Novice Nook

Dan Heisman
[Find us on Facebook.]
Translate this page

Play through and download
the games from
ChessCafe.com in the
DGT Game Viewer.

Understanding Chess Puzzles
Quote of the Month: You can't do a puzzle if you don't know what the puzzle
is asking.
I almost always use puzzles to help evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of
my students. One easy puzzle is the from A Tactics Quiz:
White to play and win

[FEN "r1bqkb1r/ppp2pp1/2np3p/1B6/4n3/
5N2/PPPP1PPP/RNBQ1RK1 w kq 0 1"]
However, it quite often happens that a new student, especially one rated under
1300, will remain silent until prompted as to whether they have found a
continuation. The no-longer-surprising answer is "I am not able to find a
mate." The student often claims they saw the intended answer 1.Re1
followed by 2.d3 winning the knight but that was not "winning."
The players who make this mistake are often experienced chess players who
have read many tactics books, or used software such as CT-ART 4.0. Since
most puzzle books and software clearly feature "play and win" problems, I
had erroneously assumed they knew what "play and win" meant. Yet it turns
out that a much higher percentage than expected did not know. So this month,
let's review some of the most common directives associated with chess
problems.
Play and Win
In order to satisfy a play and win directive, you have to find a forcing
sequence that leads to a position where, if both sides play correctly, your side
has a "winning position"; i.e., a position where a win can eventually be forced
with correct play. Except for special problems like Helpmates, in "normal"
problems you must assume the opponent is trying to play the best moves or
toughest defense. Therefore, to satisfy the criteria, you have to achieve your
goal against all possible defenses, especially the ones designed to stop what
you are trying to achieve.
For most opening and middlegame problems, "play and win" usually involves
getting to a position where your side is ahead at least the exchange (a bishop
or knight for a rook) or more, like an extra piece (bishop or knight), not to
mention winning a rook or queen. Endgame problems "play and win" goals
can be a little trickier you might play and win in the endgame where you
"only" can force a clearly winning king and pawn endgame, where material
might be temporarily even but not for long.
In terms of computer evaluation, play and win for White usually requires
achieving a value of +1.0 or, more likely, higher except in deep endgames
Purchases from our
chess shop help keep
ChessCafe.com freely
accessible:

You Move... I Win!
by Alex Angos

Winning Chess Exercises
for Kids
by Jeff Coakley

The Giants of Strategy
by Neil McDonald
where retaining mating material is a consideration. When you win a pawn
early in the game and your opponent gets no compensation, then you are
likely "winning" with best play on both sides. And if you win the exchange,
the computer should evaluate you as ahead roughly 1.8 pawns, all other
aspects being equal.
Play and win does not preclude delivering checkmate in some lines. However,
if it were checkmate in every line, the problem would more than satisfy the
"play and win" directive and could be reclassified as "play and mate"
problem. Here is a cute position from You Move... I Win! by Angos, attributed
to the famous problemist Troitsky:
White to play and win

[FEN"5B2/6p1/8/6pp/7k/5P2/q5PK/8 w - - 0 1"]
1.Bxg7 White threatens 2.Be5 and 3.Bg3# because of the unfortunate
placement of Black's king. If 1g4 2.Bf6#. 1...Qe2 Guarding e5; other
moves lose similarly. 2.Bc3!! Zugzwang. 2Qf2 If 2Qb4 3.Be1#. 3.Be5!
Zugzwang again. White wins. 3Qg1+ Other moves allow checkmate; e.g.,
3Qe3 4.g3# or 3Qe2 4.Bg3#. 4.Kxg1 g4 5.f4 and White wins.
Play and Mate
In a "play and mate" problem you have to force a checkmate, but there is no
limit to the number of moves. However, since all "winning" positions
eventually checkmate anyway (it may take forty or more moves), in practice
the number of moves to mate in a "play and mate problem" is usually fairly
short, say seven or eight at the most, and even that many is rare, especially in
"easy" problem books.
Here is a "play and mate" from Jeff Coakley's superb book Winning Chess
Exercises for Kids, which features three "play and mate" positions among
each set of nine problems:

[FEN"6k1/1p3Rpp/p1pN4/2P1n3/
1PB5/7P/1q4PK/8 w - - 0 1"]
The solution is 1.Re7+, there follows:
1Nxc4 2.Re8#.
1Nf7 2.Re8#.
1Kf8 2.Re8#.
1Kh8 2.Re8#.
Since all of these lines are two moves or less, this could also qualify as a
"White to mate in two." However, if there had been lines that took three or
more moves to force the mate, it is still a "play and mate" problem. Here is a
more difficult "Play and mate" problem from later in the same book:

[FEN"2r3k1/1b2p1b1/p5p1/1p2P1N1/
5PQ1/1P6/q1P4P/2KR4 w - - 0 1"]
The answer is 1.Qe6+ Kh8 If 1Kf8 2.Qf7#. 2.Qh3+ Kg8 3.Qh7+ Kf8 4.
Ne6+ Kf7 If 4Ke8 5.Qg8+ Bf8 6.Qxf8#. 5.Qxg7+ Kxe6 6.Qxg6#
Play and Mate in N moves
In "Play and mate in N moves" problems, the solver must force checkmate in
a specified number of moves. Often these are positions in which finding a
mate with one extra move is fairly easy, but getting down to N is the tricky
part. Here is one of my favorite problems, originally posed in the popular
"Benko's Baffler's" column in Chess Life circa 1970:
White to play and mate in three

[FEN"5K2/8/3p2k1/3P1R2/2P2p1P/
2B2P2/8/8 w - - 0 1"]
As with many "mate in three" problems, White is winning easily and can mate
in four in a straightforward way; e.g., 1.Rg5+ Kh7 (1Kh6 allows mate in
three with 2.Kf7 zugzwang! 2Kh7 3.Rh5#, but of course Black is trying to
avoid mate in three and will try 1Kh7. In a real game Black might not care
if he is mated in three or four, but here, if you were playing Black or trying to
find Black's moves, consider it a "win" for Black if you can avoid mate in
three by holding out longer!) 2.Kf7 Kh6 3.Bd4 Many moves would do as
Black is again in zugzwang 3Kh7 4.Rh5# Although mate in four is easy,
the problem is mate in three, so where is it? Not so easy at all. Turns out to
force a mate in three White needs to find the following pretty line:
1.Bh8!! Kxf5 If 1Kh7 2.Rf6! Kxh8 3.Rh6# and if 1Kh6, then 2.Kf7 Kh7
3.Rh5# as above. 2.Kg7 Ke5 3.Kg6#
Play and Draw
This type of problem asks you to take a position that looks losing and save the
half-point.
Here's an instructive example from You Move... I Win!:
White to play and Draw

[FEN"8/8/8/8/B6n/7p/6k1/4K3 w - - 0 1"]
Black threatens to play 1Kg1 and 2Ng2 to block the bishop's control of
h1 and then promote. How can White stop this plan?
White has to play 1.Bd7 h2 2.Bc6+ Kg1 3.Bh1! Now if 3Kxh1, then 4.
Kf2! and the knight can never go to the correct colored square that can
prevent White's king from moving Kf1-Kf2 with a draw, a famous "parity"
problem. If instead 4.Kf1?, then Black wins easily try it and learn. But if
instead Black tries 3Ng2+, then 4.Ke2 draws; e.g., 4Nf4+ 5.Ke1 Nh5 6.
Bc6 Ng3 7.Bb7 Nf5 8.Bc6 Ne3 9.Bh1! Ng2+ 10.Ke2 and we go around again.
Play and Win Material
This rarer type of problem usually specifies the material to be won; e.g.,
"White to play and win a pawn." This sort of problem is especially useful if
winning the pawn may or may not yield a theoretical win early in the game. In
that case "Play and win" is arguable, so you just state "White to play and win
a pawn." Otherwise, it is similar to "White to play and win."
Play and Save Material
This is a defensive problem. I include some in Back to Basics: Tactics and
Coakley includes a defensive problem as the seventh one on each page
(among a set of nine problems) in Winning Chess Exercises for Kids. In the
following position, White thought he was losing the exchange, but he had a
thematic saving move:
White to play and not lose the exchange

[FEN"3R4/1p2rppk/p1n4p/P7/2PR4/
6KP/6P1/8 w - - 0 1"]
1.R4d7! Not 1.R8d7? Nxd4 2.Rxe7 Nf5+. 1Nxd8 2.Rxe7 or 1Rxd7 2.
Rxd7 or 1Re3+ 2.Kf2 does the trick.
Is It Safe?
This type of problem is one of my specialties (see Is It Safe?). The solver has
to determine if a candidate move is safe; i.e., does it lose material or allow
checkmate to a basic tactic that your opponent can make in reply. It is a very
useful type of problem, as you should be asking yourself this question for
every one of your candidate moves, especially in "analytical" positions where
the opposing forces are clashing.
Here is an easy one from a student game:
Is 1.Bh3 safe?

[FEN"3r1r2/p1p2pk1/1p1p2p1/8/4Ppqp/
P1P1Q3/1PP2P1K/R2R1B2 w - - 0 1"]
No, because of 1Qxd1! and no matter how White replies, he is losing at
least a rook.
Find the Best Move
These are usually positional problems where you have to find the right idea or
plan, as shown through your first move. Winning Chess Exercises for Kids has
one of these on every page as well. (I really admire this work by Coakley it
is definitely not a book just for kids!) The answer usually does not involve
winning material, but it certainly does not preclude that possibility, especially
if the opposition makes an understandable mistake. Here is an example from
Neil McDonald's Chess Secrets: The Giants of Strategy, one of his superb
series of instructive anthologies:
White to play

[FEN"r4rk1/pp2qppp/4b3/2p5/8/
4PQP1/PP3PBP/R4RK1 w - - 0 1"]
McDonald writes, "Marshall should have set his pawns to work with 16.e4!
planning 17.Qe3 followed by a surge in the centre with 18.f4, 19.e5, and 20.
f5."
This is an excellent example of the principle "When you have a pawn
majority, you have to set it rolling, even if it is in front of your king," which is
a corollary of Steinitz's principle "If you have an advantage, then you have to
make use of it or else you don't have that advantage at all." Or, as commonly
stated, "If you have an advantage, you must attack." However, here you
should take the word "attack" to mean "go after your opponent's weaknesses,"
not necessarily attack, say, your opponent's king.
Positions Without Two Kings
If you see a diagram without two opposing kings on the board, that means the
author does not want to distract you with extraneous pieces, but simply wishes
to point out an isolated idea:

[FEN"6k1/8/4r3/8/8/8/4B3/6K1 w - - 0 1"]
The element of the position that deserves our focus is that White should pin
the black rook with 1.Bc4. Black should then play 1Kf7, so as to not lose
an entire rook. If there were a white king on g1, then 1Kf7 would not even
be necessary, as Black could draw whether he loses an entire rook or not.
However, in most situations where both sides have more material on the
board, Black should play 1Kf7 to only lose the exchange. Removing the
white king makes the situation more generic and instructive.
Question Sometimes when I play online opponents I feel as if they have
computer assistance. I realize they could be using an outside computer, but is
there an ICC function that helps players analyze during a game.
Answer It is illegal for ICC players (and those on almost all online chess
servers) to utilize computer assistance. Personally, I agree with IM John
Watson that you should not care. Primarily because any computer use is going
to be reflected in the opponent's rating. For example, anyone using a computer
on each move of the game would have a 3000+ online rating, and you would
likely avoid them anyway. However, if you suspect an opponent is getting
computer assistance, simply don't play him any more and don't worry about
everyone else.
2010 ChessCafe.com. All Rights Reserved.
Dan welcomes readers' questions; he is a full-time instructor on the ICC as
Phillytutor.
Yes, I have a question for Dan!
Comment on this month's column via our Contact Page! Pertinent responses
will be posted below daily.



[ChessCafe Home Page] [Book Review] [Columnists]
[Endgame Study] [The Skittles Room] [ChessCafe Archives]
[ChessCafe Links] [Online Bookstore] [About ChessCafe.com]
[Contact ChessCafe.com]
2010 BrainGamz, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
"ChessCafe.com" is a registered trademark of BrainGamz, Inc.