Honesty, is Such a Lonely Word

While you’re here, let me ask for your help. I want to keep this blog and journey going in perpetuity, but it’s not free to me.

If you feel like helping me out and can spare it, please click here and become a supporter. Even $1 a month can help me continue this project.

I mentioned in an earlier post that you have to be honest with yourself. 

That doesn’t mean part of the time or some of the time. It means all of the time. Today I come across this position:

First, take a minute and calculate what you would play here. White to play and win.

OK, did you solve it?

Here’s what I came up with. 22.Ne6 fxe6 23.Qf6.Boom! I win.

Nope. What did I miss?

Simple. After Qf6 Black can play 23…Qf8. Here 24.Rc7 wins.

But I did not see that when I was solving it.

So I think that counting ones like this as failures is a huge step on the journey to improvement.

YMMV.

Here’s the game:

Til Next Time,

Chris Wainscott

Steinitz Never Mouse-slipped

While you’re here, let me ask for your help. I want to keep this blog and journey going in perpetuity, but it’s not free to me.

If you feel like helping me out and can spare it, please click here and become a supporter. Even $1 a month can help me continue this project.

These days, when you’re looking up games, you need to pay special attention to whether or not the game was played online.

Let’s take the game Donchenko-Malek played on 11/07/2023 in the early Titled Tuesday. Since this game is in an opening I play (the Caro), I decided to look at it since I often look at games in TWIC that are played in my openings.

We start out with a sideline:

Here, Malek plays 3…g6 instead of taking the pawn and exchanging queens. Cool, I don’t look at these lines too often, so this is some good stuff.

I keep going through the game, and it’s just dead level, but I can see that Malek wins, so what the heck.

One move from the end of the game, Black is slightly better, but nothing spectacular. Then:

In this position, Donchenko, clearly intending to play 29.Rd6, instead plays 29.Rd5.

Ah. No wonder the game is lost.

Here is the entire game for anyone interested.

Just a reminder that in the digital chess age, you can’t take a result at face value 100% of the time.

Til Next Time,

Chris Wainscott

Three Lessons to Learn

While you’re here, let me ask for your help. I want to keep this blog and journey going in perpetuity, but it’s not free to me.

If you feel like helping me out and can spare it, please click here and become a supporter. Even $1 a month can help me continue this project.

Recently, I joined the Chess Dojo training program. The program is a very detailed and thought-out training plan. Please note that this is in no way similar to having a coach, and in fact, you should still keep working with the coach you have, even if you join.

The program is a detailed list of tasks that players within certain rating bands – “cohorts” – should work on.

So, for instance, part of the cohort I am in is to solve the Polgar mate in two puzzles from number 307 to number 1,800.

Another part is to analyze some master games, and that takes us to today’s work. The game is Petrosian – Lipnitsky, 1947. According to the study guide, we should spend roughly 30 min on each game, and we should be able to outline three takeaways when done.

Here is the game. See you in 30 minutes.

Something that struck me, immediately when I first saw this game was White’s next three moves from this position:

They are 12.Rad1; 13.Rc1; 14.Rfd1

What a fantastic thing to see that a player can immediately admit to themselves that they would rather have rooks on c1 and d1 and after 12.Rad1, the only way to fix that was to move the rook back to c1.

So, what are my other two takeaways? The first is that in this position, White can win the bishop pair with 19.f4

The third is the tactical sequence that starts in this position with 22.Ba7

Overall, it was an excellent game for the 18-year-old who would win the world championship 16 years later.

Til Next Time,

Chris Wainscott

Silman on Knights

While you’re here, let me ask for your help. I want to keep this blog and journey going in perpetuity, but it’s not free to me.

If you feel like helping me out and can spare it, please click here and become a supporter. Even $1 a month can help me continue this project.

As I mentioned in this post, I am working through Reassess Your Chess by Jeremy Silman. The idea is to learn a lot more about imbalances and strategic thinking.

This morning, while reading a bit of the chapter on knights, I am looking at this position.

The idea here is that the White knight has two interesting options for the knight. f5 and c6. White assesses that the knight would be better on c6, and so he plays:

12.e5

Then, after 12…Bxg2 13.Kxg2 Nd5 White can play the move they were angling for, 14.Nc6

Of course, the knight can’t be kicked with 14…Qd7 since 15.Qxd5 Qxd5 16.Nxe7+ wins on the spot.

With this octopus sitting on c6 and tearing into the position, Black quickly went wrong and was crushed.

Here is the entire game, with Roiz’s annotations.

Til Next Time,

Chris Wainscott

The Most Useful Puzzle I Have Ever Seen

While you’re here, let me ask for your help. I want to keep this blog and journey going in perpetuity, but it’s not free to me.

If you feel like helping me out and can spare it, please click here and become a supporter. Even $1 a month can help me continue this project.

I am curious to know if there are others like this out there. Do you remember the most useful puzzle or position you have ever seen?

For me, it’s this one:

The idea behind this puzzle was eye-opening and has helped me navigate many strategic ideas throughout my games in the five years since I first saw it.

The game is Donner – Smyslov from Havana 1967. This is the first position in the book Strategic Chess Exercises by Emmanuel Bricard.

I will spare you all of the analysis here (buy the book! Seriously, buy it now!) but the idea is that Black would like to own the d file. So how does the former world champion accomplish that?

Like this:

1…c6 with the idea to take away the b5 square. 2.Rfd1 preparing to double, but wait. 2…Be6 and now the queen must move. 3.Qe2 Bb3! and that’s it. The d file will now belong to Black.

I would imagine that most titled players likely think of ideas like this without much trouble, but to me, this was like a lightning bolt from the blue. The idea that I could use a bishop to hit a square on a file so that I could own the file was not something that instantly sprang to mind until I first read this one.

Have I said that you should buy the book? You should buy this book.

For those who would like to see the entire game, here you are: Jan Hein Donner vs Vasily Smyslov (1967) (chessgames.com)

Til Next Time,

Chris Wainscott

Fischer At His Best: Fischer – Panno 1-0

While you’re here, let me ask for your help. I want to keep this blog and journey going in perpetuity, but it’s not free to me.

If you feel like helping me out and can spare it, please click here and become a supporter. Even $1 a month can help me continue this project.

No, I’m not talking about this famous Fischer “win” from Palma when Panno didn’t play in protest:

Instead, we’re talking about his win in Buenos Aires in 1970. I am reading a new book I just got from New in Chess to review, and this is the first game in it. I’ll have a full review in the near future, but let’s take a look at this position:

It’s White to move. With a locked center, Fisher wants to attack on the kingside. He’s not quite ready as he needs to play a preparatory move. Take some time and try to figure out what he played. The answer is below.

Til Next Time,

Chris Wainscott

.

.

.

.

.

Bobby can’t just play 18.h4 as the attack would be stalled after 18…Nf5, so first Fischer stops the knight move by playing 18.g4

Here is the whole game.

Review of Spassky’s Best Games by Bezgodov and Oleinikov

While you’re here, let me ask for your help. I want to keep this blog and journey going in perpetuity, but it’s not free to me.

If you feel like helping me out and can spare it, please click here and become a supporter. Even $1 a month can help me continue this project.

Spassky’s Best Games by Bezgodov & Oleinikov New in Chess 2023 280pp

This is the second recent offering by New in Chess, which covers the games of a World Champion. The other, Max Euwe’s Best Games by Jan Timman, was reviewed by me here.

While  61 games are included in this volume, the book focuses at least as much on the biography of the champion. The book is separated into two parts. Part I: A brief biography, and Part II: Games.

While there is no doubt that Spassky was one of the best players of his era, his reign as World Champion was nothing special. If I am being honest, I think Spassky would be largely forgotten by today’s players if not for the fact that he is the one from whom Fischer wrested the crown.

Talk to younger or newer players today, and they will recall names from the Soviet era, such as Tal, as his games sparkle with the creativity of sacrificial genius. Sure, he was one of the two “Winter Champions” spoken of by Botvinnik. So-called due to holding the title for a short time before the Patriarch reclaimed it. The other, Smyslov, while the greater overall player, is less well remembered today.

For Spassky, being Bobby’s opponent in 1972 keeps his memory alive. It’s not fair, but it is how life works.

To properly review this book, I also need to split my review into two parts.

Part I: A brief biography

This section of the book is quite well written. It covers Spassky’s first steps with famed trainer Vladimir Zak in St. Petersburg. Then, his training with Tolush once he became too strong for Zak. His professional relationship with Bondarevsky after parting ways with Tolush, etc.

From here, we see Boris gaining strength and winning accolades as he ultimately summits Olympus, only to fall out of favor with the apparatchiks of the communist party after losing to Fischer and his subsequent relocation to France, etc.

Along the way, game fragments show Spassky’s improving strength and skill.

I highly recommend this book for this section alone, alas…

Part II: Games

Here is where I take some exceptions with this book. I have two main quibbles: one minor and one not so much.

The minor quibble is the lack of what I would think is an appropriate number of diagrams and/or oddly placed diagrams.

To show an example:

We get this diagram from Spassky-Nezhmetdinov 1959

From here, we get the following:

“15.e4! Nh6

White’s idea is founded on the variation 15…f4 16.Nxg5!. White simply has an extra pawn and a winning position: 16…Nxh2 17.Ne6 Qh4 18.Nxf8 Nxf1 19.Bxf1 Kxf8 20.Nc7 Rh8 21.Qd5 Qe7 22.Ne6+ Ke8 23.Rd1.”

OK, I get it. Only two moves played after the diagram, so it’s not hard to reconstruct. But why not have another diagram appear after …Nh6 instead?

It gets worse as we then have:

16.exf5 Nxf5 17.Bd3

Black’s attack has ended before it begun (sic). Losses, both material and positional, are inevitable.

17…Nf6

17…Nd4 18.Be4 a6 19.Nxd4 cxd4 20.Qh5 Rf7 21.Qh6 Kh8 22.Qe6 Rg7 23.b6 with a clear white advantage.”

I would like to see publishers better understand their potential target audiences for a book like this and understand the relationship that online training has with books.

I am by no means a strong chess player. Still, I am reasonably competent (US Chess rating is 1824 right now), and I find it much easier to read a book with a diagram before any analytical variation of more than a few moves. Most people reading this review will understand the pain of being well past some variation only to realize they left a piece on the wrong square for the last several moves. This is largely eliminated by placing diagrams there.

What I would do in the above passage is place diagrams after 15…Nh6 and 17…Nf6 which would help many readers, especially the lower-rated ones, with accurately playing through variations and then correctly setting the position from before the variation.

As for my remark about the relationship that online training has with books, when playing through games in Chessbase or watching a video with some analysis by strong players, there is zero chance that a piece will be on the wrong square after a variation. It can’t happen when playing through electronic content. Since it can happen when playing through games on a board, I feel that publishers would be doing themselves a favor by taking as many steps to eliminate this issue.

This brings me to my less-minor quibble. The overall lack of analysis is sad.  Take this position from the 1968 Spassky-Korchnoi Candidates Final. The notes in this case are by English FM Steve Giddins.

This position is after the move 26…Qe6

“White’s attempted ‘attack’ on the kingside is brushed away like a fly, and this illustrates the depth of Spassky’s match strategy. The Korchnoi of those days was well-known as a brilliant defender and counter-attacker, but, by his own admission, was much weaker at seizing and using the initiative. In later years, partly inspired by his match defeat against Spassky, he worked exceptionally hard to broaden his style and become more versatile.”

OK, but why was the attack brushed away? What problem does …Qe6 solve that was not solved up til now? Can we illustrate what White’s threats were with a less accurate move perhaps?

Well, maybe this is just a fluke, right? No. Here is Spassky-Larsen 1978 after 14.0-0-0

“Such things are common at lower levels, but rare at Grandmaster level. White’s advantage can already be assessed as decisive.”

OK. Neat. Why? What could Black have done to prevent this from happening? Why is White’s advantage so decisive? Again, I say these things with the understanding that the publisher is likely as happy with a player rated 1000 buying this book as they are with a player rated 2200+.

It’s not all bad, though. After each game, a brief description of the lesson to be learned is given.

All in all, I’d say this book is a solid 3.5 out of 5. Mostly for the biography, but not completely. Some of the games covered have nice analytical breakdowns; it’s just that it’s the exception rather than the norm.

Til Next Time,

Chris Wainscott

Review of Max Euwe’s Best Games by Timman

While you’re here, let me ask for your help. I want to keep this blog and journey going in perpetuity, but it’s not free to me.

If you feel like helping me out and can spare it, please click here and become a supporter. Even $1 a month can help me continue this project.

Max Euwe’s Best Games by Jan Timman New in Chess 2023 304pp

One of the latest offerings by New in Chess is this excellent tome on the 5th world chess champion. Timman notes in the introduction that he wanted to write a book on Euwe for several years, primarily due to the fact that Euwe is the only world champion that the Netherlands has produced to date.

Of course, the author knew the subject, and they even wrote a book on Fischer-Spassky together. Nevertheless, this book is a nice, objective work rather than a hagiography. 

Over its 304 pages, the book covers 80 of Euwe’s games in depth. The book is split into four chapters.

  1. The 1920’s
  2. World Champion
  3. Dethroned
  4. After the war

There is a nice index of openings in the book and a list of names. One glaring omission is the lack of a games index. The “list of names” does cover the names of the opponents, but it also includes names of players who may have commented on a game in published analysis, so there is no direct list of the opponents. I find that to be the only real omission here. 

The rest of the book is very well presented. The analysis of the games is thorough, and there are multiple diagrams on just about every page. I personally find this to be rather important. I do enjoy playing over the analysis in books, and I find this to be sometimes difficult without enough diagrams. 

I also think that Timman did a wonderful job of combining explanations with variations. Here is an example from Thomas-Euwe Carlsbad 1929

19…e4

“A logical move, gaining space in the centre. However, 19…Qxd1 20.Rxd1 Rfc8 was stronger. At the board, it was hard to calculate why the queen trade is so strong. The hidden point emerges in the variation 21.Ra1 e4 22.Rxa2 exf3 23.Bxc5 and now Black has the surprising 23…b5!, gaining a decisive advantage on the queenside. “

Lastly, I want to give serious kudos to New in Chess for what appears to be a reversal of a recent horrible decision. About a year back the paper quality of the books published by New in Chess declined significantly. At first I assumed there was a paper shortage or something similar, but New in Chess released a statement saying that the new paper was easier on the eyes, etc. While that was true, it made the books look less elegant and cheaper.

Lately they have gone back to the much higher quality of paper. I sincerely appreciate that.

Til Next Time,

Chris Wainscott

US Senior Open Training – Day 2

While you’re here, let me ask for your help. I want to keep this blog and journey going in perpetuity, but it’s not free to me.

If you feel like helping me out and can spare it, please click here and become a supporter. Even $1 a month can help me continue this project.

As I mentioned yesterday, I am now training for the US Senior Open. This morning I kept up the routine of working on four exercises from Sherlock’s Method.

So far, here are my results. Out of eight puzzles, I have gotten four correct, three incorrect, and one I am giving myself partial credit for because I saw the main idea but not the purpose of it, so while I had a couple of moves correct, I missed some of the follow-up moves.

This is why I insist on writing down all of my analysis. There is no way to pretend, “oh yeah, I saw that,” since it’s not on the page.

The next piece of work that I need to do is to determine what line of the Caro I want to play against the starting move order of the classical variation. Take this position:

Here the main three moves are 4…Bf5; 4…Nf6; 4…Nd7. The one that seems to be the most in vogue is the 4…Nf6 line, but I don’t know how I feel about it. I have never played it or 4…Nd7, so I can see some value in deeply learning one of those systems. On the other hand, there is something to be said for sticking to the lines that I know best. Something to think about in the coming few days.

In the meantime, here’s a position from So-Van Foreest Zagreb 2022 Blitz.

I was checking this game as I saw it was an 0-1 game in the 4…Nf6 line of the Caro. In this position White has a massive edge, but Wesley slipped by playing the natural looking, but less precise 23.Rae1 instead of a move that holds the bigger edge. What move did Wesley miss? Solution below.

Here is the entire game.

Til Next Time,

Chris Wainscott

What Wesley Missed

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

23.f4 keeps the position at a little over +5 according to Stockfish 15

Losing the Thread – We’ve All Been There

While you’re here, let me ask for your help. I’d like to keep this blog and journey going in perpetuity, but it’s not free to me.

If you feel like helping me out, and if you can spare it, please click here and become a supporter. Even $1 a month can help me continue this project.

Imagine you are White in the above game. You’re up a piece for a pawn. You just need to convert this won game and you’ll add a full point to your score. What could be better?

So why not just play 52.Bc2 and threaten to win a pawn to go up a full piece? Yep, that’s what you do. You see your opponent’s eyes light up. Oh no, what have you missed?

Your opponent plays 52…h4, and now after 53.Bxe4 hxg3 54.fxg3 Kg4 you realize your mistake.

If White saves the bishop, Black will win White’s last pawn, and the game is a theoretical draw of R+B vs R.

I honestly don’t know why White didn’t go into that and at least try for the win.

Here is the complete game, which is wonderfully rich and complex.

Til Next Time,

Chris Wainscott