Edmar Mednis How to Be a Complete Tournament Player 1991

0

-------

How To Be a Complete Tournament Player

�.1 :o

MAXWELL MACMILLAN CHESS

·

MAXWELL MACMILLAN CHESS SERIES

How to Be a Complete Tournament Player

MAXWELL MACMILLAN CHESS BOOKS E11ecutive Editor: Paul Lamford Technical Editor: Jimmy Adams Russian Series Editor: Kenneth Neat

Some other books in this series:

ADAMS, B. & M . Michael Adams: Development of a Grandmaster

LIVSHITZ, A. Test Your Chess IQ, Books 1 & 2 MEDNIS, E.

ALBURT, L. Test and Improve Your Chess

From the Middlegame into the Endgame From the Opening into the Endgame

ALEKHI NE, A.A. On the Road to the World Championship 1923-1927

POLUGAYEVSKY, L. Grandmaster Preparation

ALEXANDER, C.H.O'D. & BEACH, T.J. Learn Chess: A New Way for All Volume 1: First Principles Volume 2: Winning Methods AVNI, A. Creative Chess BASMAN, M. The Killer Grob CLOAD, R. & KEENE, R. Battles of Hastings GELLER, Y. The Application of Chess Theory KARPOV, A. Chess at the Top 1979-1984 KASPAROV, G. London-leningrad Championship Games New World Chess Champion The Test of Time KASPAROV, G., GELLER, E., LEIN, A. & C HEPIZHNY, V. Kasparov v. Karpov 1990

Grandmaster Performance The Sicilian Labyrinth Volumes 1 & 2 POLUGAYEVSKY, L. & DAMSKY, I. The Art of D efence in Chess PRZEWOZNIK, J. & PEIN, M. The Blumenfeld Gambit SHEKHTMAN, E. The Games of Tigran Petrosian Volumes 1 & 2 SHERESHEVSKY, M & SLUTSKY, L. Mastering the Endgame Volumes 1 & 2 SUBA, M. D ynamic Chess Strategy SUETIN, A.S. Three Steps to Chess Mastery VUKOVIC, V. The Art of Attack in Chess WATSON, J.L. Play the French WEBS, S. Chess for Tigers WINTER, E.G. World Chess Champions

A full catalogue Is available from: Muwell Macmlllan Ch ess, London Road, Wheatley, Oxlord, OX9 1YR.

How to Be a Complete Tournament Player by

Edmar Mednis International Grandmaster

MAXWELL MACMILLAN CHESS

MAXWELL MACMILLAN INTERNATIONAL PUBLISHING GROUP EUROPE/ MIDDLE EAST I AFRICA

Maxwell Macmillan International, Nuffield Building, Hollow Way, Cowley, Oxford OX4 2YH, England Tel: (0865) 748754 Fax: (0865) 748808

USA

Macmillan Publishing C ompany, 866 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10022 Tel: (212) 702-2000 Fax: (212) 605-9341

CANADA

1200 Eglinton Avenue East, Suite 200, Don Mills, Ontario M3C 3N1, Canada Tel: (416) 449-6030 Fax: (416) 449-0068

AUSTRALIN NEW ZEALAND

L akes Business Park, Building A 1, 2 Lord Street, Botany, NSW 2019, Australia Tel: (02) 316-9444 Fax: (02) 316-9485

ASINPACIFIC (Except Japan)

72 H illview Avenue, *03-00 Tacam House, Singapore 2366 Tel: (65) 769-6000 Fax: (65) 769-3731

LATIN AMERICA

28100 US Highway 19 North, Suite 200, Clearwater, FL 34621, USA Tel: (813) 725-4033 Fax: (813) 725-2185

JAPAN

Misuzu S Building 2F, 2-42-14 Matsubara Setagaya-ku, Tokyo 156, Japan Tel: (81) 3-5300-1618 Fax: (81) 3-5300-1615

Copyright ®

1991

Edmar Mednis

All

Rights Reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retriflval system or tr ansmitted in any form or by any means: electronic, electrostatic, m agnetic tape, mechanical, photocopying, recording or othflrwise, without permission in writing from the publisher.

First

Ed iti on 1991

Li brary of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Applied for

A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library

ISBN 1 85744 018 8

Cover by Pintail Design Printed in Great Britain by BPCC Wheatons Ltd. Exeter

Contents

Training Programme for Significant Improvement in Chess Ability

l

2

Starting to Think Like a Grandmaster

11

3

How to Select Your Opening Repertoire

23

4

Move Orders in the Opening - the Modern Master's Tool

30

5

How to Prepare for a Tournament Game

42

6

How to Play the Game

60

7

What to Do After the Time Control Has Been Reached

71

8

How to Analyse Adjourned Games

90

To My goddaughter Daina

Preface

This is a book for the_ tournament player who wants to score more points. It is written by a tournament player for the tournament player. The book is based on my more than forty years of tournament experience as well as over ten years of training experience. I have been doing training work with more than one hundred of the most promising American youngsters both in my capacity as the Grandmaster-Trainer of the American School of Chess and as a private trainer. Additional training activities have included work with the Puerto Rican Olympiad Team and with top Dutch and Norwegian youngsters. This is a practical book. It discusses both what works under the pressure of tournament play and what is bound to fail. As the reader will note, many of the failures discussed will be those that came out of my own hide. Yet it is true - though unpleasant - t hat each of us can learn much from our failures. A trainer must strive for complete objectivity as far as his own experiences are concerned. This has always been one of my main tenets, though of course it is only my own students who know how well I have - or have not - succeeded . Anyway, to the best of my ability, in this book I reveal everything important that I know about the subject matter. Some of the material in the book has appeared before in various publications, but most of it appears in print for the first time. Of course, the previously published material has been enlarged and adapted to fit the book's primary objective: to help the reader become a complete tournament player. Compared to my previous books, this one has a new valuable feature: at the end of each chapter there is a questons and answers section on the subject matter. For the reader/student this helps to round out the study material; for the trainer this provides additional valuable material for his work. I am indebted to Mr Paul Lamford, Executive Editor, Maxwell Macmillan Chess, for this excellent suggestion. In general, the following standard sources have been utilised in the preparation of this book: personal knowledge, personal contacts, leading

chess periodicals and chess books. When appropriate, direct credit is given in the text. To ensure that the reader and the author are on the same wavelength regarding the meaning of the question and exclamation marks as they are used in the characterisation of moves, these are the presently accepted meanings: a strong move a very strong move; a fantastic move !! a bad move; a weak move ? a horrible move; a blunder ?? !? an enterprising move; a move worthy of consideration ?! a dubious move, for theoretical or practical purposes As always, my deepest gratitude goes to my wonderful blonde wife, Baiba, not only for typing the entire manuscript but also for never-ending physical and moral support. In an undertaking of such scope, some errors are almost inevitable. The author accepts responsibility for all of these. Your assistance in bringing them to my attention will be appreciated. Edmar Mednis New York, 199 1 =

=

1

Training Programme For Significant Improvement In Chess Ability

The overall purpose of the training programme presented here is to increase your chess ability so that you can become a more successful competitive player. Maximum progress will be shown by those who are most talented and have the time and capacity for hard work. In other words, success in chess -just as in other professions - requires time, effort and dedication. B ut I am convinced that anyone who conscientiously tries to follow this programme will find his chess ability increasing steadily. The three elements of the programme are tournament play, a thorough review of games played and an ongoing programme of chess study.

1.

Tournament Play

You must play in tournaments ( 1 ) to retain your competitive sharpness, (2) to keep retesting your mettle and (3) to try to apply the chess wisdom gained in the study programme. You will learn most from competition at your own or higher level. Of course, there is nothing wrong in playing some relative "weakies", but too much of this will succeed in stretching only your ego and not your mind! How often and how many games should you play? Well, so much depends on your particular make-up. Mikhail Tal is only happy when he is playing almost continually . Sammy Reshevsky gets tired "if he plays more than a few tournaments a year" . For me the ideal cycle is a tournament followed by about six weeks of rest, review and continuing study. For most people about 50 games a year is sufficient both to retain their sharpness and to be able to improve their skills. If you have lots of time, then do play more - but only if this does not detract from your study programme. Everyone gets tired if they play too much. Chess simply demands so much nervous energy. It may be useful to compare chess with the Japanese game Go. Japan has an established group of professional Go

2

How to Be a Complete Tournament Player

players and it is absolutely unthinkable for them to be playing more than 30-40 games a year. No one can play chess successfully if he plays continuously. If you start noticing that during a series of games your mind has stopped functioning normally, with moments of blindness and inexplicable moves being the norm of your play, then you are .. over­ chessed". Take a break of at least two weeks. To add a personal note: for me the telltale sign of being over-chessed is when I start to overlook ..simple tactics". Apparently the mind retains sufficient knowledge to avoid any problems with undertaking "grand strategy". However, the mind is supposed to be able to calculate simple tactics automatically and when it is too tired, it apparently cannot perform this .. automatic function". 2.

Thorough Review of Games Played

But, by itself, playing brings little progress. A review of the .. Most Active" lists published in Chess Life shows no particular relationship between activity and progress. Most of us are familiar with regular players in various types of chess locales who play and play and never improve. Playing without a concurrent critical review of one's skills will simply get you nowhere. I can give an example from my experience with swimming. I learned to swim at the age of ten but have taken no steps to improve myself and up to now haven't shown a speck of progress. As Mikhail Botvinnik has pointed out, there is no single activity with as high a potential for reward as carefully analysing your own games. Quite appropriate here is what Garry Kasparov says in the preface to his book The Test Of Time: "By strictly observing Botvinnik's rule regarding the thorough analysis of one's own games, with the years I have come to realise that this provides the foundation for the continuous development of chess mastery." The number of eye-opening discoveries that you will make will be nothing short of a revelation. It is safe to say that all of the top grandmasters analyse their played games very carefully. Robert Hi.ibner of West Germany has always published his exceedingly detailed analysis in the Chess Informant and the young Czech GM Lubomir Ftacnik is now following suit. I also analyse my games quite thoroughly, though I must admit I don't have the patience and dedication of Hi.ibner. But of course, there is no question regarding which one of us is much the stronger player! Another example from the highest level is worth giving. About six months after losing to Bobby Fischer in 1972, Boris Spassky was asked in

Training Prog ramme for Signific ant Improv ement in Ch ess Ability

3

an interview how he had been spending his time. His reply: " I've been carefully going over the match games and have made so many discoveries. During the play, neither player realised much of what was possible and the analysts have also ignored much. " (Unfortunately neither Spassky nor Fischer has seen fit to write about the match and thus to start unlocking its secrets.) It is quite obvious that a review of your games will lead to some conclusions and perhaps revisions in the opening variation(s) you have chosen. Middlegame strategy and some unexpected tactical possibilities will emerge. Endgames will offer opportunities for both applications of general principles and specific know-how. Psychological factors should be considered: were you feeling up to the game and how did your feeling change as the game progressed? And all other special factors should be considered: time pressure (your own or your opponent's), moments of carelessness, physical or mental tiredness etc. Not only will a review bring much specific insight, it will also improve your overall analytical ability. Each game should be analysed from a personal "I" viewpoint. After all, you are doing it strictly for your own future benefit. And don't play more games than you have time to carefully review. Otherwise the playing will just tire you out and will not be productive. H ow much time should you spend on each game? Well, this depends both on its complexity and on your own temperament. Your goal should be to obtain a clear understanding of all its major phases. I don't think that a nything worthwhile can be accomplished in one hour or less. In general, you should plan to spend a minimum of two hours on each game. I should also add that periodically there will be positions which will appear to you to be unsolvable. In such cases, stop hitting your head against the wall. Stop your analysis and go on to other parts of your study programme . As your chess skills increase, you will fin d that such unsolvable positions will become much rarer.

3.

Study Programme

The science of chess is inexhaustible and forever advancing. For anyone wishing to become, and remain, a good player there is unfortunately no substitute for work. The explosion of knowledge means that all of us must run harder just to stay even. Even so I'm glad that I'm in chess rather than swimming. It appears that to become a champion swimmer you must start spending ten hours or so in a pool from the age

4

How to Be a Complete Tournament Player

of five onwards. By the time you are twenty-two or so, you are so wet and tired of training that you decide to retire. Chess is both more comfortable and provides greater longevity ! An o ngoing programme should consist of the following three parts: openings, endgames and what I call "learning chess". A.

Opening Study The game starts with the opening and it is imperative that you obtain a reasonable position for the coming middlegame play. I feel that the best single source of reliable opening information is the Encyclopedia of Chess Openings series. The best way to keep up with developments in the opening of interest to you is to refer to the Chess Informants or the recent New I n Chess volumes. These sources do have the disadvantage that everything is in symbols and therefore new concepts may be difficult to understand. An excellent way to gain a basic understanding of various openings is to study the Understanding The Chess Openings series put out by RHM Press. (So far three books have been published: Open Games (except the Ruy Lopez), Caro-Kann Defence and Queen's Indian Defence.) Also, for a more general understanding of what modern play is about I recommend my book How To Play Good Opening Moves (David McKay Co, Inc). As always, comments by leading grandmasters in various chess magazines will give much valuable current information. New In Chess Magazine, published in the English language in Holland is outstanding for the serious student. It is both professionally rigorous as well as pleasantly readable. For up-to-date information - particularly for readers in the US - excellent is GM Yasser Seirawan's magazine Inside Chess. Additional outstanding English language magazines are Maxwell Macmillan Chess and British Chess Magazine. I must also add that studying openings does not mean at all "memorising opening variations" . As a matter of fact, such memorising is generally a waste of time and is often counter-productive. The first and most important objective is to truly understand what the opening variation is about. Only then should you try to start recalling (memorising) the specific lines and variations. In strategic variations the amount of blind memorising that is required is relatively small. However, when we get to "ambiguous tactical" variations such as the Najdorf Sicilian with White playing 6 i.c4 or 6 i.gS, then the memorising required can become rather brutal .

Training Prog ramme for Significant I mprovement in Ch ess Abili ty

B.

5

Endgame Study

Formal endgame study is important not only because so many games are concluded in the endgame but also because the principles of endgame play are so radically different from those of the opening and middlegame. The amount of points that can be gained (and saved! ) by correct endgame play is enormous, yet is too often u nderestimated by youngsters and amateurs. The following sources of endgame information are highly recommended: From The Middlegame Into The Endgame by Mednis Practical Endgame Lessons by Mednis Practical Rook Endings by Mednis Question s and Answers on Practical Endgame Play by Mednis Strategic Themes In Endgames by Mednis Practical Bishop Endings by Mednis Rate Your Endgame by Mednis and Crouch A Pocket Guide To Endgames by Hooper All endgame books by A verbakh The Practical Endgame (syndicated column by Mednis) Benko's Chess Life columns Endgame articles by grandmasters in magazines I hope the reader will forgive me for recommending so many of my own books. You can be sure that you will learn much from all strong grandmasters - that is why my list above ends with "Endgame articles by grandmasters in magazines". A kind word must also be said about Fine's Basic Chess Endings. The passage of time has brought about many re-evaluations of Fine's specific examples. Yet he remains excellent in presenting the basic principles involved in endgame play. C.

"Learning Chess"

Chess is an extremely complicated and demanding game and only those of the very highest level have succeeded in unlocking a portion of the secrets of chess. It is therefore only from the top players and thinkers that the rest of us can learn a lot. Unless a player has an "understanding chess" rating of at least 2400, the amount of significant knowledge that he can impart to others is limited. Your chess knowledge will gain significantly from any and all of the following sources:

6

How to Be a Complete Tournament Player

My Best Games by Karpov Chess A t The Top by Karpov The Test of Time by Kasparov Garr.y Kasparov New World Chess Champion (Kasparov's book of the 1985 World Championship match; 98 pages of text) London-Leningrad Championship games (Kasparov's book of the 1 986 World Championship match; 1 4 1 pages of text ! ) Grandmaster Preparation b y Polugayevsky King Power In Chess by Mednis My Best Games (Vols 1 and 2) by Alekhine Life and Games of Mikhail Tal by Tal My 60 Memorable Games by Fischer The Art of Chess Analysis by Timman Any book by a famous grandmaster Tournament books of strong tournaments with notes by grandmasters It is my firm opinion that you can learn a great deal from any serious work by any good quality grandmaster. Yes, in some particular variations there may be an error in analysis - chess is just too inexhaustible to eliminate such errors altogether. But every piece of writing will serve to illuminate your mind. Conversely a minor master can well come up with a correct or new move in an opening variation. Yet the insight that he will be able to provide will generally be inconsequential and very often it will be misleading or even wrong. H ow should such a study programme be divided? In giving the following numbers, I am assuming that the student already has an elementary acquaintance with all phases of the game. Capablanca once stated seriously that "Chess should be learned starting from the endgame". Well, this advice does make sense for the strong IM trying to become a GM. However, I question its relevance for anyone else. What good is endgame expertise if you are mated every time right out of the opening? Therefore, for the general novice, emphasis on basic opening play is the overriding need. For everyone else, the following use of time is suggested: 50% openings 25% endgames 25% "learning chess" It is very important to understand correctly what I mean by saying "50% of the studying time should be spent on openings". This study is to

Training Programme for Signif icant Improv ement in Chess Ab ility

7

include everything relevant to the opening variation. For instance, if the characteristic middlegames flow naturally from the opening variation, then of course these also must be studied very carefully. If we consider, for example, the Yugoslav Attack variation in the Sicilian Dragon, we see that the middlegame is entered so smoothly from the opening that there is really no particular dividing line between them. Moreover, often the characteristic endgame structure is set already in the opening and for such variations it is also necessary to study the characteristic endgames that result. A useful aid for this aspect of preparation is Shereshevsky and Slutsky's recently published two-volume work Mastering the End­ game. It is even possible to go directly from the opening into the endgame, essentially bypassing the middlegame. My book From the Opening into the Endgame takes an in-depth look at eleven such opening variations. In such a case, the study of the whole book is considered "studying openings"! How much time should you spend studying? Well, it mostly depends on how much time you have available. It is impossible to learn everything, yet there is much to learn. Karpov has stated that for doing original, creative research, three hours a day is about all that the body can take. This is true, of course, but everything that you will be working on will not be so demanding. A youngster on a summer vacation should spend at least five hours a day on various aspects, including a review of his games. A businessman or a youngster in school has, of course, much less available time. Still, the key to ultimate success is the determination to progress day by day. Assuming that you can allocate seven hours each week to chess, it is best to spend one hour each day on it. One hour may not sound like much, but it is a lot more than nothing. And over a year's time this works out to more than 360 hours. I guarantee that you'll learn a lot in 360 hours!

Questions and Answers Question 1 You don't have much opportunity to play in tournaments. Suddenly a chance appears: You can play in two tournaments ! Yet the "catch" is that the first one requires playing nine games in seven days (no byes allowed ! ) and the next one starts the very next day and requires a three-hour trip to get there. That tournament has nine rounds in eight days. Should you

8

How to Be a Complete Tournament Player

accept this opportunity? If so, what is the best "method" for achieving good results?

Answer If you like to play in tournaments and have not had many opportunities lately, you might as well accept. Otherwise you will just be kicking yourself for a long time to come. The average player (the Kasparovs, Karpovs etc excepted) simply must make do with what is available. Waiting for the ideal tournament may mean waiting forever. Do realise, however, that the schedule will be murderous: to play 1 8 games in 1 5 straight days would be considered inhuman in any other competitive sport. The main problem is not physical tiredness (though this is real enough), but the burden on the nervous system. You simply have to give it some respite. This means a few well-placed quick draws. The best time, I believe, is after a two-round day. Your system can really use a day off then. Following this recommendation will give you three more or less "free days" in a 1 5-day period- not so much, but a lot more than nothing! Playing a quick draw in a two-round day is not so useful, because the other "full" game will be exhausting enough and thus you will not get the important "free" day. It is easier to achieve the desired quick draws if you are White or if your opponent is considered weaker than you. If you are White, play an opening that you are good at (and have confidence in) and offer the draw at around move I 0- 1 2. Do the same when you are Black. Don't get greedy (because you are White or the opponent is "weak") when you arrive at the board. Remember that you have to get through 1 8 games ! Question 2 You are a businessman who can only play in weekend tournaments. These generally run from Friday to Sunday, with one game on Friday evening and two each on Saturday and Sunday. When you are at work you must concentrate every moment. What, if anything, can you do to improve your chances for a good result in such a tournament?

Answer The particular problem is the Friday evening game. After a strenuous day in o ne activity you rush off to participate in another strenuous one. There is simply no reason to expect that you can be anywhere near your best in such circumstances. The best solution is not to play on Friday evening and take the half-point bye. If this is not available , consider

Training Prog ramme for Significant Improvement in Chess Ab ility

9

taking the afternoon off from work. Go home after lunch and relax the rest of the day. You will be surprised how fresh and "hungry" you will be at the time of the game. Question 3 A friend of yours says: "I played a horrible game; I know what I did wrong - there is no point in going over the game." Is he right?

Answer No, absolutely not! Or perhaps, to say it in a more "diplomatic" way, most likely he is quite wrong. Of course, if he left his queen hanging on move 4 or something similar, then there is no particular need to review the game. Yet, even here, it is very important to understand how such a horrible tragedy could occur, so that a reoccurrence of it is prevented once and for all. Lost games are very unpleasant for everyone, including world champions. It is therefore very easy to try to ignore them. Yet this is quite wrong. However, it is perfectly reasonable to postpone the start of your definitive analysis for a day or two. By then the pain has lessened and it is easier to be objective. As you do the analysis, you may well discover, that you did not play so badly after all and that it was just a single error that was the problem. On the other hand, you may find that you did do "everything wrong". In either case, you will know what not to do again. Also, in the first case, you will obtain the valuable information that many of the things that you were unsure of were actually correct -again valuable information for the future . Question 4 You like sound, straightforward variations. A friend has suggested that you play 4 e3 against the Queen's I ndian Defence (1 d4 lL!f6 2 c4 e6 3 lL! f3 b6). This sounds good to you . How should you go about learning this variation thoroughly?

Answer The first step is to get hold of a good "verbal" discussion of the variation . This can be from an article about this variation or from a book. The writer must be a strong player (at least 2400 in "understanding chess") and the explanation in words must be clear enough so that you understand what the main themes and objectives are. One good source is Understanding the Queen's Indian Defence by Soltis, Mednis, Keene and

10

How to Be a Complete Tournament Player

Grefe, published by R . H . M . Press. The second step is to become familiar with all the important variations. I feel that the best source for this is the Encyclopedia of Chess Openings (ECO). In this case, the volume is "E' , and the code E 14. You will find a total of 1 5 columns and an additional 8 1 notes. Select those continuations for White that get a good theoretical rating and that you are comfortable with . Since the publication date ofthis volume is 1978, it is dangerous to accept the final evaluations as the absolute truth. Yet you will have acquired valuable background information and made key decisions appropriate to your style. The final "learning" step is to consult the Chess Informants published since ECO 'E', so as to get all the later "known" information which has been made available. Ideally, you want to review all the Informants since ECO 'E', but if this is impossible, checking over the last six volumes will be a reasonable compromise. These steps - understanding the themes/objectives, selecting and learning .. your" variations, checking for the latest theoretical developments - will enable you to play this variation with confidence and success. Of course, for a proper understanding of the application of the opening variation (s) to the further course of the middlegame you do want to go over the whole game. A large number of the opening variations presented in the Informants are parts of full games.

2

Starting To Think Like a Grandmaster

Grandmasters leave a legacy of deeds (games) and words (writing). In my comments on establishing a complete training programme I pointed out the great value of becoming familiar with the grandmasters' thoughts. You will not start thinking like a grandmaster until you have absorbed a lot of grandmaster wisdom. In the examples that follow I shall show how to do this and how to make further use of the wisdom gained.

1.

Learning from Fischer

Because of his universal style and fantastic fighting qualities, Robert J. Fischer's games are a gold mine of valuable information. Lev Psakhis, who burst upon the chess sky, unheralded, to become USSR eo­ Champion in both 1 980/8 1 and 1 98 1 182 proudly admits that he has very carefully studied every one of Fischer's games . Let us assume that you have done the same with all of the Ruy Lopezes that Fischer has played - an opening in w hich he was an acclaimed virtuoso. (Primary sources of Fischer's games are My 60 Memorable Games by Fischer and Bobby Fischer's Chess Games by Wade and

11

12

How to Be a Complete Tournament Playe r

O'Connell.) In Fischer's time, a familiar type of Ruy Lopez position resulted after 1 e4 eS 2 lDf3 lDc6 3 .ibS a6 4 .ia4 lDf6 S 0-0 .ie7 6 liel bS 7 .ib3 d6 8 c3 0-0 9 h3 lDa5 10 .ic2 c5 1 1 d4 'fi'c7 12 lDbd2 .id7 13 lDfi Iife 8 14 lDe3 g6 15 dxe5 dxe5 (diagram). See, for example, F ischer-S hocron, Mar del Plato 1 959 and F ischer-U nzicker, Zurich 1959 - Games 6 and lO in this book. A mechanical evaluation would show that Black is ahead in development, has greater central influence and that White's KB has little scope. But none of this is of any consequence! All that matters is that Black has a potential hole on d5 whereas d4 is inaccessible to Black's pieces. Therefore all the chances are on White's side - as Fischer demonstrated time after time. (Note: of course, after a while methods were developed which eventually lead to laborious equality for Black.) Now let us consider the position that resulted from the Giuoco Piano of Game 8, Karpov-Korchnoi, 1981 World Championship match: 1 e4 e5 2 ltlf 3 ltlc6 3 .ic4 .ic5 4 c3 ltlf6 5 d3 d6 6 ltlbd2 a6 7 0-0 0-0 8 .ib3 .ia7 9 h3 .ie6 10 .ic2 dS 11 lie1 dxe4 12 dxe4 ltlh5 13 ltlfi 'fi'xd1 14 lixd1 liad8 1S .ie3.

This game was televised in the US (PBS's Shelby Lyman World Chess Championship 198 1 programme) and this and the upcoming positions discussed at length by the various experts taking part. The evaluations of the younger and less experienced participants were of one mind: White has nothing. (One 2200 rated person even thought that Black was better because " White's KB is inferior to Black's QB"). But the heart of the matter (and this is what you should immediately be grasping) is

Starting to Think Like a Grandmaster

13

completely different: the only item of significance is that White's chances for access to d5 are bright, whereas d4 is unavailable to Black. Therefore it is only White that has prospects for an advantage. Karpov comments as follows (Chess A t The Top, p . 65) about this endgame: "The exchange of queens condemns Black to a dubious search for equality." In the game White obtained a clear edge after 15. .. f6 16 i.xa7 lt::l x a7 1 7 ltJe3 ltJf4 18 h4! .if7 1 9 ltJel lt::l c8 2 0 f3 lt::l e 6 21 lt::ld3 lit d7?! (Better is 2 1 .. . lt::le7 - Karpov) 22 .ib3! lt::le 7 23 lt::ld5! lt::lc6 24 .ia4! (Maybe even stronger is 24 g3, followed by 25 f4 with the threat of 26 f5 to chase Black's knight away from e6 - Karpov) 24 .. . b5 25 .ic2 llfd8 26 a4. With Korchnoi in severe time pressure (he had only one minute left for his last ten moves) Karpov's prospects were most bright. However, by rushing his moves he failed to play the best ones and Korchnoi finally squeezed out a draw on move 80. 2.

L earning from Karpov about the F rench D efence, Tarrasch Variation

After 1 e4 e6 2 d4 d5 White must make a basic decision on how to proceed. A strategically healthy way is Tarrasch's 3 lt::l d2. Listen to Karpov's (My Best Games, p.29) evaluation of it: "The point is that it leads to a small but lasting advantage for White - and I stress lasting." The theoretically most reliable response for Black is 3 ... c5 and the resulting current main line is 4 exd5 exd5 5 lt::lf3 lt::lc6 6 i.b5 i.d6 7 dxc5 .ixc5 8 0-0 lt::lge7 9 ltJb3 .id6. Karpov-U hlmann, Madrid 1973 (Game 36) continued 10 .ig5 0-0 1 1 .ih4, with Karpov commenting as follows.

"The idea behind this move is simple. White's edge in this position is

14

How to Be a Complete Tournament Player

linked to Black's being saddled with an isolated d-pawn. To take advantage of this weakness, simplifying exchanges should be undertaken. The minor pieces will be removed from the board and, at the first opportunity, the dark-square bishop, which holds the squares around the pawn on d5. " The inevitable passage of time has modified some of the specifics and in fact after the time-wasting 1 1 j_h4 Black can equalise with 1 1 ... 'it'b6! as demonstrated by Vaganian and Gulko. Therefore White's strongest plan is now considered to be 10 :1Ie1 0- 0 1 1 j_ g5. But the overall strategy remains intact: White wants to exchange the dark-square bishops and any exchange of a pair of minor pieces is in White's interests. This insight allows White to formulate a number of logical middlegame continuations - even if his theoretical knowledge ends right here. Now let us see how we can apply this information to the following line, starting with 3 . . . lbf6: 4 e5 lbfd7 5 c3 c5 6 j_ d3 lbc6 7 lbe2 cxd4 8 cxd4 f6 9 exf6 lbxf6 10 0- 0 j_ d6 1 1 lt:l f3. Now White "threatens" 1 2 j_f4, saddling Black with weaknesses on the dark squares. This factor, when added to White's superior white-square bishop, Black's weakened kingside and his weak e-pawn, will give White a very pleasant advantage. Therefore, Black's normal response now is 1 1 . . . 'ti'c7. But, instead, in the game Jarecki- Remlinger, New York (March CCA) International 1 982, Black continued differently: 11 ... 0- 0?! 12 j_ f4! j_ xf4 13 lbxf4 'i& h8 14 li:i: e1!. Now Black's "rational" move is 1 4 . . . 'ti'd6, but playing a less experienced opponent he essays 14 ... lbg4?!.

The only compensation that Black has for his various weaknesses is the

Starting to Think Like a Grandmaster

15

half-open f-file. But if White now simply completes his mobilisation with the straightforward 15 1!Vd2 ! , then Black's problem would soon come home to roost. Instead, White greedily played 15 lLlxe6? i.xe6 16 llxe6 and found himself defenceless after 16 ... 1!Vc7!. White's lesser evil now is to lose the exchange in the "best" way with 1 7 i.e2! 1!Vd7! and now not 1 8 lLlg5? because of 1 8 . . . li:lxf2 19 1!Vc2 lLle4, but either 1 8 lLle5 or 1 8 llxc6. Worse are 1 7 g3? 'i¥f7! , 1 7 h3? lLlxd4 ! , or the game continuation 17 i.b5? llxf3! 18 g3 1!Vf7 19 i.xc6 bxc6 20 llxc6 lLlxfl White resign s. White's basic problem was that he thought that his overriding objective is to capture Black's weak e-pawn. But in fact his initial goal is to establish a dark square grip on the position. Other gains will then start accruing "normally" enough.

3

Sicilian Najdorf, Polugayevsky Variation

In my writings I have often made the point that the Najdorf Variation in the Sicilian is only suitable for those who are able to devote an inordinate amount of time to independent analysis. It is perfect for Fischer and his enthusiastic followers; it is suicidal for the majority of players. A very sharp and demanding line for Black is the Polugayevsky Variation ( 1 e4 c5 2 lLlf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 lLlxd4 lLlf6 5 lLlc3 a6 6 i.g5 e6 7 f4 b5). Within it, for a number of years, a critical line was the following one: 8 e5 dxe5 9 fxe5 1!Vc7 10 exf6 1!Ve5+ 11 .i.e2 "iV xg5 12 0-0 lla7 13 '@d3 lld7 14 lLle4 '@e5 and now 15 lLlf3!.

16

How to Be a Complete Tournament Player

It is very instructive to read what Polugayevsky has to say about this position specifically and his variation in general. I quote from his excellent book Grandmaster Preparation: " As often happens in chess, the most modest move in the position, 1 5 ltJf3 (blocking the f-file, along which White i s attacking, offering the exchange of queens etc), proved to be the strongest. And I decided to study the position resulting from this, in which the black queen retreats to c7, although it too did not appear particularly promising. As for the move 15 'i¥xb2, at heart I immediately condemned it as suicidal, and did not bother to reinforce this feeling with variations. Here it would seem appropriate for me to give my approximate train of thought, which caused me to reject completely 1 5 . . . 'i¥xb2. The point is that, in choosing the variation, to a certain extent Black acts contrary to the basic laws of chess, which demand rapid mobilisation in the opening. I ndeed, in the position after 1 5 ltJf3 practically all of Black's pieces are still on their initial squares, the black queen has already moved four times, and a further raid into the opponent's position cannot fail to tell against him. What's more, the basic strategic idea of the variation is not to gain material but, by creating threats, to develop the pieces with gain of tempi, and if possible to force White to assist this (e.g. by the capture fxg7). Black can gain tempi both by attacking the knight at e4 (by . . . i.b7), and b y attacking the white king (by . . . i.c5+ ). And a n y deviation from this strategic idea, any material -grabbing, makes the variation, which is already risky for Black, too reckless. It is interesting that subsequent tournament practice (of other players, of course, since I simply could not act counter to my own logic, and did not once play 1 5 . . . 'i¥xb2) fully confirmed the correctness of my judgement. The overwhelming majority of games played with the capture on b2 by the queen ended in a rapid and crushing defeat for Black. It is noteworthy that, while many grandmasters could not resist the temptation to employ the variation, if only once or twice, the move 1 5 . . . 'i¥xb2 was nevertheless made only by players o f lower class, who had evidently not grasped the strategy of the variation so deeply. This once again confirmed an ancient truth: first and foremost it is essential to understand the essence, the overall idea of any fashionable variation, and only then include it in one's opening repertoire . Otherwise the tactical trees will conceal from the pia yer the strategic picture of the wood, in which his orientation will most likely be lost." ...

S tarting to Think Like a Grandmaster

17

Thus a lot of the reasoning behind the Polugayevsky Variation has now been divulged to you. The work ahead still is very tough, of course, but your chances of coming up with the correct move, both in play and in home analysis, have increased markedly because now you will be looking in the right direction.

4.

Learning the Ruy Lopez from Karpov

Karpov-Andersson, World Junior Championship, Stockholm /969, opened with the Ruy Lopez: 1 e4 e5 2 lt:lf3 li:J c6 3 .i b5 a6 4 .ta4 li:J f6 5 0-0 .i e7 6 l:i e1 b5 7 .i b3 0-0 8 c3 d6 9 h3 lt:la5 10 .i c2 c5 11 d4 'fi/ c7 12 li:J bd2 .tb7. Here Karpov comments (My Best Games, p. 82): "One of the oldest continuations in the Chigorin Defence, now rarely encountered. Even then it is seen only after the preliminary 1 2 . . . cxd4 13 cxd4, with counter­ play along the open c-file . Now White immediately locks the centre and the bishop must lose two tempi to get to d7, a square to which it now heads. It has been said that a loss of time has no significance in closed positions. Of course, it is more costly in open positions, but even in positions like this one it should not be wasted." (My italics.) The game continued 13 d5 .i c8 14 li:J fl .i d7 15 b3.

Again let's listen to Karpov: " With the idea of restraining the black knight. In many openings, Black generally has some difficulty developing a particular piece ; for example, Black's "problem" bishop in the French Defence or the Benoni. In our game we have the "disgraced Spanish knight" , looking for a place to go. This move deprives him of c4, and if

18

How to Be a Complete Tournament Player

Black advances his c-pawn, then b3-b4 drives the knight back to b7, where it also has no good prospects. (A similar idea associated with the queen's knight is found in the Yugoslav Variation of the King's Indian Defence - it is not a new idea.)" Do note the perceptive freshness associated with the comment about restraining the queen's knight. This is a very important factor in the variations where White closes the centre with d5 . This basic understanding allows us to follow much better a whole series of Karpov games, e.g. Karpov-U nzicker, Nice 1974 ( 1 2 . . . lbc6 13 d5; Game 37) and Karpov-U nzicker, Milan 1975 ( 1 2 . . . .i.d7 13 lbfl llfe8 14 d5; Game 42). The theme through much of the coming play is that Black's QN can never find a comfortable home, and in fact when Black is defending the queenside the QN often gets in the way. BUT, but, but - despite all of the above, do not accept what grandmasters do just on faith alone. Check to make sure that it makes real chess sense. Without any questions, GMs do understand chess principles perfectly. Yet by far the bulk of what could be called ··aM errors" occur because we think we have discovered an exception to the principles. It is apparently a human trait to look for exceptions to normal rules and regulations. In chess, exceptions to principles occur far less frequently than we in our enthusiasm tend to think. Here I would like to give the following two examples. In the Yugoslav Attack against the Sicilian Dragon (I e4 cS 2 lbf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 lbxd4 lbf6 S lbc3 g6 6 .i.e3 .i.g7 7 f3 lbc6 8 'ft' d2 0- 0), White started scoring heavily from early 1956 onwards with the move 9 .i.c4.

19

Starting to Think Like a Grandmaster

Black tried a whole series of defences: 9 ... lb xd4 10 �xd4 �e6, 9 ... a6, 9 ... lba5, 9 . . . lbd7 followed by . . . lbb6, 9 . . . a5 - all to no avail. It was only after about six years of devastation that interest turned to 9 i.d7. Isn't that really by far the most logical 9th move? Black completes the development of his minor pieces in a normal way, retains good central influence and gets ready for counterplay along the half-open c-file. But it was only the singular lack of success with the other moves that led to the interest in 9 . . . �d7. Apparently Black players were so mes­ merised by the power of the �c4 that they wanted to neutralise it as quickly as possible. Sound principles of development were relegated to a subordinate role. The second example comes from the Polugayevsky Variation of the Sicilian Najdorf. In the game Bronstein-Polugayevsky, USSR Championship 1961, after the normal 1 e4 c5 2 lLlf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 lbxd4 lbf6 5 lbc3 a6 6 �g5 e6 7 f4 b5 8 e5 dxe5 9 fxe5 'i¥c7 10 exf6 'ti' e5+ 11 �e2 1!fxg5, Bronstein surprised his opponent with the new 12 1!fd3. ...

At the board Polugayevsky decided on the response 1 2 . . . l!¥h4+ 1 3 g3 1Wxf6 and equalised easily enough . However, subsequently it was found that White can gain the advantage with 14 llfl 'ti'e5 1 5 0-0-0 lla7 1 6 lbf3 ! . This put a big cloud over the whole variation for about ten years. It was only in 1 973 that Polugayevsky himself discovered that Black is perfectly fine if he plays the immediate 12 ... Wxf6, since then after 13 li[fl 1!Ve5 14 0-0-0 lla7 15 lbf3 Black has 15 .. . Wf4+ ( 1 6 lbd2 1!fe5; 16 'i!lb l lld7). Polugayevsky's comment in this connection is very interesting also:

20

How to Be a Complete Tournament Player

"Such is the unusual logic of chess. I am convinced that if the position after White's 1 2th move were shown to a beginner, he would without thinking play 12 . . . 'it'xf6. Black in fact wins a pawn,and in doing so does not spoil his pawn formation ! But for us to reach this truth, more than ten years, alas, was required! " Start thinking like grandmasters - but never forget about the unalterable basic principles of chess !

Questions and Answers Question 1 Evaluate the position reached after the following moves: 1 e4 e5 2 lbf3 lbc6 3 .i b5 a6 4 .b 4 d6 5 c3 .i d7 6 d4 lbge7 7 .i b3 h6 S 0-0 lbg6 9 lbbd2 .i e7 10 lbc4 .i g5 1 1 lbe3 .i xe3 12 -'.xe3 0-0 13 h3 lieS 14 lbh2 �e7 15 dxe5 dxe5. Who, if anyone, is better? Give reasons. If you were White, how would you continue?

Answer Black has full equality. White can't hope to exploit, in the forseeable future, d5 because he has the wrong piece on e3 (the QB instead of a N) and his only remaining knight is offside o n h2. On the other hand Black has completed his development in a sound way and has nothing to fear. White has two reasonable approaches. He can try to hold on to the bishop pair with 16 .i c2 lba5 17 b3 in the hope of making some use of it later on. Or he can forget about saving the KB from an exchange and work to improve the positioning of his pieces. For this, 16 lbf3 or 16 lie1 followed by 1 7 lbfl and 1S lbg3 makes sense. The above position arose in F ischer-Pachman, Mar del Plata 1959. Fischer chose the unmotivated attacking move 16 'ifb 5?, quickly got the worse of it after 16 ... lba5! 1 7 .i c2 lbc4 1 S .i c 1 lbf4 and lost in 56 moves. Question 2 Compare the Ruy Lopez position of Section 4 (diagram p. 17) with the one resulting after 1 e4 e5 2 lbf3 lbc6 3 -'.b5 a6 4 -'.a4 lbf6 5 0-0 -'.e7 6 lie1 b5 7 -'.b3 d6 S c3 0-0 9 h3 eb bS 10 d4 lbbd7 1 1 lbbd2 -'.b7 12 .i c2 lieS 13 lbfl � 14 lbg3 g6 15 a4 c5 16 d5 c4. In which position is Black better off? Give reasons.

21

Starting to Thi nk Like a Grandmaster

An swer Black is much better off in the above position. The two reasons are: ( 1 ) His kingside forces have been favourably regrouped (the secondary reason) and (2) the QN, located centrally on d7 , has a much more favourable location than on aS (the primary reason). The net result is that in the second position Black just has the normal slight disadvantage after the opening. White's advantage derives from the space advantage due to the pawn on dS. Question 3 Near the end of Section 4 Karpov refers in a parenthetical remark to the misplaced Black QN on aS in the Yugoslav Variation of the King's Indian Defence. The type of position that he is referring to is the following one : 1 d4ltJ f6 2 c4 g6 3ltJ c3 .i g7 4ltJ f3 d6 5 g3 0-0 6 .i g2 c5 7 0-0ltJ c6 8 d5 ltJ a5 9ltJ d2 a6 10 'it' c2 JibS 11 b3 b5 12 .i b2. What are the features of the position which could be expected to lead to some advantage for White? What should be Black's approach to try to overcome White's existing advantages? 'Can you suggest a logical move-by-move variation for Black?

An swer White has a clear central advantage because of the dS pawn. Moreover, unless the ltJa5 can be activated, Black will be saddled with an offside minor piece. In particular, if White is able to start an attack on the kingside then Black's chances for a successful defence are poor because the QN will not be helping out. A large number of GM games have shown that Black cannot afford "to do nothing" about the above two factors by just relying on prospects along the open b-file. A characteristic example is W.Addison -E.Medn is, US Championship 1962163: 12 ... .i d7 1 3 lltb 1 'it' c7?! 14ltJ ce4!ltJ xe4?! 15 .i xe4 .i xb2 16 :!I xb2 bxc4 17 bxc4! Jixb2 18 'iV xb2 :!I b8 19 \!t' c3 llb4 20 a3 :!I b7 21 h4 h5 22 .i c2! tib6 23 :!I b1 'it' d8 24 llel ! 'if b6 25 .i d3! 't!V d8 26 f4 .i g4 27 :!I fl � 6 28 f5 gxf5 29 .i xf5 .i xf5 30 Jixf5 f6 31 :!I xh5 csW8 32 'it' d3 �e8 33 Jih8+ Black resign s. The unpleasant experiences with such passivity led to the conclusion that Black must aim for active play. However, it was many years before the right specifics were discovered. The overall approach must be to make use of the pressure that the ltJa5 applies against c4 to gain some central space to neutralise White's advantage there. These objectives are achieved by (e.g.) the following well-researched variation: 12 bxc4 13 •..

22

How to Be a Complete Tournament Player

bxc4 i.h6! 14 f4 e5! 15 dxe6 i.xe6 16 tD d5 Itxb2! 1 7 't!¥ xb2 i.g7 18 'ft' c2 tD xd5 1 9 cxd5 i.xa1 20 nxa1 'ti'f6! 21 litd1 'ti'd4+ 22 Wh1 .if S with equality , Kir.Georgiev-Piket, Amsterdam /I 1985.

3

How To Select Your Opening Repertoire

The game of chess starts with the opening. Obviously, you must have at least adequate knowledge about this phase. Of course, for ultimate success in chess it is impossible to do without a knowledge of endgame principles and middlegame strategy and tactics. Still, first things should come first and it is clearly advantageous to start offthe game on the right foot. Everyone - whether a promising youngster or an experienced oldster - should establish a sound and appropriate opening repertoire. There are two parts to this. The first is the selection of the particular openings and variations/sub-variations. The second - and exceedingly important also - is the establishment of the most exact move order for achieving your desired variation. This very important topic will be covered in detail in the next chapter. The opening repertoire that you select must agree with your chess interests, playing style and work habits. If you enjoy sharp tactics, have the time and interest to follow opening theory developments worldwide, possess an excellent memory and like doing complicated independent analysis - then the " Fischer b-pawn" variation in the Najdorf Sicilian (1 e4 cS 2 lt:Jf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 lbxd4 lbf6 S lbc3 a6 6 .tgS e6 7 f4 1Wb6) is for you, whether with White or Black ! If main line strategic play is your interest, then for either White or Black, you will feel comfortable in the Orthodox Defence of the Queen's Gambit Declined (1 d4 dS 2 c4 e6 3 lbc3 lbf6 4 lbf3 .te7 S .tgS). But someone who, though strategically inclined, prefers to be on less analysed ground, will choose as White in the QGD S .tf4 rather than the standard 5 .tg5 . Greatest success will come when one is true to oneself. If there is a choice between playing something which you like and something which you dislike but feel that your oppo­ nent will dislike even more, stick to your likes! Your practical results will improve when you play what you know, like and have confidence in. As a very broad generalisation it can be stated that those who like 23

24

How to Be a Complete Tournament Player

sharp tactics will do better with 1 e4 openings, whereas strategists should choose closed openings (1 d4, 1 c4, 1 ltJf3). However, also important is to choose the particular variations or sub-variations that agree with you. There are innumerable strategically sound openings in the open games "book" and many ways of playing closed openings sharply. As one example, consider the repertoire of the long time American champion Frank J. Marshall, one of the greatest attacking players in history. Though his favourite first move was 1 d4, it was no handicap in having the fur start to fly soon thereafter. It may be of interest to compare the evolution of the opening repertoire with the White pieces of World Champions Anatoly Karpov and Garry Kasparov. Kasparov became famous as an attacking player who invariably opened with 1 e4. Yet even well before his twentieth birthday he had mostly switched over to 1 d4. When I asked him in London in December of 1983 "Why", his response was: "I have found that after 1 d4 there are more opportunities for richer play". Karpov also started out with 1 e4 and remained true to it well into the 1980s. Yet the variations that he chose were invariably strategic in nature. When in an interview in early 1 989 Karpov was questioned as to whether he prefers open or closed positions, he replied: ''I like I e4 very much, but my results are better with I d4". This makes abundant sense to me since deep strategy has always been Karpov's special strength. At this point let us take a look at a very important practical question. It deals with how many defences (variations, openings) a player should have both for White and Black. Usually it is phrased something like: "For Black (or for White) how well should I know one opening before I start learning another?". To me this kind of question sounds like "Should I know one variation well or two variations poorly?". My answer is always on the side of quality : it is much much more important to know one opening well than two (or ten ! ) poorly. Still, it is not enough for the aspiring player just to play one variation. There are two reasons for this: ( 1 ) This makes it much too easy for the opponent to prepare for you. One of the major objectives of successful opening play is to try to surprise your opponent. Conversely, you don't want to be put in the position where it is you who is always unpleasantly surprised. (2) Periodically a variation runs into a theoretical problem and this then leaves you without a reliable opening. Therefore once you know your present opening well enough, it is time

How to Select Your Opening Repertoire

25

to expand your repertoire. There are three approaches to doing this: ( 1 ) Learn a completely new opening system. If for instance, your response to 1 e4 is the French Defence (1 ... e6), you now choose to also play 1 ... e5. Or if you respond to 1 d4 with 1 ... d5, you now decide also to play the Grtinfeld Defence (1 d4 lLlf6 2 c4 g6 3 lLlc3 d5). The advantage of such an approach is that by learning something new you are considerably increasing your overall chess knowledge. We can perhaps call this a "mind-stretching" approach. Of course, the disadvantage is very obvious: a tremendous amount of time and effort is required since none of your previous knowledge is directly applicable. But even here there are ways to save study-time. For instance , currently there is much less to be known about the Caro-Kann Defence (1 e4 c6) than about the 1 e4 e5 complex and thus those who select the Caro-Kann have much less studying to do than those who select 1 .. e5 . (2) Learn a sister opening. An important example of this approach is for those w ho play the King's I ndian Defence against 1 d4 (1 d4 lLlf6 2 c4 g6 followed by . . �g7 and . d6) to select the Pirc against 1 e4 (1 e4 d6 2 d4 lLlf6 3 lLlc3 g6) or of course vice versa. The actual learning of the variations will be quite different, but there are two clear advantages: ( 1 ) it will be easier to do because you already understand the general idea behind the opening, and (2) because you understand the basic approach of the opening system, your early practical play will more likely be more successful. An even closer sister opening pair is the Pirc and the Modern ( 1 e4 g6 2 d4 i.g7). There are even a number of transpositional possibilities that turn the Modern into the Pirc. (3) Learn an adjunct variation. Let us assume that you play the Najdorf Variation in the Sicilian (1 e4 c5 2 lLlf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 lLlxd4 lLlf6 5 lLlc3 a6) as your defence to 1 e4. This means that of necessity you have to know how to handle all of the move 2 variants for White (including the Closed Variation), how to play against 3 i.bS+, how to cope with 4 'fi'xd4 (instead of 4 lLlxd4) etc. If you decide to also play the Dragon Variation (5 ... g6), you don't have to learn anything else up to here. All that you have to do is to learn the specifics of the Dragon. This is a tremendous time-saver because you are already utilising perhaps up to 113 of your Sicilian knowledge. This kind of approach is probably not sufficient for the young hotshot who wants to become a super-grandmaster with a 2600 Elo rating. But it is very appropriate for the professional person whose time is rather limited. .

.

..

26

How to Be a Complete Tournament Player

Let me now share with you the thinking and approach that I used in the early 1970s to expand my opening repertoire against l d4. Thanks to Bobby Fischer, in late 1972 it was possible for me to become a full-time chess professional. Up to then against 1 d4 I played both the King's Indian and the Nimzo-Indian/Queen's Indian complex (1 d4 lL!f6 2 c4 e6 3 lL!c3 .i.b4 or 3 lL!f3 b6). I decided that for good chess reasons I needed another defence. After careful deliberation I decided on the Slav Defence ( 1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6) because it combined basic solidity with chances for counterplay. But a further major question was what to play against White's main line: 1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 lL!f3 lL!f6 4 lL!c3 dxc4 5 a4.

The "main main line" has Black playing 5 . .. .i.f5, but I was reluctant to start with this because there was a lot to know here and I was afraid that my opponents would know more than I. So I selected the less usual 5 ... .i,g4 and h ad excellent success with it. B ut around 1976 it became very popular and major improvements were found for White. So starting in 1 977 I switched to 5 ... lL!a6, an "old" move by Smyslov, and again had excellent results. Again this soon became very popular and White found many improvements. Thus finally (in 1 980) I also learned the main line 5 ... .i.f5 variations. But by then, this was all I had to learn: all the byways and by-byways were already clear. So now I play all three moves (5 ... .i.g4, 5 ... lL!a6, 5 . . . .i.f5) - depending on my opponent and the latest up­ to-date theoretical status of each move. Let us now actually select a broad opening repertoire, one encompassing both open and closed systems. Assume that you are White, don't mind some opening study, like clear strategic positions and feel

How to S elect Your Opening Repertoire

27

much more comfortable with the queens off the board. A suggested list is the following one, which I have called "Opening Repertoire for the Sensible Strategic Player". A comprehensive discussion of these variations and the endgames that result from them form the core of my book From the Opening into the Endgame. Suggested Opening Repertoire for the Sensible Strategic Player 1 . Ruy Lopez: Exchange Variation 1 e4 e5 2 lbf3 lbc6 3 i.b5 a6 4 i.xc6 dxc6 5 0-0! f6 6 d4 exd4 7 lbxd4 c5 8 lbb3 1Vxd1 9 li[xd1 2. Sicilian Defence: Dragon Variation

1 e4 c5 2 lbf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 lbxd4 ll:lf6 5 lbc3 g6 6 .ie3 .ig7 7 f3 lbc6 8 '@d2 0-0 9 g4 lbxd4 10 .ixd4 .ie6 1 1 0-0-0 't!Va5 12 'ittb 1 l:[fc8 13 a3 l:[ab8 14 g5! lbh5 15 ll:ld5! 't!Vxd2 16 nxd2 3. Sicilian Defence: Accelerated Dragon 1 e4 c5 2 lbf3 lbc6 3 d4 cxd4 4 ll:lxd4 g6 5 c4 ll:lf6 6 lbc3 ll:lxd4 7 "@xd4 d6 8 .ig5! .ig7 9 f3! 0-0 10 '@d2 .ie6 11 net 'ifa5 12 b3 li[fc8 13 i.e2 a6 14 lba4! 1!Vxd2+ 15 'ittxd2 4. French Defence: Tarrasch Variation 1 e4 e6 2 d4 d5 3 lbd2 c5 4 exd5 exd5 5 i.b5+ i.d7 6 't!Ve2+ '@e7 7 i.xd7+ lbxd7 8 dxc5 5. Pirc Defence: Normal Variation 1 e4 d6 2 d4 lLlf6 3 lbc3 g6 4 lbf3 i.g7 5 .ie2 0-0 6 0-0 .tg4 7 .ie3 lbc6 8 '@d2 e5 9 dxe5 ! dxe5 10 l:[adl 6. Modern Defence: Averbakh Variation 1 e4 g6 2 d4 .ig7 3 c4 d6 4 lbc3 e5 5 dxe5! dxe5 6 '@xd8+ 'ittxd8 7 f4! 7. King's Indian Defence: Normal Variation 1 d4 ll:lf6 2 c4 g6 3 lDc3 i.g7 4 e4 d6 5 lbf3 0-0 6 i.e2 e5 7 dxe5! dxe5 8 '@xd8 nxd8 9 i.g5!

28

How to Be a Complete Tournament Player

8. Gri.infeld Defence: Modern Exchange Variation 1 d4 lbf6 2 c4 g6 3 lbc3 dS 4 cxd5 lbxd5 5 e4 lbxc3 6 bxc3 c5 7 lbf3 .i_g7 8 .i.e3 followed by 9 net 9. Queen's Indian Defence: Normal Variation 1 d4 lbf6 2 c4 e6 3 lbf3 b6 4 g3 .i.b7 5 .i.g2 .i.e7 6 0-0 0-0 7 lbc3 lbe4 8 lbxe4 .i.xe4 9 ll:\h4 .i.xg2 10 ll:\xg2 1 0. English/Reti Opening: Mutual Double Fianchetto 1 c4 c5 2 lbf3 lbf6 3 g3 b6 4 .i.g2 -'.b7 5 0-0 g6 6 b3 .i.g7 7 .i.b2 0-0 8 ll:\c3 d5 9 lbxd5! lbxd5 10 .i.xg7 Wxg7 11 cxd5 'fi'xd5 12 d4! cxd4 13 "it'xd4+ ti'xd4 14 lbxd4 .i.xg2 15 Wxg2 1 1 . English Opening: Andersson-Book Line 1 c4 lbf6 2 lbc3 d5 3 cxd5 lbxd5 4 lbf3 g6 5 e4 ll:\xc3 6 dxc3 ti'xd1 + 7 Wxd1

Questions and Answers Question 1 What should be the opening repertoire for White of former World Champions Tigran Petrosian and Mikhail Tal?

Answer The late GM Petrosian was a consummate manoeuvring strategist. There is no question in my mind that he should always have opened with the closed complex (1 d4, 1 c4, 1 lbf3). I am not aware of a single tournament game where he played 1 e4 after becoming a grandmaster. GM Tal - as he has become older - has adopted a "play everything" approach: 1 e4, 1 d4, 1 c4, 1 lbf3. Yet my strongly felt opinion is that he should mostly stick to 1 e4 - that is where he truly is world champion strength. When playing closed systems, he is "only" a very strong grandmaster. Question 2 You are successfully playing the Caro-Kann Defence ( 1 e4 c6 2 ci4 d5). What is a logical sister opening against 1 d4?

How to S elect Your Opening Repertoire

29

Answer I suggest playing the Slav Defence ( 1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6), because there are many strategic similarities: - If White exchanges pawns in the centre, then after . . . cxd5 Black's central pawn formation is the same in both defences. - If White does not exchange in the centre, then in the main line variations, Black will himself have to exchange and play . . . dxc4. This again will lead to the same central pawn formation for Black as in the Caro-Kann. - Because Black's e-pawn is not moved in the early play, Black is able to develop the QB via its original diagonal. - In the main line variations Black will have somewhat less central space. However, his position will be inherently sound and solid. Any precipitous attacks by White will give Black excellent prospects for successful counterplay. Of course, the specific variations of the Caro-Kann and Slav are quite different. However, Black's central pawn structure is often the same, the QB is developed similarly, and the overall strategic approach the same. Those knowing how to handle the Caro-Kann for Black will have an excellent feel for handling the variations of the Slav Defence. Question 3 What would be an adjunct variation to 1 e4 c6 2 d4 d5 3 lt:Jc3 dxe4 4 lt:Jxe4 �f5?

Answer There are two possibilities: 4 ... ltld7 and 4 ... ltlf6. In either case Black is playing a variation which in its specifics is completely different from 4 . . . �f5 . Yet Black is saving a very considerable amount of learning time - I estimate about 50% - when compared to learning a new opening. That is because he/she is already familiar with all the important move 2 variants (2 d3 and 2 ltlc3 d5 3 lt:Jf3) as well as the very important alter­ natives for White on move 3: 3 exd5 cxd5 4 c4 or 4 �d3 and 3 e5 �f5 4 lt:Jc3 followed by the rapid advance of the kingside pawns.

4

Move Orders in the Opening the Mod ern Ma ster' s Tool

A long time ago the chess player had it both easier and simpler. This was so because there was only one correct way and this was well known. All knowledgeable players of 1 00- 1 50 years ago knew that in order to win you had to attack as soon as possible. Therefore 1 e4 was "obviously" the only correct move for White and the equally open and developing 1 . . . e5 was the only correct response, with mutual attacks forming as quickly and directly as p ossible. In the 1920s and the 1930s by far the strongest move was considered to be 1 d4 and the best reply 1 . . . d5. But now things are much more difficult: we know that a tremendous number of openings, their variations and sub-variations are all equally good. It is absolutely impossible to know and play everything. But how can you ensure that you reach the opening with its sub-variation that you know and like best, while preventing your opponent from steering the game into something that you are u ncomfortable in? The modern master's tool for this is the sophisticated use of move orders and this new science is the most important single development in current opening theory. The establishment of the most exact move order for achieving your desired variation is an absolute pre-requisite for successful opening play. You must be able to handle a wide variety of move orders during the first 5-6 moves - otherwise you'll find yourself "tricked'' time and time again. The champion opening moves for maximum flexibility and deviousness are 1 c4 and 1 ltlf3 , a fact that is well recognised on the current chess scene. However, a considerable amount of perceptive transpositions can also occur from 1 e4 and 1 d4 openings and I shall look at some of these first. (The Encyclopedia of Chess Openings series is absolutely outstanding for the wealth of valuable material that it presents. Yet there is a practical problem in applying its variations to actual play: only one move order is given to reach each variation. But what if the opponent doesn't cooperate?) 30

Move Orders in the Opening - the Modern Master's Tool

31

1 e4 First of all, I want to show what I consider grotesque examples of how easily Black can wind up in I e4 openings unless he is careful from the very first move onwards. Thus, if Black responds to 1 f4 with From's Countergambit (1 . . . e5), White by playing 2 e4 transposes into the King's Gambit; if Black plays the immediate 1 ... c5 against White's 1 lt::l f3, he risks a standard Sicilian after 2 e4; after 1 c4, B lack players aiming for a Slav Defence with 1 . .. c6 (2 d4 d5) can be sabotaged with 2 e4, bringing about a Caro-Kann, with the most likely variation being the Panov Attack (2 . d5 3 exd5 cxd5 4 d4). Of course, objectively speaking there is nothing wrong with any of these openings for Black - but he had better be ready to face them! Most of the time your emphasis should be on ensuring that you achieve the variation/sub-variation desired. Assume that you like to defend the Hanham Variation of Philidor's Defence (1 e4 e5 2 li::l f3 d6 3 d4 li::ld7). Unfortu nately modern theory has demonstrated that after 4 �c4! Black has no fully satisfactory continuation, with the lesser evil being the clearly inferior endgame after 4 ... c6 5 0-0 �e7 6 dxe5! dxe5 (6 . . . lLlxe5? 7 lLlxe5 dxe5 8 \i'h5!) 7 lLlg5! �xg5 8 WitS g6 9 \i'xg5 !Vxg5 t O �xg5. Therefore Black must first play 3 . . . lLlf6 (and know how to handle 4 dxe5 lLlxe4 5 !Vd5) and only after 4 lLlc3, 4 ... lLlbd7. Then Black reaches the satisfactory main lines of the Hanham. Grandmaster Bent Larsen likes the Vienna variation resulting after 1 e4 e5 2 lLlc3 lLlf6 3 �c4 lLlc6 4 d3. Yet there is a big practical problem on the way to reaching it: Black can play the sharp 3 . lLlxe4! 4 'Wh5 lLld6 5 �b3 lLlc6, forcing very sharp and generally unclear complications onto White after 6 lLlb5 g6 7 "t!¥f3 f5 8 't!fd5 We7 9 lLlxc7+ �8 10 lLlxa8 b6. ..

.

.

32

How to Be a Complete Tournament Player

This is absolutely contrary to the sophisticated strategical game that Larsen is looking forward to in this variation. Therefore he starts off as with the Bishop's Opening - 2 .tc4 and after 2 ... lLJf6 3 d3 lL!c6 transposes into what he wants with 4 lL!c3. The main lines in the Sicilian start with 1 e4 cS 2 lL!f3 followed by 3 d4. Yet often, particularly after 2 . . . d6, White first plays 3 lL!c3. If Black is planning the Dragon then 3 . . . g6 is without fault, or if he plans systems with ... d6/ lbc6 then 3 ... lbc6 is foolproof. But what should he play now if he wants to reach the Najdorf? If now 3 ... lL!f6, White can change the complexion of the game with 4 eS; if 3 ... a6, White can transpose into a Closed Sicilian with 4 g3 - a system used by GM Biyiasas, in which White tries to show that 3 . . . a6 amounts to a lost tempo. Objectively speaking, Black is OK in either of these cases, yet the character of the play is vastly different from the anticipated Najdorf. Generally the immediate 2 lL!c3 in the Sicilian is the initiation of the Closed System (3 g3), with the purpose of White's second move being to prevent the immediate liberation of Black's position via an early ... d5. However, 2 lL!c3 can also be used for transpositional purposes. As already mentioned earlier, White can follow up with 3 lbf3. Some players even choose the eccentric looking 3 lL!ge2 - particularly if Black has played 2 . . d6. White's purpose usually is just to get Black thinking, after which White simply transposes into main lines with 4 d4. H owever, White can also continue with the immediate fianchetto 4 g3, after which the game can lead to either open or closed play - depending on whether White can/wants to play d4. Even though 2 lL!c3 serves a valid purpose in the Closed Variation, it also has a clear demerit: the d4 square goes over to Black. Therefore some White players try to do without it and play the immediate 2 g3. If Black continues routinely (e.g. 2 ... g6 3 .i.g2 .i.g7 4 lL!e2 lL!c6), White can achieve his immediate central and development goals with S c3!. Not that this guarantees White the advantage, but Black would need to continue very perceptively, as otherwise he can easily wind up in a situation with no prospects. I think that Black should immediately take the bull by the horns (after 2 g3) and play the thematic 2 ... dS!. The unbalanced position that results after 3 exdS 't!fxdS 4 lL!f3 .i.g4! S .i.g2 'i¥e6+ 6 cMt lL!c6 is fully satisfactory for Black. Do remember that there is always a good reason for any move order that GMs choose! Let us consider the following two move orders in the Normal Variation of the Pirc Defence (1 e4 d6 2 d4 lL!f6 3 lbc3 g6 4 lbf3 -

.

Move O rders in the Opening - the Modem Master's Tool

33

.tg7): ( I ) 5 .te2 0-0 6 h3 and (2) 5 h3. Both of these move orders appear in games of "less accomplished players", yet GMs only use the second (5 h3) method. The point is that after 5 h3 0-0 6 .te3! c6 7 a4 .!t:Jbd7 8 aS e5?! 9 dxe5 dxe5 10 .tc4!

White has saved a whole tempo compared to the variations where he first plays i.e2 and then .tc4. By comparison, 6 h3 after 5 .te2 has no perceptive point at all - it is just "an h3 move".

d4 If White is the direct, main line type - opening with I d4 followed by 2 c4 - then the mutual opportunities for move transpositions are slight. Yet they do exist. A simple example is from Spassky-Fischer, 3rd match game 1 972 : 1 d4 .!Df6 2 c4 e6 3 .!Df3 (With a two-point lead, Spassky avoids the sharper 3 lbc3 of Game I and is content to play against the Queen's Indian after 3 . . . b6 or the QGD after 3 . . . d5 . But . . . ) 3 c5!? and Spassky - no doubt surprised - accepted the challenge to enter the Benoni with 4 d5. However, Fischer was excellently prepared for this and won in convincing style on move 4 1 . The opportunities for transposition increase significantly when White eschews 2 c4. Let's assume that after 1 lt:Jf6 he plays the standard enough 2 lt:Jf3. H ow should Black respond? Of course, he can play 2 . . . d5, but what if he wants something which unbalances the game more yet e6 is obvious enough. Black without the fianchetto of his KB? So 2 looks forward to the Queen's Indian after 3 c4 b6 and in particular the presently popular 4 g3 .ta6 variation. But White plays the modest 1

...

...

..•

J4

How to Be a Complete Tournament Player

looking 3 g3. Without a c4 for White, the . . . i.a6 idea for Black is pointless, so that Black instead of the Queen's Indian Defence, now chooses to transpose into the Catalan with 3 ... d5. Against the standard Catalan ( I d4 lLlf6 2 c4 e6 3 g3 d5 4 i.g2 or 4 lLlf3) Black likes the sharp 4 . . . dxc4, a variation which was Anatoly Karpov's favourite in the early 1970s. Black now anticipates 4 c4 dxc4, yet White fails to oblige and continues 4 i.g2, leaving Black nothing better than 4 ... i.e7 5 0-0 0-0 and only now does White play 6 c4. Black's choices in the Catalan have been severely reduced and are only 6 . .. lLlbd7, keeping the position closed, or 6 ... dxc4. Though each of these moves is playable, the variations are distinctly different from those of 4 . . . dxc4 and unless Black knows them well, he will experience real difficulties. Yugoslav GM Sahovic used this move order against me at Nis 1 977 and left me very unhappy since I was prevented from sharpening the opening play under my terms. To do so what should Black play after 2 lt:lf3 e6 3 g3? There .is no simple answer, but one possibility worth serious consideration is the unbalancing 3 b5!?, something tried, for example, by Bronstein and Miles. Let's now assume that Black always plays the King's Indian. White opens with 1 d4 and after 1 lLlf6 Black is happy. Yet White now plays 2 g6 3 i.g2 i.g7 g3. Can Black obtain the KID after this? Let's see: 2 (All's well), but now comes 4 e4! d6 5 lt:lc3! 0-0 6 lt:lge2 and White has transposed into a currently well-thought-of variation against the Pirc. Of course, Black can get a Grtinfeld with 3 . . . d5 or can aim for Benoni positions with 2 . . . c5 or Catalan with 2 . . . d5 - but he is prevented from the King's Indian Defence. What I particularly want to emphasise in connection with the last two examples is the danger of being just a single defence or single variation player. If a perceptive White knows this, by using the proper move order he can prevent you from achieving your goal. In such cases, you must be able to have a satisfactory variation to "fall back" on. •..

...

•..

In the previous examples, the opportunity for move transpositions came quite early. Yet the thinking player will always be on the look-out for a possible favourable moment - no matter how late in the opening this could be. A marvellous example of how a top GM does this is shown from the game J.Hjartarson-R.Byrne, Reykjavik 1 982. The game opened with a variation of the Nimzo-lndian which has long been part of GM Byrne's repertoire: 1 d4 lLlf6 2 c4 e6 3 lt:lc3 i.b4 4 e3 0-0 5 i.d3 c5 6 lt:lf3 d5 7 0-0 lLlc6 8 a3 i.xc3 9 bxc3 't!fc7 10 cxd5 exd5 1 1 lLlh4 lt:le7 12 g3.

Move Orders in the Opening - the Modern Master's Tool

35

The usual/normal move - as given in opening books - is the immediate 12 . . . c4. But n ote that this "forces" White to play his bishop to the correct diagonal/square: .ic2 or .ib l . Therefore Byrne first played 12 ... .ih3! 13 lii:e 1 and only then 13 ... c4. This gave White a choice. He thought a while and instead of the correct 14 .ic2 ;!;; , selected the inferior 14 .iO?. Black thus was able to exchange off his strategically inferior bishop with 14 ... .txn 15 :ii xfi and already had the edge after 15 ... lLle4 16 .ib2 r5 + and won in 55 moves.

1 c4 True or false: " 1 c4 is the English Opening"? Well, the correct answer is both. About half the games are truly English and the other half transpose, usually of course into 1 d4 openings. The English ( 1 c4) is used almost routinely by some GMs as a method of getting their variations of Queen's Pawn games, while at the same time preventing their opponents from achieving theirs. If Black responds with 1 .. . e5 , then the chances are exceedingly high that the result will be the most thematic main lines of the English. But any other response leaves lots of opportunities for transposition and I shall now discuss a cross-section of the important possibilities. If Black responds with 1 ... c5, he must watch out that he doesn't get involuntarily transposed into the Maroczy Bind variation against the Sicilian Defence's Accelerated Dragon: 2 lLlf3 g6 3 e4! lLlc6 4 d4! cxd4 5 lLlxd4 (the "normal" move order here being 1 e4 c5 2 lLlf3 lLlc6 3 d4 cxd4 4 lt:lxd4 g6 5 c4). Many famous strategists, including GMs Portisch and

36

How to Be a Complete Tournament Player

Smejkal, love this position for White, but of course would never "risk" playing 1 e4 to try to achieve this. So they play 1 c4 and have their eyes open for the above transposition. If Black doesn't want to allow this, he must hold off playing 1 . . . c5 and first play 1 g6 and 2 .ig7. But of course White can then easily ensure himself a Queen's Pawn opening by playing d4 on either the second or third move. Of course, most of the transpositions are much less drastic and consist of reaching a desired Queen's Pawn position. Many GMs (including me) like the so-called Main Line position in the Catalan which results after 1 d4 lLlf6 2 c4 e6 3 g3 d5 4 .ig2 .ie7 5 lLlf3 0-0 6 0-0. H owever, in this normal move order Black has the option of playing 4 ... dxc4, a variation - which as I pointed out earlier - was Karpov's preferred method against the Catalan in the early 1970s. It is my opinion that the early . . . dxc4 capture gives Black rather comfortable play if White on his part has played an early d4. Therefore I delay d4 as follows: 1 c4 lLlf6 2 lLlf3 e6 3 g3 d5 4 .ig2 .ie7 5 0-0 0-0 and only now do I play 6 d4 reaching the desired position, but without having to "worry" about an early . . . dxc4. Many players as White like to play against the Tarrasch Defence to the Queen's Gambit Declined by fianchettoing the king's bishop: 1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6 3 lL!c3 c5 4 cxd5 exd5 5 lLlf3 lLlc6 6 g3. I find this position pleasant to play for White, but do not want to "risk" 1 d4 because I have little interest in coping with the, to me, static-looking variations of the Orthodox defences to the Queen's Gambit Declined. The typical solution: start off with 1 c4 and hope to transpose! This is how White reached the desired position in Mednis-Padevsky, Kragujevac 1977: 1 c4 c5 2 lL!f3 lL!f6 3 lL!c3 e6 4 g3 d5 5 cxd5 exd5 6 d4 lL!c6 7 .ig2 .ie7 8 0-0 0-0 9 .ig5 ...

.•.

-

Move Orders in the Opening - the Modern Master's Tool

37

- and White, happy to get what h e wanted, went o n t o win in good style in 25 moves. Very often 1 c4 is used to prevent a whole slew of Queen's Pawn defences. Do you like to play the Nimzo-Indian/Queen's Indian complex? You'll never have a chance against East German GM Wolfgang Uhlmann! Uhlmann's opening move order invariably is 1 c4 ltJf6 2 ltJc3 e6 3 ltJf3. Now 3 ... b6 allows 4 e4!, whereas 3 ... i.b4 is nowhere as annoying as the Nimzo-Indian since there is no pin and no d­ pawn to attack and White obtains a nice, risk-free position after 4 @c2. Therefore, Black's most normal reaction in the centre is 3 . . . d5, which leads after White's 4 d4 to the Queen's Gambit Declined. There is absolutely no disadvantage to Uhlmann's way of reaching the Queen's Gambit Declined, apart from the very small factor that with the early development of ltJf3, the Exchange Variation (cxd5) is now rather harmless. 1 c4 is also a favourite tool of those who dread having to play against the Griinfeld Defence ( 1 d4 ltJf6 2 c4 g6 3 ltJc3 d5). After 1 ... ltJf6 2 ltJc3 d5 3 cxd5 ltJxd5 White has two logical choices: ( 1 ) A pure English with 4 g3 g6 5 .ig2, or (2) Aiming for a slightly favourable endgame with 4 ltJf3 g6 5 e4! lbxc3 6 dxc3!. Black players who enjoy the typical middlegame complications of the Griinfeld will usually feel very uncomfortable in this endgame. If Black wants to respond with the most flexible 1 ... g6, White can stop all "Griinfeld dreams" with 2 e4!. Usually this leads to King's I ndians after an early d4. But do note that 2 ... c5 3 ltJf3, followed by 4 d4 will again transpose to the Accelerated Dragon. The only slight risk in playing 2 e4 is that White must have sufficient theoretical knowledge to handle the unusual variations which result after Black's possible 2 ... e5!?. As an example of the dangers of lack of knowledge, I can cite the game Holmov-Sax, Budapest 1976. The Soviet GM wanted to prevent Sax's Griinfeld by playing 2 e4, but, as he admitted after the game, he was not at all familiar with 2 . . . e5!? and went down to a resounding defeat in less than 20 moves!

1 ltjf3 An absolutely perfect and flexible opening move is 1 lL!f3, which can very easily lead to transpositions into the other main openings ( 1 e4, 1 d4, 1 c4). As a matter of fact, in a majority of cases the significance of 1 ltJf3 simply disappears into other openings. There are, however, three main independent points behind 1 lLlf3.

38

How to Be a Complete Tournament Player

Firstly, Black is prevented from employing the "pure English", l c4 e5. Some masters look upon this as a Sicilian Reversed and do not want to play a Sicilian Defence even with an extra move. Thus they defer playing c4 until move 2. Secondly, White can simply choose the King's Indian Reversed (1 lbf3, 2 g3, 3 .tg2 , 4 0-0, 5 d3), or, much less frequently, a QB fianchetto offshoot of this a la Nimzowitsch, starting with 2 b3. And thirdly White can aim for the Reti Opening with 1 lbf3 d5 2 c4. Again, however, even this sequence is used most of the time to transpose into a Queen's Pawn (in particular a Queen's Gambit) variation, without however "risking" a Griinfeld or other .. undesirable" responses to l d4. A thematic transpositional course developed in H.Oiafsson-Mednis, Reykjavik 1 982: 1 lbf3 lbf6 2 c4 c6 3 d4 d5 4 lbc3 dxc4 5 a4 .tf5 - and we have the main line in the Slav Defence! My favourite example of skulduggery, used to arrive at this main line Slav position, was pulled off by GM Robert Hiibner against Viktor Korchnoi at the Chicago 1982 International. Korchnoi was White and opened with 1 lbf3. After 1 .. d5, White transposes into a likely Queen's Gambit opening with 2 d4 a nd it did become such after 2 . . lbf6 3 c4. Here Hiibner seemed to enter the Queen's Gambit Accepted by playing 3 ... dxc4. K orchnoi quickly responded with 4 lbc3 .

.

- looking forward to the sharp gambit line 4 . . . a6 5 e4 b5 6 e5 lbdS 7 a4, something that he had prepared. But Hiibner crossed him up with 4 ... c6!, transposing into the Slav Defence. After 5 a4 .tf5 the main line of the Slav ensued, Korchnoi was uncomfortable in it and Hiibner scored an impressive 4 1 move win. The sophisticated point of H iibner's move order

Move Orders in the Opening - the Modern Master's Tool

39

is that he knew that Korchnoi doesn't like and doesn't allow the main line in the Slav. I nstead after 1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 lbf3 lbf6, he plays 4 e3, giving Black the choice between staying in the Slav with 4 ... i.f5, playing 4 ... i.g4, or heading for the Meran with 4 e6. 1 lbf3 is also a very effective tool in reaching a delayed Catalan, thereby preventing Black from employing the defences with an early (meaning on move 4) . . . dxc4. The Yugoslav GM Vukic has been very successful with this approach against those who like a classic defence (as used here meaning one based on . . . d5 and . . . e6). This is how he opens: 1 lbf3 lbf6 2 g3 d5 3 i.g2 e6 4 0-0 i.e7 and only now 5 c4!. Then after 5 .. 0-0 6 d4 we have the Main Line in the Catalan. Moreover, after 5 .. . dxc4?!, White recovers the pawn very comfortably with 6 lba3!, as demonstrated by the game Vukic-Mednis, Manhattan Internationa/ 1976. What this means to those who don't like the inherent passivity of the main line Catalan for Black (and this includes me) is that they need a different set-up to cope with Vukic's move order. As one example, I have added the following system to my opening repertoire: 1 lbf3 lbf6 2 g3 d5 3 i.g2 c6 4 0-0 i.g4, followed by e6 and . lbbd7 (or sometimes the reverse order, depending on White's play). Compared to the Catalan, Black's queen's bishop is now developed much more actively. I will end my discussion of closed openings with the following guidelines. If Black wants to achieve the most flexible King's Indian type of positions against closed openings, these are the first moves he should play: •..

.

...

Against 1 1 1 1

d4: 1 c4: 1 lbf3: g3: 1

.

.

... lbf6 (prevents 2 e4) ... g6 1 ... lbf6 ( If 1 . g6, 2 e4) ... g6 .

.

My final subject matter will be at the same time "light", yet serious. As Black, what should you play after 1 lbc3? Well, it depends on your normal opening repertoire . If you play the Sicilian , then 1 ... c5 is fine; ifthe Caro­ Kann, then 1 ... d5 2 e4 c6 is in order; if you play Philidor's Defence against 1 e4, then here 1 ... e5 is foolproof. B ut don't play the "logical" 1 ... lbf6, unless you are looking for the Pirc Defence or 1 e4 e5 positions or Alekhine's Defence. The point is that after 2 e4, Black's only reliable responses are 2 ... e5, 2 ... d6 3 d4 g6 (Pirc) and 2 ... d5 (Alekhine's). Don't assume that White plays 1 lbc3 because he wants some offbeat variation. Most likely, he wants to trick you into abandoning your normal opening

40

How to Be a Complete Tournament Player

repertoire. You have now received a considerable exposure to the use of move orders both to help you and bother your opponent. By employing these thoughtfully and creatively you will be forging a very valuable modern master's tool.

Questions and Answers Question

1 As Black you like to play the Najdorf Variation in the Sicilian: 1 e4 c5 2 lLlf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 lLlxd4 lLlf6 5 lLlc3 a6. Yet you are always unhappy when, instead of 4 lLlxd4, White plays 4 'ti'xd4. Is there a viable solution?

Answer Yes, perhaps even two solutions. The first is, in a sense, obvious: do a lot more work learning the potential responses to 4 'ti'xd4 ( 4 ... lLlc6, 4 ... a6, 4 ... .id7) and perhaps you'll become satisfied with the position(s) you get after 4 !Vxd4. If you have a better understanding and learn a lot more specifics about a variation, your liking for it usually increases significantly because your results are better. H owever, if this approach does not appeal to you, then the solution is through the "magic" of move orders. After 3 d4, play first 3 ... lLlf6 - as the Romanian grandmasters have been doing. If White responds with the normal 4 lLlc3, then 4 ... cxd4 5 lLlxd4 a6 transposes into the Najdorf. Instead of 5 lLlxd4, 5 'it'xd4 is less "threatening" than the same capture on move 4, because after 5 .id7 and 6 ... lLlc6 White's Queen will be forced to give up her central location. Note that after 4 'it'xd4 .id7 White can strengthen the centre by 5 c4 and after 4 a6, White has both 5 c4 and 5 .ie3, the latter to try to take advantage of the weakness on b6. Of course, 3 . . . lLlf6 does not get "something for nothing" and Black does have to learn how to handle 4 dxc5 and 4 .ib5+. However, most international players feel that these variations are less "annoying" for Black than 4 "@xd4. •..

.•.

Question

2 You are planning to play the Slav Defence against I d4. yet your opponent opens with 1 c4. Is 1 lLlf6 a safe response? ...

41

Move Orders in the Opening - the Modern Master's Tool

Answer No. After 2 liJc3 c6 3 e4! Black lacks a fully satisfactory plan, since 3 ... d5 4 e5! gives White a greater opening advantage than usual. If Black is aiming for the Slav, the only correct reply to 1 c4 is 1 .. c6. Then 2 liJc3 d5! leaves White with nothing better than an early d4. Moreover, after 2 e4 d5! , the best that White has is the transposition into Caro-Kann positions by either 3 exd5 cxd5 4 cxd5 or 4 d4. Theoretically these positions are satisfactory for Black. Yet note that "Slav players" must learn these variations for Black, as otherwise they will be tricked time and time again into having to play something which they are unprepared for. .

Question 3 You play the French Defence against 1 e4 and you like to play against 1 d4 when White uses irregular/unusual second or third moves. Your opponent opens with 1 liJc3. How should you respond?

Answer The correct move is 1 d5. Then after 2 d4 the game has transposed into a Queen's Pawn opening where White has immobilised his c-pawn early on. As long as Black is theoretically prepared for it, then he has "nothing to fear". If White plays 2 e4, then after 2 e6 Black has transposed into the French. White can then choose a main line French with the usual 3 d4 or play a secondary line with 3 liJf3. I n either case the French player has transposed into his favourite " French" . ...

...

5

How To Prepare For A Tournament Game

You should prepare for each game that you play. All top masters d o so. How much time you can spend on this depends on the circumstances, of course. A match gives each player lots of time. In a swiss Open you often find out your opponent and colour just an hour or two before the start. In a round robin tournament you will know the pairings as soon as the drawing for num bers is made. This will mean that for your pairings in later rounds you will have considerable time to prepare; less so for earlier rounds. No matter. You should make it an invariable policy that you will prepare for each game as well as is possible in your particular circumstances. Playing a tournament game is a most demanding and difficult activity. To ensure maximum success, you have to start your work already before the game. You will gain the following advantages if you prepare for each game: ( 1 ) You will start the game with increased confidence. (2) You will start the game with increased knowledge. (3) If the opponent plays one of the openings that you have prepared for, you will be able to play this part of the game quickly and thus will save a considerable amount of time on the clock. This extra time will then be available for later crucial middlegame play. It is of utmost importance to play the opening not only well but also relatively quickly. Bobby Fischer started off each game with a great advantage: after the opening he had used less time than his opponent and thus had more time available later on. The major reason why he never had serious time pressure problems was that his rapid opening play simply left sufficient time for the middlegame. (4) Because of the previous three items, the odds in your favour of winning the game have now been considerably increased. 42

43

How to Prepare for a Tournament Game

Please do not expect that your opponent will always fall in with your plans. After all, his goal is just the opposite: always to try to cross you up. As far as immediate specific use is concerned, only in about 50% of my games has preparation been of value. Though at first blush this may seem disappointing, in point of fact it is perfectly alright. All of us need a realistic outlook for our chess life as well as the ability to look ahead. Viewed from such a perspective we can be happy that: ( 1 ) Despite our inability to ever read the opponent's mind, in half the games we were still able to start off with significant advantages. (2) We have gained chess knowledge/wisdom which can prove useful at any time. The following example well illustrates this last point. In the Nis 1 977 International Tournament I was due to be Black against the Romanian GM Victor Ciocaltea. I knew that he opened with 1 e4 and I had decided to play the Sicilian against him. Based on some previous research of his games I determined that I must be ready to cope with the following variation: 1 e4 cS 2 lbf3 lbc6 3 d4 cxd4 4 lbxd4 lbf6 S lbc3 d6 6 .i.c4 e6 7 .i.b3 .i.e7 8 .i.e3 0-0 9 0-0 a6 1 0 f4 lbxd4 1 1 .i.xd4 bS 1 2 eS dxeS 13 fxeS lbd7 14 lbe4 .i.b7 15 lbd6 .i.xd6 16 exd6 'irgS 17 lifl.

The theoretical moves here were 1 7 . . .i.d5, 17 e5 and 1 7 . a5. But when playing over the variations, I decided that I did not like any of them. Therefore, I started to look for alternatives and it was not long before the logical 17 ... llad8 caught my eye. After some research I decided that it was fine and that I would play it. .

. . .

.

.

44

How to Be a Complete Tournament Player

Well, I didn't get my chance against Ciocaltea because he varied already on move 3 with 3 i.b5. However, I knew those positions quite well for Black and had no difficulty in getting a good game. Yet the chance did come - and quite unexpectedly - about a month later at the New York (GHI) International l977. I was due to play Black against the young Icelandic IM (now GM) Helgi Olafsson. Just a year earlier - at the Manhattan Chess Club lnternational l 976 - he had played 1 d4 and crushed my King's Indian. So this time I very carefully prepared a defence against 1 d4. But he crossed me up completely by opening with l e4!. And soon what did we arrive at but what I had prepared for Ciocaltea! I was ready with my innovation 1 7 . . . llad8! and after the further moves 18 '@dl! ( 1 8 1We2?! i.d5 !) 18 �xdl 19 llxdl l0f6! I soon equalised and the game was drawn on move 24. To add a technical footnote: my "invention" (and the whole game) is part of the main line in this important variation and appears in the "ultimate" note in the Encyclopedia of Chess Openings, Volume 2 (Revised), B 88, column 1 5, note 75. Yes, and quite obviously so, the preparation against Ciocaltea was not in vain! We are now ready for a step-by-step look at how to prepare for a tournament game. ...

S tep 1: Decide on a Realistic Objective for the Game Obviously enough no one wants to lose the game. However, a number of other rational goals are perfectly possible. If you can get a clear idea of your goal before you commence play, this will help both in preparing for the game and playing it. The following is a list of possibilities: (a) Only a win will do

, ->

The most common example is the last round of a major money swiss system tournament, where the winner of the game gets thousands, while a draw is worth peanuts. But please remember that this is your interpretation of the need for a win. Your opponent - for his own reasons, good or bad - may be satisfied to draw. Therefore the pressure is squarely on you to get the required win. · A similar situation can exist in the last round of any tournament, where only a win will give the necessary result - be it 1st prize, qualification for something, a prize etc. However, this kind of an "only a win will do" situation is both very

How to Prepare for a Tournament Game

45

demanding and extreme. lt will put you under tremendous pressure. Only put yourself under such pressure if it is truly necessary! The major effect of this situation on your preparation is with Black. You must select a variation which is sufficiently unbalanced to provide winning chances. In particular, you must avoid slightly inferior endgames. If you are White, the task of preparation is easier. Any variation giving a slight advantage (as long as it is meaningful) is fine, as are complicated variations offering equal chances. (b) A win is very important, but not critical The most common example of this is playing a weaker opponent in a round robin tournament. For a good result in such a tournament, you must defeat the weaker participant(s). However, such players do know how to play, so do not take stupid risks. I mean, there is no point in committing suicide! The critical part here for preparation is not to allow with Black a variation where White can simplify the position so that dead­ eye equality results. Equally unpalatable is the slightly inferior endgame which forces you to aim for an equality that will again leave no play in the position. It should be added that just as you don't want to look for dead-eye equality variations in your preparation, so you also want to avoid them once the game is played. The following example is instructive in this regard. In Round 7 of the Lugano I nternational 1985 I was Black against the strong Swiss master Bruno Schwagli. I had just lost in Round 6 and thus only had a 4-2 score. A win was most important, though not absolutely critical since two more rounds remained after this one. I had decided to play the Pirc Defence against 1 e4 and had generally prepared the sharpest variations possible for Black. However, after l e4 d6 2 d4 lbf6 my opponent quickly played the quiet 3 lDd2. And after the normal 3 ... g6 4 lbgf3 i.g7 5 .i.c4 0-0, he just as quickly played 6 0-0. B lack can, of course, now play the standard exchanging method 6 ... lbxe4 7 lbxe4 d5 and after 8 .i.d3 dxe4 9 .i.xe4 c5 he is pretty sure of full equality. But how can he win the rather dynamically barren position that results? Here I s hould add the observation that the strong masters of Europe have developed very solid techniques for drawing with the White pieces against GMs. It has become very very difficult to defeat these masters with Black. Many of the European GMs simply have "given up" trying to win with Black against such masters and they readily acquiesce to a draw. I was quite concerned that if I play the "normal" 6 lbxe4, my opponent will know quite well how to hold the resulting position for the draw. .

. . .

46

How to Be a Complete Tournament Player

Therefore I decided to explore the position after 6 0-0 to see if there is not a dynamically unbalancing way of handling it. After 1 5 minutes of thought I came up with : 6 . . . ll'lfd7!, which appears to be both a theoretical novelty and in no way chessically inferior to 6 . . ll'lxe4. Immediately after 6 ll'lfd7 my opponent started to use a considerable amount of time, thus showing that my move was new to him. After the following course of play - 7 c3 c5 8 llel ll'lc6 9 dxc5 ll'lxc5 10 ll'lb3 ll'la4! 1 1 .tb5 ll'lb6 12 .te3 't!Vc7 1 3 't!Vd2 .tg4 .

...

- a nice, complicated, probably fully equal position had arisen, where Black's practical winning chances are bright. Eventually I won an unbalanced, complicated endgame. (c) A win is nice to have, yet a draw is perfectly satisfactory This is the most common situation. It occurs when playing your peers in a round robin or in the early to middle rou nds in a swiss. Prepare and play normally - let the position be the boss in your decision making. (d) A draw is 100% satisfactory The above is the most lovely situation that you can have. You have played so well that only a draw is required to clinch, for example, 1 st prize, match victory, qualification etc. Wonderful! Unfortunately there is no known method to ensure this . The only top player who has had an uncanny ability to get the required draws is Sammy Reshevsky. And even he hasn't been perfect. After losing with White against GM Kavalek in the 1 972 US Championship he explained the result as follows: "I knew I should never have played for a draw. It is

How to Prepare for a Tournament Game

47

incorrect strategy to play for a draw." Nevertheless, you do want to do things the right way so that your chances for the desired draw increase. The most important thing is not to "play for the draw" since this usually means taking the "safest" way, even when this is not the best. Your emphasis should be on solidity and soundness, both in preparation and play. When preparing, select sound, slightly superior variations for White - and if you can enter a slightly superior endgame, so much the better. With Black, a sound, slightly inferior, variation is fine and if it leads to a slightly inferior ending, this is fine too. Remember that your total objective is to reach full equality and a draw. The above can be well illustrated by the following example. In the Los Angeles 1 974 I nternational Tournament I had an excellent start and two rounds from the end needed only one draw to clinch my third IM norm and with it the IM title. In the last round I was due to be Black against GM Gligoric so that the last round was a very "iffy" situation. Therefore the immediate objective was to draw with White against GM (then I M­ to-be) James Tarjan. GM Tarjan at that time was playing exclusively the Sicilian against 1 e4, and in particular the Dragon and Accelerated Dragon Variations. Against the Dragon move order (1 e4 c5 2 lL!f3 d6) I was intending to play 3 .ib5+ and against the Accelerated Dragon (1 e4 cS 2 lL!f3 lL!c6 3 d4 cxd4 4 lL!xd4 g6) the Maroczy Bind, S c4, followed by a queen exchange sequence. This in fact occurred: 5 lL!f6 6 lL!c3 d6 7 f3 lL!xd4 8 1!Vxd4 .ig7 9 .ie3 0-0 10 'fi'd2 .ie6 1 1 litcl WaS 12 b3 litfc8 13 .ie2 a6 14 lL!d5 Wxd2+ 1 5 ad2 lL!xdS 16 cxdS .id7 1 7 :S.xc8+ llxc8 18 litc1 Draw. .•.

48

How to Be a Complete Tournament Player

(Since I lost in the last round to Gligoric, this draw was the key to the IM title.) There is one more important point to be made with regard to the above example. In crucial games always play the move/opening/variation you know best. Already in 1 974 I was playing both 1 e4 and 1 c4 for White. By any objective standard 1 c4 is the safer of the two moves. But since my feel for and experience with 1 e4 was so much greater, this was the only move I considered when needing "just a draw" . And now a word about how to play the game to achieve the desired draw. To the best of your ability, do play the best move. But let solidity be your method throughout. When there is a choice between two equally "good" moves, select the one which is sounder, simpler and can lead to exchanges. A special case is the situation where a draw is equally beneficial for both players. There should be no practical problem in achieving it: an early draw offer does the trick . Whether to already offer the draw before the game is a moral/ethical question and I cannot really offer advice on it. A comment also is in order regarding how the top players in general, and those from Eastern Europe in particular, look at the "colour question". For team events in particular, but also usually for tournaments, the code is invariable: you should try to win with White, whereas with Black a draw is 100% satisfactory. Of course, this applies only for games between equals.

Step 2: Find Out as Much as Possible about Your Opponent Under this heading there are two areas to research: (1) Your opponent as a chess player His rating, age, how long he has been playing chess, health, character, psychological make-up, chess progress, playing style, chess strengths and weaknesses. (2) Your opponent's opening repertoire in as much detail as possible It is logical to assume that if you know everything about your opponent's opening repertoire then your preparation will be fruitful, i.e. the variation that you prepare for will actually be played. Chances are good that the observant club member will know the opening repertoire of other active club players. Of course, all players in major international

How to Prepare for a Tournament Game

49

tournaments leave a record of their play which appears in the official tournament bulletins. The practical problem is simply how to get hold of this information. For an American, this has been quite a problem . GM Kavalek in preparing for the 1 978 US Championship (and Zonal) and the 1979 Interzonal purchased a complete set of tournament games played over the previous three years by his prospective opponents. He won the 1978 US Championship in great style and subsequently said that this information was of major help. Needless to say, players from Eastern Europe have no problems in getting such information. Their federations and chess clubs consider it part of their duties to assist their players so that they are more successful in tournament play. GM Lev Alburt tells the story that when GM Tarjan played in the Odessa 1 976 International, the local club provided each Odessa player with a complete print-out of all of Tarjan's openings - in great detail - going back many years. For those active in international play the relentless technological advances have simplified matters. If you have a computer and money, you can purchase computer disks which contain recent games by GMs, IMs and other strong active players. By far the best known system is that of ChessBase. The most common situation is where you know something about your opponent's openings but quite obviously not everything. Well, simply prepare for what you know and don't worry about what you don't know. There is also the extreme case where you don't know a thing about what your opponent plays. Should you therefore "take it easy" before the game and not prepare? ABSOLUTELY NOT! For such cases, I offer the following intelligent guesses: a) If the opponent is old, expect the Ruy Lopez, Queen's Gambit or other classical (conventional) openings. b) If the opponent is young, expect the Sicilian, Benoni, Griinfeld or 1 e4 as White . A personal example is appropriate here. At the Barcelona International 1980 I was to be White in Round 1 against Felipe Tosan, the Champion of Catalonia. I knew nothing about him except that he was 23 years old. I had decided to play 1 e4 and felt the odds were he would play 2 d6 in the Sicilian, as this can lead to both the Najdorf and Dragon Variations as well as t he Classical (5 .. lbc6) Variation. But since I didn't have a clue which one he would play, I prepared the following line: 1 e4 cS 2 lbf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 and now 4 1!Vxd4. Then I reviewed both a) 4 ... a6 S �e3 lbc6 6 'flb6, and b) 4 ... lbc6 5 �bS �d7 6 �xc6 �c6. Here I . . .

.

j(J

How to Be a Complete Tournament Player

decided to play the strategic 7 c4 lLJf6 8 lbc3 g6 9 0-0 i.g7 10 't!rd3 0-0 1 1 .td2!.

In point of fact this variation came about. He was unprepared for it, used large chunks of time in the opening and I won quite decisively in 26 moves.

Step 3: Decide Before The Game What You Will Play If you only play a single opening/variation, whether you are White or Black, then of course there is nothing to decide ! However, most players do have more than an absolutely minimal opening repertoire and thus have decisions to make. Make as many decisions as possible before the game - this will save you valuable time once the game starts! There is nothing more stupid or less excusable than a player already taking time on his clock for his very first move! If you are White, decide : ( 1 ) Whether you will play 1 e4, 1 d4, 1 c4, 1 liJf3 or whatever. (2) Which line(s) you will play. If you are Black, decide: ( 1 ) What opening (and variation within that opening) you will play against both 1 e4 and 1 d4. (2) What opening system you will play against 1 c4, 1 lbf3, 1 g3. These three moves offer very many transpositional possibilities both for White and Black so that you cannot be sure that you can actually achieve your desired opening/variation. The best that you can do often is to

51

How to Prepare for a Tournament Game

select the system: Hedgehog, King's Indian, Griinfeld, Classical ( l . e6 followed by ... d5), queen's bishop fianchetto (aiming for the Queen's Indian Defence ) etc. The one pure choice that Black has is the various traditional lines in the English ( I c4) if he responds with 1 . . . e5. ..

In all of your decision making, follow these two principles: ( I ) Go into as much detail as possible, since this will make your actual preparation both easier and more efficient. (2) Base your decisions on the principles discussed for steps I and 2. When you make your decisions, as a general principle avoid those variations/openings which as far as you know, your opponent knows well, likes and is very good at. I n other words, try to avoid playing into your opponent's strength . In Barcelona 1 980 my mind was sharp in every way and I won the tournament. Earlier I gave the example of my successful preparation against Tosan. Here I would like to briefly describe two examples of successful decision-making based on the previous principle: ( I ) I was White against the very strong Italian IM Tatai. I didn't play I e4 against him because over the previous two years he had analysed, written about and played the Schliemann Defence to the Ruy Lopez (3 f5). I played 1 c4 and had a fairly peaceful draw. Later GM Sigurjonsson did allow 3 . f5 and lost. (2) Yugoslav GM D. Rajkovic is a fine strategist who likes and handles well as White the 4 a3 variation against the Queen's Indian. Therefore against him I played the Slav Defence, where we were on equal terms and a well-played game ended in a draw on move 4 1 . •.•

. .

I n the area of decision-making before the actual preparation starts, my experiences with the Yugoslav GM Milan Matulovic provide textbook examples of what to do and what not to do. The three incidences (in chronological order) were: ( I ) Kragujavec I 977: I was Black and I knew that against the Classical Variation in the Sicilian (1 e4 c5 2 �f3 �c6 3 d4 cxd4 4 �xd4 �f6 5 �c3 d6) he always played the Richter-Rauzer (6 i.gS). So I prepared the less usual 6 ... .id7. The preparation can be called, in a sense, "partially successful" . Matulovic was surprised and used up large amounts of time in the opening. The result: he obtained a large advantage but got into severe time pressure and allowed me to escape with a draw. (2) Nis 1 977: I was again Black and since I was not able to "fix" the 6 . . . .id7 variation used above, I had to try something else. I knew that

J2

How to Be a Complete Tournament Player

against the French he always played the Tarrasch (3 lDd2) and after 3 ... lDf6 4 e5 lDfd7, the 5 c3 c5 6 �d3 set-up. I decided to employ the less common 6 ... b6 variation . He was not familiar with it and again used lots of time, but on this occasion without coming up with the strongest moves. I easily equalised and the game was drawn on move 1 8. (3) Smederevo 198 1 : I was Black again. I, of course, knew that in the main Richter-Rauzer lines after 6 ... e6 7 1!.Vd2 a6 8 0-0-0 .i.d7 he always played 9 f4, which is the most active move. Then after 9 . . . b5 he played 1 0 �xf6 (successfully); after 9 . . . �e7 10 lDf3 b5 h e played 1 1 �xf6 and less successfully, as shown by his published games in the Informants. In particular, Matulovic-Deze, Yugoslavia 1 9 79 had gone 1 1 ... gxf6 12 f5 1!.Vb6 13 ®b1 0-0-0 14 g3 �8 15 fxe6 fxe6 16 .i.h3 �c8 17 1!,Ve1 1!.Vc5 18 lDe2 d5 19 exd5 lDb4

20 lDed4 =; Black won on move 56. In his notes to that game Deze also considers 20 lDc3 , 20 Wc3 and 20 c3 - all are fine for Black. I knew that Matulovic has a reputation for very conscientious and careful preparation in what he considers "his lines". Still, the attraction of quickly playing twenty moves and winding up with a good position was too tempting not to try. When looking at the position after Black's 1 9th, the question as to what happens if White plays the other knight to d4 (i.e 20 lDfd4) did pass through my mind and I didn't see anything so clear against it. But why worry, I told myself - there must be something! Well, in the game we soon reached the position after Black's 1 9th and White quickly played 20 lDfd4! and after 20 ... 't!Vxd5? 21 .i.xe6!! �xe6 22 lDc3. The position is hopeless for Black and White won easily in 4 1 moves. (Even after the

How to Prepare for a Tournament Game

53

better 20 . . lLlxd5 2 1 lLlb3 't!Vb6 22 lLled4 Black's position is unpleasant.) .

As a result of the above experience, I am an even greater believer in the following most important principle: only play into a variation in which your opponent is strong if you have your own personal novelty ready!

Step 4: D o the Actual Preparation You should plan to spend from 1 -2 hours preparing for each game. Less than one hour will not give you enough wisdom and more than two hours will start tiring you out. The ideal situation is: be wise, confident and fresh! The time of preparation should be shortly, though preferably not immediately, before the game. For a morning game, the previous evening is best; for an afternoon game, the morning is correct; for an evening game, the early afternoon is ideal. You want the work to be recent enough for you to be able to remember everything. However, you don't want your mind already to be tired at the start of the game. The method is simple enough: play over the variations selected from your reference sources - personal notes, Informants, ECOs, etc. Try to remember whatever seems essential: move order(s), ideas (strategic or tactical), actual variations etc. Throughout the preparation, please be realistic. I mean, you cannot expect to learn everything about the Sicilian Defence in two hours ! In other words, do not bite off more than you can chew. A lways stress quality over quantity. Two variations well prepared are of infinitely greater value than ten variations quickly skimmed over. As you do your preparation, questions will arise and they will generally involve tactical matters or strategic ones. I will consider these separately as follows: (1) Tactical matters All variations should be checkedfor tactical errors. These are of two kinds: (a) Typographical. These can occur frequently enough to be annoying. Sometimes, they can even be dangerous. As an example, in annotating the game Timman-S.Garcia, Orense 1976, in The Chess Player, after 1 d4 lLlf6 2 c4 e6 3 lLlc3 �b4 4 �g5 h6 5 �4 c5 6 d5 d6 7 e3 g5 8 .i.g3 lLle4 9 '@'cl 't!Vf6, Timman gives the following variation: 10 '@xe4 �xc3+ 1 1 'it'dl .txb2 12 litb1 �d7! 13 �d3 lLla6 + (diagram)

14 dxe6 �xe6. The question is: what does Black do after 15 1Vxb7 when

54

How to Be a Complete Tournament Player

three of his pieces are en prise? Of course, Timman never suggested 14 .. i.xe6?. That simply is a typo in place of the correct and winning 14 .. i.c6. (b) Analysis. There can always be a tactical error in analysis. It is important to catch these for two reasons: first, you surely don't want to be victimised yourself and lose a game as a result of this, and second, it is great if your opponent falls into such a hole! .

.

(2) Strategic matters My key advice here is: make sure that the line or lines given are in accordance with the idea of the opening! Here I would like to give the following four examples to illustrate the above very important principle:

(a) Ruy Lopez for Black (1 e4 e5 2 lbf3 lbc6 3 i.b5) You are Black and expect your opponent to play the Exchange Variation (3 ... a6 4 bc6 dxc6 5 0-0). A draw is perfectly satisfactory for you and therefore you don't mind defending the slightly inferior endgame resulting after 5 ... f6 6 d4 exd4 7 lbxd4 c5 8 lbb3 l!Vxdl 9 lixd l . (diagram) Your refer to the 1 974 Edition of ECO ' C' and see the line 9 .. i.e6 10 i.f4 i.xb3 11 axb3 i.d6 12 i.xd6 lidS 13 lba3 ::!:: . What should you think about this? The active 9 . . . i.e6 looks OK, but you should ask yourself: how can exchanging off your valuable bishop with I 0 . . i.xb3?! be the right idea? When Spassky considered this question he came up with 10 . . . c4! and after the obvious 11 lbd4 ( 1 1 lba5! ::!:: ), 1 1 ... 0-0-0! gives Black equality, e.g. Spiridonov-Spassky, Sochi 1973. .

.

55

How to Prepare for a Tournament Game

(b) Nimzo-lndian for Black (1 d4 �f6 2 c4 e6 3 �c3 .i.b4) You like Nimzowitsch's original plan against the Rubinstein Variation ( 4 e3) - 4 ... b6 5 .i.d3 .i.b7 6 �f3 �e4 - and expect your opponent to play the cautious and routine 7 1rc2. Main line play then goes 7 ... .i.xc3+ 8 bxc3 f5 9 0-0 0-0 and after the usual 10 �d2 Black plays 10 .. !Vh4 and has equality ( 1 1 f3 �xd2 etc). But what if White retreats the knight to e 1 (10 �e1)? .

You see that in both Sznapik-Keene, Tiflis 1974 and Atlas-Presser, USA 1976 Black played 1 0 Wh4?! unsuccessfully. But why should Black play 10 ... 1!fh4? The queen doesn't help its knight remain on e4! Correct is the simple development 1 0 ... �c6 and after 11 f3, 11 ... �d6 with . . .

56

How to Be a Complete Tournament Player

pressure on c4. In such variations White's knight is poorly placed on e 1 .

(c) Nimzo-Indian for Black The same situation exists as in (b) except you expect that your young and knowledgeable opponent will play the modern and more accurate 7 0-0 ! (instead of 7 't!Yc2). You decide that you don't like 7 . . f5 because of 8 lt::le 5. To accept the offered pawn sacrifice is also unattractive so you must play 7 ... .i.xc3 8 bxc3 f5. But how to proceed against 9 lt::le 1 0-0 10 f3? .

Clearly 10 . . . lt::lf6?! gives White too much space and after the more consistent 1 0 ... lt::ld 6, Taimanov in ECO IV (E) gives 1 1 .i.a3 c5 12 dxc5 bxc5 13 .i.xc5 t (etc). In preparing for my game against the very strong Hungarian IM (now GM) Lukacs at Budapest 1978, I came up with 11 ... l:U6!, with the dual ideas of unpinning the knight and being in a position to attack on the kingside with . . . l:th6 and . . . 't!Vh4. If White plays 12 c5, Black has 12 . lt::lf7. This in fact was to be the game course; the game was over on move 16 when in a very unbalanced position my opponent offered me a draw. .

.

.

(d) Queen's Indian for Black Against the 4 g3 variation you play 4 . . . .i.a6. It is autumn 1 980 and you consult the latest Informant (29) to find the game Tatai-Seirawan, Malaga /980, annotated by IM Tatai: 1 d4 lt::l f6 2 c4 e6 3 lt::l f3 b6 4 g3 i.a6 5 b3 .i.b4+ 6 .i.d2 .i.e7 7 .i.g2 c6 8 0-0 d5 9 \Wc2 lt::lbd7 (9 . . . lt::le4!?) 10 l:tcl ! N 0-0 1 1 a4 (diagram)

How to Prepare for a Tournament Game

57

1 1 ... :Sc8 12 lba3 lbe4 13 .iel f5 14 b4 .ib7 1 5 "i!Vb2 a6 16 c5 b5 1 7 lbe5 .if6 18 f3 lbg5 19 .id2 lb£7 20 i.J4 lbfxe5 and now instead of 2 1 dxe5?! (0- 1 in 60), correct is 21 .ixe5! .ixe5 22 dxe5 t. I was reviewing this game when preparing for Gonzales-Mestres at Barcelona 1 980. Two things about the above game "bothered" me: ( I ) Black was handling the position more like a Dutch Defence rather than a Catalan Opening, into which the opening had, in effect, transposed. (2) Tata i's plan seems to refute the lines with 4 . . . �a6. But why should moves such as 10 :Sc l , 1 1 a4 and 1 2 lba3 be so strong? My preparation was not in vain . With a different move order (7 "i!fc2 c6 8 .ig2 d5 9 0-0 lbbd7 10 :Sc l 0-0 1 1 a4) the Gonzales Mestres-Mednis game transposed into Tatai-Seirawan . But now I played, consistently with the Catalan Opening, 1 1 ... c5! 12 lba3 .ib7! 13 "i!Vb2 lbe4. Black has full equality and White's queen here looks rather stupid on b2.

Questions and Answers Question I Before the last round you and your opponent are tied for first place with 6 points. Four followers have 5 !h . The prizes are $ 1 0 ,000, 5000, 3000, 2000, 1 500 , 1 000. You are White and your rating is 50 points higher than your opponent's. What should be your objective for the last round? How should you try to achieve it?

58

How to Be a Complete Tournament Player

Answer I think the answer to the first question depends mostly on what kind of a player you are , i.e. are you a risk-taking fighter or are you a "bird-in­ the-hand" type? If you are satisfied with a guaranteed substantial amount of money, you should offer a draw in the early opening. This ensures you $5000. But if you are a hungry fighter, you should play for the full $ 1 0,000. After all, you are White and outrate your opponent. Yet, in playing to win, there is no reason to take silly chances. Select a sound and solid variation from your repertoire. If you have an opening advantage, work carefully to build on it. Continue to play with confidence and care for the win. However, if you should feel that the advantage is slipping away through your fingers - play it safe and offer the draw. Question 2 It is Round 2 in an international swiss Open . Your opponent is an unrated young Swede about 20 years old. Both of you have won your first game. The pairings were posted at l O am and the round starts at 2 pm. You are White and there is no way in the time available to learn what your opponent plays as Black. You usually open with 1 c4. What should you expect your opponent to play?

Answer Since you know nothing about him and have no opportunity to learn, the best that can be done is to use some rule(s) of thumb. The key here is that he is Swedish . A large number of Swedish international players employ against 1 c4 what I have started calling the "Swedish Variation": 1 c4 c5 2 lLlf3 lLlc6 3 lLlc3 (or 3 g3) 3 ... e5 followed by g6 and lLlge7. Pia Cramling plays it, Harry Schiissler plays it, Thomas Ernst and Ferdinand Hellers play it etc. The result is that a large number of the young Swedish players also play it. You might as well assume that your opponent will do so too . ...

Question 3 How should you prepare for the situation of Question 2?

Answer Please realise that you are basically completely in the dark as regards what your opponent might play. Therefore, you should first do some research on whatever variation or sub-variation you are least sure of at

How to Prepare for a Tournament Game

59

that moment. This is important work in general and will give you knowledge and confidence in case this variation pops up soon in one of your games. (It may even happen today! ) Then do some work o n the "Swedish Variation". See what you have with you in in your personal notes. Select a line and move order that seems attractive to you. Check this against the latest information available in the current Chess Informant. If it is April 1 990, the latest Informant is 48. Looking under A 37 you will see two complete games and two games-within-games. If you are planning early castling, then the course of game 57 is an important one: 1 c4 c5 2 lt:lf3 lt:lc6 3 g3 e5 4 .ig2 g6 5 0-0 (This is the move order that you would be using. The actual game course was I lt:lf3 c5 2 g3 lt:lc6 3 .ig2 e5 4 0-0 g6 5 c4) 5 .ig7 6 lt:lc3 lt:lge7 .ie6?!, strong is 9 lt:lg5!. 7 a3 d6 8 b4! and after 8 •..

...

6

How to Play the Game

OK, you are well prepared and confident. It is time to make use of your knowledge! The first, preliminary, point is: avoid wasting time when playing the opening. Aim for the following guideline: 5 moves in 5 minutes 1 0 moves in 1 0 minutes Of course, when the game develops as planned and the early opening moves are very routine, you can and should play faster than the above speed. The main point is not to waste time by playing slower. This question is often raised: I have prepared a complete surprise for my opponent. If I play too quickly, won't he become suspicious? Yes, perhaps. If you are worried about this, don't "blitz" your moves. A deliberate manner of playing '' 1 0 moves in 1 0 minutes" should not arouse suspicion in anyone. The three possible courses the game can take are:

(1) The Game Develops as Analysed ("Everything is normal") Be happy, play with confidence . At some point the need will come for independent thinking, but by then you should have a good position and a good time reserve. It should be helpful now to describe my preparation for and play in one of the most important games of my life. It is the 1978 US Championship and Zonal. There are only three qualifying places for the Interzonals. Two rounds from the end it is certain that GMs Kavalek and Tarjan have qualified. But for the other spot the fight is fierce: GM Shamkovich is ahead, but closely following are Byrne, Lein, Weinstein and myself. I have just defeated Rogoff with Black to reach + I . In the next to last round I am to be White against IM Zuckerman and in the last will be Black against GM Benko. Most clearly at least one more win is needed to have a real chance. Therefore the objective is clear: win with White v 60

61

How to Play the Game

Zuckerman. In my preparation I spent about 75% of my time on the Naj dorf Sicilian, since at that time this was Zuckerman's main defence against 1 e4. But the rest of the time I decided to spend on the 3 . . . �c5 variation in the Ruy Lopez, since my opponent used this on a "sometime" basis, but had never employed it against me. First I reviewed my notes and then turned to Informant 24, where I found a note within game 266, Kavalek-Spassky, 4th match game, Solingen 1 977. The note gave the early course of Kavalek-Spassky, 6th game, as follows: ( 1 e4 eS 2 lLlf3 lLlc6 3 �bS �cS 4 c3 lLlf6 S 0-0 0-0 6 d4 �b6) 7 .igS h6 8 �4 d6 9 a4 aS 10 't!Vd3 exd4 1 1 .i.xc6! bxc6 1 2 lLlxd4 gS?! ( 1 2 .. .i.d7) 1 3 �g3 �a6 14 c4 dS? ( 1 4 ... '@d7 1 5 lLlf5 ±; 14 . . . �xd4 1 5 't!Vxd4 lLld7) 1S lLlxc6! .i.xc4 16 't!Vf3 dxe4 1 7 '@'fS �e6 18 l!Ve5 lLld7 19 lLlxd8 lLlxe5 20 lLlxe6 ±± . .

When comparing this to what I had in my notes, I saw that the idea of combining 'ird3 and a4 is new. I saw no reason to think that it is better than the conventional lines with li: el . But I also didn't think that it should be any worse. I decided to employ this idea, mainly because IM Zuckerman's theoretical knowledge is legendary. I was sure that he would know all the "old stuff'. Even though I couldn't expect him to not know the above note, I felt that the chances were good that he hadn't done any independent analysis to discover Black's best defence(s) and thus could have to solve these problems over the board . Therefore I saw a favourable risk/reward situation for myself: much to gain, nothing to lose. To my 1 e4, 1 ... eS was the quick response and Zuckerman seemed surprised when I didn't seem surprised. The game took a "matter offact" course: 2 lLlf3 lLlc6 3 �bS �c5 4 c3 lLlf6 S 0-0 0-0 6 d4 �6 7 �gS h6 8 .i.h4

62

How to Be a Complete Tournament Player

d6 9 a4 aS 10 'fi'd3 (I had used 5 minutes up to now) 10 ... exd4 11 .txc6 bxc6 12 lDxd4 (8 minutes to here) 12 .ta6 13 c4 ( 1 0 minutes to here) 1 3 ... g S 1 4 i.g3 d S (Zuckerman had taken 3 0 minutes for moves 1 2 1 4) 1S lDxc6 .txc4 16 1!¥f3 (I took some time on this and the next move to see if Black had some surprise, but couldn't find anything) 1 6 ... dxe4 17 'tiffS (35 minutes used) 1 7 ... i.e6 18 \!VeS (45 minutes) 18 ... lDd7 19 lDxd8 lDxeS 20 lDxe6 fxe6 21 .txe5 (50 minutes). My first independent thinking only came after 21 ... e3. The resulting problems were not difficult to solve and I won the game in good style on move 43. .•.

-

(2) Variation is as Prepared, but Somewhere Later Opponent Plays a Theoretical Novelty Here we have to differentiate between a strategic novelty and a tactical one. (a) If the novelty is a strategic one, play a "good" move without expending too much time. Example: For my game with the black pieces against Polugayevsky at the Riga Interzonal 1979, I had prepared defences against a number of "non­ sharp" lines. The game was to be played three rounds from the end and Polugayevsky was very close to qualifying for the Candidates matches. Of course, he wanted to win with White, but it was also clear to me that he would not take unnecessary chances right in the opening. Thus after 1 c4 lDf6 2 lDc3 e6 3 lDf3 dS 4 d4 c6 he avoided the "super-sharp" S .tgS and settled for S e3, and after S ... lDbd7 the Meran Variation was reached. Here too, after 6 i.d3 dxc4 7 .txc4 bS 8 .td3 .tb7, White played the "quiet line" 9 0-0 (instead of the active 9 e4) and the play continued "theoretically" through 9 ... b4 10 lDe4 .te7 11 lDxf6+ lDxf6 12 e4 0-0 13 eS lDd7. This position was rated by "theory" as equal, yet now came the TN 14 .te4!. (After the game Polugayevsky told me that he had discovered this move when preparing as Black for his 1 977 Candidates match against Korchnoi. He was surprised that Korchnoi did not employ it.) I responded fairly quickly with the logica1 14 ... 't!tb6! (why not?) but after 15 .tgS!? (diagram) came the second moment of truth. I decided on the safe 1 5 . . . liUe8?! but after 1 6 .txe7 Ii:xe7 1 7 1!fc2 h6 1 8 a3! White is better, though I drew in 4 1 . The key line after 1 5 .tg5, obviously, was 1 5 ... .i.xgS 16 .txh7+ !? ( 1 6 lDxg5 h6 is nothing) 1 6 . .. �h7 1 7 lDxgS+ �6! (forced). During the

How to Play the Game

63

game, I decided to "trust" Polugayevsky on this, but later analysis (at home ) showed that White has nothing more than a draw. (Of course, as far as the theoretical "dispute" is concerned, my analysis could hardly be expected to be the final absolute answer. I n fact Dobosz in his notes to the game Grigorian-Dobosz, Erevan 1 980 (Informant 30, game 575) shows that White retains a slight edge in one very complicated variation.) (b) If the novelty is a tactical one, then all reasonable variations must be examined carefully. Example: Almost any of the Najdorf Sicilians with 6 i.g5, e.g. in Wedberg­ Novoselski, Kladovo 1 980 (see Informant 29, game 394) after 6 ... e6 7 f4 1Wc7 8 'ift'3 bS 9- .i.xf6 gxf6 10 eS .i.b7 1 1 WitS b4 12 ll:lxe6 Black played the TN 12 . .. Wc8!. The correct response, found after much thinking, is the game's 13 ..ibS+ !.

64

How to Be a Complete Tournament Player

(3) Opponent's Opening is a Complete Surprise This obviously means that your specific opening preparation is out the window. The first thing to do is to rethink your total preparation to see if some of the conclusions are still usable. Part of the time they will be. Here is an instructive example: In the last round of the Lugano International Tournament 1985 I was to be Black against the strong West German master Theo Rieke. A win was a must to have a chance to tie for second place and thereby obtain a good money prize. I knew nothing about Rieke except his games from this tournament. In reviewing his games, I noted that with White he opened with tt:Jf3, then played 2 c4 and invariably fianchettoed the KB. I decided to play the King's Indian Defence, because I wanted to sharpen the game and because in my opinion the king's bishop fianchetto does not present undue dangers for Black. My specific preparation lasted about one hour (the pairings are posted at l l am and rounds start at l pm). The immediate opening was "according to plan": I tt:Jf3 lDf6 2 c4 g6. Now I expected 3 g3 or 3 d4 with g3 to follow. I nstead came 3 tt:Jc3 and I immediately became concerned because this is hardly the move order if the plan is the king's bishop fianchetto. Still, I saw no reason not to continue with the King's Indian and played 3 i_g7. After 4 e4 it was clear that my specific opening preparation was for nought; after 4 d6 5 d4 0-0 6 �e2 by transposition we had reached the Normal Variation. Black's usual move is, of course, 6 e5 or if he wants to prevent the endgame resulting after 7 dxe5 dxe5 8 'ti'xd8 llxd8 9 �g5 , he can first play tt:Jbd7 and then 7 ... e5. Yet I was reluctant to enter either variation. In 6 ·

...

...

...

. ..

How to Play the Game

65

the first place , I was not going to allow a somewhat inferior endgame and most importantly , I had not at all reviewed any of the very complicated variations that can arise. I nstead, I quickly decided to play the less usual variation with 6 ... i.g4 (diagram). This was my thinking: ( 1 ) Since his basic opening repertoire consists of the king's bishop fianchetto, the chances are good that the addition of the Normal Variation is something fai rly recent. (2) He can be expected to know the usual main lines in the Normal Variation. (3) But since he probably does not have much experience with the "Normal", he may not have any sophistication about how to handle 6 . . . i.g4 even if he has "memorised" the main line within it. ,

My supposition was perfect. Rieke took 30 minutes for his 7th move and after the game admitted to me that he had known nothing about 6 . . . i.g4. The game course gave m e a quick decisive victory: 7 0-0(?!) lDfd7 8 lDe1(?!) i.xe2 9 lDxe2 c5 10 i.e3?! tbc6 1 1 b3 a6 12 :ilc1 \!VaS! 13 a4?! :ilfc8 (better is 13 ... cxd4!) 14 d5?! lbb4 15 lDd3 lDxd3! 16 'ti'xd3 b5! 17 'ti'd2?! 'ti'xd2 18 i.xd2 bxa4 19 bxa4 :ilab8 White resigns If no information is "usable", be very very careful. The best general advice is: play a good sound line with which you are basically familiar. Moreover: Avoid a complicated sharp line unless you have recently analysed/prepared it in depth. A perfect example of what not to do is demonstrated by the game Mednis-K.Burger, New York (Burger) International 1980. I had prepared for 2 . . . d6 in the Sicilian (aiming for the Naj dorf) and was quite ready. However, Burger completely surprised me (after 1 e4) with 1 ... g6. After 2 d4 d6 3 lDc3 i.g7 I had to decide which variation to play. Since I was unprepared for all of them, I should have played the simple 4 lDf3. However, this was already Round 7, I had a poor start and was - 2 and I was "counting" on a win against Burger to improve my standing. Therefore I decided on the sharp 4 f4, which I had analysed and even published 8 months earlier. It was this analysis that Burger was prepared for. After 4 ... lDc6 5 i.e3 lDf6 6 i.e2 0-0 7 lDf3 a6 8 e5 lDg4 9 i.g1 b5 10 g5 tb

66

How to Be a Complete Tournament Player

he improved with 1 0 lLlh6! (in place of 1 0 . . . f6). After 1 1 .tf3 .i.d7 my faulty 12 e6? (correct is 1 2 'i¥e2) led to a better position for Black and a subsequent win for Burger. Thus, not surprisingly, my "reward" for ignoring the sound principles presented in this section was a third loss! You have now learned the basic principles of how to prepare for the game and how to utilise this preparation in actually playing the game. Prepare hard, play hard and you will win! Good Luck! ...

Questions and Answers Question 1 You are to be Black against an opponent who lately, after 1 d4 lLlf6, has been playing 2 .i.g5. It is January 1990 and you consult the latest Chess Informant (47). The course and analysis of game 88, Hodgson-Rogers, Wijk aan Zee 11 1989, looks very attractive to you: 1 d4 lLlf6 2 .tg5 e6 3 e4 h6 4 ..txf6 'ifxf6 5 lLlf3 d6 6 lt:lc3 lt:ld7 7 'it'd2 c6 8 0-0-0 e5 (diagram) After Black's last move GM Rogers calls the chances equal, attaches ?! to White's 9 h4 and, instead, gives 9 'ti'e3 and 9 �b l as equal. You feel confident and prepared . In your game the first eight moves are played quickly, and then your opponent just as quickly plays 9 dxe5. What should be your reaction?

67

How to Play the Game

Answer Your initial reaction should be one of a combination of amazement and perplexity. 9 dxe5 is just such an amazingly anti-positional move (White completely gives up his central superiority if Black responds with the centrally indicated 9 . dxe5) that you must be at least somewhat suspicious. Please check out the position after 9 dxe5 carefully to make sure that there are no unpleasant surprises. Otherwise, you will feel that a brick has landed on your head. This happened to me in the game Hodgson-Mednis, Stavanger 1 990. I couldn't grasp what White was doing, for a fleeting moment considered the possibility that 10 lDb5 could be played, just as quickly rejected it - and a few seconds later saw myself faced with 10 lDb5 ! ! . Since 1 0 . . . cxb5 loses to 1 1 .txb5 '@e6 12 lDxe5 1!Vxe5 13 .txd7+ e6. Just as you cannot rely on your opponent, so neither can you rely on anyone else to be safe. Why assume, for instance, that the people who are putting the moves on the demo board are keeping an accurate move count when the players are in time trouble and blitzing away? As one example, Korchnoi had a poor tournament at Wijk aan Zee 1 983 (6 out of 1 3), but what really made it look even worse was what happened in the last round game, V .Korchnoi-V.Hort. Korchnoi was ready to seal his 41 st move - see the diagram - in a position where White has a slight yet nice and clear endgame edge. Both players had assumed that they had made move 40, because the demo boardsaidso. B ut, in fact, only 39 moves had been made ! Therefore, White, who was on move, had overstepped the time limit and was, of course, forfeited. ..

..

Please be very very sure that you have reached the time control before you start acting as if you had. Never, never start filling in your score sheet with your clock running unless you are 1 000% sure that time control has been reached. Otherwise you risk a most devastating loss. There really is no more wasteful and unnecessary a loss than inadvertently overstepping the time limit. A most unhappy example from the 1960 World Student

What to Do After the Time Control Has Been Reached

75

Championship in Leningrad occurred in the game Madler-A.Saidy.

The diagram s hows the position after White's 40th move - though neither player realised it was move 40 since they had been blitzing for the past 15 moves ! At this point, Tony Saidy started to fill in the moves on his score sheet and was doing this most meticulously until suddenly his flag dropped as he had just filled in Black's 39th move. Since we were at that time in a close fight with the USSR for first place, this Round 8 ••accident" was most unfortunate as it gave East Germany its only score in the match. (The USA won the Championship with 4 1 points ahead of the USSR 's 39 Y2.) Even when you realise that the time control has been reached, there is one situation where you want to act as if it has not: when your position is absolutely lost. If your only hope is blunders by your opponent, do play on in the hope that he will also do so. Playing without thinking increases the risk of a blunder and this is what you are counting on when by blitzing you try to ••force" your opponent to also do so. Sometimes this approach can also be justified when you think that you are losing. An instructive example is shown in the next diagram, E.Mednis­ K.Commons, 1975 US Championship, after Black's 40th move. I had stopped keeping score after my 33rd move and Commons had also stopped about that time. At the point shown in the diagram we didn't have a clue regarding exactly how many moves had been played. Earlier on (starting on move 3 1 ) I had horribly misplayed a superior endgame and at this point I felt that my position was hopeless: Black has two connected passed pawns for the exchange, these are ready to march

76

How to Be a Complete Tournament Player

forward decisively and where is my counterplay to come from? I decided that for better or worse I must continue blitzing: 41 Ii.a8 b4 42 Ii.h8! (Active rooks counterplay! ) 42 ... llJc3?? (Loses by force. Some reasonable move would surely draw.) 43 Ii.h7+ c,t>g6 44 Ii.xe7 Ii.xe2+ 45 'i!n1 b3 46 Ii.xe6+ (At this point I was 100% sure the time control had been reached . But I played this quickly to induce a hoped-for error.) 46 ... �h5 (As hoped. But 46 . . c.t>f7 47 Ii.b6 also wins for White.) 47 Ii.h8 (But I took plenty of time before playing this - since I wanted to make 1 000% sure it wins.) Black resigns. Apart from the above case, as soon as you are sure that the time control has been reached , it is time to take stock of the situation on the board. Your specific follow-up will be different depending on whether the game is to be continued until the next time control or adjourned once the required playing time limit is reached. =

.

I

THE GAME IS TO BE CONTINUED

With the advent of the "40 moves in 2 hours to be followed by a second time control of 20 moves in one hour" time limit, more and more games are currently being continued beyond the first time control, as compared to the situation that existed just a few years ago. This means that it is extremely important to be able to cope with the psychological pressures that can occur when the first time control is reached. A tremendous natural letdown usually occurs when the time control has been reached. This is especially so if you have just come out of time

What to Do After the Time Control Has Been Reached

77

pressure. Now that the danger point is over, the body feels that its job is done and it can take a break. This is an exceedingly dangerous situation. The number of ••unnecessary" errors that have been committed on move 41 are legion. You have to mobilise your system anew in this situation. Absolutely never rush your 4 1 st move! To get yourself in the required careful mood, it may be a good idea to get up from the board after the time control has been reached and walk around a bit. When you return to your board you should then be ready again for ••normal" concentration. 11

THE GAME IS TO BE ADJO URNED

Whether the game is to be adjourned after move 40, move 60 or whenever - the following principles apply:

(A) It is in your interest to get your opponent to seal The most important reasons why it is to your advantage that your opponent has to seal are: ( 1 ) You don't risk making an error on your sealed move. (2) You don't have to make a fundamental decision if you don't have to seal. (3) If your opponent has to seal, he has to decide on the correct plan if the position is complicated. (4) If your opponent has to seal, he may seal a poor or stupid move. The last point is a very important one. A player very often is psychologically under stress when he has to seal. He becomes unsure of the position, is worried about real or imagined ghosts etc. During the period leading up to the time control, the mind concentrates hard, but as pointed out a bit earlier, once time control is reached the mind tends to relax. This also can very easily be the situation when you seal. Here I would like to present a few of what seem to me ridiculous sealed moves: ( I ) The diagram shows the position in H. Van Riemsdyk-E.Mednis, Riga lnterzonal 1979, after Black's 46th move. Earlier on I had squandered a large advantage and was now only a bit better. Here White had to seal and my analysis showed that after the sensible 47 f3 and reasonable play thereafter, Black's winning prospects were scant. I even considered calling the game a draw without resumption, but decided that I should at least make some effort. Upon resumption of play White's sealed move

78

How to Be a Complete Tournament Player

was revealed to be 47 f4+?? (Riemsdyk explained the reasoning for the move as follows: he thought that the endgame after 47 f3 was lost and that therefore he should play for ..complications". Yet it is only after the text that White is lost) 47 ... gxf4+ 48 �2 h3! 49 lla7 ltJg5 50 lla3 d5 51 lla5! 'itte4 52 lla6 We5 53 lla5 e4 54 lla6 and now instead of 54 ... liJf3? 55 llxf6 ltJxh2 56 lle6+ eMS 57 lld6! e5 58 lld8! and White was able to stop all of Black's pawns for a 73 move draw, winning is 54 . . . f5 55 llg6 ltJf3 ! , e.g. 56 lle6+ ltJe5 57 llh6 f3+ 58 d2 d4! 59 llxh3 d3 ! and there is no defence to 60 ... f2.

(2 ) The diagram shows the position i n V.Zaltsman-E.Mednis, New York (Burger) International / 980, after Black 's 40th move. Black's queen +

Wha t to Do After the Time Control Has Been Reached

79

bishop exert some pressure on White's position, yet White can keep the chances equal with 4 1 't!Yb5! 't!Yc2 42 'i¥e2! since 42 . . . l!Vc 1 43 liJb5 ! a6 44 liJd6 gives White full counterplay. However, White had to seal his 4 1 st move and feeling generally uncomfortable with his position, decided after 20 minutes thought that he must immediately go for counterplay via the direct 41 'it'f3?. After 41 ... 'it'xb2 42 'it'f6+ 'it'g8 43 1!fd8+ �g7 44 'it'f6+ �g8 45 'ild8+ i.f8 46 liJe4 'i¥xe5! 47 liJf6+ �7 48 'ifxf8+ ®xf6! 49 1!Vh8+ 'it'f5 50 'it'xh7 'i¥d5+ Black had won a sound pawn and he won the game after 51 'it'h2 W£6! 52 'ti'h8+ �e7 53 'YWb8 'i¥a5 54 'it'c7+ �f6 55 't!fd8+ �7 56 l!Vd4+ e5 57 'ti'e4 'i¥c5. Here White sealed 58 Wf3 and resigned without continuing the game.

(3) The diagram is E.Mednis-L.Barczay, Szolnok 1975, after Black's 40th move.Black is a pawn up and has two connected passed pawns on the queenside. Theoretically speaking I felt rather queasy about the position but its complicated nature gave me confidence for the practical play to follow. It was obvious to me that White's chances must come from an attack along the g- and h-files. Therefore I quickly played 41 Wg2! since I wanted my opponent to have to seal in this complicated position. Thematic plans for Black included 4 1 ... b5 or 4 1 . . . a5, in each case mobilising his passed pawns. Instead Black had sealed 41 ... liJf6?! ­ unexpected and a rather strange move. Why remove the knight from its powerful location on e4? The further course of the game was equally strange : 42 li[hl �h7 43 lil:3bl liJg4 44 liJd7 lil:xd7?! 45 cxd7 't!Yxd7 46 lil:hcl liJf6? (46 . .. lil:c8) 47 Wc6 Wf7 48 lil:xb6 'ifb5+ 49 'it'd3! lbb6 50 @xb6 liJe4 51 @xe6 liJxfl+ 52 �c4?! (52 Wc3! ) 52 ... 't!Ye2+ 53 'iW5 Wb5+ 54 lil:c5

80

How to Be a Complete Tournament Player

.,3+ 55 Itc4 'i¥b5+ 56 Itc5 't!fb3+ Draw, offered by White ! Maybe Black has a draw after 57 Itc4 1!Vb5+ 58 \t>d6 llJe4+ 59 d7 46 �a2 'itlc7 47 ll:lc3 i.xg3 48 lLldS+ �b7 49 ll:lxf6 i.xh4 SO ll:lxh5 Wb6 51 �xa3 �xb5 52 Wb3 g3 53 ll:lf4 i.gS 54 ll:lg2 aS 55 eS i.e7 56 dS a4+ 57 �a2 i.c5! 58 d6 Wc6 59 ll:let �7 60 wb2 i.b4 61 ll:lf3 g2 62 a2 'it>e6 63 Wd3 'it>d5 64 d7 i.e7 65 wc3 'itle4 66 ll:lgl �xe5 67 lbe2 we4 68 'it>c4 'it>e3 69 lbgl �d2 70 ll:lf3+ Wet 71 wc3 'it>bl 72 ll:ld2+ �a2 73 ll:lf3 i.f6+ 74 'it>c2 'itla3 75 lbgl 'it>b4 76 lbf3 a3 77 �bl gl W+ White resigns =

(2) The diagram shows the pos1tton after Black's 40th move in E.Mednis-L.Ljubojevic, Riga Interzonal 1979. Compared to the previous example, I had been in trouble earlier on and it was only now that I was

82

How to Be a Complete Tournament Player

confident that I stood well. Therefore I decided to seal my next obvious move here, although it would have been more perceptive to play it on the board, since all the difficult choices are on Black's side: 41 I!d8+ .ifS Of course, Black could seal this forced move. But perhaps he would continue to play? In any case, White should confront Black with this decision. 42 lL:lxd5 lL:lxd5 43 l:i:xd5 The previous five "half moves" were obvious. But if Black had been forced to seal now, he would have had to do some real thinking. The only correct move is the game continuation. 43 ... lld6!! 44 lld4! rM7 45 l:U4+ Wg8! ! After 45 . . . h7 does not change matters. In either case, White wins a piece and the game with the obvious 42 b4! . But in my temporarily muddled state, I decided to "first repeat the position" . . . .

84

How to Be a Complete Tournament Player

42 @g5?? Of course, Black is not "forced" to respond with 42 ... Wg7??. Instead he sealed the correct . 42 lbg4! Black's chances are now at least equal to White's. Black safeguards the f6 square and prevents all immediate threats. It is White who now has to worry about weaknesses, e .g. the pawns on e4 and h4. The game was drawn on move 103, but White had to fight for the draw. .

.

.•.

C) Seal voluntarily if you are confident of your position and want to stop the play for analysis Continuing the play always runs the risk of error or the sudden appearance of a decision point. Immediately stopping the play removes these risks. The following two examples show the successful application of this principle.

( 1 ) The diagram is L.Polugayevsky-E.Mednis, Riga Interzonal 1979, after White's 4 1 st move. With two rooks for the queen White has a material advantage of approximately one pawn. Nevertheless, the activity of my queen coupled with the drafty situation of White's king made me feel quite secure that with the proper queen manoeuvres I could create sufficient counterplay for a draw. Therefore, it seemed in order to stop play and start analysis. After ten minutes of thought I sealed: 41 'tWdl ! Draw The draw was offered next day by my opponent. He had also come to ..•

What to Do After the Time Control Has Been Reached

the same conclusion material advantage.

as

85

me: the active queen negates White's slight

(2) This position occurred in D .Rajkovic-E.Mednis, Barcelona 1980, after White's 4 1 st move. A wonderfully unbalanced position has arisen after the time control. The prospects are excellent that with mutually best play, each side's play and counterplay is sufficient to hold the balance. But what is to be the best play? The only way to really find out is to provide time for analysis. White is threatening 42 l::t e 7+; if 4 1 . . . �f6, 42 l::tb 8 and Black has to decide whether he wants/needs to play 42 . . . b5. What should Black do now? Seal! 41 . M6 Draw The playing schedule called for a first session of 40 moves in 5 hours, followed by a two hour dinner break and then an additional four hours of play. During analysis, both of us had come to the conclusion that after 42 l::t b8 b5 Black is fine; GM Rajkovic had decided to head thereafter for a drawn Q + P endgame with 43 l::t h 8 l::t c4 44 l::t h 4. Therefore, before resumption of play we agreed on the draw. ..

D) If you must seal in a position that requires independent thinking, try to act in accordance with the following guidelines: ( 1 ) Relax so that you are able to start concentrating. (2) G et a hang of the position. (3) Seal a good move, but do not take more than 30 minutes for it. To relax right after the time control, you may want to get up from

86

How to Be a Complete Tournament Player

the board and walk around for a few minutes . Though (2) is obvious to the strongest players, those less experienced tend to skip it and start analysing concrete moves. Needless to say, if you do not understand what the position is about, your chances of coming up with a correct sealed move are poor. The last guideline is meant to help you act rationally in sealing your move. Once you understand the theme of a position, very few logical moves come into consideration. Yet some positions require so much analysis that a complete job will require much more time than the maximum one hour allowed for sealing. Nothing is gained if in such situations you spend 59 minutes on your sealed move. You may still not seal the best one and, in any case, will have put yourself in the practically untenable situation of having to play 19 good moves in less than a minute. It is much better to spend no more than 30 minutes when selecting a logical (good) move and hope that your choice is a good one.

Questions And Answers Question 1

You are White in the position shown in the diagram. The second time control has been reached after Black's 60th move. The game is about two minutes short of the six hour playing limit before adjournment will take place. You are very tired. It is Round 1 and the playing session started quite late. Moreover, the game up to now has required from you almost

What to Do After the Time Control Has Been Reached

87

six hours of solid effort. The playing schedule calls for resumption of play at 10 pm after a 1 \12-hour dinner break. What should you do now?

Answer "Nothing" is the correct answer. You should get up, clear your head and wait for the arbiter to tell you to seal your move. Except for the presence of the c- and d-pawns this would be a standard Lucena position, routinely winning for White. The presence of the pawns gives Black a bit of hope, but does not affect White's thematic play. What you want to do is seal the normal move for White, 61 'i!i>g6, and then analyse the position at your relative leisure. It will soon become clear that Black's o nly chance and the main line is 61 ... l:tg1 + 62 �f7 lid1 63 f6 �b6 64 �e7 l:te1 + 65 �f8 l:td1 66 f7 cJ, but now 67 'i!;>g7 is a clear win. But it didn't happen so in the game, E.Mednis-S.Nemirovski, Cannes 1 989, after Black's 60th move. I didn't want to adjourn, because I didn't want to come back at l O pm, as that "would make me even more tired". I somehow hoped that my opponent would resign in lieu of adjournment. The next thing that I realised was that from the diagram my king was standing on e7, as I " apparently" had played 61 'i!i>e7???. There was nothing left to do but agree on a draw - hardly the outcome I had expected when deciding not to adjourn immediately! Question 2

You are White in the diagram. After Black's 60th move the time control has been reached and the game is about a minute from being adj �urned. In the previous play you were triangulating with your king so

88

How to Be a Complete Tournament Player

that it can get to h3 at that moment when Black's king is on g7. What is your correct strategy now?

Answer You want to play 61 �h3 on the board as quickly as possible, to force Black to seal because Black has a crucial decision to make. Should he play 61 . . . W£6 or 61 ... �h6? It turns out that 61 . . . Wh6? loses while 6 1 . . . �6 draws: ( 1 ) 61 . . . �h6? 62 f4 gxf4 63 lbd3!! f3 64 lbc5 �g5 65 lbxa6 f4 66 g4! .ig6 67 lbc5 .ie4 68 a6 �g6 (68 . . . f2 69 lbxe4+ fxe4 70 �g2 etc.) 69 lbxe4 Black resigns, E .Mednis-L. Schandorff, Silkeborg 1 988. (2) 61 ... �f6! 62 lbd3 (62 f4 gxf4 63 gxf4 �g7 64 �h4 �h6 =) 62 ... .id7 63 f4 .ie6 64 fxg5+ �xg5 65 lbf4 .if7 66 �2 �4 67 �fl �g5 68 � �6 69 lbd3 .ie6 70 cM4 .id7! =. White stands "great" , but can never gain the necessary tempo to penetrate. I should add that I "tucked out" here. That is, I didn't play 6 1 �h3 quickly enough and thus had to seal it. But IM Schandorff in his analysis had assumed that line (2) after 65 lbf4 "must be lost" and thus chose the trickier (and inferior) 6 1 . . . �h6? after resumption of play. Question 3

You are Black in the diagram. Because your opponent has played so quickly, White's last move was his 5 1 st. The first session was to be for four hours with a time limit of 40 moves in 2 hours, with the adjournment after four hours of play. There are still some six minutes before adjournment. Black's obvious move is 5 1 . . . lhh4. Should you save time

What to Do After the Time Control Has Been Reached

89

and play 5 1 . . . lhh4 immediately?

Answer Absolutely not. Black wants to seal 5 1 . . . llxh4 because he is "comfortable" in that position and wants to work out during analysis the best approach for trying to realise his material advantage. The play from the diagram, J.Hodgson-E.Mednis, Stavanger 1990, after White's 5 1 st move, continued as follows: 51 ... llxh4 (Sealed move. White's response is forced) 52 ll::lf2 i.f5 ! ! ( It is crucial to first place the bishop on its best diagonal; the best square for t he rook is not yet certain.) 53 llg3? (Only the paradoxical looking 53 llf6 ! and if 53 ... llf4, 54 ll::le 4! llf3 55 ll::l d 6! offered some chances for resistance) 53 ... ll::l c 6! 54 ltJd3 i.xd3! 55 cxd3 ll::l b 4! 56 �cl llh2 57 d4 llc2+ 58 �bl lld2 59 b3 llxd4 60 �b2 lld3 61 llg4 ll::lc6 62 �2 llh3 63 �2 ll::l a5 64 �a3 ll::l xb3 65 d l 60 1!fd4+ with perpetual check. If instead 58 . . . c;t>e l , W hite continues checking with 59 'it'f2+ ! c;t>d l 60 1!fd4+ etc. Thus the only choice that Black has is whether to allow the draw by perpetual check or stalemate. After the next move, the time control was reached and White contemplated his sealed move. I sealed: 57 �a4 A silly move. And I spent over an hour on it, thus leaving myself only 3 minutes for the remaining 1 5 moves until the next time control at move 72. That was stupid! That is the penalty that one sometimes has to pay if one sees "too much". It was quite obvious to me that I can continue the checks after 57 Wb l + c;t>d2 58 '@b4+! , etc. But isn't there something better? And after a while I found 57 �d3 ! ! . If then 57 . . . 1Wh l+ 58 'i!lf2 exd3 White has a most elementary perpetual check after 59 '@c3+ etc. But I discarded 57 �d3 ! ! because of 5 7 . . . c;t>d l and White has "nothing better" than to again enter the "long complicated" checking with 58 �c2+! . (Of course, there is not a thing wrong with this - but the mind can play such tricks.) Then I noticed the intriguing text move. White himself now threatens to mate Black, starting with 58 Wc3+, so does Black have anything better than giving perpetual check himself? By the time I discovered that the situation is more complicated than I originally envisaged, I was almost out of time. I had to seal quickly - and decided on my latest creation: 5 7 �a4. ...

98

How to Be a Complete Tournament Player

57 ... li:Je2+ 58 � My initial (at the board) analysis considered only the draw after 58 ... li:Jg3+. After 58 ... �g3 White does not have to enter the complications of 59 c,t(xe2 �xg2+ but has the simple 59 �xe4 and because of the mate threat on c2, Black has nothing better than 59 ... t!ff4+ 60 t!fxf4 li:Jxf4. But the ending after 6 1 .ie8 is an easy draw. However, Black can complicate with: 58 . . 'intl + 59 c,t(f2 'i!Vgl +! 60 c,t(xe2 'i!¥xg2 + So White has been forced to allow the complications. The position is a draw, though White must be careful that the pawns do not become too strong. I had ample time for home analysis and after several pages of such analysis was quite confident that I would be able to come up with the right answer at the required clip of 1 2 seconds per move. 61 we3 't!Vf3+ After 6 1 . . . 'it'g l + , 62 We2 is sufficient. 62 �4 Wd3+ 63 wc5 't!Ve3+ There is no way Black can win, no matter what he does, as long as White defends accurately. The detailed analysis is not really all that interesting and I will omit it. 64 �5 f5 65 We5! f4 Or 65 . . 't!Vf3 66 1!fel + c,i;>b2 67 .idl . 66 1!fxe4 Wd2 6 7 W£5! f3 68 tWxe3+ c,!;>xe3 6 9 c,t>g5 Draw .

.

II

ADJOURNMENT TIME IS O VERNIGHT OR LONGER

Overnight or longer analysis can and should be rather exhaustive. Chess is generally inexhaustible and the longer you analyse the adjourned position, the closer you will come to the ultimate truth. A grandmaster who spends 1 5 hours analysing will know a lot more than the grandmaster who satisfies himself with 4 hours of work. A good example of the above is the diagram position, F.Gheorghiu­ L.Polugayevsky, Petropolis Interzonal 1973, after Black's 40th move. Events associated with this are wonderfully described by GM Polugayevsky in his marvellous book Grandmaster Preparation (pp. l l 51 1 8). Just before adjournment both sides had traded blunders and now White had to seal. At first glance things looked bleak for Black, but analysis of the adjourned position with his second GM Bagirov - lasting more than 15 hours - convinced Polugayevsky that he is just a shade away

How to Analyse Adjourned Games

99

from victory. The game resumed as follows:

41 llxe5 't!ffl+ 42 'it>g4 lld8!! This strong retreat was a huge surprise for White who had only expected the immediate 42 ... l:tg2+ or 42 ... @g l + . Not surprisingly, White fails to come up with the correct move. 43 c.t>xf4? This loses, as do: a) 43 Wg5?: 43 . . . lii xg6 44 l:txh7+ c.t>xh7 45 lle7+ c.t>h8 46 Wxg6 't!fg2+ when White is mated or loses his queen. b) 43 Wf5?: 43 . . . l:txg6+ 44 c.t>xf4 't!fc l + 45 lite3 g8! (intending 46 . . . l:tf8) 46 llxh7 c.t>xh7 4 7 'iff7+ h6 or 46 't!fc5 l:tf8+ 4 7 ct>e4 l:te6+. c) 43 liit h l?: 43 . . . lixg6+ 44 'it>xf4 Wc4+ 45 lii e4 liif8+ 46 e3 Wxc3+ 47 f2 lih6 ! ! 48 Wxh6 Wxf3+ 49 e l 'fi'xe4+ 50 d2 lii d 8+. But no win could be found after the paradoxical looking 43 g5 53 lle2 h5 54 lie4 Wc2+ 55 'it>g3 1t'c3 56 'it>g2 't!fd3 57 'it>g3 � 58 lif4+ 'it>e5 59 lla4 g5 60 lla5+ cM6

102

How to Be a Complete Tournament Player

61 lidS 'it'e3 62 :1Id6+ �e7 White resigns). But unfortunately, the majority of your adjourned games will not fall into this welcome category. Even many ..apparently simple" positions will turn out to be not so simple after all. The amount of time that you have is always limited and your position will keep appearing "limitless" . This makes it imperative for the player to continually make certain practical decisions as he analyses. I will now discuss how a GM in real life tackles such a situation. I am setting up the board (diagrams) from Black's point of view because this is the side from which I did my analysis and I want you also to follow the coming play from that side.

The diagram shows the position from K.Commons-E.Mednis, US Championship 1978, after White's 34th move. The time control (and adjournment) is after move 40 and Black is obviously looking forward to it. With good play earlier he has won a sound pawn, a pawn for which White has no compensation. B lack's immediate general goal is to reach the "safe haven" at move 40 in no worse condition than he is now. The specific evaluation of the position shows that the kingside pawn formation is symmetrical and on the queenside Black has an unopposed passed a-pawn. Theoretically, the position should be won for Black, yet this will not happen by itself. As always, Black must expect that care and accuracy will be required for the full point. The start is easy enough: 34 ... :1Ia2! Activating the rook and making room for the a-pawn's run. 35 f3 lLlc3 36 :1Ib3 lLldS 37 lLld6 As there is no time for slow defensive manoeuvres - e.g. 37 g3 a5 ! 38 e4

103

How to Analyse Adjourned Games

a4! allows Black to mobilise his a-pawn too quickly, while 37 e4 allows 37 . . . lbf4 - White tries to create some attacking chances with his rook and knight. This is the best practical approach. 37 ... aS! 38 h4 a4 39 litb8+ 'i!i>h7 40 lbxf7 The only logical move. Clearly inferior is 40 e4? lbe3 and Black is a tempo ahead of the game, i.e. Black is one move closer to queening the a­ pawn and White is a move behind in his attack. These factors completely overshadow the existence or non-existence of White's e-pawn. 40 . lDxe3 41 g4 White played this quickly to force Black to seal. The obvious move for Black now is 4 1 . . . a3 and that is what I considered for about 10 minutes prior to sealing. The main forcing line seemed to be 42 h5 g5 43 litb7 litg2+ ! 44 'i!i>h l litb2 45 lita7 a2 46 lDxg5+ �g8 47 lita8+ �g7 48 lbxe6+ �6 and now White is defenceless against the threat of 49 . . . litb l + followed b y 50 . . . a l = W. Therefore with confidence I sealed . . 41 a3 .

.

.

...

2

Returning to my room I quickly confirmed that 42 h5 indeed holds no dangers for Black since he can safeguard his king whilst also safeguarding his a-pawn. But chess is so inexhaustible and I started considering other reasonable plans for White. My attention was immediately drawn to 42 lita8 ! , thereby placing the rook in the very active "behind the passed pawn" position - see Diagram 3 . The kind of thinking and analysis that I went through in deciding on Black's best theoretical and practical plan should be of value to less experienced players in their adj ourned game analysis.

104

How to Be a Complete Tournament Player

3

To start off, I felt in my bones that if there is "justice" in chess, then the position in Diagram 3 must be won for Black. After all, Black is an advanced passed a-pawn ahead and White's king is confined to the first rank. It soon became apparent, however, that there are also negatives for Black: his king is in some danger and his rook is awkwardly placed in front of his passed pawn. Therefore I started to feel that instead of many roads to Rome, there may well only be one winning line. It was up to me to find it! There were to be two main lines as follows: ( 1 ) The most forcing approach is to get the a-pawn going and I looked at this first: 42 . . . l:lg2+ 43 'it>h1 a2 44 h5 g5 (There is no other way to prevent mate. ) 45 hxg6 e. p.+ 'it>xg6 (Unfortunately Black must capture because 45 . . . 'it>g7?! 46 lt:Je5 with the threat of 47 liia 7+ gives White a certain draw.) 46 lt:Je5+ �g5 47 lt:Jc4 (Thanks to the tempo gained by checking, White's knight has got back in time and immediately exposes the momentarily unsatisfactory placement of Black's rook and knight.) 4 7 ... lii e2 48 lt:Jxe3 liie 1 + (I was most reluctant to part with the a-pawn in any analysis and explored at some length 48 ... �f4. However, after 49 lt:Jg2+ �g3 White defends with 50 f4! and even the better 49 .. . 'it>xf3 offers nothing close to a win.) 49 �g2 a 1='fi' 50 lii xa l lii xa l 5 1 �g3 ! . H ow to correctly judge the position i n Diagram 4? Black of course has a significant material advantage, yet there are many pluses in White's situation: material is severely reduced, White's king, knight and pawns are well placed defensively, Black's pawns are scattered and weak rather than strong. Despite relative simplicity, such a position does not appear in any of the reference works on the endgame and thus independent

How to Analyse Adjourned Games

105

4

judgement and analysis is required. Black can readily make one step towards simplification by exchanging his h-pawn for White's g-pawn. Yet that would seem to clearly lead to the drawn positions discussed on pages 1 29- 1 32 of Averbakh's Rook v. Minor Piece Endings. Some analysis of Diagram 4 convinced me that though Black has good practical winning chances, White also has good practical drawing chances. The major question, however, was: is it a theoretical win for Black? I couldn't come to a firm decision and felt that at a minimum 10 hours of solid analysis were required to get at the truth. My intuition was that there was perhaps a 70% probability of the position being a win. What to do -from the standpoint of practical play? I could, of course, have spent the night and early morning analysing away in order to find the truth. B ut what if the ultimate truth was unfavourable, i.e. the position is drawn? For the endgame theoretician such a conclusion is fine, but surely not for the practical player who is trying to win from Diagram 3! And note that this conclusion would have absorbed all of Black's available time, including both analysis time and sleeping time. Even now I am not really sure of the correct evaluation of Diagram 4. After the game Commons said that his analysis showed this type of position to be lost. But I am unsure as to whether he was not being too pessimistically inclined. Also after the game I asked GM Pal Benko - an excellent endgame analyst - to comment on the position. His feeling was similar to mine: a tremendous amount of analysis is required, with the winning prospects only somewhat higher than 50%. Everything must always be put into perspective. From a run-of-the-

106

How to Be a Complete Tournament Player

mill somewhat favourable middlegame or endgame, Black has every reason to feel happy at getting to Diagram 4; after all, he has good winning chances and no risk of losing. It is just that the passed a-pawn in Diagram 3 looks so powerful that it didn't seem worth trading it for anything which wasn't a sure thing. Therefore I started looking at variations which retain the pawn. (2) The other logical approach is to free the king, starting with 42 . . . �g6. White's best then i s 4 3 lLle5+ (Both 4 3 lla7 and 43 ll f8 were quickly shown to be unsatisfactory.) and Black responds with 43 . . . Wf6. Here three tries for White came into consideration: a) 44 lLld3. After 44 . . lLlc4 I decided that with both Black's king and a-pawn safe, the win is fairly routine. b) 44 f4. This threatens 45 lla7 with unavoidable mate on f7. Yet the obvious 44 . . . g5 undermines the knight position for a certain win. c) 44 lLlc6. .

5

This turned out to be most annoying. My initial reaction was 44 . . . llg2+ 4 5 �h l a 2 46 lLlb4 �e5! a n d no matter how White captures the a­ pawn, Black's king will penetrate via ... �f4 and defoliate White's kingside. But in looking further for tactical tries for White I noted the surprising 46 g5+!? (instead of 46 lLlb4) . lf now 46 ... Wf5 47 gxh6 gxh6 48 lLlb4 and compared to the previous note, White has exchanged off one pair of pawns and thus has less to lose. A nd the tactical point of 46 g5+!? is that after 46 ... hxg5 White plays 47 h5 and threatens mate with 48 llf8. This is where my preparation for the resumption of play ended. I had analysed at night, slept fairly well for 5-6 hours and analysed again in the

107

How to Analyse Adjourned Games

morning, with the total analysis time being about 12 hours. I had decided to play this second line for several reasons. Most importantly, I felt that it was theoretically stronger. In addition, line ( I ) was of a rather forced character and my opponent was fairly sure to have found it. However, the "best" moves in this second line were based rather more on judgement and there was the more realistic hope that he would be making choices other than what I considered to be the best. Thus I went to play off the adjourned game in a confident frame of mind, but not 100% certain of a theoretical win. If he were to play perfectly and if in fact the chess goddess had decreed that there was no theoretical win from Diagram 3 - well, that's life . A n afterthought i s in order here. Looking a t the position after 4 7 h5 in the quiet of my home, it seemed that after the routine 47 ... f7 Black had every reason to expect both a theoretical and practical win. In exchange for the a-pawn, Blac k should win the other two pawns and then the three­ pawn advantage must in due course be decisive. When the game was resumed, Commons quickly played:

42 hS?! His analysis had convinced him that the position was lost and he felt that this led to "trappier" play. For my part I was delighted to see it since I was sure that I now had a certain theoretical win.

42 . . gS 43 l:lb3 .

43 hxg6+ xg6 just serves to free Black's king; 43 discussed i n the note to White's 4 1 st move.

l:lb7 was

43 ... lb c2! The last key move. The knight covers the a-pawn's queening square and thus ensures success. 44 l:ld3

White took a long time on this move, looking for a possible trap for Black to fall into.

44 ... l:lb2 45 l:ld7 a2 46 lbxgS+ g8 47 l:ld8+ g7 48 l:ld7+ The last try. 48 . . . 'i!?g8 repeats the position while 48 .. 'i!?f8?? allows 49 lbh7+ 'i!?e8 50 lbf6+ f8 5 1 lbh7+ with a perpetual check - note how White's rook on d7 cuts off the Black king from an escape route (the point behind White's 44th + 45th moves! ). .

48 ... Wf6 White resigns

108

How to Be a Complete Tournament Player

Questions and Answers Question 1

You are Black in the diagram. By being "too careful", you allowed White to consolidate before the time control and you realise that your "easy win" is gone. Your sealed move was 4 1 . . . Ii. (g3)-g8 . The game is to be resumed in less than two hours. What should you give your attention to in the very limited time available?

Answer You are a pawn up in the form of a protected passed f-pawn. If White has no tactical shots, Black, with opportunities both on the queenside and kingside, will win in due course. Therefore, the immediate need is to look for any tactical possibilities White has in the diagram. The first "tactics" that hit the eye should be 42 .txd5!? exd5 43 'Wxd5. For the moment Black's pieces stand awkwardly and White threatens 44 'ti'f7. Because 43 . . . Ii.g7? fails to 44 e6, Black needs a different way of protecting f7. Since the Ii.b8 is doing "nothing" there, the logical choice becomes 43 Ii.bf8 ! . Then Black has to consider the following White plans: ( 1 ) 44 e6: Black then has to decide between being satisfied with some winning chances in the endgame after 44 . . . i.c6 45 t'bxc6 'Wxc6 46 Ii.xf5 'ti'xd5 47 Ii.xd5 or risking the middlegame after 44 . . . i.e8 . (2) 44 Ii.dl : Black seems to have 44 . . . Ii.g4 ! , when discovered attacks along the d-file can be parried since 45 t'bxf5 is met by 45 ... i.xf5+ 46 Ii.xf5 'Wg6! . ...

1 09

How to Analyse Adjourned Games

The diagram comes from the game M.Lanzani-E.Mednis, Lugano 1 988 after Black's 4 1st move. I felt pretty confident in case of 44 lldl llg4!, but �c6 or had not decided before resumption of play whether to play 44 �e8 after 44 e6. Yet I didn't have to do any further "worrying" 44 because my opponent resigned the game and quit the tournament before play was to be resumed. ...

...

Question 2

You are White in the diagram. After a 5-hour session stretching into the late evening the game was adjourned and you sealed the flexible, non­ committal 5 1 llc6+. The game is to be resumed at 9 am. What should be your approach to analysis in order to ensure the win?

Answer While it is true tht you have a whole night for analysis, the position appears to be simple enough not to "deserve" that kind of effort. After all, there is the regular round game to be played in early afternoon and you do not want to be "dead" for that. In the diagram Black's king has to retreat, e.g. to g7 , and then White needs a convincing way of continuing. What square in White's part of the board is under attack and can be used as a further springboard for Black's pieces? If White asks this correct question, the answer will lead to the right approach. The answer is "f4", e.g. 52 f5?! lbf4! . How to smoothly protect the f4 square? "52 llc4" is the obvious answer. Then White can start working on the decisive advance of the h-pawn. This position resulted from the game E.Mednis-A.Druckenthaner, Graz

110

How t o Be a Complete Tournament Player

1987, after White's sealed 5 1st move. The game continuation demonstrated the correctness of White's approach: 51 ...