The Chess Dog Journal

Expecting The Unexpected

One of the fascinating aspects of chess is how it provides many surprises even though there are no secrets.  Yes, every position tells a story, and if you are listening to the board, it will tell you all you need to know.  Yet even in seemingly simple positions, we find ourselves surprised when a great unexpected move is played.  Here are three instructive examples of winning surprises.

This first position comes from a blitz game I played just last night.  White has proudly just played Ne2 forking my queen and rook.  But white’s glee quickly turned to despair when I responded with Rd3!  Suddenly, it is clear that white is lost.  The lesson in this position is that when you are looking at a position where pieces are tightly grouped with poor scope (white’s queen, rook, and knight) and there are lots of tactical interconnections (pawn on the 7th rank, queen threatening the rook, king stuck on 8th rank, white queen overloaded with duties) there is often an opportunity to find a disruptive and winning move.

The second position comes from the 1966 World Championship match between Petrosian and Spassky.  In game ten, when this position occurred it wasn’t obvious that white was about to win two rooks for a minor piece.  Then came Bxf7+.  Black responded with the predictable Rxf7, and then came the stunning reply Qh8+!  This position teaches us to look closely at the relationships of squares and how they can be exploited.  Because of their irregular (not straight) movement patterns, this is often a blind spot for player when it comes to knights.  Because he saw the connection between f7, h8, and g5, Petrosian was able to see the possibility of drawing the king to the critical h8 square.

The final position is well know and comes from a 1965 game between Mikenas and Bronstein.  White’s position appears quite solid.  However, the veil of illusion is pierced by Bronstein’s move: Rxa3!  Now, it is clear that white’s pieces are over taxed and that he has a fatal back rank weakness.

In all of these examples, there is a common thread.  There is a lot of dynamic tension and many piece and square interrelationships.  There is also at least one key piece with constrained movement.  This seems to be a recurring theme in many positions: when you have complexity and constraints in a position, you also have opportunity for great tactics.  Be aware of this whether you are attacking or defending.

Chess Tactics 101, Lesson # 4: TRIZ and Chess

I always enjoy finding connections between different aspects of life.  Recently, the position below presented an interesting example of this.  Try and find the fastest path to victory and then read on to see how this position links back to my work life.

[Note: To try your answer, click on the piece you want to move, then click on the square you want to move it to.  The solution will appear after you pick the correct move or after three incorrect tries.]

In my work life, I am immersed in innovation.  When I saw this problem, it immediately made me think of an innovation methodology named TRIZ (a Russian acronym that translates as Theory of Inventive Problem Solving).  TRIZ contains many tools for finding innovative solutions to problems, among these are the TRIZ Inventive Principles.  Without getting into the details of TRIZ, I saw that one of the TRIZ Inventive Principles contained the key to finding the best solution to this problem.  In particular, Inventive Principle number 13 is “Inversion”.  The idea of inversion is that when the obvious way to do something doesn’t work, the solution can be found sometimes by inverting your approach.

In the problem above, most players would jump to grabbing the 2nd rank to begin their attack.  While this works because white is already in trouble, the best path is to turn around your thinking and grab the g file as a clearing maneuver to allow the queen to enter the fray.

We have all seen positions where we have a choice of tactical plans to execute our strategy.  Sometimes, the tactical plan seems to just stop short of achieving the goal.  In these cases, it is worth asking if there is a way to invert your thinking.  In the problem, it involved flipping between rank and file thinking.  In another position you may find that a move order inversion can change the dynamics of the position.

I think this concept has broad application in practical chess.  What variations on this theme have you seen?

Don’t Stop Playing Until The Game Is Done

“It ain’t over ‘til it’s over.” – Yogi Berra

Admit it.  We’ve all been there.  After a carefully executed opening and tense middle game, you reach a position that is easily won.  You breathe a sigh of relief and embark confidently on the road to certain victory.  But, something happens on the way to the win.  Your brain takes a holiday, you make an absurd move, and there it is—in a moment you have blundered away the game only to snatch defeat out of the jaws of victory.

I was chatting to my friend, Mark Kaprielian, about this syndrome the other day as he recounted a situation from a game of his.  I understood the issue all too well having been on both sides of this sort of turning of the tide.  Here are two examples from recent play where I was the beneficiary of winning games I really didn’t deserve to win.

In the first example, I had the black pieces and had just played Qxd4.  In this position, white is clearly better because of black’s poor development and lack of piece coordination.  White should go on to win.  A simple move like 1. Qc6! looks very strong for white.  But, white zoned out and played 1. Kh1 to break the pin on the rook, completely ignoring his own back rank weakness.  Needless to say after 1. … Qa1+, white simply resigned as mate is unstoppable.

In the second example, I actually had a winning advantage myself with the black pieces, but that foolishly cut my rook off from the queenside allowing a white pawn to sail in for a queen.  Now, my situation is dire.  But, white obligingly played 1. Qc7 with the idea of crushing my f-pawn.  Play white’s move on the board to see what happened.  Yup, suddenly I was back in the game playing a many pawn vs. rook ending.  This turn of events so demoralized white, that he didn’t realize that he could still salvage a draw in the final position after 17. Kf4.

So, what lessons should we take from situations like this?

1. Never put your brain on automatic pilot. Play every move like the outcome is still uncertain.


2. Don’t become so enamored of your position that you stop considering your opponent’s ability to find counter play.


3. Always, play the whole board. Don’t become so focused on one aspect of the position that you miss the big picture.


4. When you make a blunder, don’t let it get to you. Take a deep breath; clear your head; and look at the game afresh. You may miss a chance to salvage a half point or better if you fold too early.

Chess Tactics 101, Lesson # 3: Dancing the Two Step

I just opened the latest edition of Chess Life, and always the first things I looked at were the problems that accompany GM Soltis’ Chess to Enjoy article.  I found the last problem particularly interesting because of its instructive value.  First, have a look at the problem.

What I really like about this problem is that the thought process to arrive at the solution is very useful.  When I first looked at this position, several key tactical features of the position jumped out: the nearly trapped white queen, the Bf5 attack that is parried by e4, the possible exchange on h3, the possibility of a discovered attack with Nf3+ if a white piece is place on the a1-h8 diagonal.  However, the solution lies in the theme of deflection.

Nf3 isn’t possible immediately because f3 is seemingly well protected.  But by connecting some of the tactical features of the position, Gligoric draws the defenders of f3 away one at a time in a two step dance.

The powerful lesson of this problem is to remember that tactical plans often have multiple steps.  When you look at an interesting square (f3 in this case) consider if there are ways to provoke weakness in the square, and don’t stop looking if it can’t be done in a single step.  If the first step has improved the situation, maybe another step will finish the job.

Chess Tactics 101, Lesson # 2

When thinking through tactical ideas it is always important to consider how to use the lines of influence that each piece to coordinate their interaction.  Here we see a fascinating example of piece coordination at work.

In this position, it appears as though white is losing his light squared bishop.  However, Darga has a tremendous resource to call upon, and it is soon clear that it is actually black who is lost.

Note how white’s pieces mesh together beautifully to finish the game.

Chess Tactics 101, Lesson # 1

Strategy and tactics are inextricably linked.  Without strategy, your game meanders aimlessly while your opponent builds the winning advantage.  Without tactics, you lack the capability to execute your strategic plans.

One piece of my new study plan for 2009 is to refresh tactics every day.  I am devoting 20 minutes every day to solving tactical problems.

Here is a neat one I from my tactics study last night.  I love the way this black puts this one away.

One Bad Move Deserves Another

I won my game last night.  I will have to do the post-mortem analysis and post that here.  It was an interesting reminder though of the importance of psychology in chess.  We’ve all heard expressions along the lines of, “One good turn deserves another.”  In think in chess, the expression should be: “One bad move deserves another.”

In last night’s game, we were headed towards a draw when my opponent made the mistake of underestimating my defensive resources.  He confidently slid his rook to a8 feeling that he was on his way to infiltrating my position.  However, my reply was a surprise for him.  I simply pulled my queen back to b7 where it attacked his rook.  On this new square, my queen now shared a common diagonal with his queen on f3 separated only by my rook on d5.  Suddenly he realized I had a second threat.  In the position, my rook now had the option of snagging a protected pawn with check and exposing his unprotected queen to attack by my queen.  I could see his expression change as he realized the mistake he had made by his hasty rook advance.

It was at this point that my opponent proceeded to fixate on the threat to his queen and become flustered.  In reality, his situation was not so grave as he thought.  His king could break the check by moving to f2 and protect his queen at the same time.  He would be down a pawn, but not without some compensation.

But instead of saving his rook, he compounded the mistake by sliding his bishop to e4 to block the illusory threat to his queen.  After the inevitable exchange sequence (Qxa8, Bxd5, Qxd5), he was down a full piece and headed toward a lost endgame.  Here is where chess psychology plays a role. 

When we make a bad move, it is easy to start believing that we are doomed and subsequently make a poor choice that makes our worst imaginings a reality.  It is important at that pivotal moment to step back, take a deep breath, and look at the board with fresh eyes.  Get up and walk away from the board if you have to.  You must break the negative psychology of the moment to see your opportunities to recover more clearly.  If my opponent had done this, I am certain he would have been much better off.

What do you think?  Does this resonate with your experience?