Lets Take a

Look...
Nigel Davies

Play through and download
the games from
ChessCafe.com in the
DGT Game Viewer.
The Complete
DGT Product Line
Scoundrel Chess
Following up last months column about how to deal with distractions,
and the recent release of my new DVD, Chess for Scoundrels, I think its
appropriate to look at some of the fair and legal means of conducting
psychological warfare. Please dont write in to say that its all about
pieces, this view is just very nave and will hobble your performance to
the same extent as having to move the pieces with your teeth. Do I really
have to explain? Very well then.
Every move that is played on the chessboard is not just a question of
knowledge and technique, certainly not when its played by humans.
Chess moves are imbued with hopes, dreams and fears at what one might
describe as a subatomic level. A decision to play one way or another will
be influenced by many such factors, such as the opponents demeanour,
the amount of thinking time he has left and any revelations gleaned from
a study of his games. Thats not to say that good moves will be ignored.
Its more a question of the choice being given a certain bias whereby one
good move will be chosen over another.
Many players may even go so far as to choose a move they know to be
inferior. Emanuel Lasker was particularly adept at this; for example,
giving the bishop loving Janowsky the two bishops at almost every
opportunity. Victor Korchnoi might have even surpassed his idol in the
psychology department. And indeed every world champion has been
expert in this field.
Yes, youre right. Bobby Fischer did claim that the objectively best move
was also the subjectively best move. Of course he said this before wrong-
footing Boris Spassky with the English Opening, Pirc and Alekhine
during their 1972 encounter, not to mention the various ego crushing
methods he used over the years. Maybe Fischer didnt set out to crush his
opponents egos, but he certainly did a nice job of it. Neither Mark
Taimanov nor Bent Larsen were ever quite the same after their 6-0
drubbings.
Is this any different at club level? Not really. Players do not suddenly start
thinking about psychology once theyre awarded the grandmaster or
international master title, its there from the very first steps. Once you
realise that old George with the pipe doesnt like tactics, its only sensible
to throw the pieces around against him. As for the juniors you can stop
them in their tracks with a nice queen exchange and continue the game
until after their bedtime.
Theres nothing wrong in doing this, its just sensible. And oh yes;
generally speaking it works to have the initiative at club level, whether or
not your moves are perfect. Ive mentioned this a few times in this
column, and this is why I wrote the two Gambiteer books.
What about the DVD? Well there I get a little bit more sophisticated,
examining a number of different situations and discussing what one
should do in them. And very often the correct approach may appear anti-
intuitive.
For example, many players, when they want a draw, cant help but to
blurt out a draw offer early on in the game. This, however, is entirely the
Check out these
bestselling titles from
USCFSales.com:

Deluxe Tournament
Scorebook

Diary of a Mad
Poker Player
by Richard Sparks

Gambiteer II
by Nigel Davies
wrong approach as it shows weakness. Once your opponent knows youre
desperate to draw he can take liberties, confronting you with double-
edged lines in which its very difficult to head for safety.
If you do want a draw its much better to play a normal game in which
your opponent faces some risk. This is far more likely to bring him to the
negotiating table because hes got something to lose. And if he still
believes that youre intentions are only peaceful he can easily be wrong
footed.
I look at other things too such as the reasoning behind Tony Miles use of
1a6 against Karpov. Time trouble issues are also examined plus various
forms of deception. Once again I make no apology if any of this sounds
underhanded; this is chess were playing, not pass the parcel.
Theres a clear dividing line between fair tactics and foul. And the goal of
every serious player should be to tread the ground between nave idealism
and keeping to the rules.
In this months game, White trounces an opponent nearly 400 points
higher rated than himself. Many players tend to cower in such situations
and lose without a fight, but pursuing the initiative is a much better idea.
The point is that this reduces the opponents margin for error there are
fewer good moves and more bad ones. And even strong players can pick a
losing ticket in such a lottery.
Vozza, N (1735) Sorcinelli, F (2122)
Turin 2003
Modern Benoni [A65]
1 d4 Nf6 2 c4 c5
These days most players tend to play the Modern Benoni using a 2...e6 3
Nf3 c5 move order. This is to avoid lines such as Taimanovs Variation
with 7 f4 and 8 Bb5+.
3 d5 e6 4 Nc3 g6 5 e4 exd5 6 cxd5 d6 7 Bd3
Introducing a line developed by the
German grandmaster Rainer Knaak. The
dreaded Taimanov Variation is
introduced with the moves 7 f4 Bg7 8
Bb5+, though its not that clear that this
position is unplayable for Black. One
very high level example is the game
Bareev Topalov, Dortmund 2002,
which went 8Nfd7 9 a4 O-O (9...Qh4
+ 10 g3 Qd8 is also played, arguing that
Whites g2-g3 does him less than two
tempis worth of good and more than
one tempos worth of harm) 10 Nf3 Na6 11. O-O Nb4 (11... Nc7 has also
been played) 12 h3 a6 13 Bc4 f5! 14 Ng5 Nb6 15 Bb3 a5! 16 Be3 fxe4 17
Kh1 Nd3 and Black was doing rather well.
People have been trying to make 8...Nbd7 work for years and it still isnt
100% clear. A fairly recent example went 9 e5 dxe5 10 fxe5 Nh5 11 e6
Qh4+ 12 g3 Nxg3 13 hxg3 Qxh1 14 Be3 Bxc3+ 15 bxc3 a6 16 exd7+
Bxd7 17 Bxd7+ Kxd7 18 Qb3 b5 19 O-O-O Rhe8, as in Mankeyev,R-
Kononenko,D, Alushta 2006.
7...Bg7 8 Nge2 O-O 9 O-O Re8
Keeping open several different options for development, either by
playing ...a7-a6 or ...Nb8-a6.
10 h3
Getting ready for the attacking plan (f4 etc), but its not the only way to
play this position. White also has plans based on the consolidating f2-f3;
for example, 10 f3 b6 11 Rb1 Ba6 12 b4 Bxd3 13 Qxd3 Nbd7 14 Bf4 Ne5
15 Bxe5 Rxe5 16 bxc5 bxc5 17 Qa6 Re7 18 Rb3 Ne8 19 Rfb1 was
slightly better for White in Spraggett Suetin, Vienna 1990.
10...Na6 11 f4 Nc7 12 Ng3 Rb8 13 a4 a6 14 Qf3
White often has a choice in the Benoni
to either allow ...b7-b5 or play a4-a5 and
split Blacks pawns. 14 a5 is certainly
playable here, after which 14b5 15
axb6 Rxb6 Black would seek
counterplay along the b-file.
14...b5 15 axb5
Theres also a case for the immediate 15
e5; for example, Gruenberg,H Postler,
Goerlitz 1972 continued 15dxe5 16 fxe5 Nfxd5 (16...Rxe5 17 Bf4
Rxd5 18 Bxc7 Qxc7 19 Nxd5 Nxd5 20 Qxd5 wins a whole rook, though
even this isnt completely clear after, say, 20Bxh3!?) 17 Qxf7+ (17
Nh5!? is interesting) 17...Kh8 18 Nxd5 Qxd5 19 Qxc7 Bxe5 20 Qf7 Qxf7
21 Rxf7 Bxg3 and White had enough for the pawn, but no more than that.
15...axb5
This seems like a new move, though Im sure that neither player knew
this at the time of the game. In the game Kopjonkin Ionescu,D, Decin
1996, Black played 15...Nxb5 and after 16 Nxb5 (16 e5! looks stronger,
for example 16Nd7 17 Nxb5 axb5 18 Ne4 dxe5 19 f5 is a typical Pawn
sacrifice which gives White powerful compensation) 16...axb5 17 Bd2
(17 e5?! can now be met by 17dxe5 18 fxe5 Rxe5 19 Bf4 Rxd5 as
Black is then hitting the bishop on d3) 17...Nd7 he achieved a satisfactory
game.
16 e5 dxe5 17 f5
This is a known type of pawn sacrifice
by which White secures the e4-square
and cramps Blacks kingside. Whether
its quite enough is another question. I
think it was better to play 17 fxe5, when
17Rxe5 18 Bf4 Nd7! 19 Rad1 looks
very messy.
17...e4?
Definitely not the best. Black can
seriously test the soundness of Whites sacrifice with 17...c4! 18 Bc2 b4
19 Nce4 Ncxd5. Frankly I dont think White has enough.
18 Ncxe4 Qxd5??
And this is a very serious mistake. After 18...Nfxd5, Black is very much
in the game. Now he is completely lost.
19 fxg6 Qd4+ 20 Be3 Qxd3 21 Nxf6+ Kh8 22 Nxe8 Bb7 23 Qf4 Rxe8
24 gxf7
White is winning this position, but it still requires care and attention.
24Rf8 25 Rad1 Qc2
Hitting g2, though White handles this
easily enough.
26 Rd2 Qb3 27 Nh5?
Allowing Black to fight on. White could
win comfortably with 27 Bxc5 as after
27Ne6 28 Bxf8 Nxf4 29 Bxg7+ Kxg7
30 Rxf4, theres nothing Black can do
about the f7-pawn.
27...Nd5 28 Rxd5 Qxd5 29 Qg4 Bxb2?
Putting his head back on the chopping block. But even after the superior
29...Rxf7, White is still doing well with 30 Rd1, when 30Qe5 is
answered by 31 Bf4 Rxf4 32 Nxf4 (threatening 33 Rd8+) 32Bf6 33
Qg3, renewing the threat of Rd1-d8+ because if Black takes with the
bishop, Nf4-g6+ will win his queen.
30 Rf5 Qd3
After 30...Qd7, White would play 31 Qf4, threatening 32 Qh6 and 32
Bxc5, amongst other things.
31 Bxc5
Not only threatening the rook on f8, but mate via 32 Qg8+, etc.
31Qb1+ 32 Rf1 Qxf1+ 33 Kxf1 1-0
Recommended Viewing
Chess for Scoundrels by Nigel Davies (Chessbase, 2008)
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. 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...
2008 Nigel Davies. All Rights Reserved.



[ChessCafe Home Page] [Book Review] [Columnists]
[Endgame Study] [The Skittles Room] [Archives]
[Links] [Online Bookstore] [About ChessCafe.com] [Contact Us]
2008 CyberCafes, LLC. All Rights Reserved.
"ChessCafe.com" is a registered trademark of Russell Enterprises, Inc.