I have been working hard lately in order to unearth some wisdom from "My System". I managed to flick in an hour or two a day during the passed weeks. I study with Margriet, who feels a bit better lately. Which is quality time. I focus on the center. Part 1 The elements chapter 1 the center and development , part 2 positional play chapter 1 Prophylaxis and the center.
What have I found sofar?
The most important part of a pawn center seems to be its potential mobility. Its lust to expand. The ability of the pawn mass to set itself, after ample preparation, in motion, thus becoming a steam-roller. All rules Nimzowitch gives about the center, seems to have this idea at the basis.
Looking at the center as a potential steam roller, sheds a clarifying light on the rules he gives. The rules are not an end in themselves. They must be seen in the light of the main idea. This way you can judge when a rule is applicable or not.
There are rules for preventing your center from collapsing. That is where overprotection comes in. The pawns might disappear, but you must still be in charge of the squares with your pieces.
When your center is blocked, you must undermine the blockaders. That is where freeing moves and attacking the base of the enemy pawn chain comes in. You try to annihilate the blockade, until that you can set your pawns in motion. A moving central pawn mass act as a wedge, in order to splay the enemy forces in two. Cutting off the communication lines in doing so.
Preventing the freeing moves of your enemy, or to render them harmless at least, that is where prophylaxis comes in.
What is the relationship with tactics?
Tactics flow naturally from good positions. My system is about good positions.
In a very concrete way, his treatment of the open file and the invasion of the 7th and 8th rank is immediately related to our lines of attack. For now, during the study of the center, that is out of my scope.
The book contains rules for pawns, pieces, the center as a whole and the tempo battle around the center. I suspect especially the tempo battle to have a lot in common with the tempo battle belonging to tactics.
What am I after?
Building a mental database with patterns related to the center. Knowing the thematic schemes that are common to the center and its battle. Developing my own thoughts about the center.
Developing a plan is the base of positional play. The actual moves and their order are of less importance, as long as you work towards a goal that you have set yourself. Without a goal, a move can't be bad. Or good, for that matter. Because there is no way to measure a move without a goal.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
PART I:
ReplyDeleteHere’s a recent amateur game which demonstrates a lot of Nimzovich’s ideas regarding the center and Pawn chains. I took some risks in the early middlegame, but then got hyper-focused on eliminating White’s queenside play (I considered his queenside pieces to be offside), and totally lost sight of what was happening on the kingside. I had the possibility of winning by capturing on f2 with check, but just did not see it. The final nail in my coffin was when I overlooked the tactics involving the Rook capture on d3. In the late stage of the game, I failed to follow my own thinking “recipe” for looking for tactics based on PoPLoAFun - and paid the price!
As GM Rowson used to say, “I learned something from ths loss.” Well, I mostly learned that you cannot relax tactical vigilance at any point in the game, especially if you have a significant advantage!
[Event "Tuesday Tournament"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2019.11.26"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Cantrell, Homer"]
[Black "Coble, Robert"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "A00"]
[WhiteElo "1694"]
[BlackElo "1578"]
[Annotator "Stockfish 9 64 (60s)"]
[PlyCount "75"]
[EventDate "2019.11.26"]
[EventType "rapid"]
[EventCountry "USA"]
{A00: Irregular Openings}
1. g3 d5
2. Bg2 Nf6 {last book move}
3. e3
(3. Nf3 c5 Equal)
3... g6
(3... e5 4. d4 Nc6 5. dxe5 Nxe5 6. Nd2 Equal)
4. Ne2
(4. Nf3 Bg7 Slight Black advantage)
4... Bg7
(4... h5 5. h3 Slight White advantage)
5. d3
{Consolidates e4} (5. c4 dxc4 6. Na3 Nc6 Equal)
5... O-O
(5... h5 6. b4 Equal)
6. O-O e5
7. Nd2
(7. c4 dxc4 8. dxc4 e4 Slight Black advantage)
7... c6
8. b3 Be6
(8... b5 9. Bb2 Re8 10. c4 Equal)
9. Bb2 Equal Nbd7
10. c4 Ng4
(10... Re8 11. Qc2 Equal)
11. h3
{White threatens to win material: h3xg4} (11. d4 e4 Equal)
11... Ngf6
12. d4
(12. Rb1 Re8 Equal)
12... e4 Equal
{This push gains space}
13. Nf4 Qe7
(13... Bh6 14. Nxe6 fxe6 15. h4 Equal)
14. a4 Rfd8
(14... Rfe8 15. Ba3 Qd8 16. g4 Equal)
15. Nxe6
(15. g4 Bh6 Slight White advantage)
15... fxe6
{White has the pair of bishops} (15... Qxe6 16. Ba3 Slight White advantage)
16. Qc2
(16. Ba3 c5 Equal)
16... Rac8
17. Ba3
{White threatens to win material: Ba3xe7}
17... Qe8
(17... c5 18. Rae1 Equal)
18. b4 Slight White advantage e5
19. Qa2
(19. Bb2 exd4 20. Bxd4 Nh5 White has a clear advantage)
19... Qf7
20. Rfe1
(20. Bb2 exd4 21. Bxd4 Ne8 22. Bxg7 Kxg7 Equal)
20... Ne8
(20... exd4 21. exd4 Ne8 22. Bb2 Slight Black advantage)
21. cxd5
(21. Bb2 Nd6 Slight Black advantage)
21... cxd5 Slight Black advantage
PART II:
ReplyDelete22. Nb3
(22. dxe5 Nxe5 23. Rf1 Nd6 Black has a clear advantage)
22... Nb6
{Black threatens to win material: Nb6xa4} (22... exd4 23.
Nxd4 Nd6 24. b5 Black has a clear advantage)
23. Rac1 Nc4
(23... Nxa4 24. Rxc8 Rxc8 25. Rc1 Rxc1+ 26. Bxc1 Black has a clear advantage)
24. dxe5 Equal Nxe5
25. Rxc8 Rxc8
{Black has an active position}
26. Nc5
(Interesting move. Better is 26. Rc1 {is a viable option} Rxc1+ 27. Nxc1 Equal)
26... b6 Black has a clear advantage
27. Na6
(Interesting move 27. Nb3 Nd6 28. b5 Black has a clear advantage)
27... Nd3 Black has a clear advantage I was quite happy to obtain an “octopus” on d3!
28. Rd1?
(28. Rf1 Rc3 29. b5 Black has a clear advantage)
28... Rc3
29. b5
(29. Rf1 d4 30. Qxf7+ Kxf7 31. Ra1 Black has a clear advantage)
29... Rc4
(Better is 29... Rxa3 {and Black can already relax} 30. Qc2 Rxa4 31. Rxd3 Rc4 Black has a clear advantage (31... exd3?! 32. Qxa4 d2 33. Nb4 Black has a clear advantage))
30. Qb3??
{overlooking an easy win} (Better is 30. Rxd3 {had to be tried to avoid defeat} exd3 31. Nb4 Equal)
30... Rc3
(30... Qxf2+ 31. Kh1 Qxg3 32. Qxd3 exd3 33. Bxd5+ Kh8 34. Bxc4 Qxh3+ 35. Kg1 Qxe3+ 36. Kg2 Qe2+ 37. Kg1 Qxd1+ 38. Kf2 Qe2+ 39. Kg3 Be5+ 40. Kh3 Qh2+ 41. Kg4 Qg3#)
31. Qa2
(31. Rxd3 {a fruitless try to alter the course of the game} Rxd3 32. Qb4 Rd1+ 33. Bf1 Black has a clear advantage)
31... Rc4
{Twofold repetition} (Better is 31... Rxa3 {and Black wins} 32. Qe2 Nd6 Black has a clear advantage)
32. h4??
{hands over the advantage to the opponent} (Better is 32. Rxd3 exd3 33. Nb4 Equal)
32... Nc7??
{RUINS a very nice position!} (Better is 32... Bb2! {Black clearly has the better chances} 33. f3 Rxa4 (33... exf3?! 34. Bxb2 fxg2 35. Ba1 Black has a clear advantage) 34. Rxd3 exd3 35. Qxb2 d2 36. Qxd2 Rxa3 Black has a clear advantage)
33. Nxc7 White has a decisive advantage Qxc7
(33... Kh8 {is the last straw} 34. Rxd3! {the final nail in the coffin} exd3 35. Bxd5 d2 36. Qxd2 Qxc7 37. Bxc4 Qxc4 38. Qd8+ Qg8 39.
Qxg8+ Kxg8 White has a decisive advantage)
34. Rxd3!
{Double attack: c4/g8}
34... Rc1+
(34... exd3 35. Bxd5+ {Double attack}) (34... – with the idea of 35. Rxd5 {Wins material})
35. Bxc1 Qxc1+
(35... exd3 {does not help much} 36. Qxd5+ Qf7 37. Qa8+ Qf8 38. Bd5+ Kh8 39. Qxa7 White has a decisive advantage)
36. Kh2 exd3
37. Qxd5+ Kf8
38. Qxd3
(38. Qxd3 Qc7 39. h5 gxh5 40. Qxh7 White has a decisive advantage) (38. Qd8+ Kf7 39. Bd5#)
Black Resigns
1-0
You can find 2 chapters about the center in Euwes "Middlegame"..
ReplyDeleteNakamuras thinking https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i41vx3Z4wKo
ReplyDeletePART I:
ReplyDeleteThere are some other books (besides Nimzovich and Euwe) that are worth looking at for insights into pawn structure and the center.
I used to have Hans Kmoch's Pawn Power in Chess. He uses his own arcane terminology, which can be a little daunting. I presume that, in addition to the English edition, there is still a Dutch edition available. I think (but do not know) that IM Kmoch wrote his book after collaboration with Euwe on the two-volume middlegame books.
Modern Chess Strategy by Luděk Pachman is a modern classic, similar in vein to My System. There is also a three-volume expanded set titled Complete Chess Strategy: Complete Chess Strategy 1: Planning The Pieces; Complete Chess Strategy 2: Principles of Pawn Play and the Center; and Complete Chess Strategy 3: Play on the Wings. I also have Pachman's two-volume work on tactics: Modern Chess Tactics: Pieces and Pawns in Action and Attack and Defense in Modern Chess Tactics.
The Power of Pawns: Chess Structure Fundamentals for Post-beginners by Jorg Hickl. I haven't read this book, but you can check a preview out on Amazon.
PART II:
ReplyDeleteJust to stay on subject, let's consider the French Defense, Advance Variation (much loved by Nimzovich in his polemics against Dr. Tarrasch).
After 1. e4 e6 2. d4 d5 3. e5, it is obvious that Black's Queen Bishop is not going to be developed (at least in the near future) along the c8-h3 diagonal because of the pawn chain in the center. That Bishop is considered to be "bad" because it is inside the pawn chain structure AND it is blocked by its own pawns.
Hickl writes:
"We speak of a bad bishop when the latter is restricted by its own pawns fixed on the same colour of squares as the bishop. Here, [in this Advance Variation] structures with central pawns are very much to the fore, since that is where the effects are greatest. However, even a single rook's pawn can make a bishop a bad one.
In the diagram [given position]the e6- and d5-pawns restrict the black bishop on c8. Of course this problem also exists to a slightly lesser extent for the bishop on c1. But the latter can, however, still be deployed actively on the kingside to a certain extent.
How can we remedy this shortcoming?
Basically three options are available:
(1) Exchange it off: here e.g. by the manoeuvre ...b7-b6 and ...BBa6.
(2) Change the positions of the pawns: in our diagram the white central pawns had to be eliminated in order for us to be able to move our own. So the correct plan consists of an attack on the white pawn chain with the levers [Hans Kmoch's terminology] ...c7-c5 and ... f7-f6.
(3) Get the bishop in front of the pawn chain: in our example the idea consists of ...f7-f6, followed by ...Bd7-e8-g6/h5. A protracted plan, but since in closed positions time often plays a subordinate role, such a procedure is very common in practice.
Of course we can try to prevent the scenarios mentioned above. The great weakness of the bad bishop, however, makes itself felt on squares of the other colour. The more defenders (in our example of the dark squares) disappear, the more clearly this factor moves into the foreground.
The terminology is not simple and transitions are fluid. The only way to get a feel for how to weigh up what is involved is through the study of this characteristic of the position over numerous practical examples. What is by definition a bad bishop can also represent a positive criterion in a game!
This gives a good synopsis of the tension between static and dynamic aspects of any given position. IMHO, it is too early in the game to characterize the Black Bishop as "bad." Yes, there are some static aspects that are (at least) optically bad, but if that was the entire story, the French Defense (at least the Advance Variation) would have been relegated to the dust heap of history long ago. These initial moves begin to give structure to the respective plans, but there is nothing that gives either player a significant edge.
For a slightly different (more dynamic) take, I refer you to GM Suba's maxim:
Bad Bishops protect good pawns!
I finally have an entry point for chess thinking, thanks to Nimzowitch. I never have been able to think about chess since I hadn't such an entry point. There are a lot of things I can think about logically, but chess wasn't one of them.
ReplyDeletePositional ideas were always isolated to me. I practiced them a few times, and then I forgot to apply them. But the ideas of Nimzowitch are related to each other, as I can see now. So I'm going to take my time to study the book thoroughly. And I started to work through his book Chess Praxis.
I assume it will take me a year or two. I have some hope that my way of practicing tactics is going to pay off too. There are some cautious signals that it might going to work. A thorough relearning of tactics will take a year or two too, I suspect.
I look forward to finally apply my capability of logic thinking in the realm of chess. I suspect that I must rework My System totally to make it palatable for me. But that is fun!