Ludek Pachman - The Middlegame in Chess - SC

LudekPachman
The
middle-game
in chess
Translated by John Littlewood
Routledge & Kegan Paul

London, Henley and Melbourne
English trans/Qtion first published in 1982

by Routledge de Kegan Paul Ltd
39 Store Street, London WCJE 7DD,
296 Beaconsfield Parade, Middle Park,
Melbourne, 3206, Australio, and
Broadway House, Newtown Road,
Henley-on-Thames, Oxon RG9 lEN
Set in Press Roman by
Hope Services, Abingdon, Oxon
and printed in Great Britain by
Unwin Brothers Ltd
Old Woking, Surrey
Copyright Cl 1977 by Wilhelm Heyne Verlag, Munchen
English transliJtion C> Routledge de Kegan Paul 1982
First published as Mhtelspiclpraxis im Schach in 1977 by
Wilhelm Heyne Ver/Qg, Mr1nchen
No part of this book may be reproduced in
any form without permission from the
publisher, except for the quotation of brief
pasSilges In criticism
British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data
Pachman, Ludek
The middle game in chess.
1. Oless- Middle games
II. Mfttelspielpraxis im Schach.
I. 1Ytle
English
GVJ450.3
794.1'23
ISBN 0-7100-9071-4
Contents
Translator's preface
vii
1
Can the middle-game be taught?
2 Typical mating combinations
12
3 The elements of chess tactics
43
Attack and defence
s Making plans
90
126
6 Effective use of pieces
136
7 'The pawns are the soul of chess'

Index
187
163
Translator' s preface
Alongside Nirnzovitch's. masterpiece
My System and Euwe's splendidly

Judgement and Planning in Chess it is fair to place Pachman's
Modem Chess Strategy as having done for chess what Culbert
conceived
classic
son's books once did for bridge. However, one must admit that begin
ners and even average clubplayers have sometimes found such volumes
a little above their heads, with occasional concepts, if not entirely
meaningless, often demanding from them a degree of sophistication
beyond their chess experience. It is for such players that Pachman has
written the present volume.
Recognising that at this stage a sound knowledge of tactics is indis
pensable before strategy can be properly understood, he devotes the
first half of the book to a comprehensive treatment of combinational
elements. Only then does he examine practical aspects of strategic
planning in attack and defence, highlighting that subtle blend of tactics
and strategy which is the hallmark of all great players.
Following Pachman's instructive volume on the chess openings, this
book will prove an invaluable addition to Routledge & Kegan Paul's
well-known chess series.
John littlewood
Chapter 1
Can the middle-game

be taught?
Many chess-players limit themselves to studying two aspects of theory:

openings and end-games; the former in particular being grossly over
valued. There is a desire to achieve rapid victory by learning opening
variations off by heart and overwhelming the opponent in the early
stages. Of course, a fairly comprehensive knowledge of opening theory
is essential if one is to achieve results against strong players. Equally, in

the fmal stages of the game it is of little use to rely solely on one's own
resources; a number of standard theoretical positions have to be part of
the arsenal. However, even in both these cases it is often far more
important to have a grasp of general principles so as to be able to react
to unexpected turns of event. I have heard beginners complain that,
despite all their assiduous book-learning, they have often come out of
the opening with a lost game although they knew the theory of that
opening far better than their less industrious but more experienced
opponent ! Clearly, parrot-learning without an understanding of the
basic principles is rarely effective.
In the middle-game there are so many possible positions, so many
variations, that it is seldom we meet the sam game more than once. In
other words, the middle-game can hardly be learnt in the same way as
openings or endings. Nevertheless, it is vitally important to have at
one's disposal a number of general strategic guidelines and a wealth of
specific tactical ideas. Such knowledge enables a plan to be formed
and then carried out. In chess, as in warfare and politics,
strategy
tells
us what we should be aiming to do in a given position (bearing in mind

that our opponent too has his own plans!), whilst
to set about doing it.
tactics
tell us how
Strategy and tactics are intimately linked in every game, since

without the former our play is rudderless and without the latter we
cannot achieve solutions. Of course, there are times when one element
outweighs the other, so it will prove useful if we begin by examining
two games from these two aspects: when is it essential to calculate each
2 I Can the middle-game be taught?

move with precision, looking out for possible surprises or traps from
our opponent and trying ourselves to fmd a decisive combination; and
when on the other hand is it more important to pursue a fiXed plan,
subordinating all our tactics to this end?
Game 1
French Defence
K. Richter Abramavicius (Hamburg,
1930)
e6
e4
d4
dS
Nc3
Nf6
BgS
dxe4
Nxe4
Be7
Bxf6
Bxf6
Nf3
Nd7
Bd3
0-0?
White's last move is fairly hannless but Black should react energetically
with the immediate
... cS! giving
him equal chances. Castling, usually
a good way of placing the king in safety, is premature here. White can
now castle long and launch a dangerous attack on the enemy king, as
we shall see.
Qe2
9
10
cS
0-0-0!
White's plan is simple and clear: his three minor pieces in conjunction
with the advance of
his
g and h pawns will form the basis for an attack
on the king.
10
11
cSxd4
...
g4!
... (see next diagram)
White could of course capture the d pawn by
11
Nxf6+ Qxf6 12
1 3 Bxh7+ winning the queen, an

discovered check combination. We term 'combination' a
Nxd4, when 12 ... Qxd4?? fails to

example of a
series of moves containing a surprising idea and usually involving a

sacrifice.
In
this instance a beginne r would
be
surprised by
12
Nxd4
leaving the knight unprotected, but only apparently sol

However, this continuation would pose few problems for Black, as
we can see if we examine the line 11 Nxf6+ Nxf6 12 Nxd4 QaS
Kb1 eS (or simply
13
.. . Bd7) with three variations:
13
Can the middle-game be taught? I 3
. ..... .-
Abramav icius (black)
iii
.i.
fl
.. 4Jft
8-'l84J.
ftllft.*B B
. - .
K.
Richter (white)
( 1 ) 1 4 Nb3 Qc7 1 5 Rhe 1 ReS (guarding the e pawn) 1 6 Bb5 Bd7, etc.
(2) 14 Nf3. Black cannot now save his centre pawn by 14 . . . Re8
because of 1 5 Bb5, but he can utilise the pin 1 4 . . . Bg4! thus pre
venting 1 5 Nxe5?? since a piece of higher value js standing 'behind'
the knight, allowing 1 5 . . . Bxe2, or here 1 5 Qxe5? Qxe5 1 6
Nxe5 Bxd l etc.
(3) 1 4 Nb5. Again the centre pawn is attacked, but after 14 . . . Dd7!
White cannot capture it, since afte r 15 Qxe5? a6 there is another
pin on his knight along the rank.
Coming back to the game, with 1 1 g4! White elects to leave the d
pawn alone, a bold decision which has to be backed up with a careful
evaluation of future possibilities. After all, pawns cannot be thrown
away lightly, since an extra pawn can oft en prove su fficient to win a
game. It is sometimes possible to calculate a sacrifice through to a clear
win, but pawn sacrifices are usually based or: an intuitive assessment in
which experience and positional sense play a great part.
11
g6
Black must try to maintain his bishop on the a l -h8 diagonal. If he plays
1 1 . . . e5 then White plays 1 2 g5 Be7 1 3 Rdg l and continues his attack
with h4-h5 followed by the breakthrough g6 or h6. Meanwh ile Black
must keep control of f6 to prevent the po ssible sacrifice Nf6+ opening
the g file if . . . gxf6 has to be played.
ll
h4
The correct way to open a fl.le when a black pawn stands on g6.
12
13
Bg7
hS
ReS

A useful defensive move in such positions, freeing f8 for hls knight to
guard h7 against the threat of Qfl-h3 followed by hxg6 and Qh7 mate.
14
hxg6
hxg6
It is often hard to decide which pawn to capture with in such positions.

Taking with the f pawn allows his major pieces to defend along the
second rank and keeps open the option of a possible h6, but Black
chooses to capture with the h pawn in order not to weaken his e pawn,
hoping to have enough protection of his h7 and h8 squares and banking
on a rapid counter-attack down the c fJ.I.e.
IS
gS!
Not only creating a strong-point on f6 for his knight which occupies the
square with decisive effect in seven moves' time, but also preventing the
freeing moves . . . Nf6 or . . f5.
.
IS
16
17
18
Rh4
Rdhl
Qfl
eS
Nf8
BfS
ReS
Black could also play 1 8 .. . Ne6 in order to block the h flle by Nf4-h5
and at the same tl!ne give his king an escape square on f8. Richter then
intended 1 9 Qg2 Nf4 20 Qh2 NhS 21 Ng3 ! Bxd3 22 NxhS Qc7
(threatening mate on c2!) 23 Nf6+! Kf8 (if 23 . . . Bxf6 24 Rh8 + !
followed by mate) 24 Ne l ! not only threatening the bishop and the
rook, but also NdS and Rh8+ mating. We must also mention that 1 8
.. . Bxe4 allows 1 9 Qh3 ! when there is no defence to 20 Rh8+!
2
Abramavicius (black)
K.
Richter (white)
Black now plans a counter-attack down the c me with a line StJch as

1 9 . . . Bxe4 20 Bxe4 d3 ! hoping to defend against mate by a later

. . . f6. White settles matters with a pretty combination , howeve r, giving
Black no time for any of this.
19
20
21
Rh8+ ! !
Rxh8+
Qh1+
Bxh8
Kxh8
Nh7
King moves also lose quickly: if 2 1 . . . Kg7 22 Qh6+ Kg8 23 Nf6+

Qxf6 24 gxf6 Ne6 25 Ng5 ! wins; or if 2 1 . . . Kg8 22 Nf6+! Qxf6
23 gxf6 Bxd3 24 Qh6 Rxc2+ 25 Kd1 Ne6 26 Ng5 ! with the latter
move in each variation being an example of deflection of the vital
d efender on e6 by White's knight on g5. We shall often meet similar
situations.
22
Nf6
Kg71
Losing at once but even the better 22 . . . Qxf6 23 gxf6 Kg8 is insuf
ficient after 24 BxfS when 24 . . . gxf5 fails to 25 Qgl + followed by
mate, and 24 . . . Rc7 25 Qh4! gives White a material advantage. If here
24 . . . Rc6 then 24 Bd7 wins the 'exchange' by attacking both rooks
simultaneously, a so-called fork.
23
Qh6+
Resigns
Game 2 Queen's Gambit

Capablanca Alekhine (Buenos Aires, 1 927)
1
2
3
4
s
6
7
8
d4
c4
Nc3
BgS
e3
Nf3
Rei
dS
e6
Nf6
Nbd7
Be7
0-0
a6
a3
The 'Orthodox Defence' to the Queen's Gambit. Black's usual play on

move 7 is . . . c6. After 7 . . . a6 White should continue with 8 cxdS or
8 c5, whereas Capablanca's move is too passive and allows Black a
speedy development of his Q side.
8
9
10
Bh4
Bxc4
h6
dxc4
bS

11
12
13
Bel
0-0
dxc5
Bb7
c5
Nxc51
Despite the seemingly peaceful nature of the position, there are still
tactical points to note. White should now try 14 Bxf6 with two vari
ations:
( I ) 14 . .. gxf6, weakening his K side pawn position, but this is of
little significance in view of Black's advantage of the two bishops.
We shall see later why in most positions two bishops are stronger
than knight and bishop or two knights.
(2) 14 . .. Bxf6, when White can exploit the unprotected knight on
c5 by 1 5 Nxb5 ! Qxd1 1 6 Rfxd1 Nb3 (after 1 6 . .. axb5 1 7
RxcS Bxb2 1 8 Rxb5 Bxf3 1 9 Bxf3 Rab8 20 a4 White is a pawn
up) 1 7 Rc7 Bxf3 1 8 Bxf3 axb5 1 9 Bxa8 Rxa8. After the game
Alekhine gave this variation as better for him, but this is not the
case. Normally of course two minor pieces are much better than a
rook, and a pawn is rarely sufficient compensation, but here White
can win a second pawn by 20 Rb7 since 20 .. .Bxb2? fails to 21
RxbS Rxa3 22 Rb1 etc. However, Black can maintain the balance
by 20 . .. Nc5 ! 2 1 Rxb5 Na4. White cannot advance his b pawn
without losing- the exchange to .. . Nc3 and if instead 22 Rd2 then
22 .. . Nxb2! 23 Rdxb2 Bxb2 24 Rxb2 Rxa3 the draw is clear.
1hi.s is an example of a forced manoeuvre, beginning with 1 5 Nxb5.
Both players must follow a defmite line of play to avoid some dis
advantage. A different kind of manoeuvre is seen when there are no
threats or capture of material involved, such as when we regroup our
pieces; these are of a more strategic than a tactical nature, and the order
of moves is not always so important.
After the game continuation, however, Black already stands better,
so Capablanca should at least have exchanged queens.
14
15
Nd4(?)
b4(?)
Rc8
Such careless moves are typical of an inexperienced player. The fact

that a World Champion is involved here only confinns the accepted
opinion that Capablanca was well below form for this decisive match.
(See next diagram) The move b4 creates a serious but by no means
obvious weakness in White's position: the c4 square. It is to this square
that first the black rook then the knight will penetrate to great effect.

3
Aljechin (black)
Capablanca (white)
In fact Black's main strategic plan within the next few moves is based
on this weakened square. It is important for the reader to note how
often games are decided not by i nunediate material gain or a rapid
mate, but by the creation and exploitation of small positional ad
vantages.
IS
...
Ncd71
A surprising but very strong retreat, based of course on the occupation

of c4. The seemingly powerful 1 5 .. . Nce4 on the other hand would
allow too many exchanges after 1 6 Nxe4 Bxe4 1 7 Bf3; or here 1 6 . . .
Rxcl ( 1 6 . . . Nxe4? loses to 1 7 Rxc8 Bxc8 1 8 Nc6 Qxd 1 1 9 Nxe7+!
a typical example of a zwischenzug.) 1 7 Nxf6+ Bxf6 18 Qxcl Bxh4
1 9 Bf3 etc. It is subtle points like this that reveal the true master, rather
than the calcu lation of standard combinations!
16
Bg3
White avoids a possible exchange of this bishop (by . . . Ne4) which

shows that he is not yet fully aware that he stands worse and should be
striving for equality. lt is vital to protect his c4 by 1 6 Nb3 ! followed by
NaS . Note that after 1 6 Bf3 Qb 6 1 7 Ne4 Rxcl I B Qxc I Black is first
to occupy the c file, with advantage. We shall con sider later the impor
tance of open lines.
,
16
17
Qb 3
Nb6
NfdS!
Exchanges can also play their part in an attack, sin ce Black now
threatens I B . . . Nxc3 1 9 Rxc3 Bd5 20 Qb2 Rxc3 2 1 Qxc3 Qa8
followed by . . . ReB, not only seizing the c me but also controlling the
long diagonal (h l -aB), thereby increasing the effectiveness of his piece s.

IS
Bfl
White understandably wishes to challenge the diagonal, but as a result

lets Black in on c4.
lS
19 Ne4
20 Rxc4?
Rc4!
QcS
The decisive error. White's last chance lay in holding on to the vital c
ftle by 20 Qbl ! threatening 2 1 Nd6 and if 20 . . . Rd8 2 1 Nd2! Rxcl
22 Rxcl Qa8 23 Bc7! and 24 Bxb6, almost neutralising Black's ini
tiative.
20
21
...
Ret
Nxc4
QaS!
A typical manoeuvre in modem chess; Black's queen is posted on the

diagonal behind a weaker piece, thus doubling up in a similar way to
the doubling of rooks on a fl.le or rank. He now threatens to win a
pawn by . . . Ndxe3 or . . . Nxb4, and if 22 NcS BxcS 23 bxcS ReS 24
Be2 RxcS 25 Bxc4 Qc8! the pin of the bishop again wins a pawn.
Nc3
NxdS
24 BxdS
lS a4
22
23
ReS
BxdS
QxdS
Capablanca (white)
Whit cannot tie his queen down permanently to the defence of his a
pawn, but a further weakness now appears on b4!
Let us again consider the problem of exchanging pieces. Black has
allowed the exchange of two minor plecea (bishop and knight) and one

trllljor piece
(a rook), and yet we were reconunending the use of ex
changes as a method of equalising! The contradiction is only apparent,

because exchanging pieces is often the correct and indeed only way of
increasing or exploiting a positional advantage, provided that it is our
least active pieces we are exchanging for our opponent's most active
ones, never of course the other way round! Alekhine has managed to do
this; he has exchanged his 'bad' bishop on b7 for White's 'good' bishop
will surprise most readers that we refer to Black's beautifully

Q bishop as 'bad', so let us explain our terms by looking again at
on f3 . It
posted
the diagrammed position, and asking ourselves the question: which

pawns can the bishop on g3 attack? The answer is, practically none.
Even if it could reach e5, which it cannot, and apply pressure on the g7
pawn, this pawn is guarded by the king and can later (in the ending)
move to g6. The same applies to the h6 pawn. Contrast this with the
pawn set-up on the
Q side: White's b4 pawn is ftxed by the pawn on b5
and vice versa. Such blocked pawn positions are particularly significant
from a strategic point of view, when we compare the attacking poten
tial of each side's black-squared bishop. Tills gives us the important
principle: in positions with blocked pawns, a 'good' bishop is one which
is of the same colour as the squares on which the enemy pawns are
placed, whilst a 'bad' bishop is one which is restricted by its own pawns.
We can now ask if White's 25. a4 has only served to increase the
potential of Black's
K bishop. 'This is not so, because even with the
pawns on a3 and b4 the e7 bishop is 'good' and the g3 bishop 'bad'. We

can see this clearly if we visualise an ending with only the bishops on
the board; the black bishop would in that case immediately win a pawn
if it reached b2.
25
Bf6!
Black surprisingly gives up his attack on the b pawn, since he wishes to

drive the knight away from its strong central post. Note that this could
not be achieved by 25 ... eS? 26 NfS! Bf6 27
f3 , threatening 28 e4
which would make Black's bishop 'bad' (blocked by the eS pawn),

when 27 ... e4 fails to 28 Nd6! since Black's knight is pinned.
26
NO
Bbll
An original idea, disturbing the co-ordination of White's pieces by driv

ing the rook to a less active square because more favourable squares are
tactically dangerous, i.e.
(1)
27 Rd l , surely the most natural square attacking the queen, fails to
the interesting 27...bxa4! 28 Qxa4 Nb6! 29 Rxd5 Nxa4 30

Rd l Nc3 31 Re l Rc4 32 Bd6 Ne4 33 Be7 f6 34 Rbl Kl7 35 Kfl
_Bel and the b pawn fall s .
(2) 27 Rbl Na3! 28 Qxb2 Nxbl 29 Qxbl Qb3! wins, because 30
Qxb3? allows a back-rank mate by 30 . . . Rcl+ etc.(Such a mate
along the unprotected back rank is common enough to warrant our
constant vigilance. It is amusing to note that if Black's h6 pawn
had been on h 7, White himself could have answered 26 ... Bb2
with 27 Qxb2! Nxb2 28 Rxc8+ followed by mate!) Of course,
the white queen can move' away, but aftef 30 Qfl bxa4! Black's
passed pawn wins the game for him .
27
28
29
Rei
axbS
h3
Rd8
axbS
Beginners must be careful not to make such moves without a specific

purpose, but here it is essential to cut out the chance of a back-rank
mate.
29
.. .
eS!
Now this is strong. because it no longer restricts the power of his bishop
and if now 30 e4 Qd31 3 1 Qxd3 Rxd3 32 Rbl f6, the weak pawn on
b4 will soon be lost.
30
31
Rbl
Nd4
e4
A fmal desperate attempt which Black refutes by a little combination,
but other moves are just as bad, i.e.

( 1 ) 31 Net Qd2! (threatening to win at least the e pawn by . . . Be l )
32 Qc2 Qxc2 33 Nxc2 Rd2 34 Net Na3 and the white rook is
captured in amusing fashion.
(2) 3 1 Nh2 Qd3! 32 Rxb2 (after 32 Qxd3 exd3 the black passed
pawn Is unstoppable) Qxb3! 33 Rxb3 Rd l + 34 Nfl Nd2 35 Ra3
Nxfl ! (better than the obvious check which leads nowhere) and
there Is no real defence to the threatened discovered check by the
knight e.g.after 36 Bc7 Nxe3+ followed by 37 ...NdS Black has
a won ending.
31
32
Rdl
Bxd4
Nxe31
Can the middle-game

33
be
taught? I 1 1
Resigns
He must lose a piece after 33 QxdS RxdS when 34 fxe3 Bxe3+ wins
the rook.
This game has taught us several important points about strategy and
tactics, but above all we have seen something of the thought processes
of an expert player as he plans his game, even if we may not understand
it all.
It would seem logical to begin by examining what to do in a game
(i.e. strategy) rather than how to do it (i.e. tactics), but this would be
contrary to the established teaching method of going from the concrete
to the abstract or, if you like, from the simple to the more complex.
For this reason we shall first examine principles and examples from the
realm of tactics.
Chapter2
Typical mating
combinations
The chess public is greatly impressed by combinations in which material

is sacrificed to bring about a rapid mate, such games being awarded
brilliancy prizes and acclaimed in the Press, but our problem is whether
we can acquire the tactical skill to produce fmishes like these. Each
position seems so different and requires such creative imagination that
it appears impossible to learn the art of combination.
However, this is only partially true. Of course, original ldeaa and
surprising twists are always cropping up (thankfully!), but most com
binations can be broken down to various common elements which
occur frequently and are readily learnable. Let us examine some basic
mating combinations which have already occurred in countless games,
admittedly within varying contexts but essentially containing the same
idea.
One of the commonest and therefore most important of these is the
so-called smothered mate with queen and knight, known for many
centuries, illustrated in the following composed position.
Composed position
White is threatened by the terrible I

a l (Q)+ so must act at once.
Clearly 1 Qf7+ Kh8 is useless, and it seems at first that White is forced
to take the draw by perpetual check with I QdS+ Kh8 (Kf8? 2 Qf7
.
Typical mating combinations I 1 3

mate) 2 Nf7+ Kg8 3 Nh6++ K.h8 4 Nf7+ etc. However, this very
line
gives us a clue to the solution: after 3 ... Kh8 White has the beautiful
4 Qg8+!! Rxg8 5 Nf7 mate. Now let us see this idea utilised in a game
position.
Trifunovic
Opocensky
(black)
(white)
Black played I . . . Ng4 2 Qe2 Nd3! since neither knight can be cap
tured in view of . .. Qc5+ mating as above or winning the rook (after 3
Qxd3 Qc5+ 4 Re3). So White replied 3 BO when 3 ... Qc5+ 4 Kg2
Nxe l + lost him the 'exchange', i.e. a rook for a minor piece.
The knight is a splendid piece for tactical surprises, as we see in the
next position.
Praszak
(black)
Enden (white)
White first of
all stops the black king escaping to the back rank by play
1
.Qc7 produces the pretty 2 Qxg5+! fxg5 3
ing I. Re8 and after
Nh5 mate.
An
unusual form of smothered mate occurs when two
involved, as in the following couple of typical examples.
knights are
1 4 I Typical mating combinations

Eisenschmidt (black)
Clemens (white)
After the preliminary I Ba3 ! which is essential in order to prevent
I . . Qxe l mate, play continued I . . Qxa3 2 Qe6 Nd8 (the only
way to stop mate on f7) 3 Qf7+!! Nxf7 4 Ne6 mate. This Q sacrifice
has been known since the Middle Ages and repeated many times sub
sequently, proof once again that combinations are learnable!
.
Sampomo (black)
Thorwaldsson (white)
Black first plays I . . . Nf3 threatening mate on h2. Now if White
replies 2 Bxf3 he loses his knight after 2 . Qxf3+ (3 Qg2? would
lose the rook on d 1 ), so he settles for 2 Ng3 only to fmd that even
worse is in store for him after 2 . . . Qxg3! 3 fxg3 Nxg3 mate.
Analogous to the smothered mate with the knight is the diagonal
mate by a bishop, although not as frequent, which we see in the next
position.
(See next diagram) Black forces mate by first blocking an escape
square of the white king with I
Qfl +I 2 Bgl and then fmishing him
off with 2 . . . Qf3+! 3 Bxf3 Bxf3 mate.
ln this example the diagonal onto the king was already open, but in
other cases it is necessary to create an open line for the bishop, as in the
.

10
Pillsbury
A. N.
(black)
Other
(white)
well-known trap against the Dutch Defence: 1 d4 f5 2 8g5!? h6 3 Bh4

gS 4 8g3 f4? 5 e3! (threatening both 6 Qh5 mate and simply 6 exf4)
S . . . h5 6 Bd3 and if now 6 .. . Rh6? then 7 Qxh5+! Rxh5
Bg6
mate.
There is a similar outcome from the opening stages of a game in the
following position.
Eperjesi
(black)
Perenyi (white)
From a sharp line in the Caro Kann Defence, White concludes attract
ively with 1 Nc6 Qc7 2 Qxe6+!! fxe6 3 Bg6 mate. The shortest game
in chess, the so-called 'Fool's mate', also utilises a diagonal as follows:
1 f3? e5 2 g4?? Qh4 mate. Mates by minor pieces alone are fairly
corrunon, and opening theory provides us with yet another interesting
example: 1 d4 Nf6 2 c4 g6 3 Nc3 d5 (the Griinfeld Defence) 4 cxdS
NxdS 5 e4 Nxc3 6 bxc3 cS 7 Bc4 Bg7
Ne2 Nc6 9 Be3 cxd4 10
cxd4 Qa5+!? 11 Bd2 Qa3 12 Rb1 0.0 13 dS? NeS 14 Bb4?
(See next diagram)
Black now wins with the startling move 14 . ..
Qf3!! threatening . . . Qxg2 or ... Qxe4 and if 15 gxf3? Nxf3+ 16

Kf1 Bh3 mate.
16 I Typical mating combinations

12
Variation of
Grunfeld Defence
In similar vein, a minor piece mate arose in our next position.

Termer (black)
Field (white)
After I . . Qh3 ! ! White resigned at once In view of 2 gxf3 N xh3
Or yet again, from a game played In the U.S.S.R. in 1 974:
.
14
rna te.
Kalinski (black)
White sacrificed both rooks by 1 RxhS+! gxhS 2 RxhS+ ! NxhS in

order to bring about a minor piece finish with 3 Nxf7 + Kh7 4. Bd3 +
and mate next move.

We have already met the back-rank mate which is a common feature
ol combinations with the major pieces. It is essential to bear in mind
this danger whenever our first rank is left denuded!

15
Composed position
:t:t
:t
fl II

R II
ft B B II II
R B FW"'
l::Hf li!JI
In this composed position the only piece guarding Black's back rank is
his rook , but White removes this control as follows: 1 Qe 7 ! when 1 . . .
Rxe7 allows 2 Rd8 mating, and if 1 . . .
h6
Rxf8+ Kh7 5
Qe4+
Rf8
then 2 Rd8 Qc I+ 3 Kg2
g6 6 QeS still leads to mate on h8 by the
rook or queen. We shall be returning later to this type of mate.

16
Ljunquist
Jvarsson
(black)
(white)
White is threatening to open up the c ftle onto the enemy king, so Black
plays 1 . . . Qe4 ! not only preventing this by attacking the rook on c2
but also tlueateni.ng . . . Qxe l mate. As both 2 Rxe4 Rd l+, followed
by mate, and 2 Rce2 Qxe2 ! are insufficient, White must try 2 Qc3 , but
now 2 . . . Bd2 ! 3 Rxe4 Bxc3 wins at least a rook in view of the possible
back-rank mate.
We cannot resist quoting the beautiful fmish from a famous game Adams
Torre {USA 1 92 1 ) which became known world-wide, and justly so

17
......
B
rt t itt t

. ft .
m
.4J.
ftll BEtBftB
iJ fl
Torre
(black)
Adams
(white)
The black queen is preventing a back-rank mate by Rxe8+ etc., so
White's first move is fairly obvious, I Qg4! a so-called deflection
fice
sacri
which clearly cannot be accepted, just as after 1 . .. Qb5 2 Qc4!
neither the rook nor the queen can capture the queen in view of the
same back-rank mate. Play continues 2 . . . Qd7 3 Qc7! Qb5 (if instead
. . . Qa4 then 4 Re4 wins at once). We have now reached the critical
point of the combination. It appears that White can crown his tactics
with the thematic 4 Qxb7 but the weakness of his own back rank could
then be brilliantly exploited by 4 . . . Qxe2!! when it is Black who wins
after 5 Rxe2 Rc 1 + 6 Ne 1 Rxe 1 + etc. However, the win is still there;
Adams continued. 4 a4! Qxa4 5 Re4! (the point of White's previous
move, since he wins a tempo to remove his rook from the dangerous e2
square) 5 . . . Qb5 and only now the deadly 6 Qxb7! when Black must
finally resign, because there is no way of saving
his
queen without
allowing a back-rank mate. I recommend the reader to study this com

bination carefully, since it teaches us important tactical elements such
as
deflection
3 and 6) compelling a black piece to give up its

decoy (move 4), luring Black's queen onto a square
(moves 2,
defensive role, and
where it can be attacked by the white rook with ain of time.

18
Fridriksson
Westyn
(black)
(white)
Typical mating combinations I 19

Our next example is much simpler but just as effective. Black sacrifices
hb queen by 1 . .. Qxc2+ ! ! giving White the choice between 2 Kxc2

Bxe4+ etc or 2 Rxc2 Rd l+ 3 Rei Bxe4+ 4 Ka l Rxc l mate. Note
that if White's pawn were on a3 instead of a2, play would be the same
except for the second line which would fmish
Ka2 b3 mate, a good
example of a back-rank mate linked with a pawn on the sixth rank.

Even world-class players are not immune to the danger of a back
rank mate, as Cl\fl be seen in the following position.
19
Eising (black)
Polugayevsky (white)
At Solingen in 1 974 Polugaevsky succumbed after 1 Qd7?? Qxg2 !!
when he resigned in view of 2 Rxg2 Rb l+ etc., a clear case of the
notorious 'chess blindness'.
The situation in our next diagram is more complicated, because
White has to reckon with a dangerous counter-attack.
20
Ghitescu
Batrina
(black)
(white)
For example, 1 Rd8? fails to 1 ... Bfl+! 2 Kxfl Rxb2+ when Black
wins on the principle of 'first come, first served'. However, White has I
Bg7 !! when 1 . . . Qxg7 2 Rd8+ mates next move, or if 1 . . . Qb8 2

BeS! with the double-attack on the queen (Bxb8) and the king (Qg7
mate). One tlueat is usually easy to meet, but two threats can cause real
rouble, as here, where 2 . . . QxeS allows 3 Rd8 mate. For this reason,
after I Bg7 ! ! Black tried the desperate 1 . . . Bf2+? 2 Kfl ! (but not 2
Kxf2? Rxb2+) Bb5+ (or 2 . . . Bxg2+ 3 Kxf2! Rxb2+ 4 Kgl winning,
because Black's bishop has now blocked the g2 square) 3 Kxf2 and
once again the black rook is frustrated by his own pieces (problemists
call it line-interference). Play continued 3 . . . Qe2+ 4 KgJ Qxdl and
now comes the whole point of the combination: 5 Bh8! ! with a forced
mate, since 5 . . . Kxh8 (to prevent 6 Qg7 mate) allows 6 QfB mate. In
the game Black tried 5 . . . Qd6+ 6 Kf2 then resigned.
Another typical back-rank mate is seen in our next diagram.
21
Composed position
White wins by 1 Qxc6! Qxc6 2 Rd8+ BfB 3 Bh6 followed by mate on

fB, unless Black gives up a whole queen by 3 . . . Qcl + .
A similar mate with B and R, but this time with the rook on h 1 , is
illustrated by a well-known trap in the Italian Game after the opening
moves 1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 Bc4 Bc5 4 d3 Nf6 S ? d6 6 BgS h6 7 Bh4?
gS 8 BgJ h51 9 NxgS h41 1 0 Nxf7 hxg31 1 1 Nxd8 Bg4 1 2 Qd2 Nd4
22
Variations of the Italian Game

1 3 Nc3 Nf3+! 14 gxf3 Bxf3 (tlueatening . . . gxh2 mate) IS hxg3
Rhl mate. Note that if from the diagram White tries 1 3 h3 Black
finishes neatly with 1 3 . . . Ne2+ 1 4 Kh1 Rxh3+! 1 5 gxh3 Bf3 mate.
Here is a backrank mate with R and 8 in the centre of the board,
taken from a game played in Sweden in 1974.
23

i.l
. .

lll
m
ftHft a
. . .
Knutsson (black)
S. Andersson (white)
1 . . . Qd1 +! 2 Kxd1 Bg4++ (a double-check is highly effective because

the only way to escape it is by moving the king) 3 Ke 1 (or 3 Kc 1) 3
. . . Rd 1 mate.
Once the pattern of mate is part of our tactical equipment, we can
freely sacrifice material to bring about the desired position, as in the
following diagram.
24
Kusmin (black)
Yutchov (white)
By means of a sacrifice and exploitation of the pin of a pawn White
achieves the R and 8 mate we have already seen: 1 Qxh7+!! Kxh7
2 RhS+ Kg8 3 Rh8 mate.
The same sacrifice and mate is brought about in even more spec
tacular fashion in a wellknown variation of the Berlin Defence to the

Ruy Lopez. After the moves I e4 e5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 Bb5 Nf6 4 0-0
Nxe4 5 Rei Nd6 6 NxeS Be7 7 Bd3 NxeS B RxeS 0.0 9 Nc3 c6 1 0 b3
NeB I 1 Bb2 dS 1 2 QhS Black must defend against the mate threat on
h7 by playing . . . h6 ! but not 1 2 . . . g6?? when the surprise move 13
NxdS ! ! leads after 1 3 . . . cxd5 to the same fmish as above with 14
Qxh7+! etc., or if 1 3 . . . gxh5 14 Nxe7+ Kg7 15 RxhS+! (but not
the obvious 1 5 RgS++ Kh6) Nf6 1 6 Rxh7 mate when this time it is a
knight which is pinned.
A so-called 'Epaulctte' mate is seen in the following situation: White
B on f6, R on e7; Black R on dB, K on eB, R on f8. The black king is
hemmed in by his own pieces, so a single rook can mate him with the
support of the bishop (or it could have been a pawn on f6 or d6, or a
knight on fS , or a king on e6). The king can also be blocked on one
side only, with two rooks combining to mate him on the seventh rank,
as in the situation : White rooks on g7 and h7; Black R on fB, K on gB.
Here are two typical real examples from play.
25
Bogoljubow (black)
A. N. Other (white)
It is a good time to ask ourselves how a player discovers a combination.

Clearly we in no way wish to decry the part played by originality and
the creative imagination, but we are also helped a great deal by our
knowledge of basic tactics and mating positions. In this situation, once
White has seen that the two black rooks blocking the king make an
'Epaulette' mate possible, it is much easier for him to visualise the
actual fmish of the game: 1 Rxb71 Qxe6 2 BcS!I Qxe2 3 Rxe7+
Qxe7 4 Rxe7 mate.
(See next diagram) In this case, in order to achieve the required mate,
White must first remove or deflect the two pieces guarding e7, giving us
1 QgB+ Rf8 2 Qg6+! ! Qxg6 3 Rexe7+ Kd8 4 Rbd7 mate.

26

[1. 'i!Y
Whitely (black)

B rl B

B II
llftB II
..
27
-
t
Hartston (white)
Just (black)
.t.B tat
a II
IJ_ij
t IJc).
ij ft g II
ft . ft. 11\fl.
Platz (white)
In our next position the mate is brought about by the two rooks
operating along two files, after the splendid sacrifice of both queen and
knight, by
Qxh7+! ! Kxh7 2 Rh l + Kg8
Nh6+ Kh7 4 Nf7+! Kg8
Rh8+! ! Kxf7 6 Rh7+ Kg8 (note how Black is blocked in by four of
his own men) 7 Rg7+ Kh8 8 Rh l mate .
Opening lines onto the king by sacrifice o f material or luring the
king to an open fLle, are typical ideas in mating combinations. Let us

consider a few examples.
28
Henneberger (black)
Gygli (white)

Black wins by 1 . . . Ne2+ 2 Kh1 Qxg4 ! 3 hxg4 Rh5+! 4 gxh5 Rh4
mate.
Again the answer to the question of how we arrive at such a concept
is given by the following standard position.
White wins by 1 Ne7+ Kh8 2 Qxh7+! Kxh7 3 Rh3 mate. Once this
idea is known, it becomes much easier to work out the individual
application of it to a specific position.
An open h file is once again the major factor in White's original com
bination leading from our next diagram.
Becker (block)
30
--="-===-==---""=-=-'
Renman (white)
'Normal' continuations of the attack fail: e.g. if I Qxg6 NxdS, or

1 Be3 Rxc3 ! 2 bxc3 NxdS 3 RxdS Be6 etc. The only path to victory
lies in the unusual move 1 Rh8+ ! ! Kxh8 (if I . . . Dxh8 2 Qxg6+!
Bg7 3 Qxf7+ Kh8 4 Rh1 + Nh7 5 Qg6 etc. wins) 2 Bxf7 and Black
resigned because he had no defence to the decisive attack down the
he file, e. g . 2 . . . Nh7 (if 2 . . . Nh5 3 Qxg6) 3 Rh1 when White
threatens both 4 Qxg6 and 4 Rxh7 + Kxh7 5 Qxg6+ Kh8 6 Qh5+
Bh6 7 Qxh6 mate.
Typical mating comblnations I 25

Carlsson (black)
31
Westin (white)
White's king is already situated on an open me, but Black cannot
exploit this by the immediate 1
. Rh6, since the white king can
escape to g2. For this reason the rook is needed on g7, so it is the other
rook which must use the h file. But how? Black solves the problem by
the startling but logical I . . . Kf7 ! ! allowing the dreaded knight fork of
king and queen. However, after 2 Nxd6+ Ke7 3 QxbS Nf4+! White
realgned because it is mate next move.
.
32
Schlechter (black)
This time the h me is not used directly for mate but allows a rook, in
conjunction with a knight, to achieve a typical mating finish as follows:
1 Qxh7+!! Kxh7 2 RhS + Kg8 3 Ng6! Rf6 4 Rh8+ Kf7 5 Rf8 mate .
There are many combinations based on a mate by the queen on h7
or g7 (h2, g2).
(See next diagram) Every beginner knows the mate brought about by a
queen on h7 supported by a knight on gS , but in this position not only
does the knight on f6 defend h7 but also White's knight on gS is under
attack from the pawn. However, I NdS ! settles matters at once, since

Schwarz (black)
33
Uhlmann (white)
1 . . . exd5 loses to 2 Bxf6 Qxf6 3 Qh7 mate. Black tried the hope
less 1 .. . hxg5 2 Nxe7+ Nxe7 and then resigned.
Composed position
34
All good players know off by heart the following basic manoeuvre :
1 Qh6! Rxe1 2 Bxh7+ (not of course 2 Qxh7+?? when the king
escapes to e7) 2 . . . Kh8 3 Bg6+! Kg8 4 Qh7+ KfB 5 Qxf7 mate.
Oearly this mate can appear in various guises and usually forms the
routine conclusion to a more complex piece of tactics. Take for

example our next position.
(See next diagram) White played 1 Re6 ! threatening 2 Rxh6+ gxh6
3 Qxh6+ Kg8 4 Qh7 mate. Black cannot take the rook (I . . . fxe6 2
Qg6 and mate on h7) but after 1 . . . Kg8 2 Bh7+ Kh8 3 Rxh6! he had
to resign in view of 3 . . gxh6 4 Qxh6 tlueatening both 5 QxfB mate
and 5 Bg6+ followed by 6 Qh7 mate.
Often when the queen mates on h7 it is supported by pawn on g6
as in our next diagram.
.

JS
Mjagmarsuren (black)
36
White must act quickly before Black mates him , so he carries out a
well-known clearance idea to make way for the powerful queen to
reach h7: 1 Rh8+! Kxh8 2 Rhl + Kg8 3 Rh8+ ! Kxh8 4 Qtil+ Kg8 S
Qh7 mate.
When the queen mates on g7, it is often supported by a pawn on f6
u in the following typical finish.
37

I . . . Qh3 2 Qfl (or 2 Qxf3 Rei mate) ReI! and since 3 Qxel allows
3 . . . Qg2 mate, White must try 3 Rd8+ Kf7 4 Rd7+ Kg6! (of course,
the king dare not move onto the e file because Qxel would then be
check!) 5 Rd6+ Kh5 ! winning.
We see a more complicated example of the same basic idea in our
next position.
38
Gangijew (black)
Sacharov (white)
White first removes one possible protector of g7 by 1 Nxb5 ! so that if
I . . . Nxb5 2 Qh6 Qf8 3 Ra8 leads to a similar fmish to the one above.
For this reason Black replies 1 . . . g5 only to fmd that White has
catered for this by the pretty idea 2 Qxe 5 ! dxe5 3 Nxc7 when Black
resigned, because 3 . . . Qxc7 allows a back-rank mate by 4 Ra8+ etc.,
or if 3 . . . h6 4 Ra8 Qxa8 5 Nxa8 White is a piece up, or finally if
3 . . . Qxf6 4 Ra8+ Kg7 5 Ne8+ wins the queen for the knight, ending
a whole rook up.
In the following position White uses his advanced queen to threaten
mates on both g7 and h7, linking this with another common and im
portant idea.
Hardicsay (black)
Pinter (white)

I NbS! lhreatens 2 NgS when Black will be mated on g7 or h7. If I . . .
BeS 2 NxeS follows, and if I . . . Bh8 2 NgS Nf6 3 Nxf6+ and 4 Qh7
mate. So Black played 1 . . . gxhS 2 NgS! BxgS 3 QxgS+ Kh7 4
QxhS + Kg7 S QgS + Resigns. The point is that after S
Kh7 White
lw 6 Rf3 then 7 Rh3 mate.
The same final idea is seen in simple form in the next position.
.
40
B
-
a.
Composed position
ll i rlit. t
..... . .

B.4JB
ft O. ft ll H ft O
Er
. Bxg2 ! 2 Kxg2 Qg4+ 3 K.h 1 QD + 4 Kg1 Rf6 etc.
Anolher common rnating attack occurs after a piece sacrifice on h 7,
a theme which is illustrated in our next two positions.
1
(See also next diagram) The solution is the same in both cases: 1
Bxh7+! Kxh7 2 NgS + Kg8 3 Qh5 and Black can only prevent the
mate by a great loss of material. If here 2 . . . Kg6, in the first case
White wins by 3 Qg4 or 3 Qd3+, and in the second case by 3 h5+.
Note that in diagram 42 the g5 square is guarded by the black bishop
on e7 but after 2 . . . Bxg5 3 hxg5+ Kg8 4 Qh5 fS 5 g6 it is mate next
move . Beginners often imitate this combination without really making
a proper examination of all the consequences, in particular the possi

bility of the king flight to g6, but even after 2 . . . Kg8 3 Qh5 the situ
ation is not always clear because of a possible flight square on f8 when
Black's rook moves away. Consider for example the following position:
43

t _t_ t t
t

t n-'t
II
ft ll B H ft B
IJ'it w
Horn (black)
Fincke (white)
Here White wrongly carried out the routine sacrifice and lost after 1
Bxh7+? Kxh7 2 Ng5+ Kg6! 3 h4 Rh8 4 Qf3 Raf8 5 hS+ Rxh5 6
Nxf7 Rf5 ! (more precise than 6 . . . Rxf7 7 Qg4+) 7 Ne5+ Nxe5
8 Qg3 + Kf7 9 dxe5 Bxe5 etc.
If instead White had played 3 Qg4, the 'normal' move, 3 . . . fS !
would have beaten off the attack. This possibility must always be taken
into account ; in fact as a general rule (which of course does not always
apply) one might say that one of the most important prerequisites of
this sacrifice is that a white pawn on e5 is available for capturing
Black's f pawn en passant.
(See next diagram) Tills is a well-known position arising from a vari
ation of the French Defence after I e4 e6 2 d4 d5 3 Nc3 dxe4 4 Nxe4
Nd7 5 Nf3 Be7 6 Bd3 Ngf6 7 Nxf6+ Bxf6 8 Qe2 0-0 9 h4!? White

44
. ....... . .
t t t
. t il

B II
fJ.Q.B{).
Variation of French Defence
ft ll ft ri*B ft .
D. 11
now threatens 1 0 Bxh7+! winning, so it seems that Black is forced to

make a weakening defensive move such as . . . h6 or . . . g6, when White
will castle long and launch a K side attack by using his g and h pawns to
open the necessary fl.les.
However, Black can instead equalise by playing 9 . . . eS! and after
10 Bxh7+!? Kxh7! I I NgS + Kg8 1 2 QhS ReS 1 3 Qxf7+ Kh8 we have
a Nrprising situation in which White has no more than a draw by
repetition of moves ( 1 3 QhS + Kg8 14 Qfl+, or 1 3 Qg6 Kg8 14 Qf7+)
which he would be wise to take, because Black is threatening a counter
attack by . . . exd4+ followed by . . . NeS if White tries to exploit the
insecure position of the black king. This variation illustrates the impor
tant strategic principle that a wing attack is often best countered by a
central thrust (here, 9 h4!? being answered by 9 . . . eS!).
There are, of course, many variations of the basic sacrifice on h7,
but we shall restrict ourselves to one example of an original fmish.
Grzelak (black)
Pinkas (white)
position Black controls gS , but the fact that White has the open
f me available to his rooks enables him to launch a highly interesting
In this

attack beginning 1 Bxh7+! Kxh7 2 Ng5 + Bxg5 {2 . . . Kg8 3 Qh5
Bxg5 4 Bxg5 transposes to a position we shall be examining later) 3
Qh5+ Bh6? (it is understandable that Black would like to remain two
pieces up, but if he had realised the strength of White's next move he
would have played 3 . . . Kg8 which we shall consider later) 4 Rf6 ! !
(surprising and decisive, since i f now 4 . . . gxf6 5 Qxh6+ Kg8 6 exf6
followed by mate on g7) 4 . . . Nd7 (After the alternative 4 . . . Kg8
White again sacrifices with 5 Rxh6! gxh6 6 Bxh6 Qb6 7 Rf1 ! and the
threat of 8 Rf6 followed by 9 Qg5+ forces 7 . . . Qg6 8 Qxg6+ fxg6
9 Rxf8+ Kh7 1 0 Rxc8 Kxh6 when 1 1 e6! wins for White because
this pawn cannot be stopped in view of the pinned knight. 1bis is a
typical situation where the mating attack has been warded off at the
cost of material or positional disadvantage.) 5 Rxh6+! gxh6 6 Bxh6 !
Qe8 (or 6 . . . f6 7 Bxf8+ Kg8 8 Qg6+! Kxf8 9 exf6 Nxf6 1 0 Rfl
winning) 7 Bg5+! Kg8 8 Bf6 Nxf6 9 Qg5 + Kh8 1 0 exf6 and Black
resigned since it is mate next move ( 1 0 . . . Rg8 1 1 Qh6 mate).
Now let us return to the position after the moves 1 Bxh7+ Kxh7
2 Ng5+ Bxg5 3 Qh5+ and consider the better defence 3 . . . Kg8 4
Bxg5 Qb6 when White can pursue the attack in two ways:
( 1 ) 5 Bf6 c4+ 6 Kh1 Qe3 ! 7 RD Qh6 8 Qxh6 gxh6 9 Rg3+ Kh7 1 0
Rg7 + Kh 8 1 1 Rfl ! and Black has no defence to the threat of Rf4
and Rh4 followed by mate, since 1 1 . . . Nd7 fails to 1 2 Rxf7 +
Kg8 1 3 Rg7 + Kh8 14 Rxd7 + Rxf6 1 5 Rd8+! an important
zwlschenzug (interposed), winning material.
(2) 5 Rf6 also gives White a tremendous attack, since 5
gxf6 fails
to 6 Bxf6 followed by mate, and 6 . . . Be6 7 Bh6! wins quickly.
.
46
Plater (black)
Pachman (white)
Sacrifices on g7 are also very common. In this positiqn Black can
defend against normal attacks on g7 e.g. 1 Bh6 Nh5 2 Qg4 g6 etc. or 1

Bxf6 Dxf6 or 1 Nxe7+ Qxe7, but after 1 Nxg7! Kxg7 2 e5! (the point,
Iince an inunediate discovered check is ineffective) 2 . . . dxe5 3 Bf4+
Kh8 (3 . . KfB? 4 Bh6 mate) 4 Bxe5 Qb7 S Qh4! Nd7 6 Rxd7! Qxd7 7
Ne4 QfS 8 Nxf6 BcS + 9 Kh1 RxeS 1 0 RxeS White won. The king's side
II amashed up in spectacular fashion by the famous two bishops' sacri
8ce in which both the h7 and g7 pawns are eliminated to expose the
eoemy king, as can be seen in the composed position which follows.
.
47
Composed position
1 . Bxh2+! 2 Kxh2 Qh4+ 3 Kg1 Black produces Bxg2! 4 Kxg2

(it is vitally important to examine the consequences if White refuses the
second sacrifice. In this case, after 4 f3 or 4 f4 Black has 4 . . . Rf6 !
with a winning attack) 4 . . . QgS+ S Kh 1 Rf6 ! (without the vital entry
of this rook Black's attack would fail, whereas now there is no defence)
6 Nf3 Rh6+ 7 Nh2 Qh4 8 Kg2 Qxh2+ 9 Kf3 QhS+ 10 Kf4 (or 1 0 Kg2
Rg6+) 1 0 . . . Qh4+ 1 1 KeS ReS+ 1 2 KdS Qe7 and mate next move.
Now let us see how this knowledge is utilised in practical play by a
talented player who tragically died just before the end of the Second
World War.
.
48

ltt. 'lfl i . i
Fl i .
.. i
B. ft B'IB B
B. ft .Q.. II II
ft ll - ft ll
.. . -
Kottnauer (black)
Junge (white)

The apparently closed nature of the position is deceptive, for in the
space of three moves White brings about by force the desired situation.
I NbS ! Qb8 2 Nxd7 Rxd7 3 dxcS Nxc5 (essential if he is not to lose a
pawn, since 3 . . . bxcS? 4 Bxe4 wins a piece for White because of the
unguarded rook on d7), and now the 'standard' set-up is reached. Play
continued 4 Bxh7+ Kxh7 5 Qh5 + Kg8 6 Bxg7 f5 (after 6 . . . Kxg7 7
Qg4+ Kh7 8 Rf3 it is all over) 7 Be5 ! and since 7 . . Qe8 allows 8
Qh8+ Kf7 9 Qg7 mate, Black had to give up his queen which only
postponed the inevitable.
We have already seen the enemy king being driven up the board and
mated, once he is deprived of his pawn protection, and to achieve iliis
result no sacrifice is too great. Take the following classical example.
.
Thomas (black)
Lasker (white)
White visualises the possibility of a successful 'king hunt' as it is termed,
so I Qxh7 + ! ! Kxh7 2 Nxf6++ Kh6 (or 2 . Kh8 3 Ng6 mate) 3 Neg4+
Kg5 4 h4+ Kf4 5 g3 + Kf3 6 8e2+ Kg2 7 Rh2+ Kgl 8 0-0-0 mate! A
perfect conclusion to a king hunt.
.
50
Skotarenko (black)
Selinsky (white)
Typical mating combinations f 3 5

is a similar example o f massive sacrifices t o lure the king u p the
board, but the tactical calculation is much more demanding as will be
teen : I Nxg6 ! Kxg6 2 Nxf5 ! Rxf5 3 Qxf5+! ! Kxf5 4 Be4+ Kg4 5 h3 +
giving us three variations:
(1) 5 . . . Kh5 6 g4+ Kh4 7 Re3 and 8 Be l mate .
(2) 5 . . . Kxh3 6 Bf5+ Kxg3 7 Re3 + Kh4 8 Be I + Kh5 9 Rh3+ Qh4
10 Rxh4 mate.
(3) the game continuation, 5 . . . Kxg3 6 Re3 + Kh4 7 Bg6 ! ! and Rlack
resigned because he cannot even stop mate by returning material e.g.
7 . Qg5+ 8 fxg5 Bxe5 9 Re4+ Kxh3 10 Bf5+ Kg3 I I Be l mate.
11lis
Frankie (black)
Pa tt y (white)
Black's king is already exposed, but if he is given time to play . . . f6 he
set up a solid defensive position. So White must play energetically
to prevent this by 1 N xh6 ! gxh6 2 Rxf7+ Kd6 3 Qh5 ! Bd7- (to create a
flight square on c7) 4 Qxe5 +!! KxeS S Bf4 mte.
can
Tatai (black)
Rorrun (white)
White has a difficult decision to make in this position, because after the
first part of the combination which is relatively easy to see, he has to

evaluate a new situation where Black has given back all the sacrificed
.material and assess whether or not he has sufficient resources to achieve
a win. 1 Qxh6+!! Kxh6 2 Nxf5+! KgS (Black cannot accept the second
sacrifice in view of 2 . . . NxfS? 3 Bf7+ KgS 4 f4+ Kg4 5 BhS mate, or
here 3 . . . Nh4 4 Rxh4+ KgS 5 Rh5+ Kg4 6 f3 mate) 3 Nd6. Ng6
(probably the best practical chance lay in 3 . . . Qf8 4 f4+ Qxf4 5
gxf4+ Kxf4 6 Kf2 NfS 7 Ne8! Rg8 8 Rag1 Rgxe8 9 Bxe8 Rxe8 1 0 Rh3
Nxd4 1 1 cxd4 Nxd4 1 2 Rh4+ KxeS 1 3 Rel + and the other knight is
lost) 4 Nxc8 Rxc8 5 f4+ Nxf4+ 6 gxf4+ Kxf4+ 7 Kf2 RegS 8 Bf3.
Black is now positionally lost because his e pawn is weak and White's
rook on the h ftle becomes very active along the sixth or seventh rank.
The game ended 8 . . . Nd8 9 Rh6 Rg6 1 0 Rah1 Rxh6 1 1 Rxh6 Rf8 (or
. . . Rg6 1 2 Rh8! etc.) 1 2 Rg6 ! KfS 1 3 Rg7 aS? (it was essential to play
1 3 . . . Kf4 but White still wins by 1 4 Rg4+ KfS 1 5 Ke3 ! Nf7 1 6 Rf4+
KgS 1 7 Rf6 etc.) 1 4 Ke3 Resigns. 1 5 Bg4 mate comes next.
53
Karl (black)
White has already sacrificed two pieces to reach this position and he
must give up more material to expose Black's king before he can con
solidate. 1 RxeS ! KxeS 2 Qf7! (the real point of the sacrifice, prevent
g the king's retreat to f6 and threatening d4+) 2 . . . Qxd2 3 Be l !
Black must now give up his queen to stop Bxf4+, but although he
obtains more than adequate material compensation with a rook and
two minor pieces for it, his king is far too exposed to survive for long.
The game ended 3 . . . Qxc1 4 Rxc l Nc6 5 Re l + Be4 6 Qxg7+ KdS 7
Qf7+ KcS 8 Rxe4 Rac8 9 Qc4+ Kb6 1 0 Qb3+ Ka6 1 1 Ra4+ Resigns.
(I I . NaS 1 2 Qc4+ bS 1 3 Qc6 mate, or here 1 2 . . . Kb6 1 3 Rb4
mate.)
(See next diagram) On looking at this position, one is first inclined to
echo Najdorrs famous dictum that 'both players stand badly', but
.

Pachman (black)
54
Fuderer (white)
Black has a chance to carry out a long-winded king hunt which is not
too difficult to work out . I . . Rg4+! 2 fxg4 (2 KxfS Qe6 mate) Qe4+
3 Kg3 Q xg4+ 4 Kf2 (after 4 Kh2 Qh3+ 5 Kg1 Qg3+ White is mated by
6 Kh l Be4 or 6 Kfl Bd3) 4 . . . Qf4+ 5 Kg2 Be4+ 6 Kh3 Qt1 + 7 Kh4
Qf2+ 8 Kg4 (or 8 Kg5 Qg3+ followed by mate) 8 . . . Bt1 + 9 Kf4
Be2+! 1 0 KgS ( 1 0 Ke4 Qf3 mate) 1 0 . . . Qg3+ I I Resigns.
.
ss
Bednarski (black)
Kavalek (white)
Following White's thought sequence, we can see that there is no effective
way of increasing the pressure on g7 , so play must be switched to the
h7 square. We already know the mating set-up with White's queen on
h7 and knight on gS , but how can we achieve this with gS blocked and
anyway guarded by the bishop on d8? Once an idea is found, other
elements are brought in to complete the combination as follows: I g6 !
hxg6 2 Rxd8! (removing both obstacles to the occupation of the gS
square) 2 . . . Rxd8 3 NgS QfB (or 3 . . . Qf6 4 Qg3 gaining time) 4
Qe4 ! Resigns.
(See next diagram) Everything is decided by a single move , the two key
factors being the overloading of the bishop on g7 (guarding both h6 and

56

. .
li ft .
*
. ft ll
. . . ft l:l<it>.
..
Adorjan (black)
Smeljkal (white)
the queen) and the open h ftle. After 1 Rxh6+! Black was forced to
resign, as 1 .
Kxh6 allows 2 Qh4 mate, whereas 1 . Bxh6 loses the
queen.
.
Posner (black)
Once again a fairly simple idea leads to a quick win. White sacrifices a
rook in order to penetrate to f7 with his queen and it is all over. 1
Rh7+! Kxh7 2 Qf7+ Kh8 (2 . . . Kh6 3 fS+ and mate next move) 3
Bc3 Ra6 (Black must give up his queen to avoid mate) 4 Bxf6+ Qxf6 5
Qxf6+ Kh7 6 Qe7 + Kh8 7 g3 Resigns. White is not only up on material
but will soon be able to advance his e pawn.
(See next diagram) White here brings about a mate which is rarely seen
in practical play : 1 QxeS ! QxeS 2 Rd8+ Ke7 3 ReS mate. Problernists
will recognise this as a so-ca11ed 'pure' mate (or 'model' mate), since all
the white pieces take part in the mate with no square being controlled
more than once.

58
Thornblom (black)
Friedman (white)
Achmedov (black)
Radulov (white)
White's position, with all pieces ready for action, is in stark contrast to
Black's undeveloped game. Uttle wonder that there is a sacrificial finish
at hand, as follows: 1 Bb6! axb6 2 Rxe6+! Ne7 (or 2 . fxe6 3 Bxg6 +
followed by mate) 3 Qxf7 + Kd8 4 Qe8 +!! (there are many roads to
victory, but White chooses the shortest and most elegant) and Black
resigned in view of the 'pin-mate' 4
Kxe8 5 Bxg6 mate.
.
Heinrich (black)
Kaplan (white)

At first sight it looks as if any discovered check by the rook on f7
would be successful, but in view of the fact that both the rook and
bishop are under attack the logical solution must lie in a double-check.
So 1 Rf8++! Kxf8 2 Ng6+ hxg6 3 Qh8 mate is the answer.
61
Schiljejev (black)
Mirsajev (white)
Clearly an attack down the h me is called for, but the 'evolutionary'
method of I Qh2 h5 2 Rdgl Qf3 ! seems rather slow. The 'revolutionary'
1 Rxh7 ! is much more successful, since 1
Kxh7 allows White to gain
time by 2 Qh2+ Kg8 3 Rh l etc. Black replied I
Qxg3 2 Rdh1
Bxf6 3 gxf6. Nxf6 but now White finished neatly with 4 Rh8+ Kg? 5
Bh6+! Kxh8 6 Bg7 +! forcing mate in two moves.
.
Sanz (black)
62
Medina (white)
Tineatened with mate in one, White has a clear incentive to fmd the
winning sequence : I Nf5+! Kh5 ( 1
gxfS 2 Qxf6+ and 3 QgS mate)
2 Qxh7 +! Nxh7 3 g4 mate.
(See next diagram) TI1e back-rank weakness again comes into play after
1 Rxf7 ! Rxf7 (the tempting 1
Rd8 fails to 2 Rxd8+ Qd8 3 Rf8+!
Qxf8 4 Bxe6+ mating) 2 Dxe6! Resigns. A good example of overloading
.

Gutkin (black)
63
Thelidse (white)
along with the usual deflection, since 2
mate in two moves.
64
Qxe6 allows 3 Rd8+ and
Carlsson (black)
White cleverly exploits tluee basic mating patterns in the sequence I

Nf6+ Kh8 2 QgS ! ! with mates after 2 . . gxf6 3 Qg8, or 2
hxgS
3 Rh3, or fmally 2 . . Bxd3 3 Qxh6+ gxh6 4 Rg8.
Our next two examples are two sides of the same coin.
.
65
Antosh.in (black)
Forintos (white)

We first have a typical king hunt offering few problems and ending
successfully for Black: 1 . . . Qg1 + 2 Kg3 Qe1 +! 3 Kg4 (3 Kf3 Qf2+)
3 . hS+! 4 KgS RxeS+! S Kh6 (or S fxeS QxeS+ 6 Kh6 Qf4 mate)
S . . . Re6! 6 Rxb7 gS+ 7 Resigns.
All very clear and simple, but we must warn the reader that it is vital
to calculate the fmish precisely, since it is often the case that an ad
vanced enemy king which is not immediately mated can prove a serious
embarrassment to our own king. Witness the following tragi-comedy.
.
66
..._. . .
it. . t
.t.

o
B g II II
ft . II
.
Darga (black)
Filip (white)
Black, a pan and the exchange down, should probably have resigned
already, but on the other hand optimists claim that no game was ever
won by resigning! Play went : 1 . . . QO ! 2 Rcl (much simpler is 2 Rbl
preventing 2 . . . Bb7 because of 3 Qc7+, but White opts for mate . . .)
2 . . . Bb7 3 Rc7+ Kg6 4 Qg8+ KfS S Qxh7+?? (the losing move,
whereas White could still have brought his king hunt to a successful
conclusion by S g4+! KeS 6 ReS+ Kd6 7 Qf8+ Kd7 8 Qfi+ Kd8 9
Qc7+ Ke8 1 0 Qb8+ followed by 1 1 Rc7+ and this time round the king
is really mated!) S . . . Kg4! and White realised he had to resign, because
after both 5 Qg6+ and 6 Rxb7 Black plays 6 . . . Kh3 followed by
mate on g2.
Chapter 3
The elements of
chess tactics
As we have already seen in the previous chapter, within even the most
complex combination certain basic recurring features emerge which we
can identify as the elements of chess tactics. The most important of
these are: the double-attack, the fork, deflection, decoy, the pin,
discovered check, double check, perpetual check, stalemate, trapping a
piece , piece elimination, unprotected pieces, line-opening, line<losure,
and the passed pawn.
It may all appear highly complicated and comprehensive, but the
game of chess is even more so, if we consider the infmite number of pos
lible permutations ! However, once readers have grasped the basic tactical
clements, they will be able to fmd their way much more confidently in
the combinative maze and gain invaluable aids in decision-making.

1 . The double-attack
Since both sides begin the game with the . same material, it .is usually
fairly easy to defend against a single threat. Matters become more
difficult if we can create various threats at one and the same time, and
in particular with one move only, by means of a double-attack. We see

the mechanism clearly in the following position.
67
Wolf (black)
Jahner (white)
44 I The elements of chess tactics

Black wins a pawn by 1 . . . Rxd4! since 2 Rxd4 is answered by 2 . . .
Qg5 threatening both mate on g2 and the rook on c 1 . There is no way
of countering both threats at the same time.
68
Pachman (black)
Elson (white)
A much more complex position with the double-attack idea linked to
other subtle points. Black has already sacrificed a piece and now con
cludes the game with a fine combination : 1 . . . Rxa4 ! 2 Rxa4 Qd7
attacking both the rook on a4 and the pawn on h3 . Since the latter
leads to mate, White is forced to give up the rook, so tries the counter
3 Rh4 guarding his h3 pawn whilst attacking the knight. However,
Black has catered for this and plays 3 . . . Qxa4 when it is clear that
4 Rxh5? loses to 4 . . . Rg8+ 5 Ng3 (5 Kh2 Rg2+ 6 Kh 1 Qd 1 forces
mate) 5 . . . Rxg3+! 6 fxg3 Qd1 + 7 Kf2 Qe2+ followed by 8 . . .
Qg2 mate. For this reason, White settled for the loss of a pawn, but
after 4 Qd3 ! Nf6 5 Qf3 Qxb4 his position was lost.
There are many opening traps involving a double-attack. Here is one
from the Queen's Indian Defence: 1 d4 Nf6 2 c4 e6 3 Nf3 b6 4 g3 Bb7
'
5 Bg2 Bb4+ 6 Bd2 Bxd2+ 7 Qxd2 0-0 8 Nc3 Ne4(?) 9 Qc2 Nxc3? 1 0
Ng5 ! and now, in view o f the dual threat o f Qxh7 mate an d Bxb7,
Black was forced to play 1 0 . . . QxgS losing the exchange after 1 1
Bxb7 and 1 2 Bxa8.
2. The fork
lbis is really the special form of double-attack when a piece attacks
two other pieces simultaneously, being particularly applied to the
knight fork which is such a typical part of opening play e.g. 1 e4 c5 2
Nf3 Nc6 3 d4 cxd4 4 Nxd4 Nf6 5 Nc3 e6 6 Ndb5 d5? 7 exd5 exd5 8
Nxd5 ! Nxd5 9 Qxd5 ! QxdS 1 0 Nc7+ and 1 1 NxdS winning a pawn.
The elements of chess tactics I 45

This knight check on c7 (or c2) is usually played to win the rook on
aS (at).
Now for a few examples to show what a useful tactical weapon this
knight fork is.
69
Stein (black)
Ljubojevic (white)
After the first knight fork 1
. Nxf2! White had to settle for losing the
exchange by 2 0-0, because 2 Kxf2? fails to 2 . . . Bxc3 and whichever
way White recaptures, the second fork 3 . . . Ne4+ wins the queen.
.
Rukavina (black)
Tinunan (white)
White's king is cut off in the centre, a disadvantage we shall be discussing
later, and yet one's first impression is that Black cannot exploit this
fact, mainly because the centralised knight on d4 looks so strong, as
does the passed pawn on c6. However, after 1 . Qb4+ 2 Kd 1 Bd3 !
matters are put into perspective. White's queen has no move , and 3
Qxd3 fails to the knight fork 3
Nxf2+.
(See next diagram) By 1 Qe4? I made a mistake which since that time
(1949) has been repeated many times. The result was the loss of a vital
.

71
Rossolimo (black)
Pachman (white)
pawn along with a transposition to the end-game after 1 . . . Bxc3+ 2
bxc3 Qd1 +! 3 Kxd1 Nxf2+ followed by 4 . . . Nxe4.
72
Alburt (black)
Vasyukov (white)
White's first move 1 Nd6! gives him a positional plus, but is hardly
decisive if Black replies 1 . . . cxd6 2 QxdS etc. However, Black thought
he could have more and played 1 . . . Qxd6? only to discover th-at he
loses at once to 2 Qxf7+ Kh8 3 Qxe8+! Rxe8 4 Nf7+ Kg8 5 Nxd6
cxd6 6 BxdS etc.
73
Biljinski (black)
The elements of chess tactics I 4 7

White's g pawn has just forked Black's queen and knight, but by using a
counter-fork Black turns the tables on his opponent as follows: 1 . . .
Rxd41 2 gxf4 (or 2 cxd4 Qxd2! 3 Qxd2 NfJ + etc.) Rxd2! 3 Qxd2
(White must give back the queen or else he is mated after 3 Qb3 Bxf2+
4 K.h2 Bxe l + etc.) 3 . . . NfJ + 4 Kg2 Nxd2 winning two minor
pieces for a rook. The game ended 5 Kg3 BfJ ! 6 Be 1 h4+ 7 K.h2
Nxe4 8 Be3 Nxf2 ! 9 Resigns (if 9 Bxb6 cxb6 1 0 Rfl Ng4+ 1 1 Kh3
Be2 1 2 Rfe 1 Nf2+ 1 3 Kg4 Nd3 ! 1 4 Rxe2 Nxf4+ with yet another
fork).
The very threat of a knight fork can be used to strengthen one's
position, even if the threat is never carried out. Take the next
position.
74
Basman (black)
Miles (white)
White's two minor pieces are under attack from the queen, and if I
Bxd6+ Rxd6 2 Rxd6 Qxe7 he loses material. As it turns out, this
knight is such a good piece that White can afford to sacrifice his bishop
in order to maintain it on e7 where it plays a splendid role as follows:
I Rfe l ! Qxf4 2 Rd4! QgS (immediately the knight makes its presence
felt, as the rook cannot be captured because of Nc6+ and thus gains
time to help in the attack) 3 Rc4! and Black had to resign, since he is
threatened by 4 Nc6+ followed by S Qxa7+ and if 3 . . . Rd7 then 4
ReB+ mates.
Although the knight is the main exponent of the fork, other pieces
can of course be used. We now give examples of forks by bishop, rook,
queen and pawn.
(See next diagram) By 1 . . . Rxh2+! Black removes the guard of g3
whilst at the same time luring White's king into the fatal fork as
follows: 2 Kxh2 Bxg3 + 3 Qxg3 hxg3+ winning easily.

75
Geller (black)
Kotov (white)
76
Evans (black)
'
Schmid (white)
By the temporary sacrifice of a piece followed by a rook fork mack
reaches a winning end-game : 1 . . . Bxc3 ! 2 bxc3 Rxc3 + 3 Kd2 Rxb3 etc.
77
Grunfeld (black)
Alekhine (white)
The queen's combined horizontal, vertical and diagonal movements give
her many opportunities for this special form of double attack. Here is a
famous example : 1 . . . Qc4 ! (attacking both the queen on e2 and the
knight on a2, and since 2 Nc3 fails to 2 . . . Qxe2 3 Nx e2 Rxd1 +,

White's reply is forced) 2 Qxc4 Rxd I +! (an important zwischenzug i.e.
a move which is interposed before a more obvious move such as a re
capture ; the normal move here would be 2 . . . bxc4 but Black fust
plays the deadly . . . Rxd l with a check) 3 Qfl Bd4+! 4 Resigns.
Queen forks often occur in the opening. Here is one example: 1 e4
eS 2 NO Nc6 3 Bc4 DeS 4 b4 (the Evans Gambit) Bxb4 S c3 DeS 6 d4
exd4 7 0 dxc3? (he must try 7 . . . d6 ! 8 cxd4 Bb6) 8 Bxf7+! Kxf7 9
QdS+ winning back the piece with the better game in view of the
exposed position of Black's king.
Pawn forks are also very common in the opening stages e.g. 1 e4
eS 2 NO Nc6 3 Bc4 Nf6 (the Two Knights' Defence) 4 Nc3 Nxe4! 5
Nxe4 dS winning back the piece with a good game. Note how cleverly
Black exploits the pawn fork in the following position.
78
Klovan (black)
Dvoretzky (white)
. . . Nxc3 ! 2 Kxc3 Rxa3 +! 3 Rxa3 b4+ 4 Kb2 (unfortunately for
White, he has to give up his bishop because 4 Kd2 loses to 4 . . . bxa3
S Bxe4 a2 queening the pawn) 4 . . . bxa3 + 5 Kxa3 Bxc2 6 Ng5 Bb3 7
Nxf7 KdS 8 Kb4 Ke6 9 Nd6 KxeS 1 0 Nxc4+ Bxc4 I I Kxc4 Ke4 and
the game ends not with a bang but a whisper ; the whole operation
has led to a winning end-game for Black whose king is nearer the
pawns!
3 . Deflection
This is one of the commonest tactical elements. A piece defending
against a threllt or protecting another piece is drawn away either by a
threatened exchange or by a sacrifice, as can be clearly seen in our first
example.
5 0 I The elements of chess tactics

79
Zinser (black)
Pressmann (white)
White's bishop on b3 guards the knight on d l
by . . . Qd2+, so Black simply plays 1
. Be6!
tected bishop. As 2 Nxe3 loses a piece to 2 . .
was 2 Bxe6 Qd2+ 3 Kfl Qxd 1 + 4 Kg2 Qgl +
Bf2 mate.
.
80
which is threatened
attacking the unpro
. Qxe3+, the sequel
5 Kh3 Qfl + 6 Kg3
Albano (black)
Ljubisavljevic (white)
The squares h7 and h8 seem to be adequately guarded by Black's queen
and knight. However, the knight can be deflected by 1 Nd6! Nxd6 (or 1
. . . Rcb8 2 Nxf7 Kxf7 3 Rh7 winning the queen) and now 2 Rh8+!
Qxh8 3 Rxh8+ Kxh8 4 Ne6+ reveals the point of the whole exercise,
since after a king move it is 5 Qg7 mate.
(See next diagram) As Black'& knight on g5 is guarding the rook, White
can play 1 Bf7 +! in safety. After 1 . . Rxf7 2 Nxf7 Rxe7 (in the game
Black tried 2 . . . Bf8 but lost quickly after 3 Rxe6 Nxe6 4 Nd6) 3
Nxh6+ Kf8 4 Nxf5 ! with a winning game, since 4
Rf7 allows 5
Rd8 mate.
.

81
Czerniak (black)
Pachman (white)
82
Prosorov (black)
White would clearly like his queen to reach the g7 square via f6, but at
the moment the way is blocked. However, by a clever dellection Black
achieves the miracle as follows: 1 Nf6+ Kh8 2 g4 Bd3 3 Nd7 ! ! and this
knight cannot be captured by the rook or the queen (3 . . . Qxd7 4
Qf6+ followed by mate, or 3 . . . Rxd7 4 Rxb8+ Rd8 s Rb7 ! and the
queen is still deflected) so Black played 3 . . . g5 but was mated after 4
Qf6 +! Qxf6 5 exf6 Rxd7 6 Rxb8+ etc.
AU our remaining examples contain more than one deflection, show
ing once again what a common element this is.
(See next diagram) After just two moves by White, 1 Rb7 Rd7 2 Bc4 ! !
Black resigned. Of course 2 . . . Rxb7 3 axb7 Qxb7 all ows 4 Qxf6+
wiMing, but the main variation runs: 2 . . . B xc4 (giving up the pro
tection of the rook) 3 Rxd7 (deflecting the queen) 3 . . . Qxd7 4
Qxf6+ Kh5 5 g4+ Kh4 6 Qh6 mate.
(See second diagram) Black's flfst deflection 1 . . . Rb8 ! is easy enough
to see, because obviously the rook cannot be captured (2 Rxb8?
Qe l + 3 Qfl Be3 + wins) and 2 Rfl fails to 2 . . . Rb2 when White has
no defence against the threat of 3 . . . Rxg2+! 4 Kxg2 Qg3 +, or here 4

83

.it .t
tt .t o.t.
Dvoretzky (black)

. ft .
* ft
..Q.II .ft .
II .
84
Tal (white)
Benott (blilck)
Bxg2 Bh2+ 5 Khl Bg3+ 6 Kgl Qh2 mate. Note how the well-known
basic patterns recur! So White tried 2 Kfl but had to resign after the
second deflection 2 . . . Be3 ! threatening . . . Qf2 mate and if 3 Qxe3
Rxb l + etc.
I. Fischer (blilck)
85
='-----=-==""""'----'
Zarcula (white)
Again two immediate deflections settle White's fate : 1 . . . d3 ! 2 Qg2

(after 2 Qxd3 Qxg4+ 3 Khl Rh8+ or here 3 Qg3 Qxg3+ both lead to

mate) 2 . . . Re4! and if 3 Qxe4 Rg3 +! 4 Qg2 (4 Kh2 Qh4 mate) 4 . . .
Rxg4 5 Qxg4 Qxg4 + 6 Kh2 Qxc4 winning easily. In the game White
played 3 Ne3 Rdxe3 4 Resigns.
Gufeld (black)
Karasev (white)
White has nothing after 1 exf7+ Rxf7, so he first deflects the black
queen by 1 Nc5 ! Qxc5 (the threat was 2 Nd7 and if 1 . . . fxe6 2 Nxb7
Qxb7 3 Qxe6+ Kh8 4 Qg6 and mate on h7) 2 exf7+ Kh8 (or 2 . . .
Rxf7 3 Rxf7 Kxf7 4 Qe6+ Kf8 5 Rfl + followed by mate) J Qe6 Ba6
(to stop 4 Qg6) 4 Rf6 ! ! Rxf7 (or 4 . . . Bxd3 5 Rxh6+! gxf6 6 Qxh6+
Bh7 7 Qf6 mate, or here 5 . . . Bh7 6 Qg6) 5 Rxf7 Bxd3 6 cxd3 Nd4 7
Qg6 Rg8 8 Rxg7! Resigns (8 . . . Rxg7 9 ReS+).
4. Decoy
nus element is similar in form but diffenmt in content when compared
with the deflection, since here we are concerned with turing a piece
onto a particular line or square rather than dragging it away from a
defensive function. An example will soon make this clear.
87
11 . {) .

. ft
.. . . .
..r

A&

B
Composed position

By I Bd5 +! White forces the black queen and king into a position
where they will be forked by the knight i.e. if 1
KxdS 2 Nf6+ or if
1 . . QxdS 2 Ne7 + winning in both cases the queen.
.
88
Euwe (black)
.. . . .
ll i B B II i
1
11
- . .
m IJ<31'. Bft
ft ll lift
.. u [1
Lasker (white)
Both the white and black knights are under attack, but it is White to
move and by 1 b4! Bxb4 he can lure the bishop to a square where 2
Nc2 attacks it, thus winning a piece. Simple, isn't it?
Kochiev (black)
Panchenko (white)
At first sight Black seems lost despite his material advantage, because
mate is threatened on g7 and if 1 .
Nf5 there is a finish we have
already met: 2 Qxh7+! Kxh7 3 Rh3 + and 4 Rh8 mate. However, there
is a saving move in the subtle 1 .
Bg4+! luring the rook to a square
from where it cannot mate the king after 2 Rxg4 NfS. The game ended
3 Qh3 Rxc2+ 4 Kfl QbS+ 5 Resigns. Note that if White refuses to
capture the bishop after 1
. Bg4+, then the h3 square is guarded after
2 Kfl NfS.
.

90
Beliavsky (black)
Murei (white)
If Black were to queen either pawn inunOldiately, White could draw the
game as follows: I . . . di(Q) 2 Rxb4+! Kc6 (2 . . . Kc8?? 3 Ra8 mate)
3 Rxd i Bxdi 4 Rf4 ; or I . . . fl (Q) 2 Rxfl Bxfl 3 Rxb4+ and 4 Rd4,
drawing in both cases because, although it is by no means simple, a
rook can draw in the ending against rook and bishop when there are no
pawns on the board. However, Black can avoid all this by playing the
simple decoy I . . . Rc2+! 2 Kxc2 thereby queening with check. After
2 . . . d l (Q)+ 3 Rxd l Bxd l + White resigned, since another queen now
appears on the scene.
S. The pin
Once again we have a very important tactical element which needs to be
studied with great care. First let us defme our terms. Every pin restricts
in some way the activity of an enemy piece. A pin is absolute when the
pirmed piece cannot move at all , as in the left half of diagram 9 1 .
91
Composed positions
Note that in such cases the pinned and pinning pieces have a different
movement (vertical/horizontal as opposed to diagonal or vice versa) and

the piece behind is of course the king which means there is no legal way
for the pinned piece to move.
On the right-hand side of the diagram the black king is still the piece
behind the pinned piece but now the latter has some freedom of move
ment because it moves in the same way as the pinning piece. In other
words the pin is relative; the rook on h6 cannot move along the rank
but it can move along the flle up to the pinning piece and even capture
it, and the bishop on fS cannot move along the c8-h3 diagonal (to
capture the rook for example) but has freedom to move along the b l
h 7 diagonal as far as the pinning bishop on e4 which I t can capture.
Composed positions
In diagram 92 on the left the piece standing behind the pinned one is of
higher value than the pinning piece but is nevertheless not the king, so
the pinned piece can legally move if It wishes, thus Incurring of course a
material disadvantage. In the right half of the diagram we have a
peculiar situation where the bishop on g2 is pinned, so to speak, to the
gl square, because White will be mated if the bishop moves away.
Now for two Interesting examples of an absolute pin:
93
Thynne (black)
Abrahams (white)

1 Qg8+! Kxg8 2 Ng6 ! exploits the fact that the
mate on h8 to follow.
fl
pawn is pinned. I t is
Suttles (black)
Tal (white)
First comes a deflection 1 BxaS! RxaS leading after 2 Rd8+ Bf8 to an
absolute pin on the back rank. The double attack 3 Qd2! now threatens
both 4 Qh6 and the rook on aS, giving us two main lines:
( I ) 3 . . . Qb6 4 Qd7! Qxb2 5 Qe7 Qc l + 6 Kh2 Qh6 7 NgS ! Qg7 8
Nxh7 ! ! and this excellent deflection sacrifice wins at once, since if
8 . . . Qxh7 9 Qxf8 mate, or if 8 . . . Kxh8 9 Rxf8 and 1 0 Rxf7
winning at least the queen.
(2) 3 . . . Qc7 4 ReS Kg7 (or 4 . . . Nb6 5 Qh6 Qe7 6 NgS !) 5 QgS Ra7
(other moves lose too e.g. S . . . h6 6 Qf6+ Kg8 7 Nh4 and 8
Nxg6 ! Or 5 . . Nb6 6 Qf6 + Kg8 7 NgS Ra8 8 Nxe6 ! with the fl
pawn being pinned in both cases) 6 Qf6+ Kg8 7 NgS Qd7 8 Rd8
b6 (Or 8 . . . Qc7 9 Nxh7 ! ) 9 Rxd7 Rxd7 1 0 b3 Bg7 1 1 Qf3 and in
the actual game Black now resigned.
In many openings a bishop is often pinned along the e fJ.le after a check
by rook or queen, leading to interesting situations, as in our next diagram.
.
Zita (black)
5 8 f The elements of chess tactics

White plays 1 NfS ! practically forcing I .
Kf8 (the knight cannot be
captured because of Nxd6+, since the bishop is pinne d, and if 1 . .
0-0-0 2 Qf3 ! Qc6 3 Qxd S ! QxdS 4 Nb6+ wins a piece) 2 Qf3 ! ReS
(Black's position would also be most uncomfortable after 2 . . . Ngf6
3 BgS !) 3 QxdS ReS 4 Nxe7 ! RxdS 5 NxdS with a decisive material
advantage (rook and two minor pieces against a queen).
Coming to the relative pin, we usually fmd that the principal aim ls
to win material. Consider the next position.
.
96
Bohrn (black)
Goldschmidt (white)
After 1
. NxgS ! 2 fxg5 Rxe3 ! 3 Qxe3 Bd4 White loses his queen,
because Black's" queen guards the bishop across the board.
.
97

ft .
.. . . .
.. .t4.J
E ft J .irD'i!Y
a 11
. . -
Lindblom (black)
Dieks (white)
It seems that White has no way of preventing mate on h l until a

pinning idea is seen as follows: I NxeS +! fxeS 2 BxcS piMing the
queen and answering 2 . . . Rg2+ by 3 Qxg2 since the pinned queen
cannot move.
(See next diagram) Although Black is a piece up, it is not easy to find
a winning plan because his queen is attacked and if it goes to d4 or dS

Dobsa
(black)
Gill (white)
White can obtain a draw by perpetual check with the well-known idea
2 Ng5 +! hxg5 3 Qh5 + Kg8 4 Qe8+ Kh7 5 Qh5 + etc. However, Black
found the winning plan beginning with the temporary piece sacrifice
1 . . . Qc6 ! 2 Qxe5 Bb7 when the knight dare not move because of the
mate on g2 . After 3 Re i Kh8! (Black must still be careful, as 3 . . .
ReS? loses to 4 Qxe8 ! Qxe8 5 Nf6+ and his queen is recaptured) and
White resigned because there is now no way of stopping . . . ReS
winning a piece.
A knight pinned against a queen is o fte n the source o f interesting

attacks. Here is a typical example, beginning with a piece sacrifice
1 Nxg5 ! hxg5 2 Bxg5 and it is clear how irritating a pin can be.
If
Black n o w plays 2 . . . Kg7 White has 3 f4 Ne7 4 fxe5 Nh7 5 Bf6 -r !

Kg8 6 Rf4 ! Nxf6 7 ex f6 Ng6 8 Qh5 Nxf4
9 Qh6 Ne6 10 8h3 Qd7 1 1

Bf5 mating. So Black tried 2 . . . Kh7 with the continuation 3 f4 e x f4
4 gxf4 Rg8 5 Qe 1 Qe7 6 f5 ! Bd7 (6 . . . NCB 7 Qh4 -r Kg7 8 Qh6 mate)

7 fxg6+ Rxg6 8 Qh4+ Resigns, because after 8 . . . Kg7
Rxf6
10 Qg5 +! i t i s n o w the rook which i s pinned !
Bxf6 +

Titis pin forms an important part of opening strategy. Here is an
example from the Four Knights' Game: 1 e4 eS 2 NO Nc6 3 Nc3 Nf6 4
BbS Bb4 5 0-0 0-0 6 d3 d6 7 BgS (the beginning of White's attempt
to tie Black down) Bxc3 8 bxc3 h6 9 Bh4 gS'? (a serious error in such
positions) 1 0 NxgS ! hxgS 1 1 BxgS and Black cannot shake off the
terrible pin. For example, if he tries 1 1 . . . Kg7 so that he can move his
queen away, 1 2 f4! gives White a decisive attack.
1 00
Vaganian (black)
Ribli (white)
Here is a more complicated example containing a brilliantly calculated
combination based on the pinning weapon. After the first surprise move
I Bxa6 ! ! the main variation runs 1 . . . Rxa6 2 QbS ! pinning both

knights, since 2 . . . Nee? loses to 3 Rxc8+ Nexc8 4 QeS mate (but
even without the mate, 4 Rxc8+ would win as well). The game con
tinued 1 . . . Nxa4 2 Bxb7 Nxc3 3 Rxc3 ! (not of course 3 Bxc8?
Nxe2+, yet another fork!) 3 . . . Nxd4! 4 Rxc8+ Rxc8 S Bxd4 Re i +
6 Kh2 Bxd4 7 Nxd4 Ra l 8 b S ! Resigns.
A rare but highly interesting form of the pin is the so-called cross-pin
illustrated in clear-cut fashion by our next example.
101
A.
I
f
N. Other (black)
..
-.
t
t
. ft .

E ft fl m ft
.\!(.
B IJ Horwitz (white)

White's position looks hopeless, as his queen is pinned by the black
rook. However, by 1 Rxe6 Rxe6? (he had to play 1 . . Qxe6 but he
can hardly be blamed for failing to see that the pinner will become
pinne d!) 2 b6+! Kxb6 (or 2 . . . Kb8 3 Rh8+ followed by mate) 3 Rh6!
Resigns. There we have it: the rook on e6 is pinned in two directions,
being unable to leave the third rank because of the king and losing the
queen after 3 . . . Rxh6.
.
1 02
Adorjan (black)
Bednarski (white)
The danger of the relative pin is that the pinner must be always on the
lookout for a possible move of the pinned piece. 1ltis is a case in point,
because after 1 . . . Nxd5 ! 2 Bxd8 Nb4 3 Qd2 Nxc2+ 4 K.f2 Nxa l ,
although Black has only a rook and minor piece for the queen, he
has a winning position. Not only is the white king insecure but Black's
pawn on d4 can become very strong. For example, after 5 Rxa I he
can play 5 . . . Rfxd8 6 Rxa7 Bb5 ! 7 Rxb7 Bxe2 8 Kxe2 d3+. TI1e
game continuation also proved interesting: 5 Be7 Nxb3 6 Qb4 Be6!
7 BxfB BxfB 8 Qxb7 Rc2 9 Ke 1 (otherwise the pin of the knight wins
material) 9 . . . Bc4 1 0 Ng3 d3 ! 1 1 Nfl Re2+ 1 2 Kd l Rxb2 and
White resigned because his position is hopeless e.g. 1 3 Ke 1 Re2+
14 Kd1 Na5 ! 1 5 Qb3 Bb3+ 1 6 Kc 1 Rc2+ 1 7 K b 1 Ba2+ 18 Ka 1
Nb3 + etc.
Here are two more examples of the unpinning theme.
(See next diagram) Although the white knight is pinned, Karpov calmly
ignores the fact and produces an attractive win as follows: 1 Nxe5 !
Qxe2 (if I .
dxe5 2 Qxe5+ and mate in two moves) 2 Rf7+ Kh6 3
Rh8+ Kg5 4 Rg8+ Kh4 (or 4 . . . Kh6 S Rg6 mate) 5 Ng6+ Kg5 6
Nxe7 + Kh4 7 Nf5 mate.
.

1 03
Zsoldos (black)
Karpov (white)
104
Verhaegen (black)
Wippgen (white)
Surprisingly, Black can afford to capture on the seemingly dangerous e

ftle because after 1 . . Nxe5! 2 Bxe5 he has the cunning zwischenzug
2 . . . Be4!! 3 f4 (or 3 dxe4 Qxe5 threatening . . . Qh2 mate) Qxe5 ! !
(the startling final point, for i f now 4 fxe5 Be3+ 5 Rf2 Rhl mate) 4
dxe4 Bxf4 5 Qf3 Bel + 6 Rf2 0-0-0 7 Nc3 Qh2+ 8 Kfl Bxf2 9 Resigns.
.
6. Discovered check
There is little need to explain this useful tactical device, except to say
that it illustrates the truth of the simple chess axiom that the threat is
stronger than the execution.
(See next diagram) White transposes into a won end-game by 1 Rxg7+!
Kxg7 2 Qxd7! Qxd7 3 e6+ Kg6 4 exd7 followed by 5 Rxc7 with a two
pawn advantage. The tremendous power that lies in the threat of a
discovered check is clearly demonstrated in our next position which the
reader will surely never forget.

Lacunza (black)
1 05
Kexel (white)
Szen (black)
1 06
A. N. Other (white)
After 1 .
Nc3 ! ! 2 Rxc3 Qxe4! 3 fxe4 Rxd4 Black has obtained what
problemists refer to as 'battery', aimed here at White's king. Since the
threat is 4 . . . Rdl mate, whilst at the same time the queen is under
attack, Black must emerge at least the exchange and two pawns to the
good.
.
Pachrnan (black)
1 07
Ujtelky (white)
Once again, the setting up of an R+B 'battery' is worth the sacrifice of
the queen by 1
Rxg3 ! ! 2 Qxb6 (clearly 2 Qxg3 loses at once to 2
.

. . . Bf4 and 2 Kxg3 Bf4+ 3 Kg4 Qd8 leads to a rapid mate) 2 . . . Bf4 !
We have a case o f not one but two 'batteries' a t work, the second one
appearing after . . . Rg2+, Kh l etc. Play continued 3 Rf2 (or 3 Rfl
Rg2+ 4 Kh1 Re2+! 5 Rf3 Bxf3 + 6 K.gl Be3+) 3 . . . Rg2+ 4 Kh 1
Rg8+ (even quicker is 4 . . . Rh2+! 5 K.g1 Rh 1 mate, but I was obsessed
by the following pretty fmish which illustrates our theme to perfection)
5 Rg2 Rxg2! (back again !) 6 Qxd6 BaS! and there is no way of prevent
ing the fatal (and longest!) discovered check winning the queen.
108
Kengis (black)
Again successive discovered checks from two bishops prove too much
for the defence. The first move 1 Rxf7! is obvious enough, and as 1
. . . Rxf7 2 Bxf7+ K.xf7 3 Qxh7+ is an easy win for White, play con
tinued I . . gxhS 2 Rxe7+ Kh8 3 exd6+ when Black is forced to
return material. There is little need for White to calculate much further,
but it is interesting to see how he pursues the mating attack to the end,
with the discovered check playing its full part: 3 . . . Nf6 4 Rd1 ! Bg4
(he must clear the back rank because after 4 . . . Qxd6 White's simplest
is 5 Bxf6+ Rxf6 6 Rxd6 Rxd6 7 ReS+ K.g7 8 Rg8 mate, a lovely fmish
well worth remembering) 5 gxf6 ! h6 (after 5 . . . Bxd1 6 f7+ mates
elegantly and thematically) 6 Rd3 Qxd6 7 NdS bS 8 Kh1 aS 9 BeS!
QcS 10 Nf4 Rg8 1 1 f7+ Rg7 12 f8(Q)+! Resigns. After 12 . . . Rxf8 1 3
Bxg7+ Kh7 14 Bxf8+ Kh8 1 5 Ng6 mate is a fitting conclusion t o a
splendid attack.
It is always fascinating to witness a series of discovered checks from
the same 'battery' with enemy pawns and pieces being picked up on the
way. l11e most famous example comes from an old oft-quoted game in
which the then Mexican Youth Champion sensationally defated a
World Champion.
.

Lasker (black)
I 09
Torre (white)
The relative pin of White's bishop rebounds against the pinner after 1
Bf6 ! ! Qxh5 2 Rxg7+ Kh8 3 Rxf7+ Kg8 (note that White already has a
draw whenever he wants it) 4 Rg7+ Kh8 5 Rxb7+ Kg8 6 Rg7+ Kh8 7
Rg5+ (wisely refusing to take the a pawn which would open a file for
the black rook) 7 . . . Kh7 8 Rxh5 Kg6 (winning back the piece but too
many pawns have been lost for Black to survive) 9 Rh3 Kxf6 I O Rxh6+
and won quickly.
1 10
it B
Study by Nirnzovitch
t
m
. .....[.

-
D.

We have already met the typical mating patterns with queen and
bishop, but this study adds a charming deflection of the bishop guard
ing the vital f7 square. 1 Bh7 + Kh8 2 Bc2+! (cutting off the action of
the rook on a2) 2 . . . Kg8 3 Rg2+! Bxg2 4 Bh7+ Kh8 5 Bg6+ Kg8 6
Qh7+ Kf8 7 Qxf7 mate.
7. Double check
We have seen the power of the double check in the play arising from
diagrams I 06 and I 07. Clearly this particular form of the discovered

check is the strongest at our disposal because it compels the enemy king
to move even if both the pieces jnvolved can be captured umpteen
times. Consider the following position.
Ill
Composed position
White is threatened by mate, but the power of the double check not
only saves him but wins the game as follows: 1 Qg7+! Kxg7 2 NfS+
Kg8 3 Nh6 mate. Note that after White's second move both his minor
pieces are en prise (i.e. can be captured) but the double check means
that neither of them can be taken.
1 12
A . N. Other (black)
Mingrelien (white)
A pretty combination based on the theme of double check leads to a

well-known mate. 1 Nc7+! Nxc7 2 Qd8+!! Kxd8 3 BgS+ Ke8 4 Rd8
mate.
8. Perpetual check/stalemate
Both these elements can be considered the last hope in othee lost
positions, a draw sometimes being achieved in truly surprising fashion.

The first is a common middle-game tactic whereas the second is mostly
encountered in the end-game.
Let us begin with two examples of typical perpetual checks.
1 13
I . . . Bxg3 ! 2 hxg3 Qxg3+ 3 Kh l Qh3 + 4 Kgl Qg3 + 5 Kfl Qxf3+ 6

Kel Qg3 + 7 Ke2 Qg2+ and there is no way White can avoid the draw.
l l4
Opocensky (white)
Kotov (black)
1 Bxg7! Kxg7 2 Qg5+ Kh8 (naturally 2 . . . Bg6?? fails to 3 Bxa8) 3
Qf6+ Kg8 4 Qg5 + Draw.
Our next two examples are a little more c om plicated, which is
understandable when a World Champion is at the receiving end of them
both.
(See next diagram) 1 . . . Nxe5! 2 Bxe5 Rxd6! (a pretty in troduction to
our saving device because now 3 Bxd6?? loses to 3 . . . Bd4 4 Qxd4
Qxel mate) 3 Bxg7! Kxg7 4 Rbl Rd8 5 Qb2+ Kg8 6 b7 Rb8 7 Qc2
Kg7 8 Qc8 (White has done his utmost to exploit his powerful passed
pawn in the usual way, but it is not enough to win, as will be seen .)
8 . . . Qa2! 9 Qc3 + (after 9 Qxb8 Qxb 1 + the white king cannot escape

115
Hubner (black)
Karpov (white)
the checks) 9 . . . Kg8 1 0 Ra l QdS 1 1 Qc8+ Kg7 and a draw was agreed
view of the continuation 1 2 Qxb8 Qd4+ 1 3 Kfl Qxa l + and again
there is no way to escape the checks.
in
1 16
Lengyel (black)
Karpov (white)
1 . . . Bxg2! 2 Kxg2 (not 2 Nxa6? Rb2! with a decisive attack because
the rook cannot be taken in view of . . . NO+) 2 . . . Rxb4! 3 Qxb4
Qf3 + 4 Kgl Qxd l + 5 Nfl Nf3 + 6 Kg2 Ne l + and both sides must
accept the draw by perpetual check.
Our next diagram shows us a very useful drawing mechanism which
illustrates the power of a rook on the seventh rank restricting the
enemy king.
(See next diagram) 1 Nf6+ Kf8 (the point is that 1 . . Kh8? allows
2 Rh7 mate) 2 Nh7+ Ke8 3 Nf6+ Kf8 (3 . . . Kd8? 4 Rd7 mate) 4
Nh7 + again with perpetual check. Matters would be even simpler for
White if he had two rooks on the seventh instead of the knigh.t, since
the rook continues checking along the rank.
.
The elements of chess tactics 1 69

117
Composed position
- . .

.lLJ.

i. . . .
. . .
1 18

IJ
ft .-'tll
*
II
. . .
Janowski (black)
Steinitz (white)
It seems that White is lost because he cannot prevent . . . Rb3 winning

his queen. However, he has the resource of perpetual check which saves
him : 1 fxeS! Rb3 2 Rxh6+ Kg? 3 Rh7+ K.f8 4 Rh8+ Ke7 5 Rh7+ Ke6
6 Rh6+ Draw agreed. AJ 6 . . . KxeS? allows the pretty pawn mate by
7 f4, Black is forced to settle for 6 . . . Ke7 7 Rh7 + K.f8 8 Rh8+ Kg?
9 Rh7+ Kg8 1 0 Bd5+! Kf8 1 1 Rh8+ Kg? 1 2 Rh7+ etc.
In our final two examples we see this theme combined with the
stalemate idea.
1 19
Hettenyi (black)
. .
. . i. .

. ....
. it

..
Veresov (white)

I Nd5+! (White must first eliminate his own superfluous piece, for if
now I . . exd5 2 Qf8+! Kd7 3 Qe7+! he either has perpetual check or,
fter 3 . . . Kxe7 stalemate) 1 . . . Kd6 2 Qf8+ Ke5 3 Qg7+ Kd6 4
Qf8+ Kc6 5 Qc8+ Kb5 6 Qb7+ Kc4 7 Qb4+ Kd3 8 Qc3+ Ke2 9
Qb2+ Kfl 1 0 Qcl + Kfl 1 1 Qc5+! Kg2 1 2 Ne3+ Kh2 1 3 Ng4+ Kh1 14
Qc l + Kg2 1 5 Ne3+ Kf2. 1 6 Qfl +! Kxe3 17 Qc 1 + Kd3 18 Qc3+ Ke2
19 Qd2+ Kfl 20 Qe 1 + Kg2 21 Qgl + Draw. A lot of checks, but the
ideas are clear.
.
1 20

ft m

. ft .itll
B D i

-'t
Vaisman (black)
Rodriguez (white)
1 . Nfl+! 2 Bxf2 (not 2 Kh2? Qh4+ 3 Kg1 Qg3 + followed by mate)

2 . . . Qh3 +! 3 Kgl (3 Bxh3 stalemate) 3 . . . Qg4+ 4 Kh2 Qh3+! Draw.
.
9. Trapping a piece
Every beginner knows the trap of a piece on the edge of the board
which is shown in our next diagram.
121
Composed positions

In the left half the black knight and in the right half the white bishop
have paid the penalty for capturing a rook's pawn and are now hemmed
in by the pawns. Either piece can be picked up by the enemy king going
to b 1 or g7 respectively, or of course by any other available piece. How
ever, pieces have been known to be trapped even in the middle of the
board as our next two examples illustrate.
1 22
Hiller (black)
Hortner (white)
Black first forces the knight on d4 to move to its only available square
by 1 . . . e S ! 2 fxeS dxeS 3 NfS with the hidden idea of really trapping
the bishop on f3 after 3 . . . BxfS 4 exfS e4 when White resigned.
Even the powerful rook can sometimes be caught in tltis way:
1 23
lvkov (black)
Darga (white)
White mistakenly played 1 Re7? in order to answer 1 . . . BdS by 2 Nh4
but the sequel 1 . . . KfB ! 2 Rxe6 Kf7 won the exchange and the game
for Black.
Superficially it may seem that the enormous strength of the most
powerful piece, the queen, would protect her from such trouble, but
in reality the opposite is the case. Precisely because of her power, the

queen is often used for the long-range capture of pawns in the opening
stages and is in fact more vulnerable to capture than any other piece.
Take the famous trap of the queen in the oft-quoted game Botvinnik
Spielmann (Moscow, 1 93 S) which opened with the Caro-Kann Defence:
I e4 c6 2 d4 dS 3 exdS cxdS 4 c4 Nf6 5 Nc3 Nc6 6 BgS Qb6 !? 7 cxdS
Qxb2? (7 . . . Nxd4!) 8 Re i ! Nb4 (other moves are no better: material
must be lost in view of the queen's desperate situation e.g. 8 . . . NbS
9 Na4 Qb4+ 1 0 Bd2 and the bishop on c8 cannot be guarded, or 8 . . .
Nd8 9 Bxf6 exf6 1 0 Bb5 + Bd7 1 1 Rc2! Qb4 1 2 Qe2+ Be7 1 3 Bxd7+
Kxd7 14 Qg4+ and 1 5 Qxg7 with advantage) and now after 9 Na4!
Qxa2 10 Bc4 Bg4 1 1 Nf3 Bxf3 12 gxf3 Spielmann had to resign, since
he can only save his queen by giving up a piece with 1 2 . . . Qa3 1 3 Rc3
Nc7+ etc.
1 24
Suradiredja (black)
Biyasas (while)
The black queen's only flight square is c3, normally covered in such
positions by the move NbS which is impossible here. However, White
has an excellent alternative in 1 Re3 ! not only threatening to win the
queen by the immediate 2 Rb3 but also planning the game continuation
1 . . . NaS 2 Rb 1 Qxa2 3 Re2! again winning the queen. For this
reason the b2 pawn is often referred to as 'poisoned', but of course this
is not the only square which has been the scene of the queen's capture.
We fmish with two examples of a queen being trapped on h6.
(See next diagram ) Black seemingly falls into a trap himself by playing
1 . . . QxfS+! 2 Bc2 when 2 . . . Qf3 would allow 3 Qxh7+ and 4 Qh8
mate. However, after the brilliant 2 . . . Qg6! 3 Bxg6 fxg6 the white
queen is trapped and will be captured by . . . Ng4 with a won ending
for Black. The continuation was 4 Re i Ng4 5 Rxe7 Nxh6 6 gxh6 ReB
7 Rg7+ Kh8 8 Rxb7 h4 9 Rf7 Rg8 10 Resigns.
The elements of chess taclics I 73

Lepison
1 25
(black)
Delier (white)
1 26
After
I .
Pachman
(black)
Dornn i tz
(white)
. Kh7 ! White's queen is suddenly trapped and the attempt to
free her proved unsuccessful : 2 g4 f3 ! 3 g5 Qf4 4 Bfl Rh8 ! ! and White

resigned, since there is no defence against the threat of 5 . . . g6 ! 6
Qxh6+ Kg8 winning the queen.
I 0.
An
unusual situation!
Piece elimination
By this we mean the removal, if necessary by sacrifice, of an enemy

piece which has an important defensive or attacking role. Here is
simple example :
(See next diagram) The black bishop on f6 is guarding the important

pawn on g5 , so I Rxf6 ! eliminates it at once. As I
. Qxf6 fails to 2
Bxd7, and I . . Bxh3 to 2 Qf7+ Kh8 3 Qf8 mate, the game continuation was I . . . Nxf6 2 Qxg5 + Kf7 (2 . . . Kh8 3 Rxd6 and Black must
.
lose a piece) 3 Rxd6 h6 4 Qf4 B xh3 (or 4 . . . Kg7 5 eS etc.) 5 Rxd8

Rxd8 6 eS Resigns.
The removal of a fianchettoed bishop guarding the king is one of the
most common tactical preludes to launching an attack and is often

1 27
Rossetto (black)
Uhlmann (white)
even planned in the opening stages e.g. I e4 c5 2 Nc3 Nc6 3 g3 g6 4
Bg2 Bg7 (the closed system of the Sicilian Defence) 5 d3 e6 6 Be3 d6
7 Nf3 ! Nge7 8 Qd2 Nd4 9 0-0 0-0 10 Bh6! etc. Note that White deliber
ately selects the unnatural-looking 7 Nf3 rather than 7 Ne2 because in
the latter case the move IO Bh6 would lose to I O
. Bxh6 I I Qxh6
Nxc2 etc., whereas in the given line White would then have I 2 Ng5 !
followed by mate.
TI1at was an example of a defending piece being eliminated without
any sacrifice. Contrast the following:
..
1 28
.J.Ii . 11
Velimirovic (black)
ll .t

ll ft rl .t
.
. .
ft D *n o
!i! !
rrfi
, r4h
d W Trifunovic (white)
Almost without a moment's hesitation a good chess-player would

eliminate at once the vitally important bishop on g7. After 1 Rxg7 !
Kxg7 2 Nxe5 the long a i -h8 diagonal is opened up for White's power
ful bishop on b2. Since Black would end up a pawn down if he returns
the exchange by capturing on e5, the game concluded: 2 . . . Nf6 3
Rgi + Kh8 4 Nn +! Rxn 5 Qxe8+ Rf8 6 Qe5 Qxe5 7 Bxe5 87 8 f4
Rf7 9 Rg5 Resigns.

In many openings it is a bishop on e2 or e7 which is eliminated, as
for example in the game Pachman-Griinfeld ( 1 949) which went: 1 d4
dS 2 c4 dxc4 (the Queen's Gambit Accepted) 3 Nf3 Nf6 4 e3 e6 S
Bxc4 cS 6 0-0 a6 7 Qe2 bS 8 Bd3 Nbd7? (8 . . . cxd4 ! ) 9 a4! b4 1 0
Nbd2 Bb7 1 1 Nc4 Be 7 (this bishop at the moment prevents the entry
of the white knight on d6, so I now proceed to exchange it) 1 2 e4!
cxd4 1 3 eS NdS 1 4 BgS ! Qc7 1 S Rac l NcS 1 6 Bb I 0.0 1 7 Bxe7 Qxe7
1 8 Nd6. This knight paralyses Black's position to such an extent that he
feels compelled to give up the rook for it without sufficient compensa
tion. The game ended: 1 8 . . . d3 1 9 Qd 1 Rac8 20 N xc8 Rxc8 2 1 Rc4 !
aS 22 Bxd3 Nb6 23 Rd4 Nb xa4 24 Bc2 Nb6 2S Qd2 Bxf3 26 gxf3
Nbd7 27 Rfd 1 g6 28 f4 Rc7 29 Qe3 Nb6 30 Qg3 Ned? 3 1 Bb l Na4 32
R4d2 N4cS 33 h4! a4 34 hS Kg7 3S hxg6 hxg6 36 Kg2 ReS 37 fS !
exfS 38 BxfS ! Resigns.
1 29
Kopriva (black)
Pachman (white)
The obvious I QhS + Kh7 2 BxgS would aUow Black to set up a solid
defensive position by 2 . . . Qe8 3 Qh4 Qg6 etc., so White decides to
remove the black knight which is defending the vital h6 pawn. TI1e idea
is to play I Be2 ! ! intending to transfer this piece to fS before going to
hS with the queen. If Black tries to prevent this by I . . Nf6 2 Bg4 !
Nxg4 3 Qxg4 then White has achieved his aim and play could go 3
Qd7 4 Qh5 + Kh7 S BxgS Qf7 6 Bxh6 ! QxhS 7 RxhS D xh6 8 Rbh l etc.
For this reason Black decided to retain his knight and aUow the infll
tration of the bishop, with the continuation : I . . . Kh7 2 Bg4 Nc7 3
BfS + K.h8 4 QhS Ne8 (or 4 . . . Bf6 S Qg6 Ne8 6 Rxh6 +! Nxh6 7 Rh 1
winning a t once) S Rh2! Bf6 6 Qg6 Rg7 7 Rxh6+! Nxh6 8 Qxh6+ Kg8
9 8e6 + KfB 1 0 Rfl (a decisive pin since now 1 0 . . . Ke7 loses to 1 1
Rxf6 ! ) 1 0 . . . Raa7 1 1 BxgS Raf7 1 2 NbS ! Ke7 1 3 Rxf6! Resigns ( 1 3
. . . Nxf6 1 4 Bxf6+ Rxf6 I S Qxg7 + Ke8 1 6 Nc7+ winning the queen).
.
76 I The elements
of
chess tactics
1 30
Podgaes (black)
Bednarski (white)
It is difficult to realise that the weak point in White's position will turn
out to be his bishop on cl which is protected by both the queen and
rook! Nevertheless, in a mere three moves Black succeeds in eliminating
these two pieces as follows: I . . . Ng3 ! 2 fxg3 Qxfl +! 3 Qxfl Rxfl +
4 Kxfl Rxcl + 5 Ke2 Bxb2 6 Resigns.
1 1 . Unprotected pieces
Any unprotected piece can be viewed as a potential tactical weakness.
131
Jovcic (black)
Planinc (white)
White calmly played 1 0-0 ignoring the seemingly dangerous tlueat of
1 . . . Nc2 which Black wrongly assessed as playable for him (he should
try l . . . f5, but not 1 . . . h6 which allows the lovely fmish 2 Qh5 ! g6
3 Nxe4 ! ! gxh5 4 Nf6 mate). The sequel was 2 Qh5 ! Ng6 (or 2 . . . g6
3 Qd1 ! Nxa1 4 Bxh8 and the knight is trapped) 3 Nxf7! Kxf7 4 Qd5 +
Ke8 5 Qxe4+ Kd7 6 Qf5+ Ke8 7 Qxc2. Magic? No, just th logical
exploitation of an unprotected piece.

1 32
Flohr (block)
Alekhine (white)
Alekhine sets up a splendid trap to exploit the position of the black
queen by playing I eS! Since 1 . . . fxeS weakens his pawns, Black can
not resist the plausible 1 . . . fS?? failing to realise that the main point
of White's cunning plan was to prevent Black's queen from going to d6
after 2 ReS ! whereas after 2 . . . Qxe3 White i1as the winning zwischen
zug 3 Rxd8+ before recapturing the queen.
1 2. Une-opening
To increase the effectiveness of our pieces, we have to give them more
space in which to manoeuvre. That is why we usually post knights in
the centre of the board where they have greater control (of course this
precept must not be applied too mechanically , for the knight is some
times required for a specific attacking or defensive role on one of the
wings!). Rooks and bishops need open ranks, flies and diagonals to
achieve their full potential. Here are three examples of the opening of
files for the rooks in attacks on the king.
1 33
Pilnik (black)
Pachrnan (white)

Whilst Black is preparing to open a me against the white king by . . . b5,
White's better development has already given him a clear initiative on
the king's side. How must he now proceed? The obvious opening of the
h file by 1 hxg6? fxg6 ! would allow Black to set up an adequate
defence of h7 by . . . Be8 and . . . Bh8, so White opts for the far more
dangerous opening of the g file by sacrificing a piece with 1 Nf5 ! As
White is threatening 2 Nxg7 Kxg7 3 h6+ winning a piece, and 1 . . .
Ne8 loses to 2 Ne7+! Kh8 3 hxg6 fxg6 4 Qh2 followed by 5 Nxg6+!,
Black is forced to accept the offer. After 1 . . . gxf5 2 gxf5 Black sur
prisingly cannot hold on to his extra piece e.g. if 2 . . . Ne8 3 Rdg1 f6
4 h6! fxg5 5 hxg7 Nxg7 6 Qxg5 Be8 7 f6 etc. For this reason Black
decides to block the g me by giving back a knight on g6 and then turn
his attention to the queen's side. Play continued : 2 . . . Be8 3 Rdg1 Ng6
4 f4! (an important attacking move which begins a new assault on g6.
Black cannot, for example, reply 4 . . . exf4 5 e 5 ! dxeS 6 fxg6 fxg6 7
hxg6 hxg6 8 Bxf6 Bxf6 9 Bxg6 etc., and of course 4 . . . Nxf4? loses at
once to 5 Bxf6) 4 . . . b5 5 hxg6 fxg6 6 fxg6 hxg6 7 fS ! bxc4 8 Bfl
(not wasting a vital tempo by 8 Bxc4? Rb4! and 9 . . . Rab8) 8 . . . Ra7
9 fxg6 Rab7 1 0 Bxf6 Bxf6 (he has no time for 1 0 . . . Rxb2 1 1 Qxb2
Rxb2 12 Bxg7 ! Rb7 13 Bf6 with the well-known mating set-up) 1 1
Dh3 ! Bd7 (Black dare not allow the check on e6 e.g. 1 1 . . . Rxb2 1 2
Be6+ Kf8 1 3 Qh6+ Qg7 14 Qxg7+ Bxg7 I S Rfl + Ke7 1 6 Rh7
winning) 1 2 Qf2! Rf8 (threatening 1 3 . . . BgS + winning the queen. If
instead 1 2 . . . Qd8 1 3 Bxd7 Rxd7 14 QfS Rbb7 1 5 Qe6+ Kf8 16
g7+! Bxg7 1 7 Rh8+! Bxh8 1 8 Rg8 mate, or here 14 . . . Qe7 15 g7!
Bxg7 1 6 Qh7+ Kf8 1 7 Rf1 + Ke8 1 8 Qg8+ Bf8 1 9 Rh7 ! winning) 1 3
g7 ! Dg5 + (or 1 3 . . . Bxg7 14 Rxg7+! Kxg7 1 5 Rg1 + etc.) 1 4 RxgS
Rxf2 1 5 Be6+ Resigns ( 1 5 . . . Bxe6 16 Rh8+ Kf7 1 7 g8=Q+ mating).
1 34
Vistaeckis (black)
Gromer (white)

One of the disadvantages of moving a pawn to h3 or h6 is that it often
allows our opponent to open the g me by pushing forward his g pawn,
even with sacrifice, as here : 1 g4 ! Nxg4 ( 1 . . . Nh7 ! trying to keep the
position blocked offered better defensive chances) 2 Rgl Ndf6 (the
power of the open me is seen at once after 2 . . . Ngf6 3 Bxh6 etc.) 3
0.0-0 eS (threatening 4 . . . e4 S Bxe4 Nxe4 6 Qxe4 Nxf2) 4 NxeS!
NxeS S Qxe5 Bd6 (even worse is 5 . . . Bxh3 6 Rxg7 +! Kxg7 7 Rgl +
Kh8 8 Qf4 etc.) 6 Qxd4 8xh2 7 Rxg7 +! Kxg7 8 Bxh6+! Kh8 (or 8 . .
Kxh6 9 Qe3+ Kg? 1 0 QgS + Kh8 1 1 Qh6+ Kg8 1 2 NgS ! Bf4+ 1 3
Kb l etc.) 9 Qh4 Resigns.
.
1 35
Alekhine (black)
Stahlberg (white)
Black's plan of opening the f me proves much more effective than
White's opening of the a me. Play went: 1 . . . f4 ! 2 aS fxe3 3 Qxe3 NfS
4 Qc3 d6 5 axb6 axb6 6 Ne l e5 ! (note how Black follows the correct
strategic procedure of placing his pawns on black squares to avoid
blocking the lines for his bishop, whilst at the same time creating a
strong-point for his knight on d4) 7 Ra7 Nd4 8 Qe3 Rd7 ! (the best
moves often achieve several aims at the same time. Here the rook not
only defends the bishop but also prepares to double up on the f file)
9 Ra2 Rdf7 10 f3 Rf4 1 1 Bd3 QhS (threatening 1 2 . . . e4! 1 3 Qxd4
exf3) 1 2 Bfl QgS ! (now threatening 1 3 . . . Rxf3 !) 13 Raf2 h6! and
tlus 'quiet' move guarding the queen forces the win. If now 14 Qd2
Bxf3 ! so White played 1 4 Kh 1 Rxf3 ! and resigned, the point being that
1 5 Qxg5 allows the deadly zwisciJenzug I S . . . Rxf2 when it is all
over.
(See next diagram) Here the c me is not fully open, so White must
prepare the key move bS if he wishes to penetrate into Black's position.
The master strategist Botvinnik makes it all look so easy. 1 Rae 1 f6
(or else White's knight will head for eS via c4) 2 Nb l ! Bd7 3 Na3 Nc7

1 36
Vidmar (black)
Botvinnik (white)
4 b5 ! (even though it involves a pawn sacrifice !) 4 . . . Nxb5 S Bxb5
cxb5 6 Rc7 ReS (Black must prevent the doubling of the rooks on the
7th rank by Rb7 + and Rcc7 etc.) 7 Rb7+ Ka8 8 Rxd7! Rxc l 9 NxbS
(threatening 10 Rxa7+ Kb8 1 1 Rb7 + Ka8 1 2 Nc7+, and thus forcing
Black to keep his rooks doubled on the c me which totally restricts his
freedom of movement) 9 . . . Rhc8 1 0 Rxg7 h6 1 1 Rxa7+ Kb8 1 2
Rb7+ Ka8 1 3 g4 e 5 1 4 d5 R 1 c5 1 5 Ra7+ Kb8 1 6 Rb7 + Ka8 1 7
Rxb6 Rb8 1 8 Rxb8+ Kxb8 1 9 a7+ Kb7 20 Nd6+ Kxa7 2 1 Ne8 Kb6
22 Nxf6 and White won in a few moves by advancing his pawns.
Makarow (white)
137
Karasev (black)
Uke rooks, bishops too need open lines. By 1 e5 ! the hitherto passive
bishop. After I
d4 ! White dares not play 2 Nxe4 fxe4 when the d
. . . dxe5 (or 1 . . . fxe5 2 Bd5 + Kh8 3 Bxg7+! Rxg7 4 Rxg7 Qxh4 5
Rg8 mate) 2 Bd5+ Kh8 3 Bxg7 ! Rxg7 4 Rxg7 Kxg7 5 Qh6+ Resigns,
because it is mate next move.
(See next diagram) Again a pawn advance opens a diagonal for the
bishop. After 1 . . . d4! White dare not play 2 Nxe4 fxe4 whe':l the d
pawn would be too strong, so he tries 2 exd4 Ng5 ! (a typical tactical
.

1 38
Najdorf (black)
Rossetto (white)
idea with the inunediate threat of 3 . . . Nh3 mate, revealing the tremen
dous power of Black's bishop on c6) 3 h4 Re3 ! ! {threatening 4 . . .
Rxg3 +!) 4 Kh2 f4 ! 5 f3 (5 fxe3 fxg3 + 6 Kg i Nh3 mate) 5 . . . fxg3 +
6 Kg2 Qe6 ! 7 hxg5 Rxe2+ 8 Kxg3 Qd6+ 9 f4 Rg2 + I O Kh3 Qe6+ I I
f5 Rxf5 I 2 Re I Rf3 + I 3 Resigns (it is mate in three).
I 3 . tine-closure
The idea here is to restrict the activity of enemy pieces by cutting off
vital lines. Our next example is a perfect illustration of this theme.
1 39
Propovic (blilck)
lvanovic (white)
In view of the reduced material, Black's position could hardly be
imagined as already completely lost! In fact, after a mere two moves: 1
h6+ Kh8 2 8e6 ! ! Black resigned. It is instructive to see why he felt
compelled to do so. White's beautiful fmal move cuts off the e me from
the black queen, which means (a) the black bishop is now attacked and
cannot be protected by the queen, since 2 . . . Qxe6 loses to 3 Qf8+
Qg8 4 Qf6+ followed by mate, {b) nor can it be guarded by the pawn,

2 . . . d5 allows 3 Qe5 + followed by mate, (c) nor can it move away
without opening the rank to White's queen for 3 Qd4+ and mate next
move (note that the black queen can no longer interpose on e5 !). A
truly artistic fmish.
as
1 40
Reinhardt (black)
Sahlmann (white)
The problem is simple : the white bishop needs to get to e4 and this
square is guarded by the black queen. So 1 Rd4! is the answer, blocking
the rank. After 1 . exd4 2 Be4 fS 3 gxf6 Rxf6 4 Bxh7 + Kf7 5 Qg6+1
Resigns, because 5 . . . Kf8 6 Rxf6+ Bxf6 7 Qxf6 + Ke8 8 Bg6 + leads
to a rapid mate.
.
141
Spassky (black)
Dvoris (white)
Even a World Champion can miscalculate a mixture of line-opening and
line-closure with a deflection and pin thrown in for good measure.
Spassky , in a winning position, chose the faulty 1 . . Qxc3? and lost as
follows : 2 Bc4+! ! Rxc4 (or 2
Qxc4 3 Rxd8+ Kh7 4 QxfS+ g6 S
Qd7+ followed by mate) 3 Rxd8+ Kf7 4 Qxf5+ Qf6 5 Re7+! Re.signs
(S
. Kxe7 6 Qd7 mate concludes neatly).
.
The elements of chess tactics f 83

1 42
Decker (black)
Eisinger (white)
We have already seen various tactical elements appearing within the

same combination, which is of course hardly surprising. Here is a splen
did example of a line-closure plus a decoy and a couple of forks. Who
could ask for more? White begins with the startling 1 Ne6 ! ! when the
capture by rook or knight would block the queen's diagonal allowing
2 Qxf5 mate. Black could escape with the loss of a pawn only by play
ing 1 . . . Kf7! but not 1 . . . Qf7? which loses to 2 exf5+ Qxf5 3
Qxf5+ Kxf5 4 Nxg7+ forking the king and rook. In the game Black
tried 1 . . . Qxe6 with the continuation 2 Re 1 ! {the point of the com
bination, gaining time now that the queen has been lured to the e me.
If now 2 . . . Qf7 3 Rxe8 Qxe8 White again has 4 Qxf5 mate) 2 . . .
Qe4 3 Rxe4 dxe4 4 gxf5 + Kxf5 5 Qb5 + Resigns, since the king and
rook are caught in another fork.
1 4. The passed pawn

TI1e value of passed pawns is best seen in the end-game where the
reduced material means there are fewer pieces to prevent their advance.
However, the passed pawn can also prove a decisive factor in many
middle-game situations. .
(See next diagram) After 1 Qxh6 ! Rxh6 2 gxh6 the passed pawn is
enormously strong, supported as it is by the rook. It is threatening to
queen in two moves, so 2 . . . Nf8 3 Nf6 + Ke7 is forced. Now Whi te
brings another pawn into the attack with 4 d 5 ! Qa5 5 d6+ Kd8 when
6 h7 wins at once because 6 . . . Nxh7 7 Rxh7 leads to mate on h8. In
the game play went 6 . . . Qxa2 7 h8=Q Resigns.
84 I The clements of chess tactics

1 43
Blindberg (black)
Lunddahl (white)
144
Schachnasov (black)
Meljikov (white)
We have already seen pawn promotion linked with a mating attack in
position 1 3 3 . Here White first removes the blockading piece by I i
Qxg8+! Kxg8 and then opens up the fatal diagonal for . his bishop
with 2 Nf6+! Bxf6 3 Bxe6+ Kh7 and finally begins a long but not
difficult 'king hunt' ending the game as follows : 4 g8=Q+ Kxh6 5 BfS !
Bg7 6 Qh7+ KgS 7 Qg6+ Kf4 8 Qg4 + Ke3 9 Qe2+ Kd4 (or 9
Kf4
1 0 Qf2+ KgS 1 1 Qg3 + Kf6 1 2 Qg6 + Ke7 1 3 Qxg7+ and mate in two
moves) 1 0 NbS + ! axbS 1 1 Qd2+ Kxc4 1 2 Be6+ and mate next move.
.
1 45
Alekhine (black)
Bogoljubow (white)

A justly famous example of pawn promotion: I . . b4! ! 2 Rxa8 (be t te r
is 2 Qa l but Black then has a strong passed pawn with no material
deficit) 2 . . . bxc3 3 Rxe8 c2! (the whole point of the combination,
allowing White to capture the last rook with check!) 4 Rxf8+ Kh7 5
Nf2 c i ::::Q + 6 Nfl Ne l (threatening mate in one!) 7 Rh2 Qxc4 and
although White momentarily has two rooks for the queen, the new
mating threat of . . . Bb5 forces him to give up the exchange. After 8
Rb8 Bb5 9 Rxb5 Qxb5 Black won quickly.
.
1 46
Averbach (black)
At first sight it looks as if White's passe d pawn is doomed and that

Black will then even have the better of it in view of White's misplaced
rook. And yet White troduces the magnificent move 1 Rh6! ! which
wins the game for him. As Black obtains a lost queen ending after I . . .
gxh6 2 Qd4 Kg8 3 Qd5+ and 4,Qxc6, he blockaded the pawn by I
.
. . . Qd7 only to find that 2 Re6! was playable, since 2 . . . Qxe6 3 d7
Rd6 4 d8::::Q + Rxd8 5 Qxd8+ Qg8 6 Qxb6 led to a won end-game.
The reader may well ask how the passed pawn came into all this,
since it disappeared long before the fmish. However, one of the passed
pawn's main strengths is that it can be exploited indirectly by com
pelling the opponent to take measures to prevent its advance, thus
diverting his pieces from other important work. The passed pawn can
even be sacrificed in order to obtain some other advantage. Here is an
excellent example of this.
(See next diagram) I d6 ! is not yet a pawn sacrifice because Black dare
not capture the pawn in view of the subsequent pin on the d file ( I
. . . N or Bxd6 2 Bxd6 followed b y 3 Qd5) 1 . . . Ng7! (planning to
regroup his forces by . . . Be6 and . . . Rd7 when the d pawn will surely
fall, so it is clear that Szabo had already envisaged the coming pawn
sacrifice) 2 d7! 8xd7 3 Qe4 (threatening both Qxb7 and Bc4 and thus

147
Wade (black)
Szabo (white)
forcing Black's pieces into passive positions) 3 . . . QcS 4 Bc4 Be6 S
Rfe I ! Bxc4 6 Qxc4 Nb4 7 NbS NeS S a3 Na6 (unfortunately for
Black, his knight cannot go to the far better post on c6 because of the
variation S . . . Nc6 9 Bd6 Bxd6 10 Nxd6 Nxd6 1 1 Rxd6 QfS 1 2 Nh4
QgS 13 Rd7 Rf8 1 4 ReS! etc., revealing power of the rooks released
by the pawn sacrifice) 9 h4! Nc7 10 Bxc7 Nxc7 1 1 Nd6 Bxd6 1 2 Rxd6
Kg7 (if 1 2 . . . NeS 1 3 Rde6 and 1 4 Re7 wins) 1 3 hS! (threatening h6+
which Black cannot prevent because 13 . . . gxhS allows 14 Nh4!) 1 3
. . . NeS 14 h6+ K f8 I S Rde6 Qc7 1 6 b41 Nd6 (not of course 1 6 . . .
cxb4? 1 7 Qxb4+, but 1 6 . . . b6 1 7 Qe4 is also good for White) 1 7 Qc3
NfS I S NgS ! Nd4 1 9 Nxf7 Nxe6 20 Rxe6 ReS 2 1 NgS ! Resigns.
The creation of a passed pawn is usually a strategic problem arising
from the correct exploitation of a pawn majority, a subject we shall
discuss later. However, there are also various tactical methods of
creating a passe d pawn, one of the commonest being through the
exchange of pieces. In the following example White creates two passed
pawns by forcing exchanges which are to his advantage.
14S
Fine (black)
Alekhine (white)
The elements of chess tactics f 8 1

1 NdS ! (threatening Ne7+ and thus practically forcing Black to exchange
pieces) 1 . . . BxdS 2 exdS NcS 3 BfS ! Rd8 4 Kc3 (not of course 4
BxcS? Rxd5+) 4 . . . b6 5 axb6 axb6 6 BxcS! bxcS (in rapid succession
the two passed pawns appear as if by magic, and White has little trouble
exploiting this advantage) 7 b6 Nd6 8 Bd7! Rxd7? (losing quickly, but
there is no defence to Bc6 and b7) 9 Ra8+ Ne8 1 0 Rxe8 mate.
Two connected passed pawns can be extremely powerful and sacri
fices are often possible to bring them about. Here is a typical example.
1 49
_._. ft .
. - .
t ll t ll
II
. . .
. . .
Kiamer (black)
Popov (white)
I Rxc4! dxc4 2 Bxc6 (threatening the deadly e7 wruch Black manages

to stop but at the cost of losing all his pawns) 2 . . . c3 3 Ke2 Rgl 4
Kd3 Re i 5 dS Kg7 6 Bxa4 Kf6 7 Kxc3 Resigns.
I SO
Alekhine (black)
Euwe (white)
White could win a pawn at once by I QxaS but it would be difficult
to exploit this material advantage because Black could immediately
blockade the c pawn by I . . . NeS ! So Euwe decides to first give up a
pawn himself to create two connected passed pawns wruch win the
game comfortably for him: 1 c6 ! bxc6 (after 1 . . . Qxc6 2 Nd6 wins

the exchange) 2 Qxa5 Ne5 3 Qd2 Qa6 4 a5 Nxd3 5 Nc5 ! (but not 5
Bfl Nxe 1 6 Bxa6 Nf3 +) 5 . . . Nxc5 6 Bxc5 Qb5 7 Bxe7 ReS S Bfl Qb3
9 .Ra3 Qd5 1 0 b7 RbS 1 1 a6 and White won quickly.
151
Letelier (black)
Smyslov (white)
This is a similar situation. By skilful tactics Smyslov creates two con
nected passed pawns, ignoring the fact that his opponent meanwhile
picks up an extra pawn. Quality rather than quantity is the main factor
in such situations. Play proceeded 1 a6! (killing two birds with one
stone, clearing the way for his c pawn whilst at the same time eliminat
ing a guard of the knight on c6) 1 . . . bxa6 2 Rc7+ Kg6 3 Rd7 Ne7 4
Bb4 NfS S RxdS Ne3 6 RdS Nxg2 7 dS Rb6 S Bc5 Rb7 9 ReS ! Nh4 1 0
Ke2 NfS 1 1 Rc6+ Kh S 1 2 d 6 Rd7 1 3 Rc7 Resigns.
1 52
Romanishin (black)
Peresepkin (white)
The normal play with two connected passed pawns against a bishop is
to advance them so that they cannot be blockaded, in this case by e6
followed by f6 and then f7. However, since 1 e6 falls to 1 . . . Bx:6
The elements
of
chess tactics 1 89
White resorts to combinative play as follows: 1 f6! Ke8? (preventing

Rd8+ but missing White's subtle Idea. Best Is 1
Ra8! but 2 Rd7 is
then strong for White ) 2 e6! ! RxgS 3 Rd8+! ! Kxd8 4 exf7 Resigns, as
there is no way of stopping the pawn, despite .Black's great material
advantage.
Chapter 4
Attack and
defence
Usually during a game one side possesses the initiative and the other
side must try to con'tain this whilst at the same time preparing his own
counter-action. The problems of attack and defence are so many-sided
that they can hardly be summarised in a number of specific principles.
In both situations a player needs to have a thorough knowledge of all
the basic tactical elements we have already seen. For this reason, in this
chapter we shall restrict ourselves to an examination of typical ways of
attacking the king, by no means the only but probably the commonest
and most popular form of the attack, and we shall then offer the reader
a few principles of defence to guide him through this part of the game
which can prove so difficult to handle.
We have already emonstrated how vulnerable a king can be when he
lacks the support of his pawn chain and is hunted across the board.
The protection that the king enjoys turns out to be one of the most
important factors in selecting our method of attack, so it is convenient
to divide our material into three parts: 1 ) the king in the centre, 2) the
weakened king position, and 3) breaking up the king position. Then, to
conclude this chapter, 4) methods of defence.
1 . The king in the centre
One of the first pieces of advice given to a beginner is to castle in good
time. This not only secures his own king position but is normally
essential if he is to develop all his pieces and his rooks in particular. If
our opponent neglects this rule, it is worthwhile to fmd tactical ways of
preventing him from castling. A typical method of doing this is. to place
a bishop on a3(a6) controlling the .a3-f8 diagonal (providing of course
that it is open !) Here is an example of this from the Caro-Kann Defence
(Panov Attack): 1 e4 c6 2 d4 dS 3 e xdS cxdS 4 c4 Nf6 S Nc3 e6 6
Nf3 Be7 7 cxdS NxdS and now, instead of the better 8 Bc4 or 8 .Bd3 ,
the attack on c6 by 8 Bb5 + Nc6 ! 9 Qa4? can be simply ignored by
Attack and defence I 9 1

Black with 9 . . . 0-D! 1 0 Bxc6 Nb6 ! (an important zwischenzug as we
lhall soon see) 1 1 QbS bxc6 1 2 Qxc6 Ba6 ! and White can no longer
castle short, whilst if he castles long (after Be3} he will be exposed to
an attack down tl1e open b and c ftles. Black obtained all this at the
cost of a single pawn, but we often see more material sacrificed to tltis
end, as in the following splendid example.
1 53
Planinc (black)
Donner (white)
1 . . . Ba6 ! {Black refuses to interpose 1 . Nxc6 because after 2 dxc6
Ba6 White can prepare to castle long by 3 QdS ! with gain of time) 2
Bxa8 Rxb2 {threatening . . Qa5+ followed by mate) 3 Qa4 Qf6 4
Rc1 Bxd6 5 f4 (5 Bxd6? Qxf2+) 5 . QfS ! 6 e4 Re2+ 7 Kd l QhS ! and
the queen and rook 'battery' proves fatal enougll for White to resign.
.
1 54
Seitz (black)
Przepiorka (white)
The a3-f8 diagonal is already occupied but if the queens are exchanged
Black can easily complete his development e.g. l DeS? Qxd6 2 Bxd6
0-D-D etc. whilst after 1 QcS? Black has 1 . . . Qe7. So tl1e correct move
is I Qa3 ! Qe7 2 BcS Qe6 3 Rfd 1 ! and now Black cannot castle either
side, so he tries 'artificial castling' to link his rooks by playing his king
92 I Attack and defence

to f7. Play continued 3 . . . f6 4 Qa4! Bc2 (an interesting line is 4 . . .
Bd5 5 Na5 ! b6!? 6 e4 ! bxc5 7 exd5, fork and counter-fork!) 5 Rd6
Qf5 (5 . . . Qf7? loses at once to 6 Rxc6 Qd7 7 Re6+) 6 Qc4 Nd8 7
Rei Be4 (after 7 . . . Bxb3 8 axb3 Black would have no defence to the
doubling of rooks on the d me followed by QdS) 8 Ba3 ! (vacating cS
for the knight) 8 . . . Bc6 9 NcS Qg6 (in order to answer 1 0 Ne6 with
10 . . . ReS 1 1 Rcd 1 Nf7) 10 Rcd1 bS ( 1 0 . . . Q7? loses the queen to
1 1 Rxd8+! etc.) 1 1 Rxd8+! Rxd8 1 2 Qe6+ Resigns.
The notoriously weak point of an uncastled king position is
the f2(f7) square, and the attack on this point is the main theme of
many classical openings, such as the famous 'trap' in the Two Knights'
Defence : 1 e4 eS 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 Bc4 Nf6 4 Ng5 dS 5 exd5 Nxd5? when
White can play either 6 Nxf7! Kx7 7 Qf3+, or 6 d4 Bb4+ 7 c3 Be7 8
Nx7 ! with the better game in both cases.
1 55
Winter (black)
Keres (white)
Black has been too greedy in capturing three pawns whilst neglecting
essential development. White now metes out drastic punishment which
begins with a sacrifice on 7: 1 Nx7! Kx7 2 Qh5+ g6 (if the king
retreats to g8 his bishop on c8 is lost after 3 Qe8+, and if it goes to f8
then 3 Rfe l Bd7 4 Qf3+ Kg8 5 Be 7 ! Bxe7 6 Rxe7 wins; fmally, after
2 . . . Ke6 White has 3 Bf5 +! Ke5 4 Rfe l + Kd4 5 Be3 + etc.) 3 Dxg6+!
hxg6 4 Qxh8 Bf5 (after 4 . . . Nd7 5 Qh7+ Kf8 6 Bh6+ Ke8 7 Qxg6+
Ke7 8 BgS+ White picks up the bishop on d6 with an enduring attack)
5 Rfe l (threatening 6 Qh7+ Kf8 7. Bh6 mate, and if 5 . . . BfB 6 Qh7+
8g7 7 Re7+ followed by mate) 5 . . . Be4 6 Rxe4+! dxe4 7 Qf6+ and
Black resigned in view of the continuation 7 . . . Kg8 (7 . . . Ke8 8
Qe6+ KfB 9 Bh6 mate) 8 Qxg6+ Kf8 9 Qxd6+ Kg7 1 0 Qf6+ Kg,8 1 1
Bh6 followed by mate.
Attack and defence I 93

Even after castling the pressure on f7 can prove fatal , as
in
our next
example.
Saidy
1 56
(bliJck)
Polugayevsky
By
(white)
Neg5 ! White immediately exposes the weakness. If now 1
hxg5 he has 2 Rxe7 Bxe7
3 Qxf7+ Kh7 4 Qh5 mate. The game con
cluded 1 . . . Nf6 2 Rxe7 Qxe7
Qxf7 + Kh8 4 Ne5 ! Resigns.
And now let us return to our main theme.

1 57
Junge
(bliJck)
Alekhine
(white)
Black needs only one move to castle into safety with a pawn up, but
Alekhine prevents this with an exchange sacrifice which gives him a
powerful attack against the exposed king.
the main threat of
Ra6 ! ! Qxa6 2 Qxc5 (with
3 Qxe 5 + Kd7 4 Rxd4+, and if 2 . . . Rd8 3 8c 6 +
N d 7 4 Qxe5 + Kf8 5 Qd6+ Kg8 6 Qe7 wins) 2 . . . Qe 6

(or
3 8c6+
Nd7
. . Kd8 4 Bd2! b4 5 Ra l ! tlueatening 6 Bxb4 Rxb4 7 Ra8+ and
if now 5 . . . Nd7 6 Bxd7 Qxd7 7 Ra7, or 5
. .
ReS
6 Qb6+ Ke7 7
Bxb4+) 4 Bxd7 +! Kxd7 5 Qa7+ (in this interesting position 5 . . . Kc8?

loses at once to 6 Bd2 and 7 Re i +, so 5 . . . Kd6 ! is the best defence
when the tempting line
Bf4 ! ? exf4 7 Rxd4+ Kc6 ! 8 Rd l ! Rhe8

Rc 1 + Kd5 1 0 Rd 1 + Kc4 1 1 Qd4+ Kb3 1 2 Qd3 + Kxb2 l 3 Rd2+ Kcl
14 Rd 1 + gives White perpetual check but no more, so he would have
to try 6 f4!? Qd7 ! 7 fxe5+ Ke6 8 Qa6+ Ke7 9 Bg5 + Ke8 1 0 Rcl when
the black king is still insecure. In t!. actual game Black made a serious
error which placed his king in a mating net) 5 . . . Kc6? 6 Bd2! Rhc8
7 e4! (threatening 8 Re i + Kd6 9 Bb4+) 7 . . . Qb3 8 Ra l ! b4 9 Ra6+
Kb5 10 Ra5+ Kc6 I I Qc5+ Kd7 12 Ra7+ Resigns.
1 58
Giusti (black)
Braga (white)
Dy a couple of sacrifices White opens up the central fLies for his major
pieces after which there is no defence. I Nxd5 ! exd5 2 Qxd5 Ba3 (a
desperate attempt to free his position, but if 2 . . . Rb8 3 Bb5+! axb5 4
Rhe I + when Black is mated on d7 or d8 ; or if 2 . . Qxf4+ 3 Kb I Be?
4 Qc6+! Kf8 5 Qxa8 etc.) 3 Bb5+! Ke7 4 Rhel + Be6 5 Qb7+! Resigns.
.
; 1 59
Maricic (black)
Erikson (white)
Another typical piece sacrifice opens up lines onto the enemy king. 1
Nf5 ! 0-0 (if 1 . . . exf5 2 Bxf6 gxf6 3 Nd5 Bxb5 4 Rxe7+ Kf8 5 Qh5
wins or if 1 . . . Bxb5 2 Nxg7+ Kf8 3 Dh6! Kg8 4 Re3 and 5 Rg3 wins)

2 Nxe7 + Qxe7 3 NdS ! (a decisive double pin) 3 . . . Qd8 4 Nxf6+ gxf6
5 Bh6 Kh8 6 Bxffi etc., and White won.
1 60
Liberzon (blilck)
Savon (white)
A typical Sicilian Defence position. Black's last move . . . b4 was in
tended to drive the knight on c3 away from the centre (b I or d 1 or
a4} to reduce the power of a later e5. However, White produced the
sacrifice 1 Nd5 ! exd5 2 exd5 opening the e me with gain of time. If
now 2 . . . Nd8 3 Bxf6 gxf6 4 Qh5 ! prevents castling and prepares to
double rooks on the e me. 2 . . . Nxd5 fails to 3 Be4! Bxg5 4 Bxd5 -r
Be7 5 Bxc6+ Qxc6 6 Qxe7 mate. But in the game White had to reckon
with the zwischenzug 2 . . . Bg4 ! when play went 3 Qe3 Nxd5 (note
that after 3 . . . Nd8 4 Bxf6 gxf6 5 f5 ! the bishop on g4 is trapped and
can be captured by h3 and g4} 4 Qe4 Nb6 5 Bxe7 Nxe7 6 f5 ! (the
same idea occurs again, because 6 . . . Bxf5 is not possible in view of
the pin on the knight) 6 . . . h5 7 h3 Bxh3 8 gxh3 d5 9 Qh4 Kf8 1 0
Nd4 Rh6 1 1 f6! (Black's king has escaped frol}1 the e me but now his
protective pawns are weakened) 1 1 . . . gxf6 1 2 Kh 1 Nbc8 1 3 ReJ
Qd6 1 4 Ref3 Ke8 (and now the danger appears down the f file !) 1 5
Rxf6 Rxf6 1 6 Rxf6 Qe5 1 7 Rf l Nd6 1 8 NfJ Qxb2 1 9 Re i Ra7 20
Qf4 Rd7 21 Ne5 Qc3 22 Rf1 Rc7 23 Qf6 Nec8 24 Rgl Kffi 25 Kh2
Qd2+ 26 Rg2 Qe3 27 Bh7 Resigns. A good example of how difficult
it can be with the king in the centre even if there are no direct mating
threats.
(See next diagram) Here is a similar type of sacrifice to the previous
one, but this time Black dares not aU ow his bishop to be pinned on e7,
so tries to escape to the queen's side. 11tis occurs even more often after
such a sacrifice and presents interesting tactical problems. 1 Bxf6 gxf6
2 Nd5 ! exd5 3 exd5 + Kd8 4 QfJ (threateflin8 5 Qxf6+ and plan to
answer 4 . . . Nd7 with 5 Nc6+! Bxc6 6 dxc6, and 4 . . . Be7 with 5 N f5
\

161
Covaci (black)
Ghizdaw (white)
ReS 6 Nxe7 Rxe7 7 Qxf6 BxdS 8 BfS ! Be6 9 Bxe6 fxe6 1 0 Rxe6. The
move played is equally insufficient to save the game). 4 . . . fS S QxfS
Bg7 6 Qg5+ f6 7 Ne6+ Kc8 8 Qg4! hS 9 Qh3 Qf7 1 0 Nxg7+ Nd7 1 1
NfS ! Kc7 1 2 Re7 Qf8 1 3 Rxd7+! Kxd7 1 4 Ng7+ fS I S BxfS+ Ke7 1 6
Qe3 + Kf6 1 7 Qe6+ KgS 1 8 h4+ Kxh4 1 9 g3 + KgS 20 f4 mate.
1 62
Vasyukov (black)
White has already sacrificed a piece to reach this position and must now
endeavour to open lines for his pieces to attack the enemy king. Veli
mirovic achieves this in typical masterly fashion, as follows: l c3 ! b3!
(Black tries to keep the position as closed as possible, since I
bxc3
2 Re i ! would open the c fL!e for White's attack) 2 eS ! 0-0-0 (quite
prepared to accept the loss of his queen for three minor pieces after 3
Ne7+ Nxe7 4 Bxc6 Nxc6 with sufficient compensation, but White has
other ideas) 3 Qxb 3 ! Kb8 4 Nb4! Qd7 (after 4 . . . Qb6 5 aS ! is de
cisive) 5 Bxb7 K xb7 6 NdS+! Ka8 7 Nb6+ Ka7 8 N xd7 Rxd7 9 Rad l
Resigns.
.
'
Attack and defence / 97
2. The weakened king position

A generally accepted principle Is that the pawns protecting a castled
king position are at their strongest
in their original position. One of the
main reasons for tlus is that they are then flexible enough to advance
when required to counter a serious threat, whereas this is far more
difficult once they have committed themselves. A good example of the
latter Is when a whlte pawn has m.oved to g3 allowing the enemy queen
in at
h3,
followed by a knight coming to g4 with dangerous threats.
Admittedly, a whlte bishop on g2 can offset this particular disadvantage ,

but pawns are usually much more effective than pieces at guarding
squares or other pieces. Our first example illustrates this king-side
weakness.
1 63
Eu we
(black)
Tartakower
(white)
Black already occupies the h file but must strike quickly before White
challenges hls rook by Rh l . Fortunately the eak squares created by gJ
allow
him
to sacrifice a piece and launch a mating attack, as follows:
. . . Nf4 +! 2 gxf4 Bh3 + 3 Kg3 (not of course 3 Kh2 Dfl +, or J Kg I
gxf4 followed by 4 . . . Qg7 etc.) 3 . . . exf4 + 4 Bxf4 Qd7 ! 5 Nh2

gxf4+ 6 Kxf4 Rh4+ 7 Ke3 (again forced, since 7 Kf3 Bg2 +! 8 Kxg2
Qh3 +
Kgl Rh5 ! 10 f3 Qg3 + or 7 Kg3 Rg4+ ! 8 KxhJ Rg5 + 9 Kh4
Nd6 are both hopeless) 7 . . . Bg2 8 Nf3 Rxe4+! 9 Kxe4 Nd6+ 1 0 Kd3
Qf5 + 1 1 Kd4 Qf4 + 1 2 Kd3 Qxc4+ 1 3 Kc2 Bxf3 (the rook sacrifice has
allowed Black to come out of the complications with both material and
positional advantage whlch he now utilises to produce an elegant
fmish)
1 4 b3 Be4+ 1 5 Kb2 QdJ 1 6 Rg l + Kf7 1 7 Rac l (after 1 7 Rgc l Black

plays hls rook to h8 and h2) 1 7 . . . Qd2 + 1 8 Ka3 (or 1 8 K a t Nc4 ! 1 9
Qxb 7 + Ke6 etc.) 1 8 . . . Nc4 +! 1 9 bxc4 Rxa4+! 20 K xa4 Qa2 +! 2 1
Kb4 Qb2 + and Whlte resigned in view o f 22
Ka5 QaJ
mate
or 2 2 KcS
98 I Attack ami defence

Qxf2+ winning the queen. An unusual example where a king was driven
from one exposed position right across the board to another exposed
position !
1 64
Rukavina (black)
Damjanovic (white)
Tilis time the attacking rooks are exerting pressure along the ranks
rather than down the fJ.Ies, but we see the same weakness in the king
position. A knight is again sacrificed on f5 with the additional idea of
obtaining a powerful pawn on the f me whlch will advance to close the
mating net. I Nf5+! gxf5 2 Qxh6+ Kg8 3 exf5 Qf8 (after 3 . . f6 4
Rxf6 Qxf6 5 Qxf6 .Nxa7 the whlte queen's mobility combined with hls
passed pawns will prove too much for Black e.g. 6 d6 ReS 7 Qe6+ Rf7
8 d7 Rf8 9 f6 Bc6 l 0 Qg4+ K.h8 1 1 Qh5 + Kg8 1 2 Qg6+ K.h8 1 3
Qxf7 ! o r here 8 . . . Rd8 9 Qe8+ Rf8 1 0 Qg6+ K.h 8 1 1 f6 Rxd7 1 2 Bf5
followed by Qh6 and Be6) 4 Qh4 Nd6 (if the knight takes any rook
White has 5 f6 and 6 Qh7 mate) 5 f6 e4 6 Rbxb7! Resigns. White's fmal
move brings about two deflections: if 6 . . . Nxb7 7 Bxe4 wins, or if
6 . . . Rxb7 7 Ra8! Qxa8 8 Qg5 + Kf8 9 Qg7+ Ke8 1 0 Qg8 mate.
.
165
Lazarevic (black)
Torma (white)

White has a very useful open me along with the required weak squares
around the black king, but he must proceed carefully because his own
ldng position is not all that secure. 1 Qe7! protects the g pawn whilst
threatening 2 Rd8+ Rxd8 3 Qxd8+ Kg7 4 Qh8 mate. After 1 . . . Qc7
2 Rdh1 ! mate in two moves is threatened, so Black must again guard h8
by 2 . QeS when 3 Qf6! forces him to resign, since after the exchange
of queens the pawn on f6 completes the mating net.
.
.
1 66
Sherwin (black)
Szab6 (white)
As we already know, the usual way of opening lines in such positions
is by h4-h5, with the white rook often on h 1 (e.g. in the Dragon Vari
ation of the Sicilian Defence), although here the rook can always go to
h3. However, an immediate 1 h4? would allow Black to shut the White
bishop out of the game by I . . . e5! and if 2 fS f6 3 QdS + Kg7 4 QxcS
Rad8 with a good game despite the loss of a pawn. For this reason
White first plays 1 e S ! to activate his bishop. Black's reply 1 . . . NaS?
was already the decisive mistake, because this knight is needed for the
'
defence of the king (the correct move is 1 . . . Rad8 when White would
have to pursue his attack with 2 Qf2 followed by Qh4 and Rh3). White
now played 2 Qe2 with the strong threat of 3 f5 when 2 . . . f6 allows 3
exf6 Rxf6 4 fS ! gS 5 Re3 followed by 6 Qg4 or 6 Qh5 ; or here 3 . . .
exf6 4 f5 g5 5 Re3 Nc6 6 Re6 etc. So Black had to play 2 . . . e6 and
play continued 3 h4! (only now!) Rad8 4 h5 Rd7 5 Rg3 Nc6 6 Qg4
{threatening 7 hxg6 hxg6 8 8xg6 ! fxg6 9 Qxg6+ Rg7 1 0 Qxe6+ etc.)
6 . . . Nd8 7 QgS ! (suddenly a new threat appears of 8 Qf6 followed by
h6 and mate on g7, again based on the dark square weakness in Black's
king position. Note how important it is for White to maintain the
choice of hxg6 or h6 for as long as possible, making the defence far
more difficult) 7 . . . Nc6 (to answer 8 Qf6 with 8 . . . Qd8, but now
comes a deflection) 8 Rxb7! Qxb7 9 Qf6 Rd l + (even more interesting
I 00 I Attack and defence

is the variation 9 . . . Rfd8 1 0 h6 Kf8 1 1 Rxg6! Rd l + 1 2 Kh2 Ke8 1 3
Rg8+ Kd7 1 4 Rxd8+ Nxd8 1 5 Bxd 1 winning) 1 0 Bxdl Qe7 I I Rd3 1
(the win of a pawn is not so important as the fact that the major pieces
arci now forced off the board, leaving White with an active bishop which
can attack Black's pawns, particularly the one on f7, whereas the black
knight remains totally passive and shut out of the game) 1 1 . . . Qxf6
1 2 exf6 Rd8 1 3 Rxd8+ Nxd8 1 4 Bf3 h6 1 5 Kf2 Kf8 1 6 Be4 gxhS 1 7
Kg3 Ke8 1 8 Kh4 Kd7 (Black must try to free his knight but loses
pawns in the process) 1 9 KxhS e6 20 fS ! Nc6 2 1 Kxh6 aS 22 BdS e4
23 Bxf7 eJ 24 BhS Resigns.
The reader must not be disappointed that the mating attack turned
into an end-game, because this is often the case in master chess: the
defender is often compelled to ward off mate by allowing some other
advantage to his opponent which can only be exploited in the ending,
whereas the attacker must realise that a won end-game is just as positive
a way to achieve victory as a mating combination !
Moisejev (black)
Bitman (white)
Sacrifices are often directed at the important bishop which protects the
weak squares around the king. In this position Black wins three minor
pieces for the queen which is more than adequate compensation, es
pecially when the enemy king is exposed to attack. Play went: I . . .
Qxe4! 2 Nxe4 Bxe4 3 Nc3 (or 3 Ne3 Bf3 winning the queen in view of
the threatened . . . Ne2 mate) 3
Jtf3 4 QdJ b4! S Rfe l bxc3 6 bxc3
RaJ ! 7 Rab l Ba8 (threatening 8 . . . Nf3+) 8 Kfl Rxa2! 9 f4 Dg2+ 1 0
Resigns.
The king position is weakened even further if in addition to tlle g
pawn the defender has to advance his f or h pawn.
.
Attack and defence I I 0 I

Kupreichik (black)
168
Waiser (white)
By l Nxe6! Qxe6 the black queen has been deflected from the defence
of his second rank, so now comes 2 Bxg6 ! Qe7 (Black dare not play 2
hxg6 3 Qxg6+ Kh8 4 Qh5+! Kg7 5 Rg3 mate) 3 e xf6 Rxf6 4 Bxh7+!
K.f'7 (if 4
. Qxh7 5 Rxc8+ Bxc8 6 Qxf6) 5 Qh5+ Kf8 6 Rg3 Qe6 7
Qg5 ! Qfl 8 Bg8 ! Qe7 9 Bb3 ! Resigns. Mate is threatened and if 9 . . .
Ke8 1 0 Re3 + Be4 1 1 Rfe 1 Re6 1 2 Qg8+ etc .
.
1 69
Sander (black)
Pachman (white)
White's last move h4! was not intended to open the h file which would
be more to Black's advantage, but to weaken the king position further.
Play continued l . . . Qe8 (if l . . Qe7 2 Qd2! there is a strong threat
of 3 Nd5) 2 h5! g51 (after the better 2 . . . Qfl White has 3 Qd2! Ne7 4
Qc3 ! with decisive pressure. The text move would be fme if White had
to retreat, as 3 Nh3? g4 loses a piece and 3 Nd3? Be6 would even win
the queen, but White's sacrifice fatally exposes the black king) 3
Nxg5 ! fxg5 4 Qxg5+ Kh8 (not of course 4 . . . Kf7 5 Rxd6 ! cxd6 6
Bc4+ etc.) 5 Ng6+! hxg6 (the second sacrifice must be accepted, as
5 . . . Kg7 leads to mate after 6 h6+! Kfl 7 Rxd6 cxd6 8 Bc4+ Be6 9
Nh8+! etc.) 6 Qh6+ Kg8 7 hxg6 Qe7 8 Rxd6 ! Ne5 (8 . . . cxd6 9 Bc4+)
.

9 Rd5 ! (threatening 1 0 Rxe 5 ! and if the knight moves to prevent this,
then 1 0 Q7+! Qxh7 1 1 gxh7+ followed by 1 2 Rxd7) 9 . . . Rf5 1 0 f4
Re8 1 1 Rxe5 RxeS 1 2 fxeS Be6 1 3 Rf7! Bxf7 1 4 Qh 7 + Resigns. It is
g7 mate next move.
Podgorny (black)
Dobias (white)
Without the use of the h pawn, White nevertheless succeeds in forcing
Black to weaken his king side further by the use of some clever threats,
as follows: 1 d 5 ! exd5 2 Rfe 1 (threatening 3 Rxe7 and so compelling
Black to give up his h pawn) 2 . . . h6! 3 Qxh6! (not 3 Bxh6? Ne4 4
Qf4 Bd6 and 5 . . . ReS) 3 . . . Ng4 4 Qh4 BxgS 5 NxgS Nf6 6 Qh6
(6 . . . ReS prevents .the threatened Re3-h3 but it allows another sacri
fice 7 Bxg6 ! fxg6 S Qxg6+ KhS 9 Nf7 mate) 6 . . . d4 7 Re6 ! ! ReS (7
. . . fxe6 allows S Q xg6+ KhS 9 Qh6+ KgS 1 0 Bh7+ Kh8 I I Bf5 + KgS
1 2 Bxe6+ Rf7 1 3 Bxf7 mate) 8 Bxg6 ! Resigns. 8 . . . Rxe6 9 Bxf7
mate, or S . . . fxg6 9 Qxg6+ followed by mate next move.
We have already seen in position 1 34 how the weakening move
h3(h6) enables the attacker to open the g ftle by advancing the g pawn,
but another means of exploiting this weakness is to sacrifice a piece to
open up the king position, as in our next diagram.
1 71
Sokolov (black)
Bakulin (white)
Attack and defence I I 03

1 Bxh6! gxh6 2 Rg3 + Kh8 3 Qd2 Ng8 4 Rxg8+! Kxg8 5 Qxh6 f5 6
Qg6+ Kh8 7 Rc3 ! Rf6 8 Qh5+ Kg? 9 Bxf5 ! Rg8 (or 9 . . . Rxf5 10
Rg3 + Rg5 1 1 Rxg5 + Dxg5 12 Qf7 + followed by rna te) 1 0 Rg3 + KfB
1 1 Rxg8 + Kxg8 1 2 Qh7 + Resigns. It is mate next move.
The h3(h6) move has a further disadvantage in that the g3{6) square
thereby loses one of its protectors. In particular, whenever the defender
has to advance his pawn to g3{g6) it becomes a weakness, as we see in
our next example.
172

..t -
- .

li II
. {)
ft . .'ltll ft D
R EI D m
Wallis (black)
Pachman (white)
1 Qe4 g6 2 Qg4! (not of course 2 Bxh6? Nxd4 !) 2 . . . h5 {White was

threatening 3 Bxg6) 3 Qh3 Kg? 4 Ng5 e5 {White was again threatening
to sacrifice strongly on g6 or e6, and if 4 . . . Bxg5 he can attack the
weakened black squares by 5 Bxg5 followed by 6 Qh4 and 7 Bf6+) 5
Nxf7! Kxf7 6 d5 ! (attacking the knight and threatening at the same
time 7 Qe6+. If now 6 . . . Rxd5 7 Qf3 + Ke6 8 Bxg6 Rf8 9 Qh3+ Kf6
10 Qxh5, or if 6 . . . Qd7 7 Qf3 + Kg? 8' Qg3 ! Bf6 9 Bg5 ! Qd6 1 0
dxc6 Qxc6 1 1 Bc4+! winning in both cases) 6 . . . Qd6 7 dxc6 Qxc6
8 Bb5 Qd5 9 Ba4 Kg? 1 0 Bb3 Qd6 1 1 Qe3 ! g5 1 2 Qe2! Qc6 1 3 Qxe5 +
Bf6 1 4 Qg3 Rd3 I 5 Be3 Rxc3 1 6 Rbc l Rae8 1 7 Rxc3 Qxc3 1 8 Rd I !
Rd8 1 9 Re i Qd3 20 Rc7+ Kh8 2 1 h4 ! Qb l + 22 Re i Qe4 23 hxgS
h4 24 Qf3 and White won.
The moral of all this is that, whenever we have to defend against an
attack on our h2{h7) square, we must make the correct choice between
defending by h3(h6) or g3(g6). For example, after the moves I d4 dS
2 c4 e6 3 Nc3 Nf6 4 Nf3 c5 5 cxd5 Nxd5 6 e3 Nc6 7 Bc4 cxd4 8
exd4 Be? 9 0-0 0-0 1 0 Re i Nxc3 I I bxc3 b6 1 2 Bd3 Bb7 1 3 Qc2 the
move 1 3 . . . h6 appears the right choice superficially, since 1 3 . . . g6
allows White's bishop to reach h6 with gain of time. However, the
former is the weaker of the two, because after 1 3 . . . h6 14 Qe2 !

threatens 1 5 Qe4 g6 16 Bxh6 and if 14 . . . Na5 to prevent this, White
has 1 5 Ne5 Qd5 1 6 Qg4 threatening both c4 and also Re3 followed by
Rg3 . On the other hand, 1 3 . . . g6 ! 14 Bh6 Re8 1 5 Qd2 Rc8 1 6 Rac1
Bf6 1 7 Qf4 Bg7 is quite playable for Black.
173
Znosko-Borovsky (black)
Rti (white)
Serious weaknesses often arise when trying to rid oneself of a pin such
as the one in this diagram by playing . . . h6 and . . . g5. Reti began the
attack by 1 Ne5 ! giving up a useful pawn in return for the coming
weaknesses on the king side which Black must allow in view of the
terrible threat of 2 Ng4. After 1 . . . g5 2 Bg3 Rxc3 3 h4! Black had
nothing better than 3 . . . Nfd5, because White was threatening 4 hxg5
hxg5 5 Qd2 with a double attack on the rook and the g5 pawn, and if
3 . . . ReS 4 f4! is strong. However, the knight move allows White to
play his queen to the dominating h5 square. Play continued 4 Qh5
Kg7 5 Bxd5 ! exd5 (5 . . . Nxd5 6 hxg5 hxg5 7 Nxd7! etc. wins) 6
Nxf7! Rxf7 7 Be5 + Rf6 (the only move but White has planned a
surprising switch to the b me which wins the game for him) 8 hxg5
hxg5 9 Q xg5+ Kf7 10 Qh5+ Kg8 1 1 Rb l ! Rcc6 ( 1 2 Qg5+ and 13
Qxf6+ was the threat, and if 1 1 . . . Bb5 12 Rxb5 ! axb5 1 3 Bxf6
Qxf6 14 ReS+ wins) 1 2 Rb3 ! (the real point of the exercise, transferring
the rook to the king side) 1 2 . . . BeS 1 3 Rg3 + Bg6 14 Rxg6 + Rxg6
1 5 QhS + Kf7 1 6 Qxd8 ReS 1 7 Qh4 Resigns.
It almost goes without saying that if any of the king's protective
pawns are missing, the attack is easier to prosecute . With a knight's pawn
this is obvious, but a missing rook's pawn can also cause problems. For
example, in the Queen's Gambit after the moves 1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6 3
Nc3 Nf6 4 Nf3 c5 5 cxd5 Nxd5 6 e3 Nc6 7 Bc4 Nxc3 S bxc3 Be7 9
0-0 0-0 10 Qe2 Qc7 1 1 Rd 1 Na5 1 2 Bd3 b6 1 3 e4 Bb7 White's best
Attack and defence I I OS

continuation is 1 4 d5 ! exd5 1 5 exd5 Bxd5 16 Bxh7 + Kxh7 17 Rxd5
and he lw a clear advantage in view of Black's weakened king side.
1 74
Spjelke (black)
Arebo (white)
Black has lost his h pawn and thus seriously weakened his king position.
White concluded neatly with 1 Bg6! ! fxg6 (the threat is 2 Bxf7, even in
the line 1 . . . Ba6 2 Bxf7 d3 3 Qd 1 ! g6 4 h5! Bxg5 5 hxg6+ Kg7 6
Rh7+ Kf6 7 Qf3 + Ke5 8 Qxd5+ Kf6 9 Qxd4+ Qe5 1 0 Nd5 + Kf5 1 1
g4 mate) 2 Qxg6 Bxg5 3 hxg5 + Kg8 4 Rh8+! Kxh8 5 Qh5 + Kg8 6 g6
Resigns.
It is of course even worse if more than one pawn have either moved
forward too far or been eliminated, as in our next example where White
has connected passed pawns near to their queening square but hardly
protecting his king.
1 75
Silbennan (black)
Juferov (white)
Black takes advantage of this by 1 . . . Rd2! 2 Dfl (2 Kf2 fails to the
highly original 2 . . . Nd4 ! J cxd4 cxd4 wirming) 2 . . . Qd 1 ! 3 Dg5 (the
threat was 3 . . . Qxfl 4 Qxd2 Qf3 mate ; if 3 h3 Rc2! 4 Bg2 Qxh5)
3 . . . Rxa2 4 Bh3 Qxh5 5 g7 Qg6 6 Bf5 Qxg7 7 Bxe4 Ka6 ! ! (and not
I 06
I Attack and defence
RaJ 8 Bxc6+ Kxc6 9 Qe4+ Kc7 1 0 Kh4! and Black cannot win)
8 Kg4 Ne5 + 9 KfS Rxh2 1 0 Qgl Ra2 (Black must still be careful, since
10 . . Rf2+? 1 1 Qxf2 Qf7+ 1 2 Bf6 Qxf6+! 1 3 Kxf6 Ng4+ 1 4 KfS
Nxfl 1 5 Bc2 would draw) I I Qg3 Qd7+ 1 2 Kf4 Qf7+ 13 BfS Rf2+!
14 Resigns.
1 76
Taimanov (blllck)
Evans (white)
White is hoping to launch an attack against the black king by advancing
his g pawn then capturing the weak pawn on e4. However, it is Black to
move and the white king stands somewhat insecure at the moment, a
factor which Black cleverly exploits to begin a deadly attack of his
own, as follows: 1 . . NbS ! (threatening both . . . Qh4+ and . . . Nxf4,
and already planning a second piece sacrifice) 2 gxhS Qh4+ 3 Kg2
Nxf4+! (opening the g me with gain of time and planning to answer 4
Bxf4 with 4 . . . Bd4+ 5 Ng4 Rxg4+! winning easily) 4 Kfl Bh3+ 5
Nxh3 Qxh3+ 6 K2 Raf8 7 BfJ (or 7 Bxf4 Rxf4+ 8 Ke 1 Bxc3+ etc.)
7 . . . Nd3 + 8 Ke2 RxfJ 9 Qd2 Rxe3+! 1 0 Qxe3 Qxh5+ 1 1 Kd2 Bh6
and Black won.
.
1 77
Freyman (black)
Bogatyrtschuk (white)
Attack and defence f I 07

Again, as in the last two positions, White was relying on his space
advantage to win for him and had thereby exposed his king by advancing
hil king side pawns. Now Black launches a well-calculated counter
attack in which he has to take into account the danger to his own
queen. Play went: 1 . . . g6! ! (lines must be opened!) 2 Nxf6 Nxf6 3
BO Nxe4+ 4 Rxe4 RxfS S Bf4 Qxf3+! (but not S
exf4? 6 Qh2!)
6 Kxf3 NxdS 7 Kg2 Nxf4+ 8 Kh2 Raf7 (all Black's pieces have smoothly
moved into action, he has sufficient compensation for the queen in two
minor pieces and three pawns, and he can now comfortably build up
pressure against the white king) 9 Rfl Kg7 10 Ree 1 Be6 ( . . . Bb7! was
even stronger) 1 1 a3 Bc4 1 2 Rf2 NhS 1 3 RxfS Nxg3 1 4 Rxf7+ Kxf7
but although White now has a lost position, Black failed to exploit his
advantage. A sad tale which has nothing to do with our theme. We all
quickly become expert at losing won games without any tuition!
1 78
Adorjan (black)
MaSic (white)
White's king has only the rook on g2 for protection but he is relying on
Rg4+ and a possible knight sacrifice on d4. However, Black is the first
to capitalise on his real pressure down the h ftle, even if this entails a
major sacrifice. 1 . . . Rh8 2 Rg4+ Qxg4 ! 3 fxg4 Rch7 4 Kfl (or 4
Rxg3 Rh1 + S Kf2 fxg3 + 6 Kf3 R8h2 7 Nd2 g2 and suddenly the
passed pawn becomes the decisive factor!) 4 . . . Rh l + S Rgl (5 Ke2
R8h2) S
R8h2 6 Resigns. There could follow 6 Qxh2 Rxh2 7 Rg2
Rh3 8 Nd2 Bh4, or 6 Qd2 a4! 7 Rxh l Rxh1 + 8 Ke2 Rh2+ 9 Kd l
axb3 1 0 Qb4 f3 etc.
.
3. Breaking up the king position

When there is no perceptible weakness in the enemy king position,
we can only attack successfully either with a material superiority (a

concentration of pieces against the enemy king) or with a qualitative
advantage (more active pieces or mobile pawns). TI1e well-known
military strategy can also be applied to chess, that we need more forces
in attack than in defence, particularly when we remember that the king
itself is a strong piece and can often hold off an attack carried out with
insufficient pieces having only the support of his f, g, and h pawns on
their original squares!
Let us first examine the case of a quantitative superiority on the
required wing.
1 79
Fuchs (black)
Averbach (white)
We are still in the opening stages and yet White's next move 1 Ra3 !
,
apart from cutting out the pin of the a pawn and thus slowing down the
thematic plan of . . . b5, is also already aimed at a possible later transfer
to the king side, a common attacking method. Play continued I . . .
exd5 2 exd5 Nbd7? (a serious strategic error which allows White to
build up a rapid piece attack on the king side. Black should play 2 . . .
ReS 3 Nf3 Bg4! to exchange this bishop for one of White's minor pieces
and thus reduce the power of the attack) 3 Nf3 Nb6 4 0-0 Bg4 (only
now does Black realise that his original plan of attacking the c pawn by
4 . . . Qb4 can be simply answered by 5 Qc l ! Nxc4? 6 Na2 etc., so
Black decides belatedly to develop his queen's bishop. However, he has
already wasted two moves 'developing' his knight to the wrong square
and this commits him psychologically to pursuing the misguided idea of
transferring his other knight from the king side, a suicidal plan) 5 Qf4!
Bxf3 6 Qxf3 Nfd7? 7 Ne4! (threatening the d pawn as well as 8 Bd2
trapping the queen, so the reply is forced) 7 . . . Nc8 8 Qh3 ! Qc7 9
Qh4 ReS 1 0 Rh3 ! h5 (apart from the rook on fl , all White's pieces are
directed at the black king, so it is clear that a sacrifice is in the air.
However, the immediate 1 1 Bxh5? fails because of the counter-sacrifice

1 1 . . . Rxe4! 1 2 Qxe4 gxhS 1 3 RxhS Nf8, so White prepares this)
1 1 Ng3 ! Nf8 1 2 BxhS! Bxb2 (or 1 2 . . . gxhS 1 3 NxhS Ng6 1 4 Nf6+!
Bxf6 1 5 Bxf6 Nxh4 1 6 Rxh4 winning, a tactical idea we have already
met) 1 3 NfS ! gxhS (or 1 3 . . . gxfS 1 4 Bf6! Bxf6 1 5 Qxf6 Qe7 1 6
Bxf7+! an d 1 7 Rh8 mate) 14 Bf6 Ng6 1 5 Qg5 Ne7 1 6 Nh6+ Kf8 1 7
Bxb2 Resigns.
1 80
Nimzovitch (black)
Enevo1dsen (white)
Black, one of the strongest players of his time, made exactly the same
mistake of removing his queen from the defence of his king side by
playing 1 . . . Qd6? when he could have achieved equality by 1 . . .
bxc3 2 b xc3 Na3 ! to drive the white-squared bishop away from Its
attacking diagonal. Presumably he overestimated his chances on the
queen's wing or underestimated the powerful attack which White now
institutes: 2 Ng4! bxc3 {this defensive manoeuvre is already too late, as
we shall see) 3 bxc3 Na3 4 Rxa3 ! (of course, the bishop on c2 is far
more important here than the rook, and for extra measure Black's
dark-squared bishop is temporarily removed from the scene of action !)
4 . . . Bxa3 5 Nh5 ! Ng6 (there would be a pretty fmish after 5 . . . Be7
6 Bh6! gxh6 7 Nxh6+ Kh8 8 Nxf7+ Kg8 9 Qg4+ Ng6 1 0 Bxg6 etc.) 6
Nf6+! Kh8 (or 6 . . . gxf6 7 Nxf6+ Kh8 8 Qh5} 7 Nxg7! (after 7 Nxd7
Qc7 Black can defend. If now 7 . . . Kxg7 then again 8 Qh5 mates
quickly) 7 . . . Rg8 8 Nxh7! (we have seen the two bishop sacrifice on
h7 and g7, and here it is in reverse with the two knights! If now 8 . . .
Kxh7 9 Qh5 + Kxg7 1 0 Qh6 mate, and if 8 . . . Rxg7 9 Nf6 Rh7 1 0
Nxh7 Kxh7 1 1 Qh5 + Kg8 1 2 Bxg6 fxg6 1 3 Qxg6+ Kf8 14 Bh6+ Ke7
1 5 Qf6+ Ke8 1 6 Qh8+ Kf7 1 7 Qg7+ Ke8 1 8 Qg8+ followed by mate)
8 . . . Kxg7 9 QhS f5 10 exf6+ Kf7 1 1 Ng5 +! Kxf6 1 2 Qf3 + Ke7 1 3
Qf7+ Kd8 14 Qxg8+ Nf8 1 5 Nh7 Qb2 1 6 Nxf8 Qxc2 1 7 Nxe6+ Ke7
I I 0 I Attack and defence

1 8 Bg5 + Kd6 1 9 Qf8+! Kc6 20 Qa3 Resigns. If 20 . . . Bxe6 2 1 Qa6+
Kd7 22 Qb7+ etc .
. Here are two examples of a rook sacrifice on g7:
'
181
Larsen (black)
Hartston (white)
1 Rxg7 ! ! Kxg7 2 Nh5+ Kh7 3 Nxf6+ Bxf6 4 e xd5+ Bxd3 5 Qxd3+
Kg7 6 Qg3 + Kh7 7 Bxf6 Rg8 8 Qd3+ Rg6 9 Bxd8 Qxd8 1 0 d6 Resigns.
An exactly calculated combination at the end of which White had won
back his rook and was two pawns up with a strong passed pawn. Our
next example is more complicated because Black has more choice of
possibilities and is mself threatening mate.
1 82
Kiviaho (black)
Kanko (white)
Rxg7+! Kxg7 2 Qg3 + Ng4 (after 2 . . . Kf8 White concludes neatly
with 3 Nd7+ Nxd7 4 Bg7+ Ke7 5 Qg5 + f6 Bxf6+ Nxf6 7 Qg7 mate)
3 Nxg4+ KfB (or 3 . . . Kg6 4 Nf6+ Kf5 5 Qh3+ Kg5 6 Nxh7+ Kg6 7
Qg3+! wins; or 3 . . . e5 4 Nxe5+ Kf6 5 Qf4+ etc., or fmally 3 . . . f6 4
Nh6+! Kxh6 5 Qh4+ Qh5 6 Qxf6+ Qg6 7 Qh4+ Qh5 8 Bg7+! wins) 4
Bg7+!! Kxg7 {4 . . . Kg8 allows a choice of mate by the knight, and 4
. . . Ke7 loses to 5 Qh4+ followed by mate) 5 Ne5 +! Resigns. If 5 . . .
Attack and defence I
Ill
Kh8 6 Nxf7 mate. If 5 . . . Kh6 6 Nxf7 + Kh5 7 Qg5 mate. If 5 . Kf8

6 Nd7+ Ke7 7 Qh4+ f6 8 Qxf6 mate. Finally , if 5 . . . Kf6 6 Qf4+ Kg7
7 Qg5 + and mate next move.
Another conunon sacrifice used to break up the king side whilst at
the same time often obtaining the d5 square, is an exchange sacrifice
on f6.
.
1 8J
Joffe (black)
Karasev (white)
1 Rxf6 ! gxf6 2 Qd2 exposes the weakness of the h6 pawn which would
have been difficult to exploit in any other way. If now 2 . . . Kg7 3
Nd5 ! Qd8 (J . . . Bxd5? 4 Nf5+ wins at once) 4 RaJ ! f5 5 Rg3 + Kh7
6 Nxf5 Bxf5 7 exf5 (threatening 8 Rh3) 7 . . . Rg8 8 Rxg8 Kxg8 9
Qxh6 Nd7 1 0 f6 wins; or here 4 . . . Ng6 S NfS+ Bxf5 6 exfS Ne5 7
Rg3 + Kh7 8 RhJ ; or 4 . . . Rg8 5 Qf4 ! Ng6 6 RgJ and there is no
defence against 7 NfS+. In such positions it is not always necessary to
work out every line if it is clear that there are enough weaknesses to
compensate for the loss of the exchange. The game continued : 2 . . .
Nc6 J NfS ! BxfS 4 NdS ! Qd8 S Qxh6! Bg6 6 RaJ ! Resigns. There is no
defence against 7 RhJ followed by 8 Qh8 mate.
1 84
Nestler (black)
Rossolimo (white)

In this position White decided to sacrifice two exchanges! He could not
calculate all the ramifications and relied very much on his intuition, but
in the final count we can assess the decision as a correct one, since even
if Black had found the best possible defence (difficult in the given time)
the game would have ended in a draw. The Tal philosophy, you might
say! After 1 Rxf6! Bxf6 2 Rxf6 gxf6 3 NdS ! the first question is
whether Black should leave the knight on dS by playing 3 . . . Qd6.
Exact analysis shows us that it would be too risky to do so. After 4
QhS we have the following possibilities:
(I) 4 . . . Kh8 S DeS Qe6 6 Be7! Rg8 7 Bxf6+ Rg7 S QgS RagS 9 Ne7!
Qxe7 1 0 Bxg7+ and 1 1 Qxe7 etc.
(2) 4 . . . RfeS S DeS ! QdS 6 Bb6 ! Qd6 7 Bc7 ! QCB 8 Nxf6+ Kg7 9
Bd6! ! Qxd6 1 0 QgS+ KhS 1 1 Qh6 Qd4+ 1 2 Kfl Bxe4 1 3 Dxe4
Qxe4 Nxe4 etc.
(3) 4 . . . RaeS S DeS QdS 6 Bxf8 DxdS 7 Qh6 Rxf8 S exdS etc.
(4) 4 . . . fS S DeS ! Qe6 6 QgS + Kh8 7 Bxf8 Qg6 ! (if 7 . . . Rxf8 8
Nf6 wins) S Qxg6 hxg6 9 Bd6 winning material.
(5) 4 . . . BxdS 5 exdS RfcS! (to prevent DeS after 6 Qxh7+) 6 Qh6!
(with the usual threat of 7 Bxh7+ etc.) 6 . . . Rc7 7 DeS! wins.
In the game Black rightly decided to capture the dangerous knight
and play went 3 . . . BxdS 4 Qg4+ KhS S QfS ! (a new surprise, the
point being that, i (the bishop retreats, White has 6 Qxf6+ KgS 7 Bh6
followed by mate, or if S
Kg7 6 Bh6+! Kxh6 7 Qxf6+ KhS S Be2
mate, or finally if S
Qc8 6 Qxf6+ Kg8 7 e xdS ! Qg4 8 BfS Qg7 9
Qh4 with an unusual position in which White can win back one of the
exchanges and then exploit his passed d pawn) S . . . RgS 6 Qxf6+
Rg7 7 Bh6 RagS S. exdS (again we have reached a critical stage for the
defence, with the passed pawn threatening to advance and the rooks
tied down by the pin. If now 8 . . . Qd7? 9 QxeS Qg4 1 0 g3 wins) 8
. . . Qc3 ! 9 Kfl Qd4? (a faulty plan, whereas he could still save the
game by 9 . . . Qa1 +! 1 0 Kf2 Qd4+ 1 1 Kf3? e4+, so White must play
1 0 Ke2 Qgl ! 1 1 Bxg7+ Rxg7 1 2 QdS+ RgS 1 3 Qf6+ with perpetual
check) 1 0 d6! QdS 1 1 BfS ! (it was this move that Black missed; White
can now escape the checks and his d pawn cannot be stopped) 1 1 . . .
Qxg2+ 1 2 Ke l Qgl + 1 3 Kd2 Qf2+ 1 4 Kc l Qgl + 1 S Kb2 Qd4+ 1 6
Kb l Qdl + 1 7 Kb2 Qd4+ 1 8 Ka? (a great pity! In extreme time
trouble, White misses I S c3 ! Qf2+ 1 9 Kb3 followed by 20 d7 winning)
l S . . . QdS + 1 9 Ka 1 Qd l + 20 Ka2 QdS + 2 1 Kb l Qd l + 22 Kb2 and
now of course 22 . . . Qd4+ 23 c3 ! would win as we have seen,. but
Black claimed a draw because the position had been repeated three times.
Attack and defence I 1 1 3

1 85
Vitanov (black )
Andreev (white)
To open up lines onto the black king, White sacrifices both his knights
as follows: I Nfd4 ! cxd4 2 Nxd4 Qe8 3 Nc6+! bxc6 (if Black refuses
the .second piece he is still lost e.g. 3 . . . Ka8 4 Nxd8 Qxd8 5 Qxa6
etc., or 3 . . . Kc7 4 Qa5 + Nb6 5 Nxa7!) 4 Bxc6! (stronger than 4 Qxc6
Ndc5!) 4 . . . Qe7 5 Qb5 + Nb6 6 Bxb6 Resigns.
Often a vital .part of an attack begun by a piece sacril1ce is the fact
that one of our pawns guards the f6(f3) or c6(c3) square.
1 86
Kvic ala (black)
Duras (white)
I Nxh7! Kxh7 2 Qh5 + Kg8 3 Bg5 ! (note that 3 NgS fails to 3 . IlfS .
After the text move Black cannot move his queen away because of 4
Nf6+! gxf6 5 Bxf6 mating) 3 . . . f6 4 Nxf6+! gxf6 (or 4 . . . Rxf6 5
exf6 QfB 6 Rae I and 7 Re7, or here 5 . . . Be6 6 fxg7 Qe8 7 Qh8+
Kn 8 g8=Q+ Qxg8 9 Qf6+ Ke8 10 Qe7 mate) 5 Qg6+ Kh8 6 exf6
Qd7 7 Qh6+! (not 7 Rae l ? Qh7!) 7 . . . Kg8 8 Rae l Resigns. There is
no defence to the penetration of White's rook to e7. If 8 . . dS 9 Re7 !
or 8 . . . Be 6 9 Rxe6! o r 8 . . Rf7 9 Qg6+ Kh8 1 0 Re7 Rxe7 I I fxe7
wins, or finally if 8 . . . Qh7 9 0 + ! ! Qxf7 1 0 Re7 wins.
.
1 1 4 I Attack and defence

1 87
Euwe (black)
Botvinnik (white)
We have already seen examples of pawns used to open up attacking
lines down the g or h ftles, but there are two other important uses of
pawns in attack. In this position White has a 4:3 majority of pawns on
the king side, whilst Black's chances lie in his protected passed d pawn
and a queen side break by . . . a4. In such situations time is a vital
factor as we shall see : l f4 a4 2 Qf3 axb3 3 axb3 Rd7 4 f5 ! (already
Black's position is seriously threatened by the advance of the e or f
pawn, the latter linked with mating threats) 4 . . . Rda7 (guarding his
rook on aS and thus preventing e6) 5 Qg3 Ra J 6 Reel Rxcl 7 Rxcl
Kh8 (preventing 8 Bh6) 8 Rfl Ra6 ! (Black must first concentrate on
defence, since the 'active' 8 . . . Ra2? loses at once to 9 f6! g6 1 0 e6!
etc. White should now introduce another element into the attack by
advancing his h pawn to h6, and if Black stops this by . . . h6, this pawn
weakness makes f6 all the stronger. An excellent example of the use of
pawns in attack) 9 h3(?) Qa8 1 0 Kh2 Qe8 and even now White could
continue I I h4 ! or he has another instructive attacking plan in 1 1 e6 !
fxe6? 1 2 f6 ! threatening both 1 3 fxg7+ Kxg7 1 4 Bf6+ and 1 3 f7 Qf8
1 4 Be7 ! so Black must play 1 1 . . . f6 1 2 Bf4 with a strong protected
passed pawn on e6.
After missing these two opportunities, White allowed Black to
regroup his forces and draw comfortably after the moves: 1 1 R.f3?
BaS ! 1 2 Bf4 Bc7 ! etc.
(See next diagram) This is a well-known theoretical position from the
Sicilian Defence arising after the moves I e4 c5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 d4 cxd4
4 Nxd4 Nf6 5 Nc3 d6 6 Bc4 e6 7 Be3. Be7 8 Qe2 0.0 9 O.Q.Q a6 1 0 Bb3
Qc7. It is clear that White is attacking on the king side, Black on the
queen side, but it is equally clear that neither side can make sufficient
progress by the use of pieces alone. Pawns have to be used to create
space by driving back important defensive pieces, so White continues

Lukin (black)
1 88
Balashov (white)
I I g4! Nxd4 1 2 Rxd4 (the m ore logical recapture by 1 2 Bxd4 would
allow Black to win a pawn by advancing his e pawn, whereas now 1 2
. . . e S 1 3 Rc4! Qd8 14 gS Ne8 I S h4 bS 1 6 Rxc8 ! Rxc8 1 7 Qg4 gives
White a splendid attack for the exchange, with threats of hS and g6
or 1 8 g6 !? hxg6 1 9 hS! etc.) 1 2 . . . bS ! (and now Black wants to
return the compliment by driving away the knight with . . . b4 followed
by . . . aS-a4 with an attack of his own) 1 3 gS Nd7 1 4 f4 (sometimes
h4 is also played but the game line seems the more dangerous) 1 4 . . .
NcS (a dual-purpose move attacking the centre whilst allowing his c8
bishop to control fS. White can now sacrifice a pawn by I S fS !? but
after 1 S
exfS 1 6 exfS BxfS 1 7 Rf1 Qd7 1 8 NdS Rae8 chances are
about even) 1 S Rf1 {l S Qf2 is a good alternative) 1 S
Bb7? (too
slow ; he should either anticipate the opening of the e fLle by playing I S
. . . ReS or adopt the radical measure 1 S
fS !?) 1 6 fS Rfc8 1 7 f6 !
BfB 1 8 fxg7 Bxg7 1 9 e S ! (an energetic means of opening the 4th rank
for his rook) "1 9 . . . Nxb3+ 20 axb3 dS 2 1 Rh,4 and there is no defence
to the coming attack e.g. 2 1 . . . BxeS 22 QhS b4 23 Qxh7+ Kf8 24
BcS+! winning.
1 89
Petrov (black)
Keres (white)
1 1 6 I Attack and defence

Once again the move I g4! threatens to drive awa)l . the f6 knight,
coupled with the idea of trans.ferring a rook to h4 via gi and g4. After
I . . . Bb7 2 gS ! NdS (there is no time for 2 . . . Bxhi when White wins
by 3 gxf6 Bxf6 4 Nd7 Qc6 5 Nxf6+ gxf6 6 Qg4+ Kh8 7 Qh4 fS 8
Qf6+ Kg8 9 Bh6, or here 3 . . . gxf6 4 Qg4+ Kh8 5 Rgi Rg8 6 Nxf7
mate) 3 Rhgl Qc7 4 Rg4 ! (forcing Black to defend against the standard
5 Bxh7+! Kxh7 6 Rh4+ and 7 QhS) 4 . . . g6 5 Rh4 Bd6 6 Ng4 Rfc8 7
Kb l bS 8 Rdg1 (threatening 9 Nf6+ Nxf6 1 0 gxf6 followed by 1 1
Rxh7 !) 8 . . Be7 9 Nh6+ Kf8 I O Nxf7! BcS (or I O . . Kxf7 1 1 Rxh7+
and 1 2 Bxg6) 1 1 Rxh7! Bd4 ( 1 1 . . . Kxh7 1 2 QhS+) 1 2 Qxe6 and
White won.
.
1 90
Westerinen (black)
Kestler (white)
If the black knight had to retreat, White would stand better after 2 h4
with the possibility of playing the knight to dS and advancing his pawn
to aS. However, Black has planned a piece sacrifice for which he obtains
two pawns and a powerful attack on the king, whilst at the same time
activating his otherwise passive bishop. Who could ask for more? Play
went: 1 . . . Ng4! 2 fxg4 Qxg5 ! 3 Kh l hxg4 4 Rb2 Qh5 ! 5 Bb4 f.3 6
Qe l (or 6 Kgl c5 7 Bel Bh6 8 Bd2 f2+ 9 Rxf2 Rxf2 1 0 Kxf2 Qxh2+
.1 1 Ke l Qgl + 1 2 Ke2 Qxc l etc.) 6 . . . Bf6 ! 7 Kgl Bh4 8 Qe3 Bg5 9
Qf2 (after 9 Qel c5 1 0 Bd2 g3 ! 1 1 hxg3 Rh7) 9 . . . g3 ! 1 0 Qxg3 Bh4 1 1
Qh3 Bf2+ ! 1 2 Resigns.
The defender on the other hand must try to keep lines closed and
thwart his opponent's plans to open tl.tem. Interesting tactical problems
often arise in such situations. For example, the following variation is
typical of the King's Indian Defence : 1 d4 Nf6 2 c4 g6 3 Nc3 Bg7 4
e4 d6 5 Nf3 0-0 6 Be2 e5 7 0-0 Nc6 8 d5 Ne7 9 Ne 1 Nd7 1 0 f.3 (recently
10 Nd3 fS 1 1 Bd2 is popular) 1 0 . . . fS giving us the following diagram:

191
Variation of King's
Indian Defence
For many years 1 1 Be3 was played here until it was found that there is
a strong plan at Black's disposal in 1 1 . . . f4 1 2 Bf2 gS 1 3 Nd3 Nf6 14
cS Ng6 15 Rcl Rf7 16 cxd6 cxd6 17 NbS g4! when several games have
shown that the opening of the g me is dangerous for White. For this
reason White has tried to anticipate the line by the strange-looking I I
g4!? (instead of 1 1 Be3) and after 1 1 . . . f4 then 1 2 h4! not with the
intention of attacking on the king side, which is positional madness, but
with the purely defensive idea of preventing any opening of lines on
this side of the board! If instead 1 2 Nd3? gS ! followed by
Nf6 and
. . . hS would enable Black to open the h ftle, whereas now
gS is
countered by hS, and . . . hS by gS . Of course White must be careful
not to allow Black to sacrifice a piece to break up the king side. Play
could go : 1 2 . . . Kh8 1 3 Bd2 Ng8 1 4 Ng2! Bf6 1 5 Be 1 ! and only after
thJJ essential consolidation does White ,P Ursue his attack on the queen's
wing by Bf2, b4, Re i , cS etc. It shou {d now be obvious to the reader
that it would be a mistake for White to play 5 on move 14 or 1 5 in
view of . . . h6! opening up the h me for Black.
We meet similar ideas in many openings which result in a fianchetloed
bishop position with king on g8; bishop on g7, pawns on n, g6 and h7.
If, as often happens, White tries to open up lines on the king side by
advancing his g and h pawns, it is sometimes advisable to play the h7
pawn to h6. This admittedly involves an extra weakening of the pawns
but enables Black to prevent line-opening in the way we have already
seen, provided there is of course no knight on f6 which would allow gS !
If a defender wishes to avoid opening lines, he must also have
enough pieces available to defend his king side pawns so that he does
not have to weaken them by advancing them and can at the same time
stop any line-opening sacrifices of the kind we have illustrated. Con
sider our next position.
0

Janowski (black)
1 92
Rubinstein (white)
Black is faced with the horrible prospect of an attack on his king after a
few preparatory moves such as Bb2 and R.fJ , and at the moment has
few effective defending pieces on this wing, both his bishops
in particu_..
lar being completely 'off-side'. It is vital in such a situation to provide
additional support for the king with, say, . . . Nf8 protecting h7 followed
by . . . Bc8 controlling the important fS and h3 squares, and even the
otherwise undesirable I . . Bxc3 was well worth consideration in this
difficult situation, eliminating a potentially dangerous attacking piece
at the cost of allowing White the less tangible positional advantage of
the two bishops. However, in the game Black failed to appreciate the
extent of the danger facing him and succumbed with surprising rapidity
as follows: I . . Ba6? 2 Nce4! Nxe4 3 Nxe4 Nb6? (and this is ridiculous;
he had to play 3 . . . Nf8) 4 Bb2 (threatening S NgS h6 6 Bh7+ Kf8 7
Nxf7 ! Qe7 8 Bxg7+! Kxg7 9 Qg6+ Kf8 I O Qg8 mate) 4 . . . f6 S Rf3 !
Rf8 6 NgS ! fxgS 7 Bxh7+ Kh8 8 Bxg7+! Kxg7 9 Qg6+ Kh8 1 0 Rh3
'
Qd7 I I Bg8+! Qxh3 I 2 gxh3 Resigns.
.
4. Methods of defence
Defence is always more difficult than attack. nu,cause an attacker
chooses and controls his own plan, w'hereas a (defender has first to
ascertain his opponent's intentions before he can select an appropriate
line of defence. Should the attacker have two or more poJISible plans at
his disposal, the defender must constantly bear in n$ d the various
alternatives, a most onerous task w!lich demands knowledge, experii
ence and . . . good nerves!
It is vital to adhere to the principle of economy formulated by the
founder of modern chess strategy, one time World Champion Wilhe,lm
Steinitz, wllich runs as follows: the defence should use the minimum

force necessary for the task in hand, thus freeing the remaining pieces
for essential counter-attacking purposes. It is easy to grasp the logic of
such a concept. Constantly passive defence is rarely successful unless
our opponent blunders or mishandles his attack, so we must always be
on the look-out for counter-attacking chances. For example, it would
be madness to use our strongest pieces (queen and rooks) for the
defence of a weak point if this task can be carried out by a pawn or a
minor piece. In addition, it is important to guard against the major
threats of our opponent and not be diverted by subsidiary threats. A
classic example of this is offered us by another World Champion, Dr
lAsker, in his famous Manual of Chess:
1 93

(l t [l t
il

. ft .
II
ft . D ft ll
* !1
Steinitz (black)
Tehigorin (white)
At first sight Black's main threat appears to be the win of the f2 pawn
by I . . . g4, but on closer examination we realise that the loss of the
f pawn in itself is not so fatal (exchange of at. least one pair of rooks
plus bishops of opposite colour makes a draw likely), and in reality there
is much greater danger in allowing Black to exploit the pin of the f
pawn in order to create open attacking lines on the king side. For
example, if it were Dlack to move, he could win as follows: I . . . g4 !
2 Be2 g3 ! 3 hxg3 Bxf2+ 4 Kh2 Qh4+ 5 gxh4 Rxh4 mate. So White's
best defence is I Kh l ! g4 2 Be2 Bxf2? 3 g3 and the attack is beaten
off, as 3 . . . Qh6 is answered by 4 Qd5 ! (but not 4 gxf4? g3). Or if 2
. . . Rxf2 3 Rxf2 Qxf2 4 Bxg4. Or 2 . . . h5 3 Bc4 etc.
However, in the game White was obsessed with holding on to the f
pawn at aU costs and lost as follows: I h3? g4! 2 hxg4 (or 2 Bxg4
R8xg4! 3 hxg4 Rxf2 4 Rxf2 Qxf2+ 5 Kh2 Qh4 mate) 2 . . . h5! 3 g5
(3 gxh5? RxfJ) 3 . . . Rxg5 4 Kh2 Rh4+ 5 Kgl Qf4 6 Re i Rxg2+!
followed by mate in two moves.
\,

Pactunan (black)
1 94
Romm (white)
Black must urgently direct his attention to the main threat of Ne4-f6
followed by Rh3 forcing mate on h7 or g7. In order to defend against
this, Black must give up two pawns, but the resulting positional pressure
is full compensation for this material loss. 1 . . . f5 ! 2 exf6 Bxf6 3 Bxc5
Ne7 ! (now White could win another pawn by 4 Bxe7 Qxe7 5 Bxg6 but
after 5 . . Bg7 6 Qh5 Nxg6 7 Rxg6 Rf8! Black has excellent counter
play with his threats of . . . Rxf4 and . . . e5) 4 Ba3? Nf5 ! 5 Bxf5 Bg7!
6 Qh4 exf5 7 Ne l (7 Bxf8 Qb6+ and 8 . . RxfB) 7 . . . Be6 8 Rd1
Rad8 9 Rgd3 Rxd3 10 Rxd3 Bc4 1 1 Rd2? Qxf4 ! ! 12 Qxf4 Rxe l + 1 3
Kf2 Rfl + 1 4 Ke3 Rxf4 1 5 Kxf4 Bh6+ 1 6 Ke5 Bxd2 1 7 Bxf8 Kg8 and
Black won the ending.
.
1 95
Lasker (black)
Tartakower (white)
Lasker is acknowledged as one of the greatest defensive players of all
time. Here is a splendid example of his skill. White is threatening to
develop a tremendous attack by doubling rooks on the f file followed
by Bd3 and Ne2-d4. Within a few moves Lasker regroups his pieces to
cope with this danger, using his restricted space cleverly in he first
three moves with each piece clearing a square for the next one. Play
Attack and defence
I 121
went: 1 . . . Be71 2 Raft Rf8! 3 QdJ Be8! 4 QgJ Qd8 5 Nd l Nd7 ! (it is
remarkable how quickly Black has improved his defensive prospects, his
knight In particular heading for the strong square at eS where it will
blockade the e pawn and dominate the centre. White now plays for
compUcations which lasker tactically turru to his advantage) 6 NeJ !?

BgS 7 RfJ !? f6 8 Qfl hS 9 Rg3 h4! (not 9 . . . Bh4? 1 0 Rxg7+!) 10 Rg4
BhS and the win of the exchange gav Black a comfortable victory.
1 96
Rajkovic (black)
Stean
(white)
Good defensive players utilise every hidden tactical resource they can
find, and this complex position is ripe for this treatment. Black is
threatening to capture the h pawn with queen or rook, and the tempt
ing 1 Nf5+? loses to 1 . . Kxf6 2 Qxe3 (2 Nxe3? Rxh3 + 3 Kg l Bxe3+
wins) 2 . . . Bxe3 3 Nxh4 Bfl! 4 NO e4 S Nh2 exd3 6 Ng4+ KfS 7
Nxf2 dxc2 8 Nd3 Ke4 etc. White saved himself with the subtle idea
of first luring the bishop to f3 by 1 Qxe3 BxeJ 2 Rf3 ! ! Bxf3 and only
then playing 3 Nf5 + Kf6 4 gxf3 Bg5 5 Nxh4 Bxh4 with a quick draw.
.
1 97
Paclunan (black)
1 22 I Attack and defence
White is pressing Black strongly on the king side with an imme diate
threat of Qxg6, and if I . . . Kh7 2 Ng4 threatens 3 Nxh6. The solution
lies in a counter-attack by 1 . . . NaS ! 2 Bc2 (if 2 Bxh6!? Nxb3 3 BgS
Nf4! 4 Bxf4 exf4 S axb3 Qxe4 and the bishop is stronger than the
knight, and if 2 BdS c6! 3 Qxg6 cxdS 4 Qb6 Nc4 S Qxb7 Rab8! 6
QxdS Nxe3 7 fxe3 Rxb2 with a good attack for the pawn e.g. 8 Rf2
Rxf2 9 Kxf2 Bxh3 ! 1 0 gxh3 Rd8 1 1 Qc4 Rd2+ wins) 2 . . . Nc4 3 Be l
Nf4 4 Qf3 Rad8! S Bxf4 exf4 6 Qxf4 Bc6 ! (Black's counter-attack has
resulted in a strong position for him. White cannot maintain his extra
pawn e.g. 7 b3 Na3 8 Racl Nxc2 9 Rxc2 Bxe4, or 7 Nf3 Nxb2 8 Nd4
Ba4! with advantage to Black in both cass. So he goes in for a sharp
attack) 7 Ng4!? hS ! 8 Ne3 Nxb2! 9 NfS Qf6 1 0 Qxc7 Qxc3 1 1 Rac1 (if
1 1 Ne7 + Rxe7! 1 2 Qxd8+ ReS, or here 1 2 Qxe7 ReB and Black picks
up the bishop on c2) 1 1 . . . Qf6 1 2 Rfel Nd3 1 3 Bxd3 Rxd3 1 4 Qf4!?
(after 14 f3 Rd2 White is positionally lost, but the piece sacrifice fails
too) 14 . . . g6! 1 5 ReS (or 1 5 Nh6+ Kg7 1 6 Qxf6+ Kxf6 and the
knight is trapped, or if 1 5 QhS Re6 ! etc.) I S . . . Re6! (much stronger
than 1 5 . . . gxf5? 1 6 Rxf5 , since now White loses a piece without
sufficient compensation) 1 6 Qb8t Rd8 1 7 Qf4 gxf5 1 8 RxfS Qg7 1 9
Rxh5 Rde8 2 0 f3 ReS ! 2 1 Rh4 Rg5 2 2 Rg4 Rxg4 2 3 hxg4 Qd4+ 24
Re3 QeS 25 Qf5 Qxf5 26 gxf5 Rd8 and Black won.
1 98
ScMneberger (black)
SoUer (white)
Black's threats of . . . Bxg4 and . . . Nxe4 followed by . . . Qxc3 look
too dangerous, but White finds a winning counter-attack beginning with
a surprising retreat, as follows: 1 Qd l ! Nxe4 2 Qd8+ Kg7 3 Rxh7+!
Kxh7 4 Rh l + Kg7 5 Qh8 mate.
(See next diagram) TI1e threats of Qxh7+ and Nxf6 seem conclusive
until we see Black's clever counter-attacking idea which exploits the
position of White's king and queen in original fashion: 1 . . . Qxd5 ! ! 2

1 99
l)laninc (black)
Szab6 (white)
Qxh7+ Kf8 3 cxd5 Ke7 (suddenly Black's king is perfectly safe and it is
White who has the problems despite his material advantage e.g. if 4
Ra4? Rh8 5 Qg7 RagS wins back the queen, or if 4 Rh6? Ng5 5 Qg7
Ng4+ 6 Kgl Rg8 does the same. So White must now lose the exchange,
when Black has sufficient compensation in position to equalise the
game) 4 Kg2 Nxh4+ 5 Qxh4 b5 6 Re i Rad8 and the game was eventually
drawn.
200
Shuravlev (black)
The unstoppable threat of mate on c7 (1 . . . Rd7'? 2 Rb8 mate) means

that Black's only chance lies in the following counter-attack which
secures for him an unusual draw by perpetual check: I . . . Qe3+ 2
Khl Rxh2+! 3 Kxh2 (if 3 Nxh2 Qe4+! 4 Kg l Qe3 + draws) 3 . . .
Qxe2+ 4 Kh3 Rh8+ 5 Nh4 Rxh4+! Draw.
(See next diagram) Freeing moves are very much part of the counter
attack in defence, but of course one must be careful not to open up the
game too soon, when it usually benefits the attacker. A freeing move
often proves successful when our opponent has been a little impetuous
in launching his attack and has weakened his position in a way which

201
Pachman (black)
Gligoric (white)
we must immediately exploit by means of a counter-attack. This is a

typical example of such a freeing move. White is threatening to play gS,
when Bxh7+ is in the air. The normal and logical freeing move is . . . cS
but Black has no time for this, so opts for a tactical solution based on
the fact that White has slightly exposed his king by advancing his f and
g pawns. It is a case of now or never, so I
. Nfe4! 2 Nxe4 dxe4 3
Bxe4 Nxe4 4 Qxe4 eS ! ! giving us the following possibilities:
( 1 ) S fxeS Rxfl + 6 Kxfl Qe6 ! and the threats of . . . Qc4+ or . . .
Qb3 along with a possible . Rf8 gives Black ample compensation
for his two pawns deficit.
(2) S fS exd4 6 Qxd4 Qxd4 7 exd4 Bf6 8 Bb2 Rad8 9 Radl RdS, or
here 8 Be3 Rfe8 9 Bf2 Re2 with at least equality.
(3) S QxeS Qxg4+ 6 Khl Rae8! with good play for Black.
(4) The game continued: S dxeS? Qxg4+ 6 Qg2 Qxg2+ 7 Kxg2 and
now with 7 . . . Rad8! followed by 8 . . . Rd3 Black had a decisive
positional advantage.
.
202
..
. i rl i
i
. ft .
IJ4:)[1 ft
* ll ft . ft
ft ft .
E!
Wach (black)
Sesient (white)

Here too White has an impressive-looking space advantage which he will
increase by Ne2 and Nb6 with complete control of the c fLJe. In

addition he has the threat of NaS attacking the b pawn, so urgent
ICtlon Ia required from Black who plays 1 . . . e6! 2 dxe6 (if 2 NaS
Jlxc1 3 Rxc1 Bd7! 4 Nxb7 Qa8 winning back the pawn) 2 . . . dS! 3
exd5 NxdS 4 Rfd1 Rxc4! S Rxc4 Ba4! 6 exfi+ Rxti 7 Qxa4 Nxe3 8
Rde 1 and now Black could have completely equalised with 8 . . . Bxd4!
9 Rxd4 Qxd4 10 Qe8+ RfB 1 1 Qxe3 Qxb4 etc.
10011
: .
Chapter 5
Making plans
We now come to the more difficult area of chess strategy. The first
point to stress is that any strategic plan must be finnly based on the
nature of the position we are dealing with. Here are some questions we
must ask ourselves:
( 1 ) How are the pieces of both sides posted? Depending on the number
and effectiveness of our pieces, do we stand better or worse on any
one section of the board?
(2} Has the pawn structure any peculiar characteristics? Have we a
pawn majority on the wing or in the centre? Are our pawns more
mobile? Can we create a passe d pawn? Are there any pawn weak
nesses in either camp?
(3) Are the pieces and pawns working well together? For example, is
a passed pawn or a pawn majority backed up by our pieces? Have
we a good or bad bishop, or is one minor piece better or worse in
the given pawn structure?
(4) What is the situation of the respective kings? On which side have
they castled or are they in the centre? Will a pawn advance expose
our king position?
(5) Would a transition into the end-game be favourable or not?
It is clear that some of these factors which determine our strategic
plan are of a permanent nature, whereas others are purely temporary.
In particular, we can usually change the placing of our pieces, some
times even moving them from one wing to the other or re-grouping
them for a specific purpose. However, we can hardly do this with pawns
which are of a much more fiXed nature. Our whole strategic plan may
in fact be determined by a pawn majority, a doubled pawn or an isolated
pawn, because such permanent, features are normally more important
than temporary ones.
Often beginners assume that they can attack when they feel like it,
but this is clearly misguided. A successful attack is only possible when
the conditions are suitable, as we have already seen e.g. when we have a
Making plans I 1 27
material superiority on one wing, or our opponent has certain weak
- which can be exploited. Lasker formulated four rules to help us
dedde when an attack is possible. Firstly, there is nonnally a balance of
forcoa on each side giving us an equilibrium. Secondly, direct attacks
c:an only be undertaken when this equilibrium has been in some way
upset e.g. when our opponent has made a mistake or adopted a faulty
ltratcgic plan. Thirdly, the attack must be directed against weak, not
lUong poin ts in our opponent's camp. Fourthly, the defence must be
cooducted with maximum economy, using no unnecessary force.
All these precepts will become clearer when we have seen examples
of their practical application, but let us first consider the problem of
the correct choice of strategic plan. 11tis question usually arises in the
opening stages as we move into the middle-game and then needs review
ing in the light of the subsequent play. Here are a few positions resulting
from an opening sequence, along with a brief outline of the appropriate
ltrateglc plan.
After the opening moves from the Italian Game : 1 e4 e5 2 Nf.l Nc6
3 Bc4 Bc5 4 c3 Nf6 5 d4 exd4 6 cxd4 Bb4+ 7 Bd2 Bxd2+ 8 Nbxd2 d5
9 exdS NxdS 1 0 Qb3 Nce7 1 1 0-0 0-0 1 2 Re l c6, we reach the follow
ins poaitlon:
203
Variation of the
Italian G arne
Let us first ask ourselves some of the questions we suggested at the

beginning of this chapter, arriving at these conclusions:
(1) White's pieces are better placed, especially the rook on e 1 and
bishop on c4 which are clearly more active than their counterparts
on f8 and c8. Hence the need to prevent . . . b5 driving the bishop
from its fme post (so 1 2 a4!).
(2) Neither side has a pawn majority, but White's pawnon d4 is iso
lated i.e. with no white pawn on either side, which represents a
1 28 I Making plans
permanent weakness particularly vulnerable in the end-game. How.
ever, this pawn has its good points which are significant advantages
in the middle-game, situated as it is in the centre and controlling
vital squares (e5, c5) for use as strong-points for his pieces. Black's
pawn position is solid with no weaknesses, and his c6 pawn supports
his important strong-point on d5 .
(3) White's pieces are well placed in relation to his pawns, with his
rook occupying the e flle, his f3 knight heading for e5 and his
other knight able to reach c5 via e4. All Black's pieces are geared to
his vital d5 square.
(4) Both kings are secure at the moment, with no weaknesses in their
protecting pawns.
(5) As already indicated, a transition to the end-game would favour
Black in view of White's isolated d pawn. However, he must take
care not to exchange queens too early, as the white rooks can
speedily control the e file and the knights occupy e5 and c5. For
this reason the immediate exchange after 1 2 a4 Qb6 1 3 aS ! Qxb3
14 Nxb3 is to White's advantage. Nevertheless, once Black's minor
pieces are developed, he will stand better in an ending.
So finally all these considerations point us inevitably to the plans to be
followed by both sides. White will try to increase his pressure down the
e file and along the a2-g8 diagonal combined with active posting of his
knights on e5 and c5. Black must defend against this pressure by develop
ing his pieces and gradually easing his position by exchanges, utilising to
the full his strong d5 square and eventual pressure down the d file.
Our second position arises after the moves (Two Knights' Defence):
1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 Bc4 Nf6 4 Ng5 d5 5 exd5 Na5 6 Bb5 + c6 7 dxc6
bxc6 8 Be2 h6 9 Nf3 e4 10 Ne5 Bd6 1 1 d4 exd3 1 2 Nxd3 Qc7 1 3 b3
0-0 14 Bb2 Nd5 1 5 h3 Bf5 16 0-0 Rad8 :
204
Variation of Two Knights'

Defence
M a king plans I I 29
A aimilar analysis as before gives us :
(I) Black's pieces are posted more actively and control more space (the
d me and b8-h2 diagonal).
(2) White has the important material advantage of a pawn, and Black's
a7 and c6 pawns are isolated and thus potential weaknesses.
(3) White's pieces are not developed actively enough to enable him at
the moment to exploit his pawn majority on the queen's wing,
whereas Black's central control allows him to carry out the . . . c5c4 pawn advance which would at least eliminate one of his weak
pawns whilst producing extra pressure down the c file.
(4) The position of both kings has been a little weakened by the ad
vance of the h pawns, but at the moment it is the white king's
residence which is more under siege because of the pressure of the
black pieces.
(S) In the present situation a transition to the end-game would un
doubtedly favour White.
So both plans are reasonably clear : White must try to increase the
activity of his pieces and aim for exchanges, whilst Black must use the
greater activity of his pieces to apply more pressure on the white
position and at least regain his pawn e.g. 1 7 NcJ? Nb4 !
In the French Defence after the moves: 1 e4 e6 2 d4 d5 3 Nc3 Nf6
4 Bg5 Be7 5 e5 Nfd7 6 Bxe7 Qxe7 7 Qd2 0-0 we arrive at this position :
205
Variation of French Defence
The pawn structure very much determines the strategy to be followed.

The central white and black pawns jammed against each other are
termed pawn chains, giving White space on the king's wing and Black
the same on the other wing. White will prepare to attack the base of
Black's chain by f4 and f5, whilst Dlack will rapidly take an equivalent
measure on the queen's wing by playing . . . c5. Comparing the activity
1 3 0 I Making plans
of the pieces on both sides, the main point to note is that Black's
bishop is 'bad', blocked in as it is by its own pawns, whereas White's
bishop has an unhindered development on d3 exerting pressure along
the b l -h7 diagonal. lbis factor is an important indication of White's
positional advantage in both the middle-game, where his active pieces
and king side space will enable him to take the initiative, and in the
ending, where his better bishop will prove more effective than its
counterpart. Black for his part will have to defend passively for a while
and eventually aim for a counter-attack down the c me.
206
Variation of Sicilian Defence
This position arises after the moves (Sicilian Defence) : I e4 c5 2 ND d6

3 d4 cxd4 4 Nxd4 Nf6 5 Nc3 g6 6 Be3 Bg7 7 D 0 8 Qd2 Nc6 9 Bc4
Bd7 I 0 0- The distinctive factors here are Black's fianchettoed
bishop on g7 and castling on opposite wings. Both sides will prepare to
attack the respective king, with time clearly being a vital element in. this
'first come, first served' situation. White usually aims to open he h_f i e
with
by advancing his h pawn and even sacrificing it if necessary, li
the use of the g pawn in some cases along with the essential ex ange of
the dark-squared bishops to weaken Black's king position. Black will try
to e xploit the open c flle by playing his knight to c4, dotibling rooks
on the me with a potential exchange sacrifice on c3, and advancing his
a and b pawns if need be, with the powerful bishop on g7 always lurk
ing in the background ready to participate actively if White makes a
mistake.
A variation of the Ruy Lopez which is a good example of differ
ent features balancing each other occurs after the moves: I e4 e5 2
ND Nc6 3 Bb5 a6 4 Bxc6 dxc6 5 Nc3 f6 6 d4 exd4 7 Qxd Qxd4
8 Nxd4.
'f!!:
Malting plans I 1 3 1
Variation of Ruy Lopez
207
White has a mobile 4:3 pawn majority on the king side, whereas Black's
own queen's side majority is greatly devalued by the doubled c pawn.
11lis doubled pawn is so difficult to convert into a passed pawn that we
can state Wlequivocally that, if all the pieces were off the board, the
pawn ending would be won for White! However, the end-game without
pieces is a long way off, and at the moment Black's bishop pair is more
than adequate compensation for White's mobile majority. In other
words, in this position White has a static and Black a dynamic advantage,
and these diverse factors of necessity detennine their respective plans.
White must try to simplify the position into an end-game with few
pieces on the board, whilst Black must use his bishop pair as an attack
ing weapon.
208
Variation of Ruy Lopez
:t atll :l . :l
. ... . .
.
.[. . .
ft
[1
ft ll ft B li ft ..

11lis position arises from the Steinitz Defence (to the Ruy Lopez) after
the moves: 1 e4 eS 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 BbS d6 4 0-0 Nf6 5 d4 Bd7 6 Nc3 Be7
7 Rei exd4 8 Nxd4 0.{). The position is characterised by what is termed

the little centre, a pawn on e4{d4) opposing a pawn on d6(e6). White's
pawn controls territory in the enemy camp (dS ,fS) so is more aggressively
1 3 2 I Making plans
placed compared to Black's defensive pawn on d6, giving him a modest
but definite advantage in space. Black on the other hand Is somewhat
cramped, his bishop on e7 being passively posted. As a result White
must use his space advantage and more active pieces to build up pres
sure in the centre and on the king side, for example posting his queen's
bishop effectively on b2. He must also avoid undue simplification
which would only help Black's cramped position, and since Black can
shortly exchange two pieces by . . . Nxd4 and . . . Bxb5, White usually
settles for the exchange of one piece by 9 Bxc6, the bishop pair being
of lesser importance here because the position is partially closed and
Black's bishops can rarely become active. For his part Black will look
for freeing exchanges and seek to restrain White's centre by exerting
pressure down the e me ( . . . ReS and . . . Bf8) and along the a l -h8
diagonal ( . . . g6 and . . . Bg7).
There are certain critical positions in the opening when a number
of strategic plans are possible because the fmal character of the position
has not yet been determined. Take for example the situation arising
after the moves of the Orthodox Defence to the Queen's Gambit I d4
d5 2 c4 e6 3 Nc3 Nf6 4 Bg5 8e7 5 e3 0.0 6 Nf3 Nbd7 7 Re i c6 8 Bd3
dxc4 9 Bxc4 Nd5 10 Bxe7 Qxe7 I I 0-0 Nxc3 1 2 Rxc3 e5 13 Qc2,
when everything depends on Black's next move. If he plays 1 3 . . . exd4
14 exd4 we reach a position similar to diagram 203 , where White tries
to exploit the e flle and his more active pieces. He has even better pros
pects here, because Black has not such full control of the strategically
important d5 and also White can gain time for doubling rooks on the e
file by attacking the queen.
On the other hand, the continuation 1 3 . . . e4 1 4 Nd2 Nf6 produces
an entirely different situation in which Black has created some space
for himself on the king side but settled the central position, thus giving
White a free hand on the queen's wing, allowing him to place all his
major pieces on the c fll.e with a view to breaking through by b4-5.
We have already looked at the position arising after the moves: 1 d4
Nf6 2 c4 g6 3 Nc3 Bg7 4 e4 d6 5 Nf3 0.0 6 Be2 e5 7 0.0 Nc6 8 d5 Ne7
(see diagram 1 9 1 ) which illustrates, in reverse, the characteristics of the
pawn chain situation we discussed in diagram 205. Black's plan will be
to prepare . . . f5 and later (after f3) attack on this side by advancing
his pawns ( . . . f4, g5, h5 and a subsequent . . . g4). White will meanwhile attack on the other wing by opening the c file (c4-c5 and cxd6),
combining this with appropriate defensive measures against the..coming
attack on his king. He has a choice of three plans:
Making plans I 1 33
(1} To allow Black to proceed relatively unhindered with !tis pawn
attack and begin Immediate operations on the queen's wing e.g. 9
Ne l (to prevent the active . . . NhS) 9 . . . Nd7 1 0 Bd2 fS I I Nd3
Nf6 1 2 n f4 1 3 cS with sharp and unclear play ; or 9 Nd2 intending
10 b4 followed by Nb3 and cS etc.
(2) To forestall Black's plan by 9 Ne l Nd7 10 f3 fS 1 1 g4 !? which we
discussed earlier.
(3) To begin action on the queen's wing whilst leaving the knight on f3
with the intention of playing it to gS and e6 (after . . . fS), even
sacrificing a pawn to open lines for White's pieces and at the same
time eliminate one of Black's best attacking pieces. This interesting
Idea can be carried out after the moves 9 b4 NhS 1 0 g3 {otherwise
the knight goes to f4) I 0 . . . fS I I NgS when Black has sufficient
counter-play with 1 1 . . . Nf6 1 2 f3 f4 ! or White can proceed less
riskily with 9 Bd2 NhS (9 . . . Ne8 is better) 1 0 g3 fS 1 1 NgS etc.
It is important to note that none of these plans was in conflict with
the basic characteristics of the position but merely different ways of
trying to exploit these. We have already stated that it would be wrong
to choose a plan which goes against the essential demands of the posi
tion. For example, if a positional attack on the queen's wing is called
for, It would be pointless to launch a king side attack because of some
personal preference for mating the king at all costs! And yet this is
what happened in our next position.
209
Nimzovitch (black)
The pawn structure should quickly point us towards the correct plan of
preparing a queen side attack by 1 h3 0-0 2 Be3 followed by Na4 and
cS aiming at the base of the pawn chain, with a clear advantage to
White, since Black has little time to prepare the logical counter-action
1 34 I Making plans
of . . . fS , and if he tries to block White's plan by 2 . . . cS then 3 dxc6
gives him a weak backward pawn on the d file.
However, White who was an experienced international master chose
a totally wrong plan. Because Black's pieces, in particular the bishop on
b7, were passively placed, he thought he could launch an attack on the
castled king, and quickly obtained the wont of it as follows: 1 Bb2?
0-0 2 Ne2 g6 3 Qd2 NhS! (revealing the point of . . . g6, to thwart
White's intended f4. Tills means that White must change his attacking
plans, thus leaving his bishop badly posted on b2) 4 g4 Ng7 5 Ng3 c6!
(a logical reaction, accepting a weak d pawn now that White has com
mitted himself on the other wing) 6 Qh6 ReS 7 Racl a6 (not rushing to
exchange pawns until he is ready to play . . . bS) S Rfd1 Rc7 9 h4?
(wrongly persisting with his faulty plan when he should be looking to
the safety of his king with 9 h3 !) 9 . . . cxdS 1 0 cxdS Rxc1 1 1 Rxc1
Nf6 12 Nh2 KhS! (putting paid once and for all to f4 which would now
allow 1 3 . . . NgS winning the queen) 1 3 Qe3 Nd7 14 Nf3 Nf6 1 5 Nh2
NgS 1 6 gS f6! (the fmal insult, opening up the very side on which White
was 'attacking'!) 1 7 Nf3 fxg5 1 S hxg5 DeS (White's position is now full
of holes, so he sacrifices the exchange in a vain attempt to stem the
tide) 1 9 Rc6! Bd7 20 Bxa6! (not 20 Rxb6? Rxf3 !) 20 . . . Bxc6 2 1
dxc6 Qc7 22 bS P6! 23 gxh6 Ne6 24 a4 BdS 2 5 Ba3 Qfi! 26 NxeS
dxeS 27 Bxf8 Qxf8 28 aS Nxh6 29 axb6 Ng4 30 c7 Nxe3 3 1 c8=Q
Qf3 32 fxe3 Qxg3+ 33 Resigns.
210
.l..
Variation o f Queen's Gambi
1: 1: 1:
. 1: .
t a
II
l:l.illl
ft ll-tt ll ft ll
D ;; [!
Once again, after the moves (Queen's Gambit): 1 d4 dS 2 c4 e6 3 Nc3

Nf6 4 cxdS exdS S BgS Be7 6 e3 0-0 7 Bd3 c6 8 Qc2 Nbd7, White can
proceed in three different but equally viable ways, depending .on his
next move :
Making plans I 1 3 5
(l) He can prepare a central thrust by 9 Nge2 followed by l O 0-0 and
l l f3 Intending a subsequent e4.
(2) He can prepare an attack on the castled king by 9 Nge2 and 1 0 h3
followed by I I 0-0-0 and the advance of his king side pawns.
(3) He can continue with 9 Nf3 ReS 10 0-0 intending Rab l and b4,
the so-calle d minority attack, the idea of which is to apply pressure
on the c6 pawn by playing bS. If Black captures this pawn, his d
pawn is weakened, and if he. allows White to capture on c6, he is
saddled with a backward pawn on the c me.
From all this we can draw a pertinent conclusion: we should choose
our opening variations with a view to specific strategic plans we intend
to follow and which suit our own style and preferences, and we should
try to steer the game into channels which demand strategic plans alien
to the nature of our opponent!
Chapter 6
Effective use
of pieces
One of our most important tasks in a game is to maximise the power of

our pieces. Each individual piece has its own way of moving which
demands a specific strategic treatment if it is to achieve optimum
effectiveness. The rooks, for example, desperately need open fJ.J.es so
that they can penetrate into the enemy position, the 7th and 8th ranks
in particular, where they can exert tremendous pressure.
21 1
Capablanca (black)
Alatortzev (white)
Black controls the c fJ.J.e but if he immediately doubles rooks on it
White can open the a file by 2 aS! with full equality. For this reason
Capablanca played 1 . . . Qb7! in order to answer 2 aS with 2 . . . bS
creating a strong passed pawn. If now 2 Rfcl Rfc8 3 Qd2 Qc7 ! 4 Rxc6
Qxc6, Black establishes full control of the vital file, so White should
try to exchange queens by 2 Qe2! and 3 Qf3 , since rook endings are
notoriously difficult to win. Instead he makes his first small mistake
with 2 Rfb l (?) and play continued 2 . . . Rfc8 3 h3 (the intended 3 aS
fails to 3 . . . bS! because White's back rank is undefended if he cap
tures the pawn) 3 . . . a6! 4 Qa3 Rc2! (already Black has a clear advan
tage and even after White's best play of simplifying with S Re i Rxc l +
6 Rxcl Rxc l + 7 Qxcl bS ! the queen ending with a passed pawn.gives
Dlack excellent winning chances. In the game White tries to activate his
Effective
use
of pieces I 1 3 7
instructive combination which reveals the power of

5 Qd6? Rxf2 ! 6 Qg3 Re2 7 Resigns. Black had
to calculate an important variation here : if 6 Kxf2 Rc2+ 7 Ke l Qxg2
8 QbS+ Kg7 9 Qe5+ Black escapes perpetual check by playing 9 .
Kf8! 1 0 Qd6+ KeS 1 1 Qb8+ Ke7 1 2 Qa7+ Kf6 winning.
queen but allows an
a rook on the 7th rank)
212
Simagin
(black)
GeUer (white)
White has a central pawn majority but it is not easy to exploit this
directly because mack's pieces are weU placed to cope with the advance
d pawn. The correct plan is to take over the c file by the surpris
1 Ba6! Bxa6 2 Qxa6 Rxc l (there is no other way to guard the pawn
a7) 3 Rxc l QaS 4 Bd6 RdS 5 e 5 ! (normally such a move, leaving the
of the
ing
on
d pawn backward, is strategicaUy bad, but here it is the strongest con

tinuation since 1t secures the entry point at c7 and prepares to contain
6 Rc7 Qe4 7
9 Qxa7 Bh6 1 0 Rxf7
Black's coming attempt at a counter-attack) 5 . . . Bg7
Nd2 Qe l + 8 N fl NfB (or 8 . . . NbS 9 Qc8!

Qbl 1 1 Qe7 ReS 1 2 Rxh7 Resigns.
etc.)
An open file in itself is not enough. An entry point is required if our

rooks are to penetrate down the ftle, a 'turning point' as it is sometimes
called. The next two positions illustrate this theme .
213
Composed position by
Nimzovitch
1 3 8 / Effective use of pieces

White should exploit the file by Rg6! and since exchanging would
allow White to recapture with the h pawn he succeeds in doubling rooks
on the me with a decisive advantage. On the other hand, the seemingly
powerful ! Ng6 Rh7 proves ineffective.
214
Pachman (black)
will be seen, if White's pawn were on b2 or b3, or Black's pawn on

b5, the game would be drawn! In the first case Black would be unable
to use the c4 entry point successfully, and in the second case he could
not answer I Rfc I with I . Rfc8 in view of 2 ReS ! when it is White
who has the entry point! Or if he plays here 1 . . . Rc4 2 Rxc4 dxc4 3
Ra 1 ! ReS 4 Kfl the draw is clear. However, in the actual position
matters are quite different, because Black can answer 2 ReS with 2 . . .
b6 ! 3 Rb5? Rc6 and White's rook is trapped! Play went: I Ra l Rc4 2
Rfd l Rfc8 ! 3 Rdb l Rxd4 4 Ra7 Rb8 5 b5 Re4 6 Rei d4 7 Rd l Rxe5 8
Rxd4 Rxb5 9 Rd7 g5 1 0 Kg2 h5 I I Rc7 Kg7 1 2 Ra4 Kg6 1 3 h4 g4 14
_
Ra7 Rb2 15 Resigns.
Another useful principle to remember when we are planning to open
a file is that the threat is usually stronger than the execution; in other
words, before opening the flle we build up maximum power with our
major pieces, as illustrated in the following study by Euwe.
(See next diagram) I a4! Kd7 (the only way that Black can contest the
file because 1 . . . Rb8 2 axb5 axb5 3 Ra7 is hopeless for him) 2 Ra2!
is the only correct method, since there is only a draw to be had from
the immediate opening of the file. Dr Euwe now gives the following
analysis:
(I) 2 . . . Kc7 3 Rba l Kb7 4 Kf3 f6 5 e4 Rhd8 (after 5 . . . dxe4+ 6
Kxe4 White would already threaten 7 axb5 axb5 8 Rxa8 Rxa8 9
Rxa8 Kxa8 1 0 f4 ! Kb7 1 1 d 5 ! with a won pawn ending) 6 ab5
axb5 7 Rxa8 Rxa8 8 Rxa8 Kxa8 9 exd5 e xd5 1 0 Kf4 g6 1 1 g4 h6
As
Effective use of pieces I 1 3 9

215
1 2 h4 Kb7 1 3 h 5 winning. Note how White delays opening the ft.le

until he can exchange pieces to reach a won pawn ending!
(2) 2 . . . bxa4 (trying to cross White's plan but giving himself a weak
pawn on a6) 3 Rxa4 Kc7 4 Rba 1 (threatening both 5 Rxa6 and 5
b5) 4 . . . Kb7 5 Ra5 Rhc8 6 Kf3 RedS 7 e4 dxe4+ 8 Kxe4 Rdc8 9
Re5 Rc6 1 0 R 1 a5 Rac8 1 1 d 5 ! exd5 + 1 2 Raxd5 R6c7 1 3 Kd4
Kb6 1 4 f4 R7c6 1 5 g3 R8c7 1 6 h4 ReB 1 7 h5 R8c7 1 8 b5 axb5 1 9
Rxb5 + Ka6 20 Rec5 winning.
216
Yudovitch (black)
Rauser (white)
A position which is similar to the Queen's Gam bi t variation we examined

earlier (after 1 3 . . . e4), when we stated that White's plan is to exploit
the half-open c file. Play continued: 1 a5 ! Nd5 2 a6 ! (weakening the
pawn on c6 and so increasing the effectiveness of the coming occupa
tion of the c file) 2 . . . b6 3 Rdc l Bf5 4 Nxd5 cxd5 5 Bb 5 ! Bd7 6 Bc6 !
(giving up his 'good' bishop for the greater cause of exploiting the c
file) 6 . . . Bxc6 7 Rxc6 Rec8 8 Qc3 Qd7 9 Rac 1 Rxc6 1 0 Qxc6 Qxc6
1 1 Rxc6 (despite the massive exchanges, White shows that even in the
end-game the control of an open file can be a decisive factor) 1 1 . . .
1 40
I Effective use of pieces
NeB 1 2 Nb l ! (aiming for bS) 1 2

KgB 1 3 Nc3 RdB 14 NbS Rd7. So
Black's pieces have been forced into passive positions and White begins
a new phase of the game with an attack on the other wing by 1 5 g4!
Ke7 1 6 ReB Nd6 1 7 Nxd6 Kd6 1 B b4 Rc7 1 9 RhB h6 20 bS Rcl + 21
Kg2 Ke6 22 RaB Rc7 23 Kg3 g6 24 h4! Kf6 25 Rd8 Ke6 26 g5! hxg5
27 hxg5 Rc2 28 Ra8 Rc7 29 Rb8! giving us a position which merits
another diagram, as anexarnple of an entry point along the 7th rank.
.
217
Yudovitch (black)
Rauser (white)
White threatens 30 Rb7 Kd6 3 1 Kg4! when Black is in zugzwang i.e.
any move is to }$ disadvantage ; if 3 1 . . . Rc2 32 Rxf7, or 3 1 . . . Rd7
32 Kf4 Ke6 33 Rxd7 Kxd7 34 Ke5, or 3 1 . . . Rxb7 32 axb7 Kc7 33
Kf4 Kxb7 34 Ke5 etc., a variation which reveals the usefulness of the
protected b7 square. In the game Black tried 29 . . . Rc2 and lost as
follows: 30 Rb7 Rb2 3 1 Rxa7 Rxb5 32 Rb7 Rbl 33 a7 Ra t 34 Rxb6+
Kf5 35 Rf6+ Kxg5 36 Rxf7 Rgl + 37 Kh2 Rat 38 Kg2 Resigns.
This example pin-points a common feature of open flle control: it
often forces the enemy pieces into a passive position, but then another
factor has to be introduced into the situation to take advantage of this
passivity. Our next example also illustrates a mixture of play in the
open me combined with action on the other wing.
(See next diagram) White's control of the b ftle offers him little at the
moment because his only entry point at b7 cannot be occupied immedi
ately in view of . DeS driving away his rook. The correct plan is to
launch a king side attack whilst maintaining pressure down the nle, so
as to occupy Black simultaneoly on both sides of the board. Play
went: I Bg5 ! f6 (I . . . Bf6 2 Bxf6 Qxf6 3 Rb6! followed by doubling
rooks on the b flle gives White a clear plus) 2 Bf4! (better than 2 Be3
which would not threaten 3 f4 because of 3 . . . B xc3 ! so White must
exchange the dark-squared bishop in order to create concrete threats on
.

Dueball (black)
218
Pachman (whitt)
the king side) 2 . . . Qc7 3 h4! (White's attack is now taking shape, as
becomes clear if Black tries to contest the b 111e by 3 . . Rab8 4 h5 !
gS S Rxb8 Rxb8 6 BxgS ! fxgS 7 QxgS + Kh8 8 Qe7 Bg7 9 h6 and
White wins. So Black has to take defensive measures on the king side)
3 . . . Re7 4 Bxe5 ! fxe5 (not 4 . . . dxe5? 5 Bxg6! hxg6 6 d6, or 4 . . .
Rxe5 5 f4 gaining time for the attack) 5 Qg5 Rae8 6 Be4! Rg7 7 Rb2!
Rf8 8 RJb l (in order to answer 8 . . . BfS with the interesting variation
9 Rb7! Qxb7 1 0 Rxb7 Rxb7 1 1 Qd8+ Rf8 1 2 Qxd6 Rbl + 1 3 Kh2
Rxf2 1 4 Qxc5 ! Rbb2 1 5 Qc8+ Kg7 1 6 Qd7+ Kg6 1 7 Qg4 with too
many threats and the pawn ending is lost after 1 7 . . . Rxg2+ 1 8 Qxg2
Rxg2+ 1 9 Kxg2 Kg7 20 c5 Kf7 2 1 Kf3 etc.) 8 . . . Qa5 9 h5! gxh5 1 0
Qh6! Qxc3 1 1 Rb8 Resigns. The finish could b e 1 1 . . . Rxb8 1 2 Rxb8+
Kf7 1 3 Rb7 Kg8 14 Bxh7+! Rxh7 1 5 Rb8+ Kf7 1 6 Rf8+ Ke7 17 Qf6
mate.
The following game contains a similar strategic idea:
.
Game 3 Sicilian Defence

Pachman Jakobsen (Barcelona, 1 975)
e4
Nc3
Nge2
d4
Nxd4
Be2
Be3
0
9 Nxc6
10 Na4!?
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
cS
e6
Nc6
cxd4
a6
Qc7
Nf6
Bb4
bxc6
Be7
1 4 2 I Effective use of pieces

There is an interesting line after 1 0 . . . Rb8 I I c4! Bd6 1 2 f4 Nxe4 1 3
c S Be7 1 4 Bd3 Nf6 I S Bd4 and the active white pieces fully compen
sate the sacrificed pawn.
11
12
13
14
Nb6
Nxc8
eS
Bel !
Rb8
Qxc8
NdS
This modest retreat is much stronger than 1 4 Bd4 cS ! equalising.

14
IS
...
c4
cS
Allowing the black knight to reach c6 where White will have to exchange
it for his bishop, but 1 5 a3 c4! 1 6 Qd4 c3 1 7 b3 f6 would give Black
counter-chances.
IS
16
17
b3
Bb2
Nb4
0.0
Qc7
Not a mistake in itself but the start of a faulty plan. He must eliminate
the strong pawn on eS, so 1 7 . . . f6! was the correct move when White
continues 1 8 Bf3 Nc6 19 Bxc6 Qxc6 20 Re 1 fxeS 21 BxeS with a clear
positional plus in view of Black's weak central pawns (either the d pawn
remains backward or if 2 1 . . . d6 22 Bb2 eS Black has also given him
self a bad bishop on e7).
1 8 Bf3
Jakobsen (black)
219
18
...
d6?
Effective use of pieces I 1 43

Black pursues his mistaken idea of opening the d me for the exchange
of the major pieces and a rapid draw. However, the opening of the a l
h8 diagonal for White's dark-squared bishop provea a decisive factor in
the corning attack. Even with loss of time, Black should still play
18 . . . f6!
19
20
21
22
Qe2
Rfdl
exd6
Bxc6
Rfd 8
Nc6
Bxd6
Qxc6
Let us consider for a moment the strategic aspects of this position.

White's advantage clearly lies in his powerful bishop and the weakness
of the a6 and c5 pawns. Taken individually neither of these factors is
sufficient in itself; Black can counter the pressure on the bishop's
diagonal by . . . Bf8 or even . . . Bf6, and White can only exploit the
weak pawns if he can obtain control of the d fLie, which seems impos
sible at the moment. However, taken together they allow White to form
a promising strategic plan : with his next move he quickly increases his
pressure on the king side to force Black on the defensive, then takes the
opportunity to occupy the d flle and fmally after the exchange of
queens penetrates with his rook to exploit the weak pawns on the
queen 's wing.
23
24
h4!
hS!
Df8
Threatening 25 h6 and so giving Black no time for . . . f6.

24
25
h6
Qg4!
no way a direct mating attack, but introducing the positional threat

of 26 Bf6! forcing Black to concede the d file.
In
25
26
Kh7
Bc3! (see next diagram)
It is almost unbelievable that it is Otis unobtrusive move which proves

the decisive factor. Not only does it prevent Black's sole counterplay
of . . . a5-a4 but also threatens 27 BaS again forcing Black to concede
the d fJ..Ie . Surprisingly, there is nothing to be done about the latter,
because 26 . . . Qc7 would allow the manoeuvre Re l , Re3 and Rg3
attacking the king, since 27 . . . Rd3? fails to 28 Qe4+ winning the rook.
1 44 I Effective use of pieces

220
Jakobsen (black)
Pachman (white)
26
27
28
BaS
Rxd l
Rbc8
Rxd l +
Be7
Having been compelled to hand White control of the d me, Black now
hopes to render the file useless by posting his bishop on d4 , and if
White prevents this by 29 Bc3 (Bf6? 30 Dxf6 gxf6 3 1 Qf4 Rg8 32 g3),
Black has 29 . . . Rg8 ! threatening . . . Bf6 and even . . . g6 opening the
g file. So White must quickly find a way of exploiting the d fLie.
29
Qf3 !
Tilis simple move is the answer. As the black queen is guarding the
entry point at d7, she must be eliminated! The resulting doubled pawn
is not so serious in this position where it cannot easily be attacked by
pieces and is just as good a defence against Black's pawn majority.
Some players have an obsessive fear of doubled pawns and of course it
would be a different matter if they were instead on c2 and c3 , crippling
his own pawn majority there. Black decides to bring his king over, since
29 . . . Qe8 30 Qb7 ! is good for White.
29
30
31
32
33
Qxc6
Rd7
Rb7
Bel
Kg8
R xc6
Kf8
Ke8
f6
Forced, but now the g pawn is a fixed weakness wllich ties down
Black's pieces even more. White's powerful rook makes defence im
possible.

34
35
Ra7
Kfl
Rd6
eS
Black is tied to the detence o f his pawn on a6, since 3 5 . . . Rd3 fails to
36 Be l !
followed by 37 Ke2 .
Ke2
g4!
Kd3
Ke4
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
f3
Re6
Rb6
Kf7
Ke6
Rc6
Rb 7
Bf8
BaS
Be7
Rb6
Resigns
After the exchange of rooks Black's position is totally lost. In the

bishop ending White can easily create a passed pawn on the queen's
wing which Black can only stop by using his king. White's king then
heads for g6 via f5 and the g pawn falls.
Sometimes a file is only half-open, with an enemy pawn blocking the
rook's path to the 7th rank. When such a pawn is isolated or backward
it
is particularly weak and clearly vulnerable to attack by the major
pieces.
221
Lomb ard (black)
:t :t

. .
JJ ft .
ft . llirll
ft B II B B
IA'i6'.
lvkov
(white)
Black's d6 pawn is a good example of such a weakness. White exploits

lt by exchanging the queens and after I Qd I ! Ree6 2 Qxf3 Rxf3 3
Rfd l Rff6 , attack and defence are evenly balanced, with the important
difference that White's rooks on the d me are much more actively
posted than Black's. Another factor is that the white rooks can choose
their time to move away and attack somewhere .else , whereas Black's

rooks can only leave the defence o.f the d pawn when White relinquishes
the pressure. Play continued: 4 R 1 d3 KfB S f4! and now White's plan
is clear ; by advancing his king side pawns he will force the black rooks
away from the defence of the pawn. S . . . ReB 6 Kf2 Rh6 7 h4 Ke7 B
e4 RdB 9 fS Kd7 1 0 eS Kc7 1 1 f6 ! g5 (or 1 1 . . . gxf6 1 2 Rxd6 winning
material) 1 2 hxg5 Rh2+ 1 3 Kn Rxa2 14 Rxd6 Rxd6 1 5 Rxd6 Rb2 1 6
e6! Resigns.
222

... t
t
t
II 11
[1-'tll
ft B H ft ll
"'W
L. Steiner (black)
Pachman (white)
Here is a more complicated example. The c7 pawn is backward at the

moment but is in JlO way forsaken by his colleagues and is now threaten
ing to become active by . . . c5. White's plan is first to prevent this
advance and then to apply pressure on the pawn by doubling rooks on
the me. So 1 Qb3 ! applies pressure down the b me and on the d pawn,
both of which prevent 1 . . . c5? as the following variation shows: 2
dxc5 Bxc5 (2 . . . bxc5? 3 Qxb7) 3 Bxf6 gxf6 (3 . . . Qxf6 4 Nxd5} 4
Ne2! and Black's pawn position is in shreds. Play went 1 . . . RadB 2
Bg3 Bd6 3 Ne2 NeB (already Black is on the defensive e.g. 3 . . . Ne4 4
Bxe4 dxe4 5 Qxe6 fxe6 6 Bxd6 cxd6 7 Nf4 RfeB B Rc7 etc.) 4 Rc3 !
Bxg3 5 hxg3 ! (this doubled pawn proves a good defender as usual,
compared with the line 5 Nxg3 f5 6 Qc2 g6 and . . . Rd7-f7 with
attacking chances) 5 . . . g5!? 6 Qc2 fS 7 g4! fxg4 (he must accept the
pawn sacrifice since after 7 . . . f4 B exf4 gxf4 9 BfS he loses a pawn
without compensation) B Ng3 Ng7 (strangely enough, there is no way
of saving the c pawn, as B . . . c6 9 BfS artd 1 0 Bxg4 leads to a decisive
weakening of Black's king side, artd B . . . BcB allows 9 Bg6 and 10
BxeB) 9 Rxc7 ReB 1 0 RxcB RxcB (White has now won the c pawn and
even Black's occupation of the c flle is only temporary, because his
weakened king side will force him back to defence) 1 1 Qe2 hS ) 2 Bb l !
(not of course 1 2 Bxa6? Bxa6 1 3 Qxa6 Rc2 with good play for Black)

1:' . . . RfB ! 1 3 Qc2 ! Qh6 1 4 Qc7 Bc8 (the entry of White's queen is
decisive, as is shown by the line 1 4 . . . h4 I S Ne2! Bc8 1 6 QeS) 1 5
QeS h4 1 6 Ne2 QhS? (setting a trap, as now 1 7 Qxd5+? fails to 1 7
. . . Be6 and 1 8 . . . g3 with a strong attack, but White's simple reply
10on leads to an untenable position for Black) 1 7 Nc3 gJ ! 1 8 11 ! ReS
(or 1 8 . . . Be6 1 9 NxdS Qf7 20 Bg6!) 1 9 Qxd5+ Be6 20 Qd6 Bc4 2 1
NdS Re6 2 2 Qxe6! Nxe6 23 Nf6+ K f7 24 NxhS Bxfl 2 5 Kxfl Resigns.
223
Composed position by
Nimzovitch
lbis is the position that Nimzovitch uses in 'My System' to explain

the important strategy for play on a half-open me. By l NdS the knight
occupies te 'out-post' square in front of the pawn at d6 and this
beautifull centralised position is well supported from the rear. If,
however, ')ilack drives it away by . . . c6 then the d6 pawn is weakened,
an obvious but instructive point.
224
Lilienthal (black)
Botvinnik (white)
Here is a practical example of how to exploit such a key square on a
half-open me : I NdS ! Rc6 2 Bxg7 Nxg7 3 h4! and Black only has the
choice between two evils, either allowing the knight to remain at its

dominant post where it is ready to join in the attack on the king, or else
driving it away by . . . e6 when his d pawn becomes weak. It is interest
ing to note that, if Black had recaptured on g7 with his king instead of
the knight and could now exchange the knight on dS by . . . Rd8 and
. . . Nc7, he would first of all Jose time, allowing White t advance his
pawn to hS , and secondly he would only exchange one weakness for
another, since White would recapture on dS with the e pawn and apply
pressure down the e me against the backward pawn on e7. The game
continuation was 3 . . . ReS 4 Rc3 NhS 5 Qd4! and now it would be
even more dangerous to drive the knight away by 5 . . . e6 in view of
6 Ne3 threatening 7 Ng4 followed by mate in two moves. Black's best
is 5 . . . Nf6 ! when 6 Nxf6+ exf6 gives Black more than in the game
despite his weak pawns (7 Qxf6? dS !), so White should try 6 Rdc l !
NxdS 7 cxdS Rxc3 8 Qxc3 when his control of the open file gives him
excellent play. In the game Black tried another freeing method but
once again the c file control proved its worth as follows: 5 . . . bS? 6
cxbS axbS 7 Rdc l ! Rxc3 (note that Black cannot contest the nte by
7 . . . Rec8? 8 Rxc6 Rxc6 9 Rxc6 Qxc6 1 0 Nxe7+) 8 Rxc3 bxa4 9 Rc7
QbS 10 bxa4! (more exact than 10 Nxe7+ Rxe7 1 1 Rxe7 axb3 etc.)
10 . . . Qe2+ 1 1 Qf2 Qxf2+ 12 Kxf2 e6 1 3 Nb6 Nf6 14 aS Rb8 1 5
ReS+! Rxc8 1 6. Nxc8 NeB 1 7 a6 Nc7 1 8 a7 NaB 1 9 Nxd6 Kf8 20 eS
Ke7 2 1 Ke3 f6 22 Kf4 h6 23 NcB+ Kf7 (if 23 . . . Kd7 24 exf6!) 24
Ke4 Kg7 25 Kd4 Nc7 26 KcS Resigns.
Titis game showed us how powerful a knight can be when posted
centrally with good support from pawns and pieces. Here is another
example of such a knight.
225
The white knight will be ideally placed on dS from where .it exerts
maximum control, but first Black's knight must be eliminated, so: I
Eff.:ctive use of pieces I 1 49

Bg5 ! Rfe8 2 Bxf6 Dxf6 3 Nd5! (there is no need to waste time guarding
the c pawn, since 3 . . . Qxc2 fails to 4 Rf2 QcS 5 Rc l and 6 Nc7) 3 . . .
Bd8 4 c3 b5 5 b3 QcS 6 Kh l . Rac8 7 RD and a comparison of the
minor pieces reveals White's clear superiority. After the best continu
ation 7 . . . f6 White would have two strong plans open to him. He
could either open up the a fl..l e by 8 a4 or launch a direct attack on the
king by S Rh3 and 9 Qh4. The game went: 7 . . . KhS S f6! gxf6 9 Qh4
RgS 1 0 Nxf6 Rg7 1 1 Rg3 ! Bxf6 (forced in view of the threats of 1 2
Qxh7+! and also 1 2 Rxg7 Kxg7 1 3 Qxh7+ Kxf6 14 Rfl +) 1 2 Qxf6
RegS 1 3 Rdl dS 1 4 Rxg7 Resigns.
226
Noa (black)
Tarrasch (white)
Clearly d6 is an ideal post for a white knight and as White does not wish
to allow the black knight in at the equaUy useful dS square he retains
his knight on c3 and proceeds : 1 NSe4! bS 2 Nd6 Rb8 3 fS ! Bd7 4 Rf2
NdS + 5 NxdS exdS (White's knight supports his attack admirably and
proves far superior to the black bishop) 6 gS hS 7 Ref! KgS 8 g6 f6 9
Re2 Bc6 1 0 Rfe l RdS 1 1 Kf4 fxeS + 1 2 RxeS ! Kf8 1 3 Nf7 ReS 14 NgS
Rce7? 1 5 Nh7+ Resigns. Even without Black's error on move 14, the
game was already lost e.g. 1 4 . . . RxeS I S dxe5 Re7 1 6 f6 ! gxf6 1 7
exf6 Rxe l 1 8 Nh7+ Ke8 1 9 f7+ Kd7 20 f8=Q Rf1 + 2 1 KgS Rxf8 22
Nxf8+ Ke7 23 g7 Kf7 24 Kh6 Kg8 25 Ng6 etc.
When we turn to the bishop we find that, like the rook, it needs
open lines, in this case diagonals. It is weU known that a bishop which
controls a diagonal aimed at the enemy king can often prove a decisive
winning factor.
(See next diagram) TI1e powerful black bishop on b7 ensures the suc
cess of the foUowing piece sacrifice: 1 . . . gxf4! 2 bxcS (after 2 exf4
Rhg8 ! 3 Nf3 Ne4 Black has a fine position without losing material)
2 . . . NxeS ! 3 cxb6 (or 3 exf4 QxcS+ 4 Kh l RhgS etc.) 3 . . . Rhg8 4

227
Smejkal (wllite)
e4 (White tries to block the dangerous diagonal. There is an elegant win
after 4 Nf3 Rxg2+! 5 Kxg2 Rg8+6 Khl Qg5 !) 4 . . . Rg6! 5 Nf3 Rdg8 !
6 Rf2 Qc5 7 Kfl Ng4! 8 Re2 fxe4 9 Ba4 d6 1 0 Rb5 Qxc4 1 1 Qc2 (or
I I Nh4 f3 !) I I . . . Qxc2 1 2 Rxc2 exf3 1 3 Bxf4 (or 1 3 gxf3 Ne3 +!) 1 3
. . . fxg2+ 1 4 Kg1 R6! 1 5 Rb 1 Rxf4 1 6 Bd7+ Kxd7 1 7 Rxc7+ Kd8
18 Rxb7 Ne3 19 Resigns.
228
Taimanov (white)
Apart from his vital occupation of the c flle , White has two other ad
vantages, the extra pawn and two bishops, which are offset by the
fact that the pawn is doubled and only the dark-squared bishop seems
effective at the moment. As the black knights are protecting all the
important points, it looks as though White cannot make any progress.
However, it turns out that he wins with surprising speed once he
'finds' the correct diagonal for his ))itherto bad bishop. The fmish was:
1 Bfl ! h6 2 g3 ! g4 3 fxg4 Rd8 4 Bxb6 Nxe4 5 Ra7! Resigns.
We have already discussed the question of good and bad bishops, so
we will just cite two examples in which the more active bishop proves
an important element of the winning strategy.
Effective use of pieces I I 5 1

229
Pilnik (black)
Kotov (white)
The main point of White's I aS ! is of course to save t11e pawn but its
strategic significance is to pin down Black's a6 pawn on a white square
to add to the oilier pawns on white squares (dS, e6, fl) which are not
'flXed' in ilie same way but at ilie moment block the bishop on c8,
making it far less effective than his white counterpart on d3 . Play went :
I . . Bb7 2 Ral ! (making way for ilie king to move across, and better
ilian 2 Rcl Rc8 3 K.fl Ne4 pinning ilie knight) 2 . . . Rc8 3 Kfl Kf8 4
Nd2 Ne4 5 Ke2 Nxd2? (iliis exchange only helps White to exploit his
advantage; in view of his bad bishop, Black should seek counterplay by
5
Rc3 ! 6 Nb4 Rb3 7 Ra4! when White has more difficulties ilian in
ilie game) 6 Kxd2 Rc7 7 Nb4 Ke7 8 Be2! (vacating d3 for ilie knight
from where it will have a choice of cS or eS, and at the same time
planning a pawn advance on the king side to restrict Black's position
even furilier. Note tluat once again an enemy weakness is exploited in
indirect fashion because Black's pieces are tied down to its defence and
cannot cope wiili action on ilie oilier wing) 8 . . . Kd8 9 Nd3 Nd7 I 0
f4! Bc8 1 1 g4 Nf6 1 2 Bt1 (of course White would be happy to exchange
his bishop for ilie black knight, after . . . Ne4, since he would then be
left with the far superior minor piece) 1 2 . . . Rb 7 1 3 Kc3 ! Rc7 + 1 4
Kb3 Rb7+ I S Nb4! Rc7 1 6 g5 ! hxg5 1 7 fxg5 Nd7 1 8 h4 g6 (oilierwise
White will obtain a strong passed pawn on h6. However, this m<'ve
places yet anoilier pawn on a white square, rendering t11e black bishop a
prisoner in its own camp. White's winning plan is sintple enough: he will
regroup his pieces in preparation for hS which will expose the newly
created weakness on fl) 1 9 Be2 Nb8 20 Nd3 Ke7 2 1 NeS Nc6 22 Kb2!
(the difference in the two positions is now clear; Black dares not allow
ilie exchange of knights because the bishop ending is lost for him after
both 22 . . . NxeS 23 dxeS foUowed by 24 Re i !, and 22 . . . Kd6 23
Nxc6 Rxc6 24 Rei !) 22 . . . Rb7+ 23 Kc3 Kd6! (a tactical trick, as
.
1 S 2 I Effective use of pieces

now 24 Bxa6 fails to 24 . . . Rc7 25 Bxc8 Nxe5 + 26 Kb3 Nc4 27 Ba6
Nxe3 with a probable draw) 24 Nxc6! Rc7 25 Kb3 Rxc6 26 h5 gxh5
27 Bxh5 Rb7+ 28 Kc3 Rc7+ 29 Kd2 Rb7 30 Rxf7 Rb2+ 3 1 Ke 1 Rg2
32 Rg7 Bd7 33 B3 Rh2 34 Rg8 Ke7 35 Rg7+ Kd6 36 Be2 Rh 1 + 37
Kf2 Rh2+ 38 K3 Be8 39 g6 Rh8 40 Bxa6 and White won.
230
.. .
.... . . i . i

Paclunan (black)
m o [1
ft ll B ft 8
. -
Novak (white)
Although Black's bishop is very well placed, we can hardly talk of good
and bad bishops in this position. Black's main advantage at the moment
lies in his pawn majority on the queen's wing. The reason for this is that
it is more difficult . to advance a king side majority unless one has
distinct attacking chances, whereas a queen side majority is easier to
exploit, particularly in the end-game when the enemy king is usually on
the other wing. However, this advantage in itself is insufficient to win
the game for Black ln the particular position before us. So he decides to
aim for an ending with additional factors in his favour by first preparing
an attack on the king's wing, thus forcing White to exchange pieces in a
way which will only benefit Black. Let us see how this is achieved: 1
. . . g6 ! (threatening the powerful . . . hS if White does nothing, with a
strong attack on the king supported by his active bishop) 2 Rxd8 Rxd8
3 Rd l Rxd l +! 4 Bxd l Ne4! (the surprising point, exchanging on his
own tenns, because S Nxe4? Qxe4 6 f3 Qb l ! 7 Qb3 c4! 8 Qa4 b S ! wins
the a2 pawn for Black. Th.is means that White must allow the exchange
of knights on g3 , crippling his pawn majority and even more importantly
weakening the pawn on g2. Suddenly it is to Black's advantage to reach
a bishop ending which is practically a forced win as we shall see! ) 5
Qd3 Nxg3 6 hxg3 Qe4! 7 Qxe4 Bxe4 8 Be2 Kf8 9 f3 BdS 1 0 a3 f5 !
(again a surprising move placing a pawn on the same colour as the
bishop, but it is in fact the winning move because in this position Blck's
most urgent task is to fix White's weak king side pawns. If now 1 1 g4?
Effective use of pieces I I 53

then 1 1 . . . fxg4 1 2 fxg4 g5 ! establishes the g4 pawn as a permanent
weakness, and if 1 1 Bd3 Ke7 1 2 e4? fxe4 1 3 fxe4 Bb3 14 Kf2 Ke6 and
I S . . . KeS aiming at the weak e4 pawn!) 1 1 Kf2 Ke7 1 2 Ke 1 Kd6 1 3
Kd2 c4! (once again the correct strategy is to place a pawn on a white
square, but note that this pawn is not flXed and forms part of the
unstoppable pawn advance by . . . bS, aS, b4. The bishop ending is now
won because of White's weak pawn on g2. We give the rest of the game
without comment) 1 4 Kc3 Kc5 1 5 Bfl b5 1 6 Be2 a5 1 7 Bd l b4+ 1 8
axb4 axb4+ 1 9 Kd2 Bc6 20 Be2 Ba4 2 1 Bfl g5 22 Be2 h6 23 Bfl Bc6
24 Be2 Ba4 25 Bfl BbS ! 26 Kc2 h5 ! 27 Be2 h4 28 gxh4 gxh4 29 13fl
f4! 30 exf4 Bd7! 3 1 Kd2 Kd4 32 Be2 c3 + 33 bxc3 bxc3 + 34 Kcl
Ke3 3S Bc4 BfS 36 Bd3 Kf2 37 Be4 Bxe4 38 Resigns.
When we come to bishops of opposite colour endings, we know that
it is often difficult to win even with a two pawns advantage. This is
mainly because our bishop cannot attack pawns or squares defended by
the enemy bishop. Our next two examples are typical of such endings.
23 1
B. --
11
Composed position
II
B
a t 11
i ll
II
a
.. . . .
Despite his material advantage White can make no progress. If he plays

his king over to cS, Black simply defends the pawn by . . . Bc4, whereas
if he tries to advance his king side pawns by playing his king to f6 ,
Black plays his bishop to any square on the b l h 7 diagonal preventing
g6+. Before this position was reached, White had almost certainly made
the error of placing his pawns on squares of the same colour as those
controlled by his bishop, clearly a complete misjudgment on his part
because it means that he has no effective control of the white squares
and therefore no hope of achieving anything.
(See next diagram) This is an even more startling case of material
advantage being of no avail when certain squares of the same colour are
inaccessible to our pieces. After 1 Bb3 ! e5 2 Be6 Kc7 3 Ke4, there is
I 54 I Effective use of pieces

232

.1.

.\t>. ft
.Jl.

Composed position
no way Black can make any progress provided White continues to move
his bishop along the c8-h3 diagonal.
This means that simplifying exchanges leading to an ending with
bishops of opposite colour only on the board (apart from kings and
pawns of course) often provide a way of escaping an otherwise inevit
able loss. Note, however, that in a middle-game situation the presence
of bishops of opposite colour is usually an advantage to the attacking
side, since the defender's bishop is unable to defend points under attack
from the enemy bishop. Here are two examples of this extremely
important, and ofte!l misunderstood, strategic element.
233
Unzicker (black)
Larsen (white)
If Black had a bishop on g7 instead of b7, the position would be a
clear draw, but Larsen's control of the dark squares on Black's weakened
king side gives him decisive attacking chances. 1 Bh6 R.n 2 Rb l ! cxd4
3 cxd4 Qd5 4 Qg3 (preventing mate on g2 and threatening mate him
self by 5 Qb8+) 4 . . . Rc7 (a deflection sacrifice which is answered by
another one) 5 Rb5 ! Re i +! (the third deflection, as 5 . . . QxbS 6 _Qxc7
leads to an unstoppable mate on g7) 6 Bxc l QxbS 7 Qb8+ Kf7 8 Ba3 !
Effective use of pieces I 1 5 S

dS 9 Qd6 ! gS 1 0 dxeS Qc6 1 1 e6+ Kg6 1 2 e7+ KhS 1 3 fJ g4 14 Qe5+
Resigns.
234
Pachman (black)
Filip (white)
Here White's advantage is of a more subtle nature and there is no forced
win for him despite his obvious pressure. Of the opposite-coloured
bishops White's is aggressively posted, attacking f7 and at the same time
controlling the important a8 square preventing a black rook from
occupying it. Black's bishop on the other hand stands very passively,
blocked in by his own pawn on d4 (paradoxically, he would be better
off a pawn down without tllis particular pawn!). The game continued :
I Re4! Re7 2 Rde l Bf8 (not of course 2 . . . Rbe8? 3 Qxe8+! when
Black's queen is helpless against the rooks) 3 h4 ! Kg7? (an interesting
error occasioned by the strategic problems set by this tricky position.
In his desire to prevent the blockade of his pawns on white squares
where they can be attacked by the bishop, Black places them on dark
squares, but this only serves to weaken even further the white squares
around his king. It was essential to play 3 . . . h5 ! with good defensive
chances) 4 h5 ! Rd8 5 Rxe7 Bxe7 6 Qd I ! Rd6 7 Qe2 Bf6 8 Kg2 Rd7 9
QfJ Qd6 1 0 Re4 g5 I I Qf5 h6 and now White had an elegant sacrifice
of the exchange by 1 2 Re6! fxe6 13 Qg6+ Kf8 14 Qxf6+ etc.
We have already compared the bishop and knight. In positions 77
and 1 66 the bishop was clearly better; in the first case because the long
ranging bishop was far more effective than the short-stepping knight,
and in the second case because the knight had no points of support and
the bishop could join in the attack on the king. In complete contrast,
position 225 showed the bishop helpless against the strongly centralised
knight.
A$ general guide-lines we can state that the krligl1t is superior to the
bishop when occupying a central position protected from enemy attack
I 56
I Effective 111e of pieces
or when the bishop is a 'bad' one (i.e. blocked in by its own pawns), in
a blocked position. The bishop proves stronger than the knight in open
pOsitions with pawns on both sides of the board, or in those blocked
positions where the bishop is 'good' (i.e. can attack fiXed enemy pawns).
Naturally we see all this more clearly in the end-game, but here are
two examples with more pieces on the board.
235
Konstantinopolsky (black)
Botvinnik (white)
White is not yet fully developed but he Is prepared to move a piece
twice by I BbS ! in order to obtain the vital strategic point eS for his
knight. Black is alert to the danger and immediately prevents this by
I . . NgS ! 2. Bxc6 Nxf3+! 3 Qxf3 bxc6 4 Qf4 Rae8 (and now White
cannot prevent the freeing move . . . eS, since after S QeS f4! and 6 . . .
RfS is good for Black. Nevertheless, in the coming end-game the knight
proves superior to the bishop) S 0..() eS 6 QxeS QxeS 7 dxeS RxeS 8 f4!
(White plans to fix Black's pawns on white squares to reduce even more
the scope of the bishop) 8 . . . Re7 9 Rfe l Rfe8 10 Rxe7 Rxe7 I I Kf2
Kf7 (Black dares not advance his d pawn e.g. 1 1 . . . d4 1 2 Ne2 d3 13
Nc3 Bc8 1 4 Re i ! and the pawn will fall) 12 Rd1 ReS 1 3 Rd2 h6 1 4
Re2 Rb8 (after 1 4 . . . Rxe2+ 1 S Nxe2 White wins easily by playing
Nd4 and his king over to the queen's wing followed by the advance of
his b and a pawns) 1 5 Ke3 Rb3 1 4 Kd4 Kf6 I S Na2! Rb8 1 6 b4 gS 1 7
g3 gxf4 1 8 gxf4 a6 1 9 Nc3 Rg8 20 a4 Rg4 2 1 Rf2 Be6 (or 2 1 . . . Be8
22 b5! axb5 23 axb5 cxb5 24 Nxd5+ Ke6 25 Re2+ K.f7 26 Rxe8!
Kxe8 27 Nf6+ and 28 Nxg4 when White's passed pawns are quicker)
22 b5! axb5 23 axb5 cxbS 24 N)(b5 Rgl 25 Nc3 K.f7 26 Rb2 Rf1 27
Ne2 Re i 28 Ke5 d4 (or else 29 c6 follows, with Kd6 and Nd4 in mind)
29 Kxd4 Kg6 30 Nc3 KhS 3 1 Re2 Rxe2 32 Nxe2 Kg4 33 KeS Bc8 34
Nd4 hS 35 NxfS ! Bd7 (35 . . . BxfS 36 h3 +) 36 Ng7 Ba4 37 fS KgS 38
Ne6+ Resigns.
.
Effective use of pieces I 1 57
Stahlberg (block)
236
Najdorf (white)
Although White's pawn majority is somewhat devalued by the doubled
pawn, the superiority of the bishop over the knight is of much greater
significance, as the following play shows: I Rh4 h6 2 Rh5 ! Nc7 3 f4
Ke7 4 ReS Rd6 5 f5 ! b6 6 Rc I cS 7 f4 Rc6 (Black has succeeded in
advancing his pawns, but meanwhile White has strengthened his posi
tion and with his next move prepares to use the inevitable opening of
the a file for a subsequent entry by his rook) 8 a4! bS 9 Bc2! Ne8 1 0
Be4 Rc7 I I Bd5 c4 1 2 e4 Nd6 1 3 axbS axb5 1 4 Ke3 Ra7 (at first
sight it seems that White has opened up this flle for his opponent, but
Najdorf has correctly calculated that Black will soon have to vacate the
file to use his rook in defence) 1 5 Rg1 K.f8 1 6 Kd4 Rc7 1 7 Rc1 Nb7!
(to answer 1 8 b3? with 1 8 . . . Nc5 !) 1 8 Ral ! Nc5 19 Ra8+ Ke7 20
e5 Nb3+ 21 Kc3 Nc1 22 Rg8 Ne2+ 23 Kd2 Nxf4 24 Rxg7+ Kd8 25
exf6 ! Rd7 (or 25 . . . Nxd5 26 Rg8+ and 27 f7) 26 Rxd7+ Kxd7 27
Be6+! Resigns.
The bishop's main disadvantage lies in the . fact that it can only
control squares of one colour, but this is of course remedied by the
possession of two bishops which can be tremendously powerful in open
positions. We have already pointed this out in positions 148 and 207,
but we will now show how the bishop pair can be exploited by quoting
in full a game which is of historical importance since it was one of the
first to demonstrate the strategic worth of the two bishops.
Game 4 Ruy Lopez
Englisch Steinitz (London, 1 882)
1 e4
2 Nf3
3 BbS
4 d4
eS
Nc6
g6

Modern theory recommends 4 cJ ! followed by d4 as stronger.
4
S
...
Nxd4
exd4
And here 5 BgS ! is more forceful.

S
6
7
8
Be3
Nc3
0
Bg7
Nf6
0
Ne7
Black prepares . . . dS so it would now be bet to gain a space advantage

by 9 eS Ne8 1 0 Bf4 etc.
9
10
11
12
13
14
Qd2(?)
exdS
NxdS
Be2
Bxg4
Nb3
dS
N7xeS
QxdS
Ng4!
Bxg4
Qxd2(?)
Much stronger was 14 . . . Qc4! 1 5 c3 Rad8 when Black's advantage is

easier to exploit in' the middle-game.
IS
Nxd2
Rad8!
If instead 1 5 . . . Bxb2 White can immediately win back his pawn by 16

Rab 1 , whereas now the threat is 1 6 . . . Bxb2 1 7 Rab 1 Bd4!
16
17
237
c3
Nb3
Rfe8
Englisch (black)
Effective use of pieces I ! 59

17
b6!
. Stalnltz begins a plan which is of major importance when we have the
'
adwntage of two bishops with reduced material on the board ; he aims

to deprive the knight of any support points in the centre, so that when
.Y::J.-< the poution Is opened up later it will even be possible to exchange one
c> 'f-",. : of the bishops and rely on the superiority of the remaining bishop
tpnst the passive knight. Black pursues this plan with ruthless logic
.7 -. . throughout. nus move deprives the knight of c5 and prepares . . . c5
,_]/ controlling the even more vital d4 square.
> .
.
..
18
19
20
21
'.
h3
Rfd 1
BgS
Bf4
Be6
cS
f6
Kf7
And here we see another advantage of the bishop pair; Black can easily
centralise his king, whereas 22 Kfl Bc4+ would bring White's king into
the firin g line o f the black pieces.
22
f3
gS !
aeverly forcing White to concede the d me because 23 Bel loses a

piece to 23 . . . Rxd 1 + 24 Rxd I Bxb3 and 23 Bg3 f5 ! would drive the
bishop into a passive position.
23
24
25
26
Rxd8
Bel
Ret
f4
Rxd8
h6
rs
Otherwise . . . f4 would swamp White. However, the text move aUows

Black to open up the game later to his advantage.
26
27
..
g3
Bf6!
aS!
Every Black move counts! He now threatens 28

. a4 29 Nc l a3 !
amashing White's pawn position and opening lines for the bishops, so
the knight's humiliation is now complete.
.
28
29
30
Nc l
a3
Kf2
a4
Dc4

238
Englisch (black)
.1.
1 ._.. II .
II II II li ft
II
[1
Steinitz (white)
TI1e diagrammed position clearly reveals the success of Black's strategy,

with either of his bishops now superior to the knight in any bishop
versus knight ending. Titis means that Black can begin the second phase
of opening up the position, even if this entails the exchange of his
dark-squared bishop.
30
31
...
Bxf4
gxf4!
BgS!
Tiueatcning 32
Bxf4 33 gxf4 Rd2+, and if 32 Ke3 ReS + 33 Kfl
Rxel 34 Kxel Bxf4 3 5 gxf4 Ke6 and . . . KdS winning, again illustrat
ing the helplessness of the knight.
.
32
33
34
Or
BxgS
Ke3
h4
hxgS
Kf6
34 Rhl Ke5 foUowed by . . . f4+ and Black's rook penetrates to d2.

34
35
36
37
38
gxh4
Kf2
Kxel
Ne2
gxh4
Re8+
Rxe l
KeS
The only way to free the knigllt but it allows Black to transpose to an
ending in which his active king is his main asset.
38
39
40
41
Kxe2
c4
Ke3
Bxe2!
Kf4
Kg4
f4+

Not of course 4 1 . . . Kxh4?? 42 Kf4 and White even wins!
42
43
44
Ke4
Ke3
Resigns
f3
Kg3
With more material on the board, other tactical and strategic elements
como Into play, but basically it is still a question of utilising to the full
'
the power of the attacking pieces.
239
Barwick (black)
Mileika (white)
White is a pawn down here but his pieces exert tremendous pressure on
Black's position, with the white-squared bishop in particular proving
moat effective in stopping king side castling. Play went: I 0-0 Nc6 2
Rad l ! (tlueatenlng 3 Rhe i + Kf8 4 Bh6 mate !) 2 . . . hS 3 Bd6! Rh7
(he cannot castle long in view of 4 RxfS ! gxfS 5 8e6+ and 3 . . b6
falls to 4 BbS etc.) 4 Rfe i + Kd8 5 Bxc5+ Rd7 6 Bd6! a6 7 Be6 ! (once
again we see the advantage of the two bishops . is that one of them can
be exchanged at an appropriate moment. Here White clears the way for
the entry of his rooks) 7 . . . Bxe6 8 Rxe6 bS 9 Rxg6 Kc8 1 0 RdS ! Kb7
1 1 RxhS Rad8 1 2 Rhh6! NaS I 3 DeS Resigns.
(See next diagram) Whitfs task is more difficult here because the black
knight is strongly posted on d4. Nevertheless, White has the advantage
since he can if need be exchange his bishop for the knight, when his
blahop on e4 is more actively posted than the bishop on g7. For the
moment, however, the aim is to open up the queen's wing: I QaS ! Rff8
(indirectly protecting his pawn, as now 2 Qxa7?? loses to 2 . . . Ra8 3
Qxb7 Rfb8 trapping the queen) 2 cS ! b6 3 cxb6 cxb6 4 Qa6 (if now
Black occupies the c file by 4 . . . ReS White can use the entry point
at c6 with 5 Re i followed by 6 Bxd4 and 7 Rc6! so Kotov tries to
relieve his position by exchanges) 4 . . . QbS 5 QxbS NxbS 6 Re i ReS
.
1 6 2 I Effective use of pieces

240
Kotov (black)
Pachman (white)
7 Rc6! (even better than the alternative plan of 7 a4 Nd4 B Dxd4 exd4
9 Rc6! because now the two bishops can be used in the attack on the
queen's wing) 7 . . . Rxc6 B dxc6 Kf7 9 a4 Nc7 1 0 aS ! bxa5 (if 10 . .
d5 1 1 axb6!) 1 1 Bxa7 d5 1 2 Bb6 dxe4 1 3 fxe4+ Ke6 14. Dxc7 (but not
14 RxfB Dxf8 1 5 Bxc7 Bc5 + 16 Kfl a4) 14 . . . ReB 1 5 Bxa5 Rxc6
16 Bc3 and White eventually won the ending.
Of course, the two bishops do not always represent an advantage.
Sometimes they are not active enough or else the knight has points of
support in the centre. There are even positions where two knights are
more useful than . two bishops. Consider, for example, the following
variation arising from the Ragosin System of the Queen's Gambit: 1 d4
d5 2 c4 e6 3 Nc3 Nf6 4 Nf3 Bb4 5 Qa4+ Nc6 6 Ne5 Bd7 7 Nxd7 Qxd7
B a3 Bxc3 + 9 bxc3 e5 I O e3 0-0 I I Bd3 ReB I 2 0-0 e4 1 3 Bc2 dxc4 1 4
Qxc4 Nd5 ! 1 5 Bd2 Na5 I 6 Qa4 Qxa4 I 7 Bxa4 c6. Despite hi s two
bishops White has slightly the worse of it. His bishop on d2 is passively
placed, whereas Black's knights will have excellent posts on d5 and
(after . . . b5) c4. If the knight is exchanged when it reaches c4, Black
will be left with a strong knight against a bad bishop!
In this variation Black can proceed in even sharper fashion with 9
. . 0-0 I O e3 a6 ! I I Be2 b S ! I 2 cxbS axbS I 3 QxbS RfbB I 4 Qd3
Na5 and the actively posted knights plus control of the b fl.le fully
compensate the two bishops and extra pawn.
.
Chapter 7
'The pawns are the

soul of chess'
1bJa famous quote stems from F. A. Danican, the strongest player of

hll time, whose pseudonym as a well-known musician was Philidor . In
hll L 'analyse des echecs ( 1 74 9 ) he explained further: 'pawns determine
tho conditions for attack and defence ; it is on the pawn structure that
the fate of the game depends'. Titis statement which was revolutionary
In ttl time remains one of the most important principles of chess strategy.
AI wo have already pointed out, it is fairly easy to change the position
of our pieces, whereas a pawn which has been thoughtlessly advanced
can cause irreparable damage. We have also seen in the previous chapter
tho dramatic e ffect that the pawn structure can have on the potential
atrongth of our pieces, opening or closing flies or diagonals, creating
good or bad bishops and providing points of support for the knights.
All chess-players must learn the difficult and wide-ranging art of
handling pawns correctly. Here we shall just discuss a few basic prin
ciples to guide the reader. Already we have seen the rook's pawn used
u an attacking weapon , particularly when opening a file against the
enemy king. We have also witnessed the power of passed pawns (posi
tions 90, 1 43 , 1 44, 1 4 5 , 1 48) and the indirect exploitation of them
(positions 1 46, 1 4 7 ).
An important method of defending against passed pawns is (a term
oined
by one of the greatest strategic thinkers of all time , Nimzovitch)
c
the blockade. In its simplest form this entails placing a piece in front of
an enemy pawn to prevent its advance. However, Nimzovitch demon
strated that such a blockade was not always of a defensive nature,
because the blockading piece itself often draws strength from its position
in front of the pawn! For example, a knight situated on e6 preventing
the advance of a white passed pawn on e5 can exert great power in its
centralised position , protected as it is from frontal pressure by the very
pawn it is restraining!
(See next diagram) White is threatening f5 with attacking chances, but
Black's first move I . . . fS ! which presents White with a protected
1 64 I 'The pawns are the soul of chess'

24 1
Nimzovitch (black)
Leonhardt (white)
passed pawn and at the same time seriously restricts the activity of his
own bishop on c8 may seem strange until we consider it in the light of
the blockade. By placing a knight on e6 and a bishop on b7, Black will
hold back the e and f pawns whilst aiming to set his own pawns in
motion by . . . c5, an ambitious scheme involving that subtle manoeuvring
which was so characteristic of Nimzovitch. Play went: 2 Be3 g6! 3 Na4!
(White also realises the importance of blockading Black's c pawn) 3 . . .
Ng7 4 Qd2 Qd7 5 QaS ! Ne6 6 Rad 1 Rfd8 (and now White could main
tain the initiative by 7 DeS ! Bxc5 8 Nxc5 Qe7 9 Nxe6 Bxe6 when the
blockading bishop is no way near as strong as the knight was. White
instead goes in for ihe two bishops whilst Black is happy to preserve his
splendid blockading knight) 7 Nc5? Bxc5 8 Bxc5 Bb7 ! 9 Rf3 Kf7 1 0
Rh3 Kg7 I I Rfl ReS 1 2 Rhf3 Rad8 (White can now make no real
progress and 1 3 Qxa7? loses the queen after 1 3 . Rr.F. i 4 Qxb7 Reb8)
1 3 Rd 1 a6 14 b4 Kh8 1 5 Qa3 Rg8 1 6 Qc3 Rg7 1 7 Kh l Rdg8 {the
threat of opening the g me persuades White to end the blockade of the
c pawn. Note the effectiveness of the centralised knight supporting
both advances) 1 8 Be3 c5 ! 1 9 Rg3? (he had to go into the complica
tions of 1 9 bxc5 ! d4 20 Rxd4! Nxd4 2 1 Bxd4 Bxf3 22 Bxf3) 1 9 . . .
d4 20 Qa3 g5 ! 2 1 Bc4 gxf4 22 Bxe6 Bxg2+! 23 Kg1 (or 23 Rxg2? Qc6,
or 23 Kxg2 Qc6+ 24 Kfl fxg3 25 Bxg8 gxh2 and suddenly a winning
passed pawn has appeared for Black!) 23 . . . Qxe6 24 Bxf4 Bb7 25
bxc5 QdS 26 c6 Bxc6 27 Kf2 Rxg3 28 hxg3 Qg2+ 29 Kel Bf3 30
Qxa6 Qg1 + 3 1 Resigns. In the variations of the above game we saw the
possibility of a bishop on e6 being a poor defender, but this is not
always the case. Take for example the following position which arises
after the moves: (Ruy Lopez) 1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 Bb5 a6 4 Ba4 Nf6
5 d4 e xd4 6 0-0 Be7 7 e5 Ne4 8 Nxd4 0-0 9 Re 1 Nc5 10 Bxc6 . dxc6
I I Nc3.
.
'The pawns are the soul of chess' I 1 65
242
The old continuation was 1 1 . . . ReS 1 2 Be3 Bf8 1 3 f4 with some

advantage to White, but I discovered the much more effective I I . . .
fS ! giving White a passed pawn but creating a fine blockading square on
e6. The game continued : I 2 Nce2 (after I 2 f4 I played against Foltys
1 2 . . . Ne6 1 3 Be3 Nxd4 I4 Qxd4 Qxd4 I S Bxd4 8e6 with an ideal
set-up for Black, since White has no counterplay and no way of prevent
ing the advance of Black's queen side pawns) I 2 . . . Ne6 I 3 Nxe6 Qxd i
14 Rxd l Bxe6 I S Nf4 (even after the relatively better 1 5 Nd4 Black
could either play I S . . . Kf7 1 6 Nxe6 Kxe6 with a drawn position in
which neither side can make progress, a rare case of a successful block
ade by the king, or else continue in similar fashion to the game with I S
. . . Bc8 ! and the white knight cannot maintain its centralised position
for long e.g. I 6 b3 gS ! foUowed by . . . cS and . . . Be6 with a clear
advantage to Black) I S . . . Rad8! 1 6 Be3 Bc8 1 7 Nd3 b6 1 8 b4 (con
troUing c5 and threatening to advance his pawn to aS ftxing the black
pawns, but unwittingly allowing the foUowirtg counter-action) 1 8 . . .
f4! 19 Nxf4 Bxb4 20 Ne2 Bf5 ! 2 1 c3 (after 2 1 Nd4 Bc3 ! 22 Nxf5
Bxa l 23 Nxe7+ Kf7 24 Rxa l Kxe7 2S Bg5 + Ke6 26 Bxd8 Rxd8 27
f4 Rd2 Black wins, with the king once again successfuUy blockading on
e6) 21 . . . BaS 22 Rac l c5 23 f3 Be6 24 Kfl Bc4 ! (more exact than 24
. . . Rxd l 25 Rxd l Bxa2 26 Rd7 or 24 . . . Bxa2 25 Rxd8 Rxd8 25 c4
etc.) 25 Nf4 Rfe8 26 Rxd8 Rxd8 27 a3 ReB 28 e6 Bxe6 29 Nxe6 Rxe6
30 c4 Kf7 3 1 Bf4 b5! 32 Be3 Bb6 33 cxb5 axb5 34 Rb l (34 BxcS?
Rc6) 34 . . . c4 ! 35 Bxb6 Rxb6 36 Ke3 c5 37 Ke4 Ke6 38 Resigns.
In view of the principle of economy in defence , major pieces arc
rarely used for blockading purposes, whereas minor pieces are ideal for
this task. Our next diagram shows a typicaUy favourable set-up for
Black.
1 66 / 'The pawns are the soul of chess'

243
11
._._. t . t

. ft .
ft ft
A B
ft ll -tt8 ft 0
t1 -
Composed position
White has no chance of exploiting his passed pawn, whereas Black is

prepared for action on both wings. On the queen side he has the possibility of . . . a6 and . . . b5 and on the king side the plan of . . . Rae8,
g6 and . . . f5. Should his knight have to move for some reason, he even
has a 'reserve' blockader on d7. Compare the effectiveness of these two
minor pieces with the white bishop on d3.
Even two connected passed pawns can be successfully blockaded,
although of course the task is far more difficult. Consider the following
position.
244
Euwe (white)
Dlack played 1 . . . exf4! 2 Bxf4 (2 gxf4? Nxe4 3 Bxe4 Rxe4 wins a
pawn) 2 . . . Ba6! 3 Rae 1 Qe7 4 g4 DeS ! and now White's d and e pawns
are fully restrained and this is linked in typical fashion with the weak
ness of the dark squares in White's position. TI1e game continuation was
most instructive : 5 Bxe5 Qxe5 6 Ng3 Re7 7 Bfl Bc8 ! 8 Be2 Bd7 9
Refl Rf8 1 0 Qcl Nce8 1 1 Kh 1 f6 1 2 Rg1 Ng7 1 3 BfJ QgS ! ! (a fine
strategic concept; Black allows White two connected passed paws and
doubles his g pawn but the two blockading knights now completely
'The pawns are
chess' I 1 6 7
the soul of
dominate the board, fully vindicating Black's strategy. We give the

remaining moves without comment) 1 4 Qxg5 fxg5 1 5 Rgfl Nge8 16
Be l Rxfl 1 7 Rxfl Kg7 1 8 h3 Nf6 19 Bf3 Be8! 20 Re2 Nd7 2 1 Rd 2
NeS 22 &2 b 5 ! 23 Rc2 Rc7 24 Nd l c4 25 bxc4 bxc4 26 Nc3 Kf6 27
Nb1 Rb7 28 Nd2 Ba4! 29 Rc l Rb2 ! 30 Nxc4 Nxc4 3 I Bxc4 Dc2! 32
Bb3 Rb l ! 33 Rxb l Bxb l 34 Ne2 Bxe4+ 35 KJ12 Ke5 36 Nc3 Bd3 37
Kg3 Ne4+ 38 Nxe4 Bxe4 39 d6 Kxd6 and Black won in a few moves.
We have given many examples of the strength of pawns used as
attacking weapons, or creating space for us (the e5 pawn in positions 45
and 1 86), or providing useful support for our pieces, or fmally being
important factors in a mating attack (on f6 in positions 27, 38 and 61 ;
on f3 in positions 37 and 68; on h6 in positions 82 and 139; on a6 in
positions 83, 1 36 and 2 1 7).
However, pawns can also become fatally weak. An advanced pawn
is often a weakness either in itself (position 78) or weakens squares
behind it (position 157), and we have seen how weak a backward
pawn can be (positions 1 95, 22 1 , 222 and 225). An important strategic
element is the potential weakness of isolated pawns, that is pawns with
no pawn alongside them. Let us examine more fully the tricky problems
which arise when assessing the pros and cons of such pawns.
245
Pachman (black)
Zita (white)
Both e pawns are isolated but cannot be attacked from the front . Never
theless such pawns must be classed as weak if enough pressure can be
applied on them. In tllis instance Black's pawn is adequately defended
but White's pawn on e4 can be attacked further by . . . Nf6 and even by
. . . Rf4 if Wllite's bishop goes to b2. In view of tllis weakness Black
quickly obtains a favourable end -game as follows: I
h6! (not im
mediately I . . Nd7? 2 Ng5 !) 2 Nd2? (White intends to guard his pawn
.

by Bf3 but this reduces his bishop to the status of a pawn. He should
activate the bishop by 2 Be2 ! c4 3 Qb41 when Black has the choice
between creating a passed pawn by 3 . . . Bxe4 4 Qxc4+ Qxc4 5 Bxc4+
Kh7 or 3 . . . Ba6 followed by . . . Nd7 and . . . Nf6, but in both cases
his task would be harder than in the game) 2 . . . Nd7 3 RxfB+ Rxf8 4
Bf3 Nf6 5 Nfl Qf7 ! (threatening 6 . . . Nxe4! even after 6 Bd2) 6 Ng3
Qc4 7 Qc3 (Black's last few moves have increased the power of his
pieces to such an extent that 7 c3 Rd8! would be greatly in his favour,
so White is forced to exchange queens even at the cost of weakening his
queen side pawn position) 7 . . . Qxc3 8 bxc3 h5! 9 Bg5 Nh7! I O Be3
Bf6 I I Rd l Bg5 ! (exchanging White's good bishop and at the same
time increasing his pressure on the e pawn) I 2 Bxg5 Nxg5 I 3 Rd7 Rf7
1 4 Rxf7 Kxf7 1 5 h4 Nxf3+! (it is only after the forced 1 5 h4 that this
exchange is good, because in two moves Black will obtain an outside
passed pawn giving him a won ending. Once again we see how a weak
ness, in this case the e pawn, is exploited indirectly by forcing White's
pieces into unfavourable positions. We give the remaining moves with
out comment) 1 6 gxf3 Bc8 ! 1 7 K.f2 g5 ! 1 8 hxg5 Kg6 1 9 Nfl Be6! 20
a3 Kxg5 2 1 Ne3 Ba2 ! ! 22 c4 h4 23 Ng4 Kf4 24 Ne3 h3 25 a4 Bb l !
26 Resigns.
246
Capablanca (black)
Keres (white)
Black's isolated pawn on c6 is easily attackable down the half-open file,
but even in such cases the winning method seldom consists in capturing
the pawn directly. The attacker usually forces the defending pieces into
passive positions by building up pressure on the weakness and then
exploits this tactically in another area of the board. In the present game
White's task is simplified by a mistake on Black's part. Play went: I h3
Rb5 2 Rac l Rfc8 3 Rfd i Ng6? (this leaves the pawn insufficiently
defended allowing a tactical break-through. White was threatening 4
'The pawns are the soul of chess' I 1 6 9

Qd4 with a double attack on d6 and g7, so 3 . . . Bf4 was the correct
move even though White is clearly better after 4 Rc2) 4 Nd4 Rb6 (4
RdS allows S Nxc6 ! Rxd l + 6 Rxd1 Qxc6 7 Rxd6 ! winning) 5 Ne6 !
Qb8 ! (not 5 . . . Dxh2+ 6 Kh 1 fxe6 7 Qxe6+ Kh8 8 Rd7 etc.) 6 Ng5
Rb7 7 Qg4 Bf4 (the threat was 8 Qh5 h6 9 Nxn ! Kxf7 1 0 Qf5 +) 8
Ro4 RhS? (he had to play 8 . . . Dxg5 9 Qxg5 when White's bishop is
far stronger than the knight) 9 Nxf7! ReS 1 0 g3 Qc8 1 1 Rxf4 Qxg4 1 2
Rxg4 Kxf7 1 3 Rd7 + Re7 14 Rxe7 + Kxe7 1 5 Bxg7 and Black resigned
a few moves later.
In a wide range of openings including the Queen's Gambit and
NJmzo-lndian Defence, certain variations result in an isolated d pawn
for one side or the other. We have already met two such cases in posi
tions 1 7 1 and 203 , in one case with a fuUy open c me and in the other
an open e file. There is no doubt that such a pawn can become very
weak in certain situations. Here is an example.
247
Bronstein (black)
Botvinnik (white)
White's thematic plan in these positions is to simplify the game as much
possible to prevent Black using his only assets of open lines and
active piece play. Tite game proceeded: 1 Nd3 ! Nx<13 2 Qxd3 Qg4 3
Be3 (it would be premature to play 3 Bxf6 Bxf6 4 Rad I Qxd4! 5 Qxd4
Bxd4 6 Rxd4 Re2 with good counterplay for Black) 3 . . . Bc5 4 h3
Qg6? (it is a strategic error to exchange queens in such positions. Black
should retain as many pieces as possible on the board to compensate
for his weak pawn. Perhaps Bronstein overlooked that after the better
4 . . . Qh5 ! White cannot offer the exchange of queens himself because
5 Qf5 Bxd4 6 Qxh5 Nxh5 7 Bxd4 again allows 7 . . . Re2 with sufficient
counterplay. After the game move White has few problems; he first
fixes the weak pawn and then applies pressure on it) 5 Qxg6 hxg6 6
Rad I Re4 7 c3 ! b6 8 Nc2 Rd8 9 Rd3 Kf8 (Black loses his pawn after 9
as
I 70 I 'The pawns are the soul of chess'

. . . Bxe3 1 0 Nxe3 d4 1 1 Rfd 1 , or here 1 0 . . . Rd7 1 1 Rfd 1 ReS 1 2 c4
etc.) 10 Rfd 1 Ke7 1 1 Kfl (another good idea is I 1 g4 and I 2 Kg2 with
the constant tlueat of driving away the defending knight by gS) I I . . .
Kd7 1 2 BgS Kc6 I 3 b4! Bf8 (after 1 1 . . . Be7 White could play either
I 2 Nc3 or 1 2 Nd4+ Kb7 I S bS ! and Nc6) I 4 Ne3 ReS. All Black's
pieces are now tied to the defence of his weak pawn, but White could
now win by 1 S Bxf6 gxf6 1 6 f4 ! (or 1 6 a3 threatening 1 7 c4 ; or 1 6 c4
d4 1 7 Nc2 etc.) 1 6 . . . RhS 1 7 c4 Bxb4 1 8 NxdS Bd6 1 9 Nxf6 Rhh8
20 Ne4 Be7 2 1 Rxd8 Rxd8 22 Rxd8 Bxd8 23 Ke2 fS 24 NgS and
White wins easily by bringing his knight to eS.
Our next position arises after the following moves of the Queen's
Gambit Declined: I d4 dS 2 c4 e6 3 Nc3 Nf6 4 BgS Be7 S e3 0.0 6 Nf.3
Nbd7 7 Rei c6 8 Bd3 dxc4 9 Bxc4 NdS 1 0 Bxe7 Qxe7 1 1 0.0 Nxc3 1 2
Rxc3 eS l 3 Qc2 e xd4 1 4 exd4 Nb6.
248
.....
..
t tt
t

fl-'tll

ft ll'lt. B ft 6
B
Drimer (black)
Gligorlc (white)
Even though the e me is open as in our last position, there are impor
tant differences: White is better developed and can seize the e me at
once. The d pawn is a strength rather than a weakness, giving White
useful support points for his pieces at cS and eS. Black's last move is
aimed at control of the vital defensive square dS, which is why I S Re3 !
is tactically so exact (if instead I S ReI Qd8 ! 1 6 Bb3 NdS 1 7 ReS Be6
with equality, whereas now 1 S . . . Qd8 1 6 Bb3 NdS allows 1 7 ReS !
when 1 7 . . . Be6 loses to 1 8 NgS !) 1 S . . . Qf6 1 6 Bb3 Bg4 1 7 Rfe l !
(already the control of the e fLle is a decisive factor. If now 1 7 . . .
Bxf3 1 8 Rxf3 Qxd4 1 9 Re7 wins) J 7 . . . Rad8 1 8 QcS ! Qd6 (the
natural 1 8 . . . NdS fails to 1 9 Bxd S ! RxdS? 20 Qxf8+! Kxf8 21 ReS
mate, or here 1 9 . . . cxdS 20 Qxa7 Ra8? 2 1 Qxa8 ! Rxa8 22 Re8+
mating) 19 h3 Bxf3 20 Rxf3 QxcS (20 . . . Qxd4? 2 1 Qxd4 Rxd4 _22
Rxf7 ! wins) 2 1 dxcS Nd7 22 Re7 NxcS 23 Bxf7 + Kh8 24 b4 Rd7 and
'The pawns are the soul of chess' I I 7 1

now White could have won the game in sparkling fashion by 2 5 Be8 !
Rd l + (or 25 . . . Rxf3 26 8xd7 Nxd7 27 Rxd7 winning material) 26
Kh2 Rxf3
27 BhS ! ! winning easily.
Positions with an open c me occur even more often. Here is a typical

example.
249
Varia tion of Queen's Gambit

Accepted
This position arises after the moves: 1 d4 dS 2 c4 dxc4 3 Nf3 Nf6 4 e3

cS S Bxc4 cxd4 6 e xd4 e6 7 0-0 Be7 8 Nc3 0-0. Let us briefly consider
the possibilities for both sides. Black will try to set up an effective
blockade of the isolated d pawn by moves such as . . . Nc6 , Nb4, b6,
Bb7 ; or . . . Nd7, Nb6, Bd7 and . . . Bc6. White has two options open to
him (Black's main problem is that he has to keep both constantly in
mind!): he can make a central break-through with d S , sometimes in
volving a pawn sacrifice, or he can use the support points for his pieces
on cS and eS in order to carry out a king side attack with his control of
more space and thus greater mobility. In practice White has the better
chances in view of Black's temporary probleJ!IS in developing his pieces.
Our next five diagrams illustrate the pros and cons of this kind of
position.
250
Nimzovitch
Cohn
(black)
(white)

Black has managed to develop his pieces satisfactorily and now proceeds
to blockade the d pawn, improving his position with every move. I . . .
N7 2 NeS NedS 3 NxdS NxdS 4 QhS Bxe S ! S QxeS (as we have stated,
exchanges usually benefit the side without the isolated pawn. If here S
dxeS Nxe3 ! 6 fxe3 the weak isolated pawn has become a weak doubled
pawn) S
Nf6 6 Rfe l BdS ! 7 Bd3 ReS S Rac 1 Ng4! (the isolated
pawn is compensated by the two bishops, so Black tried out an interest
ing idea) 9 Qg3 Nxe3 I 0 fxe3 Qd7 I I Ba6 Rxc1 1 2 Rxcl Qa4! 1 3 Bfl
Qb3 14 Qf2 fS ! (the e pawn has now been flXed as a weakness and in a
few moves it becomes backward on a half-open fde) I S Qd2 Rf7 1 6
Qc3 Qa4 1 7 g3 Kh7 I S Bg2 QbS 1 9 BxdS exdS and in a further 70
moves (!) Black succeeded in converting his advantage into a win.
2S l
. ....
..
1.

ll t .t. t t
.t
A a
II
[i't'W.
ft ll ll ft B
=
n
=---=
=---=
=
='--'
Sokolsky (black)
' !
.' i
... :
. . i
. .
Tolush (white)
Titis position favours Black because he not only manages to exchange

two minor pieces but one of these is White's important white-squared
bishop which is so useful in the attack and also controls the vital dS
square. Play proceeded: 1 . . . BxbS 2 QxbS a6 3 Qe2 NdS ! 4 Bd2 ReS
5 Rad l Nc6 6 Bel Nxc3 (Black could also continue his attack against
the d pawn with 6 . . . Bf6 but he decides to transfer ltis pressure to a
new weakness at c3 , a theme to which we shall return) 7 bxc3 bS ! S
Rd3 ! Qd5 9 Ng4! (with a flXed weakness at c3 , White dare not allow
any further exchanges and must throw everything into an attack on the
king whatever the consequences may be) 9 . . . RfdS 1 0 Rg3 b4? (a pity
after such fine defensive play which he could now crown with 1 0 . . .
g6 ! when White's attack is nipped in the bud e.g. 1 1 Nh6+ Kg7) I I
Nh6+ Kf8 1 2 Rxg7! Kxg7 1 3 Qg4+ Bg5 1 4 c4 Qxd4? (and this is fatal,
whereas after 14 . . . Qa5 ! 1 5 d5! White only draws) I S Qxg5+ KfB 16
QgS+ Ke7 17 Qxf7+ Kd6 IS Bf4+ NeS 1 9 Ng4 wins.
'The pawns are the soul o f chess' I 1 73

252
Troianescu (black)
Donner (white)
Here is a simple example of the thematic dS break-through, one of
White's most dangerous attacking ideas which eliminates the isolated
pawn whilst opening up vital attacking lines for his better developed
pieces. Although White can proceed with the usual buildup of BgS ,
Qd3, Rad 1 and Bb 1 forcing the weakening . . . g6 because of the rna ting
threat, if dS is playable it is usually much more effective. Tite game
went: 1 d S ! exdS 2 NxdS NxdS 3 QxdS ! Bb7 (not 3 . . . Qxd5? 4 Bxd5
winning a piece ; note how the rook on e1 is already making its presence
felt !) 4 Qh5 ! g6 (4 . . . h6 would allow 5 Bxh6 ! gxh6 6 Qg6+ Kh8 7
Qxh6+ Kg8 8 Bb 1 etc.) 5 Qh6 Nd4 6 NgS BxgS 7 Bxg5 Qb6 (after 7
. . . Nf5 8 Bxd8 Nxh6 9 Bf6 the bishop pair is very strong) 8 Rad 1
Rac8? (he had to play 8 . . . Nf5 !) 9 Re7! Qd6 (9 . . NfS 10 Rxf7!)
10 Kh l ! Qc6 1 1 Rxb7! NfS (1 1 . . . Qxb7 12 Rxd4) 12 Bd5 ! Qc2 1 3
Re i Qe2 ( 1 3 . . . Qxb2 1 4 Rxf7 !) 1 4 Bxf7+! Resigns.
.
253
Novak (black)
This is a far more complicated position in which White sacrifices his d

pawn to open lines and squares for his pieces. The fact that we are
scarcely out of the opening and Black has an apparently secure set-up
only serve to emphasise the power of the dS idea, but the weakness
of Black's h6 pawn is an important additional factor. Play proceeded:
I dS ! exdS (it is essential that Black cannot maintain a piece on dS e.g.
I . . . NxdS? 2 BxdS BxdS 3 Bxe7 Qxe7 4 QxdS winning a piece ; or
I . . . BxdS 2 NxdS and again Black must recapture with the pawn) 2
Nd4 ! Re8 (2 . . . Nb6 allows 3 NfS BcS 4 b4 Bd6 5 Qf3 threatening 6
Nxh6+) 3 Nf5 Bf8 (or 3 . . . Bc5 4 Qd2 threatening to sacrifice on h6)
4 Nxd5 ! (no mere recapture of a pawn but a highly complex com
bination as we shall see. If now 4 . . . Rxe 1 + 5 Qxe i g5 6 Nde7+!
Bxe7 7 Nxe7+ Kf8 8 Nf5 gxh4 9 Qb4+ Kg8 10 Nxh6+ Kg7 when the
most elegant finish would be I I Nf5+ Kg8 1 2 Qxh4 Nh7 I 3 Bxf7+!
etc.) 4 . . . g5 5 Nde7+! Kh8 (or 5 . . . Rxe7 6 Rxe7! Bxe7 7 Nxh6+
Kg7 8 Nxf7 Qb6 9 Bxg5 etc.) 6 Dg3 Bxe7 7 Nxh6 Rf8 8 Nxf7+ Rxf7
9 Dxf7 Kg7 I O Ba2 Nc5 I I Qxd8 Bxd8 1 2 Rad l ! Nce4 13 Be5 Kg6 I 4
Bb I Kh5 1 5 f3 Bb6+ 1 6 Bd4 Dxd4+ 1 7 Rxd4 Nc5 1 8 Rd6 Rf8 1 9 Re7
Re8 20 Rh7+! Nxh7 2 I g4+ Resigns .
254
11
ll t .J.It t t
t
a
B II
.[*!)
ft ll ll ft H
.r_
Vidmar (black)
Botvinnik (white)
Black has succeeded in blockading the d pawn, but White skilfully

utilises his space advantage along with Black's slightly passive set-up to
launch a king side attack which is a classic of its kind. 1 NeS ! (note that
capturing on dS achieves nothing e.g. 1 Nxd5 NxdS 2 BxdS Bxg5 3
Bxb7 Rb8 etc.) 1 . . . Bc6 2 Rad 1 (in such positions it is rarely wise to
capture the bishop, because Black's resulting c pawn is no weaker than
White's d pawn and the knight on eS is a strong piece) 2 . . . Nb4
(perhaps 2 . . . Nxc3 was preferable) 3 QhJ ! Dd5 ! (correctly forcing the
exchange) 4 Nxd5 Nbxd5? (but here 4 . . . Nfxd5 ! was essential and
after 5 Del Rc8 with counterplay down the c fL!e) 5 f4! Rc8 (5 . . . g6?
6 Bh6 Re8 7 Ba4 wins the exchange) 6 f5 exf5 7 Rxf5 Qd6 8 Nxf7!
'The pawns are the soul of chess' I 1 1 5

Rxn (8 . . . Kxn 9 Bxd5 + wins) 9 Bxf6 Bxf6 (9 .
. Nxf6 1 0 Rxf6!
1 1 Qxc8+) 10 Rxd5 Qc6 I I Rd6! Qe8 1 2 Rd7 Resigns.
In position 2 5 1 we met the instructive strategic idea of exchanging
on c3 and thus replacing the isolated pawn with a pair of pawns on two
half-open files, often referred to as 'hanging' pawns. Such pawns are
particularly weak when they can be blockaded as in the following oft
quoted position :
.
Bxf6
255
Alekhine (black)
Thomas (white)
After 1 . . . Qd5 ! 2 Qe3 Qb5 3 Qd2 RdS ! 4 h3 e6 5 Re i Qa4 6 Ra 1 bS!
7 Qd1 Rc4 the blockade of White's pawns is complete and Black now
begins a decisive regrouping: 8 Qb3 Rd6 9 Kh2 Ra6 1 0 Rffl Be7 1 1
K.h l Rcc6! (Black plans to play his queen to c4 and double his rooks on
the a file when the forced exchanges will ensure hint a won ending) 1 2
Rfe l Bh4 1 3 Rf1 Qc4! 14 Qxc4 Rxc4 1 5 a 3 Be 7 1 6 Rfb 1 Bd6 1 7 g3
Kf8 1 8 Kg2 Ke7 1 9 Kf2 Kd7 20 Ke2 Kc6 (threatening to win the a3
pawn by 2 1 . . . Rca4) 21 Ra2 Rca4 22 Rba1 KdS 23 Kd3 R6a5 24 Be l
a6 2 5 Bb2 h S ! 26 h4 f6! 27 Be l e S ! 2 8 fxeS fxeS 29 Bb2 exd4 30 exd4
b4! 3 1 Resigns.
Positions in which a pawn pair is blockaded on c3 , d4 (c6, dS) with
good bishop against bad (i.e. the pawns blocking their own bishop) are
almost always won for the blockading side with hardly any effort. How
ever, when the pawns are in their most active position at c4 and d4
(c5, dS) defence against them is more difficult unless there is little
material on the board. Position 1 38 was a typical example of the active
use of such pawns and here is another example of the powerful advance
of the d pawn.
(See next diagram) I dS ! exdS 2 NxdS ! (better than 2 cxdS because it
forces Black to open the a l -h8 diagonal) 2 . . . Qb8 3 Qd2 (another way
to win is 3 Bb l ! NxdS 4 cxdS Bf6 5 Qc2 Bxb2 6 dxc6! Bxc l 7 Qxh7+

256
Golombek (black)
KfB 8 Qh8+ Ke7 9 Rd7+ and mate in three moves) 3 . . . NxdS 4 cxdS
Nb4 S Be4 Rxc l 6 Rxcl Rd8? (he had to play 6 . . . Bf8 and give up
the exchange on e4 after 7 NgS) 7 Qd4 f6 8 Bxh7+! Kxh7 9 Qe4+ Kg8
1 0 Qxe7 NxdS 1 1 Qe6+ Kh8 1 2 Qh3 + Kg8 1 3 NgS ! fxgS 1 4 Qe6+
Resigns ( 14 . . . Kh7 1 S Qf7 Rg8 16 QhS mate).
We have already touched upon the subject of doubled pawns. In
position 236 the doubled pawn was not much of a problem because it
could be used to create a passed pawn just as easily as a pawn majority
without doubled pawns. However, when doubled pawns are blockaded
they represent a serious weakness.
257
Composed positions
In the left part of the diagram we have an example of doubled pawns

which are mobile if not as much as a normal row of pawns, whereas in
the right half the black doubled pawns are immobile and can be easily
blockaded by a piece on fS, whilst the white pawns can be mobilised
to a certain extent by g3 and f4.
'The pawns
arc:
the soul of chess' I 1 7 7
Thia position is a highly instructive example 'o f the difference between a
fixed and a mobile doubled pawn complex. With 1 . . . gS ! Black ftxed

White's doubled pawns. Note that it would be uneconomical to use the
bilhop for this purpose , even with gain of time, because this piece is
very actively posted on the long diagonal where it will soon be required
to support the advance of his queen side pawns. The game continued:
2 a3 bS 3 Na2! (aiming for the strong-point on f5, an idea Black had to
consider very carefully when playing . . . g5) 3 . . . Rfe8 4 Nb4 BfB ! 5
Nc2 DeS 6 Ne3 KfB 7 NfS b4 8 axb4 Bxb4 9 Rd4 DeS 1 0 Rd2 Ra2! 1 1
h41 Bb4 (not 1 1 . . . gxh4? 1 2 f4 Ng6 1 3 Bc4 and White even stands
better) 1 2 Rc2 f6! 13 hxgS fxgS 14 Ng3 Rea8 I S NhS Ra l ! (another
move which had to be carefully calculated, since after 1 6 Rxa 1 Rxa l +
1 7 Kg2 White will eliminate his doubled pawns. However, Black con
tinues 1 7 . . . Ra2 1 8 f4 gxf4 1 9 Nxf4 Ba3. 20 Ne6+ Ke7 21 NcS
BxcS 22 RxcS Rxb2! 23 RxeS+ Kd6 24 RhS Rxe2 2S Rxh7 bS
winning) 1 6 Reel Rxc 1 1 7 Rxc1 Ke7! 1 8 Rd l Ra2 1 9 Rb 1 Bd2 ! (again
blockading the doubled pawns) 20 Kg2 bS 2 1 Ng3 Kf6 22 Nfl Dc3 ! 23
Bxb5 ! Bxb2 24 Be2 Bd4 (now after 25 Ng3 Ke6 and . . . hS Black wins
easily, but White finds a clever defence) 2S Rd l ! Ng6 ! 26 Rxd4 Nf4+
27 Kh l (or 27 Kh2 Rxe2 28 Rd6+ KeS 29 Rxc6 Rxf2+ 30 Kgl Nh3+
31 Kh l RxfJ and despite the simplification Black can exploit his extra
pawn because of the white king's unfavourable position) 27 . . . Nxe2!
28 Rd 1 (after 28 Rd6+ Ke7 29 Rxc6 Ra l 30 Kg2 Nf4+ 3 1 Kgl hS!
and Black wins despite being a pawn down, since White can do nothing
against the threat of advancing the h pawn to h3 followed by . . . Ne2+
or . . . h2+ winning a piece) 28 . . . Rc2 ! 29 Kh2 Nf4 30 Kg3 hS ! 3 1
Ne3 Re i ! 32 Rd6+? {but even 32 Rxc l Ne2+ 33 Kg2 Nxc l is hopeless
for White) 32 . . . KeS 33 Rd8 Rh l ! 34 Nc4+ Ke6 3S Resigns.

Nimzovitch was the first one to demonstrate in both his play and
writings the true art of the blockade strategy against doubled pawns.
One of the main elements of his defence 1 d4 Nf6 2 c4 e6 3 Nc3 Bb4
is to give up his bishop after 4 a3 Bxc3 + 5 bxc3 in order to restrain the
doubled pawns by 5 . . . c5 ! 6 e3 b6! in order to apply pressure on the
c4 pawn by . . . Ba6 and . . . Na5. Practice has shown that, given accurate
defensive play by Black, the weakness of the doubled pawns more than
outweighs White's attacking chances.
259
Nimzovitch (black)
Black has successfully blockaded the doubled pawns and now reaps the
reward as follows: I . . . Qb7+ 2 Kgl Qa6 3 Qb3 Nc6 4 Rfd l Na5 5
Qb5 (the only defence, but even though he eliminates his doubled
pawns the weak squares remain available for the active black pieces) 5
. . . Qxb5 ! 6 cxb5 Nc4 7 Bel a6! 8 bxa6 Rxa6 9 dxc5 bxc5 1 0 Ng2
Nd5 1 1 Rd3 Rfa8 1 2 e4 Ne5 ! 1 3 Resigns.
The Ruy Lopez often results in positions where Black has doubled
pawns on c6 and c7, along with a pawn on d6. White has two main
methods of exploiting this; he can break in the centre with e5 and try
to force . . . dxe5 when the doubled pawns are isolated and thus exposed,
or he can try the method illustrated in our next example.
(See next diagram) 1 c5 ! so that If now 1 . . . dxc5 2 Be3 and the c
pawn falls, with the doubled pawns exposed on the halfopen me, or if
I . . d5 2 exd5 cxd5 3 Nxd5! Nxd5 4 Qxd5 Bxa4 5 Qe4+ and 6 Qxa4
wins a pawn. Even if Black leaves the pawn where it is, as in the game,
his doubled pawns remain blockaded. Play continued: I
. Nc8 2 Be3
0-0 3 Qd2 Qe7 4 Radl Be8 5 f4 ! f5 (after 5 . . . Bxc3 6 Qxc3 Qxe4 7
Bc2 White's attack is decisive) 6 exf5 gxf5 7 Rie l dxc5 8 Qf2 Nd6 9
Bxc5 Qd8 1 0 Bd4! (the simplest way to win) 1 0 . . . Bxd4 1 1 Qxd4
.
'The pawns are the soul

260
of
chess' I 1 79
Fine (black)
Boleslavsky (white)
Qf6 1 2 Bb3 + Kh8 1 3 Qxf6+ Rxf6 14 Re7 Rc8 and now White's
quickest way to win is I S Na4 Ne4 16 Be6 Rb8 1 7 BxfS.
We already know how the pawn structure often determines the
strategic plan to be followed. A clear example of this is when a pawn
majority is exploited on the wing, as in positions 1 87, 2 1 1 , 230, 235
and 236. We itlso gave the reasons why a queen side majority is usually
more valuable than a king side one. Interesting situations arise when
one side has a central pawn majority opposing a queen side majority.
Everything then depends on the position of the supporting pieces and
the dynamic power of the pawns, as our next two examples show.
26 1
Tal (black)
Polugayevsky {white)
White can exploit the aggressive placing of his pieces in the following
interesting manner : I dS ! exdS 2 e S ! {giving up a pawn, but the eS
pawn proves extremely useful in the coming attack as we shall see.
Black's position is difficult e.g. if 2 . . . Re8 3 Qf4 h6 4 QfS with a
further weakening of his pawns, or 2 . . . Qe7 3 Nd4 threatening 4 NfS)
2 . . . Nc4 3 Qf4 Nb2? 4 Bxh7+! Kxh7 5 Ng5 + Kg6 (or 5 . . . Kg8 6
Qh4 Re8 7 e6 ! winning easily) 6 h4! Rc4! {the threat was 7 h5+! KxhS

8 g4+ Kg6 9 Qf5 + Kh6 1 0 Nxf7+ Rxf7 I I Qh5 mate) 7 h5+ Kh6 8
Nxf7+ Kh7 9 Qf5 + Kg8 I O e6! (the point of the combination, giving
\VNte a powerful passed pawn and threatening both e7 and h6) 1 0 . . .
Qf6 1 1 Qxf6 ! gxf6 I 2 Rd2 (surprisingly White has obtained a decisive
endgame advantage and would win even without Black's next error e.g.
if 1 2 . . . Na4 1 3 Nd6 Bc6 1 4 Nxc4 dxc4 I 5 Rd6 Bb5 1 6 e7 ReS 1 7
Rxf6 wins; or I 2 . . . Rb4 1 3 a3 Rb3 1 4 Rd4 Bc6 1 5 h6 Kh7 1 6 Nd6
Nc4 1 7 e7 winning his piece back with advantage) 1 2 . . . Rc6? 1 3
Rxb2 ReS 1 4 Nh6+ Kh7 1 5 Nf5 Rxe6 1 6 Rxe6 Rxe6 I 7 Rc2! Rc6 I S
Re2 Bc8 1 9 Re7+ Kh 8 20 Nh4 f5 2 1 Ng6+ Kg8 22 Rxa7 Resigns.
Clearly the mobility of the respective pawn majorities is a vital
factor, quality being often of more importance than quantity, as our
next exan1ple well illustrates.
262
Colle (black)
Spielmann (white)
White has just played his knight to a4 with the intention of advancing
his c pawn. However, by 1 . . . b5 ! 2 cxb5 Bd6 allowing White a 4:2
pawn majority on the queen's wing which is practically immobile, Black
can calmly evaluate his own pawn majority. Play continued: 3 Rae l
Qe7 4 Bd3 Ne5 ! (an excellent centralisation of his pieces which is play
able because 5 Bxf5? fails to 5 . . . Rxf5 ! 6 Rxf5 NO+ 7 Rxn Qxe 1 +
8 Rfl Bxh2+! etc.) 5 Kh l f4! 4 Re2? (hastening the end ; of course 4
Rxf4? loses to 4 . . . Rxf4 5 Qxf4 Nxd3, but 4 NcS would have given
him some counterplay) 4 . . . Rae8 5 Nc3 Qh4 6 Ne4 Ng4 7 h3 (or 7
g3 Qh3 ! or 7 Qgl Nxh2 8 Qxh2 Qxh2+ 9 Kxh2 0+) 7 . . 0 ! 8
Rxn Rxn 9 Ng6+ Kf7! I O Resigns.
(See next diagram) 'This is a type of pawn chain we have already men
tioned, the respective structures defining the plans of each side. White's
space advantage on the queen's wing will form the basis of an attac on
that side ; he will play b4, a4 and b5 in order to open lines for his pieces
.
'The pawns an: the soul of chess' I 1 8 1

263
Composed position
and weaken Black's pawns. Black will attack in similar fashion on the
king side with . . . fS, gS and . . . f4, but of course if such an attack is
tactically possible it will prove the more dangerous, since White's king
will be the object! However, take away the pawns on cS , d4, dS and e4
and it is Black's queen side majority which is the most useful, as we
have seen.
264
Here we have the important difference that both sides have a half-open
file at their disposal down which they can apply pressure on the c pawn
and e pawn respectively, thus drastically reducing the effectiveness of
the pawn majorities. If for example I f4? the pawn on e3 becomes
backward and therefore weak ; similarly in Black's case I . . . bS? would
weaken the c pawn. It thus turns out that each side's pawns are more
mobile on the side where they are facing their opponent's majority!
White's most effective plan is in fact to play b4 and if . . . a6 then a4
and bS , using apparently two pawns to attack three (although White's u
pawn plays a vital role in dissuading Black from . . . cS) from where the
phrase 'minority attack' originated. White intends bxc6 so that if Black
1 8 2 I 'The pawns are the soul of chess'

recaptures with the pawn he has a weak backward c pawn, whilst if he
recaptures with a piece (or plays . . . cxb5 earlier) his d pawn becomes
isolated. This is an extremely useful positional plan which Black can
also use on the king side, although it is rarely easy to achieve in .view of
the exposure of Black's king which results from advancing his defending
pawns. Here is an interesting game which illustrates minority attacks by
both sides: Foltys-Podgomy (Prague, 1 943). 1 d4 Nf6 2 c4 e6 3 Nc3
Bb4 4 Qc2 d5 5 cxd5 exd5 6 Bg5 h6 7 Bxf6 Qxf6 8 a3 Bxc3+ 9 Qxc3
c6 1 0 e3 00 1 1 Nf3 Bf5 ! 1 2 Ne5 (after 1 2 Be2 Nd7 1 3 0-0 Be4! Black
would have active piece-play) 1 2 . . . Nd7 1 3 Nxd7 Bxd7 1 4 Be2 Qg6!
1 5 0-0 Bh3 ! 1 6 Bf3 Bg4! (ridding himself of his bad bishop) 1 7 Bxg4
Qxg4 1 8 b4! f5! 1 9 b5 !
265
Podgomy (blilck)
Now 1 9 . . . cxb5? 20 Qb3 ! regains the pawn with pressure against the
weak pawns on Black's queen wing. For this reason Black suddenly
went onto the defensive and was rapidly punished for his timidity as
follows: 1 9 . . . Rf6? 20 bxc6 Rg6 21 g3 Rxc6? 22 Qb3 Qf3 23 Qxb7
Rac8 24 Qxa7 h5 25 Qe7 R8c7 26 QgS g6 27 a4 Qe4 28 aS Qe8 29
Rfbl Ra7 30 Qf4 Kf7 3 1 Rh8 Resigns.
However, the logical continuation was 1 9 . . . f4! forcing 20 exf4
when Black can equalise by either 20 . . . cxbS 2 1 Qb3 Qd7, or 20 . . .
Qxf4 2 1 bxc6 Qc7! since his own weak pawns are no worse than White's
isolated d pawn. In this case we could say that both sides' minority
attacks were successful! In many lines of the Queen's Gambit, how
ever, the placing of Black's pieces makes it difficult for him to institute
such action and he must look for other ways of obtaining counterplay.
We shall use our notes to the following game to elucidate a few strategic
problems which arise when White launches a typical minority attack on
the queen side.

Game 5 Queen's Gambit
Tal Savon (40th USSR Championship, I 972)
1
2
3
4
d4
c4
Nc3
cxdS
dS
e6
N f6
Let us branch out into a little opening theory. 'After 4 Nf3 c6 5 cxdS
exdS Black has far better chances than in the game. Play might go 6
Qc2 (preventing . . . BfS which is playable after 6 Bg5) 6 . . . g6! 7 BgS
Bg7 (but not 7 . . . Bf5 S Qb3 !) S e3 Bf5 ! 9 Bd3 Bxd3 I O Qxd3 Nbd7
I I 0-0 0-0 I 2 Rab i Qe7 1 3 Rfcl Qe6! (threatening . . . Ne4) 14 Nd2
RfeS I S Bxf6! Bxf6 I 6 b4 RacS I 7 Qc2! (after I 7 b5? c S ! I S dxc5
Nxc5 and now I 9 Qxd5? fails to 19 . . . Bxc3 winning a piece, or if 1 9
Qdi d4! Black eliminates his weak pawn and even stands better) 1 7
. . . Bg7 I S Qb3 b S ! and despite his backward c pawn Black has equal
ised because he can neutralise his weakness by playing his knight to c4
via b6, and then apply pressure on the b4 pawn by posting his bishop
on fB. The strategy of exchanging white-squared bishops foUowed by
. . . bS and occupation of c4 by a knight is one of Black's best weapons
against the minority attack. Another variation runs: 4 Bg5 Be7 5 e3
0-0 6 Nf3 Nbd7 7 Rei c6 S Qc2 ReS 9 a3 a6 1 0 cxd5 exdS I I Bd3
when in the game Trifunovic-Pirc, Black introduced an original and
strong defence with I I . . . NfB! I 2 0-0 g6! 1 3 Na4 Ne6 I4 Bh4 Ng7!
I S NcS Nd7! 1 6 Bxe7 Rxe7 1 7 b4 Nb6 ! I S a4 BfS ! and the whole
point of the complex knight manoeuvre to g7 via f8 and e6 becomes
clear; he exchanges white-squared bishops and obtains control of c4.
After I 9 Nd2 Bxd3 20 Qxd3 Nf5 the game was agreed drawn, since
Black can again cover hi.s c6 pawn by playing hi.s knight to c4. Now
back to the game.
4
S
6
BgS
e3
exdS
Be7
()..()
He cannot play 6 . . . Bf5 before . . . c6 because 7 Qb3 ! then wins a

pawn.
7
8
9
Bd3
Nf3
Qcl
Nbd7
ReS
Nf8

Another common freeing method for Black is . . . Ne4 but after 9 . .
c6 I 0 0..0 it is not so easy to carry out. If at once 1 0 . . . Ne4? I I Bxe4!
Bxg5 I 2 Bxh7 + wins a pawn, or here I I . . . dxe4 I 2 Nxe4. Equally
bad is 1 0 . . . h6 I I Bf4 ! Nh5? I 2 Nxd5! again winning a pawn, since
I 2 . . . cxd5?? loses the queen to I 3 Bc7.
.
10
Qc2
Savon (black)
266
Black's usual move is now 1 0 . . . c6 when White has two possibilities:

(I ) 1 1 Rb 1 {planning b4 even after 1 1 . . . Ne4 1 2 Bxe7 Qxe7 with
good chances for White despite the simplifying exchanges) 1 1 . . .
Ng6 1 2 b4 ( 1 2 Bxf6 ! is better) 1 2 . . . Bd6! 1 3 b5 h6! 14 Bxf6
Qxf6 with good piece-play to off-set his c6 weakness. Note that 1 S
e4? loses to 1 5 . . . Nf4! 1 6 e5 Qe61 1 7 exd6 Qg4 etc.
(2) 1 1 Bxf6 (a surprising move, but the important point is not to lose
any time in carrying out the minority attack. The bishop pair has
little significance here, but now White can play b4 inunediately and
in addition Black has to lose time moving his bishop to the more
effective b8-h2 diagonal) 1 1 . . . Bxf6 1 2 b4 Bg4 1 3 Nd2 and now
Black should play 13 . . . Be71 14 Rab l Bd6 with compensation for
IUs coming weakness on c6 (after bS and bxc6). Instead the game
Reshevsky-Miagmarsuren {1 967) went 1 3 . ReS? 14 BfS I BxfS
1 S QxfS g6 1 6 Qd3 Qd6 1 7 Rfb 1 Bg7 1 8 a4 and Black had no
effective answer to the minority attack.
.
10
..
Be6
A natural enough move but mere developing moves without any.real

strategic purpose are not good enough to hold the balance in this tricky

situation. White could now play 1 1 Rab 1 and b4, since Black must
sooner or later play . . . c6 to neutralise the pressure down the c me.
1 1 NeS
1 2 Bf4
13 BxeS
14 Na4!
Nfd7
NxeS
c6
Another well-known and strong manoeuvre, playing the knight to cS

before advancing the b pawn, since driving the knight away by . . . b6
would only weaken his c6 pawn permanently.
14
IS
16
f6
Bg3
b4
on
Bd6
Black tries to relieve his position by exchanges. The fact that he gives
up the bishop controlling cS has little importance, because after 1 6
. . . Bg6 1 7 Bxg6 Nxg6 1 8 NcS the move 1 8 . . . BxcS 1 9 bxcS ! would
allow White strong pressure down the b ftle.
17
18
19
20
Rab l
hxgJ
NcS
a4
BxgJ
a6
Re7
Rc7
To prevent 2 1 bS? which would now be answered by 2 1 . . . axbS 22

axbS b6! 23 Nb3 cS! an idea which must always be considered in such
positions.
After 20 . . . Bg6 21 Bxg6 Nxg6 22 b ? axbS 23 axbS White has
obtained the kind of position he was aiming for, but even this was
preferable to the game continuation.
21
22
23
Rfc l !
Rb3!
Rbc3!
Qe7
g6
. . . (see next diagram)
By following our stated principle of first occupying a me before open

ing it, Tal has achieved the ideal position for the standard bS break
through. Of course, 23 . . . bS would be of no avail here because after
24 aS ! Black has no way of transferring his knight to c4, and the result
ing weaknesses at c6 and a6 would eventually prove fatal. In despera
tion Black tries to defend against bS only to fmd that a quicker end
awaits him.
86 I 'The pawns are the soul o f chess'
Savon (black)
267
23
24
25
26
27
Nxb7!
Bxa6
Bxb7
Qb3
Rac8(?)
Rxbi
Ra8
Qxb7
Ra6
White's combination has only given him a rook and two pawns against
two minor pieces, but Black's passive set-up contains the seeds of defeat
and he must soon lose more material. If now 27 . . . DeS then 28 bS
cxbS 29 Rc7 and Qxd5+ is decisive.
2S bS '
29 Rc7
30 axbS
3 1 Rlc6!
32 QxbS
33 Rxf6
34 ReS
35 Rf3
36 Kh2
37 RxeS
cxbS
Qb6
RaS
QxbS
RxbS
DeS
Kg7
Rb l +
Nd7
Resigns.
Index
Battery, 6 3 , 9 1
Bishops: good/bad, 9 ; opposite coloured, 1 5 3-5 ; pair of, 1 5 7 - 6 2 ;
versus knight, 1 5 5-7
Blockade, 1 63-6, 1 7 5 , 1 7 8
Castled position : break-up, 1 07-1 8 ; weakened, 97- 1 07
Centralised knight, 4 5
Cross-pin, 6 0
Decoy, 1 8, 5 3-5 , 83
Defence, 1 1 8 -25
Deflection, 1 8, 2 2 , 49-53 , 5 7 , 6 5 , 82, 98, 1 0 1
Discovered check , 62-5
Double attack, 20, 43-4, 1 04
Double check, 40, 65-6
Draw: by perpetual check, 59, 6 6 -70, 1 23 ; by repetition, 1 1 2 ; by
stalemate, 70-l
Economy, principle of, 1 1 8, 1 65
Elimination of pieces, 73-6
Exchange sacrifice, 9 3 , 1 1 1 -1 2, 1 30
Fork, 44 -9, 83
Freeing moves, 1 23-4
Half-open file, 14 5-7
King hunt, 34, 3 7 , 4 2 , 84
King in centre, 4 5 , 90-6
line: closure, 8 l -3 ; interference, 20; opening, 77- 8 1
little centre, 1 3 1
Mate: back rank, 1 7-2 1 ; 'epaulette', 2 2 ; 'Fool's', 1 S ; 'model', 3 8 ;
smothered, 1 2
Minority attack, 1 3 5 , 1 8 1 -6
Open file play, 1 36-45
Opening trap, 44
Outpost, 1 47- 9
Overloading, 40
Pawns: backward , 1 46, 1 4 8 ; chain of, 1 29 , 1 3 3 , 1 8 l ; connected, 87- 9 ;
doubled , 1 76 - 9 ; hanging, 1 75-6 ; isolated, 1 67-74 ; majority of,
1 88 I Index
1 1 4 , 1 3 1 , 1 37 , I 5,2, 1 79 ; outside, 1 68 ; passed, 83- 9 ; promotion
of, 84 -5 ; structure of, 1 29, 1 3 3 , 1 63 , 1 80-1
Pin, 5 5-62
Planning, 1 26 -3 5
Strategic p1an, 1 26-7, 1 32 , 1 4 3
Strategy and tactics (definition),
Trapping a piece, 70-3
Turning point on file, 1 3 7, 1 40
Unpinning, 6 1 -2
Unprotected piece, 76-7
Zugz wang, 1 40
Zwischenzug, 7, 32, 49, 62, 77, 79, 9 1 , 95
Games
Richter-Abramavicius (French Defence), 2-5
2 Capablanca-Alekhine (Queen's Gambit) 5-1 1

.
Pachman-Jakobsen (Sicilian Defence), 1 4 1 -5
Englisch-Steinitz (Ruy Lopez),
I 5 7-6 1
5 Ta1-Savon (Queen's Gambit), 1 8 3-6
ROUTLEDGE CHESS BOOKS

tTHE OPENING GAME IN CHESS
Ludek Pachman
tMODERN CHESS TACTICS
Pieces and Pawns in Action
Ludek Pachman
Trans/IJted by P. H. Clmfu
*ATTACK AND DEFENCE IN MODERN CHESS

Ludek Pachman
Trans/IJted by P. H. C/IJrke
tHOFFER'S CHESS
Revised and brought up-to-date
by J. du Mont
TAL'S WINNING CHESS COMBINATIONS
Mikhail Tal and Victor Khenkin
A HISTORY OF CHESS
Harry Golombek
tcHESS-BOARD DELIGHTS
Selected from the 'Sunday Telegnph' 1964-7 4
Comins Mansfield
*CHESS TECHNIQUES
A. R. B. Thomas
ROUTLEDGE CHESS HANDBOOKS
Edited by Peter Clarke
ti AN INTRODUCTION TO CHESS
Leonard Barden
*2 FURTHER STEPS IN CHESS
Owen Hindle
*3 LESSONS IN CHESS STRATEGY
W. H. Cozens
t4 BASIC CHESS OPENINGS

Raymond Edwards
tS CHESS TACfiCS AND ATTACKING TECHNIQUES

Raymond Edwards
*6 PRACfiCAL CHESS ENDGAMES
David Hooper
Also avai/IJbk in paperback

tPaperback only

Ludek Pachman - The Middlegame in Chess - SC

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Ludek Pachman - The Middlegame in Chess - SC

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Ludek Pachman - The Middlegame in Chess - SC

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

LudekPachman

Routledge & Kegan Paul

English trans/Qtion first published in 1982

Can the middle-game be taught?

2 Typical mating combinations

3 The elements of chess tactics

Attack and defence

6 Effective use of pieces

7 'The pawns are the soul of chess'

Alongside Nirnzovitch's. masterpiece

My System and Euwe's splendidly

Can the middle-game

Many chess-players limit themselves to studying two aspects of theory:

is essential if one is to achieve results against strong players. Equally, in

us what we should be aiming to do in a given position (bearing in mind

Strategy and tactics are intimately linked in every game, since

2 I Can the middle-game be taught?

K. Richter Abramavicius (Hamburg,

... cS! giving

him equal chances. Castling, usually

g and h pawns will form the basis for an attack

... (see next diagram)

White could of course capture the d pawn by

1 3 Bxh7+ winning the queen, an

Nxd4, when 12 ... Qxd4?? fails to

series of moves containing a surprising idea and usually involving a

this instance a beginne r would

leaving the knight unprotected, but only apparently sol

.. . Bd7) with three variations:

Can the middle-game be taught? I 3

Abramav icius (black)

4 I Can the middle-game be taught?

It is often hard to decide which pawn to capture with in such positions.

Black now plans a counter-attack down the c me with a line StJch as

Can the middle-game be taught? I 5

King moves also lose quickly: if 2 1 . . . Kg7 22 Qh6+ Kg8 23 Nf6+

Game 2 Queen's Gambit

The 'Orthodox Defence' to the Queen's Gambit. Black's usual play on

6 I Can the middle-game be taught?

Such careless moves are typical of an inexperienced player. The fact

Can the middle-game be taught? I 7

A surprising but very strong retreat, based of course on the occupation

White avoids a possible exchange of this bishop (by . . . Ne4) which

8 I Can the middle-game be taught?

White understandably wishes to challenge the diagonal, but as a result

A typical manoeuvre in modem chess; Black's queen is posted on the

Can the middle-game be taught? I 9

(a rook), and yet we were reconunending the use of ex

changes as a method of equalising! The contradiction is only apparent,

will surprise most readers that we refer to Black's beautifully

the diagrammed position, and asking ourselves the question: which

Q side: White's b4 pawn is ftxed by the pawn on b5

K bishop. 'This is not so, because even with the

pawns on a3 and b4 the e7 bishop is 'good' and the g3 bishop 'bad'. We

Black surprisingly gives up his attack on the b pawn, since he wishes to

which would make Black's bishop 'bad' (blocked by the eS pawn),

An original idea, disturbing the co-ordination of White's pieces by driv

27 Rd l , surely the most natural square attacking the queen, fails to

10 I Can the middle-game be taught?