A lot of the combinations in my database exist of two tactical elements which intersect. The elements make themselves manifest by salient cues. While the intersection is revealed by asking the right questions.
 |
| Black to move |
4r1k1/p2r3p/2q1p1p1/2P3N1/8/P1BnQ1P1/4R2P/3R2Kb b - - 1 1
[solution]
There are two tactical elements here.
Discovered attack
Salient cues:
- Target: Rd1
- Attackers: Rd7, Nd3
Mate in one
Salient cues:
- Target: Kg1
- Attackers: Qc6, Bh1
- Defender: Re2
Intersection
How do the two tactical elements interfere with each other?
The sheer seeing of the salient cues is the main skill what we should care about. Once that skill is obtained, the next step in our learning process will present itself. I assume.
[This is the same FEN as given above except for the move numbers.]
ReplyDeleteFEN: 4r1k1/p2r3p/2q1p1p1/2P3N1/8/P1BnQ1P1/4R2P/3R2Kb b - - 2 37
Black “missed” the winning tactical shot – and RESIGNED after just two more White moves! [See game score below.]
WRd1 is LPDO—indirectly [1:0; BRd7]
Can Black open the BRd7 LoA and “add” an attacker to WRd1? Answer: Yes, with 37… Nf2 or 37… Nb2, Black can add two attackers at once. That alone should have been sufficient to trigger analysis of the consequences. But, the WRd1 can capture on the d7-square just as easily as the BRd7 or BNf2 or BNb2 can capture on the d1-square. In isolation, this appears to be White’s “solution” to the Black double attack. Hold that thought and “LOOK” for other local areas of tension.
What other local area(s) of tension exist? The g2-square is B.A.D. [2:2; BBh1+BQc6 vs WRe2+WKg1].
Does the move 37… Nf2 affect the second local area of tension? Answer: Yes. [37… Nb2 does NOT affect this local area of tension, so simply eliminate it from consideration for the time being.] It temporarily “removes” a defender from the g2-square by blocking the WRe2 LoA. This is an Equal or Greater Threat [mate] and takes priority over moving the WRd1 to safety or capturing on the d7-square to save it.
Black did not “SEE” this at all and played 37… Qd5 and lost two pieces for a Rook in a simple exchange, because the Black Queen was overloaded trying to protect BNd3 and BBh1. He resigned after the material loss. The fact that the Black Queen could be overloaded next move apparently did not cause any concern.
None of the tactical analysis in this position was particularly difficult to “SEE” for a GM-level player in a classic time game.
“You can’t SEE what you don’t LOOK for!”
Mickevicius, Juras (2346) vs Zagorskis, Darius (2505)
Date: 2009-11-08
Event: Lithuanian chess league, LTU
Round: 2.22
Result: 1-0
Opening: Queen's Indian Defense, Fianchetto Variation, Nimzowitsch Variation (E15)
Problems: 118820591
1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 b6 4. g3 Ba6 5. Nbd2 d5 6. Bg2 Be7 7. O-O O-O 8. Ne5 Bb7 9. cxd5 exd5 10. Ndf3 c5 11. b3 Na6 12. Bb2 Rc8 13. Rc1 Rc7 14. a3 Ne4 15. dxc5 bxc5 16. Nd2 Nd6 17. Qc2 Qa8 18. e3 Rfc8 19. Bh3 Rd8 20. Bc3 Bf6 21. f4 Nc8 22. Ba5 Nb6 23. Ndf3 d4 24. Bf5 g6 25. Bd3 dxe3 26. Ng5 c4 27. Bxc4 Bxe5 28. fxe5 Nxc4 29. bxc4 Bh1 30. Qe2 Rcd7 31. Rc2 Rc8 32. e6 fxe6 33. Qxe3 Nc5 34. Re2 Qc6 35. Bc3 Nd3 36. c5 Re8 37. Rd1 Qd5 38. Rxd3 Qxd3 39. Kxh1
"You can’t SEE what you don’t LOOK for!” Yes, GM Bent Larsen taught me that the hard way.
ReplyDeleteWe seem to have named all necessary elements now. Can we concoct a method from this which helps to acquire skill and prove it?
ReplyDelete