Let's Take A Look

Lets Take A
Look...
Nigel Davies



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...
A Man's Limitations
A mans got to know his limitations.
Harry Callahan (played by Clint Eastwood) in MagnumForce
There are many paradoxes and apparent contradictions on the path towards
better chess. One of them can prove to be a particularly tricky balancing act,
knowing ones limitations whilst continually trying to raise the bar. There is
no doubt in my mind that middle-aged men, for example, should not be taking
on youngsters in razor sharp openings where tactics and memory are
important. On the other hand, they should not retreat into a shell and stagnate.
There needs to be a continual test of ones abilities, if only to stave off the
inevitable rot that occurs when things are left untouched.
A good analogy may be offered by weight training, in which incremental
improvement can be made by taking it very easy at first and then gradually
increasing the weights. Those who start out with the idea that they are Tarzan
can get injured and suffer serious set backs on the road to fitness. Conversely,
those who make a concerted and sensible effort over a period of time can be
rewarded with remarkable results. Even pensioners have been known to
increase their general fitness and bone density by pacing themselves whilst
continually raising the bar.
How should one go about this at the chessboard? The first step is a realistic
assessment of ones strengths and weaknesses. This is probably best
performed either by a stronger player or by analysing where ones good and
bad results come from. If, for example, you have far more losses than wins via
tactical oversights and the Kings Gambit is bringing you just 25% in
practical play, it might be time to reconsider the image of yourself as a
swashbuckling gambiteer.
Perhaps your tactical skills can be improved, but in my experience many
file:///C|/cafe/davies/davies.htm (1 of 6) [11/13/2006 12:00:19 PM]
Let's Take A Look
players find this difficult. So theyd be better off focusing on areas that can be
learned to some extent, while moving over to more solid openings in which
tactics have a smaller influence on the outcome. They might get to improve
their tactics later, but the first thing should be to discover an area of genuine
confidence from which one can start to build.
Im not a great believer in the kill or cure methodology adopted by many
coaches, where they get players who struggle with tactical play to adopt the
Sicilian Dragon and Grnfeld. Usually they just lose confidence, dutifully
trying to simulate a frothing-at-the-mouth wildman, while never really
discovering their own voice. Players can waste years doing this, and the
longer they do it the harder it is to change. This is especially the case given
the amount of time and dedicated effort required to master chess, there really
isnt time to make too many false starts.
What are the areas in chess that can be learned? Tactical play is going to be
very difficult for many people, as it is highly dependent on innate talent. On
the other hand, most people can acquire a modicum of endgame technique and
learn what sorts of moves are appropriate in typical structures. Its always
going to be more difficult for them and accidents will continue to happen. But
a start can be made and the bar gradually raised. And the big difference
between this and the kill or cure technique is that the player concerned is
more likely to taste a bit of success.
The following game is a well-controlled effort by Black, especially
considering the semi-rapid time limit. Certainly he stayed well within his
limitations though some of the moves were a bit too restrictive. My
impression is that the time is ripe to raise the bar and pursue this solid
positional style in a slightly more sprightly fashion.
ERaulli (1963) - Galaxian (2051)
ICC 30/30 2006
Reti Opening [A13]
1 Nf3 d5 2 c4 e6
Offering a classic Queens Gambit Declined, which at club level offers just as
many winning chances as more sexy defences, such as the Semi-Slav and
Kings Indian, but without the same concerns about having to know theory.
Not that many people listen...
3 b3 Nf6 4 Bb2 Be7 5 g3 0-0 6 Bg2 b6 7 0-0 Bb7 8 d3 c5 9 e3 Nc6 10 d4?
file:///C|/cafe/davies/davies.htm (2 of 6) [11/13/2006 12:00:19 PM]
Let's Take A Look
Looks like Ive got another customer for
my book, The Dynamic Reti! This second
advance of Whites d-pawn is clearly
wrong, if White wants to play like this,
then he should have tried 8 e3 c5 9 d4,
saving a tempo. The problem is that the c4-
pawn is going to be weak, something that
Black immediately recognises.
A couple of other moves have been tried
here for White:
a) 10 Nbd2 Rc8 11 Qe2 Rc7 12 Rad1 Rd7 13 cxd5 Nxd5 14 Nc4 Qa8 15 e4
Nf6 16 Nfe5 Nd4 17 Bxd4 Rxd4 18 f4 Rdd8 19 g4 Nd7 20 Nxd7 Rxd7 21 g5
gave White attacking chances on the kingside to compensate for the bishops
and the weak d4-square in Khasin M. Yudovich jr, USSR 1968.
b) 10 Qe2 dxc4 11 bxc4 Qc7 12 Nc3 a6 13 Rfd1 Rfd8 14 Rac1 Rab8 15 Ba1
Na7 16 Nd2 Bxg2 17 Kxg2 b5 18 cxb5 axb5 19 Kg1 Qb6 20 Nce4 Nd7 21
Nb3 Rbc8 and the position was fairly balanced in Petursson Helmers,
Reykjavik 1981.
10...dxc4 11 bxc4 Qc7
There might have been a case for 11Rc8, as the queen gets attacked with
Nc3-b5 in some lines, after which the knight can defend the c4-pawn with
Nb5-a3.
12 Nc3 Rac8?!
Giving White a brief opportunity to justify his play. Black should have played
the immediate 12...cxd4, when 13 Nb5 (13 exd4 Na5 leaves White with no
good way of defending the c-pawn.) 13...Qc8 14 exd4 a6 15 Na3 (15 Nc3
Na5) 15...Rd8 is rather good for Black, as Whites pieces are inappropriately
posted to support the hanging pawns on d4 and c4.
13 Qe2?!
Missing it. White had to try 13 d5!, when 13...Rcd8 14 Qb1! exd5 15 Ng5!
creates unexpected problems for Blacks king, the threat being 16 Nxd5,
exposing the weakness of h7.
13...Rfd8 14 Rfd1 cxd4 15 exd4?
Leaving himself with a c-pawn problem. He had to try 15 Nb5 Qb8 16 exd4
a6 17 Na3, which is unattractive, but it at least maintains material parity.
15...Na5 16 Ne5
file:///C|/cafe/davies/davies.htm (3 of 6) [11/13/2006 12:00:19 PM]
Let's Take A Look
16 d5 was a better shot at mixing it, but still looks good for Black after
16...Qxc4 17 dxe6 Qxe6 18 Qxe6 fxe6 19 Rxd8+Rxd8 20 Re1 Nc4 21 Rxe6
Bc5 22 Ba1 Ng4 23 Re2 Nxf2 24 Rxf2 Rf8, recovering the piece and
remaining a pawn ahead.
16...Bxg2 17 Kxg2 Nxc4 18 Nb5 Qb7+19 Kg1 Nxb2 20 Qxb2 Nd5
Black has emerged a good pawn up with a
solid position, and many annotators like to
declare that the rest is a matter of
technique in such situations. Id like to
add that this never seems so easy when
youre sitting at the board, but one is
assured that the guy making the notes
would make light work of it if he were in
your shoes.
21 Rac1 a6 22 Na3 Rxc1
If I have a (slight) criticism of Blacks play in this game, its that he simplifies
with a little too much haste and lets some of his advantage slip. Here, for
example, 22...b5 looks very good, playing against the knight on a3. But its
better to err on this side of things rather than try to finish with a flourish.
Many a win has been thrown away because the player with the advantage
became too cocky.
23 Rxc1 Bxa3 24 Qxa3 Rc8 25 Rb1 Rc3
Logically preparing to double on the c-file. But 25...Nc3 would have been
stronger, hitting both the rook on b1 and threatening 26...Ne2+. Whites only
good move is 26 Re1 (26 Rb2 Qe4!), when 26...b5 would start the victorious
advance of Blacks queenside pawns.
26 Qd6 Qc7 27 Qd7 Qxd7 28 Nxd7 Rc7 29 Nb8?
This should have led to the incarceration of Whites knight. 29 Nc5 was
better, but this should be winning for Black after 29...a5, followed by
centralising his king.
29...a5 30 Na6 Rc2?
file:///C|/cafe/davies/davies.htm (4 of 6) [11/13/2006 12:00:19 PM]
Let's Take A Look
30...Rc8 followed by 31...Kf8 and 32...Ra8
appears to trap the knight. The text is also
winning, but its not as easy, and that in
turn means that the odds of White
somehow slipping off the hook are higher.
31 Nc5 Kf8?!
Here 31...Rxa2 is stronger, as after 32 Nd7
f6 33 Nxb6 Nc3, Black will be winning the
d4-pawn with 34...Ne2+.
32 Nd7+Ke7 33 Nxb6 Nxb6
While its not true that all rook endgames are drawn, one certainly should
be wary of their drawish tendencies. I feel that Black went into this rather too
compliantly.
34 Rxb6 Rxa2 35 Rb7+Kf6 36 Kg2 a4 37 g4?
This unilateral weakening of the kingside
should be avoided, and not least because it
allows Black to get his rook out from
being in front of the passed pawn. 37 Ra7
is better, when its far from easy for Black
to win.
37...Rd2! 38 g5+Kg6 39 Rb4 a3
Passed pawns must be pushed, the main
point being that it will tie Whites rook
down and enable Black to activate his
king.
40 h4 a2 41 Ra4 Kf5
Finally Black is cooking with gas the a-pawn ties Whites rook down and
meanwhile he gets to work on the kingside pawn weaknesses. 37 g4? was a
really bad move.
42 Kg3 Ke4 43 f4 f6
There were other ways to win this endgame, but this is efficient enough.
44 Kg4 fxg5 45 fxg5 g6 46 Ra6 Kd5
46...Kxd4 is also good.
file:///C|/cafe/davies/davies.htm (5 of 6) [11/13/2006 12:00:19 PM]
Let's Take A Look
47 h5 Rxd4+0-1
Recommended Reading
MagnumForce starring Clint Eastwood (1973)
The Dynamic Reti by Nigel Davies (Everyman, 2004)
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) [11/13/2006 12:00:19 PM]