1 Bg4 14.f3 Be6 15.Bc5 Rfe8 16.Rf2 Nd7 17.Bxe7 Rxe7 18.Qd4 Ree8 19.Bf1 Rec8 20.e3 Qb7 21.Nc5 Nxc5 22.Rxc5 Rc7 23.Rfc2 Qb6 24.b4 a6 25.Ra5 Rb8 26.a3 Ra7 27.Rxc6 Qxc6 28.Qxa7 Ra8 29.Qc5 Qb7 30.Kf2 h5 31.Be2 g6 32.Qd6 Qc8 33.Rc5 Qb7 34.h4 a5 35.Rc7 Qb8 36.b5 a4 37.b6 Ra5 38.b7 1–0

The diagram position has been reached 66 times in the ChessBase Online Database. Five different moves have been tried by White, and all have a positive score. Rubinstein's 11.Na4 is the second most popular move. More popular is 11.e4, first played by Frank Marshall in 1912.

Isaak Boleslavsky demonstrated a winning plan with 11.e4 in 1953.

Boleslavsky,Isaak - Stoltz,Goesta [D33]
Bucharest, 1953

1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 c5 4.cxd5 exd5 5.Nf3 Nc6 6.g3 cxd4 7.Nxd4 Qb6 8.Nxc6 bxc6 9.Bg2 Nf6 10.0–0 Be7 11.e4 dxe4 12.Be3 Qxb2 13.Nxe4 0–0 14.Bd4 Qa3 15.Bxf6 Bxf6 16.Nxf6+ gxf6 17.Qh5 Kg7 18.Rae1 Rb8 19.Bxc6 h6 20.Re4 f5 21.Rh4 Qd6 22.Qf3 Rb6 23.Bd5 Rd8 24.Qc3+ Qf6 25.Qxf6+ Rxf6 26.Bb3 f4 27.Rxf4 Rxf4 28.gxf4 Kf6 29.Rc1 Rg8+ 30.Kf1 Ba6+ 31.Ke1 Re8+ 32.Kd2 Rd8+ 33.Ke3 Re8+ 34.Kd4 Rd8+ 35.Ke3 Re8+ 36.Kd4 Rd8+ 37.Kc3 Rd7 38.Kb4 Bb7 39.Rc5 Bf3 40.Kc3 h5 41.h4 Re7 42.Kd4 Re1 43.Rc7 Re7 44.Rc5 Re1 45.Ra5 Re4+ 46.Kd3 Re7 47.Kc3 Re2 48.Rxa7 Kf5 49.Rxf7+ Kg4 50.f5 Rxf2 51.f6 1–0

Which move is superior? Rubinstein's game was called a perfect model game shortly after it was played, and yet Boleslavsky opted to follow Marshall's idea, which has become more popular. Are both lines equally correct?

Blitz Tactics

2013-04-05T09:45:00.002-07:00

Black is cramped. How does White finish him off?

White to move

Training Log: March 2013

2013-03-31T07:48:00.000-07:00

Each month in 2013 I post an update on my personal progress toward my training goals for the year. I posted these goals as New Year's Resolutions on the last day of 2012. My hopes for 2013 are to achieve an Expert class rating and to win the Spokane City Championship. My goals, however, are neither.* Success is a product of training. The training goals are paramount. The rating and the championship title, if achieved, will be a consequence of meeting rigorous training goals.

1. In 2013, I will solve correctly 300 tactics problems each month.

I barely met this goal, completing 370 problems in the month. In March, my pace of tactics work slowed considerably from February. Working through Level 2 on Chess Quest, I am finding some problems challenging, especially as I solve problems while lying in bed falling asleep.

I worked Chessimo for a few days early in the month. Although I have solved over 3000 problems on Chessimo, I count towards the month's total only those problems solved six times. Chessimo's history function is a useful feature for tracking progress. Visible in the screenshot below is the information that I last worked tactics with this app on 24 March 2013, when I completed problem 21 in a set of 150. The app displays my average time per problem in each unit, my total time for the unit, the number of problems completed ("studied") in each units, and the number of problems "learned". Learned means the problem has been completed six times. This repetition is an essential component of Chessimo.

Chessimo History Screenshot

My web-based training (Chess Tempo and Chess.com) remains light. I neglected the Anthology of Chess Combinations in March.

Why is 370 "barely" meeting a goal of 300? The answer stems from the manner of counting. Problems count as "correct" if they have been completed on Chess Quest, Shredder, Chess-wise, or "learned" in Chessimo. Many errors occur in the course of solving these problems. On the other hand, when solving on Chess Tempo, Chess.com, or the Tactic Trainer iPad app, a single error disqualifies the problem from counting. Most of the problems counting for March were with resources that permit errors.

2. In 2013, I will study whole games and whole books.

I continue with a disappointing slow pace through Logical Chess: Move by Move. I returned to Game 23, Van Vliet -- Znosko-Borovsky, several times over the course of two weeks. In my first pass through the game, it was clear that White's passive play gave Black an easy advantage. But, after such passivity, the tactical errors seem more subtle. Logical Chess is not my sole source for whole games. I looked through most of the games of Candidates Tournament in London that concludes tomorrow. Many mornings were spent going through Kingscrusher's next day videos.

In March, I played through many dozens of the games of Wilhelm Steinitz. I am pursuing historical questions concerning the beginning of the so-called Modern School of Chess. I memorized the game that became my source for the final "Lesson of the Week" before the spring break. I have not added this game to my list of "Memory Games" that has now grown to twenty games, but it is in my short-term memory at present.

3. In 2013, I will finish my Pawn Endgame Flash Card project.

I am continuing to use these flash cards in elementary classrooms while teaching beginners chess, and some of the positions came up in the first endgame lesson that I completed in Chessimo. Nonetheless, progress studying Dvoretsky's Endgame Manual and mastering the blue diagram positions must be rated lackluster.

4. In 2013, I will lose fifteen pounds.

Progress seemed hopeful early in the month with more consistent walking. But, when I stepped on the scale, the reality of too much junk food made itself apparent. I spent less time with Wii boxing than planned, but developed a new upper body workout that my puppies love. They each grab hold of a rope and pull against each other and against me. One afternoon I pulled with the right arm five times, switched to the left, pulled five times, and then back to the right. Keeping up this practice for ten minutes left my arms feeling like jello--always a good feeling when one sets fitness goals.

*While pressuring me to play in the Taxing Quads, local tournament organizer David Griffin suggested that I should have a rating goal of 2013 for the year. He has spent the time using the Rating Estimator at the US Chess Federation website to estimate what my rating would be if I swept a quad consisting of Michael Cambareri, Jeremy Krasin, Nikolay Bulakh, and myself. He's a good organizer and chess promoter, and I must wonder what he said to Jeremy, Nikolay, and Michael as he seeks to make the top quad a strong one. There are two other A-Class players in Spokane who have played in at least one event in the past two years, and one provisionally rated expert, the Washington State High School Champion, an exchange student from China. But, we four are the most active top players in the city. I am the least active of the four.

Lesson of the Week

2013-03-27T07:22:00.000-07:00

Who had the Black Pieces?

There are dozens of internet sites that make reference to a match between Max Lange and Wilhelm Steinitz in Vienna in 1860, although none that I have found offer any details concerning this match. There were three games, all won by Steinitz. Black's play does not reflect the level of skill that might be expected from the editor of Schachzeitung der Berliner Schachgesellschaft, a chess newsletter. The publication was founded in 1846 and became Deutsche Schachzeitung in 1872. It continued publication until 1988. Lange was the editor 1858-1864. In 1860, Max Lange published Paul Morphy: A Sketch from the Chess World, translated into English by Ernest Falkbeer. Lange was an active and knowledgeable chess player in 1860. In 1862, he won the West German Championship.

Did Lange visit Vienna in 1860 and get trounced by Steinitz? It is possible. However, it is easier to believe that Steinitz won these lopsided games against a local Vienna player with the last name of Lang (without the e). Dozens of internet sites have Lang with no first name, but also no details.

Whoever played Black had his mistakes trounced by a sacrificial attack against the king that merits attention by improving chess players. Steinitz understood that material could be given up if it led to the execution of his opponent's king.

Steinitz,William -- Lange,Max or Lang [C44]
Vienna, 1860

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 exd4 4.Bc4 Qe7 5.0–0 Ne5 6.Nxe5 Qxe5 7.c3 c5 8.f4 Qf6 9.e5 Qb6 10.Kh1 Be7 11.f5 d5 12.Bxd5 Nh6 13.f6 Bf8 14.Bxh6 gxh6

Black has made several positional errors already in this game. Now the tactics begin. This position appears on the demonstration board in youth chess clubs this week. One young player won a chess pencil for suggesting the correct move (and later revealed that he suggested it because he thought it was "stupid"--the "stupid move is often the correct one in these problems").

White to move

15.Bxf7+! Kxf7

15...Kd8 was a better choice for Black, although White still has a considerable advantage after 16.cxd4 Qxb2 17.Nd2

16.Qh5+ Ke6

16...Kg8 also loses 17.Rf3 Qe6 18.Rg3+ Bg7 19.Qxh6 Kf7 20.Qxg7+ Ke8 21.Qxh8+ Kd7+-

17.Qe8+ Kd5

17...Be7 was possible, leading to 18.Qxh8 Qd8 19.Qxh7 Bf8 20.cxd4+-

18.cxd4 Be6

18...Qxb2 offers more stubborn defense 19.Qd8+ Kc6 20.d5+ Kb5 21.Nc3+ Ka6 22.Rab1 Qxc3 23.Rf3+-

White to move

19.Nc3+!! Kc4 20.d5 Rxe8

20...Kd4 or 20...Qxb2 hold off checkmate longer.

21.Rf4+ Kd3 22.Rd1+ Kc2 23.Rf2# 1–0