EXCELLING COMBINATIONAL LEARN TO IDENTIFY AND EXPLOIT TACTICAL CHANCES JACOB AAGAARD EVERYMAN CHESSFirst published in 2004 by Gloucester Publishers plc (formerly Everyman Publishers plo), Northburgh House, 10 Northburgh Street, London EC1V OAT Copyright © 2004 Jacob Aagaard with Nikolaj Mikkelsen. ‘The tight of Jacob Aagaard to be identified as the author of this work has been as- serted in accordance with the Copyrights, Designs and Patents Act 1988. Alll rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, electrostatic, magnetic tape, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior permission of the publisher. British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library. ISBN 1 85744 345 4 Distributed in North America by The Globe Pequot Press, P.O Box.480, 246 Goose Lane, Guilford, CT 06437-0480. All other sales enquiries should be directed to Everyman Chess, Northburgh House, 10 Northburgh Street, London EC1V OAT tel: 020 7253 7887. fax: 020 7490 3708 email: info@everymanchess.com website: www.everymanchess.com Everyman is the tegistered trade mark of Random House Inc. and is used in this work under license from Random House Inc. EVERYMAN CHESS SERIES (formerly Cadogan Chess) Chief advisor: Garry Kasparov Commissioning editor: Byron Jacobs ‘Typeset and edited by First Rank Publishing, Brighton. Cover design by Horatio Monteverde. ‘ Production by Navigator Guides. Printed in the United States by Versa Press, Inc.CONTENTS AuauUnea Bibliography Preface Introduction The Adventure of Writing a Book on Combinations Combinations and their Indicators Sicilian Sacrifices How to Solve Puzzles Exercises Solutions to Exercises NO A 11 0, 7 oy, 142PREFACE This book has been a long time in coming, Actually, after finishing my first book back in 1998 T wanted to write a book like this, but it was turned down by my publisher at the time, Gambit. On their request I instead wrote a book on the Sveshnikov. Now, finally, I have been allowed to publish this book, a book I have been working on for 12 months on and off, collecting material, analysing, commentating, losing interesting articles; cursing my computer and especially my own ability to operate it (do not ask about backup copies; when you overwrite your backup copies you lose your sense of irony!). But eventually I made it, and here it is! Because I was relatively overworked ducing the summer of 2003, I brought in Nikolaj Mik- kelsen, a talented 15-year-old with the rarely seen ability for dedicated work. He collected many positions and discarded even more after hours behind the computer, and was overall a great help. So, besides a decent cut in the small fee, I felt that his name deserved to be attached to this book. Thank you Nikolaj! The positions in this book have mainly come from my database of 2.8 million games com- piled from many sources (mainly ChessBase). Many of the positions have previously not been noticed as anything special and were found by us. But we would be lying if we did not ac- knowledge a great debt to a number of ChessBase’s regular annotators, including Har Zvi, ‘Tyomkin, Atlas, Bonsch, Gofshtein and Tsesarsky, as well as the many players who played the games themselves. The annotations here are my own, with no exceptions, but to go through already analysed games makes it easier to single out interesting tactical moments, and therefore it is important for me to acknowledge the great work of other people. Many improvements were found in existing analysis, and considerable analysis was found to be incorrect after sili- con scrutiny. But it was still priceless to have a starting point like this. Together with Nikolaj, my greatest helper has once again been Danny Kristiansen, who has found dozens of both minor and major flaws in the manuscript and asked me to correct them. 1am deeply grateful for his help and think I would somehow feel lost without it. Thanks Danny! Jacob Aagaard, Albertslund, Denmark, March 2004INTRODUCTION What is this Book about? This is a taining book for development of both combinational vision and combinational calculation. More simply, combinational skills. Thave divided the positions into two parts: Pattern Combinations The main idea here is that these positions should be able to be solved relatively easily. The lines are generally without too many branches and should not involve too much calculation. This does not mean that they are easy, but that it’s more important to find the combinational idea than to calculate the cor- rect lines against all possible defences Calculation Combinations These are harder (some of them actually really hard). At times they have many branches, and these are long and winding. J recommend that these positions should be played ont against a computer program. The computer will not ahvays understand the solution, but they are strong and reliable defenders. The only hazerd, which is a real practical problem, is that the computer would rather lose a queen than allow a brilliant 5-move mating combi- mation, and this can spoil some of the fun. However, if you do not understand why a computer plays something seemingly silly, then you immediately have a fresh exercise on your hands, It must be said that the division of the two blocks was to some extent arbitrary. Some exercises in the ‘pattern’ collection could casily have been found in the ‘calculation’ collection. The general level of difficulty rises throughout the 500 combinations, although the most difficult exercises might well be numbers 290, 292 and 294. What does ‘White to Play and Win’ really mean? When collecting exercises for this book, I decided to avoid what Chets Informant and other publications of tactical exercises have included at times. Namely, puzzles like “White to play and gain a large advantage’ and similar. To actually gain a winning position can mean many things. My agenda is not that of aesthetics, but that of improving the tactical skills of the practical player, One of these skills is also to determine when a position is winning and when it is not. So ‘vinning’ can mean winning a pann for no compensation, or gain- ing an absolutely winning positional advan- tage (as with only one case out of 500 in this book), or it can simply mean checkmating in the classical aesthetic way as in the following example clipped from Informant 87.Excelling at Combinational Fiay Omer Sbrahim-Ibarra Cuba 2003 1..Axd4! 2 &xa3 2 Wxd4 Bxa3 and Black has won a piece Ad1 is answered by 3...\Whd). 2...Wh44l! 3 Sxh4 D+ 4 Gg5 Dts 0-1 White is Everybody loves this kind of stuff ({ hope!) But how important is it for the practical player? Well, of course solving such exercises will never make you weaker, but they should not stand alone. For that reason I have col- lected examples wirh some degree of tangled over ones with aesthetics solu- us book, which is a training manual, collected examples ftom practical play sed on their cotrectness more than anything else, and also on their instructional value. All I hope for is that my evaluation in that direction has been good and that this book will help you develop your tactical chess, Why another Book on Combinations? This is one of the first questions I had to answer when I sat down to write this book. Was it really just a waste of time to produce a new collection of combinations? I had sev- eral reasons why I found it acceptable to answer this question in the negative. First of all, there have been more games available over the last 10-15 years than in any other period of chess history, and the density has inercased even more so over the last five years. A strong collection of good combina tions from this period seemed to be justified. In this collection there are 80 positions from 2000 or later, another 148 positions from the period 1996-1999, another 162 from the petiod 1990-1995, and only 108 of an earlier age. The last two are from my personal open- ing preparation that I found instructive. Secondly, there are few collections that really live up to the standards made possible in modera times by strong computer pro- grams and the collection of material through databases (he great exception is John Nuna’s excellent puzzle book). Even Infor- is somewhat sloppy. Here are two ex- s from Informant (which I still love y, though I disagree on certain choices) Ly. GSS Ly ESS y CM REL ae | We WA oe U7 Me ar deai 8Introduction Luik-Voorema USSR 1978 Chess Informant: Enovlopaedia of Chess Middlegames In the game Black won convincingly with 1...He2! 2 &xh7+ 2 Bxe2 Det and Black wins; 2 b3 Ded and Black wins. 2...&xh7 3 Wd3+ Ded! and White resigned. But all of this would have looked much different if White had found 2 b4!, the absolutely only move, after which White’s position is uncomfortable, but by no means lost. I did not find this myself, but assisted by Fritz 8 it is impossible to overlook such details. In this way, for practi- cal reasons, many older collections have a plentiful supply of incorrect combinations. Another weakness of many collections is that they are partly copies of previous collec- tions. Because gathering material for combina- tions is such a time investment and, not the least, such a drag, many authors have decided to take a short cut by partly collecting from other collections. This was acceptable back in the time when there were no computers, and you had to play through all the games by hand. Now, however, you can identify a possible combination in a game in something like five seconds from when it pops up on your screen (of course it takes longer to determine if itis correct and useful or not) A third weakness is that of more than one solution. This is especially prevalent in older collections. The main problem is in my view not so much that there is more than one solution, but more that the extra solutions are not indicated, or that a very long and difficult solution is indicated, when an easy win is present. The following example is from Informant’s Chess Combinations. Actu- ally, the combination they support is incor- rect, which shows that they have not done the necessary work of checking all the posi- tions. Still, it is an outstanding collection. tones mart pot ae 8 ! S20 were 2s oes \ a \ AWS [eae WY N Botto-Christiansen Buenos Aires 1975 The solution which Christiansen gives in his book Storming the Barricades is 14.33! 15, g3 (White also does not survive after 15 De3 2h3! for 15..2h6 — Christiansen] 16 g3 2h6 and we have a transposition to the main solution) 15..2h3 16 De3 Sho 17 Wat Wadi 18 Bb5+ Bd8 19 Bésd1 Bxe3 20 fxe3 Hyd and Black is winning. However, Black also wins with: 14..h3! 15 Ded (15 g3 transposes to the above note} 15...8xg2! 16 Qxf7+ Gxt? 17 Wd5t 6 13 Whst Se7 19 DAxg?2 Hes 20 Wxh7+ Bo and White cannot save himself in any way A\ll of this has litde to do with the game, where Black went astray, breaking the Nun, dictum DAUT (Don’t analyse unnecessary tactics). 14...Bxg2+?? Oa the quest for beauty, Black forgets that a difficult win is always less aesthetically pleasing than an easy one. Here it is even incorrect! 15 xg2 2h3+?! Black is of course preoccupied with the execution of a plan, but here 15...Wh3+ with a draw was a better move 16 seg WI3 17 De3 Bh6 18 Wd1 Yxe3! This was what Black had been looking forward too. But now White has his chance.Excelling at Combinational Play 28 =] A Z Pata a 19 fxe32? Qxe3+ 20 Pht Lg? mate is obvious. However, the thing Larey C did not see during the game and which the people at informant never saw, was that White could save himself here with 19 Qxf7H £8! 20 WS We5+ 21 WrgS Sxe5 22 2b3, with an unclear endgame. fs) 20 Wxt7+ Gd7 21 Sb5+ Ec6! 22 ¥'g8 2g5 0-1 Mate can be postponed, not prevented. T have not written this to ‘trash the com etidon’ as some people mighe think, nor ir. aay Way to create an impression of my work being superior to that of othess. Racher, I wanted to give my own reasons for feeling that writing a ne on combinations was justified, and to illustzare how the condi- for writing a book on combinations changed over the pos! eason to write a book ys ( for me personally) some kind of inner u: todo so, more than anything else. I will deal further with the work involved in writing a book on combinations in Chapter 1. tions least Wrat kind of Combinations have been included in this Book? The combinations in this book have all been taken from the Sicilian. They have been steuceured by Engclpasdia of Chess Openings (ECO) codes B20-B99 and then divided into 1) nwo blacks as explained above. The most important Sicilian lines and their codes are: B20 The Morta Gambit. B22 The 2 c3 Sicilian B24-26 The Closed Sicilian B32 The Kalashnikov B33 The Sveshnikov B34-39 The Accelerated Dragon 42-49 The Taimanov, Four Knights and Paulsen Sicilian B30 and B50-52 The 265 Sicilian B56-B69 The Classical B70-B79 The Dragon B80-B89 The Scheveningen B90-B99 The Najdorf Why the Sicilian? The Sicilian Defence is the largest ‘opening’ comples in Informant’s ECO. complex. In this day and age, it’s the most important opening to prepare for with the white pieces {if 1 e4 is your planned opening move} and the most obvious choice for tournaments players against 1 e4. My'ida with this book is that the reader is prepared for the tactical onslaughts he is bound to face on either side of the Sicilian Defence, thereby some- bow has a stronger tactical intaicion when piaring the Sicilian. But of course chese com- binations are not solely bound to the Sicilian Defence, even though the} good repre- sentation. Combinational imagery floars freely betw opening sysvems a ind of combination Sicilian is tikely to some day help you in the Nimzo-Indian cr other openings. ‘Though the choice of opening might to some extent determine the pawn structure, it does not change the way the pieces move. Why is there no system to evaluate the performance? { would simply not be able to determine what kind of performance would equal whatever Elo performance.CHAPTER ONE The Adventure of Writing a book on Combinations ‘Actually, there is no great story connected to writing a book on chess combinations Mainly itis just a lot of tiresome work: look- ing up games, occasionally finding a wicked combination, and then discarding it a few minutes later, It is close to being a one- dimensional project. Previous collections have mainly been a division between original material and ‘bor. rowed’ positions, seen in previous books on combinations. This is a bit irritating, but of course there are some pure collections out there, most notably John Nunn’s Puzeze Book, by the man himself. It is easy to understand why many writers have taken the easy road when confronted with the enormous work of looking through tons of games, especially in the old days when there were no databases. But even after the emergence of ChessBase and its compeiitors, the task of finding origi- nal combinations is a time consuming job which takes considerable patience (which is why Nikolaj was invited to participate on this book). For every good combination you will find many that do not work, mainly because they ate simply not combinations. 1 think it is realistic to say that about 20- 30,000 games were investigated in order to put this book together. The majority of thes only needed a few seconds — just enough time to establish that Caissa had not blessed the meeting of nwo players with potential immortality, but instead allowed them to remove the queens from the board and exer- cise restraint and patience in the form of a technical game. All in all, 42,500 games in my database complied to my search criteria, but often a telephone call, a tick of the clock or simply laziness decided to end my search for brilliance within an ECO code. Besides my pride with the final result, what I personally take with me from writing this book are the near misses. These can be divided into four groups: incorrect combina- tons, insufficient combinations, combina- tons with more than one solution and com- pletely insane exercises that, for some reason, are unfit for a combinations book. I have decided to include some of them here for the sheer fun of it. Chess is, after all, a game, and even though it is a competitive one, it still has strong aesthetic dimensions that should never be forgotten. Also, it is nice to go deep into combinations that do not work, for whatever reason, as this also teaches us something about the nature of combinations in chess. Incorrect Combinations One of the most interesting aspects 1 found aExcelling et Combinational Play in writing this book was all the combinations T was first stared by and then had to dispose of, when somewhere in the jungle of varia- tions there was something that just did nor add up. Often it was the computer thac came up with some irrational idea, that neither the players/annotators nor T originally consid- ered. A few times something just smelled funny, and I extended my search for mistakes and found some (even though most often it was my big nose that was oversensitive and suspicious). Here is an example of an annorator who misjudged the value of a combination. Ye yy RY Z,. Yudasin-Gelfand Munich 1991 Bi White to play his best chamcet & White is under pressure positionally and apparently has to seek his countexplay on the h-file and also partly on the g-file, the oaly parts of the board where things are going his way. Instead of trying to sucvive, something he probably could not do anyway, White decides that the moment has come for him to show what he’s got. Somehow Gelfand convinced himself that White should have been successful and therefore criticised his last move, 32..e6, claiming a win for White as we shall see. Of course, in 1991 Gelfand was not helped with a strong chéss-playing computer program, as I am today, and his failure to find che mistake in his analysis is merrily a reflection of how difficult chess is, and of how lucky the chess writer is to have a tactically flawless companion with him when he. comments on the challenges others have faced. 33 e5! As all other moves have no prospects, this is the correct choice. The key idea is of course to ‘turn off the black bishop on £6, as well as giving the g2-bishop a chance to enter the attack from e4 or d5 — quite a common theme in attacking chess. White loses directly after 33 Hh2? ex®5 34 exfS BxfS! 35 WxfS Bdt+ 36 Dxd4 Wes, for example 37 Wxf&+ Exf8+ 38 AB Wad+ 39 We2 Her 40 ed2 Wi2t 41 Gc3 We2 mate. 33 Exh6 also does not work: 33..exf3 34 exf5 Gxh6 35 Bhit &g7 36 DxgS and here Black refutes the attack with 36..2d4H 37 BEL Bxf5+ 38 DB By. ‘The only move according to Fritz 8 is ac- tually 33 Wh32!, but it is not very nice to be White after something ke 33..n5!, for ex- ample 34 Wsh52! Wxh5 35 Esh5 exfS 36 Rx and Whie will inevi lose because of ideas such as 8’, Axé3 and 4. .dxe5, 33..exf3 34 exf6+ Bxfo 35 Wh5 gives White an extra piece and pretty good chances cf winning the game. 12The Adventure of Writing a Book on Combinations 34 Exh6!? White is doing what he does best. 34...@xh6? This move should have lost the game, but White was apparently short of time. The only move was in this position was 34..exf5, when Gelfand assesses 35 Wh3! g4 36 Bh7+ y8 37 Who pxf3 38 Qxf3 e4 39 Bh5 as winning for White. a xian ti; eee, aus aa Black to play and draw! me “ Actually, this is not so easy. Black has the move 39...b6l, improving his position with a tempo because of 40...8.d4+. Now White is forced to play 40 S222 WeS 41 2g6 (the idea behind White's attack). Though it looks in- credibly dangerous, Black survives with the amazing 41...e7!, protecting £8. White now cannot force a win: 42 Bht Wxb2+ seems to lead to perpetual check, and 42 Wh5?! Wis! 43 Bh6 €3 gives Black the advantage, as after the line ¢ el Bbxt6 White will end up with a and an immobile rook: against four fabulous pieces. Another improvement over Gelfand’s 43..Wsh8 44 WeG+ dee7 45 Exh8 fe3+ 46 Bc3 Ratt 47 Gd2 Be with a draw. Allin ail, thece is no winning combination as | had originally thought, w [oe y z Ha: a a Ae 2 sim f we £02 aaa a oe 35 Eh1+? Here Yudasin misses a chance. He could . have won with 35 Axg5!. 35..8g7 is the: % only move, after which White wins with 36 Dest BET 37 DdG+ Be7 38 DxeB exfS 39 Whs Hxe8 40 Wh7+ LIB 41 Bas Leb 42 Lxe6 Hxe6 43 Wxf5. Probably Yudasin was in time trouble and overlooked that White wins after 35..Wh52 36 Bhil! Wxht 37 DETH Gh7 38 Wy6 mate. 35.097 36 AxgS exfS5 37 Bh7+ &g8 38 2d5+ Se6 39 Rg7+ 39 Wh3 loses to 39...8.x95 40 Bhat eg"! 41 Eh7+ @£6 42 BhG+ @xh6 43 Wsho+ Wo6 — Gelfand, 39...8.xg7 40 Wh3 EF6 0-1 All in all this combination cannot be said to be incorrect, but it was not winning. The same goes for the following example ~a truly impressive combination with fabulous side- lines; which unfortunately turned out only to yield a draw with best play from both sides. AAt first I thought I was facing something close to the most fantastic variation on the Greek gift sacrifice I had ever seen. But then, as I was reviewing the combination for the last time, I noticed that Black actually was doing fine until he blundered everything away. For several reasons it was hard to evaluate the position correctly. But eventue ally, after all of my more desperate attempts to prove an advantage had been unsuccess- UeExcelling at Combinational Play {ull.I gave in and disregarded the combina- tion from the book. Wel, that is until T yor theurge to weite this additional chapter. nie pr bit ayy ft W ddl y “oe \ Kupreichik-Vratonjic Budapest 1988 B89 White looks in ill health, as after 20 Wxe3 there is nothing really to like about his oa. But he has an intermediate move es the evaluation completely. astic combination arises, but unfor- ‘inning combination. clives are not so simple: 16 21 Axh7H! xb? 22 Whs+ 5 cf HxfB 26 Exdo 13 Axd5 28 Des Re6 29 a4! bxad nd White wins. _b) 20.08 21 Wes Dias 22 Wh3 g6 23 hyg6 25 S.xg6 Ber 26 Bxt7+ Qai7 27 G+ We 28 g7 and White wins 21 AxiB is easy to calculate White wins an exchange, end of story. 21 AxhT 4! we, ‘The sactitice has to be accepted. 21..98£7 16 23 Wrg6 is mate. 8 23 g6 Wxc2+ 24 kal White has sacrificed two pieces actively and decided against recapturing one other. Allin all, three pieces. That is a lot... ER omy ia mame a em a Sg a a Aa — +e of Ul Black saves himself 24... Wixb2+1! The only move. When I first played through the game I believed that this was actually just desperation or an attempt to be funny. How easy it is to misiudge the white ck at this point. Especially when Black resigns just a few seconds later. Aifter the other queen sacritice 24 Whxg6 216 26 Ded White wins: 7 Sxb2 Ded + 28 Bal Ri7 29 25 @xb2 216+ 26 &b1 Bfc8?? What a blunder. Forced was 26.26 prevent White's next move in the game. A probable continuations is 27 De+ Dbxd5 28 Wn3 Dxd1 29 Wxes+ LB, when White cannot’ win and should therefore take the perpetual check. 27:48! 1.0 ty for Black, bet noneth less a sorne- deserved victory for White. “The next example would perhaps not have found its way into the exercises section any- way, as it is perhaps more an attack than a cornbination. Stil, i’s good to illustrate how a battle on one colour of squares can take place. White displays a sound light-squared strategy, which is successful, though not suf- ficient to win the game in the post-mortem analysis. Never mind. The young German 14The Adventure of Writing a Book on Combinations grandmaster probably did not really care about this afterwards, when he signed the score-sheet. Naiditsch-Sax Bad Zwesten 2002 B81 18 Dd5! exd5 19 Qxd5 An interesting position, very important for the understanding of defence. White is trying, to win the game on the light squares, and Black is forced to do something about this. When he fails to do so in the game he has to pay the price of a full point. 19...0-0? Black tries to get the king into safety, but this is a slightly superficial evaluation of the position. The king is not safer on g8, not as long as White controls the light squares. 20 e6! White is completely taking over the light squares. Black now decides that his hanging bishop on e7 is problematic and to place it on hd, where i is at least attacking the rook onel 20.841? 20..fe6 21 Dxe6 Axe6 22 LxeG+ Ghs (22..67 23 a7 and White wins the queen or something similar) 23 &xc8 and White wins is the not-too-deep point behind the white combination 21 exd7 Hed8 The only move, but it’s not enough. Black is also losing after 21..Wxd7 22 DFS! &xet 23 DeT+ Bh8 24 Vxf7!, when White wins the queen because of @g6 mate. Or 21..0xe1 22 dxc8W and White will be a piece ahead. 22 Bf 22 Qx{TH? is also strong: 22..Exf7 23 De6 and Black does not have good pros- pects of fighting against the passed d-pawn, with his kingside all opened up. 22...Db6?! Black cracks under the pressure, Neces- sary was 22..ixd7, after which White estab- lishes an advantage with 23 DS .2£6 24 2xc4 bxc4 25 Hxd7 Wrxd7 26 Wxcd. With his extra pawn, he is well on his way to win- ning the game. 23 Qxf7+! Exf7 24 Ext7 &xf7 25 De6 Wh8 26 2f4 Wa8 27 Dxd8+ Wxds 28 27 1-0 Black resigned, as after 28..Wxc7 29 ‘We8+ White wins in a million ways. But let us return to the position where black ‘castled out of trouble’. re aa 2oR05. Black to play and defend! The right defence was 19.081, after which White does not have easy access to the light squares. Black’s main idea is to block with ..De6 on the next move. White has many ways to continue the attack, but I have found no clear-cut win. 15a) 20 EFL? does not work because of 20..Dse5. L) The direct attempt 20 e6 seems to liq- White’s winning chances as his minor ate exchanged: 20..fxe6 21 Dxe6 xe6 22 Bxe6 Bxe6 23 Wxes HAR. Now White doesn’t seem to be able to break trough: 24 g5!? (24 Sxh6l? is also a draw 24..gch6 23 Wa6+ Bt7 26 West Bes 27 gO) 24.67 25 gxh6 gxh6 26 Bgl Eis! acd there is no way “or White to srengthen his attack, as atter 27 £36 Black draws im- mediately with 27...2ia3+ 28 bxa3 Wxc2+ 29 Sal We3+. ©) The less forcing 20 AVS? Oxf 21 xf b4 22 Bei Bh?! (proweting £7 indirectly) is rather unclear. Probably the tide is with White, but icis certainly not a straightforward wianing position, Now 23 e6 fxe6 24 Bxe6 Dsvb 25 Wxet BB 26 ZA7 is too optimis- tic, as Black maies with 25..Da3i 27 Bal Dyxc2t 28 Sb! 25 bxad We2+ 30 wal Qc3- 31 21 The following example was also close to being rejected because the nature of the posi- tion was more like an attack. Then I thought, ‘Well on the other hand it can be calculated quite far as there are few branches.’ So I started analysing. Suddenly I ended up in an interesting situation. White seemed to have strengthened his attack to the maximum and Black had nothing to do but to recur mate- rial, The computer was very happy with White’s position, but something happened that is very rare these days: I saw something that the computer didn’t. White was losing and there was nothing that could be done about this. After having avoided a handful of cleaws in the analysis, 1 had managed to ob- tain a materially superior position, where there was absolutely no hope! TP x erat ai Ane ae ook ‘el oe a Fa fe Kalegin-Yuferov USSR 1990 B52 White continues his attack! White has sacrificed the exchange for a di and needs to keep i: rolling. Thet is nothing wrong with the tullowing lines. 26 Ded! Wich the double chreat rect attack f DAG (a hook) forward line is 26.228 fdr (27 Exc6l? is good too, as there is better than 27...dxe4 transposing) a8 28 DeI+ Exc? 29 Wc? Wre4 30 Wixc6+ 3 31 Wc7+ a8 32 Wrast+ Ss 33 WcT+ S2a8 34 Wsd7 with a winning end- game. 27 Bxc6+ Gb8 27.827 28 Wh5+ Bas 29 DcT+ Exc 30 Exc7 Wb8 31 WaG+ and White wins. 28 Wi4+ a8? Not the best defence. After 28..2b7! 76The Adventure of Writing a Book on Combinations White has to work things out as he goes along, as no one is able to calculate the fol- lowing line: 29 He7+ a8 30 We3!? Wbs (30..Kb7 31 Wxed Wh8 .transposes) 31 Wyed+ Hb7 32 Hxd7 (with the idea of Dc7+) 32..Hc8 “(the only move; 32..Wc8 33 Be7! Ws 34 Bco da? 35 Wdd+ Bbo 36 Wes Wb? 37 Bc? and White wins) 33 g3. ‘To evaluate this as a winning position is a neces- sary part of solving this exercise. But to find a direct win here is perhaps humanly impos- sible’ is what I originally wrote, but probably this quote wouldn’t have lasted. The line I gave here was 33.87 34 Wa4+ ga6 35 HaG+ Bbo 36 Wd3+ a7 37 Hd7+ Hb7 38 Bas das 39 Wed WaT 40 Dd8 He7 41 Hes+ and White wins. But then it turned out that Blac desperate — and strong — defence: 34 g2 Bel 35 We6? (blindly walking into the abyss; White is forced to play 35 Wxel! Bxd7, when his chances are worse but far from zero) Uy Yj Ey a ie eines Be oa - ee mee UV, PS Black: to play and win! 35..HExe6! 36 Wxe6 Bxd7 37 Wxd7 Wo7+ 38 Wab7+ Gxb7 and Black wins the pawn endgame. Black’s king is in the box of the & pawn, bue White’s king will never make it to the queenside in time, 29 Oc?+ Exc7 30 Yxc7 Now White simply wins. 30...Ab8 31 WxaS+ &b7 32 Ec7 mate Insufficient Combinations There is not too much difference between incorrect combinations and the following collection of insufficient combinations. The main contrast is that incorrect combinations fail to even bring an advantage, while insuffi- cient combinations are unable to deliver an. advantage (against the best defence of course) which deserves to be called ‘winning’. Frequently I would stumble actoss a combination that really fascinated me, but for some reason was insufficient as an exercise. Often it.was because there was more than one winning move, and I could not justify including it because of this aesthetic flaw. Usually this was because the unintended ex- tra solution was simpler than the intended one, or at least simple enough to take my attention away from the solution that origi- nally attracted me. Sometimes I was also dissatisfied with the final verdict against the best defence, usually because I did not really feel that I could call the position ‘winning’. This happened with the following example, where Fritz 8 found a brilliant defence, changing the evaluation from winning for White to clearly berter for White. Hamdouchi-Tregubov Cap d’Agde 2000 Bi2 This non-standard combination is all eeExcelling at Combinational Play about using all the pieces in the attack. White actifices an exchange in order to penetrate the black position via ¢7. This is made possi- ble because of the open nature of the black King, Still, Black has a surprising defence that would probably not save the game in a prac- tical setting, but which makes winning a teal task for White. 20 Exd4t! ‘The strong knight is eliminated and the e- file is opened 20...exd4 21 Re1 Hb7! Black wisely brings his most inactive piece into the defence. 21..HLf7 loses to 22 De?! because of 22..Exe7 23 West Se8 24 Wes mate, 22 Be7!! This is really the key move of the combi- nation. White’s tain idea is the truly aston- ishing 23 Wy5+ @h8 24 SFT! (with the threat of WEG mate) 24..Axf7 25 DgG+ and suddenly the queen on dB is unprocected. 22...45 Forced. 22..Exe7 23 Big5+ S2h8 24 Bxe7 s mated, Whet rust Black play to bang on? 22...Hb6? Losing, 23..Hd7 24 He6! is also no de- fence. After 24..Bxd5 25 WeS+ Gh8 26 Dg6+ eS 27 He7! there is no escape. ‘The amazing defence comes with 23..3!, after which the position is great for White, but not completely winning, for example: ane aN St Je A Oss Lo ote na 7 ae 7k a. a) 24 Sxb7? d2 25 Bdt Wa4+ 26 SF Qxb7 27 We2 27 Dxt5+ Bxf5 28 x5 25 29 Hxd2 Wxd2 30 We5+ WET and Black has some winning chances) 27..Wed 28 Wret Sixes 29 Bxd2 G17 30 Hd7 eb 31 Ba? He8 and the knight is lost. White stil has some drawing chances, but Black has all the strong cards in his hand, Whar a bishop! b) 24 exd and the option of ..Wd4+ that saves Blac in all tactical lines. White must abandon the attack and play for posi- tional compensation. After 25 He5! he is somewhat better, buc not winning, 24 DxcB Now White is easily winning. 24...5h6 25 He7+ Wxe7 26 Wxh6+ Sxh6 27 o7 28 &b3 &f6 29 Ac6 Hott 36 2 Bed 31 Ded h5-32 2d5 Ke3 33 a3 hd 34 c3 1-0 a7 The tactics in this example are of course brilliant, insteuctive and surprising, but I simply hate excrcises that call for a clear ad- vantage, and nothing more. This is mainly because it is never the execution of the main tactical idea that gives a clear advantage, but when the opponent realises he is out of luck, and escapes into something terrible but mo- mentauily playable In the same way, the following position contains some nice, surprising tactics, but TeThe Adventure of Writing a Book on Combinations again it was not possible to bring down the walls of White’s position in the analysis. So in the end the exercise ended up here in Chap- ter 1, where a clear advantage is just that, and nothing more, Smikovski-Yudasin St Petersburg 1997 B90 Black t0 play and obtain a clear advantage Black’s key idea comes on move two, and the lines are long and tangled. It’s not easy for a computer to find its way through. 15...R16! The start of the combination. But not 15...2h62? 16 Exh5! and White is doing well. 16 Exh5, The only move. mS tat aw YE 16.278 ‘The crucial move, a real stunner. White now cannot protect the rook, so only one move remains. 16...2.x¢5 17 Exh8+ @d7 18 Hxd8+ fa- vours White. 17 Dc5+? This is an attempt to outwit Black, but it’s not successful. 17 Wxg4? is also not an alter native: 17....xc3+ 18 bxc3 Bxgd 19 Qxg4+ Bc7 and Black wins. White was forced to go through hell with 17 Bxh$ Wxh8 18 Wd2 Aba! 19 a3! Kxc3 20 axb4 Exb3 21 cxb3 @xb2 22 Hel! (ike on many of the previous moves, this was the only move) 22...xc1 23 Wxcl Df 24 8 We7 25 £2 Wxg2 and Black has a clear advantage. However, this was the line I did not find completely clear. White has some counterchances with b4-b5 and the two bish- ops, plus the knight on £6 is not as active as it could be. Instead of trying to find an improvement over this line (which might be hard), I decided to let the combination go and look for other exercises. 17...dxc5 18 Wd2+ Dd4 19 Sxg4 Qxg4!! Black is just a piece up! ‘This was to be the real depth of the exer- cise ~ Black should not be scared of Edt. After 19...xh5?? 20 &xhS Whs 21 Wai! White is hanging on 20 Hd5+ de8 20.86 wins on the spot and is probably bgExcelling at Combinational Play more accurate. 21 tifa 21 Hsd8+ Hxd8 gives White no chances: Dsi3+ 2 gxf Bhl+ 24 $e2 Excl2 25 Gixd2 Exal and Black wias. 21...2.d7 22 0-0-0 e6 0-1 ‘The following combination is. similac. White is on the verge of winning, but only stays there, UE ES ZL, Ye y V, UBIO IK 2 ayy Cy Yl USO 7S Vutkovie-Nowak Naleczow 1986 BOS White to play and do some demoagel NY \ \N 8 \ 25 Rxc8i ‘The right move order: 25 £.x96 Bxci+ 2% Excl fxg6 27 Wexh6 2xf6 and it is Black 10 wins. 25...Exc8 26 Lxg6!! A. nice sacrifice. After 2 sh6? Ax Black collapses, probably discouraged from playing 26..2g5! 27 WtS We7, which scems to hangs on. White can get a cl advantage with 28 2h7+, but can also te his, luck with 28 Q@xf7H? @xt7 20 Wh7+ Gxfo! (caly move) 30 Efl+ Ges 31 WS+ Gud. Unfortunately there is no way to win the game ~ it’s a real problem thar Black has ‘Welt followed by mate. The best try is 32 Edl+ Wed 33 Bas, Black to play — an ‘only move is required! Now Black needs to find 33...2.66!! in or- der to stay in the game. My analysis suggests that the best way to continue is 34 Wed+ Gc5 35 We3+ bs 36 Bb3+ Gat 37 West Wet 38 Hes? Axb2! 39 exb2 Weft 40 Bxft+ Gb5 and now: a) 41 BiG Bc5 42 Hxh6 does not give any chances of an advantage, as Black will play 42.8! activating the rock. Here White has no way to advance his pawns and get his king into safety. Again a matcer of evaluation, and that is pretty far down ct b) 41 Bir cS! 42 Es will make a draw. 27 Gxh6 Now Black is simply lose. b7 EAS and Black the rook goes v 28 WxeS+ O16 29 L411 gd 1-0 Exercises with Two (obvious) Solutions When (if?) you go thro this book you will find that a few of them (I believe between 10 and 20 — 2-4%) have more than one solution. Originally I decided not to include positions where there was more than one winning move, but then I repeatedly stumbled over examples where I believed the extra possibility did not destroy gh the exercises in 20The Adventure of Writing a Book on Combinations the exercise as an exercise and that nothing ‘was lost aesthetically. You will of course be able to judge for yourselves as you go along, “The following example was one I met late in my research. I quickly decided against tasing it as both solutions seemed too obvi- ous. ae 42 ath eras Ma ame Be aa RS ue ane Lanka-Fedorov Kishinev 1998. B78 Black wins in too ways! This example is really nice. Black wins in two equally fascinating ways. 26...885+!! Obviously it must have felt really good for Fedotov to be allowed to end the game with a queen sacrifice. But actually it was not es- sential. After 26...8,15H Black wins all the same. The following lines are all given by Petmssson: 27 Bal bse} 28 bxc3 We7 29 y met with 29...Wa3!! 31 exd4. Be2 and White is busted) 29..2xc3 30 Wh7+ B68 31 Bho Gc8 32 Bel 26 33 Be7 Wad 34 Bd7 35 BaGt Gxd6 36 Wh2+ bd? 37 Se? 38 Hel+ He3 and White is out of am- munition, 27 Oxt 21 Bat does not help: 27...bxe3 28 Dsf5 cxd2! 29 Da6 Kxf4 and the endgame is easy 27...2x15+ 28 al 28 Bel bxc3 29 Wxd5 Ext 30.3. 2g5 31 Hdgi Hdd+ and Black wins 28...bxc3 29 bxe3 Lxf4! Black simply eliminates all kinds of de- fence on the dark squares. This was probably what Fedorov had foreseen and there is no real defence available for White. Note that after 29...2xc3+?? 30 Wxc3 Bxc3 31 @e5 White is better. 30 Bet Or a) 30 Wxf4 Bxc3 mate. b) 30 Bb2 loses to 30...Eb4+ 31 a3 Bbs (threatening ..2e7+) 32 Bdel Ecb8 and * there is no defence against ... LaGt. 30...Bxf3 Black now wins easily. 31 &b2 d4 32 c4 Eb8+ 33 Gal d3+ 34 Ec3 Hf2! 0-1 Iwas with some grief that I had to let go of the following example. ea _VEe7 le “9 Btta tna a A BION Re a oa U 1 & some image co SSae ey noe J.Polgar-Pliester Araba 1992 B92 White to play and win (twice?!) 20 Exf7!! According to Fritz 8, the strongest con- tinuation, and really a very nice combination However, 20 &h5! also wins because Black cannot defend £7 satisfactorily. The only try is 20..f6, when White wins with 21 Elxe5 dxe5 22 DsfG+ Sxi6 23 WxfT+ and the meExcelling at Combinational Play house comes tumbling down. Actually even 20 Eixe5! dxe5 21 Exf? sins, but ler us try to follow the game, Forced. 20...2£8 21 Ha7! and White wins because of 21..\Wxa7 22 De7+ gh8 23 Wed mate. 21 Ext? &xt7 Black has many alternatives, and at the same time no alternative: a) 21.868 22 Ha7! and White wins, b) 21.25 22 Ha? Wxa7 23 De7+ hs 24 De6 mare. 6) 21... Wa8 22 Dxe7+ and wins, d) 21...8d8 22 Ha7! and White wins. 22 Db6+ gb Black is mated no matter what. a) 22..88 23 Da7 mate. b) 22..<8£6 23 Bda+ dg6 24. Bh5+ Yxh5 25 WIT+ 96 26 WE3+ dhe5 27 Be3+ Bhd 23 ‘Wh3 mate. 23 BhS+ Sxh5 24 WI7+ 1-0 Black resigned on account of 24..@h4 25 g3+ Bh3 26 Wes mate. The following example is also attractive ty Wh Wir, Bank eA we BY Vy a cee we Svidler-Nedobora Linares 1994 B93 White wins in two wayst The initial move is the same for both tac- tical solutions. 22 19 Dxg7! xg7 20 2d4!? This wins after some length, but the cleanest winning line is 2 a hs a 5? Hes 22 + Wf6 2 Ext He6 24 Kxg6 Sxg6 is far Mane pHa 21.xf8 Q21..Dtsed!? 22 Who Wsho 23 Bxh6 Dxd3 24 exd3 Dc5 is objectively the best line, but White will win easily with his extra exchange) 22 Wh6 Dcd7 23 e5! Wxe5 24 Bxf6l. 20...Ded7 21 Ext6! Dxt6 22 Hi1 Bes?! ‘The only chance was 22...2g6, but 23 Exo Wxf6 24 BxfG+ Bxt6 25 Hb4 Btds 26 Wxb7 Hb8 27 Wa7! and White wins — Svidler. i 23 Exf6 Wxf6 24 Qxf6+ Sxf6 25 2xab! Be7 26 b4! eS 27 Axb7 Sig6 28 a5 15 29 exf5 Hfxf5 30 h3 1-0 In the following example Dvoirys per- forms fabulously, but could have won more easily. TBI) me: 0 4 fly Epishin-Dvoirys Leningrad 1990 Bs Black wins in too ways! 26...Baxc2+!? also wins with 26..c4! 27 bxc4 (27 Wrct Bxc4 28 bxed Waxed and ...e5 is com- ing) 27..Wa3+ 28 ded2 Wc3+ 29 ct Hat mate. 27 Axc2 Wat+ 28 Sd2 We3+ 29 geThe Adventure of Writing a Book on Combinations Oxi3! With the threat of ...Wal mate. 30 &b1 Wxb3+ 31 ket 31 Wal EcS! and White is finished: 32 Dxb4 Det 33 Axel Webs 34 Qd8 Be3. 31...Wa2! 0-1 ‘There is no escape from the mate. Positions Discarded for Other Reasons OF course when one is looking through thousands of games searching for something worth showing, there will always be some absurd examples. Here is an example that I originally discarded and then could not allow back in among the 500 exercises (501 exer- cises sound a bit daft when compared to 1001), when I realised that my analysis was greatly flawed, Firstly, here is the version as it was in my original notes. “2 ‘e at me, Y, ® ee, RU aa Psakhis-J.Polgar Amsterdam 1989 But jl “3 “~~ a ie is a ae \ es bat This is a brilliant example of exploiting lonse pieces in order to take over the squares of one colour, here the dark ones. 26 Ddeat White is attacking all four black minor pieces. Behind them the b8-rook is a litle awkwardly placed on the diagonal. 26...8xe4 After this there is no defence. The sare goes for 26..xe4 27 fred! Bxed 28 Bxd6 and White wins a piece. However, I did not feel that White was completely winning after 26... Deg4!? 27 Dxfo+ DxfG 28 Bes Le7 29 Bxa6 Yrxab 30 2xf6 xf6 31 Dxd5 bs, despite being a pawn up. The a-pawn is, after all, backward and there are many possible endgames which could arise from this posi- tion in which Black could scrape a draw. 27 Bxd6! Now itis all over. 27...Dd3 28 2xd3 &xd3 29 Bd 29 Waa! wins on the spot. 29...Rxd6 30 2xd6 Rd8 31 Rxd3 Wee 31..Wa7 32 Wd2 De8 33 Bd4t Dxd6 34 Ded Wb5 35 h3 and White wins ~ Psakhis. 32 Wd2 Wed 33 &g1 a5 34 bxad bxad 35 Hd4 We6 36 £93 Ke8 37 212 1.0 All of this, however, is bogus. After 26..Degd!? White wins straightforwardly. << Bata ae “eB Boge go ae :e eo gas FO \ White mins! 27 feed Dred 28 Dxet Qxf4 29 Wrs4 Axe4 30 Bc7 Exd1+ 31 Qxd1 Was 32 Ba7! and Black loses the queen. So in fact this exercise was perfect for the book, but now it will have to live the less glamorous life of being a Chapter 1 example. 1 find the following example really funny, but then again I have been known to have a warped sense of humour... muExcelling at Combinational Play Rausis-Djurhuus Skei 1993 B53 I really liked this little combination and had some variations worked out before I realised that it would not be suitable as an exercise 14 0-0-0! ‘This is the strongest, after which White is probably just winning. Black now plays a decent move, 14...8.05 a) L4..ex€4 15 Shel+ Le7 16 Dc6 Re? 17 Exe7+ GiB 18 det 5 19 Dd8 and Black heavy straight away. possibly a better defence, bat White continues with 15 Bhel Se7 16 17 Bxe5 Be6 18 Dds Dsc5 19 15 Qxd5 20 Rexd5 with a clear adv tage. The position could have been discarded for this lice slone, but there is a str asgumeut. 15 Ag3! White simply takes control over the posi- tion here. Another possibility was 15 Bhel Bs2 16 He2 Sb6 17 Deb He7 18 Axes Dse5 19 Rxe5 HeT 20 Bc6+ BA7 21 Axf6 ead White wins. It was actually here that I ed to get a funny feeling. A feeling that me teally strong when I stopped to think about Black’s nest move in the game potas RE a Sem a 15...Dg8 Now why would aayone play this. Okay, Black is a pawn up, but he is also under much pressure and could seemingly save himself rather easily with 15..0-0. Those were my thoughts, but then it dawned on me — Black cannot castle!! As I worked by first selecting the positions and then deleting all the previous moves up to the positions, and only later analysing the games, I could there- fore not see that the black king had been on a short tip to d8 and back, forever keeping him stuck ia the centre. Tc was this, and this alone, that gave White his initiative, his ad- vantage and in the end the full point, But how do you present this information in a diagram? You don't. 16 Dé 16 16..Ec7 17 Sixe5! and White wins. i! @b6 18 Dea 1-0 following line given by Boasch illus- tates why Black resigned: 18..Ee7 19 Dat BB 20 Dsc8 Hsc8 21 Bsd7. There are more examples that I could in- clude ere, but I think T have given a small insight into what itis like to collect combina- tions fo: a book in the year 2004, if you want to do it to the best of your ability. »CHAPTER TWO Combinations and Their Indicators My favourite collections of combinations are the two books from Sahovski Informant: Enoelopaedia of Chess Middlegames and Engylo- pacdia of Chess Combinations. The main reasons are that there are many combinations and very few of them seem to be daft or dissatis- fying in any way (something that many rea- sonable collections excel in). I do not like very much the fact that all the combinations are sorted according to theme, as I dislike hints, but on the other hand Chess Infor- mant has developed a great system of organ- ising combinations, which I will list below. Here it is my intention to present a few more generic themes that have a tendency to reoc- cut in combinations again and again. They are not rules, as the only mule in a combina- tion is calculation. But they are indicators of vulnerable spots in the opponent’s position, as all combinations in some way have posi- tional origins. It is a useful weapon for tour- nament players to be aware of these factors and feel them when they occur on the board. There is no guarantee that because one of mote of these factors are present, a combina- tion is imminently possible. But often it is a very good indicator. Loose Pieces Drop Off In his award-winning Seats of Practical Chess John Nunn tells us about a blitz match he had with his friend Mike Cook a long’ time ago. After hours of play his opponent came to the conclusion that loose pieces have: a tendency to disappear from the board with rapid speed, loose pieces meaning ones ex- posed to threats or (more often) simply unprotected pieces. ‘Loose pieces drop off has since become known as Nunn’s dictum. In the following position a loose piece is @ major factor in the combination: Becerra Rivero-Shabalov Virginia Beach 2008 B75 I wonder how many people would have noted that the bishop on 97 is the real prob- 25Exceiling at Combinational Play lem with Black’s position. Together with the weakness of te light squares produced by an early ...h5 (probably ...0-0 would have served Black better), the unprotected bishop gives White a tactical option. 15 es! The strongest continuation — White ex- ploits the loose bishop on g7 by overloading the f7-pawn.- Still, this should not be devastating for Black and should only pose him some problems. Weaker would be 15 Zab when after 15..Dxe3 16 Wxe3 Bxd4 17 Wsd4 We5 Black is at least even. 15...fxe6?! This leaves g6 weakened. Black. had a preferable alternative in 15..2xe6!? 16 deb Qxb2 17 exf?+ Sxf7 18 Babl 2f6, even though White looks more comfortable. 16 dxe6 Yi, (B, " Eta 16...8.xe6? still keep his positia tog 16..Axb2 (eliminating the weak L2-pawn and removing the bisliop frorn danger on g7) 17 WgGHt (17 exd7+ Gxd7 18 B.xc4 Weed 19 Babi Wxd3 20 cxd3 £66 21. Bxb7+ Ee7 22 Keb Hhc8 and the game is likely to end a draw) 17..8d8 18 exd? Wxd7 19 Bxcd Excd (19..@xat 20 Be6!) 20 Babl Be5 21 xa? and White has excellent winning chances with an extra pawa and a safer king, 17 Wxg6+ ed7 17.88 18 Wxe6 Axb2 19 Babt £97 20 &xa7 also gives White a winning position. 18 Wixg7 White has a clear extza pawn and there is nothing damaged in his pawn structure or messy about his position. 18...Ehg8 19 td4 a6 20 Ef2 h4!? There is no way this position can be saved by normal play, so Black hopes that White does not take the pawn out of some kind of secutity concern, 21 Wxh4! 1-0 Black resigns, probably due to 21...Dxe3 22 Bxe6+ Bxe6 23 Wh6t, when the loose knight drops off. Here is another example where White ex- ploits aa unprotected black piece. Et a ae 1a “hell” of Y Re — hort-Sokolov Sroningen 1997 B83 In this poston White could probably gain an ach zh che bishop, but he decides to keep: the bishop on the board to protect the knight. 21 Exda! ‘This exchange sacrifice only works due to the extra tempo White gains because of the unprotected bishup on hd. 21...2xd4 22 Wxdd 245 Black decides to give up the bishop in the hope of gaining some counterchances with rook versus tvo minor pieces, but this comes more from desperation than from desire. 2 takin, 26Combinations and Their Indicators 72...8287 loses to 23 Axb7 Wxb7 24 £6 Beas 95 Wet 28 26 fxg7 2e7 27 Wh5! and Black cannot defend the weak square without los- ing the bishop. Also, White always had the chance of playing 23. 23 Wxha 23 c4l? also wins. 23...WxeB 24 da Wxd4 25 2xd4 e5 26 Be3 a5 27 Hd1 1-0 Here’s another example. a mts Cig. ee Ivanchuk-Fedorov Polanica Zdroj 2000 B76 ‘The rook on g5 is loose. 36 Exf7! Exf7 37 Wd8+ His 38 Yxg5 Wi1 39 Be2 1-0 Aad yet another example: a os cele WY, De la Villa Garcia-Milosevic Lugano 1988 B80 White ends up winning the exchange after the following combination: 17 &xg7! Wc5+ 17..Sxg7 18 Wxg5+ Bh8 19 Hxf8+ DxfB 20 Weer deo8 21 Het 7 22 Wr7+ Shs 23 We7T Sg8 24 Wxd6 and White wins; 17..Exflt+ 18 Hxfl Wc5+ wransposes to the game. 18 Gh1 kxg7 19 e5 Ext + Stripping the black king of his defences. Better was perhaps 19..h6 20 &xa8 Dxe5 21 ‘We2, when White has a strong advantage. 20 Ext1 Wxe5 21 &xa8 DP 22 Wg2 Bh6 23 De4 d5 24 Wh3+ DAhS 25 DAgs 8e7 26 Wxh5+ Wxh5 27 DxhS &xh5 28 Bf7 2d6 29 Bxh7+ 1-0 I could go on and on. The number of ex- amples of how undefended pieces somchow allow one side to introduce tactics is almost beyond comprehension. But I want to end with showing some situations where the op- posite is the case Summerscale-Aagaard London 1997 Black has played well for once and gained a strong position. He has problems with un- defended pieces on b4 and a6 and especially aeExcelling at Combinational Play the pawn on &6. Also White is threatening h7 indirectly and the rook on c2 very directiy. But even though his calcu nothing short of awful. 31...8b7! The strongest. If Black is successful in tak- ing contol of the light squares, then White as nowhere to hide. 32 Dxe6 Sxed!? Black is not distracted by the threat to his queen and fearlessly continues his rotten calculation. 32...We8 is objectively best, after which White could resign. 33. Axc7 Axg2+ 34 2g1 Bc6 an solve many problems at once, ion in the game was my lack was of the belief that White cl and the pame was over. this was not something Black had counted on, Luckily all his pieces were scting each othet, and beliyy hing better, he simply played 33, Axed sith & positionally and materially winning position. When the white player after the game heard that Black had not even antici- taking on c7, he exclaimed: That's logical of my luck.’ Shortly after this event he gained his rightly deserved Grandmaster title. 36 R13 Eg2+ 37 wf1 Bxh2 38 Hd1 Ke2 39 Bxd4 $c5 0-1 White hud had enough, and resigned 28 Play through the following game and sce how often White has more.than one unpto- rected piece. Kasparov-Gelfand Novgorod 1997 1 dd D6 2 c4 06 3 AT3 bE 4 g3 2a6 5 b3 d5 6 fg2 dxc4 7 Ded Sb4+ 8 ot £d6 9 Axcd AdS 10 e4 De7 11 2b2 bob 12 Dbd2 0-0 13 &g1 bS 14 Axdé cxd6 15 h4 Wb6 16 HS h6 17 dS Ded 18 Afl b4 19 2d4 Wad 20 De3 Kac8 21 Eh4 Be7 22 Wd2 c3 23 &xc3 bxe3 24 Hdd exd5 25 c7 26 Wid1 BoB 27 £04 Uib6 28 Ei4 &b7 29 Bc1 WaS 30 Bc2 Sh8 31 S.g2 2a6 32 Bad Wb6 33 Ac4 Lxcd 34 bxod Of5 35 Exc3 Add 36 05 Exc5 37 ‘Bxd4 1-0 are unprotected, I can only count the moves 23-25 and 34 onwards where White has two unprotected pieces, otherwise the figure is one or zero throughout the game. In his book Chess Middlegame Yuri Averbakh has the double threat as one of the pillars of chess strategy. But how do you create a dou- ble threat against an opponeat who rarely has more than one unprotected piece? It is of course still possible to create tactical threats against positions without unprotected pieces,Combinations and Their Indicators put it’s obviously more difficult. The aware- ess of protected and unprotected pieces can be found in many books and in many strong players’ games. Big Pieces in Trouble et us now turn to a type of situation where unprotected pieces are less important. Let us start with a practical example. =n a pi mi ma fe a Kasparov-iilescas Cordoba Linares 1992 B45 White to play and win on the spot! In this position Kasparov aimed at the king and won a nice attacking game. 25 DP+!2 gxfS 26 gxf6 AcS 27 Red Sfb8 28 shxh4 3 29 Hg2 Wxc4 30 xed Lxod 31 &h7 RI2+ 32 wh 1-0 Later he was not too happy about this per- formance, as his computer indicated a win in one move with 25 Dd6l. After 25...2.xd6 26 exd6 there is no way for Blick to defend agninst 27 Ha3, which wins at least a piece. I like this example because it illustrates well how easily a heavy piece can get into trouble in the middlegame where there are many Pieces around with lower rank who would love to switch T-shitts. When collecting ex- ercises for this book, I have noticed that this 4 quite a common theme. Here is another example, Topalov-Smirin Polanica Zdroj 1995 BAS White to play and win In this position Black has some problems with weak spots on e6 and g7, unprotected pieces on c7 and a4, and on top of that the black queen is in trouble, White decides the game by chasing the black queen around and executing a winning combination. 26 Bia! 26 @xe7 Bxe7 27 Ac6 also gives White a strong position. 26...Wg6 27 Bg4 Wi7 Also bad is 27..Hf6 28 &g5 and White wins material. 28 Exg7! Wixg7 29 Axes den wt x i wi eorrae ae Oi —a Pale als ae eS ee 29...8b2 Black is lost. Fritz prefers 29..Wsg2+ 30 29Excelling at Combinational Play Wxe2 Exc, but White wins in many ways, eg. 31 Delt Bd7 32 Wyt+ dB 33 Hxc6 Sxc6 34 Bd4 and the threat of De6+ wins additional matetial. 30 Dxc7+ sed7 30... 267 31 Wh5+ and itis soon mate. 31 Wxb2 Here Topalov overlooks a very uncom- mon combination. White would like to con- tinue the attack and could do with 31 DbSt!! Bxbs 32 Wyt+ Gd8 33 DeG+ ged7 34 HeT+ 2d6 35 QF, when Black would have to resign. Still, White also wins in the game. 3 Ixb2 32 AeS+ Gd6 33 Df7+ ked7 34 DeS+ kdb 35 24 EB 36 Dca+ Sed7 37 Dbo+ 1-0 The following example is probably a bit silly. But again, like a thunderbolt from a clear blue sky, the queen finds problems in the centre. NN-Aagaard Copenhagen (rapid) 2003 Black sets up a trap! This position is taken from a recent rapid- play game ai my local chess club. Not really a memorable game, but a fabulous illustration of how easy it is for the queen to get into tzouble. 13...Hc8!? This was played not the least with my op- ponent’s lower Blo rating in mind. He had already used up much time (and: there was not so much to start with) and had to make a yuick decision 14 dxed dxed 15 Dxed?? Losing. 15...Dxe4 16 2xed Lb4! 0-1 ere ak ws 20 Os : ‘a 26 WY, ‘ea a2 ae as Impressive team work from the black, army. Allin all, this theme of big pieces in trou- ble is quite common and a good thing to be awate of. Lam sorry that I have used up all my good entrapments of rooks in the exer- ection, but at least now you kaow you should look out for them, Weakened Squares in a Colour Complex There is a specific reason why the game is often decided on squares of one particular you look at White’s minor jv white bishop is ie da while both knights and the light oe bishop are only targeting light squares. This is an important function of minor pieces: they only target one colour of square at a time. The same goes for pawns ~ look at the pawns below. Even the queen has a prefer- ence for a specific colour: a queen on a light square generally controls more light squares than dark squares and vice-versa, In the example below White is extremely well positioned for playing on the light 30Combinations and Their Indicators squires, and Black is well positioned for play- ing on the dark squares. Assisted by a lead in development and some weaknesses in. Black’s position, White is able to start a win- ning attack almost solely on the light squares, Y ‘Ss ae Ne . pet ws oa Be nee Y Bigaliev-Dao Thien Hai Budapest 1996 BS4 White to play and attack! White invades on the light squares with a knight sacrifice. 14 De6!! fxe6? Accepting the knight actually loses the game. Black could stil fight with a move like 14.0822, when he is under heavy pressure, bot nothing direct can found. Because Black is behind in development, he cannot survive ar: opening of the position. By the way, a computer program is not of much a help to the annotator here, as all it desires is to win or avoid losing the knight on <6. 15 BhS+ ‘The first sign of the weaknesses Black is suffering on the light squares. The king has to mov 15...2d8 Now White wins easily. Alternativel 2} 15..Dxh5 16 WxhS+ Bd8 17 fxe6 Abs 18 a5 Det 19 Dds Web 20 Dxe7 Wes 21 G7! and White is completely. winning. b) Black could have tried to defend with 15...8f82, planning to protect the, knight with ..%7 and leaving d8 available for the queen. Now after 16 fxe6 we have: bi) 16..Db6? 17 Qxb6 Wxb6 18 Das Wa8 19 £7 and now there is no defence, for example 19...87 20 Axf6 &xf6 21 Whs @h7 22 Lxg8+ Lxo8 23 WET+; or 19..Hh8 20 WE Bg7 (20..Axd5 21 exd5) 21 WES Dxd5 22 Wer SB 23 esr Dra 24 We7 mate; or 19..¢4 20 Sxg8 Gxg8 21 Dxfor Axf6 22 Wagd+ Bh7 23 We5+ deg7 24 Bad and White wins. b2) 16..<8g7! 17 exd? Bxd7 18 Dd5 Dxd5 19 He7+ Bh8 20 WxdS Bac8 21 of and White has a large advantage and good chances of winning the game, but no more than that. 16 fxe6 Ab6 Black cannot defend his king. 16..c5 loses to 17 Kxf6 Bxf6 18 Dds We7 19 Axf6 &c7 (19. x66 20 Wxdo+ Dd? 21 Lb6 mate) 20 Dd5+ &b8 (20...8e6 21 b4 with a winning attack) 21 &xc5 dxc5 22 e7 Sd7 23 Db6 cb 24 Was+ a7 25 Dxa8 and White is a knight up with a passed pawn on the seventh rank. 17 &xb6 An easy move to see of course, But look at how White exchanges pieces to increase his domination of the light Squares. Once this is complete, Black cannot defend the dark squares, as all dark squares have light- squared neighbours. xb6 18 Hxf6! Qxi6 19 Ads Waa Or 19,.BH2 20 Dx fo. 20 WF 28 20..2xe6 21 Wir Gd7 22 We7+ and White mates on the next move. Now comes a nice finish. 21 Wxf6+! 1-0 Black is mated after 21..Exf6 22 e7+ &d7 23 eb, The next example even clearer. White wins through a traditional attack, sacrificing the exchange in order to take full control of 31Excelling at Combinational Play the dark squares. Nothing spectacular about it, but it does illustrate my point well Maciejewski-Bashkov Katowice 1993, B85 18 Dxf6+ Qxf6 19 Exf6! gxf6 20 Wxt6 With the deadly threat of £44. Swiss cheese! 2i ‘e7 Black is trying to disrupt White’s attack, but with no success. He could also try 20...Wa8 but this is met by 21 WEY, after which White continues to attack on the dark squares. Probably there is no defence, as after 21..Wd5 White should bring in the last piece with 22 Ba3! with the threat of 23 Wh6 and with the following consequences: 22...{5 23 22! (coming to h5 at the right moment) 23..e7 24 Hg3+ Ry? 25 2d4 Bos 26 Bhs and Black is losing material and will succly get mated later 21 Wh6 #5 22 Let Wt7 23 Bes £47 23..€2h8 was objectively stronger. After 24 Hg3 Had8 25 Wh4 Bis 26 Bdd+ Bxdd 27 Wadd White wins a pawn and could well try for more before exchanging the queens. 24 He5 Had8 25 &xh7+ 1-0 All in all, the colour complex issue is something all strong practical players have developed a great feeling for, consciously or subconsciously. Geller-Yap Moscow 1986 BBS White destroys Bsc ight ares ‘The following example shows how White he black «lefence on the light ers of can undermin ices. squares wit 19 Dxe6! An interesting sactitice. 19...2.xe6 20 15 Dg7 After this mistake Black is completely killed on the light squares. Fritz 8 prefers 20...&d7 with the paradoxical idea of 21 fxg6 512, when White cannot allow the position to remain closed. He can still win after 22 exf6 Dsi6 23 gi! HT 24 We6 Exg7 25 Wrxh6, when Black cannot keep his kingside to- gether without pawns. ae