Let's Take A Look

Lets Take A
Look...
Nigel Davies


by Bruce Alberston
We invite you to submit games to be considered by Nigel in this column. For all
games submitted, please provide the following information: (1) Names of both
players; (2) Ratings of both players; (3) When and where the game was played;
(4) The time control used in the game; and (5) Any other information you think
would be helpful for us to know. Please submit the games (in PGN or CBV
format if possible) to: nigeldavies@chesscafe.com. Who knows, perhaps you
will see the game in an upcoming column, as Nigel says to you, Lets take a
look...
Preparation or Perspiration
In these days of computer databases and an ever increasing numbers of games,
the issue of preparation is rearing its head, even at club level. Assuming you
know who your opponent is and what he plays, how should you prepare?
Certainly theres a temptation to carry a laptop and cram as much info as
possible into your head in as short a time as possible. Indeed you often see
people do this if they have the tools available. But is it wise? And where does
this idea come from that one had to prepare like crazy to play a game of chess?
Look no further than the usual Soviet suspects; heres an excerpt from
Grandmaster Geller at the Chessboard (Geller, 1969):
I amoften asked how we train for events. The answer is that nearly all of
us follow the methods laid down by Botvinnik, the founder, to my mind,
of the Soviet Chess School. Briefly, this method may be summarised: -
1. Particular attention is paid to opening preparation so as to save time
in the opening and try to play into positions with which one is familiar.
General preparation includes studying the latest innovations and
attempts to penetrate ever more deeply into the secrets of those opening
systems which are most commonly employed nowadays. Specific
preparation has the aimof confusing ones opponent. For this purpose
his previous games are thoroughly studied in order to become familiar
with what are his strong points and what his weaknesses.
2. Practical play is used to get one into practice and good form.
3. Individual efforts are made to try to correct what are recognised as
one s weaknesses.
4. Physical training.
file:///C|/cafe/davies/davies.htm (1 of 6) [12/12/2004 2:48:34 PM]
Let's Take A Look
How was this applied in this particular training session? As soon as we
got to know the composition of the Argentine teamwe each had assigned
to us a particular opponent. Thus, for example, Averbakh was given a
set of game scores giving the recent games played by Panno, i.e. over
the last two years. Averbakh analysed them, drew his conclusions about
his play, and summarised these in writing. When this was done, he made
a report at a general meeting of the team. After a general discussion,
correcting some points and supplementing others, a file was drawn up
on Panno which represented our joint opinion on him. Such files were
compiled on all future opponents.
Normally such a dossier looks like this:-
Grandmaster Oscar Panno, 24 years old, former J unior World
Champion, Argentinian Champion in 1953, prize winner in a number of
South American tournaments. With white he plays only 1 d2-d4. Against
the Kings Indian he adopts such and such a line, against the Nimzo-
Indian the following lines and so on. Defends against the QP by the
Slav. Plays best in simple positions. Plays attacks quite well. Doesnt
defend so well. In playing Soviet opponents he will be very careful in the
opening, probably somewhat passive. Therefore it is recommended to
play sharp opening lines against himand go in for complications.
The benefits of such a systemcan easily be seen. When we get to
Argentina and we get to know who our individual opponents are to be,
then instead of having to work through a large number of games it is
enough merely to go through a dossier consisting of only a couple of
printed sheets.
Sounds very impressive, doesnt it? And wouldnt you say that was probably
the reason Soviet players won so many tournaments back then? But before you
decide that intensive preparation is the route to success, take a look at what I
found in Bobby Fischer Goes to War (Edmonds and Eidinow, 2004):
Yuri Averbakh tells how his first action when he took over as acting
president of the Chess Federation after Postnikovs sudden resignation
was to visit the camp for himself: Spassky was sitting there with Geller
and Krogius On the table were cards and dominoes, and when
lunchtime came Spassky pulled out a bottle of whisky.
Well that certainly doesnt tally with Gellers description of a Soviet chess
training camp and one wonders if he might have been exaggerating a little. Why
should he do this? Heres what Bent Larsen said about it in a candid interview
that was published in A Book of Chess (Alexander, 1973):
I dont believe all these stories about Soviet study; they brag about these
things. I think this is inner politics in the Soviet Union; you have to make
it clear that you are a hard working man. Kotov writes about all the
file:///C|/cafe/davies/davies.htm (2 of 6) [12/12/2004 2:48:34 PM]
Let's Take A Look
many games you must study with at least one hour for each game; you
cannot measure chess work in tons [at one time, Larsen tells me, the
Russians measured not only steel and grain output by tonnage but also
furniture production and firms behind plan caught up by producing
very heavy furniture] so the best they can do is to explain it in so many
working hours.
So could this famed Soviet preparation have been nothing more than inner
politics? My own explanation for years of Soviet supremacy has nothing to do
with preparation. It was simply because their players played good chess. That
happens when you get a lot of good players playing against each other, learning
from one another and constantly raising the bar. Something similar happened in
the UK in the 1970s and 80s with the so-called British chess explosion. From
nothing we were suddenly doing well in Olympiads, but it wasnt down to
training camps or thousands of hours of study.
What is the reality of grandmaster preparation? Amongst my grandmaster
colleagues Ive noticed a distinct tendency for them to relax during tournaments
and especially before games. A few easy-going players (for example Larry
Christiansen) are able look at chess before the game and stay very relaxed.
Many do no preparation whatsoever and Ive tended to find that works well for
me. The big thing is that you have a clear head to deal with the many problems
an average chess game will hurl at you.
If preparation is overrated what should someone work on? Basically just
general improvement, things like endgames, calculating a bit better and
understanding more types of positions etc. If, for example, you want to play a
new opening its good to play through a lot of games in which it was used and
then try it for yourself. Dont worry about remembering the formal theory (a
stressful activity if ever there was one) as much as trying to understand the
ideas, plans and typical themes. Little by little youll get to know what to do,
even if it doesnt go too well at first.
The following game was sent to me by a player who has just taken up the
Chigorin Defence (1.d4 d5 2.c4 Nc6) and still needs to get the hang of some of
the ideas. Dont imagine for a minute that his mistake was in not preparing for
3.Bf4 properly. Sensible moves can be found at the board if you have a decent
understanding of the position and a clear head. They dont need to be
remembered.
McConnell, P - Krombeen, L
Birmingham, 2004
Queens Pawn Game D02
1 d4 d5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 Bf4
Not a bad idea if White wishes to avoid Chigorin theory, such as it is. 3.c4
Bg4 gets into one of the main lines.
file:///C|/cafe/davies/davies.htm (3 of 6) [12/12/2004 2:48:34 PM]
Let's Take A Look
3...Bg4 4 Nbd2 e6 5 e3
For me this position is a trip down memory lane. In the game Bisguier - Davies,
Lone Pine 1981 White played 5.c3 after which there followed 5...Bd6 6 Bg3
Nf6 7 Qb3 Rb8 8 e3 0-0 9 Bd3 Qe7?! (Looking at this position two decades on,
9...Bh5 10 0-0 Bg6 looks like a sensible plan to me) 10 Bh4 Bh5 11 0-0 Bg6 12
Bxg6 hxg6 13 e4 dxe4 14 Nxe4 Qd8 15.Rad1 Be7 16.Neg5 when the final
result (I managed to win) had very little to do with the position in front of us.
5...a6?!
The first move I dont really like, the Chigorin is very much about quick
development. Theres nothing wrong with just 5...Bd6 as 6.Bb5 can be
answered by 6...Nge7, preparing to castle and avoiding doubled pawns if
Blacks worried about that.
6 c4 Bb4 7 Qb3?
But now it is White who goes astray. J ust
7.cxd5 looks better when 7...Qxd5 8.Be2
intending 9.0-0 should be enough for a
slight edge.
7...Nf6
Missing a golden opportunity in 7...Bxf3 8
gxf3 dxc4 9 Bxc4 (9 Qxc4 e5 10.Bg3
Bxd2+11 Kxd2 exd4 will leave Whites
king exposed) 9...Bxd2+10.Kxd2 Nxd4!
11.exd4 Qxd4+and Black wins the bishop
on f4.
8 a3 Bxd2+
After this White manages to develop quite comfortably and Black finds himself
without much compensation for the surrender of the two bishops. In this
position 8...Bxf3 can be answered by 9 axb4 (9 gxf3 Bxd2+10 Kxd2 dxc4 11
Bxc4 Nxd4! is good for Black) 9...dxc4 10.Qxc4, though this is by no means
silly for Black after 10...Bd5 11 Qc3 0-0 for example.
9 Nxd2 b6?
Once again, the kind of move that an experienced Chigorin player would not
consider. Blacks knight is never ideal on c6 unless you get to play ...e6-e5 and
moving the b-pawn leaves it unprotected. 9...Rb8 is correct with just a slight
edge for White.
10 Rc1
file:///C|/cafe/davies/davies.htm (4 of 6) [12/12/2004 2:48:34 PM]
Let's Take A Look
Not bad, but White could already win material with 10 Qa4! Qd7 (10...b5 11
cxb5 wins a pawn for nothing) 11 cxd5 Qxd5 (11...Nxd5 12 Bb5 Nde7 13 Rc1
axb5 14 Qxa8+wins the exchange) 12.e4! (12.Rc1 isnt bad either) 12...Nxe4
13.Bc4 Qd7 14.Bb5 axb5 15.Qxa8+Ke7 16.Qxh8 Qxd4 17.0-0 and White
wins.
10...Na5 11 Qa4+Qd7 12 Qxd7+Kxd7 13 cxd5 Nxd5 14 Bg3
At first glance it looks as if Black has escaped the worst - the queens are off and
his pieces seem well developed. Unfortunately its a case of having got out of
the frying pan and into the fire - Whites bishop pair is incredibly strong in this
position and Black is weak on the c-file. The immediate threat is 15 e4.
14...Rhc8 15 Bd3 h6 16 0-0 Nb7 17 e4 Nf6 18 Nc4 Ke7 19 Ne5 c5 20 Nxg4
Getting two bishops against two knights, though Black might have been quite
relieved to have the bishop on g4 removed. Lines such as 20 Nc4 Nd7 21 f3
Bh5 22 dxc5 Nbxc5 23 Bc2 hardly inspire confidence in Blacks position.
20...Nxg4 21 d5 Rd8
Perhaps Black can play 21...exd5 22 exd5
Nf6 (22...Nd6 is bad because of 23 Bxd6+
Kxd6 24 Bf5 winning the exchange and
22...Rd8 can be met by 23.Bc7 Rxd5 24.Be4
Rd7 25.Rfe1! Kf6 26.Bxb7 Ra7 27.Bf3
winning a piece) 23 Rfe1+Kf8 when White
still has a fight on his hands.
22 Bc7
Another way for White to play it would
have been 22 Be2 Nf6 23 d6+Kd7
(23Nxd6 24 e5) 24 e5 Nd5 25 Rfe1, when Whites passed pawn on d6 is very
strong though he still has to find a way through.
22...Rd7?
The losing move. Black had to try 22...Rdc8 when 23 Bxb6 (23 Bg3 would
repeat the position) 23...Ne5 24 Rfd1 Nd7 25 d6+Nxd6 26 Ba5 rescues the
bishop but leaves Black still on the board.
23 Bxb6
With Blacks rook on d7 the bishop will escape with ease.
23...exd5 24 exd5 Nf6 25 Rfe1+Kf8 26 Bxc5+Nxc5 27 Rxc5 Rxd5 28 Rxd5
Nxd5 29 Be4 Rd8?
file:///C|/cafe/davies/davies.htm (5 of 6) [12/12/2004 2:48:34 PM]
Let's Take A Look
29...Re8 would have held out longer, though
Black is a pawn down and should lose in the
end.
30 Rd1 1-0
The knight on d5 is lost.
Recommended Reading
Grandmaster Geller at the Chessboard by Efim Geller (The Chess Player,
1969).
Bobby Fischer Goes to War by David Edmonds and John Eidinow (Faber and
Faber, 2004).
A Book of Chess by Hugh Alexander, Hutchinson & Co 1973).
Copyright 2004 Nigel Davies. All rights reserved.

[ChessCafe Home Page] [Book Review] [Bulletin Board] [Columnists]
[Endgame Study] [Skittles Room] [Archives]
[Links] [Online Bookstore] [About ChessCafe] [Contact Us]
Copyright 2004 CyberCafes, LLC. All Rights Reserved.
"The Chess Cafe" is a registered trademark of Russell Enterprises, Inc.
file:///C|/cafe/davies/davies.htm (6 of 6) [12/12/2004 2:48:34 PM]