YOUR MOVE

Australia’s independent Chess magazine

your move

1st i s s u e

Choosing your next move Paul Morphy the shooting star tempo Castling Pawns The Kings Indian Attack YOUR MOVE  1

There is no need for either reams of analyses or agonising over variations—just have a look to see if there’s a piece that could be doing a little more for the cause.

Welcome to the first edition of YOUR MOVE, Australia’s independent chess magazine

specifically designed for the recreational chess player! In YOUR MOVE you’ll find a wide variety of games--from beginner’s games to those of advanced players, even the occasional grandmaster and world champion.

How your move differs from other chess magazines is that it isn’t full of detailed analyses that is very hard to follow, much less to understand. There is a definite place for detailed analyses and there is a multitude of magazines where this is the mainstay.

With YOUR MOVE the focus will be on general ideas and some rudimentary analyses to highlight the ideas behind the moves. If you’re wondering how does this work you only need to go to the games of Capablanca, Spassky, Lasker, Rubinstein and numerous other great players who put pen to paper before the advent of the computer.

Chess is dynamic and changing with every move. YOUR MOVE believes with a good understanding of basic principles followed with illustrative examples the reader will appreciate that dynamism and apply it to their games.

YOUR MOVE is also looking for your games. They don’t have to be brilliant. If you’ve played a game, whether it’s a win or a loss, and you’ve learned something from it send it in. We’d love to publish it. Again, we’re not looking for tomes of analyses; we’re looking for your thoughts, decisions--right or wrong--and what you’ve learned from it.

We hope you enjoy this first issue of YOUR MOVE and look forward to your input.

The Editors

YOUR MOVE Issue #2

Women in Chess Despite being in the minority of chess players, women have been a force in chess.

In Issue #2 we focus on some of the great women of chess and their greatest games.

Also

How did Bent Larsen lost to Boris Spassky in 14 moves!

25 entertaining games of 25 moves or less

The Petrov Defence - Solid and Dependable Enter a game against your daughter, or daughters against their father‘s and win a copy of Susan Plgars Best Games We’ll also publish that game! email: admin@thepoltroon.com

2 YOUR MOVE

First, how to sac my queen, then rook, then bishop, then knight, then pawns: (Mikhail Tal) Once a move is found it’s best not to immediately play it—Emmanuel Lasker, Or

How to choose your next move.

A journalist once asked Jose Raoul Ca-

pablanca how many moves he thought in advance. ‘One,’ the then reigning world champion replied. Capablanca wasn’t renowned for his modesty and probably answered the question truthfully; however, his ‘one’ opened a myriad of positions that only he, and perhaps a select few, could envisage. The title quote from Tal shows that he probably started with a single move and then saw the rest in his mind’s eye, as Capablanca would have done.

For we mere chess mortals the thought process of finding a move usually goes like this: ‘I move here, they take, I take; chances are castles, and…uhmm…maybe I should castle too before I move my knight.’

We are not Tal, nor Capablanca, nor Fischer, nor Karpov—we’re just trying not to blow the game and maybe win it! Winning is hard; even Emmanuel Lasker knew that: ‘The hardest game to win is a won game.’

The problem every chess player faces is finding the next move, perhaps not necessarily the best move but a good move, or at least one that won’t kiss all the previous effort goodbye. One of the best pieces of advice on the subject comes from C.J.S. Purdy, the first Correspondence Chess World Champion, ‘If you can’t think of anything look for your worst place piece then improve its position.’

again, ‘When you see a good move, wait, don’t play it, you might find a better one.’

Too often a game is ruined because of rushing. It’s far better to win a game with one minute remaining on the clock than losing it with an hour to spare. But how does one find the good move and then, possibly, the better one? Some people may prefer starting with Tal’s quote and go from there while others might decide to be a little more circumspect.

For those who prefer a modicum of caution I offer the following advice: Every move is a weakening move; find the weakness in your opponent’s position and try to exploit it. To do this; however, you mustn’t return the favour by giving them something to aim at, and it is here that some preliminary, methodical thinking needs to take place. What follows is a basic system to reduce the errors that would have you banging your head against a wall.

1. Reconnaissance Look over the whole board, not just the area you’re interested in. Make evaluations: Q-side: hostile rook has moved from a1- b1, centre OK, possible fork on K-side, for example. Remember that after each move the board has changed! What was possible may no longer be but what wasn’t could be. A look over the board may open new possibilities or force a reassessment of plan.

2. What are the threats?

Take note of the plural. As you’re planning multiple ways for your opponent’s demise so are they for yours. When you find threats are there ways of ignoring them by playing an attacking move?

Chess involves a lot of tactics and a strategic plan can fall apart due to a YOUR MOVE 3

tactical stroke.

3. How as the move changed the position?

If you can eliminate a tactical strike/combination then consideration of the overall situation should be taken into account—has the move created any weaknesses that can be exploited. If the answer is yes then a plan must be either formulated or revised to take this into account. One move can altar the board to such an extent that the use by date of your plan has passed and it’s time to get a new one.

4. Material This is broken down into two areas: pieces and pawns; furthermore, it is a mistake to assume that material equality means positional equality.

A piece is only as good as it’s mobility. With your Rook boxed in by its compatriots, unable to assist in attacking the enemy monarch, you’re playing a piece down—until it is freed. Without files and ranks a Rook can’t do much but a Bishop can be a wizard on the open diagonals. When assessing material it is important to recognise that certain pieces operate more effectively under certain circumstances; therefore, this gives them a plus or a minus depending on the position.

A Bishop can be cloistered whereas a Knight can be frisky in a closed game, for example. It is this subjectivity, and the ability to bring about favourable operating circumstances, when sacrificing of the exchange comes into its own.

‘Pawns are the soul of chess,’ said Andre Philidor and even if the merit of this quote is debatable the value of pawns are not. Books have been written on pawns and pawn structure and they role they play from the opening to the ending. When evaluating the relative merit of pawns—take note of the word ‘relative’—it is important to be able to recognise whether the pawns are strong or weak; backward, doubled; what squares they control or don’t, whether they can 4 YOUR MOVE

be blockaded, whether they’re in a chain, or are they either isolated or in islands; are they needed to attack or to defend? There will be subjectivity in the assessment relative to the position.

5. The King’s position A poorly defended king is asking for sacrifices be made to crack open the bastions. An overly defended king might be able to be smothered. In both of these cases it’s not a question of material but the ability to checkmate with the forces remaining.

The other thing to look for is the position of the pawns in front of the king.

Have they been moved? If they have there is a weakness. Can this be exploited?

6. Weaknesses and strengths Make a list of the weaknesses and strengths of both sides: weak pawns, mobility and scope of the pieces; where the majority of pawns are, cramped or exposed king, weak and strong squares—a weak square is one that can’t be defended by a pawn—what piece is controlling which squares, a lead in development, loss of tempo and so on. It was Steinitz who proposed the idea that to win at chess one must accumulate advantages, however slight, for many small advantages combine to a big one—and the player with the advantage must attack before the advantage dissipates.

7. Development Count the number of moves required to complete development—having your minor pieces out, king out of the way; possibly the Queen out.

8. Is there a combination?

Don’t become a slave to some deep plan that will bring eventual victory.

Keep your eye open for either any tactical shot or combination that presents itself.

Remember that with each move the board has changed, there are new strengths and weaknesses; so where something wasn’t possible a move or two ago might be now.

Emmanuel Lasker wrote that in the chessmaster, ‘…combination play is completed by

position play.’ (Lasker’s Chess Manual, 1932, page 109). Firstly look for the combination: if there isn’t one make the alteration in the plan.

This may seem like a lot to do; however, in correspondence/internet chess where you can have days to consider a move it is a good system to put into practice, in at least one game. If you’ve played with reasonably fast time limits try playing one game against someone who would like a longer time limit so you can try out the system.

If all of this is too much to remember: look for your worst placed piece and try to improve it.

For a more detailed explanation of the above system: ‘C.J.S. Purdy His Life, His Games, His Writings’ by J. Hammond and R. Jamieson, Belmont Printing, Melbourne 1982, pages 53-72.

How does Tal Win? He develops all his pieces to the centre and then sacrifices them somewhere Bobby Fischer

The Shooting Star.

Paul Morphy 1837 – 1884

Paul Charles Morphy was born on the 22nd of June 1837 to Alonzo and Thelcide Morphy, in New Orleans, Louisiana. His father was a distinguished jurist who would eventually hold the post of Supreme Court Judge for the State of Louisana while his mother, Therese Thelcide nee Le Carpentier, was a talented pianist, minor composer and had a pleasant mezzo-soprano singing voice. The Morphy’s were a distinguished family, his grandfather held the post of Spanish Consul in New Orleans and although there is little known of his mother’s background she was of French descent; her family coming being long term residents of the West Indies. Paul was the third of four children; he had an older brother, Edward 1834, and older and younger sister, Malvina 1830 and Helena 1839.

There isn’t a lot known of his early years except that he attended the Jefferson Academy in New Orleans where he studied Latin, Greek, French, English and Mathematics. Paul didn’t actively participate in sports since he wasn’t of a strong physical bearing. Johann YOUR MOVE 5

Lowenthal, in his book, ‘Morphy’s Chess’ gives us a description of Paul as a young man: ‘In person the subject of our Memoir is short and slight, with a graceful and dignified, though unpretending bearing.

He has black hair, dark brilliant eyes, small expressive features and a firmly set jaw, the latter lending an aspect of determination to the whole countenance.’

While at school, with the encouragement of his father, the young Morphy took up fencing and acting becoming adept at the former and, in the latter, played Portia in the Merchant of Venice, according to various sources.

Justice Eustice assured him that…Paul was quite worthy of his notice. So the game began, with Gen. Scott still angry and by no means satisfied.’

Perhaps it was dignity that had the general’s attention and not the game for he lost that in ten moves. Unwilling to accept defeat and perhaps wanting to salvage some of his ego Scott challenged the wisp across from him to another game.

He lost again. The general rose, ‘trembling with amazement’ and went home.

By the age of twelve the young Morphy could beat the best players New Orleans had to offer. In 1850 the Hungarian chess master Johann Jacob Lowenthal was in New Orleans; he was considered one of the finest players of his day. A meeting was arranged so a few games could be played. The first was a draw then Paul won the other two. According to William Hartston, Lowenthal included in this score a game that Morphy offered to discount after a mistake by his opponent. According to uncle Ernest Paul won the third game.

Ernest published it as it held a fine endgame won by Paul. In ‘An Illustrated Dictionary of Chess’, by Edward R. Brace, under the Lowenthal entry it gives the score 3-0 in favour of Morphy.

At home, along with music, chess was played for recreation. His father and uncle Ernest when visiting would play.

Paul’s brother, Edward, was also reported to be a promising player. Whether the young, diminutive Paul learned the game through merely watching his family play or was taught the rudiments of the game is anyone’s guess but, as Ernest was a prominent member of the New Orleans Chess Club he did encourage Paul to play.

By Ernest’s account to Dr. L.P. Meredith his little nephew didn’t need a lot of encouragement, ‘Paul…would suddenly drop his knife and fork at the table and set up on the checkered table-cloth a problem that had suddenly sprung into his head, The Hungarian master tried to play down those losses in later years claiming using the cruets, salt cellars and napkin he was depressed and suffering from the rings for pieces.’ climate. This is probably true as Lowenthal was in self-imposed exile, in fear for his So impressed was the uncle with his nephew’s progress that in 1846 when life as he was a supporter of the failed Kossuth uprising in his native Hungary. As General Winfield Scott was visiting New to the climate factor, it’s not known how Orleans a game was arranged between the distinguished General and the talented much time the émigré chess master had to acclimatise himself to the Louisiana nine-year-old. Scott liked chess and was considered a strong amateur. The game conditions. Paul’s uncle who was there wrote of Lowenthal during the first game, was reported in the Evening Post: At eight ‘…his startled looks and upraised brows o’clock dinner had been disposed of, the room was full. Gen. Scott, a towering giant, after each move of Paul’s was perfectly ludicrous…’ was asked to meet his competitor, a small boy, dressed in velvet knickerbockers, with a lace shirt and a big spreading collar According to uncle Ernest Lowenthal of the same material. At first Gen. Scott was, ‘a finished, courteous gentleman.’

In fact the Hungarian predicted that the imagined that it was a sorry jest and his young Paul would develop into the greatest tremendous dignity rose in protest…then 6 YOUR MOVE

master the world had ever seen. That his prediction would come true is even more unbelievable considering Paul’s fater, Alonzo, would only let his son play chess on Sundays as he had to leave the other days for schoolwork. Years later Paul would refer to Lowenthal as ‘my friend’ in the forward he wrote for the Hungarian master’s book, ‘Morphy’s Games.’

In that same year Paul entered Spring Hill College, in Mobile Alabama. It was there he befriended Charles Maurian. The two would remain friends for life and they would play the occasional game, with Paul at odds of a piece. Morphy was committed to his studies focusing on mathematics and law. Maurian vouched that Paul didn’t talk, study nor play chess in his first few years there: ‘He had neither a chess board nor even a chess book.’

Considering the scarcity of chess books and the paucity of their contents, with a few notable exceptions, and that Howard Staunton’s The Chessplayer’s Handbook wouldn’t be published until 1851, it’s not surprising that if Paul had any chessbooks he probably would have been at a much stronger playing strength than the authors and they would have been little use to him.

amateur player—the final score was 6-0 in the aspiring law student’s favour. In November of 1856 Paul’s father died.

Alonzo received a cut above his eye from a friend’s panama hat that became infected. He fell ill and never recovered.

Paul’s grief wasn’t reflected in his grades, receiving his law degree on the 7th April 1857. Since he was only twenty he needed to wait until his next birthday before he could begin practicing. Had he been born a year earlier the world and history might have never gazed upon this brilliant, shooting star of chess.

Unbeknown to Paul in early 1857 D.W. Fiske, the Editor of the new Chess Monthly magazine, a one-time Librarian and Professor of Northern European languages at Cornell University, was piecing together the idea of an American Chess Congress. He enlisted the help of the New York Chess Club that sent circulars to clubs around the country. Fiske’s dream became reality with a Prospectus announcing a National Chess Congress to be held in New York City on the 6th of October 1857.

Morphy received his A.B. Degree in 1853 and stayed another year pursuing his study of mathematics and law graduating with an A.M. Degree along with the highest honours ever awarded by Spring Hill at the time. Father Kenny in his ‘Torch on the Hill’ wrote, ‘War was the subject of his graduating thesis and he brought within very narrow limits the conditions that make it justifiable. The logic of his argument would exclude forcible secession and whether in play or in life Morphy was severely logical, even to a fault. But such a course brought consequences that preyed upon his mind.’

He returned to New Orleans and entered the Law School of the University of Louisiana. In 1855 while studying Paul took some time off to play six games against Judge Alexander Beaufort Meek, a strong YOUR MOVE 7

Paul Morphy was one of the players invited to participate however he declined, his reason being the death of his father the previous November. Such was Paul’s reputation that pressure was put on his family to convince him to attend. There is little doubt that Ernest, the voice of the New Oleans Chess Club and proud uncle, would have been ardent and vocal about Paul’s appearance at the congress. What ever Fiske, Ernest and others said it worked: Paul boarded a paddle-steamer for the eight day journey up the Mississippi to Descombe’s Rooms, 704 Broadway, New York City.

The National Chess Congress New York 1857 was to be run just as the Great Exhibition Tournament (London) of 1851: a knockout tournament of sixteen players each playing the best of three games to decide the match. In the lead up to the official play Paul played a series of convincing off-hand games against the other participants. The lad from Louisiana had established himself as a clear favourite by the time the tournament began. Only Louis Paulsen, a German émigré and leading player, was thought to have a chance against him.

In the first round Paul drew James Thompson and quickly won his three games. Next was his former foil, Judge Meek, who went down 3-0 and thirdly came Theodore Lichtenhein who managed to draw one game. The stage was then set for the final, which brought the two strongest players together—Morphy and Paulsen—both men having conceded a single draw on their way to the summit. Play began on the 29th of October.

The two protagonists were a stark contrast: Paul Morphy was short, dark haired and played quickly; Louis Paulsen was tall, blonde and played slowly, thinking nothing of spending an hour or two over a move.

The first game was won by Paul; whereas, the second was a draw after 8 YOUR MOVE

fifteen hours play. Louis won the third game, the fourth was drawn, and Paul regained the lead in the fifth game.

Before the sixth game, W.J.A. Fuller, who played a consultation game teamed with two other players at the Congress against Morphy told the following, ‘Just before this game, Morphy went down to the restaurant with me and took a glass of sherry and a biscuit. His patience was worn out by the great length of time Paulsen took for each move. His usually equable temper was so disturbed, that he clenched his fist and said, “Paulsen shall never win another game from me while he lives,” and he never did.

Paul’s ire produced a masterpiece 6th Game National Chess Congress New York Final 1857.

WHITE Louis Paulsen BLACK Paul Morphy.

1.e4, e5 2.Nf3, Nc6 3.Nc3, Nf6 4.Bb5, Bc5 5.0-0, 0-0 6.Nxe5, Re8 7.Nxc6, dxc6 8.Bc4, b5 (This weakens the c6 pawn that Paulsen tries to exploit.)

9.Be2, Nxe4 10.Nxe4, Rxe4 11.Bf3, Re6 12.c3, Qd3!

13.b4, Bb6 14.a4, bxa4 15.Qxa4, Bd7 16.Ra2 (Qa6 would have been better.)

16. …, Rae8 17. Qa6 (Too little too late.)

Morphy now spent the longest time he’d ever spent at the tournament on his next move—12 minutes.

17. …, Qxf3!

Charles Stanley, one of America’s leading players commented that Morphy should be confined to a lunatic asylum for this move. Paulsen deemed that his next move needed a great deal of cogitation—75 minutes.

18.gxf3, Rg6 19.Kh1, Bh3 20.Rd1, Bg2+ 21.Kg1, Bxf3+ 22.Kf1, Bg2+ 23.Kg1, Bh3+ 24.Kh1, Bf2 Charles Stanley was probably eating his hat by this stage realising that White can only stop checkmate by returning the Queen.

25.Qf1, Bxf1 26.Rxf1, Re2 27.Ra1, Rh6 28.d4, Be3 White Resigns.

For all that’s Weird Wonderful and Woeful in World History

www.thepoltroon.com

Paul went on to win the seventh game and on the 10th of November he won the eighth and the match. The top places were: Paul Morphy, first; Louis Paulsen, second; Theodor Lichtenheim, third.

YOUR MOVE 9

Five Points · If you move the same piece twice in the opening you’ve lost a tempo therefore it is critical to move a piece to its optimum square; to one it can’t be easily dislodged. · An exchange of two equally developed pieces loses a tempo if the recapture is with a developing move. · If the recapture is with a developed piece neither side gains a tempo. · Giving check with a piece doesn’t gain a tempo if the check can be parried by developing a piece. · If the checking piece can be driven away the check may lose a tempo.

Tempo An essential part of knowing how to play chess is understanding the importance of tempo, or chess-time. This isn’t the hours or minutes left to play a move but the move itself. White starts the game with a move— tempo—advantage. A lot of chess games are won by being one move, one tempo, ahead; in fact many sacrifices that lead to mate are initiated to gain a tempo. Gambit openings are played to gain a tempo at the cost of material and in many cases the best way to refute a gambit is to return the material, thereby regaining the lost tempo.

When you’re pondering a move alongside thoughts of centre control and development economy and efficiency should also be considered: which is the best square for the piece, where does it have the greatest potential and where can it not be immediately dislodged?

To gain a tempo in the opening is something to be aimed for. If your opponent plays a piece where it can be attacked by one of your lesser piece forcing it to move again next turn you have gained one tempo. The Scandinavian 10 YOUR MOVE

Defence (or Centre Counter) is an example: 1. e4 d5 2.exd5 Qxd5 3. Nc3 attacking Black’s queen, forcing it to move or be captured—White has developed a piece with tempo. There’s an old chess adage that says, ‘Three tempi are worth a pawn,’ and who wouldn’t like to be a pawn in front?

C.J.S. Purdy (the first Correspondence Chess World Champion) believed that players should think in tempos; he wrote articles to that effect in Australiasian Chess Review. He believed, as a general rule of thumb in the opening, a tempo was worth a third of a centre pawn and half a flank pawn. After both sides have fully developed the ‘worth’ of a tempo is harder to judge. In some closed openings the loss of a tempo is negligible, especially if it has some strategic aim—the knight manouvre to b8 in the Breyer Defence of the Ruy Lopez is an example.

With a gain in tempo—when the opponent is responding to your move—you have the initiative and the greater choice of follow-up moves, and possibly the course the game.

Usually, in an endgame one tempo is enough to win. It’s always gratifying to have your pawn being chased by the enemy king to the queening square knowing it needs one extra move to capture which it’ll never get. However, in endgames it may be critical to lose a tempo to put your king in opposition. The loss of a tempo, in that instance, can be the draw of the game.

Castling “Great players never castle.”

Königstedt in Kort AfhandlingSwedish Chess Manual, 1784

Castling is one of those mysterious chess

Why must I lose to this idiot?

Aaron Nimzovitch

moves that many people, both chess players and non-chess players, don’t understand: when to, how to and when you can’t. In an encounter between C.J.S. Purdy and Yuri Averbach, as reported in Chess World 1960, Purdy castled Queenside, whereupon Averbach pointed out that Purdy’s Rook had crossed an attacked square. It is hard to imagine the look on Purdy’s face as he tried to diplomatically tell the leading Soviet Grandmaster that that particular rule only applied to the king.

If Grandmasters aren’t sure of what to do perhaps here is a good point to refresh our knowledge.

Only once in a game can you move two pieces at the same time—a King and Rook; this is called castling. To castle very specific criteria must be met.

YOUR MOVE 11

lead to disaster. · You cannot castle to get out of check. · Your King cannot move either into or across check · You must touch the King first (castling is a King’s move) · It must be the King’s first move · It must be that particular Rook’s first move · There are no other pieces between the King and the Rook · A King that has been checked but has not moved (the check being blocked by another piece) may still castle if the other criteria pertaining to it are met. · The Rook may cross a square where it is attacked.

As stated previously the purpose of castling is to remove the king from the centre, which is where most of the chess action usually takes place. In the middle, with nowhere to hide, the King can become a sitting duck. Yet there are times when the King will be far more useful in the centre than hiding in a wing.

With Queen’s off the board and no immediate threat of checkmate, C.J.S. Purdy and G. Koshnitsky, in ‘Chess Made Easy’ put it this way: ‘To be prevented from castling is usually a great handicap because your King is likely to become exposed. But the handicap may be infinitesimal if the Queens have been exchanged off. And if at least one pair of Rooks and There are two forms of castling: Castling at least two pairs of minor pieces (Bishops, Kingside (usually written as 0-0) and Castling Knights) have also been exchanged, having your King uncastled and therefore near Queenside (usually written as 0-0-0). the centre is usually an asset. So if prevented from castling seek wholesale exchangTo castle Kingside the King moves two squares towards the King’s Rook, ending up es, especially of the Queens.’ on the Knight’s square and the Rook moves

In summary: if the Queens are off the to the King’s Bishop’s square.

King is in. If you can exchange down to an To castle Queenside the King moves two endgame it’s far better to have your King squares, ending up on the Queen’s Bishop’s in the centre where it can move quickly to either wing to support/harass pawns rather square and the Queen’s Rook ends up on than sitting on the far side of board away the Queen’s square. from the action. In such situations the King is a fighting piece.

In either case, the King moves two squares toward the Rook it wishes to castle

Despite the benefits of castling there with while the Rook ends up next to the is one drawback—your opponent knows King toward the centre files. where your King is and can devise plans for The purpose of castling is to remove the its demise. Oceans of ink and mountains of paper have gone into analysing how to King from the centre and bring the desired attack a King that has castled: variations of Rook into play. the Sicilian and the King’s Indian Defence are two good examples. In the Sicilian the When to castle.

Most opening manuals and beginners opponents often castle on opposite wings books tell you to castle as early as possible, and the game becomes one of who can to get your King out of the action and your storm the bastions first. In the King’s Indian it is black that tries to overwhelm white’s casRook into the action, thereby completing tled King while white, usually, seeks active your development. This is generally sound counterplay on the Queenside. advice and should be adhered to most of the time; however, advice is only good

when you need it. There are times it can 12 YOUR MOVE

The question is: On which side to castle? The answer isn’t always obvious. As stated previously, with the Queens off the board it may not even be necessary. The answer lies in what sort of opening you’re playing and what sort of middle game you’re expecting. It is more usual to castle on the Kingside (0-0) because the position is more compact than on the Queenside (00-0) where the a2/a7 pawn most probably needs defending with an additional move Kc1-b1. With Queenside castling moving c2-c4 doesn’t assist in activating the Rook like f2-4 does in Kingside castling.

It is also more likely that the pawns on the Queenside will advance while the Kingside pawns stay put. (Of course there are exceptions to this but these are usually well worked out attacking/defensive systems.)

As a general rule, whichever side you’ve castled on be wary of advancing the pawns on that side. The whole idea of castling is to remove your king from danger and protect it, not to open it up to attack.

Moving the pawns in front of your castled King will create weak squares where your opponent can place pieces.

If any man plays at chess and should quarrel in consequence and kill his opponent, such homicide shall be accounted involuntary and not voluntary for he employeth himself in lawful work Pope Innocent III

YOUR MOVE 13

hatches. The KID to the KIA is, nearly, the others’ alter ego: relying on active play with the thematic ideas of each sometimes merging. The important difference with the KIA is that White has the move (tempo) leading to a different type of game than that of the KID. Here’s what I.A. Horowitz— chess editor of The New York Times—had to say about it in 1964: The Indian in Reverse finds itself today at the peak of popularity.

This opening, offering White numerous chances for favourable transposition into other lines, has been adopted on important occasions by nearly every leading modern master. (Chess Openings Theory and Practice, Faber and Faber London, 1965, page 744).

Chess Openings, Vol 3’ (1973): Nowadays the King’s Indian Attack enjoys great popularity among players who do not aim for an opening advantage, but to a game which, though equal, is complicated.

Bobby Fischer, neither slouch nor timid when it came to openings, played the KIA 17times with four draws and two losses; defended against it 6 times, winning and drawing three games. The majority of Fischer’s KIAs were early in his career with just one in the Havana Olympiad 1966 and his final two at the Seigen Olympiad 1970.

The KIA has also been played intermittently at the highest level in Correspondence Chess. Here is a game from the 9th World Championship 1977-83.

King’s Indian Attack

Indeed it is the ability to transpose that makes the opening hard to meet.

As John Nunn eloquently puts it: 1.Nf3 is Chess opening fashion is changeable another move which normally transposes and the King’s Indian Attack (KIA) isn’t one to other variations. For example, some that’s currently in vogue; however, that prudent players choose 1.Nf3 not with the doesn’t mean there’s anything wrong with intention of playing a Reti or a King’s Indian it. If it was good enough for Bobby Fischer Attack but with the idea of transposing into in his early career and good enough for a 1.d4 opening; in this way they can avoid Kasparov to play it against Deep Blue (1: 0, some of the sharper alternatives for Black ½ : ½ ) then it must have something more after the more forthright 1.d4 and 2.c4. than aesthetic appeal. Some interesting (Nunn’s Chess Openings, Gambit Everyman KIA games, with annotations by Steve Chess, 1999, page 8). However, the KIA isn’t Stoyko F.M., can be found on the Kenilworth limited to shadowboxing around Queen’s Chess Club website. Another site with an pawn openings—it can be used against the interesting compilation of games is: http:// semi-open defences where Black responds www.chessgames.com/perl/chesscollecasymmetrically to e4: Caro-Kann, Pirction?cid=1001207 Robatsch, Sicilian and French defences.

The KIA isn’t a set of specific moves like the Ruy Lopez; rather it is an opening idea, or system, where the move order depends on what the opponent plays. It can be reached via 1.e4 followed by d3, Nd2, Ngf3, g3, Bg2 and 0-0, alternatively 1.g3 or 1.Nf3, or even 1.d3 can be played for the set-up to be achieved.

The King’s Indian Defence (KID) player says, ‘Come and get me,’ and sets up shop practically irrespective of White’s opening moves. The KIA player tells Black, ‘Prepare for the worst,’ and methodically builds up the assault, nearly irrespective of how the opponent battens down the 14 YOUR MOVE

The KIA is adaptive and can transpose to the Reti, Catalan, English or the Nimzo-Larsen Attack and in various opening manuals it can be found under those headings. In the Encyclopaedia of Chess Openings it can be found under A07 and A08. In the early opening manuals it’s designated an Irregular Opening—Modern Chess Openings, Fourth Edition, 1925, being one example.

Yakov Estrin (7th Correspondence Chess World Champion) and Vasily Panov (International Master and a leading Soviet chess theorist) had this to say about the KIA in their co-publication, ‘Comprehensive

18.N-Q2, Q-B2 19.N-K4, R-KN1 (19. , NxKP loses a piece after 20.P-B4. White would also do well after 20.NxP – Fischer) 20.P-B5, K-B1 (20. , NxKP loses a piece after 21.NQ6+ - Fischer) 21.N-Q6, P-N3 22.NxN!, PxN 23.P-K6! (A crushing blow. Black’s whole centre is demolished, and with all White’s pieces in play he can hardly hope to survive – Fischer) 23. ,B-B3 24.QR-Q1, N-K4 25.KR-K1, N-N5+ 26.PxN, BxB 27.R-Q7, Q-B1 28.RxBP+, K-K1 29.R-Q1 (29.Q-Q3 also wins, but I have found that over the board it is better not to make unnecessary sacrifices – Fischer) 29. , R-N2 30.RXR, BXR 31.NPXP, K-B1 32.P=K7+ 1-0

Fischer annotates his KIA game against Sherwin’s Sicilian in the New Jersey Open, 1957, played when he was 14 years old— it’s the first game in his ‘My 60 Memorable Games’. The game (as any in this book) is worth playing through to see how he handled a favourite—at the time—opening of his. In his match against Rudolfo Cardoso, 1957, he used the KIA and annotated the game for ‘Leaves of Chess’ (now defunct). Here’s the game with Fischer’s notes: Fischer – Cardoso: Match, New York, 1957 1.N-KB3, N-KB3 2.P-KN3, P-Q4 3.BN2, B-B4 4.0-0, P-K3 5.P-Q3, B-Q3 6.QN-Q2, P-KR3?! 7.P-K4!, B-KN5 8.P-KR3, BxN 9.NxB, QN-Q2 10.Q-K2, PxP 11.PxP, B-B4 12.P-K5, NQ4 13.P-B4, N-K2 14.B-Q2, N-B4 15.K-R2, P-QB3 (15. , P-QR4 was better – Fischer) 16.P-QN4, B-K2 17.B-B3 (overprotecting K5 and making way for the attack on the gaping hole at Q6 – Fischer) 17. , P-KN4?

Miliutin (Soviet Union) – Pouso (Venezuela) – Notes by Miliutin.

1.e4, c5 2.Nf3, e6 3.d3,Nc6 4.g3, d5 5.Nbd2, Nf6 6.Bg2, Be7 7.0-0, 0-0 8.Re1, Qc7 9.e5, Nd7 10.Qe2, b6?! 11.h4, Ba6 12.c3 (Nf1? Nd4!) 12. , Rac8 13.Nf1, Rfe8 14.Bf4, b5 15. Ne3! (intending Nxd5 and also intending Ng4) 15. , d4 16.Nd5, Qd8 (16. ,ed 17.e6, Bd6 18.ef+, Kxf7 19.Ng5 with attack) 17.Nxe7+, Nxe7 18.cd, cd 19.Ng5, Ng6 20.Qh5, Ndf8 21.Bd2, Rc2 22.Bb4, Qd7 [22. ,Rxb2 23.Bxf8, Kxf8 (23. , Nxf8 24.Qxf7, Kh8 25.Qxa7! with advantage) 24.Nxh7+, Ke7 25.Bc6, Rh8 26.Qg5 with advantage] 23.b3, Bb7 24.Bxb7, Qxb7 25.Qg4, Qd5 26.Nf3, Nd7 27.Qe4 (wins a pawn) 27. ,Qxe4 28.Rxe4, Rec8 29.h5, Ngf8 30.Nxd4, Rc1+ 31.Rxc1, Rxc1+ 32. Re1! (forces and endgame with more pawns) 32. ,Rxe1+ 33.Bxe1, Nxe5 34.Nxb5, Nc6 35.Bc3, Nd7 36.Kf1, f6 37.Ke2, Kf8 38.Kd2, Ke7 39.Nd4!

Kd6 (better..,Ncb8, 40.Bb4+, Kf7 41.Nb5, a6 42.Nd6+, Kg8) 40.Nxc6, Kxc6 41.Bd4, a6 42.Kc3, e5 43.Be3, f5 44.Bg5 (prevents…

Nf6) 44. ,Nb6 45.Bd8, Nd5+ 46.Kc4, f4 47.g4, f3 (intending…Ne3+) 48.Bg5, g6 49.hg, hg 50.b4, Nb6+ 51.Kb3, Nd5 52.a4, Kd6 53.Bh4!(intending Bg3) 53. ,Kc6 54.Bg3, e4 55.de, Nf6 56.Kc4, Nxe4 57.b5+, ab 58.ab+, Kb6 59.Be5 1-0 (59. ,Nxf2?? 60.Bd4+) YOUR MOVE 15

The most common plan in the KIA is the push e4-e5, making King-side space and attacking possibilities against Black’s 0-0. Of course Black doesn’t have to sit idly by and wait what’s forthcoming quietly for there is the Queen-side—and this is where counter-play is to be found. Black’s resources for gaining space and attacking potential shouldn’t be under-estimated.

The game can turn into a series of tactical skirmishes and sacrifices aimed towards one unfortunate monarch’s demise.

Just like in the KID where White seeks Queen-side counter-play the KIA is a Reverse Indian where Black seeks counterplay there. In the KID Black fights for the centre and King-side; in the KIA it is White that does that. Attacks against a King must be dealt with; otherwise the game is lost, and it is here that the KIA player has the upper hand. The logical place for the KIA is against Blacks 0-0. If Black wants to seek Queen-side counter-play White’s attack must be dealt with first. The following is a wonderful miniature between David Bronstein and Wolgang Uhlmann. In this game Uhlmann, a master of the French Defence, meets the KIA, not something he was expecting from a master of the open game like Bronstein. Uhlmann goes for the classic Queen-side expansion and breakthrough whereas Bronstein focuses on the Kingside.

Bronstein - Uhlmann Moscow 1971 1.e4, e6 2.d3, d5 3.Nd2, Nf6 4.Ngf3, c5 5.g3, Nc6 6.Bg2, Be7 7.0-0, 0-0 8.Re1, b5 9.e5, Nd7 10.Nf1, a5 11.h4, b4 12.Bf4, Ba6 13.Ng5, Qe8 14.Qg4, a4 15.Nxe6 1-0 As a practical opening system the KIA is an ideal choice. There is no particular move order to remember (or forget at a critical juncture) and it will suit a wide variety of Black defences for both the Queen and King-side.

Pawnimology:

Pawnology 101 We’re all slightly romantic when it comes

to pawns. We admire our valiant little foot-soldiers, standing their ground against overwhelming odds; knowing that each one carries a Field Marshall’s baton in their knapsack, with their ability to strike fear into the heart of the foe’s knight, bishop, rook— even their queen! The enemy king trembles at their ability to march steadily forward, never retreating. It is little wonder that Philidor said that the little chaps are the soul of the game. A bishop can be good or bad and a rook can right or wrong; however, the humble pawn has a lexicon of its own. Below are some of the more common terms.

· Backward pawn – When a pawn cannot move to the same rank as its forward companion/s without being captured. · Blocked pawn – When the pawn cannot move forward due a hostile piece occupying the square in front of it. · Connected pawns – when two pawns (sometimes more) are together on the same rank. These are sometimes called ‘united pawns’. · Doubled pawns – When one pawn is in front of the other on the same file. · Isolated pawn – A pawn with no companion pawns next to it. · Isolani – more than one isolated pawn. · Mobile pawns – Pawns that are not blocked by enemy pieces and can progress down the board · Pawn chain - Consists of two or more of a player’s pawns connected (lined up diagonally), where a rear pawn is protecting a vertically forward pawn one rank. · Phalanx of pawns – When there are three or more pawns next to each other on the same rank. · Passed pawn – A pawn with no opposing pawns to prevent it from advancing to the eighth rank, i.e. there are no opposing pawns in front of it on the same file nor on an adjacent file · Pawn majority – When one player has a greater number of pawns on one side of the board. · Pawn minority – When one player has a lesser number of pawns on one side of the board. · Pawn islands – unconnected groups or isolated pawns.

A platoon of pawns is a formidable sight whereas, as Tartakover so aptly put it, ‘An isolated pawn spreads gloom all over the board.’ And it is here, with our platoon, that we shall start examining what makes pawns tick.

When we start a game of chess each pawn is working in cooperation with the other. Like a phalanx of hoplites, pawns don’t protect the square in front of them but the squares in front of those pawns next to it. When a phalanx of hoplites moved it moved in unison, each man keeping pace with the other, protecting each other’s flank. If one man broke rank a weakness was created and through this the enemy would quickly charge. The same is true with pawns— move one and you weaken the squares to either side of its companions.

Richard Reti, ‘The essential disadvantage of the isolated pawn lies not in the pawn itself, but in the square in front of the pawn.’

A pawn can’t defend or attack the square in front of it--this is a weak square. Weak squares make ideal outposts for hostile pieces. Before you move a pawn you need to consider how the weak square could be used to advantage by your opponent. If you place three connected pawns, g4,f4,e4 the squares g5, f5, e5 are all defended; however, move the pawn f4-f5 and you create three weak squares! If you must move a pawn make sure you have adequate compensation for the weakness/es you’ve created.

A pawn, when separated from his fellows, will seldom or never make a fortune Andre Philidor

YOUR MOVE 17

An isolated pawn can be a definite weakness for it may require constant defence by pieces. It can also protect, inadvertently, and be blocked by a hostile piece placed in the weak square in front it.

However, there are variations of the Queen Gambit where play is deliberate to create an isolated queen’s pawn: 1.d4,d5 2.c4,e6 3.Nc3,c5 4.e3,Nf6 5.Nf3,Nc6 6.Bd3,dxc 7.Bxc4,cxd 8.exd,Be7, for example. In theory this opening is favourable for Black as he has gained a tempo, since White has moved the bishop twice. How to turn this advantage to a win is what the variation is all about! As Dr. Tarrasch said, ‘He who fears an isolated Queen’s pawn should give up chess.’

In the Queen’s Gambit and the Caro-Kan the isolated pawn is created purposefully, for a strategic idea, which is beyond the scope of this article.

Unless you create the isolated pawn, on purpose, for a certain aim, plan or stratagem you’re going to be saddled with a definite weakness in your position. When you have an unwanted isolated pawn see if there’s any advantageous way of getting rid of it.

If the isolated pawn is backed up by pieces it can also be used for attack, to drive a wedge into the opponent’s position, however, care should be taken when attempting this. Don’t create weaknesses elsewhere in trying to turn your pawn into a battering ram.

Place a white pawn on a4 and b5; then place a black pawn on b6. The pawn on a4 is backward—it can only advance if supported by pieces or as a sacrifice. The square a5 is a weak square, or a hole, as it can’t be defended by another pawn: it’s a perfect outpost for an enemy piece.

Weak points or holes in the opponent’s position must be occupied by pieces, not by pawns Seigbert Tarrasch

The Caro-Kan can also produce an isolated pawn: 1.e4,c6 2.d4,d5 3.exd,cxd 4.c4,e6 5.Nc3,Nf6 6.Nf3,Nc6 7.Be2,Be7 8.00,0-0 9.Bg5,dxc 10.Bxc4.

18 YOUR MOVE

Being able to exploit the weak square in front of a backward pawn can prove decisive! Your opponent must divert pieces to the defence, or possible exchanging of the intruder. The reverse is also true! It may be you that’s tying down pieces to the defence.

The longer the pawn remains backward the longer the weakness is there; therefore, try to get rid it—see if you can push the pawn forward or sacrifice it. If the backward pawn begins to weigh down your pieces to its defence perhaps let it go so those remaining might be more gainfully employed. To quote La Bourdonnais: ‘As a place for an advance post the square in front of a hostile pawn backward pawn, the “hole” in the array of pawns, is most suitable, for from that post an officer can most effectively obstruct and harass the enemy, while it is at the same time safe from attack by pawns.’

There is only one time a backward pawn can be useful and that’s as a plug to stop your opponent’s pieces from charging into your position. If the backward pawn is defended then its capture means capturing the captor. This could lead to an ‘arms race’. As pieces pile up for the attack and defence weaknesses might be created that could be tactically exploited—the backward pawn was merely the bait in the trap.

Doubled pawns can be problematic depending on, that hoary old chestnut, the position. To begin with the forward doubled pawn has a weak square in front of it; then it can hinder the mobility of the pieces.

It’s a natural target for your opponent as well. Depending on how many resources are required to ‘save’ it the better option could be to let it go and get on with the rest of the game. If that is your choice try to sacrifice the little chap at a moment of your choosing so it lays down its life for some purpose—diverting another piece or attack or disrupting the opponent’s position, for example.

Can doubled pawns ever be good?

Yes they can according to F.J.Lee and G.H.D. Gossip, in ‘The Complete Chess Guide’, Edinburgh John Grant, published 1903, page 16: ‘A doubled pawn is not always disadvantageous, especially on the Bishop’s files, or when united with other pawns so as to form a strong cluster or phalanx.’

A passed pawn increases in strength as the number of the pieces on the board diminishes Nimzovitch, passed pawn is a Jose Raoul ‘The Capablanca criminal, who should be kept under lock and key. Mild measures, such as police surveillance, are not sufficient.’

In essence what Lee and Gossip are saying is don’t treat the forward doubled pawn as isolated. Try to see that pawn as part of a squad that stick together, ready to move forward at a moment’s notice.

Your humble pawn grows in stature and strength the closer it is to the 8th rank, for once there it can convert to any other piece except a king. A hurrying pawn can completely alter the course of a game-your opponent trying desperately to stop it as you do everything in your power to ensure it reaches its destination.

The biggest problem an advancing pawn faces isn’t a knight, bishop, rook or queen--it’s a hostile pawn on the same or an adjacent file. If these two obstacles cannot be overcome the long march is finished before it began.

A passed pawn can arise from using your pawn majority on one side of the board or forcing and exchange so you can recapture with a pawn. When you want to create a passed pawn with your pawn majority begin by advancing that pawn which is not opposed by an enemy pawn on the same file. For example: white pawns on a2,b2,c2; black pawns on a7,b7-start by playing c2-c4.

As your opponent’s passed pawn is dire threat its dreams of greatness must be thwarted. A blockade is needed, something to stop the pawn’s progress. The square to blockade is the one immediately in front, the weak square. The blockading piece, ideally, should be a minor piece—a knight or a bishop, preferably a knight since it has a short range. In and endgame when there are few pieces on the board it’s better to have long range pieces active rather than tied down.

To be continued…

YOUR MOVE 19

May my fearful incantation bewitch him so that peril shall beset two or three of his pieces at once!

May the Queen lose her life! May the wee pawns grow fewer and fewer on the squares and may he be mated both with the low and high mates!

Father Stefan Olafsson, 1650

your move is happy to receive your comments, games; even articles for publication.

Publication isn’t guaranteed with your submission. Payment for articles isn’t currently possible.

To contribute email us at:

admin@thepoltroon.com