Chess Praxis The Praxis of My System A textbook of practical chess, illustrated with 109 games from my struggles
Aron Nimzowitsch
Quality Chess www.qualitychessbooks.com
Ctt,err PraMir First new English edition, 2007 by Quality Chess UK Limited 20 Balvie Road, Milngavie, Glasgow, G62 7TA, United Kingdom Translation © 2007 Ian Adams All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, electrostatic, magnetic tape, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior permission of the publisher. All sales or enquiries should be directed to Quality Chess UK Limited, 20 Balvie Road, Milngavie, Glasgow, G62 7TA, United Kingdom e-mail:
[email protected] website: www.qualitychessbooks.com Distributed in US and Canada by SCB Distributors, Gardena California www.scbdistributors.com Distribution in Europe by Sunrise Translated by Ian Adams from "Die Praxis meines System" Edited by John Shaw Typeset by Jacob Aagaard Cover Design by Ari Ziegler Cover Photos by Carole Dunlop Printed and bound in Estonia by Tallinna Raamatutrukikoja LLC ISBN - 91-85779-00-8 ISBN13 - 978-91-85779-00-0
Table of contents Index of games Index of stratagems Index of openings Introduction
page 4 page 7 page 9 page 11
1. Centralization (games 1-23)
page 13
1. Neglect of the central square complex as a typical, recurring error (games 1-3) 2. Sins of omission committed in the centre (games 4-6) 3. The vitality of troops in the centre (games 7-8) 4. Some combined forms of centralization (games 9-15) 5. A mobile pawn mass in the centre (games 16-17) 6. Giving up the pawn centre (games 18-20) 7. Centralizing as a deus ex machina (games 21-23) 2. Restriction and blockade (games 24-52)
1. Restraining freeing pawn advances (games 24-25) 2. Restraining a central pawn mass (games 26-28) 3. Restraining a qualitative majority (games 29-30) 4. Restraint where there are doubled pawn complexes (games 31-36) 5. From the workshop of the blockade 6. My new method of handling chains -The Dresden Variation (games 49-52)
page 14 page 17 page 21 page 24 page 36 page 38 page 42 page 49 page 50 page 53 page 59 page 64 page 78 page 97
3. Overprotection and other forms of Prophylaxis (games 53-60)
page 107
4. The Isolated Queen's Pawn, the two Hanging Pawns - the two Bishops (games 61-70)
page 121
5. Manoeuvring against opposing weaknesses .•. (games 71-77)
page 137
6. A brief survey of hypermodern territory - old and new (games 78-109)
page 151
1. The thesis of the relative harmlessness of the pawn roller (games 78-79) 2. Flexible handling of the opening (games 80-83) 3. The centre and play on the flank (games 84-88) 4. The small but solid centre (games 89-91) 5. The asymmetric treatment of symmetrical variations (games 92-94) 6. The bishop, with and without outposts (games 95-97) 7. A weak complex of squares of a specific colour (games 98-99) 8. A victory parade of "bizarre" and "ugly" moves (games 100-101) 9. Heroic defence (games 102-1 06) 10. "Combinations slumbering under a thin blanket" (games 107-109)
page 151 page 154 page 161 page 170 page 176 page 182 page 187 page 191 page 194 page 203
Postscript
Page 209
4
Index of games 1 Nirnzowitsch - Ahues, Berlin 1928 2 Bogoljubow - Nirnzowitsch, London 1927 3 Nirnzowitsch - von Scheve, Ostende 1907 4 E. Cohn - Nirnzowitsch, Ostende 1907 5 Spielrnann - Nirnzowitsch, Karlsbad 1923 6 Yates - Nirnzowitsch, London 1927 7 3 arnateurs - Nirnzowitsch, Oslo 1921 8 Nirnzowitsch - Levenfish, Karlsbad 1911 9 Yates - Nirnzowitsch, Sernrnering 1926 10 Reti - Nirnzowitsch, Marienbad 1925 11 Levenfish - Nirnzowitsch, Vilnius 1912 12 Dr Tartakower - Nimzowitsch, London 1927 13 Samisch - Nirnzowitsch, Berlin 1928 14 Dr Alekhine - Nirnzowitsch, St Petersburg 1913 15 Nirnzowitsch - Dr Alekhine, Sernrnering 1926 16 Nirnzowitsch - Romih, London 1927 17 Griinfeld - Nirnzowitsch, Kecskernet 1927 18 Nirnzowitsch - Steiner, Niendorf 1927 19 Alapin - Nirnzowitsch, Karlsbad 1911 20 Dr Alekhine - Nirnzowitsch, Kecskernet 1927 21 Nirnzowitsch - Marshall, New York 1927 22 Nirnzowitsch - Vukovic, Kecskernet 1927 23 Nirnzowitsch - Duras, San Sebastian 1920 24 Nirnzowitsch - Breyer, Gothenburg 1920 25 Nirnzowitsch - Dr Tartakower, Gothenburg 1920 26 Nirnzowitsch - Marshall, New York 1927 27 Sarnisch - Nirnzowitsch, Karlsbad 1923 28 Buerger - Nirnzowitsch, London 1927 29 Van Vliet - Nirnzowitsch, Ostende 1907 30 Nirnzowitsch - Buerger, London 1927 31 Nirnzowitsch - Sarnisch, Dresden 1926 32 Nirnzowitsch - Colle, London 1927 33 Janowski - Nirnzowitsch, St Petersburg 1914 34 Johner - Nirnzowitsch, Dresden 1926 35 Nirnzowitsch - Dr Vidmar, Karlsbad 1907 36 Marshall - Nirnzowitsch, New York 1927 37 Reti - Nirnzowitsch, Karlsbad 1923 38 Ahues - Nirnzowitsch, Berlin 1927 39 Ahues - Nirnzowitsch, Kecskernet 1927 40 Schweinburg - Nirnzowitsch, Berlin 1927 41 Colle - Nirnzowitsch, Baden 1925 42 Hage - Nimzowitsch, Arnstadt 1926 43 Bliirnich - Nirnzowitsch, Breslau 1926 44 von Holzhausen - Nirnzowitsch, Dresden 1926 45 Nirnzowitsch - Duhrn, Hanover 1926
page 14 page 15 page 16 page 18 page 18 page 19 page 21 page 23 page 24 page 26 page 28 page 28 page 30 page 33 page 34 page 36 page 37 page 39 page 40 page 41 page 43 page 44 page 45 page 50 page 52 page 53 page 55 page 57 page 60 page 63 page 66 page 67 page 69 page 72 page 74 page 76 page 79 page 81 page 82 page 84 page 85 page 87 page 87 page 90 page 91
5
46 Brinckmann - Nimwwitsch, Kolding 1922 47 Nimzowitsch - Leonhardt, San Sebastian 1912 48 Nimzowitsch - Ahues, Niendorf 1927 49 Dr Vajda - Nimzowitsch, Kecskemet 1927 50 Kmoch - Nimzowitsch, Niendorf 1927 51 Brinckmann - Nimwwitsch, Niendorf 1927 52 Steiner - Nimzowitsch, Dresden 1926 . 53 C. Behting - Nimwwitsch, Riga 1910 54 Schlechter - Nimzowitsch, Karlsbad 1907 55 Wendel - Nimwwitsch, Stockholm 1921 56 Yates - Nimzowitsch, London 1927 57 Morrison - Nimzowitsch, London 1927 58 Nimzowitsch - Hakansson, Kristianstad 1927 59 Nimzowitsch - Szekely, Kecskemet 1927 60 Bogoljubow - Nimzowitsch, St Petersburg 1913 61 Nimwwitsch - E. Jacobsen, Copenhagen 1923 62 Nimzowitsch - Prof. Kudrjawzew, Dorpat 1910 63 Dr Krause - Nimzowitsch, Correspondence 1924-25 64 Nimzowitsch - Janowski, Karlsbad 1907 65 Rubinstein - Nimzowitsch, Karlsbad 1907 66 Nimwwitsch - Dr Vidmar, New York 1927 67 Dr Tarrasch - Nimzowitsch, Hamburg 1910 68 Brekke - Nimzowitsch, Oslo 1921 69 Nimwwitsch - Leonhardt, Ostende 1907 70 Goldstein - Nimwwitsch, London 1927 71 Schlage - Nimzowitsch, Berlin 1928 72 von Gottschall - Nimwwitsch, Hanover 1926 73 von Holzhausen - Nimzowitsch, Hanover 1926 74 Nimwwitsch - Buerger, London 1927 75 Nimzowitsch - Dr Antze, Hanover 1926 76 Nimzowitsch - Strange Petersen, Copenhagen 1928 77 E. Cohn - Nimwwitsch, Karlsbad 1911 78 Michell - Nimwwitsch, Marienbad 1925 79 Nielsen - Nimzowitsch, Copenhagen 1928 80 Dr Vidmar - Nimzowitsch, New York 1927 81 Przepi6rka - Nimzowitsch, Kecskemet 1927 82 Nimzowitsch - Spielmann, New York 1927 83 Nimwwitsch - Rubinstein, Semmering 1926 84 Nimzowitsch - Allan Nilsson, Copenhagen 1924 85 Yates - Nimzowitsch, Karlsbad 1923 86 Nimzowitsch - Gemsoe, Copenhagen 1928 87 Johner - Nimzowitsch, Berlin 1928 88 Carl Nilsson - Nimwwitsch, Eskilstuna 1921 89 Capablanca - Nimzowitsch, New York 1927 90 E. Jacobsen - Nimzowitsch, Copenhagen 1923
page 92 page 94 page 95 page 98 page 100 page 102 page 104 page 109 page 111 page 112 page 114 page 115 page 117 page 118 page 119 page 123 page 125 page 126 page 127 page 129 page 130 page 131 page 132 page 134 page 134 page 138 page 140 page 142 page 143 page 145 page 147 page 149 page 152 page 153 page 156 page 157 page 158 page 159 page 162 page 164 page 166 page 167 page 169 page 172 page 173
6
91 E. Hansen - Nimzowitsch, Copenhagen 1928 92 Moller - Nimzowitsch, Copenhagen 1922 93 Enoch - Nimzowitsch, Berlin 1927 94 Marshall - Nimzowitsch, New York 1927 95 Dr Tartakower - Nimzowitsch, Karlsbad 1923 96 Dalseg, etc. - Nimzowitsch, Oslo 1922 97 Stoltz - Nimzowitsch, Berlin 1928 98 Mieses - Nimzowitsch, Hanover 1926 99 Erik Andersen, etc. - Nimzowitsch, Copenhagen 1923 100 Nimzowitsch - Dr Alekhine, New York 1927 101 Nimzowitsch - Gilg, New York 1927 102 Brinckmann - Nimzowitsch, Berlin 1927 103 Leonhardt - Nimzowitsch, Berlin 1928 104 Brinckmann - Nimzowitsch, Copenhagen 1924 105 Rubinstein - Nimzowitsch, Karlsbad 1923 106 Nimzowitsch - C. Behring, Riga 1909 107 Dr Fluss - Nimzowitsch, Correspondence 1912-13 108 Nimzowitsch - Dr Krause, Copenhagen 1924 109 Spielmann - Nimzowitsch, Stockholm 1920
What the practical player needs to know: 1he numbers refer to games
returning surplus material; 1, 10, 105 interesting attempt to save games: 41, 50, 51, 86, 94 (amusing draw: 49) mummification: 34, 41, 43, 50, 84, 88 the coup d'etat: 100, 105
page 174 page 177 page 179 page 180 page 182 page 183 page 185 page 188 page 190 page 191 page 193 page 195 page 196 page 197 page 199 page 202 page 204 page 205 page 207
7
Index of stratagems The numbers refer to games b~ough:4,
12, 14,28,30,38,43,48,50,71,73,78,85,97 the breakthrough warded off: 4, 54, 102 attempts to break through: 8, 44, 59, 65 cen~aation: 1-23,71,78,81,83,92,102,104,105,106,108 mistake involving centralization: 1-6, 78, 104 missing a central counterattack: 5 omitting to consolidate in the centre: 1, 2, 4, 6, 23 difficult defence: 63,84,85, 102-105 discovered check: 1, 27, 70, 75, 78, 83, 93 endgame: queen ending: 13, 27, 75 rook ending (I or 2 rooks): 7, 21, 22, 23, 32, 33, 37, 50, 53, 61, 73, 84, 97 queen against rook ending: 14, 22, 77 rook and bishop against rook and knight: 32, 33, 61, 81, 90 rook and knight against rook and knight: 51, 73, 79, 87 rook and knight against rook and pawns: 68 two bishops against bishop and knight: 96 bishop ending: 61 bishops of opposite colours: 25, 36, 50, 72, 96, 99, 105 bishop against knight: 41, 62, 64, 65, 67 knight against pawns: 100 pawn endings: 23, 61, 90, 97 files:
open with or without outpost: 1,2,3,9, 10, 12, 14,21, 28, 34, 43, 53,68, 73, 76, 81, 84,90, 92,93,99 file, neutralized: 80, 93 firm and loose formations the small centre: 89, 90, 102 overload on the small centre: 89 manoeuvring internally: 89,90 consolidating retreat: 11, 71, 79, 85, 94, 102 consolidation thwarted: 90 loose formation: 91 it limits your own options: 97 localized thrust by your opponent: 15 (move 23) isolated pawns: 61, 62, 63, 64, 72, 76 isolated pawn pair: 62 the two hanging pawns: 65-68 the two bishops: 15, 19, 46, 50, 60, 63, 67, 69, 70, 95, 96 outposts on diagonals: 61, 73, 95, 97 king in the endgame: 10,41,53,62,65,72, 74,84,87,97 it flees from perpetual check: 13,27,68, 75, 77
8 manoeuvring: 16,60,67, 71-78 overproteotion:20,44, 57,58, 59,60,62,102 passed pawn: 7,9,21,41,51,56,70,71,72,73,79,97, 105 struggle against the blockader: 7, 9, 17, 70, 73, 76 lust to expand: 15 (move 41),78,96 reserve blockader: 70 pawn chains: 8, 23, 29, 30, 35, 38, 49, 50, 58, 59,60, 84 pins: 37, 80,98,99, 101 unpinning: 2, 44 prophylaris: 13, 15,20,21,24,25,32,33,36,38-41,43,49,51, 53, 54,55,56,60,63,69,70,72, 73,74,75,81,87,88,90,105 restraint: of a pawn mass which is ready to advance, etc.: 19,23,67, 70, 74 of freeing moves: 24, 25, 35, 48 blockading: 35, 36, 42, 59, 62, 67, 70, 73 seventh rank (or 2 nd): 12, 14,21,24,27,45,49, 51, 56, 58,92, 107 seventh rank (absolute) plus passed pawn: 12, 32 seventh rank neutralized: 97 eighth rank (or pt): 25, 45, 51, 78, 84 various positional subdeties: positional feelers: 17, 18 reconnaissance mission: 96 waiting moves: 18, 53, 54, 81, 102, 107 intermediate moves: 59, 74, 108 discreet threats: 88 posthumous (transcendental) attack: 36, 64 inner divisions: 6 reflex weakness: 90 dead point: 86 weak squares of a specific colour: 20, 46, 49, 50, 59,62, 72, 81, 86, 88, 91, 98, 99, 100, 105
9
Index of openings The numbers refer to game numbers Open games King's Gambit: 53 Scotch: 64, 69 Giuoco Piano: 107 Ruy Lopez: 18, 24, 54 Hanham: 19,48 Semi-open games
French Defence a) Exchange Variation: 40, 73, 93 b) l.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.ttJc3 ib4 4.exd5: 7, 9, 36, 92, 94, 103 c) Surrender of the centre: 20 d) l.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.ttJc3 ttJf6: 13,60 e) l.e4 e6 2.d4 d4 3.e5!: 8,23,47, 58, 59 f) Irregular: 57, 72 Sicilian Defence a) l.e4 c5 2.ttJf3 ttJf6!: 6, 56, 71, 78, 79 b) l.e4 c5 2.ttJf3 ttJc6: 44, 52, 101, 105 c) Other lines: 45, 66, 97 Reversed Sicilian (1.c4 e5): 10,31,98 Caro-Kann: 5,11,63 Nimzowitsch Opening (1.e4 ttJc6): 40, 49,50,51,55,73,88,99,102,109 Alekhine: 15 Closed games
Queen's Gambit and Queen's Pawn Games a) the old defence (3 ... c5): 62, 65, 67 (Tarrasch variation - ed.) b) the modern defence, wrongly called orthodox: 16, 61, 70 c) the Stonewall: 4 d) with an obstructed c-pawn: 3, 35 e) with b2-b3: 29 Indian Defences a) l.d4 ttJf6 2.c4 e6 3.ttJc3 ib4: 17, 33, 34, 38, 46 (Nimzo-Indian Defence - ed.) b) l.d4 ttJf6 2.ttJf3 e6 3.c4 ib4t: 80 (Bogo-Indian Defence - ed.) .
10 c) l.d4ltJf6 2.c4 b6: 27, 32, 81, 87, 90 d) with ig5: 89, 90 (game 89 is the Torre-Attack, game 90 Queen's Indian Defence - ed.) e) l.d4ltJf6 2.ltJf3ltJf6 3.e3 b6 (or the same with reversed colours): 12,21, 100 (Colle - ed.)
The Bremen Opening: 1,2,28,37, 74, 91 Dutch Defence: 25, 39, 41, 42, 95, 104, 108 The same with reversed colours: 30, 76, 82, 83 (Often known as Bird, Nirnzowitch or Larsen Opening these days - ed.)
I"egular defences to 1.d4 or 1.c4: 26, 68, 75 I"egular Openings: 43, 84, 85, 86, 96
Preface The modern master is not secretive. Just like any other branch of art, positional play is founded on technique, and technique can be learned - this is the point of my book and the reason for it. It sets out to teach positional play: I shall explain lovingly and in depth (by means of articles scattered throughout the book) the stratagems which were hinted at in my maiden work and then they will be illustrated by games. And yet the book is quite independent of My System, since nowhere is it presupposed that the reader has any knowledge of the principles of the said system. Rather, wherever it appears necessary, the latter are - briefly - explained. It is really not very difficult to use words like "prophylaxis", "overprotection", etc. You just have to learn what they mean! The book is also valuable as a games collection. It contains, apart from those published in My System and in The Blockade and therefore omitted here, 109 of my best games. And a few words about the lay-out of the book. I have avoided self praise. In fact, I have come to the conclusion that this failing which has its origins in the pseudo-classical period and is still very popular, is just as out of place as 3 ... c7 -c5 and other variations which were once much praised. Self praise is admissible only in one case, when due recognition is unjustly withheld. In all other cases, self praise comes over as tasteless and demoralizing. This time I have provided plenty of indexes. As well as a detailed contents page, there is also an index of games and of openings. When dividing up the material it was impossible to go beyond all-embracing concepts such as "centralization", "restraint" and so on, and so to bring in less general ideas such as "open files", "the seventh rank", etc., I have thought it a good idea to include an index of the "guerrilla" tactics used in the games. It should be obvious that the latter could not be exhaustive; however, if you should wish to, it is possible to look more deeply into those "elements" (the file, the passed pawn, etc.) which might interest you. And one final point. I should have liked each game to have been provided with four or five diagrams in order to facilitate playing through the often complicated thicket of variations which can arise. But obesity is out of fashion these days - slim is the watchword. In any case there is a simple, tried and trusted method, which can be recommended to all readers: when playing through a game, use two chess sets at the same time (or one and a pocket set); the actual game is kept on one board and the analysis is looked at on the other. It is much simper than you might think; there is little effort involved and you do not miss the often interesting variations. With that, I think that everything has been said and that the book is ready for the public. August 1928 The author
12
Chess Praxis
From the Publisher In publishing a new translation of Chess Praxis our plan is to get closer to the author's original intentions than any previous English version. As with My System previous translations of Chess Praxis from the original German have diluted Nimzowitsch's lively, confrontational style. We have kept as true to the original language as possible, so you will read of mummification and frog positions: better a moment's confusion than hours of toned-down boredom. Mummification is Nimzowitsch's evocative term for a blocked position with interlocking pawn chains. Nimzowitsch published Chess Praxis six years after the discovery ofTutankhamun's tomb, when interest in all things Egyptian was high. A frog (or crouching) position is a cramped but solid position which has the potential to spring into life. One of Nimzowitsch's other quirks that we have left "uncorrected" was to vary in the way he referred to his own moves and thoughts. Sometimes "I played", other times "he played"; the royal "we think" and "our theories" are also common. There is an intriguing tendency for Nimzowitsch's bad moves to be mentioned as "he now made a mistake". There is no doubt that Nimzowitsch is the hero of his own book and the villain is Dr Tarrasch. In the introduction when Nimzowitsch cryptically writes "as out of place as 3 ... c7 -c5" he means after 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6, but can't stomach naming the Tarrasch Defence. Nimzowitsch also mentions that the original publishers refused to include as many diagrams as he wanted. We have granted his wish. We have also added to his work with a short closing article pointing out some analytical improvements. This is certainly not a comprehensive list of corrections, but rather a selection of positions where we think a fresh insight might interest the reader. These positions have been marked with superscript throughout the book. John Shaw, Kilmarnock 2007
Chapter 1
Centralization This leads to excellent results in modern tournament praxis. The reason is that up until now it has not been well known that under all circumstances the control of the central squares is a strategic necessity; quite often even experienced players simply "run away" from the centre. But in each individual case we must make absolutely sure that any neglect of the central area by the opponent is really punished. Sins of omission as far as the centre is concerned arise because the player is not in the habit of paying attention to the needs of strategy (that is - in other words - strategic carelessness) or because he develops a passion for the flank attack! In the first case, our opponent lets us take the centre away from him and in the second he voluntarily concedes it to us in order to try his luck with a bold sortie down the wing. But a flank attack only has a real chance of success when the centre is dosed or can be held stable with a minimum of forces. If the latter is not the case, then the attack fails because of a lack of forces. How can it be possible to successfully link a difficult attack with the heavy demands of a difficult defence? Game 3 illustrates this dearly. The central breakthrough led to complete paralysis - I nearly said demoralization - of the troops taking part in the diversion. The mechanics of centralization can be seen in the way that, after the necessary restraint of a possibly mobile opposing pawn centre, we draw the noose tighter and tighter around the central
squares. In doing so, we are glad to seize any line or diagonal which may simply pass through the centre. But if we manage to make this long-range action effective and establish some of our pieces in the centre, then we should be really pleased with the success of our policy of centralization. See game 12. Piling up pieces in the centre in the middlegame (as sketched in above) can be used for a strong attack on the flank, because in the final analysis centralization is not an end in itself, but simply the most rational way to accumulate forces which can be deployed on the wings (see game 8). It is however dear that a sensibly centralized position should in all circumstances be considered consolidated. In spite of everything, a centralized position is not necessarily free from all danger. For example, the opponent might think of getting rid of the centralized pieces by exchanges. In such a case, we need to preserve into the endgame a sufficient remainder of our centralization (game 7). Another danger might be that the opponent sacrifices one of his own blockading pieces in order to suddenly extend the central terrain. This danger is warded off by aiming to adapt to the new circumstances as soon as possible, perhaps by making a return sacrifice in order to exploit in a sharp way a central blocking diagonal (see game 8). We shall leave you for the present with these short remarks; the rest will become dear from the games themselves and the introductory notes.
14
Chess Praxis
1. Neglect of the central square complex as a typical, recurring error • The concept of the "central focussing lens"
In games 1 and 2 the central area is neglected for no apparent reason, and in game 3 for the sake of a flank attack; such a strategy can only be successful against faulty counterplay. Compare, moreover, our remarks on pages 13 and 17. The "central focussing lens" is of course an imaginary instrument, but a very effective one, which in every case tells you whether the move you are about to make would increase or decrease the effectiveness of your forces in the centre. If, during our tournament game in Berlin 1928, Brinckmann had made use of this focussing lens, he would hardly have chosen the move 5...1Mlb6 after I.d4 d5 2.tLJf3 e6 3 ..tf4 tLJf6 4.e3 c5 5.c3 because after 5... ~b6 6.~b3 tLJc6 7.tLJbd2 the centralizing 7 ....id6 proved impossible. Now he should at least have played 7 ...ie7, but he chose the decentralizing 7 ... tLJh5 and what came next was a short but effective punitive expedition: 8.~xb6 axb6 9 ..ic7 c4 10.ixb6 and Black was obliged to recall his knight with loss of time, thus 10 ... tLJf6 which also parries the threat of e3-e4. Next came 11.i.c7 with advantage to White. Without Black's 7 ... t2Jh5, White would have had no justification whatever for his marauding raid, e.g. 7 ...ie7! (instead of 7 ... tLJh5?) 8.~xb6? axb6 9.ic7 c4 10.ixb6 tLJd7 and Black gets the attack. We shall find further opportunities to test the usefulness of our lens. Gamel Aron Nimzowitsch
Carl Oscar Ahues Berlin 1928
I.c4 tl)f6 2.tl)c3 c6 3.e4 d5 4.e5 d4 5.exf6 mc3 6.bxc3 gxf6 6 ... exf6 was clearer. Why? It would then no longer be possible to prevent Black from developing with ... i.d6, ... 0-0 and ... EJ:e8. Such a set-up would mean centralization, which is the greatest possible safeguard against any surprise.
Things are very different after the text move (6 ... gxf6). Black no doubt obtains a "proud" pawn centre, but it is doubtful whether there is a good reason to be proud of this pawn centre at all. Let us examine it: the mobility of the said centre is small, e.g. 6 ... gxf6 7.tLJf3 e5 8.d4 e4? 9.tLJh4! f5 10.g3 followed by ttJg2 and if4 with paralysing effect. But, as is shown in the note to move 9, "hanging on" to the centre here also proves weak. So, 6 ... exf6 was the correct continuation.
7.tl)a c5 7 ... e6 seems positionally more correct, adopting a defensive posture in the centre.
8.d4 tl)c6 9 •.Ae2
9...£5 Worth considering was 9 ... e5 to make a stand (= the policy of hanging on or sitting tight). The continuation would be 10..ie3 1Mla5 (or 10 ... b6 11.0-0 then ~d2, EJ:adl and White has pressure down the d-file) 11.0-0 ~xc3 12.dxe5! (much better than 12.EJ:cl, which would only have driven the queen back into the defence: via a5 to c7) 12 ... fxe5 (or 12 ... t2Jxe5 13.~d5!) 13.tLJg5 if5 14.ih5 ig6 15 ..ixg6 hxg6 16.~d5 and wins. The text move 9 ... f5 is a serious error, which gives up the whole centre. Relatively the best move was 9 ... EJ:g8, although White also remains with an advantage after 10.g3 ih3 11.EJ:bl 1Mlc7 12.~a4 .id7 13.~c2 etc.
IO.d5 tl)a5 II.tl)e5 This decides matters.
Chapter 1
IS
11....id7 Or 11. ..i.g7 12.VMa4t @f8 (12 ...i.d7? 13.tDxd7! i.xc3t 14 ..id2 i.xal IS.tDf6tt @fS 16.i.h6 mate) 13.f4 f6 14.tDf3 with total positional domination. 12.,ih5 Ag7 13.lLlxf7 YNb6 14.lLlxhSt 'i!?fB 15.tl)f7 White quite simply returns all the captured material, but obtains a giant of a knight on e6. This is how to do things. You should not always just hang on to material! Flexibility is the watchword! That means transforming one advantage into another. 15 ...AeS 16.tl)gS hc3t Poor bishop, its hour has come; its only consolation is not to perish in foreign fields! 32.'i!Yh7t 'i!?fB 33.tl)e6t 'i!?eS 34.lLlxg7t 'i!?d8 35.tl)e6t 'i!?eS 36.ge5 1--0 Game 2
Efim Bogoljubow Nimzowitsch London 1927
ArOD
17.'i!?fl! Not 17.i.d2 on account of 17 ... i.xhS Is.VMxhS ixd2t 19.@xd2 VMb2t. 17....hallS.tl)e6t 'i!?gS 19..beS gxe8 20.Yfh5 ga8 21.'i!YxfS YNb4 22.g3 Yfxc4t 23.'i!?g2 'i!Ye2 Black is helpless. 24.id2 24J!el! seems even more accurate: 21...'Wxe1 25.lLlgS ig7! 26.'Wf7t @hS 27 ..ib2! and wins. 24... tl)c4 Or 24 ... 'Wxd2 2S.tDgS ig7 26.'We6t with a smothered mate. 25J~el 'i!Yxd2 26.lLlgSlLld6 The rest is somewhat bloody. Since we are not of a bloodthirsty nature, we shall be brief 27J~Yxh7t 'i!?fB 28.'i!Yxe7t 'i!?gS 29.'i!Yh7t 'i!?fB 30J'h6t 'i!?gS 31.'i!Yg6t ig7
l.c4 e6 2.tl)c3 tl)f6 3.e4 c5 4.g3 Worth considering was 4.tDf3 lDc6 S.d4 cxd4 6.tDxd4 .ib4 7.'Wd3 (the idea is from Bogoljubow). 4 ... d5 5.e5 d4 6.exf6 dxd 7.dxc3 There was nothing wrong with 7.bxc3, e.g. 7.bxc3 gxf6 S.d4 (S ... cxd4 9.cxd4 ib4t 10.i.d2 'Wxd4 11.i.xb4 'We4t 12 ..ie2 'Wxhl 13.~d6lDc6 if3 and wins). However, the text move is also playable since the black pawn majority should hardly be able to get going. 7 ...'i!Yxf6! s.lLla Here S.ig2 had to be weighed up carefully, e.g. S... lDc6 9.lDe2 eS 10.0-0 and then f4. The text move makes it harder for the bishop's diagonal to be used effectively against the centre. S... h6 9.ig2 id7! 10.tl)d2! With this, he to some extent compensates for the error on move S. lo ...ic6 11.tl)e4 'i!Yg6 12.'i!Ye2
16
Chess Praxis
24.g5 24.!!xe6 !!xg4t 25.~f2 ttJe5 leads to disaster.
24...gg4t 25.~hl Or 25.~f2 ttJe5 26.~e2 !!g2t 27.~fl !!g3 winning a piece. 25 ... hxg5 26.hxg5
12 ..• Jie7 Not 12 ... f5 on account of the reply 13 ..if3 then ttJd2 and the e5-square remains permanently weak. You can see that the problem White has to solve here is a double one: I. Black's majority has to be restrained. 2. Dominance of the centre must be achieved. This (double) problem can be solved, up to a point. However, it can only be done by the most accurate use of the forces he has available.
13.0-00-0 14.h4!?
26 ... ~f7 27.~gl After 27.g6t the best is 27 ... ~f6 (not 27 ... ~e7 because of 2B.lDh2 !!hB 29.!!e2 !!gh4?? 30.ig5t). 27.. J~~h8t 28.~h3 ~e7 29.b3 J.f4 30J~~f3 ~e5 0-1
He is neglecting the centre! Why not 14.f4! If then 14 ... ttJd7, he plays 15 ..id2 ~hB! 16.!!ael ttJf6 17.i.cl (intending ttJe4-d2-f3-e5). After the general exchanges started on move 17, then we can still see a possibility of Black advancing his pawn majority.
Game 3 Aron Nimzowitsch 1heodor von Scheve
14... f5 15.~d2.bg2
Ostende 1907
He is avoiding the trap l5 ... ixh4 l6.ttJf3!. 16.~xg2 ~c6 17.~f3 Intending .if4.
1.~f3 d5 2.d3 ~c6 3.d4!
17...f4 Barring the gate. Next comes a final attempt at consolidation and then White's game collapses. 18J~el ~U6 19.W1e4 fxg3 20.fxg3 Jid6 The g3-pawn is weak, he is badly developed and has an open king position - too much of a bad thing, even when you have a centralized position. It can now be appreciated how much damage was done by l4.h4.
21.g4 W1xe4 22.gxe4 ~a.f8 23J~~e3 gf4 Less experienced readers should pay attention to the work done down the f-file.
Because now the opposing c-pawn is blocked by its own knight. 3••• e6 3... lDf6 is better. 4.e3 ~f6 5.c4 Jle7 6.~c3 0-0 7.J.d2 tlJe4 Correct play. Note that the invasion could hardly be successfully prevented by 7.id3 either (instead of 7.id2 as played), e.g. 7 ..id3 ttJb4! B.ie2 c5.
8..id3 f5 Not very good! You cannot play a Stonewall with a knight on c6. Black should have contented himself with B... ttJxd2 9.~xd2 ttJb4 10.ie2 dxc4 11..ixc4 c5.
Chapter 1
17
9.a3 J.f6 10.'tYc2 ~hS 11.0-0 a6
In order to avoid a possible ltJb5. Instead, it was time to give up all hope of a Stonewall-like attack (along the lines of ... g5?); with the simple 11...ltJxd2 12.Wxd2 dxc4 13.i.xc4 e5 14J:!adl! e4! Black could still almost equalize (15.ltJ e 1 !!e8 16.f3 f4!). And why not: it is not easy to set up pressure in the twinkling of an eye with moves like d3, then d4 and then a3! In addition, Black has also achieved something: the diversion with the knight has got him the two bishops. So the possibility that things might still be level should not surprise us. 12J~acl
h6
13J~fdl
Compare the set-ups of both sides: White has 2 centre files, 2 centralized bishops and a monster of a knight, whilst the black pawns on c6 and e6 and the bishop on d7 are all hanging. Black has two knights making a diversionary attack and ... nothing else. No wonder that the black attack which now gets going is repelled with terrible losses for the attacking side.
26...'iNg6 27.J.b6 ~hf3t 2S.gxf3 gxf6 29.AxdS ~xf3t 30.~f1 gf7 31.J.f6t gxf6 32.e:xf6 ~xh2t 33. ~el ~f3t 34. ~e2 f4 35J;xd7 1-0
2. Sins of omission committed in the centre
g5
This would only be playable if White were not in the position of being able to open the central files. With an open centre, on the other hand, a flank attack seems hopeless.
14.J.el g4 15.~e5! Now the d-file which was previously in waiting is opened. See the next note.
15 ...Axe5 16.dxe5 ~g5 If 16 ... ltJxe5 then 17.cxd5 exd5 18.i.xe4 fxe4 19.!!xd5 etc. 17.~e2 'iNeS IS.,ic3 dxc4 19..bc4
The effectiveness of the d-file is immense: Black cannot achieve any sort of attacking set-up.
19.. .J.d7 20.~f4 gdS 21.b4 b5 22.J.b3 ~e7 23.,id4 c6 24.'iNa2 ~g6 If 24 ... ltJd5 then 25.i.xd5 cxd5 26.!!c7 etc. 25.~h5 ~h4 26.~f6
In game 4 Black had made a breakthrough, but with correct play White could have tidied up the position, starting from the centre (move 21). He omitted to do so and was at a disadvantage. In game 5 White was threatened by an attack on his king, but the opportunity presented itself to start a counterattack in the centre. He did not make use of it, because he could see in it no immediate success and rightfully lost to the opponent's attack on his king. In game 6 Black was in the act of occupying some points in the centre. White should have combated this, because central squares should absolutely never be given up without a fight. But White underestimated the "central danger" and so his opponent was able to build up a powerful central position. The errors which have been sketched in should be attributed not only to insufficient knowledge
Chess Praxis
18
of central strategy but also to a certain mood of panic. And the moral of the story? Well, even in apparently critical positions you can quite often redress the situation if you start from the centre, so: "Centralize and do not despair!"
21. ..fxe422.fxe4
Game 4 Erich Cohn Aron Nimzowitseh Ostende 1907
l.d4 1tJf6 2.1tJ£3 d6 3..if4 ltJh5
22 ... ~g7!
23.exd5? ltJg4 24.~e4 .ixh2t 25.~h1 ~xe1 26.dxe6t Or 26.:!:!xel l2Jf2t followed by mate in two moves. 26 .. ..ioo 27.~xOOt ~xOO 28.~xf8t ~xf8 29.ltJxOO ~f2 0-1
Game 5
As early as 1907 I was going my own way! 4.J.d2 1tJf6 5.e4 1tJ bd7 6.i.e3 Or 6.l2Jc3 e5 7.e4 i.e7 and the tempo presented to White (i.c1-d2) appears unimportant.
l.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 ad5 4.e3 1tJc6 5.,if4
.is An innovation.
6 ... 00 7.e3 d5 7 ... b6 is better, followed by ... i.b7
8.e5 Playable.
8 ... ltJe4 9 ..id3 S 12.ltJe3
Rudolf Spielmann Aron Nimzowitseh Karlsbad 1923
10.M g6 11..ib2 .ig7
12.0-0 then e5 and f3 was appropriate in the position.
12... 0--0 13.~e2 c6 14.~e2 ~e7 15.0--0 I would have preferred 15.l2Je5.
15 ... e5 16.dxe5 ltJxe5 17.~xe5 he5 18.ltJd4 .id7 19.£3! 1tJf6 20J~ae1 ~ae8 21.e4? The decisive error. Correct was 21.f4 i.c7 (21...Ld4 22.i.xd4) 22.l2Jf3 and then i.d4, when White's position appears to have been consolidated; the move played leads to ruin ... in a hurry.
6.~£3 00 7.~b3 ~d7 8.~bd2 f6
Chapter 1 This secures eS and prepares a general advance on the kingside. A diversionary strategy is justified here because Black's own centre seems not so badly secured, since e6 is well protected and the fS-b 1 diagonal looks both "central" and pleasant. The fact that an attack on the wing is inadmissible when your own centre is badly secured is something we have frequently emphasized.
9..te2 9.c4 was called for, e.g. 9.c4 i.b4 10.cxdS exdS 11.i.bS with equality, or 9... ltJb4 10Jkl and White has nothing to fear!
19
22..ta 22.f3 would have permitted longer resistance.
22 ..• tLlf5! 23..he4 dxe4 24.tLlf4 24 .gxe4 ~ dS etc.
24...e5 25.tLle2 tLlh4t 26.hh4 Wg4t Followed by mate in a few moves.
0-1 Game 6 Frederick Yates ArOD Nimzowitsch London 1927
9...g5 10..lg3 h5 l1.h3 tLlge7 12.0-0 At this point c3-c4 would not have noticeably improved the situation in the centre, e.g. 12.c4 dxc4 13.i.xc4 ltJdS with a huge central knight; and yet White should have preferred this line.
12•. ..th6 13.tLlel g4 14.Wdl.bd2 This wins a pawn.
15.Wxd2 gxh3 16.tLld3 b6 17J~fel h4 18..th2
mf7
Not IB ... O-O-O on account of 19.1tJcS!.
19.94
1.e4 c5 2.tLla tLlf6 My new move from San Sebastian.
3.e5 tLld5 4.i.c4 tLlb6 5.i.e2 tLlc6 White has lost two tempi with the bishop, but on the other hand the knight is not so well placed on b6, so the bishop manoeuvre should not be criticized.
6.c3 d5 7.d4 He should have preferred 7.exd6.
7 ... cxd4 8.cxd4.lf5 9.0-0 e6 10.tLlc3 .le7
White is lost after other moves too.
19••. hxg3 20.hg3 h2t 21.~g2
l1.tLlel 21. ...le4t Here there was a clear win after the continuation 21. .. eS!, e.g. 22.dxeS i.e4t 23.£3 gagB 24.e6t ~xe6 2S.ltJf4 ~g4! or 24.~f4 (instead of 24.e6t) 24 ... ltJfS 2S.fxe4 ltJxg3 26.~xf6t cj;>eB 27.e6 hI ~t 2B.gxhl ltJxhl t and wins.
Should the planned attack with f4 then g4 and fS really turn out to be possible, this would constitute proof that B...i.fS was wrong, and that would be nonsense. But in reality, nothing special is achieved after II.ltJ eland this diversion should have been replaced by a properly thought out plan down the c-file. e.g. 11..te3 0-0 12.!kl followed by a3 and b4, then ltJf3-d2-b3-cS, and
20
Chess Praxis
the sort of outpost recommended in My System is achieved. 11. •• tLld7! 12•.tg4! Ingenious play! Mter 12.f4? there would have followed 12 ... lLlxd4 13.Wfxd4?? !c5. Another unfavourable move would be 12.!e3 on account of 12 ... lLldxe5 13.dxe5 d4 14.!d2 dxc3 15.!xc3 Wfc7 with something of a positional advantage for Black. With the help of the text move (12.!g4) Yates makes possible f4 which he had been aiming for in a totally surprising way! 12•• ..tgG 13.£4 tLlxd4 14.tLlxdS! tLlc6! 14 ...!c5 was met by the strong 15.b4; 14 ... exd5 would be quite bad on account of 15.!xd7t and then 16.Wfxd4. IS.tLlxe7 Wfb6t 16.hl tLlxe7
17.Wfa4 Here we have just the sort of typical mistake mentioned in our preliminary notes! Obviously Black is planning to occupy the central squares, and naturally White should contest this, instead of simply avoiding it by means of 17.Wfa4. So 17.Wfe2! (intending !e3) 17 ... lLld5 IB.!f3 Wfc5 19.!d2 lLl7b6 20-Ekl Wfe7 and now possibly 21.ie3 leaving White with "more" of the centre than Black. But even if he had not achieved that "more", so what! He still had to fight! But now his deserved punishment is not long in coming. 17•••hS 18•.th3 Forced, because after IB.!f3 then IB ... lLlf5 would follow with fresh territorial gains in the
centre; in addition a threat of mate would pop up with ... h4 followed by ... lLlg3t. 18•••.tfS 19.Wfa3 WfhS A manoeuvre to clear space for the d7 -knight which wants to get to b6 via d5. 20.gl tLlb6 21.Wfa tLlbdS 22.b3 Wfb6t 23J%fl
23 .• J:~c8 This move, in conjunction with the next one, leads to a decentralization of one rook, rather spoiling the so harmoniously constructed set-up. Harmony would not, on the other hand, have been disturbed by the continuation 23 ... 0-0-0!. After 24 ... cttbB and 25 ... g6, there would be nothing more to prevent the rooks being employed centrally, thus 26 ... Ei:d7 and 27 ... Ei:cB. But even better here seems to be 23 ...!g4!, e.g. 23 ...!g4 24.!xg4 hxg4 25.Wfxg4 Ei:xh2 26.Wfxg7 0-0-0 27.cttxh2 Wfxf2 2B.lDd3 Wfe2 and Black must win. Finally a combination of both lines is possible, namely 23 ... 0-0-0 24.!a3 and then 24 ...ig4. If then something along the lines of 25Jkl t cttbB 26.!c5 then 26 ... Wfxc5 27.Ei:xc5 !xf3 2B.Ei:xf3 Ei:cB with a victorious invasion via the c-file. 24•.idl gh6 Interesting. At long last, now that it has been centralized, Black's position can sustain an adventurous sortie. However it was more correct to play 24 ... 0-0! then ... g6 and ... Ei:fdB. 2SJ~dl .bh3 26.Wfxh3 tLlfS 27.Wfd3 ggG 28.tLla
Chapter 1
2S ... gg41 29.h3 gg3 30.a4 tDh4 Black's set-up is now suffering from an inner division. The position of the detached rook makes a mating attack seem desirable, but the other pieces are positioned more for an endgame. (The d5-knight would be hugely influential in an ending and also the light squares would without the slightest doubt be under Black's control.)
21
In game 8 Black, by means of a pretty pawn sacrifice, had made a nonsense of his opponent's blocking attempt and many nice continuations were open to him. But here too he had counted his chickens before they were hatched (in other words forgotten about the vitality of the centre); the blockade he had apparently swept away comes back to life and is able to throttle him.
31.i>fl gc6! To draw the sting from the threat of 'lWh7 and then 'lWg8: the rook runs away in good time. Moreover Black must manoeuvre with great care.
Game 7 3 Norwegian amateurs Aron Nimzowitsch
32.aS YMdS 33.i>gl tDf5
Oslo 1921
33 ... ltJxf3t 34.!hf3 !!xf3 35.'lWxf3 g6 would not be good on account of 36.f5.
34.i>h2 a63S.YMbl To threaten ltJd4.
3S...YMe7 He accepts the threat, but he has an eye on c5 ( ... 'lWc5).
36.tDd4 This loses. 36.!!c1 was better.
36...YMh4! Since the detached troops could not get back to the army, the army comes to them.
l.e4 e6 2.d4 dS 3.tDc3 .ib4 4.exdS exdS s.tDa J.g4 6.J.e2 tDe7 7.0-0 tDbc6 S..if4 Ad6 9.tDeS 9. 'IW d2 looks more natural.
9 .. .J.xe2 12.dxe5
10.tDxe2
AxeS
I1be5
tDxeS
Each side has its pawn majority, but the white one looks less mobile. Next came: 12...YMd7 13.f4 0-0-0 14.c3 i>bS IS.YMb3 cS 16J~ael
16.!!adl!
37.J.el If 37.ltJxc6 then 37 ... !!xh3t with mate in two.
37... tDxf4 Again threatening mate (by ... !!xg2t etc.).
3S.gxf4 gxh3t The simplest.
39.gxh3 YMxf4t 40. i>g2 tDe3t And mate in two. I received a prize of ten pounds for this game (for the best played game).
0-1 3. The vitality of troops in the centre The notes to game 7 enable us to show how a threatened centralization in the middlegame can be turned into one that can be used in the endgame. The use of this stratagem is important not only as a measure for self-defence (we have in mind those cases in which the defender intends to destroy the attacking forces by exchanges) but also when slow but steady progress is required.
16... hS! 17.i>hl tDf5 And now the mobility of White's majority has been reduced to a minimum. But it is a long way from there to a successful rolling up of the paralysed majority.
IS.tDgl h4 19.tDh3 d4 20.cxd4 cxd4 21.YMd3 tDe3 22.EUl YMdS
22
Chess Praxis
Nevertheless Black has achieved something, namely a strong central position, a good passed pawn even if it is blockaded and the possibility of ... f6. Next came: 23.a3 f6 The said rolling up of the apparently isolated pawn mass (as a result of ... lDe3) could now be prepared by .. .!!heB and when possible ... a7 -a6 (to threaten to break the blockade by ...'!Bb5). But the text move is completely correct and aimed at clarifying Black's advantage.
24.exf6 gxf6 25.5!
25 ... !!heB (instead of25 ... !!hgB) 26.!!fe2 lDxg2! 27.!!xeB lDf4t 2B.'!Be4 ~xeB and wins. 26.tLlf4 ~c6 The stratagem we have mentioned several times could have been reached here via the simple 26 ... '!Bxf5, e.g. 27.'!Bxf5 lDxf5 2B.lDh5 !!geB! 29.!!cl lDe3 30.lDxf6 ~e6. If you compare the position which has now arisen with that in the previous diagram, the unblocking of the passed pawn d4 must be reckoned as a definite plus. In addition, you can see that the centralization has taken on the character of an endgame, without losing any of its intensity. Next could come, for example, 31.lDd7t ~aB 32.lDc5 :gc6 33.lDd3 !!xcl t 34.lDxcl d3! 35.lDb3 (Or 35.!!d2? !!fB!. If 35.lDxd3 then 35 ... a6! 36.!!d2 lDg4! and wins.) 35 ... lDc4 36.lDd2 lDxb2 37.~f4 b5 then ... lDc4 and wins. For that reason 26 ...'!Bxf5 was the correct move, which would have allowed an easy and comfortable transition to the endgame (passing on the benefits of centralization!). The move chosen in the game (26 ...'!Bc6) does not allow matters to be cleared up at once.
27.tLlg6
25 .. J~hg8 It was necessary to prevent or draw the teeth from the move lDf4 which was obviously being planned. For that, the preventive move 25 ... !!heB was indicated and if then 26.lDf4 then 26 ... '!Bxf5 (even stronger and immediately decisive would of course be the combinatory refutation of 26.lDf4, namely the reply 26 ... lDg4!!) 27JWxf5 lDxf5 2B.!!xeB !!xeB 29.lDd3 lDd6! 30.!!xf6 ~c7 and all of Black's pieces are on standby to support the dpawn. The strategic content of the above variation could be characterized in the following way: Black's centralization has been passed down from the middlegame to the endgame: a stratagem which can be most heartily recommended in all suitable cases. However, in the name of objectivity I must point out that in no way does the move 25 ...!!heB automatically link to the stratagem I have just sketched in. The rook move to gB is therefore totally correct.
The correct move was 27.~gl because now Black could simply have won with the following elegant combination: (27.lDg6) 27 ... h3 2B.llJe7 '!Bc7! 29.lDxgB lDg4! 30JWg3 Wlxg3 31.hxg3llJxf2t 32.~gl llJd3 33.!!dl h2!t 34.~xh2 llJf2 35.!!fl llJg4t and then ... !!xgB. On the other hand, it would not have been easy for Black to show an advantage after 27.~gl!, e.g. 27.~gl! gg4 2B.Wle2 (2B.~xe3? Wlcl t) 2B ... ~dgB 29.llJg6 gBxg6 30.fxg6 gxg6 31.Wld2 Wle4 and Black's position may look impressive, but he has some work to do in the middlegame which he might not enjoy.
27... gde8? An error caused by time trouble. Black was playing three games simultaneously and thus had to make three times twenty moves per hour. As said, he had a simple win by 27 ... h3.
28.tLlxh4 gg4 29.tLla 'i'd5 30.gdl gge4 31. tLlxd4 tLlxgl This ought to have been of no more help to him, since after the error on move 27 the game could not be saved. But things turn out differently.
Chapter 1 32J~xe4 ~xe4 33.~e6!t
This is even clearer than 33.ttJf3 'Wxd3 34.E!xd3 ttJe3 3S.~d4 ~e8 36.cj;lgl and then cj;lf2. 33... bxe6 34.YlYxdS adS 3S.~xg2 ~eS
23
plan was S... 'Wb6 6.ie2 cxd4 7.cxd4 id7 with pressure against d4.
6 ..tbS .td7 7.0-0 YlYb6 Not 7 ... ttJxeS on account of 8.ttJxeS ixbS 9.'WhSt cj;le7 IO.'Wf7t cj;ld6 11.dxcS!t cj;lxeS 12.~e1 t cj;lfS 13.'WhSt gS and 14.g4 mate.
36.~f2
This one weak move gives the dying embers of Black's centralization a chance to flare up again. The correct move was 36.h4 and if then 36 ... ~xfS 37.~f2 ~hS 38.cj;lh3 £5 39.~d2 or 36.h4 cj;lc7 37.cj;lg3 cj;ld6 38.hS ~xfS 39.~h2 ~gst 40.cj;lf4 cj;le6 41.h6 ~g8 42.h7 ~h8 43.b4, and White wins. 36... ~e7 37.~g3 ~d6 38.~g4 ~e4t And Black won as follows: 39.~h5 Or 39.~f4? cj;leS 40.~xe4t cj;lxe4 and wins. 39... d4 40.~g6 ~eS 41.b4 ~g4t 42.~f7 ~f4 43J~xf4?
A blunder of course; but the game should be lost in any case. 43 ... ~xf4 44. ~xf6 d3 4S. ~g6 d2 46.£6 dl YlY Black won.
0-1 Game 8 Aron Nimzowitseh Grigory Levenfish Karlsbad 1911
8 ..be6 bxe6 9.exf6 ~xf6 I would have chosen 9 ... gxf6. 10.~eS .td6 l1.dxeS AxeS 12..tgS
This move, which leads to a total blockade of Black's central pawns, is the point behind White's moves 8-12.
12...YlYd8 13..txf6 YlYxf6 14.YlYhSt g6 IS.YlYe2 gd8 16.~d2 0-0 17.~ael gfe8 18.~hl .td6 19.f4 eS 20.e4 .tm The bridge between a blockading game (which is always a little devious) and outright attacking play is never an easy one to build. Now I think that this might best have been achieved by 20.'Wa6, e.g. 20.'Wa6 ib8 2 l.ttJ b3 'We7 22.ttJaS or 20.'Wa6 'We7 21.ttJdf3! and White is threatening, according to how things turn out, to follow up with 'Wxa7 or ttJgS. After 20.c4 if8 Black loses a pawn, but the loss is rather pleasant, because now the bishops come into play and White will not find it easy to suddenly change his own game which has been based on blockading.
21.c:xdS J.e8 22.~e4 YlYg7 23.dxe6 l.e4 e6 2.d4 dS 3.eS eS 4.e3 ~c6 S.~f3 £6 Strategically wrong. Pawn chains should only be attacked at the base - here d4. So the correct
After 23.d6! the aforementioned change would not have been necessary, but I wanted to "evaluate" the pawn sacrifice; 23.d6 would have won easily.
24
Chess Praxis
23 .. ..he6 24.'Wa6 ~h8 25J~dl.ig8 26.b3 gd4 27 J~xd4 cxd4 28.'Wa5 White avoids provoking the mighty bishops by some sort of diversion with a knight (ltJg5). With the text move he prevents ... .E!d8, but allows the occupation of the c-file. The struggle now becomes very dramatic.
This game consists of two parts: 1. A surprisingly executed central blockade. 2. An interesting defence to an attempt by the opponent to lift the blockade by force. The first part of the game was, at the time it was played, unknown territory. The second part still is!
28 ... gc8 29J~Ml gc2 30.h3 'Wb7 31.gxd4 ~c5 Black's attack now seems all-powerful.
32.'Wd8!! The surprising point of this is 32 ...~xd4 33.~xd4 ~g7 (or worse will happen) 34.ltJd6!! and then 35.ltJe8 with an immediate win. Now I ask whether this salvation can be considered as mere chance? No, because the whole procedure is typical. If your opponent manages to break your central blockade by means of a pawn sacrifice, then just sit tight in the centre and wait for the opportunity to use a central blockading diagonal for a return sacrifice. This return sacrifice will then be decisive in its effect.
32...~e7 33.'Wd7 'Wa6 34.gd3 In order to play ~d4. Once again we have the blockading diagonal d4-h8!
34.••.tm 35.1t1flt hf7 Or 35 ... ~g7 36.~d4t and mate in two moves.
36.'Wxf7 gc8 A complete debacle.
37.gd7 1-0
4. We become more thoroughly acquainted with the centre. Some combined forms of centralization In game 9 we encounter some central terrain we know from game 7; but here (unlike in game 7) the blockader is brought down by direct attack. The central set-up in game 10 looks quite original, whereas in game 11 it is worth noticing how far into enemy territory the centralization can take place. That a central position (game 7) can also tie down points far away on the wings seems to be part of the essence of centralization. But from time to time this more or less automatically arising attacking effect is not sufficient and it turns out to be much more desirable to graft on to the central attack an attack on the flank. Such a procedure can be seen in game 12. But the fact that it is not absolutely necessary for the graft to be a diversionary attack is convincingly demonstrated by game 13: there the play which has been grafted on to the central attack is purely defensive. It must be pointed out that combined play (in the centre and on a wing at the same time) makes high demands on the solidity of your own setup; this helps us to understand the breakdown of combined play in game 14, where the queens ide turned out to be weak. Finally, in the extremely exciting game 15, we attempt by thorough analysis to define how much advantage one can expect from a centralized position.
Game 9 Frederick Yates Aron Nimzowitsch Semmering 1926
1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.1t1c3 Ab4 4.exd5 exd5 5..id3
Chapter 1
tlJe7 6.tlJge2 0--0 7.0--0 J.g4 S.O .ih5 A slight weakness has arisen on e3, which can only be exposed by the rather bold-looking advance c7-c5.
9.tlJf4.igG 10.tlJee2 Ad6 11.1!Yel
25
Black is clearly superior.
19J;0 Ab4 This seizes the e3-square for the black pieces.
20.a3 .bdl 21.1!Yxdl a5 22.tlJ g l ge3 23J~dl gaeS 24.1!Yfl The central territory here is similar to the one we saw in game 7. Here too the d4-pawn is the nucleus of the centralization, and the e3-square and the e-file which goes with it seem logically connected to it. And, in both games, Black's central pressure leads (or should lead) to the destruction of the white blockade on d3. Next came:
24...1!Yb3 25J~dl tlJd6 26.e5 tlJe4 27..be4 1!Yxe4
This can be classified as "neglect of the central complex" . Our central focussing lens clearly indicates 11.ixg6 and 12.ltJd3, and then the central squares c5 and e5 appear fixed.
11. ..e5! 12.dxe5 be5t 13.i>hl tlJbc6 14.J.dl geS 15.~xg6 hxg6 16.f4 A flank attack when the central position is inferior! Instead of this, the relatively best try was 16.VMh4 ltJf5 17.VMxd8 ~axd8 with only a slight endgame advantage for Black.
16... tlJ5 17.e3
Task completed, the blockade has fallen! You should now attempt the following test: first, on a separate board set up the position from the diagram on page 22, game 7; add the moves 25 ... ~hg8 26.lLlf4 and then study the note to move 26. Once you have done that, compare how matters developed there compared to the present game (game 9, moves 24-27). Then you should try to identify and understand the different strategies used in each case. Our explanation will be given at the end of the game. 2SJ~e21!Yd5
29.gcl 1!Ye4
And now lines such as 30 ... ~xf3 31.VMxf3 VMxf3 32.ltJxf3 ~e2 are in the air, with a decisive seizure of the second rank.
30.5 17 ... d4! IS.e4 ~6
An ingenious attempt to save himself.
26
Chess Praxis
30.. J~xf.3 31.~xf.3 Yfxf5 32.b4! axb4 33.axb4 ~xb4
The continuation 33 ... ltJe5 is also not bad, e.g. 34J~el ~e6.
34.Yfxd4 ~d3 35J~c2 Not 35.~c3 on account of 31. .. ~e1 t then
.. .Wlfl t and .. . ltJf2 mate. 35 ... ~c8
In game 9, the blockader falls in defence, in game 7 during an attack which his side was obliged to undertake. The attack in game 7 can be considered to be unwillingly pursued since White would otherwise have been crushed by his opponent's central mass. This ability to force a decentralized opponent into a premature flank attack is very typical of a powerfully centralized position.
A tempting but bad try would be 35 ... ltJe1:
Game 10 Richard Reti Aron Nimzowitsch Marienbad 1925 The introductory moves led via hypermodernlooking paths to a pawn formation well known from the Exchange Variation of the French Defence. l.c4 e5 2.~6 e4 3.~d4 ~c6 4.~c2 J.c5 5.~c3 ~f6 6.d4 exd3 7.exd3 d5 8.d4 J.e7
on account of 36.ge2!! ~xe2 37.Wld8t ~h7 38.ltJg5t ~h6 39.ltJxf7t ~h5 40.Wlh8t ~g4 41.Wlh3t ~f4 42.Wlg3t ~e4 43.ltJd6t winning the queen 2 •
36.gc3 ~xc5 We have to be dear about this: Black's continuation from moves 34 to 37 should be understood as being a centralization undertaken based on the central diagonal f5-b 1. The rest is then a matter of technique, above all the technique of the crouching (or frog) position. Next came:
37.h4 b6 38.~g5 ~f8!
And next came in enterprising blockading style:
No false shame now, the crouching position is only temporary.
9.c5 J.S
39.~6 Yfd7 4O.Yfc4 ~e6 41J~d3 Yfc8 42.Yfb5 The rook ending after 42.'iM'xc8 ~xc8 43.ltJxe6 fxe6 44J!d6 ~b8 45.~xe6 ~f7 would offer no
Attempting to break open the position with 9 ... b6 would have been premature, e.g. 9 ... b6 10.b4 a5 11.b5 and then c6.
prospects to White.
10..ld3
42 ...Yfclt 43.@h2 Yff4t 44.g3 Yfflt 45.@hl Yfflt 46.@h2 ~c5
Of course lo.ib5 and then possibly ixc6 would have been the natural continuation.
0-1 N.B. the answer to the question asked in the note to move 27.
10.. ...bd3 I1.Yfxd3 b6 Now is the correct time!
12.0-0
Chapter 1 12.b4 a5 13.b5 now fails to 13 ... ~b4 gaining a tempo.
12..•~ 12 ... bxc5 and then 13 ... hc5 does not work because of 14.Wfb5.
13.J.g5! h6! 14•.ih4 bxe5 15.dxe5lLle5 16.ti'd4 ttl g6 17..lg3 e6 Black has a good d-pawn (which is badly blockaded) and the possibility of an attack on c5. The possession of the central diagonal g3-b8 does not seem to me to be full compensation for that. White should have played 10.!b5.
18.ttlb4 ~c8 19.h3 ~e8
27
Seconded in an extremely unusual way! Two knights, one which can be driven away (by f3) and the other which is not protected ... and yet they are masters of the board. 26J~fe1
26.f3? ~e2t and then ... ~4g3t.
26•. .J.h4! The triple alliance is complete.
27•.ie5 White was already in difficulties. The text move loses a pawn.
27... gxe5 And then came:
A move which clears space for the knight and at the same time starts the occupation of the central file, which the opponent cannot contest on account of the difficulties he has with c5.
28.lLlxe5 .lxnt 29.ctt>f1 he1 30J~xd4 .ig3 31.lLlf3 ge8 32.~d1 ge6 33J~e1 ctt>f8
20.~ad1 ttlf8 21.ttld3 ti'a5
An elegant move, which prepares to answer ... @d7 with b5.
I saw that this would force 22. Wf a4 and for that case I had worked out a very original centralizing manoeuvre.
22.ti'a4 22.b4 Wfa3 23.!!bl ~e6 24.Wfe5 ~d7 25.Wfe1 i.f6 would be bad3 •
The king moves towards the threatened flank.
34.lLle3lLlxe3 35.~xe3 ~e4 36.a3 ctt>e8 37J~d3
37...a6 38.gd4 f5 39.a4 ctt>d7 40.b5 This fails to a small and yet study-like subtlety.
40 ••• axb5 41.axb5 cxb5 42J~xd5t
~exc5 26.bxc5
22...ti'xa4 23.ttlxa4 ttle4 The knight now occupies the centre which has been freed by the diversion of its counterpart.
24.J.h2 ttl e6 What is it aiming to do? The c5-pawn is easily protected!
25.b4
42 •.. ctt>c6!! Just like in game 1, the extra material is returned with thanks.
43.gd4 Or 43.!!xf5 b4, etc.
43...ctt>xe5 44J~xe4 fxe4 45.lLld2 ctt>d4 46.ctt>e2 .if4 47.ttlb3t ctt>e4 48.ttla5t ~e3 49.~b7 b4 50.ttle5 ~e2 51.g3 hg3 25 ... ttld4!
0-1
Chess Praxis
28
Game 11 Grigory Levenfish Aron Nimzowitseh Vilnius 1912
l.e4 e6 2.e4 e6 3.~f3 d5 4.exd5 exd5 5.cxd5 cxd5 6.i.b5t ~e6 7.0-0 ,id6 This allows Black's forces to be developed without disruption.
8.d4 ~ge7 9.,ig5 f6 10.,ih4 0-0 11.~bd2 Ag4 12.hc6 ~xc6 13.'iNb3,ib4 Reducing to absurdity White's attempts to show up his opponent's set-up as unstable. 14.~e5
Directed against the threat of 14 ... ~b6.
22 ... ~xel 23.'iNxe2 ~xg2 24.~d2 ~h4 25.~f3
14... ~xe5
~g6
14 ...ixd2 15.lLlxg4 g5 16.ig3 f5 17.~xb7 ~c8 would fail to the amusing reply 18.ie5! lLlxe5 19.~xc8 then 20.lLlxe5 with a pawn plus, even if it is hard to make anything of it.
Consolidation by concentrating forces in the rear. This seems particularly appropriate after the success of the raid, since such raids are often somewhat disorganizing as your forces become separated from each other. 26.i>hl g4 27.~d2 'iNd7 28J~~gl ~e2 That too!
15.'iNxb4
29.h3 g3 0-1
An amusing little game! Game 12 Dr Saviely Tartakower Aron Nimzowitseh London 1927
l.d4 e6 2.~f3 ~f6 3.e3 b6 4.J.d3 .ib7 5.~bd2 e5 6.0-0 ~e6 7.e3 ge8 8.'iNe2 J.e7 9.dxe5 bxe5 10.e4 d5 II.exd5 exd5 15 ... ~d3! 16.'iNxb7 J.e2 17JHbi ge8 The centralization which has been achieved right in the midst of the opposing camp is not without its humorous side. . 18.~fl g5 19.J.g3
£5 20.,ie5 gO 21.'iNa6 f4
22J~el
He rebels against fate, because 22.f3 ~c2 seems unbearable to him. Also 22.~dl would be just as hopeless as the text move.
Black has set up his position in an original fashion (moves 8 and 11). Play is approximately level, but even in this position Black has, as it were, preferential shares in the business of the centre, although they are hardly noticeable. Next came:
12.Aa6.ba613.'iNxa60-0 14J~dl 'iNe715.~fl gb8 16.'iNe2 ~fd8 16 .. J!e8 can be rejected since what is happening here is above all a consolidation of the position; the valuable d-pawn deserves a worthy escort.
17..ie3 h6!
Chapter 1
Central tactics: my intention was to deprive my opponent of almost all the central squares; his only central square f5 now loses most of its value (because ttJf1-g3-f5 would simply be met by ...i.f8, and White would not have a suitable attacking continuation since i.g5 is prevented. 18.tLl g3.it'S 19.YMc2 tLl g4 Black is searching for central positions (the e5square). 20.tLlfl tLlce5 21.tLlxe5 tLlxe5 22.b3 a5! An attack which is built on centralization. 23J~d2 c4 Another, possibly even "sounder" plan here consisted of ... !!d7, ... !!bd8 and ... a5-a4; if bxa4 then ... ttJc4 and the rooks go on to infiltrate via the b-file. 24.bxc4 24.!!ad1 would be a better defence, and if 24 ... ttJd3 then an exchange sacrifice on d3. 24••• tLlxc4 25.~d3
25 ••• a4! An important entry point should now be created on b2 by means of a4-a3. 26.tLld2 tLlxe3! 27.fxe3 After 27.!!xe3 d4 28.!!d3 ib4 White would for the first time be in real danger. 27 •••YMa7 28.~bl gxbl t 29.YMxbl .ic5 30.~fl gb8 31.YMc2 YMd7 White's weaknesses, the e3-pawn, the b2-square and the somewhat vulnerable king position are now treated according to the rules of the art (see
29
Chapter 5 on manoeuvring techniques against weaknesses, page 137). 32.tLlf3 32.c4? d4! 32 •••YMe6 33.YMe2 33.Wfxa4? ixe3t! 33 .•. a3! At last! 34.~d2 ~bl 35.tLld4 YMf6t 36.YMf3 YMe5 And Black has reached his high point, both in the centre and on the flank. (Because what could be more "central" than e5, and what could be more effective than an infiltrating rook, which in addition controls the 2 nd rank?) 37.g3 An error which should decide matters at once, but which was not exploited by Black. The only possible move was 37.Wfg3 which would be followed by 37 ... ixd4 38.cxd4 Wfe6 and White can still put up some (feeble) resistance. A plausible variation might be 39.Wfc7 (to anticipate ... Wfa6) 39 ... Wfa6 40.Wfd8t ~h7 41.Wfxd5 Wffl t 42.~g3 !!b2 and wins. Worth noticing here is the decisive cooperation of the a3-pawn.
37 •••hd4? There was an immediate win with 37 ... !!c1. If 38.ttJe2 then 38 ... ixe3t or if 38.ttJc6 then 38 ... Wfxc3 (the simplest) and wins. 38.cxd4 YMe6 39.~g2 Enabling !!f2 with some counterplay down the ffile, but White's game cannot be held. 39 .•. gb2
30
Chess Praxis
Black's main trump! 40J~f2 5 41.'tt g l gbl t Time trouble. The correct move was 41. .. ~h7 42. ~g2 (The f-pawn is untouchable, e.g. 42.1!Nxf5t 'Mrxf5 43.~xf5 ~xa2 44.~xd5 ~b2 and Black forces the a-pawn through.) 42 ... ~g6 43.~gl 'Mre4 and wins in similar fashion to the game.
49.'ttdl Threatening to eliminate the annoying invader: the b2-rook.
49...g5 A rescue attempt from the other side. After 50.~xb2 axb2 51.~c2 f4 White is lost.
42.'tt g2 g6
50.ge2 f4! 51.gxf4 gxf4 52.ge5t 'ttd6 53.exf4 gxa2
Protecting the f-pawn directly like this is far from being as effective as protecting it indirectly, cf. the previous note.
We now have the 71h rank "absolute" and a passed pawn. 54J~~a5 e3 55.'ttel gal t 56.'tte2 a2 57.5 ghl
43.Ylf4 Yle4t 44.Ylxe4 dxe4
Black won in a few moves.
45.ge2 Black is back on track. After 45.g4 fxg4 things would have come to a halt, e.g. 46.~f6 ~b2t 47.~g3! (certainly not back to the first rank) and White need not lose. It is clear that this saving possibility which came out of the blue was never really "on", because after 41. .. ~h7 and 42 ... ~g6 Black could have exchanged queens without allowing White any hope of a breakthrough.
45 ...'tt£1 What follows is an endgame which is charming in its simplicity and which is a model of the special case I treated in My System: the 7 th rank "absolute" together with a passed pawn almost always wins. (We call it "absolute" whenever, as is the case here, the rook shuts the king in on the 8 th [or 151] rank.)
46.'ttf2 'tte6 47.gd2 'ttd5 48.'tte2 gb2 The sealed move, after which Black had foreseen the following breakthrough:
58.'ttxe3 al" 59J3xal gxaI60.'ttf4 ggl 61.h3 'ttd5 62.h4 h5 63.f6 'tte6 64.£1 gg4t 65.'tta 'ttxf7 0-1 In spite of the carelessness on move 41, the main idea stands out clearly: the combination of pressure in the centre and a flanking manoeuvre. An instructive example!
Game 13 Fritz Samiseh
Aron Nimzowitseh Berlin 1928
l.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.~e3 ~f6 4.Ag5 lie7 5.e5 ~g8
With this move, which has a bad reputation, Black introduces a new and noteworthy plan of campaign.
6.11.e3 b6
Chapter 1
This is the point: the plan is to play ....ia6 to exchange the light-squared bishops.
7.'i'g4 g6 S.h4 h5 9.'i'g3 J.a6 10.~f3 Lfl 11.~xfl 'i'd7 Now amongst other threats there is the diversion ... V9c6, followed by ... b6-b5-b4. Notice how the white squares such as c2, c4 and b5 suffer from a certain weakness; that was the point behind the exchange of bishops.
12.a3 ~c6 Black can be content with his queen's transfer to d7. After all, a3 is now a weakness. 13J~dl
White defends prophylactically, which makes the game more interesting. Samisch, moreover, is one of those few players who fight for the central points. He is indeed a player with a brilliant sense of strategy. 13... ~a5 14.~g5 ~h6 15.J.el 0-0-0 16.'i'd3
31
IS.cit>gl He underestimates the danger; the rook had to go to f3 at once, because now its exit will be blocked. After 18.E!:f3 there would come 18 ... tDf5 19.93 f6 20.exf6 ixf6 (threatening ... tDc6 then e6-e5) 21.E!:e 1! E!:e8! 22.E!:f4! ixg5 (not 22 ... e5 on account of the exchange sacrifice 23.dxe5 ixe5 24.tDxd5 ixf4 25 ..ixf4) 23.hxg5 tDc6 and Black would have something of an advantage because of the chance of a breakthrough with e6-e5. The opening has turned out in Black's favour.
IS ... ~f5 19.~e2 'i'dS! Now 19 .. .f6 would not be so strong because of 20.tDf3.
20.g3 The threat was 20 ... tDxh4, see the first part of the note to move 18.
cit>bS 17.gh3 White's position now looks to be well consolidated, since the danger that will be posed by Black's knight on c4 may be considered to be purely localized. After ... c7-c5 there can always be d4xc5 with defensive chances (based on the d-file), and, what is the most important, the g5-knight, which can never be exchanged without conceding to the recapturing bishop a marvellous diagonal, keeps the whole kingside under pressure.
17... gdfB As will be seen shortly, this move is not without its sting.
20 ...e5 21.dxe5 bxe5 22.~g2 'i'b6 The idea now is to attack the e-pawn intensively, until f4 is played; then ....ixg5 will finally be played as the c1-bishop can no longer recapture and so the "tDg5 problem" appears to be solved!
23.£4 He could have delayed f2-f4 for a few moves, but Samisch, for whom consolidation has become a psychological necessity, cannot stand the sight of unprotected pawns.
23 .. ..ixg5 24.hxg5 gc8 25J~h2 ghdS The newly available rooks become gluttons for work. 26.~h3 d4
32
Chess Praxis
A slow advance of the central pawn mass accompanied, step by step, by the centralization of the pieces which support the advance. 27.~a gd5 28.b3 c4! 29.b4llJc6 30.c3 d3
This leads to a pleasing and apparently correct continuation. And yet from a practical point of view it would have been better to give preference to the strategy of simplification which we have illustrated on several occasions: Black would have been able without any special effort to carry over into the endgame parts of the centralization, as follows: 30 ... Ekd8 31.cxd4 ttJcxd4 32.ttJxd4 ttJxd4 Now 33.\We4 (counter centralization) would fail to 33 ... ttJf5. But 33.\Wf2 would be met by 33 ... ttJb3, and for example 34 ..ie3 \Wb7 with an overwhelming positional superiority.
40 ... cxd3 41.llJxd4 ~xd4 42.~g3 ~e4? 42 ... \Wal 43.f3 \Wxa3 44.e3 c7 would have won easily. 43.gh2 ~b7 44.a4 ~c6 45.a5 ~d5 46.h5 gxh5
47.gxh5 There now begins, as it were, a whole new game after Samisch missed a chance to draw. 47...~e2 48.gh2 ~dI49.gn ~e4 50.~h2 ~fS 51.gg2 ~f1 52.~g3 ~e4 53.:an ~hl 54.gg2 ~d4 55.gh2 ~dl 56.gg2 ~c4 57.gn ~hl 58.gh2 ~e4 59.gn ~b3 60J;h2 ~c2 61.:an ~dl 62.gh2 ~c6 63.~g4 ~c2 64.~g3
31.llJ g l dl 32J~hxdl gxdl 33..bdl gd8 34.~e2
If34 ..ic1 then 34 .. Jhdl 35.\Wxdl \Wf2 36.ttJe2 c8 37.\Wa4 \Wf3 and wins, or 37.a4 ttJe7 followed by ... ttJd5 and ... ttJe3 with an immediate win.
34... gd3 35.llJa ~d8 36JUI ~d5 37.gn
64 ... ~xdl The only chance!
65.:axdlt ~xdl 66.fS! ~e3 67.g6 fxg6 68.f6? He is afraid of ghosts. 68.fxe6 would have led a draw. e.g. 68 ... d2 69.e7 dl \W 70.e8\W \Wf3t 71.h2 f2? 72.\Wxg6. 68 ... dl 69.f7 dl~ 70.f8~ ~gl t 71.~h3 ~e4 72.b5? ~hl t 73.~g3 ~el t 74.~g4 ~xa5 75.~d6 ~b6 76.~g5 ~xb5 77.~f6 ~f1 t! 78.~g7 'iffS 79.~c6t ~xe5 80J~c5t ~e4 81.Wxa7 e5 82.Wgl ~d5 83.Wdl t ~c5 84.Wclt ~b5! 85.Wb2t ~c6 86.Wc3t ~d7 87.Wdlt ~e8 88.Wd5? Wd7t 0-1 After 88.\Wa5 White could still put up some resistance; a very interesting queen ending. to
37 ... h4 The triumph of middlegame-style centralization. White now loses his queen.
38.gxh4llJcd4 39.cxd4llJxd4 40.~xd3 He had nothing better. The endgame should now be an easy win, but tiredness (which would hardly have set in if! had played .. Jkd8 instead of the pawn sacrifice) caused Black to make a serious mistake, which nearly deprived me of the fruits of my labours.
Chapter 1
Game 14 AJexanderAJekhine Aron Nimzowitseh St Petersburg 1914; play-off for the first prize in the St Petersburg tournament
l.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.~e3 ~f6 4.exd5 ~xd5 5.~B b6 6•.ib5t c6 7•.id3 .ie7 8.0-0 ~d7 9.~xd5 ad5 lO.YlYe2 0-0 11..if4 .ib7 l2.e3 J.f6 l3J~~fel YlYe7 l4..ia6 .ixa6 l5.YlYxa6 tilb8 l6.YlYb5 YlYb7 l7J~e3 ~c6 l8.YlYd3 g6 19..ih6 .ig7 20.J.xg7 ~xg7 21.gael YlYe7 22.h4 gae8 23.h5 YlYf4 24.~e5 ~xe5 25.gxe5 ge7 26.S3 YlYf6 27.YlYe3 gd8 28.~g2 ged7 29J~hl ~f8 30J~h4 ~e8 31.YlYh6 ~e7 32.gf4 YlYh8 33.gel ge8 34.ghl YlYg8 35.YlYg5t b8 was worth considering.
l1.tDxe5 he5 12.£4 The pressure from the centre down the d6h2 diagonal has led to a loosening of White's position. 12....id4t 13.hl ge2 25 •.ie3 .be4
27.hd4?7 Returning the compliment for Black's error in time trouble. This one was also made in time trouble. 27J~kdl tLld3 28.ixd4 ~xd4 29.ixe2 ltJxf2t 30.~xf2 ~xf2 31.ixc4 would have been decisive for White. 27•..Y;Yxd4 28 ..be2 .be2 29.Y;Yh3 White scarcely has anything better.
Chapter 2
29 •••'Wxd5t 30.gl hfl 31.'Wh6t eS 32.xf1 d7 33.'Wxh7t c6 Black should now win without difficulty.
34.'Wh3 ggS 35.M axb3 36.axb3 b7 37.gc3 gaS 3S.'Wa gal t Black makes his win that much harder: he should have left the rook on a8; the immediate ... tLle4 would have won easily. 39.g2 ~e4 40.~xe4 fxe4 41.gxc7t The resource made possible by 38 ... !!al t.
41. •• xc7 42.'Wc3t 44.'Wxal e3t
b7 43.'Wg7t
c6
The queen ending which follows is most instructive. Black has somewhat the better of it.
45.g3 'Wdl 46.'WaSt c5 47.'Wa3t d5 4S.'Wa4 'WeI t 49.g4 'We2t 50.g3 b5 51.Y!Yb4 ~fl
57
shield to protect his rear. The shield will consist of a pawn on d5.
63.'Wg7t f5 64.'Wflt e5 65.'We7t d5 66.'Wb7t d4 67.'Wb6t e4! As of yet there is no point in heading for b2. 6S.'Wc6t d5! Safe passage has now been provided!
69.'We6t d4 70.'Wb6t d3 71.'Wxb5t c2 0-1 If the pawn were on d6 instead of d5, then there would be a draw after 72.1M!c4t. To sum up: If23.@hl had been played instead of23.tLlxg7 it would hardly have been possible for Black to make decisive use of the e-file. On the other hand, the correct way of proceeding on the queens ide (19 ... b5 or 20 ... b5) would have resulted in quite an easy win for Black.
Game2S V. Buerger Aron Nimzowitsch London 1927
l.c4 ~f6 2.~c3 c5 3.g3 g6 4 ..ig2 .ig7 5.d3 0-0 6 •.idl e6 I was not afraid of threats from 1M! c1 and then ~h6, so I omitted the unimaginative ... h7 -h6
followed by ... @h7 or some such line.
7.'Wcl d5 S.~h3
52.h4
He definitely has an idea in his head! He thinks he can force a decision in the centre by tLlf4. But White quite correctly does not go for 8.~h6 d4 9.tLldl 1M!a5t.
There were drawing chances after 52.f5!. e.g. 52 ... @e5 53.1M!c3t @e4 54.1M!c6t with a draw.
S... d4 9.~a4 ~a6 10.a3 'WeS 11.b3 e5 12.~b2 .ig4
52 ..•'Wflt 53.g4 'Wg2t 54.f5 'Wc2t 55.g4 e6!
To prevent him castling, though I now believe 12 ... ~f5 was better. It was hard to spot that during the game.
White had missed this move in his calculations. If now 56.1M!xb5 then' 56 ...1M!g2t 57.@h5 1M!d5t and wins.
56.f5t 'WxfSt 57.g3 e2 5S.'Wc3 'Wfl 59.'We3t fl 60.~a7t g6 61.h5t From time to time some wood is thrown on to the fire in the hope of a perpetual check. 61. .. xh5 62.~h7t g5 Now the king escapes to b3. To get there he must arrange at the appropriate moment for a
13.~g5
Very cleverly played. He employs the knight usefully around the e4-square and at the same time removes it from the attack by the bishop. This means he is ready to continue with his sustained push far out on the queenside. In other words: White is seeking to counter his opponent's threatened central advance ... e5-e4 in a more "passive" manner and to graft on to this restraint
58
Chess Praxis
some sharp attacking play on the queens ide (remember the introductory remarks).
13 .. J~ib8 14.M b6 IS.bSlLlce7 16.a4 Ac8! To swap off the g2-bishop.
17.aS J.b7 18.0 It was simpler to play 18.i.xb7 ~xb7 19.axb6 axb6 20.0-0. The a-file might not be important immediately, but would have had to be continually watched by the opponent, thus diverting forces away from the kingside.
18... lLle6 19.a6
27.gxf6 Somewhat better would have been 27 .~g I. After 27 ... fxg5 there would follow 28.hxg5, and White retains his d2-bishop for the protection of the breakthrough square f4, which is not the case after the text move. However, 27.~gl could have been met by 27 ... f5 and Black brings all his pieces into contact with e4. For example, the knight via f8, e6, c7, e8 to d6; the queen would be best placed on c7, the rooks on the e-file. And finally the breakthrough e5-e4 would be decisive. Just a few months ago I considered shutting things off like this to be playable. But nowadays I tend much more to think that White's defence, which from now on consists only of passive resistance, must fall apart sooner or later. 19.axb6 should be played.
19...J.a8! Putting it in the corner where it has no moves, but hoping, after preparation, for the breakthrough e5-e4.
20.h4 Further weakening his position. It was relatively better to playlDb2-dl-f2, in order to do something about the advance e5-e4 (= preventive tactics, but they would not have worked since White's defence is too passive).
2o... lLlhS 21.lLlxe6 YMxe6 22.g4lLlf6 It was worth considering the pawn sacrifice 22 ... lDf4 23.j,xf4 exf4 24.~xf4 j,e5 25.~d2 ~d6 followed by ... j,f4.
23.J.h3 YMd6 24.lLldl hS 2S.gSlLlh7 26.lLln f6
27...hf6 28.Ag5 Lgs 29.hxgS gf4! See the first part of the previous note.
30.gg1 gbf8 Winning the pawn by 30 ... ~e7 31.~d2lDxg5 32.0-0-0 would be pathetic.
31.Af1 gh4!
Chapter 2 This prevents 32.~h3 because of the possibility of 32 ... e4 33.dxe4 Wh2, winning a piece.
32.YMd2 ~h2! 33.~g2 Forced. The pressure exerted by the h2-rook is just too strong.
33... ~xg2 34..ixg2
59
I though for 20 minutes about whether there was a quicker win by 37 ... h4.1t would be followed by 38.~hl ~h3t 39.~f1 Wh2 40.J.xh3 Wxhl t 41.~f2 Wxal and the complications after the attack by 42.Wh6 would be unpleasant for Black. But 41. .. Wxh3 42.:8:g1 Wh2t 43.:8:g2 Wf4 would have won easily.
38.YMxg5 YMIgS 39.exf3 YMe3 40.~dl YMb3 41.~cl g5 42.'it>h2 YMe3 43.~f1 YMe2 44.~h3 d3 45.~f2 d2 46.'it>gl YMxc4 47.~dl YMcl 48.J.h3
g4 49.fxg4 .be4 The bishop gets out at last.
50.gxh5 .is 0-1
3. Restraint of a qualitative majority (especially a majority in a pawn chain)
34... e4! The point behind the combination which exchanged rooks.
35.dxe4 YMg3 The breakthrough becomes a break-in.
36.'it>f1 If 36.J.f1 then 36 ... J.xe4.
36... ~IgS 37.'it>gl If 37.~hl then 37 ... ~xe4 38.~xg3 ~xd2t followed by ... ~xc4 and the bishop which was shut in on a8 has the d5-square at its disposal.
37... ~xf3
We shall begin with an explanation of the concept of a qualitative majority. As I wrote in my treatment of The Blockade: "A majority, e.g. three pawns against two, must of course be restrained; but in this sense, we must consider as a majority positions in which there is on one wing a pawn superiority of an ideal nature, not of numbers. In my game against Jacob Bernstein in Karlsbad 1923 (I had the white pieces), after the moves l.~S ~f6 2.d4 d5 3.c4 e6 4.~c3 J.e7 5.e3 0-0 6.a3 a6 7.c5 c6 8.M ~bd7 9.J.b2 YMc7 10.YMc2 e5 11.0-0-0! e4
we reached a position in which White has an ideal majority on the queenside and Black has one
60
Chess Praxis
on the kingside. Why? Because the e4-pawn is better than the e3-pawn and on the other side c5 is a better pawn than c6. If Black were not stopped, he would set up an attack by means of ... f5, ... g5, ... f4; this attack would be no less ferocious than the pawn storm of a real majority. As was the case with the latter, here the threat would be the establishment of a wedge (by ... f4-f3) and the opening of lines (by ... f4xe3) followed by the capture of the e3-pawn which has been exposed from the side (rather than from the front). Now, if you recognize such a formation as a majority, this implies that you must undertake some measures against it. So next came 12.~h4! ~b8 (to prevent lDf5) 13.g3! ~e8 14.~g2 f5 15.h4 and Black's kingside, which was apparently ready to advance has been paralysed. After a few moves the restraint turned into a blockade (by lDf4)!" The game ended: 15 ... i.dB 16.a4 b6 17.b5 lDf6 IB.lDf4 axb5 19.axb5 'Wlf7 20.i.e2 i.c7 21.cxb6 i.xf4 22.gxf4 i.d7 23.md2 cxb5 24j~al lDc6 25.i.xb5 lDa5 26.i.e2 :8:fbB 27.lDa4 i.xa4 2B.:8:xa4 :8:xb6 29.i.c3 lDb3t 30.'Wlxb3 :8:xb3 31.:8:xaBt lDeB 32.i.dl :8:xc3 33.mxc3 'Wlc7t 34.md2 mf7 35.i.h5t g6 36.:8:hal 'Wlb6 37.i.e2 mg7 3B.mellDc7 39.:8:Ba5 mh6 40.mfl 'Wlb3 41.h5 lDeB 42.:8:a6 'Wlb2 43.hxg6 hxg6 44.:8:6a2 'Wlb7 45.:8:a7 'Wlb2 46.mg2 lDf6 47.:8:hl t lDh5 4B.i.xh5 gxh5 49.:8:hal 1-0 That was what I had to say in 1he Blockade. I should like to add the remark that the superiority of the e4-pawn over its counterpart on e3 was founded on the fact that the e3-pawn was blocked in its attempts to reach the centre (a terrible fate for a central pawn). The e4-pawn, on the other hand, has reached the centre. The strategy to be employed against a qualitative majority has already appeared with such clarity in games 13 and 27 that we think we need only recommend that you look at them. On the other hand, my teacher's conscience requires that we look into a stratagem which has not yet been examined closely: "the king's flight as a relieving measure". The following situation is typical: a qualitative majority which slowly rolls forward will destroy the opposing pawn chain. This would also result
in the defending side's king being exposed, which would be doubly unpleasant. Relief can be obtained by restraining the advancing majority long enough for one's own king to take flight; the attack is not being prevented, but simply weakened in its effect. The above procedure can be seen clearly in games 29 and 30.
Game 29 Louis Van Vliet Aron Nimzowitsch Ostende 1907 This game has already appeared in my pamphlet 1he Blockade. But fresh study of it has led me to partially revise the opinions I expressed on it and so I am including it here. In the opening Van Vliet showed that he intended to put pressure on e5. I.d4 d5 2.~a c5 3.e3 e6 4.b3 ~f6 5.~d3 ~c6
6.a3 ~d6 7.~b2 0-0 8.0-0 b6 9.~e5 ,ib7 10.~d2 a6 11.£4 I now considered it was time for some counteraction, so:
11. .. b5 12.dxc5! hc5 13.YMa For someone versed in the strategy of centralization, White's manoeuvre 12.dxc5 and 13.'Wlf3 represents an attempt to control those central squares which have become free and go on to occupy them at a later date. It is obvious that Black will not just look on, but for his part will struggle for the control of the central squares.
13 ... ~d7
Chapter 2
This attacks the e5-knight which has apparently been uprooted by 12.dxc5. In doing so, Black is apparently being extremely logical. But it is not the best move: a central knight (the f6-knight is definitely that as it is controlling e4) which is also protecting its own castled position should only be moved in an emergency, and this is not one. There was a possible sound move against the centre with 13 ... EkB (instead of 13 ... lDd7). This would be followed, as in my game against Dus-Chotomirski in Karlsbad, by 14.1Wg3 lDxe5! 15.txe5 td6 16.td4 1We7! 17.b4 g6! IB.1Wg5 and now Black could easily have equalized by IB ... lDd7 19.1Wxe7 txe7 20.e4 lDf6. It is interesting that instead of 13 ... lDd7, an immediate advance by ... d5-d4 was worth considering for Black. The attempt does fail after (13 ... d4) 14.lDxc6 dxe3 15.lDe4! lDxe4 16.lDxdB e2t 17.@hl exfl1Wt IBJhfllDf2t 19.1Wxf2 txf2 19.1Dxb7, but though not good enough, it is instructive: it tells us that the ... d5-d4 advance must be prepared. So 13 .. JkB! and if14.1Wg3 then either 14 ... lDxe5 as against Dus or 14 ... d4 15.e4lDxe5 16.fxe5lDd7 17.lDf3 with chances and counter-chances. After the text move Black gets an extremely difficult game. 14.~xc6 hc6 15.~g3! ~f6
If 15 ... f6 then 16.1Wh3! f5 and now White occupies the central squares by 17.b4 te7 IB.lDb3 tf6 19.1Dd4, but Black seems able to put up stiff resistance in the variation given after 19 ...1WcB followed by ... g6 and ... lDb6. So 15 ... f6 appears to be the correct move. After the text move the black position appears to allow White to remain in the driving seat by playing any order of moves he wants - he need not follow the strategic plan which was described.
61
17.~h3
Played in homespun style. A "system" player would have more likely thought of "the pawn sacrifice for blockading purposes", namely 17.lDf3! txe3 t lB. @hl, and White is occupying the central squares d4 and e5. Black's extra pawn would have no positive value as far as mobility is concerned, in fact its effect would be more negative, as it would get in the way of its own pieces. But, as was said, 17.1Wh3 is also very strong.
17... h6 To provoke g2-g4 and so sharpen the struggle. Another possibility consisted of 17 ... d4, e.g. IB.e4 e5 19.fxe5 td7 (not 19 ... lDd7 on account of 20.e6) 20.1Wg3 lDg4 21.!!del though in this case White's position would be preferable.
18.g4 d4 To force a locking of the pawn formation, a stratagem we shall later get to know in "From the workshop of the blockade" as an important component of the blockade.
19.e4 ~d7
This is of course a colourless sort of move. The central strategy with 16.b4! and lDb3 was really not so hard to find.
In order to meet 20.g5 with 20 ... e5. The question is whether it would not have been better to play 19 ... e5. For example, 19 ... e5 20.fxe5 lDd7 21.lDf31We7 22.1Wg3 !!aeB 23.g5 h5. In this case too, Black's position does not inspire much confidence.
16... a5
20J~del e5 21.£5 ~h7
Black goes full out: now b4, etc. is no longer possible and a3 also seems weak. Despite this, White's position is hard to get at because he has a powerfully centralized game.
Black fights as hard as he can against the threat of g2-g4 (after a preparatory queen move and then h2-h4) but he is already planning a future flight by his king. It would now be of great strategic interest
16J~~adl
62
Chess Praxis
to investigate the following question: would it not have been simpler to prepare for the flight by 21...Wfe7 and then ... ttJf6-d7 and ... f7-f6; and would this not have saved two tempi compared to the manoeuvre in the game? (Because in the game the knight makes the journey ttJf6-h7-f8d7.) Answer: 21...Wfe7 would have been met by 22.ttJf3 ttJd7 23.ttJh4! preventing ... f7-f6 and the flight of the king. (But on the other hand the threat of 24.f5-f6 and then ttJf5 would have been unpleasant.) In the manoeuvre we recommended in the introductory remarks, (namely "Restrain until the king has fled") speed is not the most important thing. It is more important to provoke the opponent into a pawn storm. But it is in the nature of a pawn advance that - at least for some time - one's pieces are pushed into the background since squares are taken away from them. This circumstance will however be very welcome to us if we are planning a flight by our king, see also the note to move 24. 22.~f3 fle7 23.ffg3 ~UeS 24.h4 f6 White's pawn storm has cost him an important square for his pieces: ttJh4 is no longer possible. 25J~al flb7 26J3fel ~f7 27J~e2 ghS 2S.~g2 ~fB 29.g5 hxg5 30.hxg5 ~d7
31.gxf6 He is aiming to occupy g6 with the knight. The plan is a good one and we can see no reason to criticize the move (the tournament book gives it a question mark). It may well be that 31.~gl looks better but what could White do after 31. .. @e7, ... ~ae8 and ... @e7-d8-c8? And a3 is unprotected. .. No, there can be no criticism of 31.gxf6. White's position still looks nice but there is a worm gnawing at it and neither 31.gxf6 nor 31.~gl can do much about that. 31. ..gxf6 32.~h4 gagS 33.~g6 ~h5 34.~fl ~fB 35J~gl ~g5
All this is quite correct play by Black; the g6square can hardly be held. Also possible was 35 ... ttJxg6 36.fxg6t @g7 and later ... ~g8-h8.
36.flh4 36.Wfh2 seems necessary.
36... ~xgl Black does not go in for the other solution which has appeared by chance, 36 ... ttJxg6, which would not have been possible after 36.Wfh2!' 37.~xgl ~xg6 3s.ffh5 ~fB 39.fxg6 flg7 4OJ~g2
ghS 41.ffe2
41. .. gh4!?
Black has more or less consolidated. The king can aim for a place of safety on d6 (or on c8) and Black also has the h-file. And for the endgame White's a3-pawn is an easy object of attack. In spite of all that, it is still very difficult to make progress.
Black goes off on the wrong track (which I would still have considered the correct one in 1925, see The Blockade). Black wrongly believes that the e4pawn would be unstoppable after the discovered check by the c5-bishop. The game should have been decided by simple attacking play, namely 41. .. gh6 42.Wfg4 .id7 43.Wfg3 .ie8 and wins.
Chapter 2
42.i.cl! gxe4!?
63
The game starts off as a seemingly harmless looking Dutch but from moves 6-10 seems to want to follow an unusual path. l.b3 lilf6 2.i.b2 e6 3.£4 d5 4.lila J.e7 5.e3
lil bd7 6.J.d3
43.fid2? He does not see that fortune has smiled upon him. But Teichmann and I and all the others missed the possibility of saving the game. White had the queen sacrifice 43.~xe4 .ixe4 44 ..txe4 with the threat of ~g2-h2-h7 which led to a draw. The check by 44 ... d3t would be useless on account of the reply 45.@f1. After the text move, however, White is finished. 43 .. J~h4 44.fixa5 fid7 45.g7t f7. For example, 20.h4 f6 21.i.cl r;:t>f7 22.g5 hxg5 23.hxg5 ~h8 and Black can transfer his king via d6 to b8 without being disturbed. Later he can think about an attack (... b6-b5 then ... c5-c4) which appears to be "on" in this position. In short, Black was in a position to consolidate fully. After the erroneous text move Black's king is no longer able to escape from the burning castle and dies a miserable death by fire (who says that death by burning is beautiful?!).
30 ... fxgS 31.hxgS bS 32.axbS axbS 33.'*'h4 c4 There was no longer any defence.
34.gxh6 '*'xh4 3S.hxg7t 1-0 The finish might be 35 ... r;:t>g8 36.~xh4 ~d8 37.i.a5 ~e8 38.i.h5 ~e7 39.i.f7t ~xf7 40.~xh7 r;:t>xh7 41.g81];Vt etc. The moral: Only provoke your opponent into a pawn storm if squares will be barred to the hostile pieces, which will then help you achieve your aim (the escape of the king). In any other case, run away as fast as you can; the "deliberate slowness" of game 29 would be totally useless!
4. Restraint in the case of doubled pawn complexes a) White: pawns on a2, c3, c4, d3, e4; Black: pawns on e5, d6, c7, b7, a7 (games 31-34); b) The fixed doubled pawns c2, c3 (or c7, c6); White: pawns on c2, c3, d4, the e-pawn on e3 or e5; Black: pawns on c4, d5, e6 (game 35).
Chapter 2 c) The doubled pawns (c2, c3) blockaded by
"lDc4". a) If White does not want to do anything, Black will find it hard to provoke into any action the complex which is curled up like a hedgehog (d3d4).1t will remain rolled up, it will "hang on" or sit tight. On the other hand, any such lack of ambition will hardly contribute to creating for White a more promising position; the opposite is far more likely to be the case (game 31). Once it comes out of its shell (d3-d4), the complex is usually not satisfied with the advance to d4 and usually gets round to d4-d5, meaning that the whole complex is compromised. This is based, in my opinion, on a certain nervousness (the unpleasant pressure being experienced down the e-file) and cannot be traced back to objective grounds. Compare, for example, the following opening from a game between Dr Saviely Tartakower (White) and me in Berlin 1928: l.d4 ~f6 2.e4 e6 3.~e3 .ib4
4ig5 .be3t 5.bxe3 VNe7 6.VNe2 d6 7.e4 e5 8..id3 h6 9..ie3 0-0 10.~e2 (or also 10.lDf3 in the style of game 33) 10..• ~e6 l1.d5
65
In game 33 too - see the note to Black's move 13 - we shall have the opportunity to convince ourselves of the great capacity for resistance offered by the complex once extended by d3d4. On the other hand, once d4-d5 has been played (without Black having resorted to the extreme measure of ... c7-c5) the weakness of the complex becomes apparent, cf. game 32, note to move 39. The possibilities which arise after ... c7-c5, d4-d5 are clarified in games 33 and 34. b) When taken together, these two weaknesses (the isolated a-pawn on one hand and the doubled c-pawns on the other) make a not very pleasant picture, because the very presence of the blockaded doubled pawns leaves the isolated pawn all that more isolated and cut off from the rest of the army (game 35). If the white pawn chain (c3, d4, e5) goes as far as e5, then White of course has a counter-chance and in such cases it is worth considering a prophylactic defence of the complex, see the later games against Kmoch (Niendorf 1927) and Vajda (Kecskemet 1927), i.e. 50 and 49 respectively. c)
Compare
the
following
two
openings:
Morrison (White), London 1927: l.e4 e6 2.g3 d5 3.lDc3 lDc6 4.exd5 exd5 5.d4 if5 6.a3 'Wd7 7.ig2 0-0-0 8.lDge2lDce7! 9.ltJf4lDf6 10.h3 h5 I1.ltJd3lDe4 12.ie3lDxc3! 13.bxc3lDc6 14.ltJb4 ie6 15.'We2 lDa5
There was no objective cause for this; the tiny threat of 11. .. exd4 12.cxd4 b4 could also be prevented by 11..~b 1.
11..• ~b8 12.0-0 ~a6 13.h3 ~e5 14.Le5 dxe5 15.f4 exf4 16.~xf4 ~d7 17.~fl ~e5 18.~af1 .id719.VNd2 ~fe8 20ie2 VNg5 21.~h2 b6 22.g4 ~g6 23 ..id3 ~e5 24..ie2 ~g6 25..id3 ~e5 1/2-1/2
and Paul Saladin Leonhardt (W) Berlin 1928:
66
Chess Praxis
l.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.lDc3 .ib4 4.exd5 exd5 5.J.d3 lDc6 6.lD ge2 lDge7 7.0-0 0-0 8.~f4 .ig4 9.h3 .ih5 10.~cl .ia5!
secondary symptom, the typical "helplessness" of the white pieces. Although ready for action, these pieces are paralysed in their desire for action by the fact they are unable to count on the support of their foot soldiers. Since the said pawn mass is also somewhat unreliable in defence (because it is may be threatened by ... c7-c6 and then ... d6-d5), the indecisive behaviour of the pieces (lO.Wic2, I1.Wid2) appears to have sufficient motivation. Thus the hidden pawn weakness is made clearly visible for the student and the study of the game is rewarding.
l.c4 e5 2.lDc3 lDf6 3.lDf3 lDc6 4.e4 .ib4 5.d3 d6 6.g3 .ig4 7 ..ie2
If now 11.a3 (to prevent ... ltJ b4) then 11. ..ixc3 12.bxc3 ltJa5, when by moving his bishop twice Black has managed to have the opposing a-pawn brought closer to him (it would not have been so easy to attack on a2).
The move is only apparently illogical, because the move g2-g3 was conceived of as protection for the knight which wanted to get to h4. Also 7.ig2 would allow 7 ... ltJd4.
7 ... b6 8..Ae3 hc3t 9.bxc3 Wld7
11.~e3 lDb4 12.lDg3 lDxd3 13.lDxh5 lDxb2 14..ih6 lDc4 15.~g5 lDg6 16.lDxd5 f6 17.lDdxf6t ~xf6 18..bg7 ~f7 19..if6 ~d6 20J~adl gam 21.~b5 Wlc6 22.~xc6 bxc6 23..AgS g5 24.f4 lDe3 25.g4 g5f7 26.5 lDxfl 27.~xfl.ic3 28J~dllDe7 29.gd3lDd5 30.~g2 ~b8 31.~f3 gb2 32.lDf6t ~xf6 33..ixf6 gxa2 34.g5 ~xc2 35..ie5 a5 36.g6 a4 37.gdl gd2 38.gbl .ib2 39.gxh7t ~xh7 4O.gg1 hd4 41.gg7t ~b8 42.gg2t he5 43.gxd2 a3 44.ge2.ib2 45.ge8t ~g7 46.ga8 lDb4
0-1 We now turn to the games.
Game 31 Aron Nimzowitsch Fritz S3..m.isch Dresden 1926 Black does not manage to push the opposing doubled pawn complex into an advance (White "sits tight" rather) and so its weakness does not appear quite so clearly. But this is made up for by the fact that we get the chance to observe a
10.~c2
White recognizes that his own central pawn mass is not very mobile, because d3-d4 and even d4-d5 would only lead to it being paralysed because of the weakness of the c5-square. So he tries to match his piece moves to the relatively modest territory at his disposal. Bearing that in mind, it was worth considering 10.ltJd2 to achieve by means of f2f3 a crouching position, for example 10 ... ixe2 I1.Wixe2 ltJg4 12.f3 ltJxe3 13.Wixe3 0-0 14.0-0 with an approximately level game. On the other hand 10.Wid2 can be seen as
Chapter 2
67
a misuse of the modest terrain at his disposal, because the d2-square should remain free and the queen would be better placed on c2 to keep an eye on a4 and on the secondary threat of d4. After 10JWd2 we recommend 10 ... ttJa5, e.g. 11.VNc2 0-0 and then .. J!fe8 ... c7-c6 and ... d6-d5, when Black should have the advantage.
10... ~? Here too 10 ... lLla5 should have been preferred (11.d4? lLlxc4!).
11.'Bd2! The correct square this time; Black's castled position is in danger.
11... ~h7? To continue with f7-f5, but this turns out to be impossible and so he is left with a decentralized knight on h7 as a result.
After completing his consolidation - moves 24 and 25 - White now tries to contest the d5square, and Black's last hope disappears.
27... ge5 If 27 .. j~d7 then 28.~a5 etc. 28J:~d4 gd8 29.'Ba5 ~h5 30.'Bxc7 a:de8
31.d6 1-0
Game 32 Aron Nimzowitsch
Edgar Colle London 1927
12.h3! 12.lLlh4 would also have been sufficient.
12.. .hh3 This loses a piece. Black had only reckoned with 13.ixh6, which would also have been strong (13.ixh6 .tg2 14J!h2.txf3 15 ..txf3 gxh6 16.VNxh6 f6 17 ..tg4! etc.). 13.~gl! ,ig4 14.8,ie6 15.d4
And Black cannot save the piece.
15 ...exd4 16.cxd4 d5 17.cxd5 .ixd5 18.exd5 'Bxd5 19J~~dl gfe8 20.ctt>n ~f6 Ruefully, the decentralized knight returns ...
21.gh4 ~e7 22.,id3 ~f5 23.hf5 'BxES 24. ctt>g2 a:e7 25.,in gae8 26JU4 'Bg6 27.d5
In this game the doubled pawn complex of the previous game is seen extended and ... weakened. This is the theme of the struggle here. Though White's advance (d4) may overall have stimulated his game, it meant the first step down a slippery slope for the complex itself. And d4-d5 was the second and final step. Let us be dear about what I am saying here: the good or bad fortune of the complex need not always be identical to that of the game as a whole, though this is generally the case. Note how White, despite all his efforts, was forced into d4-d5.
l.d4 ~f6 2.~6 e6 3.c4 b6 4.g3 ,ib7 5.J.g2 ,ib4t 6.~c3 To raise the problem of the doubled pawn complex.
6... ~ 7.~ .ixc3 8.bxc3 d6
68
Chess Praxis
Bearing in mind the threatened 31 ..ih4.
31.gxh5 A simpler line seems to be 31..ih4 f6 32.Wfh6 Wffl and then the queen's rook is moved back and forward (!!a1-d1-a1 etc.). 31. .. gagB 32..ifl f6
9.a4! To provoke ... a7 -a5 and make the a5-square unavailable for any possible future ctJb8-c6-a5.
9... a5 Or 9 ... ctJc6 10.ctJd2 ctJa5 11..ixb7 ctJxb7 12.ctJb3 and the formation is in more or less good health. 10..ia3 ~bd7 11.~d2 hg2 12.xg2 e5 13.e4 Now we can see a full size version of the extended complex seen in game 31.
13 .. J~eB Threatening 14 ... exd4 followed by ... ctJxe4. Usually this threat is enough to force d4-d5 but here the e-pawn can easily be protected.
33.gh2! This consolidates matters.
33... gg5 34..ih4 gh5 35.gg1 ~f8 36.:ag4 ~h6 37.~xh6 gxh6 3B..ifl 38.!!xg8t ~xg8 39 ..if2 would have led to a clear draw.
3B... gxh2t 39.xh2
14.8 ~f8 The e8-rook is now filling a preventive role by making 0-f4 more difficult. 15J~fl ~d7 16.~f1 ~g6 17..icl hB IB.~e3 ~gB 19.h4 ~c6 20.h5 ~6e7 21.~d3 gf8 22.g4 g6! 23 ..id2! gxh5 24.~f5
The idea of preventing the threatened advance ... fl-f5, even at the cost of a pawn sacrifice, is correct. But the question is whether this could have been more clearly achieved by 24.!!h1 Wfxa4 25.!!xh5 f6 26.~g3 followed by tripling on the h-file. But White, who was heading for first prize, did not want too sharp a game.
24... ~xf5 25.gxf5 ~f6 26.d5 Well then! In any case the formation has done a good job, at least as far as "hanging on" or sitting tight is concerned. 26 ...~d7 27.~e3 ggBt 2B.hl ~e7 29.gh2
gg7 30..iel ~d7
39 •.• gbB! It is typical of the great weakness of a paralysed doubled pawn complex that Black can forget about the fact that his own pawns are sickly
Chapter 2 (they are all on the same colour of squares as the opposing bishop) and still try to win. And not simply with the text move, but also after 39 .. .!:kB. For example: 40.E1:g1! c6 (When the formation has been enticed forwards and is paralysed this is an especially appropriate way of challenging it: first the advance is provoked, d3-d4-d5, and then the bill is presented by means of c6. Here the course is not smooth, because for his part White could also have provoked weaknesses by a direct attack on his opponent's king.) 41.E1:b I! cxd5 42.cxd5 E1:xc3 43 ..ixb6 E1:xf3 44 ..ixa5 tLlcS The position is then extremely double-edged, though it seems to me that Black has the advantage. 40J~gl ~c5 41.gal q;g7 42..Ae3 q;f7 43.ga2
69
48 ..ixf4 exf4 49J~dl q;e7 50J~bl gg7 51.gb4 c6 A late challenge, but not an easy one to answer.
52.gxf4 b5 53.gb4 gb7 54.gbl q;d7 55.gg1 ad5 56.ad5 b4 57.gg8 b3 58.gaS gb6 59J~a7t q;c8 Now the rook has the 7 th rank absolute, whereas the king will do the blockading.
60.q;gl b2t 61.q;bl
~d3
That is just what the last two preventive moves were aimed at stopping. Black should be happy with a draw. 44.gd2 ~el 45.q;g3 gg8t 46.q;n ~g2
47..ib6! The counter, which reaches its high point in the winning of the knight, namely 47 ... tLlh4 4B.@e3 E1:g3 49.E1:h2 tLlxf3 SO.@f2 tLlxh2 Sl.@xg3 ttJf1 t 52.@g2 and the knight is trapped.
61..J:!b3 All now depends on who is quicker.
62.gf7 gxa 63.g:d6 q;d7 64J~~f7t q;e8 65J~b7 gxc3 66J~~xb6 q;e7 67.gb7t Still the same leitmotif, the 7 th rank! 67... q;f8 68J~a7 gc4 69.gxa5 gxe4 70J~~a7 gf4
71.a5 gxf5 72.a6 The triumph of the 7 th rank absolute occurs when the rook occupies the seventh rank and the opposing king is cut off on the eighth, see game 12.
72... gflt Because after 72 ... E1:xdS 73.E1:b7 E1:aS there is the decisive 74.a7 followed by 7S.E1:bB with check.
73. q;xb2 gal 74.ga8t q;g7 Or 74.@e7 7S.a7 and then E1:hB, etc.
47... ~f4?
75.q;g3 ga4 76.q;a q;f6 77.a7 q;g7 78.q;e3
This costs him a pawn and, after tough resistance, the game too. By 47 ... tLlh4 4B.@e3 ttJ g2 t Colle could easily get a draw from a game in which he has played so well. The endgame is an extremely instructive illustration of the 7 th rank absolute.
1-0
Game 33 David Markelowicz Janowski Aron Nimzowitscb St Petersburg 1914
70
Chess Praxis
l.d4 ttlf6 2.c4 e6 3.ttlc3 .lb4 4.e3 b6 5.J.d3 J,b7 6.ttlO .bc3t 7.bxc3 d6 7 ... c5 then ... l2Jc6 was also possible.
8.Yffc2 ttlbd7 9.e4 e5 Black has apparently reached a solid position. However the b7-bishop is playing a rather dubious part, since on one hand it is not strong enough to force White into d4-d5 and on the other its absence from the c8-g4 diagonal will soon make itself unpleasantly felt.
10.0-00-0 11.J.g5 h6 12.J.d2 ge8 13J~~ael
But probably 13 ... ~e6 would be met with 14.~e2! and then for example 14 ... ~e8 15.~fel
and White stubbornly continues the policy of sitting tight. But Black would have one success to his name: thanks to the removal of the f-rook the possibility of f2-f4 has retreated into the distance. Apart from 13 ... ~e6 it was also worth considering 13 ... l2Jf8, e.g. 14.h3l2Jg6 15.lLlh2 ~e7 16.f4? exf4 17.ixf4 ~e8 and d4-d5 is forced. And, finally, the immediate 13 ... c5 was possible, but in this case White could block everything with 14.d5.
14.h3 After 14.@hl (as suggested in the tournament book) amongst other options there is 14 ... l2Jdf6, e.g. 15.l2Jgll2Jg5 and the advance f2-f4 would not be feasible.
14... ttlhf8 Here too 14 ... lLldf6 would have been possible.
15.ttlh2 ttle6 16.J.e3 c5 17.d5 ttlf4 Black has chances on the kingside to replace the ones he lost on the queens ide after ... c7 -c5.
18.J.e2 ttlf8 19.J.g4 J.c8 At last the bishop reaches the correct diagonal.
20.Yffd2 13 ... ttlh7 By trying the somewhat strange looking 13 ... ~e6 (followed by ... ~e8) Black could have tried to prevent his opponent from sitting tight (Le. try to force d4-d5). The continuation might have been (13 ... ~e6) 14.l2Jh4! (to exploit the weakness of the f5-square, see note to move 9) 14 ... g6! 15.f4 (not 15.ixh6 because of 15 ... l2Jg4) 15 ... exf4 16.ixf4 and now Black would have the choice between 16... g5?, 16... l2Jh5 and 16... ~e8. The strategic goal which Black might have set would show at its dearest after 16 ... ~e8, e.g. 16... ~e8 17.d5 ~e7 18.ixh6l2Jg4 19.ig5 f6 20.ic1l2Jge5 and White may be a pawn up, but his life is no bed of roses since his doubled pawn complex is paralysed and Black has some central squares. Even more illuminating however would be the variation 16 ... l2Jh5 17.~f2t ~f6 18.g3 g5 19.e5 lLlxf4 20.gxf4 ~xf4 and wins; or 16 ... lLlh5 17.ig3 lLlxg3 18.hxg3 ~g5 followed by ... E:ae8 and Black has nothing to fear.
20 ... J.a6 20 ... l2J8g6 would have been simpler, but Black has no faith in his own attack on the king. He had been depressed by the fact that he could not manage to force d4-d5 without some concession on his part - because ... c7-c5 was one. So in what follows he contents himself with a crouching
Chapter 2
(frog) position and by doing so ... could nearly have won the game.
21.g3 ll)4g6 22..ie2 ll)h7 23.h4 ll)f6 24..id3 gb8 The rook is brought to e7 prevention.
to
help with
25.tye2 gb7 26..icl gbe7 27.ebhl.ic8 28.gg1 ebf8 29.h5 ll)h8 30.g4ll)h7 31..ic2 gb7 32.£4 f6 Janowski has finally got in the planned advance, but to do so he had to give up some valuable points, e.g. g5. This will come back to haunt him.
33.fxe5 33.g5 led nowhere, e.g. 33.g5 fxg5 34.fxg5 hxg5 35.:Bg3 lDf7 36.lDf3? g4, etc. 33... dxe5 34.ll)a ll)f7 35J~ef1 eb g8 36.ll)h4
ll)d6 37.~5 h5 38.gx5 ll)g5 See the note to move 33.
39..ixg5 hxg5
71
sharp combination and considers the resulting loss of a pawn as decisive. But even if this were the case - which we doubt - in one sense this would in no way alter the value of the variation. Janowski's manoeuvre - correct or not - unveils the secret behind the position!
40 ... gf8 41..ic6 gb8 42.a4 ebf7 43.eb g2 gh8 44J~hl ~h6 45.gal tyc7 46.ebfl gbh8 47.ebe3 eb g8 48. ebd3 tyf7 49.a5 gxh5 50.gxh5 gxh5 51.axb6 gh3t 52.ebc2 axb6 53J~a8t ebh7 54.gd8 tya7 55J~a8 tyf7 56.ebb3 Here White takes his eye off the ball. How could Black win after 56j~d8? Consider 56j~d8 Wfa7 57.:Ba8 Wfc7 58.~b3 :Bh4 59.Wfa2 E:xe4 60.E:f8 lDxf5 61.Wfa8 lDd6 62.E:d8, etc. Or 60 ... g6 (instead of 60 ... lDxf5) 61.Wfa8 gxf5 62J~h8t ~g6 63.ie8t ~g7 64.ih5 and mate in a few moves. So it appears that the rolling up turns into a flanking movement and that the tournament book is wrong to consider the loss of the pawn as decisive. However, after the wrong move in the game Black should win easily.
56...tyh5! 57.tyxh5t ~xh5 58..ie8
4O..ia4 He does not bother about his own h-pawn which is in need of protection and tries instead to roll up his opponent's queens ide (ic6 then a2-a5-a5, etc.). We shall see in future games this attempt at rolling up is in the nature of a punitive expedition (revenge for ... c7-c5?). Janowski deserves the highest praise for trying, despite the weaknesses in his own camp, to expose those of his opponent; Janowski has a wonderfully subtle chess sense. Yet another opinion is expressed in the tournament book, which criticizes Janowski's
58 ... ~xe8? Exhausted by the long defensive struggle, Black misses a continuation which would be decisive at once: 58 ... E:h6! If now 59.E:d8 then simply 59 ... g4, etc. Or if 59.i.g6t then Black wins by 59 ... E:xg6 60.fxg6t ~xg6 61.~c2! lDxe4 62.~d3 ~f5! (this is the move which Black overlooked in his calculations). After the text move there should no longer be a win for Black.
72
Chess Praxis
59.gxeS gh2 60J~aS g4 61.gal c;bh662.c;ba4 c;bg5 63. c;bb5 c;bf4 64.gg1 The best move. The threat was ... 'it>xe4 followed by ... 'it>f3 and a rapid advance of the passed pawns. 64... c;bxe4 65J~xg4t c;bxf5 66J~xg7 gb2t
67.c;be6 e4 6S.d6 gd2 69.d7 e3
A subtle move. If now 9 ... e5 then 10.d5 !:De7 (not 10 ... !:Da5 because of 11.!:Db3) 11.e4 with a pawn formation such as we met in the previous game (move 22); the only difference perhaps worth taking into account would be that the black pawn is still on b7 rather than having advanced to b6, and so there is no threat of being rolled up with a2-a4-a5. But with the b-file being open, can the pawn stay on b 7? 9••• b6 To clear b7 for the knight; Black is planning 10 ... e5 11.d5 !:Da5 and if now 12.!:Db3 then
12 ... !:Db7. IO.~b3
The move indicated was 10.f4. After 10 ... e5 11.fxe5 dxe5 12.d5 !:Da5 13.!:Db3 !:Db7 14.e4 !:DeB and then ... !:Ded6, we should have reached the same pawn formation as in game 33 after move 36. On the whole it comes across as rather mummified.
IO...e5! II.f4 7o.c;bxb6 70. 'it>c7 would lose the game for White.
70... e2 71.ge7 gxd7 72.!he2 gd3 73J~e2 EMs And a draw was agreed after 12 more moves. A difficult game. 74.~el gbSt 75.c;be7 geS 76.c;bd6 gdSt 77.c;bxe5 ~eSt 7s.c;bd6 S:xe4 79.c;bd5 geS SO.e4 gdSt S1.c;be6 c;bg4 S2J~gl t c;bh3 S3.e5 f5 S4. c;be7 ~UB S5.e6 f4 I/:z-I/:z
Game 34 Paul F Johner Aron Nimzowitseh Dresden 1926 This game was already in My System. I am repeating it here, though with different annotations, because I feel it is an essential companion to game 33.
l.d4 ~f6 2.e4 e6 3.~e3 Ab4 4.e3 ~ Here, against Janowski I played 4 ... b6 (see the previous game).
5.Ad3 e5 6.~f3 ~e6 7.~ he3 S.bxe3 d6 9.~d2
11. .. e4! This move would also have followed 11.d5, e.g. 12.i.e2 !:De5 and Black is centralized, or 11.d5 e4 12.dxc6 exd3 with advantage to Black. The point of the previous apparently bloodless struggle (moves 9-11) is simply that it was in reality full of tension and very bloody: White had played f2-f4 a tempo too late, which meant that the thrusting e-pawn only just escaped the righteous anger of the f-pawn. If on move 11 Black had played 11..:~We7 (instead of 11. .. e4!) so
Chapter 2 that after 12.fxe5 dxe5 13.d5 he might choose the retreat 13 ... ttJd8 (though a better move would be 13 ... e4!) then we would once more have seen 14.e4 ttJe8 and once again we have mummification(= deadlock). After the text move, 11 ... e4, Black had a new and a very difficult problem to solve: how to restrain White's kingside (the f-, g- and h-pawns).
12..ie2
73
against the threatened a4-a5, which can now always be met with ... b5) 21.@f2 Wlf7! 22.E1:adl (22.Wlh6 fails to the combination 22 ... ttJxd5 23.cxd5 i.xe2 24.@xe2 Wlxd5 25.ttJc1 ttJh5! and the queen is permanently imprisoned: Black wins by a general pawn advance) 22 ... @h8 and then 23 ... ttJh5, after· which Black tries to prepare the breakthrough h7 -h6 by means of ... E1:g8 and ... @h8-g7-f8-e7-d7. If we imagine that Black could have played ... a7-a5 before 20 ...i.a6 (to cut out the counter-chance with a4-a5) then we realize that any attempt at a mummification of the position by White must come up against great difficulties.
14... h5 This starts the process of tying White up.
15.i.d2 Or 15.Wlh4 ttJf5 16.Wlg5 ttJh7 17.Wlxh5 ttJg3.
15 ...'i'f5! In order to make its way to h7, which was the original idea behind the restraining manoeuvre.
16.f8 26.1Wxg7t ltJxg7 27.,td7, although even in this
84
Chess Praxis
case Black would receive sufficient compensation for the exchange after 27 .. J~hb4. 25.hc8 gaxc8 26.b5 ge5 27.~e6YHe7 28.bl
llJg7 29.~f4 YHd7 30.h4 The threat was ... g5.
30... ~f5 31.YHc3 ~xg3 32.ghgl ~h5 33.~e6 llJ g7 34.~d4 ~U8
This move makes sense of the exchange. Otherwise, (e.g. after 14 ... g6) White could roll up the kingside (h3-h4-h5). Just think of game 33, then you will understand the preventive nature of the move without further ado. 15J~idgl
15 ..1xh7? g6
15 ...YHh6! 16.bl gdfB 17.~cl ~g8! 0-1
After 35.1!9xa3 would come 35 ... !!h5 36.!!hl 1!9g4 37.!!dgl !!xh4 38.!!xg4 !!xhl t then 39 ... f2 and wins. The value of the strategy chosen by Black on move 14 (see diagram on the previous page) can be seen from the following variation: imagine White omits 15.g3 and plays instead 15 ..1e2 which is followed by 15 ... ttJc5!. If now 16.fxe5 dxe5 17.d6 then 17 ... cxd6 18.1!9xd61!9xd6 19.!hd6 .1h6, e.g. 20.ttJxe5 .1xe3t 2l.r;t>c2 .1xg2 22.!!hdl ttJf4 and Black should win.
Game 40 Ernst Schweinburg Aron Nimzowitsch Berlin 1927 This was an Exchange Variation of the French with a rather unusual bishop development.
l.e4 ~c6 2.~f3 e6 3.d4 d5 4.exd5 exd5 5.i.d3 ~g4 6.i.e3 i.d6 7.c3 ~ge7 8.~bd2 YHd7 9.~b3 0-0-0 10.h3 i.h5 I1.YHc2 f5 12.0-0-0 f413..id2 hf3 14.gxf3 YHe6!
Another preventive move: since there is no avoiding ... g7-g6, any possible rolling up must be prevented by having the possibility of lDg8-f6-h5. 18.b4 g6 19.YHa4 b8 20.~b3 YHh5 21..ie2 llJf6 22.~c5 ~d8 23.b2 ge8 24..idl Yfh4 Black now sets about exploiting the weaknesses in the formation in leisurely fashion. Without his prophylactic 14th and 1yh moves this would not have been possible. This is clear proof of our point of view that blockading without preventive moves is sheer nonsense. 25J~fl
ge7 26.YHb5 ghe8 27.a4
Chapter 2
27 .•. b6 Since in all respects Black is superior, all he has to do now is to "liquidate" the c5-knight, without bothering about any weakness he may incur in doing so. Now, forcible means are rarely good, and moreover White's position is only suffering from a lack of mobility rather than being truly weak. So a slow strategy should have been preferred, namely 27 ... c6 28 JWd3 'Lld7 (threatening ... 'Llb6 and ... 'Llc4t) 29.a5 and now 29 ... a6!. White's pawn advance would then appear to be completely halted and Black would have time and leisure for long-winded manoeuvres, such as 30 ... ~a7, 31. ..i.c7 and then 'Lld8-f7-d6-c4, and White would hardly be able resist the growing pressure. 28.~b3 @a8 29.~el 29JWa6 was to be preferred, e.g. 29 ... 'Llb7 with complicated play, which would only be fractionally in Black's favour.
85
"centralization" would not be enough for a win. After the text move Black's attack becomes too powerful.
31. .. bxe5 32.J.b3 ~b7! A decisive pawn sacrifice. Instead, the continuation 32 ... c4 33.i.xc4 dxc4 34.VMxd6 :gd7 would be insufficient on account of 35.VMxf4 g5 36.VMxg5. 33.hd5 ~xd5 34.YMxd5 cxb4 35.a5
29 ...c6! 30.YMd3 e5 The immediate 29 ... c5 would have been met by 30.a5. A final ingenious attempt. After 35.cxb4 then 35 ... :gd8 would be decisive.
35 .. J~d8 The threat 36.a6 can be ignored.
36.a6 bxe3t 37.e2 J.b4 38.YMc6 After 38.axb7t :gxb7 the queen on h4 takes up the protection of the rook on d8. 38.• J~xd2t 39.@bl @b8 The same move would have followed 38.~b3. 0-1
Game 41
Edgar Colle 31.dxe5 On move 29 White missed marking out the a6square as a weakness, but now it would be too late, although this is not easy to prove. For example, 31.VMa6 (instead of 31.dxc5) 31...cxd4 32.a5! (this move was suggested by Dr Em. Lasker) 32 ... dxc3t 33.i.xc3 d4! 34.i.xd4 'Llc6 35.axb6 4Jxd4 36.b7t :gxb7 37.VMxd6 and now the simple liquidation 37 ... :gxb4t in conjunction with the
Aron Nimzowitseh Baden-Baden 1925
1.d45 2.e3 ~f6 3.J.d3 d6 4.~e2 e5 5.e4 e5 Since Black thinks he has stored up enough mobility in his pawn pair (e5 and f5) a mummification of the position on the queenside and in the centre must appear desirable to him and he tries to force just such a formation.
6.0-0 ~e6 7.~be3 g5
86
Chess Praxis
Bold play, because Black has not yet achieved the mummification he was looking for and in fact White is in a position to open the centre. Will Black then be up to the double task of protecting the d-file from a breakthrough and avoiding any losses amongst his kingside pawns? B.dxe5! dxc5 9.tilg3 e4 10..le2 J.d6 The consolidating move. 11.tilb5 J.e5 12.VxdBt xdB 13.gdl t e7 14J~bl h5 15..id2
15 ... h4 The following line should have been preferred: 15 ... f4 16.4Jf1 .tg4! e.g. 17.ixg4 hxg4 18.exf4 gxf4 18.!:!e1 r;t>e6 with a strongly centralized setup. Or 15 ... f4 16.4Jf1 ig4! 17.i.xg4 hxg4 18J~e1 f3! 19.93 a6 20.4Ja3 ~hd8 21.b4 !:!d3 22.4Jc2 ~ad8 and wins.
16.tilfl J.e6 17.J.e3 he3 IB.tilxe3 tile5 19.b3 ghgB Here and on the next move, Black misses an important prophylactic measure, namely ... b7-b6 (to make b3-b4 pointless) and this omission leads to the loss of all his advantage. 20J;b2 f4 21.tild2 J.f5 22.h4 This splits the blockading net which had been cast with so much effort. 22... til ed7 23.exf4 He should have continued the breakthrough begun by b4, i.e. 23.bxc5 4Jxc5 24.4Jb3 4Jxb3 25.~xb3 b6 26.!:!b5 etc. 23 •.. gxf4 24.gel f7 24 ... ~fl3 should be played.
25.tildxe4! tilxe4 26..ih5t g7 27.tilxe4 h6 In a desperate position Black finds an interesting saving manoeuvre. 2B..tf7 If 28.if3 then 28 ... 4Je5. 2B... S!! 29..hgB gxgB 30.tild6 30.g3 would have been met with 30 .. J!e8. 30••. gxg2t 31.hl .ih3 32J~gl He should be happy with a draw, which can be achieved, for example, by 32.4Jf7t ~g7 33.4Je5 !:!g5 34.4Jxd7 i.g2t etc. 32•.• tile5! Now White cannot exchange because of the mate in two. But there is a threat of 33 ... ltJd3. 33.bxe5 There is a neat win after 33J~d2 ltJg4! 34Jhg2 fxg2t 35.r;t>g1 ltJe5!! and the knight returns.
Chapter 2
33... ttld3 34J~d2 ~xgl t 35.cbxgl ttlf4 A nasty mating threat with so little material! 36.ttlf7t f6 32.i>f3? It was still possible for White to conjure up the problem sketched above by playing 32.~e5. And in any case, the technique of play down the file should not suddenly come to an end. The exploitation of a file, especially the occupation of outposts, is something you should be able to do in your sleep. See my explanations about open files in the first chapter of My System.
32... ~f7
38 ... d5 The queen's pawn has not got going until move 38! 39.~e2
gb8 40.ga4 gbe8
Black is finally master of the e-file. 41.gal h5 42.~gl ge3t 43.i>f2 At last the position is ready for a breakthrough.
44... c4 44.gadl Or 44.dxc4 dxc4 45.bxc4
~c3.
44... c3 45.ge2 a4! A sacrificial combination crowns the setting up of the blockade.
46.bxa4 b3 47.cxb3 ~b4 And Black won:
48.gxe3 gxe3 49.~e2 c2 50.gal ~xd3t 51. i>f1 gxe2 52. i>xe2 cl ~ 53.gxcl ~xcl t 54.i>f3 ~xb3 55.h3 d3 56.g4 hxg4t 0-1
90
Chess Praxis
Game 44 Walther von Holzhausen Aron Nimzowitsch Dresden 1926
l.e4 cS 2.~f3 ~c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.~xd4 dS An innovation which I first tried against Rubinstein in Karlsbad 1923.
S.J.bS The best line seems to be 5.ltJxc6 bxc6 6.exd5 ~xd5 7.ltJc3 ~xd1 t B.ltJxdl and White has the
more compact pawn structure, even if otherwise the game appears level. S... dxe4 6.~xc6 VNxdl t 7.rtfixdl a6 8.~d4t axbS 9.~xbS J.g4t 10.rtfiel gd8 The position after queenside castling appears unstable. For example: 10 ... 0-0-0 l1.ltJ 1c3 e5 12.h3! ih5 13.g4 ig6 14.a4 then 15.a5 and 16.a6. Or, instead of ...ih5, 12 ...id7! 13.ie3 ib4 14. ~e2. In both cases Black's king position appears open to attack.
If then 12.h3 ih5 13.g4 fxg4 14.ltJxe4 gxh3, then White could avoid greater losses by 15.if4 if3 16.ltJg5 ixh1 17.ltJc7t ~d7 1B.ltJf7 but he would have been in a position to resign after lB ...if3! 19.1tJxhB e5 20 ..ixe5 id6 21.ixd6 ~xd6. But if White does not attempt to use violent means to break the blockade, and instead tries to develop much more quietly by for example (11 ... f50 12.if4 there then follows 12 ... ltJf6 and ... e6, ... ~f7 and White would have nothing in exchange for the misplaced rook on hI. On the other hand, matters become dubious after the text move.
12.h3! J.hS I could not make up my mind to play 12 ...id7 13.ltJc7t ~e7 14.ltJ3d5t ~d6 15 ..ie3.
13.g4J.g6
11.~lc3
14.~c7t
l1. .. eS No matter how good this move may look, it in no way fits the strict demands a blockading strategy imposes on a player. The basis for the blockading operation lay in the g4-d 1 diagonal. So this diagonal should be protected and overprotected, all the more so because the opponent is now intending to destroy said basis, namely by means of 12.h3 ih5 13.g4. The correct blockading procedure consisted of 11. .. f5 (instead of 11. .. e5).
The correct continuation was 14 ..ie3 and if then 14 ... f5 15.~e2 and the rook was no longer misplaced. Strategically speaking, Black would then be duty bound to play to recapture the proud h 1-d5 diagonal, something like as follows: 15 ... fxg4! 16.hxg4 ltJf6 17.g5 i.h5t 18.~e1 i.f3 19.:B:h4ltJg4 20.ltJxe4 .ixe4 21.:B:xg4.ixc2 22.ltJc3 with a more or less level game. This variation is impressive because of the strictly logical lines on which it is built. 14... rtfid7 lS.~7dS rtfic6 16.~e3 16.i.e3 was tempting but after 16... :B:xd5 17.ltJxd5 ~xd5 1B.:B:d1 t ~c6 19.:B:dB there would come 19 ... ltJf6 20.~e2 :B:gB and unpinning by ... ie7 could not be avoided.
Chapter 2
91
16....ib4 The logic of the game demanded the immediate ... h7-h5, e.g. 16... h5! 17.g5 f5 or 17 ... h4 with advantage to Black. By neglecting this in favour of more or less mechanical "development" Black is paying tribute to the erroneous teachings of the old school, namely that all the "puppets" must be on stage before attacking. How laughable and ancient such rules seem nowadays! 17..id2 tile7 18.h4 18.a3 seems somewhat better, allowing him to achieve some counterplay. 18 ... h5!
Black starts to recapture the uncontested diagonal. The next eight moves are a bitter struggle, a struggle which is full of tension. But after these eight moves the struggle is over, the opponent is down, blockaded and gagged and can only resign himself to his fate. 19.95 tilS! 20.tilxf5 .ixf5 21J~gl gd4 Threatening 22 ... e3 23.ixe3 ~xh4 and Black gets a passed pawn. 22.a3 ghd8! 23.axb4 gxd2 24.gdl gxdl t 25.tilxdl .ig4 26.tile3 .is 27.c4 White is quite helpless in this position. 27... b5 28.b3 gd3 29.gg3 g6 30J~gl The white rook's options are very limited. If, for example, 30.~h3? then 30 ... ~xb3 31.md2 ~d3t 32.mc2 bxc4 and 33.ttJxc4 is impossible because of 33 ... idl t and then ... ~xh3. 30... h2 ggxg4 69.J.d6 ggG 70..Ag3 :Sb6 7lie5 gb3 72.'it>g2 h5 73.'it>h2 'it>e6 74..ih8 gd3 75.'it>g2 h4 76.'it>h2 'it>d5 77.'it>g2 'it>c4 7S..if6 gdl 79J~c2t 'it>b3 80.gc3t 'it>b4 S1.gh3 a2 S2J~~xh4t 'it>b5 0--1 After this enlightening introduction to the essence of the blockading sacrifice, we shall concentrate on game 46, which shows our stratagem in extremely graphic fashion and which I therefore count among my best games.
l.d4 e6 2.c4 ~f6 3.~c3 J.b4 4..id2 0--0 The immediate 4 ... b6 is also possible. 5.~f3 d6 6.e3 b6 7.J.d3 Ab7 S.9c2 Black now embarks on a dangerous course. S....hf3 9.gxf3 ~bd7l0.a3 hc3 11.J.xc3 c6!
The pawn minus would appear to be compensated for by the blocked position. After the mistaken text move, Black won as follows:
20 .. ..ib4 21.ge2 J.b5 22.he4 22.1&f3 would be somewhat better.
22 ...9xe4 23.~d6 There was nothing better.
23 ...he2 24.~xe4 ge7 25.lil g3 hdl And Black won after a hard struggle. 26J~xdl gc7 27.a3 gc2 2sJ~bl J.d6 29.lilf5 gG 30.~xd6 gxd6 31.e4 gdc6 32.g3 gd2 33.Aal
gdc2 34.Ab2 gd2 35.hl gcc2 36.gfl 'it>f8 37.'it>g2 'it>e7 3S.d5 f6 39.g4 g5 40.e5 £Xe5 4l.he5 :Sxd5 42.Ag7 gd6 43.Ae5 ge6 44..ibS a6 45.gbl 'it>d7 46.gb3 'it>c6 47..ig3 'it>d5 4S.h4 gxh4 49..hh4 gec6 5o.AdS g2c3 51.gb2 :Sxa3 52.J.xb6 ggG 53J~b4 gc3 54J~d4t 'it>c6 55..ia5 ga3 56.~d2 a5 57.Acl gal 5S.Ae3 a4 59.gb4 'it>c7 60.'it>a ga6 61.Af4t 'it>d7 62J~b7t 'it>eS 63.gb2 a3 64.ge2t 'it>f7 65 ..ie5 :Sbl
Since Black is simultaneously trying to exploit the dynamic weakness of the doubled pawn complex and to blockade the bishops, he of course avoids any premature opening of the position, such as II ... d5. It could be followed by 12.cxd5 exd5 13.0-0-0 and then bI and ~cl. White would then have play on both the c-file and the g-file, whereas Black's only counter chance, the advance ... c6-c5, would bring about the reply d4xc5 which liberates the bishops.
12.0--0--0 d5 l3.e4 Such an advance may create attacking chances, but on the other hand it quite considerably weakens the doubled pawn complex.
Chess Praxis
94
13 ...g6 Forced. And not as bad as you might think at first glance; the rolling up process h2-h4-h5 is inhibited by the f6-knight.
14.cxdS 14.h4 or 14.Wbl would have been better, but White wants to be able to play e4-e5, which would currently be unfavourable after 14.e5 dxc4 15.ixc4 lLld5.
14•..cxdS IS.eSlDhS Now Black can be happy about having paralysed the doubled pawn complex.
16.h4 as The regrouping ... Vffe7, .. J~fc8 and then ... lLlf8 will be possible after limiting the c3-bishop like this. 17J~dgl
VlIe7 18.'flfd2 ~fc8 19.f4 bS!!
This is what the position looks like when Black has solved the problem pointed out in the note to move 11. The doubled f-pawns are hopelessly blockaded and White has weaknesses everywhere. 27J~xf5
A despairing attempt which is powerfully refuted.
27•.• exf5 28.bS gb3 29.me2 W1b7 30.J.b4 VlIa6 0-1 Since 31.Wel fails to 31..J~bxb4 32.axb4 ~alt 33.Vffdl ~cl.
Game 47 Aron Nimzowitsch
Paul Saladin Leonhardt San Sebastian 1912 The blockading sacrifice: a pawn is sacrificed so that the king's bishop can be exchanged; after that White becomes weak on the white squares and must lose.
This is the stem game for the stratagem "the blockading sacrifice" (see the introduction to game 46).
20..ixbS ~ab8 21.J.e2 lD b6
1.e4 e6 2.d4 dS 3.eS cS 4.lDf3 'flfb6
A correct piece sacrifice but even stronger and more in the style of the game was 21. .. lLlg7 22.h5 lLlf5 and ... lLld7-b6-c4 with the better game.
4 ... cxd4 could be met in gambit style by 5.id3 or by 5.Vffxd4lLlc6 6.Vfff4 with solid pressure.
22.mdl Accepting by 22.ixh5 lLlc4 23.Vffc2 lLlxa3! 23.~d2! lLlc4 with a draw was the best White
had.
22•.. lDc4 23..ixc4 ~xc4 24.~g5 lDg7 2S.hSlDf5 26.hxg6 fxg6
S.J.d3 cxd4 6.~ lDc6 7.a3 We have reached the sort of position which is typical for our stratagem. The valuable e-pawn looks to be sufficient compensation for the minor sacrifice White has made. The e5-pawn appears valuable because it helps to cramp Black's position.
7 •.• lDge7
Chapter 2
95
After the game my opponent wanted to know what I had intended to play after 7 ... a5. I pointed out to him the line B.if4 ~xb2 9.tDbd2.
19.L.g6! hxg6 Or 19 ... 'Wxc4 20.~d6t ~eB 21.E:edl fxg6 22.~dBt and then 23.l2Jg5 mate. 20.YRd6t YRxd6 21.exd6t "You would never have dared to play that," thought Leonhardt. But I would have done so; this second blockading sacrifice is a logical extension of the first one. Whether there would be enough compensation after 7 ... a5 B.if4 'Wxb2 9.ttJbd2 ~b6 (after 9 ...ixa3 White could force a draw by 10.tDb3 then ic1 and id2) is not easy to decide. In any case Black's extra pawns would be immobile and his development would be difficult. In addition to the move on which my new stratagem was based (B.if4) B.a4 was also worth considering, e.g. 7 ... a5 B.a4 ic5 9.ttJa3 with chances and counter-chances. Finally, it should be pointed out that in a similar situation Lasker played 7 ... 5. I recommend the reply B.b4 a6 9.c4! dxc3 10.tDxc3 and White is threatening to occupy the b6-square after ie3 and tDa4. 8.b4lLlg6 9J~el Ae7 10.Ab2 a5 A somewhat better move would be 10 ... a6. l1.b5 a4 12.lLlbd2 . Threatening 13.bxc6 'Wxb2 14.!!bl and 15.cxb7. 12... lLla7 13.L.d4 i.c5 14.L.c5! 14.c3 would have won the a4-pawn. 14...YRxc5 15.c4 dxc4 16.lLle4 YRd5 17.lLld6t rJJe7 18.lLlxc4 YRc5 To prevent 19.12Jb6.
1-0 Because 21. .. ~eB is followed by 22.tDb6 E:bB 23.l2Je5 and there is no defence to the threat of d6-d7.
Game 48 Aron Nimzowitsch Carl Oscar Ahues Bad Niendorf 1927 The sacrifice on move 25 only looks like a blockading sacrifice. If fact it is a diversionary attack, as the blockade existed before the sacrifice. But since everything must be classified, we would describe this game as follows: a blockading game topped off with a sacrifice.
l.c4 lLlf6 2.lLlc3 d6 3.d4 lLlbd7 4.e3 e5 5.Ad3 Ae7 The usual continuation here is ttJge2, 0-0 and f2-f4, which is without doubt a sound strategy. But White tries to employ a sharper method of development. 6.f4 0-0 7.lLlf3 exd4! 8.exd4 d5 Black has met it well and achieved a more or less level game. 9.c5! c6! From now on there is always the threat of rolling up the queens ide by b7 -b6.
96
Chess Praxis
10.0--0
the most complicated way, instead of transposing
Doing without 10.a3 because of 10 ... b6 11.b4 bxc5 12.bxc5 lDxc5 13.dxc5 i.xc5! with a strong attack.
to the aforementioned variation by 14.cxb6, e.g.
10•.• a5 There was no reason for delaying the freeing move 10 ... b6, e.g. 10 ... b6! 11.lDe5 vtfc7 12.cxb6 (the best) 12 ... axb6 13.id2 and then 14..Ekl with a more or less even game. After the text move Black is at a disadvantage. 11.~e5 'f!Ie7 12.Wa4
13 ... b5 14.cxb6 ~xb6 15.lDxc6 (in KNS I only gave 15.vtfxc6) 15 ... i.b7 (or 15 ...i.d6 16.lDe5) 16.lDe5lDxe5 17.fxe5lDe4 IB.lDxe4 dxe4 19.i.c4 !!fB 20.~b3 etc. So it would appear that on his 10rh move Black committed an error of omission which he cannot make up for.
14.Y!lb3 Now the moves b7-b6 or b7-b5 should be directly prevented.
14.•. ~e6! Very good! If 15.i.e3 then 15 ...ixc5!. 15.~e2 ~d7
Black may have managed to discourage the c3knight from the route via a4 to b6, but the price of this success (having a knight on e6) is, as we shall soon see, a high one. Now he will be cramped. 16.~xd7 ixd7
Here I should have recaptured with the queen, because then Black always gets in ... lD f6, which is not the case after the text move. 17.£5 ~f8 18..if4 'f!Ie8 19.J.e5! f6 See the previous note.
20.J.g3 a421.'f!Ib4! This makes b7-b5 difficult if not impossible. During the game I was actually under the impression that 12 ... b5 was perhaps possible, based on some combinative nuances, e.g. 12 ... b5 13.cxb6 vtfxb6 14.lDxc6 id6 and this impression was so strong that I could not shake it off later. For example, in Kagans neueste Schachnachrichten I recommended after 12 ... b5 the line 13.vtfc2 and the opponent's plan to occupy e4 would fail as follows: 13 ... b4 14.lDa4 i.a6 15.i.xa6 !!xa6 (there is now the threat of 16 ... lDe4) 16.vtfe2! and wins on account of the indirect threat to the e7bishop. Nowadays I cannot see why the pawn sacrifice should not be accepted; after 12 ... b5 13.cxb6 vtfxb6 14.lDxc6 id6 White would simply have been able to play 15.~hl and then 16.lDe5, and Black would not have any compensation. 12.. J~e8 13.c;t>hl ~f8 And once more I tried in KN. Schachnachrichten to counter 13 ... b5 (instead of the text move) in
The only move to keep the blockading ring intact, e.g. 21.vtfc3 b6! 22.cxb6 idB and then possibly ... vtfb7. 21. .• b5 22.'f!Id2 Now White has a free hand on the kingside while the queens ide is all locked up.
22 .. ..td8
Chapter 2 It would be well worth thinking of 22 ... !!d8 to get the d7-bishop to f7 as quickly as possible. 23J~6 j,c7 24J~afl ge7 This allows an interesting sortie by White. So a somewhat better try might be 24 ...i.xg3, e.g. 24 ...i.xg3 2S.ltJxg3 'Wfc7 26.ltJhS !!e7 27.g4 h6 28.h4 ltJh7. But even in this case White ought to be ready for an attack after 29.ltJf4 and 30.ltJh3. 25..ld6!! .bd6 A deeply calculated pawn sacrifice! Of course the d6-pawn will go, but just when it suits Black to take it, his king position will be demolished by a knight sacrifice on f6. 26.cxd6 geS 27.tLlg3 9dS 2s.9cl! Another quiet move: ... ic8 is prevented (28 ...ic8? 29.'Wfxc6). 2S ...9b6 29.9f4 gedS 30.tl~h5 ga7 Because after 30 ... ie8 there would have corne 31.ltJxf6t smashing his position! For example, 30 ...ie8 31.ltJxf6t gxf6 32.!!g3t -moves 33.'Wfh6.
97
For example, 35.'l9xg4! ltJxf6 36.'l9g6 and White's attack should break through.
6. My new treatment of the problem of pawn chains • The Dresden Variation.
In games 49-51 I do not make an early attack on the pawn chain, but instead look for whitesquared positional play. That is, I exchange the fl-bishop and then operate on the white squares which have been weakened. The logical precondition for success is to make safe your own kingside first, and that is the main difficulty with the whole procedure. First, let us consider a pawn chain (for example the one arising after l.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.eS): restraint of the white kingside which is ready to advance could be achieved by the pawn moves ... h7-h5 and ... g7 -g6. But in such a case the black squares gS, f6, etc. become weak. See game 50 and also the following opening. Lajos Steiner - Aron Nimzowitsch, Berlin 1928 l.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.tLlc3 j,b4 4.e5 c5 As we shall soon see, this attack is not serious as the pawn later goes on its way peacefully. 5•.id21t1e7 6.a3 ,hc3 7.bxc3 c4? S.h4 h5 9 •.ie2! tLlf5 10.g3! g6 11..ig5 9a5 12.9d2
31.tLlxf6t 1-0 After 31...h8 I had planned 32.ltJxh7 which I demonstrated after the game finished. Thus: 31. .. h8 32.ltJxh7 ltJxh7 33.'l9h4 g8 34.f6 ltJxf6 3S.!!xf6 etc., or 31. .. h8 32.ltJxh7 xh7 33.f6t g6 34.'l9h4t g8 35.f7t g7 36.'l9f6t h7 37.!!f4 etc. It would have been weaker to follow 31. .. cJ:;>h8 with 32.'l9h4 because then comes 32 ... h6, e.g. 33.ltJg4 ltJh7 34.f6 ixg4 and some fresh effort is required.
The diagonal creates pressure and the blockade by the f5-knight turns out to be unsustainable.
9B
Chess Praxis
12... lilc6 13..1f6 ggS 14.lilh3 f4 ga6 37.'it>g5 Or 37.@f3 !!gl. 37... f6t Not 37... f5 on account of 38.!!xg7 ~xg4t 39.@f6 etc. 38.exf6 gxf6t 39.'it>xf6 gxg4 4O.ge7
Nor would other moves help much. White's king is too badly placed for an endgame and he does not have enough forces left for a mating attack. 40 •• JU4t 41.'it>xe6 gxd4 42.'it>f5 gaa4 43.ge6t ~c5 44. ~f6 gf4 t 45. ~e7 ga7t 46. ~e8 ge4 0-1
100
Chess Praxis
Despite what was missed on move 2B, we consider this game to be a significant strategic performance. Who else would have dared to delay the advance ... c7 -cS until move 26? This is the saving advance without which Dr Tarrasch cannot imagine struggling against an opposing pawn chain! To tell the truth, this game broke new ground.
Game 50 Hans Kmoch Aron Nimzowitsch Bad Niendorf 1927
l.e4 ~c6 2.~c3 e6 3.d4 .ib4 3 ... dS would be safer. 4.~ge2 d5 5.e5
Black chooses our preventive set-up:
5... h5 But we should prefer S... tDge7, e.g. 6.tDf4tDg6 7.tDhS ~gB and then ... J.e7, and Black plays for queenside castling. 6.~f4! g6 7..ie3
White should be able to win without too much effort. Compare this to the Steiner game quoted in the introduction (page 97).
13.. J~~g8 14.0-0 Feeble; the correct move was 14.tDgS and then either f3 and g4 or IS.g4. After IS ... hxg4 16.J.xg4, h2-h4-hS would be decisive.
14...Wa5 A tiny counter-chance.
15.Wdl ~f5 16.iUdl There was a more economical way of developing the rooks (l6J:!adl); of course the a-pawn would be taboo.
16... c;t>d7!
7 ....ixc3t? Extremely risky play. The weakness of the opponent's doubled pawn complex is more than compensated for by the possession of the gS-dB diagonal. Better was 7 ... tDge7 or even 7...J.fB!.
8.bxc3 ~a5 9..id3 ~e7 10.~h3 c5 11..igS c4 12..ie2 ~ac6 13..if6
~
A difficult decision. The king leaves the f-pawn to its fate. And yet the plan appears justified and is as mentioned in games 29 and 30 "the king's flight as a relieving measure".
Chapter 2 17.~g5 ~f8
The question is whether the straightforward 17 ... ~c7 is more in the spirit of the above stratagem. Here what is important is not the f-pawn as such but rather stopping White from using the f7 -square (after taking that pawn with his knight) as a base for further attacks. This plan for White would have been thwarted by 17 .. .r:tlc7 18.ltJxf7 .id7 19.f3 ~afB 20.ltJg5 and now either 20 ... ltJg7 and then 21. .. ltJeB or 20 ... rj;>bB.
101
there is 26 ... rj;>bB, e.g. 27.V!:Jb2 ~c6! 2B.V!:Jb4! V!:Jc7 29.~fB! ~b6? 30 ..id6. What has been said leads to two conclusions. Firstly, the prophylactic method 26. V!:J cl and then 27. V!:Jb2 was correct. Secondly, there is an intrinsic affinity between the white minor pieces and the d6-square. The pieces can develop· their own logic, untroubled by the occasionally odd plans of humans; and, as is the case here, that logic is often beautiful and compelling.
IS.h3?
26 ...Vxa2
The wrong method. 1B.f3 would have been better. IS ...c7 19.94 hxg4 20.hxg4 ~fe7 21.g2
Of course Black can be very happy about gaining this result out of a very tiny possibility of a counterattack. 27.~h7 bS 2S.~xf7 ~xf7 29.~xf7 .ic6 The doubled rooks are badly positioned.
~gS?
A bad mistake, but one his opponent does not exploit. By 21. .. .id7 22.~h1 ~aeB 23.~h7 ltJdB Black could have curled up like a hedgehog. 22.~g7 ~eS 23.~hl?
23.ltJxf7! would have seized not only the pawn but the base square d6. If after 23.ltJxf7 ~e7 24.ltJd6 .id7 (24 ... ~xg7? 25.ltJeBt rj;>dB 26.ltJxg7 V!:Jc7 27.V!:Jg5t) 25 ..ih6 White would be well placed.
30..if6 as Preference should have been given to 30 ...V!:Jb2, to anticipate the preventive move 31. V!:J c 1. But White is not thinking of preventive manoeuvres. 31.~hl
Vb2
32..ig5 ~f8
33.~fb7
~c7
34.~xc7
Or 34.~7h3 ~cf7.
34...xc73S.Wcl!
23 ....id7 24.~h3 ~dS 2S.~a ~c8!
26.~hl?
There was no good reason for this pawn sacrifice. It soon turns out that the planned doubling of rooks was hitting out at thin air. Worth considering was 26.ltJxf7 or 26.V!:Jcl and then 27.V!:Jb2. After 26.ltJxf7 would come 26 ... ltJxf7 27.~xf7 ~e7 2B.~xe7 ltJxe7. After 26.V!:Jcl, on the other hand,
White may not have been brilliant in playing for a win up till now, but he certainly knows how to make use of his minuscule drawing chances. The attempts at saving the game which he now makes are first class - one is involuntarily reminded of Schlechter.
3S ... Vxc3 36.Val! Vxal 37.~xal ~aS 3S..id2 b639.g3
102
Chess Praxis
Now the king is threatening to march forward to g5. 39... llJe7 4O..idl! Ad7 The only way for Black to win, if there is such a way, was by 40 ...i.b7. 41..ib4! llJOO 42..id6t ~b7 43.c3 b5 44J~~bl b445..ia4! Not 45.cxb4 axb4 46.i.xb4 tDxd4 47 ..ic5t tDb5 etc. 45 ... b3 This looks good but starts a process of mummification. But 45 ... tDxd4 46.i.xd7 ttJe2t 47.~f3 ttJxc3 48.i.xe6 ~c6 etc. would be double-edged. 46.Axc6t ~xc6 47.g5! Barring the bishop's way out via g6. 47.. J~a7 48J~~b2 gb7 49.~f4 With this move White allows a study-like breakthrough. 49 ..ia3 would have drawn. 49.. ..ic8 Threatening 50 .. J~h7. 50. ~g3 gb4!!
The winning move. 51.aM Necessary, or else 5I .. J~a4 etc. 51. .. a4 52.b5t ~xb5 53..ia3 c3 54J~~bl ~c4 Since the a3-bishop and the b I-rook cannot now move - or else ... b2 followed by ... ~b3 would be immediately decisive - the king can calmly take the d4-pawn and then return to c4. This is the decisive point. 55.£4 fB 21.ltJgS exd4t 22.f4 ltJxf4 23 ..E!hfl ltJexdS? 24.ltJxe6t and wins. 20.Y*fc2 exd5 21J3hel 0-0
29.gadl gc8 30.~e3 gd8 31.~c4 ~f5 To prevent ltJd6.
32.a4 32.e6 would be met by 32 ... :1:!e2! e.g. 33.:1:!xd3 (33J:J:xe2? dxe2 34.~xd8t mh7 and Black wins) 33 ... ~xel 34.:1:!xdBt mh7 and the threat of ... liJg3 is decisive. If after 32.e6 ~e2! White tries to gain a valuable tempo for the defence (e.g. 33.e7 liJxe7 34.~xd3 ~xel 3S.:gxdBt cj;>f7 36.ltJd6t me6 37.ltJcB! with a draw) Black simply plays 33 ... :geB and wins the pawn. 32... ~f7
104
Chess Praxis
This move is totally correct, as the following analysis will show: 33.e6t @e8! 34.lbeS d2 3S.:ge4 :gd4 (of course not the amusing 3S ... :gfI which would be met by 36.:gxfI lbg3 and the equally amusing 37.:gf8t @xf8 38.lbg6t followed by 39.:gxh4 and Black would be mated by :gh8.) 36.:gxd4lbxd4 37.lbc4lbb3 38.@gl :gf4 39.lbe3 :gxa4 Moreover, instead of the game move (32 ... @f7) 32 ... :ge2 could easily have been played, but it is always better to play for a blockade. 33.ge4 ge2 34J~f4 e6 Black has now achieved all his aims: the rook on e2 and the blockading position on e6. Now all that remains to be done is to chase the knight away from c4. 35J~g4 d2 36.gg6t f7 37J~~g4 a6 3SJU4 e6
Black takes his time. His opponent is short of effective moves.
S.tiJd5 To emphasize the strength of dS, but as soon becomes clear, this can only be achieved by sacrifices - of either material or position.
S... tiJf6 Taking aim at dS.
9.tiJh4 At the same time White tries to hang on to dS by combinatory methods.
9 ... tiJxd5 9 ... lbxe4 10.dxe4 i.xh4 would be bad on account of 11.f4.
10.exd5 hd5 l1.tiJf5
39.tiJd6 tiJe3 0-1 Game 52 Lajos Steiner Aron Nimzowitsch Dresden 1926
l.e4 c5 2.tiJa tiJc6 3.tiJc3 e5
The sacrifice which supports the plan (see move 8 and the note to it): White does win his pawn back, but receives doubled pawns. So the sacrifice has been positional in nature. Instead he could have sacrificed material, by 11.i.xdS ixh4 and then 12.f4 with attacking chances. Other things being equal, either the positional or the material sacrifice should be enough for a draw.
11. ..,bc4 12.dxc4 g6! Or 12 ... 0-O? 13.~g4 i.gS 14.h4 etc. To play such a move you need to have courage, and belief in the importance of the blockade. The text move sacrifices a tempo (by not developing a piece) and creates a hole on dS, all to prevent d2d4 and so restrain the opponent.
4.Ac4 d6 5.h3 .ie6 6.d3 .ie7 7.0-0 h6
13.tiJxh6 'Wd7 14.'Wd5 tiJdS 15.Ae3 If1S.lbg4 then lS ... fS 16.lbe3lbe6 followed by ... 0-0-0. The position could then be summed up as follows: Black would have play down the h-file, whilst any attempt by White to attack would peter out against the compact mass of his opponent's pawns.
Chapter 2
15 ... f5 16.~g8 ,ih4 17.g3 Y;Ye6
18J~adl?
The losing move. Nowadays I think that the immediate 1B.gxh4 El:xgB (not 1B .. .'~xd5? because of 19.tLlf6t) would have been enough for a draw. For example 19.j,g5 Wxd5 20.cxd5 El:hB 21.f4 e4 22.El:ael and 23.El:e3.
18.. J~xg8 19.9xh4 f4 Now the bishop can no longer get to g5.
20.bf4 Or 20.j,cl Wxd5 21.El:xd5 tLlf7 and then ... 00-0 and ... El:hB with an easy win. 20 ...Y;Yxd5 21J~xd5 exf4 22J3xd6 ~e7 23J~fdl b6 24J~d7t ~f6 ... 0-1 White resigned after a few unimportant moves. One gains the impression that the plan to weaken the d5-square somewhat (1...c5 in conjunction with 3 ... e5) is correct, because it cost White quite an effort to hang on to d5 and the best he could have achieved was a draw.
105
Chapter 3
Overprotection and other forms of Prophylaxis A rule which I discovered states that strategically important squares should be overprotected. "Because, should the pieces do this, their reward is that for their efforts in protecting the strategically important squares they end up in good positions; so they bathe in the reflected glory of the strategic squares, one might say in somewhat emotional fashion." The thought could be expressed more simply as follows: The contact between one's own strong square and the pieces which are overprotecting it must be to the benefit of both parties. It suits the square, which receives from the prophylactic measures the greatest possible security against potential attacks. And it also suits the overprotecting pieces, because the square becomes for them a source of energy from which they can continually draw new strength. Your author has almost always had excellent results with overprotection. To be sure, from time to time some spiteful critic has tried to make fun of the idea, but any objective summing up will prove him wrong. The difficulties in the next games were alleged to be due to overprotection.
I. Aron Nimzowitseh - Jose Raul Capablanca New York 1927
l.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 This leads to easy equality. 3.. .i.f5 4.i.d3 hd3 5.YNxd3 e6 6.~e3 ~b6 7.~ge2 e5 8.dxe5 he5 9.0-0 ~e7 10.~a4 ~c6 11.~xe5 ~xe5 12.-'.e3 ~e7 13.£4
Also good was 13.ltJd4 in order to prevent
13 ... ltJf5. 13... ~f5 14.e3
108
Chess Praxis
This starts the systematic overprotection of the d4-square, which appears to merit this concentrated attention; after all, d4 is a central blockading square and - if that were not enough - we once had a pawn on d4, which was the base of a proud chain. Even if the d4-pawn disappeared long ago and if the chain now has the f4-pawn as its base, there has been practically no change in the glamour and huge importance of the d4square. So it follows that grouping one's own pieces around the d4-square must be of enormous value in consolidating the position. Admittedly, other plans were possible, e.g. 14J!acl (instead of 14.c3) and then 15.c4. But what would that prove? Only that overprotection was not the only possible stratagem here.
37.cxd4 \We4 3S.~g2 b5 39.~gl b4 4O.axb4 axb4 41.~g2 \WeI 42.~g3 \Wh1 43J!d3 ~e1 44.~a gd1 45.b3 gel 46.ge3 ~Hl 0--1
II. Rudolf Spielmann - Aron Nimzowitseh from the same tournament
l.e4 tl)e6 2.tl)a e6 3.d4 d5 4.e5 b6 5.e3 tl)ee7 6 ..id3 a5 7.\We2 tl)f5
14... tl)c6 15J:iad1 g6 16.g4 This is where the mistake was made. After 16.if2 h5 17.g3 Black would be wondering what to do next. 16... tl)xe3 17.\Wxe3 h5 lS.g5 0-0 19.tl)d4 \Wb6
This is a precursor of my game against Samisch in Berlin (game 13, p. 39).
S.h4 h5 9.tl)g5 g6
And Black obtain~d an advantage by combining play down the c-file with the occupation of the f5-square. Instead of 19.1Lld4 I should have played 19.ffc5 ~fc8 2o.lLld4 lLle7 21.ffxc7 ~xc7 and then ~f2-e3-d3 with a safe game, or 19.ffc5 ~fc8 2o.lLld4 ffd8 21.ffb5.
2oJH2 gfcS 21.a3 Ek7 22J~d3 tl)a5 23J~e2 geS 24.~g2 tl)e6 25.gedl geeS 26J~e2 tl)e7 27.gedl ge4 2S.\Wh3 ~g7 29JH2 a5 30J:ie2 tl)f5 31.tl)xf5t gxf5 32.\W0 ~g6 33J~edl ge4 34J:id4 ge4 35.\W£'2 \Wb5 36. ~g3 gcxd4
The wrong way to overprotect, something which was unfortunately missed by the critics. The correct way was the immediate ... lLlge7. White would then not manage to carry out the manoeuvre he did in the game (lLlbl-d2-fl then f3 and g4), e.g. 9 ... lLlge7 lo.lLld2 c5 and the base of the chain, d4, is hanging. 10.tl)dl tl)ge7 Now 10 ...ie7 would have been better, because there is no point in overprotection here, since f3 and g4 cannot be prevented.
11.tl)f1 e5 12.0 e4 13 ..ie2 b5 14.g4 tl)g7 And White was better, even if he lost later by being over-hasty with his attack. So, here too overprotection would have been useful if it had been carried out properly. 15.tl)g3 tl)e6 16.\Wg2 .ie7 17.gxh5 gxh5 lS.gg18 ~a7 19.tl)xf7 ~xf7 20.tl)xh5 .hb4t 21.~e2 tl)xh5 22 ..ig6t ~e7 23 ..bh5 ~d7
Chapter 3
24.Y!Yg7t JJ.e7 25.JJ.f7 i3h2t 26. c;bdl ~c7 27.JJ.f4 i3xb2 28.Y!Yh7 c;bb6 29.i3g8 Y!Yc7 30.Y!Yh8 lLld8 31.JJ.g6 i3g2 32.Y!Yhl gxg6 33.i3xg6 b4 34.i3g7 Y!Yc6 35.Y!Yh8 Y!Ya4t 36.c;bellLlc6 37.Y!Yxc8 ~h4t 38..ig3 i3xg7 39.JJ.xh4 Y!Yc2 40.J.d8t lLlxd8 41.Y!Yb8t lLlb7 0-1
Game 53 C.Behting Aron Nimzowitsch
Something else to be said about overprotection is that only important, strong squares (not weak ones) deserve overprotection. In addition, it is also desirable that the squares should be at least partially a point of contention between the players.
4.lLlf3lLlbd75.d4
109
Informal game, Riga 1910
l.e4 d6 2.lLlc3 lLlf6 3.f4 e5 This leads to a position from the King's Gambit Declined with ... d7-d6. The move does not deserve criticism, because e4 will be easy to hold, see note to move 8.
5••• exd4 6.lLlxd4 ~e7 7.~c4 0-0 8.0-0 a6
Our games 20 and 44 are instructive examples. For prophylaxis, see games 53 to 56. We were particularly interested in demonstrating the affinity between waiting moves and preventive moves. In the game against Behting (53) 8 ... a6 would apparently have achieved nothing after the reply 9.a4! and yet White would have weakened his chances for the endgame. A move which prevents a sharp threat by your opponent need not be devoid of deeper prophylactic significance; we can see that from move 6 in game 55. If you have prevented your own options from being reduced, then what you have done has been prophylaxis (see game 55). It is rare for prophylaxis to be linked to a threat, but this can happen and even constitutes a remarkable sort of prophylaxis, see move 24 in game 54. And something else: What unpleasant events are worth systematic prevention? Well, any "positional" threats which your opponent would like to set up. For this, game 53 is particularly instructive: the difficult, extremely complicated manoeuvre (Black's 21 move, etc) is intended to help prevent a threatened centralization by his opponent. Modern tournament praxis is full of prophylactic manoeuvring; see, for example, games 7, 13, 20, 21, 32, 33, 38, 39 and 43. S[
One of these mysterious moves on which the pseudo-classical school used to pour scorn. The closed position after ... c5 and ... b5 is only a side issue here. The main purpose of the move is to wait for White to play Wlf3, and then to choose the prophylactic set-up of .. J!e8 and ... if8. The immediate 8 ... E!e8 would fail to 9.ttJf3! with the double threat of 10.e5 and 10.ttJg5. So 8 ... a6 is the sacrifice of a tempo in order to enable the prophylaxis of ... E!e8 etc. This thought must have appeared to be a huge piece of intellectual arrogance to positional players of that time, as they simply shrugged their shoulders at the idea of prophylaxis. The idea ofpreparing for the latter by sacrificing a tempo was "bizarre", "crazy", etc ... Well, in reality 8 ... a6 had to be a very fine move. The e4-pawn is both statically and dynamically full of life and restraint requires care and patience, in other words, waiting moves and preventive moves. Direct action, such as 8 ... ttJb6 (instead of 8 ... a6)
110
Chess Praxis
would only have left Black at a disadvantage after 9.i.e2! d5 10.e5 ltJe4 l1.f5. 9.~6
14.a3! bxa3 15J:~xa3 gb8 16.c3 J.b4 17.Vl8 hg3 18.Vlxg3 ge8 19ic2 Vlf6 20.b4 ~e4 21.Vld3
A possible move was 9.a4, which would have restored the status quo. I would probably in that case have chosen 9 ... c6, e.g. 9.a4 c6 10 ..ia2! (the threat was ... d5 followed by ... ltJg6) and then 10 .. j~e8. If now l1.ltJf3 then 11. .. h6 and the thrust 12.e5? would have failed to 12 ... dxe5 13.fxe5 ltJxe5 14.ltJxe5 ~xdl 15.i.xf7t i>f8 16J~xdl .tc5t 17.i>f1 ~xe5.
9 ... ~c5 10.~g3 If 10.ltJxe7t ~xe7 11..!!el then 11...b5 (not
l1. .. ltJcxe4 on account of 12.ltJxe4ltJxe4 13.i.d5) 12.i.d5ltJxd5 13.ltJxd5 ~d8 (ord7) and after .. J~e8 and ...i.b 7 Black gets some play against the e4pawn. The text move may thoroughly protect that pawn, but means a decentralization: ltJd4-fS-g3.
10... b5 llid3 b4 12.~d5 ~xd5 13.exd5
Things have worked out for Black without preventive action on the queenside, because the weakness of the a-pawn is compensated for by the strength of the e-file. But now he can now longer do without preventive measures as White is planning to centralize (i.cl-e3-d4) and then Black would be somewhat worse off. How can the planned set-up be prevented? 21. ..Vlf/! 22.J.e3 ~f6! 23.J.b3 J.b7 24J:~dl This is not good. I had of course expected 24.c4 and intended 24 ...i.c8 25.i.d2 ltJe4 26.i.el ~f6, bringing about the earlier position, except that the long diagonal would then be irretrievably lost to my opponent. This preventive combination, with its return after six moves to a previous position, should help you to get a feel for the richness and variety of combinations which are available as preventive measures. I count it among my favourite combinations. 24....bd5! 25..bd5 Vlxd5 26.Vlxd5t ~xd5
Black can chalk up the success of having taken the dynamism out of White's centre - thanks to 13.exd5 - but on the other hand he is facing the difficult task of having to take preventive measures in two directions at the same time. White is planning a3 to roll up the qtieenside and also fS to gain space. 13 ... a5! would have prevented both of them (in spite of the threat of 14 ... ltJxd3 15.cxd3 i.a6).
A dangerous move, but one which Black had spotted when he went in for the exchanges. The continuation 27.~xd5 !!xe3 28.!!xf5 !!be8 would favour Black.
13...6
27... ~e3! 28.gd3 ~g4 29.gdl gaS 30.J.d4
This prevents a possible f4-fS, but also plans activity on the e-file ( ... i.h4, ... i.xg3, ... ~e8 as well as settling the knight solidly on e4).
Black would also gain an advantage after 30J!xa6 following 30 .. J~e4 31.g3 '!!e2 or 31.~f1 ltJ g4-e3-d5.
27.J.a7
Chapter 3
30.. J~e4 31.h3 tLle3 32.Axe3 Forced now on account of 32 ... ltJc4 or 32 ... ltJd5. 32.. J;~xe3 33. ~f.2 ge4 34.g3 ~f7 Black surrenders the a6-pawn in order to bring his king into the game with decisive effect. 35.gdal ~e6 36.gxa6 gxa6 37.gxa6 ~d5
38.ga5t The threat was 38 ... !k4 and then ~d5-e4-d3. 38... ~c4 39J~xf5 ge7!
The white king is shut off and Black is threatening to create two connected passed pawns. White tried: 40.b5 ~xc3 41.b69 cxb6 Not 41. .. c6 on account of 42J~a5 ~b7 43.~a7 ~xb6 44.~xg7 when matters are still in doubt.
42.gd5 gd7 43.gb5 gb7 44J~d5 b5 45J~~xd6 b4 46.~e2 b3 47.gc6t ~b2 48.5 ~bl 49.g4 b2 50.g5 ~a2 And after a few more moves White resigned. ... 0-1 Game 54 Carl Schlechter Aroo Nimzowitsch Karlsbad 1907
l.e4 e5 2.tLlf3 tLlc6 3..ib5 a6 4 ..ia4 tLlf6 5.tLlc3 .ib4 6.tLld5 .ie7 7.0-0 0-0 8.gel d6 9.tLlxf6t .ixf6 lO.c3 Black now played a waiting game with:
lO...h6
111
Because his posltion - a crouching or frog position par excellence - can hardly be changed in any way; the waiting move was meant to emphasize this. l1.h3 tLle7 l2.d4 tLlg6 l3..ie3 ~h7 Black sits tight.
l4.Udl.ie6 l5..ic2 Ue7l6.d5 White too would have done better to sit tight. The only possible idea behind d4-d5 would be to start an attack against the opponent's queenside. But White wants to operate on the kingside and d4-d5 is bad preparation for that. l6...Ad7 l7.~h2
l7 ... tLlh8! A preventive move, which is directed against the plan of ltJgl and then f2-f4.
l8.tLl g l g5 19.93 tLlg6 20.Udl .ig7 21.Uf3 a5 More prophylactic play, this time to prevent the possibility of c4 and then b4.
22.tLle2 .ib5 23.a4 .id7 He has done what he set out to do. White's queenside no longer has the strength to break through (which he was planning to do starting with c4 and b4).
24.gb!! Schlechter is now planning to break through when possible with h3-h4, e.g. 23 ... b6 24.h4 gxh4 25.gxh4 ltJxh4 26.~h5 f5 27.~gl etc. But Black finds a move which not only is excellent prophylaxis but which also forces his opponent to act quickly.
24...Ue8!!
112
Chess Praxis
31.YNxh3 exd3 32..hh6 gh8! 0-1 Amongst other things, the game is distinguished by its all-embracing prophylaxis: preventive measures were taken against c4 and b4, and against f4, and against h4. I should also like to say a few words about the character of the preventive moves chosen here: the wait and see procedure 1O... h6 fit in with this style, because:
Waiting moves form the start ofall prophylaxis!
Threatening 25 ... 'lWc8 26.h4? i.g4, winning the knight. So White has no more time for further preparations and opens the battle for the breakthrough.
The fact that the preventive move 24 ... 'lWe8! also contains a threat in no way makes the move "unfit for purpose" because what is involved here is a quite specific type of prophylaxis, part of which involves the goading of the opponent into starting his plan hastily.
25.h4 YNc8! Threatening 26 ...i.g4.
26..id3 .ig4 27.YNg2 gxh4 28.8 h3 29.YNfl
Game 55 Wendel
The breakthrough appears to be going to succeed, because if now 29 ... i.d7 then 30.g4 followed by 'lWxh3 with a decisive attack.
Aron Nimzowitsch Stockholm 1921
29 ...£5!
l.e4 ttJc6 2.d4 d5 3.ttJc3 dxe44.d5 ttJe5 5if4 ttJ g6 6ig3 a6
The counter-thrust which was prepared a long time ago and which will decide the struggle in Black's favour.
30.fxg4 fxe4
Only now do the full implications of 28 ... h3 become apparent. It forced the queen from g2 to f1 and into the line of fire of the f8-rook.
You need to understand this move. The threat of 7.ttJb5 was apparently more easily beaten back by 6 ... f5, as f7 -fS will be played later anyway. But what Black wants - and this is the essence of prophylaxis - is not to show his cards too soon. 6 ... f5 would be followed by 7.h4 and Black would
Chapter 3 have a problem, e.g. 7 ... f4 8.hS fxg3 9.hxg6 gxf2t 1O. ~xf2 and now - better late than never - being able to access the bS-square would be important.
113
23 ... bxc3 24.bxc3 YNg3 25.YNc2 gg8 26.lLlc4! ~d7 27.lLlxd6t cxd6 28..if3
7.6! 5! 8.fxe4 If now 8.h4 then 8 ... eS 9.hS ~gS with advantage to Black.
8 ...£4 9ifl e5 loJi:lf3 .ld6 According to the law of the blockade, passed pawns and partially passed pawns must be blockaded! The position is now approximately equal. White should set about getting his majority on the move (c2-c4-cS), but there are great difficulties with that here.
11.h4 At this point I would have preferred .td3, 0-0, tDe2 and c2-c4.
11. .. b5! This diversion stems naturally from the preventive move 6 ... a6.
12.h5lLlf8 13ih4 YNd7! The threat is 14 ... ~g4.
14ie2 b4! 15.lLlbllLlf6!
The point. Since e4 and hS are attacked at the same time, 16 ..txf6 is forced and suddenly Black's pieces get space to play in (... ~g7).
16..bf6 gxf617.lLlbdl YNg7 18.f1lLld7 19.h6 YNg3 To provoke 20.!!h3, causing White to lose a tempo on move 22. 20J:~h3 YNg8 21.lLlh4lLlc5 22.ghl gb8 23.c3
The b-file gives Black an advantage, but he has the better game in any case.
White has to some extent consolidated and his opponent now has to reckon with the attempts to shake off the yoke by 29.~f2 or even 29.tDfS .txfS 30.exfS with the amusing threat of a draw by 31.!!h3 'WgS 32.!!hS etc. At this point the prophylactic king march 28 ... ~d8 and 29 ... ~c7 would be very good. Then there would be the threat of doubling rooks on the b-file. If after 28 ... ~d8 White plays his intended 29.~f2 there then follows 29 ... ~xf2t 30.~xf2 !!b2t 31.~gl fS 32.!!el !!xa2 33.exfS ~e7; but if after 28 ... ~d8 there is the diversion 29.tDfS then after 29 ....txfS 30.exfS !!e8 the rook has occupied the correct file at once and after 31.!!h3 the queen disappears to g8 with a much superior game. So 28 ... ~d8 was an excellent preventive move which would blunt the edge of those attacks on king and queen which were still far away in the future. But there is here - instead of 28 ... ~d8 - a deeper combination which gets to the goal more quickly and which I chose.
28 .. ib5t 29.c4 hc4t 30.YNxc4 gb2 31.J.e2 gg4! 32.YNcl The parry I had foreseen. If instead ofit, 32 ..!!h3 then 32 ...!!xh4 33.!!xg3 !!hl t 34.~f2 fxg3t 3S.~xg3 !!xal. Black wins the a-pawn and decides the game by direct attacks with the rooks, with the passed pawn lurking in the background. 32.. J~xh4 33.gxh4 gxe2 34.xe2 YNxg2t!
114
Chess Praxis
The point. The rook on g3 is going nowhere and Black obtains a decisive pawn superiority.
35.mdl Yffl t 36.md2 The otherwise better 36. ~c2 would fail to the problem-like mate: 36 ... Wd3t 37.~b2ltJa4 36...Yfd3t 37.~el Yfg3t 38.~fl Yfxh4
It seems more logical to completely shut off the queen by 8 ... b6. Black would then have the option of ... i.a6 or ...i.b 7. 9J~dl
0--0
10J~bl
a6 Il.d4
White is lost. 39.~gl Yfg3t 40.~hl Yfh3t 41.mgl tLlxe4
Yates has very neatly solved the problem he was set on move 5. If Black now plays 11. .. Wxc3 he intends 12.i.b2 Wa5 13.d5 ltJb8 (or 13 ... ltJa7) 14.d6.id8 and Black is the one in danger.
42.Yfc6t
11. .. b5 12.Ad3 c4 13..le4 f5
This brings the queen into the defence on g2, with the help of a few checks. 42... mf7 43.Yfc7t mg6 44.Yfg7t ~h5 45.Yfg2 Yfe3t 46.mh2 tLlfl 47J~fl 47.:B:g1 is simply followed by 47 ... We2 and White has no sensible check. 47... tLlg4t 48.~hl e4 49J~gl f5 50.a4 mxh6 51.a5 mg5 52J~bl a 53.Yfb2 fl 0-1 One of my best games. Game 56 Frederick Yates Aron Nimzowitsch London 1927
Or else 14.d5 will follow.
14.exf6.ixf6 15.tLle5 Axe5 Forced.
16.dxe5 gf7 17.Yfh5 A terrifying onslaught!
17..•g6 18.Lg6 hxg6 19.Yfxg6t gg7 20.Yfe8t ~h7 21.Yfh5t mg8 22..lh6 Yfxa2 In his unfortunate position Black finds the only move which promises him salvation. On the other hand he would have lost at once after 22 ... Wxc3, e.g. 23.We8t mh7 24.hg7 mxg7 25.:B:xd7t ixd7 26.Wxd7t mh8 27.Wxc6 and wins.
23 ..ixg7 It was well worth considering hanging on to the bishop, e.g. 23.:B:bcl Wa324.:B:d6.
23 ...mxg7 24.Wg5t mf7 25.gbcl Yfa3! 26.gel l.e4 c5 2.tLla tLlf6 3.e5 tLld5 4.tLlc3 tLlxc3 5.bxc3 Yfa5 A deliberate exaggeration of the principle of prophylaxis; one should not use the queen but rather a minor piece. But I wanted to set him problems at any cost. 6..lc4 e6 7.Yfe2 Ae7 8.0--0 tLlc6
~e8 This area is under heavy fire, so the king leaves it. At this point White should have remembered that his h-pawn is passed ... but Yates continues to play for mate! 27J~e4 Yfe7 28.Yfh6 ~d8 29.gdl ~c7 30.gg4
Yfc531.ge4
Chapter 3
115
A very beautiful combination was possible after 31.h4. It goes: 31.h4 a5 32.Wlg7 a4 33.h5 a3 34.h6 a2 35.h7 alW1 36.!!xal ~xal t 37.~h2 and now Black wins as follows 37 ...WlxfL 38.h8W1 WIg 1t 39.~g3 Wle3t 40.~h2
41. .. ~f6! Not 41. .. ltJf4 on account of 42.~xd7t etc.
42.Ue3 Uxdlt An elegant way to decide matters.
43.gxdl ghl t 44.n ttl g4t 45.e2 gh2t 46.~el ~xe3
0-1 40 ... !!f1!! (threatening 41. .. Wlel and then mate) 41.Wlh4 WId 42.Wlhf6! Wle1!! (not 42 ...!!xf6 because of 43.exf6 and wins) 43.Wlxfl Wlxfl and Black must win. Despite this, 31.h4 is good, but only if White does not meet 31. .. a5 with 32.Wlg7. The correct line is rather 32.h5 a4 33.Wld2!' But after all that, the best line appears to be 31.h4 a5 32.h5 Wlxe5! 33.Wlf4 Wlxf4 34.!!xf4 ib7 35J~f7ltJe5 36.~g7 id5! 37.f4 ~h8 38.fxe5 ~xh5 39.~el ~f5! and Black has much the better of things.
31... ~e7! 32.Ud2 32.Wle3 was needed. White's passed pawns can only become dangerous when the queens have been exchanged: 32 ... Wlxe3 33.~xe3 J.b7 34.g4 ltJg6 35.h3 ~f8 36.~f1 ltJf4 with the threat of 37...J.g2 or 36... a5 (instead of 36 ... ltJf4) 37.c;f{h2 a4 38.c;f{g3 and now 38 ... ltJf4 (with the threat of 39 ... ltJg2 40J~e2 :Bf3t) and Black should be better off.
32 .. .tl~d5 33.h4 .ib7 34.gd4 ghS 35.Uel .ic6 36.g3 Um 37.f4 Uf5 With decisive effect.
3S.Ufl Uh3 39.Uh2 Ug4 4O.Ufl gxh4! 41.f5
Game 57 Morrison Aron Nimzowitsch London 1927 This game and the next one are dedicated to overprotection.
l.e4 e6 2.g3 Tartakower's interesting suggestion.
2... d5 3.~c3 A more obvious move was 3.1g2 and then 4.d3. On c3 the knight is exposed to attack.
3... ttlc6 4.exd5 4.d3 and then 5.1g2 would have been better.
4... exd5 5.d4 .if5 6.a3 Ud7 7..ig2 0-0-01 Because the d-pawn appears indirectly protected, e.g. 8.ltJxd5 Wle6t 9.ltJe3 ltJxd4 or 8.ixd5 ltJf6 9.J.xc6 Wlxc6 with a superior attacking game.
S.ttl ge2 ~ce7! The individual elements of this strange looking plan are: 1) The e4-square should obviously be considered an important strategic point (= an outpost on the e-file).
116
Chess Praxis
2. For that reason the d5-pawn, which is supporting the e4-square, is valuable. Overprotection of a valuable pawn would fit in with our stratagem of overprotection. So the only question is whether: 3. The knight which is occupying e4 is able to remain there. The fact that this is the case should be clear. See Black's 12th move. A much weaker choice at this point would have been the "natural" defensive move 8... ltJf6 on account of 9 .~g5.
19.J.a He scarcely has anything better.
19.. J~de8 20.hg4 hxg4 21.YMdl! ~c4 Avoiding the trap 21...~xg3? 22.ltJc5! and wins.
22.J.f4 hf4 23.~xf4 g5 24.hxg5 YMfS 25.~g2 YMxg526.f4 If 26.ltJh4 then 26 ... E1:xh4 27.gxh4 Wlxh4 28.E1:el E1:h8 29.\tfl Wlhl t 30.\te2 Wlf3t etc. Note how the c4-knight cooperates.
26...YMh5
9.~f4~f6 Now ~g5 is no longer possible. 10.h3 h5 11.~d3 ~e4! 12.J.e3
This is threatening the exchange followed by
ltJc5. The prospects for the outpost knight on e4 appear to be shrinking; in fact the whole set-up from 8 ... ltJge7 appears almost refuted. But that is not true!
12... ~xc3! The e4-knight inflicts a bloody wound on the enemy, namely doubled pawns on c2 and c3; White's b-file is pretty useless and White is being slowly crushed. (So, even if not in the narrowest interpretation, the e4-knight has managed to justify its position; c( note to move 8.)
13.bxc3 ~c6 14.~b4 J.e6 15.YMe2 ~a5 16.h4 c6 17.0-0 J.d6 18.~d3 J.g4
27.f2 A pity. I had expected 27.E1:el for which I had prepared the fine move 27 ... E1:e3, e.g. 28.ltJxe3 Wlhl t and then 29 ... E1:h2t.
27... ~d6 Neglecting the c4-square, but e4 is now even stronger. 28.~h4~e4t 0-1 Because 29.\t g2 ltJxg3 is decisive.
Game 58 Aron Nimzowitsch A. Hakansson Kristianstad (match) 1922
l.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 With an enormously influential outpost on c4 and splendid development, Black now starts the attack against the weakened kingside.
I have considered this move a good one since 1911, but it has taken 17 long years to convince the chess world of its correctness ...
3 ... c54.YMg4
Chapter 3
My innovation, which was used for the first time in this game. As will soon become apparent, it is based on the idea of overprotection. 4 ... cxd4 5.~f3 ~c6 6..id3 f5
A pawn down, White is playing to blockade his opponent, thus using the stratagem we know from games 46 and 47: "the blockading sacrifice". But for it to work, he has to overprotect the e5-square which lies at the heart of the blockading idea. The overprotecting pieces will then gain kudos from their task; that is the essence of the stratagem of overprotection.
7.Vg3 ~ge7 S.O-O ~g6 9.h4 Poor knight!
9...Vc7 10J~el Ad7
117
17... ~bS IS.c3
Without any effort on its part, the overprotecting piece, the el-rook, gets to occupy the c-file and becomes really important: like an understudy having a leading role fall into his lap. Why? That was what the director wanted! So in our game who was the all-powerful director who was handing out the parts? The answer is: the stratagem of overprotection!
IS .. J:~eS The only move. Black must undertake a remarkable redeployment of his forces to save material. 19.cxd4 c;!?dS 20J:~cl Vb6 21.a5 Va7 22.b6
VaS
Here lo ...ic5 11.h5 ttJf8 was necessary. 11.a3 0-0-0 12.b4 Here White could already win the exchange: 12.h5 ttJge7 13.ttJg5 !!e8 14.ttJf7 !!g8 15.ttJd6t but afterwards he would have some problems to overcome Ch5 is unprotected and White is not developed). The text move is the logical continuation of White's build-up.
12... a6 Somewhat better was 12 ... ~b8 13.c3! dxc3 14.ttJxc3 ttJxb4 15.axb4 Wlxc3 16.ie3 Wlxd3 17.ixa7t ~c8 18.!!ec1t ic6 19.b5! Wlxb5 20.ttJd4 with complications. White could also meet 12 ... ~b8 with 13.ib2, of course.
13.h5 ~ge7 14.J.d2 h6 15.a4 g5 16.b5 £4 17.Vg4 This is a very good position for the queen.
The only time the queen is seen in such a position is in problems.
118
Chess Praxis
23J~e7 tLlf5 24.tLle3 lie7 25.tLlxd5 tLlxd4
Or 25 ... exd5 26.i.xf5 etc. 26.tLlxd4 exd5 27.lYxd7t With mate on the next move by tDe6! 1-0
GameS9 Aron Nimzowitseh Jeno Szekely Kecskemet 1927 l.e4 e6 2.d4 dS 3.e5 eS 4.lYg4 This innovation of mine suits only a few people: it is not to everyone's taste to sacrifice a pawn in order ... not to have an attack! 4 •.• cxd4 s.tLle tLlc6 6..td3 tLl ge7 7.0-0 tLlg6 8J:~el lYe79.lYg3
Your question will be: What has White actually achieved after his pawn sacrifice? The answer is simple, he has provided excellent support for the e5-square, which will be the key point for all future blockading operations, and thus created a spearhead for his own play. The idea behind White's chosen set-up comes out clearly: the loss of the d4-pawn, as can be seen from the formation which has been reached, is not so great since its main function is being fulfilled by other pieces. In fact the e5-pawn, on which the whole cramping strategy rests, no longer needs protection from the d4-pawn, since that task is being carried out by the rook, knight and queen. Therefore White may have a pawn less, but a lot of play with the e5-
pawn at the heart of all future operations (c£ the note to move 6 in the previous game). Moreover, we consider Black's 8 th move to be weak; the correct move was 8 ...i.e7 which would also have prevented h2-h4. 9 .. ..teS 10.h4 Less of an attacking move than an attempt to relieve the e5-pawn. 10... ~fB There was a better move in 10 ...i.d7, e.g. 11.h5 tDge7 12.'l!Mxg7 0-0-0 although 13.ig5 would be unpleasant enough. l1.hS tLlge7 12.h6 g6 13.a3! To provoke a fresh weakening move (... a7-a5). 13.•.aS Now b5 has become available for the white pieces, but allowing b2-b4 would have been even more dangerous. 14..tg5 tLlg8 Forced, because otherwise there is i.f6 and then tDg5. IS.tLlbd2 f6 The question is whether this violent attempt to free himself is better than sitting tight, but on the other hand it is only natural that the person under siege should try some sorties. The attempt at active defence is understandable, because if he had remained passive White could have tried, for example, the manoeuvre ltJd2-fl-h2-g4-f6. 16.tLlb3!!
I am, to tell the truth, quite proud of this intermediate move which aims to provoke ... b7-b6
Chapter 3 and with it a weakening of the position of the knight on c6. After the immediate 16.exf6 I had feared 16 ...id6 (but not the exchange of queens 16 ... Wfxg3? 17.fxg3 .id6 IS.ge2! ixg3 19.9n and Black would be rather helpless, since the gS-knight is dead and there is also a possible line opening by f6-£1) e.g. I6 ...id6! 17.Wfh4 e5 Is.ib5 id7 and I could not see how I could sacrifice; I was clear that just about any sacrifice must succeed because of my opponent's effective lack of a rook and knight, but where and how? No, first, I said to myself, the c6-knight would have to be rooted out, which would create the basis for a breakthrough sacrifice, on either d4 or e5.
119
Game 60 Efim Bogoljubow Aroo Nimzowitsch Russian Championships 1913
1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.~c3 ~f6 4.e5 ~fd7 White now chose the Gledhill Attack.
5.ti'g4 c5 6.~f.3 a6 This cleverly avoids the line 6 ... cxd4 7.~xd4 ~xe5 S.Wfg3 with which I was less familiar.
7.dxc5 ti'c7 S.ti'g3 ~xc5 9.J.d3 g6 10.J.f4 Though Bogoljubow may not have known it - I had not yet discovered this rule - he is using my stratagem of overprotection.
16...b6! 17.exf6 ti'xg3
10... ~c6 11.0--0 ~e7
If instead of this, 17...id6 then Is.Wfh4 e5 19.ib5! (with a pawn on b6, this move is far more effective than previously!) 19 ...id7 20.ixc6 ixc6 21..tf4 exf4 22.~bxd4 id7 23.~g5 and wins.
He is manoeuvring. After 11 ....ig7 and then ... 0-0 the overprotecting pieces would have become fully effective, e.g. by ~fe1, Wfh4, ih6 etc.
IS.fxg3 .id6
12J~~acl!
For IS ... a4 I had planned the following combination 19.~xc5 bxc5 20.£1! f7 20.~e7t cj;>g6 21.i.xg5 with a winning attack). Or 12.ltJc4 lLlc6 13.lLld6t .ixd6 14.exd6 ~d8 15.~e2 ~f6 16 ..!e4 with a superior central position. Or finally 12.ltJc4 ltJa6 13.~e2 0-0-0 14.lLla5 and White sidelines the attacking bishop on b 7 and retains the better pawn formation. So 12.lLlc4 would have been strong. 12.•. tDc6 13J~el 0-0--0 14.tDc4 Now this attack evaporates ineffectually. 14... b5! This creates a square on b6 for the queen. 15.tDd6t hd6 16.exd6 Vlfb6 17..iS This concedes the remains of his central superiority. The correct move was 17.i.e5 though Black could have gone fishing in troubled waters with 17 ... f5 18 ..ixh8 ~xh8 19 ..!d3 (e.g. 19 ... g4 20.h4 g3 21.fxg3 c4t would cost White a piece). But after 19.i.xc6 (instead of 19.i.d3) 19 ... ~xc6 20.f3 g4 21.~e5 or 21.~e3 we would prefer White's position. After the weaker text move the flank attack dominates the board. 17•.. g4! 18.hxg4 hxg4 19..ixg4 f5 20.,iS gh7 21.~f1 e5! 22.hc6
Chapter 6
153
There is nothing else against the double threat of ... e5-e4 and ... f5-f4.
22..•Wxc6 23.8 e4 24.fxe4 ggS 2s.Afl fxe4 26.Wd2
Threatening V!i e3 with a blockade. 26... e3! 27.Wxe3 Wxg2t 2S.ttt>e2 gf7 With the neat threat 29 .. J~xf2t 30.V!ixf2 E1:e8t 31.g;,dl and now 31. .. i.f3t and wins (not the immediate 31. ..V!ixf2 32.E1:xe8 mate).
29.ttt>dl Threatening mate on e8.
29... ttt>bS 30J~gl gxf2! A decisive queen sacrifice!
31 J~xg2 gfxg2
My game against Schlechter (who had White) in San Sebastian 1912 went: 6.i.c4 t2Jc6 7.V!ie4 d6! 8.exd6 t2Jf6 9.V!ih4 i.xd6 10.t2Jc3 t2Je5! (This emphasizes White's central inferiority which came about as a result of the badly timed excursion with the queen.) 11.t2Jxe5 .ixe5 12.0-0 0-0 13 ..id3 V!id4! (to meet 14.V!ih3 with ... V!ig4 and a correct pawn sacrifice, namely 14 ...V!ig4 15.i.xh7t g;,h8 16.,ifSt V!ixh3 17 ..ixh3 i.xc3 18.bxc3 e5 with advantage to Black) 14.V!ixd4.ixd4 (Dr Tarrasch now declares the game level; I do not agree. Black appears much better centralized.) 15.t2Jb5 .ic5 16.if4 .id7 17.E1:adl a6 18 ..id6 (18.ltJc3 is better) 18 ... E1:fc8 19.i.xc5 .ixb5 20 ..id4 ixd3 21.E!xd3!!
Even stronger than 31. .. E1:gxg2.
32.b3 ~glt And Black won easily:
33.ttt>d2 gSg2t 34.ttt>d3 gxal 3S.WxcS gdl t 36.ttt>e3 gel t 37.ttt>d3 If 37.g;,f4 then 37 ... E1:£1 t 38.g;,e3 E1:f3t 39.g;,d4 E1:g4t 40.g;,e5 E!e4 mate.
37.. ..ie4t 3S.ttt>d4gd2t 39.ttt>eS gdSt40.WxdS Ahlt 0-1 Game 79 Werner Nielsen Aron Nimzowitsch Copenhagen 1928
1.e4 cS 2.lil8 lilf6 3.eS lildS 4.d4 cxd4 S.Wxd4 e66.Ad3
Schlechter shows his wonderfully subtle feeling for chess by preferring to lose a pawn rather than allow the centralizing ... ltJd5.
154
Chess Praxis
21..J:!xc2 22.!!b3 b5 23.j,xf6 gxf6 24.!!dl !!ac8 25.@fl f5 Here Dr Tarrasch recommends 2S ...!!8cS. But after that Schlechter would calmly have played 26.@gl and if 26 ... !!f5 then 27.!!fl and the win would still have been difficult. 26.@el !!8c4 27.!!d2 And on move 79 Schlechter achieved a draw that was most honourable, considering that he was a pawn down: 27 ... !!cl t 28.@e2 !!a4 29.a3 !!gl 30.!!g3t @f8 31.b4 !!al 32.!!dd3 !!a2t 33.@e1 f4 34.!!h3 @g7 35.!!b3 @g6 36.!!hc3 f5 37.g3 fxg3 38.hxg3 e5 39.@f1 @gS 40.@g2 hS 41.!!d3 e4 42.!!e3 !!c2 43.@f1 as 44.bxa5 !!xaS 4S.!!b4 !!a2 46.!!eb3 !!c2 47.@gl !!a2 48.@fl !!c2 49.@gl !!d2 SO.@fl !!a2 S1.@gl h4 S2.gxh4t @xh4 S3.!!xbS !!xbS 54.!!xbS @g4 5S.!!eS @f4 S6.!!aS @g4 57.!!eS !!xa3 S8.@g2 !!a8 59.@fl !!alt 60.@g2 !!bl 61.!!e8 @f4 62.!!a8 !!cl 63.!!b8 !!al 64J:k8 gdl 6S.!!a8 !!d2 66J~e8 !!a2 67.!!e7 !!e2 68.!!a7 !!d2 69.!!e7 gd8 70.!!a7 @eS 71.@fl f4 72.!!e7t @d4 73.@e2 !!a8 74.!!d7t @eS 7S.ge7t @dS 76.f3 e3 77.!!e4 !!f8 78.@e1 !!fS 79.@e2 Y2-Yz C. Schlechter - A. Nimwwitsch, San Sebastian 1912 6 •• .tl~c6 7.~e4 f5 Looking for a hypermodern pawn structure. Otherwise I could have played 7 ... d6 or 7 ... ttJdb4. 8.'i;Ye2 "Hanging pawns" could have been achieved by 8.exf6 ttJxf6 9.~e2. 8 .. ..ic5 Exploring the position for central points (d4). I would not be so keen on the more cautious 8 ... ~e7. 9.0-00-0 10.a3 'i;Yc7 Not 10 ... aS which would unnecessarily weaken bS. l1.c4 ~de7 12.b4 ~d4 See the note to Black's 8th move. 13.~xd4 ,bd4 14..ib2 hb2 15.'i;Yxb2 ~g6 16J~e1 b6 17.~c3 a6 18.~dl J.b7 19.'i;Yd4 There would have been excellent chances to consolidate after 19.f3 then j,fl and ttJf2.
19.. J3ad8 20.'i;Yd6 He overlooks Black's move 24. The balance could be kept with 20.cS. 20 ...'i;Yxd6 21.exd6 .hg2 22.~xg2 ~f4t 23.~6~xd3 Black of course has a won endgame, but what happens next is very interesting. 24J~e3 e5 25.~g2 ~f4t 26.~f1 e4 27.6 ex6 28J~xf3 ~g6 29.gcl ~e5
What is interesting is the excellent cooperation between the passed pawn and the knight: at one point we have a pawn on fS and knight on g4, at another pawns on f4 and the knight on e3. In other words the knight highlights the territory which has been gained by the advance of the pawn. 30J3e3 ~g4 31.ge2 f4 32.gg2 ~h6 33J~c3 gc8 34.~b2 ~f5 35.gfl ~xd6 36.gfB g5 37J~cd3 ~f5 38J~xd7 ~e3t 39.~el g4 40J:~fl g3 41J~6 gee8 0--1
2. Flexible handling of the opening (the transposition from one opening to another)
When your author introduced this stratagem it was hailed as decadent by the smart-alecks of the Tarrasch era. For example, Therkatz, an amateur who played weakly enough to be able to write quite an important chess column, claimed that hiding your opening plans showed a "lack of moral fibre". Of course it is really just a transfer
Chapter 6 of the principle of manoeuvring to the opening phase. Although this stratagem had already been employed several times in 1907, 1910 and 1911 (see games 4, 53 and 19) the stratagem is not yet well enough understood. For example, the following method tried out by the author is not well known.
I. Ernst Griinfeld - Aron Nimzowitseh, Breslau
155
45.J.b5 ge2 46.gh2 ~e7 47.~b3 ~b6 4S..if1 gd2 49.~e3 ge2t 50.~b3 gd2 IJ:z-IJ:z II. Ernst Griinfeld Semmering 1926
Aron Nimzowitseh,
l.d4 tilf6 2.c4 e6 3.tila b6 4.g3 J.e7 5..ig2 0-0 6.0-0 .la6 7.tilbd2 e6 S.b3 d5 9.J.b2 tilbd7 10.gel geS 11.We2 c5
1925
l.d4 tilf6 2.e4 e6 3.tila b6 4.g3 J.a6!
And Black is fully developed. The idea was as follows: 3 ... b6 threatened centralization by ... ib7; to blunt the threat White played g3 intending ig2, but in doing so left the c4-pawn poorly protected. This was the signal for Black to set up an attack on c4.
5.Wa4 c6 6.J.g2 b5 7.cxb5 cxb5 S.Wdl J.b7 And after getting rid of the c4-pawn Black had at least a level game.
9.0-0 Ae7 10.tilbd2 0-0 11.tilb3 And now 11.. .ic6 had to be played to prevent a4.
11. .. d6 12.a4 b4 13.a5 J.d5 14.tilel ,hb3 15.Wxb3 d5 16.Wa4 Wd7 17.tild3 tilc6 IS.J.g5 Wb7 19.e3 gfeS 20JUeI h6 21..bf6 gxf6 22.tile5 he5 23J;xe5 a6 24J~acl tile7 25.J.f1 gxe5 26.gxe5 f5 27.We2 ga7 2S.J.d3 ~g7 29.Wdl WbS 30.Wa Wd6 31.g4 fxg4 32.Wxg4t tilg6 33.Wg3 Wxg3t 34.hxg3 tile7 35. ~f1 ~iB 36. ~e2 ~eS 37.~d2 ~d7 3S. ~e2 ~d6 39.~b3 tilc6 40J~el tilxa5t 41.~xb4 tilc6t 42.~a3 ge7 43.ghl a5 44.gxh6 tilb4
12.Wbl dxe4 13.tilxc4 cxd4 14.tilxd4 he4 15.bxe4 J.e5 16.gfdl We7 17.e3 h5 IS.We2 ~fdS 19.tilc6 geS 20.Wa4 a5 21.tild4 tile5 22.tilb5 WbS 23.tila7 Wxa7 24..ixe5 b5 25.Wxb5 gedS 26..bf6 gxf6 27.Wb7 Wxb7 2S.,hb7 gxdl 29J~~xdl gc7 30.J.a .liB 31..ixh5 a4 32.gel f5 33.~f1 J.e5 34..if3 J.a3 35J~e2 ~g7 36.~e2 ~f6 37.~d3 gd7t 3S.~e2 ge7 39.J.g2 J.b4 40.f4 a3 41.e4 e5 42.fxe5t ~xe5 43.exf5 ~xf5 44. ~d3 J.e5 45J~e2 f6 46.J.d5 J.gI 47..ie6t ~g6 4S.h4 f5 49.g4 fxg4 50.hg4 J.e5 5IJ;e6t ~f7 52.ge5 ~f6 53.gd5 gc6 54J~f5t ~g7 55.J.f3 gcs 56.h5 J.e7 57..Ad5 ~h6 5S..if3 gbS 59.ge5 gdSt 60.~c2 J.g5 61.ge6t ~h7 62..ie4t ~hS 63.c5 gd2t 64.~b3 gb2t 65.~xa3 .leI 66.e6 ~g7 67.gg6t ~f7 6S.gg1 ge2t 69.~b3 ~e5 70.~b4 J.e3 7lJ~el J.d4 72.h6 1-0 If you examine these two examples for their strategic content, you come to realize that the necessary components for a manoeuvring game
156
Chess Praxis
(namely the two weaknesses and the pivot point) are present. Here the central threat of ... ,tb7 was one of the weaknesses and the possible play against the c4-pawn the other. The pivotal point for the manoeuvres was the complex of white squares of c4 and d5 all the way to a6 and b7. As an illustration of the stratagem we are discussing here, see games 80 to 83, in which there is a blending of the Indian and Dutch defences. Note how the blending is not confined to the opening, but rather includes all sorts of middlegame motifs. The linking of the Dutch and Indian openings (stem game Bernstein - Nimzowitsch, St Petersburg 1914) was the first example of this in its day and in some sense is the gateway to a new way of playing the game.
This completes the Dutch set-up: the e4square, and the related c5-pawn (making c4-c5 impossible). 14.~d2 ~xd2 15J~xd2 e5 16.dxe5 dxe5 17.f3
g5
Game 80 Dr Milan Vidmar, Sr. Aron Nimzowitsch New York 1927
Black's task is now to conduct the flank attack in such a way that his opponent cannot penetrate via the d-file during it.
l.d4 ~f6 2.~f3 e6 3.c4 i.b4t 4.i.d2 rJe7
18..ifl ~f6 19J~fdl ~ae8 20.rJa4 h8
This innovation by your author is based on the idea of not committing yourself too early to any specific opening set-up: in either case (Indian or Dutch), the queen is extremely well placed on e7.
21.~d6
The exchange sacrifice 21.i:!d7 tDxd7 22.gxd7 would not do on account of 22 ...%Vf6 23.%Vxa7 and then simply 23 ... h6.
5.~c3
21. ..rJg722 ..tfl
5.g3 would be somewhat better.
5...0-0 6.e3 d6 Black is still able to decide between Dutch ( ... b6 and then ... ,tb7) and Indian ( ... c5 and then ... tDc6 or ... e5); the decision is not made till the next move.
7.Ae2 He does without 7.i.d3, which must be chalked up as a victory for Black's manoeuvring. 7.i.d3 would have been followed by 7 ... e5. 7 ... b6 8.0-0 Ab7 9.rJc2 ~bd7 10J'~adl .hc3 11..bc3 ~e412.i.el f5 Everything is now Dutch.
13.rJb3 The idea behind this rather mysterious move is to protect the e3-pawn, e.g. after tDd2 ... tDxd2, ~xd2 ... %Vg5, f3 and the e3-pawn is protected.
13...c5
There waS a better defence by 22.i.el. If now 22 ... e4 then 23.,tc3; but if 22 ... g4 then 23.fxg4 tDxg4 24.gd7 %Vg5 25.,txg4 Wlxg4 26.Wlc2. 22...e4! 23.,iel exf3 24.,ic3
Chapter 6
This diversion comes too late, as the pretty reply demonstrates:
IS7
14.f3 ttJxgS IS.j,xgS eS! 16.e3 with drawing chances.
24...Ve7!
14.. .J.xe4 15.he4 ~xe4 16.8 ~f6 17..ib2
After 2S.i.xf6 mate would follow: 2S .. JWxe3t 26.@hl fxg2t 27.ixg2 and then 27 ... Wel t.
~U7!
25J~6d3 fxg2 26.Lg2.ixg2 27..bf6
After 27.@xg2 comes 27 ... We4t with an immediately decisive attack.
27...Ve4 28J~Id2 J.h3 29.J.c3 Vg4t
But not 17 ... aS, e.g. 18.j,c3 and Black has unnecessarily committed himself. 18J~acl
IB •.!!f2 was correct. 18.. J~af8 19.Vd3 h5 20.e4?
And mate in two. 0-1
Game 81 David Przepiorka Aron Nimzowitsch Kecskemet 1927
l.d4 ~f6 2.~8 e6 3.c4 b6 4.~c3 .tb7 5.Vc2 .ib46.a3 This move looks a bit like a loss of tempo, so why not 6.g3!.
6 .. .J.xc3t 7.Vxc3 d6 Better than the immediate 7 ... ttJe4, e.g. B.Wc2 d6 9.g3 ttJd7 10.j,g2 and when the threatened ttJgS is taken into account, Black is forced into the uninviting defensive move 10 .. ..E!bB. So the transposition to the "second" opening formation should not come too quickly!
8.g3 ~bd7 9.J.g2 Ve710.0-0 0-0 l1.b4 ~e4
If this worked it would mean that Black's preventive set-up (. . .gO and ... '!!afB) had been useless. But the move simply does not work, because the f-file which he is so cheerfully opening ends up swallowing him whole. A better try is 20.e3 though even then White would be at a disadvantage, e.g. 20 ... h4 21.@g2ltJhS.
20 ... fxe4 21.fxe4 ~ g4 The start of the execution so cheerfully announced in the previous note. 22.h3 ~f2 23.tve2 ~xh3t 24.~hl Vg5 25J~xf7 gxf7 26.Vg2 ~f2t 27.~gl tve3 0-1
Now and only now is the correct time to play this!
12.tvc2 f5 13.~g5 ~df6 14.~xe4
To understand this game as a whole you have to grasp the logical connection between Black's waiting and attacking strategies: all Black's waiting moves (moves 7, 17 and IB) were successful to some extent because of the powerful effect of the attacking move 19 ... hS. Seen from this angle, the enormous effectiveness of move 19 becomes clear. A victory for the manoeuvring strategy transferred to the opening phase.
ISB
Chess Praxis
GameS2 Aron Nimzowitseh Rudolf Spielmann New York 1927
I.tlJa d5 2.b3 e5 3..tb2 tlJc6 4.e3 tlJf6 5..ib5 .id7 6.0-0 e6 7.d3 .ie7 S.tlJbd2 0-0 9.he6 .bc6 10.tlJe5
13.he5 13.fxeS is also worth considering, e.g. 13 ....id7 14.~f3 fS IS.exf6 .ixf6 16 ..ixf6 ~xf6 17.~xf6 Wl'xf6 IB.~fI V;¥eS 19.WI'f4 V;¥xf4 20.exf4 with
some superiority in the centre ('Dd2-f3-eS). Or (l3.fxeS) 13 ... WI'aS! 14.gf2 .
And now we are reaching the Dutch.
lo.. J:ks At this point in our game in Karlsbad 1923, H. Wolf played 10 ... 'Dd7. The game continued: 11.'Ddf3 ~cB 12.WI'e2'DxeS 13.'DxeS i.eB 14.WI'g4 fS IS.WI'e2 .if6 16.c4 Wl'e7 17.f4.
White could then choose to equalize with lS.e4 followed by 16.exdS ixdS (forced) or lS.'DfI followed by 'Dg3 and 'DhS. Compare the results of this with move diagram 2 on the next page.
13.. ..if6 14J~a Axe5 15.fxe5 'flYe7 Now lS ... WI'aS would not work because of 16J!g3 and then 'Df3.
16.'flYh5 h6 White went on to set up a strong attack with h3, cj;>h2, ~f2, ggl and g4 and won: 17 ....if7 1B.h3 ~fdB 19.cj;>h2 ~c7 20.~f2 .ieB 21.~gl dxc4 22.bxc4 .ixeS 23.ixeS ~cd7 24.g4 fxg4 2S.WI'xg4 ig6 26.d4 cxd4 27.exd4 ifS 2B.WI'hS ig6 29.WI'e2 ~fB 30.~gS gfS 31.~fg2 gxgS 32.gxgS Wl'f8 33.V;¥g4ifS 34.WI'g2 h6 3SJ~g3 cj;>h7 36.dS ~f7 37.d6 g6 3B.cS Wl'cB 39.~c3 Wl'c6 40.V;¥xc6 bxc6 41.h4 cj;>gB 42.gb3 ~d7 43.~bBt cj;>f7 44JkB .ie4 4S.cj;>g3 hS 46.cj;>f2 .idS 47.cj;>e3 ig2 4B.cj;>d4 if3 49.ihB .eSt SO.cj;>xeS idS Sl.if6 if3 S2.igS cj;>g7 S3.5 ig4 S4.f6t cj;>h7
The freeing move 16 ... 5 does not yet work (I6 ... fS? 17.exf6 gxf6 1BJ:1xf6 gxf6 19.WI'g4t) but it should have been prepared by 16 ....ieB. For example, 16...ieB! 17.!!h3 h6 IB.'Df3 5 and it would not be easy for White to conduct his attack. 17J~afl
g6
1-0
White could have reached a clear superiority in the centre after 17...ieB (instead of 17... g6), e.g. 18.~g3 fS 19.WI'xh6 Wl'xeS (threatening ... WI'xg3) 20.WI'f4 Wl'f6 21.'Df3. But after 17... ieB the sacrificial continuation 1B.gf6 would appear less clear, e.g. IB ... V;¥aS! (the same queen sortie again!) 19.!!xh6 gxh6 etc.
l1.f4 tlJd7 12.'flYg4 tlJxe5
IS.'flYxh6 'flYxe5 19J~tf6 Vh5
After 12 ... fS there would be 13.WI'xg7t cj;>xg7 14.'Dxc6t if6 IS.'DxdB ixb2 16.'Dxe6t and wins.
White was threatening some unpleasantness after g2-g4 and !!fI-f3-h3. The text move costs a pawn; Black struggles on but in vain.
SS.~xc6
Chapter 6
2o.Wlxh5 gxh5 21.tt:\a gc7 22J~h6 f6 23.tt:\h4 .ieS 24.ghxf6 gxf6 25.gxf6 ge7 26. ~n
159
This dears the b3-square for his king. Of course the d3-pawn is going nowhere. 45 ... ~d6 46.~xd3 gn 47.gd2 gat 4S.~c2 ~e6 49J~e2t ~d6 50.~b3 gd3 51.ge5 h4 52.gxh4 f!h3 53.f!h5 ~c6 54.gh6t ~b7 55.h5 1-0
GameS3 Aron Nimzowitsch
Akiba Rubinstein Semmering 1926
l.tt:\a d5 2.b3 c5 3..ib2 tt:\c6 4.e3 tt:\f6 5..ib5 .id7 6.0--0 e6 7.d3 .ie7 S.tt:\bd2 0--0 9.hc6 ,bc6 The same as in the previous game.
10.tt:\e5 i.eS l1.f4 tt:\d7 12.tt:\xd7 According to the logic of the game, White has to manoeuvre on the black squares and the fact that he preferred to take the f-pawn rather than the h-pawn seems to indicate that he was correct in his assessment of the strategic situation. However, a few moves later he makes a weaker move, which unnecessarily prolongs Black's resistance. 26 ... ~g7 27.gf4 .id7 28. ~e2 This is it. He should have played 28.cbel. White's intrinsic strength on the black squares is absolutely dear. (When playing on the black squares, he would be much more likely to think only of e5 or g5 as key squares.)
It is worth the trouble to spend some time on a continuation which was possible here, namely 12.~g4ltJxe5 13.fxe5 ~a5! (more aggressive than 13 ...i.d7 and then ... 5) 14J~f2.(This diagram is the one mentioned in previous game)
2S ... e5 29.gfS geS Because of the position of his king 30.~xh5 is now out of the question. 30J~ln
e4 31.f!f4
Slowly but surely, he gets back to those black squares. 31 .. J~e5 32.~d2 b5 33.g3 J.h3! Turning the knight into a temporary prisoner.
34.d4 cxd4 35.exd4 f!gS 36.c3 a5 37.gn a4 3S.~e3 a3 39J~c2.in 40.f!cl .id3 41.tt:\g2 The roles are now reversed and the bishop is the prisoner and the knight dances about, swinging his dub. 41. .. gfS 42.tt:\f4 ~f7 43.gdl Now the threat is 43.ltJxd3 which was not previously available because of ... ~f3t. 43 ... ~e7 44.tt:\xd3 exd3 45.h4
Planning the knight manoeuvre ltJd2-flg3, etc. 14 ... ~b4 (putting a spoke in the wheel again!) 15.e4 ic6 (best: centralization is the only way to succeed!) 16.a3 ~ as 17.exd5 i.xd5 (l7 ... exd5 seems bad on account of 18.e6 f6 19.1tJf3 threatening ltJh4 and ltJf5) 18.ltJfl (18. a4, with the aim of preventing ... b5, would allow 18 ... ~b4) 18 ... ~c7! (not 18 ... b5 on account of 19.a4 and Black's queens ide is paralysed) 19.1tJe3 b5 (the characteristic counter-chance; ... c5-c4
160
Chess Praxis
must be made possible - even at the cost of a pawn sacrifice!) 20.ctJxd5 exd5 21.e6 f6 22J~afl and White gets in first, e.g. 22 ... ~h8 23.~f3 and then ~h3. This analysis seems to prove that White would have retained good prospects after 12.Wg4. 12•••Y;Yxd7 13.e4 f6 14.Y;Yf3 Now we appear to have more of an Indian formation. 14•••J.f7 15.a4 There is no long-term preventive measure against ... c5-c4. 15 ••• b6 Not the immediate 15 ... a6? because of 16.a5 when paralysis sets in. 16J~ael
Instead of 16.~ae 1, the advance g4-h4-g5 would have been possible. Perhaps 16.~a2 then 17.~fal as prophylaxis against the threatened ... a7-a6 and ... b6-b5 would have been worth considering? How could Black then make further progress? 16••• a6 17.£5 dxe4 17 ... exf5 would be bad on account of 18.exd5 .txd5? 19.~xe7!. 18.Y;Yxe4 e5 19J~e3
In order to get at the apparently cramped opposing kingside. But the attack is not easy to conduct, especially when you consider White's somewhat misplaced queen (the e4-square would be much better occupied by the knight). Instead of 19 .~e3 we would suggest the following regrouping of the pieces: 19.Wh4 b5 20.ctJe4 c4
21.bxc4 bxc4 22.~e3 and White is threatening to follow up with 23.~h3, e.g. 23.~h3 h6 24.~g3 etc. This redeployment would combine attack with the defence of the queenside should it be needed. 19••• b5 20J~g3 Now he threatens to win a piece by Wg4 g6 fxg6 Wxg4 23.gxf7t and then ~xg4 t. 20 ••• h8 21.~f3 Wg4 (g6) and ctJe4 would still have been appropriate. 21. •• bxa4 A mistake. He had to play 21 ....td6. 22.~xe5! Y;Ye8 If 22 ... fxe5 then 23.Wxe5 .tf6 24.Wxf6 gxf6 25 ..txf6 mate. 23.Y;Yg4 gg8 24.~xf7t Y;Yxf7 25.Y;Yxa4 White now has an extra pawn and the pleasant choice between a winning mating attack and a victorious endgame (the a5- and c5-pawns are serious endgame weaknesses. In short, the game is as good as won. 25 •••Y;Yd5 26.Y;Yg4 J.d8 27.Y;Yg6 h6 28.gel Y;Yd7 29J~e6
It would have been simpler to play 29.~e4 with total domination of the board. The text move, which plans ~xf6, should however win even more quickly. 29 ••• c4!
30.bxc4? White was so annoyed at allowing the breakthrough (when prophylaxis was so easy
Chapter 6 to achieve with 29 .~e4!) and believed so much (based on how the game had gone) that the move ... c5-c4 would be effective that he could not find the courage to play the winning move he had planned. White was also in time trouble. The game was there for the taking with 30.~xf6 .ixf6 31.J.xf6 gxf6 32.~xh6t ~h7 33.~xf6t ~g7 34.~g6 cxb3 35.cxb3 <j{g8 36.~h6 ~f7 37.~g5t ~g7 38.~f4 and wins.
30.• J!~b8 31.J.c3 gbl t 32.gel Ab6t It is quite curious that this plausible check gives away the drawing possibility that was there after the immediate 32 .. .!hel t 33.i.xel ~a4. 33.~f1 gxelt 34.hel! The resourceful bishop is heading for squares such as f2 or b4.
34.••YlYa4 If 34 ... ~e8 then 35.i.b4 and ... ~e7 has been prevented.
3S.gh3! gm After other rook moves the rook sacrifice on h6 is decisive, e.g. 35 ... ~e8 36.~xh6t gxh6 37.~xh6t <j{g8 38.~g6t <j{h8 39.~xf6t and then 40.~xb6.
36.J.c3 Ad8 The final mistake. Black had a slight chance of a draw after 36 ... ~xc2 37.~xh6t gxh6 38JWxh6t <j{g8 39.~g6t <j{h8 40.i.xf6t ~xf6 41.~xf6t <j{g8 42.~xb6 because next comes 42 ... ~xd3t and White still has some problems with the queen ending.
37.J.d2 YlYxc2
161
We now have an endgame in which you might expect a banal discovered attack; but you will be most agreeably surprised. 38.J.xh6 YlYbl t 39.~e2 YlYc2t 4O.~e3!! The point. 40.i.d2t would not be so good on account of 40 ... <j{g8 41.~h7 ~f7 with the threat 42 ... ~e7t
4O.. .J.b6t Or 40 ... ~cl t 41.<j{e4 ~el t 42.~e3 ~h4t 43. <j{d5! gxh6 44.~h3 and wins. 41.~e4! YlYe2t 42.ge3!! 1-0
3. The centre and play on the Hank What is "better" (in the American sense of the word, i.e. of greater practical value for achieving success), the central attack or the diversion on the flank? This question is a very difficult one. It is in any case clear that flank attacks can only be undertaken when you have a sufficiently solid position in the centre, though what do we understand as a sufficiently sound central position? In the pawn position in which White has c4, d4, e3 and Black has c6, d5, e6, it has already been proved by the author (back in 1913) that the Tarrasch-style idea that the move c4-c5 can be refuted by the central thrust ... e6-e5 can hardly be sustained (as I showed in My System). The move ... e6-e5 (or ... f7-f5 in the position where White has pawns on d5, e4, and f2 and Black on d6, e5, f7 etc.) must rather be considered to be a normal reaction and can scarcely be seriously called a "refutation". The prospects for both sides' pawn chains (because the closing up brought about by c4-c5 or d4-d5 in both cases leads automatically to the formation of pawn chains) can be called approximately equal. This view (my view) has long since been accepted. I had done so as far back as 1907. See the start of my game in Karlsbad against Chigorin:
Aron Nimzowitsch -
Mikhail
Chigorin,
Karlsbad 1907
l.d4 dS 2.llJa .ig4 3.llJeS Af5 4.c4 e6 S.llJc3 5.~b3 is met with 5 ... ttJc6.
162
Chess Praxis
S... e6 6.m3 lYb6 7 ..if4 ~f6 S.eS lYxb3 9.axb3 ~bd710.b4 ~hS 11.~xd7 ~xd712 ..id2
in such a striking way that in following my rule:
White is not considering preventing ... e6-e5 at all.
Ifyou have a strong central position,
attacks on the flank are justified, however vague their goals.
12...J.e7 13.bS ~f6 14.e3 eS I undertake a highly individual (critics would say "bizarre") flank attack. In game 88, you will find another pioneering rule. It goes: "Keep you eye on the flanks and your mind on the centre - that is the essence of positional play." We recommend that a reader with an eye for modern chess should play through the following games with some care.
GameS4 Nimzowitseh Allan Nilsson
ArOD
Copenhagen 1924 So what?
1.~8 ~f6 2.e4 e6 3.e3 dS 4 ..ie2 .i5 S.~e3
IS ..ie2 ~eS
e66.d4
Now he even loses a pawn. The attack which was begun with ... e6-e5 should in any case be continued by 15 ... e4 or 15 ... exd4 instead of 15 ... lDe8, but this would not of course have been able to shake White's central position in any way.
By a roundabout way we have reached a very well known position.
16.bxe6t bxe6 17.dxeS! 17 ...i.xc5 is out of the question on account of 18.lDa4 winning the exchange after lDb6t.
6.. ..id6 6 ... lDbd7 first would be better.
7.lYb3lYb6 7 ... ~c8 was preferable.
S.eSlYxb3 9.axb3 .ie7 10.b4
17... ~e7 IS.~a4 ghbS 19.~ f6 20.exf6 .ixf6 21.J.e3 .ie2 22J~~fel .ib3 23..bf6 gxf6 24.~e3 gb4 2S ..id3 h6 26.~e2 as 27..i5t ~eS 2S.~d4 J.a4 29.b3 .ibS 30.ga3 a4 31.gcal ga6 32.bxa4 gbxa4 33.gxa4 gxa4 34.gxa4 .ba4 3S ..id3 ~d7 36.~f1.ibS 37.hbS cxbS 3S.~e2 b4 39.~d2 ~a6 4O.c6t ~d6 41.~e2 ~eS 42.~b3 ~b6 43.g4 ~eSt 44.~e2 ~e4 4S.8 ~d6 46.~b3 ~e447.~xb4 ~xe3 4S.~e3 ~e4 49.~d3 ~eSt SO.~e3 ~xe6 S1.~xc6 ~xc6 S2.~d4 ~d6 S3.f4 ~e6 S4.~eS 5 SS.h3 fxg4 S6.hxg4 d4 S7.~xd4 ~d6 SS.5 1-0 Modern thought obviously tends to consider as defensible (solid) any sound central formation, however cramped it may be. In game 85 I do this
The coming counterattack (... e6-e5) is ignored with an easy conscience, because even if Black gets in ... e6-e5 he will have achieved nothing.
Chapter 6 The further advance ... eS-e4 (... eSxd4 is certainly harmless) would just lead to a mummification of the position, which might be lifted by an advance of the f-pawn (... £7-fS-f4), but that would cost too much time. So ... e6-eS turns out not to be dangerous and White can continue his flank attack without bothering about it.
10... lilbd7 l1.b5 rtle7 12.h4 a5! An ingenious attempt to open the game. Otherwise White's game would be visibly superior.
13.bxa6 bxa6 14.lilh4!
163
course not work in view of 21.bxaS. This shows how useful it was to protect the bI-rook properly.
20.Ad2lileS 21.gal Consolidation first, and then the attack!
21. ..gba722.£3 This opens not only the f-file for the rooks, but also the e I-h4 diagonal for the d2-bishop.
22...f5 23.fxe4 fxe4 24.ga2 AdS 25.ghal lilc7 26.J.el! This will finish off Black's pretty defence.
26... lilb5 27.J.h4t! rtleS 2S.bdS rtlxdS 29..hb5 cxb5 30. rtld2!
Taking the pawn can hardly be recommended, e.g. 14Jha6 !!xa6 1S.ixa6 !!bB 16.bS lLle4 17.id2 lLlxc3 IB.ixc3 id3. On the other hand protecting the h-pawn by 14.!!a4 is not as good, as in some variations White must be in a position to meet ... a6-aS by b4-bS. So the a-file must be left voluntarily in order to secure the b I-square.
14.. J~hbS 15.lilxf5t exf5 16J~bllile4 17.lilxe4 fxe4 Now it looks as if ... e6-eS-e4 was played.
IS.rtld2!
The point of the exchanges. The king will hurry to the right wing to give its best support to the rook which will penetrate via the f-file. The h-pawn will also lend its support (see the note to White's move 37), while the black pieces, for their part, are unable to organize any real cooperation. 30... rtle7 31.rtle2 rtle6 32.rtlrl rtld7 33J~a5! A blockading move with a possible future threat (!!xbS). 33... rtlc6 34.rtlg3 rtlb7 35.gfl rtlc6 36J~f5!
ge737.h4 The king is aiming for c2 to provide proper protection for the bI-rook.
IS .. J~b7 If IB ... aS then 19.bS cxbS! 20.!!xbS E:xbS 21.ixbS !!bB 22.i.a4 !!b4 23.ic2 with the threat of ia3 and White's position would be preferable.
This threatens h4-hS-h6 and then %!f6t.
37.. J~aa7 Giving up the Bth rank, but 37 ... E:d7 would have been followed by 3B.!!eS.
19.rtlc2lilf6
3S.h5 ge6 After 3B ... h6 both 39.@h4 followed by g2-g4gS and 39.!!fB @b7 40.%!dB would win. Black
To transfer the knight to bS (via eB and c7). Attacking with 19 ...!!abB 2o.id2 as? would of
39JUlI
simply has too many weaknesses.
164
Chess Praxis 8 ... a5, since his opponent's central operations are not of any great importance.
9.exd5 9.f4 would have been a blunder on account of 9 ... dxe4 10.dxe4 b4 then ...i.c5t. So the "threat" of ... b5-b4 has already worked.
9 ... exd5 Now Black has a really good position.
10.lLle2 To prevent ... f5-f4.
lo ... lLld711.i.f4 The play against the black squares has turned out badly. The correct move was 11.c4 ltJ b6 with approximately level chances. The rest is a question of technique:
39...g6 40.h6 g5 41J~b8 rtlc7 42J~~bxb5 gxh6 43.ga4 gf6 Or 43 ...!!b7 44.!!ba5.
44.gba5 rtlc8 45. rtl g4 To lure the h-pawn to h6.
45 ... h6 46.ga2 :Saf7 If 46 ...!!b7 then 47.!!xa6 !!xa6 48.!!xa6 !!xb4 49.!!xh6 (see the note to move 45) 49 ... !!b3 50.!!h3 and wins.
47.gxa6 gxa6 48J~~xa6 ~fl49.g3 gb2 50.gxh6 gb3 Or 50 ... !!xb4 5 I.al ~d7 To link the major pieces. 20J~gl ~cS The king is aiming for b7.
21.lDcl b6 Keep you eye on the flanks and your mind on the centre - that is the essence ofpositional play.
Now the threat is also ... ttJc6-a5-c4; the white squares are obviously hard to defend.
l.e4 lDc6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 J.f5 4.a3
22.b4 a5 23.c3 axb4 24.cxb4 gaS 25. 'tt>b2 'tt>b7
In order to be able to play ttJc3.
4 .•. e6 5.lDc3 h5 Early preventive play against White's advance f4, g4, etc.
6.J.e3 g6 7.f4lDh6 s.lDf3lDg4! In order, in the future, to provoke the weakening move h2-h3.
9.J.gI h4 10.h3lDh6 11.J.e3 J.e7 12.Wld2 a6! Acting as if, after White castles queenside, he will play b7-b5.
13.0-O--O! gbS! 13 ... b5 would simply have led to mummification and to a mutual weakening of the c5-square after 14.ttJa2 (not 14.ttJxb5 on account of 14 ... 0-0 and ... E!b8) 14 ... ~b8 15.b4. However, the hidden threat of the text move is immediately effective.
14.lDa2 .ie4!
25 ... :Bxa3 was also possible, but Black wants to see all his positional chances come to fruition (... g5-g6) before he strikes out. Now there is the strong threat of 26 ... :Bxa3.
26.lDa2 g5 27.fxg5 hg5 2S.g4! hxg3 29.gxg3 he3 30.gxe3 Wlh4 Black has seized the g-file; d4 and h3 are weaknesses.
31.Wlc3lDa7 32J~cl 32.a4 was better, but Black is in a superior position anyway.
32•..Wlflt 33.'tt>b3lDb5 34.Wlc6t 'tt>bS 35.Wlxb5 Wlxe3t 0-1
Keep you eye on the flanks and your mind on the centre - that is the essence of positional play!
The logic behind the above game is made clear by the moves 12 ... a6, 13 .. J!b8 and 14.ttJa2 i.e4. After 12 ... a6 and 13 ... ~b8 the queenside started to look threatening; White was forced into
170
Chess Praxis
countermeasures (I 4.ttJa2), the effect ofwhich was decentralizing. By 14 ... ~e4 Black took advantage of White's decentralization and the stone began to roll. The great effect of a flank attack which did not threaten all that much must appear surprising. The explanation seems to lie in the fact that the balance had already been tilted in Black's favour beforehand (Le. before 12 ... a6); he was obviously strong on the white squares. The moves after 12 ... a6 simply allowed a latent possibility to become real. So this simultaneous game was logically conducted from A to Z. We further refer you to the move ... g7-g5 in game 71 (p. 138) and the game Samisch Alekhine, Dresden 1926.
4. The small but solid centre
As we know, the possession of a small, though cramped, centre is justification for starting flank attacks, which are to a certain extent supported by the solidity of this centre. In games 85 and 86 there was a noticeable distance between the centre and the flank attack; logically separate, both actions were independent. Things are quite different in the Paulsen formation which is so popular nowadays, as can frequently be seen, for example, in the games of Samisch: there the flank attack is intended to free one's own somewhat cramped centre. Thus it is a subsidiary operation. Also there is less of a distance between the centre and the flank attack. It is important to study the stratagem I have just pointed out. The two main demands made on a good Paulsen player are: a) Prophylaxis b) The ability to manoeuvre within his own position
Although there is no reason to fear II.e4 in itself, since it could always be met by 11. .. cxd4 12.ttJxd4 with a Paulsen position, Black prefers to take preventive measures.
11.a3 0-0 12.gadl ~Ud813.gfel gac8 14.~b3 cxd4 15.exd4 ~b8! Internal manoeuvring is starting. 16.~fd2.hg2 17.~xg2 Y;h,7t 18.~gl gc7 18 ... d5 or 19.b5 would be bad on account of the reply 19.c5.
19.tvd3 ~bd7 20.f4 g6 21.gcl gdc8 22.h3 h5 A preventive move aimed against g4. 23J~c3
d5!
And Black had somewhat the better game.
24.cxd5 gxc3 25.bxc3 Wlxd5 26.c4 Wld6
Both can be found in the openings of the following games. I. Dr MUan Vidmar Sr. - Aron Nimzowitsch, Semmering 1926: l.d4 ~f6 2.c4 e6 3.~B Ab4t 4..id2 Wle7
5.e3 .b.d2t 6.~bxd2 d6 7.tvc2 c5 8.g3 b6 9..ig2 Ab7 10.0-0 ~c6!
The hanging pawns on c4 and d4 do not inspire a great deal of confidence.
Chapter 6
27.'i'6 g7 28.g2 'i'xa3 29J~al 'i'b2 30J3bl 'i'e2 31J~el 'i'fS 32J~el gd8 33.'i'e3 h4 34.d5 hxg3 35.tl~d4 'i'xf4 36.gfl 'i'd6 37.~e4 'i'e7 38.~xf6 ~xf6 39.~b5 'i'e7 40.d6 'i'fS 41.'i'xf6t g8 42.gf4 gd7 43.gh4 'i'g7 44.'i'xg7t xg7 45.gd4 a6 46.~e7 f6 47.gdl e5 48.~e8 a5 49.xg3 a4 50.g4 a3 51.gal d4 52.~f6 gxd6 53.gdl t xe4 54.gxd6 a2 55.ge6t b5 56.gel a4 57.~d7 b5 58.~e5t a3 59.~d3 b3 60.~e5t a3 61.~d3 b3 62.6
171
only strong points should be overprotected; see the chapter on overprotection.
22.e4 J.f6 23.J.e3 ~e5 24.~d4 J.e7 25.~b3 ~f6 26.6 gfe8 27.g4 This attack is unwarranted.
27... h6 28.g2 ~fd7 There has been a lot of manoeuvring via the f6-square. 29.~d4gb6
And Black achieved an advantage on the b-file.
1--0
II. Akiba Rubinstein - Fritz Samiseh, Berlin 1926: I.d4 ~f6 2.e4 e6 3.~e3 J.b4 4.'i'e2 e5 5.dxe5 Axe5 6.~6 ~e6 7.J.g5 b6 8.e3 fie7 If you intend to set up pawns on e6 and d6, you need a bishop on e7. 9J~~dl a6 10.J.e2 J.b7 11.0--0 d6 12.gdl 0--0
13.gfdl gc8 The small centre with e6 and d6 also seems defensible against a possible 14.J.xf6 gxf6! 15.~e4? ~b4. So 13 .. .Ek8 is well-timed.
14..if4 ~e8 15.'i'bl ~a5! The struggle is based on the attempt to encircle the small centre, i.e. the c4-pawn.
16.b3 b5! 17.~e4 he4 18.'i'xe4 bxe4 19.bxe4 'i'e7 20.'i'bl gb8 21.'i'e2 ~b7
The d6-pawn is overprotected: what justifies (because we shall soon see it is justified) this overprotection? The strength of the d-pawn, because
30.ghl geb8 31.h4 'i'b7 32.g5 hxg5 33.hxg5 ~e5 34.gel ~c6 35.~xe6 'i'xe6 36J~hl e5 37.'i'dl g6 38.'i'el gbl 39.'i'h4 gxhl 40.xhl gbl t 41.gl 'i'b6 42.g3 gb2 43.he5 dxe5 44.gxb2 'i'xb2 45.f2 'i'd4t 46.fl 'i'al t 47.fl 'i'Ial 48.'i'g4 'i'dl 49.'i'c8t g7 50.'i'xa6 hg5 51.'i'al Ah4t 52.fl f6 53.'i'dl 'i'e3 54.g2 'i'flt 55.hl 'i'e3 56.'i'fl h6 57.'i'gl 'i'f4 58..ifl .ig3 59.'i'h3t gS 60. g2 i.h4 61. hl fS 62.exf5 gxf5 63.'i'g2t J.g3 64.'i'e2 f6 65.n bxe4
26.ltJc3 would be better.
Chess Praxis
174
White has managed to secure the e-file to some extent, but the weak c-pawn which he now gets is more than his position can bear.
31.bxc4 a5 32.~d3 W/f6 Manoeuvring: White's weaknesses are the cpawn, the e-file and the f6-b2 diagonal.
33.Wlb2 W/xb2t 34.~xb2 .if5 The exchange of queens has not improved White's position. The c4-pawn is not as easy to protect as it was before, though the f6-b2 diagonal seems to have been made safe. 35J~cl
h5
Not 35 ... .8:b8 36.llJdl etc., because the white king should be kept at a distance for as long as possible. The pawn move is preparation for the future pawn storm. 36J~~c3 a4 37.~dl
If 37.llJxa4 .8:a8 38.llJb2! (38.llJb6? .8:xa2t then ... .8:a6 and the king creeps closer to the encircled knight) 38 ... .8:xa2 39 ..8:b3 g5 with a superior endgame. If however 37 ..8:a3 then 37 ... .8:b8 38.llJxa4? .8:a8 and wins. 37...g5 38.~e3 Ad7 39.cit>e2 5 40.cit>d2 After this the kingside becomes weak, but also 40.f4, which was better, would hardly have been enough. For example, 40 ... gxf4 41.gxf4 h4 or 40 ... cj;>f7 41.fxg5 cj;>g6 and in both cases White has problems to face.
4O ••. £4! 41.gxf4 gxf4
Black would retain a strong endgame attack. For example, 42.llJc2 cj;>f7 43.llJel cj;>f6 44 ..8:c2 .8:b8 45.cj;>c3 .8:bl 46 ..8:e2 .8:el t 47.llJc2 i.f5 with a general exchange of pieces and a won pawn ending, since the black king can penetrate to g3. Now Black has an easy win. 42 •.. cit>f7 43.~f2 gg8 44.cit>e2 gxg2 45.Ekl
.if5 46.a3 h4 47.gfl cit>f6 48.cit>dl h3 49.cit>e2 h2 50J~~al .id3t 51.cit>xd3 gxf2 52.cit>e4 cit>g5 53.gbl ge2t 54.cit>d3 ge3t 0-1 In this endgame it was worth noting the reflex weakness of the white kingside: in the sense that the weakness of White's queens ide to some extent carried over to the kingside, meaning that the black f-, g- and h-pawns could feel and act like a qualitative majority. And they did so, not without success. The game itself is typical of the hypermodern aim of carrying out difficult manoeuvres even when the spatial balance is not in their favour. The sight of Black emerging from a terribly cramped position, slowly but surely gaining territory and finally obtaining a strong endgame attack makes this game both instructive and enjoyable. The small centre once more proved its worth. Game 91 Eigil Hansen Aron Nimzowitsch Copenhagen 1928
l.c4 c5 2.£4 The impression created by this move is somewhat odd, but as we shall soon see it is not the move that it is odd but the impression! It really is rather pathetic to judge a move by its appearance, and yet that was unfortunately very common in the days of the pseudo-classical school.
2 ... ~f6 3.d3 d5 Or else White plays 4.e4 with a solid set-up.
4.cxd5 ~xd5 5.e4
42.~dl?
Of course the correct move was 42.llJc2 followed by a possible llJel, but even in this case
Compare the above with the following opening: l.c4 c5 2.llJc3 llJf6 3.llJf3 d5 4.cxd5 llJxd5 5.e4 (the brainchild of your author, the so-called Dresden Variation). Hansen's position resembles it in principle (the d3-pawn on an open file)
Chapter 6 but when looked at in detail it represents an improvement, since the option of ... ltJd5xc3 and then ... g6 now seems to have been avoided. Hansen deserves recognition!
5... ~f6 6ie3! e6 7.~c3 ~c6 8.~f3 Ad7 To make d3-d4 easier for White!
175
20.ggc2 Or 20.gxg7 c;t>e7 then ... ghc8 with serious threats.
20... ~d5 A good solid knight!
21.gxc4 bxc4 22J'~xc4 ~d7 23..ba7 gc8
9.d4? There looks to be a much more sold line in 9.h3 then c;t>£2, e.g. 9 ... ~h5? 10.c;t>£2 then l1.g4. The text move betrays White's lack of awareness of what constitutes a solid formation - the idea of d3-d4(?) would never have occurred to a player like Samisch.
9 ...cxd4 10.~xd4 .iM Now everything is loose in White's formation. 11.~xc6.ixc6 12.lYxd8t gxd8 13.e5
The triumph of the solid formation! White has ingeniously won back everything which could be won back, all the material he had lost. But now he is left with a footloose and fancy-free pawn on f4, a greyhound on a7 and two mangy sheep on a3 and h2, and on top of all that his king is on its throne ... miles away. His fate will be terrible! 24J~~e4
White was forced into making concessions in the centre and he is now suffering from a weakness on the white squares.
13... ~e414.a3 An ingenious try: he starts to play for bishops of opposite colours.
13...Axc3t 15.bxc3 ~xc3 16ic4 16.i.xa7 is impossible because of 16 ... ltJd5 and the g-pawn cannot be protected: 17.g3? ~xf4 18.gxf4 hhl
16.. J~c8 This is the strategy to follow when your opponent's formation is loose! Let all that is hanging continue to do so and create more tension!
17.gcl .ixg2 18J~~gl
gxc4 19J~~xg2 b5
After 24.gxc8 c;t>xc8 the f4-pawn would have had it. 24... gcl t 25. ~f2 25.d2 would be followed by 25 ... ghl 26J1:e2 gal! (not the immediate 26 ... ltJxf4 because of 27.g£2 g5 28.i.e3) 27.i.c5 ~xf4. 25 ... gc2t 26.~g3 Or 26.c;t>gl gc3 27.a4 gf3. 26... gc3t 27. ~g4 An error in time trouble, but there was no saving move.
27...f5t 0-1 Because after 28.exf6 there is of course 28 ... ~xf6t winning the rook. There could be no clearer demonstration than the above game of the weakness of an extended centre which has advanced too impulsively.
176
Chess Praxis
5. The asymmetric treatment of symmetrical variations Followers of the pseudo-classical school not only had a preference (which is incomprehensible today) for symmetrical variations, but they also managed to give this unpleasant situation an air of scientific respectability. They suggested that many positions or openings tended towards symmetry and that we would be acting illogically if we tried to avoid this god-given symmetry, and all such attempts were wrong and had to lead to defeat if met by correct counterplay. Let as look at things in more depth with an example:
1.d4 d5 What could possibly be wrong with the asymmetrical 1... llJf6?
2.c4 e6 3.~c3 c5?
Aiming for symmetry or a level position. It is typical of them that this loosening move is supposed to be the only correct reply. Of course the only correct response is the asymmetrical 3 ... llJf6 followed by ... llJbd7, etc.
4.e3?
turned their noses up. And yet this departure from symmetrical development is the logical continuation. The weakness of 6 ..id3 lay in the fact that the d4-pawn would then need protection. This circumstance is exploited by 6 ...i.e7 which allows the queen to continue without interruption the attack from dB to d4; e.g. 6 ....ie7! 7.0-0 0-0 B.Wfe2 cxd4 9.exd4 dxc4 10.i.xc4 llJxd4 11.llJxd4 Wfxd4 and it is hard to evaluate how things will go. So even at a cursory glance you get the impression that every chess game is full of problems, and yet symmetrical chess with all its worries and lack of ideas tries to sidestep them all! The impression becomes even stronger when you consider symmetrical openings. In the Exchange Variation of the French Defence, after 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 exd5 4 ..td3 .id6 the kings' knights can either be developed centrally or "in diversionary fashion", i.e. either llJf3 and ... llJf6, or llJe2 and ... llJe7. It should also be pointed out that this "diversionary" development (llJe2 or ... llJe7) should go hand in hand with defensive measures in the centre (the breakthrough points e4 or e5 will be protected by f3 or ... f6. Otherwise this would make no strategic sense. (Diversions on the flank without sufficient security in the centre have been repeatedly shown to be absurd in this book.) From what has been said, it can be deduced with compelling logic (though many chess players seem to want to shake off any compulsion about it) that the development "llJf3" must be answered by " ... llJeT', and "llJe2" by" ... llJf6". The asymmetrical treatment recommended by Svenonius is logically far superior to the symmetrical approach. Just watch how clearly this contrast in attitudes to the struggle shows in the following game:
Then considered the correct reply. Of course the only correct line is 4.cxd5 and then llJf3 and g3, in other words the Schlechter-Rubinstein Variation.
Strande - Nimzowitsch, Aalesund 1925:
4 ... ~c6 5.~f3 ~f6 6..id3 .id6
~e7! 6.0-0 ~bc6 7..ie3
In Tarrasch's day if anybody had come up with the idea of playing 6 ...i.e7 they would have
7 ....if5 8.~c3 0-0 9J~el hd3
Simultaneous
at
1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 exd5 4..id3 .id6 5.~f3 To weaken the effectiveness of ... i.g4.
Chapter 6
This introduces a knight manoeuvre which is intended to combine a clearing up of the position in the centre with increased aspirations on the Hank.
177
10.YMxd3lilb4 I1.YMd2 c6 12.a3lila6 13J~e2
down to a lack of ideas at a time when they are, in any case, sadly in short supply. The next two games are dedicated to the combination of an attack on the Hank and defence in the centre.
He rightly chooses his own chance (centralization), though perhaps 13.J.gS might technically be preferable.
J. Moller
13... lilc7 14J~aellile6 15.YMd3 Is.lDgS would be harmless on account of the possible reply IS ... lD g6, e.g. 16.lDxe6 fxe6 17.J.gS
Game 92 Aron Nimzowitsch Clock friendly, Copenhagen 1922
"!!ic7. 15 ... lilg6
l.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.lilc3.ib4 4.exd5 exd5 5.lila lilc6 6.a3 .ia5
Black tries to stem the tide of his opponent's central aspirations.
If6 ... J.xc3t 7.bxc3 J.fS B.J.d3lDge7 9.0-0 0-0 then 10.J.f4 and as well as not doing badly in the centre, White would have the advantage (which should not be underestimated) that his is the better protected of the two bishops on d3 and fS.
16.g3 ge8 17.J.cl The central file is now clear for an attack! But Black has already made his preparations.
17.•.YMd718.lildl Good or bad, IB.lDeS should have been played; occupying the eS-outpost is the only possible way to continue the central initiative.
18... ge7 19.1ile3? lilef4 Now the moment for a diversion appears with lethal force. Earlier 19.1DeS would still have been correct. After 19 ... J.xeS 20.dxeS there would follow 20 .. .!!aeB and the thrust 21.f4 could then be tested with the promising pawn sacrifice 21. .. lDcS 22."!!id4lDe4 23."!!ixa7 f6 24.exf6 gxf6. We would then be confronted by the interesting case that lasting defence in the centre led to centralization, a favourable turn of events for which the latent effect of Black's intended diversion is also partially responsible. After the error 19.1De3? that possibility has disappeared.
7 ..ib5 lilge7 8.0-0 0-0 9.lila4 .ib6 10.lilxb6 axb6 11 ..id3 .if5 Black is not only better developed, but he has the more solid set-up; White's knight manoeuvre simply took too much time. 12J~el
Operating in the centre, but for the reasons given in the previous note it can hardly be considered optimistically.
12...YMd7
20.gxf4lilxf4 21.YMd2 YMh3 0-1 In this game Black protected the eS-square indirectly, by admittedly allowing its occupation by lDeS, but by being able to limit the effectiveness of this knight. As has been said, it was also possible to stop it getting there by direct methods (... f6). Let us now move on to some sample games while repeating the remark that the addiction to symmetrical development deserves to be put
Why did Black not play the obvious 12 ... f6 which would nip in the bud the central manoeuvres initiated by his opponent? Because without ctJeS, in other words the occupation of the outpost on
178
Chess Praxis
the e-file, there would apparently be no way for White to make progress on the central file in question! The reply to this question is imponant for a correct judgement of positions typified by "~e5" and " ... ~eT'. The threat of ~e5 is not at this moment real and would much more likely lead to a deterioration in White's own position, e.g. 13.~e5 ~xe5 14.dxe5, and White's kingside majority would not be very mobile. On the other hand, the move ... £7-f6 would simply give new impetus to White's e-file, because the e6-square would then be vulnerable. And the moral of the story? If it seems possible to defer ... f7 -f6, then the e6-square must first be strengthened; when that has been done, ... f7 -f6 can be played with a clear conscience. Now consider the extremely instructive variations which would follow 12 ... f7-f6. 13.~h4 (an interesting attempt) 13 ... ~xd4! (another sound and appropriate continuation would be 13 ...i.xd3 14.~xd3 ~d7 15.i.d2 g5 and then 16 ... ~f5) 14.~xf5 (or 14J~xe7, see note A below) 14 ... ~dxf5 15.~g4 ~d6! (if 15 ... ~c8 then 16.%Yh3 with the threat of g4) 16.i.f4! f5 17.%Yh3 %Yd7 18.!!e2 ~g6! 19.i.xd6 cxd6 20.g3 ~e5, and Black is somewhat better. Note how it took Black some effort to ward off White's attack. Or A: 12 ... f6 13.~h4 ~xd4! 14.!!xe7 i.xd3 15.!!e3 ~xc2 16.!!xd3 ~xal 17.ie3 This does not look bad but it is followed by 17...%Ye8 18.~xal ~e4! 19.!!d4 ~e6 20.~a2 ~ad8 21.~f3 c5 22J~d1:
And now something like 22 ... ~h8 and then ... ~c6 when his phalanx of pawns will be ready to advance. In this position too Black has a definite, if slight, advantage (a position for Capa!). We are now in a position to be able to sum up. 12 ... f6 should be good enough, but it leads in all cases to a temporary loosening of Black's otherwise solid position, and so the game move must be considered more appropriate to the needs of the position, especially since at this point "~e5" would not achieve anything. 13.tLleS As was said, this achieves nothing here. 13.i.f4 would seem much better. 13..• tLlxeS 14J~xeS Black's position would also be preferable after 14.dxe5. 14.. J~~ae8 IS.Be2 f6 Only now can this be played without worrying. 16J~e3 e5 17.e3 e4 IS..te2 g5! His diversionary plans are correctly only carried out after securing the centre. The text move creates a base on h4 for the knight on e7 which would like to get into the attack. 19.b3 he2 20.Wixe2 tLlf5 21.gxeS gxeS
Now Black has also seized the e-file; White's central operations started with the badly timed ~e5 can be considered to have failed completely. 22Jl.d2 tLlh4 Note the comment on move 18. 23.Widl cxb3 24.Wixh3 ge2 2S..te3 Wif5
Chapter 6 Black still has to consider the characteristic combination of flank attack and central defence. For example, he must never leave the d5-square unprotected. 26.'ffb5? Yfe4! Instead of 26.~b5, 26.~bl had to be played, though even then the game could not have been saved, e.g. 26.~bl ~g4 27.~f1 h6! 2B.h3 ~e4 and then f6-f5-f4 etc. 27.f1 gxe3 0-1
Game 93 David Enoch Aran Nimzowitsch Berlin 1927 l.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 ad5 4Jl~f3 .ld6 5.J.d3 ~c6 6.c3 ~ge7 7.0--0 .Ag4 S.gel Y!Yd79.J.g5 f6 Since the e6-square is strongly protected, ... £7 -f6 can be played with no qualms. IO.J.h4 h5 A little innovation! If now 11.i.g6t bS!
20.bxc7t 20.c4 seems somewhat better.
20... ~xc7 21.c4 hxg3 22.hxg3 dxc4!
23 ...~xg3 24.a6 tiJd5 25 ..ie4 There is the interesting variation 25.axb7 ltJf4
26.1Mfa2 a6! (not 26 ... ~xb 7 on account of 27 .~eb 1 with the threat of28.1Mfxa7t) and Black wins.
25 ... tiJf4 26.~b2 La 27.La ggh7 0-1 On move 14, White missed the chance to send his knight to c5; this led to the evaporation of both pressure on the centre and a kingside attack. Black, on the other hand, was able - by 15 ... ~g7 - to combine defence in the centre with a flank attack. And not only did the attacking plans succeed fully, but also the g7 -rook was a fully effective defensive piece: its protection went right through the centre to b 7 and a7. A very instructive case of asymmetric play.
Game 94 Frank James Marshall Aron Nimzowitsch New York 1927 The protagonists developed their knights on e2 and e7 and at first the game seemed really monotonous.
l.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.tiJc3 Ab4 4.exd5 exd5 5..id3 tiJe7 6.tiJge2.if5 7.0-00-0 S.tiJg3 Ag6 9.tiJce2 .id6 10..if4 tiJbc6 11.~d2 ~d7 12J~ael gaeS But now the game sprang to life.
13.c3 tiJcS! 14..ie3 tiJ6e7!
On one hand this secures the central d5-square for the black knight and on the other it diverts White's d2-knight away from the protection of the kingside.
23.tiJxc4 If 23 ..ixc4 then 23 ... ltJf5 with a decisive attack.
This combined retreat of the knights is intended to break the symmetry. Since the c8-knight is
Chapter 6 heading for e4 the black set-up suddenly takes on the character of the variation in which an f6knight faces one on e2. This quite original retreat had moreover already been employed by your author against Spielmann (Copenhagen 1923): there what happened was ... ttJe7-g8, ... ttJc6-e7 and then ... ttJg8-f6-e4.
181
However 35 ...Wld8 would be simpler, e.g. 36.ixf4 !!xd4 37.Wlf5 Wld7 38.Wlc2 :9:d3 and the bishop cannot occupy the important c3-g7 diagonal.
36..bf4 gxd4 37.'§c2 gd5? Overlooking the reply; 37 ...Wld8 should be played.
15.1L1f4 .bf4 16..hf4 hd3 17.Wixd3 1Llg6
38..id2 '§d8 39.J.c3
18.Wi6
White now has the advantage due to his free and active bishop.
18.i.d2 would have been met by 18 ... ttJd6, but Black also gets some play after the text move.
18••.5 19..id2 gxel 20.gxel f4 21.1L1e2 Wi5
39... gd3 40.ge4 Wid5 41.'§e2 Wid7 42.h4 h5 43.ge8 gdl 44J!a8 a6 45.gb8
21...ttJh4 would also not be bad, e.g. 22.Wlh5 ttJxg2 23.@xg2 f3t 24.@h1 fxe2 25.!!xe2 and now perhaps 25 ... ttJe7 and ... ttJf5 with play on the white squares.
22.c4!
A clever counter; he is looking to create a breach in his opponent's defensive wall.
22 ... 1L1b6 Not 22 ... Wle4 on account of 23.Wlxe4 dxe4 24.ttJc3. 23.cxd5 lLlxd5 24.1L1c3! lLlxc3 25.bc3 c6
Intending to tempt forward the pawns (the threat is :9:xb 7) after which the exchange of queens would be followed by a won bishop and minor piece endgame. But Black finds a most mischievous counter. The correct move was 45.Wle4 when Black would have tried to keep his head above water with 45 ... Wlf7 and then ... :9:d1-d5-f5. The defence would not have been easy.
45 ... ghl!! 46.~xhl
Black wanted more. The endgame after 33 ... Wlxe4t 34j:he4 fxg3 35.hxg3 @g8 36.!!e8t @f7 37.!!a8 a6 38.!!b8 !!d7 39.@f3 ttJe7 40.@e4 ttJd5 did not seem to offer him enough of an advantage.
After thinking for 70 (0 minutes, Marshall decided on the above move. He would lose after 46.Wle8. For example, 46 ... ttJf4t 47.gxf4 Wlh3t 48.@f2 :9:fl t 49.@e3 Wlxf3t 50.@d4 Wld5t 51.@e3 !!f3t 52.@e2 Wld3t 53.@e1 :9:fl mate. Also unfavourable was 46.Wlc4 ttJxh4t 47.gxh4 Wlh3t 48.@f2 Wlh2t 49.@e3 and then 49 ... Wlxb8. So accepting the offer seems forced and this interesting game is drawn.
34.6 '§g5 35..ld2 '§f6
46...Yfh3t 47.'§h2
26..lM gd8 27.Wie4 Wif7 28.33 h6 29.g3 Wif6 30..ic3 gd5 31.Wie8t mh7 32.Wie4 Wi5 33.mgl Wig4
182
Chess Praxis
Of course not 47.@gl? on account of 47 .. :~xg3t 48JWg2 ~xb8 49.~g5 ~f4 50.~xh5t 'W'h6 and Black has the advantage.
47...~fl t 48.~gl ~h3t ¥l-¥l 6. The bishop, with and without outposts
As you play through the next three games you will get the distinct impression that we are dealing with "neo-romantically inclined" bishops, which can "in no way be confused" with those of olden days. And yet the differences here are minimal. In game 95 a bishop's diagonal is treated according to the principles of play along a line. In the position with White: ~dl, It:)c3, pawn on e4, and Black: pawns on c7 and d6 (we are here following the ideas of My System and the position is taken from that book), we must work out a clear point of attack for the play along the file, since penetration to the 7U, rank can hardly be considered a realistic possibility because of the solid defensive formation (c7, d6). But there followed 1.lt:)c3-d5, after which the vague idea of working down the file was given more substance by the presence of an outpost knight {what came next was 1... c7-f6, to chase off the unpleasant intruder and then after 2.lt:)d5-c3 the play down the file had a clear target to attack, d6. The procedure outlined here, namely "materialization" of an abstract concept such as a diagonal into a single point, is the point of game 95! Compare for example in game 61 the move we recommended 28.~h2-f4 (p. 124). The f4queen can be thought of as the outpost on the diagonal. In game 96 the bishops are remarkable for their boldness in attack, and in game 97 in defence. All in all, the "minimal differences" mentioned above arise because the masters of the present generation are more able than their predecessors to put a higher value on concrete thought. Also courage and fantasy now appear in new and better clothes. See for example how the bishops in game 96 hover in midair and the courageous lack of selfishness shown by the b7-bishop in game 97. Now let us move to the games themselves.
Game 95 Nimzowitsch Dr Saviely Tartakower Karlsbad 1923
ArOD
1.~6 f5 2.b3 b6 3.J.b2 Ab7 4.g3 La The exchange appears unfavourable because Black's pawn structure soon turns out to be lacking in dynamism. 5.ex6 e6 6.£4 ~f6 7.J.g2 c6 8.0-0 J.e7 9.~e2
0-0 White's bishops may have strong posts, but for the moment they are not very effective. 10.~a3!
This knight now puts itself in the service of the bishops: not only does it check out the ground for them but it also entices the black pawns forwards. But its most important function is not seen till move 13. 10••• a5 The only way to develop the b8-knight; 10 ... b5 would fail to 11.lt:)xb5. 11.~c4 a4 12.J.d4 b5 13.~e5
If during the game I had considered that the e5knight was an outpost on a file (= outpost on the e-file), then I would have had no reason to publish the game here; but in reality the knight seemed to me simply an outpost on a diagonal: a vague and as yet undefined pressure along the diagonal becomes real from the placing of the knight there and it also gains clear attacking targets. In other words the effect of the diagonal is "materialized'.
Chapter 6
l3.. Jl~d5 13 ... ttJa6 would not be followed by some sort of sacrifice on c6, but rather by quiet development by,!!fel and then c4.
l4.c4 bxc4 l5.bxc4li)b4 This was played for the understandable reason that he wanted to get some use from the (very temporary) centralization of the knight on d5; the slogan is: into enemy territory via the centre. But it turns out to be harmful to him. The passive 15... ttJc7 would however have run into a decisive breakthrough on d5 (d2-d4-d5).
183
Game 96 Dalseg and Geelmuyden Aron Nimzowitsch Oslo 1922 (One of three consultation games played at the same time)
l.e3 g6 2.d4 .tg7 3.li)f3 d6 4ie2 li)d7 5.0-0 e56.dxe5
l6.J.c3 a3 l7.d4li)Sa6 lSJ~abl E!bS 19.c5!
Otherwise d4-d5 would be worth aiming for, but it is not so easy to exploit the unfortunate position of the knight.
19.. if6 20J:~b3 he5 21.fxe5 'tYa5 There was no other way to protect the a-pawn.
22.E!fbl gb7 23.ti'd2 gfbS 24..lfl 24 ... 9c7 There was no way left
to
save the game.
25.hb4 li)xb4 26.E!xb4 9a5 27J:~xb7 YNxd2 2SJ~~xbSt ~f7 29ic4 YNxd4 30ib3 YNxc5 31.gb7 9xe5 32.gxd7t ~f6 33.gbdl c5 34.E!7d6 9c3 35J~xe6t ~g5 36.E!e3 9b4 37.gcl f4 3S.E!e5t ~h6 39.E!exc5 fxg3 And mate on move 48.
40.hxg3 g6 41JHc4 gelt 42.~g2 g5 43J~c6t ~g7 44J~c7t ~f6 45.E!4c6t ~f5 46.E!f7t ~g4 47.f3t ~h5 4SJ~xh7 1-0
This sudden transition to an open game comes as a surprise, since you might rather have expected a closed method of development with c4, ttJc3 and h3. After 6.c4 Black would hardly have turned to Chigorin's method of ... £7-5, which would only have unnecessarily weakened the option of ... e5xd4. He would far rather have played 6 ... ttJgf6, e.g. 7.ttJc3 0-0 8.b3 and now perhaps 8 ... exd4 9.exd4 d5 10.c5 ttJe4! Il.ttJxd5 ttJdxc5 etc.
6 ... li)xe5 The g7 -bishop is starting to stir. After 6 ... dxe5 7.e4 ttJgf6 8.ic4! 0-0 9.1We2 Black would have reached a Hanham with two extra tempi - thanks to White having already played e2-e3-e4 and ifle2-c4, but it would be open to question whether the bishop fianchetto would be the best way to take advantage of the tempi. The a3-f8 diagonal might become a little weak, for example after 9 ... c6 10.a41Wc7 Il.b3 ttJb6 12.ia3 !!e8 13.ttJbd2.
7.li)xe5 he5 S.f4 J.g7 9.e4li)e7 lO.c3 The attempt 10.f5 could, if accepting the sacrifice by 10 ... gxf5 11.ex5 ixf5 12.ig5 ixb2
184
Chess Praxis
13.~xfS ~xal was felt to be too dangerous, also be refuted in a quite quiet way: (I0.f5) 10 ... gxfS II.exfS ~f6 12.tLlc3 dS followed by ... c6, ... ~d7, .. YJic7 (or .. JWb6) and ... 0-0-0. 10...5 11..ic8 White would have had no compensation for the lost pawn.
IBS
On the other hand, 30 ..tf6! clearly seems to equalize, e.g. 30 ... ttJe7 31.g4 then 'tt>g2 with the threat of .txe7, gS and .tg8. Or 30 ... .te7 31.ig7 .td6 32.fS gxfS 33 ..txfS hS 34.h4 etc. The premature exchange of rooks (24 ...!!xel t) seems to have given away Black's winning chances.
30.. ..ie7 The winning move. Next came:
25.hel t q;,eS 26..ie6t q;,bS 27..i.h4
31beS hdS 32..ie6 g5 33.£5 b5
Black's position now appears critical: it will be difficult to find a counter to the threatened exchange of rooks (!!dBt) followed by the pawn hunt (.tgB etc.).
White now has no hope despite the bishops of opposite colours.
27... ~eS 27 ... cS would also have sufficed for a draw, e.g. 2B.!!d8t !!xd8 29 ..txdB c4 30 ..txb6 axb6 31..txc4 and now for example 31.. ..tcl 32.g3 gS 33.fS 'tt>c7 34.'tt>g2 'tt>d6 3S.'tt>f3 'tt>eS 36.'tt>g4 'tt>f6 37.'tt>hS 'tt>g7, or 3S.f6 (instead of 3S.'tt>f3) 3S ... 'tt>eS 36.£7 .ta3 37.'tt>f3 hS.
34.q;,g2 e5 35.q;,a q;,e7 36.q;,e4 q;,d6 37..ib3 e4 3S..ie2 .ifG 39..idl a5 40..ie2 a4 41~dl a3 0-1
Game 97 Goesta Stoltz
Aron Nimzowitseh Berlin 192B
2s.gdS gxdS 29.hdS .i.a3! 1.e4 e5 2.~e3 ~e6 3.g3 g6 4 ..i.g2 .ig7 5.~ge2 e6 In order to support by the second knight on c6 the diagonal outpost which will be established on d4.
6.d3 ~ge7 7..ie3 ~d4 s.Wfd2 ~ec6 Compare the previous note. 9.~dl
In our game in Niendorf, Kostic chose 9.0-0 and we continued: 9 ... d6 10.ttJdl WlaS Il.ttJxd4 Wlxd2 12 ..txd2 cxd4 13.c3 (the immediate 13.c4 seems clearer) 13 ....td7 14.f4 dxc3 IS.bxc3 !!cB
Black had been relying on this counter.
30.g4? This loses. But in any case 30 ..tg8 would be dubious, on account of30 ... .te7 (30 ... hS? 31..tf6! .te7 32 ..teS h4 33 ..th7! gS 34.f5 ttJd6 3S.f6 .tfB 36.g3! hxg3 37.hxg3 cS 38.'tt>g2 bS 39.'tt>f3 threatening 'tt>g4). After 30 ....te7 31..txe7 ttJxe7 32 ..txh7 'tt>cB 33.g4 'tt>d7 34.h4 bS (not 34 ... 'tt>e6 on account of 3S ..txg6) 3S.hS gxhS 36.gxhS 'tt>e6 37.h6 'tt>f6 3B.'tt>g2 cS 39.'tt>f3 as 40.'tt>e4 a4 White would not be out of danger.
186
Chess Praxis
With some play on the diagonal. 16J!b 1 b6 17.ltJe3 ltJa5 18J!fc1 ~c7 19 ..ifI f5 20.exf5 gxf5 21.d4 .ic6 22 ..id3 .ie4 23.,ixe4 fxe4 24.f5 ~d7 25j~fI i.h6 26.fxe6t ~xe6 27.d5t ~d7 28.~f7t ~c8 29J!bfI !!d8 30J!xc7t ~xc7 31.~f6 .ixe3t 32.,ixe3 ltJc4 33.i.d4 ltJe5 34J~e6 ltJf3t 35.~f2 lLlxd4 36.cxd4 b5 37.~e3 a5 38.~xe4 ~d7 39.~d3 ~f7 40.~e2 ~f3t 41.!!e3 ~xe3t 42.~xe3 h5 43.h3 ~d7 44.a3 ~e7 45.~d3 ~f6 46.~e4 ~g5. 47.~e3 ~f5 48.~d3 h4 49.g4t ~f4 50.~c3 ~e4 51.a4 bxa4 52.~c4 a3 53.~b3 a2 54.~xa2 ~xd5 55.~a3 ~xd4 56.~a4 ~c4 57.g5 ~d5 58.\t>xa5 \t>e5 59.\t>b5 \t>f5 60.\t>c6 \t>xg5 61. \t>xd6 \t>f4 62. \t>d5 \t>g3 63. \t>e4 \t>xh3 64.\t>f3 Y2-Y2 B. Kostic - A. Nimzowitsch, Bad Niendorf 1927.
21.ghel h5 22.ltJe4 ~6d7 23.i.cl. Or (l8 ... iDe7 19.,ixb7t \t>xb7 20.\t>c2) 20 ... ltJd5 21.~hel f5 22.icl. Black can bring his king to f7 to secure e6, but White places his rooks on the e-file and can face up to the coming attack by his opponent (... b6-b5-b4) with confidence.
18...e5 An "energetic" attempt, but one easily parried by my youthful opponent.
19.9hel f5 20.hc6! gxc6 If20 ...i.xc6 then 21.fxe5 ixe5 22.ixc5.
21.fxe5 he5 22..tgS .tf6 23.hf6 gxf6 24.ge7 Now White has obtained an initiative which should not be underestimated.
24...gd7 25.gdel .td5!
9 ... ttlxe2 Nor should there be anything wrong with the direct 9 ... d5, e.g. 10.ltJxd4 cxd4 with overt pressure on the c-file and latent pressure on the g7-b2 diagonal. After c2-c3, a move which cannot be avoided in the long run, this would come into its own.
IO.9xe2 Va5t II.Vd2 Il.c3 would be followed by 11. .. ltJd4 12.~d2? ltJb3.
11. ..Vxd2t 12.gl gd8 0--1
8. A victory parade of "bizarre" and "ugly" moves
It was with these kind adjectives that masters of the pseudo-classical school used to describe our moves. Nowadays, since our ideas have been totally victorious, can anybody claim to understand how such a natural, beautiful and profound line such as, for example, the Hanham Variation was ever considered ugly?! After the moves 1.e4 e5 2.tiJa d6 3.d4 tiJf6 4.tiJc3 tiJ bd7! Black aims to place another pawn in the centre by 5... c6, which would achieve for him a certain dominance of the centre. What does it matter, compared to that, that the c8-bishop has not yet been developed?! But the pseudo-classical school had only one concept of the ideal: free and unhindered development of the pieces. But we have no desire to settle old scores, the formalistic pseudo-classical way of looking at things is dead, and you can't flog a dead horse. If in what follows we should mention some value judgements of the old days, it is not with the intention of settling old scores, but purely out of objective interest.
I. 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 The "decisive mistake". This was meant to signify that this "unmotivated" move (because it attacked nothing since there is no knight on (6) is ugly. But in reality, 3.e5 (as I had to insist for 20 long years since nobody would believe me) is neither a mistake nor "ugly", but it is a good and sensible move. After 3...c5 White has no less than four (!) good equalizing lines, namely4.c3, 4.dxc5, 4.tDf3 and 4.Wfg4! Nowadays there is universal recognition that the move is correct.
191
III. 1.e4 e5 2.tiJa tiJc6 3..lb5 tiJf6 4.0--0 tiJxe4 5.d4 i.e7 6.1fe2 tiJd6 7..bc6 bxc6!! 8.dxe5 tiJb7! A splendid strategic retreat! No, not a retreat, but a fighting withdrawal! As he moves back, he inflicts two bloody wounds on his opponent: he has robbed him of his bishop and has created for his own side a compact and dynamically valuable pawn centre. Charming play! The judgement of the pseudo-classical school was somewhat different; it saw neither the dynamism of the move back nor its intrinsic beauty; as far as it was concerned, the whole business was and remained ... just a pitiful jump by a knight! We shall look at two games. In game 101 we find an example of "i,b5 in a closed game", which was, according to Tarrasch, "more unforgivable for a master than leaving a piece en prise". In reality, however, ",ib5" seems to be a very good move and can be played in 70 per cent of all closed games without any disadvantage and probably even to some advantage. In game 100 we see the prelude to a fianchetto (g2-g3), which for "some incomprehensible reason" never takes place. As it goes on, the game seems somewhat "mysterious", partly lacking in harmony. And yet it is a logically thought out game. But the point is that in chess aesthetics must be firmly anchored in concrete thought. If you only judge by external appearances, you can easily consider some moves ugly which are not so. Beauty in chess, in the final judgement, exists only in thought.
Game 100 Aron Nimzowitsch
A1e.xanderAlekhine New York 1927
l.tiJa tiJf6 2.b3 d6 3.g3 e5 4.c4! "Bizarre!" He is not afraid of ... e5-e4. Anyone else would have chosen 4.d3.
4 ... e4 II. 1.e4 e5 2.tiJa tiJc6 3.J.c4 tiJf6 4.tiJg5 A "duffer's move"! Today everyone knows that 4.ltJg5 constitutes a logical attempt to punish Black's premature development of his knight (3 ... ltJf6?).
This move, which weakens the dark squares, is at the bottom of all the difficulties which will crop up.
5.tiJh4!
192
Chess Praxis
So the g2-square was not intended for the bishop to fianchetto but rather for the "bizarre" knight! This move, which would have been strong if S.ltJd4? had been played, leads in the given circumstances to a queen sortie which might well be criticized. But there was hardly anything better.
the mistake made by Black on move 8 cannot be made good: 13.~c2 would have maintained the pressure. But even the weaker text move (13.0-0) should not allow his opponent to shake off the pressure. Once the opportunity for white-squared counterplay was missed, it could not return. And for that reason we are extremely dubious about Alekhine's attempted white-squared coup d'etat in the following moves.
6.cxd5 'i;Yxd5 7Jl~c3 'i;Yc6! 8.e3
13.. ..id6 14.8
5 ...d5
Giving up for all time the possibility of a fianchetto. 8 ...a6 More logical was 8 ...ig4; the best reply would be 9.~xg4! (because the f6-knight later loses a tempo when forced to retreat) 9 ... ltJxg4 10.ibS ltJf6 11.ib2 a6 12 ..bc6t ltJxc6 13.ltJe2 ltJg4! 14.f3 (otherwise there follows 14 ... ltJceS) 14 ... exf3 lS.ltJxf3 0-0-0 with only a minimal advantage to White. This variation gives us an insight into Black's defensive resources: he obviously has some white-squared counterplay; if he correctly plays his (not all that numerous) trump cards, he has a chance of being able to restrain his opponent's rather black-squared attack. The move chosen by Alekhine makes the defence harder, without it being hopeless.
9..ib2 ,ig4 10..ie2 .ixe2 11.~xe2 ~bd7 12J~cl 'i;Yb6 13.0-0
Alekhine considered 14.d3 to be better.
14•...ie5!(?)
Extremely interesting! He wants to occupy the white squares (d3) at any cost. But what is the logic of the game? Well, he takes a rather sceptical 13.~c2 would be well worth considering, e.g. 13 ... id6 14.ltJfS. But Black apparently had· attitude to it. Why and how should the white a better line: 13.~c2 ltJcS! And if now 14.id4 squares suddenly be able to put the black squares then 14 ... ltJd3t lS.~xd3 exd3 16.ixb6 cxb6 in the shade!? After Black's slip on move 8 his black 17.ltJd4 (or 17.ltJc3 ia3! and Black seizes the c- squares had become chronically weak; White had file) 17... ics 18.Ek3? ltJdS 19.9xd3ltJb4 20.Ek3 not made any mistakes (because 13.0-0 was not ixd4 21.exd4 ltJxa2 and Black is better. In spite one), so his opponent's violent, though ingenious, of that, the variation beginning with 13.~c2 attempt must somehow be wrong. ltJcS appears to me to favour White; all he has to 15.Axe5 ~xe5 16.fxe4 ~d3 17J~c3 0--0-0 do, instead of 14.id4, is to castle with 14.0-0. 18.Y;Ybl ~xe4 You cannot have a coup d'etat without some For example, 14 ... ltJd3 ls.ixf6 ~(or pawn)xf6 16.ltJf4 (threatening 17.ltJdS) and White has the sort of sacrifice! Whether 18 ... ltJcS would have been better appears doubtful after the moves advantage. 19.d3 ltJa4 20.bxa4 ~xe3t 21.gf2 (there would 13.~c2 would also give White the advantage after other moves too (instead of 13 ... ltJcS), for also be chances after 21.cj;>h1 ~xe2 22.gfcl) example: 13.~c2 0-0-0 14.0-0 and Black has 21...ltJg4 22.~f1. problems finding a plausible continuation. The 19J~ixd3 ~xd2 20J~xd8t gxd8 21.'i;Yf5t ~b8 variations I have quoted give the impression that 22J~~el
Chapter 6 22.Ekl was also worth considering.
22 •••Y!Yxe3t 23.Y!Yfl Y!Yd3 24.li~f4
193
41. •• eS The main line consists of 41 ... bS 42.lDd2! h4 43.g4 h3 44.@f3 cS 4S.lDe4 c4 46.b4 @b6, because now the way the king manoeuvres itself into the play seems unpleasant enough; all the more so because there is not the time needed to take the gS-pawn. We now get to the point: 47.@g3 and if 47 ... @c6 then and only then the pawn can suddenly be won, namely by 48.lDxgS c3 49.lDf3! and wins. 42.a4 bS 43.axbS axbS 44.~d2 b6 4S.tLle4
h4 46.g4 h3 47. a b4! A final ingenious flurry before it is allover.
4S.tLlxgS e4 49.tLle4 cxb3 Or 49 ... c3 SO.lDf2 and then lDd3.
24 ••• Y!Ye3? 24 .. .".Wc2 would have left Black good chances of a draw. But how would things turn out? Would the coup d'etat be correct? Or would the black or the white squares be able to achieve dominance at wilPO No, neither. Firstly, the draw (after 24 .. JWc2!) would not be certain and secondly it has not yet been proved that White did not have a stronger line somewhere along the way (for example on move 22), and thirdly, there are unfortunately many positions in which a clearly demonstrable advantage is not enough for a win (victory by attrition should be included!). 2SJ~e3 Y!Yel t
There follows a bitter struggle; White wins, but only after hours of hard effort. 26.g2 Y!Ye6t 27.tiH3 g5 2S.~d3 ~xf3
29.Y!Yxf3 Y!Ye2t 30.tLlfl 5 31J~e2 Y!YeS 32.~d3 Y!Yd4 33.~eS f4 34.~e4 According to Spielmann, 34.g4 was a safe move because White had to set up a middlegarne attack. But when it finally gets to an endgame, might the protected passed pawn not become unpleasant?
34 ••• fxg3 3SJ~d2 Y!YhS 36J~~xdSt Y!YxdS 37.hxg3 Y!Yd4 3S.Y!Yf8t a7 39.Y!Yfl Y!Yxflt 4O.xfl hS The win is still hanging by a thread, namely a study-like turn of events, see the note to Black's 41 st move.
41.e3 The sealed move.
SO.g5 b2 S1.tLld2 eS S2.g6 h2 S3.g2 d4 S4.g7 d3 SS.gSY!Y xd2 S6.Y!Ya2 e2 S7.Y!Ye4t 1-0 A battle of giants.
Game 101 Aron Nimzowitseh Karl Gilg Kecskemet 1927 l.e4 eS 2.~a tLlc6 3•.ibS This move is much better than its reputation and guarantees at least sound equality.
3...YNe7 3 ... d6 ought to be best.
4.e3! Because now after c3 the counterplay by ... lDf6 can easily be parried; White can simply protect e4 by 1Mfe2.
4••• a6 S..ia4 tLlf6 6.Y!Ye2 eS 7.0-0 .ie7 S.d4 White now offers a pawn sacrifice, which Black should have refused by 8 ... d6.
S••• cxd4 8 ... 0-0 would not do either because of 9.i.xc6 1Mfxc6 10.dxeS lDxe4 11.!!el f5 12.exf6 lDxf6 13.1Mfxe7 !!e8 14.1Mfxe8t lDxe8 IS.!!xe8t @f7 16.lDeSt and White remains a piece up.
9.cxd4 ~xd410.~xd4 exd411.eS d3 If 11. .. lDdS then 12.e6 fxe6 13.1Mfxe6 lDb6 14.i.gS! 1Mfd8 IS.i.xe7 lDxa4! 16.1Mfb3 1Mfxe7 17.1Mfxa4 with a superior game for White. On the
194
Chess Praxis
other hand, after 11...ltJd5 12.e6 fxe6 13.WI'xe6 ltJb6 the continuation 14J!el 'l9dB 15 ..ig5 ltJxa4 16.WI'xe7t Wl'xe7 17.!!xe7t ~fB would be less clear and the advantage would be questionable.
12.'iNe3liJdS Nor did 12 ...ic5 save him, e.g. 13.'l9g3 ltJe4 14.Wfxg7 ixf2t 15.~hl (not 15.gx£2 on account of 15 ... Wfxclt 16.gn Wfe3t and mate in 4) 15 ... :gfB 16 ..ih6.ic5 17.e6! and wins.
13.'iNg3 g6 13 ... 0-0 would be met by the immediate 14 ..ib3.
14..ib3 liJ b4
IS.Lf7t! ct>d8 16..ih6! You would hardly think that this bishop has designs on b6, but it does!
16•.. liJc2 17.liJc3liJd4 Despair. If 17 ... ltJxal then IB.ltJd5 Wfc6 (the best) 19 ..ie3! d6 20.ib6t ~d7 21.e6 mate!! White wins in high style after the text move.
18.Uxd3 UxeS 19JUel Uf6 20J~xe7 1-0 20 ... ~xe7 is of course followed by 21.ltJd5t and 20 ... Wfxe7 by 21.Wfxd4.
9. Heroic defence A priori, you might think that all areas of practical play are influenced to the same extent by the new ideas. But that is not so. Defensive play seems to stubbornly resist the rejuvenating influence of modern thought. It even looks as if the pseudo-
classical style, which has been driven out of all other areas, wants to make its stand here. At least, progress in this field has been minimal: people still tremble at the sight of a target which could be attacked in their own camp and conventional ideas still seem to reign. The anxious care about the correctness of moves and the avoidance of unusual paths and above all the fear of anything which looks colossal (Le. on a big scale) - all this reminds one of the pseudo-classical era, long since dead and buried! In my opinion, the mistake lies in the fact that too little use is being made of the newly discovered stratagems. The use of prophylaxis, restraint, centralization and overprotection ought to be of the greatest importance in defensive technique. I am even inclined to believe that the whole skill of defence could be raised to new heights by employing them. It does make a great difference if the flank which is under attack is dependent only on its own resources or if defensive energy pours into it from the whole board. Because what else is centralization but coordination spread over the whole board?! We shall look at four games which illustrate heroic defence. They clearly demonstrate an intense cooperation between the motifs mentioned above. In game 102 a small centre is specifically overprotected, and successfully so, in that this centre confers some solidity on a set-up which looks rather undeveloped. The way Black defends by retreating his queen on moves 9 and 10 is really imbued with this modern spirit. Game 103 demonstrates in a remarkable fashion the uninhibited way in which the defence can be conducted. A highly improbable looking line from the field of endgame composition is employed for the purposes of the defence. What is particularly remarkable about game 104 is how the new defensive technique really earns its spurs there: a violent flank attack is brought to a standstill by well-timed counterplay, namely an extremely intensely driven centralization. Moreover, this game is also significant for the large scale of matters mentioned above, which is so little in harmony with the pseudo-classical school: enormously violent attacks are neutralized by equally powerful defensive measures. It should be
Chapter 6
noted that this whole question of scale is basically only the product of a new way of looking at things, and does not require any special playing strength and should thus be attainable by less experienced players. In game 105 defensive technique based on the principles of hypermodernism celebrates a new triumph. My opponent's black-squared attack is held up by appropriate use of white-squared counter-measures until the opportunity is offered to instigate a "white-squared coup d'etat" by returning material (similar to Alekhine's coup d' etat in game 100, except that in game 105 it is based on more solid foundations). The number of great defenders is extremely small; I can only name the following: Steinitz, Dr Em. Lasker, Amos Burn, Dr 0.5. Bernstein, Duras and, last but not least, Louis Paulsen. We hope that our researches will contribute to a rise in the numbers of good defensive players. We should like to take this opportunity to point out, with the greatest of satisfaction, that some younger masters, for example the strategically brilliant Samisch, are showing both interest and skill in the defence of difficult positions. Good hunting to them!
195
9 •••'ilYf6!! IO.~g3 fi'd8!
Game 102 Alfred Brinckmann Aron Nimzowitsch
What is the meaning of this manoeuvre? There are two things! The queen is seeking safety and the idea of centralization is emphasized, because there are now three pieces cooperating against the opponent's planned breakthrough by c4 and ds (of course once the knight has left c4). In short: the central knight is being overprotected. It is moreover clear that the chosen retreat looks highly neo-romantic, since Black shows by playing it that he has faith in the strength of resistance offered by the initial position, whereas the pseudo-classical school was fanatical in its insistence on rapid development.
Berlin 1927
11.fi'd2 ~gf6
l.e4 ~c6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 YNxd5 4..ie3 e6 5.Ae2
12.~e5 c6!
Continuing the overprotection!
s.llJf3, as played in game 99 (p. 190), would have caused his opponent some anxiety. However, the bishop move is also strong.
5...YNxg2! We believe in the strength of defence.
6.J.a fi'g6 7.~e2 ~b4 Vigorous modern defensive technique: centralization (by ... llJds) is being prepared. 8.~a3 ~d5 9.~c4 The correct continuation consisted of 9.llJbs e.g. 9 ... c6 (the best) 10.llJf4! llJxf4 II.llJc7t c;i{d7 12.llJxa8 llJg2t and the outcome is unclear. Attempts made by Dr Lasker and the author suggested a draw.
Overprotection and a waiting move at the same time! Black wants to retain the option of castling to either side until his opponent shows his colours, i.e. until he castles either long or short. Having to delay like this constitutes an extra resource for the cramped black position. Remember the fourth section of this chapter (The small centre, p. 170).
13.0-0! 13.0-0-0 would have been met by 13 ...ib4, e.g. 14.c3 !i.e7 and Black prepares to castle long by means of .. JfJc7 or ... Wfas, ... !i.d7 and .. J~f8! But after the text move ... 0-0-0 would be too dangerous. 13•. ..id6 14.mhl fi'c7 15.c4 ~xe3 16.YNxe3
c5
Chess Praxis
196
Our forefathers already knew how effective a counterattack can be, psychologically too. But on the other hand, this loosens the position. So 16 ... ttJd7 should be preferable. 17J~gS
Aiming to punish his opponent for his "cheek". But a more correct try was 17.!!ael cx:d4 18.Wfxd4 ~d7, although Black would not be in any special danger in this case either (I 9. ttJ fS? exfS 20. ttJ g6 t ~e6 21.ttJxh8 iie7 and wins). 17.ttJd3 cx:d4 18.Wfxd4 would also be worth considering.
17... cxd4
18J~ael
If 18.Wfxg7 then 18 ... !!g8 19.'lMxf6 ~xeS with a slight advantage to Black.
18 ... @f8!
34.~d6
A mistake in a hopeless position. Relatively best was 34.f3 E!:b8 3S.ttJd6 b6 36.ttJxbS axbS 37.cx:b6 E!:xb6, and Black wins easily. 34.. J~tg5t 3S.@hl .ic6t 0-1
Game 103 Paul Saladin Leonhardt Aron Nimzowitsch Berlin 1928
1.e4 e6 2.d4 dS 3.~c3 .ib4 4.exdS exdS s..id3 ~c6 6.~ge2 ~ge7 7.0-0 0-0 8.i.f4 i.g4
It would be wrong to castle, e.g. 18 ... 0-0 19.!!gl h6 20.Wff4 ~xeS 21.!!xeS ttJd7 22.ttJhS! WfxeS 23.Wfxh6 g6 24.!!gS Wfh8 2S.!!xg6t and mate in two.
After an unadventurous start, Leonhardt suddenly appeared to want to start an attack and played:
19J~gl h6 20.Wff4 heS 21.WfxeS
It does seem simpler to play 9.f3 ~hS 10.'lMd2 or 10.~e3 and then l1.ttJf4. The weakening of the e3-square was quite bearable.
Or 21.!!xeS ttJd7 etc.
21. ..WfxeS 22J~xeS ~d7 22 ... g6 would be simpler, e.g. 23.E!:dl iie7 24.E!:xd4 E!:d8 with a winning ending.
23.!ibS 23.!!aS! would have left Black with much greater problems to solve.
23 ... a6 24J~~b3 Or 24.E!:b4 ttJeS 2S.~g2 (2S.~xb7? E!:b8) 2S ... ttJd3! with the threat of ... ttJxf2 mate.
24... ~cS 2S.!ia3 gb8 26.b4 ~d7 27.cS ~eS 28.!iel ~xf3 29.!ixa .id7 30.!id3 !id8
9.h3
9 ...i.hS 10.Wfcl .iaS! You can hardly claim that Black is avoiding unusual paths. After l1.a3 (to prevent ... ttJb4) he intended 11. .. ~xc3 12.bxc3 and the pawn which had been lured to a3 would represent a certain weakness in White's otherwise unexceptionable set-up. Instead of 11...~xc3 (after 1 l.a3) , other moves would of course be possible, e.g. 11 ... ~b6 or 11 ... ~g6.
I1.Wfe3 ~b4 12.~g3 ~xd3 13.~xhS ~xb2
Chapter 6
14.J.h6! The reply Black expected.
14... ~e4! IS.9g5 After 15:~g3 (the main line) there would have followed 15 ... ttJ f5 16.'\Wg4 g6 17.i.xfB i.xc3 and White's bishop has no retreat square. This is a motif listed by Rinck and known as the "bishop's cross".
197
22.f4 ttJe3 23.f5 ttJxfl 24.:gxfl (24.fxg6? VMh2t etc.) 24 ...i.d2 25.VMxd2 gxf6 26.ttJxf6t VMxf6 and Black wins.
21. ..900 22.9xOO bxOO 23..ig5 gf5 24.£4 ~e3 2S.g4 gSf7 26.f5 ~xf1 27.gxfl .le3 28.gdl ~e7 29.gd3 ~dS 30.~g2 gbS 31.~f.3 :ab2 32.~f6t E!xf6
IS ... ~g6 16.~xdS
16 ... f6 At this point, as well as the text move, Black had two other good continuations. Firstly the simple exchanging line 16 .. :~xg5 17.i.xg5 f6 IB.i.e3 :gadB with an endgame in which he is dominant on the white squares. Or the variation suggested by Kostic: 16...i.d2 17.VMxdB :gaxdB IB.i.xd2 ttJxd2 19.:gfdl :gxd5 20.:gxd2 :gxh5. Or (I6 ...i.d2) 17.f4 VMxg5 IB.i.xg5 f6 19.f5 i.xg5 and Black is a pawn ahead, or finally 17. ttJ e3 gxh6 lB. VM xdB (lB. VM xh6 VMxd4) IB ... :gaxdB 19.ttJxc4 :gxd4 20.:gadl :gfdB again with an extra pawn. The line chosen does appear to be stronger.
Since I did not want to give up the lovely central knight, but of course the simple 32 ... ttJxf6 33.gxc3 gb6 would have won without any difficulty. The rest is easy to understand:
33.hf6 :axa2 34.g5 :axe2 3S..ieS as 36.g6 a4 37J~dl :ad2 38.gbl .lb2 39.gxh7t ~xh7 40J~gl hd4 41.:ag7t ~h8 42.gg2t heS 43.:axd2 a3 44J~e2 J.b2 4SJ~eSt ~g7 46J~aS ~b4
0-1
Game 104 Alfred Brinekmann Aron Nimzowitseh Copenhagen 1924
17.~dxf6t gxf6
Or 17... gxf6 IB.VMb5.
IS.Lg7 ~H7 19..if6 9d6 20.gadl After 20.VMh6 there could come 20 ... :geB 21.f4 :ge2 22.f5 i.d2 23.fxg6 i.xh6 24.gxf7t r4ifB, and Black wins; or 23.i.g5 (instead of 23.fxg6) 23 ... ttJe3 and Black not only has an extra piece, but also a very strong attack.
20.. J~af8 21.9bS If 21.VMh6 then 21 ... c6 (threatening ...i.dB)
I.d4 f5 2.e4 fxe4 3.~e3 ~f6 4.J.gS b6 A very bold-looking innovation. The usual 4 ... ttJc6 can be met either by 5.d5 ttJe5 6.VMd4 ttJf7 7.ixf6 exf6 B.ttJxe4 f5 9.ttJg3 g6 10.0-0-0 ih6t 11.r4ibl 0-0 12.ttJf3! or by the following as yet untested try: (4 ... ttJc6?) 5.ixf6! exf6 6.a3! f5 7.ic4 ttJe7 B.d5 d6leaving White ready to exploit the weakness which will arise on e6 after a possible ... d7-d6.
I9B
Chess Praxis
5..ic4 The liquidation mentioned in the previous note seems much better here: 5.ixf6! exf6 6.a3! with serious difficulties for Black. 5... e6 6..hf6 Yfxf6 7.tilxe4 W1e7!
you, since a rapid transition to open play is rarely without difficulties.
11.0-0 gg8! Intending to centralize with ... g7-g5-g4 and then to see to the relief of the e5-square. Instead it was again possible to try the "freeing" move 11 ... d5 but that would be a mistake here because of 12.lDg3 e5 13.lDxe5 lDxe5 14.!!el. But there was a playable line (though not one sanctioned by present-day theory), namely: 1I ... d5 12.lDg3 h5 13.h4 and now 13 ... e5, since the capture on e5 which was previously mentioned (14.lDxe5) now fails because the h4-pawn has been left hanging.
12.Yfe2 mb8 13.a4 Perhaps 13.ia6 should have been preferred, since the pawn storm can always be played later.
13... a5 Since it is not blockaded by the bishop on a6, the pawn demonstrates its mobility.
14JUbi g5 15.b4 d5 After only a few moves the position is full of fantastic possibilities. Consider for example the following variations: 7 .. .'\Wg6 B.Wff3 i.b7! (not B... d5 on account of 9.id3!) 9.lDd6t? Ld6 IO.'\Wxb7 0-0 I1.WlxaB lDc6 and then ...Wlxg2. Or else there is 7 ... Wlg6 B.Wlf3 ib7 9.lDf6t? Wlxf6 IO.Wlxb7 Wlxd4 Il.WlxaB i.b4t 12.c3 ixc3t! I3.<j;>f1 0-0 and Black must win. Or finally (7 ... Wfg6 B.Wff3 ib7) 9.id3! ib4t IO.c3 E!fB I1.lDd6t <j;>e7 12.lDxb7 E!xf3 I3.ixg6 E!xc3 I4.<j;>e2 E!c4 15.i.d3 E!xd4 16.a3 and White should win. The attempt 7 ... Wlg6 would thus have led to a disadvantage for Black. 8.J.d3 tilc6 9.c3 J.b7 10.tile 0-0-0 Now Black has fortunately reached a position which, by common consent, is indefensible. But public opinion is not always correct. For example, only very few positions are felt to be defensible, whereas in reality the majority of all positions can be held. Moreover, at this point IO ... d5 followed by ... e5 seems to have been possible, e.g. 10 ... d5 l1.lDeg5 e5 12.dxe5 lDxe5 13.0-0 lDxf3t I4.lDxf3 0-0-0, but Black would be left with certain weaknesses in the e-file and on the white squares, for instance after 15.Wla4 @bB 16.E!ael Wlf6 17.lDe5. Such a result should not surprise
The right moment, since the e4-knight can no longer go to the favourable d2-square. If 16.lDed2 then 16 ... axb4 and the planned I7.a5 no longer works because of 17... bxc3 attacking the knight ond2.
16.tilg3 axM 17.a5! g4 18.tile5 tilxe5 19.dxe5 c5!
With 20.axb6 White could now force his opponent into the remarkable series of moves he had intended: (20.axb6) 20 ... c4 21.cxb4! ~cB! (opening the c-file by 21 ... cxd3 would be ominous for Black; 21. .. cxd3? 22.Wla2! etc.) 22.Wla2 ~c6
Chapter 6 23.VNa7t ~c8 24.b5 !!c5!! You don't often see a rook in a position like this! The position which has arisen is full of tension, powerful attacks remain ineffective against equally colossal defensive resources; it is a position of a heroic nature. As an illustration: 25 ..te2 ig7 26.hg4 .txe5 27.:gel :gxg4 28.!!xe5 c3 29.lLlf5 VNd7 30.VNa3 !!gc4 31.lLle3 VNxb5 32.lLlxc4 VNxc4 33.:gxe6 c2 34J~eel and White should win. But Black has a better line with 25.ie2 ig7 26.ixg4 he5 27J~el d4 with mighty complications. However in the game there followed:
20.aM aM 21J~cl 21.axb6 is simply met by 21. .. VNc5.
21. ...ih6 22Jkbl 9c5 23.axb61rxb6 24.ga4 .ifB 25.f}h5 The knight is threatening to settle on f6.
25 ....ic5 26.f}f6 gg7 27.J.b5 .ics 2SJ~bal .ib7 Black is continually tormented. 29.~hl "White, who has been playing with remarkable spirit, should once more have preferred !!b 1 to the text move.
199
36..h6! 9b6 37.9d3 gc8 The immediate return of the rooks is forced.
3S..ixb7 ~xb7 39.9xh7t gc7 4O.'9'd3 ggS 41.h3? Better was 41.lLle3 with threats such as lLldl or lLlc2.
41. ..ggc8 42.f}e3 gc5 43.f4? Bh5 Consolidating.
44.Vdl gaS! 45.gxaS ~xaS 46.£5 A mistake, but in any case "White's position cannot be held; the c3-bishop and the passed pawns rule the roost.
46...d4 47.f6 dxe3 4S.Vf3t Vc6 49.1rxe3 Lf6 50J~£1
Or 50.!!xb4 !!c1t 51.~h2 VNd6t 52.!!f4 ie5.
50.. J~c2 51.Vg3 .ie5 52.'9'gSt ~b7 0-1
Game 105 Akiba Rubinstein ArOB Nimzowitsch Karlsbad 1923
l.e4 c5 2.f}f3 f}c6 3.d4 ad4 4.f}xd4 d5
29....id4! 30.gbl .ic3 31.f}eS gg5 32.9£1 gxe5 33.f}f6 9d6 34.f}xg4 gg5 35.f3
35 ... gdgS? By suddenly sounding the attack on the king, Black temporarily forsakes his main plan (play in the centre against an attack on the flank). The correct and stylistically appropriate move was 35 ... !!gg8.
This innovation, which was being played for the first time here, leads to difficult positions and can only be recommended to those who think there is more than one single correct route, the wide main road. This is more of a walking tour, which may lead past steep drops but also involves splendid views; it is not for the faint of heart.
5.ad5
200
Chess Praxis
For the possible main line here (5.ib5 dxe4!) see game 44 (p. 91). Moreover, at this point Dr Lasker recommends 5.ttJxc6 bxc6 6.exd5 lM'xd5 7.ttJc3 lM'xd1 t 8.ttJxdl. But the endgame advantage which White obtains seems to us to be somewhat problematic.
5 ...YNxd5 6.J.e3 e6! 6 ... e5 would be bad on account of the reply 7.ttJb5. Black needs the e5-square for his queen. If his a-pawn were already on a6 (it would already be on a3 in a Reversed Sicilian) then ... e7 -e5 would be fine, though it would not secure for Black either an easy or a comfortable game. This game is heading for heroic defence not quiet woodpushing. Compare it with the opening of a game I played in July 1928:
when Black plays the Sicilian) does not quite seem to fit in with the heavyweight nature of the game. 7.~c3 J.b4 8.~db5
!twas worth considering 8.ie2 ttJge7 (8 ... lM'xg2? 9.if3) 9.0-0.
8 ...YNe5! The lighter side of the reticent 6 ... e6 now comes to the fore.
9.a3
Aron Nimzowitsch - Nonnan-Hansen: 1.c4 e5 2.a3 (White is playing a Sicilian with an extra tempo) 2 ... ttJf6 3.ttJc3 d5 4.cxd5 ttJxd5 5.d4 exd4 6.lM'xd4 ie6
9 ...,ixc3t!
7.e4 ttJc6 8.ib5 ttJde7! 9.ttJge2 a6 10.ia4 b5! 11.'lWxd8t ~xd8 12.ic2 ttJe5 (I2 ... ttJa5 was also worth considering) Black had some space in the centre of the board. The "energetic" thrust 7.e4 would have been better replaced by the reticent 7.e3!, e.g. 7 ... ttJc6 8.ib5 if now 8 ... ttJde7 then 9.'lWe4!. Even 9.ttJf3 (instead of 9.'lWe4) would leave White better off than in the game after the moves 9 ... a6 10.ia4 b5 11.'lWxd8t ~xd8 12.ic2, because his position would be more solid. The exhilarating advance e2-e4 (or ... e7-e5
The retreat to e7 was also good enough, e.g. 9 ... ie7 10.ie2 a6 11.ttJd4 ttJf6 intending ... 0-0 and ... ~d8. But in my opinion the continuation which was chosen is more logical, because the storm on the black squares which White is now in a position to start must be able to be weathered, and on the other hand the avoidance of complications would be in contradiction to what has happened in the whole of the game. A frightful struggle is the result.
10.bxc3!? After 10.ttJxc3 ttJf6 White would have the two bishops, but Black would be better centralized. The text allows penetration on d6, though it does cost a pawn. 10... a6 11.~d6t ~e7 12.~c4 YNxc3t 13.J.d2
YNd4 To meet 14.ib4 t with ... ttJxb4.
14.J.d3 b5 To get the knight off the black squares: at the
Chapter 6
same time white-squared counterplay (... .ib7) is initiated.
15.tLla5 tfe5t 16..le2 tLlxa5 17..ba5 J.b7 In order to force the exchange of queens after 18.0-0 by 18 ... WfdS.
IS.f3 tLlfG At last Black has found the time and the leisure to develop the poor knight: the opportunities it has on dS and e3, however, fully compensate for the long wait. 19..ib4t ~eS
201
2S...tfxd3! 29.tff4 tfd6 30.tfg5? An anti-prophylactic move, which actually helps Black's planned ... f6 and ... ~f7, see previous note. 30.Wfe3 would have been appropriate.
30...£6 31.tfe3 e5 32.J.b4 He is still aiming to create mischief on the black squares.
32...tfd4 33.tfb3 tfd5 34.tfc2 tfd3 35.tfc5 ~f7 36.gc2 ghS Black finally manages to fully develop his forces. 37J~d2 tffS 3SJ~xd7t tfxd7 39.tfc2! J.cS!
39 ... E:c8 would have been followed by 40.Wfh7.
4O.gdl tffS The defence is of course conducted on the white squares. 41.tfc7t ~g6 42.h3 geS 43J~cl tff4 44J'~k6
J.fS Threatening ... E:c8.
45.tfd6 h4 Stronger than 4S ... E:e6.
46..ld2 tfg3 47J;c3 a5!
Le roi s'amuse. 20.~
gdS 21..ld3 tLld5 22..la5 gd7 23J!el
tfd4t And the tournament book said in astonishment: "The black queen always has a way out with check." 24.~hl tLlf4 To get rid of the "two bishops". This has become possible only thanks to the intensive drive towards centralization.
25. tf d2 tLlxd3 26.cxd3 h5! With a rook fewer in play, Black must for the moment refuse the offer of the d3-pawn: instead he plans the manoeuvre ... h4 followed by E:h8-hSdS or even E!:h8-h6-g6. 27J~acl
gh6 2S.,ic3
28.E:e3 (followed by 29.E:cel) would have been better, because, firstly, the d3-pawn is less taboo than White (somewhat too optimistically) may be thinking. And secondly, this would prevent Black from developing with ... f6 then ... ~f7.
A coup d'etat: he sacrifices all his extra material, but obtains a combined attack on both wings at the same time; cf. the next note.
4S.f4 tffl49J!f3 tfe2 50.Exe5 gxe5 51.gf4 b4 52.axb4 a4 53J~xh4 a3 54. ~h2 a2 White is of course hopelessly lost. On one side he has to tame a passed pawn, while on the other he is facing a mating attack. But what follows is quite interesting.
55..lc3 tfe3 56.J.b2
202
Chess Praxis
56 ..!xe5? Wi'xe5t 57.Wi'xe5 fxe5 and the a-pawn queens.
Game 106 C.Behting
56...De1 57.Dd4 ge3
Aron Nimzowitsch Riga 1909
Threatening ... Wi'g3t etc.
58.Df4 ge4 59.Dg3t Dxg3t 60.xg3 ge2 61..i.d4 gd2
0-1 Play could have continued 62 ..tal !!dl 63 ..tb2 !!b 1 64.i.d4 !!b3t then ... !!xb4 and ... !!xd4 and ... al Wi'. White's misfortune in the final phase lay in the fact that he had to pay far too high a price for the h-pawn which he won - in the form of a misplaced rook. In the game itself, it is worth paying attention to Black's queen moves: on the surface they appeared to be defences to danger threatened from time to time and thus without any connecting thread. In reality, it was more in the nature of a planned exploitation of the central terrain he had at his disposition, while at the same time specifically making use of all possible counter-chances on the white squares. So: centralization plus whitesquared counterplay on one hand, and powerful black-squared pressure on the other. The victory for Black may in such circumstances be hailed as a triumph of heroic defence based on modern stratagems. And in conclusion we have an endgame, in which the basis on which the heroic defence rests can be seen with absolute clarity.
Black, whose move it was, produced the obvious sacrifice: l. .. ~at 2.gxf3 Dxh3 3 ..id4t g8 4.fxe4 ga And now White did not want to have to accept a draw and scorned the safe counter 5.!!fel; instead he went in for a "great adventure", but then had to sacrifice a whole rook to avoid mate, coming out an exchange down, apparently without any compensation. And then this wonderful adventure took a fresh turn. 5J~c8t h7 6.gfcl Wg4t 7.f1 gxe48.g1c7t
g6 9.gg7t h5 10.gxg5t hxg5 11.gh8t g6 Now at least White has got rid of the terrible threat of mate via h3 ( ... Wi'h3t, gl ... !!g4 mate). But at what cost! And moreover, the queen and the d4-bishop are still hanging. And there is nothing left of his attack!
12.Y!Yc2! This completes his defensive formation. White's defenders hang disjointedly in thin air in the most incredible and almost comical fashion; this in comparison to the solidly clumsy and brutal attacking trio of queen and two rooks. But what do aesthetics matter? White is an exchange down and must lose? No! White's heroic defence is based on centralization and in fact the d4-bishop and the queen on c2 (the latter aiming via e4 at g6) appear
Chapter 6
as central forces. But the central energy which had been amassed for defensive purposes can also, as we now see, be unleashed for attacking purposes, for quite imperceptibly there has developed a sharp threat, namely that of 13.:Bg8t and if 13 ... h7? then 14.~c7t xg8 15.~g7 mate.
12•.•Bf5 13.Bc7 With various threats.
13•. J~elt Fortunately Black still has this way out.
14.'tt>xel 'i'bl t 15.'tt>e2 Wid3t Vl-Vl Perpetual check. In this endgame the heroic defence was totally based on centralization. You should look carefully at each member of White's trio (~c2, .id4, !!h8) and try to establish the type and importance of the functional changes which affected it on move 12. Move 12 was, as we know, the key moment when the white pieces suddenly had to change from being defenders into storm troopers. This brings to an end section 9 which has been devoted to heroic defence.
10. "Combinations slumbering under a thin blanket" AdolfAnderssen, who coined this excellent phrase, was describing combinations in the closed games. If this great player of classical times were still alive, it would not be unlikely that he would have included all the combinations of the hypermodern school. In fact, modern combinations seem to have something deliberately unassuming about them: from time to time their ghostly presence is felt between the lines without daring to make an appearance in the text itself. But even when a powerful wave sweeps them from the depths of the ocean to the surface (the game), their appearance is still a modest one, not at all like thunder and lightning. And their modest exterior (see for example 17 ... ltJg6 in the note to move 16 of game 107) seems very often in contrast - and deliberate contrast, it might almost be said - to the depth of thought which lies behind them.
203
We would hardly claim that modesty is one of the most obvious characteristics of our era; but there is one branch of modesty which does seem typical of our age: we mean the voluntary subordination of the self to the needs of the whole (Reinhardt, Stanislavsky; think for example of the film The Potemkin in which there is only one "main character", which is "the people"!). As well as modesty, also requiring of consideration is the loving treatment of pure technique, which is so typical of our age. Finally some importance must be accorded to the campaign I have led with the goal of replacing the existing idea of beauty in chess with a new one: what should be thought of as beautiful is neither the accumulation of small advantages nor the game moulded by textbook notions, but rather anything which somehow links the chaotic happenings on the board to the laws of nature, in order to make clear "how benevolently, wonderfully and mysteriously Mother Nature organizes her realm". I have just quoted from my article in Kagans neueste Schachnachrichten (1926, p. 484) and will also borrow from it the following description of a struggle, which should serve as a textbook example of the new idea of beauty in chess: "Thanks to careless play, Black got on to a slippery slope. But with a great effort of will he now finds a move which just holds the game. The downwards slide is brought to an end. Then no matter how the position may appear, things start to go uphill, because the game is a simple draw. So why did Black win it? Because the process of stopping the slide awakened the slumbering strength which lay in Black's position, and that suddenly came to the fore. A specialist in tuberculosis is well aware of this phenomenon: once the illness is stopped in its tracks, things must improve, resulting in the cure." Lack of space prevents us from going into this in more detail, so we refer you to the abovementioned article. We think however that the few remarks above should show quite clearly that today's combinations are less ostentatious, they tend to avoid showy brilliance and are subordinated to strategy, quite unlike the combinations of the old school. So the modern combination fully deserves the description given by Anderssen.
204
Chess Praxis
Game 107 Dr G. Floss, Budapest Aron Nimzowitsch Correspondence 1912-1914 l.e4 e5 2.tLla tLlc6 3.tLlc3 tLlf6 4 ..ic4 .ic5 5.d3 d6 6.Ag5 h6 7 ..ih4 g5 8.Ag3 .ig4 9.h3 .ih5l0.h4 The immediate 9.h4 would have been strongly met by 9 ... ltJh5, e.g. 10.hxg5 ltJxg3 11.fxg3 ltJd4 12.ltJd5.txf3 13.gxB Wxg5! and wins (14.g4 c6 15.!!h5 cxd5!! etc.). 10...g4 l1.tLldl a6 A waiting move, but one which at the same time prevents any possibility of .tb5. 12.tLld5 tLlxd5 13.,ixd5 tLle7!
A pawn sacrifice with a really unusual point to it. 14..hb7 ~a7 15.Ad5 f5 16.£4 The point would have been seen after the natural continuation 16 ..te6 f4 17..th2 when Black would not have gone for the sacrifice with 17 ....txf2t but would have turned to the modest protective move 17 ... ltJg6. After 17 ....txf2t 1B.@f1 .te3 19.1tJc4 ltJg6 (the only way to protect the important g-pawn) 20 ..tgl!! .txg1 21..txg4! White would have the advantage. On the other hand 17 ... ltJg6 (to meet 1B ..txg4? by 1B ...Wxh4; note how the knight on g6 prevents a possible check after the moves 1B ..txg4? Wxh4 19 ..txh5) would have been very effective. For example: 1B.g3 (to protect h4) 1B ... B and the h2-bishop is shut in.
Or (17 ... ltJg6) 1B ..tg1 f3 19.9xf3 gxf3 and ... ltJf4 with advantage to Black. We consider the deliberately modest combination 17... ltJg6 (and not 17 ....txf2t) to be extremely significant in view of the remarks above. Also worth considering instead of 16 ..te6 was 16. We2 which would have been followed by 16 ... ltJxd5 17.exd5 WaB 1B.c4 (not 1B ..txe5 on account of 1B ... 0-0!) 1B ... c6 19.dxc6 Wxc6 and Black - with among other things a very mobile queen's rook (just look at the possibility of ...E!a7-e7 or ... !!a7-g7) - should have a decisive advantage. The move chosen in the game (16.f4) also has its downside. 16...gxf3 17.gxf3 tLlxd5 18.exd5 ~g8 19.tLlf1 19 ..tf2 would be met by 19 ....txf2t 20.@xf2 c6!!.
A move which helps both the queen on dB and the a7-rook become fearfully mobile, e.g. 21.dxc6 Wb6t 22.@f1 !!ag7 and then mate. 19...%Yb8! Much stronger than 19 ... e4 which is followed by 20.Wd2 threatening 21.Wxh6 and then possibly 22.We6t. 20.d4 A final attempt to save the game, otherwise, after for example 20.b3, there would be 20 ... 'tlNb4t 21.@e2 e4 or 20.!!b1 !!b7! 21.b3. Now there would be no deadly queen check on b4 but 21. ...tb4 t would be similar in effect, and after 22.@f2 'tlNa7t 23.d4 .tc3! and wins.
Chapter 6
20S
20.••,ixd4 21.c3
l.d4 £3 2.~f3 ~f6 3.J.f4 d6
A bit like an Evans Gambit, if now 21. ..i.cS 22.b4! but ...
Dr Krause's pet variation, which he is also in the habit of playing against 3.c4. The idea behind it is the plan to get in the advance ... e7-eS, even at the cost of a pawn sacrifice. See Black's 6 th move.
4.e3 h6 5.h4 Aiming to forestall his opponent's plans for expansion: ... gS and ... ~g7.
5 ... ~c6 6.d5 If this has to be played, it must be played at once. Waiting by 6.c4 or 6.ttJbd2 would have as a consequence 6 ... llJg4 after which the lines beginning with 7.d5 e5 would be less favourable for White than what happens in the text (because 6 ... llJg4 would represent a valuable extra tempo for Black).
6 ...e5 21 .•.Vxb2!! An elegant final combination. 22.cxd4 Vc3t 23.cj;>n gb7! There is no antidote to this.
Krause's solution, but one which does not quite seem to work here.
7.dxc6 exf4 8.J.b5 But not 8.cxb7 i.xb7 9.exf4 Wfe7t 10.~e2 i.xf3 11.gxf3 and the f-pawns are tripled.
24.gcl Or 24.!!h2 with a similar finish.
24.. J~b2t 25. cj;>gl ~xg3t 0-1 Because next comes 26.ttJxg3 Wfe3t and mate on f2. A similar sacrifice was possible after 24.!!h2 instead of 24.!!c1. 24 ... !!b2t 2S.@gl !!xg3t 26.ttJxg3. After 26 ... Wfe3t White did have 27.@h1 but it would have been no use against 27 ...i.xf3t.
Game 108 Aron Nimzowitsch Dr Orla Hermann Krause Copenhagen 1924
This game, which does not look very combinatory in style, is in fact seething with brilliant and colourful combinations, only they do not come into the game itself but hover about in the background. You are particularly advised to play over with special care the variations analysed in the annotations.
8 ... b6 Dr Krause recommends 8 ... @f7 as a better move. It could apparently be followed by9.exf4 Wfe7t (not 9 ... Wfe8t on account of 10.ltJeSt! dxeS 11.cxb7 and wins) 10.Wfe2 Wfxe2t 11.@xe2 bxc6 12.i.xc6 !!b8 or by 9.0-0 fxe3 10.llJeSt @g8 11.fxe3 Wfe7 12.llJg6 Wfxe3t 13.@h1 Wfg3 14.llJxh8 llJg4 and wins; both replies are unfavourable for Black. But by modestly centralizing after 8 ... @f7 with 9.Wfd4 White would have the superior game; for example
206
Chess Praxis
B... h7 16.hxg5 lLlxb5 17.lLlc3 Black could (instead of 17... lLlxc3) exchange queens with 17 ...'lMxd5 IB.lLlxd5. The position would then be difficult and IB ... hxg5 would allow his opponent's attack to gain the ascendancy by 19.!!hl t xg7 31...~xg7 would remove the mate threat on h2, allowing 32.CiJxd3. 32.~xc7t c;t>g8 32 ... ~xc7 also ends the threat to h2, so 33.CiJxd3. 33.~g7t c;t>f8 33 ... c;t>h8 34.~d4 ~xg7 35.~xd3 ~xb2
214
Chess Praxis
36.1Mfxf5 !!xf2 37.!!xf2 1Mfxf2 3B.1Mff6t is a draw. Now White seems to have run out of bullets.
34.~g6!!
The whole line seems too incredible to be true. 34 ... hxg635.1Mfxd6t White draws by perpetual check. If instead 34.!!xh7? ttJxf2t 35.!!xf2 E:c1 t 36.E:fl! (36.~g21Mfg6t) 36 ... !!xfl t 37.~g21Mfxh7 3B.1Mfxd6t (3B.~xf11Mfh3t 39.~f21Mfxh2t 40.~fl 1Mfh6 and Black should win) 3B: .. 1Mfe7 39.1Mfh6t 1Mfg7t 40.1Mfxg7t ~xg7 41.~xf1 !!cB, then Black wins the endgame. So, 27 .!!fd I! was the winning move. The point is that in various lines the rook is not hanging on fl. White really does win a piece in this position, and though it is only two minor pieces for a rook, it is still enough to claim a decisive advantage. 27 ... ttJd3 (27 ...!!xf2 2B.i.xd4!!fl t 29.!!xf11Mfxd4 30J:~fd1 1Mfxf4 31.1Mfc3! and White wins due to the double threat to c4 and hB) 2B.E:xd3 ixd3 29.1Mfb4! i.e4 30.i.xe4 fxe4 31.ixd41Mff7 32.1Mfc4! In this line the rook is trapped, and White should win.
8. Rudolf Spielmann - Aron Nimzowitsch New York 1927 Page lOB
Nimwwitsch stopped three moves before this with the comment: "White was better, even if he lost later by being over-hasty with his attack." This position is worth noting as a simple but instructive example of logical play: 18J~gl
Not bad but not best. Where is the big weakness and what is defending it? 1B.ttJh7! The answers are f6 and the e7 -bishop. 1B ... ~d7 (The only calculation required is trivial: 1B ...ixh4 19.!!xh4 1Mfxh4 20.i.g5 and the queen is trapped.) 19 ..ig5 White is dominant.
Postscript
215
9. Karl Behting - Aron Nimzowitsch Riga 1910 Page III
10. R. P. Michell - Aron Nimzowitsch Marienbad 1925 Page 152
Nimzowitsch gives the impression that Black has been winning for some time, but it is White's next move that ends all hope.
Black's last move, 5 ... b6, is now known to fall into a beautiful opening trap. The game continued 6.,td3, but 6.e6!! is inspired. One of the many threats is ttJe5. Now: a) 6 ... f6 does not stop the threat. 7.ttJe5! fxe5 B.~h5t g6 9.~xe5 !!gB 10.~d5 ttJc6 Il.exd7t ~xd7 12.~xgB Black's rooks do struggle in this opening. b) 6 ... dxe6 7.~xdBt ~xdB B.ttJe5 The king's rook is in immediate danger; the hidden threats to the queen's rook are the real problem. B... ~eB 9.,tb5t .id7 (or 9 ... ttJd7 10 ..ic6 !!bB 11..if4) 10.ttJxd7 ttJxd7 11 ..if4! White simply plans to castle long. 11. .. a6 12 ..ic6 !!cB 13.,tb7 :9:dB 14.,tc7 Losing the exchange would be the least of Black's problems.
41.b6? No comment from Nimzowitsch, but a fatal thematic mistake. In rook endings the rook belongs behind the passed pawn: now Black will have this pleasure. White had to try 41.:9:fB!. For example: 41. .. d5 (or 41. .. ~c4 42.:9:bB ~c5 43.gb7 intending b6) 42J!cB ~d3 43.gaB d4 44.!!a7 This feels like a draw.
41. .. cxb6 42J3d5 )3d7 43J3b5 gb7 44J3d5 b5 45J~xd6 b4 Picture perfect for Black.
It feels appropriate that it was Tigran Petrosian who first played 6.e6!!. Of all the world champions, perhaps Petros ian was most influenced by Nimzowitsch.
