Chess Teaching » Advanced

The bad bishop

Chess Teacher — Wed, 22 Jul 2009 09:52:58 +0000

Let’s have a look at the diagram below. White is two pawns ahead, but it is Black’s turn to move. Is he able to get a draw?

White’s bishop is a bad bishop. It has the wrong color and will not be able to drive away Black’s king from the promotion square of the rook pawn. Knowing this Black only has to capture the b-pawn to get the draw.

Bad_Bishop

32… Nb8!! 33.Kc4

( The alternative 33.b5 doesn’t help either ... Nc6+ 34.bxc6 Kxc6 35.Bd8 Kb7 )

( And 33.Bd8 even gives away the bishop, but it doesn’t matter anymore. ... Nc6+ 34.Kc4 Nxb4 ( 34… Nxd8 doesn’t fit within this lesson, but will also result in a draw ) 35.Kxb4 Kc6 36.Ka5 Kb7 )

33… Nc6 and White is unable to save the b-pawn

34.Kb5 Nxb4 35.Bxb4+ resulting in an endgame with a rook pawn and a Bishop of the wrong color. This will result in a draw, because the defending king is able to reach the corner.

35… Kc7 36.a5 Nothing helps. Black may try something like 36...Kb7 but if White pays attention the result remains a draw 37.Bc5 Kb8 38.Bd6+ Ka7 39.a6 Ka8 40.Bf8 Kb8 41.Bd6+ Ka8 42.Bc5 Kb8 43.a7+ Ka8 1/2 – 1/2

Grigoriev, 1938

Chess Teacher — Tue, 19 May 2009 17:49:21 +0000

The following diagram is a nice exercise about a chess position that looks rather easy at first sight. It’s White turn to move. Is this a draw?

It’s White’s turn to move, but Black will gain a tempo because of the check by f4+. So at first sight it may look like a draw, but as we will see White will be able to win this game.

Pawn_run

1.Ke4

First of all White forces Black’s king to move away from the promotion field f1.

1… Kg4 2.a4 f5+ 3.Kd3!

This is the key move. Black won’t promote with a check and White’s king is still in reach of the black pawn.

3… f4 4.a5 f3 5.a6 Kg3 6.a7 f2 7.Ke2 Kg2

In order to keep the pawn Black’s king was forced to do so, but this enables White to promote with check.

8.a8=Q+ 1-0

The Classical Bishop Sacrifice

Chess Teacher — Fri, 27 Feb 2009 14:21:57 +0000

In the game Colle – O’Hanlon, Nice 1930 we have seen one of the most famous examples of the Classical Bishop Sacrifice. In this lesson we will focus on some of the aspects of such a position that will help you to determine whether or not the sacrifice will be sound. I am going to use the game Kothe Harry G – Lewis James W, 1974 as an example.

Classical

1.d4 d5 2.c4 dxc4 3.Nf3 e6 4.e4 b5 5.a4 c6 6.Bd2 a5 7.axb5 cxb5 8.b3 Bb7 9.bxc4 b4 10.Bd3 Bd6 11.Be3 Ne7 12.O-O O-O 13.e5 Bc7

The main conditions for the sacrifice are met:
- A bishop is able to capture the pawn on h7
- A knight is able to move to the g5 square
- This g5 square is defended
- The queen can reach h5

We even have some additional conditions that make it more likely that the sacrifice will be correct:
- Black’s Queen on d8
- Black’s Rook on f8
- White’s pawn on e5 will prevent an escape to f6

But there is also an indication that the sacrifice will not be sound:
- Black’s bishop on b7 may be able to defend h7

As we will see the sacrifice will be sound. Black’s bishop is rather harmless and will be attacked and undefended on e4.

14.Bxh7+ Kh8 Probably the best move, but we are mainly interested in the other alternative ( 14… Kxh7 15.Ng5+ Kg8

( 15… Kh8 is a mate in two 16.Qh5+ Kg8 17.Qh7# )

( 15… Kg6 16.Qg4 f5 17.exf6 gxf6 18.Nxe6+ Kf7 and White will win the queen 19.Nxd8+ )

( 15… Kh6 results in a mate in five 16.Qg4 Bxe5 17.dxe5 Nf5 18.Qh3+ Nh4 19.Qxh4+ Kg6 20.Qh7# )

16.Qh5 Be4 17.Nxe4 )

15.Ng5 g6 16.Bxg6 fxg6 17.Qg4 Kg8 18.Qxe6+ Kg7 19.Qh3 Rh8 20.Ne6+ Kg8 21.Nxd8 Rxh3 22.Nxb7 winning a piece

But the game continues for a while.

22… Rh7 23.Nc5 Nbc6 24.Ne4 Rh4 25.Nbd2 Nf5 26.Nf6+ Kg7 27.Nf3 Rxd4 28.Nd5 Rxd5 29.cxd5 Nxe3 30.fxe3 Nxe5 31.Rfb1 Re8 32.e4 Bb6+ 33.Kf1 Nc4 34.Ke2 Na3 35.Rc1 Rxe4+ 36.Kd3 Re3+ 37.Kd2 b3 38.Rxa3 b2 39.Rb1 Rxa3 40.Rxb2 Be3+ 41.Kc2 Kf6 42.Rb3 Ra2+ 43.Kd3 Bc5 44.Rb5 Bd6 45.Rb6 Ke7 46.Nh4 Kd7 47.h3 Ra3+ 48.Kc2 Rg3 49.Ra6 g5 50.Rxd6+ Kc7 51.Rg6 a4 52.Nf3 Rxg2+ 53.Kb1 Rf2 54.Nxg5 Rd2 55.d6+ Rxd6 56.Rxd6 Kxd6 57.h4 Ke5 58.Nf3+ 1-0

A final exercise:
Is the classical bishop sacrifice sound for the following position? The answer will be given in the comments.

More chess lessons? An index of all chess lessons can be found here.

Aseev – Bagirov 1989

Chess Teacher — Sun, 01 Feb 2009 10:52:37 +0000

The game between Konstantin Aseev (2520) and Vladimir Bagirov (2475) played in Leningrad 1989 is one of the games that perfectly illustrates some of the main concepts of the endgame with bishops of opposite colour.

Bishops_Endgame

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 The Ruy Lopez 3... Nd4 This variation is called the Bird’s defence.

( Instead of this variation most of the time something like 3... a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.O-O Be7 6.Re1 b5 7.Bb3 is played. )

4.Nxd4 exd4 5.Bc4 ( 5.O-O is played more frequently, but White has a lot of good alternatives like c3, d3 or Bc4. )

5… Nf6 6.O-O Nxe4 7.Bxf7+ Kxf7 8.Qh5+ g6 9.Qd5+ Kg7 10.Qxe4 Qf6 11.d3 Bc5 12.Nd2 Rf8 13.Nf3 h6 14.b3 Bb6 15.Bb2

These are probably the most logical moves but I don’t like to play this position with the black pieces. Black normally continues with c5 because the pawn has to be defended.

15… d6?! This already enables 16.Nxd4, but White continues with 16.Rae1 g5?! 17.Bc1

( 17.Nxd4! looks very promising, but let’s stop annotating the whole game and continue with the interesting position that arises after the 70th move. On the other hand I won’t stop you if you want to analyze the whole game. )

17… Rb8 18.Nd2 Bf5 19.Qf3 Rf7 20.Re2 Ba5 21.Qd5 Bxd2 22.Bxd2 and now both players have a bishop of the opposite colour on the board 22...c6 23.Qf3 Rbf8 24.Qg3 Qg6 25.Rfe1 c5 26.h3 b5 27.Re7 Kh7 28.Ba5 c4 29.Bb4 cxd3 30.cxd3 Rxe7 31.Rxe7+ Rf7 32.Rxf7+ Qxf7 33.Qxd6 Bxd3 34.Qxd4 Bb1 35.Qc5 Qd7 36.Qc1 Be4 37.Qe3 Bb1 38.Bc3 Qd1+ 39.Kh2 Qd6+ 40.Be5 Qd7 41.Qc1 Be4 42.Qc5 a5 43.a4 bxa4 44.bxa4 Kg8 45.Qxa5 Bc6 46.Qa6 Qd5 47.Qc8+ Kf7 48.Qf5+ Ke8 49.f3 Bxa4 50.Qg6+ Kd7 51.Qg7+ Kd8 52.Bg3 Qe6 53.h4 g4 54.fxg4 Bc6 55.Qh8+ Kd7 56.Qh7+ Ke8 57.Qh8+ Kf7 58.Qd4 Qe4 59.Qf2+ Kg8 60.Bf4 Kh7 61.Kg3 Bd7 62.h5 Bc6 63.Be3 Bd5 64.Bf4 Qd3+ 65.Kh4 Qe4 66.Bd2 Be6 67.Qf3 Qxf3 68.gxf3

An endgame with bishops of opposite colour arises. These endgames are mostly drawn, even when one side has a pawn advantage. In this case White is even two pawns ahead, but it is not trivial to open this position.

68… Bb3 69.f4 Bc2 70.f5 Kg7

This is a very interesting position. It is clear that White has the advantage, but at first sight the fortress seems to be well defended. Without looking at the next move can you see White’s winning move?

71.Bxh6+! The sacrifice of the bishop was needed to open the position. 71... Kxh6 72.f6 Bd3 73.g5+ Kh7 74.f7 Kg7 75.g6 1-0

More chess lessons? An index of all chess lessons can be found here.

Kasparov – Topalov (1999)

Chess Teacher — Sun, 11 Jan 2009 15:17:11 +0000

The game between Garry Kasparov (2812) and Veselin Topalov (2700) in the fourth round of the 1999 edition of the Hoogovens tournament in Wijk aan Zee is called Kaparov’s Immortal. The most noteworthy move of this game is the rook sacrifice on the 24th move. It is nice to replay the game and try to evaluate this position for yourself.
An annotated version of this game by Kasparov himself can be found here.

Kasparovs_Immortal

1.e4 d6 The Pirc

2.d4 Nf6 3.Nc3 g6 4.Be3 Bg7 5.Qd2 In ChessDB this line is called the Pirc: 4Be3, 150 Attack and its normal continuation is 5..c6 6f3 b5

5… c6 6.f3 b5 7.Nge2 Nbd7 8.Bh6 Exchanging the Bishops

8… Bxh6 9.Qxh6 Bb7 10.a3 e5 11.O-O-O Qe7 12.Kb1 a6 13.Nc1 O-O-O 14.Nb3 exd4 15.Rxd4 c5 16.Rd1 Nb6 17.g3 Kb8 18.Na5 Ba8 19.Bh3 d5 20.Qf4+ Ka7 21.Rhe1 d4 22.Nd5 Nbxd5 23.exd5 Qd6 24.Rxd4!! When Kasparov made this move, he already saw the idea 30…Rd6 31.Rb6 as well the move 37.Rd7 and he was hoping for 24…cxd4.

24… cxd4

( 24… Kb6! would have spoiled the fun unless he had found the move 25.Nb3! ( But he later told that he intended to play 25.b4 that will probably would have resulted in a draw. After 25... Qxf4 26.Rxf4 Nxd5 27.Rxf7 cxb4 28.axb4 Nxb4 29.Nb3 Rd6 Black has even a clear advantage ) )

25.Re7+ Kb6 26.Qxd4+ Kxa5 27.b4+ Ka4 28.Qc3 Qxd5 29.Ra7 Bb7 30.Rxb7 Qc4 31.Qxf6 Kxa3 32.Qxa6+ Kxb4 33.c3+ Kxc3 34.Qa1+ Kd2 35.Qb2+ Kd1 36.Bf1 Rd2 37.Rd7 Rxd7 38.Bxc4 bxc4 39.Qxh8 Rd3 40.Qa8 c3 41.Qa4+ Ke1 42.f4 f5 43.Kc1 Rd2 44.Qa7 1-0

More chess lessons? An index of all chess lessons can be found here.

Make a plan

Chess Teacher — Sun, 05 Oct 2008 17:35:31 +0000

It sounds a little bit obvious, but the lack of a plan is the main reason for a lot of losses in chess. Planning is essential in chess. After you have learned the general ideas for the opening, the middle game and the endgame, you have to create plans in order to win the game.
We can distinguish several kind of plans. Jeremy Silman starts by looking for the imbalances in the position and then the plan is to use and enlarge (one of) the positive imbalances.
Other plans are more related to finding the right squares for your pieces and then the plan is to find a way to get your pieces on these squares.

The most important thing is that you have a plan. Without a plan your moves will be incoherent and you will be just moving your pieces. Having a plan will result in more wins.

When playing chess you should always have a plan, but don’t stick to rigid to it. Your opponent also has a plan and you have to take his moves into account. Some players tend to play their moves but neglect the moves of their opponent and when the threat becomes visible it is often too late to do something about it.

More chess lessons (in the right order to study) can be found by means of the chess lessons index page and an example of looking ahead can be found in the game Kasparov – Topalov (1999).

Zugzwang

Chess Teacher — Sat, 27 Sep 2008 15:36:43 +0000

Zugzwang is a position in which every move would make the position worse, and the player that has to move would be better off if he could pass and not move at all. But in chess no such thing as skipping a move is allowed. You are forced to move.
In the picture above whoever has to make a move loses.

We have seen some examples of zugzwang before:

The Trébuchet was in fact a lesson about the mutual zugzwang.
The game Fischer – Taimanov (1971) contains some zugzwangs.
Opposition can be seen as an example of Zugzwang.
And in fact most of the endgames that we have discussed before, like the mating with the rook, make use of this zugzwang concept.

Next lesson: Make a plan.

Fischer – Taimanov 1971

Chess Teacher — Sun, 14 Sep 2008 09:50:30 +0000

One of the most famous games showing the Bishop versus Knight endgame is game number four in the quarterfinals of the candidates match between Robert James Fischer and Mark Taimanov.

Fischer_Taimanov

1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Qc7

( The Flohr variation of the Sicilian Defence. This isn’t bad at all, but you may ask why Taimanov didn’t play 4 ...e6 The Taimanov variation. )

5.Nc3 e6 6.g3 a6 7.Bg2 Nf6 8.O-O Nxd4 9.Qxd4 Bc5 10.Bf4 d6 11.Qd2 h6 12.Rad1 e5 13.Be3 Bg4 14.Bxc5 dxc5 15.f3 Be6 16.f4 Rd8 17.Nd5 Bxd5 18.exd5 e4 19.Rfe1 Rxd5 20.Rxe4+ Kd8 21.Qe2 Rxd1+ 22.Qxd1+ Qd7 23.Qxd7+ Kxd7 24.Re5 b6 25.Bf1 a5 26.Bc4 Rf8 27.Kg2 Kd6 28.Kf3 Nd7 29.Re3 Nb8 30.Rd3+ Kc7 31.c3 Nc6 32.Re3 Kd6 33.a4 Ne7 34.h3 Nc6 35.h4 h5 36.Rd3+ Kc7 37.Rd5 f5 38.Rd2 Rf6 39.Re2 Kd7 40.Re3 g6

And now we have reached the most interesting part of this game. I advice to replay and annotate the remaining moves.

41.Bb5 Rd6 42.Ke2 Kd8

This allows White to trade the rooks. Is this a serious mistake (as mentioned by a lot of commentors) or are all the alternatives as bad. In addtion Taimanov was convinced that the resulting endgame was a draw.

43.Rd3 Kc7 44.Rxd6 Kxd6 45.Kd3 Ne7 46.Be8 Kd5 47.Bf7+ Kd6 48.Kc4 Kc6 49.Be8+ Kb7 50.Kb5 Nc8 51.Bc6+ Kc7 52.Bd5 Ne7 53.Bf7 Kb7 54.Bb3 Ka7 55.Bd1 Kb7 56.Bf3+ Kc7

Now White places his King on a6. Since c6 is attacked by the white bishop this makes it impossible for Black to move his king without giving up his pawn. 57.Ka6 Nc8 ( 57… Ng8 58.Bd5 Nf6 59.Bf7 Ne4 60.Bxg6 Nxg3 61.Be8 Ne2 62.Bxh5 Nxf4 63.Bf7 doesn’t help either. ) 58.Bd5 Ne7 59.Bc4 Nc6 60.Bf7 Ne7 61.Be8 Attacking both c6 as well as the pawn on g6 and placing Black in a Zugzwang 61... Kd8

( moves like 61... Nd5?? are very bad 62.Bxg6 Ne7 63.Bxh5 )

62.Bxg6 Nxg6 63.Kxb6 Kd7 64.Kxc5 resulting in this vey nice position. If Black tries to prevent the promotion of the pawns the white king will be able to capture Black pawns on the kingside.

64… Ne7 65.b4 axb4 66.cxb4 Nc8 67.a5 Nd6 68.b5 Ne4+ 69.Kb6 Kc8 70.Kc6 Kb8 71.b6 1-0

The next lesson in this series is about Zugzwang.

Rook and pawn versus rook endgame

Chess Teacher — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 17:46:09 +0000

A lot of information about the Rook and pawn versus rook endgame can be found in Wikipedia. This article gives a nice overview of the most important positions and methods to win or to hold the position.

It describes the following winning methods:

Pawn on the sixth or seventh rank
The king without the pawn cut off along a rank is an easy win
The king without the pawn is cut off from the pawn’s file is a far more complicated endgame (like we have described in the two previous lessons) and it gives the rule of five.

The rule of five is for positions in which the pawn is protected and the opposing king is cut off by files: Add the number of rank of the pawn to the number of files the defender’s king is cut off. If the sum is more than five, it is usually a win. Otherwise it is normally a draw.

The article also refers to the Lucena position and describes an alternate method to win for bishop pawns and central pawns.

The next lesson will show another famous game: Fischer – Taimanov 1971.

Rook pawn rook draws

Chess Teacher — Sat, 28 Jun 2008 17:50:45 +0000

In this lesson I only show eight diagrams of the rook and pawn versus rook endgame, but this time all the positions correspond to a draw if played properly. Are you able to hold these postions as Black.

The next lesson continues with this Rook and pawn versus Rook endgame. It will contain a useful link and learn you the rule of five.