themes-in-chess

Knight versus Bishop: an interesting fight!

2009-06-15T07:35:00.000-07:00

So all have learnt, that bishop and knight have a different gait but a similiar value( = three pawns)

But the things are not so easy as they may seem on the first view. The value of bishop and knight are also depending on the concrete environs and circumstances, they are involved.

So let us look at following position.

A) how would you evaluate the position?

B) what would be your plan for black?

Black to move

***

continuaion will follow

Smyslov - or the "art of simplification"!

2009-05-29T10:20:00.000-07:00

In my last post I have praised the crystall-clear positional play of Akiba Rubinstein. His games were the favorites in my youth.

Now I have become much older , but I prefere nevertheless the good and clear positional play.

And in the last years I liked more and more the games of

Vasily Smyslov

(this is a link)

Vasily Smyslov in 2002

His games have become for me a source of inspiration.

In my view his strongest point was the simplification from a middlegame position into a better or won endgame. It happens so often in his games, that we have to presume one of his main winning methods behind it.

Here a game where he demonstrated this effective method of simplification masterfully

Smyslow -Vidmar
(Groningen 1946)

In the starting position we see, that white has a clear adventage. He is a pawn ahead in a calm position

Nevertheless the position is not so easy to win. There are different coloured bishops on board and they have a high draw tendency in endgames.

So let us see, how Smyslov managed it to transpose the position into a won endgame. He started a process of simplification

20. Bf4!

This is the first key move. He goes to exchange his different-coloured bishop against the knight

20. ... h6 21. Nd2!

this knight aims for d6. There is no need exchnging Bf4 against the knight immediately, because of the unprotected pawn on c7

21. ... g5 22. Bxd6 cxd6 23. Nc4!

d6 is a weak point in black`s area!

23.... Rxe1 24. Rxe1 d5 25. Nd6 Kf6 26. Nxf5 Kxf5 27. Re7!!

Now have a look at the endposition after the simplification. A clear better rookendgame.- White is a pawn ahead and has an active rook. This should be enough for a win

And Smyslov won this this gme with a good endgame technique 15 moves later

Akiba Rubinstein: A master of precise positional play!

2009-05-19T02:52:00.001-07:00

Akiba Rubinstein (wikipedia link) was the first master of chesshistory, who impressed me through his chess style. I admired the precise logic of his moves and deep inside was created the wish to play like him.

So I have reached that aim till yet :-) , but the fascination and the wish still exists. And I would say, that in over 40 years my chess style has become a bit more similiar to that one of Rubinstein. Perhaps I need another forty years...:-)

He had surely the strength to become a worldchampion between Steinitz and Lasker ( 1. and 2. worldchampion). But as it was the fate of other princes in chess history he never became it.

Rubinstein is still famous today for his -"clear as a crystall"- positional play. There were not many players in chesshistory like him enabled to accumulate small positional adventages and increase them - often in endgames - to victory.

Here a game, which illustrates his way of playing chess very good :

1. Create a weakness

2. Fix or blockade the weakness

3. Attack the weakness

4. Exploit the weakness ( or create a second one)

Rubinstein - Salwe Lodz 1908

1. Creating of a weakness

1. d4 d5 2. Nf3 c5 3.c4 e6 4. cxd5 exd5 5. Nc3 Nf6 6.g3 Nc6 7. Bg2 cxd4 8. Nxd4 Qb6 9.Nxc6 bxc6

This is a "hanging pawns" ( c6/d5) -position. This means a group of two isolated pawns. This is a small disadventage in pawnstructure and happens in some openings permanently. As long as there exists a compensation for it - normally better pieceplay - there is nothing wrong with it.

But here we can see, that there is already a weakness in black`s position. It is the backward pawn on c6. Rubinstein now began to fix it!

2. Fixing the weakness

10. 0-0 Be7 11. Na4 Qb5 12. Be3 0-0 13. Rc1 Bg4 14. f3 Be6 15. Bc5!

Rubinstein had now succeeded in fixing the weakness. Now he started to attack the backward pawn on c6 with his heavy pieces

3. Attacking the weakness

15. ...Rfe8 16. Rf2 Nd7 17 .Bxe7 Rxe7 18. Qd4! (c5 has to be hindered ) Ree8 19. Bf1 Rec8 20.e3 Qb7 21.Nc5 (again the blockade of c6-pawn.) 21. ...Nxc5 22. Rxc5 Rc7 23. Rfc2

Rubinstein had reduced material and the c-pawn was blockaded and under permanent attack of heavy pieces. Could he win that pawn a had he to create a second weakness?

4. Exploiting the weakness

23. ...Qb6 24. b4 a6 25 .Ra5 Rb8? (Allowed later tactics Rb7 would have been better) 26. a3 Ra7 27. Rxc6! with clear white adventage. After an accurately played endgame Rubinstein won the game

So here happens someting what happens often in similiar position. Being under permanent positional pressure Salwe made a mistake and overlooked a tactical ressource. The pawn c6 got lost.

But even without that unintended help Rubinstein would have had good winning chances. Presumely he would have gone on with a nowadays wellknown methode in those positions:

" If you cannot exploit a weakness, create a second one!"

Here he presumely would have had tried to open a file at kingside, starting with the advance of his h-pawn!

1-0