Travail Pursuit

The Dark art of games(wo)manship

2012-01-07T00:30:00.000-08:00

This article was the fourth by the Duchess of Blunderboro for the Hebden Bridge Chess Club blog. It was published there in September, 2011.

Rudyard Kipling: Somewhat less deadly than his wife

“The female of the species is more deadly than the male.”
- Rudyard Kipling

“If cunning alone were needed to excel, women would be the best chess players.”
- Adolf Albin

A couple of weekends ago, as I watched live coverage of the FIDE World Cup Final in Khanty Mansiysk my wife took an interest (most unusual) and asked about the lady commentator, GM Anna Sharevich. We started to talk about women in the game and I explained that there was a women’s World Champion and that most top female players played in specific, women only tournaments. Quite rightly she asked me why there were separate women’s events and titles when the game of chess conferred no physical advantage to men as it does in most sports. “Surely men and women should compete together” she said and cited show jumping (horse riding is her favourite pastime) as an example of a sport where men and women compete on equal terms.

Of course my wife is right (she almost always is I find) to point out this strange state of affairs in chess. I must admit I struggled to justify why women competed separately from men although I did point out a very significant exception to the rule. Judit Polgar. When I provided my wife with Judit’s potted curriculum vitae and went on to add that she had performed very well at the same World Cup in reaching the quarter-finals and losing to the eventual winner she simply nodded and said “Well, there you go”.

That discussion caused me to reflect a little on the differences between women and men and how they think. I don’t want to get embroiled in a gender debate and I’m no scientist but, I reasoned that physiologically, there must be some attributes that are more prevalent in one gender or the other and that those attributes must have an impact on the workings of the mind even if it’s at a trivial level. I’m fairly sure that male and female GMs approach preparation and in-game-analysis in the same way but at an amateur level, perhaps different approaches are more apparent.

Of course there was only one course of action for me to take at this point and I immediately logged on to exchange instant messenger correspondence with this website’s most illustrious contributor, Lady Cynthia Blunderboro. Our chat progressed thusly:

Intermezzo: Do you think women approach chess in a different way to men or display any attributes more or less prominently then their male counterparts?

Blunderboro: Generally I’d say no because such a blend and balance of skills are required to excel and the best players, men and women, tend to demonstrate these universally. However, remembering the words of Rudyard Kipling, I’d suggest that maybe we ladies bare chess grudges longer than men do, and, baring in mind the words of Adolf Albin, perhaps we occasionally display greater levels of imagination in our deviousness.

Intermezzo: I assume that you have examples in mind?

Blunderboro: Of course. Shall I write you a blog post?

Intermezzo: Yes please!

So now, I’ll hand you over to Lady Cynthia who, as always, has an intriguing tale to tell.

"Hello again fellow chess-heads! The gender debate surrounding the royal game has long been a cause of heated discourse. Personally I find such chatter to be rather dull as generally speaking it is, like the game itself, dominated by male opinion! Questions such as “Why don’t more women play chess?” and “Why are women not as good at chess as men?” tend to be questions that men ask when they want to pontificate about the perceived masculine intellectual attributes they possess. The truth of the matter seems to be that, proportionally, we women are at least as good at chess as men. Should any of my undoubtedly overwhelmingly male readership be interested in a more balanced female perspective on such matters then I can hardly do better than to direct you to the excellent Goddess Chess website.

From a Lady’s perspective, I’m not convinced that our approach to chess or the attributes we display are really all that different to men’s. Certainly I’m unable to recall any examples that would support such a theory. What I certainly can provide evidence to support is that when it comes to clear thinking, cold-blooded ruthlessness and down-right craftiness at the chess board, we ladies can behave in a most ungentlemanly fashion!

Today’s story begins in 1932 when I was 10 years old and attending St. Ethel’s boarding school for girls. Of course I was a member of the school chess team and we regularly played matches in the local chess league as well as against other schools around the country. At this early stage in my career I was not by any means an expert but the fire of competitive spirit was certainly stoked during my school days. This was never more evident than when St Ethel’s played our annual match against our great rivals, St Agnes’ Catholic School for Girls. By the time I represented St Ethel’s for the first time in this fixture it had already taken place 35 times previously and our school held an 18-17 lead. In 1932 then I had, for the first time, been offered the opportunity to defend the honour of St Ethel’s in this unfolding legend of inter-school rivalry. I was selected to play on the bottom board, board 10.

If further incentive to succeed were needed that day it was provided when I arrived for the match (which we played on a Saturday afternoon in our school library that year) and discovered that my opponent was to be Prunella DeLauncy. I knew this girl and we already detested each other. Prunella was the daughter of Sir Stephen and Lady Margaret DeLauncy who owned DeLauncy Castle, the nearest estate to my own family’s holdings. Although our families were not especially friendly we did operate in each others ambit on numerous social occasions and so I had already had numerous run-ins with this odious little girl. Prunella was three years older than me and took every possible opportunity to belittle, bully and taunt me for being smaller, weaker and younger than her. I reasoned that, on this occasion at least, her physical advantages would be of no use to her and resolved to take full advantage of the fact that the controlled conditions of the competition would prevent her from cheating. An deep irony baring in mind what was to take place that day.

When we took our seats at the board she looked at me as if I were something unpleasant and smelly that she had stepped in on the street and could barely bring herself to shake hands with me. When the handshake did come it was half-hearted and limp. At this point, as I looked along the two lines of players on my right, I noticed to my amusement that she was stationed beneath several girls who looked to be about my age whereas I was clearly the youngest in our team. This gave me a fresh injection of confidence for now I felt that my playing abilities would be a match for hers.

Sadly, on that wet autumnal afternoon I was to be disappointed and even devastated by my own naivety. The game started off well enough. She responded to my king’s pawn advance with the Sicilian Defence. I chose an anti-Sicilian line I’d been studying and elected to play it safe by swapping the queens off very early in the game. I felt confident of securing at least a draw from my enemy until we reached the diagram position below where Prunella was to play.

By now Prunella had begun to openly express some dissatisfaction with her position. Perhaps she felt that she ought to have already secured a decisive advantage against a player three years her junior, perhaps she had simply staged these emotions in order to prepare the way for what now came next. After a relatively short think of only a couple of minute she aggressively bashed out the move 18…Bc6, whacked her clock and then sat back smugly with a sneer on her face and her arms folded across her chest.

As I considered my response I noticed that her facial expression was slowly changing from smugness to concern. After a couple of minutes her face reddened, she muttered something to herself under her breath and then suddenly stood up, her chair scrapping noisily on the wooden floor as she did so, and stormed out of the room in disgust. The eyes of all the players followed her as she left. Amazed and excited at what had just occurred I studied the board again looking for the error that she obviously felt she had committed. It didn’t take long to for me to realise that she had left her pawn on f5 unprotected.

“A free pawn!” I thought. “Is there a trap?”

It took only the briefest of moments to check that after I captured with 19.Rxf5 there was nothing unpleasant that was going to happen to my king and saw that if she played 19…Rd1+ 20.Kh2 Bb8+ then 21.g3?? would be a dire error on account of 21…Rh1 mate! However, I soon saw that instead of this I could play 21. f4, or even better 21.Bf4 and would have simply gained a two pawn advantage.

“She must have missed 21.Bf4”, I reasoned and then wrote down the move 19.Rxf5, played it and pressed my clock confident that I had secured a decisive advantage.

Five minutes passed by and then another five. There was no sign of Prunella, where was she? I began to get restless, had she given up in dismay or been rendered physically unwell by her error? I was about to go and speak to the match referee when the door of the library creaked open and Prunella slowly crept back in. She looked like she had composed herself and she returned to our game tight lipped and serious. She sat down at the board, looked at my move and sighed meaningfully and then with a depressed air about her she responded as I had anticipated with 19…Rd1+. I played my only move 20.Kh2 and then she rocked back in her chair her expression completely transformed once again. Suddenly she was leering at me with a malignant twinkle in her eye. She paused only long enough to let me register that something was a miss before reaching forward and playing not 20…Bb8+ but the move 20…Be4!

I stared at the board in disbelief. My rook and knight forked by the bishop. How had I missed it? It was clear I had been duped by an acting performance of consummate skill. She had wanted me to think that she had made an error and so all I had done was look for one. It was a brilliant diversion. Looking only for a mistake I had found one and completely missed the best rejoinder! I couldn’t even escape with 21.Ne3 as Bxe3 simply reinstated the threat.

At that point, I confess that my world fell apart. I have never again since felt so abject at the board. Playing on in a mist of demoralised inertia I continued on auto-pilot until Prunella finally ground me down with her extra piece in the end game. To make matters even worse St Ethel’s lost the match by a score of 4½-5½! My naivety had lost us the match and it took me months and months to recover from the trauma of losing that game to Prunella DeLauncy who I should add, I never played again in the annual encounter as my game improved rapidly enough to stay above her in the board order in subsequent years. Never the less, in each year that I took part I had to endure her hard, sneering gazing on me every time I caught her eye.

I thought I would never have the chance to avenge that painful defeat. But then, over twenty years later, in 1953, fate dropped an opportunity into my lap. I received a letter from the St Ethels’ Head Mistress of that time informing me that the annual chess match against St Agnes’ had reached it’s 50th edition (the fixture was not held between 1940-45 on account of World War II) and, to commemorate this, a special anniversary match between chess-playing alumni from each school was to take place alongside the traditional match for the pupils. Of course I accepted the invitation to take part as, by this point in my life, I was an accomplished player and wanted to repay in some way the chess education I had received from my old school.

The day of the match arrived. Once more the venue was St Ethel’s School Library. I had arrived early and was enjoying chatting to several old friends who I hadn’t seen for years when suddenly on of them drew my attention to the library doorway. Prunella DeLauncy had just arrived. I hadn’t expected her to attend but I would guess that she wouldn’t have wanted to miss another opportunity to flaunt her success of 21 years previously. There she was, as tight faced and smugly superior as ever. She glared at me as she made her way over to her team mates and I found myself yearning for a re-match even though I imagined that she would not be their top board player.

When we saw our Captain’s match card I couldn’t believe what I saw, for Prunella was indeed playing on board 1 for the St. Agnes Alumni team. Her game must have improved somewhat over the last twenty odd years for I was sure there were others in the St.Agnes line up who had previously been her betters. As we sat across from one another I could sense her disdain but forced myself to be polite and looked up smiling at her.

“Good luck”, I said as I shook that limp, cold hand.

For this return game I was fortunate once again to have the White pieces. My improved skills as a player in the intervening years between our encounters had given me the confidence I needed to play for a small but enduring advantage out of the opening. I played solidly, possibly too solidly and Prunella, to her credit defended staunchly, and at times, resourcefully. As the game meandered on my advantage dwindled and I began to realise that Prunella, whilst having no winning chances herself, had succeeded in neutralising my attacking potential completely.

Stubbornly, for in all other circumstances I would have offered a draw, I played on, politely declining her curt offer of a draw when the queens came off the board as the end game began. We were now the last board playing and the match was tied at 4½-4½. Vainly I scoured the position for any opportunity to create complications and managed to find a clever way of sacrificing a pawn to reactivate my pieces. I conjured up some significant problems for my opponent and she began to spend more and more time trying to solve them. Finally though, she dug herself out of trouble yet again and, with both our clocks down to their last two minutes, we reached the position below.

I had just checked the Black king and Prunella moved it with 61…Kh6. I sat staring intently at the board. The position, with equal material and opposite coloured bishop was drawn I had to accept it and offer to share the honours. My clock was almost spent. But then, a glimmer of an idea came into my mind, perhaps there was a way and I could try to win it without any risk of losing. Quickly I checked it again and glanced at my clock. One minute left. Prunella had a little more but not much. To make this work I had to blitz her and rely on her disdain of me and need to belittle me. I could use that to my advantage.

Very swiftly we now both banged out the moves…
62. Bf4+ Kg7
63. Be5+ Kh6
64. Bf4+ Kg7

I’d made a point of calling out “Check” throughout this sequence. First of all because I knew it would annoy her and secondly because it was integral to my plan. I paused here for a couple of seconds with my hand hovering over the bishop. Prunella, flushed with adrenaline looked at me intently expecting that the repetition of moves would follow and enable her to thwart me again and draw the match. However, I now played 65.Bd6 and called out “Check” again. Immediatley Prunella’s hand darted out to her king and moved it back to h6. She pressed her clock again and then said, mockingly, “That wasn’t check.”

“Sorry! Yes, you’re right. My mistake” I replied as I paused again for a few seconds. I must have had about twenty seconds left. I used ten of those to allow Prunella to realise the full horror of her mistake before playing 66.Bf8!

“But that,” I said “is checkmate. If I’m not mistaken.”

And so it was that on this occasion it was Prunella who was left devastated. My vengeance felt very, very sweet and my team mates crowded round to congratulate me on my play. Later on, at the local pub they also congratulated me on my gameswomanship. The ultimate compliment.

As a post script to this story I should add that recently I was most surprised to find this last little set piece (listed as being played by NN and NN) in Christian Hesse’s new book “The Joys of Chess:Heroes, Battles and Brilliancies”. The position features in a chapter named “Gamesmanship” and I will end this article with a quote that features at the beginning of that chapter which seems very appropriate to the subject and an object lesson for all chess players regardless of their gender."

“As a medium for demonstrating one’s mastery of the game the board and pieces are, in fact, most unreliable.”

- William Hartston

Addendum: 01/10/2011

Since I published this post (by a bizarre coincidence) Chessbase have put up a very interesting related article on their website which I would commend to all readers interested in the gender discussion. It turns out that some research now suggests that there are differences between men and women when it comes to how they approach their chess playing. Or, rather, there are differences to their approach when men play against attractive women! Evidently a man playing a game against an attractive woman is much more likely to essay an aggressive opening system and take more risks to try and win the game. On the other hand, women are unlikely to change their approach when playing against men, regardless of whether or not they think they are attractive! So, there you go, some kind of answer to the original question I posed in the introduction to this post.

An Early Christmas Present

2011-12-30T18:09:00.000-08:00

Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year! Photo from
Rennings' photo stream on Flickr

What does every chess player want for Christmas? Well, I can't speak on behalf of every woodpusher, but for me it's really simple. I just want to play a really interesting and exciting game! There are three key ingredients that make an enjoyable encounter in my book although I do recognise these won't be everyone's cup of tea:

Monstrous complexity: a game that is so impossibly hard to assess at the board that it leaves you feeling physically exhausted and your head reeling for 24 hours afterwards!
Imbalance: an encounter where the three core elements of chess: space, time and force (material) are dynamic and imbalanced but roughly equal.
Aesthetic appeal: a pretty or unusual combination, manouevre or concept. Or a checkmate, preferably involving a king hunt.

How fortunate for me then that I had a game of just this sort last week? All the more so because it ended with me winning! Here is a game that is spawned out of a favorite opening variation of mine which brings mind-bending complexity, an imbalance of material, plenty of excitement and, in this case at least, an interesting tactical motif that is repeated throughout the game and in the sub-variations. So, for a bit of festive fun lets count the number of times in this game that a piece is attacked by a piece of lower value than itself and simply refuses to move itself.

	A	B	C	D	E	F	G	H
8									8
7									7
6									6
5									5
4									4
3									3
2									2
1									1
	A	B	C	D	E	F	G	H

Shapland, D. Unrated - Bagley, A. Unrated

1-0 (Leeds League Division 1) 21/12/2011

[#]1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nd2 Introducing the Tarrasch Variation of the French Defence. 3...Nf6 And this is the closed system which has already featured once before on these pages - "The French Fried" 17/11/11. The alternative for Black is to play 3...c5, a move which leads to positions of a very different character. Grandmasters appear to favour the c5 move but at club level I find myself almost exclusively meeting the closed system. 4.e5 Nfd7 5.c3 c5 6.Bd3 Nc6 7.Ne2 cxd4 8.cxd4 f6 9.Nf4!? I've played this move several times before. Many of the textbooks state that this is dubious and that Black can gain the advantage from it. That may be true theoretically, but the path to that advantage is hugely complex and requires fantastic map reading skills and a great deal of familiarity with the terrain in order to gain it. Most of my opponents don't face this line often enough to have been forced to learn the all the ideas in the position and as a result I've done pretty well with it. The mainline here goes 9.exf6 Nxf6 10.Nf3 and the game goes on from there. 9...Nxd4 10.Qh5+ Ke7 11.exf6+ Nxf6 12.Ng6+ hxg6 13.Qxh8 Kf7 14.Qh4 I ventured this line in a recent outing with Black (the first time I've ever played the French Defence!) and my opponent played the alternative move to this one which is

[14.O-O and play now continued with 14...e5 15.Nb3 Nxb3 16.axb3 Bf5 17.Bxf5 gxf5 18.Qh3 g6 I went on to win the game with the passed d-pawn proving to be decisive although White missed a couple of chances to improve on his play.]

14...e5 15.Nf3 Bb4+!? This was a new move to me. Previous games I've played in this line have all continued 15...Nxf3+ 16.gxf3 Bf5 17.Bxf5 gxf5 18.Bg5 and then the game really begins! In fact, as I studied this game afterwards I realised that Black has improved on the move order used in the game below where Black played

[15...e4 This is considered to be a decent alternative to 15...Nxf3 16.Nxd4 Bb4+ 17.Bd2 With this move order White can block the check. As played in the actual game that option isn't possible as we'll see in a moment. The move order played in the game is a distinct improvement on this variation then, as now 17...Bxd2+ 18.Kxd2 Qa5+ 19.Kd1 exd3 20.Nb3 Qc7 21.Rc1 Qe5 22.Re1 Qxb2 23.Qd4 Qxa2 24.Rc7+ Bd7 25.Qxd3 Rc8 26.Rxb7 with advantage to White in Agnos-Emms, British Championship, Southampton 1986.]

16.Kf1 This move is forced because as mentioned in the note above, blocking the check loses a piece after

[16.Bd2? Nxf3+ 17.gxf3 Bxd2+ and if the king recaptures the knight will check on e4 and White will lose his queen.]

16...e4 Only now this move! 17.Nxd4 exd3 18.Nb3? This is a mistake. I felt the need to try and drive the bishop from b4 but it won't be so easy to do and in the final analysis my knight was better placed on d4 than here on b3. It would have been much more sensible to develop my pieces as quickly as possible. One approach would be to play

[18.Bg5 Bd7 19.g3 Kg8 20.Kg2 Qb6 21.Bxf6 gxf6 as happened in Luther-Matamoros Franco, Capablanca B1 1997. The position is unclear and rather obscure.;

18.Be3!? is a move that my engines both llike and when I checked against the Chessbase app on my iPhone it seemed that this was the best choice of response statistically if not by volume. White prepares to meet 18...Bg4 with 19.f3 and intends Kf2 to liberate his king's rook.]

18...Qe7 With the simple but effective threat of 19...Qe2+ and mate on e1 next move. Now I had to block the e-file immediately. 19.Be3 Both engines (Crafty and Fritz) assess this position as being much better for Black and it is all down to one inaccurate move on my part - Nb3. This one mistake could have cost me the game. If you're going to play this kind of opening however, you have to accept the risks. 19...Bg4! I must admit that I hadn't seen this coming quite so soon. Black is putting my centre under great pressure. By depriving my rook of the d1 square Black is indirectly preserving his passed pawn on d3 and now threatens to force it home at once. In addition, I can't play f3 to remove the bishop from its outpost and give my king the chance to get to f2. At this stage of proceedings I realised that I was in trouble. I felt I had to try and relieve the pressure some how so I opted for 20.a3 Fritz thinks that a better line was

[20.h3 Be2+ 21.Kg1 Rc8 but that still looks jolly unpleasant for White to me.]

20...d2! 1: Here we are then. For the first time in the game an attacked piece refuses to retreat. Quite right too on this occasion. Again, I must admit to having not considered the possibility that Black would just advance the pawn but it makes complete sense. As a minimum Black will win back the exchange and he will maintain the initiative. 21.axb4 d1=Q+ Nothing wrong with this but Black overlooked his best opportunity to drive home his advantage in the form of

[21...Qxb4! After the game I told Andy that I had been really worried about this reply, more so than the game continuation. He said he hadn't considered it and it's the first time in the game that I think he selected a suboptimal choice. The post mortem analysis demonstrated the power of this continuation to both players' satisfaction. Black threatens both the White knight and also the discovered attack on the White queen revealed after Be2+. This double threat should prove decisive after 22.f3 Qxb3 23.Kf2 Kg8 24.Bxd2 Qb6+ 25.Kf1 Qxb2 26.Qe1 and Black is clearly much, much better here.]

22.Rxd1 Compared to the variation above (which I hadn't seen all the way through of course but could see was dangerous) I was more than happy to give back the exchange for Black's passed pawn and balance up the material again. 22...Bxd1 23.Nc5 Bg4 It would be easy, given the benefit of hindsight, to say that this move was inaccurate. I had expected 23...b6 to drive the knight back to d3. Certainly if Black had been able to forsee the critical role this knight will play in his demise on this outpost then he would have driven it off as soon as possible. However, at the time there didn't seem to be an immediate threat and Black wanted to remove his bishop to this square. If nhe had chosen to kick the knight immediately I had considered something like

[23...b6 24.Nd3 Bc2 25.Ke2 Rc8 although Black stands rather better here to my mind and the engines concur.]

24.h3 d4!? 2: Here is the second instance of a piece being threatened but not retreating. Aesthetically, it is the mirror idea of the previous example. The bishop is threatened by the flank pawn but does not retreat in order to allow the d-pawn to advance with a threat! On this occasion it seems likely that Black did not select the very best continuation although d4 is by no means a critical error, it simply gives White a chance to get back on terms a little. Fritz 11 recommends instead playing

[24...Bf5 25.Qf4 White lines up his queen on the f-file ready to play g4 and g5 if given the chance. This move also gets the queen back towards the centre of the board as well. 25...Kg8 Black side steps the threat and puts his king onto a safer square. 26.Kg1 White prepares to put his king on h2 in order to finally get his rook into the game. 26...b6 27.Nb3 Rc8 28.Nd4 and Black is likely to pick up the two White b-pawns whilst White will exchange on f5 and win one of Black's king's side pawns leaving the game finely balanced but slightly in Black's favour.]

25.hxg4 3: Not to be out done I now also refused to move my attacked piece. Of course this just results in an exchange but from my point of view I was happy to open the h-file in order to try and develop my rook on that file. The draw back was that I could see I was going to have my pawn structure damaged even further. 25...dxe3 26.g5! According to both engines, White has now equalised again with this move. The key point is that White now gains a tempo against the Black knight threatens to win another by coming to c4 with his queen. Now I felt I was putting pressure on my opponent rather than the other way round! 26...Rd8 4: Here we go again! Once more Black refuses to move his attacked piece. Of course White can't take the knight because 27.gxf6?? e2+ 28.Kg1 Rd1+ 29.Kh2 Rxh1+ 30.Kxh1 e1=Q+ and Black wins. 27.Qc4+ White inserts an intermezzo of his own and now the Black knight really is under threat and must move itself into a position where it is pinned and also blocks the d-file. 27...Nd5 28.fxe3!? Voluntarily breaking up the last vestages of a pawn shield around my own king. I had a fairly long think before taking this decision and didn't take it lightly. In the end I decided to go for it for two reasons. First of all I couldn't see how Black could immediatley take advantage of my king's exposure and second of all I felt that he would try and refute my play directly and that would enable my rook o develop with a tempo. In the end the benefits appeared to outweigh the risks. Of course the engines don't agree with my "human" decision. That's because, as we'll see in a moment, they can see the tactical flaw in my concept. Instead of this move, Fritz thinks White's best continuation involves developng the rook directly via h4.

[28.Rh4 b5! Black hurries to try and break the pin. 29.Qe4 (If White tries to avoid simplification then it will not go well for him after 29.Qb3 Qxg5 30.Re4 exf2 31.Ne6 Qc1+ 32.Kxf2 Rd6 and in a crazy position, Black has the edge.) 29...exf2 30.Kxf2 Qxe4 31.Rxe4 and the endgame appears to be dead even.]

28...Qxe3 29.Rh3 We've reached the critical moment of a nerve shredding game. Black has captured on e3 and allowed my rook to come alive and join the fray. I was very confident that my position was close to winning here and was very surprised when I analysed the game on my computer later on to find that, in fact, it is Black who should be winning here. How can this be? 29...Qxg5? It seems harsh to award this move a question mark and yet I must because it is the crucial inaccuracy of the game. Black captures the g-pawn but in doing so gives White the time he needs to drive the Black king into the open and onto the rocks. There was a refutation to my idea but, and maybe this would be some consolation to the losing party, I doubt many players would have found it. Neither of us saw it over the board or afterwards in our post mortem.

[29...Ke7!! 4: "We shall not, we shall not be moved!" A fourth and most unexpected refusal to retreat and a wonderful moment! The Black queen doesn't run. Instead with this quiet intermezzo Black breaks the pin and liberates the knight to recapture on e3 with check and a fork to boot. It's such a pretty move I almost wish Andy had found and played it because it deserves to see the light of day shine more brightly on it than in the footnotes of this commentary. Having said that, if he had seen it, it would have robbed me of the entertaining king hunt that now follows. After this stunning side-step White is left with nothing better than 30.Qe4+ Qxe4 31.Nxe4 Nxb4 and Black should have enough to win the endgame.]

30.Rf3+ Suddenly the White rook has sprung to life with deadly effect. 30...Ke8 This allows White a clean kill. Black could have limped on after

[30...Kg8 but White's material advantage ought to be decisive after 31.Ne6 Nb6 32.Qc3 Qb5+ 33.Ke1 Qd7 34.Nxd8 Qxd8 35.Qe5]

31.Qb5+! An important check. I needed the king on e7 in order to deprive Black of the chance to bring his queen to the aid of his majesty via that square. For the record, Fritz 11 tells me that White now has forced mate in 15 moves. 31...Ke7 32.Qe2+ This seemed cleanest to me and I'd calculated to the end of the game prior to playing my last move. The forced mate Fritz spotted continues with

[32.Qxb7+ Kd6 33.Ne4+ Ke5 34.Nxg5]

32...Kd6 Now, with the king forced out to d6, the hunt is on and the weak light squares in the Black camp will prove to be his undoing. Black could have prolonged his agony by giving up the knight but that's not the kind of decision a human being would make as it is so obviously losing.

[32...Ne3+ 33.Rxe3+ Kf7 34.Rf3+ Kg8 35.Qe6+ Kh7 36.Rh3+ Qh5]

33.Qe6+ Kc7 34.Rf7+ Kb8 35.Rxb7+ Ka8 36.Rxa7+! And now Black realised that the end is nigh. It's mate in 2. [1-0]

Generated by Aquarium

Things to remember from this game:

Attacked pieces aren't alwasy forced to retreat! In very open, tactical positions it's important to consider whether you or your opponent can leave a piece en prise in order to install a more potent threat.
In positions were both sides have exposed kings the initiative is vitally important and will likely as not decide the game. If you have the initiative do whatever you can to preserve it, if you don't have it do everything in your power to steal it from your opponent.
If you are a good little boy or girl then maybe, just maybe, Santa will bring you what you want most for Christmas!

Risky Business

2011-12-04T13:58:00.001-08:00

"I didn't really care whether I won or lost
so I just took a chance" - Hikaru Nakamura

"A real sacrifice involves a radical change in the character of a game which cannot be effected without foresight, fantasy and the willingness to risk"

- Leonid Shamkovich

Contrary to my expectations I find myself posting another recent game from this season. It's one that I played just last week. Aside from the fact that I won in 15 moves with the Black pieces against another strong player (so, the usual egotistical motivations then!), I was prompted to post this game because my thinking before and during the game chimed with something that I heard Hikaru Nakamura talk about just yesterday after his sensational win against Vishy Anand at the London Chess Classic.

Having lost to Magnus Carlsen in the previous round trying to play very solidly, Nakamura said that against Anand

"I felt like playing something exciting and I didn't really care whether I won or lost so I just took a chance."

That may sound cavalier but in fact I'd suggest that, if he hadn't been in that state of mind, he wouldn't have been prepared to take the risks he did against Anand. Okay, so he didn't sacrifice material carelessly but he did allow Anand to build up what looked like a frightening positional advantage. All the chess engines assessed that Anand's position was completely winning but as Nakamura pointed out "we are not computers" and "the owness is on Vishy to find all he right moves". As it transpired, the World Champion couldn't do that. I highly recommend that you watch Nakamura discussing this game with Daniel King and Laurence Trent (watch Round 4 - Part 4). Besides the fact that the game is tremendously exciting his discussion about his approach to that game is very interesting and instructive.

	A	B	C	D	E	F	G	H
8									8
7									7
6									6
5									5
4									4
3									3
2									2
1									1
	A	B	C	D	E	F	G	H

Slinger T 169 - Shapland D 159

0-1 (Leeds League 1 Leeds) 30/11/2011

[#]1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 exd4 4.Nxd4 Bc5 5.Nxc6 A line like this seems a good choice for a player like Tony who has excellent technical skills and who therefore likes to keep things simple. In my previous two encounters with him I had tried to play sound and sensible chess with the White pieces and had been inexorably ground down. Even at this point in the game I was wondering how I would be able to avoid a similar fate in a line that appears to be perfectly good for Black but doen't appear to offer any opportunities for complications. 5...Qf6 6.Qf3 Again I was not surprised to see this move played. Tony was clearly very happy to play a game without queens. I had no idea what the main line was but a subsequent look in my engine's openings book provides the following illustrative line.

[6.Qd2 dxc6 7.Nc3 Ne7 8.Qf4 White still wants the queens off, but the method is different here. 8...Be6!? If the middle game is going to be queenless then Black may as well develop another piece and try and hamper the development of White's king's bishop. 9.Qxf6 gxf6 and the position is pretty much equal although the imbalance in the pawn structure may provide some opportunities for interest in the middle game.]

6...dxc6 I figured that he wouldn't want to exchange queens if it allowed me to develop my knight with tempo. 7.Bc4 Qg6 Why not? My plan was to develop swiftly with, if allowed, Bg4, Nf6 and 0-0-0. I wondered if White might now be tempted to play 8.h3 which seems a little slow to me but I couldn't see an attractive square for his queen if he allowed 8...Bg4. 8.Nc3 Well, let's see what he has in mind then. 8...Bg4 9.Qf4!? I must say I was a little surprised by this but having now seen the opening variation in the note above this is very much consistent with the strategic themes in this line. The alternative was

[9.Qg3 when I had intended to play 9...O-O-O and now there is an interesting line which goes 10.Bxf7!? Qxe4+! The queen is invulnerable because of the mate on d1 that follows! 11.Be3 Qf5 12.Bxc5 Nh6 13.O-O Qxc5 With an interesting game. I think I'd prefer to be White but Black has some activity.]

9...Nf6!? This was the first of several quite sizeable risks that I elected to take in this game. The main alternative looked messy and I didn't like the look of my pawn structure after

[9...Be6 10.Bxe6 fxe6 although White's has pawn weaknesses to worry about too in this line so both Crafty and Fritz 11 suggest that White only has a smallish advantage.]

10.f3 After the game Tony was critical of this move. Certainly it does create a problem in that for now White can't castle short. However, as the game went, this isn't the crucial error. Of course the most direct continuation, and the one I was most fearful of was

[10.Qe5+! A third move with his queen by move 10! But this causes considerable disruption in the Black camp after 10...Be7 11.Be3! Critical. If I'd seen this I wouldn't have played 9...Nf6 at all. The point is that White is threatening simply to play 11.Bc5 when Black will be tied up in knots trying to hold things together. For example after 11...Rd8 12.f3 Rd6 13.O-O Not (13.fxg4? after this suddenly Black has a massive counter attack 13...Nxg4 14.Qf4 Nxe3 15.Qxe3 Qxg2 16.Rf1 Bh4+ wins for Black.) 13...Bh3 14.Rf2 b5 and although Black is hanging in there, his position is pretty stretched and White is doing very well.]

10...O-O-O!? Another big risk offering the piece sacrifice but I felt I couldn't allow the alternative

[10...Be6 11.Bxe6 fxe6 12.Qg5 b6 13.Qxg6+ hxg6 but although Black's pawn structure is in ruins both my engines assess this position as almost dead level. From a human perspective this kind of line looked like exactly the kind of thing I was trying to avoid against Tony.]

11.Qg5 An interesting choice. Tony didn't feel he needed to take the piece although in fact he can take it with complete peace of mind. That said, although the engines can refute the sacrifice it looks scary over the board so his decision to try and "keep control" is understandable. The engines give the line

[11.fxg4 Rhe8 12.Bd3! Stopping any Black counterplay in its tracks. 12...Nxg4 13.Rf1 Rd7 And now it seems hard to see how Black can avoid the trading of queens. He has very little for his missing bishop.]

11...Nxe4?! Swashbuckling, brave even... but total rubbish! I felt that Tony hadn't played all that accurately on previous moves and so I justifed the decision to play this move based on a hunch that White had so many plausible options he may not be able to find the right one! After a long think I couldn't see the answer concretely myself although I had a good idea what the refutation would involve. Fritz and Crafty suggest that

[11...Qxg5 12.Bxg5 Bh5 is the only way for Black to play and assess the position as equal.]

12.Nxe4? The worst choice but Tony had overlooked my compelling reposte which wasn't the easiest to spot. Instead he could have debunked my hocus by playing

[12.Qxg6! hxg6 13.Nxe4 Rhe8 14.Bd2 Rd4 15.Bd3 f5 16.fxg4 fxe4 17.Be2 and Black does not have enough for the piece. Or;

12.fxe4 Bd4 13.Qxg6 hxg6 14.Ne2 Bc5 15.h3 Rde8 16.Ng3 Bd6 17.Kf2! and again, White stands well though he still needs to disentangle himself a little. Another plausible but bad move would have been;

12.Qxg4+ Qxg4 13.fxg4 Nxc3 14.bxc3 Rhe8+ 15.Be2 Re4 and Black will regain the piece and holds the initiative and an extra pawn.]

12...Qxe4+!! A rude awakening! Obviously White hadn't seen this coming. The point is that the queen can't be taken as there is no longer a White knight protecting the mating square on d1. The fact that this recapture comes with check means that Black can get away with having 3 pieces enprise and still win! 13.Be2 Slightly (but not much) better was

[13.Be3 Qxe3+ 14.Qxe3 Bxe3 15.fxg4 Rd2]

13...Qxc2! Accuracy was still required. Black protects the bishop on c5 and threatens to play Rhe8. Now Tony played a very natural and seemingly effective get out. 14.Qxg4+ Even winning this bishop with check is of no use to White. 14...f5 15.Qc4 Allowing me to demonstrate the last idea in the position. 15...Rd1+! This wins on the spot as 16.Bxd1 Qf2 is mate, and a pretty one at that. Seeing this, White resigned! [0-1]

Generated by Aquarium

Points to remember from this game:

There was some interesting psychology behind my play in this game. Having lost previously to this opponent trying to play solidly, on this occasion I decided that I should try and mix it tactically and see if I could drag him away from the kinds of simple position I sensed he was most comfortable with. I took risks and some of my play was unsound but I created enough complexity to cause him significant problems at the board. The Nakamura story above illustrates the same theme. The moral of the story is, if you are having a bad run of results against the same opponent you need to consider changing your approach when you next encounter them.
Sometimes, if your opponent keeps his king in the centre for a little while, you should try and find ways to exploit this. Look for ways to prevent him from castling or open the position in order to attack him. If you have a development advantage then it might even be possible to sacrifice material in order to do this.
Finally, remember that in a complex position, if you can't figure out the best defence is for your opponent then it is quite possible they won't be able to either! Here is one more quote about sacrifices that illustrates this and is well worth remembering...

"A good sacrifice is one that is not necessarily sound but leaves your opponent dazed and confused"

- Rudolph Spielmann.

Abrakebabra!

2011-11-20T18:28:00.001-08:00

The position after 21...b6 with the appropriate visual reference!

"Abra-abra-cadabra.
I want to reach out and grab ya."

- Steve Miller

Today's game is a very recent one. I played it last week. It hadn't been my original plan to publish recent games on this blog. The reason for this was that I felt the passage of time and the accompanying opportunity for assessment and reassessment would enable me to step back from the games a little and view them in a slightly more objective fashion than is possible in the immediate aftermath of combat. Often I find it hard to detach myself from the emotions I felt during and immediately after a game and that can cloud one's judgement when it comes to assessing the merits of a game and distilling the lessons that can be learned from it.

In this case however I felt I should make an exception to my rules purely on aesthetic grounds. There is a visual motif in this game that I found very striking indeed. Oddly, as I played the game it didn't make that much of an impact on me. In the heat of battle I just noticed a tactical opportunity and tried to exploit it. Only the following day as I replayed the moves did I notice the appeal of the skewer/pin that emerged on the h1-a8 diagonal.

"In fact," I thought, "it's more like a kebab than a skewer!"

That was when my internal jukebox gave me a jolt and in my head I heard the Steve Miller Band's "Abracadabra". Why? Well it's a bit perverse but once, years ago on a trip to Ireland, I noticed a chain of fastfood stores that was ingeniously named "Abrakebabra". Ever since that day whenever I think of a kebab my brain chimes in with the Steve Miller lyric only it's been changed to the fastfood store name! Funny thing the human brain. Ok, maybe it's just my brain that's funny, no need to rub it in!

I.Lewyk vs. D.Shapland

(D13) Queen's Gambit Declined: Semi-Slav, Exchange Variation
Leeds League Division 1
16th of November, 2011

	A	B	C	D	E	F	G	H
8									8
7									7
6									6
5									5
4									4
3									3
2									2
1									1
	A	B	C	D	E	F	G	H

Lewyk, I. 178 - Shapland, D. 159

0-1 (Leeds League 1) 16/11/2011

[#]1.c4 Nf6 2.Nc3 c6 3.Nf3 d5 4.cxd5 Oh dear! I hadn't really wanted to play an exchange Semi-Slav. Looks like it'll be a long evening of dour defence for me then. 4...cxd5 5.d4 e6 6.e3!? This was a surprise. I'd expected either 6.Bf4 or Bg5 which would have led to a more orthodox position. Surely blocking in the queen's bishop like this can't be all that sensible? 6...Be7 7.Bd3 Nc6 8.O-O O-O 9.Ne5 Bd7 I remember having quite a long think about this move. I was searching for an active way to play to begin with but I found myself struggling to weigh up the pros and cons of exchanging on e5 or playing 9...Nfd7 intending 10...f6. In the end I decided that I had time to be a little more patient and just develop. It may sound odd but I'm not all that experienced at playing these slow burning positional games because, even against 1.c4 and 1.d4, I have generally found interesting ways of getting an active position. 10.f4 Ne8 My idea here was to play f5 not f6. I then have the possibility of Ne8-f6-e4 if left unmolested. 11.Bd2 f5 Maybe this is a little impetuous. There was no need to play this move immediately, and it is quite committal. Perhaps 11...Rc8 first and then even 12...Nd6 and waiting for White to deploy is pieces further would have been more circumspect. 12.g4 I'd sort of expected this. It makes sense for White to re-open the b1-h7 diagonal if he can because he is better positioned to exploit the opening up of the king's side. 12...fxg4 Again a committal move selection from me. I could see I'd be able to get a tempo to re-deploy my knight on f6 and also began to see ways of getting my queen into the key area of the battlefield. 13.Qxg4 Nf6 14.Qh3 Qe8 With the idea of Qh5 at some point in the future. 15.Rf3 Rd8! It may look very odd indeed to place this rook here but the move is both tactically and strategically motivated. Tactically, I wanted to be able to play

[15...Qh5?? but right now this loses to 16.Qxh5 Nxh5 17.Nxd7 Therefore the bizarre rook manouevre allows me to play Qh5 because it protects the bishop and also allows for its retreat to the c8 square. From a strategic perspective I had hatched a plan to liberate my pieces. I figured it would require some cooperation from my opponent but I couldn't see a good way for him to prevent me implementing it.]

16.a3?! I think this might be a bit too slow. White must have been concerned that I might play Nb4 when his king's bishop must vacate the b1-h7 diagonal or block the queen's rook in by retreating to b1. However, the best way to side-step this threat seems to me to be

[16.Rc1 making way for the bishop to go to b1 if the Black knight does advance to b4 and now White looks to have much the better position unless Black can break out. I think I would have continued with 16...Bc8 here and tried to play as I did in the game.]

16...Bc8 I felt that White's last quiet move justified me taking one more tempo to prepare my escape plan. I had a good idea for this 'bad' bishop. 17.Kh1 It looks like White is preparing for a colossal attack down the g-file with his brigade of heavy pieces. I must confess that I had to persuade myself to hold my nerve here. I wanted to reach out and play 17...g6 but that would have been a poor move. Finally, I persuaded myself to stick to the plan. 17...Qh5 The break out begins. White can scarcely accept and exchange of queens when he has laboured so hard to set up his attack. Therefore he retreats but only to begin his occupation of the g-file. 18.Qg2

[18.Qxh5 If White had chosen to exchange queens then he would have been able to enjoy a smaller, but long lasting advantage. Fritz gives the line 18...Nxh5 19.Nxc6 bxc6 20.Na4 and White's pieces seem better coordinated for the end game.]

18...Nxe5!? This move is well timed. The breakout is gathering pace. 19.dxe5

[19.fxe5 Ne4 (19...Ng4? was my original intention at the board as now 20... Rxf3 is threatened. However, this move is well met by 20.Be2 and White is winning a piece.) 20.Rxf8+ Rxf8 21.Nxe4 dxe4 22.Bxe4 b6 and White's central pawn majority combined with the weakness of Black's e-pawn should be enough to win the game but there is much work to do and Black has at least succeeded in activating his pieces.]

19...Ne4 The second stage of my plan to get activated. I wanted to sacrifice my d-pawn. 20.Bxe4? Reflecting on the game now I can see that this was an important inaccuracy which enabled me to get into the game. At the board (calculating this line before my 17th move) I had thought that it was not possible for White to play the alternative capture

[20.Nxe4 because 20...dxe4 21.Bxe4 and here I had envisaged playing 21...Rxd2 thinking that if the queen recaptured I would be able to play 22... Qxf3. Of course I hadn't pictured the position correctly at that stage because in this sequence the bishop is now defending the rook on f3.]

20...dxe4 21.Nxe4 b6 "Abrakebabra!" If you want to see a good casestudy of a pin/skewer then this is it. It's more like a kebab really! Look at all that juicy meat on the h1-a8 diagonal. This weakness is critical to my counterplay along with the open d-file. Ok, you can admit that you thought I was crazy putting my rook on d8 at the time! Suddenly all of my dreams have come true. This move is the real point behind all my previous efforts from move 15 onwards. It changes the nature of the game completely. White is now under a bit of pressure. How well will he cope with it? As we've seen along the way there were numerous tactical flaws in my strategic plan but, fortunately for me, my opponent has overlooked them. For the first time in the game I felt like I might be able to play for more than a draw. 22.Rg1 White goes for the jugular. His play down the g-file is still a potential game winner and I don't have time to execute my big skewer threat just yet. The alternative way to play was

[22.Rh3 Qf7 23.Rg1 The direct route. (23.Bb4 also looks sensible.) 23...Bb7 24.Bb4 Bxb4 (24...Rc8 Fritz 11 likes this line best for Black. 25.Bxe7 Qxe7 26.Rg3 g6) 25.Nf6+!? An interesting method for breaking the pin! 25...Qxf6 26.Qxb7 Qe7 27.Qe4 g6 28.axb4 and both my kibitzing engines assess this position as being pretty much equal.]

22...Rf7 23.Rg3 I was planning to meet the alternative

[23.Rh3! with 23...Qg6 when my combined engines think something like this might happen 24.Qf3 Qf5 25.Rh5 Bb7 26.Rxf5 exf5 27.Qe2 Bxe4+ 28.Rg2 Bc5 and the end result is a position that is very hard to assess. Crafty gives White a big advantage and Fritz 11 says it's almost equal!]

23...Qh6 Even though my g-pawn is pinned I really didn't feel like I wanted to advance it to g6 and give White even more encouragement to play 24.Nf6+. 24.Bc3 I suspect that White felt there was no rush here. He would also like to liberate his knight and queen from the protection of the bishop so this move does make sense. I think it might be a bit too slow though. Once again the best move was probably

[24.Rh3 and after 24...Qg6 25.Qf3 Qf5 26.Rh5 Bb7 we have the same variation mentioned in the previous note.]

24...Bb7 Natural and best! Is this a skewer or a pin? Strictly speaking it's a sort of super-pin because the pieces of lower value are infront of the higher value piece - knight, queen and then king. Whether it's a pin or a skewer White now has a big headache on the h1-a8 diagonal because of it. 25.Qf3 Rd3! Suddenly the mysterious rook move has paid huge dividends. How often in one of my games can such a thing have happened? Probably never before! With this move Black threatens to win back his pawn with 26...Bxa3 27.bxa3 Rxc3 and Black is doing rather well. 26.Rh3?? For the last two moves this would have been a great move. Now it is a blunder. Chess is a hard game! Instead of this White had to try something like

[26.Bb4 This is Crafty's recommendation. However after 26...Bxb4 27.axb4 Rc7 I think Black is doing really well. The superb bishop completely paralyses the White position. Or;

26.Rc1 Bc5 27.Re1 Kh8 Black can take his time. White isn't really going anywhere. 28.Kg1 Qh4! It's torture! The White king escapes one pin and walks into another. The threat is 26...Rxf4!! 29.Nxc5 That both my kibitzing engines think this to be White's best try speaks volumes for the desperate nature of the situation. It's all over bar the shouting after. 29...Bxf3 30.Nxd3 Bb7 but not;

26.Nf6+? This does White no good as 26...Bxf6 27.Qxb7 Rxb7 28.exf6 Rxc3 29.bxc3 Qxf6 gives Black a winning advantage and total control.]

26...Qxh3 My opponent resigned in dismay here. This deflection finishes the game at a stroke. The White queen can't recapture on account of 27.Qxh3 Bxe4+ 28.Qg2

[28.Rg2?? Is even worse as 28...Rd1+ is mate.]

28...Bxg2+ 29.Kxg2 Bxa3 30.Kf3 and as the dust settles White will realise he is missing a rook. [0-1]

Generated by Aquarium

Points to remember from this game:

To paraphrase an old chess proverb - "If your opponent starts a flank attack, counter attack in the centre". Even if your plan of attack is tactically flawed (as mine was in this game) it is still, strategically, the right thing to do. In this game I managed to get a strong grip on the White squares in the centre of the board and this was the catalyst for all my opponent's problems.
It doesn't happen very often, but sometimes a single piece can vastly out-weigh its theoretical value because the squares it controls and the threats it exerts are so strong. In this game my 'bad' bishop suddenly repented of his sins and became a very good boy indeed! Be alert to the possibilities of a position and look for ways to improve the status of all your pieces.
The stronger the player the less likely they are to make a blunder. When they make one against you make sure you take full advantage!

Pick a piece, any piece

2011-11-09T17:37:00.000-08:00

This post was the third by Lady Cynthia Blunderboro for the HBCC website. It was first posted in May 2011.

The Duchess is back!

Today I am delighted to welcome back to this blog our resident chess historian, Cynthia, the Duchess of Blunderboro. Readers may remember that on previous visits she has revealed who won the famous game between Lenin and Hitler as well as explaining the origins of the “hardest chess problem in the world”. After the success of that last post she e-mailed me saying:

“If you liked that one I have another, even older tale, from the life of my Great Grandfather that your readers are sure to enjoy”.

Of course I couldn’t resist such a tempting offer and immediately replied to confirm the commission of the post below. I leave it to the Lady Cynthia herself to explain further.

“Greetings chess fans. Let me start this column by asking you to consider the diagram position below. Some of you may be familiar with it as it is one of the few chess problems that has become so legendary that many chess players have heard of it by name. It’s called “Excelsior” and it was composed by the American problemist Sam Loyd and first published in 1861.

"Excelsior" by Sam Loyd, 1861

"What’s so special about this problem?” you may very well ask. In reply I will draw to your attention the fact that most chess problems are given names by their composers but there aren’t very many of those names that the average club player is likely to have heard mentioned before unless they have spent a lot of time studying chess problems. By contrast think about some of the famous chess games that have been given names such as “The Evergreen”, “The Immortal” and “The Game of the Century”. They are all renowned for their enduring beauty.

This is one of the few chess problems that could be considered to be an “immortal” and the tale I have to tell you today is the interesting and amusing story of its creation.

Let me begin my account in the school holidays of December 1935. I was 13 years old and passing some time studying a book of chess problems in the drawing room at Blunderboro Hall cosied up in front of an open fire. I think that the book may have contained some rather light-weight challenges for I recall that I was starting to feel like they were all a bit too easy when suddenly my Father burst into the room red-faced from his morning ride and chortling over some joke he had just shared with my elder brother who had accompanied him that day. When he saw me he stopped and afforded me one of his broadest smiles.

“Well, someone is taking their chess studies seriously I see.”

He ambled over, hands on hips and peered closely at the position I was studying. It was a mate in 3 puzzle.

“Chess problems today is it? What do you make of them?” he asked me, pointing at the book.

“To be honest Father, I’m beginning to think they are a little ho-hum” I sighed.

“Ho-hum!” He exclaimed and then laughed. “Why do you say that little one?”

“Well they just seem to me to be a little too contrived. The positions aren’t always natural and that can lead to a situation where the key suggests itself.”

As I said this my Father straightened and fixed me with a look that was a mixture of seriousness and surprise. He really hadn’t realised how seriously I was taking my studies.

“Go on,” he said “explain what you mean”.

“Well, in this position for example (see below) it seems obvious that the rook on f4 is the piece White must move first if he is to give check mate in three moves.”

White to play and mate in 3

“Explain how you reached that conclusion,” my Father said as he pulled up a chair on the other side of the board from me.

“Well, first of all, it’s a mate in three puzzle so White doesn’t have much time. Because Black has threats of his own, such as Rxg2+, that rules out any sort of sneaky creeping moves such as 1.Kh2. That tells me that the solution must involve forcing moves, probably checks. Most of the checks in the position simply lose material and so already there are only two plausible candidate moves. 1.g4+ or 1.Rh4+.”

“That’s very good thinking” interjected my Father. “Keep going”.

“1.g4 looks tempting but then it is easy to see that the Black king will move to h4 and it will be impossible to mate him in 3 moves, if at all. No, the only way to achieve checkmate must be to use the White pieces to drive the enemy king towards the White king and pawns. So after 1.Rh4+ Kxh4 White can play 2.g3+ and now I can see that mate will be delivered by the White knight moving to f4 whether the Black king moves to h3 or h5. It’s a pretty solution but not that difficult.”

My Father sat silent for a moment looking at the board deep in thought and then he nodded as if he has just reached an important decision.

“Your solution is absolutely correct of course and much of your reasoning is also sound. Building up such reasoning skills is the main benefit of studying these kinds of problems. However, I’d advise you to be careful about jumping to hasty conclusions about thinking all chess problems contain the obvious signposts to their solutions. That isn’t always the case. In fact, your Great Grandfather once came to the same conclusion and it cost him a slap up dinner.”

“I should like to hear that story” I said enthusiastically. I loved hearing stories about my ancestors and Father was such an excellent raconteur.

“Then I shall tell it my darling” my Father beamed. Then he quickly cleared the chess board and set up a new position. The one I gave at the start of this post.

“It’s probably about time I gave you some more challenging problems to study and this one is certainly that. Before I ask you to try and solve it though, I’ll tell you about how your Great Grandfather was ensnared by it’s trickery.

In 1858 your Great Grandfather, Herbert, was in New York. For some time he had been involved in establishing new trade opportunities between the United States and Great Britain and he had spent a large portion of the previous few years in New York which was an essential trading hub at that time. New York at that time was an exciting place to be for a chess enthusiast. Just the year before this story takes place the First American Chess Congress had been held at the St. Julien Hotel on Broadway and the winner of the tournament was none other than Paul Morphy, one of the greatest players of all time. He had emerged from obscurity to become a great celebrity of the day and after winning that tournament he travelled on to Britain and France where he was hailed as the best player in the world.

Sam Loyd, 1841-1911

Morphy had spent some considerable period of time in New York before during and after that First American congress and as a result the already burgeoning chess scene enjoyed a real golden age. This was the era just before the New York Chess Clubs were founded and so the St. Julien was the place to meet and play chess at that time and many of the best players in the states as well as visiting European stars spent time there when they were in town. Your Great Grandfather spent a lot of his recreational time there and got to meet and know many of the important characters on the scene including Morphy himself and the owner of the hotel, a great patron for chess in New York, Denis Julien. He also befriended the man who composed this problem a young fellow called Samuel Loyd.”

“I know that name” I interjected.

“And well you might” my Father responded. “Sam Loyd became a famous puzzler and not just in chess circles. He also invented that puzzle I showed you last Christmas. 'The Trick Donkeys Problem'.”

“I remember that”.

“Well, Loyd was still a youngster when your Great Grandfather met him. However, even at the age of 18 he was already a very successful composer of chess problems and a reasonably accomplished player. One night Loyd was playing, chatting and making merry at the St. Julien Hotel with a group of players of which your Great Grandfather was one. The topic of their conversation turned to problem composition and solving and Herbert said that he found most chess problems to be rather easy to solve. Sam asked him why he thought that was the case. In answer Herbert made a similar case to the one you gave a few minutes ago saying that it was usually all too easy to find the piece that was the key to the solution. Immediately Loyd offered to wager that he could design a problem in which Herbert could not pick the piece that was the key to the checkmate. Herbert readily agreed thinking that the task was an impossible one and the stakes were agreed as being the cost of a dinner at the hotel.

After that evening a few weeks passed by and Herbert didn’t see Sam at the hotel. He thought that he must have become engrossed in one of his many projects and had forgotten about the bet but then, three weeks later, as he played a friendly game in the hotel someone tapped him on the shoulder. He turned to see a beaming Sam Loyd who told him that, when he’d finished his game he had a present for him and that he hadn’t eaten all day and was starving! Your Great Grandfather quickly agreed a draw in the game he was playing and hurried across the room to another table were a gathering crowd of a dozen or so kibitzers parted to let him take a seat across the board from Loyd. On the board in front of him was this position.”

"Excelsior" by Sam Loyd
"White to play and mate in 5 with the least likely pawn or piece."

“It’s White to play and give checkmate in five moves,” grinned Sam. “But my challenge to you Herbert is to pick a piece, any piece, that doesn’t give mate in the main line.

“So, now my girl. Can you meet Sam Loyd’s challenge and find a White piece that doesn’t give mate?” Chuckled my Father. “I’m going to go and bring myself some breakfast and so you have some time to think on it.” He stood and left the room leaving me rapt in thought.

After five or ten minutes he came back with a plate of eggs and bacon and a steaming cup of coffee.

“Pick your piece young lady” he said.

“I chose the pawn on b2,” I answered, “I’ve looked for tricks and traps but I can’t envisage how it can be involved in the solution in any way. Besides this to avoid being captured it would have to be the first piece to move and I can’t see how it contributes.” My Father’s laugh boomed out.

“Well, that’s exactly what your Great Grandfather Herbert thought and I’m afraid it cost him the price of that dinner. Not only does the b-pawn have a role to play in the solution, in the mainline it actually delivers checkmate!”

I could do nothing but stare at him in amazement.

“Let me show you how”, chortled Father.

I’ve never forgotten the feeling of total surprise and joy I felt when my Father revealed that solution to me. I’m sure that Herbert must have felt the same way back in 1858.

That then, is the story of how Sam Loyd won a splendid dinner at the St. Julien Hotel from my Great Grandfather. It is also the story of how a legendary chess problem was born. In fact the mystique of this puzzle has embedded itself so vividly into chess folklore that any chess problem which involves a pawn making consecutive moves from its home square to reach promotion is said to utilise the “Excelsior” theme. What a wonderful puzzle by one of the great puzzlers!"