Let's Take A Look

Lets Take A
Look...
Nigel Davies


by Bruce Alberston
We invite you to submit games to be considered by Nigel in this column. For
all games submitted, please provide the following information: (1) Names of
both players; (2) Ratings of both players; (3) When and where the game was
played; (4) The time control used in the game; and (5) Any other information
you think would be helpful for us to know. Please submit the games (in PGN
or CBV format if possible) to: nigeldavies@chesscafe.com. Who knows,
perhaps you will see the game in an upcoming column, as Nigel says to you,
Lets take a look...
Blind Man's Bluff
One of the aspects of chess that club players find most difficult to fathom is
how to draw up a plan. This is none too surprising because Im not sure that
many GMs understand it either. They choose good plans, but how?
The books often give the impression that one of the players had a plan from
the start of the game and then saw it through to its glorious conclusion. I
would argue that this is usually a case of reverse engineering, its easy to see
how one of the players won in retrospect. So the annotator who wants to look
smart can say look at the finish and then say that the winner was playing for
this all along.
Some grandmasters have used this tactic, and some very strong ones, too. In
my opinion the main culprit was the former World Champion Mikhail
Botvinnik. My guess is that the annotations in which he described complex
multi-stage plans were politically designed. In post-revolutionary Russia there
were lots of 5 year plans to boost industrial output, catch up and surpass the
West, etc. Is it too far fetched to think that Botvinnik annotated his games in
accordance with the spirit of the time so as to appear to be a solid citizen?
file:///C|/cafe/davies/davies.htm (1 of 6) [1/15/2006 12:35:59 PM]
Let's Take A Look
Let me give you an example from his
game against Benko in Monte Carlo 1968
(Botvinniks Best Games: 1947-1970). The
position in question arose after the moves
1 c4 g6 2 g3 Bg7 3 Bg2 e5 4 Nc3 Ne7 5
e4 d6 6 Nge2 Nbc6 7 d3 f5 8 Nd5 0-0 9
Be3 Be6 10 Qd2 Qd7 11 0-0 Rf7 12 Rae1
Raf8 13 f4 and heres what Botvinnik had
to say:
The plan that Black has in mind is
not without its positional novelty or
psychological elements (see note to Whites 19
th
move). This plan
consists of the following: 1) Black exchanges in the centre straight
away by 13fxe4 so as to force the pawn to recapture (14 Bxe4 Nf5)
after which the White e-pawn might become an object of attack; 2)
exchanging white square bishops (Bh3) so as to weaken the e-pawn
and also the white king position; 3) by exchanging the pawn on f4
Black opens the way for pressure on e4 along the e-file, White will be
forced to recapture with the pawn so as not to lose control of his e5; 4)
Blacks rook will attack the e-pawn frome8 and White will defend it by
Ng3 which also helps defend his king position; 5) finally, there comes
h7-h5-h5!, the weakness of the e-pawn and the exposed White king
position must then tell.
Did he really see all this? Basically I think he described the game in this note
rather than what he saw at the time. I think he probably did see the basic
outline, but there were too many ways for White to wriggle to have it pinned
down in such detail.
It wasnt easy to survive in Stalins Russia so who can blame him? But blame
him or not, we dont have to believe him. I think that many of his annotations
were for the consumption of the authorities.
Im not alone in my cynicism, even if others didnt intend to criticize. Heres
what Kotov had to say in Think Like a Grandmaster, which wasnt exactly
dissident literature:
Fromhis very earliest steps in the game, the player knows that he is
supposed to play to a set plan. The plan which is written about and
talked about so much is the plan for the middle game, yet I must
honestly confess that for a long time I could not understand these
appeals to have a plan for every eventuality. I simply could not
conceive how a complicated fight with unexpected moves and traps,
with the advantage continually changing hands could be fitted into a
single general plan. Have a plan throughout the course of the game,
advised the textbooks and yet I tried in vain to follow this advice; in
my own games the planning side of things was very much a weak spot.
file:///C|/cafe/davies/davies.htm (2 of 6) [1/15/2006 12:35:59 PM]
Let's Take A Look
So if Botvinnik and company have been fibbing, how do grandmasters form a
plan? Basically I dont think they do, certainly not from start to finish of the
game. Instead its a question of knowing the right kind of move to play in a
particular position, a broad knowledge of positional types meaning that they
are always fairly well orientated. They take into account the countermeasures
of their opponents and make allowances for them. If one idea can be stopped
they make sure it comes at a price. The grandmaster that knits these things
together well will produce games which appear to have a unity of purpose and
a wholeness about them. But his plans will have changed on every move to
accommodate the ever-changing nature of the struggle.
Can an amateur hope to emulate this? In a word, no. Its the grandmasters
huge knowledge of positions which tells him what he should be doing at any
one time. Are there ways round it? Well many players (especially pumped and
primed juniors) try to play openings that tend to be connected with a single
idea such as the Benko Gambit (attack along the a- and b-files) or the Vinken
Variation of the Sicilian (sometimes referred to as the Grand Prix Attack). To
some extent this can work, but if the opponent crosses these one-sided ideas
then youre back to square one with having to play a chess game. And this
kind of paint by numbers chess is hardly going to develop your game in the
future.
This months game reflects many of the themes described above. For the most
part its like a game of blind mans buff, with both players shuffling about
fairly aimlessly. Suddenly Black finds a nice queen sacrifice and White
defends poorly. But this has nothing to do with him playing for the h-file from
the outset.
Edward Xing (1192) Milan Ninchich (1713)
Belconnen Club 2005
Sicilian Defence [B23]
1 e4 c5 2 Nc3 d6
Whites last move is something of a problem for Najdorf players as now
White gets a good form of f4 Sicilian. Theres actually a strong argument for
2...Nc6 in order to meet 3 Nf3 with 3...g6 and if 4 d4 then 4...cxd4 5 Nxd4
Bg7. Black gets an Accelerated Dragon without allowing a Maroczy Bind.
3 f4 Nc6 4 Nf3 e6 5 Bc4
The so-called Vinken System is popular with club players because of the
simplicity of Whites idea. He intends to use the pawn on f4 to prise open the
f-file and the a2-g8 diagonal.
The problem here is that he isnt really going to be able to do this against
Blacks chosen pawn structure. In my opinion 5 Bb5 represents a better
approach, threatening to give Black doubled pawns.
file:///C|/cafe/davies/davies.htm (3 of 6) [1/15/2006 12:35:59 PM]
Let's Take A Look
5...Be7 6 0-0 Nf6 7 d3 a6 8 a4 0-0 9 Qe1
One of the standard moves for White, but
after Blacks reply he feels obliged to go
back. Simple development with 9 Bd2
seems better to me.
9...Nd4
Black can also play 9...d5 10 Ba2 Nd4,
which in Grill - Stoklasa, Czech Republic
1999 saw White produce the surreal 11
Bb1 in reply. The game continued
11...Bd7 12 e5 Ng4 13 h3 Nh6 14 Nxd4
cxd4 15 Ne2 Nf5 16 Rf3 Rc8 with an excellent game for Black.
10 Qd1
After 10 Nxd4 cxd4 11 Ne2 Black can hit back in the center with 11...d5 12
exd5 exd5, when in return for his doubled d-pawns he gets free play for his
pieces.
10...Nd7
10...d5 seems more to the point, especially when one considers the loss of
time inherent in 9 Qe1 followed by 10 Qd1. The text move is OK, but just
rather passive.
11 Ne2 Nxe2+
And here I prefer 11...Nxf3+12 Rxf3 Nf6 intending 13...d5. The knight on f3
is a much better piece than the one on e2.
12 Qxe2 Nb6
Another move I dont like the knight is badly placed here. 12...b6 looks
better intending 13...Bb7 and 14...d5.
13 Bb3 Nd7 14 Qf2
Most grandmasters would play 14 a5 without thinking; after that Black could
only activate his queenside pawns (...b7-b5) at the cost of being saddled with
an isolated a-pawn. Is this a plan? Not at all. J ust a move which improves
Whites position whilst making it more difficult for Black to do something.
14...Nf6 15 Qg3 Nh5 16 Qg4 g6 17 Ng5 d5 18 e5 Qb6 19 Kh1
file:///C|/cafe/davies/davies.htm (4 of 6) [1/15/2006 12:35:59 PM]
Let's Take A Look
And this position is really crying out for
19 a5 to be played as this time it comes
with a gain of tempo. In any case this is
starting to look very good for White as his
pieces are congregating menacingly
around Blacks king.
19...Qb4 20 Qe2 h6?! 21 g4
Although complicated this looks pretty
strong. Another good line was 21 Bd2
Qb6 22 a5 Qc7 23 Nf3 intending 24 g4.
Given the weaknesses around his king, Black is going to be very hard pressed
to defend himself.
21...Ng3+
21...Ng7 is very similar to the previous note after 22 Bd2 Qb6 23 a5 Qc6 24
Nf3 etc.
22 hxg3 hxg5 23 Bd2 Qb6 24 Qh2?!
After Blacks reply the queen feels obliged to retrace her steps. The
immediate 24 fxg5 is better, unless White is prepared to sacrifice his queen
that is...
24...Kg7 25 Qf2
The critical line is 25 fxg5!?, intending to meet 25...Rh8 with 26 Rxf7+Kg8
27 Qxh8+Kxh8 28 Rxe7. White would have more than enough for the queen
as after 28...Qd8 29 Rf7 Whites rook can anchor itself on the massive f6-
square.
25...Bd7 26 fxg5 d4?
I dont think this is correct, but without it thered have been no queen
sacrifice. So lets not criticise too harshly.
27 Kg1 Qc6 28 Qe2?
file:///C|/cafe/davies/davies.htm (5 of 6) [1/15/2006 12:35:59 PM]
Let's Take A Look
Taking his eye off the f7-pawn allows
Black to move his rook from f8; 28 a5 is
better when must still prefer White. The
game is now raised from mediocrity by a
nice queen sacrifice from Black. It
shouldnt have been winning, but White
caves in.
28...Rh8 29 Rf3 Qxf3! 30 Qxf3 Bc6 31
Qe2??
The losing move.
31 Qf1 is a much better defence after which 31...Rh1+32 Kf2 Rah8 33 Qxh1
Bxh1 34 Rf1 is slightly better for Black, but no more than that.
31...Rh1+32 Kf2 Rxa1
White is quite lost. Its not the material balance thats killing him, but the fact
that Blacks rooks are storming into the attack.
33 Be1 Rh8 0-1
Recommended Reading
Botvinniks Best Games, 1947-1970 by M. M Botvinnik (Batsford 1972)
Think Like A Grandmaster by Alexander Kotov (Batsford 2003)
Copyright 2006 Nigel Davies. All rights reserved.

[ChessCafe Home Page] [Book Review] [Columnists]
[Endgame Study] [Skittles Room] [Archives]
[Links] [Online Bookstore] [About ChessCafe] [Contact Us]
Copyright 2006 CyberCafes, LLC. All Rights Reserved.
"The Chess Cafe" is a registered trademark of Russell Enterprises, Inc.
file:///C|/cafe/davies/davies.htm (6 of 6) [1/15/2006 12:35:59 PM]