Letelier vs Fischer, Leipzig, 1960

Game from my 1984 copy of Your First Move - Chess For Beginners by Alexei Sokolsky (first English printing was translated from the revised Russian text 1981, first Russian printing was 1977).

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 Bg7 4. e4 O-O 5. e5 Ne8 6. f4 d6 7. Be3 c5! 8. dxc5 Nc6 9. cxd6 exd6 10. Ne4 Bf5! 11. Ng3 Be6 12. Nf3 Qc7 13. Qb1 dxe5 14. f5 e4! 15. fxe6 exf3 16. gxf3 f5! 17. f4 Nf6 18. Be2 Rfe8 19. Kf2 Rxe6 20. Re1 Rae8 21. Bf3 Rxe3! 22. Rxe3 Rxe3 23. Kxe3 Qxf4+!! *

Jeroen Piket vs. Garry Kasparov, Tilburg: 1989

Game 83 in my 2010 edition of The Mammoth Book Of The World's Greatest Chess Games by Graham Burgess, Dr John Nunn, John Emms.

1. d4 Nf6 2. Nf3 g6 3. c4 Bg7 4. Nc3 O-O 5. e4 d6 6. Be2 e5 7. O-O Nc6 8. d5 Ne7 9. Ne1 Ne8 10. Be3 f5 11. f3 f4 12. Bf2 g5 13. b4 Nf6 14. c5 Ng6 15. cxd6 cxd6 16. Rc1 Rf7 17. a4 Bf8!? 18. a5 Bd7! 19. Nb5?! g4! 20. Nc7 g3! 21. Nxa8? Nh5! 22. Kh1 gxf2 23. Rxf2 Ng3+! 24. Kg1 Qxa8 25. Bc4 a6! 26. Qd3?! Qa7 27. b5 axb5 28. Bxb5 Nh1! *

Korchnoi vs. Fischer, Yugoslavia, Herceg Novi: World Blitz Championship: 1970

Game noted in the preface of my 1973 edition of The King's Indian Defence by Leonard Barden, William R. Harston, Raymond Keene.

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 Bg7 4. e4 d6 5. Be2 O-O 6. Nf3 e5 7. O-O Nc6 8. d5 Ne7 9. Nd2 c5 10. a3 Ne8 11. b4 b6 12. Rb1 f5 13. f3 f4 14. a4 g5 15. a5 Rf6 16. bxc5 bxc5 17. Nb3 Rg6 18. Bd2 Nf6 19. Kh1 g4 20. fxg4 Nxg4 21. Rf3 Rh6 22. h3 Ng6 23. Kg1 Nf6 24. Be1 Nh8 25. Rd3 Nf7 26. Bf3 Ng5 27. Qe2 Rg6 28. Kf1 Nxh3 29. gxh3 Bxh3+ 30. Kf2 Ng4+ 31. Bxg4 Bxg4 *

J Gunsberg vs M Tschigorin, Havana, circa late 1800s

I recently picked up a 1903 copy of The Complete Chess Guide by F. J. Lee and G. H. D. Gossip.

It contained the following game between J. Gunsberg and M. Tschigorin in Havana, Cuba. There was no date given, but I estimate it was the late 1800s.

1. Nf3 d5 2. d4 Nf6 3. e3 e6 4. Bd3 Bd6 5. b3 Nbd7 6. Bb2 O-O 7. Nbd2 Re8 8. Ne5 Nf8 9. f4 c5 10. O-O a6 11. Rf3 b5 12. dxc5 Bxc5 13. Rg3 Ng6 14. h4 Qb6 15. Nf1 Nxh4 16. Nxf7 Kxf7 17. Bxf6 gxf6 18. Qh5+ Ke7 19. Qxh4 Bd7 20. Rg7+ Kd6 21. Qxf6 Bxe3+ 22. Nxe3 Qxe3+ 23. Kf1 Rad8 24. Re1 Qd2 25. Re2 Qc1+ 26. Kf2 Kc6 27. Rxh7 Rf8 28. Rxe6+ Kc7 29. Rc6+ Kb7 30. Rb6+ Black Resigns

On the need for attack, from Viktor Korchnoi's Chess Is My Life

Over the ten years that I had been a grandmaster, my chess style had undergone significant changes. [...] In 1960, when I first became USSR champion, the journalist V. Vasiliev interviewed me, and then wrote an article entitled 'The Bishop Move', which became widely known. I told Vasiliev that I valued highly the art of defence in chess, that I saw an unusual form of romanticism in this, and that for my success I was chiefly indebted to my ability to save difficult positions. From that time, right to the present day, all this has been cited in numerous publications. But meanwhile a man, even at a mature age, is capable of changing his views. There came a time when I realized that the ability to defend was - for a good chess player - insufficient. You can't be dependent upon your opponent's will, but must try to impose your will on him. I realized that I was restricting my possibilities both as a person and as a chess player.

From childhood I had known how to defend, and nothing more. I had to relearn, and to a certain extent I was successful. I would put down my success in the 1960s, and my rise in stature as a chess player, to the fact that I learned how to fight for the initiative and to maintain it.

Potter vs Amateur, London, 1870

Mr. Potter does the impossible! He gives his opponent the terrific odds of a Queen, makes only six moves and then announces a forced checkmate in nine more moves!

(Remove White's Queen) 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Nf6 4. Nc3 Na5 5. Nxe5 Nxe4 6. d3 Nc5 7. Bxf7+ Ke7 8. Bg5+ Kd6 9. Nb5+ Kxe5 10. f4+ Kf5 11. Nd4+ Kg4 12. h3+ Kg3 13. Ne2+ Kxg2 14. Bd5+ Ne4 15. Bxe4# 

Game 5 from 1,000 Best Short Games of Chess, by Irving Chernev.

Isolated Pawn definition in the Dictionary Of Modern Chess

A Pawn which has no Pawn of the same color on either of its adjacent files.

Due to the fact that, first, an "isolated Pawn" is deprived of the potential support which united Pawns can offer to each other, and second, that it must be guarded by a major or minor piece, it is generally considered to be a disadvantage to its owner.

An "isolated Pawn" is frequently referred to as an "isolani".

See also: chess.ky/2014/03/the-isolani_11.html

The Isolani

Hans Berliner states this about isolated pawns in The System, A World Champion's Approach to Chess:

The System detests isolated pawns, and you should too. It is not so much that isolated pawns have to be defended by pieces; it is much more that the squares in front of an isolani can no longer be attacked by a pawn. 

The System favours board control strategy, and when there are important squares that can no longer be controlled, the strategy has probably failed. Isolated pawns may be all right if they are passed; particularly if they are centre pawns and have advanced beyond the 4th rank. 

Isolated pawns are also not a serious disadvantage of they are a- or h- pawns because the squares in front of them are not very important. 

Side-by-side pawns on the 4th rank such as on d4 and e4, or c4 and d4 are very good. They control a significant part of the board, and as such are worth much more than they amount to individually.

Apparently IM Daniel Tapia eats chocolate isolanis for breakfast:

Dadian vs Doubrava, Kiev, 1896

"Check and mate to your King!" is the usual ending to the story, but here is one with a different twist.


1. e4 d6 2. Bc4 Nd7 3. Nf3 g6 4. Ng5 Nh6 5. Bxf7+ Nxf7 6. Ne6
Game 4 from 1,000 Best Short Games of Chess, by Irving Chernev.

Gibaud vs Lazard, Paris, 1924

This is the shortest game ever played between masters in tournament competition.

It ends in a knockout in four moves!

1. d4 Nf6 2. Nd2 e5 3. dxe5 Ng4 4. h3 Ne3!
Instead of retreating, the Knight hurls himself into the enemy camp with an attack on the Queen.

White resigns, as capturing the Knight would be answered by 5 ... Qh4, forcing mate.

Game 1 from 1,000 Best Short Games of Chess, by Irving Chernev.

The Flanders Panel

I just finished reading Arturo Pérez-Reverte's The Flanders Panel. It was a fairly enjoyable read, although I think Pérez-Reverte's write-up in Wikipedia might be going a bit far when it compares him to Hemingway, telling us about "...  the author's Hemingway-like ability to build layers of complexity around each person."

Further searching found another mention of Perez-Reverte compared to Hemingway: "He has a very distinctive writing style that's clear and precise, almost like Hemingway except with more detail and lush prose, as the occasion calls." Sounds like a bit of contradiction there, but each to their own...

I'm not sure that Pérez-Reverte would be happy with the comparisons. Apparently, "... he does not give a damn about Hemingway ... [and] ... with the passing of time he has come to hate Hemingway and his pathological continuous assertion of virility..."

Anyway! The Flanders Panel. I won't bother ruining any of the plot - it's a story about an old painting that depicts a chess game, and the intrigue that flows on from the painting being restored, ready for auction. An inscription is found during restoration - you find out all of this in the first couple of pages.

On page 96, though, we have the chess position shown below, and one of the characters states, amongst his analysis on what the last move may have been, "[The] pawn on A5 couldn't have moved either, because it's between a white pawn and its own black king." That doesn't make any sense to me.

Surely the reasoning to explain that the pawn on A5 hasn't moved is because the only square it could have come from - B6 - has a white rook on it, so there's no way the pawn came from there in the last move of the game.

The Petroff - one of the oldest

The Dictionary of Modern Chess by Byrne J. Horton tells us:

[The Petroff Defence] ... is one of the oldest defenses to the King's Knight opening which dates from the Gottingen Manuscripts of 1490. 

It was described by the English master Walker in 1841, carefully analyzed by M. Jaenisch in the Palamède in 1842, and popularized about the same time by the distinguished Russian player von Petroff. Hence, this defense is sometimes known as the Russian Defense.

Exaggeration?

I recently purchased a second-hand copy of Lev Aptekar’s Wisdom in Chess, published in 1987.

The foreword by International Master Ortvin Sarapu states: "There are more books printed about chess than all other sports and games put together." While I acknowledge there are many books written about chess, that statement must surely be an exaggeration... mustn’t it?

Я благодарен за Algebraic Notation

My last post originally had some moves shown, where I misread my 1973 edition of I.A. Horowitz's Chess Openings. The final move was written in the book "B-N5", with a symbol after it meaning the opponent was in check. I missed the check symbol at the time, and moved the other bishop, which could also move to its respective N5 square. I didn’t notice at the time that both bishops could move to their own Knight’s 5^th square on opposite sides of the board.

The end position confused me, and I planned on coming back to analyse it more. Today, after analysing it and getting nowhere with the supposedly great move, I realised my mistake, and have corrected the post.

I originally learnt to read chess moves with the old notation, and for some reason enjoyed reading a game written with it more, compared to algebraic notation, but this example has shown me that algebraic has much less chance of being misunderstood. "B-b5" could never accidentally imply the other Bishop’s move, even if you missed the check symbol that might be there.

Here is the original series of moves with the (now quite funny [to me, anyway]) incorrect last move:

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nf6 3. Nxe5 Nxe4 4. Qe2 Qe7 5. Qxe4 d6 6. d4 Nd7 7. Nc3 dxe5 8. Nd5 Nf6 9. Nxf6+ gxf6 10. Bg5!

Taking the pawn is bad

Continuing on from the Petrov line that Burgess' The Mammoth Book Of Chess tells us is best for Black if the White pawn is taken on move 3 are these two lines of play from I.A. Horowitz's Chess Openings.

We're warned that Black taking the pawn "is bad".

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nf6 3. Nxe5 Nxe4 4. Qe2 Qe7 5. Qxe4 d6 6. d4 c5 7. Nc3 dxe5 8. Nd5 Qd6 9. Bf4 Nd7 10. O-O-O
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nf6 3. Nxe5 Nxe4 4. Qe2 Qe7 5. Qxe4 d6 6. d4 Nd7 7. Nc3 dxe5 8. Nd5 Nf6 9. Nxf6+ gxf6 10. Bb5+!

Don’t be too hasty

A word of caution for those starting out with the Petrov – if White takes the Pawn on his third move, Black shouldn’t immediately take White’s Pawn.

As E. E. Cunnington says in Chess Opening For Beginners, "... the Pawn cannot escape." More importantly, though – The Mammoth Book Of Chess by Graham Burgess points out that if Black takes the Pawn with his Knight, White then moving his Queen to e2 "wins material".

The Mammoth Book Of Chess illustrates a couple of lines with a real-life example (from then-future Grandmasters Nigel Short and David Norwood when they were ages 10 and 6 respectively) and the ideal play at move 4 for Black if he does in fact take the Pawn on move 3.

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nf6 3. Nxe5 Nxe4 4. Qe2 Nf6 5. Nc6+ "Black overlooks a simple idea. He has to play this line, hoping for compensation for a pawn in the play following 6. d4"
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nf6 3. Nxe5 Nxe4 4. Qe2 Qe7 5. Qxe4 d6 6. d4

I like Petrov’s Defence

1. e4 e5   2. Nf3 Nf6


When Black, it seems a nice way of saying right from the start, “Ok! You attack me - I attack you back!”

It doesn’t seem to be so popular lately due to it being considered an opening that often ends up with a draw, although Wikipedia mentions that "Grandmasters Karpov, Yusupov, Smyslov, Marshall, Kramnik, and Pillsbury have frequently played the Petrov as Black."

For my own sake as much as anyone else’s, I plan on going through my books and searching for Petrov’s Defence examples. There are a multitude of examples online, but hey, I like books (although the irony of then publishing them online isn’t lost on me...).

My old copy of David Brine Pritchard’s The Right Way To Play Chess simply states “Black answers the attack on his KP with a counter-attack on White’s KP.” [My copy actually has ‘on White’s QP’ printed, but that doesn’t make sense – White’s QP is quite safe at this point...] “White retains the minimal move advantage.”

Referring to another old book – Reverend E. E. Cunnington’s Chess Openings For Beginners, we find the following two examples of the opening:

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nf6 3. Nxe5 d6 4. Nf3 Nxe4 5. d4 d5 6. Bd3 Be7 7. O-O O-O ( 7... Nc6 )
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nf6 3. d4 exd4 4. e5 Ne4 5. Qxd4 d5 6. exd6 Nxd6 7. Nc3 Nc6