Undermining

 Another 120 mates were offered to me by the spaced repetition system of Chessable. I solved them all without a mistake, and noticed that I needed to calculate about 50% of them. The rest I simply saw.

In general, the non mates are more difficult to absorb than the mates. Anyway, that part of the training is apparently going well. Just lather, rinse and repeat.

I asked myself the question, can I use this method for other parts of the game too? I decided to find out.

So I chose an opening, the French Tarrasch, to give it a try. Apparently it was possible, but after a few days I noticed it wasn't fun. I concluded that I wasn't ready yet to study openings this way. Just playing openings and getting punished for the things I don't know during a tournament is a much more efficient way to learn openings.

So I got back to the drawing board. And I decided that I am much more interested in the middlegame. I use the Chessable book of CM Can Kabadayi The Art of awakening pieces 

With tactics I make use of repetition. There is actually not really a reason for that, but that is how the software I use works (ChessTempo and Chessable). For tactics it is good, since with every repetition I can go a bit deeper, until all the details of the layers become clear.

But strictly spoken, repetition is not needed for my method. The only thing that is needed is to invest enough energy and attention at the moment you absorb the patterns.

How does my method look like for the middlegame?

Black to move

1rbq1rk1/2p1bppp/p1n2n2/1p2p3/P2pP3/2PP1N2/1PBNQPPP/R1B2RK1 b - - 0 11 

This is from the game Spassky - Taimanov, 1956. It is not so much a chess puzzle in the usual sense. Maybe you can ask, what is the best move? But if you feed this position in Stockfish, there are other good moves too.

But that is not important. This position is about formulating a positional plan.

The plan is to create an outpost on d4. What is needed for that?

• clear the d4 square
• undermine the defense of d4
• get rid of the defending pawns c3 and b2
• get rid of pieces that can defend d4
• place a piece on d4

The undermining of an outpost is accompanied by its own tactics, and hence by its own patterns that need to be absorbed.

11. .. dxc3!
12.bxc3 b4

13.Nc4 Bg4
14.Bb2 Bc5
15.Rad1 bxc3
16.Bxc3

And you can harvest the outpost on d4

Black to move

This process of undermining works always the same, albeit the specific tactics can differ.

Bobby Fischer: "To get squares you have to give up squares."

After trading pieces, in the endgame, d3 can become weak.

Why is 11. ... b4 not so good?

How good is a grandmaster at tactics?

 I concocted my new method for transfer of knowledge from system 2 to the patterns of skill in system 1 in March 2023. So far I have absorbed 520 mates and 100 tactics (non mates) in about 13 months.

GM John Nunn played a series of 100 blitz games against a 2300 rated master. The resulting score was 88-12, mainly based on LPDO. Nunn was rated about 2600 back then.

Which leads to the conclusion, that even between high rated players, the mastering of simple tactics still show a huge difference. So what do these high rated players see and not see?

I bought the book and video of Chess for Zebras (hat tip to Robert). In the video GM Jonathan Rowson describes a game of him against GM Viktor Korchnoi. He was rated 2540 back then, while Korchnoi was about more than 100 points higher rated.

Rowson's last move was 11. ... Qf6?

White (Korchnoi) to move

r3k2r/pppn1pbp/1nb1pqp1/8/3P4/1QN1BN2/PP2PPPP/3RKB1R w Kkq - 1 12 

Korchnoi jounced up with a "this can't be good" frown on his face. And played, after just a minute checking all possibilities, with confidence a move that Rowson totally missed. As if Korchnoi was playing a simul. What did Korchnoi SEE?

Description of Rowson:

"This move is not particularly deep or difficult, yet I was taken aback by the fact that Korchnoi played it within a minute. When I completed the move 11... Qf6, he didn’t laugh or scowl (as he has been known to), but he did furrow his brow as if to say “that can’t be right” and then he looked again for just a few seconds, during which time I realized what was about to hit me. Then it happened. As soon as he saw the move there was not a trace of hesitation that it was the right one. This sense of conviction made a lasting impression and I believe it helped me to win a game later in the same tournament (Rowson-Sarakauskas in Chapter 7) ."

Slow down

 What have I learned from the past few posts and their comments?

There is little competition on the way to chess improvement. If guys even in 60 years don't absorb the patterns that belong to the removal of the guard, this means that everybody who is plateauing will not overtake you anytime soon. And even the slightest progress will set you free from the crowd.

Only youngsters will be making progress faster than you. But as soon as they hit the wall, you will be catching up, no matter how slow. Nobody so far has found the holy grail of making progress after plateauing. When the competitors are plateauing too, there is no man overboard.

How many subjects like removal of the guard are there to be mastered in the area of tactics? Not so much. Somewhere between 30 and 100, I suppose. Since even grandmasters make errors in this area, I think it is save to say that nobody masters them all perfectly. The fact that 100 blitz games by GM John Nunn against a 2300 player resulted in a 88-12 score, mainly based on LPDO, shows how many progress you can make by just absorbing the essentials well.

Hence you can take your time and master them one by one. So what's the method to absorb those skills?

Fist a bit of good advice.

• Slow down! There are only 30-100 subjects to be mastered, and nobody so far has found the holy grail to convert knowledge into skill at will. Everybody who is plateauing wastes his time with woodpecker-like methods and opening study by memorization of variations.
• Avoid complexity. You must master the simple subjects first. You will know when you are ready for more complex stuff. Nobody absorbs a subject by accident once they plateau.
• Fiddle around. The devil is in the details.
• Be especially aware of the additional punches. They make a combination work.
• Be aware of the additional punches of your opponent. They make a combination NOT work.
• Be especially aware of the duplo effect. Hitting two birds with one stone. That doesn't only work for tactics, but for every stage of the game. Think of the Reti manoeuvre, for instance.

Ok, where do we start?

It starts with the discovery of the hidden cues. They are not really hidden, they are actually clearly visible. We just don't look at them for some reason. The cues are surrounded by knowledge. Take for instance the removal of the guard.

What is the main principle?

There is a target that you attack. And the target is defended by a guard. When you get rid of the guard, it leaves the target undefended, so you can pick it up.

There is a whole host of actions you can undertake in order to get rid of the guard.

• capture it
• exchange it for a piece that is less suited for the defense
• attack it
• distract it
• block it
• overload it

All this is surrounded by the tempo battle. Your opponent must not be granted an extra tempo to both save his guard AND his target. You must be aware of desperado moves.

So there is a conceptualisation of the principle, which makes it suitable for a whole lot of similar positions, the transfer from one position to another, so to speak, and there are a bunch of methods related to it. Together this is a bundle of knowledge.

All these particles of knowledge have there own patterns.These patterns must be absorbed.

These patterns are the hidden cues. As long as they stay hidden, you have not absorbed them.

Be especially aware for calculation and reconstruction. That is a way for system 2 to hide the fact that you don't master the skill! You must SEE it.

A clear picture emerges

How does the transformation of knowledge into skill work? A clear picture starts to emerge. When you look at a position there are visible salient cues and hidden salient cues. The visible cues are already absorbed by system 1. It is about the hidden salient cues where the knowledge hides which isn't transformed into skill yet.

You can use every tool at your disposal to reveal the hidden salient cues. Logic, analysis trees, standard scenarios, mnemonics, books, chess engines et cetera. You are ready when the cues are no longer hidden, but are clearly visible.

All those tools are only useful in the study room. Behind the board these tools are often worse than useless. OTB games give you the necessary feedback to pinpoint your weak areas which need more attention.

Sounds like a healthy base for a study plan to me.

Invasion

 The problem set I use is based on a few simple conditions:

• two movers
• not mate
• rating about 1700

Despite these straightforward choices, the set is quite diverse. Often it is questionable why it are two movers, since a lot of interesting follow up moves are left out for no apparent reason.

Besides that, the end isn't always about gaining wood, as I was inclined to think. Sometimes it is about promotion, or a winning endgame, or an invasion. I gave these problems their own tag, so I can have a deeper look at them later on.

I have seen most problems about 30 times, which gave me the possibility to write a narrative for each of them. I have been surprised how rich these simple looking problems turned out to be.

Of the 111 problems, 11 got an extra tag "invasion" by me. I'm especially interested in that, because the study of the Art of Attack in Chess by Vukovic showed the importance of that idea. Vukovic made a starting point with his book. It is a pity that nobody has picked up the gauntlet he threw at us.

The Art of Attack in Chess lays an emphasis on the lines of attack that end at or near the opposing King. There is a gap in chess knowledge between the opening and the attack of the King. Between the opening and the attack lies the LoA landscape. That landscape is formed by the pawns and the piece placement.

In the past year I had a closer look at this area. Especially CM Can Kabadayi has written a few books for Chessable that prove to be useful.

The elements of interest are:

• Activate your pieces
• Bury the pieces of your opponents
• Which pieces to exchange

The role of the pawns can be quite ambiguous. Hence it is very difficult to define rules for them. The pawns are important because they move slow and can only move in one direction. That is the reason why they are at the base of any plan.

• They form the lanes for the pieces, the LoA landscape
• They can activitate your pieces by opening lines and diagonals
• They can bury your opponents pieces
• When fixed, they decide which pieces are bad and which are good
• When mobilized, they can act as a wedge
• They can claim space
• They can become targets themselves
• They can determine the outcome of an endgame
• They can protect your king
• They can act as a crowbar

Rules for pawns without a good grasp of the context turn out to become counter productive. And there are quite an amount of different contexts. Yet their specific properties (slow and unidirectional) are so important that we must study them.

But beware of the context! The context is now invasion.

White to move

r3r2k/1p5p/p1p2q2/3p1Nn1/1P6/P2Q2R1/2P3PP/5R1K w - - 0 1

[solution]

There are three moves that are winning. Why are the pawns so important? Because they aren't there where they are needed. Can you describe the LoA landscape?

UPDATE part 1

Let me first put a few things straight. I never was very fond of the PoPLoAFun system. It emerged from the analysis of tactical problems, but it never felt universally applicable to every type of tactics problem. If you look at the previous post for instance, the tactic is best described by a concrete chain of logic.

When I studied the Art of Attack in Chess though, the PoPLoAFun system seemed perfectly suited to describe the no men's land between the opening and the attack on the king. When there is no concrete tactic yet, but the pressure is already building up. The LoA's (lines of attack) provide a handle for interrogating the position. For practical reasons I limit the scope of a LoA a bit:

• a LoA starts with an attacker and ends with the opponent's King, or at a square next to the King
• There is no need to stretch the LoA to the edge of the board. For me that complicates matters for no reason. The square behind the King is far enough, when applicable
• Concrete tactics are best described by a logical narrative
• A LoA is neutral by its very nature. It is a mere pathway. This means that sometimes a battle for domination will take place
• The squares that makes the LoA change from direction are pivotal squares
• A pivotal square that lies in the enemy camp is an invasion square
• For the squares around the King I will use the PoP (point of pressure) or the focal point (coined by Vukovic)

Description of the LoA's

g-file

• attacker Rg3
• blocked by black Knight
• Knight is B.A.D. (Barely Adequate Defended)
• potential defenders K, Q, R, h7
• focal point g8

f-file

• attacker Rf1
• bonus target Qf6
• invasion square f8
• potential defenders Q, R
• battle for domination
• Rf1 is B.A.D. (Barely Adequate Defended)

a1/h8 diagonal

• attacker Qd3
• defenders Q, R
• battle for domination
• target K
• a1 = B.A.D. (Barely Adequate Defended)

Knight jump d6-f7

• attacker Knight
• defenders Q, N
• targets R, K
• discovered attack Nd6
• knight fork f7

e-file

• dominated by black Re8
• target Kh1
• invasion square e1

Intersection c3/h8 diagonal with g-file makes g7 a focal point

Intersection c3/h8 diagonal with e-file makes e5 a PoP (point of pressure)

UPDATE part 2

Let me recap. The first action of the eagle is to get an overview of the position:

• status of the targets (B.A.D. (Barely Adequate Defended), LPDO)
• status of the defenders (Fun)
• status of the LoA's (PoPs, invasion, pivotal, blockaders, clearance)
• immanent tactics (discovered attack, pin, fork)

That is seeing every salient cue in the position. This is a task that belongs to system 1, the eagle. The second step is to use your logic, in order to reveal the hidden features of the position. System 1 and system 2 work together in a cyclic process. Neither the frequency nor the order in the cyclic process is important.

Once all salient AND hidden features are known, it is time to build a logical narrative. Which is as sequential as possible, with a clear beginning, order and end.

When I looked for the status of the LoA's, I completely missed the knight jumps and the diagonal c3/h8.

While fiddling around with the Knight, I asked myself, what is the difference between 1.Ne3 and 1.Nh4? The first move is winning while the second is equal. Why? That revealed that the knight blocks a counter attack along the e-file when placed on e3.

1.Nd6 is a discovered attack against Q and R. Fiddling around showed what happens when the black Queen takes the knight. The black Queen is overloaded. When the black Queen doesn't take the knight on d6, the knight fork on f7 starts to wink. The black knight on g5 and the black king are on a knight fork's distance.

So:

• Seeing salient cues
• Revealing hidden cues by logic
• Stitching everything together in a logical narrative

• 

Chain of logic

 In the comments of the previous post, I mentioned the PoPLoAFun system to be a single branch idea. It is a line from attacker to target. The mnemonics describe the different elements you can encounter along the way.

The study of Vukovic had learned me that the PoPLoAFun system is especially suited for a description of the kingside attack. Where the end of the line of attack is the king, and an invasion square is a point of pressure.

But I'm not sure whether it is the most adequate way to describe all other tactics. Let's have another look at this diagram.

White to move

2rr1bk1/p1nq1p1p/1p1N2p1/3QP3/8/6B1/PP3PPP/2R2RK1 w - - 1 1
[solution]

What is the chain of logic here?

• First of all, The white Queen is under attack. So it seems logical to save the Queen with an additional punch.
• The white Knight attacks the rook on c8, which is the defender of the Knight on c7
• So it is logical to place the white Queen somewhere where it attacks the black knight too
• Hence Qc4 and Qb7 spring to mind
• The rook on c8 cannot move, so black must look for a way to remove the attacker of Rc8
• Hence Bxd6 springs to mind, removing the attacker of c8
• If you started the branch with 1.Qc4 (which I did not), here the branch ends. You have to prune the branch and go further with 1.Qb7
• Qb7 pins the black knight against the black Queen
• The black Queen itself is not in danger, which is a subtlety of this specific pin
• But it makes Rd8 overloaded
• Hence Rc8 is under defended

It is not rocket science. First of all you must SEE all the salient cues easy. Without that, you must calculate everything, which goes easy astray. Besides that, you must be able to reason logically and consequent.

Only when I fiddled around with the pieces, I was able to make the story  complete.

Fiddling around

 Jim said:

"I am interested in how pieces are lured off the back rank to capture . Then forced to block a rook check. on the 8th rank .the attack now has a tempo to play with."

Black to move

r3r1k1/5ppp/2pR1q2/2P5/1p2B3/1Q4Pb/1P3P1P/4R1K1 b - - 1 1
[solution]

In the comments of the previous post I was somewhat worried about whether my dataset of just 111 problems was rich enough to guarantee a sufficient frequency of occurrence of the tactical elements. With that in mind I had another look at the dataset I work with. I soon  realized that there is no reason to worry for two reasons.

The first reason is that I hang everything onto the PoPLoAFun framework. That framework appears in every game, so I have to work on the details anyway. As long as that condition is met, I'm making progress.

The second reason is that I fiddle around with the pieces a lot. Always with the question in mind "what if ... ?". Thus milking all details out of the position.

Have a look at the following diagram.

White to move

2rr1bk1/p1nq1p1p/1p1N2p1/3QP3/8/6B1/PP3PPP/2R2RK1 w - - 1 1
[solution]

After I solved this position I started to fiddle around with the pieces, and I asked myself "what is the difference between 1.Qb7 and 1.Qc4". Can you find the difference?