In search for assault patterns
The past weeks I have been busy to evaluate my conclusions and to ponder about how to continue. I get to the same conclusions over and over again, so I will give it a go. The problem is, that I hypothesize a sweet spot in my approach, while I have no idea whether such sweet spot actually exists.
My focus is the area where a kingside attack is prepared. On the one hand it is easy to get lost in the myriads of variations which can be used to describe a kingside attack, on the other hand it is easy to debit some trivialities that are too general to be useful. Like "a knight on f5 is worth 4 points", or "a pawn on e5 is worth an extra piece".
The problem is that I don't get much help from chess authors, who tend to choose for one direction or the other.
In order to try to focus on the sweet spot and not to get lost into the variations, I will try to base my conclusions on the lines of attack. After all, we know that a line of attack ends on a square in the vicinity of the enemy king (focal points), or on an invasion square (additional focal point), and that it can make use of pivotal points. I reckon that focusing on the state of the lines of attack will help me to find the patterns that accompany an assault on the king, while helping me to stay clear of the thickets of variations that are ogling at me.
I will not hesitate to use incomplete and impossible chess positions, so I can drive my points home. Please bear with me.
Without further ado, and in no particular order:
White to move |
rn1qr1k1/1p2bppp/p3p3/3pP3/P2P1B2/2RB1Q1P/1P3PP1/R5K1 w - - 1 19
Polugaevsky, L. vs. Torre, E.
We need to develop an eye for the lines of attack. The state of the lines of attack tells us the subjects to ponder about. The move a4 was played some time ago with another purpose, but it too enables a rooklift at some point. Currently the rooklift is not possible, but we need to realize that it puts a burden on the shoulders of the black bishop, which is obliged to keep an eye on a3. An important issue in positions like this, is that the potential defenders are cut off from the lines of attack that lead to the black king.
Furthermore, we should keep the 3rd rank clear of pawns, and regret the dog-ear at h3.
So:
- Be aware of the lines of attack (LoA)
- Be aware of overloading of defenders when they guard a pivotal point on the LoA (a3)
- Be aware of defenders that are cut off from the LoAs (R, R, N, Q)
- Be aware of your own pawns that block a LoA (h3)
- Be aware of the potential escape route of the black king (via f8)
- Notice the pieces that block a potential escape route (B, Re8)
- Notice our pawn that shut off some escape possibilities (e5)
- Notice that blacks knight, bishop and rook would like to make use of f8 in order to defend and how that would block the escape route
- Be aware of tempo moves like Bxh7+, clearing the third rank and prying the king position open
PART I:
ReplyDeleteThe game score is in the Chess Tempo database. I give it because this comment would make no sense otherwise. There is also interesting commentary on chessgames.com:
LINK: https://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1112513
Polugaevsky, Lev (2575) vs Torre, Eugenio (2565)
Date: 1984-04
Event: London, Phillips & Drew GLC Kings London
Round: 1
Result: 1-0
Opening: Slav Defense, Czech Variation, Classical System, Main Line (D19)
Problems: 162790628
1. d4 d5 2. c4 c6 3. Nf3 Nf6 4. Nc3 dxc4 5. a4 Bf5 6. e3 e6 7. Bxc4 Bb4 8. O-O O-O 9. Qe2 Nbd7 10. e4 Bg6 11. Bd3 Bh5 12. Bf4 Re8 13. e5 Nd5 14. Nxd5 cxd5 15. h3 Be7 16. Rfc1 a6 17. Rc3 Bxf3 18. Qxf3 Nb8 19. Bxh7+ Kxh7 20. Qh5+ Kg8 21. Rg3 g6 22. Rxg6+ fxg6 23. Qxg6+ Kh8 24. Qh6+ Kg8 25. Qxe6+ Kh8 26. Qh6+ Kg8 27. Qg6+ Kh8 28. Qh5+ Kg8 29. Bh6 Bf8 30. Qg6+ Kh8 31. Bxf8 Rxf8 32. Qh6+ Kg8 33. Ra3 Black resigns
The respective positions remain “balanced” (more or less) until around move 12; GM Stockfish’s evaluation remains within the usual values for White’s “first move” advantage [0.15-0.35]. White retains the initiative and goes over to active piece operations on the kingside at this point.
GM Luděk Pachman, in his book Modern Chess Strategy, Chapter X, Superiority on the Wings offers the following (abbreviated) assessment of the blocked pawn chain and how to handle it.
And now a few remarks about blocked pawn chains. We have seen that each player has an obvious field of action—the area in which his foremost pawn limb is situated. If he can manage to set his pawns in motion and attack the base of the blocked pawn chain, he can often obtain a decisive advantage. It follows, therefore, that obstacles to the natural advance, such as an enemy blockading piece or doubled pawns of one’s own, must not be allowed to appear or, if they do, must be eliminated as soon as possible. . . .
We have seen that basically the most effective procedure against the blocked pawn chain is a pawn advance directed against the enemy’s most backward limb [the base of the pawn chain]. This, however, is not always possible, because the opponent can sometimes thwart the plan tactically. Generally, with the pawn formation d4 and e5 against d5 and e6, White can also use his space advantage to build up a King-side piece attack: he can, by Qg4 and Bd3, work up certain tactical threats such as the Bishop sacrifice on h7, attack on the square g7 by means of Bh6, and weakening of the King’s position by h4-h5-h6. [If there is a chance of Black successfully attacking the head of the blocked pawn chain with f6, then attempting to advance the f-pawn to attack the base of the Black pawn chain is inadvisable.] The proper course is, therefore, to renounce the King-side pawn advance [by White] and thwart Black’s freeing manoeuvre by increasing control over e5 with moves such as Qe2 and Bf4; then it should be possible to proceed with a Kingside attack unaided by a pawn advance.
PART II:
ReplyDeleteThe position following 18...Nb8 [the removal of a crucial defender signals the moment to launch an all-out kingside attack] has several advantages for White. The center is blocked, with no possible way to attack the pawn chain base at d4. Black’s queenside pieces are useless for defending or creating queenside counterplay. White has a numerical majority of mobile pieces aimed at the Black kingside [the lines of attack are very favorable], while Black’s pieces in the King’ vicinity are not coordinated for effective defense.
White most likely “saw” that after the forced sequence 19.Bxh7+ Kxh7 20.Qh5+ Kg8, the WRc3 could now move into a threatening position with 21. Rg3 and White is winning with two major pieces and a minor piece [WBf4] for support.
If GM Torre thought GM Polugaevsky would hesitate to sacrifice pieces to get at the Black King, he was sorely mistaken. Given that Black has two pieces doing nothing on the queenside, White will still have three pieces with which to attack the Black King after sacrificing two pieces to destroy the kingside pawn formation. Even without calculating the entire sequence to the end, it should be fairly obvious that White is playing for two results (win or draw), with no danger of losing.
GM Stockfish evaluates the two most promising variations:
D53 +4.60 19.Bxh7+ Kxh7 20.Qh5+ Kg8 21.Rg3 Bf8 22.Bh6 Qc7 23.Raa3 Qc2 24.Bxg7 Bxg7 25.Raf3 Qb1+ 26.Kh2 Qg6 27.Rxg6 fxg6 28.Qxg6 Re7 29.Kg1 Nc6 30.Rf4 Rf8 31.Rg4 Nb4 32.h4 Rf5 33.Rg5 Rxg5 34.Qxg5 Nc6 35.h5 Kf8 36.h6 Bh8 37.Qg4 Kf7 38.Qg3 Kf8 39.Qd3 Nd8 40.g3 Nc6 41.Qc2 Kg8 42.Qg6+ Kf8 43.Qd3 Rf7 44.Qc2 Rf5 45.Qc5+ Kf7 46.b4 Kg6 47.b5 axb5 48.axb5 Nxd4 49.Qxd4 Rxe5 50.Kf1
D53 +0.95 19.Qg4 g6 20.h4 h5 21.Qh3 Nc6 22.g4 Bxh4 23.gxh5 g5 24.Be3 f5 25.exf6 e.p. Qxf6 26.Kh1 Kh8 27.Qg4 Rf8 28.Rf1 e5 29.Rxc6 Qxc6 30.Rc1 Qf6 31.dxe5 Qf3+ 32.Qxf3 Rxf3 33.Be2 Bxf2 34.Bxf3 Bxe3 35.Re1 d4 36.Bxb7 Re8 37.Bxa6 Rxe5 38.Bd3 g4 39.Kg2 Rxh5 40.Kg3 Kg7 41.Kxg4 Ra5 42.Bb5 Kf6 43.Kf3 Ke5 44.Rh1 Kd6
Before I forget, your intuition regarding a "sweet spot" is correct. I suggest differentiating between the transition from opening (development and control of space) to middlegame (maneuver and attack/defense) and the execution of a kingside attack. During the transition period, it is important to focus on maximizing flexibility (keeping open as many options as possible) and the general usefulness (coordination) of the pieces with each other and the background pawn structure. Once the commitment to a kingside attack is made, then throw every available resource into it.
ReplyDeleteI consider these ideas to be the general framework within which to pursue a kingside attack-or to purse an alternative endgame strategy. Like all generalities, when faced with a concrete situation, throw the generalities overboard (not "over the board").
YMMV.
The sweet spot lies between "diving into the variations and get lost" and "rules that are too trivial to be of any use". The LoA battle helps to prune the tree of analysis AND is about scenarios that are not too trivial.
ReplyDeleteThe amount of LoAs is finite. There are at max 9 endpoints and at max 7 attackers.
The amount of scenarios concerning the LoAs is finite too. Like:
Entering the LoA with an attacker
Clear the LoA of your own pieces
Clear the LoA of enemy pieces
Change the balance on the focal point: Add attackers, annihilate defenders
Incidentally, invasion points may emerge.
Above you find most ingredients of the logical narratives.
Two questions:
ReplyDelete(1) How goes the chess wars at the chess clubs?
(2) Any progress with the assault patterns?
Ad 1. Games have a tendency to become ferocious. Long ago, I wrote a post about the chaos theory and chess. Main message of that post is that there is often a clear tipping point in chess. When all of a sudden chaos enters the game. Currently, I play quite uncompromising chess. Meaning that when I deem a position ripe for an attack, I go for it.
DeleteIn normal life, I'm not much of a risk taker. So in a way it is very unnatural to me. But if logic tells me to go for it, I go, no matter the consequences. Which is more in accordance with my character. Hence the results are still rather fluctuating. Undeserved wins alternate with undeserved losses.
Ad 2. I haven't made much progress in that department, because my work has been busy lately. So I don't have much energy left in the evening. But I get a lot of confirmation that I'm on the right track from my games.
Overall, I seem to get more distance from my games. I'm less emotionally involved. From an energy point of view, that's a good thing. My eagles eye is beginning to develop.
Hmm, blogger has logged me out again. Tempo.
ReplyDeleteIt is apparent that Anonymous is Tempo from the thoughts expressed in the comments.
DeleteI have the same logged out problem. I've learned to check the heading "Comment as" before posting a comment. If it's "Anonymous," I open a different tab, logout from Google and then log back in. I refresh the Blogger screen and that usually corrects the issue, but sometimes it takes two or three attempts before it registers with Blogger. It's a PITA that Blogger loses (more likely, times out) the Google login from time to time. Weird, since Blogger is owned by Google.
"Free" is often the precondition of an imperfect world.
In order to focus my research on assault patterns, are you still using the London System (Jobava), Accelerated Dragon (or Hyper-Accelerated Dragon), and the Leningrad Dutch as your primary openings or have you chosen other openings?
ReplyDeleteWhite: Colle-Zukertort; Barry Attack
ReplyDeleteBlack: French; Nimzo Indian
I currently have the flu, so it might take a week before I post about assault patterns again.
I'm sorry you have the flu. I wish you a speedy recovery!
ReplyDeleteI'm feeling better already. I'm planning a post that gives you more to work with.
ReplyDeleteLuckily I can comment as myself again. I noticed that Blogger has changed a few settings again to default values. So if you notice something odd that didn't happen before, please give me a sign.
ReplyDelete